The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutO-08594tier= %kb OftbINA iCE NO s _ $ 5 § L AN OItbINANCE BEPEALIN'O He:Milt 8-7 Ti1OUOl 8-15 OF CHAPTER 8 OF THE COM OF Tilt CITY OF MIAMt FLORIbA► ENTITLEb "$ICYC'LEE" ANb iltbATINO TO THE LICINSINd OF BICYOLEilr BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MiAmI PLoilinAt Section 1, Section 8-7 through Section 8-15 of Chapter 8 of the Code of the City of Miami, Florida, entitled "Bicycles" and relating to the licensing of bicycles is hereby repealed. PASSED ON FIRST READING BY TITLE ONLY, this 28th d of OCTOBER , 1976, this PASSED AND ADOPTED ON, SECOND. READING. BY TITLE ONLY, 18 day of NOVEMBER' , 1976. MAURICE A. FERRE M A Y O, R CITY CLERK PREPARED AND APPROVED BY: ROBERT.F. CLARK Assistant City Attorney APPROVED AS TO FORM AND. CORRECTNESS: FRANK H. WESTON Acting City Attorney Ail 3hteiat3teci tAke hatted that off 04 1 th ley t3€ $8t4mb4t, 1036 the City 'Commission of Miami.; F]ari.da adopted the fatla+.iri8' titled otditidttteat Ottb1NANC1, NO,'„ . Ait bEDiNANCt: 11PPt.At.It4G St;CTIONS 8-7 TtttioUGtt g-i 5 oP CttAPTi:tt t1 OF Ttti tObt or TttE" CITY OP t•MIAMI► %LOODA, t tlTITLED "8iCYCLt:S". At1D ittiATING To TFtE LICt OsiNd OP t3lCYCL1:5,. ORbINANCE NO.88595;__ AN Et41;ttGENCY ORbIt1ANCIi AnNDi fl', St;CTION 30-28 OF TIIE CObt: of T8Fi CITY .OF Mlt1I ► i t oRlt)? A5 A'tt;IlhED+ ' COi1T:l1N/NG T11t SCt1Et)Utt OP CLASSIFICATIONS AND AMOUNTS 01' Tfl1 OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE TAX 8Y CIIANG- ING THE AMOUNT or THE m< ON CIRCUSES ' PROM $847.50 PER DAY. TO $253. FOR THE FIRST DAY Or OPERATION AND $126 50 FOR , EACH ADDITIOt3AL DAY THEREAFTER; AND BY INCLUDING THE CLASSIFICATION OF "CIRCUSES" WITHIN TI1I: CLASSIFICATION OF "CARNIVALS" THEREBY DELETING FROM SAID SECTION_ THE, SEPARATE- CLA sSIEICA TIOi1 Or CIRCUSES; 'REPEALING ALL ORDI- NANCES, CODE SECTIONS OR PATS THEREOF IN CONFLICT; AND CONTAINING A SI:VERAt31LITY CLAUSE. ORDINANCE NO. 8596. AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING 19 J 6-77 APPROPRIATIONS ORDINANCE NO. " 13Y APPROPRIATING $4 2 , 34 0. 07 1'Oi(-At i)iTi OVAL REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES FOR PROGRAMS FOR THE HANDICAPPED; SAID REVENUES TO HE RECEIVED ON REIMHURSEMl T 1::vo1C1: FROM THE STATE OP FLORIDA, RETARDATI0t1 PROGRAM OFFICE; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO IMPLEMENT THISPROGRAM; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SEC- TIONS OR PARS THEREOF IN CONFLICT; AND CONTAINING A SEVERAI3ILITY CLAUSE. bitii t3 tid -NO 8 1 � M4 tMti ct R Y thbiNANo1 :7 t4bt+ 30t ti�N SUt38t.Ctiong 6PtB IMt i2o° at` RIP LdC z.MI rno, OMMBV:R G►199► AS p•M,DD1)).hND TIE 4IAMICi1( GENERAL EMPLOYEES lIIR;:F+ PLAN (OROSI.tiANCL t1o► 5624 ► tt,\\ 2 ► 1956 ► + '. "' I`3 "COtii1`ICt�'I'ION AS At•1SNtlLn) t , AS APt I:eAtaNG + VOW. Ng A'PABT OP CHAPTtA'2 t-CtTY OP .MIAMI,' PLot:It)p 1957P Tilt C,ONS 'j ttE iil . t4 AMP Nb b i MOBti PARTICOLAM,Y e+MtnOINd SUB-, St•:CTIbNS (cl) 2 and (a) "OP St;CTIO?t 9 OF MID SECTI.ON . II0 orI; AIbICt1AP T t ,t 2 t NO p • t'ROVIbING TttAT, Tttc boLLAR AMO UNT ai~ Tttt; CITY ► S 'ACC20Eb tJILYotI! TION To 3oTl1flimTtmtTI CONTRIBUTION T P;Z+IREttt::NT PLAN to cALCULAT1) O,'1 A 35=-Yt:AR AMORTIZATION tBASIS CcTht.t:NCINO OCTOt3t:R 1. ► 1061 tztPEALINO ALL oIblilANCLS ► COD1; SI:C►1'10Ns OR t't1t2TS ' Titlrti OF IN CONFLICT, INSOFAR A9 Tim ARE IN Co?trLIC`I'; ING. A SEVERABILITY PROVISION. oRDINANCt: No. 8508 AN .ttAnItGl:t1CY at2niNANCL•' t�ML•'NbIN $ J1S�7G`77 APPROPRIATIONS ORDINANCE No. 'lOr AL BY APPROPRIATING $14,000 FORDU].�1 A REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES. 1'OR J01.1T SPONSORSHIP" OF "FLORIDA LEGISLATIVE W1;1 }tEt1D" , SAID REVENUES TO i3R RECEIVED FROM nt+bE cbvN'rY, FLORIDA, ' IOR JOINT .SPONSORSHIP OF SAID EVENT PURSUANT TO AUT110RI PlOF. COtii•.'IY • , RESOLUTION NO, R-1251-7G;- i. REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT; AND CONTAINING A SEVERABIL1T?' CLAUSE. RALPH G. ONGIE:" CITY CLERK atiteph Rs dta5 g ie City Manager ACtit7 Chief of Pollee CI? Y OF MIAMI. F"L.O$ l:'A Ell•crF cE MEMOP.ANUUM bAIE 13 y Ito 'rb SrP j Pit AdOst 30 r 1976 FILE Repeal of Article tt, Chapter 8, City Code It is the recommendation of two attorneys who are employed in the Miami Police Department that Article II, Chapter 8 of the City Code should be repealed. The Dade Count.,. Co :i+ , S,lc: Li c ri 30-264. 1, provide:. for voluntary registration for bicycles and is adequate to meet the needs of this community. From an administrative point of view, I concur in the recommendation for repealing the current City Code and I recommend that we do so. CITY t{{'.+.11. F1.DRIN tNTER•OFFICE MEMORANDUM RGq: Rehneth R. Pox ASs start Chief, Admin stratibh Aibtai e H. Strait Police Legal Advisor 9tsEtatc.s August 24, `1916 ` Repeal of Article it, Chapter 8, City Cade CLOst:Ott . 11) The provisions of Article II, Chapter 8 of the Code of the City of Miami should be repealed. In actual practice, the license section has fallen into dis- use in recent years and the Code provisions requiring bicycle licensing are not being enforced. The City Code (see Tab B) calls for an owner to mandatorially present him or herself at the nearest fire station with a 0.25 fee and thereafter display a license tag, visible from the rear of the bicycle. Telephonic spot checks at Fire Stations 1 and 2 disclose that they have not accomplished any registrations recently and Station 2 advised that they did not have the materials necessary to register bicycles at all. The Taxi Detail of the Police Department, which is charged with the overall administration of the project, advised that they had no forms for registration either. The Dade County Code (see Tab A) provides a mechanism for voluntary registration of bicycles by individual owners and for mandatory registration by retail dealers. Information obtained from such registration is maintained at a central storage place from which our officers are easily able to acquire necessary information when dealing with lost or stolen bicycles. This system is at present far more effi- cient than that available in the City of Miami and is of greater service to both the police officer and the public. In July 1975, Tom Connors recommended that similar repeal be effected (see his memo at Tab C). Should our ordinances be repealed, voluntary registration could still be offered under the County system through our fire stations as heretofore under the City Code. LHS:rjm MEW EMU MIMW FEE E CITY OF MIAMI. FLORIDA INtER-OFFICE MEMoRANDI =MO. TO: FROM: Prank Westoh Assistant to the Director Thomas 1•I. Connors !assistant City Attorney / -7 °ATE: duly 21, 1975 City of Miami Bicycle Ordinances 5s8-i, 8-8, 8-9, 8-10, a-11, 8-12, 8-13, 8-14, 8-15 Mkt: aENCts: tNcLOttiAttl: The above cited sections deal with the licensing of bicycles ridden within the City of Miami. It is my feeling that these should be repealed and the entire licensing process be abandoned by the City and left to the County. At present our licensing arrangement is sporadically effective. I obtained some figures from the Miami Police Department's licensing staff. They read as follows: October, 1974 0 licenses issued November, 1974 90 " n December, 1974 0 " January, 1975 204 n February, 1975 0 " March, 1975 0 •• April, 1975 0 „ From January 1974 through December 1975 a total. of '895 licenses were issued. I would imagine, from reading our ordinances, that its primary pur- pose was two -fold; one, to enable the City to return recovered bicycles to their owners; two, to allow some type of identifying tag in case of some sort of traffic violation (see 58-13 "(it)... should be firmly attached to the rear mud -guard or frame of the • bicycle for which issued, in such position as to be plainly visible from the rear"). The Dade County Ordinances covering licensing of bicycles S30-264.1, 20-264.2, 30-264-3, 30-264.4, 30-264.5, 30-264.6 adequately covers voluntary registrations, the same as our ordinance, and further provides that mandatorily any bicycles sold by the dealer be registered at the time of sale. Captain Evans, of Dade County Public Safety Departmemt in charge of the Property Unit, has advised that the storage of recovered bicycles from within the City of Miami would be little or no extra problem for his unit. Comparing the miniscule loss of licensing fees ($.25 per license) versus the amount of man hours spent for the City to duplicate a Praf51 ,:ostVr July 21, i 7 function the County is handling' adequately With a county --wide ordinance it seems sensible to consider repealing out ordinances, The traffic enforcer:ent aspect of our licensing section 6-13 seems to have been an after thought and fairly superfluous. I would appreciate your thoughts and if you need further data? please advise. MiW MIME a MM ME r