3-31-2017 FCWP AgendaMIAMIB ACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach , Flor ida 33139, www .miamibeachfl .gov
COMMITIEE MEMORANDUM
TO :
FROM:
Members of the Finance and Citywide Proj ~ /mittee
Jimmy L. Morales, City Manager .-:t/7' ~ __/::!
DATE : March 31, 2017 / , /
This shall serve as written notice that a meeting of the Finance and Citywide Projects
Committee (FCWPC) has been scheduled for March 31, 2017, at 2:30 P.M. in the City
Commission Chambers.
The agenda is as follows:
OLD BUSINESS
1. Discussion On Creation Of Economic Development Goals And Objectives And A
Citywide Economic Development Strategy Plan . (December 14, 2016 Commission
Item C4B)
Jeff Oris -Economic Development Division Director
Referred by: Tourism, Culture and Economic Development
Status: Item under separate cover.
2. Discussion Regarding Future Uses Or The Potential Sale Of Vacant City-Owned
Land Located At 226 87th Terrace. (October 19, 2016 Commission Item C4A)(July
13, 2016 Commission Item C4J)
Mark Milisits -Asset Manager
Referred by Commissioner: Michael Grieco
Status: Item under separate cover.
Page 2 of 5
NEW BUSINESS
3. Discussion Regarding A Skate Park/Parking Structure At 72nd Street Parking Lot
(P92). (February 8, 2017 Commission Item C4B)
Eva Silverstein-Tourism, Culture and Economic Development Director
Referred by: Tourism, Culture and Economic Development
Dual Referral: Mayor's North Beach Master Plan Steering Committee and Finance &
Citywide Projects Committee
Status: Item enclosed.
4. Discuss The Key Development Parameters For The Barclay Plaza Apartments
Workforce Housing Project. (March 1, 2017 Commission Item C4A)
Maria Ruiz -Housing and Community Services Director
Referred by: Housing and Community Services
Status: Item enclosed.
5. Discussion Regarding Transitioning To Non-Gas Powered Leaf Blowers For City
Staff And Contractors. (March 1, 2017 Commission Item R9R)
Eric Carpenter-Assistant City Manager/ Public Works Director
John Rebar-Parks and Recreation Director
Referred by Commissioner: Michael Grieco
Dual Referral: Sustainability and Resiliency Committee and Finance & Citywide Projects
Committee
Status: Item under separate cover.
6. Discussion Regarding The Maintenance Of Public Bathrooms Citywide. (February
8, 2017 Commission Item C4N)
John Rebar-Parks and Recreation Director
Adrian Morales-Property Management Director
Referred by Commissioner: Michael Grieco
Dual Referral: Neighborhood/Community Affairs Committee and Finance & Citywide
Projects Committee
Status: Discussion item.
Page 3 of 5
7. Discussion Regarding A One Cent (0.01) Food And Beverage Tax Supporting
Public Schools Within Miami Beach City Limits. (March 1, 2017 Commission Item
R9F)
Dr. Leslie Rosenfeld -Chief Learning Development Officer
Cintya Ramos -Budget and Performance Improvement Director
Referred by Commissioner: Michael Grieco
Dual Referral :
i. Neighborhood/Community Affairs Committee to determine the allocation ,
governance , and methodology of expending funds .
ii. Finance & Citywide Projects Committee to examine various funding mechanisms.
Status: Item enclosed.
8. Discuss Engaging In A Pilot Program With A Cost Reduction Consultant. (March 1,
2017 Commission Item C4N)
James Sutter -Internal Auditor
John Woodruff-Chief Financial Officer
Referred by Commissioner: Ricky Arriola
Status: Item enclosed.
9. Discussion Of The Issuance Of New Money And Refunding Water And Sewer
Revenue Bonds. (March 17, 2017)
John Woodruff-Chief Financial Officer
Referred by: Finance
Status: Item under separate cover.
10. Discussion Of The Issuance Of New Stormwater Revenue Bonds. (March 17,
2017)
John Woodruff-Chief Financial Officer
Referred by : Finance
Status: Item under separate cover.
Page 4 of 5
DEFERRED ITEMS
11. Discussion Regarding Proposed Interceptor Garage At 1623 West Avenue (Lot No.
P23). (September 27, 2016 Commission Item R9E)(Continued From September 14,
2016 Commission Item R9AA)
Saul Frances-Parking Director
Referred by : Parking
Status: Item deferred to the April 21st Finance and Citywide Projects meeting. The
CIP Department received a preliminary pedestrian bridge concept design and
associated cost estimate from Desman, DCP (design criteria professional). This
information will be provided to Crescent Heights, developer of the private garage
project contemplated for the pedestrian bridge connection for further discussion.
12. Discussion To Explore Placing Cameras On Every Corner Of The MXE (Mixed Use
Entertainment) District And On The Beachwalk, And Installing Emergency
Activation Boxes Along The Beachwalk. (March 1, 2017 Commission Item C4P)
Eric Carpenter-Assistant City Manager/ Public Works Director
Daniel Oates -Police Chief
Referred by Vice-Mayor: Kristen Rosen Gonzalez
Dual Referral : Neighborhood/Community Affairs Committee and Finance & Citywide
Projects Committee
Status: Item deferred pending completion of analysis.
13. Discuss An Arrangement With Sabrina Cohen Foundation For The Construction
And Operation Of An Adaptive Fitness Center At A Portion Of The 53rd Street
Parking Lot With Direction To Staff To Do Outreach To The Buildings Immediately
Adjacent. (March 22, 2017 Commission Item C4B)
John Rebar-Parks and Recreation Director
Referred by Commissioner: Joy Malakoff
Status: Item deferred.
/
T
Hy
M
T
H
R
Er
if
MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive , Miam i Beach , Florida 33139, www .miam ibeachfl.gov
TO:
FROM:
DATE :
COMMITTEE MEMORANDUM
Members of the Finance and City Wide Projects Committee
Jimmy L. Morales, City Manager ~~ /(_
March 31,2017 / -~
SUBJECT: DISCUSSION REGARDING A SKATE PARK/ PARKING STRUCTURE AT
THE 72ND STREET PARKING LOT (P92)
The purpose of this memorandum is to update the Committee as to staff's efforts
regarding the potential placement of a skate park in North Beach, as well as the
Committee's request for staff to provide further information regarding additional activities
the City may be looking to locate in North Beach.
BACKGROUND:
For several years, the City has had within its work plan to site and construct a skate park
within the municipal limits. Multiple sites have been explored throughout the City with
each location posing challenges. These challenges include resident objections to the
use close to their homes that the City has been unable to mitigate to date . Nonetheless,
the City has continued to pursue a site for such a park due to the demand from the local
skating community and local residents who would like to have a place for skaters to
enjoy their sport. Most recently, in 2016 several locations were presented to the
Neighborhoods and Community Affairs Community (NCAC) for a skate park or all-
wheels park concept: the 72nd Street (P92) Parking lot , the West Lots (those lots on the
west side of Collins Avenue between 791h Street and Bih Street), and the south end of
North Shore Open Space Park. Based on community input and NCAC review, the 72nd
Street lot was selected as the preferred location, and endorsed by the City's Parks and
Recreational Facilities Advisory Board.
Given the loss of parking spaces that would result from the conversion , as well as other
uses recommended for the 72nd Street lot by the North Beach Master Plan (Attachment
2), the City's Parks and Recreational Facilities Advisory Board for the 72nd street lot, as
well as City Departments and the Community (Attachment 3) the NCAC requested that
staff evaluate programming of the entire 72nd Street Lot, including a potential
replacement parking garage (See Attachment 4). The item was also referred to the
Finance and Citywide Project Committee (FCWP) who recommended input from the
Mayor's North Beach Committee prior to discussing the item in depth .
Additional detail on the background timeline is provided in Attachment 1.
Finance and City Wide Projects Committee
Skate Park! Parking Structure At The ?2nd Street Parking Lot (P92)
March 31,2017 Page 2
At the February 17, 2017 NCAC meeting, the Committee recommended that prior to any
review of potential site programming or design the Public Works Department needs to
conduct a survey of the utilities to determine potential cost of utility
relocation/replacement and how a design for the site might be created to minimize utility
conflicts. Significant stormwater, water, and sewer systems are present at the site and
most would require relocation to construct the parking structure. Additionally, a
significant electrical transmission line crosses a portion of the property.
A SKATE PARK AT THE 72N° STREET (P92) PARKING LOT
This 72nd Street Parking lot, also known as lot P92, is an entire block bounded by 72nd
Street on the South, 73rd Street on the North, Collins Avenue on the East and Harding
Avenue on the West. The lot contains 320 parking spaces and it serves the general
commercial uses to the south and north of the lot, as well as providing parking for the
North Shore Park and Youth Center, the beach, and for events at the North Beach
Bandshell. Given the uses the lot serves, it sees peak usage on the weekends, when
beach use is highest, and during special events at the bandshell and at the North Shore
Park and Youth Center that draw larger crowds for several hours at a time.
An all-wheels skate park placed at this site would be maximized at about 28,000 square
feet in area. The park could be as small as 9,000 square feet, but it has been evaluated
at the maximum size thus far. In an effort to provide conformity with the North Beach
Master Plan (issues related to the North Beach Master Plan will be explored later in this
memorandum) and to minimize neighborhood impact, it would be suggested that the
skate park be placed on the northern side of the block that is now the 72nd Street lot.
This will move the activity as far away from the heavy activity on Collins Avenue and
from Burleigh House residential tower while still placing the activity near the North Shore
Youth Center. This location also allows for a more direct connection of the skate park to
the Beachwalk at Ocean Terrace and 73rd Street. Connection to the Beachwalk was a
high priority for those that attended the May 25th public input meeting. Additionally, this
location will allow for the future development of a parking structure more to the southern
(72nd Street) side of the block as contemplated in the North Beach Master Plan.
If the Committee would like to move forward with investigating the creation and funding
of a skate park, construction of a parking garage, and construction of other public
amenities at the 72nd Street lot, several questions would need to be addressed:
• How large should the skate park be?
• How much parking needs to be located on the site?
• If a parking structure is desired, how large should it be?
• What ground floor uses should be accommodated if a parking structure is to be
built?
• What activities the City should look at placing on this site?
STATUS UPDATE
The Mayor's North Beach Committee subsequently discussed the item and various
components of a potential development of the 72nd Street lot at their February 24th
meeting and adopted the following motion by a 6-1 vote:
Finance and City Wide Projects Committee
Skate Park/ Parking Structure At The 72nd Street Parking Lot (P92)
March 31, 2017 Page 3
MOTION: The Steering Committee requests that the City of Miami Beach engage
a planner to create a cohesive vision for the 72nd Street parking lot, the Youth
Center, the Bandshell, Ocean Terrace, the Altos del Mar park area, and the
library location right away so the community can have input in the area parks and
how they can expand and work together as one, from 72nd street to 76th Street
and that the 72nd Street parking lot be designed to maximize parking, have a
single building footprint, include a breezeway to or adjacent to the Youth Center,
and have wide green walkways going east to west on the North and South sides
to encourage pedestrian circulation.
In addition, the NCAC took this matter up at their March 17th meeting with discussion
including the North Beach Committee motion as well as the anticipated completion date
of a utility study to address existing utilities on site. Public works indicated that the basic
utility study would be completed by April 14, 2017. Given that the utility study would be
completed before a designer could be engaged because the Commission's next meeting
would not be until the end of April, the Committee adopted the following motion (note:
the motion is from the meeting video as minutes for the meeting had not yet been
produced at the time this memo was created):
MOTION: To recommend to the full Commission that a designer be engaged to
prepare a comprehensive plan to include all of the areas requested by the North
Beach Committee.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the Committee seek for the City to engage a
designer to prepare a more detailed site design once the review of utilities is completed .
The Committee may also wish to address the NCAC and North Beach Committee's
requests for a more comprehensive plan for the area. Finally, if the Committee wishes
to proceed with the project, the Administration seeks direction on whether a funding
request for detailed site design for the overall lot or a parking structure should be
included in the FY 2017-18 budget process.
C: Kathie Brooks, Assistant City Manager
Eric Carpenter, Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director
Eva Silverstein, Tourism, Culture and Economic Development Director
John Rebar, Parks and Recreation Director
Saul Frances, Parking Director
Jeffrey Oris, Economic Development Division Director
KGB/ES/JO
ATTACHMENT 1
TIMELINE OF PRIOR ACTIONS
Funding for a skate park in Miami Beach was appropriated in Fiscal Year 2011/12 in the
amount of $400,000. At that time the description for the project stated "Location TBD
based on Neighborhood/Community meetings throughout the City .
In the Spring of 2015, Velosolutions USA, a locally-based company, made presentations
to the Parks and Recreation Board and the Mayor's Blue Ribbon Panel on North Beach
regarding a mixed use, all-wheels, pump track concept. This concept varies from a
traditional skate park in that it is more of a contoured and graded track suitable for
skateboards, rollerblades, bicycles and the like, and it is more suited to use by persons
of all ages and skill levels. A traditional skate park, while useable by rollerbladers and
certain bicyclists, is more for skateboard riding and would include steeper ramps and
other elements on which to launch into various "tricks."
During the last year or so, the North Beach community has become more accepting of
the location of a skate park or all wheels track within this area of the City, and the
members of the Neighborhood/Community Affairs Committee (NCAC) asked for staff to
seek potential locations in North Beach for the siting of one or both of these types of
facilities. Several locations were presented to the NCAC at their April 15, 2016 meeting.
The NCAC asked for three staff recommended sites; the 72nd Street (P92) Parking lot,
the West Lots (those lots on the west side of Collins Avenue between 79 1h Street and
ayth Street), and the south end of North Shore Open Space Park to be brought to a
public workshop in North Beach for the purposes of gathering the input of the public. In
addition, the NCAC also requested that input be obtained from the Parks and Recreation
Facilities Advisory Board and the Mayor's North Beach Master Plan Steering Committee.
At the aforementioned public input meeting, held on May 25, 2016, the public in
attendance suggested the location at the North Shore Open Space Park as their desired
site. It was clear that the public actually favored the 72nd street lots location, but
indicated preference for the park location due to an anticipated time lag on constructing
a park on the parking lot. The Parks and Recreation Facilities Advisory Board also
recommended the North Shore Open Space Park location at their May 2016 meeting.
The North Beach Master Plan Steering Committee requested conceptual drawings of
each of the three sites before committing to support a particular location. Unfortunately,
the Committee was sunset before the drawings could be reviewed and thus it made no
recommendation.
The NCAC, at the October 21, 2016, was presented with conceptual drawings of a skate
park in the three locations under consideration. After a short discussion, it was clear the
Committee unanimously favored the 72nd street parking lot with an understanding that
the placement of a skate park at this location will cause a loss of parking spaces in the
existing lot. The NCAC requested that staff return to the November meeting with more
information regarding the loss of parking if a skate park is located at the site, the
potential for reconfiguring the parking lot with a parking structure, the inclusion of
greenspace on this block, and the inclusion of other amenities as outlined in the recently
adopted North Beach Master Plan.
The City's Parks and Recreational Facilities Advisory Board adopted the following
motion at their November 2, 2016 meeting:
The Parks and Recreational Facilities Advisory Board has for the past year been
discussing various recreational facilities and locations . After giving a lot of
consideration and reviewing the North Beach Master Plan, it seems most efficient
to the board to consolidate the following four (4) sports activities into the
conceptual design of the ?2nd Street Lot in order to create a recreational sports
corridor: a competitive pool, batting cages, skate park and regulation size soccer
field. Parking and the appropriate life safety considerations for crossing Harding
Avenue should also be considered in the plan .
The uses contemplated on the site by this motion will have implications on the need for
additional new parking. Additionally, the North Beach Master Plan contemplated the
siting of a skate park at this site under all three scenarios illustrated for this site. One of
the scenarios presented also showed the potential for an open multi-use, however, this
scenario did not include any parking on the block at all. Thus, the siting of more
recreational uses at this site would be incompatible with the master plan
During the December 9, 2016 NCAC meeting, the committee members requested
additional information to determine if the activities and rudimentary site plan presented
by staff at the meeting consisted of "the right pieces in the right configuration" for the
site. In response, staff has researched other area needs which are outlined later in this
memorandum.
Additionally, at the December meeting, the members also asked for the input of the
Finance and Citywide Project Committee (FCWP). It was found that this item was not
dual referred to both committees and thus, the item was referred to the FCWP by the
City Commission at their February 8, 2017 meeting. The item was placed on the
FCWP's February 17, 2017 agenda, at which time the Committee indicated they would
like to see a design and wished to hear input from the Mayor's North Beach Committee
prior to discussing the item in depth.
At the FCWP meeting of February 13, 2017 meeting, this item was deferred until input
from the Mayor's North Beach Committee could be obtained. The North Beach
Committee subsequently took up the matter at their February 24th meeting and passed
the following motion (on at 6-1 vote):
MOTION: The Steering Committee requests that the City of Miami Beach engage
a planner to create a cohesive vision for the ?2nd Street parking lot, the Youth
Center, the Bandshell, Ocean Terrace, the Altos del Mar park area, and the
library location right away so the community can have input in the area parks and
how they can expand and work together as one, from ?2nd street to 76th Street
and that the ?2nd Street parking lot be designed to maximize parking, have a
single building footprint, include a breezeway to or adjacent to the Youth Center,
and have wide green walkways going east to west on the North and South sides
to encourage pedestrian circulation.
The North Beach Committee's motion was then taken up by the NCAC at their March 17,
2017 meeting. The Committee subsequently adopted a motion that generally
recommends to the City Commission that a designer be engaged a designer to prepare
a comprehensive plan to include all of the areas requested by the North Beach
Committee (exact wording of the motion is not available as minutes had not be prepared
as of the creation of this memo). In passing this motion, the NCAC was concerned
about potential utility conflicts at the ?2nd Street parking lot. Public Works indicated they
would have a basic utility study completed by April14,· 2017 thus , NCAC felt it was best
to not stop the item to wait for the study since any designer hired would have that
information before the design efforts began.
The NCAC took this matter up at their March 1 ih meeting with discussion including the
North Beach Committee motion as well as the anticipated completion date of a utility
study to address existing utilities on site. Public works indicated that the basic utility
study would be completed by April 14, 2017. Given that the utility study would be
completed before a designer could be engaged because the Commission's next meeting
would not be until the end of April, the Committee adopted the following motion (note:
the motion is from the meeting video as minutes for the meeting had not yet been
produced at the time this attachment was created):
MOTION: To recommend to the full Commission that a designer be engaged to
prepare a comprehensive plan to include all of the areas requested by the North
Beach Committee.
ATTACHMENT 2
RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE NORTH BEACH MASTER PLAN
The adopted North Beach Master Plan focuses on the future potential of the 72nd Street
Parking lot (P-92) as anchor of greenspace/civic use. It was, however, immediately
recognized during the planning process that the lot serves the parking needs of the
events at the North Beach Bandshell, North Shore Park and Youth Center, and visitors
to the beach and thus the greenspace/civic uses would need to be accomplished without
the loss of the 320 parking spaces the lot provides . These spaces serve the area for
major events at the Bandshell, North Shore Youth Center and Park, and the beach and
have the potential to serve the Town Center area. It is for these reasons the Master Plan
describes and includes several illustrations that show a progression of the parking from
its current state to a valet lot that is significantly smaller in footprint than the current lot
but with no loss of spaces, to ultimately a full parking structure (see Illustration 1). The
illustrations show parking to be in the southwestern portion of the lot specifically so that it
can continue to serve the aforementioned facilities, but so that it can also have some
orientation and be suitable for future uses in the Town Center area as it would be
located only one block from the area.
In addition to the above, residents in our public input meetings often expressed a desire
for the City to keep this lot in civic use and to maintain greenspace so that it was clear
that the land from the "ocean to the bay" was public domain. The illustrations also show
how the lot was further designed to keep open space across the northern half of the
block with an active skate park and open fields/lawns to maximize activities .
The lot's design in the Master Plan also addresses another lingering issue in the area;
The curve in Collins Avenue, the open space due to Bandshell Park , and the
greenspace at the eastern edge of the 72nd Street parking lot act as a barrier to
pedestrians continuing to walk northward to the commercial area north of 73rd Street on
Collins Avenue. The visual barrier these components present makes pedestrians feel as
if they have come to the end of the commercial district and thus, they do not continue to
walk towards those businesses north of 73rd Street that are not visible to them. Two
smaller buildings are shown in the illustration as a way to assure pedestrians that the
commercial district continues. The buildings are described as potentially cafes with
outdoor seating areas or other more public types of uses such as a library or community
center (see attached Map 1 ).
Other City requirements and desires were also outlined in the Master Plan for any
parking structure placed at the site. These included the need for retail, commercial,
office space on the ground floor and the potential to include residential units as part of
the project or to ensure the structure was designed for easy conversion to residential if
there is not sufficient need for parking in the future to warrant the structure's continuation
as a parking garage. While not specifically mentioned in the Master Plan, the ground
floor of a parking structure, due to its limited commercial potential and proximity to the
North Shore Youth Center, could be an ideal location for a teen center or for the
relocation of the library. It would also be appropriate to consider including a skywalk or
other direct connection above the roadway from the parking structure to the Youth
Center to increase safety for those traversing Abbott Avenue. This connection could also
encourage more parking in the garage, thereby alleviating parking pressure on the
parking lot at North Shore Park.
ATTACHMENT 3
NON-SKATE PARK POTENTIAL USES ON THE 72N° STREET LOT
Staff has reviewed the needs/wants of other departments and the public and has created
Table 3 which shows potential uses that might be placed at this site and the area, in
square feet, that they might require. Both the library and skate park could be designed to
occupy a smaller area while all of the uses could be designed to take up more area.
TABLE 3 -Potential Uses and Recommended Area
Use Area Needed
1) Library* 5,500 sq. ft.
2) Skate Park 28,000 sq. ft.
3) Teen Center* 8,600 sq. ft.
4) Batting Cages (2 Cages @ 65' x 15' 1,950 sq. ft.
each)
5) Parking Structure 45,000 sq. ft.
to
60,000 sq. ft.
6) Regulation Soccer Field" 64,800 sq. ft.
7) Multi-purpose Field" 79,550 sq. ft.
8) Parks and Recreation Offices*" < 3,000 sq. ft.
9) Code Compliance Area Office*" 900 sq . ft .
1 0) Social Services Intake Facility*" 500 sq. ft .
*Uses noted could be located erther on the ground floor of a parkrng structure or
in a civic building
"Use dismissed by NCAC at February 17, 2017 meeting.
It is important to note that the square footage provided in the above table is for the use
itself and does not include buffers or separation areas, nor does it include space for
spectators. This additional square footage need will depend on configuration, available
space, and other factors.
The master plan did not contemplate batting cages, a soccer field or a large multi-
purpose field to be located on this site . The plan did however, suggest a skate park and
parking structure (with a teen center or library as the ground floor use), along with kiosks
and a civic building along the eastern side of the lot for the purpose of maintaining
continuous visible use and activity along the Collins Avenue Corridor. Sizes for the
kiosks and civic building are not shown in the table as they can be quite flexible and rely
more on design and location to perform their function.
Several of the uses were deemed by the Neighborhood/Community Affairs Committee
too large for the site or not appropriate for a more recreational oriented facility. These
are marked with a""" in the table and include: regulation soccer field, multi-purpose field,
Parks and Recreation Department office, Code Compliance Office, and a social service
intake facility.
A number of the uses indicated in the table (those marked with "*") are suited for the
ground floor or for a civic building and may not impact the placement of other uses but
may compete with one another for available building space.
This list is not an endorsement of any of the uses, but merely a list of facilities that are
continuously requested or for which the City has been seeking a location.
ATTACHMENT 4
POTENTIAL PARKING IMPACT AND PARKING GARAGE NEEDS
If the City were to maximize the size of the skate park and provide the largest
contemplated footprint of 28,000 square feet , the park would occupy the area of
approximately 100 parking spaces in the existing lot. With this assumption, the staff
contacted Walker Parking Consultants, who had prepared a 2014 parking analysis of
North Beach, and asked for a basic assessment of what the loss of these spaces would
mean to the parking occupancy levels of the lot. The resulting analysis can be found in
Table 1.
The calculations in Table 1 do not include additional parking that would be needed for
visitors to the skate park. While many users of the park will ride skateboards to the
location, the park could be a draw from a larger area and attract users arriving by car.
Staff is working with Walker Parking Consultants to ascertain parking needs for the park,
however, additional research is required to make a more direct correlation of parking
demand from such a use due to varying types of skate parks and the limited number of
such public parks locally, in the state, and across the nation.
TABLE 1 -Parking Occupancy Impact
Observe d Conditions
Bl ock/Lot I nve ntory
13/ P92 30 5
Occupancy
Potential Conditions
Bl oc k/Lot
13/ P92
Inve nto ry
20 5
Occupan cy
Noon
156
51'16
Noo n
156
76%
"plus added de ma nd o f s kate p ark:
Sat
4:00P M 9:00 PM
304 204
1(}(1}6 67%
Sat
4;00 PM 9:00P M
304 204
14896 1~
Wee kday
11:00A M 2:00PM
7& 81
25'16 27'16
Week day
7:00P M
100
3676
ll:OOA M 2:00P M 7:00PM
76
37%
81
401)6
109
53 ~
Table 1 (Observed Cond itions) shows that without factoring in the additional parking
needs of the skate park, the lot experiences full occupancy only in the late afternoon on
Saturdays with the remainder of the Saturday and weekdays showing significant
vacancy throughout the day. When the loss of 100 spaces (Potential Conditions) is
considered, it shows that weekday parking needs could be accommodated , but Saturday
usage would become even more deficient. Again , this analysis does not address the
additional need for parking due to the skate park, although it is unlikely that the
additional need would put occupancy over capacity during weekday periods. However, it
would place even more burden o n the Saturday parking need.
Additional parking needs that may come from expected development in the area ,
coupled with potentially successful North Beach revitalization efforts, would then mea n
that this lot would start to see additional demand pushing occupancy levels even higher.
ADDRESSING PARKING NEEDS
The illustration from the North Beach Master Plan shows a parking structure at the
southwestern portion of the block . It further shows the structure occupying about two-
thirds of the western half of the block. The City Code currently allows a majority parking
structure on the site to be up to 87 feet in height. However, only the lower 50 feet of this
structure could be used for parking while upper floors could be used for other residential
or commercial uses, which may not that desirable at this site. At a 50 foot height limit,
the structure would be limited to four stories: ground floor retail/civic uses with some
parking and three floors of parking. The structure was shown with this configuration so
that it could serve all of the needs of the area and allow for a pedestrian extension of
Harding Avenue from the south through the new park. This would provide an inviting
view to drivers as well as allowing the road to terminate in a greenspace rather than with
the side of a parking structure.
Following what is allowed in the City code, a structure configured as illustrated would
provide approximately 270 spaces with 45,000 square feet of useable space for location
of a civic center, teen center, retail space, or for relocation of the public library . An
additional story could be added to the structure with a waiver by the City Commission,
yielding 44 more spaces for a total of 360. The waiver could be appropriate as it may
only be for about 5-10 feet to account for higher ceiling height on the ground floor that
would be appropriate for retail and to address future sea level rise. Additionally, several
more spaces could be made available if the entire ground floor were not dedicated to
civic or retail space . The number of additional spaces at the ground floor would depend
on the space needed for access to them and the amount of space made available.
This scenario gains approximately 40 spaces as compared to the current lot capacity ,
but it does not account for the approximately 150 spaces that would be required if the
entire ground floor of the structure were to remain non-parking space (based on a retail
use at 1 space per 300 square feet), thereby continuing to leave the area in a parking
deficit compared to what exists today. It would not be required that the entire ground
floor be used for non-parking uses and some parking could be located on the first level
thus increasing the amount of parking and decreasing the amount required for the new
uses in the structure. Additional parking would also be required to serve the skate park ,
though as mentioned, we do not yet have the information to determine the number
required. It should be noted that the City Commission has the right to waive or reduce
certain parking requirements, which would be appropriate if more civic uses such as a
library or teen center were to utilize the space.
To satisfy overall area demand and increase the amount of parking available for the
Town Center area's future revitalization, the parking garage could also vary from the
Master Plan to occupy more of the southern half of the lot (see attached Map 2). While
this may spoil the more pedestrian-friendly design, the potential to combine what is
shown as a parking garage and a building for retail or civic use in the Master Plan and
provide for a larger garage with ground floor civic and retail uses may also be
appropriate. The southern half of the block can easily provide for a structure footprint
that, with waiver for an additional floor, could provide closer to 500 spaces. If a structure
were designed that utilized two-thirds of the southern half of the lot (approximately
59,000 square feet) and utilized the assumptions from the previous example of
Commission waivers for an additional floor, this five-story garage would yield a minimum
of 472 spaces if the entire ground floor were dedicated to non-parking uses. These
ground floor uses would also generate a demand for an additional 196 spaces if the
retail parking requirements are utilized. It would be more likely that some ground floor
spaces would be more appropriate than 59,000 square foot of non-parking uses in this
location , which would increase the number of spaces and decrease the additional
demand due to the non-parking uses .
There is significant space on the southern half of the block that can be used as
described above, or another configuration could be designed that would change all of
the elements around on the lot to provide for a more efficient use of the lot overall while
maintaining parking, the skate park, appropriate civic uses and any other desired uses.
PARKING STRUCTURE COSTS
Basic cost estimates for building a parking structure can be determined by using the
City's current parking space cost factor of $30,000 per space for construction of parking
structures + 30% of this cost added on for soft costs (design and other). Table 2 shows
costs of the examples given and two sizes between the examples . It should be noted
that these are just estimates and there will probably be additional costs based on the
type of ground floor uses (Table 2 assumes no ground floor parking).
TABLE 2 -Estimated Parking Structure Costs
Sq . FtArea #of Spaces Cost
45,000 360 $14,400,000
50,000 400 $16 ,000 ,000
55,000 440 $17 ,600,000
59,000 472 $18,880,000
It is estimated that there is $2.8 million available in North Beach Impact Fees/Fees in
Lieu of Parking which can be used to increase parking availability in the North Beach
area. The Commission could chose to develop the program for the lot today, but
implement it over time, thus allowing time to develop the funding for the garage!
T
E
M
F
O
U
R
Committee Memorandum-P3 Recommendations for the Barclay Plaza Apartments-March 31 , 2017
The Commission has already earmarked this property for the development of workforce housing
serving persons employed in the education , public safety and municipal fields earning 120 to
140 percent Area Media Income (AMI). The Neighborhoods/Community Affairs Committee is
also considering whether the units should be offered to individuals with ties to the City (e.g.
grew up here , resided here formerly, has family currently residing in the City). This income
range varies from $59,640 to $69,580 for a household of one. However, this leaves a gap of
individuals earning between 80 and 120 percent AMI who are not eligible for traditional
affordable housing (subsidized by federal or state funding) and those that would be served by
the City .
Housing affordability is generally defined as housing costing no more than 30 percent of a
household's income --this is true for eligibility in state or federally subsidized housing or when
applying for a private mortgage. Using this formula , monthly rents should be no greater than
$1 ,491 (for a household of one) to $2,884 (for a household of six). In comparison, the current
Fair Market Rents as posted the Department of Housing and Urban Development is valued at
$831 (one-bedroom) to $1,728 (three-bedroom).
The restoration of the existing building will be extensive as the building has been poorly
maintained, is not compliant with its 40-year recertification and suffered a fire in its historic lobby
in February 2015 . More so, vagrants have gutted its wiring and destroyed several windows and
access points. The on-site pool is currently covered as a precaution for Zika.
Staff had undertaken a preliminary site assessment in advance of selecting Concourse Group
as its P3 consultant. Below please find the very preliminary figures as requested at the
Workforce/Affordable Housing Workshop to be used for conversational pu rposes only as we
await the Concourse Group's analysis .
The initial development investment for the property is $7 ,238 ,823 estimated at $200 per square
foot with a 20 percent premium for LEED certification . The cost increases to $13 ,014 ,903 if the
adjacent parking lot is developed as additional housing units . Adding the 10% design cost and
fees, the project cost estimate becomes $15,097 ,287. Adding parking in lieu of fees
($1,140,000), the overall estimated direct development costs are $16,237,287. (Please note that
the Commission can waive the parking fees.) In addition, the City must repay HUD $485,833
that had been previously expended in the property when it was owned by Miami Beach
Community Development Corporation. The total estimated development cost to develop the
Barclay Plaza Apartments as workforce housing is $ 16,723,120 .
In 2016 , the City Commission established the target beneficiaries for the Barclay Plaza
Apartments as educators, public safety personnel and municipal workers earning 120 to 140
percent AMI. This is a very narrow income range which would exclude a significant number
municipal and public safety employees who earn at least 100 percent AMI but below 120
percent. In all , 537 City employees earn $45,450 to $68,160. Of these, 189 are public safety
personnel. Under current income guidelines, they would be excluded from eligibility as residents
at the Barclay Plaza Apartments . Staff recommends that the income eligibility for this property
be increased to up to 140 percent AMI to ensure the broadest inclusion of public safety and
municipal workers possible.
Given the high development cost and narrow tenant requirements, staff recommends that
projected rents be established at 30% of the targeted AMI ranges and adjusted for unit size or
about $1,491 -$1 ,740 for a one bedroom and $1,917-$2,237 for a two-bedroom unit. These
proposed minimum ranges are lower than the citywide average market rates for a one-bedroom
Committee Memorandum -P3 Recommendations for the Barclay Plaza Apartments -March 31 , 2017
unit which varies from $1 ,575 to $2,300 .
At its Workforce/Affordable Housing workshop, the City Commission suggested that a minimum
period of tenure working in the City and/or living in the City be established for incoming tenants.
However, a firm period of tenure was not provided . Staff would need to establish a firm tenure
period to provide direction to Concourse Group for the fiscal analysis as well as to provide
guidance , ultimately, to the site's developer. Staff recommends two years as a minimum tenure.
This standard would apply for the length of employment for municipal employees and feeder
pattern educators as well eligible current residents of the City seeking to relocate to the
property . Please note that while broader tenant policies were referred to Committee for review
once the Barclay Plaza Apartments RFP was ready for issuance, it is expected that tenants may
remain eligible as long as they meet the eligibility criteria or until their lease is up for renewal.
The property has a 1 0-space parking lot on its west side along with a full-size pool. This lot and
the adjacent pool area have the potential for development to further maximize the number of
units that can be developed . Staff recommends including this area for development within the
RFP would increase the project's viability while also maximizing the number and size of units
that could be offered on this site . Please note that these cost projections were included in the
preliminary site analysis above .
Finally, the exploration of mixed used developments was broached at the Commission meeting.
This site , located across from the Convention Center and one block south of a new hotel being
constructed at 21st Street and Park Avenue , can possibly house an accessory use, i.e . dry
cleaner, gym, etc. to increase operational revenues . While staff is reluctant to specifically
promote an accessory use, it wishes to note that certain financing resources for the
rehabil itation of the histo ri c structure may requ ire a commercial component fo r funding approval.
As such , staff recommends that the Commission allow for an accessory use if tied to the
project's funding and only upon specific use approval by the Comm iss ion . This will enable
respondents to the RFP to have broad latitude in conceptualizing the development site within
the context of the surrounding neighborhood.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission do the following:
1. Amend the prior Barclay Plaza Apartments workforce housing resolution to expand the eligibility
to households earning between 80 and 140 present AMI instead of 120 to 140 percent AMI , thereby
including a significant number of public safety and municipal employees who would otherwise be
excluded.
2. Establish base rents for the Barclay Plaza Apartments as 30% of targeted median income
adjusted for unit size;
3. Establish a minimum two-year tenure for workers within the City who wish to reside in the
building ;
4. Allow for the inclusion of the parking lot and pool area for development to maximize the number
of units developed on site; and
5 . Allow for consideration the inclusion of a commercial accessory use as part of the development
proposal to strengthen its financial viability.
6. Prov ide guidance as to the mix of units ideally preferred for this site .
F:\neig\Homeless\CHILDREN\$ALL\Commission Committees\Finance Committee\2017\Barclay Direction for P3 Consultant
Committee 03312017 .doc
J LM/KGB/MLRI
/
T
E
M
S
if
V
E
N
FCWPC Memorandum -Education Funding Mechanism
March 31, 2017
Page 2 of 11
In Resolution No. 2015-28997, the City Commission directed the Administration to
expand the Compact to address the following areas: Early Learning;
Extracurricular/Choice Offerings; and Afterschool Programming.
Since then, the City has entered into contracts with M-DCPS and other organizations for
the following initiatives: Voluntary Pre-kindergarten (VPK) at Fienberg Fisher K-8 Center
and Biscayne Elementary; Dual Enrollment Expansion through partnerships with Florida
International University and Miami-Dade College at Miami Beach Senior High School
and Nautilus Middle School; and Afterschool Teen Program at Nautilus Middle School.
The City supports excellence in education in the City's public schools recognizing it is an
investment in the overall enhancement of education for residents. Enhanced student
achievement includes a seamless curriculum of advanced studies through the
International Baccalaureate (IB) Program, from Pre-Kindergarten through twelfth grade.
To date, approximately $747,000 has been expended for application fees, professional
development for teachers, and other youth related activities including dual enrollment
and Nurse Initiative (not including Voluntary Pre-K), for an additional $348,000 for the
first two years.1 The following is the status of implementation for each IB program:
• Diploma Program (DP): Miami Beach Senior High is authorized to teach the IB
Diploma Program as of Fall 2010. As an IB World School, approximately 82
percent of those eligible in 2012, 89 percent of those eligible in 2013, 62 percent
of those eligible in 2014, 73 percent of those eligible in 2015, and 83 percent of
those in 2016, received the IB Diploma. Currently, there are 115 students in the
tenth grade and 100 students in ninth grade seeking the IB Diploma, a 765
percent increase since program inception.
• Middle Years Program (MYP): Nautilus Middle School and Fienberg Fisher K-8
are authorized to teach the IB MYP Program and attained authorization in 2011.
Both have obtained their five-year re-authorization.
• Primary Years Program (PYP): South Pointe, North Beach, Biscayne, Fienberg
Fisher, and Treasure Island Elementary are authorized IB schools as of February
2013. All schools have obtained their re-authorization.
City Education Funding
In Fiscal Year (FY) 2016/17, the City's expenditures to support and enhance
educational programming in Miami Beach public schools amount to approximately
$354,000, offset by approximately $100,000 in dedicated funding through the Education
Compact Fund and contributions and $119,000 in General Fund support (See
Attachment B). In FY 2017/18, these expenditures are anticipated to increase to
$434,000, offset by approximately $100,000 in dedicated funding through the Education
Compact Fund.
As shown on Attachment B, these efforts have been supported by drawing of prior year
available balances in the Education Compact Fund, an approach that is not sustainable
for the long term. Based on initiatives already underway, there is a need for an
1 The Miami Beach Chamber of Commerce's Education Foundation has also donated $80,620
as of March 2017 to partially fund IB related expenses for the City's IB authorized public schools.
FCWPC Memorandum -Education Funding Mechanism
March 31, 2017
Page 3 of 11
additional $300,000 recurring annually, above the funding available for the Compact. It
is also worth noting that at least 50 percent of the City's Chief Learning Officer's time is
spent in implementing these initiatives, and the cost of this effort (estimated at $92,500),
is not included in these estimates.
In addition, the Pilot School Bus Transportation Program, which will start in August 2017
for one semester at two elementary schools, is estimated to cost $50,000, funded by the
Transportation Fund. If the Pilot Program is successful, and expanded year round-to all
public schools, the costs for a school bus transportation program could easily grow to
$500,000 per year.
Based on existing initiatives alone, the Administration has identified a need for
$400,000 to $1 million in additional annual funding.
Quality Education Committee Action
On November 15, 2016, the City's Committee for Quality Education (QEC) submitted the
following motion to the Mayor and Commission for consideration:
The Committee for Quality Education requests the Miami Beach Mayor and
Commission explore the proposal of a penny sales tax on Miami Beach which will
be directed solely to Miami Beach public schools within the City limits. The goal
is to make a sustainable fund to provide Miami Beach students with public funds
to ensure that Miami Beach public school children are given the best public
school education possible and to compete with other school districts. This penny
tax is not to replace, alter, or diminish any current or future funds provided by any
other source including but not limited to the School Board, County, State, or
Federal, but rather to provide enhancements for Miami Beach public schools. 2
2 The QEC also provided information to the City Commission regarding steps taken by the
Sarasota County Public Schools District to improve public school education within their
jurisdiction. The Sarasota County School district tax referendum was first approved by the
Sarasota County voters in 2002 to provide for a one-mill property levy to support their public
schools, and was renewed in 2006, 2010, and 2014. Approximately $45 million has been
generated each fiscal year since 2015. As a School District in the State of Florida, the Sarasota
County School District had express statutory authorization, pursuant to Chapter 1011 of the
Florida Statutes, for the imposition of the discretionary tax discussed above, once the tax was
approved by referendum . The Sarasota example is not an option for the City, as the City of
Miami Beach does not have any statutory authority to impose a discretionary tax levy
pursuant to Chapter 1011 of the Florida Statutes. As a municipality of the State of Florida, the
City is subject to separate statutes and limitations on its taxing power, discussed more fully
below.
FCWPC Memorandum -Education Funding Mechanism
March 31, 2017
Page 4 of 11
ANALYSIS
As a general matter, under Article VII of the Florida Constitution, a tax cannot be
authorized by county or municipal ordinance, unless the tax is levied pursuant to a law
enacted by the Florida Legislature. Accordingly, all taxes levied by the City are
subject to constitutional and statutory limitations, including ad valorem taxes, which
are subject to Florida Constitution and statutory millage ceilings, or the local business
tax (levied pursuant to Fla. Stat. 205.042), or the maximum of up to 4 percent tax on
transient rentals permitted by Florida law3 ("Bed Tax"), or the maximum of up to 2
percent tax on the sale of food, beverage and alcoholic beverages permitted by Florida
law4 (the "F&B Tax") (collectively, the Bed Tax and F&B Tax referred to herein as the
"Resort Tax").
The main funding options that have been identified, and which are addressed in this
Memorandum, include the following:
1) Increase Bed Tax or F&B Tax, including one cent F&B tax per transaction;
2) Increase transfers of Resort Taxes to General Fund, to offset General Fund
Expenditures for tourism and make available General Fund revenues for
education;
3) Dedicated millage for public education, including offset of decrease in debt
service millage with a dedicated millage for education;
4) Surcharge or sales/excise tax on real estate transactions;
5) Educational Impact Fee on New Development;
6) Create a non-profit charitable 501(c)3 entity to raise funds for public education
within the City.
Option 1: Increase Bed Tax or Increase One Cent Per Transaction for F&B Tax
As noted above, the Florida Legislature has authorized the City to levy a Bed Tax of up
to 4 percent on transient rental transactions, and an F&B Tax of up to 2 percent on the
sale of food and beverages sold at retail. See Footnotes 3 and 4, above. Accordingly,
pursuant to Section 5.03 of the City Charter, and following voter referendum approval for
3 See Chapter 67-930, Laws of Florida (authorizing 2 percent tax on transient rentals and 2
percent tax on food, beverages and alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption in hotels
and motels); as amended by Chapter 82-142, L.O.F. (authorizing increase of tax on transient
rentals to the rate of 3 percent) and Chapter 82-363, L.O.F. (authorizing increase of tax on
transient rentals to the rate of 4 percent); and Fla. Stat. 125.01 04(3)(b) (recognizing and
continuing the municipal resort tax authorizations provided in Chapter 67-930).
4 See Chapter 67-930, L.O.F; as amended by Chapter 93-286, L.O.F (removing exemption from
the tax for beer and malt beverages); and Chapter 94-344, L.O.F. (extending the F&B
authorization to apply the 2 percent tax on sale of food and beverages sold at retail (and not just
sales for on-premises consumption at hotels/motels).
FCWPC Memorandum -Education Funding Mechanism
March 31, 2017
Page 5 of 11
the increases in the Bed Tax5 , the City currently levies the maximum 4 percent Bed
Tax and the maximum 2 percent F&B Tax permitted by Florida law. See Section
102-307 of the City Code (imposing the current Bed Tax and F&B Tax rates).
The Florida Legislature imposes use restrictions with respect to the Bed Tax and F&B
Tax collected by the City. Specifically, the Bed Tax and F&B Tax must only be used
for the promotion of the tourist industry, which shall include, but not be restricted to
the following: publicity, advertising, news bureau, promotional events, convention bureau
activities, capital improvements, and the maintenance of all physical assets in
connection therewith, and any related purpose, including relief from ad valorem taxes
previously levied for the above purposes. See 67-930, L.O.F.; City Charter, Section
5.03.
Conclusion Regarding Option 1: As the City currently levies the maximum Bed Tax
and F&B Tax permitted by Florida law, and as the funds collected from such taxes may
only be used for the promotion of the tourist industry (i.e., tourism-related purposes), this
option would require the express authorization of the Florida Legislature as to both any
increase in the Resort Tax and any use of the funds for public education, as the use of
Resort Taxes for public education purposes is otherwise currently prohibited by law.
Option 2: Increase Transfers of Resort Taxes to General Fund, to Offset
General Fund Expenditures for Tourism and Make Available General
Fund Revenues for Education
All Resort Taxes collected by the City are first pledged to bondholders, in connection
with the City's 2015 Series Resort Tax Revenue Bonds ("Resort Tax Bonds"), which
generated proceeds to the City in the amount of $194,920,000 (all of which is currently
being used to fund the Miami Beach Convention Center Renovation and Expansion
Project). After payment of the annual principal and interest obligations under the Resort
Tax Bonds, and the various reserve requirements related thereto, any excess Resort
Tax funds must be used for the tourism-related purposes (as outlined more fully in
Option 1, above).6
As of 2010, using FY 2007/08 actual costs (the last time such a study was conducted), it
was estimated that there were approximately $50.5 million in tourism-eligible
expenditures in the General Fund. The Resort Tax fund in FY 2016/17 is budgeted to
transfer $37,609,000 to the General Fund, which is used to support these tourism
5 See City Resolution No. 1992-20648 (certifying referendum results approving increase of the
Bed Tax to the 3 percent maximum tax then-permitted by law, 50 percent of which would be used
to fund debt service for certain capital projects within the City Center district, and 50 percent of
which would be used for tourism-related "quality of life" purposes); and Resolution No. 2012-
28004 (certifying referendum results approving increase of the Bed Tax to 4 percent for the City's
Convention Center Renovation & Expansion Project).
6 As outlined in Section 5.03 of the City Charter, the first 2 percent of the Resort Tax is used for
tourism -related expenditures (summarized in Chart 1 below), the additional one percent approved
in 1992 is used for the tourism-related "Quality of Life" expenditures (summarized in Chart 2
below), and the fourth percent of the Resort Tax is used for construction and debt service for the
Convention Center.
FCWPC Memorandum -Education Funding Mechanism
March 31, 2017
Page 6 of 11
eligible expenditures in the General Fund. The $37.6 million transfer to General Fund
supports new and continuing tourism eligible expenditures such as code enforcement,
cleanliness index, park ranger program, homelessness at Lummus Park, hurricane and
disaster preparation equipment, increased support for the Miami Beach Botanical
Garden and the City's cultural facilities, public safety programs such as Ocean Rescue,
Police services on Lincoln Road, Ocean Drive/Lummus Park, Collins Avenue,
Washington Avenue, ATVs for officers, Boardwalk security, special traffic enforcement,
and special event staffing; and fire rescue units in tourist and visitor areas. The funding
also supports code compliance services to respond to evening entertainment areas and
provides for a portion of the operational costs of the Tourism and Cultural Development.
The above estimate of tourism-related expenditures funded by the General Fund has
likely grown since the 2007/08 expenditures were analyzed, especially given the
additional public safety and code enforcement resources that have been deployed in the
entertainment areas since that time.
A more detailed breakdown of the uses with respect to the first 2 percent of the Resort
Tax, and the "Quality of Life" component of the Resort Tax (the additional one percent
Bed Tax approved in 1992), are set forth below.
Use of the First 2 Percent Resort Tax
All revenues generated by the first 2 percent of the Resort Tax Revenue Fund are fully
committed in the FY 2016/17 Budget, as outlined in Chart 1. Additional transfers to the
General Fund would require increases in Resort Tax revenues through growth over time
or decreases in other Resort Tax expenditures. Unfortunately, FY 2016/17 Resort Tax
revenues have decreased below prior years and revenue collections are currently
trending below budgeted amounts. The City's ability to make additional transfers, as
contemplated herein, would require decreasing funding to other uses of the 2 percent
Resort Tax revenues.
Chart 1 -Use of the First 2 Percent Resort Tax
Resort Tax FY 16/17 Adooted Comments
2% Exoenditures
QperatinQ Costs:
Resort Tax-Finance Internal Audit Police Code $3 495 000 Reauired for administration and collection of Resort Tax
Other Uses:
Contribution to VCA $2 832 000 Citv Code Section 102-251 & Fla . Stat. 125.0104 3lfb
Contribution to Bureau GMCVB $6 500 000 Contractual Aareement throUQh Janurv 6 2021
Marketing/Promotion $350,000 Camapings short tenn rental awareness , Respect the Scene, Parks
and Recreation free services oromotions
Goodwill Ambassadors $130 000 Pavroll -admin time
Major Events $2,817,000 Memorial DaySpring Break , NYE etc., including overtime for police,
fire code , parks /recreation
Holiday Decorations $300 000
Sanitation-Beachfront Restroom Attendants $4213000
Professional Services $381,000 $200 ,0 00 Security Guards, $100,000 July 4th, $61,000 mise , $20,000
\lr, url;t
Miscellaneous/Other Centennial in FY 15 $0
Continaencv $30 000
Sub-Total $17 553 000
Transfers/Debts/ & Obliaations:
Contribution to Mt . Sinai $1 000 000 Contractual
General Fund Contribution $37 609 000
Visitors and Convention Authority ("VCA") Funding
One of the programs that the 2 percent Resort Tax funds is the City's VCA. See Chart 1.
One additional option may involve evaluation of funding for the VCA), which, for
FCWPC Memorandum -Education Funding Mechanism
March 31,2017
Page 7 of 11
FY2016/17, amounts to $2,832,000. Under Section 102-251 of the City Code, 5 percent
of the Resort Tax collected by the City shall be allocated to the VCA annually.
If the City desired to amend the requirements of the City Code with respect to the VCA
(i.e., to make adjustments to the required level of funding for the VCA), any such
amendment must either be approved by (1) affirmative vote of a majority of the members
of the City Commission and the VCA; or (2) by the voters in a City-wide referendum.
See City Code, Section 102-253. Accordingly, reallocation of VCA funding is an
available option, with the approval of either (1) the VCA and the City Commission; or (2)
the voters via referendum.
Use of the Tourism-Related Quality of Life 1 Percent Resort Tax
In 1992, following a City-wide referendum, the City's voters approved an increase of one
percent (1 percent) in the Bed Tax (increasing the Bed tax from 2 percent to 3 percent)
which, following payment of debt service for certain capital projects, is now used for
tourism-related "quality of life" purposes, such as improved landscaping, cultural
programming, public safety, and transportation in tourist-related areas. See Footnote 5,
above. Internally, the City has referred to this one percent component of the Bed tax as
the "Quality of Life" funds. The funding allocations for this 1 percent Bed Tax used for
"quality of life" tourism-related expenses are as follows: ten percent (10%) for Arts;
fifteen percent (15%) each for tourism-related capital projects in Mid, North, and South
Beach, for a total of forty-five percent ( 45%) for such capital projects; and forty-five
percent (45%) for Transportation. A summary of the Quality of Life Resort Tax
expenditures is set forth in Chart 2 below.
Chart 2 -"Quality of Life" tourism-related expenditures
Resort Tax - 1 Percent Quality of Life FY 16/17 Adopted
South Beach -Quality of Life Capital (15%) $2,110,000
Middle Beach-Quality of Life Capital (15%) $2,110,000
North Beach-Quality of Life Capital (15%) $2,110,000
Arts (10%) $1,406,000
Transportation (45%) $6,329,000
Total 1% Quality of Life Expenditures $14,065,000
Resort Tax-1 Percent Convention Center Debt Service FY 16/17 Adopted
Debit Issuance Costs $0
Debt Ser.Ace Costs $0
Transfer to Debt Ser.Ace $14,065,000
Total 1% Convention Center Expenditures $14,065,000
Examples of Quality of Life expenditures (budgeted and planned) include the following:
• Arts (Transfer to Cultural Arts Council): Grants to organizations $850,000,
education initiative for Arts for Learning $75,000, grants subscription $4,450,
supplement Arts in the Parks program $46,500, marketing $55,000, 256,000
personnel expenses, $18,000 internal charges, $94,000 for reserves,
conferences $7,000.
• Quality of Life/Tourism-related capital projects: examples of projects previously
budgeted or programmed to be budgeted in the future are as follows:
FCWPC Memorandum -Education Funding Mechanism
March 31, 2017
Page 8 of 11
o South Beach: Lifeguard stands replacement, Ocean Drive extended
sidewalk, street lighting improvements, pedestrian priority zones,
Lummus Park Muscle Beach upgrades, Maurice Gibb Park floating dock,
Bass Museum Cafe furniture & fixtures, lighting at the Botanical Garden,
standardized trash receptacles, picnic tables, and bench replacement,
public safety radio & viper system, fountain Alton 20th improvements,
World War Memorial, Flamingo Park, beach access control gates, beach
walk II, West Avenue Bridge, Bay Walk Phase I, beach shower drainage
improvements, Lummus Park playground replacement, lighting and sound
system at Collins Park, Flamingo Park softball and soccer fields, Tree
Well restoration at Washington Avenue, Bass Museum emergency
generator replacement, dune restoration.
o Mid Beach: Recreation Corridor phase Ill, Muss Park, lifeguard stand
replacement, Indian Beach playground replacement, MB Golf Cart
staging enhancement, MB golf course front loader purchase, park bench,
trash receptacles and picnic tables replacement, radio & viper system,
MB tee renovation, 28th Street Obelisk stabilization, Collins Park Medians,
MB Golf Club cart path/curb, beach access control gates, street lighting,
beach shower drainage improvements, access ramp boardwalk at 41st
Street, Beachwalk at Seville, MB golf parking lot renovation, Collins Ave
boardwalk replacement, Beachview Park improvements, and citywide
dune restoration.
o North Beach: Rue Vendome Public Plaza, Allison Park redesign, North
Shore Tennis Center expansion, street lighting improvements, kayak
launch docks, lifeguard stand replacement, North Beach streetscape pilot
program, 81st Street pedestrian bridge, Tent at North Shore Bandshell,
Bandshell sound system, public safety radio & viper system, Bonita Drive
street end improvements, Collins/Harding alleyway, painting & lighting
bridges, North Shore park playground safety surface, North Shore sound
mitigation, park bench, picnic table and trash receptacle replacement, 71 st
Eastern Street end improvement, 7300 Dickens Avenue landscaping,
North Beach Streetscape, Altos Del Mar Park development, beach
access control gates, Bandshell Master Plan Improvement, beach shower
drainage improvements, 71 st fountain renovation, North Shore restroom
addition and renovation, Skate Park, Domino Park, restrooms, entrance
signs to North Beach, park security, NSGC landscaping, and dune
restoration.
• Transportation -Primarily used for trolley operating expenditures, expansion of
bike lanes, traffic and traffic calming studies, etc.
Conclusion Regarding Resort Tax: All Resort Tax funds are fully committed to
specific programs in the FY 2016/17 Budget. In order to increase the Resort Tax
transfer to cover tourism-related expenses in the General Fund, the Commission would
need to identify reductions to programs currently funded by the Resort Tax. If such
reductions are made, and the Resort Tax transfer was increased to match Resort Tax
expenses in the General Fund, there could be approximately $12 million in other
General Fund revenues available for other uses, including education. Given that the last
FCWPC Memorandum -Education Funding Mechanism
March 31, 2017
Page 9 of 11
study of eligible tourism expenditures in the General Fund was based on FY 2007/08
expenditures, this estimate would need to be updated prior to making any changes to
the transfer. In addition, determination of amounts that may be available is subject to
further analysis of Resort Tax revenue projections, in view of the recent decline in
collections.7
Option 3: Dedicated Millage for Public Education, Including Offset of Decrease
in Debt Service Millage, with Dedicated Millage for Education
The City currently has a portion of the operating millage that is dedicated for facility
renewal and replacement needs. See City Resolution Nos. 2004-25697 and 2005-
25832). Establishing a similar fixed millage for education would allow this funding
source to grow as property values grow in the future. The City could establish a
dedicated millage for education using one of the following options:
• Offsetting any decrease in the debt service millage with a dedicated millage
for education. The renewal and replacement dedicated millage was originally
established in the FY 2004/05 budget by offsetting the decrease of 0.126 in the
debt service millage that year with a dedicated 0.126 mills for renewal and
replacement. As of FY 2016/17, the dedicated millage for renewal and
replacement is 0.0235, estimated to generate $662,000. As an example, in FY
2016/17, the debt service millage decreased by 0.0235 in FY 2016/17, had this
decrease been recaptured as education millage, it would have generated
$662,000.
• Capturing a portion of growth in taxable property values, and establishing
a millage related to those additional revenues. It is anticipated that property
values as of January 1, 2017 (the basis of FY 2016/17 property taxes) will have
increased over January 1, 2016. A portion of the resulting increased revenues
could be captured and expressed as a dedicated millage rate, without increasing
the millage rate over the prior year. Typically, the resulting revenues from growth
in property values is used to offset growth due to inflation as well as fund new
initiatives. To the extent some of the growth is diverted to education funding, it
could limit the amount of funding available for new initiatives.
• Increasing the millage rate.
Pursuant to the Florida Constitution and Chapter 200 of the Florida Statutes, there are
limitations in increasing the City's operating millage. Pursuant to recently enacted State
legislation, the City may elect to approve operating millage rates above the roll-back
rate. The roll-back rate is defined as the millage rate sufficient to generate the same
level of revenues as the previous year, taking into account the change in property
values. As property values grow, the roll-back rate decreases each year. The City may
increase the operating millage rate above the roll-back rate up to the constitutional cap
of 10 mills subject to the following votes by the City Commission or referendum:
7 By way of comparison, in FY 2016/17 one mill of property tax value generates $28.2
million in property tax revenues for the General Fund.
FCWPC Memorandum -Education Funding Mechanism
March 31, 2017
Page 10 of 11
o Option 1: A majority vote of the City Commission is required to approve a
millage that generates an increase in property tax revenues up to the percent
increase that is the state per capita personal income gain for the prior
calendar year.
o Option II: A two-thirds approval (5/ih vote) of the Commission is required to
approve a millage that generates an increase in property tax revenues up to a
1 0 percent increase in the ad valorem revenues above Option I.
o Option Ill: A unanimous approval of the Commission or referendum is
required to approve a millage above Option II, up to the 10 mill cap.
Conclusion Regarding Millage: Subject to statutory millage limitations and funding
considerations, the foregoing millage-related options are potentially available should the
City Commission desire to increase funding for City projects to improve public education
within the City.
Option 4: Surcharge or Sales/Excise Tax on Real Estate Transactions
All sales taxes, use taxes, or excise taxes on transactions, including real estate
transactions, are authorized pursuant to Chapter 212 of the Florida Statutes.
Documentary stamp taxes on all real estate documents (such as mortgages and deeds),
are authorized pursuant to Chapter 201 of the Florida Statutes . Chapter 212 and
Chapter 201 do not authorize municipalities to impose any taxes or surcharges on
real estate transactions or documents .
If the City desires to establish a surcharge on real estate sales transactions within the
City of Miami Beach, the Florida Legislature would need to amend either Chapter 212 or
Chapter 201 of the Florida Statutes to authorize the City to impose any such surcharge.
Although it may be possible to justify a logical nexus between the type of tax and the use
of the funds, since better schools are often associated with higher property values, the
City would need to consult with its lobbyists and with members of the Miami-Dade
County delegation to determine whether, and to what extent, any such legislative action
is feasible in the current environment.
In view of the approximately $2-3 billion per year in real estate sales that would be
subject to a tax (based on data the City has received from the Property Appraiser), any
such tax, if authorized, could serve as a significant source of potential funding.
Conclusion Regarding Sales/Excise Tax on Real Estate Transactions: This option
would require the express authorization of the Florida Legislature.
Option 5: Education Impact Fee on New Development
One option that the City Commission asked the Administration to consider relates to
whether the City may impose an education-related impact fee on new development.
As a general matter, the underlying public purpose for regulatory impact fees is to
impose upon new development, rather than the general public, the cost of the capital
facilities required to accommodate the growth to be generated by the new development.
FCWPC Memorandum -Education Funding Mechanism
March 31, 2017
Page 11 of 11
First, for an impact fee to be valid, the City must establish a nexus between the fee
amount imposed on the new development and the anticipated need for addit ional capital
facilities resulting from a projected growth in population. Second, impact fees are valid
when there is a rational nexus between the expenditure of the impact fee proceeds and
the benefits accruing to new development.
Conclusion Regarding Educational Impact Fee: As a threshold matter, it is unlikely
that any proposed impact fee would be available as a funding source for programming or
operational enhancements, or for any purpose other than the cost of capital facilit ies . In
addition, additional work would need to be undertaken to determine if the relevant nexus
requirements are met, in view of the manner in which students are assigned to schools
and the fact that assignments do not uniformly correspond to the neighborhood where a
student resides. If the City Commission desires to pursue an educational impact fee, the
Administration recommends that the City retain a consultant to evaluate these issues
further.
Option 6: Creation of Not-for-Profit 501(c){3) to Support Public Education
Currently, various community groups in the City of Miami Beach have organized and
established non-profits, such as the Friends of North Beach Elementary and Friends of
South Pointe Elementary, to enhance the educational experience of each child by
funding additional teachers, support staff, innovative technology programs, security
personnel, and the like.
If the City desires to participate in promo tion of such efforts, the City Commission has
the ability to create a not-for-profit organization, similar to its prior efforts with respect to
creating One Miami Beach, Inc. This option would permit the City to engage in fund-
raising, collaborate with existing groups, and provide comparable support to areas of the
City that do not benefit from the work of local neighborhood organizations.
Additional Policy Considerations Identified At City Commission Meeting
One policy concern that has been raised, and worth noting herein, is that if the City
identifies funding for public education, the School District may be less inclined to allocate
District funds for schools in Miami Beach. As noted above, the City Commission
referred to the Neighborhoods Committee a companion item to recommend a
governance structure for determining how any funds would be used. As part of the
Neighborhoods Committee discussion, the Committee may des ire to mitigate any such
concerns by limiting any City funding to "enhancements" and City projects that will be
directly implemented by the City or through agreements between the City and the School
Board (as opposed to fund transfers to the School Board).
CONCLUSION
This item is being presented to the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee for
discussion and further direction.
Attachments Aft Attachment A-Education Compact
r;rs;_chment B-Education Compact Funding Analysis through FY18
· Attachment A
AN EDUCATION COMPACT BETWEEN
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
Following the blueprint established by the formation of the Education Compacts between
Miami-Dade County Public Schools (District), and other local general purpose governments,
the District and the City of Miami Beach (City), will now partner to bring together each
organization's collective resources for the greater benefit of both the students and the citizens
of Miami Beach. Located on a barrier island in Miami-Dade County, the City, incorporated in
1915, encompasses approximately 7.1 square miles and is home to 6 District facilities
including South Pointe Elementary, Fienberg Fisher Elementary, North Beach Elementary,
and Biscayne Elementary, Nautilus Middle, and Miami Beach Senior High. With a population
of over 93,000, it is the destination of over 7 million tourists annually and the hub of the
County's hospitality and tourism industry.
In recognition of the fact that It Takes ... the commitment of the District and the City to raise
academic achievement, and recognizing the importance placed on education by the residents
of Miami Beach, the District and City seek' to codify an Education Compact to build on
existing programs and innovative Ideas which will enhance the lifelong educational
opportunities for the entire community. T~erefore, through this agreement we will strive to
meet the educational needs of each child and enhance the learning opportunities for all. This
Compact was developed with significant community input and reflects the desire of the
Miami-Beach community to support excellence in their schools and an investment in the
overall enhancement of education for its residents. It is recognized by the District and the
City that this Compact represents goals and objectives which are consistent with the long
term strategic plans of each entity and it is understood that as such goals and objectives
evolve the terms of this Compact may also be modified over time.
The areas of focus in this collaboration include: teacher recruitment and retention; enhanced
communication of educational and community events; family/parental involvement in
education; community/business engagement, enhanced student health and well-being;
. improved student achievement; school safety; and technology access. The initial major
activities, intended outcomes, and measures associated with each of these major focus areas
are outlined below.
Teacher Recruitment/Retention
Activities:
• The District and the City will collaborate to develop a supplemental incentive program
for teacher recruitment/retention in Miami Beach schools. The City component of the
program will focus on encouraging incentives which may include discounts, mentoring,
training, and tickets to public events. Mentoring and training opportunities will be least
disruptive to school staffing needs, with schools providing coverage (as applicable) for
staff to participate. The District will provide support for the City program which may
include but not be limited to invitations to participate in District recruitment events and
posting of City sponsored incentives on the District's recruitment webpage.
Page 1 of 10
• The District will make available to the City all instructional staff recruitment and
retention statistics and data for Miami Beach schools and districtwide which is
considered public information.
• The District will make available to the City all survey data pertaining to teacher
satisfaction levels (in particular key drivers for recruitment and retention) on a regu lar
basis, segregated by each Miami Beach school where possible.
• The City will support the District's efforts, those of other stakeholder groups and
districtwide initiatives that address the housing needs of teachers and non-instructional
staff. In the event the City develops a program to provide workforce housing and/or
housing support for "essential personnel," the inclusion of public school teachers
and/or other public educational personnel will be explored.
Key Intended Outcomes:
• Maintain teacher recruitment and retention at or above districtwide levels.
• Increase teacher satisfaction rates for City of Miami Beach schools .
• Enhance access to workforce and affordable housing.
Measures:
• Number and percent of Miami Beach school staff participating in various incentive
programs provided by the City;
• Number and percent of Miami Beach school staff participating in mentoring. and
training opportunities sponsored by the City;
• Percent of Miami Beach school and District school personnel that indicate they agree
or strongly agree that they like working at their 'Miami Beach' school;
• Miami Beach school instructional personnel retention rate compared to districtwide
retention rate; and
• Miami Beach school instructional personnel vacancy rate compared to districtwide
vacancy rate .
• Number of instructional personnel utilizing workforce housing options available through
the City
Page 2 of 10
Communication
Activities:
• The City will work with the District to disseminate information related to educational
opportunities and activities by placing information in strategically located kiosks .
• Collaborate to enhance education-related communication to the City's residents by
developing an education page to be included in City's website with links to the Beach
schools, providing access to the City's cable TV programming, and space in the City's
newsletters and magazines in order to disseminate information on Miami Beach's
schools.
• The City will work with the District to support a Student Expo that will highlight Beach
school offerings and student achievements.
• The City and the District will endeavor to collaborate on legislative agendas in support
of public education.
• Provide regular briefings of the School Board and City Commission regarding the
status of the implementation of this Compact and other issues of interest.
Key Intended Outcome:
• Increase community access to Miami Beach school and District information.
Measures:
• Number of District legislative priorities supported by the City; and
• Number of educationally-related articles/ads disseminated through City-sponsored
communication methods (magazines, newspaper, television).
Parental Involvement/Family Support/Youth and Community Engagement
Activities:
• The District will make available to the City all parent satisfaction survey data on a
regular basis, segregated by Miami Beach schools where possible, and the City may
conduct similar surveys with the assistance of the District, including findings on key
drivers for satisfaction, subject to any approvals which may be required from the
District's Research Review Committee.
Page 3 of 10
• The City will work with the District to foster local business support for education,
including the implementation of employee programs which encourage parent
participation in schools. As an example, the City will encourage local businesses to
model the City's commitment to parental involvement by developing an employee
policy that would allow for employee release time to participate in designated early
release day parent/teacher conferences (max. 3 per year) and would provide access
to computers for employees for the purpose of accessing the District's Parent Portal to
obtain information regarding the employees' children's academic progress. The
District will provide confirmation form for employee participation in parenUteacher
conferences.
• Through The Parent Academy (TPA), interested City personnel will be provided with
training by the District regarding use of the District's newly launched Parent Portal and
other electronic resources available through the District .
• The District will focus on Miami Beach parents by creating a City-based model of TPA
using City facilities and other community sites.
• The District will support the City's Service Partnership (service program that partners
community agencies) via participation in the governing board, provision of referrals to
the program as appropriate, recruitment of students for employment opportunities, and
assistance in the collection of qualitative data to measure success, subject to parental
consent.
Key Intended Outcomes:
• Ensure Community access to educational information.
• Increase accessibility to family/individual support services.
Measures:
• Parent satisfaction rates for each Miami Beach school;
• Number of hours provided by City for City employees to attend teacher conferences,
etc.;
• Number of parents from Miami Beach schools attending Parent Academy programs;
and
• Percent of students referred by school personnel to the Service Partnership that obtain
employment.
Page 4 of 10
Health and Well-Being
Activities:
• The District will maintain health clinics (nurse practitioners and/or registered nurses) at
Fienberg Fisher Elementary, Biscayne Elementary, Nautilus Middle School and Miami
Beach Senior High School, subject to continued available funding, and will work with
all Miami Beach schools to coordinate visits from the Health Connect on Wheels
service (as available) or similar service to schools and/or Miami Beach recreation
centers.
• The District and the City will collaborate to deliver information regarding health and
wellness education, prevention and intervention strategies regarding nutrition, physical
activity levels, and health maintenance in accordance with the District's Wellness
Initiative.
• The City will explore · the development of a middle school-level afterschool program.
The District will collaborate with the City by assisting with the recruitment of students,
including providing space within District-owned facilities as needed, and exploring
expanded transportation options for participating students.
• District will explore the expansion of full-time nurse practitioners and/or registered
nurses at schools without health clinics, subject to available funding.
Key Intended Outcome:
• Increased health and well-being of students.
Measures:
• Percent of Miami Beach schools scheduled for Health Connect Mobile provider (or
similar service) August through June;
• Number of Health Connect on Wheels mobile unit visits (or similar service) to non-
clinic Beach schools and recreation centers; and
• Number of schools with health clinics (Nurse practitioners and/or registered nurses)
through School Health Connect and/or equivalent
Student Achievement
Activities:
• The District will make available to the City all student survey data on a regular basis,
segregated by Miami Beach schools where possible, and the City may conduct similar
surveys with the assistance of a District Educational Evaluation single point of contact,
including findings on student ratings of self-esteem and sense of community. All
research is subject to approval by the M-DCPS Research Review Committee.
Page 5 of 10
• The District will identify and pursue implementation of best practice strategies to
increase the graduation rate at Miami Beach Senior High School (MBSHS).
• The City will work with the District toward the creation of an internship initiative with
Miami Beach City government to provide internship opportunities (as appropriate) to
MBSHS students based on parameters within the District's Secondary School Reform
plan.
• The City will work with the District to support the creation of a speaker's bureau for
Miami Beach schools to provide teachers with access to speakers on specialized
topics.
• The District will encourage the greater use of school facilities after-hours to support
community based programming for youth.
• The District will explore avenues to enhance counseling and teacher-to-student ratios .
• The City will negotiate where possible culture/arts contracts to include access to
programs by schools. The District will provide a dedicated Curriculum Coordinator
staffed to the feeder pattern to arrange for arts/culture utilization during school hours
and after-school hours and alignment to curriculum . Currently available City cultural
offerings for students include access to programs at the Bass Museum, Botanical
Garden, Byron Carlyle, Colony Theater, Fillmore at the Jackie Gleason , Wolfsonian,
Convention Center, Jewish Museum, 1 01h Street Auditorium , Little Acorn Theater, Arts
in Public Places, New World Symphony Campus (TBD), and various festivals/events.
• The City will support the small learning academies at the Miami Beach Senior High
School by providing City advisory board participants no more than once a month and
the District will provide training to City staff related to interdisciplinary teaching/learning
teams, relevant curriculum/instruction, inclusive programs/practices, continuous
program improvement, and building community support. Anticipated academies at
Miami Beach Senior High School may include, but not be limited to Business,
Management, and Administration, Hospitality and Tourism, Information Technology,
Public Service and Security, Visual and Performing Arts, Communication and Digital
Media, Marine and Environmental Science, Foreign Language and Humanities,
International Baccalaureate, Scholars Academy, and Education and Training Services.
Page 6 of 10
• The City and District will collaborate to implement an International Baccalaureate (IB)
program within the Miami Beach feeder pattern. The City agrees that it will provide
funding for the implementation at Miami Beach Senior High School and Nautilus
Middle School in an amount not to exceed $155,000, and for Fienberg-Fisher Middle
Years Program in an amount not to exceed $ 68,000. The implementation of the IB
program with the Miami Beach feeder pattern is as follows:
o The District will immediately initiate the application process for the International
Baccalaureate Program (lBO Diploma Program) at Miami Beach Senior High
School (MBSHS) by submitting the Interested Schools Form (October 2007),
Consultant Request Form (if applicable by November 2007), Application A
(March 1, 2008), Application B (June 1, 2008), Site Visit (Fall 2008), and
Authorization (Spring 2009).
o The City will assist the District in discussing funding or other support from the
Miami Beach Chamber of Commerce or other appropriate organizations for
annual fees, teacher training, Diploma Program (DP) Coordinator supplement,
exam registration (per student), per subject exam fee/shipping, and books .
o The City will provide resources for the lBO Diploma program rollouts including
funding for the feasibility study (if applicable), application A, application B, and
professional development costs including registration, travel and expenses for
instructional staff as applicable prior to full implementation of the program at
MBSHS.
o The District will immediately initiate the application process for the International
Baccalaureate Middle Years Program (lBO Middle Years Program) at Nautilus
Middle School (NMS) by submitting the Interested Schools Form (October
2007), Application A (May 1, 2008), Application B (June 1, 2009), Authorization
(Fall201 0), and Evaluation (Spring 2014).
o The City will assist the District in discussing funding or other support from the
Miami Beach Chamber or other appropriate organizations for annual fees,
teacher training, Area of Interaction (AOI) Leaders supplements, Middle Years
Program (MYP) Coordinator supplement, books, and extra teaching periods
supplements (as applicable).
o The City will provide resources for the lBO Middle Years program rollouts
including funding for the feasibility study (if applicable), Application A,
Application B, and professional development costs including registration, travel
and expenses for instructional staff as applicable prior to full implementation of
the program at NMS .
o The District will immediately initiate the application process for the International
Baccalaureate Middle Years Program (lBO Middle Years Program) at Fienberg
Fisher grades 6-8 by submitting the Interested Schools Form, Application A,
Application B, Authorization, and Evaluation.
Page 7 of 10
o The City will provide resources for the lBO Middle Years program rollouts at
Fienberg Fisher ·6-8 including funding for the feasibility study (if applicable),
Application A, Application B, and professional development costs including
registration and travel expenses for instructional staff as applicable prior to full
implementation of the program at Fienberg Fisher grades 6-8.
o The District and City will pursue the development of an IB program at the
elementary school levels over the next 2 years, including development of
implementation funding requirements. Funding requirements will be presented
to the City Commission for approval. Further, as part of the feasibility review for
the implementation of a Primary Years IB program, the District and the City will
reach out to its neighboring cities including the Town of North Bay Village and
Bay Harbor Islands in consideration of the location of the schools within their
borders.
• The City and District will seek to collaborate on grant development opportunities in
order to maximize the pool of available resources to serve the City's schools and
residents. Types of grants pursued will include, but not be limited to those supporting
student academic achievement, literacy, physical activity and fitness, social skills
building, family involvement, and health and well-being.
Key Intended Outcomes:
• Increased academic support and achievement.
• Increase academic enrichment. Pursue collaborative grants to support youth academic
needs and academic support citywide. Increased number of graduates exposed to
external experiential activities including meaningful mentorships and/or internships.
Measures:
• Percent of high school students graduating who entered Miami Beach High in the gth
grade year;
• Number and percent of high school target population participating in City-sponsored
internship program;
• Number of high quality internship opportunities made available to the Miami Beach
students by the City;
• Number of City employees that are registered mentors and providing services to Miami
Beach students;
• Number of speaker hours provided by City 'experts' to schools on specialized topics in
support of the speaker's bureau;
• Allocation per fulltime equivalent student;
• Number of students enrolled in the IB program by school;
• Number of Miami Beach schools receiving a state accountability grade of A orB;
• Number of attendees by school to City-sponsored/supported cultural activities during
school hours and after-school hours;
Page 8 of 10
Key Intended Outcome:
• Improve youth and parent access to technology.
Measures:
• Number of Miami Beach homes with technology enabling youth to access WiFi; and
• Number of opportunities for technology training at school sites for
parent( s )/guardian( s ).
The adoption of this Education Compact between the City of Miami Beach and M-DCPS
establishes a pact to continually strive to promote excellence and relevance in education in
the City's schools and community at large. by joining forces for the greater benefit of both the
students and the citizens of Miami Beach.
The City and the District agreed that any more favorable position provided in any other
District Education compact will be offered to the City of Miami Beach for consideration .
Page 10 of 10
T
if
M
If
T
MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMITTEE MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Finance and City Wide Projects . Commit~/
Jimmy L Morales, City Manage/+ .;,c.
March 31,2017 DATE :
SUBJECT: DISCUSS ENGAGING IN A PILOT PROGRAM WITH A COST REDUCTION
CONSULTANT
HISTORY
On March 1, 2017 , the City Commission referred the subject discussion item to the
Finance and City Wide Projects Committee (Item C4N).
BACKGROUND
ECS Business Services (cost reduction consultant) performs audits of water, sewer, gas,
electric , trash , telecom, and other service contracts' (air conditioning/elevators) invoices
searching to find errors in billing and overcharges. Once these errors are identified , the
consultant works to obtain refund checks , negotiates best rates and reduces monthly
operational costs for their clients moving forward. This consultant does not charge any
up-front fees or costs as they are compensated by receiving a percentage of
refunds/savings.
There are other service providers which provide these services as ECS Business
Services is not a sole source provider.
The City has utilized the following consultants in the past:
• In 2007, the City selected through an RFP process , Research Enhancement
Services to review the City's water, sewer, and storm water utility for unread,
misread, and unmetered services. Their review completed in April of 2009,
identified an estimated annual lost revenues of $550,000.
• In 2015 , Eric Ryan Corporation (ERC) was selected through an RFP process to
perform an audit of the telecommunication services . This included telephone
lines and network circuits. After an extensive audit, ERC made
recommendations to discontinue many services. Their recommendations fell into
the following three distinct categories.
o The first category of recommendations was not feasible as there was a
need for the services that ERC was not aware of.
o The second category of recommendations was implemented and upon
disconnect, the true need for the services was discovered and they had to
be restored.
o The third and final type of recommendations was the actual verified
disconnects that did not interrupt any viable service . Of this third type of