Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 2016-09-29 MinutesCity of Miami City Hall 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, FL 33133 www.miamigov.com Meeting Minutes Thursday, September 29, 2016 9:00 AM Special Meeting City Hall Commission Chambers City Commission Tomas Regalado, Mayor Keon Hardemon, Chair Ken Russell, Vice Chair Wifredo (Willy) Gort, Commissioner District One Frank Carollo, Commissioner District Three Francis Suarez, Commissioner District Four Daniel J. Alfonso, City Manager Victoria Mendez, City Attorney Todd B. Hannon, City Clerk City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 9:00 A.M. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Present: Commissioner Gort, Vice Chair Russell, Commissioner Carollo, Commissioner Suarez and Chair Hardemon On the 29th day of September 2016, the City Commission of the City of Miami, Florida, met at its regular meeting place in City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, Florida, in special session. The Commission Meeting was called to order by Chair Hardemon at 9:11 a. m. and adjourned at 11:54 a.m. Note for the Record: Commissioner Suarez entered the Commission chambers at 9:12 a.m. ALSO PRESENT. - Daniel J. Alfonso, City Manager Victoria Mendez, City Attorney Todd B. Hannon, City Clerk Chair Hardemon: Welcome to the September 29, 2016 meeting of the City of Miami City Commission in these historic chambers. The members of the City Commission are Wifredo Gort, Frank Carollo, Francis Suarez; Ken Russell, the Vice Chair; and me, Keon Hardemon, the Chairman. Also on the dais are Daniel J. Alfonso, our City Manager, and Victoria Mendez, the City Attorney; also, Todd Hannon, our City Clerk. The meeting will be opened with a prayer by Commissioner Gort and the pledge of allegiance, led by Commissioner Carollo. All rise, please. Invocation and pledge of allegiance delivered. Chair Hardemon: Thank you very much. ORDER OF THE DAY Chair Hardemon: We will now begin our regular meeting. The City Attorney will state the procedures to be followed during this meeting. Victoria Mendez (City Attorney): Thank you, Chairman. Any person who is a lobbyist, including all paid persons or firms retained for a principal to advocate for a particular decision by the City Commission must register with the City Clerk and comply with related City requirements for lobbyists. Any person making a presentation, formal request or petition to the City Commission regarding real property must make any disclosures. The item for the agenda is online, and at the Clerk's Office, 24 hours a day, at wwwmiamigov. com [sic]. The Chairman will advise the public when the public may have the opportunity to address the City Commission during the public comment period. When addressing the City Commission, the member of the public must first state their name, address, and the item that they are speaking about. No cell phones or other noise -making devices are permitted in Commission chambers; please silence those devices now. No clapping, applauding, heckling or verbal outbursts in support or opposition to a speaker or his or her remarks shall be permitted. Any person making offensive remarks or who becomes unruly in Commission chambers will he barred from further attending Commission meetings and may be subject to arrest. No signs or placards shall be allowed in Commission chambers. Any person with a disability requiring assistance, auxiliary aids and services for this meeting may notify the City Clerk. Thank you. SP.1 DISCUSSION ITEM 16-01380 City Commission DISCUSSION REGARDING CITY ATTORNEY VICTORIA MENDEZ. City of Miami Page 2 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 16 -01380 -Submittal -Grant Stern-Articles.pdf 16 -01380 -Submittal -Jose Herrera -Text Messages.pdf DISCUSSED A motion was made by Vice Chair Russell, seconded by Commissioner Carollo, and was passed unanimously (AYES: Russell, Carollo, Suarez, Gort, Hardemon), to allow the public to speak on discussion item SP. 1. Chair Hardemon: As we are aware, board members, this is a discussion regarding the City Attorney, Victoria Mendez. That's the only item that we have on the agenda for today. And so, what we will do is, we will have the discussion, like we have at any other City Commission meeting, and we will begin it at this time. And so, because our Vice Chairman is the one that requested this discussion, you have the floor. Vice Chair Russell: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And good morning, everyone. Good morning, fellow Commissioners. Thank you for agreeing to come on this off day. It's a non -Commission day, and we could normally be doing other business. And I really felt that giving this its own time would not distract from our regular agenda, and that we could give special attention to it. As you know, this is something that's very important to me that stemmed from a somewhat small issue many, many months ago. I take this very seriously. This is not a kneejerk reaction; this is not a personal vendetta or conspiracy, like some are trying to distract and say. This is a simple issue of process and trust in our City. I have to be able to work with my staff,' and they have to be honest with me when I ask them for information about things I'm going to vote on, and that did not happen here and it did not happen to an extent that I had to search further. And what I realized when I did search further was that much of what was withheld from me exposed another problem that we have in terms of process, where the City Attorney can get involved or should get involved, and how that guiding hand can change things. That disturbed me and that's become -- that became a distracting part of the deeper issue for me, which was the trust and original process of being straight with my Commission -- with my City Attorney. And so, here we are. There are a lot of folks who have written, who have called, who have asked to show up today and have asked to speak. I know it's on both sides, actually. I know there are a lot of people here who care very much for our City Attorney, Ms. Mendez, and they would like to speak on her behalf toward her character, her record. I know some would like to defend her with regard to what they feel is really going on here, and I want to hear all of that. And, of course, I also want to hear about those who have asked me if they could come and speak. So, Mr. Chair, if there is a lot of discussion that we would have beforehand, I think it would be enlightening to open the floor for public commentary and get that out of the way first, because that will affect my decision, it may affect your decision, and I think that's what people are here for, so I would move that we open the floor for public comment. Chair Hardemon: Board members, I would suggest that we not have public comment on a discussion item of this magnitude. Those of us who understand what a discussion like this -- and we've had some -- I'll give you an example. We've had some discussion in our past meetings that are in reference to some of the allegations that were made against our City Attorney, and what I don't want is for our City Attorney to be lamblasted [sic] and for her to be accused of things without a proper way to defend herself. I think this is not the proper way that you handle an item such as this, and so I don't think it would be improper [sic] for us to have public discussion -- I'm sorry -- public comment on something from either side, f or'or ligainst7he City Attorney. I think this is a matter that the Vice Chairman has brought before us to address and this is a matter that we should address and this is a matter in which it deals with items that -- or issues that affect us, as a board, but ultimately will affect the City, if we decide to keep Ms. Mendez or if we decide to relieve her of her duties, but nonetheless, we are the ones that deal intimately with the issues. And the issues that the Vice Chairman has, he can make his presentation, but I don't think that having a discussion that goes on for an hour or so from the public comment is the best thing to do. City of Miami Page 3 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 Vice Chair Russell: Mr. Chair, I take that to mean you won't be seconding my motion for the public to be heard. I -- Chair Hardemon: Well, you know that. Vice Chair Russell: I've made the motion and believe the people do have a right to speak and I believe that they are very entwined with this situation, and that's what the public's right is here; that's why we have these lecterns here. And when we do make a motion, they inevitably have the right to speak. Chair Hardemon: I will tell you this: We've couched our -- the Commission meetings have been -- have had -- I'm going to put it this way: I think there is much discussion that needs to be had on this board by this dais. We've used the words, transparency," we've used the words, Bight for the public to be heard. "We've had a lot of discussions on this board that I thought were earnest, and from the details that I'm starting to get on my desk, it doesn't appear to be that way. You know, this meeting, in and of itself, saddens me; not because of a motion to remove someone who is the City Attorney, but it saddens me because of the way that we've gotten here. And I will tell you that when I think about the role of the City Attorney and her right to defend the City of Miami against any suit that's filed against this community -- and I see a City Attorney who's fought; won some, lost some, but fought nonetheless. And we've had matters come before this board where we've had to decide --for instance, the standing issue, whether or not we were going to allow -- to give up that defense of standing when we're facing opposition from people who sue the City. And our City Attorney begged us not to give away that right to defend us, using that tool. And, you know, and the rumors are in the wind that it's an agenda by some other people who typically sue the City. And then, to see it on paper in black and white, it's shocking to me. It's shocking to me that, you know, we can be considered as a board and try to figure out how is it that we move our City forward in a positive direction, defend our community and do the right thing by our constituents, and it's not as in the sunshine as I thought it was. So, you know, I'm bamboozled by this whole meeting, and I think that, you know, this -- we're only going to make it worse if we allow public comment on a discussion item. Mr. Stern -- Grant Stern: Excuse me, excuse me; coughing. Chair Hardemon: I understand how you feel about me, but no matter how you feel about me, as evidenced in your text messages, no matter how Commissioner Russell's office feels about me, I'm going to do what I believe is the right thing by this Commission. And a fake cough because you disagree with me, any type of public behavioral issues that you present today as you prepare yourself for making a presentation that's going to support your positions and the things that you've done towards this City, it's not going to affect us. And so I advise you to refrain from any public comment that is unnecessary and that is -- that would interrupt this meeting, okay? So right now, Commissioner Russell did make a motion. Commissioner Carollo: Mr. Chairman. Chair Hardemon: Yes. Commissioner Carollo: Mr. Chairman, I have always welcomed the discussion and the debate, whether you vote something up or down. I truly believe that all these people that have come here came here for a reason, and I think, actually, even by State law, aren't we supposed to open up the floor and let them discuss or speak on an item? Chair Hardemon: Madam City Attorney. Victoria Mendez (City Attorney): Well, I'm not going to give that opinion. I'll let Mr. Min City of Miami Page 4 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 address it, since it has to do with me, so give me one second. Barnaby Min (Deputy City Attorney): Mr. Chairman, both the State Statute, as well as the City Code, Chapter 2 of the City Code state that the public has a right to speak prior to any action that the City Commission may take. If no action is going to be taken, then there -- under both the State Statute, as well as the City Code, there is no right to public comment. Commissioner Carollo: Mr. Chairman. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized. Commissioner Carollo: What about the possibility of an action -- Chair Hardemon: This -- Commissioner Carollo: -- or a possibility of a vote? Chair Hardemon: If you have a -- if someone has a vote that they want to take -- this is a -- I'll explain this, this way -- Commissioner Carollo: Mr. Chairman, but I'm not asking you. With all due respect, I'm asking our City Attorney. I would like our City Attorney to be the one who opines. Mr. Min: If'there is action that is going to be taken, then, yes, the public has a right to speak. I obviously cannot read into the future whether action is going to be taken. If'there's a motion, I think that's obviously -- and a second to the motion, I -- you know, obviously, there's going to be a vote if there's both a motion and a second. So that means some type of action is going to be taken. If it is simply a discussion with no potential resolution, no potential action, no potential resolu -- motion, then that means no action is going to be taken. Chair Hardemon: So, as I was about to say, a discussion item is different from a -- a discussion item is typically something that we use to discuss something. We tend not to have an action that comes from a discussion item; it's informative. If there is a measure that is on the floor, typically, there's a motion and a second to do something. So, for instance, if there was a motion and a second to fire the City Attorney, now you have -- we're leaning towards a decision to be made, and that would possibly trigger the public having the right to be heard about an issue. But simply a discussion doesn't give rise to that. Vice Chair Russell: Mr. Chair. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized. Vice Chair Russell: Thank you. The question to the Attorney was whether or not the public has the right to speak at a situation like this. Chair Hardemon: I believe he answered you. Vice Chair Russell: Yes, he did. What is not answered is whether or not we have the right to want to hear them to speak. Chair Hardemon: Oh, I mean, that's a matter for the board -- Vice -Vce Chair Russell: And that is the motion that I made. Chair Hardemon: --that's -- City of Miami Page 5 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 Vice Chair Russell: And to not second that or not vote, that means we do not want -- There's nothing forcing us to hear the public right now. It would be our choice, if we are interested in the input of the public; that is correct, right? Mr. Min: The body can invite comment from the public if 'the body wishes to. Commissioner Carollo: Mr. Chairman. Chair Hardemon: Yes. Commissioner Carollo: I second the motion to invite comments from the public. Chair Hardemon: Properly moved and seconded. Is there any further discussion about the situation? Commissioner Suarez: Yes, yes, there is. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized. Commissioner Suarez: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Unfortunately, this is not the first time that many of us -- a few of us have been in a situation similar to this. And what I can tell you, having been through two similar situations to this one is that what you're going to hear from the public, I believe, is you're going to hear people that are very supportive of Ms. Mendez and the work that she's done in the community and you're going to hear people that are upset with her decision, and you're going to hear people that are upset with the perception of the way that our government should be functioned and should be working. Some people think that's good to sort of air out the dirty laundry, if you will. And I can tell you that it is -- in my experience, it is something that has created a lot of animosity. We already are starting to see that some divisions are being created amongst ourselves, amongst each other. And that's something that, to me, very much worries me, because at the end of the day, people are watching to see what kind of a government we're going to be. And I think it's unfortunate that we are here. I certainly wish that this matter could have been deescalated in a way that would have prevented this from happening, but, you know, I think the people who are here to speak are here to speak their mind. And, you know, I personally don't have a problem listening to them and I am certainly influenced, just like on any matter that comes before us. I mean, we have contentious matters all the time and we listen to the public, and we listen to what they have to say on those matters. It's -- we're just going down a road -- I remember when we fired our Police Chief, and that was a 3-2 vote, and it was 22 hours that we were in session -- 22 hours -- which means that we were in session from 9 in the morning, I think, until 2 or 3 in the morning that day. I think we broke that day and came back the following Monday or whatever -- it was like a weekend, a Friday, or something like that -- and we were in session for another eight hours; 22 consecutive hours. And the chambers are All. If'everyone here takes their two minutes to speak, we're going to be here for three or four hours, and then we're going to have to deliberate ourselves. So I'm perfectly fine with listening to the public. Obviously, everything that we do on our -- in our job -- the public -- you know, you are our bosses. We work for you, and so, you know, it's important to get your per --we've gotten your perspective, by the way, because we've gotten many calls from many people, firo'and cion, 'and certainly, there is no lack of passion on either side; I can tell you that much. So, you know, if it's the will of this board to speak on this issue, so be it. I'm just telling you, I've been to this -- I've been here before, and it has a tendency to create more escalation, more drama, more bad will, if you will. So those are -- that's my thought on that, on the motion. Chair Hardemon: Commissioner Gort. Commissioner Gort: Mr. Chairman, let me tell you, the process that I would like to have seen is City of Miami Page 6 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 the Vice Charman has certain charges that he had. The Attorney should have the ability to respond and have due process and response to those charges, but at the same time -- and I think I know what you're trying to avoid. I think with the amount of people that we have here, I think we should listen to them, so people can understand, because before, we been hearing just a section of our community. We have the whole community here represented today. So I know it might take a long time and all that, but I'd like to hear from the whole community. Chair Hardemon: Any further discussion on the issue? Commissioner Suarez: No. Commissioner Carollo: Mr. Chairman. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized. Commissioner Carollo: Just real quick, I do want to mention beforehand, at 12:15, I will have to be leaving and I'll be hack at, I would say, 3:15. So just in case -- I didn't anticipate it would take that long, but just in case, because it could be many, many hours, so. Commissioner Gort: Yeah. Chair Hardemon: Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of the motion, say dye. " The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chair Hardemon: Motion passes. Open up the floor for public -- Todd B. Hannon (City Clerk): Chair, my apologies. I'm going to record that as unanimous? Chair Hardemon: Yes. Mr. Hannon: Yes, sir. Chair Hardemon: I open up the floor for public hearing. If you are a member of the public and you'd like to speak on an agenda -- on the agenda item which is scheduled for today, the discussion regarding the City Attorney, Victoria Mendez, please come forward and address this body. You will step before the lectern, say your name, your address -- we know the issue -- and you will have two minutes to speak. I will be as stringent as possible with the two minutes to speak, so please have respect for everyone that is here that wishes to speak for their two minutes, and for the board members that are here, listening to you discuss the issue. Commissioner Suarez: Mr. Chair. Chair Hardemon: Sir. Commissioner Suarez: I think we need to make sure that we have a translator, too, that's available, because I think we may have some people -- Chair Hardemon: Translator? Commissioner Suarez: Do we have a translator? Mr. Hannon: I'm sorry. Commissioner Gort: Yes, we do. City of Miami Page 7 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 Mr. Hannon: Translator for whom? Commissioner Suarez: I don't think our translator is here. Chair Hardemon: Justin case. Mr. Hannon: They're running late. Commissioner Suarez: Okay. Mr. Hannon: So -- Chair Hardemon: So if there's someone that needs translation, we can either have them come at the end, like as -- they can speak when a translator arrives. Mr. Hannon: We also have someone who can assist in that capacity. Chair Hardemon: Okay, from your office? Mr. Hannon: Yes. Chair Hardemon: Okay. All right. Sir, you're recognized. Williams Armbrister: Good morning to every wonderful person at the sound of 'my voice. My name is Williams Armbrister. I reside at 3260 Thomas Avenue, Miami, Florida. And I'm here to speak on hehalf �qf what is true; the truth that we all know. This Attorney came in, in continuing the fulfillment of the agenda that has been established by the City of Miami since the '60s. So she isn't doing anything that hasn't already been done. And, Commissioner Russell, I'm -- directly, I'm going to address you with this issue that I have that you were offended about her not being --not delivering the transparency that you desired. We've experienced the same thing in Coconut Grove, because there was never any discussion that the money to purchase that trolley building, which we all thought would be a good idea. Transparency would have been that: We're going to purchase the trolley building and we're going to use the money to upgrade the parks. Now, I have nothing personal against any of you. Even when you voted to --for the up -zoning of a residential community with Four Point Group, that didn't change my admiration and care and love for you, but your choices need to be revisited. Whenever you can --you came in, you come in and you give the Attorney a note or email, suggesting to her that she reconsider some of the actions of the past Attorney, so moving forward, she will represent your desire, and I doubt very seriously that that's been done. I don't know, but I doubt very seriously that that's been done. This is what we want moving forward. So if there's a problem with what she's doing, if this is a competency hearing of sort, then the competency needs to go where -- needs to be directed to where it's needed. Competency is like this: NCD, Neighborhood Conservation District, Coconut Grove, they've changed the -- it's been reworded. The word is -- has been changed, because it's a Neighborhood Construction District. And so, then there needs to be a competency hearing for our Zoning director if you want to have a -- Chair Hardemon: Mr. -- Mr. Armbrister: -- competency hearing. And in closing -- Chair Hardemon: -- sir -- Mr. Armbrister: --I want to thank you very much for allowing me to share with you the things that you are already aware of. City of Miami Page 8 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 Chair Hardemon: Thank you very much. Mr. Armbrister: God bless you all. Have a wonderful day. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, sir. Grant Stern: Thank you, Mr. Chairperson. My name is Grant Stern. I reside at 425 Northeast 22nd Street. I have a handout being given to the Commission. It is some City business that I have done with Ms. Victoria Mendez, and it shows that she took a memo from former Mayor Manny Diaz and short-circuited the process of the City of Miami in order to give Walmart an improper permit. It is undeniable, black and white evidence that anybody can see. It is proof -- Ms. Mendez: Could I have a copy? Mr. Stern: -- she took the memo from Mr. Man -- Commissioner Gort: Here. Mr. Stern: -- Mr. Diaz and thereupon interfered with the City's zoning process. Ms. Mendez used to be the Zoning lawyer. And my problem is that she has retained this fiefdom under her current job and it brings the appearance of impropriety all over the highest office in the City Attorney's Office, and it's improper. She's the City Attorney. She should be fighting FPL (Florida Power & Light), not -- Commissioner Gort: She has. Mr. Stern: -- interfering with local zoning matters. Commissioner Gort: She has, and done a good job. Mr. Stern: That's right; she's done that to -- Commissioner Gort: Yes, yes. Mr. Stern: -- successfully. And I point out that in the context of this hearing, the matter is not Walmart, but rather, does she represent this Commission as Attorney well? And my answer is, fro. "During the discussion, before the item was even brought to bear, she spoke to the Miami Herald at 2:38 p.m., the day that this was first discussed, and let me read to you what she quoted and said to David Smiley, of the Miami Herald. In interview, Mr. Russ -- she said that she gave Russell all the documents. My main point is to defend against liability; just don't think he understands the process. "She betrayed Mr. Russell's mental impression ofan item that was being heard in this chamber as it was being heard, at recess. That is a betrayal of the attorney-client privilege. It is a betrayal of every single Commissioner, because every single one of you now knows that she will betray you in the public, to the media or to anybody on any item. To do this in public is unconscionable by any attorney representing any person, and I'm sorry that I have to stand here and demonstrate that to this body. And I hope that you guys make the right decision, because she is your counsel, and that is the only thing that matters. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Chair Hardemon: Thank you very much. You're recognized, sir. Louis V. Martinez: Good morning. Louis V. Martinez. My office is at 100 Southeast 2 nd Street, Miami, Florida 33131. Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today. Commissioner Gort, you made a really important comment. You said, due process. "When this issue initially came before you, City Attorney Mendez -- City of Miami Page 9 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 Victoria Mendez -- asked for a referral to the Ethics Commission for an investigation to allow an independent, nonpartisan organization that was specifically created to investigate these type of issues determine whether anything was done improperly. She didn't ask for it; she actually demanded it. Now, instead of allowing an independent party to investigate this, this became, as you described, Chairman, a sideshow of who -- he said/she said. "Why not allow the Ethics Commission to complete a thorough investigation and determine if any process was not done ? Would not any of fou wish for that to occur? Vice Chairman Russell, you have been accused of. impro -- of ethics violations. In fact, you were (UNINTELLIGIBLE) public records. And this week, you were exonerated by the Ethics Commission for allegedly destroying public records. You were given the opportunity to defend yourself. You were given the opportunity to allow an independent body to review what was or did not occur. How could you -- how could all of you make a determination on the reputation of a woman who has a stellar reputation and not give her the opportunity for an independent body to make a determination whether or not something occurred? I am extremely confident -- and I have a bias -- that I -- and have no doubt that, should the Ethics Commission look at this, they will find no violation of ordinance or code by City Attorney Mendez, but she deserves that opportunity. That is what we are -- if you're going to accuse someone of unethical conduct, allow the pro -- due process to be done. All of you, all of us would insist on that. All of us know that when you are in the public sector, you are going to make enemies. You are going to have people who are -- that are going to agree with you; you are going to have people that are disagreeing with you. All of you who are leaders know that. That is why the voters of Miami -Dade County, including the City of Miami, created in the referendum Charter the Ethics Commission. Chair Hardemon: Sir, you -- I'm sorry, your time has expired. Mr. Martinez: I'm sorry. I apologize. Chair Hardemon: No. Mr. Martinez: My suggestion is do not take any action without allowing a transparent, independent investigation to be completed. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: Thank you very much, sir. You're recognized, ma'am. Carol Lopez -Bethel. Thank you, Commission. My name is Carol Lopez -Bethel. I reside at 3907 Loquat Avenue in Miami, Florida. I am a recent returnee to Miami from Washington, D. C. (District of Columbia), where my husband and I each worked at high cabinet levels for a number of years, where the hint or suggestion of impropriety under any allegation is enough to have anyone removed; solely the hint. And I would say that what we are looking at, what we have been seeing much outpaces the suggestion or hint. I would remind this group, this Commission that we, the people here, are the ones who asked to be recognized, and I was told, when I said, Tin moving back to Miami after 28 years in D. C., 79h, you're going to the banana republic, " because that is how we are viewed. I am asking you, the Commission that we have voted -- remind you that we have voted you in -- that you allow us to know that you will take whatever actions that are required to restore our faith in the Commission; that we have given you this, and I congratulate you, sir, for reminding yourselves, as well as us, that you serve this public. And we -- our trust is what's required; not yours. And I appreciate the time, the 22 hours that you spent, the eight hours that you've spent from time to time. Thank you very much, but it is your job. Please allow -- whether it be an independent counsel, whether it be an action taken today, please take whatever action it takes to give us that trust and remind -- be reminded that we, the public, are watching. Chair Hardemon: Thank you very much. Sir, you're recognized. Hector Lombana: Good morning. My name is Hector Lombana, and I'm a lawyer. I was past City of Miami Page 10 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 president of the Cuban -American Bar Association. You know, there are procedures for judging the performance of lawyers, government lawyers, which are set forth in the Miami -Dade County Charter, and it's what's supposed to be followed; not a kangaroo court created by one Commissioner, and that's you, Mr. Russell. I got copies of emails and records, and it appears that you, Mr. Russell, while sitting on that dais, were taking emails from that gentleman over there with the copious arrest record, Mr. Stern. Okay? Now, I got to tell you, you know, you can assault people, you can try to bring people's reputations down, you can do whatever you want because of'your politics and because whatever puppet masters you, sir, are serving. Okay? And to create this thing today, with all these people, okay, and all this public comment, when last week, it was said that there was not going to he public comment here today, is the creation of a three-ring circus. You know, to paraphrase Joseph Welch's statement to Joe McCarthy during the House Un-American Activities Committee, the Army McCarthy hearings, back in 1954 -- Until today, until I walked in here today and I saw what you've arranged and what you've created, I don't think I never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness, or your ambition -- Sir, have you no sense of decency? "At long last, no decency, putting a reputation of a fine lawyer at risk in the middle of this forum -- Chair Hardemon: Mr. Lombana -- Mr. Lombana: -- when there are appropriate forums -- Chair Hardemon: -- Mr. Lombana -- Mr. Lombana: -- that can he used? Chair Hardemon: -- your time is expired. Mr. Lombana: Mr. Javier Ortiz gave me his time. There's one more -- There is an appropriate forum for this, and that's the Miami -Dade County Commission -- or you can report her to the Florida Bar. But, no, it's a circus we get. And let me tell you, we're not going to stand for it and we're not going to sit around and wait for it, nor are we going to sit around and listen to statements like, You're in a banana republic, 'because all of us who are of Cuban descent know what that means. Okay? Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, sir. Ari Sweethaum: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Ari Sweethaum, and before I get started, I just would hope and ask that this parade of lawyers that show pure bias and allegiance that are trying to turn this into some sort of ethnic issue be taken for what it is, which is utter nonsense. I'm a resident, and I'm here as a resident, because I'm personally affected by decisions and inaction taken by the City Attorney, and I'd like you to -- I'd like to tell you that story. My parents bought a home in Coconut Grove in 1980, and it is located at 3090 Alamanda Street, adjacent to Blanche Park. At one time, our home was part of the quarry that the City of Miami used as a dump for its West Grove incinerator known as Old Smokey. "The City investigated, tested the soil. Like Blanche Park, our home is contaminated with pollutants, such as lead, arsenic, anemone; and dioxin, one of the strongest toxins known to man. Blanche Park has been remediated; our home has not. My mother was a fantastic and avid gardener, having cultivated a tropical garden at our undeveloped property. My mom spent hours upon hours and days upon days in that soil. In 2009, my mom passed away from multiple myeloma, which has a causal link to dioxin. We're not scientists. I'm here with my father, Donald Sweetbaum. We don't know that the soil was the cause, but we -- it's certainly something we have to think about and face that possibility. We're here because our property, an asset my parents held onto, is now worth zero, and they cannot pass anything on to their children. The remediation cost is several hundred thousand dollars and my -- and our house is completely upside-down. We're here because we have no political agenda and we want you to hear about the City -- how the City Attorney treats City of Miami Page 11 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 its constituents. For about three years now, we have avoided litigation, just wanting to find a way to make my family whole. There's no profit motive guiding us. Because timing is an issue, my only request is that we enter into a tolling agreement, so that we could have a continuous dialogue. And as everybody sitting here knows, a tolling agreement just puts a pause on the statute of limitations, preserving rights. The City Attorney drafted a tolling agreement, sent it to me. I changed the address, because the address was wrong; sent it back to the City. The City, months later -- this is after months and months of emails, calls unreturned -- I hear back from the City they'll only now enter into the tolling agreement if *we agree to cap our damages at $200,000. That doesn't fix our property. Chair Hardemon: Sir -- Mr. Sweethaum: If you're serving your constituents, you're a public servant. Chair Hardemon: --your two minutes have expired. Thank you very much for your public comment. Mr. Sweetbaum: Well, there's more to this, and I would hope that you guys would want to hear this. Chair Hardemon: Thank you very much, sir. Mr. Sweetbaum: Thank you. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, sir. Leroy Jones: Leroy Jones. I just want to caution and remind everybody is that sometimes, as human beings, we can he so vicious towards each other, man. You know, it's like in -- when I used to -- when I first started coming down here, I was like a angry, mean guy. Commissioner Gort can tell you, I was like real hitter, you know. But I've learned through the processes that everybody is important, man. And although I'm sure it's going to be some emails and letters and conversations that takes place as related to the City Attorney that most of us will never see, I just want to say to you, Commissioner Russell, that you reconsider your evaluation of the City Attorney. I been knowing the City Attorney for about 15 years, and I know her to he a stand-up person, you know; what I know of her, to he a honest person, someone that you can always talk to. So it's not somebody that's just sitting off from the community. So I just want to say that, you know, we have to he mindful of decisions and things that we do sometimes, because sometimes, when you do them, you can't take them back. Some mistakes that you make and things that you say, you can't recover from them; you can't he forgiven for them. It might seem like it, but the heart won't change. So I just want to say that, you know, I think this can he worked out. We got a good, fine City Attorney here that know the City, that know the people. You know, whatever it is --I don't know the whole details. You know, I'm just supporting somebody that I know to be a straight -shooter and a honest person, that I know of,' you know. And I just want to he here to say that. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: Thank you very much. Sir, you're recognized. Adrian Madriz: My name is Adrian Madriz, 1841 Northwest 1st Court. I don't know the City Attorney personally, and I do want to make sure that the right decision he made, but I have no reason to distrust Commissioner Russell. I think he has been a shining example of how to be an engaged Commissioner in his district, and to make sure that he is always doing his job and holding people accountable. And I think that if this really is an issue of accountability that we should do everything in our power to make sure that the right people are held accountable. If the City Attorney truly withheld public records f rom a City Commissioner, that's a violation of trust. That's not just a violation of his trust; that's a violation of the community's trust. And I City of Miami Page 12 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 don't know exactly what needs to happen so that the proper accountability can go into effect, but, definitely, that's something that cannot go unchecked and it cannot go unaddressed, and I really would like to see this Commission do everything in their power to make sure that that is definitely remedied and addressed. If the City Attorney should be found to be guilty of having done these things, then I really do think that maybe we should reconsider employing her for the City's purposes. As a resident of this City, I really only want to make sure that we have people working for us that truly have the actual needs and the trust of the community in their heart. And if these actions are the kinds of actions that we can expect from the City Attorney, then maybe that's not the right person for the job. Jose Herrera: Good morning. Jose T. Herrera -- Chair Hardemon: Thank you very much, sir. Mr. Herrera: -- with offices at 2350 Coral Way. I want to hand out some message threads that I obtained from Commissioner Russell's office, pursuant to a public records request. Commissioner Suarez: What is her name? Vice Chair Russell: What is being presented? Commissioner Gort: Jose Herrera. Mr. Herrera: As most of you may have received an email yesterday, directed at Joe Centorino, the Miami -Dade Commission on Ethics, I sent Commissioner Russell a public records request for specific documents. I have the public request here, and most of 'you have it in your emails from yesterday. I requested very specific documents. Commissioner Russell had this public records request prior to calling this special meeting. Coincidentally, he called this special meeting, not being able to comply with my public records request; which go to the heart of the issue here. What communications are missing? These messages which you will read show that there's back -channel communications between Commissioner Russell and his staff, which are public records regarding public business. They talk about, Let's talk about things on a different channel. "We don't have that; in addition to which, they use private Gmail accounts to communicate about private public business. Where are those emails? If you read through that, there's a hundred emails regarding Battersea Park. There's conversation about Jennings disclosure. Where are those hundred emails? You should have them readily available. In fact, I understand Mr. Lombana's request kind of requested some of the same things. I also requested toll records and phone records. I don't have those. I requested text messages. I don't have those. I intend to pursue my public records request, because the people here and the public of the City of Miami is entitled to know what you've been discussing on private channels, and I will pursue it if that means taking legal action. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, sir. Albert Gomez: Good morning. Albert Gomez, 3566 Vista Court. I've collaborated with a lot of you here in various fronts. I hung up a call on Zika with the DOD (Department of Defense) Health Commission to speak here specifically about quality assurance. By the way, I'm Cuban American. Okay? So I don't like people speaking in generalities about Cuban Americans or anybody like that, so I want to be clear about that. Quality assurance -- when you take public office or when you take a job as an employee of the City, you're held under the highest form of scrutiny. Quality assurance is key, especially when it comes to legalese and everything with regards to legal authority in the City. With the issues that this City sees right now, like Zika, like tritium, like pollution in our parks and in our actual homesteads, I think it's important that we understand that we have good quality assurance. When public trust is affected, we need to address it immediately. This is not about a court. This is about our only method of City of Miami Page 13 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 communicating as public to our elected officials. This is here. This is sacred. Anyone that questions that, I have a beef with. All right? So I think all of us have the right to speak, and if it's about quality assurance, we need to address it. If there -- if we're going to make this a character assault on Ken Russell, let's then bring that forward at its own due process. This is not about that. This is about the City Attorney's fitness to do her job, and that is all. So let's stay to task, folks. Robert Deresz: Robert Deresz, 200 Southeast 15th Road, Unite 7K, Miami, Florida; resident of Coconut Grove/Brickell for 46 years; transplant from Michigan; came down here because of the wonderful water and sailing; first generation Polak. I'm the minority in the whole room I bet. I appreciate the time to speak. I'm nervous as can be. I personally believe that this should be settled with you three gentlemen, yourselves. I think you should respect each other, and if ally of you are unhappy or uncomfortable, let's say, with our City Attorney or a few other people in, quote, 1hanagement, 'fou should, without question or without even having to explain yourselves, respect each other and just -- you know, where you can all work together for all of us. But if we're going to get down to details, I watch a lot of these meetings on TV. Over the years, I've come and spoken, especially when Mr. Trainor was involved, you know, but -- In fact, as far as that's concerned, I remember the Bops "when he got indicted. I think he runs our treasury for our Arts Festival now. When he got indicted and he subleased the property over there, and the paperwork from the State Attorney's Office or management, it said, Cops, oops, we wrote his contract incorrectly, and we only get a percentage of what he gets instead of what the whole outfit gets. "Anyways, back to this. Here's a fine example. I -- what I've seen on TV during the meetings is the City Attorney speaking up, when not asked to, when it favors a developer or special interest, but keeping their mouths -- keeping quiet when they could actually add something or correct something that's incorrect that's favoring a developer or special interest; not coming up and informing the Commission, because, of course, that would sway things the correct way. This is a good example right now where she -- it took -- she didn't immediately at the beginning step down from her seat today; she only did it when it favored her. And right now, she's up there -- Chair Hardemon: Sir -- Mr. Deresz: -- excuse me. And we're not being represented. That gentleman there -- Chair Hardemon: -- your time has expired. Mr. Deresz: -- should be sitting upfront. Thank you very much for your time. Chair Hardemon: Thank you very much. Renita Holmes: Good morning. Bear with me a little bit; a little bit overwhelmed and tired, and my back's really aching. I have to do this without opiates, standing as a woman who's been through a lot. I would like to thank you for the opportunity to have a discussion, because I'm actually torn between. I have with me some folks who've never engaged before from the Chairperson and my Commissioner's district, as well as Coconut Grove, but we're all -- My name is Madam Holmes, Women's Association Alliance Addressing Injustice and Violent Epidemia, of Women in Public Housing, Education, Finance and Development. I'm pretty much doing education advocacy to those who have no ability to pay for legal defense. So as a taxpayer, I count on the bottom line defense. Irregardless, I have some wonderful attorneys and other professionals that are -- Commissioners, you're not allowed your expertise, because it may provide a conflict of interest. I know that if you released everything, through the Chair, if she did, a lot of us would have a lot of conflict. It's been several times recently that the City Manager was charged. But you've heard me say time and time again, as WAAAIVE of Women, Wow, one woman up there, and still, we're the ones that get the attack. "I'm worried about the disparity of this, and I honestly believe that if it had been a man, it wouldn't be going like this City of Miami Page 14 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 right now, but I need that insight of professionals who sit on the daises. What gives me conflict and hypocrisy is that most of us here are being thrown out at the time in Coconut Grove and Overtown, but we have no lawyer. We're paying for legal services and can't even do a class action. So, really, is this how we do? We attack the one line of defense we have? We constantly attacking our employees. We have evaluations that you're referring to that aren't public record. I thank you, madam, because I always wanted to be attorney. I'm going to get those LSAT (Law School Admission Test) books. And sometimes, we're in conflict, but I'm going to tell you something: I'm just sick and tired of women not having any defense, being a taxpayer of poverty level, and everybody has a profession, and nobody's defending my basic civil rights. Most of us have sat -- and in closing, most of what I think is a conflict for us all, because we're all in this together. You're the point that holds us together legally. All the home rules of engagement, well, I'm concerned about those. So if they let you go, you're going to leave with a lot of secrets. I know you're supposed to protect them and us, and they're -- so protect us, too. I want to thank you all for now being in the sunshine. I want to know everything. But one can't talk about the other. Why are people being evicted and out on the streets in abandoned buildings -- Chair Hardemon: Madam Holmes -- Ms. Holmes: -- and we have all these lawyers up here? So everybody is a liar -- Chair Hardemon: -- Madam Holmes -- Ms. Holmes: -- nobody's -- and in closing, nobody's doing this -- Well, thank you, Commissioner. Chair Hardemon: -- your time -- Ms. Holmes: I have other folks -- Yeah, but I'm just saying in closing, thank you very much. And I'd like that question answered. Aren't we all a hypocrisy right now? Chair Hardemon: Thank you very much, ma'am. Ms. Holmes: I'll yield to the young lady. Some of them are disabled, so I stand with ourselves. Chair Hardemon: I understand. Ms. Holmes: Okay. Chair Hardemon: Sir, you're recognized. Juan Cuba: My name is Juan Cuba. I live at 165 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Coral Gables, Florida 33134; long-time resident in the City of Miami, as well. I want to thank --first thank Commissioner Russell and Commissioner Carollo for opening up -- this discussion up to the public. It is a public matter. I was part of coalition to reform campaign finance reform at the County, and during our long fight, the County Attorney was asked why he hadn't given his damaging legal opinion to our coalition earlier. He said his only client was the Commission, and that he did not provide counsel to members of the public. As much as the outcome of our petition fight frustrated me, he was right on that point. So I was outraged that not only was the City Attorney providing a legal opinion to a lobbyist for a developer, but she was helping them circumvent a public process against the opinion of other City departments. The City Attorney works for you, and not the developers or the lobbyists; and you work for us, the public. The Attorney is saying this is a politically motivated [sic], while she slams an elected Commissioner in the media, and organizes the Cuban Bar Association and the Police union to launch political attacks at a sitting City Commissioner. The circus, sir, is the City Attorney abusing her power to help developers avoid the public process. And the banana republic would be if you, the City City of Miami Page 15 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 Commission, gives her a pass. She has not only broken the trust of our elected City Commissioner, but more importantly, she has broken the trust with the public. We hope that you will remedy this situation immediately, and not betray our trust that we've put in all of you. Thank you. Evelyn Edmonds: Yes. My name is Evelyn Edmonds. My old address was 5815 Northwest 15th Avenue. I was evicted from the house. Right now I'm homeless, because my mother had a reverse mortgage on the house, and I never went to probate court. I went down to the lawyers. I tried everything I could, and nothing has happened. And when Igo out and ask for help, they tell me I got to wait. I just need legal defense, someone to help me where I can't, because (UNINTELLIGIBLE) I can go home, because the officers around there has tried to help me, and I don't have a lawyer. Unidentified Speaker: Say it again. Ms. Edmonds: I don't have a lawyer. Shaterica Sharp: Well, I'm standing in behalf of my mother, because I stay in public housing, and I really cannot afford for her to be at my house, because I would get evicted if I have someone that's saying with me, so. Unidentified Speaker: Speak up. Ms. Sharp: Yes, and I need a lawyer. Ms. Holmes: I'm sorry. She's asking me, is this basically -- these are some of the folks and some of those outside from Coconut Grove and Overtown that can't afford an attorney. This is their only line of defense and they're very nervous. And I've had to dig my monies, as a person with disability. We're also people, and going through changes to get here. I'm just a paralegal, so that's what we're appealing. It just seems so wrong to us that we're being evicted, and we got no legal defense. And right now, we're watching a woman being attacked and a lawyer, and we still waiting to talk to you, Commissioner Russell and Commissioner Keon. All I could do is just try to get them basic education. And thank you for the opportunity to engage in support. I'd like an attorney to tell me where the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) accommodations in the public hearings, as well. That's how you use a lawyer, where it's needed most; not protecting each other on special occasions. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, ma'am. Jody Finker: Jody Finker, 1654 Tigertail Avenue, Miami 33133. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I'm not an attorney, I'm not an employee of the City, I'm not a lobbyist, I haven't sworn any oaths to uphold laws or represent the best interest of our City, but we have specific rules in the Grove and seems like they've been ignored. And while there's been plenty of hyperbole and bullying rhetoric that's been tossed out so far, none of it seems to alter the issue as to what brought us here to this very moment. When we wanted to build a 114 -square foot hall that would connect our house with an existing garage, the home would have been noncompliant with regard to the setback. So we applied for a variance. We hired a zoning attorney, we followed every rule, we notified all of 'the neighbors necessary to get their permission. Then we presented to the Zoning Committee and it was approved and it took months, and at great cost. But it would appear that developers seem to have their own set of rules, and if their set of rules has in any way been enabled by the City Attorney, it is your responsibility to do something about it. That was the oath that you took. So however you rule, it's your job to know those rules, follow them, and operate in a transparent manner. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: Thank you, ma'am. City of Miami Page 16 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 Johannah Brown: Good morning. Chair Hardemon: Good morning. Commissioner Gort: Good morning. Ms. Brown: My name is Johannah Brown. I live at 4360 Ingraham Highway. This is now the fourth time I've spoken at a City Commission meeting, and I pray that you're not sick of 'me yet. Prior to July 29, my participation in local government was nonexistent. I, like many others in the City, are inundated with stories every day about the way things work in the City of Miami, and have been cynical for some time about how I could effect change in our community. Yet, when I actually started attending Commission meetings in July, the things I heard and saw did not jibe with the stories I've read in the paper. What I have seen is you five gentlemen working long hours on worthy projects, trying to transform Miami into a world-class city. Yet, sadly, the City Attorney threatens all that hard work. This is not the first time the City Attorney's Office conduct has been called into question. She has in the past failed to respond professionally and ethically to public records requests; not just from your fellow Commissioner, but also from citizens of the City, as well as other municipalities. It seems this questionable practice of disregarding public records to avoid public scrutiny is not a new one introduced to the Battersea Woods issue. This is the type of behavior that erodes the trust the public has in their elected officials. You are all working hard every day to make this City a legitimate world-class city. The Underline, the Wynwood, the Miami River, and other projects across the City are all making the City a better place to live in, and creating a metropolitan area that competes on a world-class level. At this moment, one individual, through negligent actions, are coloring all of your efforts with a third -world, backdoor, crony -capitalist sheen. More and more, people are paying attention every day to what happens in the City, mostly because they like what they see. They're proud of 'the efforts their elected officials are making to improve their lives, and what a shame that would be to squander that attention and support. I know I keep talking about choices, but choices are what define your character. You men have another choice today. Do you choose to set straight a City Attorney's Office cloaked in secrecy and mistrust, and show the citizens of the City you are serious about transparent and good governance, or do you make another choice that, instead of transforming Miami into a world-class city, keeps it firmly rooted in the realm of third -world-class city, where backdoor dealings are the way things are done? We sure hope you make the right choice today. We need to trust you. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, ma'am. Renescha Cotes: Hi. My name is Renescha Cotes. I stay at 3420 Hibiscus Street, Apartment 1. I agree with Chairman Keon Hardemon in that we shouldn't have had a public hearing on a City Attorney. I don't think that he should have brought a motion in front of everyone, letting them know that he was upset about something she did. I think that he should have went to her or went to -- You guys should have met privately and talked about the matter, because all that creates is a witch hunt. And then, everyone goes looking and digging for things that she may have done, she may have not done; then, people go looking into Ken Russell; then, people look into everything, and it's just -- it's -- I think it was a better way it could have been handled than in the public eye. Yes, I believe that we have the right to know what's going on. We have the right to be heard. We have the right to all of those things, but in this matter, why should you guys just push her out, to be criticized by all these people that only know of things she may have done? And this has been going on, like Armbrister -- Mr. Armbrister said before, things have been going on that have been very wrong in our City for many years; it's been going on for many years. So why, all of a sudden, since Battersea Woods, since all these people are upset about these houses being built, now you guys want to come attack this lady? What about when our community is being knocked down? What about that? What about the City Attorney who was okay with that? Our City -- our community is being knocked down. I didn't see anybody come and saying, Oh, we're going to fire somebody because of what's going on in Coconut Grove. "But you guys are upset at this City of Miami Page 17 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 lady because Battersea Woods? They're building million -dollar houses, and you're upset? All of these people that are upset at her, their houses are still there; their community is still there. They could still walk their dog, they could still walk down the street and not be harassed by police. We are not safe and it's not her fault. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, sir. Revaughn Gregory: Hello, hello. How you doing today? I'm coming on behalf of some of the residents of Coconut Grove who been -- I probably would say Illegally evicted, 'or facing evictions and stuff like that, getting put out. Chair Hardemon: Give us your name for the record, sir. Mr. Gregory: Revaughn Gregory. All right, just some of the conditions that we were living in were just -- they -- we just needed some type of help, and we don't have any help. And as you see, it's all kind of people coming into the community and they're buying up the property, and they're just pushing everybody out. And some of the thing -- they're supposed to be historical properties and stuff like that, and it seems like now they're just -- We're just going to do it and we're going to pay the fine, and don't worry about it. "So some of these people should just be held accountable for their actions and stuff. And, you know, our landlord, you know, he owns a lot of properties, but, you know, he needs to step it up, you know, because some of the apartments, we have mold, sewage, all kind of stuff. It's not living environment. So that's why I want to come and see if we can get us some help. Chair Hardemon: Thank you, brother. Cynthia Hernandez: Good morning. My name is Cynthia Hernandez. It's no surprise that the City of Miami has a reputation of working for developers, as many residents here in Coconut Grove have suggested; Miami Worldcenter being an example of that, as well. And quite frankly, I was appalled that the Chairman suggested that the public not be heard. Some of them seem to forget that they actually work for the public. When the City Attorney withheld public records from a City Commissioner, she violated his trust. When those records showed the City Attorney helping a developer avoid a public hearing on their project, she violated our trust. The City Attorney should work for the residents of Miami, not the developers. She violated our trust, and we ask our City Commissioners to stand with the residents today, and fire her immediately. If the Commission today decides to do nothing, you are violating our trust in you, not to protect the developers' ff o -to Terson. This is an issue of transparency in government. If the City Attorney is withholding documents from a City Commissioner, what else is she hiding from the public? If a junior lawyer at a firm withheld documents for a partner, that lawyer would be fired immediately. That is the case today. And I want to thank Commissioner Ken Russell for having this hearing in the first place. Thank you. Applause. Chair Hardemon: When we bang the gavel, it's to call someone's attention, and it signifies that a motion has passed or failed, or to gather the decorum of this body and the people who are here before us. In City Hall, we do not allow clapping, because it's a distraction. And then someone -- usually the Chair -- has to tell everyone, Please, to quiet down; there's no clapping allowed. "If you'd like to show your support for something that someone has said or any of our great speakers that will speak today, what you should do is raise your hands and just -- I've been told they're spirit fingers, spirit hands, different things of that nature. I didn't cheer; I played football. So I don't -- I'm not sure what they call them, but whatever it is, you do this to show your support, but please refrain from clapping and/or any loud outburst. Thank you very much. You're recognized, sir. City of Miami Page 18 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 John Dolson: John Dolson, 4205 Lennox Drive, Coconut Grove. That's called the Keon wave, " isn't it? Cham Hardemon: I don't think so. Mr. Dolson: I'm here -- I've spoken at -- a number of times, but fust place, you guys have restored to some degree my faith in local government over the last several months with the hearings that we've had here. You've been open and honest and I want to -- I really want to thank you for that. It's been very, very refreshing; especially given what goes on, on a national level. I'm here to -- because I want to condemn what I heard from that attorney earlier about the -- the personal attack on Ken Russell. I live around the corner from him. One of the things-- one of the quotes I've heard years ago from a couple hundred years ago was, Democracies work because you know who your representatives are and where they live. "I live around the corner from Ken. I've known him for three years. I can guarantee he's not an evil -- he's not a mean man. I don't know the details of what's going on with Victoria Mendez here, but I'm hoping that this will -- that you guys will rely on facts and on open, honest discussion to make a good decision, and I think you will. But I think there's no place to come up here and slander a Commissioner, who, I know, has a lot of integrity and has the best interest of the citizens of this community at heart. Thank you. Tomas Kennedy: Tomas Kennedy, 2398 Coral Way, Apartment 3, Miami, Florida 33145. I want to second Cynthia's point that came before me in this podium that it is appalling that a public hearing on this issue was attempted to be blocked by the Chairman. I also want to thank Vice Chairman Ken Russell for bringing attention to this issue and shining a light on it. And look, folks, this is an issue of transparency in government. The City Attorney withheld public documents and withheld documents from an elected official that is supposed to represent us that showed that she was working for developers and not the public. This is unacceptable. You betrayed the public trust, and the Commission should go ahead and fire her, because Miami for too long has been in the pockets of developers, and not the City. You guys need to work for us, and not the developers to make Miami, as somebody else said, a world-class city. That's all I have to say. Thank you. Sergio L. Mendez: Good morning. My name is Sergio Mendez, and I'm no relation to Victoria Mendez, who I'm here to support. My address is 5890 Southwest 117th Street. I've heard a lot of the comments that have been stated here today by our citizens, but the problem is that we have already judged and tried Ms. Mendez without affording her an opportunity to defend herself, to present her position, and that can only be done in a different forum. This is people stating their opinions and getting to conclusions without the benefit of all of the facts, and having a process that Mr. Russell was afforded, granted, and I'm sure he's thankful that he was exonerated. He -- I'm sure, Commissioner Russell, you are appreciative of the process that was afforded to you and that process was favorable to you. And this fine City Attorney, this fine woman, this fine citizen of Miami should be afforded every opportunity to defend herself. This is her life, her career, her family, and to judge her arbitrarily, reaching conclusions that all of you and none of us really have all of 'the details would be a great injustice. This is America, this is a democracy, and we should afford her every opportunity to present her position and defend herself as a citizen of the United States, without being arbitrarily judged. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: Thank you, sir. You're recognized, sir. Tony J. Diaz: Thank you. Tony Diaz, 2264 Southwest 22nd Avenue. You know, a lot of the people coming here today are talking about not being able to slander a Commissioner on the dais. Then why are we allowing them to slander the City Attorney? If the City Attorney is going to be put before us and is going to be on this witch hunt, we have to afford her an independent committee that looks into her actions. But if we want to talk about a violation of trust, let's talk about one. Commissioner Russell has had communications with his staff and with a lot of City of Miami Page 19 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 different developers and activists, without disclosing those communications. He's violating State law, sunshine law, by not allowing the proper channels to be followed so that we can then make public records requests. It's a despicable way of going about this process, and it does not represent what the City of Miami stands for. If we have a problem with the City Attorney, follow the proper channels. Don't turn this into a publicity stunt. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, sir. Bret Berlin: Thank you. My name is Bret Berlin. I'm a City resident at 2128 Southwest 25th Street. First of all, I want to thank the Commissioner for holding a public forum. I think this is primarily about public's trust and their trust in government. And by allowing people to participate --look how many people came to participate in their government today. I think it's a remarkable thing. I don't think a witch hunt is good. It doesn't help the City to attack a Commissioner or to attack a City Attorney. I think what this is about is our trust in government and our trust in the way government works. And government only works when it's transparent and everything is done in the open. The City Attorney is here to serve you, the Commissioners. And if you think she's serving you well, then you should retain her. But if you think she's not serving you well, I think it is well within the City's authority to say, 1' need to have an attorney that I can trust to guide me and advise me. "And if that's not the case in this case, then I think you have the authority and the responsibility to take action in f ^ont of everybody here. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, ma'am. Marisol Pardillo: Thank you. Hi. My name is Marisol Pardillo. I was born and raised on 2298 Southwest 16th Avenue. I'm here representing my mother, who still lives there; and my father, who would have been here would he still be alive. I am simply asking -- Clearly, we talk about transparency here today, and a lot of 'us here are going, based on what we've read, you know. There really is no transparency for us out here, because we don't work with you guys, and we're not in your office. So, truly, there is no transparency for us, because we don't know what happens behind closed doors. So all we are asking today is that the process --that you follow the process, true to the word. If, indeed, she did something wrong, let the board -- let someone independent come in, do an investigation and do the right thing, because I'm pretty certain that what she probably did was not in the had intent of the people or anybody here. So we're just asking, as citizens, that you follow the due course. And just like everybody has --you know, this shouldn't be a character attack on anybody. Everybody has people that will support them, but all we are asking is that, please, follow the process. Let the Board of Ethics go do the investigation, and at that time, take those facts, and then make your decision then. Thank you so much. Chair Hardemon: Thank you. Ma'am, you're recognized. Gladys Vzcarra: Good morning. My name is Gladys Vzcarra. I live at 2985 Day Avenue, and I'm a local resident. This is the first time I do any public speaking, but I need to do this, because no matter where we come from, what is our background, we are citizens of the United States. We're American, bottom point. And it should not matter where we come from to stand up to developers. Developers are taking over Coconut Grove, are taking over Brickell with their money. You know, we don't have money. I'm not rich. I'm not -- they say, Coconut Grove, you must be rich. "No, we're not; we're working people, you know. But taxes, developers, and increase in property values, they're going to drive us out eventually, okay? Then the fact that the law favors developers, that is the perception. And remember, perception is everything. Perception is that the City is in the pockets of developers, or the big money. Me, as a private citizen, if I go to City Hall, oh, my God, it's such amount -- red tape. I can never get out of there. I'm afraid of City Hall to do anything. My house stays almost the same. Why? Because nobody wants to deal with the City of Miami; even Coral Gables is better than the City of Miami. And remember too, perception is everything, especially in a public position. Thank you very much. City of Miami Page 20 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 Cham Hardemon: You're recognized, ma'am. Berlinda Faye -Dixon: Hi. My name is Berlinda Faye -Dixon, Overtown resident. My address is 1128 Northwest 7th Avenue, Apartment 401, Miami, Florida 33136. My telephone number is 305-766-9346. First and foremost, I would like to say I am disappointed that -- of what has been discovered and what has been brought to light. I trusted all of you, but I know firsthand of a project in Overtown that has kept an 80 -year-old woman homeless for four years, while developers have put up six multi -story buildings, and they are completely filled and occupied, as she remains homeless. So with that said, that is Shashana Lincoln. She remains homeless still, to this day; it's four years. I'm very conflicted about how this hearing has happened and how this is being handled. I want transparency, and I pray that honesty on all levels and truth will prevail. Slum and blight have not been addressed, and I am not a lawyer, but many of you are, and know that definition; please get familiar with it. Nuisance abatement is also a legal term. You developers, get familiar with it, because we're coming for your properties you think you can keep. So I say that these are the responsibilities of all of our elected officials and all of the City Attorneys, not only Victoria Mendez. So every single attorney below her that has dealt with any dealings, I think needs to be addressed, but I don't necessarily think that this was the proper place for it -- okay? -- because what I'm seeing is a witch hunt, and I wouldn't want this to happen to me. So what I think we need to do is reevaluate our system and the way we do things, because the codes are geared toward developers. The court and evictions -- you cannot win an eviction, even if you do everything legal. I was evicted for a pet, and I have a service dog; my federal rights. This is a serious problem we have with the developers and their loopholes. And I know that since this has come to light, she knows the loopholes, so let's fix the loopholes. Chair Hardemon: Your time has come to an end. Ms. Faye -Dixon: Thank you so much. Chair Hardemon: Thank you very much. Ms. Faye -Dixon: Again, I think that Victoria does have rights, and I would like due process, and I really think that this was not really appropriate. Chair Hardemon: Thank you very much. Ms. Faye -Dixon: Thank you for your service, Victoria. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, sir. Martin Blaya: Morning. Martin Blaya. I live in the Center Grove. It's unfortunate we've come to this situation here. I believe if there is anything that's been kept secret, it should be addressed, maybe by the impartial Ethics Board. Let them do their job, and then, you know, see what happens. I think what started all this was the impropriety by developers in trying, obviously, with the Battersea property to split up one parcel of land into five different properties or five different houses, or five different lots. I see the lot in the Center Grove. I live in one of the few remaining single-family homes there. Those homes are zoned duplex, so there's no issue with a house being torn down for two to be brought up. Now, the issue you see at Battersea is that, that's not the case, and you have developers trying to use some -- maybe possible back roads to get their will done, and we see that also in the West Grove. Now, I would see that, you know, people who live in the South Grove and Center Grove and maybe even, you know, also the North Grove -- not so much Center Grove -- have the means to be here, have the means to influence this Commission better than people in the West Grove, and I think this needs to be brought to light. I think everybody, including the West Grove residents, including the properties in the West Grove, everybody needs to be treated fairly. Properties in the West Grove can't just be torn down the City of Miami Page 21 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 way they've been being torn down. People just can't be evicted the way they've been evicted; just like the property on Battersea can't be split up into five lots. So it's unfortunate that we've come to this situation. I think this needs to be dealt with by the Ethical Board. I think we need to get back to doing what initially was done, which is let's look to the best interests of all of the residents of the Grove and the City of Miami; not just those with money, not just those with means; and definitely, not just the developers. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: Thank you, sir. You're recognized. Carlos Tosca: Carlos Tosca, 6844 Sunrise Court. I'm not even sure what -- which way to go with this here. I'll say this: I think this country is a great country, and Miami's a great city; it's certainly no banana republic. My family came here, is very happy here. Most of you moved into this banana republic, so you must like it. There are ways to do things in this country. Courts, for example, do not take public commentary and judges do not get influenced by the public. If this were a representation of the City of Miami's many million people -- I don't know the population, but I -- maybe we've got 200 here. Just with what you've heard so far, if this were the representation of the City of Miami, just put a moratorium on construction. Let's not build anything, not a thing. Let's make Coconut Grove a fro -construction zone. "You know how much easier that would be? We would not argue about the NCD (Neighborhood Conservation District). Just put a moratorium; don't build anything. That's what they want. I was tried in the court of public opinion and lost. I think it's unfair. If Ms. Mendez -- which I don't know -- has done anything wrong, then let the Ethics Board or a judge or the FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation), or whoever deal with it. Let's not try her in the court of public opinion; and not Mr. Russell or Commissioner Russell. Don't try him in the court of public opinion, either. There are things that should be not done in public; some things should. I mean, public records requests, I've asked for them. They've been very forthcoming with me. There are things that should not be done in public and there are things that should. I personally think that if you're not happy with an employee, you should be able to change them for a different one. But if they're accused of impropriety, that makes it different, because then, if you let them go, it implies that they did something wrong. And I think we've got to be very careful, because I don't think she did anything wrong. I've read all the emails, and I don't think she did anything wrong in this case, and I think you guys need to be very careful about what judgment you make here. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, sir. Miguel Mirabal: Good morning, Commissioners. Miguel Mirabal. I don't' live in the City, but I do have my client who is a developer in the City, and we're doing quite a big project on 36th and Biscayne. I've known Ms. Mendez for many years, and I've also dealt with her on a professional level. I represent a developer. I know many people have talked about favoritism towards developers. I have had zero favoritism, sir, towards myself or my client. We've had to work hard. We've done what we've had to do. We've paid the fees we had to do. We did everything in order. And my dealings with her office and her subordinates has been nothing but stellar and perfectly professional. So I'm here to give support in that sense, and also professionally. Her work has been amazing. My client is happy and we've had zero favoritism. And this is coming from a representative of the developer in the City of Miami. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: Thank you. Ma'am, you're recognized. Kathy Parks: Hi. I'm Kathy Parks, 4035 Battersea Road. This shouldn't be a public witch hunt. A whole lot of time has been spent on Battersea Woods. And when we talk about slander, the social media and the slander that's been done to the developers on Battersea Woods families, it's embarrassing to me that I live on that street, and the people that live in my community and the things they've said about these gentlemen is beyond acceptable. They have children that go to school, grandchildren that go to school, and they've been beat up and said things about that none of us really know is the right and correct thing. I don't think anybody in this room really City of Miami Page 22 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 knows the details of that property, and whatever it really was. That property was a land grant. I live on part of that land grant. From LeJeune to the water, the Hobbs owned all the land in South Grove, and they re platted it back in the '30s. When that property was owned by the Hobbs and no one was living there, it was an eyesore; people were in and out of there. When I was building my house, I had a homeless man living in my backyard, using my pool as a bathtub. When I had problems with my neighbors, my neighbor over my house, who was violent, no one came to my aid and no one came out of their house. I don't think it's our place to constantly be in the faces of these Commissioners or the City Attorney and dictating how things should be. I think it is our right to have transparency. We want to know what's going on, but there's other things that are far more important. There's other developers who're doing -- who're really breaking laws. They're getting away with things that we're not paying attention to. Houses in the West Grove continue to be knocked down. Developers are letting houses be demo'd by neglect. We have nowhere for people to go, and we're about to lose a lot of families. We're not spending any time on that. All I hear is South Grove, South Grove, South Grove. "It's embarrassing. All of us who have are not worried about the have-nots and it's disgusting, and I'm sick and tired of the Yahoos'and the Mays. "And I'm a Ken Russell fan -- Chair Hardemon: Ma'am, your time has expired. Ms. Parks: -- but this is getting out of control. It's not our place. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: Thank you very much. Sir, you're recognized. Ricardo Martinez -Cid: Good morning. Ricardo Martinez -Cid, 12 West Flagler Street. This morning has been incredibly disappointing to me, because it's confirmed a lot of the worst perceptions that I have about the way sometimes our City government runs. We come here, and the very first statement we heard was about how this all started from a minor issue that Commissioner Russell didn't even want to discuss in his opening statement. It was a minor issue, but it comes down to trust and transparency. And so, we're avoiding the minor issue, which is what everyone who stood up and said, 1f this is true, then she must be fired, 'and in the name of transparency, refused to find out if that minor issue has any truth to it. In the name of transparency'blocked any ethics inquiry that would exonerate and show that this minor issue of not getting an email with 24 hours or whatever it was, or maybe it was horrendous, but we don't get to find out, because we're going to block the process. We're going to turn Ms. Mendez into the boogieman for developers, lobbyists, special interests, and everything that's wrong in our City. And then we're going to send out op-eds and press releases, telling people, Come here, look, it's the developers. "And none of us know, because Commissioner Russell hasn't let us find out. Ms. Mendez is not the boogieman or a special interest. And maybe she did something wrong or not, but I know she's a mom; I know she's a wife; I know she's a City Attorney who's been serving us for a long time. And all of us would demand the right to defend ourselves, and all of 'us should demand actual truth; not just decide because someone has said that she's a special interest boogieman that she has to be fired. It's just wrong, and it's everything except transparency. It's an absolute effort to avoid transparency. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, sir. Javier Gonzalez: Javier Gonzalez, 3622 Solano Road. I'm here to speak against Commissioner Russell's request to fire the City Attorney. Everything I've heard here, I think a lot of folks that have spoken don't know Vicky or never have worked with Vicky, but if it wasn't for her efforts -- her tireless efforts to stop FP&L's efforts to build hundred foot poles in our neighborhood and protect our tree canopy -- while other municipalities have given in, she has fought on. If I knew nothing else about her, that would he enough for me. But one of the roles of the City Attorney is to protect you from yourselves, and in doing so, it protects us from decisions that you are making that may be not favorable to our City, to a whole. Decisions you make affect all of us; not just a few select in attendance. And I want to be very clear about this. I am one of those few. I live in City of Miami Page 23 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 South Grove. I live 50 yards away from one of these famed split properties. This group came to me early on for an explanation of how this process works. And to play politics with the operation of our City to please these select few has dire consequences. Ms. Mendez protects us all. She's an asset to our City, and you should retain her as our City Attorney. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, ma'am. Isabel Reyes: Hi. My name is Isabel Reyes. I'm a retiree from the City -- 5001 Southwest 74 Court -- I'm a retire [sic] from the City. I retired two years ago, and I had the pleasure of working with Mendez since the beginning of her career. I've been here -- I was working here for 35 years, so I know, really, what's going on in the City. I can write a book from the City of Miami. And I hope -- and Ms. Mendez, she's a woman of a lot of -- she's very honest. She's a good worker, a hard worker. She's a good friend. And she's been serving the City very truthfully, and I think this is not correct, what you're doing; I don't think so. And it's been a privilege to be working with her, and I think you should do this some other type of work -- way. And I do believe --and I don't want to believe that you guys have a friend attorney that you want to get rid of Victoria, because you want to put a friend here, because this is how it works too. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized. Michael Barket: Michael Barket at 19 West Flagler Street. We've heard a lot today about West Grove. We've heard a lot today about developers. Heck, we've even heard about Zika today. But let me bring it back to you. We're here today because we've questioned Victoria Mendez' integrity, and that's a bunch of'bull. As a lawyer, when you give a client an answer that they don't like, they want to fire you; they want another lawyer. That's not the way it works. I'm not going to pretend to know what you requested, Commissioner, and I'm not going to pretend to know what she provided you with, but we're here questioning her integrity. If she was dirty, corrupt, dishonest, I'd be the first one standing here: "Fire her. I don't need that in my profession. " But I'm here to tell you, she's honest as the day is long. She's worked tirelessly for the City. Go back through your memories. Really? Has she lied to you? No. She's responsive each and every time, and you know it. There's no reason to get rid of her. Heck, if I was her, I may have left already. I'm sure there's plenty of law firms out there that'll double her salary. She's sticking it out. It took guts for her. She went to the Miami -Dade County Commission on Ethics and Public Trust and said, "Investigate me. Do it. " That took guts. Now you need to do what takes guts, and keep her. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, sir. Richard Montes De Oca: Hello. My name is Richard Montes De Oca. I'm the managing partner of 'MDO Partners. We're a boutique law firm that focuses on compliance and ethics. In fact, I was the Assistant General Counsel at Royal Caribbean, where I headed up, established the compliance and ethics group that established all of'the actual compliance programs throughout the entire organization, with 400 different ports of calls, 42 ships, and 50, 000 employees. I have a lot of experience when it comes to ethics and compliance; I do that for a living, but I also know the young lady that's over there that went to law school with me, and I've known for 15 years. She's a hard worker. She's an ethical person. She's of high moral character. And I think that what's happening here is a disservice. But I'm also hereto tell you that I don't know whether what she did is right or wrong, or whether she did it or didn't do it. I'm here to tell you that as an ethics lawyer, she should be tried or accused or confronted in a forum that's impartial, which this is not. If you look at the actual website of what is the Commission, if you will, for the ethics of Miami -Dade County, it talks about the fact that it was established like in 1998, and that basically, its responsibility is to discharge the very thing we're trying to do in this forum today. So all I'm really trying to do is advocate not only for Vicky, because I believe in her personally, but for the very actual Commission that was charged to do what you're trying to do here today, City of Miami Page 24 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 and it basically says here, really quickly: "The Ethics Commission was created in 1996 as a result of the citizens' vote to amend the home rule character as an independent agency with advisory and quasi-judicial powers. Government employees and officials, 'like Ms. Mendez, Have a special duty to serve the public in a fair and just manner. The Ethics Commission is dedicated to bolstering public trust in administration of government by informing the public and private sectors about the laws and seeking strict compliance. It is empowered, "the Commission"-- not this one -- "this Commission of the Ethics is empowered to subpoena, audit, and investigate all the facts and persons materially related to any complaint at issue. " And I subject [sic] to you and request that that be done with Ms. Mendez. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: Ma'am, you're recognized. Allyson Warren: Good morning. Allyson Warren, 650 Northeast 82 Terrace, Miami. Well, I'm not a lawyer, I'm not a lobbyist, and I'm not a developer. I have dealt with all of them for many, many years, with the able assistance of Ms. Mendez, with some of your assistance, and with some of your non -assistance. I have found Ms. Mendez to work hard in favor of the citizens. What I have seen here from the beginning of this little fiasco is nothing but allegations. I see no trial. I see no evidence. In reality, I see nothing of an investigation where any of you could have withstood the same type of scrutiny that you're exposing Ms. Mendez to, with no formal charges, with no formal investigation. Mr. Chairman, you were a public defender. We've got three law -- two lawyers -- three lawyers on this stand -- two lawyers. I can't imagine any of you would take a case where there hasn't been an investigation, where there have been no charges filed, where all you're operating on is the possibility that somebody didn't get what they thought they asked for in a public records request. I've made public records requests for my neighborhood; I've gotten every single paper I ever asked for, because I knew how to ask for what I wanted. Do we feed -- do offices feed stories to reporters to make themselves look better? Yes, they probably do, but what I'm seeing here has no relation, whatsoever, to actual fact, until it's gone to an independent source for a proper investigation, which, due to whatever prejudices you may or may not have, or favorable opinions you may or may not have, I don't think this is the correct forum. This is not what you were all elected to do. You're elected to handle business for us with developers, with whoever, but the -- an independent review group, the independent panel, that's what they're supposed to do. That's why people go through Ethics' training. They're the ones who do that, because that is their job. That is not what the Commissioners are supposed to be doing. You may want to do something after an independent investigation; that's fine, but to not allow a proper investigation or defense -- I know; I'm finished -- I just think is reprehensible. I'm sora y, but I just do, because you guys are better than that, or at least, we've elected you so that you should be. Chair Hardemon: Thank you very much, ma'am. Sir, you're recognized. Jose Herrera: good morning. Jose Herrera, 2350 Coral Way. My son addressed some of the concerns earlier. I was not even going to come up here. I've heard the word "transparency, due process. " Let me tell you about transparency. We made a public records request a week ago. Some of you have some of the agenda's items. Specifically, it came to everybody's surprise that the key -- the City of Miami has a key logger system, which is very disclosing, very revealing. I invite you to look at these things. Commissioner Suarez, you know what I practice. I've been a municipal attorney in a small municipality for 24 years. I sat on the League of Cities Editorial Board for the manual that you all rely on. I was floored when a sitting City Attorney is attacked by a Commissioner on a dubious opinion, hearsay, and innuendo. Any lawyer worth his salt knows that your Code has a problem. And you know what I discovered last night at I o'clock in the morning, reading through Commissioner Russell's private chat before they went offline, because they didn't want to continue it? I invite you to read it. They recognized the problem. Your City staff recognizes the problem. That lady over there, who I've known for years, since she was a prosecutor, has rejected propositions that I've come across in the best interest of the City; have told me, "This doesn't fly. This doesn't work. " And I've battled her continuously. And let City of Miami Page 25 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 me tell you something. You want to talk about integrity? You want to talk about transparency? It's offensive, some of the threats. I would like to see --for instance, there's reference on the Batteresa [sic] that caused this whole problem. There's a hundred emails. They recognize it's a potential Jennings issue. Where are my hundred emails, folks? You want to talk about public records? Yes. We asked the Commission on Public Trust to intercede. And, yes, I've asked the State Attorney's Office to lookinto the issue. I am of that multi -- you sit here and you talk about transparency. You have a hundred emails. You have a whole thread that talks about the remnants of 'the plats, because those are legitimate issues. But instead of having a constructive conversation -- and believe me, as someone who has served in the capacity for close to 25 years, I've had disagreements with my City officials. We don't do it by ambush. We don't do it in a Machiavelli fashion. Those that've studied Machiavelli know, you just throw the aspersion out there; it stays. Chair Hardemon: Sir? Mr. Herrera: You don't charge police officers who may have committed a transgression -- Chair Hardemon: Sir? Mr. Herrera: -- until you give them an opportunity. What I'm saying to you, Commissioner, is this is neither the forum. And if we're going to talk about transparency, I think we need transparency across the board -- Chair Hardemon: Thank you very much, sir. Mr. Herrera: -- not a shadow government. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: Thank you very much, sir. Ma'am, you're recognized. Barbara Lange: My name is Barbara Lange. I live at 3901 Braganza Avenue, in Coconut Grove. I wasn't going to come here today, because I've got this thing on my nose from a dermatologist surgery; but when I was sitting here listening to people attack Commissioner Russell, I felt like I had to get up, and I'm here because I really applaud what Commissioner Russell did. I've always felt that the City Administration was cozy with developers. And I just want to say, I applaud you for that, and I hope it opens up more investigation into the coziness with developers. And thank you. Chair Hardemon: Thank you, ma'am. Sir, you're recognized. Alexander Lopez: Alexander Lopez, 1241 La Mancha, Coral Gables, Florida. I'm here as a personal friend of ' Vicky, but I'm not going to sit here and tell you about her marriage and how well she's done, but I implore you to look amongst yourselves. You guys are going to have to continue to work with each other and you're going to be divided on subjects. You have been given the ability to offset this decision to an impartial outside Ethics Committee. Let them do their job. Let them decide. If they decide, follow their advice, and that's it. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, sir. Javier Vazquez: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners. For the record, my name is Javi Vazquez, with law offices at 1450 Brickell Avenue. I am with the law offices of Berger Singerman. My firm is the firm that was representing the Battersea application; and obviously, it goes without saying, how disappointed I was to see the whole thing play out in a plat application; caught me by surprise. And as much as I am very thankful to Commissioner Russell for publicly acknowledging that our firm was doing its job, I'm -- it's important for me to be here today for the following reason: First things first, as an entitlements attorney, as a land use and City of Miami Page 26 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 zoning attorney, I not only deal with Ms. Mendez, but I deal with a lot of city attorneys. Ms. Mendez personifies professionalism at its highest level. Ms. Mendez is a tough cookie. For Ms. Mendez to agree with us, like somebody just mentioned, on an item that perhaps goes against somebody else in her staff, it's not an easy accomplishment. I would say that for every time that I've ever seen that happen, I've seen it not happen 90 times, but there are times when those situations present themselves, and she'll be the first one to acknowledge, "what's right is right. " So I wanted to say that as an attorney who does the kind of work that I do -- I do appear before many -- she is a professional. She's a star. She is a purist of'the law; and I would be remissed, for other reasons that other lawyers might not be standing here, like I am today, not to be standing here today to tell you that I would highly recommend that you retain her, because you have one tremendous City Attorney on your hands. Thank you. Brenda Betancourt: Good morning. Brenda Betancourt, 1436 Southwest 6th Street. It's hard to be standing here today. We actually have a full house. We recommend all of you to -- are so eager to speak today about our City Attorney -- to be actually here every Commission meeting. You actually kind of show to the media that you actually care about the City. Where are you every single Commission meeting when we're here until 9, 10, 1 o'clock in the morning? When, actually, people care about the City, they come to the meetings, and know what's going on; not what the Miami Herald, Channel 6, 10, or anybody else care. Do any of you care about those people that being evicted in Overtown, Coconut Grove? Do you guys even care about the City, or you just care about coming and talk back of her? She's not easy, and I say as it is. Most people that know me, most of you that are here knows I say it as it is. She is not easy, but she is a person. She might make a mistake or not. Guess what? We not going to know unless you, our Commissioners, let the process be. This is not a forum for us to be able to speak about this. But most of'the resident has to understand, you have to come out here every single Commission meeting; not just when the media tell you to come. You want to be responsible for our city? Then show your face every single Commission meeting. It's two days in a month. Or participate in the Commission, not just for the special meetings, or come to our committees. How many of you never show up to the committees to understand what the City's going on? So, if you have the right to speak right now and you spend your morning here, I better see you every Commission meeting, full house, like it is today. Have a great day, gentlemen. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, sir. Miguel Soliman: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. My name is Miguel Soliman, 1436 Southwest 6th Street. I'm not an attorney. I'm a citizen of this City, like most of you here, but I feel -- I've been sitting there and wondering whether to speak, whether or not to speak, but I feel mostly a great deal of disappointment. I don't feel like this is Miami 2016 I feel like this is Salem, Massachusetts, in the 1600's. Commissioner Russell, I truly would request of you to reconsider. I am not in favor of you or Attorney Mendez. I'm thinking of my city right now, and how this is portraying our city. There's due process. There's --we have committees. We have the law. If'we were to do this with every single case -- We all make mistakes, and I think -- I don't think anybody here is saying that our City Attorney has sold herself; or anything like that. I think everybody here just -- some say she hasn't done anything correct; others say that she's made a mistake, but we have processes for that. This isn't Salem; this is Miami 2016. Please, there's still time. There's still time for due process. Get a Commission; check into what she's done. And if she did something wrong, then take the proper action; if she didn't, do the same. You have time, Commissioner Russell, to stop this bleeding. Because if not -- you know what? No one's perfect. No one's perfect. And you may be sitting in her chair one day for simple mistakes that you did not do on purpose that just happened because of the amount of work that all of you deal with on a daily basis. Things slip. Things happen. I'm sure you would never do anything malicious, but you can make mistakes. You may be sitting up here facing the same situation that she's facing, and you may be judged as people were in Salem, Massachusetts, in the 1600's -- City of Miami Page 27 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 Chair Hardemon: Thank you very much, sir. Mr. Soliman: -- without any order. Thank you very much for your time. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, sir. Guillermo San Martin: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Guillermo San Martin. I'm a homeowner at 1170 Southwest 23rd Avenue, in Commissioner Suarez' district. I'd like to say that if 'the Commission takes a vote today, it should be on a motion to pass this on to an independent committee. Let the Ethics Committee do their job. I don't think you should vote today to retain her or fire her; just pass it on to the committee. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, sir. Joe Simmons, Jr: Joe Simmons, Jr., president of the Sanitation Workers, AFSCME (American Federal, State, County, and Municipal Employees) Local 871, City of Miami. I ask you two guys to not approve her removal. When it comes to records requests -- I've been with the City over 25 years; in my capacity as union president about 16 of those years plus, but we know there's a process in order to gain information. A lot of times when you ask for certain records [sic], if you want the full extent, especially if, let's say, we're in preparation to file a grievance, or et cetera, we may ask IT (Information Technology) to do a system's search, where they search all computers -- Police, Fire, GSA (general Services Administration), Public Works, Solid Waste -- to get the full extent of the information, because you want to gauge the understanding of the circumstances surrounding what your -- allegations you're -- may be in preparation to defend. The second thing I would say is Victoria Mendez's been nothing but professional. We've worked with a number of her attorneys in a myriad of issues, and they've been nothing but upstanding, professional to us. Oftentimes, a lot of your offices are inundated with public records requests, and we have to be patient enough to work through the process. Often, there are times we've disagreed, but guess what? We have to remain professional and respectful. In closing, I would say, keep this process, like you said, an independent body, because any time we have -- I refer to a section in our union contract, and it says, "Employees who (UNINTELLIGIBLE) permanent status may not be disciplined without proper or just cause. "So that means there has been some investigation so there won't be an appearance of impropriety, and then that point forward, you can proceed. We implore you to not do it. In closing, do unto others as you wish done unto you. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, ma'am. Debbie Dolson: My name is Debbie Dolson, 4205 Flanax Drive, Coconut Grove. First of all, I want to thank all of you Commissioners for letting us have a few words with you today, and also, the times we've been able to speak to you in the past about other issues. I have one simple request, and that is that you, as Commissioners, have a third party independent investigation, as opposed to an ethics review. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: Thank you very much. Mr. Stern: I would like to beg the special permission of the Chair to make very brief remarks. Chair Hardemon: I don't see a reason necessary for you to make any brief remarks, and the only way that I can see that you'll be able to is by -- Mr. Stern: I'm simply seeking to protect your interest, Commissioner Hardemon. Chair Hardemon: What I'm saying to you is that the only way that I see that you will be able to make more remarks is if this body allows you to do so. So unless there is -- if there is an City of Miami Page 28 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 objection to him speaking again, then let me hear it now. If not, then I'll allow him to speak. As usual, no objection. Sir, I'll give you an opportunity to speak, since I know you gave up your two minutes, but he's speaking again for two minutes (UNINTELLIGIBLE). Mr. Stern: I appreciate that. Go ahead. Chair Hardemon: Go ahead Mr. Stern: Honorable Chair people [sic], I would like to point out that the due process for hiring and firing a City Attorney is to have a public hearing and to conduct that business in public, as you are today. This is the entirety of the required due process by the contract that Ms. Mendez has agreed to with the City of Miami, which is that she serves at the will of'the Commission, and she serves the Commission as the confidential advisor as well. And it is my sole intent not to demonize. There is no witch hunt. I have no personal feelings in the matter, whatsoever, and it is my sole intent to protect the Commission from future entanglements if the City Attorney is willing to speak openly in public about the mental impressions that she has collected from the City Commission about matters that are to be heard, and she spoke about Battersea Woods, and she spoke about Commissioner Russell's understanding of City processes without permission, in breach of her duty of confidentiality to this Commission, and she did it to the Miami Herald before the Commission even had a moment to debate the actual issue at hand. That is wrong. It is wrong for any attorney -- not particularly Ms. Mendez, but it is wrong for any attorney to betray the attorney/client privilege and to the media for the purposes of self-dealing. It has brought the appearance of impropriety to these proceedings, which Ms. Mendez has carried to the City Attorney's Office. This is nota witch hunt. This is a proper venue to discuss the City Attorney's position and for the Commission to discuss it. The entire due process afforded is that. However, she has already called for a public ethics investigation, and they are investigating, and they even reached out to me directly. And as Mr. Lombana pointed out, it is entirely appropriate that the Florida Bar be brought in to investigate these serious allegations of professional misconduct, which expose all five of our Commissioners and all of'the City's decisions to future scrutiny in the court system. Chair Hardemon: Thank you very much, sir. Your time has expired. Mr. Stern: Thank you very much, Commissioner Hardemon. I appreciate it. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, sir. Javier Ortiz: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Javier Ortiz, president of the Fraternal Order of Police, 710 Southwest 12 Avenue. Victoria Mendez is an exemplary attorney. For the Fraternal Order of Police, it's a kind of interesting position, because we are suing the City of Miami. We fight the City of Miami on a daily basis. When it comes to public records, under her hierarchy, we had no problems. There is a process in place if you want public records. Try it. It's a great system. You go online, you fill out the form; they send you notifications. And when it's complete by the proper entity, which are the people that actually search every single email, you'll get your emails. Never had an issue. If we had an issue, trust me, we'll sue. We sue for everything. Ms. Mendez is not the person that you go to when you're asking for records. If I want records from Commissioner Carollo, I don't go, Ney, you're the custodian of records; I want your records. "He has a City to run. She has a City to run. She needs to protect the interest of'the City. You want a public records request? You go through a process. You don't demand it from her. She's one of the most important people in the City. And again, we're on different sides, but at the end of the day, we are all on the same side. She has the right to due process. She has the right to have her name cleared. And to do that here in a public forum, the public has the right to know. You don't know what's going on here. You don't know what's going on. Oh, she's on the side of developers. " Oh, she is? Show me the money. Show me where she's getting money. Show me how she has gained anything from any of this. But you don't hear any of that. He talks about perception. Perception isn't everything. The truth is, let the Ethics Commission do their investigation. If City of Miami Page 29 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 there's some type of criminal intent, let's see it. But we don't see that here. The Fraternal Order of Police supports the person that represents the City. Support her. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: All right. Sir, you want to make a comment? Timothy Brantley: My name is Timothy Brantley -- I was at the last Commission meeting -- 4090 Matheson Avenue, Miami, Florida. I first want to thank you everybody on the Commission for affording us this opportunity. I know you guys work really hard, and you're in an impossible position. You get bombarded by all of 'us. I'm guilty of 'a few expletives about what's going on, and then I try to correct my language, and then I drive on US 1 and that's out the window; I get frustrated. But I will say this: I've been still knocking on doors all the time now in the South Grove, and the gentleman was correct. I haven't -- I'm guilty of not pulling the records, but I also know that you don't have to pull records to know that there's a duality with the City. In one way, they want more tax money, so they allow little houses to be destroyed maybe; way too big a houses to be built for that lot size. They're 10 feet away from the border line. I explained before, trees are disappearing. I don't know what the answer is. I do know that knocking on doors, which I invite everyone out here -- if they want to come with me, you're going to hear what people say. The unfortunate thing is, most of those people I've knocked on doors, I haven't seen their faces here. And I know that we are so fortunate to live in a democracy where 60 million people died in World War II -- 60 million people -- to give us this right to speak up, and I'm guilty of not speaking up and not taking action. And whoever said about the witch hunt, that's correct; we're not here for a witch hunt. We should have transparency in all of our records for everything. It's easy to look at, and easy to know what's going on with developers, with City, Coding officials. And I do think that we need to look at the law again, the law of development, so we can try to protect the City, to keep it beautiful. Miami's a really special place. I feel very fortunate to live here, and I'm happy that everybody came here and is getting involved. It's kind of like Pandora's Box, but it's great, because people do love this city. And I thank everybody for doing the work that they're doing. Thank you for this opportunity. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, ma'am. Cindy Snyder: Hi. Can you hear me? Chair Hardemon: If you -- Ms. Snyder: Okay. My name is Cindy Snyder. I live at 3980 Hardee Road. We've lived here for about 30 years. And during the last year, we have seen a terrible thing happening in Coconut Grove. And when I started noticing it happening -- initially, what was going on was we were all focused on Merrie Christmas Park, but nonetheless, we noticed that older houses in the neighborhood were being torn down, lots were being split, and multiple houses were being built. I happen to know something about it, because I've been looking at the Code and thinking, Gee, this NCD Code, not NDD Code, was to conserve the neighborhood; that there were rules. "It was a seven page document. I think it's about seven pages. Maybe it's a little longer. There are two sentences that are really important. One talks about the intent of the Code to preserve and protect communities that are in existence and have been in existence; protect their tree canopies. It's very simple language. It fits Coconut Grove. It was voted on to be our Code. The other thing in the two sentences are, if there is a conflict with other code and other rules, the rules of NCD -3 are to pertain, they are to prevail. It was a simple code. What we have seen being going on in the last year is that people have been mincing the Code. They've been tearing it apart. They've been challenging it. They've been doing everything but paying attention to the intent of the Code. That is what got our attention. We're community citizens. There are other communities in Miami that also want to be nice neighborhoods, like Coconut Grove. People talk about, Oh, you can get rich if you live in Coconut Grove. "We didn't intend to be rich. We can barely pay our bills. We just want to be able to live here and be able to stay in this neighborhood, and we would like the Code and the rules enforced. And it has been a convoluted City of Miami Page 30 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 -- going around the rules over and over and over again. And to that point, we think that it's probably not Ms. Mendez' job to dismantle the Code; it is her job to make sure that the Code -- well, I don't even know that it's her job to see that the Code gets enforced, but somehow or another, the Code hasn't been enforced. And however that's supposed to be done, we wanted it done, and we continue to see it done to this day. And if we can't decide on what to do here about it today, I think we need a moratorium on building so that the whole neighborhood isn't gone by the time we figure out what to do about this. Chair Hardemon: Thank you very much. Ms. Snyder: It seems like it would be something we could figure out in about two days, if we put our minds to it. Chair Hardemon: Thank you very much, ma'am. Your comments are appreciated. Seeing that there are no other persons here to speak on public comment, I'm going to close the public comment at this time. We're still hereon SP. 1, discussion regarding City Attorney Victoria Mendez. There is not a motion on the floor. Vice Chair Russell: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Chair Hardemon: Vice Chairman. Vice Chair Russell: I thank everyone for coming in, for their input, and I thank my fellow Commissioners for allowing everyone to speak. It is our job to hear them. And I just wanted to make a couple of comments on some of'the things I listened to. I want everyone to know that this is not a trial. It's not a witch hunt. It seems like a trial, because there's somebody who's being accused of'something, but this is the process that we have. I am not pulling a political stunt, as some have said. There is no conspiracy, as some have said. Politically, this wasn't good for me. I've made more enemies this last two weeks than I knew I could have as a Commissioner, but I got a thick skin; I can take the lumps, and that doesn't bother me, because I expected this to happen. The political circles have said my biggest mistake was not having the votes in place before I brought the motion. We don't do it like that. This is how we do it. And I can guarantee you, to their own discomfort, none of my fellow Commissioners knew when I brought the initial issue about Victoria to them here on the dais that I had this problem, because I couldn't. I couldn't call them up and say, Hey, guys, what do you think? "This is only place we have to do it, and it can be embarrassing. It's not about accusations that need to be defended by an independent investigator or even an Ethics Commission. The Ethics Commission will make a decision about Ms. Mendez and some of her actions based on her request to them, and that's great, but they are not the arbiter of this room and the decision of who we work with. Ms. Mendez is our attorney. There is an attorney/client relationship here. It's not a trial to find guilt or innocence. It's a decision amongst five Commissioners to decide whether or not we should continue working together with Ms. Mendez as our City Attorney. I am not judging Ms. Mendez for the past before what came -- happened before I came into office, and many of the things in the particular case that we were working on did happen before I came into office, and that question was asked of me even just yesterday. "Had she brought the information to you that you wanted to know, you probably would have still fired her, right, because you feel that there was impropriety in the goings on? " And I really thought about it, and the answer is, No. "I've seen a lot of things, and I've learned a lot of things of what have been done from the past. I'm ready to move forward, but this isn't the only thing. This was enough for me to make a decision when I asked for information and was not given that information; when I saw a legal opinion that didn't make sense and I asked for more information, and she wouldn't give me information. I believe it was Javier Gonzalez who commented that "Your City Attorney has to save you from yourselves. " Her job is to give me all of the tools and all of the opinions that she has; it's my job to weigh that and make a decision at the end of the day, to make my vote. She did not give me that. What she did was, by withholding certain portions of what I needed to know, she was affecting policy for City of Miami Page 31 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 what she thought would be either the correct decision at the end of the day or what was most -- least liability for the City or best financially for the City in this particular case. That's not her job. Her job is not policy. She can't decide what to show me or not to show me, what to tell me or not tell me. So when I simply asked, "There's more here; tell me the stof-y'=- You just don't like the opinion. " No, it's not that I don't like the opinion. I know that there's a story leading up to this opinion, and that was kept from me. There is no -- what I asked for came out to my fellow Commissioners in a memo from me after the initial discussion we had about this. They didn't have enough information to make a decision, so I circulated two memos amongst them basically saying which documents I had requested, which documents I received, and which documents I should have received. That is not in dispute. Ms. Mendez tried to say, The request was unclear, " but the request was, "Can you please provide us with the email exchanges between your office, the Planning Department, and the property owner's attorney that have to do with whether a warrant was required on this replat? " That is -- couldn't be more clear. That is not a 119 request. That is not is a public records request. That is a relationship between an attorney and her client, and a very clear request for documents. She did not satisfy that request; not even close. 13 documents were given; 39 should have been given, and the 39 told the entire story. I don't want to go into whether or not that entire story at this point is -- was appropriate or inappropriate. The core of my decision of why I know that I need a new City Attorney simply rests on the withholding of that information. And like I said, this is not the first time. She and I have had differences of philosophy and opinion from day one, but that's not enough for me to ask for her removal, but those differences are vast. My very first week in office, in transition, my very first official meeting with Ms. Mendez was in front of all the directors of the City, the City Manager; even my campaign manager was there helping me transition. And her first advice to me was which phone company I should use, because it erases your text messages sooner. "Sprint, " by the way, in case anyone's wondering. And my heart sunk, because that's not the advice I want from my City Attorney. This is not hearsay. This is a room full of people. And in her mind, this is protecting me from public records scrutiny that I wouldn't want. And so, this is her advice to me, so I take that in stride. I still have AT&T (American Telephone & Telegraph), and all my public records are there. The requests that have come to me since then tells another story. There is a whole group that is launched, basically a counterattack, trying to create a story about my staff, dropping off anonymous envelopes at Commissioners' offices, trying to show embarrassing things to them that my office has been involved in. This is all very well -orchestrated. Grant Stern, for what you have said very politely here today, you have not been polite up to now, and there is no relationship between you and I. You were not a supporter of my campaign. You were a supporter of one of my opponents. The only meeting Grant and I have had in my office was with Victoria at the office; and I have to say, you were so rude that everyone in my staff apologized to her that day because of the way that went. We didn't know that that was going to happen. That's the only meeting I've ever had with Grant Stern. The fact that he writes to my office and says very rude things about these Commissioners, that doesn't mean that that's how my office feels. That's inappropriate, but I have to receive these emails. My staff has to interact with anyone who has a complaint. But just because many people have a similar complaint about public records doesn't make a conspiracy. Perhaps, it shows a pattern of behavior that public records are a mess here; it's difficult to get what you want. Even the requests that have come flooding into my office over the last two weeks, this is what we've been able to produce over the last two weeks. Our staff is working 90 minutes a day, each person -- so I don't know how many --four, five, six man-hours a day, trying to produce what we need. All of the emails that they're requesting are stuck in IT; haven't even gone to the Law Department to be vetted for 119 exemptions, and then they'll go to you. Nobody's trying to hide something from you. But I'll tell you what you don't have a right to is my personal driving record of everywhere I have been over the last six months -- same thing with my staff -- you don't get my personal phone records as being requested. This is a deeper, darker effort to, you know, smear me, create a conspiracy, cause a distraction. It's a legal tactic. I understand that. No big deal. But that shouldn't distract us from our decision here today, which does not need an independent investigator, which does not need the Ethics investigation. All those things -- well, the Ethics investigation will happen. We simply need to decide whether they believe that I am sincere in City of Miami Page 32 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 this or not. Commissioner Hardemon -- Chairman Hardemon, you expressed in the beginning that you feel you've been bamboozled about this, or that I am perhaps insincere in my efforts, or "not earnest" is, I believe, what you said, and you're wrong. I am earnest in this. You've even accused me of violating the sunshine law even this week, and that's incorrect, but that's what it's gotten us, going against each other, and that was the strategy of all the smoke we've had over the last couple of weeks. It's in good faith that they would like to clear the name of ' V ctoria Mendez. I understand that. I sympathize with that. I stand very, very firm that what I requested from my attorney was not given to me. It was withheld. And I did not ambush; I spoke to her. The only person that knew that this was coming before this mee -- the original meeting happened was Victoria, because I sat down with her and said, Why didn't I get all these messages? Why did this attorney say something completely different than the last attorney? "Oh, I forgot that I asked her for that opinion. "But, look, the opinion's the opposite of the final attorney's opinion. "Well, she's not qualified to make that decision. "She further went on to say things that confirmed to me that I am making the right decision. This is not a mistaken witch hunt. This is a very clear need for me to be able to trust my staff, my attorney to provide me information to make my decision. I've lost that. I've lost that trust, and that does not speak to her history of good deeds with the City as an attorney; her fights with FPL. That was a conflict for me, because she's doing a very good job on many things for us. I don't want this. This isn't a fight I asked for. This is something that was brought to me that I could not look away f rom . I cannot condone that. And the message has to be sent that you cannot withhold information from a Commissioner when they need to make their decision, and that's where I'm coming from. This isn't out of meanness. This isn't out of anger. This isn't out of a grudge. This isn't out of any of that. And that's really where I am on this. And so, this is a discussion item, and I won't bring a motion until we have some discussion, so I'd like to hear what my fellow Commissioners feel about this. Commissioner Gort: I will have to tell you, I understand how you feel, you personally. You don't think you've been represented by the Attorney. I don't think all of 'us feel the same way. But if there is something that have taken place, I think a due process should take place. I think she should have the ability to answer all of the questions that have been asked of her, and I don't think we be very -- it should be -- I believe it should be the -- an independent individuals doing it, not our self [sic] here. Vice Chair Russell: Commissioner Gort, what would an independent investigator find that we don't already know before us, though? That's my worry, is we're handing something off because we don't want to make a hard decision, but we have all the information we need, though, right? Commissioner Gort: You have the information; we don't have the response from her. I'd like to hear from her a response from her, and I don't know if this is the right place to do it, tell you the truth. I'll be Frank with that. That's how I feel. I might be wrong, but that's the way I feel. And I'm glad the public spoke, because we had people representing the whole City of Miami, which is very important. I think we all want the same, but we want to make sure that we have it very clear, what's happened, what you requested, and why it was not able to request [sic]. Vice Chair Russell: She has spoken with me about that, and I believe she has spoken with each -- she can talk directly with all of us independently, and there's no sunshine issue there. There's no reason she can't explain herself fully to every Commissioner here. That's why I feel that the independent investigation would actually create a different level of circus that we're trying to avoid. If we have the tools before us, we can make that decision. It's not an easy decision. And I apologize that I've put all of you on the spot to make this decision about someone you know and care about and have worked with for a long time, but it's important. It's important that we make these hard decisions. One of the gentlemen that spoke that came up was Ari Sweetbaum, and it was a little confusing of what he was talking about, but it had to do with contamination issues, and it's not the contamination issues in the parks; it's contamination issue in the homes around the parks. This is what I came in on. I was talking about contaminated parks. When I got in and realized there might actually be homes that are contaminated, what are we going to do? I City of Miami Page 33 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 called V ctoria to ask if we could call a shade meeting about this. Of course, we cannot, because there's no lawsuit pending. So I said, "Well, then, I'd like to bring it on the dais so I could talk with my fellow Commissioners about it. " She said, "Let me pull over the car. " This is a heavy, heavy issue, and we talked about it. And she said, "Listen, there's maybe 30 homes or so that are on the margin of these parks where we could not find the extent of the contamination. The cost of remediating that or getting into a lawsuit, " or whatever, "could be tremendous. You have a fiduciary responsibility. " I also have a moral obligation to those residents to find out and make sure they know what's at risk. And one resident, this Ari Sweetbaum, whose father lives on a contaminated property, right next to a city park where there was dumping by our garbage, by our ash, has been trying, without filing a lawsuit to the City, to come to an agreement with the Law office; and the way he's been treated, in my opinion, is not the way I would have handled it. It's -- what she wrote to him is -- she said, We just left City Hall after a long day at Commission. As urgent as you find your issue, 400, 000 other citizens have their agendas and concerns as well. " This is someone who is elderly and just trying to find a solution, and their issue has been kicked down the road while they live on a contaminated soil. My hands have been tied to even talk to it [sic] about it with you while, hopefully, it gets solved, but it's not getting solved. They're being pressured through -- with the City Attorney's Office. I have an obligation to the people. I need to know all the tools that are available to me, and then it's our choice to make these decisions. We can't treat our citizens this way. We have to work for them. Gentlemen, I -- if no one else has further discussion, I'll bring a motion, but I'm looking for your guidance. We have to make this choice together. Either I'm all alone or I'm not. I understand Commissioner Gort would like an independent investigation. I don't know what that investigation would look like, and what it would tell us that we don't already know. But if nobody has anything else to say, I'll simply bring my motion. Chair Hardemon: What is the motion? Vice Chair Russell: I would move that we remove our City Attorney, without cause, and begin the process of finding a new City Attorney. Chair Hardemon: Is there a second to that motion? Is there a second to the motion ? Seeing no second, motion dies for lack of second. Is there any further discussion about SP.1 ? Commissioner Gort: Mr. Chairman. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, sir. Commissioner Gort: I believe -- we have a lot of people here that want to see an answer. The ethical complaint already is being done. I think we should follow that. And if we don't believe that it's the right thing to do, then we should get somebody else, but we have to go through the due process; we all do. We all get all kinds of complaints against us, and we have to go to the Ethic Commission and they investigate us, and we got to go up. I've gone through it, and I think it's very important that we give due process to her. And I can understand your frustrations, and I agree with it, but a lot of'times you need to realize the Attorney for the City of Miami -- I understand we have the people we have to be responsible to, but also, they're responsible to the City and the benefit of the City, and these are the things we have to look at. A lot of the decisions that are made by the Administration is seeing what the benefit is, and what's -- what could happen if we make the wrong decision. I mean, we've seen that in court many times, and that's something that we always try to save. Chair Hardemon: You're recognized, Commissioner Suarez. Commissioner Suarez: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think a lot of the concern and frustration that is voiced by our residents today had to do with what they saw as a very disturbing trend in Coconut Grove of lot -splitting that was, many felt, including myself, not necessarily in conformity with the City of Miami Page 34 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 intent of the NCD, of the Neighborhood Conservation District. I think we did the right thing when we decided Battersea, and we decided unanimously that the plat, as presented to us, was not in conformity with the law or the intent of the NCD. Having said that, I think we still have an opportunity and we should fix some of the issues related to the NCD. For example, one of the problems that led to the Battersea issue is that we're issuing building permits -- By the way, the City Attorney doesn't issue building permits; the Building Department issues building permits -- we're issuing building permits during a temporary plat process. That is a mistake, particularly in the NCD, particularly. This is not just any part of the City of Miami where lot -splitting is done on a regular basis, so that is a particular mistake, and that's something that -- that's a practice that should stop immediately. Secondly, I happen to be a real estate attorney, so I happen to have a little bit of knowledge on what goes on, and one of the reasons why, you know, I was obviously supportive of the denial of the plat. The non -platted property is the 1 percent rule, generally. There's very few non platted property in the City of Miami. Most property is platted. In my opinion -- and this is something that I actually disagreed with the City Attorney's opinion on this issue, which is why I voted the way I voted on Battersea; and I'll go on to say, I've probably been the hardest -- notwithstanding Commissioner Russell, I've probably been the hardest critic and the harshest critic, and the most demanding person on the City Attorney, because I have very high expectations for what we should expect for our city. But we need to fix the Code, because there is a -- there's -- you should not interpret the 1 percent rule different from the 99 percent rule. If in the 99 percent rule for platted property you're not supposed to subdivide lots without a warrant, that shouldn't be the 1 percent rule -- that should be the 1 percent rule. It shouldn't be different for the 1 percent rule. You should borrow the 99 percent rule to interpret the 1 percent rule, and I think that's something that we need to fix and we should fix. And I think there's also matters that you brought up, Commissioner, relative to the way the City Attorney's Office operates that need to be looked at. I think one specifically is that -- and, you know, my seven years -- I've been doing this now for seven years in November -- when a specific legal question is engaged in, it should be a formal process. It should not be an informal process. It shouldn't be about writing emails back and forth and, sort of, opinions on the fly, if you will, okay? It should be -- We have what's called LSRs, legal service requests, and when there is a specific matter that requires a City Attorney's involvement, even though that might, theoretically, slow things down, if you will, or whatever the case may be, it should be done through that formal process. The conclusion of that formal process should always be a written opinion, a formal written opinion, not an email, not -- you know, it should be a formal written opinion that is published so that the members of the public can see it, can scrutinize it, can agree or disagree with it; and certainly, in situations where there is a disagreement amongst staff and a subordinate City Attorney, or subordinate City Attorney and the primary City Attorney, in those circumstances, it becomes even more important that the jurisprudence -- that the legal analysis that's engaged in to get to the final outcome is transparently developed and is published. I've often said that I really feel like we need an experienced -- and this is not a knock on anyone in the City Attorney's Office, because I know we have 30 lawyers there, but we really do need an experienced real estate practitioner. We do a tremendous amount of real estate work, and it's been sort of divvied about, based on a case-by-case basis and based on a variety of circumstances, and I don't think we've always had a very good outcome at the end of 'it, and I think this is one of those issues. We've gotten to a point where, you know, we've lost -- we -- and I say i've,'because it's really on all of us. It's not one person. We've all --you know, and I said it -- you said it too, you know -- in the Battersea matter, mistakes were made. Mistakes were made by many people, which led to, unfortunately, a situation where the Commission had to step in and do what I thought was the right thing. We probably need -- and we talked about this in the sunshine -- I'm sorry; in the Charter Review Committee -- something like an "Office of Ombudsmen " or some sort of -- but I think we need an office of transparency or a sunshine office where people can go directly to get public records. I could tell you that maybe there are people that think that we provide public records effectively and efficiently, and maybe we do in certain circumstances, but we also have been sued by many, many, many people for lack of disclosure of public records timely. And I think you can get abroad range of people that will give you abroad perspective on whether or not we give -- turn over public records effectively; and that's City of Miami Page 35 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 something, by the way, again, that's not -- doesn't just fall on the shoulders of one person; that's something that's a citywide issue, so that's something that I think needs to be addressed. You know, this has been certainly a difficult situation. We had another difficult situation where it appeared -- and our Manager's not sitting there, and I don't like to talk about people when they're not here in the room -- but where it appeared like the Manager had lost confidence of some of the Commissioners in a given moment, and maybe that was the right thing to do; maybe that was the wrong thing to do, you know. What's interesting for me is nobody really follows up on what happened after the fact, you know, with the employee who was dismissed. In that particular case, there were several Commissioners expressing frustration, and you felt -- and probably justifiably so; and certainly, nobody's calling your integrity into question on that issue -- you felt that you were not ready at that moment, or that the circumstance wasn't right; and had you felt ready and had the circumstance been right, something different may have occurred that day, but it didn't, and I think we have to respect each Commissioner's individual perspective, each Commissioner's individual dealings with the City Attorney. And I'll just finish by saying this, and I'm going to repeat what I said before: There is not a person up here -- and I will include you in that -- that has been harder on Victoria Mendez than I have, not one, who has challenged her more often, who has disagreed with her more vehemently and more strongly than I have, but I've never questioned her integrity, not once. I've never questioned her ethics. I've never questioned her morality. Never. I've never even thought about it. I've disagreed vehemently on the law with her. I've fought vociferously and will continue to do so if I think she's wrong on an issue, but I have never -- and unless something changes -- will never question her integrity, and I think that, for me, is -- somebody -- one of the audience members said this. You know, I've been, unfortunately or fortunately, around public service for a long time. For all of us, there comes a time when someone will question our integrity, for every single one of 'us, and sometimes more than once. And you only hope and pray -- and believe me, I pray -- that you have a fair opportunity when confronted with those allegations, charges, whatever they are, to be able to defend yourself and your integrity, because at the end of the day -- One of ,the things that my father once told me way before I got involved in public service is, "My time is here is temporary. " My time here is temporary. But my reputation in the community and my livelihood -- I have a son, I'm married, and I do have to work in this community, and I do have to make a living. And it is a very difficult balancing act that we do up here, very difficult, and I appreciate the fact that many of the residents acknowledge that and understood that and see the time and the way that we dedicate, and the energy in the work that we do. It is very difficult. But oftentimes, part of the reason why there's so much frustration in elected officials and in public life is because people don't want to subject themselves to this. They don't want to come up here. They don't want to be apart of this, because they're afraid of getting mixed up in something that, you know, may not tell the entire story, and I'm not saying that you're not telling the entire story; I'm just saying that these matters can get convoluted and complicated. And as one of the speakers said, we haven't even really talked about the issue of the emails, at all. So, you know, look, I think we have demonstrated, all of us, over time that we have been willing and capable of making tough decisions, very tough decisions. Wefired multiple people from this dais in very, very difficult circumstances; and if 'the Ethics Commission or any other body comes back and says that what Victoria Mendez did was improper or wrong, I suspect that we'll be faced with a very difficult decision, but we'll have to make the right decision. I just think that everybody up here is entitled to be able to defend themselves. It's very difficult, as an attorney, to be able to defend yourself against your client or one of your clients. It's almost an impossible situation, and I think that's the situation she finds herself in. And by the way, I've criticized her about how she's done it, too, in private. I have. I've been critical of it. It's a very tough place to be, very tough place to be. And I don't envy her, and I don't envy you, and I don't envy any one of us for having to be here at this moment. Thank you. Chair Hardemon: Commissioner Gort. Commissioner Gort: You know, these meetings are very important. A lot of times, you learn a lot in doing the public hearings. For example, last -- when we were dealing with this issue our last City of Miami Page 36 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 Commission meeting, somebody came up with the -- one of the reasons the -- some of these developers get away with a lot of the things they do in the Grove, because they have a loophole with the County, and I forget specifically how it was, and I made them -- I mentioned on that day, we need to look at that loophole. We need to close that loophole. And this is something that we need to do. And I hope that message goes out to Planning, whoever's in charge of that; that loophole is something that we have to close. Chair Hardemon: You know, when lawyers become attorneys, most people know that they've done at least one thing, and that is, pass the Bar. It's a test of'your intellect, your knowledge, your ability to write, take facts, analyze them, and deliver a message back to the person that's testing you. But one thing that you don't hear a lot about, which I believe protects the lawyer's profession -- those of us who are lawyers, our profession -- is something called character and fitness. "Now, I've attended law school with many people at the University of Miami, and watched them not become attorneys, because they could not get through the test of their character and their fitness. Because the Bar is concerned with, Are you the type of person that should be given the privilege of practicing law in the great State of Florida ? "That is an important question that the Bar not only asks at that point when you pass the Bar, but they ask it every time there's an inquiry into any wrongdoing that you're accused of. I think every attorney that practices law understands what their responsibility is to the Florida Bar. And no one takes it lightly when they're accused of a wrongdoing, because we, as attorneys, understand that that $200, 000 debit that you took out to help people in your community, to serve as a prosecutor and get paid $29, 000 a year, entrusted through the State of Florida to lay down the law when people do wrongdoing in our community, to ensure that our community is protected, when that person who has been vetted by someone like Kathy Fernandez Rundle to serve this community, who then comes along to a place called the City of'Miami'to help with our municipal law; when that person is accused of a wrongdoing, it is a very serious matter. When that person says, _'give all of these facts to the Ethics Commission for you to consider. "When that person sits silently as we discuss not just her employment here in the City of Miami, but her future as a lawyer in the State of Florida -- I apologize -- an attorney in the State of Florida, where the accusations that we make about her can determine whether or not she practices in another state if she decides to move away from this great State of Florida, those things should be taken very seriously. And when we start to discuss how it is that attorneys come to a decision that they make, you're crossing into afield of study that many people just don't understand. The countless hours that a prosecutor might spend with her other ASAs (Assistant State Attorneys) discussing the merits of the case; one prosecutor saying, _' don't think you can charge him for that" another prosecutor saying, _'think we have a case," or a public defender, defending his client, that may in his heart feel that something's not right, but he can't put his finger on it, and talks to his other assistant public defenders about the case to come up with a defense for the person that they've been charged with protecting, these are matters that attorneys who come to a decision, even about municipal issues, discuss amongst themselves, especially within a firm. And to watch the discussions in a firm be divulged to the public in the field of 'law is a tragedy, especially when we look at other attorneys from outside the City that agreed with the opinion of Ms. Mendez. And so, what I've learned and what I already knew about this issue is that any time you come up with an opinion about something, as an attorney, it is called just that. As a matter of fact, in the court of law -- even our Supreme Court comes up with an opinion, and at one time they thought that "separate but equal" was okay; was their opinion. At one time they had feelings about what ounce of blood of an African-American person made you black. It was their opinion. And so, when my City Attorney gives an opinion -- and I challenge her many times; probably all the time. I challenge her, Barnaby Min; I challenge my City Clerk. I challenge them because I can read the same books that they can, and I can come with an opinion myself. I actually find it quite fun, because as attorneys, that's what makes us sharper, the difference in opinions. But ultimately, her office represents us, and she's going to give her opinion as she thinks is best fit. What I'm afraid about, moving forward, is just like --for example, if you get in a car accident, and the two of us are traveling together, and one attorney wants to represent the both of us, that attorney has to have a conflict of interest waiver signed. Why? Because our interests may be different from City of Miami Page 37 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 each other; because you may want more of a claim than I want; because in that policy that's going to pay for our injuries, there may be a limit, and I as a client have to decide whether or not I want to go about with another person, a co plaintiff, with the representation of one lawyer. That reminds me of where I am today, because here I am -- possibly in the future; many times today -- either a co plaintiff or a co-defendant with the Commissioners who are here with me, and what I'm afraid of is my co-defendant or my co plaintiff sabotaging my case, and so there's a discussion that we have to start to have about how many attorneys do we need to represent us in these types of issues, because I certainly wouldn't want my lawyer -client privilege divulged by someone who is a co-defendant or a co plaintiff with me. This is a tough issue. I can't say we've gotten past it, but I can say that out of all of the battles that I've had with the City Attorney's Office, all the questions that the City Attorney's Office has answered, all the back and forth that I have with our City Clerk about how we interpret Mason's Rules of Order, I found that every single one of those offices have been nothing but helpful in helping me reach any type of decision I've come to, especially when you follow up with that office if you're unsatisfied with what they provided you. It's a simple as saying, "No, that's not what I wanted. This is what I wanted. " And I think that any time you utilize the services of an attorney, the client also has the responsibility of being forthcoming with information to assist that attorney in doing his research to give a proper opinion about something. And if the client finds himself in a position where they're playing a game of ` gotcha, " then there's no justice in it for any one of those two people. So I'm happy to move on f ^om this situation with SP. 1. Vice Chair Russell: Mr. Chair. Chair Hardemon: Unless there's any further discussion. Vice Chair Russell: Yes, please. Chair Hardemon: Commissioner Carollo? Let's hear from our Vice Chairman. Vice Chair Russell: You want --? Thank you. I respect your decision today. I must. You're my colleagues. You're my mentors. You've been here much longer than I. I don't know what I would have done differently. And the instances that you both have mentioned just now are about differences of opinion and vigorous debate and differences of legal opinion, but that's not what this was about. This was about being left in the dark, and if that had happened to you, I wonder what you would do differently. I wonder what I may have done wrong in this situation, because I am coming before you saying, 1' was left in the dark, 'that that's the issue; not that I differed with the opinion, but that I was left in the dark. And so, I don't know where we go from here. I -- we move on, as we do, with the many things we have to do with the City. And as last week, I apologized for where this went and how it went here and everywhere we are today. I apologized to you, and I apologized to Ms. Mendez, and I'm sincere in that, but I do not take back what I have said in terms of 'how I feel I need to work with those in our office, and -- but we'll move on, and I respect your opinion. Chair Hardemon: Seeing no further discussion, we're going to recess the meeting to go into our 11 o'clock attorney/client sessions. Mr. Hannon: Chair, if I may? Chair Hardemon: Yes. Mr. Hannon: We actually have two separate agendas today. Chair Hardemon: Okay. Mr. Hannon: So you can actually adjourn this meeting, and then what we will do is then begin City of Miami Page 38 Printed on 1112112016 City Commission ADJOURNMENT Meeting Minutes September 29, 2016 the next meeting. Chair Hardemon: All right. I'll adjourn this meeting at 11:54. END OF SPECIAL MEETING The meeting adjourned at 11:54 a.m. City of Miami Page 39 Printed on 1112112016