Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1974-05-02 MinutesMIAMI CITY ISSION MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING Thauday, May 2, 1974-5:00 O'CZock P.M. OF MEETING HELD ON PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CITY HALL H. D. SOUTHERN CITY CLERK RALPH G. ONGIE ASSISTANT CITY CLERK MINUTES OF SPECIAL. IteTING Sj?Y CONMISSION OF 17IAMI. FLORIDA On the 2nd day o‘ May, 1974, ,the City Comm.i4 io City of Miami, Ftonida met in SPECIAL SESSION catted Maurice Fenne to eond,ideh bu4ine44 of pubt.ie impoht. The Mayon announced the punpoe e o 6 thi4 4 peciat to d.i4 cu44 a necentty completed anatyd.id o i City o i �.n Pen4ton Statu4 net fined .in Vi4 abitity Statu4 ; 4 atd been eompteted by Retait Cned,it Conponat.ion, Atlanta The meeting wad called to ()Aden at 5 : 15 O' Clo ek SottowJng membeM of the Comme,dd-ion Found to be pne4 At4 o pne4 ent: n etc the by Mayoh meeting wad Miami Emptoyeed anatty4.i4 hawing , Geong,ia. P.M. with the ent: Comm4.44..onet J. L. PLummen Commi44i.onen Roe a Gordon Commi44Lonen Manoto Rebodo Comm 4a ionen (Rev.) Theodore GJb4on Mayon Maumee A. Fume P. W. Andnew4 , City Manager. John S. Ltoyd, City Attorney H. V. Southenn,C.ity Ctenk An invocation wad deti.vened by Reverend Gib4on who .then .ted thod a pne4 ent in a ptedg e o i atteg4 anee to the gag. ************************ Mayor Ferre: Ladies and Gentlemen, this is a Special City of Miami Commission Meeting for the purpose of discussing one item and only one item. The item is - Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, before you start Sir, may we for the record and let it reflect that I notified Publicity upon your request at at approximately 4 P.M. that a special meeting of this Commission had been called via your authority and that also all media and all people that were able to be, were contactedtto notify them of this special meeting scheduled for 5 P.M., that is merely for the record. Mayor Ferre: The City of Miami sometime ago contracted with a firm, to have an analysis made, the Retail Credit Co., Atlanta, Georgia, dated May 1, 1973. It's almost a year today. The purpose of this was to analyze on a confidential basis, the City of Miami's pensioned employees. At the time, this matter came up before this community by various reports that came out in the press and in the media, it was requested by various members of the press that a copy of the final report be submitted for their study. This request was denied by our Manager. The reason why it was denied as I understand it is because of the confidentiality of the specifics within the report. Mr. Ron Sachs, a reporter for the Miami Herald in a letter to Mr. Paul Andrews requested formally a copy of this report. We have been consulting with the City Attorney and the Attorney General of Florida. I myself talked to Bob Shevin this morning as to the implications and as to the legality specifically of our actions. The Attorney General informed me that he understood the confidentiality of the report, however, he had some questions if the report were made available to the City of Miami Commission, a Commissioner or the Mayor as to whether that by law in fact did not make the document a public document. This was an off -hand opinion, not a formal opinion on his part. The City Attorney will explain his position in a moment. It was my hope that we could cut right through this and get right down to the specifics of what we are meeting here for, that we could, in the interest of getting information to the public, to the media and to the press, so that everybody is properly informed, compromise on the following solution: That we make available to the public, the cover memorandum which is an explanatory memorandum, a 3 page memorandum, which more or less explains the results in broad numbers in terms of percentages without getting into the specifics. That we also make available to the press, the. names and the addresses of the individuals involved but not make available the specific comments and the heart of the specific confidential report. On the basis that that would be a violation of our word and also that we in effect through Mr. Reese's signature on May 1, 1973, went on record that we would not make any of this information public because of the confidential nature of the report. I am not a lawyer and obviously this is a very complex, complicated legal question as to the rights of these individuals might conflict with the rights of the public under Florida Law. It was my hope that it would be an acceptable compromise giving the generalities of the situation and specific names without getting into the specific individual reports. It was told to Mr. Paul Andrews and I understood it that way that it was not the intention in the case of this specific item that was requesting in the Herald to use neighbors comments and the specific information in these reports. Now, as a consequence, I didn't think that it was important. On my last conversation with Mr. Ron Sachs, it was his opinion that the Herald should have the full copy of the report and based on that, I felt in my opinion that unless we have a very clear legal clearum defining the legal situation, that in view of this letter dated May 1st signed by Mr. Reese, in view of our commitment. that we should take that portion a public document but since it is a matter of major import, I did not think that I should unilaterally make this decision and that the Commission should share and that's what we are meeting here on. Mr. Plummer: 2 comments. 1 a question, the other a comment. First, did anyone make the Attorney General, Robert Shevin, aware that this matter was under investigation by this Commission? Mayor Ferre: I did not. Mr. Plummer: Did you Mr. Lloyd? Mr. Lloyd: No. Mr. Plummer: So you are the only one other than Mr. Sachs, 1 assume for the record that Mr. Sachs, you or someone representing your paper has spoken to the Attorney General, is that correct? My question basically Mr. Mayor, is, has anyone brought to his attention that this matter is under investigation by a committee of this Commission? Mayor Ferre: Make your point Mr. Plummer: Mr. Plummer: Well the point is this. As I have heard from 2 or 3 sources this afternoon. The legality of releasing such a report is based upon information given to a public official, must after that point be declared an official public document and it is releasable. I only question that if a report is given to the Attorney General or to the State Attorney while its under inves- tigation, I don't see that they would release such a document, or information relating to the document. That's the only point I make. The second point that I wish to make Mr. Mayor, well I will make the point later - if the vote of this Commission is a certain way. Mayor Ferre: I have stated my position and Mr. Thompson, I think you represent the Miami Herald. Do you want to speak to it? ONO Mr. Thompson: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, 1 met with the City Attorney approximately noon today, in an attempt to resolve the issue. I believe that the City Attorney and I were in agreement that clearly the cover pages which are some 10 or 12 pages are public records , whichever they are, they are public records and capable of production and after discussing the matter with the Herald, 1 advised Mr. Lloyd that at this time the Herald was interested in receiving first those cover pages which are clearly a public record and secondly since they are statistical summaries, the names and addresses of the people in the various categories, their present place of employment, and the amount of pension, Disability coverage that they presently have and I believe that I also requested if they were presently employed elsewhere, the salary that they were receiving in that employment which was matters that could be digested from these so-called confidential reports of Retail Credit without actually exhibiting. That we would for the moment, not attempt further or argue further as to the issue which we believe that the entire report is a public document and under the public records law of this state, would have to be produced but for the moment that this would take care of the situation. I understood from Mr. Sachs, I understood first from Mr. Lloyd that this arrangement was satisfactory but Mr. Sachs has spent several hours this afternoon trying to get it worked out and as I understand it, we still don't have the cover pages much less the names and addresses and basic information Mayor Ferre: Lets - Mr. Lloyd: May I respond to - Mayor Ferre: Now wait a minute, let's, 1 will let you respond before we bring anything to a head. I would like to follow this format. I would like to, once we have heard everybody's discussion and questions, I think we ought to take this and break it down and I think I am going to ask that this Comm- ission go on record in voting on the basic premise of turning over to the media, the press, in other words to the public, through them, the basic 3 page cover memorandum. Then I think we can decide whether or not we want to take and turn over to them this specific information requested. I would like to 'drop it at that point. If however, it gets beyond that, then I am going to ask the Commission to take a position on the full document. Mr. Plummer: I personally don't see the reason for any of that. I don't think we have to drag this thing out any further. Mr. Thompson is an honorable man who is operating under a premise. You are doing likewise and so does Mr. Lloyd, Mr. Sachs, myself Mr. Frann. I think that their request personally is a legitimate, bonafide request for the first 3 pages of the document which does not spell out names and you have agreed to it, they have agreed to it so what have we got to do but give it to them? Mr. Lloyd: Wait a minute. Before we go any further, I think perhaps the Commission should hear from me what has transpired so far so you could intelligently decide on it. First, I am prepared as per the agreement, if the Commission feels so inclined, to give the 3 pages and I have them ready. #2, as to the names and addresses as to the amount of'pension, I believe that Mr. Sachs has this and Mr. Thompson you may not know this. Mr. Thompson: I understood it was very complex and what I thought could be a very quick procedure was turned into a fairly lengthy one. Mr. Lloyd: Hold the phone now, just a moment now, wait a minute. The fact of the matter is that I believe he does have them. He has the names and addresses of the disability pensioners, the amount that they are getting. Mayor Ferre: Can we stop here and find out if that's so or not or do you want to keep on making your statement? Mr. Lloyd: Well ask Mr. Ron Sachs. Does he have them? MAY 2- 1974 • Mayor ?erre: Mr. Sachs' Mr. tloyd: He went down like about 2:30 to get them. Mr. Thompson: We do have a list of names and addresses. It had been my understanding that those were to be tied back into the summary which as I recall - Mr, Lloyd: Yes but I haven't had a chance to finish. Mayor Ferre: All right go ahead. Mr. Lloyd: If I could just finish, everybody keeps interrupting me. Perhaps I could clear some of this up. He got that from Mr. John Passer, from our lists. I specifically did not get it from the information in the other documents. Now what Mr. Sachs insists upon, is get additional information regarding the fact where these people work, that he be allowed to look at this document. Now that I cannot agree to and that was not part of our agreement. Now, the only information that he does not have are the cover things which are available and6where these people, those that are working, where they are working and their salaries if that information is available. Now, I cannot say here in front of this Commission whether that information is available in this document but Mr. Sachs wanted the permission to look at the document and if that information is available on the document, to copy it off the document. Well that makes the document a public record by virtue of the fact that he has looked at it. That is the problem there if that is where the information is. That's our problem and he said due to the essence of time, he wanted to have the privelege of doing that. Following and I believe him as far as that goes, that he would keep anything else on there confidential and I have perfect confidence in Mr. Sach's integrity. No problem there but that isn't the problem that he won't divulge it. The problem is that we have allowed somebody to look at what could possibly be what might not be a public record, or a sensitive document. This is what we were trying to avoid. Mayor Ferre: In other words, once he sees it, that legally - Mr. Lloyd: Well then I can't prevent anybody else from looking at it. That is my problem. Mr. Plummer: What position is the City in, if any, from the standpoint of a lawsuit prompted by an individual, if only the first 3 cover sheets are made public? Mr. Lloyd: In a good position legally because as long as we are discussing these sheets, all they are is statistical summaries and mention no names of anybody whatsoever. Mr. Plummer: All right. Mr. Thompson, did I understand you Sir, that your request and your agreement with Mr. Lloyd is for the first 3 pages of summary and the list of the pensioners which you already have from Mr. Passer. Is that your agreement sir? Mr. Thompson: No Sir, it included also as Mr. Lloyd has said, the present place of work, the individuals ir,.volved so that they could be tied back into the summary sheet and the amount of outside income if in fact that were shown from the reco d. As I say Commissioner Plummer, it was done in the interest of speed so that we did not have to reach a confrontation on the issue of the fact of our contention that the whole document was a public record. 1.0 4 MAY 2-1974 • Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Lloyd, May t ask you a question? In excerpts removed from that document by your department relative to the names :and occupations of the individuals, would that still abridge the confidentiality fears that you - Mr. Lloyd: Hhich I am not divulging whether it is or it isn't. Assuming that such things are in the document, these documents, one of them is a volume that thick, 2 inches thick and another is 114" thick. Mrs. Gordon: All right, let me ask another question. Does this City have records of its own anywhere that reflect the occupations of those persons who have been retired from active work with the City? Present occupations? Mr. Lloyd: Not to my knowledge. Mr. Plummer: I might shed some light because you know I have worked on the committee. To my knowledge, the only document that this City has is a document stating their name, their address, of where they receive their check. Thats it. By the way, Mr. Sachs already has that list. Mrs. Gordon: Also the amount of compensation they are receiving as retirees. That is also something Mr. Sachs has already received. Mr. Plummer: Yes its on the list, the amount of pension. That is the document that they have. Mrs. Gordon: Okay, I have another question. All of this is just simply to be able to clear the air. That we can understand. I know you have worked on the committee and I have not. Mr. Lloyd, what jeopardy would the City have if in fact, the rest, not all the information, but some excerpts were, if there were in those documents, excerpts that were removed? If there were, okay? WHat jeopardy if any would we be in? Could we be indemnified against any such possible jeopardy? Mr. Lloyd: The answer to the first question is that it depends upon what information was extracted and used. As to the second one. Yes, indemnification is possible. Mayor Ferre: Any other questions? Mr. Plummer: Actually what are we talking about then. Are we talking about that the Herald is not going to be satisified with the list of pensioners and 3 page document of percentage breakdown? You are not going to be satisfied with that? Is that correct? Mr. Thompson: That is correct. That is not in accordance with my discussion with Mr. Lloyd and in light of the time factor, I am not sure that this moment well - Mayor Ferre: Mr. Thompson, the reason why we are meeting here is because the reporter of the Miami Herald, Mr. Sachs, basically disagreed with the position that you as the Attorney for the Miami Herald have taken with the City of Miami Attorney. Mr. Thompson: I don't believe so Mr. Mayor. He didn't disagree with the position. He was unable to collect the information which is a limited amount of time, under that arrangement and therefore, the purpose of the arrangement was to expedite that and since it couldn't be expedited, Mr. Sachs simply said, well the only way I can get the information quickly is to receive the basic documents so that he renewed his overall demand. Rev. Gibson: Let me ask this. t am sure Counsel that we don't really get everything we want when we want it. X think we have to deal with human frailties. I think that we, 1 don't know about anybody than Theodore Gibson but I have an obligation to protect not only the people who work for the City but in my ministry, anybody who comes to me in confidence. I think we want to do the right thing. We want to be cooperative but I don't believe, I don't believe and I don't think that we can in good conscience, can go beyond reason. Reasonable time. I would assume that we could meet at 5 o'Clock to make this decision, another hour if we summaries all over, that seems to be the order of the day so I could understand that, but I am concerned really about we do to the people and I think we ought to make available as was indicated, the cov er letter of 3 pages. If we want to give the names of where the people live and where they wo rk- Mr. Plummer: That is what I am trying to, make clear to the rest of you. You haven't worked on it as I have. Father, there is no document, lets say there is 3 documents, okey? Document #1, Mr. Sachs has. That document being a list of the pensioners on disability retirement. Thats #1 and he has that already. #2: The first 3 pages of the report which breaks down in percentages the people out on disability and the second page breaks down how many of them are out on such and such injuries and if they are working or not. The 3rd document which is the document in question, or could be question is the document in depth as to the individual recepient and I don't think there is any question, at least there is not in my mind, of releasing to the paper, the list, they already have them - of (A) and there is no question in my mind of releasing (B) which is the document cover sheets but there is a serious question in my mind as to the indepth confidential report. Rev. Gibson: That is all I was saying. I find objection to the 3rd request. Mr.P?ummer: I was just trying to outline it for you. Mayor Ferre: Now wait a moment. I want to make my little statement on this because this sounds like a small, trite and insignificant thing but this is a very very consequential and important matter to the City of Miami. There is something in Washington going on called Watergate, and the whole premise of the mess that is going on day after day in the press and on television and on radio, is nothing else but whether or not the people of the United States are entitled to some basic information even if its in the hands of no less authority than the President of the United States. Even though I am saying, we are not hashing out a little Watergate here, that is what is important in this thing. Now I personally do not think my fellow commissioners, that there is no question that reasonableness but unfortunately because there are individuals involved, fortunately because that's the way the law reads, what is on the other side of this thing is called the law. The Law evidently according to everything I have heard is pretty clear. It becomes confused because at a certain point, it bogs down in the technicality of one thing or another. There I am not clear, but one thing that I am absolutely certain of, is we cannot have confidentiality at the expanse of the taxpayers. In other words, we cannot have in the future, I hope, that after this is all over, that we would be able to pass some kind of a resolution here that in the future, will preclude the Manager and anybody else from signing any document that will state something which verges on an acknowledged violation of the law. I am not knocking Mr. Reese. I am just saying that this kind of a document which was a good document lup until recent years is something that we in this City of Miami cannot afford to get involved in in the future. We cannot have confidentiality at the expense of the taxpayers. 6 MAY 2-1974 Mrs. Gordon: I am not so sure that this ian't just a form that- Mayor Ferre: It's signed by M. L. Reese, Rose, City of Miami. Mrs. Gordon: I am talking about the form, not the signature. Mr. Reboso: I would like to have a legal opinion from Mr. Shevin regarding this matter explaining to him that this was a confidential matter. Mayor Ferre: I think we are treading on something that is a very delicate matter and I really think we have to set - i am perfectly willing to get from Bob Shevin a legal position. I heard what he said. I want to hear what Jack Lloyd has to say. We have heard what Parker Thompson had to say and I think bwe have to establish how we look at it. Rev. Gibson: I could live if you then called Bob Shevin and tell Bob Shevin that this matter is still under investigation. That we are willingto turn over document #1 and #2 but we are not willing to turn over Document #3 until such time as the investigation is over. Gentlemen I live a life of the Clergy and when people come to you in confidentiality, you are in trouble. I think I wantto make it crystal clear. I am a man of the law and I believe in the law but I believe in the reasonableness of the law. If the intent is not to destroy, then we can be reasonable. Now I am prepared to vote right now to turn over #1 and #2. Mr. Reboso: Is Mr. Shevin who happens to be an elected official, willing to give to the Miami Herald every document ,.that he has under investigation? Mayor Ferre: I haven't asked him but we don't have to make that decision for Mr. Shevin. We have to make the decision for the City of Miami. Rev. Gibson: Well all right, let's ask Bob Shevin in view of the fact that this thing is yet under investigation and we are dealing with particular individuals and instances. Let's ask him that and if he tells me that, then I take one attitude but note: We didn't tell him that. Lets call and we don't have to wait a thousaid years. Lets get it now. Mayor Ferre: I'll call Bob Shevin even though I frankly - Mrs. Gordon: While we are waiting for the call to go through, may I ask Mr. Thompson a question? Mayor Ferre: Excuse me Rose. The Attorney General is not there at his office. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Thompson representing those persons requesting this information and recognizing that our concerns are not a fear of disclosure but a fear of legal recourse against the City. What kind of indemnification could you imagine that could be offered to the City by yourself or your persons you are representing to protect us from any legal action that might accrue from us releasing this confidential matter to you? Mr. Thompson: Mrs. Gordon, frankly I cannot think of any. The City chose for reasons which I simply cannot understand to employ Retail Credit to do its investigating on their form contract which apparently has something on it which says the information will be confidential. The City could have done its investigation in a thousand ways. We are looking simply for the results of the investigation. If the City chose to enter into that contract, I simply cannot understand why but I simply cannot understand why on the demand of or for public records, anybody should indemnify the public body for producing those records. .. 7 MAY 2 -1974 Mrs. Gordon: Do 1 understani this as a point of information? Mr. Thompson: I understand :Fully. 1 wanted to I could but 1 cannot anticipate any indemnity. Mrs. Gordon: I asked Mr. Thompson if there was that 4/light become available and he said no. answer you as best any idemnification Mr. Plummer: I want to go to the actual point of the investigation of which I am chairing. Now this is something that you have got to give consideration to that the releasing of this document- will it in fact hamper the investigation which is in progress? Mayor Ferre: Father Gibson has expressed his opinion. Rose has asked some pointed important questions. Commissioner Reboso has asked for the opinion of the Attorney General. Now as I said at the beginning, I would like to take this thing one at a time and then we can leave the last pne until we get to the Attorney General but I don't think there is any doubt here that we are willing to turn over that 3 page cover memorandum. Will somebody make the motion to that effect? Rev. Gibson: I move. Mr. Plummer: If you are asking for the ruling, lets get the ruling. Mayor Ferre: Ruling of what? Mr. Plummer; Get the ruling of the Attorney General. Mayor Ferre: I have already told you what the Attorney General has told me and I am saying it on the public record. He told me that the moment that the document came into the hands of the Commission and the Mayor, that it is a public document. It doesn't matter what it has. Mr. Plummer: Without the stipulation included of an investigation on going? You are saying that has no bearing on it? Mayor Ferre: I have not asked him that question. Maybe Jack Lloyd in the meantime while we get the Attorney General, maybe you can - Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I am merely trying to prevent this City - Mayor Ferre: J. L., I understand that and I am not in any way being critical and on the contrary, I am grateful that you pointed that out. I think it's a key thing. You talk to that and Jack Lloyd, lets talk to - Mr. Thompson: I just wanted to point out Mr. Mayor that if you are referring to the investigation, it's my understanding that mr. Sach's first original oral request came before the committee before it was even formed. Mayor Ferre: What? Mr. Thompson: The original request by Mr. Sachs, oral request, came before the committee was formed, some 10 days ago. Mayor Ferre: How about that point? Is that the answer to it, that it was requested before the investigation started? Mr. Thompson; No I don't think the investigation is relevant. I just want to point out that in fact if you are going to discuss the investigation with the Attorney General, I just wanted that additional piece of information. 8 MAY 2 -1974 1 Mr. Lloyd: There is no question it my mind that before the discussion began on this situation, that this record was not a public record. i do not necessarily agree with the Attorney General by the mere fact that the record was given to Commissioners automatically snakes it a public record. There is no precedent that I can find, either way. What we have is an off the cuff opinion of the Attorney General that it did. An opinion by me, after research, that I can find no precedent one way or the other. All we have is a Statute plus 2 or 3 Attorney General's opinions. Mayor Ferre: How about this Copeland case that the Herald was involved in? Mr. Lloyd: The Herald was not involved in the Copeland case. That was Cartwright vs. Copeland. It was up in Pompano Beach. Mr. Thompson: Yes the Herald was involved. I argued the case. Mr. Lloyd: Well do you have the opinion of the lower Court? Because all there is was a memorandum - Florida SUP isn't here. I was not aware, I did not know the Florida SUP citation. From the discussion I heard of it, I doubt if that opinion is pertinent to this discussion. I would like to see the opinion first. Mr. Thompson: The opinion essentially says that a document presented to a group of .in that case, administrative employees, was automatically a public record. I could get it from my office this afternoon or tomorrow morning. Mr. Lloyd: I would like to look at it. Perhaps we could arrive at some decision then. Mr. Thompson, does that say, presented to an administrative body as a body? Mr. Thompson: Well in that case it was a group of administrative officials who met every Friday for staff planning. Mr. Lloyd: Was it presented to them in the course of their regular meeting? Mayor Ferre: Excuse the interruption a moment. Mr. Thompson. Nobody can get anybody at the Attorney General's Office at this late hour. Obviously, its 6 o'Clock. I don't know Bob Shevins home number. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, may I just interject one thing? You know this document isn't going to go away. It isn't going to disappear and I can't see the extreme urgency of having an answer orally this evening and pinning a man to the wall. Now tomorrow morning the question can be delivered or hand delivered by Mr. Lloyd to Mr. Shevin and an answer can be derived and if the answer is in the affirmative, he gets the copy of it, it isn't going anywhere. I just don't see life or death urgency in this request. 24 hours isn't going to make a difference. Mayor Ferre: We are meeting on it now. Let's get this thing over with one way or the other. We are not going to get the Attorney General now. I think we all know the situation. I didn't hear the full impact. Jack, I didn't hear. Will you then explain to the Commission what your conclusion after - Does the Copeland case affect this? 9 MAY 2 1974 Of Mr. Lloyd: Let me explain this. First candidly in my opinion, the fact of an investigation legally has no bearing on the public or private nature of the record. It simply has a bearing on public policy whether or not this should be divulged but I believe it has no bearing on whether or not this is a public record. Mayor Ferre: Go back to the law Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Lloyd: Now getting back to the law. The Copeland case. Mr. Thompson has informed me and I know enough about the case to realize this is so, there was a public administrative agency involved. Now, a record was given to a member of that agency. Now I think the only question is and I would like to read the case. Mr. Thompson: I am having it brought down to you right away. Mr. Lloyd: Fine, to see whether or not this record was given in the same fashion that this document apparently was given to some of this Commission. If in fact th(: facts are the same, then the Courts ruling would be to determine that it is a public record. If in fact the manner of giving the public record or the manner of acting upon it was different in here, then there still remains the question of whether or not this is a public record and my opinion will not change. Mayor Ferre: In the meantime, I would respectfully like to get the first two portions of this over with so that we only have one thing left. Mr. Plummer: The first is already over with. Mr. Sachs of that. has a copy Mayor Ferre: Well I want to make it because Mr. Sachs is not the only man involved in this. Mr. Plummer: You are not going to come back after that man has a document and ask me whether I agree or disagree, are you? Mayor Ferre: No, what I am saying is, Mr. Plummer is that Mr. Sachs is not the only man that is entitled to a copy of that list. I think there are others here who are also going to want that list. Mr. Lloyd: The Commission does not have to make a ruling on this. I have written an opinion to Mr. John Passer stating that that is a public record. They can get that upon demand. The Commission doesn't have to make any ruling on the list. Unless you wish to. Mayor Ferre: I think it's important enough to do so and I would respectfully like to ask for a motion of this Commission saying that we go on record that the cover memorandum and the names and addresses - well let's do it one at a time. The cover memorandum. I don't think anybody has any objection so lets go on record on that. Mr. Plummer: The cover memorandum Mr. Mayor, is that 3-page document that is immediately preceding the confidential report. Mayor Ferre: Put it in the motion. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Eades, may I see a copy of that just to refresh my memory. Mr. Lloyd does this do any harm if I refresh my memory? Mr. Lloyd: No Sir. Of course, as soon as you pass it around, that makes that part of it a public record. Mayor Ferre: We have already done that. We have already passed it around (remainder unintelligible - Mr. Lloyd: But now you see we are in an open Commission Meeting. 10 MAY 2 -1974 A Kr. Plununert 4 gages Oh the Pire DepartmentyS pages as it relates to Police. Mr Mayori I ant satisfied Sir. Mayor Perre: Any other questions? Does anybody want to make a motion? Mrs. Gordon: Aren't we just playing little games? This is not what they want. Is this what you want Mr. Thompson? Mayor Ferre: Its part of it. Mrs. Gordon: Okay, I'll move it. Mayor Ferre: Is there a second? Mrs. Gordon: I am hading in my hands an inter -office memorandum titled "Disability Retirement" and the second one is titled "Disability Retirement of Fire Officers" The first one is a 5-page summary. Mayor Ferre: There is a motion, is there a second? Rev. Gibson: Second. MOTION NO, 74-348 A MOTION GOING ON RECORD THAT THE SUMMARY DOCUMENTS SUBM;LTTED TO THE CITY IN CONNECTION WITH THE SURVEY CONDUCTED BY RETAIL CREDIT CORPORATION CONCERNING THE CITY OF MIAMI EMPLOYEES WHO ARE RETIRED ON DIS- ABILITY PENSIONS BE RELEASED TO THE PRESS Upon being seconded by Reverend Gibson, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES; Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Mrs. Gordon, Reverend Gibson and Mayor Ferre. NOES: None Mayor Ferre: The 2nd point is the making available to the public the names, addresses of both residences and where they work if that information is available, of all of the people involved in this report. Mr. Plummer: I believe you have a motion on the floor made by Commissioner Reboso, if I am not mistaken. A motion simply stating this not be released until the Attorney General's ruling has been given. Mayor Ferre: Oh well, then we shouldn't have voted on the other one. Nobody seconded that motion. You want to make a motion now that nothing - Mrs. Gordon: There is a motion on the floor which if we are going to remove this motion should bring forth another motion Mayor Ferre: We already voted on the first motion. The point was that Mr. Reboso made a statement that we shouldn't do anything until the Attorney General gives us a ruling. Mrs. Gordon: Even this that we have just voted on? Mayor Ferre: Oh the confidential report? Okay. That's the motion he is trying to make now. Is there a second to that motion? There is a second. Mrs. Gordon: Wait a moment now. Lets fully understand what we are Saying. We are waiting for the Attorney General to reaffirm his position that 1 ]� MAY 2 -1974 its a public document and now we are talking about the final portion of the report which is the full report. Statistical isn't the point. It's names, addresses and places of employment etc. etc. etc. Is that what we are talking about? Mayor Ferre: That's right. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Reboso? And your - Okay, let the record reflect what we are talking about. WHat you want is only a confirmation from the Attorney General that we can in fact, legally give this material out.right? Mr. Reboso: Right. Mayor Ferre: All right now, just so there are no surprises here, I want before we get to vote, I want to make my position very clear. I am going to vote against this. The reason is that I think that I see nothing wrong in giving to the public, the names, the addresses of the individuals involved because they in effect already have that. The only thing they don't have is the working addresses and phone numbers and I see nothing wrong with giving that information out personally. I just wanted to state my position. Mr. Plummer: Don't play games with semantics now. Let's don't play games with semantics now because obviously you - Mayor Ferre: I am quite serious about it. Mr. Plummer: There is no document existing that shows only the places of present employment of these individuals. Mayor Ferre: No I realize that but - Mr. Plummer: Are you stating that you are in favor of creating another document outlining if available, the addresses of employment? Mayor Ferre: Right. Mr. Plummer: Oh- big difference. bid difference. Sure I'll vote for that because it doesn't mean anything. Mayor Ferre: Here is what it means. It gives the press and the media the availabil'.ty of names and addresses for them to do their work. Now if they want to go out and interview 20 of these people and if those people want to interview confidential information, that is their problem. Mrs. Gordon: But Mr. Mayor, aren't you saying - Mr. Plummer: You have already given them the home address Mr. Mayor. Mrs. Gordon: That we cannot - you said, that the Attorney General said that we cannot withhold that information because once we have received this , it's public? Then, how can we now say? Mayor Ferre: That is exactly the point. I agree with you. That is exactly what I am saying Rose. Mrs. Gordon: I am saying if it's public, we must. I mean, I just want to understand because I - Mayor Ferre: What do you need to understand Rose? Mrs. Gordon: I need to understand how to and differentiate and say that even though we must, we won't or we'll take a part of it. How can .we do that? Tell me and then maybe I will want to do the same thing but I don't know how. Mayor Ferre: I don't know what you are talking about but my position is 'very clear. Mr. Reboso: We will accept the ruling of the Attorney General. 12 MAY 2.1974 gio Mrs. Gordon: That's what Mr. Reboso said. We accept his ruling and if he says - Mr. Reboso: We can release confidential information - Mrs. Gordon: But the Mayor said, if he says that, he is not going to go with that and I respect his opinion and I want to know why he thinks that way. Mayor Ferre: Let me put it another way. If, if the motion passes wherein we would release the names and the addresses of these :individuals, then the motion is made on the 3rd portion you outlined and make that dependent on the Attorney General's ruling, I would vote frith that - But in my opinion, I don't think that I can vote with that motion until another motion has been cleared through this Commission of the names and addresses including business addresses, if available are given to the public. Mrs. Gordon: You mean the kind of report Mr. Sachs is holding now? Mayor Ferre: No because that isn't complete. And Mr. Sachs is not the only person involved in this. Mrs. Gordon: I know but we have to refer to something that somebody has. Mayor Ferre: That document is not a complete document because that document only has the names and the home addresses and I am saying that I see nothing wrong with giving out the names, the home addresses and any other addresses that those people may have submitted. Now beyond that, my conclusion is absolutely not until the Attorney General rules. Mrs. Gordon: Well that's what Mr. Reboso said. That's his motion. Mayor Ferre: And Mrs. Rose Gordon, I am agreeing with everything that is being said. I am only making clear that unless the other one is voted upon first, then I have to vote no on it. I am just explaining why,. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Reboso, do you have a second to your motion? Mayor Ferre: Yes. He made the motion. Father Gibson seconded it. Mrs. Gordon: For the sake of procedure would you have any objection to withdrawing your motion so we may vote on the motion that the Mayor would like to have voted on first? Mr. Reboso: No I will - Mayor Ferre: Do you withdraw your motion? Mrs. Gordon: Will you move it Mr. Mayor, the way you would like it moved? Mayor Ferre: I will pass the chair to the Vice Mayor and I will make the motion that this Commission go on record making public the names and addresses, more than one, that are available in the public document under discussion. Does that cover it? And by addresses, I mean whatever addresses are available, home or office or otherwise. Mr. Plummer: Is there a second to that motion? Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Sachs, is that what you have already got? May I see what you have because all we do is refer to what you have. We don't know what you have, at least I don't. Mayor Ferre: A list of names with home addresses -whatever other addresses are on that document. Mrs. Gordon: Oh additional addresses. is MAY 2.1974 Mayor Ferre: Yes for example like in my case. It would be 1643 Brickell and 100 Biscayne Boulevard. Whatever is available, man or woman, thats all, so that they are available to the public. That is my only interest, period. Mrs. Gordon: Second your motion. Mr. Plummer: Discussion. I want it clarified so there will be no clamoring by the press as to who will be delegated to make this information available. What you are talking about Mr. Mayor is that a lot of documents have got to be sifted through to derive this information. As long as Mr. Sachs understands that its probably going to be at least Monday before he gets it. Mayor Ferre: Well you know, with due diligence, okay? That means starting early in the morning and whenever its available. You can't ask for anything more than diligence. Vice Mayor Reboso: Okay, any further discussion? Please call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Mayor Ferre who urged its adoption: MOTION NO. 74-349 A MOTION GOING ON RECORD THAT THE HOME ADDRESSES AND BUSINESS ADDRESSES, IF ANY, OF FORMER CITY EMPLOYEES RETIRED ON DISABILITY PENSIONS, AS MAY BE SHOWN IN THE REPORT SUBMITTED TO THE CITY IN CONNECTION WITH THE SURVEY CONDUCTED BY RETAIL CREDIT CORPORATION BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PRESS WITH ALL DUE DILIGENCE Upon being seconded by Mrs. Gordon, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Mrs. Gordon, Reverend Gibson and Mayor Ferre. NOES: None Mayor Ferre: Now I will take the chair back. Do you want to make your motion? Mrs. Gordon: Repeat your motion for the record Mr. Reboso. Mr. Reboso: That we request an opinion from the Attorney General, Bob Sheven, that its okay to release the rest of the information in this document. Mayor Ferre: The full document, in other words. Mr. Reboso: Right. The remaining portions. Mrs. Gordon: WHat you are saying is that you want the Attorney General's confirmation in writing, is that what you said, permitting or stating that this is public information that should be released to the press, is that what your motion is? Mr. Reboso: Right and stating also that this is a confidential information. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Reboso. May I go one step further because I think that I sense an honest concern by this Commission, that you indicate in your motion that this Commission delegate if I am honored or priveleged to do such either with Lt. Burns or Sgt. Tracy to take this document to Bob Shevin and get his written opinion and bring it back to this Commission. In other words, I want him to know what he is ruling on. Now would there be any question JOn? Thats all I am trying to get at. 14 MAY 2- 1974 Is the man going to be, well is this Or what's included? If we could take for the few dollars to go and take the document with you come back with the document and then included? Or is that included? involved and delegate someone asking the legal question and get an answer from Shevin. Mrs. Gordon: I think that is a very reasonable approach. Mr. Plummer: I am just asking. Mrs. Gordon: Okay, we can send somebody up tomorrow. Mr. Plummer: Well wait a minute, okay, Mr. Weston is making a good point. Mr. Lloyd: Well I thought I was to take the document. Mr. Plummer: I was talking about one of the other 2 gentlemen. Mr. Lloyd: I am sorry, I misunderstood. Mayor Ferre: J.L., it's got to be somebody in the legal department Mr. Lloyd: I thought it was going to be one of us. Mrs. Gordon: It should be someone from the law department. Mr. Lloyd: Definitely I could go Monday because I have to be there tuesday. Mayor Ferre: It's got to be tomorrow and if you can't go, then send somebody else. You can do the rest of it by phone Jack. Mr. Plummer: Well the opinion can be written and mailed back. Mayor Ferre: Not mailed back, he is going to give it to you in h hour for crying out loud; I will guarantee that the Attorney General Office will gove you an opinion within a few short hours and you can come back on a plane the same day. Mrs. Gordon: I believe he will and I think you ought to carry a cover with it, the one signed by . Mr. Reese from the Retail Credit Company. I think you ought to attach that to it so you have the whole thing. Mayor Ferre: I will personally get hold of the Attorney General tomorrow morning and he will be waiting or somebody there responsible will be waiting to give you a written opinion. Mr. Lloyd: Well if necessary, I could dispatch somebody from my office even tomorrow if we can get a plane reservation. Mayor Ferre: That is exactly what I am saying. Mr. Plummer: And it should be made very clear that this matter is presently under investigation. Mayor Ferre: Yes that's true but as our attorney just told us in his opinion it doesn't make- It doesn't seem logical to me but according to our attorney, that doesn't make any difference. Mr. Lloyd: We will check it out with Mr. Shevin to make sure I am right on that. Mayor Ferre: You have a task before you. Now we have a motion and I think the intent of the motion is very clear and exactly how it functions is clear. Any further discussion? Call the roll please. The following motion was introduced by Mr. Reboso who moved its adoption: 15 MAY 2- 1974 MOTION NO. 74-350 A MOTION REQUESTING A WRITTEN OPINION FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA AS TO THE CITY'S RIGHT TO RELEASE TO THE PUBLIC, THE REMAINING PORTIONS OF THE CONFIDENTIAL REPORT SUBMITTED BY RETAIL CREDIT CORPORATION CONCERNING CITY OF MIAMI EMPLOYEES WHO ARE RETIRED ON DIS- ABILITY PENSIONS, AND THAT A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE CITY ATTORNEYS OFFICE BE AUTHORIZED TO MEET IMMEDIATELY WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND TO SUBMIT SAID DOCUMENT TO HIM FOR PRIVATE SCRUITINY AND TO REMIND HIM THAT THE DISABILITY RETIREMENT ACTIVITIES OF THE CITY ARE PRESENTLY UNDER INVES- TIGATION BY A COMMITTEE OF THE CITY COMMISSION Upon being seconded by Reverend Gibson, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Mrs. Gordon, Reverend Gibson and Mayor Ferre. NOES: None Mayor Ferre: Is there anything else to come before this Commission? Mr. Lloyd: Yes, one other helpful thing from - so that I could give an intelligent summation to the Attorney General, is to determine factually, exactly the disposition of this document to the Commission. Was it ever presented formally to any Commissioner? What Commissioner has it and•how he or she got it. Mayor Ferre: I don't know about anybody else but I received a copy directly from Paul Andrews personally. Mrs. Gordon: One was delivered to my home. Mayor Ferre: I also want to state that I have returned it to him. Mr. Lloyd: You just got it through the mail or hand delivered or something? Mayor Ferre: Right. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, as the Chairman of this committee that is investigating this matter, that we not be held to 30 days until a determination after this is made because I really don't know where to proceed. I have already spent some 7 hours looking into this matter and I will want directions which way to go. Mrs. Gordon: I think the work you are doing on your committee is very important and I don't think that it is predicated on anything else. The work you are doing is a summary, an analysis of whats happening and has to be done. Mayor Ferre: I completely agree. I dont see that this has anything to do with the work that you and your committee are doing . You keep on doing your work and make your report. Anything else? Thank you very much. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT: 6:23 O'Clock P.M. ATTEST: H. D. SOUTHERN CITY CLERK 16 MAURICE A. FERRE MAYOR • cif IttEX • Ram rei lmi ACT a I. !NANCE OR SOUrTiON NO. • 1 2 3 SURVEY CONDUCTED BY RETAIL CREDIT CORPORATION -CITY OF MIAMI EMPLOYEES RETIRED ON DISABILITY PENSIONS HOME AND BUSINESS ADDRESSES OF FORMER ' CITY EMPLOYEES RETIRED ON DISABILITY PENSIONS BE AVAILABLE TO THE PRESS WRITTEN OPINION FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA CONCERNING DISABILITY RETIREMENT • • r M-74-348 M-74-349 M-74-350