e e e recording in progress good evening everyone and welcome today is Tuesday March 18th the time is approximately 7 PM we'll Now call to order the meeting of the South Miami city commission uh welcome again
if you could please silence or turn off your cell phones we would greatly appreciate it Madam clerk can you call the role please yes mayor Fernandez present vice mayor Cory present commissioner V here commissioner Cay here commissioner Rodriguez here you have a quum thank you madam clerk if you
please rise for a brief prayer followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by commissioner Rodriguez dear Lord in this time time and space we acknowledge you as The Giver of all good things you are our great provider as you have loved us help us to love others help us to see the
needs of others as we see the wants in our own lives forgive us when we try to argue our way out of lending a hand forgive the times we assume we understand others experiences instead of truly listening and placing ourselves in their shoes teach us to understand the weaknesses in others as we recognize the
weaknesses in ourselves father help us to be a source of unity as we make ourselves vulnerable to the needs of others as we soften our hearts help others see you in US remind us how Christ lived in humility so we may serve those in need may we think of
the least the last and the lost so we might love in Jesus's name amen iedge Al to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for it stands one nation under God
indivisible with liy and justice for all please be seated again if anyone like to speak this evening there is ass signing sheet for public remarks it's at the back of the chamber um please add your name uh staff will bring it up when we open public remarks in a few minutes uh Madam
clerk are there any add-on items to tonight's agenda yes there one could you read the item please yes excuse a resolution weing resolution number 0242 4-1 16129 which authorize the city manager to execute certain Mutual Aid agreements
memorandums of understandings and other procedural law enforcement agreements with governmental in entities including any amendments or renewals th to on an ongoing basis thank you madam clerk colleagues any objections to adding item uh F1
on seeing no objection we'll consider the item added on to tonight's agenda uh Madam clerk are we deferring the approval of the minutes yes please okay uh city manager your report please um as always the FL report can be found in tonight's agenda but as an overview the park and recck and culture
department has a lot of things going on the northwest gate at South Miami Park is scheduled for completion by the end of this month South Miami Park restroom and Concession building the construction is underway on that project and on the recreation side our Aquatic Center at Murray Park officially opens on the 24th
so that coincides with the spring break on March 8th we had City staff representing almost all departments compete in the fourth year in a row for cure CF kickball tournament I'm happy to say that they raised not staff but the uh Foundation raised $882,000 and I'm
also proud to say that they brought home the um Community trophy as well as the overall trophy so next uh commission meeting you'll see a presentation of the trophy but I just wanted to say thank you to everybody who participated because it's a great cause and a great event and thank you to you for being
there in spirit with that marvelous uh cutout of your image thank you uh one last item on the marketing side I did want to share a video that was recently produced in reference to The soic Connect app and our website that we will be marketing to Residents so that they see all the changes and how accessible
the city is if they have any questions thank you something new just came to the city of South Miami website and The somi Connect app we've redesigned these platforms to make it easier faster and more convenient for you to connect with your city our new website features a
modern mobile friendly design making it seamless to navigate from any device with our enhanced menu and cyle wide search bar finding the information you need is just a few clicks away need to pay a bill apply for a permit or contact a department the howd do I tab is your
go-to guide for navigating City operations effortlessly looking for the best shops restaurants and entertainment in South Miami shopi is an interactive business directory that connects you with all our
vibrant local businesses residents can now access city services like submit a request filling out forms and making online payments through the myomi portal your One-Stop shop for online services want to learn more about South Miami our community profile section gives you
insights into local economics and demographics for residents the police to Citizen portal makes police services and information more accessible than ever submitting a service request is also just as easy click submit a service request in your mobile app or click the
heart with wrench icon and select a request category to report a concern or request and track their progress and even check out job opportunities with the city of South Miami all in one place your city your way whether online or on
the go explore the new city of South Miami website and S Connect app thank you very nicely done thank you to elain and Anthony from our finance department for being the actor in this video Elena is also a city resident so thanks to them thank you uh colleagues
any questions to the manager okay we'll move on Mr City attorney your report please mayor we have nothing to report there is an a discussion item that I do want to discuss with you when we get to it and at your which is that sir that is
the one uh it's an update on the zoning application the County zoning application on mil Drive okay thank you sir y okay uh we will open up the flooor for public remarks at this time John list coming forward okay again we'll call your name up if you could please add your name and
address for the record you'll have provide everyone three minutes to speak thank you just two okay okay the first name of the list is Oscar Franco Please Mr Franco good evening
uh please come to the microphone sir my apologies and your name and address to the record one time for the record thank you we just pay for our um permit your name and address before you start Franco 6410 Southwest 64th Avenue thank you sir go ahead so we just pay for the permits
to build our new house and we understand that we have to put solar panels I don't see the benefit of it um and I would like to see if when we discuss about solar panels we can just give the resid is an option to decide if we want to do it or not do it not a not
a mandate like in my case we're getting natural gas carbon foodprint of natural gas is way lower than solar panels I mean the benefit of solar panels solar panels increase the cost of insurance um more than a quarter of the
complaints of solar companies it's after they install the panels they don't come back to do Service uh warranty is never granted a lot of issues so the benefit of forcing residents to install solar panels is I think not
valid okay uh insurance cost can go up to 15% there's no benefit in there uh what else I did research um warranty of the of the roof
it it's voided because the solar panel the mounts break the roof so warranty is gone uh thing sorry I don't have my notes sir can I ask you are you building a new home or are you uh are you remodeling ex
expansion without okay so you're you're you're chipping the threshold in terms of the expansion size okay just wanted to understand that so that's basically what it is I mean I don't see the benefit I would like to hear you guys explain us why you guys think there's a benefit for that yeah what we'll do is we'll we'll if you want to come up and
speak again when we bring the item up for discussion okay we'll happily recognize again thank you thank you sir uh Lisa AUST good evening AUST 655 Southwest 78th Terrace and I'm here
today just to understand uh the development that is um in question right now on 80th and manorly so that's why I'm here today and with that and I think we're going to hear that today or no it's not here today that's what I was told okay so
wrong time give her feedack which yeah which which project are we referring to if I if I can ask the development services director because I'm not familiar with it right away the project on manland we heard on the April 1st meeting it was in Planning and Zoning last week but um it's not on
the agenda for today oh it's not April 1 while you're while you're here if you'd like to give us your two seconds on it if I if I could M Caba before you go what is the nature of the project we're going to hear about just very briefly I don't want to hold so what's coming before you is the zoning okay changes only from duplex to rt18 they're
proposing six units um where they currently could have two okay thank you ma'am if you want to say something that we don't have to come back on yeah yeah no I just wanted to know everything about that and with that new development coming in and actually increasing size how we're going to manage uh the the new
people coming in the additional traffic when right now I think we're like totally at a uh at at a Breaking Point um especially with all the cross streets and everything else going on in the neighborhood so I'd like to be able to hear how we're going to address that how
we're doing it now and then how we're going to even further um be able to comply with what's happening in the area that was really overall and then with with the property all the trees and everything that will probably have to be removed we'll see you on April 1st and
we'll learn more about it along with you okay uh there's no one else on the list is there anyone else in the chamber who'd like to address this Commission in public remarks floor's open okay seeing No One in the Chamber Madam clerk is there anyone online no one's online okay so we'll go ahead and close public remarks with that uh Madam clerk
do you want to read very quickly so we can make do you need to read all the items in terms of board appointments or is there publication sufficient legally okay so uh if anyone's interested there have been a number of board appointments made by various members of the commission they are all published on tonight's agenda in the boards and
committees appointment section uh let's move on to um colleagues you want to start on the discussion items or should we move some of the other business items that probably will'll have less conversation first I think there's people in the audience doing discussion we might as well okay let's take those up
then mam clerk if you can read uh di or sorry M1 please M1 commissioner bonich plastic straws commissioner bonich you are recognized on this item okay I I actually just brought this up because I had had a conversation with somebody and
then I spoke with the city attorney so I wanted him to clarify for all of us and just on the record there had been a whole conversation and not necessarily with us I'm just saying a whole public conversation that you couldn't have public straws in the restaurants and you
couldn't do public straws public straws public straws so when I asked the City attorney like what is going on his answer was and I just want it for the record so that everybody knows it was it was an eye opener for me there is no blanket prohibition on plastic straws uh in
South Miami there figure there plastic straws are are prohibited for City contractors City vendors and um uh when there's a special uh special event that closes the streets that's when plastic straws are
prohibited I don't remember the conversation we had on no no no I'm saying I was sitting in a restaurant and there was like this whole thing going on not even with me and then obviously somehow I got dragged into it and I'm like I don't think we have a public straw problem just can I sorry yeah I
know if I can just recognize everyone okay so we're gonna go with the the vice mayor we'll come back to you that's fine worries I was just going to tell a joke did you want to ban plastic there we go that was it Mr K recognized I don't I hesitate to
laugh for the idea of our city if we do have it for local vendors and the city use how are we enforcing that right now as we speak are we doing any enforcement how do we do enforcement this is good this is an answer you're going to love to hear the answer to I asked it as
well yeah yeah I would say there's not active enforcement happening so basically the answer is we're not it's not reflected in any of our contract documents so um it's it's a rule that's not being applied I think it's probably a fair way to characteriz it the contracts do have compliance with the
Law's Clauses in them um yes they're generic they're generic compliance with the laws but they do not highlight the specifical requirement yeah so that's that's your answer commissioner gu okay is there so just by way of information uh commissioner bonich uh SP
sp1 1822 is making its way through the Senate um and it would preempt once again our abil to do anything in this field regarding Plastics styrofoams or all matter of other items so huh what is
SB let's see sp1 1822 uh would ban or preempt any local restrictions on single-use Plastics and styrofoams really yes so uh to the extent that we have this rule it would essentially become a nullity uh if we tried to apply it in the future so uh
that bill is making its way through the legislature we'll see what happens here over the next uh 45 days or so further discussion on this item none okay let's move on Madam clerk if you can read them too please yes commissioner Bon bir strike glass okay uh commissioner you are recognizing
again again I just wanted to remind us that this still exists as we move forward and we're starting to see movement with newer bigger buildings the only building that we've had come online
so far had this exempt so it was an exempt so let's let's why don't we bring up our development services director and she can yeah she can clarify what the order was I think if I can finish I think there's a question as to what the compliance is
with whatever the Restriction was that we placed on them so wait can I finish what I was saying yes you may of course yeah yeah and so I'm just saying I I don't have a problem one way or the other and we all know how I feel about birds thank you to Mr MOS for giving me the bird deterrent um today as a gift
but um I just think that whatever it is we're going to decide um if if we're going to decide to to keep it we keep keep it for everybody and if we're not we don't I you know we kind of talked this one through back and forth once
already I brought it back so that it's fresh in Our Minds when this starts to roll around so we come to a consensus and stick to it that it doesn't become a one and one and one so your is your suggestion to eliminate it expand it
because right now the only that's exempt is single family homes yes and town homes I'm not saying that we exempt that I'm saying that right now the reason I brought it up as a discussion item is to remind us that this exists and to say that when it comes up because I'm sure
that it will we're going to need I think to act Soto voice what was that sorry Soo voice One Voice One Voice okay as and and not like you yes you know you yes you know we'll make a decision and that should be the
decision not on this block yes on that block no this project yes that one no okay okay mam director can you just remind us what the condition was with respect to I think Avalon Bay is the project that we're well before yes you may yes if we
can actually State what the code States and then what Avalon certainly can you clarify the rule today and what was required of that particular project sponsor so um it requires bir bird safe glazing treatment and that is defined as treatment may include fritting netting
permanent stencils frosted glass exterior screen physical grids placed on the exterior of glazing or UV patterns visible to birds so and then it gives like some dimensional requirements for these things so it's not like just does it apply to the entirety of a building
or the 100 fet okay B the bottom 100 feet Define the aviation zone or work and and and so what is the aviation Zone i 0 to 100 feet from bra what's the what's the significance of the aviation
zone I'm presuming that that's birds fly okay okay cuz I I did ask you the question should we apply it to the balance of the building yeah so it's not um because I believe that our conversation was this this our limitation the bottom 100 feet and it's
not that is the recommendation from the bird Aviation Society or whatever it is that puts out these recommendations okay and again in terms of the rule what uses are exempt today
the single fact family like you said in the I believe town home okay great further questions on the status of what city of play is today okay tell us about the project so Avalon Bay wasn't Exempted they have in their
uh development agreement that they comply that their drawings comply um I look through the drawings they don't provide like a list of the compliance documents but they do say that they will comply with this uh not necessarily installing glazing that's bird safe but
that they would comply with the ordinance and the ordinance doesn't really require some ASM bird safe glazing I I don't even know if that exists in all honesty it gives different you know the nettings the screens the patterns the UV filters all those
things okay okay questions of the director none okay uh what's our pleasure what you what would you like to see us what are you recommending we do by way of next steps well we all know if it was up to me
I I I wouldn't have this I I don't think it's I I to me it doesn't make sense when we started having this conversation the last time I I think it was two people not not any of us actually two people that were here that said they had ever seen a bird fly into the glass but
I the only reason I bring it up is because I think we will start seeing this again and I just want us to have it front of mind for when it does that was the only reason for that one okay and it just happened to go inside with my with my gift okay yes sir
so at at the request of one of our employees that sits in this office at the end right in front of the clerk's office they get bird strikes a lot okay so um as a say you know we are a bird sanctuary City uh we respect a lot of stuff so what I would recommend and by
the way Mark stver sent me the details of what they follow it it's convoluted right it's not clear and dating so maybe what we should as a commission is go back to our staff and really figure out what is the right requirement to follow
I mean there's there's the New York son I mean New York City otton bird safety guidelines that they follow in New York there's dark sky initiatives there's the United States Coast Guard pilot bird Coalition threat there's a lot of calculations and stuff that's out there that I don't think we've done a a really
good job of putting it together so I agree with you I think we need to figure out what's the oneop solution fix a code and move forward I would Echo that sentiment um I think there's a place for this kind of Regulation I think with the
problem is we don't understand its practical impact and so uh and I don't think when it was drafted it drafted with any understanding of what products were in the market that could actually satisfy these standards so I if I had if
I the direction I would offer is to have our development services director come back and help us understand which productss uh are in the marketplace that would satisfy our guidelines and help us understand the cost differential if
there's any between what is typical you know typical a typical window treatment right for a single family home town home and a high-rise building or mid-rise building uh and and if you can help us kind of understand the cost differential if you actually
use a uh a a market product that actually would satisfy this requirement so we have a sense of what the incremental cost is that we may be passing along by the virtue of this existence of the rule to to the to the community the building Community uh by virtue of this mandate so I think that
would be helpful information to have and maybe we find out that it's still more costly than what is already already doing and and frankly my problem with this ordinance is when I read the literature is that more than 50% of all the bird strikes nationally
are against one story structures like our city hall yes so if you actually read the report that's supported the ordinance it's not the vertical it's not the tall buildings it's birds hitting that live you know typically areas with better canopy right hitting single
family probably uh glass uh sliding doors right or or your front door that's glass and is actually has a straight visual Corridor to another open window right cuz I think they get the perception they can actually fly through that space
that's what the literature says that supported this ordinance originally so I I I mean if we're going to have the Mandate I think we should probably apply it again for me if there's the Minimus cost or really no cost differential it should apply everyone so I just want to
understand what the impact is because this ordinance as it was drafted feels a lot like virtue signaling to pass the cost on to you know vertical development and really not help solve the core of the problem which is lowrise structures so those are my thoughts
further thoughts or comments Direction no I agree okay uh we will move on Madam clerk If You Could Read M4 for the record please M M3 M3 sorry commissioner Bon solar um collectors she's on fire okay well because these
are you know what the first one was because when I learned it from the city attorney I was like everybody should know this this is fabulous um the second one we all know how I feel feel for the solar collectors we all said we were going to come back to this and we never
did um In fairness it was pointed out to me that we never did because we said we at the beginning way back we all said oh we should have a special meeting we should talk about this and then we took off running and we never did um it's it's just I think kissm for me that this
gentleman who I don't know thank you for coming today um is here saying why are we doing this um um I continue to believe that this is something that should be a homeowner's choice I
think that when you force someone to do something you are essentially saying this might not be the best thing so we're forcing you to do it if it was the best thing since sliced bread everybody would do it and forcing someone to put
something on their home because we are the government is just WR and what he said is correct and at that point we looked at it and it does raise your insurance rates in many in many ways and many times it does cancel your warranty on
your roof they we saw with some of those solar companies they were going out of business they were not doing the maintenance on the panels I mean we went on and on and on about it at that point I don't think very much has changed except I don't know about you guys my homeowners insurance policy has gotten
more expensive um because of your panels BEC because of what your panels no no no it's just because my my life just works that way um just so I I just think this should be a
choice homeowners are not stupid our residents are educated people we should not force them to do something they don't want to do hi so I I what we'll have some conversation about that what I'm hoping that um
the director will give us what the state of play is today so what's the rule to remind us because we talked about this I looked up was November 15th of 2022 was the last time we discussed it uh we haven't discussed it since so if you can R Us what's the state of play what what is it supposed to apply to and what are
we actually doing so um the rule applies to all single new single family homes and to additions I think it's over a th000 square feet and you either install solar panels and it gives you how many like how many solar panel area you have
to install or you pay into a fund uh it was later modified the the way you calculate how much you have to pay into this fund um the latest that I've seen is that it's $25 per solar available solar area and you would have to have the roof and the roof plans to calculate
that area that's pretty much what the solar panel ordinance is right now there was an attempt to put a moratorium um that didn't pass what passed and said was to have a like a meeting to discuss solar panels and that's I think what you're referring to
that never happened okay um you may go ahead since then how many houses so since November of let me see
2021 we've had soy if you can do pre-2020 pre- November of 202 to so when it in in the Inception of 2017 okay it was 44 new homes 65 got solar
permits um in January of 2022 in Jan in 2022 was when it was changed and there was a confusion about the moratorium and at that point there were 54 new homes 32 of those permits are still open um eight of the of the homes
actually installed solar panels um and 32 of the 54 permits are still open so we issued 54 permits 32 are still open meaning that we can still require that they install the solar panels or
pay into the fund so so let me2 only one had the solar so we still could pick up 31 of them basically the ones that we've lost are um 14 the ones that were sealed 14 new homes is everyone following mhm okay okay
so that's 14 out of 54 14 out of 54 okay so that's the state of that's the state of the Republic today okay now I anyone want to add some thoughts yes sir Mr Rodriguez through the mayor so in look in looking at this obviously
this so first let me go back as far as where the the solar panels go there has to be direct sunlight correct if there's a tree that puts shade on the roof they're exempt from pudding is is that correct yeah the in the
calculation of the solar available solar area any shading by structures that are not from that same property are are Exempted from that calculation so it's the responsibility of your department to go in and check that you know sunlight
is available on certain square footage so the ordinance actually puts it on the archetype that they need to submit these calculations but in the research that I've done it looks like there was a lot of confusion on how to calculate this the previous City
attorney did it for one property and I took a look at it and um yeah I don't think they did it correctly either so but it was supposed to be on the architect but we have I have not not found only that one case where they tried and they were UNS unsuccessful and
so then of the 54 none of them have given you this calculation so I guess you would have to go back now and check no not of the 54 sorry of the 32 that are open so soct because one of them already yeah yeah but there's 32 still open right now you would have to go back
and see which ones qualify and which ones are exempt if they want to pay into the fund so there because one of them installed the solar panels so if they install the solar panels we don't have to do this calculation so 31 open permits yes and you would have to go
back and would they have to do a revision with their architect and and do those calculations yes so okay so that being said I you know okay let's let's let's let's just stick to questions for now and we'll have a conversation so further further
questions none yes sorry we're we're also going to talk about Solutions a little bit further along right yes that's the idea yeah yeah but questions no questions no more questions I have a question of the eight that were
installed are you are you confident that those were installed consistent with the standard I have no reason not to be I mean they're inspected they're permitted through plans they got permits it was inspected and finalized my well we'll have a
conversation about my confidence yes you have another question so we're gonna we're GNA we're goingon to ask questions we're going to open it for public comment okay it's not a public hearing on we're open for public comment so we can recognize you sir just give me a second so I have a a quick one last question so of the 31 these are all new construction or remodels new
construction we have not been able to run REM yeah on the additions because it's not a report that we can query oh a th000 square feet or more i' have to go in one by one to see how many square feet they were in the addition so but this wouldn't include if a resident on their
own wanted to put solar panels that that wouldn't be included in this no these are uh tied to a Master permit of a new home okay okay so fair to infer from that statement that any addition that would
have exceeded the threshold have no idea whether they compli with today's rule or not correct okay okay so we're done with questions let's let's let uh members of the public come on up Sir you recognize and if someone else like to
speak just line up right behind them please good evening again I want to thank you everybody for allowing me to express my discomfort about this uh solar panel stuff there is no standard of installation installation comes from
whichever installer you pick and most of them they just do whatever they want to do basically um as I said before the insurance can go up from 12 to 15% uh the money that you invest in this system you will never recover that money
back so there's no there's no benefit in that part uh the components are all made in China some of them will work some of them will just break and you won't be able to do anything warranty won't be granted and at the end you're going to have to buy a new inverter which is
like3 $4,000 so there's no benefit in there um there's different systems you can upt to get your solar panels to feed your house uh you can get a battery pack so you load the panel I mean the batteries and then you have energy when the power goes out or you can get the system that you sell power back to fpl
but then if you want to sell power back to fpl and you're producing too much energy FPL is going to charge you to install a new Transformer in the corner because they need a new Transformer to be able to you know put that power back into the grid so there's no benefit now
um hurricanes when we have a hurricane there's debr flying all over stuff that breaks the panels panel is broken and you have to go get a new one that's it there's no nothing you can do uh the voltage coming out of the unit in
order to run the the AC unit of the house you need 240 volts most of the units that are on the market today they can only produce 120 volts so what are you using those panels for when the power goes out you cannot cook you canot
do anything so if you get natural gas which is in a lot of places around South Miami you can cook because you can get a stove that use natural gas there's there's many options like I'm doing I'm getting natural gas for my water heater pool water heater stove dryer so
everything in my house is going to be natural gas that's a better option than forcing residents to get solar panels you know um there's trees all over my house the sun move depending on the time of the year so the shade changes so some during
the time of the year some of the solar pels are going to get sun some other it's done and it's going to change so I would never get 100% efficiency on my system now my my my vehicles in my house I have to watch them like once a week because they have like a dust on top if
I get solar panels I have to hire somebody to come over my house like every three months to clean the the the the solar panel so no benefi in there I still have to put more money down um what else I've been I've seen
pickups fighting the solar panels because they see their reflection I don't know if pickups are legal or not I don't know if you guys are planning to get rid of them you can you can call us and we'll have them remove for your property sorry you can call if there if some in your neighborhood we have a we have a vendor who removes them from the RightWay oh no I want them all in my
house I'm really happy with them okay just just letting you know oh we got a lot of complaints about them I thought you were complaining about them they haven't touched my wife's car so it's fine okay there's no Chrome on your car have a problem okay yeah so send them over that's fine no he
them uh in reality there's no benefit and again there's a lot of companies that they sell you the equipment they make thousands of dollars and then they just go bankrupt because they they don't want to Grant the warranties they change the name it's the same owner but they're just going all over and change in that
all you have to do is go into Google reviews or Jael look at the reviews of solar panel companies in South Florida and you see it's basically just C okay thank you sir appreciate your time thanks I just wanted to add two things if you just in the microphone please with your name and address of the record
please my name is Sam duk my mother has um solar panels and one of the the there's two main things that people forget insurance that he brought up does go up but the second most important thing and I wanted to bring it up is
that most houses are shingles the the lifespan on shingle roof is 12 years 12 years go by really quick and guess what after 12 years we all have to change the panels and we're back to Ground Zero
thank you thank you Mr Gil wow good evening good evening Mr Mayor members of the commission my name is Gus Gill with uh address at 68 48 Southwest 68 Street
uh I'm here on two roles I'm here as a resident and uh and I'm one of those that got missed so uh lucky for me yeah apparently apparently lucky for me that I got I got saved right but I'm here to tell you that and I was here before when
this came to this commission before many of you were here this ordinance that was created two things happened and I know it's there it's in the books we got to deal with it I get it um but it was written poorly because the
percentages that you had to cover was a 35% of your bill it was not the full scale um I've I've installed it in spec homes that I've done here when it was a mandate I think it was I we threw away our money um because there was really no
benefit for it um there's no incentive for the homeowner or for for a builder um and the other thing is I I'm against anything that's a mandate on construction that is not a life safety this is not a life safety this is okay
we all want to feel good about the environment I get it is it a is it now the city's trying to get money out of this as a as money to do what with clearly not clearly not CU we've been collecting no I know I know obviously but but you you have you have collect
you were supposed to have collected some money which you didn't and by the way we never know because maybe those that were missed maybe they decided to put solar panels so maybe there was no dollars at the end of the day maybe everybody came and complied and put their solar panels Because by the way it was cheaper to put
the solar panels then buy into the into this because the the numbers that you had to do this formula nobody can figure it out so it was more expensive to put in less expensive to put in a solar panel than to actually actually pay into
the fund so if you are going to decide to bring this back or keep it and do whatever I would consider that you I would request that you consider that you first of all look at the requirements do a workshop do something
where you can talk to different vendors different people make sure that we're doing the right thing I'm all about the right thing so if we can do if we can do that fine if you always got to give an option to buy out there's houses that you know that around your neighborhood
that you know that even if I wanted to put a solar panel I couldn't put a solar panel because it's all full of oak trees and then the other thing is you have a house that's facing you know it's facing south you're going to put in the front of your house you're going to put a set of panels so that that that person is going to probably buy out which is great
if you can do that make sure that the buyout is you know in a way where you're not really hurting you're not really D just digging in just to take more dollars out of the Construction Construction continues to to increase in price there's now tariffs coming in we
don't know what's going to happen so the last thing we need to do is just add more dollars to construction I know you know these homes are expensive and so on I get it so but also is land land is also expensive you know so you know
where where you're seeing the cost of the house going up in sales you're seeing the cost of the land to acquire the land going up so I ask is that you really consider this look at it carefully restructure if you have to but
you can't keep whatever you had in the books that has to be corrected Mr Gil just informational question just back of the envelope what is on a percentage basis for one of the new homes land cost aside what's the cost of a solar array
as a total uh as a product of the total construction cost so the last one that I did um in 20 2001 20 2001 for a single family home 2001 2001 that's the last one that I did
okay I thought you said I thought you just said I thought you did I thought you just said you did aect one here 2021 sorry 202 sorry 2021 I missed the 2001 yeah I missed it two I missed it 2021 that last one that last one that I did
was about 24 $225,000 for a single and again for 35% of the consumption so it was probably 10 pounds okay and so as a as a percentage of again we understand as a percentage of the cost of the
construction in 20 in 2021 what would you put in that probably a I know probably four five% okay thank you appreciate it thank you for your time okay anyone else okay assing no one else will close
public comment on this discussion item uh colleagues uh let's let's have some discussion who wants to start commissioner Rodriguez commissioner GA who wants to follow we'll let you close Okay so for me being part of the industry
like like Gus I I I tend to agree with him putting a mandate with the the cost that we have right now going up in construction I don't think that we should be burdening our residents with mandating them to do so for example I
myself have an open permit for solar panels but I decided to do it so I wasn't mandated to do it so if an owner wants to do it I'm I'm okay with that but to mandate them I don't think I'm in in favor of that or we set an actual
moratorium and do a workshop and figure out if the homeowner wants to do it then we do it if not or do we incentivize them or is there a way out that they can buy out or or do something in order to not have to to put them but at least
give options rather than just a strong Mandate of you have to do it what we spoke about last time one of the things that always concerned me was the insurance cost and the way that if you guys remember I was always talking about insurance that a lot of insurance covers weren't covering it so I
understand where you're going with that and I agree with commissioner Rodriguez that it it it needs to we need to have options right like you might not not agree that solar panel is a good option I believe it is but I'm not going to mandate that on you I don't think that's the right thing to do I do want to see if the commission would figure out or
maybe we can ask staff to come back with the options on how we can initiate you know in incentivize the opportunities you so um I definitely don't think we need to go retroactive we missed the last whatever number by the way quick
question just yes or no did did you already get your permit approved or no come to the microphone sir it's fine come on we'll let you it's fine I don't mind no it's not I you just wanted to are are you are you actively inating are you thinking about doing this what no I
pick up my my approv plans on Friday okay and but I'm not 100% sure if the permit is there when I ask Friday if I still have to do it or not because this construction has been rolling since 2020 or something like that for five years um they told me that they just heard from
one of you guys that it's mandate yeah so that that's what blame her you almost got away with it you can blame her at the end don't blame me for putting it on the agenda you would have been fine we should have options you would have been fine no your would have been open you you owe him you ow about in my case I'm
opting for natural gas so I should have an option of picking up natural gas I already PID for natural gas I paid like $3,000 we're good so I so just just to understand so you want to understand if he's imp permitting yeah I just want to understand if he was part of the stats that we just got he's not because he's a he he said he was a home expansion and
the numbers we got were about new constru there was additions in there no there was not no there was not it was just new construction so we talked about just to be clear so we were all the same page 54 new home construction units right 31 are still in some sort of open permitting 14 have been closed out eight
had installations that magically happened of their own potion so um yes sir I think we're good thank you for clarifying so my my question I think we need to add to that data in that time frame new additions that would qualify correct but to do that we don't
we can't query how many square like it's easy for us to query new single family homes because it's in the description of the project but in the description it doesn't always give the square footage so we can't query give me everything that is more than a th000 square feet so I have to go to every single addition and look at the plans and see how many
square feet the addition was how many how many additions did we have in that time frame it should be roughly around the same amount it's not lot is what I'm saying and in the zoning in the zoning opportunities on the pages it tells you what the addition how much square foot we're adding versus what's already existing the number's not that difficult
to calculate and I don't mean it like that I'm just saying it's we should act if we're doing this for new additions we should I mean for new construction we should do the same thing for new addition I need to have that date whatever the direction is today in fairness yeah In fairness to the director I mean not she just became
aware I mean I I asked for meeting with her to talk about this item before this discussion so we I could come somewhat informed and it was I think a result fair to say as a result of that request you started looking into the program and realized holy cow we haven't really been
enforcing the ordinance so that's just it just became it just came to her attention within the last week so in the last week she's done this analysis we can certainly ask her to do the analysis on I just again so everyone understands and we're not beating up on sarami and and I know that's not your intention so
but uh the point the point being if we want to give her the direction to do the same analysis on on exp on any uh any addition over 1,000 ft certainly I think she'd be happy to do it and I don't think it's a th000 sare feet I think it's 50% of the current whatever the
current yeah or a thousand because I think a th is the first when you would need the first solar array or something like that so yeah whatever what yeah and we and if the direction is to yes move forward with anything that hasn't received the co then we would go through every single addition also and make sure
that we pick them all up so that we're doing this correctly ly I would correct this my my point mayor is that if all these people went through this process not knowing they actually had to pay they go through this whole process they're about to start construction or they're in the construction phase I don't think it's fair that we go retroactive and make sure that they have
this new added cost you know that's not fair so that's all I wanted to say make sure he's included as well understood yeah let me go back commiss Cory yeah I would also agree with that I just would feel very uncomfortable having people have to come back and and pay this and I know last time we decided that we were
going to have our own special meeting on it I would personally feel a little bit more comfortable if staff did come back to us with some recommendations on how we could potentially update this uh ordinance to be a little bit more um you know applicable and take into
consideration some of the things that have happened between the time that it was first brought on to now um just to make it a little bit more relevant to today and avoid some of these issues that we've had I think that we could definitely come back with something that I mean I think perhaps this was a good
step in 2017 when it was first brought and it was adopted but today there's so much more that could be done and the mayor actually sent me an article it was very good and I prepared a little presentation because in reality I think that and what we're trying to get to is energy efficient homes or more
sustainable homes the Green living all these things and there are a lot of other things that could be done that are not done today but used to be done 60 years ago when air conditioning wasn't as prevalent as it is today and they actually work better so the
solar is good as it for the energy you do use it's a cleaner it's renewable but there are things that you could do just to lower your energy consumption and that should be what we should really incentivize and I have a presentation on that also that I wanted to show you
honestly if that's the direction that you all want to go commissioner Rodriguez now I just have a quick question do you have a presentation today I'm sorry yeah it's really short it's just to show you like some examp examples and I actually um took the images from these are actual um homes in
day County okay that use these passive methods I just have a very quick then we'll go to the presentation very quick question so this solar fund that we have right I I know there's nothing in there where is that money supposed to go to supposed to be used on City projects
that are to install solar pretty much yeah so basically we would use that money to to put solar in our own buildings yes so then what happens after those buildings have solar and then we still keep collecting I'm just saying that's I will
let you know a problem if that happens a problem we don't have and at the rate we're going probably never going to have so um yeah go ahead so this is exploring passive design strategies which is um things
that Architects could do and by the way that picture on the left is actually one of these style homes that uses all these passive methods and basically you want to maximize the natural light you want to optimize thermal Comfort enhance the air flow using thermal Mass which is basically the the heat gain like
materials that can hold heat and release it slowly so that you don't have these big fluctuations in temperature and then M minimize energy consumption that's where you would be looking into your solar panels um the yeah I just go back one second the
natural light is important and the optimizing thermal comfort and the air flow because a lot of houses today put um windows that are not operable and that is completely against like the green type of design you want windows that you can open that have screens so
you get air flow you want to have interior Courtyards you want to have water features you want to site the house on the property so that it's not facing the major windows are not facing in the west direction or in the southern Direction so there's a lot that could be done to minimize your energy consumption
and then whatever energy you do use you could use solar or whatever it is and we could incentivize solar so I go that in the next slide please so this is actually a house um it's called the prairie house and one of the things that they did is using the green roofs this
uh helps to keep the the your the the house cooler or keep the temperatures from fluctuating very much they also have um skylights for the natural light they have water features in the interior they have a lot of courtyards a very expensive home but I have a picture of a
home that is not this in Kendall that they actually did something um a home that they claim that it uses a six of the power of a regular home so for the the solar panels uh they do drastically reduce your electricity consumption and as I said it's not fossil fuels it's
renewable it's clean so if you are going to use energy that would be what you want to use but that shouldn't be your only requirement if you want to really promote green sustainable homes um um having porches and deep overhangs goes a long way to keeping your walls from being getting very hot and heating up
the inside of the house uh operable Windows which I already discussed the shade trees it's it's sad to see somebody cut down trees in order to put solar panels um because if you've ever been out in the sun and then gone under a tree in the shade you know right away
that that is the best thing to cool yourself off is to be in the shade and of course the Water Resources any water features that you have in the house help you cool it down next slide um that house there on the left is a house that is also a sustainable home
uses all the same features the the Deep overhangs they have the wooded lot they have um operable windows so I mean these are all things that that we want to incentivized and I put there how you do it you've got permission from the heral to use all these images correct
absolutely so the solar panels uh we could incentivize use of solar panels by maybe not having permit fees for solar panels like your permit feet would be waked if you install solar panels uh if you have porches and deep overhangs a lot of times that counts towards your F
we could um not count it towards the F so we incentivize the use people putting deep overhangs and um especially the the porches yes um operable windows we could reduce or even not have permit fees if
you switch from these um Windows like this to operable Windows um the shade tree trees there's a minimum number of trees that you need to have on the lot but if a owner decides to put additional ones additional cha trees I believe that the city is looking to install more sha
trees and we could donate those trees to those homeowners so that they do um put more than whatever the minimum requirement is or if they want to salvage trees I have people that come in all the time that they have to cut down a tree because the architect had zero consideration towards the trees on the
site and um there are ways to design around these trees we i' I've done it in The Gables so I mean I know that it's doable it's been done in the Grove uh and we can incentivize that by being um promoting like allowing them to have smaller setbacks or whatever it is that
they need in order to accommodate building around a specimen tree I'm not saying any little twig but you know if you have a specimen sha tree that we would be able to incentivize keeping it by working with their setbacks and things of that nature and then the water sources I mean it could be used for
irrigation they could have um on-site retainage that could be used for their irrigation but can also be a water feature in the property um next that was it so I would love to see I have a real passion for this by the way as you can tell but uh I would love to see the city
not just do away with the solar panel ordinance but to really go a step further and really incentivize find ways of incentivizing this more green Construction and design you may or do you want to have the last word oh I have the last I was
you're the sponsor so I was going to give you the last word okay I'll take the last word anybody else want to say something yes sir or questions I I think that's great see offering you know incentives to provide it is is now we're
getting somewhere where I think the homeowner would be more willing to do it at the same time you can get um tax rebates from it you get 30% for doing so the 30% along with whatever the city we
can come up with that now will motivate a homeowner to do something like that so I'm that was a great presentation thank you so I I'll just say a couple things and then we'll turn it over to you [Music] um I I I don't have a heartburn with
mandates we mandate things at governments all the time sometimes against the obvious need that people feel that you know seat belts are a perfect example right there are other societal benefits associated with some mandates that said I don't like mandates that have a single option and this is a
single option mandate and so I think what we the conversation I've had with the development services director is the heartache I have about this ordinance which I think was well intentioned is that um the southeast and Southwest United States exist in their current form because we've developed very
sophisticated mechanical systems that have allowed them to be developed the way they're being developed right so our houses are very very sophisticated in terms of their you know their their mechanical systems to cool heat Etc and I think we design our Architects design
with that as the back stop and so I think we've gotten away from a lot of traditional practices like Orting your garage on the west side of your home because when you come home in the evening and you park your car that's the hottest part of the house and you keep your bedrooms on the east side because the coolest part of the lot right so
there are things that we've gone away from as a matter of practice because we' become too dependent on mechanical systems to solve our Cooling and our heating issues so I I'd like to have an array of options with the goal of reducing energy consumption for the aage
home in South Miami right I think it's fine for us to have a sustainability standard that speaks to that as a goal and if he wants to solve it one way with natural gas or someone else wants to solve it with solar panels or someone wants to do it with passive design techniques that have architecture that's
more suited to the built environment the the environment that we live in I think those are all equally valid ways to get to the same result but I think we do need to set a standard as to what we want an outcome for our built environment and so I I I don't I personally after living this experience
now for 2 years will say definitively that we do not have the capacity as an organization to manage the current program I don't think we have the capacity as an organization to help us design this solution I think we all want at some level we all want to be good
stewards of the environment and so what I would suggest is if we're serious about doing something in the space that we invest invest some dollars and I think the obvious thing is to go to the University of Miami and say hey uh Dean Shia who was highlighting this article
you mentioned we like to retain you your students to a design studio help us and there they've got plenty of Engineers over there as well to help us figure out how we can come up with a sustainability standard for South Miami for all types of building types that helps us do right
by our society in terms of energy consumption energy consumption reduction over the long term uh at this point given what we've given what we've what's happened in terms of the our application or management of the current ordance I have no problem with a
moratorium because effectively we've been operating under one for the last years two years uh and I will say this to the manager I've said to this to him via email I've said to the director I am tired of discovering that these problems
arise and because of our own inability to take accountability for our jobs right so we do have we have excellent staff here with very few exceptions we've had issues with not timely applying for transportation grants because people have not taken ownership for their job in this job I think this
is a perfect example of people not taking accountability and ownership with their job because if there's any confusion about whether a moratorium was passed or not right all one needs to do is raise her hand and ask and that man could have given her given that person
an answer or the director could have inquired but I am tired I will not sit here in this chair and and be the titular leader of an organization where people are not accountable for doing their job and so I do expect although I have no Authority
Under the charter to require it I do expect some sort of report about whatever discipline is levied against the people who are responsible for what is a debacle frankly because like the rule not like the rule the rule is in
place and we live and die by the rules place that's the society that we have chosen to live in right the Society of laws so I expect some accountability on that point and with that I've said my piece I think we should if we want to do something here thoughtful uh we should
probably ask for some help and I would ask the development services director bring back a proposal to retain a third party consultant to look at a possible standard and in the inter room I certainly would support a moratorium Madam commissioner you're
recognized well Slappy cracker you want to give me a chance to say anything people gez like you get the clothes yeah I get the clothes like okay I I think in all
fairness you you got the lecture and you weren't here for the party um I I believe no matter what we do it should be an incentive not a Mand dat I
think we are all adults in this room as the mayor so clearly pointed out everybody has a job to do and when you have a job to do that means you are an adult um if you are a homeowner that also means you are
an adult as adults I do not believe we need to be mandated to in our own homes so I look forward to seeing a proposal or what your ideas are to go to the University of Miami or
whoever it is that you feel would be great in helping us figure out real next steps to something that works that doesn't penalize our residents they deserve better thank you to to the City attorney
uh if we wanted to adopt a moratorium procedurally what must we do we need to have it's we'll do it by we'll have to do it by ordinance I'll just emergency ordinance yeah yeah we could probably do that yeah I mean you're directing us to bring it back I I
think is there Madam well I want to call you madam Vice May again commissioner Bon is there a desire in your part to see a moratorium put in place with respect to the current program so we dispense with the 31 or 32 that are in limbo I and we figure out what we do in
the interim I think that the moratorium should apply to anything that was was permitted from the time that we had that conversation to today whether it's an addition or a new or or new so it would be more than those 50 something so
anything that's been permitted from that point to now should be part of that moratorium okay so I I think in I'm moving forward yeah no so that's why I want I think we're clear moving forward I just want to ask the City attorney because I think the sentiment is to essentially exempt those permits from
the requirement so those correct correct yeah we'll see how we how we do it but we get what you're trying to get to the general direction so you know so I guess we bring back an item on April 1st okay to deal with cleaning up the mess that we have today right and then
adopt a moratorium and how long do we want to give ourselves because that is the next question for what gentlemen and ladies well for for the moratorium I I think that's a question correct it's a question for all of us yes do we want to try 180 days to
start yeah that should be more than enough I mean I'll be calling you I'm tomorrow okay so if you can bring it back for 180 days um Mr City attorney unless there's an objection is that we pretend like 180 days can we give it to each other in months so that we're not
pretending yeah I know but like sorry months six months it's what else sorry 360 days to go around I mean like what you think that's a little too far I think yeah why wouldn't why don't we do this why don't we say you're going to start working on it and you'll give us
an update in two months and let us know where you're at and that way we can hear about it every two months so that it stays front of mind for us agree with that okay if that's the direction so we'll do it so we're not putting a time limit on the moratorium I think that as as we learn
more we we then can have a better idea if we even if we put a moratorium it would be arbitrary right now because it's all arbitrary so it's just we're just picking a time to give ourselves a deadline to try to hit with a resolution so we can do it for 60 days and then extend it for another 60 days or we can
do it I would just say just give it give us the full amount and if we take less time great if we need more time we'll deal with it then through do the me yes let me I think the City attorney wants to jump in for clarification just a thought I I have less concern about the timing of this uh because this is not
this is not going to result in an inverse condemnation claim because we're not impos osing a requirement or limiting development what we're doing is eliminate we're basically putting a moratorium on ourselves in terms of enforcing something so it's it's like the opposite situation of most
moratoriums okay so if you want to make it indefinite we can make it indefinite I was going to say six months why go every two months and say okay we got to extend it okay we got to extend it let's just do 6 months and if we it's shorter it's shorter if it's longer it's
longer let's not be doing six months Comm Mr G where are you then let's just do six months and she'll give us an update okay that's fine so let's do for 10 six months say 100 days again thank you okay any further
discussion okay seeing none and thank you for bringing the item because otherwise we would not have discovered the issue we're having so thank you you're welcome okay uh if you can read item M4 please yes County zoning application number z222
0118 okay do we need a refresher on this item from staff or are we all clear as to what we're discussing okay so we adopted a resolution today is the intention of the sponsor to who who sponsored this item
I'm sorry did you C attorney uh we brought it back because the hearing is on Thursday okay and just want to know if there was additional Direction um essentially they their proposal our resolution originally opposes the
application and specifically or or particularly the potential for that application to result in a connection between I believe it's 60th Place uh and 60th Court uh that connection that would connect to Miller and we the discussion
last time was that it it could encourage cut through traffic um their application seeks the resoning but it also seeks a non-use variance to avoid that dedication they don't want to dedicate it either have other probably my understand the applications also changed
that they've now filed for an development alternative under the affordable uh the affordable density program at the county I don't see that it's not it's not in the public hearing file okay they have now filed as an alternative oh as an as an administrative administrative
application yes so should this should they not get what they want their intention is to build more units uh under the program and do it administra the affordable program correct the workforce housing the workforce housing density bonus program through the county through the county that's correct let's see what we can
find so I I was going to suggest given that change right I think the better posture for us is not to oppose the application because it may result in more density and simply just object to the condition which I think is really the source of the most of the concern on the
part of the neighborhood which is the road closure or the road road reopening so I think we should modif we our resolution from what 2023 attorney we uh we opposed no our resolution opposed both the 24 the application and and the closure yes yeah
was February yes that's that's that's what was in the packet so I thought we had modified it just to oppose a condition but I have not looked at the minutes from the meeting so the way the resolution was transmitted was as an objection to the application and the road opening so I I would simply suggest that
we resolve to oppose staff's condition to reopen the right of whatever the street is yes sir I I would also ask the commission if if we can can we uh direct the city attorney's office to have someone go to the commission meeting on
Thursday and state on the city of South Miami's behalf what we're also reemphasizing if that's okay with the commission I I have I have no objection yes ma'am this in that area has become extremely
contentious the unifying I would well contentious with the developer of that the neighbors are extremely United um this has it it's so do you do you agree with I I
agree with commissioner gay that they they are our neighbors and whatever happens there affects us they our it's our neighborhoods what's up as well that's what I'm saying it's our neighborhood when when you've got that
when they decide to take what is now one property and let's say they break it up into acre lots which is what is around them that makes sense okay you're going to make it then you know I'm gonna I'm making this up three4 acre lots okay
that makes sense then they're saying oh you're you don't want to do what we want to do well then we're going to make it affordable housing so it's like it's like they're trying to Ram it down their throats so there's lawyers here lawyers there and I I don't want us to get stuck in the middle but but I I I agree with
commissioner Caya that our residents have to have some kind of voice there as well and they're the ones that originally I don't know if you remember they originally came here to us so we should have something further thoughts no can can I just give you one more piece of one more data point please
you mentioned the the affordable housing um I just looked it up I found it based on what you just said uh there is a Workforce housing uh at administrative application pending and it would provide for so their their public hearing
application seeks to put 12 Lots um this would provide for eight Lots with basically duplexes on each lot 16 units right it would be four more units than the other one with a unit type that is inconsistent with the
character of the neighborhood yes yes it's what we it's what we have on the west side of my neighborhood so I look I think the better part of discretion here better part of valor's discretion and I don't think that it's wise for us first to go in and comment on everybody else's applications
and their jurisdiction because certainly people will take liberties with us in the future and secondly I think really the galvanizing Point has been the road closure from what I've heard to a person people are fine with the eight or 12 homes for the most part with the exception of the fact that they're going
to have now the street reopen that's going to bring in their mind more cut through traffic so I think we're much better off if we just oppose the condition and stay silent on the or or withdraw our objection to the application um because if if in fact we
Prevail we may end up helping create a worse condition for the neighborhood that's my two cents so but I'll entertain uh a motion on the part of anyone who would like to make one so I'll I'll I'll make a motion to have the city's attorney's office uh
with the caveat that the mayor just said and removing the uh what is it the word they yeah I I would limit our objection I limit our objection to the imposition of the condition requiring the reopening of the roadway so you you'll move that is there a
second I'll second that second by commissioner bonage okay any further discussion seeing none do uh Madam clerk if you can call the role yes commissioner K yes commissioner Rodriguez yes commissioner B yes Vice May Cory yes mayor Fernandez yes
five through thank you okay um I I there's anyone here in the audience on a particular item please let um the clerk know but I I know we have folks here on items three and five so I'm going to move to item three Madam clerk if you can read that um resolution to the
record that is a public hearing item yes a resolution of the mayor City Commission of the city of sth for the approving sfm janitor services LLC for janitor services for up to a 5year term authorize the city manager to negotiate and to enter into an agreement for
janitor services for the city thank you um mam city manager do you want to give us a brief overview yes thank you um so solicitation was issued for janitorial services we had 21 respondents 20 of which were responsive um for to clean
all City facilities Community Center Silva Martin City Hall Police Department the building of Marshall Williamson Senior Center study facilities uh there was a committee that was comprised of a member from the Police Department Public Works and Parks um they overall ranked
five highest and they interviewed those five ultimately um the recommendation tonight is to uh award sfm the award there was one main thing that was discussed um at length currently we have an issue with
turnover um and sfm as part of their presentation spoke about the pay for their employees the benefits lack of turnover and obviously the Deep bench that they have being a reputable company so um the five were ranked and the recommendation tonight is to move
forward with sfm and man manager on that point you're weing to turn over with the incumbent provider not with sfm correct correct yeah just wanted to clarify that okay yes any questions of the manager commissioner Rodriguez no I have a okay no questions to the manager then let's open up the public hearing and then
we'll we'll discuss the item uh this is uh item three is a public hearing item any member of the public who'd like to address this Commission on item three is welcome to come forward at this time is there anyone in the audience who' like to come forward seeing no one we will close the
public hearing Madam clerk is there anyone online no one's online okay so uh seeing no one online we will close the public hearing commissioner Rodriguez uh through the mayor so thank you in in
reviewing um this RFP we have a we have a great company in sfm who was ranked number one to to get this this this contract in addition we have a number
two company F who's a woman-owned business and in studying this further there is an opportunity where we can split this contract and it'll actually save the city
money because in certain buildings for example like City Hall campus you have sfm who gave better pricing but then you go to the community center and FL gave better pricing so the purpose of this is I'm asking the commission would you be
open to move forward with a motion to give the city manager the approval to negotiate these contract between these two companies which will a um you know give sfm which they deserve it would
also be um awarding a woman-owned business to work for the city which I think is good for the city and it's going to save the city money okay so so just so I understand what you're proposing you want to this was bid with a schedule of values by facility so you want to take the lowest pricing with
respect to those two vendors prospective vendors on each of the facilities correct and award that facility on a lowest price basis to I responsib bter correct and and the motion is to to allow the the the manager to negotiate
the contract and and and go through okay with each building and yes perfect okay just to the City attorney is there are we is that legally permissible just to clarify for the record sure we in in the bid documents with the city reserves the right to enter to contracts with more
than one contractor okay believe that is and if I can ask do we know how much we would be saving what what because what What's the total value of the contract right now so it's a three-year contract so in the first year it's 130,000 okay so to staff is there is what what if we
did it this way have you guys discussed with the commissioner what the savings would be in year one that which is what was calculated the savings are approximately 46,000 okay soal 4599 I'm I'm totally on board with ITA so questions yes sir uh I was just curious
will the vendor still honor the contract if it's split or will the prices potentially increase per per unit or I guess that's something we'll have to figure out if we bring it to them right and we do have the vendor for sfm we have
the okay good evening just your name and address to the record please good evening Christian Infante with sfm Services 7500 Northwest 74th Avenue Medley Florida so the question is would we honor the rates um yes we would
honor the rates uh you know obviously we would like all of the contract but we would uh respect your decision uh to save uh funds for the for the city um however we would have uh one ask and that would be if we can um change the
agreement currently it is a three-year contract and we would respectfully request to make it a one-year contract or leave it as a three-year with uh um termination Claus by either party just to clarify that point we I'm
assuming we have a termination for convenience clause in favor of the city that's typically our process and you're asking for reciprocal termination right that is correct okay now to ask you are there not are there are the escalators in the pricing of concern to you I do believe there are
incremental incremental costs escalators in the a little bit of a concern from an operational standpoint the way um that it's been s uh suggested uh also also the um the community center uh it might be also beneficial for the number two uh
contractor because uh when I looked at some pricing um I noticed that they were about almost 100% lower so um not that my price is dead on but you know it is a bit of a red flag qu question um Mr St
any concerns about and and I and I would ask you what would be a minimum I think we would need some sort of a reasonable advanced notice for that termination just so we could obviously make accommodations with the other vendor if we to do that so would n would
90 days or be acceptable to you yes okay days work colleagues any concerns about that so basically we would be giving them the ability to terminate the contract with 90 days advanced notice to us so one question about the term that gentleman uh raised uh right now it is
set up as a three-year term I would leave the term the same I think I think if we I think his his concern was really to have a option to terminate got it okay okay I've got no objection to the modification anyone else okay thank you very much sir appreciate it and thank you for everything you do in the
community I know you're a big sponsor of a lot of Charities here thank you thank you okay colleagues further comments do we have a motion then so uh I guess City attorney I guess the motion would be to allow approve the
city manager to negotiate both contracts with both compan the the one contract between both companies can I maybe help a little bit there and say just to so I think we're we want to make an award and authoriz a manag to negotiate based on do do we have a schedule of I guess the lowest price
schedule of values yes right for each of the first two respondents each getting the respective facilities at which they provided the lowest price okay okay y okay so we have the commission the a motion by commissioner
Rodriguez is there a second a second thank you uh vice mayor has seconded the motion any further discussion hearing none Madam clerk if you can call the role please yes commissioner Rodriguez yes commissioner
Bon yes commissioner Cay yes Vice May Coran yes mayor Fernandez yes item passes 5 as amended thank you okay moving on to item five please if you can read that for the record item five res of the mar and City Commission of the city of South Florida approving the
operation and Management Services for Youth and Adults Swim Lessing and Aquatic Fitness programs from IAM Academy llt for a 5-year term authorizing city manager to negotiate and enter into an agreement for Youth and adults Welles and aced fitness
program management services at Murray Park aced Center thank you madam clerk Madam manager you recognized thank you the city received two proposals for youth adult swim lessons and Aquatic programming out of Murray Park uh the committee ultimately uh gave the award
to the incumbent I swim Academy the proposals over a fiveyear term thank you can you just summarize a term for the benefit of the public so it's five years five years $660,000 would be the contribution to the city for the five
years the programs they run are youth swim listens Fitness classes private Fitness classes and then the pool is also available for open swim During certain hours in the day okay great this item is a public hearing item uh we'll open up the public hearing to anyone who'd like to address this Commission on item five which is the award of a
contract for uh Youth and adult swim lessons at our and Aquatic Fitness programs at the Murray Park Pool any member of the public like to come forward please do so at this time anyone on Zoom please raise your virtual
hand okay seeing No One in the Chamber and no one online we will close the public hearing colleagues any questions of the manager yes commission Rodriguez you're recognized um to the uh through the mayor the the pricing for for the
classes and for the lessons um that that's all provided by the the vendor right or is that something that we helped establish that pricing was in response to the proposal okay I think we established the minimum for the discount
which was 20% for residents is that correct yeah current currently there is no disc resident discount this new proposal requires a resident discount versus non-resident okay so the residents are getting a discount on yes thank you Mr vice mayor and uh there's a
number of scholarships they provide too is that right they will provide 20 scholarships for open swim annually over the five years okay just wanted to recognize is that group swim classes that's 20 a year or 20 over the life of the contract 20 a year okay thank you
for the clarification further questions okay I've got I've got a couple questions did you have anything sorry okay um other observations so any discussion on the item debate no I I just wanted to ask staff if we could u
in this contract um I spoken to the director about this incorporate we have routinely set up a conflict between this paid for program and uh an organization that in the summer wants to use the pool for like a
general swim or classes for folks who are not familiar with water at all and that organization is branches just to put it very directly and so I just want to make sure that we in the the schedule that was published we did I think advertise hours in the RFP where where they would be allowed to do that so I
would like to reserve if we can one morning a week in the Summer where we allow them an hour and a half of access in that window yes please come forward if You' like and um just so they can access our pool again I think I think the vendor does a fantastic job I hear nothing but positive things about the
program they have run already but I do know that there's been that conflict I think of our own creation so sir you're recognized thank you very much uh my name is Nicholas pevaca I'm the owner of iwim Academy um I had the privilege of watching your previous meeting a month
ago when my thing was on the manager's report but we didn't get to it I get it uh kudos to you mayor and the rest of this board I was I was a former Schoolboard cop I've been in a lot of Schoolboard meetings last meeting that you all endured was a challenge to say the least and the
professionalism from you5 was impressive so you for representing I know that you're not the city that I live in but you're in the county that I live in I love this city that I get to work in um so thank you that was awesome to watch uh local government work in that manner
your response was tremendous Chief yours as well um every other Saturday now we we've this is this will be my 10th year that we've operated the first four we were on a single contract annual contract and then we just closed out the first five
year and now we've been awarded this second five year thank you very much um we've had a lot of ideas we've had some come to fruition we've never ever ever not done way more than 20 uh scholarships um I will teach your kid to
swim for free if you can't afford it no money should not be an issue for stuff like this uh and and and that's a big part of me uh I recruit money from all sorts of different uh people uh your Rotary Club has been a big contributor over the the South Miami Rotary Club uh
I partner with Carla Richie at Miami Kids magazine the Coral Gables Rotary Club has been a big contributor for us uh there's a South Miami resident that has been a private contributor for many years uh my mother you know I'm a I'm a fortunate person at this stage of my
life I I pay for a lot of stuff my wife and I do My Mother Does my aunt does my mom guilts everybody she's a former Schoolboard principal so she knows the PTA game so she gets people to donate um so that's a big part what I want to do this year in direct relation and I
apologize for that long tangent it's fine but every other Saturday we're going to offer three hours of free training um one will be for new parents well not new yeah new parents like babies we used to do a big mommy and me class when I was younger we did it here
a little little bit but we've kind of lost it I want to bring that back uh then the so we'll do like from 9: to 10 on a Saturday we'll do mommy and me free full free and I'll if I have to pay for staff to be there I will I don't care uh
and then like 10 to 11 will be uh non-swimmers that are afraid or whatever and then maybe 10 to 11 I mean 11: to noon will be non-swimmers that are not afraid or we'll split it up kids and adults we'll see how the response gets we've we've done plenty of as um I'm sure this
plenty of people here in the city are aware we've done plenty of free offerings and advertising and and all sorts of things getting people to show up and take advantage of that free has been a little bit more complicated than offering it um but you know I'm
committed to to uh sharing in your guys Vision as far as what you know Murray Park it's our little small slice of our Heaven um but I'm committed to helping this community out whatever it needs like I've I've continued to do it we we without making a big deal out of it if that makes any sense but Nick I'm not
I'm not I'm sorry to being formal but I I have a hard time pronouncing your last name SOA B think drink the water be AUA but thank you that's helpful so I drink the water as I teach kids not to I guess so Mr B AUA I think I'm not asking you to do anything more because I think you
do a tremendous amount for free um what I do want what I do want to do I mean and the history of this pool is was a hard one we it took us a long time to actually build the facility right and so I want to make make sure that the community was intended to benefit in
large measure um the one organization that when I was in the state house or running for the state senate or serving in this community that I know I could call and this is best example for me during the pandemic to put resources in the hands of families living in South Miami because they had Direct contact
with 80 families was branches and so I was and it wasn't bothered you or the department I was actually bothered with them because I found out that they were having this issue and they told me that you know for me it was $1,200 to get into um's pool I said well you should have just called me and I would have written you a check for the 1,200 bucks
not they want to do that every day but it's important enough to me to make sure that people who don't have access to instruction can get it and I think that's consistent with the history of building this facility in this community and so I just want to make sure if there's a if there's a possibility I know I don't know what impact it may
have to you I mean the the revenues we get for this are not that significant again but all revenue is right uh programmatically if there's one hour an hour and a half on a weekday in the in the Summer where we can kind of coordinate to get them in the pool in
the mornings and the reason I think it's been a conflict for them in the afternoons when we have more open swim is that the weather is pretty valuable here in the Summers there's probably more how many how many kids I I I don't I don't think it's more than 20 kids that they're bringing at a time we can get those details no problem if we can I just want to make sure that
contractually it's not a problem with you we have kind of created this issue can we write an addendum or have to I if you're open to that I'd appreciate that i' just like to create the programmatic flexibility to do that yeah yeah we'll figure if not then whatever but I would also suggest to you from like noon to
3:30 it's City's pool I I don't I know you do yeah stuff like that um Fridays we we've adjusted so traditionally or previously since since I started doing this in 1992 we've done five days half an hour each day the world wants things
to change so we've adjusted we now do four days four days days so Fridays is another day during the week that's a week day that could we could easily accommodate what you're asking great so if it's not in the contract and I have to sign an addendum I will we'll take in
your word and we'll work with it okay thank you for everything you do sir okay colleagues with that is there a motion on item five I'll move it is there a second you got it I'm sorry you want to say something no no no was going to move it okay oh a motion by the vice mayor yes
and second by commissioner bonich second okay thank you so we have a motion by the vice mayor second by commissioner bonich and commissioner Rodriguez Madam clerk if you can call the role please yes commissioner C yes commissioner bonich yes commissioner Rodriguez yes
vice mayor Cory yes mayor Fernandez yes IEM passes thank you is there anyone else in the audience here for any particular item if you want to raise your hand and let me know okay okay Jerry sir what item are you here on okay so let's take that item next
because I think there's a few folks here for it okay uh so Madam clerk I believe that's item six if you can read that into the record please yes in ordinance of the mayor City Commissioner of the city of South Florida admitting the future land use map of the future land use element of the city of South M
comprehensive plan pursuing to small scale Amendment procedures set forth in Section 163 3187 Florida Statutes to change the future land use designation of certain processs on the west side of 62nd Avenue between Southwest 64th
Street to the north and Southwest 68th Street to the south from their current designation of residential limited commercial RLC to mixed use commercial residential mucr thank you madam clerk Mark you're recognized
good evening mayor and commission this is Mark Alvarez with the quino group um as a planning planning consultant to City staff um what's up tonight is item R six and it's a feal land use Amendment
to the city's future land use map um this is a this is a small scale Amendment so it will tonight is on a second reading so if it passes tonight it would be adopted it does not have to be transmitted to the State um it is City it is sponsored by the city
Administration what we're doing is we're amending only the map we made changes already to the Future land use element or the text of the city's comprehensive plan in making those changes we crossed through certain districts that we felt
that we would no longer need we wanted to broaden the districts and give them give a little more room and control up more through the zoning this was one of those there's so what we are doing is we're replacing the um RLC category residential limited
commercial to mixed use commercial residential both are mixed use technically and they um just as a sidebar I think it might come up both categories would be applicable for live local applications so we're not making
any changes of that sort um the change is also something that's consistent that we we we went through a lot when we did the downtown sdd zoning we talked a lot about the edges we talked about how to transition the edges to the residential neighborhoods some of that was done
within the tsdd code some of it depended on certain transitional elements that we put in later so what we're doing now is we're we're sort of cleaning up some of those elements before we go to further processes with zoning and and comprehensive plan so we had some
workshops during the the middle the Summer and Autumn or in Florida the summer and and later part of last year um and we did discuss this and this item was something that we discussed to move to mixed use commercial residential as
part of the transition from the downtown on the west side of 62nd Avenue or the the tstd as we would move to the residential area um the affected Land There are 16 Parcels totaling about
2.79 Acres um they are all along the west side of Southwest 62nd Avenue going from Hardy Road to 68th Street on the east side of that actually I think is a context slide yeah I think the map works
better on the east side of that we have downtown zoning we have the tsdd for most of those properties um when we finalized the height limits most of those Heights th directly across would come in at about six
stories County property notwithstanding because the county has some flexibility as to what they do um again Mark to clarify you're talking about the east side of 62nd AV not the subject properties okay correct um on the west side we have a residential single family
residential neighborhood twostory limit um to the north across the the Freedom Wall we have also single family and then to the South those two blocks to the south of this are also tsdd or the downtown zoning so this was intended to
be a transition um what we have right now along there is it's a very underdeveloped um Parcels for downtown area we would like to see them develop at some point it's all one story it's a lot of parking lots a lot
of vacant space I think Marco drugs is the only thing that's gone in there in the last decade or more um so we would like to include it as our transition area to the downtown we would like it to be in mixed use we would would like to invite development
of a very limited form of residential along with the mixed use or the commercial limited commercial on the ground floor mix use a little bit above it again we're looking at a transition mostly between six stories to two stories so we're not thinking a we're
outside of those bounds what I do have to say is that we don't have the zoning in place for this category so mucd will be currently if we if we approve change in this to mucd on the comprehensive plan the zoning stays the
same and the zoning is limiting this all of these properties to two stories commercial when we have further discussions we have a lot more work to do with the resoning we will be discussing the zoning that will fit into
the mucd right now we we started doing it last year we got sidetracked on townhouse and some other things and we never got to it um but we will get to that and we will have a very vigorous discussion about what fits for this area in terms of height in terms of the transitional elements of the
architecture in terms of the uses the density um there will be other areas that will be mucd which will vary we planned on using it for Bird Road a little aside from this but so we will have a very very strong and vigorous and wellth thought out discussion with the
neighborhood about what we use to control this area as far as the zoning goes this is just a comprehensive plan change so that we can effectively take care of the fact that we are crossing through this District on our comprehensive plan yeah the sister and
and allow us to move forward into the zoning um that's the map of everything I just said the on the map it basically changes from the salmon color to the pink color uh I explained it you know this is what we're doing we're creating this transition the purple that you see is the downtown zoning the tsdd that's
already passed uh through the first reading we're waiting on on the state to respond to us and we'll be having a second reading on that um again just looking at the map we have two on the very North Area we do have single family
across the street that's in the culdesac um not far from the mango Lots where there are single family residential the light purple is the JRE Le school um it's a County property it may at some point be reded um we we don't NE you know again it's
County Properties and they have a little more latitude about what they do um the light I'm sorry the the purple area is the um the senior living living facility and then the green is um Park so again
this is all about transition but right now all we're doing is comprehensive plan language to or comprehensive plan map changes to try to give us the envelope to work with within when we get to the zoning and here I have a table that shows what we are currently at with
the RLC limited residential category for the comprehensive plan on the on the most left hand column the one next to it is mucr which works is what we're recommending to change it to again still a mixed use category but we're letting
the zoning control it the mucr doesn't have a lot of control that just has the concept of a mixed use and we intended to to control that with the zoning so right for right now it would stay as NR which is a neighborhood retail it's it's actually still consistent with MCR it
would limit it to a 025 F which is approximately what's there now it wouldn't allow for much more development and uh it would only allow two stories and 25 ft and then we will have a discussion about what we intend to do with the zoning on that which we're not for now calling neighborhood mixed use
and we'll determine all of the parameters at that point for the actual zoning um all that said we we always apply certain standards to make sure that our comprehensive plan changes are consistent with state requirements and we find it consistent and if there's any
questions further are I'll be happy to answer thank you questions okay Mark again because a lot was said sure that folks may have not followed all of it the zoning today controls
and so we're limited to a two-story envelope with no residential permitted what even if we adopt this when we if when we adopt this change if we were to do it right the overlaying zoning only limit limits the properties to be developed to two stories and there's no
residential allowed under the current zoning correct on the current so that's and that's not being affected by us voting to approve this item not being you said that I think you said that but I didn't it was not expressly c a different way okay no problem so uh
again colleagues no questions okay let's open up the item for public hearing uh this is a public hearing item uh anyone like to address this Commission on item six please come forward at this time sir your name and address for the record please good evening uh Mr Mayor
members of the commission Jerry Proctor attorney 7600 Red Road um please to represent Consolidated Consolidated res search and plan and planning who owns uh several of the Lots on the south side of
this property going down to 68th Street um this is the first step as you said and as Mark said and I appreciate his summary this is an important step this has been a long time incoming and this
needs to be done uh the current designation allows almost only commercial uh commercial is fine it's possible uh it's it's more possible and
I think better planning with a mixed use the only other use that's permitted is tow houses up to five units per acre that that's not adequate for a half section Line Road uh I
appreciate uh Mark's summary of the area and I think the description that I just gave is especially inappropriate with what you've already done in the area uh the east on the east side as
Mark mentioned with the six stories I I would tell you right across the street at 68th Street the county owned property is in the rtz district and it can develop up to eight stories with
bonuses uh with a area ratio that's over 1.0 I'm not suggesting that's compatible on this side of 62nd Avenue but that's what's there and that's controlled by the county uh to the South as Mark also
mentioned is the TSD uh which was enacted I think appropriately by the commission recently and sent to Tallahassee this is good planning and that's all it is it's not zoning it's not development and you've
been through that and we understand that but this is a good first step and without it frankly the designation that exists is really one of the reasons that you have had almost no development on this West Side these 16
Lots limited commercial is really just about all you can develop um and that's not really good planning so uh I hope you approve the item and uh I appreciate your attention
thank you thank you sir any other member of the public who would like to address this Commission on item six good evening sir long time good evening uh mayor Commissioners uh my name is hang I live on 62nd
Court um this was kind of a little shocker I went to the planning board meeting and tried to find out what mu arment and they didn't know they didn't know the height I see now that it's four
stories that they're trying to get the the transition from the commercial to residential has always been 62nd Avenue it's been widened it's been you know narrowed down um
if where is our neighborhood going to stand I've had many people over my house that live on my street very concerned where this is headed I mean we certainly don't want to see four stories right behind the fence of our home right now
NR doesn't give you much to build but they've could have built this property years and years ago they've chosen not to our neighborhood has gotten together and done charettes over the years we we've been dealing with this for quite a while all we want to see is something
responsible we all got together and we're talking about if you go West on 80th Street if you're on 62nd Avenue those new tow houses or the that uh those buildings that are there
that used to be where the the city drug rehab uh sorry the South Miami Hospital drug rehab little area I mean that's beautiful those things sold out quickly and they're worth a ton of money so I'm all for designing something great there
but we can't have you know 18 units per acre 602 Avenue is already going to be backed I mean at 3 o'clock in the afternoon it's already backed up to the newspaper trying to you know just cross us Warner to get on Sunset where's
where's this overbuilding going to end I thought that you know the higher density wasn't supposed to go past 68 um 70th back encroaching into our neighborhoods there used to be homes on those lots they were those were removed and left
vacant that was done by the owners of the property and I don't think it's up to the commission to Grant something for these Property Owners to Triple their money while the residents that live directly behind them are the ones that are going to pay the price and I sure
hope that you know when these decisions are being made the gentleman here said that last year they had a group get together and talk about this the residents weren't involved I wish they would have been I would be there I would be active in anything that has to do
with that property back there we're all for great development we just need it responsible four stories there isn't a transition into a twostory neighborhood when our fence is going to separate it the transition should be 62nd Avenue
from there back they have two stories have them put tow houses there give them whatever code they need for that but mu4 CR that that's four stories that's starting off you know where we don't
want to be you know and I don't like I said it's I don't think it's up to the city to you know Bend so far to one side to benefit certain people while hurting the people behind there um so I'd like a
responsible decision to be made and just keep our neighborhood informed of what's Happening you know a lot of people didn't get this letter you know I'm I'm curious about all this kind of stuff so I'm constantly you know looking at agendas and I know this is coming up I
want we all there want something built and built nice thank you thank you for coming sir anyone else Mr M or sir go ahead James MCC 6210 Southwest 63rd terrorist
um uh great concern and um right now just for the the change uh for Conformity for this I will support I got concerns just like the gentleman there but um I realized that something has to
be done and um uh when it comes to the zoning aspect of this um um I know that the department will put the word out to the neighbors uh because that's my neighborhood and we want to be involved in this uh conversation when the zoning
happens everybody's concerned and we just wanted to be responsible um and and consider it for the neighbors and for the growth because nothing has happened there for a long time and um uh and and it will increase
the the tax base for us we just want it to be responsible so I right now I'm just supporting the change for Conformity and interest to see how we uh address the zoning aspect of it okay thank you sir sir good evening good evening U um
mayor and Commissioners uh my name is Luigi vitalini um I am at 6840 Southwest 6 Second Court um I am an archit I was a former planning board member um and former Erb member for many
years um I would like to um so actually my property is right behind the the TS uh DD which I just recently found out that um was enacted um and and I've done many
studies actually I was I was part of when when there was a lawsuit between the I guess the for former owner and the in the city I actually try to mediate a little bit um what was going to be there um what I find a little bit
um uh difficult is um like a like a gentleman before me said is how you do that transition and and um and what you state in in the new FL I think all those um those statements are correct but I
think what happens is when you actually put those things into um into practice which which is where it breaks down so um I think um in in in general I'm in favor of of
having a better zoning on those lots but I think you have to be careful of I think the height is an issue and and I think the biggest problem in these Lots is the parking because what happens because that by having these
um these increased densities um you you therefore require parking I mean I've studies all those I've studied development on these Lots which therefore um brings about um multi-story parking garage which is basically the only way you can you can put enough cars
to for these new um uses and and that's I think should be something that should be very um uh denied and not allowed and in in the new in this F zoning that
you're going to happen um and it should be like looked at in the also in the in the tsdd that was just brought in front of me I just I just was preview of of the the project that is going on in the Lots just sou of where of this new
zoning and there's a it's four stories of parking garage it's two stories of building and four stories and four stories of parking I think it's not um it's how you handle this transition with which is going to be like between a
really bad development and a successful development which I do think there should be more development on the on 62nd uh Street um Avenue but it's just it's the transition should be done um and mandated well by the by the new
zoning code thank you very much s just a question since you are um a professional in space what what do you think is the right I mean again I want to everyone understand we're we're we have been trying to consolidate zoning in land use categories because we had essentially spot Zoning for Lots all
across the city so I know the mucr designation in the minds of people was scary for that reason because it's got an envelope that seems more liberal than certainly people would want and Mr M you know we've walked that neighborhood and talked about issues before that were impacting neighbors so I would just ask you what what is what's what's the right
landing spot for us just to get your feedback while I have it here well I mean I think uh um because my experience is no one wants to build structured par parking in a three or four story building because because there's not enough sellable or leasable square
footage to make the economics work yeah but for but um I mean as an example just to give you I don't know this new this new new new areas but uh I just saw the plans of the the one that is going on supposed to be um um going in in the
Lots on 6 second between 69 and 68 um I think you know if you're trying to promote um you know Transit oriented District right which is the name of the district is um but just any rules of planning you should under park right you
should make it almost impossible for people to park there so that um the people use a Transit I mean I I do it I use a Transit every day you know and I live right there nobody else does it because it's and but because the cars
are what you're promoting you know like so in this new this new development you if the requirements I think is one it's 107 cars and they're actually providing 330 I think that's where it all breaks down so I I think for these lots for
example I think you should also promote like almost no parking um which I know commercially is is not an easy thing to accept but I think that's what would make like a good development I mean I
would all be for the development that that they're um proposing in front of me if if you take out like two two two levels of parking it would be like you know four stories with one level of no but I I was asking on this in this this particular area what would be the right balance from your perspective well I
just um I mean I I think you should uh try to like give a little bit more um I would say like around two two stories but but not allow like a structur parking and and try to limit the the you
know the the the size of the building like you know if you if you put like all these buildings you know all these Lots together and you get like know 400 feet you you get this buildings that are just very massive and I think that's that's contrary to like single family housing
even though maybe you have like you know three stories or so I think those are those are the the things that you should look at when you do the zone morning in the final an so massing massing and the and the height right and and I think under under
try to like give less parking I mean you know restrict the parking so that we promote this this Transit an District I mean from there you can walk to the you know people can walk and but if you give more cars nobody's going to do it I mean if you put more parking thank you for your
thoughts any further comments Mr Kelly Levi Kelly 6250 South at 60 Avenue I pretty much in the in the impact area of this discussion and I think that u in my opinion uh it would
be somewhat uh um somewhat neglected on on the part of this commission if they don't look at trying to conform this into something that would be a better use uh in in my community right now for
I I would like to see some mix type of development there and I think in the overall scheme of things in order to make that happen it's going to have to be more than two stories I just and I just that's the way I feel about that um
i' I've been here now listening to this for probably about 20 years the same argument and I think it's it's time to move beyond that now and and I think you you as a commission need to put your big pants on here and and and and and get
moving on this thing I yes it's not going to make everybody happy but in totality I mean in the community I'm in where do we have to go in order to do any shopping there's no place in the in that walking
distance area so it's it's it's it's something that need to be looked at hard and clear with a clear eye and said okay uh uh you know we've heard it we've heard it for 20 years now what are we going to do there's a
solution out there let's get it done thank you sir all right further comments good evening Britney M 641 second court so um just listening out from what you guys were talking about if you are going to do it I understand you're going to go
ahead and move forward but um certain residents like me I'm my alley like the alley is you know what I would have to look at whether I look to the east or to the West I still have to look at it and um it's it's crazy just trying to take
the kids in the morning you know it's it almost takes me about used to be five and now it's almost 20 just trying F the cars so if you're going to build something just be mindful of you know maybe more residents you know because um
even in my backyard it's more pine trees so we chose to save the pine trees because you know not only is it good for an environment but it's overall look especially when you're in sou miam um buildings how high are you guys going
to go like that that is going to be a big question but you know if I had a preference uh you how J is more extended and not height so maybe you can think of that like you know for the ones that are going to be buildings or shopping center or whatever maybe they can go long and
not high and I do agree when he said uh under make the cars be under parking not provide a lot of you know parking but um for sure not four or five story buildings I I mean could speak for else but I sure don't want to be looking at
fourar five story buildings in such a beautiful community um just keep that in mind even across the street from newspaper place um that lot has been vacant for quite a while so like I said maybe long and not high just
a suggestion okay thank you for your comments anyone else I just anyone else who would like to address this Commission on item six please come forward mam clerk is there anyone online anyone on Zoom please raise your virtual hand no okay see no one else in the
chambers no one online we will close the public hearing colleagues discussion yes ma'am you're recognized I wasn't here last time so I just want to make sure that I understand before we vote right now when we vote it
still stays at two stories until we have further conversation on this yes the zoning is unchanged and there two stories and it does not allow for any residential currently okay thank you yes sir you recognized um Mark I think um in the first reading I I asked this I there's a
distance between the alley to where the building can start I think we said was it 150 ft I'm trying to recollect I could be wrong there's a distance from the road the the allei road inside to the property where you could start
building or we don't even haven't even said that yet we haven't said that yet we haven't said that yet we haven't set that yet the depth of the properties are about 100 the alley is about 20 okay further question questions comments okay is there a motion I'll move the motion okay a
motion by commissioner Cay second a second by vice mayor Corey uh Madam clerk please call the role yes commissioner Cay yes commissioner Rodriguez yes commissioner bones yes vice mayor Cory yes mayor Fernandez yes
item passes 5 thank you okay let's go to colleagues any other it items that is there anyone anyone else here for any other item before we move on yes sir which item okay not a problem let me do this let me take item I think we have one
other item for Mr Alvarez that we can let him go so if we'll take item seven and then we'll go to four Madam clerk if you can read item seven for the record please item seven in ordinance of the mayor and City Commission of the city of South Mar Florida amending their future land use map of the future land use element of
the city of South comprehensive plan pursuing to a small scale Amendment procedure set forth in Section 163 3187 Florida statues to change the future land use designation of certain parsers located on the north side of 64th Street generally between Southwest 59th Avenue
on the East and Southwest 59th on the west from the current destination of mix residential moderate density mrmd to townhouse residential TR thank you madam clerk Mr Alvarez your presentation thank you again Mark
Alvarez the Cordina group uh acting as consultant for the city staff um this is again a very it's a very similar item to the item six that we just heard this is a small scale Amendment for uh changing four properties on 64th Street um on the
future land use map from the current designation of mrmd which is mixed residential moderate density to townhouse residential um again it's a small scale amendment process if this passes tonight it it is um uh it is adopted it does not have to
be transmitted to the state uh it is also sponsored by the city Administration the reasons for the the sponsoring by the city administration of the same as we just heard we have as part of our our larger process of resoning and changing future land use
map we have a few we have actually cross through this category as well the mrmd the mrmd was a category for future land use that was enacted in about 2019 it had a purpose at that time to try to stimulate Redevelopment but it only took
place on seven properties in the entire city and when we had our larger discussions and we talked about the downtown and as we went to the north of the downtown we would try to stimulate Redevelopment with the townhouse category that we already have so this is
a um this is a residential category on the same note this does not this cannot have an application for live local under his current category nor under what we're proposing so again that issue Remains the Same also again this was
part of a larger discussion as I mentioned back last summer through September and October of how we would treat the areas to the north of the downtown as we transition and we were very aware that we needed uh some help with with developing this area and in a
way that's still a neighborhood and so one of the things we talked about was using the townhouse residential category which is a approximately a category that would accommodate a zoning for town houses on 25 foot frontages uh it's a townhouse that can go to three stories
at the maximum and it can also have an auxiliary dwelling unit on the bottom or lift workspace so these are the four properties um they they are four properties that are 63x 100 again there there's sort of an anomaly in the city
along with three other properties which are the mango lots that were changed back in 2019 we just want to eliminate this category and use the larger umbrella of the townhouse residential and again just like before we are not changing the zoning so these would now
either the owners could apply to to change the the zoning to townhouse or the city may come in later as part of larger zoning changes to change it to townhouse I should should mention that there are three townhouse categories we
have an rt6 six units an acre we have an rt9 which is actually 8.87 or something like that units per acre and we have an rt18 which is something that we just enacted last year which is 18 units an acre and that's the one that's meant to
be able to fit on single properties single Residential Properties these are 63 by 100 they could each fit two town houses um around in the area we have across the street of course we have Madison Square
which is mixed use and is in fact mucr um because of the sensitivity that these although they're on Hardy Road which is a collector Street we think about maybe doing mixed use we also consider that these back onto single family properties that we want to
maintain that compatibility so that's why that we're going to a townhouse residential category for these properties and in any properties where we're in the residential areas we would continue to do the same we would not want to extend the Madison Square excuse
beyond the Four Corners that it exists on um so again on the map you you see it there um it's mostly surrounded by single family residential we're very sensitive to that so the transition here is a townhouse category and um across
the street is Madison Square the pink area uh which is which is a mixed to use category that allows short stories and um actually the little corner there just to the West is owned by is also
nucr we're we're going with the idea that we want to be compatible with the residential neighborhoods the Residential Properties excuse me just like before we're not changing the zoning currently these are actually zoned in a category that's incompatible with the category that they're I'm sorry
let me say that the right way these are currently zoned RS3 which is actually incompatible with the current zoning of mrmd because one was a a duplex type zoning and we have a single family type zoning and the lunch sizes don't fit
that either um this will actually correct that because when we did the townhouse category we allowed for single family to exist as a right without being a legally non-compliant use as a right in the townhouse category so we would
cure that but we really are looking forward toing trying to cause some Redevelopment in the area we had a lot of discussions that we wanted to convert duplex to a townhouse type of product it would give us a little more of an urban feeling we always keep the door on the street and that's what we're doing again
we have uh we we evaluate it for consistency with State statutes and we find that the change is consistent thank you thank you questions of uh Mr Alvarez Mark so last time we had public hearing on this item we heard concerns
about gentrification on a lot so again just so we're clear we think about this in the future we're going to change the zoning category which one would leave it consistent with the current development profile of those lots I I believe you
said rt6 the last time I just want to make sure that's still still the same rt6 the question that we had last time was what was the lowest density that would apply under the category and that's rt6 okay for those rt6 I believe would require those lots to assemble
though so what could be applied right now without assembly of the Lots would actually the rt-8 because it was designed to fit into single Lots okay but in terms in terms of the density that's really what will probably
Drive whether those units are redeveloped or not I don't I don't know if they're Homestead and or owned by an investor just responding to what we heard at the last meeting right which was a concern that we are inadvertently encouraging people to displace those existing residents so if our if our goal
is to not displace anyone but to create but to render our plan consistent and eliminate categories and we're going to retain we're created rt18 but we retaining rt6 which is the category that does the least amount of harm in terms of in
terms of densification the rt6 would be the least tense okay okay thank you yes questions um commissioner k um Mr a so at I have I had the same question as as the mayor with the
rt6 or an R rt18 you could still only fit two tow houses on those lots or does it get if we go to rt6 you we because you said you have to assemble why would you have to assemble rt6 and
rt9 were existing townhouse categories and they were focused more on um a larger sort of uh plan development so we have those on along Lam road on the on the east side of it RT 6s and
rt9 um it's really designed to be that kind of thing so it has a minimum lot size that's a little bigger than some of those lots okay so to keep it the way so right now there's two units on those properties to keep it two units or two
Town Homes it would have to be an RT 18 the rt1 18 although it sounds like it's a lot more density you still only fit two tow houses on each property okay instead of having it as a duplex horizontally they go vertically
yeah and to answer the displacement question because those tow houses that code was written to allow for adus which would be affordable housing it could also have a unit on the bottom that's very small and would be an affordable housing unit okay so yeah I just think
it gets a little confusing I think another part of the analysis I'll ask if follow question so might clarify the issue okay so because with the rt6 the the the the footprint of the of of the structure is bigger with the r18 the footprint is smaller think I think
the difference if I can correct I'm not sure I agree with that characterization so I think the difference is the minimum lot size in rt6 is larger because it's more Suburban in character in rt-18 it's more urban in character so have a smaller minimum lot size so I would say
to you if I was advising a client I would tell them replat the Lots create more Lots get more units so the yield to the property owner is larger so I I don't I I'm I'm not happy with this characterization of the facts I think there is another analysis that very
clearly leads to a Redevelopment scenario that could result in displacement so I want to be clear for the record right the thing that changes nothing and creates no incentive for someone to essentially redevelop the by increasing the density is rt6 not
rt18 I don't want anyone appear to have a doubt in their mind about the effect of imposing rt18 zoning there it does create I think it does signal to the market that we want more units now do they have to go through the additional step of replatting I'd say the answer
that question is yes is that is that a fair statement to increase the number of unit yes yes okay yes ma'am so are you then inferring that we would give these Lots on rt6 zoning to make it
a suzero game that they would be unable to redo anything on their Lots without buying more Lots this so the they don't have to buy more Lots well but if they rt6 designation they wouldn't be able to do anything because they would so so the
the the the question I was asking that it were clear yeah we heard a lot of people come out and say yeah I watched the you did okay I know if you you weren't here that's why I wented out so so what I'm suggesting is when we think about re rezoning the property which we
will have to rezone it to render it consistent with this land use designation if I'm mistaken City attorney or M correct me right we'll have to reone it to render consistent with what we're doing now we'll have a menu of options to choose from okay the
menu options ranges from rt6 to rt18 RT if we if our goal is to say to the owner we want to give you no more rights than what you have today essentially right I think the answer to the selection of those three categories
is rt6 if if the go if the if the if our goal is to say to the owner we'd like you to do something else with this property right we make it easier by conferring an rt18 zoning designation that's how I understand our choices okay
but my question and and it's this is simply looking at what the designations are I understand what you are mentally like the mental mathematics I understand but
when you are looking at rtz and I'm making up a number these lots are 6,300 square feet rt6 is 8,300 sare f feet so by giving it an rt6 designation we are essentially handicapping anybody who
owns these properties to doing anything so no I I would disagree with that in so far as they can come before this board and make a request out the property reone to any of the other two categories if I can clarify they're currently
rezoned RS3 okay what is that uh single family three the structures that are there are actually legally non-compliant structures is under RS3 and I understand the history of this was that in 2019 the
then member the board passed on the comprehensive plan designation that we're the MU MD that we're trying to delete now um but they never agreed to rezone it so it remained RS3 in fact because when we did the
townhouse category for the the future land for the uh comprehensive plan and we had this discussion quite a lot at least Mr re and I had a lot of discussions about um causing legally non-compliant Lots with single
family and we specifically added single family residential as a category that's permitted under this land use category so that we wouldn't cause that so we would actually bring these this zoning into
compliance we don't have to reson it it would be a matter of choice if we on so that that's an important clarification then okay yeah because I I think no no I thought we I thought that's why I asked if we I thought we had to adopt any any one of the RT
categories in order okay so so we're even in a better position than we that I thought we were okay thank you for the clarification so essentially this has zero impact on our need to r that the we render the current zoning compliant with the compant designation correct okay
sorry I apologize for the misunderstanding okay so essentially we don't have to do anything no we do not yeah okay so we could do nothing and this conversation could be over I think the last time I think my confusion is born from the fact I think the last time you were recommending we consider rt18 Zoning for the site am I
yeah recalling the discussion correctly we had a question about what would be the choices and and those will be the townhouse choices okay commiss Kai you had a you had a question I understand that because we're talking about they're single family use but it also has a uh
primary land use of multif family two to nine units at at 6300 foot lot with the density at rt6 we can only Build 8 units per lot so that wasn't feasible so I agree with I I'm glad you brought that up because I
wanted to clarify that as well okay do we have a motion on this item or do we want to um discuss it further public hearing no public we didn't do the public public hearing on this I'm sorry I forgot un you did further questions still I'm sorry yes ma'am so then we have the option on the
table of do nothing and it stays the way it was with respect to zoning yes all right I just that clarification hang on yeah sorry the the current the current designation which is mrmd is a
designation that we have kind of marked to phase out so part of the reason we have proposed this was to move to the new category and if you all approve I think the statement really is if you all approve what you do tonight you don't have to do anything subsequent to that
you don't have to change the zoning it would be consistent with with a new comprehensive plan designation thank so you if you approve this change tonight you don't have to take the next step and reone it unless you want to you know but you don't have to but if we approve this
change tonight what are we approving we haven't approved our six six you're approving the designation for any of those to occur just the name there's two levels you're approving the base level okay further questions sorry for moting the waters my apologies uh this
is a public hearing item anyone who'd like to address this commission item s please come forward at this time anyone on Zoom please raise your protal hand okay seeing no one in the audience uh and no one online uh the public hearing is closed colleagues any
further discussion no mayor I'll move the motion if that's okay with you yes please second a motion by commissioner Kai second by vice mayor Cory M Clark if you can call the role please yes commissioner Cay yes commissioner bones yes commissioner
Rodriguez yes vice mayor Cory yes mayor Fernandez yes item passes 5 Z great if you can read item four please item four item four a res of the mayor City Commission of the city of South Mar Florida approved a multi-year memorandum of understanding with the underlying
management organization in DBA the underlying Conservancy related to investment in the underlying operations programming maintenance and management thank you madam clerk um Madam manager are you pres GNA do a
quick presentation or I'm happy to address the item feel free okay so um you the underline has been soliciting uh requests for support
from jurisdictions that are on uh this future in our case Future Park amenity um I know there's been discussions about a capital contribution that's not what's before us so uh I want to be clear that the agreement that was
advertised is just about the maintenance piece and as we know uh our phase of the underline it's unclear whether it will be delivered at the beginning of the next fiscal year which starts in September of this year sorry October one of this year excuse
me October one of this year so with the agreement is drafted basically uh we would appropriate a full $300,000 but we are not obligated to make a maintenance payment until such time as the facility comes online so if
that happens in uh at any point during the during the um during the fiscal year our contribution in terms of the maintenance the full $300,000 would be prated so let's say it happens in the last two months of the of the fiscal
year we would contribute two months you know a uh one six of the of the full amount okay so that's how the I believe that's how the agreement is is uh is drafted that's how I read it so if that's not an accurate representation please let me know uh Mr City attorney
that's what it's meant to say okay the um I I wanted to I wanted to mention this um I've communed to communicated to the underlying the amount is not insubstantial it's a considerable commitment on our part I do want to remind my colleagues that we are the one
jurisdiction that is on this amenity that's contribute no dollars to its capital development right so I think we have a significant amount that we are gaining uh I think it's in our best interest to fund this at a level that's well beyond what we're customarily used
to funding our own uh our own maintenance frankly I think that you know this commission's long desire to increase our maintenance effort with respect to our RightWay maintenance and Landscaping um and so you know again I'm not uh not
incentive to the fact this a substantial amount of money but again I think for the value we're getting the fact that we've made no contribution and we we're going to be a party that is directly benefited by this and we see the value and potential that the C brings to not
only our City generally but the future Redevelopment of this campus I think that it's a pretty wise investment for that reason so happy to take any questions you all have yes Madam uh commissioner I agree with you that an
investment in this is needed I agree that if is in our best interest it is our backyard I don't agree that we should be funding at capital investment in public restrooms um City Hall has has restrooms
the library has and and again I will tell you that it's not before us so I want to keep the the discussion on what is before us but I think if there is if there is a request there has been a request from the other line it unfortunately came after the date that
this item was advertised and this was advertised on March 7th so we can certainly address that item but I think if I have heard concerns from the manager's office about the request generally so rather than mixed metaphors
today what I would say is if there's a we can bring that request back at a subsequent date and discuss the merits of whatever that Capital contribution is whether it's for a bathroom or anything else and whether we should make it at all I then I would change my statement
to say I am comfortable giving an amount I think we should be able to earmark what we would like that amount to go towards since it will be given by us um we should have some input
into what that would be or at least some dialogue especially because of what I just said um I also think that there should just ask are you are you referring to maintenance dollars or Capital dollars Capital dollars okay again I I don't disagree with that
statement in the in the absolute least however it's not what's in front of us today well but if we're being asked for $300,000 uh yes but from that initial $300,000 is none of that going to Capital none of that in the agreement that's in front of us okay includes a
capital contribution so the advertise agreement that is in the record does not have any again correct me if I'm wrong Mr City attorney Madam manager does not have any reference to Capital dollars there was a request that came after this item was drafted after it was advertised
okay that we can consider but I want to be clear that the item that's in front of us that's been advertised has no Capital contribution so we're being asked for $300,000 a year for maintenance for maintenance yes ma'am and then sec in the first in the first year because we expect that the facility
will not be delivered on October one understood that contribution would be appropriated cont I understood that part of the conversation is it accurate then to say that it does continue then to have that escalator associated with it yes ma'am I think if you look at the schedule there
I think in year two I think the total amount goes to 315 and there's an escalator thereafter okay so are we all comfortable with $300,000 I I I think that that's that's a a real conversation again and I I just want to also remind the board that the
way the agreement is styled that it's subject to annual budgeting and appropriation so this is what this is The Benchmark we are going to try to solve for every year um I certainly think it's something we should should do um my concern about this whole framework
and I had wanted to make this if if I had my brothers right in the underline was not necessarily did not Embrace this idea I wanted to have a binding interlocal agreement between all the other entities my County City Miami Coral Gables uh unsa that have skin in the
game in terms of dis amenity touching their jurisdiction so that if we budgeted they had to budget the same amount or you know uh percentage of budget or yeah so we in terms of how we arrived at this number right uh it's based on a linear mile figure and Mr
cloele is here and can address questions as well um and so we have one linear mile they're allocating a $300,000 cost every other jurisdiction is basically being assessed or asked to make a contribution on the same metric
so it's an equitable amount from that perspective I just again we I I have been low to quibble about what the request is I wanted to make sure that there's maintenance standards that they have that are reflected in the document Min they've been provided to us right
and so that is BET in the agreement something they've got to adhere to our Public Works team knows what their obligations of Maintenance are where it starts and where ours you know where where there's begin and end and where our start and we are kind of operating with that kind of level of clarity and is it accurate we've never given a penny
to anything having to do with the underline yes we have or no we haven't we have not Mr kley want you sorry I'm like looking at you and I'm like yes or no good evening J clly uh CEO of friends that are underly newly appointed I'm
sure you Deli but uh I I came out about two months ago as a CEO so uh thank you mayor and the commission so from my understanding uh there hasn't been a any funding that's contributed to the uh construction cost and the capital cost for the project uh and again just to put
some context to this um we have a variety of different uh sources from the federal government as well as the Florida Department of Transportation and the county uh the total investment is close to $150 million commiss Rodriguez
okay um Congratulations by the way um so I guess before me we have I have the the maintenance so it's basically daily tasks certain amount of of of of items bi-weekly weekly monthly semiannual
annual ongoing so so forth would um a is it possible and B are we open to analyze what work and maintenance is going to be done if we did it with our own public works department and would that be a savings
to the city um because I know we're dealing with and I think Alex can can vouch for this we're dealing with certain issues with lights and maintenance and we're sitting waiting for someone to to react where and no
offense to you and or to the to the organization but if we have our own Public Works guys if there's graffiti if there's any vandalism any anything if we have our own Public Works uh team work on it it's going to be much again it's
in our backyard we don't want it sitting there for weeks looking bad or like crap and you know nothing's being done so you know at the end of the day are are you guys open to seeing what what would it cost our public works department maybe what would
it take hiring a couple a couple people to handle this you know is that an option sure I I we can have a I think it's a idea and I don't I'm not I'm sure uh uls has an opinion on it let's hear from commissioner Kai and then we'll we'll pick that up for discussion well I think the the opinion is going to be the
same I think the commitment from all the municipalities in my Matea is that they're committing to this program so if we pull out and do it ourselves the value goes up for them right like it's supposed to be unified and qualified I do agree though with the
comment that you stated that what are the conditions that if um graffiti is not cleaned up or garbage is not picked up like what what are the methods or what is the I didn't read it so I apologize what is the method on the contract that we could either enforce it
or get out of it what what are the triggers that happens to that so so look I think I want to uh I I want to speak for you so you can jump in whatever you like but I think um you know our experience with other governmental enties has been spotty I mean we had an issue with a homeless
encampment behind the library when we arrived here early and uh chip and Public Works kind of took care of it Rel landscaped it and again I don't know what Authority we had to do that but we did it to uh to resolve the matter right I I would think given the level of investment that they're putting in if it
were my linear my linear uh Park I'd be low to have anybody else go on there and perform the service for us that said right that said it because it creates consistency and control issues right in terms of the execution of the
maintenance um probably also has an impact in them Le leveraging economies of scale to service the balance of the of the amenity I I think our ultimate Hammer is if we don't want to fund this in year two because we're dissatisfied with the
level of service we're going to call him and the consern to account and they're going to have to explain to us why they're falling down on the job right this is not you know because we cannot budget and buy future commissions we always have the right to revisit this agreement and we can walk
away from it the way it's drafted so what terminated we can also terminate so I you know I think um I I expect a higher level standard and I expect them to be more Nimble because they are they are not an agent of our sister
government at the county right and so I think we're going to get a higher level of responsiveness as a result you know um but that would be my response I don't know if you want to add anything yeah and I can attest to that just to get some background so I used to be the director and CEO of the transportation and public works department from miam
County so that means I ran Metro Rail Metro mover all the buses and I can tell you the level of service that we had for the property that is was uh previously underneath uh the Metro Rail before the investment Ander underline would never amass is reflected here within this
exhibit and theou so the level of service is at a much higher level um and we have experienc of this because we have phase one and phase two that have been completed and so if you've ever been down to to Brickle or go towards the sky uh close toward 27th Avenue
you'll see how pristine uh the quarter is and that's because the contract that we have has those spe uh stipulations in terms of the requirements for uh the service um that's in front of you today so it will be far beyond anything that you get at the
county level and and again um you know definitely respect and appreciate the the collaboration with with uh the city of South Miami but I would I venture to say that uh we will even have higher greater standards at uh the city of South Miami a public works department can have for for this particular
Corridor that's one of the benefits of having this arrangement to have this public private partnership that we can provide a a accelerated and increased uh responsiveness whether it be graffiti trash pick Al like and we get the opportunity to hold our our contractor
uh to account throughout their entirety 10 miles in a corridor yeah sorry yes re as the vice May I'll come back down the line here thank you so much Congratulations by the way and for my own edification because we have dealt with um plenty of issues with obviously
um uh uh the Metro right now in terms of uh cleaning up graffiti removing items and potentially trespassing individuals things like that um what what what is the security programming for the underly now and is there an expectation for that
in in our one mile yes correct um so right now we have 247 security um we do partner uh with the private contractor security with uh the Department of Transportation and public works and uh again that's another expectation that we have as a part of our our management
agreement with the county that we provide that 24hour uh security throughout the entirey of corridor so the same thing will exist here in South thank you uh commissioner K and then commissioner Rodriguez I just stuff my face let R
okay Mr Rodriguez you're recognized so I I I do want to be clear on this I I think the underline is great I everything that that's being done with it I'm I'm in favor of where where the reason I brought up those items about the maintenance issues is when you get
off I95 on us one and you look to your right you see all the graffiti on those f fences and you see some of those fences kind of falling apart for something that's brand new it's not so just to be clear that's not within the scope of the right away that's private property so they don't don't well that's what I was going to ask so it's not yeah
how I guess I I imagine you guys have something that you're doing to alleviate that or point being is if we have that in any of our areas are is that something that that we will be responsible to handle or is that something that you uh the underline will
will take care of yeah anything that's in the underlines right of way uh we will take care of and it will be consistent with the the service requirements that are in front of you today if was on you know private property of course that's that's outside of our Runway and that'll be a different
type of approach to um you know with it's graffiti or any type of trash pickup um and we're serious about this because we you know the whole point of the underly is that it's a pristine um first class facility and we need to Ure to keep that way um and that's the the
commitment for myself as the leadership as well as our founding member and the rest of our board uh that's the expectation we'll set and we will make sure to meet it so on that point I think if they were at graffiti one of the columns for example they'd have to take care of
unfortunately those fenes have been like that for a long time and it's private property and I unfortunately it's outside I think their ability to address it so commiss guy are you ready yeah thank you sir um the service agreement that you guys have
in phase one is is that coming I'm ass I'm assuming you Outsource that is that accurate or no the maintenance the corre security services all that's outsourced are you planning to move those same companies along phase two and phase three is that or are you guys going to
open up for bid uh that's a that's a plan um now again uh the term of that contract I believe it might expire here in the next 18 months to two years I have to go back and follow up with you about that um even if it does we'll make sure that the scope is is comprehensive and we we'll
get the the best price and make sure that we have the economies in scale um but the intent as we open up the existing uh service provider will stay on board and we feel that um uh that um uh because of their past performance has been excellent uh that that that again
as these additional segments come on with phase three uh we'll we'll achieve the same level of of service and responsiveness look I I I think that I've always been a big fan of what you guys are doing um I think the city of South Miami is going
to benefit there's a lot of things that we have coming online that are really going to support it back and forth I I these little caveats are important to us I mean obviously we care about quality Best in Class like you just said is something that we're really interested in as well so whatever we can do to help
out obviously under the uh agreement that we have we need to make sure that we execute it so that was my only concern I appreciate it absolutely okay any final comments if not we'll entertain a motion public hearing oh I'm sorry this is a public hearing item thank you you
have question just final comment on this again it has nothing to do with with the it's more on on the city Side you know 300,000 is a lot of money uh to put it in perspective that's the cost of our CDs for our streetcape for for Sunset
Drive would be paid off with the 300,000 so I just I don't know I I I don't take it lightly for a city like ours it's it's 45% of the avalor revenue increase we had last year I mean I've the first thing I said to to Meg and to uh and to Ulus when they approached me about this I
said I I want you to appreciate the size of the request relative to our size and so I and and the only reason to me this makes any sense is we've gotten we've got put $1 in to this program and we are going to get the benefit
and I think you know we I'm I'm a big believer with what we're going to do here on this campus at City Hall if we actually get it executed that we're going to we're probably going to have the best destination location right on the underline of any Community uh on this linear Trail so
again um you know to to use uh Mr Kelly's comments it's time for us to put our big boy and big girl pants on right and and beted big on the city and uh I I think that's what we're doing I think we have a good partner and the truth is if a partner doesn't perform you know we
can walk away from this agreement uh and if we can't meet Our obligation because there's budget constraints I'm sure we're going to be as challenged as anybody else we'll have that conversation we'll figure out how we either supplement what they're doing with our staff or or work work with them
to right size our contribution in years going forward so those are my thoughts but happy to talk about it further yes Madam commissioner let's go you want to call you want to call the question yes let's go I'll move it let's go let's open for we got to open we got to open the public hearing oh my goodness we're never going to is there any member for
the public who like to address item four on tonight's agenda Mr Smith Mr mccant good evening uh John Edward Smith congratulations uh haven't had the opportunity to meet you yet I wanted to speak with me yes tomorrow morning to
arrange a breakfast launch for us thank you um certainly we belong here uh and as the mayor has indicated so far south Miami has not contributed to the
underline um the city of Miami has uh assessed properties along the underline and is contributing that way as well so there's a lot of other support from other municipalities that
is coming into this and yes $300,000 is a big bite uh but it's one mile we're spreading that over a while so just figure the pennies that way going out that way well it's it's a year yeah um
my association with this goes back way before shovel went in the ground um in 198 three I founded bike Miami and we used the path under the Metro Rail uh for a number of our trips that
we did monthly during um Miami's for me month in November so my familiarity with the challenges of this path and actually Meritt steim
was referring to it when when I was involved as a linear path back then too so I mean the whole thing about making it real and and Meg's Vision um is uh remarkable and it's it's
it's coming together if you look south of us right now on 80th Street um the Landscaping is going in uh I shot some pictures the other day of that and um the section from 80th down
to um dayline South is um probably probably 90% so I think they're just working on the Landscaping so I think you know we are the
only business Community First on the Metro Rail and certainly now with the underline and we have to be able to um bring that to us as well as
they're bringing it to us but we need to bring it to them I think U this is going to be absolutely fantastic I can't wait thank you thank you sir yes
ma'am commissioner leedman just texted me and said that he wanted me to let everyone know that the city of South Miami contributed to the design and Engineering back when this all got started okay so so that while we did not
we did not contribute Capital we did contribute in that form okay thank you for that clarification thank you Commissioner James MC 6210 Southwest thir Street um when we talked about this um last year and I've been talking with
the Commissioners uh both Steve and Dany and you mayor uh about the possible jobs um that could be had with the underlying and we had a lot of people really hyped up for the opportunity now we did get one guy out there who's doing
good but the possibility to get other folks um um from both South Miami and Coconut Grove and we were thinking about just trying to work together as a county thing maybe uh district 7 our job opportunities uh for folks and and it
works right in line if you're getting Federal funding you got some fer funding on this so if you do that that means Section 3 Falls unfund so the local hiring will help you comply with the section 3 initiative so if we can do that just keep that in mind and I love
to talk to you okay you got thank you for reminding us about that James appreciate it yes sir and and Mr MC we we tell them we spoke about with nb2a we've got all the subs in place we just had really bad success with it that we could put more pressure more highlight
on it I had a big big meeting with the whole group so yeah we we we did a lot we just didn't get a lot of success with it okay so so we'll definitely follow up just one one point of note um Workforce Development is something that's a part of the underline sometime sometimes
people though recognize that um we we do have actually have a grant from Bank of America where we identify uh residents to go and train them and the Art of portal culture they get certified and they can go on either stay with the underline or go on to other uh places of employment and we're definitely going to
be focusing on that more um because it's a fantastic opportunity to not only have this great asset but to really make sure it's an economic generator so just want to put that note out there that that's that's a part of of the mission and the vision of the underline moving forward thank you we'll definitely follow up on
on the subcontracting piece thank you okay further public comment anyone else who' like to address item for on tonight agenda anyone on Zoom please raise your virtual hand okay seeing no one else in the chamber no one else online we'll close the
public hearing uh colleagues final comments no is there a motion I'll move the motion is there a second second a motion by commissioner Cay a second by vice mayor Corey Madam clerk if you can call the role please yes commissioner
bones yes commissioner Rodriguez yes commissioner Cay yes vice mayor Cory yes mayor Fernandez yes item passes thank you colleagues what any preference on which items we take next you want to take the first reading
ordinances why don't we take 1289 1289 Madam clerk if you can read consent agenda item number one thank you for the suggestion M item item one a resolution of the mar City Commission of the city of South Florida approving and authorizing the purchase of 40 Smith and
Weston MMP 15t svr 556 rifles and related accessories from Pro Forest law enforcement in a total amount of $ 73,5 76 including a tradeing credit of $1,929 from existing equipment and
inventory declaring the existing tradeing equipment as Surplus property thank you madam clerk is there a motion on item one I'll move it is there a second I'll second motion by commissioner bu to Second by commissioner Caya Madam clerk
please call the role yes commissioner Caya yes commissioner bonish yes commissioner Rodriguez yes vice mayor Cory yes mayor Fernandez yes item passes 5 If You Could Read resolution two please item two a resolution of the mayor and City Commission of the city of
South Florida approving and adopting a title six non-discrimination policy and plan including a disadvantage business Enterprise dbe policy in accordance with title six of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Florida law Madam manager give
a presentation the city receives fdot fund funding for our on demand Transit program we had a tri-annual audit there are certain requirements that we have to abide by one of them is that we have a title six policy in place with specific language
so this item is drafting the policy so that it complies with what fot requires thank you for the explanation uh colleagues any questions to the manager seeing none is there a motion I'll move the motion mayor is there a second second again a motion by commission Kaa second by vice mayor Cory m clerk if you
can call the role please yes commissioner C yes commissioner bones yes commissioner Rodriguez yes Vice May Cory yes may Fernandez yes item pass 5 If You Could Read item eight please n killing me going out eight in ordinance
of the mayor City Commission of the city of South Florida amending section 15 a-18 control parking residential zones of chapter 15a parking of the city code of ordinances to establish a single residential perent parking Zone per ibility and issuance and procedures for
implementation of the program thank you madam clerk Mr riverol fl's yours know he's excited about it I know he's excited that's why I asked him to come up before even asking you number one auditor eight years running where the flowers where the flowers and the ribbons you got to wear
the ribbons to the next meeting please okay uh good evening uh it's a pleasure to be here before you uh presenting this modification to our residential program which we believe is critical for as development continues in our town center and people want to be here which is a
great thing uh this program uh we've been working on it with communities in that area with new developers that are in that area and we've gained multiple approvals and support by the community thinking that this program that was
presented before you will work and help improve the area especially come September October November December M as they start filling up some of these uh units in our town center okay colleagues uh any questions about the program for
Mr riveral yes commissioner bonich I already shared my concerns with you should I say them here or do I leave them with you no share them please um when you allow for overnight parking
in the parking garage that opens the door and not that it is a bad thing for people who only use their car sometimes when I had this conversation with alfredo he made mention to me that you couldn't park your car consistently
there for more than 72 hours that it wasn't for Park storage I then said to him I am a household of two people and two cars I don't drive my second car all the time but it is my second car so if I
lived in a building and I had a second parking space that doesn't necessarily mean that I am going to be driving my car within 72 hours we are promoting this whole thing and as a matter of fact I had to sit here and listen to somebody say don't let people have freaking
parking spaces pretend they don't exist pretend they're wearing their their car like a hat and then we're saying oh let them have parking no remember like oh no let's to a three-story you know twostory building with two stories of parking and
not give anybody any freaking parking yeah okay in a in a pretend world people don't have cars but in Miami we have cars and so even if I live in the building across I think you're channeling vanola Ras right now oh my God it it like even if I lived in that
building and I go work downtown and I take the train I may still have a second car that doesn't necessarily mean I move my car it I may it may not move in five days so we have to change the verbiage in that so that it says if you have a
second car it can just be there you don't have to move it in 72 hours because if not I would be moving my car around the parking lot like a further comments so I I have the opposite perspective quite honestly
shocker which is I I I would I would say park the car you use less frequently in your home garage right because it's not a public garage so I my comment Alfredo was two things one was I think the rate on overnight parking for the covered portion of the garage is too low for the
rooftop $100 is fine it's what they charge people on the surface lot down the street right but we're providing I mean I think there's a value in having your car protected from the elements and from the sun when I park my car outside my garage you know how flipping hot it gets right and um so I think we should
charge probably $125 but that's that'll come with a rate rate recommendation I I think we should have a a shorter vehicle relocation requirement or vehicle movement requirements because we don't want people um leaving cars there you want
the garages are safe public garages I think are safest when there's more movement in and out right they feel more threatening when you've got static people or static cars in them and so I would I would say I would say you know if I were in your situation and let's
say I were to move into a the Avalon Bay apartments and I wanted to have a second car and it's more advantageous to me to park in the garage I would say well then park the car I use least frequently in the garage Reservoir at The Building and park my daily driver across the street
you know if you're if you're moving less than every 48 Hours again I I I just I think there's a way to I think there's a way around that issue whether it's 72 or 48 hours we can have that discussion in the future but that doesn't make any sense that doesn't make any sense like if if I didn't drive that car why would I want
it where I'm where I'm living you can store it somewhere else that would I mean that's frankly my I mean there's no point then in having that second part that's it's again since we're about choices that's a choice I know what that person could make there's something about like we have to do things that are
pragmatic like we realistically we have to like come I don't know you know what you and I are never going to agree on this I for me it's common sense like I If if I live in this building and I have a second car
that I'm not using all the time I'm going to put it where I'm not where I'm not using it like if I if I live in the building and I'm I'm driving this car this car is going to go into the building with me every day because when it rains I'm not going to get wet and mess up my hair problem is we can't we
we don't want to have building we don't have we want have cars that are static they're 24/7 because the garage is also intended to serve the business in the district so from a pragmatic standpoint you want people using that car taking it out of the garage to you turn the space over to benefit the businesses from you
know 10 to 7: right and when someone comes home then they can park their car and have it there overnight that that that's the purpose of this program am I mistaken because otherwise if we're creating a parking reservoir for static cars we're damaging the business district right which is which by taking
up the parking right and so then we should say if you want to have a second car in a building let's make them park it in the building so I I think that's the balance we're trying to start it's not I understand the pragmatic difficulty or highing yes you would prefer to go downstairs in your building get in your car and drive but we can't I think the thing is the longer we make
that window of immobility the more we're encouraging long-term vehicle storage the less activity it has in the garage making it seem less safe whether it's empty or full of empty cars right and then secondly you're hurting the businesses that rely on the reservoir to
turn over spaces to support trans and customers which we desperately need in this part of South Miami so that's why I think the logic that you're suggesting I understand intuitively doesn't may not make obvious sense but that's why I think it does so anyhow we it's not um commissioner K you're recognized thank
you mayor so you I'm assuming you talked to Mr shriber uh and what what do you what what did he communicate that through his knowledge and through historical references that his tenants will get a second parking spot look for it is it pretty high is it
pretty low and then I guess the second part of the question is in that same building which you've already discussed there's also going to be the opportunities to have second parkings uh for those tenants right so their their program is not set in stone yet it's
it's being discussed amongst their board members right now so I can't tell you or I don't believe he can even tell you what definitively is going to be the parking but it's definitely going to be cafeteria style first parking space is going to be I'm going to give you a number just so don't hold me to it
$75 and if you do and you don't have to buy any parking space but if you do need a parking space 75 the second one for the first one they will be offering a second space at let's just say it's going to be about $150 and it's only at the option of the
person that's renting the unit so if you don't have a car you will not be paying for parking um if you do have one or two cars you could potentially or you would seek other options like like across the street at the at surface lot at the bank which does allow overnight parking the one immediately next to it and at the
parking garage should this pass Comm Mr Rodriguez you recognized so um as as um Alfredo just said yeah there's also the bank parking lot in the back so it's not just so I'm kind of in the middle both I agree with you as far as we can't let them sit that long but I also agree with
you no one's going to park and walk there on a daily basis we also haven't said there's three bedroom units so yeah they may buy the second car but if they have a third car where are they going to park that car so we haven't even thought of or discussed that I mean I I I I
think I I would encourage you to talk to the developer sponsor because we're talking about a building that's literally 50 feet entrance to entrance from the ramp to the exit so I don't think the parking is that inconvenient right as a second Reservoir parking and I would tell you you know last
conversation I had with them about the future phase they're contemplating having the amend suite for the new building be the many Suite of the current building so they're talking about having people come out of their building to use a gym or some recreational areas in the building next door and that was the last conversation
I had about that so they clearly as a developer sponsor are seeing that that that that that that bridging that Gap across 73rd Street is not the kind of the ocean that we're envisioning it is uh and my concern is if they're not
seeing that as a friction point and we allow to liberal an overnight parking program we're going to find that cars are going to sit in that garage all day and it's going to damage the ability for cars to turn over to support the businesses right and so I think it's
it's important conversation about the timing how much time we allow maybe 72 hours is fine I mean obviously if you have if you're doing it on a monthly basis and you're going on vacation for the week right there's got to be some ability to notify the city hey I'm going to be out of town for a week and we're going to we can make a certain number of
exceptions every year so that's actually practical for people to leave their car there overnight while they're away uh but I think we have to be sensitive to the fact that price and that tenure is important as part of the conversation because we could end up with a full garage with cars that are never
moving at the end of at the end of the day I I really appreciate um that we're being proactive instead of reactive because if we don't do this you know we don't want problems with people parking on SES or at other people's houses so
kudos to you for being you know proactive on this I think right now is it perfect no but I think this is some it's a good starting point and we'll see where it goes from there and if we got to tweak it we'll tweak it but you know as you know I'm I'm on board with you thank you that's great to hear is
there appreciate it not always a compliment government being proactive you know I will take that so thank you government is always being pro it's always being reactive not proactive so you know what I I I commend is there a is there a motion on item eight i i
mooved i the motion to Move Motion second okay we have a motion uh to approve by commissioner Rodriguez and a second by commissioner bonich Madam clerk if you can call the role please yes commissioner Rodriguez yes commissioner Cay yes commissioner bones yes vice mayor Corey yes mayor Fernandez
yes item passes first reading five okay um if you can read item nine please item nine an ordinance of the May and City Commission of the city of South Florida amending chapter the 15 offenses and miscellaneous Provisions article one in general section 15- 63 mobile vendors to
permit special events featuring mobile vendors for religious institutions and establish regulations and permit procedures commissioner Rodriguez uh you're recognized if You' like to kick off the item discussion um so no no no no different than than when we had it as
a discussion item you know this is brought upon to give the opportunity for our communities to to meet and gather have a good time and and build a sense of community um we you know sitting with the city attorney we went through it and
you know if you go and you read the sorry get into it big folder um we issued 11 basic or actually 12 because I think or 10 is doubled but 11 or 12 uh
restrictions which I think are I think meet um the requirements that there were we were all looking for it limits the the amount of trucks it limits the time uh um you know it uh recommends or actually you you have to get an off-duty
police officer some sort of security it it does everything that that that we all spoke about in the discussion item so um I'm I'm good with it colleagues questions or comments on item n mayor I just have one question yes go
ahead please the ability of the square footage per lot will dictate how many people can actually attend right there's no restrictions on people that I can attend this right five no restriction on people oh people no so my my only concern and I and I stated this last
time commissioner was you have two Big Lots um that cater to a lot of Vu church for one has a lot of uh attendees and they can generate a crowd
so my only concern on that corner there is that Vu has five and they message it out to their 4,000 members and they all show up right so highly unlikely but that that's my only concern how we address that because if we have two cops
and 4,000 people and there's food and everybody's outside like it's just a concern and maybe it's not address here maybe it is is it it was just my only concern so it it's a great point the only thing is that how do you restraint this is for you know religious um
location so how do you limit their congregation that's just almost impossible to do so I think I think there's I think there's two maybe one additional Safeguard two additional safeguards that we should consider one is I know we have a maximum of five I
would tell you that if I you know just using higher praise as an example examp Le right the feasibility you might want to get five on the lot but the feasibility of getting five in the crowd is probably impractical so I think there needs to be I think this is a really good really really good first draft and my compliments to you I think the only
thing I would suggest is maybe there's got to be some relationship between the number of food trucks with the maximum and the size of the lot right so it kind of helps make sure that we right size the number with the size of the of the church facility and I I do think we need
to think about and you know um giving the manager some authority to kind of cap the total number of attendees or shut down the event and yeah I don't know if it's there or not yeah yeah the manager has uh the right to to set
boundaries okay I just don't know if it um I'm just but no no it just but it just relates I thought that yeah that just relates to Temporary or permanent bathrooms right no no I'm sorry I just read it in two am I am I missing a section here number number 11 number 11
so as part and even as part of uh and I think that's then I think that probably is yeah thank you for that clarification I appreciate it so I think 11 covers my other I may cover your request commission Cay uh I would just my only other would be just you know five is fine I don't have uh I don't have an objection to that but some lots that
might be too many okay no no agree yeah yeah I I I would I would think that each location will designate and understand that they can only if the City attorney thinks that 11 covers that concern with respect to the maximum number of food trucks the manager has a discretion to
limit that based on you know his own determination uh I'm happy to it it won't cover the first one okay 11 won't okay because it's based on a history of events so um I mean we could tweak that language clearly um number number six
also is a crowd control one that's the the Professional Security or off dity police that's supposed to be based on the size of event because not every event needs two some might need five I no but I think that's making sure that's that's designed to make sure we are
appropriately Staffing it from a law enforcement perspective corre I don't think it's B commissioner K's concerned about a cap whether the size is yes there I think with those with with those two caveats I think this is really good for draft and hopefully will be something the community would Embrace to
activate you know um different Lots across the city and so I mean I'm happy to move the item uh and between first and second reading I'm sure we can clean up that that language to address both concerns okay is there a second yes
ma'am can I offer a suggestion with a second with one modification which I think will help all of you guys um I would suggest that on number 11 we just remove based upon its history of events because we
limit his authority so I I think think that then at least takes us a step ahead so I I think the um the or is intended to read in the I don't know how to disjunctive right to separate the first half of uh necessary for the particular
event from the operator and so I think when it's if if we have a history for the for the promoter the operator yeah so I think it's not an end it's an or for that reason so I think the manager probably has the discretion I don't know if you read it the same way Tony we'll we'll add Comma just to make
it clear okay perfect okay okay and then I'll second that okay so we have a motion and a second um any further discussion seeing none Madam clerk if you can call the role yes commissioner Rodriguez yes commissioner cayen yes
commissioner bones yes vice mayor Cory yes mayor Fernandez yes IEM passes thank you I think that just leaves us with commission reports and and the add-on correct so let's let's read um F1 please F1 a resolution of the
mayor City Commission of the city of South Florida resending resolution number 024 d241 16129 which authorize the city manager to execute certain Mutual Aid agreements memorandums of understanding mou and other procedural law enforcement
agreements with governmental entities including any amendments or renewals there too on an ongoing basis thank you uh Madam Clerk uh so I brought this item it's been a lot of scuttle but about a lot of different things recently I think
suffice it to say that um at the time that we adopted uh the resolution in question um the operating context uh was a particular way I mean uh probably a little bit less charged politically and I think the operating
context today has changed and I think that these policy decisions at the end of the day should rest with this Council right um a lot of concerns and I want to make sure that in doing this it's not an any way a criticism or an indictment of the chief
or the manager the goal here is to make sure that we are placing the burden of this decision where I think it belongs which is with the city commission uh and not leaving our manager Andor uh our chief
um in Jeopardy uh for choosing not to or choosing to exercise any discrep we may have delegated them so I think the uh with respect to any and all these agreements so I think that is the reason for my bringing it here I think if there's going to be a discussion about
uh any sort of mutual cooperation agreement with any entity we should have it uh we can we can vote it up and down um to my mind I don't understand in this current operating context what the urgency is around all these items since
as I understand chapter 908 which has been the recent discussion in many jurisdictions in Florida and I've confirmed this with the speaker with uh our lobbyist uh with members in the Florida Senate in Florida house uh we are fully
in compliance with all of our obligations under the statute uh with respect to um related issues and we've certainly given no direction to anyone not to do something that we're required to do uh nor are we required to my knowledge and the City attorney can
confirm this to take any other steps to execute any other mutual agreements so I think the best posture for the city uh which is I think always been my ejective to keep us out of any out of any trouble is to uh pull this Authority back so
that we can see what's happening assess what happens if there's a mandate that comes down saying that we've got to do something as an officer of the Court as an someone sworn to take a oath to abide by the law we will do what we're required to do as we always have um but I think uh the better part here of this
discretion is to pull it back at this particular time and Reserve action until such time as it's warranted so with that I'm happy to take any questions yes ma'am I I'm trying to think of the right way you want to think about it we'll let
someone else ask a question I don't think it's going to get any better okay um I think there's a lot of different ways that this can be handled and I feel this
was not the way to do it um I think that we've when we decided March 5th of 2024 which coincident it's interesting it was one year ago essentially that we did the change that we gave this
author to our city manager it showed our faith and our trust in him from that moment to now we've only done more things that show our continued faith in him
everything that he has done has more than shown that he deserves it I think that he is an extremely intelligent man I
think that our city manager can read a room pretty well I think that if he feels there is something that should be brought to us he will I don't think that we
sending his authority to look at Mutual Aid agreements whatever it is that we want to call them based on political climate because we want to wait in or have an opinion on
it or whatever it is I don't think this is the right way to do it I think that the conversation is Mr city manager if you feel there are things that we should be involved in or we feel there are
things we should be involved in then let's have a conversation and take those one by one I don't think that we sending an authority that I think that he has more than earned is the way to go about it I
think it's a if if I were him I would feel like this was a slap in the face I I want no part of this I feel he's worked really really hard and
not only us but our residents by voting to give him more Authority by change of Charter have shown that our faith in him is echoed by them whether we agree with what's coming
down the pike or not I don't think that this is the way to go about it so I I just so as the as the sponsor I just want to address the comment directly and so as I said from the beginning it's not a referendum on him or the manager and I disagree with the characterization of how it should be taken and the intention
of this is I want every employee in this organization to understand that I'm never going to leave them on an island and the conversations I've had with leadership in this organization from our manager to our chief they feel that they are vulnerable and they feel that they are exposed and
I would and I surmise from those conversations that that vulnerability and that exposure is higher by virtue of the fact that we have delegated that Authority and in the absence of it so I'm I'm taking it back not because it's the criticism of the manager or because
I don't think he's earned the respect frankly I would never have brought him to this board to recommend his hiring if I didn't have absolute confidence in his faith in his judgment right because I brought the name to the table that judgment has not changed I think he's only done a tremendous job bringing
people of from the chief to Mr Munoz to M Cabrera to all the new hires being people of high quality incredible professionalism and we continue to build an organization that's imp proved upon the base that we inherit which is a good one right so in no way in no way is that
care is the characterization that you've made in any way accurate okay the if people want to read it that way it's a misreading of the situation and why the fact the fact I'm explaining what it is the fact the reason we're doing it is because I'm hearing for the first time
in my adult life in this country people who are sworn to protect and serve us are concerned about whether or not their inaction their inaction exposes them to losing their jobs and I as the mayor of this city for as long as I have this
title in the seat right I'm not going to say to my employees that I'm not going to be here to support you and the way and the best way I can support them is by by taking taking them out of the political Arena you know our chief and our manager were not hired to be
politicians they're hired to be administrators they're hired to follow the law unfortunately and I'm not trying to pick a fight or take a fight because if I wanted to pick a fight I would have pursued my initial course of action which is to go to court and ask for a
declaratory action on the part of uh a judge to say are we in compliance do we need to do this okay I think the better course here because again I'm not trying to elevate my profile or the profile of the city in this debate it endures to no one's benefit we've got real projects
that we're doing we've got real projects we want to do so I think the best thing here is to say to my team we're here if there's going to be any Reckoning on this issue the Reckoning should happen with the people that ran for office not the people charged to do dis that
charged the people hired to discharge a job right so to me okay the intention of the statement is to say I have your back I'm willing to take the responsibility I'm willing to Bear the burden as I think we all should in this conversation
don't you think a better way of handling that versus taking away his authority to handle m m moas what is written there is to have a conversation have an open conversation we we did we we we I've had
multiple conversations I spent the last two weeks having conversations with our manager and our team we have an open we are having an open conversation that's why the item is on the agenda so how how else would you again I'm open to the criticism I'm not perfect I I
think that a better way of handling something like this is to say we're not taking away his power we would like to handle this one this one for whatever reason you feel you want to take that one
on I think it it it [Music] shows something more to him something more to are residents because if you are a resident and you are paying only
attention to what is on that paper you don't have the benefit of the conversation we're having right now and realistically there is one person watching and there is there are two people sitting here so three people have the benefit of the conversation that we're having right now and and but there
but they're not deprive of the opportunity to have the conversation with us in the future they have access to my cell phone number on the city's website if they have a concern about what I'm doing as a doing many other things they free to call me so I think we've heard our perspectives let me hear from commissioner Rodriguez and other members of the board yes sir through the
mayor so in my initial by the way your expl that's an eloquent explanation of the reasons that you're doing it and I and I understand it better now that we're talking we've never been able to speak about this prior I also in first
reading of this my initial thoughts to myself were I have the confidence confidence of the all confidence the manager and the deputy have my confidence in the time that I've been here they've done nothing
for me to want to remove that power given to them they haven't done anything where I they deserve that in my opinion on the contrary I think that they they've gotten more of my confidence as the longer that I'm here
and I've obviously been here the shortest time from everybody City on this dayas so I do agree with with commissioner bonich if this issue that's at hand you know and I and I trust our chief as well
you know in our conversations and everything for this issue that's at hand it's it's it it's a crappy issue you know and and we have to deal with it but I also think it's a little drastic to remove his full power or their full
power you know to sign anyos or but this one issue I would be totally fine with saying to the manager and to the deputy on this one issue we can what is it follow a motion do something where where direct that the commission will direct
you in the in the way we want you to go forward with that decision that that's going to be made on this one issue but I don't think it needs to be as broad as just removing I I I appreciate I appreciate the comment and I and I and I I think I think there's
also you know um we're in a we're in a in a moment where whatever we do and I mean you know we're certainly not going to do what fort Meers did last night I don't if you guys followed that conversation you know we're not here to apply on the policy
what I'm trying to focus is on is making sure we stay compliant with our statutory obligations right as whether I like them or not and there's plenty of things coming out tasse that I loathe right um we've got it's our our sworn
duty to live by those rules and so we do that every day here uh if I want if I want to get into matters now apparently of of policy that we thought was once reserved for the federal level well I I can run for the state legislature again apparently so I think that's not my job
today my job here is not to be a partisan my job here is not to app on things that are are promulgated down here but my job I think is to make sure that we're protecting our people and so the reason I chose to do a blanket recision because I don't want to highlight the issue right I don't want
to make this a bigger issue than it needs to be because I think people are trying to forge a narrative and trying to make the law right if I'm going to Pine on something trying to make the law read the way they want it to read as opposed to the way it's written and so I think just doing this puts us in the
safest ground as an organization which is always my intent right I read these things first as a lawyer right I read these secondly as a mayor and then I read them lastly as a partisan right and so my goal here is is not in any way to impune the character the competence of
my city manager and I say my city manager because that's how I feel about him right my goal here is to put us on the safe safest possible footing and take two people who I respect right out of the potential Firing Line right right
because they've done nothing wrong we've done nothing but comply with with the law we're going to continue to do that as we always have and I want to make sure if push comes to shove and someone asks you why haven't you done that they're not going to ask them they're going to be disable say it's in the
commission's province act okay yes sir we just received a little some additional information on this topic uh regarding Fort Meyers and the where the um this was an official communication from the governor yeah it
may be helpful if you want to take a short recess so you can read it and all of you can read it sure just so you have the full information let's let's stand in recess five minutes thank you turn off e
e e e e e e e e e e
e e e e e okay we uh we are reconvened so Mr City attorney um I believe weed a communication from the
newly minted Attorney General of the State of Florida that's that's correct that's what I wanted you all to read did you basically sum up the yes the the essence of the correspondence essentially he is uh he is
uh this is the first time that someone from the state has actually said uh that uh they consider Fort Meyers which took an overt action to not to sign not to authorize the execu
authorize the execution of the agreement right um that overt action was deemed by the attorney general which is which is in opinion not necessarily the pron what the law is but it's it's their indication or their view of the law um
is that they they consider that City this was this was again just to be clear because there are for my colleagues that may be less familiar you can request formally an opinion of the Attorney General on any on any question and he
will give you or she will give you an interpret their interpretation of Florida law on the matter this was an unsolicited opinion correct in response to last night's vote I I think yes and and an admonition an admonition yeah to to to
that Council in Fort Meyers uh telling them that they basically now are in violation of 9008 correct okay so look I I I um I always want to put us in a safe harbor because that's where we need to be right we're not here this should not
be a platform a political platform for any of us right we're not partisans right we are elected the citizens of the city to represent it in our best interest my the intention with my action was to try to put us in a Safe Harbor at least our at least our staff and let and
see what developed so that we could you know sit back evaluate what's going on and if an action need to be taken we can have the benefit of time um you know when people ask me to do something for them that goes beyond the
scope of what I typically want to do when I evaluate the agreement that the Attorney General is saying that we are required by 9008 to sign um as a lawyer my first reading of the agreement and I dealt with these in 2019
in that legislative session was that if I'm going to do if I'm going to assist in this Mission I should be indemnified right against any claims that are a result of that mission this agreement does not that agreement does not do that right um so I
I think for our Municipal Corporation it does create potential additional exposure and talking about the issue further with our City attorney uh had you know we had concerns about our current insurance coverages and whether our actions were an expansion of our scope and in potential covered
claims and what the claims that would result from this additional work that we could undertake potentially would be covered by those policies that's still an open question okay we're trying to get some clarification on there's questions related to expansions of scope in our duties that may or may not be
covered by our labor agreements whether that's a unilateral modification of those agreements that we need to then have ratified by our bargaining units there's also workman's comp issues that come into play with respect to that agreement so I think again I'm not I'm
not trying to aine on the policy people in Fort Meers did it to my utter disbelief when I watched the video of the meeting because I thought it was just irresponsible in terms of their Duty as Council people I'm not trying to appy on the policy but I think there are
legitimate legal questions that are have not been resolved right certainly to my satisfaction um that we in our fiduciary capacity as the board of this Municipal Corporation should understand before we
decide to take any action or non action on one specific Aid agreement [Music] um my resolution was intended to give us the time to do that and not force our staff to feel like they had to bring this matter forward because if you're
aware of what's Happening there's in incredible social pressure being brought to bear on administrators and chief law enforcement officers to execute these agreements to show that everyone across the state is coming into compliance quote unquote with this policy
trajectory okay my reading of the statute has confirmed by the city attorneys that we're not required legally to sign this okay it may be good policy to do it I'm not I'm not going to go as far as to foreclose that possibility but I wanted to give us the
space to have the conversation and not necessarily be the first actor see how other people what other people were doing and I what I think at this point is with with with this last message you know I think my calculus now has somewhat changed uh because my instinct having
observed the politics of this Administration for six years firsthand for two years in Tallahassee and thereafter now in this chair is that the only Safe Harbor left for us is to go to court and ask the court to render an
opinion on what the law is and what our obligations are not the merits of the policy not anything else are we required to sign the agreement that apparently is now put Fort Meers in Jeopardy it's a narrow question to ask the court I think
there's ample ambiguity they can basically declare what the law is and I'm happy to abide by any outcome as has always been my as my pleasure because I do not think as I read the statute that it's clear I think it's clear that we have no
obligation but certainly there seems to be plenty of ambiguity and the policy of the at least the policy articulated by the Attorney General seems to be of the opinion that we are required to do this and so I think for those reasons what I would say is I would resend my resolution and my my recommendation to
this board would be to direct the City attorney to file a declaratory action uh in the in the in in the a court of competent jurisdiction to basically ask ask the court what we should do with respect to this issue so
that we are fully compliant with the requirements of chapter 90o Florida Statutes that's what I would advise this board to do um the City attorney wants to add any color to the process and uh the claim but I think that will at least allow us to defer to the court wait on a
decision and then act uh in accordance with the court order I you want me to clarify what clarify we I love to hear your opinion I mean we've talked about this you and I have spent a lot of time talking about this issue to kind of find the right the right resolution here that puts us in the best
posture and so I mean I'm I love to get your perspective given that uh obviously the the ground has shifted yet again in in the minutes that we've been hours we've been convened as a body the the concern concern has always been um
that irrespective of our legal obligation the statute and the statutory framework provides for certain remedies that that the that the governor and the
state can employ um and we have seen in the past where those remedies are employed and they may be uh undone by a court later but the damage is done at that point so that's always been the that's
been the the the the Paramount concern at the same time um we do not see an overt directive in the statute that says you have to sign this agreement um indeed what you just read from the
attorney general uh comments it it says it's interpreting the failure to sign an agreement um or or in that case an authoritative we will not sign this agreement it interprets that as establishing a
sanctuary policy um again it's not they're not saying you're violating this overtly they're saying your actions are tantamount to that so um along those lines it there there seems to be some space between the Attorney
General's interpretation and our interpret ation um I believe what the mayor is proposing is to is to go to court to seek guidance from the court through a declaratory
action um to determine whether to determine whether we have this obligation to sign this agreement whether the statute requires it I would tell you I do not believe in my heart of hearts that that
insult Ates us from potential action by the state I I I I agree I mean uh I I I don't want to get into it I I'm refra with my comment but so we've seen people do other things that you know
again um not strictly adhere to the existing statutory framework I I think what it I think in my mind what it will do and why I would recommend that we do it is that it's going to give us
the great amount of comfort that we're going to get an opinion on this issue from a collateral branch of government that should not have a political lens right when rendering a determination right um in an Ideal World the court
would look at this coldly would read the statute and would say this is what it says South Miami if you do this you're fine right that's my hope right it's not 100% fail prooof but I think um at the end of the day all I want to
do is do what is right without fear without real or perceived coer um to discharge my obligation as mayor and I know that having worked for you with you guys for the last two years and commissioner Rodriguez for a short
amount of time I think that's always been all of our intent whether we like something or not we've not gotten here and use this as a platform from grandstanding we all have differences of opinions we limit our differences to the issues that are pertinent to our city and we're being forced into this
conversation which is one that I don't think anyone any of us ever would have imagined we'd ever have to contend with we're big boys and girls we're going to see our way through it I'd like to see our way through it with the benefit of a court that doesn't that you know my City
attorney may have an opinion we may agree on it but you know people may feel that his opinion is born of my influence from our conversations I want to go to a third party the referee and say ref what do we do what do we need to do
yes ma'am do you feel I'm trying to look at this from every direction do you feel that when you're saying you know when you look at you know the agreement and you look at this
and you look at that if we were to sign find the document and try to fit what they are asking of us into our existing framework based on what we know we can
provide do you feel it would be so much outside of what we are providing right now so so my fundamental discomfort with this is look I this commission can make a deal that I think is a bad deal anytime it wants prior commissions have we've talked
about other deals that we've made that aren't I don't think our our are good policy I think are a good business sense I have a business issue I have a with with respect to one element of the agreement that gives me a lot of discomfort because of what I shared before that
aside to me the more fundamental issue is not is not is not the agreement fundamental is the is the way this is Being Framed and way that we are being you know essentially sanctioning people
for not doing something that at best it's not clear I mean sorry at worst it's not clear at best I can tell you I don't think it's required right and I say that based on conversations with people that were in the room when it happened to use the phrase from Hamilton and made the
sausage around this deal which is you know sb2c uh who I called the consultant say what do I do because I'm not trying to make myself a figure in this debate I really don't want to be on Twitter or on the news right uh well I don't think I
don't know maybe not right but and this proposal with the resolution I put for was intended to kind of be a middle ground and say look I want to take my people out of Harm's Way right and I don't want to because we don't want to invite I mean I want to go to tah has I want to get my money I don't want to get my Appropriations Fe
to it right right so um well we got V to last year and we nothing but good boys and girls so I think the bottom line is yes it does not indemnify us perfectly but at this point I'm not sure
what a better option is um I don't want to live in a world [Music] where people Force us to do things because it fits a narrative right because they can bring all the pressure of the world to make us try and act in compliance with their
obligations um I get nervous from the stories I've heard from my grandparents who have now gone and my parents who were still with me right about their experience as children as adults when people with Badges and guns are doing things because they're
feeling compelled to do it right because those are the people that are sworn to protect us they're the bullwark against you know they're the bull workk and again for our safety and I I just feel that this entire entire conversation is one that's being driven by a fair amount
of coercion right putting people on lists sending out notices right if you want the law to read a certain way right we have the power within our limits to enact policy and reduce it to writing if you want the law to read a certain way draft the law that way
right I think now that there's a question about what the law is let's ask Court do you think that right now the conversation that we're having is similar to the recycling conversation that we had you know do you remember where we
were like it doesn't matter what reality is we're we're going to continue recycling because we believe in it do you remember that when I said to you do you it doesn't the numbers aren't there and you guys said we're going to recycle because we believe in recycling and and I I'm I'm asking is is that where yall
are standing on this is is that the the mentality that is going on right now because when you when you just I I was I was with you for a while I understood what you were saying for a while um and then you lost me but
um you you lost me because where did I lose you maybe I can say you you you lost me because the the people that you know that supposedly these people with Badges and guns are going after are people who are in this country legally they they are no no no so there's I'm not I'm I'm
not I'm not making it again nothing I have said is intended to be a statement on the broader policy yeah that's why I like I don't when I'm referring when I'm referring to the coercion I'm referring to I'm I I I I'm I'm a soft power guy if you understand that term right which is it's
persuasion it's influence right but what's happening now I mean I I don't remember a time where the ago has weighed in unsolicited on an item like this right um we we're we're we're living in times that are in some ways
all the Norms of the society that I grew up in are being are being pushed further and further further and further to areas that I'm just not that are historically I don't want to use the term precent but are very different right and so look I think the best recourse to us is I I
prefer to take no action right I don't want to leave my People In Harm's Way which is why I brought this item but if the message came today that what for Myers did is a violation that I think you know and again their conversation was about everything that
doesn't pertain to us right we're keeping the conversation very n about what we should be doing and that's where the conversation should be right what are obligations under Florida law that we need to discharge I think now the AG the the attorney general has clarified
right the conflict from what we understand the law to be in our obligations and what he perceives it to be and I frankly do not want to be I mean I'm a lawyer so someone can file a bar complaint against me tomorrow for not doing for not following the law right and I don't need to I don't need
that in my life frankly right I don't want it in my life right um so I I think again I'm I'm talking too much I think we go to court and we ask what do we do can we clarify two things for one second one just so that
we're all on the same page you you rescinded what you had put in as F1 correct yeah I think at this point given the statement by the attorney general I'm going to withdraw the add-on because I think it's we could do it but he's now
made an affirmative statement about what he thinks the law is and what we have to do and I think we need to go unfortunately to take the next step which is where I thought we might end up but I was hoping it wouldn't happen for a much longer period of
time yes sir so through to the mayor um and again I'm I'm I'm with you 100% I don't want to put our people you know under the under the you know under the gun per se um but by taking these
actions again you legislatively wise you you you've been through things more than than than myself so I asked the question proceeding in that manner do we put our chief under the gun do we put I think I think I think
city under the gun yeah belt and suspenders we probably should still resend the authority yeah or can we just hold off there's no pressure to sign right now well I think I think that I think what I have what I have garnered from the conversation with our manager
is that if I were to ask him today I'm not sure if he's listening or not but he not online he probably would sign the agreement because it's the one thing that kind of you know that kind of just puts everybody out of Jeopardy in his mind
now oh file directive to hold I I again then let I mean I think we reist the res I think I think look I think there's there's I was hopeful that people would be more measured right at this point but clearly
that's not going to happen and I know and I understand why the chief was nervous and chief I'm I'm not you know you you were right right in some ways right this is this is being this is being lined up this way and sometimes in life you don't have any good options and I think we're at that point and the only
and the only option here where I think we can and I and I and I again started with a pres I I started with a let's go to court conversation the chief and I talked about it we talked about I said you know what I got to where you were like you know let's hold off let's do nothing let's see what happens let's see
what happens but the problem is that this is all being precipitated and every day that gentleman gets an email from from Larry Kee saying here's the list of people and here's the new dashboard to file complaints butt by jurisdictions they not being cooperative and now we have a jurisdiction where and the
attorney general who said those guys did not Tak an action therefore they're non-compliant right and so it's going to happen to us it's going to happen to us and I don't want to sit around for another few weeks hoping and praying that it doesn't happen when I can get direction from a court that can tell me
without bias or favor right supposedly what we should do and then we can act the court and if the court comes back and says we need to sign an agreement I'm going to tell the chief put it on the agenda right if we need to approve it or if the delegation stand
Mr manager go ahead and sign it but I I I think we're better off giving the manager whether it's the manager who signs it or whether it's us as a policy board that decides to retain that decision we are all better off with getting the Council of an independent tribunal to tell us what we should
[Music] do Mr guy yes so you know RP commissioner bonich what what she said and and I I think we all completely understand and and and agree with the
sentiment pulling that back makes me sleep a little bit easier but that's not the important part here I was always under the impression that we should really wait and and and get some understanding how legal it is for us to sign um speaking to other
cities and other Commissioners and Council people there there's no movement in some of these cities at all so the abil IL of when it triggers when it triggers we don't know when that happens but we're
not by ourselves we're a small City and there's 34 of us most have not done anything I don't know what the numbers are but and the and in the municipalities that I've spoken to that there's no
action I do agree with the mayor that we should go understand it there's nothing wrong with putting a question in place with the courts does it put trigger and crosshairs in our City's line of sight maybe but we're not doing anything wrong
by asking the question right we're not saying no we're not saying yes you know if it's dictated by us I would vote Yes to go sign it but let's go ask that question most cities are not so I'm okay with what the mayor is
requesting now much more than I was before so I'm okay with that said I'm in mayor and I'll probably move for that as well commission Cory want to say anything before we um close the debate or close the discussion I think I would Echo that
sentiment I think it's hard for me as you know not necessarily being a lawyer know if that in any way shape or form is in violation by the interpretation by the uh you know attorney general whether
or not that in in of itself is I mean it seems to to be a pretty broad uh description of what a sanctuary city is but like would even an action like that potentially uh uh incur that label for
us yeah all I can do is is tell you what the law says and and he is saying that you know the the law essentially says uh it defines a sanctuary Pol a sanctuary policy and prohibits it
as any law practice procedure or custom adopted or Allowed by a state entity or local governmental entity which prohibits or impedes a law enforcement agency from complying with ausc 1373 which is the immigration uh chapter or
which prohibits or impedes a law enforcement agency from communicating or cooperating with f with a federal immigration agency so as to limit such law enforcement agency in or prohibit the agency from a number of of things complying with an immigration detainer complying with a
reest from with a request from a federal immigration agency to notify the agency uh providing a federal immigration agency access to an inmate for review um partici there is a reference specific explicit reference to this type of agreement um although it does include a
provision that says as required by a different section that that section imposes a a an overt requirement on uh Sheriff's offices and uh counties that have Corrections facilities uh the the the
chief Correctional Facility right not in other words not us correct um so there's a there is a broad definition of what a sanctuary policy is and I it seems to be what the
Attorney General is relying on um to get to the leap that he's saying he's saying Sanctuary par he says s Poli policies are not tolerated or lawful in Florida um immediate uh corrective action is required failure to correct the council's actions will result in the
enforcement of all applicable civil and criminal penalties yeah interrupt we need a motion to extend for 15 minutes any objection to the motion to extend I'll move the motion there okay was second commission bonich see that uh you
adopted adopted without opposition so yeah I was just reading from what what the Attorney General said um and how he is applying that that broad definition yeah and I think asking the question and being open to the
answer that would come does not sound like an impediment at least to me so I'd be comfortable with with asking the question yes commissioner bonish I'll be the last one I guess to comment on that um everything that I've
heard does not go outside of what I think we do or can do already so nothing here makes it sound like anything that is outside of our usual business so
signing it doesn't make me feel like it would be something outside of what we would naturally do then again my perspective not as not as party affiliation but as human being is very
likely very very different from the four of you because my life experience is very different from the four of you I will leave it at that um I
understand wanting clarification I do I just don't see reading what you did where that would be anything outside of our regular business so I don't I don't see where signing it
would be detrimental to us as a City versus putting us in crosshairs being a lawyer I get you would want everybody to give you every clarification so I no it's not I I'm I'm I want to be clear I'm clear my personal opinion is that we're not obligated to sign it and
that's a personal opinion validated by conversation with people who were in the room when it happened that all said right my personal opinion carries about as much weight as this empty bottle of Gatorade in that conversation so I would
rather go to court and say am I right or am I wrong what puts us what puts us what puts us in the best position to act in accordance with the law at this point are we going to vote to see what we're doing I I think we should so if I I would move that we direct the City
attorney to um file a declaratory action on this issue with regard to whether or not we are required by chapter 9008 to enter into a 287 G agreement uh with
ice um for the purpose of understanding whether our signing it or not signing it puts us into in violation of that chapter so that's the direction I would give if there's a second yeah yeah go ahead please this is a complicated yeah City attorney to City
attorney because I I don't understand the legal process and all when we ask for a legal clarification of the court is what is that process with it it's just a simple question form submitted and we get an answer do we have to file suit no we have to file suit it's it's
te it's technically a lawsuit um and it's a lawsuit that says Uh there's confusion over this provision it can be in the law or it could be in a contract there here's the provision there's confusion over this one way to look at is this another way to look at is this
court please decide for us so saying that mayor I'm assuming that Fort Myers is probably going to do the same thing right I mean that's their next legal recourse I would just hold off and see what happens
there just ask because I think I mean I would tell you that um i' I've spent two weeks trying to figure out what the right answer is to this question me too uh and you know I know that our Administration and chief keep operating Under The Cloud of uncertainty and so he's not the only
one I I I understand but so and and as of two hours ago I would have agreed with you that we shouldn't no need ACT first I thought we should pull back the decision and just and just wait but I think that now we have an attorney general who has
issued an admonition and an opinion and you know waiting is waiting in my opinion is futile I rather I rather frame the question so I get an answer that's in you know is one that's not influenced necessarily by politics but one that's very straightforward so
we know what our obligation is because I you know the convers if I wait for Fort Meers my concern is it's going to get framed in a way that's not going to provide any Clarity because that conversation they had last night I would invite you to watch the tape it was about everything but with the law required okay it was about everything of the effect of the policy we have we've
had no conversation about it and I thank you all for for focusing on what the issue is which is what is Our obligation and so if I wait for Fort Meyers or any other jurisdiction to act that has more of a political hankering to get a result on an issue I may not get good advice
because I'm you know garbage in garbage out but the advice would come from the court system will it not it will but but there but but you know it's not my lawyer arguing it in a way that's intended to actually solicit information as opposed to make a political Point
okay and I don't want to I I mean I we have to be we have to be attuned to the fact that we're operating an environment where people want to score political points first right they want to run up the scoreboard for their team or the other team and you know what I I
don't I don't care what I want is to live in a society where we operate by the rule of law and my concern about this whole conversation is that that's the last thing everybody's talking about um through the mayor so I'm
conflicted because in on one side I'm I'm all for holding off seeing how this plays out again we're under no obligation to sign this right now to move forward I understand that the chief is
getting the the emails on a daily basis and there's pressure being put but all the pressure could be put at the end of the day there's no obligation for us to move forward like commissioner Ka said we're not the only one there's other other cities that haven't move forward
as signing now that's one side yeah so taking your action kind of takes us in that direction where now we wait for an opinion it gives us time to hold off because just by doing that doesn't necessarily mean we're not going to sign it because at the end of the day if they say you got to sign it you got to sign
it so we we move forward with it whatever the opinion is now the other side for me is once this lawsuit goes in it's going to open up Pandora's Box and are we putting our city our chief Under Fire under a intense stress
you know that from the league of chiefs or whatever it may be like I so I'm I'm tormented because I really don't want to do anything right now I I I'm the type of person that I like to sit back listen understand what's going on see how things play out and then make a decision I say I I think I'm you know I'm I want
to bring this to a close I'm going to say this I think this is we should decide one way or the other we can't have our cake and eat it to here oh right so I mean I think the the only trouble I have with your comment commissioner Rodriguez is we don't want to put the chief in the firing line then let's resend the delegation right the
manager right the chief then can point to the fact that this commission is the is the B the policy-making body that has decided to retain that that Authority right I I and the buck stops with us right so or or I don't think there's anything wrong and people who take
offense to it frankly they should take no offense because we could stand up here and make a bunch of political statements about what's going on and we haven't done that we're doing we can or we can ask the court to tell us what Our obligation is legally and if people are offended by that my
apologies but you know they have precipitated the issue with the recent communication so I that's how I feel about it I think we either act one way or the other but to do nothing continues to put that gentleman and my manager in a in a position where they feel vulnerable and we're not doing anything
to protect them and that's what I'm that's what I fundamentally cannot stomach I know and I think resending will still what's the third option I'm happy to hear the third option Okay the third option one option is do nothing okay so
let second is go to court the third is sign the paper there are three options there you want you want you want to move to director manager to sign the 287 J agreement want to put that question on the table okay I I think
saying that there are two options is erroneous we we don't we we don't have an option because right now the person with the authority to sign it is the manager the mayor so we have no option the option if if we want to have it a third option the option starts with resending his authority right or we can
pull this one item can we not to for us to make a decision on this that's that's fine I I mean that's fine we can we can re I'm happy to accept an amendment to revise the motion to limit his the recision to just the 287g agreement is that what that's what you were
requesting that's what she's requesting original intent correct that my original intent was to basically on all these matters as it's it's my intent was as it was drafted which is to take all these issues off of the manager's plate right to give them the maximum protection and
to protect right any exposure on the part of this Corporation but since we want to put the issues so indelicately on the table then let's just let's just n n the question on the resolution and we can call out the agreement so we invite more scrutiny I'll move that motion mayor which one the one you just
St to just this one case I second it okay so a motion to resend resolution 24246 1229 only with respect to the
execution of a 287g agreement any further discussion so I again I'm going to ask you to reconsider the motion because you're putting the issue squarely at issue I mean this is this is tan amount to gross
negligence on the part of this commission okay how so because again there is there is legal Nuance to all these things and the statute is so broadly worded that even this by this
attorney general could be construed as an act of defiance okay I am trying really hard trying I mean you don't understand how much it pisses me off okay to have to even have this conversation in this chair okay personally I've done nothing but try to
keep this to the letter of the law because I have very very strong feelings about all these issues as I'm sure all of us do okay and I'm trying to check that at the door to do our jobs okay I'm inviting you I'm asking you at this point in time either we do the whole
thing or nothing okay and at this point frankly I think the conversation's gone in a direction that I'm completely uncomfortable with I would say let's just ask the question of a court so that we can at least say to whoever might call us and say you know what your ass
is out of the chair right because you Dar to ask the qu you Dar to raise the issue and that's deemed to be a customer practice or policy or whatever other vague languages in the statute right that put us in Jeopardy let's just ask
the question so that we get a final answer and we move on with our lives because frankly I have take no joy in talking about these issues or being in an oppositional Dynamic with anyone in Tallahassee or on this commission it's not the way I read it that's the one you want to ask huh that's the question you want to ask yeah let's just ask what our
let's just let's ask let's ask the court to tell us what are we supposed to do okay we call it okay fine so I I would again as I tried to move before may let me resend I'll resend okay so call go ahead call okay put your
Motion in please mayor I would ask that we direct the City attorney to file a declaratory action in a court of competent jurisdiction to ask the court whether section 908 requires us to sign a 287g agreement to be not deemed a
sanctuary city that is that that's fair I'll I'll second that then let just a motion and a second by commissioner Cay let's go any further any further discussion mam cler call the role yes
commissioner K yes commissioner bon no commissioner Rodriguez can you come back to me vice mayor coryan yes mayor Fernandez yes commissioner Rodriguez yes pass the motion pass 4 one we stand
adjourn e e e e e e e e e
e e e e e e e e e e
e e e e e e e e e for