HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubmittal-Marin Kim-Comments Made on the Recordw
My name is Marin Kim and I am here on behalf of Nautilus Enterprises, LLC at 1000 MacArthur
Causeway, Miami.'
U
Irrespective of this Commission's decision today, I would be remiss not to put on the record that,
as an interested party, there has been very little transparency or information regarding the
transition process of abolishing MSEA; this lack of communication raises troubling questions as tn
taa
how the City Administration expects to assume the legal and financial obligations of MSEA when .' a
no such plan has been shared with the public, and least of all, the interested parties that have �. .
contractual relationships with MSEA and/or the City.
� � c
I am not going to ask whether this Commission knows what this transition implies as I do not
believe that the Commission has received the appropriate information necessary to answer the
question. In the last ten months, in violation of the City Code, only one MSEA meeting has taken
place under this new administration, a meeting that failed to address the three following points,
which are all inter-related and refer specifically to the validity of one of the sublease agreements.
1. First, as some of the commissioners here are aware, in the last couple of meetings of MSEA,
individual board members have questioned whether MSEA has ever approved one of the
sublease agreements and not one of the board members present at that meeting stated
otherwise. I think that the Commission needs to consider that the automatic attornment of
a potentially non -valid agreement NOW could result in the validation of that very
agreement, in an agreement that today, in any other scenario, could require a public
referendum as waterfront property.
2. Secondly, as the MSEA audio recordings of 2017 attest, there have been serious questions
regarding the financial accounting of MSEA; the 2017 fiscal year financial audit by a
certified external accountant reveals certain findings and these findings and financial
reports have not been discussed or approved by the MSEA Board or this City Commission
despite the possible, significant consequences such findings could result in.
3. Thirdly, depending on whether the findings in such financial statements are valid or not,
the restriction of funds by MSEA in the past may or may not have been appropriate. Thus,
the disbursement of US$200,000 in restricted funds, loaned from the General Fund, which
at that time represented a significant part of MSEA's funds, to a private party, should be
thoroughly reviewed and the implications of such disbursement discussed, particularly if
those monies were to be considered public funds.
Fundamentally, what I am raising today is simply a matter regarding the democratic process at
play here and we need to ask ourselves why the lack of transparency?
As recently as last month, the City Attorney's office and the City Manager personally have
expressed to the aviation authorities, the desire to have the City of Miami manage an airport, a
responsibility that several commissioners here and the MSEA Board have expressly rejected
repeatedly and, of course, are in complete conflict with the agreements signed with the State of
Florida and the tenants on Watson Island, not to mention that such undertaking would require
financial resources and expertise that the City of Miami would be responsible for; more
importantly, the City of Miami would necessarily need an airport that it can manage to begin with,
something the City of Miami currently does not have.
(1'lA F -A n V� (n- COMK4,k fvlk o� - i�-2 2ecyd
I urge this Commission to ask all of the questions necessary to make sure that the sponsor of the
ordinance and City Administration are being truthful in not only their intentions but also in the
means and that anything that is being done or will be done, is in compliance with the law and in
protection of the citizens and the public of the City of Miami. I would hate to see this Commission
approve something under the guise of noble intents only to see the City mired in further legal
entanglements. t
U
f+
0'9
'"tet
w
0
U
(� w D