Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1973-03-08 MinutesCITY MIAMI COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON MARCH 8, 1973 PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CITY HALL INDEX MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA MARCH 8, 1973 ITEM NUMBER ORDINANCE AND OR RESOLUTIQIi NUMBERS 1, WAIVING OF MINUTES OF THE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING 2, PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES OF APPRECIATIONS, PLAQUES 3, YOUTH ;IN GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE REPORT 4. OBJECTIONS TO CONFIRMING ORDERING RESOLUTION VIRGINIA GROVE HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT H-4358 5, OBJECTIONS TO CONFIRMING ORDERING RESOLUTION LE JEUNE GARDENS HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT H-4 3 6, VARIANCE- GIFFORD & HIGHLEYMAN'S SUB, 7, AMUSEMENT RIDES ETC. -SHELL CITY SITE -AMENDING RES. 8. VARIANCE - LOT 11, BLOCK 3 - ORANGE PARK 9, PROPOSED CAR WASH AND GAS STATION -SHELL OIL CO, 10, ESTABLISH ZONED STREET-MICANOPY AVENUE 11. NIGHT CLUB LICENSE- LICENSE APPEAL PROCEDURE 12, NIGHT CLUBS - SUBMISSION OF QUARTERLY REPORTS 13, OFF-STREET PARKING FACILITIES- CONTRACTING LOAN 14, EXCISE TAXES- AMENDING CHAPTER 55 OF CODE 15, ACCEPT COMPLETED WORK- CITY HALL SANITARY SEWER MODIFICATIONS 73-144 73-145 73-146 73-147 73-148 ORD.NO, 8145 ORD,No, 8146 ORD,NO, 8147 ORD,No, 8148 ORD,No, 8149 16, ACCEPT COMPLETED WORK- N.E.FIRST AVENUE STORM SEWER PROJECT 17, ACCEPT COMPLETED WORK- MIAMARINA LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT 18, PLAT ACCEPTANCE - R. E. LEE SCHOOL SITE 19, PLAT ACCEPTANCE - TOLEDO VILLAS 20, CARNIVAL PERMIT - ST. MAR'%S CATHEDRAL SCHOOL 73-149 73-150 73-151 73-152 73-153 73-154 001 • 21, BID AWARD - CENTRAL CONCRETE OF MEDLEY FOR REDI-MIXED CONCRETE 22, BID AWARD - NORTHERN DRAINAGE PROJECT E-28 23, RECEIVE BIDS FOR SALE OF $28,350,000 PUBLIC PARK AND RECREATIONAL BONDS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI 24, BID AWARD - $28,350,000 PUBLIC PARK AND RECREATIONAL BONDS 25, CONDITIONAL USE - MOBILE TRAILER FOR FRANKLIN SAVINGS BUILDING 26, MIAMI FASHION DISTRICT 27, BLACK LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE 28, FLAGLER STREET TREE PLANTING PROGRAM DESIGNATION OF FLAGLER STREET AND MIAMI AVENUE INTERSECTION SEE 29, COCONUT GROVE INCINERATOR- USE AS PUBLIC PARK 30, MIAMI BAR OWNERS ASSOCIATION REQUEST FOR EXT�N�1ON OF HOURS OF SAID OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES BEYOND /:UU SUNDAYS 31, CERTIFICATES OF APPRECIATION 32, CHANGE DATE OF FIRST COMMISSION MEETING-APRIL 1973 33, REMOVAL OF VESSELS FROM DINNER KEY MARINA AREA EXTENDING EFFECTIVE DATE 34, GARBAGE COLLECTION NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS PRELIMINARY REPORT BY THE CITY MANAGER 35, HIGHWAY DESIGN WORK- PRIVATE CONSULTING FIRMS 36, CONTRACT PLANS FOR PARKS BOND PROGRAM -AUTHORIZE PROPOSALS 37, REGULATION OF STATE OWNED LANDS BENEATH NAVIGABLE WATERS 38, AGREEMENT FOR LANDSCAPE DESIGN- BICENTENNIAL PARK 39, SOCCER EVENTS AT THE ORANGE BOWL STADIUM 40, PAY PLAN STUDY- YARGER AND ASSOCIATES 41, INTERAMA 42, EXTEND LEASE 2 YEARS- DINNER KEY AUDITORIUM 43, MIAMI CEREBRAL PALSY TELETHON 73-155 73-156 73-157 73-158 73-159 73-160 73-164 73-165 73-166 73-167 NMEg158D, 73-168 73-169 73-170 73-171 73-172 73-173 ORD,No,8151 73-174 73-175 73-176 73-177 73-178 73-179 • 002 .€1 aifriae41, 003 • MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA On the 8th day of March, 1973, the City Commission of Miami, Florida met at its regular meeting place at City Hall in said City in regular session. The meeting was called to order at 9:22 O'Clock A.M. by Vice Mayor Rose Gordon with the following members of the Commission present: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Reverend Gibson and Vice Mayor Gordon. ABSENT: Mayor Kennedy. An invocation was delivered by Reverend Gibson who then led those present in a pledge of allegiance to the flag. 1, WAIVING OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING The following motion was introduced by Reverend Gibson who moved its adoption: A MOTION TO WAIVE TIIE READING OF THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS CITY COMMISSION MEETING Upon being seconded by Mr. Reboso, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Reverend Gibson and Mrs. Gordon. NOES: None 2, PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES OF APPRECIATION AND PROCLAMATIONS (a) A torch of Independence commemorating "Israel 25" was presented to the Commission (b) A certificate of appreciation was presented to Mrs. Fritz Gordon for her efforts to "Women In Distriss" (c) Certificate of Appreciation to Mr. John Engel for his presentation to the Bond Counsel in recent sale of Parks and Recreational facilities bonds (d) Proclaimed the week of April 2, 1973 as "World Plan Week" (e) Proclaimed week March 11 thru March 18, 1973 as DEMOLAY WEEK (f) A plaque was presented to ERNEST C. GEIGER on the occasion of his retirement from the City of Miami after 23 years (g) A proclamation in observance of "SAVE YOUR V_SION WEEK" 3, YOUTH IN GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE REPORT Vice Mayor announced the presence of Mr. Stewart Rado representing the Youth in Government Committee to explain progress on a resolution previously passed by the Commission suggesting young people's par- ticipation in government affairs. Mr. Rado: Vice Mayor, members of the Commission and Guests: The City of Miami Youth in Government Seminar is basically going to be a 3-day program which will involve the youth of the three major high schools in the City of Miami. Jackson, Edison and Miami High as well as those students who are members of private schools that the City of Miami has within its jurisdiction. The program will consist of a number of parts. Probably the most important part will be the educational part in having 60 students from these schools sit in during the morning session - target date May loth of the City Commission. 004 MARCH 8, 1973 Wednesday there will be an indoctrination program, a kind of an orientation where we hope to have Vice Mayor Gordon, Mayor Kennedy and representatives from a number of departs, hopefully Police, Parks and Recreation, Public Works and the City Manager's Office to explain the duties and responsibilities of their office to these students. These students will be seniors in high school about the same time they are learning about city government, they will be participating in this program. I call it a pilot project for the simple reason that should this program prove to be a success and there is no reason why it shouldn't. We are going to try and get a program going like this in all the 27 mun- icipalities of Lade County as well as similar programs throughout the State of Florida. 1 think that pretty well capsules it. We have a target date. We have cooperation from the Greater Miami Jaycees. We have cooperation from the City of Miami Youth Advisory Board; Ken Friedman is president of the Greater Miami Jaycees and also the head of the Miami Youth Advisory Board and he will be working on this program with all the people concerned . . If any of the Commissioners might have any questions regarding the program, I will be very happy to answer them. Mrs. Gordon: Stewart, I am very proud of the work you are doing and I commend you for it because this was an idea we had but without your assistance, and Ken Friedman and the other men who are working with you, it would have gone by the wayside. I know the amount of work that is going into organizing this effort but I know the amount of good that is going to come out of it will be countless and we will not be able to determine the amount of good, certainly not in one year and again I commend you for your efforts. Mr. Rado: Its a pleasure to serve the City of Miami with this proejct and within a 2 week period there will he a final proposal to you for your consideration. 4, OBJECTIONS TO CONFIRMIVG ORDERING RESOLUTION N0, 73-9b FOR VIRGINIA GROVE HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT H-4358 Vice Mayor Gordon announced the Commission was now ready to consider the hearing of objections to confirmation of the imp- rovement as described above and said she understood a petition had been circulated and signed by those persons in opposition. Mr. Vince Grimm, Dept. of Public Works: It is not the policy of Public Works to present streets on which there are overwhelming objectors to and until this week, the department was not aware of the objections on Virginia and Oak Avenues. I listened to the spokesman for this group last night on television and this is the first time that I had heard of these objections. Because of the overwhelming objections, the department of Public Works recommends that Virginia Street north of Oak be deleted and that Oak Avenue west of Virginia be deleted and the remainder of Florida and Rice, stay in. Mrs. Gordon: Obviously this is what the people are here to object to. Was there anything else the public wanted to tell us that Mr. Grimm has not covered? Mr. Plummer: What she is asking is. The things that have been deleted, are there still any objections? Bearing none, that means, everybody is in accord for the remainder. Rev. Gaultner: I am president of the homeowners association represented here. Mrs. Bettner: My name is Elizabeth Bettener, 3180 Florida Avenue and I believe there is one objector who is living south of Oak Avenue on Virginia Street. I am speaking in behalf of Mrs. Laura Kemp, 3327 Virginia Street. She owns the property there and she is a widow. She has just been paying for the sewers. If the street part comes in there again, 005 MARCH 8, 1973 I understand its $6.70 again for footage, its going to be kind of hard for these people to come into that. Mr. Hanson also lives on Virginia there and I don't think these people know. Any poss- ible chance of having that deleted down to Florida Avenue on that part of Virginia? Mr. Grimm: I would not recommend that Mrs. Gordon. That part of Virginia Street is all zonBd C-2 south of Oak Avenue. The con- dition of the street is that it has unpaved site parkways and as you know there is a lot of parking in that area. There is traffic congestion and the street cross section we are proposing is the same that we developed on the other part of Mary Street & Tigertail. Mrs. Bettner: Would it be possible Mrs. Gordon to have these people who are residing there to talk to the man from the city here because I think this is new to them and has come up rather quickly. Mrs. Gordon: Are they here? Mrs. Bettner: Mr. Hanson and Mrs. Kemp are the homeowners still in that area there. Mrs. Gordon: Do you want a clarification of what is being proposed and the reasons for it being proposed on that particular street? Mr. Hanson: Yes, in the last 12 years, I have put 1300 dollars in that street and now they have just resurfaced it and now its to be torn up again. I don't think its fair. We can't even hook up our toilets to the sewer, we're not able and if you go through with this thing, it will just be to steal our homes from us, so - I am J. E. Hanson, 3344 Virginia. There is only one hole in Virginia Street and thats right in front of my house. The City of Miami dug that hole when they put those sewers in there. They have dumped two loads of white rock in that and it blew right into my house. They could have filled that hole up 2=3 times. I called Public Works and asked them to fill that hole up and they said they would fill it when I pay for it. I will pay for it when you steal it. he said we don't steal nothing and he said, how did you get Coconut Grove? That's the kind of service we're getting. A couple of loads of asphalt in there would cure all of that. We don't need all of that, we got nobody go park there and to hook up my sewer, they want $600.00 for it and I already owe for the sewer and the street. If the city is trying to steal my home, they are right on to it. I just don't believe the City of Miami would steal my home from me, thank you. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Grimm, do you think we could defer this item instead of taking action on it today since there still seems to be objections in the community even though it is not confined to the area that you have deleted apparently. Mr. Grimm: Defer it just on that portion of Virginia Street between Grand and Oak, is that what you mean? Mrs. Gordon: The portion that is still raising objections, I would think and which is the remainder of the project apparently. The lady that is at the microphone, do you want to say something? Mrs. Grable: Hello, I am Mary Grable and I have the SandPiper on Florida Avenue and I want to object too. You haven't mentioned Florida but it would take my front parking lot if you do this and I think my little street will be destroyed, the trees will go down that are by the street. The whole feeling of what we are trying to do is destroyed when you go widening it. What I would like to see fixed is that big lake between Rice and Florida and I don't think you have to do all this other stuff. We have a lake everytime it rains there. Mr. Grimm: We intend to fix that. 06 MARCH Mr. Plummer: May I make a motion that we defer this item so that the Public Works Department can get with the remaining people, come back on the 22nd and then we can hear this item. I think there is enough confusion here today that should be straightened out before we the Commission and these people have their objections and maybe the objections will be eliminated if the Public Works Department would meet with them, we can hear this on the 22nd and do it in the proper fashion. Mrs. Bettner: Mr. Plummer, wouldn't it be more simple. Now we have this interim zoning thing that has gone into the Coconut Grove area there. Now they are making a comprehensive plan of the land use in Cocnnut Grove. Why can't we want until that comes up? Mr. Plummer: I don't see the two correalating together. Mrs. Bettener: Oh definitely because it says the letter that was written to the people that they would include higher density and higher traffic in the grove. Mr. Plummer: That has nothing to do with improvements Mrs. Bettner. Improvements are one thing. Mrs. Bettner: This is going to widen a street and you also say in your letter to these people, the increased residential density would be with the result of increase in local traffic circulation makes it desirable for the city to improve additional streets in this area. I know Coconut Grove cannot handle another vehicle coming through there. I live on Florida Avenue and they come accross Oak Avenue in back of me, turn on Mc Donald and exit almost into a dead end street onto Grand. Mr. Plummer: Mrs. Bettner, this is one of the things that can be talked over when Public Work!, meets with you and if your objections are still that, the Commission will take that into consideration on the 22nd. Mrs. Bettner: Well what about this interim zoning thing? Mr. Plummer: Its in effect. Mrs. Bettner: Well why can't this other thing hold up until we get all this done? I think thats logical. Mrs. Gordon: We are not going to take any action today, obviously. Mrs. Bettner: Rose, these people are older. Its hard for these people to get out, that's the reason I am speaking for them, its a hardship. Mrs. Gordon: I would recommend that Rev. Gaultner and yourself and whoever else as spokesmen for the community get together with our Public Works Department and see how it can be worked out. Father Gibson has seconded this motion. Mr. Plummer: It will be deferred to March 22nd, Item #1 after the Public Works has met with these people. Mrs. Gordon: Then we can make a decision. Mr. Reese: Is this a deferment of the public hearing? Mr. Plummer: Correct. Mr. Reese: This was an advertised public hearing. Mrs. Gordon: This is a deferment of this public hearing until the 22nd and in the interim period, the public is invited to consult withour Public Works Department for further information. Mr. Plummer: Is your concern Mr. Reese about re -publishing this? Mr. Reese: Thats right. 0 7- MARCII 8, 1973 Mr. Plummer: I think it should be republished for the meeting of the 22nd. Do you want that included in the motion, I will so do it. Mr. Southern: Mr. Plummer, there would be some question whether or not we can get it published in time because it has to be published 10 days before the hearing date. Mr. Plummer: If you got a problem, say so. Mr. Southern: the 22nd. Mr. Plummer: Why don't we make it then on the 12th of April then you definitely would have time and more than adequate time and these people wouldn't mind a little more delay? Rev. Gaultner: Does this guarantee us that no work begins until the next hearing? Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Plummer, will you make your motion to the first meeting in April because there may be a request this afternoon for a change of date on the first meeting in April conflicting with a convention for Planning. Mr. Plummer: First meeting in April. Mr. Reese: In order to satisfy the people, I think its fair to point out that we can't do any work there on this project until this Commission orders it and your are not ordering it so I think the question is answered. There is a problem if we are going to make it on 5, P-15tWt4GAR�tPdSN RAE SRliTa FOR Vice Mayor Gordon announced the Commission was now ready to consider objections to confirmation of ordering resolution as described above. No objectors appeared. The following resolution was introduced by Mr. Plummer who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO.'73-144 A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ORDERING RESOLUTION NO. 73-97 SAID RESOLUTION BEING AN AMENDMENT TO ORDERING RESOLUTION NO. 43179 ENTITLED " A RES- OLUTION ORDERING LE JEUNE GARDENS HIGHWAY IMP- ROVEMENT H-4353; DESIGNATING PROPERTY AGAINST WHICH SPECIAL ASSESSMENT SHALL BE MADE FOR A PORTION OF THE COST TI'EREOF AS LE JEUNE GARDENS HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT H-4353; AND ALLOC- ATING THE SUM OF $1,000.00 TO COVER THE PRELIM- INARY COSTS"; INCREASING THE SCOPE AND AMOUNT OF THE CONTRACT WITH MARKS BROTHERS COMPANY FOR LE JEUNE GARDENS HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT H-4353; AND ALLOCATING AN ADDITIONAL SUM OF $53,483.00 FROM THE HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND ACCOUNT (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and 1 on file in the City Clerks Office) MARCH 8, 1973 nR Upon being seconded by Reverend Gibson, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Gibson, Reboso, Mrs. Gordon NOES: None 6, VARIANCE- GIFFORD AND HIGHLEYMAN'S SUB Mr. Acton: If you recall during the last public hearing on this item, it was deferred to give the Planning Department opportunity to go back and confer with the architect and the developer to come up with a plan that would better meet the objectives as outlined by the Urban Development Review Board and as established by the Planning Department Brickell Area Study. This has been done and I believe additional improvements had been made to the overall ground level site plan and I would recommend that based on our conversations, that the Commission grant a variance of 2.297 with the following conditions: #1. Dwelling'units be limited to 161 #2. Site plan approval by the Planning Department since the plan still does not incorporate overall landscaping plan. Perhaps Mr. Iloilo would like to speak to the additional effort on the part of his architect and himself. Mr. Hollo has indicated that he would like to put in a fountain for instance at the foot of 15th Road. along the bay for the benefit of individuals travel- ing along 15th Road or those that are on the Bay as well as the residents in the project itself. Mr. Plummer: You are now recommending this project subject to the two conditions you outlined. Mr. Acton: Yes. Mr. Tibor Rollo: Madam Mayor and Honorable Commissioners. I would like to add to what Mr. Acton has said. We had some very fine meetings with the Planning Department and the Urban Review Board and consequently and subsequently, we have arrived to a project that I feel is much better than it was originally and I might say that I was very appreciative of those meetings. I am in complete conformity ;of Mr. Acton has said. I would just like to mention that as far as the fountain goes. If you see, there is an area on the plan which I can point to. Subject to approval of the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Board, we would like to put in a very fine, highly developed fountain coming out right from the bay which would be an asset visually for that entire area. We would be lighting it and maintaining it and paying for it. Mrs. Gordon: It should be very attractive. Then you are in accord with the things Mr. Acton has.said. Do we have amotion? Mr. Plummer: Madam Vice Mayor, it was my motion 30 days ago to defer this item so the Department and Mr. Hollo could get together. At that time, I thought we were left no choice and graciously Mr. Hollo consented to get with the Planning Department and I think that this is the fruits of the labor, something that is going to be beautiful and an asset to this city. I would like to compliment both the department and Mr. Hollo for a meeting of the minds and coming up with something that I think will compliment Brickell area. At this time, it gives me great pleasure to make a motion to approve. Mr. Reboso: Second the motion. RESOLUTION NO. 73-145 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM ORDINANCE NO. 6871, ARTICLE X-1, SECTION 5, TO PERMIT CON- STRUCTION OF 161 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING ON LOTS 12, 14, 15, AND 16 AND SE'LY 20' OF LOT 13, W SUBMERGED LANDS, GIFFORD AND HIGHLEYMAN'S SUB 09 MARCH 8, 1973 (3-38)- OTHERWISE KNOWN AS TENTATIVE PLAT #864- "HOLLOS FIRST ADDITION" - LOCATED AT 200 S. E. 15TH ROAD, WITH FLOOR AREA RATIO OF 2.297(2.0 PERMITTED) AS PER PLAN ON FILE IN PLANNING BOARD OFFICE, ZONED R-5A (HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE) DISTRICT SUBJECT TO SITE PLAN APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AS TO LANDSCAPING PLAN (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here aid on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Mr. Reboso, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Gibson, Reboso, Mrs. Gordon NOES: None Mrs. Gordon: Thank you for this kind of cooperation and for working these things out, we appreciate it. Mr. Hollo: It was a pleasure to cooperate. Mrs. Alexander: May I congratulate the Commission, the Department and Mr. Hollo and all concerned publically. 7, AMENDING RESOLUTION 73-138 FOR CARNIVAL PERMIT -SHELL'S CITY The following resolution was introduced by Reverend Gibson who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-146 A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 73-138 TO PERMIT CHANGE OF APPLICANT TO SPORTS DEVELOPMENT INC., A CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION; AUTHORIZING GAMES OF SKILL AND GAMES OF CHANCE TO BE CONDUCTED AT SAID EVENTS AND CHANGING THE DATES OF SAID EVENTS TO READ FROM MARCH 10 TO MARCH 17, 1973 (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Mr. Reboso, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Gibson, Plummer, Reboso, Mrs. Gordon - NOES: None Mr. Ferdy Wilson appeared and requested change of name from Larry Little's Gold Coast Summer Camp to Sports Development Inc., and explained that application for charter as a charitable org- anization had been made but not received prior to the submission of the original application and requested change, in dates and the addition of language to permit games of chance. The City Manager explained his original objections to the games of chance was based on past experience in that complaints had been received when such events were held there previously and further explained the permit confusion in that Metropolitan Dade County owned the Shell's City site and had given their per- mission and that the applicant had thought he also had the permission of the City of Miami. 10 MARCH 8, 1973 • • VARIANCE- LOT 11, BLOCK 3, ORANGE PARK The following resolution was introduced by Mr. Plummer who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-147 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM ORDINANCE NO. 6871, ARTICLE VII, SECTION 3 (2) TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF SINGLE FAMILY HOME, WITH SIDE SETBACKS (NORTH AND SOUTH) OF 5' (9' REQUIRED); ON THE S 38' OF LOT 11, BLOCK 3, ORANGE PARK, (1-109), BEING NORTH OF 73 N. W. 17TH COURT, ZONED R-3 (LOW DENSITY MULTIPLE) (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Reverend Gibson, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Gibson, Reboso, Mrs. Gordon and NOES: None Ranulfo Sosa, the applicant appeared and urged adoption of the resolution. 9, DETERMINATION OF PROPOSED COMBINED GAS STATION AND CAR WASH SHELL OIL COMPANY Mr. Simpson, Executive Secretary of the Planning Board: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, this is placed on the agenda at the request of the City Attorneys Office. Shell Oil Company sometime ago came in with a proposal, a combined gas station and car wash operation. The zoning ordinances of the City of Miami establishes a gas station as a C-2 Conditional Use and the operation of a car wash is first listed in the C-4 District. Members of the Planning Department and the Building Department reviewed this proposal which is located in a C-2 District. They came into my office for a conditional use application and the question came up as to the car wash. Members of the staff of the Building Department and the Planning Department reviewed this proposal and there was a difference of opinion. The one group indicated they felt it was a C-4 use, the other felt that it was a C-2 use providing they proceeded as a conditional use application. Our office because of this difference of opinion requested the law department to review the ordinance and the proposal as submitted for a specific location and the Law Department came back and felt this was a matter of interpretation that should be presented to the City Commission. Really what you are doing is that they are asking for you to make a determination that this particular operation that they are going to describe is a C-2 use according to the ordinance. Mr. Rothstein: For clarification purposes. This is not put on the agenda at our request. I just wrote back that there was no way that I could give a legal interpretation since it appeared to be a questio of fact and I said this would have to be determined either by the Commission first or the Board first and then act on their recommend- ation. I would like to point out that the Zoning Code specifically says "Car Washes" You must be in C-4 as Mr. Simpson said. MARCH 8, 1973 A gasoline station may be in C-2 and may have accessory uses but the nature of this as it came up from the department was such that they felt there was an extreme use of car wash in the sit- uation, that they didn't know which it was, so in effect what you will be doing is not just acting on this particular item because what you do today will be precedent. It may be you may want to consider this in another manner which would be an amendment to the zoning ordinance by saying, the zoning ordinance can be amended and thereby having other public hearings on a recommendation to you to show that car washes can be in C-2 or a car wash like this can be in C• 2 or only a car wash must be in C-4 or you can make the factual determination today as a precedent for the adminis- tration to follow. There are several ways to handle it. Mrs. Gordon: A lot depends on the presentation or what kind of development this is going to be before we would make any deter- mations. Mr. Rice: 1 am Jack Rice and myself and C. Jones represent Shell Oil Company in this matter. First of all, we don't want car washes in C-2 areas and that's not our purpose in being here. We don't want the zoning changed, we don't want a new hearing. All we want to do is go on the facts in our particular case. You can put a car wash in a C-2 zone if its incidental to a service station use. This under the letter that I wrote to the Planning Board says absolutely this has got to be an incidental use because you can't go in this place to get a car wash, you have to buy gasoline. This is an unusual gas station. This is an advertising gas station that is going to be constructed by Shell and they have been con- structed in the State of Florida and this is the 2nd one I have been involved in. One is in Lauderhill Lakes and they have one on Le Jeune Road about 36th Street. If you come into this gas station, its not a service station per se because the only thing you can do is buy gas. there is no service and they don't change tires or oil and they have no service racks, no grease, the.onl) thing you do is pull up there and buy gas. If you want to have a carwash, you may have it. If you don't want to have a carwash, you go on your particular way. theres no way you can go in there and operate specifically as a car wash perse. There are no personnel operating the car wash. You don't go in there and have your car washed and wiped off and polished. Theres no wiping or polishing, its an automatic procedure with exception of a man to push a button to run the car wash, if you want one. As far as precedent setting, there is already one in the same type of zone that has been erected in the City of Miami at 67th Avenue and West Flagler Street with C-1 or C-2 which is identical to our situation and just opened within a matter of months that I can see in looking at that station and looking at this one, there is a vast deal of difference because first of all, that is a great service station with an accessory car wash but it doesn't have the beautification of this particular station. Secondly let me say, we are not here to argue the merits of a gas station or service station. What we have to do is go back to the Planning and Zoning Board and our only purpose here today is to find out if we can go and make an application and if we do that, we have to come back here again and then you can set the terms and conditions that you want because it is a conditional use and you have a great deal of latitude and control in this operation and you can see to it that we meet the standards that we say we will meet. I have 2 gentlemen here from Shell Oil Co and I would like for them to explain the setup. Mrs. Gordon: Where was this proposed to be constructed? Mr. Rice: Biscayne Boulevard at the North City Limits, part of it is in 61 Portel. There are no Miami residents in the area. Shell Representative: Mrs. Gordon, its at 87th and Biscayne, next to the Big Daddy's where just recently a Lindsley Lumber is going to be constructed with parking on the sides of it. 12 MARCH 8, 1973 Mrs. Gordon: These pictures you are showing us, are these similar to what you are planning? Shell Representative: Yes, thats the one at Le Jeune Road at 36th Street behind the Holiday Inn there. Accross from the airport. Mrs. Gordon: Where is the car wash facility? Shell Representative: Thats is there, its completely enclosed building. Mrs. Gordon: In other words, these bays are car wash building and they can go in and out buy gas, and not get the car washed but they the car washed unless they buy gas. At this time, the Shell Oil representatives using an architects rendering of such an station, outlined to the members of the Commission the flow of traffic. Mrs. Gordon: This is incidental. They can't come in here and get a car wash unless they buy gas so primarily its a gas station and secondarily its going to wash cars and its housed in a very modern fashion apparently and the wholething is subject to con ditional use which means the neighbors can come in and state their position on it. As far as I personally am concerned, I see no reason for having to amend the ordinance or anything else. Mr. Rothstein: This was my inclination but since it was so factual I felt I didn't want to take legal position. Mrs. Gordon: I understand, you wanted us to make the determination and we should. How do the other Commissioners feel? an extension of the of your station, can't go in and get Mr. Plummer: Its based on a conditional use and it does give this Commission the latituue to say yes in some areas and no in others. I see nothing wrong with it and they will proceed through the normal procedures. Thereupon the following resolution was introduced by Mr. Plummer who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-148 A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE POLICY OF THE COMMISSION THAT A CAR WASH OPERATION IS APPROPRIATE AS AN IN- CIDENTAL USE IN C-2 ZONING DISTRICTS (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Reverend Gibson, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Gibson, Mrs. Gordon NOES: None Mr. Plummer requested Mr. Rice and the applicant tobe prepared to outline to the Commission their plans for the stacking of auto- mobiles awaiting car wash when the matter is presented to the City Commission for final approval at some future date. MARCH 8, 1973 13 10, ESTABLISHMENT OF ZONED STREET WIDTH - MICANOPY AVENUE An Ordinance entitled - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, ARTICLE XXV, SECTION 1, BY ADDING A NEW PARAGRAPH (166-C-1) TO PROVIDE FOR THE OFFICIAL ESTABLISHMENT OF A ZONED STREET WIDTHI OF MICANOPY AVENUE FROM 50' TO 40'; REPEALING ALL LAWS IN CONFLICT HEREWITH passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of;Ebbruary 22, 1973, was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On motion of Mr. Plummer, seconded by Mrs. Gordon, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and adopted by, the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Reverend Gibson, Mrs. Gordon NOES: None Said ordinance was designated Ordinance No. 8145. 11, NIGHT CLUB LICENSES - LLCEI'SI. APPEAL PROCEDURE An Ordinance entitled - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 3-47 OF THE MIAMI CITY CODE BY DELETING SECTION 3-47 IN ITS ENT- IRETY AND ENACTING A NEW SECTION 3-47 WHICH provides for A HEARING BEFORE THE CITY MANAGER INSTEAD OF THE CITY COMMISSION FOR HOLDERS OF A NIGHT CLUB LICENSE WHO HAVE BEEN REFUSED RENEWAL AND MAKING ANY ACTION TAKEN BY THE CITY MANAGER UNDER SUCH PROVISION FINAL, WITH APPEAL TO THE COURTS; AND BY REPEALING ALL LAWS IN CONFLICT HEREWITH passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of February 22, 1973, was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On motion of Mr. Plummer, seconded by Mr. Reboso, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Reverend Gibson, Mrs. Gordon NOES: None Said Ordinance was designated Ordinance No. 8146. MARCH 8, 1973 14 12. NIGHT CLUBS - SUBMISSIOiN OF QUARTERLY REPORTS An Ordinance entitled - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 3-51 OF THE MIAMMI CITY CODE BY DELETING SECTION 3-51 IN ITS ENTIRETY AND ENACTING A NEW SECTION 3-51 WHICH PROVIDES FOR THE SUBMITTING OF QUARTERLY REPORTS TO THE CHIEF OF POLICE UNDER A NIGHT CLUB LICENSE, AND BY REPEALING ALL LAWS IN CONFLICT HEREWITH passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of February 22, 1973, was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On motion of Mr. Plummer, seconded by Mr. Reboso, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Mrs. Gordon, Reverend Gibson. NOES: None. Said ordinance was designated Ordinance No. 8147. 13, OFF-STREET PARKING FACILITIES- CONTRACTING OF LOAN An Ordinance entitled - AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CONTRACTING OF A LOAN FOR PAYING A PART OF THE COST OF OFF-STREET PARKING FACILITIES WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI AND PLEDGING FUNDS FOR THE PAYMENT OF SUCH LOAN; DECLARING THIS ORDINANCE TO BE AN EMERGENCY MEASURE passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of February 22, 1973, was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On motion of Mr. Plummer, seconded by Reverend Gibson, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Reverend Gibson and Mrs. Gordon. NOES: None Mayor Kennedy. Ofdrdrdinance was designated Ordinance No. 8148. 15 MARCH 8, 1973 14, AMENDING ORDINANCE- CHAPTER 55 OF CODE - "EXCISE TAXES" _ An Ordinance entitled - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 55-2 SUBSECTION (5) OF ARTICLE I ENTITLED "EXCISE TAXES" OF CHAPTER 55 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY DELETING SECTION 55-2 SUBSECTION..(5) IN ITS ENTIRETY AND ,ENACTING A NEW SECTION 55-2 SUBSECTION (5) EXC- LUDING THE SALE OF FUEL OIL TO A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE UTILITY, EITHER FOR RESALE OR FOR USE AS FUEL IN THE GENERATION_OF ELECTRICITY FROM TAXATION; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS, OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT HEREWITH INSOFAR AS THEY ARE IN CONFLICT; AND PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY PROVISION passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of February 22, 1973, was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On motion of Mr. Plummer, seconded by Mr. Reboso, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Gibson, Plummer, Reboso and Mrs. Gordon. NOES: None Said ordinance was designated Ordinance No. 8149. 15, ACCEPT COMPLETED WORK - CITY HALL SANITARY SEWER MODIFICATIONS 1972 The following resolution was introduced by Reverend Gibson who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-149 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE COMPLETED WORK OF FLORIDA CONCRETE CONTRACTORS FOR THE CITY HALL - SANITARY SEWER MODIFICATIONS - 1972 AT A TOTAL COST OF $11,466.31 AND AUTHORIZING A FINAL PAYMENT OF $1,377.93 (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Mr. Reboso, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Gibson and Mrs. Gordon. NOES: None 16 MARCH 8, 1973 The following resolution was introduced by Reverend Gibson who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-150 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE COMPLETED WORK OF MARKS BROTHERS CO., FOR THE N. E. FIRST AVENUE STORM SEWER PROJECT - 1972 AT A TOTAL COST OF $93,933.45 AND AUTHORIZING A FINAL PAYMENT OF $8,754.08 (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Mr. Reboso, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Reboso, Gibson, Plummer and Mrs. Gordon. NOES: None 17, ACCEPT COMPLETED WORK-MIAMARINA. LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS The following resolution was introduced by Reverend Gibson who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-151 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE COMPLETED WORK OF ROSSER ELECTRIC COMPANY, INC., FOR THE MIAMARINA LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS AT A TOTAL COST OF $30,062.86 AND AUTHORIZING A FINAL PAYMENT OF $3,542.56 (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Mr. Reboso, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Reverend Gibson and Mrs. Gordon. NOES: None 17 MARCH 8, 1973 • 18, PLAT ACCEPTANCE - E. LEE SCHOOL SITE The following resolution was introduced by Mr. Plummer who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-152 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE PLAT ENTITLED R.E. LEE SCHOOL SITE, A SUBDIVISION IN THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA; ACCEPTING THE DEDICATIONS SHOWN ON SAID PLAT; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE THE PLAT (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Reverend Gibson, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES; Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Reverend Gibson and Mrs. Gordon. NOES: None 19. PLAT ACCEPTANCE - TOLEDO VILLAS The following resolution was introduced by Reverend Gibson who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-153 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE PLAT ENTITLED TOLEDO VILLAS, A SUBDIVISION IN THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA; AND ACCEPTING THE DEDICATIONS SHOWN ON SAID PLAT; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE THE PLAT (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Reverend Gibson, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Reboso, Plummer, Reverend Gibson, Mrs. Gordon . NOES: None. 18 MARCH 8, 1973 • 20, CARNIVAL PERMIT - ST. MARY'S CATHEDRAL SCHOOL The following resolution was introduced by REverend Gibson who moved it$ adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-154 A RESOLUTION GRANTING PERMISSION TO ST. MARY'S CATHEDRAL SCHOOL TO CONDUCT A CARNIVAL ON THE PLAYGROUND AREA OF SAID SCHOOL, LOCATED AT 7485 N. W. 2ND AVENUE, FOR THE PERIOD APRIL 6, 7, AND 8, 1973 (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Mr. Plummer, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Reverend Gibson and Mrs. Gordon. NOES: None 21, BID AWARD - CENTRAL CONCRETE OF MEDLEY4READY MIX CONCRETE) The following resolution was introduced by Mr. Plummer who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-155 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BID OF CENTRAL CONCRETE OF MEDLEY, INC., FOR FURNISHING READY MIX CONCRETE AT A COST OF $18.80 PER CUBIC YARD, AS REQUIRED, FOR THE PERIOD MARCH 1S, 1973 TO MARCH 15, 1974, FOR USE BY THE OPERATIONS DIVISION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, AND TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO INSTRUCT THE PURCHASING DIVISION TO ISSUE A PURCHASE ORDER THEREFOR, AFTER FIRST DETERMINING THAT FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Mr. Reboso, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Reverend Gibson and Mrs. Gordon. NOES: None • 19 MARCH 8, 1973 • 22, BID AWARD - NORTHERN DRAINAGE PROJECT E-28 The following resolution was introduced by Reverend Gibson who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-156 A RESOLUTION AWARDING THE BID RECEIVED FEBRUARY 20, 1973 OF MARKS BROTHERS CO., IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $184,795 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF NORTHERN DRAINAGE PROJECT E-28; ALLOCATING THE AMOUNT OF $206,970 FROM THE ACCOUNT ENTITLED "STORM SEWER BOND FUND"; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT THEREFOR (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Mr. Plummer, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Gibson, Reboso and Mrs. Gordon. NOES: None 23, RECEIVE BIDS FOR SALE OF $28.350.000 PUBLIC PARK AND RECREATIONAL BONDS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI At 11 O'Clock A.M., Eastern Standard Time, the Clerk announced that pursuant to legal notice, the Commission was ready to receive sealed bids for the sale of $28,350,000 Public Park and Recreational Facilities Bonds of the City of Miami, Florida. Thereupon the following resolution was introduced by Mr. Plummer who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-157 A RESOLUTION TO RECEIVE, OPEN, READ AND REFER TO THE CITY MANAGER FOR TABULATION AND REPORT, BIDS AUTHORIZED TO BE RECEIVED THIS DAZE UNDER RESOLUTION NO. 73-104 FOR THE SALE OF $28,350,000 PUBLIC PARK AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES BONDS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Reverend Gibson, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Reverend Gibson and Mrs. Gordon. NOES: None BIDS WERE RECEIVED FROM THE FOLLOWING: MARCH 8, 1973 2(1 s (1) The Chase Manhattan Bank, N. A. and Associates (2) Bankers Trust Company and Associates (3) Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner $ Smith Inc. DuPc,nt Giore Forgan Incorporated; and Associates (4) The First National Bank of Miami, for the mgrs. (5) First National City Bank and Associates (6) The First Boston Corporation and Associates (7) Halsey, Stuart & Co., Inc.; Kidder, Peabody & Co., Inc; John Nuveen & Co., Inc Smith Barney $ Co., Inc. Blyth Eastman Dillon & Co., Inc. $ Assoc. (8) Morgan Guaranty Trust Company of New York; Salomon Brothers RECESS: THE COMMISSION WA IN ECESS FOR A PIBE INNIN AT APPROXIMATELY 11:15ERQQ O'CLOCK A.M. TO 11:5U O'CLOCK A.M. 24. The following resolution was introduced by Mr. Plummer who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-158 A RESOLUTION AWARDING $28,350,000 PUBLIC PARK AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES BONDS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Mr. Reboso, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Gibson, Reboso and Mrs. Gordon. NOES: None LUNCH RECESS: THE COMMISSION WAS IN RECESS FROM 11:30 O'CLOCK A MM.LO'CLocK P.M. THIS DATE. MARCH 8 , 1973 21 NOTE: THE COMMISSION RECONVENED,AT 2:10 O'CLOCK P.M. WITH THE ROLRSI QLOWQ'Na UMMERRSREVERENDOF THE CDIBSONION ANDpVICENMAYORE(ORDON, A tNI: FIAYOR 1ENNEDY, 25, CONDITIONAL USE - MOBILE TRAILER-FRANKLIN SAVINGS BUILDING The following resolution was introduced by Mr. Plummer who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-159 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A "CONDITIONAL USE", AS PROVIDED IN ORDINANCE NO. 6871, ARTICLE IV, SECTION 8 (5), TO PERMIT TEMPORARY USE OF A MOBILE OFFICE TRAILER IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW FRANKLIN SAVINGS BUILDING ON LOTS 27 THRU 30, BACK 7, COCONUT GROVE (2-85) , LOCATED AT 3753 BIRD AVENUE, ZONED C-5 (LIBERAL COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT; NOT TO BE USED FOR LIVING QUARTERS (here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Mr. Reboso, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Reverend Gibson NOES: None 26, MIAMI FASHION DISTRICT Mr. Sol Meyerson: Good afternoon, we finally reconciled as per request of Father Gibson the cooperation of the High Schools and we notified the newspapers and we don't know what the newspapers have done. Mr. Garth Reeves in charge of the Times has no obj- ection to it, the naming of the Miami Fashion District, in fact he was for it. The principle of the Robert E. Lee High School is very much for it and the principle of the Dunbar Elementary School thinks its a very good idea. We have contacted several residents of the area and they had no objection whatsoever. We have con- tacted Mr. Rolle of the Liberty News and he said he would take it under advisement and would let me know before I appear and he said, I haven't heard from him. As of right now most everyone is for it and everyone approved it except I have not heard from Mr. Rolle. Mrs. Gordon: Did you communicate with him? Mr. Sol Meyerson: Yes, about 4 weeks ago. He came into my office about 2 days after our last meeting and sat and talked and said he would take it under advisement and I never heard from him again. He said there was nothing wrong with the idea and sev- eral old houses that people wanted to rebuild or refurbish in the area are no longer zoned for residential, they arc zoned for comm- ercial, therefore, I request the Commission to pass a resolution so we can name the district and we can go on there to try to help the fashion industry as such. We have spoken to several land owners in the area, in fact the few landowners have given us suggestions about in the future considering making it a tax district to beautify the area, so I request the Commission to give us a resolution naming it the Miami Fashion District so that we can go on and request the cooperation of the Post Office Dept. and go on further helping our industry in this area. MARCH 8, 1973 Mrs. Gordon: I will call on the Commissioners for comment. Rev. Gibson: I discharged my duty, 1 put the area on guard. I warned them and if they didn't have any more interest, shame on them, they can't blame me on later on. The following resolution was introduced by Mr. Plummer who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-160 A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE AREA BOUNDED ON THE NORTH BY N. W. 36TH STREET, ON THE WEST BY N. W. 6TH AVENUE, ON THE EAST BY NORTH MIAMI AVENUE, AND ON THE SOUTH BY N. W. 20TH STREET, AS THE "MIAMI FASHION DISTRICT" (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Mr. Reboso, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Reverend Gibson and Mrs. Gordon. NOES: None 27, BLACK LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE- APPEARANCE BY BERNARD DYER Mr. Bernard N. Dyer, appeared to outline resolutions passed by the Black Leadership Conference to the Miami City Commission regarding future plans for Miami and Dade County Black communities. Mr. Dyer: On January 21st, the first Black Leadership conference in Dade County was held. At this conference which was very well attended, there were representatives from different groups from within our community, representatives of different thinking within our community, representatives of different positions within our community but there were a couple of things that we all came together and these things included but were not limited to the M.L.K. Boulevard project and the importance of it to us here in Dade County. Shortly the 2nd Black Leadership conference will be held and we are in the process now of developing a sort of rapport to see what has happened as a result of the first conference that was held and the two resolutions that were presented to the City COmmission. The purpose of my being here today is to bring these two resolutions to you to get a reaction and secondly to ask that at a later point, a place made for us on the agenda where we could give a more complete presentation about the Boulevard and the way we see these two resolutions actually being implemented. Mrs. Gordon: Some other date, you don't mean today? Mr. Dyer: No, the presentation will be made at a later point. There arc only two things I would like to do today,:;first of all is to read these resolutions to you and secondly to ask Michael Gallis who is our director for planning to come before this body and to address himself to the County Bonds priorities being voted very shortly and also Mr.Arthur Harris, chairman of the M.L.K. businessmen's association. First resolution is that it calls on the City and County to support the goals of the Martin Luther King Development Corporation which are really mainly of achieving the building and actual con- struction of the Boulevard by the year 1976 by the Bi-Centennial which will take place here in Dade County. That's the first res- olution we wanted to ask that there be some reaction to. The second resolution requests that Revenue Sharing Funds not signal the end of public financial support of community development 23 MARCH 8, 1973 a +► programs which goes beyond the MLK program and addresses itself to a number of other projects which are now faced with the dilemma by being cutback of the recent administration cutbacks in programs, particularly the community development program. What we are asking here is that the revenue sharing funds be made available so that we can continue these projects which are dev- eloping and which are delivering much needed relief for series of conditions that exist in our community. Those are the two resolutions we would like to get some reaction on. s '.YOR 'AVID . ENNEDY ENTERED THE MEETING AT 2:2-0 O'LLOCK • Mr. Gallis: Michael Gallis is my name. In march of course the City passed the Parks bond issue of which 2 million dollars was allocated for the construction of a linear park in the city's portion of Dr. Martin Luther King Boulevard which was I-95 to 17th Avenue. In November the County passed its Decade of Progress Bond Issue which allocated 82 million dollars to the completion of the linear park and for the construction of the roadway. In recent meetings with the County Manager, a tentative time schedule had been set based on a 3-year schedule. The first year for the design drawings of the roadway and linear park, 2nd year for acquisition of all necessary right of way and the 3rd year for actual construction of the road and linear park itself. Now this 3 year schedule would begin in April or May and would then allow sufficient time for the completion of the Boulevard in time for the July 4, 1976 Bi=Centennial celebration. At these meetings the Assistant City Manager was in attendance and has been a part of these meetings however, the firm commitment for the priority of the spending of the county bond issue will be established following a series of bond issue hearings the county intends to hold beginning next week. It is very important that a resolution be passed by the City calling on the County to make Martin Luther King Boulevard a first priority in order that it may be completed in time for 1976. The reason for this is because of the size of the Decade of Progress Bond issue, bonds will be sold every year over a 10 year period and so the County will be holding hearings to establish which projects should be done in year 1 to 10. We are hopeful that Martin Luther King .through some accident end up being allocated in the year 10 so that while we ourselves a1id residents from the community be at these meetings to emphasize our point, we would also perhaps thought it might be wise if the City were to present a resolution to the County calling on them since the city will be spending its bond issue money I understand in coordination with the County, that the funds, that the bond issue hearings establish the Boulevard as a priority in order that it would be completed by 1976. The City has passed a resolution, number 72-81 A.,)ril 20, 1972, which was in reference to the City bond issue which was a resolution requestion Metro to coordinate its activities in such a manner that roadway improvement in the area of N. W. 62nd Street between I-95 and N. W. 17th Avenue can be accomplished simultaneously with the development of the proposed linear park. This however was prior to the county's passage of the bond issue since it was passed on April 20. 1 don't know if it would be sufficient to reiterate the original resolution or if it would be necessary to make a new one. Mrs. Gordon: You want a reaffirmation then of the original resolution to the County asking them to be sure to placethis on the priority list. Mr. Gallis: On the top priority list sufficient so that the completion of the Boulevard can take place by the Bi-Centennial. Mr. Arthur Harris, who is the chairman of the Martin Luther King Boulevard Businessmen's association which has become very active 0 in the development of the road and the final plan is here and would just like to speak to this issue. MARCH 8, 1973 24 Mr. Harris: This is the first opportunity that I have had to say a word and the first thing I would like to do is thank this Commission for those beautiful lights that we have out there. I am sure the City appreciates them too because we haven't had much troubles since we have gotten those lights. Right now we are hoping and looking forward to the beginning of the construction of the Martin Luther King Boulevard after all the work that Mr. Dyer and his organization have done and of course we have been meeting regularly and we have the business people,on 62nd Street meeting with the Martin Luther King Boul- evard Corporation to try to insure that while progress is being made with cooperation and with no hangups of the people in the area because we are taking a part and looking over the shoulders and seeing that our input is being acknowledged. They thought it would be wise of some representative of our businessmen's group to come down and help to try to impress the Commission, to speak with the County Commission to try to sec if we can get a priority in getting the Boulevard started. One of the most important things that I could bring up here is that most of our businesses in the black community are far apart and scattered and we don't have an awful lot and we are trying very hard to create a sort of a down- town atmosphere there. Its downtown to me already and all the people there who operate businesses in the black community con- sider it downtown. I don't believe anything else I could say would impress this Commission anymore than what has been said and we certainly would appreciate your cooperation, thank you. Mrs. Gordon: Thank you Mr. Harris, we appreciate your comments. Mr. Dyer: There is another person from the area who would like to say a few words, if he would Mr. Meadows: Leo Meadows. I would like to say good evening and I hope you arc having a good time today, sitting down and enjoy- ing yourselves in air-conditioning and everything. I would like to get to the Martin Luther King Boulevard Corporation. I don't know the workings of resolutions or commitments from the City to the County etc, but I would like to ask the Commission if in your resolution, that you would make a commitment to me, I would like to ask that, if you would make a commitment to me, a citizen of Dade County, of Miami. In your resolution- are resolutions binding? Mrs. Gordon: It's a formal position of the City Commission and certainly we don't do these things lightly. Mr. Meadows: Are they binding: Are they binding? Mrs. Gordon: Yes. This man is asking me a legal question, is it binding? Mr. Lloyd, City Atty: Yes a resolution of the City Commission is a statement of policy and is binding until it is rescinded by another resolution. Mr. Meadows: I would like to make something more binding than a resolution which can be rescinded by another resolution. Rev. Gibson: What do you want? Mr. Meadow : I would like to have some confirmation from you that the Martin Luther King Development Corporation will continue to receive top priority until its completion. Rev. Gibson: Let us say that as of now, it has top priority so we are going along, I would hate for you to, you know - Mr. Meadows: Peel that you were going to continue to have it as top priority, that's what I am trying to avoid too. Rev. Gibson: Sir, All we, I hope all of us are acting in good faith. 2,5i MARCH 8, 1973 Mr. Meadows: Yes, I hope so too but resolutions can be rescinded by another resolution and all I have left is --- Rev. Gibson: Suppose I was going in the River, may I- and my ship sprung a leak? You want me to stay in the river and go down, all the way down rather than say I am not going to do a thing to this ship? Is that what you are asking us to do? Mr. Meadows: No. Rev. Gibson: All right, we are going to operate on the basis that we are operating in good faith. Mr. Meadows: But I can't because you have a resolution that can be rescinded. Rev. Gibson: Sir, you can't tell us how to develop the policy. We develop the policy. Mr. Meadows: I understand that but I have to tell you because I am paying your salary Sir. Rev. Gibson: I don't know what the others are going to do but I am going to act as I have always acted, honorably. Mr. Meadows: Yes, I would appreciate that sir. I would like to hold the others to your same position, if I may. Rev. Gibson: I don't know what makes you think they aren't going to do it. Mr. Meadows: They haven't on some occasions Sir. Mayor Kennedy: A resolution is the only thing we can do. I don't know of any higher binding thing the :ity Commission can do. Mrs. Gordon: There isn't anything higher or more binding. Mr. Lloyd: You act by resolution or ordinance and unless you engage in a specific contract which you actually bind by contract, there is no way that you can bind the Commission to any specific thing. Resolutions may be rescinded and Ordinances may be repealed. Mr. Meadows: Repealed, all right. Mrs. Gordon: Either one could be altered or changed at some future time. A point in time, if such a thing were necessary for some reason that might come up at such a time. There is no intention on our part, at least not on mine - Rev. Gibson: My brother, let me help you here. Let us go on the way we are going now - Mr. Meadows: I am going to try to Sir but I need one more thing from the Commission, a definition of priorities so I know where Martin Luther Development Corporation is - Rev. Gibson: Sir, it is as high now as we have always had it and I urge you to let us go on. Mr. Meadows: But Sir, I am paying the salaries of everybody on this board and please dont bother me now. I am paying the salaries of everybody on this board and I feel that it is my right and your privelege to work for me. My right to ask you to do as I want done if 1 am paying your salary and I know I am paying your salary. I know this and I know quite a few other people who are paying your salary and they know more people who are paying your salary and now if you arc going to do our job right, tell me so and let me know that you are going to do your job right. The people who pay your salaries won't pay your salaries anymore if you aren't doing a good job. This is what I am asking. Are you going to do our job? 2G MARCH 8, 1973 • Mayor Kennedy: Well Sir, we have been working with people like Mr. Dyer and he knows this Commission has worked - Mr. Meadows: You are working with me now Sir, if you will excuse me, you are working with me. Mayor Kennedy: We have worked in good faith. Now you can berate us and threaten,with the $5,000 that we get, not many people pay that, you can get 4 or 5 and they could pay our salary. This job is pretty time consuming for $5,000 and every member of this Commission tries to do their best and has worked with faith and in good will with your people. Now the best thing that we can do is to pass a resolution ani that's all we can do and you can stand there and berate us all yol want, but that's what we can do and that's the good faith of this City COmmission and we have never violated that faith. Mr. Meadows: I thank you for that, this is all I was asking you for. Everybody's definition of good faith and I can then look forward to Martin Luther King Boulevard being developed by 1976 and I appreciate that, thank you. Mr. Dyer: In closing, the reality of building the Boulevard is one in which you find people who have been promised a great deal and have seen very little evidence itself in terms of change is concerned so there is a great deal of apprehension in our comm- unity and a great deal of question about the building of the Boulevard. I think it is a kind of joint involvement both the City of Miami Commission and also the residents in that area Co ultimately give the kind of faith in the process of the democratic process but its sometimes painful and 1 certainly hope that the City Commission will continue to work` with us as it has in the past and we will be able to see the boulevard developed by 1976. thank you. The following resolution was introduced by Mrs. Gordon who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-161 A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE POLICY OF THE COMMISSION THAT IT SUPPORTS IN PRINCIPLE THE REQUEST OF THE MIAMI BLACK LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE REGARDING PLANS FOR FUTURE MIAMI BLACK COMMUNITIES AND AGREEING TO GIVE THIS MATTER CONSIDERATION IN ATTEMPTING TO OBTAIN FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING FUNDS (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Mr. Plummer, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Gibson, Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NOES: None 27 MARCH 8, 1973 • The following resolution was introduced by Mrs. Gordon who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-162 A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE POLICY OF THE COMPMISSION IN SUPPORT OF THE GOALS OF THE MARTIN LUTHER KING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Mr. Plummer, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Reverend Gibson, Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NOES: None The following resolution was introduced by Mrs. Gordon who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-163 A RESOLUTION REAFFIRM-NG THE CITY COMMISSION'S SUPPORT OF A REQUEST THAT METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY IN ITS PROPOSED BOND ISSUE PROVIDE AS ONE OF ITS TOP PRIORITIES THE DEVELOPMENT OF MARTIN LUTHER KING BOULEVARD (Here follows body )f resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Mr. Plummer, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Reverend Gibson, Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NOES: None 28, FLAGLER STREET TREE PLANTING PROGRAM Mr. Lucius C. Williams, Executive Director of the Downtown Development AUthority appeared to outline a plan for the planting of trees on Flagler Street. Mr. Williams: As indicated in the 1972-3 budget of the Downtown Development AUthority Budget which this Commission approved last September, the authority is now ready to proceed with the Tree Planting Program for Flagler Street. The program has been determined to include trees on both sides of Flagler Street from the railroad east to the Boulevard except in areas where tree planting has been done in the last few months, is about to be completed as around First Federal and One Biscayne Bldg. MARCH 8, 1973 28 Or where constrictions are such that plants cannot be included. After substantial discussion, we have determined that we will use Native Florida Gumbo Limbo Tree in those areas where constrictions do not exist. That means in areas where there are no canopies, no awnings or buildings that interfere with an unlimited type shade tree. In other areas where canopies do exist, we will be using the alexander palms. If you take a look at the drawings that some of you have before you, you will see how this will work. In areas where canopies do exist, the palm trees will go beside the canopy and the top of the tree will be above the canopy but you will get the impact and the visibility of this tree from accross the street and from down the street. The trees we will be using will be 96 in number. This may look like a small project but we think after so many years, to bring trees back to Flagler Street, it will be an important factor. My purpose here this afternoon is to advise you of this program, the invitations to bid have been sent out and they will be received on March 23 and hopefully the Board will award the bids April 2. We will be doing this with funds of the Authority which comes from the special district from the downtown property owners. There really is only one factor I would like to request of you today and that has to do with the issuance of a permit for the installation of these trees. I am advised by Mr. Cliff Hayes of the Public Works Department that it is usual when a public agency has construction within the public right of way, that the permit be issued without cost. He indicated it would be easier if he had specific authority to do that so I do request that you authorize Public Works Department to issue the building permit for this installation without cost to the contractor or to the authority. If you have any questions I will be glad to answer them. Mrs.Gordon: One question, not about the program, I am very happy to see that you have this program commencing, I think that's marvelous. I would like to ask you if it would be possible, you might want to consider this. Back several years, ago around 1970, the Memorial Committee recommended that the corner of Flagler and Miami Avenue be designated in memory of the man who was instrumental in designating the streets layout for the City of Miami. His name was Josiah F. Chaille. I wonder if this not be appropo at this time with the beautification of Flagler Street, to dedicate that intersection in his memory. Mr. Williams: We have discussed this thoroughly with the Memorial Committee and with others. If we were to do it this time, the designation would have to be placed on a building or just on a sign which we wonder if that gives, enough cre3it or cognizance to Mr. Chaille. It is our proposal that at such time that the intersection development of the street be done, that an appropriate large plaque with full recognition be made at that time for that area. In this connection, we have even designed a Plaque which has been reviewed by the Memorial Committee with confidence. We have designed a star like plaque to go into the center of the street to indicate the beginning of the North, South, East and West quadrant but to have this kind of a memorial on the side of a building or just up on a street sign, we don't think that's really doing justice to it. If however someone else has other conclusions, we would be glad to cooperate. That's really why we have not done it. We felt it could best be done in coordination and as a part of the future intersection development such as has been done at Flagler and East First Avenue. Mrs. Gordon: Well couldn't this be designated for this purpose now, designated by some street sign designation now, replaced by some future more permanent designation. Mr. Williams: Could be and I think that is a policy matter for the Commission. I certainly would have no objection. Mrs. Gordon: Do you need any kind of action on our part with regard to your program. Do you need any resolution from us? Mr. Williams: No resolution. I have asked that you authorize 29 MARCH 8, 1973 specifically the issuance of a building permit without cost. Thereupon the following resolution was introduced by Mrs. Gordon who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-164 A RESOLUTION WAIVING THE PAYMENT OF PERMIT FEES BY THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OR THE CONTRACTOR IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROPOSED FLAGLER STREET TREE PLANTING PROGRAM (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Reverend Gibson, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Reboso, Plummer, Reverend Gibson, Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NOES: None The following resolution was introduced by Mrs. Gordon who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-165 A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE INTERSECTION OF FLAGLER STREET AND MIAMI AVENUE AS JOSIAH F. CHAILLE CENTER (Here follows body of.resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Reverend Gibson, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Reverend Gibson, Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NOES: None Mr. Williams: We will cooperate with the committee on designing a marker and paying for the marker. We will be glad to do that. I believe the Committee should be notified of your action today. Mrs. Gordon: I have received communication from the Committee and this is the reason I have this information in front of me right now. They are desirous of this taking place. Mr. Williams: I will work with them any way that I can. Mrs. Gordon: By the way he died in 1970 at the age of 96. Mr. Williams: Thank you very much. 3U MARCH 8, 1973 • 29, COCONUT GROVE INCINERATOR - USE AS A PUBLIC PARK Mayor Kennedy: Item #22, the request of the Metropolitan Dade County Planning and Advisory Board on the Coconut Grove Incinerator. Is anyone here from the Dade County Planning and Advisory Board? Mr. Reese you received a letter didn't you? Mr.Reese: Yes Sir, they requested to appear. Item 22, they requested to appear, they weren't satisfied with the answer but I endeavored to point out that there was a resolution already passed by this Commission to set this land aside for a park. Canon Gibson brought it up. Mayor Kennedy: Why don't ,re defer this to the next meeting and ask them to please be present, or a member of their committee. Mr. Reese: Yes but you have already taken the action previously. Mayor Kennedy: And they are opposed to the action? Mr. Reese: No, this is what they want. They just want to come here and say it. Mayor Kennedy: No reason for them to be here then? You don't need anything on 22 to reaffirm that then' Everybody is satisfied. 30, MIAMI BAR OWNERS ASSOCIATION- REQUEST EXTENSION OF HOURS OF SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES BEYGND 7:00 P.M. ON--SUNDAYS Mr. Tom Nesbitt on behalf of the Miami Bar Owners Association appeared to outline a request of their association for the extension of hours as heretofore described. Mr. Nesbitt: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, I have asked for this hearing since our last meeting, all the people who are interested in the sale of liquor hours on ;unday were turned down and that at least one phase of it came back. and they were granted what they asked for, that was the small restaurants. We have also asked for a re -hearing to get hours for the Bars in the City of Miami that would be more in line with the rest of Dade County. I would like to quickly run through some of the hours in effect in Dade County. West Miami on Sunday is open from 10 A.M. to 1 A.M. Miami Springs, 7 A.M. to 3 A.M. Hialeah, 7 A.M. to 3 A.M. Coral Gables, 7 A.M. to 12 P.M. Miami Beach, 7 A.M. to 2 A.M. Opa Locka, 7 A.M. to 3 A.M. North Miami Beach, 7 A.M. to 6 A.M. El Portal, 7 A.M. to 6 A.M. North Bay Village, 10 A.M. to 2 A.M. Dade County itself, 10 A.M. to 1 A.M. As you know, our current hours are from 1 P.M. to 7 P.M. What we would like is to be more in line with the rest of these communities and I think in particularly, Dade County, 10 A.M. to 1 A.M. would put the City of Miami on an equal footing with the rest of the communities within Dade County. Commissioner Plummer, I believe had a meeting a week or so ago regarding Metro setting hours. The paper wasn't quite clear as to what happened at that meeting. If you could tell us at this time Mr. Plummer, I would appreciate it. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, the Dade League did meet and this matter did come up for a vote. The article in the paper was correct. We came within one word of unanimously passing this resolution. The word that fell apart on the uniformity of hours was the word "Maximum Uniformity" was injected into the resolution and since most all of the representatives to the Dade League had gone to their Commissions respectively with uniform hours that every hour would be the same and as it came up for a vote, it was on "Maximum Uniformity". What does this mean?, the proposal set forth by the Dade League for presentation to Metro Commission was uniform hours all over the County to be a maximum hour that places 31 MARCH 8, 19 • could stay open. For example, the City of Coral Gables did not want to go to extend their hours any further. They were happy with the maximum hours but they said they would want to reserve the right to be more stringent. There was no communications or any objections put forth by anyone that they wanted more lucrative hours than in the proposal so at this time not only will I Mr. Nesbitt inform you of what took place at the meeting but a'k this Commission to please go on record, either in favor of "Maximum Uniformity Hours" or in opposition and we retake our stand as to uniformity all over Dade County. In other words, if I recall the one proposal and I will ju,;t use that. The proposal that Mr. Nesbitt is talking about would be from NOON to 1 A.M. Mr. Nesbitt: Were those the hours that were recommended? Mr. Plummer: That was the hours recommended but the City of Coral Gables for example said that they did not want their hours to run that long. They would go with it as far as a "Maximum" but they would not relinquish their right for more stringent regulations so it was felt at this meeting that everyone should go back to their respective Commissions and present this to them and ask for a vote at the next meeting so this is what I am asking from this Commission that if you want to go along with a "Maximum uniformity" that you so indicate or that all hours must be uniform. I will have to say this. There are certain problems and I don't think that you will ever see the utopia situation of all hours being uniform. The City of Miami Beach in particular is unique unto itself and they have hours over thei,e that I don't think anyone else would want but they are going to set their hours and if they would fall within the maximum, they had no objection to the maximum but as far as total uniformity, I think that you will never see it. I think as close as we will come will be the "Maximum uniformity" and I think that's the way its proposed now so I would like directions from this Commission as to what our vote will be at the next Dade League meeting, but that is what took place. Mr. Nesbitt: Thank you very much. Representing the City of Miami Bar Owners at this time, we would like to ask for what Dade County has on Sunday: 10 A.M. to 1 A.M. At such time as you come up with different hours on a larger basis with more communities in it, we would be happy to go along with what the majority does but I feel as it stands now, its certainly not fair and there is one other question. I had written a letter to the City Attorneys office and this asked as long as restaurants were now permitted to stay open until 1 A.M. on Sundays, what about the bars that have restaurant licenses or the restaurants that had bar licenses? How does this affect these people? Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, I am troubled Mr. Nesbitt to be honest. I think that I expressed myself the last time and I am going to express it again. We asked the League to make some recommendations to the Metro Commission. We wanted Metro to take some leadership, that's what they said they are for. I don;t think we ought to upstage them. It seems to me that every week people want us to give some relief. Every week relief, relief. Now either we ought to eat the whole hog or not. I just don't see it. Mr. Plummer I don't understand "Maximum uniformity". I would like to get that terminology straight. If you say that we will go with, for instance, I am troubled that you could live on one side of the street and go on the other side when you don't like the way we do and do what you want to do. If you arc going to sell whiskey and I am not advocating selling whiskey, sell the whiskey but I don't think the City of Miami ought to be made the scapegoat when you don't like us then you run over into another municipality and drink all the whiskey you want. 32 MARCH 8, 1973 • • Mr. Nesbitt: I don't either and thats why I say if we went along with the hours that Dade County presently has, we would be in line with just about everybody. Rev. Gibson: What about the other cities? Mr. Nesbitt: The other cities are more liberal but not to the extent that it would be a detriment to the City of Miami. Rev. Gibson: You know thin is like a festering sore. Mr. Nestiitt: If you wanted to do it. People keep coming up for the 3 A.M. hours. Our organization is not necessarily pushing for the 3 A.M. hour. What we are pushing for is equality and to have approximately the same hours on Sunday that we do on other days of the week because when the people don't come in our establishments, they go accross the street in another city and go in that establishment. They get in their car and drive accross town. Rev. Gibson: Mr. Nesbitt, would it help you any if Metro said, you know I don't understant, have you been to Metro about this problem? Mr. Nesbitt: No I haven't because Mr. Plummer was appointed to do that very thing and he just got through saying he felt that there would never be a time when Metro would take over all the hours. Rev. Gibson: I would like to see the Commission wait until the League of Municipalities act. Mr. Plummer: I see nothing wrong with that and let me say this Mr. Nesbitt because I don't know if you are aware of it. One of the proposals in the Dade League package if it is presented to the Metro Commission, is under uniformity on Sunday, that the beginning hour would be noon where today they enjoy 10 A.M., it would be moved to noon and I think that the maximum hour would be 1 o'clock. Mr. Nesbitt: That would be fine, if that's what you want to go along with'. We can agree to that until something else is done but we've been in front of the Commission for almost a year now and you changed the laws for one group to liberalize it and give them relief and I would like to see the Commission do that now for us and at such time 1s they come along with this county wide hours, we would be certainly happy to go along with it. Rev. Gibson: My brother, I don't know what the others are going to do but I am not moving. I 'shall not be moved, this may not be what the people want to hear. I just believe that if the League is going to take the leadership, they should take it and when you bring it back, I am prepared to act. I don't think - Mr. Nesbitt: There is no reason why they can't continue with it but in the meantime, is there any reason why we can't have some relief? Rev. Gibson: Well I don't know about the others but Theodore Gibson isn't ready to vote. Mayor Kennedy: IS there a motion? Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor I offer a motion that we wait until such time as the League says one or the other. Unidentified Man: Before you second that, may I speak please? 1 am not interested in arguing with the church but everytime we come up here, that's the way it turns out. One time they start showing us statistics about drunk driving, death on the highway and I explained that closing the bars in Miami puts more drunk drivers on the road because they have to go to Hialeah, Miami Beach, but they still drink. Whatever a person wants to do on Sunday morning, he is going to do. Some people want to go fishing, play golf, church or drink but whatever it is they want to do, that is exactly what they are going to do. 33 MARCH 8, 1973 • Now, I defy any person in this room to tell me that the church attendance in Miami is better than the church attendance in Coral Gables where the.bars are open from 7 A.M. until midnight. I think this is a ridiculous thing. You can walk accross the street and buy a drink but you can't do it in the City Of Miami. Who are we to say, we are holier than thou? According to the tourist development authority, 11 million people visit this area every year. They also say they spend an average of 50=60 dollars which means thats over half a billion dollars which creates jobs for many thousands of residents of the City of' Miami. Many of these visitors are of the jewish faith and they come here to have a good time and to relax and they come here since vacation time is a carefree way of life, they might want to go out and have a drink on Sunday morning or sunday evening but if one of these people were to go into a bar or restaurant, pardon me, at noon on Sunday and they are one of these people that like to have a martini before lunch, maybe the waitress will say, I am sorry sir but this is the sabhath and you can't have a drink before 1 o'clock. What about his sabbath? While he is celebrating his sabhath, the bars are having the busiest day of the week. In effect, what we are telling this man is look buster, its all right if we drink on your sabbath, but you can't drink on mine. Now, this is more than unfair. This is discrimination in its most vulgar form. I don't see why Sunday should he differenc than any other day of the week. Mr. Southern, City Clerk: Could I have your name please? Mr. Nesbitt: I would like to add one other thing here. If these hour swere changed so we could open later on Sundays, it would probably mean somewhere between 250 to 500 new jobs in this town because there isn't a bar that could operate with its personnel and additional hours, thats a lot of iohs. Also before you take a vote, could I hear from the legal department on this small restaurants serving until 1 o'clock? Mr. Plummer: What is it that you want to hear? Mr. Nesbitt: I have a bar and also have a restaurant license. I serve food 7 days a week. Mr. Plummer: Pose your question sir. Mr. Nesbitt: Am I allowed to stay open till -1 o'clock? Mayor Kennedy: I don't think thats fair at this meeting because Mr. Lloyd is not familiar with this. Our City attorney is not here. Mr. Nesbitt: I have written him a couple of weeks ago. Mayor Kennedy: It would be unfair because Mr. Lloyd is our neg- ligence attorney . He is filling in today and this isn't his line and it would he unfair to pose a question to him today on this but that answer certainly could be given to you at the next meeting and I would urge that Mr. Rothstein answer their query. Mr. Turner, Asst.City Atty.: Mr. Mayor, I am in receipt of his letter and I have contacted persons in the licensing department and the police department in working out some administrative provisions to take care of this matter. We will answer his letter in due course as soon as these provisions are worked out. Mayor Kennedy: Try to get it by the next meeting so that he can come down here based on that letter. Mr. Dave Phillips: Mr. Mayor, the fact that there are no people here in opposition should not be interpreted that they have folded the tent and gone away. I checked with the metropolitan fellowship at about 1 o'clock to see what their defense was going to be today and found out they knew nothing about it and for some strange reason got no notice although they .are on the list to send out notices. I found out that the president is out of town, they could not assemble their defense soon enough so I merely want you to know 34 that having not been publicized, they are not here. It should not be interpreted to mean that they go along with this. Mr. Nesbitt: Mr. Plummer, when is the next meeting? How long is this going to be deferred as far as the County goes or Metro? Mr. Plummer: Sir, its less than 30 days, no wait a minute, let me clarify that, its less than 30 days that the Dade League will meet again and come up with a proposal. Once a proposal is unanimously voted by the Dade League, then it will be presented to Metro. Mr. Nesbitt: At that time it is unanimously considered, would you be receptive to us or would you still want to wait until Metro votes yes or no on it? Mr. Plummer: I would assume that there should be a period of no more than 90 days total. Rev. Gibson: You asked me a question SIr. If Metro said to me in the morning, I don't want to vote on it, I would feel that I would be man enough to vote my own conscience. I want to make my position clear. I just dont think I ought to ask Metro to do a thing and then go on and do it on my own. If Metro comes in here and tells us by their actions they are not willing to face the music, I will face my own music. Mr. Nesbitt: Thank you very much. Mr. Jack Berliner: (Same previously identified in these minutes as "unidentified man") Bringing Metro into this is ridiculous because it has nothing to do with Metro. Its only right that Coral Gables, South Miami and City of Miami Beach and Miami make their own laws because man running a bar in the Fountainbleau Hotel has nothing whatsoever in common with a mom and pop store in florida city and to think that you can bring all of 27 municipalities in Dade County together, this could go on for a hundred years because by the time it comes up, everybody has elected new officials and its ridiculous to think you can bring all these people together. We are notinterested in Metro, we are interested in the City of Miami. Rev. Gibson: Let me answer because I am sure what I said, triggered your thinking. The interesting thing, I am a native of this community, 57 years. There was a time when we thought that every municipality ought to have its own water system. Mr. Berliner: That's ridiculous - Rev. Gibson: Don't tell me that's ridiculous, we had it. Mr. Berliner: It is ridiculous. Rev. Gibson: We had it and just turned it over, didn't we? We just turned it over, don't tell me its ridiculous. Whiskey can't be any more important than water. a Mr. Berliner: Its served in a different way. Rev. Gibson: Oh yes, and it has a different reaction too and its served for a different purpose. Mr. Plummer: All right I think that answers that. Now may I ask the Commission to please go on record in instructing me as your representative to the Dade League as to the proposal now before the Dade League. MARCH 8, 1973 Do you want me to tell you really what the two choices are? The 2 choices are that you go along with "Total Uniformity" or the proposal now before the Dade League and that is "Maximum Uniformity" Mayor Kennedy: What does maximum mean? Mr. Plummer: Maximum means that no municipality nor Metro would be able to set hours beyond the maximum. Mrs. Gordon: What is the maximum? Mrs. Plummer: The "maximum" for different categories Mrs. Gordon breaks down into about 8 different categories. Mrs. Gordon: What is going to determine the "maximum"? Mr; Plummer: 1 don't have the paper before me but as I recall the maximum would be 3 A.M. on everything. It broke down very similar to what the City proposed. Mrs. Gordon: It isn't what the maximum existing in any of these locations - Mr. Berliner: Mr. Plummer, may I say something else - Mr. Plummer: Sir, I am asking for the Commission to guide me. Mr. Berliner: Yes, but 3 A.M. puts us in competition with the nightclubs in which we are not interested in being. A night club now has 5 o'clock. We are not interested in cutting their hours. They are not our competitors, but they would be if - Mr. Plummer: No Sir, they still would be open until 5 A.M. Mr. Berliner: OK, fine. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Plummer, since you are close to this item and have been working with it, do you want to move it the way you see it? Mr. Plummer: I wouldn't hesitate to move it but I question that I as your representative should be the maker of the motion. Mr recommendation to you is that you accept the proposal of the "Maxiumum Uniformity Hours" It does accomplish a great deal, it does not accomplish everything we want.. Mayor Kennedy: Is that your recommendation? Mr. Plummer: My recommendation Mr. Mayor is thatwe go along with the "Maximum Uniformity " regulations as set forth. Mr. Berliner: Arc you talking about Metro's maximum thing? This is strictly the City of Miami. Mr. Plummer: This is the Dade League Sir. Mr. Berliner: The Dade League is dead, that could go for 100 years. We are interested in the City of Miami. This could go on for a hundred years and by the.time it comes up, there could be an entirely different Commission here and in Coral Gables and Hialeah. We are interested in the City of Miami. Mayor Kennedy: Are you trying to say that the Dade League hasn't had a new thought since the Dinasaur age? Mr. Berliner: I know nothing about the Dade League. I am talking about the City of Miami. I think we are being discriminated against because we are being put in unfair competition against the people in Hialeah, Miami Springs, Miami Beach and Coral Gables and all we are looking for is fairness. 36 MARCH 8, 1973 4, Mayor Kennedy; Yes but we asked Mr. Plummer to do this. The request has to come from the Dade League to Metro. Mr. Berliner: Yes but the Dade League can drop dead. We are not interested in the Dade League, we are interested in the City of Miami. Mayor Kennedy: We understand that. This thing doesn't have to be expanded. We know your thinking and I think you see the thinking of the Commission. Mr. Plummer, you have a motion on the floor? Mr. Berliner: Before somebody seconds it, I think its a lousy deal. Mr. Simon: My name is Robert Simon, 3699 N. W. 7th Street. I am at Hurtaks. For a point of information, whatever the Dade League comes up with and brings before Metro, would that have to be unanimous? Would a majority of the Dade League be able to bring pressure to bear? I am thinking for instance of the hours that Miami Beach currently has. Certain places that in the County that are open 23=24 hours a day. If you come up with a maximum such as that, it of course will be agreeable to the people that have those maximums. If you come up with a maximum that is in line with what we are requesting or what the County has now, the places that have more liberal hours than that will not be satisfied to have a restricted maximum. Mr. Plummer: I said before Sir, the only one that was unhappy was Miami Beach. Mr. Simon: Well can Miami Beach be controlled? Miami Beach would have to be within it. Mr. Plummer: I don't know that Miami Beach was ever controlled but I will say Sir, that the majority opinion of the Dade League will be the ruling factor. The majority of the League which now is on weighted voting, Miami has 6 votes, if the majority opinion that it be presented to Metro in that form, that is the way it will be presented Sir. Mr. Simon: I see, then it would be restrictive on Miami Beach in all probability. Mr. Plummer: Yes Sir. Mr. Berliner: I think the people from Miami Beach are the only ones that make any sense. This is ridiculous to say that I am holier than thou. Everybody in any other city can drink except in the City of Miami. This is a City of tourists. When they come down here, they come down here to have a good time and it is ridiculous to tell people you can drink if you walk accross the street but you can't drink on this side of the street. I think we are victims of discrimination, the businessmen of the City of Miami. Mayor Kennedy: Mr. Plummer, do you have a motion? Mr. Plummer: My motion Mr. Mayor would be that the City of Miami Commission go on record as being in favor of the proposal as set forth by the Dade League in their recommendations to the Metro Commission in reference to "Maximum Uniform hours" of liquor serving in Dade County. Mayor Kennedy: Is there a second? Mr. Reboso: Seconded by Mr. Reboso, call the roll. Thereupon the following resolution was introduced by Mr. Plummer, who moved its adoption: MARCH 8, 1973 37 RESOLUTION NO. 73-166 A RESOLUTION FAVJRING THE PROPOSAL OF THE DADE LEAGUE OF MUNICI?ALITIES IN ITS RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNTY COMMISSION WITH REFERENCE TO MAXIMUM HOURS FOR SERVING ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Mr. Reboso, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Gibson, Reboso, Plummer, Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NOES: None Mayor Kennedy: If this passes, you will get what you are asking for because you will be included in this whole sphere. 31, CERTIFICATES OF APPRECIATION The Commission presented certificates of appreciation to Mr. Wendall R. Bailey, Dlrector of Finance and to Mr. Lew Price Publicity Department for their efforts in connection with the recent sale of Parks and Recreational Facilities Bonds in New York. 32, CHANGE DATE OF FIRST COMMISSION MEETING IN APRIL 1973 The following resolution was introduced by Mrs. Gordon who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-167 A RESOLUTION POSTPONING THE FIRST MEETING IN APRIL OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION FROM APRIL 12 TO APRIL 19, 1973 (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Mr. Plummer, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Reboso, Plummer, Gibson, Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NO ES: None MARCH 8, 1973 3� 4 33. AMEND .ORD LNANCE 8133 TO EXTEND EFFECTIVE DATE REMOVAL OF VESSELS FROM DINNER KEY MARINA AREA The Mayor announced that Mr. Crouch requested a personal appearance before the Commission to discuss the effective date of Ordinance No. 8133. Mr. Crouch: All I am prepared to do or have the time to do is ask for a stay of execution on Ordinance 8133 which pertains to the removal of all vessels illegally moored or docked in the Dinner Key area until the next Commission Meeting so I can get on the agenda and come in and have some time to discuss this matter. It will save both parties a lot of confusion and conflict. Mayor Kennedy: When is that supposed to go into effect? Mr. Crouch: On the 12th Sir. No, yes on March 12th. Mr. 'Reese: Which incorporates the extension of time that the Commission previously gave. Mayor Kennedy: Why did you wait so long? Mr. Crouch: I kept feeling that the situation was going to change due to the fact the City has not made one effort to fulfill any of their particular things and there has been a lot of things that have been going on with the registration of boats that are going in this new mooring area that is in total conflict with all boat regulations and boat handling etc. I would like to discuss it at that time and I am out of time and I know you people have a lot of things to do today. Mayor Kennedy: Its an awfully late date to come in, thats the problerry, with the ordinance going into effect next Monday. Mr. Crouch: I was trying to do it by talking to the Commissioners and I was informed that the proper way to do it wouldbe to come in and speak to the whole Commission as a whole so that's, there were several days there, I assumed I would be able to accomplish my mission in that way but I was wrong. I would very much appreciate a postponement until the next meeting because if it's not, there will be some problems and I am sure tired of problems. Mr. Reese: Mr. Mayor, may I make a suggesion that it be brought to this gentleman's attention that this Commission operates as a body and not on an individual basis and also that you operate under the sunshine law. Mr. Crouch: That's why I am here this time Sir. Mayor Kennedy: What is the feeling of the Commission? Mr. Reese: Mr. Mayor, I would suggest it would be appropriate to get the answer from the City Attorney. Mayor Kennedy: Mr. Lloyd are you prepared? Mr. Lloyd: There is an ordinance currently in effect which provides for regulations under which Mr. Crouch is supposed to abide and if you are going to amend the ordinance, you can do it by another ordinance amendment. Is that what we arc talking about? As I understand it, this is in full force and effect on March 12th and unless you want to make an amendatory provision, it is. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Crouch, do you object to the ordinance or how its being administered? Mr. Crouch: Mainly no, the ordinance is fine. I am objecting to the way its being administered, definitely. The ordinance is good and the City of Miami needs it but the way its being administered, `3� MARCH 8, 1973 I do have objection to it and its a'rather lengthy and we don't have time today. Mr. Plummer: Can his be put in a stay position until we can meet on the 22nd? Mr. Reese: I personally can't do that and I don't see how any administrative action can do that. Mr. Plummer: There is no choice but to hear it today. Mr. Reese: I am not the one that has the choice. You are asking me a question and I am answering what I can do. Rev. Gibson: Why can't? Mr. Lloyd, Ididn't hear you. What is the legal position? You have a law that is supposed to be effective on the 12th. We the Commission passed a law. If we the Commission want to give this man an opportunity to be heard. Tell me why can't I do it? Mr. Lloyd: He may be heard. What I said was that if the law is in effect for March 12th and the ordinance has gone into effect, the only way you can give :zim relief is by amending the ordinance. You may hear hih. Nothing wrong with hearing him but I understand there is some administrative problem in connection with the ordinance and if there is, that is another matter. Rev. Gibson: Why can't we direct the administration, if there is an administrative remedy, why can't we direct the administration to do something about it? Mr. Reese: There is no administrative remedy. Mr. Lloyd: Providing there is an administrative remedy, I don;t know what it is. I am assuming that there is an ordinance which provides that he must do something on a certain date and if there is, I don't know what administrative remedy he could have. If there is one, why then you may consider it, Or the City Manager may. Rev. Gibson: We pass ordinances around here and people have come in here and they have said to us, this is a hardship or under the circumstance, we want you to postpone putting this in force and we have done it. I want you to tell me Sir as my legal counsel how I could help that man with that same spirit in mind? Mr. Crouch: I was led to believe - Mr. Lloyd: If I may plead my ijnorance myself, I don't yet know what the problem is exactly, I am going to have to know exactly what the problem is before I give an answer. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Reese and Mr. City Attorney, is it proper that we can put this one gentleman, the only one who has come here and objected, in a status quo position until the meeting of the 22nd? Is that possible? At that time, we can place him on the agenda and we can hear his complaint and either agree or disagree, let the ordinance go into effect except the one administrative problem that he has and we hear that on the 22nd, is there anything wrong with that? Mr. Lloyd: Unless I know exactly what the status quo problem is YES, I think there is something wrong with it. Mr. Plummer: The point is that he is there and he doesn't want to be moved, its that simple. If that can't be done, say so. Mayor Kennedy: What seems to be the problem. Mr. Reese: This ordinance applies to everybody. There is no provisions in the ordinance to make any exceptions. Mayor Kennedy: What is he objecting to? 40 MARCH 8, 1973 Mr. Reese: I don't know what the objections are. Mr. Crouch: I was led to believe that when the ordinance was passed, that if it was necessary, the people that were here at that meeting or that had the vessels would be allowed to come in and ask for a continuance. I was also led to believe at the reading of the second passage of that ordinance that there was no need for an attorney to be present. We were informed from the bench that no attorned needed to be there because it was asimple cut and dried thing. I do not believe that is true and also it was told me and the rest of the people that if an extension was needed, it would be granted and if I have to, I can get in the taped record, and bring this out. I was hoping that I would not have to do this. All I am asking is what the Commission offered, an extension and its only until the next meeting and basically there has been an ordinance on that particular area where my vessels are for the last several years and I have been allowed to sit there all this time, now why can I not have from the 12th till the next meeting? Until I can present my case? Mr. Lloyd: I'll answer that plainly and simply, because the ordinance you cannot. The ordinance says that all boat owners shall be removed at that time at that date, thats the end of it, that's why you can't have it. Mr. Crouch: May I have an extension or are we going to get into another long and lengthy battle? I do not want this. This is the reason I would like to settle it nice and peaceful without court action because court takes a lot of your time and my time and Mr. Lloyds time. I do not believe from the 12th- Mayor Kennedy: Lets hear from the Dockmaster. What is involved here, I don't understand what he is objecting to. Mr. Bob Jennings: I haven't heard what he said Mr. Mayor. Mr. Crouch: I don't want to be moved, period. until - Mr. Jennings: I am sure there are a good many boats that don;t want to be moved. Mr. Crouch: A good many boats apparently do not feel that they have the right to come in here and complain about the actions being taken and feel they have a right to come in here and express their viewpoints, why doesn't everybody move at the same time? You people came out there, brought these •maps and charts out there that you are going to start building chis new marina, right? Mr. Jennings: Thats one reason, yes. Mr. Crouch: And you stated to several people that this new marina is not going to be built for 2 to 3 years, is that correct? Mr. Jennings: I can't answer that. Mr. Crouch: This has been quotcd as what you said to different people. If the Coconut Grove Sailing Club and several other vessels that apparently have the legal right to stay where I cannot, if they can stay there, and not harm. Well I have the right to be in this 100' strip that was given to the fisherman a long time ago which you people continually deny. Mr. Jennings: Can you produce something? Mr. Crouch: I can, that is the reason that I wanted the ability to come in here and talk to the Council and bring my proof . Mr. Jennings: Where is your proof? Why haven't you brought it today? 41 MARCH 8, 1973 Mr. Jennings: There is no proof, Mr. Crouch. Mr. Crouch: Oh yes there is. ' Mr. Jennings: There is not. I have researched the deeds to that property. There is no mention of a reservation for a strip for commercial fishing. Mr. Crouch: Mr. Mayor, I would like time to produce this proof= and get the witnesses that were there at the signing of this proof and get this thing down once and for all because a resolution was made about 3 years ago that everything would be left status quo and now all of a sudden, it is not that way, kick everybody out except certain people that belong to clubs etc. If I am going, fine, but I wanted everybody in the area to be dredged, to go too, including Coconut Grove Sailing Club. Mr. Jennings: Mr. Crouch, you have already had 45 days to produce this proof. Why haven;t you done it in that period of time? Mr. Crouch: I assumed that you people would come up with something for one reason and another, reason it was stated here at this meeting that we could have a continuance, if needed. I have come in and asked for a continuance and told no. Mr. Reese: At that public hearing when that ordinance was amended, and adopted, it was pointed out to the City Commission that we had to get this problem in this Marina resolved before we could continue to go to the I,I.Board to get the permit that is needed for us to proceed with the operation of the construction of the new Marina out there. This has been the thrust and the need for this whole correction. This was discussed backwards and forwards in this public meeting and.different times and different people would come up with their individual problems and the Commission recognized that there was a need or a possibility of consideration of a need, for an extension of time. You gave this extension of time and you pointed out that you felt 45 days would be adequate for those people to make the necessary adjustments. Now you have already given the extension of time. The ordinance is coming into effect on March 12th and it affects everybody. The others are under contractual arrangements, like the Sailing Boat Club etc., they are under contractural arrangements. Rev. Gibson: I didn't get my answer. Mr. Reese are we going to do that building? When are we going to do that building? Mr. Reese: First of all, irrespective of when we do it, it is going to take us a long time to get it processed before the I.I. Board. The #1 thing we have to•do is we have to assure the I.I. Board we have taken these corrective actions before we can even make application. Rev. Gibson: Did we pass the ordinance which set the ground rules? Mr. Reese: You passed it effective March 12th. Rev, Gibson: All we did was pass a law which gave you the instrument to go to the i.I.Board and say now look, this is what we've done. Mr. Reese: This is what we are going to do - Rev. Gibson: What is wrong with letting that man stay there until such time as you all are ready to build? Mr. Jennings: Reverendgibson, may I say something? Rev. Gibson: Yes and I want you to put it all on the table today, let it all hang out so that we don't be unfair to the man. 42 MARCH 8, 1973 Mr. Jennings: You did more than pass an ordinance Reverend Gibson. You made a very substantial concession as well. You conceded that if boats meet certain criteria, these criteria really being rather simple, just come into my office and register and provide us evi- dence of current Florida State Registration or documentation, and the third criteria was that they have some means of propulsion, other than a makeshift means of propulsion. If they meet these criteria, we have provided an anchorage for them out beyond the spoil islands which is still within the area of the new Marina but we allowed them to use that area until such time as we need to use that area for the construction so even though we passed the ordinances, we did make that concession which I think is a very substantial concession. If Mr. Crouch's vessel meets the criteria, let him move out to the area that we have set aside for him. Its a matter of control Reverend Gibson. You must provide a measure of control within the yacht basis. You have to say that boats may anchor or moor here and they may not anchor or moor here. If you don't. If Mr. Crouch stays over there, what is to prohibit 100 other boats coming over there and anchoring? How do you get control? Rev. Gibson: I know how it is easy to write rules to take care of cases but let me go to the other part of the argument. If we were ready to build in the morning, I am sure that that gen- telman wouldn't dare or we could work out an agreement that within 90 days of the time we are ready to go, get out of the way or some such time. What really troubles me is we aren't showing a willing- ness. I am not pleading his cause, I have got to live with my concience and it troubles me that we gave you the law, the instrument to go to the Board and say this is our intention, this is the way we are going to move. Mr. Reese: Mr. Mayor, I hate to disagree with Canon Gibson but I am going to have to. This was a document of intent. This was a document that had to be administered. Now, you have always been the campaigner of treating everybody alike and we are endeavoring to do that and not make an exception here. Now, if this Commission wants to make the exception, then the vehicle is to amend the ordinance. Rev. Gibson: I am for giving the man relief. Will you tell me how to give him the relief Mr. Lloyd? That's what we have you for, you tell me what approach I must take to give the man the relief and yet be within reason and I will do it. Mr. Lloyd: There is only one way to do it and that is to pass an emergency ordinance at this meeting because March 12th is before your next meeting and that is the only way to do it and the relief would be for every single boat owner. You can't make something personal with him. You have to demonstrate that its .an emergency to everybody, you can't just demonstrate he has an emergency. Rev. Gibson: If we wanted to put off the enforcement of that ordinance for 2 weeks, what is there to prevent us from doing it? I want the lawyer to answer it. Mr. Lloyd: You have the power, maybe not legally so, but you have the power. I can't stop you. Rev. Gibson; No, no, no. Mr. Lloyd: Just a moment. I am advising you legally that legally you can't do that unless you pass an emergency ordinance amending. That is the only way you can do it. Rev. Gibson: I am ready to pass that too because I just feel that the man wants 2 weeks, you aren't going to build in 2 weeks, give him the 2 weeks. Thats my position and I offer that as a motion. 43 MARCH 8, 1973 Mr. Plummer: What position does this put the administration in before the I.I. Board? Mr. Reese: We can't submit any application. Mr. Plummer: What position putting it off 2 weeks. Is it going to put this total package in jeopardy Sir, or not. Mr. Reese: I have no way to evaluate it. All I did was when this ordinance was passed, send a copy of it on to the staff of the I.I.Board so they knew what we were doing. As of the 12th we were going to then make the application but this is a legislative matter and if thats your decision, Mr. Crouch: Rather than put the City in jeopardy on this I.I. thing, I would withdraw my request but when the 12th comes, we are going to have a hassle and I am not going to move until the next meeting but rather than cause any hassle with this II thing or have a chance of losing your state and federal aid through any other means, I would rather withdraw and take my chances. It's still going to be there until that next meeting. Mayor Kennedy: Do you think that 2 weeks is going to cost us before the II Board, can you realistically say that? Mr. Reese: I can't realistically say it, 2 months either as far as that goes. Mayor Kennedy: Is there a second to Canon Gibsons motion? Mrs. Gordon: I was ready to make the second but since the gentleman has withdrawn his request for consideration, I see no reason for us to take this action. Mr. Crouch: I did it only as a gentleman. If you still want to second it, feel free. Its much easier than fighting on the 12th. Mrs. Gordon: Second your motion. An Ordinance entitled - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING. ORDINANCE NO. 8133 PASSED AND ADOPTED JANUARY 25, 1973, TO EXTEND THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF SAID ORDINANCE TO MARCH 26,1973 WAS INTRODUCED BY Reverend Gibson, seconded by Mrs. Gordon for adoption as an emergency measure and dispensing with the requirement of reading same on two sepa'ate days, which was agreed to by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Gibson, Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NOES: Mr. Reboso. Whereupon the Commission, on motion of Reverend Gibson, seconded by Mrs. Gordon, adopted said ordinance by the following vote -AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Gibson, Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NOES: Mr. Reboso. Said ordinance was designated Ordinance No. 8150. 44 MARCH 8, 1973 34, 4 EC H The Mayor recognized the presence in the Commission Chambers of Judge Milton A. Friedman and former Commissioner B. E. Hearn and announced that all persons present in regard to this item would be given an opportunity to speak today and that the Commission was committed to hold a public hearing on the matter at a later date. Judge Friedman: Mr. Mayor and Members of the Commission. Might I say it has always been a pleasure for me to appear before this Commission, mainly because its because of the fact that I have yet to lose any time that I have been before you. Maybe its because I never come before you unless I know I am in the right and this is one of the times but.I don't know if this is the propitious moment to go into a full discussion of the garbage matter. It is my understanding that the City Commission made a determination that there be 12 community meetings at which time the various city departments would explain to the populace, what their thoughts were, what the city's thoughts were on the subject of garbage collection through disposal bags on the curbside. Those meetings were held and the people expressed their opinion in no uncertain terms that they were almost violently opposed to the proposal of the City. As I understand it, today the City Manager is supposed to report to you the results of those 12 meetings and if that is all that is supposed to take place as far as the garbage question is concerned, that the City Commission would then set a date when there would be a public hearing when the thousands of people who are disturbed would appear before this Commission and express to you how they feel about it in person at which time, you would then at that meeting, and I don't know how your procedure is, at a following meeting, public meeting, make your decision. I want to know #1. Has there been a decision already reached by the City Commission that you are definitely going ahead with the having of garbage disposal bags for curbside pickup? Has there been a decision reached on that or are you in just the talking stage? Mayor Kennedy: Mr. Reese, fill us in on what action the Commission has taken. Mr. Reese: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission. At the time the Greenleaf and Wigan report was submitted to this Commission, one of their basic recommendations was that we should consider curbside pickup in order to reduce the overall costs for our garbage pickup because that was one of the purposes behind that. From that report, we then 'developed a task force of city employees to pull together a presentation and I came back to the City Commission to give you a schedule of this presentation and the different neighbor- hoods to hold this meeting to discuss this possible proposal. There was no commitment madeby this Commission to go into curbside pickup. There was no commitment made by this Commission to use plastic bags other than to give us the,peroggative to go out into the neighborhood and tell the story to the City Commission. These were not public hearings because we can't hold public hearings. The City Commission can hold them but we can't have neighborhood meetings. What we have endeavored to do is to explain to the people what experiences we have had by showing slides to the people and endeavoring to discuss it. These meetings have been held in a total of 13 different areas throughout the city an out of that represents a population according to 1970 census of 354,200 people. In attendance, there was 942 and there were petitions to sign, made available for those who express their opinion for the curbside pickup and those who expressed against it. There were 71 people for it. There were 572 people against it, at these meetings out of the total population of the area that we cover in the City of Miami. This report submitted to the City COmmission today with the idea that if you are so inclined to proceed to hold a public hearing. • 45 MARCH 8, 1973 • When we submitted the budget to you October 1, 1972, we pointed out where some of these funds could be made available on a reduction in anticipation of putting in an operation where we would reduce the expenditure on our garbage pickup. This is where the second thrust for us to go ahead on this project is stemming from. This is the status of it and these are the purposes behind it but therehas been no promises, no commitments made, nor at no time was the City Commission committed this action, that there would be without first, a public hearing. First of all you have to amend your trash and garbage ordinance. Judge Friedman: Thats a fine statement except the newspapers apparently don't print it the way Mr. Reese states it because the story I read in the newspaper was that only reason there is going to be a delay is to give the City time to buy the plastic bags for the first 3 bags for the people under the new plan which indicates that you have already decided in your minds what you are going to do and have definitely made a determination you are going to have delivery at curbside and the only thing that is holding it up is that the City can't go out and buy plastic bags. Now that is what the newspaper said and that is why I am here today because i want to disregard what the newspapers print and I want to find it from you folks in person. Now if we are assured that there has been no vote taken, and that it is still an open matter for discussion, I am satisfied. This is not the time or the place to make my presentation. It will be at the public hearing. What I would like to have done now is if you arc going to consider this matter and if it is going to be at a public presentation, if you will let me know where and when the presentation should be made, and then I will be there and we will have all the busloads of people and have about 300,000 people coming down talking to you. Of course, I am being facetious. I might say this to those of you who read the newspaper article. There was something I said in there which I did say and I want to be sure that you understand that what I said was facetious and I said something about if Mr. Reese wants to have a central collection for the garbage, we could make it much cheaper to have all the garbage in one place, less trucks, less manpower, the people in the City of Miami should bring their garbage and deposit it at the front door of City Hall it would be a central place and easy to collect. Obviously I was being facetious and I just wanted to be sure for the record. What I am here for today is not to make a presentation but if you will tell me where and when it should be, I will be there and my constituents will also and for the record, someone made a remark before the meeting started. Mr. Reese said it and for the record, i am here, you know I am a Judge, but I am here as a private citizen and taxpayer and not in my capacity as a Circuit Judge and I am not taking out time from my busy calendar to come down here and talk about garbage but the reason why I am here is that fortunately at the end of a 2 day trial, the jury came in at 12"45 with a verdict and I was free for the afternoon and I know of no better place to spend my afternoon than with you gentlemen and Mrs. Gordon. If you will tell me the time and place of the meeting Mr. Hearn wants to know the same thing, we are working together. Mayor Kennedy,: What day would you suggest Mr. Reese? Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, may I make a suggestion that we have it in the evening at Bayfront Auditorium? Mayor Kennedy: We will have to check the date to be sure the auditorium is available. Mrs. Gordon: I didn't set the date yet but I do think we should have it in a larger place than this and we should have it in the evening. Mayor Kennedy: What about the evening of April 26th, after the City Commission meeting? Try to make that commission light for that day. Judge Friedman: Its okay with me. Mr. Reese: May I find out when that auditorium is available and then notify the City Commission to get an agreeable date 46 • • to the City Commission, if its agreeable and then I will personally notify Judge Friedman and B. E. Hearn as well as advertise it and do all the necessary things to do with the hearing. Mr. Hearn: I would like to say thank you and for Mrs. Gordon's thought of getting a place large enough. When we met in Morningside Park, there was more people on the outside than on the inside. It was a very inappropriate place to try to hold a meeting and get any satisfaction because the people outside couldn't hear what was being said. All we want to know is when and where. 35, Mr. Reese: I presented to the City Commission, a program for us to complete and have in place, all our bond anticipated programs by 1976. In order to get this accomplished and we rec- ognized it at the time but didn't know what particular phase it should be phased in, it will be necessary to put some of the street work, sewer work and some of the storm drains out with private consultants. We are asking the City Commission for the authority to see if we can get some private consultants to put this work out with them so we can move ahead more expeditiously rather than for us to hire additional staff, train them and wait to get this project underway. The following resolution was introduced by Mr. Plummer who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-168 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING UTILIZATION OF PRIVATE CONSULTING ENGINEERING FIRMS TO ACCOMPLISH CERTAIN SPECIALIZED HIGHWAY DESIGN WORK TO BE ACCOMPLISHED THROUGH THE GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND PROGRAM (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Mrs. Gordon, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Gibson, Reboso, Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NOES: None '36, AUTHORIZE PROPOSALS -CONTRACT PLANS FOR PARKS BOND PROGRAM The following resolution was introduced by Mrs. Gordon who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-169 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO RECEIVE PROPOSALS FROM RECREATION PLANNERS FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING CONTRACT PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE PARKS BOND PROGRAM TO BE IMPLEMENTED AT THE EARLIEST POSSIBLE DATE, AND PROVIDING THAT THE RESULTS OF THESE SUBMISSIONS BE PRESENTED TO THE CITY COMMISSION FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION 47 MARCH 8, 1973 • • (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here andon file in the City Clerks Office) Upor being seconded by Mrs. Gordon, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Gibson, Reboso, Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NOES: None 37. REGULATION OF STATE OWNED LANDS BENEATH NAVIGABLE WATERS Mr. Reese: The State of Florida is coming up with some proposals to license and control navigable waters and especially dock fac- ilities and marinas within the confines and jurisdiction of the City as well as private enterprise and we are asking for the City Commission to consider passing a resolution so that these provisions would be drafted but not to affect municipal owned facilities to the extent of their proposed fees. Their fees are very high and we are asking for them to reduce the fees for municipal operations. The following resolution was introduced by Mr. Plummer who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-170 A RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING THE NEED FOR THE STATE OF FLORIDA TO PROVIDE A MEANS FOR REGULATION OVER STATE OWNED LANDS BENEATH THE NAVIGABLE WATERS OF THE STATE, AND OF THE WATER COLUMN IN NAVIGABLE WATERS, INCLUDING THAN' AREA OF THE SHORE SEAWARD OF THE LINE OF MEAN HiGH TIDE; BUT REQUESTING THAT THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND CAREFULLY CONSIDER THE IMPORTANCE OF MARINAS AND THE ENTIRE MARINE INDUSTRY TO THE POPULARITY AND ECONOMY OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA AND ACCORDINGLY REQUESTING THAT THEY REEVALUATE THE STRINGENT PROVISIONS OF THE PRESENT DRAFT PROPOSAL OF MARINA REGULATIONS TO ENSURE THAT THE FINAL FORM OF THESE MARINA REGULATIONS IS NOT SUCH AS TO STIFLE OR STAGNATE THE FUTURE OF MARINE INTERESTS IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Mrs. Gordon, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Gibson, Plummer, Reboso, Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NOES: None MARCH 8, 1973 48 • • 38, AGREEMENT FOR LANDSCAPE DESIGN - BI-CENTENNIAL PARK The following resolution was introduced by Mrs. Gordon who moved its adoption: rRESOLUTION NO. 73-171 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH EDWARD D. STONE JR., AND ASSOCIATES FOR THE LANDSCAPE DESIGN OF THE BICENTENNIAL PARK, A COPY OF SAID AGREEMENT BEING ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Reverend Gibson, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Gibson, Reboso, Plummer, Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NOES: None 39, SOCCER EVENTS AT THE ORANGF, BOLL STADIUM The following resolution was introduced by Mrs. Gordon who moved its adoption: R ESOLUTION NO. 73-172 /'RESOLUTION ,FIXING MARCH 22, 1973 AS THE DATE FOR A PUB:.IC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE POSSIBILITY OF SCHEDULING PROFESSIONAL SOCCER EVENTS AT THE ORANGE BOWL STADIUM (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Reverend Gibson, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following, vote - AYES: Messrs. Gibson, Reboso, Plummer, Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NOES: None 49 MARCH 8, 1973 40 40, PAY PLAN_ STUDY - YARGER AND ASSOCIATES Mr. Yarger: Mr. Mayor and Members of the Commission, it is a pleasure to meet with you on our Pay Survey Report and I will be brief and to the point and available to answer any questions you may have. I might say first, 'I am sure we all realize that a pay plan has to satisfy many elements of a city government. It has to satisfy the taxpayer who foots the bill. The Board of Directors or the policy making group of the City, the City Manager as Chief Exec- utive, Department Heads who have to get the job done, employees on the job so they have a reasonable opportunity to be rewarded for good performance and a reasonable opportunity to be considered on equitable basis for promotion, to move up the line and also applicants for job in the city service. I point that out to indicate that no pay plan satisfies all of these elements 100%. We used to say about 20 years ago, if we satisfied about 95i, we were doing quite well. Reduce that per- centage to somewhere between 75 to 90. Briefly, we have conducted a classification survey, grouped like positions together in classes. Drafted class specifications, working very closely with Department Heads, Employees on the job and Employee organizations. WE had each employee complete a position description with an opportunity to describe his own job in his own words. We then made desk audits or interviews with a representative number of employees visiting fire stations, public works activities, city garage, in fact every major place of work in the city service. We then drafted rough specifications, and passed them out to department heads and employee groups and got feedback from them and from the groups. We then discussed the class specifications with the department head so I would say that we had maximum participation from all concerned on the survey. Now as I said before, we got the feedback, analyzed any suggestions for changes or recommendations and very carefully considered them. Some we agreed with, others we did not agree with but we do hope now that we are all through, that every employee and every department head will feel his views have been considered because we have developed the pay plan with a view toward equity for all concerned to the maximum extent possible. Now this is the core city. It is the key city of the area. We found in collecting pay data, that other cities look to Miami for leadership. It is also one of the major public employers in the area. We believe professionally the personnel from an administrative point of view and also from a general public employee point of view that the salary levels of the City of Miami should be competitive with the major employers in the area and where it is necessary to recruit on a nation-wide basis as for Planners, professional Engineers, Parks and Recreation Director etc. that those salaries be competitive with major cities throughout the country. I might say that in our salary survey that the prestige of this city ranks very high. We solicited pay data for key professional administrative classes from 55 cities of over 250,000 population and we received a response from 54 of them which is excellent. Normally we receive a response from 2/3 of the cities covered, that is considered very well. You reviewed a tentative or preliminary partial report of our pay plan on December 14th so I won't go into any great detail. I would say that we have to the best of our ability assigned classes to pay grades to make the city competitive and still preserving proper relationships internally between classes so unless there are any questions, that concludes my presentation, thank you. Mayor Kennedy: Are there any questions of Mr. Yarger from the members of the Commission or Mr. Reese? MARCH 8, 1973 50 • Mr. Richard: My name is Harry Richard. I personally believe that Mr. Yarger did a fine job and while doing a fine job you can always overlook a little item. On this one item in the classification on Page 11-5, on the Building Inspectors, Electrical Inspectors and Plumbing Inspectors. He rates them #1 at 25, 27 and 31 and if you will turn to Page 8, you will notice that a Maintenance Journeyman Plumber is rated at 26 and I think he just overlooked it and made a mistake on that type of a rating. The Inspector is a professional man, the Inspector has to work in the field as an architect, a n engin.eers helper, a contractors helper, check violations and has to be an overseer. He has to have much more qualifications than the Maintenance Plumber doing the work for the City and I just feel that the man overlooked this particular item and I want it known that the City of Miami has one of the finest building department inspectors of any place in the country. We keep the best records and I would like to say to Reverend Gibson that he made a statement between water and liquor, that turning over the water to the County as far as I am concerned, you are taking one of our inspections that we feel was one of the greatest in the country and you can read the papers today, because of unqualified men not making proper inspections, that there happens to be a typhoid epidemic now in the Homestead area and I hope that it doesn't happen here in the City of Miami because we can't get good qualified inspectors, thank you. Mr. Reese: Mr. Mayor, and members of the Commission. When we had a wage survey performed in 1963, it was pointed out that most likely 95% of the classifications or the salary ranges are acceptable. There is individual cases in all categories that undoubtedly will have to be reevaluated and discussed and negotiated out when this is put into effect and I feel that this City Commission wouldn't want to assume the detailed responsibility.of getting into each individual case so the question that was raised can undoubtedly be reconciled in one way or the other. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, I personally we will probably come up with many others maybe that would have to be resolved and could be handled at a later date and rather than try to find all the cases at this time that we ought to move forward in accepting the survey, however, I would like to ask that we ask that credit be given for longevity in regard to the analysis of the individual's position. Mr. Reese : Well I think Mrs. Gordon is endeavoring to talk to one point of an individual job that is within the longevity category and the only way that can be adjusted would be a re-class- ification again but you can't make an exception for one"boat man', that's the only thing. Rev. Gibson: When I saw the gentleman up here two minutes ago who repeated my words, I appreciate that and I remember when we were talking about pay raises sometime ago, something struck me that before we adopt this that I hope we get this on the table. I happen to be a Priest in the Episcopal Church and I have a Bishop and somehow they work out some salary business and I find it a little difficult for me to deal with my Bishop about my salary. I am doing this rather awkward. A department head. Maybe I better ask Mr:`-Reese_-t-#pis. If these department heads are not satisfied with the way they are classified or the consideration that would be dealt to them after you go through this report, are they going to be free and unhibited to raise some questions without fear of? You know, there are some things I don't ask my Bishop man. Don't tell him I told you that now. Mr. Reese: I won't tell him. Rev. Gibson: I am not saying this. All I am trying to make sure that I understand. For instance, I live in a world of reality and if a man is doing a good job, one of the best ways to make him continue doing a good job is to reward him and Mr. Reese reminded how I always handle on treating everybody alike. I don't know if what I am saying comes through. z 51 MARCH 8, 1973 • Mr. Reese: Well I can answer your questions for you. When this pay plan is adopted, then its a burden to write up the adminis- trative order as to how it's administered and at that particular time, is when you come acc.oss a lot of these questions and the Department Head as well as,the employe: representatives, as well as individuals will raise questions snd I assure you one thing, that I know from experience in 1963, it took us until about 1965 to get all of the questions resolved and worked out and for individuals and also for groups. Rev. Gibson: I appreciate that, now let me make sure that I raise it another way so that I will get my thinking right. Department Head "A" complains. Who does he complain to? Mr. Reese: Under our charter, he complains to the City Manager. Rev. Gibson: All right now, let me raise another question. Well I understand but I just, Mr. Reese, we know each other well enough. Mr. Reese: Yes Sir, don't pull any pinches. Rev. Gibson: Let me talk with you right now in the open. If I were a department head and I talked with you about my classification or where I think I ought to be over against where you think I ought to be or where you say I am. I am troubled about what will happen to those men and women. Human nature being what it is and that's all I deal with, that's my living, dealing with people. Human nature being what it is, makes me not want to change the charter but just makes me want to ask you. Mr. Reese: Well all I can answer is I endeavor to resolve the question and at no time have I ever deprived anybody the opportunity to come before the City Commission. Any one of the Department Heads on any one of their problems, and I think that stands up and was actually demonstrated on several occasions. Rev. Gibson: All right, I will say this and I am going to stop. Then I am to assume that any department head who feels that he has not been dealth with fai:•ly and justly and squarely, he can appeal to us, and at no time will you take it as an indication of being disloyal. Mr. Reese: Positively not. Why would he be disloyal? Rev. Gibson: All right, I just want to make sure we understand that. Mr. Reese: The only time he would be disloyal is if he would go and talk to a Commissioner individually without getting on the agenda and talking to all of you. Rev. Gibson: All right, I just want to, you men to understand that I don't want you to talk with me individually but you'be sure to come here and let it hang out and let all that wash come out here before the Commission. Mayor Kennedy: Mr. Reese, you forgot to put in this report and in mine was inadvertently left out, the Executive Pay Scale. That's the only thing that doesn't seem to be in this one. Mr. Southern, City Clerk: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, I would like to call to the attention of the Commission that it was obviously an oversight but the position of Assistant City Clerk, was also omitted from this report. Mayor Kennedy: You almost got omitted. Mr. Southern: Well I certainly am interested in him being in that and I am sure that it must have been an oversight. r 52 MARCH 8, 1973 Mrs. Gordon: May I try again to clarify the point I was trying to make before Mr. Reese? Mayor Kennedy: Wait a minute. I haven't got an answer. How come the Executive's on our book what Mr. Reese and the rest of the bigwigs are going to be getting? I would like to see that too. Mr. Reese: Mr. Mayor, I passed out to you previously the entire proposed plan. Mayor Kennedy: Yes I know. Mr. Reese: This one I pass,:d out today - Mayor Kennedy: As I said, there is a difference in them. Mr. Reese: It was omitted and it was omitted erroneously. Mayor Kennedy: Okay fine. The Assistant City Clerk. He will be included in there, that was just left out inadvertently or was that left out on purpose? Mr. Reese: Yes Sir, because there was quite a discussion if we should leave out the Assistant City Clerk, the Clerk and other people that are appointed and their salaries are set through other procedures. For an example, the Secretary of the Civil Service Board. He is really appointed by the Civil Service Board and at the budget time, there is a recommendation made on his salary and that is also true on the Planning and Zoning Board etc., but in order wherever it was possible for the consultant to'lmake comparisons, that's what was done. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Reese, a question with regard to what I tried to bring out before so that I may understand the procedure better. In a case where some employees will be increasing their class by one or two pay raises. Some of those employees may have been with the City for 10 years and some others for one year. Will they be classified the same or will the;, be given credit for the years they have been in the City although -:hey are going into a higher pay scale? Do you follow what I mean? Mr. Reese: Yes, are you asking me the question on the implementation Mrs. Gordon: I am asking you the question for clarification and for my own edification. Mr. Reese: If I understand your question correctly, You are asking me that if a person was in one particular pay range for a 10 year period and assume he is at the 8th step in that pay range, would he be put into the 8th step of the new range? Mrs. Gordon: Yes, or would he be on the same level as someone who has only been with the City a very short time who is also moving up to the same higher classification because the whole section of that whole particular group has been reclassified? Mr. Reese: I can't answer the question without knowing more of the details. Its a hypothetical question but I would have to know more of the details. Mrs. Gordon: Well is there any additional benefit for someone who has been. with the City for a long time who is being stepped up one or two classes by this survey? Mr. Reese: He has already been given benefits over the 8-year period and there would be a consideration in the next pay rangy he wouldn't go downgrade, he would go upgrade. MARCH 8, 1973 53 Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Yarger can you answer my question? Mr. Yarger: I think I can say something that will clarify the matter however I should make clear that the problem of implemen- tation. There are a good many ways to implement a pay plan, that is an administrative responsibility of the City and Mr. Reese very able explained, it takes quite a while to work out all the kinks but basically the answer is that yes with perhaps a few exceptions. In other words, if I am in Pay grade 25 on the top longevity step and my position is reassigned to Pay Grade 26, it is assumed that I would be on the top of Pay grade 26. Mrs. Gordon: That is what I wanted to know. That is assumed and that would be so. Mr. Yarger: In other words, the easy way to say it. I am on the same step in the new pay grade that I was in the old pay grade. Mrs. Gordon: I just wanted that assurance and you said that is so. Mr. Yarger: Thank you. Rev. Gibson: Let me ask one that sounds awful. You make the surveys. Do you think in good conscience, I am sure you must have seen our pay scale, do you think in good conscience that we pay our people fairly well as civil servants or employees of the City? Mr. Yarger: Well I would say that certainly the City Commission and Officials give constant recognition to the problem of the pay of employees. You have made several surveys in the last 10 to 15 years and then by virtue of the fact that you had this survey and what we recommended is in the way of more or less refinement of what is basically a gooi classification and pay plan. You have to make some increases in some areas to be exactly comparable with the major employers in the area. Rev. Gibson: This, and I am through. This pay plan makes it comparable? All right another question. Mr. Reese hasn't told me the answer yet but I happen to know if you do well to the topside, maybe the bottom guym some of it may sift down, you know what I mean? Mr. Yarger: Yes I know what you mean. Rev. Gibson: Based on the way we pay our City Manager and people in comparable cities of the same size, how do we look? Mr. Yarger: As far as the job is concerned, we go along with what you said earlier, everybody is a human being and has a certain sense of dignity and we give the same treatment and the same judgment in all jobs up and down the line and we would say that the salaries recommended for the Executive Pay Plan and the Unclassified Service are competitive in the same sense that they are competitive for the classified service. The same treatment for all. Mr. Plummer: Assuming this thing is passed today by this Commission, when will the employees see the dollar in hand? Mr. Reese: If this is passed by the Commission today, we would endeavor to get it on the payroll as rapidly as possible. Now that is not a very good date but I can't answer, I can't give you an exact date of when it could be on the payroll but it shouldn't take too long to get it accomplished. The question is that when this City Commission adopted the budget, and also I reported back at a later date, in keeping with your resolutions at that time, was that October 1972 was the date when this would become effective or in other words to make this pay plan retroactive. 54 MARCH 8, 1973 • • If this is still the wishes of 'he City Commission, it will be necessary to implement this pay plan by establishing a date at this time of when it is to go into effect and should your decision reach back to October 1972, the difference between the date you would establish today and the October 1972, it will be necessary for us to appeal that under Phase III of the government regulations. The government regulations that came out under Phase III stipulates that it can't be retroactive without appealing to the Chair. We would have to appeal and whatever the decision would be, I assume is binding or again its only advisory. Mr. Plummer: Aren't we more or less talking in 2 categories here today. 1. The pay plan perse, and 2. Retroactive back to October 1, 1972? Mr. Reese: Yes sir, but its altogether. Mr. Plummer: It is altogether and would have to be considered that way by the Pay Board? Mr. Reese: No no. If the City Commission passes this pay plan today. We then would make it effective immediately with the exception of the retroactive or the back pay. That is the part that would have to be submitted for consideration and an appeal to the Chairman. That is the rules and regulations that are out under Phase III. Mr. Plummer: A11 right Sir, at the last meeting Mr. Reese, and I think the big thing involved is, what is the dollar cost? Mr. Reese: The dollar cost if we implement it and make it ret- roactive to October 1972, will be $4,541,841. Now if the Commission decides to make it retroactive using Federal Sharing Funds, I would suggest that we reserve or set that amount or establish it as far as wages and salaries are concerned. If the Commission decides to implement it effective today, and not reserve the total amount, then your amount thatyou would expend for the balance of this year is $2, 649,409. Mr.Plummer: In other words, the 2 million 6 figure is without retroactive. The 4-5 is retroactive. My next question is this. What we then in fact for next year are building in is approximately a 2.6 million dollar factor. Mr. Reese: No Sir, because I have given you a 12 month figure. This $4,541,841 is from October to September 30th. Mr. Plummer: That has the retroactive built into it. Mr. Reese: That's right. Mr. Plummer: What I am asking then, my question is what is the figure without the retroactive pay? Mr. Reese: $2,649,409. Mr. Plummer: For 12 months? Mr. Reese: No that's not for the 12 months. That is from March until September. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Reese, what you are saying is that the annual figure - Mr. Reese: For a 12 month period. Mrs. Gordon: For any 12 month period will be the $4,541,841 Mr. Reese: That is correct. Because we only deal in the terms of the budget year. 55 MARCH 8, 1973 • MR. Reese: I reported back to the City Commission in negotiating with these employee groups that I went on record that I would recommend to you to honor the resolutions of intent that was passed in October to make it retroactive. This is what I told these people when the question was asked at the negotiations and I reported this back to the Commission. Mr. Litvak: Mr. Mayor, I am Marshall Litvak, General Employees Association. I think what Canon Gibson and Mrs. Gordon were asking in the same question and we would like to have it answered and we still haven't really heard it is with reference to implementation. If all employees will be put into the new pay plan at the same longevity that their length of service in their position would entitle them? Mr. Yarger, I understand, stated just that. I would like to hear Mr. Reese that this is what he intends to do with reference to the implementation. We also have a problem with as soon as feasible, fortunately most of us would be patient enough to wait but we have our employees who are with Water and Sewers who will be transferring to the County as of APril 1st. Their pay will be the pay in effect as of that date and if there is to be a pay increase, it would have to be in their paychecks before the date of transfer. Mr. Reese: I was answering the question solely on the payroll that the City of Miami makes. Water and Sewers makes up their own payroll and if this City Commission passes this today and sets a date for it to be effective and also with the provisions of the retroactive aspects in it, that would be trarsmitted to Garrett Sloan immediately and I understand that he said that he would go ahead with it. I can't give you a date on that but he recognized April 1 is here. Mr. Litvak: Are we correct Mr. Reese in that the implementation would be at the pay level that theEmployee now fits in his classification? Mr. Reese: I have not studied this and reviewed it to that extent and I will endeavor to do it and if I couldn't do it, I would come back and tell the City Commission that I couldn't do it within the estimated funds. Mr. Litvak: Canon Gibson, the reason I was stating that is the department heads would have the right to appeal before this board. Employees are governed by the pay plan and we must live within the plan. We do not have any right nor can we expect one to appeal individually for our position. This is the reason we are asking for clarification. One question Mr. Reese. Would a pay raise retroactive to January 11, the date of the ending of the guidelines require approval from the pay board? Mr. Reese: I can't answer that question because the orders that are written say for retroactive aspects, it has to be appealed. The date of the order I recognize as January 12th but thereis no provision that says from January 12th on, do you appeal it. This would be one of the questions that would have to be resolved. Mr. Salerno: I am Sergeant Charles Salerno, President of the Fraternal Order of Police, representing the Police Department. We are in accord with the study. We think the study is a good one and a much needed one. We have been waiting for quite some time. We have been negotiating since June 1972. We would love to get this thing retroactive to the first of October, however as Mr. Reese has pointed out, it may become a game of russian roulette whereby we may take this thing to the pay board and wait for 4 to 5 more months before they make a decision and then wind up losing the ballgame. I don't know, I dor't have the availability of information that maybe Mr. Reese has been able to get. Possibly as Mr. Litvak has pointedout, if this thing was retroactive to the expiration date of Phase II, maybe then we wouldn't have to get an appeal. We would like to get,as I said, the whole thing of course but in a practical vein, 56 MARCH 8, 1973 • • we don't want to jeopardize the entire package for a couple of months of retroactive pay raise. We will leave you with the problem and hopefully Mr. Reese can come up with a solution. Mr. Reese: Sergeant, do I understand that you are saying that you would be satisfied if this would only be retroactive until January if that would be permissible? Mr. Salerno: Yes, we would sacrifice the 3 months of 1972 rather than take a chance of losing everything and have to wait 4 or 5 months from an appeal to Washington. Mr. Reese: This would be representative of the Police. How about the other employees? Mrs. Gordon: Well why would we have to risk anything? Couldn't we go from one point forward positively and then appeal the other portion Mr. Reese? Mr. Charles Hall: I think you could, Mr. Mayor. We have a lobbyist in Washington that monitors the pay board operation and it is our understanding that for that period after January 11, that there are in fact, no controls even though some of the news articles and stuff you might have heard to the contrary but the regulations as we understand them indicate that there is no prior reporting procedure required nor are there any penalties in Phase III so you have absolutely no problem from going from the period from January llth forward. I think if you go back before that, you take a chance of really complicating the situation and I would urge the Commission to consider that period from January llth forward. Mrs. Gordon: And forget the other portion? Mr. Hall: Just the retroactivity. Rev. Gibson: Would this jeopardize the possibility of going? Say if we started with January, take care of that. Can they then address themselves to the other portion? Mr. Reese: I am quite sure we could appeal the other portion. In other words, we could put it in two packages. If we could get a ruling immediately, favorable. Rev. Gibson: This is what I, Sir, Mr. Salerno, I want to make sure I understand what you said. You said to us and I don't like the idea that you are willing to give up that other part. You say you would be willing to settle for us to deal with January to now, and keep on and in the meantime, I hope I am not understanding you to say then don't let us bother with going further than that. Mr. Salerno: Canon, what I was trying to say is that as we under- stand it as lay people, if we go back to October 1, the entire package comes under the guidelines of Phase II which is a 5.5 or 7% increase. Mrs. Gordon: Even;if its under appeal? Mr. Salerno: Yes Mam. We are kind of leery. We would like to have the thing retroactive for the entire package, of course but rather than risk the possibility and have to wait. There is a contract that was submitted several months ago for 81/2% that has not come back yet from Washington. We don't want to have to go there, wait 5 or 6 months and then take a chance on losing everything for just those 3 months of retroactive pay raise. Mr. Reese: It would be my suggestion to the Commission that if we can get a decision on this,, our of Jacksonville or out of Washington, that we can make it retroactive till January 12th or the llth, that we make it retroactive to that date if its agreeable to the City Commission, then abide by the rules, if we should appeal the difference between January and October. 57 MARCH 8, 1973 • Rev. Gibson: Would that satisfy you? Mayor Kennedy: That's what they just said. Mr. Reese: If everybody i3 in agreement. Where is the firefighters? Mayor Kennedy: I think everybody is in agreement on that, that we go from the January date where we don't have a conflict and then if we appeal it, it won't mess up from January llt,i on, if from January llth back through October 1, is thrown out by the Pay Board. Mr. Salerno: Mr. Reese, may I ask you a question? If presenting this package, as I understand, you would make a recommendation of 2 separate items. Now if presenting this package to the Pay Board brings attention to the fact that it is above the 5.5 guidelines of Phase II, can they then say, the entire package is outside the guideline and cut it back. Mr. Reese: It is my understanding that Phase II is out of existence. Mr. Salerno: Yes Sir, but they had 90 days I believe in which to phase out. Mr. Reese: Yes but Phase III is in and it severed the 90 days, whatever was left of the 90 days. Phase III is now in full force and affect but we are not, we have an individual here in town with Internal Revenue that is calling us daily of what on different salaries and different adjustments and different con- tracts etc., and he is doing the investigative work but I would suggest that we proceed to get a definite, positive ruling to cover us on January llth, the effective date, and if the City Commission is still of the opinion, then if we get that as a favorable ruling, we implement the pay plan on that but appeal the matter from October 1 to January loth. Mr. Plummer: In other wDrds, they get definite in hand now, back to January 12th. Mr. Reese: I am assuming we will get favorable - Mr. Plummer: From January lath back to October 1 is the portion that if needed, will be appealed so they are really not out any dollars in hand, they get some of it immediately and the 'rest of it maybe if we take the appeal. I can't see where they are losing anything. Mr. Litvak: Can we go back to one thing, Mr. Reese? Mr. Plummer: Well I think Mr. Reese and so does the Commission, is that agreeable? Mr. Litvak: Yes Sir, but we still have the one unanswered question and that is with reference to -the implementation at what rate of pay. We have figures that Mr. Reese has supplied with reference to $2,649,000. This must have been based on implementing salaries on some basis. This is all we are asking. What the basis is for implementing these salaries? Mr. Reese: These figures were based, are based on the statement that Mr. Yarger made the statement on because he was part and parcel of gathering these figures but I said, I still would want to look at it, on an individual basis because there could be some ommissions in here as well as some people that would not be adjusted at all and we endeavor to cover that in the pay plan so I wasn't going to give you an inclusive so that you could then come and say I said this and it would be affecting maybe an individual. 58 MARCH 8, 1973 • • Mr. Litvak: But then I understand what you are saying is that the effect is to try to implement under the basis of ---- Mr. Reese: That is what I told the Commission a little while ago. Mr. Litvak: Then our group would be in agreement with the retroactive to January 1st, January llth, on the basis of if there was a possibility of being retroactive to October 1, without causing any probability of upsetting the entire pay schedule. Rev. Gibson: Let me ask one other question. We said that there may be some inequities. You gave us a 2 million plus figure. Would the 2-million plus figure take, I trust that in that 2 million plus figure, you are taking care of, or you have in mind, there will be enough money if need be to make some adjustments? Is that true? Mr. Reese: Let me answer your question in this manner. These figures were pulled off the first of the month in final form. We had people in positions who have been terminated from the first of the month up to this point. The replacement will undoubtedly come in at a lower grade than they were terminated. While we pull this together, we can never have the positive figure as of this time of what the true and exact amount is so we have these plus funds, that it would be possible to take care of the exceptional case. Mayor Kennedy: If we vote to implement this today Mr. Reese and you come back with your method of implementation, then we can, if there are certain inequities in certain, say the Building Department, and then when we get to the executive level, like an Assistant Attorney or the Assistant City Attorney, the Assistant City Clerk, and we want to add those and we certainly want our Executive Dlrector of the Civil Service Board covered under this and also Dave Simpson covered under this. Mr. Reese: They are covered. Mayor Kennedy: We can then vote to have them included in the range that we want them included under, is that right? Mr. Reese: That is correct. This City Commission fixes all those salaries so I can't implement that. Mayor Kennedy: But what about at the level that Mr. Richard was talking about. If we vote to implement this today, can we adjust that salary later or no? Mr. Reese: You can at the next budget meeting? Mayor Kennedy: In October. Mr. Reese: I don't think you could now on account of the provisions in the Charter. Mayor Kennedy: But for the Executive Positions, we can. Mr. Reese: You can fix those, yes. Mr. Litvak: Mr. Reese would the implementation of this plan require two readings so that it would be effective immediately for Water and Sewer Employees? Mr. Reese: Well I would suggest that the City Commission if they are going to adopt this, to pass a resolution adopting it and the date has been discussed here and then that covers all of the employees under the City of Miami Pay Plan which is also the Water and Sewer people at this present time. 59 MARCH 8, 1973 • Mr. Litvak: I would like to make one final comment. We General Employees feel that the pay plan as presented is the fairest and most equitable for all that we have had in many years. Our only concern is that as we stated, the implementation of it and we appreciate your consideration. Mr. Hagman: I am Bill Hagman, Department of Water and Sewers, Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, we also feel that the report is fair and equitable work and we also would go along with the idea of the date of January llth with the possibility of the appeal to October 1st. We will accept that very gladly and of course we would like to stress also the fact that our time is short. Mayor Kennedy: We are going to pass this today on an emergency basis as of April 1 and that will be sent over to Mr. Sloan and I am sure he knows the deadline so I am sure he is going to come up and cover you all. Implementing it as of APri1 1st. Mr. Hagman: As I understand it, March 31, as of midnight, we are county employees. Mayor Kennedy: It will be implemented by then. Now Mr. Reese may not be able to do that himself but we are going push to do it through the Water and Sewer people. Mr. Reese: The Water and Sewer people make out your payroll and from what we have been able to gather, it will be possible to do it. I can't commit Garrett Sloan etc., as you know but we have this indication it would be possible to do it and if this City Commission accepts this as the Pay Plan and the resolution would be so adopted to include everybody under the Pay Plan, then I think you are in a position that Garrett Sloan would be just as obligated to make it effective on the date that they make it effective and I would make a suggestion that if they are going to pass it, that they make it effective today. Mr. Hagman: That was the idea I had in mind because we would feel much safer and I would appreciate it, thank you. Mr. Halfman: I am Myron Halfman, Water and Sewers representing the employees in the new Local which we are forming to go over to the County and I think Mr. Hagman expressed my theories and -:.here isn't any sense in me going any further into them. The only thing I would like to stress is that I believe that we should have it implemented as of today or tomorrow because our pay ends, our pay period ends next Saturday and I think that it should be implemented into a pay before we go over to the County, thank you. Mr. Hinnoven: I am Jim Hinnoven, Chairman of the negotiating committee for the employees in the Public Properties Department. We have wrangled for some time as to salaries and felt that the City of Miami employees wages were inadequate in competing with the outside. I am thrilled to be chairman at this moment to go back to the people that I represent and I think that if this Wage Survey is passed as presented to the Commission, that I can go back smiling to the people I represent and they will be very happy. I think the Manager, Mr. Yarger and the Commission hopefully, that they are going to pass this. You have been most generous and I thank you. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I think we have heard all of the discussion that:is needed to be heard. If you are ready at this time, Mr. Mayor, I am prepared to make a motion. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, I asked for the floor several times before. Mr. Reese: Mr. Mayor, before a motion is made, we didn't hear from the American Federation of Labor Employees. 60 MARCH 8, 1973 Mr. Naga*: Thats me Mr. Reese, President of Local 654 We concur with the Police and the rest of the employees on the date set. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, I specifically asked for the floor because I specifically wanted to make the motion but to include in that motion, the matter flit troubled me before which I was answered affirmatively by Mr. Yarger which was the positioning of the employees within his pay scale based upon his longevity with the City so I would therefore with all due respect to Mr. Plummer, had askedfor the floor. Thereupon the following resolution was introduced by Mrs. Gordon who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-173 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE PAY SURVEY REPORT SUBMITTED BY YARGER AND ASSOCIATES WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SAID PAY PLAN TO BE RETRO- ACTIVE YO JANUARY 11, 1973 AND TO BECOME EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY AND TAKING INTO CONSID- ERATION THE MATT::R OF LONGEVITY OF CITY EMPLOYEES IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SAID PLAN (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Mr. Plummer, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Reverend Gibson, Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NOES: None Mr. John Lloyd, Assistant City Attorn,iy: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission. Mr. Rothstein did wait me to briefly mention his memo to the Commission which is before the Commissioners on some exceptions he had to the plan. Would it be appropriate for me to make that brief statement at this time? Mayor Kennedy: Certainly. Mr. Lloyd; Originally, in the Yarger plan, the Assistant City Attorneys were left out after trey had been going to be put in and they were put back in at Pay Range, I think 32, and we suggest that the Assistant City Attorney should be at Pay. Range and continue through Salary Range 43 and that the pay range should be one pay range, rather than Assistant City Attorneys I and II. That is Mr. Rothstein's suggestion. He also makes a reference to assistant to the director of the Department of Law and in view of the fact thAt I am personally involved, I just suggest that you read his memo because I feel embarassed to mention that to you about myself. I do wish to call your attention to the fact that we have lost 3 fine Assistant City Attorneys since I have taken over the post of Assistant to the Director and from my personal experience, it has been very difficult forus to recruit members of the Bar to come and be Assistant City Attorneys and we do feel that a Range 33 progressing through Range 43 gives a good in -hiring rate. We have been unable to recruit anybody at the in -hiring rate of $14,000 and we have only been able to recruit at the in -hiring rate of $16,200 which pay range, which salary range 33 encompasses. We do feel and have made a study into this and that under the federal pay plan and other pay plans which we studied, we are presenting to the Commission an adequate or rather a fair exception that Mr. Rothstein has made to the Yarger Pay Plan. /0z MARCH 8, 1973 61 • Mayor Kennedy: All right Mr. Reese, this is another area that we can set later on, right?, because they are now appointed rather than coming under Civil Service? Mr. Lloyd: This is correct, I neglected to mention that. Mr. Reese: These are unclassified positions. Mayor Kennedy: So we can take that up - Mr. Reese: The City Commission can. Mrs. Gordon: And the inequities that should arise in the classified positions would be heard by the Civil Service Board in the meantime? Mr. Reese: No. Not on the pay plan. Mr. Mayor before you take this vote, I neglected and it has just been called to my attention that I didn't get a reaction of this January date from the Sanitation Workers and they have been here all day. Mrs. Gordon: May we have. a reaction? Mr.? : I represent the Sanitation workers. Mr. Mayor and I would like to say that we agree with the Plan wholeheartedly and the next time you see those toters whistling, you know you will have a bunch of happy drivers. We would just like to say that we agree with it and we are glad everybody is together now and everybody now is at least going to be smiling at one another instead of fighting one another. Mr. Reese: Is this in agreement for the January date? Sanitation Representative: Yes Sir, the whole thing, thank you. Mr. Robert Paulk, Executive Secretary of the Civil Service Board: Mr. Mayor and Members of the Commission, for a point of clarity with regard to the Assistant City Attorneys, I heard what Mr. Lloyd had to say. There are still 2 classified Assistant City Attorneys which have been re-established under the Yarger Classification Study and the recommendation is not at the level of 33 but at range 35, Mr. Lloyd, so that everyone is clear on that, it is a part and parcel of this ;gay plan and it is substantially higher than the figure that you indicated. The salary range would be in Range 35, commence salary at $17,867 in -hiring and would range all the way up to $25,147 with longevity. Mayor Kennedy: Anyone else would like to speak. Mr. Reese: At the next meeting we will have to ask the Commission to pass an ordinance amending the appropriation ordinance to make $4,541,841 available in the appropriation of Federal Revenue Sharing Funds, that would be the ordinance to be amended. Mrs. Gordon: That was -predicated on the appeal. Mr. Reese: that is predicated on the appeal. An Ordinance entitled - MARCH 8, 1973 • AN GRDINANCE AMEND::NG ORDINANCE NO. 8099 BEING THE APPROPRIATIONS ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1972-73 TO PROVIDE FOR THE ALLOCATION OF $4,541,841. FROM FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING FUNDS IN THE PROPER SALARY ACCOUNTS OF THE C T TY OF MIAMI FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PAY SURVEY REPORT SUBMITTED BY YARGER AND ASSOCIATES AND ACCEPTED BY RESOLUTICN NO. 73-173 PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DATE: DECLARING THIS ORDINANC. TO BE AN EMERGENCY MEASURE was introduced by Mrs. Gordon and seconded by Rev. Gibson for adoption as an emergencl :.:easure and dispensing with r:quirement of reading same on two separate days, which was agreed to by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Reverend Gibson, Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NOES: None. Whereupon the Commission on motion of Mrs. Gordon, seconded by Rev. Gibson, adopted said ordinance by the following vote: AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Reverend Gibson, Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NOES: None. Said ordinance was designated Ordinance No. 8151. J • The following resolution was introduced by Mrs. Gordon who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-174 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO TAKE AN APPEAL TO THE FEDERAL GOVERN- MENT IN THE MATTER OF RETROACTIVE PAY FOR CITY EMPLOYEES PURSUANT TO THE PAY SURVEY REPORT SUB- MITTED BY YARGER AND ASSOCIATES AND ACCEPTED BY RESOLUTION 73-173 PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DATE - SAID APPEAL TO ENCOMPASS THE PORTION OF TIME BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 1972 THROUGH JANUARY 10, 1973 (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Reverend Gibson, the revolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Gibson, Plummer, Reboso, Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NOES: None Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, my inquiry as to why the Secretaries to the Mayor and Commission were not included is that they are not in clsssified positions. I think it is only proper that we bring them up to the standard that we have everyone else. I am told that the standard would be 71/2% and that they be given the same increase as all city employees and I so move at this time. Thereupon the following resolution was introduced by Mr. Plummer who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-175 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A 7.5% PAY INCREASE FOR THE SECRETARIES TO THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COMMISSION (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Reverend Gibson, the resolution was Al passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Reboso and Plummer, Reverend Gibson, Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NOES: None Mayor Kennedy: Let me just say this. Mr. Yarger, you have to .be a genius sir because you have gotten together all of the groups in the City and come up with a very equitable plan that has pleased all of them. I take my hat off to you for doing a great job and also take my hat off to the employee groups who ' worked so hard in working with him for their understanding of the city's finances and for being able to come up with a tremendous plan for everybody. I would like to say to those Water and Sewer employees who are leaving, I am one of the ones that pushed very hard for a unified sewer system but not because we wanted to lose you but because we wanted to give you to the whole county. 64 MARCH 8, 1973 I know that the job that you did for the City you are going to be able to do for the whole county and I expect in the years to come that you will become a regional agency to take in Broward, Palm Beach, Dade and Monroe and I think it is coming to that in the Water and Sewers and we are sorely going to miss all of our great friends over there but we knew you are going to do a great job for the public. Mr. Charles Huttoe: Mr. Mayor, I would like to make one inquiry and that is to find out exactly where the Executive Pay Plan lies at this time? Mayor kennedy: Well, as we discussed•, I asked for that. When he comes back with implementation, we will go through that. This City Commission will be able to set. Mr. Huttoe: But I understand at the same time that there was an Executive Pay Plan recommended by the same people who conducted the survey that now exists. Mayor Kennedy: I think that is only for recommendation purposes and we can use that range to determine, thats my interpretation of it, we can use that range to determine whether nor.not we will go within that range or if we want to higher in some instances, I think we can. I think that there are certain areas, the City Attorneys and the City Clerk's Office, that I want to look at a little more thoroughly but as a whole, I think that the Executive Pay Plan is a good one also. 5 MINUTE RECESS Rev. Gibson: Before we get into Interama, let me ask a question. As I look through this a few minutes ago, I see some people, some subordinates who may be making more than their supervisors. I hope the City Manager is aware of that possibility and that that can cause an awful rift in an organization and I hope - Mr. Reese: Yes Sir, and that is what you have the number of steps in there for etc., so that would not happen. Mrs. Gordon: One more question to clear my mind. I am still not clear on the pay raise for the Executives. When does that begin? Mr. Reese: The City Commission can review it and adopt it at any time? Mrs. Gordon: Yes but when? Do we have to take a position now if we want to start it? Mr. Reese: If you want it at the next Commission Meeting and make it effective as of today or whenever you want to do it. Mrs. Gordon: All right, as long as we have some sort of time schedule certain that this will be implemented. Mr . Reese: I would gather at the next Commission Meeting that you would want the administration to come in with the existing pay and then supply you with the wage scale for the Executives and then you do what you see fit. Mayor Kennedy: And I imagine it would be retroactive the same way as the overall wage survey. January llth and then to the Pay Board back to October 1. Mr. Reese: Surely. MARCH 8, 1973 65 Mrs. Gordon: Okay, then will move that so we will have it in the records. Thereupon the following resolution was introduced by Mrs. Gordon who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-176 A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE POLICY OF THE COMMISSION THAT IT WILL AT ITS NEXT REGULAR MEETING CONSIDER THE EXECUTIVE PAY PLAN PORTION OF THE PAY PLAN REPORT SUBMITTED BY YARGER AND ASSOCIATES WITH FIGURES TO BE SUBMITTED BY THE CITY MANAGER AND ALSO TO CONSIDER PAY PLAN FOR COMMISSION APPOINTED POSITIONS OF CITY ATTORNEY AND ASSISTANT CITY, ATTORNEYS, CITY CLERK, AND ASSISTANT CITY CLERK, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY CIVIL SERVICE BOARD, ASSISTANT TO EXECUTIVE SECRETARY OF CIVIL SERVICE BOARD, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD AND ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE SECRETARY OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD AND FURTHER THAT IT IS THE INTENTION OF THE COMMISSION THAT THIS PAY PLAN WHEN ADOPTED BE RETROACTIVE TO JANUARY 11, 1973 AND FURTHER THAT IT ALSO BE SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF RESOLUTION NO. 73-174 PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DATE (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Citr Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Reverend Gibson, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Reverend Gibson , Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NOES: None 41, INTERAMA Attorney Robert Ware: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission. Interama is before you today to ask for a new agreement between Interama and City of Miami. It is new actually in only one regard. We have a signed agreement which we had signed and had the hearing last summer. What we are proposing here in this agreement is a swap in the land. If you will recall, and you might look at the back of the contract which I have put in each of your places, the schematic design map, as security for the City of Miami's 8h million dollars which Interama owes them, we had granted you by quit claim or were to grant you by quit claim, area "J" and "K" which is on the coast or the throat of the lagoon and an indeterminate interest in area "X" which is up alongside of U. S. 1. The County also has an interest in area "X". U. S. 1 bypass goes through area "X". The fire station was taken out of that, the sewer plant is going to be out of there "X" and our old agreement had required that the land would be quit claimed to you would total by appraisal 12.7 million dollars. We have since actually had the appraisal made and presented it to the City Manager and we are proposing here that you consolidate your land. Those 2 areas as you can see were considerably apart in the entire site. Now, we are proposing that in place of your indeterminate interest in area "X", we quit claim to you, area "J-1" which is just north of "J" and "J" and "J-1" are under water, which is where the Marina was going to go and the docks of the proposed marina. In one of those 2 sites are area N-1A and N-2 66 MARCH 8, 1973 • Those areas as a consolidated group are appraised at 13.5 million but its considerably in excess of what we had agreed that we would convey to you. We think that this will be an advantage to you in having the property that you have in a consolidatedarea. M ayor Kennedy: Do you have a big map with you so the Commissioners can see it? Mr. Ware: Yes. Dr. Gissendanner: I think its important to emphasize Mr. Mayor that the only difference in this agreement and the one we have signed with you is the change of the land. Mr. Reese: And also the 30 day provision of supplying a deed, that was not lived -up with, so it will be.a new 30 day period. Mr. Ware: The 30 day peribd will start and we will have you the deed this time. (At this time showed the land under discussion to the Commission as it ap:)ears on the map) Mrs. Gordon: Is the valuelof the security equal? Mr. Ware: It is in excess. Due to the lateness of the hour, we think that is the only change and we will give you that quit claim deed. I will open the floor to questions unless Dr. Gissendanner has something to say. Dr. Gissendanner: The reason that this larger site is less valuable than the other sites is because its not on the water and because the Dade County Water Sewer treatment plant comes out of there which we didn't know was going to happen before, that's why its less valuable. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Reese, do you have any objections to this. Mr. Reese: I don't have any objectiols, its up to the City Commission to decide on it but I want to bring it back to the City Commission's attention that when I made the recommendation to the City Commission, on May 18, 1972, I pointed out that in order for us not to subregate this land but we get a quit claim deed to the City for parts of the Graves tract of "X", "K" and "J", and also that this land would be deeded to the City and that the City would not develop it at any time other than if Interama decided not to develop it but now, the way the agreement is drafted and the way the previous agreement was drafted, it is interpreted that they can go in there and use this land and have a revenue ofi' it and we would be perpetually holding the deed on it and have no income other than what would be left over after the operating expense, debt service and every- thing else, which would be part of the overall revenue. Mrs. Gordon: In effect, we are leasing it, its a sale and lease back with a subordination in it, is that what you are saying? Mr. Reese: No, it has no subordination in it but they have a provision in the agreement whereby they could go ahead and utilize this land and also there was another void in the last agreement and it was neglectful on my part that I didn't insist that there be aplan, a development plan attached to the agreement. We kept referring to a plan but it was not a plan attached. This time, this agreement does have a plan attached. The City Commission previously approved the other agreement with these conditions in it. The only reason I am bringing it up is that I want the record to show what my recommendation was as far as these sites are concerned. Mrs. Gordon: Well now that we are about to take an action which will alter that agreement, can we include your recommendations into it now? Mr. Reese: This is the part that we were not able to reconcile through negotiation. 67 MARCH 8, 1973 Dr. Gissendanner: I think I can satisfactorily answer it. Its true that Mr. Reese did object. There is nothing in here that wasn't in the one signed already and sealed and the only thing here is a change of location, lets get that straight. Mr. Reese world like to make a further change and go back to what his recommendation was when we met and Mr. Alvah Chapman and everybody was here that day. This question came up and it was resolved by a vote of the Commission that the authority could, we have until January 1, 1977, to use this piece of property which is the old Merrill Stevens Marina site which you would get the benefit of and credit to what we owe you in the event we do that. If we don't do' anything with it by January 1, 1977, then we can never use it, until we pay you and what Mr. Reese wants to do is to remove that provision that allows us to use it to establish a plan to use it between now and January 1, 1977. In other words, he wants the land to lie fallow until then. We think its important that if it could be an integral part of our overall plan and we might need to proceed before January 1, 1977 but you would get the benefit of any land -lease or any profits from the operation. Mr. Reese: Well 1 would like to clarify what was just stated. I don't want the land to lie farrow, I do want to have the City to have a Quit -Claim Deed and if anybody goes to develop the land, which would be Interama, they just buy out the city's appraised value and they got their land, just the same as if it was privately owned. There's no difference. Mrs. Gordon: In effect, whether you call it subordination or not, if you do what you say you want to do, we are subordinating our interest. Dr. Gissendanner: And that was agreed here at the meeting last year when everybody was down here, we made no, it wasn't concealed at all, it was discussed and the minutes will reflect it was discussed. Mr. Reese: The only reason its back up here before the Commission that agreement was signed, as I understand it, null and void for the simple reason that site "X" is not longer identifiable and also the deed was not delivered within the 30 days, so it has to be a new agreement and the 30 day period has to start at a given time. Mayor Kennedy: All right, I think that it is better from our standpoint to have all of our land contiguous to one another. Mrs. Gordon: I agree. Mayor Kennedy: Secondly, the appraised value of this is probably greater than the appraised value of the separate pieces and certainly this land, god forbid, if we do get it back because all of us are hoping that Interama will be developed, would be much more valuable for development purposes in a City Marina or something of that type, so from that standpoint, I think the City is getting a better deal than they had before. On the basic thing that we decided by a vote of this Commission was when Mr. Reese said he wanted a Quit -Claim -Deed and we allowed sub- ordination and that's what we allowed by the agreement, we had to have faith in this project. Certainly the City of Miami has as much interest in this as anyone because we made the land initially available for this project and through the years, the City has always leaned over backwards to see that this land was kept available for the Interama project. I think for the first time we are at a breakthrough period. I think that the Finley -Green group have come up with a workable plan that can be financed. I think that money is going to be available from a bond issue and from federal gov'rnment sources. The State University is going to go in there and I think that we can get the project off the groundoso I am wearing 2 hats on this as a member of this City Commission and also as a member of the Interama Authority but I think in my own personal opinion, is that we should go with this agreement and help Interama get off the ground. 68 MARC}} 8, 1973 • i 1 Dr. Gissendanner: Mr. Mayor, may I make one further statement. Although the agreement doesn't require it, we have included Miami's Debt, in our Bond Indenture and set up a pay schedule in the Bond Indenture itself, in addition to this agreement which I think it shows we are thinking of Miami and trying to take care of our interest. Mr. Ware: From our general revenues, we make specified payments to you periodically for the land. Mrs. Gordon: After 77, after - Mr. Ware: You have the first lien, if its developed on any of the income we make from this land so we don't get anything out of it if we develop it with the exception that we pay off your loan early. Mrs. Gordon: I understood only what I heard Mr. Reese say was that we would not receive any return until it was above a certain level which would take care of the expenses and the bond indebtedness or whatever. If there was anything above that, then we would receive some return to the City prior to 77, is that right? Dr. Gissendanner: I think I understand her point. Like any business obviously you pay the help first and any other operating expenses and whatever is left over, we would get. Mr. Reese : Also there is another facet if I understand correctly your bond indenture has the Tower of the Sun is excluded in this but the supporting parking area happens to be C-1, so if there is any spillover in parking needs, it's going to be moved down on "NI -A". That revenue will be deleted to the use for operating and then goes into the bonds. Dr. Gissendanner: No Sir, it does not. None of the money from the Bond Issue we propose would be used to build that parking lot so therefore, if that parking lot is used, any portion of that land is used for parking, the revenue would go to you. Mr. Reese: I am not in a position to argue with you about it but I do know that it is contemplated to use it as a spillover parking area and I have been told that in your Bond Indenture, any income from this prescribed area and that would be, you would be taking the parking in on "C-1", but actually parking on "NI -A", would go toward the bonds because you wouldn't have a separate parking facility. Dr. Gissendanner: Yes Sir, it would be because we do not propose to build, I didn't intend to get into Interama's plans but - (At this time went over to the map and remainder of conversation is inaudible) Mr. Reese: Well I hate to be stubborn in this and disagree on this but I wanted you to know that this was brought out in a conference the other day, of what was contemplated on that and it was going to be grass parking, there wouldn't be any construction expenditure. Dr. Gissendanner: We will have a provision in the Bond Indenture which we are going to pass in the morning, which Mayor Kennedy will be present to vote on and he can check this point out, it will specifically exclude those revenues and the City of Miami will have exclusive right, exclusive use of those revenues to guarantee the debt. I think that's the best presentation I can make to you. The Mayor will be there in the morning to vouch for that. Mrs. Gordon : All right, the Mayor thinks its good, the Mayor is on the Interama Board and I will move it. Thereupon the following resolution was introduced by Mrs. Gordon, who moved its adoption: 69 MARCH 8, 1973 11 tip RESOLUTION NO. 73-177 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI AND THE INTER AMERICAN CENTER AUTHORITY, A COPY OF WHICH AGREEMENT IS ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF BY REFERENCE (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Mr. Reboso, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Reboso, Plummer, Reverend Gibson, Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NOES: None 42, PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF GEORCE MC LEAN RE: DINNER KEY_AUDITORIUM Mr. Mc Lean: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners. You all havea copy of the letter I sent you. My appearance before you this evening is two -fold but after hearing the two giants, employees of the City for 41 million, than Interama, I am glad you take time for a small businessman to be heard too and I thank you for that. In my letter, I pointed out to you several tenants who have suffered the pioneering of Dinner Key Auditorium all the years, from 3 to 29 years these shows have been there and I ask that they be given the dates immediately after my lease. I feel certain that the city administration will see that that is done but I wanted to make it a record with all of you so you would know the amount of people involved in the shows at Dinner Key Auditorium. The Balance of the letter is based on the fact that at your last Commission Meeting, you granted a lease in the Santana Area for 2 years here at Dinner Key, which makes me realize that the Dinner Key plans for development may be postponed for a year or two and due to the money shortages that I know exist in the City, its my personal opinion, as one of the taxpayers, that you will be 2=3 years before you can implement an auditorium or an exhibition hall that would take the place of dinner key. In view of that, I am asking that my lease be extended 21 years through June 30 which would take me through the 75=76 fall winter spring period and the auditorium has no air-conditioning and by that time, we may have a new exhibition hall and we can transfer our shows intact to our new facility. Knowing that something could come about possibly where there would be a complete rennovation of the Dinner Key area and the possibility of building a new exhibition hall, I am aware and recognize and recommend that my lease be based on a 60-day cancellation clause in writing. For the past 8 years, I have done my very best at Dinner Key. It's been referred to as a rathole. It is unsightly, its not air con- ditioned. Its a job to keep tenants in there, its a job to keep tenants, but the one thing that is very very pronounced and that you all recognize when you hear 412 million in raises this year, is the fact that the taxpayers have not lost one penny since George Mc Lean has had the lease at Dinner Key. In fact instead of a 30-40,000 dollar a year loss to the taxpayer, in my opinion, the taxpayers benefit by that amount, so I respectfully request that you give me an extension on my lease through June 30, 1976, with the understanding that I am subject to a 60-day cancellation clause should you find the money to build an exhibition hall that we so sorely need. Mayor Kennedy: 60 Days? Mr. Mc Lean: Correct -Sir. MARCH 8, 1973 70 Mayor Kennedy: Is everyone in receipt of this letter from Mr Mc Lean? You intend to recondition the ugly concrete floor if this is renewed then? Mr. Mc Lean: Yes Sir, I intend to invest several thousand dollars in the primary thing, the concrete floor does need a complete resurfacing and several meetings rooms need a false ceiling, new lighting and decorating. Mayor Kennedy: Mr. Reese - Mr. Reese: Are you asking me for my recommendation? I can't recommend the renewal of this. First of all this Commission adopted a policy when I recommended the Santana be renewed for a year, of going out on competitive bids. We have had inquiries from people that want to bid on it. The second is, there has been a lot of problems with Mr. Mc Leans operation, this is not new to the Commission, its been brought before you a number of times. One of the most devastating eyesores is this building out here, this temporary building. It was put there in violation of the lease in 1971 and administratively we did everything possible to get it out of there. It was brought before the Commission and at a meeting in February that it would then be moved within 21 days and the only thing being moved about it is the vandalism type activities on it all the time. Its still there. There is other parts of it that we are getting complaints on constantly. The condition of the restrooms over there and other activities and even though its a suggestion that Mr. Mc Lean makes that $3,000 deposit that he had with the City for Boxing and Wrestling promotion, he asked that that apply to his money owing the City and there is still $2,985 outstanding and the City of Miami has been going ahead and paying these power bills over there in advance because we have to do it. The power is in our name and it is supposed to be paid for. It isn't a matter of negotiating anything. These are things that we have to make the payments on, the City. I don't think its right and justified for this to go on and on over these years. Now these are just some of the highlights that I think that need to be brought out and as far as extending the life of that building over there, based on the engineers, structural engineers evaluation that was incorporated in the report that was supplied for the Dinner Key area, it was pointed out that it is beyond its livlihood right now. Mr. Mc Lean: Mr. Mayor, may I comment on that? Last of all do I need to get into a debate with Mr. Reese again as I have through the years. I must point ot't in this City that we have here in Miami, it would be disgraceful in my opinion for me to go out and tear down and destroy a perfectly good 2-bedroom house with bath knowing the conditions that exist in our City. There was a legal problem on the ownership of it, since then I have tried and I now have .Judge Christie who represents a group of people, to donate that house. I am certain that Mr. Reese nor any of the Commissioners or the Mayor would want me to simply go out and tear it to pieces and throw it on the junk pile, knowing that there are people living in our community that need a home like this, absolutely free. I just am not that kind of man to do such a thing and I realize it subjects me to criticism but I'refuse to do it. You have a perfect right, the City Manager has a perfect right if he takes it upon himself to destroy that beautiful little home, that will be his business, not mine but I would highly recommend that we find a family that needs one absolutely free of charge and give it to them. Mr. Reese: Mr. Mayor and Members of the Commission. I would like to go on record to say that there would be have to be an enormous amount of work done on that structure before it would ever be accepted under the South Florida Building Code in the City of Miami, on that little home, so it isn't something that you can go ahead and move. Its been evaluated. It was proposed;by somebody that we ought to look at it to see if we couldn't use it in one of the parks so the people went ahead and looked at it and inspected it and it can't be because of the amount of work that we would have to do in order for it to meet the South Florida Building Code. 71 MARCH, 8, 1973 • Mr. Mc Lean: The manufacturer of that building has issued an affidavit that it meets all South Florida Code. If it does not, it would be his obligation, not the city's nor mine. I have in writing that it meets all SOuth Florida Code. Now, I don't know who inspected the building, I don't know what extent they went to. I would like to have had a representative of the factory that built it at the time it was inspected so if there were questions, he could answer it but I ..would like to go a little further and talk about the 2300 or 2600 dollars Mr. Reese brings up. I wrote to Mr. Reese 2 years ago in a completion of work the City had agreed to. The balance due George Mc Lean is $2300. In June 1971, it was brought up to the COmmission and twice since then, I have never yet received an answer nor have I been given the $2300, nor have they insper:ted the work the contractor did to verify whether I did or dil not pay these monies so I don't owe the City of Miami one single penny and at all times, the City has $5,000 in cash to be certain that George Mc Lean does pay his obligations and lastly Mr. Reese would have you believe that you should tear that building down tomorrow. In my letter I point out to you, there are 1000 licensed businessmen who use that building for exhibition. There are 5,000 people who work in it during our show and there are over a million people, the majority of them, Miamians, who come and enjoy our,events. Don't tear it down until you can give them a place to go. I realize you have a situation that is pretty tough, I would like very much to work with Mr. Reese. I have never been in this position. I will make a living elsewhere but I respectfully request that you do grant me my extension, thank you very much. Mr. Reese: Mr. Mayor, the City Administration has not asked for anything that is not within the lease and its our obligation to administer the lease. Now, as far as the $2300 figure, several years ago, the City Commission saw fit to make $12,000 available over there because it was going to be professional basketball and college basketball played in that auditorium. The monies that were spent amounted to approximately somewhere =+$10,000 out of the 12 based on work orders. That was paid out of the $12,000. Now the question is that we should give up the $2,300, that was the question. I don't think it needed to be answered, there was no work orders, there was no wo:•k done for it. Mr. Mc Lean said he would do certain things but it wasn't part of the reimbursement. Now it isn't a matter of getting along or anything else or this house over there for some poor family. The house is in violation of the lease and we are held accountable for administering it as well as we get the complaints on the other parts of the operation and I think its up to the City Commission to decide what you want to do and which route you want to go. Mr. Mc Lean: Incidentally there are invoices. The contractor signed them and did do the work and will verify this thing. Mayor Kennedy: I have been hearing about this $2,300 for 4 years and its never been resolved by anybody. What about the house, Canon Gibson, don't you know a family that would like a house like that? Reverend Gibson: I certainly would be delighted to check. Mayor Kennedy: What is the pleasure of the Commission? Has everybody read this letter? Is there a motion? I imagine there is 3 types of motions. One motion to grant the extension. The other is to put it out for bids and the other is to tear it down. Mr. Reese: Not at this time because Mr. Mc Leans contract goes to November 30. Mayor Kennedy: He is asking for an extension from December 1st through November 1975, right? 3 years - Say a 2-year extension through 1975, a 2 year extension with a 60 day written notice. MARCH 8, 1973 72 • Mayor Kennedy: Is there a motion of any sort? Mr. Reboso: Mr. Mc Lean. Why did you ask for 2 years? or 21 years, instead of 1 year? Any specific reason? Mr. Mc Lean: The only reason I did it was because that you issued a lease for 2 years on property here in Dinner Key, that is the only reason I have. I would be perfectly happy to accept a 1 year extension. Mr. Reese: The Santana went out on a bid and there was a provision that it would be for 2 years but it would be subject to cancellation. Mr. Mc Lean: As would my extension. Mr. Reese: It went out on bid. Mayori(ennedy: We put this out on bid, what 3 times?, and never got anybody but one - Mr. Reese: Once we put it out on a bid and got no bids and the second time, we got one bid, in 1961 or 1962. Mr. Mc Lean: I was the sole bidder at the time and I assure you that we have built up a nice schedule and you will have bidders but by the same token, one year from now, you may tear it down and after all the years of work, I think I am entitled to that. Mayor Kennedy: Is there a motion? Mr. Reboso: I will move the 2-year extension with the provision of the 60 days cancellation. Mayor Kennedy: Is there a second to that motion? Is there a second to that motion? Mrs. Gordon is you will take the chair, I will second it, I it's only fair, this building may not last another 2 years. I don't see anybody really coming in here and putting the money in there that is necessary to make it a going business. It may well be torn down in a year or less. think Mr. Mc Lean: I recognize that. Mayor Kennedy: If we get federal funds, you are taking a chance that we may tear it down. Mr. Mc Lean: Yes Sir, I am well aware of that. Mayor Kennedy: I will second it. Mrs. Gordon: Any discussion on the motion? Call the roll please. Mr. Southern, City Clerk: That's to extend the existing lease for an additional 2-year period under the same terms and conditions with the exception of a 60 day cancellation clause? Mr. Reese: I can't answer that as a fact - Mr. Southern: With a 60 day cancellation clause, in the event the City needs it for public purposes, roll call. Mr. Reese: No, no, no, no. In the event the Clty needs it to implement the Master Plan. Thereupon the following resolution was introduced by Mr. Reboso who moved its adoption: 73 MARCH 8, 1973 RESOLUTION NO. 73-178 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A TWO YEAR EXTENSION OF THE EXISTING AGREEMENT BETWEEN GEORGE MC LEAN AND THE CITY OF MIAMI FOR USE OF THE DINNER KEY AUDIT- ORIUM SUBJECT TO A 60 DAY CANCELLATION NOTICE CLAUSE IN THE EVENT THE CITY OF MIAMI SHOULD REQUIRE THIS PROPERTY FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DINNER KEY MASTER PLAN SUBJECT FURTHER TO THE REMOVAL OF AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE ON SAID PREMISES WITHIN A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED 30 DAYS AND SUBJECT FURTHER THAT UTILITY BILLS BE PAID WITHIN 5 DAYS OF THE TIME THEY ARE SUBMITTED TO MR. MC LEAN BY THE CITY AND FURTHER PROVIDING THAT IF SAID UTILITIES ARE NOT PAID IN ACCORDANCE WITIH THIS PROVISION, THAT SAID UTILITIES WILL BE DISCONNECTED (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Mayor Kennedy, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Reverend Gibson, Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NOES: None NOTE: Prior to the introduction of the resolution, Mayor Kennedy surrendered the chair to Vice Mayor Gordon and following adoption of the resolution, the Mayor resumed the chair. The following additional conversation occured in connection with roll call and the adoption of the preceding resolution. Mr. Plummer: I predicate my vote on the.fact that the City if we did not extend this lease, would be in fact, after November, left without a convention facility. The City does reserve the right of the 60 day cancellation and because of that I vote yes. Mrs. Gordon: I was the one 2 years ago that asked for that house to be removed and its still sitting there and I feel that I personally have been let down because you are the one that said it would be out of there in a certain number of days. Mr. Mc Lean: I am ashamed but I am not as ashamed as if I went out tomorrow and tore it dcwn. Mr. Reese: Mr. Mayor, may I interrupt at this point before Mrs. Gordon casts her vote because I know it won't have any bearing but you are accepting the same lease that hasn't been abided by. Now aren't we in a position to amend this lease if you are going to grant this, so it will be abided by and one of these things is that building out there. Somebody can go out there and knock down those 2 ends, the 4X4s and its going to fall down and nothing is going to keep it up. Mayor Kennedy: I think you have to get rid of the building, its got to go. Mr. Mc Lean: Father Gibson, is there any possibility you would know somebody who would need that home? If not the workmen will start on it tomorrow morning. Mayor Kennedy: Mr. Reboso, please amend your motion to reflect that provision. Mr. Reese: Well the money that is due the City when the City goes out and reimburses and pays power bill., there ought to be conditions in that lease that we get reimbursed immediately or have the power shut off. There is no argument when we pay that power bill. When we pay the water, there is no argument. MARCH 8, 1973 74 • • Mrs. Gordon: Do we have your word that you will keep faith w'th us? Mr. Mc Lean: I gave you my word before on the building. Mrs. Gordon: I know, and you didn't keep it. Mr. Mc Lean: I am sorry. Mrs. Gordon: I am not condemming you at this point, I know you have been ill this past year. Mr. Mc Lean: Based on the actual and factual, I will be up to date but not based on Mr. Reese's interpretation. Mrs. Gordon: I never could get heads or tails out of that discussion of money. Mr. Reese: Mrs. Gordon, I presented that report to this City Commission on three different occasions. Its based on the auditors. Each and every time it was never reconciled. Mayor Kennedy: All right the motion is that it be extended for 2 years with 60 day cancellation provided that the building be torn downin 30 days, either moved or torn down period, in 30 days or there is no extension - Mrs. Gordon: And that the lease will be re -written in the manner that Mr. Reese suggested, it needs more teeth in it. Mr. Reese explain what you meant by more teeth in the lease. Mr. Reese: What I meant by what? Mrs. Gordon: You said the lease should be re -written. Mr. Reese: Yes Maam, the lease should be modified that on the power bills and water bills, they should be paid when the city bills Mr. Mc Lean for them and if not, in 5 days, we will have the power or water shut off. Mrs. Gordon: Agreed Mr. Mc Lean? Mr. Mc Lean: Agreed. Mrs. Gordon: Then, you have my vote. 43, MIAMI CEREBRAL PALSY TELETHON The following resolution was introduced by Reverend Gibson who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 73-179 A RESOLUTION DECLARING MARCH 17, AND MARCH 18, 1973 AS MIAMI CEREBRAL PALSY TELETHON WEEKEND AND URGING ALL MIAMIANS TO WATCH SAID TELETHON (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the City Clerks Office) Upon being seconded by Mrs. Gordon, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Messrs. Plummer, Reboso, Reverend Gibson, Mrs. Gordon and Mayor Kennedy. NOES: None 75 MARCH 8, L 7 3 ADJOURNMENT: THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE ITY COMMISSION, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT ATTEST: H, D, SOUTHERN CITY CLERK RALPH G. ONGIE ASSISTANT CITY CLERK 6:30 O'CLOCK P.M. THIS DATE. DAVIMAYoRKENNEDY MARCH 8, 1973- EN I! 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. CITY OF MtAMI DOCUMENT MEETING DATE: INDEX MARCH 8,1973 DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION COMMISSION AGENDA & CITY CLERK REPORT (9 pgs.) NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING -GARBAGE PICK UP. AMENDMENT - "A RESOLUTION ORDERING LEJEUNE GAR- DENS HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS H4353. VARIANCE - UNIT APARTMENTS BLDG. LOTS 12, 14, 15, 16, AND SE'LY 20' OF LOTS 13 - 200 S.E. 15th ROAD VARIANCE - SINGLE FAMILY HOME - LOT 11, BLK.3, ORANGE PARK, 73 N.W. 17th COURT. CAR WASH OPERATION - INCIDENTAL USE IN C-2 ZONING DISTRICT. ACCEPT COMPLETED WORK- FLA. CONCRETE CONTRACTORS FOR TIIE CITY HALL. (SEWER MODIFICATIONS) ACCEPT COMPLETED WORK- MARKS BROTHERS CO. - (STORM SEWER PROJECT.) ACCEPT COMPLETED WORK- ROSSER ELECTRIC CO, INC. - MIAMARINA LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS. ACCEPT PLAT - R.E. LEE SCHOOL, FLA. ACCEPT PLAT - TOLEDO VILLAS. ISSUE PERMIT - ST. MARY'S CATHEDRAL SCHOOL - CARNIVAL ON PLAYGROUND. ACCEPT BID - CENTRAL CONCRETE OF MEDLEY, INC. AWARD BID - MARKS BROTHERS CO, NOT INC. - CONSTRUCTION OF NORTHERN DRAINAGE PROJECT E-28. SALE OF PUBLIC PARK AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES BONDS - MIAMI CITY - RESOLUTION #73-104 AWARD - PUBLIC PARK AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES BONDS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI. CONDITIONAL USE - NEW FRANKLIN SAVINGS BLDG. - LOTS 27 THRU 30, BLK. 7 - 3753 BIRD AVE. ZONE0 C-5, COCONUT GROVE. DESIGNATING AREA OF THE MIAMI FASHION DISTRICT. DEVELOPMENT OF MARTIN LUTHER KING BLVD. - BOND ISSUE. DESIGNATING INTERSECTION OF FLAGLER ST. AND MIAMI AVE. AS JOSIAH F. CHAILLE MEMORIAL INTER- SECTION. COMMISSION 1 RETRIEVAL ACTION CODE NO. R-73-144 R-73-145 R-73-147 R-73-148 R-73-149 R-73-150 R-73-151 R-73-152 R-73-153 R-73-154 R-73-155 R-73-156 R-73-157 R-73-158 R-73-159 R-73-160 R-73-163 R-73-165 0044 0045 73-144 73-145 73-147 73-148 73-149 73-150 73-151 73-152 73-153 73-154 73-155 73-156 73-157 73-158 73-159 73-160 73-163 73-165 DOCU IVIENT•I1V DEX CONTINUEDeAGE�z ITEM NO. DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION CM �N ACTION _CODE NO. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25 26 27 28 •PROPOSAL - MAXIMUM HOURS FOR SERVING ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES. PROPOSAL - RECREATION PLANNERS - DEVELOPING CONTRACT PLANS - PARKS BOND PROGRAM. PAY SURVEY REPORT FOR CITY OF MIA.MI - YARGER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. (31 pgs) RETROACTIVE PAY FOR CITY EMPLOYEES PURSUANT TO THE PAY SURVEY REPORT BY YARGER AND ASSOCIATES 7.5% PAY INCREASE FOR SECRETARIES OF THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COMMISSION PAY PLAN REPORT BY YARGER AND ASSOCIATES AND PAY PLAN FOR COMMISSION APPOINTED POSITIONS AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF MIAMI AND THE INTER AMERICAN CENTER AUTHORITY EXTENSION AGREEMENT BETWEEN GEORGE MC LEAN AND THE CITY OF MIAMI-DINNER KEY AUDITORIUM R-73-166 R-73-169 R-73-174 R-73-175 R-73-176 R-73-177 R-73-178 73-166 73-169 0046 73-174 73-175 73-176 73-177 73-178