Please take your seat. seats. The meeting is about to begin. Remember to speak into the microphone as this meeting is being recorded for public record. Please stand by. We are going on air in
5 4 3 2 1. >> Good morning and welcome to our commission meeting of March 18th, 2026. Thanks everyone for being here. And I'll turn it to our city clerk Rafael Granada to give us any instructions. Thank you,
mayor. Uh, good morning everyone. The city commission is physically present in the commission chamber at Miami Beach City Hall, 1700 Convention Center Drive, third floor. Members of the public are invited to attend either in person or virtually. If you're joining us virtually, you can log in using the Zoom app or visit the Zoom US on your
browser. You can also phone in at 3052241968. That's 305224-1968 or toll-free 888-4754499. The webinar ID is 813928-57671 pound. Again, 813-928-57671 pound. If you would like to speak
virtually on an item during the meeting, please click the raise hand icon in the Zoom app or press star9 on your on your phone. The Zoom link, webinar ID, and phone number stay the same for every commission meeting. All lobbyists must register with the office of the city clerk located on the first floor of the
of city hall. You do not need to register if you're an expert witness giving only technical or specialized testimony, a representative of a neighborhood association or nonprofit speaking without pay or a private citizen speaking on your own behalf without compensation. However, if you're
an expert witness or a nonprofit or a neighborhood rep, you do need to submit a written disclosure form to the office of the city clerk before speaking with a commission or staff. Forms are available at the office of the city clerk. If a lobbyist gives or agre or agrees to give $1,000 or more to a neighborhood
association or its representative regarding a city matter, that must be disclosed in writing to the clerk. Note that contingency fees are not permitted to compensate lobbyists. If you plan to speak during the public comment today, please sign in. You can use the sign-in sheets at the podium or scan the QR code
also located there to sign in electronically. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Ralph. It's my honor to uh introduce Rabbi Scholom Corf of the Kabad of Lake View to give our invocation. I will say it's uh it's a fairly new synagogue to the Miami Beach
community and it already has a tremendous profound impact on the uh Lake View and surrounding areas. Uh, I actually visited uh not too long ago on on a on a Shabbat and you were you were packed. >> Yeah.
Thank you. Welcome. Thank you, mayor. Good morning. Morning, mayor, commissioners, city staff, and all members of the community here today. We gather with the shared purpose to serve, to lead, and to strengthen the
community of Miami Beach with the help of God. As we approach the holiday of Passover, where we tell the story of the Exodus of Egypt, the Jewish sages teach that a name actually holds within its essential
meaning. The name Egypt in Hebrew means limitations. So the exodus of Egypt doesn't just mean a story of physical freedom from bondage, but actually traversing beyond our limitations,
going out of our comfort zone and leaving perhaps what we're comfortable doing to go a bit greater, more beyond to do a little more. Each of us faces moments when we're called to rise beyond what is easy and beyond
what is known. Leadership at its core means exactly that. To be able to do beyond what is your comfort zone. To rise beyond what is the usual, what's easy, and to go a bit above the
call of duty. With the help of God, may the work here done today be guided by wisdom, clarity, and compassion. May there be an openness to new ideas, courage in the face of challenge,
and a sheared commitment to progress that benefits all those that call this city their home. Just as the journey of Passover reminds us that growth begins when we step beyond our boundaries. May this gathering be a place where meaningful steps are taken towards
growth, towards unity, and towards purpose that benefit the city of Miami Beach. May this meeting with the help of God bring about outcomes that promote opportunity, growth, joy, and well-being for all the residents of this city. May we merit the
coming of the Messiah where there will be peace and harmony amongst all nations, people, and creation. And let us say, amen. >> Amen. >> Thank you very much. Thank you, Rabbi Corf. You had the the room uh
mesmerized. Thank you. Um, so as I look around the room for our pledge of allegiance, uh, I will say we're in the middle of spring break, getting toward the end, and for the third consecutive year, uh, so far, tremendous success. I don't want to jinx it, but, uh, really
congratulations to everyone up here to our city manager, our police department so far. All right, great. But we also have to thank our marketing department, uh, and the great marketing campaigns that you continue to roll out. So, I'm gonna ask Melissa Berthier, our director of marketing, to lead us in the pledge
of allegiance. >> Mr. Mayor, as a fellow baseball fan and a superstitious baseball fan, what do you never do? You never call a no hitter before it's over. >> Fair enough. >> Baseball. >> All right, everyone, please rise.
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> So, Commissioner Bot, you actually teed it up perfectly because I was going to
wish congratulations to the country and the people of Venezuela who who uh beat the United States in the World Baseball Classic last night. Uh it was an incredible incredible game. The uh the dedication, the love, the love of
country, but really what I what I saw was the love of people and uh it's really what sports brings out. It's what the arts and culture it brings out. We just had the Olympics. It's it's really great when you see people come together and you obviously you support one team,
but then uh you literally high-five the uh the opponent next to you and and just wish them congratulations. So, it was it was a great moment for our country um and and for the world last night uh to see and witness the competitiveness and
the spirit of uh togetherness. We're going to start the uh Sutnik hour, our open forum. So, thank you everyone for uh coming and and speaking. Good morning everyone. If you're going to speak, please approach the podium, state your name, address, and you have two
minutes. Please go ahead. Good morning everyone. My name is Ka Rato. I'm part of the seniors committee representing for freedoms tower and these are all my friends and neighbors from for freedom. Um we're here because
we're a little bit concerned about the cuts um donation cut regarding our senior the senior programs or classes. Um, I I understand that there might be funds allocated for bingo um in several
buildings. And we really we play bingo in our building every Friday and Saturday. And God forbid, you know, you cancel they you probably cancel Christmas before you can cancel bingo. But the thing is that we do it on our own. We don't need city money for that.
People can bring chips, somebody brings soda. The other one brings paper. The other one brings cups. What we do need are the classes that we have because we have yoga which helps with balance which helps our muscles. Um we have a dance
which she also gives exercises that will help us helps our hips. She does exercises for hips and bones. We have sumba which is for seniors and we do sit it down. Even our 94 year old does the
Zumba sitting down because she exercises and um and we have painting which is the only class where we're not exercising our bodies but then we're using our minds and all those classes we consider are very important. They have been
growing. It took a while for people but the classes not only help physically but also mentally. A lot of people are inside their apartments alone. Some of them have family that are very far and they're alone all the time.
Like our 94 year old, she participates in everything. And she goes in a walker because she wants to get out of the house. And even though she doesn't exercise her legs, she exercise her arms and it gives her muscle strength. They teach us how to fall. If you're going to
fall, how to sa, you know, be safer. So to us all those classes are really important just as well as transportation and the activities. Um actually instead of less we need more. You know there's
places where like the e extravaganza um at the Scott center most people don't come because there's no transportation for some of them. They have to cross the street. they have to, you know, and I understand you don't put a bus for some of the things, but maybe Ubers, you
know, six people in an Uber. So, um, instead of less, what we really need is more. I mean, we paid our dues, we pay taxes, we put you guys, you know, our children to college, and now that we are seniors,
Miami Beach has always been known for having so many programs for seniors. I hope that doesn't change, you know. Um, actually, if you can improve it, it will be better. Thank >> you. >> Thank you. Commissioner Dominguez asked this. >> Thank you. Um, I just want to change um
and clarify the narrative. You were given misinformation. I'm sure it's coming from the mayor's office because several seniors called me saying that Gloria told them to come in today and to call me. I have an item to add more, not
to take away from your services. That's first and foremost. I've been working very hard to get things uh additional things for you. As a matter of fact, one of the buildings that asked for bingo was Federation and Vicky Lopez is going to pay for it. So, um when this item
gets called, I'm going to make an amendment. Your building specifically did not ask for bingo, but Rebecca Towers did. So, that's another amendment that I'll make that um I won't be asking for. We spend a lot of money uh with the
seniors and we're always looking to help and spend more whether it's the senior meals at um the different comedes but also through the parks department. Do you know that our parks funding is about $193,000 for the seniors? You mentioned buses. We
spend about $37,000 in bus services for the seniors for the different events and we're looking to spend more on that. Part of that 193,000 also includes senior classes, our contractors for yoga, taichi, and all of those different
things. So, we are looking to add and help more. The housing authority asked us for that additional funding, and as I mentioned, the county is going to help with some. So, in my amended item, when it's called later, it'll be $3,000
as But it's not for any cuts whatsoever. And I'm so sorry that you were given misinformation because that was not at all what's happening with this item. >> I always want to try to give you more. >> No, thank you so much.
>> Yeah. And I I I have no problem with your response and and I take it in good faith that what you're trying to do, Commissioner Dominguez, but since you invoked my office, I I have not directed anyone to make those calls. I just asked my chief of staff who said that she has not made any calls. and Gloria Campus,
I'm being told, is on vacation this week. I'm just saying you you directedly pointed at me as saying that I was directing these calls from my office. And I I >> I didn't say you, I said the mayor's office. I didn't say the mayor directed his office. It's my office. >> Uh for clarification,
um your office was calling seniors to call me and that's what I wanted to uh clarify the narrative. That's not at all what this is. >> Okay. Can you come up here? Did you get a call from anyone from my office? No, I got an email. >> Could come up to the
>> I' I'd like to know. >> Okay. No, I did get an email >> from >> from Gloria Campus. And it wasn't just directed to me. It was directed to Esta, which is our administrator, our social worker, and a few other people. And it
was in regards to to that, you know, and she and she said that the donations were that the person or the company that was donating was cutting the funding in half and that's where the worry came. >> Okay. >> Okay.
>> Thank you. >> But she didn't say to call you, L. >> You didn't call me, but I did get calls from somebody other people in Rebecca Towers. And I know that you guys are so busy. You don't read the agendas. like how would this even come up? And then
they told me that Gloria had been calling and and >> in my case she didn't call and she didn't and her email didn't even mention your name though. Okay. >> Thank you. Next go next speaker.
>> Good morning mayor. Good morning commissioners. Good morning neighbors. My name is Alina Valdez and I'm here at the invitation of Kissa. She already went over basically what I was going to talk about also. So, I'm just going to
make it very short. I just want to remind everyone commissioners and the mayor that uh when election time was here uh you all approach us and promise us that we will always be taken care of.
And I just want to remind you all of that that uh we have given you our trust and uh we're very happy living in Miami Beach. Very grateful for all the services and just please don't forget
us. We count on you all. Okay. Thank you so much for your time. >> Thank you and thank you for being here. We we as a commission and I have certainly uh made an uh strong effort to increase the amount of uh services that we provide to our seniors and I and I I
am I'm confident that will only continue. >> Thank you very much, >> Mr. Mayor. I just Commissioner Fernandez. >> Thank you. And I just want to thank all of you because you all have always the entire commission you, Mr. mayor, each one of of the commissioners have always
looked out for the seniors in our community um with with great passion and I think it's one of those things that unite us unite us not only as a community but as elected officials how much we value the senior community how much we owe to you how much we respect
you and most importantly how much we love you we serve you with love and this entire commission has always been unified uh in that and in a matter of I because of a political matter uh one point was saying well maybe we shouldn't
be doing this certain event and the entire commission was like oh no each one of my colleagues actually I was the only person I think that ever in the history of the city that said maybe we should do something a little bit differently and the entire body was so united and continues to be so united and
that is the beautiful part of the city of Miami Beach that we really care for each other as neighbors and so I just wanted to put that on on the record because sometimes things can get tense, but there's beautiful stuff happening beyond that. Thank you. >> Good morning. My name is Meg Lustoau.
I'm the executive director of the Miami Design Preservation League, and I'm here to speak in strong support of Commissioner Fernandez's resolution R7H, which will be coming up later today. This would authorize the city attorney to explore legal action regarding House Bill 399, which was passed by the
legislature last week, which takes away the rights of Miami Beach residents as well as your rights as our elected representatives to make decisions about the development of our city. Thank you. >> Thank you so much. Next, please. >> Good morning, everyone. Mitch Novik to
piggy back on to what Meg stated, uh, House and Senate approved, uh, Live Local 4.0 last week. I hope you guys uh, consider discussing that at some point. On another note, uh, I want to say my
numbers for March have been uh, uh, fantastic. Uh there's no longer utter chaos or a police lockdown outside of my home and business. Uh I have to admit I never
heard of uh What a Pooer or Hydrox or any of those other fitness events until last year. And uh many of my guests uh from this past weekend were in town uh from Switzerland, Germany, uh uh Brazil,
Uruguay uh to attend these events. So you're on uh you're on a good track and uh thank you. >> Next, please. >> Good evening, mayor and commissioners. Uh, my name is Brenda Jordan. I've lived
here in Miami Beach for over 35 years. And you know, when I came to Miami Beach, it was not a diverse community. As a matter of fact, I was appointed to the housing commission and denied because I don't speak Spanish. And the
first thing that people would say, get a lawyer. A lot of people did. And I didn't. I gave the city a chance. As an artist, I brought my culture, my diversity to this city. And as an
artist, I'm being discriminated against because they set up program without any input of artists. It was set up maybe with good intentions, but it totally left the artists out of away from the
table. And it was set up by people who know nothing about art, have no degree in art, probably don't even have arts tag on their car, which I do. I pay extra money. And the problem is is that I had a nonforprofit. They cut me out of
the grants. I worked at the Art Center of South Florida. I've worked with the county countywide. And the perception of the city, people don't know what the city is perceived of. I taught children in the inner city and one girl asked me,
"Where do you live?" I said, "Miami Beach." She said, "Only only white people live there." And I said, "No, you can live wherever you want. Even though I've been discriminated against, I will not be discriminated against in the arts. The program that was set up
recently, revised, made it worse. I'm paying double the fees. I get nothing in return. There's no website. There's no updates and people who are real artists are being discriminated against. They
can't even sell in the city again and dictating that jewelry is not art. I sent numerous emails and Mr. Mayor, last meeting you promised to have a meeting with me. I went to the office and tried to set up one. I got no response.
Luckily, some people who promised during the election that they would be there for me, like you know, um the vice mayor here, Monica, she promised and she called me. Mr. Alex Hernandez, and I
also spoke to David Suarez, even though we were on different pages because he already had a program in his mind and wasn't open his heart or his ears. He listened, but he was limited to because
I think he had a program already dictated. It's not fair. It's not fair to elderly people who lived in the city who can't afford to live in the city. They moved out and now they're discarded. >> Thank you so much. >> That's not fair. Thank you for listening.
>> Thank you. >> I will. >> So, I I uh I do get a lot of requests for for meetings. I try to accommodate all of them. I uh if you did reach out, I apologize that we didn't do it. We >> because you promised and this has been going on before you were reelected. I
vote >> it. >> It's not a matter of voting. If you ask if you ask to talk, we will talk. >> You told me we would last meeting. That was a month ago. >> Okay. I I was not aware that you had reached out. I am giving you my my commitment that we will talk before the next meeting >> again. And I hope this time you honor
>> Now I'm saying in front of a lot of people. >> Well, you did last time. I hope you honor your word. We >> because words are sacred. >> You and I have spoken. We may have not have spoken since the last meeting, but I we have talked about this issue. >> No, I've sent you emails, but we have not individually spoken. No.
>> So, I'm giving you my I'm giving I'm giving you my commitment that we will have that conversation. >> Okay. I hope you honor your word. >> Commissioner Mattail Selenus, >> uh Miss Jordan and other artists, um I'm I think that you're aware uh that I do have an item, a referral to the
neighborhoods committee to discuss the artist vendors program. So that way we can at committee talk about what um how we can improve the program and we can have further discussions about this to see what could improve the program. >> Commissioners because I have emailed
like a ridiculous amount of time. Yes. >> Even giving you like a blueprint of how to set up Yes. you know artist program >> and this is the first step in that process. So we we are definitely I'm definitely trying to help. So >> I appreciate it. >> You're welcome. We are. Commissioner
Suarez, I know you had good intentions and you know, art is inclusive. It's not just painting. >> I'm sure we'll come to a a good place here. >> I hope so. >> We will hope so. >> We will. I'm optimistic. Thank you, Miss
Jordan. >> Yeah. Yeah. Because I'm not against anyone. I just want to be at the table. When you're setting up something and you know nothing about, it's not your field. is not your lane. Bring someone in. I'm
not even asking for pay. I'm a cultural ambassador for this city. Bringing diversity. I'm not trying to take away. I'm trying to build. So, I appreciate all the help. >> Yes, we will have further conversations. Thank you. With all of you. Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Next, please. No problem. Miami Beach. No, it wasn't Okay. >> Hi, you all know me already. My name is Janet Figaro. I'm one of the artist vendors. Um, I've been here some of the meetings with Miss Matteo, with Mr.
Fernandez. Um, I have talked to the mayor. I have talked to Miss Tanya on the sidelines. And I'm very grateful that you all have taken out the time to talk to us. And we're trying our hardest to be patient. But some of these people, they are elderly. We are already more
than 55 and older in this program. I'm 61 this year. So, we all struggling to try to make it. And it's very difficult when you're a person that been injured in a car accident like me and I was hurt here in the MacArthur. My car was
totaled. My neck and my back is damaged. I cannot proceed with a surgery because I would not be able to work ever. So this is all I have and this is how I keep my home. And I live out of Miami
Beach because I don't live here because I cannot afford to live here. You cannot tell me that I'm paying for 1300 square ft for $957 is my mortgage, my taxes, and my insurance to turn to trade that to come
live in Miami Beach to keep a job. It's insane. None of you would do that. So you have to understand I keeping my budget among my needs what I what I could afford. I am not exceeding my budget
>> because I know that I can't exceed my budget. So this is very important to me and my family because I don't want my children to have to take care of me. I chose this place and I afford I could afford this place that's $957 for a
reason. I went through this. I planned my life for like that I won't be a burden to my children. You understand? This is so important to me as a senior. I don't want my kids to have to take care of me. I want to be able to take care of myself. And this is program is
all I have. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you everyone. I see no one else in the audience requesting to speak. Therefore, I'm going to go to Zoom. First caller, Alicia Kasanova. Please state your name and you have two minutes.
Hi, my name is Alicia Kasanoa. I'm here this morning as vice president of the Mid Beach Neighborhood Association, as president of the Blue and Green Diamond Condominiums, representing over 2,000 residents, and as a lifelong Miami Beach resident. We hope that Commissioner
Fernandez's resolution R7H is heard today. We fully support it and hope that it's voted on favorably. We heard the mayor's virtual town hall and fully understand the concerns about Miami Beach potentially losing millions of dollars in state grant funding if the
city uses its legal resources on House Bill 399. But this is about protecting the rights of Miami Beach residents and ensuring that we are not silenced by decisions made in Tallahassee like the one made last minute in the Senate last
Friday. Our city cannot be intimidated. No amount of grand money can justify giving up our city's rights, our home rule, or our voice as residents to be heard before our historic preservation board. Commissioner Fernandez's resolution is not about starting a
lawsuit next week. The resolution will serve to preserve the city's ability to explore legal action if and when it becomes necessary, following all legal advice available to defend its rights. It's also about our elected officials making a statement in support of its
residents who will be severely impacted by this bill. Governor Dantes will be leaving office in a few months and while we cannot predict what will happen, we hope integrity and honor will prevail with the next governor. We know this is a difficult decision for all of you. But
please listen to the voices of the residents who voted for you, who will suffer the consequences of what the state just voted on and who strongly support this resolution R7H. Thank you. >> Thank you so much. Our next virtual
caller is Mid Beach Neighborhood Association. State your name, address, and you have two minutes, please. >> Good morning. Uh my name is Oscar Vasquez. I am also with the Mid Beach Neighborhood Association where I chair the beach and water quality working
group. MBNA recently attended a meeting of the beachfront management plan and we appreciate the opportunity the city provided the community feedback. We also want to thank Commissioner
Fernandez who's served on that ad hoc committee and her for his support during that meeting. MBNA has submitted public comments on roughly 10 areas of concern. Our overreaching concern is that the
draft plan lacks vision. It does a reasonable job of describing current conditions, but it does not go far enough in setting a forward-looking strategy for the environmental challenges that
could make our beaches unusual in the short term and over time. As you know, our beach is one of our most valuable public assets, and this plan should do more to bind the county to prioritizing and preserving this
asset. In our view, this is an important opportunity to create a stronger accountability and ensure that beach management decisions match the value of the resource being protected.
Our top concern is sargasm. The plan needs a stronger strategy for surge response, operational scaling during peak periods, and long-term adaptation if conditions worsen.
A second major concern is water quality, including recurring bacteria issues and a need for stronger integration between beach operations and public health protection. We also submitted comments on additional
issues including concession enforcement, breakwater performance, special events. >> I need you to start wrapping up. Please go ahead. >> Yes, I'm done. Dune protections and water sports channels. This item is coming before the commission in the coming months and we remain available to
discuss concerns with any commissioner or their staff. Thank you. >> Thank you. Our next virtual caller is Johan Moore. Mr. Moore, please state your name, address. You have two minutes. >> Good morning, Johan Moore, 717 Jefferson
Avenue. Um, I'm calling to um oppose uh, as you might assume, item R7A, which would authorize the demolition of the Southshore Community Center. Uh, I would remind uh that the
uh planning board um uh no historic preservation board um declined uh unanimous uh declined uh to support that demolition. Uh we continue to believe it is a bad idea and that this infrastructure should not be forced into
our residential neighborhood when other neighborhoods fail to carry their fair share of heavy urban uh infrastructure. Uh, I also object to our item R5T, R5U, and I'm not sure whom Commissioner
Fetinandis was intending to benefit with the suspension of the color review requirements for the exterior of buildings, but speaking uh uh in in um echo of what many of my neighbors have said to me over the years, I believe that many of us who
live in the historic district very strongly support continuing uh outdoor color uh review requirements for paint on the outside of buildings. Uh I am supportive of R7H. Uh and in fact uh would echo um Mitch's
useful language uh rather than getting caught up in the weeds. It really is difficult for the public to keep track of all the negative legislation coming out of Tallahassee, but I think it's a useful shortorthhand to refer to it as live local 4.0. Uh and finally uh in
light of the focus on uh the beachfront and the dunes uh I would encourage uh the commission to fill the vacant position uh formerly held by um Juanita Vajest in the environment and sustainability department in order to
further that work. Thank you. >> Our next caller is Judy Smeiggel. State your name, address. You have two minutes. Judy, unmute yourself. PJ, I think they may have a double collar because we also
have Judith Smiggle. So, let's try that. >> Judith, please unmute yourself. >> Okay. Thank you for waiting. >> Um, I'm You hear me, right? >> Yes, perfectly. Go ahead. >> I am very happy to praise so many
important people and bodies in this area for their advocacy of trying to balance our interest with Tallahassee, the extraordinary efforts of the Mid Beach Neighborhood Association, the Miami Design
Preservation League, the advocacy of uh Commissioner Fernandez, the mayor, other people, we have we're certainly in an uneven battle um to keep local control and I just wish
you all the strength to go up against Tallahassee, which is very difficult. I would love that more and more our community be a beacon of free speech, diversity embraced, and a balance of interest between residents and wise
development. And I thank you all. These are not easy times. That's it. >> Thank you so much. Our next caller is Patrick Brushik. >> State your name, address. You have two minutes, sir. >> Hello. Uh my name is Patrick Brushik. I
live at 1754 Meridian Avenue across from Fi Park. I'm calling uh to thank Commissioner Dominguez for item C4M to discuss moving the swim buoys uh further east to include the nearshore reef and the reef line. And thank you Commissioner Bot for co-sponsoring this
item and really all the commissioners and the mayor for supporting the CC initiative in the past and hopefully in the future um so that people can enjoy the ocean safely without having to worry about getting hit by a boat. The reef line was just listed as one of the new great places uh in the world by time. So
we know there's going to be more people going out there to swim. Uh so it's important that we uh keep this safety initiative uh moving forward as more and more people are going to be going out there to visit it. And speaking of safety, I also noticed there's an item
to discuss the Jefferson bike lanes. And I want to say how wonderful these bike lanes are. Uh they are the highest standard of bike lane safety and support support both bikers and people using e-mobility and giving everyone safe space including pedestrians, bikers and cars alike uh by creating separate zones
for each of them. I hope the city continues to invest in these highquality infrastructure projects that prioritize safety. Thank you. >> Thank you so much. Our next caller is has a screen name of Vashiva's uh iPhone. Please state your name, address.
You have two minutes. Please unmute yourself. >> PJ, let's go to the next. Go ahead. >> Hi. Hi. This is Bachva Catz. I live at 4747 Collins Avenue. I'd like to request that the commission please support item R7H
sponsored by Commissioner Alex Fernandez, which will authorize the city attorney to challenge HB399 if it is signed into law and if it is deemed necessary by all legal committees. This bill interferes with Miami Beach's local local zoning
authority and strips residents of their voices in decisions that directly impact our neighborhoods. Our community deserves to be heard. Please vote yes on R7H to protect Miami Beach and its residents. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Our next caller is Susanna.
Susanna, state your name, address, and you have two minutes. >> Susanna, please unmute yourself. >> PJ, let's go then. Next to Dave. >> Okay. Hello. Go ahead. >> Hello. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Sorry about that. Uh, my name is Susanna Santo. I'm the president of 5600
Condominium Association and a proud resident of Miami Beach for the past 30 years. I respectfully urge you to vote yes on R7H. This resolution is not about filing lawsuit tomorrow. is about preserving
our right to act, our home rule, and ensuring that if and when the time comes, the city has the ability to defend itself and its resident. Commissioner, mayor, you're entrusted with safeguarding critical elements of this community. Our infrastructure,
emergency response, traffic management, and budget. Those responsibilities do not exist in a vacuum. They require authority. Because responsibility without authority is not governance, it's exposure. And today the risk is real. Increasing density, traffic
congestion, strain on emergency services and pressure on already limited infrastructure are not abstract concerns. Their daily reality your residents are asking you to address. This resolution is about standing up for your residents, ensuring that their
voices are not overridden, and that the city retains the ability to act in their best interest. This is your opportunity to make a clear statement that the city of Miami Beach will not relinquish its responsibility, its authority, or its commitment to the people it serves.
Stand with your residents. Protect your city. Vote yes on R 7H. And thank you, Commissioner Fernandez, the mayor, and all the commissioners who have stood with residents in opposing HB399 and defending our community. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Our next caller is Dave Dobler. Mr. Doer, state your name, address. You have two minutes. >> Good morning, mayor and commissioners. My name is Dave Dobler, living at 8000 West Drive, and I'm the chair of the sanitation committee and former chair of
the sustainability committee. I'm here to support C7L, the updated special event permit requirements that enhance sustainability and sustain and sanitation plan guidelines that reduce waste and improve diversion from
landfills. Miami Dade County and Miami Beach has a waste crisis. We are almost out of landfill space and are already putting our trash on trains, shipping it to landfills in Central Florida. Reducing and diverting waste from landfills is not just an environmental
priority. It's a fiscal one. If we don't reduce and divert waste now, those rising landfill costs will ultimately fall on our residents and businesses. Special events can generate tremendous volumes of waste, but are one of the few places where we can actually control
both the input and the output. What material comes in and what happens to them afterward. That makes them a powerful opportunity to reduce waste, improve recycling, and keep plastic out of our waterways. We know this can be done. Ultra Music Festival at Bayfront
Park has shown that with the right planning, execution, and engaging of vendors, large-scale events can dramatically improve waste diversion, and they've won worldwide awards for their sustainability programs. After you vote to implement these new guidelines, it is important for staff to develop the
support systems to help event producers succeed and strong compliance oversight to ensure accountability. I specifically want to recognize the city staff who led this effort, particularly chief resilience officer Amy Nolles and our new sustainability coordinator Emily
Milton. Emily has hit the ground running delivering exceptional work. This is exactly the kind of leadership we need right now. And I'd like to tell the environment and sustainability department, good job. Thank you. >> Thank you. Our next caller is Mark. Mark, state your name, address, and you
have two minutes. >> Hi, good morning everyone. Thank you, mayor and commissioners. My name is Mark Weiss. I'm the founder of Stop Six Flags. I found a blew the viral resident movement representing over 4,500 residents. Uh, the biggest threat to Miami Beach today and the biggest story
on Miami Beach today, according to every news article, is the destruction of our beaches with the Fountain Blue Waterpark. Uh, let's be very clear, what happened at Tallahassee was not preeemption. It was a bill paid for by a single developer with a representative
who doesn't live in Miami who openly admitted that he worked with the Fiboo to draft a bill that overrides all of our local zoning control. And commissioners and mayor, when this gets built, the complaints are going to be much worse than we don't have bingo.
This is going to be absolute gridlock on our Miami Beach. The traffic is going to be disaster. The environmental impact will be a disaster. We got gut punched. Let's be real. We got punched in the gut by Tallahassee, by Jeffrey Sofur, and by
the Hotel Borrero handout. I am going to support R7H because it's the bare minimum. A city has the right to control its zoning, its planning board, its environmental protections, its coastal lines, its historic preservation. This
is basic. We have to defend our home rule. We have to protect our local zoning and we have to put our foot down and say Miami Beach is beautiful because we know what we're doing and Tallahassee from 500 miles away should not be
barreling down legislation paid for by billionaires. It sets an awful president and I want to thank Commissioner Fernandez for taking lead here and fighting so hard. I want to thank Mayor Miner for fighting so hard and we must fight with resolve because it will send a message the next time you think this
is bad. There's much more coming. Every developer is watching with drool coming out of the side of their mouth saying, "Wow, I don't even have to go to those annoying commissioners and mayor and talk to those pesky residents. I can go right to the top." Thank you very much.
>> Our ne Excuse me. Our next caller has a screen name of Zoom user. Please state your name and address, please. You have two minutes. >> Zoom user, go ahead. Good morning. This is Carolanne Alt at 408 West 25th Street. I'm also a member
of the sustainability committee. Um, thank you, mayor and commissioners. I'm calling in to give my full support to C7L special events requirements and guidelines. I support the updates, particularly creating the standardized
template for sanitation plan process. I also would like to draw attention to be mindful of the language that suggests the applicants with a thousand plus participants must assign a paid sustainability coordinator. I suggest
that applicant fees compensate for a designated code compliance field inspector that will monitor and evaluate events to adhere to sanitation plans during events so any infractions can be corrected in real time. Additionally, I
did not see on the agenda um an item for the new commission committee um work water environment resource committee, but I do give my full support of that as well. Thank you so much. Have a great day.
>> Thank you. Our next virtual caller is Miriam's iPhone. Please state your name, address. You have two minutes. >> Hello. My name is Miriam Weiss. I am the co-founder with Mark Weiss of Stop Six Flags at Fountain Blue. My address is
4779 in the Blue Diamond. The residents have been working to fight this monstrosity for 6 months. It has unanimous opposition from everyone that lives in the community. There is no one that wants it on our beachfront. When
you walk on the boardwalk, you are going to be see this 120 ft towering in the air coming all the way wrapping around the building right into the setback lines because now Jeffrey Sofur does not have to follow
any of the basic rules that the city sets out for planning. Even if you wanted a water park, you now even have no say where that water park is going to be, how it's going to be constructed. It's going to come all the way up to the beachfront. It's going to be tremendous
noise. It is up to you. You are the city. You have to lead the way and show the residents that Jeffrey Sofur cannot buy whatever he wants on our beachfront. That democracy still exists. The
residents still have a voice in what happens. And our local leaders and officials get to lead us and decide what should be done in Miami Beach and if it's appropriate and if it's compatible.
Please vote for R7H and please as a city consider all the possibilities whether this is actually a water park and therefore is not permitted by zoning because Jeffrey Sofur is going to sell day passes and
that is not a permitted use. The city should be evaluating all the possible avenues to stop this train that's coming down the tracks and then the next thing that he's going to go for is going to be gambling. >> Thank you, Mr.
>> Thank you. Thank you. >> Our next caller is Vincent. Vincent, please state your name, address, and you have two minutes. >> Vincent. >> Yeah. Can you hear me? >> Go ahead, please. >> Do you hear me? >> Yes. Go ahead.
>> Yes. Vincent Mph. I'm a condo owner at the Sarrento right in 15t away from the proposed water slide. Um, I'm calling in support of R7H. I have to thank uh the
mayor and commissioners u to take to consider uh to cons keep u opposing uh this situation and I want to give you guys just an idea and turn this thing
flip it over and turn it on its other side. I think this bill this carveout is is discriminatory. Just think if you owned a hotel that only had 499
rooms or you had 4.8 acres or whatever the the arbitrary cut offs were that were conveniently fit the fountain blue would would you're going to have to play by a different set of rules.
I believe this bill was discriminatory and it was so bad they had to put a five-year limit on it. So, we hope you guys can don't throw up the white flag and keep doing what's right. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Our next caller has a screen name of iPhone 275. Please state your name. >> Please unmute yourself. Good morning. Can you hear me? >> Yes. Go ahead, please. State your name. >> Hi, this is Chris Carney from the Fountain Blue Trace Tower and Sorrento
Tower. Uh along with everybody else who's already spoken, I totally support resolution R7H. And if if we allow Tallahassee to do this to us now, uh what's going to be next? Is the Eden Rock going to have a a um water park as well? Uh they're going
to have a ferris wheel. uh it's just going to turn Miami Beach into a monstrosity. So, please consider resolution R7H and uh let's try to stand up for our rights. >> Thank you. Uh our next caller is Anna Marie. Go ahead, please.
>> Good morning. My name is Anna Marie Federa de Melo and I'm the president of the Mid Beach Neighborhood Association and I reside at 4779 Collins Avenue. I'm here today in support of resolution R7H and thank Commissioner Fernandez for putting this forward and Commissioner Bot and others that have co-sponsored
this item. What happened last Friday in Tallahassee where the state stripped local authority and disregarded the voice of our community is not proper business and exploring all possibilities is essential to protecting our city and upholding our principles. I thank you for your consideration of this item
today. >> Thank you so much. Our final caller is Andres. Go ahead, please. >> The noise. >> Good morning, commissioners. And I I hear the >> how upset our residents are regarding
>> the water park and the traffic nightmare that's going to be coming having a mini Six Flags on Avenue. It's going to be a nightmare for everybody in that area. But we're fighting to, you know, to have historic preservation board have a say. But when the historic preservation board
had a say to try to keep the Morris slap building uh alive uh and the county voted to place the fire station on Alton Road and Evans, that sort of feels like it got vetoed uh even though they had a say on that. It hurts uh to think that
we are going to um destroy that Morris Lapidus building. You know, I am on the board of OIC Miami which I know you came by Commissioner Bot. you came by, Commissioner Dominguez, you came by. That was a $22 million facility that we built for the community to be able to
have after school programming and programming for the seniors. As a matter of fact, we have Brutner himself doing a blue zone class in the building that's more we're going to take that building and we're going to tear it
apart instead of building on a site that is not here now by a simply by a bathroom and a locker room on Alton Road where the police office where the firefighters actually prefer that site because it's one block away from their current site and they're going to continue to be able to use Flamingo park
for training the track, the field, the pool and everything else. So, >> Mr. You're breaking up, but your time is up. >> Thank you so much, Mr. Was the last caller originally in line. Uh, so we can
conclude Sadnik at this time. Okay, let's uh let's go over the consent agenda. Thank you, everyone. >> Thank you, Mayor. Uh the following items have been separated from the consent agenda. Mayor Miner is separating items C7T
and C7U. Again, Mayor Miner is separating C7T and C7U. Commissioner Dominguez is separating C7J. So, Commissioner Dominguez, C7J, Commissioner Suarez is separating C4P as
in Paul, C7 AF, and C7 AG. Again, Commissioner Suarez is separating C4P, C7 AF, C7 A. Uh, the mayor has not approved the inclusion of any uh addendum item.
Therefore, they will be heard after 5:00. And just for the for the record, uh the consent agenda in these items have uh the following items. The city commission must wave by a 67's vote the requirement for the land use and sustainability committee to review and
transmit its recommendation before reaching before referring each of the following items to the planning board. That would be C4B, C4 C and C4D and C4E. Again, C4B, C4 C, C4D and C4E. So any
motion on the consent agenda would include that >> a motion to set the consent agenda. >> Second call vote. >> So this is to set or to approve >> to approve the consent agenda except for those items that have been separated as announced by the city clerk.
>> So I have a motion by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Vice Mayor Mattel Selenus. All in favor of the consent agenda as as set please say I. >> I. I. >> Anyone opposed? Hearing no. 70 approved. Thank you everyone for calling in and uh
we'll get started with our with our business. Hopefully we can uh get through a lot of items today. I think we can. R7L R7L is regularly monitor beachwalk camera feeds to ID address visibility issues. >> Um I'm sponsoring. Thank you,
Commissioner Fernandez, for co-sponsoring with me. Um, who's going to be speaking on this? Uh, Eric from the administration. This would be our police department. >> All right. Thank you, Chief. And so far so good. As we mentioned on
spring break, I'll give you uh kudos for that. And uh obviously with uh geopolitical issues going on around the world in the Middle East um really we've we've all seen the stepped up presence from our police department. So yeah, again thank you. >> Good morning Mr. Mayor Commission. I
appreciate the uh the comments. Um as you know we've got a robust camera system covering much of the city particularly along the beach and boardwalk. Um total of almost a thousand cameras and almost 2,000 camera views. uh much of those uh cameras are monitored uh in real time through our
Arctic, our real-time intelligence center. Um but there are times obviously when those cameras are used retroactively uh to help us solve mitigate crimes that may occur in and around those those uh camera coverage
areas. Um but you know, it's something that we we do regularly and we'll continue to do. I mean, can we can we qu how do how do you monitor for example that there's no obstructions of cameras? >> So, there's a maintenance program that we have and on a regular basis we have
people that go out uh survey the areas where cameras are installed particularly on on the beach and boardwalk where it's really problematic at times because trees grow um need to be trimmed back to make sure they're not obstructed. >> Okay. Are you comfortable that uh that
is being done and we have enough resources to ensure the cameras are operational and not being obstructed? >> Yes, we we have we do have a line item in our budget for camera maintenance and that those funds used to do just that. >> How are we with uh a full operational
camera system throughout the beachwalk? Uh >> I think there are some gaps still um not because there's not a wish to get it done or desire to get it done. Um the project has been fully funded, but it's gone going on in stages. Um I don't have a timeline as to when that's going to be
fully completed, but I can get that for you. >> Okay. Yeah, let's follow up on that. And uh I guess it came to mind as we heard a number of uh members of the Mid Mid Beach Neighborhood Association. I know they've they've often uh championed the completion of the cameras uh throughout
the beachwalk. So we'll follow up on that. >> We are to get it done, sir. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Mr. Mayor. Commissioner Suarez. Um, >> Chief, have we considered using possible AI solutions to detect when a crime might be happening that you can send an alert to the department? I mean, because
you can't have you can't cover a whole beachwalk unless you have dozens of officers looking at the cameras. >> Yeah. So, we we are we are constantly looking for new technology, emerging technology to help us uh be smarter in how we approach, predict, um, prevent
crime. And so we we do look at this on a regular basis. >> But are we using AI to do that or are you looking into AI solutions? >> We are. >> We are what? >> Looking into AI solutions, >> right? Are you can't close? I mean, >> yeah. Yeah. I mean, I I can give you an
update as to where we are next time I I we have this conversation. Um but we are. >> Okay. Yeah. I'd like I'd like an update next commission meeting. >> Absolutely. >> My fellow co-sponsor, Commissioner Fernandez, anything? No, >> just um it's it's impressive the work
that we're doing with the cameras. Um I know that there's a lot of different areas where we want to expand into into parks for for example like Beayshore Park. Um and the police department has done its part in making sure that the technology was was was implemented as
part of the park design. Um the the technology the I guess the infrastructure that's necessary for other areas of the beachwalk is there. It's just a matter of getting the technology in. >> That's correct. Um, Beayhore Park is one of places that's high priority for us to
get uh cameras in there. I mean, it's such a large real estate, if you will, and we we like to be able to see what's going on there at any given time. You know, one of the things that I appreciate, chief, that I see our city doing now more frequently than what we did years before is that as we're
looking at new spaces, you know, whether it be the Baywalk that we're uh hoping to complete at some point uh or whether it be a completed project like like Beayshore Park, this department has been very forward thinking instead of having
to come in after the fact and run the infrastructure and think about how are we going to keep this safe. This department is planning together with a planning process of of whether it be our public works department or our capital improvement departments or our parks
department, you're working side by side with them to ensure that as we envision new public facilities and new public areas, the department is up to speed with the safety resources that the users of those facilities are going to need. And so I'm for that. I'm very grateful
for this item and proud to support it. I'm happy to co-sponsor it. But most importantly, you know, truly, you know, thank you for being very thoughtful and making sure that as other departments are planning the future of the city, our police department is working on a
parallel path to ensure that at completion you're able to implement the necessary resources. >> Well, thank you, Commissioner. I wish we we the police department could take full credit for it. The truth is we've been in collaboration with all the departments you just mentioned. we're brought in at the very ground floor to make sure that we're we're being smart
about how we think about crime prevention u when these projects are are done. >> Mr. Mayor, >> Commissioner Bot. >> Um so we're heading into our budget planning process, which seems like we just finished one and start another. Um we know that we're likely going to be
facing some hardship imposed by the state. Uh completing this, expanding it, maintaining it. Is this um I guess let's start with completing it. Um is this a function of not enough money to complete it or it just takes even if it's fully
funded it takes x amount of time and we just don't have that yet. >> It's really a time and resource capacity issue we're dealing with more so than I think the funding has been funded for quite some time. So is there an opportunity um to expedite the implementation if we
bring in outside help to subcontract out the installation for instance? >> That's actually part of the the process as it stands today. Um much of the installation and maintenance is subcontracted out. >> So how do we expedite it if that's already happening? I like I guess what
I'm getting at is what do you need from us to get this finished this year? Let's say hypothetically speaking, I >> I'm not sure we need anything at at this time. I'd have to go back and and speak to the folks that overseeing the the deployment of of the uh cameras. I'm not sure we need anything at this time. >> Okay.
>> Can you come back next month and let us know if there if if you don't come back, we'll presume everything's fine, but if there is something, let's have that conversation. >> Sure. >> Okay. Thanks. >> Thank you, Chief. Welcome. Let's
call R7D. >> I I need a motion and a second on the >> seconded by the mayor. >> All in favor of R7L, please say I. >> I. >> I. >> The item is approved. 70. R7 L. >> R7D.
>> I'm sorry, Mary. What? What letter? >> D as in David. >> D. R 7D is uh restoration of Star Island water tower as a fiscal year 27 budget priority. R7D Commissioner Dominguez and co-sponsored
by Commissioner Bot. >> I think this item was a um was on consent. I had put it on for it to be a priority in discussions for the upcoming budget. it was not anything to approve it outright. Um I had a visit with uh
the Palm Hibiscus Star Neighborhood Association and in going through this and having discussions with the city manager and others in the city administration um the water tower is over 100 years old and it has been uh on the to be
determined when we're going to fund fixing it since 2019. And each year it um gets pushed to the side and the cost to repair it get uh increased. It is historic um and it means a lot to the neighbors in the neighborhood. I even
threw out there if they wanted to tax themselves to pay to fix it themselves and they do not. They feel strongly that the city should. So, this item is simply to put it on the list so that when we go through our budget workshops, we can discuss it and decide as a whole if we'd
like to have it um as a priority for 2027. >> Commissioner, is that a motion? >> Yes. So, motion by Commissioner Dominguez, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez. If no discussion, all in favor of R7D, please say I. >> I.
>> Anyone opposed? Seeing none, R7D is approved. 70. >> R7E. >> R7E is implement comprehensive and regulatory schedule C grape management plan. >> Um I thank you mayor. Um
I would like to open and continue this um for another month. Is John here? John Norris? Hi. Do is a month enough time? So, this is something we've been working on internally as well as legislatively with
Amy Nolles and John Norris and uh the chief to really address the fact that um the seag um along our beachwalk are an area that um becomes a repository for people doing unsavory things, whether
they commit crimes then run in there or they're they're camping out there. Um, this is not an effort, and I know I know there's been misinformation out in the community. Um, this is not an an effort to chop everything back and make it look like a pile of twigs. This is a public
safety issue and an, you know, ensuring that the um the plants grow in a healthy manner. Um, so we've had a lot of internal conversations, most recently earlier this week, and what we're what we're going to be doing is um um having
the police identify the hot spots um along the beachwalk and then go out and visibly investigate and we are going to determine if we actually um can fix the issues within the budget that we have currently for these departments. um
versus the original thought which was we were going to need to hire somebody outside to do something. So um with the clerk's uh permission I or whatever the right procedure is to open and continue uh
>> I have a motion to open and continue our 7E to April 22nd by Commissioner Pot. We may >> Can I just >> Great. Thanks. May >> Commissioner Suarez. >> Yeah. Um, I'm not totally okay with opening continued, but you know, I just want to make sure cuz I spoke with Amy
about, you know, my biggest issue with this. And I think Amy actually came back with something reasonable was for for sea turtles uh and nesting season because a lot of these sea grapes do block the light from the street and from
the street lamps, cars. Um, and I want to make sure that that isn't affected. >> That's correct. We've had those conversations that is a top priority as well. >> Okay, great. >> So, I have a motion to open and continue to April 22nd by Commissioner Bos, seconded by Vice Mayor Telenus. All in favor, please say I.
>> I. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Just that's not going to change the vote. Um, is a month enough time or do we do you need two months? >> I I think two months would be helpful to us to do the inspection and then get any quotes that we need to address the issues. I think that'd be important.
>> Okay. So, to May would be is that okay, Ralph? You got So that would be May 20th. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. R7G R7G installed traffic delineators.
>> I just did we take I just want to confirm we took the vote on R7E. >> Uh we were it's all it was a commissioner bought Mattel Selenas open and continue to uh May 20th. >> Okay. Just wanted to make sure because we had a we had a a motion and a second to do that. I didn't know if you
actually voted. Thank you, mayor. Just want to confirm >> R 7G is installed traffic delineators on Alton Road between Fifth and Sixth Street. R 7G. >> Commissioner Suarez. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um I I think all of us have gotten almost like a dozen
emails of pictures where you have these loading trucks that um are parking on the side of the road uh where you're not supposed to park and it's causing huge traffic jams uh along Alton Road just as
you get onto the overpass for 395. Um, and I I believe parking enforcement has gone out there multiple times and I mean every time I go by there, there's always a delivery truck or, you know, there's there's hundreds of residents there. So,
you can imagine all the the the hundreds of deliveries that go to that place and they think that that's okay. So, I would like to see if the city can put delineators there to expressly and explicitly show that you cannot park here. So, I mean, will let me know what you think about that, but right now,
enforcement doesn't seem to be working. >> Will McDonald, director of parking, city Miami Beach. Uh, you are correct, Commissioner. It's, uh, I will say that particular property creates a game of whack-a-ole. So, as soon as we send a detail through there and we clear it out, um, I'll be honest with you, some of the delivery truck drivers who don't
deliver there every day just say, "Hey, I'll take the fine." Um, they take the fine. Uh it would be almost impossible for us to actually move them because by the time we get a a a tow truck large enough to move them, they're going to be long gone. Um the barricades, uh you
know, I'll say it's >> I wouldn't say they're barricades. >> The delineator post uh will absolutely be a deterrent. Um we can I mean obviously from my understanding and I'll kind of defer to our transportation director. I believe that is an F dot
road. So, we do just have to get permission to be able to do that. Um, we have been working with the dockmaster at the property with with mixed results. It started off amazingly. They even called parking enforcement a few times when they told trucks to leave and they would not. Um, so there there began a great
relationship, but I believe as you stated, Commissioner, um, there are uh that is a very dense property and there are a lot of untimed deliveries there. So it will continue to be a challenge moving forward. >> So what do we need to do to put
delineators there? >> Good morning, Mr. Mayor, commissioners. Jose Gonzalez, transportation and mobility director. As director McDonald mentioned, because Alton Road is a state road um to place the lineators would require a maintenance agreement, an
installation and maintenance agreement with them. We've we do those all the time. um we would negotiate with them and it would need to come before this body for execution. Uh and I think that's really that's all we would need be able to install and maintain them.
>> Yes, sir. >> Uh Commissioner Monica Mate. Huh? >> Oh, sorry. Commissioner Fernandez, Commissioner Monica Mate Selenus and Commissioner B. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor and uh Commissioner Suarez. Thank you for bringing this item. I'd love to join uh as a co-sponsor. I know back uh in December
and January, we were getting emails from David Martinez who lives in in the building fifth and Alton um I welcome the change of position from the administration. I know that when I reached out to the city administration
specifically about placing delineators there, I was told and I relayed to my constituent at the time that the city administration believed that it would make situations worse by having cars instead of parking in that striped area.
They would then park on Alton Road and that would create a parking situation on Alton Road with cars. Uh given that the administration now seems to have a different position on what could have been done administratively, I'm going to join as a co-sponsor uh with
Commissioner Suarez on this on this item. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you, Commissioner Fernandez, Commissioner Matteo Selenus, and Commissioner Bach. I just I have concerns because, you know, and I don't mind the delineators, but again, like Commissioner Fernandez
said, and what everyone kind of knows what will happen is that that lane going onto the causeway will be blocked. So, I'll support this today, but if that does end up happening and we can't figure out a way, a better way for them to unload and load and whatever they
need to do, and it does block that lane, then I'll bring an item to remove the delineators because that would be awful. That's the entrance under the causeway and that it'll be a mess. It'll be a mess. So, >> Commissioner Bach, >> um, so can the last time I checked on
this, the administration was not supportive of this because of the, um, the concern about traffic impacts. So, can you guys explain to me maybe Eric, can you explain to me >> how this changed, why it changed? I >> I don't believe that it necessarily has
changed. I as the administration have concerns that if we take away the parking spaces adjacent to the loading dock area, where are those vehicles going to go? >> I I'd like to show a picture of what
what happens. I think it'll give a lot of context um to >> when was that submitted? >> PJ, can you can you put up some of the pictures I sent? I mean, everyone has seen it from David Martinez, and I think it's important for the public to see it.
>> Let's give him one second. >> Sure. >> And I think the way it's situated is if there's delineators there, there's no way that a a truck or I mean some sometimes there's these semi-truckss that >> we know what happens, but where are they going to go now?
>> Well, where they're supposed to, >> which is where >> I think the south side of of Five Park. So if if I >> they're not supposed to be there to buy. >> So I I think we have a delineators are no that's regardless we have a bigger
issue. Um we see it with trucks doing deliveries on main thoroughares during rush hour who choose to not pull into their designated loading spots because either the building says they don't want them blocking the driveway or um the drivers don't want to waste the time
getting in and out of a complicated driveway. We have the Ritz and the decoplage which have been in a Hatfield McCoy situation for years. Um, we have a building that we know is egregiously dense in a in a very dense area already
that somehow approval without taking this into consideration and a doc master who isn't pulling his or her weight. How do we and Mr. manager, maybe this is a conversation
we can bring uh for next month. How do we hold people accountable for doing the very things that the various um zoning laws, planning boards, and other land use committees, um traffic studies,
parking studies are supposed to prevent in advance of these things happening. We have I know Will, you've been working with um delivery truck companies to have them sign pledges um
saying that they understand the rules of engagement and if their their operators violate them then they will be held accountable. Um do we require more doc masters? Do we hold the building management accountable if there are issues like this? I mean this is absurd.
This affects people beyond just the residents of that particular building. um it affects potentially life safety if if there are people backed up and can't get to where they need to go. It's a bigger issue than this particular building. So I I do want to understand
um how the position changed or didn't change because my understanding was that we were not supportive of this. And the bigger issue is um as this becomes a city-wide problem, what are we going to do to make sure that people comply with the rules of engagement of of living and
doing business in our city? Living in and doing business of our in our city, whether it's building a building that is too large for our infrastructure, whether it's um bringing trucks in that are too large for our infrastructure. I mean, bring in smaller delivery trucks. You don't need, you know, Amazon has
these little sprinter vans. Use those. I mean, if you're delivering huge amounts of furniture and somebody's moving in, that's a different conversation, then you get a a delivery permit or something where for from 9 to 4, it's blocked off for that particular delivery. But this is this needs to be once again a
holistic review between departments and, you know, it planning, building, transportation, and parking holistically to come up with a game plan of how we're going to deal with this in our city because we're going to have more new developments, not fewer. I mean, look in North Beach, we're going to have 13
buildings in an 8 by6 block radius. And those are some narrow, desperately congested streets up there. So, I would like to bring an item and Mr. Manager, if you could take point on this for next month uh and have these departments work together and put together a
comprehensive plan of what our options are and what we can do. >> Yeah, Mr. Mayor, I think PJ's ready for the uh picture and I think it's important for the public to see it. And so, you know, right now it already sort of blocks traffic and commissioner brought does raise a good point and they
should people at five park should know that you you cannot have these massive delivery trucks parking on a no parking section of the of the road. So look, I I think um we we can't we can't
obviously I don't think that the amount of education you have given out to a lot of these delivery trucks and the drivers is going to solve that. I mean that's that's just laziness at its finest. And I think with a simple
fix like this, we can alleviate traffic for a an important section of our beach, which is fifth in Alton. Um, and you know, I I think wherever we can step in and and actually make a difference,
um, we should, and I'm not I'm not I'm not saying that we we shouldn't have a comprehensive plan, but right now, this is going on every day. And so this is something we can take an act action on relatively short period of time. Commissioner Fernandez. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh, and I see we
have one of the representatives of our uh, towing companies here. And I I want to know, are we when these car when these vehicles are engaging in these activities, have we actually engaged in towing these vehicles, are we only
giving them citations? What are we doing? >> So, when we have trucks of this size, it does require specialized towing equipment, which uh, right now does not exist on the island. it would require an off island solution. Um, also most of
the time these trucks have somebody that is within a 3 to five minute walk. So they are they'll be there and for example in in one of those photos a truck was unloading but they're walking back and forth. So the minute that a a even if we got a a big rig to 10 ton,
for example, to tow that out, they would just hop in the cab. So uh and and I want to recognize through the mayor Manny Diaz who I see sitting in the in the audience from one of our twin companies because I saw you reacted and I'd like if you could approach the podium as I would love
>> please come to the podium. >> Hi Manny Diaz Tmont to uh Will and I work hand in hand and uh if we need a medium duty we could get you a medium duty but like what he said by the time the medium duty comes down they're already running out. Yeah, but if we know that there is a specific location
that is a recurring nuisance, you know, perhaps it could be kept in close proximity uh to that location, especially the city has property very close to there where it could be stationed or you I'm sure you're very capable to to finding that. But here we
have a recurring nuisance where it is predictable that a location like this you're going to be having these problems, you know, to be in in the vicinity. If he needs a medium duty, we could work together and I could have a medium duty at all times. >> Yeah. Because nothing is going to change
>> unless we drop the hammer. >> 100%. >> You know, and so and so what I don't like is when the administration gives me one opinion and then without notifying me, then all of a sudden the opinion for a solution changes. Now that we have a
different avenue for solutions, Commissioner Suarez, you know, I support you. I join you as a as a co-sponsor of this, but I do think that as we experience more of these types of challenges throughout our barrier island, uh we certainly need you um to
make sure we have these resources available because ultimately, you know, we can issue citations, we can issue citations, we can issue traffic tickets to people and all that type of stuff. That doesn't solve the violation. And what we need is
compliance of the violation in order in order to mitigate the impact. There's a reason why we issue violations. We issue violations because you have a lack of compliance that is causing a domino effect that is affecting other people.
And it's very wonderful. We can give of a parking violation. We can put uh something on someone's driver's license. But what we really want is not to be punitive, but we want to drive compliance and achieve compliance as quickly as possible. And that's where we need your collaboration to address this
nuisance. >> That's how we did it when we first started the freight loading zones back in the days. Now we don't have those problems. If the tow trucks come, take the cars out. We could do the same with the heavy duties. I mean, 100% needs >> Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you. No, I have Commissioner Bach,
Commissioner Dominguez, and Commissioner Suarez. and then Commissioner Magazine. >> Um, so I still there are two questions. Um, I still haven't heard why the position has changed. And then I do have a second question that I'd like to raise.
>> So, as I mentioned, I don't know why the position of our parking director and our transportation director has changed. My position has not changed. We're going to displace a problem from what is not a traffic lane into a traffic lane. So, Manny, I hope that
you're going to have plenty of tow trucks available because we're going to be towing people out of travel lanes on a regular basis. >> So, and if you could allow me to clarify, Commissioner, so this is uh six in one hand, half a dozen in the other. So, um, as, uh, uh, Commissioner Matteo
Selenus talked right now, the trucks are in violation. Our enforcement officers show up, uh, they they write a $124 obstruction of traffic citation plus generally a $500, $1,000, $5,000 right-of-way violation. Generally, we
receive compliance. And I say generally because I would say 90% of the time, um, there is an absolute risk of the trucks just turning on their flashers in the lane of traffic with these barricades and acting like they're invisible. That
is an absolute risk. Um, so I I I want to make it very clear that um this could absolutely push somebody from the striped area, the Gore, out into the lane of traffic and they could just not care. So I don't know what that will
look like. So and I don't think anybody can can can look forward into the future and say now will there be some drivers that will be um deterred from the uh delinear post? Absolutely. There will be some drivers that are deterred because they don't want to be as brazen. Um we
have from the parking uh department we have a freight loading zone next to the building. However, unfortunately the freight loading zone is on west. It's on the complete opposite side. So, the design of this building is the flaw, not anything around it. Um, because if it
would have just if we could pick it up and turn it around, it would be perfect. Unfortunately, >> that goes back to one of my earlier comments. I mean, listen, this was not a small building that just snuck in and nobody noticed. This was went to a public referendum. This was designed up the yin-yang. It's being sold for
bazillions of dollars as beachfront property. The fact that the loading zone is on the wrong side for traffic impacts is offensive. It's it's absolutely freaking offensive. So, be that as it may, I don't know if there's a way to
retrofit that somehow. Probably not. But, you know, that is I as part of this comprehensive thing that I want to work with you on, Eric, that needs to be addressed. There is no way on God's green earth that a building of this magnitude should have a loading dock
that is not in the ideal place and no other building should going forward. So that is a big problem for me. Um second of all, can we not um you know if if enforcement is the issue, why are we waiting for somebody to call enforcement? I want somebody staffed
there during the loading hours uh the loading dock hours so that the second somebody pulls up they are ticketed and and fined. Um I believe most buildings have boards with cups and and and and um
um plans for how loading happens in their buildings. I want the buildings held responsible too. It's affecting their members. It's affecting their residents. So hold the buildings responsible. Is there a way to um increase the penalties for repeat offenders? I mean, this is absurd and it
is if we don't figure out a solution here and now, it is going to become beyond problematic throughout the city. And so, I want every option explored. I want it back at the April meeting a comprehensive plan. I'm I'm I appreciate
the intent with which this was brought. All of us have gotten the same calls and emails and photographs sent. I cannot be supportive now. I think it is going to just displace the problem. I want real solutions in April and I want them to be enacted without the delay of anou with
fot etc. I want to understand how we prevent this going forward. what we can do immediately. I think staffing can happen tomorrow, right? You can have somebody assigned there tomorrow 24/7 if that's what it needs to be. And you know, I don't know how quickly we can get a a big rig tow truck or whatever
available to us, but if that can be as of tomorrow or next week to have on call and and parked nearby, let's get that going. Like those don't need additional time. Um so that's where I am on this. Thank you, >> Commissioner Dominguez.
>> Thank you. Um, so I had also heard the same thing from the city administration that um, having delineators. They worried because we don't own the street and uh, the trucks would be parking in the street uh, instead of where they currently are. Um, and I keep hearing
about bringing these massive tow trucks. Are boots not a thing? Are boots only for cars? Can't we just have the boots and then the trucks can't go anywhere? That's the same as a toe. >> You can. Um, so boots can absolutely um, uh, be done, but it doesn't I I'll say
solve the problem. So, right now, um, we do have advanced penalties with repeat offenders. So, our right of ways can go up to 10, I believe, $15,000, $15,000 for a third offense. Um, which obviously um, you know, that that is where we get
the attention of some of these delivery companies. The challenge of this building right now, there seems to be a lot of unique delivery companies for individuals moving in, individuals buying furniture from this location, this location, having special deliveries. So, this isn't while we do
see the FedEx's and the UPS's and the Amazons, they are starting to um hear us. We've had several meetings with all three of those vendors. Um, this seems to be the larger one-off delivery companies that, hey, I have somebody moving in. So, this delivery truck came
from Colorado or came from New York or came from fill-in- thelank here. And so, we will give them a first time violation and they will never come back into the city again. Um, that is what we're seeing at this current time. >> Can the violations go to the building?
Um, they have a loading zone. They have staff that works there. If they see the truck, they shouldn't be accepting anything until the truck moves to the appropriate place. Can the building be held liable? >> So, parking department doesn't have any
power for private property. I would I would probably defer to our code partners or building to see if that could be done. I'm not sure if that's a thing, but we have no mechanism to to effectuate the receiver. Yeah, I don't believe that
we have a mechanism in the code to currently charge that back to the >> So, what would you need? Uh, a new item for the next commission. >> Probably need a code amendment to tie those violations back to the adjacent buildings.
>> And can something like that can an amendment be made to this item to include that amendment? Mr. city attorney. >> I think what we're talking about is a is an ordinance. So something we would have to look at.
>> What are you proposing? >> Um the city manager mentioned that in order for the building to get a violation for not telling their delivery trucks to move, um we don't have a mechanism in place right now. >> Don't to enforce that and we would need
new legislation um >> to move forward. Eric, don't they have a CUP that they have to follow that has a delivery plan? >> So, not all buildings are going to have a cup, but >> part five does not have a cup. >> They weren't they weren't required to
obtain a CUP. >> Okay. So, this is what I'm talking about. Like, I want in April, I want a comprehensive this is what we can do. This is what we need to amend our code for. This is how we I don't think we're going to be able to solve it on the fly today. I we can definitely do staffing. We can definitely get a tow truck into
the city that can handle this capacity, but in April, I want to have a comprehensive review of these are options. Here's how we amend the code and and address this and and really get ahead of this problem. >> Commissioner Fernandez, >> thank you. And so one of the things I
wanted to to mention just to build upon what my colleagues and the city manager has mentioned is that if we do bring back uh an ordinance uh an enforcement ordinance you know what I what I do think should happen is that the enforcement yes the enforcement that we're doing on the vehicles and the
drivers but the enforcement on the building and require the building rather than to you know put a hefty fine on them that goes to the city to some fund um in in the city's accounts um that the violation, the remedy be
that they have to hire, you know, whether it be offduty police or offduty parking enforcement uh to be their present to do now the work that their doc master is not doing that their doc master is being negligent and dropping
the ball in doing. So now we need to allocate our public resources, the taxpayers resources to do the work that they're not doing right. So the violation should be once we bring that ordinance, Mr. Attorney is that you're found not to be in compliance. Your
building gets a violation, but you just don't write a check. You now have to hire off duty to sit there and do the work that you could have done yourself. >> And if Commissioner Suarez is next, I'm sorry. >> It's okay. Finish your thought. Commissioner M.
>> Thank you. Um, currently when buildings want to hire somebody to trim palms um on their property, there's a right of way permit that has to be obtained because they have to bring their truck. I I you know, they're the guys with the co the hooks and the shopping carts that do it. But
that's not what I'm talking about. I I know a resident had had reached out and there was a whole process where they had to like shut down the sidewalk so they could bring their large truck. Let's have as part of this a a procedure where um if you are bringing in an 18-wheeler because you just moved cross country
that's fine but you need to then schedule that time with the city and if it needs to be um you know we need to have an alternate traffic plan in in place to ensure that we don't have an emergency then then that is that's what has to happen too. Um and you know can
be selective to just super highly dense uh neighborhoods with narrow streets. you know, if it's on a four-lane street, Collins, not necessarily um required, but in this case, in other cases like what will be happening up in North Beach, we need to look at that
comprehensively. So, as you guys all the departments work together to bring back ordinance an ordinance for us next uh next month, I want that to be considered as well. Please, >> Commissioner Suarez. >> Well, I'm really glad this burn on a very robust conversation on on loading
and unloading. Um yeah, look, I I I I I think delineators would be a great way so that enforcement doesn't have to, you know, stand by 24/7 there. I think that, you know, just having it there without delineators kind
of invites these uh tow truck deliveries, you know, they that's probably what they're used to outside of Miami Beach, you know, maybe in Halia or what have you. Um but um I look I I
would love to try this see how it does. I mean we have cameras there and and um and see if it makes an impact because right now this happens every day all day, right? I mean well you know between the hours of like maybe 3 and 7 p.m. So
um I hope that delineators are also part of the plan uh for some cases. Now, you said it's al they're supposed to load on the west side of >> of five park. >> So, we have uh the city already has a
freight loading zone that also belongs to the building. When I say belongs, it's there to service any building that's, you know, within a walking distance that is on the west side of that building because it was pre-existing. In the perfect world, um
yeah, the building would have been flipped and on that side we would have had the entrance into the loading zones off West A. We would have had the freight loading zone uh that is directly north of the road to the causeway um activated. So there would have been enough room to handle I would say at any
one time between the loading zone and the freight loading zone five uh I'll say relatively large box trucks. The challenge is that on the Alton side there is no on street solution. Um obviously that that uh uh that gore that
that hash striped area that is right there outside is there because there's some um for a reason there's some access to I believe some public works pumps uh under there. I'm not really sure. I don't want to speak unintelligently on that. Uh but unfortunately we have no
place to to put additional loading resources on Alton Road right there. >> Have you given any fines so far? >> Oh uh >> did that >> we can I can we can tabulate it but it's going to be in the thousands of dollars, tens of thousands of dollars because we we continue to keep that while we don't
have anybody stationed there all day. That is on our I'll say south of fifth or kind of our southern island route. So we do have team members pass by there on a frequent basis and so every time they go by um they will write the appropriate citations.
I was and again generally compliance occurs while we are there. Um it's it's one of those things that happens I'll just say frequently throughout the island. We show up um we start sighting. If there's more than one somebody generally pulls off but we will at least
be able to site the main offender at that point in time. >> Okay. And and if Jose can step up, what what again? What is the process? You have to get anou with the county >> with F dot >> F dot. Okay. >> It's an F dot roadway. >> And what's the time what's the time
frame on this? >> Um I would give it probably two to two to three months. We would have to come back to the city commission for execution of that maintenance memorandum of agreement. So a couple months
Okay, >> it vice >> mayor. >> Yes, Commissioner Max. >> Have a number of different things I want to address. Uh, agree with the traffic delineators, but what are they aesthetically going to look like? Because I'm working steadfast in trying
to approve the aesthetics of our public rights of way. And my fear is we're just adding these little orange cones or things like that. Could we not why would flower pots placed in that
area not work? >> So the generally they would be the white delineator post with a reflective stripe at the top. Um the challenge with any fixed item would be the access. So we have two different hashmarked areas in this specific area. One is for a fire
hydrant. The other one is for access to um some and I there are these doors for something that's underneath the roadway. I'll defer to our public works director. Um I think the challenge is is those those doors are half in the gore and
half on the roadway. So >> Got it. So but across the board we need to do a better job of having a practical purpose for things but making it more aesthetically pleasing. We need to have more respect for how our city looks.
Right. And and I I'm so frustrated because I've been emphasizing this for years and years and nobody seems to care, right? Nobody seems to care. You You drive up and down Alton Road or 17th Street and there's these silly little
messaging signs. For what? For what? Looks like hell. Okay, we will never fix this problem that we're talking about unless we better design our streets. And I have been sending our staff and administrators
videos for years. And Jose, it was one of the first meetings we had about the loading in West Avenue. And PJ, if you could show two videos that I sent our city administration and code uh just in the
past couple of weeks. This is every single day. And we could have enforcement, but it's going to be a whack-a-mole. Somebody is going to get killed. Should we address this after they're killed? This is a crosswalk
right outside of one of the busiest parks in our city. And we have delivery trucks every single day. Okay, if that was 15 seconds earlier, I took this video cuz you saw a mother like this peeking out past the delivery truck with
a baby stroller and 10 seconds later, a car comes flying down. Is somebody gonna have to get killed before we really address this? This happens every day. Every single day, right? And and saying, "Well, we're gonna have staff towe or staff." That doesn't work. That does not
work. We need to better design our roads to permanently address this. And I've been on it for years and I've gotten nowhere. Okay. I Well, this problem that that crosswalk, I've been working for two and a half years to try and get an elevated crosswalk. What does it say
about any of our initiatives if it takes two and a half years to build a freaking crosswalk, 30 feet wide or 30 feet long? Why? Right? Hundreds of people walk out of there every single day, kids,
families, and it takes three years to build a crosswalk. Right? We we have hundreds of agenda items, but if it takes three years to do a crosswalk, I I saw Commissioner Abbot. Uh she had an item a few years ago about building a new flyover on 63rd Street, and it was right after I I go, "Well, this
crosswalk will take another year." I go, "What are we even doing?" Like like how how can we possibly be ambitious and think comprehensive and and truly game-changing solutions? If it takes three years to build a crosswalk, an elevated crosswalk, what what are we
doing in the city? What? What are we really doing? That video. PJ, can you play the second one? This is every day up and down West Avenue. How can we not have an aesthetic design in the median that prevents delivery trucks from doing this? I took
a video just this day. This is on every block up and down West Avenue. Are we going to get calls from people that are pissed and going, "You know what? I want to run into Pure Vita on West Avenue and because you have these beautiful plants there now I can't. Yes, we're going to
Are we going to get calls from buildings along West Avenue like my own, right? Where they go, h it's a lot easier for us just to have these cars out in the street. Yes, we are. Okay. And we're going to have to be strong and say this is not the right way to go about things.
Okay. We should have planters in the median just like we have in Sunset Harbor. I've been bringing it up for three years. And maybe it'll take somebody getting killed. Maybe it'll take a mother trying to cross in front of an Amazon driver that's there every single day. And we'll go, you know what?
Maybe now we'll address it. I really hope the city can show some proactiveness in addressing this that I've sent around to every single department head for years before it's a result of somebody dying there. Okay. The widening of West
Avenue is five lanes long. People are going there and passing every single day. People pass in the medians. They pass on the right side. I've sent everybody videos. And it's not about having the police out there to enforce because that can't be a constant strategy. We have to have better design
in our roadways. Better design. So this is a permanent solution. So who's who's going to take the initiative and do it? >> Well, uh guys, seriously, not all at once. >> Commissioner, not all at once. I will work with the team and we will come up
with a plan that we will bring back to commission next month. >> I appreciate that. Thank you. >> You know, I'm getting text messages here and it's asked me to ask you, Tom, for for specifically Five Park, doesn't DRB or HPV for that five park
have have orders to address delivery? >> Yeah, they're Well, I need to check the orders and I did double check. I misspoke, Commissioner Bot. they do have a cup and that likely will have conditions regarding loading and delivery. The DRB order may also have
conditions on loading and delivery, but since they have a corresponding CUP, it's likely going to be in that. One other thing I wanted to mention, and I I mentioned this to the manager, is that with regard to the loading area, they do have a very robust interior loading dock
that's accessed from Alton Road. The reason that it was placed on Alton Road is because that was really the only viable location. The problem with the southside is that it fronts directly on MacArthur Causeway, which is for all practical purposes a freeway entrance.
The problem with the west side fronting West Avenue, is that the future pedestrian bridge, the downs slope to provide access to that bridge that goes over West Avenue comes all the way down the west side of the building. And then on the north side, that was the main
entrance that has the interface with the park. But with that said, the uh it was anticipated that the trucks were supposed to easily pull right into that very large loading dock area. And so there was never an intention for trucks
to be parked on Alton Road. >> So how come they don't do that? Sorry. >> Go ahead. >> That's how come they don't do that? Why don't they go into the loading dock, which is designed for them to >> So pull in. Part of part of the challenge is every time I've gone down the loading dock, you will see um single
occupancy vehicles with inside the loading dock. Also, the the way that the loading dock is structured, it does require I will say a CDL driver to have a certain skill set. And I am sure that there are some so it would require you to pull head in and then back your
vehicle up into one of two bays that that exist um while inside the area. And um I I will say that there's probably, you know, in my experience, certain CDL drivers that have that skill set and there's certain that may not feel comfortable. >> So So now that they now that we've
confirmed that they do have a CUP, can the property owners be held responsible for these traffic violations? >> Yeah, if there's violations that are issued, we can certainly issue a cure letter and then bring them bring them back for a progress report. a will I
>> and city manager you see this like by the way it shouldn't take this to to to get it going you know because we've been getting emails like this for the last 6 months and for now all of a
sudden you know the staff to be like well this is what you know you have seven lay people telling you that something needs to be done and you know we've been telling you this for a long time. It shouldn't take like a a little delineator item to spur on an hour
discussion on >> insane >> on on what to do about traffic because this happens every day and it's very frustrating. And you know, look, I I I think it's I think it's ridiculous that the staff isn't ready to really
handle this head on because the number one issue in Miami Beach is traffic. And so when you have blatant violations and your staff didn't even know it, it had a cup and that we can hold hold the the property owners
accountable. You know, I mean, come on. I think if we would have known that and we would have held them accountable, I bet you those people at Five Park would would would make sure that every single delivery driver that comes through is either making sure it goes parks in the bay and doesn't block traffic and
doesn't go on the the gore. Um, so look, get your get your get your stuff together, Eric. Okay? Because this is obviously a big issue for us and obviously we you have seven of us really encouraging whatever we you need to pass legislation
for for you to do your job effectively. It we're willing to do that, but this is a big issue for us and for the residents. >> And I just want to >> Commissioner Fernandez. >> Yeah. And I and I just want to say, you know, Commissioner Magazine, >> you know, I value so much what you're
saying about the aesthetics of our city. >> It's so important the on the ground experience uh that our residents have, that our visitors have. That's they're not going to look at the details of everything except what is on the surface.
And that's what they're going to remember when they go back home. And I think we truly, even though we live in a beautiful city, we truly need to go above and beyond making sure. Yes, we're going to put delineators. We're going to do some other type of infrastructure, but just don't throw delineators there.
Do it. Pay attention to the detail and the final product that people are going to be seeing and remembering. And lastly, Commissioner Magazine, I share your frustration about the crosswalk. Um, Vice Mayor Matel Selenas and I when she worked in in my office, you know, we worked I think it took us two years to
get or two or three years to get a crosswalk on Meridian Avenue by Lincoln Road. It was the most frustrating thing. I didn't understand how is it possible for me as a commissioner for us to take two years to get a
crosswalk a simple crosswalk and for it to take an elected official now you commissioner magazine in your neighborhood where you're trying to make conditions safer for mothers and families and children just pedestrians in general for it to take this long I to me then like
then why are we commissioners if we cannot push an agenda for the benefit and the safety of those who have placed their trust in us, then why do we hold these offices? So, you know, I I I support my
colleagues, Commissioner Dominguez uh and Commissioner M and their efforts and there being an enforcement ordinance with real teeth uh in there. uh Commissioner um Suarez and his initiative to to to bring forward these delineators and Commissioner Magazine
and the finished product and the amount of time it takes on this and I'm happy to support all of you and second your item because this truly just speaks to just a bigger effort in our city which is not have things take so long and do things that you know with attention to
detail. And also, by the way, if we go to you guys with a problem, a problem with UN, you know, deliveries and we're coming to you guys with delineators, well, don't tell us, well, no, we can't do the delineators. Give us an alternative. Don't just say no. It's so easy just to say no. But if if the
administration knows, well, there's there's a development agreement or there's a conditional use permit and there might be other avenues through which to achieve your objective. Well, guide us in that direction. Commissioner Magazine, then Commissioner Bot.
>> Few things that I'd uh like to ask the administration to consider when we're looking at this. Uh if we're thinking comprehensively, if you look at a lot of our curbs, and again, this sounds silly, but this is the surface level experience for so many visitors or residents, they
are completely destroyed, right? And I see it firsthand. It's because some of these large trucks have such a wide turning radius that they go around fifth uh 15th Street right by the Valagio is a great example, right? We spend so much money to take care of the aesthetics of
our city and then these large trucks are destroying it. Uh right outside on Collins Avenue uh by Council Tower South, it's the same exact thing. These curbs are destroyed by these large trucks. Uh perhaps we do need to look at some ways to encourage or I I hate the
word, but penalize the larger trucks and really encourage the smaller uh trucks that are more compatible with our city. Um I want to bring up something specific, but I'd like an answer. The exit of West Avenue right onto the MacArthur Causeway. Um, it's always been
a very complicated intersection, I guess, compounded with uh the possibility of having that uh crosswalk project going on, but right now the it's essentially split between the
the north and south lane, the entrance on West Avenue and the MacArthur. There's about 12 traffic cones that are there, right? And what what is the purpose of that? Why is it there? Again, it's because we have a
poorly planned road where I mean, am I crazy? Nobody knows what I'm talking about. It's literally the exit of our city. People have to come and enter every single day. There's 12 traffic cones right there. Where are our area managers? Who Who are they? What do
they do? Why do they not drive around looking at issues like this all day? Why does our neighborhood affairs community not driving around golf cart highlighting this issue? For a year, we've had 12 traffic cones for no rhyme or reason at the exit of
our city and the entrance of our city, right? West Avenue and MacArthur Causeway. And I'm getting a bunch of blank stairs. Who's responsible? This is the nobody knows. Nobody knows. But everybody will drive by them for years and years with no accountability. Why are there 12
traffic cones at the end of West Avenue exiting on the MacArthur? Thousands thousands of employees drive by there every single week. Wh why do we have them? Who can answer that? All right. I I don't want
you to, right? Because I get that you want to take one for the team and accountability start stops at the top. I get that. But this should be individual department heads. Somebody's
department is responsible for them. Who? How is that possible? H how is that possible? At the exit where thousands of people, tens of thousands of tourists go out every
single day. It looks like hell and nobody knows why. Nobody knows why they're there. John >> Commissioner, I'll find out immediately. I'm not familiar with the exact location, but I will get you an answer. >> When we say the exact location, I'm not
trying to be pompous or an ass here. This is the exit to our city, right? The exit that thousands of people, we don't have a 100 exits to our city. We have three main arteries, four main arteries. This is one of them.
And there are 12 traffic cones for no the reason why they're there is because the roadway is so poorly designed. But instead of having long-term structural fixes, we'll have a grouping of traffic cones. And if it weren't for
this for an elected official to say what what are we doing here and nobody knows it would be there for the next 10 years, >> right? like how do we have all these department you guys make and gals make really good money an area manager we just hired a whole team of them
neighborhood affairs right these should be the people dayto day just going around our city and saying that looks off I'm going to find the person to fix that looks off I'm going to find the person to fix that what do they do I
have my phone full of the detour signs that are thrown in bushes they're on the bridge of Sunset Harbor. They're laying down on the street. How can we have thousands of employees going around our city every day, whether it be the city
manager or a sanitation worker or anybody in between and not highlighting that and saying that really looks off, we need to do better. >> That's I I know why. >> Commissioner B was next.
Um, so we know there are violations at this building and we know they have a cup. Can we have them can we get them a notice to cure um and to appear at the planning board for the next planning board meeting?
>> Yes, there's a minimum 15-day notice when you issue a cure letter. Um, I can try to have that issued and get them to the planning board for their April 7th meeting. If we can't meet that minimum notice requirement, then it would be the May 5th meeting.
>> Okay. >> Commissioner Sars, >> I was going to say something I probably should not, but I understand there's public comment. >> Is there public comment? >> Our first is a public hearing. >> Is there public comment? >> Somebody calls, somebody wants to call
in, I say we will. Okay. So, we're gonna do the people outside and then I'll call you in. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> I'll let Carla go first. She's here. >> Okay, Carla. >> Oh, it's it's related to >> Hold on, Carla. Come on in. >> Oh, sorry. Carla Probus. I live in 20th in Alta now. Uh, but I wanted to say I
used to live south the Fifth and I go down there quite a bit to go to Smith and Winsky. Everyone knows that. And Commissioner Sues, you had an item last week and or last month. It was about the uh timing of lights and us taking over
work from the county. And I just want to mention also the problem that's here at this intersection is six, fifth and fourth street. I know they I got the crosswalk put in fourth street that is all out of time. So I think that also causes the backup. You know sixth and
fifth were in time. It would also help with the flow. Okay. So, I want to bring that because I know it ties in with your other item you brought in last month. So, thank you. >> Thank you, Carl. >> Thank you. Our first public caller, virtual caller is Susanna. Susanna, state your name, address, and you have
two minutes. >> Susanna Santoro, 5600 Collins Avenue. My comment is regarding the delivery companies. Um, if the city has not been able to get a grip on commercial delivery companies, the solution cannot be to shift enforcement onto
associations and residents. All in the financially responsible for actions that they neither employ nor control is just unjust and misplaced. Enforcement should instead target the delivery companies directly with meaningful fines and consequence not the properties that they
service. And I do agree with Commissioner Magazine that safety must be addressed. But again, penalizing residents for content they cannot control is not fair or effective solution. Thank you. >> Thank you. Well, you know, Tom, she does bring up a good point. What What is the
argument there where, you know, sometimes the the HOAs are oblivious to I mean, who who's really at fault here? And maybe that's city manager question, but you know, I mean, because right now we continue to find
tens of thousands of dollars that building, yet every day it continues to happen and there's no compliance. So >> in terms of enforcement um if they're in violation of either a land use board
order, CUP order um that is something that we can enforce. Now in terms of how the HOAs deal with their violations internally that's something that's not something that we could speak to, but we could certainly enforce what their
approvals are any conditions of that. And to Susanna, that building was built with the understanding that they were going to follow the rules and that they were going to enforce their delivery trucks to follow the rules. And so, uh,
they went into an agreement with that with the city to do that. So, sorry, I'm going to keep continue. >> So, our next caller is Alex Himenez. Go ahead, Alex. Alex Hanes, Bell Isle. I'm calling uh
because this happens here on Bell Isle. And I also have an idea for you guys. Uh as we know, the Standard Hotel is next door and you are diverting traffic uh right now because of the undergrounding of the water utility. So Venetian the
Venetian causeway is blocked. So when that happens, they bring everybody here along, you know, in front of the standard hotel and that's for all the traffic to exit. talk about exiting our city and the beauty of exiting our city. The standard hotel has two or three trucks, you know, at a time delivering
stuff. Can you imagine what it looks like here during rush hour where there's a lot of traffic? People are coming into the city and they're coming out of the city and there's three huge box trucks in the middle of the way. That wouldn't be allowed if you know it was on the
Venetian causeway. But why is it allowed on our little street? That's not to say that it's the standard's fault. I think this is the city's fault. You know, I think an idea for for everyone here, I think you we've had like I've heard a lot of great ideas is, you know, there
needs to be a place for these trucks to go and there's plenty of parking spaces. You know, I know that parking is limited, but three or four or five or six can be converted to a freight zone for the standard right right in front. There should be some more proactive
creative ideas with the real estate that we have like our parking spaces. is I think Commissioner Magazine was totally correct. We should with all the employees the city has, there should be a looks off person that walk that drives around and finds uh opportunities and
create creative ideas uh to fix things, paint curbs, uh suggest ideas. But I definitely think converting parking spaces is is an easy win near Five Park, near the standard, all over the city because people do need
deliveries and if you're a delivery driver, you need to stop somewhere and you need to park. So, we should be converting more parking spaces to freight zones and not just for one truck, but for three or you know, two or three. >> Thank you, sir. >> Our next caller is Jane Crup.
>> Go ahead. You have two minutes. Hi, Jane Crop 1390 Ocean Drive. You all know me from the parking department because I call about 10 times a day. And the parking department, you know, they're doing the best they can, but it really is a cat-and- mouse game with these drivers and they know it. We have a very
limited amount of staff to get over there. But, um, it's a city-wide problem. And you can see the beginnings of where has this problem started? It's this big highrise. The big high-rise is creating density, creating the need for
more deliveries. And the city needs a city plan, overall city plan of how to integrate the higher density that's coming. If you want to encourage higher F and Washington Avenue, you need to have a loading uh plan citywide. And
part of it is restricting the size of trucks. We don't have a terminal like they have in New York where they all the big trucks don't come in because they can't maneuver the streets. So, we're we're heading towards this conflict of more density and safety because the
trucks are very unsafe, especially I'm here on 14th Street and Ocean Court. A man was killed by a huge truck trying to make a three-point turn. No, no truck over 30 ft should be going east of Collins Avenue. We need some
rules. We need a plan and I encourage um the traffic department to get with this and the police and the parking department to get together. I agree with what the commissioners are saying that right now we have an unsafe condition where yes, tourists are are walking in
between huge trucks on 14th Street near the beach. That's not acceptable. If you're going to do your laundry in your hotel from Broward County in a tractor trailer because it's a dollar cheaper for the water, that's not a common sense solution. Use a local laundry that has
vans. They're available. We by not allowing these huge trucks coming from long distances. One more second. Um we encourage local businesses with vans and local deliveries. So, it's a win-win if we can have some city planning around this as well considering the density
that's coming. Thank you. >> Thank you. Our next Hold on, let me Our next virtual caller is has a screen name of callin user 4. State your name, address. You have two minutes. >> Good morning, mayors and commissioners.
My name is Matthew Volanov. My address is 125 Jefferson Avenue. I remember many years ago at the fifth and al site there was a lowrise medium density project that was approved. It was called the wage. It would have brought sixtory
buildings to that site with much needed market rate apartment housing for residents of the city and area neighbors actually came and fought it saying that it was going to be delivering too much traffic uh to the site. And so it's kind
of funny now I look up and I actually see the fifth and alpha tower at over 500 ft. And here we are now a decade later and the actual issue is that there is tremendous traffic impacts being caused by this tower. And the narrative
that it would just be empty and people contributing to the coffers of the city and not living here actually doesn't appear to be necessarily true either. But remember the formula for success many times is lowrise medium density in cities. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Our last virtual caller is David. David go ahead please. >> Uh hello. Can you hear me? >> Yeah. Go ahead. State your name, please. >> David Wallock. I seem to sound like a bit of a broken record as do many of
these callers, but uh deliveries are a part of hotel business. They are a part of restaurant and cafe business. And Ocean Drive from 5th to 15th Street is a
commercial district. It is not a residential district. It is filled with hotels. It is filled with restaurants and mixed retail. They all require regular deliveries virtually every
single day. Not just one truck, but each business requires probably five different trucks. And if large trucks uh cannot get in, then they have to use four small trucks. And so we're
propagating the problem by closure of any of our main streets, including Ocean Drive, and throwing that problem onto Collins Avenue, plus valet, plus ride
share Ubers, plus multiple multiple delivery trucks per block. And the further you put these trucks from the delivery point, the more truck, you know, uh, uh, hand truck back and forths
have to happen and then the more time those trucks have to stay. It's a domino effect by closing main arteries which were not designed to be closed. So please consider all of the multiple
domino effects and collateral damage that we are creating ourselves by poor planning and thinking that we can close a major artery and it not seriously affect major arteries that are attached
to it. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you. >> Uh Mitch, >> uh Mitch Novik, 901 Collins Avenue. I agree with the last caller and Jane Crup. Uh when you close Ocean Drive, you create a dangerous condition. My street
becomes a uh uh traffic cesspool of absolute gridlock. So I would urge you to uh keep the traffic flowing and the way to do that is not not disrupt our traditional urban traffic grid. Thank you.
>> Thank you, mayor. That concludes. Okay. Okay, I believe we have a motion and a second. >> We do. We have a motion by Commissioner Suarez, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez. Commissioner Fernandez will be listed as a co-sponsor. >> Thank you. >> Let's call a vote. All in favor of R 7G, please say I. >> I. >> I. Anyone opposed?
>> Item is approved 70. That was item R 7G. >> R7S R 7S approved strategic plan 2026. Commissioner Magazine. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And Mr. City Manager, I I'll turn this largely over
to you, uh, but it's really just um a good governance method and while I love that this commission gets down into the details like we just did today, right? Because that is the importance of local government. It is when you walk outside of your house,
>> what you experience, whether it be the safety of your roads, the cleanliness of your streets, whether your city is safe during March for spring break, uh whether your streets are aesthetically pleasing or not. Uh those are the meat and potatoes of everyday day-to-day
operation of a city. But we also need to think comprehensively a and oftentimes I think our way of governance tends that we focus solely on some of these day-to-day issues and uh don't take a step back take a breath and figure out
those macro issues as well and the decisions that we make are often piece meal together and lack uh being part of a broader context and vision for a comprehensive plan for our city. So this is essentially setting some of those parameters. Now, that's not to say that
we can't deviate from that. If uh uh if we have a comprehensive plan or vision, something is outside of that, perhaps we take a step back and explain why we're doing something that deviates from our comprehensive vision. Uh but Mr. City Manager, I'll turn it over to you about how we're going to essentially lay this
out and then how we'll govern uh within the context of this. >> Thank you, Commissioner. through the mayor. Um this is uh obviously a very important discussion. Uh we prioritize
how we want this organization to be run every year through the budget process, but a document like this is really taking us out further multiple years. Um, I liken this to if you're in an
oldtime boat and you had 40 people who were rowing, each stroke of the ore is important, but if you all don't know where the point in the distance is that you're trying to go to, it becomes very difficult to move
that boat forward in a positive direction. Um, this particular document is the culmination of input from the mayor and commission over the past year.
Um, it does obviously build on what we've done historically. Our city of Miami Beach's first strategic plan was established pursuant to resolution 2006 26341
and was updated in 2015, 2019, and 2023. Um, this particular document remains committed to our mission of providing excellent public service and safety to all who live, work, and play in our vibrant tropical historic
community. It outlines our organizational values to maintain Miami Beach as a world-class city, to work as a cooperative team of well-trained and empowered professionals, to act with ownership and
authority to reach exceptional outcomes, to expediently serve the public with dignity and respect, to conduct the business of the city with honesty, integrity, and dedication. We are ambassadors of goodwill to our residents, visitors, and the business
community. And we treat our citizens, staff, and each other with professionalism, kindness, and collegiality. We have a number of strategic vision areas, a vibrant city um where our
objective is to build on our internationally recognized reputation by balancing tourism and development initiatives to enrich the quality of life and vitality of our neighborhoods, schools, and commercial areas. Safe city where our objective is to
build resident satisfaction through safety, cleanliness, parks, and modern codes. our resilient coastal city where we our objective is to protect and enhance our natural and build environments through
leading edge resilience infrastructure initiatives and investments in support of the longevity and sustainability of our community. A connected and engaged city where our objective is to embrace a multimodal
philosophy to encourage non-motorized mobility options to reduce congestion and provide enhanced connectivity to our neighborhoods, schools, employment, special events, open spaces, businesses, and attractions.
a smart city where our goal is to create a high quality and efficient governance services and employees. Mr. City Manager, if I could uh maybe for the best usage, I explain is this
the result of the retreat that we did uh this past year. Okay. Yes, this is the result of a two-day retreat with the um >> six of you. Obviously, uh Vice Mayor Matteo Selenus was involved but not in
her current role. Um but obviously this is the uh consolidation of a lot of discussions and a lot of um you know thought-provoking exchange >> and where will this be publicly visible
and is this already locked in and set in stone or is this kind of a uh dynamic document that we'll be able to essentially um change or uh massage as we go along. >> So this is adopted by resolution. It can
be changed by resolution at any point in time. Um this would inform our budgeting process and this would inform the day-to-day direction that I give to the teams on how to
deliver the best results for the community. >> Is there anything that almost adds uh acts like a safeguard? I'll give an example. Let's say we want to one of our strategic goals and priorities is to make a more walkable pedestrian-friendly
city and then somebody proposes legislation uh without giving a concrete example but just flies in the face of that right really takes uh uh that that will result in going the exact opposite. Will there be some sort of flag or
discussion that'll say, "Well, our strategic priority is walkability, but this is flying in the face of that." So, in our memos, um, in prior iterations, we've always tried
to incorporate some of our strategic goals and initiatives into what we're formulating as we're putting the information forward. Um, we we've transitioned a little bit away from that. Uh, I think that's probably because we haven't done a full-blown
refresh since 2019. Um, but I would like to get back to that so that we could help the commission uh dovetail initiatives with the strategic plan. >> So, I guess I'll turn over to my colleagues and not that I have the power, but uh, Commissioner Bot, but are
we going to discuss what this is or are we just going to kind of adopt? Uh who know commissioner bot >> um you know over the last number of years through um impetus from residents or commissioners at the time there have
been things added to um the the blue sheets the the cover memos about fiscal impact or um is it a resident's right to know or whatever. Could we um add a thing like a little check box to those cover memos say does this align with an
init initiative? If yes, which one? So that we can that's a quick reference point that we can just keep ourselves accountable. >> Absolutely. If that's the commission's desire. I think that's >> Is that something we have to vote on or >> we could propose an amendment to to
this? I'd like to propose an amendment that the cover sheets incorporate a a a place to indicate whether or not um the item being proposed aligns with one of the initiatives and if it does which one it is. It doesn't mean that it doesn't it
doesn't mean that it is a bad item if it doesn't. It just helps us keep a frame of reference >> incorporation of key performance indicators. >> Yeah. So that's the motion if there's a second.
>> Yeah, I'll second. >> Okay, let's call a vote. >> This is item R sevens as amended to include a section uh moved by Commissioner Bach, seconded by Commissioner Magazine. All in favor of R7S as amended. >> Please say I.
>> I. Anyone opposed? Hearing none. R sevens is approved as amended. And just if I may through the chair for clarity, the the box to be checked will be whether the item aligns with or whether the item affects because there may be
items that don't align with. >> Right. Um I think it would be does it does it affect >> does it is it related to >> is it related to is a good way and and then which one it relates to. >> Okay. Very good. Should we do that, commissioner, or is it maybe just ask
for a flag if it adversely uh impacts? >> I I like having sort of the the benchmark of, oh, look, we're doing another thing that aligns with one of our strategic priorities. R9X >> R9X is discuss take action naming rights
opportunities to fund capital projects R9X >> Vice Mayor Mattel Selenus >> so this is going to be an interesting discussion I I'm guessing um I want to explore possibilities for our city to
reach out and see if there's any opportunities for naming rights or advertise advertising opportunities for some of our facilities here. And I think at one point we had that um I believe it was maybe Norwegian cruise ships. They
offered us $11 million to co-ename the um convention center for maybe five years. Was it Mr. Manager? >> I would ask our marketing communications >> Melissa please join us >> team to talk about it. Uh, sure. Melissa Berier. Um, it was a
10-year deal. >> Um, and ultimately we turned it down. The commission turned it down at the time, which I think was a bit of a missed opportunity. And I think we should explore that again, especially considering we're trying to cut cut and maybe we need to instead increase
revenue in certain ways. For example, I learned that in Miami Dade County, one of their parks, the underlying park was sponsored by Chewy, the dog food brand. um or it's they sell more than dog food, but you know, maybe we could approach Chewy for some advertising. Maybe they
can, you know, wrap a park in a banner. Um and and my biggest issue actually is that, you know, I I want to one of my budget allocations that we're going to discuss in May is the Flamingo Park um uh football field, soccer field right
there. And in order for that field to be returfed, it's going to be $1, I think, $3 million. And so what if we reached out to Adidas, for example, and we said, "Hey Adidas, you're doing multiple events in our city. FIFA is big this year. Why don't we do some type of
naming opportunity where Adidas names, co-enames our Flamingo Park Track, and gives us the 1.3 for a couple years and we call it the Adidas Flamingo Park Track." So many ideas. And the reason why I did this as a discussion item and not sent it to committee was because I
wanted to have the discussion here, talk about it with our staff and have them come back and give us some ideas of appropriate locations. Um, so that way it wasn't clogging up committees and and and and kind of eating up time. Um, I
want to see what everyone I want to take everyone's temperature and see how we all feel and see if we can get started on something. >> Mr. Mayor, Commissioner Fernandez. >> Thank you, Mr. mayor and I'll say traditionally I'm I am not a fan of having names throughout our cities. It
comes with unintended consequences at time at times. You know you might enter into an agreement with an entities whose values in the future you might not realize might not necessarily align with the public values and the public policies of the city. However,
notwithstanding that, we're in a very different time and place today than when we were four years ago when Norwegian Cruise Lines came to us with a proposal uh to name the convention center. Today,
we're facing a potential shift in revenues, uh potential reform uh to our source of funding for the operations and the maintenance of important facilities to our city. And because of that, I do think, Madame Vice Mayor, it is indeed
prudent uh for us to be exploring what opportunities may be out there. Doesn't mean that we're necessarily going to engage in those opportunities. But if it's the right opportunity, uh then it's only responsible for us uh to be
considering uh those potential partnerships. Not all of them will work. I know in the past, Melissa, we had a company, >> correct? >> Uh do we still have group? do not have that company anymore. >> We don't >> and we don't have a sales team, >> right? also add >> but I mean we can try our best but we
are not a sales team you know um but maybe we can get together with economic development um and do our best but there are specialized firms that do do this but of course it's comes with a cut >> right but I do I I do think you know and and to your point the communications
department um you know handles communications marketing but you guys don't do media sales you don't do sales for bus benches you don't do sales for trolley wraps you don't do sales for exercise equipments. Uh, and we shouldn't be
engaging either in sales of of naming rights. Um however I do like the idea of approaching this through an outside entity that does have uh those those contacts those relationships knows how
to negotiate uh a a really worthwhile financially worthwhile uh term and agreement for the city. Um so you know whereas four years ago I would have completely been against this. I think that the shifting landscape uh that we
may be potentially uh facing if 60% of the state's voters make a constitutional amendment to property taxes, which could foreseively happen over the next year or so. Um it it makes it prudent to be ahead of it and be engaging in these conversations. I was happy to support
your motion. >> Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner. >> Yeah, I Commissioner Magazine, >> I'll echo those thoughts. I don't want to tie ourselves into anything. Uh I would have historically been against it as well and I do want to maintain some
sort of decision-making authority while not micromanaging there. There could be some good opportunities. You know, the Flamingo uh stadium by Adidas. I I don't think that's overly offensive or something like that, but again, I don't want to micromanage, but I do want to uh not
just kind of give the green light sign off to wave all of these things in. I I'll offer up our first possibility. I I'll offer $500 for the magazine orange cone removal capital project uh across the city. So,
>> commissioner bot. Um, so I have historically been dead set against this. I share my colleagues open to openness to um, consider what's out there. I'm actually very leerary of having an outside organization go out and sell the
city because for them it's revenue and I think this needs to be curated with um, careful consideration of what the property is and who the sponsor could be. I would like to actually pivot this possibly to a different approach. Um, we
have increasingly and Rick, I'd need you to tell me how how we can do this um, legally. Um, and maybe you don't have an answer at your fingertips because it's a weird I don't know if if other cities do this. We have increasingly mega weealthy residents in the city and
in other cities we we see people underwriting arts and culture institutions, school playgrounds, uh public playgrounds, improved waterways, all things that will be dramatically affected um if, god forbid um we lose
our property tax and potentially our business taxes. So, is there a way to set up an a an employee, an office, a firm to basically be a municipal fundraiser
to the way that you know, you've got um fundraisers for other notfor-profit organizations to fund initiatives to take up um uh maintenance costs for existing
facilities. ities that is not selling naming rights but is is a different approach to this >> because I I would be kind of much more interested in that. And this is a a a target demographic that is usually not
or is is usually new to the city. Might not be super engaged yet with with the community because they're here some of the time, not all of the time. uh doesn't know the history of what what gets valued and what is a challenge and it's a way to um engage with them and
and um have them build relationships in meaningful ways. >> Sure. In fact, one of your colleagues uh several months ago had had discussed with my office the possibility of some kind of a fundraising uh 501c3.
I believe that this was done during uh Mayor Lavine's administration. Um and I think that it was shut down eventually because of some concerns. So uh the your colleague did not pursue this as a result of some of the concerns. But we can certainly revisit the idea again,
especially given the current economic climate. Maybe there's some guard rails that we can come up with to ensure that the that the issues that were um identified back then do not >> The city at the time had one Miami Beach which was a foundation that was set up um the the uh city commissioner I think
authorized the city attorney's office to work on setting up a foundation uh on behalf of the city and then that foundation had a board of directors uh I believe you know the late commissioner Malikov and a number of other members
from the day is uh were on that board of of directors and specifically it focused on um you know contributions that were made by by people throughout the community uh and then the reinvestment of those you know into projects that
then the city wouldn't have to to to fund. And maybe, you know, if if we can't do a nonforprofit again, maybe we have a development person uh in in the city that can work on, you know, if someone wants to work on improving a
park and we have, you know, we have it set as a goal to make, you know, improvements in a park or do an improvement somewhere in North Beach and there's a new business that's coming in or there's a new resident that came in that wants to contribute towards that,
you know, someone that's making those relationships with those stakeholders. Um so that then you know we can pursue that money even through the city and we the city every once in a while we accept contributions you know we can consider a resolution accepting a private
contribution and allocate that and dedicate that for a specific purpose. And so maybe that's something that we could explore is bringing in a development person and maybe part of that person's compensation doesn't have to be, you know, coming out of the general fund. Maybe, you know, it's a
structure where, you know, they get a percentage of what they fund raise, which is, you know, very typical a lot of times in the nonprofit world. So maybe that's something we can explore. >> Yeah. And I just to be clear, I I this is not Relentless for Progress. This is not a pack. This is this is a um this
would be you know sort of a high-end bespoke um um fundraiser the way as you mentioned not for-p profofit organizations have um and use very effectively and it's long-term relationship development and um I think
it would be a very interesting way to approach this. >> Um so I don't know if that's an amendment to this or becomes a separate item. >> I think it's a separate item. I think if I heard correctly, Commissioner Matteo Solenos would like to make a um well, right now you are acting as mayor, so
you cannot uh make a motion, but the earlier motion that I believe you had made was to direct administration to work on some potential naming opportunities for the city and return back to commission. And I do want to assure everybody that the city has a very vigorous process for naming rights.
So this would go to neighborhoods. it would come back to you all. In some instances, there's a a referendum required for certain namings. So, um, so it's not that that this would happen without your substantial input. >> I just want to add that, um,
Commissioner Bot, I love your idea as well. That was one of my ideas, too. If a family wanted to, you know, say, "Hey, this little pocket park in my neighborhood, you know, I want to explore." Lots of opportunities here. And I don't want to limit it to just corporate partners, but I do think we
should look at corporate partners. In fact, I was told that one of our one of the events, the corporate events that we're going to be doing, one of the the folks that's hosting an upcoming event wanted to wrap one of our lifeguard stands. And I won't say which, but um and I think that they're going to end up
be being able to do that. But then someone had asked, well, how much are they being charged to wrap their logo on our lifeguard stand? And the response was nothing. We're going to let them do it for free. and it's like, well, maybe we could have charged for that. Um, you know, so we just need to be a little bit
more cognizant about brands that are coming to our city that want that that PR and that marketing aspect and and and what we can get for that. Um, similarly, Muscle Beach, you know, we we do activations there all the time and, you
know, if if we're with a brand or a partnership with some type of brand that's there, maybe they can wrap the inside of that coral wall with with a banner. I mean, there's just so many opportunities. There's so many opportunities for revenue here. Um, and I'd like to just explore all of them. And then, of course, you know, I
Commissioner Magazine, you mentioned something about, you know, this isn't just like Carp Launch, do do whatever. We, you know, need to look at the brands and we need to look at the the sponsorships and look at the areas and what the amount is. But I do want to brainstorm and just kind of see what we can come up with. See what your team can
come up with, Melissa. Or or not your team. I'm sorry. The whomever. Yep. >> One team. >> That's right. one city, one team and whomever we get to do this. >> I I do want to ask a question about >> um are there any categories that you would want to exclude and specifically I'm asking about alcohol
>> alcohol. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> I don't think that's appropriate. Yeah. >> Vape >> and vape and alco alcohol, cigarettes, >> vape, >> CBD, THC. >> Yep. >> Agreed. >> All the bad stuff. >> You like wholesome
because there was there, you know, obviously alcohol. We're still on that same page. I I would what I would do is I would look at our current uh agreements that we have like with the trolleys and with the uh with some of those because >> then haven't we addressed this issue
like I remember bus on on trolley yes there alcohol is not permitted but on bus shelters alcohol is permitted >> but that was an administrative decision that was not legislative so we have the ability to advertise alcohol on the trolleys I've directed the communication
department to not >> do that we just have a standard a consistent standard uh that we don't want to explore. >> No, no adult toys, please. Okay. >> Yeah, I'll also add and give a plug for our water taxi, but we've had some interest for uh from some private
enterprise potentially partnering with with us that they would help potentially fund some of our our routes, but also for naming, right? So, I think it fits in what you're saying. This is thinking outside of the box and thank you for guiding us into this
conversation because I'll tell you, you know, it's it's a four years ago the conversation came up and it takes courage to bring it up again. It was a very difficult and controversial conversation four years ago. It became very politically charged and I think
it's very forward thinking of you to take that very brave step to bring it up uh now because we do have to be looking at this. How are we going to close the gaps to maintain the operations and the maintenance at the level of service that our residents have been blessed to get
accustomed to? And so this is forward thinking and I like the direction that we're going in. I'm happy to support you. >> Thank you, Commissioner. Anyone else? >> Let's vote. >> So, I have a motion from Commissioner from Vice Mayor Matel Selenus uh
seconded by Commissioner Fernandez to direct administration to explore naming rights. All in favor, please say I. >> I. >> I. >> The item is approved. 70. Uh, Commissioner Bot also had a separate >> Yeah, we'll work on that for the for the
April meeting. We'll work on an item for you and maybe an item for you or you guys could work together. >> Ri. R5 I is an ordinance of the mayor of city commissioner of city of Miami Beach Florida amending part one subp part B article 9 related special acts of Miami Beach city code entitled pension system
for disability and retirement of members of police and fire departments amending section 62 definitions adding definition for police management employees amending section 79 entitled deferred retirement option plan drop related to the maximum drop participation period providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict
here with clarification servability and providing for an effective date. This is a second reading public hearing. It is item R5 I seven sponsors. I guess congratulations Chief Jones
Fernandez. >> Thank you Mr. mayor and uh I want to begin by thanking all of you uh the entire commission for joining me in sponsoring this ordinance and for recognizing the uh very important uh role of continuity and leadership uh
within the police department. And briefly before we speak about our wonderful chief uh Jones, I want to speak briefly about what this legislation uh actually does because this ordinance is a matter of policy. It's a policy decision amending uh the
uh pension plan to allow the chief to extend his participation in the drop program from 8 years to a maximum of 10 years. Uh and I want to highlight something that's very important and that is that uh our actuary, Mr. Manager and
correct me if I'm wrong, the city's actuary has reviewed the ordinance and they have confirmed that it does not increase cost to the city. >> Correct. And so in other words, this uh this ordinance allows us to maintain stability in leadership without placing
any additional burden to our taxpayers. But ultimately, and more important than this being a policy decision, um, and a very prudent uh, policy decision, this is an ordinance about the men and women of the Miami Beach Police Department.
The officers who show up every day, those who answer the call of service, who put on that uniform every day, and they don't know whether they're going to come back home at night, they walk our streets. They put themselves in harm's way so that our residents and our
visitors can feel safe. And a department like ours, like our incredible Miami Beach Police Department, is only as strong as a people who wear that uniform and who serve every day with that bravery. And those officers deserve leadership. That leadership that
supports them, that prepares them, and that gives them the tools that they need every day to succeed. And when you look at the results of this department and what has been delivered under Chiefs Jones leadership, it really talks about
that support that he gives every day to our officers so that they can succeed. And PJ, uh, I don't know if we have the slide on major crime statistics. If you have that ready to to be displayed. There we go. If you look at our most
recent uh major crime statistics, we see meaningful redu reductions across nearly every category. You look at violent crimes, that's down by 9%. You look at property crimes, that's down by 19%.
Robberies down 32%. You look at burglaries, they're down 26%. Autothefts down 36%. homicides. Homicides down 75%. And these are real improvements in
safety for the residents of Miami Beach. And what we're seeing today is a department that's operating with a high level of discipline, a high level of purpose, with strong morale. That's why
we see those reductions in crimes. the morale in our police officers who are bringing us these results and that that begins with the leadership of the Miami Beach Police Department. Chief Jones has cultivated an environment where officers
tell us this is not anecdotal. Officers are telling us that they feel supported by their chief of police. They feel well trained. They are equipped to perform at the highest levels expected for them. And that leadership is is is reflected
in the department's activity and presence throughout our community. And I think we all know the numbers, but in 2025 alone, the department responded to more than 80,000 calls for service. More than 81,000 of calls for service. Uh 58%
of those, nearly 60% of those are initiated by the officers themselves. And officers don't do that if they don't feel supported and if morale isn't strong. That level of proactive policing is a result of a workforce that is
engaged and actively working to prevent crime uh rather than simply reacting to crime. We've also seen their visibility. Officers under Chief Jones uh leadership conducted nearly 5,000
park and walk patrols and that increases the engagement with our neighborhoods. That increases visibility. Chief Jones, as we all know, one of the cool things uh and and new changes in our department is that Chief Jones has pushed the department forward in how we
use technology to keep our community safe. Uh and PJ, do we have there the drone footage and what you're seeing there is drone footage from about a week ago. uh and I believe uh and perhaps the chief is
probably the best one to uh to to give this description, but in the real-time intelligence center uh that was completed uh during during his tenure, uh they they get alerts for license plate from their license plate readers and whether when there's a stolen
vehicle, that real-time intelligence center gets the alert and they're able now to deploy this new technology that we have the drones uh in less than a couple of minutes. It's over the MacArthur Causeway waiting for that
license plate of that stolen vehicle to show up. And there at the far you see that stolen uh motorcycle coming into into our city. It is such cool stuff when you see it.
And there's that motorcycle coming in. >> Can you zoom in on those cones, Alex? There's that motorcycle coming in. Look, I mean, the the work that our police department does with this technology that the chief has brought forward. There's the stolen motorcycle and what
and what and what happens there is just incredible. It just speaks to to the techniques and the and the abilities in which the chief has taken this department to. And PJ, is this is this uh at double the speed?
>> I don't want to double the speed. >> There we go. There the there there goes the guy. Bad boy. There goes the guy. There he goes going into the opposite direction of traffic. >> He goes down into the residential neighborhoods into
Flamingo Park. Commissioner >> Selena's close to you. He abandons his motorcycle, throws it in the alley, goes into a building, takes off a shirt and a cap. Thinks he's getting away, but oh no, there are there are Chief Jones
officers. There they are responding, and the guy thinks he got away, but no, he didn't. There are our officers taking him down. That is the work of true leadership of leadership like Chief Jones. But
technology alone doesn't create these results. It's the people people. It's the leadership that guide that that guides them. And we see that leadership play out right now during one of the most demanding times of the year for the city of Miami Beach. But most
importantly uh for for for our police officers and um and PJ, do we have there the news clip that just reminds us of where we were and where we are now? >> This is the moment chaos erupts in Daytona Beach, Florida.
Hundreds of people running across the beach Saturday after what appeared to be gunshots ringing out. >> There were zero gunshots on the beach because what they were doing was crushing a water bottle to make it sound like a gunshot to stampede the crowd.
The Valuchia County Sheriff says it happened even with dozens of law enforcement officers in the crowd. Later adding at least one weekend shooting was also spring break related. And in Port Aranis, Texas, police say a 17-year-old shot and wounded five people on a beach
late Saturday night. No one's running from gunshots. >> But in Miami Beach, Florida, an iconic party town has worked on a spring break rebrand in recent years, and it seems to be working. Police say this weekend arrests plummeted almost 21%
year-over-year. The city's surging resources, more police, DUI and license plate checks, but also parking and getting towed are more expensive. The strategy that we implemented was an all hands on deck and a collective strategy
involving not only the police department, but different city entities that made it very clear, we welcome you to our city, but if you decide to break the rules and break the law, you'll be dealt with accordingly. embracing a new
strategy to avoid scenes like this. Jesse Kers, NBC News, Miami Beach, Florida. >> Thank you, PJ. That type that kind of turnaround doesn't happen by accident. It happens when a department has strong
leadership, clear expectations from the very top and officers that know that their city stands behind them. So extending the drop uh for Chief Jones is not just
about his tenure. It's not just about keeping Chief Jones here for another two years, but it's most importantly about maintaining the stability, continuing on the progress we are seeing and supporting the men and women and the police officers of the Miami Beach
Police Department who rely on that leadership, on the leadership of Chief Jones every single day. And when our officers know that their leadership has the confidence and the full banking of this Miami Beach City Commission, I
think that message strengthens the import the the entire department. So with that uh for those reasons uh Mr. Mayor colleagues, I thank you all uh for being sponsors in this in this legislation and I'm proud I'm very proud
to move it in support of our incredible chief and the and all the men and women who work in the Miami Beach Police Department. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you, Commissioner Fernandez. That was a very good presentation. I appreciate it uh and enjoyed it. So, um I think it highlights and it's important
uh and it resonates with with our residents. I'll I'll add one other a couple of things, but one is I'm a big believer that data and numbers are very significant and it tells a good story and and in this case it tells a real story but uh I'm also a big believer in
it's how our residents and tourists feel when they walk down the street uh as a even and apart from the data and the good news there is I hear all the time and I I assume all of us hear from our residents and visitors wow Miami Beach has changed in a big way I feel very
comfortable walking down the street taking my family. I've had people tell me they wouldn't take their kids to South Beach and they do now and they're walking on Ocean Drive and other parts. So, um there's a great story o overall. It's and obviously it all comes with breaking that spring break cycle, the
major crimes you talked about. Our homeless numbers, the lowest we've ever had in our city's history, 60% lower than just three years ago. Um the staffing, full staffing, which shows that we have a a a well- motivated force. And I'm actually hearing a lot and again I I suppose I'm hear I hear a
lot of people telling me I run into uh officers in other cities or security guards who are telling me I'm trying to get into the Miami Beach Police Department. That's where I want to be. But you guys are fully staffed. I can't even get in. So uh it's a great place to be cuz it wasn't that long ago we were I
remember hearing we have 40 slots that we have to fill in our uh uh police department. So, it's um there there's a lot going on and I and I and I I'll give all of us here uh a pat on the back because I also hear Chief Jones, others
and officers on the street who say thank you to us because not every city does the elected body support our police department in the way we do and say publicly we got your back. Um and uh I think uh I think our officers the
message is loud and clear. We got their backs. We're giving them the best technology that we have to offer. We do um it's important it's important for their own safety and it's also important for for preventing and solving crimes to have that. So uh Chief Jones, it's uh
it's it's uh it's great working with you. We started around the same time in our respective roles. So, uh, it, you know, we work obviously closely together. Um, I will say, and I and I've had this conversation with you, I think, and I don't want to speak for you, you
could say it, but I think part of your motivation in wanting to continue is we've seen so many positive changes, and there's more to do, right? We don't we don't rest on our on our laurels, and uh, the police visibility has gotten tremendously improved, and there's even
more we can do, right? We we never stop we never stop pushing. Um and uh and I and I think I think I personally believe our officers love that. They love the fact that we are uh giving them the tools to do their job and that we want
them and expect them to to uh follow their training and do the jobs that we're asking them to do. So thank you again. Fully supportive of uh and looking forward to working with you for the next couple of uh couple of years. Commissioner Dominguez,
>> thank you. Uh I too am very supportive. I'd like to second the item. Under uh Chief Jones leadership, we have seen a reduction in crime. He and his team has worked very hard in tackling the rampant drug problem that had really built up
during COVID in the entertainment district. He filled all the vacancies. That was an incredible feat. Not easy. And um now we have fully f staffed police department. Uh the chief is very
responsive and he has also built a strong command staff of men and women very experienced and of diverse backgrounds. We have an incredible team under the chief and I look forward to
working with him for the next few years. >> Commissioner M. Um, obviously I'm very supportive of this as well. And um one of the things that I've been talking to you about, Chief Jones, that I'm excited about for the next two years is the opportunity to really improve,
not improve, to continue um and build on the successes you've had and your command staff in support of you in the initiatives like 30 by30 and making this a safe department for people who are not traditionally seen as cops. Um because I
think that it is so important for community to be policed by people who look like they are and um I am going to look to you and to you know see significant improvement not I'm sorry significant movement um as that
continues over the next two years and ensure that no matter who uh comes to try to fill your shoes after you leave in two years um that that is a priority and a pillar of the department moving forward in perpetuity. So, I know you
can do it. We've talked about this. I am thousand% confident in your vision and supportive of your vision and confident in your command staff who will continue uh to do this after you've gone. And uh I look forward to what we can get done together in the next two years.
>> Chief, I'd like to take a moment to thank you for all that you've done. I fully support you in in this extension and I'm so impressed by the work that you've done and the team you've created and the staff that you oversee. I every
time I speak with an officer, no matter where they're at in their rank, they all really love their job and I think it's because they love the environment that you've created within the force and within the team. It's just it's palpable. I I had the I was at roll call
on Sunday and I had the chance to go on a ride along with a sergeant. Um and he just you could tell he just loved his job. I mean the way everything he was so detailed about every explanation about you know it was fascinating. It was truly fascinating and I'm so glad I got
that opportunity because you have created such an impressive team. Um, every single officer just has such pride in what they do and the residents know it. We see it. We We love it. We love you. We love the team. We love every
single officer that that protects us um and and helps us. And it's just so impressive. And I just want to thank you again. I I truly can't give you enough accolades. You know, when I went to you and I said, "Listen, I want to work on human trafficking this year because that's very important to me." and you
agreed immediately and you said that you had created the first human trafficking team within the police department several years ago and if that if I misspeak please correct me but I mean I just behind the scenes you do so much and as in front of the scenes you do so much and I really truly can't thank you
enough so I'm happy to support you chief any any commissioner magazine >> yeah chief we could go on until you're uh you're you're halfway through your extension here so we could >> we have some talkers huh Uh maybe we'll bring this in for a landing. Uh love
you, love what you do, love your family. Um and it's clearly a lot of people in the city do. You're a great ambassador, great police officer, great police chief. So proud to work with you going forward. >> If I may, if I uh I just wanted to add one one other thing which uh which I
thought of. there's really like there's so much that goes into what you have to do in in a department like this and and everything we do is so high-profile uh which adds to the uh sort of the the pressure stakes because you know every decision but um I'm I'm really proud of
our of our entire city because you've gotten nothing but support from us as the commission, our residents, our business community. It really takes that to uh to to to build and and I say that partly because you know when this process was coming up and and until this
came up there was some talk about potential successors and what have you and and there's and and you've built a deep bench which is also part of uh I think is going to be part of your legacy as well and it's a compliment to you and our entire department that we have so many good people in in our in our in
senior command and senior management. But at the same time, I I always like to tell people and residents because I have residents come to me, "Thank God we live in South Florida. Things are good. Things are safe. We're a safe haven here." Um I've even had some people from
outside our country tell me recently that they're looking to move here, looking to move business here, looking to move themselves. And they said, "But the it's it's going to stay this way in South Florida, right? It's guaranteed." I'm like, "There's no guarantee in life. Things can change very quickly. a change in leadership, a change in in different
uh and we've seen that in other cities in our country, we've seen it in other parts of the world. Things can change very quickly. So, uh I do not take it for granted that I work with so many good colleagues up here and work with so many uh work with our city manager, our
police chief and other departments as well. And I believe our residents don't, but I say it as a cautionary tale that um the successes that we're seeing doesn't happen in a vacuum. It does not happen by accident. It takes a tremendous amount of hard work. It takes some tough decisions that we often do
get uh negative push back, but we do it because we know it's the right thing. And today is proof of why we do it because we're seeing the success that our city is having and you're a big part of it. >> Mr. Mayor, >> Commissioner Fernandez. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, I just want to
recognize um, you know, we all have very stressful, very challenging, high-profile positions. Uh, they can be at times, uh, disheartening as they can be rewarding. They can be demoralizing as they can be uplifting. And at the end
of the day, we all go home. We go home to our families, whether it be our partners or our significant others, our children, our families. They're the ones that keep us going. And I want to recognize that in the audience we have Mariana uh Chief Jones uh wife and
Mariana this community owes so much gratitude to you. Uh I know that you are the rock of that family. I know I know the chief feels so supported and doing his job every single day because you're there supporting him and supporting your
beautiful children and your beautiful family. And the fact that you are here in this milestone moment is is is so beautiful. And I also, you know, we are a team. I know in my office I have my uh two aids who help me in absolutely everything that I do. And I'd be remiss
not to equally, you know, highlight the incredible team chief that you have around you, whether it be assistant chief Sammy Guerrero and and Denny Morgal or whether it be Chantel and Celia and Chris Bass or Nesso Rodriguez.
Um, you know, you all, each one of you, we call you guys at all times of the day, at all times of the night, on holidays and weekends, and you guys on Sunday mornings, you interrupt your
beautiful Sunday mornings to respond to us. You interrupt your family celebrations to address the needs and the public safety of our city. And so chief, our residents feel the difference with your leadership and our officers are making a difference in our city.
They support you and today we stand with them in supporting you. And with that, I move the item. >> Let's call the vote. And if I may, through the chair. Um, I had previously um discussed with uh the sponsor of the item and the city manager that because
uh the ordinance could entail in um administration by the police department that it needed to be referred to public safety pursuant to resolution 22533496. However, as currently drafted, um it will be administered purely by HR. So, I
just wanted to clarify that there was no need for for that referral. >> Thank you. >> It is a public hearing. I see no one on Zoom and I see no one in the audience requesting to speak. May I call the role? >> I'll acknowledge Bobby Hernandez here as well, the union chief. I know there's a lot of discussions uh that the city
manager and others had with him. So, so thank you. >> Yeah, it was good morning everyone. It was a pretty contestious at the beginning I think, but meeting with the manager, Mr. Taxes, uh we were able to come up with a resolution where our members won't be affected. That was our
biggest concern. But you know, where were we 3 years ago? We were in a vocational school they call the police academy. We're in a serious police academy now. Chief Jones changed that. We don't have a just in case staffing plan where all of us were working every day just because something might happen.
I always refer to my Publix analogy with Mr. Carpenter. You don't walk into Publix at 7:00 in the morning, see every cash register open just because you might get a complaint. Um, and we're no longer there. That's why you see the 437 officers. That's not a coincidence. It's leadership. So, we're very happy for him
and congratulations, Chief. >> Thank you. I have a motion from Commissioner by Commissioner Fernandez, excuse me. Seconded by Commissioner Dominguez. Commissioner Suarez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Magazine, >> yes. >> Commissioner Bot, >> yes. >> Commissioner Dominguez, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Matselinas,
>> yes. >> Commissioner Fernandez, >> yes. >> Mayor Miner, >> yes. >> Motion carries. The item is approved. That was item R5. You want to say a few words, chief? >> You know what they they say in court here? >> She's expecting a speech from you. You know, they say in court when the judge
is in your favor, you sort of don't say anything. But >> I um >> that's why that's why you waited for the vote. >> Yeah. I I uh um not not sure what to say actually. You know, I have uh this past weekend
was 30 years for me in this great city that I often refer to as the capital of the world. Um I love it. Uh much like all the men and women of the Miami Beach Police Space Department love it. We do what we do because we think it's a great
city and we want to make it even better and we all love it. I I am thankful to each of you for the confidence you have collectively showed today. You have in me and in the organization. I am grateful to my boss for giving me
the space and latitude to be a police chief. We speak on the phone multiple times a day, meet multiple times a week, and but not for that, I don't think we'll be in a position we are in right now as an organization. Uh we're doing great things, not because I'm brilliant,
not because I'm the best chief in this country, but it's because of these people behind me standing against the wall. I really think I have a command staff made up of absolute police brilliance. I have a team of police
officers uh doing the heavy lifting for us every day that believe in this city, believe in protecting his residents and his visitors, believe that we can make this, as you say all the time, Mr. Mayor, the safest city in America. And because of that belief, we've seen
success. And so I am honored and grateful. I'm simply going to say thank you for today and for supporting. like to thank my wife who showed up unexpectedly um for being there all the time and she's there when I get the calls late at
night and uh early Sunday mornings and she's taken a brunt of raising our twins that quite frankly a piece of work. Um but it's been a collective and team effort and so I'm simply going to say
thank you all. I'm grateful. I think we should do a group picture. >> Mr. Manager, >> he's your employee. Let's do it. >> Everyone is going to be in the
Where are the guys? Excuse me. The command staff can >> if you guys can get a rear be. Our name you guys can hold them in the
windows. We're going to have to do two lines. So, you guys can come up a little bit, please. And command set. You guys can follow suit. >> Major Garcia tennis, if you guys can come on this side. Take the picture.
>> Okay. One, two, three. No, she's got nothing. this camera. >> One, two, three. >> Okay. Look at this camera. All right. Thank you so much.
Congratulations. >> Why don't we call while uh >> Looks like the sheriff's department got some My baby boy. >> Yeah. >> Manny, thank you for being here. Manny. Manny.
>> It's called R5V as in Victor. >> I'll be right here. >> Yes, sir. RV. It is an ordinance of the mayor and city commission of the city of Miami Beach, Florida, amending chapter 66 of the city code entitled marine structures,
facilities, and vessels by amending article 2 entitled restricted rig zones by amending section 66-43 entitled restricted areas to establish a designated public swim area and corresponding motorized vessel exclusion zone in the water surrounding Flaggler
Memorial Island, also known as Monument Island, pursuant to section 327.46 46 of Florida statutes and further authorizing the city manager to undertake and execute the necessary applications and coordination within the various agencies of Miami Day County, the state of Florida and the US government in order
to effectuate the establishment of designated public swim area and corresponding motorized vessel exclusion zone and providing for repealer servability qualification and effective date. This is a first reading public hearing. We're doing item R5V.
>> Hello, good morning. I'm uh I'm sponsoring this item and uh thank you to Commissioner De Mingz and Vice Mayor Matteas Selenus for joining me as co-sponsors. Um why don't you take it away? >> Sure. Good morning uh Mr. Mayor, Commissioners Lindseay Pre, Deputy
Resilience Officer, and Assistant Director for Environment and Sustainability. What this ordinance would allow us to do is move forward in the regulatory permitting process to establish a designated swim area around Monument Island, uh, which is a required step in the FWC process before we
continue with the other permits. As you know, Monument Island has seen increasing pressures from vessel and swimmer conflicts, heavy vessel traffic, um boats anchoring very close to shore, shoreline erosion in addition to seaggrass bed decline as a result of
those beaching activities. In 2023, the commission prioritized a project to move forward with funding for shoreline restoration in addition to a motorized vessel andor swim zone uh exclusion zone, excuse me, for the motorized vessels. um and allowing us to move
forward through the regulatory permitting process. Uh since then, we underwent consultant selection and procurement. And the city's consultant has completed surveys, environmental assessments, conceptual design, and submitted permit applications in August
of 2025. We've now received agency comments that clarify what may be permittable within the Biscane Bay Aquatic Preserve. Initially, the project contemplated both a motorized vessel exclusion zone and a public swim area or swim only zone um to
allow us the flexibility through permitting uh depending on what the agency comments were. FD FD has made it clear that uh establishing a motorized vessel exclusion zone would require a submerged lands lease which they are not issuing new leases for that purpose
within the bay which essentially negates that option. However, they did indicate that a public swim area would be permittable. Um, while we were going through the FDP process, we also in conjunction worked with FWC on reviewing the draft ordinance which was prepared
in close coordination with the city attorney's office on that language and they confirmed that the language is appropriate and approvable by their agency. The swim zone is proposed to extend 150 ft from the shoreline and that distance was based on several
factors. The first is we worked very closely with marine patrol to provide a meaningful safety buffer between the vessels, motorized vessels and the swimmers that utilize the island. The second is it avoids impacts to seagrasses and other benthic resources surrounding the island based on the
results of the environmental surveys. The third is it stays clear of navigation routes and deeper waters used by boers. And then finally, um, to not take everything out of my pocket, but, uh, it allows for regulatory compromise while you're going through permitting, when you go for the largest, there may
be some give and take that happens as a as a result of those permits. This approach for a swim only area is consistent with the commission's goals and priorities for the island, prioritizing public safety, and reducing the conflicts between vessels and swimmers. Uh the ordinance before you
today is required by state statute in order for us to continue with the regulatory permitting process. Uh and then if the ordinance is approved, staff with the consultant will revise the engineer drawings to reflect the swim only zone, remove references to to the motorized vessel exclusion zone um and
resubmit the application materials to all of the regulatory permitting agencies. The ordinance in parallel will be transmitted to FD uh FWC for their approval. >> Thank you. This is a perfect example of uh you know our commission taking action to to improve the quality of life of our
residents. This was uh Monument Island was was something we were getting a lot of complaints about. Um the motorized vehicles uh the trash that was being left there. Um the the noise that was emanating from uh from boats that were there and uh proud to sponsor this item.
Thank you to my to my co-sponsors as well. Um does anybody want to >> Commissioner Dominguez? Um, I do have a few questions. Uh, yesterday I was bombarded um with a few folks that had concerns and I'm just
going to go through their concerns and see if there's anything um see what the answers are and how to make this better if uh that's necessary. So, let me just open this. Um, is it currently no swim? I mean, is it currently swim only or?
>> What it currently is is it's a beach where swimmers are accessing the area. However, because we did not designate a public swim area, there is allowed to be a conflict unfortunately with the vessels. >> Okay. And um
so currently motorized vessels can go and this change would would force the motorized vessels to be at what length? 150 feet outside of the swim only area >> and then people can swim from the
motorized vessel to the island or go on kayak or paddle board. >> So the swim only zone does prohibit other uses. However, I did speak with marine patrol. We would be responsible
for our own enforcement and as such the number one goal would be to prohibit the motorized vessels from entering the zone. There are are other areas as well on Monument Island where paddle boards and cattle uh kayaks can access the island. >> Are there other areas on Monument Island
where a motorized vehicle would get close? >> There are uh smaller rip wrap vetments on the south side of the island that essentially makes it impossible for boats to get too close because they wouldn't want to ruin their holes.
>> Um are we bound by ADA compliance? Uh people were concerned about um elderly folks that wouldn't necessarily be able to swim 150 ft. >> Well, the swim zone doesn't say that you have to swim to like the 150 ft to get
to the island. It just prohibits motorized vessels from staying outside of that. There are areas on adjacent to the swim buoys where they'd be able to get closer to the island along the adjacent areas. So like the northernmost buoy and the southernmost buoy, you can get close to the island. It essentially
draws a fake line from those and keeps vessels outside of that. >> And so a motorized vessel would be able to go along that line to get closer to the island. Okay. >> Um let's see.
And then there was a lot of commentary on um the trash. There is a ton of trash there. Somebody mentioned to me that there's another island on the Miami side where they decided to take the trash cans out altogether and that's helped
make the trash situation better. Um I know I recently traveled to Japan. They don't have trash cans anywhere. So people have to carry their trash, keep it in their pocket or uh their bag until they found Has that been thought of as an idea to
help with trash there? um because I know our funding was like $400,000. It might have been doubled um for clearance of the trash, but it hasn't solved the issue. >> Yeah, I'll let Amy speak a little bit on our leave no trace policy. >> Yes, I'd be happy to do that,
Commissioner. Um so, the Miami Date County actually does trash pickup once a week there through a find grant. We actually added on an additional day per week to address any litter issues and we also do beach uh actually island cleanups as well as um education. I
don't think we're at a point where it's time to actually remove the trash cans. I don't think our culture and our behaviors are really there yet, but I think it's something we can continue to work to work towards. It is important. I understand the leave no trace policy, but we still have people that aren't really ready for that and we don't want
the island to just have tons of litter. >> Okay. Um and so the last thing was um is there a current statute in place where boats cannot beach on the island? >> There are not. Thank you,
>> Commissioner Matteo Selenus. >> So, I am co-sponsoring this item because I do believe we need an area where swimmers can be safe around the island and swim safe. And, you know, I did get some emails, you know, how could you support this? And I'll tell you how. Um,
because in 2018, and this is in the memo, but people don't read memos, they just knee-jerk react sometimes. So, I want to spell out in 2018, there was a tra tragic incident when a charter vessel guest was swimming within the swim zone and um it was hit by um uh the
another vessel's propellers. Um the victim sustained catastrophic injuries including a severed arm and leg, a split open back and a displaced spine. And despite the immediate response from the marine patrol, um it recovery efforts took two days to locate and res and
retrieve the the descendant. So, this is why we're doing this. Um, and I thank you for putting this together. And I thank you, Mr. Mayor and Commissioner Dominguez for for uh creating this swim zone because ultimately safety in the water is paramount to um, you know,
enjoyment and and stuff, you know, that's not quite as paramount to life or death situations that happen on the water such as this. So, I fully support this item. Thank you. I >> think that actually happened over Easter weekend, unfortunately. Yeah,
>> I'll second the >> Let's call the vote. >> You can't make the motion. >> I didn't I didn't make it. >> I'll second. >> Okay. So, I have a motion from Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner by Mayor Miner. Uh, Commissioner Fernandez, >> yes.
>> Commissioner Dominguez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Magazine, >> yes. >> Commissioner Suarez, >> yes. >> Bot. >> Yes. >> Vice Mayor Matselenz, >> yes. Mayor Miner. And for the record, this was a public hearing. There was no one on Zoom and there was no one in the audience.
Second reading, public hearing scheduled for April 22nd. That was item R5V, approved 70. >> Let's call one more item. R5Q. R5Q is appendix A fee schedule modification advertisement fees orders of the mayor and city commission of the city of Miami Beach Florida amending
appendix A to of ordinances to change the advertisement fees for public notices required by section 2.2.3.5 of the resiliency code of providing for repealers of ability clarification and an effective date. This is a first reading public hearing R5Q.
Commissioner Suarez. >> Call the vote. >> Motion for Commissioner Suarez. Seconded by uh Commissioner Fernandez. It is a public hearing. No one in Zoom. No one in the audience requesting to speak. Uh Commissioner Magazine, >> yes. >> Commissioner Fernandez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Dominguez, >> yes.
>> Commissioner Bot, >> yes. >> Commissioner Suarez, >> yes. >> West Mayor Matelas, >> yes. >> Mayor Miner, >> yes. >> Motion carries. The item is approved. Second reading. Public hearing is April 22nd. That was item R5Q. R7 AF
R7 AF is approved sponsorship Ocean Drive fireworks display July 4th, 2026. R7 AF. >> I have a motion by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner Suarez. If there's no discussion by caller roll, >> yes.
>> On R seven AF, all approved. >> Say I. Hearing no nos. R7 AF is approved. 70. >> R7N. >> R7N is allocate funds enhance ethics training for city employees.
>> Commissioner Fernandez. >> Let's call the vote. >> I have a motion on R seven by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Vice Mayor Moscelenus. All in favor of R7N, please say I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed? Hearing none. R7N is approved. 70.
>> R70. >> R70 is flag flagpole at Normandy Fountain. >> I move the item. >> Second. >> Have a motion by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Vice Mayor Matel Selenus on R70. All in favor, please say I. I.
>> I. >> Opposed, please. Uh, hearing none. The item is approved. 70 R70. >> Thank you. >> Is HR here, Eric? >> Yes, HR's here. >> Oh, great. Uh R7T R7T up there.
>> Recurring donations from employees enrollment in voluntary benefits program. R7T. >> I have a motion by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by uh Commissioner Suarez. If no discussion, all in favor of R7T, please say I. >> I. I.
>> Anyone opposed? Hearing none. R7T is approved. 70. >> Thank you. >> R7 AG. >> R7 AG is mail notice to condo owners bulk buyout uh good standing ordinance.
R7 AG. >> Second. >> Second. >> Second. >> I heard a motion from uh Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner Dominguez on R7 A. All in favor, please say I. I. >> Anyone opposed? Hearing none. R7G is
approved. 70. >> I don't want to press my luck. We've been uh we've been doing so great. But uh let's call lunch break. We'll reconvene at one 1:00. Thank you. N la
girl la n. Baby, baby, love you. Baby, In the night, Hey, hey, hey. don't know. Don't do it.
Everything. Hey everybody, hey Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. I want a feel. Hey down. Hey Heat. Heat.
Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. feel yeah a a Hey feel yeah. Heat. Heat. Baby, you Down.
Baby. Baby, baby, baby. Hey, you falling. Hallelujah. Get
it. Get it. N I'm N baby know about it. enough. Another time. Heat. Hey, Heat.
on your hand. Hey Thank you. Thank you. Hey, hey, hey. Time. I'm Time feel.
feel. I feel Hey, hey, hey. Hey, a hey. Down. Hey. Hey. Hey,
hey, hey. Heat. Heat. Baby, baby. Baby, baby. like baby. Ah, ah.
Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Ooh, hey. Hey, hey, hey. Black behind me behind. Nap
another neighbor. N it Heat. Hey, Heat. Another good Hey, hey, hey. You're down. Baby,
hey. Heat up here. Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. Feel feel.
Feel Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey. Beautiful. Heat up. Heat. Heat. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Hey. Hey. Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. Baby, baby, give me feel. Hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey.
Make baby. Hey. Hey. Hey, hey, hey. It moving it. Okay. Do you ever do
Nana nah I'm not baby. Baby, baby. Heat. Heat. down. Hey Don't do it.
Hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey. Hey, down. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. N. I want to see. Feel
heart. Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. feel a
feel. Yeah, feel me feel. Heat. Heat. Take you. You are feeling. Down. You
Don't take Hey, hey, hey. Falling pooling. Hallelujah. Behind you. Get it.
Everybody N make up. N Hey. Hey. Hey. Baby, baby. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat.
Hey, down. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. N. Hey, hey, hey. Are you hey? Heat. Heat. I feel the heart.
Heat. Heat. beauty. Beautiful. Heat. Heat. N. Hey, hey, hey. Please take your seats. The meeting is about to begin. Remember to speak into the microphone as this meeting is being recorded for public record.
Please stand by. We are going on air in 5 4 3 2 1. >> Welcome back to our afternoon session and we'll kick it off with our Oakland Public Forum, the Sutnik >> time. Good afternoon.
>> Hey Sarah. >> Sarah, state your name, address, and you have two minutes. >> Sarah de loses Santa Harbor Neighborhood Association. Uh I this weekend that this past weekend I was at in Palm Beach. I took my cats to the 33rd pet parade of Palm Beach. It was
wonderful. And I think it will be great to bring the pet parade back to my start the pet parade in Miami Beach because it brings family together and the kids and they love watching the the dogs and the animals parade and and dressed up. So hopefully you guys can bring it back.
>> Mr. Mayor, Commissioner Fernandez, last year, uh, Commissioner Laura Dominguez took a lead in bringing the pet parade actually during the month of March. I think it was the first weekend in March. Uh, or when was it? >> It last March 29th. >> It was the last week in March. >> Y
>> and it was such a beautiful event. Uh, you saw so many people come out to Ocean Drive to uh to Lumis Park, people from throughout the city, even outside the city. And then they were supporting the businesses and it was a great family event that just brought everyone
together. We had such a great time and Commissioner Dominguez, thank you for your leadership in bringing that that that parade. It will be great as uh Sarah mentioned to do something like that again and maybe we can refer >> I'll refer >> you'll refer to uh public safety. That'll be great. >> Yeah, that would be really great. I think it will be a benefit to Miami
Beach if we start something like that that is every year people plan and it gets bigger and bigger because people love to dress their animal and show them and everything. So >> it was great for your dog. >> I have a question Sarah for that parade. Were there any sponsors? Did you see >> we had we had um
>> not ours but the one >> we actually had the air the um bad air that air the the private plans who actually gave the grand prize of a a trip to New York and back on the private plane with your pet. They all they do is
carry your pet with you in the plane and and in fact Bark Air Bark Air was one of the big sponsor if we got him. We got a few one that you went to this past weekend. What sponsors did you see? >> Oh, well, in Palm Beach, it's all the
sponsors on Worth Avenue. I got a Tory C Tory church bag as a present. You know, my cats won the tied with other the cats, but there's mostly dogs as you know. It's like there's only three cats and 100 dogs,
but it works, you know. So, they get really they get hotels gifts to stay in a hotel for three days. So we can actually even have sponsor of the hotels to actually they can sponsor a gift. So I think there there's a there's a good um there's a good promotion for Miami
Beach. I think it starts growing and then it'll get bigger and bigger. Everybody start training their pets to do something. >> I'd like for us to make a motion to send this to the public safety committee or or I'll second your >> I'll second that. >> Thank you. >> Perfect. >> Yeah.
>> So So we'll do it out. >> There you go. >> That's right. do it now. We won't even need to place an item. >> Okay. >> And we can refer it now. >> We We'll do it now based on if you all make a motion and vote on it. We can do that. >> I'll second Commissioner Dominguez this motion.
>> So I have a motion for the PEP parade to public safety. Motion by Commissioner uh Dominguez, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez. All in favor, please say I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed? Item is referred to public safety. >> Yay.
Uh anyone else wish to speak? Seeing none, I have Mr. Aion on Zoom. Mr. Oion, you have two minutes. Please state your name and address. >> Andreas Aion, 1000 South Point Drive. Sorry, I got uh bad reception this morning, but I was touching upon the
fact that um we're voting so hard to make sure that historic preservation has a say and historic preservation voiced their opinion of not knocking down the more slapous building community center that we have on the beach and that's looks like it's getting vetoed. U the
county uh we took this to referendum to the county. the people voted. Uh that's getting vetoed as well. And all I just want to say is that, you know, the firefighters truly would have liked to have had their fire station on Alton Road in 11th because it would have been a campus. They would have been able to
continue to enjoy Flamingo Parks track, field, pool, and all the facilities as part of their training versus being on six and Jefferson. Um it's hard. You know, we I took uh the mayor, Commissioner uh Dominguez, as well as Commissioner Bot over to the community
center in Overtown where I'm a board member at. That was a $22 million facility, and we have amazing programming for our seniors, our kids, and and and all that. And we're going to lose such a valuable asset in our community versus knocking down a
bathroom in a locker room to build a fire station on Alton Road. Um it's sad. It's sad to see it happen. Not because, you know, and I hate that the firefighters are the ping-pong ball in this scenario, but it's not like if we didn't have another option, we did have another option, and we're executing on
knocking down a Morris Lapis building, and it hurts. That's all. Thank you guys. >> Thank you, mayor. Uh, seeing no one else on Zoom, this concludes uh the afternoon Zoom. >> Thank you. Let's call R5M.
R5M is a notice to the mayor, city commission of the city may be short amending chapter 46 of the city code entitled environment by amending article 4 entitled noise by amending section 46-152 entitled noises unnecessary and excessive prohibited by amending section B subsection B to reduce the distance to
establish primmaacia evidence of the specified noise violation during specified hours providing for repealer servability clarification and an effective date. This is a first reading. It is a public hearing. It is item R5M. >> So, one of uh one of the best tools that
we can do here as a legislative body is to give our police department the additional tools through through through the law. So, this would reduce the codes 100 foot standard to 25 ft regarding noise from vehicles of vessels and
floating structures. But take it away, chief. >> Yeah. Uh good afternoon, Mr. Mayor Commission. Um Wayne Jones, police chief. We're really really excited about this. I think it gives the police department just yet another tool to address some of the concerns we've been having. Uh which seems to have peaked up
quite a bit quite frankly in the past few months. Getting lots and lots of residential complaints about it from residents about this. Um certainly creating what I think to be a quality of life uh issue. Even got complaint from you one night, Mr. Mayor, late at night um about people making loud noise,
speeding, loud, mouthless music along the Collins Avenue corridor. Uh a few months ago we started what is called operation quiet streets is sole purpose of addressing some of these concerns. Um obviously right now we're doing it doing it and enforcing it based on the 100
foot rule. Uh having it reduced to 25 ft I think makes a world of difference both for cars vehicles um and for boats as well in the waterways. Um just wanted to throw some numbers at you Mr. Mayor. I'm really really proud of it. You know, if you look at um back to 2021,
our enforcement efforts as it relates to noise coming from vehicles was really, really bleak to be honest with you. Wrote 76 citations for the entire year. That year, um as recent as 2024, we wrote 430 and last year we wrote 675 for
the entire year. This year, as a result of Operation Quiet Streets, we've already written 513 citations. That's two and a half months into the year itself on record only on track to probably break 1500 at this particular pace. So we hear the community, we
understand how much this impacts their daily nightly lives. Um and we we're committed to doing something about it. By the way, this is not an issue that um is solely uh limited to here on the beach. Um much of other cities, many
other cities and counties sort of facing same problem. Uh, in fact, there was a a recent news article um highlighting what city is doing for this very same same reason. Um, there Chief Danny McGallo is here and he's actually the brainchild behind Operation Safe Streets and so
he's here to answer any specific questions you may have. Quiet streets. Um, so he's here to answer any questions you can have. >> Okay, great. Well, thank you. >> It's uh before I turn over, it's interesting because uh I've been I've been on this commission for a little over six years. commissioner first. It's
interesting to see the shift, I think, in focus that of the quality of life and I think we're getting into a good place because spring break obviously was a major problem. >> We've uh again I feel like I'm jinxing it again, but we've uh we've solved that. Um crime, a lot of misdemeanors uh
which were were plaguing our city. Then we started prosecuting those cases obviously through the efforts of our police. Um again, all these things we have to continue improving on. they they exist. But as far as uh they they we've definitely improved significantly exponentially.
>> Um when we're talking about a homeless population, which we mentioned uh down 60% in the last three years, our lowest homeless count ever. Doesn't mean there's not more work to do, but we're I used to get complaints all the time about homeless individuals. Now it comes in they're much more rare.
>> Um but certainly something we need to address. This is now sort of the issue. And I think that's a it's a good place. It shows that we've we've we've helped improve so many different areas of public safety. Now, the to me one of the prime complaints that I get is about the about the vehicle noise.
>> Yeah. >> So, um and uh since since we've been able to uh improve significantly on the others, I think we can do it here, too. >> Absolutely. Absolutely. >> Um Commissioner Bot. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, chief, we've we've um done a lot of enforcement and
education programming or programs um with micromobility on the beachwalk. We're talking about it for um enforcement going forward on micromobility issues. What's one of the things that's been really successful about it is that um uh we haven't seen repeat offenders there. There will
always be some who need to be educated because they're visitors for the first time. They're um uh so they didn't have the opportunity to get educated about where they can and can't ride. Are you seeing the same thing? And um Danny, maybe you can address this as well. Um are you seeing the same thing with this
type of violation? I would imagine part of the issue is that people come over the bridges because it's cool to do it down here. It's cool for the Graham. Um so I don't know if we'll ever get through to them, but is there any are you seeing repeat offenders or is it
first, you know, once and done or what are you seeing? >> I'm going to let Danny answer the question, but I'll tell you this. We we also couple the enforcement with an educational campaign mostly um social media and the recent data point I saw we've had at one point 17,000 people
actually looking at the social media content we're putting out there so people are aware that we're doing this and we're serious about it then. >> Yes. >> So good afternoon Mr. Mayor Commissioners Assistant Chief Danny Morgal here. Um, we haven't taken a deep
dive into whether or not we're seeing repeat offenders. Just anecdotally, based on experience, a lot of the people that are getting these type of tickets historically and and this has been an issue for us dating back to when I started working here. I remember details that we had on Ocean Drive as a young officer here where we were writing
people citations for loud noise. Um, and it's come back to the forefront again after going through, you know, the last 25 26 years. Um, it is not a Miami Beach specific problem. As the chief alluded to, we're seeing that same complaint coming from Bickl in Miami and other
neighborhoods throughout uh the Tri County area, which is what led to us partnering with FHP and collaborating loosely with Miami and other departments to actually spread the word and let everyone know that this is an issue. And just, you know, reinforcing what the
mayor said, it's a great place for us to be as a police department to be able to focus on issues like this that are important to the community because it reflects the fact that our officers are doing such a great job to keep this community safe that we're not chasing robbers and shooters. We're able to focus on the quality of life issues that
are important to this community. And based on the numbers and what the officers are doing, they have ramped up um focus on this issue tremendously. In two and a half months, we've written over 513 citations specifically for loud noise from vehicles for comparison. All
of 2026, we wrote 675. So, we're on pace to triple that number this year. Now, I don't know if we're ever going to get to the point where we have zero noise violations. So, if if that's the standard we're going to, we're going to try hard to get there, but I don't know if we're ever going to make it there. >> So, what what happens when you write a
citation? Is it um is it points on your license? Is it a fine? Um, >> yeah, this one is considered a non-moving violation. There's no points license, but there's a fine associated with it. If you don't pay that fine, and obviously your license is suspended after 30 days. >> And so,
is there a way to track or if there's a rec first offense is $250, second offense is $500, and then it goes up, or um is it just it's a flat fine? >> It's a flat fine that's set um as a uniform traffic citation. And it's not
like our city citations that ramp up or anything like that. >> And do we have control over that or is that mandated by the state? >> State. >> Yeah, I believe it's mandated by the state. >> Okay. So, um, Mr. City attorney, it would be interesting if we could take a look at what options we might have um if
if this is mandated by the state, is there anything that we can do from a city perspective? And if I may clarify, what this ordinance is doing is it's taking our existing ordinance which establishes that noise emanating from a vehicle or or a vessel uh by radio or
other instrument. Um it there's a primaaccia evidence of a violation if it is audible and we're taking it from 100 ft to 25 ft. So this is unrelated to other concerns. We we do have another item which is to make a legislative priority um asking the state to allow us
to use noise cameras to to enforce noise throughout the city. And so this is then a third related I question which is if the state controls the fines for UTC's is there anything that we can do as a municipality that if you are now on your
fifth or 10th >> we would need to ask the state to enact legislation to enable us to or or rather the state would need to enact legislation that ex that increase the fees statewide like we don't have the ability to >> and there's nothing we can layer on
separately. No, not to my understanding. >> It would be I mean if it's not ownorous to do to just run a report to see how many people are getting more than one ticket. >> Yeah. >> For the same thing. I mean because if it's all new people coming in that's one conversation. If it's the same 30 people getting tickets every weekend that's a
different kind of conversation. >> Don't don't know if it's possible. We certainly ask and see if it is. Yeah. >> That would be great. Thank you. >> Sure. >> No, it's a good call. the um I mean I think what you were alluding to chief is the chief of Miami came out with a public plea because there was one individual I guess who does it for kicks
on Instagram and uh and and then unfortunately the problem is the tools that we have um are not great as and you're asking the perfect questions commissioner bot because you know we uh I had brought an item to bring cameras here which we did have we had these uh
video they would take pictures videos but under state law there's nothing we can do with it >> correct >> New York actually has a very great good program, but um they if their cameras detect, you can issue a ticket and then
require them to fix the noise violation because they their cars get inspected in New York, unlike here in Florida. And if they don't, then they have to pay the fine. So, and the fine is significant there. I think it's over $800. So, there's an incentive for them to correct
the the uh the issue. Unfortunately, here the fine is much less and there's no incentive for them to fix it. They're not going to lose their vehicle. >> Yeah, I I think giving away things are a best course of action um is to continue
uh the program we're doing. Uh mostly done at at night. Like I said, 80% of citations are issued at night when people are most impacted by this. Continue doing that and then celebrating it uh publicly, whether social media, other means, just celebrating the fact that we're doing it. uh getting the
message out to folks that don't come to the beach and re your engines or play loud music. >> Yeah. So, uh well, let's let's get through this item and then I'll call the next item which is the muffler item. >> Uh well, who's moving it? >> I'll second.
>> Thank you. Call the vote. >> It is a public hearing and I see Mr. Mitch Novik on the line. Mr. Robick, you have two minutes. Please go ahead. >> Thanks, Ralph. Good good afternoon. Mitch Novik, uh, I like the conversation
you're having. Uh, I believe the 25 foot threshold should also apply to businesses, especially along Ocean Drive, the 1000 block. You have some businesses, which you can hear their music and screaming all the way to the
shoreline. Want to point out a hot spot. I spend a lot of time at Sixth and Jefferson where I've managed the property for I I don't know 35 36 years. Uh the golf carts of of as of late uh
coming down that sixth street corridor probably from Publix or Total Wine uh have been blasting and uh really uh impacting that section of uh of the beach. And thank you again. >> Thank you, Mitch. I see no one else
requesting to speak, so the public hearing is closed. >> Call the vote. >> Commissioner Bot, >> just a quick question. You know, Mitch Trades is a good point there. I see these um little free golf carts. They're not city freebies, but they're I guess sponsored by who knows whom, but they
down especially in the entertainment district and they have music blasting. What who's are they? How do they operate this way? And how do we I I have no issue with the music obviously, but like it doesn't need to be blasting that you can hear it a block away. >> So we have done we have done details in
the entertainment district specifically targeting those individuals and those reckless operators basically operating with noise uh blasting. We've written um numerous citations and and dealt with it. Obviously Mitch bringing it up is is it that it's moved to Sixth Street shows
that our enforcement in the entertainment juristic works but we need to expand it to >> but but those are businesses and I'm not even talking about the private operators but so do they have BTRs or is that a code thing where we can enforce that if they've been you know bad operators we
can pull their BTR? So again, I would defer to code to to answer that question, but if they're required to have a BTR and they're operating a business, then we we collaborate with code and we do the appropriate >> I would hope they're required to have a BTR if they're operating some kind of commercial taxi service.
>> Hi, good afternoon all her and Cardino code compliance. So um yeah, in our joint ventures out there, what we do is we'll go out and we'll issue the violation for not having a business tax receipt. Police usually arrest and will impound will tow the golf cart. But yes,
it is a code violation because they're conducting business on a public roadway soliciting these rights. >> Okay. So, what do they need to do to cure it then? I mean, they just need to get their BTR and then they can go about their business again. >> Correct.
>> Um, and then we'd presumably catch them with this 25 foot ordinance or whatever in theory. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Mr. May. >> Commission magazine. >> Um, Mr. City Attorney Mitch brought up a
point that I actually observed when I was in his neighborhood actually just this weekend. And while I certainly never want to be the word police are too heavy-handed in government, what people do inside their own businesses and their own walls will never be any of my business. Um, but there was uh one
establishment in particular that had their music blasting. We we could debate whether there should be outdoor live entertainment, things like that, but the actual music that was coming there was so egregious. Um I was with my daughter,
it it would offend anybody. Is there something where even where we're restricted uh in places that are grandfathered in and do have the uh open outdoor live entertainment abilities that there has to be some sort of common
decency threshold about what can emanate out of their establishments? >> Well, I mean, we we have our noise ordinance and so if if the music or the sound is unreasonably loud, that could could trigger a code violation. Um there are some businesses that have that have
grand been grandfathered in and I think theirs is triggered by um being over a certain decel level. >> Um so that would require taking a decibel meter and and determining. So so really what you're talking about would be a code enforcement. I
>> I actually mean the the content. >> I'm sorry. >> The content. >> Oh, the content. I mean, if if I would repeat 30 seconds of it up here, people would cover their ears in heart, >> right? Um I I believe that there would be some some First Amendment issues with
trying to regulate the content, but >> not within their establishment. They could do whatever they want within their establishment. We we're talking about what's emanating audibly and loudly on the public right of way. >> Yeah. I mean, I could look into that
further, but my general understanding is that uh people can shout profanity if they're in public. Um, >> there's a first amendment right. >> Can a business >> businesses have first amendment rights the same way that people do?
>> Yeah. >> Right. But we we must have some sort of regulations about uh you you couldn't optically have something. There has to be some sort of line. what you can have commission start giving examples on the day.
>> No, no, I I mean I hear what you're saying. There are certain things that are considered pornographic that you can't just have out in public. Um and I see our first amendment expert coming up here uh to to assist, but but there's a there's a difference between visual and and spoken.
Can I just ask a question because I think this you're picking up on a very good point and just in general sometimes a lot of these businesses they engage in activity that we give them the rights to engage in some of these activities like for example entertainment. They don't
they're not always entitled to life enter entertainment. And so to the extent >> to the extent that we're giving them a right that they are not entitled to we should at minimum ask them hey are you
agreeing to you know not use not you know engage in you know profanity in the entertainment that you're putting out there. Uh not engaging in anti-semitic entertainment like what we saw happen uh at at the nightclub. uh not engage in
homophobic uh stuff. uh the type of stuff that you know if we're giving you these actual rights that increase the value of your business and that increase the value of the of your property we at the very least I feel we should be able to at least ask them you know are you
willing voluntarily profer you know before we give you this do you voluntarily agree are you willing to state whether or not you agree not to engage in if and I'm going to use the anti-semitic artwork um that we dealt
with um recently. Yeah, that isn't even artwork. That was just like anti-semitism, you know, flaunting anti-semitism from a night life venue. Can't we do that? The question is whether we can ask for a voluntary profer of uh something that we
could not demand is an open question that you've asked us to look at and we are looking at. But the general rule is that you cannot impose an unconstitutional condition upon a permit or a license. And so if >> but that's not a condition if we're if we're we're asking them do you
voluntarily profer now they can choose to say no and God knows if someone someone says that they're not willing to agree to not engage in anti-semitic activity and not to not to engage in in racist activity and not to engage in
homophobic activity. I want to know that if someone is not willing to profer that I wanna I I wanna I wanna I want to know that I think it's important to to know your request we are currently uh thinking about that and thinking about
if it's possible and the best way to formulate it if we are so I wouldn't want to discuss it uh here on the dis right now but we are looking at it >> well at the right time if we do have that avenue you know perhaps we could work together with commissioner Joseph magazine uh on this because I think it
speaks specifically to the issue that you, Commissioner Magazine, are bringing up. Uh, and thank you for researching. I know you guys and your office has been putting a lot of time uh into researching this matter to make sure that we get that that um that control,
that safeguard in place, but doing it the right way. So we don't violate any anyone's rights, but we also protect and uphold the values of our community that that are to be an inclusive and a protective community that we're everyone can feel safe. Um and I think an
important process in that is using you know when the process when we're giving rights for live entertainment and for music and for noise uh rights that they don't have that we put that safeguard that you're speaking of in place. Yeah, cuz Rob, uh, it was so egregious. I
actually Shazammed the song. And again, I was with my nine-year-old. We're not just talking like, oh, I I casually hear I'm across the street and I hear it as as clear as Shazam picks up. And I'm looking here. They I'm not going to say it, but I'm just looking at the lyrics
of the song. They they use the N-word seven times. They F on bees. Hide is H. uh just just things that are not conducive to any type of you know uh not even a familyfriendly environment just common decency
>> right you lost me on some of those but the um I mean if if I mean obviously you have the noise violation if you if they're over whatever is allowed in their cup or by our general noise ordinance you can charge them with that if if an organization is allowed to play
music outside we cannot in almost every case including the cases you're talking about control the content of what they're doing. >> Okay, I appreciate that. >> We can't. So that's that's so we can't I mean there are certain things you can >> if they want to play the Hail Hitler song, they we can't do anything about
it. >> That is constitutionally protected. >> Yes. So um since this is an informative discussion, can you um illuminate why there is a standard a different standard for um visual things that are visually
offensive versus um things that are spoken that are offensive under the first amendment. >> Like for example, commissioner >> not going to play that game. >> Okay. Well, I mean, the the things that you can prohibit or restrict under the First Amendment are fall into certain
categories like fighting words or true threats or things that you say that it's going to incite someone to violence immediately against and against someone specific and words obviously lend themselves to that much more than a
picture like on a on a on a frame would lend itself to. Um and so in that way spoken words uh have can be restricted in some ways more because they have more power >> uh than written. >> But in this case it's actually the
opposite right >> that if if um the the phrases that were in the song were done up as cartoon caricatures for instance and put on a wall they would be visually repellent um and probably not permitted. But since
they're spoken or sung or whatever phrases, they are protected. >> No, I I'm sorry. I didn't realize that was what you were saying. I think they would have the same protection for in this context uh if they were written or spoken. No, but I'm I'm saying if if the
phrases were translated to illustrations of the phrase, like, you know, >> I mean, for example, we had a we I think we may still have a business that wanted to call themselves uh uh hamburger B. Uh
since we're inaccess, >> okay, and and and that was constitutionally protected. It was written on their sign and they had the right to do that. Uh, so that would be the example. But >> no, that's not like if if these were visual like
>> if if I may, I think she's trying to draw the distinction between words and pornography. And there is there is protection. I mean, you know, pornography is not protected under the first amendment. >> She did mention pornography. I'm following what Commissioner B is referring to. I'm sorry, we're talking
about pornography. No, I'm saying these the words that are explicit and offensive to, you know, sort of general run-of-the-mill decency, right? I don't want to get into the foot loose generation of what we can and can't hear, but if something were not
permitted to be visually represented with an a photograph or picture on a public right of way because it's offensive to the community standards, right? Then why would something that is the same level of offensive but is done
with words rather than images allowed to be on a public right away if it's offensive to community standards? >> In that context, they would be the same. There would not be a difference. There's a different legal analysis for uh obscenity and pornography in this ca in
the type of situation of like nudity. uh and that is a more detailed nuanced and different discussion uh that it has a different standard but as far as words and whether you say the B- word or you write the B- word on a sign that has the
same constitutional protection. >> Yeah. And Mr. Mayor, if you don't mind, I mean that's like I mean that's like hip-hop, you I mean, hip-hop consistently uses that sort of taglines of
mistreating of women. Okay. Um, you name it. And especially profanity. I I mean, what are we going to say? We can't allow hip-hop on on the, you know, for businesses to play hip-hop. Are we going to crack down on what they're going to
be playing? Look, I'm not a fan of it. It's not my It's not my It's not my choice of musical. I'm just saying like there's this is a slippery slope that we're going to go start going down on and are we going to really regulate what businesses play >> you have cont Yeah. Look at on one
extreme you have you know you have yes there's unfortunately we have the disgusting business that plays Ad Hitler in its club. Um and then you have businesses that are just playing you know the top 10 hits of hip-hop which could potentially fall under this
category. And I don't know if we really want to get into the business of regulating that. >> Where I was going was there's usually clean versions of any song, right? So, you can play whatever you want, but if you have people walking down our street
at 1:00 p.m. and they hear FFN, it's probably something that we don't enjoy, frown upon. But where does that line fall? like is it just allowed and there's nothing that we can do? >> Well, we usually think about it at the
outset when the legislation or the permit is is being for thought about in the abstract. Uh like when you think about are you going to allow music outside? We when we advise you we tell you well think about it in this context. This is what you may hear outside. Uh and so you you have contentneutral
uh ways of dealing with it which are noise or not allowing music outside at all or something like that. But uh once you do allow it uh you have to you can't >> regulate based on content >> informative.
>> Commissioner Fernandez. >> Thank you. Going back. So um Mr. Mr. Chief Deputy Attorney you mentioned >> when the language incites violence. >> Yes. >> That then the city could have uh in a
level of enforcement authority or a level of regulatory jurisdiction over the matter. matter. Words aren't protected by the First Amendment if they incite imminent violence. >> Okay. So, but you but that's an incite to violence. That's a call to action is
what you're saying. >> You could say it that way. >> Now, let me ask violence. >> Could wouldn't couldn't couldn't it be said that if if you're putting out there racist language that could incite violence. people who are offended by that, people
who are, you know, to whom it's something that's emotional. For example, you put something, you know, a song, you go to Little Havana, you go to Halia, and I'm sure if you put something that celebrates, you know, the Castro murderous regime,
um, you know, that's been depriving people of their rights and, you know, making human rights violations and arresting political descendants and descent and and all that. If you put a music hailing that, it's gonna incite
violence in in in some in some of those communities. It could incite violence right here. If if if you play that here, um we wouldn't have a way to regulate that because it's being done with the intent of creating, you know, an
incitement to violence >> uh to people to violence. >> But no, the what you're talking about is the heckler's veto. that that the effect on the listener who is offended by it is not the standard by which uh an imminent
threat of violence is measured. It is are you uh urging somebody to take violence against someone else now like I want you to go out and kill this gay person today uh is a threat of violence
and um the entire gay community may be very offended by that but it's not a threat of violence against all of the gay community so they couldn't react that way and uh act in self-defense for example. So the the reaction of people
who are hearing it except for the the the the exact threat that's being made is what's uh the what we have to look at here. >> Okay. >> Well, Commissioner Magazine, I hope you'll join us. Uh if if we this leads
to to to an ordinance, I know you've been working on this for a few months now. um looking at the issue of you know whether we can get a voluntary profer on on the matter of voluntary disclosure as to whether or not they agree you know
not to engage in this type of language or entertainment. Um I'd love to have Commissioner Magazine participate in >> it was Commissioner Joseph Magazine. >> Joseph Mag. Yes. We've got the original Joe Magazine in the audience by the way.
Shout out to him. the original >> OG, >> the OG >> Commissioner Mateo Selenus. >> I just want to circle back to um our police department and our code department because I understand there was a um crackdown on unlicensed golf carts and limousine services called
Operation Titalist, which uh led to the about eight arrests and multiple vehicles that were impounded. So, thank you for doing that operation um both to code and um our police department for working together so seamlessly and enforcing our laws. Thank you.
>> Take the vote. >> It is a roll call. And again, no one else is on Zoom or in the audience. I have a motion by Commissioner Fernandez and seconded by Mayor Miner. Commissioner Dominguez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Bot, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Matelinz, >> yes. >> Commissioner Suarez, >> yes. Commissioner Magazine,
>> yes. >> Commissioner Fernandez, >> yes. >> Mayor Miner, >> yes. >> Motion carries. Second reading, public hearing scheduled for April 22nd. That was item R5M. >> R9AB. >> R9 R9AB
is discuss take action enforcement efforts addressing excessive vehicular muffler exhaust exhaust noise. It's >> kind of a continuation of of the last item, but uh let's close the loop on this. So, I had brought leg legislation and Commissioner Dominguez uh co-prime
sponsor. We've actually uh co-prime sponsored several items uh recently relating to and again this gets back to the concerns we're hearing from from residents. So, just wanted to hear an update uh regarding our efforts. I think you kind of described some of them, but this is specifically to the the mufflers
and loud exhausts. And uh just obviously you know this well but just for the public some of the noises you hear from cars are actually legal if it's the car is manufactured that way but we're talking about it's kind of obvious sometimes I mean I know that the police department sometimes has to uh do um do
some checks on the car but generally when you hear those booming noises coming out of the exhaust system those are illegal and um so the the recent legislation that I brought along with Commissioner Dominguez fully supported by our commission was still have uh
nighttime details uh basically from 10 p.m. to 5:00 a.m. mostly because that's when people are trying to relax, go to sleep and um and and these cars clearly intentionally driving down our streets and and trying to disturb disturb the
peace. They're also easier to locate for your police department uh because there's not as many cars on the road so it's pretty obvious. I mean, I can see it from my window sometimes and I can pinpoint which car is. So, I just want to hear about your efforts, what uh you how many tickets we're issuing, how many are at nighttime during those hours.
Thanks. >> Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor, commissioners. Uh, Assistant Chief Danny Morgal on behalf of Chief Jones and the Miami Beach Police Department. So, I can tell you, and I alluded to it in the previous item, um, in 2025, specific to loud noise, loud mufflers emanating from
vehicles, we wrote 675 citations for the entire year. In the two and a half months of 2026, based on the recommendations from the commission and the guidance and the feedback that we've gotten from the from the the residents in the city, Chief Jones has made it a priority for us to focus on dealing with
this issue specific not only to the the locations that were in the resolution, which was the fifth street corridor, 41st Street corridor, both causeways, uh 71st Street and uh from 44th to 63rd along the Collins corridor. Um we have
written already in two and a half months 513 citations as compared to 675 of all of last year. The overwhelming majority of those citations as the chief mentioned over 80% 397 citations have been written on the midnight shift for
us which is after 10 p.m. and before that 6 a.m. window um at the direction of the commission. We're very proud of the workforce and the job that they're doing to prioritize this among the many different priorities that we give them constantly and they have come through
overwhelmingly and they will continue to do an amazing job at addressing this issue and if we need to continue to ramp it up, we'll continue to ramp it up. Again, we we started Operation Quiet Streets in January and we've partnered with FHP. FHP is also issuing citations and as I mentioned earlier, Miami police
is also doing this and we're also even seeing things on social media that Fort Lauderdale police and other jurisdictions are dealing with the same issues. Yeah. And and that's well to me I look at it as as a couple of one it there's a um it's always good to have police
presence. We talk about it all the time. So there's a couple of major spots whether it be Fifth Street off the MacArthur 41st 71st. I hate to leave some out because there's other areas in our city. Collins, Bell Isle, there's other places clearly, but we we sort of in the in the legislation that
Commissioner Dominganas and I brought that that our commission approved, we sort of hit on some major spots >> that impact that one car going down with that illegal exhaust impacts thousands of people. Thousands. >> And they hear it.
>> Um, you know, people jump out of their beds when they hear, by the way, I think there's a safety. I was on the highway, so it's not our jurisdiction, but I was on the on the highway and one of these cars with the exhaust came up. I mean, I literally jumped in my in my in driving. >> It was scary cuz I I didn't expect it. I
guess he I'm assuming it was a he hit the uh hit the pedal and uh and and I jumped. It's scary. It's dangerous. So these cars definitely need to be um pulled over, but so there's a police visibility aspect to it and they're easy to catch and that's why uh I think if we
have that high level detail and those cars are going to know that basically coming down any major intersection whether it be 71st, 41st or 5th, they're going to get caught. >> Yep. >> I mean is there an issue at having a literally a detail from 10 to 10 p.m. to 5:00 a.m.? >> No. No, there's not there's not an
issue. The the traffic level is less. So, it allows us to pinpoint those specific vehicles, which is a little bit more difficult when you have dense traffic. Um, and then the other advantage, too, is that we have a usually less volume of calls between 10:00 and 6:00 a.m. So, it has we have
available resources that we can target on not just the noise enforcement, but also speeding and, you know, reckless driving, things like that. So, it's maximizing the visibility and adding in the productivity and directing the workforce on the the the areas that are most important to obviously the the
community and to the commission. >> Okay. >> Anything else? >> No, sir. That's it. We're uh we're happy to come back next month and continue to report on the great job that our officers are doing. >> Okay. Great. Sounds good to me. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. I'm going to call um C 7J. C7J is amend city of Miami Beach Ocean Drive sidewalk cafe design guidelines. C7J was separated by uh Commissioner
Dominguez. >> Okay. So, this item drew uh some concern from uh folks on Ocean Drive and I'd like to refer this item to the Public Safety and Neighborhood Quality of Life Committee for further discussion.
>> Second that motion. Let's call the vote >> on C7 on C7 AJ referral to public safety. All in favor, please say I. >> Mr. Mayor, >> Commissioner Suarez, um, is this going to have any financial impact?
>> No, there's no financial impact on this. >> I was going to say maybe also refer to finance, but if there's no financial impact, it's fine. >> So, the item 70 is referred to public safety. That was C7J. No reszo.
R5C. R5C is an art of the mayor of city commission of city of Miami Beach, Florida. Amending sub part A of the city code entitles charter and amending chapter two entitled administration by amending article three entitled agencies boards and committees by amending division four entitled budget advisory committee by amending section 2-41
thereof entitled established purpose powers and duties composition by amending the name purpose and powers and duties of the committee providing for repealer servability clarification and effective date. This is a second reading public hearing. It is item R5C. Commissioner Magazine. >> Yeah, I appreciate this. Uh we had a
pretty robust discussion about this on first reading. I have since spoke with uh the chairman of the budget advisory committee and I think uh they had their latest and greatest meeting just this past week. Um Tamika I don't know if uh
you have any feedback of what they discussed there but from what was conveyed to me uh those changes um and the enhanced scope that we're looking for all seem positive. So uh I don't see need to prolong uh the discussion here. We went pretty detailed last time unless
anybody had any uh incremental comments or issues in between first and second reading. >> Sounds good. So that's a motion. >> I'll move it. >> I heard a motion from Commissioner Magazine. >> I second by Commissioner Bot. >> Sure.
>> Uh may I call the role? >> Yes. Uh it is a public hearing. No one in Zoom. No one in the audience requesting to speak. Commissioner Fernandez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Bach, >> yes. >> Commissioner Magazine, >> yes. >> Commissioner Suarez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Dominguez, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Matelas, >> yes.
>> Miner, >> yes. >> Motion carries. The item is approved. That was item R5C. >> CR A1. >> CR A. >> So, we are recessing as a commission meeting and reconvening as the North
Beach Community Redevelopment Agency. Uh, Commissioner Steinberg is absent. We're doing uh CRA one, which is approved commercial PA facade grant award Miami by Me Beach Express, Inc. >> I move the item. >> Hey, can you're not giving Steve his
chance in the limelight here. >> Thank you very much. >> You're welcome. >> Call the vote. >> So on uh North Beach CR1, I have heard a motion from Commissioner Fernandez. I believe I heard Vice Mayor Matel Selenas. Uh all in favor, please say I. I. >> That is is approved. 70 with one
absence. Motion to reconvene at the Miami Beach City Commission. >> Thank you. >> All good. >> All good. R seven A. R7 A D increase special magistrate compensation by $25. So moved.
>> Hold it. Hold it. Not there yet. Uh, Commissioner Fernandez. Seconded by Commissioner Matel. Vice Mayor Matelin. >> No discuss. >> What's the thing? just the what's the think behind this? >> So, the chief special magistrate whose
um compensation can be set by me administratively has not gotten a raise since 2023. This would be the equivalent of 3% per year since her last raise. Um, and the special magistrates that are set by ordinance by the commission will have
to bring back an ordinance. But this $25 would result in a 2% per year increase since the last time they got a raise, which I believe was in 2018. >> And what would this bring them amount to? uh would bring the chief special
magistrate from 275 to 300 and the ma uh magistrates from 175 to 200. Okay, let's call the vote. This is on R7 A. All in favor, please say I. >> I.
>> I. Any opposed? R7 A is approved. 70. Uh R5D R5D an ordinance of the mayor and city commissioner of the city of Miami Beach Florida amending chapter two of the Miami Beach city code entitle administration by amending article 3 entitled agencies boards and committees amending division 17 entitle city of
Miami Beach commission for women by amending section 2-190.4 four thereof entitled composition to modify the total number of members who serve on the commission for women and modify the number of members who may be appointed by each member of the of the city commission and providing for a theater subability clarification and an
effective date. R 5D is a second reading public hearing. >> Move it. >> Exactly. >> Let's call the vote. I will say uh since we're talking about the commission for women, what a great event we had last week honoring uh 10 exemplary women in our city.
um really was uh first class. You can see the exhibit in in Lumis Park. Thank you, Commissioner Bot. Um and uh it it was really a special event. Hundreds of We really had several several hundred people in attendance and I and I highly suggest you check out uh the 10 women
that we uh we we highlighted and and and honored. >> Mr. Mayor, if I might, um and the exhibit will be moving up to Almar Park when it has completes its run here in South Beach. I was trying to confirm that. So, thank you for confirming that. Excellent. >> And congratulations to your aid,
Commissioner Bod, who did such an incredible job. And you could tell that how proud she was of the work that she was doing. So, comm congratulations to you and to your team. >> Well, I can't take any credit for Sarah, but I will give her a huge shout out. She's up here upstairs. But also I would
like to point out um that yesterday was her birthday and she is doing all this as a very young, very accomplished and quite awesome human being. So >> um Sarah, I hope you're hearing the loud and clear. >> If not, we'll send the tape. >> All right.
>> Excellent. >> So have a motion by Commissioner Bot, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez. This is a public hearing. I see no one on Zoom and no one in the audience requesting to speak. Uh Vice Mayor Matio Selenas, >> yes. >> Commissioner Suarez, >> yeah. Commissioner Magazine, >> yes. >> Commissioner Dominguez, >> yes.
>> Commissioner Bach, >> yes. >> Commissioner Fernandez, >> yes. >> Mayor Miner, >> yes. >> Motion carries. The item is approved. That was item R5D. >> R5B. R5B is uh an ordinance of the mayor and city commissioner of city Miami Beach, Florida amending chapter 14 of the Miami
Beach city code entitled building regulations by amending article 7 entitled permits applied for hon or after March 1st 2002 by amending division 2 entitled demolition by amending section 14-421 thereof entitled notice of demolition to affect persons and by to affected persons by creating
section 14-442 thereof entitled one-way trap door installation prior to demolition and providing for repeal of ability confication an effective date. This is a second reading public hearing and it's item R5B. >> Commissioner Dominguez. >> Thanks. Um, so this item is second
reading and it's basically uh ensuring that before buildings demolished that there are trap doors for any animals that could have been trapped there. And with that, I move the item. >> Second. >> Is this call? >> Is this for also single family homes? >> Yes, it is. Okay.
It is a public hearing. There's no one on Zoom. There's no one in the audience. Uh, I have a motion by Commissioner Dominguez, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez. Vice Mayor Mattel Selenas. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Magazine, >> yes. >> Commissioner Suarez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Bach, >> yes. >> Commissioner Dominguez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Fernandez,
>> yes. >> Mayor Miner, >> yes. >> Motion carries. The item is approved. That was item R5B. >> R5E. R5E is an or notice of the mayor city commission of the city of Miami Beach Florida amending chapter two of the code of the city of Miami Beach entitle administration article three entitled agencies boards and committees division
22 entitled Miami Beach animal welfare committee section 2-190.59 >> thereof entitled composition to modify the composition of the voting members of Miami Beach animal welfare committee and providing for repeater qualification servability and effective date this is a second reading public hearing it is item R5E
>> commissioner Dominguez >> thanks so we have a situation where an organization um that was no longer active was still listed. So this ordinance changes so that any organization that's involved
with animal welfare can appoint rather than u mentioning one in particular and I move the item >> second. Call the vote. >> It is a second reading. Have a motion by Commissioner Dominguez. I have a uh seconded by Commissioner Fernandez. It is a public hearing. No one in Zoom. No
one in the audience requesting to speak. Uh, Commissioner Dominguez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Fernandez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Magazine, >> yes. >> Commissioner Bot, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Telenz, >> yes. >> Commissioner Suarez, >> yes. >> Mayor Miner, >> yes.
>> Motion carries. The item is approved. That was item R5E. >> Since you're on a roll, Commissioner Dominguez, we'll go with R5F. R5 F is an art of the mayor city commission of city beach Florida amending sub part A of the city code entitled general ordinances by amending chapter 10 entitled animals by creating
section 10-21 entitled interference with trapneuter vaccination return activities prohibited definition penalties to prohibit interference with specified trapneuter vaccination return activities and providing for repealer of ability cification and effectively this is a second reading public hearing it is item
R5F commissioner Dominguez >> so this item is for trap, neuter, vaccinate, release uh protection of the cat trappers and that includes the city and volunteer trappers. What tends to happen is um interference with the
trappers while they're doing TNVR. And so this item is strictly during a TNVR cat trap. Uh and it protects our city uh workers and volunteer trappers. >> I second the item. Move the item.
>> Call the vote. It is a public hearing. I see no one in Zoom. No one in the audience requesting to speak. I have a motion by Commissioner Dominguez, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez. Commissioner Fernandez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Magazine, >> yes. >> Commissioner Suarez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Dominguez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Bach, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Telenz, >> yes.
>> Mayor Miner, >> yes. >> Motion carries. Item is approved. That was item R5F. >> R5N. R5N is an orders of the mayor city commission of the city of Miami Beach for amending the code of the of of ordinances of the city of Miami Beach by amending chapter 90 entitled solid waste division 3 rates charges billing
procedure section 90-133 thereof entitled single utility billing billing to relocate the table of sanitation commercial impact fees to appendix A by amending appendix A to the city code and title fee schedule to add sanitation commercial impact fees imposed pursuant to section 90-133 and to include an
automatic annual consumer price index CPI adjustment for sanitation commercial impact fees, water impact fees, and sewer impact fees imposed by the city pursuant to section 90-133, section 110-167, and section 110-169 and providing for codification,
repeatability, and an effect update. This is a first reading public hearing. It is item R5N. >> Commissioner Bot. >> Um, before anybody panics, this is a correction. This is not new water fees or anything like that. Um, these fees
have not been updated. uh in close to 30 years and it's high time that we did. Um so I will turn it over to John to explain in further detail. >> Yes, John Norris, public works director. As Commissioner Bob mentioned, this does update the commercial sanitation impact
fees which have not been changed since 1998. So that's applied CTI CPI to come up with a current value in today's market. And it also adds CPI increases annually to water, sewer, and sanitation impact fees. So we don't find ourselves
in this situation in 30 years. So we'll update them annually, and I'm happy to answer any questions. >> What are the rates that are going up? >> I'm sorry, what are the rates? >> So there's a chart uh that we provided. A commercial unit with 0 to 25 units,
the uh monthly fee will go from $16 to $34. And then at the other end of the spectrum, a commercial building with 101 or more units would go from 50 to 109 per month.
>> And commercial units could be four unic or eight unicondo. >> Correct. That would be on the 0 to25. So this is an impact fee that's added to the solid waste collection for that building and that uh comes to the city
to uh compensate for the impact of adding the uh structures. So >> this is for new development. >> This is for well this is for every development the impact on our system to maintain the sanitation division. Is it
you mean would it be to it be for any commercial properties that are currently exist or just new >> current current exist? I'm sorry that currently exist. This is added to every commercial solid waste bill that waste connections or waste management would
have. >> So okay. So can you just for the public to hear what are the thresholds? It's from zero to >> Yeah, absolutely. So 0 to 25, 26 to 50, 51 to 75,
76 to 100, and 101 and above. >> What are the diff what are the rates percentages? >> So the associated rates from 0 to 25, the old rate was $16, it's going to $34.93. From 26 to 50 units, the old rate was
$24. It's going to 52.40 >> per per household. This would be for the complex that's getting the bill. So >> So that that's that $25 increase is shared amongst
>> shared amongst the entire building. Yes, sir. >> Okay. It's not per household. >> Correct. Correct. And from 51 units to 75 units, it goes from 30 to 6550. From 76 to 100 units, it goes from $40
to 8733. And then 101 and above goes from 50 to >> $19 annual fee. >> This is a monthly fee. >> Can you run that threshold again? So, okay, it's per month, but these aren't per unit.
This is per aggregated development. >> That's correct. >> So, we're going from 0 to what was the threshold? >> So, 0 to25 is the first bracket. That goes from $16 to 34.93. >> So we're talking less than a dollar
per unit. >> Correct. >> That's correct. Yes. >> Per month. >> That would be passed on to the >> per month. >> Correct. I'm just if if I may because you know
I'm concerned about passing utility costs to residents and we're working we're working very hard for example on an item >> to lower the cost of this specific of for example trash
collection waste collection >> we're working very hard on an item to lower cost on the residence I cannot come then on the other side pass this along when I thought that this was specifically for new construction. We're talking about new construction. I'm fine
with that and and perhaps the sponsor could take that as a friendly amendment focuses focuses on new construction. I I don't feel comfortable especially when we look at a lot of like all of our all of our forplexes are going to be getting
this increase. I that's something that I wouldn't feel comfortable with our forplexes, our smaller buildings. This is sometimes where, you know, the most affordable or the naturally occurring affordable housing is at I don't feel comfortable passing along any sort of
increase to these individuals because it gets passed down to the tenants that live in those buildings. Um, if the sponsor amends this to make this for new construction, 100% on board because I understand where
where the sponsor is coming from. Um, but to apply this to the existing that I cannot support. >> What do these fees go to, John? >> These basically come back to the city to support the operations of sanitation. So, you know, we have contracted
services doing solid waste collection and this is a fee that comes back to the city. We administer those contracts. So, we have staff that's basically administering all the commercial solid waste and this basically goes to help us
do that. And this does not include it's only new construction for the water sewer impact fees. That's a little different. That is when you're upgrading a meter or installing a new meter. So sanitation is on the monthly bill. >> Is this going to be
>> Can I Can I um Mr. Manager, you know, last year we discovered that there were fees um that had not been updated in the city for three decades. And as a result of that conversation, it might have been two years ago. As a result of that
conversation, the direction was given by this body to have the administration go through every single fee to make sure that there are CPIs applied and that they are brought up to current standards of of cost assignment. Um, you know, I
can't think of a single thing that we provide updated and um extensive service for that we were charging at a price of 30 years ago. I am not in I'm not a fan of adding cost to residents and I know
things are very difficult now but I also think that we need to pay a reasonable amount for the city services that we all rely on and getting your trash picked up is one of them and this is a um this is
something that we should never have been put in this position to have to do. I can't believe that, you know, for three decades there was nobody who caught this, but here we are. And we have to be the grown-ups in the room to do the
right thing to ensure that we don't have waste management issues. It is it is a a relatively small amount of money, and I'm not being cavalier. It is a small amount of money to ensure
and we get calls from residents all the time saying they haven't come picked up my trash or there's trash being dumped or uh whatever the issues are. If we don't update our costs to be in line with what the actual costs are,
something is going to have to give. So, how did we can you walk us through what the process was to arrive at these amounts? And again, if we'd had CPI built in properly, it would have increased by pennies every year and
nobody would have noticed this. And that's what's going to happen going forward. >> So, commissioner, through the mayor or the vice mayor, um, this item that you have in front of you is what would have happened if CPIs had been applied each
year since the last time there were were increases implemented. um this you know over that period of approximately 30 years you're seeing that many of these rates would have for
all intents and purposes slightly more than doubled and so that's what we are proposing here. Um you can see that you know those rates although they have may have doubled are still relatively small
in the grand scheme of things for the number of units that you're talking about. So if you were to divide it out amongst the number of units you would find that that rate increase is relatively minor >> through the mayor
commissioner Suarez. I I I totally can sign on that, you know, we need to catch the times, but shouldn't we phase this out and over a period of time instead of just all at once? >> Uh Jason Green, chief financial officer.
I I think to that point, I think that was perhaps what Commissioner Bot was getting to was the fact that the city hasn't done that over the past uh 28 or 30 years um by not having those very small incremental adjustments here. And I know >> I'm not saying small, right? I'm just
saying it's a little unfair to punish, you know, current residents for the previous mismanagement of financial responsibility from the city >> in like just like that. I'm saying maybe you phase it out over 3 four years instead of >> if that I mean if that is the
commission's will obviously that's something that uh could be you know looked at to come back. But I think it's just important a couple of things that I wanted to just clarify because there were a couple of questions. Just one on the sanitation fund. And I think a lot of this started uh due to probably a budget retreat from a year two years ago
when uh the office of management of budget raised at a May budget retreat uh kind of the red flag on concerns about the sanitation fund and all the wonderful things it does for the residents. Uh you know litter pickup and we've expanded a lot uh over the past couple of years. This commission's one of their major directions was a clean
and safe city. Uh to that effect, we've expanded our uh maintenance cycles related to litter pickup. Uh the residential pressure washing, sidewalk program, all of that gets funded through our co cap programs. All of that gets funded through here. And it had a major structural deficit uh at the end of the
day. That was either going to make some rates go up dramatically or or a mixture of that or service level cuts. And to that effect, I believe Commissioner Bot was the one who sponsored this was originally look, I think she mentioned, look at all the different uh impact or
connection fees uh that we have across the city that haven't been looked at, that haven't been indexed to inflation to rectify that situation. Last year, the first part of this ordinance is the the connection fees or those one-time connection fees for new developments that haven't been updated in 20 or 30
years, and we lost those monies. That was rectified by the commission last year. But the one thing we realized going through this exercise is when we did that we it was through just I think through paperwork error we didn't add a CPI escalator to it. So that that's the first part of this ordinance is that
water and sewer connection fees for new developments that was approved by commission last year to add a CPI escalator like most fees do. So that's the first part related to the water and sewer on the one-time developer connection fees. >> Could we vote on these individually? So
could we vote on that part? I think we're all aligned there, right? >> I don't know if there's an appetite for the body to >> Well, and then on I I think we can if there's a determination to approve one and the other one to come back in a different form that could be that could be looked at. And then on the sanitation
fees, that was one that was also discovered just like the water and sewer and even further back wasn't since 1998 that those rates have been adjusted. So these are just if there had been a small incremental rate adjustment per uh per year over all those times and I think as our public works director was stating is
though that looks like you know obviously had doubled but when you spread it over a 50 unit building we're talking about you know pennies per month perhaps at the end of the day and this goes again I just wanted the importance of all the things of the sanitation fund. So, it's going to, you know, very specifically where these dollars are
going. It's for clean city, clean parks, clean right ofway, clean sidewalks. So, just wanted to, you know, this is >> we got it, Jason. You don't need to sell this on it. But look, the condo owners in Miami Beach particularly are getting, you know, there's like a death by a thousand cuts, right? There's now the
FPL raised their rates. Uh, condo special assessments, you know, you you name it. Um, and this is just another hike. So, I'm not a Look, I I want to be financially responsible obviously, but I I don't I
think it's a little bit just I think a little too much to just do it all at once. I don't know. I mean, you have one commissioner, Fernandez, who doesn't like from what he just says, he's going to be opposed to the idea. I don't know if he's be amunable to maybe
a a a step increase by 25% for the next four years to get to where we are. That way we can kind of phase it in. I don't know how the rest of the body feels about that. But, you know, there's we're going to be I we're going to be voting probably soon on everyone else,
right? Um for for uh more water impact fees. So, >> I don't know. I I'd like to see what the rest of the body feels on this. >> Could we at a minimum agree that we're
going to start implementing a CPI >> per year? I >> right. I I think that is a big because what you're saying is there hasn't been a CPI in 30 years adjustment for 30 years. So I think at a minimum just like
almost any other fee, right? You add a CPI just to keep up so we don't get further and further behind. I think that should be kind of the base minimum part of our discussion. And then if we want to do a step in, if we want to do maybe CPI
plus 1% each year um for five years or we can get creative between first and second reading, but I would ask at least if we add C that we start applying CPI right now, even if we don't increase the fees, that at least uh we add CPI
adjustments annually. >> Yeah. I mean, I think you know, it's obviously up to the commission how they want to do. they wanted to do a phase in one, you know, and do uh, you know, one half of that value now and the other half we just would modify the table to have a an immediate 20, you know, 26
implementation and a 2027 number. Uh, that's really up up to the commission. If if you wanted to split it in half, let's say, and go 50% of the way uh to the for like I'm just using the $16 to the 34.93, whatever that halfway increase is, and do that immediate and
the other one to be to be implemented in 2027 and then for the CPI to be escalated beyond that. I I I think that that's that's reasonable if if that's a happy medium. >> Commissioner Matteo Selenus, >> do we know I'm looking at this chart here. Do we know how many buildings that
we have in these ranges? So yeah, I know it's a uh Okay, >> I don't have that number with me. We can get that. >> I'd like to see that because I do agree. You know, the the the smaller buildings from 0 to 25, you know, if there is a
building that only has eight units or 12 units, they're going to be paying a lot more than the buildings, you know, that are over 100. It it just it just doesn't seem to be fair. And those smaller buildings from 0 to 25 generally are the more affordable older buildings that are
you know they don't necessarily um you know they're in a tougher spot and I think the math just doesn't even though it's it's I get that it's equal across the board. It's a double number from what they're paying now. But then if the smaller buildings you know have less units they're paying more versus
the larger ones, you know. So I am hesitant with this. I I would like to look at this a little bit more. >> Commissioner, we have another item that's going to address those small buildings. Uh we had first reading. We'll be coming to second reading. I think it's on the 22nd of April
hopefully. >> Yeah, we're we're finishing working on it, but that will probably address that part of this because then they will go to a different uh contract. So So >> So why don't we just wait then until
that's finished? Take it step by step. I'm okay with adding a CPI like what Commissioner Magazine said at least moving forward. >> We're saying that the water impact is for new builds, but the sanitation is for >> it's an right. The sanitation is an ongoing fee that funds all the
activities of the sanitation fund. The water and sewer connection fees as the commission tackled last year. >> Can we bif a motion on the the water fees? I'm 100% fine supporting that. I will not vote today to pass along a cost to our fixed
income residents. our residents who are making who are facing difficulties facing uh making ends meet and and in fact you know we sent the homestead relief check in the mail because we understand in residents are facing cost
but we didn't send that to tenants and tenants are going to be affected by this as well and because we weren't able to send that relief to tenants is why I've been working so closely with public works uh to see in what other ways can
we uh help our residents uh by lowering other costs such as some some of these um sewer costs, not sewer uh waste collection uh costs. Um, and so today I'm not going to sit here and, you know, while I'm exerting so much effort with
staff and meeting with attorneys and meeting with the way holers and meeting with public works to see how can we lower the cost on collection while at the same time pass them um this this other impact fee increase that I don't
feel comfortable. So we can bifurcate um I'll be I'll feel much more comfortable. If I could just ask one clarification, is the bifurcation that the table meaning the rates being gapped up on the retroactive CPI is what would be pulled out for now, but both the water and sewer impact and sanitation
would just have the future CPIs added to it or no >> that was a lot and I will ask you attorney that to me >> down Jason >> wanted to ask because there have been some I think a little bit of discussion that there would seem to be okay on
having the CPI added to the both the water and sewer and the sanitation on a going forward basis with this retroactive catch up on the sanitation of what you I think are >> Commissioner Fernz wants to both I Commissioner Pernz and I want to bifurcate
>> I'm okay with the CPI moving forward on both water and sir >> that's what >> um but I would like to bifurcate the I guess the >> yes the catch up of of the 20 30 years >> so through the chair if I may what I think we could do here is we could bring
back the CPI increase for a second reading and then the sanitation element which is the catchup could be a a a new ordinance first reading uh so that everybody could study it and and be comfortable with it. >> If I can can the can the CPI is that we
are at second reading could the CPI is in there be be approved today? >> Pardon me. The CPI can move forward to second reading. This is just first reading today. >> No, this is second reading. >> No first reading on the screen. >> Okay. And if it was second reading, we could
do that, but it's not. >> I apologize. >> No problem. >> Okay. So, I'll make a motion to move forward with CPI on a pro for basis. >> Second. >> Okay.
>> It is a public hearing and I have to uh Mr. Mitch, >> this doesn't increase any cost in our residence today. >> Is that correct, Mr. Attorney? When the CPI increases in October, that will be the first time that it will increase. Today, there is no increase.
>> The CPI is what? 3%. >> I don't think we'll have >> telling us. >> I thought it was just for new builds. >> I'm sorry. I thought it was just for new builds moving forward. What we're approving today, >> the water and sewer, all the water and sewer connection fees are always for new builds. >> Okay.
>> The sanitation is an ongoing charge for all existing >> and that's what we're coming back with the sanitation. what what it appears you'll be approving today on first reading will be a CPI escalator for both of those going forward. >> So new bill >> would adjust the rates today. It would
be October 1st which is normal. >> I I think the question coming up is that CPI going to be applied to sanitation impact as well. >> Yes, that's what they're discussing. And it would be October 1st which is typically when all fees go >> I understood it to be across the board. Yes. >> I'm going to if
>> and it won't be now. will be October 1st when all >> I want to know what we're voting on as it relates to costs and I see a lot of a lot of uncertainty. So just to cl make it as simple as possible, right? We have two fees here. Neither of those fees have been
increased in 30 years. They haven't had any type of CPI step up in 30 years. Water, sewer, sanitation. We the original ordinance was to say, let's do a one-time catchup for the last
30 years. We're going >> sanitation. >> Yes. We're going to shove that. We're not implementing that. But as fiduciaries of our system, we're saying, "Okay, we can't be 31 years behind and 32 years behind and 33 years behind." So
like just about any other fee, we're going to on a go forward basis, our water and sewer and sanitation impact fees will have a CPI applied to it. >> Mr. Manager, can you confirm all this please because this is really your responsibility.
>> Yes. So what I believe the debate was is whether we are going to bifurcate the water and sewer impact fees from the sanitation impact fees. I think what's being discussed on the table right now is taking the CPI for the water and
sewer impact fees and the CPI for the sanitation impact fees as a package to move forward today and putting the sanitation ketchup um as part of a future discussion.
>> I'll second that. I I heard originally a motion from >> We have public comment. >> It is. Yeah. And we have two individuals waiting to speak and and Sarah, you can go up, but originally I heard a motion from Commissioner Magazine and uh Vice Mayor Monica Matelinas. Is that correct?
>> No. So, Commissioner Bot seconded then. >> I second it. >> So, motion by Commissioner Magazine, seconded by Commissioner Bot. Uh, please go ahead. >> Hi, Sarah Deos Reyes. Personally, I'm I'm a realtor and I do have my clients that I do manage in small buildings and
they are getting hit very much with an increase in their maintenance because of the of the reserves and that's really huge. Some of them are trying for one year to collect some money and then get some credit, you know, from the bank to
have it there. But they're really getting hit the small buildings who are fivetory five stories, you know, not the big ones. I mean, we're getting hit. The big ones are getting hit, but I'm saying it's more impact on those type of building. Three floors, five floors. You have to think about that when you do
this. So, just letting you know. >> Thank you. No one else in the audience. I see Mitch Novik requesting to speak. Go ahead, Mitch. >> Thank you again, Ralph. Mitch Novik, I've been watching our water rate
increases for 30 years. need to correct the the record. Uh for since the days of Jimmy Morales uh being our city manager, we've had an automatic CPA uh CPI increase every October.
>> Uh all this leads to housing on affordability. Uh David Durmer, former mayor and commissioner David Durmer, perhaps the best legislator this city has had, policy maker this city's had in
uh decades, would never uh approve as a as a policy and as a promise he made to p to the public, never approve any of these types of rate hikes and fee hikes. And he's he stuck by that. Um what
what's going to give uh what's going to give what's what's going to give is you guys are going to have to focus in on pay uh spending our money wisely. We have 500 more employees uh today than we
had when Jimmy Morales took took office. We need to reduce our city staffing uh and do what's financially responsible and and that's and that objective needs to be towards the residents not towards
the monster monster of government. Thank you. >> Thank you. Our next caller, >> wait, can I just through the mayor? Um, can we clarify because Mitch just said that we are trying to raise uh a rate that has already been raised.
Can we please set the record straight? If he's correct, let's address it. If that's a misunderstanding, let's address it, please. >> So, >> I was just going to mention that I think what Mr. Novik is speaking of are the uh
user fees related to water and sewer. What we're talking about today are impact fees that are charged as new construction is coming online and they need to connect to our system. They have a impact to that system and we're trying
to offset a small percentage of that cost. >> Okay. So, I just want anybody who's listening to understand there are two different types of fees and we are talking about the one that has not been addressed in three decades.
I want that to be loud and clear. >> And not only that, Commissioner apologies. >> While it hasn't been addressed in 30 decades, that's not um sorry, 30 years. It's not an ongoing monthly fee. The
water and sewer fee is strictly a one-time fee for new development. Right. Correct. So, we cannot sit here and talk out both sides of our mouth about, oh, all these uh billionaire developers, they're doing all this and they don't
help out with anything. This is a chance to make a 30year too late modest change to just increasing from CPI from a price that was set
in the '9s in the 80s. >> I'm a little conf I'm a little confused now. Hold on. I'm a little confused. So >> the sanitation fee is applied monthly. The water and sewer fee is a one-time impact setup fee only for new development.
>> Okay. Can I make a suggestion? I'm going to make a motion to bifrocate uh the water and sewer impact fee which is the one that's on new development. So, we can do a motion on that if the if the sponsor would allow. I would like to to to make a motion to bifrocate that
because I can support that. If we're talking about new development, I will 100% on the new development that's coming into our city. I will 100% support an increase in the impact fees that Commissioner B, thank you for leading on this because it is 100% long
overdue. Uh, and three decades is way too long of infrastructure impacts and you are taking the leader the the leadership to finally address that, Commissioner Bod. I'll be happy to make a motion to bifurcate uh that part so that we can vote on that and maybe then
we can vote on the other because the other I cannot support if the other means >> there's already a motion on the floor then >> but hold on if if we can clarify then we'll almost have to bifurcate the bifurcation because where we said we go okay we're not going to change the fees
in a rears we're just going to start CPI going forward but if we're going to bifurcate water and sewer from sanitation and we're just talking about new development then I think we do the catchup that's 30 years in a rear end
and add the >> through the Mr. Mr. Mayor this is already starting to get a little out of hand. Can we can we just defer this one month? Honestly like this is this is getting a little out of hand and I think it's not even I'm having a little hard time tracking this. I can't imagine the
residents are having a hard time track if if we're going to do it let's do it right. Let's do it responsibly. Let's have let's have plenty of more time to prepare for this. At the next meeting, we can discuss this and dedicate a time certain for this because this does impact a lot of people. As Sarah said,
there's a lot of people who are hurting out there who need help. And I think it's I think it's a disservice to our taxpayers if we kind of just rush this and a and kind of kind of shotgun this through. I think let's just defer one month and
then let's really get our bearings straight. >> So, I'm going to make a motion to defer. >> I'll turn it to our city attorney since we have now two motions on the table. >> Three motions. Great. >> Well, and before the motions because there is a motion on the table, but the motion to defer would would would take precedence. Um, but I think there is a
little confusion here and I would love for for Jason and or John and the manager. The water and sewer connection fees, those were already updated. You did that in >> June of last year. So all that this does to those connection fees is adds the CPI
the sanitation fee that is the one that has not been addressed for 30 years and this ordinance would both update and start to apply the CPI. >> Correct. >> So I don't know if that helps but uh but the motion >> connection fees were >> so why don't we just get that out of the
way right? If we want to bifurcate things, we can all sit here and simply agree that we can just tack on the CPI for the water sewer impact fees. That way when this comes back in a month, it'll just be the sanitation part and we
could discuss twofold whether there's going to be any catchup for Mar and whether we're going to apply CPI going forward. But if we truly want to simplify things, this is as simple as possible. In previous months, we passed in a new impact fee for only new
development for water and sewer. What this portion is that we can vote on here is just to include that it will be updated at the rate of CPI going forward. That that's very clear. That's very simple and I think probably what we intended to do anyway. And what that'll
also do is in a month when it comes back for the sanitation side, it simplifies that so we don't even have this discussion on the table on two different parts. So right now what I'm suggesting if we go with what Commissioner Fernandez suggested, I'll second that
this bifurcate it only address the water and sewer part today. As the city attorney just mentioned, we all voted to increase the water sewer impact fees that hadn't been updated in 30 years. The motion before us given uh Commissioner Fernandez's direction is
simply to continue applying a CPI adjustment so in 30 years we don't have to do another catchup. That part is very simple and then we'll have a little more complex and comprehensive discussion on the sanitation side perhaps a month from now. >> Commissioner Dominguez.
>> Okay. >> So this item has gone in a few different um directions. I'd like to go back to the sponsor of the item, Commissioner Bot. What is your intention on how this item should move? >> Hello from this side of the world.
>> You want to change side, huh? >> Um, yeah. Sorry. >> Um, >> I would like to move the CPI on both items or no, is it on on it's on both now? I'm so turned around. I'd like to
move the CPI because that has to happen. That's a no-brainer. It has to happen. And I'm very okay with coming back next month with a a different conversation about how to catch us up on sanitation. Whether it's we do half of it um this
upcoming year and then 25% and 25% or if we do CPI plus some percentage over the next five years. I'll leave that to you guys to proceed and come back to us with a plan. but that we're making this far more complicated than it needs to be.
And I know that you're working on a sanitation program to carve out the smaller buildings. So, we will make sure that whatever gets accomplished in that um in that undertaking gets applied to this as well, so they're not forgotten.
I I think we've just overcomplicated the >> significant. Are So, are you moving that item? >> Yeah. So, that's >> I'll second it. >> So, I think that was on there and it was sec and I seconded it. >> Okay. So I have two different motions completely. The original motion is what Commissioner Bot just said. Then we have
the second motion that Commissioner Fernandez and Magazine said just for the water impact fees. >> And just to move forward with the first motion. >> The first motion is CPI for both the water and sewer and the sanitation. So that one needs to be voted on first.
>> Okay, I'll second. >> So let's do that. So the first motion is Commissioner Bot. Commissioner Doming uh Dominguez is second. This is CPI on both water and uh impact fees. Water impact fees and sanitation.
>> Um yeah, I I just got a text message from Mitch Novik and he sent me a picture. I think we all got it, a picture of his bill where it says uh notice all building customers pursu an ordinance 2016 4039 effective 1st 2025 base consumption components of the water
and sewer chargers will increase by 1.6%. 6%. So >> that looks like CPI. So what >> that I think as the manager said that's the usage fee, not a connection fee for new new construction. >> I I'm just going to suggest, you know,
I'm going to defer to to to my colleague. I'm just I'm not feeling comfortable voting on this today. Um I my you know our
a number of us found out here that this was going to apply to existing construction. Um which is not what I had discussed in my briefing. Um if we have to vote on this today, I want to be able to be supportive and I always like to
get to a place of a yes. But if I have to vote on this today, I I'm going to have to vote no. Uh very respectfully because I and I say respectfully because I understand the intent and the effort here and how responsible the effort is, but I just cannot support this today. Um
if or we can bring it back next >> first reading. So you can support it on first reading making changes of meeting with the sponsor by second reading. But this is an item that's been on for months. It was just not reached. >> Yeah. I I I hear what I think we all
hear loud and clear what the concerns are. It is first reading. It has been on for months and months and months. And I think that even if second reading doesn't take place, I mean, I think we can get there by April, but if we need more time, the second reading can be assigned for for May. I think we can get
there, but I would really hate to get this kicked off this pile because it's taken I don't Ralph, I don't know if you have in front of you how long it's >> not in front of me, but I can I can look it up if you want. Yeah, I mean it's been it's been on forever and so I don't want to lose the progress. >> So maybe so so so let's do something.
Let's let's vote on this today and maybe we can have just a quick sunshine meeting just to make sure that we're all on the same page that we all understand it clearly. Uh because I know I think there's even members from the administration that didn't even understand it clearly before today. uh so that by the time it comes to second
reading >> we all make sure I just want to make sure that we are not passing cost >> to residents while I'm I am actively working trying to reduce cost for them on a recurring basis. So, if that's the case, you guys are hearing loud and
clear what he's saying. You know this inside and out. Should we break these two items apart right now? Water and sewer and sanitation. >> That's >> or do we break it apart, CPI? And >> you're not going to have his support and
perhaps others. >> I think the easiest way, hold on. The easiest way is to have these travel in two different paths, right? We have a vote for water and sewer. We have a vote for sanitation. >> I agree with that. Yeah, that I feel more comfortable with >> because you're talking about two
different populouses here. One is being charged for new development on developers, right? The other is for existing residents. >> On point. Yep. >> Read the room. Let's allow these to travel differently. Right. I say we take a vote on the I don't know how we could do this legally, but take a vote on the
water and sewer and then defer the discussion on sanitation. >> Okay. I like where Commissioner Magazine is at. Well, I think just procedurally you're gonna have to start with the initial motion which was to apply CPI across the board and then if that fails, you go to the second motion.
>> So, could we do a friendly vote down of that? As you said, >> the motion. >> Yeah, with >> somebody could withdraw that motion. Sure. >> Who made the motion? >> Mr. B made the motion. >> Withdraw the motion. >> Commissioner Magazine's motion. >> So, I have a motion on Commissioner Fernandez, sorry, Commissioner Magazine
made a motion uh seconded by Commissioner Fernandez. is this is only CPI new impact water and sewer fees >> going forward. >> I for the mayor I mean far >> respectfully we're >> this is really unprofessional. I I understand this has been on the agenda
but we're like learning on the fly right now what is what >> I mean come on >> I think that's our fault. I mean >> it's sure it's our fault but like still doesn't two wrongs don't make a right I think. I mean what's Can I finish please? What's been on the agenda for months? What's what's the what's maybe
next month we have a packaged after having a sunshine meeting we have a package deal we have we really thought this through but I mean do we really want to you know vote on this where clearly for the last 45 minutes we've kind of just been learning on the fly what's what's what and I and I wouldn't
wouldn't necessarily place the blame on us I mean our administration I haven't had this conversation there he hasn't brought this up to me you know so again I I I'm with Commissioner Fernandez. I don't feel comfortable voting on this today. I'm going to vote
no. So, you guys can vote at your conscience, but I was simply saying, let's just wait one month. Let's have a sunshine meeting. Let's really iron everything out. That way, we all feel comfortable and then the and the voters of Miami Beach can see that we've been professionally prepared for this and and
move accordingly. I mean, I don't see what the big deal is. It's one month. It's and then we'll be better informed and we'll have a much more thoughtful discussion instead of on the day on a commission meeting. >> Well, I think that's how discussions are supposed to happen given the sunshine
that this is where we have discussions. This is where we hash things out, right? We can't talk to each other in private and public. This >> Yeah, but we could have a sunshine meeting. We can call a sunshine meeting. >> I mean, this is a sunshine meeting, right? Like >> no, like a sunshine meeting dedicated to this. I mean, we're we're going to be raising rates on our customer on our on
our residents. Well, but if if we if we address the motion that Commissioner Fernandez has on the floor with me, it actually does that. Uh, Commissioner Suarez, it makes this simple, right? Where the sanitation we could discuss
whether that's in a sunshine meeting or next commission meeting and we travel in two different paths. The water and sewer is very simple. We've already voted to increase the impact fees that hadn't been updated on 30 years. This is just adding almost a text amendment to make
sure that they continue to be adjusted by CPI. It doesn't impact any existing residents at all and it actually cleans up this process. So then we could have that more robust discussion on the sanitation fees. This actually just cleans it up and gets rid of some of
this back and forth >> prefully occupancy. Respectfully to my colleagues, respectfully to my colleagues, this is the first reading of two. I can't tell you the number of times that we have had
um differences of opinion amongst ourselves on the details of how to get to where we want to go. And we have time and time again said, you know what, direction has been given. Come back to us with second at second reading with
the item cleaned up and and fixed. We have also said we will have a sunshine meeting to make sure that between now and second reading we will be in agreement with the direction and at second reading if it's not there we can defer it at this point. Why why are we
not extending the same grace to this project as this initiative as we do to other initiatives? >> If I may Mr. Mayor >> Commissioner Fernandez and let's call the vote. For a long time, we've been looking at cost savings on utility rates. I mean,
there's been an item, I think I connected you with an entity actually that reached out to us that looked at ways in which we could save money for people based, you know, through their utility rates. And we've been specifically this issue has been an
issue of concern for a number of years. this issue issues relating to rate increases potentially to our residents. And so and and so in the in the way that it's being described by Commissioner Magazine, it makes sense to me because
we can still move forward with a significant part of your legislation while we still figure out the other part that would have a more direct impact to residents uh that are living here now.
>> Understood. But why wouldn't we do that between first and second reading? And if second reading needs to be pushed out till May because we're not there yet, so be it. But why are we >> because it gives residents an opportunity to object or to hear? And the more public input that we can have >> been very consistent on this. I'm sorry
and I'm sorry. Zero item and I want to be able to to to support you and the part that I feel very comfortable supporting, but I have just been very very very consistent. Mr. manager, you've asked us to have discussions about rate increases in the past, as has
Jason, as has our current public works director and previous public works directors and I've been and I've held the line on it and I said, I don't want to talk about it until we figure out how do we address the lower income people, the people who are struggling, the people who are going to end up absorbing
these costs because it certainly won't be the association. The association is going to pass it on to people and and it's certainly not going to be the landlords. they're going to pass it on to the tenants and I'm just very mindful and very cognizant and try to put myself
in their shoes as I know all of us do and especially you commissioner bod uh but I've just for a long for I think probably two or three years now I have been very very very very consistent and very passionate about this that we don't
take any legislative action as it relates to these utilities that is going to be passed down to the most struggle struggling segment of our population. Um they don't they it's it's expensive enough for them right now. Yep. So
before we over complicate this further, the motion on the floor I think is very simple, very digestible and very doable for all of us, right? And that is to separate the discussion for the water and sewer and then the sanitation. And we vote to apply a go forward CPI that
only applies to new development on the water and sewer. We have already caught up 30 years that that has not been forward. So this is a very simple routing a CPI metric. Then we're going to have basically have a separate item where we discuss the more robust
sanitation. That's the one that's not so much confusing, but where there's a lot of different viewpoints about where we go. And I think separating those two allows us to have, sorry for the pun, a much cleaner discussion. >> Oh,
right. So, what we should be voting on given there's a motion in a second is are we going to apply a CPI charge on an annual basis on water and sewer impact fees that is only applied to new development. >> Yep. Second.
>> It is a It is a public hearing. I have one more person requesting to speak. Susanna, go ahead, please. >> Good afternoon, uh, commissioners. So in in regards to the matter of the increase of the water, sewer and sanitation first of all buildings are getting increases
uh every year uh and I understand that it's not an impact fees but solid waste management for instance just from last year to this year went up 4%. Uh I'm glad to hear that you're planning to apply the impact fees at least for water and sewer only to new developments
because really the impact fees are are prompted by new developments. So they should bear the cost. Uh in regards to the concerns that both Commissioner Suarez and Commissioner Fernandez uh repeatedly stated for residents in the old older buildings that is a legitimate
concern. As we know Sears came into effect uh the uh costs have gone up. I can tell you that just with for our association we had to raise maintenance fee by 22%. So, and we do have older people living
in our buildings in older buildings that are on a fixed income where most of their money actually goes to pay for medication. So, it's very important to be mindful of those people and the fact that what may uh be construed as a minor
increase all around to people on a fixed income that are older, it's not a minor issue. uh it's it's you know it might move them out of the beach or may you know uh make it impossible for them to live here and um
so we definitely don't want to put people in a chokeold and um Commissioner Suarez asking for uh more information to make an informed decision I think is responsible and legit and I and I and I thank Commissioner Suarez and M and and
Commissioner Fernandez in particular for wanting to have more information so that they can better represent the interest of the community and also to make sure that whatever decision they make it's made with facts uh that are corroorated
by uh documentation. Thank you. >> Thank you. Our next caller is Elizabeth Laton. >> Hi, good afternoon. Um I just wanted to say thank you uh to everyone for bringing these uh impact fees uh current
and also bifurcating it. I think that's the right way. Um we cannot continue to maintain our systems the way we have been without doing this. Um it's very simple as uh Commissioner Magazine said it's a to new developments only and we
have to do it. We cannot with all of the new things that are going to be coming onto Washington Avenue and Lincoln Road. Um we it just has to be done and I just would like this to pass. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. I see no one else in Zoom. No one else in the audience requesting to
speak. May I call the role? >> Can we just be very clear on what we're voting on right now? >> Sure. Um, right now you're voting on the motion that was made by Commissioner Magazine, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, which is to move forward with the CPI increases only as to the water
and sewer connection fees. And then the >> development, >> well, those are only on new development or on changes to an existing water service. And then that would come back for second reading next month. The sanitation will be exerted from this and
that will come back for a first reading. um next month presumably. >> Okay, let's call the role. >> Commissioner Dominguez, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Selenas, >> yes. >> Commissioner Suarez, >> yes.
>> Commissioner Magazine, >> yes. >> Commissioner Fernandez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Bach, >> yes. >> Mayor Miner, >> yes. >> A second reading public hearing is scheduled for April 22. >> Mr. Mayor, >> Mr. But
>> um John, will you be ready to talk about sanitation in April? >> Yes, that that shouldn't be a problem. >> So, respectfully, Mr. Mayor, would we be able to assign this to a time certain in April so that we could make sure it doesn't we don't lose more? >> Sure.
>> Okay, that would be great. >> R 7A. >> R 7A is a public hearing. Approve certificate of appropriateness demolition of building at 833 6th Street R7A.
>> I make a motion. I mean, we've literally discussed this to death. >> Motion and a second. I have a motion by Commissioner Magazine, seconded by Commissioner Swore. Is it is a public hearing. I see no one on Zoom. No one on in the audience requesting to speak. Roll call. Let's call the vote.
>> R 7A. All in favor, please say I. I. >> Anyone opposed? hearing none. R7A is approved. 70. >> I know this is purely symbolic. I know it's moving forward, but this is breaking my heart, so I'm going to be a no. >> Uh, so you are an O. A no on R 7A. That
is Commissioner Bot. So item is approved 61 with Commissioner Bot voting no. with all this stuff. >> No, it's it's uh this has been through so much. Uh congratulations Eric and our
fire department. >> Really quickly, Eric Troll is on behalf of the uh on behalf of the Miami Beach Firefighters Union. Just wanted to say thank you all for your continued support and again we don't want to see the demolition either, but it's unfortunately, you know, it's where we are today. Um you know, but thank you all for your continued support to get us
a new fire station, let our uh firefighters, men and women sleep in, you know, actually, you know, acceptable conditions. We really appreciate it. Thank you. >> Thank you, Eric. R9D. R9D is DRB appeal number 25-112
filed by Michael Kger. R9D. >> Milk. Nick, welcome. Welcome to the day here, >> bro. This is going to be fun. Thank you, mayor, and good afternoon, members of the commission. This is an appeal of a design review board approval
for a new two-story single family residence at 50 West Alto Drive. The application included a waiver from the maximum height limitation for single family homes and a waiver from the sitewall uh requirements. The appeal was filed by Michael Creger, the owner of
the property to the south at 34 West Toledo Drive. Because this is an appeal of an order of the design review board for specific property, the city commission is sitting in a quasi judicial capacity. Your decision must be based on the record before the DRB and
no new testimony or evidence may be taken. Any exparte communications by members of the commission have been disclosed on the record and I've given copies to uh to the parties. Under the code, the city commission can only reverse or remand a decision of the
DRB if the commission finds on a 5-7 vote that the DRB either failed to provide procedural due process, failed to observe the essential requirements of law, meaning the failed to apply the correct law, or failed to
base its decision upon competent substantial evidence. The commission cannot reweigh the evidence presented to the design review board. Your job today is only to determine whether the DRB's decision was supported by competential evidence at all. Uh the order of the
hearing, it will start with the the petitioner, in other words, the the neighbor who filed the um followed by the respondents, which are the property owner and applicant and the and the city. And uh and and lastly
with any rebuttal by the petitioner. And then at that point, um, the attorney should sit down and the city commission can deliberate. >> Mr. Mayor, >> Commissioner Fernandez, >> just just a quick question. Is it I mean, I've I I saw the the hearing. I
reviewed the record and the materials presented to us. Um, is it the position of the city attorney's office that the DRB followed all the proper objective criteria? So the so I'm sitting here as councel to the city commission as a board. The city
is represented uh by my colleague Justin Alexander and the but the parties do have an opportunity under the code to present oral argument. Yes, the the the briefs and the exhibits and the and the transcript all are part of the record. Um but the petitioner does have a a
right to make his presentation. >> Thank you. >> Commissioner Magazine. >> Thank you, Mr. City Attorney. And just to speak in more plain layman's English, I watched the video as well, but just so we can put this in a simplistic form, there was an applicant. They got a
favorable ruling at the DRB and now a neighbor is saying he's making an appeal saying, "I do not agree with that ruling." We're not necessarily litigating whether we would agree or disagree with his thoughts. It's just
did the DRB act appropriately owing to that approval. >> That's right. >> How much time uh does are they do they have to present? >> So consistent with prior appeals before the city commission, the um petitioner
could have 10 minutes. The respondents have agreed to split uh their 10 minutes. And then lastly, the petitioner can can present a brief two-minute rebuttal. Okay. Okay. So, set the clock for 10. >> Good afternoon, uh, Mr. Mayor, members
of the board. Uh, for the record, my name is Bill Riley. I'm an attorney located with offices located at 16343 Southwest 256th Street in Miami Day County. I'm here on behalf of the applicant or the appellant, uh, Mr. Michael Kger, who is the sole uh
neighbor affected by the development program that was approved by the DRB. In order to make our time here efficient and make it move as fast as possible, the client would like to make a statement. I'm going to ask him to come up and make that statement first and then I'm going to present with my legal
arguments. >> Hello board, Mr. Commissioner. I appreciate your time and letting me be here. Uh, I'm a uh I'm Michael Kger. I'm a 40year resident of DO Island at 34 West DO.
I've peacefully lived here uh for all these years and walked my islands daily. What I've seen happen over the years is astounding to me. There's been waiver after waiver has been issued exceeding
the code. The reason for the code is a reason for the code in itself. It's exceeded continuously with waiverss for setbacks and heights. Uh it's it's a situation where I'm here regarding 50 West Alto Drive to make it this
statement as simple as possible. My concern is straightforward. The approval of a height waiver of 3 ft above code without a present hardship or compelling basis. The code established limits for a reason and exceeding those limits without a clearly demonstrated hardship
undermines consistency and goes against the written code. It's it raises a fundamental question. What is the purpose of having a code written code if it can be exceeded on a recurring basis which it is? This is not an isolated issue. It's repeated exceptions are becoming more
common and have been over the years. My neighborhood is starting to look like an office park. We're progressively altering the scale and the character of the Venetian Islands which are historic in nature. In this case, the property is already a
large scale double lot facing due west approximately 200 ft and the home is about 11,000 square ft. They originally came to me asking for a twoft height extension. I rejected it. Then when they showed up
at the hearing, they pushed it to three feet. Granting additional height is not about necessity. There's no hardship. It reforces it reinforces a pattern of incremental overbuilding. At some point, a boundary has to be
maintained. I respectfully ask the board to ensure that any deviations from code are supported by a clear legitimate hardship and remain consistent with the intent of the regulations. I would also like the statement entered into the record to preserve my rights. >> Mr. Mayor,
>> it's time someone speaks up. >> Commissioner Suarez. Thank you. >> I'd like Mr. Kger to be at the podium if that's possible. >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> Yes, sir. >> Uh, so is it true that you have asked
the applicant for half a million dollars for your approval for his project and then when he didn't >> Well, excuse me. I'm asking Mr. Kger. >> The attorneys the attorneys were negotiating prior to this hearing. >> Okay. >> So is that a settlement wasn't a basis?
>> I'm just simply asking a question. Did you request half a million dollars from the applicant for your approval? >> No. >> No, I did not. >> Okay. Um, another issue that I heard was that you sent a demand letter to a
well-known resident in Miami Beach, Melissa Bey, because apparently she also had concerns about a type of quid proquo uh in the neighborhood as a result relates to Mr. Sanjay's project.
Is that true? Miss Bey accused me of extortion on a public platform, which is a criminal offense, and I requested her to withdraw that statement, and she did. >> So, I'm asking you here on the record, did you ask the applicant or did you try
to negotiate a half a million? >> I did not try to negotiate anything. I had my attorney try to negotiate to not exceed the height. >> Sorry. Your representatives, did any of your representatives try to negotiate a half a million dollar settlement for your approval? >> No. Okay, >> there was negotiation partation. Is this
under oath? >> The because we're on a quasi judicial. >> We aren't in a quiz judicial hearing. The oral arguments are typically conducted by attorneys only. Um I think the the uh the petitioner asked if if he could address the board. But the the
truth is that that the argument should be presented by um by council to each party >> and these aren't under oath. >> No. So usually you know usually these and is the the gentleman speaking before
you want if council's under oath maybe the council >> since Mr. Right since since Mr. Briger did provide a statement. I can ask you is the testimony that you have given the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth as well as the any testimony that you will give in this proceeding. >> I'm not party to discussions the
attorneys took place prior to the previous hearing. Okay. >> You are testifying before a hearing. You're testifying at at a hearing and >> I'm testifying about overbuilding height. >> Excuse me. Usually individuals that come to testify on
matters like these are testifying under oath and they're usually administered an oath before the test before they start testifying before the body. >> You are commissioner, you are correct. Um Mr. Griger, I'd like to place you under oath and ask you if the testimony
you have given is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. >> There was discussions. >> It's a yes or a simple yes or no. >> There was discussions. It's a simple yes or no, sir. Period. >> It's a simple yes or no. You're under oath. Yes. >> Okay. Can you ask him one more time? >> Thank you. Do you swear that the testimony you've given and will give is the truth of all truth and nothing but
the truth? >> My statement before I make that statement >> the testimony you've given at this at this oral argument. >> My statement is the attorneys negotiated a settlement for this and I was not party to that is the truth. >> Mayor, my my recommendation would be that we limit the rest of the argument
to the uh to to council for parties to the appeal. I'd like to I I'd like to hear him be under oath because he's making serious allegations and I want to know the truth. >> What allegations am I making except that he's building over hype. Excuse me.
>> I'd like I'd like you to be under oath that is >> Mr. Ker. I'd like you to be under oath. I It's a simple yes or no. It's binary. Yes or no? Not my attorney. >> Yes or no to what? >> Can you ask him the question one more time? Sir, since you are since you have given testimony, I I just I'd like to
ask you if the testimony I I'm placing you under oath. If the testimony you have given and the testimony you will give in this proceeding is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. >> I'm not going to answer that question. >> Okay. Mr. Mayor, I would just recommend that the that the argument be handled by by council. >> Yeah. On that front, hello everybody.
Gra the recommendation. >> Thank you, Mayor. >> 200 Gamble Boulevard for our record before if we could >> hold on one second. I just just real quick not confused. >> Are they under oath? >> Council are not under our our code and under in general counsel not do not need
to be placed under oath at these proceedings. >> But but point of >> testifying is this a public hearing item or No, >> it is not a public hearing. It's an oral argument. >> Okay. Could we perhaps do something? If anyone is going to testify as part of these proceedings, of course, not the
attorneys, but anyone else, you know, can they just not stand and you administer their just like with any other typical proceeding of this nature? >> It's it has not happened to me in my 13 years here, but >> All right. All right. >> And well, Bill,
>> wait a minute. Wait a minute. I need to make sure the record needs to be clear for the next reviewing court body. And my understanding was that the appellant goes first and then we're going to have a limited amount of time. He gets to respond and then I get to reply. I'm not
sure. I just want I don't want it to get confusing, especially since this is a record for a reviewing court. >> Your time the timer was stopped. It was paused. >> No, I know. But he's going to start speaking now. >> And I had a question and no one's answering my question. I wanted >> I like I like to answer it. Sure. So,
the question is, was there a an offer for a sum of half a million dollars to buy your client's approval for Mr. Sanjay's property? >> The answer is no. With an explanation.
If you allow me to explain, I can walk you through and you can understand the full history associated with that item. >> Let's hear it. >> Okay. So, I'm going to just pivot for a moment to answer your question and I'm going to go back to our presentation. But before
I got involved, um the client, the homeowner, Mr. Larkin, sat down, had a conversation. The conversation didn't result in a agreement. So, Mr. Kger decided to hire an attorney. Um I came in and started speaking to Burke
Howardell and Fernandez's office and we were working on a settlement agreement. That settlement agreement included and primarily focused upon moving the outdoor entertainment area that's located against the uh appellants's
property to the north side of the lot where there is no neighbor. If that was not something that they would do, which I thought was an easy fix, but that's not something that they could do. Mr. Kger said, "My home is going to be substantially damaged. the
valuation of my home is going to be substantially damaged. I said, "Look, you have to have actual empirical evidence to state say state something like that. You can't just come up with it's my opinion." So he went out to Burkow and Hathaway and Burkow Hathaway
did an evaluation of the property, came back with a written opinion which we submitted for the record and that written opinion says that if the house was built as proposed at the height it was proposed and created a canyon effect that the home would be diminished in value by millions of dollars.
What we asked for is if and it wasn't to buy anybody's vote. If you don't want to move the entertainment area from the southside that's abuing our property, it's going to be a major for force of impact to the north where there is no neighbor. Well, then we would like to
mitigate our damages. We gave them the letter from Brookalow Hathway. They didn't have anybody else evaluate the proposal. Um our our proposal was for mitigation the $500,000. We put that in writing. Your code
requires disclosure of all types of settlement discussions. >> What do you mean by mitigation? >> Mitigation means that we didn't ask for the full damages affected by the reduced valuation that's in the professionals opinion letter. >> But what would it what would half a
million dollars buy to mitigate >> center? It would offset the devaluation of the home. >> It's a damage. So if somebody if somebody comes in and decides they want to do a a carnival next to your house, >> but this isn't a carnival. This is a
single family >> house being a hypothetical. Another hypothetical. >> Your property is going to be damaged. The valuation of your property is going to be damaged. >> But everything I'm sorry, I'm I'm trying to play devil's ad. >> Yeah, sure. >> But everything is to to code other than the three-foot variance. Is that
correct? It's not like he's building carnival next door. It's he's just the only thing he's asking as far as a variance is three feet. >> And just to be clear, no variances were approved as part of this. It was a it was a three-foot waiver. >> It's a waiver,
>> right? So, what I'm saying is I don't see I mean 3 feet causing half a million dollars in damages when it it could be 3 ft less and it's the same it's going to be the same location of this entertainment center. It's it's very
it's very different because the height has shadowing effects and that's one thing we complained about your code requires a VR >> if you don't mind because I had this discussion also on like last year when it came to understories >> is Tom Mooney around Tom
>> Tom I I remember on the record you told us when we had the discussion for understories that three feet was what what was the what was the term you you recommend you said >> dimminimous >> dimminimous okay so just I want to be clear that my planning director, our
planning director says that 3 ft is dimminimous. It's imperceptible. And you're telling me that it's not? >> Yes, sir. >> And it's worth half a million dollars. >> Well, what I'm saying is that we had an expert in the real estate industry give an opinion, a written opinion, and that
opinion says it's going to be damaged by millions of dollars with this canyon effect. There was no lighting plan submitted which was required to be submitted associated with this application which is one of our arguments. Um that lighting that lighting plan when you have a flat roof don't know what type of overcast is
going to have on our property. The location of the outdoor entertainment area which didn't have a variance but was our main point of concern because that was going to be the noise situation. >> But again he could have built that without the three foot and it wouldn't have made a difference. But the the city
the city has spent tens of millions of dollars on a zoning study and a zoning code and they provide for an exceptional situations for applicants to get waivers. Our our point >> but he just but our city attorney said
there was no waivers granted. >> This was a waiver. >> No no other than the Yeah. No varian variances. Just a three-foot waiver for height. >> Exactly. >> Okay. So if there's some type of reason, there's an irregularity associated with this property,
um then an applicant come before a board and say there are extraordinary circumstances here, we need to ask for an additional 3 ft. You shouldn't they without those extraordinary circumstances, the city invested so much time and so much
resources into a zoning code, they should have to develop in accordance with that zoning code unless those extraordinary circumstances exist. They don't and in our case by giving them an additional three feet I'm not a professional in the real estate industry
but we had person go out there he gave his written opinion and that's the opinion we submitted now your code requires us to make disclosures and as an attorney following the code I made the disclosure to the board I put it out there for everybody to hear what
the what the hearing was that you saw and I'm glad you guys all saw was basically filled with insinuations that we were somehow which it sounded like it was going this direction today selling our our approval which was not the case at
all. We provided different options in order to settle our grievances. Okay, it was almost like a menu and that menu can be picked and choose from. What they decided to do was to address none of our concerns and instead lobby the
neighborhood with false allegations and to lobby the uh design review board with false allegations. Now, for the first time in my history, the vice chairman of the design review board asked every person that came up to the deis whether or not they were asking
for monetary compensation to sell their vote. And it put this whole um it put this whole uh shadow this dark shadow upon the hearing because it wasn't focused on the actual issues. It was
focused on a misguided narrative that something was improperly done. Well, we were actually following the code. The code has that disclosure requirement because it is proper to ask for mitigation of your damages. That's that's what we did. Whether or not they
accepted it is a different story. Um they they declined it, but there was other options in a settlement agreement they could accept accept too and they declined those. >> Yeah. I'm just simply saying that if there was no 3-FFT variance for the height
and Mr. Sanjay decided to keep his entertainment center where he originally intended. >> Yes sir. >> I mean I have a planning director that says it's dimminimous. it would you there would have still been in the same situation, right? Except just 3 ft less. And to me it looks looks
a little different when um there is, you know, a half a million dollar settlement uh that's being proposed to b essentially go away. Uh as far as
opposition is concerned, you know, >> it it was it wasn't to go away. it. We were never going to propose anything like that. And I will say on the record, under oath, I know of no other firm out there that's made more disclosures than Burkow Don Fernandez on those types of
issues. >> It's not unusual. >> Commissioner Magazine, >> and I'll take the devil's advocate approach to that, right? where I'm saying, well, if there's two neighbors and a guy wants to build 3 ft higher for a house or he wants to build a fence a
foot closer to your property line than the code allows, he comes over and goes, "Hey, Frank, if uh if you support this, whether he goes, I'll give you a case of beer or a million dollars." I don't really think it's the government's job to get involved there, especially if
it's disclosed. Right. So I think we just move on to the further >> orders that are under >> the law says. >> But in the same regard, >> I saw nothing in the DRB hearing that says, well, the DRB hearing somehow
granted this waiver because of what was disclosed. So, while I agree with you in one regard where it's really not the government's business about what happened between those two private entities, again, whether it was for a case of beer for support or half a
million dollars. Yes, sir. >> I also didn't see anything, but you're going to have your chance to uh further make that case here. Thank you. >> Whether >> somehow this waiver was improperly granted. >> Thank you. >> I have a question. >> Commissioner Fernandez, then
Commissioner Dominguez. Thank you. And in the materials that were pro that was provided to us, uh there's a letter from m from a Mr. Jason Zarco. >> Mr. Riley, >> I don't think so. >> Mr. Riley, I'm speaking to you. >> Sorry, I'm very >> uh there's a letter from a Mr. Jason
Sarco. Is that correct? And the materials that were provided? >> Yeah. Yes, sir. >> Okay. And uh Mr. Zarko is the one that has determined um that this equates to a significant devaluation for land. >> Yes, sir. That's that's a gentleman from
Brook Hathaway, I think. Birkshshire Hathway. >> And what is what are uh Mr. Zarko's professional qualifications uh to issue this opinion? >> He's a professional licensed real est um real estate agent in the state of
Florida. >> Is he an appraiser? >> I don't not to my knowledge. >> Okay. I don't know. So we're so we have someone who is not an appraiser making a determination or a recommendation or giving professional advice on value of
property. >> Yes sir. And and it's a good point you're break bringing up. It's something that could have been raised. I just I just I just I I think you know >> it if you if you told me that this was an appraiser >> an appraiser guides themsself through a
scientific metric uh and they're trained to do that then I would say you know what this is important evidence that's presented to us. But considering the fact that that that this isn't someone that's trained in evaluations. We know the real estate agents all the time um
agents from from from companies like the one that you provided, you know, they might say, "Yeah, property is worth this or that, but then when it gets time to get a loan or or whatever, it's not what someone like Mr. Zarco says that matters. It's what a professional
appraiser says that matters. And I don't see any evidence before us today that's been provided to the design review board or passed along to us that shows that a that a expert and a professional on evaluating values of properties and
their impacts has made this determination that you're alleging. >> So our position was that we relied upon him as a professional as a licensed professional. You as a tryer of fact bring up a good point and as a trial of fact you can decide whether his qualifications are
>> but wouldn't you say that he if you if if you if you had to get an an a valuation on loss of of of of value on your property would you hire a real estate agent to do that for you or would you hire an appraiser to do that for you? I would
me personally I'd probably hire both because when you first go to sell your house the first person you do talk to is a listing agent and that listing agent usually decides what the listing price would be if >> but then when you go get financing in order to make the deal you're going to need that appraiser and this is nothing
this is no different and you haven't presented us with any evidence to show that a professionally licensed appraiser which is a trade that is licensed and regulated uh in under the state of Florida under specific speific training requirements has come out and made the
determination that you are making on behalf of your client. And so I don't see >> and if it was I'm sorry. >> Yeah, >> I was just going to rebut but if if it was something that was entertained by them and not used as a weapon and they decided to say look well let's have an
appraiser do it. We could have taken a next step and had an appraiser do it. I personally would probably have done both but it was never fully considered by them. Instead, it was used as a gotcha. And it was this gotcha that created this false narrative that didn't allow us to
have a full affair hearing at the DRB board and has cloaked this discussion about the waiver into, you know, something that it really shouldn't be. >> No, we but but let me ask you something. But putting aside um what you know your
questions about whether whe whether the hearing was was fair or not in the DRB and I trust that with the guidance of our city attorney I trust with the guidance of staff uh those who are appointed to the DRB conducted a fair a fair hearing. Uh I mean you trust that
you know as as as an AICP accredited planner Tom Mooney has experience in this matter. Wouldn't you wouldn't wouldn't you say? >> Yes sir. I think he's one of the best uh planning directors that's out there. I made that point in my >> He's one of the best planning directors out there.
>> I think so. and uh and and you know, do you agree with me that um that on page three of Mr. Mooney's staff report who you who you just described as one of the best planning professionals out there.
>> Yeah. He has written that the proposed structure has an orientation and massing which is sensitive to and compatible with the building site and surrounding area and which creates or maintains important view corridors. The massing and the orientation is sensitive and
compatible with the building sites and he wrote that that was satisfied. Do you agree that that is what Mr. Mooney said? >> Yeah, that sounds like you read it correctly. >> All right. So, so Mr. Mooney who you have described as one of the most professional and the best planning
planning professionals in the area has written that the proposed structure which you are which you are appealing on behalf of your client is indeed has the right orientation and the right massing and it is sensitive and this is someone
who is licensed and who is trained to do that. However, you come and you bring as your evidence someone who is not a licensed professional on the issues of valuation. And so, how do I give more >> not on the issue of appraisals and evaluations? He's a he's he's licensed
he's licensed to sell property but not to value property. And so how do I give more wage to your evidence >> as opposed to the weight of our planning director who you just have said is one of the best in the area. >> In in page 14 of my of my complaint to
this board, I mention that I say that I believe that your professional staff is one of the best professional staffs in all of South Florida. I said it here again today. However, your code, your zoning code has a criteria that has to be followed by the planning by the design review board. And when I
questioned staff at that hearing, and if you watch the tape, you may have heard it. They missed one of those criterias. And the criteria says shall, and they didn't evaluate that criteria. Okay? Now, that's a departure from the essential requirements of law. And even though you may have the best
professional staff out there, I put in my arguments, everybody's makes mistakes. Everybody's entitled to a bad day. So, was there issues associated with this? Yes. And I believe those are appealable issues. Is he one of the best planning directors out there? Yes. But
mistakes happen and our our appeal is based upon those mistakes. >> Mr. Ali, does that conclude your presentation? So, we need to let the applica uh >> Are you talking to me? >> Yes. >> I haven't really even started my presentation. I'll just respond to
answers questions. >> Would you would you like to finish here? >> I would like to go ahead and do my presentation. Yes, sir. So >> what I was going to start with is to explain to the board that this is a very narrow issue and the issue is not to
have a reharing on the matter as your city attorney mentioned but to see whether the legal requirements of the application were met and the law has determined that those this legal review has three prongs and they're pretty
short and pretty uh concise. The first is whether or not the hearing allowed procedural due process. And to make it very short, and I quoted the the law in my complaint, but to make it very short, it means that you have a meaningful,
fair opportunity to be heard. Now, if you watched that hearing and if you read the transcript that we submitted after the hearing, it's our position that there was procedural due process that was not afforded in this case. Um
because I had a PowerPoint presentation. My PowerPoint presentation was very short. I asked to go through the PowerPoint presentation. I wasn't given an opportunity to present our our evidence. I was cut off repeatedly. I was asked
about questions about $500,000. Um there was arguments throughout the day. Um whenever I went to make one objection, the chairman yelled at me and told me to sit down. I couldn't make an objection. Well, that's my job to make
objections. It was it was really very strange to me to be in that setting. um whenever a staff person was inter uh introduced on on the response as an expert witness
not the case and chief but in the response I asked to cross cross-examine the witness I was told I had I could give them one question um and these arbitrary these arbitrary and capriccious rules that were set up by
the design review board on that particular day and this particular matter never allowed us to go through our evidence, never allowed us to address the the 3T in height. And we stand and I'll stand upon the complaint. I don't want to belabor the point, but
there really was a departure from the essential requirements law because the whole hearing centered around $500,000 and it put this the decision was made before we walked in the door. Okay? And it was all cloaked within this
uh black cloud and conspiracy theory that was very easily to address and I wanted to address it was never given the opportunity. We think based upon the law that they failed the first prong and whether or not they failed the first prong is not decisive on this issue. The
courts have determined that the applicant has to meet each and every prong satisfy everyone and if they miss one well then the case has to be remanded or overturned. Now the second one the second prong is
whether the essential requirements of law were observed in the case. I wholeheartedly believe that the answer to that question is no. And the reason I say that is because in section,
let me just find it real fast. Sorry. Let me give you the right section code in section 2.5.3.1 of the design review board's uh regulations. is is codified within the land development code, the zoning resiliency code. It provides for a
laundry list of items that must be reviewed on an application. And one of those items, it says, and I'm going to read it verbatim, a light lighting shall be reviewed to ensure safe movement of persons and vehicles and reflection on
public property for security purposes and to minimize glare and reflection onto adjacent properties. The one question I asked the staff I was only allowed one was whether or not they reviewed the lighting and his answer was no. Now a departure from the essential
requirements of law to make it very simple is whether or not the law was followed. Your code says it shall be reviewed. Now co court courts have said when the word shall is done it's a mandate. It's not like may. There's no uh discretion to
determine whether or not you can or cannot. You must comply with that criteria and that was missed. Staff never reviewed that criteria. The applicant never submitted those documentation by making a ruling and the case could have been deferred and they could have
resolved this. They decided not to. Instead, they were going to shove us down our throat. You know, they they they missed that criteria and therefore the essential requirements of law were not followed. The last one very shortly is whether or not disputed action is supported by
substantial competent evidence. Your staff issued a recommendation of approval. Uh the applicant made a long his long argument and the design review board about how that was substantial competent evidence per se. The law has
said it creates a rebuttal presumption. the reportable presumption we submitted uh was that the code itself was not followed and if the code was not followed then there's no substantial competent evidence and I'm just trying to rush but with that those are our
arguments on appeal we appreciate your time and of course I'm available to answer any questions you may have >> thank you okay Graham Penn 200 South Biscane Boulevard on behalf of the applicant KC property, Holdings, Land Trust. And I
think one thing we've learned this afternoon is that the it's a good idea to move forward with that uh ordinance moving this into a special magistrate process. Uh Commissioner Suarez, uh the because again, I don't think this commission on, you know, this is natural
is well set up for what this is really supposed to be because I can tell you, >> Mr. And >> yes, >> you're getting into an area that has to do with the policy and with what is the jurisdiction of this body and I think that that's for policy makers to make and not for lobbyists to pine. >> Yes, I apologize.
>> Uh but let me be clear uh and I meant to do this earlier. The statements of Mr. Kger uh I would object to as being new evidence being presented to this commission. this commission cannot take in new evidence and I would even say
apologies to Commissioner Suarez the colloquy with Mr. Mooney who is the best planner that has ever lived is my opinion. Uh but that is new evidence and that cannot be considered by this commission. You are limited to the record in front of the DRP. You uh you
are limited to the arguments uh in uh that that were made and and given to the DRP. So I let me touch on and I I apologize. I meant to mention that Mr. Justin Alexander, the city attorney's office is going to help uh on any due process portions, but I'll I'll touch on
a couple of the things that uh that came up in our init in Mr. Riley's presentation. First, waiverss just as an uh just as a point of information. A waiver in your code is not a variance. It's does not require any special
showing or elevated showing uh to the board. It just it is a the board reviews waiverss under the same standards they review any application. It is not a special request. It's not a variance. It's not out of sorts or inconsistent with the code.
Uh two on waiverss we had two waivers in our application. One was was the additional 3 ft of building height. The other one was to provide 7 foot solid walls on either side for Mr. Kger. Uh that was what he requested. So, we agreed to to seek a waiver and we did.
And and contrary to the the uh the assertions we've heard, this plan from the outset has been designed to limit the impacts on Mr. Kger. We set this building back 18 ft from his property line. We put the garage, the kitchen, the pool equipment, all the the AC's all
on the north side of this property, as far away from it as possible. But again, uh the the questions before you today, and I think, uh Commissioner Magazine got at this is not whether the commissioner would make the same decision that the DRB made, but whether
the DRB made a legal decision and the and based on those standards, the three prongs that Mr. Riley outlined, the DRB clearly made a legal decision. The Let me turn to the essential requirements of law argument. Basically what the essential when when you're asked to
determine what the uh whether an application is consistent with the essential requirement or a decision is consistent with the essential requirements. The biggest question is did they apply the standards in the code? Did they look outside of the code and make a decision? Uh here you can see from the transcript is very clear that
the board sought to keep their purview on design. the vice chair who's chairing the meeting expressly and this is on page 69 made sure that look uh we're not going to talk about valuation. We're not going to talk about $500,000. This is
about the code criteria and he forced that he made sure that that was not being discussed because that's not relevant to their decision. As to the the question of the lighting plan, uh the petitioner suggested that there is not a lighting plan provided. There
was a discussion on page 71 of your transcript where planner explained another great planner Raholio Madan explained that the uh that for single family homes the department's policy is not to require a phototric lighting plan until building permit and that's why
there was no phototric plan provided. However, if you look in your packages, which I'm sure you've enjoyed reading at length, l page l uh plan L7 in our submitt, which is the last page of our appendix, uh includes a lighting plan that was submitted as part of this
application. That lighting plan shows the every exterior light on this property, including everything against Mr. Kger's property line. It also shows if you look at it that every single exterior light on this property is low wattage and and and every all but one
are located no higher than 24 inches off the ground which is again for landscaping purposes. So there is a lighting plan now a phototric plan per city policy will be reviewed a building permit but there's a lighting plan in this set. So and I don't know if Mr. Uh
if Justin wants to get up because we really didn't get 10 here, but the Let me just summarize our uh our clear position based on the record in front of the DRB. The DRB clearly provided uh Mr. Kger with due process. They clearly observe
the essential requirements of the law and they clearly base their decision on substantial competent evidence including staff recommendation, the extensive uh lengthy plans that are in this set on nearly 50 pages of detailed plans and all the testimony at the hearing. Your
job again is not to reweigh this decision, not to say, well look, we'll revisit it and maybe make a different choice. The only question is could the DRB have properly legally made that choice? And in our opinion, the answer is clearly yes. I'm here for any questions. Mr. Alexander.
>> Thank you. Good afternoon, uh, honorable mayor and commissioners. Justin Alexander, assistant city attorney. On behalf of the design review board, I would respectfully request 5 minutes to present if that's acceptable to the board. Um, the DRB respectfully requests that you affirm its order approving the
design review application for 50 West Toledo because the DRB afforded procedural due process to the petitioner, Mr. Kger. This is so for three reasons. First, the DRB afforded the petitioner a meaningful opportunity
to be heard on October 23rd. Second, the DRB fairly and impartially deliberated prior to rendering its decision. And third, all exparte communications were fully disclosed on the record at the beginning of the public hearing and are not prejuditial. The petitioner claims
he lacked a meaningful opportunity to be heard, but the but the record plainly reveals that the petitioner had exactly the amount of time he requested, 5 to 8 minutes, plus significant additional time speaking in colloquy with board members, making evidentiary objections,
introducing evidence, and providing supplemental testimony, as well as cross-examining planning staff. It should be noted uh neither the law of due process nor the city's resiliency code requires anything more for a meaningful opportunity. And I'd just like to point
out that on page uh 42 of the transcript at line 5, Mr. Riley requested 5 to 8 minutes to uh to present to which m vice chair defender who was presiding over the hearing said I can give you five. To which Mr. Riley responded, "I I'll speed
through it some." Now, 5 to 8 minutes should have been plenty of time to get through his public comment. Most uh most of the other public commenters only received about 2 minutes. Uh but he did uh go well in excess of that. Um and additionally any suggestion that there
were arbitrary rules governing the hearing is simply belied by the fact that in the in the in the in the transcript uh uh v Vice Chair Defenderfer and Deputy City Attorney Steve Rothstein controlled uh the time
taken by public speakers at the hearing on no fewer than 13 separate occasions. As to the fairness and impartiality of the hearing, the design review board fairly uh and properly applied every design review criterion set forth in section 2.5.3.1
of the resiliency code. Uh regardless of the petitioner's attempt to inject the settlement negotiations into the hearing, even though doing so was neither uh required by the code, I'd like to reiterate something and correct something that Mr. Riley said. Neither the resiliency code nor the code of
ordinances requires someone to disclose settlement negotiations between two private parties as part of a design a a design review board application. The disclosure requirement only applies to exparte communications by board members. And here that disclosure was properly
made as I'll explain shortly. But the design review board repeatedly uh Mr. Derender and Miss Bhut Cavolei repeatedly said this is out of our purview. This is out of our purview. we don't want to discuss this and would would repeatedly try to redirect the
conversation uh back toward the design issues properly jurisdictionally before the design review board. Uh and in any event, the board speaks through its written order and the petitioner's request to try to attribute a few brief responsive comments uh to
some grand uh uh bias or uh sensationalism that tainted the proceedings is simply contrary to the law. There was simply uh no evidence that they were biased based on the um the the settlement disclosure. And also
the transcript reveals that Miss Bhuta Cavoi never asked Mr. Riley to disclose the settlement negotiations. Um she may have asked other applicants at dur for other applications on the in during the public meeting but not this
one. And finally all of the expparte communications uh that that uh Mr. Defender and Miss Bhuta Cavolei engaged in were fully disclosed on the record and uh uh consistent with the requirements set forth by section 2-512
of the the city code of ordinances. And even if the petitioner could now raise some some defect with the disclosure, uh he waved that by not objecting contemporaneously at the hearing and by cross-examining those board members about the substance of those
communications during the public hearing portion. So that cannot be a basis on which uh the commission would reverse the design review board. So in uh in light of the foregoing, the DRB respectfully requests that you affirm its order because due process of law was
afforded. Thank you, >> Madam Vice Mayor. >> Commissioner Magazine, >> uh appreciate it. uh have two questions and again whether there was some sort of payment or negotiation I don't think is
in my purview especially for this hearing and I don't think it was in the DRB's purview uh as long as it was disclosed and I don't see any evidence that any decision was made uh in relation to that. So going on two things
that the not the applicant uh appealing. >> Yeah. >> The petitioner >> the petitioner uh mentioned and this is for the city attorney. You talked about a lack of adequate uh time to speak
publicly which was 5 minutes as our city attorney said. Uh I understand that the petitioner may uh be directly impacted. And I guess I'll ask our city attorney if there is somebody at a public hearing DRB or
things like that if they are directly impacted does that give them more time more right to public comment than anybody else? >> So in this case an immediate neighbor no the code does not provide for additional time. Uh what happened here was that the
board I think in recognition that this was the immediate neighbor um allowed Mr. Riley additional time, but no, the code does not require >> actually allowed him additional time. Yes, he didn't shrink his time. >> And the second is you made a compelling argument with the lighting that was then
again to a lay person compellingly rebutted. Do you have a response to that rebuttal? >> Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh or Mr. Commissioner. Um I just wanted to provide a very short reply. There's only uh three items I wanted to address. I'm going to address the lighting uh first
uh because you asked about it. So, the code requirement specifically states the following. I want to read it verbatim because it's important. Lighting shall be reviewed to ensure
safe movement of persons and vehicles and reflection on public property for security purposes and to minimize glare and reflection on adjacent properties. period. Now, when he was mentioning that a lighting plan was issued, sort of
trying to sort of a red herring um because even though they had a plan within their 51 pages that showed where flood lights and items were going to be, the question specifically to professional staff on city on the day is
was did staff review a lighting plan for the glare and effect onto Mr. Kger's property? The answer was no that none was provided but they're talking about the phototrics and the photometrics can be done at the time of building permit.
So it's it's convol trying to convolute a very simple question in my mind. Um I'm going directly with how the uh code reads. Um the I asked that specific question to staff. Staff said no. The second item I just wanted to bring up uh
very quickly was on my time that I presented. Um it was almost like today when there was a lot of discussion initially but I didn't get to uh present the meats and potatoes that was all counted against me um at that hearing
and I never like I mentioned the easiest way for me to explain it unless you watched it and had your own opinion was that I had a very simple PowerPoint and yeah I did say I was going to rush through it because I had like a minute they gave me left. Um, so anyways, uh, that's the one thing I want to mention.
>> That was an ironic beep timing. >> Yeah, that's it. And and I'm done and I'm done and uh I hope that answers your question. >> Appreciate it. Thank you. >> I have a question, Commissioner Fernandez. >> Um, and perhaps someone can guide me as
to whom I should direct this question to. Um so when it comes to the RB proceedings and this specific section of the code um single family homes are lighting plans
uh always required of single family homes when they go before the design review board. if >> even though you you cannot consider uh new testimony or evidence, I think that's a question that is best directed
to the uh to the to the planning director, even if you're just asking forformational purposes. Well, so perhaps I can ask the uh planning director um on the record, page 71 of the transcript, the line 17 says for single
family homes, we leave that as a condition that can be addressed as part of the building per uh process. Do you agree with that statement that was made on the record on October 23rd, 2025? Generally lighting plans um are
submitted um based upon and this is generally based upon all DRB applications um the detail of the lighting plan submitted um is based upon the type of development project in this particular instance and again I don't
want to be in a position where I'm offering new testimony but the testimony that was provided uh was accurate and I agree with So, so, so it is. So, when I'm reading here that says for single family homes, we leave that as a
condition that can be addressed as part of the of the building permit process. That is something that was stated on the record that was discussed at the design review board hearing that that is something that is done at the uh building permit process. And you agree
with that record that was made uh at the board hearing? >> Yes. >> Okay. All right. And so and so and so for me that satis that satisfies was there was there any objection uh from
from the board members of of this being heard at the uh build building permit process. Uh we uh petitioner objected. >> No, the board the the board members that we appoint
they >> the transcript shows no objection to Mr. Madan's conclusion. >> Okay. And so I I would make a motion then to uphold what was the uh the
ruling. I mean, what I'm seeing here is that, you know, the allegation is that is that they didn't uh review lighting. Um, but but but the record states that it was discussed and was disclosed at
the time of the hearing that this is something that is handled at the design review process. The the board members that they had concerns with that. they could have raised that concern, but it seems like they all agreed uh with the guidance of the of of of Roelio Madan uh
that our planning director just also, you know, supported. So, I I I'd like to make that motion to uphold the ruling. >> Yeah. And I think to that specific point, Commissioner, uh, what we're reviewing and what's in our purview is was there any answer that came out of
that lighting that would have prevented the board of adjustment from making the decision or granting the waiver? And to that, I see no evidence of that. So, I I agree with where you're going. And to Commissioner Fernandez who made the motion, may I suggest that the motion is
to affirm based on a finding that the that the standard of review was satisfied, right? That the board provided uh procedural due process that the essential requirements of law were observed and that the board's decision was supported by competence, potential
evidence. >> So moved. Second. >> Can I just make one statement for the record? Is that okay? Um, I just want to say for the record to make sure it's clear that the code requirement on the lance on the lighting uh is specifically submitted for the DRB criteria and to uh
delegate that uh to the permit process leaves neighboring property owners without a remedy. So, it makes that criteria meaningless is my only point. But I I appreciate everybody's time. >> We appreciate yours. Thank you.
Okay. So, I have a motion for from Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner Suarez. All in favor, please say I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed? Hearing none. The item is approved. 70. >> Mr. Kger, thank you for your time and the amount of time you've spent here on
Miami Beach. And >> thank you. uh what you opened with I think a lot of us don't necessarily disagree with but that's not what was in our purview here. Thank you. R7J. >> R7J is accept recommendation modification to 63rd Street Bridge
schedule. >> Commissioner Bach. >> Um, I'm going to make a motion to defer this item. The Coast Guard has been on furlow unfortunately and so we don't have answers to some of the questions. I very much appreciate the fact that you
folks are here to speak. I've received your letters. I can assure you nobody's trying to make the waterways less safe for you. I rode in high school. I thought I would rode Brown, but I'm clearly too short to be of use. Um, so I want to make sure it's safe for you and
I want to make sure that nothing um um there are no unintended consequences. As soon as we have some answers from the Coast Guard, I will share with you. I have emails. Um I will share with you what we're thinking. I'm very eager to get your input once we have a plan moving forward. But right now, we don't
have any new information. Bear, >> Mr. Mayor, if you don't mind, I I think in that same thought, I think it's also important that we give direction to the city for any recommendations to the Coast Guard. I And I
>> I'm sorry. There's been a motion and second to defer. We have had a community meeting. We've taken a number of um uh phone calls and emails. I think we have a very clear direction on what needs to happen next. >> Well, I don't have a clear direction. >> Well, did you were at the meeting, you made presentations. How do you not We
don't, but staff doesn't have a clear direction to negotiate with the the Coast Guard. >> I've been speaking to staff. It's my item. I have been speaking with staff. We have very clear direction. And if you would let me manage my item, I would appreciate it. It's been deferred. There's a motion in the second. And as
soon as we have more information, I will share it and we will proceed accordingly. Thanks. >> Can we call the vote? I I'd still like to at least have five minutes to discuss this with our transportation director just to see if he can at least suggest some certain things to the Coast Guard.
It's just going to take five minutes. >> With due respect, it is my item. I have been working on this with the input from you and the community um residents and other involved parties that came to the community meeting. and you're free to have a conversation with Jose on your
own time, but how is this that I'm not permitted to manage my own items? >> No one's no one's changing what you can and can't negotiate with the Coast Guard. I think it's just important that staff, you know, has some sort of direction for what to request from the Coast Guard. We have the rowing club
here who took time out of their day. Mr. >> Mayor, pointed >> a forer because I've asked Rick to give me procedure. >> Sure. I mean, there's a motion in a second, so usually you would vote on on that. >> So, look, I I just I think it's important to have public input and and
and consider alternatives from people who who are on the water every day. >> Mr. Mayor, if I may, >> we've just been told the uh from the city attorney, we have a motion to second. I got to call the vote. >> Call the vote. >> So, this is a motion to defer to April 22nd.
>> No. Um No. >> What did we decide? May or June? I forget what we decided. June, I think, to make sure they're back and we have time to >> Exactly. Because >> Okay. So, deferring to the June meeting. >> So, the June meeting is June 24th. >> So, motion to defer to June 24th. I
heard a motion by Commissioner Bot, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez. All in favor of deferring R7J to June 24th. Please say I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed? >> Hearing none, the item is deferred 70 to June 24th. That was item R sevenj
>> to to the rowing club. Sorry to if the if the sponsor would have let let us everyone know that it was going to be deferred. We you know you wouldn't have wasted your time to come and to those who are watching. But you know we're going to we're going to continue to make sure that whatever gets passed is not
going to be detrimental to the safety on the water for you and your kids. >> Clearly that is never the intent and that's not what's going to happen. You have my word. >> Thank you commissioner. Thank you. R7 AE
R7 AE is a men model volleyball with electronic music concerts. >> Move the item. >> Second. >> Hold on. >> Did want to say my daughter has been going here since she was 3 months old. No discussion. >> I'd like to discuss this.
Commissioner Suarez. >> Okay. Can staff present, please. >> Good afternoon, Lisa Roante, director of tourism and culture. Uh we're presenting now the amendment of the model volleyball event uh before you. They are
requesting for this year to add um additional programming. They're a long-standing grandfathered event. They've been 15 years with the city of Miami Beach. And for this year, they're proposing to add nighttime uh activations with DJs uh Saturday and
Sunday until 11:00 p.m. We did meet with them to bring down on Sunday night to 10:00 p.m. uh their activations. Uh it will not be a tented event. It's out in the open. Uh as part of our special event permitting process, they do have to receive approvals from state. Um it's
reviewed internally from all departments including environment and sustainability and we're going through that process right now. >> And just in terms of the volume uh when we had the college football concert which I actually thought was awesome, excellent. I had three generations my
family there uh we did get complaints that the music was loud. I'm going to guess that that event was for 70,000 people and it was professionally produced by some of the biggest prevent producers in the world. We're not talking even in the same ballpark is the
decibel level that will be emanated especially on a Sunday evening. >> Any event has to adhere to the noise or the county and the city of Miami Beach noise ordinance that's starts at 11 p.m. However, uh if any noise is heard within a 100 ft, they would have to adjust that
or even be shut down. So that that applies to any event any time of the day. >> So I guess what I'll say is I'll place my trust in you all. However, I'm guessing you don't want this to be a oneanddone type thing, right? So there's no coming back next year and going, "Ah,
I'm sorry. We didn't realize something. If you mess up, you mess up and we're not having this discussion next year." So take it as you will. Let's be respectful. Let's manage this perfectly because it's not a second chance
opportunity. Let's really get this right from the get-go. >> So, when when is the event >> I'm sorry, >> when would the event take place? >> The event is taking place Saturday, April 18th and Sunday, April 19th >> of this year. >> Correct. >> Okay. And is there any proposal for the
following year? >> This is an annual event. So, they they technically do come every year for the last 15 years. >> Okay. Uh my look, my only concern is turtle nesting season, >> right? Uh with lights and you know, I had a brief discussion with Amy. Is
there any way to mitigate the lights on the beach? >> Absolutely. Through the turtle ordinance, they would have to uh adjust and have a lighting plan. Uh most events end at 9:00 p.m. during that time. So, it's going through the process now. We're waiting. We would wait to see what
the state um would require of this event in order for them to be to adhere to the turtle ordinance. Is that Amy if you don't mind if is this something that your department is going to work with Lisa on on making sure that it is total compliant? >> Yes, we will commissioner. Um our our
ordinance which we updated in October of 2024 has some very specific requirements um for any events in the evening. Um, first it says they have to have a permit or an exemption from the state and then any lighting associated with the event cannot be visible from the beach after
9:00 p.m. and any authorized lighting must be low wattage longwavelength light source shielded and directed away from the beach. So we have an expectation that it would be very low light that there would be shielding and that it would not be causing an impact. >> Is this on the beach? >> Yes, it's on the beach front.
>> So how do how do you wrangle those? It's on the beach, so obviously there's going to be light. >> Yeah. I mean, the whole goal is to minimize the situation, but it is something that the state may may allow. So, our ordinance minim minimizes it as much as possible.
>> Okay. Well, I hope I hope it's minimized. I'm a big turtle fan. So, you know, just make sure that we can, you know, minimize the amount of light pollution even if it's till what time? 11:00. 900 p.m. is is our
>> 9 p.m. >> 9 p.m. They just said 11. >> The the application that they've submitted is until 11 p.m. >> So when is it going to go till? >> I'm sorry. >> So when would it go till? >> It would go depending on what the state recommends. So the if the state recommends 9:00 p.m. they would have to
end at 9:00 p.m. >> Can we recommend as the city 9:00 p.m.? >> AB: >> Absolutely we can. And our ordinance recommends that the light be minimized after 9:00 p.m. Any lights have to be sea turtle friendly and not not visible
>> as amended. I'll I'll move it as amended >> till 9:00. >> Okay, Rick. Can we tell the question? >> I didn't hear the answer. >> I'd like to make I'd like to make a an amendment to make sure that the the event ends at 9:00.
That would be um I mean this is approving the the event, but that would be up to the the special event permit to reduce the hours, right? >> So So motion has amended. >> And just to be clear, what is the
amendment? Because I want staff to >> The amendment is to qualify the special ed permit so that the music ends at 9:00. >> Yeah. Good. And I do believe that the ordinance as it's currently drafted says that the event has to be concluded and
any load out that happens that evening has to be concluded as well. >> So if they're going to load out that night, that would have to start before 9 >> or they would need to load out the next day.
>> I I would I would say the the the event should end at 9. If we we say that the load out has to happen by night, then might as well not give them any approval because then we're, you know, just effectively just destroying the event. >> Yeah, I'm a little I'm a little
uncomfortable having an event on the beach till 11:00 and then coupled with the fact that it is sea turtle nesting season, >> right? >> You know, we have a code that says end at 9:00 load in. And the reason why we have load in, load out is because trucks come on the beach, right, with their
headlights, they could run over a sea turtle. We don't want that. >> Right. But they can load out the following morning. >> Correct. Correct. So, what I was just going to say is typically our event has run from 12:00 to 8:00 p.m. What we were asking for was to get a couple more hours into the evening. This was the first last week that we heard about sea
turtles and we're not trying to do anything that is against what city needs to happen in that scenario. So, I think um we were asked to move the event on Sunday to 10 p.m. and we said that was no problem. And we don't load out um until Monday. So, it's not an issue for
us and we don't do any interchangeable loadouts between Saturday and Sunday. >> What you're saying is you would end at 9:00 and then load out the next day, leave everything as is and then >> if that's what we need to do, >> if you're requesting at 9:00 p.m. Yeah. >> Yeah. Well, we've been told through our
production who's produced hundreds of events on Miami Beach, Josh Blaze, who we've worked with for 15 years. Um, they did events in April last year and they use amber lighting and so um that is something we've taken, you know, serious. >> That was the protocol we were told that
we could put into place that has been successful in the past. >> Let me ask you this. If since since a load out is happening the following day I then I feel comfortable with the schedule because my concern is would have been okay if it ends at 10:00 and then at 10:00 they do the load out or
clearly I have concerns with that but based on on what's being stated on the record that the load out is going to happen the following day at a time that is not going to conflict with our code as it relates to the sea turtles then I'm comfortable with the schedule as was
presented in the agenda item >> which is what 9:00 or 11 o'clock. >> Sunday would be 10 p.m. >> Sunday would be 10 p.m. >> Well, well, there's going to be light after 9:00 and then our code says after 9:00 there's not supposed to be light on the beach. >> But what I'm saying is instead of having to end at 8:00 and have an hour of
loading time where they have to shut off an hour later, what they're saying is they'll they'll end the show and then load out the next day during the day where they don't have to have trucks on the beach with the lights on um possibly making disruptions.
So, if I could Oh, sorry. Go ahead. >> Commissioner Mattail Selenus has been asking. >> So, I um you know, how long have you been planning the concert? >> So, we first brought up the fact that we wanted to do this back in August >> with with our staff. >> Correct.
>> And were you ever told about sea sea turtles back in August and about >> until the first week of March? >> So, I do I do feel for you guys. I mean, you have a concert less than a month away and here we are telling you you have to reduce the hours by two hours. I I don't think that's fair to you. Um, and I'd like to at least allow you
guys to have the concert till 10 p.m. at the very least. And I respect the sea turtles, but you really should have been told this. You've been promoting this, right? I mean, I think I've seen ads and you've been selling tickets for this. And so, you know, I I don't want to pull the rug out from under you with less than a month from your event. So, I
actually would like you to be able to have your concert till 11:00 p.m. If I don't get the support for my colleagues, maybe 10 p.m., but I think 9:00 p.m. is just unfair to you. I realize that staff didn't tell you that. So with that, I will withdraw my motion. I support what you're proposing.
>> Would and obviously we have seven cooks up here in the kitchen. >> Not the turtle soup kitchen. Relax. Um would there be appetite for 900 p.m. on Sunday? Right. And then we could go till the
proposed time that we had originally on Saturday, which is fine. >> Yeah. So Saturday right now as it stands was 12:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. and then Sunday we were asked to go from 11:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. just last week. So >> and and I'm very rarely like 9:30 even something like that just
>> I mean typically this event has always ended at 8. So like with this request originally and trying to do something a little bit different and you know the VCA's given us a big um awarded grant for this exact moment. So we want to be able to pull through on all home fronts.
>> And and Amy, is this mitigated? Is the amber lights does that provide sufficient mitigation >> using amber lights? >> They do it properly. That is the the goal of the ordinance that the light is minimized that it's not visible, that the light is shooting downwards, it's shielded, um not visible from the beach.
And so it's a tall order, you know, for a for a concert. Um this has been in place since 2024 and October. >> And you'll be there to or guide them and help them code will be, you know, that's part of their that's part of their job. I mean, I'm out there often as well, but it is um it
is a tall order. Um and we we we anticipate that if they're on the beach after 9 would need to comply. >> How come, Lette, how come you didn't tell them about the sea turtle? I mean, may maybe explain. >> Thank you for giving me the opportunity. They just mentioned that they work with
a producer who's been doing the event for 15 years. He's aware of turtle season. This is something that all events know about uh especially experienced producers that we have on the beach. So it's not a new uh turtle turtle or >> so they so they knew >> they should know their producers should
be aware. We did have a conversation with them. It wasn't until February 6 that they emailed us with announcing the details of what they were planning. >> When did you respond to that email? I we reviewed it internally if I may and then we scheduled a meeting to discuss with
them and have a conversation about are you going to have a tent because you're doing a concert until 11:00 at night. Are you going are you willing to go down? People work. There are residents in that area. So Sunday to 11 was something that I didn't feel was feasible. So we had a conversation with them after we reviewed internally. We
permit over 600 special event permits a year. So we also had to take our time to review everything else as well. Not it's not you know you understand our workload and so to tell me that >> we haven't we took us a month we reviewing a lot of permits
I don't think that it's fair listen I understand you you have a lot on your plate but at a bare minimum you know we just passed a law in 2024 specifically for sea turtle lighting how come it wasn't explained to to model volleyball that look 9:00 is the last last hour
>> sure so if I may when they go through the process us this gets presented to the state as well as we review internally. We have been reviewing those uh details of their event that they submitted last month. And so once the state reviews is what I said at the beginning of this of this item, the
state will then return and give feedback on what they need to do to do the amber lighting to be able to do. >> But forget about the state. I'm just simply saying our own code that we passed. >> The code says it has to be minimized. Doesn't say that they can't have any lighting at all. And I I defer to my colleague who's more versed in this, but
what I'm saying to you is that the ordinance that the way that it's written does not preclude them from having an event with lighting. It just has to be minimized and it has to follow what Amy stated. >> Sure. But let me ask the event producer. Was any of this relay to you? >> No. No. >> But they they're not the ones who are
pulling the permit. The person who's pulling the permit, the producer is not here today who can't speak for himself, but he knows and he pulled the permit for the event that they mentioned the year prior. So he understands. >> He also mentioned to us that he did other events in April in the late hours
of the evening following the following the same uh recommendations from the state and from the city. >> Hi Olivia. By the way, Olivia and I went to high school together. >> Elementary. >> Elementary school together. >> Let's get it right. >> Sorry. >> Any stories you want to share, Olivia? That >> No, I don't know. David,
>> we could go to midnight if you share the right stories. >> Like who wants my best? >> Listen, I just >> look you know it's a soft spot for me. It was a soft spot for Mark uh Sameon, you know, of the sea turtles. Um, and I
just want to make sure that there's no >> there's no disruptions because, you know, we we we have, you know, the last thing you guys want us also see is a sea turtle get like run over or crushed, you know, like it's not it's not something that you want. It's not something that we want to deal with. Um, but so at at
any event, is it possible to really like I don't know, put curtains on the side because it's hard for me to fathom a concert on the sand without, you know, without lights spilling over. I mean, >> I think that what we plan to do is everything that we're told we need to
do. Like whatever the guidelines that are put in place are there from the state. >> Like we're not here to go against any guidelines. That's why we've had a perfect track record for 15 years. And this event has historically never had an arrest, never had a shutdown. The police are behind us. The VCA is behind us.
They police even play in this tournament. Like, everyone loves this event. And it's been the same exact event for 15 years. And we're trying >> This is a little different obviously, right? >> Yeah. We're trying to do something a little bit different this year. And we've been really transparent about that from the beginning. >> And then we want to reward good actors.
>> We're not We don't want to give you a reason to not have us come back. Like we're trying to do everything right. And we're here to be transparent on anything that we're planning. >> Okay. Okay. Well, look, I'm going to be there. I'm going to make sure that I'll be there to to participate and I'll make sure that the lights >> I'll make sure that, you know, I I would
hope that our sustainability director is also there to assess the situation. Um, so, okay. >> No, I mean, listen, we're grateful to be still standing 15 years later on this beach and we're not here to jeopardize anything for that going forward. >> Commissioner Matteo Selenus. So I just
want to um suggest that you know and let you have a lot on your plate and you do a great job. you do in your department, you know, you there's so many events, especially in in this time frame, but I do want to encourage, you know, so that it similar events don't get to this.
What's the better way? What's the better conduit? Um, you know, why isn't the three points guy person here? You know, how you know, you know, so I just wish the communication would go a little bit smoother so that way you're not caught off guard, you're not caught off guard,
no one's caught off guard. >> Absolutely. And it all depends also on how soon we receive the information. So we could talk about it for six months, but until we receive confirmed information in writing, then we can't move forward. >> Yeah. I mean, it's obviously really challenging for us to stop everything to
wait to get a response when we were planning an event that is approaching very quickly. So we uh we tried to keep every update as as best as possible. And L said, I think you can, you know, vouch that we've have been transparent across the board. There's no um >> and you know I sent along every DJ we
were planning to have there the the marketing plan everything and and unfortunately there have busy schedules and they didn't get back to us for 30 days. >> That's not correct if I may. The 30 days yes but it's because we were reviewing internally not because we were >> stop I can't stop everything for 30 days.
>> We're not going to go back and forth there was an issue I would Yeah. Let's not go back and forth to submit things in I'm just glad we're at a good place now um because I do think that this su successful event and I, you know, wish you the best of luck with the concert and um that's uh all I
have to say. I think we do we have a motion on the floor. I'd like to move the item. >> Actually, the motion was withdrawn by Commissioner Fernandez. So, I don't >> if we could clarify the hours, please, just because there's been a lot of back and forth. >> Yeah, I don't I don't know. I don't have
a motion yet. >> I was going to second your motion. Commissioner, >> one one last question, Mr. Mayor. Commissioner Suarez, >> someone someone's asking is is the speakers going to be pointed uh west or east? >> East. >> Okay. So, away from
>> said that they're they're all to to the water >> and that was part of the meeting that we had >> and that's Yeah, we've we've we've we've done >> sound waves. We've done that every >> We've also never been shut down for noise. >> Yeah, we've we've done that every every year. >> Yeah. Um,
>> so I'd like to make a motion that Model Volleyball, your event, and your concert series can can uh proceed. Uh, Saturday night, 11:00 p.m. Sunday night. Did you say 9:00 p.m., Commissioner Magazine? Or >> 9:30? >> 9:30. >> I mean, I think we can give them I think
>> if we can go till 10 and then make sure we >> time one at a time, please. I >> I think we can give them what they ask for. This is going to be a first. I'm going to be there. A lot of us are going to be there. >> Great. Um, if there is a concern about lighting, you know, I mean, there's, you
know, you you guys put your best foot forward and if if if it looks like this is fine, you know, I'm I'm I I don't see how it's going to be fine, but I'm willing to to to be open-minded and see how this works out. Um, and
then, you know, we'll assess the next year. >> Sounds great. You know, I want to just u put on the record the importance of us being there at these events that we're voting on. Um and by the way, I'm sorry I wasn't able to be a lot of Palooa, but I for
the fitness competition, but I had to be at a wedding at the same time. The mayor and I were at a wedding at the same time. Um but yeah, >> separately, did you see the competition that Commissioner Suarez and I had, >> you know, you gave Commissioner Suarez a run, you know, on those push-ups. Um,
but you know, we're put in the position constantly about having to vote on events and events that often times, you know, we can't even step foot in them to understand what it is that we're approving or not approving and the impacts that they're causing and the
back of house and the noise and the lighting and the sanitation and the flow of traffic and everything that goes along with approving these things. We need to do a better job in making sure because it's hard for us to vote on these things and then be told, "Oh,
well, yeah, no, you can't step foot there because of of of whatever reason." Well, how can we vote on stuff that we have to make decisions on if we're not able to experience what we're voting on? I mean, it it's it really is important for us to be able to to understand these
events when we're voting on them. In the past, I've attended uh model volleyball and I know the caliber of the event, how good it is for for the city, the uh the the the amount of athletes and and the and the amount of partnerships that you
have and really it does elevate our city and that gives me confidence in voting for this because I've been there. I've experienced it. I know to trust you as a good partner for our city that's going to protect our environment, that's going to protect our businesses, that's going
to protect our our residents. But I just say it, Mr. Manager, because, you know, when we just need to keep that in mind because a lot of times these items do come before us and it's hard to, you know, out of thin air say, "Yeah, I'm going to support this or not." When we
really don't experience them, we don't experience the challenges or how it's good or how it's bad. a lot of time. So, I just, you know, want to put it out there for for for the record, >> commissioner. And I would like the record to reflect and also send to my girlfriend. I I will be attending model
volleyball an official city capacity. So, thank you. And by the way, by the way, you reached out, by the way, and for example, with future proof, you've reached out. You said, you know, if people want to experience future proof um but I think,
you know, that should have been through the city. That outreach should have been through the city for us to understand what it is that we're voting on, what we're supporting. And you were very kind to have reached out and made sure that we all felt welcomed. Uh but that really
needs to be coming from the from from the administration. We need to make sure that we experience these things because the worst thing also a lot of times is that then we have elected officials from other jurisdictions who are there who tell us about it who tell us oh I didn't see you there and it's like oh well
sorry you know over you know we can't be there yet we have to vote on it and it's hard to explain to our residents you know then why why we don't know the impacts of something. >> We'd be really excited to have all of you there. >> Yeah. We would welcome all of you with open arms. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. And I I try to make every event I often I often do get uh invited to come sometimes speak uh at events. So >> yeah, but those will make their way down to us. And I think that's it's somehow that needs to be addressed. >> And I agree, Commissioner, we do um
sometimes have challenges with events that the city doesn't sponsor because they're not obligated to provide tickets. But we have been asking um the the promoters that are doing those kind of events to provide opportunities for
our electeds to show. Um I was under the impression that future proof was reaching out. >> Um and I'm hearing that they did not. So that that's frustrating >> and I'm grateful to my colleague, you know, who did reach out in a very collegial manner uh to make sure. But,
you know, next year we're going to have to vote on on something relating to that again. And how do I make a decision when I'm not able to see the impacts and experience the impacts? It puts us in a very difficult position >> and and Mr. Mayor,
>> Commissioner Suarez, and let's call Sure. Call. So, moving forward, so that we're not put putting our vendors in these positions, can can we put in writing that during sea turtle nesting season, there's really no more things
that could impact disorientations at, for example, after 9:00, you have to be out and done. >> Yeah, Commissioner, we would have to amend our ordinance to do that. Um, which the commission could do that. Um, but right now the ordinance basically says after nine you have to have the
minimized lighting, the sea turtle compliant lighting. That's how it currently stands. >> Okay. Well, I guess we'll see how it goes. >> Can can you help explain the that amendment in terms of what the lighting is after? >> Yeah. Do you see how like you see how this is this is that's a perfect example
of of >> one hand not Yeah, that's fine. Yeah. >> Okay. >> I mean, they don't even know what the what the minimization is. Josh does does know he's he's produced last year in April. Uh he is our lead on production. Um and we've we've already had conversations with that.
>> Let's call out the team as well. >> Let's call out. >> So I have a motion. >> Sorry, I don't mean to cut you off. We just got >> It's an important conversation, but >> No, thank you. >> As is. >> So as So I have a motion from Vice Mayor Mattel Selenas as is. And I I thought I
heard a second from Commissioner. Okay. >> Okay. Okay. So, I'm going to do Commissioner Magazine as is. >> All in favor of R7A as is, please say I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed? Hearing none. The item is approved. Olivia. >> Yes. >> I didn't get your names. Can you both
introduce yourself? >> Of course. Olivia Ormos and this is Michael Malone. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you all so much. >> Thank you. Thank you so much. Looking forward. Let's call R sevenB. R7B is a public hearing approved for
Rainbow Crosswalk replica R 7B. I move the item. >> Second. >> Let's call the vote. >> The second was Commissioner Bot. >> It is a public hearing. I see no one on Zoom and I see no one in the audience requesting to speak. All in favor of
R7B, please say I. >> Anyone opposed? Hearing none. R7B is approved. 70. Thank you, colleagues. >> Thank you, Commissioner Fernandez. >> I'm sorry. I know uh maybe one of the city attorneys reached out. I don't think I had a chance to get back to him
if you could add me as a co-sponsor. >> Thank you, Commissioner Magazine. >> Thank you for the opportunity. >> I always say it I we are strong because of our allies and you all are incredible allies. So, thank you. Thank you. R7W
>> R7W is wave rental fee use of Pride Park on April 4th, 2026. R7W >> I move the item. >> Let's call vote. >> It's R7W. I heard a motion for Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Vice Mayor Matel Selenus on R7W. All in
favor, please say I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed? Hearing none, R7W is approved. 70 R50 R5 is an orders of the mayor city commission of city beach accepting a five on a 57s vote after holding a duly noticed public hearing the
recommendation of the public safety and neighborhood quality of life committee at its February 19th meeting amending chapter 82 of the code of the city of Miami Beach entitled public property by amending article Six entitled naming of public facilities that establish environments or memorials by amending section 82-503 thereof entitled naming
of public facilities co-naming and renaming of streets by amending subsections C1A and C2A to provide additional criteria and procedures for the co-aming of streets and providing for sunset provisions therefore providing for repeal of ability clication and effective date. This is a
first reading. It's a public hearing. It is item R50. >> I move the item. Call the vote. >> One second. It is a public hearing. I see no one on Zoom and I see no one in the audience requesting to speak on R50. I heard a motion by Commissioner Fernandez. Seconded by Commissioner Bot.
Commissioner Fernandez. >> Yes. >> Vice Mayor Matel Selenas. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Dominguez. >> Yes. Uh, Commissioner Ba. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Magazine. >> Yes. >> Suarez. >> Yes. >> Mayor Miner. >> Yes.
>> Motion carries. Second reading public hearing is on April 22nd. That was item R50. >> R7K. >> Second. R7K is authorized expansion of Forever Proud Lighthouse Banner Program. R7K. >> I move the item.
>> Second. >> I separated that. Commissioner Suarez. >> It's okay. >> Um, yeah. We we currently have a proposal before us to expand the forever light pole uh banners as a way to affirm inclusion, support a community that has
faced discrimination and enhance the vibrancy of the art deco cultural district. I support that concept and I believe we should apply that same framework to an idea that I have. I'd like to propose a similar banner initiative using Israeli
flags around the Wilsonian. uh specifically on Washington Avenue from 10th to 11th Street and along 10th Street from uh Washington Avenue to Lumis Park. For me, it comes down to visibility, safety, and consistency.
It's not about foreign policy. It's about standing with our Jewish community at a moment when anti-semitism is rising, including very fresh incidents that we've seen here in Miami Beach. The location is intentional. The Wsonian was
founded by a Jewish family and its founder's father was Miami Beach's first Jewish mayor. Jewish leadership helped build this city. The Wilsonian's mission also examines fascism, propaganda, and forces that led
to the Holocaust, which makes this location especially meaningful. If we're willing to use public space to visibly support one community facing hostility, we should do the same for another. That's not special treatment. It's equal
treatment. Inclusion isn't just what we say, it's what we show. And Miami Beach should be clear. Hate has no place here. And our Jewish community will not stand alone. So with that, u I'd like to see if my colleagues are
okay with also including Israeli flags around the Wilsonian, especially with what's been going on in the world almost what seems like on a daily basis uh of anti-semitism. >> I am fully supportive. Thank you for bringing it up, Commissioner Soros.
>> And Mr. Mayor, and I'll say I would love to join you in that. Uh I believe it was before October 7th when uh Israel was celebrating its 75th anniversary. I have brought an item to the city commission to display the Israeli flag in celebration of Israel, in celebration of
our Jewish community. Um and at the time the item was pulled. Uh I didn't have support to move forward uh with with with that item. Uh but I shared the sentiment. It's it's important. Uh I
tried to do that very same thing um for the 75th anniversary of of uh of of Israel realizing that we are all communities that have a target on our backs sadly and unfortunately though we
wait to react uh after events like October 7th happens to display our our our support. No, we need to show our strength always. We need to show that we stand with with with with the people of Israel and with Jewish people um uh
after October 7th, but before October 7th happens. Um we need to show that we stand with the LGBTQ community uh as they were rising uh through progress, but now that they're being pushed into
the shadows, now more than ever, we need to do that. We need to do it with a Hispanic community that that and immigrants in general that were embraced and have been hugged and have been part of the beautiful history of our country,
but now they face the target of them being the enemy and being put into inhumane conditions uh in in in in place places like alligator ocatros and and and and others. These are the people that have always been a part of our
community that we have always celebrated and elevated and that slowly our society has placed a target on them and put them face pushed them back into the shadows to justify all the evil actions that are
being done towards them uh from legislators on all the way down. And so and so it's 100% consistent with what I tried to do years ago. I wish you would have been on the deis back then to have supported me at that time and I'm proud
to support you now as you take the lead and charge on that. >> Thank you. So, um, >> thank you, Commissioner Fernandez. Uh, Commissioner Dominguez, >> I have a question for the city attorney. Um, wasn't there an ordinance that
prevented flying foreign flags in the city and that's why >> Yeah, I I want to look into We do have some in the LDRs uh some restrictions on flags. So, my office is going to look into whether doing this would require an amendment to uh the LDRs because it
sounds like there's support for the item. So, if there is a need for an amendment, we will prepare something. >> Thank you. >> Call the vote as amended. >> As amended. >> Yeah. So, we have a motion for second. >> Yep. >> Okay. We have to remember that when one group is being attacked, the same people
who are attacking the LGBTQ community are the same people who are going to attack Jewish people and the same people who are attacking Jewish people are the same people who are going to who are who are going after Hispanics and who are going after other immigrant groups and
who are going after the black community. It is just a systematic intolerance against all of us regardless of what the group is called is anyone who is not like them is not welcomed is not supported. Even they were saying uh
someone someone was even saying the procession of the eukarist that's done during Holy Week in many in many communities is anti-American. How dare they how how dare they say that the procession of the Eucharist is anti-American,
you know, and so and and so and so this is the target that we're facing now. And this isn't and I love that we're doing this together because the LGBTQ community and the Jewish community have always been allies and have always been in the same fight in a parallel path
supporting each other. And that's the vision that I love that when we are on a parallel path supporting each other and pushing back against the hate that is targeting all of us. That same hate, the hate against gays, it's a hate against Jews. It's a hate gate the hate against
immigrants. It's a hate against blacks, against anyone that is not, you know, a white Christian in this in this country. And we need to push hard against that hate. And >> Mr. city attorney if maybe to correct
not flags but we're going to have banners Israeli. >> Yeah, I understand. We're going to look into >> Star of David. It doesn't necessarily have to be the flag. I want >> It's just the Star of David. It's not the flag. That's that's that would not require an amendment.
>> Well, Mr. Mayor, I don't know. I I I I want to see I'd like to see Israeli flags >> as a as a banner, >> right? Yeah. I don't I don't think we should start changing a flag personally. >> Correct. >> No, I mean if you could >> it's not a flag. It's not
>> symbol to represent the >> it's going to be on a banner just like any other. >> We're going to look into whether we need to amend the code. If we don't, we absolutely won't do it. >> Good. Okay. >> So, have a motion by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner Suarez as amended. All in favor, please say I.
>> I. Anyone opposed? R 7K is approved. 70 as amended. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, colleagues. I have a great sense of nachos. Yeah, >> nachas. Nakas. >> Very good. >> Nakas. Nakas. >> Lordy. Alex. It's not nachos. It's nachos.
>> You either know it or you don't, man. It's not. >> Alex is learning a little Yiddish. Yiddish. Fernandez. >> Uh, thank you all. RP. >> So, Commissioner Fernandez. R5P is an order to the mayor and city commission of city man beach amending
the Miami Beach resiliency code amending chapter 2 entitle administration and review procedures article five entitle reasonzoning and redevelopment approval section 2.5.3 entitled design review section 2.5.3 thereof entitle administrative design review to extend the planning director's authority to administrative
review of eligible temporary surface parking lots by amending article 13 entitled historic preservation section 2.1 2.13.7 thereof entitled issuance of certificate of appropriateness, certificate to dig, certificate of appropriateness for demolition to expand administrative review authority for
temporary surface parking lots and providing for codification repeatability and an effective date. R5P is a first reading public hearing. It requires 57's vote. >> I move the item second. >> Call vote. Uh Tom, if we could maybe
just one minute overview and where I'm at with this, uh I think it's good administrative review. I hate surface parking lots. I think they're the worst absolute land use that we can have, especially as we're trying to make a more walkable, vibrant city.
Um I get that they're a necessary means, especially as uh development projects may be coming underway. Um especially as we're in a housing crisis. I'd much rather see people living as opposed to cars being parked. Um, so the one thing I want to be cognizant of is that we're
not just allowing these forever covered land plays um that essentially remove the incentive or as much of an incentive to create much needed workforce and attainable housing because a lot of uh these surface parking lots are in the exact areas where we could probably have
some housing development that would be in line for attainable and affordable housing. So, Commissioner, what this ordinance basically does is it allows for administrative design review of surface parking lots where they're currently
permitted. So, right now, if you're in a commercial district, whether you're inside an historic district or outside an historic district, in most instances, if you want to do a temporary surface parking lot, you would need to go before the design review board or historic
preservation board. What this ordinance does is it allow Got it. Yeah. Okay. Allows for administrative. Now, all the other requirements, landscaping, surfaces, everything else have to be complied with. They just wouldn't have to go to a land use. >> Got it. Thank you, Tom. >> I move the item.
>> I have a motion for Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner Suarez. It is a public hearing. I have one person in Zoom requesting to speak. Call in user 10. Please state your name. You have two minutes. And are you
calling on R5P? >> Good afternoon. Yes, Matthew Volcanov, 125 Jefferson Avenue. I am calling about this first reading. Uh, I just want to call in and say that I have concerns about making it easier to build surface
parking lots. as it's already been expressed by members of the commission, surface parking lots are the least desirable use uh land use for land in a uh urban environment and this may very well be um going down the wrong
direction. I'll remind everyone that the site of the fifth and Alton tower was a surface parking lot for many years. Uh it fell into disrepair, some people said, and had a number of uh questionable um it was taken care of in in ways which
was not great for the community. Um ended up leading to a tower of course that's over 500 ft. I just want two call and uh share my concern about um making it easier to build surface parking lots in our urban environment. Thank you. >> There's no one else. So the public
hearing is closed. May I call the role? >> Yes. Yeah. >> Have a motion by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner Suarez. Commissioner Fernandez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Suarez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Dominguez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Magazine, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Matilio Selenas, >> yes.
>> Commissioner Bach, >> yep. >> Mayor Miner, >> yes. >> Uh, here. There we go. Uh, second reading, public hearing is scheduled for April 22nd. The item passes on first reading, R5B, >> R5R. Thank you, Tom.
Tom, I hope you saved that tape from before about your uh you >> use that for your for your resume. >> No, I'm actually going to use it for my next evaluation from the >> nice R5R is an order of the mayor, city
commissioner of the city of Miami Beach, Florida, amending the code of the city of Miami Beach. Sub part B entitled Miami Beach Resiliency Code by amending chapter 7 entitled zoning districts and regulations article 2 entitled district regulations section 7.2.2 two entitled RS1, RS2, RS3, RS4, single family residential districts are modifying the
two-story house standards specific to open space requirements for side elevations of single family homes and providing for codification, repeal of ability, and an effective date. This is a first reading public hearing. The item requires 57's vote. It is R5R. Commissioner Suarez.
>> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh Tom, if you can lead the commission on what this intended for. >> Sure. Um, this is actually a very simple amendment to chapter 7 of the LDRs. Currently, when people are building new single family homes that are greater than 60 ft in length, that are two
stories in height, they're required to provide a minimum amount of extra sideyard open space. And so, if they meet the minimum setbacks, this requires minimum dimension notches. What this particular ordinance does is it updates
and clarifies where that open space can be located uh in order to simplify it, allow it to be better used um and to hopefully uh improve the and expedite both the ability of an architect to
design the space as well as for it to go through the peritting process. It doesn't make any reductions to the amount of open space but uh but but rather uh simplifies the requirements and allows for a redistribution of it and the administration and the planning
board are supportive of it. >> Mr. Mayor, >> Commissioner Bot >> Tom, can you explain why it was originally crafted the way it was? If there was an intent for there to be um this space along the sides of the house as opposed to anywhere within the lot.
>> Yeah. the the this was actually originally drafted um back in the mid 2000s and the intent is the same as today and substantively it remains the same as it was when it was drafted. And this is so that if you have a home that's uh two stories in height that's
longer than 6 feet 60 ft in length, you don't have a solid blank wall. And so that was the whole purpose of that requirement. The amendments here maintain that requirement. They just provide more flexibility in terms of uh
the shape of that open space, where it can be located um and how it can be used and what the elevation of that spaces, but substantively it will still require that you break up those long expanses of
twotory elevations. So how would that how would that um maintain the requirement to break up the uniform facade if the space can be relocated with within the lot itself?
>> Well, it when I say relocated, you can do it in multiple locations. So under the ordinance, the additional open space um shall be at least 4 feet in depth. And then we've added a requirement that
it be at least 4 ft in width. And it must equal 1% of the lot area. So if somebody wants to do one large open space, that's at least 1% of the lot area, they would have the option of doing one large cutout um somewhere
along that side elevation, or they could do multiple cutouts. Um either one would address the requirement to break up that elevation. Currently uh under the code it requires a depth of at least 8 ft
which has proven to be challenging. We think that by reducing that but having a minimum width will allow for more variety in terms of how this is actually applied to new homes. And is there any requirement for what it has to be
whether it could be pavers or a swimming pool or green space in terms of um uh sustainability and water absorption? >> Yeah, at least 50% of the open space area has to be either pvious landscaped
area or some type of water feature. There wouldn't be enough room to get a swimming pool in there. Um but at least 50% of that area. Now, um if they only do 50% that doesn't reduce the total amount of pvious area and lot coverage
that would be required in the home and it wouldn't affect the minimum open space requirements in the front or the rear yard as this is in the sideyard. >> Okay. So, the total would be the same. It just might not be on the sides. It
would that this is specific to the sides and the total would be the same. It's just that you may see multiple locations of this aso as opposed to say one big one. >> Yeah. It just gives more flexibility to home owners and architects. Yeah. >> I'd like to move my item.
>> Second. >> Call a vote. >> It is a public hearing. I see no one in Zoom and no one in the audience requesting to speak. I have a motion by Commissioner Suarez. Seconded by Commissioner Fernandez. Uh, Commissioner Magazine, >> yes. >> Commissioner Fernandez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Suarez, >> yes.
>> Commissioner Bot, >> yes. >> Commissioner Dominguez, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Mattail Selenas, >> yes. >> Mayor Miner, >> yes. >> Motion carries. Second reading, public hearing is scheduled for April 22nd. That was item R5R. RW.
R5W is an arts the mayor city commission of city of Miami Beach Florida amending chapter 10 of the code of the city of Miami Beach entitled animals by amending section 10-2 thereof entitled fines for violations of animal control and ordinance unpaid fines to constitute lean and basis for revocation of city
parking permits decal by amending and identifying those sections of the city code to which the generally the general penalty provision set forth in section 10-2 did not apply by amending section 10-11 thereof entitled running at large prohibited exceptions by providing enhanced civil penalties for animals
running at large and providing for repeal servability clification and effective date. This is a first reading public hearing. It is item R5W. Commissioner Bot. >> Yeah. Um so this sort of came to a head recently with a really unfortunate incident with a child getting mauled by
a dog. Um I am a a rescue dog lover. I have rescue dogs. I have had rescue dogs. This is not an anti-dog uh provision. This is an anti-reserresponsible owners provision. Um, we have, you know, the worst case example, which is the child who got
mauled by this dog. We have other examples of neighbors who refuse to keep their dogs on leashes when they're taking them out for a walk and and letting the dog evacuate all over the neighbors yards without cleaning up. Um, no matter how well-trained a dog might
be, um, at the end of the day, dogs are still animals and they can have a bad day like everybody else can. And, um, you know, h by having them off leash, that just sets up a situation where somebody can get hurt. Um, and I don't
think that's necessary. Um, I think, uh, in a congested city like ours, we need to respect the fact that we share space and, um, this just makes it safer for everybody. So, with that, I'd like to move the item. >> I'd like to make a comment. >> Commissioner Suarez,
>> the only issue I have with this is, you know, I I take my dogs to South Point Park and sometimes, you know, South Point Park there's no gates. Um, and sometimes they run off to where the lifeguard, not the lifeguard, the light tower is. I mean, can we make can we make an amendment that maybe 200 feet
from any dog park? Um there there's like a grace uh distance because if they run off and then there's, you know, a code or a park ranger said, "Ah, your dog ran off. I'm going to give you a code a fine now." I'd like to just at least have
some sort of buffer between the dog park and outside the dog park. So, if I may through the mayor, um, >> I I think one of our colleagues is working on something for South Point Park. I also, um, Chief Jones, I'm sorry to call you up for a pop quiz. I don't
know if you remember where this incident happened. My recollection is that it may have happened in South Point Park. Um, >> good afternoon, Wayne. J police chief. Um I don't think was South Park. I for some reason I think is was at the park
at 53rd Street. Maybe >> it was where I'm sorry. >> 53rd Street. >> 53rd Street. Well, regardless I um you know it's first reading. I hear what you're saying. Let us talk about um if that's if there's an option. I I'm
concerned about that about giving some kind of a two 200 feet seems really >> 100 feet, you know, something just reasonable. So, let us let us um work on it between now and second reading. And >> if I may through the chair, um so the title for this ordinance relates to the
fines that apply cuz the the the code already prohibits dogs off leash. So, if you'd like to bring a separate item, Commissioner Suarez, to to add a like a buffer zone, then we could we could work on something with you. >> If I may, Mr. Mayor. >> Commissioner Fernandez.
>> Yeah. I I have a concern with it. I think, you know, if if the policy is said animals need to be on the leash, they need to be on the leash until they enter the the designated dog park. Having an exclusion area, a buffer area,
I think then becomes very subjective. Um, you know, what is 200 ft? You know, most people don't know. >> And I totally get it. Um, South Point dog park is just very unique in the sense that your dog can just run away like into like another yard and so there's no gate and that's the beauty of
that dog park and from what I understand there's rarely any ever instances but and I just want, you know, I don't want to have to to be in a situation where there's a park ranger who doesn't like a particular resident who just targets
someone and and because it happens to my dogs quite frequently. I mean, you know, they see >> park rangers don't sound like you. Wait, what? I was going to say the owner. >> I'm just simply saying that that, you know, that particular park it's open for a reason. It's it's it's beautiful and
uh there's no gates. So, I don't want to have an unintended consequence of, you know, of of of people not wanting to bring their dogs because they might run off >> for as long as it's as it's specific to that dog park because most of the other dog parks are gated and I just don't
want to have, you know, the situation that now 100t 200 feet from all dog parks were creating this buffer zone where you can have animals just off their leashes. That's very unique at South Point Park. And so, I don't disagree. So, if I might, >> if I might, I I would encourage you to
bring a separate item. I don't want to muddy this. Um, you know, we did have another episode um that was in the dunes where a very aggressive person with his very aggressive dog was targeting the cat feeders um and the cats and the dunes. I I think, you know, I'm open to
hear what you propose. I I would like to keep this clean and I would like to move this item >> as it as it is. It is a public hearing. I see no one on Zoom and I see no one in the audience requesting to speak. May I call the role? >> Yeah. >> I have a motion by Commissioner Bot,
seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, as is Vice Mayor Mattel Selenas. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Dominguez, >> yes. >> Fernandez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Magazine, >> yes. >> Commissioner Bot, >> yes. >> Commissioner Suarez, >> yes. >> Mayor Miner, >> yes. >> Motion carries, second reading, public
hearing scheduled for April 22nd. That was item R5W. >> R7Y. >> R7Y is fee waiver of $25,000 for model volleyball event. >> Commissioner Magazine. I'm >> sorry. This was uh meant to be heard in tandem. This is something that we've
done for this event, I think, for all 15 years. Uh we're not giving money away. We're not handing cash, but this is a fee waiver that we've done uh for at least 10 years. >> Second the item. >> Yeah. Excellent. I'll move. >> Let's call the vote >> on R seveny. I have a motion by
Commissioner Magazine, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez. All in favor of R seveny, please say I. I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed? Hearing none. R7 Y is approved. 70. >> R7 AH. R7 AH is authorized city attorney
challenge HB 399 large destination resorts. This was an addendum being heard after 5:00. >> Commissioner Fernandez. Um, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, and so I've I I placed um this item R7H today to
ensure that the city of Miami Beach is fully prepared to respond uh to HP 399 should it be signed into law. As you all know, over the past few weeks, we witnessed the legislature insert itself
uh into what is fundamentally a local decision that falls under the jurisdiction of the historic preservation board. A decision, a local decision that directly impacts the residents and the taxpayers of the city
of Miami Beach. Um, and you know, this was a real decision by the legislature affecting real people in a builtout uh community like ours where residential buildings coexist side by side uh with
with hotels. And while the language in the bill is written broadly, it is clear to anyone who is following the issue that this was crafted very specifically with Miami Beach in mind. uh with an
with with an outcome uh that is to bypass the process of the historic uh review board of the historic preservation board that exists to ensure that there is objective criteria that's being applied that there is community
input in these decisions and that there is thoughtful planning in put in place. Um, and I and I actually I want to just take a moment to acknowledge and thank those who who who have fought uh in this. You know, the Mid Beach
Neighborhood Association, Alicia Kasanova and Anna Maria, um Fer Melo have taken such an incredible leadership uh role uh advocating for the residents uh who they represent, thousands of residents who are very much concerned
about traffic, about infrastructure in impacts. Um the the organizers of Stop the Six Flag uh movement, the Wise family. Um and also you know our legislators in in Tallahassee, Representative Basab who made it very
clear to his colleagues in the House his opposition uh to to to this bill and he voted against this bill. Our Senator Shron Jones who really fought tirelessly on the Senate floor uh including sponsoring an important amendment to
remove the fountain blue provision from the bill. Um and that it almost passed. It almost passed. That that amendment uh almost passed. But now is the time to turn the page from uh from from the
legislative side of it. And so this resolution does one simple thing, but an important thing, which is to authorize the city attorney uh to evaluate uh what legal options we we have available.
uh filing a lawsuit uh is certainly one potential avenue, but it's not the only avenue that our city attorneys can explore. And so this authorization that we're giving them through through this resolution ensures um that the city
attorney has flexibility to explore all appropriate legal actions. uh whether that involves litigation uh or any other type of legal remedy that might be available to to to the city. And so I
just want to make sure that um that we preserve the rights of our residents, the rights of our process, a process that was started, and a process that protects our community because at the end of the day, it's our duty. It's our
duty to protect our residents. is why we have these processes in place and to ensure that their voices are respected. Okay, Commissioner Magazine, Commissioner Bot and Commissioner Suarez. Commissioner Fernandez, uh, thank you very much. Thank you for being so outfront and vocal about this. Um, I
agree uh with the comments that we've been making all along where local decisions belong in local control and we continue to see uh preeemptions happening at state level. I I just want to clarify. I wasn't sure when I read uh
when I discussed this yesterday with our city manager and city attorney, but I think you provided some good clarity, which is exactly in line with where I wanted this to go. Is this isn't just letting the genie out of the bottle and then we have no say or control over what
happens. This is directing our city attorney to explore options, explore what remedies are available and possible on the table and then kind of comes back to us and we can collectively discuss what the appropriate next steps are. >> And and I just want to put clarity. I'm
not sure that it comes back to us because I think with this the challenge with this is that uh we don't know what could happen. We don't know if this gets signed into law. one has to assume that this will likely uh get signed into into into law. Uh but
once this gets signed into law, it is my understanding that this is a bill that goes into effect immediately. Is that correct? >> Yes, that is correct. >> And so and and so the moment that it's signed into into law, a lot of quick action might happen. And I just want to
make sure that um that the city attorney knows that he has authorization uh to pursue whatever legal actions are available to the city and that might not necessarily even be filing litigation against against the state. There there
there might be other options uh which I encourage all of us to discuss privately with the city attorney. But I just don't want our city attorney to have to wait, you know, 36 hours, 48 hours for us to advertise a sunshine meeting or to call a special meeting of the city commission
or have to wait a month uh for us to because a lot could happen the moment uh that bill uh there's income paper with that bill and together with this actually what I would love to do is separately um urge the governor urge the
governor uh through a separate motion not to sign uh this this law to urge him to veto this law because I think our residents have been indeed very vocal about the significant impacts that this will have
on in their quality of life and the significant concerns of inserting uh the the legislature inserting itself in a due process that had already been initiated. Um which is a whole different concern in and of itself. And because of
that, you know, had this process not been initiated, it would have been less egregious. But the fact that that the process was initiated and things just went a different direction because residents were simply exercising their rights, their right that they're
entitled to to voice their opposition is certainly something that is very concerning. Uh, and so with this item, I would like us to consider a separate motion, you know, very respectfully urging and encouraging the governor to veto the bill. >> And and I'll I'll second that motion and
that's I agree with you there. For the original item that's on the table, I guess what I'm trying to strike a balance of and thread this needle is not being caught behind the eight-ball. I agree wholeheartedly that we need to be proactive, need to have a lot of tools
at our disposal and not be uh reactive proactive, but at the same time, I'm not giving you the message, Rick, this the second this is signed, go out and sue the state because I think there's a lot of considerations that we need to consider. Uh the implications that'll
have, not saying that's yes, not saying that's no, but that's not the mandate that I'm delivering here. the the direction is let's start proactively thinking about what options are at our disposal, what tools in our toolkit and
really be proactive in thinking about how we likely will respond when this is likely signed into law. And I and and and I think through the mayor, you know, should the city attorney determine that there that litigation is the right path,
I do not see a world where our city attorney would make that decision lightly and without considering reaching out to every single one of us and making sure that he has the support of his elected uh bosses uh on something like
that. to say to say that he would have to come back to this body I would say could potentially create a delay if if any action that he takes regarding this has to come back here it could put us behind the eightball uh so I you know I
want to make sure that we give him authorization uh and and then you know he can check with each one of us individually as has been done in in in the past you know the city attorney has authorization and he can check with his bosses on, you know,
if if it rises to a lawsuit, which I don't know that it will, um, you know, he can check with each one of us. >> Commissioner Bob, >> so in addition to what my colleagues have said, um, and Commissioner Fernandez, thank you for once again
being on the lead on this. Um, you know, this is the worst case scenario. This is when a kid goes to dad and asks to to get something and dad says no and the kid immediately goes to mom to get a different answer. Um but in this case,
the kid went to somebody who doesn't live here, who doesn't represent this district, and then, you know, um to get the item added and then went to the governor who um you know, he has a a long relationship
of supporting um to to make this happen. That is not how local government is supposed to work. And I'm sorry, you know, sometimes you win them and sometimes lose them and people are supposed to um abide by local decisions
and and um so I I fully support giving our city attorney the the the ability to go explore and investigate to see what resources might be available to us to try to um to nip this in the bud,
not just for for this, but you know um for anything that might come down the pike. I I think once we once one developer sees this, I think that um it's going to stir up a lot of very unfortunate um unintended consequences, follow-on consequences. And I think it's
really bad policy um from from the state um taking away once again home rule. And it's it's um it's something that's got to stop >> and and it's not when they see us, they're seeing it already. It happened with the Unsafe Structures and Resiliency Act. that happened with lift
local is happening now with this and that is you know the concern >> commissioner Suarez. >> So are we giving the city attorney's sole discretion on what to do because I I I don't think it should be upon the
city attorney to make that decision. I think I'm okay I'm certainly okay with seeing the exploration of options and being presented to us. I don't really see it. You know, I mean, once you have your analysis, you can come back to us and say, "Hey,
here here are your options. What would you how would you like to proceed?" I certainly don't want to give the city attorney the reigns to potentially make a lawsuit, you know, that we haven't discussed. I I
I think that's kind of crazy. I think we're the ones who should be deciding that. If we're going to say we're going to sue, then then that that should be the motion. Um, and you know, look, I I there are some serious consequences to
what we decide today. Uh, the governor has line item veto and there is about $5 million in appropriations to our city that's on the line that could potentially be cut. And in fact, I mean, I have it on the screen.
PJ, if you could put that up, you know, we have, you know, the West Avenue project, uh, that the state's giving us $900,000 for, Uniad, half a million. The Beachwalk Security
Ballards, $850,000, Miami Beach, Alton Road reconstruction, 900,000. And you know, pedestrian safety in Pure Park, that's $2 million. And you can close the slide, PJ. That
and look, this this governor has a reputation for retalatory political uh engagements. And I I don't look, I I I think we're we're we're
we're going down a really dangerous rabbit hole here. on on challenging this, especially with so much money that is potentially coming to us um that our city depends on to fund
things that are very necessary. Look, I I'm I'm all about local control. Um, but I I also have to be mindful that, you know, there there there is a
state government and there is a a governor who has the ability to really hurt us uh with the stroke of a pen. And we all got a call from our city attorney last night about this. and the chances
of any lawsuit is probably not good. Okay. Uh to not get into details. >> I I think I think that that's the type of detail that we don't discuss in public. >> Yeah. Look, >> and we're not authorized. We're not directing a lawsuit. >> Let me finish, please. Look, I >> that's that's that's the unknown I'm not
comfortable with. I'm okay with having him explore and then have the mayor call an emergency meeting uh and then bring us to options to discuss, but I certainly don't want to have a decision like this that has serious ramifications
at the state level to be decided by our city attorney. I think it needs to be decided by us. So, I I think that that's a reasonable thing to ask. Uh, I'm not I'm not saying no to this, but I certainly don't want to leave the final decision in the hands of of one person. I think it should
really be a collective decision between all of us. >> Yeah. And I I was actually going to say something similar. I think we can get to the same place. I really do because for the most part, I think we're all in agreement on on we want to potentially
have all our options. I I maybe it's the lawyer and me. I can't imagine a situation other than a temporary restraining order, which I don't think that's even applicable here, but um I don't want to speak for for Rick, for our city attorney. I mean, generally, you have to prepare a lawsuit. It takes
time. I we can convene an emergency meeting if we had to. I I think the spirit is good. We're we're directing our city attorney to take all actions that potentially and we're just asking for the opportunity to to weigh in. This is a major this is a major decision.
Obviously, we're all disappointed. I've I I was standing right next to you at that press conference and and and I appreciate everything you've done. >> Fernandez, >> it's teamwork. It's not me. It's teamwork. >> No. And and we held the press conference and and I and I came out and we were working we were working with our
lobbyists and and and reaching out to electeds. But ultimately, um this is where we're at and I think we can still make a very very strong statement. uh we've made it clear how we feel and we're standing with our residents who have been very vocal against this but
ultimately have the opportunity because it's there's so many different factors that could happen here. One, I suspect there's going to be a lawsuit by some of these condominiums or or associations. I I'm I'm anticipating that's going to happen. Um
then that may change how we approach it. Um, but I mean there's so many unforeseen aspects cuz it hasn't even been signed into law yet. Um, I do share some of the concerns. I'm not saying that we shouldn't take action. I I am disappointed that our zoning laws were
preempted. We we've been very vocal that we don't appreciate the fact that we we are elected as the local body to represent our residents. We should we should be making the decisions and uh it's increasingly being taken out of our hands which is unfortunate. Uh at the same time there is there is a
significant amount of funding that we've been getting uh from from the state that we've used to good use including the resources during spring break. Doesn't mean we don't fight these issues but um I I at least would like to know what we're what we're up to before before we
actually uh go there. I'm not and it's interesting you you you you made a comment commissioner for another I thought was interesting because you said I'm not sure we would file litigation but the way this reads it's almost like we would and it's almost like we're trying to tell the state this is what
we're going to do right to take any and all appropriate legal action including the initiation of litigation that's like the there's many different avenues we could take and that's the one we're actually highlighting um and whe again I I don't know if that's the avenue you're
thinking Uh um and I obviously we've had conversations so I have a sense but I'm not going to say it what your thinking is. Um what's anyway I want to hear from my the rest of my colleagues. >> Yeah. So if I if I may
um you know I think our home rule is very important. Um but you know I'm I'm going to say this and so are the dollars that we get from the state of Florida. No amount of money,
not a dollar is worth surrendering our rights, our home rules, or the voices of our residents. Not going to let our city be intimidated. Every year we sit here and, you know, I
have to hear, "Oh, but Tallahassee is watching this and we so we shouldn't do this because Tallahassee is watching." And yet every year, year after year after year after year, we're getting preempted. And it's not stopping Tallahassee from preempting us. And so,
you know, I'm not going to put an appropriation value on the rights of our residents to be able to have a fair hearing before the historic preservation board. That is invaluable. That is their voice and that is their rights. And I
don't feel comfortable, you know, saying saying that because of grant dollars that we get from the state that that, you know, we wouldn't feel comfortable in in defending that or the code that we have that we've adopted uh over over the
years. I think we appoint a city attorney who we trust to work with with all of us. Um, and what we've been told is that the governor could sign this bill at any moment. and the go and once the governor signs that bill um that
bill goes into effect immediately. Unlike other bills that might go into effect at the start of the fiscal year or might go into effect January 1st, this is a different type of bill, a bill that can go into effect immediately. And
um and and you know, I think we should be giving the city attorney that that that authority to take any and all necessary and appropriate appropriate legal action
uh as as it relates to to H3 uh HB3399. And and again, if we trust our city attorney, we trust he's going to check with each one of us. I think he I I think if our if our if if our city attorney chooses if you know not that he
will but if he chooses that litigation is the path that that that is best for the city if he determines that I'm sure he will check with each one of the commissioners before he moves forward with something
as significant as that. And I'm sure that if he sees if he sees that there that that there isn't support for that, I doubt that he's going to do something that doesn't reflect the desires of the of the elected leadership. But I think
it's important to give him this legislative authority so that we don't hold back the process in having to call a sunshine meeting or an emergency meeting or wait till the next city commission meeting. Um I I I I don't
know that he's going to move forward with necessarily proposing a lawsuit. I think as you've mentioned uh Mr. Mayor, it sounds like you've been briefed and that there might be other avenues through which you know one could
challenge uh HB 399. Uh and so I think that that that the resolution is appropriate as is written. But >> Commissioner Suarez, >> M. Mr. City Attorney, but wouldn't it have to be signed into law in order to
take action against the bill? So, wouldn't it I mean, shouldn't we wait to see what the action is I'm assuming it's going to pass for sure, but after it gets signed, wouldn't it then be prudent to have, you know, options for legal
action at that point? I mean because you know at this point it seems kind of moot because it hasn't even been signed into law and what Commissioner Fernandez is saying is that we need to act now. >> I'm underression that we need to act after the bill is signed so that you
have I guess some sort of standing of of where where to position yourself. >> Well, we we would not file any litigation until the bill is signed into law. That is for sure. But I think Commissioner Fernandez, and I'll let him speak for for himself, has a different
view as to what what this does. >> And I I I understand what Commissioner Fernandez is saying, but I I I for one would like to have my the options of what the city attorneys plans to do. We're the elected officials. Let you
know, let us decide what the best course of action is on the menu of options that our city attorney is doing. I don't want him deciding what to do. He doesn't even live here. So, you know, I I I think it's prudent for us to get options. There's no there's no
there's no problem with waiting because the bill we can't even do anything until the bill is signed anyways. And that gives also time for our city attorney to really research this because this was put on last night, you know, less than
24 hours ago. So, um, you know, and and and we got calls that I I certainly didn't like to hear. Um, and I I you know, I think, look, I all I'm saying is I think we should give the city attorney a little bit more time to digest this.
He's had 24 hours, less than 24 hours to see this. I don't think we're under any time constraint because the bill isn't even signed yet. and and it gives and I certainly don't feel comfortable having our city attorney make decisions that could impact
things that are that forces in Tallahassee that could really come down on us. I think we should be making that decision, not handing it off to someone. And I think that's the reasonable thing to do. I'm I'm not I'm not trying to stop this. I'm I'm I'm simply saying like let's be in control, not have the
city attorney who doesn't even live in Miami Beach be in control. Yeah. So, just to be clear, some of the some of the comments uh I don't I don't think anybody on the here has backed down from Tallahassee. We have made it so clear in every which way how how we feel and and
um and often we get we get we get some blowback from representatives in Tallahassee and that's okay. But I also think it would be and this is why this is a healthy discussion. I think it would be a uh a detriment to our fiduciary duty to look at what the
potential consequences could be. We hope they won't be, but I think we certainly have to explore that. Doesn't mean we back down, >> but um they're real. I mean, to be honest, if if if I could also I mean, if if if our city attorney calls me after this is signed in and says, I'm
contemplating XYZ, I could just call a special commission meeting, right? And then sort of force because I don't think anything's going to happen. that's takes 24 hours. So I don't think usually anything happens that quickly. It's got a call all seven of us. Um I just think there's there's a lot of lot of
unknowns. I I would I personally think this is such a major decision whatever step we take and maybe it is maybe whatever I I'm not going to I'm not saying I'm not going to be supportive. I might be but it's it's a it's a very major decision. And it's
uh we're not happy with what transpired at all. We've we've as I said we've done we've we did everything we could. Uh the press conference, the uh I mean I came out on social media um the the conversations, the calls. At the same
time though, it's uh we're dealing with uh with a situation where the governor either signs it or doesn't sign it. We're dealing with uh our second largest employer in the city and I would I think we need to be very
hands-on on how we approach this and what decisions we make. That's all I'm saying. I just wanted I I would prefer it to come back to us. But I I'm I'm glad you brought the item. It's a good item. I just to me I would rather not take that control out of our hands. By the way, I was consistent with this uh
even during we were talking about I mean it's a different issue, but during spring break, right, I was I was actually giving push back because I was like, "Hey, do we really want to give all that control uh to the city manager and making changes without uh us as the legislative body um weighing it?" Commissioner Magazine.
>> Yeah, I'm absolutely going to support the part of directing the city attorney to begin exploring all of our options. I do have a couple of questions. Rick, maybe this is for you. And uh assuming that this law gets signed into place, what rights does the Fountain Blue have
if this gets signed in on a Friday, can they show up Monday with a bulldozer and just start clearing things out and constructing a water tower or do they are there still things within the city and processes that they need to go
through? And I guess where I'm going with that is I guess that in part forms how immediate we need to be with our response when this does get signed into. >> They would need to apply for the
variances that they requested from the HPB that they would have to start that process administratively. So that would be the first step >> and presumably like demolition permits, building permits or or all those things completely waved and it's just do whatever you want. >> Well, I think they would first need to
substantiate that they that they meet all the criteria in the bill for a large destination resort, the acreage, the number of rooms, the 70% occupancy over the last 3 years. Um, and if they did meet that criteria, then they could
submit an application for administrative approval again of just the variances >> or not the the commission but the city >> to city staff. Yeah. >> Tallahassee, not Florida. >> Correct. Um, and then the second thing I think we
should at least have some discussion and be honest about, right, with this, >> are we just directing the city attorney to kind of file lawsuit come hell or high water? >> No, we're not, >> right? And well, let's let's discuss
that, right? If he comes back and goes, "Bill was signed. I'm ready to essentially act if you all kind of give me the green light." Are we how are we going to come to that decision? Are we going to handicap the odds of okay, I
think we have an 80% chance of winning. Then maybe we're like, you know what, go ahead. Let's let's roll the dice here. We understand the consequences, but if we can do that, then this is worth going all in on. If Rick comes and says, well, there's a 20% chance we win. Do we say,
you know what, we need to be principled and still stand up for our residents and and show them we believe in them even though Steve >> this has just been handicapped in 20%. You know, where how are we making our next decisions,
>> especially if we're not going to be able to talk amongst each other. >> So, Fernandez, >> thank you. Um, and so I just, you know, want to read what we're enacting here. It is authorizing the city attorney to take any and all appropriate legal action to challenge that portion of HP
399 creating section whatever it is entitled large destination research. So we're not directing we're authorizing the city attorney to take any and all necessary and appropriate legal actions. Um by the way this I think the bill has
been presented to the governor. I don't know if Peter is here. Um, but uh the bill was presented to has been presented to the governor >> today was just >> today. Okay. So, our intergovernmental >> Hello, Peter Lisaragi, intergovernmental
affairs leazison. Um, the bill was just presented to the governor today. So, he has until April 2nd to decide whether or not he's going to sign the legislation. >> Okay. And when is our next city commission meeting? >> April 22nd. >> 22nd. >> April 22nd. So >> Peter,
>> I know you're not a prophet. If I could just have Do you have any doubt that the government is going to sign it? >> To be honest, I don't have any doubt that he's going to sign it. >> I think Yeah. I And I think we fall we're all on on the same page on that. So let me ask you this because I think
we're looking very narrowly about litigation, but you know, there's more than just litigation and the city has many legal tools that it could consider. Uh obviously litigation is is one of them.
Um what I'm hearing is that is that the body has concern with giving a blanket authorization for litigation. the mayor, you're committing that if it is necessary for there to be litigation
that you would call for a special meeting um at the request of of of the city attorney or if I ask you for a special meeting because he feels that you would grant that. So, let me ask you, Mr. Attorney, because my concern with that is that even in this discussion, as we were discussing this,
we almost stepped into the territory of publicly revealing strategy that we may not want to discuss in the sunshine. And while a vote would should absolutely happen in the sunshine, uh would it be possible to discuss the merits and the strategy part of that in
an executive session? >> Um or an entire an attorney client privilege session. >> Probably not. Um those are >> and that's my concern. I don't want to reveal to a billionaire what our strategy would be so that he could use our
>> we may be able to in the context of the the financing for the expenditures that is potentially an angle that we could use. Um but I'd want to look into that. But absolutely if that was not an angle that we could use I would discuss with each one of you individually and then
you would vote at the special meeting. And so and so my concern is is that then we get to to you know a special meeting and you know especially when things are when when there's not a consensus we start debates and we start entering the
territory of revealing strategy or territory of speaking publicly and creating a record that then can potentially be used against the city's arguments and and that would not benefit our residents.
And that's and that's where, you know, the same way that uh our city attorney, you know, would brief each one of us privately, you know, if if we trust our city attorney, we have to trust that he will not file something as significant
as filing a litigation if he doesn't have the backing of the commission for it. I mean, I mean, he's not going to put his job in the line for that. >> Mr. just because Commissioner Fernandez, you know, wants to >> You don't know how strongly he feels
about this. No, I'm kidding. >> Well, the irony is I mean, I don't want to say I know for sure. I have a pretty good sense as to what would would happen or not happen. U >> Yeah, I just >> I'll keep that close to the >> Mr. Mayor. I I I just think it's good for us to for us to decide. I don't
think the city attorney should decide that, you know, this sort of case when it has severe, you know, ramifications of what could come out of it. I just let's keep it in in in our hands and and make a decision, you know, moving
forward. Who knows what will happen between now and and then? Plus, I think he needs I think the city attorney needs time to really digest this. Like I said, within the last 24 hours, this was put on our on our on our desk and and on his
desk as well, I I I think there's no rush to do that do so. And especially writing a blank check. I I I don't feel comfortable writing a blank check to our city attorney to to make a decision. I I I think as soon as he has a an opinion,
you know, maybe we instruct you to to to to give an opinion of of perhaps, you know, what what our case would entail. Is this something that you would hire outside counsel for? Because I understand if it's going to be outside counsel, it could be it could cost us
millions of dollars on top of the fact that we were going to lose all our appropriations. you know, then then we're starting to really get into sevenf figureure problems that I don't want to happen to
our city. I completely respect and understand that I don't want Tallahassee trampling on us on our rights for zoning, but at the same time, this is the reality that we're in, you know, and this is millions of dollars that is at
risk for for our city, and I I don't I don't want to lose that. Um, but again, at the end of the day, I think it should be our decision and I don't I certainly don't want to be writing a blank check to staff to make policy decisions. So, >> Rick,
>> are there other options on the table either besides or in addition to litigation or is that something you want to kind of discuss with us uh privately? I would rather discuss that with you privately, but certainly there are things that could come up between now
and when the law comes >> uh into effect. >> I think we're all almost perfectly aligned here, right? We are giving you we all want to fight for our residents. We do not want to roll over to higher authority. We want local control to remain in local control and we want to
fight for that. We want to instruct you to go exhaust what our different options are, right? and >> whether it be in a public form or calling us individually and we make a collective decision then we essentially
make that decision then I think that's where we're all at. >> I I would certainly speak with each of you individually. I cannot poll you. So if if it comes down to that if that's the direction the body gives today then there would need to be a special meeting. I is is would this fall under a
potential sunshine uh well not not a sunshine meeting meaning a legal meeting with us because it impacts a litigation or potential litigation >> unless there's active litigation I I would not be a I mean I said earlier that potentially to discuss um financing
strategy but that really only applies when there's active litigation so we would have individual briefings but we would need to have a special meeting. No, I I think the public should deserve I think the public should see how we go about this. I don't I don't see why we need to have this out of the sunshine. I
think this very much needs to be in the sunshine. >> I only mean it cuz if there's potential >> strategy >> strategies. Now remember, litigation gets very detailed there. There's there's sometimes there's there's you can say, you know what, we're going to do these causes of action but not these at this time depending on what the
defense does. I mean, there's literally a lot of strategy that goes into this. It's why lawyers get paid a lot of money, right? So, uh, that's probably something you don't want to be discussing out in in the public. The fact, yes, whether to file a lawsuit or not, I think that's appropriate for but
to discuss specific strategy. Now, you're giving the defense. >> I don't think we're going to be discussing specific legal tactics on the deis. I think it's just going to be these are our options. this is what you can do and you can either hire legal
counsel, outside counsel, you can have us do it, you can do nothing, you can do this or that. But I don't think we're going to be going into the weeds of each. You know, I I'm not I mean, I give you my word. I'm not going to do that. But I think we just need to decide as a
body in the sunshine of what we're going to do, not what he's going to do. You know, I'm just that's all I'm saying. And I I think it's I think it's crazy that again I don't want to have staff decide this. I want us to decide this. It should be us and hopefully it'll be a
unanimous decision. >> So Mr. >> uh Commissioner Fernandez. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And you know, it's not just staff. It's our charter officer who is, you know, vested with looking out for the best interest of the city. and we hire him to be the city attorney
because I assume we all trust him to be our city attorney and to defend the best interest of the city. Um and so and so you know I think a good amendment perhaps could be that if the city
attorney determines and again it's if we're not saying that there will be litigation. If the city attorney determines that litigation is necessary, that he should only proceed with litigation upon consultation. So at least he can reach out to each of the
commissioners, discuss it with with each of the commissioners and determine on his own after consulting with his clients uh whether whether it is still in the best interest of the city um to move forward with this. And by the way,
even even and that would also not only allow us to have a say directly to him, it wouldn't preclude any one of us if we wanted to to call for a special meeting uh to request one from the mayor or to submit a request to the city clerk. Uh
but I but I do think, you know, a lot of times we don't know what could happen. These things could move very quickly between now and our next meeting on April 22nd. a lot of different scenarios besides us litigating the city could
happen. Uh us litigating um us litigating the state could happen. And um and I don't I I don't think we should hold back or tie the hands of the person who we have, you know, appointed to look
after the best legal options for the city. I would propose uh that that that we amend the resolution hearing the feedback from all of my colleagues that we amend the resolution to make it clear that if the city attorney determines that there be litigation
that he only do it upon consultation with each of the members of the city commission. uh because that way if anyone has any significant concerns, someone could call for a special meeting of the commission uh if if there there
were to be concerns at that point and I don't know if that's something we can >> and if I may the chair um in order to direct me would have to be a special meeting like if I I can't call you individually and ask uh and poll you so either you authorize today or if if the
will of the body is >> but wait we're no one is directing you. Okay. >> We are authorizing you to we are authorizing which is different than directing. We're authorizing you to take any and all necessary uh legal and
appropriate actions. >> Sure. >> Um and so and so you know in without us even putting this language in, if you were to file litigation, you wouldn't consult with each one of us before filing litigation.
Um I I would absolutely consult with each one of you, but to in order for what what is being decided here um to get direction specific um it would it would require a special meeting. I can't pull >> That's not what you told me when we
created this item. You told me that with this item you would have authorization to file litigation if you felt that that was the best course of action. >> Well, that is true, but that would not require me polling each one of you. This would authorize >> no one's telling to pull to pull us but
you may want to discuss your strategy. What are what are the positions of the city? What are the arguments that the city what are the claims that the city would be bringing forward? >> You wouldn't be you wouldn't be briefing us and consulting with us on that. >> I I I would be sure that's fair.
>> I I I didn't get a clear answer from that. Again, I I'm simply saying have him give us a menu of options. The mayor is willing to call a special meeting within a 24-hour notice and then let us decide. I don't want to give I don't
want to have a I don't want to give the city attorney. I understand he's a charter officer. I don't want to give him a blank check. I don't I don't think that's the right thing to do. I think we have plenty of time. We shouldn't rush into this. The bill isn't signed. I understand it's at the governor's desk,
but there's I mean, come on. Like, we we we can still make a decision in a very short period of time if this, you know, once he gives us a menu of options. I mean, I don't even think he feels comfortable kind of doing this himself
without getting direction from us. And he just said that he can't pull us to have direction. It has to come from a sunshine meeting, explicit direction on what to do. >> Mr. Attorney, you don't feel comfortable. Can you confirm that for the record? >> Sure. If the direction of this body
authorizes litigation, I would feel comfortable taking action. If the if the direction is, you know, come back and get further direction, then I would need further direction. So, the the way that the the the resolution is currently drafted, I would feel comfortable taking
action. I would consult with each one of you. I would explain what you know my thoughts are and as you pointed out if somebody wanted to call a special meeting in in that case they they they absolutely could. >> Yeah. If you if you if you call all of my colleagues and there is a and and
again this is if a big capital I and a big capital F capitalized if if that is the route that you decide. Someone could call a special meeting and the mayor has said that he would grant
the special meeting and and you know the city could the commission could give you different a different different avenue but but but I wouldn't want to hold back you know your ability to to to do work on something that is very timesensitive
that's so important to so many of of of our of our residents. Um, and I and and and again I trust that I think if you feel that there's hesitation, not that you would pull, but but if in consulting with people, you know, that there's, you
know, concerns uh and and and and legitimate reasons that you probably wouldn't move forward with it. I mean, I I trust I trust you with that. I I think I I think I I think when we appoint you to be city attorney, most of us uh trust
you with that. But so, you know, it's interesting. Uh, Commissioner Fernandez, it may not sound like it. I actually think we're very, very closely aligned. Um, you know, there's a couple things. One, we're talking litigation a lot, but the the resolution actually says any and all appropriate legal action. Actually, in
the last 48 hours, I've heard a couple of a menu of different options that could be >> That's correct. >> appropriate. So, we've focused on the litigation, but there's actually other avenues as well. So, >> overly focused on litigation, >> right? So this conversation sort of honed in on that, but I think we're
we're both on the same page that there may be there may be there may be other avenues which again sort of that's kind of why I kind of want to hear it out in the open. Uh and that's where that's kind of where we only deviate where you
know obviously if the city attorney comes to us then we're having a one-on-one with him. The beauty of this process is that we get to talk to each other which we're not going to have the opportunity to do otherwise. So >> listen, I'm just one one one of seven. I would love to hear what my colleagues
have to say. Uh quoting the great David Suarez. Uh you know, love to know where my colleagues stand on this. Uh because interesting point. I I think I think collectively just we're we
we all are looking out for our residents and our >> this was not the way we wanted this to go down. Then the question is how how do we respond? What is in the best interest of our residents? What is in the best interest of our city? And again, I think
I think we're pretty much aligned. It's just the the the slight nuances whether it comes back to us as a full body to make that final decision or whether city attorney just >> and Mr. Mayor, I don't mind saying I'll tell you I'll tell you this much. I
don't even mind delegating that decision to you and the city attorney. Uh I just don't want us to get held up by bureaucracy and by time on something that the city attorney might need to act quickly on. And so and so I don't mind saying, you know what, the city
attorney, you know, together with the mayor can determine whether whether whether we proceed with with a with a lawsuit or not. I just don't want bureaucracy having to notice a meeting. someone's out of town, two of us are out of town, three of us are out of town,
uh, you know, and and that type of stuff to get in the way of something that is so incredibly sensitive to so many of our residents who have been so passionate and so vocal about this that our personal schedules and that advertising a meeting and all that could
get in the way of the business of the city protecting not only its rights, but for forget about the rights. most importantly, the voices of those who have entrusted us with public office, who have been usurped uh by by some
senator in Ocala that knows nothing about my idea about the traffic jams on Collins Avenue that has that has no understanding on how this will directly impact not only the quality of life, but even the safety of the people who who who live in this area. Um, and I don't
want bureaucracy to get in in the way of of of of doing that. So, um, so that's that's that's what I would suggest. So that you know I don't mind delegating that authority to you that the that the
city attorney if again big capital if capitalized if the city uh attorney you know decides that this is the best course of action that he consult with with with a mayor on that and and and
get buyin from him because I trust them both. I trust them both. >> And >> I appreciate that, Commissioner. >> Oh, Commissioner Dominguez, I promise. Then Commissioner Magazine. >> Uh, thanks. >> So, this is a very um difficult item
because we keep getting home rule removed from us over and over and we just sit back and say, "Okay, we'll try harder next time." And um it's not right. I agree with Commissioner Formandis 100%. we
need to have have to have this ready to go and agreed upon and it's not a blank check. It's um we can have parameters on there and the city attorney would still be calling us. Um but enough with being
afraid. Uh I more and more keeps taking being taken away from us and we don't fight back hard enough and maybe this is what we need. Maybe other cities will join this. Um I think it's very important and it really sends a message.
>> Commissioner Magazine. Yeah, I agree with that. Uh, Commissioner Devingas and I I do think uh it is wise of us to expand our toolkit to as many possibilities as possible and we've, you know, sat here and focused on what if
about litigation, but I think we should really expand that toolkit and even to the extent where I don't know if we do an urging, but ask the fountain blue to come back to the table. It's okay. We recognize maybe now you do have the upper hand, but is there some sort of
way where we can say we're all one community. You're our largest employer, our largest taxpayer, but you operate in our bit. Are we really going to go with this totally uh at odds? Maybe we can find some way that this becomes more
palatable for the community where we actually are working together. Maybe that's not on the table. Maybe there's no appetite whatsoever. But I don't think we should limit any tools in our toolkit and our direction to you should be as um being as creative and unique as
possible about what our different options are. >> So So Commissioner Magazine, are you saying that he should come back to us for us to decide what the what the path forward is? I mean, it seems if we're saying
litigation isn't the only option, >> which I think we've all collectively said, right? >> Then it seems as if that is the natural scenario that occurs, right? Because the only way you you know, >> let me ask you, Mr. City attorney, is
there what is there any benefit or or not benefit to doing this right now or if we wait or for you to give us an option? I mean, what what would be the downfall? I mean, because there's this apparently it seems like there's a scenario that if you
don't act like right now, something's going to happen and we're going to lose sort of like the upper hand. Is that the case or is is >> there is some concern timing wise because the governor is expected to sign the bill. Now, is it, you know, a lawsuit that needs to be filed
immediately, but what if a April 22nd commission meeting is canceled for whatever reason and you all don't meet until May? So there there is some time sensitivity. Um >> so the only time sensitivity is to actually have a meeting >> it in other words if you're not acting
today and not giving let's say that this item just >> no what I think what I think what we're debating now is you're going to come to us and give us a menu of options or you just unilaterally decide on your own what to do. What I'm saying is, or what
I'm asking is, if we go ahead with waiting for you to explore your options, which you're going to have to do anyways, and come back to us to decide, what is that time frame delay going to cause us? >> Okay. Well, the option that Commissioner
Magazine mentioned, which you know would be a welcome option, and I would work closely with the city manager and his staff to see is there any uh any way to find a a a common ground with the fountain blue that works for the city, that works for the residents, that works
for the fountain blue. Um that would be something that we would start working on immediately and bring an option. >> How about we how about we bifrocate that? How about we say everything else you can go forward and you can you can do, but any sort of litigation has to come before the city commission for us
to vote on which this mayor can call for a special meeting. >> Yeah. And and as I think about this, I mean, possibly suing the state, which I'm not for, I'm not opposed to, right? But I'd want to know the specifics of
that is one of the most consequential decisions we could ever make. And the buck stops with us. We got elected. We put our trust in you. You are a charter officer. We put our highest trust in you, but the buck stops at us, right?
So, I'm not ready to delegate the largest decision that we could make suing our partner and somebody that has significant power over us. That's not to say we're not going to do it. But if we're going to do it, I don't want this wishy-washy phone call. We're kind of
giving you some direction. I want you to come and say commissioners, mayor, here's what's at stake. This is our strategy. And there's no wishy-washiness. It's you know what? We're going to or we're not because ultimately
we're the ones that got elected by thousands of residents. And that's where the ultimate responsibility shall lie. Right? I don't want to put that on you. not going to leave you out there, you know, I don't want to say to dry, but
that if we're going to take one of the most consequential decisions a city can take, suing a state, then we should be the ones that are signing off on that. >> Rick, have we ever sued this? Has the city of Miami Beach ever sued the state of Florida?
>> Not enjoined on a suit. Just >> I I not to my knowledge. I I know that we've challenged um we filed an administrative appeal with the FDOT not too long ago. Uh but I don't believe that we've filed a suit against the state. >> Right. And the reason why I asked that is sort of following up with
Commissioner Magazine saying it's again we all options but it's a very consequential decision. That's that's what I'm trying to get at. In the 110 year history of of the city, we haven't done it yet. >> I think there may have been something with rent control back in the 70s when the constitutional change that happened.
>> Commissioner Dominguez. Thank you. Um I know that it's been mentioned here that um we should go back to the table with the Fountain Blue or uh same thing with the uh neighborhood association and come up with something better. And they've also
been called a partner, but a partner doesn't wait for the answers from HPB and instead goes up to Tallahassee and slips stuff in at the last minute. So they have not been a partner to our city and that's why we're having this
discussion today. >> Mr. Mayor, >> does that mean we shouldn't >> we should never speak with them? I mean that's what I'm suggesting. >> Mike >> like Mike >> it is on What does that mean? Like we
should just pencil those down and not speak with them? >> I don't get it. I said we should speak to them, but calling them a partner is an air quotes because they didn't behave like a partner. But the first thing I said was absolutely they should come back to the
table. That's the very first thing I said. >> Well, thank you. I was asking for clarification. Um, >> yes, agree. And when I say partner, I mean going forward, they are our largest employer, our largest taxpayer, and we
operate they operate in our city. So, so behind I think it's behind him outside. >> I think just can we just bring this in for a landing? I think if we can just bifrocate if there is going to be any sort of legal action that the city attorney wants to take, he has to come before the commission for us to make a decision. Anything beyond legal action,
bringing the fountain blue for a meeting to discuss, you know, whatever compatibility um or anything else that is being contemplated, he can, you know, go forward with. But any sort of legal action I think needs to be decided by us
>> and and so I'll say this because I want and I'm sorry commissioner Mr. Mayor and I know Commissioner B. So let me wait my term is not I'll be reminded about protocol following the protocol. >> Commissioner Bond you're doing great commissioner >> just for the record um it it the bill
has been signed by the officers and has been presented to the governor as of 5:30 today. We said that ago. >> Um, all right. Uh, so, Mr. Mayor, because I want us I want this to be a unanimous item and this is not my item. It's the city commission's item and it's
the city commission speaking. And so, you know, I think two things that perhaps we could do. one uh either we authorize we delegate to the city man to the city mayor uh to
be able to make the final decision with the attorney uh so that it's not delayed by having to call publicly advertised meeting and and and all of that or um you know I got we're all elected by the same people um
and and I and I and I understand where you're all coming from so allowing for for the city attorney to bring this back to the city commission for as long as it's not delayed by more than 24 hours. But what I don't want there is to be a
delay. the city attorney feels that there should be a lawsuit and someone's out of town and you know uh I'm in California and and all of a sudden you know and someone else is in Japan and someone else is in South Africa and then
all of a sudden we can't have a vote on this because you know we're all actually having a life uh between committee meetings and city commission meetings. I don't want that to get in the way of the city's business of defending the rights
of our residents of of protecting a nationally designated historic structure of this of protecting the due process that that that affords a fair process for everyone. I don't want our personal schedules to get in in the way of that.
So, I would propose one of those two amendments. we either delegate to the mayor the trust in him as well to be able to make this decision with the city attorney or uh that if we do want uh a vote on this but that that not happen
you know later than 24 hours that we have 24 hours to have that meeting otherwise you know the attorney can go ahead and proceed uh with that litigation if that is what he feels is the right you know move. Yeah, and I like that. And I think the thing that
I'm most looking for is not, oh, we need to reconvene just because this bill's signed. I'm operating as if this bill's already signed. Right. >> Right. >> I think what's causing even some cause, I don't even want to say delay, but just to give you some time to get your legs
under you about what our full menu of options are, right? Because if it's not only litigation, what are our other possibilities, right? That's why I mean it absent that we'd be able to make a decision today and just operate as if this is going to be signed because I
think we all know that's a foregone conclusion that this will be signed, right? So am I fair in saying given that this is a rapidly developing situation, you need a bit more time to kind of
present us with all the options and the different paths that we could take. >> Okay? Because if not, then I guess we can just make a decision here today, right? And say yes, sue or not sue if that's our only option. Yes. >> Um, look, ultimately what I want is
clear direction from the body. Um, and if that direction is that you want uh, you know, want options spelled out before a final decision is made. If the body wants to make the mayor uh, the designate to decide whether or not to bring litigation, I just I mean, I'm just looking for clear direction. I I
know we're trying to land this plane here. >> Yeah. >> What are other options besides litigation? >> I don't think we should be discussing that on this day, but I'm not the attorney. >> I think we're good. I think we're good with Commissioner Fernandez. I I I I'd be available. I think 48 hours is a little bit more reasonable. Commissioner,
>> no, I don't think so. >> Japan. >> Japan. Someone said Japan. >> Okay. Look, uh, fine. you know, I'll I'll make myself available within 24 hours.
>> Are you fine with that, Mr. Mayor? Do do you want the delegated authority or do you prefer to come meeting within 24 hours? >> I I don't mind the delegated authority as I said, but I also value everyone's input here. So I have to say that to me I feel better with the with the delegated authority because I really
have hesitation about discussing any type of strategy and I don't feel with all due respect to all of us collectively including myself disciplined enough that we won't put our city attorney into that corner of having to discuss uh strategy publicly which
would not be in the best interest of the city or its residents. Uh and so and so, you know, in in in the big if event that uh the city attorney determines that uh litigation is necessary that we delegate
final authorization on behalf of the body to to to the mayor for that. That way we don't delay the process and that would be my amendment to the >> commissioner bot clarif I don't understand what you don't feel comfortable about us talking about it
with our city attorney. I don't understand >> publicly in the sunshine >> selling the fountain blue at the the litigators of of the state of >> Florida. Okay, understood that. But I thought there was a thing I mean we had these committee of the whole meetings when
>> those are actually public meetings. The shade sessions that you might be thinking of can only happen when there's active litigation and for >> not to discuss the possibility. >> No. So there's no way for us to meet as a body to discuss possible actions that wouldn't require sunshine notice.
>> Correct. Yeah. Because the residents want to know what we're thinking. >> I guess I look at again I keep saying there's there's there may be a menu of options uh short of litigation or maybe includes but litigation one of them and then there's other potential options. But but as it relates to litigation
specifically, if if that's the direction that the city attorney feels he has to go in that, you know, he he'd be able to to to consult with the with the mayor as our design to to to make that drastic decision.
>> Yeah. I guess where you and I may differ on this a little bit is yes, if we were going to sit up here and discuss specific legal strategies and go into the nuances, I'd have a concern about that. But what I'm what I'm envisioning is this. Let's say our city attorney
says, "Okay, we should have a lawsuit." He's going to draft it for us to review. And then we could sit up here and say yay or nay without getting into the nuance of every single line. And anyway, if we gay if we say yay, it's going to be filed within hours. We literally
probably after the meeting, it's going to be it's going to be 30 minutes later it's going to be filed. So >> that's very optimistic of you that we're we are a very engaged legislative body and to talk about delineators. We go into the details of delineators.
I'm sure that when it comes into litigating the state of the of Florida, you know, we're we probably, you know, would be very engaged uh and >> we would be micromanaging the hell out of that document. >> So So just so just so we're clear, the
We we we can I just say this is obviously a very consequential issue. Very that being said, the city is engaged in significant amount of litigation. I'm pretty confident that most of us do not read uh too much of those legal proceedings. So that's not
taking away from us. We're we're we have we have good counsel and in some of those cases we have outside counsel >> because they're large litigations. I'm just saying I'm not I'm not so sure we're going to get into the weeds of every single nuanced cause of action. >> So, Mr. Mayor, the the the option before us, and I'd like you to speak on this,
is to make you the design to make the decision of well to to speak with the city attorney and come up with a plan forward for the commission, right?
I think you would be the one designated to talk strategy and which makes sense because you're the only attorney on this body. Um, and if you feel it is necessary to call a special meeting, call a special
meeting. If you feel it is necessary to I guess follow suit, you know, follow suit. Um, I I I don't know. Is that something you're comfortable with? >> I'm comfortable with it. Okay. >> I mean, my thinking now is my thinking
now is if that got to that point, I would call the special commission meeting because I don't >> that's how I think you would do. That's exactly >> and not because I'm not comfortable with it because I I respect this body and I would want to hear from everybody. But there are issues as Commissioner Fernandez is raising. What if there are timing issues? Well, then that would >> that would be taken off the table and
you'd be by this vote you'd be recognizing and and granting that authority. >> Also, there could be quorum issues. Let's say hypothetically you say people are traveling. I don't have any travel plans right now. We'll just say that. Um but you know some people some people could and and that's and that's all
fair. Some of it could be even worse with that. I don't know. But um so I'm comfortable with what you're proposing. But I'm just telling you my my opinion would be I would probably again talking in a vacuum. I would probably try to call it special. >> There's always the unforeseen. >> Correct. >> There is always the unforeseen. For
example, we didn't expect for the other members of I guess the cabinet to sign this bill already and to be sent or who is it the legislature that signs it? I don't know who signs this bill before it's sent to the governor's desk. We didn't expect that to happen today.
That's where we're at. Um >> but we knew it was happening. >> Yeah, we knew it was going to go. It's but you know it's but it's happening now, you know, and so and so things could happen very quickly. So yeah. So, I will I will amend my item. I will make
uh an amendment to the item um that should the city attorney determine that litigation is the course of action that we designate the ma the mayor uh to to to act on behalf of the commission. uh
which could include approving uh litigation, declining litigation, or calling for a special meeting of the city commission. >> And and the way I think it should be written is you will give the mayor a
menu of options of what to do and then have have >> I think what this has been specifically about a litigation. This has been you the commissioner Suarez the issues that you have raised are suing the state of Florida is a very
drastic move and I think we can all agree on that and suing the state of Florida could involve outside counsel. We all agree on that and that that could cost a lot of money. I think we can all agree on that and that and that um you
know there could be retaliatory consequences and for as much as I hate to say that we shouldn't be sacrificing uh grants you know we shouldn't be sacrificing people's voices at for grants um those those are real
consequences. So because of those real issues when it comes to litigation, uh because how serious we take that that we designate the mayor to make that decision. Now there's other aspects other other other uh appropriate legal actions that we
shouldn't, you know, be micromanaging the city attorney on that he should be able to act on. And I'm sure he regardless is going to check with all of us and most certainly the mayor. Um but this but but I think that's that that's different. That's not litigation. That's
that is something that is very different that I think should be the decision of the city attorney who we've selected. But when we're talking about litigation, I do that's the motion that's on the table. We've been debating here how we address litigation. That's been the nature of this whole discussion to this
very point. And that is the the motion that I have on on the table. uh and that to the effect that that the mayor may feel that a special meeting may be necessary that that not happen uh later than 24 hours uh so that we don't hold
uh back the city attorney from doing whatever they feel necessary. >> Okay, I second. >> Okay, let's call the vote. >> I have a motion R7H as amended uh delegating authority to the mayor and with special conditions. Uh motion by
Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner Suarez. All in favor, please say I. I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed? R7H is approved as amended. 70. I had a second motion to urge uh Governor to veto bill. That motion was made by Commissioner Fernandez, took it in by Commissioner
Magazine. >> Uh anyone, all in favor of that motion, please say I. >> I'm sorry, what was it? >> To urge the governor to veto. You uh Fernandez made the motion. >> You second it. >> Yeah. >> All in favor, please say I. >> I. I. And I think uh what I would love,
Commissioner Magazine, if you would make that motion, I would join you in seconding it. I I love the collaborative spirit of reaching out to the Fountain Blue and saying, "Listen, we're here. We're one community. We all live next to
each other. We all deal with with with the consequences of the decisions that are made. You sidestepped us and you went over there, but we can still find middle ground. we can still find, you know, an ability to work here locally on
something that perhaps isn't as ownorous on our community. I think we need to signal to I think you're so right. That is leadership right there, Commissioner Magazine. I think we need to signal to Tallahassee that that we were not the problem that when that when people go to
Tallahassee with this narrative that Miami Beach is the problem, they should say, "Well, have you met with the elected officials in Miami Beach? Have you tried to solve this locally? Because I think had they tried to come to all of us, I think we're all
solutions driven individuals that trying to find solutions. And so I'm happy to support you um and join you in in saying, you know, let's let's reach out to Fountain Blue. Let's try to find a a
solution so that hopefully um we can avoid the preeemption alto together. Y absolutely. I'll uh >> make that motion. Mr. Mayor, would you like to be the delegated authority to do that? Um >> should staff do it? Yep.
>> I think we need elected representation there and and I think it could also be included in the urging to the governor. Uh, I think it should be included in the urging to the governor that this city commission didn't have jurisdiction over the matter and that and that and that the that this interest didn't come
before this body before going to Tallahassee and to give us the opportunity to solve this locally because we're extending we're extending this olive branch to try to solve something very significant at at the local level the way that it should have
been from day one. Well, you know, M commissioner Fern, you bring up an excellent point. >> He always does. >> You really honestly this is this is an excellent idea. >> Is there any mechanism where and we have a we have a someone from the fountain
blue right here willing to speak. Um is there any because if for everyone watching out there, this never came before us. Never. It came before the Historic Preservation Board and it really is a shame that we weren't able to
work together with the with our second biggest employer a and the commission and it is a is a it is a real shame because I think between myself, Commissioner Fernandez and everyone else on here, we would have came somewhere where it was comfortable for everyone
and everyone would have been happy and reasonable people and cooler heads would have prevailed And we we would have we would had an outcome that I think we would have all been okay with. Perhaps perhaps we have a special meeting
to discuss this and ask the Fountain Blue if they're willing to come here speak and make amendments to whatever they're proposing so that they we don't have to have what is going on in the
state. I'm I'm sure and you know representative from Found Blue can correct me if I'm wrong. I'm sure they're willing to meet us halfway and where if we can come to a conclusion because what when when does the governor have to sign this? >> April second.
>> But but when is the what is the deadline? Is it >> April second? >> April 2nd. >> If we can somehow come I mean that is kind of short. >> It doesn't even need to be before then because >> right we're not going to solve this between now and April 2nd. >> Yeah. So, you know, maybe we do have a
special meeting where we do have them present a case before us, not the historic preservation board, but before us, and then we can ask them to compromise on on a on a certain set of things, height, amount of slides, amount of pumps, etc.
>> Is it open to the public or not? >> And it'll be open to the public, of course. >> No, no, no. I mean, is is is the water park open or not? we could work on to the details and then maybe they're willing to say, you know what, fine. We're willing to to negotiate and we're
not going to do the maximum of what we could do because I'm I'm I'm going to venture out and say that they're going to try to be good neighbors and and and put their best foot forward and and if that's the case, it's really a win-win for everyone. So, you know, I don't
know, Ralph, if you want to come speak through the mayor, I I don't know if you want to, but you're more than welcome to and and see is there an appetite for something like that. But >> if I could just call the vote >> if you're while you're approaching, you know, I I would love to give them the
benefit of the doubt. I will just remind everybody that there was an opportunity for continued dialogue with people making decisions where the residents were here to share their viewpoint and um the found Blue chose to not engage in that conversation and um you know I I'd
like to be optimistic and I would hope that if we extend them the opportunity to come before the commission open to the public um that they would reconsider that decision that they made at that time and take advantage of the opportunity to engage as you know as good neighbors.
>> Usually we require a tie but we'll make an exception today. I was yeah I wasn't planning on speaking today but um thank you Mr. mayor and and commissioners uh Ralph Andradi. I represent the Fountain Blue and yes, look, the Fountain Blue has been a a great corporate partner as
corporate citizen for for decades. Um regretfully, we are where we are, but they are willing to to meet with the city, meet with the community, engage, and try and come up with uh with a solution that uh you know, we're never going to make everyone happy, but that
the community can live with and that the commission uh can hopefully support and get behind. So, we're ready to talk whenever the city is. Uh we welcome uh reaching out to uh or having MBNA participate in those conversations as well. Um any of the community members that feel that they're affected by this.
Um we're here. Uh >> so, if that is the case, that is great news. That's very exciting to hear. If that is the case, with great respect, would Jeff, Mr. Sofur, would he call the governor and ask him to hold off on
signing this until we've had a chance to have that meeting? Because if he signs that bill today, I I think it's going to be harder to undo the legislation and that then has the follow-on effect of of preempting us home rule for other other
decisions that might come down the down the road. It still gives him the the opportunity to sign on April 2nd if we're not at a place where we all feel good, but it gives us a a minute to try to do something that that that ends this drama.
>> You're seeing a unified commission willing to work with someone the way that it should have been from day one before before they sidestepped us and they sidestepped our residents. They should have come here first. And so and
so, you know, we're willing to work with them. They've been partners. That partnership relationship is is important. Uh and I think Commissioner Bod is is making a very reasonable point. You know, if there really is a goodwill intent to work
together the way the partners do to, you know, to call the governor, tell the governor, hey, listen, don't sign that bill because you know what? this is a city that is willing to work with us. But what but what was done was something that just promulgates this this false
narrative, you know, that we're not willing to work with people. We are 100% and and by the way, you know, you see here a commission of people that dedicate themselves almost full time to serving the city. Commissioner Suarez, Commissioner Bod, Commissioner Matel Selenas, Commissioner Dominguez, myself,
we're all read and you know my colleagues. Well, you guys have full-time jobs, but I'm saying I'm sorry. >> No, but I'm not. But what I'm saying is that we're always very readily available. And yes, you guys always >> I'm always readily available. You tell me when the meeting is. I'm there. I have
>> That's not what I meant. >> Let's That's That's not what I meant. >> Let Ralph Let Ralph speak. Ralph, is this is this an appetite something? Like, look, I I don't expect the governor to wave his his his sort of leverage, right? But I want to know like
even if he signs the bill, I still believe that Jeff is willing to still negotiate and in good faith and and come to the table and say, "Look, you know, I understand I could do this, but you know, after hearing this, we can do
that." Is that something that's that is something that that the Fountain Blue and Mr. Sofur is absolutely willing to do? he is happy and glad to meet and looking forward to meeting with the city with all of you either in a sunshine meeting or or or individually one-on-one um as well as with the community at
large. So, yes, we're ready to have that conversation and I I don't want to get into the how we got here, but the lot of stuff happened that is why we got here. Um not that >> Let me just >> And look, we're not we're not trying to rehash old, you know, arguments, right?
We're trying to move forward and that's not the point of this. So anyone listening, so for MBNA, we're not trying to rehash old arguments. What we're trying to do is come to a possible compromise on something that is going to be palatable for the community. Okay?
You know, maybe, you know, the biggest concern that I hear is traffic, right? Maybe there is a certain way to alleviate traffic where it's not impactful at all. Um, you know, another concern that I hear, um, is, you know,
day passes, etc. So, let's we can probably work on something that that most people can sign on and be happy with. >> Well, people's views also, you know, you know, how you position this so you're not affecting the value of people's properties and their and their views.
There's things that we have to consider. But, >> so, how do we want to go about this? Is this like a sunshine meeting? Do you want to make a design? You know, um I I prefer I I mean I'd love to be the one to negotiate this if you guys are okay with it or we do sunshine meetings. Um
you know, >> I think I think the mayor I I you know I think the mayor is the figurehead of of of the city. Um and and you know I the mayor I think out of all of us is the one that lives closest uh to this that
you know that deals with the Collins Avenue traffic with which which would be affected uh by this. Um and so you know I would I would I would start with the mayor uh who is the figure head of of
our city and take it from there. Look, you you tell us, you know, who to talk to, and we will. >> Commissioner Bach, >> but I think MBNA needs to have a seat at the table for this conversation as well. So, it's not a closed door negotiation and and I'm not sure why it wouldn't be
held here with all of us and and like what should have happened at the plan at the um DRB. Um, >> I'm okay with the mayor being the designate and then you know because look I mean because when the cameras are rolling it's a little different but I think once the mayor can certainly have
a meeting with MBNA right >> and with Mr. Sofur >> and have a closed door meeting >> and then whatever comes out of that >> the mayor can bring it back to the commission. >> That's right. >> You know really because you're right Alex he's the figurehead of the city. uh
he he just won the mayorship in a very hot hotly contested race and he deserves that right. So I'm okay with designating the mayor to negotiate uh between all the interested stakeholders to possibly
come back with a uh a compromise. I I don't understand why, you know, some on on some things we want to do sunshine meetings, on other meetings, on other issues we don't want to do sunshine meetings. Like, why wouldn't we have a conversation here open to the public where residents can be here and we can
share our our perspectives and um >> eventually it's going to come back to us >> and I do agree I do agree with you. I mean, and I've said that even on the other issue, I actually want to have as much as possible in a commission meeting in the sunshine everyone here. >> Why would we change you know this? But I think there should be like the moment we
come to commission there should be something that's negotiated and I and none of us can legally under the ethics code negotiate on behalf of the city unless they are voted on and appointed by the city commission to negotiate on behalf of the city and so
and so to the extent that something would be prepared some sort of middle ground middle ground that mitigates the issues and that's brought to the commission you know I would I would want to you know designate the mayor mayor, the city manager. Uh, you've been very
quiet, Mr. Manager. >> A little bit about legal issues. So, but >> you've been looking left and not right. Ready, willing, and available. >> If I might. So, if that's if we're trying to put together like a negotiating committee, my my uncle was a labor lawyer for for AT&T for decades.
And so, have everybody have a seat at the table. So, if it's uh Mr. city manager, if it's if it's the mayor, if it's somebody from from Fountain Blue, then also have somebody from NBNA, >> of course, MBNA and stop six flag. >> Those four entities need to roll up
their sleeves, sit around a table and figure out what they can live with and what they can what they will, you know, fall in their sword about. >> MBNA is our leading organization in Mid Beach. They represent, they have done a very good job over the years advocating. there are incredible partners and I 100%
agree with >> I mean this is not you know let's not forget that this is a very serious um neighborhood organization they're not fly by night representing a handful of people in some cases seem to know more
than staff do on some issues um and that's not a that's not a a slam to staff but they live there it's you know this is their backyard so >> they represent several thousand people >> and and different kinds of you know residential, business, commercial. Um, so those four stakeholders need to be
locked in a room and nobody comes out till everyone can sign on the dotted line is my view. Not >> like a conclave. >> It's a conclave, right? >> Like a conclave. >> And we'll have a little smoke going out. >> I was about to sign. >> All right. So, we're going to have Okay. So, just to recap, the city attorney,
the city manager, the mayor and MBNA uh at the table with with with the Fountain Blue and once the mayor feels mayor together with with our staff feel comfortable that there's something that is well baked, you know, again, then
this is all, you know, hoping that the fountain blue, you know, realizes that, you know, they had here a government um that is a very accessible government um to work on on solutions as opposed to preeemption. Um you know, we're once
they feel once the mayor feels that this is well baked to bring that to the full commission >> and and and I want to just say this is, you know, this is what the message to Tallahassee should be is that we're trying our best to come to a compromise
and we're willing to do that. and the fact that we weren't able to do that from the get-go and now that we are able to do that really, you know, I I hope that they're listening that look, we're trying to be reasonable and we want to make this work for everyone.
>> So Ralph, I don't think you answered the question about whether or not Mr. Sofur would be willing to put a call into the governor and say, "Hold off until April 2nd." >> Look, I I I don't have that authority. You're asking me I would have to ask Mr. sulfur. Um, if you were inclined to do that, I I don't, you know, I I'm happy
to ask and and get back to you. I do think the idea of of designating uh the mayor or or individual is a good idea rather than start with what's sure to turn into, you know, a public shouting match uh between all the different
interest. >> I think I think we got there. So, if you could reach out to Mr. sofur and urge him to please respectfully. No one's taking anybody's power away. It's just giving us time to try to accomplish what should have happened in the first place.
I will. Yeah. And if I could also ask uh my colleagues, is this the right order of operations having the mayor negotiate and then come back to the commission? Because uh presumably the commission meeting will be an open format and as
much as we all would love to, we are not going to please everyone, right? And there was a lot of passion at the HPB and it's I would expect the same no matter what the outcome this negotiated between MBNA, the mayor and the Fountain
Blue team. So are we setting ourselves up where a good faith deal being optimistic here? a good faith deal and compromise could be struck between those parties and then it comes to be signed
off by us in an open meeting and pandemonium breaks loose. >> I think that's why MBNA needs to be a part of the conversation and if they come out of those four organizations come out of the meeting with an agreement that they all can sign on to then we're just ratifying it. MBNA is going to be there negotiating on behalf
of their full membership. I commissioner >> well I guess where I'm going and yes MBNA negotiating on behalf of their full ownership I wasn't at the HPB but from what I saw I don't know if that was all how we
think of MBNA right I I don't want to speculate but >> that does not reflect MBNA >> yeah and that's where I was going like but yes even MBA NA could be >> under the umbrella compar compromise and let's be
optimistic. Uh, a good compromise is made, but at a public meeting, we're still going to have people with perhaps other special interests that are there to rile things up. And that's what I'm worried about. That's their prerogative. >> Yeah, >> that's their prerogative, but it's our
job and it's our jurisdiction ultimately to make the final decision. And then also along the process I trust um you know of the mayor >> you know of course the mayor you know is is negotiating there but I also trust that the city attorney the city manager is going to keep us a breast of what's
happening in those negotiations uh briefing us uh so that so that so they get our feedback. I mean that's something that you're allowed to do Mr. Attorney. Would that be correct? >> Yes absolutely. >> Yeah. And so and so obviously, you know, I think, you know, we need to delegate this authority to the mayor, but nothing
precludes the uh the city attorney, the city manager from briefing us as what, as has been the case multiple times in the past with other negotiations where one of our colleagues is the designate to negotiate and staff just keeps us a
breast and gets our feedback on stuff and but I do think that there couldn't be a stronger message to send to the governor as to why not to sign this bill. Then showing to him that there was always an avenue
to solve this locally and that and and that that we are a responsible body and that we want to be able to in a very responsible professional manner work with our partners to solve this our first and foremost our resident partners but our
business partners like like the fountain blue. So, you know, uh, Commissioner Magazine, I would second your motion on this item. Um, and I thank you for having that very thoughtful leadership of when when when this became such a
tense and heated issue that you thought it is still the right thing to extend an olive branch uh because, you know, we should always keep that door open to solve our issues here locally. >> As you always eloquently say, >> teamwork, >> Mr. Mr. Mayor, can I just close with,
look, I I don't want to misrepresent anything or overpromise and underdel. Um, the Fountain Blue is always available to talk to its elected officials. Um, whether it's the mayor, whether it's the commissioner, the city manager. Um, our doors are always
welcome to have conversations with you and to the extent we can resolve some of the outstanding issues, we will. I'm a little hesitant that we're calling this, you know, negotiations. that sort of implies, you know, sort of a a legal setting. We want to have conversations
with you. We want to see if we can, you know, address some of the concerns that are out in the community. That's all I I don't have the authority to say. We're going to sit and negotiate terms. And what I have the authority to tell you is that we are happy to meet with the city, discuss potential solutions to what's uh
the situation that's going on. part of us is en urging for the mayor to be our designate and reaching out to try and make that uh bridge. >> No, we get that. Ralph, I guess I want to make be clear because I'm going to I'm going to be showing up to these meetings. MBNA is going to be showing up to these meetings. Somebody whether it's
>> it won't be me. It'll >> No, hopefully it'll be Jeffrey so himself, but it has to be somebody with authority because as we all know, we don't want to hear I'm not going to waste anyone's time. I >> got to be somebody sitting in the room. >> Understood. >> Who who can make decisions. Understood.
Thank you. Call the role. >> Could we could we include as part of this motion asking our lobbyist in Tallahassee uh to notify the governor that that we are asking the Fountain Blue to work with us on this solution locally?
>> They may be watching >> probably. >> I'm I'm guessing I'm guessing so. Yeah. But sure. >> All right. Let's call the vote. >> So, make sure I got this right. So this is one designating the city uh the mayor
along with the city attorney, city manager and MBNA to have conversations with the fountain and blue to reach >> an amicable solution. >> Uh and and also include notifying the governor of that decision. >> That's correct.
>> That would be a third resolution. >> Yes. Correct. So okay. Well, we should recap. Once we we have the if there's going to be litigation, the mayor would decide yay, nay, or call a special meeting. We have a resolution to urge the governor to veto the measure. We
have a new resolution to designate the mayor together with the city manager, city attorney, a representative of MBNA to sit and discuss with Fountain Blue possible find finding a a solution that works for all. Well, I I'll let it may
be more than one representative of NBNA. >> Well, one or more representatives of NBNA. Um, and last uh you know to request that our lobbyists notify the governor of this new development. >> Mhm. So, that's uh all in favor motion
by Commissioner Magazine, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez. All in favor, >> please say I. >> Yes. And Commissioner Suarez is a yes. So, it's 70. >> Okay. Excellent. Thank you colleagues. Thank you Commissioner Fernandez for bringing the item. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you to the residents. The
residents who have been putting up the good fight, Alisia and Amarie, the Wise family. >> Yeah. >> Um you know, we stand by them and protecting our whole world, but most importantly their rights. >> I'll even mention Marcia Schwarz. I'm sure you've spoken before. She's been
very vocal. Um, >> no, I this is probably in the handful of top three issues of uh that I've been since I've been elected of passion uh for for an issue and resident engagement and involvement.
>> Number one is the pants. >> By the way, since we are in decision, Mr. Mayor, I just want to know because in the event, let's say in the event this gets this could be signed today into or well, I don't know 6:30. I don't know if the governor works past six. I don't know.
Uh, let's say it's signed tomorrow. Um, and the Fountain Blue could rush to submit their application. There's still a number of things that the city has to review. Site plans, traffic impacts, other concurrencies that would apply that those are part of the regulatory
process that they're not, you know, that we're not preempted on. Is that correct? I don't think traffic impacts because I asked about a traffic study early on and was told no. >> So I would ask Tom to step forward. I
believe that there are still some um checks and balances. Uh I also don't know when the legislation would become effective if it's it becomes effective immediately. >> Is it immed? >> Okay. Um >> I mean we voted on the items. Do we
really >> well I just want to make sure that if there are you know that we understand clearly what are you know in the event someone rushes to submit an application uh which could happen they could have an application ready to submit to the to the administration
um immediately when the when the governor uh signs this this this bill there's still regulatory frameworks uh that the that this that they have to comply with. That's correct. And I think that the as Nick Claire just pointed out
earlier, we would first have to determine that they are eligible under this statute because there are some benchmarks that they are going to have to substantiate. And so assuming that they can substantiate that, then we will make sure that all applicable regulatory
requirements that are not preempted are adhered to. >> How about traffic impacts? Is that part of the review? Again, it would depend upon the nature of what they submit. I wouldn't want to say yes or no without actually seeing an application. But I'm just asking because, you know, one one
of the legislators mentioned something uh on social media and I just want to make sure that if we really do have uh you know these specific oversight rights that you know that we don't just throw those out the window that we
indeed are, you know, looking at every review option that we have and making sure that it's being abided for responsibly, respectfully, and fairly. Uh but that we just don't you know throw those are not thrown out the window by the preeemption.
>> Yeah. Anything that we're not preempted on we will absolutely insist on compliance with. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Let's call R9A and R9B. >> So board of committees.
>> Yes. Uh everyone has a blue sheet in front of them. There's one seat for every appointee. You could do it by acclamation if you wish. >> Let's do that. >> Sounds good. >> Okay. So, R9B is done by acclamation. Congratulations to all the nominees.
>> R7X R7X is accept recommendation close Ocean Drive during FIFA World Cup. Let's call the vote. Mayor heard a motion by Commissioner. >> City manager wants to speak. >> So, um, we were reached out to by the
Ocean Drive Association who mentioned that, uh, we typically do close Ocean Drive during Memorial Day weekend. Um, and because the first FIFA match will be June 11th, that there might be some
value in extending that closure for Memorial Day through the FIFA games. Just wanted to put that out there that that was an ask that was received by our office. We believe it's workable, but um
>> I would be supportive of that. Second that. Yeah. >> Okay. with that amendment. So, Eric is as amended then. As amended. Yes. Okay. So, I have a motion by Commissioner Vod, seconded by Vice Mayor Monica Mattel Selenus as
amended. R7X. All in favor, please say I. >> I. I. >> Anyone opposed? Hearing none. It's approved. 760. Commissioner Suarez is absent at the moment. R7AB. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Oh, sorry.
>> R7AB is purchase and install flags for FIFA World Cup. >> I move my item. >> Second vote. >> Motion by Commissioner Mattail Selena, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez. This is on R 7AB. All in favor, please say I. >> I.
>> I. >> Anyone opposed? Hearing none. The item is approved. 6. Uh, Commissioner Suarez absent. R5S as in Sam >> Sammy >> Sammy
>> R5S is an ordinance of the mayor city commissioner of the city of Miami Beach Florida amending the code of the city of Miami Beach sub part B entitled land development regulations by amending chapter one entitled general provisions article two entitled definition section 1.2.1 2.1 entitled general definitions to create a definition for bicycle ride
share station by amending chapter 5 entitled off- streetet parking article two entitled vehicle parking bicycle parking and off- streetet loading requirements section 5.2.14 2.14 entitled alternative parking incentives by modifying the alternative parking incentives to include a provision for bicycle ride share stations by amending
chapter 7 entitled zoning districts and regulation. Article one residential use incentives to include a provision requiring bicycle uh district ride share stations by amending article 5 entitled supplementary district regulation. Section 7.5.3 entitled supplementary
yard regulations by amending the allowable setback encroachments to include bicycle ride share stations and providing for codification repeater servability and effective date. This is R5S. It is a first reading public hearing. It is 57th vote required. >> Commissioner Fernandez co-sponsored by
Commissioner Bach. I move the item >> second. A motion by Commissioner Fernandez seconded by the mayor. It is a public hearing. I see Mitch, Mr. Mitch Novik requesting to speak. Mitch, are you here
to talk on R5S? >> Hi Ralph. No, I wanted to speak on the Fountain Blue, but I won't say what I had to say. >> Thank you. >> Appreciate it. Um, there is no one else requested to speak. I have one more person requesting to speak. David, are
you here to speak on R5S? >> Uh, forgive me. Uh, I I didn't hear the result of the the the last one that you voted on 60 uh FIFA month. What was the the result of that? Please,
>> Eric, it's on the FIFA one. Is that the one you talked about the road closures? >> Yes. >> Yes. What what happened with that? Forgive me. It went so fast. This is >> David. We'll call you after the meeting and and fill you in. It was already voted on. Um,
thank you. We have one more caller. Michael. >> Yes. Am I heard? >> Yes. On R5S, please. >> Yes. I do want to thank publicly Commissioner Fernandez for really taking the side of the residents and I hope uh
M uh Commissioner Suarez you as well you could start taking his side and really push for the residents. We have voted you guys in and we you guys are supposed to be our voice and not the voice of a billionaire. Thank you very much for all those and especially for you miss uh
Mayor Miner. I really appreciate you as well and for the rest of our speaking up for the residents and to stop this bad bill and to stop the fountain from doing >> sir. Thank you very much. >> R5s. >> May I call the role? >> Call the roll.
>> Have a motion by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by the mayor. Commissioner Suarez is out. Commissioner Dominguez. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Bot. >> Yes. >> Vice Mayor Matt Selenas. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Magazine. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Fernandez. Yes. >> Mayor Miner.
>> Yes. >> Motion carries. Second reading. Public hearing is on April 22nd. That was item R5S. >> R5X. R5X is an ordinance of the mayor and city commission of the city of Miami Beach, Florida, amending chapter 14 of the code of the city of Miami Beach entitled building regulations by
amending article two entitled construction standards by amending division 4 thereof entitled 2017 through 2017 2026 building permit reprieve program to extend the duration of the building permit reprieve program for owners of single family residential, multif family residential, mixeduse or
commercial properties uh who have failed to obtain a building permit or who hold expired permits through December 31, 2028 and to amend the definition of existing buildings as used therein and providing for repealer qualification, subverability and an effective date and a sunset provision. It is a first
reading public hearing. It is item R5X. Commissioner Fernandez. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is extending the building permit reprieve period through December 31st, 2028. But this now in incorporates a new element into whereby we are waving the usual double
and triple permit fees that get charged when work is done without a permit. Uh and so this is an effort uh to give people some assistance, some forgiveness if they come uh to us and they tell us, hey, you know, yeah, I I messed up. I
did work without I'm doing work without a permit. It gets them into compliance without having to face double and triple permit fees. I move my item. >> Second motion by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner B. It is a public hearing as you see no one in Zoom. No one in the audience requesting
to speak. Uh may I call the RO? >> Yeah. >> Uh Commissioner Fernandez, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Matt Selenas, >> yes. >> Commissioner Bot, >> yes. >> Commissioner Dominguez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Magazine, >> yes. Commissioner Suarez, >> yes. >> Mayor Miner, >> yes. >> Motion carries. The item is approved.
70. Second reading, public hearing is April 22nd. That was R5X. R5Y. R5 Y is an orders of the mayor city of commission of city of Miami Beach amending chapter 82 of the code of the city of Miami Beach entitled public property article 7 entitled uh art and public spaces division one entitled
generally section 82-537 thereof entitled definitions to create certain defined terms amending division 2 section 82 82-562 thereof entitled powers and duties to modify the powers of the art and public spaces AIP committee amending division 3 entitled
fund section 82-587 thereof entitled appropriations by the city to the fund to amend require requirements for a art and public places allocation to be implemented on the site of a city construction project and providing for repeater qualification servability and effective date. This is R5Y. It is a
first reading public hearing. >> Commissioner Bot. >> Yeah, this is a very simple um item and Lette can answer any specific questions but basically this is to um reinforce the notion that the art that gets purchased to be displayed as part of these projects um actually gets
displayed in a public space. ideally the majority of the time outside of the building um as opposed to say for instance um in the office of the manager of the property which is technically a public space but is not what this was
intended or in you know behind the concierge desk that is technically a public space but the idea of art and public places is that that residents who have no would never need to set foot into that facility would still be able to get the benefit of the art in public places very simple, no money being
spent, just encouraging people to make sure that when um development agreements are negotiated that this is how things are are handled. And with that, I move the item. >> Call them out. It is a public hearing. I see no one in Zoom, no one in the
audience requesting to speak. I have a motion by Commissioner Bot, seconded by Commissioner Magazine. Uh Commissioner Suarez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Bot, >> yes. >> Commissioner Magazine, >> yes. >> Commissioner Dominguez, >> yes. Commissioner Fernandez. >> Yes.
>> Vice Mayor Matel Selenas. >> Yes. >> Mayor Miner. >> Yes. >> Motion carries. The item is approved. Second reading. First reading. Second reading. Public hearing scheduled for April 22. R5. >> R5 L. R5L is an ordinance of the mayor city
commission of city Miami Beach short amending chapter 82 of the code of city Miami Beach entitled public property by amending article 3 entitled uses of public property by amending division one entitled generally by amending section 82-74 thereof entitled plastic related or metalized decorations prohibited at
public marinas marine facilities parks and beaches in order to clarify applicable restrictions on the possession and use of decorations in outdoor public settings and providing for repeatability clarification and effective dates. This is a first meeting public hearing and it's item R5L.
Commissioner Fernandez. >> Second. >> Let's call the vote. >> I have a motion by Commissioner Fernandez. Seconded by Vice Mayor Mattel Selenas. Uh this is a public hearing. I see no one in Zoom. No one in the audience. Uh Commissioner Magazine. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Fernandez,
>> yes. >> Commissioner Suarez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Dominguez, >> yes. >> Commissioner Bot, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Matelin, >> yes. >> Yes. Motion carries. Second reading. Public hearing scheduled for April 22nd. That was item R5 L. >> C7 AF.
>> C7 AF is request additional office hours. Condo AB uh whatever. I can never pronounce that word. I think we'll save it from now on. >> Commissioner Dominguez, co-sponsored by Commissioner Matteo Selenus and
Commissioner Bot. Uh Commissioner Suarez separated the item for the record. Commissioner Suarez. >> Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I um I had a big condo town hall and we actually had the condo absment here. Uh and I negotiated more time for the uh condo
abuzzman to be here uh either virtually or in person uh at least once a week in Miami Beach. And that took a lot of time to to negotiate. Um, and I don't want to send mixed messages to the condo budsman
uh on where we're at. So that's the only reason why I pulled it for discussion. >> That's amazing news. I had no idea. And um so then this item is moot. >> Yeah, I had reached out to the condo
ombbitsman. I have an appointment with him in like two weeks. It was impossible to get it. You, like everybody else on the commission, is probably on a daily, weekly basis getting emails, calls, and worry from people that are getting condo buyouts and we're just sitting there not
able to do anything and um I had a meeting with the legal team um here and uh that was one of the suggestions that they gave. So, if it's been negotiated, bring it out as soon as possible so that people can start uh putting it on their
calendars and we can refer people to the new hours because right now it's only three a month. >> Sure. Commissioner. Yeah. Um just so everyone's was paying attention, it's going to be the first and Thursday of each month in person and virtually uh the second and fourth week of every month. So, uh maybe we can expand those
hours, but I think we want to just take it step by step and and see, you know, what kind of bandwidth they they need. uh engage it over the next couple months and then Commissioner Dominguez, maybe you and I can work together uh after that and see if we need to get more. I'd be more than happy to co-prime that with
you because I know you live in one of the condos and which is also facing serious assessment. the res if you are too I'm sure people in their 80s um that feel that there is nothing they can do and so maybe uh
having a condo umbsman here can guide them more than we can >> sure >> because we're not >> let's revisit this in six months and then and then let's see how how good this now weekly meeting is and see what else resources we can lend to condo owners
>> so uh commissioner Dominguez do you want to Withdraw or defer from 6 months? >> Withdrawn. Okay. Withdrawn. C7 AF is withdrawn. >> Great. C7J C7J I believe was done. But >> yeah, we did that.
>> Great. Um, >> C7U C7U allocate funds from Sterling Foundation donation for senior bingo program. C7U was separated by the mayor. >> Yes. The reason why I pulled that out and
>> I have amendments which you may like. So >> So I'll turn it over to you. >> Okay. Um so the the amendment is $3,000 um for Federation. $1,500 um came from Vicky Lopez. So uh that wouldn't come from us. I tried to get more but I
couldn't. So the $3,000 would be for Rebecca Towers. They've made that specific ask. um the other buildings we have not gotten that specific ask so I just took it off the table and if you remember last year Federation Stella asked us for it and I paid for it out of
my ticket budget um for them and it really should be more under whatever budget >> right >> stuff gets done so it's 3,000 >> and originally was 10,000 >> how much was I think it was like 7500 >> 7500 no the re and the reason why I
pulled it is I I I like the item. It's just we this comes from the from from the mayor and commission's office. This comes from our budget and the 10,000 that we're currently the grant that we're currently using it for uh encompasses a lot of fitness classes. I
mean, I have a list here. I'm not going to read it all out, but I I get concerned if we're dealing with a finite grant and where we're using the fund that we would have to potentially um lose some of that access, which is why >> I don't want any access. And I know you
do. I just But I have I have to make sure these funds go all the way uh as far as we can break it. And since we're deal anyone listening, we're dealing with a specific grant given of $10,000. So this is how we have to utilize the money. And right now we're we're we're
capped out. We're maxed out. So that's why I want to have this discussion. So figure out what we do because even that amount, the 3,000 is going to have an impact on some of these classes. So, I did check um with the with several departments because um we the seniors do
get money from a lot of different pockets. Um the only thing that I got from the um mayor and commission budget, there's no line items for seniors, but uh they were able to tell me that there's um a promo
budget that's 22,000. I'm not sure what that is. Um, maybe we leave this on if it's okay and I work with Veronica on finding where that 30,000 can come from. >> Okay. Amazing. >> So that nobody loses out. >> Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely.
>> Let me ask a question if I can. >> Please. >> Um, >> so our office is I don't understand our office budget and I'm it's fine because whatever that's Robert can tell you all
about that at home. Um but um we have senior activities and events that are paid for through our office budget. >> Yes. >> Okay. Well, this is specifically a grant
that is given. You want to explain it, Erica? This is a specifically a grant that is given to the city that we as a commission have to vote on authorize accepting the grant. >> Right. But then the expenditure, >> correct? >> Okay. >> We have no input. >> Well, right. If
>> if I could finish, sorry. >> Um, okay. So, we don't What would be good is to get a briefing every once in a while just to know. >> Sure. >> Just to know just so we know what's being done because it's just good. I just want to be able to know what's what's what's going on.
You have a great team. You have a very good team. People who really care about about the elderly and want to make sure that, you know, they're getting good services and and good events. And it'll be just good since since all of this is being organized, you know, on behalf of the office of the mayor and the
commission for the commission to kind of be in the in the loop of what's happening. And not just with this, for example, um for for for example, like the Georgie, the Georgie serves all of us. Um, I don't know if one serves all of us, but it's good just to be kept in
the loop of where of of you know how how we're serving everyone through these resources that we have available in our office. >> Yeah. And by the way, we have a list. I'm happy to share it with you. I mean, it's uh Veronica can brief us on it. >> This is all
laid out and we'll share we'll share with everyone here. >> That's actually very good news. is the most wonderful news. >> Yeah. No, it's it's it's broken out. I mean, I could I could read it, but it's take time for happy to share, make it public. >> Yes.
>> So, I I mean, we're really dealing with uh a finite amount of money. I just It sounds funny. We're talking about sometimes millions of dollars and here we're we're talking about $3,000, but we have to adhere to what the grant provides and and we'll figure it out. We'll we'll talk about it offline
>> and we'll bring it back to the next commission meeting. So, does this come from the Sternlick Foundation or does it come from the mayor commission? >> What was the question? >> Just where does the money come from for the >> Oh, Barry Sternick donated $10,000 and
since uh Rebecca Towers the last time that we were there asked for $3,000 for bingo, um I asked that the $3,000 come out of the Barry Stern donation. Then Gloria came back and um explained that
they do yoga and other classes in those buildings and that's above and beyond the senior yoga and tai chichi and art classes that we do through the parks department. Um, so she does those in those those
buildings and she said, um, no, you can't use that money for the bingo and then she emailed and called seniors to come in um worried that some of their stuff was getting cut. >> Okay. Okay. So, so just and just so
educate me, the Barry Cink gave us a grant and then it's under our purview how to administer the money. Uh it is but uh the commission wasn't involved. Gloria handled it. >> Got it. Okay. >> I mean it's just more I mean obviously
>> Yeah. I mean obviously the Veronica is the chief of staff and and it's on their own and I have a list here which I'm going to share with everyone but it basically here there's Zumba yoga and dance classes. Um $50 per class paid to the instructor instructor and there's freedom towers four freedoms and it goes
through how many classes how much that each cost. um the arts uh paid to instructor Gabriella Esquival Arts um AG music entertainment and production so >> yoga once a month >> right so it's all laid out and obviously
we'll we'll share but I think and I'll turn to Eric as well but the Barry Stern grant for 10,000 was specifically earmarked for our seniors >> so >> and that's why I asked for that from there >> we have to use it for seniors >> so commissioner are we deferring the
item C7 you deferring it or approving it as amended. >> Let's open and continue cuz uh we're not done with it yet. >> Yeah. >> So, C7U's opening continued to the April 22nd meeting. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Very productive meeting everyone. Thank you.
>> Enjoy the holiday season that is upcoming in between our next uh commission meeting.