Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1977-10-26 MinutesCITY OF MIAMI COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON October 26, 1977 • PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CITY HALL IfiE( $SENOETLNO CIIYSSI�OF MiAMI, FLORIN ITEM NO. SUBJECT QEESRDINANCE OR I OLUTI ON N0, PACE NO, 1. TABLE OF CONTENTS BRIEF DISCUSSION: - PROPOSED WATSON ISLAND AGREEMENT. 2. EXTENDED AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY BUDGET ADVISORY PANEL. 3. CITY MANAGER AND ONE MEMBER OF THE CITY COMMISSION TO ATTEND 1978 SUPERBOWL GAME. 4. REPORT OF JEFFERSON STREET/WASHINGTON AVENUE NEIGHBOR- HOOD ANALYSIS. 5. DEDICATION N.E. CORNER GRAND AVENUE TO DADE COUNTY FOR GRAND AVENUE WIDENING. 6. CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED WATSON ISLAND AGREEMEN 7. FOURTH YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES, (TEMPORARY DEFERRAL) . 8. PLAQUES, PRESENTATIONS AND SPECIAL ITEMS. 9. CONTINUED DISCUSSION FOURTH YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES. 10. PRESENTATION OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF LITTLE HAVANA COMMUNITY CENTER. 11. FIRST ANNUAN MIAMI MUSIC FESTIVAL OF THE ARTS (BICEN- TENIAL PARK) . 12. "911 EMEPJIENCY TELEPHONE SYSTEM" FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI. 13. DEFERRAL AND CONSIDERATION OF PARKING LOT LIGHTING ORDINANCE. 14. DEFERRAL AND CONSIDERATION OF CITY ATTORNEY'S ANNUAL REPORT. 15. RE -SCHEDULE NOVEMBER 24 COMMISSION MEETING TQ NOVEMBER 10. 4 16. PROPOSED LEASING OF DINNER KEY MARINA AND MIAMARINA. 17. DEFERRAL AND CONSIDERATION FOR ESTABLISHING FEES PRE-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES. 18. DISCUSSION AND DEFERRAL OF PROPOSED AGREEMENT MIAMI WORLD TRADE CENTER, INC. 19. INSTRUCT CITY MANAGER TO RESEARCH FUND FOR 31 PERCENT SALARY INCREASE FOR GENERAL EMPLOYEES. 20. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS APPROPRI ATIONS FOR DISCAL 1977-1978. 21. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: REVISE TENNIS COURT FEES AND ESTABLISH ANNUAL PERMIT FEE. DISCUSSION M- 77-829 M- 77-830 DISCUSSION SEE R- 77-859 M- 77-831 DISCUSSION PRESENTATION DISCUSSION M- 77-832 DISCUSSION M- 77-833 DEFERRED DEFERRED M- 77-834 M- 77-835 DEFERRED DEFERRED M- 77-836 ORD. 8716 ORD. 8717 1 - 3 3 - 4 4 5 - 8 - 9 9. - 53' 54 - 63 63 63 - 69 69 - 71 71-72 72 - 78 79 79 79 80 - 90 91 91-9E 99 - 1( 101 101 ITEM NO. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. IfX CIiYJG0�ht11SSIQJ OF MIAMI, Fl.ORIM SUBJECT I NANCE OR SOLUTION NO. TABLE OF CONTENTS AMEND SELF-INSURANCE ORDINANCE TO INCREASE FROM $1,000 TO $4,500. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: ESTABLISH TRUST AND AGENCY FUNDS FOR FEDERAL, STATE, COUNTY FOUNDATIONS AND OTHER GRANTS CITY MATCHING FUNDS. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE #8780 - PROVIDE INCREASE IN DEPARTMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTION 39.13.1 OF THE CITY CODE - REVISE GOLF COURSE GREEN FEES. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: RE-ESTABLISH CITY OF MIAMI AFFIRMATIVE ACTION ADVISORY BOARD. GRANT PERMISSION TO HOLD GOLDEN GLOVES TOURNAMENT - MIAMI BEACH CONVENTION CENTER. APPROVE CONTRACT WITH HAMMER, SILER, GEORGE ASSOCS. AND WALLCE, McHARG, ROBERTS Y TODD - CONSULTING SERVICES ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF CIVIC CENTER - (SECONDARY DEVELOP- MENT AREA). EXECUTE AGREEMENT WITH BETHUNE COOKMAN COLLEGE FOR USE OF THE ORANGE BOWL STADIUM. AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT WITH LARRY GONZALEZ FOR OPERATION OF FOOD AND BEVERAGE CONCESSION AT SHENANDOAH PARK. AUTHORIZE BIDS FOR ONE AUTOMOBILE FOR THE MAYOR'S OFFICE. ORDERING RESOULUTION: CRESTWOOD SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT. AUTHORIZE GRANT OF EASEMENT STORM SEWER - LOCATED AT ROCKERMAN RD. NEAR BISCAYNE BAY. PURCHASE IN LIEU OF CONDEMNATION ALLEY RIGHT-OF-WAY 4101 N.W. 7TH STREET - FIRE STATION NO. 10. ESTABLISH GREEN khLS FOR NORTH -SOUTH GOLF TOURNAMENT - CITY OF MIAMI COUNTRY CLUB GOLF COURSE. APPOINT N'LT FRVMAN TO SERVE AS MEMBER OF ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION REVIEW BOARD. APPOINT JULIA R. FERNANDEZ AS,/ EMBER OF ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION REVIEW BOARD. APPOINT ELEANOR E. RATELLE TO CITY OF MIAMI MEMORIAL COMMI'1.1'LE . CLAIM SETTLEMENT: MARINA MOLINA. CLAIM SETTLEMENT: ANDRE DUKES. ORD. 8718 1102 ORD. 8719 102-1 ORD. 8720 103 FIRST READING 104 FIRST READING 104-1 M - 77-837 105-1 R- 77-838 106 R- 77-839 106- R- 77-840 107 R- 77-841 108 R- 77-842 108 R- 77-843 109 R- 77-844 109- R- 77-845 110 R- 77-846 110- R- 77-847 111 R- 77-848 111 R- 77-849 112 R- 77-850 112 INDEX CIlY1ISSIonMIAMI, FtARIi11 HEM NO. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. SUBJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS DENYING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND INSTRUCTING THE CITY ATTORNE TO DEFEND ANY SUITS. gOLUTION INANCE Of NO. PAGE N0, R- 77-851 113 CLAIM SETTLEMENT: KRAFTCO. R- 77-852 113 ACCEPT BID: CONVENTION CENTER BUILDING DEMOLITION - THIRD BIDDING. R- 77-853 114 ACCEPT BID: FLAGLER STREET LANDSCAPING. R- 77-854 114-115 ACCEPT BID: TIFTON GRASS SPRINGS. R- 77-855 115 ACCEPT BID: 3,000 CUBIC YARDS OF CLEAN FILL' MATERIAL (BAYFRONT PARK). R- 77-856 115-116 ACCEPT BID: DEMOLITION OF BUILDING (UNSAFE STRUCTURE )- 832 N.W. 2ND AVENUE. R- 77-857 116-117 ACCEPT BID: AUTOMOTIVE AND HEAVY EQUIPMENT PARTS. R- 77-858 117 EXECUTE DEED TRANSFERRING SMALL TRACT OF LAND N.E.CORNE OF GRAND AVE. PARK TO DADE COUNTY FOR GRAND AVENUE PARK. R-77-859 117-118 CONFIRMING RESOLUTION: ESTABLISH ANNUAL SALARY AND ASSISTANT CITY CLERK. CONFIRMING RESOLUTION: AUTHORIZE NEGOTIATION WITH THE LAW FIRM OF BRYANT, FRANSON,: IILLER, OLIVE, BRANDT & RYAN - BOND COUNSEL FOR FINANCE OF WATSON ISLAND DEVELOPMENT. R- 77-860 119 R- 77-861 119-120 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA. * * * * * * * ON THE 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1977, THE CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA MET AT ITS REGULAR MEETING PLACE AT LITY HALL IN SAID CITY SITTING AS A COMMITTEE OF THE HOLE, THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORD R AT 8:20 O'CLOCK A, M. WITH THE FOLLOWING MEMBERS OF THE UOMMISSION FOUND TO BE PRESENT: CommL44.ionek ManoZo Rebobo Comm.i44 Lone/. J. L. Ptummen, 14. Comm.i44.ione L Robe Gokdon Mayon Maun.Lae A. Fe'ne ALSO PRESENT: Jo4eph R. Gka44.Le, City Manage'. R. L. Fosmoen, A44.C.4.ant City Manageh Geon.ge F. Knox, City Atto'ney Ralph G. Ongie, City CZenh Mat.ty Hika.L, A44.i4tant City CIe'h ABSENT: Vice Mayor (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson AN INVOCATION WAS DELIVERED BY J, L. PLUMMER WHO THEN LED THOSE PRESENT IN A PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. A MOTION TO WAIVE THE READING OF THE MINUTES WAS INTRODUCED AND SECONDED AND WAS PASSED UNANIMOUSLY, 1, BRIEF DISCUSSION: - PROPOSED WATSON ISLAND AGREEMENT, Mayor Ferre: We are now in discussion on the Watson Island Agreement, Joe. Mr. Joseph R. Grassie: On the 28th of July, Mr. Mayor and members of the City Commission, you approved an agreement to agree and in the intervening weeks what we have been doing is transforming that agreement into a contract. Now I would like first to ask the City Attorney to comment on the review that his office has made of the contract in terms of the Charter. Mayor Ferre: Let's wait until everybody settles down a little bit. Mr. George Knox: The City Attorney's Office reviewed the proposed agreement in order to ascertain whether it conforms to state law or our Charter, our Code and whether it conforms in particular to the resolution that was passed which adopted a set of principles upon which the contract was to be based and after our examin- ation we were convinced that the contract before you is a lawful document and there are no legal impediments in terms of its execution. Mrs. Gordon: Will you explain that statement more fully, sir, with regard to for instance your sign off at the end, "Approved as to form and correctness". Specifically are you not then approving it in all forms, not only as to the form of the wording and the correctness of the wording but as to any other aspects? Mr. Knox: Well, I'm saying that all of the terms are lawful without passing upon anything that would encroach upon your legislative wisdom. I'm saying that there is nothing in the contract that violates the law. Mr. Plummer: Even if there are such things in the contract which the city is supposed to guarantee that they can't? Even though there are things in the con- tract in which the city has to guarantee to the developer which the city has no control or cannot produce? Mr. Knox: If you are suggesting that there is some question about the exercise of the powers granted to you in the Constitution or by its own Charter? 1 OCT 2619; Mr. Plummer: Well, it is a very insignificant thing but what, for examplesthe ohe thing that I have question on is on page 11, Section 13 in which it says that the city shall provide directional signs and traffic control, that's not under our control nor our authority. Mr. Grassie: Well, it is so, Commissioner, in the sense that any reasonable things that we ask for we get done. Mr. Plummer: You haven't been around long. Mr. Grassie: In my brief experience any reasonable thing we ask for we get done. Mayor Ferre: J. L., let me see if I can .... Excuse the interruption, but I think what we're doing here, I want to be sure that we understand what the proced- ure is, we passed a resolution authorizing the Manager to proceed with signing a contract and we also gave him the specific parameters of the contract. Technic- ally,unless this contract is in substance different from what was already author- ized,he has the authority to sign this off right now and that's the end of it. Now,I want to tell you that I took it upon myself -and Mr. Grassie was in 100% concurrence -that since this subject has been the subject of review, shall we say, by one particular newspaper that it would be more gracious I would rather say rather than prudent because I think we are prudent people but I thought it would be more gracious to let them have the full advantage of an open discussion on this so that the commission could express any reservations, any positive vibrat- ions, any questions on the specific context and,secondly, because I have a feeling that they might want to pursue this in another way legally or otherwise and I think it is important to cross all the is and dot all the is if, indeed, we are going to proceed on this. Mr. Grassie: As you say, Mr. Mayor, we have envisaged this session as an oppor- tunity for you to surface any questions or comments that you might have and to questions about whether or not it conforms with the agreement. Mrs. Gordon: If everything, excuse me, is going to revolve back to a previous agreement which you are referring to, should not copies of that previous agreement be furnished every person here? Mayor Ferre: The one we passed. Mr. Grassie: You do have them unless you through them away, you have had them. Mrs. Gordon: I'm saying every person here. If we are commenting and making com- ments as we are the previous agreement, shouldn't every person here be holding a copy of the previous agreement, therefore, we know what directly we're referring to? Mr. Grassie: If you have misplaced your copy, we certainly can get you a copy. Mayor Ferre: We11)I think that might be the wise thing to do. Now... Mrs. Gordon: You're very cute, Mr. Grassie. Mayor Ferre: Now George, ... Well,we have copies of the previous... Mr. Grassie: Commissioner, I'm simply indicating to you that on July 28th you passed the agreement.... Mrs. Gordon: Every person here is entitled to, I'm referring to a copy of your agreement that you're referring to in substance. Mayor Ferre: That's a mechanical thing, Joe, I happen to have two or three cop- ies of it upstairs and I'm sure you have others so just pass them out. All right now,George, if I may ask you, as I understand this we don't really need to do anything this morning unless there is a change of substance in this agreement. Mr. Knox: Right. If this agreement deviates from the agreement which you ap- proved then that's the subject. Mayor Ferre: Now explain deviates, does that mean in substance? Mr. Knox: In substance, that's correct. You approved a set of concepts, a basis upon which this agreement was to be modeled. 2 OCT 261977 Mayor Ferre: So then comes my question. In your opinion as the City Attorney) does this agreement change in substance what we have previously approved? Mr. Knox: No, sir. Mr. Plummer: Well, I disagree. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, I beg your indulgence that we hold the meeting until copies of the agreement have been furnished. Mayor Ferre: All right, then why don't we do this, Joe, I think that is a valid request and,anywayyFather Gibson is not here and it is an important matter and we should perhaps wait until he arrives on that. Perhaps what we can do is this, if you will have somebody go and get copies of the previous agreement, Mr. Gil- christ, is that what you're going to be doing? And then we'll goon to Item B until Father Gibson arrives.... 2. EXTENDED AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY BUDGET ADVISORY PANEL, Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, while we're taking a minute here let me announce to the Commission that I have successfully negotiated with the panel from FIU in what I feel is a fair agreement. They have agreed, in fact, to reduce from four men to two men to work with the administration for the major oportion of the review and work with at an agreed upon price of $35 an hour. They reserve the right, and I agree, that at the conclusion for the final analysis that the four men would prob- ably be involved again but for the basic work to be done that only two out of the four would be present. I have an agreement to that in writing in my office but the basis of the agreement is $35 an hour for two men and, of course, it would be $35 an hour at the conclusion for the four. Mrs. Gordon: Which two, J. L.? Mr. Plummer: Dr. Hendrickson is the one and I believe Dr. Remington was the other, those are the two. Mrs. Gordon: Do you need a motion? Mr. Plummer: No, I was just merely sent to do a job and.... Do we need a motion? Mr. Grassie: I don't believe so, Commissioner, you already indicated your intent... Mrs. Gordon: Yes, but the acceptance of the fee and the number of persons in- volved, perhaps we should take a positive position. J. L., would you move it that way? NOTE: Reverend Gibson entered the meeting. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, Mrs. Gordon seems to feel that it would be appropriate, I made a motion that we accept the offer of the FIU panel as outlined by me and in their letter and Mrs. Gordon did second the motion and Father, very briefly they've agreed to the panel1to go to two men at $35 an hour reserving the right at the end to bring back in the full team of four for the conclusion. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer who moved its adoption. MOTION NO. 77-829 A MOTION OF INTENT TO INDICATE AGREEMENT WITH A PROPOSAL MADE BY DR. HARVEY HENDRICKSON AND DR. JOHN REMINGTON OF FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY TO CONTINUE REQUIRED SERVICES CON- CERNING REVIEW OF THE 1977-78 BUDGET DOCUMENT AT THE RATE OF $35.00 PER HOUR WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT TWO ADDITIONAL MEMBERS OF THE PANEL (DR. IRVING FANTL AND DR. WILLIAM WELCH) MAY BE ADDED TO THE PANEL UPON THE CONCLUSION OF THIS STUDY. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gordon, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote -AYES: Mr. Plummer, Mr. Reboso, Mrs. Gordon, Rev. Gibson and Mayor Ferre. NOES: None. 3 OCT 26197 Mr. Plummer: In a spirit of cooperation, Mr. Grassie, they also asked me to inform you that they would like to work with you and the Budget Management Department in what they feel would be a great help in some of the procedures that are used, and they would hope that you would avail yourself of their knowledge and expertise at the school and they are available if you wish to bring them in as such. Mr. Grassie: We appreciate that. 3. CITY MANAGER AND ONE MEMBER OF THE CITY COMMISSION TO ATTEND 1978 SUPERBOWL GP E. Mr. Dlumner- Mr. "a -,or, let ne un another •.re-•• '---ief ite:. ;'-at "r. ^rice brought to my attention this morning. I think it is appropriate that I bring it up since I can't go. Mr. Mayor, it has always been the policy of this commission that even though we have Super Bowl locked up for 1979 that the Mayor and the Manager, if possible usually go to the SuperBowl Game just to be there for repre- sentation of this city, to let those people know that we're there and we're con- cerned and,Mr. Mayor, I think it would be appropriate that we do so again this year. Mayor Ferre: Where is this game? Mr. Plummer: It's in New Orleans this year,in January, it's the middle of January. Mayor Ferre: Well Plummer, you're the one that brought the bacon home, so... Mr. Plummer: Well, let's leave it this way, I would suggest or I'll make a motion, Mr. Mayor, that the expenses of the Manager and one member of this commission be authorized to represent Miami at the Superbowl Game for the purposes of being there to remind the people that we love them and we're looking forward to seeing them in '79. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 77-830 A MOTION OF INTENT TO REIMBURSE EXPENSES FOR THE CITY MANAGER AND ONE MEMBER OF THE CITY COMMISSION TO ATTEND THE SUPER BOWL GAME TO BE HELD IN NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA,IN JANUARY OF 1978 TO REPRESENT THE CITY OF MIAMI. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Reboso, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor (Rev.) Theodore Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. OCT 261977 KEPORT ON JEFFERSON STREET/WASHINGTON AVENUE i'NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS. Mr. R. L. Fosmoen: I guess it was about a month or a nonth and a half a^o the City Commission considered the closing of Jefferson Street to facilitate the development of "Old Smoky Park". At that time/the issue of closing Jefferson Street was deferred at the request of Commissioner Gibson until we had examined the impact of those houses that would be left between Washington and Grand Avenue once Grand Avenue was widened. You have in your packet a report and an analysis of the impact of the park on those properties of the widening of Grand Avenue on those properties and we have a recommendation to the commission which includes the modification of the Grand Avenue widening to provide an additional nine feet of rear property for those houses on Washington Street to attempt a residential rehabilitation program for that area south of Grand Avenue including Washington Street, street improvements, property improvements, some selective clearance of single family residential properties that are deteriorating. We're also recom- mending that we continue with the closing of Jefferson Street in order to combine the two sides of the park and not have through traffic coming through the park. I think it is important that the commission recognize that one of the decisions, that of giving or providing an additional nine feet of rear yard to the houses between Grand and Jefferson is not within.... Mayor Ferre: You mean between Grand and Washington. Mr. Fosmoen: Right, between Grand and Washington is not within our decision -mak- ing capability but that street is being widened by Dade County Public Works Depart- ment. We would depose as we proceed to work with them in modifying their Grand Avenue cross section to provide an additional nine feet of rear yard for those properties left between Washington and Grand. We don't think that it makes sense to acquire all the properties between Washington and Grand, there is sufficient park space provided around the school and at the "Old Smoky Park". We think that it is important that we maintain the single family residential character but that we provide some relief to the people on Washington by an additional nine feet of rear yard. If the commission concurs,we would be back to you with the question of closing Jefferson and would begin to work with the Community Development Task Force for Coconut Grove in designating this area as a residential rehab area under the Fourth or Fifth Year Community Development. Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor and members of the commission, I'm not prepared to vote one thing about closing that street. I want us to make the decision about those people who are housed first. I told you that at the last time it came up. I realize that what happens to that street, Grand Avenue, is not within the purview of the city but it is also true that the commission ought to know that the only reason some of the action is going on is I went to the Metro Commission myself personally, the staff wasn't interested in what was going to happen to those peo- ple and I don't think we need to do one thing about that street until we have solved the problem of housing. Another thing that needs to be put on the table in front, based on the agenda and based on the material I see/this may not be the time to raise it but it needs to be raised because what you're talking about has bearing on something else you're going to ask us to do. Sometime ago/it needs to be recalled here for the purpose of the recent members of the staff, joiners of the staff, that we once had Code enforcement. We once had the Housing Authority. I notice in this agenda either you're going back to that or what you're going to do? All of that ought to be cleared up. I don't know if you all realize that. Now we turned over HUD, we said we were going to get out of the housing business. Now you're talking about selective rehabbing and all of this jazz, tell me what that means, clear it up. Mr. Fosmoen: Well, you're quite right, Commissioner, we did give the authority to Dade County. We gave it away when we didn't have any money to do it. The city now receives approximately $10,000,000 a year in Community Development Funds. Those funds have to be spent in certain ways within the federal guidelines and this commission has the responsibility. Now Dade County may have the implementat- ion responsibility and we have to work out contracts with them but this commission and this city has the responsibility for determining how those dollars are spent. Rev. Gibson: I fully agree with you but I want to get that part on the table before I do this. I'm not going to let the tail wag the dog, I'm going to let the dog wag the tail. You know that's exactly the way we get a lot of other things around here, that was before I came on the commission. That's right! 5 OCT 2 6197 Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, in the essence of what I hear I think for us to defer to discuss this at this time is wrong. I think Father has made his points and well taken and that this item both B and C I assume, Father, be deferred until such time as Father's concerns are thoroughly hashed out by staff. Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, one further comment. You see some of us who sit on this commission have some long memories. You ought to have, Mr. Plummer, you ought to have, Rose, I know I have. I not only have the memories but I have the hurts, you all have the memories not the hurts. Thank God I am here and I don't want a street closed, I don't want a single piece of that property touched until adequate provision has been made. I must call to the attention of this commission HUD built some houses on the corner of #1 and on Day and you know, we let them use up the housing. Now we talk about we want to get this property and I want to agree with your conclusion but if I don't give you authority now you'll work like hell to make sure that something is done about those people finding somewhere to live knowing you're trying to get this done and I have no faith in doing it tomorrow - absolutely none. I want to do it now. Mr. Fosmoen: You're saying, Commissioner, that you don't want the street closed, Jefferson Street, or the park completed in that area until such time as there is an in -place residential rehabilitation program. Mayor Ferre: No, that's not what he said. I heard very clearly. Let me repeat because perhaps I didn't... What he said was that he doesn't want anything done to Jefferson Street or Washington Avenue until you solve - we solve the problem of those people that are affected in housing, 15 houses, and it's not a question that they're going to be in place and built but that we have a firm understanding and binding commitment as to exactly what is going to be done to those 15 houses. Is that correct? Rev. Gibson: Yes, sir. Mayor Ferre: That's what I heard. Rev. Gibson: Before we even entertain the idea. Knowing they're going to close the street, I'm for that... Mayor Ferre: Solve the 15... problem and then we close the street. That's what he's saying. Mr. Fosmoen: The best we can do is wait until we get fourth year funding which is next June or July before we can start Mayor Ferre: No, that's not the best you can do. I think you could do a lot of other things. I think we could have spent in conjunction with Metro and in con- junction with other funds to try to solve the problem of those 15 houses and then you come here as a finished package. What happens to those people that live there? Father has already told you, and I don't know about the rest but I happen to con- cur with that that he is saying that he is perfectly willing to close the street that you're recommending, provided, however. You know, the horse comes before the cart. Mr. Fosmoen: Well, Ok, if I may just to clarify this point, we really don't Mayor Ferre: Did I say that right? Rev. Gibson: Right. Mr. Fosmoen: We really don't have any additional funding, the commitment to do something on Washington for those 15 properties would come with the submission of the fourth year Community Development .... Mayor Ferre: Well let me ask you exactly what is it that we're talking about? Mr. Fosmoen: We're talking about selective clearance of those properties which are dilapidated and about rehabilitation.... Mayor Ferre: Of which you mark as dilapidated three and those that need major repairs are nine, is that correct? Mr. Fosmoen: That's correct. It's also our recommendation, Mx. Mayor, that we incorporate all three of those blocks, that we not just invest our dollars in one block but that we look at the blocks.... OCT 261' Mayor Ferre: Well you see, Father Gibson hasn't extended that because otherwise we're going to be sitting here three years from now waiting for a solution to the problem. Correct me if I'm wrong now. ...those houses along Washington Avenue, they're going to be directly affected. Is that right? Rev. Gibson: That's correct. Mr. Fosmoen: I can't recommend only doing one block... Rev. Gibson: I'm not asking you that. I'm saying that since you need that block you take care of that block before you touch anything else, that's what I'm say- ing. Mr. Fosmoen: Ok. There are limited dollars and let me get one other point clari- fied and that's the nine feet of rear property. Rev. Gibson: I'm for that. Mr. Fosmoen: Again the commission recognizes that that is not our project, we're going to try to negotiate that when the day comes. If the commission agrees with this general direction we'll pursue it. We came back to you for some directions since this issue had been tabled by the commission until we came to you with a recommendation. Rev. Gibson: Let me tell you where I am. I'm for the nine feet business, I want you to negotiate it but I want you to have a firm commitment before we move one step. Ok? Mayor Ferre: All right, any further discussion? Mr. Plummer: If I understand correctly then we're talking about the deferral of Item B and C. Correct? Mayor Ferre: This is a Committee of the Whole Meeting so there is no need to pass any resolution. Mr. Fosmoen: Commissioner, I have the understanding that the commission gener- ally concurs with the recommendation we made and you want us to move ahead in trying to formalize that with all of the actors - Dade County Public Works before we close Jefferson Street. Mayor Ferre: That's correct, ... discussion of doing the whole thing first and the first thing is the question of people, the human beings that are affected because they live there. If we solve that one then we can saw the tree. We're on B and you talked about C, now Father, this is inclusive of C, is that correct? Rev. Gibson: I have no objection with C because I think C is way up on that.... Mayor Ferre: Well then we won't hear C. This is only for B and now, J. L. go ahead. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I'm just going to surrender to the Clerk the letter of agreement with the panel from FIU and I'd ask that you make copies available to all members of the commission and to the administration. A r+T 9 A �q' IJEDICATION N,E, CORNER GRAND AVENUE TO DADE COUNTY FOR GRN'J) AVENUE WIDENING' Mr. Grassie: Vince, do you want to speak to C? Mr. Vince Grimm: Mr. Mayor and members of the commission, this in a way does tie in and that's exactly the reason why we put it on the agenda in the same place so that you would be aware that there is another problem with widening of Grand Avenue and that is that dedication is required of all public and private land. Dade County has asked us for that little corner of Grand Avenue which is shown in your packet. It is about 1400 square feet off the northeast corner of the park. Mayor Ferre: You mean this little sliver here? Mr. Grimm: Yes, sir. There is a resolution on your agenda.... that would author- ize the Manager to transfer that parcel of property to Dade County for the sum of one dollar. Mayor Ferre: That's at the corner of Jefferson and Grand, is that it? Mr. Grimm: Yes, sir. That's why we put it on the agenda, so that you would be aware that... Incidentally, with the closing of Jefferson Street but primarily in relation to widening of Grand Avenue that piece of property is necessary. Mr. Plummer: Since it's not going to be done until such time as Item H is cleared up... Mayor Ferre: No, that's exactly why I cleared this.... Mr. Plummer: No, until the closing of the street, is that correct? Mr. Grimm: No, sir, that's exactly what I'm trying to say to you; that to devel- op Grand Avenue whether you close Jefferson Street or not you have to have this piece of land. Mayor Ferre: Let's go over this. Father made a statement about B. I asked him whether that included C. He said no that C was a separate matter. Vince Grimm said that the thrust of it is that there is a sliver of land on the corner of Jefferson and Grand which the county needs and later on we're going to have a resolution approving it. Mr. Grimm: Now I want you to realize one thing though that obviously if you don't give them this sliver of land you can't develop Grand Avenue according to their plan and if your purpose is not to develop Grand Avenue until you've resolved the family location then you can consider that. Mayor Ferre: Well who is going to develop Grand Avenue? Mr. Grimm: Dade County under the Decade of Progress Bond Program. Mayor Ferre: Well that's a heavy decision. Mr. Grimm: This is something that father has been working on for a couple of years. Rev. Gibson: It seems to me, Mr. Mayor and members of the commission, that this staff should have been moving post haste. I brought this thing before you some time ago and I went myself, the staff wasn't doing one thing, I went myself be- fore the Metro Commission and asked them about this and they passed a resolution. Do you remember when came and wanted us to change the zoning? Every- body thought I was a bad boy. If you know the tongue lashing I got in the com- munity because I stopped that man you'd wonder why in the devil did I take that kind of a chance but I felt that the community deserved more than that. Mayor Ferre: Well, what's your feeling then on this sliver of land, did you want to hold that up until we get the other thing clarified or are we going to let this proceed? And that means that Dade County would then get started on the re- development of that portion of Grand Avenue. Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, I'll go for turning it over to them knowing that if they get that piece of land that this staff can't sit on its behind the rest of its life. 8 OCT 26 la Mayot Ferre: All right, there is a motion and a second in regards to C. Is there further discussion on the motion made by Father Gibson that the staff recommendlt- ion be followed? The preceding motion introduced by Reverend Gibson and seconded by Commissioner Plummer was passed and adopted by a unanimous vote. See formalizing Resolution No. 77-859 which was adopted later in the meeting. 6, CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED WATSOi' ISLMD AGREEMENT. Mr. Grassie: Mr. Mayor, we have copies of the July 28th Resolution for the City Commission. I believe the ou eation was whether or not this agreement to actree, the resolution you have in front of you is in conformance with the contract that is proposed today and the City Attorney has already spoken to that. Mayor Ferre: Since Father wasn't here at that point let me repeat the statement. On July 28th we passed a resolution which basically said this. Since that time the Manager and subsequently the City Attorney were involved in coming up with this document for the proposed development. Mr. Knox in the back of this says that this is approved as to form and correctness which I guess is a legal way of saying that it is a legally OK document. Now Iasked4r. Knox whether or not there was any change of substance between this document and this document and I think I asked Mr. Grassie and I think the response from Mr. Knox was that there was no change of substance between these documents. So therefore, what we did on July 28th is binding unless, of course, sombody wants to rescind it. Now Plummer then made a statement that he thought that there was change of substance. Rose Gordon then asked for a copy of the one we had passed which has now been passed around and that's where we're at. Mrs. Gordon: There is change of substance, I don't know which change Mr. Plummer is referring to but I have some that are changes. Mayor Ferre: Ok. This is the original and then in your packet you've got one that's proposed now and that's where we're at. Mr. Knox: While you're doing that, in a legal sense perhaps I should define more precisely what chance in substance means. What in a legal sense we're talk- ing about is a so-called material change which would alter the concept that has been agreed to previously. In other words does the subsequent agreement imple- ment the concepts that were set forth in the agreement in July. And when we talk about material changes what we're talking about is something that frustrates or substantially deviates from the concept as represented in the original document. Mr. Plummer: You're speaking of the concept or the theme of the park. Mr. Knox: The concept of the theme of the park, the concept of the method of financing... Mayor Ferre: The specifics of the business transaction, in other words if we're going to get 2% and 2% it can't be 1%, that would be a change of substance but the basic substantive matters that were agreed upon as I understand your state- ment are intact. What you have done is you have elaborated at the city's request for the most part to clarify things that were not clear. Is that correct? Mr. Knox: Yes, sir. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Knox, may I ask you a question as to substance? Would you con- sider the elimination of the infrastructure cost from the funded moneys of 55 mil- lion a change of substance? Mayor Ferre: What page are you on, Rose? Mrs. Gordon: Twc of the agreement adopted in July. Mayor Ferre: Oh, you mean item 2. Mrs. Gordon: "B", page 2 where it recites.._ Mayor Ferre: That's small 2, Arabic 2 which is about five or six pages back. Mrs. Gordon: No, sir. ... Ok, I understand but I'm referring more specifically under financing. It is under 5(b) and this last paragraph refers to infrastruct- ure as being a part of the 55 in the new agreement but it is not and I'll find the page for you if you'll wait. 9 OCT 261� Mr. Knox: Again, I would respectfully direct the question to the person who en- gaged in negotiations. From the point of view of the Law Department again if there is a plan for financing in this document and there is a plan for financing in this document then both documents contain a plan for financing. Now if the parties have agreed that there should be some deviation among particulars then that doesn't change the substance. Mrs. Gordon: It doesn't change it if it amounts to this much? Mr. Knox: Right. Now, again, you know the City Manager or the persons who negot• - iated the contract can talk about that change. Mr. Grassie: I believe, Commissioner Gordon, you're talking about the cost of infrastructure for the project. As you remember that was valued at $6,000,000. Mrs. Gordon: That's what's recited in this contract. Mr. Grassie: And that is to be part of the $55,000,000. Mrs. Gordon: It is in the original agreement. Mr. Grassie: Yes. Mrs. Gordon: It is an option in this second one. Mr. Grassie: I do not believe it is an option, Commissioner, if you refer to page 11 and 12 of the agreement, the new agreement.... Mayor Ferre: Of the new agreement? I'll tell you, as you go along would you say the agreement before us today and the July 28th so we can distinguish. Page eleven? Mr. Grassie: I believe that you will find that what the agreement says is that the city will make every effort to secure grants to pay for any of the infra- structure costs, of course, that's in our best interest. If we can get a federal public works grant to put in the sewer we would try to do that. It would obvious- ly free up more money for the development of the park. If we are unable to do it you will see at the bottom of page eleven and the top of page 12 of the new agreement that it is specifically provided that the city will utilize moneys from the $55,000,000 to the extent of 6 million to pay for these costs. Mr. Plummer: But that's only an estimate. Mr. Grassie: Well, it is a limit. It is a budget if you wish. Mr. Plummer: What happens if you can't do it for 6 million? Mr. Grassie: The same thing that happens with any project, you have to redesign the project to make sure that you do it within the budget. Mr. Plummer: But that's not really answering the question. You are in this con- tract obligating the city to do outlined in detailed work. As I read that out- lined in detailed work it is not an option. Water and Sewers, I don't know how you would redesign to fit the park to fit a budget. Mr. Grassie: It happens every day in all kinds of projects. Let me give you an example, commissioner. We have a very specific budget for the construction of a Heavy Equipment Maintenance Facility based on a Public Works Grant. The bids for that came in $900,000 high. We redesigned the project, stayed within the intent of the project, did everything, we're going to do everything we said we were going to do when we applied for the grant and the project is going to cost $900,000 less and that's what you do in any of these projects. Mr. Plummer: Well, but Mr. Grassie, the point I'm trying to make - let me use another example. In this contract you are guaranteeing the city will bulkhead the property. Now as far as I know there is only really one kind of bulkhead. Now are you telling me there is an economy standard and a deluxe bulkheading? Mr. Grassie: In almost every kind of public works project the answer is yes. Mayor Ferre: Oh sure. Mr. Plummer: Well, if that's the case then what you're saying is correct but you know it just seems like to me that the problem is that the peer is the same thing that happened with the Heavyduty Facility is that we're going to come in over budgeted 10 fr,T 2619 what we have allocated of the $6,000,000 and then where are we? Mr. Grassie: Well, where we are is that we don't come back and ask you for $900,000, we redesign the project until it comes in within budget. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Grassie, perhaps it might be... Is this the time when we would ask the representative of Diplomat World to make a comment? Mr. Grassie: I think it mightbe very helpful to the City Commission to know that, in fact,thatprogress has been taking place and what has been happening. Mayor Ferre: Fine, why don't you clarify exactly what in your view has happened and where you are and what have you. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, pardon me, could you get some chairs brought in so that the people that are standing in the back; it's grossly unfair to make people stand. Mayor Ferre: All right, I agree with that. Mr. Grassie, can they get additional chairs? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: There's no room fcr the chairs. Mrs. Gordon: Then why are we here imposing them to stand, why don't we move into the chambers? Mr. Grassie: Do we have people here for a specific item? If they're here for Community Development they can.... Mayor Ferre: Well we can't deny people the right who want to hear whatever they want to hear. If they want to be here to listen to this you know. So I hate to do this to the camera crews again. .... Is this going to cause you a big problem? Mr. Ronald L. Fine: Mr. Mayor, may I address please the last issue that was raised by the commission? May I remind you that in the City of Miami's request for proposals to bid on the project as part of that proposal the city represented that it would provide the infrastructure. Those bids were submitted on April 26, six months ago today and they were then reviewed and adopted by the commission on June 21st of this past year. The Commission authorized the Manager to negotia- ted an agreement to be approved by the commisssion. On July 28th of this year the commission passed the resolution before you, Resolution 77-671. I would in- vite your attention to page 10 of the resolution passed by the commission, para- graph (b) which says as follows: In the development of Watson Island the City of Miami agrees to perform the following and to use its best efforts to obtain funds for the cost thereof from sources other than the proposed $55,000,000 revenue issue subject tc the reasonable approval of the developer -operator and which cost may be included in the $55,000,000 Bond Issue if revenues for these infra- structure improvements are not available from other sources provided, however, that the cost charged by the City of Miami to the Bond Issue does not exceed $6,000,000. The items enumerated are sanitary sewer, water, electric, gas lines, surface parking for approximately 2600 cars, on -off access ramps to MacArthur Causeway, pedestrian overpass and service roads, storm drains for the entire island, slips for ferry docking, walk docking area, bulkheading and shoreline improvements related to the marina, relocation and upgrading Watson Island port- ion of Mac Arthur Causeway, site and fill as required by design and applicable flood criteria. The Manager in his continuing negotiation relating to the pro- visions of the resolution passed by the commission improved the city's position and if you will now turn to the context presented for you and titled in green and go to page 11 you will notice that there has been deleted from what the city had approved by resolution the absolute requirement to relocate Mac Arthur Cause - say, a substantial item in the budget estimate. All of the items were estimated by the city prior to the passage of the resolution and continually estimated prior to establishment of the contract itself. I further remind you that the contract gives unconditional rights to the commission to the entire approval of the project including all of the costs relating to them when they are presented to you for final adoption. The risk is not the cost of the improvements, I think those are fairly ascertainable by construction estimates. The risk is that we must commence construction and development of this project in order to avoid the continuing escalation in the cost of money in the bond market. So my conclusion is that the contract before you requires less of a burden economically upon the city to provide infrastructure by the elimination in the negotiations with the Manager. Number 2..is it provides an absolute provision that the funds for these 11 OCT 26 improvements will come out of the bond issue. Mayor Ferre: So much for that. Do you want to add anything else? Mr. Fine: I would encourage the commission to raise any other points that they feel may be at variance with the resolution 77-671 passed on July 28, 1977 so that we are able to continually move forward. I would like to advise the commis- sion that the conceptual planning, design engineering functions for the project were com" nced on July 28, 1977 when the resolution was passed by the city author- izing tie Manager to enter into the contract. The developers have been proceed- ing under the parameters and intent of that resolution and what is before you today is just an instrument, a contract and agreement that is intended to formal- ize the Resolution 77-671 which was passed and approved unanimously by the com- mission. on July 28, 1977. Mrs. Gordon: If we're going to be taking this contract we ought to be taking it in the sequence cf one through whatever number of pages and any comments that any of us have ought to be addressed at the same time, trying to flip back and forth through this is confusing. Mr. Fine: We can read for you, we have a converter code available here. If you will give us the paragraph either in the resolution which you adopted on July 28 or in the agreement to be executed which is before you we can refer you from one paragraph to the other to make it simpler for you so you wouldn't have to look through the entire agreement. If you have concern about a particular provision in either one of those documents we can tell you where you can find the related provision in the other document. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, I think it would be simpler. Mayor Ferre: Fine, Mrs. Gordon, I have no objections to anything the commission wants to do. Mrs. Gordon: I know you don't, you said you didn't have any objections and Mr. Plummer, would you have any objections, Mr. Reboso or Father Gibson, if we go from the first page through the document and if there is any comments on -the page that we make those comments as we go? Mayor Ferre: All right, I'll tell you what I'll do to simplify it. Rose, and I'll get tired after a while, I'll read the first couple of pages and.... Mrs. Gordon: I don't think you have to read them. I'm sure all of us have made them and have made some notes if we have any comments to make on that page and if there is nothing said on that page we'll go to the next one. Mayor Ferre: Alright, let's start then on page 1 on the agreement, page 1 of Resolution 77-671. Are there any questions on that page? Tell me when you're ready to flip. Mrs. Gordon: I can't hear you, Plummer, put your mike on. Mr. Plummer: Rose, I'm just asking for a certain thing in this document as it relates, I don't want to disrupt your procedure of what page but I want to make sure that when it comes to that page I have it. To me it is the key of the whole contract. Mrs. Gordon: Do you want to go to it and then maybe save us time? Ok. Mr. Plummer: It is immaterial, Rose, but I do feel that it is the key. Mrs. Gordon: There are some points in this first page but I will hold them be- cause I don't believe that.... Mr. Fine: Page 13 of the resolution Mr. Plummer.... The new document, where does that appear? Mr. Fine: Page 14, Article 22. Mr. Plummer: Ok. Rose, the only thing that I want to bring up, and I think it is really the key to this thing, and that is on page 14 of the new agreement under Section 22 I had very very serious reservations relating to this so-called committee or municipal authority because I thought and I still think that basic- ally as composed here it really is a sham when you put the Manager, the City 12 OCT 2619 Attorney and the project director as a committee. In my estimation, and I don't mean to say it disparagingly of those individuals but I don't know that Mr. Gil- christ, Mr. Grassie or Mr. Knox nor I will be here tomorrow but it is the word- ing of the contract that bothered me. When you figure that the project director is solely responsible to the Manager then what you are really saying is that the Manager is still a committee of one and that bothers me. But I think the key to the whole thing is just above where it states the city shall promulgate legis- lation, and that refers to the whole contract, that neither the Manager nor any- one else shall do anything other than what this commission shall approve, delegate or authorize and I think that the one thing that I'm concerned about and I think the members of this commission are concerned about is that the control of obvious- ly the biggest project that this city has ever undertaken remains under the con- trol of this commission. Surely we have and we will delegate the Manager to do certain things but my concern was that this contract which is binding was giving that authority carte blanche and was not giving the right to this commission in which the Charter says the buck stops here. I feel certain and I feel safe and comfortable that with this proviso in there it is immaterial how it is suggested that this committee is made up. It has been my feeling and will remain my feeling that if a municipal authority is established that one member of this commission sits on that authority if for nothing more than to,at all times,keep this commis- sion apprised of what is going on. Mayor Ferre: I don't have any objection to that, do you? Mr. Plummer: Well my objection, Mr. Mayor, it was so specific,here that it comes to the point that it even names the Manager as the Chairman of the authority and you don't even have a commission representative on this thing. Mr. Fine: May I address this, Mr. Mayor, because I think I can clarify the point very quickly for you. The Charter provides that the sole and exclusive legal control of the city and all of its functions rest within the City Commission. Only the commission can delegate its responsibilities by ordinance or resolution and the commission is limited in the amount of authority it can delegate. By law it is required to perform certain functions that it cannot delegate. Now in the resolution on page 13 the resolution says, 77-671, Paragraph (c) says: "The City of Miami hereby designates the City Manager as its agent who shall be em- powered to effectuate the terms of this agreement on behalf of the city and to exercise reasonable monitoring of the management and operation of Watson Island. The City Manager may delegate all or a portion of his authority and responsibil- ities to the City of Miami Project Director." The city legal department had some concern that in the Charter there may be in the validation proceedings of the bonds some question as to whether the City Manager had complete and full constitutional authority to serve as the chief executive officer of the commis- sion in implementing all of these items that will come before you for approval, the approval of plans and specifications, the award of construction contracts, etc., all of those things. So the city legal department recommended that we provide two alternatives in affect to be able to put two different types of suits on the City Manager who would serve as your chief executive officer as he does in the operation of the city and therefore, they said that the city shall promul- gate or enact legislation to confer upon a municipally created authority ex-officio committee or city manager the power and authority to give or withhold consent and that Diplomat and any third persons may rely upon such consent. Now, none of those bodies or the manager has any authority to do anything more than this City Commission directs by resolution or ordinance to empower anybody to do and the commission is limited as to what it has the right to delegate to anybody else. Now, so there was no misinterpretation that all that the city was doing was modifying paragraph (c) in the resolution so that he could wear two different suits. We further said in the contract in the event that a municipal authority is created the City Manager shall serve as chairman of the board of such author- ity and the City Attorney and Project Director shall constitute the membership of the board. That means that the Manager and his appointees who are responsi- ble to the commission - that's the City Attorney who is responsible to the com- mission would serve as the executive committee. It is just a method of putting a different legal suit on the same function. There is no power, no authority and no intent to extract from the commission its sole and exclusive power, author- ity and rulings over this project. Mr. Plummer: Fine. My only concern is when you make a contract you make a con- tract for a reason and I don't have to explain that to you being an attorney. The Charter is a different thing but I don't want this commission to be bound if, in fact, the day comes that we establish a municipal authority. I don't want it established through a contract that only those three people can be the author- ity. I don't want it where the Manager is mandatory the chairman. Now I accept, feel comfortable with this other clause that this commission could, in fact, 13 OCT 2 6 ' increase it to five or seven members that the committee as we normally know it in this city could elect its own chairman and I'm just bringing that point up that the way it is spoiled out in this contract it is absolute and that's not the way I understand it. Mr. Knox, do you understand it differently? Mr. Knox: Now the language of the contract appears to be absolute. Again, to the extent that this contract would conflict with some Charter granted power that the commission has, of course, that provision of the contract to coin a phrase would be inoperative. What I'm saying is that the City Commission can do one of two things with respect to this provision. Either the provision can be changed or there can be a recognition on the record that the City Commission does not agree with the composition of the authority that it would create and it would create an authority composed of those individuals that it would desire to have. Mr. Plummer: Well, whatever way you want it and whatever way is legal without impeding what is trying to be accomplished is the way I want it to be done and whether it is recognition on the record. When you say recognition you're mean- ing by Mr. Fine and the Manager, is that it? Mr. Knox: Yes, all the parties can just indicate that they recognize the author- ity or the power of the City Commission to appoint an authority and name its mem- bers. Mr. Plummer: Now how should that be done because I want it? Should I do it in the form of En amendment? Should I do it in the form of just making a motion? How do I do that to accomplish it? Mr. Knox: Ok, you can make a motion of intent by the City Commission that this provision, not withstanding the terms of this provision that all of the parties recognize the power of the City Commission to appoint authorities and to name its members. Mr. Plummer: I offer that in the form of a motion. Mayor Ferre: Tell me what it is agair. now. Mrs. Gordon: Could we hold all these corrective motions until we have a complete picture, Mr. Plummer? Mr. Plummer: Be happy to. Mrs. Gordon: Well shall we make a note of it so that that will be one that perharE will join some others? May I ask a question of you, Mr. Grassie? Has this contract been scrutinized by bond counsel and also who is our bond counsel? Mr. Grassie: Two things, Commissioner, you may know that the Chamber of Commerce has had a committee that has been working on Watson Island along with the city and we have distributed to them a copy of this agreement for their review also. In discussion with them one of the things that has been suggested with which I concur is that not only bond counsel but also the city's CPA firm take a look at this agreement as soon as we get the full comment from the City Commission and that's what we expect to do. Now on the question of.... Mrs. Gordon: I wonder why you didn't do it before you brought it to us. Mr. Grassie: Very simply because we want to incorporate your comments before we hve that final review. Mrs. Gordon: But bond counsel's comments are going to be relative to the financ- ing of this project. Mayor Ferre: And much more important are our comments because we are the ones who have the final say so and, therefore, I think it is important that the com- mission's input be involved in this. Mr. Plummer: Why go to bond counsel if we turn it down? ... Mayor Ferre: That's right. Mr. Fine: There's one other important point that I'd like to remind you of, com- missioner. Both the resolution and this agreement if you'll look at page 20, paragraph 41 provide that the parties agree to make any reasonable modifications to this agreement which will not materially adversely affect either if requested 14 OCT 26" to do so by any underwriter for financing or any lender. So bond counsel we anti- cipate may have a time prior to validation request for a modification, changing of words, insertion of other procedural requirements related to the bond financ- ing that would be inserted at that time and that is the time of final review of the contract of the perspectus of the economics of the plans of the City Charter, etc., all of the ingredients that will encompass the project and that is the normal time that the final reviews are made prior to the validation of the bonds and the important thing was to include a provision in the contract where the part- ies agreed to those reasonable modifications that are made or suggest.ed by bond counsel and the underwriters. Mrs. Gordon: I'm sorry but it troubles me that we are moving in this direction the way we're moving. The provisions in here, we didn't go page by page so I'm not going to be able to pick the page that has it but the IRS is mentioned and certain other provisions in here, make me wonder whether or not the IRS will approve these tax exempt bonds with the other provisions that are included in this contract. that is your opinon on that? Mr. Fine: It is my opinion that the bond issue will be within the definitions of the Internal Revenue Code and the rulings that are required for tax free bonds are given after the project is presented in the whole not just on the contract, not just on the plans, on the prospectus, the economics, the whole project in its entirety will be reviewed at that time. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Fine, is it important to you and your associates that this con- tract be approved by the IRS? Mrs. Gordon: Yes. Mr. Fine: It is important, no, it is not important to us that it be approved by the IRS. It is important to the underwriters and they get an opinion of bond counsel prior to the validation. Mayer Ferre: Let me start over again. It is important to the project that the IRS approve the validity of the tax free nature of the bonds that are to be sold? Mr. Fine: It is on every tax free bond issue. It is important that they do... Mayor Ferre: If IRS were to turn this down do you think that the $55,000,000 of revenue bonds could be sold? Mr. Fine: In this or another form yes I do think they can be sold. Mayor Ferre: So in other words even though it is important to the project it is not absolutely essential. Mr. Fine: It is not a life or death. Mayor Ferre: I just wanted to understand that. Mr. Fine: The sale of tax free bcnds produces a lower operating cost to the city of the project because the cost of money is less. That is the primary advantage in this being a city owned and city operated project. Mayer Ferre: Mr. Fine, Mrs. Gordon asked a question which hasn't been answered perhaps we should address it to Mr. Grassie with regards to bond counsel. I think it is very important that the proper bond counsel be selected for the purposes of making sure that the validation procedure moves adequately and perhaps Mr. Knox might want to address himself to that. Mr. Grassie; I think the City Attorney can address himself to that, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Knox: Yes. For some period of time we've been having conversations with Mr. Bob Olive who is a member of the firm of Bryant, France and Miller, Olive, Brant and Ryan in Tallahassee. Now this is the premier bond firm in the State of Flor- ida. They have handled a number of bond issues to include Interama and this would probably be the recommendation of the City Attorney's Office with respect to the selection Mayor Ferre: What do you mean probably, is it your recommendation? Mr. Knox: Yes. OCT 2 61977 Mayor Ferre: Let me understand this and I don't mean to in any way criticize another firm but you know we had such a hard time with Mitchell Petty and I know John Guandolas has got to be the best most conservative tax attorney in New York but it took us, Charlie, over a year to get that validation for the Housing Bond Issue that he was - 8 months, well ok - but I certainly think that I would certainly agree perhaps we might try another bond firm this time out. And we have used, this is Governor Farris Bryant's firm isn't it? Mr. Knox: Yes, sir. Mayor Ferre: We used them as I recall before we went to Mitchell Petty, is that correct? Mr. Grassie: That's correct, Mayor. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Grassie, have you had any input into any of this? Mr. Grassie: I agree with the City Attorney's recommendation in this case, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Fine: I just would like to state that Wall Street considers the Bryant firm the leading bond counsel firm in the State of Florida and they probably handle more tax free issues than any firm that I know south of New York. Mayor Ferre: But Ronnie, let me ask you this. Is the importance of the bond counsel for the purposes of validation in the Supreme Court of Florida or is it to sell the issue in New York? Where is the importance? Mr. Fine: The importance of the bond counsel is that they will do particularly as Florida lawyers, they will do two reviews. One is they will review the viabil- ity and legality of the in total project relating to the Florida Constitution, the City Charter, ordinances, etc., that type of thing. Number two is they will render an opinion as to the tax free requirements of the Internal Revenue Code. When they sign that opinion the day before the validation of the bonds all of the bond holders will then rely upon that opinion. They are the ones that certify for the entire project including the Internal Revenue Code. Mayor Ferre: I see. So in other words it is important both vis-a-vis Florida and vis-a-vis New York. Mr. Fine: Correct. Now if you appointed them today, they're normal procedures. They would begin working tomorrow on all aspects of the project. They would come in and begin to prepare the total concept so that as the project evolved they were monitoring what was happening so that when it was finished you didn't have to go back and re -do the whole thing. Mayor Ferre: Is that what you're recommending? Mr. Fine: I would recommend that the city appoint.... Mayor Ferre: Let me see if I understand then what's come out so far from what I've gathered besides the motion that Plummer's going to make in a little while with regards to the authority and so on. As I understand it you're saying that before we get up to Wall Street, and I'm sure we've got a long way to go to do that, the three things that I've heard you say, two I'm sorry, one is that this be subject to approval by the bond counsel as to legal form, etc. and that is specifically provided in paragraph 41; and twc, Mr. Grassie is recommending that we also pass it through our auditors which are Peat, Marwick and Mitchell. Is that right? Mr. Grassie: That's correct, Mayor. Mrs. Gordon: Have they been advising you, Mr. Grassie, with regard to the terms of this agreement up to this point? Have you had counsel with them regarding that? Mr. Grassie: Yes, in a preliminary way but I want to give it to them to give me a formal review. Mayor Ferre: So we -would have both an audit opinion ar:C; legal opinion, is that what you're saying? Mrs. Gordon: Here again, you know it seems to me that two very important first 16 OCT 26197 steps have been delayed to some other time and it almost seems like we always spin our wheels. The bond counsel in my opinion should have been working with whoever created this document and certainly the financial advisor should have been called in at the outset. Mr. Fine: May I correct that, Mrs. Gordon, because I don't think that follows a normal sequence? The bond counsel will impart as every bond counsel rely upon the city legal department for its opinion that this agreement meets the Charter and the Codes and the laws of the city and that you have had your legal depart- ment which consists of some ten or twelve lawyers involved in the approval of this contract. So I think you've had legal attention to the contract and I think it has been represented here this morning by the City Attorney who is your chief legal officer that this contract meets the laws of the City of Miami and the State of Florida. I think what bond counsel will do will be to determine whether there are any modifications that are required that might affect the financeability or the exposure of the city. I think that's what the bond counsel will do. The bus- iness terms were established by the commission and not by bond -counsel. He will not attempt to renegotiate the structure of the deal. Mrs. Gordon: That is not what I said. I did not say bond counsel would set the financial terms. I did say that the bond ccunsel would have or could have or in my opinion would be a businesslike procedure to have them involved in the drafting of the contract to avoid any possibility of nonvalidation by the IRS for the sale of these tax free bonds. Mr. Fine: Bond counsel traditionally performs a eervice that they do not want to render an opinion until the day of validation. What they do is they work in- formally with the city in all of the processes. There should be only one legal opinion in any bond issue and that is the legal opinion that is issued on the day that the bonds are validated. Mayor Ferre: Well I think it is amply covered by Section 41 and I repeat, "The parties agree to make any reasonable modifications to this agreement which will not materially adversely affect either of them if requested so to do by any under- writer of the financing or any lender." Now obviously if you have a machine that doesn't fly and the engineer that you're asking or the pilot says if you twist this thing a little bit five degrees it is going to get off the ground you know it is academic because what value is the airplane if it doesn't fly? So we have to fine tune this thing so that this machine that we've dreamed up here is going to fly. I think the main point as I understood what you're saying is, Look we've already cast the main ingredients of this machine, this airplane, and we're not talking about you know it has two wings and two motors and so on. We're not talk- ing about that because that bond counsel is not going to have any and they're not involved in that. I think what they're involved in is the fine tuning to make sure that the machine flies, flies better or gets off the ground well but I think the main aspect of what this instrument is and how it is going to work and how it is going to last and who gets what payments where and who has what rights and what authorities have already been predetermined by the July 28th statement that we made. That's why I keep asking is that in any way in substance modified. If the answer is no then what we're talking about is that we're making some adjust- ments at this point. I'm sure that there will be many many many other adju etments between now and the day we cut the ribbon. Mr. Fine: And I would like to further say in reliance of the resolution 77-671 that you passed in July that the developers have commenced the planning, engineer- ing, economic conceptual work that is well in process and we're hopeful to be able to come back to you and give you for first public review the first concept- ual plan with the supporting data and economics sometime within the next 60 days so that we have moved forward in reliance of the resolution that uea unanimously passed by the commission. Mrs. Gordon: Could we look on page 3, Mr. Fine and if you would answer this.... Mayor Ferre: Rose, I'll tell you you had a very good idea. Are we now past pages one and two? Mrs. Gordon: I have some minor points on those pages but.... Mayor Ferre: Well why don't you cover those then we can do it, and I think I agree with you let's do it on an orderly basis. On pages 1 and 2 does anybody have any questions on pages 1 and 2? Limited just to that. Mrs. Gordon: Ok, on page 1 so there'll be no problem with any questioning whether 17 OCT 2619 t of hot we have or have not done this. 1 simply bring this to the table because it is in the agreement and it is the public bin? process, Mr. Grassie, the pro- cedure that we took for the record would you simply state them? Mr. Grassie: Commissioner, are you suggesting we include them as a whereas? Mayor Ferre: No, she didn't say that. She said would you for the record into the microphone express one more time what the procedures were as to the public bidding process. It's all on the record so repeat it. Mr. Grassie: Based on authorization of the City Commission that this project be put out to public bid the city went through the full process of advertising in local and national newspapers. It also contacted major developers throughout the United States who had expressed an interest in the past in this project and in- vited any demonstration of interest from any of these parties. It received sealed bids through the Office of the City Clerk, those bids were opened in public with all of the bidding parties present at the time as well as the news media and the bids were made available to all of the parties so that they could see them immed- iately on their being opened. Mrs. Gordon: All right. Page 2, Mr. Plummer, you had a question on 2? Mr. Plummer: I have the answer but I want it clarified on the record so there will be no question. Mrs. Gordon: That's the point of all of this. Mr. Plummer: Ok. As it relates to Convention facilities, it is my understanding that, in fact, the wording herein contained in the document convention facilities does not mean that there will be built a conver.t:on facility on Watson Island nor does it preclude that mutually agreed at a later tine that it cannot be built but as it relates basically here in this contract that it wct.:d be a convention ac- cessory facility in which bringing conventions to this town would be the availa- bility of Watson Island as one of the focal points. Mrs. Gordon: Tterefore, the word facility in your opinion should be changed? Mr. Plummer: ro, the word facilities covers. Rose, what I was trying to elimin- ate was at this time writing words emphatically into a contract would give the indication that here we are building a $40,000,000 convention complex and it was giving them or mzr.dating them to build a competitive situation. So it is clari- fied for the record that the wording convention facility does not mean that a con- vention hall or convention structure will be built. Mrs. Gordon: But it could be. Mr. Plummer: rixtually agreed. In other words they can't do it unilaterally but they could come back to this commission in ten years or fifteen years and say we want to put E., convention facility and if the commission agreed it could be done. Mr. Fine: May I address that question for a moment, please? Under this contract there is nothing that can be built, rebuilt, redeveloped on this island without the express approval of the City Commission under any conditions during any term of this agreement, condition one. Number two is the wording convention facilities were included in the description of the park in order to further establish under the Internal Revenue Code the use of the facilities as a tax exempt facility. It can be used for recreational entertainment, park, sports, convention facilities. It does not mean nor does it require that convention he..11 or that meeting rooms be placed upon the island. It means that this has as an attraction of the City of Miami will further enhance the ability of the city to attract conventions and have an entertainment cultural recreational facility for conventioneers as well as our local people to attend. Mr. Plummer: Yes, but just as important, Mr. Fine, it doesn't preclude or pre- vent later on if the city and Diplomat agree that a convention center or hall were to be built, it doesn't preclude that. Mayor Ferre: J. L., let me say that I'm not a lawyer but that has to be obviously correct because in any agreement between two consenting parties which we are and we've come to an agreement that agreement can be meCified, altered,. changed in perpetuity. The Supreme Court of the United Stales has ruled time and time again that one legislative body cannot bind a future legislative body. We cannot pass legislation right now which if ten years from now a commission at that time and 18 OCT 26197 the people whc represent Diplomat World want to change this completely around they have the authority to do it. WE cannot say that no one will ever tamper with this in perpetuity because that's against the constitution. Mr. Plummer: As mutually agreed. Mayor Ferre: Obviously it's mutually agreed. Mr. Fine: It would further require the approval of the trustees for the bond holders. Neither the city nor ourselves cold change the island. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Fine and Mr. Mayor, please don't misinterpret my remarks. I am merely bringing these points up on the record for clarification, that's all. Mayor Ferre: And I think what we're trying to do is clarify it. Mrs. Gordon: On paragraph 1, a very minor change and a question to you, Mr. Fine. The words "to cause a financing" basically means to obtain. Why not use the word obtain? Mr. Fine: The words of art that the lawyers use that are established by case law are those words that have been followed within the contract. The words"to cause" are different than the words"to obtain" and although we as laymen look upon them as the same they do have a distinction in terms of activity and authority. Mrs. Gordon: If you don't mind, would you tell me what the distinction is and why you use ere instead of the other? Mr. Fine: Well, the developer cannot obtain the financing for the city. He can negotiate and recommend to the city that it obt`ir the financing from underwriters. We have no authority to commit the city it any financing, the city must commit itself and solely itself. Mrs. Gorder: And for the reason being that the Diplomat will be the ones to pur- sue the financing but you are specifically using that in that sense because you are not going to do the finalizing... Mr. Fine: We don't have a legal right to do that. Mrs. Gordon: Ok. Thank you for telling me, I had that question. Ok, the next point and down further in the page under a small 4 under 2, you have all other activities relating to plans for developing the property, you Lave no objection to the word necessary being inserted in there do you? tx. Fine: Well, this relates to the planning only. This section relates to planning. Mrs. Gordon: Yes, but in all cases where it is left in that manner de you have any objections? Mr. Fine: Let me respond to the question. In the contract nothing can occur without the prior approval of the City Commission. Now what we are doing is we are charging the developer with the responsibility to do the planning, to bring the planning to the point where it comes to the commission for approval. We're trying not tc (jive the developer a way out to say, "Well I didn't do this because I didn't think it was necessar," so what the contract is saying to the developer is that you have to do everything to bring this project to us for recctrr'endation to the point of financing. If you insert the word necessary you may reduce the requirements of the developer to produce all of the wcik necessary. We would then have a discussion as to what we consider neceeser-y or what you consider nec- essary. Although it is remote that that woul6 happen it is my judgement that the city is in a better position by requiring the developer to do all activities what- ever they may be without creating the test as to whether the developer thinks it is necessary. kayor Ferre: Mr. Fine, in response to that let me see if I understand thi: prop- erly since we're now getting into very detailed aspects of 1e%.. and since none of us up here except for Father Gibson who went to law school for one day are lawyers. Now forgive the lecture but as I understand it the difference between common law and Roman Law which is the Napoleonic Civic Code as used in most Latin countries of the world and most of Europe is that Common Law has a historical tradition of not using every word and, therefore, leaving the construction of things as loose 19 OCT 26197 t as possible and perhaps the most dramatic example of that is our constitution, the Constitution of the United States. F:oman Law on the other hand is very specific. It tells you everything that must be done and, therefore, it has the strength of being very detailed and rigid but it also has the disadvantage that it is alwa}E problematical because it is easily violated. Now as I understand the corstruct- ion of legal contracts in the United States usually unless a word is absolutely essential it is better to leave for clarity's purpose it is better to leave a legal document like the Constitution or this legal agreement as loose as possible so that the interpretation of it can be more flexible and, therefore, in the long rtal ironically binding to the welfare of the parties that are in agreement. Now excuse the lecture in law but it seems to me that the more words you add that are not necessary complicate the legal document beyond a point which is reasonable and since we do function under common law in this country that is why we construe things as simply as possible. Mr. Fine: The answer would be I have no objection to the insertion of the word but I think the city will get less than they bargained for. I think the insert- ion of the word necessary reduces the.... Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Knox, in your position as our counsel desire or not desire the word inserted? Mr. Knox: It would probably be my position that from the point of view of the city that the greater the scope of the undertaking by Diplomat World the better off the city is and what we try to do in all cases and one of the subjects of the negotiation to the extent that the City Attorney's Office participated was to resolve those kinds of conflicts where for example we used the word necessary in such a manner that the parties understand that the interpretation that would be given to these apparent ambiguities would be construed in best interest of the city and as Mr. Fine pointed out I think in this particular case it is a synthesiz- ing process that they're required to do all and the City Commission has the power to select out those things that it determines are necessary. Then we resolve the problem of having Diplomat World determine what is necessary with respect to planning. Mrs. Gordon: All right, we can move along. Mayor Ferre: Are we through with page 2? Then we're on page 3. Mrs. Ga1don? Mrs. Gordon: Two questions: The $20,000,000 security which the city has to pledge does that have to be pledged in increments or can it be pledged in increments or must this be pledged at the time of the issuance? Mr. Fine: At the time of the underwriting, well prior to the underwriting the underwriters when they get close to coming to the commission for the approval of the underwriting they would then set forth a request to the city that it reserve an amount of money that would be sufficient to pay a portion of the bonds in the event there were a default under the bonds. It is not going to require the pay- ment of monies to anybody. It is going to require the establishment in effect of a trust in which sufficient monies each year would be held in reserve. Now let's assume that payments are made by the project year 1,2,3 up to 19 and in the 19th year there was a default. At that time those trust funds for that partic- ular year would then be paid to the trustee for the bond holders. Each year that passes where the money is not required it goes into the General Fund and it does not tie the money up more than one year in advance. Mayor Ferre: Wait. In the first place as I recall the $20,000,000 even though it is not spelled out in this particular paragraph is earmarked to come from the Florida Power and Light Franchise. Mr. Fine: Correct. Mayor Ferre: All right, now the Florida Power and Light Franchise has 7 years to run. A11 right? And as I recall the estimated is close to $40,000,000 that we're going to be getting from that in the next 7 years. Now, as I understand it as this money tames in it gets put into a special reserve. Is that correct? Mr.Fine: Correct. Mayor Ferre: Now that reserve remains until it is released by the bond holders. So I don't understand what you mean by that the money in the, ----unless you're talking about the interest that's gained out of the investment of the $20,000,000. Now that can be used in the General Fund but the $20,000,000. itself cannot be used, Mr. Fine: That's correct. 20 OCT 2619 Mayor Ferre: Now, let me ask you this, is there any provision or I know it can't be covered in this document as such, but when you get to the point when you are at Wall Street and you are to go to market and what have you, in the bond document itself, are you going to have some type of a clause that will release the holding of these $20 million as the bond is paid down, for example, let's take year 23, when what we owe now is $4 million or $3 million, it seems to me patently absurd to hold $20 million in reserve when what we owe is $4 million. Mr. Fine: They do that, Mr. Mayor, and you are correct. I would like to make two points about that. No. 1 is that the bond negotiations will be done in conjunction with the City and the City has under a contract a financial consultant that works with it on the bond issues for the City. Mayor Ferre: Who is that, Mr. Grassie? Mr. Grassie: William Huff... Mayor Ferre: From St. Petersburgh? Mr. Grassie: Yes, Sir. Mrs. Gordon: Have you been in consultation with him with regards to this issue? Mr. Grassie: No, and wouldn't be until we go to the validation of the bond issue, that's when they get involved in the negotiations. Mayor Ferre: Yes, bond representatives of that nature are people who get involved when you go into market, they are not there basically to design the instrument because..that's what's been done. Mr. Fine: You see, the City's financial consultants' role will be to, in effect, negotiate with us on behalf of the City for the most favorable terms and conditions of the bond issue and they would come in place after the City has approved the conceptual plan and begins to work with the underwriters as to form and content. Mayor Ferre: If you will forgive the 30-second editorializing on this, you know, a lot of people give a lot of reasons why Interama went down the drain but the main reason, the real reason, is that the bond market was out of hand. We are reaching...the irony of all this is that we are going in the same direction in the bond market which was happening exactly three years ago when Interama was ready to go to market and I think that time is really of the essence. I am not a financial expert on bonds, but from all that I can read this bond market is going to be very different 5 or 6 months from now. So, I think time is of the essence. Mr. Fine: Let me give you what may be a 'for example', Mrs. Gordon we are in effect in some of these areas trying to select the cups and saucers that go on the table of a house that we don't have the plans for, that we haven't arranged for a mortgage for, that we don't have a General Contractor for, and we are trying to work on things that in the order of things will be taken care of in an orderly process of development and it's very difficult trying to say that we want to select the cups and saucersthat are going to go on the kitchen table before we have the plans and the mortgage to build the house. Mayor F"rre: Counselor, your are good. Mrs. Gordon: I want to tell you what I believe, that facsimile may or may not be correct. In my opinion it's incorrect, with all due respects to you, because I have a lot of respect for you. I my opinion, all of those various and sundry entities that make up a part of a planning project which includes the bond counsel, some of the financial aspects, should all be brought in at the very beginning and that everything be planned together. We are at a point now when we are reviewing something that we do or do not know if it will fly, okay? That's what I think, at this point. We are hoping it will fly, maybe it will. The ,next question that I have is a little further down where you in the same para- graph on page 3, it says: 'However, subject to the financial feasibility and approval of the City as herein defined..." this "herein defined" again refers back to the City Manager's position because in the beginning that's where you delineated but I believe everywhere you put "City" it should be more specific OCT 2 6197' "Commission." Mr. Fine: May I suggest that you turn to page 5, paragraph n, the definition of City - "City, as used herein, shall mean the appropriate official or branch of the City government including the City Commission as required by the Charter or Code of the City to take whatever action is required by the terms of this agreement. That means, that under the Charter, all of those things that require approval by the Commission will be done by the Commission, those things that may be delegated by the Commission to a Manager would be done by the Manager, etc."...and it would be impossible to go through every line and describe now who has the legal authority to do it. Mrs. Gordon: All right, I didn't bring that up as the point that I was going to bring up, it just preceded it. "Additional revenue bonds or to obtain other means of financing the property and/or to separately finance or fund individual segments of the development from other sources including the unsubordinated ground leasing of portions thereof." Would you explain to me how you could fund other portions when all of the revenues that are being generated under the original contract are going to be already pledged? Mr. Fine: Yes, it may be determined, number one, that instead of having one issue for $55 million, that the issue be divided into multiple issues, for example, the marine facilities, the underwriters may suggest that we finance separately, so you may have multiple issues for different aspects of the park. Mrs. Gordon: You are not speaking then of additional beyond the $55 million at any place in this contract. Mr. Fine: No. There is no method of doing anything that this Commission does not approve. Mrs. Gordon: Agreed, on that, but you know. Mr. Plummer: No, no, wait a minute Rose, back up. On page 3, that's right, Mr. Fine, I think that if you'll review your answer is incorrect, there is a method in this contract to go beyond the $55 million if mutually agreed. Mr. Fine: Oh yes, if the Commission approves it. Mr. Plummer: Okay, but her statement was that there was no way in this contract to go beyond the $55 million and you said 'that is correct'... Mr. Fine: Well, without the Commission's approval. For example, suppose that this Commission decided that it wants to further enhance the project after it was developed and it felt that it was economically viable and in the public interest to expand the Marina, for example, and they wanted to raise another $1 or $2 millions to expand the marina facilities, they would have the authority to do that provided there were no further guarantees of any City monies. Mrs. Gordon: How about the revenues? Would there be further pledging of... in my reading of the thing all revenues are already pledged. Mr. Fine: That's correct, it would require the approval of the under- writers also. The underwriters might agree, for example, let's suppose if we had "x" amount of boat slips and it was very successful and there . as a demand for "x" times two, and the City went and determined that it would like to build twice the amount of marine facilities and it was a very successful project, and the City talked to the underwriters and the under- writers said - yes, we are willing to float another $3 million worth of bonds, then they would be able to do that to expand the facilities that were there. Mrs. Gordon: Okay, then in line with that and also for clarification, I hope you don't object to this line of questioning and...because it's clarified not only for me but for the others here and those here present and also for any one reading the records of this meeting in the future. The point I would like to ask you then is in line with that development possibility over and above the $55 million, okay?, the source of repayment then would be from where? Mr. Fine: From the project revenues. 22 OCT 26197; Mrs. Gordon: From additional project revenues? Mr. Fine: From additional project revenues or from the project revenues. Mrs. Gordon: Well, would that in any way if it was not on the water, if it was on the land, that this additional projects took place, would that in any way reduce the ground area that was available to generate the original sources of revenue to repay the original bonds? Mr. Fine: I don't believe that either the City nor the bond underwriters or ourselves would recommend something that would diminish the viability of what was developed there in the first place. Mrs. Gordon: Okay, we are on the next page, that's 4. Mayor Ferre: All right, does anybody else have any questions on page 3?.. We are now on page 4. Mrs. Gordon: Is there any reason why... -and I know you did not originate this wording, I think I recall it from being in the original Pritzker deal- why the delineated --can you tell me-- 'hard cost', 'soft cost'..aren't all 'costs' costs? Mr. Fine: In the words of art and development, when you talk about the defi- nition of 'hard costs' and 'soft costs'...'hard costs' generally refer to the actual cost of the building contract, of construction, materials and labor. 'Soft costs' relate to interest costs, architectural fees, legal fees, those are the terms - words of art that are used in the construction -development field, that's why they have the two definitions. Mrs. Gordon: Does anybody else have any questions? Mayor Ferre: Any other questions on page 4? All right, we will now move to page 5. Mrs. Gordon: In the first paragraph, where you refer to additional improvements would you want to delineate that more with capital expenditures instead of additional improvements?..it's much clearer as to what you have in mind. Mr. Fine: We are anticipating that the bond underwriters because of the nature of this park may require that we set aside reserves out of the net income that is produced before it is distributed to anbybody, sufficient money for replace- ment or the adding of additional facilities in the island in order to further enhance the viability of the project. Mrs. Gordon: Well, I understand your answer but it doesn't answer my question, but that's all right, but I just want to clarify just one thing in our previous question because you touched on it and you explained to me how you would get the financing for over $55 million but was that revenue as produced by that a part of the distribution to the developer and to the City as well? Mr. Fine: It would come prior to the distribution to the City or the developer. Mrs. Gordon: It would become disbursed in the same manner? Mr. Fine: It would become a project cost, it would be as though we had built those improvements when we first built it. It would defer the profit to the City and to the developer. Mrs. Gordon: With regards to the municipal tax aspect, under k, would this also how would it affect county taxes and how would School Board taxation come into play under that? Mr. Fine: It would have no effect. If those taxes were levied and now levied was approved by the Supreme Court of Florida, then those taxes would become a project expense. Mrs. Gordon: Coming off the top? Mr. Fine: That's correct. 23 our 26 Mayor Ferre: I have a question. On 3, Mr. Fine, for the record even though I think I understand pretty well, one of the three concerns that I have expressed on this is the question of control of the planning. It says here: "The City shall not approve such planning in whole, Diplomat shall have forty-five days from the notification of such disapproval in which to modify such Planning to obtain such approval." My question is, what if within the forty-five days you don't resubmit something which is approved, does that mean that if it is not approved we end up in a hiatus situation?..or... Mr. Fine: No, we...what it is if the City doesn't direct some planning then the City would make recommendations as to what it wanted and we would have to incorporate those into the planning and return it to the City. If we give you a plan and the City.... Mayor Ferre: That wasn't my question, my question is once the procedure starts and you submit your second change and the City says again "we don't accept that" then, what happens? Do you have another 45 days? Mr. Fine: No, what I'm saying is we'll require it to respond to the direction of the Commission. Mayor Ferre: I understand that, and suppose that the Commission says, no we don't want that in green, we want it to be painted red. Mr. Fine: It has to come back painted red, we are bound to do that. Mayor Ferre: I understand, thank you. Mrs. Gordon: Would you have any objection to putting in a clarification on the county and School Board taxes? There it's silent, you know, you said what you said but the contract is silent. Mr. Fine: Let me.... Mayor Ferre: Excuse me, again, Rose, this is a matter of law, if it is silent therefore it is not included, in other words, the only thing that it speaks to is City taxes, and obviously by not speaking to Federal Taxes, Dade taxes, county taxes, School Board taxes, are not involved. The more...we could put in a whole page talking about all the kinds of taxes but that's not legal language the way things are done. Now, I'd like to ask George Knox, not Mr. Fine, whether he wants to specifically outline the various taxes or is it stronger by just speaking to what we are talking about. Mr. Knox: Again, the rules of construction are that whatever law prevails at the time governs the language that you use in an agreement; it is not necessary to talk about those laws that you must adhere to in the agreement implicit in a provision by municipal taxes. Number one, you take the literal definition and if there is a prohibition against giving tax -exemption with respect to county, state or federal taxes then that can be validly implied from the language of the document. Mr. Fine: May I further say, Mrs. Gordon, that neither the City nor ourselves are of the opinion that any other taxing authority has the right to tax the City on projects, and we see no benefit to the City in implying or including any insinuation that they may have such authority. Mrs. Gordon: Okay, any other questions? Mrs. Gordon: On 5, Mr. Fine, one question to you again, you have reiterated it time and time again but you reiterate just one more time that there would be nothing that would be done without the City Commission's approval, even though it says here: "City, as used herein shall mean the City Commission, or the appropriate official or branch of the City government..." Okay, let's go to cumber 5. Mayor Ferre: We are on page 6 now. Questions on page 6. Mrs. Gordon: Did you ask this question before, Mr. Mayor, I was reading and I wasn't concentrating in your conversation but did you ask if 45 days wasn't enough time to modify plans...? Mayor Ferre: I did not. 24 OCT 26197 Mrs, Gordon: I heard you say 45 regarding something and I didn't know,.. Mayor Ferre: Yes, but I didn't ask that question. Mrs. Gordon: What if, it says here: "If If the City shall not approve such Planning in whole, Diplomat shall have days from the notification of such disapproval in which to modify such Planning to obtain such approval." What if more than 45 days becomes necessary or if it is not completed in 45 days? or whatever... Mr. Fine: Then, we would have to come back to the City for approval. We don't anticipate.... Mrs. Gordon: You don't think more than 45 days are needed in the first place. Mr. Fine: No. Mrs. Gordon: You don't. Mr. Fine: No. Mr. Plummer: May I interject, Rose? Mr. Mayor, I might suggest on page 5, under n, you know, I have assurances from everyone but, you know, I think if that paragraph was reworded it might alleviate a lot of fears that I have and Mrs. Gordon. Mayor Ferre: Well, what are you talking about? Mr. Plummer: To the extent...really, the way you read this paragraph it puts the Administration first and the Commission second. Mayor Ferre: All right, then how would you like to reworded it? Mr. Plummer: If you would reword basically to say- The City, as used, herein shall mean the City Commission or the appropriate official or branch of that government as required by Charter. In other words, put the Commission first and the Administration second. Mayor Ferre: Does anybody have any objection to that?..Mr. Fine? Mr. Plummer: I think it would alleviate a lot of fears that may exist. Mayor Ferre: J. L., let's move ahead, I think it is a good recommendation. Do you agree, Mr. Fine? Mr. Fine: Yes, Sir. Mayor Ferre: Do you agree, Mr. Knox? Mr. Knox: Yes, Sir. Mayor Ferre: Do you agree, Mr. Grassie? Mr. Grassie: Yes. Mayor Ferre: All right, I'll tell you, so that we won't forget these things as they come up let's make a motion of it, specifically. Is that all right with you? Mrs. Gordon: Well, J. L. had a couple of previous ones. Mr. Plummer: No, I had one other. Mayor Ferre: Well, is there anything that needs to be changed other than this? Mrs. Gordon: I'm sure the Clerk is making a note of the things we are discussing and then he'll bring them to us at one time and then we'll make the corrections in one lump sum. Mayor Ferre: All right, that's fine,'City, as used herein shall mean the City 25 OCT 2619 Commission or the appropriate official or branch of the City government as required by the Charter or Code of the City to take whatever action is required by the terms of this Agreement. Period. Is that correct? Mr. Plummer: That puts the Commission first and it will alleviate any fears that this Commission might not be the final authority. Mayor Ferre: All right, is there anything else on page 5? We are now on page 6. All right, there was a question asked about the 45 days, that's answered, is there anything else? Mrs. Gordon: On page 6, I have a question. Under e)5," approvals and permits from all governmental authorities having jurisdiction over the property (other than those enumerated in Article 19, which the City shall have obtained in City's name)"...in referring to article 19, which is on page 13, it is contrary to the one I just read because it says: "....the City shall use its best efforts to Assist Diplomat to obtain, in the name of the City, approvals from the following (if requested by Diplomat)..." I bring this up because it is in conflict one to the other. Mr. Fine: Well, it's not intended to be in conflict. Mrs. Gordon: It's not intended but it is. Mr. Fine: What it's saying is that if there are approvals and permits required other than those that were listed in 19, that then Diplomat would be responsible for the cost of the preparation and obtaining of those additional permits. So that paragraph 19 does not become an exclusive but it becomes inclusive, it in effect is an additional to the effect that paragraph 19 is a 'catch-all' again to make sure that we have Mrs. Gordon: I'm not talking to that point at all, Mr. Fine, I'm only saying that which is it?, City shall obtain? or Diplomat shall obtain?, because you are say- ing both. Mr. Fine: The Diplomat is the agent of the City to cause the obtaining of the permits. The permits are obtained in the City's name, the permit process is worked by the consultants, the City's staff, and the developer, simultaneously. Mrs. Gordon: But, it doesn't say that, it says the Diplomat to obtain, it does not say 'cause to obtain' or 'cause approvals..', you know, like you explained before, Mr. Attorney, you gave an education in law, okay?, now here is the opposite of what you said before. Isn't it? I think a clarification is neces- sary between e, on page 6, and 19 on page 13, and I would assume someone will make the clarification. Mr. Fine: May I just address..Mrs. Gordon, if you'll read the bottom of the first paragraph, in full, go back to your page 6, paragraph 5. MRs Gordon: Right. Mr. Fine: At the end, before the enumeration, before e), it says: "...cause the preparation of, or obtain...." as the case may be, I think it's clarified within that paragraph. Mrs. Gordon: Page 6? Mr. Fine: On page 6, paragraph 5, you just addressed yourself to item e), if you'll look above item a) the last few words, say that the Diplomat shall, subject to the approval of the City, cause the preparation of, or obtain:..." Mrs. Gordon: I'm not quoting that one, it's really page 13 that's in conflict. Okay, can we move along? Mr. Fine: Okay, what we can do on 13, if it'll further satisfy you is that on the bottom on paragraph 19, if you'll follow with me before it, about three lines up, - "....the City shall use its best efforts to assist Diplomat to obtain...." ---and insert there the wording 'in the name of the City'... Mrs. Gordon: Okay, where...let me get that... 2E► OCT 26197 Mr. Fine: Page 13, paragraph 19.... Mrs. Gordon: What line?... Mr. Fine: Next to the last line in the first paragraph. Mrs. Gordon: All right. Mr. Fine: Where it says: "....efforts to assist Diplomat to obtain,...." insert the words: 'in the name of the City'. Mr. Plummer: ordination of the City. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Plummer: Mr. Fine: Mayor Ferre: We move to 7. Well, I think it goes without saying where there is this property that any approval has to be in the no sub - name of That's clearly spelled out here. Well, it's further delineation. in other paragraphs, that's okay. All right, where are we now? Is there anything else on 6? Mrs. Gordon: You see, it also again refers to Article 19...here again, you'd like to look at that with the same view.How would you...I mean, we have in here the Affirmative Action Program...we are all with you on that, everybody I know in this Commission is for an Affirmative Action program...does it need any further spelling out or clarification or is that sufficient to indicate in what way Affirmative Action will be employed? Mr. Knox: All right, this again implies that the Affirmative Action program will satisfy the Federal guidelines and the policy of the Commission with respect to Affirmative Action. Mrs. Gordon: May I ask of you...under 11 whether you have any objection to the word 'written' being inserted between 'prior' and 'approval'? On page 7, "with the prior, written, approval of the City"...do you have any objection? Mr. Fine: I have no.... Mr. Plummer: Rose, truthfully, it's covered in item 36, on page 18, in which it says "notices relating to this agreement shall be in writing by certified mail return receipt requested..." it's covered there. Mrs. Gordon: Yes, but in this paragraph which is recited here it hasn't any real strong...I'm not very strong on it but I just ask the question. W. Fine: Let me address that, let me tell you what, it slows the process. For example, suppose you pass a Resolution here today, we are prepared to implement whatever. the Commission ordered based on that Resolution immediately. The process of waiting until all of the paperwork may be refined and certified by the Clerk, etc. may present a delay that's undesirable by the City. As long as the word "prior approval" is in there, we think that too much of the paperwork may work to the adverse interest of the City. Mrs. Gordon: Under 7(d)..."borrow money and incur other obligations for the development and operation of the facilities in the approved plans;...." on what security or whose security would that be done? Mr. Fine: Number one, it requires a prior approval of the City, any borrowings that were done; number two is it would be a borrowing that..unemcumbered any City funds. For example, if we found that we had to establish an operating bank or line of credit for the operation of the Park, or for transfer of payroll funds or something of that type, it would all be related to the funds of the project itself. Mrs. Gordon: In other words, the security would be thatthe City would recommend it and therefore it would be the City's guarantee. Mr. Fine: It wouldn't be at the City's guarantee, it would be the City authorizing 27 OCT 2619i the project to do that. For example, suppose it was the policy of the City to keep its funds in interest bearing accounts, and even though it might have a weekly payroll to operate on an overdraft position, with the transfer of those funds coming out of the interesting bearing into a non -interest bearing account was done by authorization, that would be a form of borrowing, so that the banks then would be authorized to withdraw the funds from the interest - bearing account only when the checks were presented for payment. Mrs. Gordon: That's the only thing you had in mind, then.... Mr. Fine: It's that type of operation, that's correct. MRs. Gordon: Under f), would you explain to me, please, why we use the word 'mortgage'?...public property, in my opinion, doesn't permit mortgaging, even un s u bordinate mortgaging... Mr. Fine: Under what?... Mrs. Gordon: F, 7(f), the word is used "unsurbordinated mortgage". Mayor Ferre: "....and may as Agent for the City• (f) prepay, in whole or in part, re -finance, re -cast, increase, modify, consolidate or extend any un- subordinated mortgage or security interest affecting all or any part of the property;...." For example, suppose somebody puts up a restaurant and that restaurant does not have a mortgage on fee simple title but it has a mortgage on the building itself... Mr. Fine: The leasehold improvements. Mayor Ferre:...which is called a hypothecation...is that the correct legal language, counsel? Mr. Knox: Yes, Sir. Mayor Ferre:...So, I think... Mrs. Gordon: I question the word 'mortgage', even in that instance, with regard to anything that is on public property or public possession, once affixed to the property it becomes the property of the City and... Mr. Fine: Unless by contract the City permits it not to part of it, that's a matter of contract. In the absence of an agreement between parties, generally if it is affixed to the realty it becomes part of the realty, but you can contract. For example, if you had a restaurant tenant and he wanted to finance his kitchen equipment, as is a custom in most restaurants, then he gives to the lender, his borrower, his bank, what we would call a leasehold mortgage, a security. So that if he defaulted on the payment of the note for his kitchen equipment the lender could come in and remove that equipment and take it elsewhere and sell it. That would not have been anything that the City would have paid for in the beginning. Mrs. Gordon: That would have been your sub -lessee, you know, under you, a lessee of the portion that would be in the position to do what you are just describing that the title... Mr. Fine: It would be the City's sub -lessee. Mrs. Gordon: ...but the title of the paragraph reads: "with the prior ap- proval of the City, Diplomat shall be primarily responsible for day-to-day operation of the property excepting those segments agreed upon by the parties hereto, and may as Agent for the City• " now, that only refers to you, Diplomat --"....may prepay, in whole or in part, re -finance, re -cast, increase, modify, consolidate or extend any unsubordinated mortgage..." I take exception with the unsubordinated. mortgage portion of that paragraph and I think we dwelt on it long enough and you may take that into consideration for a modification. In my opinion it ought to be modified in some way, the word mortgage should not appear there. Mr. Fine: All right, let me give you another possibility. It might at a future date, be the desire of the Commission to add an improvement or an addition to the island that could be done in what you might call an unsubordinated mortgage 28 OCT 26197 structure, which is another name perhaps for the effect of an industrial bond which might be used. There are techniques where the City... Mrs. Gordon: Use those other words... Mr. Fine: Pardon me?.. Mrs. Gordon: Use that 'industrial bonds' or whatever else. Mr. Fine: This tends to cover the field, that's why it's in. Mrs. Gordon: AGain, under j) - "enter into approved construction, or other contracts;...." all of this prior...to agreement by the. Commission is under- stood and agreed. You don't enter into any contracts, you don't - Diplomat does not, the City does. Mr. Fine: That's correct. Mrs. Gordon: I'm wondering why I'm doing all the questioning, don't my fellow Commissioners have anything at all in here that you want to know about? If you think that these questions are unnecessary or shouldn't be asked or we are wasting too much time I wish somebody would say something. Mayor Ferre: I think it is highly appropriate, Mrs. Gordon. The difference, I think, perhaps, is that at least in my case that I've gone over this contract and I've done my discussions previous to this time. Mrs. Gordon: Well, perhaps if you had done them at the table I would have known what you had in mind and I might be saving a lot of people a lot of time. Mr. Fine: Mrs. Gordon, these were all in Resolution 77-671, which was addressed by two public hearings, there is nothing in this contract that wasn't addressed that you are discussing in Resolution 77-671. Mr. Plummer: changes in this contract that were not in the former Reso- lution. Mr. Fine: Well, there are modifications. Mr. Plummer: Exactly, if that was not the case, we wouldn't even be discussing it this morning. Mr. Fine: I think the wording that we are going over is in general. Mr. Plummer: Oh, all right, but there are some changes. Just for Mrs. Gordon's edification, Rose, I've been asking questions and my next one does not appear until page 10, so it's a matter of courtesy waiting for you. Mrs. Gordon: You go to 10 and I'll come back after... Mayor Ferre: No, no, let's go one by one, just like you recommended, which was a good recommendation. We are now on 7, is there anything on 7? All right, we now move to page 8, are there any questions on page 8? Mr. Plummer: Only a clarification on page 8, it's not a question, Mr. Grassie, as it relates to item n, you know...we are all looking that this is going to be a revenue producer for the City and I think that you for a matter of convenience should be a little bit more clear on what is the accounting year, since you are going to be depending upon anticipated revenues from this to put your budget together, I think it would be more advantageous to you, to make that clear. It gives them the right to make or change which could be in conflict with you being able to put your budget together and I just offer that to you for what it's worth, it is not a question. Mr. Fine: All this requires the approval of the City Commission. The establish- ment of the accounting year would require the approval. Mr. Plummer: I understand, I'm only saying that if you have the right, you know, it's a mechanical 'in-house' problem of them putting the budget together and I think it would be better for them to clarify it, not for me, Sir, it's 29 OCT 261977 immaterial to me...Well, I shouldn't say that. Mrs. Gordon: I have one more question on 8, Mr. Mayor, and that is on 8, paragraph 8, I didn't find it and maybe it is in here and I didn't notice it and I'm not going to say that I couldn't have missed it. but what if your service as a developer is not satisfactory?..How would the City handle that? Mr. Fine: The City would...we are required to meet certain standards in the operation and management of the Park, if we were...if we did not meet those standards to our mutual satisfaction and we provided for the resolution of those standards by the establishment of arbitration and the arbitrator would determine whether or not the Park was being operated in an equitable and fair purpose considering the operation of the Park. Mrs. Gordon: Isn't that what you would call a binding arbitration? Mr. Plummer: You are running one step ahead of me, Rose, because that was one point I wanted to get to and it is a major change from the former Resolution, so you all go ahead but I want to comment on that. Mrs. Gordon: Would you call that a binding arbitration?, that's something I would like to know, and I have faith in you or I wouldn't have voted for you in the first place, okay? Mr. Fine: We are prepared to have it binding, the arbitration rules are such that it is binding, our understanding of it is that the ruling is binding. It is enforced if one of the parties does not live up to the arbitration it is then enforced by an order of the Court. You then take the ruling of the arbitrator and you take it to the Court and the Court orders it implemented. Mr. Plummer: Well, but you see Ronney, in the old document, on page 14, section (i), it says: "you shall use the rules and the facilities of the American Arbitration Association" Now, in this new document, it says: "you shall only go by the rules set forth by the them." You don't have to use them but you shall abide by the rules that are set forth, it's a big difference. In the old document it's page 14, Section (i), in the new document it's on page 19.. article 37:"Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agree- ment, or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association...." Mr. Fine: The rules provide for the facilities according to the attorneys, they thought the word "facilities" was superfluous. Mr. Plummer: Well, I don't read that this way, I don't read the new agree- ment saying that we have to use the American Arbitration Association as arbi- trators. Mr. Fine: I have no objection to re-inserting the words "and facilities". Mr. Plummer: Well, I do. Mayor Ferre: What? Mr. Plummer: Well, I'll go by the rules as set forth in guidelines but using them, --and it's my opinion that once the City did get into..with that before it, —it's awful expensive, to use those people, now I have mo problems..I like the wording of the new contract. Mayor Ferre: Well, the Court isn't exactly cheap. Mr. Plummer: But the difference here, Mr. Mayor, is that in the old Resolution it states that you shall not only use their rule, but you shall use that orga- nization as arbitrator. Mrs. Gordon: What page is that on in the old one, J.L.? Mr. Plummer: In the old one page 14, Section (i), in the new document it only states that you shall play by those rules, you don't have to use them as the 30 OCT 26197-i arbitrator, it gives more latitude to the City. Mrs. Gordon: If you have no objection to the change I don't either because it's the reason I questioned about the binding aspect, the Mayor as very, very adamant against binding arbitration in a similar situation very recently and expounded extensively on the subject. Mr. Plummer: My only objection, Rose, is to working of the old document, I'm fully in accord with the new document. Mrs. Gordon: Okay, then, in accord with that if in fact, you know, your opera- tion which you are the beginner..you are the commencer with us and we are beginning with you, will be aired to somebody in the future from your side and ours, in that case how will it be determined, how would it be finalized if in fact your error, or...you know what I mean, anybody who takes over this project 20 or 30 years down the road is not performing satisfactorily? How? Mr. Fine: They shall be subject to the same standards. Mrs. Gordon: Can the City Commission by Resolution, Ordinance or whatever terminate? Mr. Fine: There is not a provision for termination, there is not a provision to terminate. The contract has a provision to reform and enforce the provi- sions of the contract. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Grassie, do you want to speak to that because that is a basic philosophical point which is not covered in the Resolution that was passed on the 28 of July. It was the subject of an article in the Miami Herald and sub- sequently an editorial, and since as you recall, when I called you about it, that I thought it was proper to answer all of the questions that have arisen from all reasonable sources of criticism, I think that in itself was a question- able statement --but, perhaps you can address yourself to that. Mr. Grassie: A termination clause, Mr. Mayor, members of the City Commission, would simply inject into the contract what is implied by law as I understand it and you may want to ask the City Attorney about this, basically any violation of the contract, any non-compliance or non-performance provides a legal basis for termination. Now, there is the arbitration process that must be gone throug.:. There is also provision in the contract which speaks to due notice; in other words, there is a provision for a 10-day notice so that if there is an implied non-performance, the party not -performing has to be notified of that and have 10 days to cure it. But, the document by requiring things makes it possible that either party could cause termination simply by going to the courts and maintaining a breach of contract, that's typical of any contract. Mayor Ferre: Now, Mr. Knox, on the record so that we can get this specifically addressed. As I understand it, in American law and specifically in the laws of the State of Florida -which would cover this- when two parties agree to something there is no such thing as 'marriage in perpetuity ',that if two parties whether it is a personal contract which marriage is , or any other binding contract between people, if there is a disagreement that there is a provision in the law where people can get divorces or where things can go into default or a breach of contract would require a different prosivion. Now is that, am I understanding that right? Could you expand on that? OCT 261977 Mr. Knox: Yes, sir, I'd just say that the nature of a contract is the mutual exchange of promises and any breach of any promise is enforceable in court so the courts are always open to allegations concerning a breach of a contract. Mayor Ferre: All right, now Mr. Grassie, the only area where this wouldn't be covered as I understand it is in the case where it wouldn't be a legal matter but rather an economic situation. Let's take the position that this matter be- comes, that the park is not functioning financially successful, that there is a loss of money and that our $20,000,000 is being utilized to cover payments and what then does the City of Miami have as an avenue to pursue to get the park going in the right direction? Mr. Grassie: The avenue probably would be pursued by others before it was pur- sued by the City, Mr. Mayor because the trustees for the bond holders would not let the project go that far without... Mayor Ferre: They would if they were being covered by our $20,000,000. Mr. Fine: No. M. Grassie: What they would is change the operator. Mr. Fine: One of the provisions for making the changes in the contract is that the bond underwriters will insert in the agreement a termination clause that will come into effect before there is a default on the bonds. For example, we will be required to maintain a net cash flow in excess of what the amount of money is required to pay the bonds. At a point that we begin to drop below that point the bond holders would have the right to terminate the operating agreement. Mayor Ferre: Are you ready for my two minute philosophical statement now? You know the reason why this is a great country is because we believe in something called the open free system. And you know, I know it goes back 400 years to Adam Smith and what have you but the real crux of our civilization in the Western World is the ability of free forces to take play. You cannot, we cannot think of every single thing that is going to happen. There is no man or group of women and men intelligent enough to be able to do that. So therefore, when we have these situations that like the Constitution that we think of the general things that takes care of the specifics as we go along if the document is properly thought through. Now I want to make this very special point to this commission. The reason why I feel secure in this document is because the people that are really going to be worried about it that really have to be concerned that really have to scrutinize all of this are the people that are going to put up the $55,000,000 because they are the ones that are really going to be risking... Yes, we're risking 20 but they're going to be risking 55 and they're going to make very sure that all of the is are crossed and the is are dotted and everything is scrutin- ized - bond counsel and this counsel and that thing and the management and what have you. I want, Rose, to say to you in the questions that you were asking me just a bit ago, Rose, that - and I'm saying this with all sincerity -that I think that that is our most difficult hurdle. It is not going to be the I.I. Board, it's not going to be the neighborhood, it's not going to be the legal challenges. Be they what they may it's not going to be the criticism of the Miami Herald or it is not going to be the constant harrassment of editorials. It is going to be when it gets up to New York City which is where everything happens in the world and somebody says, "All right, fellows, where is the #55,000,000?" and that is going to be the real acid test. That's where it is really either going to happen or not happen. Mrs. Gordon: I want to tell you why it is important and maybe you won't agree but it is, because in any transaction where realestate is involved the amount of leverage that is used influences the amount of interest on whatever and in this particular case although you don't call it that you've got to sell those bonds at the best and lowest price in order to make the best and most profit and, there- fore, it is relevant and it isn't only because we're putting up a portion and they're securing only a portion...securing the rest, the whole picture counts whether or not we're recognized as the tax free bonds by IRS is important as to the sale of the bonds and to the ultimate profits involved in the transaction. 32 OCT 2 6197 Mayor Ferre: You haven't said a word I don't agree with. Mrs. Gordon: ok, you agree, I agree and now we're still.... Mayor Ferre: But wait a minute, Rose, excuse me. For the record I want to make sure that it is not misinterpreted that I feel, I have never said that it is irrelevant. I think what you're doing and what we've done and what Grassie's done and Knox and everybody, the Chamber of Commerce and everybody is all very relevant. There is no question about it. I'm just saying that in the way our American system works the real crux of the test is not what we're doing here this is relevant and important but where it really is important is for the peo- ple that are putting up the $55,000,000. That's all I'm saying. Mrs. Gordon: On page 9, will someone explain the wording that has been used in (e)? It differs from the prior agreement and it's wording in my opinion it's less than clear, (e), 1, start with. Mr. Fine: The original proposal requires or sets forth that the developer pro- pose to receive 80% of the revenue and the city 20. The City Commission with the consent and approval of the developer then attempted to devise a formula that as the volume of the park increased would give in effect the parties a 50-50 share. In order to do that mathematically the formula was established before you and what that provides is as follows: After all the bills are paid and there is money left an amount equal to 2% of what the total income was in the project.... Mrs. Gordon: I can save some time and tell you that's not what I'm asking. What I'm asking, Ron, is (i), the wording is: 3% of all gross revenues if such gross revenues shall be $20,000,000 or less per annum. Or less? Ten million would still be 3%? Fifteen million? Well now many million? It says or less. Mr. Fine: Let's assume that there is $10,000,000 left over. .... That's correct. Anything under $20,000,000 after the city has 4% and after we had 4% we would get an amount equal to 3%. Mrs. Gordon: Ok. Now come down to the next one where you say 4% of all gross revenues if such gross revenues shall be $30,000,000 or less per annum, how much, 20,000,000, 15,000,000, 12,000,000? Mr. Fine: If we get it to $30,000,000 it has to be more than 20. Mrs. Gordon: Well your wording is wrong in these, that's all I'm trying to tell you. In the one that you had on July 28th, July 28th doesn't read that way. July 28th reads: Diplomat World Enterprises shall receive an amount equal to 3% of all gross revenues as additional performance payment until gross revenues reach an amount of $20,000,000 per annum and thereafter receive an amount equal to 4% of all gross revenues until gross revenues reach an amount of $30,000,000 zip --clear! it's this one - ambiguous, this one. Mr. Fine: Well I think you have to look at the sequence to see why the lawyers thought this was less ambiguous. In other words.... Mrs. Gordon: Well I don't care if the lawyers thought it was or not I think it is wrong and it doesn't say what has to be done. Mr. Fine: Well, it does say what has to be done. You have to look at the para- graph and then I'll accept what your wording says. The distribution of funds are that there is X amount of money left over after it's paid. Then the city gets 2% then the developer gets 2% and the city gets 2% then the developer gets 2% and let's assume there's some left. Now, if the gross revenue for that year _ was less than $20,000,000 then the developer gets the next 3% and the city gets everything that's left over. Next item: Now let's say the revenue is $21,000,000, $30,000,000. We have so much left over. The city gets the first 2%, the devel- oper gets the next 2%, the city gets the next 2%, the developer gets the next 2% then the developer gets an amount equal to 4% then the city gets everything that's left over. So that the higher the amount of income.... Mrs. Gordon: I know your intent, I recognize your intent and you spelled it out in the one we have on the 28th. Why change it to where you have it on this agree- ment? The one on the 28th was very clear. It tells you exactly what to expect and this does not. Ok, I'm not going to argue the point. Mayor Ferre: Wait, she's got a valid point, Mr. Grassie and Mr. Knox, with re- gards to on page 9 Article XI a thru f in your opinion specifically on items e 33 OCT 26197 • is there a difference between page 3 of the previous agreement Article VI A (5) from E in Section (9)? Mr. Grassie: In my opinion there is not a difference, Mayor, the words were changed basically to try and protect the city and make it a little more clear. Mayor Ferre: mr. Knox? Mr. Knox: The primary concern was whether or not there was a formula for the distribution of the funds and there's no material change as between what's on page 9 paragraph 11 and what' on page 3 of the resolution. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Fine. Mr. Fine: The paragraph on page 11 is intended to effectuate the same thing as the paragraph in the resolution. Mayor Ferre: Do you see any substantial difference between the two? Mr. Fine: I don't but it is a matter of.... Mrs. Gordon: Paragraph 11? Excuse me, Mr. Fine, we're on page 9. Mr. Fine: Yes, I'm sorry, pane 9 paragraph 11, I mean Section 11. Mayor Ferre: Section 11 subsection e. Mrs. Gordon: Have you any objection to reverting to the one that we approved in July? It's very clear, I think any layman can read it and understand specifically what you're talking about. Mayor Ferre: I do have an objection. Mrs. Gordon: All right, what is your objection? Mayor Ferre: My objection is that the City Manager, the City Attorney and Mr. Fine have gone into negotiations and have specified here on the record that in substance there is no difference between one and the other. However, one is clearer and it is in the interest of the City of Miami according to Mr. Grassie's statement. Now, if you want to question that I think you're entitled to do it but I feel that if this has been something.... Mrs. Gordon: Well let me see if I can clarify it since there seems to be a reason why people don't want or want to keep the one on the 28th and would rather have this. Would you have any objection to inserting in any one of those items which pertains to percentages, take for instance 4. Ok? E, 4. Six percent of all gross revenues if such gross revenues shall be $50,000,000 or less but not less than $40,000,000? Therefore, what I'm trying to establish and what is being left out of this wording in this new agreement is the steps that you're trying to establish but you're not establishing it unless you say what your steps are. Now, Mr. Grassie, do you object to the inclusion of the steps, the levels of the steps? Mr. Grassie; Let me see if I understand the question, commissioner. Are you sug- gesting that we put in language to make sure that the developer would not be elibi- ble for a 3% up to 20,000,000 and on top of that a 4% of the 30, is that the point that you're trying to.... Mrs. Gordon: To clarify it in simple language I would like to say to you that if for instance the gross revenues would be whatever number of these various items they're increments. They're a step and there are certain percentages being allot- ed for increased revenues to the developer if he reaches certain steps in this ladder of achievement. Ok? I'm saying that the top and bottom ladder of those steps of achievement should be spelled out and not left open ended as it is with only a top figure and no bottom figure. You're leaving it to the reader to make an assumption and I don't think that that kind of an item should be left to an assumption. Mr. Fine: I have no objection to doing that or to going to the resolution, the only thing I'm saying to you is that lawyers tend to say, they.have to start at the beginning of the paragraph. If we have a container that has four cups of water and we take one cup out then we take another cup out then we take another cup out then we take another cup out the container is empty. Then if you have one that has 5 cups you take the first, second, third, fourth and it tells you 34 OCT 261977 What to do with the fifth. There is nothing wrong in going to the original word- ing or those this, they just felt it was less ambiguous as to the mechanics of ' how a third party would look at the container and how to take the water out of the container. Mrs. Gordon: Well, I don't know the city's advantage in abolishing the wording of the 28th of July, nobody's told me that yet. Mr. Fine: It was to be less ambiguous, there was some concern by the lawyers that there may be some ambiguity to it. I have no discomfort with it at all. Mrs. Gordon: I have a great deal more comfort with it than I have in what I see here but I'm not going to be the one to be around when this thing is going to be adjudicated by some other forces besides me. Mayor Ferre: Adjudicated? Mrs. Gordon: Yes, adjudicated meaning judging, looked at with an eye of right and wrong. Mr. Grassie: Commissioner, you know we'll try to prepare the wording in whatever way you like that makes you more comfortable but as I recall the thought process that we went through what we were trying to avoid in the second language which is a possibility, a possible interpretation in the first language is that the first language appears to allow the developer if gross revenues are say $50,000,000 to get 3% on 20,000,000 and then to get 4% on 30,000,000 and sort of piggy -back that or accumulate that you see so that they would get the 3% but they'd also get 4% on all of the 30,000,000. That's.... Mrs. Gordon: Well you ought to find some wording that's clearer because I know your intent is honorable in trying to change it from this to this but as I read it I read it as being clearer here and you read it as being clearer here and I think the third person coming in will think them both muddied up. Mr. Fine: May I suggest this, if you want to look at item two, ok, the 4% one. Suppose if you'll follow me in the reading. Suppose we said that 4€ of all gross revenues if such gross revenues shall be $30,000,000 greater than $20,000,000, shall be greater than $20,000,000 but equal to or less than $30,000,000? Mrs. Gordon: I think you're going to have to work with this a little bit and come up with.... Mayor Ferre: It is clear as daylight, it couldn't be clearer. Mrs. Gordon: It isn't clear at all, Mr. Mayor. Ok, let it go at that. Mr. Plummer: Well, let me offer a suggestion. Why don't you say, you know maybe the simplicity is better. Item e, Section 1. Three percent of gross revenues from zero to 20,000,000. Item 2, 4% from 20,000,000 to 30,000,000. Is there any difference? Mr. Grassie: That's not the intent. Mayor Ferre: Yes. Mr. Fine: The higher the gross revenues the higher the profit, the higher the percentage of participation. Mrs. Gordon: Well then answer this question. Is the percentage increment only on that step or on the entire gross? Mr. Fine: On the entire gross. Mrs. Gordon: Oh, see that's where I thought you were not looking to get the higher percentage on the entire gross but on the increment. Mr. Fine: No, the way it charts, the gross figure charts to get to this 50-50 level this formula is designed to take you to that level. That's what the affect of the formula is. Mrs. Gordon: Well that makes a tremendous and financial impact on the revenues as far as the city is concerned. 35 6 CT 26197 Mr. Grassie: Yes, it does and let me comment on that if I may, Commissioner. The financial formulas of this contract are so organized that the city benefits much more out of greater gross than actually does the developer. It is in the city's interest that the project have a large gross. And what this formula does is it provides an incentive to the developer to increase that gross. Now you know I think that was something that we discussed at some length when we talked about the first agreement but there is definitely an incentive to the developer to make that gross larger, to make the project successful and to make it grow because we get the greatest benefit out of the growth in the project. Mrs. Gordon: Well you know this agreement that we did on the 28th is not in sub- stance then the same thing you're saying now. Mr. Grassie: I don't believe that's true, Commissioner, I think it is in substance exactly the same agreement. Mrs. Gordon: If it is in substance then why not use it? Mr. Grassie: If it is equally clear or better we would. The only thing we're trying to achieve is clarity. Mr. Plummer: Well, but the point I wanted to get on the record, Mr. Grassie.... Mrs. Gordon: It looks to me like Mr. Grassie: We will try and work on it and see.... Mrs. Gordon: It looks to me like the intent, certainly it was my understanding I'm sorry but it was my understanding that the increments of increase in percent- age would only be on the level of difference of increased gross revenue that was going to be produced by the developer. In other words if he raised up to 20 he would get the initial amount. If he raised between 20 and 30 he would get a 1% differential on that portion. Now you're saying no. Mr. Fine: That's not what the resolution says. If you want to go to the resolut- ion and read that we can do that. Mrs. Gordon: See, that's why I feel that this commission in very important and very big items such as this, I feel a bit harried by this. I feel like I'm ask- ing too many questions I'm saying too many things, I'm indicating things but the feeling that I have is that like for instance on the 28th I don't remember how much time we took on it but we certainly didn't take enough time if this was not clear to me. Mr. Fine: Mrs. Gordon, I'm not saying it may not be clear to you today but I would like to remind you that on the 28th we spent substantial time with the economists and with the charts reflecting the effect of the formula and charting them for the commission so they could see where the revenue movement was at that time and that was based upon the formula that is on page three of the resolution. I said I have no problem with that. In order to achieve the effect of that chart to the advantage of the city over the approved proposal this was the mathematical formula that was arrived at with the city's economic people and concurred with us and this appears to be in implementation the clearest way to achieve the affect that the city wanted to receive as reflected on the charts and the estimates that were presented to the commission but I don't think the city, I don't think anybody is that hard that we wouldn't want to extract the exact language in the resolut- ion. It was just a feeling of the parties during the negotiation that it could be made more exacting and more clear to effectuate the intent and the desire of the city as approved by the commission in the resolution. Mr. Grassie: We'll have your comments in mind, Commissioner, and try and clarify it. Mr. Plummer: May I, Mr. Grassie, try to establish the bottom line? Between the old document and the new document you keep referring that there is no change of substance. Now let me ask is there any change in the formula of a dollar either way? Mr. Grassie: No, I don't believe so, Commissioner. Mr. Plummer: Ok, so in fact, the change is of wording not of the formula. Mr. Grassie: Exactly. 36 OCT 261971 Mt. plt tPera Ok. Mt. Grassie: May we proceed, Mayor? Mayor Ferre: Yes, of course. Mr. Plummer: Page 10. Mayor Ferre: Anything on page 10? Mr. Plummer: I had a brief observation in the second line of where it's paid annually and what this commission tried to do with Florida Power and Light in- stead of them holding and making payments once a year basically deriving interest from our money I find, and for the record, that is not the case here that that account for trust of the city is put in a trust, the city derives any interest and then it is paid on an annual basis so they're not making money on our money we, in fact, are making money on our money so I just wanted to bring that out. Mr. Grassie: Page 11 then, Mayor? Mayor Ferre: All right, the next page is 11. Mrs. Gordon: Page 11 deals with the infrastructures and Mr. Grassie, you answer the question. Whwere will you get the money if, in fact, it exceeds the 6,000,000 that the developer is willing to contribute? Mr. Grassie: It is our intention that it not exceed 6,000,000. We have two sources, we have two things that we will do. First we are obliging ourselves to seek grants any grants that are available for these purposes. If that fails we would go to the bond issue and we have $6,000,000 with which to do these infrastructure improve- ments. We would expect to do them within that amount of money. Mr. Fine: Before the project is approved, commissioner, you will have before you the actual cost of the contracts to do the work. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Grassie, my only comment on page 11, section 14, item (h), here again I think that you're interjecting into a contract something that the city has no control over. We have no control over relocating Mac Arthur Causeway or regrading. That, if I'm not mistaken is a state road. Mr. Grassie: That is entirely right, Commissioner. What we indicate here is that that would be one of the expenses if and when it ever gets relocated which presumes the cooperation and permission of the State Highway Department. Mr. Plummer: Well, you know here again I don't mean to be a stickler but if, in fact, it is to be relocated mandated by this contract I don't think we can do that. Mr. Fine: It is not mandated by the contract. Mr. Grassie: That's why it says may, it does not say we shall do it. Mr. Fine: It is not mandated by the contract (1) and (2) is it is not in the con- templation of the plans for development at this time. (3) It would require your desire and approval if it ever got done and (4) you would have to be assured at that time that the funds were available to do it. Mr. Grassie: And you willnote thatdifferent than the other items that on this one we have a caviat. It says subject to availability of funds. That means that if within the $6,000,000 this can't be done it won't be done. Mr. Plummer: Maybe to deviate if I may just a minute from the contract just a minute, Mr. Fine, of great concern seems to be the flow of traffic over the is- land once the facility is built. Do you have any comments in that matter? Mr. Fine: I feel very strongly that in the alternate traffic plans that we have looked at to date that the approved recommended plan to you will be one that will not impede the traffic flow on Mac Arthur Causeway, that will not cause a stack up over the bridge or into the downtown area and I'm well satisfied at this point as I believe the commission and the public will be when the professional designers and engineers present it to you the solution to these problems that these concerns that we have as well as the city and others will not occur. I think that it will be engineeringly and statistically proven to you that these spectors of problems will dissipate when the approved recommended plans are put before you. I would 37 OCT 261977 like to note for example that there was a comment today in the Miami Herald quot- ing an attendance figure that is beyond comprehension to me. We have estimated 3,000,000 people attending the park. If you divide 3,000,000 by 365 or divide it by 300 that comes out to 10,000 people a day. The Herald has obtained from some other source other than ourselves, the city, the consultants or anybody con- nected with the project an estimate of 30,000 people a day. It has no basis in fact or substance. We hope that when we bring these plans to you that you will have the facts, the estimates and the professional opinions that will satisfy both you, the community and those people that are concerned. Mr. Plummer: Would you further comment on 2,600 parking spaces being adequate for 10,000 if that is your figure? Would you just comment on what your feelings are? Mr. Fine: We are entirely satisfied that the amount of parking that we will pro- vide on the island will be adequate to accomodate the capacity for which the is- land is being designed and it will be able to maintain a self -containment. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Fine, if like the Herald fears all of a sudden 100,000 people all show up at the park what, in fact, will happen? Mr. Fine: Number one the park would be closed because it has a certain capacity. It would become like a theater. People would have to make advanced reservations and buy admission tickets in advance on a scheduled basis to attend the park. Mayor Ferre: Now in parking lots for example when you have a parking lot that has place for 100 people and 200 people show up then isn't that what happens, isn't there a sign put up in front that says lot full, sorry, go to the next lot? Mr. Fine: That's correct. Mayor Ferre: Well, when you get to the capacity in your park I would assume that you are going to say, "Park full, sorry, come back tomorrow." or come back in an hour or come back in five hours. Mr. Fine: We have the further option of providing off site alternate parking and methods of transportation between the off site parking and the park. Mayor Ferre: That's not my question. The thrust of the question is you know you can sit and fret that the moon is going to hit the earth someday but the pract- icality of it is that simply two and two makes four. Logic would tell you that once the park is filled to the capacity like a parking lot like a theater you can't jam it beyond that, and I would assume that it is the clear intention on the rec- ord of the operators, that is Diplomat World, to do exactly that, to not go beyond the normal expected capacity which will be part and parcel of the documentation which you're going to present to the city so that we know what is the design capac- ity .... Mr. Fine: That's absolutely correct. Mayor Ferre: And that's going to be part of the bond document isn't it? Mr. Fine: That's correct. Mayor Ferre: Let me ask you one other thing. Going back a little bit to this financial thing because sometimes when we get all concerned and worried about things and I think, Rose, that the questions that you've asked are very very intelligent and very valid. I think they're very valid questions but I think we have to keep our eye on the ball in the specifics of what it is that we're talk- ing about. Now let me get specific. Is it within the realm of possibility or probability because everything is maybe possible, let's get more conservative - probable. Is it probable that we'll get beyond $60,000,000 revenue with the projected maximum that you have on the people that can go to the park and the projected dollars of revenue that you can expect to get in the next ten or fifteen years? Mr. Fine: Not without increasing the development... Mayor Ferre: What is it that you would have to increase to get up to $60,000,000? There are two thiings, either the volume of the park... Mr. Fine: Inflation might increase it. 38 OCT 261977 Mayor Ferre: Or the value of the ticket. Now as projected by ERA and the other people that have made the projections and they've taken that into account, on the physical size of that park multiplied by the number of dollars if you were at 100% capacity ten years from now what is the reasonable expectation of what the gross of that park would be? Mr. Fine: I would not want to presumpt of ERA because they are in the process of finalizing that at this time. Mayor Ferre: The preliminary figures that have been submitted to this commission and which we voted on back with Pritzker and again with you on July 28th? Mr. Fine: Over a period of time? Mayor Ferre: Yes, sir. Mr. Fine: I would say that it is reasonable to expect an excess of $50,000,000 over and beyond the ten year period. Mayor Ferre: All right. Now, is it reasonable to expect $100►000,000 in a ten year period? I'm trying to get to the limits of the reality of what we're deal- ing with so that we don't go into dream world here. Mr. Fine: Well, the unknown factor is inflation. That's the unknown factor. Mayor Ferre: Of course it's an unknown factor and nobody can tell you what the bond market is going to be ten years from now and nobody is going to tell you whether we're going to be in a depression or you know ten years from now. Mr. Fine: Well there are two other factors, Mayor, that addresses itself to this. If the people mover system is in effect and a monorail feeder is extended to the island, if the water transportation system is in effect, if the ferry system is in effect it may create a condition where there is no need for any on site parking which would release that land for additional development, additional capacity.... Mayor Ferre: We're not talking about that now, Mr. Fine. That's something for a future commission to determine in future years. I'm not at all talking about that. I'm talking about what we have before us today and what I'm saying simply is that even though $50,000,000 could be reached it is not probable in the immed- iate future and I certainly would make a statement that I think it is impossible for us to reach $100,000,000 because to do that you would need a much larger park and that's not what we're voting on today. Now the reason I'm going through all this is because I want to give you the figures between what Mrs. Gordon pointed out and what she thought it was and what it is because you know we can get scared over things that may not be that scary. Now if you get a 3% of a $20,000,000 gross you're getting $600,000. Now.... Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, ask the question and see what the question is, is that.. excludes the provisos of two and four under A? Mayor Ferre: No, it doesn't say that. It says Diplomat shall receive an amount equal. The first thing that is paid is 2% to the city, 2 to Diplomat, 2 to the City, 2 to Diplomat - 4% is gone. Now beyond that if there is any money left here's what they get. They get 3% of the gross revenue up to $20,000,000. Now that's $600,000. Suppose there's only $300,000 left there, that's all they get. Mr. Fine: There may be nothing. Mayor Ferre: Suppose there's nothing. But suppose there is money. The most they would get is $600,000 in addition to 4% that they've already gotten. So what will they be getting? They will be getting $20,000,000 if they operate this properly, if they operate it intelligently, if they control the costs. If they don't operate it right there's no incentive there and they're not going to make anything because if they give away everything then that's going to be the answer. At $20,000,000 they would make 4% assuming there's enough there. Four percent of $20,000,000 is $800,000. In addition to that if there is money they can get up to an additional $600,000. Now when you go up to the 30$ level you're going to be getting 4%. Now if you go on an incremental basis which is what Rose is talking about the incremental basis would give you a million dollars and would give them a million dollars. Now if you do it on a total basis you're talking about a million two hundred thousand dollars. The difference is $200,000, am I correct? 39 OCT 261977 • s' Mrs. Gordon: You see a much higher return on the higher amount, of course, and it doesn't ever eliminate the original 4% so it's that plus. Mayor Ferre: Instead of getting $600,000 they would be getting a million two. But if you do it on an incremental basis that is the ten million and the addit- ional ten if they get four it would be a million. The difference is 200,000 be- tween one system and the other. A11 right now let's go up to the next level. Mr. Fine: Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferre: Am I wrong? Mr. Fine: Conceptually no but the affect is that in order for us to get that the way the mechanics operate the city is always getting more. Whatever you talk about the city is always getting more. Mayor Ferre: Now because we're getting four percent you mean? Mr. Fine: Whatever will be remaining, at that volume in order for us to get that the residue that goes to the city is an excess. The total moneys under this formula that go to the city will be more than the total monies that go Diplomat. Mayor Ferre: Well are you telling me now that under the formula where it speci- fically says the City shall receive any remaining money that shall be earned dur- ing such annual period that when we get up to a 30 or a 40 million gross and you will be getting an additional million two that the city will be getting more than that? You're saying that? Mr. Grassie, you're saying that into the record. Mr. Grassie: Yes, sir, that's the intent of the formula. Mayor Ferre: I just want to point these things out so that people don't get con- fused. Now when we get up to the $40,000,000 one formula which is the increment formula would have you up at a million five, the formula that is in here would have you at two million. When you get up to 50 million the increment formula would have you up to two million one and in this case you'd be up to three mill- ion. When you get up to 6 million it would be 4.2 versus 7. When you get up to 60 million it would be 4.8 million versus 3.4 million. When you get up to 70 mil- lion you're getting up to 5 million 6 versus 4 million 2. I'm just pointing out what the differences are. Mrs. Gordon: AT what point woudl those differences become payable in the sched- ule of payments? Mr. Fine: All of the bills have to be paid, all of the monies have to be paid into the reserves. That has to occur. Now everything has been paid, everything is in the reserve, there is an amount of money left over, an amount equal to 2% of whatever the total volume.... Mrs. Gordon: No, not the 2% let's go past that we're beyond that. Mr. Fine: You mean after the 2, 2, 2, 2? Mrs. Gordon: We're going to the extra increments. Mr. Fine: At that point an amount equal to whatever that percentage of the total volume would be would come to the developer. Mrs. Gordon: After all obligations paid then the developer would get the extra increment which would be a percentage of the entire gross in addition as a bonus. Mr. Fine: That's correct. And under the formula there would be additional monies left over beyond that so that the formula is designed so that the city will get in total more than the developer would get. Mrs. Gordon: That is if there is an increment left ober after this percentage is - paid, right? Mayor Ferre: Of course, but the whole crux of the argument is and the reason why I subscribe to this formula is because the more the incentive to Diplomat to make money the more the city is going to make. 40 OCT 261977 Mrs. Gordon: All right. What about let's say we have a good year and then we have a bad year. Is there a provision there for some carry over of some of the monies, the extra increment monies? Mr. Fine: There is no carry over. Mrs. Gordon: There is no carry over. Ok, that's the answer, the answer is you get paid at the end of the fiscal year. Mr. Fine: We get paid only at the end of each year if we make a profit in that year. Mayor Ferre: Each year stands on its own. Mrs. Gordon: If we stand on a loss year we've had a loss year. Mr. Fine: That's correct. Mayor Ferre: That's correct. Now let me ask you this question. Suppose we have a loss year and suppose we lose a couple million dollars. Ronnie, we're asking these questions because you know these are questions that are being asked and I think the community is entitled to have all these things spelled out on the rec- ord. Suppose there is a couple million dollar loss, I doubt very much if there will be but let's suppose that there is, now does the $20,000,000 get tapped at that point? Mr. Fine: No, there are reserves at that the underwriters require to be maintained. Mayor Ferre: At what point do we start tapping the $20,000,000? Mr. Fine: We'd have to probably .... Mrs. Gordon: Excuse me, is that for operating losses reserve or for capital im- provements? Mr. Fine: Operating loss reserves or what they call operating fund reserves, they don't use the word loss. Mrs. Gordon: That's in addition to capital improvement reserves. Mr. Fine: That's correct. Mayor Ferre: So tell me at what point is it that the $20,000,000 gets tapped. Mr. Fine: We'd have to lose money... Mayor Ferre: How much? Mr. Fine: ..for more than a year and I don't have the exact figure but I would say that we'd have to lose in excess of a million dollars, how much in excess I can't answer. What would happen is this. AS soon as that had happened before that had happened the trustee would have the authority to terminate the operating agreement and to substitute another operator. They wouldn't wait until the loss occured. In other words the formula in the bonds provides for the contract term- ination as soon as we drop down where it is even within looking distance. In other words as soon as the net bottom line doesn't have let's say an amount equal to pay the bonds for that year and maybe 25% cushion on top of that, as soon as we hit that operating formula the trustees can step in and put in another operator developer. Mayor Ferre: All right, let's use Miami editorial logic on this and let's say that everything is going to go bad and all is bad and it's doom and the clouds are thundering and all is going to go down the drain and this is a horrible disaster and you're gone because you've lost a million dollars and the bond guys have come in and wiped you out and they've put in a different operator. Suppose the operator still continues to lose in the same editorial type of thinking, still continues to be a disaster and they start tapping the City of Miami 2 million, 5, 10 million dollars and all of a sudden this thing begins to reverse itself. Five years down and we're out ten million dollars and all of a sudden it starts to come back and money begins, do we get that five or ten million dollars back? 43. 'OCT 26 1977 Mr. Fine: The bonds are paid off faster and it reverts to you, the project, as soon as the bonds are paid off. So you get the income back. Mr. Grassie It is important Mr. Mayor to realize that this formula is written in such a way that once the bonds are paid off, all of the money that was pre- viously was used for debt service, reverts to the City, Mayor Ferre: So in effect, the way we recoup our 20 million dollars, if the project doesn't go completely busted and it turns around, --is the quicker the bond is paid, then the quicker we begin to recoup the investment. Mr. Grassie: That's correct. Mrs. Gordon: What is anticipated as the terms of years for bond repayment? 25? Mr. Fine: It will depend upon what the condition of the market is, normally within the month that they propose to go to the market. It can be 25 to 30 years, depending upon what the market is interested in investing . Mrs. Gordon: It would be of the best interest of the City to have the shortest possible prepayment term wouldn't it? Mr. Fine: Not necessarily. Mayor Ferre: Excuse the interruption. Mr. Fine: It is like saying the higher the rent to pay off the mortgage, the better off you are. You may not. It may be too much of a burden. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Grimm has just pointed out something which I think is only fair for the people that are here. It is now 11:30 ladies and gentlemen, and we are on page 11 out of 20. I doubt very much if we are going to get to the other items of the morning agenda, because we have to inaugurate a park at 12 and people expecting us there. We have to do that. I would recommend we do as follows. No use making all these people sit through all of this, and say we leave at 12, we could reconvene here at 1:30 P.M. and pick up the morning agenda then. Mrs. Gordon: You do as you please Mr. Mayor, you are running the meeting, but I think there are people who have come here, and I guess this is the biggest and most important thing this commission is going to be doing this year. I don't know if the park dedication is more important than us continuing. Mayor Ferre: 0f course it is not more important. We have an obligation. I have made a commitment I cannot break Mrs. Gordon: Mrs. Gordon: Can we postpone it? Can we reschedule it? Mayor Ferre: I don't think that we can. That is already cast. I apologize to you and the point is well taken. But I will be absent. I will be absent for exactly one hour. From 12 to 1:00. I will be happy to be back here at 1 o'clock, and the only reason I am telling the members of the audience is, so they don't sit here waiting when something is not going to happen. This commission will be breaking up in one-half hour. We are going to get to the other matters before us. Hopefully we will in the afternoon session. I apologize for the inconvenience. Mrs. Gordon: What about the people that have come to this issue? Mayor Ferre: They are welcome to stay. We are going to continue talking. I don't want people on items D,E,F,G,H,I,J,K, to be sitting around here waiting and then be upset at 12:15 or 12:30 when we break up. Mr. Plummer: Let me once again put on the record, Mr. Mayor you are aware as I announced earlier, to represent this city, I have to leave at 4 o'clock. Mayor Ferre: We will try our best Mr. Plummer. That's the way the ball bounces. 42 OCT 261977 Mrs. Gordon: I asked for the page -by -page, ---I am not going to be asking very many questions on the page -by -page unless some other commissioners, ----I have asked most of those that I am going to ask. So if there is anyone else that wishes to ask, Mayor Ferre: We started on this process and I insist that we finish this way. Mrs. Gordon: Maybe we are going to have to postpone the item, that if that's the case. Mr. Plummer has to leave to go out of town. You have to leave to go to a dedication and , MayorFerre: We are losing time. We are on page 11. Any other comments on page 11? Are there any comments on page 12? Page 13? Page 14? Page 15? Mr. Plummer: Page 15 Sec. 23. I would you to put into that section 'at no cost to the City.' It is my understanding what you are going to do, is to get these studies done, and we have to request them. Mayor Ferre: I think it is a reasonable request. Mr. Plummer: Hopefully we will get government monies to do it, or other funds to do it. Mayor Ferre: Why don't you put it this way,'at cost to the ad valorem taxpayer.' Mr. Plummer: Okay. Mayor Ferre: It may be a cost to the City. We get federal funds. Is that acceptable to you? Mr. Plummer: Acceptable to me. Mayor Ferre: At no cost, Mrs. Gordon: We didn't skip over 14. That's an item on there with regard to the authority that you J.L. brought up earlier. Right? Mr. Plummer: I have already brought it up. Mrs. Gordon: We don't have to talk about it again. Mayor Ferre:--'at no cost to ad valorem taxpayers of City.' Anything else on page 15? Page 16, any changes? Mrs. Gordon: We are back to #27 with regard to the internal revenue service and the bond counsel and etc. There isn't any anticipated way of knowing how long it would be if we could get that resolved, with regard to the internal revenue service. I'll read the thing,'the City agrees that if bond counsel selected by the City for the financing shall require a ruling from the internal revenue service prior to issuing its validating opinion letter to the underwriter, or underwriters, then the City shall promptly notify Diplomat thereof and 90 days from the date the City shall have received notice by its bond counsel of such requirements, Diplomat may suspend further action or proceed as this agreement provided. If Diplomat so procedes, all expenses of any type and character, from such date shall be deemed to cost -incurred after the obtaining of a bond commitment of commitments under article 4 above.' Mr. Grassie are you satisfied with that? Mr. Grassie: I think it represents a risk that we take. Keep in mind what the developer is trying to do here is to protect himself against an arbitrary action on the part of the City in which the City's own bond counsel would issue an opinion to the detriment to the developer. Really that is what they are trying to protect against. We have to assume that our bond counsel would act reasonably, that's really their concern. Mr —Plummer: Let me interject something here. Mr. Fine made comment a while back and that was that it is not life or death over this project, whether or not IRS makes this tax exempt or not. That was his comment. If you go to page 17 and look at that paragraph, it says in effect, if IRS does not, or if the opinion is not for the purposes of tax exempt, ---as I understand it, says, the project is scuttled we have to buy everything they have done at 90%. 43 OCT 2 61977 rur Mr. Vine: May I address that? Mr. Plummer: Please. Mr. Fine: The city in its request for bids, set forth certain commitments upon which it invited bidders to come in. One of the commitments it represented, and invited the bids to be submitted on, is that the City would cause the issuance of tax-free bonds. Every bidder that came in, and entered into this process, relied upon the representation that the City would cause the issuance of tax-free bonds. If the city is unwilling, or unable, to cause the issuance of tax-free bonds, we arrive at a formula of 90% of cost on the basis that this was a subjective feeling, that all of the work product that is being generated, 90% would be re -useable by the city or others in the development of the island. Mr. Plummer: But in reality Mr. Fine, if the City can't get it with you, in fact it would be highly suspect that nobody else would want to touch it. Correct? Mr. Fine: That is a probability. Mr. Plummer: I think it is a good probability and all I am saying to you is, you have made the statement that the tax-free status is not life or death. Sure it would be a great help. The way I read this paragraph here, who knows what the bond counsel is going to offer in the way of an opinion. I don't,you don't. You said that they don't issue it usually till the day before. I am saying to you, the way this language is in this particular paragraph, if that counsel does not offer such an opinion, we bought 90% of incurred cost for which in my estimation, no other developer is going to touch, and we are sitting here with a stack of papers that we have purchased, that are for naught. Mr. Grassie: That is a possible eventuality. The alternative is that you have to admit that the city would have carried the developer down the garden path, as it were, with a representation that it did not intend to fulfill. And those costs would then become a loss to the developer, because he advanced his money. Mr. Plummer: Do I understand you to say then that the city would have influence over bond counsel's opinion? Mr. Grassie: No. What I am saying to you is, that our representation as Mr. Fine has already stated was that this project would be based on tax-free bonds.Now, if we have designed a project and invited them to bid, on a basis which in fact can't be accomplished, then there is a certain element or misrepresentation there. Mr. Plummer: I have to go back to what Mrs. Gordon said. Maybe in fact she is right. We should have got that opinion before we let him start down the road. Mr. Fine: You can't get the opinion until you are ready to go to the market. Mr. Plummer: I understand. I am merely stating that I would hate to be sitting in this chair if they day were to come, that you are down that road $250,000. and the opinion comes out no, not tax-free. Then I have to buy a dead horse. That is conceivable under this wording. Mr. Fine: You have the same problem in every project the city does. You have the same problem with the conference center. You have acquired land. You paid for plans, you have contracts. You have gone through bidding procedure. If that doesn't get built, it is an expense of the city. Mayor Ferre: Behold the turtle. It only makes progress when it sticks its neck out. You want to progress in the City of Miami, you are going to have to stick your neck out. You don't want to stick your neck out, then we stay the same. Mr. Plummer:Behold the turtle he makes great soup, and I am trying to keep out of the soup. Mayor Ferre: If what you want to do, is keep on making soup, that's fine. You want to keep on making soup, then keep on making soup. Then don't expect Miami to be any more than a village. Mrs. Gordon: Let's give him credit. That was really great. Mayor Ferre: If what you want Miami to be well known for is turtle soup, fine. 44 DC 26197.7 _ _ T If you rant Miami to be well known because it is a progressive community, then We have to build convention and conference centers. We have to build amusement parks. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor you are getting far afield of my point. My point is simply this. Based upon this wording I feel that it give the possibility to the developer of yes, if the tax-free does not exist, that it could be life or death. Mr. Fine is standing here and clearly stated for the record prior that the tax-free status is not life or death. Mr. Fine: Not for the project. It could have other ramifications. Mr. Plummer: What I am saying to you is, if it is not life or death over the project, then I don't think you should insert wording in here that gives you the elective of selling to us a dead horse. That's all I am saying. Mr. Fine: I can understand your concern. No. 1 as I stated, it was in the proposal, it was also in your resolution 77-671, which you passed on July 28. Let's assume for some unforseen reason, you couldn't do it tax-free bonds, but you could do a taxable bonds. That might affect the economic structure of the project because of the higher cost of money. Mr. Plummer: Definitely. Mr. Fine: Where it then became feasible for the City to do without a developer, because it already had all of the plans, all of the design. Everything was ready to do. It may take a developer out of the picture from an economic standpoint. That doesn't mean the project couldn't be built. Mr. Plummer: I understand Mr. Fine. What I am saying is, this as it is worded is a unilaterial situation. The City does not have that elective here. Only you. Mr. Fine:Suppose it is determined for example, that the City doesn't have title to the property. Mr. Plummer: Then we hang Mr. Knox. Mr. Fine: I understand what alternatives you may have. But I am saying ------ Mayor Ferre: Does he go into the tutle soup too? Mr. Fine: I am saying that the representation of the city has been, that it owns the property. The same way in any other project the people rely upon. This addresses it self to the representations made by the city and was confirmed in the resolution of July 28. Mr. Plummer: I understand sir. All I am saying, that the way I interpret this, you have an escape hatch here and we don't. Mr. Fine: We don't have an escape hatch unless the city finds itself where it cannot meet its representation. Mr. Plummer: I agree. If you want to argue the point maybe the city shouldn't have represented that, ----- Mr. Fine: I am not arguing that point. Mr. Plummer: Maybe we should have earlier. Mayor Ferre: Is there any other questions on page 17? Mr. Plummer: Under 32 again, I think to resolve your fears, it says that any such waivers shall be made in writing. In 32. That was a concern of yours before and it is clearly stiuplated here in 32, as well as in 36. Mrs. Gordon: It only deals with waivers. We realize we might not be waiving anything but we may have an agreement to proceed. Mr. Plummer: Any deviation from this in -writing contract to me, is a waiver. Mrs. Gordon: I think that anything that deals with items as important as this, the more written records, are made between the parties, the better off you all are, 45 OCT 261977 including us. I don't think anybody would find it too difficult to put in writing whatever verbal agreements have been made, whether they are waivers or not. Mr. Fine: I think that is what the paragraphs addresses itself, --it says it has to be in writing. Mrs. Gordon: But only on the waiver, meaining that if it is different than something we have already done. I am not going to argue with anybody or draw this thing out any longer, because I am not an attorney. I read somewhere in some paper, or some memorandum that was given to me, that there were several attorneys who had been engaged in, or looking at these contracts. Who they are I don't even know. I just read one name that I recall, and that was Marion Sibley I believe. Is that correct? Who else they are, I don't know. Was there something you did Mr. Grassie, or is that the Chamber's action or what? Mr. Grassie: We sent the agreement to the Chamber sub committee and asked them to review it and they went through this process of getting volunteer reviews from attorneys. Yes. Mrs. Gordon: Have they returned any opinions to you? Mr. Grassie: This is all part of those opinions that are going to be incorporated through the CPA review and the bond counsel review that we expect to do as soon as we have incorporated your comments in the agreement.That is in process right now. Mr. Plummer: I have some other questions if you are going to deviate from your page -by -page. My next questions are on 19. Under 38, Mr. Grassie, it speaks to bondable. I would like to see worded in that, --- Mayor Ferre: We are following a pattern J.L. Is there anything else on page 18 before we get to that one? All right. Now we are on page 19. Mr. Plummer: I would like to see the words inserted here,'bondable in a like amount comsenurate with the work being done.' If you are trying to make someone bondable, that establishes a Mayor Ferre: That's reasonable, ----- Mr. Plummer: If you are bonding a person for a thousand dollars, is one thing. If you are bonding them for a million dollars, that's another. Do you understand what I am saying? Mr. Grassie: Yes, of course, Commissioner. Implicit in this is, the City would observe its standing policy the way we do on any contract. Mr. Plummer: Why do you have it here at all? Mr. Grassie: Simply to make sure that that is a requirement on the developer, that they abide by the city's standing policy. Mr. Plummer: You don't feel it is necessary? Mr. Grassie: Would you like Mr. Grimm to explain? Mayor Ferre: He wants to specifically insert in the language on 38,'that the amount of bonding that is required, is similar or in conjunction with the amount of the job. For example, if the job is a million dollar, you are not going to ask for a 5 million dollar bond. Mr. Fine: That is implicit in the trade. In the use. In the trade, the use, the bond is equal to the amount of the contract. Mr. Plummer: It doesn't state that. It just says be bondable. Mr. Fine: I understand. But in the trade, in construction, the word bonded, it is implicit that the bond is in the amount of the contract. Mr. Grassie: That is the city's practice. Mr. Plummer: It is not, because when we get to the marina, I am going to show OCT 26197 you differently. Its not. Mayor Ferre: Yoti don't have any objection to repeating it. Even if it is implicit, its repeated. Do you have any objections Mr. Grassie? Mr. Grassie: No we can certainly put that in. Mayor Ferre: Anything on 19? Mr. Plummer: Yes. I am very concerned with item 39. What it really states here if a court finds one portion of this null and void, or unconstitutional, it doesn't affect the rest of the agreement. The rest of the agreement would be in full force and effect. Mayor Ferre: I've never seen a contract that didn't have that clause. Mr. Plummer: Let me tell you my concern. Let's assume, hypothetically, the courts find that the rental agreement is bad and they strike the rental agreement. Let's assume that is attacked, in the courts. Mayor Ferre: How could it be unconstitutional? Mr. Plummer: I didn't say that Maurice. I am saying that if the parties of this agreement may be severable, and any part or provision, if the attack is on the rate structure as inoperable or ineffective. Mr. Fine: Let's assume that. Then the court would have to substitute another formula or provide another method of doing it, and the project wouldn't die because one part of it was not, Mayor Ferre: This is strictly a legal question. Mr. Knox, would you, into the record give us an answer? You want an answer? Mr. Plummer: Yes. Mayor Ferre: The appropriate person to answer is the City of Miami's attorney who has the responsibility. Not Mr. Fine who is on the other side of the bench. Mr. Knox. Mr. Knox: The court has the power to fashion a remedy that would preserve the integrity of the agreement. There could be a situation where some portion of the agreement would render the rest of the agreement impractical in order to execute, but that is a different question. The courts will strain the instrument if you will in order to fashion a remedy that will satisfy the other provisions of the contract. Mr. Plummer:You have an awful short memory Mr. Knox. I might refer you to the day that you and I sat in a certain courtroom with a man who is known for pigskin in which that very thing was attacked which in fact would have completely obliterated the city's right to even maintain maintenance cost. Do you recall that sir? That's my concern here. I have lived it. I am not second guessing or what might be. You and I lived that in that courtroom that day. Mayor Ferre: Do you have any recommended solutions to it? Mr. Plummer: No, I don't. That's not my job. I am voicing a concern. If nobody else in the law department or Mr. Grassie has no concern, they are the experts. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Grassie, this is strictly a legal matter. Mr. Knox do you feel that this clause is an operable clause, that it protects the city,and that it is reasonable? From a legal point of view? Mr. Knox: Yes, sir. Especially if the alternative is not to have such provision because where that the case, then the whole contract would be avoided by some court determining that some, ------relatively minor provision. Mr. Plummer: Not necessarily aborted Mr. Knox. Not necessarily. My concern is that if the court found a factor in this contract in operative, in effective, or null and void, that it would be subjects for gound for renegotiating this contract. I don't want to be in a position where a court puts me at their mercy, that they take the very heart out of this contract. And to me the very 4'7 OCT 26191 heart is what this city is going to derive in revenue, as well as a tourist attraction. But if the courts take that very heart out of this contract, to me, the rent, what you are spelling out here says to me, that we have to live with the rest of the contract. I am saying to you, that if the court takes the heart out of the contract the whole thing should be renegotiable. Mr. Fine: Let me address that for you from a practical stand point. The court doesn't arbitrarily have the power to take the heart of the contract unless the contract is illegal. Now, if the contract is illegal, regardless of whether we put this wording in a contract, whether this, or any other, or not, doesn't make the contract legal. What this does is, for example, the city is going to borrow 55 million dollars. It is going to be building 55 million dollars worth of capital improvements. Along comes an attack on the project that the entrance door should have been painted red instead of green. And the court then determines that is correct and the color comblination of the doors are inoperative and in- effective. Without this provision the whole project could self destruct. Unidentified person: I agree. Mr. Fine: So you must have in most contracts the type of wording, particular where financing is involved, that lets the project continue and it doesn't die because any portion of it comes under criticism of attack. What the court would do is to reform the contract in a legal manner. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Fine, Mr. Knox is not concerned about it, Mr. Grassie is not concerned about it. I was, and I have raised the question and I put it on the record. I can live with it. Mayor Ferre: Anything else on 39? Anything else on page 19? Page 20? Mrs. Gordon: I don't know if it is on page 20 or not, but there's a question I would like to ask. If the developers should decide to permit operators of specialty kinds of uses, maybe marina specialty uses or others at no rental fee. How is that provided for? There are two non-profit organizations presently existing on the properties which do not return a revenue to the city. What are your plans for those properties? W. Fine: The plans are to have those agreements approved by the city. Negotiated and recommended by us and approved by the city. Mrs. Gordon: At a dollar a year? Mr. Fine: We don't anticipate any dollar -a -year tenants on the island. We believe everybody will pay a fair rent in accordance with the service they provide, the land they use and the economics they can afford. Mrs. Gordon: In other words, and you are saying and this is going in the record, every portion of this property will be income producing, and viewed in that light? Mr. Fine: That will be our recommendation to the commission. The commission has final say over what the rents and the use of those properties will be. That will be our recommendation, and that will be the tenure of our negotiation. Mrs. Gordon: Is that your recommendation too, W. Grassie? Mr. Grassie:Yes it is our recommendation that the developer have total responsibility for the initial negotiation of arrangements on that island. All of them. Every one of those leases, and this document provides it very clearly, every one of those leases must be signed by the city, which means it has to come to you. Anybody who is occupying part of the island will be covered by a lease and that will•.come to the city commission. Mr. Fine: I might say for the record Mrs. Gordon, that in our great preliminary discussion with some of the tenants that are there, we find no resistance to paying a fair rental for the property. Mrs. Gordon: That fair means equal to any other, ---- Mr. Fine: We haven't determined fair, but the parties we discussed with `2 8 OCT 26197 acknowledge that they do not expect to stay on the island under the terms of a dollar a year rent which they have had for many years. They indicate a willingness to pay a fair rent. A fair rent we have not negotiated with them. Mrs. Gordon: But fair in my opinion is fair and equal to any other at-arm's- length user would be. Right? Mr. Fine: Taking into place whatever public service and whatever use they may provide. Because we have not negotiated, I am trying to leave us the flexibility to sit down and talk with these people in detail because we have not had that opportunity to do that. But I can say that the preliminary discussions reflected that they are willing to pay a fair rent. Mayor Ferre: We have the final say-so. If we don't want it, then we don't have to do it. Mr. Fine: That's correct. Mayor Ferre: We, the commission, or future, Mr. Fine: You may want more than what we negotiate. Mrs. Gordon: That would extend to all leases you are going to negotiate. Mr. Fine: To each and every lease that exists on that island. Mayor Ferre: We are now on page 21. I guess we have gone through this. I do have one question, that is, that there was a'discussion which I do not see into this contract about 5% of the gross being used for the purposes, ----would you specify where that is? Mr. Fine: At the bottom of page 10. Last paragraph. Mayor Ferre: 'Diplomat shall provide in its annual operating budget for the amusement theme park in the amount of no less than 5% of said budget, for live show entertainment and presentations of all types. Would you define for me what budget means. Does that take into account, --is that 5%? That's obviously not of the gross. Mr. Fine: Five -percent of estimated gross income. Mayor Ferre: Is that what that means Mr. Grassie,into the record. Mr. Grassie: Assume that the operating budget is 70% of gross, it would be 5% of the 70%. Mayor Ferre: Obviously, you are not taking 5% of your interest expense etc. Mr. Grassie: Correct. Mayor Ferre: But this is taking 5% of your budget which means your operating gross you estimate to make that year. For example you have a 20 million dollar estimated gross of which 15 million is your operating, you are taking 5% of that? Is that correct? I have no further questions. Mrs. Gordon; Would that request you are making then require the construction of a facility like the convention facility that previously was discussed? Mr. Fine: No. We anticipate that there will be facilities designed in the park, that will have multi -uses, so that if they were desired to be used for fine arts, for strolling musicians, for art shows, it said it would be incorporated within the program of the park itself. Mayor Ferre: Let me speak to that point specifically Rose. The vision, anyway, I have had, is Tivoli Gardens, and there are three things that are basically out- standing about Tivoli Gardens. One is that it is heavily vegetated and land- scapped. Two, there's a tremendous amount of restaurants there. Three, they have all over thatoplace Rose, strolling violins, people with guitars, acrobats, jugglers, marionettes, the guy with the accordions and little monkeys, --all these things happening as you walk through. The wonderful thing is, yes there are rides, but as you go from the ride to the restaurant, all of a sudden you see a little 49 OCT 26197 acrobat tumbling around. What I wanted to make sure, is that in this place we are going to have here, one that we have the design control which means that we can man what kind of things, two, we also have the control on the leases which is the economics. Three, that the base of this thing makes economic sense. It is a good business. Four, there's going to be sufficient restaurants, but we have control of that. The last thing was, that they are going to have sufficient live thing happening where people can just stroll around and watch this. A mariachi band, a steel drum band from the West Indies, the strolling violins, in that variety. Now I have a specific question that I want you to put into the record. Ronny this doesn't intend for you to use that 5% to bring Frank Sinatra, Sammy Davis Jr. and all that kind of stuff. I would hope, that into the record, that the intent of this is to have continuous type of entertainment. We don't want to go out and spent 100 thousand dollars to bring some super star. The intent of this is to have culture and entertainment continually mingled with the program. Is that correct? Mr. Fine: That's correct. 0f all types. I don't want to preclude at some future time the desirablity of bringing a named entertainer into the park, which was done. It may be a desirable thing to do. It may be an opra star. It may be somebody else. It may be a violinist, a pianist, maybe, Mayor Ferre: I don't either. I don't want to end up, you are coming in with a proposed budget, taking 5% and getting 5 artists, ---one every other month. Mr. Fine: That is not our concept of what we intend. Mayor Ferre: I want you to say into the record, if that is the case. Mr. Fine: It's not the concept of entertainment that we plan on putting on. Mayor Ferre: You are talking about continuous type entertainment at all times in the park. Mr. Fine: Perhaps ballet, ----perhaps a whole variety of things. I would like to make one other statement. This island is approximately 90 acres. The experiences enjoyed by the public, will encompass the entire 90 acres. Any reference to this being a 27 acre development, is totally distorted and totally misleading. I just want the commission to understand, that we are going to give you a comprehensive development plan for the approximate 90 acres on the entire island. Mayor Ferre: No neon signs, no Coney Island. Mrs. Gordon: What is the next step with regards to obtaining permits that are needed. All kinds of permits. Environmental permits, etc. Who is going to move in that direction. You or the developers. W. Grassie: The developer has responsibility for all of the permitting with the exception of city departments. The City takes cares of city departments, but all other permitting is done by the developer. Mrs. Gordon: At what point in time Mr. Fine will you then be moving in that direction? Mr. Fine: Let me tell you where we are. Since the time of the resolution, in July, our 6 (six) consulting firms that we have described in terms of what we have, ----- we have 5 architectural engineering firms working in different areas. The park and general design, the landscaping site design, the environmental, the traffic and parking, the marine design. They all have been working. The economic consultants have been working, the construction scheduling and cost consultants have been working. All of these have been going on. Upon the execution of this contract , we will then have the authority from the city implementing the resolution. We are prepared to go with the city for our first walk-through on certain aspects of conceptual ideas. For example, relating to traffic, upon the execution of this contract, so it could be done this week, or it could be done next week. Mrs. Gordon: The contract can't be executed, however until the Manager as he explained has received the input of bond counsel, other advisors, ---- Mr. Fine: It is my judgement that if you authorize the Manager to retain Jf� OCT 2 619) the bond counsel firm between that bond counsel firm and the auditor by the middle of next week, I think the Mananger would be in the position to execute this contract without any further action by the Commission. Mrs. Gordon: Won't this come back to this commission after all these, ---- Mr. Fine: I would think it would only come back, if there are substantial modifications. Mrs. Gordon: Everything is a matter of interpretation, what is substantial and what is not substantial. I personally want to see this before its signed. After all the modifications have been inserted again by whoever is going to be brought in by the attorneys that are working on reviewing this by the Chamber's attorneys, by everybody and anybody who is putting input into this. I want to see it when it is all said and done. I want to put the icing on the cake. Mayor Ferre: If there's no other questions, at this point? If not, Father I am going to give you the gavel and I would like to be recognized to make the following motion. Mrs. Gordon:Excuse me Mr. Mayor, before you do this, one thing I want to put in the record and get an answer from Mr. Fine, if you remember a long time back there was discussion regarding the possibility of revenue bonds not being permitted by the state statute. And in fact a letter I have here which I received yesterday in my delivery of my packet from Mr. Rick Sisser, again relates itself to that proviso, I want this in the record today for the reason being that,(I don't want anybody to say later on, we didn't know, nobody asked the question), --that provision in his analysis of things that the constitutional revision commission should take up as priority items that are important to the city of Miami, on the 3rd one he says, the provision for revenue bonding, for tourist related attractions and recreational facilities, since it is a current item of concern to the City of Miami, I want a current answer from three people: Mr. Knox, Mr. Grassie and Mr. Fine. Mr. Knox: Mrs. Gordon, that particular item has been considered by the constitutional revision commission, was based upon a suggestion made by your city attorney, that that language be inserted into the constitution, simply because the law as has been determined by the Supreme Court of the state has indicated consistently, that revenue bonds may be used for the financing of recreational facilities. It is nothing more than having the constitution reflect that. What has happened in the past is that the supreme court of the state, has interpreted that provision in such a manner that these are authorized and all the basis of my own request was to have it spelled out to resolve the kinds of questions that arose when we first considered this project. Mrs. Gordon: Okay. I understand your reasoning why it is here, and now, Mr. Grassie are you satisfied that we are moving in a manner that we have no problem with the funding of revenue bonds for this facility, because it is a tourist related attraction, even though the constitution does not spell it out. Mr. Grassie: I have no reason to disagree with the city attorney's opinion on this. I think he has taken a very prudent course. He has taken every reasonable action to make sure that the city's project is insured and this is simply one more guarantee that we are going to have no problems. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Fine you confer? Mr. Fine: I would like to bring again to the City's attention that the state legislature in the last session of the state legislature, at the city's request, specifically amended the bond statutes of the state of Florida to provide, allow and declare as a public purpose, theme and amusement parks and to specifically authorize cities to issue bonds for theme and amusement parks. Mrs. Gordon: Okay. Thank you. It is in the record now. Mayor Ferre: First of all in my motion I want to commend the Commission, but very specially Mrs. Gordon for the very thorough job that she has done and I am saying this,(I am not being facetious, I am being very sincere), for the very, very thorough combing you have done and bringing out very important things to the record which remain as part of these proceedings. Now, Father I would like to move, Mr. Chairman as follows, that this commission go on record, incorporating all of the statements 51 OCT 26197. that have been made, as to amendments into the contract that happened in the last four hours of this discussion. The members of the commission have inserted such changes. No 2, that we retain the bond counsel, Bryant Dickinson of Jacksonville Florida as bond counsel, No. 3 that the firm of Bryant, Dickinson and the auditing firm of the City of Miami which is Peat Marwick & Mitchell, also go over this contract. And NO.4, that once the document is finalized, you submit it in person to each member of this commission and that the members of this commission will have 5 days to look at that contract. If at the end of that 5 days, no member of the commission has raised any objections in writing to you Mr. Grassie, then you will proceed to sign the contract. If on the other hand, any member of this commission in writing, requires that a further commission meeting be held to review the contract, that it will then be called within 5 days of that request. I so move. Mrs. Gordon: You say 5 days, (five working days) but that even isn't the point. The point is, it should come to this body as a body, for final ratification in my opinion. That is the proper procedure. There's not extreme delay in doing it that way. Mayor Ferre: Let's see if we have a second. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor without question I second the motion. Mayor Ferre: Under discussion. Mrs. Gordon: I feel like this commission benefits from open discussion to each other. If we air our concerns, and we hear the concerns of the other members, and they are alleviated. There's a feeling of confidence that goes forward with it. And I personally would prefer this, --come back again. We have 5 days to study it, look at it, become acquainted with it, and then come here and ratify it and move on from that point. Mayor Ferre: In rebuttal to that, let me put it this way, if after you get the document, feel that way, anybody here has the right to say, hey, I want to hear it. Now you are telling me you are going to do it. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor that would delay things because any hearing that we would have, would have to be advertised. There would therefore be a delay. If you schedule it the other way, you don't have a delay. Mayor Ferre: I am willing to accept that. But I want to point out, I am not a bond expert, but I have a feeling that the bond market is going bad again and its going bad quick. And I think we need to move on this thing very quickly because it is going to take you six months -----how many months is it going to take before you can go to the market? Six months? Time is really of the absolute essence right now. Mr. Fine: It is six months since we submitted the bid, ----since the city opened the bids on the proposals. Mayor Ferre: We need to get on. They need to get the II Board, or whatever it is called to approve, and the environmental study, this and that study and the legal challenges and all this stuff that is going to come up, way before we go to market. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor I want to vote affirmatively with your motion. But if we don't ---- Mayor Ferre: Rose, as I said I will ammend my motion, to put it this way, that the moment the Manager is ready to sign the contract, that he submit it to the 5 members of this commission, and that a commission meeting be called within 5 working days after you have submitted it, so we can ratify it, and to move along. So 1 amend my -motion on that point. Mr. Plummer: Under discussion, I would like to talk about this contract. Mr. Fine I would like to compliment you, the administration, including the City Attorney. It has been sometimes criticized by this commission, that when you start airing your laundry, that you are going to kill a project. This is far as I am concerned today, has had over four hours of airing the laundry. And I think it is good. I think it is healthy and I revert back to Mr. Paul Andrews who said if you can't do this and 52 OCT 261977 stand that kind of a test, maybe it deserves to be killed. I think this airing this morning has been very good, I think it has established the record very clearly, and I for one, am very happy that this meeting took place. I think it is something that is needed and I compliment all parties involved for standing the test of this kind of airing for the betterment of this contract. Mrs. Gordon: On discussion , only one thing because some of us do go out of town and have commitments that take us away. I would like at least the courtesy that this meeting be a regular, scheduled commission meeting and not a special meeting. That may mean that some of us not be present. Okay Mr. Mayor? Mayor Ferre: It's all right with me. He keeps putting it back. Mrs. Gordon: No, it is just a matter of the Mananger delivering it five days before a scheduled meeting. I don't think you will have too much difficulty . We meet exactly every two weeks. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Manager do you have any problems with that? Or Mr. Fine? Mr. Grassie: That puts it off until the loth of November Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferre: Let's not quibble over one day. I accept that. Plummer do you accept that? The following motion was introduced by Mayor Ferre who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 77- 831 A MOTION INSTRUCTING THE CITY ADMINISTRATION TO MAKE SUCH CHANGES TO THE PROPOSED AGREEMENT WITH DIPLOMAT WORLD Ec.TERPRISES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF WATSON ISLAND AS OUTLINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION THIS DATE; RETAINING THE FIRM OF BRYANT, FRANSON, MILLER, OLIVE, BRANDDT & RYAN TO ACT AS SPECIAL BOND COUNSEL & INSTRUCTING THE CITY MANANGER TO HAVE THE COMPLETED DOCUMENT REVIEWED BY THE AUDITING FIRM OF PEAT, MARWICK, CO. & ASSOCIATES PRIOR TO SUBMISSION TO THE CITY COMMISSION MEMBERS INDIVIDUALLY TO STUDY FOR A PERIOD OF 5 DAYS AND MAKING PRO- VISIONS FOR THIS ITEM TO BE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA OF A REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING FOR FINAL REVIEW PRIOR TO ANY SIGNING OF THE AGREEMENT DOCUMENT Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor let me make this comment. I am certainly glad to see the we accepted this project, five of us. I want to congratulate all of us on that. Mayor Ferre: That's not the way it is going to come out in the editorial. Rev. Gibson: I don't write the editorials. That's their problem. NOTE: The Commission recessed at 12:25 o'clock P.M and reconvened at 1:50 o'clock P.M. with all members present. 53 ^^T 7(11977 WINCH RECESS) 7. FOURTH YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES. (1EMPORARY DEFERRAL). • Mayor Ferre: Dena Spillman, we are waiting for you now, for your presenta- tion. Is Mr. Plummer here? Mr. Fosmoen: There are some changes in the Community Development guide- lines which we'd like to very briefly review with you. We distributed to you a packet of information on Fourth Year Community Development. I think that you all went through this same kind of preliminary review last year where the Department asked.... Mayor Ferre: What item are we on now? Mr. Fosmoen: You are on Fourth Year Community Development. Mr. Grassie: That's item E, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferre: I thought we weren't going to pick that up before?..but if no one is here there is nothing I can do about that. Do you want to take up Item 911, which is item D on the Agenda now that Plummer is here? Mr. Plummer: Is Gilstrap here? Mayor Ferre: Mr. Gilstrap? Mr. Grassie: Mr. Mayor, we are waiting for the Chief who is right in the corridor somewhere.... Mayor Ferre: Okay, Sir, whenever we get our full contingent of people to do these things we'll get on with them. Now, continue with the Fourth Year Com- munity Development which is item E, Dick, and I'm sorry. Mx. Fosmoen: As I started to say, Mr. Mayor, what we want is to present you with some background information on changes that are coming down from the Federal Government on eligible activities, on the general thrust of community development, we want to review with you a preliminary budget for fourth year community development funds. You'll recall..I guess a month or a month and a half ago, we brought to you a set of housing issue papers and began talking to you about concentrating our efforts on neighborhood improvement rather than having the dollars spread all over the various target areas. That's generally what we want to talk to you about today; also about the preliminary budget outlining the general categories within which Fourth Year CD funding will be spent. Now, we are coming to you early, you know, you are not going to be looking at a final application until probably next February, but we are starting into our Fourth Year planning effort with all of the community development task forces and it's important that we have some general guidelines from this Com- mission with regards to when we begin meeting with those various target areas Committees. So, Dena will first review with you the changes that are coming down from the Feds in CD regulation; shel will talk specifically about the budget for next year and I'll spend a few minutes talking about target areas and our general strategy over the next three years for CD funding. We are probably looking at a 20-25 minute presentation Mayor Ferre: Okay, go ahead, and make that as quick as you can. Ms. Spillman: To put this in perspective if you look at page 6 of your package you'll see a schedule for our planning process, we are in October now, we are meeting with you to review our budget strategy and we'll be coming back to you after we meet with the citizens in February for our first public hearing on this program. We have also included at the back of your package a status report on all on -going community development projects. If you have any particular ques- tions, we will be happy to answer those after the presentations. I'd like to take a few minutes to describe to you Community Development as it stands today. We've been working with this program for three years now Last week Congress passed a new Act called "The Housing and Community Develop- ment Act of 1977," it has been signed by the President and it means some dif- ferent types of constraints this year in our Community Development program. 'OCT 261977 I think that you are all familiar basically with the projects which are eligible under Community Development. There are a few changes in those eligibility re- quirements and I'd like to briefly go over them with you. HUD has created a new eligibility requirement which says that if the City of Miami chose to, we could take our CD dollars go into another City, outside the City, and buy housing to house our poor people, but we are not recommending this. Their rationale is that they don't want inner cities impacted by low income minority residents, so we could go into South Dade and buy housing if we wanted. We feel that that's Dade County's responsibility and we don't need to get involved in that activity. Item No. 2 is a further constraint on public services and I think that this is very important for us. If the City funded a social service activity during the past twelve months, that would be 12 months prior to the date when we submit our application --this would be in April--, we cannot pick up that program with Community Development funds. The best example I can use is, if we were previous- ly funding a program under Federal Revenue Sharing for some reason..we choose not to fund it under Federal Revenue Sharing again, we cannot use CD dollars to pick that program up and this is clearly.... Mayor Ferre: Is that good or bad, Dena, in our case?...Do we have many projects that we would like to switch over? Ms. Soillman: I can't answer that at this point because I haven't talked to Rob Parkins about what recommendations he will be making. Mrs. Gordon: What about the prohibition on time, is that forever more? Ms. Spillman: I don't understand your question. Mrs. Gordon: If you are funding a project with Revenue Sharing and you cannot fund it with CD, is there a time limitation, is that forever more? Ms. Apillman: 12 months, if you stop funding it you can wait 12 months and then pick it up with Cd, if it fits into the CD strategy. Now remember that all CD... social service projects have to have been turned down for funding by another federal agency before we can pick it up. Mr. Fosmoen: I think it will be a problem, Mr. Mayor, because the amount of monies available from Revenue Sharing for Social Service programs this year is going to be reduced and, without this restrictions, of course, a number of agencies would have looked at CD for continued funding but we now have a restriction for continued funding of these programs. Mrs. Gordon: Is there something in the material that you have just passed out that we can put out finger on that recites that restriction? Mr. Fosmoen: We'll be getting you copies of the guidelines when they are published in the Federal Register. Mayor Ferre: It is going to be problem. Mrs. Gordon: But there is nothing I can have yet. Ms. Spillman: It didn't bring that, it is in the law, the particular prohi- bition is in the statute, it's not an administrative regulation, Congress passed the law which says...and we'll get that to you as soon as we get it. Okay, No. 3, if you remember last year we had a big problem with eco- nomic development because it had to fall under the Social Service criteria which didn't make any sense to anybody. Well, it didn't make sense to Congress either and because of that they created a new eligible activity which they are calling "economic development." Mayor Ferre: Amen. Ms. Spillman: Now, we still have a problem now, unless we are classified as "a distress City", according to the HUD criterial, we cannot use this program. Mayor Ferre: Can you tell me how in the world the City of Miami, with the unemployment that it has, and economic income that it has per capita, and the problems that it has, and the 28% to 45% senior citizens that it has, ...and on and on and on..that we are not a distress City. Ms. Spillman: Okay, the key criteria in this program are age of housing, 55 OCT 261977 which is pre-1930 , which we do not do well on.... Mayor Ferre: But that's absurd because obviously, and we have to get out Cot& gressman to speak to that, .... Ms. Spillman: Well, let me just say that we have been working on this, I think Mayor you spoke to HUD people on this, and things are looking better every day we are doing everything we can, I just want to say that if this acitvity was designed for northeastern and midwestern older cities, it was a political pro- gram and we have a 50/50 chance of being eligible, that's all I can say. Mrs. Gordon: Who will be the criteria maker of us in that respect... Mr. Fosmoen: Th Department of Housing and Urban Development at the Federal level... Mrs. Gordon: OUt of Washington?.. Mr. Fosmoen: Yes. And, you know, we are not going to let them get away very easily with... Mr. Plummer: You know, maybe it's the Washington syndrome but I find it extreme- ly difficult to work very hard to get the eligible title of being distressed. Mayor Ferre: Well, I don't. Mr. Plummer: Maybe to me it's big brotherism, so we've got to work damn hard so that we can be declared "distressed"...something is wrong. Mayor Ferre: Well, a lot of things are wrong but we can't cure what's wrong in Washington. If they want to give that money, Mr., my hand is out for the City of Miami. Ms. Spillman: Okay, we'll keep you informed on the status of the distressed criteria. Okay, we have new application requirements. The Community Development program is becoming more bureaucratic, there is more red tape, we are going to have to file more papers than we had to in the past years. However, there are some things that I think are very good about the new regulations. The first thing that we have to do is prepare three-year plans. Now, if you recall in past years we came to you with the one year program. HUD is saying to cities, look beyond the end of your nose, look at three -years, see what you are going to do, see what kind of effect you can have on a particular neighborhood during a three-year period and submit to us, once every three years, a plan for your City, so when we come to you in February we are going to have a three-year plan which will include a neighborhood revitalization strategy, a housing strategy, a community facilities and public improvement strategy and an economic develop- ment strategy. We will also be coming to you at the same time with the one-year action program to implement that plan. Does everybody understand that now? Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, I want to raise a very important question here that I've raised in depth. I think it's about time that either we must get back in the housing business, take all the things back, or get out of it entirely. I really believe that, and I happen to be the Vice -Chairman of the HUD Board, and I think it's very, very basic. essential, that there ought to be a policy and we need to start making that policy so that by the first of the year we are in 'business. Mr. Plummer: Yes, Father, but I think what you ought to determine first is Mr. Knox better answer the question, can we go back into the HUD business under the home rule. Rev. Gibson: Isn't it strange that the other people don't have the same problem? We gave ours over. Let me say this, the guys who preceded us gave it over, and I think we ought to put that on the table. Mr. Plummer: Well, wait a minute, let's put that to rest,because I've got some hang-up that once we give it to Metro we can't take it back,..now, Mr, Knox, under the home rule Charter Father is talking about an alternative, I don't think there is that alternative. Mr. Knox: The ultimate decision will no longer rest in the hands of the City of Miami. 56 OCT 261977. Mr. Plummer: But if we want, can we go back into the HUD business? Rev. Gibson: Not HUD.. Mayor Ferre: Housing, housing, I think you better research that because we may not be able to go back in the same way. Mr. Plummer: I don't want to be traveling down a road that says we've got 'if', 'and' and 'or', when it's.... Rev. Gibson: Let me make sure that everybody understands what I'm talking about. I'm not interested in public housing, that's their baby,...one of the reasons I built my house in the City of Miami unlike anybody else up here, in 1977 I'm building a brand new home in the City, a new my building permit and my inspection, and I see up here you are talking about housing, housing, housing. Okay? And then you say we had a bond issue, we had a $25 million bond issue, so we gave it to her, gave it to the county. Now, in the memornadum what makes me ring it up...the Manager in the memo- randum said, you know, we are going to be getting the money and not Dade County, so we've got to tango with housing, if that's the case then let us go on and do it, that's what I'm talking about, and don't come tell me about...look man, when you have it just you bring me an answer on that housing question, that's right, it doesn't make sense. Mr. Fosmoen: If the Commission wishes, I can give you at least a preliminary indication of what it says. Rev. Gibson: All right, let me hear it. Mr. Fosmoen: And that is for Dade County to give it back to us, we have to ask for it and Dade County has to agree to give it back. Rev. Gibson: Well, Mr. Mayor, if we are going to get $10 million and the County is going to get $3 million, and that was what the memorandum indicated -- didn't it, Mr. Grassie? I say,...pronto, forthwith -we ought to proceed and take the necessary measures to get housing back to us. Mr. Fosmoen: There is somewhat of a danger in that of course, Dade County receives $17 million from Community Development funds, we receive $10M. We are working with Dade County as you will see on the budget that's before you..we are requesting $5 million from them so that we have a $15 million program not a $10 million program. One of the reasons we can work with them is because they have certain responsibilities county -wide which includes re -development, which includes housing. Rev. Gibson: You know, I want to say something to this Commission that I want everybody to understand that I'm watching --I hope that what I am seeing is what I do not want to experience, and do you know what that is?..I hope you all not plan to put those people out of the Culmer area. You know?, what you all don't know I've overheard of conversation, and I want to make doggone sure you don't do it while I'm sitting up here. Ms. Spillman: We'll be getting to the specific City strategies after we go through the Federal requirements. Mr. Plummer: Yes, but let me just add a comment in here, okay? You know, I can't say that this is the thing that is a localized issue but let me tell you something, if this here is passed as you say it is, and we were to go to fight Metro as we did a month or two ago, let me tell you, we would be hard pressed to win that lawsuit based on what Father is talking about so much housing in- volved and we don't have housing. Now, you know, there is a lot of stuff that I see underwritten here. You know, another thing you ought to be aware of is you ought to read today's paper, okay? The County Manager has just appointed a task force for Metro to take over the cities, you ought to be aware of this, I hope the Administration is looking at that. ..Well, it took them less than a year to appoint a task force but I think we better look between the lines. Mayor Ferre: J.L., we've been there before, we'll be there again, we are going to wip them again. One of these days it is going to be their turn. Mr. Fosmoen: You know, one other comment on the issue of re -development. The City of Miami Beach does have that authority. When the South Beach plan was submitted to Metro, Metro gave to South Beach --the South Beach Re -Development 51 OCT 261977 Authority the Little HUD House, it's possible to do. Are we hearing from the Commission that that's the direction you want us to take. Mr. Plummer: Well, if you want one person's opinion, you are entitled to it. I think that the best defense is a good offense. Get your but down there and request, that's one persons's opinion. You know, what does the Mayor say? If you don't ask me to dance I'm not going to dance, now, if that's the first step.... Mr. Fosmoen: I understand that, Commissioner, what I'm asking is if that's the direction the Commission wishes us to take we can begin to pursue that. Mr. Plummer: You've heard from one. Silence gives consent. Mr. Grassie: Would you like us to continue, Mr. Mayor, with the presenta- tion or shall we dwell on this question in front of us now? Mr. Plummer: ARe we going to be in the business that long? Ms. Spillman: All right, just to sum up here what we are going to be coming to you with. We will also be coming with a Housing Assistance. It shall be a three-year plan showing how we are going to deal with all the housing pro- blems of the City which we discussed with you previously. The new regulations having in them what is called "planning considerations encouraged by HUD". Now the reason HUD started talking about comprehensive neighborhood revitaliza- tion programs is because one of the major problems they've seen nation-wide with the Community Development Program over the passed three years is that City's are taking their grant monies and spreading them over the entire City. Because of this, no results are seen. You put a neighborhood facility here, you do street improvements over here, there is no impact on the neighborhood, so HUD is saying to us now, we want you to come to us with comprehensive neighborhood revitalization programs which must be neighborhoods of manageable size and conditions so that the neighborhood can be improved over a 3-5 year period. We must provide a coordinated program in that particular neighborhood --physical development, public facilities and services, and private investment -- they want to encourage more private investent by leveraging CD dollars. These areas must be residential in nature. Now, an example of this and what we will be proposing to you today is a residential rehab area, where we would provide loans and grants to owners, we would provide street improvements, and we would also provide new playgrounds if necessary as well as needed social services for the area. Another example of this kind of program would be a re -development program which includes systematic demolition of sub -standard structures and assemblage of site for private re -development, so beyond going into target areas we are going to have to identify specific neighborhoods and tell HUD how we are going to change those neighborhoods within a 3-5 year period. This is another element of the regulations which is very important in the City and which will have an effect on us. In previouslyears the law said that CD activity should be addressed to low and moderate income people, HUD never imposed a percentage on us as to how many low and moderate income people or what percentage of our grant should go to low and moderate income people. These year they've said that 75% of our Block Grant funds must be of direct benefit to low and moderate income residents. Now, all of our target areas right now consist of low and moderate income residents, so I don't think we are going to run into too many problems on that criteria but we do need to be careful about it. They are say- ing that 25% of your funds can go for anything if you are removing slums and blight, so that we can buy vacant land with this money and build a shopping center. We have to take buildings which are dilapidated and are a blighting influence in our community. Now, if we qualify under the distress criteria, which I mentioned earlier --this gets very complicated -- Rev. Gibson: Watch it, it's intentional... Ms. Spillman: No, we didn't do this..If we qualify under the distress cri- teria we can use 25% of our funds for any economic development activity. There will be no restriction as to buying slum and blighted property, so again, all this ties in into the distress factors and as soon as we get a reading on that we'll let you know what the status on it is. Rev. Gibson: I hope that the staff will specifically raise the question that the Federal government.. about using that money in the Culmer area. You know, those promises you made here and I said to them I didn't think you were getting very much but maybe this will save the day and since you are talking about distress I don't know of another area in the City that is more distressed than that area, they need business and they need housing and keep in mind that Gibson OCT 261977 overheard that there is a move afoot that they are not going to move back. Ms. Spillman: Okay, I just want to talk about one further thing that could be very important to us and that is the new program which was passed by Congress called the Urban Development Action Grant Program. If we can meet the distress criterion we would be eligible for additional funds above and beyond our Community Development Block Grant. Now, for example, if the City decides to build the Specialty Center on the River and downtown or Little Havana or wherever, we could get a special HUD grant to buy the land, assemble the site and put in the proper improvements, now this could be a big bonus for us. The key element in this program is that you have to have a developer up front, you have to have a developer sign up and if you go to HUD with the developer they'll fund your program. So if we meet the distress criteria we are considering various projects in the City for this program and I think we are going to need everybody's help in attract- ting developers so that we can get some additional money from HUD. Mayor Ferre: Do you want a recommendation, Dena? I think it would be a very good idea if you were to go visit every member of the Commission at their offices and go over this. Ms. Spillman: I'll be happy to do that. Mr. Plummer: Yes, it's the great old brotherism, Federalism, they are going to give us more money, but by the time they put all the requirements on we are going to get less accomplished because we are going to have less spend- able dollars. Mr. Fosmoen: Mr. Mayor, are you suggesting that we take the entire presenta- tion to each Commissioner rather than doing it now? Mayor Ferre: No, I'm suggesting that you do both things. Because, you know, the Committee of the Whole concept which so far has been very nice in theory and hasn't worked too well as far as the practicality of it, you can also do it on a one to one basis. And I think that it is a little bit easier to keep people's attention that way. Ms. Spillman: Okay, in light of these new rules and regulations which we've just discussed, we've come up with what we called a Fourth Year Community Development Strategy for the City. Now, if you recall we did the same thing last year. We came to you with the general outline of expenditures so that we could go to the community with your backing and your policies and work from there. Now, the items that I am going to present to you are for your considera- tion and I'll start with number one on the memo. As we said before, because Dade County's share of the community development dollars is decreasing, it is incumbent upon the City to raise our share of funding in the area of housing. Now, let me remind you of something. The Community Development program is based on the Housing and Community Development Act, and housing is an integral part of this program and HUD expects us to show results in the area of housing whether or not we have our own Housing Authority, they don't really care, they want to usee results. So generally we are saying that because our share of funds is going up, because Dade County's is going down, we are going to have to be increasingly involved in housing rehabilitation and house acquisition for housing activities. Mrs. Gordon: Go ahead, I'm willing to wait, go ahead. Rev. Gibson: So what are you telling me? Ms. Spillman: I'm saying that in previous years, we've spent approximately $3 million --well, we did last year-- for the acquisition of land for new housing. This year we are going to have to spend probably a little more money and include in that funding, funds for the rehabilitation of housing units, funds for neighborhoods rehabilitation programs which Mr. Fosmoen will be explaining in just a few minutes. Rev. Gibson: Let me ask a question of the Commission, Commissioner Reboso, I want to make sure that he asks this too, did you read the Miami Daily News for yesterday? Ms. Spillman: I heard about it, 59► OCT 2 61977 Rev. Gibson: Did you read it? Ms. Spillman: No. Rev. Gibson: We want you to read it. (COMMENTS MADE OUTSIDE THE PUBLIC RECORD) Rev. Gibson: Do you know what they are saying to me? Mayor Ferre: They are saying bue-bye. Mr. Fosmoen: No. Rev. Gibson: Bo, no, no, Mr. Mayor,..what I've been saying..nobody listens to me. Mr. Fosmoen: I guess I'm missing the point. Rev. Gibson: You missed my point....man, one that you can read. Read the article. Mr. Fosmoen: I read the article but apparently..there is a concern and Ism not sure what the concern is, you know, that's Bill JGebre's article and not the staff's recommendation to you. Rev. Gibson: No, Sir, my concern is that the same thing is happening that has consistently happened right allong. That's my concern. Ms. Apil]man: All right, number two. As you recall, over the past three years we've used the formula allocation to allocate monies to our "A" target areas. We've re-evaluated that process and this year we are recommending that monies be based on the needs of each particular target area. Wht we want to do is target CD funds to show maximum results. Build on passed City investments like Capital Improvements Program, EDA money, and try to put to- gether some packages and show some impact in the different target areas. So, we'll be coming to you with recommended projects instead of allocation as we have done in the past for each target area. We are recommending no new park acquisition in the Fourth Year Community Development Program because CD funds cannot be used for maintenance and operation of parks, we feel that the City does not have enough money at this time to maintain any new parks. Now, for your information, right now we have in progress 21 parks being funded with at least partially ---by community development funds. So, even though it may not seem like a lot, soon we are going to have new parks, 21 new parks, that the City is going to have to operate and because of that we feel that at this time we should not make any new major park in- vestments. We are also recommending as we did last year that the level of social service funding remain the same. On this item, the office of Com- munity Affairs will be responsible for monitoring and evaluating on -going programs. If they recommend that a program is not doing it's job well and that it not be funded, we will recommend a new program in its place. We are recommending a target area -wide program, street planning, historic pre- servation, building demolition, economic development and removal of archi- tectural barriers be funded gain at the same level they were funded last year. And one final note, every fourth year CD programs proposal is in accordance with the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan. Now, on page 3 of your memo we prepared a general budget outline and the purpose of this is really not to approve dollar amounts --these are best guestimates at the moment-- We want you to look at funding categories. Now, the areas that we are looking at for funding are on -going community develop- ment projects, those projects which we've started in previous CD years and which need additional funding to be completed. We have 3.5 million dollars worth of on -going CD commitments that we need to finish. We are talking about approximately $300,000 in on -going social service programs. Another major area of investment is in the area of new re -development projects, and I'll explain those to you in just one minute. Housing activities..we are recommend- ing $6 million. Now, let me clarify one thing. If you look at the bottom of this budget it only adds up to over $15 million. Our entitlement amount is only $10 million. We are working with Dade County and looking toward them 60 OCT 261977 • to provide the additional $5 or so million in the City, that we are going to teed to implement this program. Mr. Plummer: How much of a snowball's chance do you have of getting this? Mr. Fosmoen: No, Sir, I don't agree. Mr. Plummer: I'm asking. Mr. Fosmoen: We do have a chance. Mr. Plummer: Why did you disagree with my question? Mr. Fosmoen: I thought you said we don't have a snowball's chance. We do have a chance of getting that much out of Dade County's allocation. Their part of the City's program has been averaging between 4 and 6 million dollars each year. Mr.Plummer: Than that answers my question. Ms. Spillman: We've also worked with them in developing this entire package and they are in agreement with it. AGain, we are looking toward continuing our target area -wide projects and then we have administration and local option. Now, what I've done on page 4 is just broken these out --these are not final recommendations, we just want you to have an idea of what we are talking about with each particular area. We've listed some on -going funding commit- ments, we've listed areas of social service funding, we propose a new re- development project which carry high tags -I might add- as all re -developments projects do, and we've listed housing activities consisting of of neighborhood improvement programs in the first year, and Little Havana model cities, Edison Allapattah and a pilot program --another pilot program in Little Havana. We are also talking about additional funds for land acquisition for new housing. At this time, unless anyone has any questions on this... Mr. Fosmoen: Dena, I think that rather than going to the side of maps -- because the Commissioners want to go over this individually-- maybe it would be worthwhile just taking a minute to review what we mean by "a neighborhood improvement program" which is attachedment "b" in your package, and also since Commissioner Gibson has expressed considerable concern about Culmer, to talk specifically about the programs that we are proposing to undertake in Culmer after --I want to underline that several times-- after considerable discussion with the community about what is going to be happening in that neighborhood. Rev. Gibson: Mr. Fosmoen, let me ask you a question. Bill JGebre told the truth? Mr. Fosmoen: What?, that we are proposing re -development in Culmer? Rev. Gibson: Is Bill JGebre telling the truth in this article he wrote? Mr. Fosmoen: That we are proposing re -development in Culmer? Rev. Gibson: No, no. Did Bill Gebre tell the truth when he said about the talking with the different people and all that...is that true? Mr. Fosmoen: I'm sorry I didn't hear you, Commissioner. Mrs. Gordon: I think he is referring more specifically to Mr. Daughtry's input into your planning for re -development. Has there been input from him and through him from the community...that's what Father Gibson is asking you. Did Mr. Gebre report this incorrectly when he wrote the way he wrote. Mr. Fosmoen: I don't know what Mr. Daughtry said. I know what it said in the article. Rev. Gibson: Well, it would appear to me you would be concerned, man, if I had an assistant on my staff and he was supposed to know I would call him in and find out. Did you do that? Mr. Fosmoen: I am concerned. The article came out last night, I have not had a chance to talk to Mr. Daughtry. 61 OCT 261977 Rev. Gibson. Man, you knew us before today, did you think we weren't going to raise that question? Mr. Fosmoen: Commissioner, what we are before you with...what we are hoping will be guidelines to us to begin to work with thae mmunity. Wwe are saying need youris that we direction before we go out to the community. are allocating dollars in the fourth year program to begin re -development in Culmer. Mrs. Gordon: I've got to ask a question and I just want a simple and direct answer. Have you or Ms. Spillman conferred with Mr. Daughtry prior to preparing this Report today which includes Culmer. Mrto. Fbmissi I dihad not give this Report to Mr. Daughtry for his review prior sub that's correct. My job is to make a recommendation tot s Co mission --and job-- on how to spend for their funding. Commission Dena's and that isn't the answer I'm asking you to give Mrs. Gordon: My statement, in the planning for this area. me. Have you asked him to be a participant Yes or no. Mr. Fosmoen: Yes, we have been working with Mr. Daughtry in the planning for this area. 62 OCT 261977 Mrs. Gordon: I've got to ask a question, and I just want a simple and direct answer. Have you or Ms. Spillman conferred conferred with Mr. Daughtry prior to preparing this Report today which includes Culmer? Mr. Fosmoen: I did not give this Report to Mr. Daughtry for this review prior to submission, that's correct, my job is to make a recommendation to this Com- mission on how to spend in spend...Fourth Year funding. Mrs. Gordon: No, that wasn't my statement and it isn't the answer I'm asking you to give me. Have you asked him to be a participant in the planning for this area?...Yes or No. Mr. Fosmoen: Yes, we have been working with Mr. Daughtry in this area. Now, whether or not he understood fully what the implications were, whether he understood what the agenda contained when Bill Jgeb re called him at 9:00 o'clock, I don't know. Mr: Plummer: You know, I don't understand...where is Mr. Daughtry? Why are we trying to second guess what Mr. Daughtry might have done, could have done or would have done? Why don't we ask the man to come forth and answer the ques- tions?.. Rev. Gibson: That's right. Mayor Ferre: Plummer, Plummer...I'll tell you, while you do that I see an awful lot of restless children back there, so...if it's all right with Mr. Grassie and the Commission wants to pursue this matter, and I assume you do, why don't we have Mr. Daughtry come here..in the meantime we can take the picture with all these children. Rev. Gibson: All right, let's take the picture with the children. Mayor Ferre: All right, are we ready? 8. PLAQUES, PRESENTATIONS AND SPECIAL ITEMS, 1. Presentation of Haitian Independence Week proclamation to Mr. Viter Juste. 2. Presentation of Meet'n Treat Day Proclamation to Mrs. Gretchen Di Martino, Principal, Coral Way Elementary School, and to a delegation of students from said school. 3. Presentation of a Certificate of Appreciation to Mr. Louis Torres. Mr. Torres recently retired from the Federal Government after 34 years of service. For the last 15 years he was with the Immigration Department in Miami where he was of great assistance to all. 4. Presentation of Dia del Mordazeno Ausente to members of el Municipio de Mordazo en el exilio. (NO SHOW). 9, CONTINUED DISCUSSION FOURTH YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES, Mayor Ferre: Mr. Daughtry?...Are you ready now?...Father Gibson, Mr. Daughtry is not with us, you were asking a question. Plummer recommended that Mr. Daughtry be present,..I'11 recognize you for asking those questions. Rev. Gibson: Mr. Daughtry...what I'm interested in, Sir, is...did Mr. JGebre called you?... Mr. Daughtry: Which particular part, Sir? 63 OCT 261977 lteu. Gibson: Any and all of it. Mr. Daughtry: Okay. This came about as the result, I guess, of a phone call from Mr. Gebre late Friday night. •Gebre asked me if I was aware of this item on the Agenda on which the Planning Director, the Assistant City Manager, Mr. Fosmoen, had recommended approximately $2 million for land clearance in the Culmer area. At that time, I had not reviewed the Agenda . He asked me to pull it out and I did and it was, to my surprise, to see that the $2 million was in the strategy plan and the reason that I was surprised is this - last year in reviewing the document when we went to the community, we had in effect an item - Slum and Land Clearance for $2 million that we presented to the community. This year there was no dollar figure or no figure at all in the... analysis that we presented to the community and the presentation of a question by the reporter there was an apparent inconsistency in terms of what we presented to the community in the needs analysis and what is presented here. In my conversation of yesterday with Mr. Fosmoen he indicated to me that the difference was that this is a request to the Commission to establish policy but my comment or my concern was that in terms of dealing with the community when we present an item to them and another item of that same or similar package later on is altered it will give the ap- pearance as if we are trying to hide something from them. Mr. Fosmoen commented that that needless to say was not the case and that in the last year's document that that document had been presented to the Commission prior to. But, nevertheless, when you walk out there in the community you have to be above board and above reproach and because I did not have knowledge as to this particular item I could not very well say that I did. Mr. Plummer: Well, I think you said I will not allow myself to be a liar. Mr. Daughtry: That is correct, and that comment was a response based upon.. is this the exact document or was that the figure presented to the community for that purpose?...and, of course, it was not. The concept was there but no dollar amount as to whether we had intended to do that this year or not because last year $2 million was allocated. Mrs. Gordon: I've got to ask a question because I'm not getting...it's not coming through clear, as I'm sure you intend it to be, and I want it to be clear. What I want to ask you, --and if this is out of order for me to ask, Mr. Grassie, tell me-- because it is, you know, with the employee...but it is in the paper and need ask questions about things that appear in the paper, such as, you know, maybe your right hand does not know what your left hand is doing, and it certainly doesn't help our image. What I want to know is.. you have been in touch with the community on the level of community involve- ment and the Department apparently is also. What confuses people who read this and even myself, is how you wouldn't be aware of everything pertaining to your neighborhood that you are a Project Director, in a sense, just as much of a Project Direct as Mr. Gilchrist and Mr. Connelly, and therefore I feel, Mr. Fosmoen, and this is your ball game, that if I were in your place, I wouldn't eliminate, I would bring in all the input from all those persons who are intimately involved and specially a Project Director. Now, you are coming to us for policy, and that's fine, that's what we are here for, but on the other hand before we make policy we should be able to have all the input which includes this input. That's the way I look at it, now, if I'm wrong, somebody tell me, but that's the way I see it. Mr. Grassie: As a generalization, Commissioner, I don't think that you are wrong but I think that we need to understand a couple of things. One, we have two very different processes that are going on here. Mr. Daughtry is responsible for monitoring for me all sorts of on -going activities in that neighborhood and making sure that there is coordination and there is follow- up, that in fact we get done what we say we are going to do, and it is because of that that he is concerned about any representation that we make that anybody in the City may have made, even if it is years ago, and what we are doing about it, and that is a natural concern. Now, there is a parallel process going on in the Planning Department which deals with a Federal requirement to prepare a plan, a comprehensive plan, for the spending of CD monies and to go through a review process. Now, that review process really starts with citizens but we have really, out of consideration for the opinion of the City Commission, chosen to start here with you so that you would know what we are going out to the neighborhood with. The real process of reviewing these recommendations is out in the neighborhood and that is a process with which, at that stage, which is the next stage, Mr. Daughtry will be intimately connected. After that is all done, then the recommendation -- • as you may have seen on your schedule-- the recommendations come back to the City Commission. What I'm saying to you is that we have had two parallel processes going on and we are one step ahead of the point where the Planning Department's outline and Mr. Daughtry's working in the neighborhood come together, which will naturally happen as the next step. Mrs. Gordon: May I ask a question? Mr. Daughtry, do you feel comfortable now that you've heard the explanations of...you know, what has happened and what is happening with regards to...or do you still feel that your position as the liaison person to the Culmer is not being utilized to its fullest. Mr. Daughtry: I feel now that, with the assurance that we are going to be able to mediate any problems that we may have had --and I'm not really suggesting that there were problems with the exception of the degree of com- munication-- primarily I work with the planner for the Culmer area from the Parks Department and most of the information, I guess, from the Planning Department is through that person and I don't feel that we will have any problems. Mrs. Gordon: Okay. Our interest is not specifically in the individuals involved of either Department, our concern --Father's, mine too-- is that the best be done for this neighborhood and I personally feel that 1 don't want to see this area, and I want to say it right now, removed at the com- munity from the face of the earth. I really and truly do not want that to happen and re -development is one thing but removal is another thing and I don't want it removed, I want it re -developed, and if that is what you all have in mind then we are all in the same wave length and if you have any idea of buying the property and removing everything and everybody for 6 years or 4 years or 3 years or 2 years, or one year or whatever period of time you have in mind, I'm opposed to it. Those people will be dispersed throughout and they will never come back to this area, that's urban re- newal in another sense, that's another way of saying 'urban renewal', 'urban removal', that's what it is. Mr. Fosmoen: Commissioner, there is no way that the City can afford, even if it wanted to, .... Mr. Plummer: to clear that entire area. Mr. Fosmoen: ...what we are talking about is a base program. I think the Commission needs to recognize that until certain blighting influences are taken out of that neighborhood, you are not going to see change. There will be no private investors in that neighborhood if there are not some changes made in the physical condition of it. But I'm not talking about total clearance, Commissioner, I'm talking about a re -development plan that makes sense both from a social point and from an economic standpoint. Mrs. Gordon: Well, this is not rruly written in the way you intended it to be. Mr. Fosmoen: I learned a long time ago not to apologize for a reporter. Mrs. Gordon: Okay, but I'm not criticizing him, because I don't know what happened before that made the story come out, okay? It says: "The detailed proposal will involve acquisition of property, relocation of residences, demolition of structures, to provide opportunities for housing and com- mercial redevelopment." Well, the re -development is fine, but when you renew the people where are you going to put them? Mr. Fosmoen: Commissioner, there will be some people displaced. In order to put together a decent package for re -development there are going to have to be some people displaced but this is a phase program and as we build new houses there will be opportunities for low-income people in that new housing. Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, maybe we need to give the staff a sense of direc- tion. You already have a lot of vacant land over there. ARe you aware of that? Mr. Fosmoen: Yes, Sir, I'm well aware of that Commissioner. Rev. Gibson: And you still want to....you know? Acquire land and all of that?...HUD has a lot of land over there that they are begging to have developed 65 OCT 2 61977 Mr. Fosmoen: Yes, as a matter of fact, HUD is proposing to put back it public housing on those sites, Commissioner. Rev. Gibson: You know,...I don't know, I don't know. Mr. Fosmoen: And I have a problem with that, I have a problem with impacting the area with many, many low-income families. Rev. Gibson: Well, let me say this, Sir, Mr. Mayor members of the Commission, you know, the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing and you know, you heard Mr. Daughtry and I'm not criticizing saying that there was a lack of communication. My brother, let me tell you something, every time my wife tells me there is a lack of communication that's an indication she didn't want to talk with me. I hope you understand that and I hope the staff understands what I'm saying. Okay? Now, I want you, Mr. Fosmoen, as a Commissioner I'm going to ask you through Mr. Grassie, you to talk with Mr. Adams. Mr. Fosmoen: Mr. Adams and I communicate weekly. Rev. Gibson: Sir, I don't mean like that. Okay? Remember what you just told me, I want to hear Mr. Adams bring it up before the HUD Board and say 'well, we want to put up all low-income housing on here,' and then what you hear me say in here, I'll say it even more forcefully in there;...if I knew you had some money and wanted to do otherwise. You need to know, for the benefit of this Commission, that HUD is talking about , going up by Phillis Wheatley school, acquiring some property there to join to tie into your park. You see?, and I'm trying to say to you that HUD is saying what you are not saying here. HUD is not interested in all low-income housing and if it is a lie you go and tell Mr. Adams that that's what he told me. Mr. Fosmoen: I apologize for becoming defensive. Mr. Adams and I spend a great deal of time together because they have the implementation power for re -development in that neighborhood. If we can agree then our objective is to provide decent housing to the people who are living in Culmer, to provide mixed -use housing, to provide an economic mix of housing in that neighborhood if we can all agree in that basic point then we don't have a problem. Mrs. Gordon: Seriously, you are laughing and I'm not. Mr. Fosmoen: What we started out to talk to the Commission about was a three year strategy for community development speaking to the issues that Com- missioner Gibson is raising. You know, when we get embroiled in some internal inconsistencies within the city. That's not the point. The point is that we're making recommendations that we believe in our professional opinion will improve that community and will not result in totally destroy- ing the social fabric of that community. We are sensitive to the social fabric that exists in that community. There will have to be change if the area is going to be improved. The level of change is something that we're going to have to work out with the community and with private investors who may be willing to put money into that community. Now I apologize for be- coming defensive. Rev. Gibson: I don't mind that but I want to say this. I hope your exper- ience in this won't be like your experience was in that auto pound. Mr. Fosmoen: Commissioner, it is our intent to work with the community in putting together a redevelopment package that is acceptable - I shouldn't say that. I don't know whether it can be totally acceptable to the entire community, I don't think that you can make change with complete consensus, complete agreement. Someone always is hurt whenever there is change but that hurt should be minimized. Mayor Ferre: Nobody is asking for that, Dick. You know we're going off on a tangent here. Mr. Fosmoen: I'm to trying to respond to what Father said. Mayor Ferre: Yes but you're not and that's exactly the point because what you're doing is you're escalating it one step up and the point is that what you ought to be doing is escalating it one step down and what you're say- ing is that you're coming back - if you'll forgive me - with a statement which is a cliche and that doesn't answer it. Obviously Gibson has not asked you to please every person. That's not what the man is asking for, What does that have to do with this discussion? All he's saying, and I'm 66 nf:T _9g1077._ going to tell you you've already heard two, this is the third one that is going to tell you right here he wants two - I heard him very clear - two things: (1) consult the community. He didn't say please 100% of the people in the community, I didn't hear him say that. He said consult the community and the second thing he said is communicate and the third thing that the man said as I heard him any- way was that the left hand should know what the right hand is doing and you know what that means. And the fourth thing that the man said was that we're not going to all of a sudden start taking and wiping out the Culmer area by putting in baseball stadiums, this and that. Nobody is saying that you're recommending that, I know that you're not recommending that. He made that statement, I happen to agree with it. Rose made the statement, I agree with her statement and I guess it is just that simple, four things: Communicate - the left hand knows what the right hand is doing, talk to the community and consult them, make them a part of the decision making process; (3) don't wipe out the Culmer area, help it to sur- vive. I know we can't redevelop the whole area, Gibson knows that. Mrs. Gordon: And Dick, don't feel hurt if I say it again but I want to really impress it to you that in the eyes of the Culmer area and in the eyes of this com- mission Mr. Daugherty is the liaison and when he's not fully aware of everything then they're not fully aware of everything. They feel hurt by his not being kept up and we feel hurt because we think, "Uh-huh, here we go again." You know... Rev. Gibson: ...one last comment. The last meeting ',.we had here a good friend of mine made a presentation to us, the commission. Do you remember that presentat- ion? Marty Fine. I raised a question that I continue, maybe Mr. Grassie one day will understand why I continue raising these questions. Martin Fine made a pres- entation and I raised a question and the commission didn't catch it. I said the staff did all of this, said yes. Any black on that staff when these blacks was involved on that committee? .... Martin, he's my friend, no. See the same pat- tern, that's all I'm saying. And then you know when you come here at the last minute you want us to go forward and I want to promise all of you as long as I'm up here when I find out that those people don't know what's happening man I'm going to be doing the same thing. I'm going to try to get my fellow commissioners to send you back with a zero. Mayor Ferre: All right, now we're going to move ahead because it is 3:00 O'Clock and we're still on the 10:00 A.M. agenda. So at this point I have one question _ that I'd like to ask if I may on the tree planting proposal of $300,000. Now Dena, did we spend $300,000 on tree planting this last year as was in the budget? Ms. Spillman: We are in the process of preparing a master plan for the whole.... . Mayor Ferre: That's not what I asked you. Ms. Spillman: We haven't spent any of it yet. Mayor Ferre: The answer is no. Now we approved one year ago an expenditure of $300,000 for trees and you're saying that.... We're saying that tree one, Mr. Grassie, has not been planted even though this commission voted and went on rec- ord one year ago to plant trees. Now the point is that here you're coming back again and asking us for another $300,000. Now are we going to have a plan to plant trees or are we going to plant any trees this year or is the money going to be released into another fund or what? Ms. Spillman: No. At the next Commission Meeting the first very small part of it will be on the agenda. As soon as the comprehensive plan is completed we'll go out for bid for the whole amount of money. We did it that way because it is cheaper. It is much cheaper to go out all at once. Mayor Ferre: Let me ask you this question. What happens to the $300,000 that was allocated for tree planting last year? Ms. Spillman: That's the money I'm talking about right now. We just got it re- leased from HUD in August. Mayor Ferre: I see, and you have it all in one lump sum? Mr. Plummer: Wait, go get me a budget book. It was not from HUD. Ms. Spillman: No, it's HUD, that's what the Mayor's asking about is our city- wide Ary 2$ 1977 Mr. Plummer: I'm talking about the $250,000 that we allocated in the budget. Ms. Spillman: I can't speak to that. Mayor Ferre: Well how many trees are we going to plant? Ms. Spillman: I don't think there is any city money for trees. Mr. Plummer: I beg to differ with you, it's sure in that budget. Ms. Spillman: In the Capital Improvements Program? That's the C.D. money. Mr. Plummer: This was set aside I think two years ago in the budget. ... Mayor Ferre: So the $300,000 is in federal funds which was approved last year, it was just released now. Ms. Spillman: In August. Mayor Ferre: And we're going to spend the $300,000... Ms. Spillman: Before next June, before our program year is up. Mayor Ferre: Now the $300,000 that you have in this budget... Ms. Spillman: Will start next August. We're talking about almost a year ahead of time. Mayor Ferre: I understand. • Mrs. Gordon: Ok, Dena, where are you going to put those trees, could you say? Ms. Spillman: We have to put them in C.D. target areas. A member of our Parks Department, our landscape architect right now is developing a plan to spread trees throughout our target areas so I can't specifically answer your question. Mrs. Gordon: Ok, fine. Mayor Ferre: All right, are there any other questions? Now, Mr. Manager, this is a Committee of the Whole Meeting so we don't have any public, this is not a public hearing for those of you in .... No, sir, you're out of order I'm sorry. This is not a public hearing. Later on we can talk about these things. Mr. Grassie, with regards to.... This is an agenda item, do you want any action at all on this? I think you've got the sense of the Commission. Mr. Grassie: No, I think basically what you've done is what we're looking for, get some kind of feedback from you. Mayor Ferre: I don't mean to be rude to members of the public here but we are not in a public hearing. ... No, sir, this is not a public hearing. .... No, sir, I'm sorry I can't do that with you and not let somebody else talk. .... No, sir, Rev. Gibson: Come to the mike and take your three minutes. Mrs. Gordon: Put your name on the record please. Mr. R. Wesley Harris: My name is R. Wesley Harris, 5603 N.E. 3rd Avenue. I used to live at 8th Street and 2nd Avenue. A couple of years ago I've seen a new police station overtown grow up like median. A year later I saw a drug rehabilitation center and build a new women's jail. All of this is in the middle of the black community but I don't see nothing positive going in to enhance. How would you feel if in the middle of your community somebody built a big monstrous jail? They have a gymnasium, a swimming pool, all of that but they don't have a swimming pool even in the whole area but they've got one for the police. You're talking about planting $300,000 worth of trees, you can't eat trees, you can't eat leaves, well - fare, food stamps, they're not sufficient, why don't you plant something so the people can eat - tomatoes, plant oranges, plant coconut trees or something. Do something for the people. The people want something positive done. Our people are living in pestilence. We live worse in Liberty City, Culmer and Coconut Grove than any other place in Florida. We want to know when are we going to do something. I see in Little Havana all these other projects going up but I don't see nothing in my community. I'm tired of it. In 1968 black people took to the street and 78 is almost here, ten years later. Situations are worse - in Liberty City, Martin 1077 • tuthet King Boulevard, that is a disgrace to every black man in the whole of Dade County. I drove by there this morning, I saw a bunch of dirt and rocks thrown up to one side, is this supposed to be a tribute to one of the greatest black men in America? Martin Luther King Boulevard is nothing and that's all I hear. It is going to be built in three years, five years, fifty years. I'm going to be a hundred years old before I see any progress there for my people. I don't see nothing done and I want to know when are we going to start doing something instead of hearing rhetoric back and forth, back and forth? It is time for us to start taking to the streets if nothing is not going to be done. I want to know what you all have positive going that can help us now, a right now plan not three, not five, not a hundred, not 2000 years but right now. 10, PRESENTATION OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF LITTLE HAVANA COMMUNITY CEJ1 ER. Mr. Grassie: Item F, Mr. Mayor and members of the City Commission is a progress report on the design for the Little Havana Community Center. This is a project which I know all of you have been very interested in. I think it is on schedule and we'd like to have the architects now tell you what they are planning for. Mr. David Perez: For the record, my name is David Perez representing the firm of Bouterse, Perez and Fabregas. We are here for the official presentation of the design development phase. After this presentation we are ready to go into work- ing drawings. We have some boards and a model that we are bringing in right now which will be easier to understand. To be brief, we have a 20,000 square foot building which is designed on four levels, the first level being parking and sup- porting facilities; the second level being the public level elevated about ten feet from the ground and the other two levels above the plaza represent leasing areas, office areas. What we had done is that we had taken the building and we have studied the building in relationship to existing and future structures and also to the configuration of the street. Mayor Ferre: Is that a slide that's on the side of the building? Mr. Perez: I'll go to that point in a minute, Mr. Mayor. What we did is move the building back to create an area for drop out and connect the future housing for the elderly which is not designed yet to the Little Havana Project with a com- mon plaza which would be built 50% now and 50% with the other building. This area that you're looking at right here is like a steel truss to create an urban area and probably will be used for supporting of the art work in the future. ... That's correct. 0ur area of site is this. Mrs. Gordon: Yes, and between that and the proposed elderly housing project in the future is where you're talking about having... What did you say you were going to have there? Mr. Perez: Yes, there is going to be a plaza elevated about 10 feet and this area is like a main entrance to the building at level #2. The building is really zoned in levels, the public areas being closer to the plaza and the more private areas being on the top floors. I think that explains in general.... Mrs. Gordon: What do you mean by private areas? What do you mean by that? Mr. Perez: Well, for instance, we have in the plaza area we have an auditorium for 170 people which is a public place. We have a day care center which is a public space. As we move up we have those offices of those agencies that have less volume of visitors in a day so we move them to the upper floors. Mrs. Gordon: Are you going to utilize the roof area for anything? Mr. Perez: What we did is we separated over the west, we moved the building tow - are the west and we went up inorder to create terraces, garden terraces so people can.... Mayor Ferre: No, she's asking a question, on the roof will you use it for any area, will you put plants there? Mr. Perez: At this point we're only putting plants because I don't think we will be able to afford a paving of these areas for utilization but we are going to leave it prepared for that. Mayor Ferre: Could you put a tennis court up there for people in the neighborhood to play tennis? 69 OCT 261977 • Mr. Perez: I don't think we have room for that but it might be possible... Mayor Ferre: On the roof, she's asking you could you put use on the roof. Mrs. Gordon: Can you utilize the surface of the roof some purposes, recreational or beautification? Mr. Perez: It could be utilized, it has to be specially prepared for that. Mrs. Gordon: Well the point is tell us how much is it. Is it a big deal or a small deal to do that? Mr. Perez: Well, it is a little bit difficult code -wise. Based upon the Code it is a little bit more complicated than a regular structure. Mayor Ferre: Well I think Mrs. Gordon is asking you and I would subscribe to that, I think she's come up with a very good idea. You've got a flat surface on the roof, find some use for it. If putting a tennis court or some kind of a thing where kids can go up there and play... Mrs. Gordon: Even shuffleboard courts because you're going to be dealing with elderly next door. Mayor Ferre: But there are a lot of children in the area too, Rose. Mr. Perez: Well, we have a mini -park right here which is not in our particular area of the contract right now but we have placed that where the existing trees are and is equally or centrally located to both the Little Havana Project. Mayor Ferre: Rose, I don't agree with that. Where children play you know better than I do that old people don't want to sit because they're bothered by the child- ren jumping up and down and making noise. You've got to provide something for both. What Mrs. Gordon is saying is you have a very nice surface on top of the building, would you in your future presentation give us a study as to what could be done with that area so that it becomes useful property rather than a ugly roof. Mrs. Gordon: Yes, use it because from the upper levels of the building next door you're going to be looking down on that roof anyhow so maybe you can look down at some plantings or maybe some umbrellas and chairs and tables. You'd have to fence around it so people don't fall off it. Mr. Perez: We'll have to evaluate that and bring it up for decision making. Mrs. Gordon: Yes, then you'll have to cost it out too and tell us how much it costs. Ok. Mr. Plummer: What is the next step? Mr. Perez: The next step is going into working drawings. I think we are in a very compressed schedule and I think we are supposed to be ready to go out for bids at the end of next month. Mayor Ferre: Well, I don't think you're talking about that complicated a deal. Put a stairwell up here, this roof all you're talking about is Mr. Perez: It's not really a ramp it is steps. For the handicapped we are enter- ing at that level and going up the elevator which will happen also in the other building. For the purpose of making the model we just, actually a ramp is very difficult to deal with because it needs twelve feet for every foot or reverse, one foot in rise for every twelve feet so it becomes very long. Mayor Ferre: Look, I don't want to get into an architectural critique but that is a very flat surface. See, most people are going to see this thing this way, that's ugly. ... Mr. Perez: The adjacent building which is a story high right in front of this building and the only thing that we have which is not indicated here because it has to be based on an energy study we're doing is that we'll have to shade this glass from the sun because it is west but in the other areas we're using solid lass. ... Right here, it is Luria and Son. It is a two story building, L- shaped like that and it gets to about this point, very close. That's why we... Mr. Plummer: ...building on the west and that's about four or five stories, the one on the corner, the 590 Building. 7q OCT 261977 1 Mr. Perez: Luria's is using the parking lot right here on the site. ... That's correct, right here in the front. Mrs. Gordon: Only in the front? Mr. Perez: Exactly. That's one of the reasons this area is mostly a solid area and also why we made this turn in the building to separate from the existing build- ing because we don't have any control over what happens here. We have a little bit of control, what is going to happen here in the future. Mayor Ferre: All right, do you need a motion on this, Mr. Grassie? Mr. Grassie: No, really what we're looking for here is really to keep you informed and to .... Mayor Ferre: You don't need any motion of approval to proceed in working drawings, etc? Mr. Grassie: We will go to continuing drawings if this is satisfactory to you. Mayor Ferre: Hearing no objections I guess you want a formal motion. Mr. grassie: It's not necessary but if you wish that's fine. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Reboso, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 77-832 A MOTION TO APPROVE IN PRINCIPLE THE ARCHITECTURAL PRESENTATION MADE BY THE FIRM OF BOUTERSE, PEREZ AND FABREGAS FOR THE DESIGN OF THE LITTLE HAVANA COMMUNITY CENTER AS MODIFIED BY SUGGESTIONS OF THE CITY COMMISSION. Upon being seconded by Cyaissioner Gibson, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Plummer, Mr. Reboso, Rev. Gibson and Mayor Ferre. NOES: None. ABSENT: Mrs. Gordon I1, FIRST ANNUAL MIAMI MUSIC FESTIVAL OF THE ARTS CBICENTENNIAL PARK) Mayor Ferre: !'e're on Item (G) , the First Annual niarni Music Festival of the Arts to be held in Bicentennial Park. I understand that some people are calling this Woodstock II or is it III? I hope that's not the case. Mr. Lee Lawrence: No, it is not the case as far as we're concerned. The purpose is for me really to bring you right up to date and tell you about the unbelievable cooperation we've had from all the city services and all the community and to in- form everybody that this is a family event. Mayor Ferre: Ok, you just said the magic word. This is not Woodstock II, this is a family event and we're not going to have all kinds of O.D.'s and ambulances going back and forth and national publicity about what is happening at Bicentennial Park, sight? Mr. Lawrence: That's correct. We are going to have all different forms of enter- tainment, Mr. Mayor and there will be rock, there will be jazz, there will be cloggers and there will be Spider Man, Ronald McDonald, the Big Bird from Sesame Street. This is a three day event. I can tell you that I am sure there will be problems, to tell you there will not be would be wrong on my part but I will also tell you that the experience of our crew of volunteers, the cooperation of the City of Miami Police, the Fire Department, from all the previous commercial endeavors which this is not, this is a free three day family event all going to charity. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Grassie,do you agree... subscribe to this event? Mr. Grassie: I think this event, Mr. Mayor, is typical of a lot of things the city is trying to do. There are risks involved but I think that the potential for having a good affair for the entire community is worthwhile and we ought to try and make it happen. Mayor Ferre: But the risks are reasonable is what I'm saying and I'm one of those people and I think the majority of the commission here are people who are willing • to take risks, if they are reasonable risks or good things. This is a reasonable thing and it's for a good cause. Right? Mr. Lawrence: Mr. Mayor, we are going to apply every possible professional person who is a bolunteer, and I want to let you know, at this time, that we understand that at this time almost all the hotels are pertty well booked for this 3-days event which will bring, I think, millions of dollars to the whole downtown area. Mayor Ferre: Lee, please don't misunderstand, I think that's supper. I want to commend you, I want to be thrilled after... and happy. I don't want to see a front page story in the New York Times, you know, about Woodstock II. You are telling me that that's not the case, I'm satisfied. The Manager has told me the same thing and I'd tell you, I want to thank you really,for this is exactly what this community needs, these types of events. I think we are headed on the right way. Mr. Lawrence: i t. Mayor, we are calling this the First Annual because we want it to be so good that we expect to do it year after year and in different locations in throughout the City. Mayor Ferre: All right. Any questions? Mrs. Gordon: Not in Coconut Grove. Mr. Lawrence: That's a good point because, you know, that's a very heavely resi- dential area and this is a mixed area and I think it's perfect. Mayor Ferre: All right, thank you very much. Mr. Lawrence: Thank you. Mayor Ferre: You don't need any action. All right. 12, " 911 EMERGENCY TELEPHONE SYSTD`1" FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI. Mayor Ferre: Now, we are on Item " D ". "911" Emergency Telephone Number. Plummer? Mr. Plummer: Don't talk to me, it's proposed by Fosmoen. Mr. Fosmoen: There have been a number of people involved in this and the Chief is here to respond along with people from Southern Bell. The Commission of the City was committed to "911". There have been several increases in cost which we need to bring to your attention. The initial cost that was proposed to this Commission was $19,000 for installation and a recurring cost to $63,800 per year. We are now looking at a new cost of installation of $102,000 as a City share and a yearly cost about $105,000 for the City share. That increase cost has come about, principally, because of two reasons. Number 1, the 72 OCT 261977 selective dispatching. It permits the call to be routed directly to the City or the governmental agency, the county that's providing the service; secondly, a rather sophisticated addition, is the immediate identification of telephone number from which the call is being made. There are a couple of alternatives, of course, that the City could consider in order to reduce cost. One would be to not have the selective dispatching which would immediately suggest some sort of county -wide central dispatching; that would mean at least a two-step process for someone who wanted to reach the Miami Police Department or Fire Department. I think perhaps it might be worthwhile to have the Chief respond his impression of the additional costs. We have the Police Chief, Fire Chief, and people from computers and communications looking at the additional cost. Mr. Plummer: What is your recommendation Don; let's start with the bottom line first. Chief Hickman: I recommend we go along with it, Sir. I have difficulty in buying the Telephone Co. a computer,but I recommend going along with it. I think it is good for the community. Mayor Ferre: Any questions from the Chief? Mr. Plummer: No questions. I want you to know, Mr. Mayor, you know, it seems like Chief Hickman and I are here at odds every time that he recommends something when I vote against it; but I've got to vote my conscience. In no way, in good conscience, can I go with an increase cost of 437%. Mayor Ferre: Any other question? Mr. Plummer: Yes. Mr. Mayor, you through my representation of this Commission, fought very hard to get a thing through the legislature which was exactly "911". That was that the State would not mandate programs without giving the appropri- ation; and here it is, just as beautiful as you can see it, we got that through the legislature that they could not mandate this programs. Here you are being asked to do it once again; but it is not madated. Mr. Mayor, as far as I am concerned, these costs are strictly prohibitive. I am not yet convinced that "911" is what it is purported to be. To me, it is ridiculous, at best, it would be a delaying factor to the recipients in this City and if you go into what is being recommended here, to the additional beautiful equipment, God help you on the cost.. Our phone bill right now runs about a million dollars a year. Right off the bat you are increasing it to about a million and a half dollars a year. I don't know, I think "911" mandated by the State, with the appropri- ate funding, is worth trying. But where you are asking the taxpayer of this City to pick-up the entire tab, it is completely wrong in my estimation. Mayor Ferre: Alright, Chief, do you have anything else you want to add? Chief Hickman: No, the only thing, Commissioner Plummer, I agree with you, as I said, I have difficulty. Part of that price is buying a computer for the Telephone Co. and that's about half of it. Mr. Fosmoen: There is, perhaps, one additional point that the Chief might want to make; and that is the possibility of some offsetting savings with respect to our emergency call boxes. Chief Hickman: We basically have paid about $160,000 a year for our call boxes; they probably are used about 20% of calls to fires. We have evaluated the possi- bility of "911" being an emergency call without a coin, that this could be placed to call boxes. Mayor Ferre: Anybody else from the Administration, Mr. Grassie? Mr. Crumpton? Mrs. Gordon: If in fact we proceeded, what portion of Dade County would then be covered with this emergency telephone number? Mr. Fosmoen: 'There is only one city that has not acted, and that's Miami Beach. Mr. Grassie: The intent is that the whole county will be covered. Mr. Fosmoen: The whole county will be covered. Mr. Gordon: We would then, if we don't proceed, be the only city that is not covered? OCT 2 61977 Mr. Fosmoen: No. It's all or nothing according to folks from Southern Bell. Mr. Plummer: But what happened to the proposal that the State plan would only be implemented when they appropriated the money? Mr. Grassie: They've appropriated the money, Commissioner, but it's an inade- quate amount of money. Mr. Plummer: How much have they appropriated, 22%? This is asinine, to make us put in a system, at best, which isn't proven to be good. The City of New York has had "911" and is now in a reverse trend to do away with "911"; and we are being asked to pick-up 80% of a cost of a State program. Now,the law that we passed through the legislature says that the State would not mandate programs without appropriation; and I wholeheartedly concur, this Commission had me going fight for that legislation. And here we are turned around, cutting our own throats by putting in a program that is not proven and we are having to pick-up 80% of the tab. And if you think it's going up 435% in two years, wait until you see what's is going to happen in the next two years. Mrs. Gordon: Mac, would you come to the microphone, please. Because we've been talking to matters that addressed themselves to dollars and cents. Mr. Gilstrap: Yes, Ma'am. Mrs. Gordon: 0. K. ? How many dollars is it going to cost us to get this thing in place? Mr. Gilstrap: The City of Miami? Mrs. Gordon: Yes. And the rest of Dade County. First let me say that as one individual person I am, feel that the security of having an emer- gency number is worth something. Mr. Plummer: Well, to answer your question, Rose, it will cost.... Mrs. Gordon: How much is it worth? Mr. Plummer: The total cost of the City of Miami would be $207,950.53, accord- ing to the Memo. Mrs. Gordon: Initially, or ...? Mr. Gilstrap: The initial charge or installation for it is estimated to be $83,348 for the City of Miami. Mr. Plummer: Well, Mac, where does the figure come from, $102,000 installation cost? Mr. Gilstrap: I did not prepare those figures. Mr. Plummer: Well, then somebody is lying. Mr. Gilstrap: I'm sorry, I'm sorry, excuse me. J. L., it's my mistake. I've given you the increase instead of the total, I apologize, you are correct, $102,420. Mrs. Gordon: That would install the computer that would be needed. Is it that correct? Mr. Gilstrap: This is the total installation cost for the selective routing system for the City of Miami. Mrs. Gordon: And without the selective routing it wouldn't be effective because it would require the two calls for dispatching, right? Mr. Gilstrap: It would require transfer of calls, yes Ma'am. Mrs. Gordon: 0. K. The rest of Dade County is ready to move ahead, you say, correct? Meaning that Dade County itself and all the other municipalities that have jurisdiction are all ready to go? 74 OCT 2 61977 Mr. Gilstrap; That is correct with the exception of Miami Beach and it is still under discussion with them. We hope to have a decision from them very shortly. Mrs. Gordon: What will it cost them to do it? Mr. Plummer: Miami Beach is $43,000. Mayor Ferre: And 514.35. Mrs. Gordon: How do you base your charges Oh.s. Mr. Plummer: Number of users. Mrs. Gordon: Number of users? Mr. Gilstrap: It is based on a prorated charge which is based on the main tele- phone stations in each community and in the unincorporated area. Mayor Ferre: Mac, I know you represent the phone company and what have you, but you think that this is the way to go, or is this something that is on its way...? Mrs. Gordon: Do you want him to keep his job? Mr. Gilstrap: I'll give you an answer, I'll give you several answers if you don't mind. Let me respond the several thoughts. One, this is not our plan. We responded with this plan as a result of the request of the Committee which was established to come up with a plan for "911" in Dade County. Mr. Plummer: Only because it was mandated by the State. Mr. Gilstrap: At that time the Committee was established because it was mandated. Mr. Plummer: That's right. Mr. Gilstrap: But this system is not a result of a mandate. This system is a result of the decision of that Committee as directed by their commissions. Mr. Plummer: Now give me an answer. Mr. Gilstrap: From a company viewpoint, we'd be delighted to see it. Mr Plummer: Now, that does not answer the question. Mr. Gilstrap: From the taxpayer's viewpoint we are buying a Cadillac. Mr. Plummer: No. We are buying a Rolls Royce. Mrs. Gordon: You are saying that the taxpayers can get along without it very well? Mr. Plummer: He didn't say that. Mr. Gilstrap: No, I do not say that. Mrs. Gordon: You don't need a Cadillac or Rolls Royce but you can drive a Ford. Mr. Gilstrap: But, bear in mind that we have five major law enforcement juris- dictions here and, of course, the five major political jurisdictions who give them their guidance. These are the decisions that are made in order to comply with their wishes. Mr. Plummer: No, I don't want to kill it. I think that it is fine, it's great, but I think the very thing you have me fight for, is that it's a State program and let the State put out the money for it. Mayor Ferre: In other words, you want to kill it. Mr. Plummer: If that's the case, so be it. Mrs. Gordon: But, J. L., let's try and analyze it this way. What possibility is there that the State will fund it? 75 OCT 261977 Mr. Gilstrap: Ther State has provided some funding already... Mr. Plummer: 22% Mr. Gilstrap: ... And they, I believe according to Mr. Merrill there is a possi- bility of some additional funding. Not to cover the whole thing. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Gilstrap, now, I'm not putting you on a spot with this question, but for the edification of the Commission. What has been the experience of the "911" success in the City of New York? Well, I want all of you to hear this. Mr. Gilstrap: Mr. Plummer, when the "911" system was installed in New York it was installed as a panacea; and you were to call "911" if you had a cat on the tree, if your mother in law argued at you, or if you needed an ambulance or a policeman, regardless of what it was. They flooded the "911" system. Mr. Plummer: And Mr. Gilstrap... Mr. Gilstrap: Now, let me finish. You ask me a question, let me finish. They went back into the public education program. They used TV, newspapers, everything. Don't call "911" unless it's an emergency. If you need a fireman, if you need a policeman, or what have you. Since that time the calls trailed down to only the emergency calls, they got the bugs out of the system and it is working suc- cessfully today and there are no plans to do away with it. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Gilstrap, let me... I was asking you a series of questions and I am trying to get down to something which you may understand but I don't. Now, I asked you a question... did you... do you recommend this "911"? do you think it's the thing? I didn't ask what your company says or what anybody else says. Now look, well... The reason I am asking this question is, alright, I am going to get off from that for a moment. I am going to go over to... when Rose Gordon had a problem and I'll tell you I thank God I've had that once, you know what I did, same thing she did, I dialed "0". I don't have time to go look at any... now, when I dialed "0" what does the operator do?. Mrs. Gordon: Well, she asks questions. Now, which city are you in?, And which Police Department do you need?, And I want to tell you it really would be a great help to the number of elderly people that we do have in our community. If they knew that that was their number to call, if they were educated enough to the fact that you call "911" and you get help, and you don't have to say I am in the City of Miami or Miami Beach or Coral Gables. If it works the way you say it works, then it would be really worth the money, I would think. Mr. Gilstrap: Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Ferre, let me say this. From an overall public viewpoint and from a need to solve specific problems like Mrs. Gordon just mentioned, we need "911". We should have "911". We are going to have it throughout the country. Every city in the country will ultimately have it in one form or another. The way you implement it may vary in location, but we are going to have "911", either by legislative mandate or by public pressure or what have you, but it's coming. Mrs. Gordon: Mac, excuse me for interrupting you, but how many states do you know that are presently operating on state-wide basis with "911"7 Mr.Gilstrap: I don't know any state is fully covered with "911". We have many metropolitan areas that are. We have several systems in operation in the State of Florida and they are operating successfully. Broward County has one, Martin - St. Lucy County, Gainesville County, Monroe County to the South of us, Broward County. Mrs. Gordon: In California they do have it. Don't they? Mr. Gilstrap: In some areas. Mrs. Gordon: In Nevada? Mr. Gilstrap: I don't know that.... Mrs. Gordon: The reason I... I thought you.... Mr. Gilstrap: It goes in on a local basis. 7s OCT 261977 Mrs. Gordon: ...it's spotty, but some day it could be a universal number. Mr. Gilstrap: It will be. Mayor Ferre: Are there any more questions? Mr. Merrill, do you want to come to the microphone? You've been following this for the City Administration, is that correct? Do you recommend this? Mr. Merrill: Yes. Mayor Ferre; Does it make sense? Mr. Merrill: It makes sense to me. Mayor Ferre: To the people of Miami? Mr. Merrill: I believe it will. Mayor Ferre: Well, I'm going to express my opinion, I think... Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Grassie, do we have the money to pay for it? Mr. Merrill: Well, there are some costs involved that we have not been able to get into, some cost savings, and what the Telephone Co. now is looking at some savings in the system. Mayor Ferre: Well, let me ask you this. Mr. Merrill: But in direct question... Mayor Ferre: Excuse me, Mr. Grassie, Mr. Merrill, if I dial "0" what's the response time to get to the polcice? If I dial the police number direct what's the response time and if I dial "911" after this is in, what's the response time? Mr. Merrill: I have no way in determining that. The Police Department will have to answer that question.. or the Telephone Co. Mr. Gilstrap: If you dial "Operator" right now and ask for a policeman, you got to go through a questioning series. What city are you calling from, which Police Department do you want. There will be a delay in getting to the Police. You may also get a young inexperienced operator, a new operator, or any type of a person. If you dial the direct Police number in the Telephone Directory wou will go right into your complaint answering desk and you will receive immediate attention and I'm sure they will dispatch in a matter of seconds. Mrs. Gordon: Yes, I could tell you that that's true, Mac. Mayor Ferre: In "911"? Mr. Gilstrap: If you dial "911" your call will go in a split second to the appro- priate answering center, Emergency Answering Center, and there will be an immedi- ate dispatch made with the appropriate Police Department. Mrs. Gordon: The calling line is the line that determines where it goes. Mr. Gilstrap: The calling line determines to which disctrict should it do. Mayor Ferre: I'd like to hear from somebody from the Police Department, if you would...Does the Police Department recommend this? You studied it through? You think it's a logical conclusion? Major McLaughlin: I think it's the only way to go. Mayor Ferre: All right, Sir... I... my position... Mr. Plummer: Can we afford it3 Major Mc Laughlin: I guess that's like a television or radio. If we can afford television, I think we can afford this. I think we are going to have to afford it. ;Mk. Plummer: I disagree with you Mac, you know. 77 OCT 261977 Mayor Perre: I'll tell you, Mr. Plummer, it's now 3:35 P.M., and you are leaving in 20 minutes. I would say that... I'll give you my opinion. It's not whether I want to or what have you, if it saves one live, two lives, three lives, it's worth $102,420 to me and it's just that simple. Mrs. Gordon: Well, I personally can attest to the necessity of having a, honestly having one line to call. And I didn't finish that little story I told you while I dialed the operator I got the Metropolitan Dade County Police Department. She said, Lady, you don't want us. I said, but I didn't ask for you. I asked for the City of Miami Police Department. Oh, we are sorry, but we'll transmit it for you. This was a delay of several minutes. I was in the house, I didn't know if the person who was in my house uninvited was still there or not. A11 I knew was I was on the telephone trying to get help quick. So, I can tell you. I'm for it and I'll move it. Mayor Ferre: Alright, there is a motion by Mrs. Gordon, is there a second? Second by Reboso. Further discussion? Mr. Plummer: Just remember when you approve this, just remember,... and off the bat on the budget, you are $200,000 short and also remember you gave in, don't you expect to get another dime from the State. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Grassie, are you recommending this? Mr. Grassie: Yes, Sir. I think that the Fire Chief tried to tell you about the financing of it. You are talking about an annual extra cost of $105,000, the Chief indicated to you that we have a budget of a $165,000 for call -box phones many of which can be decreased to support this cost,so, it is our expectation that in terms of the annual operating cost it's going to be a wash item. But we do have an additional $100,000 of a one time cost. Mayor Ferre: Further discussion? Call the roll, please. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gordon, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 77-833 A MOTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO PROCEED WITH IMPLEMENTATION AND DEVELOPMENT FOR THE "911" EMERGENCY TELEPHONE SYSTEM IN THE CITY OF MIAMI AS OUTLINED IN MEMORANDUMS PRESENTED TO THE CITY COMMISSION THIS DATE. Upon being seconded by commissioner Reboso, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NONES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. ON ROLL CALL: Mr. Plummer: Let me clarify my vote,just so that the record will be clear. I am all in favor of "911", I think it is a good system. But I think it is the system that should be paid for by the State, and since it was mandated by the:.State. And I think that's the way that it should apply. 78 OCT 261977 • 13i DEFERRAL At4D CONSIDERATION OF PARKING LOT LIGHTING Q DINANCE, Mayor Ferre: Is anybody her on I? Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Simon was here earlier, but he asked that if you would please reschedule this to the next meeting because he had to go to the Board of Realtors. Mayor Ferre: You're talking about item ... which? Mrs. Gordon and Mr. Plummer: I Mayor Ferre: Alright. Mrs. Gordon: Herbert Lee Simon was going to speak to it. Mayor Ferre: Alright. There is a motion that I'd be rescheduling, is that alright, Mr. Manager to that? Mrs. Gordon: To the next meeting.. Upon motion of Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, the item was deferred to November 10, 1977 by unanimous vote. 14, DEFERRAL AND CONSIDERATION OF CITY ATTORNEYS ANNUAL REPORT. Mayor Ferre: How about item J? How about H? We skip the H...but wait a minute. Mr. Plummer: Why? ... Could we put the City Attorney's report over to the next meeting? Upon motion of Commissioner Plummer, seconded by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, item "J" was deferred to November 10, 1977 by unanimous vote. 15, RE -SCHEDULE NOVEMBER 24 COMMISSION MEETING TO NOVEMBER 10. Mr. Plummer: ... Mr. Mayor, I'm listening to a conversation here which says we can comply with the charter because technically we are having two meetings on the loth. We are having one on the day time, and one on the evening, and that would make us comply. And I ask a question, can the Administration get by with just having the loth? And they said yes. Mayor Ferre: O. K. Mr. Plummer: Is that agreed? The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77-834 A RESOLUTION RESCHEDULING THE REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 1977 TO NOVEMBER 10, 1977. Upon being seconded by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordong Vice-Mayour Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None `9 OCT 261977 • • 16, PROPOSED LEASING OF DINNER KEY MARINA AND MIAMARINA, Mayor Ferre: Item H, Mr. Manager? Mr. Grassie: This item, Mr. Mayor, members of the City Commission brings to you a proposed document which would provide for the leasing of the Dinner Key Marina. You had asked for this several months ago and it is here for your review and comment and if you approve of this, without... I see Commissioner Plummer laughing ...you know, without expecting that you would read through all of the details of this, basically, they are provisions which protect the City in putting this out for bid. What we are looking for, then, is your approval to put this out to bid and we will bring those bids back to you, of course. Mayor Ferre: I've got a basic question and two recommendations. One, is this broad enough from scope that anybody and everybody can come in with any idea that they want? If somebody wants to put in the Dade County Zoo here.... Mr. Fosmoen: We have asked for a set of minimum proposals, Mr. Mayor, but it's an open-ended kind of document. If someone wants to come in with the Dade County Zoo in addition to the minimum, they could do that. Mayor Ferre: I just don't want anybody to be precluded from doing whatever they feel is the thing to do there. Mr. Grassie: That would be possible, Mr. Mayor, but they would have to do the five things that are listed on the cover sheet. Those five are minimum, and then past that they could recommend anything that they would wish. Mayor Ferre: Completely restored and modernized the electrical service with renovation of Pier 1 and 2, reconstruction of the dock master's office with the rest rooms and showers, repair of the replacement of the deteriorated pilings and renovation of the Seminole Boat Service. Now, beyond that,they can add if they want to put 500 slips in. Mr. Plummer: Or a 1,000. Mayor Ferre: Or a 1,000. And at that point we are going to have a big public hearing about this whole process. Now, that was my question. I'll tell you my comments and then we'll open up for discussion. Number 1, I think that you ought to leave, you ought to give at least 120 days so that everybody in the world that wants to come in and bid on this thing won't say: "Well, you didn't give me..uh. Mrs. Gordon: An awful long time. Mr. Plummer: Too much time. Mayor Ferre: 90 days? Mrs. Gordon: What's happening on this, Mr. Mayor? Mayor Ferre: 60 days? Mrs. Gordon: 30 days ought to be enough. Mayor Ferre: How much? Mrs. Gordon: 30 days. Mr. Grassie: We have anticipated 60, but if you want more than that we can do it more. Mrs. Gordon: I don't see any need. Mr. Fosmoen: I don't think they can respond in 30 days. Mayor Ferre: I think 30 days (inaudible) Mrs. Gordon: I. K. 60 days? More reasonable? Mayor Ferre: I see Spence Meredith who represents on side and I see Paul Walker who I know has an interest and I know ther at least two other groups that are 80 'OCT 2 6197 7 • a interested. Now, how many days would you recommend since you are an interested party? How many days you recommend since you are an interested party? 90 days? Would 90 days be sufficient for you? Rev. Gibson: No. Mrs. Gordon: No. Mayor Ferre: No? Look, I'll do whatever the majority wants. You know, you know that this isn't the end. This is just the beginning. Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, I think I wrote the Manager a memo on this. Every time I go down to the waterfront here, the people continuesly say to me, when we were there, you know, and I just get tire of people asking me... Mr. Reboso: Last meeting in December. Rev. Gibson: Let's say 60 days, and tell everybody. I move 60 days. Mayor Ferre: Father Gibson moves just for 60 days. Mr. Reboso: Second. Mayor Ferre: Second. Further discussion? Mr. Plummer: That's all we are going to discuss. Right? Mr. Fosmoen: From the date of advertising? Mayor Ferre: At this point. Mr. Fosmoen: From the date of advertising, Sir? Mr. Plummer: I'm sorry, Mr. Mayor, and I'm just very sorry that this stuff is getting rushed through. Let me tell you something, you know, old man said you ought to punch him in the nose that's communications. And Dick I'm not saying punch you the nose. But you know what's funny? This is not the instructions of this Commission.. Not at all. Now, someone here again has come up with a Rolls Toyce of a package. I'm not saying that I'm opposed to this, I think it's great, it's the future and everything. Do you know what this Commission told the Adminis- tration to do? Let me remind you what we told them to do. "Consider putting out the dock facilities to bid the private concessioners". That's what we told them to do. Mayor Ferre: That's only half of it. Now, let's talk about the other half. Mr. Plummer: 0. K. Wait a minute. Mayor Ferre: The other half was... Mr. Plummer: The golf courses. Mayor Ferre: No, the other half was.. come back with recommnedations for improve- ments besides just fixing up what we have. I'll tell you... Mrs. Gordon: But, what's wrong with this J. L. ? Mr. Plummer: Rose, what's wrong with this, you are getting in voting on a package, O. K., that conceivably can't fly. The thing of this Commission, the instructions. Now, you know, when my father gives me instructions, God ehlp me if I don't follow. If I want to come up after I comply with the insturctions and make recommnedations for furtherance, that's great. This is not what the Commission recommended. This is not what the Commission ask them to do. This Commission said to them: "Come back to us and tell us , is it feasible to take this marina facilities and put them out to a private concessioner". That's was all. Mayor Ferre: And use that as a leverage to get more things done. I want to tell you point blank right now. This vote right here is not for turning over one single dock of any private sector unless I get ten times in return. Now, we are going to put up something and get something in return that is a lot better, that's what I'm for. But to come and get this out... 81 'OCT 2 61977 • 1 Mt. Plummer: But you see, the question that we are trying to answer, you are not going to get it here, because let me tell you what your face was right off the bat. This thing here makes it a minimum requirement of a thousand boats. Thousand boats, do you know what a thousand boats means? Let me tell you what it means since you obviously don't know. It means dredging, it means that you've got to get approval from I.I. Board. Do you know when the last approval from an I.I. Board was given? Mayor Ferre: It's time we start it again. Mr. Plummer: Hes, fine. But we're still then suffering with the main thing and I come back to the point... We instructed the Administration to vome back with a feasibility and recommendation of whether or not you put the faiclities out for public concession. Now we come back with a champagne bucket, not with the beer that we can afford... Mayor Ferre: Behold the turtle, it only makes progress when it sticks its neck out. Mr. Plummer: That's right. The old turtle's soup again. Mrs. Gordon: Oh, come on, you'll get some soup of turtle.. Mayor Ferre: Well.. I'll tell you... Mr. Plummer: The old turtle soup that never gets anything done. Mayor Ferre: It's long overdue that we started making some progress on things. Mr. Plummer: Hey, Maurice, I'm all in favor. if you can increase it to two thousand slips. Mayor Ferre: Look, I'm going to tell you. Winston Churchill made a statement, now I'll make you a little statement. I am not serving as the Mayor of the City of Miami as a caretaker, and I am not here to... take... and I think I would hope that all us feel the same way, that we are here to see this City progress. I'm not interested in fixing two hundred and thirty two rickety... Mr. Plummer: Three hundred and seventy one. Mayor Ferre: ...three hundred and seventy one rickety old slots here, what I'm interested in seeing, is seeing this become a beautiful marina -oriented facility which will be the marvel and the envy of everybody in California. I'm tired of hearing that Long Beach, California this, Marina Del Rey that, San Francisco this, Sausalito that. Well, I want to hear Miami this. Mr. Plummer: I'm all in favor of it. Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, isn't it true that we took the position that instead of us doing this thing, that we would let the people in the industry come in and tell us what they... and I would hope, Mr. Manager, I hope this is what I'm hearing, that you sent all those people out ther who are in the industry; look man, we got this plan out here.. you've got some ideas, you know, come bring it in and then let's move... Mayor Ferre: Look, my recommendation is this, let's get along with this thing and I would hope that we'll have enough interested parties, this may become more than one, you know, we may have two or three developers that get involved in this. Mr. Plummer: That's right, we are not a caretaker but we're sure going to the poor house in a Cadillac. Mayor Ferre: Alright. Further discussion" yes... go ahead... sure. Mr. Meredith: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission. I'm Spence Meredith from the Grove Key Marina, and I would just like to comment on the subject of seeing the docks go out for bid.. I would just like to comment on the subject of seeing, in seeing the docks go out for bid since that's what you are discussing right now. I gather that some bid specifications have been prepared and as you have all 82 OCT 2 61977 pointed out I gather that the purposes of these be sufficiently broad in scope so that they are not limiting but rather opening a door to a variety of proposals. Mayor Ferre: Right. Mr. Meredith: If I understand the bid specifications,they are relatively specific in what must be done first; and if there is a certain minimums as for example, I heard the number of thousand boat slips, well, that's a very good number, but that may be too many boats for this particular area and if a bid specification is written in such way that you did not come in with a thousand boat slips but came in with eight hundred but actually you had better boats so you had a more efficient or more attractive marina, then your bid really wouldn't meet the bid specifications and you would be out of luck. By the same token, if you came in with an offer which said that instead of doing this thing first, again, you wouldn't be meeting with these specifications and so you'd have some problems, and I think that this is a serious thing and also I would comment because I would go on public record saying that... you know, we take a very active interest in what goes on down on this area, and I'm sure we along with many other groups will be making some offer to the City, we'll do the best we can and I'm sure they all will... I don't think 60 days is really enough. I'd really like to see a longer period... we are talking of millions of dollars here... Mr. Plummer: Five. Mr. Meredith: ... and to do the kind of cost that it, in order to finance a project like that you'd have to know first what it is you want to do so you have to see the bid specifications to find out what the City wants; secondly, you have to know what it's going to cost; and third, you have to get your money together, and 60 days I think it's too short. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Grassie, let's ask your advise on this. Number one, to the two points. I'll go along with 60, that's the will of this Commission. I do think that 90 would be a little bit better because you really need to let these people go out and go to New York and get the financing and all this stuff. The second thing is this, this is just my personal opinion, I don't think you should put that many... that type of restriction. Suppose somebody wants to come in and build five hundred units instead of a thousand, I think we ought to be able to listen to people who say: "Hey, look I think we rather"... it's better to take a step at a time. Plummer may be right for a change. Mr. Plummer: Oh, no, please, my heart can't take that. Mrs. Gordon: J. L. and Maurice, isn't this the summary of what is the minimum requirements on the front page..I don't see anything in there that says it'd have to be one thousand boat slips. Mr. Grassie: It does in the next sentence, Commissioner,.. yes,immediately. Mayor Ferre: The proposal would also be required to provide the marina extension that will accommodate a thousand vessel within seventy two months, you know, why not take that down to five hundred, for example. Mr. Plummer: Mayor Ferre: Mr. Plummer: twenty nine. Well, you're saying five hundred. Or more, five hundred or more, only.. You are only increasing a hundred and twenty one, a hundred and Mr. Grassie: Well, if that's your desire. We had understood that you wanted to increase the capacity significantly. Mr. Plummer; And this also includes the development of those islands. Let me tell you, Spencer just brought out a point. Now, I don't mean to hit on a sore subject but this is a damned sore subject in this Commission, you know, in the master plan which this thing continuously refers to, speaks about the beautiful facilities of marina...the barn was gone... Mrs. Gordon: You're darn right. Mr. Plummer: ... the barn is now being bigger and better that it was before. And now, you are going to jam a thousand boat spaces with the bigger and better OCT 2 61977 barn. Now, you know, you keep talking about on both sides of your face here oh,... you've got to comply with the master plan... well, the City didn't... now, you are going to demand it of somebody else. You've got to develop those islands... Hey, look, I want to get back to the point we asked once before, that point is very simple. Would it be well for this Commission to consider putting the marina facilities, and we inlcuded the golf courses, out to public bid where we put it out on a concession? That's number one. Now, once we establish that point, then if you want to have people as we did at Underwood, come in and make us a proposal, give us some of your ideas, you are in the business, you want to come in an put in five hundred and it's doable, then do it. Mayor Ferre: Father Gibson. Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, I want to suggest to the Commission that we let the men in the business develop a program and come back and tell us. Whether it's five hundred, see whether it's five hundred or whether it's a thousand, at least, you know, these things need to be done and when they come back, to come back with a full knowledge knowing that these are basic things. And whether that we go for five hundred or thousand... but these men can come up with some imaginative plans... Mayor Ferre: But, that's what we want to let them do. Rev. Gibson: That's what we want. Mr. Plummer: But you are not doing it here. Mayor Ferre: Yes, but now wait a minute, Plummer. Excuse me, Father, because I want to quote Plummer. Now, at the last meeting, I want to remind you, that while we were smacked in the middle of this thing and we were talking about negotiation... do you remember that?... And Plummer had a bid to do about the thing because he thought that is was up, this is on this Conference Convention Center,... and Plummer said: "Now, this Commission is going to first set the guidelines"... Mr. Plummer: We did. Mayor Ferre: And we are going to do this and that... Mr. Plummer: We did set the guidelines. Mayor Ferre: ... and we are not goint to let the Manager... as you recall. Mr. Plummer: We did set the guidelines, but they've not been complied yet. Mayor Ferre: All I'm saying with in this particular case is, let this thing go out to bid, let's see who is interested... Look, that's what we did with the Pritzker situation. That's what we... let's... it may not be over in sixty days. Mr. Plummer: Yes, but I want it's a dead item. The minute Now„ if you want to send out spaces,... ah. to remind you, it's like the Pritzker alright, you do it like the Pritzker, it's a dead item. a bid and you say here not to exceed a thousand Mrs. Gordon: Yes, but that is the way I understood it, I'm sorry I read it wrong. Rev. Gibson: Mr. Manager, ;would another word bother you too much? Proposals. You know, that way anybody who comes in here to propose anything knows that these certain things have got to be done and you know, you just say to them, we want proposals keeping in mind this frame work. OK? I'm talking about these... Mayor Ferre: In other words, if you wouldn't limit people just to this, if someone has a different idea... Rev. Gibson; Mr. Plummer: Mayor Ferre: Right, and let them go on and become creative and imaginative. That's beautiful. That's great. It's that acceptable, Mr. Manager? Mr. Grassie: Yes, it certainly is, Mr. Mayor. I would think. You've asked me several questions and I haven't had a chance to respond. One, I think that possibly you're right that we should extend this to 90 days. Two, I think that if the City Commission would feel more comfortable with five hundred spaces, that would be fine. OCT 261977 Mayor Ferre: Or more, ore more, Mr. Grassie: We can say that it would be desirable to have a -few more, brit we can make that as a basic. Mr. Plummer: Well, Mr. Grassie, I would Mr. Grassie: And then ask for proposals as the Father has suggested. Mr. Plummer: I would feel very comfortable with the terminology "not to exceed a thousand". Mayor Ferre: I didn't know that that was the case. Mr. Plummer: That's setting a parameter. OK? In other words, they can do none for up to six hundred and twenty nine more, let them make the proposal. Rev. Gibson: Alright, Mr. Mayor, suppose I do this. Mayor Ferre: Alright, Father. Rev. Gibson: If the seconder would let me change that motion, I would like to offer a motion that we advertise for proposals setting these parameters as you indicate on this front page for a minimum of five hundred; and we don't deal with the maximum. Mr. Plummer: OK? I'll buy that. Rev. Gibson: And I will yield to the numver of days, I personally feel bad that we've promised those people and now... Mrs. Gordon: That's what I feel about... though. Rev. Gibson: . three pople to for sixty, let .. and I was willing to go for sixty days, but if I can't get go for sixty, and they'd rather go for ninety. But I'd rather go them get on with it so that those people around her won't be Mrs. Gordon: You know, personally I feel as Father Gibson does, that we have put off the improvements to those docks so long that those people, they have no faith or confidence whatsoever... that anything will ever be done. I don't think they believe it. Mayor Ferre: That makes two for sixty days. Reboso? Plummer? For sixty days. Is that the motion? Mrs. Gordon: Yes. Mr. Plummer: That's it. Mayor Ferre: Alright, there is a motion and a second. Yes Sir? Mr. Meredith: Before you are all finished voting on this, may I add one or two more comments? because you are still under a discussion stage here. One, I would hope that, as you said, the way the bid specifications are, they set up certain parameters as to what you are looking for. I would hope that instead of setting these as specific minimums they would be stated to be guidelines for what the City is looking for as compared to these specifications. There is a dirrerence when you bid on offering to sell three cars to the City, it's a very specifig item at a specific price; but you are now dealing in many millions of dollars, you are dealing with numbers like two million, five million, three million, whatever they are, big numbers now. Are those numbers finite? Would your bid be disqualified if you came with a different... I think that'd be wrong, maybe it should be done for less. The Grove is a very sensitive area and some things get blown out of proportion. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Grassie, do you want to answer that? Mr. Grassie: I wonder if we can do it this way, Mr. Mayor. If we indicated to the people making proposals that the City would seriously consider these elements and we will list the element4, then we will not make them absolute but we would put everybody on notice that in evaluating.... 85 OCT 261977 Mayor Ferre: Alright. That's acceptable.., Rev. Gibson: I'll buy that. Mrs. Gordon: Say that again... Mayor Ferre: Is there further discussion? Mr. Meredith: May I add one more thing which is relevant, and that is that in approaching a project of this size you are dealing with a variety of govern- mental bodies, it's going to take time and it takes time to get the permits and it takes time to make certain that you can do certain things. And if we start fooling around with those islands out there, it's going to be very complex. I am on a number of committees which are very active in that area. Mayor Ferre: The majority of this Commission has said sixty days and that's the way it is. Mr. Plummer: Well, then securing a permit would not come within that time frame. OK. Let me bring out one other point, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferre: It's 4:05 P.M. Mr. Plummer: OK. One other point, I want you to realize that this, as it is presented to us, does not address Miamarina at all, and that was one of the things that we told the Administration to do. Mayor Ferre: Plummer, we'll have to do that at some other meeting, we just can't do it today. Now, is a further discussion on this item H? Mr. Weiner: Do I understand that there will be an invitation for proposals? Mayor Ferre: Yes. Mr. Weiner: Ther proposals willbe brought up at a public meeting for... Mr. Plummer: Yes Sir, oh sure. Mayor Ferre: Yes, absolutely, completely discussed in the public hearing. Mr. Weiner: You mean it's not a bid contract. Mayor Ferre: Give us your name for the records, so we know... Mr. Weiner: Irwin Weiner, 2699 South Bayshore Drive. Mayor Ferre: Alright, Mr. Weiner. Mr. Weiner: In other words this will be brought up and we;11 have a chance to give you our own bid? Rev: -Gibson: Yes Sir, yes Sir. Mr. Weiner: Vaious proposals are represented. Mayor Ferre and Rev. Gibson: Right. Mr. Dickson: My name is Tom Dickson, I have a boat at Dinner Key Marina and I would like to ask the Commission a couple of questions relative to leasing the facilities. Mr. Plummer has said, we are going to present a study to the Com- mission as to whether or not it's feasible to put these properties out for public lease. I'm not clear, nor perhaps other people that might be bidding clear, as to what do you mean by feasible. Are you going to evaluate the leases to the City on the basis of the number of slips that they produce? On the basis of the revenue that each lessee will agree to pay to the City?... and if so, is there a check? Because whenever you give private industry the opportunity to obtain a monopoly, it must be regulated. And what are the checks and ballances for that regulation and are the people who are bidding on it aware of this? Because if so, I'll agree to pay you ten million dollars because I know I'll get it out of the monopoly. That's not a monopoly. Is not a monopoly? 86 OCT 261977, Mayor r'erre: No, it is a monopoly and the answer to that is that it will all come out during the public hearing process. Mr. Dickson: What is the criteria by which you will select the operator? Mayor Ferre: The criteria hopefully is..., look, we've got a beautiful piece of property on the water we want to improve it, we want to develop it, come up with recommendations. Now, as we review the recommendations, the Manager is going to come back and say, --look, we recommend this, we don't like this, we recommend that, this is our final recommendation--. The Commission is then going to have time to study it; then, we are going to have a public hearing, and this room is going to be full of people, and we are going to start like we always do going through the process and we are gcing to do this and we are going to do that; regulations are going to be such and what... I can't tell you what there is going to be here, all we are doing now is looking for what we've been doing for some time which is using a public -private combination to get on with the development of this City in the way this City should be developed. Now, what is the end? what's the end line? what's the bottom line? Nobody here can tell you. Come back in sixty days and we'll be discussing it right here. Rev. Gibson: Sir, I remember you because I kind of made a commitment, I feel awfully bad. When we... when these proposals come in, since boating is your business, we would hope that you would be right here. Remember I'm not a boater, you know, I don't own a boat there, I have no time, no land but I want the people who do this business to be satisfied. Mr. Dickson: I totally agree with you and I would ask the question, --has any of the industry, --marine industry --been asked to put their input into this bid classification? Has any of the residents or the people that have boats at Dinner Key? Has the City Administration, the Marina's facilities people been asked to put their input? Mayor Ferre: That's what's done all of this, and your input, and the Marine Industry's input, and the private sector's input is going to be listened to in sixty days. We'll see it here. Mr. Dickson: You know what I feel like? I feel like a cow being led to slaughter, and they're only arguing over the price. Mayor Ferre: I don't quite think that's a.... Mr. Meredith: May I raise one question that you discussed down there? And that is, in regard to the preparation of these bid specifications, -where various ele- ments of marina contact--? I'm not aware of any that were. Mayor Ferre: I didn't say they were. I said that's where they'll come in in sixty days and I guarantee you this room will be full of people screaming and arguing and recommending.... Rev. Gibson: You'll believe it. Mr. Meredith: If I understand what happens though,-- and see if I'm correct- this bid specifications --either these or modified bid specifications-- will be made public and there will be a sixty-day time period for people to respond.... Mayor Ferre: That's correct. Mr. Meredith: ....and then following... the City's staff will evaluate these things and after a period of timer -probably more than sixty days-- they will come back with a recommendation. Mayor Ferre: You've got it. And we're going to advertise in the Wall Street Journal and the New 'York Times and Yachting World and U.S. Boating and every other boating and marina publication. I would hope, Mr. Grassie. And I hope with all the respect to you and the other group that me have fifteen people wanting to do this. Mr. Plummer: I think that's the thing that I was trying to bring up, Mr. Mayor. If you're going to do such a thing which I'm all in accordance with, then I think Miamarina is what we discussed before should be included. You're going to have to go... if you've going to divorce Miamarina now and take it later, then you're going to have to go through this whole process again. 87 OCT 2 61977 Mayor Ferre: We may very well do that. Alright, is there further discussion on this? Mr. Plummer: Where are we? Mayor Ferre: We all have a motion and a second. Is there a further discussion? Mrs. Gordon: J. L. are you suggesting that we inlcude Miamarina in this now? Mr. Plummer: Sure. Unidentified Speaker: No. Mrs. Gordon: But why not? Mr. Plummer: For proposals, why not? Rev. Gibson: Oh, then we'll never get, well never answer these people here. Mr. Plummer: Get us out of the business. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Plummer, I'll tell you, I have no objection if you want to make an amendment to throw Miamarina in and let's see what happens. Mr. Plummer: I agree. Mayor Ferre: Somebody may say, look we're interested in this but not in Miamarina. Fine. Mr. Plummer: I make an amendment that Miamarina be included as part of the.... Rev. Gibson: And with the understanding that the people who are not interested in bidding on Miamarina don't have to do a darn thing about it. If they just want this, this is all they are going to talk about. Mr. Plummer: That's good. Rev. Gibson: OK. Mayor Ferre: Have you got any problem with that? Mr. Grassie: Well two things. One, it's going to delay your process signifi- cantly. We are not at all prepared to put Miamarina out. Two, Miamarina is basically developed. Now, what are you going to ask somebody to do for it other than run it? Mr. Plummer: Run it. That's it, run it. Mr. Grassie: That is a very different question, Commissioner. Mr. Plummer: No, it's not. Ther original question, Mr. Grassie, to you, to the Administration was made by the Mayor, give us your recommendation as to whether or not it would be better for this City if the City was not involved in the marina business, period. Mr. Grassie: And you are not getting that answer today, Commissioner. Mr. Plummer: That's right. Not in this document. Mr. Grassie: It is a separate question and it is not pretended, nor, you know... it is very simple,... Sir, are we going to continue to operate marinas or are we going to get out of the City operating? Mr. Plummer: It's not been answered here. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Grassie, the concensus of this Commission, as I sense it now, is to throw it in there, is going to delay your bidding process; that's going to make Spencer happy because that's going to give him an extra thirty days, because that's what is going to take you to do-- and just put it out for bids, Mr Mrs. Gordon: Why do you have to keep them both locked together in a tied package when what you are really saying is they can deal separately? 8V OCT 261977 Mayor Ferre: We don't. That's what you said and I agree with you, what it it „ :t Mr. Plummer: That's right. Mrs. Gordon: And if one doesn't delay the other unnecessarily.... Mayor Ferre: Other than, that's what Gibson said, and... Mr. Plummer: I agree. Mayor Ferre: If they want to do it, fine, if they don't want tt, d Mrs, Gordon: But, what do they know? Rev. Gibson: Fine Let's call them over. Mayor Ferre: That's it. Mrs. Gordon: OK. Mayor Ferre: Do we all understand what we are voting on? Mr. Grassie: Mr. Mayor, I think we need a little additional comment. Mayor Ferre: Go ahead, Mr. Grassie. Mr. Grassie: Commissioner Plummer has indicated a couple of times that we are answering the wrong question. I want to remind you that you've asked two questions. One question you asked was for an evaluation of the advisability of putting both golf courses and marina facilities out for bid. Mr. Plummer: That's right. Mr. Grassie: That is not in front of you today. We are not responding to that, we have not responded to that yet and we have not intended to respond to it until we did another thing that you asked us to do, separately. As a process of all the public hearings that you had on the Dinner Key Marina rates, one of the things that was in your Resolution was that within six months we would put this facility only out for bid. Sir, it's a prt of the public record. Mr. Plummer: Now, listen, listen. Fin, let's go to the public record. Mr. Grassie: And we will get the public record for you.... Mr. Plummer: The public record.... Mr. Grassie: Can I finish, Commissioner, please? Mr. Plummer: Surely. Mr. Grassie: What we are doing is following up on your Resolution insofar as it is applied to Dinner Key only and we are implementing that decision that you took which is completely separate from you other request and we have not responded to second request yet. Mr. Plummer: Are you finished? Mr. Grassie, I would tell you, Sir, that the public record in your own budget will tell you you are wrong. What we promised those people, and Mr. Dickson is here, and let him correct me if I am wrong, was that any surplus monies would be put into your enterprise fund and that the City would draw from that fund only for the purposes of improvements. Now, that enter- prise fund is nowhere near what you are talking about in this document; at no time was there ever any discussion that these improvements were going to be done by the private sector, it was going to be done by the City. Now, we are not talking about the same thing and I think if you want to go to the public records, Sir, let's go to the public record; because I remember very clearly. Mr. Dickson, am I wrong, Sir? Mr. Grassie: Could I do this, Commissioner? Could I provide all of the City Commission with a copy of the Resolution? Mayor Ferre: No, Mr. Grassie, because I tell you it's not necessary. I'll tell 89 OCT 261977 you again, I wish to reiterate have recommended which I think put into this bid document, on to incorporate that as part of and the bidder says, -look, I'm that's the bidder's option. what it is that Commissioner Gibson and Mrs. Gordon the majority of us have accepted, and that is to a flexible-selcetive basis, if the bidder wants the proposal. If the bidder does not want to, just simply not interested in Miamarina, then, Mr. Grassie: Could we at least do this?, could we, at least... if we are going to put them out, let's put them out as two different packages. Mr. Plummer: Have no objection. Mr. Grassie: You're likely to have completely different people, you are asking for completely different results. One is strictly management, the other one is development. Mayor Ferre: Go put them together, I don't care.... Mr. Plummer: Have no problem with that. Mrs. Gordon: Does suit you, J. L.? Mr. Plummer: Fine. Mrs. Gordon: OK. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Plummer: Mayor Ferre: Alright, will that.... As long as they are put out at the same time. Separate or together? Mr. Plummer: As long as they are put out at the same time. Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, my motion will carry within it that you put them out tomorrow if we can. And then that you ask for results... in sixty days, and if they can't come in in sixty days, then we must go for more time, we will have to understand that but I think sixty days, make everybody ship up or ship out and that's it. Mayor Ferre: Alright, is that clear, Mr. Grassie? Whenever you are ready. Yes. Alright. Further discussion. Mr. Plummer: The only request I have is before that document goes out I want a copy of it. Mayor Ferre: Alright. Is there further discussion? Call the roll, please. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gibson who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 77-835 A MOTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO PROCEED WITH ADVERTISING INVITING QUALIFIED FIRMS AND DEVELOPERS TO SUBMIT PROPOSALS FOR LEASING AND IMPROVEMENTS TO MARINA FACILITIES LOCATED AT DINNER KEY WITHIN THE PARAMETERS CONTAINED IN A MEMO FROM THE CITY ADMINISTRATION DATED OCTOBER 18, 1977 WITH THE MODIFICATION THAT BOAT SLIPS WILL BE DEVELOPED TO TOTAL 500 MINIMUM AND THAT MIAMARINA BE INCLUDED IN SAID ADVERTISING FOR LEASE BUT THAT THE BIDDER/ DEVELOPER BE PERMITTED TO SUBMIT PROPOSALS ON EITHER OR BOTH FACILITIES AS THEY DEEM APPROPRIATE. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Reboso, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES• None OCT 2 61977 v, DEFERRAL AND CONSIDERATION FOR ESTABLISHING FEES PRE-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES. Mayor Ferre: We'll now take item 14. Pat, do you want to say something into the record?... We are now on item 14... Mr. 14, you're on. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor just before this gentleman speaks, may I ask that item 8 be deferred so that I may look into it little further? It has to do with the Pre -School program. Mr. Mayor, I'd like to move that it be deferred. Mayor Ferre: Alright. There is a motion that item #8 be deferred until next meeting. Are there any objectors to that? Item #8, look at it. This is on First Reading establishing fees for Pre -School Activities. Mrs. Gordon: Yes. I'd like to just defer it until I have the opportunity to study it. Mr. Plummer: Second to motion. Mayor Ferre: It's been seconded. Further discussion, call the roll on deferral of 8. Thereupon a motion to defer item 8 was introduced by Commissioner Gordon and seconded by Commissioner Plummer; and was passed and adopted by the follow- ing vote: AYES: Commissioner Rose Gordon Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Manolo Reboso Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. 18. DISCUSSION AND DEFERRAL OF PORPOSED AGREEMENT MIAMI WORLD TRADE CQ'ITER,INC. Mayor Ferre: Now we are on item 14. Mr. Paul, Mr. Pei. We welcome you back. Mr. Paul: Thank you Mr. Mayor and all the Commissioners. Pursuant to the Resolution 77-619, we met with the City Manager and we came up with a draft contract which would basically provide a nominal participation by the City and a development plan which would analyze the possibility of a World Trade Center to be developed in connection and conjunction with the James L. Knight Conference Convention Center. The commitment by the City that's requested in this agreement would be contingent upon our organization, Miami World Trade Center, Inc. obtain- ing another additional $20,000 somewhere in the South Florida community or at our option, providing that additional $20,000 as well, out of a total of an estimated $180,000 development plan. This isn't just a feasibility study, it's a comprehensive plan addressed towards the ramifications and all of the contin- gencies and possibilities connected with developing a major World Trade Center in downtown Miami. I'd like to reserve the right to continue a presentation after some questions. Mr. Grassie: This agreement attempts to implement the direction that we received from the City Commission the last time that you heard from Mr. Paul. The agreement would carry the City and the proposed developer through the first stage -the analysis stage- and at that point/ the question of whether or not the City would wish to go ahead in cooperation with the proposed developer would be in front of you. Mayor Ferre: Are you recommending this? Mr. Grassie: Yes, I am recommending that we go ahead with the study. Mayor Ferre: Alright, this morning we had Professor Leiches here and he wasn't able to stay but he left with Mr. Crumpton some things, no? Mrs. Gordon: How much money is this going to cost the City now? Mr. Paul: This will cost $10,000 for a $180,000 plan which will be jointly owned by the City and the development company. 91 OCT 261977 Mrs. Gordon: Who is going to pay the $170.000? M. Faul: $150,000 has been committed by Miami World Trade Center, Inc, Mrs. Gordon: With a no -strings attached? Mr. Paull: The only string attached would be that Miami World Trade Center, Inc. would have the first option to accomplish the project assuming that it was feasible. Mr. Grassie: Well, now, when you say "accomplish" we need clarification. They have the first option to negotiate with the City. Now, if the City does not reach agreement with them, that's a different question. Mayor Ferre: That's not quite the same thing, let's make sure we understand each other now. What it means is that you would have the right to negotiate. Now, Mr. Paul, this is all assuming that you maintain the exclusive, you know, right... Mr. Paul: Designation. Mayor Ferre: .... to be the.... Mr. Paul: Exclusive developer under World Trade Center Association. Mayor Ferre: That's right, from the World... at the World Trade Center Associ- ation the Yanks got away from you, you know, we are sorry you are not going to... Mr. Paul: Well, we'll have no problem with that. Mrs. Gordon: But what does that give us if he has the title? What does that mean to us? Mr. Grassie: Well, basically, if you look on page 5 of the Agreement, Commissioner, you'll see that ownership of the documents that result from this study, -and assume that we are talking about $180,000 study- ownership of the documents is shared equally with the City and with the developers so that all of the product of this will become the property of the City although it could also be used by the po- tential developer, of course. Mrs. Gordon: I didn't mean that question, Mr. Grassie, I meant.... Mr. Grassie: I'm sorry. Mrs. Gordon: .... what does it mean to us whether he is or is not a part of the World Trade Center Organization perse? What does that mean to us? Mr. Grassie: In terms of having a World Trade Center in Miami, it would be very much to out advantage -to the City's advantage- that this facility be associated with an international, cooperative organization which gathers information from all countries and really provides a major cooperation internationally for this Center. Mayor Ferre: But much more than that, Mr. Grassie, because as I understand it every World Trade Center in the United States belongs to the World Trade Center Association, is that correct? Mr. Grassie: Well, but I believe, Commissioner Gordon.... Mr. Paul: It would depend on how you define World Trade Center; but yes, every effective World Trade Center in the world is connected with this organization which is the largest private organization of this type in the world. Mrs. Gordon: What are the benefits to the community that has amember organization? Mr. Paul: I think a major benefit for Miami would be international exposure of the City as a serious place to do international business. The proliferation of infor- mation regarding what's happening in Miami would be facilitated through this network. It's a very strong, cohesive group that has significant activity, that is, a dynamic organization hta's been increasing in size since 1968 from approximately 10 World Trade Centers to now, that there are 38 in operation, and with the open- ing of Iran, Bulgaria and Moscow in 1980, there will be over 40 organizations 92 OCT 261977 who are regular World Trade Centers. Mrs. Gordon: Is there any information that's been furnished to us that has the locations of all the other centers? Mr. Paul: Yes, our last presentation included some copious written material. Mrs. Gordon: I don't have it here with me. Mr. Paul: Well, we assembled, stacked these leaflets but I didn't think you wanted that duplicated in your file. Mrs. Gordon: Oh, I want everything in duplicate in my file. Mr. Paul: I'd be happy to provide it to you. What we are offering the City, basically, is an opportunity to have a reverse situation of what happened with Phase A of the Conference Convention Center. Phase A required the City to go ahead and do a developmental study that would then disseminate the developers around the United States. The interest in to come to Miami to do a development that costs the City time and money to prepare, as a result there are basically two major developers that were interested and was brought down to one developer. What we are offering the City here is a little twist which I think is a big benefit to the City and that is you don't have to go out and pay for your own development study to attract private developers to accomplish a project that's quasi public. Here, the developer is inverting the situation by coming to the City and saying - I'll take care of the risk capital necessary to prepare a development plan to determine if this is feasible, I'll incur that risk instead of the City having to do it. Mrs. Gordon: Okay. All right, I understand that point, Okay. We've got the land and you want to put a development on it, okay? Mr. Paul: Now, I'd like to also clarify for the Commission.... Mayor Ferre: But wait a minute, Mrs. Gordon is making a statement, let her... Mr. Paul: I'm sorry. Mrs. Gordon: No, it's okay. I'm listening now. Mr. Paul: Okay. I'd like to clarify that World Trade Centers around the world are generally public ventures. They are usually Port Authorities, Chambers of Commerce that do them themselves, or public organizations or entities. At this point Miami's development it doesn't appear that there is a public entity capable and willing to go forward with this kind of a project We are talking basically about $20 million project. Mrs. Gordon: And you are willing to put the $20 million up. Mr. Paul: That's correct. Assuming the development plan indicates it's feasible, yes. Mayor Ferre: All right, now, Mr. Paul... Mr. Paul: I'd like just to finish this point that we are consistent in our atti- tude with the Chamber of Commerce in Miami in that we believe that the private sector should cooperate... well, it should be done by the private sector. But in order for it to be done, since it's not a profitable venture and very few World Trade Centers at the outset are, the developer is taking a major risk. Now, this developer is interested in staying in Miami for a considerable period time since it's not a plum project where a developer can, after a year, take his profit and run because there won't be any. He is willing to be committed to the area. Mrs. Gordon: Who is this developer perse? Mr. Paul: Well, the company that's the contracting party is a Florida corporation comprised of a few groups which include one of the largest French Development companies in Europe. Mrs. Gordon: I've a funny feeling that I'm not hearing everything about every- thing. And, you know, I also heard, and what pleased me very much,... develop- ment of the Knight Center and I know that there is parking needed for that center OCT 2 61977 and this land that we are discussing - that you are discussing- now is a part of that? Mr. Paul: Exactly. We will be building the building on top of the parking structure which would facilitate financing of that construction as well. Mrs. Gordon: And, you know, I have some reservations about this, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Plummer: Let me... can I ask some questions? Mr. Paul: Please. Mr. Plummer: First of all, my fear, you know, is the fact that you're not in this for your health, you are in it for a profit. Now, let's establish that from the beginning. Mr. Paul: Maybe I could clarify that. It's thought in some quarters that the profit arrives from a Real Estate venture and such, that's not really the case, if there is profit and we are not saying that there won't be profit eventually, the profit comes on a long term basis by staying in the picture as part of the operation of this facility. Mr. Plummer: I'll show you a stein in my office where profit in my estimation is not a dirty word, but you are in this for profit. Now,... Mr. Paul: We hope that that would be a profitable venture because we are trying to demonstrate that this con be done by the private sector. Mr. Plummer: Now, another fear that I have which is not anywhere delineated at this point. You're speaking about a $20 million portion of yours as it relates to that. Now, am I looking at the fact that you're going to put up a $20 million structure that is only going to be for the World Trade Fair or are you put in up -as I read here in between the lines- an office building in which you are going to occupy part of, and the general public is going to be availed of the rest of it? Mayor Ferre: But J. L., that's exactly what a World Trade Center is. Mr. Plummer: But, Mr. Mayor, are we just putting up an office building for office building or are we putting up a World Trade building for the sole purpose of World Trade? Mayor Ferre: Look, I may have an advantage on you. Let me tell you what my advantage is. May advantage is that I've been to New Orleans and that I've been to Los Angeles and I've seen the World Trade Center in Los Angeles and I see how it functions. And it functions well, and what it is, basically, it's an office building next to hotels and exhition halls where people can go and sell and buy goods and services. Mr. Plummer: That I have no problem with, Mr. Mayor, but are putting up... are you proposing a 20-story building? a 10-story building? Mayor Ferre: We don't know that. That's what they have to go at.... Mr. Paul: That;s what the developing plan is for. Mr. Plummer: When they're talking about $20 million, they've got a pretty damned, idea. Mr. Paul: We are talking about a 350,000 sq. ft. building. Mr. Plummer: All right, approximately, now... Mayor Ferre: You think, you don't know. Mr. Paul: Oh, of course not. Mr. Plummer: Will that 350,000 ft. be solely dedicated to and accessory uses of the World Trade Center? Mr. Paul: 1f I can clarify that for a second. The concept of a World Trade Center has to include offices which are let, however, ultimately, and ideally, 94 OCT 261977 the building itself will be limited in the type of letting of space to those enterprises, services, organizations, that are somehow connected with inter- national Trade. Moreover, over and above that limitation there are services and common elements that are unique in World Trade Centers that distinguish them from office buildings. There are sophisticated communications banks and networks, information centers, libraries, seminars, we have made... we've had a meeting of the minds with International Center of Florida and they would participate as the World Trade Institute -arm of the organization. It's a building which basically embodies a number of services and that's what makes it unique. It's an accumu- lation of internationally -oriented or internationally -commercially oriented enter- prises in business, connected by a management that is oriented towards educating and informing and connecting all these local entities internationally through the chain of World Trade Centers around the world. Mr. Plummer: To basically answer my question you are saying that all the tenants of that building in someway would be associated with World Trade Center. Mr. Paul: Ultimately, yes. Mr. Plummer: Okay. That's what I would like to know. Now, this company by the name of S E C 0 F I, are they the ones that are going to do the major part of the study? Mr. Paul: They will be doing the economic analysis. Mr. Pei would be better prepared to tell you. Mr. Pei: SECOFI, which is a french consulting firm, will do a substantial part but not by any means all of the work which is contemplated. They will do what is essentially economic feasibility analysis, marketing analysis and some work for architectural programming for this facility. It will be a great deal of additional work which will be handled by Miami World Trade Center itself as the... ... in effect, it's really the prime contractor and SECOFY is really a kind of a subcontractor under our direction. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Pei, the total contract is $180,000 and it is proposed that you're paying them $100,000, then they are doing the major portion of the work. Mr. Pei: Well, yes and no. If you look at it strictly in dollar terms, that might be a proper construction. When we... they are, of course, in business too and they expect to make some money on doing that work, so obviously they, since say...our fee for this work is a $100,000-then, you assume that there is an ele- ment of profit there. Our part- the balance of the $80,000- is an estimate of the actual cost which we will incur which is not a profit -making cost, it's an actual cost of what our time and effort and services will be in administrating this entire proposal, so that I think you can't divide it strictly according to the dollars. Mr. Plummer: Well, let me get to the point I'm trying to make with this particu- lar company. You have obviously sent to them certain documents which they have examined, and have returned to you on the 9th of September letter. Now, if this company is going to be doing the major part of the work- whether it's dollars or what- they are being misled by their interpretation of the documents which you sent to them and the point that I'm trying to make to you, Mr. Pei: In what way, I'm sorry.... Mr. Plummer: .... well, let me read to you from their letter because it is totally a misconception or it is totally wrong, and that's what I'm trying to get at... and that is on page 2 and I quote: " In a Resolution of the Miami City Commission on July 28, 1977 authorizing the City Manager to negotiate with MWTC for the project", that was not the case. Mr. Pei: Well, I think that's a question of definition and that is, the Resolution provided or authorizes the City Manager to begin discussions regarding the air... well, discussions and negotiations in french translation possibly, I'm lost on the translation. I believe, though, that the concept of negotiations and dis- cussions are relatively similar. Mr. Plummer: Sir, let me read to you from Mr. Grassie's document in part of the agreement. " The City of Miami on July 28 by Motion # authorizes the City Manager to begin discussion with the Miami World Trade Center concerning City 95 OCT 261977 participation in the possible development". If you read this letter of the company who's going to do the major part of the study, they're under an im- pression that you now have the right to negotiate with the City Manager. Mr. Paul: No, I believe it says that.... Mr. Plummer: Authorizing the City Manager.... Mr. Paul: You just quoted the Resolution authorizes the City Manager to negotiate and negotiate and discuss.... Mr. Plummer: .... for the project. Mr. Pei: Correct. Mrs. Gordon: Well, we mean 'negotiate' in a different terminology, perhaps, from what you do. Mr. Pei: I would say, if I might, that I don't believe that that it's a sub- stantial problem for SECOFI, their work is very limited, it's defined, they do a job and well... What precisely our relantionship is - in WTC that is, with respect to the City- is really a relatively minor concern to them provided they know they are going to get a contract and be paid and I would say that it's possi- ble that, you know, there is a problem in a word here, but I don't I think it really bears on the work that they are going to do with their understanding about it Mr. Plummer: I think, I think.... Mr. Pei- there is a recapitulation by them. Mr. Plummer: I think the conception in which they travel under could be different, and don't get me wrong. Look, I'm all in favor of this project for $10,000 and we are going to be the recipient of the documents, but you know, it's a different story if you are looking at a project where you've got the Manager negotiating to put it in and you are, on the other hand, talking about the possibility. There is a big difference. We'd like to have what this man indicates but you don't have it at this point. Now, my other problem Rose with this proposal is, Mr. Grassie, as it's set forth here, let me see if I can briefly express to you my concern. These people here will be coming back to this Commission making a presentation in their interpretation of the analysis, that bothers me. This company is going to be receiving $100,000 to do the major portion of this study, I think that company should be here to make the presentation. Mrs. Gordon: I would also... I would want it clearly understood that they don't receive an option, you know,... their... that's what it amounts to, you said that. Mr. Paul: Well, in order for a developer to come and precede by putting the cart before the horse and coming to the City with the capacity to build the $20 million project for the City, he's got to have an incentive. What is the incentive if he is not going to be considered first when he comes around to doing a project? Mrs. Gordon: Okay. Let me simply state that I'm not ready to take a step in that direction for you and this developer today. I would like you to furnish me with the volumes of documents you said you have and you are willing to let me have copies of, that I may become more familiar with you, your company and your developer and the entire proposal before I move forward in the direction of giving you or them an option. Okay? Mayor Ferre: All right, in addition I want to.... Mrs. Gordon: I am in favor of the World Trade Center concept and I demonstrated that time and time again, Mr. Mayor can attest, but I certainly don't go into things without a full and complete feeling of comfortableness about it and I am not comfortable today. Mr. Paul: In July those documents were presented and we assumed that we... well, we'll be happy.... Mayor Ferre: Mr. P., that may be, but I think that's a valid question. Now, let me read into the record and I'll ask the Manager to give you a copy of it, 0CT 2 61977 but I've been requested by the Chamber to do this. The letter is dated October 26 and it reads as follows: "Dear Mayor: At a meeting today the Executive Committee of the Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce instructed me to share the following view with you and your colleagues. The Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce is actively seeking World Trade Center development. We are encouraging the City, the Inter- national Center and others to work with the private developer on a World Trade Center. It is the opinion of this Chamberthat these kinds of developments can be entirely supported by private investments. Feasibility studies are part of the normal preliminary process ultimately charged to the cost of the project; therefore, included in the private sector's responsibility. The Chamber's insistence on private development of the World Trade Center recognizes the ability of private developers to finance the basic requirements of feasibility studies in pre -planning details eliminating the costly dollars and time and government delays involved in the process of such development by public means. The developers should be offered the full support of the City's political and administrative leaders short of direct financial participation. Miami has truly demonstrated that international trade and commerce have reached the stage of activity that will support a profitable World Trade Center in our opinion. Sincerely, Lester Freeman, Executive Vice - President." Let me in response to that letter state that I respect the Chamber's position and their opinion. I don't subscribe to it. I feel that the City of Miami has, for long,-- and when I say the City I mean the County and all of the government entities here-- been sitting, waiting for things to happen when things don't happen. I also feel that it is the responsibility of government on a joint venture process of City and the public and private sector to move along„ that's what tax increment financing is all about, that's what tax... all these tax plans that we've been proposing are all about, that's what Watson Island is all about, that's what the Convention Conference Center is all about. The Chamber of Commerce did not, in any way, take that posture when the City of Miami expended moneys to have the Conference Convention Center, when we spent our money to make those kinds of studies which have now resulted in the private sector coming in; so I respect Mrs. Gordon's position. I personally have no objections. One, in spending $10,000 provided, however, that you make a commitment that the remaining funds will be expended I don't care where you get them, if the Chamber of Commerce doesn't want to back you and you can't get any private sector moneys in Miami, that you commit to come with the rest of the money. Now, if you can't do that, then I'm not going to vote on spending $10,000. Mr. Paul: I believe that the contract provides that the commitment is contingent upon us either adquiring that money from the rest of the community or providing it, and therefore, the commitment that you'd be making today would be conditional. Mayor Ferre: Okay, I just want to say it on the record.... Mrs. Gordon: I want to ask you respectfully, Mr. Mayor, if you would let this matter come up again on the loth of November and I would move it to be deferred. Mayor Ferre: All right. There is a motion... Mr. Paul, I would respectfully recommend that any member of this Commission has that right and I think it's an appropriate thing to request. I have gone over the documents and Mrs. Gordon I'm sure did too, but I think it's important that you spend time with each member of the Commission... well, but he ought of do it again. If somebody isn't satisfied... and I think you should go over who your principals are, who is SAFRIAS, who the principals are, get all the requirements, let's find out where is the money coming from. I mean, you know, we need to know. Is it coming from Venezuela? or South America? Is it coming from France? Is it going to be financed?... We need to know who we are dealing with. Mr. Paul: I understand. My last comment on this and I know that it's important that we discuss further with Commissioner Gordon the principals behind the organi- zation... Mayor Ferre: Nor Commissioner Gordon, all members of this Commission. Mr. Paul: I will happy to arrange appointments. Is the fact that we are on the brink of being very close to be able to take advantage fo a golden opportunity for Miami, and that is to coordinate the development of a World Trade Center in where awe believe is an ideal location that's connceted to, adjacent to, the Conference Convention Center. If we delay too long in coming to a conclusion on whether and when the plan should be started - the development plan - we are going to miss the opportunity to put the... 97 @CT 261977 Mayor Ferre: I respectfully suggest... Mrs. Gordon: I motioned it November loth and that was specific. Mayor Ferre: That's what I was going to say. I respectfully submit to you that between now and the loth what you have in effect is two weeks; so why don't..., you know, come back in two weeks. Mr. Paul: Thank you very much. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Lauredo do you want to say something into the record? Mrs. Gordon: Is there a second to the motion? Mayor Ferre: Yes, there is a motion that this matter be deferred. Is there a second?... Second. All right, now Mr. Lauredo, do you want to say something? Mr. Lauredo: Thank you. I want to say something because I was asked to come in support of the principal of the project and it's becoming increasingly confusing. I'm obviously in very strong support of it but I was checking with Mr. Crumpton who sits for the City on the World Trade Center Committee, I sit for the State of Florida and the people from the County etc.,etc. Professor Leiches was here this morning; but it's important that we get our act together so to speak.... Mayor Ferre: Whats's your point? Mr. Laureso: My point is that you ought to coordinate and the specific message... that I wanted to bring to you, that I was asked to relay by the Economic Develop- ment Director of the County - who I saw this morning in a ligislative session we had at the County Commission, that they'd like to be involved. Mayor Ferre: Well, look, let me tell you what I'm worried about, I'm worried about the same, old Mary -Go -Round. Do you know what the Mary -Go -Round is? The Mary - Go -Round is that we wait, and we wait, and then do you know what happens? All of a sudden, with all due respect to our brothers and sisters in Coral Gables, you know, or Hialeah with Dale Bennet or what have you, all of a sudden out comes another project and then we go into this... this is something that belongs in downtown Miami, we've got a responsible, well-known, international company based in Paris, France and New York City, we've got Mr. Pei from New York here, he's been here now for the third time, I understand and I'm perfectly willing to delay this until November loth, but I'll tell you one thing, this is a City of Miami project and we are going to go ahead with it. Mr. Lauredo: Mr. Mayor, I am a hundred and twenty five percent in agreement with you, that's the reason I am spending my time sitting here. I came here originally to speak for it. I'm just telling you.... Mrs. Gordon: Okay, there is a motion and second, it's for deferment and I would prefer Mr. Paul would furnish me with the names of all the principals, who they are, where they are.... Mayor Ferre: And Luis, please don't misunderstand my comments, I wouldn't probably.... Mrs. Gordon: .... when the funding is coming for the development, etc., etc. Mayor Ferre: .... I wasn't trying to be in anyway rude, I'm saying I welcome Professor Leiches, Mr. Crumpton, I welcome the committe that you and Mr. Lauredo serve on to give us all the advice and recommendations, but.... Mr. Crumpton: All I'm trying to say, Mayor, is I, as a person in favor of the project, I rather you anticipate criticism and deal with it objectively than having them say after you, you had a hint but you didn't consult with them- and then go out and sabotage you. I don't think that's the.... Mayor Ferre: They have the opportunity to come here November loth. All right, without further discussion, then, call the roll on the deferral. Upon motion of Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, item 14 was deferred to November 10, 1977 by unanimous vote. 98 OCT 261977 19. INSTRUCT CITY MANAGER TO RESEARCH FUND FOR 3k PERCENT SALARY INCREASE FOR GENERAL EMPLOYEES, Ms. Skubish: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, name is Pat Skubish, and I'm here today on behalf of non -sworn ---what are you laughing at Plummer? ---employees. I heard :fir. Plummer, that you hau to go to Disney World, we can do without. On behalf of all non -sworn employees who have received only 2% cost of living increase in the passed 25 months and who cannot, I repeat,cannot afford to exist financially at this current progression of inflation. If granted the 31% increase that was appropriated for us October 1, 1976, would be the nicest Christmas present that these employees could receive, even the Irish would celebrate. You know, Commissioners, its the little guy, the one who can least afford it, that really seems to suffer the most and we need the money and we need it now, we can't afford to wait any longer, because it's going on, I don't know if you're aware that--- maybe Mr. Grassie, you can inform the Commission, I beleive ASFME has waited once a cooling off period, for six months or so, we can't afford it we don't have any money, the custodian workers, the secretaries, the police dispatchers, we don't have anything, we didn't get any raises when other employees were raised. Mr. Grassie, maybe you could help me. Mr. Grassie: You know, it's a very difficult position,Mr. Mayor and members of the City Commission. Frankly, from the point of view of the employees, I have to sympathize with what she's saying, you know, they've got a point. We've got two impediments that you are already aware of--- you know, its hardly worth reciting, one is the budget and the other is negotiations. I guess I would encourage us to try and find some way of doing something for these employees in the short run, I'm afraid that the question of establishing a bargaining unit for the General Employees because of the fact that it is a contested kind of an election and it could take some time, there are several groups that want to represent the General Employees and that could delay this unreasonably, so if the City Commission is of a mind to try and do something for the employees in a shorter period of time--- I guess what I'm saying to you is that I think that there is some equity in what they are suggesting and that we should try and come up with some kind of an interim plan so they don't have to wait until that election; takes place, the election for the bargaining unit is what I'm talking about. Well, if you concur with that general sentiment, I guess what I'm recommending is that you ask us to go back and look at how we can get it accomplished. Ms. Skubish: No kidding, that's terrific! Mayor Ferre: There is a motion and a second, further discussion, call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Vice -Mayor Gibson, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 77-836 A MOTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO INVESTIGATE FUNDING SOURCES TO FUND A 31 COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT TO BE GRANTED TO ALL CITY OF MIAMI GENERAL EMPLOYEES. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Reboso, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Plummer, Mr. Reboso, Rev. Gibson, Mrs. Gordon, and Mayor Ferre. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. Ms. Skubish: Mr. Mayor, if I still have a minute may A.G. Sherman speak? Mr. Sherman: Well, I think the City Manager has covered just about everything I'd like to ask. I had a little presentation prepared here --- by the way my name is A.G. Sherman and I am representing the General Employees and I do appreciate the City Manager's comments and it has 99 OCT 261877 been quite a while since we have received a raise and we do appreciate your consideration. I'll forego any comments or speech which I have presented► but I can... we'll appreciate your interest and consideration ir.to this matter and I thank you. Mayor Ferre: Alright sir, thank you very much. Mr. Sherman: May I ask you Mr. Mayor... Mayor, excuse me, are you going to make a motion as to the City Manager's appointment of this money. Ms. Skubish: We did. Mr. Sherman: There is a motion made? Ms. Skubish: Yes, just a second ago there was a roll call. Mr. Sherman: Alright, the roll has been called. When may we come back for an answer?... check with the City Manager? Mayor Ferre: Tomorrow morning at 8:0'clock. Mr. Sherman: Thats fine, thank you. Mrs. Gordon: November loth, Mr. Manager? Mr. Grassie: I'd like not to have to promise that at this stage, let me see what the problem is, if we can do it by the loth we will, but... Mrs. Gordon: We don't have another meeting in November,... the evening of loth? Mr. Grassie: Yes, we'll settle for that, are those the two changes Commissioner? Mrs. Gordon: Its all we've got. Mr. Grassie: Well, let me do this, we'll shoot for that, if we run into some problems we'll simply have to discuss it with you... Mayor Ferre: Alright, thank you very much. o OCT 26197? 20, SECOND READING ORDINANCE: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL 1977-1978, AN ORDINANCE ENTI I l ED- AN ORDINANCE MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 1978, PROVIDING THAT IF ANY SECTION, CLAUSE, OR SUBSECTION SHALL BE DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL IT SHALL NOT AFFECT THE REMAINING PROVISIONS, REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH. Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of October 13, 1977 was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Reboso, seconded by Vice Mayor Gibson, the Ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 8716 The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. 21, SECOND READING ORDINANCE: REVISE TENNIS COURT FEES AND ESTABLISH ANNUAL PERMIT FEE, AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 39-3 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, REVISING TENNIS COURT FEES DURING THE EVENING HOURS WHEN LIGHTS ARE IN USE AND ESTABLISHING AN ANNUAL PERMIT FEE FOR CITY OF MIAMI RESIDENT JUNIORS AND ADULTS AND NONRESIDENT JUNIORS ADULTS AND SENIORS; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of October 13, 1977 was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Reboso, seconded by Vice Mayor Gibson, the Ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: NONE. ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 8717 The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. 101 OCT 2 6191? 22. AMEND SELF-INSURANCE ORDINANCE TO INCREASE FROM $1,OD0 TO $4,500 AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 16-58 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, BY INCREASING THE LIMIT OF AUTHORITY POSSESSED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY TO SETTLE CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES ON ACCOUNT OF PERSONAL INJURY OR PROPERTY DAMAGE, OR BOTH, BY PAYMENT OF SAID CLAIMS UP TO $4,500.00 PER CLAIM FROM THE SELF-INSURANCE TRUST FUND, WITHOUT THE NECESSITY FOR ADVANCE APPROVAL BY THE CITY COMMISSION FOR SUCH INCREASED SETTLEMENT PAYMENT, CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of October 13, 1977, was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Vice Mayor Gibson, the Ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice Mayor Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 8718 The City Attorney read the Ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. 23G VCY ORDINANCE: ESTABLISH TRUST AND AGENCY FUNDS FOR FEDERAL, STATE, COUNTY FOUNDATIONS AND OTHER GRANTS- CITY MATCHING FUNDS, AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING TRUST AND AGENCY FUNDS FOR FEDERAL, STATE, COUNTY, FOUNDATION, AND OTHER GRANTS AND CORRESPONDING CITY MATCHING FUNDS; MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FROM THESE VARIOUS FUNDS; PROVIDING THAT IF ANY SECTION, CLAUSE, OR SUBSECTION SHALL BE DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL, IT SHALL NOT AFFECT THE REMAINING PRO- VISIONS; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH) DECLARING THIS ORDINANCE TO BE AN EMERGENCY MEASURE AND DISPENSING WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF READING THE SAME ON TWO SEPARATE DAYS BY A VOTE OF NOT LESS THAN FOUR -FIFTHS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. was introduced by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore RevJTheodore R. Gibson and seconded by Commissioner Manolo Reboso, for adoption as an emergency measure and dispensing with the requirement of reading same on two separate days, which was agreed to by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr, THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 8719 t4Q2 OCT 261977 The City Attorney read the Ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. Mrs. Gordon: Why is this an emergency, Mr. Grassie? Mr. Grassie: Well, this is the way we adopt most of the budget transactions so that they can go forward, but this does allow the City to receive these moneys and to expend them. Money like the City, moneys in term of revenue sharing and so on. Mrs. Gordon: Okay, all right. 24. URGENCY ORDINANCE: AME1m ORDINANCE /780 - PROVIDE INCREASE IN DEPARIT'ENTAL APPROPRIATIONS, Mayor Ferre: A11 right, take up item 6 which it's another emergency ordinance. Do you wish to explain? Mr. Grassie: As you know, Mr.°Mayor, I was talking to the news media now. Was there a question... something that...? Mayor Ferre: No, Mr. Manager, this is an emergency ordinance, it Manager recommends. The way we do things here, as you know is, o ordinances the Mayor, who charis the meeting, asks the Manager if why he wants this on an emergency basis and then we see if we get get a second and we pass it. Mr. Grassie: Well, the only emergency is that if this continues the ability of the City to spend money. in order to keep the budget going, that really is the only one since. says that the n emergency he would explain a motion, we Mayor Ferre: Mr. Manager, doesn't this have to do with the fact that we haven't as yet passed the appropriate fiscal year appropriations ordinance? Mrs. Grassie: Exactly. It's the 112 Appropriation that keeps the City running. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 8707, ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 30, 1977, BY AMENDING SECTIONS 1 AND 2 THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR AN INCREASE IN DEPART- MENTAL APPROPRIATIONS, AND MAKING SUCH APPROPRIATIONS CHARGEABLE TO THE APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1977-78 WHEN ADOPTED; DISPENSING WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF READING ON TWO SEPARATE DAYS BY A VOTE OF NOT LESS THAN FOUR -FIFTHS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. was introduced by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson and seconded by Com- missioner Rose Gordon, for adoption as an emergency measure and dispensing with the requirement of reading same on two separate days, which was agreed to by the following vote: AYES: NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 8720 The City Attorney read the Ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public, 103 OCT 261977 25. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTION 39.13.1 OF THE CITY CODE- REVISE GOLF COURSE GREEN FEES, Mayor Ferre: We are now on first reading of item 7. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED AN ORDINANCE AMENDING §39-13.1 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, FOR THE PURPOSE OF REVISING THE AMOUNT CHARGED FOR CITY OF MIAMI GOLF COURSE GREEN FEES; CONTAINING A REPEALER CLAUSE AND A SEVERA- BILITY PROVISION AND DISPENSING WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF READING THE SABLE ON TWO 'SEPARATE DAYS BY A VOTE OF NOT LESS THAN FOURTFIFTHS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. was introduced by Commissioner Manolo Reboso and seconded by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson and passed on its first reading by title by the following vote: AYES: NOES; None ABSENT: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. 26, FIRST READING ORDINANCE: RE-ESTABLISH CITY OF MIAMI AFFIRMATIVE ACTION ADVISORY BOARD. Mayor Ferre: Item 8 has been deferred. Mr. Reboso: I move to 9, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Reboso moves number 9. Mrs. Gordon: I want of ask why do we have to re-establish, when did it go out of... Mayor Ferre: We have been doing that with all our committees and this is about the fourth one we've done. Mts. Gordon: Yes, but it's in effective. Isn't it? Mrs. Grassie: It is in effective, it has never discontinued its operations but they have felt that the basic documents establishing them should be revised which they've worked on them. I'm talking about the Affirmative Action Committee itself. Mrs. Gordon: Is it changed? Is it changing the concept in anyway at all from what it was? Is there o Mr. Grassie: Simply strengthening and expanding it from their point of view. Mayor Ferre: Does this come with their recommendation, Mr. Manager? Mr. Grassie: Yes Sir. Mrs. Gordon: Is there any additional appointments that are going to be needed because of the change? I'm sorry I haven't caught up on everything I've spent a lot of time on that first thing this morning as you know. Mr. Grassie: No, you will have to do the regular appointment process, but no , Mr. Reboso: There is continuity.... Mr. Grassie: They .are people continue to serve.. firs. Gordon: Okay. Mr. Knox: I'll read the Ordinance, but before 1 read the Ordinance, there was some LU4 OCT 2619717 question which was raised by the Collective Bargain Unit's concern - the fill in vacancies. And it is the intention of the Ordinance for the record that the City Commission will use the same formula for fill in vacancies as it will use for the initial appointments. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED AN ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 8519 ADOPTED FEB. 20, 1976 AND ENACTING IN LIEU THEREOF A NEW ORDINANCE RE-ESTABLISHING THE CITY OF MIAMI'S AFFIRMATIVE ACTION ADVISORY BOARD CONSISTING OF FIFTEEN (15) MEMBERS; PROVIDING FOR THE ELECTION OR APPOINTMENT AND FOR THE TERMS OF OFFICE FOR THOSE MEMBERS; PROVIDING FOR THE BOARD TO SERVE AS A FORUM FOR HEARING AND REVIEWING COMPLAINTS AND GRIEVANCES AGAINST ALLEGED DISCRIMINATION IN THIS CITY'S EMPLOYMENT AND HIRING PRACTICES; ESTABLISHING THE FUNCTIONS, POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE BOARD; PROVIDING FOR THE BOARD'S SELECTION OF ITS OWN OFFICERS; PROVIDING FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF THE CITY'S AFFIRMATIVE ACTION OFFICER AS EXECUTIVE SECRETARY OF THE BOARD; PROVIDING FOR REGULARLY SCHEDULED PUBLIC MEETINGS OF THE BOARD IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE GOVERNMENT IN THE SUNSHINE LAW; PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CERTAIN RULES AND PROCEDURES; PROVIDING(FOR THE DIS- QUALIFICATION FROM VOTING OF MEMBERS HAVING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST; PROVIDING FOR DISQUALIFICATION FROM THE BOARD FOR UNJUSTIFIABLE ABSENCES; PROVIDING FOR THE DEPARTMENTAL ASSIGNMENT OF PERSONNEL REOUESTED TO ATTEND THE BOARD'S MEETINGS; PROVIDING FOR THE COORDINATION OF CITY BOARDS AND DEPARTMENTS IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE CITY'S AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAM; PROVIDING FOR THE REVIEW OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PLANS FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI; PROVIDING FOR THE SUBMISSION OF THE BOARD'S REPORTS ON THE PLANS TO THE COMMISSION; PROVIDING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE REPORT OF THE AFFIRMATIVE ACTION ADVISORY BOARD BY THE CITY COMMISSION NOT LESS THAN THIRTY (30) DAYS FROM THE DATE THE REPORT IS SUBMITTED TO THE COMMISSION; PROVIDING FOR AN ONGOING REVIEW OF CITY AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PLANS AND PROGRAMS; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS THEROF IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY PROVISION AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. was introduced by Commissioner Manolo Reboso and seconded by Commissioner Rose Gordon and passed on its first reading by title by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. 27, GRANT PERMISSION TO HOLD GOLDEN GLOVES TOURNAMENT - MIAMI BEACH CONVENTION CENTER. Mayor Ferre: Now, we are on Mrs. Virrick's request that one more year they qo to Miami Beach. I don't think we have any choice, really. Does anybody have any objections to it? Mr. Reboso: We don't have any other choice, Mr. Mayor. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Manolo Reboso, who moved its adoption: W5 OCT 2 6197,7 MOTION NO. 77-837 A MOTION GRANTING PERMISSION TO COCONUT GROVE DARES, INC. TO HOLD THE GOLDEN GLOVES REGIONAL TOURNAMENT IN MIAMI BEACH FOR THE YEAR OF 1978, SAID EVENT TO BE HELD FEBRUARY 1, 2, AND 3 DUE TO THE UNAVAILABILITY OF DINNER KEY AUDITORIUM CURRENTLY UNDERGOING RENOVATION. Upon being seconded by vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. 28. APPROVE CONTRACT WITH HAMMER, SILER, GEORGE ASSOCS. AND WALLACE, McHARG, ROBERTS & TODD CONSULTING SERVICES ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF CIVIC CENTER — (SECONDARY DEVELOPMENT AREA), Mayor Ferre: Now we are on item 11. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Rose Gordon, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77-838 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACT WITH HAMMER, SILER, GEORGE ASSOCIATES AND WALLACE, McHARG, ROBERTS AND TODD FOR CONSULTING SERVICES FOR THE PREPARATION OF ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE CIVIE CENTER/ HOSPITAL COMPLEX - SEXONDARY DEVELOPMENT AREA, FOR THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $30,000, OF WHICH CITY FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,000 ARE ALLOCATED THERFOR FROM 3RD YEAR COM- MUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS AND $20,000 FROM OTHER FUNDING AGENCIES. Upon being seconded by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None ABSENT: ON ROLL CALL Mayor Ferre: this is going Mr. Fosmoen: Mayor Ferre: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Now, before I vote, I'll have to do a question. As I understand, to cost $30,000 and we only take $10,000; is that it? That is correct. Okay, I vote yes. 29, EXECUTE AGREEMENT WITH BETFHUNE COOKMAN COLLEGE FOR USE OF THE ORANGE BM. STADIA Mayor Ferre: Now we have item 12. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, who moved its adoption: WG OCT 2sisii AYES: NOES: None ABSENT: RESOLUTION NO. 77-839 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH BETHUNE COOKMAN COLLEGE FOR THE USE OF THE ORANGE BOWL STADIUM FOR THE PURPOSE OF PLAYING AN ANNUAL FOOTBALL GAME BY SAID COLLEGE FOR A THREE-YEAR PERIOD WITH AN ADDITIONAL THREE-YEAR TERM RENEWABLE AT THE OPTION OF THE COLLEGE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS SET FORTH IN THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Rose Gordon, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. 30. AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT WITH LARRY GO« FOR OPERATION OF FOOD AND BEVERAGE COI4CESSIOfd AT SHENANDOAH PARK. Mayor Ferre: We'll take item 13, authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with Larry Gonzalez for operation of Food and Beverage Concession at Shenandoah for four years. Mrs. Gordon: Is he presently operating up there? Is he already an operator? Mr. Grassie: No, this is a new one as I understand it, Commissioner. Mayor Ferre: Al, do you recommend this? Mr. Howard: Yes, I do, Mayor. Mayor Ferre: Then tell us why. Mr. Howard: We haven't had an operation in Shenandoah for the part eight years and this man has come forward to operate it and he has expressed in making improve- ments and have its costs.... Mayor Ferre: Do you think this is good, and all that? Mr. Howard: I do, Mayor. The following resolution was introduced by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77-840 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT WITH LARRY GONZALEZ FOR OPERATION OF THE FOOD AND BEVERAGE CONCESSION AT SHENANDOAH PARK FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION FOR A PERIOD OF 4 YEARS PURSUANT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS SET FORTH THEREIN. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Rose Gordon, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. 'OCT 2 61977 31. AUTHORIZE BIDS FOR ONE AUTOMOBILE FOR THE MAYOR'S OFFICE Mayor Ferre: We'll take up item 15, authorizing the City Manager to solicit and receive bids for one Chevrolet Caprice Automobile for the Mayor's Office: Is that what you are going to get me? A Chevrolet? Mrs. Gordon: What do you want? A Cadillac? Mayor Ferre: I don't care, that's good enough. Mr. Grassie: Is that all right, Mr. Mayor? Mayor Ferre: Yes, Why don't you do it this way?... or equivalent in case you find something which is just as good. I mean, I have no objections, the Chevrolet is fine, but you know, maybe... or equivalent. Is that all right? Rev. Gibson: Yes. The following resolution was introduced by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77-841 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SOLICIT AND RECEIVE BIDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF ONE CHEVROLET CAPRICE AUTOMOBILE FOR THE MAYOR'S OFFICE OR EQUIVALENT AUTOMOBILE. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Manolo Reboso, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Mayor Ferre: In voting let me just state for the record - even though I don't know, you know- I may not be Mayor, but anyway, that car is 4 years old and has 3,000 miles on it and its.... Mrs. Gordon: Would you trade that one in? Do you use that as a trade-in when you bid or do you... what would you do? Mayor Ferre: I don't know, that's up to the Manager. Mar. Grassie: We would leave that to Eddy Cox's shop, Commissioner, he would determine whether or not it's in the best interest of the City to trade it in or to keep it.... Mayor Ferre: That car is in bad shape. Mrs. Gordon: Was that a Chevrolet too? Was that a Chevy? Mayor Ferre: No, that was an Oldsmobile 98, the big one. Mrs. Gordon: Okay, go ahead, let's move. 32, ORDERINdG RESOUJTIa4c CRESTWOOD SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT, Mayor Ferre: We'll take up item 16. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Manolo Reboso, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77-842 A RESOLUTION ORDERING CRESTWOOD SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT SR-5432-C (CENTERLINE SEWER) AND DESIGNATING THE PROPERTY AGAINST WHICH SPECIAL LVV OCT 261977 ASSESSMENTS SHALL BE MADE FOR A PORTION OF THE COST THEREOF AS CRESTWOOD SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SR-5432-C (CENTERLINE SEWER), AND ALLOCATING $10,000.00 FROM THE SANITARY SEWER BOND FUND TO COVER THE COST OF PRELIMINARY AND INCIDENTAL EXPENSES. Upon being seconded by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, the tesolbtion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A.Ferre NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. 33. AUTHORIZE GRANT OF EASEMENT STORM SEWER - LOCATED AT ROCKERMAN RD, NEAR BISCAYNE BAY. Mayor Ferre: We'll take item 17. The following resolution was introduced by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77-843 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION, INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE BY THE CITY OF MIAMI OF A STORM SEWER LOCATED AT ROCKERMAN ROAD NEAR BISCAYNE BAY; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE PROPERTY OFFICIAL OF THE CITY OF MIAMI TO RECORD SAME IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA Upon being seconded by Commissioner Rose Gordon, the resolution was passed and adlopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. 34. PURCHASE IN LIEU OF CONDEMNATION ALLEY RIGHTOOF--WAY - 4101 N.W. 7TH STREET - FIRE STATION No. 1O, Mayor Ferre: Now we are on item 18. The following resolution was introduced by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, Mho moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77-844 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO PURCHASE IN LIEU OF CONDEMNATION AN ALLEY RIGHT- OF-WAY COMPRISED OF 133.3 SQ. FT. M/L, LOCATED CONTIGUOUS TO AND IMMEDIATELY NORTH OF FIRE STATION NO. 10, 4101 N. W. 7TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FOR THE SUM OF ONE THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED SEVENTY TWO DOLLARS AND NINETY-NINE CENTS ($1,372.99), ALLOCATING ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED ($1,500.00) DOLLARS FROM FIRE FIGHTING FIRE PREVENTION & RESCUE FACILITIES BOND FUNDS TO COVER THE COST OF ACQUISITION OF FEE SIMPLE TITLE TO THIS PROPERTY AND OTHER COSTS INCIDENTAL TO THE ACQUISITION. LO9 OCT 2 61971 Upon being seconded by Commissioner Manolo Reboso, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. 35. ESTABLISH GREEN FEES FOR NORTH -SOUTH GOLF TOURNAMENT - CITY OF MIAMI COUNTRY CLUB GOLF COURSE. Mayor Terre: !•'e are now on iter 1°. The following resolution was introduced by Vice -Mayor Theodore R. Gibson, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77-845 A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING GREENS FEES FOR THE NORTH - AOUTH GOLF TOURNAMENT TO BE HELD FEBRUARY 7 THROUGH 11, 1978, AT THE CITY OF MIAMI COUNTRY CLUB GOLF COURSE AND REQUIRING USE OF AN ELECTRIC CART BY EACH GOLFER IN SAID TOURNAMENT. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Manolo Reboso, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. 36, APPOINT NURSERYMAN TO SERVE AS MEMBER OF ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION REVIEW HOARD, Mai►or Ferre: well, take up member 20 which is a resolution appointing a Nurseryman to serve as a member on the Environmental Preservation Review Board. A vote is expressed to select. Mrs. Gordon: Well, Mr. Howard, could you make us a recommendation of the three names here? Rev. Gibson: We have the names. Mrs. Gordon: We have three names here. Mr. Grassie: The Building Department basically administers this Board, Commissioner.... Mrs. Gordon: Yes, but he is in that kind of business and he ought to.... Mr. Reboso: We have three names here. Mrs. Gordon: Yes, which of the three do you... do you know any of the -three? I don Mayor Ferre: I don't know their names. .Is anybody here 7 Mr. Reboso: And none of them live in the City of Miami. Mrs. Gordon: I know, but it's a.... Mayor Ferre: Does anybody recommend anybody? Mr. Grassie: Yes, I understand that the Nurseryman's Association recommends Mr. Lavargna, the first name. 110 . OCT 261977 Mrs. Gordon: A11 right, I'll move Mr. Lavargna. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Rose GOrdoh, Who inoved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77-846 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MR. ANTHON LAVARGNA TO SERVE AS A MEMBER ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL PRESER- VATION REVIEW BOARD. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Manolo Reboso, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. 37. APPOINT JULIA R. FERNANDEZ AS MEMBER OF ENVIRONINTAL PRESERVATION REVIEW BOARD. Mayor Ferre: Wca11, now we are on item 21. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Rose Gordon, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77-847 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MRS. JULIA R. FERNANDEZ TO SERVE AS A MEMBER OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION REVIEW BOARD. Upon being seconded by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. 38. APPOINT ELEANOR L. RATELLE TO CITY OF MIAMI IIMORIAL CONNIIltt. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Rose Gordon, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77-848 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING ELEANOR E. RATELLE AS A MEMBER OF THE CITY OF MIAMI MEMORIAL COMMITTEE. Upon being seconded by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson !ayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Mayor Ferre: Who is Eleanot Ratelle? Mrs. Gordon: She writed under the name of Eleanor Hart, OCT 2 61977 a 39, CLAIM SETTWvENT: MARINA MOLINA, Mayor Ferre: We are now on item 24, 23 was withdrawn. The following resolution was introduced by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77-849 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO PAY TO MARINA MOLINA AND ALBERT P. ROSILLQ, HER ATTORNEY, WITHOUT THE AD- MISSION OF LIABILITY, THE SUM OF $1,200.00 IN FULL AND COMPLETE SETTLEMENT OF ALL BODILY INJURY CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY OF MIAMI, AND UPON EXECUTION OF A RELEASE, RE- LEASING THE CITY OF MIAMI FROM ALL CLAIMS AND DEMANDS, AND TO PAY TO THE UNITED STATES FIDELITY & GUARANTY COMPANY, WITHOUT THE ADMISSION OF LIABILITY, THE SUM OF $100.00 IN FULL AND COMPLETE SETTLEMENT OF THEIR PERSONAL INJURY PROTECTION LIEN, CLAIM AND DEMAND AGAINST THE CITY OF MIAMI, AND UPON THE EXECUTION OF A RELEASE, RELEASING THE CITY OF MIAMI FROM ALL CLAIMS AND DEMANDS. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Manolo Reboso, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. 40, CLAIM SETTLE) EN 1: Hit DUKES, Mayor Ferre: We are now on item 25. The following resolution was introduced by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77-850 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO PAY TO ANDRE DUKES AND BRUMER, MOSS, COHEN & RODGERS, WITHOUT THE ADMISSION OF LIABILITY, THE SUM OF $1,996.00 IN FULL AND COMPLETE SETTLEMENT OF ALL BODILY INJURY AND AUTOMOBILE COLLISION DEDUCTIBLE CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY OF MIAMI, UPON THE EXECUTION OF A RELEASE, RELEASING THE CITY OF MIAMI FROM ALL CLAIMS AND DEMANDS, AND TO PAY TO STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, WITHOUT THE ADMISSION OF LIABILITY, THE SUM OF $1,395.00 IN FULL AND COMPLETE SETTLEMENT OF THEIR PERSONAL INJURY PROTECTION LIEN AND COLLISION SUBROGATION CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY OF MIAMI, UPON THE EXECUTION OF A RELEASE, RELEASING THE CITY OF MIAMI FROM ALL CLAIMS AND DEMANDS. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Manolo Reboso, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon QCT 261977 NOES: None. ABSENT: Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. 41, DENYING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND INSTRUCTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO DEFEND ANY SUITS. Nayor Ferre: Take up item 26. The following resolution was introduced by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77-851 A RESOLUTION DENYING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO DEFEND ANY SUIT BROUGHT FOR THE RECOVERY OF DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF SAID CLAIMS. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Manolo Reboso, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. 42. CLAIM SETTLEMENT: KRAFTCO. Mayor Ferre: We are now on item 27. The following resolution was introduced by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77-852 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO ACCEPT THE SUM OF $481.82 IN FULL AND COMPLETE SETTLEMENT IN THE CLAIM OF THE CITY OF MIAMI VERSUS KRAFT FOOD, DIVISION OF KRAFTCO CORP.; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF MIAMI TO EXECUTE A RELEASE RELEASING KRAFT FOOD, DIVISION OF KRAFTCO CORP., FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS AND DEMANDS ARISING OUT OF THE ACCIDENT INVOLVED IN THE ABOVE CLAIM. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Manolo Reboso, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. 113 ©t T 261 7 43i ACCEPT BID: CONVENTION CENTER BUILDING DEMOLITION - THIRD BIDDING. Mayor Ferre: Item 28 is the Convention Center -Building Demolition, East side of S.E. 1 Avenue. The Convention is in a Bond Fund,and this is accepting bids and authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract. Do we have a low bidder on this? Mr. Grassie: Yes, Sir, we do. Mayor Ferre: Who is the low bidder? Mr. Grassie: Cleveland Wrecking Company. Mr. Reboso: Okay, I'll move it. Mayor Ferre: Does that have your recommendation, is that a minority firm? Rev. Gibson: Is it a minority firm? Mr. Grassie: Apparently not, Mayor. Mayor Ferre: All right. There is a motion. Is there a second? Second, Further discussion. Call on the roll. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Manolo Reboso, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77-853 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BID OF CLEVEALND WRECKING CO. IN THE AMOUNT OF $107,000.00 FOR THE CONVENTION CENTER -BUILDINGS DEMOLITION (3RD BIDDING); ALLOCATING THE AMOUNT OF $107,000.00 FROM THE ACCOUNT ENTITLED "CONVENTION CENTER BOND FUND" TO COVER THE PROPOSED CONTRACT COST; ALLOCATING FROM SAID ACCOUNT THE AMOUNT OF $2,130.00 TO COVER THE COST OF SUCH ITEMS AS ADVERTISING, TESTING LABORATORIES AND POSTAGE; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH SAID FIRM. Upon being seconded by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson , the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Mayor Ferre: Listen, for the record, how many bidders were there? Mr. Parks: Three. Mayor Ferre: Is this the low bid? Mr. Parks: Yes, Sit, this is the lowest bid out of three. Mayor Ferre: All right. 144, ACCEPT BID: FLAGLER STREET LANDSCAPING. Mayor Ferre: All right, we are now on item 30. Mr. Parks: We were having trouble with the low bidder. Be was not acceptable to the City since we were on litigation with him. [14 OCT 2 61977 The following resolution was introduced by Vice -Mayor Rev. 'Theodore R. Gibson, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77-854 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BID OF TAMIAMI PLANT SYSTEMS, INC. IN THE PROPOSED AMOUNT OF $16,344.48 FOR THE FLAGLER STREET LANDSCAPING - 1977; ALLOCATING THE AMOUNT OF $16,344.48 FROM THE ACCOUNT ENTITLED "HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT BOND FUNDS" TO COVER THE CONTRACT COST; ALLOCATING FROM SAID ACCOUNT THE AMOUNT OF $1,797.52 TO COVER THE COST OF PROJECT EXPENSE; ALLOCATING FROM SAID ACCOUNT THE AMOUNT OF $327.00 TO COVER THE COST OF SUCH ITEMS AS ADVERTISING, TESTING LABORATORIES, POSTAGE; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH SAID FIRM. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Rose Gordon, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. 45, ACCEPT BID: TIFTON GRASS SPRINGS. The following resolution was introduced by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77- 855 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BID OF STAN CRUSE AND ASSOCIATES FOR FURNISHING AND PLANTING TIFTON GRASS SPRIGS ON 375,000 SQUARE FEET OF LAND IN BAYFRONT PARK FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION AT AN ESTIMATED COST OF $4,644.00; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM FEDERAL GRANT, BAYFRONT PARK PHASE I, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER AND THE PURCHASING AGENT TO ISSUE THE PURCHASE ORDER FOR THIS MATERIAL. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Rose Gordon, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev.Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. . ACCEPT BID: 3,000 CUBID YARDS OF CLEAN FILL MATERIAL. - (BAYFRONT PARK) The following resolution was introduced by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore_R. Gibson, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77-856 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BID OF L. C. MORRIS, INC. FOR FURNISHING 3,000 CUBIC YARDS OF CLEAN FILL MATER- IAL FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION AT A TOTAL COST OF $11,790.00; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE FEDERAL GRANT - BAYFRONT PARK, PHASE I BEAUTIFICATION PROJECT; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER AND THE PUCHAS- ING AGENT TO ISSUE THE PURCHASE ORDER FOR THIS MATERIAL. 115 OCT 261977, Upon being seconded by Commissioner Rose Gordon, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: ' AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev.Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurica A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. 47. ACCEPT BID: DEMOLITION OF BUILDING (UNSAFE STRUCTURE) .. 832 N.W, 2ND AVENUE, Mayor Ferre: On item 33, Ben Hurwithz - to demolish 832 N. W. 2nd Avenue. Is he the low bidder? Mrs. Gordon: Question. Who owns the property 832? Mr. Grassie: Yes, Sir, there was a low bidder. Mayor Ferre: The question is, who owns it? Mrs. Gordon: 33 title is vested in.... Mayor Ferre: The question is who owns the property on 33, Mr. Grimm? Mr. Grimm: I don't know the answer to that. Mayor Ferre: Is it a City property? Mr. Grimm: No, this is a Building Department demolition. I don't know who the owner of the proerty is. I can find out if you wish. Mayor Ferre: Who is going to end -up paying for it? Mr. Grimm: We are. Mrs. Gordon: We are. I want to know a little bit about this, not that I want to prevent unsafe structures from being removed; it's just that I want to know that the owner is completely aware of what we are doing and how do we anticipate, you know, being reimbursed and so forth. Mr. Grassie: There is a very detailed process that the Department goes through before it tears down private property, as you would imagine. The only recourse that the City has is to make the cost of the demolition a lien against the property so that before... at the time that the property changes hands the City's lien against that property has to be satisfied. Mrs. -Gordon: Yes, it's like lot clearing in the same aspect which you do the same thing. Of course, this is a heck of a lot more money for us to put out, but obviously it most be in a very, very bad deteriorated condition or you wouldn't be willing to put this money out, I'm assuming. Mr. Grassie: It's the last resort, but I think Father Gibson brought up a similar case about three months ago, you know. It gets to a point where you simply have take the initial even if you have to take the building down. Mrs. Gordon: It becomes a hazard. All right, go ahead. Mayor Ferre: All right, further discussion. Mrs. Gordon: Here we have a funny feeling about taking private property down, you know. I just do. The following resolution was introduced by Mayor Maurice A. Ferre who moved its adoption: 116 OCT 261977 RESOLUTION NO. 77-857 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BID OF BEN HURWITZ, INC. FOR THE DEMOLITION OF THE BUILDING AT 832 N.W. 2ND AVENUE FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING AT A TOTAL COST OF $6,200.00 ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE FEDERAL GRANT FUNDS PROVIDED THROUGH THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PRO- GRAM; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER AND THE PURCHASING AGENT TO ISSUE THE PURCHASE ORDER FOR THIS SERVICE. Upon being seconded by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. 448. ACCEPT BID: AUTOMOTIVE AND HEAVY EQUIPMENT PARTS, Mayor Ferre: All right, we are on item 34 - Automotive and Heavy Equipment Parts, City Wide. Okay, who moves this? The Manager recommends. This is Nineteen Suppliers for Automotive and Heavy Equipment Parts, City Wide. Was this the low bidder? Mr. Grassie: Well, there are about four of five low bidders. Mayor Ferre: Were they the low bidders? Mr. Grassie: Yes, Mr. Mayor. The following resolution was introduced by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77-858 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BIDS RECEIVED FROM NINETEEN (19) SUPPLIERS FOR AUTOMOTIVE AND HEAVY EQUIPMENT PARTS AND ACCESSORIES FOR USE AS NEEDED, CITY WIDE, ON A CON- TRACT BASIS FOR ONE YEAR FROM DATE OF AWARD AT A TOTAL ANNUAL COST NOT TO EXCEED $240,000.00; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER AND THE PURCHASING AGENT TO ISSUE THE PUR- CHASE ORDERS FOR THESE MATERIALS. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Manolo Reboso, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. 49. bcECUTE DEED TRANSFERRING SMALL TRACT OF LAND N.E. CORNER OF GRAND AVE, PARK TO DADE COUNTY FOR GRAND AVENUE PARK, Mayor Ferre: Take up item 35. Mrs. Gordon: I just want to say something. We did work on this this morning but, you know, Dade County gives this for a buck and they want to hold us up- for I don't know how much money- for that little piece of land next to the Expressway where we want to put the Velodrome. Is there anyway we could, you know, offer them a trade? You know,'you give us this and we give you that'. We want to develop Grand Avenue, no question about that, there is no question of whether we do or don't want to do it, i • OCT 261977 but I feel very reluctant about the whole situation, the whole mess up for what- $17,000? Or something more than that. Mr. Grassie: Oh no, much, much more than that. We are though, Commissioner, trying to work a trade which I hope will be on an even-steven basis so there is no cash outlet,but we are talking about mach more money than that. Mrs. Gordon: What was it, do you remember? Mr. Grassie: You are talking about something like $250,000. Mrs. Gordon: No, no. There is a little bitty piece of land there. Mr. Grimm: It's almost an acre, Mrs. Gordon, it isn't a little bitty piece of land. Mrs. Gordon: Okay, but they have no use for it. It's next to the Expressway. Is it landlocked? Does it have road frontage? Mr. Grimm: No Ma'am. The piece of property is at the corner of 12th Avenue and Ilth Street. It's a triangular -shape piece of property that cuts off the whole corner of 12th Avenue and llth Street and it's 39,000 bucks. Mrs.Gordon: Do they have a street frontage side? I thought they had the piece abutting the Expressway. Mr. Grimm: No Ma'am. Mrs. Gordon: Well, the Velodrome is going up abutting the Expressway. Mr. Grimm: It goes all the way to llth Street and that's the reason we triangular -shape piece of property .That piece of property was exchanged and we thought the Expressway was going to come through there and there to be a cloverly type interchange at that point, at that.... Mrs. Gordon: Since that we paid them.any money...did they pay us any money those years that we gave them that? For that land? Mr. Grimm: Well, if you hold my feet in the fire, the way I remember this is, when that Country Club property was excanged there was an established value on the pieces of property that we were exchanged between between the City and the County, and we traded the properties back and forth at the same rate. I don't remember what that number was. There have been several trades between the City and the County on that so called City's Center Complex. Isn't it? need that years ago was going Mrs. Gordon: All right. Mayor Ferre: All right, What's the will of this Commission on item 35? The following resolution was introduced by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77-859 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE ATTACHED DEED TRANSFERRING TO DADE COUNTY A SMALL TRACT OF LAND ENCOMPASS- ING APPROXIMATELY .03 ACRES AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF GRAND AVENUE PARK ADJACENT TO THE INTERSECTION OF GRAND AVENUE AND JEFFERSON STREET. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Rose Gordon, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. OCT 2 61977; 50. CONFIRMING RESOLUTION: ESTABLISH ANNUAL SALARY AND ASSISTANT CITY CLERK. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Manolo Reboso Who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77-860 A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE ANNUAL SALARY OF THE POSITION OF ASSISTANT CITY CLERK AT $19,5000, AS OF OCTOBER 1, 1977. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Rose Gordon, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissioner Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Mayor Ferre: There is a resolution before you authorizing the Manager to negotiate... Mrs. Gordon: Wait a minute, wait... Mayor Ferre: ... we've done item 37. Mrs. Gordon: ... yes, I just wanted to ask about the Clerk now. Forgive me for bringing this up but I feel good about this recognizing the inequity of the Assistant Clerk but, what about the Clerk? There is still an inequity there where he is concerned. Can we bring this back at the November meeting for recom- mendation? Mayor Ferre: Sure. 51, CONFIRMING RESOLUTION: AUTHORIZE NEGOTIATION WITH THE LAWFIRM OF BRYANT FRAPISUI, MILLER, OLIVE, BRPJDT & RYAN - BOND COUNSEL FOR FINANCE OF WATSON ISLAND DEVELOPMENT, The following resolution was introduced by Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R. Gibson, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 77-861 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NE- GOTIATE WITH THE LAW FIRM OF BRYANT, FRANSON, MILLER, OLIVE, BRANDT & RYAN, TO ACT AS BOND APPROVING COUNSEL FOR NECESSARY LEGAL SERVICES, IN CONNECTION WITH THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF BONDS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI TO FINANCE THE WATSON ISLAND DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND, UPON CONCLUSION OF SAID NEGOTIATION, TO SUBMIT THE PROPOSED AGREEMENT TO THE CITY COMMISSION FOR APPROVAL, PRIOR TO EXE- CUTION THEREOF. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Rose Gordon, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote; AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso Commissionser Rose Gordon Vice -Mayor Rev. Theodore R.Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. �� 9OCT 2 61977 Mayor Ferre: Is there anything else to come? Mrs. Gordon: Yes. Don't you have to have a resolution also for the accounting firm? What's the name...? Mayor Ferre: For the Law Firm? Mr. Grassie: No, they are the regular CPA firms for the City, Commissioner. Mrs. Gordon: , do you give your financial counseling without additional fee? Mr. Grassie: Sure. Mrs. Gordon: Okay. Mayor Ferre: Is there anything else, Mr.Manager? Mr. Grassie: No, Sir. Rev. Gibson: I move to adjourn. ADJoJRNITIIT : THERE BEING NO FURTHER U,S1N SS TO COME BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT :L� v.M. ATTEST: RRALPH�G. ONGIE CITYLERK PUTTY HIRAI ASSISTANT CITY CLERK MAURI CE A. FERRE MAYOR OCT 2 61977 ITEM NO, 1 3 4 5 10 11 I 14 CITY OF MIAMI DOCUMENT MEETING DATE: NOctober 26, 1977 DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION COMMISSION AGENDA ANI) CITY CLERK REPORT RESCHEDULING THE REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 1977 TO NOVEMBER 10, 1977 APPROVING A CONTRACT WITH HAMMER, SILER, GEORGE ASSOCI- ATES AND WALLACE, McHARG, ROBERTS AND TODD FOR CONSULT- ING SERVICES FOR THE PREPARATION OF ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE CIVIC CENTER/HOSPITAL COMPLEX-SECONT)ARY DEVEELOP- MENT AREA. AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH BETHUNE COOKMAN COLLEGE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT WITH LARRY GONZALEZ FOR OPERATION OF THE FOOD AND BEVERAGE CONCESSION AT SHENANDOAH PARK FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SOLICIT AND RECEIVE BIDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF ONE CHEVROLET CAPRICE AUTO- MOBILE FOR THE MAYOR'S OFFICE ORDERING CRESTWOOD SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT SR-5432- C ACCEPTING A GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE BY THE CITY OF MIAMI OF A STORM SEWER LOCATED AT ROCKERMAN ROAD NEAR BIS- CAYNE BAY AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO PURCHASE IN LIEU OF CONDEM'NA,'TION AN ALLEY RIGHT-OF-WAY COMPRISED OF 133.3 S0. FT. M/L, LOCATED CONTIGUOUS TO AND IMMEDIATE LY NORM OF FIRE STATION NO. 10, 4101 N.W. 7TH STREET ESTABLISHING SIZING GREENS FEES FOR THE NORTH -SOUTH GOLF TOURNAMENT TO BE HELD FEBRUARY 7 THROUGH 11, 1978, AT THE CITY OF MIAMI COUNTRY CLUB (;OLF COURSE APPOINTING MR. ANTHONY LAVARGNA TO SERVE AS A MEMBER ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION REVIEW BOARD APPOINTING MRS. JUI.IA R. FERNANDE7. TO SERVE AS A MEMBER OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION REVIEW BOARS) APPOINTING ELEANOR E. RATELLE AS A MEMBER OF THE CITY OF MIAMI MEMORIAL COMMITTEE AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE `I'0 PAY TO MARINA MOLINA AND ALBERT P. ROSILLO, WITHOUT THE ADMISSION OF LIABILITY, THE SUM OF $1,200.00 IN FULL AND COMPLETE SE'I"I'LEMENT OF ALL BODILY INJURY CLAIMS COMMISSION ACTION R-77-834 R-77-838 R-77-839 R-77-840 R-77-841 R-77-852 • R-77-843 R-77-844 R-77-845 R-77-846 R-77-847 R-77-848 R-77-849 RETRIEVAL CODE NO, 0052 77-834 77-838 77-839 77-480 77-841 77-842 77-843 77-844 77-845 77-846 77-847 77-848 77-84c TEM NO. IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 TINDE AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE: TO PAY TO ANDRE DUKES AND )3RUNER, MOSS, COVEN & RODGERS, WITHOUT THE ADMISSION OF LIABILITY, THE SUM OF $1,996.00 IN FULL AND COMPLETE SETTLEMENT OF ALL BODILY INJURY. DENYING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO DEFEND ANY SUIT BROUGHT FOR THE RECOVERY OF DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF SAID CLAIMS AUTHORTZTNG THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO ACCEPT THE SUM OF $481.82 IN FULL AND COMPLETE SETTLEMENT IN THE CLAIM OF THE CITY OF MTAMI VERSUS KRAFT FOOD, DIVISION OF KRAfl'CO CORP. ACCEPTING THE BID OF CLEVELAND WRECKING CO. IN THE AMOUNT OF S107,000,00 FOR THE CONVENTION CENTER - BUILDING DEMOLITION ACCEPTING THE 131D OF TAMIAMI PLANT SYSTEMS, INC. IN THE PROPOSED AMOUNT OF $16,344.48 FOR THE FLAGLER STREET LANDSCAPING-1977 ACCEPTING TIIE Bl1) OF STAN CRUSE AND ASSOCIATES FOR FURNISITNG AND PLANTING TIFTON GRASS SPRIGS ON $375,000 SQUARE FEET OF LAND IN BAYFRONT PARK FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PARES AND RECREATION AT AN ESTIMATED COST OF $4, 644.00 ACCEPTING THE BID OF L.C. MORRIS, INC. FOR FURNISHING 3,000 CUBIC YARDS OF CLEAN FILL MATERIAL FOR TIIE DE- PARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION AT A TOTAL COST OF $11,790.00 ACCEPTING THE BID OF BEN HURWITZ, INC. FOR THE DEMOLI- TION OF THE BUILDING AT 8 Y2 N.W. 2ND AVENUE FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF BU TLDING AT A TOTAL COST OF $6,200.00 ACCEPTING TEEE BIDS RECEIVED FROM NINETEEN (19) SUP- PLIERS FOR AUTOMOTIVE AND HEAVY EQUIPMENT PARTS AND ACCESSORIES FOR USE AS NEEDED, CITY WIDE, ON A CON- TRACT BASIS FOR ONE: YEAR FROM DATE OF AWARD A'I' A TO- TAL ANNUAL COST. AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE ATTACHED DEED TRANSFERRING '1'O DADE COUNTY A SMALL TR.'kCT OF LAND ENCOMPASSING APPROXIMATELY . 03 ACRES AT 'l'}lE NORTHEAST CORNER OF GRANT) AVENUE PARK ESTABLISHING THE ANNUAL SALARY OF THE POSITION OF ASSISTANT CITY CLERIC A'I' $19,500, AS OF OCTOBER 1, 1977 AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE LAE FIRM OF BRYANT FRANSON, MILLER, OLIVE, BRANDT & RYAN LEGAL SERVICES, IN CONNECTION WITH THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF BONDS OF THE: CITY OF M1AMII R-77-850 R-77-851 R-77-852 R-77-853 R-77-854 R-77-855 R-77-856 R-77-857 R-77-858 R-77-859 R-77-860 R-77-861. 77-950 77-851 77-852 77-853 77-854 77-855 77-856 77-857 77-858 77-859 77-860 77-861