Loading...
Resolution 2023-32863R E S O L U T IO N N O . 2 0 2 3 -3 2 8 6 3 A R E S O L U T IO N O F T H E M A Y O R A N D C IT Y C O M M IS S IO N O F T H E C IT Y O F M IA M I B E A C H , F L O R ID A , A U T H O R IZ IN G T H E C IT Y M A N A G E R T O N E G O T IA T E A N D E X E C U T E A N A M E N D M E N T T O T H E A G R E E M E N T B E T W E E N T H E C IT Y A N D IK E S M A R T C IT Y , L L C (IK E ), P U R S U A N T T O R E Q U E S T F O R P R O P O S A L S (R F P ) N O . 2 0 2 2 -0 4 0 -K B, T O D E S IG N , M A N U F A C T U R E , IN S T A L L , M A IN T A IN , A N D O P E RA T E IN T E RA C T IV E D IG IT A L M E D IA K IO S K S ; S A ID A M E N D M E N T (1 ) G RA N T IN G T H E C IT Y , F O R IT S C O N V E N IE N C E , T H E R IG H T T O R E Q U IR E IK E T O R E L O C A T E A N Y IK E K IO S K , W IT H IK E B E A R IN G A N Y A N D A L L R E L O C A T IO N C O S T S ; A N D (2 ) R E Q U IRI N G T H A T M A IL N O T IC E S A S S O C IA T E D W IT H T H E A P P R O V A L O F IK E K IO S K L O C A T IO N S B Y T H E D E S IG N R E V IE W B O A R D O R H IS T O R IC P R E S E R V A T IO N B O A R D B E S E N T C IT YW ID E A T IK E 'S S O L E C O S T . W H E R E A S , on A ug u st 25, 20 2 1, the A d m in istratio n received an unsolicited proposal fr om IK E S m a rt C ity , LL C ("IKE "), pur s u an t to Se ctio n 25 5 .06 5, Florida S tatutes, to D e sig n , M anufacture, In s ta ll, O p e rate a n d M a in ta in In te ra ctive D ig ital M ed ia Kiosks at certain sites thro ugho ut the City; a n d WHEREAS, on Jan u a ry 20, 20 2 2 , the M ayo r a nd C ity C om m issio n ap p ro ved R esolution 20 2 2 -3 19 8 9 , a c ce pting the un so lici te d pro p o sa l pu rsu ant to Section 25 5 .06 5, Flo rid a Statutes and au th o rizin g th e A dm in istratio n to issue R eq u e st fo r Pro p o sa ls (R FP ) N o. 202 2-04 0-K B (th e "RFP"), se e k in g pro p o sa ls fro m other inte re sted pa rt ie s fo r the sa m e project purpo se as the unsolicited pro p o sa l; a n d WHEREAS, on D ece m b e r 14 , 20 2 2 , via R e solution 2022-32 4 22, the M ayor and City C o m m is sio n a u th o riz e d the A dm in istratio n to ente r into neg otia tio ns w ith IK E , the top-ranked pro p o se r, a n d if un s uc c e ssful, to ne g o tia te w ith Sm art C ity M e d ia, the se co nd-ran ked pro poser, w ith th e fin a l ne g o tia te d ag re em en t be in g su bje ct to the prio r appro val of the M ayor and C ity C o m m is sio n ; a n d WHEREAS, on Ju n e 28, 20 2 3, th e Ci ty C om m i s sion , by a vote of 5/7 , adopte d R esol ution N o . 2 0 2 3 -3 2 6 2 7, ap p rovin g the esse ntia l bu sine ss te rm s fo r an A greem ent w ith IK E , pursuant to the R F P , to D e sign , M an ufactu re , In sta ll, M a in ta in , an d O perate Interactive D igital M edia K io sks w ith the fo llo w in g a m endm e nts: (1) th e in sta lla tio n of an y ad ditio na l kio sks, exceeding the orig inal fift een, sh a ll be su bject to ap p ro va l by the C ity C o m m ission ; and (2 ) the m a intenance stan da rds fo r the kio s ks sh a ll in clu de the re q u ire m ent tha t the kio sk be m aintaine d in "like-new cond ition" thro ughout th e te rm of th e A g re e m e nt; an d WHEREAS, o n Ju ly 28, 20 2 3, the C ity an d IK E executed an A greem ent pursuant to the RFP (th e "A g re e m ent"); an d WHEREAS, on S ep te m b e r 13 , 20 2 3, the M a yor and C ity C om m ission of the C ity of M iam i Be a c h a d o p te d R e so lution N o . 20 2 3 -3 2 7 5 9 , authorizin g the C ity to enter into a M em orandum of un d e rsta n d in g w ith the F lorid a D e p a rt m ent of T ra n sp o rt ation (F O O T ) fo r the in stalla tion , operation, an d m a in te n a n c e of IK E kiosks w h ich w o u ld be placed on vario us FO O T rig hts-of-w ay pursuant to the A g re e m en t; an d WHEREAS, C o m m ission e r Ta n ya K. B ha tt placed an age nda item to be hea rd during the D e c em b er 13, 20 2 3 C ity C o m m issio n m e e tin g, entitle d "D iscuss/T ake A ction R egarding T e rm in a tio n of th e A g reem ent w ith IK E Sm a rt C ity fo r D ig ital M e d ia Kio sks"; and W H E R E A S , in the City Commission Memorandum, Commissioner Bhatt cited to residents' opposition to the kiosks; the reduced need for signage due to the availability of smart devices; the already congested walkways; and the possible negative effects of commercial messaging, which could downgrade the experience of the residents and visitors and the City's brand; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement, the locations for the IKE kiosks would need to be approved administratively by the City Manager and at the regulatory level by the Design Review Board (DRB) or the Historic Preservation Board (HPB), as applicable; and WHEREAS, although IKE removed its application for the placement of IKE kiosks in the South of Fifth Neighborhood in response to residents' objections, members of the City Commission expressed concern over the lack of community engagement in connection with the installation of a kiosk at a particular location; and WHEREAS, notwithstanding the limitation of liability provision in the Agreement, limiting the City's liability for a breach of contract action to $100,000.00, the members of the City Commissioners in general expressed concern over setting a precedent for the City of reneging on its contractual obligations; and WHEREAS, during the discussion of this agenda item, IKE agreed to modify the Agreement to include: (1) the City's right, for convenience and without cause, to request the relocation of any IKE kiosk, with IKE being responsible for all costs associated with the relocation; and (2) the requirement that mail notices associated with the regulatory approvals by the DRB or the HPB of any IKE kiosk locations be sent citywide at IKE's sole cost. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City Commission hereby authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an amendment to the Agreement between the City and IKE Smart City, LLC (IKE), pursuant to Request for Proposals (RFP) No. 2022-040-KB, to Design, Manufacture, Install, Maintain, and Operate Interactive Digital Media Kiosks; said amendment (1) granting the City, for its convenience, the right to require IKE to relocate any IKE kiosk, with IKE bearing any and all relocation costs; and (2) requiring that mail notices associated with the approval of IKE kiosk locations by the Design Review Board or Historic Preservation Board be sent citywide at IKE's sole cost. PASSED and ADOPTED this 13th day of December, 2023. ATTEST: (~~~~?;~'.!!) 20 . i as Steven Meiner, Mayor JAN 0 8 2024 APPROVED AS TO FORM & LANGUAGE & FOR EXECUTION tu- s cw Arone" { of @ New B us iness an d C om m issi on R eq ues ts -R 9 W MIAM I BEA CH COMMISSION MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission Commissioner Tanya K. Bhatt December 13, 2023 SUBJECT: DISCUSS/TAKE ACTION REGARDING TERMINATION OF THE AGREEMENT WITH IKE SMART CITY FOR DIGITAL MEDIA KIOSKS. ANALYSIS On June 28, 2023, pursuant to RFP No. 2022-040-KB, the City of Miami Beach executed a 30-year agreement with IKE Smart City (the "Agreement") for the design, manufacture, installation, operation and maintenance of interactive digital media kiosks ("IKE Kiosks") at designated locations in the City of Miami Beach. Since June 2017, when in response to residents' concerns, the Miami Beach United advocacy group submitted a resolution encouraging the City "reject the idea of creating digital kiosks as information sources for tourists and residents," and again with this new iteration of the digital kiosk proposal, there continues to be extremely strong resident pushback against these kiosks. That should count for something. • Since 2017, the volume and accessibility of information on the ubiquitous smart devices has only increased exponentially, and therefore the need for such information signage is greatly reduced. • Additionally, we already have challenging public right of ways: narrow sidewalks that have to accommodate utilities, signage, alternative modes of transportation, and increasing numbers of pedestrians. • Wider public right of ways may also have, in addition to those challenges, sidewalk cafes, planters, host/ess stands, etc. • While I appreciate the opportunity for a revenue stream from a portion of the advertising sales on the kiosk, we do not need more commercial visual clutter, especially that which could potentially be pushing out messages contrary to the branding narrative the City wishes to move towards. For such a small revenue impact, the cost in lack of control of the narrative may be onerous. The effective visual pollution certainly would be. and in a city where there is so much beautiful architecture and natural beauty to enjoy, downgrading the experience further erodes our brand. In response to resident concerns, IKE has withdrawn its application to the Historic Preservation Board for placement of any kiosks in the South of Fifth neighborhood. If it is reasonable to eliminate this type of visual clutter in one neighborhood, why is it not reasonable to eliminate it in every other neighborhood? Although I commend IKE for listening to the City's residents and voluntarily agreeing to not install any kiosks in the South of Fifth neighborhood, I would like to discuss this matter further with my colleagues, to consider the possible termination of the Agreement. Based on direction provided by the City Commission during negotiations with IKE, the Termination for Convenience clause in the Agreement approved by the City Commission cannot be exercised until the sixteenth year following its effective date. It appears that if the City were to refund the initial $1,000,000 payment made by IKE following the execution of the Agreement, the City would also have exposure on a breach of contract claim of up to $100,000, as the Agreement includes a limitation on the City's liability of $100,000, for a total of $1.1 million. As a businessperson and tax paying resident, I am not being cavalier about this significant amount of money. Despite all of this, I believe that it may be in the best interests of the City and its residents to terminate an agreement even if there are costs involved for breaching the contract. SUPPORTING SURVEY DATA N/A FINANCIAL INFORMATION N/A Is this a "Residents Right to Know" item,_pursuant to Ci ty Code Section 2-14? No Does this item utilize G.O. Bond Funds? No Legislative Tracking Com m issioner Tanya K. Bhatt