Now you're up. Good evening everyone and welcome to uh tonight's edition of the South Miami City Commission. Today is Tuesday, June 17th. The time is approximately 7 p.m. Uh please uh if you can silence or turn off your cell phones. Uh, Madame Clerk,
if you could call the role, please. Yes. Mayor Fernandez, present. Vice Mayor Corey, present. Commissioner Rodriguez, here. Commissioner Bonish, here. Commissioner Cay, here. You have a quorum. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Uh, before we begin tonight's meeting, we'd like to begin by offering our
condolences to the family of Paul Young. uh former Vice Mayor Young uh was a stalwart pillar of this community uh who served the city uh and our community with distinction both as a member of this board and uh on many uh of our
community boards including most recently as a participant in the Marshall Williamson scholarship fund board. Um we play pray for his paternal repose and uh want to express our deepest sympathies to his family. Um, with that,
I also want to keep in mind this evening, uh, in our thoughts as we take a stand in a moment for a moment of silence and a prayer, uh, the victims of the political violence in Minnesota, uh, Melissa and John Hortzman who were
foolishly killed or unexplicably killed, and the Hoffman, John and I Hoffman who were uh, wounded and are luckily making a recovery from their injuries. Uh if we could stand for a brief moment of silence and I'd ask you to keep all of
those individuals in your thoughts. Commissioner Rodriguez, would you please the pledge, please? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all. Please be seated. Thank you. Madam clerk, I believe we have a presentation this evening. Yes. Um, via Metro program update by Juliana Zues. Great. Mr. Mayor, do you want to kick us
off? Yeah, mayor. Thank you. Uh, mayor, um, as we know, we had transitioned uh, our program uh, uh, with uh, two via Metro Connect and we're we're sort of at the out set of our first quarter and we thought it was important to kind of share some thoughts and ideas and and comments and just provide uh, a little
bit on performance uh, just so you understand how the program has transitioned. So, uh, that's what the purpose of this presentation is and certainly um to get any input or or answer any questions that that you may have. Thank you sir. Please come forward.
Hello. Good night uh commissioners, Mr. Mayor, residents of South Miami. Uh as uh Chip was mentioning, the objective of today is to share a bit of the performance of the VIA service uh Metro Connect South Miami we've had in the last kind of three months since launch.
Um I don't know if there's something that's going to be shared on the screen. Just [Music] [Music] um I'm sorry. Yes. Yeah. I I I guess the PowerPoint was not transition over to to
Mr. Okay. So, let's give it give it five minutes and then we'll recognize the next item. Yeah, thank you for your patience. And I'd like to recognize the presence of my lovely daughter, Susanna Fernandez, who's sitting in the back observing tonight's proceedings. There you go. Welcome, Suzu. Mayor, I think
she should come up and comment on she should she should feel free to comment on any any item, including the poor performance by her father or heckle. Heckling. Heckling would be fun. Heckling would be welcome in this case. Okay. Um, colleagues, why don't we are there any any concerns regarding any of
the CA items? No. Uh do we have any items that we want to defer? Uh yes, Mr. Mayor. I'd like recognized. I'd like to defer item four to the next uh meeting in July. Okay. Well, let's just let me just call the items and we'll see. Anything else we
want to defer or or not take up or discuss consent or otherwise? Okay. So, can I get a motion to defer item four on the agenda, please? I'll take yours as a motion. Yes. Mr. Vice Mayor, second by Commissioner Ga. Without objection, show the item deferred to uh the first
meeting in July. Um do we want to take up the CA items while we're have them read? Okay, madam clerk, if you can read CA one, two, and three, please. I'm sorry, which one? Why don't we start with the board? Why don't we start with the board items? If you can read those
into the record, and then we'll take up the CA items and hopefully dispense those quickly. Okay. But the second one needs to be voted on because he's termed out. So that's fine. Let's go ahead and read uh N1 and we'll read N2 and take uh whatever actions required. Okay. N1. Andy Ko has been reappointed by
Commissioner Bonich to the S town center advisory board as business owner as per city charter article 2 section 8A for two-year term ending January 17, 2027. Gary Castales has been reappointed by Commissioner Bonise to the Historic Preservation Board as per charter
articles 2 section 88 for a two-year term ending June 17 2027. It needs a commission vote because it to extend the term limits. Okay. And then in three um Angel Lopez has been appointed by Commissioner Bish to the design review board as per city charter article 2
section 884 to your term ending June 17, 2027. Okay. Show N1 and N3 is accepted. And uh can we get a motion on N2, please? I'll move that please. Second. Have a motion by Commissioner Bonich and a second by Vice Mayor Cory. Madam
Clerk, if you can call the role on N2, please. Yes. Commissioner Bonich, yes. Commissioner Rodriguez, yes. Commissioner Cay, yes. Vice Mayor Corey, yes. Mayor Fernandez, yes. Item passes five. Great. Thank you. So, we can allow for public remarks on comments that are published on the agenda. Why don't we take up the city manager's report or are
we ready? We're ready. Oh, we are. Okay, great. So, let's go back to presentations again. Our represent from V is recognized. Zikes, good evening. All right. Okay. Uh, so the idea is that we cover a bit the Somi Metro Connect uh
microransit program that was launched in uh late February. And I'll move this along. Um, the idea of the program was to attract a flow of writers into downtown South Miami. Uh, we set up the service profile running on
late weekdays and late week hours. So, th Thursday to Saturday um up to 11 p.m. and then Sunday from noon to 8:30 uh with a designated amount of uh hours per week across three vehicles. The objective was to cover the entire city
of South Miami um and eventually uh just parameters as needed and as we learned uh we worked together uh with the city of South Miami to uh work on writer marketing leveraging most of uh
communication through um the Metroconnect app and so our base of writers uh reaching out to um former freebie um writers Okay. um were uh communicating on PR uh
instances to build awareness uh conducting community engagement for uh senior training centers and uh most recently we've been engaging on a business outreach campaign um that basically puts some some thematics um
around food health uh to attract uh writers into the uh the south down uh downtown Miami Um the service has been growing consistently since launch. Uh we've already completed 2,700
rides uh since the program started in late February. Uh what you're going to see in this chart, not only is the number of rides increasing, but also the productivity. Productivity means the number of rides that are being done on average per a
vehicle. and from the moment that the driver logs in and receives the first um the first uh ride assignment. So you can see that we started obviously at two and we're now trending at 3.7 um on a on the
productivity increase. This is very typical. It's a good metric for the service. We expect it to continue to get better as we evolve and become better at predicting um uh ridership and matching supply uh versus the demand.
So I was mentioning we in May have reached um 1,386 rides. As a comparison, the previous program was doing um around a thousand rides per month. So this has seeing an important increase there. We still um
see that there's potential to continue to grow that number. Uh we are internally targeting a number of,450 rides on average uh per month and a growing productivity to 3.8 rides. Um the more that these rides increase, the
more the productivity increase, the lower the cost per ride becomes. And so we already seeing how that has trended uh positively in the last kind of three months. And we're expecting it to land at around $15. uh which is very much in line with the metro connect overall
service in throughout the county. But overall very good uh metrics uh so far um trending in a very positive uh light uh with regards to um ETA so the times that the how long it will take for you
to get a ride uh we have 73% of the trips uh with ETAs below 25 minutes and more than 50% of the trips with ETAs below 15 minutes which was a cutoff that we had from um the start.
The other thing to highlight is that once you get a uh proposed pickup time, we're saying that our variation is under one minute between the actual arrival and the proposed time for arrival. So
that's a very good metric on of ontime performance. And actually that's on average but um almost 90% of rides have this variation under five minutes. We're also doing uh 41% are shared rides
and this is very much in line um uh with the rise of productivity and um the idea of the microtransit program. Uh if we zoom in so we had seen on the first slide the bigger zone. This is
where when we're zooming in more specifically to this area here shaded in blue, which we understand is the expanded downtown um South Miami district. Uh we are highly lighting here that six of the
zones, six of the top uh destinations and pickups are within that um blue zone. So, this is um part of part of what we had as goals, right? Uh increasing traffic into that area. So,
we're seeing that six of the top 10 uh pickups are actually within that zone, the downtown South Miami area. It's important to highlight that there is an overlap of the South Miami uh area with um the kind of county service. So,
the South Miami actually does benefit from this broader metro connect um service from the county. The county runs this from Mondays to Friday from very early morning to 7:00 p.m. um and does put in 10 other vehicles, right? So,
some of these rides are going to be exclusively in the South Miami uh zone. Some of them are going to be in and out of the South Miami zone, and some of them don't touch the South Miami zone. But basically we wanted to highlight on the left side what you see here is the
rides that we have been doing with the South Miami vehicles. So that's the 1,386 numbers and that's how we've been increasing with the 233 vehicles that we have in service. But you can see that in the same zone we have other vehicles
from the Metro Connect program. And this we service if you see the on the right hand side bar the number that is showing there 2,600 that is how many uh in total rides are done within the south Miami zone if you
add both uh the south Miami exclusive supply and the metric connect supply in the same south Miami zone. So this is just to highlight that apart from the 1,400 rides that we're doing with the South Miami supply zone, you also
benefit in almost double the number of rides within the same zone by leveraging the Metro Connect um um um service. Again, if we zoom in into that um South
Miami downtown area, you can see that uh we've brought the service has brought around 2.5,000 so two uh 200 2.5,000 riders into the south uh Miami area. 80% of the rides
have touched this uh blue zone and 35% of them so around 940 rides per month have the downtown district as a destination. Um and um most of the the the top
destinations are within this downtown district zone. All right. We know um that the mayor had highlighted not only this expanded area, but especially a a goal within the um more restricted
current South um South Miami downtown area district. Uh we and this has been important for us as we've set up the service. It's been three months. Um, I think we're the plan is to keep on working here with the city to continue to bring traffic into that specific area
to help support restaurants and businesses um uh to bring in more traffic here. So, we've been discussing uh what else can we continue to do to raise awareness of the Metro Connect service as a possibility for riders to
come in and um uh make use uh and bring more awareness to the service. All right. Um just wanted to highlight um lastly that the current supply is very try uh tries
to match the requests and the demand that we have for the zone. So we have a very strong coverage around 84% of the requests actually do receive a proposal. That means that and we don't give proposals that are over 35 minutes. So
it means that 30 84% of people who consider writing are actually going to be able to get a proposal and get a right. Um, and this just shows that uh, you know, there's a very strong there's a
peak of service around 2 3 4 p.m. So that's when you're less likely to get uh, all of your proposals, but um, more likely throughout the day um, in other depending on how the time of the day goes, right? But this is something we
monitor very closely uh and we're always in discussion also with the city to in our interest we always want to match very carefully the supply with the requests and the demands so we can do more rise lower costs per ride higher productivity and get the most um um out
of the resources putting into the program. Uh having said that um I know that it had been an interest or had been discussed when we had uh first brought up the program um uh metroconnect is integrated with Uber. So that is always
a possibility and can be leveraged um as an option if it's an integration that we want to turn on. Um the way it would work is we would define some of some of the parameters. they have to meet uh some of the MetroConnect parameters, but then that would be configured and then
you would be able to track um um when you make that request, if there if the ride meets those parameters, you would be sent to uh an Uber uh request and you'd be able to track then in the Uber app. So, that's a possibility if it's
something we want to track. As I said before, I think we're trending very well in the request um and our ability to service um the the demand. Right. All right. I think that's what we had for today. I don't know if there is any
questions. Colleagues, any questions? Yes, you're recognized, sir. Hi. So, I've I've heard good things. Um the only place that and and the only comment I want to bring up is in the senior center. Mhm. So, we've had a couple of
the seniors say that they they they have to go walk to meet the the Metro Connect. Is there any way that we can make it so that one location is always pickup no matter who calls as long as that address and that location is is
known where the pickup is going to be like that that they can pick up the seniors at the building rather than making them walk? Okay, that's a very good question. So the way the service in South Miami is set up is set up as a doortodoor. So the South Miami service
is a doortodoor which means that regardless of seniors on non seniors you don't have to walk. The complication comes in because the metroconnect county uh service which is not and it also serves the same some of the same areas
depending on if it's serving morning time you're actually riding a metroconnect county um ride that one is not a doortodoor that is a curb to curb um what we have been doing and we have I've been personally going to the senior
centers um trainings is we've been registering the people who were there and changing the profile on their account so that they can once they do request they are automatically assigned to as a doortodoor even if they're part
of the metroconnect. Um uh this is something that as we've engaged in the senior um community engagement trainings, we've been doing that. They don't need me to be there for that to be done. They can call a customer center and then that profile
can be changed. So we can also bring awareness of that point because it is something doable and very feasible that any senior or anybody who has a mobility um difficulty um can be changed to a doortodoor. no matter it's guaranteed in
the South Miami supply, but it can be changed for also the Metro Connect. So, yes. Um, and the mayor was also um I I me and him I showed him some of the seniors have it already and it still
won't do. Yeah. So, just if you can if I can elaborate on that point, Julian, what what what we observed one day was in the person's profile. Yeah, it was accurate. But if they they were not necessarily hailing rides through the app, they were calling and when they
call true the the telephonic operator or the the phone operator I said that the phone operator uh apparently the profile online did not recognize that they had selected that they were handicapped. So let me look into that. That should not be the case because regardless of how
you book you how you create the profile it should it should be it should link up. You're saying yes correct. For whatever reason in that case I think it is not. So, okay. No, thank you for talking. We'll keep an eye on that. Yes, definitely. Definitely. In fact, in our weekly uh calls, um we've shared if if
there's any kind of complaints um you know uh we can submit a ticket. This things goes directly and we we'll look at any of these um whatever complaints we have. So, investigation is part of commission. When you said a question, you're recognized. Ma'am, thank you. Um
you say that even when you're not there, they can do it. Does the senior center have like instructions on how to do it if you're not there? Yes, because it's not um that they have to do anything. They just have to call the customer center. So when you call the customer center, they can change the profile.
Okay. So they physically have to call. It's not something that we can help them do. We can help them do it. So if if just for our collective information, if you open up their profile on the app, there's a button you select that basically says that you're identify yourself as handicapped. Okay. Yes. And so that is what that is what will allow
for on Metro Connect pointto-oint pickup service. Gotcha. While our service is standard, on the basic service, it is not. That is the differentiator in terms of being picked up. It's a very easy fix. We're able to confirm on this young woman's profile that in fact she had been properly designated, but for
whatever reason, when she called the operator to Hillary, they made her walk a block or two. So, thank you for letting us know. We investigate uh any instances of that. Commissioner Kaya, you're recognized. Thanks again for the presentation. I think that um you spoke a little bit more about efficiencies
like roughly around 3 or 4 o'clock. What can VIA do a little bit better um specifically in those time frames? I'll give you a scenario where I've been called twice because they're complaining that they couldn't get a ride. I actually physically went up and picked them up myself so he would be quiet.
Shout out. He knows who he is. Um we know who he is too by the way. So actually Yeah. But what what what are the efficiencies that we can move looking forward to get a little bit better during peak towers? Yeah. Um, the more mature the service becomes, um,
the better the algorithm becomes at understanding, predicting ride requests and, um, prioritizing rides and assigning and we work with the operations GM to assign the right supply
around that. Obviously, um the more supply you have, the higher chances that you're going to not incur, um an unmet request. I think uh one of the key things that we
have at VIA is that we can always adjust parameters and we can adjust the service. Um the way we currently have it, we're trying to cover all the service hours and we're trying to distribute and if you see the red lines there, we're trying to distribute it the
supply of cars around the requests. We could always revisit that, but there will be trade-offs, right? So you're saying, okay, let's uh you know, shrink some of the hours so we have more hours around those 3M or let's increase supply. Those are solutions that that
come in with certain trade-offs. But we do expect I don't know if you saw the the July, we expect uh to serve more rides uh and get better as productivity continues to get better. So that also helps improve. The tricky thing that
exists is that um this is a very popular zone and uh the service is in an area that I don't think we need to necessarily put more supply because when you put more supply more people jump on board and so there's always a a level of
unmet demand and um we can play with service. Can I can I translate that is is that the the cheaper it is and the more efficient it becomes the more people want to ride. So it becomes a I think what I'm what I've
heard in our in our private conversation it becomes a self-perpetuating problem. So if you have a completely free service that's gets optimized people want to use it more. It creates more demand and so there's still you never really c you never really capture 100%. I think just for our collective
information, I think the broader policy question of the county is are they going to begin to charge some sort of a per ride fee to make the system more viable and begin to also rightsize demand so that people don't ride this this option all the time because
it's just that free and convenient. So, um it's a conversation we may want to have as we see this develop. I know we're reviewing the data. One of my observations was that it seems that we're providing a better version of our prior service still serving many of the
same uh the same customer base. So my conversations we have been about how do we attract new customers into the system and again those may be customers that can can afford to pay something for their ride. Um but with the idea of again going back to the I my core reason
for wanting to do this was to bring people into our town center. I'm not seeing that level of, you know, inbound ride from nontraditional users. So, we'll probably have to do something on the marketing side here to really kind of grow the service base to a new complement of riders that are just not
familiar with it and probably never never used it. But, um, in aggregate numbers, I think we're better. We're delivering more people to places than we were with the prior provider. Um, but we still have this service gap that opportunity. Yeah.
the uh did you did you sorry ma'am go ahead so you're recognized um did we go through the presentation and see what the lead times are or wait times is that something you presented yes um I can go back to the slide we need to she did
yeah I think the the slide in one of the slides in question showed 50% of the rides under 25 minute headways and the other 50% above a 25 to 35 minute headway yes correct So again, in terms of getting premium writers, commissioner guy, that's not an
optimal headway number, right? So I think what is a good a good measure though is the variation. So when you're given a time, at least you know how to manage that time and um the pickup tends to be very close to the proposed time.
These I mean these numbers are not necessarily 50% is less than 15 minutes and that was one of our big things that we're keeping track as is a KPI is that we wanted it to be roughly under 15 minutes across the board but we're seeing 50% of the trips below 15 minutes but 50% closer up all the way between 20
to 35 minutes. So it's just something we got to keep an eye on because I mean that's that's not a service that we want to provide to our to our to our residents is wait 40 minutes. I know it's a free service right now, but it's something that we we should try to strive to be a little bit better with. Yeah. I think I think again
if we want to bring on people who are I call choice writers or premium riders, obviously this this headway is not going to be attractive to them. But I think what is what is at least for folks who are transit dependent the important thing is they the service is predictable enough
they can plan around the headway. So if they make a reservation, they can they can count on it arriving when they say it's going to arrive. So that is the positive information from this database. I think the other information I asked Juliana for as well is understanding we're doing very well. That's 50% of the
rides are at our KPI. Um but I'm wondering at what point of the day are those rides distributed. So are we seeing longer headways at different points in time that may speak to when we want to concentrate services right to meet that demand and reduce services and change our service window essentially.
So further comments or questions? So when when do the mayor um so when you say premium service it would be like something that like they would opt to pay for but it wouldn't be the standard service. So there'd be a standard and then a premium where they pay to get it faster.
No, I think you know, look, if you add a dollar or$2 dollars to the service, it's not going to it's not going to allow you to add additional fleet, right? Because it's I think at the end of the at the end of the day, uh uh running quick numbers, it's about $80,000 per vehicle.
Uh given the amount of hours that we are asking them to be in operation. So the if we're doing 1,500 rides a month, you know, tag a dollar or two on it, it's not going to generate a whole lot of uh a whole lot of income to offset that cost. But and it's also very uncommon
that a the cost of any surface is usually funded by fears. Correct. So and then they have the option for the Uber option that you were presenting that requires more money. Yeah. Yeah. So I think I think really what we're talking about is understanding the when the
distribution of trips are happening and concentrating resources at particular inflection points if we want to reduce these headways substantially. You can correct me if I'm wrong. Yeah. No, that's absolutely correct. So we could revisit the size of the zone. We could revisit service hours so that we could
shift more supply to certain times. But again, I want to highlight it's pretty much impossible to get 100% um payment because the better you do, more people jump on board, right? So, uh, 84% up to 90% is a very, um, uh,
consistent metric of a good service, um, that we see on the parameters we have. Again, I think Mr. Mayor might have some other ideas and we're going to be working alongside to see what else could uh, we do and what how we can bring more awareness, bring a different profile,
maybe more willingness to pay. Um that also reduces cancellations and no shows which also tends to improve um service. Further questions. No, I'm just 84% of the people don't get a ride. No, no, it's the opposite.
Sorry. The other way around. Sorry. 16% of the people don't get rides. I'm trying to I'm trying to see if determine that if that's something that how important that is. You know, people are if people are depending on this particular service to get home from
point A to point B and 16% of the people don't get their ride or 16 or 40% of the people have to wait over over 20 minutes. Is that is that something that we could do better with? Is that something that we want to look at? Because if we're marketing at this for a
way of having our residents and our constituents use this on a daily basis, the system's not going to work. if we're going to market it, which what was our intention was to start shipping more people back into our hometown so our businesses and the creativity in our
area would be much better and better served. And that's something we might need to look back into and figure out what what are the parameters that we want to set there. So just boost your thoughts. Yeah. No, I think I think there I think there are a lot of questions that we need to answer and you know uh the county is offering a
base service. It may change with this coming fiscal year. Uh there's conversations about changing the hours of service, possibly adding a fair. We have to monitor that to see because obviously it's built on the back of that service. Um but I think you know
we pro probably the answer is I've been thinking about this for quite a while today as been in preparation for this meeting. So we're probably have to figure out where we can want to concentrate our our dollars in terms of providing service. We're not going to be the backbone service provider for people to get to last mile to and from the
station. that's should already be covered by by the county. Um, where we want to play in that space, how we want to deploy these resources a bit more strategically to reduce these headways and possibly make it attractive to
non-traditional writers is a conversation we probably need to continue to have. So, um, but I think you're right on sir. Okay, further further questions and comments. Okay, thank you for the presentation. We appreciate it. Thank you. Okay.
Okay, colleagues, we will move on to the adoption of the minutes. Can I get a motion for the adoption of the minutes of June 3rd, 2025? I'll move that. Second. Okay. Have a motion by Commissioner Bonich and a second by Commissioner Rodriguez. Uh, any questions, comments? Madam Clerk, if you could call the role, please. Yes.
Commissioner Cay. I wasn't here. You could read it. Did you read them? No. Okay. I guess I guess can he can he abstain? You need me to vote on? Yes, you can. You can vote for it even though you weren't there, but it's up to you. Or you can just vote no if you want to feel
uncomfortable. No. Okay, there you go. It's fine. Commissioner Rodriguez, yes. Never had that problem. Commissioner Bonish, yes. Vice Mayor Corey, yes. Mayor Fernandez, yes. Minutes pass 41. Thank you. Uh, Mr. Manager, can we get your report, please?
Yes, sir. Our deputy will be providing. Madam Deputy, good evening. Good evening. A reminder that city hall will be closed on Thursday, June 19th in observance of the Junth holiday. The Black Cultural Affairs Association is going to be hosting their Junth
celebration at our community center on Saturday the 21st and that's going to be from 11 to 1. We also have one of the biggest the city's biggest events July 4th. That's at Palmer Park. It's very familyfriendly. It's going to be a good time. that is um from 5:00 to 9:00 with
fireworks at 9:00 p.m. I'm happy to report that at the state level currently we have secured 900,000 for the covert replacement, 900 for septic to sewer conversion and 350 for our police CAD. So obviously that's subject to the
governor's review and potential veto but we should have answers in early July for that. And finally, our team has been working on Taste of Somi, which I mentioned during the last commission meeting, is our version of Miami Spice, but better because it includes our retail as well. Um, we have over 31
participating businesses. Right now, the savings are going to take place in the month of July. We're going to show you just a quick sneak preview of one of our uh marketing materials that'll be used. Now, for the first time ever, South Miami brings you taste of Somi flavor.
Come check out our local restaurants at a bargain. Breakfast from $15 to $20. Brunch $20 to $40. Lunch $20 to $35. And yes, of course, dinner from $45 to $65 only through the month of July. Come
check it out. [Music] That's just a short clip. We'll have lots of marketing material with It's a party. Um, with all of the participating businesses, when you log on to our website, there'll be an automatic popup that comes up where you
can see everybody's menu and everything that they're offering. So, we're excited about that. That's the end of the manager's report. Questions of uh the deputy manager. Have a question. Yes, sir. You're recognized. So, what um what are we doing from the
som taste like from a marketing perspective? Are we blasting this through socials across the board? Is this something that could Can we get it catchy to make sure we can get more people across all Miami date? Yep. We're blasting it everywhere. So, we are going to put marketing dollars behind it.
There's going to be ads. It's going out in our newsletter, all of our social media channels. It's going out everywhere. We are we uh do we have some benchmarks or some like understanding of what we're trying to see out of this thing? Is you don't have
to answer this. I mean, I'm sure internally that you guys have some good feedback on I think his question is how how we how are we going to measure success behind this initiative? We have all well all of the businesses are going to have a QR code for whoever participates to respond. We already have
um these loyalty cards, so they have stamps on them. You participate, you come to a Somi business five times during the month of July that's participating. You get a sticker, you get entered into a raffle to win a prize. So, a lot of the businesses are participating in that. So I think we'll have good feedback as to how good
participation was and you know how far our marketing efforts went. Questions manager who's been helping you put this together? We have our team in uh community affairs and marketing. So we have Brandon Sam, we have Evelyn, we
have uh Chamber South, we have John Edward Smith on the board. So a nice group of people. We have Michael Hoffman who brought the idea from Kitchen 57. It's been a good team community effort to get it going. Well, thank you to all of you. Appreciate it. Thank you. Okay.
Thank you. Uh Madam City Attorney, you're recognized for your report. Uh yes. Good evening everyone. Two items tonight. We have an update on the state litigation, the 287 agreement. Um a amended complaint was filed last Friday,
June 13th. I believe it was circulated to all of you earlier this week. Um the city filed its amended complaint and now we expect the state to file an amended motion uh to dismiss. They have 10 days to file their new response. At that
point, a hearing will likely be set to address the motion to dismiss. That's the first item. Any questions on that? You you may you're recognized. Yes. I I would just like to make clear that not
all of us are in agreement with this. I've been actually asked now a couple of times. If you can believe that, somebody actually asking me if I support that. Um, so I just want to make it clear again, this is not something I support. I did not support this. I did not support taking away the right for the
city manager to make decisions for us. I don't support any of this and I think this is a really bad idea, especially when you look at the dollar amount attached to it. Okay, further comments, questions.
Um, Madam Attorney, in terms of disposition of the case, I know we had a conference call or status call with opposing counsel, I believe, recently on the case. And so, from that call, what did we learn or were there were there any agreements made? We learned that they they will file an amended motion to
dismiss most likely in in response to our amended complaint. Okay. Um, and there'll be a hearing on that. There's also a possibility of a stipulated uh summary judgement where there's no facts at issue and we move to a hearing on summary judgement. So we would avoid a
protracted discovery that would avoid protracted discovery. Yes. So we can just get to the merits and get allow the judge to rule on the briefs without a further hearing. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Uh and just and you're on the record as being not not in support. Uh,
I want to go on the record here publicly and say that I'm actually going to raise money to defer the costs of the litigation on behalf of the city. I'm still trying to figure out a vehicle so that the donations can be made and uh hopefully reduce uh the amount of our financial exposure by pursuing this
cause of action. So, I just want to put that on the record as well. Um, with that, yeah, yes. No, I just I I think that when we do something like that, we we politicize
our position. And I I think your intention is is a great one. I you know, considering that we have 900, 900, and 350 that will likely meet a veto pen hard. Um
I I applaud your efforts. I just think that we are allowing or we're courting people that have personal interest into something that should not have personal interest. Do
you you know and bad job of exp Yeah. No, I I understand what you're saying and I understand the possibility for the perception of a conflict which is why we have not alied oursel with any third party group in the prosecution of this litigation. I always try to just keep it
to us and any other municipality who'd like to join us uh if they're so inclined uh because I do not want there to be any sort of confusion as to what we're trying to accomplish here. So I I I was encouraged to hear from our other city attorney Mr. Russio that in fact
the state council was inclined to kind of move on an expedited basis because it would also minimize our respective costs. Um, but again, to the extent that this board is concerned about the expenditure, ultimately it'll be our choice whether we want to accept those funds or not.
But I'm certainly going to make an effort to personally uh defay those costs on behalf of the city. So, I said that to us I said that in a private session. Hopefully, I'm not violating uh the confines of that of that conference, but I did want to put that on the record as well. Okay. Uh, you said there were
two items. That was the first. Yes. The second item is the Mandel Stem litigation that matter. You may recall you had directed us to seek a settlement agreement with Mandle Steam uh where they would provide us with a fire access easement along the southern portion of their property in exchange for the
commission considering a modification to their planned unit development. Uh that was rejected by Mandle Stem. They are not in agreement with granting the city the fire access easement along that perimeter of their property. Yes. Let me elaborate on that since I've been kind of trying to lead those discussions on
our behalf with uh Mr. Manlestim. Uh from the outset of the conversations that I had with him, I communicated to him that to reach any sort of an understanding I needed to have the you know the concurrence of this board which you all granted when we presented the uh outline of the agreement last last I
think last meeting or the meeting prior I can't remember when it was uh at no time was it represented to me that he needed the concurrence of any third party. To my knowledge, the property was owned by himself and his spouse through a holding company that they controlled. And uh I think it was uh today's
Tuesday, so probably last Thursday. I had called to follow up on the status of their review of the documents we transmitted, including the final description of the easement so they have a full understanding of what portion of their property would be uh burdened by by the benefit that we were getting. And
I was advised at that time by Mr. Mandleston that uh the board of the school had voted to reject the terms of the settlement out of concerns for impacts to the property value uh and possible operation of school. And
just for the benefit of the board and anyone who may be listening, what what had been indicated to me was that the footprint of the parking lot uh that would be burdened by the easement would be unchanged in any future expansion scenario for the school and it was a very limited expansion plan that they
had. So I did not understand why first of all they would have any objection operationally and secondly why it was only being communicated to us now that there was any other board that had an interest in the disposition of this matter. So personally, it's very bitter and very disappointing that we find ourselves here given that we spent three
and a half months plus trying to fashion a solution really on a case that is as frivolous as anyone could bring against the city. Um and unfortunately we have not uh didn't end up with the result that we had hoped. I thought it was a good outcome for us in terms of not uh
impacting uh a very important park in any sort of negative way with an additional roadway uh to allow us to build the facility. and I thought it gave them some predictability in their ability to continue to operate the school for an extended period of time under a development agreement. Um, so
that that's where the discussion ended. Unfortunately, happy to answer any questions you have and I do have some questions for the city attorney at at the appropriate time. Yes, ma'am. Have we considered just fixing the building that we have?
Because we're looking at an over $3 million price tag. We haven't started anything. We've hit numerous road roadblocks at this point. And now with this easement issue, I'm not quite sure how that easement would work with where
the building is. So it would either be we have to reimagine where that building's going to be in the park or we have to just stop and fix what we have because I I think we continue to go down this
road. Unfortunately, we thought we we solved the problem, which would have been great. But since we aren't and realistically, we can't count on any other outcome, I think, with with that party, then we need to reassess on our
side. I agree. So, I think uh your comments are spot on. I think one, whatever we do from a redesign perspective, I think we should call upon the same firm to fix the mistake they made because frankly, I think we find ourselves in this position because the
design firm made a material oversight in not anticipating that an access, you know, access, fire access would be required for a substantially new and redesigned facility. So I think remodeling the building is an option we
can discuss. Um the other option is relocating the building closer to the existing parking asphalt which would require us maybe to modify or move it or move it to the back where that other street is. I think that puts that puts that activity node close to the neighborhood. I think that would
probably just knowing the sensitivities of the neighbors around there to begin with. I would imagine that would be something that would not be well received by neighbors given some feedback we've gotten around a much less intense improvement which was pickle ball courts that were adjacent to those same homes. So I don't know that I don't
know that that's an option but certainly relocating it closer to the main parking apron which would require us to relocate tennis courts. I was going to say then we'd have to switch flip them right. Um that's a second option that we can just abandon the project altogether. That's a third a fourth option and so I wanted to
ask the city attorney about is is there the ability for us to explore eminent domaining the easement which I don't think would be that expensive um but at least analyzing that as an option to preserve what we've expended on plans to date and you know procure
what is access that we're probably never going to hopefully need to use given the nature of the easement that we're seeking. So I don't know madam madam attorney is that something we could explore? Yes, there is an option for the city to pursue what we call a quick take, which is an eminent domain action.
Um, that's about a six-month process. And that requires the first step is a five factor study which looks at the need, the alternative locations, the cost, safety, and the environmental factors affecting that. Um, based on that, the city would adopt a resolution.
It would authorize the manager and the city attorney to pursue eminent domain either by voluntary acquisition or through um the quicktake process. It would require an appraisal of the property. Roughly you're looking at about six months to get that process
completed and that's in the best case scenario um to complete it. But it is an option. Just want to let you know. I I think those are the options. I don't know if anybody else had any thoughts they wanted to put on in terms of options we could explore. And I think, you know, when we do the project, your comments at our workshop were exactly
spot on. They've been bothering me since you made them because they're 100% right. You know, I I I would love to have a conversation, Mr. Manager, about just and Stephen possibly how we get through a bidding process if we end up with a cost per square foot on the order of
what we're estimating north of $1,000 for what is a very basic building. what procurement alternatives we have to enter into direct negotiations with parties because I it seems to me that it's in fact the public bidding process may be driving up the cost and I I it's
it's just what we're what we're proposed to spend we're estimating that we have to spend I think in all of our professional and personal experience is in congruent with what costs are in the marketplace they're I'd say easily twice as expensive as what we're seeing for comparable buildings you know uh that
are being done private party to private So, um, that's a I don't think the city attorneys were here for that conversation at the last time, but when we were going through our capital workshop, we did we did all comment that the cost per square foot of the building was north of $,100 per square foot. That
was the estimate. And I can tell you, we've got clients that are building luxury product that are substantially below that number, half that number. Um so again what what direct negotiation options we have to procure those improvements I think are something at
least I'd like to understand our option whether it's post the procurement and getting back pricing that we think is just in congruent with what we could get privately in the marketplace. uh what are what are our procurement options, you know, once we get through these issues of citing the building in terms
of actually procuring the improvements themselves, hopefully at a price that's more reasonable than what we're being told we should estimate because it's a public construction project. We're governed by Florida statute. That's 25520 20. Yeah. If the work exceeds 300,000, it has to be bid
out unless we meet one of the exemptions in that Florida statute, which we will not from what I from what I understand of the statute, unless it's a repair, maintenance or exempt. I think a new building would not be a repair maintenance. It would be a new public work. Um, so I'm not familiar with any exceptions that would fit the new
construction of that building. But if we if we bid the building, let's assume we get three bids and they're all north of,100 square feet, $1,100 a square foot and our strong belief is that we could procure if we were doing it personally, we could procure for substantially less,
right? Can we discard a bid and then enter into direct negotiations? I think that's what happens after the competitive bidding. Do we have can we only procure through the competitive bidding or we do do we have to ensure that we do the bidding to make sure that we're getting the most advantageous
pricing and so that that's the question really legally that I I've never dealt never really thought of dealt with but was at least sparked in my mind as a byproduct of that conversation certainly I think per two 25520 we have to procure it
right but whether we have to actually complete the procurement if we think the number is unreasonable short of throwing it out and rebidding, what are our options? Yeah, we would need to look at that, mayor and commission. Um, I know if you don't receive responsive bids, you can cancel the solicitation and then directly
negotiate with some of these vendors. But in this instance, we would sorry, if you don't re if don't receive if you don't receive responsive okay bids, but they're put out in responsible, we can then direct. It's okay. Yes. Okay. So, we would need to look at that situation and advise you what other options you
may have. um in that situation that you mentioned and get back to you. I off the top of my head, I'll tell you. Yes, sir. You're recognized. Um to to the manager, how do we um procure these projects? Well, how do we
advertise basically is what my question is on on what platform? Yeah, we we um we have a platform that that people subscribe to that's that that's national and if you remind me the name the demand star. Yeah. And and so a lot
of people subscribe to that and and and so it's a platform that it's widely distributed. Yeah. Do we do like uh like the business review and advertise there? I'm just saying I think that maybe one of the the issues that we're having is that we're having too few biders and so
maybe we need to advertise a little bit more. We have not bid this out yet. I just want to the price. No, no, this is this is just the order of magnitude estimate, I believe. Correct. So, but it it is, you know, we've all remarked that it is very high. So, we're concerned about concerned about that. Yeah. Mayor.
Yes, sir. You're recognized. Maybe we can just uh give some recommendations back or have the team, you know, parks and public works and the manager's office to figure out different solutions on how to go about doing this. I think that there was a solution that we could
have looked into before on getting some fire hydrant through the process because we remember we've already spent money on the design already. So, we were pretty close to getting it permitted. Um maybe we can kind of revisit that as well and just figure out what the differential options are.
Yeah, certainly be happy to we've been talking about some different ideas. Obviously that some are old ideas but that we may have to go to and um the specific issue is that the as the mayor mentioned was not identified when the building was cited which is that the
fire suppression vehicle has to uh be within reach within 50 ft of the building. And so that's the issue that caused this sort of revisit. Um, and that's hence the mayor's comment about, you know, well, maybe we put it towards the front where the tennis court is and then build the tennis court in the back.
That's one option. Uh, but obviously that triggers um adjustments to your design and and I don't know, you know, what kind of time. So, we need to evaluate what that does to a timeline from a permitting standpoint. So, yeah, be happy to look at some options and put something together for you. Thank you.
Okay. further uh questions or comments of the city attorney? Seeing none, we'll move on then. Uh let's open up the floor for public remarks. Um if you've not yet signed up, uh please do so with John at the back. I've got first on the list uh Jezelle
Jimenez, please come forward. Actually, we've got your item I think later on the agenda, so we'll wait till then. Uh Mr. Lopez, Jason Lopez, you're next. Hello all, Jason Lopez, 7730 Southwest 65th Place. Uh, I'm just here as a
longtime resident of the city of South Miami, hoping to convince you guys to start making more of an investment in parks and green space in the city of South Miami. Um, we are watching development take our space faster than
we are acquiring it. and it is a finite resource that once it's gone, we cannot get back. Um, I know that accounting is complicated, but I know that accounting can be figured out after the fact in a lot of a lot of cases, but we cannot make more space. So, as a resident who
pays taxes, I would rather trade small tax breaks for individuals for better services, and I would like those services to include parks and green space and everything associated with them. Um, I know that The best cities in
our country and around the world have great parks and green space and you can visit them and you can either engage in them or disappear from your life or whatever it is you're looking to do. And I know that with the thousands of new residents that are planned and these new
annexations that you're considering and whatnot, we have a lot of new residents in South Miami coming our way and we need more parks and green space. So, as a taxpayer, I would encourage you to figure out a way to invest in parks and
green space. Thank you. Thank you, sir, for your comments. Uh, Madame Mayor, you're next on the list. [Music] My name is Sally Phillips and I live at 7310 Southwest 64th Court in South Miami. And I was going to speak to item
number four, which has been postponed now. I'm not sure why, but I want to say that last time the city tried to annex something, it was shot down by one of the Miami date commissioners. And I not sure, but I think that that even after
her disapproval of those parts of it that she did not like after that was fixed, her staff did not work with our city um manager. I don't I think that the part that was that the annexation that was
shot down was probably worth more than the um annexation that was proposed or was going to be discussed today. And I want to be sure that you know that it takes an awful lot of work to set up and
get all of the gizmo, everything that has to be done to get something annexed. The annexation of the southeast part of near where that was going to happen for South Miami was brought forward initially by the residents there and
that most of the res that enough of the residents approved of it for it to go forward. I'm not sure where this particular proposal is coming from and if it's coming from the residents. I'm I so I want you to be careful about
putting an awful lot of time and energy into putting together something that may not work. And I also want to know why you don't look back at that souththeast chunk that we were going to that was proposed to be annexed that got shot
down. It got shot down initially because it was including too much of Dade land in it. But once day land was carved out, the commissioner sta staff never did respond to us. And there's
been a big change over in staff and commissions since then. But I wonder why you haven't gone back and looked at that, which was something that those residents wanted, why you haven't
revitalized that and worked on that. M madame mayor, just for your information and and the public's that that application was brought back forward. Unfortunately, when it was revisited uh the preliminary ballots uh to hit the minimum threshold, we did meet the
threshold. The the the residents of that area unfortunately did not want to proceed with annexation. So, I believe it died, Mr. Manager, when was it last December, last November? Roughly, roughly last November, if I recall, we spent about five months attempting to do outreach with that neighborhood. Unfortunately, they voted the option
down. So, just wanted to share that for the record. Thank you. Uh, Miss Fischer, you're recognized. Good evening. Good evening to all of you. Good evening to you. Thank you all for being here and your service. And the same thing with all of my fellow residents and our
wonderful staff and our wonderful police department. Thank I'm very grateful to everyone for doing their great job. Anyway, now to get down to my remarks. Um I want to give a big thanks to our mayor. You're
famous now, mayor. Yeah. I I've been a many many years long uh watcher fan of this of that show this week in South Florida. Uh they it's a great informational show. Yeah, you're a star now, apparently. So I you know you gave
a great clear um explanation of the issue and I'm very proud of you because and I'm very proud of our city because of you uh because this is the I was aware that this is the only municipality and Glenna Milberg brought that out in
the whole state of Florida that's asking for some clarification dealing with a very important legal issue. Um, and as a resident, I don't want our police department to be forced to do anything outside of the parameters of their legal
obligation to the city and normal functions of law enforcement. So, I know that your question is dealing with all of that and thank you so much for what you're doing. I hope to see you on that show again. Hopefully, hopefully not anytime soon. So, I hope she invites you
again often. Often, and soon. It's been a long time. So, okay. Okay. Um, then I'll go on to my next issue, which is preeemption. Um, I've spoken to maybe all of you about preeemption or maybe most of you about preeemption. It's a
big concern of mine. As an old-timer, I I go back to the days when there wasn't any I was not certainly not aware of any preeemption. We actually had something called municipal sovereignty and I valued it and I think most of our
citizens valued it and um I think that the city needs to start a movement to educate the voters about preeemption and how this is and how it is a dictatorial policy that has robbed us of this
self-determination as a city. What we need to do is start voting for people in the state legislature and in the governor's office who will support municipal sovereignty. And maybe we can start with some um alliance with the
League of Cities. I do not know if the city if South Miami is still actively involved. League of Cities that would be a great alliance and you got we have to whenever there's a movement it has to start somewhere. So, it might be a good
starting point and it might be a good starting point to start talking about this a lot. I think I think um Commissioner Bonich will take that that effort head on. We're going to volunteer her to lead us on in the preeemption fight. Do I see a no or a yes? No, you see a
no. No. No. Well, that's a shame. And I think that there are things that are doable. Sometimes we don't think they're doable, but if we get ourselves the courage and the uh the will to do it that we we're we're capable of an awful lot more than
we may think we are. So, on the mango, I think you had one. On the mango. Okay. On the mango lot. Okay. We'll give you 10 seconds to wrap up. So, okay. Uh I want to say that I just I did a walk with my husband. I forced him to
come and see the Mango Lot. Four. Let's do this. For green space or for affordable housing? What's your vote? Oh my gosh, I am so for retaining that mangle law green as a green space and more than that, a historical green space. We'll
see you tomorrow night then. Okay. Yes, I'll be there and I'll give you a little bit of what I saw and what it means to all of us. Thank you, Miss Fischer. Thank you. Good night. Uh, Paige Teasdale. Good evening. Welcome. Hi.
Uh, do I need to say if you can say your name and address of the record. Okay. Just want to make sure. Wasn't sure the routine here. Paige Teasdale, 6620 Southwest 77 Terrace. Um, thank you for having us all here tonight. Um, I've
been up here a couple times and uh, I kind of want to piggyback off of my neighbor Jason about green space. I have lived here in city of South Miami now for over 25 years. Um, love this
neighborhood, love our neighbors. It brings me back to having something rare that when I was growing up, we all just kids ran out the neighborhood. We were out till got dark and then had to come home. My kids have experienced what I
experienced. Um, which is rare and you don't find that especially here in Miami anymore. Um, when I would tell my friends that I work here, uh, close by at Epiphany and I would tell them, you know, what where I live and what my kids
are able to do. They're like, "You know, all your neighbors and your kids grew up there." I'm like, "Yeah." They're like, "We don't even know our neighbors." I'm like, "That's so weird. How do you do that? I know everybody in my neighborhood. My kids know everybody in my neighborhood. We all grew up
together." Um, it's sad to see how much this has changed. Um, hey, I think I understand things have to grow. People are coming into Miami and we're lucky. I obviously it's a great place to live and
it's out there. Everybody wants to come here. I get that. And we have a very rare gem. South Miami is amazing place to live and we're spoiled and it's it's wonderful here. But we are seeing
changes going so rapidly. It's it's sad. I'll be honest with you. Um just right across the street from our little local bar here where when Dixie used to be, um you know, you've got this huge building
that's going up here that just sticks out like a sore thumb. Now they're getting ready to tear down the little tavern and build another one right there on the corner. uh you know across the street from it. Now obviously they're going to move the restaurant. I
understand that. But it's not going to be the same. Um so you're going to have another building there. Talking about Sunset Place changing. Obviously we know that's got to change. U then there's other buildings that are going to be coming up around here. the growth is
going to be unbelievable and it's starting to happen so rapidly that our neighborhood is not is not looking like it used to be. I understand we have to change and I I get that but the amount of people that are going to be moving
here in I continue our neighborhood is just it's sad to see. Um, again, I fought for trying to keep the the lot across the street from my house, green space, when a lady passed away. You all
were so close in purchasing it, and I lost that fight. Um, this was years ago, many years ago. And, uh, now I know it's taken over. We're going to have the three buildings that are going to be moving in there. I understand that. And
it's sad to see. But you know what's even sadder now is that little tiny lot that's on 80th Street that you guys want to put houses there. Even I I can't even understand how houses are even going to fit there. That's on my way to work every single day. I take that little
corner there. The traffic there is bad enough. I can't believe there's been so many accidents. It's almost happened there on that corner. And now you want to put I don't even know how many houses or or or tenants would even fit in that little corner. You've got those
beautiful mangroves. It's a small lot and it's I I don't know how you guys would even fit in housing there. Um we are losing green space by the minute. There is nothing left here but our backyards basically. So I am just saying
whatever you guys can start trying to preserve. I understand these people are coming in and they're wanting to build these big buildings, but please try to keep to keep in green space. Yes. Try to keep some in our beautiful neighborhoods. Okay. Thank you. Sorry.
Thank you. Okay. Do you have a question? I'm sorry. No, I was just going to give her a comment. Okay. Go ahead. I you know I think that you you bring up great comments and I think that you'll see that this commission has been very green oriented uh putting money aside getting ready to plant trees throughout the
city. Uh now we have a bond that you guys thankfully approved for us for us to go have the opportunity to acquire properties like that. Two years ago when the property on 77 Terrace was available we couldn't buy it. Now, we could, right? So, I think that you'll see this commission really work hard on trying to
figure out what's the best way for the community to keep the community as is. And by doing that, sometimes we have to make sure that we do smart development in specific areas so we protect everything else around it. So, I think that's what you've seen a lot from this commission to keep our community safe,
to keep it the way that it's been traditionally. My kids play just like your kids in the streets. I love it that they come home at 8 n o'clock for supper. Uh most of our kids are doing that throughout the city. We intend to keep that. Um we intend to make it more
green. We intend to make sure our canopy is better and bigger than ever. Those are our priorities from the commission side. I think everybody here on my colleagues would agree with that. So I just want to make sure you understand that that is one of our top priorities and we appreciate the advocacy. Yeah, I
do. Sincerely. Thank you. Okay. Um, anyone else in public remarks? Madam clerk, anyone else signed up? I don't see I don't have anyone else on my list. Okay. Anyone else online? No one's on. No one's online. So, uh, James, you're recognized, sir. Welcome.
Good evening, everybody. I was just instructed to invite everybody to the Junth event this Saturday, between 2 and 6 p.m. at the community center. Okay. All right. Thank you, sir.
always. Okay. With that, we'll close public remarks. Uh madam clerk, uh anyone have any objection to the reading of CAS one, two, and three, which are the consent agenda items? Anyone want to discuss any of those items? Okay. Madam clerk, if you can read for the record CA one, two,
and three. Yes. Item one, a resolution of the mayor and city commission of the city of South Florida authorizing the city manager to issue a notice of intent to withdraw from the public risk management of Florida Insurance pool. Item two, a resolution of the mayor and city commission of the city of South
Florida relating to the fiscal year 2024 2025 budget authorizing a budget transfer of $450,000 from the non-ED departmental general contingency line item to the public works engineering and construction division construction projects line item item three a
resolution of the mayor city commission of the city of South Florida authorizing the city manager to execute the state of Florida division of emergency management statewide mutual aid agreement SMA 2023 on behalf of the city. Thank you. Can I get a motion on the consent agenda? I'll
move it. I'll second. Okay. Have a motion by Commissioner Wish and a second by Commissioner Cay. Uh Madam Clerk, if you can call the role on a motion for CA1, two, and three uh and their adoption. Yes. Commissioner Cay. Yes. Commissioner Rodriguez. Yes.
Commissioner Bonish. Yes. Vari. Yes. Mayor Fernandez. Yes, ma'am. Agenda pass 5. Thank you. If we can uh read the I believe we need a quasi judicial warning on item six. Correct. I'm going to take up colleagues items uh
six, five, and then seven, eight, and nine in that order. Okay. And we'll close out the uh we'll close out with the discussion items. Okay. Good evening, mayor, members of the commission. Agenda item number six on this evening's city commission meeting agenda is an application to
delete a condition of a previous resolution that approved a final plat. Because the final plat was approved after a quasi judicial hearing, tonight's hearing, which considers whether to change the previous resolution, will also be considered in a quasi judicial hearing. The clerk should
read the title of the resolution um immediately after this statement. Um public hearing will start with a staff presentation followed by the applicant's remarks and any public comment. The commission may ask any questions either before or after public comment is closed. Following public comment, the
commission may deliberate on the item. The quasi judicial procedures require that this commission consider the evidence presented to it and base its decision on the applicable law and primarily on the evidence presented whether by the applicant, staff or members of the public. Because the
previous resolution involved a final plat, the criteria to be applied this evening is the subdivision criteria under section 20-4.2 of the city's land development code, which includes compatibility with the asbuilt character of the surrounding area and an avoidance
of adverse impacts on the surrounding area. The evidence to be considered during this hearing must be substantial competent evidence. This means testimony or other evidence based on personal observation or relevant expert testimony that a reasonable mind would accept as
adequate to support a conclusion. It is not a popularity contest. It cannot be based solely on non-expert opinions, no matter how fervent those opinions might be. Madame clerk, would you kindly read item six? Yes. Item six, a resolution of the
mayor city commission of the city of South Miami, Florida, approving or denying an application to amend the conditions of resolution number 022-24-16127, which approved a final plan to permit development of of a two-story single family home on a property located at
6623 Southwest 77 Terrace. Anyone who wishes to speak on this item should be given an opportunity to speak during the public comment portion of each hearing. If you intend to provide testimony as to the application considered tonight, you'll be sworn in before your testimony
is taken. Please know if you speak, you may be subject to cross-examination. If you refuse either to be cross-examined or to be sworn, your testimony will be considered in that context and given its due weight. The general public will not be permitted to cross-examine witness witnesses, but the public may request that this city commission direct
questions on their behalf to either staff or the applicant. At this time, anyone who wishes to speak should be sworn in. Anyone here at item six who'd like to speak on the item? If so, please stand and be sworn in. All righty. Do you swear to affir Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth? All
truth and nothing but you. Hold up for a second. Just just in case, why don't we swear you in in case there are any questions? That way, it's considered testimony for the record. Thank you. Sorry to interrupt. Um, again, raise your right hand.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Madame clerk, please confirm compliance with the advertising and notice requirements for these hearings. Yes. Mayor, vice mayor, and commissioners, have you had any exparte communications
with the applicant or any member of the public, either for or against any of the applications to be heard tonight? If so, please state for the record who the communication was with and the nature of the communication. Anyone have any communication? I I did before the application was
filed, but I'll disclose it nonetheless. Uh I met with the applicant for coffee shortly after he purchased the property and he asked me about the restriction that we had adopted um prior that was considered. So all right, Mayor, I turn the proceedings over to you to begin the
hearing with the recommendations of the planning and zoning staff. Thank you, Mr. City Attorney. Uh Marcus, if you could. Thank you. We'll hear staff's presentation followed by any comments from the applicants and any questions we have. Good evening again.
Hi, good evening mayor, members of the commission. Marcus Lightoot, city of South Miami senior planner. The item before you is a is a request to amend the final plat application for the original property of 7709 Southwest 67. That was the original property. This now is for this request is for the eastern
most lot. The request is to amend RE resolution 022-24-16127 which was adopted by the commission in March of last year. The condition in question is the eastern most lot of the property shall be limited to one story
but be permitted at but be permitted a building coverage of 35% of the lot area and impervious coverage of 50% of the lot area. Uh the applicant is is requesting that the condition be be removed so that they can
build per what's permitted by right in the RS3 zoning district which is a two-story home. I'm available for any questions. Thank you. Thank you colleagues. Any questions of staff? Commissioner Rodriguez, you're recognized. Um are the the the lots
already platted? Yes, the lot is already platted. It's been it was platted into three three individual lots. Okay, that's further questions. Charloot, I have a question. Um, has there when we discussed the restriction when this repl proposal was brought to us, I think
about a year and a half ago, I think one of the reasons that we imposed the restriction was that the neighbor had a one-story home um and wanted to keep the profile of the home the same. Is it my is it my my is it is my understanding correct that that
home has been sold and that a two-story home has been proposed for development on the adjacent lot. You are correct. The house immediately to the to the east of lot three. Correct. Was sold and has already been demolished. Um their building permit was issued for the to demolish that property. A temporary
construction fence permit has been already issued for the property and a two-story home has been was submitted to the design review board and and even though there was no quorum at the meeting, it went with staff's recommendation was which was approval for that project. Thank you for that
clarification. You're welcome. Further questions? Okay. Do we want to hear presentation of the applicant? Okay. Sir, just briefly your name and as for the record and if you could just state the nature of your request and the reason for it briefly, we'd appreciate
it. Good evening. My name is Hass Jimenez. Um I'm the owner of the three lots and we're developing three two-story homes. A we're we're not ready. The plans are not have not been submitted to you guys. But uh um based
on based on the the fact that if we do a one-story home in that lot we will take more space more green space and we want to preserve as much as possible. I think submitting uh twotory home for this lot is going to make sense. Besides also the
fact that the two houses on the two sides of this house are going to be also twotory homes. I think is is uh we're presenting or we're proposing a tropical modern house which is very very earthy and I think it's going to be a very nice
uh development. Yes. Uh we'll start with Commissioner Wich and we'll go to you with Commissioner Rodriguez next. Okay. I'm trying to do a mental picture. So this is your lot. You're saying now the lot that was next to it that had the issue is gone and they're building a two-story
house. There's a two-story house on this side. He owns He owns the He owns the west side. So he's the next. So literally it's going to be twotory, twotory, twotory if this has changed. Correct. Behind you will be what? It's a house that is for sale now I believe.
Okay. So the back side of this is one story. One story. One story. Yeah. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Other questions? So my my question to you is um do you have a plan for the current trees that are on the any mitigation or correct? Yeah, we have
the plan. We already submitted and I think it's being approved. What can you just what what is it that that the plan is for? Can you elaborate on trees that are being preserved versus removed uh in a transferring them or giving them in a one story versus twotory context? So correct. Yeah, we're preserving a lot of
trees, but all the invasive species are are getting uh removed and we have some mitigation trees that going in. Okay. So, so the oaks you're trying to maintain as many All the are going to stay. All the oaks are going to stay. All the oaks are staying. Okay.
Great. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. You're Wait. Questions or comments? Okay. So, let's wait until we close the presentation. So, thank you, sir. Uh Mr. Mr. Lifewood, anything else you need to add for the record? Okay, so we'll open up for discussion. Commissioner, you're
recognized. Thank you. I I just want to remind all of us, except for Commissioner Rodriguez, because you weren't here, that when we approved the division of this one property into three properties, there was a lot of neighbors
here and most of them went off. They were not happy that the property was being divided. And I feel that while there was that one neighbor that was being directly affected, I think that neighborhood as a whole was concerned about, you know, all
of these two stories going up because the majority of their houses are one-story houses. I know that has no play in what decision you guys might make, but I want us to remember the conversations that we had with the residents who live there and have to continue to live there. And that the
change to a one story was part of a larger conversation, not just with the one guy next door. So I I think that we should keep that in mind when we consider what we're going to do.
Other comments? No. So I I mean and I I agree with your point obviously if the residents are I wasn't here so if the residents are but I think by right now so you're going to have twotory twotory and then let's say we this doesn't go through it would be twotory twotory one
story twotory at that point that one story becomes I mean it's it's sandwiched in between two twotory homes so I I don't I don't know I think I think the question would I I apologize. Let me let me stop our conversation because I forgot to open
the public hearing on this item. So before we before we move forward, um this is a public hearing item. My apologies. Does any member of the public who'd like to address this commission with respect to item six, please come forward. So we'll open the public hearing.
Miss Teo, please come forward. Good evening. Have to represent all the other people that are not here like you mentioned. Uh, Paige Teasdale, 6620 Southwest 77th Terrace. Um, I will represent the rest
of our neighborhood that is not here. Um, I do live across the street from that beautiful lot. Um, again, that is a beautiful lot that uh, again, we tried to get you guys to purchase. Um, the oak
trees on there are gorgeous. There are um starf fruit trees that are on that lot. Um there are a lot of wildlife that live on that lot. Um it would be an absolute beautiful park. People walk
their dogs through there. Um so it's sad. It is really sad that that lot is going to be gone and taken um because it's been empty for so many years when that elderly lady passed away. um her
son and daughter tried to um get us to we tried to work on trying to get you guys to purchase it and again like I said when I was here you guys were so close to getting that lot and it didn't didn't go through. Um so
uh our neighbors yes we are sad to see we do know that on the other side on the Mango Terrace side um not on our side of of Llam we don't have any twotory houses right now the other side you can see
that there has been a few going up um so it is sad knowing that these twotory houses I understand I drive 80th Street every day going into work. Um I I see them popping up everywhere. All
these modern two-story houses that are beautiful. I get that. And they just they don't fit the charm of South Miami. They would look great on South Beach.
They might look great somewhere else. Um there is one two-story house that they did build on I think it's 76 terrace in Leelam that they it does look a little bit nicer maybe a little different
architecture um that maybe look a little I don't know how you say it maybe uh southern homely looking that gives you a little bit more of the charm but all of these art deco kind of boxy looking type of houses just
don't go in our neighborhood. Um you go right down our street and you see these old key the Key West houses that are that um Jose, one of our neighbors built for his sister. It's beautiful house with a front porch that wraps around. Um
you know, we we just we're losing that charm. And unfortunately, I feel like when I'm walking out of my house, I'm going to have four two-story houses right in front of my house, and it's going to look like an apartment complex or a townhouse complex. So, it it's sad
to see again that I'm we are losing the charm of this. And yes, I understand having two houses that would be one story would be taking up, I guess you'd or three houses taking up more green
space. What about having two nice bigger houses and having a nice front yard and a backyard? You could still have a pool um in there. It doesn't have to necessarily be three houses. You could still get the money out of two houses.
And uh I just again there's other things that you can do to keep with the charm of the neighborhood instead of building these modern box type of town houses that are making it like a cookie cutter type of location. Like it just doesn't
fit in South Miami. It just doesn't fit. And it's just sad to see that this is what we are coming to now to try to cram in as many people as we can into our neighborhood. We've already got these huge highrises that are shooting up in
our neighborhood. I I just don't see the need of why we are having to do this in where we living now instead of downtown. I mean, Jason, I forgot how many 8,000 people or how many people we have coming in here and these highrises that we're putting up in the next few years. I
mean, look what's coming in here. I don't know where that 8,000 person number comes from, but we'll we'll debate that another day. They did the statistics. It was crazy, but in our little neighborhoods, we should not have to be putting in all these little box type of town houses. We appreciate your
comments. Thank you. Yeah. So, okay. Thank you. Is there anyone else like to address this commission? Item six, madam clerk, is there anyone online? No one. So, let's close the public hearing. Let's bring the conversation back. uh hopefully close out this item.
So, do you want to go down the line? Um, Commissioner Bonich, anything else you want to add for the record? No. Okay. Vice Mayor, I just wanted to say yes. I I do recall that meeting and there were a lot of people that that showed up and I remember why we ended up limiting that
to one story. I was very happy to hear that the developers keeping the oak trees on there and I am happy to hear that there's going to be more green space um as well. So, Okay, Commissioner Cay, you know, I there are three lots. We
subdivided the lots at 10,000 square feet, which is in line with everybody around the neighborhood. Um, I think whether the times have changed from the 1950s, '60s,7s, 80s, and the 2000s. We today, we still have the opportunity to buy a house and build a house in this beautiful neighborhood. I don't see the
reason why these people can't buy and be your neighbor. Um or anybody's neighbor in our city specifically for this particular piece of land. Um whether it's two story or one story. Look, we we've had this code for a long long time. I think the mayor did a good job
just trying to appease a lot of the neighbors in the area. U but truthfully speaking, there's two stories all over throughout South Miami that are mixed with one stories. is just the way our city was built, right? That's the beautiful thing about our city is that you can build in any episode, any
different type of architecture, and there's not one piece of architecture that fits into South Miami. I think it's a it's a mixture and a mesh of a lot of beautiful architecture. So, um I'm okay with this moving forward and and looking forward to, you know, having three new
neighbors and constituents to our beautiful city. Commission Rodriguez. So I I just want to I think we have to put this out and clarify certain things. So first thing being is what we're voting on is to make that onestory house
into a twotory house. But when it comes So just be just be clear, we're voting to remove a restriction that the prior owner accepted as a compromise to try to harmonize the future development of the lots with the existing condition to the east. Yes,
that's a more eloquent way of saying yes, but the right to build on the three lots and I would ask Marcus, this is by right. He's not asking for permission to do three the three residences. He's he's already Yes, we've already approved that
issue. Yeah, these are this has been approved already by a year ago, right? Yeah, the plat has already been the plat's already. So there's no he's not really asking us for permission to do three homes. He's just asking us to again as the mayor eloquently said to
remove the old uh requirement and now he would be able to do a twotory. Correct. Because by right you can't do a twotory in this in this area. Okay. And then just to the resident just in the mango lot on a on on manor lane there he's asking for a complete zoning change. So
that's the difference where there we have more of a vote because he doesn't have the right to do the five that he's proposing there by right where this gentleman would have it already done because it's already been approved. So that's the difference between the two. So I just wanted to clarify that so you
don't think that we're voting for that we can turn down the three lots at this point. It's been approved. Thank you. Appreciate it. You're welcome, sir. Thank you. So, so to to the neighbors, again, I I I was very sympathetic to the request before because we had an existing
condition and I chose to retain my single family house when we remodeled it in 2013 and through 15. Um, that was our choice. Uh, the trend certainly in my neighborhood and throughout the city is to many cases maximize this the amount
of house you can build on it given where values are going. Uh, I've seen neighbors that have lived in my neighborhood for 25 plus years who I thought would never tear down and rebuild a two-story house that are doing that right now. Uh, because they're thinking about what they're going to do when they head into retirement. So, um,
I think for better or worse, the code has been to allow two stories in the zoning district for ever. Um we we were able to solicit a restriction in that last application, you know, where we were where we were subdividing
what should have been a park probably uh years ago into three lots um that were completely consistent with the character of the neighborhood. I understand that the change is not ideal, but it's unfortunately that's an issue that's you know the horse that horse left the barn
a long time ago. So, I think in terms of being fair to the existing owner, to me, the the big decisive change in circumstances between the last time we heard this and now is that the lot next door is now been approved for a two-story home. And so, I really don't
see the purpose in, you know, preserving this restriction given that changing condition. I mean, uh, so I'll be voting in the affirmative for that reason. So, with that, uh, is there a motion on item six? I'll move it if that's it. Second. Okay.
So, move by the mayor, second by the vice mayor. Madame clerk, if you can call the role, please. Yes. Commissioner Cay, yes. Commissioner Rodriguez, yes. Commissioner Bonish, no. Vice Mayor Corey, yes. Mayor Fernandez, yes. Item
passes 41. Thank you. Uh, if you can read item five into the record, please. Item five, a resolution of the mayor and city commission of the city of South Florida authorizing the city manager to negotiate and execute an agreement for parking enforcement management services pursuant to request for proposal number
FN 2025-03. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Uh Mr. Manager, floor is yours. Thank you, mayor. Um mayor, vice mayor, commissioners, um our current um parking enforcement is outsourced to last parking. um they they
manage uh not only garage enforcement but on street parking. Uh their uh current contract was uh set to expire. So the city uh went out on a solicitation and an RFP. We had three firms that submitted uh to provide these services and a committee internal
committee of of city employees reviewed and ranked these uh firms. Last parking uh came out ranked number one. um they were not the the cheapest over a five-year period, but given the the difference in price and their history with the city um and and their expertise
specifically with garage and on street parking recommendation before you is to authorize me to negotiate and execute a 5-year contract with Laz Parking for a renewal of those services. Uh certainly happy to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you. Uh questions of the manager. I actually I have one question. I think I asked it during our briefing, which is I I was surprised to see um that the Miami Parking Authority didn't bid on this contract and I just don't know if you had a chance to inquire with them as
to why since I know that they do provide parking forcement services for other cities uh and obviously have substantial experience managing garage inventory as well. Besides their own mayor, don't they only have one or two? That's it. Sorry. Well, they only do like one other
I don't think I know most recently they picked up I think they're doing work in Dorado I think most recently and that was uh probably the last contract they acquired. I I just don't know if they again I don't know if they competitively if they pursue competitive opportunities or they're done since they are kind of a quasi public entity. I don't know if they do it via interlocal or what the
mechanism is. I was just curious to understand why if we had had any conversation as to why they had not bid. Yeah mayor I I have not spoken to to him directly as you said they didn't really participate. I I don't my understanding that they don't necessarily participate in this type of
solicitation. Um the Dural they are providing that service for Dural um and and certainly happy to discuss it with them but obviously they didn't participate in the procurement which I don't know that it's their practice per se. I think maybe that was more of a direct uh request and negotiation and
and I don't have that full knowledge but just from my historical understanding I don't know that they traditionally participate in this procurement um as these companies would okay further comments or questions okay uh do we want to hear from the director
we want to open up a public hearing okay so let's uh this is a public hearing item um if any member from the public would like to address this commission On item five, uh, please come forward at this time. Seeing no one in the chamber and madam
clerk, seeing no one on the line. No, it's all right. We'll close a public hearing. Final comments. I I just want to put this on the record and to Mr. River. I mean, LAZ does a very efficient job. We'll be talking about parking enforcement later. I'd like to see this contract relationship evolve. They do
have substantial experience managing uh garage assets. I I don't think we're using their strategic experience to the full level. I'm not sure it's contemplated in our contract. Maybe something you want to talk about bringing back by way of some sort of a revision, but um you're speaking about
Laz about Laz. Yeah. I mean, Laz is part I mean they're part of a huge conglome parking conglomerate. They've got, you know, experience the breath of this country. I I I'd like to see this more of a strategic kind of consulting relationship rather than just a vendor contract where they're
performing one limited service because I do think that they have the reach and the experience and the breath of knowledge to bring a lot of value to how we manage these assets. So, if that's not something, and again, I didn't go through the fine details with the contract, but I think if that's not something that's contemplated, we should talk about how we can expand the
relationship because, you know, I'd like to hear more proactive suggestions beyond what we got in our parking study, which is very helpful from the vendor in terms of how we can better manage and maximize the value of the inventory, not from a monetization perspective solely, but in terms of supporting the business
climate in in part most most particularly in our town center. So, just that by way of editorial comment. Yes, sir. You're recognized. So, director, if you can, uh, I just wanted to bring something up because I we I did have a meeting with the director with another vendor uh, speaking about
technology. Um, with Bryant, um, that wasn't L&R, what wasn't the acronym for the LPRs? LPR. Yeah, license plate readers. So I was under the impression that it was something that we can start using the solutions engineering solutions and
consulting into our parking uh enforcement and kind of having a conglomerate like what what the mayor was saying. Was that not part of this particular uh proposal? Um yes, we have a relationship and we've had a relationship well before my tenure even
here with Last Parking. um we we lean on them a lot because they are the number one largest private parking provider um in in the industry. Um so we rely every time we're doing a move we strategic they part of this contract they are
required to do certain reports for us to help us enhance our parking infrastructure maybe on street off streetet parking garage. Um we use them in many capacities. Obviously the primary is enforcement. We used to do collections when we had uh
single meter heads and multispace meters. uh they help maintain the parking infrastructure, uh painting, uh installing signs, fading signs, things of that nature. Um but as far as strategically, we lean on them a lot on that. And I I work with Lewis. Lewis is
the operations manager out of their M or Miami Beach headquarters, which is um where they have all their resources here for South Florida. Um, but we we we will use them and we will continue to use them and strategically uh increase rates, lose rates. When we're when we're
doing those different things, we're doing that in conjunction with them. It's not something that's just solely done here in my office. But from a technology base, is that something that we can leverage them as well with all these other systems? Do they provide part of the agreement is they're going to give us LPR with supervision?
Supervision is a uh a huge provider in the LPR market. um particularly in the garage and that's something that we're working on right now to implement uh enforcement in the garage. Certain some some of these you see the day pass which
is uh 7 to 10 which we're probably going to be amending extending the hours to help the employees in the the hospitality employees because some are staying later than 10 o'clock. Um, but we're going to be addressing all of those parking enforcement needs, uh, identifying who's overnight, who's not
using these LPR, um, which is being provided by LAZ as part of this contract. So, so essentially, you can set up a profile and you drive in the garage, it scans your tag, and you get charged the time you're in the garage. Correct. Without having to actually have any sort of a payment interaction. We
are working towards that 100%. We're constantly looking at different technologies to do some stuff like that. Okay. Yes, ma'am. You're recognized. Thank you. It's Metropolis. Metropolis. Yes. Metropolis is I've had this conversation with Alfredo for a year and
a half, maybe. Because that's what they have in Nashville. So, I never even think about it. I just drive in, it sends me a text to my phone saying you've arrived. And when I drive out, it says thank you for parking. Correct. And I never think about it. And that's how I
don't get tickets. Exactly. No, it's it's it's a very I'm glad to see that it's it's coming here because we sorely need it. We're we're working towards that and using all technology that's available to us. They attend conferences constantly, the Florida conference, the
national conference, looking all different opportunities and there are tons of opportunities. Further questions? Okay. Is there a motion on the item? I'll move the motion. Oh, there a second. We have a motion by Commissioner Cay, second by uh Commissioner Bonich.
Madam clerk, please call the role. Yes. Commissioner Bonish, yes. Commissioner Rodriguez, yes. Commissioner Cay, yes. Vice Mayor Corey, yes. Mayor Fernandez, yes. Item passes. You can read item seven, please. Item seven, an ordinance of the city commission of the city of South Florida relating to the city's
2024 2025 fiscal year budget authorizing an increase of $100,000 appropriation for public places fund allocating such increase to expenditure line item 122-1790-519-3450 [Music]
contractual services. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Commission Manager, you're recognized and by way of report to the commission, the Panthers are up one zero in the first period. Mr. Cole, thank you. Uh, mayor, vice mayor, commissioners, um, this
commission has previously discussed this project. Uh, what this is doing really is just appropriating funds within from the art and public places uh, fund uh, to pay for this project, which is an eligible expense. And so we're appropriating $100,000 from that fund
for purposes of funding this project. Um, and that's what this item is is doing. Questions to the manager. Okay. Again, this is for the benefit of the public. The project is the mural project, correct? Correct. This will be a mural project at the parking garage and we're hoping it's going to be substantially
less than the $100,000 we're appropriating. Correct. It it it was less. Uh we're just appropriating a little bit extra money. Uh at the end of the day, um uh we may have other projects that we would tap into this fund to do, but yes, the estimated costs are are less than 100. And what is the
estimated cost we're working on right now? So, it's been a while since we discussed it. The last uh item that we had was roughly about $75,000. Um I think I'm going off the top of my head, give or take a little bit. Um and
uh we're having a conversation on how how to execute the project which may also influence pricing or or reduce pricing uh because maybe the the mesh that would go on would be smaller in nature. So um I I'll provide the exact number. I'm going off the top of my head. I think it was around $75,000 when
we brought it before you. Okay. Can can we just as on your next report, can you use an update on what the actual execution is going to look like? Yes. the cost and you know just final details. I know we kind of I thought we agreed under direction and I know I'm a little
surprised it's taken this long to kind of get to it actually being rolled out. So if you can give us an update at the next at our next meeting as to what the final details are, I'd appreciate it. Okay, we'll do further questions. Yeah, mayor. Yes, sir. Quick, sir. And so just through the process, this will go back
to our new board, art, our board where uh Commissioner Bonich loves and I want to make sure that I love them. I I they don't know me, but I love them. But so okay, so it'll trigger that. Yeah, the ordinance when the ordinance was created creating that committee and and those
representatives from those institutions, any pot of money that comes from that fund, uh they would review the project and and give us some recommendations. So I'm curious just if if for example that reviewing board I guess it's the the group frost all all the museums
right okay if if for some reason they don't like the execution of the proposed art is that come back to us for some sort of action or what's what's the disposition of the of the project they're after yeah I mean if it's if it's you know substantial deviation if you will right that kind of completely changes we would come back to to to this
commission um if there's some you know tweaks or recommendations to improve enhance I I would say that it's within the spirit of what was approved. Um so yeah, previously we had some other funds allocated that were not part of this. So that wasn't a requirement. In this case, even though it's a requirement, I I
think uh Commissioner Bonich uh watched u the first meeting that they had and their interactions and she was very uh uh excited to see that kind of level of input in in anything having to do with the city. So it's a good group. We want to leverage that.
Okay. Further questions, sir. You good? Good. Okay. Let's open up a public hearing on this item. Um, is there any member of the public who would like to speak or address this commission on item seven? If so, please come forward at this time. Seeing no one in the chamber and no one online, we will close the
public hearing. Uh, is there a motion on item seven? I'll move it. Is there a second? Second. A motion by Commissioner Bonich and a second by Commissioner Gay. Madam Clerk, please call the role. Yes. Commissioner Bonich. Yes. Yes. Commissioner Rodriguez, yes. Commissioner Cay, yes. Vice Mayor Corey, yes. Mayor Fernandez, yes. Item passes
54. Thank you, Madam Clerk. If you can read item eight, please. Item eight. An ordinance of the mayor and city commission of the city of South Florida amending section 20-8.6 parking of article 8 transit supportive development district tsd of the land development code to advise regulations related to
parking within the TSDD. Sir, you're recognized. Good to see you again, Mark. Thank you very much, Mark Alvarez, Corodina Group as a planning consultant for the city. Um, this is an ordinance only for the TSDD. It is the parking ordinance. We're making some minor amendments to it. They are really
things that we intended to do when we first wrote this ordinance, but as you know, the TSDD was a very large ordinance. Um, there we're doing four things here. The first thing is to consolidate all of the parking requirements in one place within that section uh of the TSDD ordinance. Right
now, as it stands, we have to go to the city's parking section, which is 20.8 20-8.8 and kind of cross reference. We never intended for that. We wanted everything to be in one section. Uh two, we had
intended to consolidate all of the dimensional standards in one place. As the ordinance is written, the dimensional standards for loading are in one place. We have them in different parts of that ordinance. and we also had some in the the uh city's main parking
section 24.4. Um so we consolidated everything. We created a section E section E um with just the table of dimensional standards. In doing that we had one change to make. Um right now we had always intended and
we stated this intent from the beginning when we were working on the TSDD that we would use urban standards for parking. Try to minimize our parking. try to maximize the amount of habitable area. We want a pedestrian area, not large parking lots. So, we did everything we
could to minimize the parking. And in in we had always intended to use the minimum dimensions for a parking stall, which are 8 1/2 by 18. We did not have that included in the ordinance. We had to go back to 24.4, the city's more
suburban standard, and use the 9 foot wide parking standards. It's not a big difference. Eight and a half is a very standard size. It's just the minimum end of that size for standard cars. We're not talking about small cars. Um so we've made that change to change from an
or not really a change. We've created the change in a way to do an 18 1/2 by 8 1/2 foot parking stall. With that, we also have changed the aisles uh dimension. So the aisle that's outside of the parking space has a minimum width. The minimum width in this
ordinance is 21 ft. As again, very tight on the minimum side. That was our intent to keep everything as small as possible. To give you the information, generally parking standards are around 24 for sort of generous aisle, two ways, so 12 ft
each side. Um, that's that's a very generous standard. There are standards that use 22. They're a little more common and they're a little more into the urban areas. We actually looked at some of the standards. First of all, we copied the standards from the downtown Somi, which is what we used 21 ft for.
We also looked at city of Miami, which has some very urban standards. They've gone back and forth quite a bit on it. I think they've settled on 22 now, but they were at 21. They're 20. They're 23 for a long time. They go up again. They They've been at 23 for a long I think they may have gone down to 22, but I'm
pretty sure it's 23. Um, it it has bounced around. So, um, we want to keep it as minimum. We don't want 24. we we pushed to the minimum side of that and used 21. Um with that I will say the planning board has recommended that we would go to 22 feet for the width on
that. And lastly um more of an oversight we had a as you know the TSDD has a different set of land uses their general categories. One of those categories was a very particular use um that's very particular to the TSDD for limited automotive business and it's really a
path for some of the businesses on Progress and Commerce Street to morph into something that's more of a retail type of a automotive type business. Um there there in any case we did not have a parking criteria for that parking amount criteria. So we added that into
that at one space per thousand feet which would be enough to cover one employee or owner of the place and the very these businesses are very very small volume traffic so we didn't expect that to be a very high number so we're using one per thousand. Those are the
four things the ordinance does and um of course we recommend that we we go forward with it. Colleagues, any questions? You're recognized. Thank you. I I would feel more comfortable with the 22 versus the 21. I I'm a menace in the garage. And I am
the majority. I am the majority. Let's Let's be real. Really really good drivers. They don't live here. You drive slow, but you uh you're a parking menace. There you go. Okay. Just a walking contradiction. A parking a walking contradiction. Parking and
driving. There you go. I have a question for Mark. Quick question. Um, so standard parking space size is uh 9 ft or 8 and a half? 8 and 12 by 18 is the small end of that. It's so that's more
like compact. No, that's right. That's that's pretty standard. I was related question to his is when we have a column condition mark, are we requiring the extra foot or are we just requiring eight and a half? Eight and a half. We don't have a column condition. So I I mean I I would Yeah. going I I would
echo her comments on the 22 foot wide drive. That would be my meaning that if you have a column you need to still have the eight and a half. And this column you didn't make an exclusion for the column to intrude into it. So no no we okay I I I so most codes that I'm
familiar with require extra require the space to be extra wide when it's there's a column adjacent to the space. So you could have a space that's typically 9 and 1/2 ft wide, right? Adjacent to the column. The adjacent space is center condition is 8 and 1/2
ft by 18 and everyone down the road until you get to the next column, it's wider than the standard space to allow for, you know, uh easier access in and out of the space. So I is there I is there any accommodation or any consideration for having a wider space adjacent to the
column in the standard? No. So they are just require 8 and 1/2 ft, right? So others be the eight and a half clear of the column. That's it. Okay. Okay. Um so what I was trying to get at is what is the average
size of let's say like a suburban because I hate parking like you know when you get that tight parking space. So, I guess my my ultimate question is what what are we trying to accomplish here? Just for the future buildings to
have easier time fitting in their parking or what what what's the purpose of this? We're trying to provide a standard of the parking size. Correct. Correct. No, no, I get I I understand that. But why set that standard instead of 9 ft? Why eight and a why eight and a half instead of 9 ft? It's all I'm
saying like why why are we setting that that size? We simp we want to keep it as the smaller urban standard. so that we get as many parking spaces as we can into these buildings at the second and fourth. Okay. So that's I think you had another question there too. I mean for
you will see wider spaces for example um Publix or any sort of supermarket they typically use 10 ft because they want to accommodate people in and out of their doors a lot putting bags and groceries in there. That's their choice but they would still they do that usually
exceeding the parking requirements. And I'm sorry, these questions that that I'm I'm providing is because I've done many parking lots for restaurants and other construction projects and shopping centers and typically 10 ft is the standard that we have. Eight and a half
just seems like you're going to be that's that's very tight. But I mean it just if you have a nice car and you're parked and there's a big pickup next to you, like how do you get out of the car? you know that that those are just the things that that that we got to foresee
because we're going to set this as law and you know people are gonna what's but Mark what's the standard today right now for the city 9 by 18 9 by8 and that is outside the ced sorry right now we're not specific that was what we were
trying to fix we didn't we meant to so again this is this is this is a reduced standard in this immediate catchment area yeah doesn't apply it does that apply in to your standard if you were building a you're rebuilding a strip mall on Bird Road? No, it would you
would you'd be bound by the larger standard. Yeah. This is mostly for the new developments that are that are coming in. Yeah. Just in the downtown. Just in the downtown. Yeah. Yeah. Correct. Which is right now we're we have the highrises coming in. So Okay. I I just can I for the question? Yes.
You recognize. So can can we get an idea? Can I get an idea from you guys? Do you care? eight and a half, nine. I mean, what I care about the I I you know, eight and a half is a pretty typical standard. Uh I would want to see an accommodation when you have a column
condition. You have to have a wider space because the turning radius psychologically and otherwise is tougher to get in and out of. So definitely there I would say 9 and 1/2 ft add an extra foot. That's pretty standard in the codes I work on. You see that variation, but I think eight and a half
in this in this context is fine. I would tell you the thing that's gets hairy is the drive width. So I agree with you. I would want to have a 22 foot minimum because backing up particular if you get a larger truck that's already protruding into the drive aisle because you know if
you you got to pick up a little bit longer maybe it's 20 feet it's already a foot and a half encroaching into the drive aisle that that maneuver in and out gets gets very tight. So I would I would prefer to see us bump up the drive with 22 feet at minimum. So, so then are
we okay as a group with the eight and a half, but we want the 22? No, the Well, the 22 is different than the eight and a half. I would prefer I I mean, if I'm not going to be living in these buildings, but I'm saying if I lived in those buildings, I would prefer nine just because, you know, I've been
in those tight spaces where you're like, who the hell designed this? And you're you're trying to get out of your car and you're trying not to hit the car next to you. I mean, for half an inch, I guess, you know, makes it makes a huge difference. I will tell you it makes a huge difference amount in the amount of um parking spaces. No, not Yeah. Well,
ultimately I think what what what the balance you're trying to strike is we want more habitable feasible sellable space than parking that's going to sit, you know, vacant and so or empty for a majority of the day. So, um that's the trade-off. It's, you know, I will tell
you that the more you I do believe, and it's going to sound, some people may be crazy, but Democrat, I think the market adjusts to to Mark's point, what the preferences for the use. And so, you'll see without question, we could have a parking standard that
requires one space per thousand square feet. And if it's a grosser, they're going to want their typical three and a half or four spaces per thousand. So the market adjusts to what its standard is based on the product type. I would tell you I think an 8 and 1/2t standard as the minimum is fine.
My concern is not the space dimension if there isn't if there is an accommodation for columns because columns if that space is 8 and a half without the column it's fine but you add the column getting in and out of the space just to park it forget getting out of the car whole different conversation. It gets it gets
very tight. But the dry valves to me is where people want to cheat because, you know, it it does eat up a lot of real estate, but it does make the functionality of the garage and the experience in the garage a lot more unpleasant to maneuver in and out of. That's just my personal observation as a practitioner and as a user of some of
these spaces. Thank you. And by the way, if you have a nice car, secret is park between the columns. That's Yes, that's exactly what if those spaces exist. Yeah, those are best. Okay. Uh, so do we have a motion
with modifications? How do we want to how do we want to advance the item? Do we want to then move it forward at 8 and a half wide by 20 and then the 22 ft? So the only modification would be to the drive all width at 22 ft. 22. Uh, the second
modification again, Mark, if it's not expressly called out, I don't want to add it now, but if on second reading, we can account for some extra space when there's a a column adjacency, that's fine. Okay. So we have a motion to move item nine with sorry item eight with the
modification that the drive aisle minimum width be set at 22 feet as opposed to 21. Okay. Is there a second? I'll second. Okay. So we have a motion by Commissioner Bonich, a second by Commissioner Caya for the adoption as amended. Madam Well, did we call there's no public hearing requirement? Madam
clerk, if you can call the role on this one. Yes. Commissioner Bonich. Yes. Commissioner Rodriguez. Yes. Commissioner Cay. Yes. Vice Mayor Corey? Yes. Mayor Fernandez? Yes. Item passes as sponsor. Great. If you can read item nine, please. Thank you, Mark. Have a good evening. Item nine, an ordinance of the mayor and city commission of the
city of South Florida relating to South Pension Plan by amending chapter 16 pensions. Specifically, section 16-14 pension benefits and retirement date. Section 16-15, disability benefits. Section 16-16,
death of a participant. Section 16-21, purchase of credited services. and section 16-32 city of South Police Officers retirement trust fund created an order to evacuate the pension related provisions of the collective bargain agreement between the city and the
fraternal oil police. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Uh Mr. Manager, you're recognized on this side. Thank you, Mayor Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners. Uh this uh ordinance um uh amends and modifies the city's police uh pension plan to incorporate um four
statemandated minimum benefits that are uh available to shared plans. A shared plan is is a plan that has uh both municipal funds and um monies that are uh received through the state on policies written a search charge that's written at the state level and made
available to uh police agencies, municipal police agencies through uh chapter 185. This will allow these benefits to be derived by the members of the plan, police officers uh that they currently do not um enjoy and this will be funded by those revenues. Uh, also it
it provides for the uh ability to purchase uh time and other credible uh service from prior law enforcement um employment with other municipal or county agencies uh or state or federal for that matter. Some of these benefits
uh have been incorporated into the um bargaining uh agreements that you've uh uh approved here recently both for PBA and FOP. So this is uh providing the the vehicle to to do so. Uh so again we're using providing minimum benefits required by the plan and using the the
search charge collected uh through the state uh for these benefits. Certainly can answer any question you may have. Colleagues, any questions? No, Mr. Mayor, just just um my only question ha has the pension
board reviewed and approved these modifications? Yeah, they have. Okay, fair enough. Okay. Uh, seeing no further questions, is there a motion on item nine? I'll move the motion. Mayor, is there a second? I'll second. Motion by Commissioner Kaya, second by Commissioner Bonich. Madam Clerk, please
call the role. Yes. Commissioner Bonish, yes. Commissioner Rodriguez, yes. Commissioner Cay, yes. Vice Mayor Corey, yes. Mayor Fernandez, yes. It'll pass by. Thank you. Um, let's take up our discussion items. Do we want to start with M3 on moving or
cancelling uh the commission meeting for July 15th? Uh I believe last time we'd had some preliminary conversation or workshop about possibly cancelling July 15th. So we do have a trim notice meeting on the 29th. Is that correct, Mr. Manager? I'm sorry. Can you repeat
the question? I believe we have a trim notice meeting scheduled for the 29th of July. Yes, that's what we have. So our thought was to consolidate our regular business meeting and that meeting on the same date. So we're not here for that one item. So unless there's an objection, do we want to move to cancel the meeting on July 15th? Sounds good to
me. And reschedule for the 29th? Sounds good. That require action, madam clerk, or does the direction suffice? This direction. Okay. Thank you. So let's consider item M3 resolved. Um Mr. Munoz, let's let you go next and we'll make uh Mr. River. I'll wait.
He just got back from He just got back from vacation. So Alfred, it just means you're saving the best for last. Exactly. Exactly. Believe it or not, I think your item is going to be easier. Mr. River, I got to go to the Mr. Mayor. I'll I'll tee this up uh tee this up a little bit uh while
we're getting the presentation ready and the director will will speak on this item. Um this is something that uh has been uh ongoing for a bit where we've been doing some research on the manner in which we provide garbage and trash service um as it relates to uh
properties of a particular size and um um part of the research was really understanding who who is being served, who is not being served and how does uh that service comport with what what the code requires of the city. Obviously, there's been a lot of research done for
quite a while. So, Director Munoz is is going to um go through a little bit of the stats and provide some information of which at some point uh we would need some direction from this commission on how you would want to proceed uh relating to the code and the ordinance that that provides uh how this uh
service is provided and there's some ideas uh within the presentation. So, um, this is a culmination of some research of quite some time and, um, I'll let Director Munoz give you give you the specifics. Good evening. We're going to go through
the presentation. I know you've seen some of this already before and we'll keep it moving quickly. It's kind of summary level uh, information. By the way, I love the green the green motif leafy motif for a trash presentation. I looked hard for that. I'm glad somebody
appreciates it. Thank you. So, uh, this is what we're going to try to set out to do right here. Understanding the current ordinance, which I think a lot of you do already. Uh, who receives, uh, service. We'll do a quick overview on that. How our services align uh, with the ordinance and then the impacts and then
obviously discussion or throughout as you have questions, of course. So, um, just to level set, right, we have garbage and we have trash. Uh, slight difference there. Garbage is uh the stinky stuff, the food, uh the stuff
that comes out of the home for the most part. And trash typ typically is your vegetative uh you know yard waste and also the white goods uh for the city which we do have additional fees for those. Uh but that's how we divide up our service.
Uh this is about as much information as we get into here in terms of uh heavy slides. And really the punchline on this is and let me see if this works. Very cool. Yes. The the punchline on
this is what the code um says that we can pick up versus what the private haulers pick up. And it's four or more attached uh residential commercial residential units. That's for the private haulers. So, the city services uh the way the code reads is supposed to
be only up to three uh units. So, single family homes or duplexes uh for the most part. The code goes on to further uh say um and define how we're supposed to who provides those services. And uh it's you got to read a couple of parts of it
together, but the punchline uh ends up being that we the city cannot service if you read this section here. We the city cannot service the uh commercial uh solid waste residential commercial uh and the private haulers do. So just
wanted to get through that because it's kind of the back backbone of what we're discussing. Uh this is the punchline in terms of how our services align with the code. So, we do duplexes and single family homes for the most part in alignment with the code. However, uh we
do have um properties customers uh that are not in alignment with the way the code reads today. And it's seven properties totaling 150 units. So, I will pause there as we go to the second part of this if there's any questions on that part.
No. Okay. So then we started to look at options and these are random options I must say uh just different scenarios uh to include uh properties that um you know at at the different levels for which we're
providing services to not in alignment with the code. Uh so scenario one we just picked uh the number nine because it picks up a lot of properties uh that we were um in the near similar to the ones that we are providing services to. We're providing services to a couple of
properties that are nine and eight uh units. So, we went up to nine here. Very low impact in this scenario, about a 2% impact. So, easy enough to pick up. Uh you see scenario two goes up to 20, which was another uh grouping of uh
units. And that picks up this is a cumulative number here. So, it's the uh the one plus whatever the extra properties are in scenario two for a total of 19 properties and 236 units. Uh that's about a 7% increase. A little bit more difficult to pick up, but it's
doable as I'll show you on the next slide coming up. And then the last scenario that we looked at uh was up to 50 units uh because there are a couple of properties that we service that are are near that amount. And so that one is a lot more sizable and it looks like a
20% increase there. Uh it does add 743 units. This uh is a quick summary on the fact that we feel comfortable in picking up scenarios one and two. Excuse me. Um if you see there you have
total of 236 units. Uh that would be the impact. Uh when you combined when you look at this together with what we do today, this little section here, just to remind you all is how our service looks today. We have route A and route B on
Mondays and Thursdays doing 961 and 841 uh properties. And then on the other route days, uh Tuesdays and Fridays, you can see that they're in the 600s. So you could easily take that uh those units there and add them into uh those Tuesday
Friday and I'm not saying we would do that just on a straight line basis. We would look at the whole uh universe of what we're doing and realign as we need to. But just mathematically we know that it can be done and we we feel comfortable with that. The next scenario is the one that I
described a little bit earlier which is a little more sizable uh and uh you know would require at 743 uh total right here would require uh additional resources. So that and just you did not see this
information before I just added this in. We were waiting for some numbers on what the impact of that would be on the financial side. So, we took each of those scenarios that I previously described, looked at those properties. These are estimates because in one of the scenarios, we didn't uh we couldn't
identify a few of the properties, but these are rough scenarios uh rough amounts of what we would lose in franchise fee uh in each scenario um depending on, you know, what you pick or cumulatively if we pick them all. And then the cost so that you have the cost,
you know, at your uh fingertips there. A garbage truck runs about 450, you know, it could be more or less at the time that we go to a market. And an equipment operator, depending on where you bring them in with fringes, uh, uh, is 60,000 to 95,00 before you go on, just to
understand. So, is it $7,000 plus $25,000 plus 29,000 or is it correct? Okay. So, so the so that's the incremental cost per per tier. No, I if if you decided that you're going to do scenario three,
um then the franchise fees that would be lost would be the addition of the seven, the 25 and the 29 63. Okay. Yeah. What what is what is the direct line cost of executing all those scenarios? So for scenarios one and two, there are no additional direct costs because we have latent capacity. Is that what Yeah, we
could absorb it within our existing services. Okay. you know, because I saw a a I saw increases of 7% for scenario two in a prior slide. So, I want to know 7% above what what base 7% of over what we're doing today.
Volume. Yeah, volume, but not not cost. Not cost. That's what I was that's what I want to understand. Yep. Units. Thank you. And through the mayor, if I may hold on a second. Yes. Oh, and and and additionally scenario three, if you go back to the last slide, it's not only
the seven, the 25, the 29, but for that scenario would also be an inc purchasing a new truck, correct? And a new equipment operator. Correct. Yes. So, it's okay. Yeah. We wouldn't be able to absorb that with with the existing resources. But scenario one and two, you do not have to buy an extra truck and you do not need another operator.
Correct. Yes. May recognize. But we have to keep in mind that if we do scenario one or scenario two, we're losing a franchise fee. So, we're adding to our workload and taking away $32,000.
Yeah. Yeah. No, I'm clear on that. Okay. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Yep. And then lastly, last slide here, um, is we did want to talk about trash just to, you know, have the whole conversation. Trash is a little bit easier to absorb. Uh,
different truck, different, you know, different crew, different equipment. Uh, they're out there every day. Uh, the total impact, we do service a few properties. Uh, currently we service three properties, which equals 72 units. Uh, not in alignment with the code.
However, the for trash, it's not as dependent upon the properties as it is the units because you go to one location and although there's a lot of units, there's only one trash pile. So, that one we, you know, based on the worst case scenario, we would pick up a total
of 38 uh properties that we think could easily be serviced because that would break out if you divide it, you know, by five, seven to eight properties uh a day depending on, you know, this where you how they align on the service. So, that one's a little bit easier to absorb. And we also have
the crews on both garbage and trash. They're not finishing at 3:30 at the end of the day. They're finishing earlier. So, there is time left in the day uh for them to squeeze that into what they do. Okay. And that's it for at least setting the
conversations. Commissioner Kai, I think you had a question, so I'll start I'll start right to left. Yeah, I had a comment on on the franchise fees. So th those franchise fees are assuming that from day one that's what we would lose, right? So that's accurate, right? Correct. That
would be day one, which as you know, we've discussed that's not going to be that easy to Yeah. So just just so the commission knows to get rid of those contracts for these commercial buildings extremely difficult, right? So these contracts that waste connections and waste and waste management have with
these uh HOAs and and buildings are are very tight and extremely extremely difficult to get rid of. So yeah, there's a long lead time and long lead time. So just so you guys understand, it's not a direct cut off. The seven and the 20, whatever the number was, seven and 25, it's not it won't work right off
the getgo. It'll it'll trickle over time. All right. So I guess my comments too, right? Yes. Um if you look at all the numbers uh for me item uh scenario two encompasses the best scenario where we
take care of a lot of kind of miscellaneous inbetweens. Um there's only like two opportunities that might be in some gray area that we probably need to finagle. Um those two that are will be in the gray area. Currently,
we're we're servicing with um our cans, not necessarily waste like the big trash bins. I mean, sorry, the bins, not necessarily the big I always forget the differentiation. What's the big the dumpster thing? Um so, if we continue to do that, they they will still fall under
the 20. You know, right right now, I think it's 17 bins for one uh condo association and probably another 17 for the other condo association. So, technically, it's still under the 20. I know we haven't really differentiated based on bins uh for some of these scenarios, but I just want you guys to
understand that's what it looks like. Okay. But but just to be clear, the analysis is done on a perunit basis. Correct. Not on a per bin basis. Correct. Yeah. So, we we did consider how long it takes to pick up bins. We
did. It's not dumpsters, it's bins, just to make sure that our time, you know, analysis, you know, made sense. And because the bins do take uh uh sorry the yeah the bins take a little bit longer but no this is based on units. Okay. Mr. Rodriguez thoughts comments. Um I'm
in complete agreeance with Commissioner Cay as far as scenario two. Um, I do believe that those two properties, the the difference thoughts that I have aside from everything he said is that these two
properties have been basically we've been picking up their trash since the 80s. So, they know nothing. You're talking specifically, you're talking about the Banyan, correct? And you're talking and Miller 57. Miller and 67 and the Banyan. Those are the two largest. Correct. And
they've they've been getting their trash picked up since, like I said, since since the 80s. Nobody can John says since before he's been here, and he's been here forever. So, John John, you're an old man. John, you're an old um I just think and then the other
properties, they've never had it. So, I just think we need to be smart and figure out how to keep those two properties. Maybe I know this is a bad word, but like grandfathered or figure out something. um because the other properties never had it. So, it's I
guess it's it's it's harder to get residents that you take it away from them when they've always had it rather than give them something that they've never had. So, that's it. I I want to get a clarification. I'm not sure if there's a recommendation embedded here.
Uh this is just for discussion. There's no So, I wanted on the trash side, just going down the line here. Are we are we proposing to service all these properties from a bulk trash perspective? Uh no, not necessarily. I mean that we just provided that because we want didn't want to leave it out of
the discussion. Uh only we only have three that are receiving service today and there's only three receiving service on the test and none should be receiving service. Correct. Uh not in alignment with the code. Correct. They wouldn't be receiving services. Like my my my my thought on that portion of the issue is that we should just pull the band-aid
off of those three and come into compliance with what our code is since it's a relatively small amount as opposed to expanding that service which for the garbage or the trash or the trash. For the trash I I when it comes
to the trash yeah I I'm I'm less less I'm more lenient. The garbage is I guess I I I said around the garbage is the one that those two properties have always had. So I think that with the bins, you know, I think if we take those away, you're going to have a lot of angry
residents. The only other question I had on the garbage side is we have an analysis on lost revenue associated with franchise fees. And I concur with Commissioner Kay. I don't think the revenue hits going to be that linear uh
day one, but I I I don't have a I again we data here is hard to come by. So, I'm wondering whether we have a sense of what the tipping costs are associated with the additional volume with picking up these accounts under any of these scenarios. The tipping is 87 to include
No. So, again, I I I know the the raw number. I know what the what the fee is, but I'm wondering do we have a projection on the volume? Oh, no. For each of these scenarios, and how do we get our hands around that? Because that's the other cost side here that right now we're not we're not responsible for. Yeah. I think we need
to do some more due diligence with these properties and with the agreements as was mentioned by Commissioner Caya to see what the reality is of how long and the reality of even getting out of those. We'd have to do some more due diligence in that. Well, that's but that's we but so so that's but that's that's a separate issue because that's their contractual issue. I don't want to
make it my issue, right? I'm saying in terms of getting the information. Yeah, I know. But we can so what what I'm saying is we can establish a policy that says we adopt scenario two. We're going to service buildings up to 20 units. It may take a building three years to be
able to take advantage of that service, but I want to understand what we're buying in terms of average volumes, right? Under all these scenarios. So, I mean, we've got to have a rate in terms of we got to know what the average household produces in terms of waste per bin, right? Or we can divide what we're
picking up today by our total gross tonnage and come up with a number and then ascribe a value to it. That's the next part of the analysis I would certainly like to see because I think that's that's still missing as part of this conversation. Those were those were my comments. So I'll move it down the line here. Mr. Vice Mayor, yeah, this
seems reasonable in scenario two. I would just love to see if we did bring it back, how we plan to roll that out to the residents who are no longer receiving services and those who are how we would do that, whether we would give them a period of time to adjust or or
how we're going to be communicating with them. We'll provide some recommendations. That'll be part of the communication plan. Yes. Thank you. I must say that I find it shocking that none of you have actually made mention
of the fact that it's all wrong. I don't know how many of you had have offices in this city where Mr. Hector Ravi came and knocked on the door this past year and said, "By the way, the county made a mistake. They didn't bill you for X, Y,
and Z for X amount of years, and now you have to pay it." There was no conversation at the county of, "Oh my bad. Forget about paying me." Not only are we not doing that, we're actually taking it to the other extreme and
saying we gave this to I'm making this up to three people. So now we have to give it to everybody instead of saying we made a mistake. Somebody somewhere made a mistake. Our code states three. So everybody who is
above three needs to figure themselves out. Conversely, even say, "Hey, I'm going to take scenario one, which is the lowest impact to the city." Nobody has even talked about that, which is
shocking to me because all of that equals time and money. So, when we're having this discussion, I think we need to start on the ground floor. Nobody by our books should be getting this. So,
happening for but but but that's not the point. Just the county said the same thing. It is not the No, that's a different thing. How's it different? It's different. It's it's it's a contractual matter and they pass along the cost to us, right? No, no, but no. Are we talking about the same is this the is this the local business? No,
we're talking about we're talking about the uh we deferred they apparently underbuild us on our recycling. Is that what we're talking about? No. No, no, no, no, no. If if you have a business in the city of South Miami, not us, any business, Mr. Hector Rabbi came and
knocked on your door not too long ago and said, "Oops, the county didn't realize that for x amount of years they did not bill x, y, and z." So, they didn't build for their BTRs. Correct. that the the derm review and the derm
review they were supposed to they say review and they did not and therefore there's a fee with that and they were going back to collect to collect the fees saying that they were supposed to be part of again I don't know how this is in any way relevant to No what I'm saying is when when some other
municipality or the county makes a mistake or or realizes there is an oversight they correct they don't say let's just add everybody or we have a sprinkle of people over here that we gave something to didn't give to the
rest. But we're not even starting at the ground floor. We're performing. We've been for but but I guess the point the point I'm making is we've been performing the service for decades. Now it's not like a few years for decades because I went back and I asked Mr. Munoz and I looked at the legis legislation that was adopted of record.
It was adopted in 2007. I figured at that point they were trying to correct for the practice and there's like zero legislative history around what we were trying to do. So it's impossible to tailor what was happening with what the
code says. At best as best I understand the city has never followed its code with how it's it's collected garbage. Is is that a fair statement or not? Well to this point substantially departed from it. We can't confirm any information. How how we how we ended up with this set of practices is a mystery to everyone
who's worked here for 20 plus years and to each of us sitting up here now. But then why wouldn't we start again at the ground floor? The ground floor is zero. The code you know what is written by the city whether we have followed it or not
is zero. I'm not saying scenario one scenario two or scenario is the correct for me that I'm saying we just haven't done it. For me that represents a service reduction. That's how I arrive at my conclusion and understanding why I asked for scenario three to be included.
So we would understand what the incremental impact would be of getting to a level where we say okay everything below 50 units we are going to service through our our our solid waste department because that is the outer bound of the largest project.
I think it's 43 units that we're servicing today. So, so we understand and we're communicating to the public what is a zero service reduction. It is a standard that says we're going to service every building below 50 units. Not an arbitrary number that was set god knows when without any reference to our
actual practice that doesn't doesn't as far as we can tell does not relate to anything we've done here in all of our adult lifetimes. Commissioner G, you're recognized. Commissioner, I just want to understand when you say start at zero, what does that mean? Are you saying that anybody that's over four units any any
four units or more would be in the commercial category? You're saying that every anything over four units retroactive they have to go pay. No, I'm not. What I'm saying is what I am saying is our discussion isn't even starting at the ground floor. What does that mean?
It means our code says less than four. Okay, we've messed it up. Okay, I'm not I'm not saying we didn't mess it up. We maybe let's pretend we messed it up for 50 years. So you're saying leave it as is. No, I'm just saying can we start the
conversation at the ground floor which we've literally jumped to scenario two because in our minds I think we realize that it means no service interruption and we can cover it. But that doesn't we're adopting something and we're t
we're having a discussion about adopting something that is 17 or 16 more than what our code says. So why wouldn't we start the discussion at four at four? I mean I understand that we've given
something to people for free forever. It doesn't mean that it is right. It doesn't but it's not but let's be clear. It's not free. No but they're paying for it. It's only Only some people. That's what I was going to say. Only some people. So, what about the people that have been paying for it all these years?
So, do should we So, if we if we're going to go to an have an equity argument, then the equity argument should break out this entire operation and set up an enterprise fund. Do we want to do that? Because that's a zerobased conversation. I I think if you want to get to zero base, that is as zero base as you're going to get. I say
our conversation needs to start at what the code says and talk up. We've literally jumped to 20 because I think that meets a magic number in our heads that doesn't cost us more money. I I think you are drawing the conclusion
that we've all reached a conclusion. I certainly have not. I have I I I think the biggest piece of missing information is what is the actual cost to tip right all this additional volume. And so I I certainly need to understand that economic piece before I make any
decision at 20 or 50%. I simply wanted the information of understanding what a scenario that would cover what our practice has been right wrong or indifference is what we've been doing for as long as anyone here can tell and so I don't disagree with the fact you're making a point that
let's get back to baseline but my point to you is in retort is that there's never been a practice at the baseline so I think it's it's it's like a it's like this fictional argument about rolling back your tax rate when you know you've
had 6 and 9% cost because of inflation on on services every year. As much as you would want to do it theoretically and the state wants to characterize it as a tax increase, you can never achieve it because costs go up. So similar here, we can talk about a code that says we
should only be servicing three units or less, but if for 50 years we've been servicing everything up to 43 units, I I I think it's prudent to ask, well, maybe that's our baseline and we should work back from that because I think that all the people that we're going to communicate with about this issue,
whatever scenario we choose, zero to your scenario, well, that's not necessarily what my choice is. saying we have not started 0 1 2 or three right for anyone who's not in one of the scenarios that we adopt they're going to see it as a service reduction and we're
going to have to explain it to them. So when you look at it though, if you look at scenario three, realistically right now the Miller 67 and Written House, they are above scenario two.
But I agree. So is the building that's going up in the corner. So is the one that's going to go up across the street. So is the one that's coming here. Yeah, but those buildings are it's not even, let's be clear, we're talking it's order of magnitudes larger than what the problem we're talking about today. So I mean let's keep that. Let's not
analogize. No, but I'm saying you're gonna have other things coming up that will fall within this. So while we are having a conversation, can we please not jump to scenario two? We don't even know what scenario one is.
I mean that's I I understand what you're saying. I just I've already gone through that process in my head and a lot of numbers that I've done and that's the one I I want. That's just my my opinion. Whether I jump to conclusions that as it a matter of opinion, it's not. It's something I've done a lot of research on
more. So, there's a lot of stuff that I got want to work on on top of this that goes into the commercial part of it where we need to open up more franchises because right now we only have two and our commercial businesses are getting reamed. So, this will this will move forward into commercial that we need to
open it up as well. Just as a matter of opinion. Well, those are two completely different things. They they kind of are and they're not. Um they're franchises. We're talking about franchises right now. Look, I think I think I mean to to we have one building for example that we brought into our operation recently or
talked about bringing to the operation. They came to us begging and pleading to be included because they're they the cost escalation on their commercial contract has been exorbitant. Right. So that's also another driver here uh in trying to preserve affordability for
people. I think you know I I want to ask some questions generally if I can commission about some related issues. Number one is the only prohibition in our the only prohibition on serving commercial properties in our own code. We're not we're not prohibited from serving commercial properties by
interlocal or any other contractual relationship with a third party. That's my my understanding. Yeah. My reading of the code I don't know if you have anything else to add to that. My qu my so right now from what we saw in the presentation we have a prohibition on
serving anything that we deem to be commercial which is four or more units. Right. Right. And I'm just asking the question is there any other limitation by interlocal or whatnot on us servicing uh commercial properties? I didn't see
not the way I read it. Okay. are franchise agreements with commercial haulers are they are they I'm assuming we have a contract with each commercial hauler that we're required to abide by and they're required to abide by and so I'm another question is are we
potentially in breach of those agreements by virtue of our current practice we can certainly look at the diff the two franchise agreements and see if there's anything in there okay I mean I just like to understand and maybe we need an executive session to discuss that to understand what our legal posture is we're you know visav those
two commercial haulers. Third, my other question is for further discussions. I don't think I don't think the intention was to arrive at a conclusion today. We're just getting the benefit of what staff's analysis was is can we actually uh we've been talking about this
interlocal with a county modification and possibly having our own waste to rail transfer facility. Can we require our commercial haulers to tip at a city designated facility? That would be part of the agreement that they're going to review. Correct. So I'm just want to understand whether there's
and again is there any prohibation prohibition via our interlocal assuming it's modified you know consistent what we discussed most recently with the county to us kind of geo fencing and requiring them to dispose at a city facility. Right. Okay. Yes ma'am. When
we're talking about trash we need to understand or at least I need to I'm just talking about garbage right now. No, I know. But you were saying you're talking about tipping, which made it pop into my head. When we're looking at trash, if we're going to say we're not going to
service anybody, like does the county pick it up? Like, how's that going to work? Or if we decide we're going to do something, do we want to do what the county does, which is, hey, you get twice a year? So, so trash trash again is subject to their commercial,
I'm assuming their commercial contract with one of the two vendors that are franchised in the city. So, bulk waste or vegetative waste, the vegetative waste is either removed by their by their landscape contractor and they pay for it as part of that service, I'm
guessing, or bulk trash, it's removed pursuant to their contract with their commercial waste hauler. Again, if I'm misspeaking, please correct me. It could be either or. Either or. So, um I I I my my concern about adding trash into this
conversation for all of these buildings is that the the overwhelming majority are not getting the benefit of that service today. So, why increase the burden on our general fund, right? Because we're all we're going to see there is additional costs in terms of
disposing of waste. So, uh vegetative material otherwise. So I I I my my goal is to fix what is a misalignment of our code with our practice in terms of how we handle garbage and whether that's scenario zero, one, two, or three. I
think we need some more information on on cost particularly the cost of disposing of that volume in any of those scenarios. And I think we've got a I think we've got a pretty good size on what we stand to lose long term in terms of recurring revenue in terms of franchise franchise revenues and I think
our cost to staff scenario three which would be the most aggressive scenario in terms of additional manpower and uh capital. Anything else we want to ask staff for in terms of trying to understand this issue for our next discussion and when do we want to have that next discussion? Sir, you're
recognized. I'll go down the road down this down the way again. I you know I also had a suggestion and idea that you know we I I keep on bringing up bins because we do have that currently as your your kind of tip tipping point if you will. Um, if we have the opportunity
to put in legislation the instead of doing it by units or that we do it by bins as a as an allocation towards commercial or residential condos that that might be a solution as well that there's a cut off at 20 bins.
So, for example, uh the banyans right now currently they're at 17. um if they go up to 20, they go over 20, they now go to commercial and they have to get their own trash. So, I'm not saying that's the solution, but that's a a thing that I thought about and that we
would need to change legislation to make it based on bins. So, just a thought process. Do we have a standard as to how many bins we require per residential dwelling unit? No, I asked that question. No. And
u the at one time one of these properties was serviced through um uh dumpster when we had the equipment that would accommodate that and a front loader that would accommodate it. When we switched uh when the city switched to a different vehicle then they went to
the bins. The number as far as I I understand it's kind of random. Obviously we're not getting complaints that individuals are not able to find space for their garbage or else they would call. Uh so 17 bins has supported 43 units in one property. Uh but no
known standard that that that I'm aware of. Okay. Comments, questions, what else you want to see about your information and when do you want to have this follow-up conversation? So quick question cuz I'm I'm looking for it here. So but I can't find it. Maybe it is here.
Over four unit um units. How many buildings are we servicing for garbage that are over our code, our current code? And I already know of the two special cases. Four units. No, I I just
clarification. The code reads four or more. Okay. Four or more. Three. Over three. Okay. Over three. So, four or more? 43, I think. How many How many? I I remember we went over, but I don't see the numbers here. I think it was
743, wasn't it? No, no, no. Bu you buildings buildings complex 34 34 34 properties and that we're doing right now 34 properties no if you went up No I'm
asking right now how many over seven how many over three are we servicing seven seven and of the seven two of them are the two property middle 57th and and and the banyans right correct So
when it comes I for me it's we have to do something about th those two. If if we get rid of the other five and stick to the four, I'm open to that. But when it comes to the banions and when it comes to Miller 567th,
these are properties that have been serviced for decades. I will I don't want to be going to those residents telling them now we're taking something that you've always had, however they got it, they got lucky, however they got it, and now taking that away from the
residents because at the end of the day, they do pay for it in their property taxes when they pay for their units. Yeah. So, if we want to cut the other five, okay, so we don't have lose any franchise fees. We don't lose any money that we're making off the franchise
fees, but we I I I I am strong about keeping the other two properties, however it is that we figure it out, grandfathering them, whatever it is, that's where I stand. C can we draw a legal basis, legal distinction on that basis? Yes,
I think conceivably we could. We just need to look at each property on a case-by case basis and analyze each one. But we'd have to but we'd have to keep all seven and 150 units in our current program. I think we can conceivably do that. Yeah. I mean I think we can't we can't grandfather some and not all.
Yeah. I mean that's really so I think if you can get us an opinion as to whether we have a rational basis for drawing that distinction which would be that would be helpful which at the end of the day if we stay with those
seven nothing changes. We still receive all the franchise fees that we're getting now. There's no loss of scenario one, two, or or three. Correct, Alex? There's no if if you just keep those seven properties, nothing changes. Nothing changes. Right. It's just
absorbed within what we have. Just addressing the, you know, code u alignment. So, you know, just so that we're again, I just feel this correctly into the future. I just feel taking something away from residents that they've always had is a lot more
difficult than giving someone who's never had it. Have we have we I mean did we finally check any of the devel I mean those buildings are not I mean the banyan are not terribly old. I mean they're you know what 30 No, they get remodeled all the time. They got No, but they were built in the last probably 30
years in the Yeah. Early 80s. Early 80s. So there's no we even we even checked billing because like I I mentioned that the previous versions of the code had uh an amount to be charged to properties directly for garbage but there's no
documentation finance went back and checked there's no record of any charges or being built to properties there's no list of properties available to say that we there's no did we check any of the development orders on those buildings and confirm whether or not they
one of the conditions that we were going to provide garbage service to those particular buildings. I mean, I I just think let's turn over that one that one that one stone and see if there's a way for drawing a distinction that's more principled than just saying we've always done it that way.
Yeah. I I my my discomfort is with treating parties that are in the same situation similarly because they happen to have the benefit of uh our yeah our our malpractice, right? And what do we
what do we say to an HOA that comes to us when we grandfather them in say, "Hey, why weren't we included in this originally?" So, but I I do I do understand. I think it is 100% true. just harder to take something away from someone who's been getting it forever. Um, but I I'd prefer to do it on the
basis of something that was some affirmative action other than just our inaction and the establishment of a practice historically. Okay. But so in ter any additional follow-up questions, when do we want to discuss this item next? Do we want to do this before have
a follow-up on the 29th so we can try and take some action before we go into our next budget? What's the board's preference? Do you think that we'll have enough time on the 29th? Yeah, because we have we have so much going on on the 29th, I think. I I would say move it
probably to the next one. Yeah, to the one after that is what I would say. Okay. So, we're we're talking about September. August. Are we meeting in August? Yeah. We have to we have to meet at least once. No, I don't. We haven't canceled any meeting in August yet. Okay.
I quot Sorry, mayor. Yes, sir. By code, we have to have one in August. One. Yes. One. Okay. Yeah. So, I would say move it to August. We'll move it to August then. That gives them time to look at all the development things, crunch more numbers, and see where we land legally.
Okay. Well, to Mr. Mos and the team, thank you for the exhaustive analysis and at least helping us understand where we are, right? And we look forward to getting a a couple more questions answered. Thanks. Thank you. Uh, moving on to item
M1, uh, parking enforcement. Mr. Riverall, you're recognized. Mayor, I'm gonna And just just by way of update, uh, the Panthers were up two zero at the end of the first period. I'll check on the score again now. If none of us talk on this one, you can go
watch the game. Yeah, it's okay. Now, if I watch, they lose. So, it's better off. I'm just checking the score. So, when I watch, they lose. So, that's it. The only two games I've seen. No, no, no, no. Then yeah, I'm not I'm not watching. I'm not watching. You're not watching. Mr. Man, you you're going to kick us off
on item M1? Yes, sir. Um we um previously had a conversation uh uh in regards to um a request Commissioner Rodriguez had wanted us to take a look at if if we stopped enforcement at 10 p.m. for all days of the week, what that
would look like. Uh, prior to that, we had done some additional work um, as a result of some questions that the commission had asked and the mayor had asked us to review. At that last meeting when we discussed the enforcement stopping at at 10 p.m., uh, the mayor made reference to the prior research and wanted us to take a look at that
information and see what that would provide. So, what we're showing you is a snapshot of a really a four-week effort that was done. Um, they pretty much mirror each other. I'm just the one the one that you have on the screen is April 1st, but you could pretty much see that each week thereafter there's a there's a
pattern and and the pattern sort of validates what's going on which is that at the late hours um the uh citation revenue uh either equals and or exceeds the paid revenue. And so um and and you
see that pattern what you see before you is on red is citation revenue in this uh line line graph and then the the blue is the parking revenue. So when blue and red kind of touch or blue dips below red is is where you see that um that in fact
enforcement revenue is exceeding parking revenue. Therefore, uh what we are um bringing forward is and the request that was made of us is um if we stop enforcement at 10 p.m. all days, what's the fiscal impact to that? Roughly
50,000. That's a moving target depending on when we do it, but in order of magnitude, it would be 50,000. So, uh what we're saying is that we would go ahead and do that. I could do that administratively, but because this uh had uh commission discussion and was asked to bring it back to take a look at
this a little further, we're bringing it back. Um and so we would u stop enforcement at 10 p.m. for all days, which this line graph pretty much validates that. That's when we have that conflict that I just described. Certainly happy to answer any questions
that that that you may have. Sure. Um commission, you recognize. Does this mean the garage as well? All all enforcement because then it would What about the people that we were
talking about the parking pass? How would that monthly pass? Yeah. So then like overnight overnight parking. Yeah. No, it it's not necessarily overnight parking. like the staff that stays till like midnight or 1, they we wouldn't have to then change the parking
pass verbage if this were to come into play. Correct. You're so clear. Thank you. Can we Yeah. Can we get just So, let's have the conversation on the record. Um, as far as the day pass or the rooftop parking at the parking garage or
the overnight, the overnight permit is still required. Um, obviously for reasons of it's offset the Avalon or whatever other developments that occur in the town center to keep it. Um, so this is really for expired meter.
This is for individuals. You're right. But they still shouldn't need to p buy the day pass so that they could park during those hours. So it wouldn't really affect any of the parking permit. It would only affect hourly parking after or expired meter after 10 p.m.
instead of what we're doing now, which is midnight on Fridays and Saturdays. It would be across the board 7 days 10 p.m. Just a a tactical question. The citation revenue you're showing here, is it our portion of the citation or our portion? Okay. Can you can I'm just curious. Can
you show me the not for this discussion, but I want to see the full the fully loaded amount. The amount that's actually paid the $36. Yeah, because to the I mean again to the user it's indistinguishable. So, and our ours is what what what
percentage? 66%. We keep 66. The rest of it it goes with Miami date county clerk of courts. because I'm s I was surprised when I saw the graph that the citation revenue was so far tracked so far below our parking revenue at at at some intervals not all of them as far as what we collect. No, but the gross revenue
the gross revenue is a lot higher. What you see there is really what we're collecting. I I suspect we would see in some portions on some days that there'd be other locations where the citation revenue in its totality would surpass our parking revenue. So that's my
speculation just yeah I know but it would h but but that's that's because you're showing just our portion I'm say so fully loaded it's 33% higher so it's probably would you probably see a greater imbalance so anyhow
it's all good just wanted to see it other questions okay so is the idea Mr. Manager we'd implement this as of October one for the next budget no we we can implement Yeah, we would do this now. Yeah. Not not tonight, but we want So, you want to
do that? You don't want to do the parking till 10 every day? No. Okay. So, immediately or do you want to not build it into the next budget ever? Do you guys want to do parking enforce? No parking enforcement after 10. Yes. Across the board? Yes. Not. Okay. So
just a clarification, mayor, on on enforcement, there still be out there and enforcing other aspects, right? You know, blocking a hydrant, handicap, you know, uh uh improper direction. So there'll be other enforcement. It would just be the expired meter that they
would not enforce. And and if Okay, so I I believe we were talking about this. The data shows that when someone goes out to eat for dinner, they pay two hours typically. That's what most people pay. So, if you go to dinner in our downtown, again, we're asking people to come to our downtown that we're trying
to build. We're trying to bring people here and we're giving them tickets at 11 12:00 at night, which is ridiculous. Well, when there's no one parked on the street when there's nobody there where you come to eat in our downtown at 8:00, you pay your two hours, you're done, right? We're they're still paying.
They're they're paying for the parking. What this is avoiding is when someone pays for parking at 8:00 and then at 11 at 10:30 or 10:05 they get hit with the ticket because they forgot to to renew it. So I think this is something we're you know let's so let's let's let's let
me ask you this. Let me ask the board this question. Is this something we want to consider immediately because that's I think the manager was inclined to do that or perspectively I I wanted to ask the manager Mr. Overall, how are we tracking in this year's budget for this line item in terms of budgeted revenue
versus actual revenue? We're tracking on target. We're tracking on target. We're not tracking ahead of the forecast. We may be about 2% higher. Okay. Going into summer is very difficult because our slowest time is the summer. So, so, so could we have some reduction? If we if
if we if we adopted if we adopted this policy, the manager would had to execute it because it's below his procurement threshold. I'm assuming that's why you're doing it or budgetary threshold. No, I mean implement changing enforcement hours are done administratively. Changing fees would require commission action. Okay. Okay.
So, if we change the enforcement hours, can we offset the loss revenue against our budgeted revenues this year? So, I don't want to bring the I don't I don't want to I want I want this to be done I want to be the last budget, right? We didn't do it because we couldn't get there, right? But even even though I'm a
zealous proponent with my new commission friend here, right, on this item, I I want to make sure that we're not busting the budget uh in the current fiscal year. So just if you can give me some sense of where we are and whether we could absorb a perspective reduction in
revenue for what is what uh 3 months four months of the fiscal year July August September three months three and a half months. Yeah. or if we start tonight as commissioner Rodriguez said. Well, I think I think it would make sense to start this July one when we were trying to invite people to come in
here for what you know of case of there are some other dynamics because we've made other modifications to enforcement and there's been certainly from by practice and and so we've already reduced ours and so those impacted maybe what we originally forecasted. So this will be on top of that and you know it's
something that we can monitor monthto month. Uh and I I know what your concern is that you know we do this and now we got to come back and find a way to balance the budget because uh but it it it goes into our general one big pool right and at the end of the day we can
find other means to try and balance what we may lose. So, uh, that's why we were saying to implement it now. Um, and we would find other ways to try and balance that if we find ourselves that the projections are are not trending on track. And the idea was in in our conversations
were to balance this during the budget talks and see where our parking is and see what fair market is and see where we stand with that and, you know, and if finding our break even point and and going from there. So, we wouldn't be losing what? Let's go. Let's go. a
little word on this and get everyone's thoughts. Commissioner, well, I mean, the numbers here it you know me, $50,000 is a lot of money. But wait, it's my turn. Wait, I know what you're going to say. I know what you're going to say.
$50,000 is a lot of money. This is our residents money. If I I am not opposed to this because realistically there's not a lot of people there after 10 o'clock at night and when they are they're pissed off when they get to their car. But I think
we need to find ways. No, no, but I think you four including me. So let's make us us five need to find ways to try to bridge that gap while we're talking budget. We don't have to talk about it right now. We need to find a way to bridge that gap either
here somewhere else. Stop giving people money. Something I'm okay with this. That's that's that's the idea to go to budget and and No, no, no. Go through budget and and balance it out. I hear this all the
time. We're going to No, we're going to We'll find out. What was the conversation to balance it out, right? Figure it out. The conversation has been and I'm sure uh Mr. River already knows what that number is. You know what? I'm going to stop talking because the more I talk, you make me change my mind. Okay. Thank you. So will I. Commissioner, Vice
Mayor. Yeah. I'm also a fan of us going through more of the planning phase through the budget and just make sure that we're doing this the right way. And the other thing is I always think about, you know, so so is that is that let's let's so you're hearing your yes. So I'll be
clear. Believe it or not, you're yes to doing it immediately. Okay. I'm like I'm about to file my chair. Shock. It's okay. Okay. I think you have a yes back there as well. I'm a no to doing immediately. You're a no to doing it immediately. Okay. So that's that's what I wanted to get to. Yeah. You want to do it immediately? July 1st. I'm good with
with the taste of Somi. July one. Okay. That's a good start. July. July one. July one. Commissioner Gay. So you're saying that we want to eliminate force. So when when do we stop enforcement again? 12. Well on Fridays and Saturdays. It's at 12 midnight. And
then Monday through Thursday 10. So it's only two days. It's our It's our busiest day. Our busiest days. I know. is when people come visit our city. I mean, I'm so tired of manipulating these numbers already. Like, it's nothing. Like, you guys, we've done all
these manipulations before you, Commissioner Rodriguez. We've done so many different manipulations. We don't understand what the impacts are. I don't hear people complain about anymore about tickets anymore. What what if you
advertised that you're not going to bill anybody for parking after 10:00? Do you think they might stay in the bars a little longer? Do you think they might want to come downtown maybe at 9:00 and stay for longer? Do you think then that
maybe the merchants would earn more money and have to pay more taxes because they had more um profit? Thank you for the comment. So, Commissioner Guy, you're known doing
it immediately. No, man. I'm done. I'm like, we've done so much and nothing moves the needle. Like, we just need to figure the big plan to just let it go. That's my opinion. I'm like, I'm We've already done so many changes with this stuff. I don't think it moves the needle.
I'm sorry. Moves the needle on on what our our reputation in the area. Yeah. I don't think I don't think it moves the needle. I think it will. We've already done this before, but whatever. That's I mean, that's my vote. Do we have to vote on it? Do we do
we vote like No, he he he can choose to do it. I mean, I I I think he would like our direction. I would like it to be more unanimous than just a 3-2 vote. Um I mean, I I my thought was we're going to do this prospectively, but uh I I don't want to miss the opportunity. So, I mean, my my you know,
I'm I'm honestly shocked that Commissioner Wich is on board with this. So, I knew I'll say yes just to kind of uh just to kind of uh get help us all along here. Uh so, Mr. Andrew, I I think uh if you want formal action, we're happy to take it or No, I just if there's a general consensus, you know,
majority and you know, that's I I would I would like to understand what the impact is financially. If you can get us a report as soon as the month closes for July because I you know, I just want to make sure we're going to b we're going to bust the line item. Okay. I don't think we will because it's a slow month
historically anyways. So, I would imagine our best revenue months are are behind us already fiscally. So anyhow, those are my thoughts. Okay. Okay. Uh just a couple things on commission reports. I'll be quick. Uh I
just want to share on on on Manor Lane. I've spoken to council, Mr. Russio, about whether we want to present an offer. I want to get a sense from there is there is a willingness to hear an offer on the part of the developer for us to purchase the lot. I don't know if we want to give the manager. I
believe they've procured a pre a preliminary evaluation. Want to get a sense of whether the board wants to actually tender an offer to the developer. I'd prefer to do that before we get close to a a reharing of their application. I don't want to be put in a position where we're we're it's perceived that we're trying to perceive
an extraction from them. So, I don't know if the board had a has wanted to move forward. We certainly heard a lot from the neighbors about them wanting to see us acquire the green space. Which way are we going? which let's go left to right since we were right to left the last time. Okay. Um I don't
have a problem with having that conversation. I think that if we're going to be kind of turning our eyes more towards that, that we need to then look at other neighborhoods, not just the people that scream the loudest because guess what? My neighborhood
doesn't scream at all. So does that mean we don't want green space? you know that that kind of convers it's the same as the garbage trash thing. Correct. No, I think it's a fair point and I think that's part of the purpose of uh certainly the conversations I've had with our director for parks and the
consultant the master plan is identifying some other opportunities. So concur with that statement. Yes sir. And I I would just want to make sure we're getting a good deal with it. I mean I know it's right up against the underline. It might be hard to get comparable properties, but yeah, that's my biggest concern is that if we could
purchase a property in or around it or somewhere else that was a better deal, I'd rather do that. So, I mean I mean roughly the valuation I think that came back was $75 a foot for our informal that was on the on the high end, right? So, um you know, it didn't strike me as
outrageous, but you know, I don't know. uh it's in the north of a million dollars range. So I think roughly just under 1.2 when you when you apply that that metric to a so I think if we're going to tender an offer it's got to be with the
understanding that I mean the expectation we probably have to borrow. Mr. Manager I don't know if you've done the analysis we're going to basically purchase it. I know that we want to go into reserves or our general fund to to take down the uh to take down the property. So, we probably want to structure a borrowing so we can limit
our limit it to just our carrying costs until we figure out how we're going to how we're going to improve and bring that into the portfolio. Do you want to say anything about that? No, no, that's correct. If if the reserves is not a route, then then certainly we would borrow to to make
that purchase. And yeah, 75 was a was a ceiling uh from a estimate standpoint. certainly um opportunity for something lower than that, but 75 was was a ceiling. Thoughts? I'm definitely open to, you
know, seeing giving an offer and and seeing other other options were um during the underline event, I talked to Meg about that property and see because they're looking for properties. So maybe the underline would be interested in buying it because they're actively looking for properties right now. So
maybe we don't have to absorb it, but maybe the underline can. Yeah. I just be shocked. I'm shocked to hear that because since they're asking us for form money. Yeah. Well, yeah. For maintenance, but but they're still acquiring property. Okay. Um and Lisa, yes, I we're neighbors and I am
screaming loud. I think the the manager's tired of hearing me talk about the Girl Scout property and when are we going to start clearing that out? So, I saw I saw the uh director for Tropical Girl Scouts at uh the Chamber event last week and they she committed she's going
to get us comments to the lease here very shortly. So hopefully that'll happen soon. Hopefully. Yes, sir. Look, I think the opportunity buy for the city is a great opportunity. Um we should definitely look into it. I will say that we do have a parks study that we're
doing now. Do we need green space in the area? I'm sure we do. I think we need to be a little bit more planoriented to make sure we do these things correctly sometimes, but having the opportunity to buy that now, which doesn't come out often and it solves a lot of problems,
it's something that we should definitely look into. Okay. So, do we want to uh direct the manager to put together an offer and present it? Again, again, I I just think in good faith if we're going to go down this route, I I you know, want to have a sense that four of us are going to agree
to to a companion borrowing because otherwise there's no point making an offer. I I'm certainly not going to vote to take the money out of cash in our reserves in one shot. Um prefer not to see all that money go out the door. I think we can probably get debt a very
reasonable terms. So, do we want to have the manager brief us on that? kind of get our individual sign off, give us a sense of what the plan would be from a finance perspective, carry terms, and then kind of blesses out the door and and and can we then I know that Alfredo
has shown us our debt and when it's coming like when it's coming off the books so that we also have a better idea like okay, we would be doing this this debt will be coming off the books here in 1026 is our is our debt retirement date. So essentially we'd be just
transferring. If we did that, we'd be transferring. Yeah. So, I think it would be helpful to understand what's our what's our debt service on what's our annual debt service on the um Toronto that we're retiring in October of 26.
Okay. So, basically where we I would guess right if we took a more aggressive acquisition price than the one we're even talking about. That's what I was saying. You're at a quarter of that total debt service. So you're looking at bridging 25% of that capacity between
now and October one of 26. Correct. Okay. I I I would agree with going finding out what the debt service what the whole and then giving a a little better offer. I mean don't let's not start high. I start low and I again I
you know they're they can hear you. Yeah. Yeah. I I've never been told I talk low. No. You're like let's the strategy should be blah blah blah person you're not listening right like sir mayor and not to decide
today but just thinking about it because I think it'll be related at some point is is certainly managing expectations of if it were to be green space what type of use would be on that property because uh hearing a range of comments of uses I I don't know that everybody would be aligned with a certain activation of
that space so I I just I well it was suggested by one neighbor that that could be one of the uh options Um I I'm not sure that that would be met with you know by others. So um it's a it's a big investment. That may be a strategic acquisition. That is an easy neighborhood to design a park in. I
think commissioner you know sorry mayor uh mayor our former mayor can attest to that. You know it's our park director can attest to the very smooth process that was the creation of Bob Walsh Park. So um that's sarcasm in case anybody doesn't know. So I I would imagine I'
I'd say that's an issue we kind of leave to another day and uh we just make a decision whether we want to add it into the inventory in the short term because you know we have the opportunity. So Mr. Mayor, if you can kind of lay out some terms and confirm what the financing would look like, if we can have
individual conversations and if you get a sense of four of us are willing to move forward, I' I'd be inclined to at least try to get an offer across either side and see what they come back with. Okay. Um lastly, uh obviously we lost Sorry. Yes, ma'am. Oh, no. I didn't want to say
something. So, so we we uh had the unfortunate news that former vice mayor passed away recently and was uh uh buried today. And so, I I wanted to get a sense of the commissioner whether we wanted to do something to uh in in memory of uh his
service. I I hadn't inquired with him whether the portion of his street uh in front of his home is designated in honor of anyone who apparently is not. Would we like to consider a resolution to possibly designate that portion of 64th Street in his honor? I I thought it
might be a fitting tribute. So, um right now we're looking just so that you guys know. Yeah. What for Gail? Exactly. Because her street in front of her house has somebody else's name on it. So, we're looking at a section of 64th Street. Got it. So, we want to make sure
he's not he doesn't live in the same section as her because then we'll run into the same problem. West of 68th Avenue. He does. Okay. So, Mr. Manager, if you can uh maybe in for the July or August agenda, kind of bring forward an item for, you know, to
clarify the designation for um Gail and maybe a section that would be appropriate to name for Vice Mayor Young as well. Certainly on on the Gil one uh as I understand it um has a prior
designation of a name and 63rd court. Um so obviously from an option standpoint uh we can come back with some ideas if if naming of the street uh is is the option the preferred option. I mean we can be other things that we would name as well andor I believe um her her house
uh was on a corner. So although she would not face the avenue from a naming standpoint, it could be maybe 64th Street for that segment potentially and then it wouldn't conflict with the already named avenue if you will. I forget it's 60 I forget the avenue. So
that that could be an option or Okay. I I believe uh as for Mr. Young uh is a little bit further west. He's a little bit further west. Yeah. And which is 6825 I think was his home his home address. kind of like it's the section closest to the uh Lum Trail, last block
and a half of the city. Yeah. So, anyhow, if you could just want to make I think to the commissioner's point, it's let's make sure we reconcile that potential conflict, but if you can bring forward a recommendation for a segment that we can name as proximate to his home as possible, I think that would be
appropriate. Okay. Uh with that, any other commissioner reports, discussion, or comments? Yes, I live on 64th Place off of Miller. Alpha Miller. Just remember that. Okay, we'll do it while you're alive. Okay, seeing no further business before
the commission, we stand a journ. Have a good evening. Take this.