Loading...
2001-24395 RESO , RESOLUTION NO. 2001-24395 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. ONE TO THE 1996 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH AND MIAMI-DADE COUNTY AND ADDENDUM THERETO, WITH RESPECT TO THE CONVENTION DEVELOPMENT TAX, THE PERFORMING ARTS CENTER AND OTHER ISSUES WHEREAS, on March 20,1996, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 96-21927 authorizing the creation of an Interlocal Agreement (the "lnterlocal Agreement") between the City and Miami-Dade County with respect to the Convention Development Tax (levied and collected pursuant to Section 212.0305, Florida Statutes), the Performing Arts Center, and other issues; and WHEREAS, Section 212.0305(4)(b)(2)(a), Florida Statutes, provides that two-thirds (213m.) of the Convention Development Tax "shall be used to extend, enlarge, and improve" the Miami Beach Convention Center; and WHEREAS, the Miami Beach Convention Center is the major engine that drives the tourism industry in Miami-Dade County and benefits the County's economy and all of its citizens; and WHEREAS, it is necessary, desirable and in the best interest of all the people of Miami- Dade County that the City's share of the Convention Development Tax be protected and kept available to assure that there will be sufficient future funding to maintain the Miami Beach Convention Center and supporting facilities as a top quality state-of-the-art convention resource to attract major conventions to Miami-Dade County, and for other eligible uses within the City, thus maximizing tourism within the County; and WHEREAS, on December 20, 2000, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2000-24196, which authorized and directed the City Manager and City Attorney to take all necessary action to assure sufficient funding be available to maintain the Miami Beach Convention Center and supporting facilities and otherwise protect the City's interests; and WHEREAS, the attached Amendment No. One to the Jnterlocal Agreement dated May 4, 2001, signed by the Managers of the City of Miami Beach and Miami-Dade County, respectively, and approved by the Miami-Dade County Board of County Commissioners, assures that sufficient funding will be available to maintain the Miami Beach Convention Center and supporting facilities and provides for funds for other eligible uses within the City and the County; and WHEREAS, following approval of Amendment No. One by the County Commission, minor drafting errors were discovered which should be clarified and which have been clarified in the Addendum to Amendment No. One, attached thereto and incorporated in this Resolution. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that: Section 1. Amendment No. One to the Jnterlocal Agreement dated May 4, 2001, with the Addendum to Amendment No. One attached, is hereby ratified and approved. Section 2. The City will express its support of the baseball stadium project by not opposing the use of Convention Development Tax proceeds for the uses set forth in Amendment No. One to the Jnterlocal Agreement dated May 4, 2001. P ASSED ~d ADOPTED <hi, 16th day of M'y, 2001. 'Y/~ MAYOR ~}~~ CJTY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LANGUAGE & FOR EXECUTION /J1! /41t0tdL- $"-) ~()J CITY ATTORNEY DATE T:\AGENDA\2001\MA Y1601\REGULAR\CDT.RES CITY OF MIAMI BEACH CITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA 33139 http:\\ci.miami-beach,fl.us COMMISSION MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Neisen O. Kasdin and Members ofthe City Commission DATE: May 16,2001 SUBJECT: Jorge M. Gonzalez \ . A_~ City Manager 0 ~r d SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FOR ITEM R7N FROM: The attached Addendum to Amendment One to lnterlocal Cooperation Agreement dated June 21, 1996 between Miami-Dade County and the City of Miami Beach ("Addendum") is being presented in connection with item R7N. The Addendum is submitted to clarify and providing conforming language as it relates to Section lV.A. Annual Payment, specifically by clarifying Section lV.A. 2.(b), 3.(b), 4.(b) and 5.(b) which sets forth the amount of ad valorem taxes which would have been produced by the rate upon which the tax is levied each year by either the County or City, respectively, and removing any reference to any other taxing authority. Additionally, a new Subsection lV.A 9 has been added to clarify that ad valorem taxes exclude taxes from taxing authorities exempt from the requirements of Section 163.387 2 (A) F.S. which excludes I. A special district that levies ad valorem taxes on taxable real property in more than one county. 2. A special district the sole available source of revenue of which is ad valorem taxes at the time an ordinance is adopted under this section. 3. A library district, except a library district in a jurisdiction where the community redevelopment agency had validated bonds as of April 30, 1984. 4. A neighborhood improvement district created under the Safe Neighborhoods Act. 5. A metropolitan transportation authority. 6. A water management district created under s.373.069. Pursuant to the City Attorney's discussion with the County Attorney, said Addendum will require County Commission approval as well. It is recommended that the attached Addendum and the modified Resolution attached hereto, be approved together with item R7N. JMG/C~/rar T:\AGENDA\200I\MA YI601\REGULAR\CDTADDEN.CM attachment AGENDA ITEM R7f1 S~/'-O/ DATE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO: Howard Whitaker, Esq. FROM: Murray H. Dubbin ,1\ City A !torney I\;~\ \~ III May 11, 2001 DATE: SUBJECT: Addendum to Amendment One to lnterlocal Cooperation Agreement dated June 21, 1996 between Miami-Dade County and the City of Miami Beach Attached is the Addendum to Amendment One containing all of the corrections you and I have discussed. I think it is ready for approval by the respective Managers and approval by the respective Commissions. As to the mechanics of formalizing such approvals, I would like to rely upon the respecti ve Managers' offices. MHD:lm Enc!. cc: Joseph Rebak, Esq. City Manager Jorge M. Gonzalez Assistant City Manager Christina Cuervo V Finance Director Patricia Walker -1'*'" Addendum to Amendment One to Interlocal Cooperation Al.'reement Dated June 21. 1996 Between Miami-Dade County and the City of Miami Beach The purpose of this Addendum to Amendment One to Interlocal Cooperation Agreement dated June 21, 1996 between Miami-Dade County and the City of Miami Beach (" Addendum") is to clarify Section IV A 2,3,4 and 5 of the Amendment One to Interlocal Cooperation Agreement dated June 21,1996 between Miami-Dade County and the City of Miami Beach. Section IV A 2,3,4 and 5 of Amendment One is amended to read as follows: IV. MUTUAL OBLIGATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES A. ANNUAL PAYMENT 2. Commencing October 1,2005 and ending September 30, 2016 the County shall annually appropriate and remit to the City no later than January 1 of the following year an annual amount equal to fifty percent (50%) of the difference between (a) the amount of general Countywide operating ad valorem taxes levied each year by the County, exclusive of any amount from any debt service millage, on the assessed value of the taxable real property contained within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment and (b) the amount of general Countywide operating ad valorem taxes which would have been produced by the rate upon which the tax is levied each year by or for oaeh ta)[iHg authority the County, exclusive of any debt service millage, upon the total of the assessed value of the taxable real property in the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A for the tax year 1976. The total amount remitted by the County to the City shall be expended by the City for projects within the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A. 3. Commencing October 1,2005 and ending September 30, 2016 the County shall annually appropriate and remit to the City no later than January 1 of the following year an annual amount equal to twenty-five percent (25%) of the difference between (a) the amount of general Countywide operating ad valorem taxes levied each year by the County, exclusive of any amount from any debt service millage, on the assessed value of the taxable real property contained within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment and (b) the amount of general Countywide operating ad valorem taxes which would have been produced by the rate upon which the tax is levied each year by erfef oaeh tlEciHg alItherity the County, exclusive of any debt service millage, upon the total of the assessed value of the taxable real property in the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A for the tax year 1976. 4. Commencing October 1,2016 and ending September 30, 2020 the County shall annually appropriate and remit to the City no later than January 1 of the following year an amount equal to fifty percent (50%) of the difference between (a) the amount of general Countywide operating ad valorem taxes levied each year by the County, exclusive of any amount from any debt service millage, on the assessed value of the taxable real property contained within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment and (b) the amount of general Countywide operating ad valorem taxes which would have been produced by the rate upon which the tax is levied each year by er fer 2aea tallia;; a\ltaerit)' the Countv, exclusive of any debt service millage, upon the total of the assessed value of the taxable real property in the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A for the tax year 1976. The total amount remitted by the County to the City shall be expended by the City for projects within the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A. 5. Commencing October 1,2005 and ending September 30, 2020 the City shall annually appropriate and expend within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment an annual amount equal to fifty (50%) of the difference between (a) the amount of ad valorem taxes levied each year by the City. exclusive of any amount from any debt service millage, on taxable real property contained within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment and (b) the amount of City ad valorem taxes which would have been produced by the rate upon which the ta-x is levied each year by er fer 2aea tal:in;; a',ttheritj' the Citv, exclusive of any debt service millage, upon the total of the assessed value of the taxable real property in the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A for the tax year 1976. A new Subsection IV A 9 is added to read: 9. The Terms. "general Countvwide ad valorem operating taxes" as used in oaragraphs A 2, 3 and 4 and "ad valorem taxes levied bv the Citv" as used in oaragraph A 5 are defined to exclude taxes from taxing authorities exempt from the requirements of Section 163.387 (2) (a) FS. Jorge M. Gonzalez City Manager City of Miami Beach Steve Shiver County Manager Miami-Dade County APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY c~:Jf~ Assistant County Attorney City Clerk Clerk of the Board -:-',. 1111~IIIIUIIII~IIIII~I~~~~~~~!~~ii~llliiliiiii . I ~ · iimi H !l i ~ . ~ nnn ~ ~ ~--~-------------------- ~~i i ~a~~$~$aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ! iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii df ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ':!~ ~ . to ~ ~ ~ ~ "ll j ~ . III j! j! ~ H I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -'II mjmm~j , I f ~ " " 1.11 ~ i i ~.U~H~~~ ~ ~ ~ . ~!f . " **************************~**********~~ l;J I- ." g .. ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I~~~~~ i w Iii ~ ~ ~ . . , i i i mt~w~g~~~$~~~~ ~~~~~ii~i~iij~i~!~i~Jffi ~Ii ~ ~.a~~~~~~~~~~~ I I~!~~~~~~~~!!~ ~~....g~~~.~~~.i~.~~.~ ! ii~~~i~~~s~i~~~i~ ,I ;; . . "I' . . ! ~. . nil' ql ~ ~I~ ~~"I~..;g.._~ - II J ~ mHi~~~iii ,I , .. ,. I ~ ~~~n~~I!~~ ~ -j I~ . ~ - I [ Il - ~ ~~.~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1.1" III i ~ .~~~~~~~.~....~. ~HUH~~"~n..n ; ~ ~ - .If . " ~~i~~~~~i~~~~~~i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ c I:. .. " !l . .~ ~~. ~~~~~. ~~~~~~. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ I ~ ~ ~~I~~~~~I~I~~~~~~~~~~~~~I~~~~~I~~~~~~II . ~ f I ~ ! I ~ I . III ~ ~ ~ . . , I j ! !l:~_!!l ~!llJ:JS~_l!l~i~~ ~~~~~~~p~~~~~~~~~ ~Ii ; ~~j .~~UH-j" ~I~~~.~~.~~~~~~~~' & ~ I I ! ~~ ~~~~!~~ ~ ....g~~~.~~.li~~ ! jj~i~~~~i~~iiii~j ,I ~ ql ~I~~~~"~~..;g..!~ - Ii z q ~ ~ immimi ,I , ~ ,. I ~~~.~~~ ~~~~oooo -j - I !! '" [ Il I~ i :; ,"1"." ......... ......,. ~ oW LI" . '! ~ ~~~ U~ ~.. ~ . III ." . ~i~ !i~ ~~~ ~ ~ooo. ; ..... ~ i! ~ I I m ~ e ~ ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ m m F i ~ ~ IIII ~ IIIII U g g ~ gill B ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~! ~ Hi i ~ Ii! 11111 U i i i --. m U III 51 . . Ii II" i~ 1m ~ mil t ili i l h B I' l:!l~ ~ ~~ \11" ~! ~8 .. ~; I' -15 ('> .2 h f i ~ 9 f ~ i. , f 1 [ i I . J ~ I ~Hli 1 n l! I ~ il!I007 05/09/01 WED 16:07 FAX ApprovetO .. -...9c-..O~Mavor Veto Override Sl .titute Agenda Item No. lOCAl (2) 4-24-01 RESOLUTION NO. R-45l-Ol RESOLUTION APPROVING TERMS OF AMENDMENT ONE TO 1996 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN COUNTY AND CITY OF MIAMI BEACH AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION BY COUNTY MANAGER OF SUCH AMENDMENT . lJf, h:lAI. FILE CUI') ~ERK Of THE BOARI; Of COUNTYCOMMlSSIONE~ DADE COUNTY. fLORro~ WHEREAS, this Board desires to accomplish the purposes outlined in the accompanying memorandum, a copy of which is incorporated herein by reference, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that this Board hereby approves the terms of Amendment One to the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement dated June 21, 1996 between Miami-Dade County and the City of Miami Beach (the "Amendment") a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein and authorizes the County Manager to execute such Amendment. The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner Bruno A. :Ban:ei.ro who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by Commissioner GlIien Margolis and upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Dr. Miriam Alonso aye Dr. Barbara M. Carey-Shuler aye Gwen Margolis aye Jimmy L. Morales =-." Pedro Reboredo Natacha Seijas aye Javier D. Souto aye Bruno A. Barreiro Betty T. Ferguson Joe A. Martinez Dennis C Moss Dorrin D, Rolle Katy Sorenson aye MY aye absent aye nay -. 05/UM/Ul W~U 1~:U7 ~AA II!IUU~ SuO ';itute Age...Ja Item No. Page No.2 lO(A)(2) , The Chairperson thereupon declared the resolution duly passed imd adopted this ,'. . I," . ..,', April 26. ~'~ resolution shall become effective ten (10) days after the date ofits adoption '. unless vetoed by the Mayor, and ifvetoec:l, shall become effective only upon an override by this Board, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA BY ITS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS HARVEY RUVIN, CLERK By: KAY SULLIVAN Deputy Clerk Approved by County Attorney as 1\ 0-..1/ to fonn and legal sufficiency. \.::J.I.Lb- ~ 05/09/01 WED 16:07 FAX il!I009 AMENDMENT ONE TO INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT DATED JUNE 21,1996 BETWEEN MIAMI"DADE COUNTY AND THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH . U Amendment One (the "Amendment") to the 1996 Interlocal hereinafter defined made this -2-dayof IY\ a..~ .2001 by and between Miami-Dade COWlty, a political subdivision of the State of Flori a (the "County") and the City of Miami Beach, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Florida (the "City" or "CMB"), for a term commencing upon the dated date above and ending on the Termination Date, as defined herein. The term of this Amendment hereby extends the term of the 1996 Interlocal to commence upon the dated date above and ending on the Termination Date. After the Termination Date, the allocation of Convention Development Taxes (CDT) shall be made pursuant to state law. A. The Parties have previously executed an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement dated June 21, 1996 (the "1996 Interlocal") providing for the allocation ofCDT. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the 1996 Interloca1 remains in full force and effect, as may be amended by this Amendment. B. To the extent that the terms and provisions of the 1996lnterlocal arc not expressly amended herein, such other terms and provisions shall be deemed to be in full force and effect, except that in the event of conflict between the 1996 Interlocal and this Amendment, the provisions of this Amendment shall prevail. All capitalized terms contained in this Amendment which are not defined in this Amendment shall have the respective meanings ascribed to them in the 1996 Interlocal. C. Upon final approval of this Amendment by the Board of County Commissioners, the City hereby agrees to support all County and State legislative initiatives related to the financing and development of the baseball stadium project. D. Definitions. "CDT Receipts" shall mean the revenues collected annually (excluding any carryover from prior year collections) by the County of the levy on the exercise within its boWldaries of the taxable privilege of leasing or letting transient rental accommodations at the rate of three percent (3%) (the "Current CDT Rate") of the total consideration charged therefore as currently authorized pursuant to Section 2l2.0305(4)(b), Florida Statutes (net of Tax Collector administrative costs for local administration pursuant to Section 212.0305(S)(b)5, Florida Statutes). COT Receipts wherever used in this Amendment shall apply solely to the Current CDT Rate; provided;' however, that it is recognized that any outstanding indebtedness of either the County or t1ie City secured by a pledge of COT Receipts shall have a first claim on such CDT Receipts prior to any other payments required under this Amendment. 05/09/01 WED 16:08 FAX ~010 "Termination Date" - In the event that CDT Receipts are not pledged by December I, 2003 for a baseball stadium, then this Amendment shall terminate on September 30, 2040. In the. event that CDT Receipts are pledged prior to December 1, 2003 for a baseball stadium, then this Amendment shall terminate on the later of: (a) the expiration of any agreement providing for the pledge of CDT Receipts for the Performing Arts Center (pAC) project or (b) the expiration of any agreement providing for the pledge of CDT Receipts for a baseball stadium. E. Section I.D. of the 1996 Interlocal is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: 1. DISPOSITION OF THE TWO-THIRDS PORTION * * * D. The City shall receive the following payments from the County payable solely from the Two-Thirds Portion of the CDT Receipts. 1. $3.0 million to be paid by April 1,2002, provided that $1.5 million of the amount payable on April 1, 2002 may only be paid from CDT Receipts becoming available pursuant to subsection 3 of Section 504 of County Ordinance No. 97-210, enacted on November 18, 1997. 2. $4.5 million per year commencing on April 1, 2003 and ending on the Termination Date, provided that commencing on April1, 2027 and each succeeding April 1 through the Termination Date this payment to the City shall only be paid from CDT Receipts becoming available pursuant to subsection 3 of Section 504 of County Ordinance No. 97-210, enacted on November 18, 1997. 3. A net capital contribution of $15.0 million to be remitted to the City on the earlier of: a) December I, 2003; or b) the first issuance by the County of bonds, which are secured by a first lien on CDT Receipts. These funds shall be used for Convention Center Complex Area Projects to the extent such proj ecls are eligible for CDT funding pursuant to state law. 4. a.} In the event that CDT Receipts are pledged prior to December I, 2003 for a baseball stadium, the following payments': 2001. 2S% ofCDT Ileceipts received by lb. County in Fiscal V... 2001 in .x.... ofS31.S22,748 2002.25% ofCDT Receipts received by the County in Fis.al Y... 2002 io .X.... ofS33,729,341 2003 - 25% of COT Rec.ipts rec.ived by the County in Fi..a1 Y... 2003 in .x.... of536,090,39S . 20<14 - 25% .fCDT Rec.ipts rec.ived by the County in Fiscal Y.ar 2004 in .xc'" of $38.616,722 2005 - 100% of COT Receipts rec.ived by the County in Fiscal Year 2005 greater tban 540,541,S58 bull.., than 54I,S36,146 2006 - 90'-' of CDT Rec.ipts received by the County in Fiscal Year 2006 8,ealer than 542,574,936 bur les. than 544,616.279 2007 - 80% of COT Rec.ipts received by the ~ty in Fiscal V.ar 2001 groote, than 544,103,683 but I.., than $48,OS3,806 2008 - 70% ofCDT R.ceipts received by the County ill.Fi,cal Yea, 2008 gr.ate, than 546,938,861 but I.., than 5SI,686,674 2009 - 60% ofCDTlleceipts rec.ived by the County in Fiscal Year 2009 ".eater tban 549,285,811 bur Ies. than 5SS,594 186 2010 - 50% ofCDTReceipl> rec.ived by the County in Fiscal Y... 2010 great.r th.n S51,150,IOI but les, than SS9,197:101 2011 - 50% .fCDT Rece,pts rec.IVed by the County In FIScal Year 2011 8,eater than 5S4 337606 bUlles,than 564.311768 2012 - 50% ofCDTReceipl> received by the County in Fiscal Year 2012 s,eater than 5S1:054:481 bur I.., than 569.180:191 -2- . 05/09/01 WED 16:08 FAX il!IOll 2013 - SO% ofCDT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Vcar 2013 grea"r than 5S9,907,211 bUll... than 574,410,214 2014 - 50% ofCDT Receipts received by the County io Fi.cal Vear 2014 grealer thm 562,902,571 but ,... than S80,03S,626 20lS - 50"1i of COT Receipts =<ived by the County in Fi.cal Vear 2015 grea..r than $66,047,700 but I... thm S86,086,319 2016 - 50% or CDT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Year 2016 greater than $69,350,085 but less than $92.S94J44S 2017 - SO'll ofCDT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Vear 2017 grcaler than S72,817,S89 bUlle.. than $99,594,S85 2018 - SO% of COT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Vear 2018 greater thm 576,4S8,469 bUlles. than S107,123,93S 2019 - SO'll of COT Receipts received by the Count)' in Fi.cal Vear 2019 grea..r than S80,281.392 bUll... than S115,222,505 2020 - 50% of COT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Year 2020 greater thm 584,295,462 bUlless thm 5123.933.326 2021 - 50% of COT Receipts received by the County in Fi.cal Year 2021 grea..r than $88,510.235 bulIes. than S133.302,687 2022 - 50% orCDT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Year 2022 greater than S92,935,747 but less than 5143,380,370 2023 - 50% ofCDT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Year 2023 greater than 597,582,534 but less than 5154,2191926 2024 - 50% of COT Receipts ,eceived by the County in Fi.cal Year 2024 grea..r than SI02,<!1;I,661 hutles. than $165,878,952 2025 - 50% ofCDT Receipts rec:eived by the County in Fiscal Year 2025 gr<aterthan 5107,584,744 but Ie.. than 5178,419,400 2026 - 50% afCDT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Year 2026 greater than S112,963,981 but less than 5191,907,907 2027. 50% of COT Receipts received by the County in Fisc&l Year 2027 greater than SI 18,612.180 but less than $206,416,145 2028 - 50% of COT Receipts ,eceived by lbe County in Fi.cal Year 2028 greater than $124,542,769 bUll... than 5222.021.205 2029 - ~O% of COT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Vear 2029 grealer than S130,769.928 bUll... than 5238,806.008 2030 - 50% of COT Rc<eipts received by the County in Fiscal Vear 2030 greater than $137,308,425 bulless than $256.859.742 2031 - 50% nfCDT Receipts received by the County in Fi.cal Vear 2031 gr<ater than 5144,173,846 bull... than 5276,278.339 2032 - 50% ofCDT Receipts received by tbe Couoty in Fiscal Vear 2032 gr<ater Ibm 51~1.382,538 bulless than 5297,164,98\ 2033 - 50% of COT Receipts received hy the Coutuy in Fi.cal Vea, 2033 grealer than 5158,951,665 bullcas than 5319,630,654 2034 - 50% ofCDT Receipts l'oteived by the County in Fiscal Year 2034 greater than 5166.899,248 bUlless than 5343.794,731 203~ - 50% of COT Receipts received by the County in Fi.cal V.., 2035 gruter than $175.244,211 bulle.. than $369,785,613 2036 - 50% or COT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Vear 2036 grealer than $184.006,42\ but less thm 5397,741,405 2037 - 50% ofCDT Receipts rec:eived by the County in Fi.cal Vea, 2037 greale' than S193,206,742 but less than 5427.810,655 2038 - 50% ofCDT Receipts ,eceived by the County in Fiscal Vear 2038 gr...er than 5202,867,080 but less than 5460.153,141 2039 - 50% ofCDT Receipts received by the County in Fixal Vear 2039 grealer than 5213.010,433 but 1... than 5494,940,718 2040 - 50'110 of COT Receipts received by the County in Fisca' Vear 2040 greater than $223,660,955 bntles. than 5532,358,236 'AU years listed above are fiscal years ending September 30; aU CDT Receipts are based on Cunent CDT Rate. To the extent the Termination Date is later than September 30, 2040, the City will continue to receive an allocation of 50% ofCDT Receipts calculated based upon the Current cor Rate and the formula established in the aforementioned schedule, which represents County growth estimates of annual CDr Receipts based upon the Current CDr Rate between 5% and a cap at 7,56% growth. The County shall receive 100% of any annual cor Receipts in excess ofthe 7.56% annual growth figure based on the Current CDr Rate. b.) In the event that CDT Receipts are not pledged prior to December 1, 2003 for a baseball stadium. the following payments': 2005 - 50% of CDT Receipts rec:eived by the County in Fiscal V.... 2005 greater than 540,547,558 bnt I... than 5-41,536,146 2006 - 50% ofCDT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Vear 2006 grea..r than 542.574,936 but I... than $44,676,279 2007 - 50% ofCDT Rc<eipts received by the County in Fiscal Vear 2007 greater than 544.703,683 but I... than 548,053,806 2008 - 50% of COT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Year 2008 greater man S461938,867 but less than 551,686,674 2009 - 50% of COT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Year 2009 greater than $019,285,811 but less than 55S,594,186 2010 - 50% of COT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Vear 2010 8realer than 551,750,101 bulIeas than 559,797,107 201! - 50% of COT Rec..ipts received by fr.e County in Fiscal Vear 2011 gre...r than 554,337.606 but les, than 564,317,768 2012 - 50% of COT Receipts received by the County in FiacBI Year 2012 gr<ater than 557,054,487 but I... than S69.180.191 201) - 50% of COT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Vear 2013 greater than S59,907,211 but less than 574,410,214 2014 - 50% oCCDT Receipts received by the County in Pistil Year 20104 grelter than $62,902,571 but less than 580,035,626 2015 - 50% ofCDT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Year 20\5 greater than 566,047,700 but I... than 586,086,319 2016 ~ SQG,4 ofCDT Re<:eipts received by the C~'u:nty in Fistal Year 2016 greater than 569,350,085 but less than S92,594,445 2017 - 50"/. of COT Receipts received by the County io'Fiscat Vear 2017 gr<ater than S72,817,589 butl...1han $99,594.585 2018 - 50% of COT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Vear 2018 gr....r than 576,458,469 bUll... than $107,123,935 2019 - 50% ofCDT Receipts rec:eived by the County in Fiscal Vear 2019 8reater than $80,28t,392 but less than 51 15,222,505 2020 - 50% of COT Receipts rec:eived by the County in Fiscal Year 2020 greale' than 584,295,462 bull... than S123,933,326 2021 - 50'10 of COT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Vear 2021 8reate, Ibm S88,510,235 hut less than $133,302,687 - 3 - 05/09/01 WED 16:09 FAX 1i!I012 2022. 50% of COT Receipts recei.ed by lbe County in Fiscal Vear 2022 greater than $92,935,747 but I... tbau $143,380,370 2023. 50% of COT Receipts recei.ed by lbe County in Fiscal Year 2023 greater than $97,582,534 huiles. tbau SI54,219,926 2024 - 50% Dr COT Receipts recei.ed hy the County in Fiscal Year 2024 greatcr than $102,461,661 hut 1... than S165,878,952 2025. 50'10 afCDT Receipts received hy the County in Fisc.l Year 2025 greaterthan $107,584,744 hut I... tbau S178,419,400 2026 - 50% of COT Receipts received hy the County in Fiscol Vear 2026 greater !h.n $112,963,981 but I... than $191,907.907 2027. 50% Dr COT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Year 2027 grealer!han $118.612,180 bull... than S206,416,145 2028. 50% af COT Receipts received by !he County in Fiscol V car 2028 greater than $124,542,789 but les. than S222,021 ,205 2029 - 50% oreDT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Year 2029 greater than 5130,769,928 but leA than 5238,806,008 2030 - 50% DrCDT Receipts received by tbe County in Fiscal Vear 2030 greater Ihan S137,308.425 bull... than 5256,859,742 2031 - 50% or CDT Receipts received by lbe County in Fiscal Veu 2031 8realerthan 5144,173,846 bUlle.. than 5276.278,339 2032 - 50% or COT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Year 2032 greater than S151,382,538 bull... than 5297,164,981 2033 - 50% or COT Receiplsreceived by the County in Fiscol Yeu 2033 greater than S I 58,95 1,665 bUlless than 5319.630,654 2034 - 50% nfCDT Receipts rteeived by the County in Fiscal Yeu 2034 greater than $166,899,248 but less than 5343,794,731 2035 - 50% or COT Receipts rteeived by the County in Fiscal Year 2035 8reater than S175,244,21 \ bull... than S369,785,613 2036 ~ 50% ofCDT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Year 2036 greater tha.n $184,006,421 but less than $397.741,40S 2037 - 50% orenT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Vear 2037 greater than $193,206,742 bull... lban 5427,810,655 2038. 50% of COT Receipts received by the County in Fiscal Vcar 2038 greater than 5202,867,080 butl... than 5460,153,141 2039. 50% or COT Receipts received by lbe County in Fiscal Year 2039 grealer than 5213,010,433 bUlless than 5494,940,718 2040 - 50% orenT Receipts recei.ed by !he County in Fiscal Year 2040 greater Ihan 5223,660,955 bulles. than $532,358,236 1 All years listed above are fiscal yem ending September 30; all CDT Receipts are based on Current CDT Rate. In the event (i) the City has received payments from the County pursuant to Section I. D. 4.a. prior to December 1, 2003 and (ii) CDT Receipts are not pledged by December I, 2003 for a baseball stadium (the "Pre-Baseball Payments"), then the City shall repay the County in the form of a credit against the payments in this subsection, an amount equal to the Pre-Baseball Payments. The Pre- Baseball Payments shall be credited solely against amounts to be received by the City pursuant to this subsection. The County shall receive 100010 of any annual CDT Receipts in excess of the 7.56% annual growth figure based on the Current CDT Rate. c,) Annual payments to the City as listed in Section LD. 4.a. or I. D. 4.b., as the case may be, shall be capped at $50 million. provided, however. that beginning in Fiscal Year ending September 30, 2030, the $50 million cap shall escalate annually at the lesser of three percent (3%) or the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers for the United States, all items, index base period 1982-84= 1 00 (commonly referred to as CPI-U). as published periodically by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. These payments to the City shall be used for Convention Center Complex Area projects to the extent such projects are eligible for CDT funding pursuant to state law. To the extent that the City determines funds are not needed for the Convention Center Complex Area projects. the funds may be used for other projects eligible for CDT funds under State law. The County shall have ninety (90) days after the close of the County's fiscal year to make its remittance to the City. 5. In the event that COT Receipts are not pledged by December 1,2003 for a baseball stadium, $5~ million shall be remitted to the City May I, 2004, This payment is to be used for a Convention Center Complex Area project, to include expansion and improvement of the Convention Center Complex exhibition halls and related facilities, including parking and staging areas. To -4- 05/09/01 WED 16:10 FAX ~013 the extent the cost of such project exceeds $50 million the City shall provide required supplemental funding. F. Section ill A. 2. of the 1996 Interlocal is amended by deleting the period at the end of the sentence and adding the following: "or such other construct as the County may detennine to be necessary or desirable as it relates to the PAC." G. Section N. A. of the 1996 Interlocal is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: IV. MUTUAL OBLIGATIONS AND RESPONSffiILITIES A. ANNUAL PAYMENT 1. The South Pointe CRA shall terminate effective September 30, 2005 in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance No. 89-59. To the extent that the amount appropriated and paid to the tax increment fund by the County in fiscal year 2004-2005 in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance No. 89-59 is less than the full year's tax increment for fiscal year 2004-2005, the County shall appropriate and remit to the City no later than January 1, 2005 an amount equal to the difference between the amount paid in accordance with the provision of Ordinance No. 89-59 and the full year's tax increment for fiscal year 2004-2005, but said payment shall be paid solely from non-ad valorem revenues from the County, To the extent the amount appropriate and paid to the tax increment fund by the City in fiscal year 2004- 2005 is less than the full year's tax increment for fiscal year 2004-2005, the City shall appropriate and expend an amount equal to the difference between the amount appropriated and paid by the City to the tax increment fund and the full year's tax increment for fiscal year 2004-2005. The total amount remitted by the County to the City and the total amount remitted by the City shall be expended by the City for projects within the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A. 2. Commencing October I, 2005 and ending September 30,2016 the County shall annually appropriate and remit to the City no later than January 1 of the following year an annual amount equal to fifty percent (50%) of the difference between (a) the amount of general Countywide operating ad valorem taxes levied each year by the County, exclusive of any amount from any debt service millage, on the assessed value of the taxable real property contained within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment and (b) the amount of general Countywide operating ad valorem taxes which would have been produced by the rate upon which the tax is levied each year by or for each taxing authority, exclusive of any debt service millage, upon the total of the assessed value of the taxable real property in the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A for the tax year 1976. The total amount remitted by the County to the City shall be expended by the City for projects within the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A. 3. Commencing October I, 2005 and ending September 30, 2016 the County shall annually appropriate and remit to the City no later than January 1 of the following year an annual - 5 - 05/09/01 WED 16:11 FAX il!I014 amount equal to twenty-five percent (25%) of the difference between (a) the amount of general Countywide operating ad valorem taxes levied each year by the County, exclusive of any amount from any debt service millage, on the assessed value of the taxable real property contained within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment and (b) the amount of general Countywide operating ad valorem taxes which would have been produced by the rate upon which the tax is levied each year by or for each taxing authority, exclusive of any debt service millage, upon the total of the assessed value of the taxable real property in the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A for the tax year 1976. 4. Commencing October 1, 2016 and ending September 30, 2020 the County shall annually appropriate and remit to the City no later than January 1 of the following year an amount equal to fifty percent (50%) of the difference between (a) the amount of general Countywide operating ad valorem taxes levied each year by the County, exclusive of any amount from any debt service millage, on the assessed value of the taxable real property contained within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment and (b) the amount of general Countywide ad valorem taxes which would have been produced by the rate upon which the tax is levied each year by or for each taxing authority, exclusive of any debt service millage, upon the total ofthe assessed value of the taxable real property in the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A for the tax year 1976. The total amount remitted by the County to the City shall be expended by the City for projects within the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A. 5. Commencing October 1, 2005 and ending September 30,2020 the City shall annually appropriate and expend within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment an annual amount equal to fifty (50%) of the difference between (a) the amount of ad valorem taxes levied each year by the City, exclusive of any amount from any debt service millage, on taxable real property contained within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment and (b) the amount of City ad valorem taxes which would have been produced by the rate upon which the tax is levied each year by or for each taxing authority, exclusive of any debt service millage, upon the total of the assessed value of the taxable real property in the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A for the tax year 1976. 6, To the extent that CDT revenues are used for payments relating to section IV,A. 3, the City agrees to use the money for COT eligible activities in accordance with State law. 7. It is understood and agreed that the amounts payable by the County under sectionss!VA 2.,3., and 4. above, are calculated by reference to certain ad valorem tax collections, but said payments shall be paid solely from non-ad valorem revenues of the County, and the obligation of the County to make such payments shall not create any debt, liability, obligation, or pledge of the taxing power, on the part of the County that would require said payments to be subject to referendum. - 6- 05/09/01 WED 16:11 FAX 14]015 8. The provisions of this Section IV. A(l) through (7) shall survive the termination oflhis Amendment and the 1996 Interlocal, regardless of the reason for such termination. H. Section V. of the 1996 Interlocal is deleted in its entirety. I. Within sixty (60) days of receiving the $15.0 million net capital contribution described in Section I. D.3 of the 1996 Interlocal, as amended, the City agrees to remit $2.0 million to the Miaini- Dade Public Library System to fund the cost of library books for the new regional library in Miami Beach. The County agrees to provide additional funding for library books, in excess of the City's $2.0 million contribution, as deemed necessary by the Miami-Dade County Library Department. In the event the new regional library in Miami Beach is completed prior to the receipt of the $15,0 million described in Section I. D.3 of the 1996 Interlocal, as amended, the County will provide library books for such library prior to opening. In such event, tbe City sha1l remit to the County an amount equal to $2.0 million within sixty (60) days of receiving the $15.0 million contribution described in Section I. D.3 of the 1996 Interlocal, as amended. J. The City agrees to forgive interest and late penalties for the FY 2000 tax increment payments to the Miami Beach Redevelopment Agency and waives any rights it may have to seek payment. Any disputes regarding this matter shall henceforth be considered resolved, K. The City agrees that the County has the authority to use, at the sole discretion of the County, any CDT receipts based on the Current CDT Rate, not expressly allocated to Miami Beach as described above, for projects eligible under Section 212.0305( 4)(b )2.c. and d., Florida Statutes, as the same may be amended. 1. The County shall provide a copy of its comprehensive annual financial report for each Fiscal Year to the City for the duration of this Amendment and for one Fiscal Year thereafter and an annual certified CDT receipt schedule. Notwithstanding such report, the City shall have, at its own expense, the right to audit CDT receipts, subject to Section 213.053, Florida Statutes, or any other provision of law related to confidentiality and information sharing. M. Nothing herein contained shall prevent the City from applying to the County for additional CDT funding for projects within the City. In such case, the County shall evaluate such request. -7 - 05/09/01 WED 16:12 FAX ~016 N. Section VI, of the 1 996 InterJocal is amended to read as folJows: VI. Entire Agreement. This Amendment and the 1996 lnterJocal, as amended, constitute the sole and only agreement of the Parties with respect to the Two-Thirds Portion of the CDT Receipts and correctly sets forth the rights, duties and obligations of each to the other as of its date. Any prior agreements, promises, negotiations, or representations not expressly set forth in the 1996 lnterlocal, as amended, and this Amendment are of no force and effect. I ~ ~- --- APPROVED AS TO FORM & LANGUAGE Steve Shiver & FOR EXECUTION County Manager Miami-Dade County 11(~ tr-2-~. 0 I ea. APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: City Attorney Assistant County Attorney City Clerk Clerk of the Board , -8- 05/09/01 WED 16:12 FAX Ii!J017 '--- ... 1-. - VI I - ~ .... ! - ,.. lilt - I <( .! i '-' .. .... ., :a l!l ~ I - I- ... - . j( ~ 5 ... .. .--/ 11 19J018 AI 05/09/01 WED 16:12 FAX ROUNOAAY OESCRIP~ION ---- The South Bo.ch ~o~ov.lo~~ont ~~oj~ct Aroa. hereinaftor call~d the .proJ.ct ~r~a.. is ~Q\1"03ted on the Proj.ct Boun~.ry and Land Use Plan ~'p desiqnated ~. ~~hibit A. ~nd is ~or. ~ar- ticul.rly d.eerl~d ~s tellows: All that ro.l propert.y. 1n the ca.y of Miaml le.eh. County of D.de. Sute of Florld.. .' wlthln the followln~-dQscrl~ed bound.rlee: aeqlnnlnq .t the Northwesterly corner of LO~ 2. aLeCK 1. FLr.~.~OOD SUBDIVISION accordlnq to THE AMENDED PLAT thecaof IS recorded ln Pl.t Book 21, pav- '34 of the PUbllc R.cord. of. Cad. County, Flori~a: Th.nce run E.st.rly .lonv the North.rly llne cf' s81d LOT 2 for a d~s- t.nee of 150.' feet mol" or 1... to a po1nt. ~.ld polnt b.inq the North...terly corner of ..1d LOT 2; Thence contlnue .10n9 .boye mentloned cour.. for a dl.t.nc. of 50 f.e~ ~or. or 1.... acroe. Weat Ayenue,to the lnt.rs.ctlon with west.rly l1ne of lLaCK 2. FLEETWOOD SVlDIVISION. Iccordln~ to the AMENDED PLA~ th.r.of a. r.corded In .lat look 21. .PaV' 34 of the .ublic Records of Oad. county. 110r1d&; Thenc. run southerly alon, the w..terly l1n. of .ald 8LO~ 2 for a . dlet.nee of 160.3 fe.t more or le.. to . polnt. ..14 polnt belnq a ~ Polnt of CUrvature (P.C.) of a clrcular curve concave to the North.a.~ ana hav1nq for It. 81..enta . rad1u. of 15 t..~ and a central an;1a ot 90 ,. ' ----' Thence run alon, .ald clr~lar cury. an arc 41Atance ot 23.~ f.et mol'. or lese to the Polnt ot Tan;lncy (P.T.1 I ' Thenc. ra.terly alon9 th~ Northerly 11n. of Sl~th Street for a di.tan~. ot 26'9.. f..t IIIOl'e or 1... to the POl1lt of IntersecUoD with the ta.terly l1ne of Wa.hln9~on Avenue: Thence run South.a.torly 810nv ..14 ta.t.rly I1n. of w..hinqton Ay.nue for a'41.tanee of 164.3 f..t mere or le.. to the polnt of %nt.r.oct1Q~ w~th the Northerly llfte of . 20 toot all.y ~novft pre..ntly " Slxth Street, Thence ruB EI.t.rly a10ft9 the Northerly line ot ..1d Sixth Str..t tor a dl.tanc. of '13.' t..c more or l.sa to.th. point ot Intersectic~ with the Easterly 11fte of Oc.an Drlve: Thence contlnu. 110n9' a~Y' de.cribe. cour.e (Northerly 11n. of Slxth Stre.t project.d tasterly) tor a dllUnce of 14(10 reet lion or lUs to I polnt: Thence run Southwosterly alonQ the Jln. plrallel to arod 1680 t.et ~- . . 16. -. Ij!J019 .... 05/09/01 WED 16:12 FAX "-.--/ ~ore or le~..~3~t.rly of Lhn ~~~~ lino of ~olll~1 Avenue for .. J~~:~~ of 2800 fee~ morc or I~~s t~ . pOlnt: 'rhenee rlln ~o)uthQ":S'rlrly ;!t 'In '"''1''' of ?CO with Ula llrlJvi~us course at a di,lItanc:e of 6'.10 fuet ,nore or 1".. t.o a point: Thenc:e run Southwesterly at an ~n91e of 900 with ~h. prlvl~ul eours. a di:lt..nc:e of 2100 feet n,ora or lell. to . point: 'rhcnC'ct run WQllter1y alon9 tho Hno pllr"llel. t" and 300 feee more or 1alll south of the Northerly limits of Covcrnmant Cut for i distance of 3900 fectt 'ftore or Ie... to a point: Th.nee run Horthw~ltctrly 410nfl thQ line parall.l to and 620 feet ~or' or lell Southwalt of axistinfl bulkhead lin. (~'.K.W. Line) for a dis- tanea of 1000 fuet mora or 10.. to a ~oint: ~ene. run Southwelterly at an anfllct of 900 with the previous course a di.t~nee of 95 fact more or 101. .to . point: Thonee run Northwolterly at an an91. of 900 with the previous eourse .. d1stanee of SUO fa~t more or 1.,. to a point: ~.ne. run Morthe..t.rly ae an anfl1e of 900 with the pr,viou. eo~.. for a di.tanc. of 95 fo.t more or 1e.. to a point, . . Th.ne. run Morthwe.t.rly alon9 the 11ne parall.l to and 620 feet mar. or 1... southw..t of exi.tinq bulkhead line (M.H.W. Line) for I dis- tanc. of'2500 f..t mar. or. Ie.. to a point' , ~enc' Ea.t.rly alon9 the I1ne paral1.l to. and 175 f..t ~ore or 1... M Nor~h of the Nor~h 11n. of S1x~h Street pcoduc~ W..~erly for. dis- tance of 930 f..t mer. ~r 1... to the Point of 8191nn1n9. '-...... . )9 CITY OF MIAMI BEACH CITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA 33139 http:\\cLmiami-beach.fl.us ~. COMMISSION MEMORANDUM NO. 3;;l.S:O l TO: Mayor Nelsen O. Kasdln and Members of the City Commission JOrgeM.Gonzalez\,. A~ City Manager (j ~v 0 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AMENDMENT ONE TO THE 1996 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH AND MIAMI-DADE COUNTY WITH RESPECT TO THE CONVENTION DEVELOPMENT TAX, THE PERFORMING ARTS CENTER AND OTHER ISSUES. DATE: May 16, 2001 FROM: SUBJECT: ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Resolution. ANAI,YSIS: On March 15, 2000, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2000-23841 authorizing the City Manager to refine a list of proposed Convention Development Tax ("CDT'') eligible projects and to request an allocation and distribution of the two-thirds portion of the CDT sufficient to provide funding for such projects. On April 3, 2000, City staff met with the Miami- Dade County ("County") Manager and his staff to submit said list ofprojects and request funding. On December 4, 2000, the Administration met again with the County Manager to request an allocation and distribution of CDT and to discuss the 1996 Interlocal Agreement by and between the City of Miami Beach and Miami-Dade County which set forth the uses of the two-thirds portion of the CDT. On December 17, 2000, a Letter of Intent was signed between Mayor Alex Penelas and John Henry, owner of the Florida Marlins, regarding the financing of a new baseball stadium and amongst other items, identified CDT to finance a portion of the baseball stadium project. Immediately thereafter, City staff met with County staff on December 18, 2000 and began to negotiate Amendment One to the 1996 Interlocal Agreement (the "Amendment"), presented in final form attached hereto. On December 20, 2000, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2000-24196 stating that prior to the use of CDT for any projects other than the Performing Arts Center (PAC), the City's share ofCDT should be assured to maintain the convention center, supporting facilities and other eligible projects. To that end, the City continued negotiation discussions with the County, culminating in the Amendment presented herein. DATE R1 (II S-/(,-O) AGENDA iTEM T:\AGENDA\2001\MA Yl60I\RBGUlAR\CDT.CM May 16, 2001 Commission Memorandum Convention Development Tax Page 2 On Wednesday, April 18, 2001 the City Commission directed the Administration to negotiate a final Amendment that would be effective whether or not an agreement was reached for a new baseball stadium project. As a result, City and County staff met thereafter and on April 26, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners adopted County Resolution No. R-452-01 approving the terms of the attached Amendment and authorizing the execution by the County Manager of said Amendment. The Amendment provides for the allocation of CDT funds to the City in the event the County provides financing for a new baseball stadium project before December 1,2003 and an alternative allocation in the event no baseball stadium is constructed. Additionally, the Amendment sets forth the City's Agreement to support all County and State legislative initiatives related to the financing and development of the baseball stadium project. Said expression of support is satisfied by the adoption of the attached resolution which clearly states that the City expresses its support of the baseball stadium project by uot opposing the use of CDT proceeds fOr the uses set forth in the Amendment. The fundamental terms of the Amendment are as follows; In the event an agreement is reached regarding a baseball stadium and CDT funds are pledged for the project by December 1,2003, the following provisions would be in effect under the terms of the Amendment: 1. The 1996 InterJocal Agreement, as amended, shall continue in full force and effect through the term of any fmancial agreements providing CDT in support of the development of the stadium project or for the Performing Arts Center Project. 2. A subsidy of$3 million paid by April 1, 2002 and $4.5 million paid by April 1 of each year thereafter shall be paid to the City through the term of this agreement. This represents a $1.5 million increase in 2002 from the amount in the current agreement and an increase of minimum annual payments from $1.1 million from 2003 through 2026 to a fixed payment of$4.5 million through the term of this Amendment (anticipated to be at a minimum through 2040). 3. A net capital contribution of$15 million shall be paid to the City from the first CDT-backed bond sale by the County subsequent to the effective date of this amendment to be used for Convention Center Complex Area projects. 4. A $2 million payment to the Miami-Dade Public Library System from the City shall be made within 60 days of the $15 million capital contribution to the City for the County to purchase books and materials for the new regional library in Miami Beach, In the event that such capital contribution is subsequent to the completion of the Library, the County will provide the books for the Library and will be reimbursed the $2 million by the City. 5. The County and City will share excess annual CDT receipts beyond the County's projections of eight percent growth in 2001, seven percent growth in the year 2002-2004 and five percent growth for each year thereafter. The specific amounts to be shared are outlined in the T:'lAGE.NJ)A \2001\MA Yl60 1 \llBGULAR.\CDT.CM May 16, 2001 Commission Memorandum Convention Development Tax Page 3 Amendment and are based on: . 25 percent of excess annual CDT revenue above the revenue level identified in the County dollar-specific projection schedule, attached hereto, to the City in each year beginning in 2001 and extending through 2004, . 100 percent of excess annual CDT revenue between the five percent County growth estimates and a cap of7.56 percent growth (the 7.56 percent is based on average armual growth since inception of the CDT) as outlined in the doJlar-specific projection schedule to the City in 2005, . 90 percent of excess annual CDT revenue between the five percent County growth estimates and a cap of 7.56 percent growth as outlined in the dollar-specific projection schedule to the City in 2006, . 80 percent of excess annual CDT revenue between five percent County growth estimates and a cap of 7.56 percent growth as outlined in the dollar-specific projection schedule to the City in 2007, . 70 percent of excess annual CDT revenue between the five percent County growth estimates and a cap of 7.56 percent growth as outlined in the doJlar-specific projection schedule to the City in 2008, . 60 percent of excess annual CDT revenue between the five percent County growth estimates and a cap of 7,56 percent growth as outlined in the dollar-specific projection schedule to the City in 2009, . 50 percent of excess annual CDT revenue between the five percent County growth estimates and a cap of 7,56 percent growth as outlined in the dollar-specific projection schedule to the City each year from 2010 through the term of the agreement with a cap of$50 million (adjusted for inflation) for any annual payment. 6. For the vast majority of the term of the Amendment, the City and County will share equally any annual excess CDT receipts above the County's five percent annual growth estimate and the cap of 7.56 percent. The County wiJl receive 100 percent of any annual CDT receipts in excess of the 7.56 percent annual growth figure based on the current CDT rate. 7, The City and the County agree that the South Pointe Redevelopment District shall be terminated effective September 30, 2005 in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance No. 89-59, To the extent that the amount paid to the tax increment fund in PY 2005 is less than the full year's tax increment for that year, the County will remit to the City the difference between the full year's increment and the amount paid to the fund. Prom 2005 through 2020 the County will annuaJly appropriate and provide an amount equal to 50 percent of incremental countywide property tax revenue from the geographic area formally known as the South Pointe Redevelopment Area (RDA) area payable from non-ad valorem revenue sources for projects in such geographic area, From 2005 through 2020 the City shall also armually appropriate and provide an amount equal to 50 percent of incremental municipal property tax revenue from the geographic area formally known as the South Pointe RDA for projects in such geographic area. Prom 2005 through 2016 the County will also provide an amount equal to 25 percent of incremental countywide property tax revenue from the geographic area formally known as South Pointe CRA area payable from non-ad valorem T:\AGBNDA\200I\MA YI601\ImGUI..All\CDT.CM May 16, 1001 Commission Memorandum Convention Development Tax Page 4 revenue sources. Also, penalties and late fees for the FY 2000 tax increment payment to the City are waived. These provisions wilJ survive any termination of the agreement before 2021. The South Pointe RDA currently expires in 2004 or 2008 (depending on the CountylCity interpretation, respectively) and the 1996 Interlocal provided for a 12 year extension to the life of the South Pointe RDA to 2016. While payments are made for projects in the South Pointe area through 2020 under this agreement, they are made at levels less than the current incremental payment levels of 95 percent for both the City and County, The City benefits through its receipt of the County's 50% of the increment for the South Pointe area and 25% of the increment for the use throughout the City. The City also retains 50% of the City's increment in the general fund. Consequently, this adjustment is beneficial to both the City and the County. In the event that CDT funds are not pledged for the stadium project by December 1, 2003, certain terms of the amendment change. The delay, until 2003, is provided to alJow time for legislative action, to negotiate the stadium project terms, and for the commitment of the CDT funds. The provisions that change are: 1. The term of the agreement is through 2040. This change affects point 1 above. 2. The payment schedule, as noted in point 5 above, is modified to eliminate payments prior to 2005, and beginning in 2005, 50 percent of excess CDT revenue between five percent County growth estimates and a cap of7.56 percent growth as outlined in a dollar-specific schedule are made to the City for the terms of the agreement. Such payments are capped at $50 million per year (adjusted for inflation). 3. In the event that payments are made in 2001,2002, and 2003 and assuming a subsequent agreement would be reached with the team, the County would be reimbursed through a credit on the scheduled payments from excess CDT to the City beginning in 2005. 4. The City will be paid on May I, 2004, $50 million for a CDT eligible capital project in the Convention Center Area, The projected growth in CDT revenues upon which the assumptions for the baseball stadium are based is ap?roximately fiv~ percent per year for the term ofthe agreement. The present value of the agreement IS worth approxImately $409 million to the City over the next 44 years in the event CDT revenue growth is at historic annual levels (7.56 percent per year) and an agreement is reached with the team. In the event that no agr~e~~nt is reached with the team, the adjustments to the a ent :hedule and to the term, ~d the Imttal alJocation for the Convention Center Area projecf c: s~pr;sent v:e to ~pproxrmately $446 million over the next 40 years (see attached chart) At ~e e rme WI or Without an agreement with the team at historic ' e would receive in excess of $200 million mor CDT' annual growth levels, the County under the five percent assumption It should be. t ~venue over the tenn of the agreement than average of five percent annual gr' owth th be POfilll e out th~t if CDT revenues are realized at an , e ene t to the City of M' . B h' . . reduced and there would be no additional reve t th C lanll eac IS SIgnIficantly nue 0 e ounty beyond the five percent annual T:\AGENDAIJOO1\MA YI601\RBGULARICDT.CM May 16, 2001 Commission Memorandum Convention Development Tax Page 5 growth assumptions. Benefits to the City of Miami Beach The Amendment significantly enhances the City's revenue stream and financial capacity to implement CDT eligible projects. It has consistently been the City's negotiating stance that approximately 40% of total CDT revenues are generated from facilities within the City of Miami Beach and that a significant portion of those revenues are related to the Convention Center and related proj ects. Attached you will find a chart summarizing the benefits to the City under three different scenarios (A) if the 1996 Interlocal remains in place; (8) the 2001 Amendment with Baseball; and (C) the 2001 Amendment without baseball. Through FY 2040, the potential aggregate maximum revenue stream, assuming all projections are met, to the City is as follows: Maximum Aggregate Revenue Net Present Stream FYOI-FY40 ~ (A) 1996 Interlocal: $276,461,705 (B) 2001 Amendment with Baseball: $1,466,522,054 $408,859,685 (C) 2001 Amendment without Baseball: $1,505,014,292 $446,840,218 In either the "Baseball or no Baseball" scenario, the revenue stream provided through the Amendment greatly enhances the City's general fund receipts commencing in FY 2005 and beyond by returning 50% of the City's tax increment generated in South Pointe back to the general fund. In 1996 the City CDT collections represented approximately 31.8% of the total CDT receipts. By year-end 2000, the City's CDT collections had grown to 40.2% of the total CDT receipts. Despite the increase in City CDT collections, the 1996 Interlocal only provided a return of 8,6% to the City. The Amendment with Baseball returns 18.5% of the total CDT receipts to the City and without Baseball, 19.2% of the total CDT receipts are returned to the City. (See attached chart) Not factored into these percentage returns, is the benefit of the additional general fund receipts the City will receive in lieu of extending the South Pointe RDA. Based on the significant financial enhancements and assurances achieved in the proposed Amendment, it is recommended that the Mayor and City Commission adopt the attached Resolution. ~~S~~~R=CM Attachment \ Addendum to Amendment One to Interlocal Cooperation A2reement Dated June 21. 1996 Between Miami-Dade County and the City of Miami Beach The purpose of this Addendum to Amendment One to lnterJocal Cooperation Agreement dated June 21, 1996 between Miami-Dade County and the City of Miami Beach ("Addendum") is to clarify Section IV A 2,3,4 and 5 of the Amendment One to lnterJocal Cooperation Agreement dated June 21,1996 between Miami-Dade County and the City of Miami Beach. Section IV A 2, 3, 4 and 5 of Amendment One is amended to read as follows: IV. MUTUAL OBLIGATIONS AND RESPONSmILlTIES A. ANNUAL PAYMENT 2. Commencing October 1,2005 and ending September 30, 2016 the County shall annually appropriate and remit to the City no later than January 1 of the following year an annual amount equal to fifty percent (50%) of the difference between (a) the amount of general Countywide operating ad valorem taxes levied each year by the County, exclusive of any amount from any debt service millage, on the assessed value of the taxable real property contained within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment and (b) the amount of general Countywide operating ad valorem taxes which would have been produced by the rate upon which the tax is levied each year by ar for eaoh t&Jdllg lUIt1iarity the County, exclusive of any debt service millage, upon the total of the assessed value of the taxable real property in the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A for the tax year 1976. The total amount remitted by the County to the City shall be expended by the City for projects within the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A. 3. Commencing October 1,2005 and ending September 30, 2016 the County shall annually appropriate and remit to the City no later than January 1 of the following year an annual amount equal to twenty-five percent (25%) of the difference between (a) the amount of general Countywide operating ad valorem taxes levied each year by the County, exclusive of any amOunt from any debt service millage, on the assessed value of the taxable real property contained within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment and (b) the amount of general Countywide operating ad valorem taxes which would have been produced by the rate upon which the tax is levied each year by ef for eaeh telEiRg aliiftant). the County, exclusive of any debt service millage, upon the total of the assessed value of the taxable real property in the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A for the tax year 1976. 4. Commencing October 1,2016 and ending September 30, 2020 the County shall annually appropriate and remit to the City no later than January 1 of the following year an amount equal to fifty percent (50%) of the difference between (a) the amount of general Countywide operating ad valorem taxes levied each year by the County, exclusive of any amount from any debt service millage, on the assessed value of the taxable real property contained within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment and (b) the amount of general Countywide o.peratin~ ad valorem taxes which would have been produced by the rate upon which the tax is levied each year by Bf far eaell. t&lang alitftaMy the County. exclusive of any debt service millage, upon the total of the assessed value of the \ taxable real property in the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A for the tax year 1976. The total amount remitted by the County to the City shall be expended by the City for projects within the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A. 5. Commencing October 1,2005 and ending September 30, 2020 the City shall annually appropriate and expend within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment an annual amount equal to fifty (50%) of the difference between (a) the amount of ad valorem taxes levied each year by the City, exclusive of any amount from any debt service millage, on taxable real property contained within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment and (b) the amount of City , ad valorem taxes which would have been produced by the rate upon which the tax is levied each year by aT for afteR tlIJdBg lI\itharily the City, exclusive of any debt service millage, upon the total of the assessed value of the taxable real property in the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A for the tax year 1976. A new Subsection IV A 9 is added to read: 9. The Terms. "\:eneral Countywide ad valorem ol)eratini taxes" a.~ Ilsed in pata.itaphs A 2. 3 and 4 and" ad valorem taxes levied by the City" as used in paralUl\ph A 5 are defined to exclude taxes from taxing authorities exempt from the req,uirements of Section 163.387 (2) (10 FS. APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY; c~~ ~ ?6A~ City Clerk Steve Shiver County Manager Miami-Dade County APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY Assistant County Attorney Clerk of the Board c.f ..... ~) .... ..c j ... .. - '" ! - .. c ... - ! - - ... .. I = ~ ~ ! - .. A. - .. ~ ~ ~ ... .... II ROUNCARY OESCR!P~I~N The South Beach ~edev.lepment Proj~et Area. hereir.aftar caltr.d the .project ~r~a". is ce\ineated on the Project. Boundary and Land Use Plan Map des1qnated as r.xhi~it A. and is ~6re ~ar- t1eularly deseribad AS !olloys: All that real property in the City of Miami .each. COunty of Dade. State of Florida. within the followin;-de.cr1bed boundaries: Se;1nn1n; at the Northwesterly corner of LOT 2. BLOCK 1. rLF.~.~OOC SUBDIVISION accord in; to THE AMENCE~ PLAT thereof as recorced in Plat Book 28. pa;e 34 of the Pu~l1c Records of Cade County. rlori~a Thence run Ea.terly alon; the Northerly line of said LOT 2 for a c~: tanee of 150.1 feet more or less to a point. said po1ntoeinq the Northeasterly corner of .aid LOT 2: Thence continue alon; a~ove mentioned course for a distance of SO f. more or le.s, aero.s Weat Avenue.to the intersection With Westerly line of BLOCK 2, FLEETWOOD SUBDIVISION. accord1n; to the AMENCE~ P~ thereof a. recorded in Plat Book 28, Page 34 of the Pu~lic Records c Dade County, Florida: Thence run Southerly alon; the We.terly line of .aid ILO~ 2 for a ~ d1.tance of 160.3 feet more or le.. to a point. .aid point ~e1nq a ~ Point of CUrvature (P.C.' ot a circular curve concave to the Northel ana hav1n; for its element. a rad1u. of lS feet and a central anqle 90 : . Thence run alon; .a1d circular curve an arc distance of 23.~ Ceet more or less to the Point of Tanqency (P.T.): Thence Easterly alon; th~ Northerly line ot Sixth Street for a distl of 2619.4 feet more or le.. to the Point of Intersection with the Ea.terly line of We.h1n;ton Avenue: Thence run Southee.terly alon; .a1d Ea.terly line of wa.hinqton Aver. tor a'distance ot 164.3 feet more or le.. to the point of Intersect wjth the Northerly line of a 20 foot alley known pre.ently a. Sixth Street: Thence run Ea.terly alon9 the Northerly line of s.id Sixth Street for a di.tance of 113.7 feet more or less to the Point of !ntersecti with the Easterly line of Oce.n Drive: . Thene. cent1nue alon;' above d..er1~.c ceurse (Northerly line of Sixt Street projected Easterly) fer a di.tanee of 1400 Ceet mere or less to a ~o1nt: Thence r~n Southwesterly alonq tho line parallel to anc 1680 teet . ) c;. mo~e o~ le~..~~~t.~ty of lhn ~~~t lino of ~olllr.S hvonue fQ~ A ~~~t ot 2800 feet mo~m o~ 1 ..~s t lJ a r'01 nt: '\'honee run 5.::lutho,'''tnrly o1t "In "n'11" ot ?Co wilh 1.:'0 p~"vi"us c:curs at a dilltance of 6.;0 fllot In.::lre or 1..,.s t.o a point; Thence run 50uthwes1:mrly at an 4nqlo ot 900 with the prevlcus ;curs A di:l1:4nco ot 2100 foet n,ore or le..s to a point; 'rhen~e run Wosterly ~lonq the line p~r~llel to and 300 feet more cr loss South of the Northerly limits of Government Cut for L distance of 3900 feat ,nore or less to a point: Thenee run Northw..sterly alonq the line parallel to and 620 feet ~c or loss Southwast of oxist1nq bulkhead line (M.H.W. Linm) for a dis tanee of 1000 f~ct moro or less to a point: Thence run Southwesterly at an anqle of 900 With the previous cours, a dist3nee of 95 fect more or loss to a point: Thence run Northwosterly at an anqle of 900 with the previous cours, a d1st'anee of 500 fot!t mO,re or Illss to a point: Thence run Northeasterly at an anqle ot 900 with the previous eourSj for a distance at 95 foet more or less to a point: . . Thence run Northwesterly along the line parallel to and 620 !eet mOl or less Southwe.t of existing bulkhead line (M.H.W. Line) for a d1s. tance of'2500 feet more orle.. to a point: , Thence Easterly along the line parallel to and 175 feet more or les: · North of the North line of Sixth Street produced Westerly for a dis. tanee of 930 feet more ~r l.s. to the Point of Seqinninq. ) g ,. " \ /f' MIAMI TEW CARDENAS REBAK KELLOGG LEHMAN DEMARIA TAGUE RAYMOND & LEV1NE, L.L.p. \ 1""D1'JL!\'''>c "1'''-<::1 , ','. L 0 ,~.l, ~'.." -..) (305) 539.2 \22 ',' 'I'" Ci 1'1 i,\ i 1I,-,/:L r :; ufFil:i: lLRrii'TEWLAW,COM ,\ T T 0 !~ 0.' !: Y ,", :\ ;' .\:, June 22, 2001 Murray H. Dubbin, Esq. City Attorney City of Miami Beach 1700 Convention Center Drive Miami Beach, FL 33139 Re: Convention Development Tax Dear Murray: Please provide us with copies of the folJowing: 1. Fully executed Resolution of City of Miami Beach approving the Addenda to Amendment One to the 1996 Interlocal Agreement; 2. Fully executed Resolutions of Miami-Dade County approving either or both of: (a) Amendment One to the 1996 Interlocal Agreement; or (b) Addenda to the Amendment One to the 1996 Interlocal Agreement. Thank you for your attention to this matter. JLR/mcm cc: Christina M. Cuervo . ~ll.\:"1l OFFICE . :\1[\.\0 C::,\;TI':H. ::(,1" FH)()\{ ~O' SOl'T11 B ., ... B . -. X[ . . - ',. 1~( ,,-n ;-";1: ()j i.I:\.-\1l.lJ. l" 1.-\.\1I, Fr.o1l.l1lt\ .BU1-.l-.1Jb. TELEl'll()"E ill:, .;.)1,-1112. F.\t:Sl.\\lU: .)lh";;" "," . T.\J.L.\ll.-\SSEE OFFH"!.: . .\!1)"IIIJ1: P,II(1, TO\~'EI\. 101 N '\-h):\g()\, STI~lTT S\'lT' -,- T . F ' .. . . '.: " I: -.". .-\1.1..\I1.\SSI-:I:, U)RIl);\ 32.101. TI~LEl'll()NE :-\50 ,"~1 -~-o_ F\CS1\'1\J.I: ,~"O.i-I-H ---, CITY OF MIAMI BEACH CITY ATTOR.'iEY'S OFFICE TO: Howard Whitaker, Esq. FROiVl: DATE: Murray H. Dubbin ,1\ City Attorney I\;\~ \~ III May 11, 2001 SlTBJECT: Addendum to Amendment One to Interlocal Cooperation Agreement dated June 21,1996 between Miami-Dade County and the City of Miami Beach Attached is the Addendum to Amendment One containing all of the corrections you and I have discussed. I think it is ready for approval by the respective Managers and approval by the respective Commissions. As to the mechanics of formalizing such approvals. I would like to rely upon the respecti ve Managers' offices. MHD:lm Encl. cc: Joseph Rebak, Esq. City Manager Jorge M. Gonzalez Assistant City Manager Christina Cuervo Finance Director Patricia Walker Addendum to Amendment One to lnterlocal Cooperation Agreement Dated June 21. 1996 Between Miami-Dade Countv and the Citv of Miami Beacb The purpose of this Addendum to Amendment One to InterlocaI Cooperation Agreement dated June 21, 1996 between Miami-Dade County and the City of Miami Beach ("Addendum") is to clarify Section IV A 2,3,4 and 5 of the Amendment One to Interlocal Cooperation Agreement dated June 21,1996 between Miami-Dade County and the City of Miami Beach. Section IV A 2, 3, 4 and 5 of Amendment One is amended to read as follows: IV. MUTUAL OBLIGATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES A. Al'lNUAL PAYMENT 2. Commencing October 1,2005 and ending September 30, 2016 the County shall annually appropriate and remit to the City no later than January 1 of the following year an annual amount equal to fifty percent (50%) of the difference between (a) the amount of general Countywide operating ad valorem taxes levied each year by the County, exclusive of any amount from any debt service millage, on the assessed value of the taxable real property contained within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment and (b) the amount of general Countywide operating ad valorem taxes which would have been produced by the rate upon which the tax is levied each year by af fer sash taJdBg affiaarity the County, exclusive of any debt service millage, upon the total of the assessed value of the taxable real property in the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A for the tax year 1976. The total amount remitted by the County to the City shall be expended by the City for projects within the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A. 3. Commencing October 1,2005 and ending September 30, 2016 the County shall annually appropriate and remit to the City no later than January 1 of the following year an annual amount equal to twenty-five percent (25%) of the difference between (a) the amount of general Countywide operating ad valorem taxes levied each year by the County, exclusive of any amount from any debt service millage, on the assessed value of the taxable real property contained within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment and (b) the amount of general Countywide operating ad valorem taxes which would have been produced by the rate upon which the tax is levied each year by ef-fef saea tallmg aIHll.arit). the County, exclusive of any debt service millage, upon the total of the assessed value of the taxable real property in the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A for the tax year 1976. 4. Commencing October 1,2016 and ending September 30, 2020 the County shall annually appropriate and remit to the City no later than January 1 of the following year an amount equal to fifty percent (50%) ofthe difference between (a) the amount of general Countywide operating ad valorem taxes levied each year by the County, exclusive of any amount from any debt service millage, on the assessed value of the taxable real property contained within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment and (b) the amount of general Countywide operating ad valorem taxes which would have been produced by the rate upon which the tax is levied each year by or for >a,R ta"in; "'-'thens' the Countv, exclusive of any debt service millage. upon the total of the assessed value of the taxable real property in the geographic area specitlcally described in Exhibit A for the tax year 1976. The total amount remitted by the County to the City shall be expended by the City for projects within the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A. 5. Commencing October \.2005 and ending September 30, 2020 the City shall annually appropriate and expend within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment an annual amount equal to tifty (50%) of the difference between (a) the amount of ad valorem taxes levied each vear bv the Citv. exclusive of anv amount from ~ ~. ~ any debt service millage. on taxable real property contained within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment and (b) the amount of City ad valorem taxes which would have been produced by the rate upon which the tax is levied each year by or fer >a,R ta:jn; ac~tl:orit:. the Citv,. exclusive of any debt service millage, upon the total of the assessed value of the taxable real property in the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A for the ta'{ year \976. A new Subsection IV A 9 is added to read: 9. The Terms. "general Countywide ad valorem ooerating ta'{es" as used in oaragraohs A 2,3 and 4 and" ad valorem taxes levied bv the Citv" as used in oaragraoh A 5 are defined to exclude taxes from taxing authorities exemot from the requirements of Section \63.387 (2) (a) FS. Jorge M. Gonzalez City Manager City of Miami Beach Steve Shiver County Manager Miami-Dade County APPROVED AS TO FORM AJ.'1D LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY c1#i~12f~ Assistant County Attorney City Clerk Clerk of the Board RESOLUTION NO. 1001.24395 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. ONE TO THE 1996 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH AND MIAMI-DADE COUNTY AND ADDENDUM THERETO, WITH RESPECT TO THE CONVENTION DEVELOPMENT TAX, THE PERFORMING ARTS CENTER AND OTHER ISSUES WHEREAS, on March 20,1996, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 96-21927 authorizing the creation of an Interloca1 Agreement (the "Inter1ocal Agreemenf') between the City and Miami-Dade County with respect to the Convention Development Tax (levied and collected pursuant to Section 212.0305, Florida Statutes), the Performing Arts Center, and other issues; and WHEREAS, Section 212.0305(4)(bX2)(a), Florida Statutes, provides that two-thirds (213~ of the Convention Development Tax "shall be used to extend, enlarge, and improve" the Miami Beach Convention Center; and WHEREAS, the Miami Beach Convention Center is the major engine that drives the tourism industry in Miami-Dade County and benefits the County's economy and all of its citizens; and WHEREAS, it is necessary, desirable and in the best interest of all the people of Miami- Dade County that the City's share of the Convention Development Tax be protected and kept available to assure that there will be sufficient future funding to maintain the Miami Beach Convention Center and supporting facilities as a top quality state-of-the-art convention resource to attract major conventions to Miami-Dade County, and for other eligible uses within the City, thus maximizing tourism within the County; and WHEREAS, on December 20, 2000, the Mayor and City Conunission adopted Resolution No. 2000-24196, which authorized and directed the City Manager and City Attorney to take all 'City of Miami Beach - City Clerk's Office May 16,2001 \ REGULAR AGENDA \ R7 - Resolutions 8:20 pm. R7N Commission Memorandum No. 325-01 A Resolution Approving Amendment No. One to the 1996 lnterlocal Agreement Between the City of Miami Beach and Miami-Dade County with Respect to the Convention Development Tax, the Performing Arts Center and Other Issues (City Manager's Office) ACTION: See Supplemental Materials. Resolution No. 2001-24395 adopted. Motion made by Commissioner Cruz; Seconded by Vice-Mayor Garcia; Voice vote: 4-3; Opposed: Commissioners Dermer, Liebman and Smith. Christina Cuervo to handle. Commissioner Smith feels the agreement has a poison piJI relative to Miami Beach supporting the baseball stadium. Commissioner Liebman finds it difficult to allow the baseball because we need to have the money. Commissioner Dermer feels the same as Commissioner Smith. He cannot agree with this contract. Mr. Rebak, attorney representing the City, spoke. Handout: 1. Document titled: "Proposed Amendment to the 1996 lnterlocal Agreement between the City of Miami Beach and Miami-Dade County" City Clerk's Note: See Miami-Dade County Resolution R-452-01 Prepared by the City Clerk's Office Date Printed: 6/26/01 Time Printed: 6:38:5\ PM Source Database: C:IDATAIFOLlOICLERKI17.NFO .~. 2 W- 2.-Cl?Cf.S' -" .~ --. STATE OF FLORIDA } } S5: COUNTY OF DADE } I, HARVEY RlNIN, Clerk of .the Circuit Court in and for Dade County, Florida, and Ex~fficio ClerK of the Board of County Commissioners of said County, 00 HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing is a true and correct copy of Agenda Item No. 10(A)(l) "Addendum to Amendment to 1996 Interloca1 Agreement 'With City of Miami Beach", approved by the Board of Countv' Commissioners at its meeting of May 22, 2001. as appears of record. IN WI Tl'ESS Yf-ER8:F'. have hereunto set my hand and official seal on this 17th day of ~f'~T' , A.D. 2001 . HARVEY RUVIN, Clerk Board of County Commissioners Dade County, Florida BY~~~ ....- Deputy ClerK ,..4f."'":'~~~^." .4(fp~i1 {i~) '"1 ~==rY . **~ '.- I; , l ': Board of County Commissioners Dade County, Florida CLI:/<:'t 5{1S 3/93 ~" .J. Addendum to Amendment One to Interlocal Cooperation Agreement Dated June 21. 1996 Between Miami-Dade Countv and the City of Miami Beach The purpQse Qf this Addendum tQ Amendment One tQ InterlQcal CQoperatiQn Agreement dated June 21, 1996 between Miami-Dade CQunty and the City QfMiami Beach ("Addendum") is to clarify SectiQn IV A 2,3,4 and 5 Qfthe Amendment One tQ InterIQcal COQperation Agreement dated June 21, 1996 between Miami-Dade CQunty and the City QfMiami Beach. Section IV A 2, 3, 4 and 5 Qf Amendment One is amended tQ read as follQws: IV. ~MUTUAL OBLIGATIONS Al~D RESPONSIBILITIES A. ANNUAL PAYMENT 2. CQmmencing OctQber 1, 2005 and ending September 30, 2016 the CQunty shall annually apprQpriate and remit tQ the City no later than January 1 Qf the follQWing year an annual amount equal tc fifty percent (50%) cfthe difference between (a) the amount cf general Ccuntywide Qperating ad valQrem ta'{es levied each year by the Ccunty, exclusive Qf any amount frcm any debt service millage, Qn the assessed value of the taxable real prQPerty cQntained within the geographi~ bQundaries specifically described in Exhibit A tQ this Amendment and (b) the amount of general Countywide Qperating ad valorem taxes which would have been produced by the rate upcn which the ta..'{ is levied each year by cr for eaeh ta.'Xing aatherity the County, exclusive of any debt service millage, upon the total cf the aSsessed value of the taxable real prQperty in L'1e gecgraphic area specifically described in Exhibit A for the tax year 1976. The total amount remitted by the County to the City shall be expended by the City for projects within the geQgraphic area specifically described in Exhibit A. 3. Commencing October 1,2005 and ending September 30,2016 the County shall annually appropriate and remit to the City no later than January 1 of the following year an annual amQunt equal to twenty-five percent (25%) of the difference between (a) the amount of general Ceuntywide operating ad valorem taxes levied each year by the County, exclusive Qf any amount from any debt service millage, cn the assessed value ef the taxable real preperty contained within the geegraphic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment and (b) the amount of general Countywide eperating ad valorem taxes which would have been produced by the rate upen which the tax is levied each year by ef f'0r eaea taxing amhority the County, exclusive of any debt service millage, upon the total of the assessed value of the ta.'{able real property in the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A for the tax year 1976. 4. Commencing October 1,2016 and ending September 30, 2020 the County shall annually appropriate and remit to the City no later than January 1 of the follewing year an amount equal te fifty percent (50%) of the difference between (a) the amount ef general Countywide operating ad valerem taxes levied each year by the County, exclusive ef any amount from any debt service millage, en the assessed value.ef the taxable real property contained within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A te this Amendment and (b) the amount of general Countywide Qperating ad valorem taxe~ which would have been produced by the rate upon which the tax is levied each year by er for CEleB taxing a1:Hherity the County, exclusive of any debt service millage, UPQn the total of the assessed value of the '\ , . ..J taxable real property in the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A for the tax year 1976. The total amount remitted by the County to the City shall be expended by the City for projects within the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A. 5. Commencing October 1, 2005 and ending September 30, 2020 the City shall annually appropriate and expend within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment an annual amount equal to fifty (50%) of the difference between (a) the amount of ad valorem taxes levied each year by the City, exclusive of any amount from any debt service millage, on taxable real property contained within the geographic boundaries specifically described in Exhibit A to this Amendment and (b) the amount of City ad valorem taxes which would have been produced by the rate upon which the tax is levied each year by or for each ta>(inb ClUthority the City, exclusive of any debt service millage, upon the total of the assessed value of the taxable r.eal property in the geographic area specifically described in Exhibit A for the tax year 1976. F. A new Subsection IV A 9 is added to read: 9. The Terms. "ieneral Countywide ad valorem operatin~ taxes" as used in paraiI'aphs A 2. 3 and 4 and "ad valorem ta'}es levied by the City" as used in parawaph A 5 are defined to exclude taxes from taxin~ authorities exempt from the requirements of Section 163.387 (2) (a) FS. ~ APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: ~ ~~r~ City Clerk ~ Steve Shiver County Manager Miami-Dade County APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY ~! ./61 Clerk of the Board 1 I if ( .' ..:...40-'. III. '-C:e.", ",,~Q 'M t~!~~;. il;J/f'''' ", . ;.:'>.:....... ....-F If_" ~"~ ." ,'. ~ ".... t~: f~ft);.~.~:>::~ ~t . '. ....l'~ '.. ~~~~::.:.>'~:~~~-:" .'. ~~(' ,~. . ~ ~~ of:~".".I:' ..,:~~~~. " . J" w - - "'" ! - - f., c .... - ~ ~ - =- w a: w .... I . .l i'l = < ~ . ~ ~ ~ , "l"'4 ..0 ~ "l"'4 S . = - .- Go. - lZ ~ """ Q ~ .., ~ / -:\ .j ". ~o~e o~ le~~.~~~t.rly of lh~ ~~~~ l\nc of ~ol11~S Avenue fo~ ~ ~~ o t 2 e 0 0 fee 1: mo ~ e: 0 r 1l"" ~ s t tJ .) r'o, n 1:. : '!"hence r"\Jn .'$\Juthc:,,::st~~ly ~t: 'In .'n(Jl~ of ')Co 'J1.th U'Q pt"~vi::us ~ eo a d i ~ tan c: e 0 f 6.; 0 f I': e ':. &n~ reo ~ 1,'! !liS t. 0 a po i n t: : 4hc:nc:e run South~est.c:ly at a~ ~n;le of 900 with the prevlcUS ~=~; a d1:nilnc:e of 2100 feet. nloce: o~ le:u t.o ~ point.: ,..~" ......... 'rhc:nc-e run Wostcrl y 1110n.; the line p."" r.' lle1 to and 300 feee. more 0,,; lQ~s South of the Nor~herly limits of Government. Cut for ~ dis~an' of 3900 feat more or less to a point.: Thenee run North~rstarly alonq the ~ine parallel to and 620 feet. ~ or less Sout.h~~st. of Qxist.in.; bulxh~ad line (M.M.W. Line) for a d~ e.anee: of 1000 f~et mo~e or less 1:eI ~ J.'o1nt.: ~ence ~un Southwesterly at an an~lG of 900 wi:h the ~rev~ous c:=~: a d1st~nce of 95 fact. mo~. or less to a poine.: Thenc:e run North~esterly at. an angle of 900 with the previous c:CU: a dis~anc:e of 500 fQ~t. mo~. 0: 1.55 t.o a point.: Thenee run Northeasterly at an anqle of 900 with the previous c:cu: ter a distance ot 9S foet. mere or le.s to a point: . . Thence run North~e.terly alonq the line parallel to and 620 ~ee~ ~ or less ~outhw..~ of exist1nq bulkhead line (M.H.W. Line) for'a ~i ~anee of 2500 feet more or. less to a point.: ~ Thence Easterly alonq t~. line parallel to and 175 teet more or 1. · North of the Nor~h line of Sixth Street pro~ueed We3t.erly for ~ ~~ tanee of 930 feet more ~r less to the Point of aeq~nninq. 1 ~ ,j . ...~- . . . . ~. , MEMORANDUM Agenda Item No. 10 (A) (1) TO: Honorable Chairperson and Members Board of County Commissioners . FROM: ~~:~_~.._ DATE: May 22, 2001 ~ SUBJECT: Addendum to Amendment to 1996 lnterlocal Agreement with City of Miami Beach , , RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Board approve the accompanying Resolution, which approves an addendum to the amendment to the 1996 lnterlocal Agreement (the "Amendment) between the County and the City of Miami Beach (the "City") which Amendment was approved by the Board on April 24, 2001. BACKGROUND This addendum clarifies the basis on which the County will annually appropriate and provide amounts equal to varying percentages of incremental countywide property tax revenues from the geographic area known as the South Pointe Community Development Agency area payable from non ad valorem revenue sources. This addendum does not make any substantive changes in the basis for such payments but rather corrects a scrivener's error relating to such basis. SS/eg I . . ',oW ., Approved Veto Override Mavor Agenda Item No. 10(A)(1) 5-22-01 Off1CIAL fILE COPT CLERK 0F. THE BOARD Vf COUNTY COMMISSiONERS OADE COUNTY. FlORtDa RESOLUTION NO. R-563-o1 RESOLUTION APPROVING ADDENDUM TO AMENDMENT ONE TO 1996 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN COUNTY AND CITY OF MIAMI BEACH AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION BY COUNTY MANAGER OF SUCH ADDENDUM ~ WHEREAS, this Board desires to accomplish the purposes outlined 10 the accompanying memorandum, a copy of which is incorporated herein by reference, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that this Board hereby approves the terms of Addendum to Amendment One to the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement dated June 21, 1996 between Miami-Dade County and the City of Miami Beach (the "Addendum") a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein and authorizes the County Manager to execute such Addendum'. The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner Dennis c. ~ss who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by Commissioner JimDy L. Morales and upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Dr. Miriam Alonso absent. Bruno A. Barreiro aye Dr. Barbara M. Carey-Shuler aye Betty T. Ferguson aye Gwen Margolis aye Joe A. Martinez aye Jimmy L. Morales aye Dennis C. Moss aye Domn D. Rolle aye Natchas Seijas aye Katy Sorenson ..aye Javier D. Souto aye ~ . STATE OF FLORIDA ) ) SS: COUNTY OF DADE ) > I, HARVEY RUVIN, Clerk of the Circuit Coutt in and for Dade County, ;. Florida, and ex- officio Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners of said County, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing is a true and correct copy of Resolution No. R-563-01. adopted by the said ..' board of County Commissioners at its meeting held on Mav 22.2001. IN WITINESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal on this 1 st day of June, A. D. 2001. HARVEY RUVIN, Clerk Board of County Commissioners Dade County, Florida B~~)t!~ Deputy Cl k SEAL Board of County Commissioners Dade County, Florida CLK/CT 587 3/93 (I MEMORANDUM TO: Tom David Executive Assistant to the County Manager DATE: SUBJECT.:. August 7, 2001 Addendum to Amendment One to . Interlocal Cooperation Agreement Dated June 21, 1996 between Miami-Dade County and tbe City of Miami Beach FROM: Geri Bonzon-Keena"/lfiiJ Assistant County At~.I\...-- The attached Addendum to Amendment One to Interlocal Cooperation Agreement dated June 21, 1996 between Miami-Dade County and the City of Miami Beach has been approved for legal sufficiency and can be fully executed by the Manager. : ~ Attachment cc: Robert Ginsburg, (Esquire Miami-Dade County Attorney (o , j ,1 () . . - o ..,- . .. -~ ~ ,- ..... C') c-<'" , -r, _, C) (1 C=.-~ ~ 10-, ~ ......- " f/.~'~ -- . f,1 o o ...0 C) -" ,.... L.'- , . " I .; . . CITY OF MIAMI BEACH CITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE MIAMI BEACH, FLORIOA.33n9,.-:-,,\ www.ci.miami-beach.ft.us: .. : . " ;:. U Office of the City Manager Jorge M. Gonzalez '1'. ~I' ; '.: ~_. ~ I~ C: ,,-,'_.. '-. j \ l \ I . '. ~. : ;:-: ." ". : ~~. r;: i \ . .~ Gr r-\Ce. Telephone 305 673-7010 Facsimile 305 673-nS2 July 19,2001 o - Mr. Steve Shiver County Manager Miami-Dade County 111 NW First Street, Suite 2910 Miami, FL 33128 ~ Dear Mr. SWer: ;.' ."" .-~ . . .~ .- ';;:; , i~ -.... -- , .-,- .~ ~::~. ~:~ ;-: , , -0 ::s:: . c.,.) .. s:- ........" - R1~.~~ :2-< ;c~rn ~'.:r:O ~!:Q :z: ..-I . -f. . ." Enclosed please find two signed copies of the Addendum to Amendment One to Inter10cal Cooperation Agreement dated June 21, 1996 between Miami-Dade County and the City of Miami Beach for your execution. Please ret:un.J. one signed original for our files. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (305) 673-7010. Sincerely, dvQ~ Jorge M. Gonzalez City Manager JMG\~C\rar F:ICMGII.\SAu,\CHlUSTlNIJMG\AddoncIamAmendOn InterlocalTrm.doc c: Christina M. Cuervo, Assistant City Manager Robert Parcher, City Clerk