Loading...
Meeting Minutes - June 14, 2018 Mayor’s General Obligation Bond Advisory Panel Meeting Minutes June 14, 2018 City Manager’s Large Conference Room Karen Rivo, Chairperson, called the meeting to order at 4:07 p.m. Attendance was taken. Mayor’s General Obligation Advisory Panel Members in attendance were as follows: Last Name First Name Present Absent Phone Not Sworn in Rivo Karen X Breslin Ray X Glottman Jack X tt p s :/ / w w w . m ia m i b e a c h fl . g o v/ ci t y - h al l/ ci t y - cl e r k/ b o a r Gross Saul X Jones Carolina X Leibowitz Debra X Libbin Jerry X Malakoff Joy X Meiner Steven X Peter Marie X Ramos Margueritte X City of Miami Beach employees and City of Miami Beach residents present included: John Woodruff, Chief Financial Officer Michele Burger, Mayor’s Chief of Staff Raul Aguila, City Attorney Tonya Daniels, Director of Communications Melissa Berthier, Public Relations Manager Claudia Rodriguez, Community Outreach Coordinator Ceci Velasco, Executive Director Ocean Drive Association Jay Fink, Public Works Assistant Director Luis Soto, Acting City Engineer Adrian Morales, Property Management Director Jose Gonzalez, Transportation Director Josiel Ferrer, Transportation Manager Luis Wong, Administrative Services Manager for Tourism, Culture, and Economic Development Michelle Huttenhoff, Economic Development Manager for Tourism, Culture, and Economic Development Heather Shaw, Tourism, Culture, and Economic Development Assistant Director Brandi Reddick, Cultural Affairs Manager David Martinez, Office of Capital Improvement Projects Director Maria Cerna, Office of Capital Improvement Projects Division Director Margarita Wells, Environment and Sustainability Assistant Director Natasha Nicholson, Public Works Senior Administrative Manager Diana Fontani, Aide to Commissioner Góngora Erick Chiroles, Aide to Commissioner Arriola Adrian Chamberlain, Aide to Mayor Gelber Introductions Members of the Panel, City of Miami Beach staff, and visitors went around the room and introduced themselves. Tonya Daniels, Communications Director, explained the reasoning for not having the meeting televised like the Panel requested. She said the reason is due to Special Master taking place every Thursday. The Mayor’s G.O. Bond Advisory Panel meetings cannot be recorded at the same time as the Special Masters’ hearings. She explained that the team can upload audio of the meetings to the website. The Panel agreed that audio would be sufficient and they would like staff to check if the Special Master can change their slot of 6 p.m. in order for the Panel’s meeting to be televised. Morgan will send audio after each Panel meeting to Communications, so it can be uploaded to the website (www.GOMB2018.com). Minutes June 7, 2018 Former Commissioner Saul Gross provided an amendment to the minutes as follows: We have to show we have been good stewards of money in the past. What a lot of people don’t realize the G.O. Bond is a small fraction of the work that the City has been doing in the neighborhoods, the larger portion of the investment is in the stormwater and water and sewer replacement. When talking to residents, the City needs to explain what those costs would be that are associated with the G.O. Bond. Last time those costs were 7 or 8 times more than the G.O. Bond. He thinks it is a big factor, explaining this whole thing to the residents. The minutes were approved as amended. Motion by Jack Glottman, seconded by Marie Peter. All in favor. November Ballot Raul Aguila, City Attorney, explained the November Ballot. He had two points he wanted to focus on. First, he knows as panel members there are a lot of questions as what can be done as citizens in terms of advocating and educating on the G.O. Bond in private capacity. Second,what is the November Ballot and what do we need to do to get there.  The City cannot spend money for or against any referendum, including City employees and other City officials. While we cannot use money to advocate for or against, we can use public dollars and resources to educate voters on the G.O. Bond. We have already started our public information and education campaign.  He went through some do’s and don’ts regarding advocacy. o Don’ts: if an outside political committee is created, the City cannot contribute money to that PAC. What the PAC does is separate from what the City can do. We cannot require City employees to support a referendum. We cannot provide City spaces for advocating. o Do’s: outreach, obtain feedback, advocate, educate, talk about Commission findings regarding the City’s future. It is okay to develop a voter’s guide and FAQ with regard to the actual Bond ballot questions once they are developed. Factual information on websites and social media is allowed. Discuss facts regarding local organizations. Discuss tax payer impacts. Host information sessions once project list is approved. Private citizens can advocate on behalf of projects and Bonds, as long as you are not spending City money to do that. Ethics Committee said it is okay for City Commission to express their opinion on how they feel about the G.O. Bond.  He spoke about the ballot questions: July 25th will be the last meeting to approve the questions put on the November ballot. Questions need to be presented to the City Commission for approval and for transmittal to the County. Ray Breslin asked if we need to have a dollar amount. Raul said yes. He described the single subject rule related to ballot measures. Projects within a ballot measure need to have a connecting nexus. It seems that we have projects that are based on a broad spectrum. He said right now it looks like we would have more than one ballot question to present to the voters. The projects are attached to the questions. Once projects are approved, the City Attorney’s Office has the responsibility in drafting the ballot question. Questions cannot be more than 75 words. They have to have essential information. They have to be as easy as possible for the public.  Margueritte Ramos asked when this panel has to approve the project list by. Raul said before July 25th in order to provide a recommendation to the Commission.  John Woodruff said we need a workshop before the July 25th Commission meeting to share the input from the Advisory Panel. Raul Aguila said the Chair and Vice-chair usually present the findings to the Commission.  Need to schedule meeting a week before July 25th. Raul would like a final resolution to be presented at the July 25th meeting. Chairperson Karen Rivo asked if City staff can make new posters to educate. Raul Aguila said it has to be factual education. We cannot go beyond an educational campaign. We can educate the voters through our public information campaign. Carolina Jones asked if the panel will be making recommendations on the categories for names and dollars for each one. Raul Aguila said yes. John Woodruff added that less ballot questions are usually better. Chairperson Karen Rivo said the goal is to make decisions by the July 12th panel meeting. John Woodruff said maybe they can present findings at the budget briefing on July 20th since the Panel will meet on 12th. Marie Peter said last week was public safety and today is infrastructure, then parks and it is just a draft by the 21st of June. Melissa Berthier said the project prioritization survey will continue to be pushed out weekly to get more results. Leslie Rosenfeld will send out to the schools so parents can do it as well. Raul Aguila mentioned other items that are anticipated to be on the November ballot: Convention Center Hotel Lease agreement, proposals are open today before the City Commission, Creation of an Office of Inspector General. These are City items projected on the November ballot. Non-City items include State constitutional amendments and County charter amendments. The ballot will probably be about 5 to 7 pages long starting with State questions, County, and then City items - the first question will probably be G.O. Bond related. Commissioner Malakoff asked if the Office of Inspector General will be overseeing the G.O. Bond with it being on the same ballot. It will. Presentation: Infrastructure (#42-87) Carolina Jones asked if the Parks presentation can be moved out a week from next week’s meeting since she will be out of town and she has valuable insights to share from serving on the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board. Karen Rivo said it is a tough situation and the Panel needs to keep moving. Carolina will put together a document with her input, John Woodruff recommended prepping John Rebar. John Woodruff said that Eric Carpenter has oversight in a lot of departments in the area of infrastructure projects. Although Eric could not attend this meeting since he is on vacation, he did direct his departments to create a one page document that includes the relative priority of the Infrastructure projects (except for the projects under the Tourism, Culture, & Economic Development Department which reports to another Assistant City Manager). He said they will introduce a person from each department and they will explain why the projects were prioritized the way they are on the sheet. Jose Gonzalez, Transportation Director, went through the projects on the list. He started with #85 on the list. He explained the City adopted a Transportation Master plan. As part of the master plan there was a bicycle pedestrian component and street design guideline component. Order of priority in the master plan: Pedestrians, bicycles, private vehicles. He explained a neighborhood greenway and how it makes bicyclists feel safer. He mentioned some areas where they exist today. He continued to a discussion of neighborhood traffic calming. He named some neighborhoods where they would be. Josiel Ferrer said their design guidelines are more contact sensitive than just speed tables. Former Commissioner Joy Malakoff said she has a problem with the traffic calming measures as traffic often just gets diverted to another street. Save the $18 million and go forward only with the green areas and bicycles component. Jack Glottman asked about the how the neighborhoods were selected and that we should reconsider which neighborhoods should be included. Jose Gonzalez said this covers community requests or concerns with safety that have been reported. Jose Gonzalez said it is important if we can move forward with the projects, it needs to be done on a neighborhood perspective not street by street. Josiel Ferrer said one addition to that is traffic calming is recommended where it is warranted in order for people to walk the area safer. In other areas they wouldn’t recommend traffic calming. It is areas where there is a documented speeding issue. Debra Leibowitz said she has a concern about Belle Isle because she lives there and there is speeding all the time. Jose Gonzalez addressed #86, he said these are targeted to specific streets. Off roads and shared views including bicycle paths. For example, 23rd Street is a County street and is in very poor condition. It prioritizes vehicles. 63rd street is a similar street with similar challenges. This project would create a shared use path. Carolina Jones asked for the protected bicycles what kind of barrier is used. Jose Gonzalez said it depends. We are narrowing the lanes to 10 feet in some streets to get as much streets for the other modes of transportation. For example, armadillos. There are different treatments. The ideal path is the off road, which is what we are proposing. Carolina suggested if there is a barrier we can call it a protected bike lane, if not it should just be called a bike lane. Jack Glottman asked if you will be able to get from one end of the City to the other. Jose Gonzalez said yes. Karen Rivo said she is concerned about what the $12 million really includes without concrete details. Jose Gonzalez said we have done feasibility studies for a lot of these and the funding is to construct the capital project. Next step would be design and construct. Jose asked if they would like renderings. Jack Glottman said he thinks it would be best to come back with a plan and visual map of the City. Carolina said if it is part of the master plan that contains the meat of the discussion. Carolina brought up item #83, which she hopes means synchronizing the lights. Jose Gonzalez said yes it does, but it is more than that. Carolina said she thinks that is a top priority of the residents, she thinks all lights should be synchronized. The panel asked why it is on medium priority. Jose mentioned that the City does not have jurisdiction over traffic signals. The County has no specific direction and are trying out different corridors. Until we get commitment from County, it wasn’t a project that should be a top priority, because it is outside of our jurisdiction. Jose Gonzalez said we are moving forward with another project that will improve traffic flow, etc. which is the Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) which is moving forward and it is already funded. Jose Gonzalez said the $3 million is for smart signals. They will adapt to real time traffic demand. Ray Breslin asked if we don’t have location for intermodal facility why do we need $5 million? Jose mentioned that the $5 million ask from the GO Bond is being leveraged with $15 million from a prior capital appropriation for Transportation. Intermodal hubs are facilities where passengers can conveniently and comfortably transfer between trolleys, buses, bikes, and vehicle parking. His department has completed a feasibility study for an Intermodal Hub in North Beach and are working on identifying a site in Middle Beach. Former Commissioner Saul Gross said the bike transportation is important. It is one thing that humanizes Miami Beach. He would love a further presentation. He asked about West Avenue. Jose said it is already funded. Chairperson Karen Rivo said the Panel would like Jose Gonzalez to come back and said for the Panel to send their questions to John so when he comes back, staff can address everything. Adrian Morales, Property Management Director presented on #60. He said they are tasked with maintaining assets for the City. The capital budget fund renewal and replacement has been under funded over time. There has been $60 million in deferred maintenance. They want to avoid doing things in an emergency. The roof replacements for culture facilities- for example Fillmore, Ballet, and Colony Theater are needed. Preserving building envelope is very important, otherwise we can experience a negative domino effect. The roofs are beyond their useful life. Ray Breslin said there are some areas having green roofs and some aren’t. Adrian said there are going to be white roofs that are sustainable. Adrian Morales touched on facilities having dated bathrooms and don’t look the way they should. Some places don’t have ADA accommodations. If you start to touch these places you need to include ADA accommodations. Margueritte Ramos asked about the North End Sub Station for Police (NESS). Adrian Morales said there are no ADA accommodations. Ray Breslin asked about 555 building, if it is going to get torn down why would we fix it. Adrian mentioned that the 555 building may be taken off the list depending on the pending plans for the proposed Convention Center Hotel since it is on that site. #56 for the Fillmore is beyond what is needed to meet 40 year certification, which is about $700,000 worth of work in order to continue to occupy the building. The $700,000 does not address many things that haven’t been done for many years. If we are going to keep the Fillmore we need to rebuild it or a major renovation. Discussion was had about the Fillmore and the Convention Center Hotel. Ray Breslin said if this project stays on here he would tell people not to vote for the G.O. Bond. Most of the panel agreed that this project should not remain on the list. Adrian spoke about #59. Over time these things will pay for themselves. Former Commissioner Saul Gross asked about programs through the State that will front the money and pay it back over time. Adrian Morales said in the past we had a similar contract with Amaresco to retrofit buildings and payback the debt service from savings in the energy bills. He mentioned that the City is not sure if the contract was worth doing. Margarita Wells said the difference from before, is that we can much more accurately track the usage of energy in our buildings. It would be $200,000 total for City Hall. We are requesting $2 million to do about 10 buildings. She said after this process we would be able to report how much on our investment we would get in the certain period of time. Debra Leibowitz said she served on the Sustainability Committee for several years. The City hired Amaresco to deal with many of these same issues, including the replacement of all of the City’s light bulbs and a wide variety of sustainable projects that were supposed to save the City money. It is disconcerting to learn that years later the City is unable to quantify exactly what has been spent or saved. She has a hard time asking people to spend more money on similar projects when we don’t know what we are getting. Adrian Morales said the technology has changed. As new technology becomes available we need to start incorporating into the buildings. These types of systems are the future. Carolina asked about item #55. She talked about how running our City business is important. The City Council Chambers needs a new audio visual system, metal detectors, etc. Adrian Morales said the overall condition isn’t great. It doesn’t meet ADA accommodations. It is a concern of his. It is becoming more difficult to maintain. The carpet and paneling are an example of what needs to be replaced. Former Commissioner Malakoff said the Commission has spoken about it. They f elt the residents wouldn’t vote on it because they would think the Commission just wants to make the Chambers pretty. ADA and safety are important and audio and visual. The Panel would like to get the amount of money needed for those. Ray Breslin said this isn’t an all or nothing, we can fund partially. Jack Glottman said group funding by categories, such as life safety or capital improvements as opposed to funding on a per building basis. Heather Shaw, Assistant Director of Tourism, Culture, & Economic Development, presented. #75 was discussed. Michelle Huttenhoff said they are looking at 41st and Washington Avenue, these are important for economy. Mayor’s Blue Ribbon task force was created for 41st Street. Improvements could include sidewalk improvements, lighting, shade. The project would provide a more vibrant gateway corridor to Miami Beach. An Urban Design report will be produced by tomorrow, which will provide more specifics to the $10 million allocation. Washington Avenue also recently created a business improvement district. Going out in July for a RFQ to hire a firm to develop an urban design plan. Margueritte Ramos asked about #43. Michelle said in the North Beach Master plan there were different recommendations made for signage. David Martinez, CIP Director said that the concepts were provided by Alan Schulman and they did a cost analysis. The description might be a little deceiving like how you spend the money on entrance signs. Margueritte Ramos asked for panel to make #43 and #81 a priority. Carolina Jones agreed. It is safety element and traffic calming, safer place to walk and bike and live. Jack Glottman said he wants to make sure the money is not overlapping with the transportation traffic calming item. #80- Michelle Huttenhoff said that it was identified in the master plan as a catalytic redevelopment site. It is also within a district with an FAR increase. It has a lot of opportunity. A good amount of the building is unsafe and inhabitable. We put out a RFI of what their interests would be in redeveloping that site, no responses came back. Maybe language was not as clear as it could have been. Ray Breslin said we put a lot of money into the Byron Carlyle in the past. He said this investment needs to be proven that it will pay off. He said maybe we should think about tearing it down, like the Jackie Gleason. Margueritte Ramos said part of master plan was to demolish it and build something else. Michelle Huttenhoff said we may need to remedy certain things so someone can occupy the space. Jack Glottman said we may need to have consultants look at other buildings in similar condition before we spend any money. Need to see if they are worth savings or not. He likes the idea of doing a ground lease and having a developer redevelop the site. Chairperson Karen Rivo said it sounds like the building needs to come down. Ray Breslin asked about #78. Michelle said this is to address storefronts to be more resilient. Creative ways to help commercial corridors. Not a high priority. A way to blend economic development and resiliency together. David Martinez presented #44. Ray Breslin asked about the boardwalk from 23rd-45th, there is a section of Miami Beach Drive 24th-29th. They could close that section and we have an alternate way to go. He wanted to know if there was any thought about that. David Martinez said no. Debra Leibowitz said this is a really important project for connectivity. She thinks the project description can be written in a better way; the key is that you connect North to South, it is finally finishing a project that has been going on for 20 years. Chairperson Karen Rivo agreed. Carolina Jones asked if this is the last link that is missing funding. David Martinez said North Beach Ocean Side Park has a portion missing. Carolina Jones said she would echo everyone’s comments that this is a priority. The baywalk is also one that should be considered. It provides another way that people can commute. She wanted to know how the projects were organized this way on the one- pager. Jay Fink, Public Works Assistant Director said they went through to see what the community has been pushing for and what are those types of projects, those were typically put in the highest priority. The ranking in each section is strictly numerical. The intent was to facilitate a discussion. Jack Glottman wanted to make sure he understood the scope of the project. David Martinez said the current standard of the City would be a paver brick with architectural features to it. David Martinez said not all was state funded and it is not guaranteed, we will not know until the end of the year. Margueritte Ramos asked when this would be completed if we get the funding. We will be ready by the end of the year to put this on the street for bid. Discussion continued. Beachwalk is a minimum of 15 feet wide, there are challenges in making it wider. The panel would like to make #42 the Baywalk a higher priority. #46- David Martinez said this is a two-tiered project. The first component is an extensive reforestation with pedestrian lighting. There is a conceptual plan that is developed, which is where the cost comes from. The second component includes the retrofitting on the new stormwater pump stations with auxiliary powered generators, which might be taken out. Chairperson Karen Rivo asked if this is a top priority with the City or the neighborhood just asked for it. David said the neighborhood lobbied for it. Margueritte Ramos said she thought the 5 projects that the money ran out for in 1999 G.O. Bond would be the top 5 here. Ray Breslin said he was happy about the generators. He said his neighborhood was redone and it looks great. David Martinez said this project did not include a significant element of landscaping, what was included was the mitigation of things that might have gotten removed or damaged. Jack Glottman said he would like to see generators included in the stormwater system budget, not part of the G.O. Bond funding. Debra Leibowitz said there needs to be equity amongst different areas and priorities. All of the City should benefit. It is tough to see neighborhoods getting some things and not others. Marie Peter said South of 5th spoke about this and their neighborhood is very blessed, but there are sections like North Beach that we have to be conscious of and she wants to make sure the areas that need help are taken care of. Former Commissioner Saul Gross asked if areas like #46 are coming back for a second request. He thinks it is a dangerous precedent to go back to the same neighborhood and make improvements from the G.O. Bond again. He wanted to know which neighborhoods from the 1999 bond received work that was not completed. Jay Fink said La Gorce was not done. Margueritte Ramos named the 5 projects from the 1999 bond from the powerpoint in her binder. There is approximately $28 million unfunded needs. Debra Leibowitz said that at the last meeting, it was discussed that we would eventually get a list of the 1999 projects were. John said it will be layered in after we do the first pass of the project list. Carolina Jones asked some questions about the utility undergrounding. David Martinez said the efforts in the past have been resident driven and have been paid for by special assessments by the properties in the district. This neighborhood in LaGorce includes other limits which are listed in the description. They have said they would like to underground. There is no particular reason that they would need to be undergrounded. There are benefits to having it done. At the end of the day, what this is, it is a request. John Woodruff said there is some other work being done on Alton Road and the idea was to do the undergrounding at the same time. Discussion continued about the undergrounding of utilities. #45- creates an Ocean Drive from 5th-15th Streets that is pedestrianized similar to Española Way, but vehicles would be able to travel there most of the time. It would be flattening or leveling the experience. There would be protective devices for pedestrians. The cost estimate has been updated from $6.3 to $7.5 million. Ceci Velasco, Executive Director of Ocean Drive Association, said this project needs to be done. She gave some background information. Debra Leibowitz suggested closing the street to vehicular traffic; the residents have issues with the traffic on Ocean Drive. Jack Glottman said when doing some of these improvements we need to take into account what will the impact of ride sharing services like Uber and Lyft be in a few years down the road. He suggested maybe create some drop off locations for ride sharing services and close portions of the street. Ray Breslin would like to see what the Ocean Drive project would look like. Chairperson Karen Rivo asked if there is a sense that the panel wants to move #45 to a higher priority. The panel agreed. #42 and #45 move up to high priority on the project list. Panel Discussion The Panel discussed the people who will not be in attendance at the next meeting. Former Commissioner Saul Gross will chair the meeting, Former Commissioner Malakoff will not be here, Chairperson Karen Rivo will not be here, Carolina Jones will not be here. The Panel will hear from Public Works and Environment and Sustainability about their projects next meeting. A representative will come from MDPL to talk about their project. Former Commissioner Saul Gross said he doesn’t think we are giving enough attention to whether the projects are completely ready. When there is a $50 million line item, we need more detail to be comfortable. He suggested sending more detailed information and the members can review in further detail before the meeting. John Woodruff suggested picking out the projects of where the panel wants more information and he can come back with that, instead of just giving too much information at once. Former Commissioner Saul Gross said he thinks the City needs to have available additional documentation for the people who want to know what the detail in the projects are. Chairperson Karen Rivo asked the panel as a whole if they want more detailed information. Jack Glottman recommended getting the information a few days before the meetings. The meetings will be a lot more productive with getting the information in advance. Marie Peter said what Jack is saying would be helpful, but the second pass also works like John Woodruff described. She said they need to sound intelligent with the residents if they are being asked questions about the different projects. Former Commissioner Saul Gross suggested taking the things on the highest priority list and providing the back up for that, so the Panel would be more prepared at the meeting. Next Steps The Panel would like details for highest priority projects for next meeting and for the ones that were not discussed today. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 7:10 p.m.