--------- 7 I uh I think that is a much needed improvement for Lincoln Road and thank you very much. Thank you so much. Go ahead please. Good morning everyone. Dear commissioners, I thank you for your dedication and tireless service uh for
our Miami Beach community. My name is Rita Shankawa and I'm a proud resident of uh the Flamingo Park neighborhood living near Bay Road and uh 15th Street. I deeply cherish Flamingo Park, a space I visit at least twice a week for peace,
recreation, and community connection. Flamingo Park is not just a green space. It is a historical and cultural gem that has served generations of families since 1920s. It is a sanctuary for children playing,
seniors walking, athletes training, and neighbors gathering. It is a vital part of our city. That is why I strongly oppose the construction of a fire station or any industrial development within the park grounds.
Placing such an invasive facility in the middle of a cherished recreational space would not only disrupt its beauty and purpose, but also set a dangerous precedent for the erosion of our public green spaces. I respectfully urge you to support
resolution C7AF which would put a stop to the planning of the fire station in Flamingo Park. I also encourage you to consider resolution C7 AG as a smart and sustainable
alternative expanding the current facility rather than sacrificing our limited parkland. Please protect what makes Miami Beach special. I thank you for your time and thoughtful consideration to this matter. Thank you.
Thank you so much. Our next virtual caller is David Ston. Please state your name, address, and you have two minutes. Hi, this is David Ston. Uh I'm at 1255 Marseilles Drive in North Beach. I'm calling in today to ask that the
commission please support the item that's being brought to make sure that the shade sales over Normandy Plaza go up. Um when we started working on this item in March, I probably naively thought that we would be able to have shade up there for the summer and that
has not been the case yet. We've had to cancel a couple of events that were scheduled as more daytime events. Um, it is so important that we be able to activate the plaza during the summer. That is when it is most challenging for our local businesses. The plaza was
envisioned with shade sales in mind. All of the hardware is there. We just need the shades and installation. One of the uh local businesses here has decided to donate the fabric. So, the cost is
extremely low uh especially when you consider the investment that the city has put into the plaza and this would allow it to be functional or more functional year round. Thank you. Thank you. Go ahead. Please state your name and address. Oh, hello. Uh my name is Gail Dorham. I live at 1504 Bay Road, which is in the
West Avenue neighborhood. And I wanted to make two points about my opposition to the fire station at Flamingo Park. Um I've used the park at least two or three times a week. And the spot right behind the goalpost uh is where I do my stretching exercises and I juggle a
soccer ball um to keep loose and fit. And it's the exact spot where this fire station is um proposed to be located. So it directly affects me and it's a nice spot to to do yoga and stretching because it's nice artificial grass back there. Um the second point I wanted to
make is I don't know if um you all know this or if staff remembers this but I was at the very very first meeting presentation by the former fire chief um who after he did an analysis and did a report where he really wanted the fire station
to go. It was about uh nine years ago. It was um a flamingco park neighborhood association meeting in the beauty center and he said that the population of south of fifth had exploded so much that he thought the best spot was the furthest
south that you could go and his number one choice actually was the dog park on second street. Now, I'm just telling you this story um because it's a fact. And second of all, if you're going to consider another location, please consider everything from First Street, you know, all the way to 11th Street.
Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. 30 minutes have elapsed. We have uh right now we have eight callers, nine callers on Zoom and I believe there's someone behind the young lady. Uh can we do one minute from now on? Sure.
Okay. So, everyone, let's do one minute. Uh The next caller on Zoom is Sharon. Sharon, please go ahead. State your name and address and you have one minute. Hi, Sharon Weiss, uh, 23381st Street. Uh, I'm calling today, um, basically,
uh, in support of C7X, uh, the Kitty campus and Soie Catz does great work, so thank you for that. Um, the second item I wanted to talk about was a small request. I don't know if there's a legal reason why the agenda has to be in all caps. It's very difficult to read. Uh just some food for
thought there. And lastly, I strongly echo Paula King's uh comments about the uh feces in the water up here. Uh it's disgusting and like really I know you talked about it last week uh at the at a different meeting, but you really have to pay attention to this and put all
effort into remediating this. It's disgusting. Thank you. Thank you. Go ahead, sir. You have one minute. Say name, address. I'm Ian. Uh I live at 15th and West. I'm a Miami Beach resident and I'm here to support the track. This can park is part of the heart of the Miami Beach community. It's a rare green space where
kids, neighbors, residents can all gather for free. It's the soul of our neighborhood. It's where generations have learned to swim, shoot hoops, play soccer, exercise around the track, and just be outside. It's where parents take their kids after school, where seniors walk in the morning, where friends meet up to connect, and people of all ages get fit. This is a city that's
constantly changing. Flamingo Park is one of the few constants. It's a shared backyard for the thousands of people who live here who do not have a backyard. To build in this place is something we can never replace. Our green space is a major reason why so many of us live in Miami Beach and not in Miami. Once that space is gone, it's gone for good. Parks
are irreplaceable. They make our hot city livable and resilient. There are other essential places to put essential services, but no substitute for open park space. Let's protect what makes Miami Beach so livable. Let's choose community. Let's choose nature. Let's keep Miami Park whole. Thank you, sir.
Our next virtual caller is Larry Schaefer. Sir, state your name, address, so you have one minute. Larry Schaefer, 23381st Street. I'm calling to oppose the budget in millillage. I actually emailed the CFO, Mr. Green, and FK chair, Mr. Magazine, to ask about the budget, but I didn't
hear back from them, and I want to know why. This budget seeks to raise taxes by, I believe, 7%, inflation was 3%. Why do we need an additional four points on top of inflation? Why should the cost of government be based on the market value of properties? The needs of the people don't change when the value of their
condos go up and down. You're just taking advantage of us as you have for the last 5 years, 25% or so over the last 5 years when inflation was far less. Have you talked to the thousands of constituents who lived in older condos? Do you know the type of trouble they're in with rising maintenance, rising taxes, assessments? They're
suffering. And then you think it's wise to raise the budget beyond inflation when you're beating down your constituents financially when they're hurting the most. It's time to be bold and re in excess spending. And if you're going to increase your tax haul again, how about you assign all the amounts over inflation to cleaning up the
disgusting lazy river of feces that is Park View Canal? Go ahead, sir. State your name, address. You have one minute. Good morning. Kevin Krueger, uh Miami Beach resident of uh eight years here, uh seventh and Jeff, and I chose
Flamingo Park eight years ago to the neighborhood in order to have access not just to the beach, but to the workout. Uh, so I'm here in a few capacities, a commercial real estate agent, uh, and then on behalf of Miami Athletic Association, which some of you know is my below profit. I first want to, uh,
commend the fire department. Um, in particular, a year ago, I had to call Emergency Services Sunrise. They were there within 2 minutes, about six blocks away, uh, when I lived on West. So, um, I haven't heard yet about how, uh, the
county put this, uh, vote. Everybody supports the fire department and the county residents are not using the park. They don't know exactly where they voted it for. Uh what I would encourage you all is to promote more sports tourism within the county. Uh don't let this
crisis go to waste, but instead enhance the space with real green space, grass. I think our city can afford maintenance to build a real park that's not um astroturf, which is carcinogenic. Thank you. Our next virtual caller is
David. David, state your name, address, and you have one minute. David Wallock, I want to praise Commissioner Alex Fernandez with his ordinance regarding immigration. And what we in Miami Beach may not realize
is that our Miami Beach businesses are all right now experiencing the loss of talented, wonderful employees due to their papers becoming out of date and were on
temporary status awaiting legal immigration processing approval. That is a very sad sad sad thing that we are experiencing all on Miami Beach right now. In addition, Ocean Drive hotels and
cafe businesses require full automobile access to provide the most basic requirement of customer service, which is access. No ballards, no ocean drive street closures. We must retain access
to the front of our businesses for automobiles. Thank you sir. Go ahead. You have one minute. State your name and address. Good morning. My name is Andreas Farash. Um I live here 12 years on 1500 Bay Road. Um I discovered Flamingo Park in
pandemic lockdown. For me it literally changed my life. I started running five times a week for 5 months. I lost 40 pounds and I'm still using the park every two week. Sometimes unfortunately I have to do it after 9:00 p.m. and it's closed and I choose a treadmill or on
the street probably the same like me. There are people with a knee problem. If I run on the uh concrete I cannot run anymore. It's like two miles I have to stop. I cannot reach my five miles. So please uh don't build a fire station on the flamingo park. It's a nice environment for entire community. Keep
the running healthy environment available. Thank you. Thank you. Our next our next virtual caller is Caitlyn. Caitlyn, go ahead. State your name and address. You have one minute. Hello, my name is Caitlyn Swadik. I'm a Miami rep resident and I'm representing
TBD track club. I stand opposition to a new fire station to be built in Flamingo Park and I'm in support of the proposed resolution removing Flamingo Park as the location site for a new fire station. This track is home to countless community members and leaders. It is a source of wellness to many who do not
have access and it is the only publicly accessible park in Miami Beach with as with a track. As a leader to TBD Track Club, a weekly track club inclusive to folks of all levels on the way to their first big races. Flamingo Park is our home base every Thursday morning and it has been for the past two years, which
is a short time compared to many other fitness groups and clubs that meet every day of the week, including South Beach Track Club, Miami's largest track club, which has over a decade long in standing and it is its home base. I'm here on behalf of myself, my team, and the Miami running community to represent the
importance of protecting our sacred green space as vely as we do the development of our beautiful city. And I want you to vote yes on resolution C7 AG. Thank you. Thank you so much. Go ahead, sir. State your name and address. Good morning, mayor and commissioners.
My name is Matthew Ganoff, and I want to speak on a few items real quickly. C4L on micromobility. I'm concerned about this item and I encourage that you include uh experts on this topic before you uh as you discuss and make recommendations. C7A I'm concerned about
trimming of landscaping along the beachwalk and again include your sustainability and your public works in those that have clear guidelines. C7AE Parklets along 41st Street. Great idea. I'd encourage you to refer this to committee andor the transportation
committee to discuss the impacts to the vital bike share network R5E the Miami Beach prominade. Uh I think that needs further discussion. R70 parking holiday if you're going to extend that which again I think is a good idea. I think you should have some supporting evidence or at least some evidence of its use
over the summer so far. R7 I believe this is L about the 100 block of Lincoln Road. 300 buses use that area a day. excuse me, the two and 300 blocks. And then lastly, uh I don't support putting the fire station in Flamingo Park. I'm a
strong supporter of our first responders, the police and the fire department. I believe they deserve the best. Thank you so much. And you should rebuild the current station. Thank you. Our next virtual caller has initials of DA. State your name, address, and you
have one minute. My name is David McKenna. I live at 1020 Meridian Avenue, 416 in Miami Beach. As you deliberate on where to put the fire station, I hope that you will remember that there was a county and citywide
referendum and to consider the will of the voters as well as those that have been uh vehement in their opposition. uh the the ballot box really is the great leveler and it gives all of us one vote
and one voice there not those that that speak the loudest or those that have the opportunity and the luxury of speaking at um at meetings. So, as you deliberate, please consider that the majority of uh Flamingo Park
neighborhood voted in favor of uh this uh res the referendum as well as all of the city. Thank you. Thank you. Go ahead, sir. Um good morning. Uh my name is Desmond Neil Leech. I I'm a resident of 1330
Trexel Avenue. I speak firstly as a as someone who uses Flamingo Park on daily basis. Um, I want to say I'm astonished by how well um, the park has been used. I see families having p having birthday parties for their kids. I see old people getting together. I see the basketball
is absolutely swarming with people. I completely disagree with the person who said it is not being used enough. That is nonsense. Secondly, I speak as a professor of architecture at FIU. I completely endorsed the comments of the architect previously about the catastrophic environmental impact the
the fire station in that space would be. Um and and finally I speak as a UK native um please do not make the mistake that we did in the UK. Margaret Thatcher sold off many of the public playing fields. Once they are gone, they are
gone. This is a public facility that should be cherished and protected. Thank you sir. Our next caller has a screen name of a picture of the Instagram logo. Good morning everybody. Can you hear me?
Okay. Yeah. Name and address, please. This is Michael Grio. How are you? I'm good, sir. All right, guys. So, uh, listen, as somebody who's used the park for over 25 plus years actively and the track, uh, it's I think it's ridiculous to put the
fire station there. That being said, I want to just very quickly mention that, you know, I have a newfound perspective regarding what our first responders are going through. And I I saw a video that Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez posted yesterday regarding the deplorable conditions in which our sanitation
workers work. But when it comes to our firefighters, they live in the fire station. And the existing fire station, for people that don't know, it's actually built on a uh on a sewage on a sewage pump. So, every drop of sewage north of 11th Street gets pumped under
that building. It is not fit for human habitation. It needs to be relocated. We need to find a spot. There have been multiple locations that have been proposed over the years and we essentially need to find a proper location that doesn't negatively impact
response times, but it also treats our first responders the way they need to be treated. So, that being said, it sounds like the uh Alton Roads Lingo Park location is not going to work, which is great, but we really need to not turn this into a another 10 years of
political football. Thank Go ahead, please. Hi. Uh, good morning. My name is Christine Qua and I'm a longtime resident of Miami Beach. I live on 8th in Meridian and I recently started using Flamingo Park. Um, and was pleasantly surprised by the amount of people that
utilize that track on a daily basis. Um, as a longtime member of the volleyball community, I didn't know or understand that there were other communities like the volleyball community around South Beach. And um, now it's slowly becoming part of my life too. And I see that the
I can also speak on um my experience, you know, working at a school where four years ago we had to build a brand new football field and for an entire year we had to bus our students to Tropical Park to be able to utilize that field. The proposal of simply moving the track, I
can tell you it's going to have a detrimental impact on the community. We don't have the resources to move the people from the track to another park. We don't even have another park in the area. So, simply building a a fire
station on a facility that is utilized by thousands of people per week is going to have a long-term detrimental impact on the community as a whole. And I want you to consider that before moving forward. Thank you. Our next virtual caller is Amy Mayhew. Amy, please unmute yourself.
Good morning. Thank you again and sorry about earlier. Um, Amy Mayhew, executive director of the 41st Street Business Improvement District. I'm speaking today in support of Commissioner Fernandez's item C7 AE to allow parklets on certain side streets at the 4,000 block. Um,
we're truly appreciative of this thoughtful response to the needs of our small restaurants. Um, it's as well as the feedback that we've heard from businesses who are looking to join the 41st Street corridor. So, we're hoping that the commission will continue to move this forward and we're excited to
see uh our our tasty cafe and uh PETA and whomever else will join us to uh take up take this up and we're excited. So, thank you for the support. I before our next speaker, I just want to interject something. I know a lot of people are here about the Flamingo Park
fire station conversation and I know it is a very passionate issue. Anybody who's read my newsletters or my opinion piece in the Herald will understand how I feel about it. I'm not going to interject that here. What I am going to interject is a very healthy dose of facts because those are sorely lacking.
Nobody is talking about moving the track. Nobody is talking about moving the field uh the the playing field. Those are not going to be touched. Period. Full stop. I see skepticism. We have plans. We can show you. Does it
work? It does work. Excuse me. Excuse me. No dialogue here. Just just trust me. We have teams of architects and engineers who have shown us that it works. Okay. So, that's not this item at the moment. What I'm saying to you is the track is not going to be
impinged upon at all. The field will not be impinged upon at all. It will not be closed for any portion of the construction. So if you would like to share your views on this, I'm very eager
to continue listening, but I request that you do so based in fact. I am also a runner. I have also used that track. Nobody is closing the track. Nobody is getting rid of the entire park. Full stop.
Go ahead, sir. Go ahead, ma'am. Sir, really? It's never it. How are you? You go ahead. Good morning, Valerie Navaret. Uh, last month I spoke about the troubling acquisition of Alligator Alcatras.
Today I return to voice my strong support for Commissioners Fernandez resolution C7Y which challenges the discriminatory language and criminalization embedded in this issue. Let's be honest.
Look uh it's very short. Uh look around you at this very commission. Look at each other. Only if I come here now for the discrimination. I guess only KRG and maybe magazine would get away with it.
Um Mr. Mayor, you and your beautiful kids. You guys have Latin pictures. Um and especially you, Mr. Suarez. Actually, Suarez, very Spanish. Um, with your dark hair and your beautiful tan, you would be doomed.
Um, a criminal should be judged by their actions, not by the color of their skin or their accent. The port murders and rapist, yes, but hardworking individual with a traffic ticket. An 82 years old American citizen with a clean record. That's not justice.
It's injustice and a disgrace. Thank you, Mr. I urge this commission, just one paragraph. I urge this commission and administration to lead by example and extend this advocacy to all 33 municipalities. Okay. This moment remind us all that we no longer live in the land of the free
and the safety and freedom are conditioned. They become nothing more than illusions. I now walk with the copy of my passport and my alien card, a little copy in my wallet just in case. So that's how Thank you so much
and I suggest every American to do so even if you were born here and if you don't look like you know our next virtual caller yes is Audrey. Audrey please go ahead. You have one minute. Um hi good morning. I want to thank the commissioners so much for their
consideration to this Flamingo Park issue. Um I speak as a concerned member of the community. I am concerned about the impacts on community and recreation as well as the dangerous precedent it would set to take green space and um dedicated to any space or any use that
isn't green space to build on top of it. Um I also speak as an expert on the on the impacts of the urban heat island and um and air pollution on public health. And to Commissioner Bot's point, I just want to say that I feel like the construction of a fire station on that
site, even if the track remains open during construction, all of the particulate air pollution, all of the various impacts of construction are completely incompatible with the use of the track for recreational purposes, particularly you have a lot of senior citizens, a lot of children on the
track. Um, I know this is a difficult issue and I thank the commissioners for weighing all of their various constituencies. I know we need a fire station, but Flamingo Park isn't the place, and I am in opposition. Thank you very much. Thank you. Go ahead, sir. State your name, address. You have one minute.
Hello. Uh Jay Moore. I live at 11:30 11th Street. Um it's kind of surreal to see you guys not on campaign posters, but in person. Um but I'm really here to really talk about uh Flamingo Park. And I think that the the plan to put a fire
station there is really not in the best interest of the people. uh me being a person across the street as well. So um when I saw the rendering, did my research um and decided to come out and really just express my voice. I don't know if a lot of normal people do that.
And so I thought, you know, let me show up first time here. Um been in Miami Beach about four years and I play tennis in the park and I enjoy the park. And so the thought of construction as someone whose building is going through construction right now for the third year to see that happen on Alton Road
just really decided for me to get up off the couch and come here and let you guys know what I think. So please change your mind. Thank you. Please keep coming and getting more people left. And if you're interested, I I'll make you the offer. I'm sure my colleagues would extend if you want to come up and
meet us. And uh we're more than happy to chat as well. I'll be around. All right. Thank you. Our next virtual caller is Floren. Floren, please unmute yourself, state your full name, address, and you have one minute. Hello, my name is uh Florinu. I live on
800 West Avenue and um I'm supporting the resolution 67 AF against building the fire station. U I used to be an industrial engineer and it's surprising to hear that building of that magnitude doesn't uh disrupt the current
activities. I'm an avid runner. I'm part of the running community in uh South Beach and we all oppose the building of the firehouse. Thank you. Thank you. Go ahead, please. Good morning. I'm Nora Ryan. I'm part of
South Beach Track Club as well. And honestly, that track club is a huge part of why I'm in Miami. I would visit every so often my sister and I would go home searching for a community like the South Beach Track Club. Couldn't find it anywhere. When I tell people I run repeat 200s in my 30s, they're in awe.
And I will say that every square foot of that track is well utilized, including the green space. When we're running there, there are kids like there are multiple groups playing soccer on the field. The kids that don't fit then play in the green space by the um by the bathroom area and where the fire station
will go. There are boxers over there. Um people stretching to sprint. So like every square inch of the track is utilized and I've gone there. I go on Monday nights but I've gone throughout the day and that's been true as well. And so I will just say um the cohesion
of leadership in these clubs over the course of years really sets South Beach apart and is really special. Something really special about this community. Thank you. Good morning. David Adams, 1242 Alter Road. I'm here to support Commissioner Fernandez resolution on the consent
agenda and ask all of you to please support this resolution that urges the state legislature to amend section 775.215 of Florida statute. I'd like to thank Commissioner Fernandez for highlighting this important safety issue and I'd also
like to thank Mayor Miner as it has been his highest priority uh for public safety. Over the past few years, we've had many sexual offenders and predators residing in Miami Beach. I've been notified by FDL about sexual offenders
residing in the community on both the temporary and permanent status within a,000 ft of a school, park, or playground. This resolution requests the state legislature to change the current law which protects minors who are under
the age of 16 and change the law to protect all minor children under the age of 18. Uh protecting our children at Paramount. Thank you. Thank you. Go ahead. Virtual caller me. Go ahead.
Andresion Miami Beach resident for 50 years. I've been using Flamingo Park. Yeah, I actually turned I'm 50. But I've been using Flamingo Park since I'm three years old, going to the Boys and Girls Club there and using that that park. And so that park is a special park for me. I got to tell you that hurts me that the
current structure that's actually sitting where this fire station is proposed has been pretty much abandoned for many years. Those bathrooms are not used. I don't hear anybody complaining about having those facilities be repaired. I don't hear anybody talking about that. That's, you know, Flamingo
Lake. Every single time it rains and there's a a storm coming through here. When Alton Road was raised and the park wasn't raised and the proper infrastructure for drainage was not provided, that field and track becomes a lake every single time there's something happening there. I hear a lot of people
that are worried about that track being closed down. uh if this fire station was placed there, which is not going to be, but regardless, at some point that's going to have to please give me 20 more seconds, 30 seconds, uh that that park is going to have to be repaired
regardless moving forward. So, I just want to say that the prior fire chief and the fire union had previously stated that this is the best location that they have seen out of all the sites proposed. And the people did vote and I do feel for the people that are here speaking and I
thank you so much. Thank you. Go ahead, please. Okay. Hi, everyone. My name is Darby. I am a new resident to Miami Beach. Actually moved here in November. Um, and I am in opposition of building the fire
department at Flamingo Park. I understand this proposal won't completely take away the track, but it will take away precious green space that makes Flamingo Park so special to the community. When I moved here, I had zero friends. But showing up to the park, especially the track, helped me find
connection. Through the South Beach Track Club, I've met incredible people who've become my real friends. We support each other. We show up week after week, and we grab pizza after any runs. Anyone's welcome to join. Um, it's become a place where I feel grounded and at home. Flamingo Park isn't just a
facility, but it's a community. So, taking away part of that space disrupts something that is really beautiful. There are other options. Please protect Miami Beach um and continue to make it feel like home. Thank you. Thank you.
Good morning. Good morning. I'm Haskell Meyer. I've lived here for over 55 years. I've been running on this track for over 55 years. Some of the greatest runners in the world have run on this track. And for me
to sit here and listen to one of the commissioners state that this building will not affect the track is preposterous. If you know anything about running, you know that you have to have wind direction in both. You have to have wind
flow in both directions. This building is going to be five or six stories tall. How many feet is it going to be? Um, I don't know. You ought to know. You're the one who's sponsoring this. No, I'm not an engineer, but
Martinez I'm very angry over this issue because you're taking public space and moving a fire station 6 to 700 ft away. What's the purpose of that? Why are we spending all this money to do studies that could
be conducted on the back of a napkin and and laid to rest as soon as it's completed? It makes absolutely no sense. Please leave this park alone. Rebuild the fire station where it is currently. There's 21,000 square ft of space on
that lot. Thank you, sir. Hello, my name is Neil Ross. I'm with the Deco Plage 100 Lincoln Road. Uh I'm here today in support of uh two initiatives R uh 7i. Um I would like I was told by the Ritz the great job that
the city has done with the Ritz to move this forward. I've also been told about the great effort from Commissioner Alex Fernandez initiating and following through with this effort. This is an important effort uh for the area. It conceptualizes and provides a budget to
revitalize the area by making the 2300 block a pedestrian mall. In addition to that, if the city funds this this initiative, the rich will contribute uh to the design costs. Also important to this is the county that will be helping close the 200300 block and rerouting the
buses. And then finally, there's legislation by uh Commissioner Fernandez to revitalize the area. This is probably the best chance we have to make this area better for the residents and for tourists who come. On a separate note, I would like to thank um the commission
for addressing our needs. Steven Miner, Tanya Bach for providing police uh patrol in the area, for providing uh power washing and more initiatives. Please continue that effort. Thank you. Good morning. My name is Ann Bloom. I'm also from the Decopl. I echo
what Neil said. So that is the great news I've now shared uh saved a lot of time. I also want to say uh that really Lincoln Road really need not wait for all these developments for all of this pedestrianization. We need your attention now. We need
money now to fix the homeless uh to to move them to fix the crime. It's the world deplorable has now become politicized. It is the it's terrible. I moved here uh full-time a few years ago. I came to Miami Beach because Lincoln
Road is just such a cool place. Ocean Drive is such a cool place. And now look at it right postco you we've got just I mean it's it's inhumane for the people who are there. It's inhumane to make our tourists go through this. I find myself
traveling north and south to go to dinner because I don't want to walk through that. This is my neighborhood. Fix it now. Please. Really fix it now. And I've run out of time. I have other uh things I wanted to thank you all for. So, I'll just say thank you for all of your time. We really appreciate it.
Mayor, that concludes everyone who was online when Sutnik uh for Sutnik originally. Uh there's another Sundick hour at 1 if anyone wants to attend. Okay, thank you everyone for uh your comments. We also in addition I guess my time is up.
In addition to all the uh helpful comments today, uh I know myself and my colleagues received a lot of emails. We get text messages. So, thank you everyone for uh providing your input. It's invaluable. Why don't we go to the uh consent agenda? Yes, sir. So, the following items have
been separated. Um unless I state otherwise, the list that you have been provided is correct for the most part. Commissioner Bot is separating the following items. C7 AF, C7 A G,
C7 A L, C7K. Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez is separating item C7 A D. So, Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez, C7 A D. Commissioner Suarez is separating the following
items. C7 W, C7X, C7J, C7 Q, and an item that you do not have on the list, C7A. So, please add to your list, C7A. And I'm pulling for the first time in 14
years. I'm pulling an item C7D. I need to provide the commission with additional information. Motion to set the agenda with the exception of the u separated items. Second. So this is a motion for the to approve
the consent agenda. I have a motion from Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Vice Mayor Suarez. All in favor? I. I. Please note that any addendum it addendum item including those on the consent agenda have not been approved by the mayor at this time. They will be
heard separately after 5:00. Thank you, mayor. So, a couple of acknowledgements that we just uh did on consent. One, um starting August 1st, we're going to have a changing of the vice mayor. I know uh Commissioner Suarez never liked to be referred to it, so I don't do it. But starting August
1st, Commissioner Magazine, you will take over that role, which is uh mostly just ceremonial. If I step away from the deis, um the vice mayor then runs the meeting. But um but obviously that's an important role. So, thank you for your service and thank you for doing that. Uh, coming up, I do want
to acknowledge also uh C78K was an item we just approved. We are going to have a new public works director, John Norris. And, uh, Eric, I know a couple months ago I had put an item on the agenda about filling certain positions. And uh I have to tell you so far the people
you're picking whether it be parking and uh economic development um facilities now public works uh so far I've been very impressed with the uh with the individuals you have selected that we have approved and um I'm I'm confident that John will continue in that in that
trend. Um is he here if we can acknowledge him? Yeah, John's here in the audience and I thank you very much, mayor, for the support that I've gotten from the commission and confirming all of my recommendations. Um, I'm very pleased to say that this is the last of
the vacant director positions and so now we have no more interim roles in the director level and the and above in the city and uh I met with John and uh understand he's going to be a constituent as well. So uh we're pleased pleased about that.
Why don't we go to R7K? R7K is negotiate special event sponsorship agreement 26 2026 FIFA World Cup. It's a tourism item. R7K. Yeah. And thank you. We had a robust discussion at our finance meeting on
Friday uh about this and um I'm actually I have to say first of all we're we're very excited to have FIFA. It is um it's literally kind of once in a generation opportunity to have FIFA be here for our city and the South Florida community. So, we're very excited. I did express
some concerns about the 1.5 million and then I had a conference call with uh with the host committee and ask them to come down to 1.25 which they have. So, I appreciate that. Uh so, that's what's on the table today.
Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Lisa Aarante uh tourism and culture director city of Miami Beach. Good morning everyone. Uh we're less than a year away of Miami date county and the city of Miami Beach being one of the host uh locations for the world's largest sporting event which
is the FIFA World Cup 2026. Uh as you mentioned the administration has been negotiating with the FIFA host committee for the past few months. I'm going to share really quickly what the terms were for the special event sponsorship request that was presented at the FE uh
December 20th 24 uh FK meeting. Uh the terms for the special event sponsorship are as follows. Uh waiverss of special event fees, numerous park user fees, square footage fees, and city services not to exceed 500,000. A cash sponsorship amount not to exceed
1.5 million. a zone of exclusivity similar to our Bosle in North and South Beach, a waiver of the Pepsi pouring rights in exchange for public benefits of an official kickoff of concert in Lumis Park, an official watch party location in Miami Beach, a media row
similar to Super Bowl in Lumis Park, and a legacy project with fundraising efforts to contribute to a high quality soccer field in the city. Uh the FK voted to uh move this item to the commission with a favorable recommendation for the administration to
negotiate on the terms that were presented at the July 11th F budget workshop. Uh Mr. Mayor and committee members discussed uh the cash sponsorship of the special event sponsorship and asked the uh staff to negotiate bringing that number down for
1.5, excuse me, to 1.25. And so we have some updates that we've also negotiated which I'm going to share uh with the terms which include um as I mentioned bringing that cash sponsorship down. Uh the committee has uh a number to be
determined of watch parties in North and South Beach. And um we also have excluded the following events from their zone of exclusivity which includes the Miami Beach Pride celebration in Lumis Park in June. the city of Miami Beach um
Junth celebration, the July 4th celebrations in Lumis Park and in Alto Zamar Park. And they will also bring a FIFA legend to attend a Miami Beach public event. Um I have today um representatives from the FIFA host
committee, Ray Martinez, who's here to talk a little bit more about any further details that I didn't capture or answer any of your questions. Good morning and thank you for the opportunity. My name is Ray Martinez. I'm the chief operating officer for the World Cup Miami Host Committee. I'd like
to thank the mayor, the commission, uh the city manager, uh the city attorney, and the clerk for working with us over the past six, seven months to fruition to bring this item here uh today to you. Uh as mentioned, the World Cup is the largest sporting event in the world. Uh,
and this is the largest World Cup that ever has been held. There are 48 different nations that will be participating, 104 matches spread out over 16 host cities with Miami being one of them. We have seven matches that are going to be played here at the Hard Rock
Stadium, which will be um renamed and rebranded as the Miami Stadium. Uh for the matches we have four uh qualifying matches, a round of 32, a quarterfinal and a bronze medal final. Um one of the uh unique things about the World Cup
obviously is the international draw from 48 different nations. Our uh tournament period starts on June 15th and goes till July 18th. So we have the second longest tournament period from the first match to the second to the last match. uh
which means that there's going to be a lot of people in our community. So they're not only here for the seven days that the matches are. They're going to be using, you know, South Florida, the city of Miami, Miami Beach as their jump off point, if you will. We have met as a host committee with a lot of different
uh um entities uh including the counselor cores and uh different uh nations that have come and wanted to meet with us because they feel Miami and Miami Beach and South Florida is an important place for their countries coming to view the World Cup. Uh we look
forward to partnering uh with Miami Beach and I don't know if there's any questions. We do have a sizzle reel if you're interested uh to show that kind of highlights, you know, the level of what will be taking place here in Miami Beach. How long is the reel? Uh 90 seconds.
Perfect. PJ, if you could cue the reel. Thank you. That's it. Heat up here. Get off fast. Nice.
Think you summed it up. Commissioner Fernandez. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And just a quick question. How many matches are happening in South Florida? We have seven matches. Seven matches. Correct. So, and I only asked that because I I um
I did some research and I was looking back um in 2024 when the game day for Copa America. And when you look at our occupancy rates, our occupancy rates in Miami Beach for game day of Copa America
went up almost 10%. Our ADRs went up almost 14%. Our gross room revenue went up 27%. And that's just looking at data as it relates to our hotels. That's not going
and looking into the impact on our restaurants or the significant media impact that we're going to get from having media row here. And that was only looking at a one-day game. And this is, you know, seven seven uh games. So we
can see much bigger impacts I would imagine because you this this is an international game um with uh with just great ripple effects for our economy. So thank you for your partnership with our city and I'm glad to support it. Admission Rosen Gonzalez.
I just want to say that this is a once ina-lifetime opportunity for Miami Beach. I believe 1.5 billion people watch the World Cup and viewing it with the official association with FIFA
is just invaluable and the public relations value to our city. Um I don't think we could ever get it. So I'm happy to sponsor the 1.25 million because I think we're going to get it back in so many other ways. So, I'm really excited
to showcase Miami Beach with FIFA and the World Cup committee and uh it's going to be really exciting. So, thank you. I Commissioner Dominguez, then Commissioner Magazine. Thank you, Mayor. I'm very excited to support this. I think there's a lot of
uh great public benefit that we're going to get out of it as well. Um, I've read some of the material and it talks about uh a watch party, a legend appearance, um, of other viewings, potential broadcast from, uh, Ocean Drive. Uh, so
I think it's a good investment for our city. Uh, it's going to be a very exciting time next year and I'm really looking forward to it. Yeah, Mr. Mayor, if I could, um, this is a once in a lifetime opportunity. This will be the biggest event in the world
and possibly the biggest event in the history of Miami and Miami Beach. For those out there wondering why the city may be giving FIFA such a substantial sum of money, uh, one to clarify, it is coming out of our resort taxes, which are designed to essentially promote and
enhance tourism. And the money that we will essentially be sharing will have a significant ROI, return on investment. So, this isn't just some sort of giveaway or we're giving money to FIFA. It's because of the substantial benefits that we're getting back. That $1.25
million that FIFA will utilize will be paid back to the city multiple times over through things like viewing parties, watch parties, the international exposure and the marketing that we're going to get from worldwide broadcast, the billions of people that show front and center, Ocean Drive, our
lovely uh art deco historic district, our beautiful beaches. Uh those things are incalculable, immeasurable. So, we're happy to welcome FIFA and uh can't wait for next summer. So, thank you all. Great. Thank you. Anybody want to make a motion?
I'll second. I heard Commissioner Bot and then I heard Commissioner uh Magazine has the second. So, okay, let's call the vote. All in favor of R 7K, please say I.
I. Anyone opposed? hearing none. The item is approved 70. That was item R7K. Thank you. Looking forward to it. Thank you. We look forward to working together. Thank you. Absolutely. Let's call uh C7K, which was pulled from the consent agenda. Yes, sir.
C7K is approve amendment two to beachfront concession agreement with Buché Brothers. Commissioner Bot. Um, yeah. So, I I pulled this item because I have a a question or two. I am torn, as I said in
our fur discussion last week about this item, but I'm willing to give it a a pilot test for uh the period of of one year with the right to pull the plug with 24 hours notice if anything gets even close to
um moving in the right in the wrong direction. Um that's very important to me and and I think that we all and the city manager um needs to make sure that that is something that we pay close attention to. Um a question that I had for years on the planning board, we had
um um folks coming to us to plead their case for one mis misstep or another. And often we were told, "Oh well, I couldn't hire any offduty policemen." And that is part of what this this program is going
to be covering. And I know that, you know, the operation will evolve as as the needs become apparent. But I just wanted to get clarity on how that issue was going to be overcome. So I don't know if that's a Ron question or Ralph question.
Good morning, mayor and commissioners. City attorney, city manager Ralph Andradi, represent uh the Buché brothers. Uh with respect to your question, um we intend to hire offduty police. Uh we know sometimes they're not available. If they're not available, we'll look to outside jurisdictions uh
to hire offduty police, which you know happens all the time. A lot of private businesses do that. And you should know in addition to that as a licensed premises under state law with the state license we're subject to oversight um and enforcement uh under state law by
the DABT which is a division of alcoholic beverages and tobacco. So the city will essentially be getting a state law enforcement agency at no cost to the city which also has eyes on this program and does inspections for you know serving uh to minors and and things of
that nature and illegal activity. So um in addition to the security that we intend to provide with offduty as well as our own private security and park rangers if they're available uh there will be oversight uh by the state law enforcement agency as well.
And um that can be um bolstered as needed. Correct. Okay. And these sales will be only in the footprints of the individual concession spaces on the beach that are currently existing. Correct. They are not going to be uh
west of the dune. So they will not impinge on businesses on Ocean Drive and Collins. That is correct. Okay. So as I was going through the contract um you know the Bush brothers are excellent partners with the city. They have a long history of being excellent partners with the city, but
they do have the right um to go all the way up through the very northern end of North Beach. And that causes some concern for North Beach residents because as great as it is to have very organized um concessions in South Beach
and some people really like that, there are lots of people who choose not to ever use that and don't want to have to be basically forced to find a little plot of sand, you know, winnow their way through um areas of of uh um
seating arrangement. ments and umbrellas that have been set up. So, I would like to ask if you would be agreeable to um not activating those spots in North Beach, north of Alto Delmare Park, unless the commission expressly and
explicitly votes to authorize you to do that rather than by doing it as of right. Yes, we agree to that. That would be great. I think that allays a lot of concerns for North Beach residents. Um, if there is a pocket where you know there's a desire for
North Beach residents to have one outpost rather than the eight, I think that you have as of right. Is that something that you could would be willing to activate? Sure. Look, whatever the comm we're here to serve the city and and the commission's, you know, desire and will.
So, if that's something that the city would if you don't want us to activate it, we won't activate it. If you don't bless the activation, obviously we won't activate it. If you want us to activate one block, we'll do one block. If you want two, we'll do two. And I think in in addition to that, um, we understand,
you know, the different dynamics between South Beach and North Beach. And so, uh, we're happy to, you know, agree to some number of of beach equipment that the residents in that area can use at no cost to them. Um, so we're happy to do
that. So, so you would activate a a one outpost where residents could put in a request and use a beach chair for free in North Beach. Correct. Up to a certain amount, of course. Right. Obviously. And then what about a citywide resident discount? A lot of
people um are not able to, you know, it's one thing to splurge for a weekend, but it's another or if you're out in from out of town, but if you're a resident here, um is there there is no resident discount now. That is correct, though. So, could we for a citywide resident discounts, could
you figure out a way to implement that? Yes, we could. Um, how soon could you effectuate that? How much of a, you know, I'm thinking 40%. Um,
could we respectfully count to 35%. Mhm. Sure. Thank you. Um and we would look to implement that with give me a time. Two months. Could you give us 90 days to to implement that?
Why would you need 90 days? 60 just because I think it's going to require some type of programming where we we want to make sure that the program is available to folks, but we don't want to deal with the situ and I get this with the towing a lot. The resident discount as you know folks show up. I'm a resident, but they don't have the
ability to prove they're a resident. And so there has to be some method of accountability that we know they're resident. So I think it just would take a month to two months to develop a program where maybe residents can enroll sort of like in the the text to tow that you have or the the handicap parking um
program. That's where we know the folks that are showing up are residents and we can afford the discount to them. It is the end of July. It is hotter than blazes. I would like to see this activated no later than six weeks from now. Okay.
Okay. And Melissa, I know I'm sure you're here. Hi. Um let's collaborate as soon as you know what the system will be so we can start preparing citywide um communicates to let residents know. Um because I think a lot of people would be pretty psyched to be able to go to the
beach and have a chair which might not have been something in their budget prior. Um so thank you for that. I appreciate that. I am very excited about protecting North Beach. And uh with that, I move the item. Thank you, Mr. M. Commissioner Suarez.
Thank you, Mr. Mayor. You know, there's been a lot of talk about this um from residents, and I think there's a lot of misunderstanding. If my colleagues would be okay with it, I just have a quick two-minute presentation to really uh lay the reasons of why this is uh a good
idea for a pilot. Um, so PJ, can you put it up on the screen, please? Next slide, please. So, uh, the problem is a lot of there's a lot of illegal alcohol sales that are on the beach. Um,
illegal beach vending is out of control. Both residents and tourists have have sent me uh emails saying that they feel very uncomfortable. um some of the stats, 136 arrests in 2023, 151 in 2024, and only 27 for year to date. And I
don't think that there's less alcohol sales. I just think that police resources are so strained that um it it's it's not it's not cost prohibitive to be on the beach enforcing illegal alcohol sales. Some of the common issues is that they a lot of these illegal
beach vendors make unsafe homemade cocktails. Um, they sell uh in glass containers and in plastic, which is obviously bad for the environment. Um, like I said, an uncomfortable environment for tourists and residents. Uh, undermines local businesses and and
and city tax revenue. Next slide, please. Here's a video of um some of these illegal vendors. So, a lot of these vendors, we don't know how they're mixing the drinks. Could be drugged. Obviously, there's no
accountability for where they're made, how they're made, and how they're passed out. Um, and these illegal vendors are are really are omniresent. And Wayne, I don't know if you can you come up for a second, chief. And this is just one after the other uh
especially in Lumis Park. And my fear is, you know, I want to make sure that this doesn't um continue to happen. and someone gets severely hurtuh or drugged or injured from one of these illegal vendors. You
go to the next slide, PJ the point. Um, like I said, the Miami Beach Police Department's already stretched thin. Beach ATVs are covering safety, emergencies, and more. Um, you know, the these illegal vendors get arrested and they're released within hours and they go back to on the beach. Uh, undercover
stings are resourceheavy. um you know given a choice between illegal vendors and regulated businesses they would choose the the business. Next slide. Uh one-year pilot program for everyone watching. Location would only be for Lumis Park and 21st Street Beach
beachfront concessions. Um there's going to be oversight licensed concessionire Buché Brothers been with us with the city for a very long time. Um, we're instead of instead of allowing these illegal vendors to to capitalize on our beaches and priv private property, at
least now, we're going to be getting much needed revenue to the city. Um, and the city of course has a um a clause where if things get out of hand, we have a we can terminate on a 24-hour notice through the city manager. Next slide.
removes the incentives for illegal vendors, safer control product, no glass, no plastic, no mystery cocktails, fun enforcement and services without raising taxes, leverages trusting partners, and um it it pro it proves a a
a model across Florida that has already worked. And next slide. Um and here are just some of the concerns. It invites more alcohol consumption. Alcohol is already widespread via legal sellers and bring your own beer. This regulates, not expands. It hurts our image is a common
argument. Illegal, unregulated alcohol service is what really hurts our brand on Miami Beach. So, when tourists come here and they see they get harassed by these illegal vendors, I think that's more of a threat to our brand than uh having something that's regulated. Uh
we've made progress. True. Let's build on it with smarter tools, not turn a blind eye. Next slide. Um, believe it or not, there's over a dozen beaches in Florida already permitting alcohol consumption on the beach. On the screen, you can see them. Um, if
they can do it responsibly, so can we, uh, with strict oversight and guaranteed revenue. And, uh, PJ, you can turn on the slide, please. And so, I'm I'm going to be fully supportive. I I think, um, I think it's important that the community knows, you
know, why we're doing this. um and and and really put an end to these these illegal vendors on the beach. Uh Chief, thank you. Um how how difficult would it be to enforce this 24/7 or during the
day? Um yeah, especially in Mumis Park and and these locations. Good morning, Wayne Jones, chief of police. Uh you're referring to legitimized um business out there selling alcohol. Yeah. How difficult would it be to enforce? Well, no. The illegal alcohol that's
already on the on the beach now. Incredibly challenging to enforce because it is resource intensive. Um, as you know, we had 151 arrests out there last year for legal vending. Some of these folks not only selling alcohol,
they're also selling drugs. The drug of choice is typically marijuana. Uh often times you make these arrests, these folks go to court. These cases are tr uh thrown out of court and they're back doing it again because it's a cash um cash business. So they're filling a
void quite frankly on the beach. There's obviously a market for it. Folks are out there. They're hot as um just mentioned. Um they want a soft drink, alcohol beverage um and sometimes drugs. And so we police it as best we
can. Uh the preference would be obviously for us there's legitimate business out there, folks that are IDing kids, buying alcohol um out there on the beach as opposed to buying it from a legal vendor. U a business that we can actually regulate and enforce laws
against if they violate the law in any way. Um is a preference for police department. Thank you. I'm I'm going to second the motion. And Mr. Commissioner Bot, just uh a couple more things. Chief Jones, um I want to make sure that as
this gets implemented and hopefully um you're able to exert better control over the illegal sales in South Beach that you are proactively monitoring what's happening um in North Beach. I think the Mid Beach area is a little bit safer because they've got their upland
concessions for their hotels and and uh condos up there. North Beach where it's, you know, intentionally by design and by choice. Um, less intentionally activated. Um, let's make sure that, you know, people don't decide that that's their new stomping grounds.
Absolutely. Um, we are proactive about this. We have been proactive about this. We'll continue to do that. personal story. I took my family to North Beach months ago and as I walk over the um entrance of the BM to get to the sound itself, there's a guy set up full store
of various different beers displayed and mixed drinks. Obviously, I had the power to reduce them about it. I called my cops and took care of it. The fact of the matter is this beach, our beach, Miami Beach, is a wash with folks doing illegal vending u from South Point all
the way to the city limits. And so I think um this measure actually helps us mitigate that. Okay. Um and then um I had one more thing that I had meant to ask um for from Ralph and Steve. Um if you could
just come back up for a quick second. My understanding is that for your concessions in South Beach, you sift the sand every day. Is that right? Correct. Okay. And this we as a city in Miami Beach get our sand sifted by the state but no by the county. county
on an annual basis. Correct. Is it any more than that, Ron? It's It depends on whether or not there's any events out there as well. If if there are, then they do it uh multiple days to sift through the sand. Okay. So, since there are fewer events
up in North Beach there sand gets sifted up in North Beach, how often a year? I think it's just just daily. Just as needed. Correct. So, let's say maybe 10 times a year. Correct. Um would you be able and
willing to um use the sandsifting equipment that you have in South Beach and do a sweep up in North Beach a few times a week? Yes, we would. You would? Yes, we would. We'd be happy to do that up to three times a week. Three times a week up in North Beach. Um
which is a marked improvement over what North Beach gets now. Okay. Then I move the item again. Thank you. I appreciate that. Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez. Yeah. There's a few things that I wanted to state about this. Number one, we
estimate that this will generate um well, a minimum of $250,000, but it could generate um several million dollars if it's successful. um anywhere you go um to worldclass tourist destinations in Europe whether it's um
Capri or Nice uh they have an experience on the beach Sanrope uh and that's really where we're going here. This is not animal house style partying. This is um think a whispering angel beach uh having a glass of rosé under pink pale
umbrellas style um activations. That's where we're moving toward and we want to attract people. You know, in the entire United States, there is not a tropical beach experience like you have in Miami Beach, but right now you can only have a drink on the beach if you um are staying
at a an expensive beachfront hotel. So, I would like to think of you I would like to think of this almost as a democratization of the the beach style experience. Um, and uh, I love the fact that Commissioner Bot um, got the 35%
resident discount. I wish I would have thought of that myself when we were negotiating this. And, um, it's just a one-year pilot program. Um, I want the businesses on Ocean Drive, which are very concerned, to understand that there will not be liquor sales in any green patch of Lumis Park because I think
there was some sort of controversy or people thought that that was going to happen. It's going to be east of the dunes um only. So um I'm very supportive. I do think that we will find enforcement because if we are if the Bush brothers in partnership with Miami
Beach are selling these beverages on the beach and all of a sudden you have an illegal vendor who comes by the offduty police officer that is there on that beach is obviously going to uh you know call the police or have some level of enforcement that we wouldn't have if we
weren't regulating and actually selling uh the beverages on the beach. So, I think you will see an improvement in overall enforcement simply because of market conditions. Why would they want illegal sales or why would they want anybody competing with whatever the
beach and Miami Beach is selling? So, um I'm excited about this. I look forward to seeing some of the activations and um I'm supportive. And Commissioner, can I just add one thing? Just you you hit the nail on the head. You know, the idea here it's not
to create a party atmosphere out on the beach. It's to extend the the experience and the service that folks are getting behind the hotels, the Fountain Blue, the W, all all the nice the Lowe's hotel, the Royal Palm, the Seavoy Hotel, all the hotels where alcohol is already
being served. Extend that experience to Lumis Park without having to pay $1,000 a night for a room, right? And I think everyone will benefit from that, including the Ocean Drive businesses, cuz you know, rising tides lift all boats. And we believe that this new experience will attract new families,
folks that aren't otherwise coming to the beach and going to the Miami River, for example. Um, so we believe this is in the best interest of the city and and will be a good thing for Miami Beach. It's it is elevating the experience. And right now, if for example, let's say that somebody goes to one of the beaches
in Lumis Park and they have their own alcohol with them. Right now, that's not permitted. Correct. So that would be an illegal use, too. So, at the same time, you kind of limit people who would come to the beach and possibly over drink because they're bringing, you know, bottles of liquor
themselves. And if you have these offduty police officers who were there monitoring that, I think you will see that we'll have less incidences of uh bad behavior. And that is the beach experience. When like I can't say it
enough, when you go to the Amalfi Coast, uh that is what you see on the beach. you will see the apperal spritz beach. I'm not saying that we have to commercialize every inch of every beach, but this will be something that will make people say, you know what, let's go
to Miami Beach and um and and just think of something very elegant, sophisticated. I I saw some of uh what they were looking to do, even kind of like a Christian Dior beach. I don't mind. Um, and I think it's going to be great for Miami Beach, and I think that
we can generate um significant amount of revenue, both of us. Commissioner Bot, don't worry, I'm not going to ask for anything else. Um, uh, just to clarify, because I I think perhaps there's a concern out there that this is going to be a full open bar and that you can buy
shots, ad nauseium, etc., etc. That is not what you're intending. You're intending closed containers, premixed cocktails. How would you handle wine and beer? Like a bottle of of Yes, yes, it would all be in in packaged containers. There's not going to be
bartenders out there, you know, flipping bottles and like in the movie Cocktail, right? So, that it's not that it's it's contained. Can you get Tom Cruz to come? No. May maybe he'll make a ribbon cutting appearance for the first sale, but that is correct. We're not going to be
serving shots or mixing cocktails or drinks out on the beach. Um, so for glasses of wine, they'll be prepackaged, correct? And there will be no glass. It'll There will be no glass. It will be all environmentally friendly, accepted Miami Beach products. Um, look, we're looking to do something good here for Miami
Beach. So, um, for the record, in case anybody thinks that this is um not conducive with blue zones, which is a very important um, initiative that I'm championing with the unanimous support of my colleagues. I will tell you that
two of the tenants of Blue Zones um ways of living better longer include having a glass of wine daily and spending time with friends actually three in open air spaces. So um it is actually I'm not suggesting anybody abuses this to excess
but this is a nice way to explore that part of the blue zones initiative question. Um so there are basically three organizations that have directly by that area in Ocean Drive to
our residents, one is a neighborhood association. So be safe, the Ocean Drive Association and the Art Deco Neighborhood Association. They've all come out against this pilot program. Have you reached out to them? Have you conversed with them? Have you communicated with them at all?
Yes, we did. Um Steve met with with all of them and um some of the reasons that were given um for opposing the project are are based solely on on selfinterest, commercial interest, business interest. They don't want competition with respect to
that's the Ocean Drive. You could argue, but the two others are neighborhood residents. The the other two um am I free to share how you know the other at least one of the other two expressed a an opinion of we don't care
about the illegal sales. It it's not affecting our building. They don't come and sell illegal alcohol here on our beach. We don't care what happens in Lumis Park. We don't care what's happening in Ocean Drive. And that was their position. It wasn't based on a larger vision for or what's
in the best interest of Miami Beach. It wasn't based on bringing families uh to Miami Beach to have a diversification of of the city, reclaim um some of what Miami Beach has lost to other destinations who are offering uh
experiences such as this. Um by the way, when you say we lost, I I there's a stat that the GMCVB and I saw David Whitaker here before that. I mean we were at first four months of the year we were the highest and multiple uh levels of rating. Uh we were at the
highest room per night revpar uh occupancy rate in the entire nation. We were at 357 a night. The next city was 284. We're 25% higher on annual on an average room rate of any city. So we're definitely expensive but we can tell you from from our
I'm saying we're doing well. Well, yeah. Look, the city's we just want to enhance the experience for for for folks. The city is doing great. I think under your leadership, it's done, you know, a great job and and thank you for that. Uh we just want to enhance the experience u for those folks that are looking for
this type of experience. It's common place throughout Florida. It's common place in Europe. I just came back from Portugal. Had a lovely time, you know, having this type of experience. It's something that it's all over the Caribbean. People expect this type of experience. They they expect to be able
to go to the beach with their families, have a glass of wine. It It's common. Um and somehow it's been made out to be a boogeyman or it's going to devolve into chaos. The issue is that we've had we've had problems here. I think we myself and our entire commission and our police
department have done a good job of turning the narrative around. Obviously, spring break the last two years, a great success. So listen, Buché Brothers is does a great job, great concessions. Really, I mean, we're we couldn't not be more proud of the relationship we have.
I just get concerned what the image that we're projecting to the world is when we do something like this, especially if since I think we've done a really good job of turning that image, it's not easy, but we're doing it. I I would just say for those folks that are concerned, the residents, we've, you know, the city
manager insisted on the right to suspend or terminate the program upon 24 hours notice. So the moment there's a hint or a whiff that this is somehow I believe asked the city manager to add to that that the city commission can also and the city commission. So you all have
maximum authority and control over this program. And the moment you think it's not serving the city's interest, the next day you could stop it. And we've agreed to that and it's not a problem, we believe you're going to be happy with what we're doing. M Commissioner Fernandez.
Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, first and foremost, I think the Bashet brothers have such an incredible partnership with our city and contribute in so many incredible ways to the city of Miami Beach. Um, and you know, got you you
manage our most prized asset at such a high level. And so I think I I think that that that just speaks to to you being a partner who we would trust for something of this nature. Um, I just my
concern is that I know that alcohol and heat dehydrate people and dehydration yields bad decisions in public safety. And we've seen it time and after again. And it's why back in 1999,
Miami Beach passed an open container law. And that was years ago. Um, how old were you then? I I was young. I was young. Um but but
those are the laws that we have today and I trust no one more than the Bush brothers to to to do something like this to to to manage a program like this. I'm just greatly concerned about the unintended consequence. not only about
the unintended consequence on the ground, but that the headline be or the perception be that Miami Beach is going now in a different direction that does not align with the direction we have been going in into promoting a health
and wellness environment where we have been going into residential areas and telling businesses uh that that were seeking to have 5:00 a.m. uh alcohol beverage licenses that now no we're
rolling back those areas to 2 a.m. uh because we want to preserve the character and the residential quality of life and the public safety of some of these neighborhoods. Um and so you know
if we are to do this I would trust doing this with no one other than the Bush brothers but I can't support this today. Thank you Mr. Mayor. Commissioner Magazine. Um, some of the feedback that we've gotten uh has been well, you all have
worked so hard uh to shift the image and the branding and what defines Miami Beach. And we have and it's something uh I'm the least self- congratulatory person in the world, but I I think our
entire city uh is right to be proud of doing so. Um, but I also think we can walk and chew gum at the same time, right? We somehow wine on the beach is not mutually exclusive with moving
towards a more elevated uh classier even health and wellness focused um approach. And at the end of the day, that's not going to be everybody's cup of tea. Uh my mother and my father uh live here and
they're not going to be out running at Flamingo Park and you know uh while they're healthy not in you know that's not going to define their life. Uh both of my parents like to go to the beach on a weekly basis and uh not to throw my
dad under the bus there, but you know they they are uh some some buyers of the illegal sales they go on out there, right? Because they like to sit there and enjoy a drink on the beach. So to have this I know it is more mom than you
dad. So u uh this is also an amendment. That's why that's why I chose that route. That that's um this is an amenity to our residents as well, right? And I saw some of my friends that came up that are members of the Miami Beach uh track
club that are live health and wellness uh day in day out. But again, that's not mutually exclusive with getting together with a group of friends and enjoying a glass of wine on a Sunday on the beach. Right now, if you want to do so, you could do so a block away.
But your chairs are going to be five times more expensive because you're at one of the fancier hotels. Um, and what's ironic is the people that are delivering that service are the same ones that we're entrusting to do so on public land a mere 50 ft away. Um, so
while I am very proud of the direction that the city has moved in away from the anything goes party till you drop atmosphere and more resident focused and a health and wellness, I don't think that's mutually exclusive with providing this not only amenity to our visitors
and we talked about the World Cup and things like that coming. Um, but an amenity to our residents, right, where we're providing a discount for them to be able to go down and enjoy beach chairs. Why should they not be able to also be able to enjoy a glass of wine sitting on a beach on 10th Street? So,
it's something that I'm excited about. We'll be very focused on the operational plan and we have the safeguards in place to essentially uh turn this ship if it gets uh to a place where we don't intend. Um, and with that, I I I think
I'm excited to see our residents be able to be offered in this. Uh I know so much focus has been on uh the draw for tourism, but for that whether it be my parents or anybody else to be able to go down on a Sunday afternoon uh to Lumis Park and order a glass of rosé and
really take that all-enhancing experience. I I think it's going to be wonderful for Miami Beach. Motion and second call the vote. A motion by Commissioner Bot. I have a seconded by Commissioner Suarez. This is to approve the item as amended. All in
favor, please say I. I. Anyone opposed? Me. And me. Two nos. That's a no from Commissioner Fernandez and a no from Mayor Miner. The item passes. Okay. I see we have our tax collector
Dariel Fernandez here. So, let's call RDA2. We are recessing as a Me Beach Convention Center and we are reconvening as a redevelopment agency. the RDA. RDA2 is a public hearing new lease with Miami Day County Tax Collector's Office, RDA2.
And and Dariel, I am I am so excited uh and I'll let you do the uh the the details, but to have a DMV come to Miami Beach. I mean, just literally yesterday, I was talking to someone who lit who spent most of their day in in a in an office, uh it's we're we're very much
looking forward to you uh improving the process. Oh, thank you so much. I just wanted to start say thank you God for the opportunity to be here in one of the most beautiful city in the entire state of uh Florida Miami wish uh also I wanted to say thank you to you mayor
thank you to all commissioners uh for this opportunity I think for a long time of the people Miami day county need to have one office here in Miami Beach and this office will be located at the shop at the anko garage uh between the
Collins Avenue on Washington Avenue. Um it's uh will be a 14f full um service of windows uh with 19 full employee um 1,500 parking space. Um where is the the service that we're going to start
providing over there is a real estate property taxes. This the people the resident of Miami Beach now going to have their own uh office here in the middle of Miami Beach. They don't need to go far away. They don't need to go to the downtown to pay the property taxes.
They don't needed to go to another place to get the driver license or ID. If they need to open a new business, now we going to offers uh that service. Also, I wanted to say thank you to the city manager. I'm sorry for that because this is a collaboration between uh two
entity. The office of the tax collector and the city of Miami Beach. Um for a long time the people ma of Miami they counting uh need to come to us. Now, we're going to you to the resident of Miami Beach. If you need to renew your driver license, uh I know a lot of
people think about the waiting time, the long lines. We already stopped that in about uh 100 days, 200 days. Now, it's a new uh future for uh Miami Beach to start providing this service here in your uh community. disabled parking
permit, baby stroller parking permit, and now expecting mother's apartment parking uh permit. So, thank you so much to all of you for this opportunity. Thank you to my team that is here today. Uh I hope uh in a few months we're going
to have our uh new office here for the first time ever in the city of Mami Beach. Thank you to all of you. I'm going to recognize Commissioner Fernandez. Actually, uh he's the sponsor of the Yes, I'm sorry. Let's move the I did have one question, Mr. Um, very excited for this. Uh, Dariel, I
love your involvement in the community, how front and center you are. Uh, but before we approve it, you referred to Miami Beach as one of the most beautiful uh, cities in Florida. Are there any you put higher than us? There's too many too many beautiful
lease approval. Yeah, but here is a beautiful. It's beautiful. Perfect. All right. All right. With that, I'll uh I'll second Commissioner Rosa Gonzalez. Um, if it's okay, I would like to co-sponsor this item and I think our residents are going to be really excited that they don't
have to to go anywhere to get a driver's license. I know that one of the most frustrating experiences in Miami date county is the DMV and I know that you're working on that and that is a huge feat um to improve that service. So, I'm really excited that the county is
actually taking this over and I can't believe we're going to be able to get a driver's license right here on Miami Beach. It's a wonderful initiative and it's going to draw a lot of people to the area. I think the businesses surrounding will also benefit from this because, you know, people who wouldn't
possibly, you know, normally go to that location on Washington Avenue, uh, will, you know, be visiting Miami Beach. Yes, I just wanted to mention that I remember when uh Commissioner Alex Fernandez uh came to me and say hey can we open a new office here in Misha say uh yes I think
it's possible and you know let's move forward and we also wanted to bring the service to the community more closer to be more closer to the resident commissioner Dominguez well thank you so much for your hard work and what your team has done and to
commissioner Fernandez for bringing this item forward I'm very excited about it and to have this service in Miami Beach is going to be a gamecher. I too would like to co-sponsor the item and if it hasn't been moved, I'll move the item. And Mr. Mayor, I just want to put for the record that originally what the
administration had coming for us for for this item uh if for this ground space retail at the anchor shops. It was slated to be leased to a barber shop. Um and instead we asked the administration uh to find something that better served
the needs of our residences when we reached out to the tax collector understanding the needs of the services of our residents. Uh the vision you've had uh Mr. Mayor for having this type of facility here. Uh and we proactively reached out to to um to my dear friend
uh the tax collector to see how we could transform this space. I think it's 4,000 square feet, almost 4,000 square feet. Almost 4,000 square feet uh of prime uh space where people will be able to get better public services. And as you mentioned, Mr. Mayor, being able to to
get um license renewals here in Miami Beach without having to go off the island, being able to do your tax payments, uh being able to do your vehicle registrations without having to get in your car cross and go to downtown. It's a great convenience to to
our residents and Mr. Tax Collector. Thank you. Thank you to your staff, to Andrew, Vimundo, Manny, Ced, your entire staff uh that has worked so professionally and so diligently. And to you, Mr. Manager, uh for getting our feedback and delivering this vision in a
great uh partnership with the Miami Day County Tax Collector's Office. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Dario, when can we expect this to be open? And this I think before before uh end of the year. We're working hard. If the commissioner help us, you know, I know the process with the permits, you know,
sometimes take time, but you know, we wanted to to do everything correct. You know, Raundu, I love how you shifted it back to us. That's great. Classic Commissioner Bond and Commissioner Rosa Gonzalez. Okay. Um, Ron, uh, Darl, did did I hear this
correctly that you can also get BTRs there that there's a joint office? Did you say something about uh, if you're opening a business? Uh can you repeat again your question? Did you say something about um if you're opening a business that you can Oh yes. For example, if people need to open a new business in Miami date county
need to they need to come to us for the local business tax. Okay. And also they need to go back to you, you know, to the city. So this won't be a joint. So you can get your county applications there, but you still have to come to city hall for your BTR. Yes. Okay. Thank you for clarifying. And um
Alex, if you'd permit, I'd be happy to join the train as well. Sure. So, um, I think we should all co-sponsor. I think so. Thank you. I'm looking forward to it. Mr. Mayor, if you could join me as a co-prime. Yes, please. Love that. Thank you so much. Wow. I like the invitation. Thank
you, Commissioner Rose Gonzalez. Yeah. I can't stress enough the economic benefit to this and having all these people there and having security there or, you know, our police officers and the county also. I'm sure you're going to have some sort of security there because it's also been an area where we
have had some problems. So, I think restaurants that that are in the anchor shop like Yuko 105 that's been having some issues is going to benefit tremendously from this. I can't say what a positive um what a positive initiative this is. Thank you.
No more. No more nice. Thank you. Thank you so much. uh you're you're you've been an outstanding partner uh since you got elected. So, thank you for that. Thank you. Anything that you need, you know, we are here to support the community of the beautiful Miami Beach. We may have to do Thank you. May have to
do something about changing changing the actual title tax collector. But, uh uh we wanted to change that. But, you know, but also I wanted to say that um for a long time the people mommy they see the tax collector as just take my taxes, but we also give back that taxes to you.
That is why you have this beautiful city, you know, fixing your roof, pay the police, pay the, you know, the the 500, you know, everything coming from us to you. Thank you. Okay, we're going to call uh Mayor, this is a public hearing. May Oh, yeah.
Uh, is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak on this item? Seeing none, I see two individuals requesting to speak online. One is Inz's iPhone. INZ, are you here to speak on the lease with Miami Day County Tax Collector?
I want to thank Dariel and the commissioners and the mayor for working together in bringing this facility to us. It's is a wonderful accomplishment. Thank you. Thank you, Anz. Next, see Janessa Strode. Janessa, are you here to talk about the
Miami Dade Tax Collector's Office? Um, no, I'm not. I hope that's okay. It's a little off. I'm sorry, but we're It's a different item. If you want to talk on Sutnik, we could do so. That's at 1:00. Thank you. Thank you, mayor. Let's call the vote. I have a motion by from
Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner Magazine. Um, Commissioner Higgins is absent. All in favor, please say I. I. I. Anyone opposed? Hearing none, the item is approved. 70 with Commissioner Higgins absent.
R seven I. We're reconvening as the city man commission meeting. Uh R7 I is execute an improvement maintenance agreement for 10 100 to 300 blocks of Lincoln Road.
Commissioner Fernandez, co-sponsored by Commissioner Magazine. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, for too long, for way too long, the eastern gateway to our city's iconic
street, Lincoln Road, has stood, I believe, in stark contrast to the vision we all share for Miami Beach. Um, the 100, the 200, and the 300 blocks of Lincoln Road. Um, you know, once
imagined as a vibrant connection between our worldrenowned pedestrian mall and our shoreline have instead become a corridor, sadly of neglect. It's been in decline. What should be a red carpet
entrance to the beach for years have been marred by by grime, by disorder, by social ailments, by a deep sense of lost potential of what should be the most premier, the most beautiful, the most
iconic entrance to the beaches of the city of Miami Beach. It should be the entrance at Lincoln Road. Uh, but I think collectively we never stopped believing in what Lincoln Road and the East End of Lincoln Road could be. And
today we have the opportunity to finally once and for all reclaim that vision. Um, actually since 2020, since before I took office, I've been pushing for for for this vision. Uh, I've been pushing
for a bold public private partnership uh that would restore the stretch of uh of Lincoln Road into something that is worthy of our city and worthy of the residents that live in this part of of
our city and of the tourists that dream of coming to our city but come and face face crime and face grime and dirt. uh in these in these areas. Back then, back in 2020, uh when I served on the police
citizens relations committee, I I in fact brought forward a motion that called for collaboration that called for collaboration between the stakeholders. And I see we have representatives from the Ritz Carlton here, Peter Kavanagh, and collaboration with the residents.
And we we heard from Anne Bloom and and other residents from from the Deco Plodge to bring back safety, to bring back beauty and pride to this neglected area. And I believed then, as I do now, that we can do better and that the
people of Miami Beach deserve better in this area of this of the city. And so today is very exciting because today we finally get to hopefully move forward with an ambitious and transformative
plan um for for the renaissance of the east end of Lincoln Road. It's a two-phase project um that we in that we initially approved I believe almost three years ago. Um almost three three years ago, right David?
Yes. started in 22 and in 23 we got the direction to consummate this agreement. So we started in 22, we we we gave uh approval in in 23 and today we're hopefully finally adopting this this agreement uh for a two-phase project.
phase one focusing on the 100 block of Lincoln Road from Collins Avenue to the Beachwalk uh with the city, the state of Florida and the owners of the Ritz Carlton and the Sagamore coming together as true partners, a true private public partnership where we will completely
redesign this block from the ground up. Literally pedestrian walkways will be reconfigured. New green uh spaces will mark the transition to to tip to the beachwalk. Our underground aging underground infrastructure, water,
sewer, storm water infrastructure will be modernized uh for resilience. And at the eastern end of Lincoln Road, it's all going to be topped off with a signature architectural feature inspired by the original vision of Morris Lapis.
It'll stand there as a proud symbol of our city's identity. And I and it really is something something beautiful. And I want us to see this more than just a beautifification project because it aligns with our vision for a safer city.
This is beyond a beautifification project. It is a safetydriven project. That was the vision from when we initiated it. It's also a mobility project. It's a quality of life project and for and for for the first time the
ongoing maintenance um in terms of cleanliness of this public area will also be a uh private uh public partnership uh with a private stakeholder contributing not only to the improvements of the public right ofways
but making sure that those public rightways on a monthly basis at least are powerwashed that the landscaping that the landscaping is worthy of this beautiful tropical paradise that we live in, that the care is given so that our
residents get the experience that they deserve living on on Linker Road. And that's only phase one, this incredible transformation of this beach entry point. And phase two will will bring the dream full circle, I believe, because
that's the 200 and 300 blocks. And when those hopefully become fully pedestrianized with the support of Miami Day County, closing the gap between uh our pedestrianized Lincoln Road Mall and the revitalized 100 block, it'll be
something transformative for for that area, changing the energy. buses will be hopefully relocated uh to to Washington Avenue so that now pedestrians have space for positive energy, but the retail spaces have the opportunity to
expand and be able to attract better quality, highquality retail spaces that Lincoln Road deserves in this in this area. So, this hasn't happened overnight. It has happened through great partnership. The drive of our residents
who have been asking for change. The vision of private property owners from the Ritz Carlton uh and the and the Sagamore. the vision of people like Peter Kavanagh that's that's joining us today and the and the different stakeholders and the partnership with
the public entity my the city of Miami Beach with a $4 million investment will be getting a $12 million project and that is something we should all be proud of. If you weren't proud enough of the fact that Lincoln Road is going to be
transformed into a beautiful red carpet entrance to the beaches of Miami Beach, well then you should be proud that that transformation is coming at a great value for the taxpayers investments. So with that, Mr. Mayor, I'd like to recognize David Martinez, our assistant
city manager, who's been working on this to guide us through through to through the technicalities of this item. And David, before you start, I just want to commend you, Commissioner Fernandez. Before you even elected official, you had reached out to me when I referred to like a baby commissioner about 5 years
ago. I know a smaller component of this. You were you were driving me to make this a reality. And then when you got elected, you rightfully took the lead on this and uh really commend you for there's a lot of work that goes into something like this. Uh so kudos. Thank you.
Good morning, Mr. Mayor, honorable commissioners. Uh, I believe Commissioner Fernandez stole most of my thunder. Very exciting stuff. Ready to vote? Are we ready to vote? I will I will keep it simple. What we're here today to do is for you all to
approve the the uh um improvement and maintenance agreement that is part of this item that we have worked with uh the uh the owner of the properties for many many months. I think a lot of work went into it and I think the city and and the private entity uh will end up in
a good place with this. The other things you'll be approving is authorizing the city manager to finalize the agreement uh and eventually uh executed along with the city clerk. The uh the agreement basically establishes responsibilities, terms and conditions uh ahead of the
construction regarding design and those sort of elements. uh it then establishes conditions during the construction and uh finally it establishes requirements for maintenance. The agreement has a total duration of 15 years. Um one of
the key uh items that I want to touch on uh that I know that Commissioner Fernandez obviously is very passionate about is that the two and 300 block uh has it does have the built-in conditions and and the terms. Uh it allows for
while phase one is is is going on as well as the construction of their private project is it gives us 10 years to sort out funding sort out uh approvals that are required from from the county related to the bus stops related to closing of the streets and
some technicalities and I know that they've made great advancement in in in those particular topics. Uh it would culminate in a separate agreement once we we get those things ironed out. Um, I'm happy to get into any of the details you'd like. Um, we believe the information we provided is pretty
comprehensive. So, I'm happy to answer any questions. And David, I just um I want to just ask a few questions of the of the of the private stakeholder that's that's partnering with us. Uh, either Peter or
Peter, welcome. Good morning. Good morning. Thank you for for sharing in our vision. It's it is it is as much our vision as it is your vision. And that is the beauty of a public private partnership. That is not just one person's vision is people coming together to achieve great things for the
greater good of of our community. Just a couple things I want to touch upon. Um because once this is built and completed, it's going to be transformative for the east end of Lincoln Road. But equally important as the construction is the ongoing
cleanliness, the ongoing aesthetics, the ongoing landscaping. Um how tell me tell tell me what is the arrangement right now for for for maintenance for power washing for for cleaning this area of of
Lincoln Road once the project is complete. Yes. Um for the record, Peter Cannabis one Lincoln Road representing the Ritz Carlton. Before I respond, I I really want to thank Commissioner Fernandez. None of this would have happened uh without his guidance. He had a vision um
for a public private partnership that I think is going to work beautifully. I also want to thank um the staff uh the manager, assistant city manager for the hard work that they did. Let me tell you, they did a good job. I know by the level of complaints I'm getting from my lender's attorneys uh that they they
really did their work. Um to answer your question directly um yes we uh we are um contri we are maintaining the landscaping from Collins Avenue uh all the way down through the uh path of the beach on an annual basis. Um the power
washing of the streets uh um you know originally uh we in in the uh agreement that we worked out with the staff we were going to be powerwashing the north side of the road. city was going to be doing the southside. At at a uh request from you yesterday, late yesterday,
unfortunately, we were able to get back to our lenders in time. Uh we are now agreeing to do both sides of the road on the power washing. Um and is it just power washing, but is it also once we got to the beachwalk, the landscaping? Is it also just the general the general cleanliness of the of the
Yeah. Um the well, you know, there's only so much that we can encompass in this agreement, but the concerns that you have are actually being uh handled a little bit differently. So um I think Commissioner Bot can uh verify what I'm going to tell you. But uh
with her help um we have been meeting with the stakeholders in the road, the decoplage soon to be the Alo and the Ritz Carlton. And we're working on issues of the uh cleanliness uh of uh the the homeless problem that we've been having over there which I think the
decoplage folks referred to and uh we are in coordination our personnel at the Ritz uh is in coordination with the city with the police department uh and um we're uh we're looking at those issues which I think will address your concerns
although they really are not encompassed in this particular agreement. Yeah. And um and thank you so much for working on the 200 and 300 blocks as well. That phase two part I think will truly be the most transformative part of it. Being able to continue the
pedestrianization of Lincoln Road east of Washington Avenue, closing off vehicular traffic to activate uh that that that area and help the quality of the businesses that go in there. Um, are we going to continue working with Miami
Day County in addressing the bigger issue of the bus route uh that is ending at this location? It's very exciting uh what's happening and I can tell you that we are think within weeks for doing something that people have been trying to do for decades which is to get the
county to agree to relocate the bus stops uh over on Washington Street which would be the precursor to bringing uh that to you here for a road closure resolution which I expect would occur sometime this fall. Uh we're we're we're this close right now. we've pretty much
um answered all the uh hurdles that we had to answer with traffic analysis and so forth and and bus rerouting. So, we're we're we're just about there. I I will also say there's, you know, there's several moving parts to this commissioner. Um some of which are encompassed in this agreement and some
of which have been being done X agreement. Um the the the part that uh we have agreed to within the scope of the agreement is that we have already uh submitted a conceptual plan and a conceptual budget for the pedestrianization of the road. We have
also committed to pay the uh entire soft cost meaning through construction documents if and when the county appropriates money for the actual hardcost construction. Uh we're doing that because we don't see this project as just benefiting the Ritz Carlton.
This is not a Ritz Carlton project. This is a city project. We are we are part of a district and it's a district that's in trouble. And we recognize that we can't separate ourselves from that district. And that's why we have committed to spend uh you know I think $2.5 million
in essence uh some of which is already much of which has already been spent with the county to um create the preconditions for uh actually closing off that road. And I know that you have sponsored legislation uh that's going through land use right now to talk about
some um zoning incentives or resoning that would uh encourage redevelopment by the property owners. So the these are all um pieces that are kind of synergizing and coming together. It's a puzzle piece all together. It's like a jigsaw puzzle that's finally coming together. And and I just want to ask PJ. PJ, I
sent you two two attachments and I think there's one that has phase one of this uh project if if you can just show those images because it really shows the transformation. And anyone that's that's been out there uh recently will will
notice the the great difference between um I don't know PJ if you if you have there we Oh well we that's sideways. I don't know if you can rotate that for us.
There we go. Um so and let's and let's go up to the first page. Yeah. And uh and and Peter, I I don't know if you if you want to walk us through what we're seeing, but um you know, you're seeing there, you know, the
the transformed entrance, the new heartscape, the repositioning of the pedestrian areas, the change. Yeah, it it it it's a um there's so much going on here, it's a little hard to describe, but to try and make it brief, we tried very um very much to address
traffic circulation and life safety issues. Right now, we have a very unfortunate circumstance where we have almost 8,000 people a day traversing this road to the beach to and from the beach, which is the most trafficked entrance to the beach of anywhere in the city. And unfortunately, um they bottle
up down at this culde-sac in a rather dangerous way. We have trucks, we have cars queuing up. Uh they have to cross our loading dock area. Um there's there's no delineations in the sidewalk or signage warning them where they may reach a choke point. We we have tried to
eliminate all the choke points where pedestrians can potentially interface with cars. I know on a couple of occasions I myself am almost been hit by vehicles uh trying to cross over. Um we also have a a median cut which you can't really see here and we're going to work with the city on signage so that the
look's of which probably are 50% of the traffic that go down there are forewarned that there's nothing down here for you. So take the median cut and make a make a U-turn and go back out. Um, we have uh also made uh changes to our loading dock area so that it is
wider and it can accommodate U-turns within the loading dock as opposed to trucks backing out which is a source of safety concern but also when trucks back out they make that loud beeping noise which you've probably heard from the decoplash residents is really not one of their favorite sounds. So, um you know,
uh we the these um there's another component to here where we're allowing for some public art which will be a private initiative to be placed along both sides of the street. And you also mentioned commissioner the um lapidous inspired monument that I think we have a
picture in there. It's really beautiful somewhere in here that will delineate uh where the city ends and nature begins. And it's also a terminus to really this should really be the grand prominade from bay to sea and it and it terminates where we are. We should have a real a
monument that's befitting that. And I think that that entrance monument will fit that bill. And I think as we get further down on this presentation, there's there's the u there's the picture of of what that grand prominade entrance to to the beach
ends up being. That's the entrance to the beachwalk there. Uh yeah, that the beachwalk incidentally um the these are slides are a little bit old, but um the beach path is actually being doubled in size and it will have both landscaping and artwork
along it to um to be a pleasant experience for those people going to and from the beach. Can I ask a question? Can I ask you a question? Uh yeah, wait. I have Commissioner Bot unless it's a question. I have Commissioner Bot though who asked this be Let's go in order here. Commissioner Bot, Commissioner
Dominguez, and then Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez, can you um I know it's not done yet, but can you address the bus route issue? Um we're not ending the bus routes, we're relocating them in the ideal world. Is that Yeah, they're they're being relocated onto U Washington Avenue and this the
the county has done all the studies about um you know the traffic uh the traffic routes and the bus routes and there's not a necessity to add more buses. they found out and um it's it's actually it's actually fairly close to where they are right now. But to tell
you in all honesty, Commissioner, when people take that bus and they land on Lincoln Road, they're not landing in the safest environment in the world. Um they'll be far better off in terms of safety and in terms of uh convenience. Um they're going to be so close that it wouldn't be an inconvenience. And obviously, we don't really know when
people uh get onto this end exactly where they're going. they may be clo they may be closer to where they're going than where they you know when the bus stops are now. So, not only are we not um ending the bus route, but we're going to get additional buses on those routes because in the course of the traffic studies, it's been determined that the number of
buses serving those routes isn't sufficient. And so, the county is going to add no the the current bus routes number of buses are sufficient. There's no need for change. Oh, okay. I'm sorry. I misunderstood that. Yeah. Okay. And then I just wanted to to point out for anybody listening
that um I'm supportive of this. I'm excited to see this happen. Um it should be one of the most beautiful um byways from Beta Beach um in the city and I'm excited to make that happen. But we are not waiting um until the hard
environment is built to work on the problems that have been plaguing the Ritz and the Deco Plage for the last couple of years. I've been working on it um with city staff, assistant city manager uh Martinez and a number of other staff, with residents, with yourself. We have a parking pilot
program in that 100 block. Um testing, new signage, new um color coding, um having the little um I think they're called candlesticks on both sides to try to mitigate. Yeah. Yes. Um to mitigate some of the the idling that happens. Um, and we will at
the end of the summer assess how that's working and what's working and continue forward with what is and get rid of what isn't. Um, I uh at the last budget meeting I requested that my um allocation for second aid be used for specifically for street cleaning in that
uh 1 to 300 block radius uh range because it is insufficient now and there's no funding in the budget. So that is a something that I'm uh that we are codifying with this budget. And um I worked with uh Chief Jones uh I think
he's still there he is um who I think your staff meeting was Wednesday. No uh Tuesday. When when did we have that conversation? Tuesday. um working with Chief Jones to um expand and heighten the police efforts to ensure that the homeless
folks who are using especially the 200 and 300 blocks of Lincoln Road because it's so conducive to use as a bathroom or a place to sleep for the night is going to be addressed. And how did that go if you don't mind addressing at the at the staff meeting because you were introducing that.
Go ahead. Good morning again. Wayne Jones, chief of police. Um so after our conversation I I met with my staff on Tuesday we have a meeting every Tuesday morning and part of the direction I gave was for RDA officers assigned to uh Lincoln Road
itself to um increase significantly their presence along the one to 300 block of Lincoln Road. And additionally when they're not working the RA officers they don't work really early in the morning or very late at night. when they're not working. Um, that task will be done by police officers assigned to
dayshift early in the morning and midnight shift at night. And I think that's going to be I mean we'll see the proof will be in the pudding because you're starting this weekend. But I think that is going to make a significant impact immediately. Um because we know those folks are using
the street as facilities overnight. And by having more uh boots on the ground, if you will, um moving them along, offering services for them, helping them find a different path forward, um we should immediately effective this weekend start seeing a better result. Yeah, Commissioner, I want to I want to
thank you for your the attention that you've paid and all the measures you said are correct. I I just want to add especially since the chief was just up here, this isn't the first uh revitalization in the city that I've been involved in and my experience is well going back um we were closed down
for almost 2 years when Hurricane Irma tore the air conditioning off our roof and created a funnel effect and um during that period of time is really when the homeless issue on that block accelerated because like any abandoned building in Miami Beach, it
becomes a magnet. Uh and uh when we make these improvements uh it also kind of sends out a signal and there'll be lighting and other things involved that this is really not going to be the friendliest environment to loiter around in. So it's my hope that the renovation itself will reduce the need for police
presence to ease the burden of the police department and also in frankly there's a double-edged sword. We appreciate the help of the police. It's not the greatest optics in the world uh you know to have a lot of police cars and and uniforms you know patrolling the street when you're talking about the kind of people that come to the Ritz
Carlton or the residences. So it's my hope that the very uh act of um revitalizing the street will have a um positive effect in that regard. Agreed. Thank you. And I think also when we move the bus stop and that's going to have something I think a transformational impact in
this in this area. And and PJ, I just I just sent you an an attachment because I I think that Morris Lapis arc was not part of the images we were showing. Unfortunately, I don't know. And I think if we go to page six of the of the of the attachment I showed you
because it's something so beautiful. It's going to be so transformational and if the public gets the opportunity to to to see it as part of our presentation today, Mr. Mayor, it'd be great. One second here. Bring it up for you right now. And after this, Commissioner Dominguez, then Commissioner Rosen
Gonzalez. Let's see. While it's being pulled up, I just wanted to clarification. This is going to be a beautiful transformation to that area. I'm happy to hear that the uh Deco Plage is on board and um it'll be great
for the neighborhood. Will the Beach Walk be open during construction? Um yes. I I I I I mean I I I don't I can't really remember the exact details of all the plans, but I believe we do have to keep a an access open during
that period of time because that's a critical uh artery for our city. Um people use it to commute and not just for uh enjoyment. So it would be important to keep it open. Commissioner Rosa Gonzalez. Yeah, I'm totally supportive. I don't
know when the end of 16 16th Street became like a den of iniquity, but it really there was some horrible activity happening on your block and the city's sidewalks have been filthy and we've been very reactive instead of proactive.
Here here are my questions regarding this. I mean, given what I've seen our city do, these estimates seem very low. $14 million. I know we're getting 4.5 from the state and you're giving $4 million. Um, who is build? Are are you you guys are not building this? Is the
city building this? And are these estimates current estimates? Because one of my big worries is that this never gets done because we get an estimate that sounds so low for a city project unless it's being built by the private sector. We we believe these these estimates are
adequate. And the way this functions, commissioner, is that um of the uh 12 12 of our $4 million uh the first money spent are ours going into the design. Uh then when the uh designs are completed
and uh the RFP goes out uh and the city will be handling the construction uh the hard construction portion of it. But I I'll I'll defer to David. He can probably explain it better than I can. Okay. I David, here's my question. Thank you. Yes. My my my question is David, so if
they're handling the soft cost of this construction and they're going to hand you a design and they're gonna and you're going to get the permits also, is that where we are or this and and I can add a little bit of information to that. So yes, as Peter stated, they'll be responsible for the design. Just to mention that this the
design's already uh has received approval from the historical preservation board. So technically, we're already 30% into the the design process. uh we would you will probably be seeing in September from administration a request uh for authority to put out an RFQ for a
construction manager at risk. That would be the mechanism which we'll use to deliver the project as most of you are have heard us talking about construction manager at risk. we will be able to review project the project at 50% and 100% at which time the dollars would be
shared and the estimates and the idea is to uh designed to the budget that we have. So we will be working collaborative to get to that point. We feel at this point comfortable with with the budget. Um so that's that's how we are proceeding with this. So their four
million is all soft cost. But no, you're the first I'm going to say roughly the first one 1.8 to 2 million will go to soft cost. When that's completed, the balance of our monies kick into the hard cost construction. Okay. I my only my my biggest
reservation about this is our ability to get this done um with that estimate because I've never seen us do anything. You're saying water water. Just keep in mind that is $12 million for one block. No. Yes. I I I know that. I'm just
there's a lot going on here. A water sewer. Like I'm hoping that we can do it. The only thing that I would like is a realistic estimate from the administration, especially CIP, um about doing this because it's very easy to say this is going to cost us $12 million and then we never have the money to do it. And after you've spent the money for all
of these soft costs 5 years down the road, we look back and we haven't done anything. I mean, you know, I see the dates in here that have to be done. So, who's going to make up the difference when the city comes back and says, "Oh, it's not going to be uh $12 million. It's going to cost 20." Uh, what do we
do at that point? And how are we going to uh get those funds? Can we use Do you have an Because I know, David, I've seen your prices and I've never seen anything uh this cheap, seen what you guys do, and I just feel
like I just want it to happen. And I want to see the deal take place, you know, and this is so I mean, I think we have to budget. I think you need to get an estimate. Look, we'll approve this to Well, of course, we're going to approve this today because we all know that something needs to happen there. I think
we're all as a body also willing to um add some additional zoning within reason to transform the block. I know the block is in bad shape and I feel for the Ritz Carlton. I feel for the Deco Plage people. I mean I it's it's terrible. So
I I I just this is wonderful and we sign it. Um you think you can do you can deliver this. We have verified the numbers and at least today standing here it appears that this this is a reasonable budget. The agreement does provide a mechanism
in the event that for whatever reason they are not able to we are not able to value engineer if for some reason they come in higher does have a mechanism that provides for a cost sharing if if mutually agreed obviously the commission would obviously have to approve any any
sharing if there is any there are any overages would you guys consider doing the project for us and taking a construction fee because that I think is the key to getting this we can't do that because we have state funs Yeah, the state funding involved and that would preclude us from having any kind of involvement. Well, believe
me, my preference would have been for the private sector because again, part of the vision of doing private public partnership is that when the private sector's involved, everything costs less and everything is done more timely. Um, because we have state dollars, which
means that for a $4 million investment, the Miami Beach taxpayer is getting a $12 million product. But that means that we have to adhere to certain procurement requirements and regulations tied to the state allocation of those funds. Can I can I ask one more question? Let's
say that you come in with a $25 million estimate, but uh the Ritz Carlton says to you, "Look, we could probably get this done for 10 or 12 million using a certain contractor. could we agree to bid wave and go with their contractor even though the city could be
supervising um the project and and uh it's what commissioner Fernandez was alluding to because of the grant the state requires the city to procure the construction. So we would have to figure out a way of how do we keep the the state's money and still to
be able to do that the original Can you speak to the FDOT secretary and ask for a bid waiver so we could get this done or ask for some sort of exemption? I I just want to see this. I mean, we we look, we would be happy. We we've worked with with staff on getting this done this far. I think we
have a good relationship with them. Uh if they uh I mean, we we can help in the recommendation process in terms of contractors and things like that, but but we we don't have any final decision- making over this. Okay. Well, I'm excited to see it done,
and I hope that uh I know that you guys will do your part. Hope that the city can can get it done, too. Mr. Mayor, um there are some areas of any city, Miami Beach in particular, that are more iconic than others, and they define the
brand identity of a city. Sometimes rightfully, sometimes wrongly. Um this area is one of those. And unfortunately, in recent years, it's fallen on harder times where I think it's negatively impacted the brand and experience of many in our city. And I commend
Commissioner Fernandez, to you, Peter, and your team for having this vision, carrying it out. I'm excited to execute this, and that this is just one piece of that jigsaw puzzle that is part of a much further uh true ecosystem here that gets on track of defining this as one of
the most iconic parts of one of the most iconic cities in the world. Um, what do you need from us? I'll ask this both of you to have this go as quickly as possible, right? I do not want to be sitting here years from now still
talking about design. So, what can we do to help this move along as fast as possible because that is what our city deserves. Do you want to answer that first? I will I I will start on my end. Obviously, it begins with approval of the agreement today that sets everything in motion and then working with the city
attorney's office. We'll get it executed as quickly as possible. uh from administration perspective is when obviously considering when we bring back the authorization to put the uh RFQ out for the construction manager at risk. That would be the more important things that we need on our side for
administration and I'm sure Peter has I I think the major um issue that I see is really um construction access. Um uh right now in the agreement it's an eitheror situation between 17th Street and Lincoln Road. um 17th Street um is
far preferable would uh allow the projects uh the the the public project and and the condominium they were doing to run concurrently without the potential of you know bumping schedules against each other. And I I think um when you take a look at it uh 17th
Street, no residential uh no real um service uh to any of the hotels. In fact, one of the one of the hotels I think has gone dark for a while, but that's not our decision. That's a decision that will have to be made at the city level. But just to make you aware of that that that is something
that I believe would really uh help in you know ensure all of us keeping on schedule for the various projects. Are you both aligned with uh that course of action or do we have some caveats? We we have some caveats. We we do have concerns and it's something we'll have to look at when the time comes and what
we're talking about is the construction of the private of their private project uh which would have to happen from the beach side. So at some so they either would have to have access to the beach and they would have to cut through the dune with the proper permitting. They would have to have access either off of
Lincoln Road or 17th. So we we have not come exactly to terms on which would be the best route. If it is determined that the best route is Lincoln Road, which is where we're leaning on because of a lot of different reasons, then it would push
potentially push the public project on Lincoln Road towards the end of their private construction, which could be several years. If the access to their private project is off off of 17th Street and into the beach, then clearly that would allow the public project to
proceed as soon as the documents are ready and the construction manager is is is contracted. Uh so it's it's not a easy decision. Uh there's going to be impacted parties whichever side whichever street is being uh used for
access. So that's kind of what uh we've been trying to work through. And who sorry uh who ultimately makes that decision? Is that you, Mr. City Manager? Ultimately with input from both our environment group and our public works
department. Yes, I would have to make that decision. And I just want to just put for the record because I I think Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez, your point about the $12 million, it's true for a city project, it sounds like a small amount, but again, I'm just going to put it back
into the perspective. That's $12 million just on one block. David, how much is our entire Lincoln Road project? I'm sorry. Which project? Our capital Lincoln Road project. Um the current project that we have now, this is a it was a $60 million pro
project. 60 maybe just north of $60 million. The full-blown Lincoln Road project that we've been working on. Yeah. Yes. It's north of $60 million. And how many blocks is that? That is all the way from uh Washington to uh Atlantics. So that's about eight blocks
roughly. Yes, about eight blocks. So we were talking about, you know, just rough numbers, about $7.5 million per block on those parts of of of Lincoln Road. Here we're talking about a $12 million investment
on this beach entrance. Why? Because we believe that this is what our city deserves. We need to transform this. And um and I know you want to ask a question, Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez, but if PJ would show finally the picture that I was trying to get there because it is just so beautiful. I want to make
sure look like there's that Morris Labraas uh archway uh that will hopefully be adorning uh that beach entrance. I mean, talk about iconic and beautiful and just sets just a whole new tone and vision uh for what people
experience uh on this east end of Lincoln Road. Okay. Um, Commissioner, so is there Thank you. Sorry. Is there a way to somehow um include in this agreement that and have the
administration just reach out to uh the Florida Department of Transportation where the grant is and see if a bid waiver is available just so that we could potentially use the same contractor that you're using when you use the building and just get it done. that that would be my only request um to
you and I think uh commissioner state rep just yeah I will say that we already have something in the agreement that um you know part of the the 100 block is that we're doing work on the front entrance of the rits that not to be confused with what's called the private project which
is the condominiums we already have in there that to the extent possible we're going to be trying to use the same uh contractors there um I I if there if there are any further uh amendments to this. The agreement that we have in
front of us now has been approved by our lenders. Okay? If there's any changes to this, I have to go back to them, which would push this off until September. I I really don't want to do that because I don't want to have another go around with their attorneys that may open up new questions themselves. Uh and gum, you know, kind of
That's fine. That's fine. So what we can do is sign the agreement today uh with the caveat that you guys reach out to FDA so that we can potentially use the same contractor that's doing the side of the Ritz Carlton which would create a seamless more expedited way of doing the project but we're not we won't make any changes to the agreement we're signing
today. Understood. Through the chair I believe what you can do is amend the resolution to direct the administration to do that. Um but he's saying that his lenders not the contract the resolution. the resolution. Could we amend the resolution just to do this just because you want to see this done?
I don't I don't want it to get in the in the way of it. I know the state is very particular uh when it comes to to to these things. I remember, you know, back with other projects when when I worked at the county, they are very particular about this stuff. And I don't want to
jeopardize in any way um the funding that we have from the state because what that state funding means is that for our city of Miami Beach investment we get 200% return uh from what we are investing from city dollars. So I in no
way want to jeopardize um the uh state dollars that we're getting. So to the extent that your motion is just, you know, just to reach out, nonbinding, it's a simple meeting with the secretary or however you want to. Sure. And just to clarify, I don't
believe that the state will actually grant us this waiver, but I I think we can always ask. Yeah. I mean, okay. Okay. Let's call the vote. Your motion, please. I'll make the motion. I have motion from Commissioner Suarez.
I heard then Commissioner Fernandez. Yes. Uh all in favor of the amended resolution uh please say I. I. Anyone opposed? Hearing none. The item is approved 70 as amended. That was R seven I. Okay. Thank you. I think this is historic.
Thank you very much for your help. Thank you. Good work. R 5A and B. R5A is an or not of the mayor, city commissioner of the city of Miami Beach, Florida, amending chapter 66 of the code of the city of Miami Beach, Florida entitled marine structures, facilities
and vessels by amending article 4 entitled vessels by creating section 66-143 thereof entitled anchoring of commercial vessels or floating structures used to rent, store or otherwise secure other vessels prohibited and providing for repealer servability clarification and effective
date. That is item R5A. It is a second reading public hearing. R5B is in order to the mayor, city commission of the city of Miami Beach, Florida, amending chapter 66 of the code of the city entitled marine structures, facilities, and vessels by amending article 4 entitled vessels by creating section
66-156 entitled Miami Beach overnight anchoring limitations area established by establishing a Miami Beach overnight anchoring limitation area and providing for repealer servability clarification and effective date. This is a second reading public hearing as well. It is
item R5B. Commissioner Suarez. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, final second and final reading for this much needed ordinance to really protect the environment and the access to free and
clear waterways of Miami Beach. Um again, this is a very rare case of Tallahassee giving government, local governments control um o over their their municipal uh
jurisdiction. Um it's been a long time coming and I'm I'm happy to have uh have championed this. I want to give just a couple uh special thanks to a few people who have
really helped guide this uh bill through Tallahassee. One thing that I've realized is it's it's very hard to get a bill passed in Tallahassee. Um and um I had a crash course in it uh from last
session and this year's session. Um, I specifically want to thank uh Representative Vicky Lopez who who sponsored the bill in the House and Senator John Martin uh in the Senate. I also want to thank uh House Speaker
Danny Perez for for really pushing this through. Um, on the House side, uh, of course, Governor Ronda Santis for approving it at the governor level. Um, I also want to give a big shout out to our our new lobbying team. Um, you we
have uh we also have a new hireer. I don't know if he's here, Peter Leriggo, who who helped really push this um and advocated for it in Tallahassee. Um Eric uh Shanti from Ruben and Turbull Associates, Jared Rosenstein from
Capital Cities did a phenomenal job, both of them on on passing the on pushing this in Tallahassee. Um, I also want to thank Spencer Crowley from Find Florida in Inland Navigation District,
uh, Southern Boon magazine. I I went out multiple times with multiple news outlets, uh, really showcasing these, uh, the issue that we have on the water and the growing threat to the environment and public safety and and access to to free and clear waterways.
Um, also want to thank Phil Purcell from the Marine Industries Association of South Florida who who connected me with with many industry leaders um that that were going to advocate against this bill in Tallahassee. But after uh speaking
with me, changed changed their mind. Um, locally, of course, I want to recognize some of our our activists who really never wavered in in the support of this. Uh Tim Carr from from Wabna um or or
Soie West. Uh Sarah Delos Ray is here. Thank you again for your unwavering support on this. Uh Chris Torto from from Star Hibiscus and uh Palm uh and John Gardner from from the Venetian um
um islands. And uh last but not least, you know, Commissioner Steinberg also had a big part in this um at the at the county and state level. So um and last but not least, I I I'm going to I'm going to hope that the police do a
great job on this because Marine Patrol has really turned around uh in the last year or so uh under Javier. I mean, it it's completely night and day. You guys do a phenomenal job. uh very responsive,
proactive, and um I I expect no less once this law passes to really enforce um our laws and make it free and clear. So um with with that, I'd like to move my item and um
welcome this opportunity. if I can. Uh, magazine, you're a co-sponsor on R5B. Yeah. Congratulations on getting this uh seemingly across. It's been a long journey. I can remember having a sunshine meetings uh at city hall in the
conference room that became very contentious and divisive and downright vitrial that was happening. And listen, we signed up for this. Commissioner Suarez, sorry. Um, is that different than any other?
Just a joke. Just a joke. uh we signed up for this. Our our residents do not and they were the recipients of a lot of this vitrial as well, but you stood firm and had our backs and you have our backs, we're always going to have yours.
So that that means the world. Uh thank you for that. And that's not a onetime thing. That that's always going forward. So uh commend the police and code compliance and everybody that's going to have a hand in this. Um so uh congratulations. Uh I believe if I'm
able to read the room correctly. Uh so I'll make a motion and move this forward. Sarah um Sarah de los Reyes Sansa Harbor and resident of Miami Beach. This was a very contagious u u item. It was hard for
David to put up with a lot of stuff and even even Tanya who attended some of the meetings and really tried to negotiate. It was like meetings after meeting. We really tried very hard to negotiate and it didn't happen. But I'm happy that we're going to protect the waters. I'm
happy that the boats are going to be moving out of there that they should not be there. Some of them been there for 15 years. Some of them have Airbnbs on them. The water the water in the area was not that great. And at least the kayaks and the paddle boards and in front of the park will be really it's
really a beautiful park. So it's going to be very nice. And I thank all of you for all this. I know it took almost two years, but we got it done. And thank you for Tahasi also for voting. Mayor, this is a public hearing. I don't know if you want to hear the rest of the public or Sure.
Is there anyone else in the audience? I have Troy Wright on Zoom. Mr. Wright, are you here to speak about anchoring of vessels? Unfortunately, no. I'm I'm I mean I I'm was here for something else. Sorry about that. I apologize, Mr. Roy. Thank you. There
is no other individual on Zoom at this time. Let's call a vote. We're calling a vote on both on both R5A and R5B. I have a motion on both items by Vice Mayor Suarez, seconded by Commissioner Magazine. Commissioner
Dominguez on both items. Yes. Commissioner Bot. Yes. Commissioner Fernandez is absent. Vice Mayor Suarez, yes. Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez, yes. Commissioner Magazine,
yes. Mayor Miner, yes. Motion passes. The items are approved. Those were R5A and R5B. Okay, we're going to do the uh fire station Flamingo Park items now. Let's call them all together.
Yes, sir. So we're going to do C7 AF, C7 AG, C7 A all of which were separated by Commissioner Bot. So I'm going to read the titles. The first one is C7 AF. It is save Flamingo Park. C7 Action plan to
utilize existing location for fire station number one and C7 is consider repurposing Flamingo Parking lots into green space. That's C7 AF A G A L. We will do them all under C7 AL.
Yeah. So before I'm going to call Commissioner SW, I'm going to go into order that the items were on the agenda. I'll just say one, I'm going to talk about our firefighters. Uh please don't take and DNA, thank you for being here representing. Uh you guys and gals have
been caught in the uh in this for a long time and it's really unfair to you. Uh actually uh it it's we our firefighters who do an incredible job don't deserve this sort of uh Thank you.
don't deserve this really this volleyball back and forth. Uh I I heard Commissioner Magazine say at the finance meeting that uh he went back to an agenda in 2016. Um but it's it's where we're at. So, I won't belabor it, but I hope our and I
see Eric Charerel's in the crowd as well. And I I just hope our firefighters know that this is unfortunately part of the process, but doesn't take any way or anyhow in any form for our affection and appreciation for the work that you do. But we do have an obligation to get our
firefighters and it's really our residents and we say our firefighters but it's ultimately for the benefit of our residents to have a firstass fire station uh that has the amenities that uh will provide the services and also obviously give our firefighters um a decent place to to be. I will also say
as we go into this and and and we'll discuss the the items I I said this when it came up a year or two ago. I was never a fan of putting in a flamingo park. I said that publicly. I say it publicly then, I'll say it publicly now. Um, so that's where we're at. I am going to turn in order of where the items were
put on the agenda and Commissioner Suarez, C7 AF, and Commissioner Magazine, a co-sponsor. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, the need for a new fire station is not in question. Um, but putting a 66- foot
tall industrial structure in Flamingo Park, a historic community green space that has been here for well over a 100red years, is the wrong solution. Um, some might say the voters approved
this, that's misleading. Uh, the August 2024 referendum was non-binding uh and lacked much context. Uh the referendum was emotionally framed invoking emergency response times and public
safety. Um of course people voted yes. Who wouldn't support public safety? Uh but what they weren't told was that yes meant building a massive facility in the heart of one of the most city's
beloved parks. Voters never got to see that rendering. Then the renderings came out uh and people were shocked. A 66 ft industrial structure shoved just 1 foot from the
sidewalk of of Alton Road, looming over the park like a concrete wall. It's a brutal intrusion on one of the most cherished green spaces of our city. Um this isn't something that blends in or serves the park. It dwarfs it. It blocks
it and it violates the very spirit of the park. Flamingo Park is supposed to be a sanctuary open to brea breathable human scaled. This plan would replace that with shadow and noise. It doesn't enhance the park.
It would destroy what's most sacred about it. Um this is bigger than just one building. It's about setting a precedent. If we allow this kind of industrial infrastructure in protected parkland, what's to stop the next one?
And and let's not forget the the same commission unanimously passed a resolution requiring neighborhood consensus from the Flamingo Park Neighborhood Association before moving forward. That never happened. The same commission passed a stop the
pause policy because the previous fire station was at 90% design and we decided to change course at the last minute after 5 years of planning costing millions of dollars in the process. That was a mistake. And I think by doing this
today, we're going to we're going to recognize and not repeat the same mistake of waiting till the last minute. I'd rather us make a decision today on if it's going to be at this park or not. Public safety is essential,
but so is protecting public space. And we have an obligation as a city commission to do both. Let's commit to finding a better site and pres preserve Flamingo Park for the next 100 years to come. Mr. Mayor,
Commissioner Bot. So, um I would be thrilled to find another space. Um we've been looking for one for 10 years and what I am going to ask my colleagues is that while we go around the bend again to look for another
space, um we do not take this off the table until we have found a better solution. It doesn't mean doing anything further than what we're doing um currently. No action needs to be taken. Nothing will be stop. nothing will be um
there will be no pause in this project. There won't be any, you know, it's it's kind of where it is and we have some time before we need to get to our next step step. What I don't want to do is let the perfect stand in the way of the good.
And I actually have a presentation for the first time in my elected tenure. PJ, if you don't mind. Um, when we were putting this presentation together, Sarah helped pull the the sources. So, thank you, Sarah.
Um, you know, I I I read through the minutes that were taken by our mayor uh by our clerk's office. I watch video clips and I could have put together a three-hour presentation
um of unedited video of people on this day as talking about what a great solution this could be um how important it is to keep our options open, how important it is to um explore everything. And I am just asking
for the same courtesy that we extended this process a year and a half ago through last the end of last year to the process where it is now. We can bring this back for a vote at a later time if it is determined that that
is necessary, but to stop it now is cutting off our nose to to spite our face. Um, the amount of disinformation that has surrounded this entire process since the beginning is staggering. And I don't I don't um I don't begrudge
anybody for being passionate about how they feel. I don't begrudge anybody for feeling the way they do. But I really really have an issue when people do not tell the truth. Um, there were conversations about a a
parking lot going into the Flamingo Park to accommodate the firefighters that would be overlooking the pool so that people could stand there learing at people swimming. Obviously, that's not a thing. There
were conversations about the fire station being put in Flamingo Park, literally on top of the track and field. taking away the track and field. Not adjacent to obviously that's not a thing. I mean you might not like us but
we are actually not idiots and certainly our staff and our firefighters are not idiots. Um so with your forbearance I would like a couple of minutes of time to go through what is a pretty quick presentation. Like I said I could have put in video clips of all of us talking
about the merits of this um process but I chose not to. If you can go to the next slide, PJ. Um, you know, it feels like every milestone has been passed unanimously 70 or 60 because for two votes I had to be
out of um not uh present at the day because my daughter was having health issues, but every single one has passed 6. We have met every benchmark requirement, but it feels like the goalposts keep moving. PJ, the next slide, please. I mean, if anybody knows
this, this has been our lives for the last year and a half, and it's it's no way to do anything. It's really frustrating. Um, in fact, today a new benchmark was um offered up by one of the folks speaking about the concerns
that he had that it might affect the wind patterns. I mean, at what point does this become absurd? I would argue that affecting wind patterns might be that point. January 31st, 2024.
The motion pass 70 directing the administration to explore alternative site. Next slide, please. February 21, 2024. Motion pass 60. I was not present as stated um but I would have voted in favor. Directing the administration to
study the suggested sites. We pulled together a list of eight potential sites. Um, we worked with the neighborhood association, Flamingo Park neighborhood association, every step of the way, um, to determine if they were even feasible. One of the things we looked at, the first thing we looked at
in fact, is if it fell within the correct GIS parameters. If it was not good enough, if it was not fast enough, if it was too close to any existing fire station, if it had any issues, it was no longer considered because if it didn't work for public safety, it didn't work.
Period. We did not exclude lots that we could have to buy. Um, in fact, we approached several private property owners and they were already in plans to develop and had no interest in even entertaining a conversation. One of the sites that was proposed and
that was evaluated was a site that Commissioner Fernandez brought to us to evaluate, which is the current Flamingo Park uh, location that was actually suggested by a resident that was included in the evaluation. At that point, we as a commission
decided unanimously to not move forward with demolition until the staff returns uh returned in May or June with full evaluations of the sites. That's what I'm asking for here today. That's all I'm asking for here today. April 3rd,
2024, motion pass 60. Again, I wasn't present, but I would have voted to support it. um directing the administration to proceed with preparing language with um with the staff to uh and and Commissioner Fernandez who graciously took the lead on that to um
start the referendum process because it had to go to county vote. Right. June 26th, approval of relocation pending voter referendum adoption motion pass 70. Um,
it is true that the motion was non-binding, that the referendum was a non-binding referendum, but we did say in that motion that provided that the referendum was approved by a majority of the the Miami Dade County voters, which it had to be legally, and um, a majority
of the Miami Beach voters in the aggregate, we could move forward. Didn't say we had to. It said we could. I'm not misrepresenting anything here. the results of the August uh referendum. Um
it passed countywide almost 76%. The referendum passed in Miami Beach by 71% overall in every single precinct. Every single one, including the Flamingo Park uh PAL voter precinct.
Almost 6,500 Miami Beach voters voted. Are we going to as a commission for a second time for a second time in a year and a half subvert the will of the voters? Are you telling me that 6,452
voters are having their vote that they cast taken away by them again? Uncunchable. I will never support that. I didn't last time and I will not this time and I will not ever in the future. There's concern about how the language
of the referendum was misleading and that nobody knew what it meant. That there are no there were no images. I beg to differ. I personally sent out two factual emails that had questions and answers including representations that were not just received but opened by
41,000 recipients. There was an opinion piece in the Miami Herald. There is massive media coverage and actually um updated uh results for the media coverage is over three million people reached.
That's a lot. This was a hot topic. This was a hot topic. No pun intended. But it caught the attention of people who were going to be voting on this with images with links to presentations. So
to say that nobody knew what we were talking about is nonsense. It is an it's a false narrative. September 11th, we directed the administration to explore design modifications on the Flamingo Park site.
Again, passed unanimously. We gave the parameters that it had to um not impact the the track um not um shift the track which was a
concern because it would be a very expensive thing to do. It had to uh be able to be cited without having to close the track and field during the construction. We had to do it without getting too close to the track. Nobody wants to be
running next to a cement wall. There is currently a fence there. We were not moving the the fence. Fence stays where it is. And the then the proposition the proposed um um
project is further away than the fence. and if we could to make an open air view corridor through the structure to preserve the views looking from east to west. All of those things
were set out as goals because colleagues said if we don't do X I won't support it. So that's very clear direction. The staff and the architects and the engineers heard and came back with something that met all the criteria.
December 11th, we had a uh a motion again pass 70 to authorize the change amendments uh to the contract to do the work. And here we are. Here we are today
as elected officials. The only job that we are responsible for. The only thing that matters is public safety for the city residents and visitors and businesses in Miami Beach. That's it. That is job one. All the other quibbles
and quarrels insignificant. The second is fiscal responsibility. We currently have a fully funded fire station, including an 11 million grant, which could be at risk if we move it
someplace where it doesn't fit the criteria that that grant covers, making it a category 5 hardened uh uh facility. It could potentially if we do something like have two smaller stations in two
different places to fit into land that's available. It could actually jeopardize and Chief Abella, I'd love to hear you talk about this in a second, but it could from as I was explained it um it could jeopardize our uh top tier rating
now it for the fire service overall in the city, not just for that station. And if that's not correct, if I misunderstood, please correct me. But I will want you to speak about that. So going with the knowledge that we are facing a
tough budget year next year. We have already were I don't know 80% through our budget process maybe closer to 90. We have already seen the list of projects that this commission passed to address the needs and concerns of our
residents and our public safety departments that we cannot fund because we don't have the money. Yeah, we have a billion dollar budget, but right now it's spent. So, if we could find new land and if the land
owners would agree to sell, okay, where are we finding the 15 to30 million? If we can, that's great. I'm not saying we can't. I'm just saying let's not close this door permanently before we have a solution.
We also, some of us campaigned on it, some of us supported it in so many words, literally to protect the Southshore Community Center, to revitalize it. And everyone says, "Oh, it's ugly. Oh, it's never used." It had the sword of dam hanging
over its head for years. So, our the tenants who were there moved out because they stopped wanting to be living and offering services in a place that was scheduled for demolition. So to say like it or not aesthetically that's your
that's your prerogative. But to say it's underutilized. Yeah. Because it was on life support. We just gave it the go-ahad a few months ago. It feels like to move forward with programming. And what do we have so far? This is without even trying. This is without reaching
out to neighborhood associations and having evening events there and community uh meeting space and potentially renting it out as a venue for events. Without any of that, right now we have the possibility or not the
possibility, the the the actuality of enhanced neighborhood security with a Miami Beach Police Department facility serving a part of the city that could use a little more attention from the police department. There'd be 20 to 30 police officers going in and out. A
senior lunch program daily serving 50 seniors. Currently, as we speak right now, there are 57 kids in that facility enjoying summer camp that we couldn't accommodate before because we didn't
have the facilities in the city. So, we don't have to have a summer camp there again. But that's 57 kids who won't have an option for summer camp next year. Currently, um, we have 66 kids in daycare year round,
plus during the summer, an additional 51. It's over 100 kids. Um, with the Miami uh, Beach Police Department training facility space, the um, kids who go up to North Beach and
across the bridge to do boxing, they're between 10 and 20 during the week. double that number could come down to uh to the Southshore Community Center. So thereby increasing the total number of
people using that facility. There are community services offices that are moving back in there or much needed community service. You think you like having a DMV on Miami Beach? Imagine trying to get help with, you know, Medicaid or Medicare while it
still lasts. or trying to find language classes or how do I talk to my landlord? Those are services that are housed there. And as I mentioned, there will be other programming. Again, I'm not saying don't sorry I will I will hold off on that
comment. Um so let's look at the goals that we accomplished. The referendum passed countywide and citywide in every single precinct. The track and field will not be moved to accommodate the fire station. The track
and field will not be closed during the construction. The fire station will be set back from the existing chain fence significantly. It will not be the track and field Oh, I'm sorry, duplicated. I really wanted to press the point that it will not be closed during construction. I guess I I duplicated that point. I
apologize. The view corridor that was suggested has actually been incorporated. And it's I don't know. I'm not a six-year-old boy, but I think it's pretty cool that you can actually see the the slide that firefighters can go down. They don't use poles anymore because it's not safe. Fun fact that I
didn't know until I saw this design. Am I right, Eric? Thank you. Um and you can see the apparatus. You can actually see the fire trucks through the window. It's kind of cool. Um the fieldhouse which is in sor need
of attention is going to be upgraded and moved and incorporated in the overall design and the project as I mentioned is fully funded. Um if we move it we and we have that that prerogative. If we find a different spot that's fine but we risk
an an 11 million grant. Again I'm not saying put it there. I am saying don't close the door on the possibility until we find a solution. The goalpost were removed one last time before today.
That goalpost was address the loss of green space in the park. Nobody wants to lose green space in the park. Nobody. This is not our first choice obviously. So we looked
and we found a way to add a net increase of green space in the park of close to 30,000 ft. 30,000 square feet. Is it in the same place? It is not. Is it more usable? It is. This is a lot to
digest. The picture on the left is the full schematic and then the two pictures on the right are the close-ups. We can get into this in more detail um if you like, but basically the idea is that number one, PJ, you can leave this up as I talk
through the next points, the northern ramp of the fire station could be removed. The fire department had wanted a pullthrough project, but is willing to put to live with um a different kind of project with an apron that's big enough for the vehicles to
turn around without having to back into the streets. So that square now becomes um green space. We extend green space into the southern half of the 12th Street sidewalk. So still maintaining an
ADA compliant sidewalk, but now you have this long lovely stretch of green space that is runs the entire length of the track and field. Repurpose most of the underutilized parking lot that is adjacent to the baseball field, which is only really heavily used during games.
and make accommodations for those parking spots that are lost um for game days by incorporating them into the new parks and wreck facility that will be built in our next go bond trunch is
already identified as a project to be built um so that we can reimagine that that very important um welcoming corridor to the to the park that the FPNA is so adamant about protecting it and actually reimagining it into
something that is far better than open parking surface parking lot and no greenery. So that whole space can be transformed into a um green space taking up the majority of that of that parking
lot. incorporate the parking spaces without any being lost and creating a new parks and wreck facility that is beautiful, that is suitable for the community, that embraces its um park setting and enhances the immediate
entrance into Flamingo Park because right now you see the parks and wreck building which is nothing much to look at. It serves a vital and and important um role, but it's not particularly pleasant to look at. And a surface parking lot.
And I know we can do better. So by doing this, not only do we make up for the green space that would be taken away, but we as actually add 26,000 square ft of additional incremental green space,
thereby getting us closer to our goal of more green space per per resident going forward. So all I am asking of my colleagues today is to grant grant the same grace that you did
a year and a half ago to keep the door open as we pursue a parallel path to ideally find something better before you irrevocably close this door. Mr. Mayor, Commissioner Suarez, then Commissioner
Magazine. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, okay. Well, I I'd like to cover some points that were mentioned by Commissioner Bot. I I certainly wouldn't be in favor of building another taller structure on top of another taller
structure for parking uh in Flamingo Park. I don't think there should be a garage in Flamingo Park. I think that's a ridiculous idea um to to to even to even introduce um for this area. We want we want to keep
it low scale, not upscale and taller. Um, talking about fiscal responsibility, you know, and I guess we're all to blame for this except Mayor Miner. The the 90
we were at 90% with full grant funding. Not full granting with grant funding for the Southshore Community Center at the very last minute. We pulled it. the same arguments that you're making now are are the same arguments that I'm
making except for the Flamingo Park. Um, again, yes, technically the track doesn't get moved, but during the course of the construction, could be 2, 3 years, you're going to have noise, you're going to have construction debris, you're going to have particular
matter. People are going to be running. They're not going to want to obviously breathe this uh construction debris in. Um, I I don't think that that that's a that's that's a that's a good idea. Um,
and look, I I I respectfully I I understand um, you know, the the need to keep this on, but at the same time, I I don't see a concession for keeping the Southshore
Community Center on. Um, and look, I I think the residents have clearly spoken. They they've come out in in people that I've never seen before. They they certainly do not want this 6
foot, sixtory building in Flamingo Park. And then to top it off, another three or four, fivetory building as a garage on Flamingo Park. I think that's a terrible idea. Um, you know, we certainly don't want to set the precedent by by by
allowing this to continue. I think we should put our foot down today and not kick the can down the road. Obviously, this is my this is an initiative that I'm I'm spearheading. I think the commission staff and the residents of
Miami Beach should know where we stand uh today for this particular item. So, um I I would I would love to move forward on forever nixing this particular area um as as a potential
site for the fire station. Commissioner Magazine. Uh thank you, Mr. Mayor. In March 13th of 2024, when we were talking about pausing other options that were on the table uh because we thought we found
this new solution for Flamingo Park, this is what I said. I pulled the item and I said, "Well, I'm eager to hear staff recommendations for how feasible the park would be." My primary concern is there hasn't been full community vetting and there's not an appreciation
for what this will really entail. I am in this park all the time. My daughter goes to summer camp there right now. She learned to swim there. She plays soccer there. It just takes one drive on a Monday evening at 6 PM past this park to realize how many people use this as
their primary means and mode of community sense of space and being. Uh so then I further went on to say if city staff comes back and recommends its feasibility, we essentially sit here as an elected body and start hearing from our constituents they do not want it in
the park. exactly what we're beginning to hear now. And we realize that we're essentially an impass where we were 10 years ago. There are so many moving pieces to this and there always have been. There are other opportunities
in here and there's several proposals. One thing that I lament that we truly haven't done, whether it be this commission, but really the um dating back 10 years, a comprehensive plan, right? We did all this talk about
whether Southshore or or the the park. We didn't discuss at all what would become a fire station one then if it was moved, right? So, we haven't had this comprehensive discussion of all these moving pieces, a parking lot, you know,
if there's other options. So, we could sit here and discuss all these different possibilities, add nause for 10 years. I don't think we get anywhere doing that today. I am never one to kick the can down the road, but the worst thing that we could do is make these impartial
decisions that cost significant amounts of taxpayer money and time, which is what I tried forewarning back in March of 2024. And then we get to a point and realize that the desire to move
in some regards I'll take take that last part up but we we get to a point where we go down the path a little way and then have to backtrack because we haven't thought comprehensively about it. So, what I'll suggest here, I'm going to make a motion that I'll put on
the table, is we all come back and give a multitude of solutions to city staff. I know Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez has staff go out and determine the feasibility of keeping the location as is, and I talked to the city manager.
Could we incorporate putting some of the larger equipment in parts of the Flamingo Parking lot if they weren't able to be accommodated? Point being, there's a multitude of different solutions. Commissioner bot solution about the parking lot for Flamingo Park
being expanded into green space. And we hear from the community as well. We give 60 days for that process to happen. And we give 60 days for our staff to come back and explore the feasibility and say, "Here are your different options." We sit there and we look at every option
that's on the table and we take a vote of which way we're going to move forward. and we live with that vote and we move forward from that day on and do not look back. Any solution that we could ever come up with is going to come with imperfections and
unintended consequences. There will always be a handful of people that say yes, but I don't want this. We need to prioritize public safety. Understand that this will come with unintended consequences and things that are
imperfect. We live in an imperfect world, but we can't just keep kicking the can down the road at the expense of millions and millions of dollars, not getting any further towards a solution and really just putting a number of
different things in jeopardy. So, I'll make the motion that over the next 60 days between city elected officials, city staff, and our community, we come back with a multitude of different options that we put to city staff, including the construction of fire
station one in its reconstruction of fire station one in its existing place. And perhaps if we needed to expand the footprint to the building just to the south, uh, not to the building, but to the parking lot that's owned by the building to the south or the parking lot
in Flamingo Park or Commissioner Bot's options about greenifying the parking space. Any option possible, we have 60 days to put in front of city staff and you come up with your own solutions. We hear from our community and then we give
city staff 60 days to at least determine the feasibility of each of those to them which it comes back to us for a vote that we take a vote of which site we're going to put this on and we move forward and do not look back. I'll second that motion. Good night. Commissioner Bot and Commissioner
Fernandez. Um to correct a statement that was made according to city staff who have looked at this to incorporate parking into the parks and wreck building would not be a six-story building. It would be two or three stories to cover. Is that correct David
or am I depending on the scenario we follow at most it would be uh four stories at most four but it could be as low as two or three. Okay. So what would the ground level be? How high would the ground level be for the parking garage? It would be at grade for the facilities, the parks facilities. We would have to do those at
BF. So, how tall would that be in total? Uh, I haven't done that math exactly. It would be at an NGBD of nine. And I think the parking lot currently is around three. So, with four stores, it could be up to 50 ft or more approximately.
Are you saying that you don't want a parks and wreck building built? I'm talking about your parking garage. It is one in the same building, just to be clear. Anyhow, if I can continue with my questions. Um, DNA, if you Chief, I'm sorry. That's what happens when you're
friends with people. Um, Chief Abello, could you please explain, make sure that I understood it correctly and let everybody who's listening to the conversation understand that um, there is a possibility to break up the
functions of the fire station into smaller pieces, but that it might, not necessarily would, but it could jeopardize the overall Miami Beach Fire Department rating. Yeah. Um not sure what time it is. Good
afternoon fire chief of Mayor and commissioners. Thank you for this opportunity and in regards to what you're saying. So there's two parts that measure the effectiveness of the fire department and that is the accreditation status which is through the centers of
fires internationals and ISO. So ISO is what's tied into the residents homeowners insurance and commercial insurance and it's basically the approximity that you are within a hydrant and a fire station. And within
that there are certain parameters that we have to fall in. So you need to be within 1.5 miles of a fire engine and you need to be within 2.5 miles of a ladder truck. So, our ladder trucks, we have two ladder trucks in the city of
Miami Beach. Uh, ladder one serves uh from South Point all the way to 41st Street. And I did the data yesterday, 697, so it's 682 buildings that are three stories and higher. And out of the 682
buildings that we service from 1st Street to 41st Street, there is a proximity of 60 of them that are greater than seven stories or higher that are pre 1993 buildings that don't have sprinklers or uh fire protection supply
to it. So us arriving there on time is what is paramount to this whole entire picture. Um, ladder one, engine one, rescue one, and rescue 11. They are the busiest fire station per square mileage
of the entire nation. So, they service from 1st Street to 15th Street. Like I said, the ladder trucks service from First Street to 41st Street. And that is where the paradigm of the radius and how that affects your ISO. Can you see that again? I'm sorry. And
I'm sorry to interrupt. Okay, that data about the busiest station in the nation, I heard per per square um mileage, the amount densed area that we service, we are the busiest in the nation.
More than more than Manhattan, I find remember we're less we're less than that area is 15 blocks. Mhm. 15 blocks and we run. So to date our data is
so today 33% of our call volume is station one. 32% is station 2. Engine one has to date has run,900 calls in the year last year is 4,000. I think a lot of people tuning in may not know the
locations. Can you just give the location? So So we have um station one services what we're discussing right now, which is 15th Street all the way to 15th Street. It's 1051 Jefferson. From the
north side of 15th Street is where uh station 2 comes down, which is 2300. So station 2 runs from 15th Street to 41st Street. And then you have 5303 which is Collins that comes down to 41st Street
up to 69th. And then you have station 4 which is on 60th and Collins. So in in historically I'll go back historically. So the fire department was established in 1926. The original station one was old city
hall. We had 22 firefighters, 22 men. 1965 is when fire station one was built. We had 122 men, zero women. So that fire station is designed for the time that it serviced 40 years between one fire
station was built and the next one was built which is in 1051 Morris Lapidus building. Here we are today. Now we have 220 men and 20 women. the the fire station is still it's like you know stopped in
time and it's just not feasible for the men and women that service it. That's just one aspect of it. Okay, you have five bathrooms there. You throw three women in that fire station and it disrupts the entire dynamics for the
bathrooms. There's one common bathroom for the men and then two that we had to make um you know unisex. In addition to that, you also have what we're facing now as fire department is cancer where the port holes, you know,
where everyone wants to slide down the fire pole that is tied into the apparatus base. The apparatus base where all the muffler and your diesel and everything's coming out. Well, it's going right up to where we sleep in our rooms. So again, 1965, the station was
built. When I was at that station, every time I went home, I was sick. I was sick for a whole entire day. And then the next day that I was off, it was like finally when I recovered, I came back to work and I was back at it. But wasn't that because there was a severe mold problem there and not related to exhaust? I mean, when we did
the test and we did the mold remediation and that would make sense. I mean, in terms of having some sort of respiratory feeling because you guys didn't maintain the station and you allowed a mo mold condition to go grow out of control over years and years and years and I'm not
you weren't not the chief or in charge of when that happened, but you guys finally completed that mold remediation. Now, um after actually Commissioner Torres called, you know, said you guys have a a mold problem. So, in the last year, we spent about $150,000. However,
that should have never been like that. But that's what would cause that type of respiratory uh you know issue. No, completely understandable. But we're talking about, you know, the the exhaust fumes, the antique truck that is in the parade, that was the original ladder truck that serviced Miami Beach compared
to the new ladder trucks that goes up to 75 ft. So, going back to Commissioner Bots question, everything is tied into ISO rating and CFI. So, how do you measure the the effectiveness of the department? How do you mitigate a fire and to guarantee that you're going to have first responders with a fire truck
arrive there on time is through that ISO rating and splitting up the units, splitting up the engine and a rescue truck or the ladder and a rescue truck in different areas. Again, we're going back to a 1.5 mile radius 2 point for a
ladder truck. the dynamics are not going to um fluidly work itself out, especially having to arrive there within the prescribed time of 4 minutes. It's, you know, 460 seconds um and 8 minutes
to your highrises. Again, like I said, uh 269 highrises that are non-spared here in um zone one. So, in the last I I ran the data in the
last seven years for the 26 non-sprinkler buildings prescribed to um all of the beach. So, we have 10,930 calls that we've ran to each of those buildings um in the last seven seven
years. To date, we've ran 134 calls to those 26 buildings that service um that are serviced by Ladder One's uh company. And my last question, thank you, Chief.
Um Joe Commissioner Magazine. Um I would I would uh support your motion. A couple of questions. So that includes keeping this on the table as part of that overall evaluation of what our options are. I'll be upfront. Um, sure.
I I'll put my cards on the table. Yeah. Full assessment. Right now, I can't envision myself ever voting to put this in the park, but I think out of good governance, we need all options on the table. So, that's my personal viewpoint. Other people don't need to put theirs on. But yeah, let's let's keep any and
all options on the table because we don't want to limit ourselves, but I'll just convey my personal viewpoint. So my what I would request is that I I support this, but I don't think 60 days, especially as we're going into August recess, is enough. Um staff is going on vacation, colleagues are going on vacation, people who own property are on
vacation. I think it'll be very hard to get answers in August. So I would extend 90 or 120 days to get the full amount of research done to make them. So I think how I was envisioning is we would have 60 days to give them ideas and then 60
days which would start in September when everybody's back to get results right so we could come up with uh you know have our dropbox of saying here's my idea here's my idea here's my idea and then that'll be what middle of September and
then the staff will have 60 days to evaluate those or if they have any of their own and they come back 60 days after that with a menu of options No delay. We take a vote and we move forward. I second that.
Commissioner Fernandez, then Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh, and thank you, Commissioner Magazine, for for for that motion. Um, I I support your motion. Um, I think one of the things that we have not done, though, we have approached
individual property owners. Commissioner Bod, thank you for leading that very thorough process. I know you are very much invested in um in handling this in a very responsible way and approaching uh potential land owners on about the
possibility of partnering with the city. I don't think we've ever really put out there an RFLI an RLI to ask private property owners that we have not engaged with, hey listen, are you looking to develop your property? Are you looking
to do something with your property? are you willing to enter into a public private partnership with the city and accommodate this as part as part of your of of your project? And so, you know, for for for as long as we are looking at
options, uh, Commissioner Ma Magazine, I think you're taking a very responsible approach. Um, I would just suggest, you know, let's put out there an RFLI and see and see if there is interest out there uh from from private property
owners to work with the city and including this as part of any project that that they might be looking to to do within the city. And I don't know if you're willing to incorporate that as part of your motion. I'm not dogmatic about this. I'm not dogmatic. This isn't personal to
me. uh we're all going to have to give a little bit here and whatever the right solution is that comes back, we move forward with this because it's not about what we personally and prof there's a whole ecosystem that goes into this. Public safety, financial considerations,
um you know, how how quickly we can get things done. So, the more options that we have at our disposal, the better. So, I'll welcome that. Yeah. And and I just checked with our city manager and he's he seems fine with that with doing an RFI. Yeah. Po for poor Eric doesn't feel his best today.
Um I have be sure to take Zakam uh during lunch break. Um you know the one thing I have always said about the park location. It is not a great solution. It's it is
it is an important solution but only out of necessity. It was never the ideal solution. It was never a great solution. Clearly, no one likes the idea of touching green space. Whether it's active park space, whether it's utilized
or not, it's green space. It's open space. It's uh it's permeable space for the water. It's open space just for to have a a good good urban planning. So, it was never a great solution. It was
imperfect from from from the get-go, but it was a necessity and and that's and that's our priority. Public safety is our priority. I've always felt very comfortable exploring this because we were always unanimous as was
highlighted. We were either 70 or 60, but there was never a dissenting voice or or a dissenting vote in this process. And so and so for as long as we are going out there and looking for another
location, seeing clearly that we have at least two dissenting votes for the park location. You know, touching green space is a big move and we should only continue doing that if there really is a
strong backing of the commission. In fact, no, there's three voices against against having it at on the green space. Commissioner Rosson Gonzalez, you sent an email today saying you don't support it at at the park. Commissioner Magazine
has repeatedly uh said he doesn't support it at the park and Commissioner Suarez has said he doesn't support it at at the park. Actually said that too in my remarks. Okay. And there you go. And and Mayor Miner. So there so there's already four four voices saying saying that this does
not belong at at the park. It's a hard band-aid to pull off because we want to move forward. We want to deliver this highly necessary public safety infrastructure and as we just heard from our fire chief, the busiest
fire station in the nation with the density that we have in this area. So clearly there is an urgent need for this critical infrastructure facility in the heart of South Beach. But clearly Flamingo Park is not going
to be the location. I I think I think that that writing is clearly on the wall. And I think and and and and for as much as this location was raised with good intentions and the voters countywide backed placing it in this
space and the Miami Beach residents backed placing it in this space and even the Flamingo Park voting precinct uh voted in favor of placing it in this space. the commission today is not is not aligned in in placing it
there any anymore. And so I'm not against today saying you know what it is time to take that option off the table and let's go ahead and just focus on what it can be. We know it can't be the the Southshore Community Center. We know
it can't be Flamingo Park. We know um we know Fire Station One has its very unique challenges. So, Commissioner Magazine has this motion. Let's go out there, look for different options. Let's go out there, do an RFLI, and come back in 60 days, give feedback to our
administration, get them some more time so they can come back with something solid. Uh, but clearly clearly today, you know, it I don't think this commission is is going to be moving forward in and keeping that there. And let's just pull that band-aid off. O
otherwise the residents that have come out they're just going to keep coming out to speak about this and it's their time is their energy is the stability that they deserve. Is it is it the perfect solution or or or or is it the perfect
sit situation to be at today? No, it's not the perfect situation to be at today. Commissioner Bod, is it highly frustrating? It is very highly frustrating. It feels like deja vu. We keep on having this discussion because the reality is there will never be the
perfect site. South South Fifth doesn't want it. People in certain areas of West Avenue don't want it. People don't want it further in the middle of Flamingo Park. So, it's going to be very difficult, incredibly difficult to find
the right location for this. And I am convinced the only way we will land on a location that everyone will be ultimately able to agree upon is if we work with the private sector. What do
people have? What assets do people own on Alton Road that they may want to develop and be willing to incorporate a fire station in? The one thing I've heard is that is that people are against it being in the park, but people are not against the fire station being on Alton
Road. And that stands out to me. What assets do people own on Fifth Street? Scott Needleman has brought up a number of times the the Walgreens there, you know, and on Fifth Street on Fifth Street. And I know perhaps we have
reached out, but we haven't reached out to the open market in general and placed out a request for interests uh from the general marketplace of property owners out there. Let's do that and see like how we did with Lincoln Road. We partnered with the private sector and
we're delivering solutions for the residents on Lincoln Road where the taxpayers are getting a 200% return on their investment. Well, perhaps this is one point, one such instance where we might need to partner up with the private sector and find the right solution. So, Commissioner Magazine, I
support you. Um, I also support us incorporating into that doing an RFI into into the private sector. And, uh, Commissioner Suarez, I think I think you have the support today to to to get um the fire station out of consideration.
And Commissioner Bond, I give you my admiration because you really worked very hard on this. Uh we've collaborated a lot on this issue and I know how frustrating it is to find ourselves at this point. Again, it is very frustrating to us. I know it's very
frustrating to the members of the GOB oversight committee, but I think it's just better to rip that band-aid now. Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez. So, I just want to understand, Commissioner Fernandez, you're saying take Flamingo Park off the table today. Can we take the Southshore Community
Center off the table today because it already is. You passed it 61 last year. Well, but this doesn't take it back off the table. I mean, is it still on the table? That would be my uh big worry because as we've gone through this process, first it went south of Fifth.
You have a lot of um organized, affluent, educated people and they said we don't want it here. Well, actually that's not true. First, it was supposed to go into Flamingo Park where the Police Athletic League was. And actually, I helped run a campaign to take it out of Flamingo Park the first time. Then we tried to move it south of
Fifth to the Dock Park and they organized. Then what what upsets me so much about all of this is the people who didn't have a voice, who um English is not their first language, our hospitality workers and the working class of Miami Beach. we just decided to
plop it in the middle of their neighborhood and it didn't matter if it was servicing seniors or servicing children. Um those people had no voice. And so when we came up with this solution for the park, did we want to put it in a park? No. Why should we have to sacrifice a park or a community
center to get a fire station? And that is why my resolution is build it where it currently is. Now, former commissioner Griico came forward today and said, "Oh, there's a sewer pump there." But you guys have plans to put the Police Athletic League there. So, you're saying that it's okay for underprivileged children to occupy a
facility next to a sewer station, but a a bunch of muscly guys, firefighters can't take it. What I'm saying is that there is always a way to remediate. We have a slot right there. We have the
funding right there. We have the piece of property where it has been functioning for decades right there and all of our arrival times are working. We don't have any complaints at all. A lot of those calls are EMS calls that you're getting there, not necessarily fire
calls. And I'm not saying that we should sacrifice anything, but we have a piece of land. We have that piece of land. We also have the new bikini hostel, which is right there. Possibly we could take it and put it where the bikini hostel is. I know. Uh, you know, Tap Tap is for sale on Fifth Street. And by the way,
that property has been on sale for a long time now. And you could probably negotiate Tap Tap for a very uh good price because if you needed to rebuild part of it where it currently is. And then if you need a space to put a couple of trucks, just buy Tap Tap and have your big what are they called?
Ladder. Big ladder trucks on Fifth Street right there. Okay. bec because by the way those big trucks are very intrusive for that neighborhood which is a primarily multif family residential neighborhood. So I mean I agree with this. I love the
fact that we're going to take some time. I hate the fact that we're going to wait because there are serious economic uh consequences to all of this waiting as we've waited over the years um we've lost um millions of dollars. But the
point is is when you put it in a place that it shouldn't have gone in in the first place and then insisted upon that place a Morris lapidous building a building servicing um our poorest of a poor you know it takes a village and the communities that move forward are the
ones that help those who might not have the ability to help themselves. So, Commissioner Bot, I know that this was a mammoth effort and Andre Sassion and Kobe Karp and Commissioner Fernandez and um so what I would say and I I hate to
do this the fire department is that we should extend it for are we saying 120 days now to come back with um and we're removing the So, would that be the motion? Commissioner Magazine, will you add to your motion? We take Flamingo Park off the table. We wait 120 days and
we come back with um and we come back with uh creative solutions including I bet you you can pick up Tap Tap for probably make an offer for $4 million. It's an estate by the way. I mean the the man died. Nobody has wanted to uh
purchase it. It could just be a huge bay and with something on top of it to accommodate the largest trucks. I thought that was going to be the Haitian cysteine chapel. I try. It's I was listen I was going to the county to try to save it with a Haitian cultural center and uh now the county
has a series I I saying just I know but it's true I I would hate to I would hate to see that happen when when this comes back with I I want to see all recommendations whether they're on the table off the table whatever they may be in 120 days and I'm going to put a motion then that we make
a vote and it I'm going to talk to legal about how it would be irreversible or things like that. I don't care what's on the table, what's off the table. Alls I know is I want to see every and all option possible so we can make a collective decision in 120 days, move
forward, give the firemen and women the station that they deserve, the station our city deserves and not look back. So then I'll defer my resolution too in case we don't come up with anything else. Eric, we uh we started with 60 days, now it's appears once. Do you do you need
that much time? I I mean, I want to give you the time that you need, but not not anymore. I obviously if we're changing direction on this, then I'm going to need every bit of a 4mon period to analyze
everything as to what is potentially in the best interest of the city. Um, you know, obviously I am very interested in providing the infrastructure needs of our fire department as soon as possible
in the most efficient and cost-effective way. Um, and I'm going to need some time to do that evaluation. Mr. Mayor, yeah, and before I call in Commissioner Suarez, thank you for your all the comments, but Commissioner Fernandez, your comments. And you mentioned that there was uh zero descent. I don't know
if you meant that literally, but uh a resident reminded me that when this came up, I had expressed my concerns. I I even said that I don't think this will ever happen, which is actually happening right now. Um besides and and it's obviously the park and what's what's doing what's right for our city, but
also um we were putting on an extra 1520$20 million price tag, which uh which was quite a bit, but I don't I don't think that's the impediment happening. No, I understand. I understand. Uh Commissioner Suarez, Mr. Mayor, thank you. Um,
look, I I I echo what Commissioner Fernandez said. We we really do need to rip the band-aid off and I think the residents have come out and and really spoken about this that this site should be off the table. Um, because the
commission is broken on this. I I understand the need to to possibly keep all options on the table. I mean, I that should be reciprocal with Southshore Community Center, but it's not. I'm not particularly in favor of of putting it there at the Southshore Community
Center, but I for sure 100% I'm opposed to putting the fire station in Flamingo Park because of the precedent um that it's going to set and the damage it's going to do to to to the park's overall essence. And so I I'm I could be fully
supportive of Commissioner Magazine's initiative to really perhaps maybe call a special meeting um in in a certain period of time, 100 days, 120 days, but I'd like to walk away today and I and I'm I'm pretty sure the residents who
are watching today and who are in the audience would would not like to be hung out to dry and and get another 3 4 months of waiting. meeting to to to see if this um fire station is going to
be built uh in our community park. So, Commissioner Magazine, I respectfully ask you to amend your motion to uh remove Flamingo Park u track off the table for for consideration because I
think the votes up here already um already signal that that we're not going to really want to do that. Um, and let's at least give the courtesy to the residents here in Miami Beach who are looking or watching uh that it's not
going to be there. Well, we just lost your Commissioner Magazine. There's a motion and a second on the table. Why don't we call the vote? I think we should wait for Commissioner Magazine to come back because this is a big item and if we need to wait, we can
also go to public comment. Um, but Commissioner Magn, here's the thing. Um, we have we know what this option looks like, right? So, we don't need any more information. Uh, we've signaled that
it's not going here. Um, so I don't know if it matters if we include it, exclude it. We could exclude it, right? But we actually have this information. So, in 120 days when we come to vote on it, if there's seven people up here or even
four people to go, you know what? Thanks. But these options are actually lukewarm to me, I'm going to put it back in the park. Certainly, that's a possibility. If there's four people then at that time that want to do so. Um, so given that we actually have the
information for the SSC and also Flamingo Park, it's really immaterial if we include them, exclude them when it comes time to vote. We're going to do so with a plethora of all of our options. So, I'm fine either way. Um,
but if you respectfully I would like, you know, like I said, Commissioner Magazine, respectfully, uh, you know, there's a lot of people here watching. There's a lot of people very passionate about this particular location not being included. I think we
owe it to them not to drag them along for another 3 4 months and then possibly have them come back again uh in 3 4 months to to to also oppose this location. I mean the votes are here to exclude it.
Okay. Well, I I' I'd like this to be I'd like, you know, I I'd like us to be almost unanimous on this. I think it's I think it's important that, you know, we we don't I I I think the commissions in the past have gotten a real bad habit of
kind of kicking the can down the road, just letting these options out uh for for time to pass on. let's make a decision today moving, you know, that this is not the appropriate step for um
for our community. Um I think we just look, we need to take a bold stance and and say, look, we definitely don't want it here. We see what it looks like. People have come out, people that we've never seen uh have spoken and they vehemently do not want it here. Um, and
I think I mean, as co-sponsor to your item, and I came out unequivocally and said I I don't ever see myself putting it there, uh, I think that's a bold stance. Now, whether the rest of the body wants to include it or exclude it, I'll let you all make that call. Obviously, by me
saying I never am going to vote for it to put it in the park by de facto, that's my vote to exclude it. Uh, but if there's four or five other people that say I want that option on the table, then you all can collectively decide. Uh, I'm fine excluding it, but if
there's um I think Mr. Mayor, if just for just for procedure, how about we just call my the original item first and then we can see where the votes lie and then we can see um if the the new motion put on the table today. Um
you have to vote on the motion that was just made. Commissioner Fernandez, I would just I would just say clearly again when when this was started, I know Mr. Mayor, you desanted voiced concerns,
but the votes were ultimately the votes were unanimous. the vote all along the process as Commissioner Bot mentioned in in her presentation and and again Commissioner Bot has worked so hard on this issue and I can only you know I cannot begin to understand the
level of frustration she must have uh as I'm sure our fire department the men and women that have to deal with with with the conditions and the challenges at Fire Station One and the administration that's been working with us. It is incredibly frustrating.
This process was started unanimously all along the way. This is no longer a unanimous decision. And if touching green space, recreational park green space requires a vote of the electorate, I think it also
should require a strong unified position of the city commission, of the governing body of this city. This cannot be a divided position that some of us want it there and some of us do not. No like this is this is precious asset and we all have to be united in this. So given
that we are no longer united now we're being unanimous and placing it there. I think we owe it to our administration that it's going to be going through a process the clarity
of just saying today, let's just we're we're just going to take it off the table. And so, Commissioner Magazine, I I would I would just say, let's just amend your item. Let's amend your your your motion to make it clear. Okay, we're going to go out there. We're going
to give 60 days for ideas, another 60 days to explore um those results, do a do an RFLI, and make it clear today, we're just ripping the band-aid and taking fire station um out of out of this green space. And again, if not only
for the clarity, for the respect of all the people who will continue to mobilize and activate and send emails and be concerned about this. And I don't I don't want to I don't want to continue causing our residents to be concerned
and activating and collecting signatures and showing up at meetings if it's not necessary. Mhm. Commissioner Bot. So, um there the the motion then would be taking this off the table and taking Southshore Community Center off the
table and evaluating all other options. Yes. Yes. That is what I would vote for. I don't want to have to choose between a community center or a park. And I think that's where we've been for a long time. We have to give the direction, find a
new new spot, which is why I say build it. Build it where it is. We have we have a spot. It's good enough for the PAL. It can be good enough for the firefighters. And everybody on this commission is comfortable with um subverting the will of the residents of the city of Miami
Beach in every single precinct, including the Flamingo Park precinct. Can I respond to that, Commissioner Rosa Gonzalez? I I Commissioner Brock, I know that, but the ballot question just said public safety. It it wasn't clear. People did
not know where or what that meant. Oh, it was clear when they voted for it. Well, no, it was clear. It said, you know, for public safety, would you give up this portion? But if you were to go out here and ask 50 people in Flamingo Park if they understood what the ballot question really was and what we were
planning on doing, they would tell you, "No, we voted for this, but we didn't want this." And that's why you got the save Flamingo Park afterward. I mean, if you really wanted, we could put another ballot question on. It would cost us nothing in November and just say, "Would
you want to put the fire station in Flamingo Park? Would you want to put the fire station in the Southshore Community Center?" Let the electorate finally weigh in and save and and you know, save these two uh buildings. Uh it's not
going to cost us anything to put these questions on the ballot. It's not even about running a campaign. I don't want to. But I don't I don't think that I mean that way you would know if the electorate really did. I think if you told them we're going to put the fire station in Flamingo Park the way that we were
um it would be troublesome if it were up to me. I would wait the 120 days and let's come back with a whole menu. But I would really today let's I understand where you're coming from because of all the work we've done
with that design. But you know what? Just because we vote for that right now doesn't mean that in 120 days. Mr. I don't know. I I can't see us ever voting for it because it really would it would kind of box in the track. It's not
that it would intrude upon the track. But you have constructions on one side. If you put constructions on the other, you get kind of a hot box instead of the a like breeze. And that's why people are upset about that because they want to be able to to breathe. Commissioner Bot. Then Commissioner Magazine is going to bring us home.
I would strongly encourage my colleagues to support 120 days. Half of which is to find every conceivable option. The other half of which is to try to bring one or
two of those forward as the best options and in doing so not removing anything from the table. The work has been done. So this drama of you know swearing feelalty to one person or
another is is absurd. Let's put every option on the table. Every option doesn't mean every but two. Every option means every and then we can all make an informed decision.
Thank you commissioner magazine. So not to complicate matters um because I am going to bring this home. Mr. Mayor, I will vote to exclude Flamingo Park uh from this cuz that seems to be the temperature of my colleagues. That
being said, whether it be this or one of the other options that are quote unquote excluded, we can sit here, we reverse decisions all the time, and if it's the will in 120 days that there are seven people up here that want to put it in a park, then they're going to vote to put it in a park, whether we include it,
excluded. So, this is kind of all mini drama. uh up here now. So, I'll amend the motion to exclude Flamingo Park. Now, um I will not backtrack on my word ever about voting to put it in Flamingo
Park. Uh but just a forewarn, just because it is technically excluded uh from here on this motion doesn't mean that if there's the will of four people in 120 days to put it there that this decision cannot be reversed. So this is,
you know, we're making kind of much ado about nothing because we actually already have these plans for Flamingo Park and other options where just because we're excluding it now doesn't mean in 120 days that vote can't include this. That will not be my vote. Um so I
will happily amend the motion to exclude Flamingo Park now. Uh but for better or for worse, whatever is included or excluded at this point can simply be reversed in 120 days anyway. So this is so much much to do about nothing. If it's symbolic, then will you add in
the community center too? Um it it's I'll repeat the same exact uh soapbox drama that I just gave whatever it may be. Um but there's going to come a point in time in 120 days where we make a vote and everything is on the
table, right? That's it's just how legislation works. Let's call the vote. So what was the motion? It was only taking Flamingo Park off the table. If this is just a symbolic motion, then would you also take the Southshore Community Center? Would you add that on? Sure. Whatever the colleagues want to do.
Okay, that's the motion. I'll second. Let's call the vote. So, just to clarify, you've accepted the amendment that Southshore Community is also off the table that Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez has offered. Yeah, city staff doesn't have to come back with those options. We already have uh the full information, things like
that. So, uh, we just, you know, we'll have a full menu of options of how to advance. Okay. I have a motion by Commissioner Magazine, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez. It includes the 60 days of ideas, the additional 60 days of exploration, RFli.
Well, it can we do more than we should we we should do more than 60 days because we're going into a summer. So, let's make it 90 days to include commissioner. Okay. So, so 90 plus 60 is that what? No, 90 total. No.
Well, we're going to do 60 days to come up with community administration and elected sourced ideas and then and yes and then city staff will have 60 days to evaluate that. If you come back
and say, "Hey, we're making progress, but we need another 30 days," we can amend that. But whether it's after 120 days or 150 days, I'm going to do everything within my power to make sure that that vote happens and we never look back from it.
Try to stick to the 120. Okay. That's Raphael. Yeah. So 60. Got to get moving. RFLI. Uh Flamingo Park excluded, Southshore Park excluded. All in favor? I. Anyone opposed?
Hearing none. The item is approved. 70. For the record, the the 120 days would take us to November 20th. The next commission meeting after that is December 17th. So, we would bring this item back on December 17th. Yeah. And it is possible as I think
Commissioner Suarez says obviously uh you want to come back in 60 days first. Okay. We could call a special commission meeting just to discuss this, but we'll play that by year. So, ignore the that date then. Uh do you want what do you want to do with these three items that were there originally?
Are these now withdrawn and now a new uh resolution takes place? I'll withdraw. Okay. So So you are withdrawing C7 Commissioner. Y So Commissioner Suarez, are you withdrawing then C7 AF? Sure. But I don't think we want to
withdraw Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez's because that's actually one of the ideas to put forward uh as part of this menu of items we'd like to see returned. So C7 A is deferred to whenever the whole bulk of the items come back. Yes, just defer mine. So withdrawing C7 AF, deferring C7 A
withdrawing C7A. I I Okay, I have a question. If we're in the election cycle in November and now we have a month-long um let's say that we have runoffs or something the monthlong runoffs. So what who is
serving at the commission meeting in November is it the current electeds are serving until the new electeds are appointed which is on the first Monday after the second Tuesday in December. But I but I think what Ralph said is there is after the second Tuesday in December. Ralph, there is you were just
giving the November 20. There's no commission meeting. There is no commission meeting. No commission in November. He was just telling us when the dates run and the next commission meeting is December 17. We don't have and then the next one is December 17th. December 17th. And what is our art Basle this year? Do we know
Art Basle? Yes, I know that it's uh December 3rd through the 7th. You all have your calendars with you, by the way, if you want to look at it. It's the first Saturday after the second Monday. Okay, I think we can resolve this offline. Why
don't we take our lunch break? Uh uh we'll reconvene at 1:30. Usually we come back at 1:00, but obviously that's only 12 minutes. Now 1:30 Sutnik hour. I love you. You are Heat. Heat.
Heat up here. Data. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. N. Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat.
Happy. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. Make it make Don't
like you. Can you find it? I'll be Heat. Heat. feeling like feel Wonder. Hey.
Hey. Hey. I'm a honey. until the red. All right. Feel All right. All right.
Heat. Hey, Heat. I want you. I want you. What do you do? Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. N.
Data data dict. Heat. Heat. Hey, hey, hey. Hey. Hey. Hey. Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey.
Heat. Heat. hold you. Hey Heat up Everything. Heat. Heat. Love you. Make Make
it back. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey. All day. Hey
Hello. Hey. Hey. Feel well. All right. All right. Heat. Heat. N. Black. Hey. Hey. One more.
Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Data da n d. Heat. Heat. N. Hey. Hey. Hey. Today, Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey.
Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. All right. Happy birthday. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Are you
Are you Make it make that How do you feel there? Heat. Heat. N. Hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey.
One day I want you. Everything. Heat. Heat. 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. Thank you uh for bearing with us as we had a little bit shortened uh lunchtime, working lunch as as I say. But uh why
don't we continue with our sutnik I don't want to say hour because I don't the afternoon session is generally not an hour. Ralph thank you mayor. If anyone is here in the audience and wishes to speak please approach the podium. Uh our first caller via zoom is Daniel. Daniel please state
your name address and you have two minutes. unmute yourself. Yes. Hi, thank you. Daniel Seraldo, Commission Candidate Group 1, 7:30 10th Street. And I'm here to urge you to vote no on item R7B, warrant request for 3611
and 3612 Collins Avenue. This is not just a routine warrant request. It is a test of our values of whether we stand by the principles of historic preservation that define Miami Beach. These are not just old buildings. They are designated historic landmarks listed
on the National Register. They're still intact, though neglected by the current owners who are asking for the same warrant. And this these properties are absolutely capable of being part of a revised, more respectful plan. The proposal before you uses state law 1526
to bypass local preservation rules raises serious legal and ethical questions and the warrant being considered today would grant additional development rights based on a false premise that these buildings no longer matter. More study is needed to determine how much F would actually be
available without the historic buildings that are currently on the site. This calculation is critical and rushing ahead without it risk setting a dangerous precedent that rewards demolition by neglect. As we know, the zoning laws in Collins Waterfront District were written with historic
buildings on these sites. So, the maximum F cannot be the same if they're just going to be vacant lots to build another luxury high-rise. If we grant this warrant today, we lose all leverage to negotiate a better outcome. But if you vote no, you bring the owners back
to the table to work with the community on a project that respects both our past and our future. This is your chance to show that historic preservation means something in Miami Beach. Not just when it's easy, but when it counts. Thank you. And also for those interested, you could visit my website where I have a
letter to the Chipriani family at daniel formiam beach.org. Thank you. Go ahead, sir. State your name, address. You have two minutes. Sure. My name is Tomas Kennedy. I uh live in the mainland 6601 Northwest first place uh Miami, Florida 33150. But
I wanted to come here and and uh thank you uh Commissioner Fernandez and the rest of the commission regarding item uh I believe C7 Y uh you know Miami Beach has always been a a place that has welcomed people uh fleeing tyranny, fleeing genocide. It's been a place uh
where people have sought refuge and also it's a place where the economy is dependent on on tourism, right? It's it's supposed to be a welcoming place. So, I think that this item really reaffirms not just that history, but also puts uh the city's best face forward to ensure that it continues to
be a welcoming and thriving place. So, I think it it's a it's a great item and I again I appreciate the support. Thank you. Thank you. Our next virtual caller, I just want to Mr. Fernandez. Thank you. And I just want to put for the record for for anyone that's that's waiting, item C7Y was passed unanimously
with a consent agenda. So, but thank you to the gentleman who spoke. Thank you. Thank you. Our next virtual caller is State Representative Basabi. Please state your name, address, and you have two minutes. Hi everybody, it's Fabian Basabi, Nine
Island Avenue. Hope you all had a good lunch in a nice, clean, and sanitary place. You all talk about public safety, you talk about fiscal responsibility, you talk about dignity for everyone else, but where is the dignity for our firefighters? Right now, the men and women who risk their lives to protect
the city are working in a fire station where raw sewage backs up all the time. They show up to be your heroes and instead they're shoveling human waste. They're literally wet vacuuming it before starting their shift. And you guys let this item go on and on for
years. You chase their endorsements during campaign season. You stand next to them for photo ops. But when it comes time to actually fight for their working conditions, there's silence, no urgency, no decision, no respect. I realize many of our firefighters do not live or vote
in Miami Beach. But that should never determine the value we place on service. These are people we count on in emergencies, and we have left them to work in conditions that we would never ever tolerate anywhere else. Let's be honest, if this were a hotel or a private business, the city would have
shut them down without hesitation. But because this is city, it's a silly city facility and not politically convenient. You guys continue to delay. I do not support building over any public uh parkland. But this is not about the location anymore. This is about leadership. It's about basic decency.
Fix the problem. Move the station. Rebuild it. Do something. Just stop pretending that public safety matters. If you guys cannot provide your first responders with a clean, safe place to work. If you're not willing to solve it, then maybe you should all volunteer to clean up Station One yourselves because
right now you're asking our firefighters to do it for you. Enough is enough, guys. It's time to act on this. Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner say Grio. Yes. Um, good afternoon everybody. Michael Grio. Uh, I wanted to touch on
two things. Both of which are kind of nebulous, so just kind of bear with me. So, I was joking around about the number 410. It's my favorite number because it's how long it took to build the Empire State Building. And if you look at all of these projects that are
popping up on the city agenda, and I'm not talking just about the fire station, but whether it be, you know, West Avenue, you know, South of Fifth, whether it be, you know, more projects than you can count things up in North Beach. Um, there's only one thing that everybody in this room and everybody
listening and watching that we all have in common. It's time or the lack thereof. And I just want to remind you all, as we were reminded when I served on the commission and as a state representative, that we owe it to the constituents, to the residents, to
ourselves. You know, you have a limited time amount of time up there and try to get things done quicker. you know, to to quote Commissioner Bot, you know, the the the perfection is the enemy. You know, you've got to really at some point you just got to lay it down and make a
decision and and not kick the can down the road. So, that's that's a little bit of advice from a retired commissioner. And then the other the other piece of it is, you know, I was listening earlier to the the item on the Ritz project and and the the 100 block of Lincoln Road, and
that's another one that's taken a long time. And you know, we want to talk about public safety. We want to talk about development, but where is the economic development? You know, the positive foot traffic that Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez was talking about that's going to be generated by having the
driver's license bureau available on in the city. Um, these are important things and I am not seeing any economic development coming from this city. I don't see anybody pushing to fill those empty storefronts on Washington, on Collins, on 41st Street, areas that really need positive foot traffic. And
I'll leave you with this that Teddy Pendergrass, you know, told you to turn the lights off, but if you want to really impact uh public safety, it's not about police presence. It's about lighting and turning the lights on. So, with that, thank you guys. Thank you.
Thank you. Yeah, if I could just comment, we had a couple of uh Thank you for the callers, but I I will remind people who may be just tuning in today that I am very proud of this commission on we'll start with infrastructure projects that had been stalled and
please excuse me that had been stalled for years and this commission and I'll give Commissioner Fernandez who's head land use who who uh who spearheaded those that have now not only have some of them started started,
but they've been completed and others are in the process of being completed. So, this commission has has done a lot. And then recently, we had the Bikini Hostel that's been a blight. We've now resolved that. The Doleville, whichever you believe about it, something had to go there. We've now uh resolved that.
So, this commission is acting. Yes, there are certain areas that uh certainly as we discussed the fire station that unfortunately has taken us a long time, but that even precedes this commission. So, I'm I'm uh I I have to remind people that we are acting and
moving and as far as lighting that this commission continues to add lighting in multiple areas and uh yes, there's more to do, but we're not ignoring it. There's many items on the agendas that we get to to discuss uh retail. I mean, it's a great point and it's certainly something we're hoping I'll give a
little pressure to our new economic development director, Steve Anthony. Uh there he is. Uh but um and certainly an issue worth noting and certainly one that our commission is very mindful of. Our next virtual caller is has a screen
name of Inz's iPhone. INZ, please state your name, address, and you have two minutes. Uh yes, is Flax at 1500 Ocean Drive. This is not concerning any of the items on your agenda and it's more of a question. I have a neighbor who recently
has called me because where she lives, the condo that she leaves, um, Airbnb are legal. They're allowed and she doesn't have a problem with that. What she's concerned is that those rooms are being occupied
uh by um much higher than the occupancy that is allowed. She says that there's sometimes 8 to 12 people to a room and she's just concerned for her own safety when this uh apartments are being the the uh the occupancy is being you know
overwhelmingly being uh by you know by many many residents. So just wonder um who can help in the city. She wants to be anonymous. She's afraid of harassment and intimidation within her own community. So if someone can help with
this issue, I would appreciate they call me. That's all. State your name, address. I have two minutes. Good afternoon, uh, commissioners, Mayor Miner. Uh, it's nice to appear here once in support of something, uh, the
commission is doing. Um, I'm here to congratulate all of you for your unanimous passage of item C7Y. Uh, I congratulate you, Commissioner Fernandez, uh, for introducing it. You, Commissioner Bot, for co-sponsoring it.
Uh, let me just say a couple of words that I think reflect your vote. The current frenzy of hatred that our state and federal government has directed at an immigrant communities will be
remembered with shame by history. The TV and newspaper images of mass men wrestling down men and women in the streets should horrify us all. It is well to remember that the immigrants who law enforcement treats as
criminals, people who have come to this country for the same reasons our parents, our grandparents, and our greatgrandparents came here to escape violence and persecution. Offering comfort and welcome to the stranger is an ethical principle deeply
baked into all of our religions. This resolution reflects that profound principle. More than that, it will send an important message to public officials in Florida and elsewhere that Miami Beach reaffirms its commitment, a
commitment that has made to marginalized groups in the past to treat all members of its community with the decency and dignity they deserve. Thank you for your unanimous consent to that resolution. I'm sorry, but I didn't catch your name. I'm sorry.
Your name? I didn't I'm sorry. Alan Lavine. and I reside on Miami Beach. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Our next virtual caller is Larry Schaefer. Larry Schaefer, 2338 Street. Um, I'd like to issue a correction regarding my
comments with Commissioner Magazine and Jason Green. Uh, Mr. Magazine did call me and did discuss the budget and then we started talking about developments and other matters like the vision for the city. So, he did get in contact with and Mr. Green probably uh heard that and so we're going to try to just
communicate more after that. Um next topic, I'd like to encourage candidates to call in and share your opinion on as many topics as possible. We just heard Daniel Seraldo. It would be so wonderful to hear from the other candidates. Spread the word of how you would run the city. Reach out. Uh I will support you as a person even if I don't support your
position on the issues. We really appreciate when people take time out of their lives to run for office and share their issues. Um, regarding water quality issue, Faban Bisab has money at the state level to to remedy the situation. And I think there's why aren't we working together
with the state or even the county to fix these issues. Uh, Mr. Carpenter has been here for what, like 12 years initially in public works. So, he knows all about the water quality issues and he has not solved the problem the entire time he's been here. Now, Mr. Mayor and Mr. Carpenter, this problem is yours. You
need to pick it up. The water quality issue is urgent. It's a public health issue and we need to have a public hearing. We have a right to call public hearing in the city charter to bring everyone to the table in a town hall format hopefully to address the water quality issues. We need real answers. Are people getting sick from water
that's in the baseball field across from Park View Canal? Have we notified the buyers of 72 Park that they have water quality issues and they should steer clear of certain things? Should we send kids back to school at Biscane Elementary when we know the water is is foul and that water is going to be on the grounds? Should we be building a
playground on on on an area that has pollution? We have serious public health concerns. Mr. Depico, can we have a public hearing on this matter? Thank you very much. Thank you. Go ahead, sir. Andreion 1000 South Point Drive. Uh, mayor and commissioners, I just want to
say that we really need to be doing wow projects in our city, you know, and and projects that people come over and say, "How do we do this in our city?" when they walk into the projects in our city, you know, is our PAL facility a WOW facility? Are
our fire stations WOW fire stations? Are people going to walk in there and say, "How can we copy this in our city?" We don't have facilities like this. So, when you're thinking about the fire station or the new POW or whatever it is that you're doing, make it wow. Don't just say, "Let me just find any piece of
property where we can possibly fit this in and and and make it work." You know, think above and beyond. Think bigger than what we're doing. Think greater. Um, with that being said, I also want to bring up something that's been uh bothering me for a while. For past few
years, I've been talking to several of you that the exit ramp off of the MacArthur Causeway heading onto Biscane Boulevard is a one- lane exit. They've been planning on that one lane, which opens up to four lanes for a while. We've had a one lane exit that opens up
to four lanes for the past 30 years. And right now they're spending over a billion dollars on that bridge and that exit. And it's still going to be a one lane opening up to four lanes. There's going to be three towers built on Watson Island. There's going to be about eight towers built right off of that exit,
which were not there before and are not there now. And that exit bottlenecks constantly and backs up the Macarthur Causeway for a lot of our residents as well as guests that come here that are leaving our beaches. It's going to be a problem and we need to work together
with the state uh the county uh and try to do a power of eminent domain to buy out some of the land that's adjacent to that exit in order to be able to expand that before the five buildings get built on the Miami Herald site and uh and think of that in advance because if not
we're going to hurt it ourselves here in Miami Beach with that exit. Thank you. Thank you Commissioner Dominguez. I'll just chime in that um I have been working with the Palm Hibiscus Star Island Neighborhood Association and we've had meetings with FDOT and there's
been multiple so they're aware we're on the case and thank you for bringing it up. Our next our next virtual caller is Janessa Strode. Janessa, unmute yourself. You have two minutes. Okay. Hello. Good afternoon. I want to
bring up the I was going to bring up about the water quality as well being off on the bay um and people wanting to be able to access you know the water safely. I have a four-year-old myself just seems like the sign on Dickens over
at like 72nd has just been up there for years really talking about the water quality. So that's a huge issue. I also want to bring up something that I know is not directly funded by Miami Beach, but that hopefully you guys can stand behind and
I maybe something can be done about the animal shelters at uh Medley and Durell not having any air conditioning and these dogs are literally like stroking out and having heat stroke. Um it's just really upsetting to know that that's
happening. I don't know exactly what can be done about it except for more funding being given to them. I don't know if you guys can maybe develop a letter or something that you can excuse me write to the justice please um write to the county about that would be a great thing
to do and just something I really wanted to speak about. Thank you for your time. Thank you so much. Go ahead sir. Hey Eric, I know we've Can you just summarize briefly and we've had a couple callers about the water quality and this just briefly some the steps we've taken.
So through uh many legislative initiatives and direction from this commission including Operation Clean Water, uh we have spent in excess of $2.5 million to date and we have another
$2.5 million programmed to think of out ofthe-box solutions. Uh we've been working with a consulting firm. We've been working with the folks at um the elementary school and we've
been working with our counterparts at the county to try to come up with new and different solutions in addition to the great work that's been done by Dr. Solo Gabrielle uh which has clearly
shown that this is primarily a storm water issue um and that that storm water is not inconsistent with other storm water issues across the state and across the country and across the world. Um but
we are continuing to push the envelope on this and you have our commitment that we will leave no stone unturned. I have a question, Eric. Questions. Um, when is it being dredged? When is the Park View Canal being dredged? Number one. And number two, when are we
retrofitting the storm water drains with those fluorescent lights that supposedly get rid of the bacteria before it drains? Those are really the two big things that we need to do. And um I don't know where they are scheduled, but so I'd ask Amy Nolles, our um chief
resilience officer and director of environment and sustainability. Sure. Um good afternoon, Commissioner. So I'll take the the dredging item first. Um our staff has uh done a lot of studies with the consultants on a flushing analysis and the type of dredging that would work in the area. Um you know, it's there's not a lot of
flushing. It's a slowmoving canal and they're trying to determine uh what level of dredging would be appropriate that could actually make a difference. And we haven't received resolution on that yet. So, we're going to continue to move forward on it, but um we certainly don't want to spend $2.5 million to
dredge and not have it fix the water quality problems. Um so, that definitely needs to come back to the commission at the right time and we're exploring some other kind of exciting alternatives. The second item is the UV disinfection. So that one is to not disinfect um storm
water exactly um because that can't be done but to disinfect areas on the roadway so that that bacteria doesn't go then go into the storm water system. So that one the plan is completely ready. We just now have another agreement from that we took back to our attorney's
office. So it's just some back and forth but that is on 73rd Street. There's three different areas and we'll study um we're actually got the equipment donated to sterilize the actual pavement and then we will be sort of spraying water on it tested to see if that sterilizing
helps what goes into the storm drain system. Um is it much better than just simple you know street sweeping. So that will be great once we can we can get it started. Really we have nothing moving forward right now because I was under the impression that number one we were going to dredge. Number two, we were going to
retrofit the storm water drains with the fluorescent lighting. And it seems like neither one of those initiatives is moving forward. I mean, it's it's moving forward, but I mean, it's been years. I mean, I Well, I would say that the UV disinfection is very new. No city has
ever done that. So, it has taken a few months to get through how we would do that. We have to have an agreement with the University of Miami. They have a huge um, you know, system of approvals as well. But, we do have the equipment and the plan. And then dredging. Um I don't think our city has dredged in
years and years and years and years. I don't know if CIP has any examples, but dredging is a is a huge capital project and we just have to do that, you know, properly. Do we have the dredging funded? Yes. Yeah. Okay. So, we have the dredging funded and we're working on the fluorescent lights. Um
but there's 15 items. I mean, those are just a couple. Yeah. Amy, um, I'm not sure if this is for you or for Rodney, but the the huge hot spots that we found at the, um, Biscane Beach, uh, elementary school. What's the status of getting in there and ideally fixing it
before the kids come back to school? Yeah, I mean, I think public works is really close to issuing a purchase order on that one. Um, ask Rodney come up and go ahead. Good afternoon. Rodney Nolles, the assistant director for the public works department. U, where we're at is that we are in touch with the school. Um they've
agreed to well the school board has allowed us to enter the property. We're working on an access agreement with them right now. That should be forthcoming in uh less than a week. Uh we have a vendor lined up who's going to line uh the lateral lines to seal those up and so we
can CCTV that also to really get a good handle on what's happening there. So uh the contractors ready to go 2 days after notice to proceed. So we have everything lined up. We have um the building permit uh for the plumbing lined up also. So, we have everything in place. We're just
waiting for the green light from and it's funded as well. So, literally as soon as you get the the Okay, we can start going. We're ready to go. Okay. Thank you. Welcome. Thank you. Thank you. I'm going to call our next virtual caller who has a screen name of Miami Beach. Please state your name, address,
and you have two minutes. Please unmute yourself. Okay, PJ, we're going to go back to that caller. We're going to go with Mr. Ganov next. Okay. Good afternoon, mayor and commissioners. Matthew Ganoff, 125 Jefferson Avenue. I usually don't speak
in the morning and the afternoon. Uh, but I just went to a brand new restaurant or I guess uh establishment on Lincoln Road called Joe's Pizza of New York. It seems to have opened in record time. So, you have that. At least there's one business that's able to open here. Uh the pizza was was great, but
really what got me thinking was uh New York City does a lot of great things. For example, I was just there last weekend and I was able to take a clean, a comfortable, a safe train from the airport to the city. And here on Miami
Beach, uh you know, we don't um well, I'll just give you an example. There is a bus stop right next to city hall and it was closed last week. It's the bus stop that serves the convention center that's right next to city hall. It's blocked off of concrete blocks. There's
not even a sign that says the bus stop is closed. There's not a sign that says where is the next bus stop. And this is something that New York City does great. I'm sure anyone here that's visited or perhaps has lived there before knows that when there is work being done on the subway, on bus stops, when they're
being relocated, whether it's temporary or permanent or for months or for weeks, there's signage and people know. And yet people who are coming to city hall, your constituents, who are good people taking public transit, by the way, they they won't have a way to get back to the bus because they don't know where it is. So
just these little things are super important. and next to city hall. We need to make sure that we let people know how to get to the bus. Eric, is it a Was it the bus or trolley? It's actually both. Eric,
I'm assuming that Matthew's talking about 17th Street uh east of Convention Center Drive where the hotel construction is going on. and we will have our um our program managers that are working with the hotel folks address
that immediately. Thank you, Matt. Thank you. Our next virtual caller is has a screen name of Miami Beach. Please unmute yourself, state your name and address. Uh good day, mayor and commissioners. Wanda Jamon, 8305 Crestby Boulevard. Uh
we've been talking about the water contamination in the bay. Um, and this is something that I want to discuss. Uh, you all aware of the health risk both by this alarming levels of bacteria. With that said, is it it is imperative that the city of Miami Beach prioritizes the
safety and health of his residents. I petitioned this body to implement advertising measures including danger signage and or mailers to inform residents of the hazardous conditions and health risk associated with the
contaminated waters and advocate for transparency as many residents are unaware of this issues. Furthermore, I encourage contacting the health department and any any state office to assist as this is a pressing concern.
Personally, I have witnessed individuals swimming in this contaminated waters daily. I thank you and um I I believe that any any monetary that we have coming in for the bill or any other projects as public benefits should be
applied universally just to fix our waters and our bay. Thank you all and have a great day. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone else in the audience who wishes to speak? Mayor, this concludes subject. Great. Thank you again all for for
contributing. We'll get right back to the agenda. Let's do uh try to get through the second reading items. R5C R5C is a notice of the mayor, city commissioner of city of Miami Beach, Florida, amending chapter 54 of the Miami Beach code entitled floods by amending article 3 entitled resiliency
standards for title flood protection to amend the applicability of this article. modified definitions to strengthen construction standards for a new and existing seaw wall and other title floods barriers strengthen coastal resilience and mitigate the effects of title flooding and sea level rise and providing for repealer severability
codification and an effective date. This is a second reading public hearing. It is item R5C. Commissioner Fernandez co-sponsored by Commissioner Dominguez. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So, back in 2021, um our city commission adopted um some
minimum elevation requirements for for seaw walls. It made sure that properties with new construction or substantial improvements uh would upgrade their their seaw walls. Um
and we did considerations so that so that um property owners would consider using materials um to that promote biodiversity as part of their seaw walls and it established um it it it established other
protections to prevent over topping and and other matters. Today we're bringing an ordinance that is further strengthening um that is further strengthening this this ordinance. Right now uh our current current ordinance
says that if the city is requiring a property owner to fix their seaw walls, the owner has 60 days to show they're working on it. But we have no indication as to what showing progress really
means. We need we're requiring them to show progress that they're doing all of this work on their seaw walls um to prevent tidal waters from flowing uh overland and leaving their properties and creating other types of community flooding. So we have this 60-day time
period where they need to show that they're doing progress on repairing their seaw walls, but it's not clear what what progress really means. So, with a revised ordinance that we have before us, we're making that clear. Uh, we're we're demonstrating progress could
include things like getting price quotes from contractors because we want to make sure that they're really engaging with contractors and they're really attempting to do the work, that they're securing financing, that they're applying for the necessary improvements. acting active actually putting some some
criteria, some objective criteria into what showing progress in in seaw repairs really means. In addition to the 60-day requirement, uh property owners are required within 6 months to apply for
permits within the city and the county. So, not only are we required to show progress in the first 60 days with quotes, with financing, and applying for the necessary improvements, but within 6 months, we're requiring people to apply
for permits with uh with the city and the county. And that just helps make sure that our repairs are moving forward and gives clear next steps. Um, also currently the ordinance says if
your repairs cost $300 or dollars or more per linear foot, it's considered a major repair. And then now that triggers for the seaw wall to be raised to the to the new current NAVD, which is 5.7 ft.
We're amending that understanding the changes in market conditions and we're and we're increasing that cost to I believe it's $500 uh per per uh per linear foot. And the issue is that some people may be making
smaller repairs and the cost of those repairs elevate. And now if we say if your cost of repair costs $300 a linear foot if and you'll have to raise the the elevation of your seaw wall, we are in
essence discouraging people from repairing um their their their seaw walls. So this is an an important amendment. Uh so with a revised ordinance uh not only are we raising the costs for major repairs uh from $300 to
$500, um we're also putting a condition by which a property owner needs to prevent water from flowing out into the community, which is the bigger issue that we have in areas like in Palm View.
In areas like Palm View, we have crumbling seaw walls. And those crumbling seaw walls, yes, they need be need to be prepared. And we know repairing these seaw walls is a long-term process. But in the short term, in the short term, that community
flooding needs to be stopped. And so now it creates this requirement for temporary uh barriers for flooding uh so that so that that that um that damaged seaw wall doesn't flood the rest of the neighborhood. So this is an overview of
work that we've done in coordination with neighborhoods that have been experiencing community flooding. Community flooding as a result of broken seaw walls. It it encourages people to make repairs long-term repairs. It
changes the criteria so that so that people are not forced to completely raise the elevation of their seaw walls just for making responsible maintenance to their seaw wall. But it also makes sure that when we have times of flooding
that there is this 72-hour period where temporary barriers for flooding need to be placed so that the rest of the neighborhood doesn't get impacted uh by damaged seaw walls. So, with that, I want to recognize Amy. And also, I want to rec I want to thank my co-sponsor in
this item, Commissioner Laura Dominguez, for for for for their work on this on this item. Uh because when we talk about resiliency, uh we can only be truly resilient if we help our private property owners fix
their seaw walls. And right now, we're facing a burden where fixing the seaw wall isn't really encouraged. and this helps move the needle in the right direction. Commissioner Dominguez, right on Q. Thank you. Uh so it was a pleasure to work with you on this as being the
co-sponsor. I remember doing a walk through uh with Palm View Neighborhood Association um where we really got uh down and dirty because it was flooded that day. Um but some of the things I'll quickly recap. It provides clear steps for property owners and ensures timely
action. It increases the threshold for substantial improvements. Uh allows exemptions for maintenance work unrelated to elevation and requires temporary title barriers if overt topping conditions impact public right away which was a real big deal in Palm
View. So I'd like to move the item. Let's call the vote. I don't Well, before we do, Amy, is there anything that needs to be clarified? Because it's a very technical item and I put it in layman's terms, but this is a very technical item that you've worked very hard on.
Um, and we've also seen changes at the county level also that has an impact on our ordinance and the use of rip wrap, which makes these repairs very expensive. I don't know if there's anything that you feel we need to place on the record. Um, Commissioner, I think you covered it
very well and Commissioner Dominguez as well. Um, I think you highlighted all of our main items and I think it's a a really nice um sort of slight adjustment of an ordinance that was passed in 2021. You know, we should be very proud that we passed one of the first seaw wall ordinances that require elevation for
the resilience of our community and this gives us some some really important updates. So, thank you for your support. All right. Thank you. Let's call the vote. I have a motion by Commissioner Dominguez, seconded by Commissioner Suarez. It is a public hearing and there's no one in Zoom and there's no one in the audience requesting to speak.
Vice Mayor Suarez, yes. Commissioner Bot, yes. Commissioner Magazine, yes. Commissioner Dominguez, yes. Commissioner Fernandez, yes. Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez, yes. Mayor Miner, yes. Motion carries. The item is
approved. That was item R5 C. R5D. Commissioner Suarez's item. Let him Ralph ceue it up. Uh this this is R5D. the orders of the mayor and city commission of the city of Miami Beach, Florida, amending chapter 82 of the Miami Beach city code entitled
public property by amending article 3 entitled use of public property by amending division one entitled generally by amending section 82-73 thereof entitled balloons prohibited at public marinas marine facilities parks and beaches to increase the civil penalties and specify respons responsible parties
for violations in order to deter harmful littering and protect marine and coastal wildlife and providing for repeal servability cification and effective date. Second reading public hearing. It is item R5D. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I move my item
second. Let's call the RO. Is a public hearing and I see no one in Zoom and no one in the audience. If there's no discussion, Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez, yes. Commissioner Bach, yes. Commissioner Fernandez, yes.
Vice Mayor, uh, Commissioner Dominguez, yes. Vice Mayor Suarez, yes. Commissioner Magazine, yes. Mayor Miner. Yes. Motion carries. The item is approved. That was item R5D. R5G. R5G is an ordinance of mayor, city commissioner of the city of Miami Beach,
Florida, amending chapter 106 of the city code entitled traffic and vehicles article two entitled metered parking division one. uh penalties exceptions to expand the existing exemption from the requirement to pay a fee for the permanent removal of a parking space when a removal is necessary to provide
access to off- streetet parking. A to allow for removal of up to two spaces and B to enable duplexes and triplexes to qualify for the exemption providing for codification repeal servability and effective date. This is a second reading public hearing. It is item R5G.
This is my item. Tom, I'll turn it to you. Okay, Mr. Mayor, I'll try to be brief. This is a second reading uh amendment to um chapter 106 of the city code pertaining to the removal of off- streetet parking spaces when they're removed to provide cur access to a
property. As you may recall, when this was approved to first reading, the commission had requested that the applicability be narrowed. And so what we've included is a provision where duplex and triplex uses in either a residential single family district or an
RO district uh would be allowed to remove up to two parking spaces so long as the off- streetet spaces created are equal to or greater than the number of on street parking spaces for which the parking spaces the removal is requested
and they would be exempt from the fee. Any more than that would require the payment of the fee. Tom, a resident had reached out and I'd forwarded you the email and also um we discussed it earlier. Can you explain what what the request is and what your thoughts about it are?
The request was to consider expanding this applicability to RM districts. And um in speaking with the parking director, I think one of our collective concerns with expanding it is that it would result in potentially the
removal of more on street parking spaces and it would affect a very significant number of properties as a very large number or a large portion of the city is zoned RM1. And so, uh, at least as part of this ordinance, we wouldn't recommend
adding that as part of this ordinance. If it's something that you wanted to look at separately at some point in the future, we could do that. Okay. Somebody want to move my item since I can't move it. Move it. Thank you. I'll second. Commissioner Fernandez moved. I second.
It is a It is a public hearing and we have Mr. Larry Schaefer requesting to speak. Mr. Schaefer, please go ahead. You have two minutes. Larry Schaefer, 233 First Street. Um, I was the person to inquire about extending these benefits to
duplex and triplex owners within RM1 districts. I do understand Mr. Mooney's concern about that covering such a large area. Um, and I understand if this this doesn't get included. I would like to ask, however, that um when we review the North Beach parking plan, we really do a
a refresh and see what works and what doesn't work. We have the West lots up here. We would like to rationalize their use as parking and actually add two more parking lots, the top two parcels. And if we can rationalize the West lots in their use for parking, then then it
might be fine for RM1 zone properties up here to not get the benefits that these other properties are going to get. So, I hope that when I sit down with the parking director, we really take a look at the entirety of the North Beach parking program, the West Lots is providing additional parking. And we also need to take a look at additional
demand for parking from the schools up here that the Lairman schools expanded. They're probably going to need some more parking and um so there may be additional schools coming. So, we'd like to take a look at the MBP overall. Um, thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. There is no one else
requesting to speak on Zoom. I see no one in the audience requesting to speak. Command CO. Yes. Commissioner Dominguez. Yes. Commissioner Bot. Yes. Commissioner Fernandez. Yes. Vice Mayor Suarez. Yes. He's a yes. Commissioner Magazine.
Yes. Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez. Yes. Mayor Miner. Yes. Motion carries. The item is approved. That was item R5G. R5J. R5J is an ordinance of the mayor city commission of the city of Miami Beach,
Florida, amending the resiliency code of the city of Miami Beach by amending chapter 7 entitled zoning districts and regulations article 5 entitled supplementary district regulations section 7.5.3 entitled supplementary yard regulations by amending the allowable setback encroachment for air conditioning units and providing for
codification repealer shability at an effective date. This is a second reading public hearing. The item requires 57 vote is item R5J. Commissioner Rosa Gonzalez. Thank you. So, this is a simple item to streamline our building permit process.
There are a lot of smaller units that have wall units in the city of Miami Beach in South Beach, North Beach, especially in the older buildings. Right now, we have certain setback requirements that are cumbersome. So, when I sat down with Tom and we said, how can we make it easier for people to do these simple jobs? One of the thing
we found was to amend the setback. So that is what we're doing here. Correct. That's correct. And with that, I move the item. Call the vote. It is a public hearing. I see no one in Zoom. And I see no one in the audience requesting to speak on R5J. Commissioner
Rosen Gonzalez. Yes. Vice Mayor Suarez. Yes. Commissioner Bot. Yes. Commissioner Magazine. Yes. Commissioner Dominguez. Yes. Commissioner Fernandez. Yes. Mayor Miner. Yes. Motion carries. The item is approved.
That was item R5J. R5K. R5K is an ordinance of the mayor city commission of the city of Miami Beach amending my the Miami Beach resiliency code by amending chapter 7 entitled zoning districts and regulations article one entitled general to all zoning
districts by creating section 7.12 thereof entitle amendments or release of covenants restricting transient uses submitted by property owners to establish a minimum voting threshold for the release of a covenant restricting transient uses and providing for codification repeal servability and an effective date. This is a second reading
public hearing. The item requires 57's vote is item R5K. Commissioner Fernandez, co-sponsored by Commissioners Magazine and Suarez. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, so this is an item that would require a 67th vote to release any future covenant tied to
nontransient residential uses. Um, and the idea here is that when we offer incentives in exchange for a commitment to provide long-term housing, we expect for that commitment to mean something. And these are legal arrangements made to
serve the to serve the public good. And so if in the future someone wants to wave, remove from their covenants their promise to the public that they won't have transient uses, that they won't have short-term rentals, well then it must be, if this ordinance gets adopted,
a 67th vote of the city commission, not a simple majority vote of of the city commission. requiring uh this uh this supermajority will help ensure uh that future commissions take these commitments seriously and don't reverse
course without a strong consensus of the governing body. So with that I move my item second second. It is a public hearing. I see no one on Zoom and I see no one in the audience. Commissioner Dominguez,
yes. As Mayor Suarez, yes. Commissioner Fernandez, yes. Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez, yes. Commissioner Bot, yes. And for the record, I'm also a co-sponsor on this item. Thank you, Commissioner Bot. Commissioner Magazine,
yes. Mayor Miner, yes. Motion carries. The item is approved. That was item R5K. R5 L. R5L is an or notice of the mayor and city commission of the city of Miami Beach, Florida, amending the code of the city of Miami Beach. Subp part B
entitled land development regulations by amending chapter 2 entitled administration and review procedures. Article article entitled general development application and hearing procedures by amending section 2.2.3 2.3 entitled development application submission and review by modifying the applicable provisions for land use board application fees and establishing a
process for criteria for the city commission to consider a waiver of required fees for variance applications related to compliance with applicable building resertification requirements providing for qualification of repeater shability and effective date. R5L is a second reading public hearing. It it requires 57 vote. R5L
Commissioner Fernandez. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh so this is an ordinance that allows the city commission to wave uh fees for variances when those variances are necessary uh to complete critical repairs identified in
a reertification report. Uh and that's something that we're seeing happen more and more uh where buildings as they reach their point of reertification um they realize they might need to do certain work certain work that might not
comply with the code. They need to seek a variance and oftent times these variances tend to be expensive. uh especially for financially strained condominiums and individuals uh living pay to pay paycheck to uh paycheck pay
paycheck to paycheck. Um so this this is a variance this is um a variance on the fees um that would be used only for safety and certification repairs. This is not for other type of discretionary
luxury construction. It's strictly tied to helping build uh buildings meet their certification requirements so that they can meet the safety standards that they need to continue operating. And with that, Tom, I don't know if there's anything else that needs to be added for
the record. Uh no, it's it's limited solely to residential buildings. And as you correctly pointed out, it's only for those variances that are necessated by a building resertification. Then it was approved at first reading with no changes. And it's when the building is able to
demonstrate a financial hardship. Uh and that hardship has to be determined by the city commission. That's correct. All right. With that, I move my item. Second. Let's call a vote. It is a public hearing. No one on Zoom, no one in the audience. I have a motion
by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by uh Vice Mayor Suarez. Commissioner Bach, yes. Commissioner Dominguez, yes. Commissioner Fernandez, yes. Vice Mayor Suarez, yes. Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez, yes. Commissioner Magazine, yes. Miner, yes. Motion carries. The item is approved.
That was item R5L. R5M. R5M is an an ordinance of the mayor city commission of the city of Miami Beach, Florida amending the Miami Beach resiliency code amending chapter 2 entitle administration of review procedures article 13 entitled historic preservation by amending section 2-13-2
entitled historic preservation review of projects to remove the supplemental notice requirement for applications continued by the historic preservation board by amending section 2- 2.13.7 entitled issuance of certificate of appropriateness certificate to dig certificate of appropriateness for
demolition to increase the square footage threshold for the transportation analysis and mitigation plan requirement to clarify the two-step review process and to consolidate and otherwise amend the applicable review criteria by amending section 2.13.8 made entitled special review procedures to expand
administrative review authority for the re for the review of additions to single family homes located within local historic districts by amending section 2.13.9 entitled historic designation to introduce procedures for the repeal of historic designation required pursuant to Miami date county code section
168-3.1 and by amending section 2.13.10 10 entitled single family advalorum tax exemption to expand the types of properties that qualify for the exemption in a manner consistent with section 196.197 Florida statutes by amending chapter 7
entitled zoning districts and regulations by amending article 2 entitled district regulations section 7.2.2 entitled RS1 RS2 RS3 RS4 single family residential districts subsection 7.2.2.4 four entitled additional regulations RS by expanding the
applicability of zoning incentives to include contributing single family homes located within local historic districts by amending article 5 entitled supplementary district regulations section 7.5.1 entitled generally supplementary district regulations subsequent subsection 7.5.1.5
entitled roof replacements and new roofs to expand administrative review authority for sustainable roofs provided for codification repealer severability and effective date this is a second reading public hearing The item requires 57's vote is R5M. Commissioner Fernandez, co-sponsored by
Commissioners Dominguez and Bach. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I am very excited, very excited about this ordinance because we have seen over time an attack on our historic districts, on
our historic properties. And we have heard from whether it be from the states from or from private property owners or from stakeholders the difficulties and the challenges that people encounter when even their goal is to preserve
historic properties that they are finding challenges working with our complicated code, working with the system in addition to working with the challenges of that historic properties naturally have. And we've listened.
We've listened. We've wanted to address these these these concerns. And I just want to begin by expressing a deep appreciation for the architectural heritage that makes Miami Beach unique
in the world. It is our built environment that tells the story of our past, that shapes the identity that we are so proud of today, that we promote that we promote all over social media
and in throughout our campaigns, and that deserves that thoughtful stewardship for future generations. It's 14 historic districts. It's 17 individual historic sites. is 31 historic single family homes. And this
historic preservation ordinance that that that preserves this cherished patrimony of ours, one could call it, uh was first adopted in 1982. And while it's seen certain amendments over time,
the last real comprehensive review really took place in 2001. And since then, a lot of things have changed. A lot of things have changed and the needs of our community has has changed. And recognizing this, uh, back in March of
last year, I convened, uh, an ad hoc historic preservation ordinance advisory committee. and their purpose was to thoroughly review and modernize our preservation regulations in a way that balances the architectural integrity of
our city but with contemporary needs. And I just want to recognize that the committee was designed to be non-political and professionally driven. It was led by Rick Lopez, uh, who was also a former chair of our historic
preservation board, a professor at the University of Miami. Uh and committee members were composed of a diverse group of community stakeholders, of activists, of residents from neighborhood associations, of bankers, of developers.
And they focused on identifying ways to simplify and enhance the preservation process, making it more feasible for people to save and to protect and to invest in our historic assets. And I'm going to turn it over uh to do to to to
Mooney and to Debbie Tacket. Debbie, our chief preservation officer who sat with this committee and walked through through this incredible work that has been created. But just superficially, I'm just going to touch
on some highlights. uh because we are expanding certain administrative review authority uh that's going to help some of our condominium associations save time and save money. We are working on a two-step process that we're adopting
today uh to facilitate and streamline the process before the historic preservation board and save also time and money for for applicants. We're streamlining the transportation analysis process so that transportation studies
don't hold back small applications. We are allowing uh additions, greater additions to historic homes so that hopefully we see less of a loss of historic homes and more investment into preserving these the these homes in
addition to finally expanding our adorum tax exception to go beyond single family homes and to also include commercial properties. Putting our money where where our mouth is. When we say we want you to invest in preserving historic
properties, well, now we are giving you a tax incentive on commercial properties to invest in the preservation of that beautiful historic asset that people have in our city. And with that, I'm very proud to recognize our chief
preservation officer, Debbie Tacket, to walk us through the details of this reform. Um, thank you, Commissioner. Uh, good afternoon, uh, Mr. Mayor, members of the commission. Um, Commissioner Fernandez did a great job of summarizing. I'm just going to hit on a couple more uh
details. Um, the the committee's recommendations that are reflected in the ordinance can be really characterized into three different categories. Uh, the first category um that we looked at was the certificate of appropriateness review
criteria. Currently, um the city of Miami Beach, um because we love to be unique and we are, um has over 50 criteria when you break them all out. Um when when the committee um and staff researched other comparable historic
preserv preservation programs in Chicago, New York, Washington DC, New Orleans, Savannah, Charleston, we realized that the vast majority of all preservation programs have about 10, maybe a handful more. um and they primarily rely on the Secretary of
Interior standards for rehabilitation. While we have those standards as well in our criteria, what we found is that there were many redundant criteria throughout those you know nearly 50 criteria. Um there were some erroneous
criteria, outofdate criteria about code requirements. Um and so the committee unanimously um recommended that we remove 14 of these criteria and in the reduction in criteria would be um consistent with
best practices throughout other historic preservation programs and staff is uh very supportive of that. um that will limit the perception that that our review is very burdensome and ownorous and complicated. Just by reducing that amount of criteria um for not only the
board to review but staff and the applicants to respond to, we think that will be a benefit. Um the second major category that the committee looked at was the historic preservation review process. Now there is basically a two-prong process in our
current ordinance. one are projects that require going through the historic preservation board and the other the other side of that would be um work that can be reviewed and approved administratively. Currently there's a very limited amount that admin administratively that we can review and
approve and um the committee talked about this at length. Um they have recommended and and staff is supportive of including under the administrative review so staff level review sustainable roofing, property walls, fences and
gates minor modifications to public interiors, minor work within the public right ofway, demolition and reconstruction of architectural features consistent with historical documentation, railing replacement and an alternate material that closely
replicates the original design for contributing buildings. and an alternate design railing um review process that staff could go through for non-contributing buildings. These are buildings that were primarily built in the late 60s,7s and 80s.
What we're seeing and and what we discussed at the committee is a lot of these these buildings of that period have these heavy concrete railings. Most of those buildings right now are in the building reertification process. I would say nine out of 10 are coming in
saying our engineers are telling us that, you know, our slabs cannot support this weight. If we do try to repair it, we're going to have we're going to be in the same position in about 10 years. So, we're seeing a real hardship for for these larger condominium buildings. And repairing it would also mean a cost. A
cost because it's concrete. But it also means going currently they would have to go through through the preservation board process which adds time and engineer fees and other fees to the condominium associations. And we have seen several of these of
these non-contributing condominiums go through the process and they have you know expressed concern about being delayed in the structural repairs that need to be done to the building. About how much time do you believe that? I mean it it adds probably between four between three and six months.
So right there we are saving many of these condominium associations up to six months in time and not even talking about money with this simple modification. Correct. Um so that would be the uh the
recommendations with regarding the expansion of the administrative review. Um the other um process that the committee is recommending that's in the ordinance is to modify the existing two-step process. There is an existing two-step process that allows projects um
to get a site plan approval, a binding approval, and then go back to the board at within a certain time frame for the architectural detailing of the project. However, as currently written, um that is a very nebulous process. there's no criteria, there's no guidelines, there's
no determination of who's eligible for this type of process. So, um what the committee did is they um recommended major clarifications, detailed guidance, detailed requirements and uh thresholds
for what projects would be eligible for this. These would be larger projects that typically and I and I brought a visual um you know we have I I heard the conversation earlier today about the Lincoln Road uh Ritz Carlton project well this you know this is the the book
that the board gets for this one projects and what we have found is that it's extremely difficult for the board to digest you know while they have other applications to be heard that day to digest all of these details and and agree to move forward with a project.
Typically, what we've seen with these larger projects is um they get continued with recommended design changes. And what happens when they get continued is that this entire set needs to go back to the architect, to the landscape architect, to the lighting designer, to
all of these different professionals. And we're seeing a real waste in resources. Whereas a two-step process would allow the board to review and approve certain threshold requirements such as the height, the massing, the site plan, the level of demolition that they're
comfortable with and focus on those real big picture issues. approve that or, you know, recommend changes to that, but then you're only a smaller package, revising a much smaller package, which will save time and and resources. And in my opinion,
we're talking about when what right now is going before the historic preservation board in that first hearing. We're talking about everything not just from massing but everything to like a detailed site plan uh all the floor plans for all for all the floors
elevations materials finishes maneuverability a very detailed set of plans that with with a minor tweak if they want to change the HPB feels that there has to be more setbacks or the height has to be changed or any any any
change whatsoever now they have to go back and redesign and change that entire thick book when in fact do that more bigger picture concept can first be addressed in a first hearing in a
two-step process where you you know consider perhaps more more uh more superficially the side plan and the massing and then once you know what your site plan and your massing is then you come back with your bigger set of plans with all of your other details.
Correct. And how much money do you think that this costs uh applicants when they're when they're applying uh for the historic preservation process redesigning these books? If it's if it's a like if it's a redesign of a set that's this thick, you
know, we're probably talking about at least $100,000. All right. So, we're talking because of all the design professionals that are required to redesign their We're talking hundreds of thousands of dollars here that we're facilitating to help this process go more smoothly. And
I would imagine if you need to go back amend that big book, it's also time. I'm sure it's not the same thing to amend that big book as to amending the smaller set of plans. Correct. Um the next uh process recommendation
contained in the ordinance is to increase the threshold um for applications that require the transportation analysis and mitigation plan. Um, currently any project that contains over 5,000 gross square feet of new construction or four or more
resident or four more than four residential units does require this transportation analysis. Um, which does include a peer review through the transportation project. Um, we've seen this really delay smaller projects, five unit residential buildings. Um, and the
committee was all unanimously in agreement that we should increase those thresholds to a 50,000 gross square foot. And what causes the delay with that transportation analysis? Because we're saying, okay, if you're creating four new residential units, which in essence,
we want to encourage people to create new residential units um because we need that housing. Why why does it cause a delay when we have that transportation analysis? from my experience. Well, the first the calendar requires you to to
reach out to transportation a month prior to the deadline to submit for the planning uh department review. So that's an additional month. Then once um that meeting with transportation is held, a methodology has to be determined agreed
upon with an outside uh traffic consultant. So what we've seen is certain uh you know the city has our own outside um peer reviewer and the applicant is required to have their outside transportation uh professional. We've
seen a delay in that process where there before we can even agree on a methodology for what needs to be submitted things are getting you know bumped back to the to the next agenda cycle. So we're seeing two, three, four months. Um,
and how many projects end up getting in this transportation analysis red tape? A significant number. Um, because uh 5,000 gross square feet is is very small, you know, and that's for for non-residential buildings. So, you know,
you're talking about that's that's, you know, almost a non-existent F for most properties. All right. Um, okay. Just a few more things. I will go through these quickly. Um, the the committee and in your ordinance, it's
reflected is also recommending expanding the current special review process for single family homes located within historic districts. Um, this would just expand the allowable administrative review where we're already given more latitude for these properties um in the
in the regulations. This would allow for um more realistic additions that are not visible from the right ofway or from a waterway to be reviewed and approved by staff. And this is to discourage the demolition or encourage the preservation of these of these homes as opposed to
demolishing. Correct. And this would require the the retention and restoration of the existing home. This would also have um as as drafted a notice requirement for the immediate uh adjacent neighbors, a male notice. So as we could review this
administratively, we would the applicant would still be responsible for for providing a mail notice to their neighbors that uh the last category is the incentives for historic preservation. Um for the incentives we have two um
elements that are contained within the draft ordinance. One is the expansion of the applicability for the existing single family home zoning incentives. Um, this is currently eligible for pre-1966 architecturally significant homes. This would expand those
incentives to contributing buildings within local historic districts, contributing single family homes with the exception of the additional unit size. So, the lot coverage, the the allowance for the reduced setbacks would be included, but the committee did not
want to allow for the additional 10% lot or unit size. So, that is not in here. Um, finally, the last uh incentive is to expand the city's advorum tax exemption program. We currently have that program and only single family homes located in
historic districts are eligible for that. Um, and this is very exciting exciting because this is putting our money where our mouth is. We say we want to encourage preservation. And not only are we encouraging preservation through our
zoning policies and not only are we doing it by cutting red tape, by cutting time for applicants, by cutting reviewed criterias, but by giving those who invest in our historic assets a tax break as a thank you for investing in
our historic assets in Miami Beach. Correct. And and just let me point out that the the tax exemption program, which is is is also the county has the same program, um is for qualifying improvements. So, it's not just a rubber
stamp. You're historic, you get a tax break. You have to invest into restoration and repair of the existing building. And that increase in building value is what is potentially exempted for a period, a maximum period of 10 years, and then it's rolled back in.
Debbie, I want to thank you uh for your leadership in this. I had a vision of convening this committee and you and you you went with that vision. you drove that that that committee and brought back some incredibly substantive
recommendations that I'm so excited about because I really do do believe when we get complaints from Tallahassee or from the private industry, we often times get frustrated because we want to help people, but we want to preserve the integrity of our architectural districts
and we struggle to find this balance. And I think with the work that you've led together with this advisory committee of experts and professionals and residents and activists, I think we're striking that great balance. I think there's more work to be done in the future, but I hope that this is
received by the industry and by legislators as a message that we take this seriously. We care about our historic uh assets, but we also care about helping property owners facilitate the investments into these historic
assets to breathe new life into them for their future. With that, Mr. Mayor, I'm very proud to move this item. Thank you. Thank you. Good item. Call vote. It is a public hearing. I see Mr. Larry Schaefer online. Mr. Schaefer,
you have two minutes. Larry Schaefer, 2338 Street. This is a comment just in support of Mr. Granado. This item had the longest title I've ever heard, and I can't believe he got it all out. It didn't sound like he even took a breath. So, thank you, Raph.
Thank you, Mr. Granado. That was an an awesome title reading. Perhaps in the future we could shorten some of these. The first public comment like that, but thank you. Uh, I see no one else in the audience. Uh, may I call the role? Yes. And if the state allows us to
shorten it, we'll do it. I vote for that. Commissioner Bot. Yes. Vice Mayor Suarez? Yes. Commissioner Magazine? Yes. Commissioner Dominguez? Yes. Commissioner Fernandez? Yes. Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez? Yes. Mayor Miner? Yes. Motion carries. The item is approved.
That was item R5M. R5N. R5N is it's an order. the mayor and city commission of the city of Miami Beach, Florida, amending chapter 4 of Miami Beach resiliency code entitled landscape requirements by amending article one entitles intent and applicability by amending section 4.1.2 entitled short
title applicability by modifying the minimum landscape requirements for single family home projects exceeding the 50% rule providing for a dealershability clarification and effective date. This is a second reading public hearing. The item requires a 57th vote. It is R5N. Commissioner Rosa Gonzalez.
Um, hi. Continuing along with cutting through cutting through red tape and eliminating some of the barriers that we have to just getting building permits. And I sat down with Tom and this was one of the items that came out of this which was instead of following our code which
makes things complicated. um you need a certain kind of tree that has to be uh 12 ft. But the county, if it's a native tree, it could be 8 8 ft, which saves people a lot of money, especially if you own a home, you hit the 50% rule, uh for example, just because you're converting your garage and all of a sudden you have
to comply with our very very complicated standards. But if we follow the county code, it's just a little bit more simpler. Uh for example, if you plant a shrub, it only has to be 30%, but ours is 50% and ours has to be drought tolerant, salt tolerant, low maintenance. So, we get people tied up
over shrubs where they don't need to be. So, we're just going to follow the county code, which I think eliminates things. It makes it um inexpensive in case you do hit the 50% threshold because you you can hit that threshold very easily and then all of a sudden you have to comply with these super
complicated landscaping codes and people just can't get it done. So, what do they do? They don't get a building permit. So, um, in keeping with the spirit of eliminating red tape, but following the county code, which does have, you know, landscaping regulations, I move this item.
Second. Let's call a vote. Public hearing. I see no one in Zoom. No one in the audience requesting to speak. Bush of Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez, seconded by Vice Mayor Suarez. Commissioner Fernandez. Yes. Commissioner Bach. Yes. Commissioner Magazine. Yes. Vice Mayor Suarez.
Yes. Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez. Yes. Commissioner Dominguez. Yes. Mayor Miner, yes. Motion passes. The item is approved. 70. That was item R5N. R5 Q. R5Q is
R5R. R5Q is an ordinance of the mayor, city commissioner of the city of Miami Beach, Florida, amending the city code of the city of Miami Beach year 2040 comprehensive plan by amending goal RLU1 land use objective objective RU RLU 1.1 establishment of future land use
categories policy RLU 1.11 residential office RORO to establish requirements for non-conforming cafes serving alcohol and located on Alton Road providing for inclusion in the comprehensive plan transmitt servability and an effective date that is R5Q which is a second reading Public hearing
companion item R5R is an ordinance to the mayor and city commissioner of the city of Miami Beach, Florida amending the code of the city of Miami Beach. So part B entitled land development regulations by amending chapter 2 entitle administration and review procedures article 12 entitled non-conform nonconformities by amending section 2.12.5 entitled non-conforming
use of buildings to establish requirements for non-conforming cafes serving alcohol and located in Alton Road by amending chapter 7 entitled zoning districts and regulations. Article 2 entitled general to all zoning districts division 7.2 2.9 entitle RO residential office district by amending
section 7.2.9.2 entitled uses uh RO to allow alcohol sales in existing cafes providing for codification servability and an effective date. That was companion item R5R which is a second reading public hearing requiring 57s vote. Commissioner Dominguez.
Thank you mayor. So currently there's a small twob block gap between 12 and 14th Street on Altren Road where alcohol sales are prohibited. The proposal here would permit limited beer and wine sales at existing cafes only within the RO
district. There are key provisions. Maximum of 10 seats per cafe applies only to existing cafes. No new cafes will be permitted and it includes a vesting provision to protect current uses. because it applies only to existing
small cafes and under strict conditions. The overall impact is expected to be minimal and the planning board had approved this unanimously. The existing cafe in question is the plant nursery that's currently there and in the back
there is a tiny restaurant that um serves salads, sandwiches, and um food and drinks. And with that, I would like to move the item. Second. Miss uh Commissioner Dominguez, is there any or Mr. Director, is there any
provision for noise, ambient noise uh for entertaining the guest? uh entertainment would not be permitted. So they could not have any any form of entertainment and if they were to provide ambian music, it could not be
played at a level that exceeded um what we would call uh normal levels or levels that would interfere with normal conversation. It would have to be ambian music. And and when would alcohol sales end? I think they close at 9:00. It would be
the sales would have to end by 1000 p.m. for indoor areas and 8:00 p.m. if there are outdoor seats. Okay, I think that's reasonable. Call the role. This is a public hearing and I see Mr. Tom Hawkins requesting to speak. Mr.
Hawkins, state your name, address, so you have two minutes. Hi, my name is Tom Hawkins. I live at 1300 Monad Terrace and I just wanted to say that I commend Commissioner Dominguez for caring about the businesses in our neighborhoods and
surrounding neighborhoods that she would make this proposal today. Uh I fully support it and uh this is coming at a time where many of our local establishments are suffering uh from the lack of business and uh and this is a great thing that the commission is doing
today. Please vote in favor of it. There is no one else on Zoom. No one in the audience requesting to speak. May I call the role? Yes. This is on both R5Q and R5R. Commissioner Dominguez, yes. Commissioner Rosa Gonzalez, yes. Commissioner Bach, yes.
Vice Mayor Suarez, yes. Commissioner Magazine, yes. Commissioner Fernandez, yes. Mayor Miner, yes. Items is approved. 70. Both items R5Q and R5R are approved. R5E.
R5E is an arts the mayor city commission of the city of Miami Beach Florida amending chapter 70 of the city code entitled miscellaneous offenses by amending article two entitled public places by amending division two entitled bicycle bicycling skateboarding roller skating inline skating motorized means of transportation electric bicycle mopets motorcycles motorized vehicles
and motorized scooters by amending section 70-66 entitled definitions by clarifying the definition of motorized means of transportation and by amending section 70-67 entitled prohibited activities by prohibiting motorized means of transportation on Miami Beach prominade and providing for repealer
servability cification and effective date. This is a first reading public hearing. It is item R5E. Thank you. It's my uh uh my item and uh Miami Prominade which was formerly known as Miami Beach Drive. It's a shared use pathway parallel to and west of the Beachwalk
extends from uh basically 24th to 29th streets. This would prohibit motorized vehicles sim similar to the beachwalk. I want to thank the Mid Beach Neighbor Neighborhood Association for their help in uh the renaming and also for driving this um for this legislation.
No pun intended. No pun intended. Correct. Mr. Mayor, just one comment, please. Good afternoon, Jose Gonzalez, transportation director. Mr. Mayor, commissioners, what we'd like to do between first reading and second reading is to come back to you and potentially
include uh some interior pathways of parks, particularly new parks that have come online or will be coming online where we would like to uh include them in section 70 uh-67 as well between
first reading and second reading. Just looking Mark Fisherman is shaking his head through the chair through the chair. We will need a new title to do that. So to bring a new ordinance. Okay. Okay. I'm happy to uh work with you on that.
Okay. So, um, Commissioner Rosa Gonzalez, um, I understand that the danger and the need to, I guess suppose, regulate, but what I don't understand is why we don't just have like a separate lane
everywhere and just have it marked with like a bike or transit. Everywhere else in the world that I go, they have a simple marked lane and everybody seems to be able to follow it and we can't follow that. We can't just put a put a lane on the beachwalk however possible.
Have it marked, you know, have it be like 30% of the beachwalk so that we avoid all accidents. And then in these areas too, have a have a lane instead of just prohibiting because how are you going to get across the prominade if you're on your bike? It doesn't make a lot of sense um to do this. Why don't
you just mark it instead so that you have a lane? I mean, I'll support this today because I understand that um you know, there is a danger, but you know, instead of just prohibit prohibit uh ban, you just mark it.
Can't you just mark it? It's been a challenge, but I'll let you address that. So, go through with a marker and put a little bike on it or wheel or something and and mark the lane. So to be clear, what this ordinance does is prohibit
electric mobility devices, motorized means of transportation, which are not prohibited anywhere on the beachwalk or other shared use paths. The only thing is that 70-67 is very prescriptive in terms of the areas where motorized means
of transportation are prohibited and the Miami Beach Prominade is currently not in one of those areas. I'm if I could just jump in here. Commissioner Fernandez, I'm gonna say why I'm supportive of this just because I'm there every morning and I and this in this half a mile stretch
you have a lot of buildings that their back entrance opens right into the prominade. And that prominade is right between the back entrance of the building and usually the pool of the building. And
what what ends up happening is that you have children that run out of the back door of of those buildings running to the pool. You have people with their dogs running from the back door of their building running to the east side with a
pool. And then mixed with that you have north south traffic that crosses there. And so so when you have people going from west to east, the west the back of the buildings to the east which is their
pool areas mixed with north south pedestrian and bicycle traffic it creates a very dangerous environment in this prominade because of that unique configuration to have these uh these motorized uh vehicles and so I'm very
supportive of this because of that it is a very unique circumstance there there is not the issue of space because a prominade it's very wide. It's probably 15 feet wide if I had to guess. Um but the issue there is that you have cross
traffic uh at every building and so um happy to support this. Commissioner Rosa Gonzalez. Yeah, I'm fine with this but Jose given all the complaints that we have and the fact that we're preempted from regulation, why haven't you just marked the lane? Do we have a marked lane up and down the beachwalk at this point?
So, we we tried, you may recall, we tried that a few years ago where um we tried to segregate bicyclists from pedestrians and along the beachwalk. It just did did not work because to try to squeeze
two-way bicycle traffic in about 8 feet on the beachwalk and then giving about seven feet to two-way pedestrian traffic. It was just too many conflicts occurring and it was more dangerous than actually not doing um
than than doing nothing. So what we did which is what we what we have in place now is we drew a center line down the entire seven mile stretch of the beachwalk and we are encouraging through symbols and through signage for all
users to keep to their right with very simple signage that says keep right and u slow down. Has that been working? Have you seen less complaints about accidents? We've received generally positive feedback. That's good. Okay. All right. Commissioner Bond.
Yeah. To to that um point, as you all know, because we talk about it almost every committee meeting, commission meeting that's comes up in one way or another. There is a working group internally that has been in effect for a year and a half working on these micromobility issues holistically. Um
and um the signage changes, the dividing of the beachwalk, all of that are steps getting to what we hope will be a lot more usable mileage for all types of microobility devices, including electric. But we need to get to a point where we can get the data and make
measure the metrics and make informed decisions in order to do it safely. The problem with the Beachwalk as it stands right now is up in North Beach, you got I don't know 25 feet across or something enormous where it would be absolutely no problem to divide um into multiple segments, but down um just north of of
um of Ocean Drive, you you know, you can barely go two or three people across, right? So, it it doesn't work. It's not uniform. So before we start doing things that will end up in complicating and um potentially dangerous circumstances, we're trying to fix everything we can as
easily as we can while we get the data to make better decisions that fix us in a comprehensive permanent way moving forward. So it's it's the goal. I do think at some point too that we're going to have to mark sidewalks because people are telling me how like how dangerous it is to walk on the
sidewalks, especially in North Beach. Yeah, it's we're dealing with that as well. Now we're going to be adding robots to the mix. So you're going to have delivery bots and every kind of wiz on wheels and you're going to have to mark your a bot lane to Well, yeah. I mean that's actually going
to be a thing. The the delivery bots which we have no it already is. It No, my point is which we have no ability to, you know, exert home rule about. It's going to get very complicated. So yeah, it's it's an octopus of an issue.
Just one more bot to deal with. I move the full vote. Motion by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Mayor Miner. Excuse me. Fernandez, but uh No, but you seconding it. Your item. That's fine. It's your item. Second. Okay, sir.
Okay. Uh I have a there is a public hearing. I have Anz on on Zoom. Anz state your name, address, and you have two minutes. Uh yes, thank you to all the commissioners and the mayor for all the effort and the work and the time that
you volunteer. I appreciate all your work. Uh what I want to suggest because I hear, you know, I live on the ocean and 1500 ocean drive and I hear from many of my neighbors, especially my elderly neighbors, how afraid they are to walk on the prominent on the beach
walk perman or even bike. So I think that I may suggest that you may consider uh uh designated say certain days certain hours for just pedestrian or just bicycles and I think that would be very helpful and I think is a is is very
possible and like you say with announcements signs and all of that that you should reserve certain days certain hours for only bicycles and certain days certain uh hours for just pedestrian so the pedestrian can be at peace. that they're not going to be run over because
there's been quite a few accident happenings with the bicycles running into the pedestrians, especially two of my friends recently. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Go ahead, sir. Okay. Good afternoon once again. Matthew Ganoff, 125 Jefferson Avenue. I have a
few questions about this. Um I'm wondering why it's happening now. Is there is there a problem on this uh this half mile stretch of Miami Beach prominade? what is the width of the prominade? Um
why didn't why weren't other things looked at first before just banning uh banning motorized means of transportation? And then I was hoping that the city attorney could clarify a couple of things. I've heard that state grants that were used to fund the
beachwalk prohibit uh bicycles or ebikes ebikes as well. And I don't believe that to be true. Can you clarify that statement? That's not decided. No, the the state does not preclude the restriction on ebikes. We we did look into that previously.
Okay. And then lastly, u what is the history of 70-67, the city code that was I I believe it was enacted in 2014. It predates me, but I would ask Mark Fishman if he can address, but I suspect that it was always related to public safety
back and forth. So I did I I went and looked at it and I would love to hear you don't know about it the history of it. It was about Segways. It wasn't about ebikes. Ebikes didn't exist. It wasn't about e- scooters. It was Segways non-tandem. They called them assistant
motorized devices electric personal assisted mobility devices also known as Segways. It was Taurus on Segways who have never ridden them before. And Segways if you haven't seen them before they're super wide. So, I mean, I know that we're in a day and
age now of microobility, but this is this this ordinance was or the city code was for a different problem at a different time. And microobility is here today and it's going to stay and it's going to keep getting bigger. So, just saying no, no, no is not addressing
anything here. Pushing the problem away won't make it. By the way, I don't think it is a problem, but many call it a problem isn't going to make it go away. These are these are your neighbors. These are your constituents. got to find some way to deal with this. It's literally one of the biggest complaints we get. Uh people fear are
fearful walking on the on the beachwalk because of the speed of of some of these motorized vehicles. Speed limit all around the country. Matthew, you've been sitting in every single one of these meetings. You know what the goal is? The goal is to have safe, ridable, sharable paths and
streets to get people out of cars and onto bikes or scooters or segways if they want if it's legal in the in that right spot. But you know what we're trying to do. So I appreciate your passion, but let us do the work. We had to get funded. Now we've got the
devices. Now we're getting them installed. Then we're going to have the data. We've just got the signs going. I was just I was up all the way up at 87th Street and ran back down. The signs look amazing and they are universally clear. You don't even have to speak English. They're legible. Like, you know where
we're going with this. I hear you loud and clear. We are all trying to get to the same destination, but we have to put in the work. Our next public speaker via Zoom is Daniel. Thank you. Yes. Hi, Daniel Seraldo, candidate for
Miami Beach Commission. I also wanted to express that I'm hearing a lot about uh these bikes uh causing safety issues. I myself ride an electric bike um but I do it responsibly and unfortunately not everybody does. But I wasn't going to
speak on this but I heard one of the constituency nest flags call in and she had a great idea about also having a time when uh bicycle folks can use some of those lanes. I know, for example, Lincoln Road, a lot of us like to go
before 9:00 a.m. when uh bicycles are allowed. And so perhaps as an interim, you all can consider something like they do in Central Park where they they switch the modes from time to time and allow that boardwalk that's a public
taxpayer funded uh uh street to allow for all different modes of mobility, but to do it safely. Thank you. Thank you. There are no other individuals requesting to speak. Okay, let's call a vote. Have a motion by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by
Mayor Miner, Vice Mayor Suarez, yes. He's a yes. Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez, yes. Commissioner Magazine, yes. Commissioner Dominguez, yes. Commissioner Fernandez, yes. Commissioner Bot, yes. Mayor Miner, yes. Motion carries. Second reading, public hearing is scheduled for September 3rd.
R5F R5F is an orders of the mayor, city commissioner of the city of Miami Beach, Florida, amending chapter 18 of the code of the city of my of the city of Miami Beach entitled business by creating article 20 entitled police cost recovery recreating section 18-950 thereof entitled recovery of cost for failure of
responsible person to appear on behalf of business by authorizing the recovery of all lost cost or minimum service fee in lie of recovery of all cost incurred by the city's police department under circum under circumstanc testes in which a criminal prosecution is null prost abandoned, dismissed or otherwise
unsuccess unsuccessful as a result as a direct result of the failure of a responsible person to appear in court in court proceedings on behalf of the owner or operator of a business establishment and providing for repealer shability complication and an effective date. This is a first reading. It is a public
hearing. It is item R5F. Commissioner Bot. Yeah, this is an item that I'm bringing um in service of um helping keep the bad guys from doing bad things. We um are frustrated um and have made
great strides in prosecuting cases that are brought which is great. Thank you, mayor, for bringing that. Um I think that started when you were a baby commissioner as you said earlier. Um, one of the other problems we have is that we make the arrests, our police officers fill out all of the reports,
they go to the courthouse, and the store or the retailer or whoever um who uh press charges fails to appear. So, it's a waste of time and also the case is immediately dismissed. Um, there are other jurisdictions that have uh
programs in place to combat that. um it it doesn't have to fall on the shoulders of the um individual store owner or manager or employee who um was the victim of the crime. There are ways to mitigate that so it's not a drain on on
the retail operator. Um, and I think that if we start encouraging people by, you know, having negative consequences to make sure they show up to, um, enact the, you know, the the court proceedings to go through the court proceedings, um,
they will do that more often and we will have another tool in our in our kit to, uh, try to curb this. And I'd like to bring up Chief Jones to talk about this if there's anything more particular that needs to be added. Good evening. Good afternoon. I'm sorry.
of Wayne Jones, police chief. Um, you know, we support this this item. Um, and I'll let uh Assistant Chief Dan Mcgallo uh tell you why. Um, but in summary, we oftent times go to uh theft calls for service at various businesses throughout
the city, um, arrest people in good faith, probable cause, expecting those folks be fully um, held to the extent of the law. And oftent times those cases are dropped because victims don't show up to see the case through to to the
end. But I'm going let let Chief Dan McGall sort of speak directly to this. Good afternoon, commissioners, Mr. Mayor, Assistant Chief Dian Mgallow on behalf of the police department. So the prosecution of these retail theft cases is extremely important, especially for
us to be able to deal with the habitual offenders that we have in our city. um also with um the issue of organized theft rings that hit some of these major um retailers on Lincoln Road and some other areas. And what we've found
throughout the years is that some of these retailers call the police. We respond. We spend hours with our officers and sometimes our detectives in some of these cases investigating, making arrests and then once the
retailer recovers the stolen property, which is almost immediately, there is no follow through with the prosecution. And what ends up happening is that these habitual offenders continue to remain on the street because the cases are dropped because the state attorney's office cannot prosecute the case without a
representative of the business appearing in court. So what this ordinance would do is basically it would put us in the position as the city that if a retailer asks the police department to respond, make an arrest and does not follow through with the prosecution, it
provides the city a recourse to recover some of the expenditures that were placed in manh hours of the police department responding, making the arrest and following through towards the prosecution. I have a question.
Uh, as do I. But Commissioner Fernandez, so I have a question. Is this for business that reports uh a crime and doesn't show up in court or is it only for bigger businesses? I I
just I I get concerned. I get concerned about that because I don't want to discourage people from reporting things. Um and you know we do live in a time and place where we may have certain segments of the population that are scared of
witness to something scared of showing up to court. I mean this is the reality of the world that we live in today. And so this is across the board to any and all businesses. I see Mark shaking your head. Yes, Commissioner. That's correct. This would apply to any business across the board where a responsible person fails
to appear in any court proceeding on behalf of the business and as a direct result of that the case is no pro dismissed, dropped or abandoned. However, let me ask you, but let me ask you because I know there's other jurisdictions that have similar legislation and in other jurisdictions
where they have the similar type of legislation, which is which makes sense. you know, if you're calling reporting a crime and then you don't show up in court to support our law enforcement, I get it. But there's also, you know, we don't want to discourage people also and
and so in other jurisdictions, how do they do this? Do they apply it across the board to to to all businesses or is there a distinction? My understanding was the other jurisdiction you might be referring to is Aventura and they had problems these theft problems at the Aventura mall and they applied it to the
stores in the Aventura mall most of whom are big box stores. They said it really helped remediate the problem. However, in all honesty they haven't used it in a number of years when we called and spoke to them about it. Uh but I think they're going to revive it. What I was going to tell you is the police chief always has discretion whether to invoice the
business either a $250 amount or a full cost amount in which case it would involve the the CFO Jason Green or not do it at all. And I think our our police chief has shown uh that he's a very uh reasonable and and thoughtful individual. And I'm sure if it's a small business where something happened or
it's a one-off I I I don't think he would probably invoice and look for that police cost recovery. I think what they're more referring to is the bigger businesses. I don't have to name them, but some of the bigger stores who just routinely as a cost of doing business have decided that they're not going to send a responsible person to court, which frustrates our police department
and then doesn't get a conviction on a person. They get arrested for shoplifting. They get their property back and that person looks like they were, you know, in essence wrongly arrested. So, they keep doing it again and the judge sees they have no priors. You use it judiciously, I think. All right. So there is the way where
someone if a small business someone is not able to attend because it's a one-man shop or the the witness is scared to to appear in court, they don't automatically get this fine. No. And nobody's automatically getting it. The police chief, we would have to
invoice them and that would be up to the police chief to either invoice them for $250 or to do a full cost recovery which could be far in excess of that or not at all. And you know that would be up to Chief Jones. Thank you, Mark, if you don't mind. Um, it's it's
not necessarily like if somebody is uncomfortable with going to court because of the current climate, the business can appoint a responsible person. Is that right? I mean, that's that's you've my understanding is that that exists where you have design. Yeah, they they could appoint a
responsible person to testify to certain aspects of the crime. For example, the dollar value of the property stolen. However, there's other situations where you would need an exact person, the the victim of the crime or someone who actually witnessed it where you couldn't relate off on someone else. Um, but there is a mechanism, like I said, for
them to send a designated person. But again, you know, Chief Jones would have the discretion where if they have a reason why someone didn't go to court, they're no longer in their employee or maybe they can't go for another reason, you know, or an accident or whatever to to not um, you know, invoice them. Commissioner Rose Gonzalez,
Commissioner Ba, I congratulate you on this. One of my biggest pet peeves is that we don't prosecute shoplifterss and if you go in, you can just shoplift a certain amount and then there's no consequences and nothing happens. So, I think if we really do start to fine or invoice these businesses, maybe they
will understand and will send a clear message that we do not want, we're not going to accept shoplifting on Miami Beach. If it's okay with you, I would like to co-sponsor this. And you know it it's troubling when you go into a store and everything is under lock and key
because uh so no matter what you want to get um you know and some sort of medicine you can't. So I think that this is really important. I I would also like us to you know really draft a letter to every single business especially all of the Walgreens and CVS's and let them
know okay that we take shoplifting seriously. I'd like this to be a stern letter and we want them to enforce our laws and we should find a way, you know, demand that they enforce our laws. Um, because I pay I'm pretty sure Commissioner Magazine isn't shoplifting
anything. And the notion that you can go into someplace and shoplift up to a certain amount. I was going to make a joke, but I won't. Um, what is the amount that you can quote unquote shoplift without it being grand
theft? What is that threshold? I think they raised it to $750. Yeah. So, you can technically go in and take up to $750 and have zero consequences. But I think if we send this really strong letter and say we're going to enforce our laws and there should be some sort of penalty, if we
see um a repetitive pattern because if CVS and Walgreens is allowing this to happen, then nobody's ever, you know, going to learn. So maybe we should put the onus on them so that they start to enforce even petty theft. Yeah, it's a it's a great item. I do
believe Walgreens does have a program and they're working with an organization to ensure that they're prosecuting. Yes, sir. So, some of the Walgreens and CVS's, not all of them in our city, uh partner with a company that represents them in court. There's also that same
company represents other of the same stores on the Miami side. And what we've seen is very positive results from these this particular company representing those stores in court that have linked cases that normally wouldn't have been linked where the same offender was
committing retail thefts both in Miami and Miami Beach. And because of the involvement of that representative company on behalf of Walgreens, we were able to get felony convictions of individuals um and basically get people actually kept in jail for habitually
being retail thieves. Excellent. Couple more questions and and I agree. I I really like this item, Commissioner Bot. Um and I know we've talked about it in the past, but you actually took the mantle and did it. We we talked about when property is
returned to the establishment. This item though holds true whether the property was returned or not. Correct. So our normal procedure is uh we would have crime scene or the actual retailer in some cases photograph the property and then retain custody of the property. In some instances if we make an arrest
offsite and we would impound the property then we would release it back to them after we would photograph it for evidentiary purposes. But the property is usually returned almost immediately. We don't retain it. It's not contingent on that. Let's say you arrest someone and there's no property, they still have to comply and show up to court.
If if they call the police wishing to prosecute somebody for retail theft, then it's understood that they need to follow through with the prosecution of that case moving forward. Do we have data on how widespread this is? Meaning shoplifting you come and make an arrest and whether that they prosecute the case
or we can do the research and find some of the data to see where some of these cases have been dropped to give you a percentage, but I just don't have that with me today. Okay. Um I do agree with my colleague. Uh we certainly want to notify businesses so they're aware of this and also hopefully incentivize them to
continue to show up. And also just following up on the the $750 that it's still a misdemeanor though if it's under $750 and that would fall under our municipal prosecution program. That could theoretically that would be a misdemeanor under state law. We haven't adopted petty thefts as uh municipal
ordinance violations. You think we should the volume is is too high enormous. It would require an expansion of our program. I remind you because I think we looked into this a while back and that was your warning to me that it would it would take up a lot of resources. There are a lot of petty thefts. The grand theft
amount is $750, but there are a lot of petty theft misdemeanor which the state prosecutes and for us to take them, it would be additional resources. Can Okay. Yeah. I'd like I'd like to co-sponsor as well. Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez. So Oh, Commissioner B. I did promise Commissioner B and Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez. Um, so a couple of questions. If if you
find somebody who has stolen $749 at three consecutive stores in the course of a week, does that then bump it up from petty theft to something more? No, it's each No, it doesn't. Each one would be individually petty theft. But there is in the law where if you commit a first petty theft and you commit a second or
subsequent one, it bumps it from a second degree misdemeanor, I'm sorry, a second degree, yeah, second degree misdemeanor to a third degree felony. So a second petty theft under state law turns into a felony. Okay. So there there are bigger consequences the more you do it. So I do love Kristen Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez
the um idea of having a very robust awareness campaign and you know I'd love to see that between now and second reading. The other thing I'd like to explore um if there are retailers I'm thinking maybe I don't want to cast assertions but perhaps some of the
larger chains who you know sort of write this off as a cost of doing business. If there are are retailers who have a um um a pattern of doing this and they don't start um engaging in the way this is intended, you know, could we explore
having an an a sliding fee structure cost recovery structure? So if it happens one time or once every blue moon, that's one thing versus if every time you do this and you don't um go to court, we're going to it's going to
become incrementally higher. Yeah, Commissioner, that's a that's a great thought. We had actually talked about that, but I would be leerary about doing that. Remember, they they they do pay taxes. We are required to provide services, police services, fire services. We don't decide which police calls will go to or won't go to. We like them or don't like them. So, this is a
cost recovery. Uh it's it's not a fine. It's a cost recovery. Um, and I I would be very leerary about having a sliding scale where it goes beyond the the the basic one is 250 or we can do a full cost recovery which will probably exceed that. But I'd be lerary of having an automatic fine of 500 or,000 because the
police resources utilized on any particular case, any particular investigation did not exceed that amount or under that amount, it would no longer be a cost recovery. We'd be taking in excess money. So be ly. But we can always get our full cost recovery and do that formula with the police chief and the CFO. And just to clarify for those
listening, in no way was I suggesting that we would not respond to calls at all. That was never that's not what I'm talking about. It was the idea of like let's, you know, let's have a little bit of a more of a of a stick instead of a carrot um if you're not showing up. Like
just go to go to court and let us put these guys away. But okay, understood. Yeah. Yeah. We're under the obligation, of course, and I know you meant to go to to go to each and every call, which is exactly what we would of course do. Um, so it's just a matter of recovering costs and not finding them for for us going to a call that we have to go to
and of course we all want to go to. Mr. Rosa Gonzalez, one question. Could this have an adverse effect if we punish the businesses? Like let's say right now they're reporting the thefts, right? And then they get the notice and they don't show up to court and then we find them $250. The next time will they just not report it at all
and then it could be like a shoplifting looting. It could have an adverse effect. I have I I would before we do this, maybe we should have a like a little focus group with some of the managers. I don't know. I mean, we can approve this right now, but what happens
if we start to find these businesses and then they don't report any of the petty crimes? That's my first thought. Second is, let's say right now, okay, someone gets arrested for shoplifting. They go in, they get nobody prosecuted by the state. Let's say that the business does
show up, okay, and the police show up. What is what happens to them? Are most of these getting dismissed as please or what's happening in criminal court? Yeah. Um I I can't say without looking, but I I do think the state attorney does prosecute them. And of course, a plea would be a conviction, a guilty verdict,
which is a very good thing. Most successful prosecutions end in a plea, not with the trial, 90 some odd percent of it. So, a plea is a very successful thing. Um so, but I can't say what they're doing, but I do believe they're prosecuting them. Of course, they can't if there's not the witnesses from the the businesses, typically the big box uh
businesses. And you had a you had a good point. Um you know could it possibly have an adverse reaction or they just start yeah not reporting. It is it is possible but I again I think the chief would slowly roll this out you know after they send the letter notifying all the businesses that this is going to be happening. You need to show up. It's
very important. If not we're going to look at cost recovery. If they still fail to show up, he'll probably, you know, hit them with the $250, the automatic $250. they continue not showing up and we see if they're continuing to to call in when they have thefts and if they are maybe he would increase it and then do the full cost recovery and if they start then not
calling in thefts then we might have to reevaluate at that point you know he doesn't want to get to that point where people aren't reporting their thefts because we're punishing them if I can first of all and and the chief I think can address this the city of Aventura is utilizing it and and our
understanding is it's it's been pretty successful overall it's true there's the potential unintended consequences. But think of it from the business standpoint. It's it's not in their self-interest ultimately. Either they're gonna have to hire a private security guard or they're going to have to or or they're because they're not going to
want massive thefts in their in their establishment. Right. Right. Yes, sir. So, as you mentioned, Aventura has had success with this because it was designed to they they identified a problem that was happening at Aventura Mall where they were having
multiple retail thefts. They were spending hours upon hours making arrests and then those cases were being dropped because the retailers weren't prosecuting. So, that's kind of what led to it in Aventura. Um, and my understanding anecdotally from speaking to my counterparts over there is that
they saw a reduction in the theft cases and because they were able to prosecute cases, they didn't actually see a reduction in people reporting and it hasn't they haven't had to find very many businesses is my understanding. So, in this situation, they're calling the police. The police, as you were
saying, are literally recovering the property almost immediately. So, they don't have the incentive maybe to prosecute the case. But ultimately, if they stop calling police, they're not going to get their items back and therefore they're going to have a loss. And the message it sends within the community is it's okay to come here and steal, which none of the retailers want
that. So they will continue to call the benefits far outweigh and and the result that we've heard through Aventura is that they've gotten the compliance and they're able to prosecute these cases. Is it citywide or just the Aventur mall? My understanding it's just the mall. Just the mall. One other question. Let's
say there's I'm giving a hypothetical. There's a battery within a an establishment and the witness is out of town. Is that a separate than retail? We're talking that would be completely separate and there wouldn't be cost recovery done through the ordinance. It's this is specific to theft.
Okay. Okay. Let's call the vote. I need a motion and a second, please. I'll move it. Second. I have a motion by Commissioner Vice Mayor Suarez. I have a second by Commissioner Fernandez. Uh, this is a
public hearing. I see no one in the audience requesting to speak and uh, no one in Zoom either. Uh, Commissioner Magazine, uh, Commissioner Fernandez, yes. Commissioner Bot, yes. Commissioner Dominguez, yes.
Vice Mayor Suarez, yes. Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez, yes. Mayor Miner, yes. Motion carry. Second reading, public hearing is scheduled for September 3rd. That was item R5F. R5. R5 O is an order of the mayor, city
commissioner, city of Miami Beach uh year 2040 comprehensive plan pursuant to expedited state review process of section 163.3184 subsection 3 Florida statutes by the resilient land use and development element. Goal R goal RLU1
entitled land use objective RLU 1.1 entitle establishment of future land use categories at table RLU 1.1 to provide floor area ratio F incentives through the city commission warrant review process of providing for codification appearability at an effective date this is a first reading public hearing it is
item R50 okay we got commissioner Fernandez and let me just uh we have a lot of co-sponsors commissioner Suarez myself magazine and bot Commissioner Fernandez. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and I want to thank the entire commission for joining
as co-sponsors of this of this item that we're introducing for targeted land use incentives to make it easier to develop uh new educational facilities in our city. And we keep on saying how we want to increase the resident base in our
city. Increasing the resident base in our city also means making more educational quality educational institutions available uh for the families that move into our city. And the goal is to streamline the approval
process, provide more flexibility and cut through some of the unnecessary red tape. Um, we want to encourage investment in education. Uh, and by removing or not removing but reducing
certain regulatory uh, barriers will will help schools get built faster and in the right places with fewer delays. I'm going to recognize Tom. I don't know if there's anything you want to put on the record to explain this item. I think uh, Commissioner, you did an excellent job. Uh, you summarized it
very well. As you may have noted in the memo, this particular item had been approved at first reading on May 21st. However, due to an oversight, we did not transmit the comp plan amendment to the state within the required 10 days. So,
that's before you for a really a proform reapproval of what you approved in May 21st. Um, and then you would set second reading for September 3rd. And then tangentially, uh, we're recommending that R5P, which is second reading of the
LDR amendment, also be open and continued to the September 3rd meeting so that the comprehensive plan amendment, uh, at second reading can be adopted with the LDR amendment at the same time. Thank you, Tom. Can I No one's here. Mayor,
can I can you put me on as a co-sponsor because Commissioner Fernin has just admonished me that I'm the only person who is not. This is just incentives if you're going to build a school. Yes. Wonderful. I'm trying to bring a French lease to Miami Beach and uh hoping we can get it done and the more incentives
the better because we do need schools. That's great economic development there. And I'll second the item. Vote. It is a public hearing and I see Daniel online. Please state your name, address, and you have two minutes.
Yes, I am. Sorry about that. Daniel Seraldo, candidate for Miami Beach Commission. I was just curious about whether or sort of what the F change would be uh
including um you know existing F uh currently and what would be allowed as well as the maximum heights. If uh perhaps if the planning director could just share that with the public, I'd appreciate it. Thank you.
Sure. It's it's Tom Tom not take direction only only from the commission please. Okay. Well, but it' be good to feel free to answer the question. Okay. Uh at the request of the the sponsor, I can uh answer the question.
Um there is no technical increase um uh in F or increase in height. However, the commission would have the ability to grant a warrant uh for a potential uh increase by up to 10% not to exceed
5,000 square ft for um schools. And similarly with heights um there would be the ability for the commission as part of a warrant to allow for a building height to exceed 50 ft um or whatever
the uh underlying zoning district is, whichever is less. So the goal is to amend the procedure. We're not granting F. We're not granting height, but to the extent that a school might potentially need more height or F in order to make a
school work, we are providing them with a more flexible procedure through commission action. That's correct. All right. With that, I second the item that was moved by Commissioner Bot. Mor and there's no one on Zoom. No one on uh on the audience. Have a motion by
Commissioner Bot. Uh seconded by Commissioner Fernandez. Uh on item R50, Commissioner Bot. Commissioner Bot, sorry. Yes. Vice Mayor Suarez. Yes. Commissioner Dominguez. Yes. Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez. Yes.
Commissioner Fernandez. Yes. Commissioner Magazine. Yes. Mayor Miner. And for the record, uh R5P is being open and continued to September 3rd. This item R5O is a sec. It's second reading. Public hearing is September 3rd. Mayor
Miner. He's a yes. Item is approved 70. R5S. R5S is a north of the mayor, city commission of the city of Miami Beach, Florida, amending chapter 46 of the code of the city of Miami Beach entitled environment article 11 entitled use of gas powered leaf blowers and chainsaws
by amending title that amending title and creating section 42-249 subsection one or.1 to be entitled regulation of noise produced by air conditioning and swimming pool equipment to prohibit noise on residential properties that unreasonably disturb the quiet enjoyment of a neighboring
residence by a nearby resident and establishing enforcement and penalty provisions to provide for repealer severability calcification and effective date. This is a first reading public hearing. It is item R5S. Commissioner Bot. Yeah. Very simple. um to make sure that
um new pool equipment or air conditioning units that are installed are within a reasonable decibel range um so that people who are living adjacent to them are not impeded in enjoying their space um by the noise coming out of air conditioning and pool equipment
devices. Um uh it is not intended to require people to retrofit replace uh the the equipment that they have now. It is just intended to going to as things get repaired and you might need a new compressor or
whatever to make sure you've got something that is within a reasonable standard and um won't impinge upon your neighbors enjoyment of their homes. Commissioner Rosa Gonzalez. Okay, I understand that that that noise could
bother people, but okay, so let's say I'm changing out my compressor and now all of a sudden I have to come in with a permit and have a certain decibel size unit. Do you know the cost of what that would increase the cost of a unit or I mean like
I'm a little concerned about this because um so you can't just call in and complain and say like hey my neighbor's AC unit is bothering me right they're going to be in violation correct this is only for new units but I just wonder what is this
going to require when you go to when you go to pull a building permit and all of a sudden if you didn't need a permit for an im for for an emergency repair at your home. Um just nobody's going to get a permit.
That's what we're going to do. I just What is the How do you know what's quiet and what's not? Is there like some sort of labeling? Is that going to double the price of the unit? Do you know that? So, good afternoon, Hernand Cardino for the code compliance department. Um to add to that just another point of
distinction is uh we have no other decibel base enforcement throughout the city. Our noise we do you do or don't? We don't. We do not. So uh that would require us to buy the equipment and to have the equipment calibrated and our staff trained uh for
the special magistrate testimony. Can I So So are you recommending this or not recommending it? We're a staff's position on this. Again, it's going to require us to buy additional equipment, training, and there is no other. We follow the reasonable person standard on
whether noise is unreasonably loud, excessive, unnecessary, or unusual. And that I understand has been held up uh in in court in the 11th uh circuit sitting in capacity. Commission Commissioner Dominguez has
I just I wanted to I might have misstated saying decel range. I It's the It's the standard that we have now. I'm sorry. Audible. Say again. Audible. It's If I misspoke about decibel range. I'm not This is not intended to have people go out and buy new equipment. This is if you've got
something that is an outrageous air conditioning unit that is, you know, rattling the windows. And that's what I was going to chime in about um when the mayor called me. It does not go. Uh so, uh years ago, Mark Samuel had brought an item similar and was trying
to bring decibbles and that got shot down. It wasn't something that we could do. Um I think the county may have something for it, but it wasn't something easy. And where it stemmed from was uh on Bell Isle there was a building that replaced their fan uh
their um air conditioning and then the outside fan used to be super quiet and then all of a sudden it sounds like a helicopter's landing. So the building next door have been in a feud with them for years and it's still not settled. So, moving forward now, doing a decibel
system sounds like it's going to cost money. Yes. I I because I want to be supportive of this and if the item says decibel, then maybe we need to be audible for but I have to if I could just jump in
there quickly. I have to say decibel. A decibel system is objective. Mhm. It is very objective. There's no question when a calibrated instrument is used, the number that it reports is the
number that it reports. When we say reasonable, what's reasonable to me is different than what is reasonable uh to to you. Or when we say 100 ft, if it's audible within 100 ft, I might hear it within 100 ft, but someone else who
might be hard of hearing might not hear it within 100 ft. But a decibel system it is it is objective. Um and when I read this this item I read
it in such a way who drafted this item was was this drafted was this item drafted by the city administration or was it drafted by the city attorney's office? It was drafted by the city attorney's office. Rob Rosenwald uh worked on the item. Okay. Because it in the in the clauses
that were placed here says the American Nationals Standard Institute provides reliable and widely accepted guidelines for sound measurement and instrumentation which are utilized to ensure consistent and enforcable compliant assessments. And this
ordinance introduces a phase implementation timeline uh to ensure fair notice and informed adoption. Um it it establishes a clear enforcement and appeals process. To me, this is exactly
what we need. It takes away It takes away the subjectivity that we currently deal with, not only with this type of equipment, with all other types of noise that have been plaguing some of
our residential areas coming from commercial areas, noise leaving commercial establishments. Why? because the enforcement has been so subjectively driven driven by what is reasonable to me versus what's reasonable to you and
was heard at a certain distance. I much rather us starting to see this shift towards a decibel system. And I think this ordinance could be a good way to test it. Commissioner B. Um so I apologize. I did not um
pay as close attention to the language of this as I should have and that's my fault. Um, I will say that I think a lot of us on the commission as even before we were elected as residents have been frustrated by the fact that we keep getting told that we can't have decel
measures um for mufflers or music outside or whatever because it's too hard to enforce because there's so many other competing factors to determine where the music or the noise might be coming from. In this case, however, I think it's pretty, you know, it's pretty
clear. there's either a very loud uh engine going or there isn't. So, um I know money is really tight. Um I can't imagine we would need more than a couple of these units. I can't imagine we would need a super expensive couple of these
units. Um and you know it if if I would like between first and second um reading to have the administration come back with an idea of what it would cost to buy one or two handheld units. They don't have to be super top of the line. Um, I'm sure we can get them on Amazon
that, you know, to see how it goes. Um, and and learn from it. And I'm sure training people won't be that hard. People do much more complicated things with drones in their own private time. So, how hard can it be to use a handheld decibel reader? Let's find out what the costs are and if we want to institute
this as a pilot program to see how useful it is. I would be willing to entertain that, but let's let's finish this conversation in a more concrete way. I agree, Commissioner Fernandez, that I would love to see us um move to a decibel measuring city the way other
cities around the world seem to be able to do. You know, Philadelphia does it, Paris does it. Why can't we? So, um let's start with something that is cut and dry. Makes sense. makes. And even to your point, when you go to destinations around the world, even in night life establishments, they regulated so well
where you see there's a there's a display that shows you the decibel of the music that helps them self-regulate and self-p police the noise that is being created by their establishment. And so I am so grateful that you have uh
taken this initiative forward, Mr. Attorney. I would like us to start working on legislation now that we have uh um creating precedent with this ordinance but let's start working on legislation so that we can look at some of our other um uh enforcement
mechanisms as it relates to noise to see how can we start if this works well start transitioning uh to uh decibb for the other areas. um use objective using objective criteria. Would this require if you're for a new
home build would would there has to be an inspection for this decibel reader for an air conditioning? Maybe Tom can answer that. If it if it was something that was included as part of the permit, then I would imagine that the inspector would
have to verify that the decibel reader has been installed and is working correctly. So if it's a So if it's a new home build, every new home is going to have an air conditioning that this is that is going to add another layer of review. And with
code or planning or building uh it would probably be code or building because it would have to be installed in a manner consistent with the criteria in the ordinance and it would have to be somebody with expertise in ensuring that
the decibel reader has been properly calibrated and is working correctly. And so what is the threshold decel? Cuz like let's say it's a very large home and the air conditioning rises maybe one decel over the threshold,
you know, and where is that decibel reading being taken place? Is it being taken place from the neighboring property? Is it 5t away? So yeah, the the reading is taken from the decibel from the property line. It is the uh at
at levels that rise for single family homes starting at the quietest for single family homes then going through multif family residential and then commercial industrial with each being allowed a little bit louder. And it is
uh 55 60 and 65 dB which our research showed was what modern equipment at the quiet to moderate rating. When you mean our research, whose research? My research when I wrote this. Okay. So, look, I generally I am supportive of this, but what I don't
want to happen is add another layer to the building permit process and and I don't feel comfortable having a city hold on a city attorney tell us what the decibel should be. I think it should come from building.
Yeah. You know, or planning. Uh they say this is what the average decibel reader for an air conditioning or pool equipment should be not not from legal. Um but I just I want to be cautious because you know this is going to add another you know it's going to
add another layer of the permit process. Um and and I you know I certainly don't like to hear loud equipment but I just want to know I want to be very thoughtful on this. I want to make sure we're thoughtful on what is that threshold.
So, I I would like to suggest, if I may, um, excellent points. Nobody's trying to put in an additional layer of complication. You need to have a permit to, um, build a home, uh, install a pool, all those things are permitted processes. Anyhow, I think perhaps one
of one of the things to consider is that in the permit guidelines, there's a, you know, best practice. this is what we expect you to install. Every piece of equipment that is sold uh whether it's a dishwasher or um you know a a a
generator tells you what their ratings are. And so that is not a complicated thing to do. And so if you um if we state in the permitting process guidelines this is what's allowed in this neighborhood. I my vote would be that um the person is given the benefit
of the doubt that here's a sticker on the piece of equipment. Ah check. So there's no additional there's no additional level of anything that has to happen. It's just hey this is a brand new piece of equipment. Here's a star rating. Here's everything else. This falls within the guidelines. Not a problem. If in six years it becomes a
problem, that's a different conversation. I would also suggest if I and I I I have to go back and look at my notes, but I believe and I could be wrong, but I believe Miami Dade County or the city of Miami um already has legislation along these lines perhaps
that we can um base our levels at to make them commensurate so it's not crazy complicated and we're not extrapolating. Um and we have a good basis that if it's working in Miami, it's likely that it would work here. Um, and I think this, you know, I think there's some refining
that needs to happen between now and second reading, but I think, um, I think it's worth getting it right. And also, also, you said the the property line where Okay, so where from the property line? I mean, are you you know, it's measured from the property line. Where in the
property line is it measured from at the closest spot between uh the property line and your neighbor's property line? Well, that could be 5T, right? Right. I mean, that's a set correct if you I think that the goal of this is if you're going to put and and the way this came
about was a resident complained about a a unit that was put in almost right at the property line and was super and was super loud. And so the idea being if you're going to build so that your unit is right at the property line, then you really need to buy a quiet unit. Um, and
if I could just add to So, so I if I if I could make a friendly suggestion instead of making it part of the permitting process. Um, maybe it could just be a uh a process where it's proactive. If someone has an issue, they
call in and they say, "Okay, is that is that the is I think I was going to say is this isn't part of the this isn't drafted as part of the permit process. This is drafted as part of our noise ordinances. It is not part of the main noise ordinance
because that has been approved by the courts and is not based on decibb. And in that broad circumstance, we do not recommend moving to decibb for a variety of reasons that I can get into with you individually or or when you want to have a long discussion about that. But in
this we uh in this case this is our noise violations are complaint driven and this would be no different. If your neighbor uh calls and says the air conditioner is too loud, code would go out to a decibel reading and uh and
there's a fine associated with it if you are too loud. I and and just to follow up, I it just sucks that we're gonna that we may potentially pass this against our own residents, but we haven't we don't
have any ordinance against businesses that consistently make a lot of loud noise. I I don't know if this is like necessarily the right place to start against, you know, neighboring properties. Um I I would much would have rather prefer having a what Commissioner
Fernandez is suggesting a decibelbased objective system before we go with this. Um, but I guess we could just see between first and second reading, you know, what the what the if it's the thresholds are if it's the desire that if it's the desire of the commission, we
can switch to a reasonable level sound uh plainly audible with the property line or something along those lines uh would also be a fine standard and one that some do use. Uh, the last thing I wanted to add was that the numbers that we do use, although I did research and
see that those are the numbers for new equipment, they are also the same same numbers that the city of Miami uses in their almost identical ordinance. Can I commission Ellison? Let's uh call a vote. So, if we pass this today, it
just gives you it gives code compliance a tool if somebody's AC is noisy or their pool equipment is overly noisy, which could happen at the end of a useful life of any of these units. Is that all this is? We are not imposing anything on anyone who wants to replace
a unit. We are not going to wait for an inspector to come out with their decibel machine. Right? We're not adding anything to the planning or building process. Right. Right. it's only newly installed and it's not part of the building or permit process. It's if you get a if your neighbor complains and says this this uh
pool equipment is keeping me up at night. Uh we can go out and say see if it's if newly installed equipment is too loud. And that way people if they've already installed it and they have super loud equipment, they're not penalized until they get around to and if I but let's say that my let's say
an AC unit breaks. Wait, single family home. My unit breaks, the guy comes out and says, "You know what? I need to pull a permit to replace this unit. I don't know. Is it required for replacement of AC? No, not to replace. There's no there's nothing required. Replace a pool pump or AC.
Okay. So, he got Let's The AC guy comes out and he says, "I I'm I'm going to go pull the permit." Does he have to do anything extra? If I may. Well, are we passing any expense at all onto residents? If I may, the way that the ordinance is drafted, it applies only to newly
installed equipment. So, back to the question about if somebody calls, if you have existing equipment, but you purchased it 2 years ago, you're not going to be liable for a violation. Uh, this will apply from and after January 1st of 2026. So, we will need to engage
in an educational campaign to let folks know that if you are installing new equipment from and after January 1st of 2026, you will need to buy equipment that complies with these standards or you could face violations. But how do they comply? Isn't there an assumption that all AC
units that are being sold on the market right now are re reasonable units? I mean, who's going to are some I I don't know. I'm not an expert in AC units. Have you, Vince? I mean, are you recommending this policy? What will it I don't have anything in the building code to regulate noise outside of an
alarm that has to be 85 dB at 10 ft from the source. That's the only So, this doesn't affect you at all, right, in the building department at all. It just gives you a tool. I'll support it then. If it's not going to pass along any expense to people and it's just an educational campaign and there's no extra step in the building
process and we're not creating red tape, that true. Yes. To all of these things. If I may, you guys are recommending this. The again, a person who purchases or installs a new air conditioning unit or pool pump after January 1st of 2026
would need to be mindful of this ordinance because you don't the last thing you want to do is install equipment that will violate the decibel uh requirements because then you're going to be subject to fines. So I believe that the research that Rob conducted suggests that most equipment
that is out there today will be in compliance with these decibel. But I think between first and second reading, we could work with staff to ensure that these standards that that we are including or that that have been included in the ordinance are are reasonable based on equipment that is
available today. Can can can we also for by second reading can we also have a test here at chambers of like what because it's going to be five feet right that would probably be the the minimum what is whatever you're recommending what is that threshold
um uh sure we could do that I mean uh the the decibel levels here like 60 uh dB is generally the sound that a refrigerator makes 70 to 80 dB is the sound of a vacuum cleaner. Um,
and so what is the threshold that you're recommending uh for uh residences uh uh 55 above ambient, which it means with with it on and with it off. Let's work this out between readings.
Let's call the vote. Yeah. And I I just want to I'm at all of this because let let no good deed go unpunished. We are trying to help um keep Miami Beach quieter and if it leads to a more codified way to approach sound issues across the city because we
learned that in fact we can um use decibel readers to manage this issue that is a chronic um quality of of life annoyance to our residents and our businesses. Um you know it's it's there's been a lot of good points raised. Let us rework it between now and
September. And you know, hold vote. It's amazing. Thank you all for uh coming up here. I have a motion by Commissioner Bot and a second by Second. I'm sorry. I heard I'll second Commissioner Suarez. Uh Commissioner
Dominguez. Yes. And by Oh, I'm sorry. It is a public hearing and I have Daniel Saldo on on Zoom. Mr. Go ahead, please. Yes. Thank you. Uh, this is a great ordinance. Thank you to the sponsor. We
must protect our residents from commercial intrusions like oversized McMansions and Airbnbs which cheapen our neighborhoods and impact our quality of life. The recent understory ordinance is leading to even more speckome tearowns.
We must protect our taxpaying homeowners whose quality of life is under attack. Thank you. Our next virtual caller is has a screen name of Zoom user. Identify yourself, please. State your name, address, and you have two minutes.
Hi, this is Jane Crop, 1390 Ocean Drive. I'm surprised my name didn't come up for some reason. Um, I just like to make a comment. I'm a designer. I've worked many, many um apartments, soundproofing them and dealing with sound issues in New York where everybody lives on top of each other. And the first thing we do is
we strip out the apartment to demo it and then we bring in a sound engineer and they have a decibb are don't do not measure anything. They measure sound in the air. There's a more complex problem
here of vibration. vibration goes into the ground and if you're have a neighbor that's close to your unit that set that vibration travels and it comes up into the foundations of the buildings. There is a meter that measures and identifies
every single frequency and where that frequency is coming from. So you're not getting ambient sound from cars and traffic. That is the accurate way to measure sound that annoys a neighbor. So this whole decel issue, it just doesn't
work. It doesn't work. It's it doesn't identify the problem and it doesn't create a accurate measurement of vibration. It's the vibration that comes up into your bedroom at night, not the sound in the air. So, you know, I've written to you guys before about this. There are special meters and special
training that reads these meters and identifies every single frequency and where it comes from. And that's what you need to focus on to mitigate sound. Thank you. Thank you so much, Jane.
Uh I see no one else in Zoom and no one in the audience requesting to speak. The vote I Commissioner Dominguez, yes. Vice Mayor Suarez, yes. Commissioner Bach, yes. Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez, yes. Commissioner Fernandez, yes. Commissioner Magazine, yes.
Mayor Miner, yes. Motion carry, second reading, public hearing is scheduled for September 3rd. That was item R5S. R 7B. R 7B. It is a public hearing. City commission warrant request for 3611
through 3651 Collins Avenue. 3 R7B. Mayor, if I may, since this is a quiz judicial hearing, I need to swear in any witnesses who will be testifying today, including staff. So, if you intend to speak on this item, please raise your right hands. Do you swear affirm the
testimony you'll give in this proceeding is the truth, all truth, nothing but the truth. I do. Thank you. Uh, Mr. Mr. Mayor, I'll go ahead and um kick this off and then I'm going to and then I'm going to turn it over to the applicant because this is a private application that has been filed. But as
the commission may recall, uh when the resiliency code was adopted in 2023, there was a warrant process that was instituted. And this warrant process gives the city commission the ability to grant some latitude for certain elements related to the land development
regulation such as a slight increase in building height or a slight reduction in setbacks. Uh the application herein is for a reduction in the uh some of the sideyard setbacks for a development project that has been recently approved
by the historic preservation board. It's important to note that what's before you is solely the request for a warrant for a reduction in the some of the sideyard setback requirements. There is nothing else that's before you with regard to the development as it has already been
approved by the historic preservation board. As you'll note in the commission memo, we have provided a description of the request which is basically a reduction by 8 ft of the sum of the sideyard setback requirements. We've also determined that the warrant is
appropriately before the commission and most importantly that pursuant to section 2.7.1 the proposed warrant does satisfy the criteria that is required for the commission to take into consideration. As such the administration is recommending um approval of the warrant
for the property at 3611 and 3621 Collins Avenue. Tom, before we get into the application and Mr. Is it okay if I ask a question or the applicant can go? It's up to you. Please. Nick, if I could call you. Um, we've
been getting some emails and in fact, we heard somebody during sick that uh I believe said he's a commission candidate essentially saying don't vote for this because we want to save the historic structures on this site and we've been
getting lobbyed to do so. I started going through some of these emails late last night and this morning saying, "Please save these historic structures. Vote no for this warrant." And then I read through your email that seemed very specific about reasons why
we could vote against this warrant. And full disclosure, since we're in a quasi judicial hearing, I called you and I said, "How tied are our hands here?" And essentially I go, Nick, would I be able reading through your email was very,
very descriptive about why we could or could not vote against this warrant. I said, Nick, if I if I said I woke up this morning in a bad mood, I'm cranky. I want to vote against this.
Would that be improper? So if if I guess I would start by saying you're the commission's hands are not are not tied, right? You still have um you still have the authority independent authority to make a decision on this application, but your decision because
this is a quai judicial matter. You're not in a policy setting role in this hearing. You're in a you're applying policy to a particular application. So, your decision has to be made based on the criteria in the code for the granting of a warrant. And it has to be
made based on the evidence before you, which is everything in your agenda materials, the presentation you you heard from the planning director, and the presentation you'll hear from the applicant, and the testimony and evidence that you'll hear during the public hearing. So, your decision ultimately has to be based on those
things. What's before you is a is a is is is is a very limited issue which is a a request for relief from the sum of the sideyards setback for this development. The historic preservation board has has approved a certificate of
appropriateness for the overall project. Um and the the demolition the proposed demolition of existing buildings on the site um has been is the applicant has applied for pursuant to the resiliency
and safe structures act. So neither the certificate of appropriateness for the overall project nor the proposed demolition of of the two buildings on the site are before you. What's the only thing before you is the warrant for relief from the sum of the sideyards
setback. So some of the email campaign that we've been getting and what was suggested during Sutnik hour is if we would essentially say you know what well the emails and the gist of that were vote against this warrant save these historic buildings. If we would sit here
and say you know what I want to save these historic buildings so I'm going to vote against this warrant because I think it gives them a greater chance to be saved. Is that within the described criteria that we could make this decision on? No, it's not. If if you
wanted to vote for or against the granting of the warrant, you would have to make that decision based on the criteria for the warrant. Does the has the applicant uh substantiated that that they uh that they should So, what we're being lobbyed to do is
improper and we even used even stronger words when we were debating back and forth earlier today. And if we would sit here and say, you know what, we want to save these historic buildings. We're going to vote against this warrant. Then what would be the
process? What would happen immediately after that? One of two things. Either the applicant would would uh would would need to redesign the project to to uh to comply with the code uh without the warrant. Um or the applicant could uh seek review of
the city commission's decision by petitioning to to the circuit court essentially by by appealing your decision and also they could also request a variance from the from the sum of the sideyards. And in your calculation that would be an
easy win if we sat up here and used uh the reasons that we just laid out for voting against this warrant. given that that's not one of the stir criteria that you've outlined as to why we can or cannot vote on this warrant.
My my advice would be to make your decision today based on the warrant and the warrant alone. That's the only thing that's before you. Thank you. Yeah. So, if I can just follow up just to clarify one further thing. So the the idea of using this as leverage to
negotiate a better project that should have happened at the prior quasi judicial hearings from the HPB and whoever else like that like that we don't have that we don't have that purview to say you know we'll give you
the warrant you know the way we do horse trading up here against everyone's council um all the time you know we we'll say yes to the warrants but really we want you to do x y and z like that's not a thing that can happen, right? I mean, the the reason the the commission adopted a warrant process as
part of the resiliency code is to be able to consider these one-off requests for relief that might improve the overall design of a project without having to go through the legislative process of amending the code, right? So, so this so this is the first warrant application um that's before you, but
it's it's for that reason. So, so you know there are a number of us on this on this commission who are preservationists and this ship has sailed. We are preempted by the state on doing all kinds of things that would have perhaps
made things better for us. Um we at this moment don't have a path to proceed to undo that, although we're never going to stop looking. Um, and so, uh, it's not a question of let's save these buildings because the the die has been cast. If
we, you know, had made a different decision as a city, not us up here. But if the the, um, the plans weren't approved by the other boards, um, the applicant could say, "Fine, we're not we're not preserving anything. We're building a live local project," which
they can do as of right. I do think this property this property is likely eligible for live local. Um I would just say you know what's before you is a very narrow request. Uh the staff analysis
analyzes the application under the the through the lens of the of the warrant criteria. Um the applicant will will now have an opportunity to make a presentation. Uh this is a public hearing item. The city commission has forwarded me all of your exparte communications which we uploaded to the
online agenda so that they're part of the record. Um, and then after the public hearing, if the applicant wants to make a rebuttal, they can and then you can deliberate and make your decision. But so what I want to get clear is that this is not a a a reflection of whether or not we like the project, whether or
not we think the building should be demolished. It is purely and solely about these very minor variances that are a a more efficient way of granting variances rather than making an application or changing the code for a you know an overlay district as we like
to call them here. Um that affect very limited areas. Um, and so because I know I I'm guessing the reason why a lot of my preservation friends are in the audience um are because they are very concerned about the demolition of these buildings, which I I share the concerns.
Um, this vote will not protect that cannot. It it it just we can't vote on whether or not those buildings should or should not be demolished. That is not what this is about. and and what we are required to do to fulfill our obligations
is vote on the very specific matter before us. Not the validity of the project, not whether or not we like it, not whether or not um we want to save one more of the buildings and get it incorporated. I mean, yes, obviously I would, but that's not what I'm voting
on. And if I make a decision to say no to this very specific thing because I don't like the project, then I'm not fulfilling my legal obligation. Is that correct? Right. You you again you just want to make this decision based on the the criteria specific. So I just want that
understood because I know that's why you guys are here and and it's it's so frustrating. I share your frustration and I know I've gotten the same emails that my colleagues have and I I hear the frustration just, you know, dripping through the emails. I like we all share it in the city. We have this gem of an
architectural landscape that is no longer ours to manage. Be that as it may, this vote is specifically on some very minor variances on a project that is already approved. And that is what we are bound by law to do. I just want to
make sure that I'm understanding it correctly, that anybody else who has a view on the project as a whole also understands the constrictions that we're under correctly. So, thank you, Commissioner Dominguez, and then Commissioner Fernandez, and we'll open up to public comment.
Uh, thank you, Mayor. Um, and like Commissioner Magazine mentioned, all of a sudden last night I started getting so many emails and I emailed you a couple times saying, "Aren't we preempted?" And uh, so I just want to share that I do
share your passion for art deco. I um, appreciate the value of those uh, buildings and preserving it as much as possible. But as Commissioner Vot mentioned, we as a city are preempted by state law when it comes to the demolition of these buildings. And the
applicant previously submitted a demolition permit under the Resiliency and Safe Structures Act. And the city staff confirmed that the existing structures meet the criteria for the administrative approval under the law.
And so the only item before us today is to vote on a warrant related to the projects required some of the sideyards set back and we're not voting on the demolition strictly on the setback. So
commissioner please. Okay, Kasen, thank you for being here that on uh we have a presentation if it could be how long posted. I'll try to make it pretty short
because the staff report I think is complete. Uh so good afternoon uh Nissan Casden and Cecilia Torres Toledo of Acreman as well as Tracy Slavvens and Mike Urente of LSN representing the
applicant. Uh, also with us today is Brandon Hall, the lead architect, who I will turn over to in a moment, and Steve Abdikov, the consulting architect. I think you had a very wholesome, honest, and accurate discussion of the legal
posture of this matter. So, I will not go into that. What I would like to say before bringing Mr. Hall up is that this project is a magnificent addition to that part of Collins Avenue. It fits in
in terms of character and scale with the rest of the neighborhood. It was approved unanimously by the historic preservation board and has received a strong support of uh the neighboring of all the neighboring properties. uh will
distribute now and you may have received before letters of support including from the FA House Condominium Association. Uh, also from the Mid Beach Neighborhood Association, the representatives of Beach House 8,
the neighboring property are here. And I think you'll also hear from the representatives of the Caribbean condominium board. And you will see that they are all as well as individual letters from the pioneer in that area, Alan Fyena, and Himea Caminos, who's
been a major force in the art scene in that area and in Miami Beach. everyone is welcoming this beautiful new addition to this neighborhood. So with that um you have the staff report. The staff report shows how we meet all of the
necessary criteria. This is truly a very minor request which is result only of the fact that the property expanded by 50 ft when beach house 8 was included by covenant eloo and that therefore
uh ex increased the size of the some of the sideyard setbacks. So, we're talking about basically 8 ft here. And you will see the design that Brandon has come up with is has been is the best for the site for the neighborhood and consistent
with the design principles that have guided the beautiful buildings in that neighborhood. I'll introduce Brandon. Brandon was for many years one of the senior partners of uh Lord Norman Foster. He is also the architect who designed Fyena House and many other famous buildings in America and abroad.
and Brandon, if you would take over and briefly take them through uh the request. Thank you, N. You know, I Sorry. Sorry. I I think I think you guys have the votes. I mean, we're we're good. You know, let's let's
go to public comment and let's let's wrap this up. So, I'll spare you. I'm good with that. I wouldn't mind seeing other Is there more? We got so much on the There's very little. I mean, I I am I'm not doing an architectural presentation. This is diagrams and and dimensions.
It's a common sense argument. Basically, we're taking an area because beach house 8 has got a non-conforming setback of 7 foot6 instead of putting it on 36th Street where you've got a public car park. Setbacks are for light and air. As
Roy France always said, what we're doing is taking that 8 ft deficit and putting it between Beach House, Beach House 8 and our new building to get light and air between buildings, view corridors, light and air. That's what it's about.
You don't need it on 36th Street. And we're increasing the setback from 4'9 to 16'6 on 36th Street anyway, which we would do as of right anyway. This is just an anomaly of the situation and we're doing a common sense move.
Is it a better project because of it? Much better. I mean it's as an urbanist, as an architect, it's a common sense urban response to an anomalous situation. It's very simple and I can go through the diagrams, but
interest time. Yeah. Let let's hear public comment. We'll bring it back here if we think it's necessary to hear from you. I obviously I I can't predict how it will go. I I do let we'll go back to you. Let's hear public comment. Thank you. If there's anyone in the audience requesting to speak, please approach the
podium. I'm going to call Steve Gabinsky first. Mr. Gabinsky, please state your name and then I'll swear you in. Hi. Um, how are you? My name is Steve Gumbinsky. I'm president of the Caribbean Condominium Association. Thank you, sir. Before you before you go
on, do you swear or affirm that any and all testimony you're about to give is a truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? If so, please say I do. I do. Go ahead, please. You have to. I also was president of Lincoln Road Business Improvement District. I renovated 900 Lincoln Road, bringing it
up to its 1925 storefront. We also have an historic building in the Caribbean condo. couldn't agree more with the need to have historic buildings, but I live next door to the two existing structures and they are dilapidated buildings that add in my opinion no architectural value
and are at real detriment to the community. This is a beautiful project that will definitely enhance the neighborhood and more importantly, I've looked at the architectural diagrams closely and I believe there is an architecturally significant need for the setback. Um, we can talk about
preservation, but we shouldn't talk about preservation in a vacuum. And I wanted the commission to feel more comfortable to know that they're creating a beautiful project and what's being saved is simply, in my opinion, and many people's opinion, not worth saving or you wouldn't had the Mid Beach
Association and other communities support. Thank you. Thank you. Our next virtual caller is Daniel Saldo. Mr. Mr. Aldo, before you begin, do you swear or affirm that any and all testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? If so, please say I do.
I do. Thank you. So, Daniel Seraldo, candidate for Miami Beach Commission, but I'm also the previous executive director of the Miami Design Preservation League. And I remember it was probably a couple years back when I met with the owners of this property and saw a plan that included the adaptive
reuse and partial demolition of these two properties, the historic Coral Reef and the Patrician Hotel, which by the way, the Pat the Patrician is a Roy France building. And just like the Versailles and the National Hotel, uh
these are amazing buildings. I understand Mr. Gambinsk's point. Uh that in his opinion, they're not they don't look that great, but it's not really our opinion that matters. It's the National Register of Historic Places that these buildings are on and they're also in
local historic districts. So, it's unfortunate. It sounds like the votes already been made, although it was supposed to be quasi judicial. We heard that uh that folks up there are already biased towards uh supporting this. I do know that there is a way to save these
buildings, but it seems like this commission has been defeated and just another example of our history being trashed while there's platitudes sent out on emails about actually caring about it. So, please vote no. Thank you.
There is no one on Zoom. Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak? Ner, please state your full name first. Yes. My name is George Terry. I'm the interim executive director of the Miami Design Preservation League. They swear you in. I'm sorry. I don't know if Yeah, I got I was sworn in already. Perfect.
And uh I just want to say as I said at the finance committee, it's deja vu all over again. I served from 91 to 98. And the things that you've heard from the gentleman behind me, I have heard for 30 years. These are dumpy. The gentleman that just spoke, if I hear one more
person tell me how bad these buildings are, we wouldn't have the carile. We wouldn't have the hotels on Ocean Drive. I want you to think about three buildings. The Lennox Hotel. Have you been in the Lennox? Fantastic. Was it Dumpy before? Yes.
What about the uh Greystone? Do you remember the Greystone? Was it Dumpy before? The same stories I've heard then, I'm hearing now. And also the Esme, what a fantastic renovation. Someone took it. They didn't say, "Oh,
like the gentleman on, oh, they don't need to be preserved." You know, I want to say two things. I want to read to you our motto here. We are committed to providing excellent public service and safety to all who
live, work, and play and are vibrant, tropical, historic, not future-driven, not uh any but historic. And what we do is we listen to the glitz and glamour because when you're born here a lot of
times you spend your whole life walking by these buildings and they were dilapidated then and it's hard to change your inner uh self because you've gone by them for so long that you think oh they don't need to be preserved. That is
who we are. We just celebrated the 100th anniversary of art deco the art deco capital of the world. So, I know we can't now do anything about this building and I'm so impressed with your questions. It made me feel that, you
know, we're really uh looking at the future and art deco is so important. But I just want you to know that the comments that I've heard I've heard since the day I arrived and I've given you I can give you 20 more examples of buildings that have been renovated that
are gorgeous and wonderful that people thought were dumpy at the same time. Thank you, George. George, Commissioner B. So, George, I I I share I echo everything that you said up here and and
I know that, you know, um ugly ducklings can turn into beautiful swans with enough tender loving care. We've seen it a million times. Go walk down Ocean Drive, walk down Collins. We see it all the time. As I stated in the beginning, um, contrary to what the previous caller
said, our hands have been tied, right? We are not in in the grand scheme with the the the state legislation, but in in this exact particular case, we are voting just on setbacks. And if if I'm being given the opportunity to create a
better light corridor and create light and air and space in a project that is already going to move forward with or without me, I'm going to try to help to make it better. That does not mean that I'm giving cart blanch to anybody even this project anybody to to just come and
say, "Oh, you know, it's it's it's got some spalling. We should really get rid of it." Or or like the people who bought Jennifer Lopez's um mansion, I forget what the address was, and said, "No, no, no. has to be torn down because there are cockroaches. Hello, you live in Florida. What are you kidding? You're in a swamp. So, you know, I I want to make
sure this narrative that I'm hearing um whether it's from people calling in or people who are emailing that we are just signing the death warrant to art deco and to mid-century modern and to all the other beautiful archetypes that we have in the city that we are blessed to have
in this city that we are fighting like mad to protect is nonsense. I can speak for myself. I can I can imagine at least some of my colleagues feel that feel that way because I've worked with them on some issues. I would never presume to speak for all of my colleagues on this
matter, but I can tell you for myself that's not how I roll and I will never be comfortable with what has happened to us. I will never be comfortable with home rule being taken away from us. And I will always fight to get that back. And where I can make a decision that
makes a project that's already in full motion better, I'm going to make that decision. Do I wish it were being presented to us differently? I sure do. I I'm sure it's going to be beautiful. I have no doubt of that. That's not the issue, right? That's not the issue. Could it have been beautiful incorporating different things
differently? I'm quite sure we have incredibly talented architects in front of us and a whole team behind you. I have no doubt that no, whatever the constrictions had been, it would have been a spectacular project. But this is where we are now. And so this is what we're going to vote on. And the
narrative of we're condemning the entire city to death uh by demolition is false, ridiculous, and quite frankly offensive. Mr. Mayor, uh George, if you could stay by the podium. Commissioner Suarez. Uh George. Yes.
I know you're the interim director, right? Okay. But the the previous director called in. Are you aware that the same group and the same representatives advocating for this for this project
donated I think close to $10,000 to MDPL? No. You didn't know that? So, because when I look at the public records, this was I think done in February of 23. there was a a large
donation made to MDPL and then the following year or I believe the same year in that Florida session we have this Florida unsafe structures act right and again this is no fault to you but where was MDPL and your previous
director when this was going through the Florida state legislator they were very much there they were there and then knocking the door and we got exemptions because of it we got exempted all the way up to which the we got the article historic 22nd 23rd
one at a time one at a time 23rd. So So if I if I can I I want to I want to make the excuse me I want to make the I want to make the point because I've been I've been consistently in the last couple months that it's important to make sure that developer
and special interest money stays out of MDPL. Okay. Exactly. Um because this again the you know, we don't know where interests lie, what agendas are being driven, and so I I
think it's important to to really uh stay transparent on that. I I agree. And also, as as you know, uh they haven't been voted on, but the board is is uh going to be uh approving very soon some some new directives for the uh for the rules and regulations,
and those things are going to be included included. Uh so those kinds of things won't happen again. Thank you. Thank you all. Thank you. Thank you, George. Commissioner Fernandez, still on public comments, by the way.
Is is this building being demolished whether or not we approve the warrant? Yes. Yes. So whether or not in inconsequential of our vote today on this warrant, these this the building is being removed.
Question. Yes. The site plan that was approved by the historic preservation board unanimously which they thought was the best design solution, urban planning solution and neighborhood solution would require the
demolition of the two buildings. Okay, which also happened to be structurally unsafe. Okay, but well and and and un unusable. Okay. So, so whether we approve this or not, the buildings are gone.
Yes. Okay. So, what we're discussing today is whether or not we want there to be an increase in space between two buildings, a condominium building and the proposed project. Exactly, Commissioner. To create more
light and air and a better overall planning for that block. Okay. And so because to the south we have the parking lot and to the north uh there's a residential condominium building. And if this waiver is not approved then in essence the building
would just extend further north uh reducing the light uh for the condominium building to correct. Okay. So to the extent that we have to deal with a demolition of a building whether or not our vote today is in favor or against what we can do today
with our vote is improve conditions for the neighbors to the north. Precisely commissioner. Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Rosa Gonzalez. You know, when the UN safe structures bill came the first time, we were all in
shock because historically we had rights over demolition and if you demolish then you had to replicate. So, it was a really bitter pill for all of us. Commissioner Suarez, um MDPL was fighting like crazy in Tallahassee. I
know that Commissioner Fernandez was up in Tallahassee. I went to Tallahassee. Um but there you have it. we got the preeemption. Thank goodness we got the exemption up to 23rd Street. Um, so in this case,
all I can say is if it is not bothering the neighbors and I did speak to people at the Caribbean who and I know that you went and spoke to them and if we get light and air voting for I mean like let's say that we vote now, right? Let's
say that three of us vote no right now. Um, two things happened. What? The buildings will still The buildings will still be gone and then there will just be less light, less air, and possibly a worse project
for the neighbors because I think the neighbors were fine with this um design. Correct. Okay. At least the Caribbean. I'm looking at the letters here. So, you know, that's where we are. And I do I I mourn some of these structures. There's
one there's one of the three buildings that I think is is a is a beautiful building with, you know, wonderful bones. Um that is not that we're going to lose. And that's sad. It really is. But if we
vote now, then we just send a message. It's hard to do business. And then guess what? Then people go to Tallahassee and they're going to say, "Next time you you can no longer uh vote on easements." Then we don't even get to vote on these easements. This is really literally what
we've been going through, right? That that's exactly what we're facing. So, you know, and the cost to do these look, I'm given the circumstances. Oh, and the fact that they built within the
regulations of 200 ft in height when everybody else is asking for a lot more height. So, when I initially looked at it, I said, "Well, at least they're building within what they could currently build." And that is a lot to ask right now because we get a lot of
pressure from people to go higher and higher. And I have had an item on the agenda for literally a year and a half about a 67 threshold on height that the mayor has not called. Not sure why. Should probably call it at some point.
Although it's funny. I get criticize me while we've I'm not I'm not critic. I'm just saying that, you know. So, please don't interrupt me. No, I'm not interrupt. But no, the the Robert's rules, if I am if I am reference, we've literally hit records of the amount of items I heard
and you're actually on the top of the list of items that have been heard. Well, um, as we're saying, at a time where people are telling us we have to go higher and higher and and we've been trying to regulate that and we can't. I like the fact that they're building
within what they have. And by the way, Cucha Brand is a fabulous brand. I mean, it's Milano. It's true. I mean, Milano, New York, Miami Beach. It puts us on
this new map in a way that really is iconic for Miami Beach internationally, worldwide. So, we're not getting some generic project. I mean, we're getting the best of the best of the most beautiful
woodwork and design and light and Norman Foster within our building code. So, okay, let's continue with public comment. Jack, good afternoon, commissioners and Mr.
Mayor. I'm Jack Finlass. I live at 7935 East Drive temporarily and um I'd like to comment on what's going on here. Former chairman of the HPB and longtime advocate for historic preservation. I'd like to quote my former colleague on the
HPB, Scott Needleman, who never never saw an variance that he liked. And for a long time, I criticized him because I thought that that was a very bad attitude to take that there should be variances for some things. But this is a case, even a symbolic case, where it
might be a good thing for you all to have a backbone for change and vote against this because even though we may lose, and we probably will in the long run, um this new building, which is fabulous, I think I'm an architect and I think Mr. Norman Foster is a fabulous
addition to the city, we we we have to have a backbone no matter what the opposition is in Tallahassee or anywhere else. and we really need to stand up and take a stand permanently against the destruction of our city. So, thank you very much. That's all I have to say.
Thank you. Any other public comment? Everyone has spoken out on Zoom at least once. Oh, please. Hi, I'm Roger Gold. I'm just talking as Roger Gold. That's uh Miami Beach citizen. Um I'm sorry I didn't get your name.
Excuse me. Your name? I didn't catch you. Roger Gold. Everybody asked that. I must mumble. Uh anyway, uh what what I like to see has happened pretty much the conversation of historic preservation.
Uh it it would be nice, I think, as a citizen uh to see a little a little more compromise in structures and buildings, things you can't save. Uh we understand the laws. Uh we we are a uh vibrant
MDPL. We want we want to show our face. We're there to help you help give advice if you want it. Uh but anyway, thank you very much for what you say about historic preservation. I think it means a lot. Thank you.
Commissioner Magazine and let's uh let's call the vote. Oh, hello. Good afternoon everybody. Julie Isacson, 85015 Street. Obviously, we've heard everything that you have to say and we understand
that there's not a lot that we can do in this particular situation because it's already been uh unfortunately decided. But I still feel as Jack I believe feels and the rest of us that are here, we do need to have more conversations about
this topic because we are going to lose these structures one way or another. unfortunately, but there could have been a way to possibly incorporate the buildings into the new design. And this is something
that I believe that we really need to look into more often. We keep coming up against the same developers, the same architects, the same people over and over. I've been a resident for over 30 years. I've been involved with the Miami
Design Preservation League since 2011. I served on the board of directors and I have been on the advocacy committee since 2020. It's as what George Neri said. We keep hearing the same things over and over and over and over and over and over and
over. Historic our historic preservation, our historic buildings is what made this city. It was falling apart and all of a sudden people noticed and they painted it and the the entertainment industry came and the
video and the modeling industry and we became the we have the the largest concentration of art deco. You all know all this. So we are getting very tired of constantly having to discuss demolition.
Why can't some of these buildings be incorporated into some of the newer designs? Thank you, Commissioner Magazine. Is there any more public comment? Commissioner Magazine, I I appreciate everybody coming out and
sharing your feedback. Truly, I do. I I bothered our uh deputy city attorney at 7:15 this morning with a phone call uh talking about what our options are, whether we would be able to somehow drive a discussion towards incorporating saving and things like that. And unfortunately, that ship is sailed. So,
I'd really like to bifurcate the issues into what's going forward. And I agree with Commissioner Suarez. It seems like the votes are there. But I do want to take this time because we're not going to see this project in front of the commission again. We haven't seen it before. To welcome you to our city. This
is going to be one of the most architecturally significant and celebrated projects not in Miami, not in the United States, in the entire world. Right. We are proud and we welcome this
moving forward in our city. I hope it's a great project because I see this big team that I guess has to be paid down here and uh you know, it's pretty big. So I I I hope it's going to be a great project. Um but kidding aside, uh truly th this is going to be one of those
types like the Fena where in 10 or 15 years we can't imagine what that area was like prior to Kasa Chipriani coming to our town. This is going to be the American Riviera and a section of our
city that was once left abandoned and now with the addition of the Fena and Kasi Chipriyani, the Aman, this will be one of the most celebrated and recognized areas in the entire country
and the entire world and I look forward to that. So I'd really like to bifurcate the discussion about lamenting losing buildings that ship is sailed but really turning an eye towards celebrating what we have coming to our city. So thank you for that. Are you moving it? Yeah. With that I'll move the
and I got a question for the city attorney for Nick. So the unsafe structure and resiliency act is something that I feel very strongly about. Um, for two years we fought this and we
fought this very very hard. We put a lot of time and a lot of energy and a lot of heartache into fighting this in in Tallahassee. Uh, because it was in the name of safety and resiliency. Uh, but it really what it was is a bill about
demolishing historic buildings uh, to create new buildings. And so this is the first the first application that we have that considers the unsafe structures and resiliency act. It was mentioned
first. It is the it is the fir it's the first it's both the first warrant application before the city commission and it's also the first uh demolition permit application under the resiliency and safe structures act.
And and that for me is you know We fought so hard against that. We fought. Am I allowed to vote against this because of that? That would be outside the scope of your review criteria.
So I cannot vote against this because it's invoking the unsafe structures and resiliency act. You could only vote the commission could only deny make a decision to deny the warrant on the basis of the warrant criteria. the demolition is is not is
not as a matter of law. It's not before you today. All right. That and that is what's incredibly challenging is we fought hard against against that bill. We spent weeks fighting fighting this on the ground dealing with people from different parts of the state, creating
alliances, getting the protections for our art deco district from 5th to to to 23rd Street. But this section was not accepted. and we and we raised the alarm about these areas. And Nick, you were a pivotal part of helping us in our
advocacy efforts and educating members of of the legislature of the impact that this would have. And so and so because of that, I feel in my heart the right thing to do to not be a hypocrite to the
efforts that I fought for to vote against this because of that. But if I do that then what's the consequence? I mean the the com the decision of the the decision the commission makes today could be subject to challenge right
whether it's to approve or deny the warrant. Uh every this whole conversation will be part of the record. So when I look at the at the warrant itself, the warrant itself having greater setback between two buildings, having more separation between two
buildings is a good thing. That part is good. What I don't like is is that this is tied to this demolition. And so I absolutely cannot vote against this based on that.
You cannot vote against this based on the proposed demolition. Okay. All right, call the vote. It is a uh a voice vote. So, all in favor and the motion was from Commissioner Magazine, seconded by Vice Mayor Suarez. All in favor, please say
I. I. Anyone opposed? Hearing none. The item is approved. 70. Thank you very much, Mayor, and thank you for your confidence in this great project. Thank you. R9 R9V
R9V, discuss, take action, enhance measures, remediate charter vessel issues at Miami Beach Marina. R9V. Okay, please uh if everyone can clear the room as we uh continue uh our items.
So, um want to talk about the Miami Beach Marina. This um had been an issue that came up several years ago where charter boats and some unruly behavior was occurring there. Our I took the lead on some items, but our commission in
general uh did a good job of passing legislation. Our city did a good job, seemed to clean up the problem for a while, but it's come back. Um, and we've been hearing a lot and we've all been hearing a lot from the South and Fifth Neighborhood Association, which we appreciate taking the lead and bringing
to our attention. Please, everyone, if you can clear the room. Thank you. Um, and, uh, we appreciate uh, again this the Silna bringing bringing these issues to our attention and trying to work
through it. So, there's several items that I want to discuss today. Some of them are going to be I'm going to be putting in an ordinance. The the rules prohibited to bring the ordinance today. So, I'm going to be putting it in an ordinance to come back. But then
there's some other issues that are more negotiation issues that we'll deal with. And um but let me tee up the first two items uh for the potential the ordinance that I plan to bring in September. One is uh pushing back the curfew, the current curfew times uh to 700 p.m. for
the charter boats and also increasing the current fines. And Mark Fishman or maybe you, Mark, can can walk us through what the uh what the increase in fines would be. The fine. Yeah. I mean, yes, I have here.
You want to walk through? Yeah. Mayor, as it stands now, I think the fines are for commercial charter vessel activity. Um, that's unpermitted. The fines are for a first offense within the preceding 6 months, uh, it's $500. Uh, for a second offense within the
preceding 6 months, the,000, third offense is 2,000, and a fourth or subsequent is 5,000. Um, what we'd be looking at doing or what what you'd be looking at doing is rolling back the commercial vessel activity operating hours from 9:00 p.m.
uh to 7:00 p.m. So, we' be prohibiting it from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. instead of now they can continue till till 9:00 p.m. So it would end earlier and increasing the fines to a first offense from 500 to a,000, a second offense from a,000 to 5,000 and potentially with
potentially with looking at a suspension of a period of time of the BTR potentially for maybe 10 days and then for a third or subsequent offense, a $5,000 fine as well uh and potentially denying um uh the BTR uh in the future.
What about the removal of the BTR? Uh, you know, the the code uh doesn't really contemplate that. There's two different sections. Um, 102, I think 371 or 372 and then 102, I think it's 381. Um, but it's it's contemplated in the denial, but I don't
know um if it's contemplated in the uh revocation, but I'd have to look. Okay. Yeah. Commissioner Botr Mark, can I ask you a quick question about that? Don't we currently have in our code about other BTR issues um that
if you're a third time uh striker, you lose your BTR for 13 months. Yeah, that's that was in the code um that you challen I think we might be switching it now or soon to to May, right? Well, it was opened in the item was open in regardless of whether it's shall or may.
But there is the provision that if you screw up three times on the third time, you're done and you're done for 13 months. And we're talking about that for a brickandmortar establishment where it would be incredibly punitive. I mean, they lose their lease, all this stuff. Why would we not have that same standard
for boats, which, you know, it might be an inconvenience for them to lose their slip at the Miami Beach Marina, but they're a boat. they can go any place else that they want to. I would respectfully request that we look at making it that same level of of um
of um of punishment because it's easier for them to go elsewhere. And I don't think that people who have historically shown, especially in the marinas of uh, you know, being bad actors and not really caring about what they do as long as they make their dollars, um, they
should be held at least as accountable. Yeah. No, I I think you're right. I I agree. We were trying to max out the fines with 1,000, 5,000, and 5,000 and look at suspending and denying and possibly revoking the BTRs, but I we were just started looking at it. So, I think that's something we definitely want to look at and want to do, you
know, as strongly as possible cuz we've just had you all have had recurring uh issues at at the Marine Police Charter Vessel Operations just consistently. No matter how much you you try and do, um there there still seem to be some issues. Okay. Two other issues that um I'm in in
my meetings and consultation with legal are not something we put in ordinance, but is subject to negotiations. I want to discuss those as well. One is potentially moving the pickup and drop off to the Monty's. Um, and then two about making the parking for marina
only. I'll take that uh silence as acquiescence. Uh, oh, good. I'm sorry. I realiz that was a question. I thought it was a statement. Yes. So, we've been mayor, we've been working
with SUNTEX to move the drop off and pickup to Monty's. Um, they're working to change all of the make sure that everyone that's advertising no longer advertises because there's an advertisement that's gone out for the drop off for the or the drive-in for the
uh yach club and they're working on changing that. So, I think that's something that's go that is moving forward, but but um we can put that in legislation as well, but they're working to try to make that happen currently.
In regards to the other issue that you raised as far as the parking, that that would be a negotiation because it's in their contract, their agreement now that that they have act they control the first floor of the parking garages. Is that being negotiated currently? No, we have not started yet. I'm sure
that they're going to it that would be a negotiation where there'd be give and take. So we we haven't started that. We have uh representative from SUNTX here. Uh yes, Mr. Mayor. Good afternoon. Any opinion on that? Um I just want to give every Michael Grio uh on behalf of Sunex. I just want to give everybody kind of an update.
I've emailed you all collectively over the last few months, but just some updates on the charter activity. So SUNTEX, which is the uh master lease holder, they took it over about five years ago. Um, in the last 45 days, I believe that they have evicted nine uh
charters uh due to code violations or violations of the rules and regulations of the marina. Um, we are going to be actively uh addressing any renewals on any of the commercial slips and we'll be doing that on a case-by case basis as well. Um, Mr. Mayor, you and I met about
a week and a half ago, discussed issues, and you had mentioned the the concept of moving the pickup and drop off to a centralized location at Monty's. we are now working on that um on the feasibility of that uh just based on where the where the boats are um and whether or not the traffic can handle
it. So those those are issues that are being discussed internally and and what's the timeline on getting I I'd be I I the answer is I don't know. I I don't know the answer to that. I can tell you I can I can tell you when somebody tells me that hey listen I don't know it's a bit my my
favorite judges are the ones that say I don't know. You know it's the same thing. So um you know Mr. taxes is on top of me, calls me twice a week making sure that we're moving on these things. So, I I can tell you that the city manager's office is they're they're definitely ruling with an iron fist. And I would I would only add that uh
Commissioner Grio um talked about nine that have been removed. They are currently looking at a list that we've given them from our efforts over the past three weekends. that's that's more than double that of of it's in their legal department now looking at boats
that that we've violated and they're um we expect to have an answer within the next day or two um on those additional charters. So we are actively um out there and and enforcing our rules and um
again we have a list of over 18 boats that they're looking at now to evict. Yeah. And I and I know the city has uh after obviously the south of fifth folks brought it to our attention then uh the city administration. So we do appreciate the police and code have have stepped it up
in a big way. Uh but obviously uh we want to resolve this without having to use all those resources 365 days a year. Right. I just wanted to add Mr. Mayor one more thing that that you know we have added resources. We we have offduty police officers that are working I think Thursday through Sunday especially
during those peak hours where we're going from sunset to sundown. Is that recent? I know we had done that a couple years ago. We had done Yeah. And we're and we're restarting that now. So that's in addition to and remind I live across. Yes. And I and I and I want to remind you that I live across the street. I'm out there um I would say at least a four
three or four nights a week during dusk um and I see with my own eyes not only uh the sundex outsource security but I've seen aggressive code enforcement um and police presence out there as well because you've got the spill out for Monty's as well as folks that are just
kind of coming through from the park plus anybody that's coming off from any charters. So it's it's a lot to manage but I think there's going to be some outliers where things happen unfortunately. Um, and we had a recent call, but at the same time, um, you know, I know that Sunex is doing everything that they can do to be a good
partner. So, just bring back it's So, it sounds like the garage has not been negotiated yet. It has not, sir. And is that going to start this week? I I think that the the the issue is is that there it's a negotiation where
they're going to want to be able to get something and and then we go back to the negotiation probably. We're we're looking at what's the current contract say? The current contract says that they have they control the first floor of all of those garages. We don't have
to thought there was an opt out, but no. And then the only other the only other thing, Mr. Mayor, that that I think is is positive news is at the direction of the city manager, we now have a camera trailer out there where we do have some some of our cameras out there. Um, Sunex
is also reviewing the ability to give access to all of their cameras pointing at the docks and the Baywalk. Um, they're reviewing that and we we would hope to have a favorable answer that we'll have access to their cameras that we could then put over into our police station. H is their coverage sufficient?
They have great coverage. Our coverage is limited. We don't have nearly as many cameras on the on each one of those docks. So, um, we could either install more cameras on the buildings. That's something that we could do, but we're waiting to get an answer back. And and again, we expect to have that answer one
way or another within the next few days. Any issues with that, you think? Above my pay grade, Mr. Mayor. I I I know that the city has definitely installed a few more or at least temporary uh cameras specifically right outside of Jose's apartment. The city the city gaining access to
suntex cameras. It's it's a it's a deeper legal issue that's that's above my pay grade because, you know, they are the master lease holder and those cameras are, you know, technically private and they there's people that live on those docks as well. So, there's there's those are issues that are again above my pay grade. And so, those those
are being made either I have I have legal counsel with me and I also we also have uh general counsel in in Texas that they're the ones that are making those decisions. Okay. Um, so again, September will bring the ordinance and and I'd like to stay
regularly in contact Eric about these negotiations. Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez, look, we are getting constant photos and complaints. And has that stopped over the past month since the last blow up where there were several incidences?
Because the reason that we're doing this is because of the constant uh noise complaints, people vomiting, somebody going to the bathroom and the planters. I mean, like, we get the pictures. And so, how have the how have
the calls been to code of the marina for the past month? Have we been getting a lot of complaints? Because that's really all this is about. If you fix it, we won't get the complaints. You know, the bad behavior. That's the reason we're so upset is the constant complaining from
the residents. And I understand them. Nobody that wants to, you know, is on their boat or lives right there wants to, you know, walk out their front door and see somebody going to the bathroom in the planter who's wasted or wake up to somebody's mom. You know what I mean?
So that's that's the crux of this. And have we been able to meet like fix it? So, Hernand Cardino for code compliance. So, I can give you some statistical information for the last four weeks um
with respect to licensing uh and doing business, conducting business without a permit on public property and either departing or coming in after hours. Um, so for the last four weeks, we're at about 68 violations for licensing uh in
business on public property for the illegal advertising, which means every license charter has to have their BTR, their business tax receipt on that advertising and the imbarcation and disembarkcation location. Uh we've
issued 19 violations for them because we did identify several that were identifying private property for the pickup and drop off. Those have since complied and now they identified 300 Alton. Uh with respect to the marine hours, which is departing either after
7:00 p.m. or coming in in that charter after 9:00 p.m., we've had 18 violations in the last four weeks. Uh since January 1, that's been 24 violations. since January 1st. So we have a hundred violations
since over the last four weeks or January since January 1st. Those are two different We had 87 violations in the last four weeks. The 6868 um I gave you that's the last four weeks, right? And what I can what I can tell you is that every time that there's a
violation and there is a legit code violation, we then do a review to determine whether or not the lease is going to be uh terminated. So just reminding everybody that, you know, everybody in the marina, all of those boats, they all have subleasases that
that go to suntex. So they have rights within those those leases and we have to make sure that we don't create legal liability. we being suntex doesn't create legal liability for themselves. We have received notice from several of the charters that we have evicted that
they're contemplating legal action. So, you know, our concern is that we've got to make sure that there is a code violation that we can hang our hat on before we evict somebody. And that's what's that's what's been happening. And as it happens, it gets reviewed by
legal. It's and then they make the determination and then they send the termination letter and it's usually like you're out in two days. I've seen the letters. Um I'm not part of that process. Um I'm just reporting back as to what the process is. But I can tell you that a lot of those violations were repeat offenders. So it was those those
nine that we removed just over the last 45 days and however many that we removed before that. Um those were all a product of a lot of uh repeat offenders that we just decided that were no longer supposed to be in the marina. So, we can only police we can only police so much. We we're not we, you know, as a as a
SUNTEX can only police so much. Um, we're but we work hand in hand. I'm in constant communication with Mark, with Hernand, with Azie. Um, we, you know, and they're in constant communication with our team on the ground, the ones that are actually actively managing the marina to make sure that, you know,
we're not purely reactive, but we're also now being proactive. Can we can we leave this on the agenda and come back at the next meeting and look at and see if the number of violations has decreased since we're getting rid of those nine
repeat offenders because if we remove those nine people and we still h you know are getting s you know significant violations then at some point has to become responsible for this or held accountable because it's ruining
people's quality of life. So I I don't know what the what we can do legally to hold Sunex accountable every time we have a violation. Um well we have the ordinance coming back in September. So I think that'll be a good time as we're voting on that to
discuss the uh what's going on. And also I we're going to continue this item because we have the items that are not going to be in the ordinance such as the garage, the pickup and drop off that you're negotiating currently. So yes, this will yeah, this will definitely be on September.
And I fully expect that when we come back in September, there will be a lot the list of it won't be nine. It will be a much larger number. And as we get rid of those back bad actors, I think you're correct, Commissioner. I think that you we will I've I've already heard that there's a change in the behavior out
there from several of the the the residents out in that area that they've noticed a difference. I think it'll even be greater in the coming weeks once we get rid of a few more of those bad actors. Um, and everything that we've turned over to SUNTX, they've been very responsive and they've worked with us to to try to to deal with those situations.
I mean, it's in SUNTC's best interest to have a secure marina because nobody wants to dock and sleep on their boat or yacht in Miami Beach and have that kind of behavior. So, I mean, it doesn't make sense that Sunex is even allowing that
type of behavior or those charters because wouldn't you think that boats that are the Miami Beach Marina is not cheap, right? What does it cost to dock? It's it's an expensive experience. So, I mean, I just think that it would behoove
the marina to secure secure your marina for customers. What I you know, it does it. Yeah, that's what I'm saying. To me, this whole thing is is ridiculous that the people who are paying these fees to dock at the Sunex Marina also have this
DVM behavior that they're constantly dealing with. And we're getting uh the complaints, but it's really the Sunex. It's not us. And now you've put us in a situation where, you know, we're responsible. But
I mean, at this point, you're probably definitely in violation of of the contract. I just given the fact that our laws are being violated 68 times in a month. 68 times.
You said it yourself, Commissioner. Laws are being violated. The people violating the laws are getting cited for the law. violations. Just as if if you have a landlord that owns a residential property in Flamingo Park and they have a tenant that's doing something wrong,
is it the landlord's fault or is it the tenants's fault? Do the police arrest the landlord? Do the police blame the landlord? No. They go after the tenant and then the tenant gets evicted. There are processes involved. So, I appreciate what you're saying. I'm in constant communication with not only everybody up here, but also the neighborhood
association of which I used to s I used to sit on. So I I'm out there personally myself. But I will tell you this that it's very easy to take a picture of a puddle and say it's flooding. Okay? 99.9% of the time there aren't any problems. The problem is when there is a problem, there's a video or someone's
going to take a snapshot and it is what it is. And then you'll get a call or Commissioner Suarez will get a call and then he'll text me at 2:00 in the morning because that's what we do, you know, and and this this is what we do. It's fine. It and I'm I I'm not trying to make light of it. What I'm telling you is is that we're moving in the right
direction. You know, prior to prior to COVID, it was a different world. Okay? There was a model shift during COVID, especially when certain people locally and at the state level, it was letting everybody know how open Florida was and they all decided to come to South Beach and it was chaotic and trying to unwind
that chaos or overly monetizing the charter business. We've been trying to unwind that for a very long time and it's challenging and we have to make sure that Sunex is not creating legal liability for itself and the city has provided us with legislation with the
tools to legally remove people when it's appropriate, when there's an issue, you know, and that's what we're doing. So, we're trying to be good stewards of the marina and also being good partners with the city and we will continue to do it. And one of the reasons they brought me on, I've only been on for, you know,
probably a year now this time around. And it's and it's because I'm boots on the ground in the area and because I understand every inch of that Baywalk and I take it personally. I I I get upset when I get a call. Thank you, Michael. We have Robert Celum
from the South Fifth Neighborhood Association uh here. Good afternoon, everybody. Um, I'm just speaking as a resident of the O club who has been involved in these marina issues and been before you many times before. I just want to give you our perspective.
This used to be a neighborhood marina. It was compatible with everything that went on. It was delightful to have it there. It was an asset to the community. We have been suffering absolute mayhem
from the changes that SUNTEX has allowed the marina to become and a simple fact that in in a threemon I'm sorry a three-week surge by Hernand and his people they issued 161 violations which
is evidence of the mayhem that we have been suffering. So, we are very very grateful for the city, for uh the commission, for code enforcement, for uh Mark and and Eric's efforts to help us finally bring this under control. So, thank you very much.
Thank you. Thank you, Robert. We have a couple of callers. Yes. First caller is Wayne Roberts. Mr. Roberts, go ahead, please. Thank you, sir. Um, I've been very involved in the Marina negotiations or
the referendum and and um uh I appreciate that uh you're working with SUNTEX to uh take care of the problems and Sunex is listening finally. Um the the issue for me is that um the contract
that we had in the 80s that's still ex that's still in force enables the city at the at the discretion of the city manager to cancel any any contract sub subleasase of any party in the marina.
Uh I'm I'm afraid that if we change that rule that uh that would uh actually uh impact our position, our strength. Uh additionally um the parking agreement
doesn't give them grounds as far as I read the agreement to the first floor. Um what happened during the prior administration, not yours, mayor. Um the uh the the parking lot was given a
10-year um agreement where pay by plate and it was but the 10-year agreement was specific. It allowed uh a 2-year window where you can cancel and then you're allowed to cancel every year thereafter is the way I read it. So I would ask our
legal department to look at the original agreement. I sent the language that enables the city manager to cancel any sub lease at will without without reason. And secondarily, um, uh, additionally, uh, the parking agreement
where we're enabled to cancel annually. Thank you very much. Thank you. Our next virtual caller is Keith. Keith, state your name, address. You have two minutes. Thank you. uh Keith Marks continuum
president of SNA speaking for Sona and uh happy to report I am not running for a commissioner seat. Um but I uh I appreciate the efforts that as uh Robert
said uh SNA has been working with Sunex and talking to Michael uh Greco and talking to Eric and it's just it seems like as uh Commissioner Bot wrote to me that there might be a uh a light at the
end of a tunnel instead of a tunnel at a looking at a fight. Um, you know, it's we are showing and there's proof that there are numerous bad operators and uh it's it's incumbent on code to continue
to do that to fair it out these bad operators to lower the threshold of um as the mayor has proposed to 700 p.m. to up the fines. And I would recommend that
we look at an at our power to say that if you have a illegal operation, meaning you're running a boat, you're taking money and you don't have a BTR or it's expired that you can cancel their lease. Uh it's it's sort of you're running an illegal business and that's what they're
doing. They're taking money. Uh some of them uh are actually doing it on purpose. They're they say they're private. They don't have a uh a have a a pleasure cruise uh craft and they don't have a license and so we have to do
something about it. Lastly, uh I agree with Wayne. We need to look and cancel the uh pay for park arrangement. It needs to go back to marina use. I don't understand why sex would not want people
there who are just there to enjoy the marina shops, the restaurants, monties and go to the boats. So please work on the garage issue. Thank you. Okay, this uh was a good discussion. The ordinance we'll bring back uh in
September and uh as we discuss we'll we'll also discuss these negotiation issues. Thank you again to uh our police and code that's uh really stepped it up and and really to SNA to for uh highlighting these issues for us.
Mr. Mayor, we'll continue to keep you updated throughout the the coming weeks on what's being done. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Let's go to R. Well, actually, let's we have one more marina related item. R9U.
R9U is discuss update on Miami Beach Marina lease agreement audited by inspector general. Yeah. So, I I brought this item. the inspector general had a had a report um and I thought it behooves us where where we're at as a city and in uh moving
forward on some of the findings and recommendations. Hi, thank you Mr. Mayor. Commissioners, uh Ron Muma, director of facilities and fleet. Um you are correct. The uh OIG did conduct a lease agreement covering an audit of the lease agreement covering
uh January 1st through December 31st of 2022. and they did come up with four items that I'll kind of highlight real quickly here. Um the first one being um under reportported fuel sales um totaling uh $2.3 million which the city
is is due 10% of that for $238,000. The second item that was discovered was the uh under reportported gross receipts. Um the amount was two $2.3 million. Uh again, the city has due 10%
of that for $239,000. The third item was under reportported parking gross receipts. Uh total debt was 660,000. Uh reported was 165,000. Unreported recovered was 495,000.
Uh due to the city, uh 35% of that would be 173. Um the last item um is unreported parking receipts uh total 12,158.
So the total there is $668,000 with a 3% tax of $19,000. The gross total um is $683,000 due to the city based upon the OIG's report. That's just one year.
That's just one year. Yes, that's Yes, sir. And so what action is the city taking? So as of yesterday, we did send out a demand letter to the to the marina itself and we're waiting to hear about any response from them. A demand letter for the payment of
683,000. That is correct. And how will we purs and what's what is the letter say? A demand letter usually has a consequence. If the demand is not met, what is the consequence? Mr. Well, the city has the right to pursue all of its remedies under the
lease and applicable law. So, we did not specify exactly what we will do, but uh we we have the same remedies we would have in the context of another demand letter. We reserve all our rights basically. And uh do we do we um anticipate that these same issues occurred in other
years as well? Possibly could be. Yes. I'm getting a nod from you and the off and the inspector general. Um what are we planning to do about that? We have another audit um that we are going to pursue.
What year? What years? We have the 20 I believe the 24 audit. We're going to audit 24. I don't think we could do the 23. And why is that? I don't think it it met that we were
timely on that. What? Please. So wait, we did 22, but we're not timely on 23. That's That's what I'm I believe. Yes, sir. Okay. And we can't go back to 21. Cannot go back to 21, I believe.
Why don't we hire Why don't we hire a special forensic accountant to go back since the initiation of the contract? Because when you look here, it says that there was a $6.5 million difference between the revenue that they reported to the state of Florida submitted to the
city. Is that that's illegal, isn't it? If you report I Joe, that's a manipulation. I mean, that's they're in viol. Well, okay. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Commissioner Joseph Center, Inspector
General. I think what you're you're referring to is that the we pointed out that the that the marina had had reported I don't know maybe $28 million in in receipts for that year but they to the to the to the to the state
for purposes but they reported substantially less than that to the city. The bone of contention here is that they claim that there were certain exclusions that they were entitled to make. We didn't agree. I don't think the city attorney agreed with their
position, but so it's not a question of legality, but it's question of whether they complied with the with the contract. So, it's a civil contractual issue. Yes. Yeah. Okay. Yes. Um, I mean, I think we hit on something
because this is $680,000 and when was the first the inception of the contract? Well, I think I I'll leave it to our city attorney, but I think what we're hearing is that there's since it's a civil contractual matter, we may be
procluded from going back past a certain amount of time. And if I may, there was an audit notice sent that I because I was surprised when you said we didn't include 2023. There was an audit not audit notice sent that included both the 2023 and 2024 years.
Um, pursuant to the lease's terms, we do have limitations on what years we can audit. Now, we probably have sufficient information to extrapolate the claims related to the findings that were made by the inspector general that we don't even need to conduct an audit. we could
just extrapolate and and apply the the same findings to prior years subject to a statute of limitations for any contract claims that would that would be applicable. Are we planning to issue with the demand letter for that as well? Are does this mean that they're in
direct violation of our contractual agreement with them? Pardon me. Can you repeat the question? like this $680,000 discrepancy does our contract with the marina I mean would this mean that they
are in obviously in violation of our contract or with these well they have replied to the inspector general's report and their position is that they are not they've taken a contrary position so right now uh we've made a demand based on what our what the IG's findings were and what the city's
position is but you know ultimately if we don't reach a negot negotiated settlement, we would potentially end up in court to to figure out uh what what actually applies. But we are we're confident in our position. And Joe, what you were saying is that uh
Sunex is claiming that there were exclusions. So they're saying that they don't owe this money or at least that was their initial position. Yes. something that in general I mean the big ticket items here are the exclusions and they have asserted that there are certain things that they're
entitled to exclude from their gross receipts and therefore when they when they uh reported to the city they reported you know the the amount of their receipts with the exclusions from that they had decided to make and we disagree we disagreed I mean
but presumably those exclusions were also made in other years so as as Rick pointed out yes We have no reason to think that these that that there was any difference in the way they interpreted the contract for for the number of years that uh that we're aware of. In fact, I think we even may have may have estimated what we
think, you know, the total amount might be for the for the years in question. Michael, yes, Mr. Grio. Uh again, Michael Grio on behalf of Sunex. Reminding you I'm not legal counsel for Sunex. We have legal counsel for Sunex. Um, I'm gonna do a dance here
a little bit, but um, I want to remind everybody on the deis and I want to remind anybody else that's listening that SUNTX took over this lease which was drafted on microfich in like the early 1980s. It's still 90% of the lease
language goes back to the 80s and we took over or sundex took over about half a decade ago. Prior to SUNTX taking over this lease, the city was getting a check from the previous lease holder for about $1.2 million a year. SUNTEX takes over,
the city starts getting a check for $2.7 million a year. So from year one moving on, SUNTEX has more than doubled the city's revenue since it has taken over the marina. On top of that, every time that the payment is made, accompanying
that payment is a full audit report that's generated by a third-party auditing and accounting forensic accounting company that presents how those numbers came to pass showing everything, open kimono, the whole deal,
and actually explaining how it's calculated related to those pass through costs. The big ticket item out of all of that money is the pass through costs. I'll give you an example. The city charges the master leaseholder being
SUNTEX one bill for water. SUNTEX then bills all of the subtenants for water because Sunex doesn't use the water. The subtenants use the water, right? Sunex isn't making money on this. They're just getting reimbursed for the
water bill. According to the IG report, it's expected based upon the interpretation of the lease that the city is to give the that that Sunex is to give the city 10% of all of the money it collects from its subtenants for the water bill back to the city again. So
the city gets paid for the water bill, then it gets another 10% for the pass through cost for the water bill, and then extrapolate that out to all other pass through costs that one could have as a master landlord. So, I'm oversimplifying it, but there is
terminology in the lease, and I'm not going to make any legal arguments. There's terminology in the lease, and there is a delta between what the city attorney and both our general counsel and outside council have interpreted regarding the language in the lease. So,
this is not about like the math, not mathing or anybody hiding the ball. It's not like that. We provide full accounting like the audit report that the IG did essentially matches what we've already provided to them when we give our audit report when we submit our check to the city. So there's not a lot
of difference on the math. There's a difference on how it's calculated based upon an interpretation of a lease. So there are three or four items in the lease where there's just not an agreement between my client and the city as to how those are interpreted.
reminding you that prior to 2022, the city had interpreted that clause the same way does for three decades and then in 2022 as a product of this audit is now being interpreted
differently. So that's that's where we are. It's not a situation where where the city has a tenant on one of if not its most important asset and the tenant is hiding the ball or hiding money. That's not the situation. the situation is there's a disagreement about how
there are clauses in the lease, you know, gross receipts and and how that's interpreted. To the commissioner to Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez's point, when SunX submits its numbers to the state, it includes everything, which is gross receipts and fuel sales. In the
lease, fuel sales and gross receipts are separate items. They are almost they're pretty much walled off from each other in how they're calculated. So when you see the gross receipts numbers that the OIG is talking about, those are going to be different than the numbers that are reported to the state because the
numbers to the state include everything as opposed to the number that's being reported and the exclusions are different for purposes of the contract. So that's why there's a disparity there. So, if I'm not going to judge anybody up there, but I will tell you that I
I would bet a lot of money that there's at least one person on the day that has not fully read the IG report andor has not fully read the response by SUNTX Legal Council and don't you don't have to break eye contact. I'm just I I know that's the case because of some of the things I'm hearing and I
encourage you to do that. Just don't ju all I ask is don't just fast forward to the summary of the IG report or you know I you know Rick I love you but you know or a summary from the from the city attorney. Okay you know people are fallible and people are going to
disagree but there's always another side to that and all I ask is that as we continue these conversations understand that there are there's one side there's the other side. Usually there's somewhere in the middle. That's generally how it works but But I just
ask you to read everything and don't just take it for what's being the chair. Yeah. Just by the way, so obviously we have the ordinance coming back. We'll bring this item back as well to see where we are in response to the demand letter. Yes. I I just want to make one clarification. Uh love you too,
Commissioner Grio. Um I do want to clarify that the city you you you stated that the city has interpreted the lease in a particular manner for three decades. I don't believe that the city has ever taken a position on the lease or how it's to be interpreted until very recently. Just wanted to clarify.
Commissioner Bot and then Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez. So, what I'm not sure who to ask this to. I guess I'll start with you, Rick, and then we can go to to Michael and and the IG. Um, how are we planning to resolve this so-called discrepancy on how things are being interpreted?
Because, you know, 700 700 I wish it were 700 million. 700,000 is a lot of money. And so if there is a discrepancy, it needs to be resolved. And what steps are being taken to resolve it? I if I may, I believe uh next steps will
probably involve some conversations between Commissioner Grio's clients and the city and staff to figure out where we go from here. And in what time frame? Um I I I know that the manager and my office knows that this is an important
matter. So, we will work diligently to make this happen as quickly as possible and we're going to discuss it on September 3rd. So, yeah, I mean I listen, we're we're a city that has a big budget but not enough in our budget to fund the things that we've already committed to funding this past year. Um, we're making tough
decisions and this is not a rounding error for us. So, if if there's a discrepancy, let's figure it out. Let's figure out how much is owed. Let's get it paid. let's clean things up and let's move forward in in a manner that's mutually beneficial, ranging from making sure that that Sunex is looking out for
the best um behavior from its tenants to continuing city enforcement and moving forward to to make um as Robert mentioned, make this a a community amenity that is happymaking rather than really horrifying. Commissioner Rosen
Gonzalez, I'm glad you explained to me the the different the discrepancy between one payment and another, but right after that in the IG's report, it says that they also under reported parking revenue
by $167,000. Why is that? No. Well, that's that's another disagreement. So, SUNTEX at the direction of the city manager's office several years ago, um, made a move to mon, and this predates me, but made a move to to monetize the
parking uh, and generate revenue really more for the city's sake. This did not come from Suntax, but the in order to generate that revenue, they hired a vendor to collect the parking revenue. So I it's my understanding that the
city's interpretation is that whatever the total gross collections are, the city's entitled to its percentage even before we pay the vendor its percentage. So it's another it's another disagreement about how this how it's
supposed to be paid. So, let's say SUNTEX generated $100,000 in parking revenue. And let's say the vendor that collects it, whatever the contract says, the vendor gets a percentage of that $100,000 because that's how they make their revenue. It's not a flat rate.
They get a percentage of the collections. It's just like, you know, any private private vendor that's doing uh parking enforcement. So, the vendor gets paid and then whatever remains, SUNTX and the city splits. That's SUNTC's interpretation. The city's
interpretation, I believe, is that the city gets its percentage regardless as to whether or not this vendor is entitled to to anything and then we have to pay afterwards. And actually, if you math that out, Sunex, I think, takes a loss. Whether it was written on microfish or a
cave wall, I would think that the contract had something as simple as gross first net. No, on on parking. No, because the parking the the the contract goes back to the 80s, but the parking agreement it's only been over the last few years. Our position is that gross parking
receipts are gross parking receipts. It's what it's what comes in. If they pay their, you know, their contractor, then that's fine, but that that doesn't reduce the gross receipts. So, I think that's the nature of the disagreement. If let's say it would come we don't reach an agreement it would have to be
litigated and we would come out on top uh then of course it's not just this one year but even though we can't audit in years past this would have been a recurring theme would we have any recourse the previous years well I I think we estimated it's
probably over $2 million the total amount that we think is owed. So, um I think that's a question. I think yeah, a lot of that is should be within the statute of limitations. So, I would think that most of that would be this would be subject to the statute of limitations basically a claim. Um
and have we agreed now on the reinterpretation of everything from water to parking to all of these revenue streams? Oh, no. There's no Oh, that's that's what we're talking I mean that's that's kind of where that's kind of where we are like like where I think everybody's on the opposing 10 yard line
at this point and we've got to figure out who's going to who's going to move towards the Well, we're going to be discussing this back in September along with the ordinance and uh hopefully we can make some strides in resolving this. Also, if you want to use my um my moving goalpost
and Charlie Brown football photograph, I can send it to anybody up there who feels like they might need it or Rick, it's available, mayor. So, we're bringing back R9U and R9V in September. All right. Thank you. R5U R5U is an ordinance of the mayor city
commission of the city of Miami Beach, Florida, amending chapter two of the code of the city of Miami Beach entitled administration by amending article 3 entitled agencies, boards and committees by creating section 2-28 entitled procedure for the removal of board and committee members to establish a procedure for the removal of a board or
committee member and providing for repeater qualification servability and an effective date. Commissioner Suarez Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Ricardo, why don't you keep this up for me? Sure. Um, so currently
currently the the code does not have a mechanism for the removal of members from uh boards and committees. And so, uh, Commissioner Suire has asked my office to work on legislation, uh, to provide a mechanism. And in a nutshell,
um, there are certain provisions that require an automatic removal. For example, if a board member I think that is the only, uh, cause for removal we we currently have, which is related to attendance. But if a if a board or committee member is um charged with or
convicted of certain crimes that will uh result in automatic automatic renewal removal. Um if a board or committee member has been appointed um is a direct appointment then the commissioner or the mayor who appointed that individual can
remove that individual. And if it's an atlarge appointment, then any member of the commission may may make a request to have the member uh removed. And I believe it's a 57th vote to to remove um
any uh board or committee member. And I'm actually going to turn it over to Nick who worked on this item. Thank you, Rick. Let's get up. Go ahead, Nick. Sure. So the only thing I would add is
that we don't currently have a rule in place for the removal of a board and committee member except uh as to attendance. If a board or committee member fails to meet the fails to attend the minimum required number of meetings in a given year, then they are
automatically removed. Um aside from that, um the city code requirements for boards and committee members don't really establish a process. So, this ordinance would put a process into place where uh with or without cause, the city
commission would be able to uh remove a member of any of the city's boards or committees. Okay. Thank you. Um so without rehashing some of the issues that I brought up at the last meeting uh I think uh one I
think it's important that we do have at least a process in case that there is a uh a sitting board member who raises concerns for for many reasons and we have the ability to remove that
person. So, I think um I I think it's a good policy in place to have as as a uh an emergency uh process and I think with a 57 vote for at large um appointees, I I think
it's it's a pretty good threshold uh and um consideration for for for the will of the body. I welcome feedback from my colleagues. Commissioner Fernandez Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and to the sponsor. Thank you for
bringing this item. I think uh I think it is uh a good safeguard for us as appointing members, whether whether it be us as an appointing body or individually, uh to be able to have a mechanism
through which to remove members. Um Mr. attorney. This this establishes a provision um that if someone has a felony, some sort of criminal activity that we can
remove them. Is that correct? So, that's one of the components. Um this ordinance gives the commission the ability to remove a board member with or without cause. It also provides for automatic removal of board members under
certain uh circumstances. One of those circumstances, Mr. Fernandez, is what you were alluding to, which is if the member is uh is arrested or convicted of certain crimes and then if like there are certain categories on land use boards where we require licenses. If
they don't have the license, then they can be removed. uh they no longer live in the city or do business in the city or they fail to meet uh failed to attend meetings that is automatic removal. Correct. No vote of the city commission is
necessary. Okay. So then on the on the issue where on on the on the on the issue where someone who was appointed to a boarding committee by the city commission
is brought forward to be removed. Is there any criteria like unbecoming behavior or anything like that that we're placing there or is it for any reason? What? Because what I want to make sure is that what we don't end up with is, you know,
the, you know, the planning board doesn't vote on a project the way that we that we want them to vote and then we end up with planning board members being nominated for removal or, you know, with the HPB or the DRB. The the great thing
about the boards that we have, the land use boards, whether it be planning or historic preservation or design review board, is that they are independent boards and that many of them do their work based on on you know in quasi judicial hearings and their decisions
like us today are based on criteria and what I don't want to see is a situation where where this policy ends up having members of the boards being brought to us for removal because
of positions they've taken in their independent capacity. So, I want to make sure it's for really extraordinary circumstances. It's an important tool to have because we do need to have an avenue through which to remove people. Uh, but I really want to make sure that
it's for unbecoming behavior or like what we've seen in the past, you know, hateful speech or, you know, issues of anti-semitism or, you know, or or that type of stuff. But, but I'm sorry, rape.
Yeah. Yeah. Or crimes. Uh, crimes and unbecoming behavior, uh, dangerous rhetoric, that type of stuff. That's what I want to make sure. uh so that this policy is never misused or goes outside of what the intended purpose is.
Um so we we drafted this ordinance to give the commission the ability to remove with or without cause. That's consistent with the removal ordinances that uh that Miami date county, the city of Miami and the city of Coral Gables
have. Obviously the reasons for a board member's removal would be unique to to that particular uh situation. Um but we we wanted to you know to we wanted to to build flexibility for you know any
number of situations that that may arise. But like for example like going back to my point like issues like you know um findings of of ethics violations you know findings of ethics violations to me
is a reason why why we would we would uh bring someone forward to be removed. Uh findings by the office of the inspector general of you know abuse of power or or that type of stuff. I would find that to
be reasons why to bring someone to be removed. Uh unbecoming behavior, uh language that goes outside of our of of of the positions that that the city takes. But, you know, I just want to make sure that this is not used to
penalize people based on their voting record. So, how do we do that? How do we put that safeguard? I I think um a possible amendment would be for certain boards uh for instance
the the land use boards which have final decision-m authority um the ordinance could be more specific and provide you know specific reasons for removal if that were the will of the sponsor or of this body or perhaps
Commissioner Bot or perhaps um you know Commissioner Bots Um I um I share that concern. I I don't want this to become a star chamber um where accusations are hurled and it
becomes, you know, like manufactured. I know there are a couple of instances where there have been significant reasons for people to get um um removed from their positions and and so in principle I support this and I you know talking with the legal team um I think
it's been an oversight that we haven't had something like this. So I'm I'm in favor of this as a matter of principle. I do want to make sure this has no there is no ability for this to get abused. And I also want to make sure that if somebody is appointed um uh and in the
middle of their two-term appointment, for instance, they hit the lottery and decide they're going to retire. So they're not no longer a practicing architect, let's say, but they're still an architect. Um and they're still living here. And so nothing has changed except they're no longer getting a paycheck or, you know, working for a
living, but they're still qualified that they're not automatically subject to being removed because of deciding to retire. And so the way the way we've drafted it for purposes of automatic removal is if your position requires you to be a
licensed professional and you no longer have that license. Some of our positions on the land use boards say you have to be a registered architect. Some say you have to be a professional practicing in the field of architecture. So, it's really going to depend, but that's it. It's the practicing. So, you're a professional, you're licensed,
whatever. But if you're no longer practicing and that that um criteria is part of the job description criteria, um does the fact that you have chosen to no longer be practicing in the middle of your two-year two-year appointment then nullify your ability to continue serving
out that term? it would, you know, it would be legitimate to say you can't be reappointed because you're no longer practicing, but for that duration of the two-year term, it seems like that is, I would imagine that's not the intended um desire of this. And so, how do we how do
we work that language? I think for for automatic removal, um the way the ordinance is drafted is only if if you're required to be uh licensed for that position. So, it would that wouldn't apply to somebody who was in one of maybe the broader categories. Um
I I think to your your other question about you know could this ordinance be abused? Um the the two safeguards that we built into the ordinance are that uh that a member at large can only be removed on a 57th vote and that they
have a right to appear before the city commission before removal um to to make the case why they should not be removed. Okay. Commissioner Magazine, I did lose $10 because I bet
Commissioner Fernandez that you would for sure have a slide for this. Um, he's kidding. There should be uh I I do want to be cautious not to almost have this contingent on hanging it over people's heads. You need to vote
a certain way or suffer the consequences. Um, so how about a higher threshold? Maybe that could thread the needle. we saw something egregious that we all unanimously agreed that person uh that made such remarks had said no business serving on a city board. So you
would have had a 8 to zero vote if uh if it would have been called much less 70. So what if that threshold would be 67th? I'm not tied to it. I'm just putting it out there for sake of discussion. I'm okay. I was also about to make the suggestion perhaps that you know that
you cannot be removed based simply because of a vote um about how you know how you voted on a land use board. Um, so I think that with a higher threshold I would feel more comfortable with that because I think I think if something comes to the point where someone has to
be removed in office where the behavior, the action, the situation involved is so egregious that it really does merit the removal of of someone from one of these offices. I think we will probably more than likely be pretty united uh in
something like that. Um, and I think I think to Commissioner Magazine's recommendation, I I think a sixth, seventh vote, I think this is great ordinance. I mean, I you know, we need this safeguard. Um, but I do think getting it right uh will make sure that
in the future it sticks to to to the intended purpose. And I like the recommendation of the 67 vote. And and I just want to say thank you colleagues. I mean, you're helping me craft this much better cuz I certainly don't want it to be used against someone or to pressure people how to vote the
way they want to vote or how the way we may want them to vote or special interests may want them to vote. Um, so, uh, again, you know, not to rehash what happened last meeting, that's sort of like the crux of of of why I'm doing
this. Um, and the fact that we we don't have a process in place is is kind of why I'm bringing this forward. Commissioner Rosa Gonzalez, thank you for this. We've needed this for a long time. I think that you can Okay.
Section 1A is the city, you know, you have, sorry. Section two is automatic removal by the city clerk if you don't, you know, if like if you don't attend the number of meetings, if you don't have the professional license, if you're convicted of a felony or charged with a
felony um or moral turpitude. But what I don't like is the the removal of atlarge appointees in section 1B. I would say there has to be a cause with cause. Why without cause? There are any number of reasons why the
city commission may want to remove a member from a border committee. Um we look closely at other ordinances that that Miami County, city of Miami, and city of Coral Gables have for removal of board members. Um I think that I would
recommend including without cause. Um, I also think that, you know, even though we have we established a process, um, it's not to say that a board member could not file a lawsuit challenging
their removal if and when it it it happened. So, I would recommend uh that you give yourselves the flexibility to to uh to remove without cause. I okay then. Um I think and I don't know
if we've been enforcing in the committees um the attendance rules but we do we do we are enforcing them every month. I think that on those um land use boards the the attendance policy should be even
more strict. It is it is one how your one I think it's two. you can only miss two. And I the only caution I would say on that is if if we make that tougher. We already have it's really challenging to recruit qualified members to the land
use boards as it is. Um and it it makes it if somebody misses a meeting because they're out sick, you know, then that would be their last absence. Okay. Okay. Let's call a vote. It is a public hearing and I have Mr.
Saldo requesting to speak. Mr. Aldo, you're here on the board appointments. Yes, thank you. And I know my name was mentioned in a prior item and so I have my hand up, but I was not able to respond. I'll do that another time. Uh,
as far as this one, good afternoon, mayor and commissioners. I'm here to speak out of concern regarding this ordinance, which proposes a formal procedure for removing board and committee members. While I support accountability and high standards for civic service, I'm deeply troubled by
the risk this ordinance poses for misuse and politicization. We must ensure our boards remain places for honest civic engagement, not battlegrounds for personal vendettas or political retaliation.
Policies that allow for the removal of volunteers must be accompanied by equally strong safeguards for fairness, transparency, and due process. Without these, we risk turning public service into a liability, discouraging qualified
residents from stepping forward, and opening the door to selective enforcement or public witch hunts, as I'm personally in the middle of. Let's be cautious not to enact a policy that could be used not for good governance but as a tool to intimidate and silence
disscent. Finally, I want to mention that I've been told by many members of these boards that commissioners have reached out in the past and urge them to vote a certain way. And so I hope that that can also be addressed either by this or a future commission to make sure
these commissioners do not pressure our precious volunteer board members. Thank you. Thank you. Go ahead, ma'am. State 2555 Collins Avenue. And I have a a clarification question for Mr. Nicks. So
when you say appointed at large, what does that mean? If someone on a committee is appointed by a specific commissioner, would that be considered at large or I I don't think so. No, that would be a direct appointment. Okay. So, in that case, if you want to remove a committee member, who can do
that? Is it the chair of the committee or do you have to go back to the person who sponsored that person under this or under this ordinance? It would be by the by the uh by the commissioner who appointed that member. Well, the commissioner or the city clerk based on a set of criteria. Well, by the
city clerk, if it's for one of the automatic for direct appointments, but if you were voted on by the entire commission, then your appointment has to rever be reversed by a 57th vote or 67th vote depending on if we made the amendment. That's right. So, we have two different types of appointments. Okay. Thank you.
Sure. Appreciate it. And I like the bill. One more individual, U. Steven Conn. Stephen, please state your name, address, and you have two minutes. Name is Dr. Steven Con, 6365 Collins Avenue. I'm a newly appointed uh newly
voted in member of the parks and recck committee and I just have a question about the attendance requirements uh because it wasn't clear to me when when we spoke to the people at the last meeting. Are you allowed to miss two meetings and on the third miss you're
you're kicked out or you allowed to miss three and on the fourth meeting you're kicked out? And why is there no uh opportunity to attend by Zoom and have that count for at least half credit? I missed I was out for the first meeting. I I did it by Zoom. They said it didn't count. Second meeting, I was across the other side of the country. I couldn't
even do it by Zoom. So then they said if I miss another meeting, I'm out and I didn't even start yet. The attendance policy goes by 33 and a third. You can miss up to 33 and a3% of the meetings. uh we cannot give you a specific numbers because there are some
boards that meet quarterly, some boards meet more often. So it's based on that percentage. Um so that was the first question. I don't if you mayor if you if you'd like me to respond to the second question. Um under state law,
board members have to be physically present in order to to vote and to uh to count toward the quorum and to count for attendance purposes. Great. Let's call a vote. I need a motion. And it's amendments.
And the amendments were the 67th. Was the other amendment uh based on not based on the vote also accepted? Yes. So as amended by Commissioner Vas Suarez, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez. Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez. Yes. Commissioner Fernandez.
Yes. Commissioner Magazine. Yes. Commissioner Dominguez. Yes. Vice Mayor Suarez. Yes. Commissioner Bot. Yes. Mayor Miner. Yes. Motion carry. Second reading. Public hearing is scheduled for September 3rd. That was R5U. Mayor, I have items on consent and some
timely M. Okay. The consent items for the Yes. If you can if you can actually give me a little note of your items. Also, the Pedra Portuguese. I'll give you a note. But I'm going to go to uh Ralph has the first item in 14 years. We want to make
sure we get to him. C7D. C7D. Uh, let's see. C7D is authorize early voting drive-thru dropbox locations for general and runoff election. I separated this item. Mayor, I've taken it upon myself uh to request the supervisor of
elections to extend the early voting hours for a runoff if necessary. Usually, we have we we have three days of early voting for the runoff. Those are from 8:00 a.m. to 400 pm. I requested because it's the same as during it's it's during the Art Basel
period. I requested that they if they could please expand those from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. to allow more people to possibly vote uh early voting. They have said yes. Uh they have also said that it would be an increase of $39,000.
Uh I do have the money because based on the new uh ordinances that have been passed, I will not be advertising as much for the election as was used to before. So the money is available. So I just wanted to get your permission to go
ahead and say yes or return to the normal A24. Sounds good. What's your recommendation? My recommendation is to expand it from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on the three days of early voting for the runoff in the four locations that we now have
at four locations. Yes, I support that. Great. So, by acclamation, we could approve that. Yes. So, I will amend the resolution to state exactly that versus what it's how it's written now. So, C7 P passes and mayor also we needed to vote on the technically a vote on the
appointment of the new director. Yes, I'm going to get to that. So really what we're hitting now is time-sensitive items. Um we had a couple long items today. So I'm going to try to hit all them that are timesensitive. R9D. I'm sorry. You said D, right? D as in
David. David. Okay. This is discuss take action set special commission meeting for final fiscal year 2025 budget amendment. This was requested by the budget director. uh they are requesting to hold the special commission meeting on November 21st. Uh
as you recall any meeting between the election, which is November 4th, and the runoff election acceptance, which would be December 15th, can only be emergency matters. We do have a meeting on November uh 10th, but that is not early enough for the budget department to
obtain all their financial data information to amend the budget. So, they're requesting November 21st. I've given everyone a calendar that you have with all the dates and color if you wanted to use that. That's the date they're recommending. What we would be asking is if that date works for the for
this body, what time do you want to have it? Um, Mr. Mr. Mayor, can we can I Mr. Suarez, can I propose the 20th of Thursday instead of Friday? I agree with that. That's fine. Is it in the evening? It doesn't matter. Anytime is good.
I can do that in the evening. This is This is not one of those 501 meetings. No, this is just a budget amendment. Okay. Okay. So, so 5:00 p.m. is 5:00 p.m. on the 20th. November 20th.
That's fine. So, by acclamation, November 20th is being requested at at 5:00 p.m. the 21st. enough. Is that late enough? And just for the record, Tikica, this should be rather short meeting, correct?
It should be. Yes. Just a budget amendment. Yes. Okay. So, I'll move I'll move the approval of the special commission meeting for the budget amendment to November 20th at 5:00 p.m. Thank you.
Thank you. Um I I I I may be speaking at a um a mayor's conference about anti-semitism in New Orleans at the same time. I need to be physically present, right?
And what's the pro Friday you came down? I need a majority vote. Is this my anniversary? M okay 17 is this um can we can we can you can you find out between now and September 3rd okay sure
so tenatively on the 20th okay if 17th is not doable it's too early we need time to actually have the year end numbers yeah the 20th and does this include like the north the Normandy shore special taxing districts and or just
it just depends on what the commission brings up and you have an item to use the funds that we have at year end. Um because the memory serves me right. Some of these uh special taxing districts require a unanimous vote of this is just roll this is really just the year end rollover uh budget
amendment that's done every year uh in November to close out usually as late as in November as is humanly possible. We can make the 20 21st was the recommended um but it can be the 20th if it's needed. Got it. And we just need a majority vote. Right. Just like a budget amendment.
Okay. Okay. So tentatively we'll show Thursday at at 5:00 PM but certainly we wouldn't want the mayor to be here in the future. This is the second time this happened. Can we try to work this out off the desk? It's like I don't we shouldn't be taking up our commission. I mean obviously we try to resolve it but I think we could probably do it you know
now your anniversary. Exactly. So I'm just saying it's like we're taking up valuable time on on uh administrative items. If we could try to do these offline that would be better. Okay. We good? Yes. Actually, since you're up here already,
I think we have four other ones. Let's Let's do the Let's do the budget items. R sevendef R seven, I'm sorry. Yeah. RDEF R7D. Adopt seventh amendment to fiscal year 2025 operating budget. I move the item.
Second. Hold on. RDD is Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner Bot. It is a public hearing. I see no one in Zoom and I see no one in the audience on R 7B. If no discussion, all in favor? I I.
Anyone opposed? R 7B is approved unanimously. I'm sorry. R 7 C. No, hold on. Where are we? It's D. R7D. The next one is R7E.
It is a public hearing. Adopt eth amendment to the fiscal year 2025 capital budget. R7E. I move the item. Second. I heard a motion by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner Suarez. It is a public hearing. I see no one in Zoom, no one in the audience. If May I call the RO?
Yes. All in favor, please say I. I. Anyone opposed? No one opposed. R seven D. What is it? E. R7E is approved. R seven uh R7F is set proposed fiscal
year 2026 millage rate, debt service rate, and roll back rate. R7F. So this item proposes the maximum millage rate that was discussed at the July 11th city commission meeting at 6.1481 mills and it's the same millage rate
that we've had for the last two years. This would be the third year in a row we'd have the same millage. I move the item. Second. I have a motion by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner Bot. This is not a public hearing, correct? Correct.
Okay. U all in favor, please say I. Anyone opposed? Hearing none. R 7F is approved. 70 R 7G is set proposed fiscal year 2026 mage debt service roll back rates. DMA the
shore that is R seven that's a military just being said that's G yep yes so this is the maximum millage rate for Normandy shores special taxing district their millage rate is proposed
at 7305 which is actually a reduction from this year's millage rate I move the item second a motion by commissioner Fernandez seconded by V by Vice Mayor Suarez all in favor please say I Anyone opposed
hearing. None. R7G is approved. 70. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. C7X. C7X authorized city manager negotiate grant agreement with Soie Cats not to exceed $250,000. Commissioner Suarez.
Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I I pulled this out. Are Soie Cats here? Are they online? I think they're going to call. They're going to call in. I I I'm supportive. I I just want to make sure that it with this with this grant um if they are not able to actually end up
purchasing these containers um it doesn't get spent on anything else and we'd have to go back to the drawing board for um consideration for a permanent structure. So, uh, I just want to make that perfectly clear
with my colleagues, uh, if if we can agree on that, um, that this money is going to be actually used for its intended purpose and if it's not able to, then it would come back or not be spent on anything else.
I mean, this is very prescriptive. They've submitted invoices, electric, I mean, and and the administration is going to be on top of this. We just wanted to grant them a little bit of latitude. And you're negotiating this grant agreement,
right? We would draft into the grant agreement that it's not to exceed $250,000 and it would be prescriptive as to what the expectation is they would deliver on the site. And Eric, correct me if I'm wrong, do you think that with this money it's
going to be enough for their intended and for their goal? Um, I am not convinced as we sit here today, but that's why I would recommend it be a grant agreement so that they have the ability to fund raise to do any
differential cost above the 250,000 to be able to deliver this the outcome. Okay. And and just part of that grant agreement, if they're not able to, then we come back to the drawing board. We don't just give out $250,000.
No, they they submitted very detailed I don't know if you looked and saw the containers. These are custommade containers that they sourced. Um I think the company is in Orlando. And it's pretty amazing because what they do is they they um they designed this container and if you would have seen the
level of detail that they put into the invoices of exactly where they wanted the water connection. These are Soapie Cats is incredibly diligent and detailed or they would not have the operation that they currently are are running up there. So yeah, I'm again I'm supportive. I just
want to make sure that I just want to make sure that this money would be used specifically for this purpose and nothing else. And you know cuz if the city manager is telling us that he doesn't feel that it's going to be enough and that they're going to have to fund raise, great. They'll have to fund raise. I may even donate uh to their
cause. Um, but in the event that they can't raise the money and they can't get the to the intended goal, I want to make sure that we don't just give $250,000 of taxpayer money. We are not. If you look at these custom design, basically they are going to
order these custom designed containers that will be shipped and then they really have to just work on water, sewer, electric connections. And the reason that we're outsourcing this is to get it done cheaper and quicker. kind of like the shade structure at Beach High for $150,000. Julie Basner came to us.
She did her research. She found it at 30% of the price and we agreed to, you know, save the money. So, Commissioner Bob, motion. Commissioner Magazine second. Call the vote on C7X. All in favor, please say I. I. Anyone opposed?
Hearing none. C7X is approved. 70. C7 AK. C7 AK is appoint John C. Norris as public works director. So it was submitted uh after the agenda printed. So do you want to get after 5 p.m.
Have a motion? I'll move. Second. Have a motion by Commissioner Bot, seconded by Vice Mayor Suarez. All in favor, please say I. I. I. Anyone opposed? Hearing none. C7 AK is approved unanimously. Congratulations. C7W
C7W is approve agreement with artist Janet Eckleman for Elevate Espanola. C7W pulled it. I pulled it. Mr. Suarez. Thank you. Um, look, I we're we're in
the middle of a budget crisis. I I'm I'm going to try to be as cautious as possible on on how we spend uh our money or well, not our money, our taxpayers money. Um spending, I believe, $100,000
on a temporary art installation for just one year, I don't think is a good use of taxpayer money. Um I I think if we're going to be doing something like that, at least make it like 2 3 years so that we get a little bit more value um out of
our our dollars. But I think right now is not the time to be, you know, putting six figures uh on temporary art installations. If it was permanent, it' be one thing. But, um, you know, I I think, you know, we I think at the last
meeting, you know, I think there was a comment that said, you know, we're going to have to start saying no um to to some of these to some of these items. So, um you know, I I there's there's cuts coming from the county. There's obviously cuts coming
from the state. And I just I can't go to my constituents and say that I'm okay with a temporary art installation for a six-f figureure amount that's only going to last a year or maybe a year and a half. So, um I don't know how my
colleagues feel about that, but you know, I think we're in a time of financial scrutiny and and this is unfortunately not the time to be doing this. Yeah, very good. Um, ironically, I actually had a similar conversation with the city manager to drill down into what
this means because I don't want to be pennywise pound foolish and espanol way is one of the great successes of our city. Um, it is truly just something to be celebrated. So, I don't want to take away from that experience. Uh, however,
I did want to be more inquisitive about this program. Right? for $150,000. Are we renting this and then it gets like recycled and used back somewhere? Could we buy a permanent structure? Tell me more about like the dynamics here
because I I I do want to be conscious here. Um it's not that I'd be opposed to spending money, uh but if we could do so in a more prolonged fashion and get more bang for our buck, I'd like to explore that. Sure. Thank you, Commissioner Lisa,
director of chairsman culture. And thank you for uh your question and allowing me to explain which is uh interesting because the reason why it's here is because I'm trying to get more bang for our buck. Uh the reason the genesis of this program was that street was
extremely blighted. I mean in uh back in 2021 and we heard uh from both the Ocean Drive um association and the Espanola Way bid of how bad it looked and that corridor like you just mentioned is extremely important and it's uh it
connects both beautiful Espanola way west and Ocean Drive and so to do a quick win in 2021 we did a little cloud sky and it immediately cleaned up the area with beautiful art and a mural and we started this program elevated spanola Uh based on the success of Little Cloud
Sky, uh we did two of these activations a year, but we noticed once we uh deinstalled uh the one that ran from December through March, uh the street became lighted again and dirty with uh just unsightly and folks that you wouldn't want hanging
out on the street. And so we noticed that and what we did is last year we extended the program to run 11 months so that the mural stays up. We we obviously have to take down the lighting, excuse me, the hanging installation because of hurricane season. But we are trying to
we eliminated doing two to just one to get one big installation so that the street is beautiful for 11 months out of the year because we saw that the issues were happening. This is not just art for art's sake. It's a creative m making place creative placemaking program in
order to mitigate blight in one of the most amazing uh corridors of our city. Yeah. And if you don't mind one second, uh, I looked at the memorandum because I I reviewed this carefully and I don't think I was able to get a true sense for what this is. This is something that's
hanging above the pedestrian right of way. Sure. And you might have gone, we always uh unveil it during art week in December. So, it's a mural and it is a hanging installation and it brings a lot of foot traffic to the two businesses that are there, Laenda and I think La Mulata restaurant on the other corner.
So why wouldn't we be able to keep the structures that are there now? That there's no structures. We take them down because of hurricane season. So the mural is up. Do do we throw them away? No, we don't. They're temporary. So the the materials necessarily wouldn't don't
withstand a lot with the weather, the rain and everything. They get beat up. So their depreciable life is a year basically. we wouldn't be able to extend the permanent would be a lot more than the money that we're discussing today. Mr. Mayor, can
I ask one question? Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez and Commissioner Suarez. Um, I saw that previous to this item, we had had a special art exhibit by Michelle Okadon that was going to be permanent and it was going to be in the new park and it was withdrawn. Is that because of finances?
No, no, it's just it has to go through DRB first. Oh, okay. I was very nervous about that because that is going to be iconic. If you don't know Michelle Okadon is from Miami Beach and when you walk through um Miami International Airport, you know how you see in the Terzo those gold inlays of different shells and leaves
and stuff. I mean, she is super iconic and Miami Beach. So, I was hoping that that was not because of finances. Fine. I understand where they're coming from, Mr. Mayor. But if we didn't have it, are those funds do those are these funds coming out of the general fund? No, they're part of CAC and we've been
doing this since 2021. CAC is the Cultural Arts Council. Cultural art. And so we could spend that money on something permanent on some sort of permanent some installation. Not for that amount of money. No. Commissioner Suarez. Um you brought up a
good point, Lette. Um it was blighted, right? Lasola was blighted. It's not blighted anymore. It's it's not because we have artwork there. I I don't necessarily think that's the reason why it's not blighted. I mean, I'm sure lights on Washington Avenue. I'm sure there's there's a there's a
multitude of factors, but if if that is truly the reason, I think that taxpayer dollar should go to other streets that are blighted right now that could use that sort of foot traffic and and help um you know, perhaps on Link Lincoln
Road. Um but again, I I don't think we're getting value out of 150. I mean, $150,000 for something that's temporary during a budget crisis. I And and listen, I know it's coming out of the
cat fund, but it's still taxpayer money, right? I mean, it's still coming from the taxpayers uh of Miami Beach. So, I I I think how about we defer this and uh we we work with staff on on finding
possibly a more long-term uh art art exhibit for either Espanol Way or use these funds to a an area perhaps maybe in North Beach um maybe at the at the fountain um where at the
Normandy Fountain where it could draw even more uh activations there. So, um, I I'd like to defer this if I may through the Mr. Mayor. Uh, we can't defer it because we've already done a call to artist. It's been announced. We have a artist that we're
ready to contract. And if we're ready to launch this for the first week of December, and we defer it to September, we won't have enough time for the artist to produce the work and contract with the artist. So, we can't defer this item. We want to have something ready
for art week. Mr. Mayor, Commissioner Fernandez. So, I get the spirit of this conversation and I don't disagree with the spirit of this conversation. Um, I would say I would say this artwork is
it's it's it's already been it's already been procured, I guess, is the best. Yes. Through the Art and Public Places Committee, right? And these are resort tax dollars, right? Uh I believe so. Yes. uh all cultural
arts council grant funding is I remember a number of years ago I guess at this point maybe like six years ago John Deutsitsman he used to call this area of the city he used to call it murder square that's what he used to
call it murder square and was this area that's bordered on Collins east on Washington on the west Espanola way on the north and 14th on the south where We would even have murders there. We would even have murders there. And
when we would listen to the law enforcement as to what would be the change agent to restore safety in this area of the city that was once dubbed murder square was positive activation.
positive activation was what was prescribed by law enforcement to transform this area of the city. And and and I think it's undeniable the influence of the businesses in
transforming these areas. The bis the quality of the businesses have have been elevated. The work uh done at the Esme hotel and that has elevated the street. the United ownership on on Espanella Way
and and the pride that those owners take take there, the work of the Washington Avenue bid, the lighting of of the street, uh the work that's being done on Collins Avenue to together with Ocean Drive, it's all part of the puzzle piece, but I think this is also a part
of the puzzle piece. I think the right thing might be you know moving forward to give direction that if we are looking for places to cut that this might be something that for future budget years we might look to reconsider
but given that a call for artist already has been put out there being that this has already been vetted that the cultural arts council has made a recommendation that's before us at this point I think we kind of lost the
opportunity to to not do this. But I think Commissioner Suarez, the right thing is to say, you know, for future fiscal years, we want to reconsider the Elevate Espanola program or rather than investing in a temporary installation,
consider a permanent in installation that perhaps might give us uh greater uh return on our investment. Uh but I think for for for this year already it's it would be unfair uh to to to the call for
artists that was put out there, the work done by the CAC uh and the selection of the of the artists. At this point we need positive activation. Let's call a vote. I need a motion. What are we voting the item?
Approve. Commissioner Fernandez makes the motion. I'll second. Commissioner Bot second. So all in favor please say I. I. Anyone opposed? Nay. I have no no from Commissioner uh Suarez
and no from Commissioner Magazine. Item is approved. Thank you. C7W C7 AJ C7 AJ accept recommendation acid wash sidewalk stones fish pond at 1100 block
of Lincoln Road. Who pulled it? It's a It was just an addendum from the administration. I'll second the Yeah, this is just the maintenance and the ceiling, the acid washing of the 1100 block on Lincoln Road just to upkeep and maintain what we currently
have so that it looks beautiful and thank you for getting it in. Thank you, Rodney. Welcome. I hope it looks nice. Motion by Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez. All in favor of C7 AJ. Please say I. I. Anyone opposed? C7 AJ is approved 70.
Let's do the uh remaining the RDA items one and three. RDA item is RDA. We're recessing as a commission meeting uh uh commencing as RDA. Uh item one is joint grant RDA executive director authorized during RDA
board of directors. This is a item that was approved. This is companion item to one that was approved at the consent agenda. I will move the item. Second. I heard a motion by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by
Commissioner Bot. Uh, all in favor? I. Anyone opposed? Hearing none. RDA1 is approved. 70 with Commissioner Higgins absent. RDA3 is a public hearing. New lease for
Crown Castle Fiber LLC at Anchor Shops. That's RD83. I move the item. Second. Motion by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Vice Mayor Suarez. It is a public hearing. I see no one in Zoom, no one in the audience. Uh all in favor, please say I. I. Anyone opposed?
Hearing none. Item is approved. 70. Commissioner Higgins is absent. Let's call the CRA items. We are not convening as the North Beach Community Redevelopment Agency. First item is a similar item. Grant North Beach CRA Executive Director authorization during the North Beach CRA
board of director recess. Yeah, they're both second. A motion by Commissioner Bot, seconded by Second. Uh, Commissioner Schwarz. Did I hear that correct? Yeah. Uh, no problem. RDA1. All in favor,
please say I. I. Anyone opposed? Hearing none. RDA1 is approved with Commissioner Steinberg absent. RDA2 is a joint item. Uh, allocate Northb funds Normandy. Fountain shaped structure.
Move it. Second. Have a motion by Commissioner Bot, seconded by Commissioner Suarez on RDA2. Uh, all in favor, please say I. I. Anyone opposed? Hearing none. Item is approved 70 with Commissioner Steinberg
absent. Uh item three is joint and a joint item accept North Beach CRA rec recreation fund work force housing analysis for the Byron Carile. I um I move it. I I pulled this item. You didn't pull this. You pulled the
item from consent. This is approving the use that the CRA has authorized. So, a motion by Commissioner Bot. Yes. Second by Commissioner Fernandez.
All in favor of item three, please say I. I. Anyone opposed? Hearing none. The item is approved 70 with Commissioner Steinberg absent. R 7A. R7A is the joint item and we're not
convening back as a city of commission meeting. R7A is use North Beach CRA funds Normandy fountain shade structure R7A. I move the second. Call the vote. Motion by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner Bot. All in
favor, please say I. I. Anyone opposed? Hearing none. R seven A is approved. 70 C7Q. C7Q is increase annual city funding Rhythm Foundation execute new management
agreement. It requires 57 vote. C7Q was separated by Commissioner Suarez. Commissioner Suarez. Um thank you Mr. Mayor. Same line of reasoning since the the last item except this is going to be
uh for I believe nine years uh and extra funding. We're we're we're we're we're tripling the budget from 50,000 to 150,000. Um I I I love the band shell. I go
there, you know, I go there often. Um I know Adam does great work there. Um, but again, I'm going to consistently be pushing back on on not just for my colleagues, but also staff uh when these sorts of items come up uh that really
start to put a strain on our our budget um especially if it's recurring. So, I mean, is there any way to lower that amount? You know, perhaps we double it instead of tripling it. It's going to be it's going to be a little difficult going back to our constituents saying,
"Hey, you know, we're we're going to expect you to do more with less, but we're going to triple um uh the operating budget of this particular program." Um, so I don't know how my colleagues feel
about that, but I'm I'm gonna again, respectfully to everyone, I'm not trying to be difficult. I I think it's important to have at least a cautionary voice on here that really does want to uh scrutinize with with a microscope a
lot of this these these funds these funding of of taxpayer money. So uh request increase 100%. um to to to the band shell and not go to
3x. So I'd like to um ask Adam to step up. I I think it is pennywise and pound foolish in the highest to the highest order to um to do this. It is already a reduction from what had been already asked for. Yes. Um we are, you know, for
2023 or 2024, let's look at um we spent $49,000 with the band shell and over $1.6 million with the BAS. And the band shell got uh $77,000
attendees versus 75,000 attendees for the BAS. So, if you're looking to cut funds, and I'm not suggesting we cut funds from the VATS, but I would say your ROI is significantly improved with with the band show. Um, we
have 72 park coming online. We have two I think two, if not three other buildings already with construction fences and equipment and cranes building already. Um, the Doville will be coming online in a few years. Um, Ocean Terrace will be coming online in in a few years.
It is one of the preeminent destination destinations in the county for live music and around the country. People are coming here saying literally, "Oh my god, where is this place? How did I not know about this before?" So to to cut funding by 50 grand as opposed to maybe
not spending $6.5 million to change the purpose of a of a of a a public building um is pennywise and pound foolish. And I will absolutely not support this budget. uh reduction. I completely agree with you that we need to find ways to do that
to to uh to cut funding. And I think we need to look at big ticket items, not nickeling diamonding ourselves into failure. With all due respect, Commissioner, I'm I'm not cutting the budget. I'm simply saying instead of a 3x, we do a 2x. Um in fact, I'm in favor of of increasing
their um their taxpayer dollar grants on a on a yearly basis, but I just think it should be in a modest amount. I don't think it should be uh 3x. Um and look, I pennywise, pound foolish, I I look at all pennies that taxpayers spend. I I
don't I don't It doesn't matter if it's a big ticket item or a small ticket item. I'm I'm going to be a u I'm going to do my best to guard safeguard taxpayer money no matter
how small or how how large it is. So, with all due respect, that's that's going to be my position moving forward. It's nothing personal. I I hope you don't take it that way. Oh, no. I'm not I'm not I wasn't talking to you, Adam. Um, and you know, it's this is again, we're all
elected and Alex tells me we're we're all elected by the same people in Miami Beach. Um, and people elected me for different reasons of why they elected you. Um, and I have a different view and
I don't think there's anything wrong with criticizing and scrutinizing how taxpayer money is spent and I certainly don't like to be chastised on here on on my view on on on how to do that. So, with respect, Dadam, please go ahead and
uh state your case. Um, yes, thank you. Well, um, we did have and I certainly appreciate and and understand and respect your position of wanting to be good stewards of the, uh, public coffers and your your
colleagues, I I I believe take that same tack as well. When we had the conversation at the finance committee meeting uh last last month, it was a very um let's say thorough and spirited discussion around what the right amount
would would be. And it was the uh conclusion of that board at that time that $150,000 total, which amounts to a $99,000 increase, um was the right uh amount.
So I would like to move this item to um to approve this increase as as uh put forth. I have a question. Sure. Okay. So when this went to finance
what was staff's recommendation the um we had recommended the the 9-year extension and um to start with a true up of CPI over the over the term and that CPI
uh totaled to what amount? I don't have that number with me. I want to say it was in the the 60,000 range. Remember how much? Yeah. If I recall, the band shell asked for significantly more. Yeah. 200 something. We came in at what
100,000. Yeah. We started at 250 was our initial request. But I remember when when we met you guys I think you guys said that you understood you were not going to you were not going to receive your full
request and you were you were comfortable with staff's recommendation. We hold on. We uh respected the position that this that the staff was was in and then brought
our request to the finance committee for the additional 250 for $250,000 for its consideration at that time. And the and the only reason why why I I mentioned that is is because we are in a
position where we are going to have to tell a lot of the organizations that we support that we love that we care about that we're not going to be able to support them to the level of funding that we have provided them in the past. Mhm. Uh like for example, you know, everyone
knows how how passionate I am about the mobile mamogram services and and this year in the request I've reduced that in half understanding understanding you know the cuts that we have to that we have to make. So in my mind I thought
you all were comfortable with staff's recommendation. you were comfortable in the $100,000 support uh from the city. I think we we are thankful for any contribution um for the city and for the
consideration of the um uh an expansion of what that funding is. But we're asking for the money that we need to be able to continue to deliver the services at the becoming of a of a worldass
performing arts facility. And and so let me let me just ask this. At the 150 that is being proposed, does this stay at 150 for the nine years or does this change over the course of the year? So I think the recommendation
that came out of finance was that it would be that way for three years and then it would be reassessed. Exactly. Precisely. That is correct. At 100 or 150 finance recommended 150 150. So does if it gets reassessed if it gets
reassessed does it is this is the baseline 150,000 now? Because that's what exactly what's happening here. The baseline was 50. It's getting reassessed. Now it's 150. in three years baseline's 150. It's gonna be a lot
harder then from now to go back down uh because they're going to build out their staff operating expenses, etc. And again, that that's why I'm not saying not to I'm not going with staff's recommendation of $60,000 a year. I'm
just simply saying if we're going to go to our voters, we should say, look, instead of 3xing it, we 2xed it. And you know, I also want to make sure that this also sends a signal to other organizations that you're not going to always get the full funding that what
you request. And granted, I understand you came with 250,000, but you could have came with half a million and then settle in for 250, you know. So I I I get the argument, but at the same time, I think it's important to, you know, to
realize that we we we want to help the organization because, you know, I know you run a good good ship there or a tight ship. Um, but let's have modest increases. perhaps in 3 years we can reassess, see how our city finances are
going and then maybe make up for the the two years um between now and year three where I if if our city coffers are doing better, maybe add a little bit more at the time. I I have a question. I'm sorry. Wait,
wait. I just want to say in in March we had a fitness festival, right, where you guys all preined and, you know, squatted and took all these pictures and that was $400,000. And that was not really economic development. It was a couple of days sporting events, but we supported
this. But this is serious economic development because the amount of people that the band shell is bringing to North Beach is really positive for those small businesses there. So to not see that, I'd like you to just see the benefit of this economic development because I
personally didn't really see the value in your uh what was it called? Your sporting thing where you were out there. Well, I deadlifted commission. I didn't squatting. I don't know what you were doing. Squatting and musling on the beach. I personally didn't really see the value
in that. But I said maybe there is something here. That's to me for what was it two days of of I believe it was a week a week of squatting and screaming and deadlifting whatever it was. I mean I mean the economic impact that was was
pretty huge Kristen. I mean it it there's a lot of hotel rooms that came in. I think they actually put out a financial analysis. I I don't know if um Kevin is here to 80,000 people coming to North Beach. I can guarantee that 80,000 people did not
attend um that event, but I supported it cuz I thought it it's great. But if you think of the positive press that we get from the North Beach band, the fact that it has become a North Beach is a destination because of it. That band
shell is more successful than anything else that we've invested in. So this small seed investment and it really is small compared to what we've allocated to other cultural institutions is smart um economic development for that area right now that is an area in transition.
Again no one's no one's disputing that commissioner. I I just think that let's have a modest increase. Instead of a 3x, let's do a 2x. And then perhaps at in year three when we renegotiate, we can look at we can look at our city funds and say, "All right, well, you know
what? You're doing such a good job. We're we're a couple properties came online. You know, we can give a little bit more." But right now, we're in a huge budget crisis. I mean, even the counties the county is starting to cut lifeguards. It's so bad. And you know, I certainly don't.
I would cut this if we cut 100,000 from your sporting festival. I'm sorry. Cut. You want to cut? I think I mean I just don't I just don't understand it. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Adam, I have a question for you. And these are penny and in the whole
But it's not pennies. It's over nine years. I have a question for you. I have two questions for you. Um here to four. Was your contract rounded up each year to cover CPI increases? There was um there was a number of of
years where that wasn't happening and that's where um John and staff got the Okay. So, that was just um correcting a problem that will not be happening again, which it once again, I don't know how we're doing this, you know, we're doing it with impact fees and all sorts of other things, but we've corrected
that and that will be corrected. Um, when is the last time you got a an increase in funding? In funding? No, never. So, this is the initial amount that you were funded with since 2015.
Okay. And since then, it is arguably the top draw cultural institution in the city. We've increased the utilization of the space by six times, the annual attendance by nine times.
I could there was a I could do the super truncated return on investment spiel if that's if that's helpful. Um but the moral of the story is you have a space that uh a facility that went from kind
of sleepy parks facility um to something that is completely uh completely different uh uh now. And you know, our part of our big vision is having the band shell become synonymous with my
with Miami Beach and with Miami and the public consciousness in much the same way as uh Radio City Music Hall is for New York or Red Rocks Amphitheater would be for for Denver. And we're starting to we're seeing that that momentum most
certainly. So, I have made a motion to um support this increase as stated, and I'd like to know if I have a second so we can call the vote. So, I'll second this, and I'll and I'll tell you why. Um within the next 18 months, Mr. Manager, we're going to start we're going to break ground on the
72nd Street Community Complex, God willing. Okay. And so, you know, realistically, number one, when the band shell is activated, the businesses in North Beach are
thriving. It is an economic engine for North Beach. And number two, we know that this project will cause an impact, an interruption of some sorts to the
band shell. And the worst thing that could happen is that they they have to turn off the lights. Uh, and I want to make sure that for for as much as there's going to be an interruption that we're going to be creating there that we
help them get through that that phase of of interruption. And so and so again I agree with the spirit of what commissioner Suarez is saying but at the same time I also understand the great importance and the energy that this
facility brings there and just seeing bigger picture the work that is going to be happening there that we are promoting uh in terms in terms of construction that's going to cause an problem. So, I'm going to support the full amount that came out of the committee re
recommendation. Yeah. Before we call the vote, just a quick uh I know this is it's not for this item. I'm not going to I'm going to support this. Um it's 9 years 364 days and we're doing that in this case. So, um it's a 57 vote instead of a 67. Sometimes we do it to avoid a voter
referendum. just not crazy about that because it's we're we're we're rubbing up right against the 10 years and I I I just think it's not the best look because it's obvious we're trying to get around that. I think we in the future maybe we should look to make it something less than that.
I'm glad I see Commissioner Fernandez nodding his head. So, um Okay, let's call a vote on C7Q. All in favor, please say I. I. Anyone opposed? Nay. I hear one no from Commissioner Suarez. The item is approved. C7Q
C7J C7J is a joint item except North Beach CRA uh fund workforce housing analysis by Byron Carile. C7J was separated by by Mayor Suarez. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Suarez. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We we had a um we
had a spirited discussion on this particular property and actually on a different property and one of the developers, Don Peeles, came um to the podium and I asked him if he would be willing to uh lend his expertise on on
helping us uh better guide us through this process instead of possibly spending $190,000 on a study. Um, I would prefer to start there before
uh spending again $190,000 of taxpayer money on a on a study. Um, I understand it's it's it's for a great uh purpose. Uh, but the fact that we have a developer who's willing to uh recuse himself from bidding on the project and
is willing to help proono uh who happens to also be a North Beach resident. I think we should start there, especially given that we're in a budget crisis again. Um, I I I would respectfully ask that we start there. Uh, I understand this these
are CRA funds, but at the end of the day, it's still taxpayer money. Um, and you know, again, we want to be good stewards of of taxpayer dollars. Um, and I I just it doesn't I understand it may
come in under $190,000, but I could spend $190,000 to to me spending close almost $200,000 on studies for a a project where we don't know where the outcome is going to be, especially since there's going to be
a uh a a person in in the industry who is respected who can help as proono. I I think that makes sense starting there. So, I'd like to see where my colleagues are because, you know, the way the way it has gone down in the last couple
votes, I mean, we're we're spending a lot of taxpayer money where I mean, I for one think we could be saving we we we we could we could certainly be taking a haircut on some of these things. Yeah. And I appreciate your your comments and and what you're doing on
the budget, although I would differ on the characterization of a budget crisis. Actually, we're we're in extremely good health and this is part of the budget process that we go through. So, uh, Commissioner Bach, so um, we actually have been speaking with Don Peeles for the last six, eight
weeks, um, six weeks, six weeks, um, the conversation that we had the finance committee a couple months ago. I reached out to him and I asked him specifically that, explained what the vision is, um, and whether or not he'd be willing to share some thoughts about doing this.
And um I then stepped out of the conversation, turned it over to Daniel and your team. Um we got Roberto Espejo who's the architect who's working on not necessarily designing the project but helping to visualize how to make the space work, right? sort of to fit all
the things into it that we need to. Um, and there has been very robust conversation over a number of multiple meetings from from the reports that I've gotten from from the staff team um to work through a variety of different options. Um, at the end of the day, what
we keep coming back to is that we are trying to create something that will be an additional economic engine and add um affordable workforce housing to the mix that isn't repurposing. Um, it is
adding um and it in the in the way that we're trying to do it is never been done before. So, we can't just look to a model. And the last three times that we've tried to do something, two times on the Byron Carile site and one time on the Anomar site, we've met with mixed
results at best because it is incredibly difficult to do and what we're trying to do here is even harder. So, we have Don's input. It's been I from what you told me, it's been incredibly useful and it's helped get us a little further down
the road. But here we are a year after we've approved this project, still trying to figure out how to do it. and this um resistance to spending money to do it correctly with money that has been authorized from the CRA for the
community from the community and for the community that will benefit the most directly um so that we can get the expertise we need and craft the solicitation and find the funding mechanisms to produce the
results that we want and not have a fourth example of how this didn't work right because we didn't ask for the right things in the right way or we didn't know how to do something. We're delaying this project. What the goal was to have this project done by 2027. We're
never going to meet that now. It's not possible. Any delay to funding this, which by the way is already funded because the CRA already approved it is a delay on this project for desperately needed workforce housing and an another
engine of economic development for North Beach. and thereby by extension for the entire city of Miami Beach. I would make a motion and urge my colleagues to support this. I'll just ask for clarification. I see
things slightly differently. I look at the amount of studies that any government does, our government, other I mean we're we're paying millions of dollars per year for studies. Studies it's crazy. and and that's where government really gets taken to the
cleaner, right? All these consultants and studies and things like that. I feel we don't need it cuz I trust you. I trust you, right? I've seen your work. I trust you. Go out and do it. Right? When I see uh studies, I don't see if we
don't do a study, we're delaying things. I see all these superolous studies as delaying. Right? and and Commissioner Bot, I I think with our team here and if Donnu needs to be complimented by another developer that would give up all
possibility of doing a uh a bid on the workforce housing some sometimes you just you just go right you you just go we could sit here and microenineer till the cows come home. Um I'm confident in our team uh especially with the work at
hand. So I view it differently as not delaying. I move this as just removing a I view this as removing a cog in the wheel and just giving you the ability and freedom to work with the private sector and go out and get this done. So that's been happening already and what
our team is saying is they and this is not no disrespect for the team and Daniel I'll let you answer the question but what we are hearing is that because this hasn't been done yet before and what is that just what is
the team let me just please finish my sentence this hasn't been done before and we the team we don't have the in-house expertise to do what we deal will get us the best correct result. It's possible
we don't spend the full $198 $98,000. But we need to have the ability and I agree there are too many studies and too many consultants, but yet another traffic study to appease the FDOT gods is very different from trying to figure out how to create something that has
never been done before. Daniel, please. And let me ask Hold on. Hold on. What hasn't been done? We there has never been a community arts center built with affordable housing, workforce housing on top of it. So, what makes you think a consultant is
going to be in the middle of a sentence answering a question? Thank you. I'm the vice mayor. I can speak. Listen, I I I've been trying to interject again. I'm trying to be respectful. You're saying that this is the this has never been done before. There's no guarantee
that if we spend this $190,000 that we're going to get the intended desire that we want. It could just be waste money wasted, which is what Commissioner Magazine is trying to say. At the end of the day, I think we all have faith in our staff to do this. Sure, we've had mistakes in the past,
and you know, we we've learned from them. We're even willing to have developers who are willing to recuse themselves from bidding on this, who are willing to work pro bono for us. I think that's the the the start that we should do before we start spending hundreds of
thousands of dollars of taxpayer money on studies. I'm sorry. I just I think I think studies are a big waste of time and a big waste of money. Commissioner Bot. No, I just wanted to finish the answer to the question that I was directly a asked. Um, apparently,
so if I could, apparently I got pulled rank on. Um, what what hasn't existed to continue answering? And Daniel, I'd like you to please. Yes. because you'll do a better job of this. But it's the combination of the um the cultural arts
complex complex plus the workforce housing plus we retain the land plus the um the the way that we finance it is such that we don't have to um that we don't have to subsidize the cultural arts complex
because the rents that come in after the first x number of years will help do that thereby enabling the cultural arts complex to be a better amenity for the community by providing more different and more affordable more comma different
comma and more affordable offerings for the community that it serves. Daniel and if I could Daniel because I'm going to ask you a question if I could commissioner um there could be some different dynamics you know uh but in terms of it hasn't been done there's different iterations
or versions. So, I'm just going to ask you point blank. I'm going to put you on the spot. Sorry if it's uncomfortable in doing so, but speak truly and freely because I'm going to go on your guidance one way or another. Are you confident you with the help of the uh private
sector teams that we've kind of elicited can do this in a efficient manner? So uh uh through the chair Daniel facilities and fleet management uh we have been having conversations and and
in short I I say yes if or no because there it could fall on either side and uh we have been in conversations with uh Don Peoples of Legacy um and we explained what we're trying to create
here and Commissioner Bot is correct in that to my knowledge And to those who I've spoken to this model, this permutation of the the joint buildings of the cultural center with the workforce housing managed by a nonprofit
entity that then sees the realization of the profits from the rent to subsidize, you know, in in our conversations about subsidizing the arts and paying for the arts. This is very timely. We are essentially swinging for the fences here in that we're trying to create a
cultural institution that is self-supporting and will never have to come back to the city for for money. So we're doing that through a very large investment through the geo bond. We are we believe through the work with with Don and engaging C studios and Roberto
Espejo who did do the initial massing study pro bono for friends of the Byron. So he had all of the models, we re-engaged them, re-engaged Don. We had a very candid conversation, a great ideiation session where Don contributed so much insight into uh what we're
trying to achieve. Uh but they very much look at it from a forprofit developer standpoint which needs to see market returns on their investment where so that's one end of the spectrum. you know, we we hand this over to a
developer much like the Anomar model where they need to they're required, you know, for their stakeholders to extract a certain amount of value from that project. It's the business they're in. The other end of that spectrum is we
partner with the nonprofit cultural organization. It's missiondriven and they run they they hire a property manager. I I get it. Yes. Can you do it or do you need help? Do you need a study to help you be efficient?
What I need is what essentially is a financial business plan or an analysis for a financial analysis for a business plan. We need people that live in this realm to say, "Yes, you can you can
finance up to X amount with the funding that you're given and the land that you're given." So what we're asking is for this consultant to model a business plan using the nonprofit model that would then enable in long-term the
cultural center to realize the profits from the workforce housing. The other part of this is um in conversation with legacy they very much are interested in developing this or being part of the development to some degree. You know, at the last finance meeting, I brought this
up to him and he never mentioned that this has been these are conversations that have been going on for eight weeks. And that finance meeting was last week. And someone just texted me saying that the CRA was never told that there was conversations going on with Don Poples
ever. And so I mean I if apparently if if that CRA board had known that uh there was a developer interested in helping out proono perhaps they may not have passed those funds uh to to be spent.
So I'm sorry I'll second motion to re motion to 15 minutes. I can do five. I can do five too. I've got do five. Five minutes. Five minutes. Can I can I say something? So hold on. Let me Okay. Let me finish, please. Uh, so
Commissioner Magazine asked you a question. Can you do it? I think there's other developers in in who live in Miami Beach who would be more than willing to step up, help on a pro bono basis, and then what we could do is we can take their advice. Staff works with them and
then put together a financial plan. And if that doesn't make sense and if or or or we don't get the action or the goal that we want or bids then we can come back and say all right we've tried everything staff has has done their job
we've gotten all the help from the community from from leaders in the community and development community now we need to go to a study so I think that's the proper course of action that we need to take to before we start spending hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer money uh on on on on
studies. So, you know, I'm not saying no, but I think right now, let's have staff work with uh with with interested um members of the community that that can actually help us craft what we want without having to pay extra dollars for
it. I think that's I think that's fair and reasonable. I you know, I mean, again, I'm just trying to be cautious of of all taxpayer money. And my biggest fear is that we spend this money and we don't get what we want, you know, and then and
then we're we're we're we we spent hundreds of thousand dollars and and and we have nothing to show for it. So, you know, respectfully, I I I would like I'd like to decline this offer. I'd like to just say say something very quickly. I mean, I I would be willing to support the study because it is very complicated
when you remove profit from it, but $180,000 for somebody to explain to us how we do this. I mean, there are lessons learned. you did, you know, you can go speak to the the people at the Anomar. We did structure something like this that time and there has been a lesson learned
between what we did there and what we need now, which is probably why you're asking um for the study. Maybe what needs to happen is schedule a couple of focus groups. I'm not opposed to what you're saying either. Like we're going to have residents telling us how to structure a deal that
doesn't has never been done focus groups. This is I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Eric Carpenter. So, I think I might be able to help. I think we've gotten some very helpful feedback and very informative data
points from Legacy. Um, Daniel and I have talked about that the 190,000 was a worst case scenario. My suggestion would be city manager's office has authority up to 100,000. I
would like to have your blessing to make sure that whatever gaps that we have in our knowledge base to make sure that we're getting the best outcome here, I can fill in with that 100,000 over the next month. And if I need more, then I
come back. And I would I would like to just add that you have the authorization from the CRA to spend up to 198,000. So between if we need 50 grand from the CRA and 100,000 from the veterans, like I do not want to to cut off our noses to spite
our face to get to what will be if we do it right, something studied and emulated all over the country. That's that's the level of stuff we're talking about. We're not saying, "Oh, well, it's affordable housing. Who cares?" Or, "It's just another blackbox theater," which was proposed and and dismissed out
of hand by residents and prior commissions. Like, that's all we're trying to do. And I I really respect and appreciate the desire to turn up money under every possible opportunity, under every stone. I get it and I share that with you. I just don't happen to agree
with the items that are being put on the chopping block today. There are plenty of other items that we all agree on that we could wait. Let's just move this forward. I'm begging my colleagues to move this forward. Get this done and approve this today, right now. So, are you okay with
Eric's kind of uh threading the needle? Give him the discretion up to $100,000. But but then we would withdraw this item. No, with with any additional funding that might be needed from what the CRA has approved.
No, because that could that then you're spending $290,000 potentially. I mean, no, like we got to draw the line somewhere. I think look, it's really easy to spend other people's money, okay? It's really, that's what I'm starting to learn. It's really easy to spend other people's money. I, for one,
don't like spending other people's money. If we have an avenue to do this in-house and have people willing to do it for free for proono and then we can go to go to bid or to market and see
what we get, then great. And we don't we could we could spare a dollar of taxpayer money. Even if it's a dollar, I don't care if it's a dollar or $190,000. We all know our position. Let's call the vote because we're going to lose some people soon. Some people have to leave. Some people have a flight. Not me. I'm good, but
trying to be considerate. I have a motion by Commissioner Bot. I haven't heard a second yet. May we defer the item to September. Second. Second. Okay. So, I have a motion by Commissioner Bot, seconded by uh Commissioner Fernandez. All in favor, please say I.
Let's call Let's call a RO. I think it's going to be Okay. I'm going to go alphabetically. Commissioner Bot, wait. Can I just ask one question before we vote on this? This money for this study are is the whole comprehensive I just want to understand exactly what we're getting. We're getting the whole comprehensive breakdown of the arts
center plus the workforce housing plus the affordable housing. So the cultural center is more or less laid out. This is the the study of the workforce housing, the finances around the the bu the development of the workforce housing and the returns on the workforce housing that would then
service the bond that would be taken out for the work. And can we once you get this model, can it be general enough that we can extrapolate to other workforce housing projects across the city if we needed to do these types more of these types of projects to some measure? I would I would assume so. The modeling uh it's just different
different areas have different economics. So the the market rent uh in South Beach is going to be different than North Beach is going to be. So we would need another site basically. No. No. My my question is just why is it so expensive?
Why $190,000 for one project for workforce housing for the financial model? It seems very high. So 190 is the top end of that. It's actually 160 with 30 uh 30,000 for allowance for activations if we wanted
to have uh resident uh info sessions or some sort of resident engagement. So we will spend as little of that money as we can. Um just for clarification the conversations that I've had with Legacy uh I I think we've reached the point that they're no longer comfortable going
proono and offered to give me a proposal to consult. So I I think I've exhausted that um that you know there there are a multitude of developers who I know would be willing to help. You have a motion in the second. Let's call the vote. I'm going to do it with an official roll
call vote. So randomly, Commissioner Magazine, no. Commissioner Rosen Gonzalez, yes. Commissioner Dominguez, yes. Vice Mayor Suarez, no. Commissioner Bach, yes. Commissioner Fernandez. Yes.
Mayor Miner. No. Item fails. This is a 57th. It was a 43. Okay. Um, we have a couple quick quick items and we can extend the meeting. Mayor, this is they told us 57.
Why is it 57? That's what's on the sheet that someone told us. So, someone can verify that. Oh, cuz it's a bid. I even asked the question privately and I was told it was 47s. It's 57s because part of that is also the bid waiver to engage AMS.
Motion to reconsider. It's not. I second the motion. So, motion to reconsider by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner Bot. All in favor of reconsidering, please say I. Not going to change. I mean, I think it's You're not changing your vote, but then but then I
Yeah. Um Okay. Uh let's talk a couple quick items. Uh R9B the boards and committees. R9. Yes. By acclamation I believe by acclamation there is one nominee for each seat. Just for the record uh budget advisory committee reappointment of Maj Kagan uh for the general obligation bond
uh Isaac Kesler and for the North Beach CRA one nominee John Spitia. If we do those by acclamations we can get those done. Okay. There's no no competition. No competition at this time. No. Okay. So, so okay. So, everyone is
appointed. Congratulations. That's R9B. Thank you. R5V R5V an ordinance to the mayor, city commission of May Beach, Florida, amending chapter 58 of M city code entitled housing by amending article 7
entitled consumer protection of owners of residential property by amending section 58-600 entitled definition section 58. 602 entitled notice to associations and section 58-611 civil penalties for violations of section 58-602 to require prospective bulk owner of
residential condominium units to provide notice to residential unit owners of any present or pending application or other request to amend the comprehensive plan or land development regulations in connection with the proposed redevelopment of the condominium property and providing for repealer subability clarification and effective date
second. So, Commissioner Fernandez, uh, Commissioner, uh, Magazine, it is a public hearing. I see no one in Zoom. No one in the audience. Call is Vice Mayor Suarez. Yes. Commissioner Magazine, yes. Rosa Gonzalez, yes. Commissioner Dominguez,
one more. Yes. Commissioner Fernandez. Yes. Commissioner Bach, yes. Mayor Miner, David, one more. Motion carry, second reading, public hearing is September 3rd. One, one last item for candidates. Commissioner Fernandez said to extend the parking holiday. We need to vote on it now. R70. Last item. I move.
Hold on. Second. We got to call it officially. R70. R70. I heard magazine. Yes. And Rosa Gonzalez. R70. All right. All in favor? Yeah. I
Anyone oppose? Thank you. Have a great night. Enjoy the summer everyone. Enjoy August without all of us bothering you. No meetings. We'll see you September 3rd. Have a great night. God bless. Part: 2
How do you feel? Hey. Hey. Hey. One word. Fire. Oh my god. Let's go. Heat. Heat. I'm a Heat. Heat. N. Hello.
Hey. Feel good. Come on. Come on. I know it pop up. You are Hey, hey, hey.
Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. 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. >> Good morning and welcome to our commission meeting July 23rd 2025. I'm going to turn it over to our city clerk
Ralph Granado to give us any pertinent instructions. Good morning everyone. During this hybrid special comm during this hybrid commission meeting, the city commission is physically present in the commission chamber at Miami Beach City Hall, 1700 convention center drive, third floor. The public is invited to
attend the meeting virtually. However, members of the public who wish to attend the meeting or provide public comments in person may appear at the commission chamber. To participate or provide comments virtually during the commission meeting, the public may join the meeting by visiting the Zoom app on their smart device or on the web at zoom. us, by
telephone at 3052241968. Again, the local toll-free number is 3052241968. The toll-free number is 888-475-4499. Again, 888475-4499. The webinar ID is 813928-57671
pound. Again, the webinar ID is 813928-57671 pound. Members of the public wanting to speak virtually on an item during the meeting must click the raise hand icon if using the Zoom app or press star 9 on the telephone to raise their hand. The Zoom link, webinar ID, and telephone
numbers provided for this commission meeting are static and remain unchanged from meeting to meeting. Thank you, mayor. >> Thank you. I'm honored to uh ask uh Miami Beach Police Department Police Chaplain, Rabbi Dovid Weberman, to give our invocation today.
>> Good morning, mayor and commissioners, and all those in attendance. Let us pray. our father in heaven, the mayor and conflicting interests. May those whose requests are granted appreciate the decisions and may those whose
requests are denied accept the decisions with grace. We pray for tranquility in Washington, inspiring all parties to embrace mutual respect. May God bless the state of Israel and keep it safe. mowed unsuspectingly to lead us in the
pledge. I see Stfan Lingmirth from the Miami Business Club. Just start the words I pledge and we'll all say it with you. So, you're good even if you don't know it. >> I pledge >> uh next time. Well, why don't we start
our uh our sutnik time? Thank you. Well, why don't we start our uh our sutnik time? Thank you. Thank you everyone. Please approach the podium. You have two minutes. Please state your name and address. I'm going to be going from the audience to Zoom, so you're first. Go ahead, sir.
>> Uh, thank you. Good morning. My name is Adam Saper. I'm an attorney with the Community Justice Project and a longtime Miami Beach resident at 10th and Lennox. I'm here to support Resolution C7Y. And I urge this commission to continue to oppose the dehumanizing and violent rhetoric targeting immigrants, including
the horrific idea that using the Everglades and its wildlife as weapons against their own community members. This should obviously be an easy unanimous vote. You all do not want to be on the wrong side of our families and our neighbors as pawns in their political games. But these have real
consequences. This rhetoric normalizes cruelty, incites violence and racial profiling and degrades the values that Miami Beach has long stood for. We are witnessing human rights violations in real time in our own backyard. Local governments should be doing every in our
own backyard. Local governments should be doing everything that they can to stop these atrocities. Unfortunately, our next virtual caller, our first virtual caller is Darren. Darren, please unmute yourself. You have two minutes. State your name and address. >> Okay. Hello. I'm all of you, of course.
>> Oh, no. >> It's me. >> Uh, good morning. Uh, >> oh, >> yeah. >> Hi. Good morning, Mayor Mayor and commissioners. Uh, my name is Daryl Mcgurian. I live near Flamingo Park, 910 Jefferson Avenue. Uh first I would like
to commend you for your amazing year of service. Um you're moving in the right direction on public safety and towards making Miami Beach uh hopefully a blue zone certified community. Um I urge you to support resolution C7AF and stop the
plan to build fire station number one next to the running truck. Um moving the fire station just two blocks west to Alton Road uh would not improve response times. Um, it puts emergency trucks in traffic. Uh, the current location
already has direct access to all the areas via the less congested Jefferson Avenue. Uh, what we lose is irreplaceable. One of the last peaceful green spaces in our city. This is where families gather, kids play, and residents heal physically and mentally.
Replacing that with sirens, diesel fumes, and years of construction is not public safety. Uh, it could be considered as public harm. Uh we already fall short of the city's 2040 Parkland goal with just 5 acres of parkland per
thousand residents, half of what's recommended nationally. Uh and we do already have a top 1% ISO, fire department emergency response ratings uh from the existing location. Um I guess why to destroy green space when empty
lots and other common sense alternatives exist? Let's protect our park, our people, and our future. Thank you so much for your time. >> Please go ahead. Please. >> Now I can speak. Oh, hello. I'm Audrey. All of you know me that I'm a community
activist. I'm here today to present an idea that I have that I feel will be better for the entire city. I'll tell you a little of the background and how I got the idea. You all know we have the sunflower society free art classes for
children at Fineberg Fischer and at Unidad. And when we had the exhibit at Unidad, one of our board members came with a service dog and they yelled so loud at her, you cannot bring a dog in here and it's not allowed and this and
that. And I know the disability laws because I'm on many committees and I know it's against the law, but I didn't want to make a fuss about it. But it gave me a wonderful idea. Most people in the community do not know the actual
laws and we don't need controversy and yelling about people nodding not allowing dogs in various places. So I would like to I went to the police chief first and said I want to make a sign that says service dogs are allowed
everywhere by order of the police. But it wasn't just an easy thing to do. I got the county laws and the um and the state laws and the federal laws from upstairs from the legal department, but I'm working with the disability access
committee with Valyria. She brought an expert to last week's meeting and I found out exactly what to do. They have these decals that you can put up in different them up in all of the buildings. Thank you.
Our next virtual caller is Paula King. Paula, unmute yourself, state your name, address. You have two minutes. >> Hi, I'm Paula King, 811 Cresby Boulevard, uh, North Beach, and I'm here to address the problem of the
unattractive problem of feces in our canals. Um, we've gone back and forth with this for over 10 years and we have more beach shutdown days these days than not. Um, we have a big problem coming at
us and that we have 15 roughly 15,000 more units coming online and nobody's addressing this problem. They say, "Oh, the poop is coming from the school." that school cannot produce enough poop
to warrant the the um heightened amounts of fecal matter in our waters. We really have to be serious about this. We have we have all of the poop from Bay Harbor Island, Surf Side, Ball Harbor, and um
anyway, many municipalities poop comes through North Beach and our our canals are polluted as a result of it. We we haven't checked our pumping station and we haven't checked the tanks. So, we've checked all around and we've found a
finger to point at the pool, but the the school, but that could not be the problem. We really need to address the pumping station, the tanks, the pumping station on on Hawthorne Avenue. We have a big problem here. And, you know,
unless we hit this before we have 15,000 new additional units pumping through North Beach, we're going to have big problems. I wish our city would address this. I know there will be no ribbon cutting ceremonies or anything else.
It's not the most glamorous thing to do, but we must address this or we're going to have very big problems in Miami Beach, not only in North Beach. Thank you for your time and I would appreciate this issue being addressed.
>> Go ahead, sir. State your name, address. You have two minutes. >> My name is Robert McDougall. I live off 13th Street in Drexel. I'm a resident here. Um, I'm here, as you can tell, I'm not a lobbyist. I'm here to support the track and I hope we get to keep it. I just came from the track this morning. I run about three or four times a week
with my friends and it means a lot to me. So, it would be good if we can keep it and that's pretty much all I want to say. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you. >> Our next virtual caller is Johan Moore. State your name, address. You have two minutes.
>> Good morning. Johan Moore, 717 Jefferson Avenue. Speaking for Meridian Court community, uh we want to express our support for item C7Y. Um but also uh express our support as an
organization for reopening the site search for the new fire station with the proviso that the Southshore Community Center be off the table. this despite one of our co-founders impatience with the process. Uh and she in fact would
prefer that we go forward with the current plan. But a majority of our members uh feel that we would not want to impose on another neighborhood or on others what we ourselves have opposed as
an unreasonable imposition on a residential neighborhood. Now, while obviously the west end of the park has less impact than within the neighborhood, um we wouldn't want to, as we say, uh force anyone, uh into a situation accepting something which
primarily is needed to benefit the highrises in another neighborhood. We are intrigued by item C7 AG, but obviously questions have been raised in the past about that site not being big enough uh specifically for trucks to
drive through. Uh an idea has been raised of a turntable. Perhaps something along those lines would be able to accommodate a new fire station at the current site. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Go ahead, sir. >> Yeah. Hi. Uh hi everyone. I'm Stefan
Ling Mmurf, resident and business owner here on West Avenue. Um I'm here in support of the resolution of not building um anything in the park at all. Uh we want to keep the Flamingo Park as it is. Um I'm a passionate runner. Um I
also started a business club here on the on the beach and um we have a big community now and and we all want to support uh the park. The Flamingo Park is a very valuable assets been around for 100 years. We believe we should not build in the park at all. So hopefully
you vote in the direction of this and uh for a better future on Miami Beach. So thank you for that. Thank you. >> Thank you. Our next virtual caller is Raquel Pacheco. Go ahead. Please state your name, address. You have two minutes. >> Hi, good morning everyone. um Raquel
Pacheo uh my Flamingo Park resident, local activist. I'm calling in support of two items. First item, I'd like to start with people first. So the first item is C7Y. I want to thank and commend Commissioner Fernandez for taking the initiative for speaking out for our
immigrant communities. I myself am a child of uh of of uh war. I was a refugee at 9 months of age. uh my family and I uh have migrated uh to several parts of the world and landed here in the United States when I was about 10 years old. Um, so it is incredibly
important that I all of you um hopefully will support this item and not just here in Miami Beach, but that you also please do what you can to advocate um at the uh higher levels for more to be done because uh what's being done here in
Florida is a stain on our morality that I fear will never be washed clean. Um, so that being said, I also want to commend uh Commissioner Suarez for item C7 AF and for taking the initiative to take the park off the chopping block for
the fire station. Uh, as many of you know, I'm a former candidate. I was supported by the fire department when I ran for office. I love our fire department and its staff and all the wonderful men and women um, who do an amazing job uh, as you know by their ratings. But when it comes to to green
space, I truly believe that it is sacred and in an urban space. I I do have a degree in urban studies and I believe that, you know, good urban developers protect green space at all costs. And um in terms of where we build this fire station, there are other options. I know
some of them may be costly, but we love to boast about our wealth and we love to invest in things that are some would call frivolous like temporary art installations. So, in my opinion, if we have money to spend on things like that, we certainly have the funds to give our
firemen the best that they deserve. >> Thank you. >> Go ahead, sir. >> Yes. Hello, everyone. My name is Frana. I am a West Avenue resident and I own a restaurant as well on West Avenue. I'm here to try to save the Flamingo Park.
Uh, I understand the importance of a fire station, but I think that this park is beautiful. Miami Beach is beautiful and we are very lucky to live here. I really think that we could find a more appropriate location for the fire station.
At this moment, I don't really use the track, but I commit to use the track if we can actually save the >> the park. I will go with you. Thank you for listening to me. >> Thank you so much. Our next virtual caller is Ken Barnes. Please state your
name, address, and you have two minutes. My name is Ken Barnes and I live in North Miami. Like Commissioner Alex Fernandez, my story is shaped by immigration. My mother came from a poor Ukrainian farming family, often going
hungry before immigrating to Canada in 1921 and eventually settling in Oakland, California, where I was born. Commissioner Fernand's resolution opposing violent and dehumanizing rhetoric towards immigrants
is both timely and essential. Too often immigrants are portrayed as criminals or threats when in fact they are our neighbors working in restaurants, cleaning homes, and helping build our communities. One example is the meaning the demeaning
alligator Alcatraz, a name many of us reject. Some are now calling it, and I know the word is emotional, but I use it purposefully, the Everglades concentration camp, as it meets the definition, a facility detaining large
groups, often persecuted minorities in inadequate conditions. Agencies like ICE and Customs and Bureau Border Protection play central roles in this crisis. CBP detains migrants and separates families. ICE locates, detains, and deports
individuals, often without oversight. ICE agents have reported to arrest people without clear identification, sometimes violently, and there are cases of entering schools, under false pretenses, and even detaining US citizens. This kind of secret policing
breeds fear and distrust. That's why I fully support the resolution of Alex Fernandez. It sends a powerful message that Miami Beach stands for compassion, dignity, and our shared humanity. It's a message the whole country needs to hear.
>> Thank you so much, sir. Go ahead. State your name, address. You have two minutes. >> Okay. Good morning, Mayor, Commissioner, and everyone in attendance here. My name is Richard Rashinsky. I'm president of Palms Association, uh, 1025 Alton Road, representing approximately 100 residents. I'm here on
behalf of the board of directors and more than 100 residents we represent to strongly oppose the proposal to build a fire station in Flamingo Park. Our residents and neighbors simply don't understand how anyone could justify taking an inch of a green space from a
small precious park such as ours. In great cities like New York, London, Munich, you would never see parts of Central Park, Hide Park, or English Gardens carved away for a structure such as this. Dwarfed as it is, Flamingo Park
is our Central Park. And why should we be any different here in Miami Beach? This would be the sixth gra in Flamingo Park over the years. The first grab was the expansion of the parking lot next to the Pal Gym. then the extension of the
tennis courts, then the boys and girls club, then the bathroom on the hill, and recently the newly proposed pickle ball courts. If this continues, there will be nothing left of the fire station in Flamingo Park. Thank you for your time.
>> Thank you. Our next virtual caller is Alicia Kasanova. Please state your name, address. You have two minutes. >> Alicia Kasanova, 4775 Collins Avenue. Good morning. Good to see you all. I'm here representing the Mid Beach Neighborhood Association. The MBNA would
like to express its support for the following. Mayor Miner's R5E proposal, which includes prohibiting motorized means of transportation on the Miami Beach prominade. The MBNA is currently working with city staff on maintenance options to improve the aesthetics
temporarily, but we're looking forward to continue working together on the long-term vision for this valuable pedestrian prominade stretch stretching from 24th Street to 29th Street. We fully support strictly prohibiting all means of motorized transportation on the
Miami Beach prominade. We also support Commissioner Fernandez's C7AE, supporting small restaurants and permitting installation of parklets on side streets by 41st Street. Although the MBNA appreciates the recent PA power
washing and garbage cleanup on 41st, which is our mid beach entrance artery, we strongly urge the city to prioritize the revitalization project, and in the meantime do whatever is necessary to entice good tenants for 41st Street. We
feel allowing parkletits can attract good restaurants and help with the muchneeded revitalization of this area. We also support Commissioner Bot and Commissioner Magazines R90 regarding the installation of additional security bolards on the beachwalk and
other areas. Since safety is everyone's priority, we need to make sure that these areas are secure without any possibility of vehicle access. Thank you so much. Thank you. Go ahead, please. >> Oh, my name is Marilyn Nabella. I live
on Miami Beach in Alton Road, 11th Street. And I oppose the firehouse on uh Flamingo Park. My grandchildren ride their bike up and down the street. And that would be very dangerous with those big trucks coming out when there's an emergency and and I just feel it would
be terrible to take any of the trees away from the park. Thank you. Our next virtual >> our next virtual caller has initials of DA. Please go ahead. >> Please unmute yourself.
>> Let's then go to Juliana. Go ahead, please. >> Hello. >> Go ahead, please. >> Hi, my name is Juliana Tuma. I'm a resident in Flamingo, uh, the Flamingo neighborhood. I'm also board member at 734 Michigan town homes. I'm an
architect and I also have a master's in urban design and sustainability. I'm calling um in support of not putting the fire station in our sacred park area. The green space of that little sliver serves a big purpose such as retaining
storm water off of the streets, sidewalks, and also lowering the heat island effect so we don't feel so hot, especially in the summer months. Um, creating more concrete, more roofed area is going to create more runoff and more
storm water that we have to then inject into our infrastructure to accept that much water coming off. Um, so please find another area that is not in the green space. We don't have enough already per habitant as we constructing
more and more condos and and growing the city. We need to really take a focus on how we can get more green space and not take away from our green space. Thank you. >> Go ahead, sir. Hi everybody. Matt Rosenberg Path, South Beach Track Club, Safe Flamingo Park. I have great respect
for everyone up there. Whether we agree or disagree on any particular thing, you have a hard job. I know everyone is there working hard for the best interests of the of the city. This is a fantastic community that we all have. That's part of the reason why we all love it so much. I don't have a prepared thing. I'm going to speak to you all
from the heart today because I've spoken to you personally about the technicalities. This park, the green space, the air, the blowing, watching kids running back and forth, playing soccer, doing track, adults, kids, families, people in
walkers, the kidic shul across the street, their kids come over, set up volleyball nets, they play right there in that spot. We love this place. Children go there. Generations from here on out can't get the space back if it's
turned into a cement location. Believe me, everybody loves a fire department. We just seriously, sincerely ask for you to do everything in your power to find another way somewhere else. And uh we've always been an advocate of trying to
find some kind of retail public private partnership and more beautiful or more interactive or otherware in other places in the park as well. We love it. We care very much about the city and we appreciate each and every one of you for what you're doing. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Our next virtual caller has a
screen name of I Frost. Please go ahead, state your name, address. >> Um, hello. My name is Iris Frost. I'm at 1418 Michigan Avenue. And I am going to quickly say two things. Um, I appreciate
people standing up for our immigrant community. I too stand for human rights for all. And the second thing I want to talk about briefly is Flamingo Park. I appreciate all of the speakers before me who have