Heat. Heat. N. Hey, hey, hey. Baby, hey. on your head. Thank you. 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. >> Hey guys, good morning. >> Good. >> Please stand by. We are going on air in 5 4 3 2 1. >> Good morning everybody. Welcome to the July 2026 Finance Economic Resiliency
Committee meeting. Uh joined by my colleagues, uh Commissioner Laura Dominguez, Commissioner David Suarez. Have a pretty packed agenda here. So, let me turn it over to our city CFO and our city attorney to get the formalities out of the way and then we'll get right into the people's business. Good morning. Today's meeting of the finance
and economic resiliency committee has been scheduled in a hybrid format with a quorum of the committee physically present and remaining members, staff and members of the public appearing either in person or virtually via Zoom. In order to participate in today's meeting virtually, members of the public may
dial 1888-475-4499 and enter the webinar ID which is 8636059-5462 pound or log into the Zoom app and enter the webinar ID which again is 8636059-5462. Any individual wishing to speak on an
item must click the raise hand icon if they are using the Zoom app or dial star9 if participating by phone. Uh thank you chair. We just have two uh announcements. We have a time certain of 1010 for MB10 and uh the supplemental
item MB13 is deferred. >> Okay. So why don't we go ahead and get started with uh NB1. Okay, we're going to call >> call MB1 first. MB1 discuss an amendment extension to the professional services agreement between the city of Miami Beach and Paddle LLC to provide and
maintain kayak and paddle board rental equipment and stations NB1. >> Good morning. I'm John Rebar, facilities, parks, facilities, fleet, and beaches director. um here today to talk about the extension of the um our our paddle kiosk agreement that we have.
>> Can we just clarify on record this is different than the other paddle. I want to start paddlegate again and uh Okay. This is just what an acronym. >> Yes, I will clarify this. >> I know we have another paddle we're excited about on the Lincoln Road rooftop. >> This is not the racket sports sir. This
is actually stand up paddle boards and kayaks. Just imagine our city bike program. this is what we have for paddle boards and and kayaks and that we've been doing this for several years. They're at Pine Tree Park now. >> Um the the years we've been with them have been great. We recommend staying
with this company and also we'd like to expand in other locations as they become available. >> And what is the financial impact or cost of expansion? >> Um this is no cost to the city. This is a a 20% profit share. Um it's like
passive income for the city. They put them out here. They take care of 100% of everything and we received $14,259 over the last >> What's the downside to it? Uh who's in charge of picking additional expans
expansion uh spots? Are neighbors typically enthusiastic about it or do they complain? I I just I don't want to open Pandora's box and uh >> great great >> but if you have oversight I'm comfortable with that. Yeah, we we um parks recre recreation would make the
recommendations after speaking with the consultant and we've dealt with the community a lot when it comes to these waterfront areas and it would not go we wouldn't even suggest anywhere that would be a nuisance to single family homes. That's why currently it's at Pine Tree Park. There's no conflicts. It wasn't Park View. We have some water quality issues there that once they
clear up and now we we know perhaps Marie Skip Park could be the next one. >> Incredible. Yep. >> Incredible. Yep. Okay. So, I I think we would have a motion to return to commission with a favorable recommendation approve an amendment to the existing agreement to include waving bidding and extending the
current agreement. Motion made by Commissioner Suarez, seconded by I'll second. Commissioner Magazine. All in favor? >> I >> I item passes. Thank you. >> Think we have a lot of people in the
audience for the NB10, the GMCV. uh want to be respectful of people's time and see if we can uh hear that. >> Thank you. Uh MB10 discuss a proposed new agreement between the city and the Greater Miami Convention and Visitors Bureau for Destination Management
Services. MB10 >> Stephen David. >> Yes. Thank you chair and members of the committee. Uh this is uh to uh discuss the the agreement with the uh GMCBB. This is for the the new the new
contract. Um the administration is uh is recommending a few a few things. One for the committee to discuss some proposed uh new terms uh to the existing agreement. Uh potential restructuring a bit of the of the financial uh financial terms considering a waiver of
competitive competitive bidding uh because the the GMCVB is is the primary destination management uh company on behalf of the of the county. and then considering potentially how how things things lay out, whether or not we need to consider a a month-to-month uh
extension um in order to kind of move this move this process forward in a in a timely way as the contract is due at the end of well comes expired at the end of September. Um so there's a couple of couple of things that the administration has uh has recommended. Uh the term
still the same as we kept before 5-year term. Um what we have uh recommended is is a potential sliding scale um where there's a a range now from 8 to 15% and basically this just and this is based on
the 2% of the uh resort tax. So this gives an opportunity that the higher the resort tax and the ability of the GMCB to really contribute uh this is gives the potential to make higher revenue uh based on how the resort taxes uh fall and then if if there's a chance where
resort taxes are lower then their percentage would uh would would correspond accordingly. Um so higher percentage higher opportunity to make make more money on the lower end. If the the resort taxes drop, then their their percentage would would would uh do the
same thing. >> What's the current base level? >> The C So the current base level is 2% of of the uh of the resort tax. So it's it's a flat 2% of well 10% rather 10% of the 2% resort tax. So it's a flat 10%
that they that they make currently. And the proposal is >> so the current proposal is would go from 8 to 15% depending on where the resort taxes fall. So there's a there's a sliding scale of where the resort taxes would fall. So if they if the the higher
the percentage of the resort tax then they could get up to uh 15% of the resort tax with a cap. >> But you can only go as low as 8%. >> Yes. >> Well, why wouldn't you why didn't you go down to 5% if you're going to go up to five if you're going to go up to 15%.
Doesn't that more fair? >> Like what? Let's say there's um you know, god forbid another co and we don't have any resort taxes, we're stuck paying 8%. >> I was thinking the same even if we don't go to 5%.
>> If we go to 8% but then some sort of cap on the upside, right? So it seems as if we're giving perhaps more upside than sharing the loss. So, you know, it could go to 15% but a maximum cap of X where
>> So, we do have a cap that we recommended up to 9 million is the is the cap. And so, you can go up to 15% but a cap at 9 million is what is what we're recommending. >> What are we currently at? 10% right now. >> Currently at 10% there is no cap. How
much >> what is that number? So with the based on the last couple of years, that number with their their incentive. So it's been a base around 7 million, a little bit over 7 million over the last the last few years with the incentive. There's a $2 million incentive um that they that
they also have too. So they've qualified for the incentive. So it's been a little bit over about 9 million for the last the last couple of years. >> I would be in favor of the sliding scale. I think that's a good idea, but not in favor of the cap. Um, I know that
we want we have a convention center hotel that's going to be opening soon and we want uh robust sales and having that convention center and the hotel filled and a cap wouldn't um really incentivize and if we're already
decreasing from a flat fee percent to a scale um I don't think the cap should be done simultaneously. >> I think you know But who's to say that this resort sales
are all coming from the GMTVB, right? I mean, how do we know that if we have a good year, is it really the GMCBB that's doing it, or is it, for example, is it FIFA or is it an event that we're throwing as a city commission? Uh,
I mean, I I'm all about incentives, but um maybe there's a way to really pinpoint demand from or not demand, but if there is if there is terrorism that is that is in fact generated from the GMCV's
effort, I'm okay with incentivizing that, but not just a blank check for saying all the resort sales. Maybe we could do, you know, Mr. Whitaker, I I know you do a lot of events. I worked with you on the the on the VCA.
Um, is there a way to determine how impactful the GMCV is? >> Well, the staff may have some additional comment, but my interpretation is that our agreement has some very detailed metrics that which we appreciate and we're held accountable to. There's booking in there's goals for booking
meetings at the convention center. There's goals for room nights. There's goals for media impression. >> The GMCV is solely responsible for bookings at the convention center hotel. >> The major conventions. Uh anything
within a 12-month window or 16-month window is and small, relatively small. We're we're not focusing on that. That's something that's inhouse at the convention center. It'd be relatively small, less than 250 people. We're responsible for the big conventions that are that are solicited and held. >> Can you give me can you give me a couple
names? >> Adobe. >> Well, there you I mean obviously Laura, thank you. A member of our board of directors. So, you know, Adobee's coming back. That's probably one of that we're most proud of. Uh Swift Cyos is the biggest international banking convention in the world. Has never been in the
United States. And we were able and again it's part of >> and again this is a direct result of the GMCVB. >> Yes. Yes. Yeah. >> So, one of the comments that you made, which I respect, is, you know, we're not we're never saying, "Hey, it's all us. We're doing everything. We work in
partnership with the Lowe's, the Fountain Blue, they book their own meetings. Uh, you know, there are major events that happen in the city that bring excitement to the city that we help market and promote. we not necessarily taking credit for bringing them here, but the performance metrics
that we have to your comment about, you know, what we're generating. There's dozens of metrics both in the marketing team that we have with the staff here who are fantastic partners and the convention sales team. And we review those metrics weekly, monthly. Uh that's part of the incentive. If we achieve
those goals, we get that extra million if we achieve the convention sales goal. We get an extra million if we achieve the marketing goals. Uh but the focus for all of us is that continue to have the destination grow average daily rate increase occupancy increase to the point
where the resort tax keeps growing. When it grows because of our efforts and others then we share in that growth to some extent. There are discussions about limiting that growth and and again we want to be great partners with the city. We understand some of the economic challenges the city's facing. We're
always going to want to be a great partner and collaborate where we can to help get over any kind of challenge. But we also want to continue to do our best to market and promote and sell the city with the great results that we're seeing. >> And so right now it's 10% of the 2%. >> Correct. >> That's correct.
>> All right. Well, look, I'm I think it should go both ways. If we're going to go up 5%, we should be able to go down 5%. Forever whatever reason. I think that's what's fair. I as far as a cap, I don't know. I $9 million is a lot, but
if it brings in a lot of money, I could be open to it. So, I'd have to speak with staff a little bit before >> if I could add a little color. Um, exhibit A of the the attachment does show a model that uh economic development ran to show the prior model
versus the proposed model looking at the 2025 closed out numbers. So, in 2025, they collected approximately $9.1 million in revenue. If this new fee structure was put in place with a sliding 8 to 15, uh, that would be about
$8.2 million. So it would be about 950,000 let's say less uh revenue them money that the city would be able to keep. So they would have growth from that 8.2 up to 9 million just just so um from
transparency perspective. So the sliding scale that you know we worked on and I I was involved in a bit when we ran through that model that sliding scale of the 8 to 15 actually does bring down their their revenue or the city's expenditure to them uh from about 9.1 to
8.2. So it does save the money uh save the city money. >> Yeah. But once the convention center opens that's going to change. Correct. >> Uh we would expect uh resort tax revenues to uh go up. Yes. But this is I think was part of the reason for the $9 million cap that was recommended. So we
give them some runway. Uh but then would put a cap on because this agreement is for a few years and obviously be something that we looked at every time that the agreement was was up for renewal and probably setting a new cap. >> Okay. >> What else? >> Yeah. And if we could David use the term
limiting growth uh but it's a five-year deal. >> Correct. >> Correct. And the revenue we currently pay is n around $9 million. >> That's right. With the their base and the incentive >> and how would they essentially be able to uh eclipse the 10% revenue share.
Talk to me about the sliding scale, the hurdles and milestones that they have to achieve. >> So it's and and Mr. Whitaker mentioned a number of different uh metrics that are that are there. So the the number of >> okay that was what you said bookings number of total of bookings the room
nights um those are considered parts of parts of the metrics there's also uh a marketing metric so how they're marketing so different parts in terms of impressions and um and so forth is also part of part of their metrics as well >> okay but under this agreement here use
the term limiting growth you would have to say if you have a flat 10% of course your growth would be limited there. >> Correct. >> Well, I I mean I I I think we're really kind of letting the >> letting you really run here. Uh going up
to a 15% revenue share. >> You know, I would never use that word because I don't just see it in the numbers. I would defer to the staff who again we fully support the collaboration. We start and dare I say haircut. We start with a haircut uh and then we move on and grow when the city grows. And and we love the
incentivization of growing with the city. Why don't you start with a haircut? >> No, no. I mean like obviously not a haircut. >> Okay. The >> the CFO mentioned that the first year of
this agreement we would have about 8 900,000 less to start the to start and we understand that there are limits and the city's got a lot of challenges and we want to be great partners. If I if I may also >> like I said that's going to change once yeah
>> the convention center hotel opens up right >> yeah so just for perspective about the resort tax if you go back to 22 they collected about 7.5 uh then it went up to 9.4 9.1 9.1 so there's been growth since 22 and I think in I think as Mr.
Mr. Whitaker has explained and obviously we know our financial situation. We're just looking anywhere for the city to uh save uh when it comes to certain revenues. So, >> and you proposed a cap. >> There's a a $9 million cap for this 5year 5year >> $9 million cap, right? And that's that's
that's to to help from a from a savings aspect. But, I mean, certainly the cap >> Yeah. listen to. But but if there's a cap of 9 million and they've been making 9 million for the previous four years minus the
last one, where's the incentive? >> Well, our incentive is always going to be to be successful. And I'm not just saying that. You know, we have goals to book the convention center. >> I'm just saying, why are we going to 15% if it's you're never going to go past nine and make this deal?
So we can we can certainly look at at moving moving the cab, but the the idea is if they can go up to 15% and there's I wouldn't what I what I what I would certainly suggest to the to the committee is to look at if we remove the
cap then the total percentage may be different because if they can go up to 15% with no cap then there's there's absolutely kind of >> and Stephen maybe you can talk about the million dollar incentive maybe you can speak about the million incentive and what are the aspects that would they
would need to go through to earn that $1 million incentive. >> So that's the other I mean the other aspect of of being able to currently they can make up to $2 million in the in their incentive. And so the idea of what we've what we suggested also is to reduce to reduce the the 2 million to 1
million. But the the same thing in terms of the metrics in terms of the number of bookings that that has to be has to be picked out the number of room nights that have to be booked. the marketing there's marketing metrics that have to be met in order to earn those earn that level of incentive. The last few years
that incentive has been hit and so that's where we get to that total that total two uh total 9 million um a little bit over 9 million but if there's there's still an opportunity to still make that amount uh make up to that uh up to that amount in total.
>> Um do you mind if we defer this? see it as an incentive either when you have a cap where they can't make more. This year was a should be a phenomenal year. We had the college football championship. We had FIFA, Formula 1. Um next year is going to be a little different. We'll
still have Formula 1, but some of the other um major events that we've experienced this year are not going to be there. Having a sliding scale, okay, fine. Um but having a cap is not an incentive. Can we defer this for one meeting and
then it gives me an opportunity to discuss with staff and David a little bit more of a I want to better understand this with what the KPIs are and um how we can really incentivize because right now it doesn't seem like it's incentivized and
um I think we're all a little sort of unclear about exactly how GMCBB impacts the I think we still need to make a motion today because if their agreement ends in September and if we defer this, we won't
hear it at finance until September. Um, so a motion needs to be put forth at least that we keep it monthtomonth. I think the recommendation was through December. Uh, yes. If the committee wanted to keep it here and be heard again in September, uh I I think that
would be a good idea that we would um retain the item but uh have it return to commission with a favor recommendation to uh extend on a month-to-month basis through the end of December as as as um as presented. So I think >> that's I'll I'll I'll make that. Is is that as amended or is that
>> No, I I think it would just be to uh for the item to be retained a to return to commission with a favor recommendation to extend the agreement uh the the existing agreement on a month-to-month basis through uh the end of the year. >> I'll make that motion. Okay, >> I'll second.
>> Commissioner, uh I know you wanted to speak. We're going to defer, but feel free. You're here. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. real quick. You do a great job. Thank you. Um GMBB GMCVB does a great job, too. And right now, we're in a sweet spot where
we have global attention with World Cup and all eyes are on Miami Beach and Ocean Drive and we've had record numbers here and our our resort taxes are are wonderful and that is what keeps our tax base low. So, I appreciate you and all
that you do and I'm interested in supporting you and uh having further discussions of how we can keep our uh foot on the gas pedal. >> Okay. So, we we'll show that return to commissioner with a favor recommendation to approve an extension to December 31st, 2026 in the existing agreement as
presented and return to FK for further discussion. Uh that was Commissioner uh Suarez made the motion. Commissioner Dominguez seconded. All in favor? >> I. >> Item passes. Thank you. >> Let's hear uh OB1 uh or business one uh
the Barkley. >> Okay. OB1 ground lease agreement pursuant to RFP2 2022-115-KB for mixeduse redevelopment incorporating class A multif family residential and groundf flooror retail space with
respect to the city-owned property located at 1940 Park Avenue. The Barlay OB1. Okay. >> All right. Thank you. uh chair and and members of the committee. So, this this item of course um concerns the proposed long-term ground lease for the
redevelopment of the the city-owned Barlay property at 1940 Park Avenue. Um that site has remained inactive and fenced off for a little bit over a decade now. And so this proposal uh for the ground lease is basically a culmination of our four years um competitive transparent process that
we've gone through with the formal RFP um extensive public engagement um committee review and the unanimous approval of the material lease terms um that was that was approved by both the city commission and the finance committee last year. Um so the ground lease had that we've been working
through uh with the developer with members of the of the certainly of of staff um spans 99 years 51-year initial initial ground lease with two developer options um extensions. The developer would assume all full full cost and responsibility associated with design
development financing permitting construction operations maintenance um tax insurance without any uh city subsidy on those on those uh parts. Um and so also the there's affordability there's a public benefit affordability uh commitments here that are that are in
the ground lease. So the 22% of the 105 units um that's being proposed u would would be for set aside for part of it for seniors. So, seven units for for seniors and at least 15 units uh would be set aside uh for restricted uh rents
that are capped at 6% of AMI or market rate, whichever is lower. And so, we talked about the missing middle. Um that's that's certainly a part of that. And then this these uh covenants would go through the entire uh term of the of the lease there. Um the developer would
make a one-time uh upfront payment of $2 million. Um uh while the city retains uh land ownership of of uh the opportunity there. And so those are the the material uh pieces there that are that are being
considered in the ground lease. And >> and thank you Stephen. I know this was heard at the planning board yesterday. I was tuning in and out and just given how quickly that overlap was uh is there and apologies if this isn't your wheelhouse if there's anybody that wanted to kind
of summize. Uh sure you don't have a vested interest in that. Uh but maybe somebody from staff just kind of rehash uh how that went where we stand now. >> Sure. So there was the the planning board gave favor uh favorable recommendation uh for both the the LDR
amendments um and and there was uh some additional pieces there for the uh tax amendments LDR and tax amendments for uh to be able to include setbacks I believe. Um so the planning board gave a federal uh recommendation to move that
that piece of it forward. So, the housing unit mix um what the building is going to look like, all of that is in discussion in other committees. We're just focused here on the financial terms of that. >> That's correct. >> Absolutely.
>> And this was negotiated just by your office was um our uh facilities team uh Azie and his team who this has been going on for so long. So, there's so many different iterations. talk to me kind of like where we're at now and then
where this goes from here. >> Absolutely. So, this has been this has been led by economic development um of course with the CEO's office who've who certainly contributed a ton to being able to kind of work through the ground lease and really do what's what's in the best interest of of the city. Um so,
we've this has been a a long process to get it to this point. And so from this point, what we would do is if there's a favorable recommendation by the committee, we would then take this in front of the full uh the full commission in September. >> Okay. >> And how quick can this get done? Right?
I mean, this is an eyesore. I remember talking about this since before I was even on the planning board, before being elected. I don't want to sound morose that there was a before this gentleman got involved, there was a body found there, right? And this was on the news.
The neighbors are like, "Please help me out here." Like, "What is this doing?" So, this gets approved. How quickly can we move forward? Not only for getting rid of that blight and eyesore, but also for an economic vital revitalization of
that area and bringing much needed middle- class housing. Absolutely. I'm sure the development team is here, can speak to can speak to that aspect of it. um parts of the ground lease actually do give give that uh toll that we can move a little bit faster um for this project
um and be able to get it get it in ground and done as as soon as possible but I'm sure they can speak to that that timeline. Uh absolutely. Uh the ground lease at this point is uh fun. First of all, I apologize. Don Hugh Peebles the third uh legacy real estate development.
It's great to be here and uh really a pleasure to see everybody. The ground lease is materially negotiated and should be in a place uh pending this committee's approval in the subsequent two readings by the city commission to be executed shortly thereafter. We're targeting September or October. Uh from
there uh the project's fully capitalized. We have a number of uh LP options that'll be solidified and finalized once we have site control and a binding development agreement. Uh there are a number of uh of lenders that have taken a look at this from a construction financing perspective and
you know as of today are excited to issue term sheets at the appropriate time. You know I spent a lot of time behind this behind this podium speaking to the deis uh about what we can do and what we will do. Uh, I promise I can show you better than I can tell you. And you know, as my uh my southern friends
say, I'm sitting on G waiting on O. >> I don't even know what that means. But okay. Um, what protections do we have as a city that this moves forward and while that sounds great, we know reality, you
know, we have to prepare not for what we expect, but in downside, what protections do we have making sure that this project actually moves forward? >> Yeah. So, and and I'm I'm not a lawyer, but um but certainly there's been our
our legal team, our the CEO has certainly worked through a ton of those pieces in terms of what's what's there and and and and gives us the capabilities to be able to um take back or or work through anything in the case that the that the development can um
development team cannot move forward. >> Rick, any any thoughts there in the agreement? Are there incentives to move forward? There there are um there are a number of outside dates that have to be met by the developer and the city has uh
its usual default uh remedies provide notice give them an opportunity to cure and if they don't then the city could take over the project >> which we don't really want to do. So I don't want that as our only downside
protection if you will. Right. Um >> right. Yeah. Um >> do we have incentives? >> I believe we have liquidated damages. Um so for a period of a year. So uh we did build in a a layer of protection understanding fully that we do not want
to be in the process of developing it ourselves. >> So if I understood correctly, there's sunset clauses. So if they don't meet those dates and the deal is off, >> there are outside dates that need to be met. And for uh some of those um the
penalties, if you will, are not as severe, but once they're in construction, um they they must hit certain dates. If they don't, then liquidated damages kick in for a period of 365 days, and after that, the city would have the right to terminate.
>> When is construction supposed to start? >> Um I do not know the outside dates off the top of my head. Maybe that's something that Alfredo or Steven could >> Yeah. Good morning. Uh, Fred Gonzalez on behalf of 1940 Barkley uh, Partners LLC. Um, right now we've already started the
entitlement because as part of getting this lease approved and now waiting until the lease is executed yesterday. The planning board were asking three items were on the agenda. uh review of the the lease the terms uh that was favorably recommended unanimously and
the other two items was the comp plan and land use amendments that would allow the project that we've been negotiating with the city to then ultimately move to plans. We've um that'll be coming to you in September for first reading. So we got that also got unanimously approved. It had some tweaks. It allows a greater
density so you could actually use the F that >> So when would construction begin? >> About 18 months after we get entitlements. So, we're we're actually preparing starting we got site access and >> 2028 >> 2020.
>> I I think Alfredo's right in that 18 months is typically what the entitlement process uh takes for a project like this one in the city of Miami Beach. Uh my goal is to get that done as quickly as possible. uh it won't be uh it won't be due to our inaction or our failure to
push design forward or our failure to meet with the community you know with whom we've developed a deep and substantive relationship with uh that that causes these sorts of delays. There are a number of layers of approvals as you all are intimately aware that we'll have to navigate through. Uh but we intend on doing that as quickly as
humanly possible and we're incentivized to do that uh because if we don't uh I nor our capital partners are able to make money and so there is a timing component and there's nobody more incentivized to move this forward than I am. >> Yeah, that's great. And I look at you as
our partner so when I'm asking these protections it's not in an adversarial relationship. it. So, uh I I hope we're aligned in being sure that we're getting this done as quickly as possible. >> Yeah, we absolutely are. >> And per the just per the terms the um
there's a 2029 construction finish. And so that's that's the that's the estimate of where of where the developer is agreed that you know. >> And when does that payment uh that's due to the city is that a upfront balloon payment? >> That is an upfront payment that's due upon uh possession. Let's do upon
possession >> possession of the land or the TCOed property >> of the property. >> When when is building TCOed? >> No, I believe it's uh simultaneous with construction commencement. >> Oh, okay. So, that actually
>> it's still a ways away because they need to get their their um entitlements first and building permit. Once they have a building permit, there are a number of other um possession conditions that need to be satisfied such as providing proof of financing, etc. and then they take possession and make the payment. >> So that's an inherent protection to the
city in itself where if the developer doesn't hit these deadlines or walks away from the project because it just becomes too difficult that they're out that $2 million. So they're incentized to get that done. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> So if if we're satisfied, I think we would return to commission with a favorable recommendation approve the
proposed ground lease as presented. Does anyone wants to make that motion? >> Am I able? No, I can't. You can. >> I'll move it. >> Yep. >> I'll second. >> Okay. >> It's uh exciting. All right. It's it's uh years in the making. So, you know,
let's continue on this track and uh hopefully get around the corner. >> All in favor? >> All right. I >> I motion passes. >> Let's hear uh NB4 uh nully. >> Okay. And as the team's coming up, uh, I'll preface it with another exciting kind of
revitalization, uh, for something we all talk about, um, in exciting fashion is Lincoln Road. I think this is going to be a tremendous added dynamic. Uh, Mr. CFO, turn it over to you. >> Thank you. Uh, MB4, a discussion regarding the design a design concept
and general terms for proposed public private improvement, management, and maintenance agreement. the agreement for an initial term of 20 years between the city of Miami Beach, the city, and MAC 719 LR LLC, MAC 723 LL LLC and MAC 723
LLC MAC or the tenant and Lincoln for Lincoln Road North between Meridian Avenue and Meridian Court and before and Aussie, before you take over, I'll give you a little like CYA if you will. uh because I know you and the city manager uh kind of said, "Hey, we're 95% of the
way there, perhaps not a 100% of the way there." Said, especially with our August break, I want to see these things move forward in a quick fashion. Always protecting ourselves in the city. Um but if we can understand, I I told you I
understand your team wouldn't be ready to sit here and say we have a hundred of things signed off on. If we were the full commission, I probably would have felt differently. But given we're a committee, we have two months until our next meeting. I think if we can really focus on the high level stuff,
understand that there's going to be that 5% of details that you and the project team essentially are still going to negotiate and hear out. If we can get 95% of the way there, give you two months to get the other 5% across the finish line with the project sponsor and
then those details are heard in full at the city commission. That's the tact that uh I wanted to move again to have these projects remain on a steady time frame. Um using the Barkley as an example, I six years, seven years,
right? I just I don't want that to become the norm in our city. uh would never advocate doing something that you know we're we're not is not fully baked or prepared for. But given that if we can focus on those 95% recognize uh you
and your team only are negotiating the other 5% that'll kind of be finalized by the full commission. So I didn't want you to have any reservations about sitting up there saying uh we're not at the finish line yet. We've had that talk and uh I fully recognize that.
>> Thank you Mr. Chair Azie Dominguez, division director uh of asset management for the city of Miami Beach. Uh the Nully project is a very exciting project for this area of North Lincoln Lane. Uh we started our discussions with a Comrades company who is spearheading
this as a developer a few months ago and we've gone back and forth on revisions to the term sheet. There are still some fundamental uh and material term points in the term sheet that we have not come to an agreement. >> High level. What what do in general
what's the theme or premise of some of those where are you stuck? Does it just take time? Is there material uh disagreements like high level? What are the themes of those? >> Yes. To all three questions. Uh we PJ if
you can please have a a a one-page uh PowerPoint that just highlights what the the more highlevel uh fundamental points are here. Uh the first two are are critical as far as we can we're concerned. The developer is asking for a covenant in lie of
>> this is what's outstanding or >> outstanding. Okay. >> Yeah. There's some other minor areas that we feel comfortable in in our discussions and negotiations uh we should be able to clear up but these are the ones that are the big biggest hurdles for us uh that we really got to iron out before uh you know leaving
committee. uh but the covenant in lie of unity of title and the covenant running with the with the land are are two big uh items for us. This is not a public rightway. This is city-owned fe simple folios uh that the city has the right to
sell or lease or develop on in the future if they wish. And by tying up our title in perpetuity with the length of this agreement uh is is not in the best interest of the city as far as >> what would we ever do there? Because I'm not This isn't you. This is collectively
on the city. >> Yes. >> I go there. It looks like a bomb was dropped out there. So I I I don't I don't want to say I don't like, but I have a hard time hearing, "Oh my gosh, we're going to do all this ties our
hands. We're going to do all this amazing stuff." I'm embarrassed walking by. Like I want to get out of that area, right? So what what are we Yes. Would we tie our hands? Of course. But tell me under any realistic scenario
how we don't do anything other than just let this continue to degrade and deteriorate. Like what are we ti I know in legality, but in practicality, >> what would we do there that we're tying our hands? >> Uh Mr. Chair, I agree with you. Uh this
is a beautifification of this area of North Lincoln Lane. I know that uh years ago when I was involved with the the Lincoln Road bid in the private sector, part of the uh the uh improvements to Lincoln Road included North and South Lincoln lanes with the beautifification of those. So, I don't know that we
currently have any plans for improvements or or projects of this area, but it's important to just be clear and the commission understand that if we enter into a covenant lie of title, uh it will tie our hands for anything we decide to do in the future. And maybe today we're not thinking of
that. We're not planning that. We we're faced with some budget cuts, but we should be able to move forward with this project without tying the city's hands on on its private um assets. Uh and that's why we we really want to focus and highlight. When >> you say assets, we we're talking like
the street and the land, right? >> Correct. >> David. >> Uh good morning, Mr. Chair. David Martinez, assistant city manager. Uh just to put it bluntly um the property appraiser uh mark has a market value for this property of $5 million. The property can be developed, can be
rented, can be uh you know various different things can be done under that structure. >> When you say property, >> this this is a very unusual circumstance with this stretch of property. Um we kind of joke that it, you know, looks
like a duck and quacks like a duck. It must be a duck, but it isn't. It looks like a rideway. It looks like a road. It is a road. It's been used that way. But it's a fe simple fully old property that is developable. It has zero lot line
setbacks. It's just over a quarter acre and it's a developable piece of property that if we proceed with a covenant in lie of the unity and uh see the attorney can correct me if I'm wrong, it would tie it up in perpetuity. Um, so
>> now in practicality and Nick feel free to jump in. I I have tended to notice you don't just come because you enjoy sitting in the front row. So jump in at at your will.
Would we ever just develop that uh kind of in a vacuum? I mean, wouldn't we have to acquire either the property to the north or to the south unless we would just like develop the street, if you will?
>> I mean, I'll leave that to the attorneys. My opinion is that you don't have to. It it is a it's a vacant lot for all practical purposes. It just happens that the city owns a road, >> right? But it's the sidewalk. >> It's the width of uh
>> two-way street, oneway street. >> It's plus the sidewalk. So, we go to the the the property is from roughly the face of the buildings with the overhangs on the north side to the face of the buildings roughly to the back of sidewalk that's on the south side. So,
you know, in theory, something could be done there somewhere. >> But what like, and I'm not trying to be adversarial, like what could be done? >> Well, the the area is actually the same size as any other lot on that block. So, so it it is a platted lot. Now, it's
currently being used as a roadway. Um, but on the original plat, it is it is the same size as as a developable lot, >> right? But guys, talk to me just in layman's like, let's be practical here.
Let's say we're urban planners. I say, you know what, guys, let let's do something cool there in in our own. What would we do? Like, would we build another parallel Lincoln road? Would we build housing there? Um,
>> what could >> I mean, I'm not going to say the sky's is the limit. Obviously, it's the imagination. I mean, it could be a linear park. >> It could be certain structures built on it. It could be for art. Uh, it could be for just about anything. It it uh again,
just a reminder on this, if this were to move forward, it's going to require a bid waiver by commission. It's also going to require a 67th vote 67th vote by commission for a concession agreement that's over 10 years. >> So, it has a few hurdles to go through.
Um, if if let's just say this proposal was not on the table, the city could elect to put out uh an RFLI or or an RFP for somebody wanting to do something with that stretch of road. Uh, and you know, imagination could be could be
anything. So that's why we're having a like as as Azie stated is a fundamental, you know, circumstance that we have to get by. The rest of everything else is more negotiating terms and agreeing on how long and all these other things, but
we have to get past that part. Does the city want to bind that property that's developable forever? >> And is it forever, >> Mr. Chair? because what the developer is
proposing is to use the the city parcel as part of a unified development site with the developers properties to the north and the south. The the proposal is to is to do that just so they can move development rights from from one side to the other. There are other ways to
accomplish that whether it's legislatively by revising the maximum F on one side >> um and reducing it on the other side in an in an equivalent amount. Um the the the city parcel could be could be sold to developer. I mean there are other options.
>> Put the tell me who who would buy it. >> Right. You just said he has properties to the north. He has properties to the south. There is a street running down the middle of it that is used to pick up trash.
If all of these have been such great options, why haven't we done it? Why do I look there and it looks like a war zone? Wh why you guys are telling me everything that is possible? The sky is the limit. It
looks like the dumpster now. It looks like a dumpster. Actually, it looks worse than a dumpster because there's dumpsters there, right? like we pass this opportunity up five years from now, 10 years from now,
we're sitting here. Well, guys, the sky is still the limit. We could do anything. Tell me in practicality what could be done by anybody else. It's just like the Call Me Gabby um thing uh right out front, right? Where that's a
city-owned uh what was it? Sidewalk patio. >> It's a parcel. Yeah. Right. Who Who else would have rented that besides Call Me Gabby? >> No one. >> Nobody. We could We could do anything there. We We We could have the Monae out
there, maybe have the Mona Lisa or the, you know, sure we could, but we're not, right? Just like here. We're not going to do anything. We're going to let it sit there. And we have somebody that's going to come and spend millions of dollars. Why?
Yes, he cares about the city, but also he has his property to the north and south. So, it's quite literally the only person that that makes sense that is only going to go and invest their public money in. Nobody is going to go down and buy this in a vacuum so they could
create some sort of outdoor market or anything else. Am I off there? the difference but the one thing I would highlight because I think it is important is a traditional right of way um the city holds the dedication but the
the fe simple owners on either side have the underlying property rights this is different this is the city owns this parcel outright so it has value so that I mean that's that's really the point is um is that you know I if if the covenant
in lie is being proposed by the developer to allow F to shifted. There are other ways to do that without tying up our property. That's the only >> So, is that the only re When you say tying up our property, I thought it was so he can do the villa and the kiosks
and things like that. I apologize for using the term kiosks, but um isn't that the point of this? >> That can be accomplished through the concession agreement. >> Okay. So
where the disagreement is in the covenant is is that in perpetuity of the property is that for a fixed term? >> So it it would be permanent if development rights were transferred from
one side of the street to the other because uh at that point we could not undo the unified development site. So until until that point um we could you know potentially get out of it but but once development rights
are shifted then it is permanent >> and right but I guess tying up we're sitting here saying about tying up the property that's not just forever right because that that was the concern that I heard about first is we're tying
this up we're tying the city's hands if we want to go out and build all these cool things the city has never done in the 70 years we've had the opportunity to do so, but we're going to do it now. Is that forever or is that just for Isn't this a 20-year fixed term?
>> I guess it would depend on on um how much of the agreement has been consummated by the time we wanted to undo it if we needed to. Right. So, um I think you know in the initial before any development rights are transferred, I don't think it is permanent.
>> Yeah. the I'm going to step in. If no F is transferred and the parties agree that upon the termination of the concession agreement, the covenant and LU will go away, then there's no issue. The issue is that the developer wants to do this simply to transfer development
rights. But as Nick has pointed out, that could be accomplished without a covenant in lie. So the developer can still receive what it wants without tying up the property in perpetuity. And I agree, what are we going to do with it? But who knows in 50 years what what the world is going to look like, what
the city's going to look like. The city may want to do something once the concession agreement expires. >> Is is there a term for this? I thought there was a term for this. >> Yes, there's a term. The the term is 20 years. So we three 10 years would be permanent if the if the F is
transferred. >> What does that mean? >> Meaning it cannot the lots cannot be separated if there's transfers of F. >> Mr. Mr. Chairman, the same way for the 500 Alton project that a covenant in Lou was recorded to join what is now the park parcel, the Sixth Street, the
former Sixth Street rightway and the private development site. The city commission, the developer could not now undo that unified development site because all of the the development rights have been constructed on the southernmost parcel which is where the
five park tower is. So, so that it's that that's the analogy to this situation. >> Is does staff supportive of this or or >> what's still to be worked out? >> What is staff think? >> I'm sorry. What's your question? >> What is staff's position or legal's
position on this? >> Well, our position is that we right now are not prepared to bring a recommendation to proceed forward if we can't get past this initial roadblock. I think we can work through probably most of everything else if we can get past this to uh deliver exactly what Mr.
Comra wants to deliver. Uh but this is a to me a fundamental decision that that the commission is going to have to make if >> uh >> my paperwork did not have any attachment, no memos, nothing. So if it's not ready, why is it on the agenda today? >> What's the urgency?
>> I asked for it, right? Like this has been delayed three months. And that's what I prefaced it with. We're talking about this, but I don't expect this term to be negotiated today. And I don't even care if we don't move it forward with a
recommendation. I want to hash out a lot of this, but it's with the understanding not everything will be agreed to here today. Um, and hopefully that's okay with my colleagues. It's to keep on a time frame that these things don't just languish, right? I don't want to be
sitting here. Okay, we're going away for summer, so let's just kick it to September and then something's outstanding where we need to keep it in committee. Like I walk down Lincoln Road every day. Every day. Zara just shut for renovation. There's a restaurant there
on the corner of Meridian that just filed for bankruptcy because between here and Bickl, it's taken so long to get open. The Zeke's Roadhouse, everything is closed. Okay. the western part of Lincoln Road.
It's two stores. One's a popup, right? Sega Fredo just walked away. It's a ghost town. We need to move forward with some of this stuff. I understand that
this isn't fully baked and I preface it. This will give you two months before coming to commission to work out these points. So, I don't need you to commit to anything here today, but I do think that we can hear 90% of the things for
this project and trust our city staff to work with the project team over the next two months to hopefully complete that other 10% in here by the full commission. You guys don't have anything wrong with that, right? >> Absolutely not. and we're prepared to
talk through some of assuming we put this to the side knowing we just want to make sure you're all aware of the circumstances with that property. >> Are there any other pain points that we should be aware? >> Yeah, there there's some other things and I'll let Aussie take care of those, you know, to walk through some uh
starting with the uh the value of of the public benefit. We can start you can start with that and go down your list. Um, as David had mentioned, this is a it's a 20-year term with three 10-year options at the developer's option. The investment of capital into this um
property is between 1.5 and $2 million. Uh there is no termination for convenience rights for the city under the the current terms. Um >> what >> I'm sorry why this is what we're still negotiating with them. We are requesting
a termination for convenience and we're we're happy to to discuss some stipulations in it. Uh but we're still stuck there. >> I'm not trying to be like adversarial to the city staff or negotiate against us, but tell me in what world somebody would make a multi-million dollar investment
and the city could just go take the city out of it. The other party can just say, "I'm going to terminate uh because I woke up on the other side of the bed." >> And go ahead, >> Commissioner. I just want to clarify. I know you mentioned multi-million investment. We're talking one.5 to $2
million for 50 years. That translates to over $3,000 a month. >> But does that not $2 million, not multi-million? >> Yes, it is. And I don't I'm sorry. I I wasn't trying to I wasn't trying to be smart with that. Sounds like you are.
>> I wasn't trying. He's literally making a multi-million dollar investment that you just decided to get up out of your chair to try and correct me. for saying he's making a multi-million dollar investment. >> What is the investment?
>> One and a half to $2 million. >> Tell me the definition. Is $2 million multi? >> Okay. I don't I don't know the answer to that, Commissioner. I have to look it up. See what $2 million is more than $1 million. >> Mr. Chair, respectfully, >> we I think staff and my including
myself, we want to make sure what's best for the city. We understand this property looks like a hole. I get that. But we want to make sure that we're doing our vetting process for this project. And I certainly don't think
that $2 million is good for 50 years. Uh, you know, this is Miami Beach and it's Lincoln Road, but >> Well, it's not $2 million. Okay. So, that's that's I mean, this is just fundamentally incorrect. The stuff you guys are putting out. So, only $2 million. That's the investment he's
making. Okay. So now on the record, we have a commissioner saying we're only getting $2 million. No, that is fundamentally discreet. Okay. Are we not getting a revenue share? >> I I'll be more than happy to get to that. >> Right. So that that is what I want to finish. I'd like them to finish
>> which I wanted to before somebody wanted to get up and correct me for saying a multi-million dollar investment. Why would we give options to terminate? somehow like David, I don't know why you felt the need to do that, but just let's put that behind us. I appreciate the work you guys are doing here.
>> I'll get back to what I'm saying. Whether it be a $500,000 investment, a million dollar investment, $2 million, why would anybody make that investment and just have a right to terminate, right, at at convenience? That's just a fundamental.
You would never do that, right? Well, Azie, you mentioned that you are looking for a termination or >> correct. We are we are more than happy to work in some stipulations. >> The chair brings up a good point, >> correct? >> Why why would you and you know in a practicality standpoint for this
particular project? Why would you want to terminate if something were to go wrong? Maybe you can >> give an example. >> Keeping in mind that this is a a a private property, city property. You never know what comes in the future that would require us to need to regain control of the property and we would
need to exercise a termination for example. There's nothing in our mind right now that says >> like there's like they decide to throw I'm not saying that there will but you know anything can happen right if >> it could be a default on their on their part or it could be something outside of our control that that just requires us
we we're going to need to recapture this property to you know redevelop it into something else city owned. You never know what comes. >> And are they actually required by a dollar amount to to invest or this is just an estimate? >> This is this is what their proposal is
that they're going to invest the $ 1.5 to $2 million. Right. We have not >> when I when I when I hear that is that updating the street and and and the buildings surrounding it. Is that is that what the investments for? >> Correct. No, no. Let me clarify. That
does not include the buildings. That's part of the private street that's the private development. This is strictly the public investment within our property >> uh the street. >> Mr. Conra, right? Mr. Conra is proposing obviously investing into his properties and and uplifting those properties separately.
>> Okay. So the one and a half the two million is simply for the street correct which is your own property. >> Correct. Correct. >> All right. >> Surface infrastructure and FFN there. That's >> okay. So, let's move past the uh if you don't mind, commissioner, let's move
past the uh the one and a half two and what other pain point? >> I'll just I'll add one point to that. Not against the termination option, but it just can't be for convenience. And if it would be after the uh project applicant recovered his investment, if
it would be a sliding scale where we said after year one, you've just made that $ 1.5 million. We need to terminate it because we're doing X. there would have to be some sort of payment in L right for him to move forward. He can't just have this in, you know, uh in a uh
ambiguous that we could terminate like that right away for no reason. Right. If there's protections around it, fully supportive, but it just makes sense that somebody making investment has to protect themselves to a certain point. >> Correct. And staff is willing to discuss
options on on a termination along the lines that you were saying. >> Awesome. Uh in addition to that, the developer is requesting to receive 100 monthly parking passes for the G5 garage. Um in our discussions with our parking department, there is a long
waiting list there for residents to receive parking passes. It's something that the city cannot commit to. Uh we've discussed this >> receive for free. >> Uh no, at city rates at city rates. >> Um but the parking passes are just not available to give because that garage is
in such great demand. and with a convention center. >> But that sounds like something you can negotiate in the interim if there's other garages or things like that. Leave it to you all. I'm sure those are discussions that you all can have. >> Correct. Um and and yes, we will, sir. Um on public benefits, the public
benefits that have been listed is the beautifification of this area of the street, which we agree that is a great benefit for for the city. Uh but there's no other public benefits as you would see in in other P3 projects that we have done. Uh, so we look forward to having
something to be able to present at commission with with a little bit more elaborate public benefit. They would also like to install a mural on the G5 garage that faces the North Lincoln Lane area and uh staff is willing to discuss
a mural that beautifies the area that enhances the area. But there >> is that already >> is it already designed? There's a design that's facing 17th. Um, but the side view to Meridian Court is blank and down towards the back of um, so if it would
be a beautifification mural, we're willing to discuss it as long as the city has full autonomy on on approving or disapproving, but they want to use this area for uh, advertisement, sponsorships, and banners. And the city's completely staff is completely opposed to that.
>> They want to do that. They want to use that part of the garage for event advertising, sponsorships, and banners. >> That's different than mural though. No. >> Yes. >> Okay. But that's that sounds like little things that you can work out in two
months. >> We are hopeful. Yeah. >> Uh they also want exclusive rights to programs and activations of the North Lincoln Lane project area. Uh and while they we we would encourage them to have activating programs there and having
sponsorships there, uh we do not want them to have the full rights where there's no oversight from city or city department um to make sure that it lines up with the city. >> Are there any other locations in the city that do have or properties that do
have full autonomy? >> Not that I am aware of. Uh Mr. Vice Chair, I believe they'll go through the TCD special permits um program where everything needs to be approved. >> Okay. So, almost have it aligned like Lincoln Road, right? Because that's the city's property.
>> Correct. Lincoln Road has a master permit where they're entitled to have X amount of events per year under certain categories. And if they need to um you know go past that, they would have to revisit with TCD. >> Okay. So, it sounds like there's good present there. pleasure.
>> And as part of the public benefits, has there have been uh discussions about making investments to the Lincoln Road bid? I know that each year, whether it's for holiday decor, um elevating street lights within Lincoln Road, uh there's like a series
of things that the bid needs. Um so I think that should be included in the discussions. >> This will be noted. Thank you, Commissioner. Um, I'm going to skip to the last two points real because those are really fast to say and then I'll get to my last point which is the financial. The last two points they would like a
fee waiver for any concession fees for the ramp up period which is first 18 months of the project and then thereafter uh for the term of the agreement in in its um renewal options a 50% uh discount on concession fees and
>> the second part one more time >> they would like a a um fee waiver for concession fees during the first 18 months >> and then the second part of that >> and then the second part of that is that Thereafter for the life of the of the agreement they would like a 50%
reduction on any fee wavers. >> So after 18 months it's 50%. >> The first 18 months is free and then thereafter it's 50%. Okay. >> What so what does that mean? We have standard concession rev shares.
>> Uh correct. There'll be there'll be uh cafe cafe uh dining fees for you know any of their restaurants or any tables and chairs that they want to put out. So they want those fees to be waved for the first 18 months. >> But this is going to be on the North Lincoln side or there's currently a
street there. >> Correct. >> Right. >> Okay. >> Help me understand that 50% part. Um cuz isn't this just like a bilateral negotiation to say, okay, a revenue share of let's take a step back, right?
Because I maybe we're talking insider baseball and I want the public to understand what's going on. So the project uh sponsor, he will have concessions uh right now where we have a street that will generate revenue. We get a revenue
share of that, right? Um, and perhaps we can have the project team put up uh depictions of what that would look like because in the previous meetings, I think it's beautiful. It's not just um public beautifification. It's an activation of that way. We get a revenue
share of that activation. Aren't we just negoti I shouldn't say aren't we because I I don't know. Are we negotiating what the percentage revenue share of the revenue that's derived from that is going to be?
>> This would be separate from the revenue share. So, this would be for any concession fees. And I can't I can't tell you right now fees >> what those could be um because we haven't seen what the full proposal is as to what's going to go where. But if there were any, it's not guaranteed that
the city is going to um implement a concession fee because maybe it doesn't warrant it. But if there were any, they want to guarantee that it will be waved for the first 18 months and then thereafter it would be at a reduction of 50%. >> Through the chair, if I may, just to
clarify, so there's concession uh fee sharing with the developer on whatever concessions the developer brings in the concession fee uh reduction that that Azie is talking about would relate to
any sidewalk cafe operations by tenants. So it's it's a little different than the the rev share. Does that make sense? So these would be independent like tenants in the buildings want to have sidewalk cafes would pay the same as any tenant on Lincoln Road.
>> So it kind of makes sense, right? Because do we just charge a flat sidewalk fee? Lincoln Road is a I think it's a square footage fee and we do have programs I think during the summer months where we reduce the fees by 50%.
>> Perhaps because I don't like the way it sounds, you know, it caused me to sit up where I hear 50% reduction, but that's based on what we would charge something on Lincoln Road, right? Can't we just actually since this isn't on Lincoln
Road, right? Can't we have our own separate negotiation of what those sidewalk fees should be? It'd be like if we charge a restaurant x amount of dollars to have a sidewalk cafe on Ocean Drive, we would certainly not
charge the same amount for the alleyway behind Ocean Drive. >> Look, if I if I may step in, um I understand right now we're not making anything there, right? because it's just an alleyway. I get it. >> Yeah, it's nothing. Um
I don't know about in perpetuity forever, but I'm I'm okay with you up until the point of this 20 year term. 20 years is the agenda. >> Look, I mean I think after that we we should have to renegotiate or maybe even
after 10 because you know if it if it is going to be the spot um you know maybe things change in in 10 20 years but I don't think it it's right to do it in perpetuity. >> Okay. Yeah, maybe we could negotiate
>> instead of like, oh, a 50% reduction in Lincoln Road >> come up with fair market value for what that is, right? It maybe not base it on Lincoln Road because I don't like how it sounds. Oh, we're giving a 50% reduction in fees. Well, yes, that's just basing
it on what the our most visible pedestrian corridor in our city and in the region are, right? this certainly shouldn't be pegged to that. Um, so whatever, you
know, whatever is the right market value for something that certainly isn't prime beachfront reality, you know, there's a reason why beachfront house sells for a lot more than, you know, the second or third house or court row seats sell for more than, you know, second or third
row. Find out what that, you know, fair value is. But it seems like that's something that can easily be not easily but negotiated uh within two months. >> I feel confident. >> Yeah. Uh and then the last point on this um uh PowerPoint is the financial
structure. Uh so they're requesting an 18month ramp up period where there's no revenue share uh to allow them to recuperate and get their program going. And then thereafter on year two uh they are proposing a 5% of gross revenue. Uh
however the the city had proposed a different structure a lot more simpler. The the issue that we have the hurdle that we have with their proposal is that they're 5% of gross revenue. Uh 5% being a very low percentage >> gross revenue of what exactly
>> of whatever they generate on the actual project. So if they bring in the city >> city project not their private property strictly within the city land. >> But give me an example. >> So if they bring in special events and sponsors that they generate um any revenue from or the kiosk
>> uh the retail structures uh that pay them rent on a monthly basis. Those would be revenues that are generated on the city property. Uh they are proposing that we >> concessions. >> Concessions correct. That the city will receive 5% of the gross revenue. However, they define their gross revenue
as gross revenue less repairs, maintenance, employee salaries, capital reimbursements, and then if there's anything left over, the city will get 5% of that. And we do not think that that is a true definition of gross revenue,
which is very standard in commercial real estate. >> So, do we currently have around the city this sort of deal? >> We we definitely do percentage inls all the time. We had one with Sega Fredo where they paid us um I think it was 8%
or 6% was their last term of their gross revenue. Um so it's not minus salaries um or minus rent or their cost of doing uh business. It is based on the revenues that are generated. >> Yeah. So they want to give us like a net almost.
>> They want to give us 5% of net and then after year three they want to put caps on it as well. Uh city is is not in in support of that. The proposal that we had was very simple. We gave them a 12-month ramp up period. Um I I believe
that you know they asked for 18. That's definitely something we can discuss. Uh but it was 10% >> is 5% standard? >> No. No. It's very low. 10% would be the standard. And you know it's you know negotiations are always a a a blank canvas in commercial real estate. So it
just depends on how much you want and how much they want to give. But 10% is definitely a very fair uh amount especially if you're rent revenue from city-owned property. Correct. >> Corre just the city owned property has nothing to do with what they generate from their retailers.
>> Okay. And rough what do you maybe I don't know if they're representative but what do they expect to make on on the city side the city scale? >> Yeah. Let's have the project team come up as well. >> I'd like to talk to Michael. Michael, and feel free to take a step
back. Uh, you know, we've discussed what's outstanding and I prefaced it with we knew there would be things outstanding because I asked, you know, given the summer break that we can hear this recognizing that there's things
between the sponsor and the city that won't be finalized today. But let's talk about and Azie feel free to kind of loop in with or David loop in with Michael. What what are we comfortable with? Tell us about
the project. Michael introduced the project. Uh tell us what we're agreeing what we've agreed to. We've heard what's outstanding. Uh I have confidence that within two months especially for some of the minor stuff like parking where that comes from the definition between gross
and net. I don't want to sit here and you know legislate that from the deis that's we have a very competent city staff that that that's your guys bread and butter. Uh Michael has a deep uh retail expertise. I'm sure um we're going to be partners here. So we'll
we'll come to terms with that. Tell us kind of where we're at, Michael. Um what we've agreed to and uh take it from there. >> Sure. Michael Comrades with offices at 126120th Street and a 30-year Miami Beach resident. Um, we're excited about
the Nolley project and I thank you all for taking the time. We've been working very closely with staff and we're looking forward to actually getting something actually completed. Um, what we're doing is really trying to reimagine an area of Miami Beach that
had gotten to a place which I don't think it should ever have gotten to. I actually sat there with the city manager across the street before we acquired the property and I was trying to pull up the pictures, but I don't have any of my >> You guys, can you put the slides going? >> We don't.
>> Okay. We we we know how poorly that area looks. So, to me, I was very surprised that we could actually have something like this that exists. Can you just put that up? >> Yeah. There we go. That's what it looks like today. And um I don't I've been developing here on Me Beach for over 30
years. I don't have any properties that look like this, especially in such a high-profile area. The the beauty of the Nolley project is bringing together several buildings to form a a sort of a micro district will sort of change the perspective of Lincoln Road and solve for many of the issues that currently
impact Lincoln Road. Multiple property owners, building depths, lack of continuity, um lack of investment um on various properties. And really what we're looking to do here is take a building that generally fronts Lincoln
Road and I should say that last week we received unanimous approval from historic preservation board and design review board for our complete project. So that portion is done. So we'll be redoing all of the Lincoln Road facades but then introducing two novel concepts.
Uh the first concept that we're introducing is the via we're actually >> Michael what? Sorry. What will you do is the back facades? I don't know if I just created a word there. Does that remain as is or will you be making investment
in this cuz that that looks equally as >> basically I don't believe in backs of buildings being such in in front of everybody in front of the public. So my goal is to remove the back of the building and create a second street front. Okay. Over the last 14 months, I've worked with FPNL to take those four or five transformers there and actually
consolidate them into one transformer and relocate in board of the property. So, that will be out of the public realm. The project will create all new storefronts. What you see today is the back of the building that would be transformed completely into a new
storefront, which I'd love to share with you, but I'm not sure I can find it right here. I think we've all sort of seen it and it's be it's going to be great and beautiful. But can we just get to the meat and potatoes of what what we discussed with Azie? Like some of the
concerns we have was for like the F, >> right? Mhm. >> Why do you why do you need a permanent F >> uh swap if >> what we're doing is we're really creating a what ends up happening is have having both sides of the street
gives us the ability and the desire to try and improve what's in between the two properties. Take the back of the building, make it a second street front and unify. We are not building up on Lincoln Road right now. um which you know to many people that's probably a
very positive thing. We do have the ability to do that. We're not doing that right now. We are looking at taking the building off of Lincoln Road, the 723 building, and actually making up for some of the shortcomings of that building. When that building was developed, there were a lot of cantal
floors, a lot of open areas. That building does not have enough F within it to make it a a very good building. And what is that's the link >> that's Marshall's building. >> The Marshall's building where the ery is when it was built it was limited.
>> DJ, you can put the screen down please. >> Yeah, please. >> Um, >> and one concern that I have and I've mentioned this before is if normally in the back of the house is when you have the loading, the drop off and if you're going to make uh the back of the house, front of the house in addition, where
are those trucks going to go? Is there going to be gridlock? There's also been discussions of doing valet and um in that section, where are the cues going to be? Where's valet going to be? So, I want to make sure that all of that's ironed out in advance.
>> Commissioner Graham pen 2007. I just want to clarify as Michael said, this project has already been unanimously approved by both HPB and DRB. in those materials they had a full loading uh trash room re relocation has already
been sused out. Um, >> okay. But the commissioner's point, you know, we she wants to hear, I want to hear. >> Yeah. So, if we can pull up the actual plan that we're doing, that would be great. >> Um, the idea is that we're taking the segment of Lincoln Lane from Meridian to Meridian Court and looking to
pedestrianize it. >> We're moving the cars and creating a prominade, a pedestrian prominade. The prominade, >> speaking of a mic, please. >> So, on the east end, I'm sorry, >> it's mic. >> Sorry. At the east end, it would be bothered
off as well as at the west end. The um the we are working with the fire department to minimize the fire lane and create a completely pedestrianized area. Um the loading has all been inboarded. So
uh we have a very large loading dock over at the 723 ery building. So, we're putting compactor into the ery building and then we have internalized trash rooms on the Lincoln Road property which will then in the middle of the night we'll have a porter remove the trash
bins from the internalized trash rooms to our loading zone in the Lincoln Road building, the 723 building, and then return those bids. >> There will never be trash out on the street. The goal is to the we want what
we wanted to do is not have the dumpsters being put out on the street, wait for the trash uh people to come, pour the things into the the truck, and then have things on the sidewalk. >> You're going to So, you're going to have like a trash >> We have a rendevous point. >> Yeah, it's already here.
>> Yeah. In the in the 723 building, there's a very large trash room. So what we've done is we've provided for a compactor in there and within the Lincoln Road building there'll be two trash rooms internalized so that every night at around you know the middle of the night the porter will come take
those totes bring them out put them into the dumpster and bring them back >> that cost is borne by you. >> Yes. Yeah. This all all the costs so far all the costs involved with this project are going to be borne by us. the FPNL relocation,
>> but that's like an ongoing operating thing. I just want to be sure that that doesn't get like shifted uh by city staff for Lincoln Road bid. >> For sure. That was very important to us. Again, cleaning up the p public realm is of critical importance to us. Making it a place where people want to actually
come and hang out and have a cup of coffee where that dumpster where the dumpsters are today. Our goal is to actually put in lush landscaping, canopy trees, following suit with what's happening over on Meridian Avenue, and providing a destination for people that
will able to spend time more for the community. This is a project really for locals by locals. I'm focused on making a place where locals could actually come and enjoy and then be able to activate Lincoln Road in a new way. So your
street design will essentially look like >> what's happening on Meridian here. Will there be kind of some adjacency? >> Yeah. And I'm going to I'm going to I've I've done Michael a disservice. I submitted the older version of this so it doesn't have all the details in it.
It's my fault because I sent PJ the wrong link. But the Hold on. We have >> We We were discussing the F changes, right? That's where we got >> So the idea of the F was to actually be able to take some F that we have excess of on Lincoln Road and be able to use it
to enhance the building that's on Lincoln Lane to make it more usable. When that building was developed, it didn't have enough F, so it kept delivered areas and open spaces, which today we would like to fill in at some point in the future. You're
taking F from the front facing Lincoln Road >> and putting it in the back >> into the the uh >> F that you haven't used in the front. >> Correct. Correct. We're under 50% F on Lincoln Road. >> And then I hope is there I think you
mentioned this, but the height, it's not going to be a height or change. >> It's a Lincoln Road. No, we're not uh we're not changing any heights. We're not adding any heights to Lincoln Road. the if I could uh sorry to interrupt but if I could talk briefly about the
covenant aloo there's a couple reasons why we think it's important switching our microphones uh number one is that a forementioned transfer number two we have the development plan for the for the property contemplates those micro
retail structures that could be partially on Lincoln Lane partially on the private property and and we need to make sure that there's free movement uh between those lots like they're not treated like as separate properties. That's very important for ensuring this
is a unified development. Now I understand what David was explaining about the you know the impact on the city's interest. There's nothing inherent in a Covenant Lou that says that Lincoln Lane the site could not be redeveloped in the future. But not only
that, to Commissioner Dominguez's point, and if you could pull up that diagram again, keep going. One more slide, maybe two. >> Which one? >> This one. >> No, it kind of had the aerial uh map view right here.
>> This is what's there today, >> right? The right one. >> Yeah. So actually this is a a great example because when you can see this actually shows you when we introduced the via >> how it deals with the depths of these lots. >> But Michael to Commissioner Dominguez's
point you have the back of the house stuff there. Um you have go back to the other one. You have the front of the house from the Lincoln Road Eery. I I'm just very hardressed to think what anybody other than the property owner to
the north and south would be able to do there, right? Because the back of the house needs to be accessed. You're able to uniquely do that because you're actually taking the trash pickup to the property to the north. Um, >> and was that resolved?
>> Yeah. See if I can show you onto this here. You can you can see to the east and to the west along Lincoln first to the west side uh along Meridian Avenue. You can see where the two cars are parked there. That would be a valet zone as well as on the
east side where we've created sort of a circular motion and a um a boid situation there where we'll be able to have valet on that side as well. internalized um here
and along here are where the trash bins are. So there is no more trash bins out in this public realm. The path would be from here coming across and into the loading dock here and then bringing them bringing them back the bins back in one
fair motion. So, we've dealt with the trash, we've dealt with the uh valet, and we've been working very close with fire uh to work through what their requirements are. >> Keep uh keep that. Go back to the other one. What do you say? >> Well, why why not put the valet on
Meridian Court? >> It is. >> I'm sorry. >> Is the valet on Meridian or Meridian Court? >> We're not sure where it'll actually function from, but there are two areas where valet could actually occur. >> Yeah. Cuz like >> that's the circle. >> Yeah. Yes. And then they but they don't
know where they're going to put valet. And one one thing that I've Commissioner Dominguez knows this but I can't stand the valet operation in front of Mila. I mean Mila's a great restaurant. They're a great partner but that whole that whole valley it's not
the valet service's fault. It's just that there's so much people and then then they they Yeah. The Ubers, the black cars. It's >> We don't want another one on Meridian. >> Yeah. Well, I mean, it's clearly clearly we could locate that on um on Meridian
Court uh and just have Uber drop offs over on Meridian or pedestrian drop offs. That's something that from an operation. >> So, just now that we have this diagram up, you want to transfer F from which building to to to where? >> So, it would be from the Lincoln Road, the mouse cursor
>> from this building here >> across to this building here. >> Okay. And that's just to for the interior, >> correct? >> Yeah, pretty much. >> Okay. All right. Well, >> so you're not like building up or >> I mean, if we were going to do a slight
enclosure on the rooftop, maybe for a few thousand feet, but it's not about taking this building and going up 20 stories or doing something like that. Um, at some point down the line, if I could build some resi there, I would love to. That would be >> But that would still be subject to a vote. Correct.
>> That that I'm sorry, which part? Would it still be subject to a commission vote if you wanted to build higher there? >> If we wanted to change the underlying F and the height. Yes. >> Yeah. Right now, >> but we're giving F now. Correct. And >> the Well, I mean, it wouldn't change
>> swap the F. >> Yeah. We we would be moving the our necessary floor area from the south to the north >> for the purpose like help me understand. So, it's internal. >> The confines. I would say 90% of it
would likely be internal. Um re right now the rooftop of that building has been very unsuccessful and for the reason why it's unsuccessful in my opinion is because there is no interior space adjacent to the >> So you're just enclosing part of the rooftop.
>> Perhaps we haven't even studied it yet, but the idea maybe to put two or three thousand square feet on the rooftop next to the open rooftop so that way it can function. I think that would be preferable because if I understand it, the rooftop there well before you were
ever involved actually would be in front of the planning board for the open air entertainment. Um I think it was actually somebody uh represents your firm Grim. Um >> probably >> uh because it was just this rooftop open
air kind of destination. So you're just talking about enclosing perhaps part of that, >> right? But more as important is the interior design of the building has a bunch of slabs that are are not complete. They're they're cantalvered slabs. And the cantalver slab to me
would be better if it came across and went onto the wall and filled it in and made a better layout. There's some funky layouts in the building as a result of the limited F when it was developed. and those we're looking toward >> and legally we we can kind of protect
ourselves that that's going to be the extent of uh you know the F transfer that we don't just get you know hoodwinkedked and all of a sudden there's another 10 stories there or whatever that may be. >> Yeah, I think we're still um going to be
negotiating how the F transfers will occur. So, if it's done through an ordinance, and I see Nick coming up, then the ordinance will will contain or the LDR amendment will contain the protections that we need. >> We can safeguard us. >> We could we could put that in the code. Yes.
>> Okay. Okay. Um, perfect. >> Um, and then David, what in general, what was what's our cost for what we're doing on Meridian Avenue right now? I want to
say in the $20 million range, right? Yeah. Okay. >> Somewhere somewhere south of 20 million but but close. >> So we're essentially getting a public right way improvement that we're paying $18 million for on the lane. >> Well well the difference commissioner is
that in on Meridian a great amount of the investment is on is underground. A lot of pipes and stuff that are not contemplated on on North Carolina. what's visible with the eye will essentially get the finished product that's akin to what's happening already. >> And I will tell you that what what we
try to compare it to in terms of appearance is maybe espanol way. That's kind of the that's what we see the concept being is a that great plaza from one street end to another. So something >> Yeah. And you know, not to rehash it and >> but when we talk about like h we're
tying our hands. If we were going to do something there, we would have done it with this huge Lincoln Road um investment that we're making now, right? We're literally putting $18 million into Meridian Avenue. We're doing the same
thing on uh Drexel if we're going to do something on the lane that that we we would have done. So David, >> just forformational purposes, the Lincoln lanes, both north and south, were originally looked at as part of the
master plan by James Corner. The commission decided to focus only on Lincoln Road and leave the l the lanes for a future project. >> Okay. Excellent. Thank you. Can we uh put the >> So, we talked about public benefits and
the improvements that we're looking to do to the street. Where'd that big tree? How >> how can we hold him that it looks something like if it looks anything like this, sign me up. Like just sign me up. I >> mean, it's this is the exact same
picture as this. >> But h how can we be sure we get something like this? because if we can I don't care about you know if uh if you know 12 months is abated or 16 months or whatever like I want that on Lincoln
Road right let's you guys negotiate >> termination rights if not >> yes yes and yes but like I don't want to be hoodwinkedked protect us from being hoodwinkedked and have them deliver this and sign me up let's do it ASAP if this
can be delivered that that is my highest priority. I want we're what 85% of the way there. Let's allow you guys and gals before it's heard by full commission to
iron out some of these outstanding points and you be the drivers of helping the project sponsor deliver this. It it's I know the outstanding points are not simple, but my goal is as simple as that, right? Let let's let's fast track it to deliver this vision.
>> Can can we on that front can we talk about process because as I as I discussed with the city attorney earlier >> what we need to do to get to commission for the ultimate decision is that we need to leave here with uh with a recommendation to continue the
negotiations. >> Yeah. We need an item on the July agenda, the commission to basically authorize the the the administration to continue negotiations with the goal of that we could return with the agreement in September to the commission. So that
that's what in order to keep things moving as quickly as possible and align this with the meridian improvements uh as best we can. That's the timeline that we would like to see and I think that that gives us as you said earlier >> that gives us between now and September
to work through all these remaining issues and we're confident that we can. So that's what we would ask >> is how I envision it but let me ask staff are you I I don't want to overstep my bounds here. Are you comfortable with that? Right. And I prefaced it with Azie. I understand you're not going to
come up here and tell me hey we're 100%. And I'm fine not even making a favorable recommendation because we can't, right? We don't have all of uh the details of what needs to be actually voted on. But I would like to essentially make a
recommendation that is heard by the full commission to say guys continue guys and gals continue negotiating. Gives you two months. come back to the commission with the remaining 10% that's outstanding and we can then opine on
those terms as well. >> Mr. Chair, I will answer your your question. I I want to just reiterate and be clear for for Mr. Penn that it's two months till commission, but I really will have 30 days because then I got to start preparing the package for
commission. So 30 days is the more realistic time frame that we have. Um, and yes, we can make that happen. I've told Michael it's very simple. Agree to our terms and we're >> good people >> and we're good. >> He has said that in the past.
>> Uh, but we will work. >> Feel like I hear that enough from my sign. >> I do want to I do want to stress what point from a timing standpoint and really why this is so important. My goal is to and been working with CIP on the
Midian Avenue improvements. The goal is to take that same team that is completing the Meridian Avenue improvements hopefully by November for Basil to take that team and have them come in and take and do all of Lincoln Lane and be done by Lincoln link done
with Lincoln Lane by March April of next year by having getting through this process will allow me the comfort to be able to go spend the money on the construction documents and do the necessary work to be prepared so I can file for permit, get the permit So I can
make that time schedule. I don't want the guys to leave the site because getting them back to the site to start up again is just a whole >> and with the same team there will be cohesion with the development. Like that's what I'm trying to working in
Lincoln Lane to do a final tiein. So, what I'd love to see happen is they do that final tie-in, city signs off on whatever they need to sign off, and I enter into this contract with them where these people will come in now and on my dime redo all of that street. >> Yeah, I I do. And part of my wanting to
kind of fasttrack it is just thinking cohesively, right? cohesive with the Meridian project so they look similar and then this timeline keeps it on track to essentially be adjacent to the opening of the convention center hotel instead of just peacemealing all of this
stuff we have one unified wow all of this is happening together here it's happening for season we have Nolley coming on we have the convention center hotel coming on we have it looking exactly like Meridian that the team has spent years you know designing and and
finally executing it's just it's a cohesive comprehensive vision. Um do you have of course caveats? I'm not asking you to sign off on anything but just with the process are we okay with this process and if we get there in September and you
say nope we have these material issues outstanding I hear that loud and clear. >> Thank you Mr. Chair. uh with with that in mind and hearing that yes, I mean we can go back and uh get through these fundamental points and
>> um you know have our our city attorney's office uh give us further guidance and give some more feedback as needed. >> Uh we just want to make sure that this ends up not only being the most beautiful street on Lincoln Road, but that it's also a good project and a good
deal for the city of Miami Beach. And hopefully you recognize that I'm putting my trust in you, right? I'm not sitting here trying to overrule you here. I'm saying I don't need to sign off in three different committees on
every single term. I'm going to be the same guy that's signing off as a commissioner as we are here. So if we can get 90% of the way there, I have my trust in you all. I don't need to hear the same thing today, then September,
then October, and in November. I trust you. I heard 90% of it. If you come and tell me, I'm the same guy in the finance committee as I am in the commissioner. You know what? We took a flyer, we just couldn't get there, then I hear that loud and clear. You all are professionals. You're big boys and
girls. I'm putting my trust in you that you don't need me sitting here having to sign off on every detail just before it moves forward to be heard by the same three and four people. >> Uh Mr. Chair, if I may ask um um you and
and the vice chair and the commissioner based on the 12 points that we listed, were there any that you would like us to I I took some notes on on the uh the concession fee waiver and the public benefit that Commissioner Dominguez recommended, but are there any other
comments or recommendations on the other points that you felt we were off on or we should >> not off um he's been doing this a long time. You guys are experts. I'm not going to stand in here. The termination thing
at the end of the day, these are our partners, right? We always have to protect the city and always have your back on there. But we also have to put ourselves in the position of somebody making multi multi-million dollar investments
in our city. David, stay seated. Um, we have to recognize, you know, uh, that that person needs protection as well. Uh, so I'm not telling you what that should look like, but it seems logical that we can't just pull the rug
on day two after you know things are like that. So, you know, just have some nuance there. We can work with >> other than that, you all are the professionals. I don't want to sit here and uh negotiate these terms. It's very rare for me to even sit here if you guys
agree. >> You know, who am I to say otherwise? >> Wonderful. Thank you. So chair, is this this the intent the committee is to send this back to commission to finalize? >> Yeah, I don't even want to put a favorable recommendation or unfavorable because we don't know, right? We we're
giving them their uh rope and leeway to essentially get that other 10%. Uh but I think we've heard the nuances and the details which committee is designed to do and now we can move this along and we'll have very similar to uh the same
discussion but hopefully we're talking about how we came to an agreement on those outstanding points. >> Okay. So I think it would be returning to commission to discuss the final terms of an agreement between the city and the tenant. >> Um so >> in September >> just leave it live that. So uh who will
be making that motion? >> I'll move it. Okay. Commissioner Suarez seconded. Uh, >> Commissioner Magazine, all in favor. Are are you saying you think we need to hear it in July? My My point is not to hear all this stuff like 50 times. >> I, Mr. Chairman, all I want to make sure
is that everyone's comfortable, including the city attorney, that this action today will move this to final that we do not need to go to the commission to authorize further negotiations at in July. If we do, then the motion needs to be different. >> Yes, we
>> I'd love to hear what's negotiated. We are the commission. >> The commission does need to give direction. So, uh, what Graham and I discussed was that this should be on the July agenda as a direct administration to continue negotiating and come back. It could go back to commission for final
approval of the agreement or it could come to FIRK early September and then go to commission. But whatever y'all want. >> I get this is process stuff, but I mean these these guys and girls are negotiating so we have to give commission approval to continue negotiating.
>> That's the way we do it. Yes. >> We shouldn't do it like that. We I mean we we need to we don't want to overrule the process but if that's the process let's work together to make things more efficient. >> Yeah. The issue is committees cannot direct and I know that staff has been
negotiating in good faith based on the you know this item having been put on agendas previously but the the technically the committee cannot direct the staff to continue to negotiate although the negotiations will in fact continue.
>> It's it's it's formalizing and it's it's uh the commission is formalizing the approval basically. So >> so let me try this again. Um, since we did not vote on that motion, I think this would be returned to commission with a favorable recommendation >> in uh in July to direct the
administration to finalize the terms of an agreement between the city and the tenant. >> And if we can keep Commissioner Suarez is making the motion, Commissioner Magazine is seconding. >> Yeah, >> we're all good. Okay. All in favor? >> I. >> Thank you. The item passes. >> Thank you. Thank you team for all of
this. Uh truly like hopefully you recognize I want to put the power in your all hands and not tie you to think you have to come back here to committee to finalize every term do awesome things together and we're partners. Um I have faith that we can you know get this done
in a time frame that works for everybody. So thank you all. >> Thank you. Thank you. here. This one. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, we'll hear NB12. Um, we have Mayor Miner on the line and then we are going to hear uh NB11 as well.
>> Okay. So uh MB12 discuss take action regarding a citywide review of boards and committees to improve operational efficiency and streamline advisory functions. MB12. >> Thank you Alta. First of all, good discussion just now and uh a lot of exciting things for our city and Lincoln
Road. Uh nine new businesses that are going to be opening this year alone by year end. There's some media coverage on that. Um, so NB12 basically as we've looked at our our city budget and really a shout out to our chair magazine, but
our entire commission for really being fiscally responsible. We're we're looking to be efficient with our resources, cutting cutting each department 5% to really be lean and most efficient. But this item looks at committees. We have 48 committees
throughout our city, mostly resident committees and they serve an outstanding function. Nobody's nobody's questioning that. But looking for efficiencies because it's a lot of staff time when we when we put these committees and have them and how we can streamline that and
uh because time is money and if we can have our our city level people and it's usually pretty high level people too within our city and obviously time at a committee taking minutes um preparing the agendas that all takes time away from other work that we're we're asking
them to do. So um I'll turn it over. I think Maria Hernandez is going to handle this and came up with a pretty good analysis. So, thanks. Thanks for calling this item. Chair, >> thank you, Mr. Mayor. Maria, >> good morning and thank you for uh
hearing this item. Um I'm here with our city clerk, um Rafael Granado, who has assisted the administration um in the preparation of this item. It is a joint item between both of our uh both the administration and the city clerk's office. Uh so um I want to thank
the mayor for that in introduction. It's really what this is um all about. It took about a year uh to gather the data that came uh to the conclusions that we have presented in the memo. Um, so just
for your own information, um, uh, our city clerk has told me that we kind of did this 10 years ago, um, where we looked at our committees and kind of, um, reset some of the, um, some of the committees that we had at the time. So, this isn't the first
time that we do something like this. looking at it um a little more closely um and really trying to find a balance between um preserving you know the meaningful dialogue that we get from residents and also uh improving our operational
efficiency which right now is at the top of uh just about every agenda. Um so to put it in a nutshell we do have these 48 committees uh 41 of them are resident committees. This is basically where the residents are chairs of their own
committees. There are four land use boards. Uh that's the board of adjustment, HPB, DRB, um and the planning board. And then we have three commission committees which is of course this one. FK, we have neighborhoods and we have land use. Um
so 18 administrative departments uh spend approximately 20,000 hours a year managing these committees. Uh that does not include the time of the city attorney's office and that does not include the time of the city clerk's
office. Um that also does not include a lot of other things that the administration does. That doesn't include um any time dedicated to neighborhood and HOA meetings, business business improvement districts or bids,
community events, press conferences, town hall meetings, uh sunshine meetings, um anything with a chamber and also uh nothing that is project specific. We have a lot of meetings um having to do with that. This is strictly the management of the 48 uh committees.
That's where the 20,000 hours goes. um the split of that time. There's two there's two pie charts in the memo. There's only two pie charts. The second pie chart shows how our hours are uh are divvied up. Um so the land use boards
which are very important and um uh uh have very a very small amount of staff. It's really the planning department that manages those. Those are really more for the development community. um only about
15% of our land use boards um uh of of time is spent on land use boards commission boards. We're talking things that like our HPB >> correct. >> None of this is >> we're not touching any of that. Not touching any of that. We're also not
touching the commission committees obviously. We're not touching for land use um or neighborhoods. 44% of staff time goes into these committees. So that's about 8,800 hours out of the 20,000. So the resident
committees come out to about 8,300 hours. Again, not including um the city clerk's office or the city attorney's office. So um that's really what we wanted to discuss uh today. And um what I'd like to just let you know is what
our blanket, you know, general uh recommendations are. We can get into individual um individual thing uh committees if you want to. Um but in a nutshell, we want to limit at number one, we want to limit
ad hoc committees to just their mission specific assignments and that's usually for about a year. We have several of them um on the list. And by the way, if you want to see the list of committees, it's on the last page of the item. You
can see them all. Um then we want quarterly meetings to become the standard framework for these committees. Um and that is really as per division 1, chapter 2 of the city code. The that
chapter says that that would be the minimum. What has happened over time is that monthly meetings have become the standard. So of course the staff time involved is you know three times more. Um and we also believe that quarterly
meetings um it provides sufficient input from this is our opinion from the advisory boards uh while at the same time um uh you know control our workload a lot uh dimin you know uh bring it down
a lot. We also would like to cancel all resident committees during the month of August. That aligns more with the recess period that the city commission has. Uh some boards want to meet in August. And then finally, we'd like for the meetings
to be a maximum of an hour and a half. Uh so they don't go into two or three hours. Um because of course that then that's a ripple effect to all the documents that have to follow. so we can discuss individual um uh recommendations that we have. I'd
also like um our city clerk to say anything if he would like to add. Um and then >> good morning commission. >> Discuss. >> Um I just want to make it clear what we're recommending is for the quarterly period not for all committees. There are the land land use boards will continue
to meet monthly because that's necessary. The commission committees will continue to meet uh monthly that's necessary. other committees such as the budget stuff that impacts financial impacts will continue to uh to meet on a monthly basis. And for the committees that are meeting quarterly, those are
the only ones that recommending an hour and a half. And if there's a special referral you need to make, those committees can meet at a time that's not during their quarter. So this wouldn't impact what you if there's an emergency or whatever you refer, it wouldn't impact that.
>> Well, I'm I'm in total favor of this. It makes it makes sense. You guys need to free up some of your time, especially the August. It's kind of ridiculous. There's >> there's committees that meet in August that refuse to. >> Um, okay. >> Yeah, I'm in favor of streamlighting the
committees. As a matter of fact, Commissioner Suarez and I had a sunshine meeting in 2024 with the city clerk and discussed this. And um, at that time, there really weren't a lot of big options. um >> and we recommended some sun setting and
some merging of committees, >> right? But then instead more committees popped up and um circumstances changed. Uh so I'm definitely in favor of this. I have something similar with streamlining committees that's going to be heard at neighborhoods um soon I hope.
>> And um I think some of the committees are redundant and can be folded under existing committees. Um, I know that I've spoken with staff and in some cases they've told me 40% of their workload is working on these advisory committees and
that's ridiculous. >> Um, not every committee I think could be turned to quarterly. So, um, as you mentioned, there may be a few others that may need monthly um, or at least every other month
>> and that will alleviate. But the more we can fold existing committees that are redundant and uh sunset ad hoc committees uh I think that's going to be a big help. >> And we've made those types of recommendations and we're not getting
rid of any subject matter because like you said they're repetitive. Multiple committees cover the same topic. There's so the subject matter that we are getting from the residents will not be lost. >> It's just >> So do you have recommendations of combining committees? We do.
>> Yes. >> You want to go Maria? >> Okay. Well, I mean this has to go to commission approval, right? >> Correct. >> So, we'll change uh I believe we does this change the code uh Rick. >> Yes, there will be code amendments required because the committees are all
in the code, >> right? It the quarterly meetings would not be necessary to change. that's already in the in the code that they they they meet on at a minimum of uh >> this specific committees the topic matter and subject matter would have to go to. >> So how many how many committees do you
want to um bring into half >> um >> or not half but consolidated? >> Well some let me just explain that um some committees don't have to be touched because they already meet quarterly. Um,
some committees have a purpose where they really only have to meet like half the year because they have to approve a budget that then one of the departments manages. So, they would meet six times
in a row and then they wouldn't have to meet again. What's happening though is that they just continue to meet. I mean, we want to look at this very closely. If you all give us the authority to be
the gatekeepers of this and really demand that they change the way they do their business. Um because it's it's just become the norm to keep going and going and never end.
And and I you know we just by the way I I only speak for myself but you have my support on that. >> No thank I appreciate it. Um, just so you know, this amount of time is 10 full-time equivalents. Full-time. This
is the equivalent of 10 people doing nothing but this all the time. >> Well, um, how about you bring it to the commission? Okay. And, um, you have my full support. I think you guys are on
the right track for efficiency and it's been a long time coming. There's one subject matter we did not touch but I want to get your opinion. We did not touch the ones where the liaison are your aids because that's your purview but we think our recommendations are
appropriate for all but we leave that up to you. We have animal welfare committee, economic uh commission for women. Those are all run by you. So we didn't want to >> invade your purview. >> But I think this recommendation >> boards and the ones that are like the
commission boards >> I think it should all be universal. But >> yeah, >> it should so are it should be universal including the ones that are chaired not shared but liaison by our aids. >> Yeah. Okay. >> I think that less is more right. Less is
more. They don't have to meet monthly. They're still going to meet. They're still gonna >> and they still get the benefits being on. >> Yeah, exactly. It's just >> they're going to meet quarterly instead of every month. >> And I actually think that'll make some of these committees much more efficient
actually because >> some of these committees, if you're meeting monthly, you have to look for things to discuss. Great. >> And I I've seen it firsthand. Less is more for a lot of these uh including for not just sucking up time but actually
making the committees themselves more efficient. >> So I'll make the motion to uh move this with a favorable recommendation. >> Yeah, I think it would be because it's going to be multifaceted because it might be code and it be obviously going back as a resolution to support the things that be approved by resolution and then some code issues. I think it's
if I'm looking at the item returning to commissioner with a favor recommendation to approve the recommended policy direction regarding amendments to city code and enabling legislation necessary to improve operational efficiency and modernize the city's boards and committee structure. Commissioner Suarez made the motion second. I'll second.
>> Commissioner Magazine seconded. All in favor? >> I. >> And we will be hearing it again at neighborhoods. >> Same item similar. >> And when will that be heard? >> Next week. >> Okay. Maybe that's the detail of >> it printed but it's on the agenda. >> Maybe the detail of of of the folding in
because we didn't get into that here. Maybe that could be the purview under neighborhoods where they can target uh the folding in of certain committees. >> Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. >> Thank you all. Good. Good discussion. >> Okay. Thank you, Mayor. >> Chair, I believe you said you wanted to
hear MB11 next, please. Okay. MB11 discussion uh of extension of Lincoln Road outdoor concession fee abatement program for an additional year in response to continuing construction related impact. MB11. >> Commissioner Dominguez and John turn it
over to both of you all. >> Okay. Hi John. How you doing? >> Good. How are you doing? John Norris, public works director. >> Yeah. >> Before you city looks really good. I say that to everybody. uh people that are in the audience, people that are not, we're
on the world stage right now, uh from a cleanliness perspective, from an activation perspective, city looks great. So, thank you for your team on the sanitation side. Uh just across the board, thank you all. I I think we're sorry for the pun, but putting our best
foot forward for the World Cup. >> Thank you. I'll pass that along to staff. Appreciate it. >> All right. So this is the um extending the Lincoln Road outdoor concession fee abatement um uh for an additional year. We have 17
cafes uh currently and Lincoln Road is undergoing u major construction including from the city and um closures of stores and restaurants and those businesses are really struggling. I know the city recommends um offering the
abatement for an additional year and I support that. I'd love to move that item. >> Second. >> So, we'll show this. >> Sorry. >> Return a commissioner with the favor recommendation for an additional one-year uh abatement for the uh the existing abatement program for the
outdoor concession fee for Lincoln Road. And that I'm sorry that motion was made by Commissioner um Dominguez and seconded by Commission Commissioner Suarez. All in favor? >> I all item passes.
>> Um Commissioner Dominguez want to hear NB2, the on demand water mobility. >> MB2 discuss the benefits of ondemand water mobility services. MB2. So, I was uh approached by a resident um
about an idea where um an ondemand water taxi service could help supplement our free service that's um happening now. And um there there's no other place in the
county uh waterways that do this. And there are some organizations that have the infrastructure to um offer on demand service. This would be an RFP, so we'd see what uh would come out of it, but I
think it would be a unique way for the city to potentially get into a revenue share. Um the stopping points could be at um our marina. I don't know if they could do private uh partnerships with other marina locations like Sunset
Harbor. Um, and the the time that I'm really thinking this is going to be helpful is during high impact weekends. Uh, it's just an idea and I don't know what my colleagues think about it. >> Um,
if you have any other feedback, >> I I was approached by the the potential uh group. I think it's a great idea. Um, but one of the one of the things I told him is you you can't do pickups and drop offs at, you know, a private not a
private, but a public seaw wall, for example. Um, and the only real pickups and drop offs that I know are that would probably be beneficial to them is Sunset Harbor, the boat ramp, or Miami Beach Marina, right?
and other locations could be which is private >> North Bay Village or is that too far? >> North Bay Village. >> Yeah. >> Like can it can be expanded? >> Yeah, but just the pickup and drop off portion, Jose, where could that happen
legally currently? >> So, good afternoon, Mr. Chair, committee members. Jose Gonzalez, transportation and mobility director. Uh, certainly there is growing interest in ondemand water. uh mobility services. Uh unlike
public transit, waterborne transportation services such as our water taxi service and on demand service works a lot like a ride share but on the water. Uh these are typically companies that have licensed uh operators, vessel
operators, and they are appbased companies. And you request a ride. You go into the app, you request a ride much like you would an Uber or or a Lift. Um there is growing interest particularly in coastal communities such as such as ours.
The challenge becomes where to pick up and where to where to drop off. Certainly private uh marinas, private docks are are uh eligible and that's something that any private company can enter into an agreement with the uh private dock
owner to uh to to perform those pickup and drop off operations. Uh in terms of public uh locations, uh we have two that we've identified. We have the Maurice Gibb Memorial Park, the um Barry Coutun
boat ramp there, and we've got the Miami Beach Marina. >> What about Chain Rowing Center? Can that be considered as a mid beach option? >> Um so that's more like a public private uh type of partnership. We can look into
that one. I'm not sure that that's a that anyone from the public can just go there and and and dock. >> I don't know if we want with the rowing club there and boats doing pickups and drop off there. I don't know if that'd be a What about But you know, >> are we signing off on like specifics or
just kind of general idea? >> General just throwing it out there. We Sounds like you might have been approached by uh >> but North Beach Yeah, certainly needs it. Um, >> and we are looking at docking potential docking locations in North Beach for our own water taxi service to be able to
expand it to uh to North Beach. So, going back to the docking locations, we have those two. As you are aware, Miami Beach Marina um well, there's a lease agreement with SUNTEX and essentially even though it's a public marina, SUNTEX operates, manages that um you know, that
that marina. So there it would need to be allowed by by suntex. Um there are also some restrictions that have recently been placed by the city commission on charter vessels on private uh you know operators. So we would need to revisit some of those restrictions to
see if they either prohibit or restrict a uh ondemand water mobility service which is in essence you know it's performing a a private uh function. Mhm. >> Um the Maurice Gibb Memorial Park.
So we're operating water taxi that docks at at uh the floating dock there at Maurice Gibb Memorial. Um but that's through a concession agreement that was competitively procured. Our vendor was progre um competitive competitively
procured through a uh solicitation process and there is a concession agreement that allows our operator to perform that function. So there would likely need to be, you know, something similar uh for a private uh service over
at Maurice Gibb Park. Um here's what I >> um this is our last meeting before the break in August. Why don't we defer this to listen uh to discuss it again in September and in the meantime uh give uh
you the opportunity to get more concrete potential locations to see if this is viable, maybe meet with the um a potential person that's reached out to um the commission and um discuss those findings in September.
>> May I also add some insight or or um recommendations is if if if there is a company that wants to seriously build out, you know, we do have a lot of sort
of dead ends on the um like parkletits. If the company is willing to build a dock for pickups and drop offs and build out some sort of infrastructure, I think that could be also beneficial. You know, there'd have to be, you know, gates and
and security, not security, but um it couldn't just be anyone goes onto the dock. I would be I'd be open to hearing something like that if they're going to make that sort of investment. Um I think I think it is an interesting
thing. So, I wouldn't just want to limit it to Maurice Gift Park. It is a good location, but we we'd want to make sure with at least the Sunset uh neighborhood association if they're okay with that. Right. So, >> right.
>> And there would need to be some code amendments because currently our code would prohibit this type of private operation out of Mara. >> Right. >> Okay. But I'm okay with the deferral and you guys coming back with some more. Can I jump in, please?
>> Yeah, of course. >> Thanks. Um, Jose, um, I know we've had conversations about the route going north south because we're working on finding funding for it. Um, there is possibly an opportunity. I don't know what size boat or what size dock, but
the end of Bonita Drive on the south side could be a really good uh location for a pickup spot. Um, one of the biggest opportunities we have in the city is to get traffic off the roads by having better sources of transportation
going north to south. Um, I do like this idea of having these private vendors come in and and build some of the infrastructure. Um, and I think as you work on investigating further details and opportunities, one of the priorities
is finding a spot in North Beach, whether it is a temporary spot where we share, you know, locations with um the police and fire stations that are up there. if we approach the church which is you know shuttered and you know in
theory is going to become um uh residential units at some point although I know there's a movement to change that regardless or this location on Bonita Drive. I think it this conversation has to include a North Beach pickup and drop
off point. Um, and with Commissioner Dominguez permission, I'd like to become a a co-sponsor as well because I think this is a great um, initiative and I I would love to see this come to fruition with North Beach included. >> Yeah. And just looking at the map, what
about the street end of 69th Street where, you know, just north of the fire department, >> Indian Creek. Um, yeah, it's it's right in front of the the King Cold Bay, but it's the street end of 69th Street. It's literally adjacent to the fire
department. >> We are looking at that location. That's next to the also close to the police station. The next >> It's between the church and the fire department >> between the Correct. We're looking at that area and uh Commissioner Bod had a great point. She hit the nail on the
head with Bonita Drive Street and that's public rightway. So, we're also looking at that street end. Again, these um you know, this investigation so far has been in the context of our own water taxi service, which is a mass transit service. Uh but we, you know, are happy
to u to uh also look at these locations for potential private on demand. >> Yeah. And it would be great if like you know if if there is going to be for example a no bid waiver for some of these companies or maybe there's not I don't know but building out
infrastructure would be a huge benefit to us obviously if they can build a sort of a dock and and even for North Beach maybe even have now now that those derk boats are gone maybe you have something similar to Sunset Harbor where you have
like little finger finger peers and kayak launches. is which could also be part of cuz if you're going to if they're going to go through the process of getting a permit for a dock, it's going to take a long time. Might as well just do add other things in there as far as a public benefit.
>> Agreed. >> Okay. If I if I could jump in for a minute, um it's great discussion. Love this. And and as everyone has been mentioning there, Jose and his team have really done a good job of mapping out additional pickup and drop off locations. some of them have been
discussed right now in this on this meeting. There's also in the south of Fifth Marina, there's also discussions with Mount Si. So all that um as subject to some additional funding should be uh as we're doing should be part of this discussion because I think anybody who
wants to do a sort of this additional on demand is going to want to know when this where the city is going to have a service that's that's running free uh because it might impede their their business. and and this is coming and it's going to come fairly soon. So, um
it it all ties together. So, I'm glad we're having this discussion. >> Okay. So, we have a motion. >> Yeah, I think so. I think they um Jose's gotten some information and he'll be able to come back obviously because we're not only looking at I think necessarily because it's you know like a water literally an Uber or a taxi, you
know, for maybe a individual or a family. It's it wouldn't be such a big boat. So you might be looking at public to public location could be a a private to public picked up at your condo building and taken to Monty's let's say for dinner and and return. So there's a lot of options there but I think we'll show the item heard and discussed and return to FK with additional
information. And on that point and and and I believe it was referenced, but the north and south potential linking the entire Miami Beach, it would take a different uh a lower scale boat, but still definitely doable to get under some of those some
of those bridges. But um that's it. The the the possibilities are endless. And I know Jose has it mapped out. I took a I took a boat tour with Jose and his team as well. We literally mapped out the city and different drop off and pickup points because certainly uh anything
owned by the city is usable and some of them are actually pretty ripe for for doing it uh now with very little uh infrastructure cost. So there's there's a lot that could be done uh with minimal funding we we could get uh we can really make a transportation and what's great
about this is and a number of the county commissioners have taken uh taxi rides with me because they're looking at uh expanding it. Some of the neighboring cities to our north are looking to link to to our water taxis. So, this this really has um in in a short period of
time could be something that expands countywide as opposed to even just a Miami Beach linked. >> Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I appreciate uh your years of advocacy in this. The water tax has been a great success. Commissioner Dominguez and Suarez, thank
you for uh expanding and elaborating even upon it. I I think this is a tremendous opportunity as we look, you know, for uh alternative transportation solutions. So, Jose, thanks for you and your team for uh continuing to facilitate. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you.
>> So, that's closed out. Uh Mr. CFO, >> well, u we're done with this one. It'll return the >> for now. It'll return. >> Um let's get an update on parking. This is OB6. I've had this on for a while and don't want this to fall off. Uh so, let's have a discussion with that. Uh
Will, you're either the most responsive guy in the world, which I I think you are, or you were halfway up here before I even called the item, just in anticipation, but uh good job. Um listen, understand that uh you and your department had a loss this week. And uh I think we'd all like to acknowledge uh
that our hearts and condolences uh there for your department. Um, I I know we're in good hands with uh your your leadership in helping uh troops push forward. Um, but you know, our our thoughts go out to uh to you all. >> I I appreciate
>> and the city as a whole. >> Very much, Commissioner. Will McDonald uh director, >> I'm sorry. Let me just read an item in OB6. discuss the resolution of the mayor and city commission of the city of Miami Beach accepting the recommendation of the finance and economic resiliency committee at April 19th, 2024 meeting to accept the city administration's update
on the city of Miami Beach parking department enforcement uh efforts OB6. >> Uh Will McDonald, director of parking city Miami Beach. Um so this is obviously a a very all-encompassing update. Um I will uh kind of go down
each of them one by one. Some of them require some some possible action. Some of them are more just along the lines of the the theme of the memo and that's an update. We'll first talk about the let's go right down the list. Automated lot parking lot enforcement. So this is regarding the paved mobility. This was a
program that was in effect when I came on board. Um this really serves to leveraging technology to be a force multiplier within the city. Um I from my understanding Pave was here for approximately one year doing a a no
action uh pilot. Uh we started uh the actual actionable pilot which means that citations went live on November 1st in one lot. We started three other lots on January 1st. I've included a table a table with the citation data that is
included in this. Um, so this really just allows us to, we talk about it, but to deploy our parking enforcement specialist to quality of life, life safety items. Obviously, over the last several months, this has been a focal point um of the commission, and this
really just allows us to continue that push. Um, it with this, we have recommended an extension of this pilot. If there is an expansion desired by the commission, we absolutely um um can sit down with our partners, talk about what
that expansion looks like. We understand that there are some capital costs when they are expanding to lots where they don't have cameras. They do have some lots that they have cameras from the previous deployment. So, this can be a conversation that can be had, but um as I think I've shown in my capital costs
are borne by us or that's part of the negotiations. >> No, that's part of the negotiations. Um uh you know and and I I think I'll just say that the theme of this goes along with uh I feel what I've shown during my tenure is that I love technology. Um it
is uh whether it's garages, whether it's in lots, whether it's on the street, technology can allow us to do our job better. Um ending resident toes, um the the text before tow, all of these are technological advances and our team will absolutely continue to work with our partners to ensure that we do it in a
responsible manner. Um but it allows our team to remain effective in the field. >> Yeah. I think what you've heard a theme from this commission up here and especially from this body is efficiency, government efficiency. Work I don't want to say work smarter not harder. I'll say work smarter. Let's all work harder
always. Um but where let's work harder in other areas where we can leverage technology to work smarter and more efficient in some areas. Uh, I see this firsthand um for my private sector job. My office on 17th in Alton, so just to
the east of us, we have a public lot and as recent as just yesterday, I I walk through there and I see like 15 different contractor vans, right? And there will be some days where I see your specialists going through and writing
tickets having to go one by one like why, you know, why do they have to do that? Um I would rather them focus on cleaning up our residential areas like Flamingo Park and south of Fifth.
utilize our resources there if we have the technology that can smartly implement that in areas. Right? This isn't uh meant to be gotcha for residents or visitors, but if we have contractor vans that are parking in our
public lots probably for free, you know, for them it's a cost of doing business. If they go, you know what, I'll get one ticket every 12 times I park. So, not paying is actually smarter than, you know, uh, paying every single day for
them. It's just the calculation. This this isn't meant to be a gotcha for the grandom that comes to the Apple store, but fe but for people that are gaming our system, saying, "I'm going to park here every single day as I contract to go work on this building." And you know
what? My data shows me I'm only getting caught once every 12 times because your people can't be everywhere at all times. This frees them up to be the places that they need to be and we can use our technology to be the places they don't have to be. Um, so I I very much welcome
an expansion of this. you just even putting that out there into the universe kind of tells me, tell me if I'm reading it wrong, that you've you're comfortable with the technology, you think it's efficient, it works well. Um, so I'd welcome an expansion, you know, in our
South Beach and even mid beach areas. Uh, I remember a few years ago where we talked about some of those lots preceded your time in the mid beach areas. uh maybe by the Eden Rock, maybe across the street from like the addition wherever
we have that lot there. But to the extent where we don't need our parking specialists uh spending their time on commercial lots, right? Let's not have them do that. Let's have them focus on our residential areas.
>> 100% agree. And and I'll point out that actually one of the pilots is in P71 right beside Eden Rock. And I know when I first got here, uh, that lot has approximately 400 spaces inside of it. And the amount of time that it takes for one individual to walk along that and
scan every single license plate by tablet um really kind of I'll just say triggered me in a way of like there's got to be a way better way than this. So um I I am absolutely on board with the technology. Um it works. We there's
still a a part of it that also uh we do not issue citations to residents. So, this is a resident savior. Now, the county does give us uh the ability now to send invoices by mail through a recent ordinance change. So, we're going
to work with our partners at uh uh Miami Parking Authority because they operate in a little bit different. They're an authority. So, they don't really operate off citation. They operate purely on revenue. So, they love sending invoices. So, we're going to start building that into our workflow as well because, you know, obviously if this rolls out uh
citywide, this technology, you know, there there's people that are used to running in for 5 minutes or, you know, or I'll say 25 minutes because also one of the great things about the technology is there's a grace period in these parking lots. So, nobody that pulls in for 5 minutes is is getting a ticket in the mail. You know, we've
built in a fair grace period to let somebody come in, get their stuff ready, go to a payment machine, get on the app, figure out how to do it. Um, so so we're we're working some boundaries. We're still working it out. >> How many lots is this currently on? >> Uh, right now it's on four parking lots.
>> Okay. And you guys are recommending more. >> Uh, so I I will say that we definitely recommend the extension if there's an expansion that's warranted. We've had to talk with our partners and so we do have cameras in lots that are currently there. There's also um that that are
there from the previous pilot. Uh there are also some other lots. Um I'll say you know P49 which is uh right in front of the W uh right 23rd and Collins probably very similar in structure as the one right on 46th and Collins beside
Eden uh just from the amount of traffic uh that goes through there, the amount of cars that probably go in there and sit and hold a space without paying. So we've had the talks already regarding Lincoln uh Lane South, a lot of those parking lots. So, how much how much additional revenue was a result of of
this program? >> So, these these cameras primarily issue uh uh $36 violation. So, 32 $4 of that 36 goes to uh crossing guards. So, which leaves $32 essentially right now on the
structure. the rough math, very rough math. The county automatically takes a third um county and then right now the essentially a third goes to the city and a third goes to um the vendor.
Total we've had about 36,000 to date and that's from November until the end of May. Um >> just $36,000. >> No, 36,000 citations. >> 36,000 citations. And so if you and that's how many have been paid through
uh the county. >> So I just want to know I'm just trying to compare apples to apples. >> How much was that particular lot making before and now what is it making now? >> So this is so ironically enough we pulled the data from 25 to 26. The
transactions have actually decreased um in these lots. So the revenue has gone down. But I want to make it very clear and I'm I'm I'm taking citation revenue versus um versus actual transactional revenue.
But those two live in different worlds. So citation revenue is absolutely gone up because uh as uh the chair pointed out, you know, we have 10 human beings that are on the road at any given time. And so you can go through a lot in a
shift and then not come back to that lot for 3 hours. And when you look at the average stay in a lot of our lots, a lot the average stay a lot of times is 2 hours, an hour and a half. And so if somebody goes in there for 30 minutes, we'll never catch that individual. So the citation revenue is absolutely
exploded because in the in the previous history, the city never placed a priority on sending team members into this lot cuz it just, you know, it >> Okay. Okay. So what's the just can you give me the delta please? >> Yeah it's it's I would say I mean from a
financial aspect from it's it's not even comparable. We will never be able to do what cameras can do with people. It is expens I would like to just process that in my head. >> So with these four lots uh with one being the primary driver there's been
about 360,000 >> 360,000 what? uh $360,000 that has come into the city over this six months, seven month period. Um >> that we would have that we would have not seen you typically.
>> Correct. We would have not seen that. Um >> and that's just for a quarter. >> Uh seven months. >> Okay. >> Seven months. Um now >> for only four lots. >> This is four parking lots. Now one of them happens to be our largest lot in the city. Um because it's it was a great test case. >> Which one? >> Uh P71. So it's 46 in college. I decided
to eat and rock. >> Okay. Okay. >> And so um while the in the previous history and I I'll be very blunt. So I looked at the time period and this was before I arrived. I want to put that precedent out there. Um so the January to the June uh before the cameras were
installed in 2025. Uh the department had only written 200 citations in that lot. whereas the total for uh that lot over 7 months was about 4,000. >> So look, I when I look at these numbers and you take into consideration
uh efficiency and manpower of the parking department, not having to take take time to manage something that could be done efficiently. Why don't we just roll this out to the rest of the city for all the parking lots? Like for example, North Beach, we have what is
it? 92 P lot 90. I mean, that is a that's a 300 parking spot lot. And I'm assuming North Beach residents would rather the parking department take their time on enforcing residential
parking as opposed to 32 or $36 citations at the parking lot. So, you know, perhaps that's another parking lot that we should start utilizing this technology for. >> So, actually, I love that idea for the lot. Uh, however, that is also in we've
working with our CIP partners. That's a lot that's uh supposed to go undergo construction in >> Yeah, but that could be like a couple years from now. Correct. >> I I keep hearing I don't want to speak out. I I keep hearing it could be summer of next year. Um, and so I don't want to
>> or m maybe in general, we don't have to say any specific lot, but I I think I mean if we're seeing efficiency increases like this, like for instance, you know, my ex-mother-in-law, she drives a gray Toyota Camry license plate
VH742. She parks every Tuesday at the W lot >> for three hours without any tickets. Okay, >> we're good, commissioner. We're good, sir. But um kidding aside, I mean we're seeing 20fold increases in efficiency. Let's roll this out across the board
because one >> No, no, of course the devil's in the details. We'd like to we'd like to make sure that it, you know, it's a fair I don't you know, we we have a contract with these four lots, but if we're going to be rolling this out citywide, we're
going to probably want a more of a robust um contract that that we're going to want to have input in. Um, but I'm I'm ready to just move this forward citywide. I don't want to just limit
this to I don't know. I think the I think the the ask is south of 23rd. I want to do this all all over the city. Uh and then free up your resources for what matters the most, which is residential,
um parking, uh commercial delivery parking, etc. So, you know, I I think I would I would like to make a motion for the city administration to start negotiating
all city parking lots with this technology and come back to FK for the details of um of that contract. >> Are there because I think there might be
more than one item. Are there multiple items to this update or is this the action that you're looking for out of here? >> So, yeah, uh the others there are no I'll say required update or required actions on the rest of the updates. >> Okay. Okay. Yeah. So, look, will um we
want to be efficient, right? >> Yes, sir. >> This is going to bring in and I do want to say that I don't want residents being punished by this. Like I think there, you know, that could be part of the contract. Obviously, if it's a resident registered vehicle, you know, maybe they
get the first 30 minutes free, right? Um or they're free, period. I want to be able to free up all the parking resources uh to what we as a commission have
really hammered you on, right? like you guys shouldn't be you guys have honestly should not be enforcing you know parking at these parking lots the the for for visitors and that should just be done through AI or technology. So yeah, every
single parking lot should have this and and with North Beach I I mean I don't know the representatives here I don't know if you guys are okay with you know building something out for for something that potentially is going to you know it will be demolished in 18 months maybe 3
years but who knows. Uh I my concern is getting parking enforcement off of that parking lot and into the North Beach residential uh areas. Yes, >> that's something you guys are willing to I don't know if you guys want to come up
and and say if that's a if if you're interested in that and putting it into a location that you it's not going to be there in in a potentially 18 months or a couple years. >> Good. >> Maybe you can move that equipment to another spot. It's up. Let me I'd like
to hear if that's something would be interest of you. >> Thank you and good afternoon. I'm Fred Braman. I'm a co-founder of Pave Mobility and uh we appreciate the feedback and the uh city's willingness to look at an expansion and extension of this pilot. Exactly what you're talking about is one
of our only concerns. If it's 18 months, 24 months, yes, it's something that we're very interested in. Um the term of us deploying capital and installing any parking lot is the variable that you know we like to to just know upfront. You know if it's again if it's 10 lots
and one of them might disappear in in 18 months yes we can we can do something like that. If it's um one you know it's four lots and they all might go away in 6 months that would be you know a different scenario. No, but this particular lot in North Beach is is the
biggest lot and it's anywhere from 18 months to 3 years when we would put a shovel in the ground. >> But in the meantime, we want to free up our parking resources >> enforcement out of that lot and into the residential areas. So, you know, I it
would be great if you could consider that lot. It's going to be you know shortlived at from this point but >> we would be very interested in that. Yes. >> Okay. >> So I think we can show this return to commissioner favor recommendation to advance the new technological procurements at all city lots as
discussed. >> So we'll show commissioner Suarez making that motion. >> Yes. >> Can you repeat the motion? >> Um return to commissioner the favor recommendation to advance new technological procurements uh at all city lots as discussed. >> Okay. because there may be procurement
maybe contract negotiations keeping it generic. >> Well, if if the intention is to stay with paid mobility, then it would be to recommend to expand the contract with paid mobility, wave procurement for the contract. >> Okay. So, we'll show it to uh show this to advance.
>> You guys feel okay with that? >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> To expand the pave mobility agreement. >> Yeah. They've proven themselves >> and wave uh bidding at Okay. At all city lots. Mr. chair and commissioners, just one thing. You you mentioned residents a couple of times and I'll we'll explain
further, but I believe that there is a program right now where the residents are not receiving citations. So, by zip code, if we recognize that a a vehicle is registered to Miami Beach, they do not receive a citation. Instead, I believe they receive a warning or notice letter saying, "Hey, you forgot to pay.
You owe us 75 cents or something." So, the residents are being excluded from from this type of enforcement. Now that you're up here, Ralph, you know, another part of the contract would, if we're going to be rolling this out citywide, I'd love there to be
funds dedicated to improving the lots. You know, for example, I don't want any curbs that are broken. I want the landscaping perfect. Um, trash, debris picked up. Okay, I think that should fall, you know, on the operator if if it
if it's possible. uh that that way we can free up sanitation dollars there. But remember, we're if we're going to be expanding this citywide, you're going to have a much more you're going to have a greater real estate and we'd want you to invest in the parking lots,
infrastructure, and um and beautifying it, right? As far as sanitation, the looks, I mean, are you guys okay with that? Look, >> it it it all boils down to dollars and cents. So yeah, if if we're getting an appropriate share of of the revenues of
the citation >> and that'll be between you and staff, I'm not going to get into the I'm not going to micromanage how how you guys do that, but at least for myself, and I don't I don't think there's any disagreement up here, we would want our parking lots to be pristine.
Okay. Um, so if if we're going to be given this as a no bid and we are going to expand this citywide citywide there there should be certainly a a
capital improvement to our our lots. So, uh, it bit of aside, but right now our department is currently working with a vendor that is approved by the city to provide a 10-year capital improvement plan for not only our garages, but also our parking lots. That was one of the
first things I identified when I got here because it used to be I'll say bifurcated where our parking lots although the repair or or the structure was paid for out of parking funds, parking didn't necessarily have a hand
in creating that plan. And so we've worked really well with our facilities partners to say, "Hey, we want to be part of creating that plan." And so this CIP plan uh over 10 years will now allow us to say that this contract will come out and say this lot needs X done this
year. This lot needs X done that year. >> So you're you sir you're saying you have a program and a process already for that improvement. >> We're about to get there. I'm saying we're on that path because I see what you see, sir. If I could add and so that's going to hopefully go in tandem
with this proposal if it goes if if it gets favorable votes from the commission. >> That would be excellent. >> Yeah, if I could add on to that. Yes, that's something that will all and I have had a discussion since you come on board was developing a long-term 5 10year renewal replacement program so we
have exactly what you're talking about is that our lots and garages but in this case we're talking about lots to look beautiful to be paved when they need to be striped when they need to be landscaping approved when they need to be this is a separate enterprise fund that uses own parking dollars it's well capitalized and has the ability to execute those projects so they're
working too diligently to put together a detailed plan on that uh but to the effect of this agreement obviously that's something they can discuss operationally about like uh cleaning and and maybe more of a maintenance thing on a capital. I think the capital we're good on, but maybe they can have discussions about cleanliness.
>> And remind me, is the parking department part of the transportation? >> No. No, it's its own separate enterprise fund. It lives off of the uh fees. Uh >> how is that fund doing so far? >> It's doing well. That's why it it will be if there is a capital project needed to resurface and beautify let's say this
parking lot, the funds will be available to execute. Okay. >> All right. So will >> understood. And let me just >> you and you and Ralph are gonna have to work together on on making this work. Okay. >> So it's all in the betterment of the community. >> And let me just restate.
>> We have that license plate number. >> We we'll make sure >> I got a couple other license plates. Uh >> uh let me just restate the motion so the city attorney doesn't uh I don't get in trouble with him. I return the commission with a favor recommendation
uh to expand the pave mobility agreement and uh wave uh for all city parking lots and to wave uh bidding. >> Hold on like what the commission what the committee directed. Yes. >> Yeah. Uh commotion made by Commissioner
Suarez, seconded by >> I'll second uh Commissioner Magazine. All in favor? >> I. >> Motion passes. Thank you. >> And will I know that was just one component. Were there other material updates you wanted to go through? I don't want to open Pandora's box. Um,
>> but you're going to >> I'm going to uh so the purple curbs are we really tied to that. >> So I'll >> for no other reason than aesthetics in my uh point of view.
>> So I will say that the purple curbs are having their effect within the community. In fact, there was there was a recent Instagram post where somebody uh they they took a picture of one of our uh tow partners towing a Corvette out of a 100 block on 7th Street and um
somebody said uh South Beach tow scam. And so they were like, "Oh man, these tow companies are scamming." And there was a person that dropped down in the client said, "The purple curb means loading zone. Where's the scam?" With a question mark. So, um, >> that was probably him.
>> Color color. How many accounts do you have? Um, I will say this, color-coded curbs are used in other municipalities throughout the country. Florida was really behind the times. Right now, we are we are This
is something that MPA I'll say we rolled out first. MPA rolled out literally weeks after us. >> Don't disagree. There's probably good merits to it. And I'm not going to like fall on the sword here. It's just we put so much like focus and attention on the
aesthetics of every last thing in our city. Uh from, you know, having a color palette if you want to paint your own house um that you have to select from. >> I don't know. I just look out. I'm like, "Oh, that
just maybe that's more of a personal opinion I'm throwing out there." >> Not to be, you know, not to really, >> but you're going to. >> Yeah. >> I mean, cuz I see the purple curbs and it's the paint's already peeling off and they've kind of painted on like a broken curb and it kind of looks it looks,
you know, not to Miami Beach's standard. >> So, this is >> keep we'll say, let's just keep in the back of your mind. It just looks like someone took a paintbrush and put it over. And >> so this is where the challenge we had when everything was yellow. Um, we would get the I never saw the color of the
curb because when the yellow fades, it blends into the exact same color of the curb and people were talking about the parking department had a gotcha moment and you know and so this is going to take some time but we are really really focusing on painting and upkeep and we
are working with our maintenance team um, small but mighty to create a plan where we can start touching up the curbs from North Beach all the way to South point drive on an annual basis where we just go through and continue to plus them up much like we're talking about
keeping our parking lots beautiful. We are trying to keep our curbs at the same time >> wellkept. I can't speak to the construction of it. It's a little bit more of a public works item. Um sorry John um but uh uh you have my word we're going to continue to attack that try to keep
>> I applaud the innovative thinking. We need more entrepreneurial spirit innovative thinking in here. I applaud that. Absolutely. And if I was in the parking department, it works in yours keeping the overall aesthetics of the city. Uh I'm back and forth, but thank
you for your efforts and uh all that you do. >> My pleasure. >> And again to the entire department and city staff, you know, it's uh you guys are our thoughts and prayers. >> Thank you, sir. >> Thank you. >> Um any priority items from my colleagues? Uh wanted to try and wrap up
by one. Um, >> what else did you have? >> We can hear the trolley edge. Yeah. Yeah. Let's hear OB2 quickly. Uh, >> sure. All right. Uh OB2 discussed establishing
a Muscle Beach in North Beach considering the widely recognized positive impact on health, community, and quality of life observed at Muscle Beach and South Beach with sponsorship support to offset project costs and reduce financial impact of the city. OB2, >> I don't want to make you blush. You look
great, dude. >> Um I have I have a brief update. Um we continue to work on with the sponsor Techno Gym. Um their next meeting is scheduled for the 16th. So we did not make it for this meeting, but they're hoping um to have a proposal and even a
rendering. Hope I hope by the 16th we'll have that >> without I mean are you is it okay to give us some basic highlights of what there might be proposed? >> I have not seen a proposal of the of a rendering of the equipment. what they what I >> the the terms
>> the terms I I have very initial we're looking at they they're looking at doing an inkind a value inind where we would pay for the installation I've seen an estimated value of the installation maybe around the $60,000 mark for the city but they would they're looking to
have some sort of um multi-year um arrangement with us for the value in kind of the equipment >> the last time we talked about this you the staff recommended $300,000 right for >> so with the sponsorship
>> it would only be the install or >> what other we don't know what we're getting for this equipment we don't know if we meaning the that the commission the committees will want to stop here um but we would not if if what they bring us in kind is exactly what we want we'd
be looking at far less than $300,000 >> and if I could add to that um so that was the obviously the allocation if we were going to completely do But so I think this gives the monies that are being used are from a very restricted fund have to be used in North Beach in a tourist area which is is limited in that
area. So yes, if this ends up being executed, I would see that obviously the whole $300,000 allocation would not be uh needed to execute the ultimate project, but at the same time it does give ammunition to the department to deliver an excellent product. >> Correct. >> Yeah. Great. Okay. So, um I'm I'm I'm
excited to hear what they have to say. >> Okay. Very good. >> Do uh do we want to uh have them come back to close this adding to close this out? >> Yeah, let's come back. >> Right. >> Sure. Why don't we just bring it? >> Okay. Yeah. Awesome. Let's not delay it. So, bring bring up to the full
commission. >> Yeah. >> So, I don't I think uh I don't think we need a motion here because you would be taking that to procurement. So, you'd be taking that directly to commission anyway. Or do we need this to >> I don't >> I heard that they wanted to come back here. >> No. >> No. Oh, you don't >> I'm just I didn't know if we could just
close this item and it's a separate favorable recommendation uh for the city to enter into this in kind and I think once this gets commission you'll have all the details so the commission could decide yay or nay or or what supplements what what we want to >> be put on consent. So just
>> okay there's definitely a procurement aspect because the delivery installation >> sponsor on this >> uh no commissioner magazine is the the sole soft >> I'd like to be a co-sponsor on this >> didn't we have something you have to be able to do six pull-ups to be a sponsor >> I can do six pull-ups I don't think Mr.
magazine can. But >> so this will be returned to commissioner with a favorable recommendation to enter into a sponsorship agreement for North Beach Muscle Beach as discussed. >> Okay, >> great. >> Uh that that motion has been made by Commissioner Suarez. >> I'll second and seconded by Commissioner Magazine. All in favor?
>> I the item passes. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Excellent. I >> think we'll wrap things up, Jason. Yeah, we'll show the meeting ajourned. Thank you very much. >> Thank you all.