Miami Beach City Commission Meeting – March 18, 2026
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Please take your seats.
The meeting is about to begin.
Remember to speak into the microphone as this meeting is being recorded for public record.
Please stand by.
We are going on air in five, four, three, two, one.
Good morning and welcome to our commission meeting of March 18th, 2026.
Thanks everyone for being here.
And I'll turn it to our city clerk, Rafael Granada, to give us any instructions.
Good morning, everyone.
The city commission is physically present in the commission chamber at Miami Beach City Hall, 1700, Conventional Center Drive, third floor.
Members of the public are invited to attend either in person or virtually.
If you're joining us virtually, you can log in using the Zoom app or visit the Zoom.us on your browser.
You can also phone in at 305-224-1968.
That's 305-224-1968 or toll-free 888-475-4499.
The webinar ID is 813-928-576-71 pound.
Again, 813-928-576-71 pound.
If you would like to speak virtually on an item during the meeting, please click the raise hand icon in the zoom app or press star 9 on your vote on your phone.
The Zoom link, webinar ID, and phone number stay the same for every commission meeting.
All lobbyists must register with the office of the city clerk located on the first floor of the city hall.
You do not need to register if you're an expert witness giving only technical or specialized testimony.
A representative of a neighborhood association or nonprofit speaking without pay, or a private citizen speaking on your own behalf without compensation.
However, if you're an expert witness or a nonprofit or a neighborhood rep, you do need to submit a written disclosure form to the office of the city clerk before speaking with a commission or staff.
Forms are available at the office of the city clerk.
If a lobbyist gives or agrees or agrees to give a thousand dollars or more to a neighborhood association or its representative regarding a city matter, that must be disclosed in writing to the clerk.
Note that contingency fees are not permitted to compensate lobbyists.
If you plan to speak during the public comment today, please sign in.
Thank you, Ralph.
It's my honor to uh introduce Rabbi Sholem Korf of the Chabad of Lakeview to give our invocation.
Uh I will say it's uh it's a fairly new synagogue to the Miami Beach community, and it already has a tremendous profound impact on the uh Lakeview and surrounding areas.
Uh I actually visited uh not too long ago on a on a Shabbat, and you were you are packed.
Yeah.
Thank you.
Welcome.
Thank you, Mayor.
Good morning.
Morning, Mayor, Commissioners, City staff, and all members of the community here today.
We gather with the shared purpose to serve, to lead, and to strengthen the community of Miami Beach with the help of God.
As we approach the holiday of Passover, where we tell the story of the exodus of Egypt.
The Jewish sages teach that a name actually holds within its essential meaning.
The name Egypt in Hebrew means limitations.
So the exodus of Egypt doesn't just mean a story of physical freedom from bondage, but actually traversing beyond our limitations, going out of our comfort zone, and leaving perhaps what we're comfortable doing to go a bit greater more beyond to do a little more.
Each of us faces moments when we're called to rise beyond what is easy and beyond what is known.
Leadership at its core means exactly that.
To be able to do beyond what is your comfort zone, to rise beyond what is the usual, what's easy, and to go a bit above the call of duty.
With the help of God, may the work here done today be guided by wisdom, clarity, and compassion.
May there be an openness to new ideas, courage in the face of challenge, and a sheer commitment to progress that benefits all those that call this city their home.
Just as the journey of Passover reminds us that growth begins when we step beyond our boundaries.
May this gathering be a place where meaningful steps are taken towards growth, towards unity, and towards purpose that benefit the city of Miami Beach.
May this meeting with the help of God bring about outcomes that promote opportunity, growth, joy, and well-being for all the residents of the city.
May we merit the coming of the Mashiach, where there will be peace and harmony amongst all nations, people and creation.
And let us say Amen.
Thank you very much.
Thank you, Robert Korf.
You had the room mesmerized.
Thank you.
So as I look around the room for our Pledge of Allegiance, uh I will say we're in the middle of spring break, getting toward the end, and for the third consecutive year so far, tremendous success.
I don't want to jinx it, but uh really congratulations to everyone up here to our city manager, our police department so far.
I agree.
But we also have to thank our marketing department uh and the great marketing campaigns that you continue to roll out.
So I'm gonna ask Melissa Berthiara, director of marketing to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Mr.
Mayor, as a fellow baseball fan and a superstitious baseball fan, what do you never do?
You never call a no-hitter before it's over.
Fair enough.
All right, everyone, please rise.
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.
One nation, under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.
So, Commissioner Bot, you actually teed it up perfectly because I was gonna wish congratulations to the country and the people of Venezuela who uh beat the United States in the world baseball classic last night.
Uh it was an incredible, incredible game.
The uh the dedication, the love, the love of country, but really what I what I saw was the love of people.
And uh that's really what sports brings out.
It's what the arts and culture it brings out.
We just had the Olympics.
It's it's really great when you see people come together and you obviously you support one team, but then uh you literally high-five the uh the opponent next to you and just wish them congratulations.
So it was a it was a great moment for our country um and and for the world last night uh to see and witness the competitiveness and the spirit of uh togetherness.
We're gonna start the uh Sunday hour, our open forum.
So thank you everyone for uh coming and speaking.
Good morning, everyone.
If you're gonna speak, please approach the podium, state your name, address, and you have two minutes.
Please go ahead.
Good morning, everyone.
My name is Kirsa Rafo.
I'm part of the seniors committee representing for Freedom's Tower.
And these are all my friends and neighbors from Fort Freedom.
Um we're here because we're a little bit concerned about the cut um donation cut regarding our senior the senior programs or classes.
Um I understand that there might be funds allocated for bingo in several buildings, and we really we play bingo in our building every Friday and Saturday.
And God forbid, you know, you cancel the you probably cancel Christmas before you can cancel bingo.
But the thing is that we do it on our own.
We don't need city money for that.
People can bring chips, somebody brings soda, the other one brings paper, the other one brings cups.
What we do need are the classes that we have, because we have yoga, which helps with balance, which helps our muscles.
Um we have a dance, which she also gives exercises that will help us, helps our hips.
She does exercises for hips and bones.
We have sumba, which is for seniors, and we do sit it down.
Even our 94-year-old does the sumba sitting down because she exercises.
And um, and we have painting, which is the only class where we're not exercising our bodies, but then we're using our minds.
And all those classes we consider are very important.
They have been growing.
It took a while for people.
Well, the classes not only help physically but also mentally.
A lot of people are inside their apartments alone.
Some of them have family that are very far, and they're alone all the time.
Like our 94-year-old, she participates in everything.
And she goes in a walker because she wants to get out of the house.
And even though she doesn't exercise her legs, she exercises her arms.
And it gives some muscle strength.
They teach us how to fall.
If you're gonna fall, how to say, you know, it be safer.
So to us, all those classes are really important, just as well as transportation and the activities.
We need more.
You know, there's places where like the extravaganza at the Scott Center.
Most people don't come because there's no transportation.
For some of them, they have to cross the street, they have to, you know, and I understand you don't put a bus for some of the things, but maybe Ubers, you know, six people in an Uber.
So instead of less, what we really need is more.
I mean, we paid our dues, we pay taxes.
We put you guys, you know, uh, our children to college, and now that we are seniors, Miami Beach has always been known for having so many programs for seniors.
I hope that doesn't change.
You know, um actually if you can improve it, it will be better.
Thanks.
Thank you.
Commissioner Dominguez asked the speaker.
Thank you.
Um, I just want to change um and clarify the narrative.
You were given misinformation.
I'm sure it's coming from the mayor's office because several seniors called me saying that Gloria told them to come in today and to call me.
I have an item to add more, not to take away from your services.
That's first and foremost.
I've been working very hard to get things uh additional things for you.
As a matter of fact, one of the buildings that asked for bingo was Federation, and Vicky Lopez is gonna pay for it.
So when this item gets called, I'm gonna make an amendment.
Your building specifically did not ask for bingo, but Rebecca Towers did.
So that's another amendment that I'll make that um I won't be asking for.
We spend a lot of money uh with the seniors, and we're always looking to help and spend more, whether it's the senior meals at um the different comedores, but also through the parks department.
Do you know that our parks funding is about 193,000 for the seniors?
You mentioned buses.
We spent about 37,000 dollars in bus services for the seniors for the different events for the party, and we're looking to spend more on that.
Part of that 193,000 also includes senior classes, our contractors for yoga, tai chi and all of those different things.
So we are looking to add and help more.
The housing authority asked us for that additional funding, and as I mentioned, the county is gonna help with some.
So, in my amended item when it's called later, it'll be three thousand dollars as opposed, but it's not for any cuts whatsoever, and I'm so sorry that you were given misinformation because that was not at all what's happening with this item.
I always want to try to give you more.
No, thank you so much.
Yeah, and I I I have no problem with your response, and and I take it in good faith that what you're trying to do, Commissioner Dominguez, but since you invoked my office, I I have not directed anyone to make those calls.
I just asked my chief of staff who said that she has not made any calls, and Gloria Campus, I'm being told is on vacation this week.
I'm just saying you you directly pointed at me as saying that I was directing these calls from my office, and I I didn't say you, I said the mayor's office.
I didn't say the mayor directed his office.
It's my office uh for clarification.
Um your office was calling seniors to call me, and that's what I wanted to uh clarify the narrative.
That's not at all what this is.
Okay.
Can you come up here?
Did you get a call from anyone from my office?
No, I got an email.
Come up to the I'd I'd like to know.
Okay.
No, I did get an email from Gloria Campos, and it wasn't just directed to me, it was directed to Estrella, which is our administrator, our social worker, and a few other people.
And it was in regards to to that, you know.
And she uh she said that the donations were uh the person or the company that was donating was cutting the funding in half, and that's where the worry came.
Okay, thank you.
But she didn't say to call you Lara that's a good thing.
You didn't call me, but I did get calls from somebody, other people in Rebecca Towers, and I know that you guys are so busy, you don't read the agendas, like how would you this even come up?
And then they told me that Gloria had been calling, and and in my case, she didn't call and she didn't and emailed the clarification keeps up.
Didn't even mention your name, so okay.
Thank you.
Next call, a next speaker.
Good morning, Mayor.
Good morning, commissioners, good morning, neighbors.
My name is Alina Valdez, and I'm here at the invitation of Kisa.
She already went over basically what I was going to talk about also.
So I'm just gonna make it very short.
I just want to remind everyone, commissioners and the mayor, that uh when election time was here, uh you all approach us and promise us that we will always be taken care of.
And I just wanted to remind you all of that, that uh we have given you our trust, and uh, we're very happy living in Miami Beach, very grateful for all the services, and just please don't forget us.
We count on you all.
Okay, thank you so much for your time.
Thank you, and thank you for being here.
We we as a commission and I have certainly uh made it an uh strong effort to increase the amount of uh services that we provide to our seniors, and I and I I am I'm confident that we'll only continue.
Thank you very much, Mr.
Mayor.
I just Commissioner Fernandez, thank you, and I just want to thank all of you because you all have always the entire commission, you Mr.
Mayor, each one of the commissioners have always looked out for the seniors in our community um with great passion, and I think it's one of those things that unite us, unite us not only as a community, but as elected officials, how much we value the senior community, how much we owe to you, how much we respect you, and most importantly, how much we love you.
We serve you with love.
And this entire commission has always been unified uh in that, and in a matter of fact, because of a political matter, uh, one point was saying, well, maybe we shouldn't be doing this certain event, and the entire commission was like, oh no, each one of my colleagues actually, I was the only person I think that ever in the history of the city that said maybe we should do something a little bit differently.
And the entire body was so united and continues to be so united, and that is the beautiful part of the city of Miami Beach that we really care for each other as neighbors.
And so I just wanted to put that on on the record because sometimes things can get tense, but there's beautiful stuff happening beyond that.
Thank you.
Good morning.
My name is Meg Lusteau, I'm the executive director of the Miami Design Preservation League, and I'm here to speak in strong support of Commissioner Fernandez's resolution R7AH, which will be coming up later today.
This would authorize the city attorney to explore legal action regarding House Bill 399, which was passed by the legislature last week, which takes away the rights of Miami Beach residents as well as your rights as our elected representatives to make decisions about the development of our city.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
Next, please.
Good morning, everyone.
Mitch Novick to piggyback on to what Meg stated.
Uh House and Senate approved uh Live Local 4.0 last week.
I hope you guys uh consider discussing that at some point.
On another note, uh I want to say my numbers for March have been uh uh fantastic.
Uh there's no longer utter chaos or a police lockdown outside of my home and business.
Uh I have to admit I never heard of uh what a Palooza or Hydrox or any of those other fitness events until last year.
And uh many of my guests uh from this past weekend were in town uh from Switzerland, Germany, uh Brazil, Uruguay uh to attend these events.
So you're on uh you're on a good track, and uh thank you.
Next, please.
Good evening, Mayor and Commissioners.
Uh my name is Brenda Jordan.
I've lived here in Miami Beach for over 35 years.
And you know, when I came to Miami Beach, it was not a diverse community.
As a matter of fact, I was appointed to the housing commission and denied because I don't speak Spanish.
And the first thing that people would say, get a lawyer.
A lot of people did, and I didn't.
I gave the city a chance.
As an artist, I brought my culture, my diversity to this city.
And as an artist, I'm being discriminated against because they set up a program without any input of artists.
It was set up, maybe with good intentions, but it totally left the artists out of away from the table.
And it was set up by people who know nothing about art, have no degree in art, probably don't even have arts tag on their car, which I do.
I pay extra money.
And the problem is that I had a non-for-profit.
They cut me out of the grants.
I said, Miami Beach.
She said, Oh only white people live there.
And I said, No, you can live wherever you want.
Even though I've been discriminated against, I will not be discriminated against in the arts.
The program that was set up recently, revised, made it worse.
I'm paying double the fees.
I get nothing in return.
There's no website, there's no updates.
And people who are real artists are being discriminated against.
They can't even sell in the city again.
And dictating that jewelry is not art.
I sent numerous emails, and Mr.
Mayor, last meeting, you promised to have a meeting with me.
I went to the office and tried to set up one.
I got no response.
Luckily, some people who promised during the election that they would be there for me, like, you know, um the vice mayor here, Monica, she promised, and she called me.
Mr.
Alex Fernandez, and I also spoke to David Suarez, even though we were on different pages, because he already had a program in his mind and wasn't open.
His heart or his ears.
Thank you.
He listened, but he was limited to because I think he had a program already dictated.
It's not fair.
It's not fair to elderly people who lived in the city who can't afford to live in the city.
They moved out and now they're discarded.
Thank you so much.
That's not fair.
Thank you for listening.
Thank you.
So I I uh I do get a lot of requests for for meetings.
I try to accommodate all of them.
I uh uh if you did reach out, I apologize that we didn't do it.
Because you promised, and this has been going on before you were re-elected.
I vote.
It's not a matter of voting.
If you ask if you ask to talk, we will talk.
You told me we would.
Last meeting.
Okay that was a month ago.
I I was not aware that you had reached out.
I am giving you my my commitment that we will talk before the next meeting.
Again, and I hope this time you're saying in front of a lot of people.
Well, you did last time.
I hope you honor your word.
Because words are sacred.
You and I have spoken.
We may have not spoken since the last meeting, but I we have talked about this issue.
I've sent you emails, but we have not individually spoken, no.
So I'm giving you my I'm giving you I'm giving you my commitment that we will have that conversation.
Okay, I hope you honor your word.
Commissioner Mateo Salinas.
Uh Ms.
Jordan, another artist.
Um I'm I think that you're aware uh that I do have an item, a referral to the neighborhoods committee to discuss the artist vendors program so that way we can at committee talk about what um how we can improve the program and we can have further discussions about this to see what can improve the program.
Commissioners, because I have emailed like a ridiculous amount of time.
Yes, even giving you like a blueprint, yes, how to set up an artist program.
And this is the first step in that process.
So we we are definitely I'm definitely trying to help some.
I appreciate it.
You're welcome.
We are commissioner Suarez, I know you had good intentions.
And you know, art is inclusive, it's not just painting.
I'm sure we'll come to a good place here.
I hope so.
We will.
I'm optimistic.
Thank you, Mr.
National.
Yeah, yeah, because I'm not against anyone.
I just want to be at the table when you're setting up something and you know nothing about.
It's not your field, it's not your lane.
Bring someone in.
I'm not even asking for pay.
I'm a cultural ambassador for this city, bringing diversity.
I'm not trying to take away, I'm trying to build.
So I appreciate all the help.
Yes, we will have further conversations.
Thank you, with all of you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Next, please.
Yeah, you're not sure.
No, you shouldn't be Alberto Galvan.
Amigos Agravended Miami Beach because no.
No, it wasn't.
Hi, you all know me already.
My name is Janet Figueroa.
I'm one of the artist vendors.
Um, I've been here some of the meetings with Miss Mateo with Mr.
Fernandez.
Um, I have talked to the mayor, have talked to Miss Tanya on the side lines.
And I'm very grateful that you all have taken out the time to talk to us.
And we're trying our hardest to be patient.
But some of these people, they are elderly.
We are already more than 55 and older in this program.
I'm 61 this year.
So we're all struggling to try to make it.
And it's very difficult when your person that has been injured in a car accident like me, and I was hurt here in the Makatra.
My car was totaled.
My neck and my back is damaged.
I cannot proceed with our surgery because I would not be able to work ever.
So this is all I have, and this is how I keep my home.
And I live out of Miami Beach because I don't live here because I cannot afford to live here.
You cannot tell me that I'm paying for 1300 square feet for 957 dollars is my mortgage, my taxes, and my insurance.
To turn to trade that to come live in Miami Beach to keep a job.
It's insane.
None of you would do that.
So you have to understand.
I keeping my budget among my needs, what I what I could afford.
I am not exceeding my budget because I know that I can't exceed my budget.
So this is very important to me and my family.
Because I don't want my children to have to take care of me.
I chose this place and I afford I will afford this place that's 957 dollars for a reason.
I went through this, I planned my life.
For like that, I won't be a burden to my children.
You understand?
This is so important to me.
As a senior, I don't want my kids to have to take care of me.
I want to be able to take care of myself.
And this is program is all I have.
Thank you so much.
Thank you, Mr.
Mayor.
Thank you, everyone.
I see no one else in the audience requesting to speak.
Therefore, I'm going to go to Zoom.
First caller, Alicia Casanova.
Please state your name, and you have two minutes.
Hi, my name is Alicia Casanova.
I'm here this morning as vice president of the Mid Beach Neighborhood Association as president of the Blue and Green Diamond Condominiums representing over 2,000 residents and is a lifelong Miami Beach resident.
We hope that Commissioner Fernandez's resolution R7AH is heard today.
We fully support it and hope that it's voted on favorably.
We heard the mayor's virtual town hall and fully understand the concerns about Miami Beach potentially losing millions of dollars in state grant funding if the city uses its legal resources on House Bill 399.
But this is about protecting the rights of Miami Beach residents and ensuring that we are not silenced by decisions made in Tallahassee like the one made last minute in the Senate last Friday.
Our city cannot be intimidated.
No amount of grand money can justify giving up our city's rights, our home rule, or our voice as residents to be heard before our historic preservation board.
Commissioner Fernandez's resolution is not about starting a lawsuit next week.
The resolution will serve to preserve the city's ability to explore legal action if and when it becomes necessary, following all legal advice available to defend its rights.
It's also about our elected officials making a statement in support of its residents who will be severely impacted by this bill.
Governor DeSantis will be leaving office in a few months.
And while we cannot predict what will happen, we hope integrity and honor will prevail with the next governor.
We know this is a difficult decision for all of you, but please listen to the voices of the residents who voted for you, who will suffer the consequences of what the state just voted on, and who strongly support this resolution R7AH.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
Our next virtual caller is Mid Beach Neighborhood Association.
State your name, address, and you have two minutes, please.
Good morning.
I am also with the Mid Beach Neighborhood Association, where I chair the beach and water quality working group.
MBA recently attended a meeting of the beachfront management plan.
And we appreciate the opportunity the city provided the community feedback.
We also want to thank Commissioner Fernandez, who served on that ad hoc committee and her for his support during that meeting.
MBNA has submitted public comments on roughly 10 areas of concern.
Our overreaching concern is that the draft plan lacks vision.
It does a reasonable job of describing current conditions, but it does not go far enough in setting a forward-looking strategy for the environmental challenges that could make our beaches unusual in the short term and over time.
As you know, our beach is one of our most valuable public assets, and this plan should do more to bind the county to prioritizing and preserving this asset.
In our view, this is an important opportunity to create a stronger accountability and ensure that beach management decisions match the value of the resource being protected.
Our top concern is sargasm.
The plan needs a stronger strategy for surge response, operational scaling during peak periods, and long-term adaptation if conditions worsen.
A second major concern is water quality, including recurring bacteria issues and a need for stronger integration between beach operations and public health protection.
We also submitted comments on additional issues, including concession enforcement, breakwater performance, special events.
Yes, I'm done.
This item is coming before the commission in the coming months, and we remain available to discuss concerns with any commissioner or their staff.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Our next virtual caller is Johan Moore.
Mr.
Moore, state your name, address, and you have two minutes.
Good morning, Johan Moore, 717 Jefferson Avenue.
I'm calling to oppose, as you might assume, item R7A, which would authorize the demolition of the South Shore Community Center.
I would remind that the uh Planning Board, no Historic Preservation Board, um, declined uh unanimously uh declined uh to support that demolition.
Uh we continue to believe it is a bad idea and that this infrastructure should not be forced into our residential neighborhood when other neighborhoods fail to carry their fair share of heavy urban uh infrastructure.
Uh I also object to our item R5T, R5U, and I'm not sure whom Commissioner Fernandes was intending to benefit with the suspension of the color review requirements for the exterior of buildings.
But speaking uh in um echo of what many of my neighbors have said to me over the years, I believe that many of us who live in the historic district very strongly support continuing uh outdoor color uh review requirements for paint on the outside of buildings.
Uh, I am supportive of R7AH uh, and in fact, uh would echo um Mitch's useful language uh rather than getting caught up in the weeds, it really is difficult for the public to keep track of all the negative legislation coming out of Tallahassee.
But I think it's a useful shorthand to refer to it as Live Local 4.0.
Uh and finally, uh, in light of the focus on uh the beachfront and the dunes, uh, I would encourage uh the commission to fill the vacant position uh formerly held by um Juanita Vallesteros in the environment and sustainability department in order to further that work.
Thank you.
Our next caller is Judy Smeigle.
State your name, address you have two minutes.
Judy, unmute yourself.
PJ, I think they may have a double caller because we also have Judith Smeigel.
So let's try that.
Judith, please unmute yourself.
Okay.
Thank you for waiting.
Um I'm you hear me, right?
Yes, perfectly.
Go ahead.
I am very happy to praise so many important people and bodies in this area for their advocacy of trying to balance our interests with Tallahassee, the extraordinary efforts of the Mid-Beach Neighborhood Association, the Miami Design Preservation League, the advocacy of uh Commissioner Fernandez, the mayor, other people.
We have we're certainly in an uneven battle.
Um to keep local control, and I just wish you all the strength to go up against Tallahassee, which is very difficult.
I would love that more and more our community be a beacon of free speech, diversity embraced, and a balance of interest between residents and wise development.
And I thank you all.
These are not easy times.
That's it.
Thank you so much.
Our next caller is Patrick Breshaig.
So your name address, you have two minutes, sir.
Hello.
Uh, my name is Patrick Brescick.
I live at 1754 Meridian Avenue across from Py Park.
I'm calling uh to thank Commissioner Dominguez for item C4M to discuss moving the Sunbuys uh further east to include the near shore reef and the reef line.
And thank you, Commissioner Bott for co-sponsoring this item, and really all the commissioners and the mayor for supporting the CC initiative in the past and hopefully in the future, um, so that people can enjoy the ocean safely without having to worry about getting hit by a boat.
The reef line was just listed as one of the new great places uh in the world by time, so we know there's gonna be more people going out there to swim.
Uh so it's important that we uh keep this safety initiative uh moving forward as more and more people are going to be going out there to visit it.
And speaking of safety, I also notice there's an item to discuss the Jefferson bike lanes, and I want to say how wonderful these bike lanes are.
Uh they are the highest standard of bike lane safety and support support both bikers and people using e-mobility and giving everyone safe space, including pedestrians, bikers, and cars alike, uh, by creating separate zones for each of them.
I hope the city continues to invest in these high-quality infrastructure projects that prioritize safety.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
Our next caller is has a screen name of Vashiva's uh iPhone.
Please state your name, address.
You have two minutes.
Please unmute yourself.
PJ, let's go to the next call.
Oh, go ahead.
Hi.
Hi, this is Bacheva Katz.
I live at 4747 Collins Avenue.
I'd like to request that the commission please support item R7AH, sponsored by Commissioner Alex Fernandez, which will authorize the city attorney to challenge HB 399 if it is signed into law and if it is deemed necessary by all legal committees.
This bill interferes with Miami Beach's local local zoning authority and strips residents of their voices and decisions that directly impact our neighborhoods.
Please vote yes on R7AH to protect Miami Beach and its residents.
Thank you so much.
Thank you.
Our next caller is Susanna.
Susanna, state your name, address, and you have two minutes.
PJ, let's go then next to Dave Dolphin.
Okay, hello?
Go ahead.
Hello?
Yes.
Yeah, sorry about that.
Uh, my name is Susanna Santoro.
I'm the president of 5600 condominium association and a proud residence of Miami Beach for the past 30 years.
I respectfully urge you to vote yes on R7 AH.
This resolution is not about filing lawsuit tomorrow.
It's about preserving our right to act, our home rule, and ensuring that if and when the time comes, the city has the ability to defend itself and its resident.
Commissioner, mayor, you're entrusted with safeguarding critical elements of this community, our infrastructure, emergency response, traffic management, and budget.
Those responsibilities do not exist in a vacuum.
They require authority.
Because responsibility without authority is not governance, it's exposure.
And today the risk is real.
Increase the density, traffic congestions, train on emergency services, and pressure and already limited infrastructure, are not abstract concerns.
They are daily reality.
Your residents are asking you to address.
This resolution is about standing up for your residents, ensuring that their voices are not overridden and that the city retains the ability to act in their best interest.
This is your opportunity to make a clear statement that the city of Miami Beach will not relinquish its responsibility, its authority or its commitment to the people it serves.
Stand with your residents, protect your CD, vote yes on R7AH.
And thank you, Commissioner Fernandez, the mayor, and all the commissioners who have stood with residents in opposing HB 399 and defending our community.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Our next caller is Dave Dobler.
Mr.
Doubler, say your name, address.
You have two minutes.
Good morning, Mayor and Commissioners.
My name is Dave Dobler, living at 8000 West Drive.
And I'm the chair of the sanitation committee and former chair of the Sustainability Committee.
I'm here to support C7L, the updated special event permit requirements that enhance sustainability and sustain and sanitation plan guidelines that reduce waste and improve diversion from landfills.
Miami Dade County and Miami Beach has a waste crisis.
We are almost out of landfill space and are already putting our trash on trains, shipping it to landfills in central Florida.
Reducing and diverting waste from landfills is not just an environmental priority, it's a fiscal one.
If we don't reduce and divert waste now, those rising landfill costs will ultimately fall on our residents and businesses.
Special events can generate tremendous volumes of waste, but are one of the few places where we can actually control both the input and the output.
What material comes in and what happens to them afterward.
That makes them a powerful opportunity to reduce waste, improve recycling, and keep plastic out of our waterways.
We know this can be done.
Ultra Music Festival at Bayfront Park has shown that with the right planning, execution, and engaging of vendors, large-scale events can dramatically improve waste diversion, and they've won worldwide awards for their sustainability programs.
After you vote to implement these new guidelines, it is important for staff to develop the support systems to help event producers succeed and strong compliance oversight to ensure accountability.
And I'd like to tell the environment and sustainability department, good job.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Our next caller is Mark.
Mark's state your name, address.
And you have two minutes.
Hi, good morning, everyone.
Thank you, Mayor and Commissioners.
My name is Mark Weiss.
I'm the founder of Stop Six Flags.
I found a blue the viral resident movement, representing over 4,500 residents.
The biggest threat to Miami Beach today, and the biggest story on Miami Beach today, according to every news article, is the destruction of our beaches with the Fountain Blue water park.
Uh, let's be very clear.
What happened to Tallahassee was not preemption, it was a bill paid for by a single developer with a representative who doesn't live in Miami, who openly admitted that he worked with the Foundablu to draft a bill that overrides all of our local zoning control.
And commissioners and mayor, when this gets built, the complaints are going to be much worse than we don't have bingo.
This is going to be absolute gridlock on our Miami Beach.
The traffic is going to be a disaster.
The environmental impact will be a disaster.
We got gut punched.
Let's be real.
We got punched in the gut by Tallahassee, by Jeffrey Silver, and by the Hotel Barrero handout.
I'm going to support R7AH because it's the bare minimum.
A city has the right to control its zoning, its planning board, its environmental protections, its coastal lines, its historic preservation.
This is basic.
We have to defend our home rule.
We have to protect our local zoning.
And we have to put our foot down and say, Miami Beach is beautiful because we know what we're doing.
And Tallahassee from 500 miles away should not be barreling down legislation paid for by billionaires.
It's that's an awful precedent.
And I want to thank Commissioner Fernandez for taking leave here and fighting so hard.
I want to thank Mayor Minor for fighting so hard.
And we must fight with resolve because it will send a message the next time you think this is bad.
There's much more coming.
Every developer is watching with drool coming out of the side of their mouth saying, Wow, I don't even have to go to those annoying commissioners and mayor and talk to those pesky residents.
I can go right to the top.
Thank you very much.
Our next excuse me.
Our next caller has a screen name of Sum User.
Please state your name and address, please.
You have two minutes.
Zoom user, go ahead.
Good morning.
This is Carol Ann Alt at 408 West 25th Street.
I'm also a member of the Sustainability Committee.
Um, thank you, Mayor and Commissioners.
I'm calling in to give my full support to C7L special events requirements and guidelines.
I support the updates, particularly creating the standardized template for sanitation plan process.
I also would like to draw attention to be mindful of the language that suggests the applicants with a thousand plus participants must assign a paid sustainability coordinator.
I suggest that applicant fees compensate for a designated code compliance field inspector that will monitor and evaluate events to adhere to sanitation plans during events, so any infractions can be corrected in real time.
Additionally, I did not see on the agenda an item for the new commission committee.
Um work, water, environment, resource committee, but I do give my full support of that as well.
Thank you so much.
Have a great day.
Thank you.
Our next virtual caller is Miriam's iPhone.
Please state your name, address.
You have two minutes.
Hello, my name is Miriam Weiss.
I am the co-founder with Mark Weiss of Stop Six Flags at Fountain Blue.
My address is 4779 in the blue diamond.
The residents have been working to fight this monstrosity for six months.
It has unanimous opposition from everyone that lives in the community.
There is no one that wants it on our beach front.
When you walk on the boardwalk, you are going to be see this 120 feet towering in the air, coming all the way wrapping around the building, right into the setback lines.
Because now Jeffrey Sopher does not have to follow any of the basic rules that the city sets out for planning.
Even if you wanted a water park, you now even have no say where that water park is going to be, how it's going to be constructed.
It's going to come all the way up to the beach front.
It's going to be tremendous noise.
It is up to you.
You are the city.
You have to lead the way and show the residents that Jeffrey Sopher cannot buy whatever he wants on our beach front, that democracy still exists.
The residents still have a voice in what happens.
And our local leaders and officials yet to lead us and decide what should be done in Miami Beach and if it's appropriate and if it's compatible.
Please vote for R7AH.
And please, as a city, consider all the possibilities whether this is actually a water park and therefore is not permitted by zoning.
Because Jeffrey Sopher is going to sell day passes, and that is not a permitted use.
The city should be evaluating all the possible avenues to stop this train that's coming down the tracks.
And then the next thing that he's gonna go for is gonna be gambling.
Thank you, Mr.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Our next caller is Vincent Vincent.
Please take your name, address.
You have two minutes.
Vincent.
Yeah, can you hear me?
Go ahead, please.
Do you hear me?
Yes, go ahead.
Yeah, Vincent Mafey.
I'm uh condo owner at the Sorrento, right in 15 feet away from the proposed water slide.
Um, I'm calling in support of R7AH, and I have to thank uh the mayor and commissioners uh to take to consider uh to consider keep uh opposing uh the situation.
And I want to give you guys just an idea and turn this thing, flip it over and turn it on its other side.
I think this bill, this carve out is discriminatory.
Just think if you owned a hotel that only had 499 rooms, or you had 4.8 acres or whatever.
The the arbitrary cutoffs were that were conveniently fit the fountain blue.
Would would you gonna have to play by a different set of rules?
I believe this bill was discriminatory.
And it was so bad they had to put a five-year limit on it.
So we hope you guys can don't throw up the white flag and keep doing what's right.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Our next caller has a screen name of iPhone 275.
Please state your name.
Please unmute yourself.
Good morning.
Can you hear me?
Yes, go ahead, please say your name.
Hi, this is Chris Carney from the Fountain Blue Tracer Tower and Sorrento Tower.
Uh along with everybody else who's already spoken.
I totally support resolution R7AH.
And if if we allow Callahasse to do this to us now, uh, what's going to be next?
Is the Eden Rock gonna have a um water park as well?
Uh they're gonna have a Ferris wheel.
Uh it's just gonna turn Miami Beach into a monstrosity.
So please consider resolution R7AH and uh let's try to stand up for our rights.
Thank you.
Uh our next caller is Anna Marie.
Go ahead, please.
Good morning.
My name is Anna Marie Ferreta de Melo, and I'm the president of the Mid Beach Neighborhood Association, and I reside at 4779 Collins Avenue.
I'm here today in support of resolution R7AH and thank Commissioner Fernandez for putting this forward and Commissioner Bott and others that have co-sponsored this item.
What happened last Friday in Tallahassee, where the state stripped local authority and disregarded the voice of our community is not proper business.
And exploring all possibilities is essential to protecting our city and upholding our principles.
I thank you for your consideration of this item today.
Thank you so much.
Our final caller is Andresong.
Go ahead, please.
The noise order.
Good morning, Commissioners.
And I I hear the C5.
How upset our residents are regarding the water park and the traffic nightmare that's going to be coming, having a mini six flags on Collins Avenue is going to be a nightmare for everybody in that area.
But we're fighting to, you know, to have historic preservation board have a say.
But when the historic preservation board had a say to try to keep the more slap this building uh alive, uh, and the county voted to place the fire station on Alton Road and the 11th, that sort of feels like it got vetoed, uh, even though they had a say on that.
It hurts uh to think that we are going to um destroy that Morris Lapidus building.
You know, I am on the board of OIC Miami, which I know there you came by, Commissioner Bot, you came by, Commissioner Dominguez, you came by.
That was a 22 million dollar facility that we built for the community to be able to have after school programming and programming for the seniors.
As a matter of fact, we have Ann Brutner himself doing a blue zone box uh in the building that's worth added more.
We're gonna take that building and we're gonna tear it apart instead of building on a site that is not used now by a simply by a bathroom in a locker room on Alton Road where the police office where the firefighters actually preferred that site because it's one block away from their current site, and they're gonna continue to be able to use Flamingo Park for training, the track, the field, the pool, and everything else.
So when it's working, Mr.
You're breaking up, but your time was up.
Thank you so much.
Was the last caller originally in line?
Uh, so we can conclude Sutnik at this time.
Okay, let's uh let's go over the consent agenda.
Thank you, everyone.
Thank you, Mayor.
Uh the following items have been separated from the consent agenda.
Mayor Minor is separating items C7T and C7U.
Again, Mayor Minor is separating C7T and C7U.
Commissioner Dominguez is separating C7J.
So Commissioner Dominguez, C7J.
Commissioner Suarez is separating C4P as in Paul, C7AF, and C7AG.
Again, Commissioner Suarez is separating C4P, C7AF, C7AG.
Uh the mayor has not approved the inclusion of any uh addendum item, therefore they will be heard after five o'clock.
And just for the for the record, uh the consent agenda and uh these items have uh the following items the city commission must waive by a six-seventh vote the requirement for the land use and sustainability committee to review and transmit its recommendation before it reaching before referring each of the following items to the planning board.
That would be C4B, C4C, and C4D, and C4E.
Again, C4B, C4C, C4D, and C4E.
So any motion on the consent agenda would include that.
Motion to set the consent agenda.
Second.
So this is to set or to approve.
To approve the consent agenda for those items that have been separated as announced by the city clerk Al Granado.
So I have uh motion by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Vice Mayor Matil Salinas.
All in favor of the consent agenda as set, please say aye.
Aye.
Aye.
Anyone opposed hearing no 7-0 approved.
Thank you everyone for calling in and uh we'll get started with our with our business.
Hopefully, we can uh get through a lot of items that I think we can.
R7L.
R7L is regularly monitor beachwalk camera feeds to ID address visibility issues.
Um I'm sponsoring.
Thank you, Commissioner Fernandez, for co-sponsoring with me.
Um who's gonna be speaking on this, uh, Eric from the administration?
This would be our police department.
All right.
Thank you, Chief.
Okay.
And so far, so good.
Uh as we mentioned on spring breaks.
I'll give you uh kudos for that.
And uh obviously with uh geopolitical issues going on around the world in the Middle East.
Um really we've we've all seen the stepped up presence from our police department.
So yeah, again, thank you.
Good morning, Mr.
Mayor Commission.
Uh, appreciate the uh the comments.
Um as you know, we've got a robust camera system covering much of the city, particularly along the beach and boardwalk.
Um total of almost a thousand cameras and uh almost two thousand camera views.
Uh much of those uh cameras are monitored uh in real time through our Arctic, a real-time intelligence center.
Um but there are times obviously when those cameras are used retroactively uh to help us solve mitigate uh crimes that may occur in and around those those uh camera coverage areas.
Um but you know it's something that we we do regularly and we'll continue to do.
I mean, can we can we quant how how do you monitor, for example, that there's no obstructions of cameras?
So there's a maintenance program that we have, and on a regular basis, we have people that go out, uh survey the areas where cameras are installed, particularly on the on the beach and boardwalk where it's really problematic at times because trees grow uh need to be trimmed back to make sure they're not obstructed.
Okay.
Are you comfortable that uh that is being done and we have enough resources to ensure the cameras are operational and not being obstructed?
Yes, we we have we do have a line item on our budget for camera maintenance, and that those funds are used to do just that.
How are we with uh a full operational camera system throughout the beachwalk?
Uh I think there are some gaps still.
Um not because there's not a wish to get it done or desire to get it done.
Um the project has been put fully funded, but it's gone going on in stages.
Um I don't have a timeline as to when that's gonna be fully completed, but I can get that for you.
Okay, yeah, let's follow up on that.
And uh I guess it came to mind as we heard a number of uh members of the Mid Mid Beach Neighborhood Association.
I know they've they've often uh championed uh the completion of the cameras uh throughout the beachwalk.
So we'll follow up on that.
We are e to get it done, sir.
Okay, thank you.
Commissioner Suarez.
Um Chief, have we considered using possible AI solutions to detect what a crime might be happening that you can send an alert to the department?
I mean, because you can't have you can't cover a whole beachwalk unless you have dozens of uh officers looking at the cameras.
Yeah, so we we are we are constantly looking for new technology, emerging technology to help us uh be smarter in how we approach predict um prevent crime, and so we we do look at this uh on regular basis.
But are we using AI to do that?
Or are you looking into AI solutions?
We are.
We are what?
Looking into AI solutions.
All right, you can't close.
I mean Yeah, yeah.
I mean, I I can give you an update as where we are next time I I we have this conversation.
Um, but we are.
Okay, yeah, I'd like I'd like an update next commission meeting.
Absolutely.
My fellow co-sponsor, Commissioner Fernandez, anything?
No, just um it's it's impressive the work that we're doing with the cameras.
Um I know that there's a lot of different areas where we want to expand into into parks for, for example, like Bay Shore Park.
Um, and the police department has done its part in making sure that the technology was was implemented as part of the park design.
Um the the technology, the I guess the infrastructure that's necessary for other areas of the beachwalk is there, it's just a matter of getting the technology in.
That's correct.
Um Bay Shore Park is one of the places that's high priority for us to get uh cameras in there.
It means such a large real estate, if you will, and we we like to be able to see what's going on there at any given time.
You know, one of the things that I appreciate, Chief, that I see our city doing now more frequently than what we did years before is that as we're looking a new spaces, you know, whether it be the Bay Wonk that we're uh hoping to complete at some point, uh, or whether it be a completed project like like Bay Shore Park.
Uh this department has been very forward thinking.
Instead of having to come in after the fact and run the infrastructure and think about how are we going to keep this safe?
This department is planning together with a planning process of of whether it be our public works department or our capital improvement departments or our parks department, you're working side by side with them to ensure that as we envision new public facilities and new public areas.
The department is up to speed with a safety resources that the users of those facilities are going to need.
And so I'm for that I'm very grateful for this item.
I'm proud to support it.
I'm happy to co-sponsor it, but most importantly, you know, truly, you know, thank you for being very thoughtful and making sure that as other departments are planning the future of the city, our police department is working on a parallel path to ensure that at completion you're able to implement the necessary resources.
Well, thank you, Commissioner.
I wish we we the police department could take full credit for it.
The truth is we've been in collaboration with all the departments you just mentioned.
We're brought into the very ground floor to make sure that we're being smart about how we think about crime prevention um when these projects are done.
Mr.
Mayor?
Commissioner Bott.
Um, so we're heading into our budget planning process, which seems like we just finished one and start another.
Um we know that we're likely going to be facing some hardship imposed by the state.
Uh completing this, expanding it, maintaining it.
Is this um I guess let's start with completing it?
Um is this a function of not enough money to complete it, or it just takes, even if it's fully funded, it takes X amount of time, and we just don't have that yet.
It's really a time and resource capacity issue we're dealing with more so than I think the funding has been funded for quite some time.
So is there an opportunity um to expedite the implementation if we bring in outside help to subcontract out the installation for instance?
Uh that's actually part of the the process as it stands today.
Um much of the installation and maintenance is subcontracted out.
So how do we expedite it if that's already happening?
I like I guess what I'm getting at is what do you need from us to get this finished this year, let's say, hypothetically speaking.
I'm not sure we need anything at this time and have to go back and speak to the folks that uh overseeing the deployment of the uh cameras.
I'm not sure we need anything at this time.
Okay.
Can you come back next month and let us know if there if if you don't come back, we'll presume everything's fine.
But if there is something, let's have that conversation.
Sure.
Okay, thanks.
Thank you, Chief.
Welcome.
It's called R7D.
I need a motion and a second on the present.
Seconded by the mayor.
All in favor of R7L, please say aye.
Aye.
Aye.
The item is approved 70 R7L.
R7D.
I'm sorry, Mary, what letter?
D as in David.
D R7D is uh restoration of Star Island Water Tower as a fiscal year 27 budget priority.
R7D.
Commissioner Dominguez and co-sponsor by Commissioner Bach.
I think this item was a um was on consent.
I had put it on for it to be a priority in discussions for the upcoming budget.
It was not anything to approve it outright.
Um I had a visit with uh the Palm Hibiscus Star Neighborhood Association, and in going through this and having discussions with the city manager and others in the city administration.
Um the water tower is over a hundred years old, and it has been uh on the to be determined when we're gonna fund fixing it since 2019, and each year it um gets pushed to the side and the cost to repair it get uh increased.
It is historic um and it means a lot to the neighbors in the neighborhood.
I even threw out there if they wanted to tax themselves to pay to fix it themselves, and they do not, they feel strongly that the city should.
So this item is simply to put it on the list so that when we go through our budget workshops, we can discuss it and decide as a whole if we'd like to have it as a priority for 2027.
Commissioner, is that a motion?
Yes, so motion by Commissioner Dominguez, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, if no discussion, all in favor of R7D, please say aye.
Anyone opposed?
Seeing none, R7D is approved 70.
R7E.
R7E is implement comprehensive and regulatory schedule C grape management planning.
Um I thank you, Mayor.
Um I would like to open and continue this um for another month.
Is John here, John Norris?
Hi.
Do it is a month enough time.
So this is something we've been working on internally as well as legislatively with Amy Knowles and John Norris and uh the chief to really address the fact that um the sea grapes um along our beach walk are an area that um becomes a repository for people doing unsavory things, whether they commit crimes then run in there or they're they're camping out there.
Um this is not an effort, and I I know there's been misinformation out in the community.
Um this is not an effort to chop everything back and make it look like a pile of twigs.
This is a public safety issue, and you know, ensuring that the um the plants grow in a healthy manner.
Um so we've had a lot of internal conversations most recently earlier this week, and what we're what we're going to be doing is um um having the police identify the hot spots um along the beachwalk and then go out and visibly investigate, and we are going to determine if we actually um can fix the issues within the budget that we have currently for these departments um versus the original thought, which was we were gonna need to hire somebody outside to do something.
So um with the clerks uh permission night or whatever the right procedure is to open and continue.
Um I have a motion to open and continue R7E to April 22nd by Commissioner Pott.
We may see great thanks to Commissioner Suarez.
Yeah, um I'm not totally okay with opening and continued, but you know, I just want to make sure because I spoke with Amy about you know my biggest issue with this, and I think Amy actually came back with something reasonable was for sea turtles uh and nesting season because a lot of these sea grapes do block the light from the street and from the street lamps, cars, um, and I want to make sure that that isn't affected.
That's correct.
We've had those conversations that that is a top priority as well.
So I have a motion to open and continue to April 22nd by Commissioner Boss, seconded by Vice Mayor Matthew Salinas, all in favor?
Please say aye.
Aye.
Oh, I'm sorry, just uh it's not gonna change the vote.
Um is a month enough time, or do we do you need two months?
I I think two months would be helpful to us to do the inspection and then get any quotes that we need to address the issues.
I think that'd be important.
Okay, so to May would be is that okay, Ralph?
Yeah, so that would be May 20th.
Thank you.
Thank you.
R7G.
R7G installed traffic delineators.
I just did we take I just want to confirm we took the vote on R7E.
Uh we were.
It's all but it was a commissioner bought Latel Salinas open and continue to uh May 20th.
Okay.
Just wanted to make sure because we had our f we had a motion and a second to do that.
I didn't know if we actually voted.
Thank you, Mayor.
R7G is installed traffic delineators on Altern Road between 5th and 6th Street.
R7G.
Commissioner Suarez.
Thank you, Mr.
Mayor.
Um, I I think all of us have gotten almost like a dozen emails of pictures where you have these loading trucks that um are parking on the side of the road uh where you're not supposed to park, and it's causing huge traffic jams uh along Alton Road just as you get onto the overpass for 395.
Um I I believe parking enforcement has gone out there multiple times.
So you can imagine all the the hundreds of deliveries that go to that place, and they think that that's okay.
So I would like to see if the city can put delineators there to expressly and explicitly show that you cannot park here.
So uh, I mean, well, let me know what you think about that, but right now enforcement doesn't seem to be working.
Will McDonald, director of parking city mining beach.
Uh you are correct, Commissioner.
It's uh I will say that particular property creates a game of whack-a-mole.
So as soon as we send a detail through there and we clear it out.
Um, I'll be honest with you, some of the delivery truck drivers who don't deliver there every day just say, hey, I'll take the fine.
Um, they take the fine.
Uh it would be almost impossible for us to actually move them because by the time we get a tow truck large enough to move them, they're gonna be long gone.
Um the barricades, uh, you know, I'll say it's I wouldn't say they're barricades or delineators.
The delineator post uh will absolutely be a deterrent.
Um we can, I mean, obviously, from my understanding, and I'll kind of defer to our transportation director.
I believe that is an FDOT road, so we do just have to get permission to be able to do that.
Um we have been working with the dock master at the property with with mixed results.
It started off amazingly.
They even called parking enforcement a few times when they told trucks to leave and they would not.
Um so there began a great relationship, but I believe as you stated, Commissioner, um, there are uh that is a very dense property, and there are a lot of untimed deliveries there.
So it will continue to be a challenge moving forward.
So what do we need to do to put delineators there?
Good morning, Mr.
Mayor, Commissioners Jose Gonzalez, transportation and mobility director, as Director McDonald mentioned, because Alton Road is a state road, um, to place delineators would require a maintenance agreement, an installation and maintenance agreement with them.
We've we do those all the time.
Um we would negotiate with them, and it would need to come before this body for execution.
Uh and I think that's really that's all we would need to be able to install and maintain them.
Uh Commissioner Monica Mateo Solane, huh?
Oh, sorry, Commissioner Fernandez, Commissioner Monica Mateas Salinas, and Commissioner Bottton.
Thank you, Mr.
Mayor, and uh Commissioner Suarez, thank you for bringing this item.
I'd love to join uh as a co-sponsor.
I know back uh in December and January we were getting emails from David Martinez, who lives in in the building Fifth and Alton.
Um I welcome uh the uh change of position from the administration.
I know that when I reached out to the city administration specifically about placing delineators there, I was told and I relayed to my constituent at the time that the city administration believed that it would make situations worse by having cars instead of parking in that striped area, they would then park on Alton Road, and that would create a parking situation on Alton Road with cars.
Uh given that the administration now seems to have a different position on what could have been done administratively.
I'm gonna join as a co-sponsor uh with Commissioner Suarez on this undecidable.
Thank you, Mr.
Mayor.
Thank you, Commissioner Fernandez.
Commissioner Mateo Salinas and Commissioner Bach.
I just I have concerns because you know, and I don't mind the delineators, but again, like Commissioner Fernandez said, and what everyone kind of knows what will happen is that that lane going onto the causeway will be blocked.
So I'll support this today, but if that does end up happening and we can't figure out a way, a better way for them to unload and load and whatever they need to do, and it does block that lane, then I'll bring an item to remove the delineators because that would be awful.
That's the entrance onto the causeway, and that it'll be a mess.
It'll be a mess.
So Commissioner Bach.
Um, so can uh the last time I checked on this, the administration was not supportive of this because of the um the concern about traffic impacts.
So can you guys explain to me, maybe Eric, can you explain to me how this changed, why it changed?
I don't believe that it necessarily has changed.
I, as the administration, have concerns that if we take away the parking spaces adjacent to the loading dock area, where are those vehicles gonna go?
I I'd like to show a picture of what what happens.
I think it'll give a lot of context.
Um was that submitted.
PJ, can you can you put up some of the pictures I sent?
I mean, it's everyone has seen it from David Martinez, and I think it's important for the public to see it.
Let's give them one second.
Sure.
Well where they're supposed to sway I think the south side of of five park so if if I can they're not supposed to be there.
Commissioner Bot So I I think we have a delineators are no that's regardless we have a bigger issue.
We see it with trucks doing deliveries on main thoroughfares during rush hour who choose to not pull into their designated loading spots because either the building says they don't want them blocking the driveway or um the drivers don't want to waste the time getting in and out of a complicated driveway we have the writs and the decoplage which have been in a Hatfield McCoy situation for years we have a building that we know is egregiously dense in a in a very dense area already that somehow got approval without taking this into consideration and a dock master who isn't pulling his or her weight how do we and Mr Manager maybe this is a conversation we can bring uh for next month how do we hold people accountable for doing the very things that the various um zoning laws planning boards and other land use committees um traffic studies parking studies are supposed to prevent in advance of these things happening we have I know Will you've been working with um delivery truck companies to have them sign pledges um saying that they understand the rules of engagement and if their their operators violate them then they will be held accountable do we require more dock masters do we hold the building management accountable if there are issues like this I mean this is absurd this affects people beyond just the residents of that particular building um it affects potentially life safety if if there are people backed up and can't get to where they need to go it's a bigger issue than this particular building so I I do want to understand um how the position changed or didn't change because my understanding was that we were not supportive of this and the bigger issue is um as this becomes a citywide problem what are we going to do to make sure that people comply with the rules of engagement of of living and doing business in our city living in and doing business of our city in our city whether it's building a building that is too large for our infrastructure whether it's um bringing trucks in that are too large for our infrastructure I mean bring in smaller delivery trucks you don't need you know you Amazon has those little sprinter vans use those I mean if you're delivering huge amounts of furniture and somebody's moving in that's a different conversation then you get a delivery permit or something where for from nine to four it's blocked off for that particular delivery but this is this needs to be once again a holistic review between departments and you know it planning building transportation and parking holistically to come up with a game plan of how we're gonna deal with this in our city because we're gonna have more new developments not fewer.
I mean look in Northbeach we're gonna have 13 buildings in an eight by six block radius and those are some narrow desperately congested streets are up there.
So I would like to bring an item and Mr Manager if you could take point on this for next month and have these departments work together and put together a comprehensive plan of what our options are and what we can do.
Yeah Mr.
Mayor I think PJ's ready for the uh picture and I think it's important for the public to see it and so you know right now it already sort of blocks traffic and uh commissioner bott does raise a good point and they should the people at five park should know that you you cannot have these massive delivery trucks parking on a no parking section of the of the road so like I I think um we we can we can't obviously I don't think that the amount of education you have given out to a lot of these delivery trucks and the drivers is going to solve that.
I mean that's that's just laziness at its finest.
And I think with a simple fix like this we can alleviate traffic for a an important section of our beach which is fifth and Alton and you know I I think wherever we can step in and and actually make a difference um we should and I'm not I'm not I'm not saying that we we shouldn't have a comprehensive plan but right now this is going on every day and so this is something we can take an action action on relatively short period of time.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Thank you, Mr.
Mayor.
Uh and I see we have one of the representatives of our uh toin companies here, and I I want to know are we when these cars when these vehicles are engaging in these activities, have we actually engaged in towing these vehicles?
Are we only giving them citations?
What are we doing?
So when we have trucks of this size, it does require specialized towing equipment, which uh right now does not exist on the island.
It would require an off-island solution.
Um also most of the time these trucks have somebody that is within a three to five minute walk.
So they are they'll be there, and for example, in in one of those photos, a truck was unloading, but they're walking back and forth.
So the minute that a even if we got a big rig to 10 ton to, for example, to tow that out, they would just hop in the cabin.
So uh and and I want to recognize through the mayor or many the uh so I see sitting in the in the audience from one of our twin companies, but it's like how you reacted.
I'd like if you could approach the podium because I would love uh please come to the podium.
Hi, many dials tree month.
Uh we'll not work hand in hand, and uh if we need a medium duty, we could get you a medium duty, but like what he said, by the time the medium duty comes down, they're already running out.
Yeah, but if we know that there is a specific location that it's a recurring nuisance, you know, perhaps it could be kept in close proximity uh to that location, especially the city has property very close to there where it could be stationed, or you know, I'm sure you're very capable to to find that.
But here we have a recurring nuisance where it is predictable that at a location like this, you're gonna be having these problems you know to be in in the vicinity.
If he needs a medium duty, we could work together and I could have a medium duty at all times.
Yeah, because nothing is going to change unless we drop the hammer.
100%.
You know, and so and so what I don't like is when the administration gives me one opinion, and then without notifying me, then all of a sudden the opinion for a solution changes.
Now that we have a different avenue for solutions, Commissioner Suarez, you know, I support you, I join you as a as a co-sponsor of this, but I do think that as we experience more of these types of challenges throughout our barrier islands, uh, we certainly need you to make sure we we have these resources available because ultimately, you know, we can issue citations, we can issue citations, we can issue traffic tickets to people and all that type of stuff.
That doesn't solve the violation.
And what we need is compliance of the violation in order in order to mitigate the impact.
There's a reason why we issue violations.
We issue violations because you have a lack of compliance that is causing a domino effect that is affecting other people.
And it's very wonderful we can give uh a parking violation, we can put uh something on someone's driver's license.
But what we really want is not to be punitive, but we want to drive compliance and achieve compliance as quickly as possible, and that's where we need your collaboration to address this nuisance.
That's how we did it when we first started the freight loading zones back in the days.
Now we don't have those problems.
The tow tricks come, take the cars out, we could do the same with the heavy duties.
I mean, a hundred percent needs Mr.
Mayor, thank you.
No, I have uh Commissioner Bach, Commissioner Dominguez, and Commissioner Suarez.
And then Commissioner Magazine.
Um so I still there are two questions.
Um I still haven't heard why the position has changed, and then I do have a second question that I to raise.
So as I mentioned, I don't know why the position of our parking director and our transportation director has changed.
My position has not changed.
We are going to displace a problem from what is not a traffic lane into a traffic lane.
So Manny, I hope that you're gonna have plenty of tow trucks available because we're gonna be towing people out of travel lanes on a regular basis.
So and uh if you could allow me to clarify, Commissioner, so this is uh six in one hand, half a dozen in the other.
So um, as uh uh Commissioner Mateo Salinas talked right now, the trucks are in violation.
Our enforcement officers show up, uh they they write a hundred and twenty-four dollar obstruction of traffic citation plus generally a 500, 1,000, 5,000 dollar right-of-way violation.
Generally, we receive compliance.
And I say generally, because I would say 90% of the time.
Um there is an absolute risk of the trucks just turning on their flashers in the lane of traffic with these barricades and acting like they're invisible.
That is an absolute risk.
So I I want to make it very clear that this could absolutely push somebody from the striped area, the gore, out into the lane of traffic.
And they could just not care.
So I don't know what that will look like.
So and I don't think anybody can look forward to the future and say, now, will there be some drivers that will be deterred from the uh delinear post?
Absolutely.
There'll be some drivers that are deterred because they don't want to be as brazen.
Um we have from the parking uh department, we have a freight loading zone next to the building.
However, unfortunately, the freight loading zone is on west, it's on the complete opposite side.
So the design of this building is the flaw, not anything around it.
Um because if it would have just, if we could pick it up and turn it around, it would be perfect, unfortunately.
That goes back to one of my earlier comments.
I mean, listen, this was not a small building that just snuck in and nobody noticed.
This was went to a public referendum.
This was designed up the yin yang, it's being sold for bazillions of dollars as beachfront property.
The fact that the loading zone is on the wrong side for traffic impacts is offensive.
It's it's absolutely freaking offensive.
So be that as it may.
I don't know if there's a way to retrofit that somehow.
Probably not, but you know, that is I as part of this comprehensive thing that I want to work with you on, Eric, that needs to be addressed.
There is no way on God's green earth that a building of this magnitude should have a loading dock that is not in the ideal place.
And no other building should go forward.
So that is a big problem for me.
Um, second of all, can we not um, you know, if if enforcement is the issue, why are we waiting for somebody to call enforcement?
I want somebody staffed there during the loading hours, uh, the loading dock hours, so that the second somebody pulls up, they are ticketed and and fined.
Um I believe most buildings have boards with CUPs and and and um plans for how loading happens in their buildings.
I want the buildings held responsible too.
It's affecting their members, it's affecting their residents.
So hold the buildings responsible.
Is there a way to um increase the penalties for repeat offenders?
I mean, this is absurd.
And it is if we don't figure out a solution here and now, it is going to become beyond problematic throughout the city.
And so I want every option explored.
I want it back at the April meeting, a comprehensive plan.
I'm I'm I appreciate the intent with which this was brought.
All of us have gotten the same calls and emails and photographs sent.
I cannot be supportive now.
I think it is going to just displace the problem.
I want real solutions in April, and I want them to be enacted without the delay of an MOU with F dot, etc.
I want to understand how we prevent this going forward, what we can do immediately.
I think staffing can happen tomorrow, right?
You can have somebody assigned there tomorrow 24-7 if that's what it needs to be.
And you know, I don't know how quickly we can get a um a big rig tow truck or whatever available to us, but if that can be as of tomorrow or next week to have on call and and parked nearby, let's get that going.
Like those don't need additional time.
Um, so that's where I am on this.
Thank you.
Commissioner Dominguez.
Thank you.
Um, I had also heard the same thing from the city administration that um having delineators, they worried because we don't own the street and uh the trucks would be parking in the street uh instead of where they currently are.
Um and I keep hearing about bringing these massive tow trucks.
Are boots not a thing?
Are boots only for cars?
Can't we just have the boots and then the trucks can't go anywhere?
That's the same as a toe.
You can.
Um so boots can absolutely um uh be done, but it doesn't say solve the problem.
So right now um we do have advanced penalties with repeat offenders.
So our right-of-ways can go up to 10, I believe $15,000, $15,000 for a third offense, um, which obviously um, you know, that that is where we get the attention of some of these delivery companies.
The challenge of this building right now, there seems to be a lot of unique delivery companies for individuals moving in, individuals buying furniture from this location, this location, having special deliveries.
So this isn't while we do see the FedExes and the UPSs and the Amazons, they are starting to um hear us.
We've had several meetings with all three of those vendors.
Um this seems to be the larger one-off delivery companies that hey, I have somebody moving in, so this delivery truck came from Colorado or came from New York or came from fill in the blank here.
And so we will give them a first-time violation, and they will never come back into the city again.
That is what we're seeing at this current time.
Can the violations go to the building?
They have a loading zone, they have staff that works there.
If they see the truck, they shouldn't be accepting anything until the truck moves to the appropriate place.
Can the building be held liable?
So parking department doesn't have any power for private property.
I would I would probably defer to our code partners or building to see if that could be done.
Yeah, I don't believe that we have a mechanism in the code to currently charge that back to the So what would you need?
Uh a new item for the next commission?
Probably need a code amendment to tie those violations back to the adjacent buildings.
And can something like that can an amendment be made to this item to include that amendment, Mr.
City Attorney?
I think what we're talking about is an ordinance.
So something we would have to look at.
What are you proposing?
Um the city manager mentioned that in order for the building to get uh a violation for not telling their delivery trucks to move.
Um we don't have a mechanism in place right now.
Don't they have a C to enforce that?
And we would need new legislation um to move forward.
Eric, don't they have a CUP that they have to follow that has a delivery plan?
So not all buildings are gonna have a CUP, but part five does not have a CUP.
They weren't they weren't required to obtain a CUP.
Okay, so this is what I'm talking about.
Like I want in April, I want a comprehensive, this is what we can do, this is what we need to amend our code for.
This is how we uh I don't think we're gonna be able to solve it on the fly today.
I we can definitely do staffing, we can definitely get a tow truck into the city that can handle this capacity.
But in April, I want to have a comprehensive review of these are our options.
Here's how we amend the code uh and and address this and and really get ahead of this problem.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Thank you.
And so one of the things I wanted to mention, just to build upon what my colleagues and the city manager has mentioned is that if we do bring back uh an ordinance, uh an enforcement ordinance, you know, when I what I do think should happen is that the enforcement, yes, the enforcement that we're doing on the vehicles and the drivers, but the enforcement on the building and require the building rather than to you know put a hefty fine on them that goes to the city to some fund um in the city's accounts, um, that the violation, the remedy be that they have to hire, you know, whether it be off-duty police or off-duty parking enforcement uh to be there present to do now the work that their dock master is not doing, that their dock master is being negligent and dropping the ball and doing so.
Now we need to allocate our public resources, the taxpayers' resources to do the work that they're not doing right.
So the violation should be once we bring that ordinance, Mr.
Attorney, is that you're found not to be in compliance, your building gets a violation, but you just don't write a check.
You now have to hire off duty to sit there and do the work that you could have done yourself.
And if I Commissioner Suarez is next, I'm sorry.
That's okay.
Finish your thought, Commissioner Bottom.
Thank you.
Um currently when buildings want to hire somebody to trim palms um on their property, there's a right-of-way permit that has to be obtained because they have to bring their truck.
I I you know they're the guys with the cook the hooks and the shopping carts that do it.
But that's not what I'm talking about.
I I know a resident had had reached out and there was a whole process where they had to like shut down the sidewalk so they could bring their large truck.
Let's have as part of this a procedure where um if you are bringing in an 18-wheeler because you just move cross-country, that's fine, but you need to then schedule that time with the city.
And if it needs to be um, you know, we need to have an alternate traffic plan in uh in place to ensure that we don't have an emergency, then that is that's what has to happen too.
Um and you know, it can be selective to just super highly dense uh neighborhoods with narrow streets.
You know, if it's on a four-lane street, Collins, not necessarily um required, but in this case and other cases like what will be happening up in North Beach, we need to look at that comprehensively.
So, as you guys, all the departments work together to bring back ordinance and ordinance for us next uh next month, I want that to be considered as well.
Please.
Commissioner Suarez.
Well, I'm really glad this burn on a very robust conversation on on loading and unloading.
Um look, I I think delineators would be a great way so that enforcement doesn't have to, you know, stand by 24-7 there.
I think that you know, just having it there without delineators kind of invites these uh tow truck deliveries, you know, they that's probably what they're used to outside of Miami Beach, you know, maybe in Hylia or what have you.
Um but um I look I I would love to try this, see how it does.
I mean, we have cameras there and um uh and see if it makes an impact because right now this happens every day all day, right?
I mean, well, you know, between the hours of like maybe three and seven p.m.
So um I hope that delineators are also part of the plan uh for in for some cases.
Now you said it's also they're supposed to load on the west side of Five Park.
So we have uh the the city already has a freight loading zone that also belongs to the building.
When I say belongs, it's there to service any building that's you know within a walking distance that is on the west side of that building because it was pre-existing in the perfect world.
Um the building would have been flipped, and on that side we would have had the entrance into the loading zones off West Nav.
We would have had the freight loading zone uh that is directly north of the road to the causeway um activated.
So there would have been enough room to handle, uh I would say at any one time between the loading zone and the freight loading zone five, uh I'll say relatively large box trucks.
The challenge is that on the Alton side there is no on-street solution.
Um obviously that that uh uh that gore that that hash-striped area that is right there outside is there because there's some um for a reason there's some access to I believe some public works pumps uh under there.
I'm not really sure.
I don't want to speak unintelligently on that.
Uh but unfortunately we have no place to to put additional loading resources on Alton Road right there.
Have you given any fines so far?
Oh uh to that I we can I can we can tabulate it, but it's going to be in the thousands of dollars, tens of thousands of dollars because we we continue to keep that while we don't have anybody stationed there all day.
That is on our I'll say south of fifth or kind of our Southern Island route.
So we do have team members pass by there on a frequent basis, and so every time they go by, um, they will write the appropriate citations.
Uh I was and again, generally compliance occurs while we are there.
Um it's it's one of those things that happens, I'll just say frequently throughout the island.
We show up, um, we start citing.
If there's more than one, somebody generally pulls off, but we will at least be able to cite the main offender at that point in time.
Okay, and and uh if Jose can step up, what what again?
What is the process?
You have to get an MOU with the county with F Tot.
F dot's an F dot roadway.
And what's the time what's the time frame on this?
Um I would give it probably two to two to three months.
We would have to come back to the city commission for execution of that maintenance memorandum of agreement.
So a couple months.
Okay.
Sorry, yeah.
Yes, Commissioner Max.
Have a number of different things I want to address.
Uh agree with the traffic delineators, but what are they aesthetically going to look like?
Because I'm working steadfast in trying to approve the aesthetics of our public rights of way.
And my fear is we're just adding these little orange cones or things like that.
Could we not?
Why would flower pots placed in that area not work?
So the generally they would be the white delineator post with a reflective stripe at the top.
Um, the challenge with any fixed item would be the access.
So we have two different hash marked areas in this specific area.
One is for a fire hydrant, the other one is for access to um some there are these doors for something that's underneath the roadway.
I'll defer to our public works director.
Um I think the challenge is is those those doors are half in the gore and half on the roadway.
So but across the board, we need to do a better job of having a practical purpose for things, but making it more aesthetically pleasing.
We need to have more respect for how our city looks, right?
And I'm so frustrated because I've been emphasizing this for years and years.
And nobody seems to care.
Right?
Nobody seems to care.
You you drive up and down Alton Road or 17th Street, and there's these silly little messaging signs.
For what?
For what?
Looks like hell.
Okay.
We will never fix this problem that we're talking about unless we better design our streets.
And I have been sending our staff and administrators videos for years.
And Jose was one of the first meetings we had about the loading in West Avenue.
And PJ, if you could show two videos that I sent uh our city administration and code uh just in the past couple of weeks.
This is every single day.
And we could have enforcement, but it's going to be a whack-a-mole.
Somebody is going to get killed.
Should we address this after they're killed?
This is a crosswalk right outside of one of the busiest parks in our city.
And we have delivery trucks every single day.
Okay, if that was 15 seconds earlier, I took this video because you saw the mother like this peeking out past the delivery truck with a baby stroller.
And 10 seconds later a car comes flying down.
Is somebody going to have to get killed before we really address this?
This happens every day, every single day, right?
And and saying, well, we're gonna have staff tow or staff, that doesn't work.
That does not work.
We need to better design our roads to permanently address this.
And I've been on it for years and I've got in nowhere.
Okay?
I well, this problem that crosswalk, I've been working for two and a half years to try and get an elevated crosswalk.
What does it say about any of our initiatives if it takes two and a half years to build a freaking crosswalk 30 feet wide or 30 feet long?
Why?
Right?
Hundreds of people walk out of there every single day, kids, families.
And it takes three years to build a crosswalk.
Right?
We we have hundreds of agenda items.
But if it takes three years to do a crosswalk, I I saw Commissioner Bott, uh, she had an item a few years ago about building a new flyover on 63rd Street.
And it was right after I go, well, this crosswalk will take another year.
I go, what are we even doing?
Like, like how how can we possibly be ambitious and think comprehensive and truly game-changing solutions?
If it takes three years to build a crosswalk, an elevated crosswalk.
Well, what are we doing in the city?
What what are we really doing?
That video, PJ.
Can you play the second one?
This is every day up and down West Avenue.
How can we not have an aesthetic design in the median that prevents delivery trucks from doing this?
I took a video just this day.
This is on every block up and down West Avenue.
Are we gonna get calls from people that are pissed and going, you know what?
I want to run into pure Vita on West Avenue, and because you have these beautiful plants there, now I can't.
Yes, we're going to.
Are we going to get calls from buildings along West Avenue, like my own, right?
Where they go, oh, it it's a lot easier for us just to have these cars out in the street.
Yes, we are.
Okay, and we're gonna have to be strong and say this is not the right way to go about things.
Okay, we should have planters in the median, just like we have in Sunset Harbor.
I've been bringing it up for three years, and maybe it'll take somebody getting killed.
Maybe it'll take a mother trying to cross in front of an Amazon driver that's there every single day, and we'll go, you know what?
Maybe now we'll address it.
I really hope the city can show some proactiveness in addressing this that I've sent around to every single department head for years before it's a result of somebody dying there.
Okay?
The widening of West Avenue is five lanes long, people are going there and passing every single day.
People pass in the meetings, they pass on the right side.
I've sent everybody videos, and it's not about having the police out there to enforce, because that can't be a constant strategy.
We have to have better design in our roadways.
Better design so this is a permanent solution.
So who's who's going to take the initiative and do it?
Well, uh guys, seriously, not all at once.
Commissioner, all at once.
I will work with the team and we will come up with a plan that we will bring back to commission next month.
I appreciate that.
Thank you.
You know, I'm getting text messages, I agree.
And it's a meeting ask you, Tom, for for specifically five park.
Doesn't DRB or HPV for that fire park have uh have orders to address delivery?
Yeah, they're well.
And that likely will have conditions regarding loading and delivery.
The DRB order may also have conditions on loading and delivery, but since they have a corresponding C UP, it's likely going to be in that.
One other thing I wanted to mention, and I mentioned this to the manager is that with regard to the loading area, they do have a very robust interior loading dock that's accessed from Alton Road.
The reason that it was placed on Alton Road is because that was really the only viable location.
The problem with the South Side is that it fronts directly on MacArthur Causeway, which is for all practical purposes a freeway entrance.
The problem with the west side fronting West Avenue is that the future pedestrian bridge, the downslope to provide access to that bridge that goes over West Avenue comes all the way down the west side of the building.
And then on the north side, that was the main entrance that has the interface with the park.
But with that said, the uh it was anticipated that the trucks were supposed to easily pull right into that very large loading dock area.
And so there was never an intention for trucks to be parked on Alton Road.
So how come they don't do that?
Sorry.
That's how come they don't do that.
Why don't they go into the loading dock, which is designed for them to pull in?
Part of part of the challenge is every time I've gone down the loading dock, you will see um single occupancy vehicles with inside the loading dock.
Also, the the way that the loading dock is structured, it does require, I will say, a CDL driver to have a certain skill set, and I am sure that there are some, so it would require you to pull head in and then back your vehicle up into one of two bays that that exist um while inside the area.
And um I I will say that there's probably, you know, in my experience, certain CDL drivers that have that skill set and there's certain that may not feel comfortable.
So now that they now that we've confirmed that they do have a CUP, can the property owners be held responsible for these traffic violations?
Yeah, if there's violations that are issued, we can certainly issue a cure letter and then bring them bring them back for a progress report.
So will I and city manager, you see this?
Like, by the way, it shouldn't take this to to get it going, you know, because we've been getting emails like this for the last six months, and for now all of a sudden, you know, the staff to be like, well, this is what you know you have seven lay people telling you that something needs to be done, and you know, we've been telling you this for a long time.
It shouldn't take like a little delineator item to spur on an hour discussion on what to do about traffic because this fucking happens every day.
And it's very frustrating.
And you know, look, I I I think it's I think it's ridiculous that the staff isn't ready to really handle this head on because the number one issue it might be just traffic.
And so when you have blatant violations, and your staff didn't even know it it had a CUP and that we can help hold the the property owners accountable, you know.
I mean, come on.
I think if we would have known that and we would have held them accountable, I bet you those people at Five Park would would make sure that every single delivery driver that comes through is either making sure it goes parks in the bay and doesn't block traffic and doesn't go on the the gore.
Um so look, get your get your get your stuff together, Eric.
Okay, because this is obviously a big issue for us, and obviously we have you have seven of us really encouraging whatever we you need to pass legislation for for you to do your job effectively, we're willing to do that.
But this is a big issue for us and for the residents.
And I just want to Commissioner Fernandez.
Yeah, and I and I just want to say, you know, Commissioner Magazine, you know, I value so much what you're saying about the aesthetics of our city.
It's so important the on-the-ground experience uh that our residents have, that our visitors have, that's they're not gonna look at the details of everything except what is on the surface.
And that's what they're gonna remember when they go back home.
And I think we truly, even though we live in a beautiful city, we truly need to go above and beyond making sure, yes, we're gonna put delineators, we're gonna do some other type of infrastructure, but just don't throw delineators there.
Do it, pay attention to the detail and the final product that people are going to be seeing and remembering.
And lastly, Commissioner Magazine, I share your frustration about the crosswalk.
Um Vice Mayor Matil Salinas and I, when she worked in in my office, you know, we've worked, I think it took us two years to get, or two or three years to get a crosswalk on Meridian Avenue by Lincoln Road.
It was the most frustrating thing.
I didn't understand.
How is it possible for me as a commissioner for us to take two years to get a crosswalk?
A simple crosswalk.
And for it to take an elected official now, you commissioner magazine in your neighborhood, where you're trying to make conditions safer for mothers and families and children, just pedestrians in general, for it to take this long, I to me, then like then why are we commissioners?
If we cannot push an agenda for the benefit and the safety of those who have placed their trust in us, then why do we hold these offices?
So, you know, I I I support my colleagues, Commissioner Dominguez uh and Commissioner Bonn and their efforts and there being an enforcement ordinance with real teeth uh in there, uh Commissioner Um Suarez and his initiative to to to bring forward these delineators and Commissioner Magazine and the finished product and the amount of time it takes on this, and I'm happy to support all of you and second your item because this truly just speaks to just a bigger effort in our city, which is not have things take so long and do things that you know with attention to detail.
And also, by the way, if we go to you guys with a problem, a problem with on you know deliveries, and we're coming to you guys with delineators.
Well, don't tell us, well, no, we can't do the delineators, give us an alternative.
Don't just say no.
It's so easy just to say no.
But if if the administration knows, well, there's there's a development agreement or there's a conditional use permit, and there might be other avenues through which to achieve your objective will guide us in that direction.
Commissioner Magazine and Commissioner Bott.
Few things that I'd uh like to ask the administration to consider when we're looking at this.
Uh, if we're thinking comprehensively, if you look at a lot of our curbs, and again, this sounds silly, but this is the surface level experience for so many visitors or residents.
They are completely destroyed, right?
And I see it firsthand.
It's because some of these large trucks have such a wide turning radius that they go around fifth uh 15th Street, right by the Ile Villagio is a great example, right?
We spend so much money to take care of the aesthetics of our city, and then these large trucks are destroying it.
Uh, right outside on Collins Avenue uh by Council Tower South, it's the same exact thing.
These curbs are destroyed by these large trucks.
Uh perhaps we do need to look at some ways to encourage or I I hate the word, but penalize the larger trucks and really encourage the smaller uh trucks that are more compatible with our city.
Um I want to bring up something specific, but uh I'd like an answer.
The exit of West Avenue right onto the MacArthur Causeway.
Um it's always been a very complicated intersection, I guess compounded with uh the possibility of having that uh crosswalk project going on, but right now the it's essentially split between the the north and south lane, the entrance on West Avenue and the MacArthur, there's about 12 traffic cones that are there, right?
And what what is the purpose of that?
Well, why is it there?
Again, it's because we have a poorly planned road where I mean am I crazy?
Nobody knows what I'm talking about.
It's literally the exit of our city, people have to come and enter every single day.
There's 12 traffic cones right there.
Where are our area managers?
Who who are they?
What do they do?
Why do they not drive around looking at issues like this all day?
Why does our neighborhood affairs community not drive around golf court highlighting this issue?
For a year, we've had 12 traffic cones for no rhyme or reason at the exit of our city and the entrance of our city, right?
West Avenue and MacArthur Causeway, and I'm getting a bunch of blank stairs.
Who's responsible?
This is the thing nobody knows.
Nobody knows.
Everybody will drive by them for years and years with no accountability.
Why are there 12 traffic cones at the end of West Avenue, exiting on the MacArthur?
Thousands, thousands of employees drive by there every single week.
What why do we have them?
Who can answer that?
I don't want you to, right?
Because I get that you want to take one for the team, and accountability starts stops at the top.
I get that.
But this should be individual department heads.
Somebody's department is responsible for them.
Who?
How is that possible?
How is that possible?
At the exit, where thousands of people, tens of thousands of tourists, go out every single day.
It looks like hell.
And nobody knows why.
Nobody knows why they're there.
John.
Commissioner, I'll find out immediately.
I'm not familiar with the exact location, but I'll get you an answer.
When we say the exact location, I'm not trying to be pompous or an ass here.
This is the exit to our city.
Right?
The exit that thousands of people.
Well, we don't have a hundred exits to our city.
We have three main arteries, four main arteries.
This is one of them.
And there are 12 traffic cones for no the reason why they're there is because the roadway is so poorly designed.
But instead of having long-term structural fixes, we'll have a grouping of traffic coons.
And if it weren't for this, for an elected official to say, what are we doing here?
And nobody knows, it would be there for the next 10 years.
Right?
Like, how do we have all these departments?
You guys make and gals make really good money.
An area manager.
We just hired a whole team of them.
Neighborhood affairs, right?
These should be the people day to day just going around our city and saying that looks off.
I'm gonna find the person to fix that.
That looks off, I'm gonna find the person to fix that.
What do they do?
I have my phone full of the detour signs that are thrown in bushes, they're on the bridge of Sunset Harbor, they're laying down on the street.
How can we have thousands of employees going around our city every day, whether it be the city manager or a sanitation worker or anybody in between, and not highlighting that and saying that really looks off?
We need to do better.
Commissioner Bott was next to the Sunday Speaker 1.
Um so we know there are violations at this building, and we know they have a CUP.
Can we have them?
Can we get them a notice to cure um and to appear at the planning board for the next planning board meeting?
Yes, there's a minimum 15-day notice when you issue a cure letter.
Um I can try to have that issued and get them to the planning board for their April 7th meeting.
If we can't meet that minimum notice requirement, then it would be the May 5th meeting.
Okay.
Commissioner Swarez.
I was gonna say something I probably should not, but I understand there's public comment.
Is there public comment?
Our first hearing.
Is there public comment?
Somebody calls, somebody mostly calls in, I say we don't.
Okay.
Yeah, so we're gonna do the people outside of that I'll call you in.
Okay.
Okay.
I'll let Carla go first.
She's okay, Carla.
Oh, I it's it's related to the.
Hold on, Carter.
Come on in.
Oh, sorry.
Carla Provis, uh, live in 20th and Alta now.
Uh, but I wanted to say I used to live South the Fifth, and I go down there quite a bit to go to Smith and Walinsky, everyone knows that.
And Commissioner Swarez, you had an item last week and or last month.
It was about uh uh timing of lights and uh taking over work from the county, and I just want to mention the also the problem that's here at this intersection is at six, fifth, and fourth street.
I know they I got the crosswalk, put it in fourth street.
That is all out of time.
So I think that also causes the backup, you know, sixth and fifth were in time, it would also help with the flow.
Okay?
So I wonder that because I know it ties in with your other item you brought in last month.
So thank you.
Thank you, Carolyn.
Thank you.
Our first public caller, virtual caller is Susanna, so Santa State, your name address, and you have two minutes.
Susanna Santoro, 5600 Collins Avenue.
My comment is regarding the delivery companies.
Um, if the CD has not been able to get a great commercial delivery companies, the solution cannot be to shift enforcement associations and residents all the financially responsible for actions that they neither employ nor control is just unjust and misplaced.
Enforcement should instead target the delivery companies directly with meaningful fines and concept with not the properties that they service.
And I do agree with Commissioner Magazine that safety must be addressed, but again, penalizing residents for content they cannot control is not fair or effective solution.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Well, you know, Tom She does bring up a good point.
What what is the argument there where you know sometimes the the HOAs are oblivious to I mean who's really at fault here?
Maybe that's the city manager question, but you know, I mean because right now we continue to find tens of thousands of dollars that building yet every day it continues to happen, and there's no compliance.
So in terms of enforcement, um, if they're in violation of either a land use board order, CUP order, um, that is something that we can enforce.
Now, in terms of how the HOAs deal with their violations internally, that's something that's not something that we could speak to, but we could certainly enforce what their approvals are.
Yeah, definitions of that area.
And to Susanna, that building was built with the understanding that they were gonna follow the rules, and that they were going to enforce their delivery trucks to follow the rules, and so uh they went into an agreement with that with the city to do that.
So sorry, want to keep continuing.
So, our next caller is Alex uh Jimenez.
Go ahead, Alex.
Alex Jimenez, Bell Isle.
I'm calling uh because this happens here on Bell Island, and I also have an idea for you guys.
Uh as we know, the standard hotel is next door, and you are diverting traffic uh right now because of the undergrounding of the water utility.
So Venetian, the Venetian causeway is blocked, so when that happens, they bring everybody here along, you know, in front of the standard hotel, and that's for all the traffic to exit.
Talk about exiting our city and the beauty of exiting our city.
The standard hotel has two or three trucks, you know, at a time delivering stuff.
Can you imagine what it looks like here during rush hour where there's a lot of traffic?
People are coming into the city and they're coming out of the city, and there's three huge box trucks in the middle of the way.
That wouldn't be allowed if you know it was on the Venetian causeway.
But why is it allowed on our little street?
Uh that's not to say that it's the standard's fault.
I think this is the city's fault.
You know, I think an idea for for everyone here, I think you we've had a like I've heard a lot of great ideas, is you know, there needs to be a place for these trucks to go.
And there's plenty of parking spaces.
You know, I know that parking is limited, but three or four, five or six can be converted to a freight zone for the standard, right?
Right in front.
There should be some more proactive creative ideas with the real estate that we have, like our parking spaces.
I think Commissioner Magazine was totally correct.
We should, with all the employees the city has, there should be a looks off person that walks that drives around and finds uh opportunities and create creative ideas uh to fix things, paint curves, uh suggest ideas.
But I definitely think converting parking spaces is is an easy win near Five Park, near the standard, all over the city because people do need deliveries, and if you're delivery driver, you need to stop somewhere and you need to park.
So we should be converting more parking spaces to freight zones, and not just for one truck, but for three or you know, two or three.
Thank you, sir.
Our next caller is Jane Krupp.
Go ahead, you have two minutes.
Hi, Jane Krupp 1390 Ocean Drive.
You all know me from the parking department because I call about 10 times a day.
And the parking department, you know, they're doing the best they can, but it really is a cat and mouse game with these drivers and they know it.
We have a very limited amount of staff to get over there.
But um it's a citywide problem, and you can see the beginnings of where has this problem started?
It's this big high rise.
The big high-rise is creating density, creating the need for more deliveries, and the city needs a city plan, overall city plan of how to integrate the higher density that's coming.
If you want to encourage higher FAR and Washington Avenue, you need to have a loading uh plan citywide, and part of it is restricting the size of trucks.
We don't have a terminal like they have in New York where they all the big trucks don't come in because they can't maneuver the streets.
So we're we're heading towards this conflict of more density and safety because the trucks are very unsafe, especially I'm here on 14th Street and Ocean Court.
A man was killed by a huge truck trying to make a three-point turn.
No, no truck over 30 feet should be going east of Collins Avenue.
We need some rules.
We need a plan.
And I encourage um the traffic department to get with this and the police and the parking department to get together.
I agree with what the commissioners are saying, that right now we have an unsafe condition where yes, tourists are are walking in between huge trucks on 14th Street near the beach.
That's not acceptable.
If you're gonna do your laundry in your hotel from Broward County in a tractor trailer, because it's a dollar cheaper for the water, that's not a common sense solution.
Use a local laundry that has vans.
They're available.
We by not allowing these huge trucks coming from long distances, one more second.
We encourage local businesses with vans and local deliveries.
So it's a win-win if we can have some city planning around this as well, considering the density that's coming.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Our next hold on to me.
Our next virtual caller is has a screen name of called user four.
State your name, address.
Good morning, Mayors and Commissioners.
My name is Matthew Baltanoff.
My address is 125 Jefferson Avenue.
I remember many years ago at the Fifth and Alton site, there was a low rise, medium density project that was approved.
It was called the Ways.
It would have brought six-story buildings to that site with much needed market rate, apartment housing for residents of the city.
And area neighbors actually came and fought it saying that it was going to be delivering too much traffic to the site.
And so it's kind of funny now.
I look up and I actually see the Pift and Alton Tower at over 500 feet.
And here we are now, a decade later.
And the actual issue is that there is tremendous traffic impacts being caused by this tower.
And the narrative that it would just be empty and people contributing to the coffers of the city and not living here actually doesn't appear to be necessarily true either.
Remember, the formula for success many times is low rise, medium density in cities.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Our last virtual caller is David.
David, go ahead, please.
Hello, can you hear me?
Yeah, go ahead.
State your name, please.
David Wallach.
I seem to sound like a bit of a broken record, as do many of these callers.
But uh deliveries are uh a part of hotel business.
They are a part of restaurant and cafe business.
And Ocean Drive from 5th to 15th Street is a commercial district.
It is not a residential district.
It is filled with hotels, it is filled with restaurants and mixed retail.
They all require regular deliveries virtually every single day.
Not just one truck, but each business requires probably five different trucks.
And if large trucks uh cannot get in, then they have to use four small trucks.
And so we're propagating the problem by closure of any of our main streets, including Ocean Drive, and throwing that problem onto Collins Avenue, plus ballet, plus ride share Ubers, plus multiple, multiple delivery trucks per block.
And the further you put these trucks from the delivery point, the more truck, you know, uh uh hand truck back and forths have to happen, and then the more time those trucks have to stay.
It's a domino effect by closing main arteries which were not designed to be closed.
So please consider all of the multiple domino effects and collateral damage that we are creating ourselves by poor planning and thinking that we can close a major artery and it not seriously affect major arteries that are attached to it.
Thank you so much.
Uh Mitch.
Uh Mitch Novick, 901 Collins Avenue.
I agree with the last caller and Jane Krupp.
Uh when you close Ocean Drive, you create a dangerous condition.
My street becomes a uh uh traffic cesspool of absolute gridlock.
So I would urge you to uh keep the traffic flowing, and the way to do that is not true, not disrupt our traditional urban traffic grid.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Mayor, that concludes.
Okay, I believe we have a motion and a second.
We do.
We have bush by commissioner Sware, second by Commissioner Fernandez, Commissioner Fernandez will be listed as a co-sponsor.
Thank you.
Call vote.
All in favor of R7G, please say aye.
Aye.
Aye.
Anyone opposed?
Item is approved 7-0.
That was item R7G.
R7S.
R7S approved strategic plan 2026.
Commissioner Magazine.
Thank you, Mr.
Mayor.
And Mr.
City Manager, I'll turn this largely over to you.
But it's really just a good governance method.
And while I love that this commission gets down into the details like we just did today.
Right?
Because that is the importance of local government.
It is when you walk outside of your house, what you experience, whether it be the safety of your roads, the cleanliness of your streets, whether your city is safe during March first spring break, whether your streets are aesthetically pleasing or not.
Those are the meat and potatoes of everyday, day-to-day operation of a city.
But we also need to think comprehensively.
But Mr.
City Manager, I'll turn it over to you about how we're going to essentially lay this out and then how we'll govern within the context of this.
Thank you, Commissioner, through the mayor.
We prioritize how we want this organization to be run every year through the budget process.
But a document like this is really taking us out further.
Multiple years.
Each stroke of the ore is important, but if you all don't know where the point in the distance is that you're trying to go to, it becomes very difficult to move that boat forward in a positive direction.
This particular document is the culmination of input from the mayor and commission over the past year.
It does obviously build on what we've done historically.
Our City of Miami Beach's first strategic plan was established pursuant to resolution 2006, 26341, and was updated in 2015, 2019, and 2023.
This particular document remains committed to our mission of providing excellent public service and safety to all who live, work, and play in our vibrant tropical historic community.
It outlines our organizational values to maintain Miami Beach as a world-class city, to work as a cooperative team of well-trained and empowered professionals to act with ownership and authority to reach exceptional outcomes, to expediently serve the public with dignity and respect, to conduct the business of the city with honesty, integrity, and dedication.
We are ambassadors of goodwill to our residents, visitors, and the business community, and we treat our citizens, staff, and each other with professionalism, kindness, and collegiality.
We have a number of strategic vision areas, a vibrant city, where our objective is to build on our internationally recognized reputation by balancing tourism and development initiatives to enrich the quality of life and vitality of our neighborhoods, schools, and commercial areas.
Safe city, where our objective is to build resident satisfaction through safety, cleanliness, parks, and modern codes.
Our resilient coastal city, where we our objective is to protect and enhance our natural and build environments through leading edge resilience infrastructure initiatives and investments in support of the longevity and sustainability of our community, a connected and engaged city where our objective is to embrace a multimodal philosophy to encourage non-motorized mobility options, to reduce congestion, and provide enhanced connectivity to our neighborhoods, schools, employment, special events, open spaces, businesses and attractions, a smart city, where our goal is to create a high quality and efficient governance services and employees.
Mr.
City Manager, if I could uh maybe for the best usage, explain is this the result of the retreat that we did uh this past year.
Okay, yes.
And this is the result of a two-day retreat with the um six of you obviously uh Vice Mayor Mateo Selinas was involved, but not in her current role.
Um obviously this is the uh consolidation of a lot of discussions and a lot of um you know thought-provoking exchange.
And where will this be publicly visible?
And is this already locked in and said in stone, or is this kind of a uh dynamic document that will be able to essentially um change or uh massage as we go along?
So this is adopted by resolution, it can be changed by resolution at any point in time.
Um this would inform our budgeting process, and this would inform the day-to-day direction that I give to the teams on how to deliver the best results for the community.
Is there anything that almost adds uh acts like a safeguard?
I'll give an example.
Let's say we want to one of our strategic goals and priorities is to make a more walkable pedestrian-friendly city, and then somebody proposes legislation uh without giving concrete example, but just flies in the face of that, right?
Really takes uh uh that will result in going the exact opposite.
Will there be some sort of flag or discussion that'll say, well, our strategic priority is walkability, but this is flying in the face of that.
So in our memos, um in prior iterations, we've always tried to incorporate some of our strategic goals and initiatives into what we're formulating as we're putting the information forward.
Um we we've transitioned a little bit away from that.
Uh I think that's probably because we haven't done a full-blown refresh since 2019.
Um, but I would like to get back to that so that we could help the commission uh dovetail initiatives with the strategic plan.
So I guess I'll turn over to my colleagues and uh not that I have the power, but uh Commissioner Bott.
But are we going to discuss what this is, or are we just going to kind of adopt uh what Commissioner Bach?
Um, you know, over the last number of years, through um impetus from residents or commissioners at the time, there have been things added to um the the blue sheets, the c the cover memos about fiscal impact or um is it a resident's right to know or whatever?
Could we um add a thing like a little check box to those cover memos?
Say, does this align with an initial initiative?
If yes, which one?
So that we can that's a quick reference point that we can just keep ourselves accountable.
Absolutely, if that's the commission's desire.
I think that's that something we have to vote on, or we could propose an amendment to to this.
Okay, I'd like to propose an amendment that the cover sheets incorporate a place to indicate whether or not um the item being proposed aligns with one of the initiatives, and if it does, which one it is?
It doesn't mean that it doesn't it doesn't mean that it it's a bad item if it doesn't, it just helps us keep a frame of reference incorporation of key performance indicators.
Yeah.
So that's the motion if there's a second.
Yeah, I'll say okay.
Let's call a vote.
This is item R7S as amended to include a section uh moved by Commissioner Bott, seconded by commissioner magazine, all in favor of R7 S as amended.
You say aye.
Aye.
Anyone opposed, hearing none, R7S is approved as amended.
And just if I may, through the chair for clarity, the the box to be checked will be whether the item aligns with or whether the item affects because there may be items that don't align with.
Right.
Um I think it would be does it does it affect does it is it related to it?
Is it related to it's a good way of and and then which one it relates to?
Okay, very good.
Should we do that, Commissioner, or is it maybe just ask for flag if it adversely uh impacts?
I I like having sort of the the benchmark of oh, look, we're doing another thing that aligns with one of our strategic priorities.
R9X.
R9X is discuss fake action, naming rights opportunities to fund capital projects.
R9X.
Vice Mayor Mattel Salinas.
So this is going to be an interesting discussion, I'm guessing.
I want to explore possibilities for our city to reach out and see if there's any opportunities for naming rights or advertising advertising opportunities for some of our facilities here.
And I think at one point we had that.
I would ask our marketing communications.
Melissa, please join us.
Sure, Melissa Bertier, it was a 10-year deal.
And it ultimately we turned it down.
The commission turned it down at the time, which I think was a bit of a missed opportunity.
And I think we should explore that again, especially considering we're trying to cut, cut, cut, and maybe we need to instead increase revenue in certain ways.
For example, I learned that in Miami Dade County, one of their parks, the underlying park was sponsored by Chewy, the dog food brand.
Or it's they sell more than dog food.
But you know, maybe we could approach Chewy for some advertising.
Maybe they can you know wrap a park in a banner.
Um and my biggest issue actually is that you know, I I want to one of my budget allocations that we're gonna discuss in May is the Flamingo Park um uh uh football field, soccer field right there, and in order for that field to be returfed, it's gonna be one point, I think three million dollars.
And so what if we reached out to Adidas, for example, and we said, hey Adidas, you're doing multiple events in our city, FIFA is big this year.
Why don't we do some type of naming opportunity where Adidas names co-names our flamingo park track and gives us the 1.3 for a couple years and we call it the Adidas Flomingo Park Track.
So many ideas.
And the reason why I did this as a discussion item and not sent it to committee was because I wanted to have this discussion here, talk about it with our staff and have them come back and give us some ideas of appropriate locations.
Um so that way it wasn't clogging up committees and and and kind of eating up time.
Um I want to see what everyone I want to take everyone's temperature and see how we all feel and see if we can get started on something.
Mr.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Thank you, Mr.
Mayor.
And I'll say traditionally, I'm I am not a fan of having names throughout our cities that comes with unintended consequences at time.
At times, you know, you might enter into an agreement with an entities whose values in the future you might not realize might not necessarily align with the public values and the public policies of the city.
However, notwithstanding that, we're in a very different time and place today than when we were four years ago when Norwegian cruise lines came to us with a proposal uh to name the convention center.
Today we're facing a potential shift in revenues, uh potential reform uh to our source of funding for the operations and the maintenance of important facilities to our city.
And because of that, I do think, Madam Vice Mayor, it is indeed prudent uh for us to be exploring what opportunities may be out there, doesn't mean that we're necessarily going to engage in those opportunities, but if it's the right opportunity, uh then it's only responsible for us uh to be considering uh those potential partnerships.
Not all of them will work.
I know in the past, Melissa, we had a company.
Correct.
Uh do we still have a.
And we don't have a sales team.
Right.
Which lots of adds.
Yeah.
But I mean we can try our best, but I we are not a sales team, you know.
Um, but maybe we can get together with economic development um and do our best, but there are specialized firms that do do this, but of course it's comes with a cut.
Right, and but I do I I do think, you know, and to and to your point, the communications department um, you know, handles communications marketing, but you guys don't do media sales.
You don't do sales for bus benches, you don't do sales for trolley wraps, you don't do sales for exercise equipment, uh, and we shouldn't be engaging either in sales of of naming rights.
Um however, I do like the idea of approaching this through an outside entity that does have uh those those contacts, those relationships, knows how to negotiate uh a really worthwhile, financially worthwhile uh term and agreement for the city.
Um so you know, whereas four years ago, I would have completely been against this.
I think that the shifting landscape uh that we may be potentially uh facing if 60% of the state's voters make a constitutional amendment to property taxes, which could foreseeably happen over the next year or so.
Um if it makes it prudent to be ahead of it and be engaging in these conversations.
I was happy to support your motion.
Thank you.
Thank you, Commissioner.
Yeah, I'll Commissioner Magazine.
I'll echo those thoughts.
I don't want to tie ourselves into anything.
Uh I would have historically been against it as well.
And I do want to maintain some sort of decision making authority while not micromanaging.
There could be some good opportunities, you know, the flamingo uh stadium by Adidas.
I don't think that's overly offensive or something like that, but again, I don't want to micromanage, but I do want to uh not just kind of give the green light sign off the wave all of these things in.
I I'll offer up our first possibility.
I'll I'll offer $500 for the magazine orange cone removal capital project uh across the city.
So Commissioner Bach.
Um so I have historically been dead set against this.
I share my colleagues' open to openness to um consider what's out there.
I am actually very leery of having an outside organization go out and sell the city because for them it's revenue, and I think this needs to be curated with um careful consideration of what the property is and who the sponsor could be.
I would like to actually pivot this possibly to a different approach.
Um we have increasing and Rick, I'd need you to tell me how how we can do this um legally, um, and maybe you don't have an answer at the at your fingertips because it's a weird.
I I don't know if the if other cities do this.
We have increasingly mega wealthy residents in the city.
And in other cities, we uh we see people underwriting arts and culture institutions, school playgrounds, uh public playgrounds, improved waterways, all things that will be dramatically affected if God forbid um we lose our property tax and potentially our business taxes.
So is there a way to set up an uh uh an employee, an office, uh, a firm to basically be a municipal fundraiser to the way that you know you've got um fundraisers for uh other not-for-profit organizations to fund initiatives to take up um uh maintenance costs for existing facilities that is not selling naming rights but is a different approach to this.
Because I I would be kind of much more interested in that.
And this is a uh target demographic that is usually not or is is usually new to the city, might not be super engaged yet with the community because they're here some of the time, not all of the time, uh doesn't know the history of what what gets valued and what is a challenge, and it's a way to um engage with them and and um have them build relationships in meaningful ways.
Sure.
And in fact, one of your colleagues uh several months ago had had pro discussed with my office the possibility of some kind of a fundraising uh 501c3.
I believe that this was done during uh Mayor Levine's administration.
Um and I think that it was shut down eventually because of some concerns.
So uh the your colleague did not pursue this as a result of some of the concerns, but we can certainly revisit the idea again, especially given the current economic climate.
Maybe there's some guardrails that we can come up with to ensure that the that the issues that were um identified back then do not the city at the time had one Miami Beach, which was a foundation that was set up.
Um the uh city commission, I think authorized the city attorney's office to work on setting up a foundation uh on behalf of the city.
And then that foundation had a board of directors, uh, I believe, you know, the late Commissioner Malikov and a number of other members from the dais uh were on that board of directors and specifically a focused on um you know contributions that were made by people throughout the community uh and then the reinvestment of those you know into projects that then the city wouldn't have to to fund.
And then the reinvestment of those, you know, into projects that then the city wouldn't have to fund.
And maybe, you know, if if we can't do a non-for-profit again, maybe we have a development person in the city that can work on, you know, if someone wants to work on improving a park.
And we have, you know, we have a set as a goal to make you know improvements in a park or do an improvement somewhere in North Beach, and there's a new business that's coming in, or there's a new resident that came in that wants to contribute towards that.
You know, someone that's making those relationships with those stakeholders, um, so that then you know, we can pursue that money even through the city, and we the city, every once in a while, we usually contributions.
You know, we can consider a resolution accepting a private contribution and allocate that and dedicate that for a specific purpose.
And so maybe that's something that we could explore is bringing in a development person, and maybe part of that person's compensation doesn't have to be you know coming out of the general fund.
Maybe you know, it's a structure where you know they get a percentage of what they fundraise, which is you know, very typical a lot of times in the nonprofit world.
So maybe that's something we can explore.
Yeah, and I just to be clear, I I this is not relentless for progress.
This is not a pack.
This is this is a um this would be you know, sort of a high-end, bespoke um um fundraiser the way, as you mentioned, uh not-for-profit organizations have um and use very effectively, and it's long-term relationship development, and um I think it would be a very interesting way to approach this.
Um I don't know if that's an amendment to this or becomes a separate item.
I think it's a separate item.
I think if I heard correctly, Commissioner Mateo Salinas would like to make a um well, right now you are acting as mayor, so you cannot uh make a motion, but the earlier motion that I believe you had made was to direct the administration to work on some potential naming opportunities for the city and return back to commission.
And I do want to assure everybody that the city has a very vigorous process for naming rights.
So this would go to neighborhoods, it would come back to you all.
In some instances, there's a referendum required for certain namings.
So um, so it's not that that this would happen without your substantial input.
I just want to add that um I Commissioner Bott, I love your idea as well.
That was one of my ideas too.
If a family wanted to, you know, say, hey, this little pocket park in my neighborhood, you know, I want to explore lots of opportunities here, and I don't want to limit it to just corporate partners, but I do think we should look at corporate partners.
In fact, I was told that one of our one of the events, the corporate events that we're gonna be doing, one of the the folks that's hosting at an upcoming event wanted to wrap one of our lifeguard stands, and I won't say which, but um, and I think that they're gonna end up being being able to do that.
But then someone had asked, well, how much are they being charged to wrap their logo on our lifeguard stand?
And the response was a nothing.
We're gonna let them do it for free.
And it's like well, maybe we could have charged for that.
Um, so we just need to be a little bit more cognizant about brands that are coming to our city that want that that PR and that marketing aspect and and what we can get for that.
Um similarly, Muscle Beach, you know, we we do activations there all the time, and you know, if if we're with a brand or a partnership with some type of brand that's there, maybe they can wrap the inside of that coral wall with with a banner.
I mean, there's just so many opportunities.
There's so many opportunities for revenue here.
Um, and I'd like to just explore all of them, and then of course, you know, I commissioner magazine, you mentioned something about you know, this isn't just like carp launch do do whatever we you know need to look at the brands and we need to look at the the sponsorships and look at the areas and what the amount is, but I do want to brainstorm and just kind of see what we can come up with, see what your team can come up with, Melissa, or or not your team.
I'm sorry.
The whom whomever, yeah.
One team.
That's right, one city one team and whom whomever we get to do this.
I do want to ask a question about microphone summaries.
Um are there any categories that you would want to exclude, and specifically I'm asking about alcohol?
Alcoholics.
Yeah, yeah.
Yeah, and vape and alcohol cigarettes, vape, C B D T H C.
Yeah, agreed.
All the best, though.
We like wholesome wholesale.
I do say because there is uh the you know, obviously alcohol.
We're still on that same page, yeah.
I wouldn't what it would do is I would look at our current uh agreements that we have like with the trolleys and with the uh with some of those because we addressed this issue.
Like I remember bus calls.
Not on on trolleys, yes, their alcohol is not permitted, but on bus shelters, alcohol is permitted.
But that was an administrative decision that was not legislative.
So we have the ability to advertise alcohol in the trolleys.
I've directed the communication department to not do that.
We just have a a standard, a consistent standard that we don't want to explore.
No, no adult toys, please.
Okay.
I can just find any first thing.
Yeah, I'll also add and give a plug for our water taxi, but we've had some interest for uh from some private enterprise potentially partnering with with us that they would help potentially fund some of our our routes, but also for naming right.
So I think it fits in with your saying.
This is thinking outside of the box, and thank you for guiding us into this conversation because I'll tell you, you know, it's is a four years ago the conversation came up, and it takes courage to bring it up again.
It was a very difficult and controversial conversation four years ago.
It became very politically charged, and I think it's very forward-thinking of you to take that very brave step to bring it up uh now, because we do have to be looking at this.
How are we going to close the gaps to maintain the operations and the maintenance at the level of service that our residents have been blessed to get accustomed to?
And so this is forward thinking, and I like the direction that we're going in.
I'm happy to support you.
Thank you, Commissioner.
Anyone else?
Let's vote.
So I have a motion from Commissioner from Vice Mayor Mattel Salinas, uh, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez to direct the administration to explore naming rights.
All in favor, please say aye.
Aye.
Aye.
The item is approved 70.
Uh Commissioner Bott also had a separate.
Yeah, we'll we'll work on that for the for the April meeting.
We'll work on an item for you and maybe an item for you, or you guys could work together.
R5i.
R5I is an ordinance of the mayor city commission of the city of Miami Beach, amending part one, subpart B, Article 9 related special acts of Miami Beach City Code entitled Pension System for Disability and Retirement of Members of Police and Fire Department's amending section 62 definitions.
I think definition for police management employees amending section 79 entitled deferred retirement option plan drop related to the maximum drop participation period providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict here with qualification servability and providing for an effective date.
This is a second reading public hearing.
It is item R5i.
Seven sponsors.
I guess congratulations, Chief Jones.
Thank you, Mr.
Mayor.
And uh I want to begin by thanking all of you, uh, the entire commission for joining me in sponsoring this ordinance and for recognizing the uh very important uh role of continuity and leadership uh within the police department.
And briefly before we speak about our wonderful chief uh Jones, I want to speak briefly about what this legislation uh actually does because this ordinance is a matter of policy, it's a policy decision amending uh the uh pension plan to allow the chief to extend his participation in the drop program from eight years to a maximum of 10 years.
Uh and I want to highlight something that's very important, and that is that uh our actuary, Mr.
Manager, and correct me if I'm wrong, the city's actuary has reviewed the ordinance and they have confirmed it that it does not increase cost to the city.
Correct.
And so, in other words, this uh this ordinance allows us to maintain stability in leadership without placing any additional burden to our taxpayers.
But ultimately, and more important than this being a policy decision, um, and a very prudent uh policy decision.
This is an ordinance about the men and women of the Miami Beach police departments, and the officers who show up every day.
Those who answer the call of service who put on that uniform every day, and they don't know whether they're gonna come back home at night, they walk our streets, they put themselves in harm's way so that our residents and our visitors can feel safe.
And a department like ours, like our incredible Miami Beach police departments is only as strong as the people who wear that uniform and who serve every day with that bravery, and those officers deserve leadership.
That leadership that supports them, that prepares them, and that gives them the tools that they need every day to succeed.
And when you look at the results of this department and what has been delivered under Chiefs Jones' leadership, it really talks about that support that he gives every day to our officers so that they can succeed.
And PJ, uh, I don't know if we have the slide on major crime statistics.
If you have that ready to be displayed.
There we go.
If you look at our most recent uh major crime statistics, we see meaningful reduct reductions across nearly every category.
You look at violent crimes, that's down by 9%.
You look at property crimes, that's down by 19%.
Robberies, down 32%.
You look at burglaries, they're down 26%, auto thefts down 36%, homicides, homicides down 75%.
And these are real improvements in safety for the residents of Miami Beach.
And what we're seeing today is a department that's operating with a high level of discipline, a high level of purpose with strong morale.
That's why we see those reductions in crimes.
The morale in our police officers who are bringing us these results.
And that begins with the leadership of the Miami Beach police department.
Chief Jones has cultivated an environment where officers tell us, this is not anecdotal.
Officers are telling us that they feel supported by their chief of police.
They feel well trained.
They are equipped to perform at the highest levels expected for them.
And that leadership is reflected in the department's activity and presence throughout our community.
And I think we all know the numbers, but in 2025 alone, the department responded to more than 80,000 calls for service.
More than 81,000 of calls for service.
And officers don't do that if they don't feel supported, and if morale isn't strong.
That level of proactive policing is a result of a workforce that is engaged and actively working to prevent crime rather than simply reacting to crime.
We've also seen their visibility.
Officers under Chief Jones' uh leadership conducted nearly 5,000 park and walk and walk patrols.
And that increases the engagement with our neighborhoods.
That increases visibility.
Chief Jones, as we all know, one of the cool things uh and and new changes in our department is that Chief Jones has pushed the department forward in how we use technology to keep our community safe.
And PJ, do we have there the drone footage?
And what you're seeing there is drone footage from about a week ago.
Uh, and I believe uh, and uh perhaps the chief is probably the best one to uh to to give this description, but in the real-time intelligence center uh that was completed uh during during his tenure.
Uh they they get alerts for license plate from their licensed prey readers, and whether when there's a stolen vehicle, that real-time intelligence center gets the alert, and they're able now to deploy this new technology that we have the drones uh in less than a couple of minutes, it's over the uh McArthur causeway, waiting for that license plate of that stolen vehicle to show up.
And there at the far you see that stolen uh motorcycle coming into our city.
It is such cool stuff when you see it.
And there's that motorcycle coming in.
Can you zoom in on those guns, Alex?
There's that motorcycle coming in.
Look, I mean, the the work that our police department does with this technology that the chief has brought forward.
There's the stolen motorcycle, and what and what and what happens there is just incredible, and it just speaks to the techniques and the and the abilities in which the chief has taken this department to.
And PJ, is this is this uh at double the speed?
There we go.
There the there goes the guy.
That boy there goes the guy.
There he goes, going into the opposite direction of traffic.
He goes down into the residential neighborhoods into Flamingo Park.
Commissioner Selena's close to you.
He abandons his motorcycle, throws it in the alley, goes into a building, takes off a shirt and a cap, thinks he's getting away, but oh no.
There are they are Chief Jones officers.
There they are responding.
And the guy thinks he got away, but no, he didn't.
There are our officers taking him down.
That is the work of true leadership of leadership like Chief Jones.
But technology alone doesn't create these results.
It's the people, it's the leadership that guide that guides them.
And we see that leadership play out right now during one of the most demanding times of the year for the city of Miami Beach, but most importantly for our police officers.
And um and PJ, do we have there the news clip that just reminds us of where we were and where we are now?
This is the moment chaos erupts in Daytona Beach, Florida.
Hundreds of people running across the beach Saturday after what appeared to be gunshots ringing out.
There were zero gunshots on the beach because what they were doing was crushing a water bottle to make it sound like a gunshot to stampede the crowd.
The Volusia County Sheriff says it happened even with dozens of law enforcement officers in the crowd.
Later adding at least one weekend shooting was also spring break related.
And in Port Oranges, Texas, police say a 17-year-old shot and wounded five people on a beach late Saturday night.
No one's running from gunshots, but in Miami Beach, Florida, an iconic party town has worked on a spring break rebrand in recent years.
And it seems to be working.
Police say this weekend arrests plummeted almost 21% year over year.
The city surging resources, more police, DUI and license plate checks, but also parking and getting towed are more expensive.
The strategy that we implemented was an all hands on deck and a collective strategy involving not only the police department but different city entities that made it very clear.
But if you decide to break the rules and break the law, you'll be dealt with accordingly.
Racing a new strategy to avoid scenes like this.
Jesse Kirsch, NBC News, Miami Beach, Florida.
Thank you, PJ.
That type, that kind of turnaround doesn't happen by accident.
It happens when a department has strong leadership.
Clear expectations from the very top.
And officers that know that their city stands behind them.
So extending the drop uh for Chief Jones is not just about his tenure.
It's not just about keeping Chief Jones here for another two years, but it's most importantly about maintaining the stability.
Continuing on the progress we are seeing.
And supporting the men and women and the police officers of the Miami Beach Police Department who rely on that leadership, on the leadership of Chief Jones, every single day.
And when our officers know that their leadership has the confidence and the full banking of this Miami Beach City Commission, I think that message strengthens the entire department.
So with that, uh for those reasons, uh, Mr.
Mayor colleagues, I thank you all uh for being sponsors in this in this legislation, and I'm proud, I'm very proud to move it in support of our incredible chief and the and all the men and women who work in the Miami Beach Police Department.
Thank you, Mr.
Mayor.
Thank you, Commissioner Fernandez.
That was uh very good presentation.
I appreciate it uh and enjoyed it.
So I think it highlights it's important uh and it resonates with with our residents.
I'll I'll add one other couple of things, but one is I'm a big believer that uh data and numbers are very significant, and it tells a good story, and it and in this case it tells a real story.
But uh, I'm also a big believer in it's how our residents and tourists feel when they walk down the street.
Uh as of even in a part from the data.
And the good news there is I hear all the time, and I assume all of us here from our residents and visitors.
Wow, Miami Beach has changed in a big way.
I feel very comfortable walking down the street, taking my family.
I've had people tell me that they wouldn't take their kids to South Beach, and they do now, and they're walking on Ocean Drive and other parts.
So there's a great story overall.
It's and obviously it all comes with breaking that spring break cycle, the major crimes you talked about.
Our homeless numbers, the lowest we've ever had in our city's history, 60% lower than just three years ago.
Um, the staffing, full staffing, which shows that we have a a uh well-motivated force.
And I'm actually hearing a lot, and I again I I suppose I'm here, I hear a lot of people telling me I run into uh officers in other cities or security guards who are telling me I'm trying to get into the Miami Beach Police Department.
That's where I want to be.
But you guys are fully staffed, I can't even get in.
So uh it's a great place to be because it wasn't that long ago we were.
I remember hearing we have 40 slots that we have to fill in our uh uh police department.
So it's um there's there's a lot going on.
And I and uh I'll give all of us here uh a pat on the back because I also hear Chief Jones, others, and officers on the street who say thank you to us because not every city does the elected body support our police department in the way we do and say publicly, we got your back.
Um and uh I think uh I think our officers the message is loud and clear.
We got their backs, we're giving them the best technology that we have to offer.
We do um it's important, it's important for their own safety, and it's also important for for preventing and solving crimes to have that.
So uh Chief Jones, it's uh it's it's uh it's great working with you.
We started around the same time in our respective roles, so uh you know, we work obviously closely together.
Um I will say, and and I've had this conversation with you.
I think I don't want to speak for you, you could say it, but I think part of your motivation in wanting to continue is we've seen so many positive changes, and there's more to do, right?
We don't we don't rest on our on our laurels and uh the police visibility has gotten tremendously improved, and there's even more we can do, right?
We that we never stop, we never stop pushing.
Um and uh and I and I think I think I personally believe our officers love that.
They love the fact that we are uh giving them the tools to do their job and that we want them and expect them to uh follow their training and do the jobs that we're asking them to do.
So thank you again, fully supportive of uh and looking forward to working with you for the next couple of uh couple of years.
Commissioner Dominguez.
Thank you.
Uh I too am very supportive.
I'd like to second the item.
Under uh Chief Jones' leadership, we have seen a reduction in crime.
He and his team has worked very hard in tackling the rampant drug problem that had really built up during COVID in the entertainment district.
He filled all the vacancies.
That was an incredible feat, not easy, and um now we have fully fed staffed police department.
Uh the chief is very responsive, and he has also built a strong command staff of men and women, very experienced and of diverse backgrounds.
Uh, we have an incredible team under the chief, and I look forward to working with him for the next few years.
Commissioner Bott.
Um obviously I'm very supportive of this as well.
And um one of the things that I've been talking to you about, Chief Jones, that I'm excited about for the next two years is the opportunity to really improve, not improve, to continue um and build on the successes you've had and your command staff and support of you in the initiatives like 30 by 30 and making this a safe department for people who are not traditionally seen as cops.
Um, because I think that it is so important for community to be policed by people who look like they are.
And um, I am going to look to you and to you know see significant improvement.
Not I'm sorry, significant movement um as that continues over the next two years and ensure that no matter who uh comes to try to fill your shoes after you leave in two years, um, that that is a priority and a pillar of the department moving forward in perpetuity.
So I know you can do it.
We've talked about this.
I am a thousand percent confident in your vision and supportive of your vision and confident in your command staff who will continue uh to do this after you've gone.
And uh I look forward to what we can get done together in the next two years.
Chief, I'd like to take a moment to thank you for all that you've done.
I fully support you in in this extension, and I'm so impressed by the work that you've done and the team you've created and the staff that you oversee.
I every time I speak with an officer, no matter where they're at in their rank, they all really love their job.
And I think it's because they love the environment that you've created within the force and within the team.
It's just it's palpable.
I I had the I was at roll call on Sunday and I had the chance to go on a ride along with a sergeant.
Um, and he just you could tell he just loved his job.
I mean, the way everything, he was so detailed about every explanation about you know, it was fascinating.
It was truly fascinating.
And I'm so glad I got that opportunity because you have created such an impressive team.
Um every single officer just has such pride in what they do, and the residents know it, we see it, we we love it, we love you.
And it's just so impressive.
And I just want to thank you again.
I I truly can't give you enough accolades.
You know, when I went to you and I said, listen, I want to work on human trafficking this year because that's very important to me.
And you agreed immediately, and you said that you had created the first human trafficking team within the police department several years ago.
And if that if I misspeak, please correct me.
But I mean, I just behind the scenes, you do so much, and as in front of the scenes, you do so much, and I really truly can't thank you enough.
So I'm happy to support you, Chief.
Any any commissioner magazine?
Yeah, Chief, we could go on until you're uh you're you're halfway through your extension here.
So we could.
We have some talkers, huh?
Uh maybe we'll bring this in for a landing.
Uh love you, love what you do, love your family.
Um, and it's clearly a lot of people in the city do.
You're a great ambassador, great police officer, great police chief.
So proud to work with you going forward.
Well, if I may do that, if I uh I just wanted to add one one other thing, which uh which I thought of there's really like there's so much that goes into what you have to do in in a department like this, and and everything we do is so high profile, uh, which adds to the uh sort of the the pressure stakes because you know every decision.
But um I'm I'm really proud of our of our entire city because you've gotten nothing but support from us as a commission, our residents, our business community.
It really takes that to uh to to build.
And and I say that partly because you know, when this process was coming up, and and until this came up, there was some talk about potential successors and what have you, and and there's and and you've built the deep bench, which is also part of uh I think it's gonna be part of your legacy as well, and it's a compliment to you and our entire department that we have so many good people in in our in our in in senior command and senior management.
But at the same time, I I always like to tell people and residents, because I have residents come to me, thank God we live in South Florida.
Things are good, things are safe, we're safe haven here.
Um I've even had some people from outside our country tell me recently that they're looking to move here, looking to move business here, looking to move themselves.
And they said, but the it's it's gonna stay this way in South Florida, right?
It's guaranteed.
I'm like, there's no guarantee in life.
Things can change very quickly.
A change in leadership, a change in in different uh and we've seen that in other cities in our country, we've seen it in other parts of the world.
Things can change very quickly.
So uh I do not take it for granted that I work with so many good colleagues up here and work with so many uh I work with our city manager, our police chief, and other departments as well.
And I believe our residents don't, but I say it as a cautionary tale that um the successes that we're seeing doesn't happen in a vacuum, it does not happen by accident.
It takes a tremendous amount of hard work.
It takes some tough decisions that we often do get uh negative pushback, but we do it because we know it's the right thing, and today is proof of why we do it because we're seeing the success that our city is having.
And you're a big part of it.
Mr.
Mayor.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Thank you, Mr.
Mayor.
Um I just want to recognize um, you know, we all have very stressful, very challenging, high-profile positions.
Uh that can be at times uh disheartening as they can be rewarding, they can be demoralizing as they can be uplifting.
And at the end of the day, we all go home.
We go home to our families, whether it be our partners or our significant others, our children, our families, they're the ones that keep us going.
And I recognize that in the audience, we have Mariana, uh, Chief Jones' uh wife and Mariana.
This community owes so much gratitude to you.
Uh I know that you are the rock of that family.
I know I know the chief feels so supported and doing his job every single day because you're there supporting him as supporting your beautiful children and your beautiful family.
And the fact that you're here in this milestone moment is is so beautiful.
And I also, you know, we are a team.
I know in my office I have my uh two aides who help me in absolutely everything that I do.
And I'd be remiss not to equally, you know, highlight the incredible team chief that you have around you, whether it be assistant chief, Sammy Guerrero, uh and Danny Morgallo, or whether it be Chantal and Celia and Chris Bass or Nasso Rodriguez, um, you know, you all, each one of you.
We call you guys at all times of the day, at all times of the night, on holidays and weekends.
You interrupt your family celebrations to address the needs and the public safety of our city.
And so, Chief, our residents feel the difference with your leadership, and our officers are making a difference in our city.
They support you, and today we stand with them in supporting you.
And with that, I move the item.
Let's call the vote.
And if I may, through the chair.
Um, I had previously um discussed with uh the sponsor of the item and the city manager that because uh the ordinance could entail um administration by the police department that it needed to be referred to public safety pursuant to resolution 2025 33496.
However, as currently drafted, um, it will be administered purely by HR.
So I just wanted to clarify that there was no need for for that referral.
Thank you.
It is a public hearing.
I see no one on Zoom, and I see no one in the audience requesting to speak.
May I call the role?
I'll acknowledge Bobby Hernandez here as well, the union chief.
I know there's a lot of discussions uh that the city manager and others uh had with him, so thank you.
Yeah, it was uh good morning, everyone.
It was a pretty contentious at the beginning.
I think what meeting with the manager, Mr.
Taxes, uh, we were able to come up with a resolution where our members won't be affected.
That was our biggest concern.
But you know, where were we three years ago?
We were in a vocational school, they call the police academy.
We're in a serious police academy now.
Chief Jones changed that.
We don't have a just-in-case staffing plan where all of us were working every day just because something might happen.
I always refer to my public's analogy with Mr.
Carpenter.
You don't walk into public to seven in the morning, see every cash register open just because you might get a complaint.
Um, and we're no longer there.
That's why you see the 437 officers.
That's not a coincidence, his leadership.
So we're very happy for him.
And uh congratulations, Chief.
Thank you.
Uh motion from Commissioner by Commissioner Fernandez, excuse me, seconded by Commissioner Dominguez, Commissioner Suarez.
Yes.
Commissioner Magazine.
Yes.
Commissioner Bach.
Yes.
Commissioner Dominguez.
Yes.
Vice Mayor Matasolinas.
Yes.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Yes.
Mayor Minor.
Yes.
Motion carries the item is approved.
That was item R5.
You want to say a few words, Chief?
You know what they say.
They say in court.
She's expecting a speech from you.
You know, they say in court when the judges in your favor, you sort of don't say anything.
But that's why you waited for the vote.
Yeah, I uh um not sure what to say, actually.
You know, I have uh this past weekend was 30 years for me in this great city that I often refer to as the capital of the world.
Um I love it.
Um, much like all the men and women of the Miami Space Department love it.
We do what we do because we think it's a great city and we want to make it even better, and we all love it.
I am thankful to each of you for the confidence you have collectively showed today, you have in me and in the organization.
I am grateful to my boss for giving me the space and latitude to be a police chief.
We speak on the phone multiple times today, meet multiple times a week, and but not for that.
I don't think we'll be in a position you are in right now as an organization.
Uh we're doing great things, not because I'm brilliant, not because I'm the best chief in this country.
It's because of these people behind me standing against the wall.
I really think I have a command staff made up of absolute police brilliance.
I have a team of police officers uh doing heavy lifting force every day that believe in this city, believe in protecting his residents and his visas, believe that we can make this, as you say all the time, Mr.
Mayor, the safest city in America.
And because of that belief, we've seen success.
And so I am honored and grateful.
I'm simply going to say thank you for today and for supporting.
I'd like to thank my wife who showed up the unexpectedly for being there all the time.
And she's there when I get the calls late at night and uh early Sunday mornings, and she's taking a brunt of raising our twins.
That quite frankly, a piece of work.
Um but it's been a collective and team effort, and so I'm simply gonna say thank you all.
I'm grateful.
I think we should do a group fixture.
He's your employee.
Everyone is going to be in the district guy.
Sammy and the guys are here.
Let's go.
Where are all the guys?
The command staff can be a good idea.
If you guys can get a rear luck, it's a window.
You guys can fall in the windows.
Sorry, you can't see it.
Yes.
Yes, I mean we're gonna have to do two lines, so you guys can come up a little bit, please.
And command seven you guys can fall student in the rear.
Major Garcia, if you guys can come on this side.
I love this.
Okay, one, two, three.
Okay, now we're pressing.
No, no, she's got the right.
I love your own.
Right.
One, two, three.
Okay.
All right.
Thank you for watching.
All right.
Oh.
All right.
Congratulations.
All right.
I love the lake.
Why don't we call while uh chair's apartment got the look at the top of the case?
Yeah.
Manny.
Thank you for being here.
Manny Manning.
Call R5 V as in Victor.
Yes, sir.
R5V.
It is an ordinance of the mayor of City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, Florida, amending chapter 66 of the City Code.
And titled Marine Structures, Facilities and Vessels by amending Article 2 and title restricted wake zones by amending Section 66-43 and title restrictive areas to establish a designated public swim area and corresponding motorized vessel exclusion zone in the water surrounding Flagler Memorial Island, also known as Monument Island, pursuant to Section 327.46 of Florida Statute and further authorizing the city manager to undertake and execute the necessary applications of coordination within the various agencies of Miami Dade County, the state of Florida, and the U.S.
government in order to effectuate the establishment of designated public swim area and corresponding motorized vessel exclusion zone.
I'm providing for repealer servability codification and an effective date.
This is a first reading public hearing.
We're doing item R5V.
Hello.
Why don't you take it away?
Sure.
Good morning, Mr.
Mayor, Commissioners Lindsey Precht, Deputy Resilience Officer and Assistant Director for Environment and Sustainability.
What this ordinance would allow us to do is move forward in the regulatory permitting process to establish a designated swim area around Monument Island, which is a required step in the FWC process before we continue with the other permits.
As you know, Monument Island has seen increasing pressures from vessel and swimmer conflicts, heavy vessel traffic, boats anchoring very close to shore, shoreline erosion in addition to seagrass bed decline as a result of those beaching activities.
In 2023, the commission prioritized a project to move forward with funding for shoreline restoration in addition to a motorized vessel and or swim zone exclusion zone, excuse me, for the motorized vessels, and allowing us to move forward through the regulatory permitting process.
Since then, we underwent consultant selection and procurement, and the city's consultant has completed surveys, environmental assessments, conceptual design, and submitted permit applications in August of 2025.
We've now received agency comments that clarify what may be permittable within the Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve.
Initially, the project contemplated both a motorized vessel exclusion zone and a public swim area or swim only zone to allow us the flexibility through permitting depending on what the agency comments were.
FW FDEP has made it clear that uh establishing a motorized vessel exclusion zone would require a submerged lands lease, which they are not issuing new leases for that purpose within the bay, which essentially negates that option.
However, they did indicate that a public swim area would be permittable.
Um while we were going through the FDEP process, we also in conjunction worked with FWC on reviewing the draft ordinance, which was prepared in close coordination with the city attorney's office on that language, and they confirmed that the language is appropriate and approvable by their agency.
The swim zone is proposed to extend 150 feet from the shoreline, and that distance was based on several factors.
The first is we worked very closely with Marine Patrol to provide a meaningful safety buffer between the vessels, motorized vessels, and the swimmers that utilize the island.
The second is it avoids impacts to seagrasses and other benthic resources surrounding the island based on the results of the environmental surveys.
The third is it stays clear of navigation routes and deeper waters used by boaters.
And then finally, um, to not take everything out of my pocket, but uh it allows for regulatory compromise while you're going through permitting.
When you go for the largest, there may be some give and take that happens as a as a result of those permits.
This approach for a swim-only area is consistent with the commission's goals and priorities for the island, prioritizing public safety and reducing the conflicts between vessels and swimmers.
Uh the ordinance before you today is required by state statute in order for us to continue with the regulatory permitting process.
Uh and then if the ordinance is approved, staff with the consultant will revise the engineer drawings to reflect the swim-only zone, remove references to the motorized vessel exclusion zone, um, and resubmit the application materials to all of the regulatory permitting agencies.
The ordinance in parallel will be transmitted to FD uh FWC for their approval.
Thank you.
This is a perfect example of uh you know our commission taking action to to improve the quality of life of our residents.
This was uh monument island was was something we're getting a lot of complaints about.
Um the motorized vehicles, uh the trash that was being left there, um, and the noise that was emanating from uh from boats that were there and uh proud to sponsor this item.
Thank you to my to my co-sponsors as well.
Um Commissioner Dominguez Um I do have a few questions.
Uh yesterday I was bombarded um with a few folks that had concerns, and I'm just gonna go through their concerns and see if there's anything.
So let me just open Montessa.
Um is it currently no swim?
I mean, is it currently swim only?
Or what it currently is is it's a beach where swimmers are accessing the area.
However, because we did not designate a public swim area, there is allowed to be a conflict, unfortunately, with the vessels.
Okay.
And um so currently motorized vessels can go, and this change would force the motorized vessels to be at what length?
150 feet outside of the swim only area.
And then people can swim from the motorized vessel to the island or go on kayak or paddle board.
So the swim only zone does prohibit other uses.
However, I did speak with Marine Patrol.
We would be responsible for our own enforcement, and as such, the number one goal would be to prohibit the motorized vessels from entering the zone.
There are are other areas as well on Monument Island where paddle boards and cattle uh kayaks can access the island.
Are there other areas on Monument Island where a motorized vehicle would get close?
There are uh smaller riprapper vetments on the south side of the island that essentially makes it impossible for boats to get too close because they wouldn't want to ruin their holes.
Um bound by ADA compliance.
Uh people were concerned about um elderly folks that wouldn't necessarily be able to swim 150 feet.
Well, the swim zone doesn't say that you have to swim to like the 150 feet to get to the island, it just prohibits motorized vessels from staying outside of that.
There are areas on adjacent to the swim buoys where they'd be able to get closer to the island along the adjacent areas.
So, like the northernmost buoy and the southernmost buoy, you can get close to the island.
It essentially draws a fake line from those and keeps vessels outside of that.
And so a motorized vessel would be able to go along that line to get closer to the island of the um let's see.
And then there was a lot of commentary on um the trash.
There is a ton of trash there.
Somebody mentioned to me that there's another island on the Miami side where they decided to take the trash cans out altogether, and that's helped make the trash situation better.
Um I know I recently traveled to Japan, they don't have trash cans anywhere.
So people have to carry their trash, keep it in their pocket or uh their bag until they found has that been thought of as an idea to help with trash there because I know our funding was like 400,000.
It might have been doubled for clearance of the trash, but it hasn't solved the issue.
Yeah, I'll let Amy speak a little bit on our leave no trace policy.
Yes, I would be happy to do that, Commissioner.
Um, so the Miami Dade County actually does trash pickup once a week there through a find grant.
We actually added on uh an additional day per week to address any litter issues, and we also do beach uh actually island cleanups as well as um education.
I don't think we're at a point where it's time to actually remove the trash cans.
I don't think our culture and our behaviors are really there yet, but I think it's something we can continue to work to work towards.
It is important, I understand the leave no trace policy, but we still have people that aren't really ready for that, and we don't want the island to just have tons of litter.
Okay, um, and so the last thing was um is there a current statute in place where boats cannot beach on the island?
There are not thank you, Commissioner Mateo Salinas.
So I am co-sponsoring this item because I do believe we need an area where swimmers can be safe around the island and swim safe.
And you know, I did get some emails, you know, how could you support this?
And I'll tell you how.
Um, because in 2018, and this is in the memo, but people don't read memos, they just need your react sometimes.
So I want to spell out in 2018 there was a tragic incident when a charter vessel guest was swimming within the swim zone, and um it was hit by um uh the another vessel's propellers.
Um the victim sustained catastrophic injuries, including a severed arm and leg, a split open back, and a displaced spine.
And despite the immediate response from the Marine Patrol, um, it recovery efforts took two days to locate and risk and retrieve the the descendant.
So this is why we're doing this.
Um and I thank you for putting this together, and I thank you, Mr.
Mayor, and Commissioner Dominguez for for uh creating this swim zone because ultimately safety in the water is paramount to um you know enjoyment and and stuff you know that's not quite as paramount to life or death situations that happen on the water, such as this.
So I fully support this item.
Thank you.
I think that actually happened over Easter weekend, unfortunately.
Yeah.
I'll second the eye.
Let's call the vote.
You can't make the motion, so I'll I didn't I didn't make it.
I'll move the eye.
Okay, so I have a motion from Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner by Mayor Minor.
Uh Commissioner Fernandez.
Yes.
Commissioner Dominguez.
Yes.
Commissioner Magazine.
Yes.
Commissioner Suarez.
Yes.
Yes.
Vice Mayor Mattel Salinas.
Yes.
Mayor Minor.
And for the record, this was a public hearing.
There was no one on Zoom, and there was no one in the audience.
Second reading public hearing is scheduled for April 22nd.
That was item R5V, approved 7-0.
Let's call one more item, R5Q.
R5Q is appendix A, fee schedule modification, advertisement fees.
Of ordinances to change the advertisement fees for public notices required by section 2.2.3.5 of the resiliency code of providing for repealers of mobility codification and an effective date.
This is a first reading public hearing, R5Q.
Commissioner Suarez.
Seconded by uh Commissioner Fernandez, it is a public hearing.
No one in Zoom, no one in the audience requesting to speak.
Uh Commissioner Magazine.
Yes.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Yes.
Commissioner Dominguez.
Yes.
Commissioner Bott.
Yes.
Commissioner Suarez.
Yes.
Last man with Tessalinas.
Yes.
Mayor Minor.
Yes.
Motion carries the item is approved.
Second reading public hearing is April 22nd.
That was item R5Q.
R7AF.
R7AF is approved.
Sponsorship Ocean Drive Fireworks display July 4th, 2026.
R7AF.
Sorry.
Seconded by Commissioner Suarez.
If there's no discussion by caller well, yes.
On R7AF.
All approved.
Say aye.
Hearing no's R7AF is approved 7-0.
R7N.
R7N is allocate funds and enhance ethics training for city employees.
Commissioner Fernandez.
I move the aye.
Let's call the vote.
Seconded by Vice Mayor Mattel Salinas.
All in favor of R7N, please say aye.
Aye.
Anyone opposed?
Hearing none, R7N is approved 7-0.
R7 O R7O is flag flagpole at Normandy Fountain.
I move the aye.
Second.
Motion by Commissioner Fernandez, secondary by last mayor Mattel Salinas on R7 0.
All in favor, please say aye.
Aye.
One opposed, please.
Hearing none, the item is approved 70.
R7O.
Thank you.
Is it HR here?
Eric?
Yes, HR's here.
Oh, great.
R7T.
R7T up in the there, Marlon.
Motion by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by uh Commissioner Suarez.
If no discussion, all in favor of R7T, please say aye.
Aye.
Aye.
Anyone opposed?
Hearing none, R7T is approved 7-0.
Thank you.
R7.
A G.
R7AG is mail notice to condo owners.
Bulk buyout good standing ordinance.
R7AG.
Second.
Second.
I heard a motion from Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner Dominguez on R7AG.
All in favor, please say aye.
Aye.
Anyone opposed?
Hearing none, R7AG is approved 7-0.
I don't want to press my luck.
We've been uh we've been doing so great.
But uh let's call lunch break while reconvene at one o'clock.
Thank you.
Please take your seats.
The meeting is about to begin.
Remember to speak into the microphone as this meeting is being recorded for public record.
Please stand by.
We are going on air in five, four, three, two, one.
Welcome back to our afternoon session, and we'll kick it off with our open public forum.
Hey Sarah.
Sarah, state your name, address, and you have two minutes.
Sarah de los reyes, their Harvard Neighborhood Association.
And they love watching the dogs and the animals parade and dressed up.
So hopefully you guys can bring it back.
Mr.
Mayor.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Last year, uh, Commissioner Laura Dominguez took a lead in bringing the pet parade actually during the month of March.
I think it was the first weekend in March.
Uh, or when was it?
It's last March twenty ninth.
That was the last week in March.
Yep.
And it was such a beautiful event.
Uh, you saw so many people come out to Ocean Drive to uh to Loomis Park, people from throughout the city city, even outside the city.
And then they were supporting the businesses, and it was a great family event that just brought everyone together.
We had such a great time, and Commissioner Dominguez, thank you for your leadership in bringing that that that parade will be great as uh Sarah mentioned to do something like that again, and maybe we can refer.
You'll refer to uh public safety, that'd be great.
Yeah, that would be really great.
I think it will be a benefit to Miami Beach if we start something like that that is every year, and people plan.
It gets bigger and bigger because people love to dress their animal and show them and everything.
So, I have a question, Sarah.
For that parade, were there any sponsors?
Did you see?
But the ones that are in the world.
The um bad air.
That air, the the private plane planes, who actually gave the grand price of uh a trip to New York and back on the private plane with your pet.
They all they all they do is carry your pet with you in the plane, and and back bark air.
Bark here was one of the big sponsors we got him.
We got a few.
Yeah, there we go.
Oh, well, in Palm Beach, it's all the sponsors on Worth Avenue.
I got a Tory Court Tory Turch bag as a present, you know, my cats won.
So they were tied with other the cats.
But there's mostly dogs, as you know.
It's like there's only three cats and a hundred dogs, but it works, you know.
So they get really they get hotels, gifts to stay in a hotel for three days.
So we can actually even have sponsor of the hotels to actually they can sponsor a gift.
So I think you there's a there's a good um, it's a good promotion for Miami Beach.
I think it starts growing, and then it'll get bigger and bigger.
Everybody start training their pets to do something.
I'd like for us to make a motion to send this to the public safety committee or I'll second your I'll second that.
Thank you.
Perfect.
We just do it around yet.
So we'll do it.
There you go.
That's everything.
We do it now.
We won't even need to place an item.
Okay.
We can refer now.
We will do it now based on if you all make a motion and vote on it.
We can do that.
I'll second Commissioner Dominguez this motion.
So I have a motion for the pep raid to public safety.
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez.
All in favor, please say aye.
Aye.
Anyone opposed?
Item is referred to public safety.
Yay.
Anyone else wish to speak?
Seeing none, I have Mr.
Acion on Zoom.
Mr.
You have two minutes, please state your name and address.
Andres Asiron 1000 South Point Drive.
Sorry, got uh bad reception this morning.
But I was touching upon the fact that we're voting so hard to make sure that historic preservation has a say.
And historic preservation voiced their opinion of not knocking down the more slapidous building community center that we have on the beach.
And that's looks like it's getting vetoed.
The county, uh, we took this to referendum to the county, the people voted.
Uh that's getting vetoed as well.
And all I just want to say is that you know, the firefighters truly would have liked to have had their fire station on Alton Road in the 11th because it would have been a campus.
They would have been able to continue to enjoy Flamengo Parks track, field, pool, and all the facilities as part of their training versus being on six and Jefferson.
Um it's hard.
You know, we I took uh the mayor, Commissioner uh Dominguez, as well as Commissioner Bott over to the community center in overtime where I'm a board member on.
That was a 22 million dollar facility, and we have amazing programming for our seniors, our kids, and and and all that.
And we're gonna lose such a valuable asset in our community versus knocking down a bathroom and a locker room to build a fire station on Alton Road.
Um it's sad, it's sad to see it happen.
Not because, you know, and I hate that the firefighters are the ping pong ball in this scenario, but it's not like if we didn't have another option, we did have another option, and we're executing on knocking down a more slapist building, and it hurts.
That's all.
Thank you guys.
Thank you, Mayor.
Uh, seeing no one else on Zoom, this concludes uh the afternoon zoom.
Uh thank you.
It's called uh R5M.
R5M is the North of the Mayor City Commission of the City might be fraud amending chapter 46 of the city code entitled environment by amending Article 4 entitled Noise by amending section 46-152 entitled Noises.
Unnecessary and excessive, prohibited by amending section B.
Subsection B to reduce the distance to establish prima facial evidence of the specified noise violation during specified hours providing for repealer servability codification and an effective date.
This is a first reading.
So one of uh one of the best tools that we can do here as a legislative body is to give our police department uh additional tools through through through the law.
So this would reduce the code's hundred foot standard to 25 feet regarding noise from vehicles of vessels and floating structures.
But take it away, Chief.
Yeah, uh good afternoon, Mr.
Mayor Commission, um Wayne Jones, police chief.
We're really really excited about this.
I think gives the police department just yet another tool to address some of the concerns we've been having, uh, which seems to have peaked up quite a bit, quite frankly, in the past few months, getting lots and lots of residential complaints about it from residents about this.
Um certainly creating uh what I think to be a quality of life uh issue.
Even got a complaint from you one night, Mr.
Mayor, late at night, um, about people making loud noise, speeding, loudmouthless music along the Collins Avenue corridor.
Uh a few months ago, we started what is called Operation Quiet Streets, the sole purpose of addressing some of these concerns.
Um obviously, right now we're doing it, doing it and enforcing it based on the hundred-foot rule.
Uh having it reduced to 25 feet, I think makes a world of difference, both for cars, nickels, um, and for boats as well in the waterways.
Um just wanted to throw some numbers at you, Mr.
Mayor.
I'm really, really proud of it.
You know, if you look at um back to 2021, uh enforcement efforts as it relates to noise coming from vehicles was really really bleak, to be honest with you.
Wrote 76 citations for the entire year that year.
Um, as recent as 2024, we wrote 430.
And last year we we wrote 675 for the entire year.
This year, as a result of Operation Quiet Streets, we've already written 513 citations.
That's two and a half months into the year itself on record, on the on track to probably break 1500 at this particular pace.
So we hear the community, we understand how much this impacts their daily nightly lives.
Um and we we're committed to doing something about it.
By the way, this is not an issue that um is solely uh limited to here on the beach.
Um much of other cities, many other cities and counties sort of facing the same problem.
Uh in fact, there was a recent news article um highlighting what City Miami is doing for this very same same reason.
Um Chief Danny McGowell is here, and he's actually the brain child behind operation safe streets, and so you should answer any specific questions you may have quiet streets, um, so you should answer any questions you can have.
Okay, great.
Well, thank you.
It's uh before I turn over, it's interesting because uh I've been I've been on this commission for a little over six years, uh commissioner first.
It's interesting to see the shift, I think, in focus that uh the quality of life.
And I think we're getting into a good place because spring break obviously was a major problem.
We've uh again, I feel like I'm jinxing it again, but we've uh we've solved that.
Um crime, a lot of misdemeanors, uh, which were were plaguing our city, then we started prosecuting those cases, obviously, through the efforts of our police.
Um again, all these things we have to continue improving on.
They they exist, but as far as uh they they we've definitely improved significantly exponentially.
Yeah.
Um when we're talking about a homeless population, which we mentioned uh down 60 percent in the last three years, our lowest homeless count ever.
Doesn't mean there's not more work to do, but we're I used to get complaints all the time about homeless individuals.
Now it comes in, they're much more rare, um, but certainly something we need to address.
This is now sort of the issue, and I think that's a it's a good place, it shows that we've we've we've helped improve so many different areas of public safety.
Now, the to me, one of the prime complaints that I get is about the about the vehicle noise.
Yeah, so um and uh since since we've been able to uh improve significantly on the others, I think we can do it here too.
Absolutely, absolutely.
Um, Commissioner Bott.
Thank you, Mayor.
Um, Chief, we've we've um done a lot of enforcement and education programming or programs um with micro mobility on the beachwalk.
We're talking about it for um enforcement going forward on micromobility issues.
What's one of the things that's been really successful about it is that um uh we haven't seen repeat offenders.
There will always be some who need to be educated because they're visitors for the first time, they're um uh so they didn't have the opportunity to get educated about where they can and can't ride.
Are you seeing the same thing?
And um Danny, maybe you can address this as well.
Um are you seeing the same thing with this type of violation?
I would imagine part of the issue is that people come over the bridges because it's cool to do it down here, it's cool for the gram.
Um so I don't know if we'll ever get through to them, but is there any are you seeing repeat offenders or is it first you know, once and done, or what are you seeing?
I'm gonna let Danny answer the question, but I'll tell you this.
We we also couple the enforcement with an educational campaign, mostly um social media.
And the recent data point I saw, we've had at one point 17,000 people actually looking at the social media content we're putting out there.
So people are aware that we're doing this and we're serious about it.
Dan?
Yes.
So good afternoon, Mr.
Mayor, Commissioners, uh Sistant Chief Danny Morgallo here.
Um we haven't taken a deep dive into whether or not we're seeing repeat offenders, just anecdotally based on experience.
A lot of the people that are getting these type of tickets historically, and and this has been an issue for us dating back to when I started working here.
I remember details that we had on Ocean Drive as a young officer here, where we were writing people citations for loud noise.
Um, and it's come back to the forefront again after going through you know the last 25-26 years.
Um it is not a Miami Beach specific problem, as the chief alluded to.
We're seeing that same complaint coming from Brickle in Miami and other neighborhoods throughout uh the Tri-County area, which is what led to us partnering with FHP and collaborating loosely with Miami and other departments to actually spread the word and let everyone know that this is an issue, and just you know, reinforcing what the mayor said, it's a great place for us to be as a police department to be able to focus on issues like this that are important to the community because it reflects the fact that our officer are doing such a great job to keep this community safe that we're not chasing robbers and shooters.
We're able to focus on the quality of life issues that are important to this community, and based on the numbers and what the officers are doing, they have ramped up focus on this issue tremendously.
Two and a half months, we've written over 513 citations specifically for loud noise from vehicles for comparison.
All of 2026, we wrote 675.
So we're on pace to triple that number this year.
Now, I don't know if we're ever gonna get to the point where we have zero noise violations.
So if that's the standard we're going to, we're gonna try hard to get there, but I don't know if we're ever gonna make it there.
So what what happens when you write a citation?
Is it um uh is it points on your license?
Is it a fine?
Um this one is considered non-moving violations, there's no pointing license, but there's a fine associated with it.
If you don't pay that fine, and obviously your license is spending out to 30 days.
And so is there a way to track or if there's a record like first offense is 250 dollars, second offense is 500, and then it goes up, or um, is it just it's a flat fine?
It's a flat fine that's set um as a uniform traffic citation.
It's not like our city citations that ramp up or anything.
And do we have control over that or is that mandated by the state?
Yeah, I believe it's mandated by the state.
Okay.
So um, Mr.
City Attorney, it would be interesting if we could take a look at what options we might have.
Um, if if this is mandated by the state, is there anything that we can do from a city perspective?
No, no, if I may clarify, what this ordinance is doing is it's taking our existing ordinance which establishes that noise emanating from a vehicle or a or or a vessel uh by radio or other instrument.
Um it there's a prima facie evidence of a violation if it is audible, and we're taking it from 100 feet to 25 feet.
So this is unrelated to other concerns.
We we do have another item, which is to make a legislative priority, um, asking the state to allow us to use noise cameras to to enforce noise throughout the city.
And so this is then a third related question, which is if the state controls the fines for UTCs, is there anything that we can do as a municipality that if you are now on your fifth or tenth, we would need to ask the state to enact legislation to enable us to, or or rather the state would need to enact legislation that increase the fees statewide.
Like we don't have the ability to and there's nothing we can layer on separately.
No, not to my understanding.
It would be, I mean, if it's not onerous to do to just run a report to see how many people are getting more than one ticket for the same thing.
I mean, because if it's all new people coming in, that's one conversation.
If it's the same 30 people getting tickets every weekend, that's a different kind of conversation.
Don't know if it's possible, we certainly ask because it is.
Yeah.
That would be great.
Thank you.
Sure.
No, it's a good call.
The um, I mean, I think what you're alluding to, Chief, is the chief of Miami came out with a public plea because there was one individual, I guess, who does it for kicks on Instagram.
And uh and and unfortunately, the problem is the tools that we have um are not great, as and you're asking the perfect questions, Commissioner Bott, because you know, we uh I had brought an item to bring cameras here, which we did have.
We had these uh video, they would take pictures, videos, but under state law, where there's nothing we can do with it.
Correct.
New York actually has a very great good program, but um they uh if their cameras detect, you can issue a ticket and then require them to fix the noise violation because they their cars get inspected in New York, unlike here in Florida, and if they don't, then they have to pay the fine.
So and the fine is significant there.
I think it's over $800.
So there's an incentive for them to correct the the uh the issue.
Unfortunately, here the fine is much less, and there's no incentive for them to fix it, they're not gonna lose their vehicle.
Yeah, I think given the way things are uh a best course of action um is to continue uh the program we're doing uh mostly done at at night, like I said, 80% of citations are issued at night when people are most impacted uh by this.
Continue doing that and then celebrating it uh publicly with whether social media or other means, just celebrating the fact that we're doing it, uh getting the message out to folks that don't come to the beach and radio engines or play loud music.
Yeah, so uh well let's let's get through this item and then I'll call the next item, which is the muffler uh item.
Uh well, who's moving it?
I'll second.
Okay, thank you.
Call the vote.
It is a public hearing.
I see ms Mr.
Mitch Novick on line.
Mr.
Elbeck, you have two minutes, please go ahead.
Thanks, Ralph.
Good good afternoon, Mitch Novick.
Uh I like the conversation you're having.
Uh I believe the 25-foot threshold should also apply to businesses, especially along Ocean Drive, the 100 block.
You have some businesses which you can hear their music and screaming all the way to the shoreline.
I want to point out a hot spot.
I spend a lot of time at Sixton Jefferson where I manage the property for uh I don't know, 35, 36 years.
Uh the golf carts of a vl as of late uh coming down that sixth street corridor, probably from publics or total line, uh, have been blasting and uh really uh impacting that section of uh of the beach.
And thank you again.
Thank you, Mitch.
I see no one else requesting to speak, so the public hearing is closed.
Call the vote.
Uh Commissioner Bach.
Just a quick question.
You know, uh Mitch race is a good point.
There, I see these um little free golf carts, they're not city freebies, but they're I guess sponsored by who knows whom, but they down, especially in the entertainment district, and they have music blasting.
What whose are they?
How do they operate this way?
And how do we I I have no issue with music, obviously, but like it doesn't need to be blasting that you can hear it a block away.
So we have done we have done details in the entertainment district specifically, targeting those individuals and those reckless operators basically operating with noise uh blasting.
We've written um numerous citations and and dealt with it.
Obviously, Mitch bringing it up is is it that it's moved to Sixth Street shows that our enforcement in the entertainment risk works, but we need to expand it to the But those are businesses.
Uh yeah, I'm not even talking about the private operators, but so do they have BTRs?
Is that a code thing where we can enforce that if they've been you know bad operators, we can pull their BTR?
So again, I I would defer to code to to answer that question, but if they're required to have a BTR and they're operating a business, then we we collaborate with code and we do appropriate.
I would hope they're required to have a BTR if they're operating some kind of commercial taxi service.
Hi, good afternoon, all Hernan and Cardino Code compliance.
So um, yeah, in our joint ventures out there, what we do is we'll go out and we'll issue the violation for not having a business tax receipt.
Police usually arrest and will impound, we'll tow the golf court.
But yes, it is a code violation because they're conducting business on a public roadway soliciting these rights.
Okay.
So what do they need to do to cure it then?
I mean, they just need to get their BTR and then they can go about their business again.
Correct.
Um and then we'd uh presumably catch them with this 25-foot ordinance or whatever, in theory.
Yes.
Okay.
Thank you.
Commissioner Magazine.
Um Mr.
City Attorney, Mitch brought up a point that I actually observed when I was in his neighborhood actually just this weekend.
And while I certainly never want to be the word police are too heavy-handed in government, what people do inside their own businesses and their own walls, it will never be any of my business.
Um, but there was uh one establishment in particular that had their music blasting.
Listen, we we could debate whether there should be outdoor live entertainment, things like that.
But the actual music that was coming there was so egregious.
Um I was with my daughter, it it would offend anybody.
Is there something where even where we're restricted uh in places that are grandfathered in and do have the uh open outdoor live entertainment abilities that there has to be some sort of common decency threshold about what can emanate out of their establishments?
Well, I mean, we we have our noise ordinance, and so if if the music or the sound is unreasonably loud that could could trigger a code violation.
Um there are some businesses that have that have grand been grandfathered in, and I think theirs is triggered by um being over a certain decibel level.
Um so that would require taking a decimal meter and and determining.
So really what you're talking about would be a code enforcement.
I actually mean the the content.
I'm sorry, the content.
Oh, the content.
I mean, if if I would repeat 30 seconds of it up here, uh people would cover their ears in horror.
Right.
Um I I believe that there would be some some First Amendment issues with trying to regulate the content.
But not within their establishment.
They could do whatever they want within their establishment.
We talk we're talking about what's emanating audibly and loudly on the public right of way.
That's the question.
Yeah, I mean, I could look into that further, but my general understanding is that uh people can shout profanity if they're in public.
Um there's a First Amendment.
Right.
Can a business businesses have First Amendment rights the same way that people do?
Yeah.
Right, but we we must have some sort of regulations about uh you you couldn't optically have something.
There has to be some sort of line where you can have Commissioner Magazine start giving examples on the days.
No, no, I I mean I think you're saying there are certain things that are considered pornographic that you can't just have out in public.
Um and I see our first amendment expert coming up here uh to to assist.
But there's a there's a difference between visual and and spoken.
Uh can I just ask a question?
Because I think this you're picking up on a very good point.
And just in general, sometimes a lot of these businesses, they engage in activity that we get them the rights to engage in some of these activities.
Like, for example, entertainment.
They don't they're not always entitled to life exer entertainment.
And so to the extent to the extent that we're giving them a right that they are not entitled to, we should at minimum ask them, hey, are you agreeing to you know not use, not you know, engage in you know profanity in the entertainment that you're putting out there, uh not engaging in anti-Semitic entertainment like what we saw happen uh at the nightclub, uh, not engage in homophobic uh stuff.
Uh the type of stuff that you know, if we're giving you these actual rights that increase the value of your business and that increase the value of the of your property, we at the very least I feel we should be able to at least ask them, you know, are you willing voluntarily proffer, you know, before we give you this, do you voluntarily agree?
Are you willing to state whether or not you agree not to engage in and I'm gonna use the anti-Semitic artwork that we dealt with recently?
Yeah, that isn't even our work, that was just like anti-Semitism, you know, flunting anti-Semitism from a nightlife venue.
Can't we do that?
The question is whether we can ask for a voluntary proffer of uh something that we could not demand is an open question that you've asked us to look at and we are looking at, but the general rule is that you cannot impose an unconstitutional condition upon a permit or a license.
And so if but that's not a condition.
If we're if we're we're asking them, do you voluntarily proffer?
Now they can choose to say no.
And God knows if someone someone says that they're not willing to agree to not engage in anti-Semitic activity and not to not to engage in racist activity and not to engage in homophobic activity.
I want to know that.
If someone is not willing to proffer that, I wanna I I wanna I want to I want to know that I think it's important to know.
Your requests, we are currently uh thinking about that and thinking about if it's possible and the best way to formulate it if we are.
So I wouldn't want to discuss it uh here on the dais right now, but we are looking at it in the case.
Well, at the right time, if we do have that avenue, you know, perhaps we could work together with Commissioner Joseph Magazine uh on this because I think it speaks specifically to the issue that you, Commissioner Magazine are bringing up.
Uh and thank you for researching.
I know you guys and your office has been putting a lot of time uh into researching this matter to make sure that we get the that uh that control that safeguard in place, but doing it the right way.
So we don't violate any anyone's rights, but we also protect and uphold the values of our community that that are to be an inclusive and a protective community that we're everyone can feel safe.
Um and I think an important process in that is using you know when the process when we're giving rights for life entertainment and for music and for noise, uh rights that they don't have, that we put that safeguard that you're speaking of in place.
Yeah, because Rob, uh it was so egregious I actually shazamed the song.
And again, I was with my nine-year-old, we're not just talking like, oh, I I casually hear I'm across the street and I hear it as clear as Shazam picks up, and I'm looking here, they're not gonna say it, but I'm just looking at the lyrics of the song.
They they use the N-word seven times.
They F on B's, hide is H.
Uh just things that are not conducive to any type of you know uh not even a family-friendly environment, just common decency.
Right.
You lost me on some of those, but the uh I mean if if I mean obviously you have the noise violation.
If you uh if they're over whatever's allowed in their CUP or by our general noise ordinance, you can charge them with that.
If if an organization is allowed to play music outside, we cannot, in almost every case, including the cases you're talking about, control the content of what they're doing.
Okay, I appreciate that.
We can't.
So that's that's so we can't.
Um I mean, there are certain things you you can if they want to play the Hale Hitler song, they can't we can't do anything about it.
That is constitutionally protective.
Yes.
So since this is an informative discussion, can you um illuminate why there is a standard of a different standard for um visual things that are visually offensive versus um things that are spoken that are offensive under the first amendment?
Like, for example, Commissioner.
Not gonna play that game.
Well, I mean the things that you can prohibit or restrict under the First Amendment are fall into certain categories like fighting words or true threats or things that you say that's going to incite someone to violence immediately against and against someone specific.
And words obviously lend themselves to that much more than a picture like on a uh on a uh uh on a frame would lend itself to.
Um and so in that way, spoken words uh have can be restricted in some ways more because they have more power uh than a written but in this case it's actually the opposite.
Right.
That if if um the phrases that were in the song were done up as cartoon caricatures, for instance, and put on a wall, they would be visually repellent um and probably not permitted.
But since they're spoken or sung or whatever phrases, they are protected.
No, I I'm sorry, I didn't realize that was what you were saying.
I think they would have the same protection for in this context uh if they were written or spoken.
No, but I'm I'm saying if if the phrases were translated to illustrations of the phrase, like you know, I mean, for example, we had a we I think we may still have a business that wanted to call themselves uh uh hamburger B.
Uh since we have the initials.
Make it the establishment where it was.
Okay.
And and and that was constitutionally protected that was written on their sign, and they had the right to do that.
Uh so that would be the example.
But no, but that's not like if they if these were visual, like, if I may I think she's trying to draw the distinction between words and pornography, and there is there is protection.
I mean, you know, it's pornography is not protected under the first amendment.
She didn't mention pornography.
I'm following what Commissioner Bott is referring to.
I'm sorry, we're talking about pornography.
No, I'm saying these the words that are explicit and offensive to you know, sort of general run-of-the-mill decency, right?
I don't want to get into the footloose uh generation of what we can and can't hear.
But if something were not permitted to be visually represented with an a photograph or picture on a public rate right of way because it's offensive to the community standards, right?
Then why would something that is the same level of offensive but is done with words rather than images allowed to be on a public right-of-way if it's offensive to community standards?
In that context, they would be the same.
There would not be a difference.
There's a different legal analysis for uh obscenity and pornography in this case in the type of situation of like nudity.
Uh and that is a more detailed nuance and different discussion uh that it has a different standard.
But as far as words and whether you say the B word or you write the B word on a sign that has the same constitutional protection.
Yeah, and Mr.
Mayor, if you don't mind, I mean that's like I mean we that's like hip hop, you know.
I mean, hip hop consistently uses that sort of taglines of mistreating of women, okay.
Um you name it, especially profanity.
I I mean, what are we gonna say we can't allow hip hop on on the you know for businesses to play hip hop?
Are we going to crack down on what they're gonna be playing?
Uh look, I'm not a fan of it, right?
It's not my choice of respect, but neutral.
This is a slippery slope that we're gonna go start going down on, and are we gonna really regulate what businesses play?
You have content.
Yeah, look, uh on one extreme you have, you know, you have, yes, there's unfortunately we have the disgusting business that plays Dale Hitler and its club.
Um and then you have businesses that are just playing, you know, the top ten hits of hip hop, which could potentially fall under this category.
And I don't know if we really want to get into the business of regulating that.
Uh where I was going was there's usually clean versions of any song, right?
So you can play whatever you want, but if you have people walking down our street at 1 p.m.
and they hear FFN, it's probably something that we don't joy frown upon.
Where does that line fall?
Like is it just allowed and there's nothing that we can do?
Well, we usually think about it at the outset when the legislation or the permit is being thought about in the abstract.
Uh like we think are you gonna allow music outside?
We when we advise you, we tell you, well, think about it in this context, this is what you may hear outside.
But uh once you do allow it, uh you have to you can't get regulate based on content.
Informative Commissioner Fernandez.
Thank you.
Going back, so um Mr.
Mr.
Chief Deputy Attorney, you mentioned when the language incites violence, yes, that then the city could have uh in a level of enforcement authority or a level of regulatory jurisdiction over the matter.
Matter the words aren't protected by the first amendment if they incite imminent violence.
Okay, so but you but that's an incite to violence that's a call to action, is what you're saying?
You could say it that way.
Now violence couldn't couldn't couldn't it be said that if you're putting out their racist language, that could incite violence.
People who are offended by that, people who are you know to whom it's something that's emotional.
For example, you put something, you know, a song you go to Little Havana, you go to Hayalia, and I'm sure if you put something that celebrates, you know, the Castro murderous regime, um, you know, that's been depriving people of their rights and can you know making human rights violations and arresting political descendants uh dissent and and all that.
If you put a music hailing that, it's gonna incite violence in in in some in some of those communities.
It could incite violence right here if if you play that here.
Um we wouldn't have a way to regulate that because it's being done with the intent of creating you know an incitement to violence.
Uh to put people to violence.
But no, the what you're talking about is the heckler's veto.
The effect on the listener who is offended by it is not the standard by which uh an imminent threat of violence is measured.
It is are you uh urging somebody to take violence against someone else now?
Like, I want you to go out and kill this gay person today, uh is a threat of violence.
And um the entire gay community may be very offended by that, but it's not a threat of violence against all of the gay community, so they couldn't react that way and uh act in self-defense, for example.
So the reaction of people who are hearing it, except for the the exact threat that's being made is what's uh the the what we have to look at here.
Okay.
Well, Commissioner Magazine, I hope you'll join us uh if you if we this leads to to an ordinance.
I know you've been working on this for a few months now, um, looking at the issue of you know whether we can get a voluntary proffer on on the matter of voluntary disclosure as to whether or not they agree, you know, not to engage in this type of language or entertainment.
Um I'd love to have Commissioner Magazine participate in.
Joseph Magazine, yes.
We've got the original Joe magazine in the audience, by the way.
Shout out to him.
The original.
OG.
The OG.
Commissioner Mateos Alinas.
I just want to circle back to um our police department and our code department because I understand there was a um crackdown on unlicensed golf carts and limousine services called Operation Titalist, which uh led to the about eight arrests and multiple vehicles that were impounded.
So thank you for doing that operation, uh, both to code and um our police department for working together so seamlessly and enforcing our laws.
Thank you.
Take the vote.
It is a roll caller, and again, no one else is on Zoom or in the audience.
I'll have a motion by Commissioner Fernandez and seconded by Mayor Minor.
Commissioner Dominguez?
Yes.
Commissioner Baught.
Yes.
Vice Mayor Matel Salinas.
Yes.
Commissioner Suarez.
Yes.
Commissioner Magazine.
Yes.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Yes.
Mayor Minor.
Yes.
Motion carry, second reading, public hearing schedule for April 22nd.
That was item R5 M.
R9AB.
R9.
R9AB is discussed, take action enforcement efforts addressing excessive vehicular muffler exhaust exhaust noise.
It's kind of a continuation of the last item, but uh let's close the loop on this.
So I had brought legislation and Commissioner Dominguez uh co-prime sponsor.
We've actually uh co-prime sponsored several items uh recently relating to, and again, this gets back to the concerns we're hearing from from residents.
So just wanted to hear an update uh regarding our efforts.
I think you kind of described some of them, but this is specifically to the the mufflers and loud exhausts.
And uh just obviously you know this well, but just for the public, some of the noises you hear from cars are actually legal if it's the car is manufactured that way.
But we're talking about it's kind of obvious sometimes.
I mean, I know that the police department sometimes has to uh do um do some checks on the car, but generally when you hear those booming noises coming out of uh uh the exhaust system, those are illegal.
And um so the the recent legislation that I brought along with Commissioner Dominguez, fully supported by our commission, was to have uh nighttime details, uh basically from 10 p.m.
to 5 a.m.
mostly because that's when people are trying to relax, go to sleep, and um and and these cars clearly intentionally driving down our streets and trying to disturb disturb the peace.
They're also easier to locate uh for your police department uh because there's not as many cars on the road, so it's pretty obvious.
I mean, I can see it from my window sometimes, and I can pinpoint which car it is.
So I just want to hear about your efforts, what uh you know how many tickets we're issuing, how many are at night time during those hours.
Thanks.
Good afternoon, Mr.
Mayor Commissioners.
Uh Assistant Chief Danny Morgalo on behalf of Chief Jones and the Miami Beach Police Department.
So I can tell you, and I alluded to it in the previous item.
Um, in 2025, specific to loud noise loud mufflers emanating from vehicles, we wrote 675 citations for the entire year.
In the two and a half months of 2026, based on the recommendations from the commission and the guidance and the feedback that we've gotten from the from the the residents in the city, Chief Jones has made it a priority for us to focus on dealing with this issue, specific not only to the I the locations that were in the resolution, which was the Fifth Street Corridor, 41st Street Court, or both causeways, uh 71st Street, and uh from 44th to 63rd along the Collins Corridor.
Um we have written already in two and a half months 513 citations as compared to 675 of all of last year.
The overwhelming majority of those citations, as the chief mentioned, over 80 percent.
397 citations have been written on the midnight shift rush, which is after 10 p.m.
and before that 6 a.m.
window at the direction of the commission.
We're very proud of the workforce and the job that they're doing to prioritize this among the many different priorities that we give them constantly.
And they have come through overwhelmingly, and they will continue to do an amazing job at addressing this issue.
And if we need to continue to ramp it up, we'll continue to ramp it up.
Again, we we started Operation Quiet Streets in January, and we've partnered with FHP.
FHP is also issuing citations, and as I mentioned earlier, Miami police is also doing this, and we're also even seeing things on social media that Fort Lauderio Police and other jurisdictions are dealing with the same issues.
Okay.
Yeah, and and that's well, to me, I look at it as a couple of one.
It there's a um it's always good to have police presence.
We talk about it all the time.
So there's a couple of major spots, whether it be 5th Street off the MacArthur, 41st, 71st.
I hate to leave some out because there's other areas in our city, Don Collins, Bell Isle, uh there's other places, clearly.
But we we sort of in the in the legislation that Commissioner Dominguez and I brought uh that that our commissioner proved, we sort of hit on some major spots that impact that one car going down with that illegal exhaust impacts thousands of people.
Thousands.
Hear it.
Um, you know, people jump out of their beds in there.
By the way, I think there's a safety.
I was on the highway, so it's not our jurisdiction, but I was on the on the highway, and one of these cars with the exhaust came up.
I mean, I literally jumped in my in my in and drive it.
It was scary because I didn't I didn't expect it.
He guess he I'm assuming it was a he uh hit the uh hit the pedal and uh and and I jumped, it's scary, it's dangerous.
So these cars definitely need to be um pulled over.
But so there's a police visibility aspect to it, and they're easy to catch, and that's why uh I think if we have that high-level detail, those cars are gonna know that basically coming down any major intersection, whether it be 71st, 41st, or 5th, they're gonna get caught.
Yep.
I mean, is there an issue with having a literally a detail from 10 to 5 10 p.m.
to 5 a.m.?
No, no, there's not a there's not an issue.
The the traffic level is less, so it allows us to pinpoint those specific vehicles, which is a little bit more difficult when you have dense traffic.
Um, and then the other advantage too is that we have a usually less volume of calls between 10 and 6 a.m.
So it has we have available resources that we can target on not just the noise enforcement, but also speeding and you know reckless driving, things like that.
So it's maximizing the visibility and adding in the productivity and directing the workforce on the the the areas that are most important to obviously the the community and to the commission.
Okay.
Anything else?
No, sir.
That's it.
We're uh we're we're happy to come back next month and continue to report on the great job that our officers are doing.
Okay, great.
Sounds good to me.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I'm gonna call um C7J.
C7J is amend City Bank Beach Ocean Drive Sidewalk Cafe Design Guidelines.
C7J was separated by Commissioner Dominguez.
Okay, so this item drew uh some concern from uh folks on Ocean Drive, and I'd like to refer this item to the public safety and neighborhood quality of life committee for further discussion.
Second that motion let's call the vote on C on C7AJ referral to public safety.
All in favor, please say aye toye Mr.
Mayor.
Commissioner Suarez.
Um is this gonna have any financial impact?
No, there's no financial impact on this.
I was gonna say maybe also referred to finance, but there's no financial impact.
So the item 70 is referred to public safety, that was C7J, no resounders.
R5C R5C is an art of the mayor of city commission on City Mayor Beach Florida amending subpart A of the City Code entitles charter and amending chapter two and title administration by amending article three and title agencies, boards and committees by amending division four and title budget advisory committee by amending section 2-41 thereof and titled Established Purpose, powers, and duties composition by amending the name, purpose, and powers and duties of the committee and providing for repeal or sub-bility qualification and effective date.
This is a second reading public hearing.
It is item R5C.
Commissioner Magazine.
Yeah, I appreciate this.
Uh we had a pretty robust discussion about this on first reading.
I have since spoke with uh the chairman of the budget advisory committee, and I think uh they had their latest and greatest meeting just this past week.
Um to me, I don't know if uh you have any feedback of what they discussed there, but from what was conveyed to me, uh those changes um and the enhanced scope that we're looking for all seem positive.
So uh I don't see need to prolong uh the discussion here.
We went pretty detailed last time unless anybody had any uh incremental comments or issues in between first and second reading.
Sounds good.
So that's a motion.
I'll move it.
I heard a motion from Commissioner Magazine.
Uh second by Commissioner Bott?
Sure.
Uh may I call the roll?
Yes.
Uh it is a public hearing, no one in Zoom, no one in the audience requesting to speak.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Yes.
Commissioner Bach.
Yes.
Commissioner Magazine.
Yes.
Commissioner Suarez.
Yeah.
Commissioner Dominguez.
Yes.
Mayor Matasolinas.
Yes.
Yes.
Motion carries the item is approved.
That was item R5C.
CRA1.
So we are recessing as a commission meeting and reconvening as the North Beach Community Redevelopment Agency.
Uh Commissioner Steinberg is absent.
We're doing uh CRA one, which is approved commercial facade grant award by Me Beach Express Inc.
I move the item.
You're not giving Steve his chance in the limelight here.
Thank you very much.
You're welcome.
Call the vote.
So on uh no uh North Beach CRA one.
I have heard a motion from Commissioner Fernandez.
I believe I heard uh Vice Mayor Mattel Salinas.
Uh all in favor, please say aye.
Aye.
Is approved seven zero with one absence.
Motion to reconvene at the Miami Beach City Commission.
Thank you.
All good.
All good.
R7AD.
7AD.
Increase special magistrate compensation by $25.
So moved.
Hold it, hold it.
Not there yet.
Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner Mattel Salinas.
Vice Mayor Mattel Salinas.
No display.
What's the thing?
Just the what's the thing behind this?
So the Chief Special Magistrate whose compensation can be set by me administratively has not gotten a raise since 2023.
This would be the equivalent of 3% per year since her last raise.
And the special magistrates that are set by ordinance by the commission will have to bring back an ordinance, but this $25 would result in a 2% per year increase since the last time they got a raise, which I believe was in 2018.
And what would this bring them out to?
And the uh magistrates from 175 to 200.
Okay.
Hold the vote.
This is on R7AD.
All in favor, please say aye.
Aye.
Aye.
Any opposed?
R7AD is approved 70.
Uh R5D.
R5D.
An ordinance of the mayor and city commission of the City of Miami Beach Florida, amending chapter 2 of the Miami Beach City Code and Title Administration by amending Article 3, entitled Agencies, Boards and Committees, amending Division 17, entitled City of Miami Beach Commission for Women by amending section 2-190.4 thereof entitled composition to modify the total number of members who serve on the commission for women and modify the number of members who may be appointed by each member of the city commission and providing for a feeder submobility calification and effective date.
R5D, there's a second reading public hearing.
Exactly.
Let's call the vote.
Honoring uh 10 exemplary women in our city.
Um really was uh first class.
You can see the exhibit in in Lumbas Park.
Thank you, Commissioner Bott.
Um, and uh it was it was really a special event.
Hundreds of really had seven several hundred people in attendance, and I and I highly suggest you check out uh the ten women that we uh we we highlighted and uh and and honored.
Mr.
Mayor, if I might um and the exhibit will be moving up to Altistelmar Park when it has completes its run here in South Beach.
I was trying to confirm that, so thank you for confirming that.
Excellent.
And congratulations to your aide, Commissioner Bott, who did such an incredible job.
And you could tell that how proud she was of the work that she was doing.
So communicate congratulations to you and to your team.
Well, I can't take any credit for Sarah, but I will give her a huge shout out.
She's up here upstairs, but also I would like to point out um that yesterday was her birthday, and she is doing all this as a very young, very accomplished and quite awesome human being.
So I hope you're hearing this loud and clear.
If not, we'll send to the tape.
All right.
So motion by Commissioner Bott, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez.
This is a public hearing.
I see no one on Zoom and no one in the audience requesting to speak.
Uh Vice Mayor Matthias Salinas.
Yes.
Commissioner Suarez.
Yeah.
Commissioner Magazine.
Yes.
Commissioner Dominguez.
Yes.
Commissioner Bott.
Yes.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Yes.
Mayor Minor.
Yes.
Motion carries the item is approved.
That was Adam R5D.
R5B.
No.
R5B is an ordinance of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach Florida, amending chapter 14 of the Miami Beach City Code entitled Building Regulations by amending Article 7 permits applied for on or after March 1st, 2002, by amending Division 2 and title Demolition by amending section 14-421 thereof.
Entitled notice of demolition to affect persons and by create to affective persons by creating section 14-442 thereof and title one-way trapdoor installation prior to demolition and providing for repealers of ability qualification and effective date.
This is a second reading public hearing, and it's item R5B.
Commissioner Dominguez.
Thanks.
So this item is second reading, and it's basically uh ensuring that before buildings demolish that there are trapdoors for any animals that could have been trapped there.
And with that, I move the item.
Second.
Is this called a vote?
Is this for also single family homes?
Yes, it is.
Okay.
It is a public hearing.
There's no one on Zoom.
There's no one in the audience.
I have a motion by Commissioner Dominguez, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez.
Vice Mayor Mattel Salinas.
Yes.
Commissioner Magazine.
Yes.
Commissioner Suarez.
Yes.
Commissioner Bott.
Yes.
Commissioner Dominguez.
Yes.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Yes.
Mayor Minor.
Yes.
Motion carries the item is approved.
That was item R5B.
R5E.
R5E is an order to the Mayor City Commission of the City of Miami Beach Florida.
Amending chapter two of the code of the City of Miami Beach and title administration.
Article 3 and title agencies, boards, and committees, division 22, and title of Miami Beach Animal Welfare Committee, Section 2-190.59.
They're of entitled composition to modify the composition of the voting members of Miami Beach Animal Welfare Committee and providing for repeater codification servability and effective date.
This is a second reading public hearing.
It is item R5E.
Commissioner Dominguez.
Thanks.
So we had a situation where an organization that was no longer active was still listed.
So this ordinance changes so that any organization that's involved with animal welfare can appoint rather than mentioning one in particular.
And I move the item.
Second.
It is a second reading.
I have a motion by Commissioner Dominguez have a uh seconded by Commissioner Fernandez.
It is a public hearing.
No one in Zoom, no one in the audience requesting to speak.
Uh Commissioner Dominguez.
Yes.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Yes.
Commissioner Magazine.
Yes.
Commissioner Bach.
Yes.
Vice Mayor Mattel Salinas.
Yes.
Commissioner Suarez.
Yeah.
Mayor Minor.
Yes.
Motion carries the item is approved.
That was item R5E.
Since you're on a roll, Commissioner Dominguez will go with R5F.
R5F is an order to the Mayor City Commission of the City by Beach Florida.
Amending subpart A of the City Code and title general ordinances by amending chapter 10 and title animals by creating section 10-21 and title interference with trap neuter vaccination return activities prohibited definition penalties to prohibit interference with specified trap neuter vaccination return activities and providing for repealer servability codification and effect of a this is a second reading public hearing.
It is item R5F.
Commissioner Dominguez.
So this item is for trap neuter vaccination release protection of the cat trappers, and that includes the city and volunteer trappers.
What tends to happen is interference with the trappers while they're doing TNVR.
And so this item is strictly during a TNVR cat trap.
I second the item.
Move the item.
Call the vote.
It is a public hearing.
I see no one in Zoom, no one in the audience requesting to speak.
I have a motion by Commissioner Dominguez, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Yes.
Commissioner Magazine.
Yes.
Commissioner Suarez.
Yes.
Commissioner Dominguez.
Yes.
Commissioner Bach.
Yes.
Vice Mayor Mattel Salinas.
Yes.
Mayor Minor.
Yes.
Motion carries item is approved.
That was item R5F.
R5N.
R5N is an order to the Mayor City Commission of the City of Miami Beach Ford.
Amending the code of the city of ordinances of the City of Miami Beach by amending Chapter 90 entitled Solid Waste Division 3 Rates Charges Building Procedures Section 90-133 thereof and title single utility building billing to relocate the table of sanitation commercial impact fees to appendix A by amending appendix A to the City Code and Title Fee schedule to add sanitation commercial impact fees imposed pursuant to Section 90-133 and to include an automatic annual consumer price index CPI adjustment for sanitation commercial impact fees water impact fees and sewer impact fees imposed by the city pursuant to section 90-133, section 110-167, and section 110-6 169 and providing for codification repeater servability and an effect update.
This is a first reading public hearing.
It is item R5N.
Commissioner Bott.
These fees have not been updated in close to 30 years, and it's high time that we did.
So I will turn it over to John to explain in further detail.
Yes, John Norris, public works director.
As Commissioner Bott mentioned, this does update the commercial sanitation impact fees, which have not been changed since 1998.
So that's applied CTI, CPI to come up with a current value in today's market.
And it also had CPI increases annually to water, sewer, and sanitation impact fees.
So we don't find ourselves in this situation in 30 years.
So we'll update them annually.
And I'm happy to answer any questions.
What are the rates that are going up?
I'm sorry, what are the rates?
So there's a chart that we provided.
A commercial unit with zero to 25 units.
The uh monthly fee will go from 16 dollars to 34 dollars.
And then at the other end of the spectrum, a commercial building with 101 or more units would go from 50 to 109 dollars per month.
Commercial units could be for Uniconder or six unicondo.
Correct.
That would be on the zero to twenty-five.
So this is an impact fee that's added to the solid waste collection for that building.
And that uh comes to the city to uh compensate for the impact of adding the uh structures though.
This is for new development.
This is for well, this is for every development, the impact on our system to maintain the sanitation division.
Is it you mean with it'd be the it'd be for any commercial properties that are currently exist or just new commercial?
I'm sorry, that currently exist.
This is added to every commercial solid waste bill that waste connections or waste management would have.
So can you just for the public to hear what what are the thresholds?
It's from zero to Yeah, absolutely.
So zero to twenty-five, twenty-six to fifty, fifty-one to seventy-five, seventy-six to a hundred, and a hundred one and above.
What are the different what are the rates percentages?
So the associated rates from zero to twenty-five, the old rate was sixteen dollars, it's going to thirty-four ninety-three from twenty-six to fifty units, the old rate was twenty-four dollars, it's going to fifty-two forty.
Per household.
This would be for the complex that's getting the bill.
So that that's that $25 increase is shared among the shared amongst the entire building, yes, sir.
Okay.
It's not per household.
Correct.
Correct.
And from 51 units to 75 units, it goes from 30 to 65.50.
From 76 to 100 units, it goes from 40 dollars to 8733.
And then 101 and above goes from 50 to 19.
This is a monthly fee.
Can you run that threshold again?
So okay, it's per month, but these aren't per unit.
This is per aggregated development.
That's correct.
So we're going from zero to what was the threshold?
So zero to twenty-five is the first bracket that goes from sixteen dollars to 3493.
So we're talking less than a dollar per unit.
Correct.
That's correct, yes.
Per month.
That would be passed on to the per month.
Correct.
I'm just if if I may, because you know I'm concerned about passing utility costs to residents.
And we're working, we're working very hard, for example, on an item to lower the cost of this specific of, for example, trash collection, waste collection.
We're working very hard on an item to lower costs on the residents.
I cannot come then on the other side, pass this along when I thought that this was specifically for new construction.
We're talking about new construction.
I'm fine with that.
And and perhaps the sponsor could take that as a friendly amendment, focuses on new construction.
I I don't feel comfortable, especially when we look at a lot of like out of our all of our fourplexes are going to be getting this increase.
I that's something that I wouldn't feel comfortable with.
Our four plaques, our smaller buildings.
This is sometimes where you know the most affordable or the naturally occurring affordable housing is at.
I don't feel comfortable passing along any sort of increase to these individuals because I guess passed down to the tenants that live in those buildings.
Um if the sponsor amends us to make this for new construction, 100% on board, because I understand where where the sponsors coming from.
Um, but to apply this to the existing, that I cannot support.
What are these fees go to, John?
These basically come back to the city to support the operations of sanitation.
So, you know, we have contracted services doing solid waste collection, and this is the fee that comes back to the city.
We administer those contracts.
So we have staff that's basically administering all the commercial solid waste, and this basically goes to help us do that.
And this does not include it's only new construction for the water sewer impact fees.
That's a little different.
That is when you're upgrading a meter or installing a new meter.
So sanitation is on the monthly bill.
Is this gonna be can I uh Mr.
Manager?
You know, last year we discovered that there were fees that had not been updated in the city for three decades.
And as a result of that conversation, it might have been two years ago.
As a result of that conversation, the direction was given by this body to have the administration go through every single fee to make sure that there are CPIs applied and that they are brought up to current standards of cost assignment.
You know, I I can't think of a single thing that we provide updated and extensive service for that we are charging at a price of 30 years ago.
I am not in I'm not a fan of adding cost to residents, and I know things are very difficult now, but I also think that we need to pay a reasonable amount for the city services that we all rely on.
And getting your trash picked up is one of them.
And this is a um this is something that we should never have been put in this position to have to do.
I can't believe that you know, for three decades, there was nobody who caught this.
But here we are, and we have to be the grown-ups in the room to do the right thing to ensure that we don't have waste management issues.
It is it is a relatively small amount of money, and I'm not being cavalier.
It is a small amount of money to ensure, and we get calls from residents all the time saying they haven't come picked up my trash, or there's trash being dumped, or uh whatever the issues are.
If we don't update our costs to be in line with what the actual costs are, something is going to have to give.
So how did we can you walk us through what the process was to arrive at these amounts?
And again, if we'd had CPI built in properly, it would have increased by pennies every year, and nobody would have noticed this.
And that's what's going to happen going forward.
So, Commissioner, through the mayor or the vice mayor, um this item that you have in front of you is what would have happened if CPIs had been applied each year since the last time there were rate increases implemented.
Um, over that period of approximately 30 years, you're seeing that many of these rates would have for all intents and purposes slightly more than doubled.
And so that's what we are proposing here.
Um you can see that you know those rates, although they have may have doubled, are still relatively small in the grand scheme of things for the number of units that you're talking about.
So if you were to divide it out amongst the number of units, you would find that that rate increase is relatively minor.
Uh through the mayor.
Commissioner Suarez.
I I I totally can sign on that you know, we need to catch a good times, but shouldn't we phase this out over a period of time instead of just all at once?
Uh uh Jason Green, Chief Financial Officer.
I I think to that point, I think that was perhaps what Commissioner Bott was getting to was the fact that the city hasn't done that over the past uh 28 or 30 years by not having those very small incremental adjustments here.
And I know I'm not saying small, right?
I'm just saying it's a little unfair to punish you know the current residents for the previous mismanagement of financial responsibility from the city in like just like that.
I'm saying maybe you phase it out over three, four years instead of if that I mean if that is the commission's will, obviously that's something that uh could be you know looked at to come back, but I think it's just important a couple of things so that I wanted to just clarify because there are a couple of questions.
Just one on the sanitation fund.
I think a lot of this started uh due to probably a budget retreat from a year, two years ago when uh the Office of Management of Budget raised at a May budget retreat, uh kind of the red flag on concerns about the sanitation fund and all the wonderful things it does for the residents.
Uh, you know, litter pickup, and we've expanded a lot uh over the past couple of years.
This commission's one of their major directions was a clean and safe city.
Uh, to that effect, we've expanded our uh maintenance cycles related to litter pickup, uh, the residential pressure washing sidewalk program, all of that gets funded through your co programs.
All of that gets funded through here, and it had a major structural deficit uh at the end of the day that was either going to make some rates go up dramatically, or uh or a mixture of that or service level cuts.
And to that effect, I believe Commissioner Bott was the one who sponsored this was originally look at, I think as she mentioned, look at all the different uh impact or connection fees uh that we have across the city that haven't been looked at that haven't been indexed to inflation and to rectify that situation.
Last year, the first part of this ordinance is the the connection fees or those one-time connection fees for new developments that haven't been updated in 20 or 30 years, and we lost those monies.
That was rectified by the commission last year.
But the one thing we realized going through this exercise is when we did that, we it was through just I think through paperwork error, we didn't add a CPI escalator to it.
So that that's the first part of this ordinance is that water and sewer connection fees for new developments that was approved by commission last year to add a CPI escalator like most fees do.
So that's the first part related to the water and sewer on the one-time developer connection fees.
Individually, so could we vote on that part?
I think we're all aligned there, right?
I don't know if there's an appetite for the body to and then just if there's a determination to approve one and the other one that come back in a different form, that could be that could be looked at.
And then on the sanitation fees, that was one that was also discovered just like the water and sewer, that even further back wasn't since 1998 that those rates have been adjusted.
So these are just if there had been a small incremental rate adjustment per uh per year over all those times.
And I think as our public works director was stating is though that looks like you know, it obviously had doubled, but when you spread it over a 50 unit building, we're talking about you know pennies per month, perhaps at the end of the day.
And this goes again, I just wanted the the importance of all the things that the sanitation fund.
So it's going to you know very specifically where these dollars are going.
It's for clean city, clean parks, clean right-of-way, clean sidewalks.
So just wanted to, you know, the this is the dollar.
We got Jason, you don't need to sell the sign, but you look, uh the condo owners in Miami Beach particularly are getting, you know, there's like a death by a thousand cuts, right?
There's now the FPL raise their rates, uh condo special assessments.
You know, you you name it.
Um this is just another hike.
So I'm not a look, I I want to be financially responsible, obviously, but I I don't I think it's a little bit just I think a little too much, just do it all at once.
I don't know.
I mean, you have one commissioner Fernandez who doesn't like from what he just says, he's gonna be opposed to the idea.
I don't know if he's amenable to maybe a a step increase by 25% for the next four years to get to where we are.
That way we can kind of phase it in.
Uh I don't know how the rest of the body feels about that.
But you know, there's we're gonna be we're gonna be voting probably soon on everyone else, right?
Um for uh more more water impact fees.
So I don't know.
I I'd like to see where the rest of the body program is.
Could we at a minimum agree that we're going to start implementing a CPI per year?
Right.
I I think that is a big because what you're saying is there hasn't been a CPI in 30 years adjustment for 30 years.
So I think at a minimum, just like almost any other fee, right?
You add a CPI just to keep up so we don't get further and further behind.
I think that should be kind of the base minimum part of our discussion.
And then if we want to do a step-in, if we want to do maybe CPI plus one percent each year for five years, or we we can get creative between first and second rating, but I would ask at least if we add C that we start applying CPI right now, even if we don't increase the fees, that at least uh we add CPI adjustments annually.
Yeah, I mean I think you know it's obviously up to the commission how they would want to do it if they wanted to do a phase-in one, you know, and do uh you know, one half of that value now, and the other half we would just would modify the table to have uh an immediate 2000 you know 26 implementation and the 2027 number.
Uh that's really up to the commission if if you wanted to split it in half, let's say, and go 50% of the way uh to the for like the $16 to the 3493, whatever that halfway increases and do that immediate, and the other one to be to be implemented in 2027, and then for the CPI to be escalated beyond that.
I I think that that's that's reasonable if if that's a happy medium.
Commissioner Mateo Salinas.
Do we know?
I'm looking at this chart here.
Do we know how many buildings that we have in these ranges?
So yeah, I know that's a uh okay.
I don't have the number with me, we can get that.
I'd like to see that because I do agree, you know, the the smaller buildings from zero to twenty-five, you know, if there is a building that only has eight units or twelve units, they're gonna be paying a lot more than the buildings you know that are over a hundred.
It it just it just doesn't seem to be fair.
And those smaller buildings from zero to twenty-five generally are the more affordable older buildings that are you know, they don't necessarily um they're in a tougher spot, and I think the math just doesn't, even though it's it's I I get that it's equal across the board, it's a double number from what they're paying now.
But then if the smaller buildings you know have less units, they're paying more versus the larger ones.
I might, you know.
So I am hesitant with this.
I I would like to look at this a little bit more.
Commissioner, we have another item that's going to address those small buildings.
Uh we had first reading, we'll be coming to second reading.
I think it's on the 22nd of April, hopefully.
Yeah, we're we're finishing working on it, but that will probably address that part of this because then they will go to a different uh contract.
So why don't we just wait then until that's finished, take it step by step.
I'm okay with adding the CPI, like what Commissioner Magazine said, at least moving forward.
We're saying that the water impact is for new builds, but the sanitation is for that's an all right.
The sanitation is an ongoing fee that funds all the activities of the sanitation fund, the water and sewer connection fees as the commission tackle by the way.
Yeah, I would the water fees.
I'm 100% fine supporting that.
I will not vote today to pass along a cost to our fixed income residents, our residents who are making who are facing difficulties facing uh making and speaking, and and in fact, you know, we sent the homestead relief check in the mail because we understand in residents are facing costs, but we didn't send that to tenants, and tenants are going to be affected by this as well.
And because we weren't able to send that relief to tenants, is why I've been working so closely with public works uh to see in what other ways can we uh help our residents uh by lowering other costs, such as some of these um sewer costs, uh not sewer, uh waste collection uh costs.
Um and so today I'm not gonna sit here and you know, while I'm exerting so much effort with staff and meeting with attorneys and meeting with the waste haulers and meeting with public works to see how can we lower the cost on collection while at the same time pass them this the this other impact fee increase that I don't feel comfortable.
So if we can bifurcate, um I'll be I'll feel much more comfortable.
If I could just ask one clarification is the bifurcation that the table meaning the rates being gapped up on the retroactive CPI is what would be pulled out for now, but both the water and sewer impact and sanitation would just have the future CPIs added to it or no?
That was a lot, and I will ask you a Jason.
Wanted to ask, because there have been some this I think a little bit of discussion that there would seem to be okay on having the CPI added to the both the water and sewer and the sanitation on a going forward basis, but this retroactive catch up on the sanitation of what you I think are.
And Commissioner Fernes wants to both I Commissioner Bernards and I want to bifurcate.
I'm okay with the CPI moving forward on both water and sewer.
Um but I would like to bifurcate the I guess the retroactive yes, the catch up of of the 20, 30 years.
So through the chair, if I may.
What I think we could do here is we could bring back the CPI increase for a second reading, and then the sanitation element, which is the catch-up, could be a a new ordinance first reading, uh, so that everybody could study it and and be comfortable with it.
If I could can the can the CPI is it we are at second reading?
Could the CPI is in there be approved today?
Pardon me.
The CPI can move forward to second reading.
This is just first reading today.
No, this is second reading, yeah.
Oh, it's first reading on the screen.
Okay.
So if it was second reading, we could do that, but I apologize.
No problem.
Okay, so I'll make a motion to life for K to move forward with uh CPI on uh pro forma basis.
Second.
Okay.
It is a public hearing and I have two uh Mr.
This doesn't increase any costs in our residents today.
No, is that correct, Mr.
Attorney?
When the CPI increases in October, that will be the first time that it will increase today.
There is no increase.
The CPI is what three percent sanitation is also okay.
I don't think we'll have to.
I thought it was just for new builds.
I'm sorry, I thought it was just for new builds moving forward, but we're approving today.
The water and sewer, all the water and sewer connection fees are always for new builds.
Okay.
Yes.
The sanitation is an ongoing charge for all existing.
And that's what we're coming back with.
The sanitation.
What it appears to be approving today on first reading will be uh CPI escalator for both of those going forward.
So new bills.
Would adjust the rates today.
It would be October 1st, which is normal.
I I think the question coming up is that CPI going to be applied to sanitation impact as well.
Yes, that's what they're discussing.
And it would be October 1st, which is technically when all fees go.
I understood it to be across the board, yes.
I'm gonna if and it won't be now, it'll be October 1st when all fees.
I want to know what we're voting on as a relative cost, and I see a lot of a lot of uncertainty.
So just the make it as simple as possible, right?
We have two fees here.
Neither of those fees have been increased in 30 years.
They haven't had any type of CPI step up in 30 years.
Water sewer, sanitation.
We the original ordinance was to say let's do a one-time catch-up for the last 30 years.
We're going to sanitation.
Yes, we're going to shove that.
We're not implementing that.
But as fiduciaries of our system, we're saying, okay, we can't be 31 years behind and 32 years behind and 33 years behind.
So, like just about any other fee, we're going to, on a go forward basis, our water and sewer and sanitation impact fees will have a CPI applied to it.
Mr.
Manager, can you confirm all this, please?
Because this is really your responsibility.
Yes.
So what I believe the debate was whether we are going to bifurcate the water and sewer impact fees from the sanitation impact fees.
I think what's being discussed on the table right now is taking the CPI for the water and sewer impact fees and the CPI for the sanitation impact fees as a package to move forward today and putting the sanitation catch-up as part of a future discussion.
I'll sign that.
We have public comment.
It is, yeah.
And we have two individuals waiting to speak.
And Sarah, you can go up, but I originally I heard a motion from Commissioner Magazine and Vice Mayor Monica Matel Salinas.
Is that correct?
I don't know.
I don't know, yes.
Commissioner Botts seconded then.
I second it.
So motion by Commissioner Magazine, seconded by Commissioner Bott.
Uh please go ahead.
Hi, Sarah the Los Reyes.
Personally, um I'm a realtor and I do have my clients that I do manage in small buildings, and they are getting hit very much with an increase in their maintenance because of the of the reserves.
And that's really huge.
Some of them are trying for one year to collect some money and then get some credit, you know, from the bank to have it there.
But they're really getting hit, the small buildings who are five-story, five stories, you know, not the big ones.
I mean, we're getting hit, the big ones are getting hit.
But I'm saying it's more impact on those type of building, three floors, five floors.
You have to think about that when you do this.
So just letting you know.
Thank you.
No one else in the audience.
I see Mitch Nobak requested to speak.
Go ahead, Mitch.
Thank you again, Ralph.
Mitch Novick.
I've been watching our water rate increases for 30 years.
Need to correct the record uh for since the days of Jimmy Morales uh being our city manager.
We've had an automatic CPA CPI increase every October.
Not on that.
All this leads to housing on affordability.
Uh David Dermer, former mayor and commissioner David Dermer, perhaps the best legislator this city has had, policymaker this city's had in uh decades, would never uh approve uh as a as a policy and as a promise he made to pa to the public, never approve any of these types of rate hikes and fee hikes.
Any stuff by that.
Um what's going to give?
Uh what's gonna give what's what's gonna give is you guys who are gonna have to focus in on uh spending our money wisely.
We have 500 more employees uh today than we had when Jimmy Morales took took office.
We need to reduce our city staffing uh uh and do what's financially responsible.
And that's uh and that objective needs to be towards the residents, not towards the monster monster of government.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Wait, can I just do the mayor?
Um can we clarify?
Because Mitch just said that we are trying to raise uh a rate that has already been raised.
Can we please set the record straight if he's correct?
Let's address it.
If that's a misunderstanding, let's address it, please.
So I was just gonna mention that I think what Mr.
Novick is speaking of are the uh user fees related to water and sewer.
What we're talking about today are impact fees that are charged as new construction is coming online and they need to connect to our system, they have a impact to that system, and we're trying to offset a small percentage of that cost.
Okay, so I just want anybody who's listening to understand there are two different types of fees, and we are talking about the one that has not been addressed in three decades.
I want that to be loud and clear.
And not only that, Commissioner.
Apologies.
Well, it hasn't been addressed in 30 decades.
That's not um, sorry, 30 years.
It's not an ongoing monthly fee.
The water and sewer fee is strictly a one-time fee for new development.
Right?
Correct.
So we cannot sit here and talk out both sides of our mouth about oh, all these uh billionaire developers, they're doing all of this and they don't help out with anything.
This is a chance to make a 30-year too late, modest change to just increasing from CPI from a price that was set in the 90s in the 80s.
I'm a little confused.
I'm a little confused now.
Hold on, I'm a little confused.
So the sanitation fee is applied monthly.
The water and sewer fee is a one-time impact setup fee only for new development.
Okay, can I make a suggestion?
I'm gonna make a motion to bifurcate uh the water and sewer impact fee, which is the one that's on new developments.
So we can do a motion on that.
If the sponsor would allow, I would like to make a motion to bifurcate that because I can support that.
If we're talking about new developments, I will 100% on the new development that's coming into our city.
I will 100% support an increase in the impact fees that Commissioner Bond, thank you for leading on this because it is 100% long overdue.
Uh and Bree Decades is way too long of infrastructure impacts, and you are taking the leader, the leadership to finally address that, Commissioner Bond.
So I'll be happy to make a motion to bifurcate uh that part so that we can vote on that, and maybe then we can vote on the other, because the other I cannot support.
If the other means there's already a motion on the floor there.
But hold on.
If we can clarify, then we'll almost have to bifurcate the bifurcation because where we said we go, okay, we're not going to change the fees in arrears.
We're just going to start CPI going forward.
But if we're going to bifurcate water and sewer from sanitation, and we're just talking about new development, then I think we do the catch-up.
It's 30 years in arrear and add the through the TPS.
Mr.
Mayor, this is already starting to get a little out of hand.
Can we can we just defer this one month?
Honestly, like this is this is getting a little out of hand.
And I think it's not even I'm having a little hard time tracking this.
I can't imagine the residents are having a hard time tracking.
If if we're gonna do it, let's do it right.
Let's do it responsibly.
Let's have let's have plenty of more time to prepare for this.
At the next meeting, we can discuss this and dedicate uh time certain for this because this does impact a lot of people, as Sarah said.
There's a lot of people who are hurting out there who need help.
And I think it's I think it's disservice to our taxpayers if we kind of just rush this and uh and kind of kind of shotgun this through.
I think let's just defer one month and then let's really get our bearings straight.
I'll turn so I'm gonna make a motion to defer.
I'll turn it to our city attorney since we have now two motions on the table.
Do you have three motions?
Okay.
Well, and before the motions, because there is a motion on the table, but the motion to defer would would would take precedence.
Um, but I think there is a little confusion here, and I would love for for Jason andor John and the manager.
The water and sewer connection fees, those were already updated.
You did that in June of last year.
So all that this does to those connection fees is adds the CPI.
The sanitation fee, that is the one that has not been addressed for 30 years.
And this ordinance would both update and start to apply the CPI.
Correct.
So I don't know if that helps but uh but the motion connection fees were so why don't we just get that out of the way right if we want to bifurcate things we can all sit here and simply agree that we can just tack on the CPI for the water sewer impact fees.
That way when this comes back in a month it'll just be the sanitation part and we could discuss twofold whether there's going to be any catch up from ARIA and whether we're going to apply CPI going forward but if we truly want to simplify things this is as simple as possible in previous months we passed in a new impact fee for only new development for water and sewer what this portion is that we can vote on here is just to include that it will be updated at the rate of CPI going forward.
That that's very clear that's very simple and I think probably what we intended to do anyway and what that'll also do is in a month when it comes back for the sanitation side it simplifies that so we don't even have this discussion on the table on two different parts so right now what I'm suggesting if we go with what Commissioner Fernandez suggested I'll second that this bifurcated only address the water and sewer part today.
As the city attorney just mentioned we all voted to increase the water sewer impact fees that hadn't been updated in 30 years.
The motion before us given uh Commissioner Fernandez's direction is simply to continue applying a CPI adjustment so in 30 years we don't have to do another catch up that part is very simple and then we'll have a little more complex and comprehensive discussion on the sanitation side perhaps a month from now Commissioner Dominguez so this item has gone in a few different um directions I'd like to go back to the sponsor of the item Commissioner but what is your intention on how this item should move hello from this side of the world you want to side huh um yeah over to the side um I would like to move the CPI on both items or no is it on on it's on but on now so turned around I'd like to move the CPI because that has to happen that's a no-brainer it has to happen and I'm very okay with coming back next month with a uh different conversation about how to catch us up on sanitation whether it's we do half of it um this upcoming year and then a 25% and 25% or if we do CPI plus some percentage over the next five years I I'll leave that to you guys to proceed and come back to us with a plan.
But we're making this far more complicated than it needs to be and I know that you're working on a sanitation program to carve out the smaller buildings so we will make sure that whatever gets accomplished in that um in that undertaking gets applied to this as well so they're not forgotten.
I I think we've just overcomplicated this significant so are you moving that item yeah so that's I'll second it so I think that was on there and it was second and I seconded it.
Okay so I have two different motions completely the original motion is what Commissioner Bot just said and then we have the second motion that Commissioner Fernandes of magazine said just for the water impact fees.
And just to I would like to move forward with the first motion.
The first motion is CPI for both the water and sewer and the sanitation yes so that one needs to be voted on first.
Okay I'll second so let's do that so the first motion is Commissioner Bott Commissioner Domingue uh Dominguez is second this is CPI on both water and uh impact fees water impact fees and sanitation I I just got a text message from Mitch Novick and he sent me a picture I think we all got it.
A picture of his bill where it says uh no solid building customers pursue an ordinance 2016 4039 effective first 2025 the base conception components of the water and sewer chargers will increase by 1.6 percent so that looks like this guy so that I think is the manager said that's the usage fee not a connection fee for new can new construction.
I I'm just gonna suggest you know I'm gonna defer to to to my colleague I'm just I'm not feeling comfortable voting on this today.
I my you know our number of us found out here that this was going to apply to existing construction um which is not what I had discussed in my briefing um if we have to vote on this today I want to be able to be supportive and I always like to get to a place of a yes but if I have to vote on this today I I'm gonna have to vote no very respectfully because I and I said respectfully because I understand the intent and the effort here and how responsible the effort is but I just cannot support this today.
Um if we have to vote on this today, I want to be able to be supportive, and I always like to get to a place of a yes.
But if I have to vote on this today, I I'm gonna have to vote no.
Um very respectfully because I and I said respectfully because I understand the intent and the effort here and how responsible the effort is, but I just cannot support this today.
Um or we can bring it back next year.
So you can support it on first reading, making changes a meeting with the sponsor by second reading.
But this is an item that's been on for months.
It was just not reached.
Yeah, I I I I hear what I think we all hear loud and clear what the concerns are.
It is first reading, it has been on for months and months and months.
And I think that even if second reading doesn't take place, I mean I think we can get there by April, but if we need more time, the second reading can be assigned for for May.
I think we can get there.
But I would really hate to get this kicked off this pile because it's taken.
I don't Ralph, I don't know if you have in front of you how long it's not in front of me, but I can I can look it up if you want.
Yeah, I mean it's been it's been on forever.
And so I don't want to lose the progress.
So maybe so so let's do something.
Let's let's vote on this today, and maybe we can have just a quick sunshine meeting just to make sure that we're all on the same page, that we all understand it clearly.
Uh, because I know I think there's even members from the administration that didn't even understand it clearly before today.
Uh so that by the time it comes to the second reading, we all make sure I just want to make sure that we are not passing cost to residents while I'm I am actively working trying to reduce costs for them on a recurring basis.
So if that's the case, you guys are hearing loud and clear what he's saying.
You know this inside now.
Should we break these two items apart right now?
Water and sewer and sanitation.
That's what we're doing.
Or do we break it apart CPI and and you you're not going to have his support and perhaps others?
I think the easiest way.
Hold on.
The easiest way is to have these travel in two different paths, right?
We have a vote for water and sewer, we have a vote for sanitation.
I agree with that.
That I feel more comfortable with.
Because you're talking about two different populaces here.
One is being charged for new development on developers, right?
The other is for existing residents.
On point.
Yep.
Read the room.
Let's allow these to travel differently, right?
I say we take a vote on the, I don't know how we could do this legally, but take a vote on the water and sewer and then defer the discussion on sanitation.
Okay.
I like where Commissioner Magazine has had.
Well, I think just procedurally, you're gonna have to start with the initial motion, which was to apply CPI across the board.
And then if that fails, you go to the second motion.
So could we do a friendly vote down of that?
Yeah, withdrawal.
Somebody could withdraw that motion, sure.
We made the motion.
I'll say Commissioner Magazine's motion.
So I have a motion on Commissioner Fernandez.
I'm sorry, Commissioner Magazine made a motion.
Uh seconded by Commissioner Fernandez.
This is only CPI, new impact water and sewer fees going forward.
I mean respectfully, we're this is really unprofessional.
I understand this has been on the agenda, but we're like learning on the fly right now.
What is what?
I mean, coming to the case.
I think it's awful.
I mean, I think sure it's our fault, but like I still doesn't wrong is not make a right.
I think I mean what's the point of the thing.
It's been on the it's can I finish, please?
What's it?
What's what's the what's maybe next month we have a package after having a sunshine meeting, we have a package deal.
We have we really thought this through.
But I mean, do we really want to you know vote on this?
Where clearly for the last 45 minutes, we've kind of just been learning on the fly what's what's what.
And I and I wouldn't wouldn't necessarily place the blame on us.
I mean, our administration had I haven't had this conversation with Eric.
He hasn't brought this up to me.
You know, so I again I I I'm with Commissioner Fernandez.
I don't feel comfortable voting on this today.
I'm gonna vote no.
So uh you guys can vote your conscience.
But I was simply saying, let's just wait one month, let's have a sunshine meeting, let's really iron everything out.
That way we all feel comfortable, and then the and the voters of Miami Beach can see that we've been professionally prepared for this and and move accordingly.
I mean, I don't see what the big deal is.
One month.
It's and then we'll be better informed, and we'll have a much more thoughtful discussion instead of on the days on a commission meeting.
Well, I think that's how discussions are supposed to happen given the sunshine that this is where we have discussions.
This is where we hash things out, right?
We can't talk to each other in private in public.
This is a good thing.
But we can have a sunshine meeting.
We can call it meeting.
I mean, this is a sunshine meeting, right?
Like no, like a sunshine meeting dedicated to this.
I mean, we're we're we're gonna be raising rates on our customer on our on our residents.
Well, let's but if if we if we address the motion that Commissioner Fernandez has on the floor with me, it actually does that, uh, Commissioner Suarez.
It makes this simple, right?
Where the sanitation we could discuss, whether that's in a sunshine meeting or next commission meeting, and we travel in two different paths.
The water and sewer is very simple.
We've already voted to increase the impact fees that hadn't been updated on 30 years.
This is just adding almost a text amendment to make sure that they continue to be adjusted by CPI.
It doesn't impact any existing residents at all, and it actually cleans up this process, so then we could have that more robust discussion on the sanitation fees.
This actually just cleans it up and gets rid of some of this back and forth.
Pre-core can be respectfully to my colleagues, respectfully to my colleagues.
This is the first reading of two.
I can't tell you the number of times that we have had um differences of opinion amongst ourselves on the details of how to get to where we want to go.
And we have time and time again said, you know what?
Direction has been given, come back to us with second at second reading with the item cleaned up and and fixed.
We have also said we will have a sunshine meeting to make sure that between now and second reading, we will be in agreement with the direction.
And at second reading, if it's not there, we can defer it at this point.
Why are we not extending the same grace to this project as this initiative as we do to other initiatives?
If I may, Mr.
Mayor, to the question.
Commissioner Fernandez, and let's call the vote.
For a long time, we've been looking at cost savings on utility rates.
I mean, there's been an item I think I connected you with an entity actually that reached out to us that looked at ways in which we could save money for people based, you know, through their utility rates.
And we've been specifically this issue has been an issue of concern for a number of years.
This issue, issues relating to rate increases potentially to our residents.
And so it's and so in the way that it's being described by Commissioner Magazine, it makes sense to me because we can still move forward with a significant part of your legislation while we still figure out the other part that would have a more direct impact to residents uh that are living here now.
Understood, but why wouldn't we do that between first and second reading?
And if second reading needs to be pushed out to May, because we're not there yet, so be it.
But why are we because it gives residents an opportunity to object or to hear and the more public input that we can have to do?
I've just been very consistent on this.
I'm sorry, and I'm sorry, it's your item, and I want to be able to to support you and the part that I feel very comfortable supporting.
But I have just been very, very, very consistent.
Mr.
Manager, you've asked us to have discussions about rate increases in the past, as has Jason, as has our current public works director and previous public works directors.
And I've been and I've held the line on it, and I said I don't want to talk about it until we figure out how do we address the lower income people, the people who are struggling, the people who are going to end up absorbing these costs, because it certainly won't be the association.
The association is going to pass it on to people.
And it's certainly not going to be the landlords.
They're going to pass it on to the tenants.
And I'm just very mindful and very cognizant, and try to put myself in their shoes as I know all of us do, and especially you come, Commissioner Bod.
Uh, but I've just for a long for I think probably two or three years now, I have been very, very, very, very consistent and very passionate about this, that we don't take any legislative action as it relates to these utilities that is going to be passed down to the most struggle struggling segment of our population.
Um they don't they it's it's expensive enough for them right now.
So before we overcomplicate this further, the motion on the floor, I think is very simple, very digestible, and very doable for all of us, right?
And that is to separate the discussion for the water and sewer and then the sanitation.
And we vote to apply a go forward CPI that only applies to new development on the water and sewer.
We have already caught up 30 years that that is not been forward.
So this is a very simple we're adding a CPI metric.
Then we're going to have basically have a separate item where we discuss the more robust sanitation.
That's the one that's not so much confusing, but where there's a lot of different viewpoints about where we go.
And I think separating those two allows us to have, sorry for the pun, a much cleaner discussion.
So what we should be voting on, given there's a motion in a second, is are we going to apply a CPI charge on an annual basis on water and sewer impact fees that is only applied to new development?
Yep, second.
Hold on.
It is a public hearing.
I have one more person requesting to speak.
Susanna, go ahead, please.
Good afternoon, uh Commissioners.
Uh so in regards to the matter of the increase of the water, sewer and sanitation.
First of all, buildings are getting increases every year.
And I understand that it's not an impact fees, but solid waste management, for instance, just from last year to this year went up four percent.
In regards to the concerns that both uh Commissioner Suarez and uh Commissioner Fernandez uh uh repeatedly stated for residents in the old older buildings, uh that is a legitimate concern.
As we know, SEERS came into effect.
Uh the uh costs have gone up.
I can tell you the just we're for our association, we had to raise maintenance fee by 22 percent.
So and we do have older people living in our buildings in older buildings that are on a fixed income where most of their money actually goes to pay for medication.
So it's very important to be mindful of those people and the fact that what may uh be construed as a minor increase all around to people on a fixed income that are older, it's not a minor issue.
Uh it's it's you know, it might move them out of the beach or may me you know uh make it impossible for them to leave here.
And um so we definitely don't want to put people in the chalkhold and um commissioner Suarez uh asking for uh more information to make an informed decision.
I think it's responsible and legit, and I and I and I thank Commissioner Suarez and Ms.
and Commissioner Fernandez in particular for one to have more information so that they can better represent the interest of the community and also to make sure that whatever decision they make, it's made with facts uh that are corroborated by uh documentation.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Our next caller is Elizabeth Latone.
Hi, good afternoon.
Um I just wanted to say thank you to everyone for bringing these uh impact fees uh current and also bifurcating it.
I think that's the right way.
Um we cannot continue to maintain our systems the way we have been without doing this.
Um it's very simple, as uh Commissioner Magazine said, it's uh to new developments only, and we have to do it.
We cannot, with all of the new things that are going to be coming on to Washington Avenue and Lincoln Road.
Um we it just has to be done.
And I just would like this to pass.
Thank you so much.
Thank you.
I see no one else in Zoom, no one else in the audience requesting to speak.
May I call the role?
Can we just need to be very clear on what we're voting on right now?
Sure.
Um, right now you're voting on the motion that was made by Commissioner Magazine, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, which is to move forward with the CPI increases only as to the water and sewer connection fees, and then the development well, it's only those are only on new development or on changes to an existing water service.
And then that would come back for second reading next month.
The sanitation will be excerted from this, and that will come back for a first reading um next month, presumably.
Okay.
Let's call the role.
Commissioner Dominguez.
Yes.
Yes.
Commissioner Suarez.
Yes.
Commissioner Magazine.
Yes.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Yes.
Commissioner Bond.
Yes.
Mayor Minor.
Yes, sir.
Second reading public hearing is scheduled for April 22.
Mr.
Mayor.
Commissioner Bott.
Um, John, will you be ready to talk about sanitation in April?
Yes, that that shouldn't be a problem.
So respectfully, Mr.
Mayor, would we be able to assign this to a time certain in April so that we could make sure it doesn't we don't lose water?
Okay, that would be great.
R7A.
R7A is a public hearing.
Approved certificate of appropriateness, demolition of building at 8336th Street, R7A.
I make a motion.
I mean, we've literally discussed this to death.
Motion and a second.
Of motion by Commissioner Magazine, seconded by Commissioner Swore is it is a public hearing.
I see no one on Zoom, no one on in the audience requesting to speak.
Roll call.
Let's call the vote.
R7A, all in favor, please say aye.
Aye.
Anyone opposed?
Hearing none, R7A is approved.
70.
I know this is purely symbolic.
I know it's moving forward, but this is breaking my heart, so I'm gonna be a no.
So you are an O on R7A.
That is Commissioner Bott.
So item is approved 6-1.
With Commissioner Bot voting no.
Although it's all stuff.
No, it's it's uh this has been through so much.
Uh congratulations, Eric and our fire department.
Really quickly, Eric Troll is on behalf of the uh on behalf of the Mind Beach Firefighters Union.
Just wanted to say thank you all for your continued support.
And again, we don't want to see the demolition either, but it's unfortunately, you know, it's where we are today.
Um, you know, but thank you all for your continued support to get us any fire station letter uh firefighters, men and women sleep in you know actually you know acceptable conditions.
We really appreciate it.
Thank you.
Thank you, Eric.
R9D.
R9D is DRB appeal number 25-112 filed by Michael Krieger, R9D.
Milk, Nick, welcome, uh welcome to the day I us here.
Well, this is gonna be fun.
Thank you, Mayor, and good afternoon, members of the commission.
This is an appeal of a design review board approval for a new two-story single-family residence at 50 West Alito Drive.
The application included a waiver from the maximum height limitation for single family homes and a waiver from the site wall uh requirements.
The appeal was filed by Michael Krieger, the owner of the property to the south at 34 West Toledo Drive.
Because this is an appeal of an order of the design review board for a specific property, the city commission is sitting in a quasi judicial capacity.
Your decision must be based on the record before the DRB, and no new testimony or evidence may be taken.
Any ex parte communications by members of the commission have been disclosed on the record and I've given copies to uh to the parties.
Under the code, the city commission can only reverse or remand a decision of the DRB if the Commission finds on a 5-7 vote that the DRB either failed to provide procedural due process, failed to observe the essential requirements of law, meaning the failed to apply the correct law, or fail to base its decision upon competent substantial evidence.
The commission cannot re-weigh the evidence presented to the design review board.
Your job today is only to determine whether the DRB's decision was supported by competent substantial evidence at all.
Uh the order of the hearing, it will start with the the petitioner, in other words, the the neighbor who filed this appeal, um, followed by the respondents, which are the property owner and applicant, uh and the and the city.
And uh and and lastly, with any rebuttal by the petitioner, and then at that point, um the attorney should sit down and the city commission can deliberate.
Mr.
Mayor.
Commissioner Fernandez, just a quick question.
Is it I mean I've I I saw the the hearing, I reviewed the record and the materials presented to us.
Um is it the position of the city attorney's office that the DRB followed all the proper adjective criteria?
So the so I'm sitting here as counsel to the city commission as a board.
The city is represented uh by my colleague Justin Alexander, and the but the the parties do have an opportunity under the code to present oral argument.
Yes, the the briefs and the exhibits and the and the transcript all are part of the record.
Um but the petitioner does have a a right to make his presentation.
Commissioner magazine.
Thank you, Mr.
City Attorney.
And just to speak in more plain layman's English.
I watched the video as well, but just so we can put this in a simplistic form.
There's an applicant, they got a favorable ruling at the DRB, and now a neighbor is saying he's making an appeal saying I do not agree with that ruling.
We're not necessarily litigating whether we would agree or disagree with his thoughts.
It's just did the DRB act appropriately coming to that approval.
That's right.
How much time uh does are they do they have to present?
So consistent with prior appeals before the city commission, the um petitioner could have 10 minutes.
The respondents have agreed to split uh their 10 minutes, and then lastly, the petitioner can present a brief two-minute rebuttal.
Okay.
Okay.
So set the clock for 10.
Good afternoon, uh, Mr.
Mayor, members of the board.
Uh, for the record, my name is Bill Riley.
I'm an attorney located with offices located at 1634 3 Southwest 256th Street in Miami Dade County.
I'm here on behalf of the applicant or the appellant, uh, Mr.
Michael Krieger, who is the sole uh neighbor affected by the development program that was approved by the DRP.
In order to make our time here efficient and make it move as fast as possible, the client would like to make a statement.
I'm gonna ask him to come up and make that statement first, and then I'm gonna present with my legal arguments.
Hello, board, Mr.
Commissioner.
I appreciate your time in letting me be here.
Uh I'm a uh I'm Michael Krieger.
I'm a 40-year resident of Dolito Island at 34 West Dolito Drive.
I've peacefully lived here uh for all these years and walk my islands daily.
What I've seen happen over the years is astounding to me.
There's been waiver after waiver has been issued, exceeding the code.
The reason for the code is a reason for the code in itself.
It's exceeded continuously with waivers for setbacks and heights.
Uh it's it's a situation where I'm here regarding 50 West Dolito Drive to make it the statement as simple as possible.
My concern is straightforward.
The approval of a height waiver of three feet above code without a present hardship or compelling basis.
The code established limits for a reason and exceeding those limits without a clearly demonstrated hardship, undermines consistency and goes against the written code.
It's it raises a fundamental question.
What is the purpose of having a code, written code if it can be exceeded on a recurring basis, which it is?
This is not an isolated issue.
It's repeated exceptions are becoming more common and have been over the years.
My neighborhood is starting to look like an office park.
We're progressively altering the scale and the character of the Venetian Islands, which are historic in nature.
In this case, the property is already a large-scale double lot facing due west, approximately 200 feet, and the home is about 11,000 square feet.
They originally came to me asking for a two-foot height extension.
I rejected it.
Then when they showed up at the hearing, they pushed it to three feet.
Granting additional height is not about necessity.
There's no hardship.
It reforces it reinforces a pattern of incremental overbuilding.
At some point, a boundary has to be maintained.
I respectfully ask the board to ensure that any deviations from code are supported by a clear, legitimate hardship and remain consistent with the intent of the regulations.
Mr.
Mayor.
It's time someone speaks up.
Commissioner Suarez, thank you.
I'd like Mr.
Krieger to be at the podium if that's possible.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Yes, sir.
Uh so is it true that you have asked the applicant for half a million dollars for your approval for his project?
And then when he didn't excuse me, I'm asking Mr.
Krieger.
The attorneys, the attorneys were negotiating prior to this hearing.
Okay.
So is that try to cover a settlement?
I'm just asking.
I'm just simply asking.
Did you request half a million dollars from the applicant for your approval?
No.
No, I did not.
Okay.
Um another issue that I heard was that you sent a demand letter to uh a well-known resident in Miami Beach, Melissa Beattie, because apparently she also had concerns about a type of quid pro quo uh in the neighborhood as a result relates to Mr.
Sandray's project.
Is that true?
Ms.
Beatty accused me of extortion on a public platform, which is a criminal offense.
And I requested her to withdraw that statement, and she did.
So I'm asking you here on the record.
Did you ask the applicant?
Or did you try to negotiate a half a million?
I did not try to negotiate anything.
I had my attorney try to negotiate to not exceed that.
Sorry, your representatives.
Did any of your representatives try to negotiate a half a million dollar settlement for your approval?
No.
Okay.
There was negotiations.
Is this under oath?
Because we're on a quasi-side judicial company.
We are in a quasi judicial hearing.
The oral arguments are typically conducted by attorneys only.
But the the truth is that that the argument should be presented by counsel to each party.
And these are in under oath?
No.
Usually these and is the gentleman's speaking before the case.
So do you want the second thing?
If counsel's under oath, maybe the counselor should be.
Since Mr.
Right, since since Mr.
Krieger did provide a statement, I can ask you is the testimony that you have given the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth, as well as the past any testimony that you will give in this proceeding?
I'm not party to the discussions.
The attorneys took place prior to the previous hearing.
Okay.
And everyone's going to be able to do that.
You're testifying at a hearing, and I understand about overbuilding height.
Excuse me.
Usually individuals to come to testify on matters like these are testifying under oath.
And they're usually administered an oath before the test before they start testifying before the body.
Commissioner, you are correct.
Um Mr.
Krieger, I'd like to place you under oath and ask you if the testimony you have given is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
There was discussions.
It's a simple yes or no.
There was discussions.
It's a simple yes or no.
You're under oath.
Yes.
Okay.
Can you ask him one more time?
Thank you.
Do you swear that the testimony you've given and will give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
My statement before I make that statement you've given at this at this oral argument.
My statement is that the attorneys negotiated a settlement for this.
And I was not party to that.
That is the truth.
Mayor, my my recommendation would be that we limit the rest of the argument to the uh to counsel for parties to the appeal.
I'd like to I I'd like to hear him be under oath because he's making serious allegations, and I want to know.
Wait, the truth.
What allegations am I making except that he's building over hype?
Excuse me.
I'd like to be under oath.
Mr.
Krieger, I'd like you to be under oath.
I it's a simple yes or no.
It's binary.
Yes or no.
Not my attorney.
Yes or no to what?
Can you ask him the question one more time?
Sir, since you are since you have given testimony, uh I just I'd like to ask you if the testimony and I'm placing you under oath.
If the testimony you have given and the testimony you will give in this proceeding is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
I'm not gonna answer that question.
Okay, Mr.
Mayor, I would just recommend that that the argument be handled by by counsel and uh yeah, on that front.
Hello, everybody.
Go ahead and the recommendation.
Thank you, Mayor.
Two orders game blow bar for our record.
Before if we could start the question, just real quick now.
Are they under oath?
Counselor not under our our code and under in general, counsel do not need to be placed under oath at these proceedings.
But but point of testifying is this a public hearing item or no?
It is not a public hearing, it's an oral argument.
Okay.
Could we perhaps do something?
If anyone is going to testify as part of these proceedings, of course, not the attorneys, but anyone else, you know, can they just not stand and you administer their oath just like with any other typical proceeding of this nature?
It's it has not happened to me in my 13 years here.
Okay.
All right.
All right.
And well, Bill for the minute, wait a minute.
I wouldn't make sure the record needs to be clear for the next reviewing court body.
And my understanding was that the appellant goes first, and then we're gonna have a limited amount of time, he gets to respond, and then I get to reply.
I'm not sure.
I just want I don't want it to get confusing, especially since this is a record for uh a reviewing court.
Your time the timer was stop.
It was paused.
No, I know, but he's gonna start speaking now.
And I had a question, and no one's answering my question.
I wanted to I'd like to answer it.
Sure.
So the question is was there a an offer for a sum of half a million dollars to buy your client's approval for Mr.
Sanjay's property?
The answer is no with an explanation.
If you allow me to explain, I can walk you through and you can understand the full history associated with that item.
Let's hear it.
Okay.
So I'm gonna just pivot for a moment to answer your question, and I'm gonna go back to our presentation.
But before I got involved, um the client, the homeowner, Mr.
Larkin sat down, had a conversation.
The conversation didn't result in a agreement, so Mr.
Krieger decided to hire an attorney.
Um I came in and started speaking to Burke Albertell and Fernandez's office, and we were working on a settlement agreement.
That settlement agreement included and primarily focused upon moving the outdoor entertainment area that's located against the uh appellant's property to the north side of the lot where there is no neighbor.
If that was not something that they would do, which I thought was an easy fix, but that's not something that they could do.
Mr.
Krieger said, My home is going to be substantially damaged.
The valuation of my home is gonna be substantially damaged.
I said, Look, you have to have actual empirical evidence to state say state something like that.
You can't just come up with it's my opinion.
So he went out to Burke Haupt and Hathaway, and Burke How Hathaway did an evaluation of the property, came back with a written opinion, which we submitted for the record, and that written opinion says that if the house was built as proposed, at the height it was proposed and created a canyon effect, that the home would be diminished in value by millions of dollars.
What we asked for is if, and it wasn't to buy anybody's vote, if you don't want to move the entertainment area from the south side that's abutting our property, it's gonna be a major force of impact to the north where there is no neighbor.
Well, then we would like to mitigate our damages.
We gave them the letter from Burke Hathaway, they didn't have anybody else evaluate the proposal.
Um our proposal was for mitigation, the $500,000.
We put that in writing.
Your code requires disclosure of all types of settlement discussions.
But what do you mean by mitigation?
Mitigation means that we didn't ask for the full damages affected by the reduced valuation that's in the professionals' opinion letter.
But what would it be the what would half a million dollars buy to mitigate an entertainment center?
This is damage.
So somebody, if somebody comes in and decides they want to do a carnival next to your house, but this isn't a carnival, this is a single family owner.
Your property is gonna be damaged.
The valuation of your property is gonna be damaged.
But everything I'm sorry, I'm I'm trying to play devil's advocate.
Yeah, sure.
But everything is to code other than the three-foot variance.
Is that correct?
It's not like he's building a carnival next door.
It's he's just the only thing he's asking as far as the variance is three feet.
And just to be clear, uh, no variances were approved as part of this.
It was uh it was a three-foot waiver.
It's a waiver.
Right.
So what I'm saying is I don't see three feet causing half a million dollars in damages when it it could be three feet less, and it's the same, it's gonna be the same location of this entertainment center.
It's very it's very different because the height has shadowing effects, and that's one thing we complained about.
Your code requires a DRP.
If you don't mind because I had this discussion also on like last year when it came to understories, uh is Tom Mooney around, Tom, I I remember on the record, you told us when we had the discussion for understories that three feet was what?
What was the more what was the term you you recommend?
You said de minimis, de minimis.
Okay.
Okay, so just I want to be clear that my planning director, our planning director says that three feet is de minimis, it's imperceptible.
And you're telling me that it's not.
Yes, sir.
And it's worth half a million dollars.
Well, what I'm saying is that we had an expert and the real estate industry give an opinion, a written opinion.
And that opinion says it's gonna be damaged by millions of dollars with this canyon effect.
There was no lighting plan submitted, which was required to be submitted associated with this application, which is one of our arguments.
Um that lighting fl that lighting plan when you have a flat roof, don't know what type of overcast is gonna have with our property.
The location of the outdoor entertainment area, which didn't have a variance, but it's our main point of concern because that was gonna be the noise situation.
But again, he could have built that without the three foot and it wouldn't have made a difference.
But the the city the city has spent tens of millions of dollars on a zoning study and a zoning code, and they provide for an exceptional situation for applicants to get waivers.
But he just but our city attorney said there was no waivers granted.
This is a waiver.
No, uh no, then the yeah, no variance.
Sorry, the variance is just a right three-foot waiver for height.
Exactly.
Okay.
So if there's some type of reason, there's an irregularity associated with this property.
Um then an applicant come before a board and say there are extraordinary circumstances here.
We need to ask for an additional three feet.
You should have they without those extraordinary circumstances, the city invested so much time and so much resources into a zoning code.
They should have to develop in accordance with that zoning code, unless those extraordinary circumstances exist.
They don't.
And in our case, by giving them an additional three feet, I'm not a professional in the real estate industry, but we had person go out there, he gave his written opinion, and that's the opinion we submitted.
Now your code requires us to make disclosures.
And as an attorney following the code, I made the disclosure to the board.
I put it out there for everybody to hear.
What the what the hearing was that you saw, and I'm glad you guys all saw it, was basically filled with insinuations that we were somehow, which it sounded like it was going this direction today, selling our approval, which was not the case at all.
We provided different options in order to settle our grievances.
Okay?
It was almost like a menu.
And that menu can be picked and choose from.
What they decided to do was to address another of our concerns, and instead lobby the neighborhood with false allegations, and to lobby the bo uh design review board with false allegations.
Now, for the first time in my history, the vice chairman of the design review board asked every person that came up to the dais whether or not they were asking for monetary compensation to sell their vote.
And it put this whole um it put this whole uh shadow, uh dark shadow upon the hearing because it wasn't focused on the actual issues, it was focused on a misguided narrative that something was improperly done.
Well, we were actually following the code.
The code has that disclosure requirement because it is proper to ask for mitigation of your damages.
That's that's what we did.
Whether or not they accepted it is a different story.
Um they did they declined it, but there was other options in a settlement agreement they could accept except two, and they declined those.
Yeah, I'm just simply saying that if there was no three foot variance for the height.
And Mr.
Sanjay decided to keep his entertainment center where he originally intended.
Yes, sir.
I mean, I have a planning director that says it's the minimus it would you there would have still been in the same situation, right?
Except just three feet less.
And to me, it looks a little different when there is you know a ha a half a million dollar settlement uh that's being proposed to bait essentially go away uh as far as opposition is concerned.
You know, I'll it it wasn't it wasn't to go away.
We were never going to propose anything like that.
And I will say, on the record, on your oath, I know of no other firm out there that's made more disclosures than Burke Albert Del Fernandez on those types of issues.
It's not unusual.
Commissioner Magazine.
And I'll take the Devon Devil's Advocate approach to that, right?
Where I'm saying, well, if there's two neighbors and the guy wants to build three feet higher for a house, or he wants to build a fence uh foot closer to your property line than the code allows, he comes over and goes, hey Frank, if uh if you support this, whether he goes, I'll give you a case of beer or a million dollars.
I don't really think it's the government's job to get involved there, especially if it's disclosed, right?
So I think we just move on to the further orders that are under the law says but in the same regard, I saw nothing in the DRB hearing that says well, the DRB hearing somehow granted this waiver because of what was disclosed.
So while I agree with you in one regard, where it's really not the government's business about what happened between those two private entities, again, whether it was for a case of beer for support or half a million dollars.
Yes, sir.
I also didn't see anything, but you're gonna have your chance to uh further make that case here.
Thank you.
Whether somehow this waiver was improperly granted.
Thank you.
I have a question, Commissioner Fernandez, then Commissioner Dominguez.
Thank you.
And then the materials that were that was provided to us.
Uh there's a letter from a Mr.
Jason Zarko.
Mr.
Riley?
I don't think so.
Mr.
Riley, I'm speaking to you.
Sorry, I'm very sorry.
Uh there's a letter from a Mr.
Jason Sarko, because is that correct?
And the materials that were provided.
Yes, sir.
Okay.
And uh Mr.
Zarko is the one that has determined that this equates to a significant devaluation for land.
Yes, sir.
That's that's the gentleman from Brookhouse Hathaway, I think, Berkshire Hathaway.
And what is what are uh Mr.
Zarko's professional qualifications to issue this opinion?
He's a professional licensed real estate um real estate agent in the state of Florida.
Is the an appraiser?
I don't not to my knowledge.
Okay.
So we're so we have someone who is not an appraiser making uh determination or a recommendation or giving professional advice on value of property.
Yes, sir.
And it's a good point you're breaking bringing up.
It's something that could have been raised.
I just want to I just I I think you know it if you if you told me that this was an appraiser, an appraiser guides themselves through a scientific metric, uh, and they're trained to do that, then I would say, you know what, this is important evidence that's presented to us.
But considering the fact that that that this isn't someone that's trained in evaluations, we know the real estate agents all the time, um, agents from from companies like the one that you provided, you know, they might say, yeah, property is worth this or that, but then when it gets time to get a loan or whatever, it's not what someone like Mr.
Zarko says that matters, it's what a professional appraiser says that matters.
And I don't see any evidence before us today that's been provided to the design review board or passed along to us that shows that a that a expert and a professional on evaluating values of properties and their impacts has made this determination that you're alleging.
So our position was that we relied upon him as a professional, as a licensed professional, you as a trier of fact bring up a good point.
And as a trier of fact, you can decide whether his qualifications aren't you say that he if you if if you if you had to get an uh an uh evaluation on loss of of value on your property, would you hire a real estate agent to do that for you or would you hire uh uh uh uh an appraiser to do that for you?
I would me personally I'd probably hire both because when you first go to sell your house, the first person you do talk to is a listing agent, and that listing agent usually decides what the listing price would be.
But then when you go get financing in order to make the deal, yeah, different you're you're gonna need that appraiser, and this is nothing, this is no different, and you haven't presented us with any evidence to show that a professionally licensed appraiser, which is a trade that is licensed and regulated uh in under the state of Florida under specific training requirements, has come out and made the determination that you are making on behalf of your client.
And so I don't see and if it was I'm sorry, yeah.
I was just gonna rebut, but it if if it was something that was entertained by them and not used as a weapon, and they decided to say, look, well, let's have an appraiser do it.
We could have taken the next step and had an appraiser do it.
I personally would probably have done both, but it was never fully considered by them.
Instead, it was used as a gotcha, and it was this gotcha that created this false narrative that didn't allow us to have a full affair hearing at the DRB board and has cloaked this discussion about the waiver into you know something that it really shouldn't be.
No, but we've always but but but let me ask you something.
But putting aside um what you know your questions about whether whether the hearing was was fair or not in the DRB, and I trust that with the guidance of our city attorney I trust with the guidance of staff, uh those who are appointed to the DRB conducted a fair a fair hearing.
Uh I mean you trust that you know it's as an AI CP accredited planner, Tom Mooney has experience in this matter.
Wouldn't you what it wouldn't you say?
Yes, sir.
I think he's one of the best uh planning directors that's out there.
I made that point in my own.
It's one of the best planning directors out there.
Uh I think so.
And uh and and you know, do you agree with me that um that on page three of Mr.
Mooney's staff report who you who you just described as one of the best planning professionals out there, yeah, he has written that the proposed structure has an orientation and massing which is sensitive to and compatible with the building site and surrounding area and which creates or maintains important view corridors.
The massing and the orientation is sensitive and compatible with the building sites, and he wrote that that was satisfied.
Do you agree that that is what Mr.
Mooney said?
That sounds like you read it correctly.
All right, so so Mr.
Mooney, who you have described as one of the most professional and the best planning planning professionals in the area has written that the proposed structure, which you are which you are appealing on behalf of your client, is indeed has the right orientation and the right massing, and it is sensitive.
And this is someone who is licensed and who is trained to do that.
However, you come and you bring us your evidence, someone who is not a licensed professional on the issues of valuation.
And so, how do I give more not in the issue of appraisals and evaluations?
He's a he's he's licensed, he's licensed to sell property, but not to value property.
And so, how do I give more weight to your evidence as opposed to the weight of our planning director who you just have said is one of the best in the area?
In page 14 of my complaint to this board, I mentioned that I say that I believe that your professional staff is one of the best professional staffs in all of South Florida.
I said it here again today.
However, your code, your zoning code has a criteria that has to be followed by the planning by the design review board.
And when I questioned staff for that hearing, and if you watch the tape, you may have heard it, they missed one of those criteria.
And the criteria says shall, and they didn't evaluate that criteria.
Okay.
Now that's a departure from the essential requirements of law.
And even though you may have the best professional staff out there, I put in my arguments, everybody's makes mistakes.
Everybody's entitled to a bad day.
So was there issues associated with this?
Yes.
And I believe those are appealable issues.
Is he one of the best planning directors out there?
Yes.
But mistakes happen, and our our appeal is based upon those mistakes.
Mr.
Rally, does that conclude your presentation?
So we need to let the applicant uh you're talking to me?
Yes.
I haven't really even started my presentation.
I'll just respond to answers or questions.
Would you would you like to finish?
Oh, I would like to go ahead and do my presentation, yes, sir.
So what I was going to start with is to explain to the board that this is a very narrow issue.
And the issue is not to have a rehearing on the matter, as your city attorney mentioned, but to see whether the legal requirements of the application were met.
The first is whether or not the hearing allowed procedural due process.
And to make it very short, and I quoted the law in my complaint, but to make it very short, it means that you have a meaningful, fair opportunity to be heard.
Now, if you watch that hearing, and if you read the transcript that we submitted after the hearing, it's our position that there was procedural due process that was not afforded in this case.
Um, because I had a PowerPoint presentation.
My PowerPoint presentation was very short.
I asked to go through the PowerPoint presentation, I wasn't given an opportunity to present our our evidence.
I was cut off repeatedly.
I was asked about questions about $500,000.
Um there was arguments throughout the day.
Um whenever I went to make one objection, the chairman yelled at me and told me to sit down.
I couldn't make an objection.
Well, that's my job to make objections.
It was it was really strange to me to be in that setting.
Um whenever a staff person was inter uh introduced on the response as an expert witness, not in the case in chief, but in the response, I asked the cross-examine the witness.
I was told I had I could give them one question.
Um, and these arbitrary, these arbitrary and capricious rules that were set up by the design review board on that particular day in this particular matter, never allowed us to go through our evidence.
Never allowed us to address the the three feet in height.
And we stand and I'll stand up on the complaint.
I don't want to belabor the point, but there really was a departure from the essential requirements law because the whole hearing centered around $500,000.
And it put this the decision was made before we walked in the door.
Okay, and it was all cloaked within this uh uh black cloud and conspiracy theory that was very easily to address, and I wanted to address it, was never given the opportunity.
And I wanted to address it, was never given the opportunity.
We think, based upon the law, that they failed the first prong.
And whether or not they failed the first prong is not decisive on this issue.
The courts have determined that the applicant has to meet each and every prong, satisfy everyone, and if they miss one, well, then the case has to be remanded or overturned.
Now the second one, the second prong is whether the essential requirements or law were observed in the case.
Let me just find it real fast, sorry.
Let me give you the right section code.
In section 2.5.3.1 the design review board's uh regulations isn't it's codified within the land development code, the zoning resiliency code.
It provides for a laundry list of items that must be reviewed on an application.
And one of those items, it says, and I'm gonna read it verbatim a lighting lighting shall be reviewed to ensure safe movement of persons and vehicles and reflection on public property for security purposes and a minimize glare and reflection onto adjacent properties.
The one question I asked the staff, I was only allowed one, was whether or not they reviewed the lighting.
And his answer was no.
Now, a departure from the essential requirements of law to make it very simple is whether or not the law was followed.
Your code says it shall be reviewed.
Now, coach courts have said when your word shall is done, it's a mandate, it's not like May.
There's no uh discretion to determine whether or not you can or cannot, you must comply with that criteria, and that was missed.
Staff never reviewed that criteria, the applicant never submitted those documentation.
By making a ruling, and the case could have been deferred, and they could have resolved this, they decided not to.
Instead, they were gonna shove it down our throat.
You know, they they they missed that criteria, and therefore the essential requirements of law were not followed.
The last one, very shortly, is whether or not disputed action is supported by substantial competent evidence.
Your staff issued a recommendation of approval.
Uh the applicant made a long hist uh long argument in the design review board about how that was substantial competent evidence per se.
The law has said it creates a rebuttable presumption, the revolvable presumption we submitted uh was that the code itself was not followed.
And if the code was not followed, then there's no substantial competent evidence.
And I'm just trying to rush, but with that, those are our arguments on appeal.
We appreciate your time, and of course, I'm available to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you.
Okay.
Graham Penn, 2007 Biscan Boulevard on behalf of the applicant, KC property holdings land trust.
And I think one thing we learned this afternoon is that the it's a good idea to move forward with that uh ordinance moving this into a special magistrate process, uh, Commissioner Suarez.
Uh the because again, I don't think this commission on you know, this is natural, is well set up for what this is really supposed to be because I can tell you Mr.
Penn.
Yes, you're getting into an area that has to do with the policy and with what is the jurisdiction of this body, and I think that that's for policymakers to make and not for lobbyists opine on it.
Yes, I thank you.
Uh but let me be clear.
Uh, and I meant to do this earlier.
The statements of Mr.
Krieger uh I would object to as being new evidence being presented to this commission.
This commission cannot take in new evidence.
And I would even say apologies to uh Commissioner Suarez, the colloquy with Mr.
Mooney, who is the best planner that has ever lived, is my opinion.
Uh, but that is new evidence, and that cannot be considered by this commission.
You are limited to the record in front of the DRP.
You were uh you were limited to the arguments uh in uh that that were made uh and given to the DRP.
So I let me touch on, and I apologize.
I meant to mention that Mr.
Justin Alexander, the city attorney's office is gonna help uh on any due process portions, but I'll I'll touch on a couple of the things that uh that came up in our initiative in Mr.
Riley's presentation.
First, waivers just as an uh just as a point of information.
A waiver in your code is not a variance, it does not require any special showing or elevated showing uh to the board.
It does not require any special showing or elevated showing uh to the board.
It just it is a the board reviews waivers under the same standards they review any application.
It is not a special request, it's not a variance, it's not out of sorts or inconsistent with the code.
Uh two on waivers, we had two waivers in our application.
One was was that there was the additional three feet of building height.
The other one was to provide seven foot solid walls on either side for Mr.
Krieger.
Uh that was what he requested.
So we agreed to seek a waiver, and we did.
And and contrary to the the uh the assertions we've heard, this plan from the outset has been designed to limit the impacts on Mr.
Krieger.
We set this building back 18 feet from his property line.
We put the garage, the kitchen, the pool uh equipment, all the the ACs all on the north side of this property, as far away from it as possible.
But again, uh the questions before you today, and I think uh uh Commissioner Magazine got at this is not whether the commission would make the same decision that the DRB made, but whether the DRB made a legal decision.
And the and based on those standards, the three prongs that Mr.
Riley outlined, the DRB clearly made a legal decision.
The let me turn to the essential requirements of the law argument.
Basically, what the essential when when you're asked to determine what the uh whether an application is consistent with the essential requirement or a decision is consistent with the essential requirements.
The biggest question is did they apply the standards in the code?
Did they look outside of the code and make a decision?
Uh here you can see from the transcript is very clear that the board sought to keep their purview on design.
The vice chair who's chairing the meeting, expressly, and this is on page 69, made sure that look, uh, we're not going to talk about valuation, we're not going to talk about 500,000.
This is about the code criteria.
And he forced that he made sure that that was not being discussed, because that's not relevant to their decision.
As to the the question of the lighting plan, uh the petitioner suggested that there is not a lighting plan provided.
There was a discussion on page 71 of your transcript where planner explained another great planner with Holy O Medan, explained that the uh that for single family homes, the department's policy is not to require a photometric lighting plan until building permit.
And that's why there was no photometric plan provided.
However, if you look in your packages, which I'm sure you've enjoyed reading at length, L page L uh Plan L7 in our submittal, which is the last page of our appendix, uh includes a lighting plan that was submitted as part of this application.
That lighting plan shows the every exterior light on this property, including everything against Mr.
Krieger's property line.
It also shows, if you look at it, that every single exterior light on this property is low wattage and and and every all but one are located no higher than 24 inches off the ground, which is again for landscaping purposes.
So there is a lighting plan.
Now a photometric plan per city policy will be reviewed a building permit, but there's a lighting plan in this set.
So, and I don't know if Mr.
if Justin wants to get up because we really didn't get 10 here, but the uh let me just summarize our uh our clear position.
Based on the record in front of the DRB, the DRB clearly provided uh Mr.
Krieger with due process.
They clearly observe the essential requirements of the law, and they clearly base their decision on substantial competent evidence, including staff recommendation, the extensive lengthy plans that are in this set on nearly 50 pages of detailed plans and all the testimony at the hearing.
Your job again is not to re-weigh this decision, not to say, well, look, we'll revisit it and maybe make a different choice.
The only question is could the DRB have properly legally made that choice?
And in our opinion, the answer is clearly yes.
I'm here for any questions, Mr.
Alexander.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, uh, honorable mayor and commissioners.
Justin Alexander, Assistant City Attorney, on behalf of the design review board.
I would respectfully request five minutes to present, if that's acceptable to the board.
Um the DRB respectfully requests that you affirm its order approving the design review application for 50 West Toledo.
Because the DRB uh afforded procedural due process to the petitioner, Mr.
Krieger.
This is so for three reasons.
First, the DRB afforded the petitioner a meaningful opportunity to be heard on October 23rd.
Second, the DRB fairly and impartially deliberated prior to rendering its decision.
And third, all ex parte communications were fully disclosed on the record at the beginning of the public hearing and are not prejudicial.
The petitioner claims he lacked a meaningful opportunity to be heard, but the but the record plainly reveals that the petitioner had exactly the amount of time he requested, five to eight minutes, plus significant additional time, speaking in colloquy with board members, making evidentiary objections, introducing evidence, and providing supplemental testimony, as well as cross-examining planning staff, it should be noted.
Neither the law of due process nor the city's resiliency code requires anything more for a meaningful opportunity.
And I'd just like to point out that on page uh 42 of the transcript at line five, Mr.
Riley requested five to eight minutes to uh to present, to which Vice Chair Diffendurfer, who was presiding over the hearing, said, I can give you five, to which Mr.
Riley responded, uh I'll speed through it some.
Now, five to eight minutes should have been plenty of time to get through his public comment.
Most uh uh most of the other public commenters only received about two minutes, uh, but he did uh go well in excess of that.
Um and additionally, any suggestion that there were arbitrary rules governing the hearing is simply belied by the fact that in the in the in the in the transcript, uh uh vice chair Diffendurfer and Deputy City Attorney Steve Rothstein controlled uh the time taken by public speakers at the hearing on no fewer than 13 separate occasions.
As to the fairness and impartiality of the hearing, the design review board fairly uh and properly applied every design review criterion set forth in section 2.5.3.1 of the resiliency code, uh, regardless of the petitioner's attempt to inject the settlement negotiations into the hearing, even though doing so was neither uh required by the code.
I'd like to reiterate something and correct something that Mr.
Riley said.
Neither the resiliency code nor the code of ordinances requires someone to disclose settlement negotiations between two private parties as part of a design uh uh a design review board application.
The disclosure requirement only applies to ex parte communications by board members.
And here that disclosure was properly made, as I'll explain shortly.
But the design review board repeatedly, uh Mr.
Diffendurfer and Ms.
Buttacavoli repeatedly said this is out of our purview.
This is out of our purview.
We don't want to discuss this and would would repeatedly try to redirect the conversation uh back toward the design issues properly jurisdictionally before the design review board.
Uh and in any event, the board speaks through its written order and the petitioners' request to try to attribute a few brief responsive comments uh to some grand uh uh bias or uh sensationalism that tainted the proceedings is simply contrary to the law.
There was simply uh no evidence that they were biased based on the um the settlement disclosure.
And also the transcript reveals that Ms.
Butacavoli never asked Mr.
Riley to disclose the settlement negotiations.
Um she may have asked other applicants at direct for other applications on the in during the public meeting, but not this one.
And finally, all of the ex parte communications uh that that uh Mr.
Diffendurfer and Ms.
Butta Cavoli engaged in were fully disclosed on the record and uh uh consistent with the requirements set forth by section two-five twelve of the the city code of ordinances.
And even if the petitioner could now raise some some defect with the disclosure, uh he waived that by not objecting contemporaneously at the hearing and by cross-examining those board members about the substance of those communications during the public hearing portion.
So that cannot be a basis on which uh the commission would reverse the design review board.
So in uh in light of the foregoing, the DRB respectfully requests that you affirm its order because due process of law was afforded.
Thank you.
Madam Voicemayor.
Commissioner Magazine.
Uh appreciated uh have two questions, and again, whether there was some sort of payment or negotiation, I don't think is in my purview, especially for this hearing, and I don't think it was in the DRB's purview uh as long as it was disclosed, and I don't see any evidence that any decision was made uh in relation to that.
So going on two things that the not the applicant, the appealant.
Yeah, the petitioner.
The petitioner uh mentioned.
And this is for the city attorney, you you talked about a lack of adequate uh time to speak publicly, which was five minutes as our city attorney said.
Uh I understand that the petitioner may uh be directly impacted.
And I guess I'll ask our city attorney if there is somebody at a public hearing, DRB or things like that, if they are directly impacted, does that give them more time, more right to public comment than anybody else?
So in this case, an immediate neighbor, no, the code does not provide for additional time.
Uh what happened here was that the board, I think, in recognition that this was the immediate neighbor, um, allowed Mr.
Riley additional time, but no, the code does not report.
So actually allowed him additional time.
Yes.
Didn't shrink his time.
And the second is you made a compelling argument with the lighting that was then again to a layperson compellingly rebutted.
Do you have a response to the rebuttal?
Uh thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Uh or Mr.
Commissioner.
Um, I just wanted to provide a very short reply.
There's only uh three items I wanted to address.
I'm gonna address the lighting uh first uh because uh you asked about it.
So the code requirement specifically states the following.
I want to read it verbatim because it's important.
Lighting shall be reviewed to ensure safe movement of persons and vehicles and reflection on public property for security purposes, and to minimize glare and reflection on adjacent properties, period.
Now, when he was mentioning that a lighting plan was issued, sort of trying to sort of a red herring, um, because even though they had a plan within their 51 pages that showed where floodlights and items were going to be, the question specifically to professional staff on city on the day is was did staff review a lighting plan for the glare and effect onto Mr.
Krieger's property?
The answer was no.
That none was provided, but they're talking about the photometrics and the photometric can be done at the time of building permit.
So it's it's convo trying to convolute a very simple question in my mind.
Um I'm going directly with how the uh code reads.
Um the I asked that specific question to staff, staff said no.
The second item I just wanted to bring up uh very quickly was on my time that I presented.
Um it was almost like today when there was a lot of discussion initially, but I didn't get to uh present the meats and potatoes.
That was all counted against me at that hearing.
And I never, like I mentioned, the easiest way for me to explain it, unless you watched it and had your own opinion, was that I had a very simple PowerPoint, and yeah, I did say I was gonna rush through it because I had like a minute they gave me love.
Um so, anyways, uh that's the one thing I want to mention on.
That was an ironic beep, Tommy.
Yeah, that's it.
And I'm done, and I'm done.
And uh I hope that answers your question.
Appreciate it.
Thank you.
I have a question.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Um, and perhaps someone can guide me as to whom I should direct this question to um so when it comes to DRB proceedings and this specific section of the code, um single family homes.
Are lighting plans uh always required of single family homes when they go before the design review board?
Even though you you cannot consider uh new testimony or evidence, I think that's a question that is best directed to the uh to the to the planning director, even if you're just asking for informational purposes.
Well, so perhaps I can ask the uh planning director.
Um on the record, page 71 of the transcript, uh, line 17 says for single family homes, we leave that as a condition that can be addressed as part of the building per uh process.
Do you agree with that statement that was made on the record on October 23rd, 2025?
Generally, lighting plans um are submitted um based upon, and this is generally based upon all DRB applications.
Um the detail of the lighting plan submitted um is based upon the type of development project.
In this particular instance, and again, I don't want to be in a position where I'm offering new testimony, but the testimony that was provided uh was accurate and I agree with it.
So so it is actually so when I'm reading here that says for single family homes, we leave that as a condition that can be addressed as part of the of the building permit process.
That is something that was stated on the record that was discussed at the design review board hearing that that is something that is done at the uh building permit process, and you agree with that record that was made uh at the board hearing.
Yes.
Okay.
All right.
And so and so and so for me that sat if that satisfies was there, was there any objection uh from from the board members of this being heard at the uh bill building permit processor objective?
No, the board though the board members that we appoint.
They the transcript shows no objection to Mr.
Madon's conclusion.
Okay.
And so I I would make a motion then to um uphold what was the uh second the uh ruling.
I mean, what I'm seeing here is that you know the allegation is that is that they didn't uh review lighting um, but but but the record states that it was discussed and was disclosed at the time of the hearing that this is something that is handled in the design review process.
The the board members that they had concerns with that they could have raised that concern, but it seems like they all agreed uh with the guidance of the of Rohelio Madon uh that our planning director does also you know supported.
So I I'd like to make the motion to uphold the ruling.
Yeah, and I think to that specific point, Commissioner, uh what were reviewing and what's in our purview is was there any answer that came out of that lighting that would have prevented the board of adjustment from making the decision or granting the waiver?
And to that I I see no evidence of that.
So I I agree with where you're going.
And to Commissioner Fernandez, who made the motion, may I suggest that the motion is to affirm based on a finding that the that the standard of review was satisfied, right?
That the board provided uh procedural due process, that the essential requirements of law were observed, and that the board's decision was supported by competent financial evidence.
So moved.
Second.
Can I just make one uh statement for the record?
Is that okay?
Um I just want to say for the record to make sure it's clear that the code requirement on the last on the lighting uh is specifically submitted for the DRB criteria, and to uh delegate that uh to the permit process leaves a neighboring property owners without a remedy.
So it makes up criteria meaningless.
So my only point.
But I I appreciate everybody's time.
Appreciate yours.
Thank you.
Okay, so I have a motion for from Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner Suarez.
All in favor, please say aye.
Aye.
Anyone opposed?
Hearing none, the item is approved 7-0.
Um Mr.
Krieger, thank you for your time and the amount of time you've spent here on Miami Beach and what you opened with.
I think a lot of us don't necessarily disagree with, but that's not what was in our purview here.
Thank you.
R7J.
R7J is accept recommendation modification to 63rd Street Bridge schedule.
Commissioner Bach.
Um, I'm going to make a motion to defer this item.
The Coast Guard has been on furlough, unfortunately, and so we don't have answers to some of the questions.
I very much appreciate the fact that you folks are here to speak.
I've received your letters.
I can assure you nobody's trying to make the waterways less safe for you.
I rode in high school.
I thought I would roll it brown, but I'm clearly too short to be of use.
Um, so I want to make sure it's safe for you, and I want to make sure that nothing um there are no unintended consequences.
As soon as we have some answers from the Coast Guard, I will share with you.
I have emails.
Um I will share with you what we're thinking.
I'm very eager to get your input once we have a plan moving forward.
But right now we don't have any new information.
Fair?
Um Mr.
Mayor, if you don't mind, I I think in that same thought, I think it's also important that we give direction to the city for any recommendations to the Coast Guard.
I'm sorry.
There's been a motion and second to defer.
We have had a community meeting.
We've taken a number of um uh phone calls and emails.
I think we have a very clear direction on what needs to happen next.
Well, I don't have a clear direction.
Well, did you were at the meeting?
You made presentations.
How do you nominate?
Yeah, but we don't, but staff doesn't have a clear direction to negotiate with the the Coast Guard.
I've been speaking to staff.
It's my item.
I have been speaking with staff.
We have very clear direction.
And if you would let me manage my item, I would appreciate it.
It's been deferred.
There's a motion and second, and as soon as we have more information, I will share it and we'll proceed accordingly.
Thanks.
Can we call the vote?
I'd still like to at least have five minutes to discuss this with our transportation director just to see if he can at least suggest some certain things to the Coast Guard.
It's just gonna take five minutes.
I have been working on this with the input from you and the community um residents and other involved parties that came to the community meeting.
And you're free to have a conversation with Jose on your own time.
But uh how is this that I'm not permitted to manage my own items?
No one's no one's changing what you can and can't negotiate with the Coast Guard.
I think it's just important that staff you know has some sort of direction for what to request from the Coast Guard.
We have the Browing Club here who took time out of their day for Mr.
Mayor.
That's uh procedure.
No for order because I I've asked Rick to give me procedure up.
Sure.
I mean, there's a motion in a second, so usually you would vote on on that.
So look, I I just I think it's important to have public input and and and consider alternatives from people who who are on the water every day.
Mr.
Mayor, if I may.
We've just been told the uh from the city attorney we have a motion a second, I gotta call the vote.
Call the vote.
So this is a motion to defer to April 22nd.
No.
Um what did we decide?
May or June?
I forget what we said, June, I think, to make sure they're back and we have time to exactly because deferring to the June meeting.
So the June meeting is June 24th.
Because of the motion to defer to June 24th.
I heard a motion by Commissioner Bott, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez.
All in favor of deferring R7J to June 24th, please say aye.
Anyone opposed?
Don't understand.
Hearing none, the item is deferred 7-0 to June 24th.
That was item R7J.
To the rowing club.
Sorry to if the if the sponsor would have let us everyone know that it was going to be deferred.
Um we you know, you wouldn't have had to wasted your time to come and to those who are watching, but you know, we're gonna we're gonna continue to make sure that whatever gets passed is not going to be detrimental to the safety on the water for you and your kids.
Clearly, that is never the intent, and that's not what's gonna happen.
You have my word.
Thank you, Commissioner.
Thank you.
R7 AE.
R7AE is a man model volleyball with electronic music concerts.
Move the item.
Second.
Oh, did want to say my daughter's been going here since she was three months old.
No discussion.
I'd like to discuss this.
Commissioner Suarez.
Okay, can staff present, please?
Good afternoon, Lisa Rogante, Director of Tourism and Culture.
Uh, we're presenting now the amendment of the model volleyball event uh before you.
They are requesting for this year to add um additional programming.
They're a long-standing grandfathered event.
They've been 15 years with the city of Miami Beach.
And for this year, they're proposing to add nighttime uh activations with DJs uh Saturday and Sunday until 11 p.m.
We did meet with them to bring down on Sunday night to 10 p.m.
Uh their activations.
Uh it will not be a tented event, it's out in the open uh as part of our special event permitting process.
They do have to receive approvals from state.
Um it's reviewed internally from all departments, including environment and sustainability, and we're going through that process right now.
And just in terms of the volume, uh when we had the college football concert, which I actually thought was awesome, excellent.
I had three generations, my family there.
Uh we did get complaints that the music was loud.
I'm going to guess that that event was for 70,000 people and it was professionally produced by some of the biggest event producers in the world.
We're not talking even in the same ballpark is the decibel level that will be emanated, especially on a Sunday evening.
Any event has to adhere to the noise or the county and the city might be beach noise ordinance that's uh starts at 11 p.m.
However, uh if any noise is heard within a hundred feet, they would have to adjust that or even be shut down.
So that that applies to any event any time of the day.
So I guess what I'll say is I'll place my trust in you all.
However, I'm guessing you don't want this to be a one and done type thing, right?
So there's no coming back next year and going, ah, I'm sorry we didn't realize something.
If you mess up, you mess up, and we're not having this discussion next year.
So take it as you will.
Let's be respectful.
Let's manage this perfectly because it's not a second chance opportunity.
Let's really get this right from the get-go.
So what when is the event?
I'm sorry?
When would the event take place?
The event is taking place Saturday, April 18th and Sunday, April 19th.
Of this year?
Correct.
Okay.
And is there any proposal for the following year?
This is an annual event, so they they technically do come every year for the last 15 years.
Okay.
Uh my look, my only concern is turtle nesting season, right?
Uh with lights.
And you know, I had a brief discussion with Amy.
Is there any way to mitigate the lights on the beach?
Absolutely, through the turtle ordinance, they would have to uh adjust and have a lighting plan.
Uh most events end at 9 p.m.
during that time.
So it's going through the process now.
We're waiting.
We would wait to see what the state um would require of this event in order for them to be to adhere to the turtle ordinance.
Is that Amy, if you don't mind, if is this something that your department is going to work with, Alyssa on making sure that it is total compliant?
Yes, we will, Commissioner.
Um our our ordinance, which we updated in October of 2024 has some very specific requirements um for any events in the evening.
Um first it says they have to have a permit or an exemption from the state, and then any lighting associated with the event cannot be visible from the beach after 9 p.m.
And any authorized lighting must be low wattage long wavelength light source shielded and directed away from the beach.
So we have an expectation that it would be very low light, that there would be shielding, and that it would not be causing an impact.
Is this on the beach?
Yes, it's on the beachfront.
So how do how do you wrangle those two?
It's on the beach, so obviously there's gonna be light.
Yeah.
I mean, the whole goal is to minimize the situation.
But it is something that the state may allow, so our ordinance minimum minimizes it as much as possible.
Okay, well, I mean I hope I hope it's minimized.
I'm a big turtle fan, so you know, just make sure that we can you know minimize the amount of light pollution, even if it and it's from till what time?
11 o'clock?
9 p.m.
is our nine pm.
9 p.m.
But they just said a lot of the the application that they've submitted is until 11 p.m.
So when is it gonna go to?
I'm sorry.
So when would it go to?
It would go depending on what the state recommends.
So the if the state recommends 9 p.m., they would have to end at 9 p.m.
Can we recommend as the city 9 p.m.?
Absolutely.
We can.
Our ordinance recommends that the light be minimized after 9 p.m.
Any lights have to be sea turtle friendly and not not visible.
That's I'll move it as amended.
Till nine o'clock.
You're going to get more strictly days.
Okay.
Rick?
Can we tell the question?
I didn't hear the answer.
I'd like to make a I'd like to make a uh an amendment to make sure that the event ends at 9 o'clock.
That would be um, I mean, this is approving the the event, but that would be up to the the special event permit to reduce the hours, right?
So motion that's amended.
And just to be clear, what is the amendment?
Because I want staff to the amendment is to qualify the special event permit so that the music ends at 9 o'clock.
Okay.
And I do believe that the ordinance as it's currently drafted says that the event has to be concluded and any loadout that happens that evening has to be concluded as well.
So if they're gonna load out that night, that would have to start before nine.
Or they would need to load out the next day.
I uh I would say the the event should end at nine.
If we we say that the loadout has to happen by nine, then might as well not give them any approval.
Is then we're you know, just effectively just destroying the event.
Yeah.
I'm a little I'm a little uncomfortable having an event on the beach till 11 o'clock.
And then coupled with the fact that it is sea turtle nesting season.
Right.
You know, we have a code that says end at 9 o'clock loaded.
And the reason why we have load and load out is because trucks come on the beach, right?
With their headlights, they could run over a sea turtle.
We don't want that uh right, but they can load out the following morning.
Correct, correct.
So what I was just gonna say is typically our event has run from 12 to 8 p.m.
What we were asking for was to get a couple more hours into the evening.
This was the first last week that we heard about sea turtles, and we're not trying to do anything that is against what city needs to happen in that scenario.
So I think um we were asked to move the event on Sunday to 10 p.m.
and we said that was no problem, and we don't load out um until Monday.
So it's not an issue for us, and we don't do any interchangeable loadouts between Saturday and Sunday.
So what you're saying is you would end at nine and then load out the next day, leave everything as is, and then if that's what we need to do, if you're requesting at 9 p.m., yeah.
Yeah.
Well, we've been told through our production who's produced hundreds of events on Miami Beach, Josh Blaze, we've worked with for 15 years.
Um they did events in April last year, and they use amber lighting.
And so um that is something we've taken kind of seriously.
That was the protocol we were told that we could put into place that has been successful in the past.
Let me ask you this.
If since since the loadout is happening the following day, I then I feel comfortable with the schedule.
Because my concern is would have been okay, if it ends at 10 o'clock, and then at 10 o'clock they do the loadout.
We're clearly have concerns with that, but based on what's being stated on the record, that the loadout is going to happen the following day at a time that it's not going to conflict with our code as it relates to the sea turtles.
Then I'm comfortable with the schedule as was presented in the agenda item, which is what nine o'clock or eleven o'clock?
Sunday would be 10 p.m.
Sunday would be 10 p.m.
Well, well, there's gonna be light after nine o'clock, and then our code says after nine o'clock, there's not supposed to be light on the beach.
But what I'm saying is instead of having to end at eight o'clock and have an hour of loading time where they have to shut off an hour later.
What they're saying is they'll they'll end the show and then load out the next day during the day where they don't have to have trucks on the beach with the lights on, um, possibly making disruptions.
So in if I could oh sorry, go ahead.
Uh Commissioner Mateo Salinas has been asking.
So I um, you know, how long have you been planning the concert?
So we first brought up the fact that we wanted to do this back in August with with our staff, correct.
And were you ever told about C Turtles back in August and about until the first week of March?
So I do I do feel for you guys.
I mean, you have a concert less than a month away, and here we are telling you you have to reduce the hours by two hours.
I I don't think that's fair to you.
Um and I'd like to at least allow you guys to have the concert till 10 p.m.
at the very least, and I respect the sea turtles, but you really should have been told this.
You've been promoting this, right?
I mean, I think I've seen ads and you've been selling tickets for this, and so you know, I I don't want to pull the rug out from under you with less than a month from your event.
So I actually would like you to be able to have your concert till 11 p.m.
If I don't get the support for my colleagues, maybe 10 p.m.
But I think 9 p.m.
is just unfair to you.
I think we're nice that staff didn't tell you that.
So with that, I will withdraw my motion and support what you're proposing.
Not the turtle soup kitchen, electric.
Um would there be appetite uh for 9 p.m.
on Sunday?
Right?
And then we could go till the proposed time that we had originally on Saturday, which is fine.
Yeah, so Saturday right now as it stands was 12 p.m.
to 11 p.m.
And then Sunday we were asked to go from 11 p.m.
to 10 p.m.
just last week.
So yeah, like 9:30, even something like that.
Yeah, I mean, typically this event has always ended at 8.
So, like with this request originally and trying to do something a little bit different, and you know, the VCA's given us a big um worded grant for this exact moment.
So we want to be able to pull through on all home fronts.
And I mean is this mitigated?
Is the amber lights does that provide sufficient mitigation using Amber Lights?
If they do it properly, that is the the goal of the ordinance that the light is minimized so that it's not visible, that the light is shooting downwards, it's shielded, um, not visible from the beach.
And so it's a tall order, you know, for a for a concert.
Um, this has been in place since 2024 in October.
And you'll be there to or guide them and help them.
Code will be, you know, that's part of their that's part of their job.
I mean, I I'm out there often as well, but it it is um it is a tall order.
Um and we we we anticipate that if they're on the beach after nine that they would need to comply.
How come Lissad?
How come you didn't tell them about the sea turtle?
I mean, maybe maybe explain correct yourself a little bit.
Uh especially experienced producers that we have on the beach.
So it's not a new uh turtle turtle or they so they knew.
They should know.
Their producers should be aware.
We did have a conversation with them.
It wasn't until February 6th that they emailed us with announcing the details of what they were planning to do.
When did you respond to that email?
It's a good idea.
I we reviewed it internally, if I may, and then we scheduled a meeting to discuss with them and have a conversation about.
Are you going to have a tent because you're doing a concert until 11 o'clock at night?
Are you gonna are you willing to go down?
People work, there are residents in that area.
So Sunday till 11 was something that I didn't feel was feasible.
So we had a conversation with them after we reviewed internally.
We permit over 600 special event permits a year.
So we also had to take our time to review everything else as well.
Not it's not you know you understand our workload.
And so you tell me that we haven't we took us a month, we are reviewing a lot of permits.
I think it's really hard to find.
I don't think that it's fair.
Listen, I understand you you have a lot on your plate.
But at a bare minimum, you know, we just passed a law in 2024 specifically for sea turtle lighting.
How come it wasn't explained to model volleyball that look nine o'clock is the last last hour?
Sure.
So if I may, when they go through the process, this gets presented to the state as well as we review internally.
We have been reviewing those uh details of their event that they submitted last month.
And so once the state reviews is what I said at the beginning of this of this item, the state will then return and give feedback on what they need to do to do the amber lighting to be able to do that.
But forget about the state.
I'm just simply saying our own code, the code that we pass.
The code says it has to be minimized, doesn't say that they can't have any lighting at all.
And I I defer to my colleague who's more versed in this.
But what I'm saying to you is that the ordinance at the way that it's written does not preclude them from having an event with lighting.
It just has to be minimized and it has to follow what Amy stated.
Sure, but let me ask the event producer.
Was any of this relay to you?
No.
No.
But they they're they're not the ones who are pulling the permit.
The person who's pulling the permit, the producer is not here today who can't speak for himself, but he knows and he pulled the permit for the event that they mentioned the year prior, so he understands.
He also mentioned to us that he did other events in April in the late hours of the evening.
Following the following the same uh recommendations from the state and from the city.
Hi, Olivia.
By the way, Livia and I went to high school together.
Elementary.
Elementary school together.
Let's get it right.
Sorry, Louis.
Any stories you want to share, Libya.
No, we're not.
I don't know, David.
We could go to midnight if you share the right stories.
Like who wants my best.
Listen, I just look, you know, it's a soft spot for me.
It was a soft spot for Mark, uh, Semeleon, you know, of the sea turtles.
Um I just want to make sure that there's no there's no disruptions because you know, we we we have you know, the last thing you guys want us also see is a sea turtle get like run over or crushed.
You know, like it's not it's not something that you want, it's not something that we want to deal with.
Um but so at any event, is it possible to really like I don't know, put curtains on the side?
Because it's hard for me to fathom a concert on the sand without you know without lights spilling over.
I mean I think that what we plan to do is everything that we're still we need to do.
Like whatever the guidelines that are put in place are there from the state.
Like we're not here to go against any guidelines.
That's why we've had a perfect track record for 15 years.
And this event has historically never had an arrest, never had a shutdown.
The police are behind us, the VCA's behind us.
They police even play in this tournament.
Like everyone loves this event.
And it's been the same exact event for 15 years.
And we're gonna be able to do that.
This is a little different, obviously, right?
I mean, yeah, we're trying to do something a little bit different this year, and we've been really transparent about that from the beginning.
And then we want to reward good good actors.
We're not gonna we don't want to give you a reason to not have us come back.
Like we're trying to do everything right, and we're here to be transparent on anything that we're planning.
Okay, well, look, I'm gonna be there.
I'm gonna make sure that I'll be there to participate, and I'll make sure that the lights.
I'll make sure that you know I would hope that our sustainability director is also there to assess the situation.
Um, I mean, listen, we're grateful to be still standing 15 years later on this beach, and we're not here to jeopardize anything for that going forward.
Commissioner Mateo Salinas.
So I just want to um suggest that, you know, and Lissette, you have a lot on your plate and you do a great job you do in your department.
You know, you there's so many events, especially in in this time frame, but I do want to encourage, you know, so that it does and similar events don't get to this.
What's the better way?
What's the better conduit?
Um, you know, why isn't the three points guy person here?
You know, how you know I'm not sure why it is you know.
So I just wish the communication would go a little bit smoother so that way you're not caught off guard, you're not caught off guard, no one's caught off guard.
Absolutely.
And it all depends also on how soon we receive the information.
So we could talk about it for six months, but until we receive confirmed information in writing, then we can't move forward.
Yeah, I mean, it's obviously really challenging for us to stop everything to wait to get a response when we're planning an event that is approaching very quickly.
So we uh we try to keep every update as as best as possible, and let's add I think you can you know vouch that we have been transparent across the board.
There's no um and you know, I sent along every DJ we were planning to have there, the the marketing plan, everything, and unfortunately they're have busy schedules and they didn't get back to us for 30 days.
That's not correct, if I may 30 days.
The 30 days, yes.
But it's because you're reviewing internally, not because of the city.
But I can't stop every I can't stop everything for 30 days.
There was an issue I would yeah, let's not go back and forth.
You're gonna let's not go back and forth.
I'm just glad we're at a good place now because I do think that this is successful event and I you know wish you the best of luck with the concert.
And um that's uh all I have to say.
I think we do have a motion on the floor.
I'd like to move the item.
Actually, the motion was withdrawn by Commissioner Fernandez, so I don't we could clarify the hours, please, just because there's been a lot of back and forth.
Yeah, I don't know.
I don't have a motion yet.
I was gonna stuck in your motion, Commissioner Montes.
One one last question, Mr.
Mayor.
Commissioner Suarez.
Someone someone's asking, is is the speaker's gonna be pointing uh west or east or east, east.
Okay, so away.
As part of the meeting that we had.
And that's yeah, we've we've we've sound waves.
We've done that everyone.
Yeah, we've we've done that every every year.
Yeah.
Um so I'd like to make a motion that model volleyball, your event and your concert series can can uh proceed.
Uh Saturday night, 11 p.m., Sunday night.
Did you say 9 p.m., Commissioner Magazine?
Or 9 30.
I mean, this is just I think we can just give them I think if we can go till 10 and then make sure we're gonna be able to do that.
I think we can give them what they ask for.
This is gonna be a first.
I'm gonna be there.
A lot of us are gonna be there.
Um if there is a concern about lighting, you know, I mean, there's you know, you you guys put your best foot forward.
And if if if it looks like this is fine, you know, I'm I'm I don't see how it's gonna be fine, but I'm willing to be open-minded and see how this works out.
Um and then you know, we'll assess the next year.
Sounds great.
You know, I want to just uh put it on the record.
The importance of us being there are these events that we're voting on.
Um by the way, I'm sorry I wasn't able to be a lot of Palooza, but I for the fitness competition, but I had to be at a wedding at the same time.
The mayor and I were at a wedding at the same time.
Um but yeah, separately did you see the competition that Commissioner Suarez and I have.
You know, you gave Commissioner Suarez a run, you know, on those push-ups.
Um, we're put in the position constantly about having to vote on events, and events that oftentimes, you know.
We can't even step foot in them to understand what it is that we're approving or not approving and the impacts that they're causing and the back of house and the noise and the lighting and the sanitation and the flow of traffic and everything that goes along with approving these things.
We need to do a better job in making sure because it's hard for us to vote on these things and then be told, oh, well, yeah, no, you can't step foot there because of of of whatever reason.
Well, how can we vote on stuff that we have to make decisions on if we're not able to experience what we're voting on?
I mean, it it's it really is important for us to be able to understand these events when we're voting on them.
In the past I've attended uh model volleyball, and I know the caliber of the event, how good it is for for the city, the uh the the amount of athletes and and the and the amount of partnerships that you have, and really it does elevate our city, and that gives me confidence in voting for this because I've been there, I've experienced it.
I know to trust you as a good partner for our city that's gonna protect our environment, it's gonna protect our businesses, that's gonna protect our our residents.
But I just say it, Mr.
Manager, because you know, when we just need to keep that in mind because a lot of times these items do come before us, and it's hard to, you know, out of thin air or say, yeah, I'm gonna support this or not.
When we really don't experience them, we don't experience the challenges or how it's good or how it's bad a lot of times.
So I just you know want to put it out there for for the record.
Commissioner, I and I would like the record to reflect and also send to my girlfriend I I will be attending model volleyball on official city capacity.
So thank you.
And by the way, think about it.
By the way, you reached out by the way, and for example, with future proof.
You've reached out, you said you know, if people want to experience future proof, um, but I think you know that should have been through the city.
That outreach should have been through the city for us to understand what it is that we're voting on, what we're supporting, and you were very kind to have reached out and made sure that we all felt welcomed.
Um, but that really should needs to be coming from the from the administration.
We need to make sure that we experience these things because the worst thing also a lot of times is that then we have elected officials from other jurisdictions who are there who tell us about it, who tell us, oh, I didn't see you there.
And it's like, oh well, sorry, you know, however, you know, we can't be there.
Yet we have to vote on it, and it's hard to explain to our residents, you know, then why why we don't know the impacts of something.
We'd be really excited to have all of you there.
Yeah, we would welcome all of you with open rooms.
Yeah.
Yeah, and I I try to make every event.
I often I often do get uh invited to come sometimes speak uh at events, though.
Yeah, but those will make their way down to us, and I think that's it's somehow that needs to be addressed.
And I agree, Commissioner, we do um sometimes have challenges with events that the city doesn't sponsor because they're not obligated to provide tickets, but we have been asking um the promoters that are doing those kind of events to provide opportunities for our electeds to show.
Um I was under the impression that future proof was reaching out, um, and I'm hearing that they did not, so that that's frustrating.
And I'm grateful to my colleague, you know, who did reach out in a very collegial manner uh to make sure, but you know, next year we're gonna have to vote on on something relating to that again, and how do I make a decision when I'm not able to see the impacts and experience the impacts?
It puts us in a very difficult position.
And and Mr.
Mayor?
Commissioner Suarez, and let's call and call the vote.
So moving forward so that we're not put putting our vendors in these positions.
Can can we put in writing that during sea turtle nesting season if there's really no more things that can impact this orientation that for example after nine o'clock, you have to be out and done.
Yeah, Commissioner, we would have to amend our ordinance to do that, um, which the commission could do that.
Um but right now the ordinance basically says after nine, you have to have the minimized lighting, the sea turtle compliant lighting.
That's how it currently stands.
Okay, well, I guess we'll see how it goes.
Can you can you help explain the that amendment in terms of what the lighting is after that?
Yeah, do you see how like you see how this is this is that's a perfect example of of one hand not to be able to do that?
Yeah, that's fine.
Yeah, all right.
I mean, they don't even know what the what the minimization is.
Josh does does know he's he's produced last year in April.
Uh he is our lead on production.
Um and we've we've already had conversations with that team as well.
So I have a motion.
Oh, sorry, I don't mean to cut you off.
We got to move it and it's an important conversation, but as soon as I have a motion from my mayor uh Matteo Salinas, as is and I I thought I heard a second from Commissioner for Okay, so I'm gonna do Commissioner Magazine as is.
All in favor of R7A as is, please say aye.
All right.
Anyone opposed?
Hearing none, the item is approved.
Olivia?
Yes, um, they get your names.
Can you both introduce yourself?
Of course.
Olivia Urmos and this is Michael Malone.
Thank you.
All right, thank you all so much.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
Looking forward.
Call R7B.
R7B is a public hearing approved for rainbow crosswalk replica.
R7B.
I move the item.
Second.
Let's call the vote.
The second was Commissioner Blatt.
It is a public hearing.
I see no one on Zoom, and I see no one in the audience requesting to speak.
All in favor of R7B, please say aye.
Aye.
Anyone opposed?
Hearing none, R7B is approved 7-0.
Thank you, colleagues.
Thank you, Commissioner Fernandez.
Well, I'm sorry, I know uh maybe one of the city attorneys reached out.
I don't think I had a chance to get back to them if you could add me as a co-sponsor that.
Thank you, Commissioner Magazine.
Thank you for the opportunity.
I always say it I we are strong because of our allies, and you all are incredible allies.
So thank you.
Thank you.
R7W.
R7W is waive rental fee use of Pride Park on April 4th, 2026.
R7W.
I move the item.
Let's call the vote.
It's R7W.
I have heard a motion for Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by uh Vice Mayor Mateo Salinas on R7W.
All in favor, please say aye.
Aye.
Anyone opposed?
Hearing none.
R7W is approved 7-0.
R5O.
R5O is an order to the mayor city commission of City of My Beach Fort accepting a five on a 5-7th vote after holding a duly noticed public hearing.
The recommendation of the public safety and neighborhood quality of life committee at its February 19th meeting, amending chapter 82 of the code of the city of Maya Beach entitled public property by amending Article 6 entitled naming of public facilities and establishment revivements or memorials by amending section 82-503 thereof.
To provide additional criteria and procedures for the co-naming of streets and providing for sunset provisions, there are four, providing for repealers of ability qualification and an effective date.
This is a first reading of the public hearing and it's item R50.
I move the item.
Call the vote.
One second.
It is a public hearing.
I see no one on Zoom, and I see no one in the audience requesting to speak on R5O.
I heard a motion by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner Bott.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Yes.
Vice Mayor Mattel Salinas.
Yes.
Commissioner Dominguez.
Yes.
Commissioner Bott.
Yes.
Commissioner Magazine.
Yes.
Suarez.
Yes.
Mayor Minor.
Yes.
Motion carries.
Second reading public hearing is on April 22nd.
That was item R5O.
R7K.
R7K is authorized expansion of Forever Proud Lighthouse Banner Program R7K.
I moved the item.
I separated that.
Commissioner Suarez.
Okay.
We currently have a proposal before us to expand the Forever Light Pole banners as a way to firm inclusion, support a community that has faced discrimination and enhance the vibrancy of the Art Deco Cultural District.
I support that concept.
And I believe we should apply that same framework to an idea that I have.
And along 10th Street from Washington Avenue to Loomis Park.
For me, it comes down to visibility, safety, and consistency.
It's not about foreign policy, it's about standing with our Jewish community.
At a moment when anti-Semitism is rising, including very fresh incidents that we've seen here in Miami Beach.
Jewish leadership helped build this city.
If we're willing to use public space to visibly support one community facing hostility, we should do the same for another.
Inclusion isn't just what we say, it's what we show.
And Mime Beach should be clear.
So with that, uh I'd like to see if my colleagues are okay with also including Israeli flags around the Wilsonian, especially with what's been going on in the world, almost what seems like on a daily basis, uh of anti-Semitism.
I am fully supportive.
Thank you for bringing it up, uh, Commissioner Suarez.
And Mr.
Mayor and I'll say I would love to join you in that.
Uh, I believe it was before October 7th when uh Israel was celebrating its 75th anniversary.
I have brought an item to the city commission to display the Israeli flag in celebration of Israel in celebration of our Jewish community.
Um, and at the time the item was pulled.
Uh I didn't have support to move forward uh with with that item.
Uh but I share the sentiment it's it's important.
Uh I tried to do that very same thing for the 75th anniversary of uh of Israel, realizing that we're all communities to have a target on our backs, sadly.
And unfortunately, though, we wait to react uh after events like October 7th happens to display our our our support.
uh with with with that item uh but i share the sentiment it's it's important uh i tried to do that very same thing um for the 75th anniversary of of uh of of israel realizing that we're all communities that have a target on our backs sadly and unfortunately though we wait to react uh after events like october 7th happens to display our our our support no we need to show our strength always we need to show that we stand with with with with the people of Israel and with jewish people um uh after october 7th but before october 7th happens um we need to show that we stand with the LGBTQ community uh as they were rising uh through progress but now that they're being pushed into the shadows now more than ever we need to do that we need to do it with a Hispanic community that that and immigrants in general that were embraced and have been hugged and have been part of the beautiful history of our country but now they face the target of them being the enemy and being put into inhumane conditions uh in in in in place places like alligator alcatraz and and and and others these are the people that have always been a part of our community that we have always celebrated and elevated and that slowly our society has placed a target on them and put them face push them back into the shadows to justify all the evil actions that are being done towards them uh from legislators on all the way down and so and so it's 100% consistent with what I tried to do years ago I wish you would have been on the dais back then to have supported me at that time and I'm proud to support you now as you take the lead and charge on that thank you so um thank you Commissioner Fernandez uh Commissioner Dominguez I have a question for the city attorney um wasn't there an ordinance that prevented flying foreign flags in the city and that's why yeah I I want to look into the we do have some uh in the LDRs uh some restrictions on flags so my office is gonna look into whether doing this would require an amendment to uh the LDRs because it sounds like there's support for the item so if there is a need for an amendment we will prepare something thank you so all the vote as amended as amended yes we have a 100% yep okay we have to remember that when one group is being attacked the same people who are attacking the LGBTQ community are the same people who are going to attack Jewish people and the same people who are attacking Jewish people are the same people who are gonna who are who are going after Hispanics and who are going after other immigrant groups and who are going after the black community it is just a systematic intolerance against all of us regardless of what the group is called is anyone who is not like them is not welcomed it's not supported even they were saying um someone someone was even saying the procession of the Eucharist that's done during Holy Week in many in many communities is anti-American how dare they how how dare they say that the procession of the Eucharist is anti-American you know and so and so and so this is the target that we're facing now and this isn't and I love that we're doing this together because the LGBTQ community and the Jewish community have always been allies and have always been in the same fight in a parallel path supporting each other and that's the vision that I love that when we are in a parallel path supporting each other and pushing back against the hate that is targeting all of us.
That same hate the hate against gays is the hate against Jews it's a hate gay the hate against immigrants is a hate against blacks against anyone that is not you know a white christian in this in this country and we need to push hard against that hate.
Mr city attorney if maybe to correct not flags but we're gonna have banners Israeli yeah I understand that we're gonna look into the star of David it doesn't necessarily have to be the flag if it's just the star of David that's not the flag that's that's that would not require an amendment.
Well Mr Mayor I don't know um I I I want to see I'd like to see Israeli flags as a as a banner right yeah I don't think we should start changing the flag personally no I mean if it you could it's not a flag it's like symbol to represent the it's gonna be on a banner just right like any other we're gonna look into whether we need to amend the code if we don't we absolutely won't do it.
Good okay so a motion by Commissioner Fernandez seconded by Commissioner Suarez as amended all in favor please say aye.
Aye anyone opposed R7K is approved 70 as amended.
Thank you Mr.
Mayor and thank you colleagues I have a great sense of notches very good knock us.
It's not you either know it or you don't, man.
It's not this.
Alex is learning a little unish.
Thank you all.
R5P.
Commissioner Fernandez.
R5P is an order to the Mayor City Commission of the City of Madame Beach Florida, amending the Manu Beach Resiliency Code, amending chapter two entitled Administration and Review Procedures.
Article 5 entitled Rezoning and Redevelopment Approval, Section 2.5.3.
Entitled Design Review set with subsection 2.5.3.3 thereof.
Entitled Administrative Design Review to extend the planning director's authority to administrative review of eligible temporary surface parking lots by amending Article 13 entitled Historic Preservation Section 2.1 2.13.7 thereof and title issuance of certificate of appropriateness certificate to dig certificate of appropriateness for demolition to expand administrative review authority for temporary surface parking lots and providing for codification repeal servability and an effective date.
R5 P is a first reading public hearing.
It requires five sevens vote.
I move the item.
Second.
If you could maybe just want to commit an overview, and where I'm at with this uh I think it's good administrative review.
I hate surface parking lots.
I think they're the worst absolute land use that we can have, especially as we're trying to make a more walkable, vibrant city.
Um I get that they're uh a necessary means, especially as uh development projects may be coming underway, um, especially as we're in a housing crisis.
I'd much rather see people living as opposed to cars being parked.
Um so the one thing I want to be cognizant of is that we're not just allowing these forever covered land pleas.
Um that essentially remove the incentive or as much of an incentive to create much needed workforce and attainable housing because a lot of uh these surface parking lots are in the exact areas where we could probably have some housing development that would be in line for attainable and affordable housing.
So, Commissioner, what this ordinance basically does is it allows for administrative design review of surface parking lots where they're currently permitted.
So, right now, if you're in a commercial district, whether you're inside a historic district or outside an historic district, in most instances, if you want to do a temporary surface parking lot, you would need to go before the design review board or historic preservation board.
What this ordinance does is it allows it.
Yeah, okay, allows for administrative.
Now, all the other requirements, landscaping, surfaces, everything else, have to be complied with.
They just wouldn't have to go to all the annuals.
Got it.
Thank you, Tom.
I move the item.
I have a motion, a motion for Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner Suarez.
It is a public hearing.
I have one person in Zoom requesting to speak.
Uh call in user 10.
Please state your name.
You have two minutes.
And are you calling on R5P?
Good afternoon.
Yes.
Matthew Ball Pan off, 125 Jefferson Avenue.
I am calling about this first reading.
Uh I just want to call in and concerns about making it easier to build surface parking lots as it's already been expressed by members of the commission.
Surface parking lots are the least desirable use, uh, land use for land in a uh urban environment.
And this may very well be um the wrong direction.
I'll remind everyone that the site uh the fifth and all things tower was a surface parking lot for many years.
Uh it fell into disrepair, some people said and had uh a number of uh questionable um it was taken care of in in ways which was not great for the community.
Um ended up leading to a tower, of course, that's over 500 feet.
I just want to call and uh share my concern about uh making it easier to build surface parking lots in our urban environment.
Thank you.
There's no one else, so the public hearing is closed.
May I call the roll?
Yes.
Seconded by Commissioner Suarez.
Uh Commissioner Fernandez.
Yes.
Commissioner Suarez.
Yes.
Commissioner Dominguez.
Yes.
Commissioner Magazine.
Yes.
Vice Mayor Matil Salinas.
Yes.
Commissioner Bach?
Yep.
Mayor Minor.
Yes.
Uh here.
There we go.
Uh second reading public hearing is scheduled for April 22nd.
The item passes on first reading, R5P.
R5R.
Thank you, Tom.
Tom, I hope you saved that tape from before about your uh use that for your resume for your resume.
R5R is in order to the mayor city commissioner of the City of Valley Beach, Florida, and the code of the City of Mayor Beach, subpart B and Title Bammy Beach Resiliency Code by Amending Chapter 7 and Title Zoning Districts and Regulations, Article 2, Entitled District Regulation, Section 7.2.2 and Title R S1, R S2, RS3, R is 4.
Single Family Residential Districts are modifying the two story house standards specific to open space requirements for side elevations of single family homes and providing for codification repealer servability and effective date.
This is a first reading public hearing.
The item requires five sevenths vote.
It is R5R.
Commissioner Suarez.
Thank you, Mr.
Mayor.
Tom, if you can leave the commission on what this is intended to be.
Sure.
Um this is actually a very simple amendment to Chapter 7 of the LDRs.
Currently, when people are building new single family homes that are greater than 60 feet in length that are two stories in height, they're required to provide a minimum amount of extra side yard open space.
And so if they meet the minimum setbacks, this requires minimum dimension notches.
What this particular ordinance does is it updates and clarifies where that open space can be located in order to simplify it, allow it to be better used, and to hopefully uh improve the an expedite both the ability of an architect to design the space as well as for it to go through the permitting process.
It doesn't make any reductions to the amount of open space, but uh but but rather uh simplifies the requirements and allows for a redistribution of it.
And the administration and the planning board are supportive of it.
Mr.
Mayor?
Commissioner Bach.
Tom, can you explain why it was originally crafted the way it was?
If there was an intent for there to be the space along the sides of the house as opposed to anywhere within the lot?
Yeah, the the this was actually originally drafted um back in the mid-2000s, and the intent is the same as today, and substantively it remains the same as it was when it was drafted.
And this is so that if you have a home that's uh two stories in height that's longer than six feet, sixty feet in length, you don't have a solid blank wall.
And so that was the whole purpose of that requirement.
The amendments here maintain that requirement.
They just provide more flexibility in terms of uh the shape of that open space, where it can be located, um, and how it can be used and what the elevation of that space is.
But substantively, it will still require that you break up those long expanses of two-story elevations.
So how would that how would that um maintain the requirement to break up the uniform facade if the space can be relocated with on within the lot itself?
Well, it when I say relocated, you can do it in multiple locations.
So under the ordinance, the additional open space shall be at least four feet in depth, and then we've added a requirement that it be at least four feet in width.
And it must equal one percent of the lot area.
So if somebody wants to do one large open space, that's at least one percent of the lot area, they would have the option of doing one large cutout somewhere along that side elevation, or they could do multiple cutouts.
Um either one would address the requirement to break up that elevation.
Currently, uh under the code, it requires a depth of at least eight feet, which has proven to be challenging.
We think that by reducing that, but having a minimum width will allow for more variety in terms of how this is actually applied to new homes.
And is there any requirement for what it has to be, whether it could be pavers or a swimming pool or green space in terms of um uh sustainability and water absorption?
Yeah, at least 50 percent of the open space area has to be either pervious landscape area or some type of water feature.
There wouldn't be enough room to get a swimming pool in there, um, but at least 50 percent of that area.
Now, um if they only do 50 percent, that doesn't reduce the total amount of pervious area and lot coverage that would be required in the home, and it wouldn't affect the minimum open space requirements in the front or the rear yard, as this is in the side yard.
Okay, so the total would be the same, it just might not be on the sides.
It would the this is specific to the sides, and the total would be the same.
It's just that you may see multiple locations of this as to as opposed to say one big one.
Yeah, it just gives more flexibility to homeowners and architects.
Yeah.
I'd like to move my item.
Call the vote.
It is a public hearing.
I see no one in Zoom and no one in the audience requesting to speak.
I have a motion by Commissioner Suarez, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez.
Uh Commissioner Magazine.
Yes.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Yes.
Commissioner Suarez.
Yes.
Yes.
Commissioner Dominguez.
Yes.
Vice Mayor Bateo Salinas.
Yes.
Mayor Minor.
Yes.
Motion carry second reading public hearing is scheduled for April 22nd.
That was item R5R.
R5W.
R5W is an order to the mayor, so the commissioner of City of Maya Beach, Florida.
Amending Chapter 10 of the Code of the City of May Beach entitled Animals by amending section 10-2 thereof and titled fines for violations of animal control and ordinance on paid fines to constitute lien and basis for revocation of city parking permits decal by amending and identifying those sections of the city code to which the generally the general penalty provision set forth in section 10-2 do not apply.
And by amending section 10-11 thereof and titled running at large prohibited exceptions by providing enhanced civil penalties for animals running at large and providing for repealers of ability qualification and effective date.
This is a first reading public hearing.
It is item R5W.
Commissioner Bott.
Yeah, um, so this sort of came to a head recently with a really unfortunate incident with a child getting mauled by a dog.
Um I am a rescue dog lover.
I have rescue dogs, I have had rescue dogs.
This is not an anti-dog uh provision.
This is an anti-irresponsible owner's provision.
Um we have, you know, the worst case example, which is the child who got mauled by this dog.
We have other examples of neighbors who refuse to keep their dogs on leashes when they're taking them out for a walk and letting the dog evacuate all over the neighbor's yards without cleaning up.
Um no matter how well trained a dog might be, um, at the end of the day, dogs are still animals and they can have a bad day like everybody else can.
And um, you know, by having them off leash, that just sets up a situation where somebody can get hurt.
Um, and I don't think that's necessary.
Um I think uh in a congested city like ours, we need to respect the fact that we share space and um this just makes it safer for everybody.
So with that I'd like to move the item.
Uh I'd like to make a comment.
Commissioner Suarez.
Uh the only issue I have with this is you know, I I take my dogs to South Point Park.
And sometimes, you know, South Point Park, there's no gates.
Um and sometimes they run off to where the lifeguard, not the lifeguard, the light tower is.
I mean, can we make can we make an amendment that maybe 200 feet from any dog park?
Um there is like a grace uh distance because if they run off and then there's you know a code or a park ranger said, ah, your dog ran off, I'm gonna give you a code uh a fine now.
I'd like to just at least have some sort of buffer between the dog park and uh and outside the dog park.
So uh if I may through the mayor.
Um I I think one of our colleagues is working on something for South Point Park.
I also um Chief Jones, uh sorry to call you up for a pop quiz.
I don't know if you remember where this incident happened.
My recollection is that it m may have happened in South Point Park.
Um I don't think with South Point Park, I for some reason I think is was that the park in 53rd Street, maybe.
It was where?
I'm sorry.
53rd Street.
53rd Street.
Well, regardless, I uh um you know it's first reading.
I hear what you're saying.
Let us talk about um if that's if there's an option.
I I'm concerned about that, about giving some kind of a two 200 feet seems really a hundred feet.
You know, something just repeated.
So let us let us um work on it between now and second reading and if I may through the chair.
Um so the title for this ordinance relates to the fines that apply, because the the code already prohibits dogs off leash.
So if you'd like to bring a separate item, Commissioner Suarez to to add a like a buffer zone, then we could we could work on something with you, if I may, Mr.
Mayor.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Yeah, I I have a concern with it.
I think you know, if if the policy is that animals need to be on the leash, they need to be on the leash until they enter the the designated dog park.
Having an exclusion area, a buffer area, I think then becomes very subjective.
Um, what is 200 feet?
You know, most people don't know.
And I totally get it, but um, South Point Dog Park is just very unique in the sense that your dog can just run away, like into like another yard.
And so there's no gate.
And that's the beauty of that dog park.
And uh, from what I understand, there's rarely any ever instances.
But and I just want, you know, I don't want to have to be in a situation where there's a park ranger who doesn't like a per particular resident who just targets someone.
And in because it happens to my dogs quite frequently.
I mean, you know, they're the rangers don't like you.
Wait, what else?
I'm just simply saying that that you know that particular park, it's open for a reason.
It's it's it's beautiful, and uh there's no gates.
So I don't want to have an unintended consequence of you know, of course, people not wanting to bring their dogs because they might run off.
For as long as it's as it's specific to that dog park, because most of the other dog parts are gated, and I just don't want to have you know the situation that now a hundred feet, two hundred feet from all dog parks were creating this buffer zone where you can have animals just off their leashes.
That's very unique at South Point Park, and so I don't disagree with that.
If I might if I might, I I would encourage you to bring a separate item.
I don't want to muddy this.
Um, you know, we did have another episode um that was in the dunes where a very aggressive person with this very aggressive dog was targeting the cat feeders um and the cats and the dunes.
I I think you know, I'm open to hear what you propose.
I I would like to keep this clean and I would like to move this item as it as it is.
It is a public hearing.
I'll see no one on Zoom, and I see no one in the audience requesting to speak.
May I call the roll?
Yeah.
Uh motion by Commissioner Bott, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez, as is Vice Mayor Matil Salinas.
Yes.
Commissioner Dominguez.
Yes.
Fernandez.
Yes.
Commissioner Magazine.
Yes.
Commissioner Bott?
Yes.
Commissioner Suarez.
Yes.
Yes.
Motion carry second reading public hearings schedule for April 22nd.
That was item R5W.
R7Y.
R7Y is fee waiver of 25,000 for model volleyball event.
Commissioner magazine.
Sorry, this was uh meant to be heard in tandem.
This is something we've done for this event, I think for all 15 years.
Uh, we're not giving money away.
We're not handing cash, but this is a fee waiver that we've done uh uh for at least 10 years.
Uh second the item.
Yeah.
Excellent.
I'll move.
Let's call the vote on R7Y.
I have a motion by Commissioner Magazine, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez.
All in favor of R7Y, please say aye.
Aye.
Aye.
Anyone opposed, hearing none.
R7Y is approved.
7-0.
R7AH.
R7AH is authorized city attorney, challenge HB 399, large destination resorts.
This was an addendum being heard after five o'clock.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Um thank you, Mr.
Mayor.
Um, and so I've I've I place um this item R7AH today to ensure that the city of Miami Beach is fully prepared to respond uh to HB 399.
Should it be signed into law, as you all know over the past few weeks, we witnessed the legislature insert itself uh into what is fundamentally a local decision that falls under the jurisdiction of the historic preservation board, a decision, a local decision that directly impacts the residents and the taxpayers of the city of Miami Beach.
Um and you know, this was a real decision by the legislature affecting real people in a built-out uh community like ours, where residential buildings coexist side by side uh with hotels.
And while the language in the bill is written broadly, it is clear to anyone who is following the issue that this was crafted very specifically with Miami Beach in mind, uh with an with an outcome uh that is to bypass the process of the historic uh review board of the historic preservation board that exists to ensure that there is objective criteria that's being applied, that there is community input in these decisions and that there is thoughtful planning put in place.
Thousands of residents who are very much concerned about traffic, about infrastructure in impacts, um, the the organizers of Stop the Six Flag uh movement, the wise family.
Um, and also, you know, our legislators and in Tallahassee, Representative Basabe, who made it very clear to his colleagues in the House, his opposition uh to this bill, and he voted against this bill.
Our Senator Chevron Jones, who really fought tirelessly on the Senate floor, uh, including sponsoring an important amendment to remove the Fountain Blue provision from the bill, um, and that it almost passed.
It almost passed.
That that amendment uh almost passed.
But now is the time to turn the page from uh from the legislative side of it.
And so this resolution does one simple thing, but an important thing, which is to authorize the city attorney uh to evaluate uh what legal options we we have available.
Uh filing a lawsuit uh is certainly one potential avenue, but it's not the only avenue that our city attorneys can explore.
And so this authorization that we're giving them through through this resolution ensures um that the city attorney has flexibility to explore all appropriate legal actions, uh whether that involves litigation uh or any other type of legal remedy that might be available to to the city.
And so I just want to make sure that um that we preserve the rights of our residents, the rights of our process, a process that was started, and a process that protects our community.
Because at the end of the day, it's our duty, it's our duty to protect our residents.
That's why we have these processes in place and to ensure that their voices are respected.
Okay, Commissioner Magazine, Commissioner Bot, and Commissioner Suarez.
Yeah, Commissioner Fernandez, uh thank you very much.
Thank you for being so outfront and vocal about this.
Um I agree uh with the comments that we've been making all along, where local decisions belong in local control, and we continue to see uh preemptions happening at state level.
I I just want to clarify.
Uh I wasn't sure when I read uh when I discussed this yesterday with our city manager and city attorney, but I think you provided some good clarity, which is exactly in line with where I wanted this to go.
Is this isn't just letting the genie out of the bottle and then we have no say or control over what happens.
This is directing our city attorney to explore options, explore what remedies are available and possible on the table, and then kind of comes back to us and we can collectively discuss what the appropriate next steps are.
And I just want to put clarity.
I'm not sure that it comes back to us because I think with this the challenge with this is that uh we don't know what could happen.
We don't know if this gets signed into law.
One has to assume that this will likely uh get signed into into law.
Uh, but once this got signed into law, it is my understanding that this is a bill that goes into effect immediately.
Is that correct?
Yes, that is correct.
And so and and so the moment that it's signed into law, a lot of quick action might happen.
And I just want to make sure that um that the city attorney knows that he has authorization uh to pursue whatever legal actions are available to the city, and that might not necessarily even be filing litigation against against the state.
There might be other options uh which I encourage all of us to discuss privately with the city attorney, but I just don't want our city attorney to have to wait, you know, 36 hours, 48 hours for us to advertise a sunshine meeting or to call a special meeting of the city commission or have to wait a month uh for us to, because a lot that could happen the moment uh that bill uh there's income paper with that bill.
And together with this, actually, what I would love to do is separately um urge the governor, urge the governor uh through a separate motion not to sign uh this this law, to urge him to veto this law, because I think our residents have been indeed very vocal about the significant impacts that this will have on in their quality of life and the significant concerns of inserting uh the the legislature inserting itself in a due process that had already been initiated, um, which is a whole different concern in and of itself.
income paper with that bill and together with this actually what I would love to do is separately um urge the governor urge the governor uh through a separate motion not to sign uh this this law to urge him to veto this law because I think our residents have been indeed very vocal about the significant impacts that this will have on in their quality of life and the significant concerns of inserting uh the the legislature inserting itself in a due process that had already been initiated um which is a whole different concern in and of itself and because of that you know had this process not been initiated it would have been less egregious but the fact that that the process was initiated and things just went a different direction because residents were simply exercising their rights their right that they're entitled to to voice their opposition is certainly something that is very concerning.
And so with this item I would like us to consider a separate motion you know very respectfully urging and encouraging the governor to veto the bill and and and I'll I'll second that motion and that's uh I agree with you there for the original item this on the table I guess what I'm trying to strike a balance of and thread this needle is not being caught behind the APOL.
I agree wholeheartedly that we need to be proactive need to have a lot of tools at our disposal and not be uh reactive proactive but at the same time I'm not giving you the message Rick this the second this is sign go out and sue the state because I think there's a lot of considerations that we need to consider uh the implications that'll have not saying that's yes not saying that's no but that's not the mandate that I'm delivering here.
The the direction is let's start proactively thinking about what options are at our disposal what tools in our toolkit and really be proactive in thinking about how we likely will respond when this is likely signed into law.
And I and and I and I think through the mayor you know should the city attorney determine that they're that litigation is the right path I do not see a world where our city attorney would make that decision lightly and without considering reaching out to every single one of us and making sure that he has the support of his elected uh bosses on something something like that to say to say that he would have to come back to this body I would say could potentially create a delay if if any action that he takes regarding this has to come back here.
It could put us behind the eight ball.
So I you know I want to make sure that we give him authorization and and then you know he can check with each one of us individually as has been done in in the past you know the city attorney has authorization and he can check with his bosses on you know if if it rises to a lawsuit which I don't know that it will you know he can check with each one of us.
Commissioner Baught so in addition to what my colleagues have said um and Commissioner Fernandez thank you for once again being on the lead on this you know this is the worst case scenario this is when a kid goes to dad and asks to to get something and dad says no and the kid immediately goes to mom to get a different answer.
But in this case the kid went to somebody who doesn't live here who doesn't represent this district and then you know to get the item added and then went to the governor who he has a long relationship of supporting to to make this happen.
That is not how local government is supposed to work and I'm sorry you know sometimes you win them and sometimes lose them and people are supposed to um abide by local decisions and and um so I I fully support giving our city attorney the the ability to go explore and investigate to see what resources might be available to us to try to um to nip this in the bud not just for for this but you know um for anything that might come down the pike I I think once we once one developer sees this I think that um it's gonna stir up a lot of very unfortunate um unintended consequences follow on consequences and I think it's really bad policy um from from the state um taking away once again home rule and it's it's um it's something that's got to stop.
And it's not when they see us they're seeing it already it happened with the unsafe structures and resiliency act that happened with Lif Local is happening now with this and that is you know the concern.
Commissioner Suarez so are we giving the city attorney's sole discretion on what to do because I I don't think it should be up on the city attorney to make that decision.
I mean, once you have your analysis, you can come back to us and say, hey, here are your options.
What would you how would you like to proceed?
I certainly don't want to give the city attorney the reins to potentially make a lawsuit, you know, that we haven't discussed.
I I think that's kind of crazy.
I think we're the ones who should be deciding that.
If we're gonna say we're gonna sue, then that that should be the motion.
Um and you know, look, I I there are some serious consequences to what we decide today.
Uh the governor has line item veto, and there is about five million dollars in appropriations to our city that's on the line that could potentially be cut.
In fact, I mean I have it on the screen.
PJ, if you could put that up.
You know, we have you know the West Avenue project uh that the state's giving us 900,000 for new odd, half a million dollars, the beachwalk security ballards, uh, 850,000, maybe Charlton Road Reconstruction, 900,000, and you know, pedestrian safety in Pier Park, that's two million dollars.
You can close the slide, PJ.
That and look, this this governor has a reputation for retaliatory political uh engagements.
And I I don't look, I I think we're we're we're we're going down a really dangerous rabbit hole here on uh on challenging this, especially with so much money that is potentially coming to us.
Um that our city depends on to fund things that are very necessary.
Look, I I'm I'm all about local control.
Um but I I also have to be mindful that you know there is a state government, and there is a governor who has the ability to really hurt us uh with the stroke of a pen.
And we all got a call from our city attorney last night about this, and the chances of any lawsuit is probably not good.
Okay.
Uh to not get into details.
I I think I think that that's the type of detail that we don't discuss in public.
Yeah, look, I think we're not authorized, we're not directing a lawsuit.
Let me finish, please.
Yeah, look, I that's the that's that's the unknown I'm not comfortable with.
I'm okay with having him explore and then have the mayor call an emergency meeting uh and then bring us to options to discuss, but I certainly don't want to have a decision like this that has serious ramifications at the state level to be decided by our city attorney.
I think it needs to be decided by us.
So I I think that that's a reasonable thing to ask.
Uh, I'm not I'm not saying no to this, but I certainly don't want to leave the final decision in the hands of of one person.
I think it should really be a collective decision between all of us.
Yeah, and I I was actually just gonna say something similar.
I I think we can get to the same place.
I really do, because for the most part, I think we're all in agreement on we want to potentially have our all our options.
I I maybe it's the lawyer in me.
I can't imagine a situation other than a temporary restraining order, which I don't think that's even applicable here, but um, I don't want to speak for for Rick for our city attorney.
I mean, generally you have to prepare uh a lawsuit.
It takes time.
I we can convene an emergency meeting if we had to.
I I think the spirit is good.
We're we're directing our city attorney to take all actions that potentially we're just asking for the opportunity to to weigh in.
This is a major this is a major decision.
Obviously, we're all disappointed.
I've I was standing right next to you at that press conference, and and and I appreciate everything you've done.
It's teamwork, it's not me as teamwork.
No, and and we held the press conference, and and I and I came out and we were working, we were working with our lobbyists and and and reaching out to electeds, but ultimately um this is where we're at, and I think we can still make a very, very strong statement.
Uh we've made it clear what how we feel, and we're standing with our residents who have been very vocal against this, but ultimately have the opportunity because it's there's so many different factors that could happen here.
One, I suspect there's gonna be a lawsuit by some of these condominiums or or associations.
I I'm I'm anticipating that's going to happen.
Um then that may change how we approach it.
Um I mean there's so many unforeseen aspects because it hasn't even been signed into law yet.
Um I do share some of the concerns.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't take action.
I I am disappointed that our zoning laws were preempted.
We we've been very vocal that we don't appreciate the fact that we we are elected as the local body to represent our residents.
We should we should be making decisions, and uh it's increasingly being taken out of our hands, which is unfortunate.
Uh at the same time, there is there is a significant amount of funding that we've been getting uh from the state that we've used to good use, including the resources during spring break.
Doesn't mean we don't fight these issues, but um I I at least would like to know what we're what we're up to before before we actually uh go there.
I'm not uh and it's interesting you you you you made a comment, Commissioner Fernandez, I thought it was interesting because you said I'm not sure we would file litigation, but the way this reads, it's almost like we would.
And it's almost like we're trying to tell the state, hey, this is what we're gonna do, right?
To take any and all appreapate legal action, including the initiation of litigation.
That's like the there's many different avenues we could take, and that's the one we're actually highlighting.
Um and whether again, I I don't know if that's the avenue you're thinking.
Uh I and I obviously we've had conversations, so I have a sense, but I'm not gonna say it.
What you're thinking is.
Um what's anyway, I want to hear from my the rest of my colleagues.
Yeah.
So if I if I may.
Um, I think our home rule is very important.
Um, but you know, I'm I'm gonna say this.
And so are the dollars that we get from the state of Florida?
No amount of money, not a dollar is worth surrendering our rights, our home rules, or the voices of our residents.
Not gonna let our city be intimidated.
Every year we sit here and you know, I have to hear, oh, but Tallahassee is watching this, and we so we shouldn't do this because Tallahassee is watching.
And yet every year, year after year after year after year, we're getting preempted.
And it's not stopping Tallahassee from preempting us.
And so, you know, I'm not gonna put an appropriation value on the rights of our residents to be able to have a fair hearing before the historic preservation board.
That is invaluable.
That is their voice and that is their rights.
And I don't feel comfortable, you know, saying, saying, saying that because of grant dollars that we get from the state that that you know we wouldn't feel comfortable in in in defending that or the code that we have that we've adopted uh over the years.
I think we appoint a city attorney who we trust to work with with all of us.
Um and what we've been told is that the governor could sign this bill at any moment.
And the government once the governor signs that bill, um that bill goes into effect immediately, unlike other bills that might go into effect at the start of the fiscal year or might go into effect January 1st.
This is a different type of bill, a bill that can go into effect immediately.
And um and and you know, I think we should be giving the city attorney that that authority to take any and all necessary and appropriate appropriate legal action uh as as it relates to to H3 uh HB 339.
And and again, if we trust that we're city attorney, we trust he's gonna check with each one of us.
I think he I think if our if our if if our city attorney chooses, if you know, not that he will, but if he chooses that litigation is the path that that is best for the city if he determines that, I'm sure he will check with each one of the commissioners before he moves forward with something as significant as that.
And I'm sure that if he sees, if he sees that there that there isn't support for that, I doubt that he's gonna do something that doesn't reflect the desires of the of the elected leadership.
But I think it's important to give him this legislative authority so that we don't hold back the process and having to call a sunshine meeting or an emergency meeting or wait till the next city commission meeting.
Um I I don't know that he's going to move forward with necessarily proposing a lawsuit.
I think as you've mentioned, uh Mr.
Mayor, it sounds like you've been briefed, and that there might be other avenues through which you know one could challenge uh HB 399.
Uh and so I think that that the resolution is appropriate as is written.
But Commissioner Suarez.
Mr.
City Attorney, but wouldn't it have to be signed into law in order to take action against the bill?
So wouldn't it I mean, shouldn't we wait to see what the action is?
I'm assuming it's gonna get passed for sure, but after it gets signed, wouldn't it then be prudent to have you know options for legal action at that point?
I mean, because you know, at this point it seems kind of moot because it hasn't even been signed into law, and what Commissioner Fernandez is saying is that we need to act now.
I'm under the impression that we need to act after the bill is signed, so that you have uh I guess some sort of standing of of where to position yourself.
Well, we we would not file any litigation until the bill is signed into law, that is for sure.
But I think Commissioner Fernandez, and I'll let him speak for himself, has a different view as to what this does.
And I I I can I understand where Commissioner Fernandez is saying, but I I I for one would like to have my the options of what the city attorneys plans to do, or the elected officials, let you know, let us decide what the best course of action is on the menu of options that our city attorneys doing.
I don't want him deciding what to do.
He doesn't even live here.
So you know, I I think it's prudent for us to get options.
There's no there's no problem with waiting because the bill we can't even do anything until the bill is signed anyways.
And that gives also time for our city attorney to really research this because this was put on last night, you know, less than 24 hours ago.
So you know, and and and we got calls that I I certainly didn't like to hear.
Um I I you know I think look, I I all I'm saying is I think we should give the city attorney a little bit more time to digest this.
He's had 24 hours, less than 24 hours to see this.
I don't think we're under any time constraint because the bill isn't even signed yet.
And it gives, and I certainly don't feel comfortable having our city attorney make decisions that could impact things that are uh forces in Tallahassee that can really come down on us.
I think we should be making that decision, not handing it off to someone.
And I think that's the reasonable thing to do.
I'm I'm not I'm not trying to stop this.
I'm I'm I'm simply saying like let's be in control, not have the city attorney who doesn't even live in Miami Beach be in control.
Yeah, so just to be clear, some of the some of the comments, uh I don't I don't think anybody on the here is back down from Tallahassee.
We have made it so clear in every which way how how we feel, and and um and often we get we get we get some blowback from representatives in Tallahassee, and that's okay.
But I also think it would be, and this is why this is a healthy discussion.
I think it would be a uh a detriment to our fiduciary duty to look at what the potential consequences could be.
We hope they won't be, but uh I think we certainly have to explore that.
Doesn't mean we back down, but um they're real.
I mean, to be honest, it if if I could also, I mean, if if our city attorney calls me after this is signed in and says I'm contemplating XYZ, I could just call it a special commission meeting, right?
And then sort of foresee because I don't think anything's gonna happen.
That's takes 24 hours.
So I don't think usually anything happens that quickly because I've talked to all seven of us.
Um I just think there's there's a lot of a lot of unknowns.
I I would I personally think this is such a major decision, whatever step we take.
And maybe it is, maybe whatever.
I I'm not gonna say I'm not saying I'm not gonna be supportive.
I might be.
But it's it's a it's a very major decision.
It's uh we're not happy with what transpired at all.
We've we've as I said, we've we did everything we could.
Uh the press conference, the uh I mean I came out on social media.
Um the the conversations, the calls.
At the same time though, it's uh we're dealing with uh with uh a situation where the governor either signs it or doesn't sign it.
We're dealing with uh our second largest employer in the city.
And I would I think we need to be very hands-on on how we approach this and what decisions we make.
That's all I'm saying.
I just wanted I I would prefer it to come back to us.
Well, I I'm glad you brought the item.
It's a good item.
I just to me, I would rather not take that control out of our hands.
By the way, it was consistent with this, uh, even during we were talking about I mean it's a different issue, but during spring break, right?
I was I was actually giving pushback because I was like, hey, do we really want to give all that control uh to the city manager and making changes without uh us as the legislative body um weighing a commissioner magazine?
Yeah, I'm absolutely going to support the part of directing the city attorney to begin exploring all of our options.
I do have a couple of questions.
Rick, maybe this is for you, and uh assuming that this law gets signed into place.
What rights does the Fountain Blue have?
If this gets signed in on a Friday, can they show up Monday with a bulldozer and just start clearing things out and constructing a water tower?
Or do they are there still things within the city and processes that they need to go through?
And I guess where I'm going with that is I guess that in part forms how immediate we need to be with our response when this does get signed in.
They would need to apply for the variances that they requested from the HPB, not they would have to start that process administratively.
So that would be the first step.
And presumably like demolition permits, building permits, or are all those things completely waived, and it's just do whatever you want.
Well, I think they would first need to substantiate that they that they meet all the criteria in the bill for a large destination resort, the acreage, the number of rooms, the 70% occupancy over the last three years.
Um and if they did meet that criteria, then they could submit an application for administrative approval to just the variance.
Or not the commission, but the city to city staff, yeah.
So not for Tallahassee, not Florida.
Correct.
Um and then the second thing I think we should at least have some discussion and be honest about, right?
With this, are we just directing the city attorney to kind of file lawsuit?
Come hell or high water.
No, we're not, right?
And well, let's let's discuss that, right?
If he comes back and goes, Bill was signed, I'm ready to essentially act if you all kind of give me the green light.
Are we how are we going to come to that decision?
Are we going to handicap the odds of okay?
I think we have an 80% chance of winning.
Then maybe we're like, you know what?
Go ahead.
This let's roll the dice here.
We understand the consequences, but if we can do that, then this is worth going all in on.
If Rick comes and says, Well, there's a 20% chance we win, do we say, you know what, we need to be principled and still stand up for our residents and ensure them we believe in them, even though this has just been handicapped in 20%.
You know, we're we're how are we making our next decisions?
Especially if we're not going to be able to talk amongst each other.
Yeah.
So thank you.
Um, and so I just you know want to read what we're enacting here.
It is authorizing the city attorney to take any and all appropriate legal action to challenge that portion of HB 399 creating section, whatever it is entitled Large Destination Research.
So we're not directing, we're authorizing the city attorney to take any and all necessary and appropriate legal actions.
Um by the way, this I think the bill has been presented to the governor.
I don't know if Peter is here.
Um, but uh the bill was presented to has been presented to the governor.
Today it was just uh today.
Okay, so our intergovernmental.
Hello, Peter Disaragi, intergovernmental affairs liaison.
Um the bill was just presented to the governor today, so he has until April 2nd to decide whether or not he's going to sign the legislation.
Okay, and when is our next city commission meeting?
April 22nd.
April 22nd.
So Peter, I know you're not a prophet.
If I can just have do you have any doubt that the governor is gonna sign it?
To be honest, I don't have any doubt that he's gonna sign it.
I think, yeah, I think and I think we've all we're all on the on the same page on that.
So let me ask you this, because I think we're looking very narrowly about litigation, but you know, there's more than just litigation, and the city has many legal tools that it could consider uh obviously litigation is it's one of them.
Um what I'm hearing is that is that the body has concern with giving a blanket authorization for litigation.
The mayor, you're committing that if it is necessary for there to be litigation, that you would call for a special meeting at the request of the city attorney, or if I ask you for a special meeting because he feels that you would grant that.
So let me ask you, Mr.
Tempias, my concern with that is that even in this discussion, as we were discussing this, we almost stepped into the territory of publicly revealing strategy that we may not want to discuss in the sunshine.
And while a vote would should absolutely happen in the sunshine, uh, would it be possible to discuss the merits and the strategy part of that in an executive session?
Um an attorney client privilege session.
Probably not.
Um those are that's my concern.
I don't want to reveal to a billionaire what our strategy would be so that he could use our in the context of the the financing for the expenditures, that is potentially an angle that we could use.
Um, but I'd want to look into that.
But absolutely, if that was not an angle that we could use, I would discuss with each one of you individually, and then you would vote at the special meeting.
And so and so my concern is is that then we get to to you know a special meeting, and you know, especially when things are when when there's not a consensus, we start debate and we start entering the territory of revealing strategy or territorial speaking publicly and creating a record that then can potentially be used against the city's arguments.
And and that would not benefit our residents.
And that's and that's where you know, the same way that uh our city attorney, you know, would brief each one of us privately, you know, if if we trust our city attorney, we have to trust that he will not file something as significant as filing a litigation if he doesn't have the backing of the commission for it.
I mean, I mean, he's not gonna put his job in the line for that.
Mr.
Mayor.
Just because Commissioner Fernandez, you know, wants to know how strongly he feels about this.
No, I'm kidding.
Well, the irony is I I mean, I don't want to say I know for sure.
I have a pretty good sense as to what would would happen or not happen.
Uh yeah, I just I'll keep that close to the past.
Mr.
Mayor, I I I just think it's good for us to for us to decide.
I don't think the city attorney should decide that you know this sort of case where it has severe, you know, ramifications of what could come out of it.
I just let's keep it in and in the in our hands and and make a decision, you know, moving forward.
Who knows what will happen between now and and then.
Plus, I think he needs I think the city attorney needs time to really digest this.
Like I said, within the last 24 hours, this was put on our on our on our desk and and on his desk as well.
I I I think there's no rush to do that, do so.
And especially writing a blank check.
I I I don't feel comfortable writing a blank check to our city attorney to to make a decision.
I I I think as soon as he has a an opinion, you know, maybe we instruct you to to to give an opinion of perhaps you know what what our case would entail.
Is this something that you would hire outside counsel for?
Because I understand that if it's gonna be outside counsel, it could be it could cost us millions of dollars on top of the fact that we were gonna lose all our appropriations.
You know, then we're starting to really get into seven-figure problems that I don't want to happen to our city.
I completely respect and understand that I don't want Tallahassee trampling on us on our rights for zoning, but at the same time, this is the reality that we're in, you know, and this is millions of dollars that is at risk for for our city.
And I I don't I don't want to lose that.
Um But again, at the end of the day, I think it should be our decision, and I don't I certainly don't want to be writing a blank check to staff to make policy dis decisions.
So are there other options on the table either besides or in addition to litigation, or is that something you want to kind of discuss with us uh privately?
I would rather discuss that with you privately, but certainly there are things that could come up between now and when the law comes uh in terms of the case.
And I think we're all almost perfectly aligned here, right?
We are giving you we all want to fight for our residents.
We do not want to roll over to higher authority.
We want local control to remain in local control, and we want to fight for that.
We uh want to instruct you to go exhaust what our different options are, right?
And whether it be in a public form or calling us individually and we make a collective decision, then we essentially make that decision then.
I think that's where we're all at.
I I would certainly speak with each of you individually.
I cannot poll you.
So if if it comes down to that, if that's the direction the body gives today, then there would need to be a special meeting.
Would this fall under a potential sunshine uh well not a sunshine meeting, meaning a legal meeting with us because it impacts a litigation or potential litigation?
Unless there's active litigation, I I would not be able to.
I mean, I said earlier that potentially to discuss um financing strategy, but uh that really only applies when there's active litigation.
So we would have individual briefings, but we would need to have a special meeting.
No, I I think the public should deserve.
I think the public should see how we go about this.
I don't I don't see why we need to have this out of the sunshine.
I think this very much needs to be in the sunshine.
I only mean it because if there's potential strategy.
Strategies.
Now remember, litigation gets very detailed.
There's there's sometimes there's there's you can say, you know what, we're gonna do these causes of action, but not these at this time, depending on what the defense does.
I mean, there's literally a lot of strategy that goes into this.
That's why lawyers get paid a lot of money, right?
So uh that's probably something you don't want to be discussing out in in the public.
The fact, yes, whether to file a lawsuit or not, I think that's appropriate for but to discuss specific strategy.
Now you're giving the defense.
I don't think we're gonna be discussing specific legal tactics on the dais.
I think it's just gonna be these are our options.
This is what you can do.
And that you can either hire legal counsel, outside council, you can have us do it, you can do nothing, you can do this or that.
But I don't think we're gonna be going into the weeds of each, you know.
I I'm not.
I mean, I give you my word, I'm not gonna do that.
But I think we just need to decide as a body in the sunshine of what we're going to do, not what he's gonna do.
You know, I'm just that's all I'm saying.
I I think it's I think it's crazy that again, I don't want to have staff decide this.
I want to us to decide this.
It should be us, and hopefully it'll be a unanimous decision.
So Mr.
Uh Commissioner Fernandez.
Thank you, Mr.
Mayor.
And you know, it's not just staff.
I mean, it's our charter officer who is you know vested with looking out for the best interest of the city, and we hire him to be the city attorney because I assume we all trust him to be our city attorney and to defend the best interest of the city.
Um and so and so, you know, I think a good amendment perhaps could be that if the city attorney determines, and again, it's if we're not saying that there will be litigation.
If the city attorney determines that litigation is necessary, that he should only proceed with l litigation upon consultation, so at least he can uh reach out to each other commissioners, discuss it with with each of the commissioners and determine on his own after consulting with his clients, uh whether whether it is still in the best interest of the city um uh to move forward with this.
And by the way, even even and that would also not only allow us to have a say directly to him, it wouldn't preclude any one of us if we wanted to to call for a special meeting uh to request one from the mayor or to submit a request to the city clerk.
Uh but I but I do think you know a lot of times we don't know what could happen.
These things could move very quickly between now and our next meeting on April 22nd.
A lot of different scenarios besides us litigating the city could happen.
Uh us litigating um litigating the state could happen.
And um, and I don't I I don't think we should hold back or tie the hands of the person who we have you know appointed to look after the best legal options for the city.
I would propose uh that that we amend the resolution hearing the feedback from all of my colleagues that we amend the resolution to make it clear that if the city attorney determines that there be litigation, that he only do it upon consultation with each other members of the city commission.
Uh because that way if anyone has any significant concerns, someone could call for a special meeting of the commission uh if if there were to be concerns at that point.
And I don't know if that's something we can do.
And if I make them the chair.
Um in order to direct me, it would have to be a special meeting.
Like if I I can't call you individually and ask uh and poll you.
So either you authorize today or if if the will of the body is.
No one is directing you.
Okay.
I understand.
We are authorizing you to we are authorizing, which is different than directing, we're authorizing you to take any and all necessary uh legal and appropriate actions.
Sure.
Um and so and so you know, in a without us even putting this language in, if you were to file litigation, you wouldn't consult with each one of us before filing litigation.
Um I I would absolutely consult with each one of you, but to in order for what what is being decided here um to get direction specific, um it would it would require a special meeting.
I can't poll that's not what you told me.
When we created this item, you told me that with this item you would have authorization to file litigation if you felt that that was the best course of action.
Well, that is true, but that would not require me polling each one of you.
This would authorize the case.
No one's telling you to poll to poll us.
But you may want to discuss your strategy, what are what are the uh positions of the city, what are the arguments of the city, what are the claims that the city would be bringing forward.
You wouldn't be you wouldn't be briefing us and consulting with us on that.
I I I would be, sure.
That's fair.
I I didn't get a clear answer from that.
Uh again, uh I'm simply saying have him give us a menu of options.
The mayor is willing to call a special meeting within a 24-hour notice, and then let us decide.
I don't want to give, I don't want to have a I don't want to give the city attorney.
I understand he's a charter officer.
I don't want to give him a blank check.
I don't I don't think that's the right thing to do.
I think we have plenty of time.
We shouldn't rush into this.
The bill isn't signed.
I understand it's at the governor's desk, but there's I mean, come on, like we we we can still make a decision, it's a very short period of time if this you know once he gives us a menu of options.
I mean, I don't even think he feels comfortable kind of doing this himself without getting direction from us.
And he just said that he can't poll us to have direction.
It has to come from a sunshine meeting, explicit direction on what to do.
Mr.
Attorney, you don't feel comfortable.
Can you confirm that for the record?
Sure.
If the direction of this body authorizes litigation, I would feel comfortable taking action.
If the if the direction is you know, come back and get further direction, then I would need further direction.
So the the way that the the resolution is currently drafted, I would feel comfortable taking action.
I would consult with each one of you, I would explain what you know my thoughts are.
And as you pointed out, if somebody wanted to call a special meeting in that case, they they they absolutely could.
If you if you if you call all my colleagues, and there is a and again, this is if a big capital I and a big capital F capitalized if that is the you decide someone could call a special meeting, and the mayor has said that he would grant the special meeting.
And you know, the city could the commission could give you different uh a different different avenue, but but but I wouldn't want to hold back, you know, your ability to to to do work on something that is very time-sensitive, that's so important to so many of our of our residents.
Um and I and and and again I trust that I think if you feel that there's hesitation, not that you would poll, but but if in consulting with people, you know, that there's you know concerns uh and and and legitimate reasons that you probably wouldn't move forward with it.
I mean, I I trust I trust you with that.
I I think I I think I I think when we appoint you to be city attorney, most of us uh trust you with that.
But so you know it's interesting, uh Commissioner Fernandez, it may not sound like it.
I actually think we're very, very closely aligned.
Um, there's a couple of things.
One, we're talking litigation a lot, but the the resolution actually says any and all appropriate legal action.
Actually, in the last 48 hours, I've heard a couple of a menu of different options that could be that's correct.
Appropriate.
So we've focused on the litigation, but there's actually other avenues as well.
So overly focused on litigation.
Right.
So this conversation sort of honed in on that, but I think we're we're both on the same page that there may be there may be there may be other avenues, which again uh sort of that's kind of why I kind of want to hear it out in the open.
Uh that's where that's kind of where we only deviate.
Where, you know, obviously if the city attorney comes to us, then we're having a one-on-one with him.
The beauty of this process is that we get to talk to each other, which we're not gonna have the opportunity to do otherwise.
So I listen, I'm just one one of seven.
I would love to hear what my colleagues have to say, uh quoting the great David Suarez.
Um, you know, love to know where my colleagues stand on this.
Uh because I'm not the only one understanding that point.
I I think I think collectively just uh uh we're we are we all are looking out for our residents and our this was not the way we wanted this to go down.
Then the question is how how do we respond?
What is in the best interest of our residents, what is in the best interest of our city.
And again, I think I think we're pretty much aligned.
It's just the the slight nuance is whether it comes back to us as a full body to make that final decision or whether city attorney just and Mr.
Mayor, I don't mind saying I'll tell you, I'll tell you this much.
I don't even mind delegating that decision to you and the city attorney.
Uh I just don't want us to get held up by bureaucracy and by time on something that the city attorney might need to act quickly on.
And so, and so I don't mind saying, you know what, the city attorney, you know, together with the mayor, can determine whether whether whether we proceed with with a with a lawsuit or not.
I just don't want bureaucracy having to notice a meeting, someone's out of town, two of us are out of town, three of us are out of town.
Uh, you know, and and that type of stuff to get in the way of something that is so incredibly sensitive to so many of our residents who have been so passionate and so vocal about this that our personal schedules and that advertising a meeting and all that could get in the way of the business of the city protecting not only its rights, but forget about the rights.
Most importantly, the voices of those who have entrusted us with public office who have been usurped uh by by some senator in Ocala that knows nothing about my idea about the traffic jams on Collins Avenue that has that has no understanding on how this will directly impact not only the quality of life but even the safety of the people who who who live in this area.
Um and I don't want bureaucracy to get in in the way of doing that.
So um so that's that's that's what I would suggest, so that you know I don't mind delegating that authority to you that the that the city attorney, if again big capital IF capitalized, if the city uh attorney the you know decides that this is the best course of action, that he consult with with a mayor on that and and get buy-in from him because I trust them both.
I trust them both.
I appreciate that, Commissioner Bernard.
Oh, Commissioner Dominguez, I promise and Commissioner Magazine.
Uh thanks.
So this is a very um difficult item because we keep getting home rule removed from us over and over, and we just sit back and say, okay, we'll try harder next time.
And um it's not right.
I agree with Commissioner for Mineandis 100%.
We need to have have to have this ready to go and agreed upon, and it's not a blank check.
It's um we can have parameters on there, and the city attorney would still be calling us.
Um, but enough with being afraid.
Uh I more and more keeps taking tip being taken away from us, and we don't fight back hard enough, and maybe this is what we need, maybe other cities will join this.
Um I think it's very important, and it really sends a message.
Commissioner Magazine.
Yeah, I agree with that uh Commissioner Deving is and I I do think uh it is wise of us to expand our toolkit to as many possibilities as possible.
And we've you know sat here and focused on what if about litigation, but I think we should really expand that toolkit and even to the extent where I don't know if we do an urging, but ask the fountain blue to come back to the table.
It's okay, we recognize maybe now you do have the upper hand.
But is there some sort of way where we can say we're all one community?
You're our largest employer, our largest taxpayer, but you operate in our b uh uh are we really going to go with this totally uh at odds?
Maybe we can find some way that this becomes more palatable for the community where we actually are working together.
And our direction to you should be is um being as creative and unique as possible about what our different options are.
So Commissioner Magazine, are you saying that he should come back to us for us to decide what the what the path forward is?
It seems if we're saying litigation isn't the only option, which I think we've all collectively said, right?
Then it seems as if that is the natural scenario that occurs, right?
Because the only way you you know let me ask you, Mr.
Cattory, is there what is there any benefit or or not benefit to doing this right now, or if we wait, or for you to give us an option?
I mean, what what would be the downfall?
I mean, because there's a apparently it seems like there's a scenario that if you don't act like right now, something's gonna happen and we're gonna lose sort of like the upper hand.
Uh is that the case?
Or there is is there is some concern timing-wise because the governor's expected to sign the bill.
Now, is it you know a lawsuit that needs to be filed immediately?
But what if a April 22nd commission meeting is cancelled for whatever reason and you all don't meet until May?
So there is some time sensitivity.
Um the only time sensitivity is to actually have a meeting.
It in other words, if you're not acting today and not giving, let's say that this item just.
No, what I think what I think what we're debating now is you're gonna come to us and give us a menu of options, or you just unilaterally decide on your own what to do.
What I'm saying is, or what I'm asking is if we go ahead with waiting for you to explore your options, which you're gonna have to do anyways, and come back to us to decide, what is that time frame delay going to cause us?
Okay, well, the option that Commissioner Magazine mentioned, which you know would be a welcome option, and I would work closely with the city manager and his staff to see is there any uh any way to find uh a common ground with the fountain blue that works for the city that works for the residents that works for the fountain blue, um that would be something that we would start working on immediately and bring an option to do that.
How about we bifurcate that?
How about we say everything else you can go forward and you can you can do, but any sort of litigation has to come before the city commission for us to vote on, which this mayor can call for a special meeting.
Yeah, and and as I think about this, I mean, possibly suing the state, which I'm not for, I'm not opposed to, right?
But I'd want to know the specifics of that, is one of the most consequential decisions we could ever make.
And the buck stops with us.
We got elected, we put our trust in you, you are a charter officer, we put our highest trust in you, but the buck stops at us, right?
So I'm not ready to delegate the largest decision that we could make, suing our partner and somebody that has significant power over us.
That's not to say we're not going to do it, but if we're going to do it, I don't want this wishy-washy phone call.
We're kind of giving you some direction.
I want you to come and say, Commissioners, mayor, here's what's at stake.
This is our strategy, and there's no wishy-washiness.
It's, you know what, we're going to or we're not, because ultimately we're the ones that got elected by thousands of residents, and that's where the ultimate responsibility shall lie.
Right?
I don't want to put that on you.
Not going to leave you out there, you know, I don't want to say to dry, but that if we're gonna take one of the most consequential decisions a city can take suing a state, then we should be the ones that are signing off on that.
Yeah, Rick, have we ever sued this has the city of Miami Beach ever sued the state of Florida?
Not in joint on a suit.
Just I I I'm not to my knowledge.
I I know that we've challenged um we filed an administrative appeal with the FDOT not too long ago.
Um but I don't believe that we've filed a suit against the state.
Right.
And the reason why I asked that is sort of following up with Commissioner Magazine saying it's again, we all options, but it's a very consequential decision.
That's that's what I'm trying to get at uh in the 110-year history of of the city, we haven't done it yet.
I think there may have been something with rent control back in the 70s with the constitutional change that happened.
Commissioner Dominguez.
Thank you.
Um I know that it's been mentioned here that um we should go back to the table with the Fountain Blue or uh same thing with the uh neighborhood association and come up with something better.
And they've also been called a partner, but a partner doesn't wait for the answers from HPB and instead goes up to Tallahassee and slips stuff in at the last minute.
So they have not been a partner to our city, and that's why we're having this discussion today.
Mr.
Mayor?
Does that mean we shouldn't we should never speak with them?
I I mean that's what I'm suggesting.
Mike, like Mike.
It is on what does that mean?
Like we should just pencils down and not speak with them.
I don't get it.
I said we should speak to them, but calling them a partner is an air quotes because they didn't behave like a partner.
Totally.
But the first thing I said was absolutely they should come back to the table.
That's the very first thing I said.
Well, thank you.
I was asking for clarification.
Um agree.
And when I say partner, I mean going forward.
They are our largest employer, our largest taxpayer, and we operate they operate in our city.
So can we can we make a think it's behind outside?
I think just can we just bring this in for a landing?
I think if we can just bifurcate if there is going to be any sort of legal action that the city attorney wants to take, he has to come before the commission for us to make a decision.
Anything beyond legal action, bringing the fountain blue uh for a a meeting to discuss you know, whatever compatibility or anything else that uh is being contemplated you can go forward with, but any sort of legal action, I think needs to be decided by us.
And and so I'll say this because I want and I'm sorry, Commissioner Mr.
Mayor, and I know Commissioner Baum wanted to speak, so let me wait my term.
Because then I'll be reminded about protocol following the protocol.
Commissioner Bond.
You're doing great, Commissioner Frontier.
Just for the record, um, it it the bill has been signed by the officers and has been presented to the governor as of 53.
Yeah, we said that too.
Yes, yeah.
Um so Mr.
Mayor, because I want us I want this to be a unanimous item.
And this is not my item is the city commission's item, and it's the city commission speaking.
And so, you know, I think two things that perhaps we could do.
One uh either we authorize we delegate to the city man to the city mayor uh to be able to make the final decision with the attorney, uh so that it's not delayed by having to call a publicly advertised meeting and and and all of that, or um, you know, I got it.
We're all elected by the same people.
Um and and I and I and I understand where you're all coming from.
So allowing for for the city attorney to bring this back to the city commission for as long as it's not delayed by more than 24 hours.
But what I don't want there is to be a delay.
The city attorney feels that there should be a lawsuit, and someone's out of town, and you know uh I'm in California, and and all of a sudden, you know, and someone else is in Japan and someone else is in South Africa, and then all of a sudden we can't have uh vote on this because you know we're all actually having a life uh between committee meetings and city commission meetings.
I don't want that to get in the way of the city's business of defending the rights of our residents of dis of protecting a nationally designated historic structure of just uh protecting the due process that that that affords a fair process for everyone.
I don't want our personal schedules to get in in the way of that.
So I would propose one of those two amendments.
We either delegate to the mayor the trust in him as well to be able to make this decision with the city attorney, or uh that if we do want uh a vote on this, but that that not happened you know later than 24 hours, that we have 24 hours to have that meeting, otherwise, you know, the attorney can go ahead and proceed uh with uh litigation if that is what he feels is the right you know move.
Yeah, and and I like that, and I think the thing that I'm most looking for is not oh, we need to reconvene just because this bill is signed.
I'm operating as if this bill's already signed.
Right, right?
I think what's causing even some cause, I don't even want to say delay, but just to give you some time to get your legs under you about what our full menu of options are, right?
Because if it's not only litigation, what are our other possibilities?
Right, that's why I mean it absent that we'd be able to make a decision today and just operate as if this is going to be signed, because I think we all know that's a foregone conclusion that this will be signed, right?
So am I fair in saying, given that this is a rapidly developing situation, you need a bit more time to kind of present us with all the options and the different paths that we could take?
Okay.
Because if not, then I guess we can just make a decision here today, right?
And say, yes, sue or not sue if that's our only option.
Yes.
Um look, ultimately what I want is clear direction from the body.
Um and if that direction is that you want uh you know want options spelled out before a final decision is made if the body wants to make the mayor uh the designee to decide whether or not to bring litigation.
I just I mean I'm just looking for clear direction.
I know we're trying to land this plane here.
Yeah.
What are other options besides litigation?
I don't think we should be discussing that on this day, but I'm not the attitude.
I think we're good.
I think we're good with Commissioner Fernandez.
I I I'd be available.
I think 48 hours is a little bit more reasonable, Commissioner.
No, I don't think so.
Japan.
Someone's in Japan.
Okay.
Look, uh fine, you know, uh I'll I'll make myself available within 24 hours.
All right, are you fine with that, Mr.
Mayor?
Do you do you want the delegated authority or do you prefer to come in within 24 hours?
I I don't mind the delegated authority as I said, but I also value everyone's input here.
So I have to say that to me, I feel better with the with the delegated authority because I really have hesitation about discussing any type of strategy, and I don't feel with all due respect to all of us collectively, including myself disciplined enough that we won't put our city attorney into that corner of having to discuss uh strategy publicly, which would not be in the best interest of the city or its residents.
Uh and so and so, you know, in in the big if event that uh the city attorney determines that uh litigation is necessary that we delegate final authorization on behalf of the body to to the mayor for that.
That way we don't delay the process.
And that would be my amendment.
I'm sorry, can I just Commissioner Bot?
Okay, Clarify I don't understand what you don't feel comfortable about us talking about it with our city attorney.
I don't understand publicly in the sunshine?
I think the fountain blue and the litigators of the state of Florida.
Okay, understood that.
But I thought there was a thing, I mean, we had these committee of the whole meetings when those are actually public meetings.
The shade sessions that you might be thinking of can only happen when there's act of litigation and for burning.
No.
So there's no way for us to meet as a body to discuss possible actions that wouldn't require sunshine notice.
Correct.
Um, because the residents want to know what we're thinking.
I guess I look at it again, I keep saying there's there's there may be a menu of options uh short of litigation, or maybe includes, but uh litigation one of them, and then there's other potential options.
But but as it relates to litigation specifically, if if that's the direction that the city attorney feels he has to go in, that you know he he'd be able to to consult with uh with the mayor as our designee to to to make that drastic decision.
Yeah, I guess where you and I may differ on this a little bit is yes, if we were to gonna sit up here and discuss specific legal strategies and go into the nuances, I'd have a concern about that.
But what I'm what I'm envisioning is this.
Let's say our city attorney says, okay, we should have a lawsuit.
He's gonna draft it for us to review.
And then we could sit up here and say, yeah, you're net, without getting into the nuance of every single line.
And anyway, if we yay, if we say yay, it's gonna be filed within hours.
Well, literally, probably after the meeting, it's gonna be it's gonna be 30 minutes later, it's gonna be filed.
So that's very optimistic of you.
The word the we are a very engaged legislative body, and to talk about delineators.
We go into the details of delineators.
I'm sure that when it comes into litigating the state of the of Florida, you know, we're we probably you know would be very engaged.
Uh we would be micromanaging the hell out of that document.
So uh so just I'm not sure.
So just so we're clear.
The we've we we have we uh can I just say this is obviously a very consequential issue.
Very that being said, the city is engaged in significant amount of litigation.
I'm pretty confident that most of us do not read uh too much of those legal proceedings.
So that's not taken away from us.
We're we're we have we have good counsel, and in some of those cases we have outside counsel.
So Mr.
Because there are large litigations.
I'm just saying I'm not I'm not so sure we're gonna get into the weeds of every single nuanced uh cause of action.
So, Mr.
Mayor, the the the option before us, and I'd like you to speak on this is to make you the designee to make the decision of well to speak with the city attorney and come up with a plan forward for the commission, right?
I think you would be the one designated to talk strategy, and which makes sense because you're the only attorney on this body.
Um if you feel it is necessary to call a special meeting, call a special meeting if you feel it is necessary to I guess follow suit, you know, follow suit.
Um I I don't know.
Is that something you're comfortable with?
I'm comfortable with it.
Okay.
I mean my my thinking now is my thinking now is if that it got to that point, I would call the special commission meeting.
That's how I think you would do.
That's the one.
And not because I'm not comfortable with it, because I I respect this body and I would want to hear from everybody.
But there are issues as Commissioner Fernandez is raising.
What if there are timing issues?
Well, then that would that would be taken off the table, and you'd be by this vote, you'd be recognizing and and granting that authority.
Also, there could be quorum issues.
Let's say hypothetically you say people are traveling.
Uh I don't have any travel plans right now to say that.
Um, but you know, some people, some people could, and and that's and that's all fair.
Some of it could be even work related.
I don't know.
But um, so I'm comfortable with what you're proposing.
But I'm just telling you, my my opinion would be I would probably again.
I would probably try to call it special.
There's always the unforeseen.
Correct.
There is always the unforeseen, for example.
We didn't expect for the other members of I guess the cabinet to sign this bill already and to be sent, or who is it?
The legislature does signs.
I don't know who signs this bill before it's sent to the governor's desk.
We didn't expect that to happen today.
That's where we're at.
Um we knew it was happening.
Yeah, we knew it was gonna go with, but you know, is it but it's happening now, you know.
And so and so things could happen very quickly.
So, yeah, so I will amend my item.
I will make uh an amendment to the item.
Um that should the city attorney determine that litigation is the course of action that we designate the may the mayor uh to to act on behalf of the commission, uh, which could include approving uh litigation, declining litigation, or calling for a special meeting of the city commission.
And and the way I think it should be written is you will give the mayor a menu of options of what to do, and then have this has been specifically about a litigation.
This has been you though, Commissioner Suarez, the issues that you have raised are suing the state of Florida is a very drastic move.
And I think we can all agree on that.
And suing the state of Florida could involve outside counsel.
We all agree on that, and that that could cost a lot of money.
I think we can all agree on that, and that and that um, you know, there could be retaliatory consequences, and for as much as I hate to say that we shouldn't be sacrificing uh grants, you know, we shouldn't be sacrificing people's voices at the for grants, um those those are real consequences.
So because of those real issues when it comes to litigation, uh, because how serious we take that, that we designate the mayor to make that decision.
Now there's other aspects, other other uh appropriate legal actions that we shouldn't, you know, be micromanaging the city attorney on that he should be able to act on.
And I'm sure he regardless is gonna check with all of us and most certainly the mayor.
Um but this but but I think that's that that's different.
That's not litigation.
That's that is something that is very different that I think should be the decision of the city attorney who we've selected.
But when we're talking about litigation, I do that's the motion that's on the table.
We've been debating here how we address litigation.
That's been the nature of this whole discussion to this very point, and that is the motion that I have on on the table.
Uh and that to the expect that that the mayor may feel that a special meeting may be necessary that that not happen uh later than 24 hours, uh, so that we don't hold uh back the city attorney from doing whatever they feel necessary.
Okay, I second.
Okay.
Let's call the vote.
Uh a motion R7 AH has amended uh delegating authority to the mayor and with special conditions, uh motion by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by Commissioner Suarez.
All in favor, please say aye.
Aye.
Anyone opposed R7 AH is approved as amended 7-0.
I had a second motion to urge uh governor to veto bill that that motion was made by Commissioner Fernandez, took it by Commissioner Magazine.
Uh anyone uh all in favor of that motion, please say I'm sorry, what was that?
To urge the governor to veto you uh Fernandes made the motion?
You seconded it?
Yeah, all in favor, please say aye.
Aye.
Okay.
And I think uh what I would love for Commissioner Magazine, if you would make that motion and I would join you in seconding it.
I I love the collaborative spirit of reaching out to the Fountain Blue and saying, listen, we're here, we're one community.
We all live next to each other, we all deal with with with the consequences of the decisions that are made.
You sidestepped us and you went over there, but we can still find middle ground.
We can still find you know an ability to work here locally on something that perhaps isn't as onerous on our community.
I think we need to signal to I think you're so right, that is leadership right there, Commissioner Magazine.
I think we need to signal to Tallahassee that that we were not the problem.
That when that when people go to Tallahassee with this narrative, then Miami Beach is the problem.
They should say, Well, have you met with the elected officials in Miami Beach?
Have you tried to solve this locally?
Because I think had they tried to come to all of us, I think we're all solutions-driven individuals to try to find solutions.
And so I'm happy to support you and join you in in saying, you know, let's let's reach out to Fountain Blue.
Let's try to find a solution so that hopefully um we can avoid the preemption altogether.
Yeah, absolutely.
I'll uh make that motion.
Mr.
Mayor, would you like to be the delegated authority to do that?
Um staff do it.
Um I think we need elected representation there.
And and I think it could also be included in the urging to the governor.
Uh I think it should be included in the urging to the governor that this city commission didn't have jurisdiction over the matter.
And that and that, and that the that this interest didn't come before this body before going to Tallahassee, and to give us the opportunity to solve this locally, because we're extending, we're extending this olive branch to try to solve something very significant at the local level, the way that it should have been from day one.
Well, you know, Ms.
Commissioner Vernet, you bring up an excellent point.
You really honestly, this is this is an excellent idea.
Is there any mechanism where and we have a we have a someone from the Fountain Blue right here willing to speak?
Um is there any because if for everyone watching out there, this never came before us.
Never it came before the Historic Preservation Board.
And it really is a shame that we weren't able to work together with the with our second biggest employer and the commission.
And it is a is it it is a real shame because I think between myself, Commissioner Fernandez, and everyone else on here, we would have came somewhere where it was comfortable for everyone, and everyone would have been happy, and reasonable people and cooler heads would have prevailed, and we we would have we would have had an outcome that I think we would have all been okay with.
Perhaps perhaps we have a special meeting to discuss this and ask the Fountain Blue if they're willing to come here, speak, and make amendments to whatever they're proposing, so that they we don't have to have what is going on in the state.
I am I'm sure, and you could you know representative for fountain blue, you can correct me if I'm wrong.
I'm sure they're willing to meet us halfway.
And where if we can come to a conclusion, because what when does the governor have to sign this?
April second.
April second.
But what but when is the what is the deadline?
April second.
April second.
If we can somehow come, I mean that is kind of short.
It doesn't even need to be before.
We're not gonna stop this between now and April 2nd.
Yeah, so you know, maybe we do have a special meeting where we do have them present a case before us, not the historic preservation board, but before us, and then we can ask them to compromise on a on a certain set of things, height, amount of slides, amount of pumps, etc.
Is it open to the public or not?
And it'll be open to the public, of course.
No, no, no.
I mean it's is is the water park open to the public or not.
Well, we could work on to the details, and then maybe they're willing to say, you know what?
Fine, we're willing to to negotiate, and we're not going to do the maximum of what we could do.
Because I'm I'm I'm gonna venture out to say that they're gonna try to be good neighbors and and and put their best foot forward.
And and if that's the case, it's really a win-win for everyone.
So, you know, I don't know, Ralph, if you want to come speak through the mayor, uh I don't know if you want to, but you're more than welcome to.
And see, is there an appetite for something like that?
But if I could just call the vote.
If you're while you're approaching, uh you know, I I would love to give them the benefit of the doubt.
I will just remind everybody that there was an opportunity for continued dialogue with people making decisions where the residents were here to share their viewpoint.
And um the Fountain Blue chose to not engage in that conversation.
And um, you know, I I like to be optimistic, and I would hope that if we extend them the opportunity to come before the commission, open to the public, um, that they would reconsider that decision that they made at that time and take advantage of the opportunity to engage as you know, as good neighbors.
Usually we require a tie, but we'll make an exception to that.
Okay, fantastic.
Yeah, I wasn't planning on speaking today, but um thank you, Mr.
Mayor and and commissioners, uh Ralph Andrade, I represent the Fountain Blue.
And yes, look, the Fountain Blue has been uh a great corporate partner as corporate citizen for for decades.
Um regretfully we are where we are, but they are willing to to meet with the city, meet with the community, engage, and try and come up with uh with a solution that uh you know you know we're never gonna make everyone happy, but that the community can live with and that the commission uh can hopefully support and get behind.
So we're ready to talk whenever the city is.
Uh we welcome uh reaching out to uh or having MBNA participate in those conversations as well.
Um any of the community members that feel that they're affected by this, um, we're here uh so Ralph, if that is the case, that is great news.
That's very exciting to hear.
If that is the case, with great respect, would Jeff, Mr.
Sofer, would he call the governor and ask him to hold off on signing this until we've had a chance to have that meeting?
Because if he signs that bill today, I I think it's gonna be harder to undo the legislation and that then has the follow-on effect of preempting us home rule for other decisions that might come down the down the road.
It still gives him the uh the opportunity to sign on April 2nd if we're not at a place where we all feel good, but it gives us a minute to try to do something that that ends this drama.
You're seeing a unified commission willing to work with someone the way that it should have been from day one.
Before before they sidestepped us and they sidestepped our residents, they should have come here first.
And so, and so you know, we're willing to work with them, they've been partners, that partnership relationship is important.
Uh and I think Commissioner Bod is making a very reasonable point.
You know, if there really is a goodwill intent to work together the way the partners do, to, you know, to call the governor, tell the governor, hey, listen, don't sign that bill because you know what, this is a city that is willing to work with us.
But what but what was done was something that just promulgates this this false narrative, you know, that we're not willing to work with people.
We are 100% and by the way, you know, you see here a commission of people that dedicate themselves almost full time to serving the city.
Commissioner Suarez, Commissioner Bott, Commissioner Matel Salinas, Commissioner Dominguez, myself, we're all ready, and you know, my colleagues.
Well, you guys have full-time jobs.
But I'm saying I'm sorry.
No, but I'm not but what I'm saying is that we're always very readily available.
And yes, you guys always I'm always readily available.
I know you tell me when the meeting is, I'm there.
That's not what I meant.
That's that's not what I meant.
Ralph, let Ralph speak.
I mean, Ralph, is this is this an appetite something like look, I I don't expect the governor to wave his his sort of leverage, right?
But I want to know, like even if he signs the bill, I still believe that Jeff is willing to still negotiate and in good faith and and come to the table and say, look, you know, I I understand I could do this, but you know, after hearing this, we can do that.
Is that something that's that is something that that the Fountain Blue and Mr.
Sulfer is absolutely willing to do?
He is happy and glad to meet and looking forward to meeting with the city with all of you, either in a sunshine meeting or or or individually, one-on-one, um, as well as with the community at large.
So, yes, we'll we're ready to have that conversation.
And I I don't want to get into the how we got here, but the lot of stuff happened that is why we got here.
Um not that we're not we're not trying to rehash old you know arguments, right?
We're trying to move forward.
And that's not the point of this.
So anyone listening, so for MBNA, we're not trying to rehash old arguments.
What we're trying to do is come to a possible compromise on something that is going to be palatable for the community.
Okay.
You know, maybe you know, the biggest concern that I hear is traffic, right?
Maybe there is a certain way to alleviate traffic where uh it's not impactful at all.
Um, you know, another concern that I hear um is you know, day passes, it's et cetera.
So let's we can probably work on something that most people can sign on and be happy with people's views also, you know, you you know how you positioned this, so you're not affecting the value of people's properties and there and there because there's things that we have to consider, but so how do we want to go about this?
Is this like a sunshine meeting?
Do you want to make a designee?
You know, um I I prefer I I mean I'd love to be the one to negotiate this if you guys are okay with it, or we do sunshine meetings.
Um I think I think the mayor, I I you know, I think the mayor is the figurehead of of the city.
Um and and you know, I the mayor, I think out of all of us is the one that lives closest to this that you know that deals with the Collins Avenue traffic with which which would be affected uh by this.
Um and so you know I would I would I I would start with the mayor uh who is the figurehead of of our city and take it from there.
Well, you you tell us you know who can talk to you and we will.
Commissioner Bot.
But I think MBNA needs to have a seat at the table for this conversation as well.
So it's not a closed door negotiation.
And and I'm not sure why it wouldn't be held here with all of us.
And and like uh what should have happened at the plan at the um DRB, um I'm okay with the mayor being the designee.
And then, you know, because uh look, I mean so because when the cameras are rolling, it's a little different, but I think once the mayor can certainly have a meeting with MBNA and with Mr.
Sopher and have a closed door meeting, and then whatever comes out of that bring that the mayor can bring it back to the commission.
That's right.
You know, really, because you're right, Alex, he's the figurehead of the city.
Uh he just won the mayorship in a very high hotly contested race, and he deserves that right.
So I'm okay with designating the mayor to negotiate uh between all the interested stakeholders to possibly come back with a uh a compromise.
I don't understand why, you know, some on on some things we want to do sunshine meetings, on other meetings on other issues we don't want to do sunshine meetings.
Like why wouldn't we have a conversation here open to the public where residents can be here and we can share our our perspectives and um eventually it's gonna come back to us.
And I do agree, I do agree with you.
I mean, and I've said that even on the other issue.
I actually want to have as much as possible in a commission meeting in the sunshine, everyone here.
But I think that's a good thing.
So why would we change you know this is But I think there should be like the moment we come to commission, there should be something that's negotiated.
And I and none of us can legally under the ethics code negotiate on behalf of the city unless they're voted on and appointed by the city commission to negotiate on behalf of the city.
And so, and so to the extent that something would be prepared, some sort of middle ground middle ground that mitigates the issues and that's brought to the commission, you know, I would I would want to you know designate the mayor, the city manager.
Um you've been very quiet, Mr.
Manager.
A little bit about legal issues.
So you've been looking left and not right, ready, willing and available.
If I might so if that's if we're trying to put together like a negotiating committee, my my uncle is a labor lawyer for for ATT for decades.
And so have everybody have a seat at the table.
So if it's uh Mr.
City Manager, if it's if it's the mayor, if it's somebody from from Fountain Blue, then also have somebody from MBN.
Of course, MBNA has top six flag.
Those four entities need to roll up their sleeves, sit around a table and figure out what they can live with and what they can what they will, you know, falling their sword about.
MBNA is how we're leading organization in Midbeach.
They represent, they have done a very good job over the years advocating there are incredible partners, and I 100% agree.
I mean, this is not you know, let's not forget that this is a very serious um neighborhood organization.
They're not fly by night representing a handful of people.
They in some cases seem to know more than staff do on some issues.
It's true.
Um and that's not a that's not a slam to staff, but they live there.
It's you know, this is their backyard.
So they represent several thousand people.
Yeah, and and different kinds of you know, residential business, commercial.
Um so those four stakeholders need to be locked in a room and nobody comes out till everyone can sign on the dotted line, is my view.
Not that it's like a conclave.
It's a conclave, right?
Like a conclave.
And we'll have a little smoke going on.
I was about to say, All right, so we're gonna have okay, so just to recap the city attorney, the city manager, the mayor, and MBA uh at the table with with the Fountain Blue.
And once the mayor feels mayor together with with our staff feel comfortable that there's something that is well baked, you know, again, and this is all you know, hoping that the Fountain Blue, you know, realizes that you know they had here a government um that is a very accessible government to work and on solutions as opposed to preemption.
Um, you know, we're once they feel once the mayor feels that this is well baked to bring that to the full commission.
And and and I want to just say that this is you know, this is what the message to Tallahassee should be is that we're trying our best to come to a compromise.
And we're willing to do that.
And the fact that we weren't able to do that from the get go, and now that we are able to do that, really, you know, I I hope that they're listening that look, we're we're trying to be reasonable and we want to make this work for everyone.
So, Ralph, I don't think you answer the question about whether or not Mr.
Sophra would be willing to call into the governor and say, hold off until April 2nd.
Look, I I don't have that authority.
You're asking me, I would have to ask Mr.
Sophor if you were inclined to do that.
I I don't, you know, I'll I'm happy to ask and and get back to you.
I do think the idea of of designating uh the mayor or individual is a good idea rather than start with what's short of turning to you know a public shouting match uh between all the different interests if we're I think I think we got there.
So if you could reach out to Mr.
Sofer and urge him to please respectfully, no one's taking anybody's power away, it's just giving us time to try to accomplish what should have happened in the first place.
Okay, I will and if I could also ask uh my colleagues, is this the right order of operations, having the mayor negotiate and then come back to the commission?
Because uh presumably the commission meeting will be an open format.
And as much as we all would love to, we are not going to uh please everyone, right?
And there was a lot of passion at the HPB, and it's I would expect the same no matter what the outcome this negotiated between MBA, the mayor, and the Fountain Blue team.
So are we setting ourselves up where a good faith deal, being optimistic here, a good faith deal and compromise could be struck between those parties, and then it comes to be signed off by us in an open meeting and pandemonium breaks loose.
I think that's why MBNA needs to be a part of the conversation.
And if they come out of those four organizations, come out of the meeting with an agreement that they all uh can sign on to, then we're just ratifying it.
MBNA is gonna be there negotiating on behalf of their full uh membership.
Uh Commissioner, well, I guess where I'm going and yes, MBNA negotiating on behalf of their full ownership.
I wasn't at the HPB, but from what I saw, I don't know if that was all how we think of MBNA, right?
I I don't want to speculate, but that does not reflect MBNA.
Yeah.
And that's where I was going later.
But yes, even MBNA could be under the umbrella, compromise, and let's be optimistic.
Uh a good compromise is made, but at a public meeting, we're still gonna have people with perhaps other special interests that are there to rile things up.
And that's what I'm worried about.
That's their prerogative.
Yeah.
That's their prerogative.
But it's our job, and it's our jurisdiction ultimately to make the final decision.
And also along the process, I trust uh, you know, of the mayor.
You know, of course, the mayor, you know, is ne is negotiating there, but I also trust that the city attorney, the city manager is gonna keep us abreast of what's happening in those negotiations, uh briefing us uh so that so that so they get our feedback.
I mean, that's something that you're allowed to do, Mr.
Attorney.
Would that be correct?
Yes, absolutely.
Yeah.
Yeah, and so obviously, you know, I think you know, we need to delegate this authority to the mayor, but nothing precludes the uh the city attorney, the city manager from briefing us as what as has been the case multiple times in the past with other negotiations where one of our colleagues is the designee to negotiate, and staff just keeps us abreast and gets our feedback on stuff.
And but I do think that there couldn't be a stronger message to send to the governor as to why not to sign this bill than showing to him that there was always an avenue to solve this locally, and that and and that that we are a responsible body and that we want to be able to, in a very responsible professional manner, work with our partners to solve this.
Our first and foremost our resident partners, but our business partners like like the Fountain Blue.
So, you know, uh Commissioner Magazine, I would second your motion on this item.
Um, and I thank you for having that very thoughtful leadership of when when this became such a tense and heated issue that you thought it is still the right thing to extend an olive branch, uh, because you know we should always keep that door open to solve our issues here locally.
As you always eloquently say teamwork.
Mr.
Mayor, can I just close with look?
I I don't want to misrepresent anything or overpromise and underdeliver.
Um the Fountain Blue is always available to talk to its elected officials, um, whether it's the mayor, whether it's the commissioner or the city manager.
Um doors are always welcome to have conversations with you, and to the extent we can resolve some of the outstanding issues.
We will.
I'm a little hesitant that we're calling this, you know, negotiations that sort of implies you know, sort of a a legal setting.
We want to have conversations with you.
We want to see if we can you know address some of the concerns that are out in the community.
That's all.
I I don't have the authority to say we're gonna sit and negotiate terms, and uh what I have the authority to tell you is that we are happy to meet with the city, discuss potential solutions to what's uh the situation that's coming up.
No, we get that rough.
I guess I want to make be clear because I'm gonna I'm gonna be showing up to these meetings.
MBNA is gonna be showing up to these meetings.
Somebody, whether it's it won't be me, it'll be no hopefully it'll be Jeffrey uh so for himself, but it has to be somebody with authority because as we all know, we don't want to hear that.
It's gotta be somebody sitting in the room.
Understood who who can make decisions.
Understood.
Thank you.
Call the role.
Could we could we include as part of this motion asking our lobbyist in Tallahassee uh to notify the governor that that we are asking the Fountain Blue to work with us on this solution locally?
They may be watching.
Probably.
I'm I'm guessing I'm guessing so, yeah.
But sure.
All right, let's call the vote.
So make sure I got this right.
So this is one designating the city, uh the mayor, along with the city attorney, city manager, and MBNA to have conversations with the Fountain Blue to reach an amicable solution and also include notifying the governor of that decision.
That's correct.
That would be a third resolution.
Yes, correct.
So okay.
Well, we should recap once we we have the if there's going to be litigation, the mayor would decide yay, nay, or call a special meeting.
We have a resolution to urge the governor to veto the measure.
We have a new resolution to designate the mayor together with the city manager, city attorney, a representative of MBNA to sit and discuss with Fountain Blue, possible find finding a solution that works for all.
Well, I'll I'll uh it it may be more than one representative MBA.
Well, one or more representatives of MBNA.
Um, and last uh you know, to request that our lobbyists notify the governor of this new development.
So that's uh all in favor of motion by commissioner magazine, second by commissioner Fernandez, all in favor.
Yes, and Commissioner Soares is a yes, so it's 7-0.
Okay, excellent.
Thank you, colleagues.
Thank you, Commissioner Fernandez, for bringing the item.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you to the residents, the residents who have been putting up the good fight, Alicia, Anna Marie, the wise family.
Yeah.
Um, you know, we stand by them and protecting our home rule, and most importantly, their rights.
I'll even mention Marcia Schwartz.
I'm sure you've spoken before.
She's been very vocal.
Yes.
No, I this is probably on the handful of top three issues of uh that I've been since I've been elected of passion uh for for an issue and resident engagement and involvement.
You're the ones depends.
By the way, since we are in decision, Mr.
Mayer, I just want to know because in the event, let's say in the event this gets this could be easy signed today into the or well, I don't know, six story.
I don't know if the governor works past six.
I don't know.
Uh let's say it's signed tomorrow.
Um and the Fountain Blue could rush to submit their application.
There's still a number of things that the city has to review site plans, traffic impacts, other concurrencies that would apply that those are part of the regulatory process that they're not you know that we're not preempted on.
Is that correct?
I don't think traffic impacts, because I asked about a traffic study early on and was told no.
So I would ask Tom to step forward.
I believe that there are still some um checks and balances.
Uh I also don't know when the legislation would become effective if immediately becomes effective immediately.
Is it a meeting?
Okay.
Um we voted on the items.
Do we really well I just want to make sure that if there are you know that we understand clearly what are you know in the event someone rushes to submit an application, uh, which could happen, they could have an application ready to submit to the to the administration immediately when the when the governor uh signs this this bill, there's still regulatory frameworks uh that the that this that they have to comply with.
That's correct.
And I think that the as Nick Claire just pointed out earlier, we would first have to determine that they are eligible under this statute because there are some benchmarks that they are going to have to substantiate.
And so assuming that they can substantiate that, then we will make sure that all applicable regulatory requirements that are not preempted are adhered to.
How about traffic impacts?
Is that part of the review?
Again, it would depend upon the nature of what they submit.
I wouldn't want to say yes or no without actually seeing an application.
But I'm just asking because you know, one of the legislators mentioned something uh on social media, and I just want to make sure that if we really do have uh you know these specific oversight rights that you know that we don't just throw those out the window, that we indeed are you know looking at every review option that we have and making sure that it's being abided for responsibly, respectfully, and fairly.
Uh, but that we just don't you know throw those are not thrown out the window by the preemption.
Yeah, anything that we're not preempted on, we will absolutely insist on compliance with.
Okay.
Thank you.
Call uh R9A and R9B.
So board of committees.
Yes.
Uh everyone has a blue sheet uh in front of them.
There's one seat for every appointee.
You could do it by acclamation if you wish.
Let's do that.
Sounds good.
Okay, so R9B is done by acclamation.
Congratulations to all the nominees.
R7X.
R7X is accept recommendation, close ocean drive during FIFA World Cup.
Let's call the vote.
Uh city manager wants to speak.
So um we were reached out to uh by the Ocean Drive Association, who mentioned that uh we typically do close Ocean Drive during Memorial Day weekend.
Um and because the first FIFA match will be June 11th, that there might be some value in extending that closure for Memorial Day through the FIFA games.
Just wanted to put that out there that that was an ask that was received by our office.
We believe it's workable, but um I would be supportive of that.
Okay.
With that amendment.
So Eric, is that as amended then as amended?
Yes, okay.
So I have a motion by Commissioner Bottts, seconded by Vice Mayor Monica Matil Salinas as amended R7X.
All in favor, please say aye.
Aye.
Aye.
Anyone opposed?
Hearing none.
It's approved seven six zero.
Commissioner Suarez is absent at the moment.
R7AB.
Thank you, Mr.
Mayor.
Oh, sorry.
R7AB is purchase and installed flags for FIFA World Cup.
I move my item.
Second.
We'll vote.
Motion by Commissioner Mattel Salinas, seconded by Commissioner Fernandez.
This is on R7AB.
All in favor, please say aye.
Aye.
Anyone opposed, hearing none, the item is approved.
60.
Commissioner Suarez absent.
R5S.
As in Sam.
Sam me.
Sammy.
R5S is an order to the mayor, city commissioner of the City of May Beach, Florida, amending the code of the City of My Beach.
So part B entitled land development regulations by amending Chapter 1 entitled general provisions.
Article 2, entitled Definition of Section 1.2.1 and title general definitions to create a definition for bicycle ride chair station by amending chapter 5 entitled off-street parking.
Article 2, entitled vehicle parking, bicycle parking, and off street loading requirements, section 5.2.14 entitled alternative parking incentives by modifying the alternative parking incentives to include a provision for bicycle ride share stations by amending chapter 7 entitled zoning districts of regulation.
Article 1 residential use incentives to include a provision requiring bicycle uh district rights share stations by amending article 5 entitled supplementary district regulations section 7.5.3 entitled supplementary yard regulations by amending the allowable setback encroachments to include bicycle ride chair stations and providing for codification repeaters of ability and effective date.
This is R5S.
It is a first reading public hearing.
It is 57th vote required.
Commissioner Fernandez, co-sponsored by Commissioner Bach.
I move the item.
Second.
Motion by Commissioner Fernandez, uh seconded by the mayor.
It is a public hearing.
I see Mitch Mr.
Mitch Novick requesting to speak.
Mitch, are you here to talk on R5S?
Hi Ralph.
No, I wanted to speak on the fountain blue, but I won't say what I had to say.
Thank you, Mitch.
Appreciate it.
There is no one else requested to speak.
I have one more personal requesting to speak.
David, are you here to speak on R5S?
Forgive me.
What was the the result of that, please?
Eric, it's on the FIFA one.
Is that the one you're talking about?
The road closures?
Yes.
Yes.
What what happened with that?
Forgive me, it went so fast.
This is David.
We'll call you after the meeting and fill you in.
It was already voted on.
Thank you.
We have one more caller.
Michael.
Yes, am I heard?
Yes, on R5S, please.
Yes, I do want to thank publicly Commissioner Fernandez for really taking the side of the residents.
And I hope Ms.
Commissioner Suarez, you as well.
You could start taking his side.
And really push for the residents.
We have voted you guys in.
And we you guys are supposed to be our voice and not the voice of a billing there.
Thank you very much for all those and especially for you, Mr.
Mayor Minor.
I really appreciate you as well.
And for the rest of our speaking up for the residents.
And to stop this bad bill and to stop the move from doing that.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you very much.
R5S.
May I call the roll?
Or have motion by Commissioner Fernandez, seconded by the mayor.
Commissioner Suarez.
Is out.
Commissioner Dominguez.
Yes.
Commissioner Bott.
Yes.
Vice Mayor Matthias Salinas.
Yes.
Commissioner Magazine.
Yes.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Yes.
Mayor Minor.
Yes.
Motion carry.
Second reading public hearing is on April 22nd.
That was item R5S.
R5X.
R5X is an order to the Mayor, City Commission of the City of My Beach, Florida, amending Chapter 14 of the Code of the City of Mayor Beach.
Entitled Building Regulations by amending Article 2 and Title Construction Standards by amending Division 4 thereof entitled 2017 through 27 2026 building permit reprieve program to extend the duration of the building permit reprieve program for orders of single family residential multifamily residential mixed use or commercial properties who have failed to obtain a building permit or who hold expired permits through December 31, 2028, and to amend the definition of existing buildings as used therein and providing for repealer qualification of several ability and an effective date and a sunset provision.
It is a first reading public hearing.
It is item R5X.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Thank you, Mr.
Mayor.
This is extending the building permit reprieve period through December 31st, 2028.
But this now incorporates a new element into whereby we are waiving the usual double and triple permit fees that get charged when work is done without a permit.
And so this is an effort uh to give people some assistance, some forgiveness if they come uh to us and they tell us, hey, you know, yeah, I I messed up.
I did work without I'm doing work without a permit.
It gets them into compliance without having to face double and triple permit fees.
Uh I move my item.
Uh motion by Commissioner Fernandez, secondary by Commissioner Bot.
It is a public hearing.
I see no one in Zoom, no one in the audience requesting to speak.
Uh back all the roll.
Yeah.
Uh Commissioner Fernandez.
Yes.
Vice Mayor Matil Salinas.
Yes.
Commissioner Bott.
Yes.
Commissioner Dominguez.
Yes.
Commissioner Magazine.
Yes.
Commissioner Suarez.
Mayor Minor.
Yes.
Motion carries the item is approved 7-0.
Second reading public hearing is April 22nd.
That was R5X.
R5Y.
R5Y is an order to the mayor to the Commission of the City May Beach.
Amending Chapter 32 of the code of the City of Mayor Beach, entitled public property, Article 7, entitled Art and Public Spaces, Division 1, entitled generally section 82-537 thereof.
In title definitions to create certain defined terms amending division two, section 82 point 82-562 thereof.
Entitled powers and duties to modify the powers of the art in public spaces, AIPP Committee Amending Division 3 and Title Fund, Section 82 587 thereof and title appropriations by the city to the fund to amend requirements for art and public places allocation to be implemented on the site of a city construction project on providing for repeat or qualification servability and effective date.
This is R5Y.
It is a first reading public hearing.
Commissioner Bott.
Yeah, this is a very simple um item, and Lisa can answer any specific questions.
But basically, this is to um reinforce the notion that the art that gets purchased to be displayed as part of these projects actually gets displayed in a public space.
Ideally, the majority of the time outside of the building, um as opposed to say, for instance, um in the office of the manager of the property, which is technically a public space, but is not what this was intended, or in you know, behind the concierge desk that is technically a public space.
But the idea of art in public places is that that residents who have no would never need to set foot into that facility would still be able to get the benefit of the art in public places.
Very simple, no money being spent, just encouraging people to make sure that when um development agreements are negotiated that this is how things are are handled.
And with that, I move the item.
Call the vote.
It is a public hearing.
I see no one in Zoom, no one in the audience requesting to speak.
I have a motion by Commissioner Bott, seconded by Commissioner Magazine.
Uh Commissioner Suarez.
Yes.
Commissioner Bott.
Yes.
Commissioner Magazine.
Yes.
Commissioner Dominguez.
Yes.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Yes.
Vice Mayor Matil Salinas.
Yes.
Mayor Minor.
Yes.
Motion carries the item is approved.
The second reading first reading, second reading, public hearing scheduled for April 22.
R5Y.
R5L.
R5L is an order for the mayor of City Commission of City Valley Beach for an amending chapter 80 of the code of City Maybe Beach entitled public property by amending Article 3 entitled uses of public property by amending division 1 entitled generally by amending section 82-74 thereof entitled plastic related or metallicized decorations prohibited at public marinas, marine facilities, parks, and beaches in order to clarify applicable restrictions on the possession and use of decorations in outdoor public settings and providing for repeaters, submobility codification, and effective dates.
This is a first reading public hearing, and it's item R5L.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Second.
Let's call the vote.
Seconded by Vice Mayor Matil Salinas.
I see no one in Zoom, no one in the audience.
Commissioner Magazine.
Yes.
Commissioner Fernandez.
Yes.
Commissioner Suarez.
Yes.
Commissioner Dominguez.
Yes.
Commissioner Bott.
Yes.
Vice Mayor Matil Salinas.
Yes.
Yes.
Motion carry second reading public hearing scheduled for April 22nd.
That was item R5L.
C7AF.
C7AF is request additional office hours.
Condo ob uh whatever.
I can never pronounce that word.
I think we'll say it from now on.
Commissioner Dominguez, co-sponsor by Commissioner Mateo Salinas and Commissioner Bott.
Commissioner Suarez separated the item for the record.
Commissioner Suarez.
Yeah, it thank you, Mr.
Mayor.
I um I had a big condo town hall, and we actually had the condo abudsman here.
Uh and I negotiated more time for the uh condo abudsman to be here uh either virtually or in person uh at least once a week in Miami Beach, and that took a lot of time to to negotiate.
Um I don't want to send mixed messages to the condo budsman uh uh on where we're at.
So that's the only reason why I pulled it for discussion that's amazing news.
I had no idea, and um, so then this m item is moot.
Yeah, I had reached out to the condo ombudsman.
I have an appointment with him in like two weeks, it was impossible to get it.
You, like everybody else on the commission is probably on a daily weekly basis, getting emails, calls, and worry from people that are getting condo buyouts, and we're just sitting there not able to do anything.
And um, I had a meeting with the legal team um here, and uh that was one of the suggestions that they gave.
So if it's been negotiated, bring it out as soon as possible so that people can start uh putting it on their calendars and we can refer people to the new hours because right now it's only three a month.
Sure, Commissioner Dominguez, yeah.
Um just so everyone who's paying attention, it's gonna be the first and Thursday of each month in person and virtually uh the second and fourth week of every month.
So uh maybe we can expand those hours, but I think we want to just take it step by step and and see you know what kind of bandwidth they they need, uh, and gauge it over the next couple months, and then Commissioner Dominguez, maybe you and I can work together uh after that see if we need to get more, I'd be more than happy to co-prime that with you.
Because I know you live in one of the condos and wait, which is also facing serious assessments, so yeah.
You are too, I'm sure.
People in their 80s um that feel that there is nothing they can do.
And so maybe maybe uh having a condo ombudsman here can guide them more than we can.
Sure.
Because we're not looking at the let's revisit this in six months and then and then let's see how how good this now weekly meeting is see what else resources we can lend to condo owners.
So uh Commissioner Dominguez, do you want to withdraw or defer from six months?
Okay, we're drawn.
Great.
C7J.
C7J, I believe was done.
But yeah, we did that great.
Um C7U.
C7U allocate funds from Sterlick Foundation donation for senior bingo program C7U was separated by the mayor.
Yes, the reason why I pulled it out.
I have amendments which you may like.
So I'll turn it over to you.
Okay.
Um so the the amendment is three thousand dollars.
Um for federation, fifteen hundred dollars um came from Vicky Lopez.
So uh that wouldn't come from us.
I tried to get more, but I couldn't.
So the 3,000 would be for Rebecca Towers.
They've made that specific ask.
Um the other buildings, we have not gotten that specific ask, so I just took it off the table.
And if you remember, last year, Federation Stella asked us for it, and I paid for it out of my ticket budget um for them, and it really should be more under whatever budget stuff gets done.
So it's three thousand.
And the originally it was ten thousand?
How much was the original?
7500.
No, the re and the reason why I pulled it is I I like the item.
It's just we this comes from the from from the mayor and commission's office.
This comes from our budget.
And the 10,000 that we're currently the grant that we're currently using it for uh encompasses a lot of fitness classes.
I mean, I have a list here, I'm not gonna read it all out.
But I I get concerned if we're dealing with a finite grant and where we're using the funds, that we would have to potentially um lose some of that access, which is why I'm gonna do that.
I don't want any access.
I and I know you do.
I I just but I have I have to make sure these funds go all the way uh as far as we can break it.
And since we're dealing anyone listening, we're dealing with a specific grant given of ten thousand dollars.
So this is how we have to use the lize the money, and right now we're we're we're capped out, we're maxed out.
So that's why I want to have this discussion, so figure out what we do because even that amount, the 3,000 is gonna have an impact on some of these classes.
So I did check um with the with several departments, because um we uh the seniors do get money from a lot of different pockets.
Um the only thing that I got from the um mayor and commission budget.
There's no line items for seniors, but uh they were able to tell me that there's um a promo budget that's 22,000.
I'm not sure what that is.
Um maybe we leave this on if it's okay.
And I work with Veronica on finding where that 3,000 can come from.
Okay, amazing.
So that nobody loses out.
Yeah, yeah, absolutely.
Let me ask a question if I can.
Please.
Um so our office, as I don't understand our office budget, and um it's fine because whatever that's Robert can tell you all about that at home.
Um we have senior activities and events that are paid for through our office budget.
Yes.
Okay.
Well, this is specifically a grant that is given.
You want to explain it, Erica?
This is a specifically a grant that is given to the city that we as a commission have to vote on authorized accepting the grant.
Right, but then the expenditure.
We have no input.
Well, let me if I could finish.
It's sorry.
Um okay, so we don't what would be good is to get a briefing every once in a while just to know.
Sure.
Just to know, just so that we know what's being done because it's just good.
I just wanted to be able to know what's what's what was going on.
You have a great team, you have a very good team, people who really care about about the elderly and want to make sure that you know they're getting good services and good and good events, and it'll be just good since since all of this is being organized, you know, on behalf of the office of the mayor and commission for the commission to kind of be in the in the loop of what's happening, and not just with this.
For example, um, for for example, like the Georgie, the Georgie serves all of us.
Um, I don't know if one serves all of us, but it's good just to be kept in the loop of where of you know how we're serving everyone through these resources that we have available in our office.
Yeah, by the way, we have a list.
I'm happy to share it with you.
I mean, it's uh they're on a good company on it.
This is all it's great.
We'll share it with everyone here.
That's actually very good news, is the most wonderful news.
Yeah, no, it's it's it's broken out.
I mean I could I could read it, but it's uh take time so I'm happy to share it, make it public.
Yes.
So I I mean we're really dealing with uh a finite amount of money.
I just it sounds sounds funny.
We're talking about sometimes millions of dollars, and here we're we're talking about three thousand dollars, but we have to adhere to what the grant provides, and and we'll figure it out.
We'll we'll talk about it offline, and we'll bring it back to the next commission meeting.
So does this come from the Sternlink Foundation or does it come from the Mayor Commission?
What was the question?
Uh just where did the money come from for the Ohry Sternlick donated 10,000, and since uh Rebecca Towers the last time that we were there asked for $3,000 for bingo, um I asked that the $3,000 come out of the Barry Sternlick donation.
Then Gloria came back and um explained that they do yoga and other classes in those buildings, and that's above and beyond the senior yoga and Tai Chi and art classes that we do through the parks department.
Um so she does those in those those buildings, and she said um no, you can't use that money for the bingo, and then she emailed and called seniors to come in worried that some of their stuff was getting cut.
Okay, okay.
So so just and just sort of educate me, the very snow like uh gave us a grant, and then it's under our purview how to administer the money.
Uh it is, but uh the commission wasn't involved.
Gloria handled it.
Okay.
So I mean it's just more, I mean, obviously.
That's their job.
Yeah, I mean, obviously the Veronica's the chief of staff, and and it's on their all of it.
And I have a list here which I'm gonna share with everyone, but it basically here there's Zumba Yoga and Dance classes.
Um $50 per class paid to the instructor instructor, and there's freedom towers for freedoms, and it goes through how many classes, how much that each cost, um arts uh paid to instructor, Gabriella Esquivel Arts, um, AG music entertainment and production.
So the yoga once a month, right?
So it's all laid out, and obviously we'll we'll share.
But I think I'll turn to Eric as well, but the Barry Sternlick grant for 10,000 was specifically earmarked for our seniors.
So we're and that's why I asked for that from there.
We have to use it for seniors.
So Commissioner's referring the item C7U deferring it or approving it as a member.
Let's open a continue because uh we're not done with it yet.
Yeah, so C7U is opening continue to the April 22nd meeting.
Okay.
Thank you.
Very productive meeting, everyone.
Thank you.
Miami Beach City Commission Meeting – March 18, 2026
The Miami Beach City Commission met on March 18, 2026, at City Hall for a full-day session that included public comments, consent agenda, and numerous discussion and action items. Key topics included senior program funding, traffic enforcement on Alton Road, the extension of Police Chief Wayne Jones’ DROP participation, a resolution to challenge state preemption (HB 399), and discussions on naming rights and sustainability.
Consent Calendar
- Approved unanimously (7-0) with several items separated by commissioners, including C7T, C7U, C7J, C4P, C7AF, and C7AG. The consent agenda was adopted as set.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Kirsa Rafo (Seniors Committee, Freedom Tower) expressed concern over potential cuts to senior classes (yoga, dance, painting) and asked for more transportation. Commissioner Dominguez clarified that the item was to add funding, not cut.
- Alina Valdez (senior) reminded commissioners of campaign promises to take care of seniors.
- Meg Lusteau (Miami Design Preservation League) spoke in strong support of Commissioner Fernandez's resolution R7AH to challenge HB 399.
- Mitch Novick spoke in support of R7AH and praised the spring break success.
- Brenda Jordan (artist) alleged discrimination in the city's artist vendor program and requested a meeting with the mayor.
- Janet Figueroa (artist vendor) emphasized the importance of the program for seniors and people with disabilities.
- Alicia Casanova (Mid Beach Neighborhood Association) supported R7AH and urged the commission to protect home rule.
- Multiple virtual callers (Johan Moore, Judith Smeigle, Patrick Breshaig, Susanna Santoro, Mark Weiss, Miriam Weiss, Vincent Mafey, Chris Carney, Anna Marie Ferreta de Melo, and others) spoke in support of R7AH and against HB 399, and also on beach management, safety, and sustainability.
Discussion Items
- R7L – Beachwalk Camera Monitoring: Police Chief Wayne Jones reported over 1,000 cameras with real-time monitoring. Discussion focused on maintenance and gaps in coverage; commissioners requested updates on completion timeline and AI solutions.
- R7D – Star Island Water Tower Restoration: Approved as a budget priority for FY27.
- R7E – Sea Grape Management: Opened and continued to May 20, 2026, to allow police to identify hot spots and assess budget impact.
- R7G – Traffic Delineators on Alton Road: Approved after extensive debate about enforcement, truck parking violations, and comprehensive planning. Commissioner Bott requested a holistic review of delivery truck management citywide.
- R7S – Strategic Plan 2026: Approved with an amendment to add a checkbox on agenda cover sheets indicating alignment with strategic initiatives.
- R9X – Naming Rights Opportunities: Commissioners explored corporate naming rights and a municipal fundraising officer; directed administration to explore options.
- R5i – Police Pension DROP Extension (Chief Jones): Unanimously approved (7-0) to extend the chief’s participation to 10 years, noting no increased cost to the city.
- R5V – Monument Island Swim Zone: Approved first reading to establish a designated swim area and motorized vessel exclusion zone for safety.
- R7AH – Challenge HB 399 (Large Destination Resorts): After lengthy debate, approved 7-0 as amended, authorizing the city attorney to take appropriate legal action (including litigation) with delegation to the mayor for final decision on litigation. Also passed separate motions to urge the governor to veto HB 399 and to designate the mayor, city manager, city attorney, and MBNA to negotiate with Fountainbleau.
- R9AB – Muffler/Exhaust Noise Enforcement: Noted that Operation Quiet Streets has written 513 citations in 2026, up from 675 all of 2025. Commissioners supported continued enforcement.
- R7J – 63rd Street Bridge Schedule: Deferred to June 24, 2026, pending Coast Guard guidance.
- R7AE – Model Volleyball with Electronic Music: Approved as amended with music ending at 10:00 PM (Sunday) and 11:00 PM (Saturday), with compliance with sea turtle lighting regulations.
- R7K – Expansion of Forever Proud Banner Program: Approved with an amendment to include Israeli flags on banners, subject to legal review.
- R5N – Sanitation Commercial Impact Fees: First reading approved with bifurcation: water/sewer CPI applied to new development, sanitation catch-up deferred to April.
- R5P – Administrative Review for Surface Parking Lots: Approved on first reading (6-0, one absent).
- R5W – Enhanced Animal Control Penalties: Approved first reading despite concerns about off-leash buffers. Commissioner Suarez asked to discuss buffer zone for dog parks at second reading.
- C7U – Senior Bingo Program Funding: Opened and continued to April 22 to resolve funding source without cutting existing classes.
- C7AF – Condo Ombudsman Office Hours: Withdrawn after Commissioner Suarez reported that weekly in-person and virtual hours have been negotiated.
Key Outcomes
- Approved consent agenda (7-0).
- Approved R7D, R7L, R7G, R7S, R9X, R5i, R5V, R7AH, R7AE, R7K, R5N (part), R5P, R5W, R5X, R5Y, R5L, R7AB, R7B, R7W, R7O, R7N, R7AF, R7T, R7AG, R7AD, R5C, R5D, R5B, R5E, R5F, R5O, R5R, R5S.
- Deferred: R7E (to May 20), R7J (to June 24), C7U (to April 22).
- Referred: C7J (Ocean Drive sidewalk cafe guidelines) to Public Safety Committee.
- Negotiating committee established for Fountainbleau/HB 399: Mayor, City Manager, City Attorney, and MBNA representative.
Vote totals: All items approved by at least 6-0 or 7-0 unless noted. Commissioner Steinberg absent for CRA1. Commissioner Bott voted no on R7A (demolition of South Shore Community Center).
Meeting Transcript
Please take your seats. The meeting is about to begin. Remember to speak into the microphone as this meeting is being recorded for public record. Please stand by. We are going on air in five, four, three, two, one. Good morning and welcome to our commission meeting of March 18th, 2026. Thanks everyone for being here. And I'll turn it to our city clerk, Rafael Granada, to give us any instructions. Good morning, everyone. The city commission is physically present in the commission chamber at Miami Beach City Hall, 1700, Conventional Center Drive, third floor. Members of the public are invited to attend either in person or virtually. If you're joining us virtually, you can log in using the Zoom app or visit the Zoom.us on your browser. You can also phone in at 305-224-1968. That's 305-224-1968 or toll-free 888-475-4499. The webinar ID is 813-928-576-71 pound. Again, 813-928-576-71 pound. If you would like to speak virtually on an item during the meeting, please click the raise hand icon in the zoom app or press star 9 on your vote on your phone. The Zoom link, webinar ID, and phone number stay the same for every commission meeting. All lobbyists must register with the office of the city clerk located on the first floor of the city hall. You do not need to register if you're an expert witness giving only technical or specialized testimony. A representative of a neighborhood association or nonprofit speaking without pay, or a private citizen speaking on your own behalf without compensation. However, if you're an expert witness or a nonprofit or a neighborhood rep, you do need to submit a written disclosure form to the office of the city clerk before speaking with a commission or staff. Forms are available at the office of the city clerk. If a lobbyist gives or agrees or agrees to give a thousand dollars or more to a neighborhood association or its representative regarding a city matter, that must be disclosed in writing to the clerk. Note that contingency fees are not permitted to compensate lobbyists. If you plan to speak during the public comment today, please sign in. Thank you, Ralph. It's my honor to uh introduce Rabbi Sholem Korf of the Chabad of Lakeview to give our invocation. Uh I will say it's uh it's a fairly new synagogue to the Miami Beach community, and it already has a tremendous profound impact on the uh Lakeview and surrounding areas. Uh I actually visited uh not too long ago on a on a Shabbat, and you were you are packed. Yeah. Thank you. Welcome. Thank you, Mayor. Good morning. Morning, Mayor, Commissioners, City staff, and all members of the community here today. We gather with the shared purpose to serve, to lead, and to strengthen the community of Miami Beach with the help of God. As we approach the holiday of Passover, where we tell the story of the exodus of Egypt. The Jewish sages teach that a name actually holds within its essential meaning. The name Egypt in Hebrew means limitations. So the exodus of Egypt doesn't just mean a story of physical freedom from bondage, but actually traversing beyond our limitations, going out of our comfort zone, and leaving perhaps what we're comfortable doing to go a bit greater more beyond to do a little more. Each of us faces moments when we're called to rise beyond what is easy and beyond what is known. Leadership at its core means exactly that. To be able to do beyond what is your comfort zone, to rise beyond what is the usual, what's easy, and to go a bit above the call of duty. With the help of God, may the work here done today be guided by wisdom, clarity, and compassion. May there be an openness to new ideas, courage in the face of challenge, and a sheer commitment to progress that benefits all those that call this city their home. Just as the journey of Passover reminds us that growth begins when we step beyond our boundaries. May this gathering be a place where meaningful steps are taken towards growth, towards unity, and towards purpose that benefit the city of Miami Beach. May this meeting with the help of God bring about outcomes that promote opportunity, growth, joy, and well-being for all the residents of the city. May we merit the coming of the Mashiach, where there will be peace and harmony amongst all nations, people and creation.
openpublica.com