20120111 BM AgendaMIAMI BEACH
City Commission Meeting
City Hall, Commission Chambers, 3rd Floor, 1700 Convention Center Drive
January 11, 2012
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower
Vice-Mayor Deede Weithorn
Commissioner Jorge R. Exposito
Commissioner Michael G6ngora
Commissioner Jerry Libbin
Commissioner Edward L. Tobin
Commissioner Jonah Wolfson
City Manager Jorge M. Gonzalez
City Attorney Jose Smith
City Clerk Robert E. Parcher
Visit us at www.miamibeachfl.gov for agendas and video "streaming" of City Commission Meetings.
ATTENTION ALL LOBBYISTS
Chapter 2, Article VII, Division 3 of the City Code of Miami Beach entitled "Lobbyists"
requires the registration of all lobbyists with the City Clerk prior to engaging in any lobbying
activity with the City Commission, any City Board or Committee, or any personnel as defined
in the subject Code sections. Copies of the City Code sections on lobbyists laws are
available in the City Clerk's office. Questions regarding the provisions of the Ordinance
should be directed to the Office of the City Attorney.
Special note: In order to ensure adequate public consideration, if necessary, the Mayor and City
Commission may move any agenda item to the alternate meeting date which will only be held if needed.
In addition, the Mayor and City Commission may, at their discretion, adjourn the Commission Meeting
without reaching all agenda items.
Call to Order-9:00 a.m.
Inspirational Message, Pledge of Allegiance
Requests for Additions, Withdrawals, and Deferrals
The City Commission will recess for lunch at approximately 1:00 p.m.
Presentations and Awards Regular Agenda
PA Presentations and Awards R2 Competitive Bid Reports
R5 Ordinances
Consent Agenda R7 Resolutions
C2 Competitive Bid Reports R9 New Business & Commission Requests
C4 Commission Committee Assignments R 1 0 City Attorney Reports
C6 Commission Committee Reports
C7 Resolutions Reports and Informational Items
We are committed to providing excellent public seNice and safety to all who live, work, and play in our vibrant, tropical, historic community.
1
Commission Agenda, January 11, 2012
Presentations and Awards
PA1 Presentation Of A Plaque And T-Shirt To The Mayor, City Commission, City Manager And City
Attorney For Their Continued Support Of The City's Special Olympics Team Who Recently
Represented The City And Participated In The State Games.
(Parks & Recreation Department)
PA2 Certificate Of Recognition To Be Presented To Cafe Avanti For Their Long Standing Contribution
To The City Of Miami Beach.
(Requested by Michael Gongora)
PA3 Certificate Of Appreciation To Be Presented To The Gay And Lesbian Task Force Of Miami For
Their Outstanding Fundraising Efforts For 2011.
(Requested by Michael Gongora)
PA4 Proclamation To Be Presented To Miami Beach Senior High School, Its Students, Parents,
Administration And PTSA Board For Becoming An "A" School For The First Time.
(Requested by Commissioner Jonah Wolfson)
PAS Certificates Of Appreciation To Be Presented To Octavio Rodriguez And Maria Makueria Of
Walgreens Store #3942, For Their Toy Collection Drive For The Miami Beach Fire Department
Toy Giveaway.
(Requested by Mayor Matti Herrera Bower)
PA6 Proclamation To Be Presented To Elsie Howard For Her Many Years Of Service At The Visitors
And Convention Authority.
(Requested by Mayor Matti Herrera Bower)
CONSENT AGENDA
Action:
Moved:
Seconded:
Vote:
C2 -Competitive Bid Reports
C2A Request For Approval To Issue A Request For Qualifications (RFQ) For Citywide Surveying,
Topographical, And Mapping Services On An As-Needed Basis.
(Capital Improvement Projects/Public Works/Procurement)
2
2
Commission Agenda, January 11, 2012
C2 -Competitive Bid Reports (Continued)
C28 Request For Approval To Issue A Request For Qualifications (RFQ) For Citywide Geotechnical
And Laboratory Testing Services On An As-Needed Basis.
(Capital Improvement Projects/Procurement)
C2C Request For Approval To Issue A Request For Proposals (RFP) For Security Guard Services.
(Procurement)
C2D Request For Approval To Award A Contract To Miami Stagecraft, Inc., Pursuant To Invitation To
Bid (ITS) No. 12-11/12, For Purchase And Delivery Of Stage Lighting For The Colony Theatre, In
The Total Amount Of $41,323.25.
(Tourism & Cultural Development/Procurement)
C4 -Commission Committee Assignments
C4A Referral To The Neighborhoods/Community Affairs Committee -Discussion Regarding The
Placement Of A Barbara Capitman Memorial Bust In Lummus Park.
(Requested by Mayor Matti Herrera Bower)
C4B Referral To The Land Use And Development Committee-Discussion Regarding An Ordinance
Proposed By A Business Owner To Allow Alcohol Service In Nude Adult Establishments.
(Requested by Mayor Matti Herrera Bower)
C4C Referral To The Finance And Citywide Projects Committee-Proposed Amendment To Chapter
106, Article VI (Towing And Immobilization Of Vehicles) Providing For The City's Right To Audit
Towing Permitees Engaged In Towing Vehicles On Private Property.
(Requested by Commissioner Jerry Libbin)
C6 -Commission Committee Reports
C6A Report Of The Capital Improvement Projects Oversight Committee Meeting On November 14,
2011: 1) Attendance. 2) Review And Acceptance Of Minutes. 3) Public Comments. 4) Old
Business/Requested Reports: 4A) Status Of Water Reclamation Project In Golf Courses; 48)
Status Report: Sunset Island I & II; 4C) Status Report: Sunset Island Ill & IV; 40) Status Report:
Lower North Bay Road; 4E) Status Report: Venetian Islands; 4F) Status Report: Palm & Hibiscus
Islands; 4G) Status Report: Flamingo Park; 4H) Status Report: Stormwater Master Plan.
3
3
Commission Agenda, January 11, 2012
C6 -Commission Committee Reports (Continued)
C6B Report Of The Finance And Citywide Projects Committee Meeting On December 6, 2011: 1)
Discussion Of A Proposed Modification Of The Promissory Note Dated February 5, 2007,
Between MBCDC: Meridian Place, LLC, A Florida Limited Liability Corporation, To The Miami
Beach Redevelopment Agency; And To Discuss A Subordination Of The City's Mortgages In
Favor Of A Mortgage Made By A Commercial Lending Institution. 2) Discussion Concerning City
Fees And Charges For Gay Pride 2012. 3) Discussion And Review Of City's Investment Policy. 4)
Discussion Regarding The Public Beachfront Concessions Agreement. 5) Request For Approval
To Issue A Request For Proposals (RFP) For Security Guard Services. 6) Discussion Pertaining
To The Issuance Of A Request For Proposals (RFP) For Auditing Services For The City's
(CAFR), (OMS A-133 Single Audit), The Miami Beach Redevelopment Agency's Basic Financial
Statements (RDA), (PSF), 0./CA) Financial Statements, The Miami Beach Convention Center, As
Managed By Global Spectrum, Financial Statements, The Children's Trust Program, The Building
Better Communities Bonds Program, And The Safe Neighborhood Parks And Bond Program
(SNP). 7) Discussion Of Right-Of-Way Recycling Program. 8) Discussion On FPL Franchise
Payments To The City Of Miami Beach. 9) Discussion On Outsourcing Of Lincoln Road Mall
Maintenance Services.
C6C Report Of The Neighborhoods/Community Affairs Committee Meeting On December 8, 2011: 1)
Discussion Of Potential Policies For The Nomination/Number Of Memorials Or Commemorative
Plaques. 2) Follow-Up Discussion And Request For Direction Concerning The Continuation Or
Termination Of The Dog Off-Leash Pilot Program Approved By The City Commission In South
Pointe Park. 3) Discussion Regarding Neighborhood Park/Street-Ends Bus Bench Issue. 4)
Discussion On The Viability Of Storing City Directed Towed Vehicles On Terminal Island. 5)
Discussion Regarding An Ordinance Which Prohibits Docking On City Owned Property,
Specifically Seawalls. 6) Discussion To Consider Leaving The Altos Del Mar Location As Passive
Greenspace. 7) Discussion Regarding A Proposal For A Donation Of Art Pieces To Be Displayed
On Lincoln Road. 8) Discussion Regarding The Ongoing Store Front Damages And Graffiti
Issues On Washington Avenue.
C7 -Resolutions
C7A A Resolution Approving And Authorizing The Mayor And City Clerk To Execute An Agreement
Between The City Of Miami Beach, Florida, And The Cat Network, Inc., To Provide Low-Cost
Spay/Neuter Services For Stray, Homeless And Abandoned Cats; In The Estimated Amount Of
$80,000 Over Two Years, Funded By The Petsmart Charities® Grant To The City Of Miami
Beach; Said Agreement Approval Is Subject To The Successful Execution Of The Grant
Agreement With Petsmart Charities®.
(City Manager's Office)
C7B A Resolution Approving And Authorizing The Mayor And City Clerk To Execute An Agreement
Between The City Of Miami Beach, Florida And Barry University To Be The Provider Of Home
Visiting Services For The Parent-Child Home Program, In Accordance To The Children's Trust
Contract #1128-1090, In An Estimated Amount Of $73,326.00.
(Community Services)
4
4
Commission Agenda, January 11, 2012
C7 -Resolutions (Continued)
C7C A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2011-27713, Which Approved And Authorized The Mayor
And City Clerk To Execute: 1) Amendment No. 1 To The Purchase And Sale Agreement, Dated
July 14, 2010, Between The City Of Miami Beach And The Housing Authority Of The City Of
Miami Beach (HACMB), For The Purchase Of A Perpetual Easement Over The Property Located
At 1231-1251 17th Street, Miami Beach, Florida, For The Purpose Of Constructing A Bridge
Connecting West Avenue And Dade Boulevard; Said Amendment To Extend The "Inspection
Period", As Defined Therein; And 2) Amendment No. 1 To The Accompanying Development
Agreement Between The City And HACMB, Having A Commencement Date Of September 15,
2010; Said Amendment To Extend The "Due Diligence Period", As Defined Therein; Said
Amendment To Resolution No. 2011-27713 To Reference The Actual Dates Of The Extensions
To The Inspection And Due Diligence Periods, As Granted By The HACMB, To May 11, 2012.
(Economic Development)
C7D A Resolution Amending The City's Investment Policy And Procedures, As Adopted By Resolution
No. 95-21726 And Amended By Resolutions No. 97-22315 And No. 2007-26602 By Adding
Israeli Bonds As Authorized Investments, Adding Maximum Percentage Per Issuer And
Replacing· The Investment Committee With The Investment Advisor.
(Finance Department)
C7E A Resolution Retroactively Approving A Month To Month Extension To The Services Framework
Agreement Between The City And Parkeon Inc. For Technical Support Services, Parkfolio And
Online Credit Card Processing, Maintenance, And Extended Hardware Warranty; Said Extension
Commencing On December 24, 2011 And Expiring No Later Than June 30, 2013.
(Parking Department)
C7F A Resolution Authorizing The Administration To Issue Purchase Orders In The Amount Of
$225,000 For The Maintenance And Repair Of The Gated Revenue Control Equipment For The
City's Parking Garages From The Sole Source Provider, Consolidated Parking Equipment.
(Parking Department)
C7G A Resolution Approving And Appropriating Funding For The Sole Source Purchase Of Software
Upgrades To The Gated Revenue Control Equipment From Consolidated Parking Equipment For
The City's Parking Garages, In An Amount Not To Exceed $30,250.
(Parking Department)
C7H A Resolution Approving And Authorizing The Mayor And City Clerk To Execute Amendment No.
1, In A Negotiated Not-To-Exceed Amount Of $164,102.94, To An Existing Agreement Between
The City Of Miami Beach And Valleycrest Landscape Development, Dated October 13, 2010, For
Landscape Maintenance Services On The Boardwalk, Beachwalk, Street Ends, And Spoil Areas
Citywide, Said Amendment For The Inclusion Of The Miami Beach Soundscape.
(Parks & Recreation)
5
5
Commission Agenda, January 11, 2012
C7 -Resolutions (Continued)
C71 A Resolution Approving A Federal Equitable Sharing Agreement With The United States
Department Of Justice And The United States Department Of The Treasury, And Authorizing The
Mayor And The City Clerk To Execute The Agreement.
(Police Department)
C7 J A Resolution Authorizing The City Of Miami Beach, On Behalf Of The Miami Beach Police
Department, To Accept A Donation Of A T3 Motion Series ESV Three Wheel Electric Vehicle,
With An Approximate Value Of $9,000.00, From Mr. Adam Rose, Which Will Be Utilized For
Specialized Patrol Along Walkways, Beachwalks And Mall Areas.
(Police Department)
C7K A Resolution Setting A Public Hearing For The February 8, 2012 City Commission Meeting, To
Consider Granting A Revocable Permit To 1790 Alton Holdings LLC, As Owner Of The Property
Located At 1790 Alton Road, To Allow A Concrete "Eyebrow" To Extend Into The Public Right-Of-
Way On 18th Street And The Service Road Adjacent To Alton Road (And A Minimum Of 14 Feet
Above The Sidewalk).
(Public Works)
C7L A Resolution Authorizing The Administration And City Attorney's Office To Proceed With, And
Take Any And All Required Actions Relative To The Condominiumization Of The City-Owned
Property Located At 1661 Pennsylvania Avenue, Miami Beach, Florida.
(Real Estate, Housing & Community Development)
C7M A Resolution Retroactively Approving And Authorizing The Appropriation Of A Contribution From
The Ocean Drive Association And Orange Bowl Committee Of $60,000 In Support Of The 2011-
2012 New Year's Celebration.
(Tourism & Cultural Development)
End of Consent Agenda
6
6
Commission Agenda, January 11, 2012
REGULAR AGENDA
R2 -Competitive Bid Reports
R2A Request For Approval To Issue A Request For Qualifications (RFQ) From Qualified Developers
For A Public-Private Mixed-Use Development In Miami Beach For The Enhancement Of The
Miami Beach Convention Center Campus/District, Including The Expansion Of The Miami Beach
Convention Center And Development Of A Convention Center Hotel.
(City Manager's Office)
R5 -Ordinances
R5A An Ordinance Amending Chapter 110 Of The City Code, Entitled "Utilities," By Amending Article
IV, Entitled "Fees, Charges, Rates And Billing Procedure," By Amending Division 3, Entitled
"Billing Procedure," By Amending Section 110-191, Entitled "Payment Of Bills," By Amending
110-191 (B) By Changing The Penalty For Late Utility Bills From Ten Percent Of The Current Bill
To 0.833% Per Month Of The Late Outstanding Balance; Providing For Repealer, Severability,
Codification And Effective Date. 10:15 a.m. Second Reading Public Hearing
(Requested by Commissioner Jonah Wolfson)
(Legislative Tracking: Finance Department)
(First Reading on December 14, 2011)
R5B An Ordinance Amending Chapter 26 Of The Miami Beach City Code Entitled "Civil Emergencies,"
By Amending Article II, Entitled "State Of Emergency," By Repealing Section 26-32, Entitled
"Automatic Emergency Measures" Due To The Preemption Of The Entire Field Of Regulation Of
Firearms To The State Of Florida; By Amending Chapter 70, Entitled "Miscellaneous Offenses,"
By Amending Article I, Entitled "In General," By Repealing Section 70-2, Entitled "Weapons;
Discharging," Due To The Preemption Of The Entire Field Of Regulation Of Firearms To The
State Of Florida; By Amending Chapter 106 Of The Miami Beach City Code, Entitled "Traffic And
Vehicles," By Amending Article Ill, Entitled "Parades," By Amending Division 2, Entitled "Permit,"
By Amending Section 106-375(A)(1) To Repeal Language Regarding The Regulation Of Firearms
That Is Preempted By The State Of Florida, And To Provide That Weapons Shall Not Include Any
Destructive Device Or Firearm As Defined Under Florida Law; Providing For Repealer,
Severability, Codification, And An Effective Date. 10:20 a.m. Second Reading Public Hearing
(Requested by Commissioner Jerry Libbin)
(Legislative Tracking: City Attorney's Office)
(First Reading on December 14, 2011)
7
7
Commission Agenda, January 11, 2012
R5 -Ordinances (Continued)
R5C An Ordinance Amending Chapter 10 Of The Miami Beach City Code Entitled "Animals," By
Amending Section 10-10, Entitled "Animals Prohibited In Public Parks And On Beaches" To
Cross-Reference Language In Section 10-11 Regarding Off-Leash Areas For Dogs; By Amending
Section 10-11, Entitled "Running At Large Prohibited," By Extending The Pilot Program Off-Leash
Area For Dogs In South Pointe Park Until July 15, 2012, By Providing Off-Leash Hours In The
Designated Area In The Morning From Sunrise To 10:00 A.M. Daily And Between 4:00 P.M. And
7:00P.M. Monday Through Friday, And Relocating The Off-Leash Area To The South And East
Of The Washington Avenue Entry Plaza; Providing For Repealer, Severability, Codification, And
An Effective Date. 10:25 a.m. Second Reading Public Hearing
(Requested by the Administration And Neighborhoods/Community Affairs Committee)
(Legislative Tracking: City Attorney's Office)
(First Reading on December 14, 2011)
R5D Recycling Ordinance
An Ordinance Amending Chapter 90 Of The Miami Beach City Code, Entitled "Solid Waste," By
Amending The Definitions In Article I, Entitled "In General," By Amending Section 90-2, Entitled
"Definitions"; By Amending Article II, Entitled "Administration" By Amending The Penalties For
Solid Waste Violations And To Provide Provisions And Penalties Relative To Recycling For
Multifamily Residences And Commercial Establishments; By Creating Article V, To Be Entitled
"Citywide Recycling Program For Multifamily Residences And Commercial Establishments," To
Provide Provisions For Recycling Requirements And Enforcement, A Public Education Program,
A Warning Period, An Enforcement Date, Collector Liability, A "Red Tag" Noticing System,
Penalties, And Special Master Appeal Procedures; Providing For Repealer, Severability,
Codification, And An Effective Date. 10:35 a.m. Second Reading Public Hearing
(Requested by Commissioner Jonah Wolfson)
(Legislative Tracking: Public Works)
(Continued from October 19, 2011, 2011/Referred to FCWP)
R5E RPS-4 Heights 2011
An Ordinance Amending The Land Development Regulations Of The Code Of The City Of Miami
Beach, By Amending Chapter 142, "Zoning Districts And Regulations," Article II, "District
Regulations," Division 18, "PS Performance Standard District", Section 142-696 "Residential
Performance Standard Area Requirements" To Modify The Maximum Height Requirements For
Residential Apartment Structures; By Amending Section 142-697 "Setback Requirements In The
R-PS 1, 2, 3, 4 District," To Modify The Setback Requirements For Oceanfront Buildings;
Providing For Repealer, Codification, Severability And An Effective Date. 5:00 p.m. Second
Reading Public Hearing
(Requested by Commissioner Jonah Wolfson)
(Legislative Tracking: Planning Department)
(First Reading on December 14, 2011)
8
8
Commission Agenda, January 11, 2012
R5 -Ordinances (Continued)
R5F An Ordinance Granting To Florida Power And Light Company, Its Successors And Assigns, An
Electric Franchise Imposing Provisions And Conditions Relating Thereto, Providing For Monthly
Payments To The City Of Miami Beach, And Providing For An Effective Date. 5:05p.m. Second
Reading Public Hearing
(Requested by the City Commission)
(Legislative Tracking: Public Works)
(First Reading on December 14, 2011)
R5G An Ordinance Amending Chapter 66, "Marine Structures, Facilities And Vehicles," Article IV,
"Vessels," Sectiqn 66-151, "Launching And Hauling," To Prohibit Docking, Securing, Embarking
Or Disembarking Vessels At Municipal Or Public Seawalls, Wharfs, Docks Or Bulkheads In
Single Family Neighborhoods, Creating Exceptions, Providing For Repealer; Codification;
Severability And An Effective Date. First Reading
(Requested by Vice-Mayor Deede Weithorn)
(Legislative Tracking: City Attorney's Office)
R5H An Ordinance Amending The Land Development Regulations Of The Code Of The City Of Miami
Beach, By Amending Chapter 118, "Administrative And Review Procedures," Article II, "Boards,"
Division 5, "Board Of Adjustment," Section 118-134, "Notification Of Hearings;" Article IV,
"Conditional Use Procedure," Section 118-193 "Applications For Conditional Uses"; Article VI,
"Design Review Procedures;" Article X, "Historic Preservation;" And Article XI "Neighborhood
Conservation Districts (NCO);" To Clarify That Continuances Shall Be Noticed By Mail After The
First Continuance Granted By A Land Use Board; Providing For Repealer; Codification;
Severability And An Effective Date. First Reading
(Requested by Commissioner Jonah Wolfson)
(Legislative Tracking: Planning Department)
R51 Temporary Removal Of Parking Spaces
An Ordinance Amending The Code Of The City Of Miami Beach By Amending Chapter 82,
"Public Property," Amending Section 82-384, "Permitted Sidewalk Cafe Frontage; Requests For
Expansion," To Permit Sidewalk Cafes To Extend Into A Loading Zone Fronting A Restaurant;
Providing For Repealer, Codification, Severability And An Effective Date. First Reading
(Requested by the Land Use & Development Committee)
(Legislative Tracking: Planning Department)
9
9
Commission Agenda, January 11, 2012
R7 -Resolutions
R7A A Resolution Granting And Authorizing The Mayor And City Clerk To Execute An After-The-Fact
Revocable Permit To ASR Berwick Family LTD Partners, As Owner Of The Commercial Property
Located At 335 West 4th Street, To Retain A/C Units, A Utility Room, And A Trash Enclosure,
Currently Placed Within The Public City Right-Of-Way On West 47th Court. 10:30 a.m. Public
Hearing
(Public Works)
R7B Amendments To The FY 2010/11 And 2011/12 Budgets
1. A Resolution Adopting The Second Amendment To The FY 2010/11 General Fund
Budget And The First Amendment To The Enterprise, Internal Service And Resort Tax
Funds Budgets For Fiscal Year (FY) 2010/11.
2. A Resolution Adopting The First Amendment To The General Fund, Enterprise, Internal
Service And Special Revenue Funds Budgets For Fiscal Year (FY) 2011/12 To
Appropriate Encumbrances And Prior Appropriations Carried Forward From FY 2010/11
And To Appropriate Funds Carried Forward For Special Revenue Budgets
(Budget & Performance Improvement)
(Memorandum & Resolutions to be Submitted in Supplemental)
R7C A Resolution Accepting The Recommendation Of The Finance And Citywide Projects Committee
At Their October 27, 2011 Meeting To Extend The Current Management Agreement With
Greensquare On A Month-To-Month Basis Until Such Time As The New Flamingo Tennis Center
Is Nearing Completion And Coordinate The Issuance Of A New Tennis Centers Operations And
Management Request For Proposals (RFP) In A Manner To Have The Selected Operator In
Place To Coincide With The Grand Opening Of The New Flamingo Park Tennis Center Facility
And Authorizing The Issuance Of The Above Referenced Request For Proposals As Described.
(Parks & Recreation)
R9 -New Business and Commission Requests
R9A Board And Committee Appointments.
(City Clerk's Office)
R9A 1 Board And Committee Appointments -City Commission Appointments.
(City Clerk's Office)
R9B1 Dr. Stanley Sutnick Citizen's Forum. (12:30 p.m.)
R9B2 Dr. Stanley Sutnick Citizen's Forum. (5:30 p.m.)
10
10
Commission Agenda, January 11, 2012
R9 -New Business and Commission Requests (Continued)
R9C The Committee Of The Whole Will Meet During Lunch Recess In The City Manager's Large
Conference Room To Discuss The Audit Committee.
(Budget & Performance Improvement)
R9D The Committee Of The Whole Will Meet During Lunch Recess In The City Manager's Large
Conference Room To Discuss The Community Satisfaction Survey.
(Budget & Performance Improvement)
R9E Discussion And Update Regarding The Tennis Management Contract RFP.
(Requested by Commissioner Edward L. Tobin)
(Deferred from December 14, 2011)
R9F Discussion Regarding Creating A Tennis Committee.
(Requested by Commissioner Jonah Wolfson)
(Deferred from December 14, 2011)
R9G Discussion Regarding An Ordinance Amending The Miami Beach City Code By Amending
Chapter 2, Entitled "Administration," By Amending Article Ill, Entitled "Agencies, Boards And
Committees," By Creating Division 33, To Be Entitled "Tennis Advisory Committee," And By
Creating Sections 2-190.148 Through 2-190.153 Thereto To Create A Tennis Advisory
Committee And Provisions Establishing The Committee And Its Mission, Powers, Duties,
Composition, And Supporting Department; And Providing For Repealer, Severability, Codification,
And An Effective Date.
(Requested by Commissioners Michael Gongora)
(Deferred from December 14, 2011)
R9H Discussion And Update On The Citywide Dunes Maintenance Plan.
(Requested by Commissioner Edward L. Tobin)
(Deferred from December 14, 2011)
R1 0 -City Attorney Reports
R 1 OA City Attorney's Status Report.
(City Attorney Office)
11
11
Commission Agenda, January 11, 2012
R10-City Attorney Reports (Continued)
R 1 OB Closed Attorney-Client Session
Pursuant To §286.011, Florida Statutes, The City Attorney Hereby Advises The Mayor And City
Commission That He Desires Advice Concerning The Following Pending Litigation Matter:
The City Of Miami Beach, Vs. Hargreaves Associates, Incorporated, Et AI. Eleventh Judicial
Circuit Of Florida, Case No. 10-61979 CA 03, 11th Judicial Circuit In And For Miami-Dade County,
Florida.
Therefore, A Private Closed Attorney-Client Session Will Be Held During The Lunch Recess Of
The City Commission Meeting On January 11, 2012 In The City Manager's Large Conference
Room, Fourth Floor, City Hall, To Discuss Settlement Negotiations And/Or Strategy Related To
Litigation Expenditures With Regard To The Above-Referenced Litigation Matter.
The Following Individuals Will Be In Attendance: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower; Members Of The
City Commission: Jorge Exposito, Michael Gongora, Jerry Libbin, Edward Tobin, Deede Weithorn
And Jonah Wolfson; City Manager Jorge Gonzalez, City Attorney Jose Smith, First Assistant City
Attorney Steven Rothstein, Special Counsel Richard Lydecker, And Special Counsel Meredyth
Cooper.
R 1 OC Closed Attorney-Client Sessions
Pursuant To §286.011, Florida Statutes, The City Attorney Hereby Advises The Mayor And City
Commission That He Desires Advice Concerning The Following Pending Litigation Matter:
1) 1100 West Properties, LLC V. City Of Miami Beach, Circuit Court Case No. 09-70789 CA 23
2) City Of Miami Beach V. 1100 West Properties. LLC, Circuit Court Appellate Division Case No.:
11-505 AP
Therefore, A Private Closed Attorney-Client Session Will Be Held During The Lunch Recess Of
The City Commission Meeting On January 11, 2012 In The City Manager's Large Conference
Room, Fourth Floor, City Hall, To Discuss Settlement Negotiations And/Or Strategy Related To
Litigation Expenditures With Regard To The Above-Referenced Litigation Matters.
The Following Individuals Will Be In Attendance: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower; Members Of The
City Commission: Jorge Exposito, Michael Gongora, Jerry Libbin, Edward Tobin, Deede Weithorn
And Jonah Wolfson; City Manager Jorge Gonzalez, City Attorney Jose Smith, And First Assistant
City Rhonda Montoya Hasan.
12
12
Commission Agenda, January 11, 2012
R1 0 -City Attorney Reports (Continued)
R1 OD Attorney Client Session
Pursuant To §286.011, Florida Statutes, The City Attorney Hereby Advises The Mayor And City
Commission That He Desires Advice Concerning The Following Pending Litigation Matter:
Museum Walk Apartments V. City Of Miami Beach, Eleventh Judicial Circuit Of Florida, Appellate
Jurisdiction, Case Nos. 11-058-061; 068-07 4; 076-084; 086-087; 115-124; 662; And 670
Therefore, A Private Closed Attorney-Client Session. Will Be Held During The Lunch Recess Of
The City Commission Meeting On January 11, 2012 In The City Manager's Large Conference
Room, Fourth Floor, City Hall, To Discuss Settlement Negotiations And/Or Litigation Strategy
With Regard To The Above-Referenced Litigation Matters.
The Following Individuals Will Be In Attendance: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower; Members Of The
City Commission: Vice Mayor Deede Weithorn, Edward Tobin, Jorge Exposito, Michael Gongora,
Jerry Libbin And Jonah Wolfson; City Attorney Jose Smith, City Manager Jorge Gonzalez, First
Assistant City Attorney Rhonda Montoya Hasan And First Assistant City Attorney Steven
Rothstein.
Reports and Informational Items
Reports and Informational Items (see LTC #004-2012)
End of Regular Agenda
13
13
Commission Agenda, January 11, 2012
Miami Beach Redevelopment Agency
City Hall, Commission Chambers, 3rd Floor, 1700 Convention Center Drive
January 11, 2012
Chairperson of the Board Matti Herrera Bower
Member of the Board Jorge Exposito
Member of the Board Michael G6ngora
Member of the Board Jerry Libbin
Member of the Board Edward L. Tobin
Member of the Board Deede Weithorn
Member of the Board Jonah Wolfson
Executive Director Jorge M. Gonzalez
Assistant Director Jorge Gomez
General Counsel Jose Smith
Secretary Robert E. Parcher
1. NEW BUSINESS
AGENDA
A A Resolution Of The Chairperson And Members Of The Miami Beach Redevelopment
Agency Adopting And Appropriating The First Amendment To The Operating Budget For
The City Center Redevelopment Area And The Anchor Shops And Parking Garage For
Items That Are Over-Budget; And, Retroactively Adopting And Appropriating The Budget
For The Pennsylvania Avenue Shops And Parking Garage For Fiscal Year 2010/11.
(Budget & Performance Improvement)
14
14
CITY CLERK’S OFFICE LOBBYIST LIST REVISED
F:\CLER\COMMON\2012\20120111\Lobbyist List.doc
January 11, 2012
Commission Meeting
LOBBYIST NAME RETAINED BY DATE REGISTERED DISCLOSURE
C7K Set PH - Grant Revocable Permit to 1790 Alton Holdings, LLC
Matthew Amster 1790 Alton Holdings, LLC 07/08/2011 $310 per hour
Michael Larkin 1790 Alton Holdings, LLC 07/08/2011 $435 per hour
R2A Approve RFQ, Enhancement of Miami Beach Convention Center/Expansion & Hotel Development
Marcos Llorente Philip Goldfarb 12/05/2011 $250 - $500/hour
Lyle Stern Kim Sinatra 11/10/2011 No compensation
R5D Recycling Ordinance
Ashley Ligas SE Florida Apartment Assoc. 9/20/2011 Employee
Eston Melton, III Waste Pro of Florida, Inc. 06/06/2011 $1,000 monthly
R7A Authorize After-The-Fact Revocable Permit, ASR Berwick Family LTD, 335 W. 47th Street
Michael Larkin ASR Berwick Family, LTD 12/02/2011 $435 per hour
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
2012 MEETING DATES
COMMISSION MEETINGS ALTERNATE MEETINGS
January 11 (Wednesday) January 18 (Wednesday)
February 8 (Wednesday) February 15 (Wednesday)
March 21 (Wednesday) March 28 (Wednesday)
April 11 (Wednesday) April 18 (Wednesday)
May 9 (Wednesday) May 16 (Wednesday)
June 6 (Wednesday)
July 18 (Wednesday) July 25 (Wednesday)
August - City Commission in recess
September 12 (Wednesday)
October 24 (Wednesday) October 31 (Wednesday)
November 14 (Wednesday) November 21 (Wednesday)
December 12 (Wednesday) December 19 (Wednesday)
PA
PRESENTATIONS
AND
AWARDS
17
""C
)>
Presentations and Awards
PA1 Presentation Of A Plaque And T-Shirt, To The Mayor, City Commission, City Manager
And City Attorney For Their Continued Support Of The City's Special Olympics Team
Who Recently Represented The City And Participated In The State Games.
(Parks & Recreation Department)
PA2 Certificate Of Recognition To Be Presented To Cafe Avanti For Their Long Standing
Contribution To The City Of Miami Beach.
(Requested by Michael Gongora)
PA3 Certificate Of Appreciation To Be Presented To The Gay And Lesbian Task Force Of
Miami For Their Outstanding Fundraising Efforts For 2011.
(Requested by Michael Gongora)
PA4 Proclamation To Be Presented To Miami Beach Senior High School, Its Students,
Parents, Administration And PTSA Board For Becoming An "A" School For The First
Time.
(Requested by Commissioner Jonah Wolfson)
PA5 Certificates Of Appreciation To Be Presented To Octavio Rodriguez And Maria Makueria
Of Walgreens Store #3942, For Their Toy Collection Drive For The Miami Beach Fire
Department Toy Giveaway.
(Requested by Mayor Matti Herrera Bower)
PA6 Proclamation To Be Presented To Elsie Howard For Her Many Years Of Service At The
Visitors And Convention Authority.
(Requested by Mayor Matti Herrera Bower)
19
Agenda Item PA 1-"
Date 1-ll-12....
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
20
C2
COMPETITIVE BID REPORTS
21
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
Request For Approval To Issue A Request For Qualifications (RFQ) For Surveying, Topographical, And
Ma in Services On An As-Need Basis.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Ensure well-maintained infrastructure
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): The 2009 Customer Satisfaction Survey
indicated that 79% of businesses rated recently completed capital improvement projects as "excellent"
or "good."
Issue: I Shall the Mayor and City Commission approve the issuance of the RFQ?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
The City of Miami Beach is required to have current boundary and topographical surveys for the projects
in the Capital Improvement Program as well as right-of-way improvement projects for Public Works
Department. The ability to have a rotating list of Surveyors available to update, and prepare boundary
and/or topographical surveys for Capital Improvement Projects(CIP) and Public Works would enable the
City to plan projects in an expedited manner.
It is the intent of the City of Miami Beach to select several firms under this RFQ, which will be contacted
on an as-needed basis. This contract shall remain in effect for three (3) years from the date of contract
execution by the Mayor and City Clerk and two (2), one (1) year renewal options at the sole discretion of
the City Manager.
All survey work prepared for the City or through the City's Consultants shall comply with the Minimum
Technical Standards for Land Surveys in the State of Florida for work in commercial/high risk areas and
any applicable state laws, regulations or other requirements. All field data is to be collected in digital
form (GPS, Total Station, etc.) and reference recorded in field books. The digital data shall be post
processed and delivered to the City as specified.
All surveying work shall be conducted under the supervision of a Professional Surveyor and Mapper
licensed in the State of Florida. The surveyor or his designee shall furnish and maintain, at his own
expense, stakes and other such material, including qualified helpers during field survey activities.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
IN/A
Financial Information:
Source of Amount
Funds: 1 N/A
OBPI Total
Financiallm_l)_act Summary: N/A
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
Fernando Vazquez ext. 6135
MIAMI BEACH 23
Account
AGENDA ~TE.IIti---=C-=-· ;J.~A~
DATE /-/f-/2_
lD MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager (') v-"-/
January 11,2012 Q 7)
REQUEST FOR APPROVAL TO ISSUE A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS
(RFQ) FOR CITYWIDE SURVEYING, TOPOGRAPHICAL, AND MAPPING
SERVICES ON AN AS-NEEDED BASIS.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Approve issuance of the RFQ.
ANALYSIS
The City of Miami Beach is required to have current boundary and topographical surveys for the
projects in the Capital Improvement Program as well as right-of-way improvement projects for
Public Works Department. The ability to have a rotating list of Surveyors available to update,
and prepare boundary and/or topographical surveys for Capital Improvement Projects(CIP) and
Public Works would enable the City to plan projects in an expedited manner.
It is the intent of the City of Miami Beach to select several firms under this RFQ, which will be
contacted on an as-needed basis. This contract shall remain in effect for three (3) years from
the date of contract execution by the Mayor and City Clerk and two (2), one (1) year renewal
options at the sole discretion of the City Manager.
All survey work prepared for the City or through the City's Consultants shall comply with the
Minimum Technical Standards for Land Surveys in the State of Florida for work in
commercial/high risk areas and any applicable state laws, regulations or other requirements. All
field data is to be collected in digital form (GPS, Total Station, etc.) and reference recorded in
field books. The digital data shall be post processed and delivered to the City as specified
herein.
All surveying work shall be conducted under the supervision of a Professional Surveyor and
Mapper licensed in the State of Florida. The surveyor or his designee shall furnish and
maintain, at his own expense, stakes and other such material, including qualified helpers during
field survey activities.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
• Preliminary Engineering Surveys: This type of work shall include establishing
benchmarks, horizontal control utilizing existing right-of-way, locating all improvements
and culture, measuring distances and angles, measuring elevations of existing
improvements, and all other required by City of Miami Beach Public Works Department
for Engineering surveys. Miscellaneous office calculations from field work may be
required. All field work shall be kept in a City of Miami Beach field book using standard
note keeping techniques, supplemented with digital data including data collector files,
and . DXF or . DWG format drawings.
24
Commission Memorandum -Issuance of the Surveying, Topographical, & Mapping Services RFQ
January 11, 2012
Page2of4
• Boundary I Right-Of-Way Surveys/Legal Descriptions: This work shall include
locating all required public land corners, street monumentation, property corners, and
gathering of parcel evidence as required to determine the existing land lines and/or right-
of-way lines. Once the location of the actual boundary or right-of-way lines has been
determined, monuments as required by the Rules and Regulations of the State Board of
Professional Regulation, or Florida Statutes 472, shall be set by the Consultant at all
angle points, points of curvature, block corners, property corners, etc. In addition to
monumenting the actual right-of-way lines, a monument line or centerline, whichever the
case may be, shall also be fully monumented. A Record of Survey shall be prepared in
accordance with all applicable City, County and State regulations and Statutes, showing
the results of the survey. Preparation of legal descriptions for acquisition or disposal of
City property shall be accomplished to all State and local standards and approved by the
City Surveyor.
• Legal Descriptions: The Consultant shall perform any and all Survey work that may be
required to prepare a legal description to be used for any purpose. Any survey work
performed for this function shall be in compliance with the conditions set forth in this
contract.
• Additional Survey Services: The Consultant shall provide additional survey services
such as, but not limited to, engineering, right-of-way, specific purpose surveys,
topographical surveys, general land and aerial photography surveying services, mean
high water line, submerged/filled lands, GPS (Global Positioning System) and GPR
(Ground Penetration Radar) surveys, survey vertical control and elevations referenced to
the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 1988), survey horizontal control and
points referenced to Florida State Plane Coordinates North American Datum 1983/1990
(NAD 83/90), and elevation certificates in conjunction with City's Capital Improvement
Projects program and Public Works Department.
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
For purposes of compliance with this minimum experience requirement, the term "Proposer" is
hereby defined to mean the firm and/or business entity which is submitting a proposal pursuant
to this RFQ. Accordingly, the firm and/or business entity must meet the minimum requirements
listed below in order to be deemed responsive. Non-responsive bids will be disqualified from
consideration. ·
Interested Firms shall address the following items in the RFQ response:
• Team's Experience
• Indicate the firm's number of years of experience in providing Topographical
Surveying and Mapping Services for diversified projects for public agencies
as well as private clients ..
• List all successfully completed projects comparable in design, scope, size
and complexity, undertaken in the past five (5) years. Describe the scope of
each project in physical terms and by cost, describe the respondent's
responsibilities, and provide the name and contact telephone number of an
individual in a position of responsibility who can attest to respondent's
activities in relation to the project. An SF254 can suffice this request.
• List the firm's successfully completed projects comparable in design, scope,
size and complexity, undertaken in the past five (5) years;
• Provide the name(s) of the person, within your organization who was most
actively concerned with managing each project;
• List and describe all legal claims against any member of the team alleging
25
Commission Memorandum-Issuance of the SuNeying, Topographical, & Mapping SeNices RFQ
January 11, 2012
Page 3 of4
errors and/or omissions, or any breach of professional ethics, including those
settled out of court, during in the past five (5) years.
• Project Manager's Experience: Provide a comprehensive summary of the experience
and qualifications of the individual who will be selected to serve as the Project Manager.
This individual must have a minimum of five (5) years experience in the preparation and
coordination of Surveys to include but not limited to, engineering, right-of-way, specific
purpose surveys, topographical surveys, general land and aerial photography surveying
services, GPS (Ground Penetration Radar) surveys, and elevation certificates and
should have served as Project Manager on a minimum of five previous surveying
projects for private and public agencies.
• Previous Similar Projects: Provide a list of a minimum of ten (1 0) projects which
demonstrates the Team's experience in providing the services outlined in this RFQ. Must
provide the following information for each sample project.
• Client name, address, phone number, email
• Consultant name, address, phone number, fax and/or e-Mail address
• Description of the scope of the work
• Role of the firm and the responsibilities
• Month and Year the project was started and completed
• Total cost and/or fees paid to your firm
• Total cost of the construction, estimated and actual
• Qualifications of Project Team: Provide a list of the personnel to be used on this
project and their qualifications. A resume of each individual, including education,
experience, and any other pertinent information shall be included for each team member
to be assigned to this project.
RFQ PROCESS
The procedure for response, evaluation and selection will be as follows:
1. RFQ issued
2. Pre-qualification meeting
3. Receipt of qualificaiton packages
4. Opening and listing of all responses received.
5. An Evaluation Committee, appointed by the City Manager, shall meet to evaluate each
response in accordance with the requirements of this RFQ. If further information is
desired, respondents may be requested to make additional written submissions or oral
presentations to the Evaluation Committee.
6. The Evaluation Committee will recommend to the City Manager the proposal(s) that the
Evaluation Committee deem to be in the best interest of the City by using the following
criteria for selection:
26
Commission Memorandum -Issuance of the Surveying, Topographical, & Mapping Services RFQ
January 11, 2012
Page 4 of4
10 The experience and qualifications of the professional personnel assigned to
the Project Team and their familiarity with this project and a thorough
understanding of the methodology and design approach to be used in this
assignment.
5 Willingness to meet time and budget requirements as demonstrated by past
performance, methodology and approach
5 Certified minority business enterprise participation. Either the Prime
Consultant or the sub-Consultant team may qualify for proof of certification
for minority business enterprise participation. Accepted minority business
enterprise certifications include the Small Business Administration (SBA),
State of Florida, or Miami-Dade County.
5 Location
5 Recent, current and projected workloads of the firms
5 The volume of work previously awarded to each firm by the City, with the
object of effecting an equitable distribution of contracts among qualified
firms, provided such distribution does not violate the principle of selection of
the most highlY_ qualified firm.
5 Local Preference -The Evaluation Committee will assign an additional five
(5) points to Proposers, which are, or include as part of their proposal team,
a Miami Beach-based vendor as defined in the City's Local Preference
Ordinance.
5 Veterans Preference -The Evaluation Committee will assign an additional
five (5) points to Proposers, which are, or include as part of their proposal
team, a small business concern owned and controlled by a veteran(s) or a
service-disabled veteran business enterprise, as defined in the City's
Veterans Preference Ordinance.
7. The City Manager shall recommend to the City Commission the firm or firms,
acceptance of which the City Manager deems to be in the best interest of the City.
8. The City Commission shall consider the City Manager's recommendation(s) in light of
the recommendation(s) and evaluation of the Evaluation Committee and, if appropriate,
approve the City Manager's recommendation(s). The City Commission may reject the
City Manager's recommendation(s) and select another response or responses. In any
case, City Commission shall select the response or responses, acceptance of which the
City Commission de.ems to be in the best interest of the City. The City Commission may
also reject all proposals.
9. Negotiations between the selected respondent and the City take place to arrive at
agreement terms. If the City Commission has so directed, the City may proceed to
negotiate an agreement with a respondent other than the top ranked respondent if the
negotiations with the top ranked respondent fail to produce a mutually acceptable
agreement within a reasonable period of time.
10. A proposed contract is recommemed by the City Manager to the City Commission for
approval.
11. If and when a contract or contracts acceptable to the respective parties is approved by
the City Commission, the Mayor and City Clerk sign the contract(s) after the selected
respondent(s) has (or have) done so.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and the City Commission authorize the
issuance of a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for citywide surveying, topographical, and
mapping services on an as-needed basis.
27
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
28
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
Request For Approval To Issue A Request For Qualifications (RFQ) For Geotechnical And Laboratory
Services On An As-Need Basis.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Ensure well-maintained infrastructure
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): The 2009 Customer Satisfaction Survey
indicated that 79% of businesses rated recently completed capital improvement projects as "excellent"
or "good."
Issue: I Shall the Mayor and City Commission approve the issuance of the RFQ?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
Geotechnical, Soil Testing and/or Lab Testing Services are required steps in the proper pre-planning of
construction projects for the City. Many of the City's CIP and Public Works projects will require, during
one time or another, a Geotechnical, Soils or Lab Testing Report to validate either the City's Engineer's
or any Architect's or Engineer of Records recommendations as to any site, building or any other
project's unknown characteristics.
By issuing a Geotechnical Services RFQ and its subsequent Agreement(s), the City will be able to
adequately plan and incorporate Geotechnical and Soil Testing Services as part of the pre-construction
preparatory work, which is a phase that is part of every City construction project. In addition, the
Geotechnical firm(s) would provide personnel that are qualified, trained and thoroughly familiar with the
City's rules, policies, and procedures in inspection, sampling testing, and reporting various areas and
stages of construction. The ability to have a rotating list of Geotechnical firms would enable the City to
procure these services directly at a cost savings to the City. It will be the Administration's intent to select
multiple firms to provide this service for the City.
It is the intent of the City of Miami Beach to select several firms under this RFQ, which will be contacted
on an as-needed basis. This contract shall remain in effect for three (3) years from the date of contract
execution by the Mayor and City Clerk and two (2), one (1) year renewal options at the sole discretion of
the City Manager.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
I N/A
Financial Information:
Source of Amount
Funds: 1 N/A
OBPI
MIAMI BEACH 29
Account
AGENDA ITEM _C_~...;;;.B __
DATE /-//-/2._
lD MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager ~--/"
January 11,2012 u Q
REQUEST FOR APPROVAL TO ISSUE A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS
(RFQ) FOR CITYWIDE GEOTECHNICAL AND LABORATORY TESTING SERVICES
ON AN AS-NEEDED BASIS.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Approve issuance of the RFQ.
ANALYSIS
Geotechnical, Soil Testing and/or Lab Testing Services are required steps in the proper pre-
planning of construction projects for the City. Many of the City's CIP and Public Works projects
will require, during one time or another, a Geotechnical, Soils or Lab Testing Report to validate
either the City's Engineer's or any Architect's or Engineer of Records recommendations as to
any site, building or any other project's unknown characteristics.
By issuing a Geotechnical Services RFQ and its subsequent Agreement(s}, the City will be able
to adequately plan and incorporate Geotechnical and Soil Testing Services as part of the pre-
construction preparatory work, which is a phase that is part of every City construction project. In
addition, the Geotechnical firm(s) would provide personnel that are qualified, trained and
thoroughly familiar with the City's rules, policies, and procedures in inspection, sampling testing,
and reporting various areas and stages of construction. The ability to have a rotating list of
Geotechnical firms would enable the City to procure these services directly at a cost savings to
the City. It will be the Administration's intent to select multiple firms to provide this service for the
City.
It is the intent of the City of Miami Beach to select several firms under this RFQ, which will be
contacted on an as-needed basis. This contract shall remain in effect for three (3) years from
the date of contract execution by the Mayor and City Clerk and two (2), one (1) year renewal
options at the sole discretion of the City Manager.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Geotechnical Services
• The Consultant shall provide all labor, materials, equipment, transportation, and other
appurtenant work for performing subsurface explorations, obtaining representative
samples, and performing all other geotechnical services.
• The Consultant shall comply with all federal, state, and local rules and regu·lations with
regard to permits, bonds, drilling, plugging, and all other applicable aspects of drilling.
• The Consultant shall research and review all pertinent existing geologic and
geotechnical data and information available from USGS, area development, and the
company's own files.
• The Consultant shall review the proposed project information and requested scope of
work indicated as a minimum level of services desired relative to the anticipated
30
Commission Memorandum -Issuance of the Geotechnical and Laboratory Services RFQ
January 11, 2012
Page 2 of 8
subsurface conditions present. If localized subsurface conditions are expected to vary
significantly, Consultant shall advise Owner of additional recommended services prior to
commencing work.
• The Consultant shall be responsible for contacting the appropriate agencies (state/city
utility check) for determining locations of utilities in the vicinity of the actual boring
locations.
• Borings shall be backfilled to the original ground surface in accordance with all
applicable local, state, and federal guidelines.
• Consultant shall perform the standard penetration test (SPT) in accordance with ASTM
Designation D 1586.
• In soil that is predominantly cohesive (silty clays, sandy clays, and material with
adhesive binder), Consultant shall use the thin-walled tube method for sampling in
accordance with ASTM Designation D 1587.
• Rock coring shall be performed in accordance with ASTM Designation D 2113.
• Double-ring infiltration test shall be conducted in accordance with ASTM Designation D
5093.
• Laboratory tests shall be assigned and performed by the Consultant to classify soils and
obtain geotechnical physical characteristics such as strength, compressibility, swell
potential, compaction characteristics, and chemical characteristics such as
corrosiveness. Perform laboratory testing consistent in quantity and. quality with local
geotechnical engineering practice to provide the required design parameters and
recommendations. The quantity of tests to be performed will be dependent upon the type
of soil and/or rock encountered during drilling and sampling with additional consideration
of the foundation types that may be required to support the proposed structures.
• The Consultant shall prepare a geotechnical engineering report containing a discussion
of the proposed construction, final boring logs, boring location plan, a description of the
drilling and sampling program, a description of the geology and subsurface conditions
encountered, groundwater conditions, laboratory test results, and foundation and
earthwork recommendations and design parameters.
The following is a list of major items that shall appear in the geotechnical engineering report:
• Previous Construction Activity and Existing Fill (If present): A discussion of previous
construction activity shall address any existing fills or subsurface openings, if
encountered. Outline the engineering properties of any existing fills with regard to
foundation design.
• Subsurface Conditions: Subsurface conditions encountered at the site shall be
discussed, based upon stratigraphic sequence observed and local geology. Figures shall
be provided displaying soil borings and generalized cross sections. A general description
of the engineering properties or parameters determined from the investigation and
applied to design recommendations shall be provided. Prevailing groundwater elevations
observed and those recommended for design shall be noted. "
• Site Preparation Recommendations: Provide grading and site preparation
recommendations taking into consideration the conceptual grading plan for the site.
• Compaction Requirements: The report shall contain detailed and specific criteria for
acceptable embankment, fill, or backfill materials and address whether the available
borrow material on site is suitable for general or structural fill. The report shall contain
recommendations for material usage at the site with regard to placement and
compaction requirements as well as any recommended treatment. Compaction criteria,
including acceptable gradations, moisture control, compactive effort, and need for
proofrolling shall be discussed, including criteria for both granular and cohesive fill, if
applicable. Preparation of subgrades for fill and backfill placement shall be discussed.
31
Commission Memorandum -Issuance of the Geotechnical and Laboratory Services RFQ
January 11, 2012
Page 3 ofB
• Foundation Design: The geotechnical engineering report prepared by the Consultant will
be used to size and structurally design stable foundations for the structures. To
accomplish this task, the report shall contain recommendations in regard to the
recommended foundation type for each structure, as loading and site conditions may
require.
The report shall provide net allowable bearing pressures for shallow spread footings and mats,
at recommended bearing depths, considering the types of materials supporting the mats, and
note whether any overstressing is allowed under short-term loading such as dynamic, wind, or
seismic loading conditions. If over-excavation of unsuitable materials and backfill with structural
backfill are required to improve the foundation soils to allow the use of shallow foundations,
provide estimated vertical and horizontal extent of the over-excavation and structural backfill.
Provide estimated total and differential settlement for foundations using the recommended
bearing pressures. Provide an estimate of the time of settlement. Note factors of safety included
or recommended. Provide recommendations for resistance to lateral loads, such as passive
earth pressures and sliding friction for the base of foundations. Provide recommended
groundwater level for determination of buoyancy and means to resist buoyant forces, if needed.
Recommendations for deep foundations shall include diameter, depth, and any recommended
installation requirements. Provide allowable design loading capacities for vertical downward
loading, vertical upward loading, and horizontal loading, as appropriate to the site conditions.
Provide design parameters for analysis of laterally loaded drilled piers as required for input into
lateral pile capacity software. All factors of safety utilized in developing the allowable load
capacities shall be outlined in detail.
• Slope Stability and Excavations: The report shall address the recommended inclination
of both temporary excavation and permanent slopes.
• Excavation Requirements: If necessary, a section of the report shall address the
excavatibility of the soils and rock which may be exposed during foundation excavation
and site grading. The effort and type of equipment utilized to perform excavations is
dependent upon the size and depth of the excavation. Thus, the discussion shall be in
regard to area-type excavations and confined excavations, such as utility trenches.
• Dewatering: Conditions present at the site requiring groundwater control, dewatering, or
surface drainage during excavation for mats, footings, and other construction shall be
discussed. Anticipated types of dewatering shall be described. Special consideration to
exposed sub-soils within the bottom of excavations during construction shall be
addressed.
• Corrosion Potential and Chemical Attack to Concrete: An evaluation of representative
subsurface materials shall be performed to provide laboratory test results for chemical
constituents, specifically pH, chloride ion, soluble sulfates, and sulfides as well as
electrical resistivity. These parameters are required to evaluate the potential for
corrosion to underground piping and grounding, and selection of cement type to resist
potential sulfate attack.
• Pavements and Roadway: Provide typical pavement thickness suggestions in
accordance with Miami Dade County and FOOT specifications.
Any other items of consideration as deemed necessary by the geotechnical company. The
geotechnical engineering report shall be prepared by or under the direction of a Registered
Professional Engineer registered under the regulatory laws of the State of Florida.
32
Commission Memorandum -Issuance of the Geotechnical and Laboratory Services RFQ
January 11, 2012
Page 4 ofB
Roadway Reports
Roadway reports shall include, but not be limited to:
• Copies of SCS and USGS maps with project limits.
• A report of tests sheet that summarizes the laboratory test results, the soil stratification
(i.e., soils grouped into layers of similar materials) and construction recommendations
relative to the current Standard Indices.
• Estimated seasonal high and/or low groundwater levels, and review with respect to
proposed pavement grades.
• Recommend type of geosynthetic for various applications.
• The Design LBR results from 90% and mean methods.
• Permeability/infiltration parameters for water retention areas/exfiltration trenches/swales.
• A description of the site and subsoil conditions, design recommendations and a
discussion of any special considerations (i.e., removal of unsuitable material,
recompression of weak soils, estimated settlement time/amount, groundwater control
etc.).
• An appendix which contains stratified soil boring profiles, laboratory test data sheets,
Design LBR calculations/graphs, and any other pertinent information.
In addition to the roadway report, the Consultant will also provide stratified boring profiles to the
Designer and review the entire set of plans for completeness before each submittal as
requested by the Department. The Consultant shall assist the Designer with detailing limits on
the cross-sections of subsoil excavation. Up to four draft roadway reports shall be submitted to
the District Geotechnical Engineer for each review prior to incorporation of the Consultant's
recommendations in the project design.
Permits
The consultant is responsible for obtaining and maintaining all required City of Miami Beach and
any Miami Dade County Public Works permits, including but not limited to, MOT, excavations,
etc. Additionally, if required, the consultant shall be responsible for all special events permits
from the City of Miami Beach and Miami Dade County Police Departments.
Additional Services
Other geotechnical services to perform geotechnical investigation and/or construction material
testing at other locations to be determined at a later date, may be required beyond the scope of
this work. Compensation for such additional services shall be negotiated based on hourly rates
contained in the Agreement awarded under this RFQ.
Materials Testing, Inspection, and Reporting
The Consultant shall provide the City of Miami Beach with personnel that are qualified, trained
and thoroughly familiar with the City's rules, policies, and procedures in inspection, sampling
testing, and reporting in the following areas:
• Bituminous Construction Materials
• Sand, Coarse Aggregate, Limerock and Cemented Coquina Mine Inspection
• Base, Sub-Grade and Embankment Materials
• Pavement Parking Materials
• Portland Cement Concrete
• Precast Concrete Products
• Pre-Stressed Concrete Products
33
Commission Memorandum-Issuance of the Geotechnical and Laboratory Services RFQ
January 11, 2012
Page 5 ofB
• Drilled Shaft Inspection
• Laboratory Information Management System (LIMS) Data Entry
• Pavement Coring Reporting (PCR) Data Entry
• Consultant Contract Project Management
• Construction Materials Investigations, Special Studies & Projects
• Miscellaneous Construction Related Activities
• Materials Inspection and Testing Related Maintenance Activities
• Asphalt Concrete Inspection/Evaluation
The Consultant shall provide (when required) qualified and experienced technicians in the
following:
• Aggregate Field Testing
• Concrete Field Technician Levell and II
• Aggregate Laboratory Testing
• Concrete Laboratory Technician
• LBR Technician
• Asphalt Paving
• Asphalt Plant
• CTCI-Concrete Transportation Construction Inspections
• Pre-stress Inspector Technician
• Drilled Shaft Inspector
• Pile Driving Inspector
Laboratory Services
The Consultant shall have a capable materials laboratory. The Consultant laboratory shall have
a Quality Control Program that includes provisions for checking test equipment and lab
personnel proficiency. The laboratory must keep up-to-date records of calibration checks.
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
For purposes of compliance with this minimum experience requirement, the term "Proposer" is
hereby defined to mean the firm and/or business entity which is submitting a proposal pursuant
to this RFQ. Accordingly, the firm and/or business entity must meet the minimum requirements
listed below in order to be deemed responsive. Non-responsive bids will be disqualified from
consideration.
Interested Firms shall address the following items in the RFQ response:
• Team's Experience
• lnoicate the firm's number of years of experience in providing Geotechnical,
Soil Testing, and Laboratory Testing Services for diversified projects for
public agencies as well as private clients.
• List all successfully completed projects undertaken in the past five (5) years.
Describe the scope of each project in physical terms and by cost, describe
the respondent's responsibilities, and provide the name and contact
telephone number of an individual in a position of responsibility who can
attest to respondent's activities in relation to the project. An SF254 can
suffice this request.
• Provide the name(s) of the person, within your organization who was most
actively concerned with managing each project;
• List and describe all legal claims against any member of the team alleging
34
Commission Memorandum -Issuance of the Geotechnical and Laboratory Services RFQ
January 11, 2012
Page 6 ofB
errors and/or omissions, or any breach of professional ethics, including those
settled out of court, during in the past five (5) years.
• Project Manager's Experience: Provide a comprehensive summary of the experience
and qualifications of the individual who will be selected to serve as the Project Manager.
This individual must have a minimum of five (5) years experience in the preparation and
coordination of geotechnical services to include, but not limited to, subsurface
explorations, obtaining representative samples, materials testing, inspections and
reporting, and performing any other geotechnical services as required under this RFQ.
The Project Manager must provide documentation as to their past experience in
providing as to his/her past experience in providing geotechnical services.
• Previous Similar Projects: Provide a list of a minimum of ten (1 0) projects which
demonstrates the Team's experience in providing the services outlined in this RFQ. Must
provide the following information for each sample project.
• Client name, address, phone number, email
• Consultant name, address, phone number, fax and/or e-Mail address
• Description of the scope of the work
• Role of the firm and the responsibilities
• Month and Year the project was started and completed
• Total cost and/or fees paid to your firm
• Total cost of the construction, estimated and actual
• Qualifications of Project Team: Provide a list of the personnel to be used on this
project and their qualifications. A resume of each individual, including education,
experience, and any other pertinent information shall be included for each team member
to be assigned to this project.
• Risk-Assessment Plan (RAP): All Consultants must submit a Risk-Assessment Plan.
The RAP must not be longer than two (2) pages front side of page only should be
included within the RFQ response. The RAP should address the following items in a
clear and generic language:
• Potential project risks. (Areas that may cause the Contractor not to finish on
time, not finish with budget, cause any change orders, or be a source of
dissatisfaction with the owner)
• Explanation of how the risks can be avoided/minimized
• Propose any options that could increase the value of this project
• Explain the benefits of the RAP. Address the quality and performance
differences in terms of risk minimization that the City can understand and
what benefits the option will provide to the user. No brochures or marketing
pieces please.
RFQ PROCESS
The procedure for response, evaluation and selection will be as follows:
1. RFQ issued
2. Pre-qualification meeting
3. Receipt of qualificaiton packages
4. Opening and listing of all responses received.
35
Commission Memorandum -Issuance of the Geotechnical and Laboratory Services RFQ
January 11, 2012
Page 7 ofB
5. An Evaluation Committee, appointed by the City Manager, shall meet to evaluate each
response in accordance with the requirements of this RFQ. If further information is
desired, respondents may be requested to make additional written submissions or oral
presentations to the Evaluation Committee.
6. The Evaluation Committee will recommend to the City Manager the proposal(s) that the
Evaluation Committee deem to be in the best interest of the City by using the following
criteria for selection:
20 Risk Assessment Plan that reflects a clear understanding of project
objectives; a thorough review of existing conditions; familiarity with the
project site; a thorough understanding of all permitting and regulatory
requirements and impacts; and other considerations that may impact the
desi n and construction of the ro osed im rovements.
15 The experience, qualifications and portfolio of the Project Manager, as
well as his/her familiarity with this project and a thorough understanding
of the methodolo and desi n a roach to be used in this assi nment.
15 Past performance based on quality of the Performance Evaluation
Surveys and the Administration's due dilligence based upon reference
checks erformed of the Firm s clients.
10 The experience and qualifications of the professional personnel
assigned to the Project Team as well as their familiarity with this project
and a thorough understanding of the methodology and design approach
to be used in this assi nment.
5 Willingness to meet time and budget requirements as demonstrated by
ast erformance, methodolo and a roach
5 Certified minority business enterprise participation. Either the Prime
Consultant or the sub-Consultant team may qualify for proof of
certification for minority business enterprise participation. Accepted
minority business enterprise certifications include the Small Business
Administration SBA , State of Florida, or Miami-Dade Count .
5 Location
5 Recent, current and ro·ected workloads of the firms
5 The volume of work previously awarded to each firm by the City, with the
object of effecting an equitable distribution of contracts among qualified
firms, provided such distribution does not violate the principle of
selection of the most hi hi ualified firm.
7. The City Manager shall re..commend to the City Commission the firm or firms,
acceptance of which the City Manager deems to be in the best interest of the City.
8. The City Commission shall consider the City Manager's recommendation(s) in light of
the recommendation(s) and evaluation of the Evaluation Committee and, if appropriate,
approve the City Manager's recommendation(s). The City Commission may reject the
City Manager's recommendation(s) and select another response or responses. In any
case, City Commission shall select the response or responses, acceptance of which the
City Commission deems to be in the best interest of the City. The City Commission may
also reject all proposals.
9. Negotiations between the selected respondent and the City take place to arrive at
agreement terms. If the City Commission has so directed, the City may proceed to
negotiate an agreement with a respondent other than the top ranked respondent if the
36
Commission Memorandum -Issuance of the Geotechnical and Laboratory Services RFQ
January 11, 2012
Page 8 ofB
negotiations with the top ranked respondent fail to produce a mutually acceptable
agreement within a reasonable period of time.
10. A proposed contract is recommemed by the City Manager to the City Commission for
approval.
11. If and when a contract or contracts acceptable to the respective parties is approved by
the City Commission, the Mayor and City Clerk sign the contract(s) after the selected
respondent(s) has (or have) done so.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and the City Commission authorize the
issuance of a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for geotechnical and laboratory services on an
as-needed basis.
37
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
38
T
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
j Request For Approval To Issue A Request For Proposals (RFP) For Security Guard Services.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Maintain crime rates at or below national trends
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): According to the 2009 Strategic Plan, 90%
of the residents responded that they feel very safe or somewhat safe in their neighborhoods during the
night.
Issue: I Whether the City Commission should approve the issuance of the RFP?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
At the March 9, 2011 the Mayor and City Commission approved the Administration's recommendation
to renew the contract with Security Alliance for two additional one-year terms and issue a Request for
Proposals (RFP) by October 1, 2011 for security guard services.
The current Security Guard Contract with Security Alliance expires on April 30, 2012. At the City's
sole option and discretion, the contract may be renewed for one (1) additional one-year period.
As a result of today's market conditions, the Administration has consistently elected not to exercise its
renewal options, but rather has elected to issue new RFPs. It is the intent of this RFP to use the
"Best Value" Procurement process to select a Security Guard Contractor with the experience and
qualifications; the ability; capability, capacity; and proven past successful performance in providing
high quality unarmed security guard services.
The results of the new RFP process will be compared to the existing contract, to determine if it's in the
City's best interest to reject proposals or award a new contract.
APPROVE ISSUANCE OF THE RFP.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
The Finance and Citywide Projects Committee (the Committee) at its January 27, 2011 meeting
retroactively approved the first-year renewal of Security Alliance's contract from May 1, 2010 to April
30, 2011; prospectively approved the second-year renewal of Security Alliance's contract from May 1,
2011 to April 30, 2012; and further authorized the issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFP) by
October 1, 2011 (six months prior to contract expiration). The Committee also approved the issuance
at its September 26, and at its December 6, 2011 meeting, recommended that the results of the RFP
process be compared with the existing contract, and if it's not in the City's best interest to award a
contract, we can reject all proposals received and renew the existing agreement.
Financial Information:
Source of Amount
Funds: 1
OBPI Total
Financial Impact Summa!)l -
City Clerk's Office Legisliflv,k Tracking:
Gus Lopez, extension 6641 J I ..--
't ----Sign-Offs:
Department Director II Assistant City Manager
SF fk} RM ~W\ JGG PDW
:\AGENDA\2'012\1-11-12\SecurityGuardSummary .docx
MIAMlBEACH 39
Account Approved
City Manager
JMG ('I ..---~
0
AGENDA ITEM _C~a;.:...C-=-
DATE /-//-/2.
~ MIAMI BEACH '"=""
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager ~ ~
January 11, 2012 DATE:
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL TO I SUE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
(RFP) FOR SECURITY GUARD SERVICES.
ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATION
Approve the issuance of the RFP.
KEY INTENDED OUTCOMES (KIOs) SUPPORTED
Increase resident rating of public safety services; and maintain crime rates at or below
national trends.
BACKGROUND
The Finance and Citywide Projects Committee, at its January 26, 2010 meeting,
recommended the issuance of a new Request for Proposals (RFP) for Security Guard
Services and that the following information be incorporated as part of the RFP:
1. Training as an evaluation criteria;
2. Financial stability as requirement of the Successful Contractor; and
3. Language which states that the Living Wage rates are under review and is
subject to change.
At its March 10, 2010 meeting, the Mayor and City Commission approved the issuance
of an RFP for Security Guard Services.
The RFP was posted on BidSync and the Procurement's City website on March 10,
2010, with an original bid opening date of April 9, 2010. The bid was also advertised on
the March 12, 2010, Daily Business Review publication.
A pre-proposal submission meeting was he1d on March 25, 2010, at which 42 interested
agencies attended (includes telephone call-in).
At the May 20, 2010 Finance and Citywide Projects Committee, the deadline for
submission of the proposals for the RFP for security guard services was extended to
allow for an analysis on paid time off for employees covered by the Living Wage
Ordinance, and the possible inclusion of paid time off in the RFP requirements.
Subsequently, the RFP opening date was postponed.
40
Commission Memo
Unarmed Security Guard Services RFP
January 11, 2012
Page 2 of 15
The Finance and Citywide Projects Committee at its January 27, 2011 meeting,
retroactively approved the first-year renewal of Security Alliance of Florida's ("Security
Alliance") contract from May 1, 2010 to April 30, 2011; prospectively approved the
second-year renewal of Security Alliance's contract from May 1, 2011 to April 30, 2012;
and further authorized the issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFP) at least six (6)
months prior to the expiration of the current contract.
The Mayor and City Commission at its March 9, 2011 meeting, approved the Finance
and Citywide Projects Committee's recommendation, to exercise the first and second
renewal option for the unarmed security services contract with Security Alliance and to
issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the Security Guard Services Contract at least
six (6) months prior to the expiration of the current contract.
The Finance and Citywide Projects Committee at its September 26, 2011 meeting,
discussed an investigation that involved Security Alliance and "Rooms To Go"
employees. After being briefed by the City Attorney's Office, the Committee's
recommendation was to issue the RFP immediately. Subsequently, the item to approve
the issuance of an RFP for Security Guard Services was presented to the Mayor and
City Commission at its October 19, 2011 meeting, at which time it was referred to the
Finance and Citywide Projects Committee ("the Committee") meeting, December 6,
2011 for further discussion. At its December 6, 2011 meeting, the Committee
recommended that the results of the RFP process be compared with the existing
contract, and if it's not in the City's best interest to award a contract, we can reject all
proposals received and renew the existing agreement
CONTRACT TERM
Contract No. 34-05/06, was awarded to Security Alliance on April 2, 2007, with an
effective date of May 1, 2007. The contract's basic term expired on April 30, 2010, and
has been renewed for two additional one-year terms set to expire April 30, 2012. At the
City's sole option and discretion, the contract may be renewed for one (1) additional one-
year period through April 30, 2013.
As a result of today's market conditions, the Administration has consistently elected not
to exercise its renewal options, but rather has elected to issue new RFPs. It is the
intent of this RFP to use the "Best Value" Procurement process to select a Security
Guard Contractor with the experience and qualifications; the ability; capability, capacity;
and proven past successful performance in providing high quality unarmed security
guard services.
The results of the new RFP process will be compared to the existing contract, to
determine if it's in the City's best interest to reject proposals or award a new contract.
EVALUATION CRITERIA
The Evaluation Committee appointed by the City Manager will review all responsive
proposals received and score and rank the Contractors based on the following criteria:
1. The experience and qualifications of the Contractor (35 points);
2. The experience and qualifications of the Management Team (20 points).
3. Past performance based on number and quality of the Performance Evaluation
Surveys (10 points); and
41
Commission Memo
Unarmed Security Guard Services RFP
January 11, 2012
Page 3 of 15
4. Financial Strength as evidenced by financial statements (10 points);
5. Total cost (25 points).
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The selected Contractor shall have a minimum "A" rating from Standard & Poor or
Moody's as of the due date of this RFP, if the company has a rating by either of those
agencies. If the selected Contractor has no such rating because it is a non-profit entity or
it is a non-stock organization and it has no long-term debt, then the selected Proposer
shall submit financial statements showing a strong financial position, including strong
asset to liability ratio, to be determined by the City. Additionally, the Successful
Contractor must provide the City with a 1 00% Performance Bond.
COST PROPOSAL
The billing rate quoted shall include full compensation for labor, equipment use, travel
time, hiring of security guards and any and all cost associated to the proposer in order to
provide the City of Miami Beach with a Best Value Contract for Unarmed Security Guard
Services.
Contractors will be asked to submit cost information based on the following:
DESCRIPTION 1EST. HOURS BILLING
RATES
TOTAL
UNARMED GUARDS 130, 000/year $ __ ____,/hour $ __
SUPERVISORS 30,000/year $ __ __,/hour $ __ _
GRAND TOTAL $ __ _
ADD ALTERNATES
1. Issuance of warnings and violations as the City determines
to be warranted to include:
a. dog off leash laws;
b. pooper scooper laws; and
c. littering.
2. Appearance of security guards and/or supervisors at
Special Master Hearings when needed in support of the
City's efforts to ensure compliance with City Code.
a. Security Guard
b. Supervisor
3. Guards certified in traffic control procedures
BILLING RATE
$ __ ----'/violation
$ /violation
$ /violation
$ __ """"/appearance
$ /appearance
$ __ ....:/hour
1 The City is not guaranteeing the number of hours and will reserve the right to
adjust hours either up or down on an "as needed" basis.
42
Commission Memo
Unarmed Security Guard Services RFP
January 11, 2012
Page 4 of 15
4. Issuance of warnings and violations as the City determines
to be warranted to include:
a. Skateboarding on Lincoln Road
b. Skateboarding and Bicycle riding on the Boardwalk
5. Taking photographs of violations as the City determines
to be warranted.
6. Costs associated with additional vehicle(s)
$ /violation
$ /violation
$ /photograph
$ /vehicle
The City reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to select none, any, or all Add
Alternates.
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS I QUALIFICATIONS
a) The Security Guard Contractor shall submit incorporation or other business
entity/form documentation with their proposal. Contractor shall have provided
continuous and successful security guard services for a minimum of five (5) years.
b) The Security Guard Contractor must provide a drug and alcohol free workplace.
c) The Security Guard Contractor must have a proven track record of paying
its employees as regularly scheduled. Security Guard Contractors who
have failed to pay its employees on time will be disqualified and not receive
any consideration.
d) The minimum requirements of the Unarmed Security Guards are as follows:
UNARMED SECURITY GUARDS
a. A minimum of 40 hours of training as required by the State of Florida Department
of Licensing pursuant to Section 493.6123 (1) F.S., and must possess a Florida
Class "D" License and a minimum of 16 hours of site-specific training at their
assigned post.
b. Specialized training, as requested by the City of Miami Beach Police Department,
on an as needed basis per post assignments (e.g. building evacuations,
hurricane evacuations, training, traffic control, etc.).
c. Pass a Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) criminal background
check.
d. Ability to write a report to document incidents as required.
e. Ability to follow all the terms and conditions in the City of Miami Beach Post
Order Bid Manual.
f. Ability to speak English (multilingual desirable) and write all reports in English.
g. Ability to communicate, provide information, and gives directions in a courteous
matter to tourists and residents.
h. Pass a drug screening test.
i. Ability to respond to and take command of emergency situation.
j. Ability to provide effective access control and maintain a safe and secure
environment.
k. Ability to provide protection with professionalism.
43
Commission Memo
Unarmed Security Guard Services RFP
January 11, 2012
Page 5of15
I. Ability to provide a professional level of personal interaction services.
m. Trained and certified in first aid and rendering Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation
(CPR).
n. Physically capable of pursuing and detaining individuals who have committed
criminal acts.
o. Have a minimum of 6 months of security officer experience, law enforcement or
equivalent military training.
p. Ability to issue written warnings and code citations as City determines it is
warranted.
q. Ability to take photographs and document violations and incidents as required.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
The Successful Contractor will provide the following:
• A minimum of three (3) roving shift supervisors equipped with an automobile on
duty within the City limits of Miami Beach at all times. The supervisors will be
able to respond to any site within 15 minutes. A list must be submitted in writing,
identifying the name(s) of each roving shift supervisor, and all security personnel
under their supervision, to the Miami Beach Police Department (MBPD), Contract
Administrator.
• A written street/park lighting report, where applicable, forwarded to the MBPD
within 48 hours of any "lights out" occurrence.
• All drug screening, background checks, and psychological testing of employees
assigned to Miami Beach posts at the Successful Contractor expense.
• All sensors/readers at contracted posts to ensure that security officers are
making required rounds at assigned frequencies and times and provide a weekly
computerized printout downloaded from sensors installed at each post to the
Police Department. The location of the sensors will be submitted to the MBPD for
approval.
• A supervisor, who will be required to meet with the MBPD, authorized
representative, upon request.
• All uniforms, radios, firearms, rain gear, traffic vests, tools and equipment
necessary to perform the required security services in accordance with the bid
documents.
• Uninterrupted services under all conditions, to include but not limited to the threat
of a strike or the actually to the threat of a strike or the actuality of a strike,
adverse weather conditions, a disaster, or emergency situations, at the agreed
upon hourly contractual rate. -
• Compliance by their personnel assigned to City of Miami Beach posts with the
Security Contractor's Post Order and Rules and Regulations Manual.
• Any holiday and sick-time pay to assigned personnel.
• A written quarterly statistical analysis report of security incidents forwarded to the
City of Miami Beach Police Department on a quarterly basis.
• Certify in writing, the names of all employees who will provide security services to
the City of Miami Beach, of which will have a valid Florida Armed Security Guard
Licenses (D) and G). Copies of State license(s) will be keep in employee
personnel file for immediate viewing if necessary and produced in hard copy
44
Commission Memo
Unarmed Security Guard Services RFP
January 11, 2012
Page 6 of 15
within five business days (excluding weekends and holidays) upon receipt of
request from the MBPD.
The City reserves the right to take any action necessary to ensure that the security
forces are fully staffed in order to protect the City of Miami Beach property, personnel,
and assets. This may include contractual arrangements with others contractors for the
purpose of obtaining additional resources in the event that the Successful Contractor
cannot perform.
If such arrangements are deemed necessary, then the Successful Contractor may, at
the sole discretion of the City of Miami Beach, be terminated, and any cost incurred by
the City of Miami Beach may be withheld from funds owed to the Successful Contractor.
The City of Miami Beach reserves the right to an employee from a duty assignment, and
lor bar the employee from further service under this Contract.
The Successful Contractor will be responsible for advertising and recruiting help, training
the security guards, preparing paychecks, payroll taxes, Social Security and Withholding
taxes, preparing W-2's, Unemployment and Workmen's Compensation claims and
liability insurance.
The obligation of the City of Miami Beach will be solely to compensate the Successful
Contractor for the number of hours provided monthly in accordance with the contract
price schedule. The Successful Contractor will provide a Schedule of Values/Payment
Schedule to the City's Contract Administrator for review and approval, prior to the
commencement of work.
Should the Successful Contractor be asked to provide additional coverage and support
for major events, or emergencies, and the Successful Contractor cannot provide the
additional coverage/support with its own employees, then the Successful Contractor
must request in writing that the City approve its sub-contractor, and the City Manager or
designee, will reserve its right approve the sub-contractor prior to any sub-contracting or
performance of any work.
RECORDS
The Successful Contractor will submit all invoices to the City of Miami Beach containing
an itemized employee time record, to include the employee name and hours
worked/shift, for the time period identified on the invoice. The computerized printout from
the downloaded sensors will accompany the weekly invoices. These printouts will be the
same date~nd time frame of the submitted invoices.
All correspondence, records, vouchers and books of account insofar as work done under
this Contract is concerned, will be open to inspection, by an authorized City of Miami
Beach representative, during the course of the Contract and for a period of two (2) years
after expiration of the Contract.
The Successful Contractor will maintain accurate and complete records of personnel
criteria, training criteria and biographical data of all personnel affiliated with this Contract.
The Successful Contractor will keep on file a separate personnel file for each employee
employed under the Miami Beach contract. This file will specifically, along with the above
mentioned criteria, include:
45
Commission Memo
Unarmed Security Guard Services RFP
January 11, 2012
Page 7 of 15
• Personal information of the employee, sex/race/ DOB/ and social security
number.
• Copies of Florida Drivers license and security guard class "D" license.
• Copies or notification of all discipline actions taken by the vendor or City
of Miami Beach. This will include all verbal or written documentation of
warnings or discipline.
• Proof of successful Background Check, Drug Screen, and Polygraph
examination.
The City reserves the right to perform audit investigations of the Successful Contractor
payroll and related records of employees assigned to the City of Miami Beach to
ascertain that such employees' records indicate payment received for the specific hours
worked for the City. Such audit will be at the discretion of and at the option of the City.
Successful Contractor will be required to provide any/all records in its possession which
contain information concerning hours worked and payment received based on the
contractor's invoices to the City of Miami Beach. All required documentation and
personnel files will be readily available for inspection by any authorized City of Miami
Beach representative, during initial research and during the course of this Contract.
Failure to have the required documentation will be deemed as non-compliance to the
Terms and Conditions of the contract.
Each guard must have their individual "D" and "G" license in their possession while
performing work for the City of Miami Beach, and if operating a vehicle have a valid
driver's license.
WORK FORCE AND WORK ASSIGNMENTS
Unarmed security guards will be provided to work various locations, including patrolling
numerous City of Miami Beach facilities. All Security Guards will be required to carry 2-way
radios and electronic scanner wards unless specifically exempted by the City of Miami
Beach Contract Administrator.
REGULAR SECURITY OFFICER DUTIES
1. All security personnel furnished by the Successful Contractor to Miami Beach will
be required to monitor the facilities by walking the Facility, riding a golf cart and/or
whatever other means the City of Miami Beach considers best for each facility _...
and/or location.
2. All security personnel furnished by Successful Contractor to the City of Miami
Beach will provide all phases of building and personnel security, personal property
protection and vehicle protection, both within and out of the facility. This will
include, but not limited to, making rounds and clock rounds of assigned areas and
key locations; checking lights; assuring locks of gates and doors.
3. The Successful Contractor's personnel will take proper steps to prevent
unauthorized entrance and access to the Facility or contents thereof.
4. While fulfilling regular security duties, Successful Contractor's personnel may detain
any person using reasonably necessary measures, in or about the premises, until
46
Commission Memo
Unarmed Security Guard Services RFP
January 11, 2012
Page Bof 15
said personnel is able to turn such person(s) over to the police.
5. Reporting in detail daily reports to employee's Supervisor verbally and in writing, in
a prescribed manner, regarding the performance of his/her shift and special reports
regarding any problems or incidents occurring during his/her shift of all unusual
situations and circumstances. Such daily reports will be submitted to the City of
Miami Beach on a weekly basis.
6. Conducting and/or undertaking initial incident investigations and submitting
appropriate detail reports to the City of Miami Beach without undue delay.
Special incident reports will be submitted to the City of Miami Beach the following
business day.
7. All security personnel furnished to City of Miami Beach will give instructions or
information to visitors upon request, or direct them to the appropriate administrative
office if any questions cannot be answered. Security personnel will, escort from
time to time, patrons to their vehicles at patron's request.
8. Utilizing their two-way radio, security personnel must contact their supervisor or
their base station, which can contact and dispatch police if the need arises.
9. The Successful Contractor and their assigned personnel will follow all terms,
conditions, and procedures as outline in the attached "Post Orders for the City of
Miami Beach Security Guard Contracts.
10. Responding to alarms, suspicious activities, fires, injuries, security incidents or any
emergency situation.
11. Performing any other duties or functions not specifically outlined or set forth above
but which are identified as falling within the scope and realm of a security officer's
responsibilities.
12. The Successful Contractor will provide an adequate supply of flashlights and
batteries, raingear, uniforms, clipboards and any other personnel equipment
required for the Security Guard to perform their duties.
13. The Successful Contractor will provide all related forms, pencils, pens
and miscellaneous office supplies.
14. All equipment utilized by the Successful Contractor in the execution of
this contract shall be maintained by the Successful Contractor.
15. All Successful Contractor personnel will read, understand and follow the attached
"Current Security" Posts for the City of Miami Beach Security Guard Contracts.
SUPERVISOR DUTIES ~
The Successful Contractor's supervisors in charge of its employees to the City of Miami
Beach shall:
1. Review the day or night activities and report in writing to the proper City of Miami
Beach authorities any unusual incident.
2. Ensure proper inventory of keys, electronic key cards and supplies.
3. Coordinate with proper City of Miami Beach designees all security operations
and services for regular and event assignments to insure that all are properly
47
Commission Memo
Unarmed Security Guard Services RFP
January 11, 2012
Page 9 of 15
staffed. In some instances, this requires daily contact with City of Miami Beach
staff to learn of authorized activities.
4. Conduct daily visual inspection of assigned personnel verifying all post are
manned and all security guard are fully equipped and in proper uniform.
Additional locations may be added and some existing locations may be deleted
from service requirements.
5. Install scanner buttons where directed by the City of Miami Beach Contract
Administrator.
6. Provide weekly downloads of all the City of Miami Beach Posts where scanner
buttons are installed. The downloaded information will accompany the weekly
invoices.
SERVICE LOCATIONS AND ASSIGNMENT HOURS
See Attachment A -"Post Orders for City of Miami Beach Security Contracts" for
locations/shifts requiring service. It will be the sole discretion of the City of Miami Beach as
to locations, number of guards, and hours of services needed. The City of Miami Beach
reserves the right to add other possible locations and to change the required hours of
service during the term of the Contract.
OVERTIME
No overtime for either regularly scheduled or special event guards will be paid by City for
security personnel supplied by the Successful Contractor unless pre-approved by the
Police Department Contract Administrator.
PERSONNEL PROBATION
The City's Contract Administrator or designated representative personnel may observe
each employee of the Successful Contractor for a period of thirty (30) consecutive days.
If during this probation, the City of Miami Beach is not satisfied with the performance of
that employee, the City of Miami Beach will notify the vendor of such performance and the
vendor will replace such employees immediately.
Additionally, the City of Miami Beach reserves the right to demand in writing that the
Successful Contractor relieve an employee from a duty assignment, and/or ban the
employee from further service under the contract, at the sole discretion of the City of Miami
Beach.
Personnel must not be employed by the Successful Contractor under the Contract if they
have currently or have in the past been involved in:
a. Military conduct resulting in dishonorable or undesirable discharge.
b. Any pattern of irresponsible behavior, including but not limited to
unreasonable driving or a problem employment record.
c. Personnel employed by Successful Contractor to provide services for the City
of Miami Beach must successfully complete a polygraph examination, to be
conducted at the Successful Contractor's expense, prior to assignment, and
whose minimum testing parameters will include:
48
Commission Memo
Unarmed Security Guard Services RFP
January 11, 2012
Page 10 of 15
1. Nature of discharge from military service.
2. Substance abuse (drug and alcohol).
3. Child abuse and/or molestation.
4. Convictions (misdemeanors and/or felony).
5. Dismissal other than layoff.
UNIFORMS
All security personnel furnished to the City of Miami Beach will be well groomed and neatly
uniformed. Each guard supplied by the Successful Contractor will wear a nameplate
bearing the guard's name. Successful Contractor's name will appear either on guard's
nameplate or as a patch on guard's uniform. Uniforms will be readily distinguishable from
the City of Miami Beach Police uniforms.
TRAINING
The Successful Contractor is required to provide training to all field personnel in order
that the City of Miami Beach may be assured said personnel are capable of assuming
the responsibilities of respective assignments.
The cost for such training will be considered as a part of the Successful Contractor's
operational expenses and should be considered when proposing overall hourly rate.
The time spent by staff in such a program, though required, is not billable to the City of
Miami Beach. All security personnel are to successfully complete and pass such training
course prior to assumption of duty under this contract. This training course, to be
developed or made available by the Successful Contractor, is to include minimum
requirements for subject matter and hours of instruction, and must be approved by the
City of Miami Beach. The City of Miami Beach evaluation of proposed training will
include, but not be limited to, previews of techniques and methods of instruction, quality
of instructions, motivation, adequacy of classroom and supportive adjunct training
materials, test content, and individual retentiveness.
All formal training is to be administered by persons, corporations, and/or institutions that
have been expressly approved by the City of Miami Beach. A written certification of
each employee's training will be made available as part of the employee's personnel file.
The Successful Contractor's supervisors must have also completed required training and
worked for six (6) continuous months as an actual guard; additionally, basic supervisory
skills are required, as well as an overall knowledge of operations, locations, etc.
The Successful Contractor is required to ensure that all security guards providing traffic
control services are certified.
ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACT
Successful Contractor will not assign, transfer, convey or otherwise dispose of the
Contract, or of any or all of its rights, title or interest therein, or its power to execute such
Contract to any person, company or corporation without prior written consent of the City
of Miami Beach.
PROTECTION OF PROPERTY
The Successful Contractor will at all times guard against damage to or loss of property to
the City and will replace or repair any loss or damage unless the damage is caused by The
49
Commission Memo
Unarmed Security Guard Services RFP
January 11, 2012
Page 11 of15
City of Miami Beach, another Successful Contractor and/or contractors. The City of Miami
Beach may withhold payment or make such deductions as it might deem necessary to
insure reimbursement for loss or damage to property through negligence of the Successful
Contractor, its employees or agents.
EXPENDITURES
The Successful Contractor understands that any expenditure that it makes, or prepares to
make in order to perform the Services required by the City of Miami Beach, is a business
risk which the Successful Contractor must assume.
FINES
Fines may be imposed on the Successful Contractor for violations by its personnel by
deducting the amount of the fine from a subsequent invoice for that location. Notice of a
violation and the intent to impose a fine will be given to the Successful Contractor by
sending a copy of the site representative's report, through the Contract Administrator,
promptly after the site representative submits it. This allows the Successful Contractor
time to bring any extenuating circumstances to the site and contract administrator's
attention. All fines are assessed by the City of Miami Beach Contract Administrator,
whose decisions are final.
Violations that may result in a fine includes but are not limited to those listed below. Fines
imposed will be $100.00 per infraction.
Management/ Administrative Violations:
1. Not properly equipped for specific detail;
2. No radio or inoperative radio;
3. No scanner wand, improper scanning buttons, failure to fix inoperative scanning
Buttons;
4. Leaving an abandoned post unattended or failure to fill post assignment within one
and one half (1-1/2) hours of scheduled event;
5. Lack of contract supervision;
6. Excessive hours on duty (more than 1 0 hour shift not approved in advance by the
Contract Administrator;
7. Assigning any guard previously suspended from duty by the Contract
Administrator;
8. Failure to follow all Vendor Rules and Regulations; and Incidents where Vendor
Rules and Regulations where discipline was insufficient.
Violations that may result in a fine include but are not limited to those listed below. Fines
imposed will be $100.00 per infraction.
Security Officer Violations:
1. Inappropriate behavior (reading, lounging, inattention, etc.);
2. Failing to make a report promptly;
3. Improper clock rounds;
4. Failing to follow post orders;
5. Improper or badly soiled uniforms;
6. Acts of theft or vandalism; and
7. Failure to adhere to City of Miami Beach policies, procedures and locations
50
Commission Memo
Unarmed Security Guard Services RFP
January 11, 2012
Page 12 of 15
guidelines.
Security Officer Significant Violations ($250.00):
1. Late for duty;
2. Sleeping on duty;
3. Abandoning post;
4. Participating or attempting to; in any criminal act; and
5. Any action that would cause the City harm, physically, financially, or in repetition.
Repeated violations of any type at the same location will be taken as proof of a general
incapacity on the part of the Successful Contractor to perform in accordance with
contract requirements.
PRE-AWARD INSPECTION OF FACILITY
The Successful Contractor will have the personnel, equipment and organization
necessary to satisfactorily provide the services required in this contract to include, but
not limited to:
• Performing required background checks on all guards and to provide all
required training and supervision. Successful Contractor will provide written
documentation, which states in detail, that these requirements have been
met, prior to the assignment of security personnel.
• Radios are to be utilized by all assigned security personnel. The
Successful Contractor will maintain a South Florida office with
supervisory personnel reachable by telephone (only) on a 24-hour
basis.
COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
The Successful Contractor will be responsible for the following:
1. HAND-HELD RADIOS
Two-way hand-held radios, licensed for use by the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC), will be provided by the Successful Contractor to all on-duty
contract security officers and supervisors as required unless otherwise accepted by
the City of Miami Beach Police Department Contract Administrator.
2. SUCCESSFUL CONTRACTOR CENTRAL DISPATCH
The Successful Contractor will provide a centralized di~patching service through use
of a stationary base station manned by experienced personnel on a 24-hour per day
basis, to include a taped back-up system. A mobile transmitter/receiver, operated by
field personnel, will not be considered sufficient to adequately provide such service.
Successful Contractor personnel must be available at the Central Dispatch Station
who has the ability and authority to take immediate action on behalf of the
Successful Contractor, as required. The Successful Contractor will provide the
names, with all pertinent information of these assigned personnel, to the City's
Contract Administrator.
51
Commission Memo
Unarmed Security Guard Services RFP
January 11, 2012
Page 13 of 15
SYSTEM QUALITY
The Successful Contractor will at all times, have high quality radio communications
transmitting and receiving). The Successful Contractor will be totally responsible for
providing and maintaining required system quality, as follows:
1. The Successful Contractor will provide/lease a network of transceivers
and repeaters of sufficient strength and capacity to service all sites
specifically identified in this Invitation to Bid.
2. The Successful Contractor must provide/lease an exclusive radio
frequency operated exclusively by the Contractor. Radios will have
printout identification and emergency capability.
3. The Successful Contractor must implement a program of maintenance
and repair for all equipment to be used in the performance of this
contract. Such a program will ensure the optimum performance of all
equipment at all times, thereby, allowing the system to meet the service
requirements and quality standards specified above.
The Successful Contractor will ensure that all radio equipment has sufficient operating
power at all times during a tour of duty. It may be necessary for the Successful
Contractor to implement a system by which fresh batteries, adequate supply of
flashlights or charged radios, are delivered to the posts in order to meet this
requirement.
EVALUATION OF RADIO COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM
All aspects of the Successful Contractor's radio communications system will be
evaluated by the City of Miami Beach prior to award of Contract. Should the system be
judged inadequate to provide service within the contractual standards specified herein,
and the Successful Contractor is unable and/or unwilling to make changes deemed
necessary by the City of Miami Beach, then the Successful Contractor will be considered
non-responsive to the required Terms and Conditions of this Contract. Likewise, should
there be a deterioration of performance during the term of this contract, and the
Successful Contractor is unable or unwilling to make the required improvements, the
City of Miami Beach may terminate, in accordance with the Termination for Default
Clause of this Contract. The City of Miami Beach will address, in writing to the
Contractor, any/all identified inadequacies of the required radio communications, and
prior to any termination procedures.
PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
The City of Miami Beach will provide to Successful Contractor, for the duration of the
contract, the Post Order and Rules and Regulation Manual. Changes to Post Orders, if
needed, will be provided by the Contract Administrator through written addendum to
these orders.
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT
This contract may be terminated upon thirty days written notice to the Successful
Contractor due to lack of performance and after Successful Contractor fails to correct
deficiencies after written notification.
52
Commission Memo
Unarmed Security Guard Services RFP
January 11, 2012
Page 14 of 15
Performance items include, but are not limited to the following:
A. Security Guard timeliness in responding to assigned post;
B. Security Guard dressed incomplete uniform, to include (serviceable radio,
fire arm, etc.);
C. Security Guard completion of all assignments, in a timely manner;
D. Successful Contractor not providing required training to all assigned
security guards;
E. Successful Contractor not providing the required trained supervisory
personnel;
F. Successful Contractor to ensure compliance of Miami Beach Security
Contractor's Post Orders Manual;
G. Successful Contractor reporting of any/all missing City supplies,
equipment, property; and
H. Excessive non-compliance incidences.
Additionally, the City of Miami Beach reserves the right to have any security guards
removed from Miami Beach assigned posts for violation of the Post Orders Manual. The
City of Miami Beach Police Department will not pay Successful Contractor billing
charges for times in excess of thirty (30) minutes between security officer rounds made
between sensors, unless there are extenuating circumstances or this requirement is
waived by the City of Miami Beach Police Department on a post by post basis.
LICENSES AND PERMITS
Successful Contractor will abide by all ordinances and laws pertaining to his operation
and will secure, at his expense, all licenses and permits necessary for these operations.
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION MEETINGS
The Successful Contractor will assign two (2) Contract Managers to meet with the City of
Miami Beach Contract Administrator on a daily basis, if required. Regularly scheduled
meetings will be held on a monthly basis. Additionally, a meeting will be held whenever a
Contract Discrepancy Report is issued by the City Contract Administrator.
A mutual effort will be made to resolve all problems identified. The written minutes of
these meetings will be signed by the Successful Contractor's Contract Administrator and
the City's Contract Administrator, and a copy will be forwarded to the Procurement
Director. Should the Successful Contractor not concur with the minutes, he will state in
writing to the Procurement Director any areas wherein he does not concur~
;
Fine assessment procedure
Once a violation which has the possibility of a fine assessment is identified and written
notification of intent to fine ("Contract Discrepancy Report") is issued to the Successful
Contractor. The Successful Contractor will have seven (7) days to provide a written
response to the CMB Contract Administrator.
The Contract Administrator will review all written documents, conduct a cursory
investigation if the needed and a final determination will be forwarded to the Successful
Contractor and the CMB Procurement Dept. Security Contract Administrator's decision is
final.
53
Commission Memo
Unarmed Security Guard Services RFP
January 11, 2012
Page 15 of 15
KEY CONTROL
The Successful Contractor will establish and implement methods of ensuring that all
keys issued to the Successful Contractor by the City are not lost, or misplaced, and are
not used by unauthorized person(s). No keys issued the Successful Contractor by the
City will be duplicated. The Successful Contractor will develop procedures covering key
control that will be included in his/her quality control plan, which will be submitted to the
City's Contract Administrator and Procurement Director. The Successful Contractor may
be required to replace, re-key, or to reimburse the City for replacement of locks or re-
keying as a result of Successful Contractor losing keys.
In the event a master key is lost or duplicated, all locks and keys for that system will be
replaced by the City and the total cost deducted from the monthly payment due.
The Successful Contractor will report the occurrence of a lost key immediately to the
City's Contract Administrator but no later than the next workday.
CONSERVATION OF UTILITIES
The Successful Contractor will be directly responsible for instructing employees in
utilities conservation practices. The Successful Contractor will be responsible for
operating under conditions, which preclude the waste of any/all utilities.
FIRE AND SECURITY
Successful Contractor is to comply with all fire regulations and is responsible for
securing the buildings during and after clean up. The City may have security personnel
on duty during night cleaning hours.
SERVICE EXCELLENCE STANDARDS
Excellent Customer Service is the standard of the City of Miami Beach. As contract
employees of the City, security guards will be required to conduct themselves in a
professional, courteous and ethical manner at all times and adhere to the City's Service
Excellence standards.
PHOTO IDENTIFICATION
Work hereunder requires Successful Contractor employees to have on their person
photo ide.otification at all times. The City of Miami Beach reserves the right to verify a
guard's identity and required credentials, upon that guard reporting to work.
If for any reason, any Successful Contractor employee is terminated; the Police
Department Contract Administrator will be advised in writing.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends the issuance of the RFP for Security Guard Services
with the scope of services; evaluation criteria; and other provisions as set forth in this
memo.
JMG/CN/JGG/RM/SF/GL
T:\AGENDA \2012\ 1-11-12\SecurityGuardRFPMemo.docx
54
"ATTACHMENT A"
SECURITY CONTRACT GENERAL POST ORDERS
TYPE OF POSTS
This is an Unarmed Security Officer Post.
II HOURS OF COVERAGE
1. PARKING DEPARTMENT
a. Two security supervisors 24/7.
b. Two security office officers, one posted at 7th street garage office,
one posted at 1 ih street garage office, 24/7.
2. POLICE DEPARTMENT
a. One security supervisor per shift.
b. One or more guards patrolling (depending on location and hours)
c. At any of the 14 city location (parking not included-see parking
post orders).
Ill EQUIPMENT REQUIRED
1. Current State of Florida "D" license, properly displayed.
2. Complete Company issued Uniform and ID card.
3. Incident Report Form.
4. Company-issued Radio.
5. Flash Light.
6. Deggy Wand.
7. One vehicle per Rover Supervisor
IV SPECIFIC POST ORDERS (Primary Orders)
SECURITY FUNCTIONS, REQUIRED SKILLS AND TOOLS
Security Guards have to maintain the following functions:
1. Observe, Report and Document any safety concerns I issues including but
not limited to customer complaints regarding property loss or damage and
personal injury.
2. Enforce various city quality of life ordinances.
3. Address homeless issues and have working knowledge of applicable laws.
4. Provide traffic control as directed. (Police Department guards only)
5. Control access in and out of parking garages and lots. (Parking Department
guards only)
Required Skills:
1. Ability to communicate effectively in the English Language, provide
information and give directions in a courteous manner to tourist and
residents.
2. Ability to provide protection with professionalism.
3. Ability to write in clear legible fashion in the English Language.
4. Ability to carry out instructions.
55
Tools:
5. Full understanding of proper safety conditions within a parking structure. This
will include but are not limited to:
a. Lighting
b. Elevators
c. Emergency Doors
d. Emergency Lights
e. Cleanliness
f. Foreign Objects
g. Suspicious Activity
6. Full understanding of proper safety conditions in and around assigned area
(Police Department). This will include but are not limited to:
a. Lighting
b. Suspicious persons and activity
c. Emergency doors and lights (if assigned to a building)
7. Full understanding of emergency procedures. This will include but are not
limited to:
a. Robbery/In Progress
b. Battery/Assault
c. Sick or injured person
d. Personal and Property Injury
e. Fire
f. Flooding
1. Security Vehicle
2. Vehicle Inventory Form
3. Log-book
4. Open Lot Access Form
5. Maintenance Check List Form
6. CCTV video cameras
7. Bicycle equipped with proper lighting and rider with a helmet. "Security" must
be affixed to the back of uniform jacket or shirt worn by rider.
8. Incident Form
9. Two Way Radios
10. Deggy wand
11. Reflective traffic vest to be worn when directing traffic.
12. Any other tool(s) deemed appropriate or necessary.
SECURITY GUARDS OFFICE POSITION -PARKING DEPARTMENT
Two locations require an office guard to be posted at the office at all times, the 171h
street garage and the ih street garage. The guards are responsible of the following:
1. Monitor and report all activities in the office and surrounding area.
2. Log money bag #, cashier name, supervisor name and ensure that bag is
dropped in available safe deposit box.
3. Answer the phones and intercoms, log and convey any messages.
56
4. Monitor and convey any maintenance or incidents to the City of Miami Beach
on duty supervisor.
5. Monitor garage counts; convey information to Labor Contractor supervisor
and City of Miami Beach on duty supervisor.
6. Monitor CCTV cameras, report I log any incidents to City of Miami Beach on
duty supervisor.
7. Monitor I Review daily vehicle inventory.
8. Control secure access into the office.
SECURITY GUARD OFFICER POSITION -POLICE DEPARTMENT
1. Monitor and report all suspicious activities to supervisor and police.
2. Respond to all calls for service.
3. Complete written report of any enforcement action taken and of any incident
that took place during officer's shift.
4. Monitor and report any city observed city maintenance issue to immediate
supervisor and or the appropriate city department and document same.
5. Provide assistance to city on duty police supervisor to include traffic control
and specific security detail.
6. Maintain key control as appropriate to a given assignment.
7. Control secure access to a building or structure as appropriate to an assigned
post.
8. Enforce city I county quality of life ordinances as directed
SECURITY SUPERVISOR POSITION -PARKING DEPARTMENT
We have seven garages that are patrolled by two security supervisors 24 hours 7 days a
week. The supervisors are responsible of the following:
1. Patrol all garages as directed by the city for any suspicious activity.
2. Supervise the two office positions.
3. Inspect I Patrol the stairwells and document and report the city of any
problems.
4. Inspect I Patrol all garage levels for homeless activity, proceed to escort out
of the building and document and report to the city.
5. Do vehicle inventories at night as requested by the city.
6. Be knowledgeable of all security guard office position duties.
7. Fill out and report trip sheet activity report to the city.
8. Document and report any incidents that took place during officers shift.
9. Maintain constant communication with City on duty supervisors via two way
radios.
10. Provide assistance to city on duty supervisor to include, traffic control and
specific security detail.
SECURITY SUPERVISOR POSITION -POLICE DEPARTMENT
The supervisor must be able to perform all the duties of the security guard but
additionally be able to:
1. Patrol area of assignment and actively supervisor all officers under
command.
57
2. Ensure all on duty officers have a valid security license on their person and
that their company identification cards are being properly displayed at all
times.
3. Ensure that all officers are wearing a uniform appropriate to his I her
assignment and that they present a neat and professional image at all times.
4. Ensure that all tools and equipment used by subordinates are in proper
working condition.
5. Be knowledgeable of all security officer position and duties.
6. Document and report any incident that took place during an officer's shift.
7. Maintain constant communication with subordinates via two way radios.
8. Be knowledgeable of all city /county ordinances as applicable to quality of life
issues.
9. Respond and take command of emergency situations.
10. Be trained in and be able to effectively perform CPR.
11. Be capable of pursuing and detaining individuals who have committed
criminal acts.
58
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
Request For Approval To Award A Contract To Miami Stagecraft Inc. Pursuant To Invitation To Bid
12-11/12, For Purchase And Delivery Of Stage Lighting For The Colony Theatre, In The Total Amount
Of $41,323.25.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Maximize Miami Beach as a destination brand
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): According to the 2009 Strategic Plan,
there were 33,317 attendees at the Colony Theatre which indicates a significant improvement from a
few years before.
Issue:
Shall the City Commission Approve The Award of Contract?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
In light of deficiencies with the current stage lighting at the Colony Theatre, this project was added to
the FY 2011/2012 Capital Projects Program list, and subsequently approved.
On November 21, 2011, Invitation to Bid (ITB) No. 12-11/12 was issued with an opening date of
December 21, 2011. A Pre-bid conference to provide information to prospective bidders was held on
December 7, 2011, and a site visit of the Colony Theatre was offered via addendum for December 10,
2011. BidNet issued bid notices to 47 prospective bidders. Additionally, the Procurement division
notified 20 local contractors via e-mail, which resulted in the receipt of four (4) bids.
An administrative review of the responsive bidders' qualifications, experience, capability, and
performance evaluations was conducted. Based on the analysis of the four (4) responsive bids
received, two of the three reviewers recommended the lowest bidder, Miami Stagecraft, Inc. based on
surveys, price and experience in working with theatres such as the Adrienne Arsht Center, the Miami
City Ballet, and the South Miami Dade Cultural Arts Center. A third reviewer recommended Barbizon
Delta Corporation, the third lowest bidder, based on past performance and their ongoing technical
support after completion of previous projects at the Colony Theatre.
The Administration concluded that it would be in the best interest of the City to recommend the lowest
bidder, Miami Stagecraft, Inc. The Administration recommends Approving the Award.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
Financial Information:
Source of Amount
Funds: 1 $41,323.25
I I 2
OBPI Total
Financial Impact Summary: N/A
Clerk's Office Le islative Trackin
Gus Lopez, Director Ext # 6641
Si n-Offs:
Department Director
GL MS __
MIAMI BEACH
Account
RDA City Center Projects No. 365-2057-000674
59
AGENDA 1TEM ....__.:C~J~D:...___
DATE /~//-/2..
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Member~ommission
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager (\,.... u
January 11, 2012 U DATE:
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL TO AWARD A CONTRACT TO MIAMI
STAGECRAFT, INC., PURSUANT TO INVITATION TO BID (ITB) NO. 12-
11/12, FOR PURCHASE AND DELIVERY OF STAGE LIGHTING FOR THE
COLONY THEATRE, IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $41,323.25.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Approve the Award of the contract.
KEY INTENDED OUTCOME
Ensure well-maintained facilities
FUNDING
$41 ,323.25 from City Center RDA previously appropriated in FY 2011/12 Capital Budget.
ANALYSIS
The purpose of this bid was to establish a contract to furnish all labor, material, equipment,
supervision and transportation necessary to supply and deliver stage lighting for the City of
Miami Beach Colony Theatre, from a source of supply that will give prompt and efficient
service. This Contract shall remain in effect from the time of award by the Mayor and City
Commission until completion of delivery. This project was approved as part of the FY
2011/2012 Capital Budget Program, and is intended to address deficiencies in the current
stage lighting at the Colony Theatre.
BID PROCESS
On November 21, 2011, Invitation to Bid (ITB) No. 12-11/12 was issued with an opening date
of December 21, 2011. A Pre-bid conference to provide information to prospective bidders
was held on December 7, 2011, and a site visit of the Colony Theatre was offered via
addendum for December 10, 2011. BidNet issued bid notices to 47 prospective bidders.
Additionally, the Procurement division notified 20 local contractors via e-mail, which resulted
in the receipt of four (4) bids from the following vendors:
1. Barbizon Lighting Company
2. Mainstage Theatrical Supply
3. Miami Stagecraft, Inc.
4. SECOA
60
Commission Memo
ITB 12-11/12 Purchase and Delivery of Stage Lighting for the Colony Theatre
January 11, 2012
In determining the lowest and best bidder, the City utilized the "Best Value" Procurement
process to select a contractor with the experience and qualifications; the ability; capability,
and capacity; and proven past successful performance for the purchase and delivery of stage
lighting.
An administrative review of the responsive bidders' qualifications, experience, capability, and
performance evaluations was conducted by the following individuals:
• Max Sklar, Division Director, Tourism and Cultural Development Department;
• Valentino Medina, Technical Director, Colony Theatre; and
• Angelo Grande, Director of Operations, Miami Beach Convention Center.
Based on the analysis of the four (4) responsive bids received, Mr. Max Sklar and Mr. Angelo
Grande recommended the lowest bidder, Miami Stagecraft, Inc. based on surveys, price and
experience in working with theatres such as the Adrienne Arsht Center, the Miami City Ballet,
and the South Miami Dade Cultural Arts Center. Mr. Valentino Medina recommended
Barbizon Delta Corporation, the third lowest bidder, based on past performance and their
ongoing technical support after completion of previous projects at the Colony Theatre.
The Administration concluded that it would be in the best interest of the City to recommend
the lowest bidder, Miami Stagecraft, Inc.
CONCLUSION
Based on the aforementioned, the Administration recommends that the Mayor and City
Commission Award a Contract to Miami Stagecraft, Inc., pursuant to ITB No. 12-11/12, for
Purchase and Delivery of Stage Lighting for the Colony Theatre in the total amount of
$41,323.25.
T:\AGENDA\2012\1-11-12\ITB 12-11-12 Stage Lighting for the Colony Theatre-MEMO.docx
2
61
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
62
C4
COMMISSION COMMITTEE
ASSIGNMENTS
63
MIAMI BEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
FROM: Matti Herrera Bower, Mayor {(vJ ~ I"'\ H 6
DATE: December 28, 2011
SUBJECT: Consent Agenda Item: Referral to Neighborhoods Committee
Please place on the Jan. 11, 201a_.Commission meeting agenda a referral to the
Neighborhoods Committee of a discussion regarding placement of a Barbara
Capitman memorial bust in Lummus Park.
I thank you in advance for your cooperation in this matter. If you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to contact Rebecca Wakefield at extension 6157.
Thank you.
MHB/rw
We are cammilled Ia providing excel/en/ public service ond solely /a all who live, work, and ploy in our vj A d It : gen a em_C---L.lf..L..IA.____
Date J-/1-{7.__ _..;..__ ___ _
65
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
66
~ MIAMI BEACH "'=""
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
FROM: Matti Herrera Bower, Mayor (LvJ . ...-fovL 11\f\ K ')
DATE: January 4, 2012
SUBJECT: Consent Agenda Item: Referral to Land Use Committee
Please place on the Jan. 11; 2012 Commission meeting agenda a referral to the
Land Use Committee of a discussion regarding an ordinance proposed by a
business owner to allow alcohol service in nude adult establishments.
I thank you in advance for your cooperation in this matter. If you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to contact Rebecca Wakefield at extension 6157.
Thank you.
MHB/rw
We are commilled lo providing excel/en/ public service and safely lo all who live. work, and ploy in oul
1 Agenda ltem __ C_,Cf ...... B::;___
Date /-11-12... _..;__..;__:"-=;...__-
67
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
68
MIAMI BEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Jorge Gonzalez, City Manager
Jerry Libbin, Commissioner
January 5, 2012
JJ/~
Referral to the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee of a Proposed
Amendment to Chapter 106, Article VI (Towing and Immobilization of Vehicles)
providing for the City's Right to Audit Towing Permittees Engaged in Towing
Vehicles on Private Property.
Similar to the requirements in the City's Administrative Rules and Regulations governing the towing
of vehicles on public property, which allow the City the right to audit towing Permittees that are
issued permits for police and parking tows, I am proposing a simple amendment to the Code
section which addresses the Permittees' right to tow on private property, to also provide the City
with audit rights as to those activities and records pertaining thereto.
The City's Administrative Rules and Regulations also allow consumer to pay for towed vehicles (on
public property), and require permittees to accept such payment, via cash, check or credit card;
accordingly, I would like to propose an amendment to the Code section pertaining to private tows,
to allow for similar forms of payment.
Please refer this item so that it can be heard in conjunction with the towing item already scheduled
for discussion at the January l91h Finance and Citywide Projects Committee meeting.
The City Attorney's office is preparing the necessary Code amendment, which will be provided at
the Finance Committee Meeting.
Please contact my office at ext. 7106 if you have any questions.
JL/er
. Agenda Item C lf C
We are committed to providing excellent public service and safety to all who live, work, and play in our i __ _,;_-=;..__-
Date 1-1/-12. _....:...,_.,;...;......:....;=--
69
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
70
C6
COMMISSION COMMITTEE REPORTS
71
('")
0')
(e MIAMI BEACH -
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
To:
From:
Date:
COMMITTEE MEMORANDUM
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager tV'~
January 11, 2012 \J U
Subject: REPORT OF THE CAPITAL IMPJ6VEMENT PROJECTS OVERSIGHT
COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 14,2011
The meeting was called to order at 5:45 p.m.
Please note: These minutes are not a full transcript of the meeting.
Full audio and visual record of this meeting available online on the City's website:
http:! I www.miamibeachfl.gov/video/video.asp
1. ATTENDANCE
See attendance sheet copy attached.
2. REVIEW AND ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES 5:46pm
Report of the Capital Improvement Oversight Committee Meeting of October 17, 2011
MOTION: Acceptance of Minutes of the September 12, 2011 CIPOC Meeting.
MOVED: T. Trujillo 2nd: E. Carney
PASSED: Unanimous -WITH REVISIONS as per D. Kraai
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS 5:56 pm
Greg Carney, President of the Venetian Islands Homeowner Association, requested an update on
the rebidding for a contractor for the Venetian Islands project.
Aaron Sinnes, Senior Capital Projects Coordinator, presented the status of the project. The
Commission rejected all the bids that had been submitted through the ITB process. They did not
recommend a timeline on when the project should go into construction.
CIP staff met with the Engineer of Record (EOR-Schwebke Shiskin) and electrical engineers.
Savings have been identified for the electrical components, through this value engineering
process and staff plans to follow an aggressive timeline with the intention of awarding this project
to a contractor as early as February, followed by possible commencement of construction in
March or April. The first step is to amend the consultant's contract. Because the changes fall
under $25,000, there is no need to go back to Commission for these changes. The goal through
the value-engineering process here is to seek alternatives that result in cost savings, not redesign
of the project. Savings have already been identified in the concrete encasement and wiring of the
lighting, as well as some other areas.
The contract provides a range of up to 15% for the consultant to come in with an opinion of cost.
Saul Gross felt that this was too liberal and asked that staff look into this tolerance level for future
contracts.
STAFF ACTION: Look at the tolerance range provided for in the standard contract form for
consultants to provide opinions of estimate of costs. Compare with State guidelines and other
guidelines. • /1 /_A
• Agenda Item _<-=-<P.,...r-:~-73 . Date 1-1/-IL
CIPOC MEETING MINUTES, November 14, 2011
Page 2 of6
4.
Eleanor Carney clarified that Schwebke Shiskin was not contracted to do the electrical estimate.
Hillers Electric is the consultant who did the electrical. Probable cost estimate was not included in
the scope of work for Schwebke Shiskin. The cost estimate came from Hillers, hired under the
contract of the last EOR.
STAFF ACTION: Bring standard contract and the contract for consultant with information about
the probable cost estimate to CIPOC for review.
County work on Causeway-Greg Carney contacted Roberto Rodriguez just prior to the CIPOC
meeting, with concerns about safety practices in the County project. Sidewalks on the north side
of the causeway are presently unfinished, posing a safety hazard for walkers and bikers. Mr.
Carney had contacted the County project manager several weeks before, and was told that there
were conflicts with utilities which delayed the completion of the sidewalks. Mr. Carney requested
that some temporary fill material be placed in the holes until the sidewalks could be completed,
but was unsuccessful in getting his request filled. He asked the City to intervene. According to
staff at the meeting, the County was going to fill the holes with crushed rock that day.
OLD BUSINESS I REQUESTED REPORTS 6:30pm
Status of Water Reclamation Project in Golf Courses
Kevin Smith, Parks and Recreation Department Director, was prepared to present. Saul Gross
said that the request was actually made about the AMERESCO project, which he confused with
the lake reclamation project.
Mr. Smith did not give the presentation. Instead, ACM Duncan Ballantyne gave an update on the
AMERESCO project. He said that the most recent document analysis was provided to Mr. Kraai.
The administration has evaluated the material presented by AMERESCO and determined that
there is no cost benefit to the project. There would be what was determined an excessive period
of time before realizing a cost benefit.
Mr. Smith took the opportunity to invite the Committee members to the re-opening of the new
playground at South Pointe Park.
Status Report: Sunset Island I & II 6:16pm
Maria Hernandez, Senior Capital Project Coordinator, stated that some issues are being worked
out with the contractor. A Community Pre-construction meeting is planned to take place
Wednesday, November 16 and the first round of encroachment notices are planned to go out the
same day.
Staff reviewed the schedule submitted by the contractor and that has been the source of issues
between the City and DMSI. DMSI had submitted a new schedule just before the CIPOC meeting,
but staff had not yet had a chance to review this newest schedule. Issuance of the second Notice
to Proceed (NTP2) is contingent on acceptance of the schedule. The other item that needed
some resolution is the schedule of values.
The first NTP was issued in late August. Some instances in other projects that this contractor is in
involved in appear to have affected the contractor's performance in Sunset Islands. The
contractor promised certain items, such as concurrent crews, during the Technical Review Panel
(TRP), and now not providing that in the schedule. Some line items on the schedule of values
F:\CAPI\$aii\Comm. & CIPOC\Commission ltems\2012\CIPOC November 14 Meeting Minutes.docx
74
CIPOC MEETING MINUTES, November 14, 2011
Page3of6
have also changed in quantity since the TRP. This results in significant reduction in the cost of
the project. The contractor has invoked the 20% rule and has resubmitted a price that the City is
not willing to accept. Specifically, this has had an impact to cost in the area of water meter
relocations.
William Goldsmith, 1820 West 25th Street, member of the Sunset Island Homeowners
Association, gave his opinion on the situation. He first asked if the new schedule that was
submitted responded sufficiently to the requests made by the City on November 14 (in a letter
that is included in the Nov. 14 CIPOC agenda packet).
Fernando Vazquez stated that the contractor had just submitted the requested schedule before
the meeting, but staff had not yet had a chance to review it and that staff and the contractor also
needed to iron out the water meter pricing in the schedule of values.
Maria Hernandez handed Mr. Goldsmith a copy of the material that she had just received from
DMSI, Inc.
Mr. Goldsmith further pointed out his concerns with the construction schedule and the schedule of
values. He made the point, when Mr. Gross said that he had confidence in the work that Albert
Dominguez (Principal with DMSI) had done for the City before, that DMSI is not the same
company as Ric-Man International; and that DMSI had not done a lot of work with the City since
incorporating. Mr. Gross responded that the principals, superintendent and other key DMSI
personnel were the main people involved in City projects when they were with Ric-Man
International.
At the TRP, Mr. Goldsmith confirmed with Albert Dominguez that the number of meters listed on
the contract (200) was an over-estimate and requested a pro-rata reduction in the cost that would
reflect this and was told that, yes DMSI would do that. The last schedule of values submitted by
DMSI showed an increase in the cost of the meters. Also at the TRP, the panel asked if the
contractor will provide a construction trailer and, if not, a $25,000 credit (He did not finish his
statement, but was insinuating that the contractor reneged on this item. Mr. Gross asked if the
items mentioned at the TRP were included in the contract, offering direction to the City that
material representations made at the TRP should be passed on to the Legal Department for
inclusion in contracts. Maria Hernandez stated that she tried to do just that, particularly because
the material promise of parallel crews on site would ensure that the project stuck to a ten-month
schedule, as represented at the TRP. Recently, a contractor on another project under Ms.
Hernandez's direction, failed to provide concurrent crews as promised and it affected the
schedule adversely. She was unable to pursue action against this contractor because that item
was not included in the contract. Now, DMSI on this schedule has to stick to a new schedule of
12 months. Correspondence pertaining to the schedule is included in the agenda packet. The
final schedule, once agreed upon, will be certified.
Albert Dominguez, DMSI, said that the company presented many different ideas at the TRP.
Some ideas included different type of pipe, and installation at shallower depths, for example. Mr.
Dominguez stated that some parts of their proposal were rejected. He claimed that some of their
proposals actually reflect value-engineering towards getting better value in the project.
Saul Gross asked why the City rejected the idea of installing the pipe above the muck line.
Fernando Vazquez responded that the proposal was to install the pipe under the valley gutter,
which posed a problem for the Public Works Department and they rejected that proposal. Mr.
Dominguez said that item impacted other portions of the proposed schedule. If the City rejects
certain proposed means and methods, DMSI cannot guarantee the shorter schedule.
F:\CAPI\$aii\Comm. & CIPOC\Commission ltems\2012\CIPOC November 14 Meeting Minutes.docx
75
CIPOC MEETING MINUTES, November 14, 2011
Page4 of6
Mr. Dominguez said that some issues that are currently affecting DMSI crews at the Biscayne
Point project are now delaying the use of parallel crews for the Sunset Islands project. DMSI had
planned to roll some crews from Biscayne Point to Sunsets I & II, but now the work seems to be
delayed by almost 8 months.
Mr. Vazquez said that the City is working very hard to try and resolve the issue with the EOR on
Biscayne Point so that the schedule can be accommodated and approved for Sunset Islands.
Staff is confident that the issues will be ironed out before the next CIPOC meeting and then be
brought to Commission in December.
More deliberations continued. The conclusion of the discussion was that staff was working on
reaching a meeting of the minds among all parties, and if the City and the contractor cannot come
to an agreement, that staff proceed accordingly.
Status Reoort: Sunset Island Ill & IV 7:09 pm
Mattie Reyes, Senior Capital Project Coordinator said that the RFQ was advertised for a design
criteria professional and four companies responded. A selection committee was scheduled for
November 29.
Status Report: Lower North Bay Road 7:10pm
Maria Hernandez told the Committee that a 2nd Notice to Proceed will be issued the second week
in December. Encroachment surveys are being conducted and encroachment letters will go out
soon. Construction will begin by the end of the year (the contractor will take some time off for the
holidays). The EOR and the City are still reviewing the change order that was submitted, but that
will not delay the start of construction. The change order reflects $250,000 in the overall $5
million contract.
Saul Gross asked about water meter relocations and the process for those homeowners who
want to install a second meter. Residents who are interested in purchasing a second meter are
encouraged to call the Public Works Department to make arrangements for the meter. PWD will
coordinate with CIP for the properties that fall within a project.
Ms. Hernandez indicated that interested residents can call CIP and staff would
coordinate/facilitate the process, but the best course of action is to contact Public Works
Engineering directly at 305-673-7080 to request an additional meter. Once all the permitting is in
place and fees are collected, the CIP contractor would receive the work order from Public Works.
STAFF ACTION: Bring information about the process for obtaining sub-meters and irrigation
meters during a CIP ROW project to the next meeting. Clarify whether the process is slightly
streamlined when it takes place in conjunction with a CIP ROW project.
Status Report: Venetian Islands 7:14pm
*See above -topic was covered during Public Comments at 5:56.
Eleanor Carney had an additional question about the status of the encroachment notices for the
Venetian Islands. At the last meeting, CIPOC requested a schedule of notices to be provided.
This was not reflected on the staff action items. Robert Rodriguez responded that the surveys are
currently being done to determine encroachments at this stage. Ms. Carney expressed her
opinion that residents "are being held hostage" in the meantime. But there is a process and
typically, the encroachment notices do not go out until NTP 1 is issued after a contractor has
been hired, since coordination for removal involves the contractor. (There are other projects
where construction is imminent and encroachment notices are being sent out for those, since
they now take priority status). Stacy Kilroy stated that encroachments are such a bone of
contention for residents that sending notification as early as possible would give them time to deal
F:\CAPI\$aii\Comm. & CIPOC\Commission ltems\2012\CIPOC November 14 Meeting Minutes.docx
76
CIPOC MEETING MINUTES, November 14, 2011
Page5of6
with relocation of the encroachments should they choose that. Fernando Vazquez stated that
staff could go outside of regular procedure and send notices before a contractor is hired, but CIP
staff will first concentrate on those neighborhoods that are closer to construction. NTP for
Venetian Islands is expected in March or April. Ms. Carney reiterated that she wants notices sent
out as early as possible.
STAFF ACTION: Bring an outline of encroachment process to CIPOC that outlines the general
guidelines and timelines for encroachment removal.
Status Report: Palm and Hibiscus Islands 7:21 pm
Senior Capital Project Coordinator Grace Escalante told the Committee that the drawings and
binding estimate from FPL for undergrounding of utilities were received on October 27. The City
submitted the drawings to Atlantic Broadband and AT&T as well as a JOG contractor. At the time
of the CIPOC meeting, a meeting was planned for the following Thursday to coordinate all the
estimates for the work from all parties involved. Staff submitted the drawings to the Public Works
Department on November 3 for their review. Another meeting was scheduled with the top ranked
Design Criteria Professional (DCP). Since the proposal for the DCP have remained high, it is
likely that the second ranked firm will be recommended for negotiation, and the City may
terminate negotiations with the first-ranked firm. As soon as the City gets the total cost estimates
for the project, they will submit this to the County, and then the County will pursue a bond issue
and draft the inter-local agreement. The County promised that this would take four weeks. Once
the attorneys review the inter-local agreement, the package will be taken to City Commission for
approval.
Status Report: Flamingo Park 7:24 pm
Ms. Escalante stated that Pirtle Construction submitted an executed contract for pre-construction
services for the Tennis Center. The project is on schedule. An award, if we remain on schedule,
will be issued in February. The City has 100% permitted drawings for the Tennis Center. Once
Pirtle conducts a constructability review, and makes any necessary changes, they will submit a
guaranteed maximum price to go to Commission. If approved in February, construction can begin
in March of 2012 and is expected last one year.
Status Report: Stormwater Master Plan 7:27 pm
Rick Saltrick stated that the City is working with FOOT to finalize the connection with the Alton
Road project. He is confident in the progress. Saul Gross asked if the Sunset Harbor pump
station was tied in with the Flamingo stormwater project. Mr. Saltrick responded that the
consulting firm of APCTE recommended replacements with larger pumps rather than the original
plan to retro-fit the pump station. Once the DERM and DEP permits are acquired, the project can
start with a JOG contractor. Eleanor Carney clarified that the replacements are a better solution
than adding an additional station. Mr. Saltrick confirmed this. Mr. Gross asked if the engineers
who designed the currently inadequate stations are culpable for negligence or something similar.
The City has not pursued any action against the engineers.
Additional Discussion 7:30 pm
Dwight Kraai said he had still not received appropriate information on stormwater and sea-level
models that he had asked for. Mr. Ballantyne replied that the City will provide Mr. Kraai with
information prior to meeting with the consultant and the City Manager. Mr. Ballantyne has
performed a preliminary review of the proposal for the stormwater master plan from COM, and
asked Public Works to get some additional information from the consultant, especially the
information about sea-level rise that had been requested by Mr. Kraai. Once the proposal is
complete, the plan is to present it to the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee. There are
opportunities for Public input in this process. After the consultants have finalized design that
would satisfy criteria for FOOT, Mr, Saltrick will meet with FOOT and at that time the City can
F:\CAPI\$aii\Comm. & CIPOC\Commission ltems\2012\CIPOC November 14 Meeting Minutes.docx
77
CIPOC MEETING MINUTES, November 14, 2011
Page 6 of6
schedule a meeting with the City Manager and Mr. Kraai on this topic. The administration
recognizes that Mr. Kraai wants the opportunity to provide some input based on his professional
expertise in this matter before the process is closed.
STAFF ACTION: Bring back information to the next meeting on the timeline for this process and a
proposed date for meeting with Dwight Kraai. Mr. Ballantyne, in response to Mr. Kraai's inquiries,
has asked the consultant to re-evaluate the plans based on a more accurate range of sea-level
rise.
Meeting Adjourned: 7:35pm
Next CIPOC meeting is scheduled for Monday, December 12, 2011 at 5:30 p.m. in Commission
Chambers.
F:\CAPI\$aii\Comm. & CIPOC\Commission ltems\2012\CIPOC November 14 Meeting Minutes.docx
78
lD MIAMIBEACH ~
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMITIEE MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: City Manager Jorge M. Gonzale
DATE: January 11, 2012
SUBJECT: REPORT OF THE FINANCE AND CITYWIDE PROJECTS COMMITTEE
MEETING OF December 6, 2011.
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
1. A discussion of a proposed modification of the promissory note dated
February 5, 2007, between MBCDC: Meridian Place, LLC, a Florida Limited
Liability Corporation, to the Miami Beach Redevelopment Agency; and to
discuss a subordination of the City's Mortgages in favor of a mortgage
made by a commercial lending institution
ACTION
The Committee asked that the item be brought to the full Commission without a
recommendation.
Anna Parekh, Director of Real Estate, Housing, and Community Development,
presented the item.
Meridian Place was built in 1940 and had been operating as a 72-unit transient hotel,
located at 530 Meridian Avenue, which was purchased for rehabilitation by Carrfour
Supportive Housing in 2001. An August 22, 2006 appraisal by J.B. Alhale &
Assosicated, Inc., determined the "as-is" value to be $3,800,000 and the "upon-
completion" value of $6,525,000. As a result of ongoing issues with its funders, Carrfour
Supportive Housing indicated that it would no longer pursue completion of the re-named
"Sunsouth Place Apartments" project. Miami Beach Community Development
Corporation (MBCDC) was approached regarding its interest in acquiring the property to
ensure its continued availability to the community as affordable housing. To complete
the transactions, MBCDC requested funding from the City to assist in the acquisition of
the property. In July 2006, MBCDC entered into a purchase agreement with Carrfour
Supportive Housing for acquisition of the property. At that time, there was no debt
service contemplated for the RDA's $1,500,000 contribution. On October 11, 2006, the
1
Agenda Item C. C 8
79 Date 1-1/-1 2.-
Miami Beach Redevelopment Agency (RDA) approved Resolution No. 538-2006
authorizing an appropriation of South Pointe Redevelopment Area funds in the amount
of $1,500,000 to be utilized by MBCDC for the purpose of MBCDC's .acquisition and
rehabilitation of the building located at 530 Meridian Avenue to provide 34 units of
affordable housing for elderly, formerly homeless persons. On February 5, 2007, a
Mortgage and Security Agreement and a corresponding Promissory Note were executed
by MBCDC: Meridian Place, LLC, a Florida limited liability corporation (the Promissory
Note), committing to a repayment schedule in the amount of $150,000, commencing
December 31, 2011, and continuing each December 31 thereafter annually.
At the time of MBCDC's acquisition of Meridian Place, total project costs were estimated
at $6,629,000, including acquisition. Since that time, the City's regulatory processes as
well as HUD's regulations concerning the size of the units, necessitated significant
modifications to the plans, including complete reconfiguration of the floor plans to reduce
the number of units to 34, the addition of an elevator, and the configuration of the lobby
for ADA compliance. The total costs are currently projected at $8,117,797, including the
$3,800,000 acquisition cost. Until the HUD and County General Obligation Bond funds,
$355,012 and $440,431 respectively, are paid to MBCDC, the funding gap to complete
the construction of the project is $977,975. Based on the current rental income
projected for this affordable housing project, the RDA debt service which is scheduled to
commence this December and the current market value of the property, MBCDC has
been unable to obtain a commitment for private bank financing to fill the current funding
gap.
Based on cash flow projections outlined in MBCDC's Meridian Place Profoma dated
9/21/11, the annual RDA debt payments would create negative cashflow of more than
$100,000 in each of the next ten years. This position is further compounded by an
additional $1,000,000 in negative cashflow if the State debt is repaid in the year 2020, as
required. MBCDC states that if the RDA Promissory Note is modified to reflect a
deferred or forgivable status, then the project will be provided with a modest net cash
flow average of approximately $20,000 for each of the next ten years; with the exception
of the first year of operation. This also presumes that MBCDC is successful in receiving
its requested payment deferral and extended amortization of the State debt.
The Administration recommended that the RDA loan repayment terms be restructured to
be consistent with other affordable housing grants (loans) from the City which defer the
repayment of the funding as long as the project is kept "affordable" in accordance with
HUD guidelines. The project's "affordability period" is currently thirty (30) years,
commencing at the issuance of the Final Certificate of Completion. It was also
recommended that should the deferral of the RDA repayment be approved, that the
expiration of the 30-year affordability period, the City may be given the option to either
call in the note, extend the affordability period (e.g. another thirty years), or otherwise
modify the note. Commissioner Jorge Exposito asked at what time the debt repayments
normally begin. Ms. Parekh stated that normally the City does not give debt service on
affordable housing loans; rather they are turned into forgivable grants as long as the
project is kept affordable. Chairperson Deede Weithorn asked what would happen if the
repayment is not deferred. Assistant City Manager Hilda Fernandez stated that project
would not be able to continue. Chairperson Weithorn asked how much money is left to
finish the project. Ms. Fernandez stated that there is a $900,000 funding gap.
Discussion ensued. The Committee asked that the item be brought to the full
Commission without a recommendation.
2
80
2. Discussion concerning City Fees and Charges for Gay Pride 2012
ACTION
Item Deferred
3. Discussion and review of City's Investment Policy
ACTION
The Committee recommended that the item be brought to the full Commission
with the recommended changes.
Chief Financial Officer Patricia Walker presented and gave a brief history of the item.
On September 27, 1995 the City's Investment Policy and Procedures were officially
adopted in writing with the passage and adoption of Resolution No. 95-21726. This was
a result of the passing of Chapter 218.415 of the Florida Statues that require the
adoption of a formal written investment policy by local governments. The last
amendment to the Investment Policy was done in 2007 by the request of then Mayor
David Dermer who wanted to add certain investments that the City should not invest in.
He wanted to incorporate the State's "Protecting Florida's Investment Act" to the City's
policy. This Act prohibited the investment of public funds managed by the City in any
"Scrutinized Companies" with active business operations in Sudan or Iran, as listed by
the State Board of Administration (SBA) on a quarterly basis. Thus this Act was
incorporated into the City's Investment Policy by the adoption and passage of Resolution
No. 2007-26602 on July 11, 2007. The State of Florida, in the passing of Chapter
218.415, has allowed investment in Israeli bonds. Due to the State allowing investments
in Israeli bonds, the City will be adding the investment of Israeli bonds as an allowable
City investment. In addition, it was recommended that Section L-lnvestment Committee
was removed from the Investment Policy and replaced with the City's current practice of
using an Investment Advisor.
Chairperson Deede Weithorn suggested that the policy be reviewed on a regular basis.
Ms. Walker stated that provision will be added stating that the policy shall be reviewed
no longer than five (5) years from the last review date or at the time of a change of any
significant accounting pronouncement or change in the City's market treasury services.
The Committee recommended that the item be brought to the full Commission with the
recommended changes.
4. Discussion regarding the public beachfront concessions agreement
ACTION
The Committee recommended bringing the item to the full Commission with the
language of the old agreement regarding the renewal provision, including
benchmarks to be developed by Staff for the consideration of the Commission,
and requested that two options be presented regarding the increase to the
minimum guarantee: the greater of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) or three
percent (3%); or the lesser of CPI or three percent (3%).
3
81
Assistant City Manager Hilda Fernandez presented the item and gave a brief synopsis of
the memo.
On February 21, 2001, the Mayor and City Commission authorized the issuance of a
Request for Proposals (RFP) which resulted in the selection of Boucher Brothers Miami
Beach, LLC (Boucher Brothers) for the operation and management of beachfront
concessions including beach equipment rentals, food and beverage sales, and water
sport rentals on the beaches seaward of Lummus Park, Ocean Terrace and North Shore
Open Space Park. The agreement commenced on November 4, 2001, and expired on
November 4, 2006 with an option to renew for an additional five (5) year term. An
amended and restated concession agreement was entered into on May 18, 2005, which
clarified and memorialized operational issues. An amendment to the amended and
restated concession agreement was entered into on January 11, 2006, which granted a
renewal term through November 5, 2011, and memorialized value enhancements form
the Concessionaire to the City. A second amendment to amend the amended and
restated beachfront concession agreement was executed on April 16, 2008, said
amendment providing for the addition of a concession area adjacent to Bandshell Park.
A third amendment to the amended and restated beachfront concession agreement was
executed on July 15, 2008, which provided for the reconfiguration of a fenced storage
area for storage and for a dumpster facility.
In light of satisfaction with the performance of the current concessionaire, and a desire to
ensure that the concession agreement addressed desirable items, such as non-
motorized water sports in North Beach, additional cleaning services, and the installation
of beach lockers, Staff was directed by the Commission (following the Commission
Retreat) to negotiate a new concession agreement with Boucher Brothers. The current
opportunities afforded under the existing contract, as well as other options that can
generate potential new revenue for the City, were researched and negotiated. In
addition to allowing the rental of new types of luxury beachfront equipment, servicing
new areas, and allowing for "heating' of certain foods, Boucher Brothers expressed a
willingness to develop a non-motorized water sports program in North Beach, as well as
continuing to provide (and offer additional) "Value-Added Enhancements" (VAE). The
VAE would continue to include annual donations to the City for scholarships, for
environmental programming, and in support of the promotion of the City of Miami Beach.
Additionally, the proposed new Agreement requires that the Concessionaire shall
provide, at its sole cost, support in cleanliness in Lummus Park, including the area
outside of the Concession Areas. Furthermore, under the proposed new agreement, the
Concessionaire will provide a public beachfront outdoor ashtray program and implement
a beach locker program. The proposed terms reflect a flat minimum guarantee for Year
One (same as year ten of current Agreement) and a deferred escalator that is intended
to offset the capital investment necessary to implement the non-motorized sports
concession in North Beach, the beach locker program and the additional services.
Ms. Fernandez stated that last month, the Concession Agreement was extended on a
month-to-month basis pending the review and consideration by the City Commission of a
new concession agreement, therefore, retroactive approval would be needed on this.
Discussion ensued. Commissioner Jorge Exposito asked what the timeframe was for
adding the non-motorized sports water channel. Ms. Fernandez stated that Staff will
research what the timeframe and requirements are for a non-motorized water sports
channel. The Boucher Brothers were asked for their comments on the proposed
agreement. They mentioned that they had two issues of concern for them: the renewal
language as proposed in the agenda item, and the escalator provision. On the former,
4
82
Perry Boucher requested that the language from the last agreement be included. Ms.
Fernandez explained that the current language does not provide for an automatic
renewal, but requires further Commission action. She also added that under the previous
agreement, Boucher had to meet certain benchmarks for a renewal to even be
considered. On the latter, staff explained that the current proposed escalator is a
reduction from the flat 5% and that the CPI over the past ten years has never exceeded
2.5% (by calculations provided by Boucher), so the possibility of the escalator being
greater than 3% was not likely. Following discussion, the Committee recommended
bringing the item to the full Commission with the language of the old agreement
regarding the renewal provision, including benchmarks to be developed by staff and
included, and requested that two options be presented for the Commission's
consideration regarding the increase to the minimum guarantee: the greater of the
Consumer Price Index (CPI) or three percent (3%); or, the lesser of CPI or three percent
(3%).
5. Request for approval to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for security
guard services
ACTION
The Committee recommended:
• the criterion for Financial Strength be made a minimum requirement;
• the criterion for character, integrity, judgment and reputation be removed;
• five (5) points from the removed criterion be added to experience and
qualifications of the Contractor;
• five (5) points be added to experience and qualifications of the
Management Team;
• that Staff determine the location and types of enforcement assistance for
the trial basis
Procurement Director Gus Lopez presented the item and gave a brief synopsis of the
memo.
Chairperson Deede Weithorn suggested that the criterion for Financial Strength be made
a minimum requirement, the character, integrity, judgment and reputation criterion be
removed and that the points be added to experience and qualifications of the Contractor
and experience and qualifications of the Management Team.
Chairperson Weithorn then asked if the City would save money if the Request for
Proposals (RFP) went out. Mr. Lopez stated that in the past, the results of the RFP have
been compared to the existing contract and if it is in the City's best interest, the City
reserves the right to renew the existing contract and reject all proposals.
Commissioner Jorge Exposito asked if the purview of the security guards could be
extended to include issuing citations. City Attorney Jose Smith stated that the issue
would be if the City would pay more to have a more qualified security guard that is able
to issue code violations. Assistant City Manager Hilda Fernandez stated that the
difference would be approximately $5 per hour for this level of officer. Chairperson
Weithorn suggested that this be tested in South Pointe Park on a trial basis.
Commissioner Exposito asked that should the City decide to move forward with this,
what the training timeframe would be. Ms. Fernandez stated that the types of
enforcement assistance would have to be narrowed down to determine the amount of
training that would be needed.
5
83
The Committee recommended that the criterion for Financial Strength be made a
minimum requirement; the criterion for character, integrity, judgment and reputation be
removed; and that five (5) points from the removed criterion be added to experience and
qualifications of the Contractor; five (5) points be added to experience and qualifications
of the Management Team; and that Staff determine the location and types of
enforcement assistance for the trial basis.
6. Discussion pertaining to the issuance of a Request for Proposals {RFP) for
auditing services for the City's {CAFR), {OMB A-133 Single Audit), The
Miami Beach Redevelopment Agency's basic financial statements {RDA),
... (PSF), {VCA) financial statements, The Miami Beach Convention Center,
as managed by Global Spectrum, financial statements, The Children's Trust
Program, The Building Better Communities Bonds Program, and The Safe
Neighborhood Parks and Bond Program {SNP)
ACTION
Item Deferred
7. Discussion of Right-of-way recycling program
ACTION
The Committee recommended that a pilot program proposal be brought to the
January Finance & Citywide Projects Committee Meeting.
Public Works Director Fred Beckmann presented the item.
Since 2009, the City installed 74 dual recycling bins and 74 silver urban style standalone
recycling bins throughout the City's Right of Way (ROW), beach entrances, and in select
parks. The bins were financed through negotiations with the City's franchise waste
haulers. Also, through these negotiations the City's franchise waste haulers provide in-
kind solid waste and recycling pick-up. Waste haulers service the ROW waste
receptacles on a regular schedule to ensure a high level of service in City parks, beach
entrances, and ROW locations.
Currently, the City is negotiating a partnership agreement with Coca-Cola. As part of
this agreement, Coca-Cola will assist with developing signage for existing recycling bins
to improve recycling rates. All future recycling receptacles purchased by the City would
also include this updated message to create a uniform design throughout the City.
A number of companies have presented dual trash and recycling receptacle products to
the Sustainability Committee including Go Green Eco-Bins and Big Belly Solar. Both of
these companies' business models include an option to use advertising to offset the cost
of providing these public benefits. Other concerns that have been identified with
selecting new recycling receptacles include size constraints in ROW, uniformity with
current receptacles, and odor problems associated with the compacting models of
decomposing organic waste in Miami Beach's hot, humid climate. Neither the Go Green
Eco-Bins nor the Big Belly Solar bin could be installed in the standard 5-foot wide
sidewalks as they would not leave enough space to provide compliance with ADA
standards. It was also noted that both the Go Green Eco-Bins and the Big Belly Solar
design would require a concrete slab foundation for installation adjacent to the beach.
6
84
The Florida Department of Environmental Protection regulates construction activities
west of the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL) and would require the City to
obtain a CCCL Permit to move forward with installing these receptacles. Bruce Renard,
President of Go Green stated that their proposal was not to place the bins on the ROW
but rather in beach areas.
The Committee recommended that a pilot program proposal be brought to the January
Finance & Citywide Projects Committee Meeting.
8. Discussion on FPL Franchise Payments to the City of Miami Beach
ACTION
None Required
Assistant City Manager Duncan Ballantyne presented the item.
The City's current thirty (30) year non-exclusive franchise agreement with Florida Power
& Light (FPL) expires on January 22, 2012. Since January 2011, representatives of the
City Manager and City Attorney's Office have been negotiating the terms and conditions
of a new franchise agreement with FPL. A public workshop was held on November 28,
2011 at the Miami Beach Golf Course Clubhouse to discuss the terms of the proposed
new agreement. A major concern at the workshop was the 30-year term, which,
notwithstanding the City's continuous efforts to reduce, FPL indicated could not be
modified. Residents from Sunset Islands 3 & 4 neighborhood addressed concerns
regarding the difficulties surrounding the process of undergrounding. The Committee
discussed the calculation of the current and proposed franchise payments. Chairperson
Deede Weithorn opened the floor to public comment which included requests for
research regarding the process of undergrounding.
9. Discussion on Outsourcing of Lincoln Road mall Maintenance Services
ACTION
The Committee asked that a detailed analysis about the positions that would be
eliminated by the outsourcing of Lincoln Road Mall maintenance services be
completed before the item is brought to the full Commission and that staff reply to
the public records request by CWA.
Chairperson Deede Weithorn was concerned about positions being eliminated by the
outsourcing of Lincoln Road Mall maintenance services. Fred Beckman, Public Works
Director, stated that anyone that gets displaced due to the outsourcing will be placed in
another job within the City. Chairperson Weithorn then asked for more detail about the
positions that would be eliminated including how many positions and if any of the
employees holding those positions would be retiring in the near future. The Committee
asked that detailed analysis about the positions that would be eliminated by the
outsourcing of Lincoln Road Mall maintenance services be completed before the item is
brought to the full Commission. Discussion ensued. Commissioner Jonah Wolfson
asked Richard McKinnon, Communications Workers of America (CWA) President Local
7
85
3178, what he was seeking to understand from the detailed analysis being asked for.
Mr. McKinnon stated that he would like to show the difference in cost between
outsourcing the maintenance services and having City employees provide the
maintenance services was minimal. CWA Secretary Jonathan Sinkes added that union
workers that work on Lincoln Road have not been sent out in several weeks because
parts necessary to complete the work orders are not available. Discussion ensued. The
Committee requested a Letter to Commission regarding open work orders and the
Standard Operating Procedures for obtaining supplies. Chairperson Weithorn opened
the floor to public comment which included requests for a workshop for the business on
Lincoln Road to discuss policy changes. The Committee recommended a workshop be
held with both business and property owners to discuss the scope of current Lincoln
Road maintenance services as well as the possibility of out sourcing the maintenance
services.
Additional Item (not on agenda): Discussion regarding towing permits
ACTION
The Committee directed Staff to meet with the towing companies before the
December 14, 2011 Commission Meeting to work on the unresolved issues and
bring their recommendations or policy questions to the Commission meeting.
Chairperson Deede Weithorn asked that the Administration bring the item to the
December 14, 2011 Commission Meeting. Assistant City Manager Jorge Gomez stated
that a memo had been drafted stating that the contract was to continue on a month-to-
month basis, the issues that have not reached a conclusion were outlined, and asked for
the Commissions to refer the item to the appropriate committee. Mr. Gomez then asked
that the Commission give their direction regarding the unresolved issues at the
December 14, 2011 Commission Meeting. Chairperson Weithorn recommended that
Administration meet with the towing companies before the Commission Meeting to try to
resolve the outstanding issues so that the policy decisions could be made and the item
can move forward. The Committee directed Staff to meet with the towing companies
before the December 14, 2011 Commission Meeting to work on the unresolved issues
and bring their recommendations or policy questions to the Commission meeting.
8
86
MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachA.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Mana2!2er
DATE:
SUBJECT:
January 11 , 2012 -
REPORT OF THE NEIGHBORH ODS/COMMUNITY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE MEETING
HELD ON THURSDAY, DECEMBER 8, 2011.
A meeting of the Neighborhoods/Community Affairs Committee was scheduled for Thursday,
December 8, 2011 at 3:00 pm in the City Manager's Large Conference Room, 41h Floor in City Hall.
Commissioners in attendance: Commissioners Jerry Libbin, Deede Weithorn, and Michael
Gongora. Members from the Administration and the public were also in attendance. Please see the
attached sign-in sheet.
THE MEETING OPENED AT 3:20PM
1. DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL POLICIES FOR THE NOMINATION/NUMBER OF MEMORIALS
OR COMMEMORATIVE PLAQUES. (Referred at February 9, 2011 Commission, Item R7 A), Requested
by Commissioner Tobin) (3:45 PM)
Kevin Smith, Parks and Recreation Department Director, reviewed the history ofthis item and the
options listed in the memo included in the agenda package.
David Coggin spoke.
Commissioner Libbin expressed his concern with sudden proliferation of requests for
monuments/memorials. His preference was to limiting Commissioners and the Mayor to one (1)
request per term of elected office.
Commissioner Gongora stated that while the proposal is logical and correct, the Commission
should just start saying no instead of just going along with recommendations/requests.
Commissioner Weithorn made the motion to recommend limiting Commissioners and the Mayor
to one ( 1) monument/memorial recommendation per term of elected office and that if the request
is coming from a third party, then the cost and maintenance will be their responsibility, and
allowing the Commission, with a 6/7 vote, to waive that financial responsibility requirement.
Commissioner Libbin seconded. Commissioner Gongora voted no.
Commissioner Gongora made a motion to include Commissioner Weithorn's motion and adding
that the individual be in good standing and if convicted/adjudicated of a felony, their name shall be
removed. Commissioner Weithorn also added to the motion to direct the Administration to add
whatever language is necessary for any administrative cleanup.
Hilda Fernandez, Assistant City Manager, reviewed the recommended alternative for streamlining
the process for handling the monuments/memorials as follows:
87
Agenda Item C rP C
Date 1-11-/2...
City Commission Memorandum
January 11, 2012
Report of the Neighborhoods /Community Affairs Committee of December 8, 2011
Page 2 of6
• Recommendations for monuments or memorials are referred by the sponsoring
commissioner to the appropriate Commission committee.
• If the committee approves (with the required majority) the placement of a memorial
plaque, that recommendation is forwarded to the full City Commission for the full City
Commission to set a public hearing.
• If the Committee approves a monument or a memorial that is not a plaque (e.g. a site,
bust, sculpture, structure, art work), the recommendation is forwarded to the Art in
Public Places Committee (AiPP) for their review and recommendation as to location,
aesthetic quality, maintenance, and other related issues (in accordance with their
criteria); the AiPP recommendation is subsequently forwarded to the full City
Commission to set a public hearing.
• At the close of the public hearing, the City Commission may approve the
establishment of the monument or memorial, subject to consistency with the criteria
established in the Code.
These recommendations were added to the motion by Commissioner Gongora and seconded by
Commissioner Weithorn. The vote was unanimous. Ms. Fernandez stated that the amendments
to the ordinance will be brought to the Commission.
ACTION: The Committee (Commissioners Libbin, Weithorn, and Gongora present) moved to
recommend the following to the Commission:
• Limit Commissioners and the Mayor to one ( 1) monument/memorial recommendation
per term of elected office.
• In the event the request comes from a third party, then the cost and maintenance is
the requestor's responsibility.
• Add language to allow for the financial responsibility of the third-party requestor to be
waived with a 6/7 vote of the City Commission.
• Include recommended wording that the individual be in good standing and if
convicted/adjudicated of a felony, their name shall be removed.
• Administration to add whatever language is necessary for administrative cleanup.
• Streamline the process for handling monuments/memorials as recommended.
o Recommendations for monuments or memorials are referred by the
sponsoring commissioner to the appropriate committee
o If the committee approves (with the required majority) the placement of a
memorial plaque, that recommendation is forwarded to the full City
Commission for the full City Commission to set a public hearing
o If the Committee approves a monument ora memorial that is not a plaque (e.g.
a site, bust, sculpture, structure, art work), the recommendation is forwarded to
the Art in Public Places Committee (AiPP) for their review and
recommendation as to location, aesthetic quality, maintenance, and other
related issues (in accordance with their criteria); the AiPP recommendation is
subsequently forwarded to the full City Commission to set a public hearing
o At the close of the public hearing, the City Commission may approve the
establishment of the monument or memorial, subject to consistency with the
criteria established in the Code.
• Monuments/memorials must comply with all established City Policies, procedures,
standards and guidelines.
88
City Commission Memorandum
January 11, 2012
Report of the Neighborhoods /Community Affairs Committee of December 8, 2011
Page 3 of6
2. FOLLOW-UP DISCUSSION AND REQUEST FOR DIRECTION CONCERNING THE
CONTINUATION OR TERMINATION OF THE DOG OFF-LEASH PILOT PROGRAM
APPROVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION IN SOUTH POINTE PARK. (Originally referred at
January 28, 2009, Commission, Item C41), returning from February 3, 2011 NCAC meeting. Originally
requested by City Manager Jorge M. Gonzalez) (3:20 PM)
Kevin Smith, Parks and Recreation Department Director, reviewed the history of the dog off-leash
area in South Pointe Park. He requested direction from the Committee as to whether the pilot
program should be continued, not continued, or made permanent. Additionally, he asked that if
the pilot program is continued or made permanent, where the off-leash area should be located.
Commissioner Libbin stated that he would like the program to be continued and that he would like
to include a low, green hedge placed to enclose the area.
Commissioner Weithorn stated that she is happy with the peer pressure that has been managing
the dogs in the park and the limited hours that help create a sense of community. She added
that she is okay with a visual barrier however she wants to make sure that the hedge selected not
be a delicate plant as people and dogs will most likely be walking over it.
David Coggin spoke.
Maryann Marcous spoke.
Larry Wyman spoke.
Brian Harris spoke.
Jeff Atlas spoke.
Ulrich Lachler spoke.
Renata Mariani spoke.
Thomas Butler spoke.
Assistant City Manager Hilda M. Fernandez stated she will need to confer with the City Attorney's
Office regarding the concept of a hedge, as she believes the placement of the hedge, although
low, would make this an enclosed dog park. In addition, she added for the record that the
proposal of a hedge would need to go before the Design Review Board (ORB) for approval.
Commissioner Libbin added that if it is the desire of the commission to place a hedge around the
off-leash area, it is essential for the public to attend the ORB meetings to voice their opinions.
Ms. Fernandez explained that a few things will need to happen concurrently, including working
through the ORB process and identification of funding sources, which would happen after
estimates are received for the hedge.
CommissionerWeithorn made the motion to extend of the current program and in the meantime
work on the hedge and the permanent location. Commissioner Gongora agreed and in response
to requests made by residents at the meeting, recommended adding an hour to the morning and
evening off-leash hours. CommissionerWeithorn agreed with the adding of the hour prior to the
permanent decision on continuing the program, to allow for possible adjustments if there is a
problem. Commissioner Gongora seconded the motion. Commissioner Libbin clarified the
motion to extend the pilot program for six months, add one hour to the morning and evening off-
leash hours, ask the Administration to come up with an estimate for the proposed hedge and
recommend to the Commission a referral to the ORB regarding the proposed hedge.
89
City Commission Memorandum
January 11, 2012
Report of the Neighborhoods /Community Affairs Committee of December 8, 2011
Page 4 of6
ACTION: The Committee (Commissioners Libbin, Weithorn, and Gongora present) unanimously
recommended the Administration be directed to:
• Extend the South Pointe Dog Off-leash Pilot Program for a six (6) month period in its current
location, with an extension of one hour in both the morning and the evening sessions;
• Prepare a site plan of the South Pointe off-leash area in its present location, which is
approximately 18,000 SF in the green space just to the east of the Washington Avenue Plaza,
bordered by the Cut Walk to the south and the sidewalk to the north, with a cost estimate to
install a hedge of the appropriate species and height, to enclose the area;
• Take the steps necessary to have the site plan presented to the ORB for review and approval;
• Return to the Neighborhoods/Community Affairs Committee for final review and action;
• Based on the direction of the Neighborhoods/Community Affairs Committee prepare the
appropriate commission action to implement the directions; and
• Return to the Neighborhoods/Community Affairs Committee in five (5) months (if need be) to
extend the existing program again, if the final version and plan is not completed.
3. DISCUSSION REGARDING NEIGHBORHOOD PARK/STREET-ENDS BUS BENCH ISSUE.
(Referred during the July 28, 2011 Finance & Citywide Projects meeting; see September 14, 2011
Commission Item C6E) (4:02PM)
Fernando Vazquez, Capital Improvement Projects Office Director, explained that this item was
brought up at the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee meeting in July.
After some discussion, Commissioner Weithorn made a motion to recommend removing benches
at street-ends from inclusion in Basis of Design Reports (BOOR) unless there is greater general
community consensus. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gongora.
ACTION: The Committee (Commissioners Libbin, Weithorn, and Gongora present) unanimously
moved to recommend removing benches at street-ends from inclusion in Basis of Design Reports
(BOOR) unless there is greater general community consensus.
4. DISCUSSION ON THE VIABILITY OF STORING CITY DIRECTED TOWED VEHICLES ON
TERMINAL ISLAND. (Referred at June 1, 2011 Commission, Item R9F, Requested by Commissioner
Tobin) (4:00 PM)
The Committee recommended tabling the discussion of this item (defer indefinitely) until it is
specifically requested again.
ACTION: The Committee (Commissioners Libbin, Weithorn, and Gongora present) unanimously
recommended tabling the discussion of this item until it is specifically requested again.
5. DISCUSSION REGARDING AN ORDINANCE WHICH PROHIBITS DOCKING ON CITY OWNED
PROPERTY, SPECIFICALLY SEAWALLS. (Referred at October 19, 2011 Commission, Item R9D,
Requested by Commissioner Weithom) (4:05PM)
Commissioner Weithorn explained her concern with boaters docking on seawalls in single-family
neighborhoods.
David Coggin spoke.
90
City Commission Memorandum
January 11, 2012
Report of the Neighborhoods /Community Affairs Committee of December 8, 2011
Page 5 of 6
After some discussion, CommissionerWeithorn moved to recommend the proposed ordinance to
the Commission. Motion seconded by Commissioner Gongora.
ACTION: The Committee (Commissioners Libbin, Weithorn, and Gongora present) unanimously
moved to recommend the proposed ordinance to the City Commission.
6. DISCUSSION TO CONSIDER LEAVING THE ALTOS DEL MAR LOCATION AS PASSIVE
GREENSPACE. (Referred at October 19, 2011 Commission Item C4E; requested by Commissioner
Exposito) (4:11 PM)
Commissioner Libbin advised that since nothing is happening with the Altos Del Mar location at
this time, the Committee will not discuss the subject at this time. It will be dealt with if and when
anything comes up.
ACTION: No discussion was held. Commissioner Libbin advised that since nothing is happening
with the Altos del Mar location at this time, the Committee will not discuss the subject at this time.
It will be dealt with if and when anything comes up.
7. DISCUSSION REGARDING A PROPOSAL FOR A DONATION OF ART PIECES TO BE
DISPLAYED ON LINCOLN ROAD. (Referred at October 19, 2011, Commission Item C4G; requested
by Commissioner Libbin) (4:12PM)
Commissioner Libbin explained that the artist making this proposal was unable to attend the
meeting today. The artist's idea was not to get credit for this but to make the area look nicer.
Max Sklar, Cultural Affairs and Tourism Development Director, commented that if it is desired to
do a project on the balls on Lincoln Road then perhaps a Call to Artists can be done to get
different proposals to be reviewed by the Art in Public Places Committee for a recommendation to
bring to the Neighborhoods/Community Affairs Committee for a decision. Certainly this artist can
make a proposal along with others.
Commissioner Libbin expressed his concern regarding the poor conditions of Lincoln Road that
need addressing. He asked the Administration to reach out to the manager of the Meat Market to
address some of his concerns with the condition of Lincoln Road.
David Coggin spoke.
Commissioner Gongora made a motion to refer a discussion to the Art in Public Places committee
as to what can be done with a Call to Artists for Lincoln Road and bring back as soon as possible
to the Neighborhoods/Community Affairs Committee. Motion seconded by Commissioner
Weithorn.
ACTION: The Committee (Commissioners Libbin, Weithorn, and Gongora present) unanimously
moved to recommend a referral for discussion to the Art in Public Places committee as to what
can be done with a Call to Artists for Lincoln Road and bring back as soon as possible to the
Neighborhoods/Community Affairs Committee.
91
City Commission Memorandum
January 11, 2012
Report of the Neighborhoods /Community Affairs Committee of December 8, 2011
Page 6 of6
8. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE ONGOING STORE FRONT DAMAGES AND GRAFFITI
ISSUES ON WASHINGTON AVENUE. (Referred at October 19, 2011, Commission Item C4H;
requested by Commissioner Gongora) (4:20 PM)
Commissioner Gongora spoke of his concerns about the condition of Washington Avenue.
Commissioner Libbin suggested scheduling a public workshop to discuss this.
Police Captain Mark Causey explained the Police Department's improved efforts on Washington
Avenue that began in November.
• Washington Avenue is now being patrolled by a beat detail including two officers daily
from 11 :OOam -9:00pm
• RDA has mandated a foot-patrol on the 1600 block of Washington Avenue
• New bike squads are also patrolling Washington Avenue
Commissioner Gongora stated that he would like to receive regular reports from the Police
Department regarding what is happening on Washington Avenue.
Code Compliance Division Director Robert Santos-Aiborna detailed improvements made through
efforts made by Code, Police, and the Homeless Outreach Office to address concerns impacting
the condition of Washington Avenue from the residents of Oceanview, an Adult Living Facility
located at gth Street and Pennsylvania Avenue.
Commissioner Weithorn stated that a comprehensive effort must be made to improve Washington
Avenue.
David Coggin spoke.
The committee recommendation is for the Administration to hold a public workshop regarding
improvements to Washington Avenue and for the Police Department to provide a quarterly report
on Washington Avenue to be included in their current quarterly crime report to the
Neighborhoods/Community Affairs Committee.
ACTION: The Committee recommended that the Administration schedule a public workshop
regarding improvements to Washington Avenue and for the Police Department to provide a
quarterly report on Washington Avenue to be included in their current quarterly crime report to the
Neighborhoods/Community Affairs Committee.
THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 4:35PM.
JMG/HMF/SS/KT/BH/rfm
T:\AGENDA\2012\1-11-12\NCAC Report-DECEMBER 8-2011 -2.doc
92
rn· -~n-··· <0 w -(9 Mli\Mf BEACH ·, NEIGHBORHOODS/COMMUNITY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE December 8, 2011 .. , SIGN-IN SHEET PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY NAME ORGANIZATION I DEPT. I PHONE NO. ~·' 'fOS ·'2-'f(]i) J't:G-tJJJ-~ 1'1 fA R 11-rl o doN /J-0 ,4-~:;..oo_ fV\·\.Av.Af\.0 . r.e.4<~~ t J We are commilted to providing excellent public service and safety to all who live, work, and play in our vibrant, tropical, historic community. EMAIL I -~4 1 , __ !;..~~.J
CD ~ -.,_..--....=----... .-·"~-~~---~-~--~---"""<---------------------= (9 M~A~Id BEACH NEIGHBORHOODS/COMMUNITY AFFAIRS COMMI.TTEE December 8, 2011 :v SIGN-IN SHEET PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY -· NAME -ORGANIZATION I DEPT. PHONE NO. ~ EMAIL Lattra Cu-lf·en·· -~rrMJ 1 16tLH'ac(ii)davkesm,t7m' fy::ach, 1tDW7 1 ~ ---"..... 7J ft., , t--.... --4= --T -4 1 , ..... --?r-,r -t c,c 1-t -· ... > &. -oo-----~ , .. qt?h... c~~ '~ ~ "' ~zt) ~~~0 ;£--\-trLLr fttlJfL~ jstJ~ 6 o'J!Cf ?6 We are committed to providing excellent public seiVice and safety to all who live, work, and play in our vibrant, tropical, historic community. , · i· el!J:i-,i~~~
CD c.n . ·--~-~.::-·-~.-~ -~ -. ~ (9= MliAfv\li BEACH NEIGHBORHOODS/COMMUNITY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE December 8, 2011 ..... SIGN-IN SHEET PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY NAME ORGANIZATION I DEPT. .PHONE NO. ~ EMAIL ., ( !\ OJ\~ fG<t.-'La W' 5ofl?~~ '"ts-o~6/--p L\..IC..,e.Cfl~.-V'.<7f.t.CJ<....,/ . II ;L -::;....'7 I:1D vY\-Q.. L.Ja YVI , R£ !I 1 ;J S,4/rfl <LWJ B ~~!?_, 773D : ! ----·--j_ - -----·--We are committed to providing excellent public service and safety to all who live, work, and play in our vibrant, tropical, historic community.,
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
96
C7
RESOLUTIONS
97
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution Of The Mayor And City Commission Of The City Of Miami Beach, Florida, Approving And Authorizing The
Mayor and City Clerk To Execute An Agreement Between The City Of Miami Beach, Florida, And The Cat Network, Inc.,
To Provide Low-Cost Spay/Neuter Services For Stray, Homeless And Abandoned Cats In The Estimated Amount Of
$80,000 over two years, Funded By The PetSmart Charities®; Said Agreement Approval Is Subject To The Successful
Execution Of The Grant Agreement With PetSmart Charities®;.
Key Intended Outcome Supported: Maximize efficient delivery of services
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): In the 2009 business and resident satisfaction surveys, 65% of
businesses and 55% of residents rated the overall value of City services for tax dollars paid as "good" or "excellent."
Issue: I Whether the Mayor and City Commission should approve the agreement with the Cat Network?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
The Mayor and City Commission at its September 14, 2011 meeting, passed and adopted Resolution No. 2011-27007,
which retroactively approved and authorized the City Manager, or his designee, to submit an application to PetSmart
Charities® in the approximate amount of $80,000 to fund the city's cat spay/neuter program. The free-roaming cat grant
offered by PetSmart Charities® is intended to provide funding, strategic planning and mentoring for a comprehensive
trap-neuter-return (TNR) program for free-roaming cats. The City applied for this grant in partnership with the Cat
network. The goal is to build a program that is community-wide in scope, effective in reducing the local feral and stray cat
population, efficient in its use of resources, measurable in impact and sustainable over a period of years to come.
The City has been collaborating with the Cat Network for approximately two (2) years to address animal issues in the
community, namely spay and neutering of pets. Over these years, the City and the Cat Network have held monthly spay
and neutering events, yielding an average of 40 surgeries per event. The goal of both the City and the Cat Network is to
sterilize 1000 cats per year for two consecutive years. In September 26, 2010, The Cat Network began receiving the
City's annual allocation for the sterilization of stray and feral cats. Since September 26, 2010, 715 stray and feral cats in
Miami Beach have been spayed using these funds, as well as a grant from a charitable foundation and donations. The
Cat Network is dedicated to reducing the overpopulation of stray and feral cats in South Florida through the humane
practice of sterilization, vaccination, and release.
On October 18, 2011, the City received notification from PetSmart Charities® that it was selected to receive the grant
funding. The total grant is for $80,000, or $40,000 for each year of this two-year grant. City staff has been working with
the City Attorney's office on the contract execution. Once the grant agreement with PetSmart Charities® is executed, the
City would be able to start expending funds. It is necessary to have an agreement in place with the Cat Network for such.
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION APPROVE THE AGREEMENT WITH THE CAT
NETWORK, SUBJECT TO THE CITY'S EXECUTION OF THE AGREEMENT WITH PETSMART CHARITIES®.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
Financial Information:
Source of Amount Account
Funds: n/a 1 $80,000 Funded By The PetSmart Charities® Subject To The Successful Execution
Of The Grant Agreement With PetS mart Charities®.
Financial Impact Summary:
C10 Clerk's Off1ce Leg1slat1ve Trackmg:
Si n-Offs:
Department Director
GL __ JMG
MIAMI BEACH 99
AGENDA ITEM c 7 A
DATE /-//-/'2-
m MIAMIBEACH ~
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti H. Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: January 11, 2012
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR
AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AND THE CAT NETWORK, INC., TO PROVIDE
LOW-COST SPAY/NEUTER SERVICES FOR STRAY, HOMELESS AND
ABANDONED CATS; IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $80,000 OVER TWO
YEARS, FUNDED BY THE PETSMART CHARITIES® GRANT TO THE CITY
OF MIAMI BEACH; SAID AGREEMENT APPROVAL IS SUBJECT TO THE
SUCCESSFUL EXECUTION OF THE GRANT AGREEMENT WITH
PETSMART CHARITIES®
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
FUNDING
Funds in the amount of $80,000 are available from the PetSmart Charities® Grant.
BACKGROUND
The Mayor and City Commission at its September 14, 2011 meeting, passed and adopted
Resolution No. 2011-27007, which retroactively approved and authorized the City Manager, or his
designee, to submit an application to PetSmart Charities® in the approximate amount of $80,000
to assist in funding the City's feral cat spay/neuter program. The City submitted an application to
PetSmart Charities®. for funding to continue and expand the current feral cat spay/neuter
program that is being implemented with the Cat Network.
The free-roaming cat grant offered by PetSmart Charities® is intended to provide funding,
strategic planning and mentoring for a comprehensive trap-neuter-return (TNR) program for free-
roaming cats. The goal is to build a program that is community-wide in scope, effective in
reducing the local feral and stray cat population, efficient in its use of resources, measurable in
impact and sustainable over a period of years to come.
CAT NETWORK
The Cat Network, Inc. (CN) is a 501(c)3, incorporated in December 1995 and is dedicated to
reducing the overpopulation of stray and feral cats in South Florida through the humane practice
of sterilization, vaccination, and return. It also dedicated to providing low-cost spay/neuter
services for stray, homeless and abandoned cats; helping members in their efforts to place
adoptable cats in loving homes; and advocating non-lethal population control and humane public
policy.
100
Commission Memo Cat Network
January 11, 2012
Page 2of3
The Cat Network is the only local organization that does this service routinely and on the scale
required by the City's program. As a non-profit volunteer organization, Cat Network is absorbing
all the costs other than the surgery itself -the biggest cost being trapping, but also is includes
expenses such as gas, insurance, medications and materials. The costs associated with the Cat
Network's services for spay/neutering will be funded by PetSmart Charities®.
The City has been collaborating with the Cat Network for approximately two (2) years to address
animal issues in the community, namely spay and neutering of feral cats. Over these years, the
City and the Cat Network have held monthly spay and neutering events, yielding an average of
40 surgeries per event.
The Cat Network first brought its mobile surgical unit, the Miami Meow Mobile, to Miami Beach in
March 2009 providing low cost spay and neuter services to Miami Beach for pets, strays and feral
cats. For the past two years, the Cat Network has been receiving the City's annual allocation
that has been identified to sterilize stray and feral cats ($5,000). Since September 26, 2010, the
Cat Network has sterilized 715 stray and feral cats in Miami Beach using the fund allocated by
the City, a grant from a charitable foundation and donations.
In addition to the City funding, the Cat Network secures other resources to fund the costs of the
spay/neuter mobile unit used to provide this service (and the reduced fee charged by the
Veterinarian). The City has worked closely with the Cat Network to identify dates, locations (for
the placement of the mobile unit, as well as storage of trapped and treated cats) and additional
funds to expand this effort. The goal of both the City and the Cat Network has been to secure
funding to sterilize 1000 cats per year. The PetS mart Charities® Grant program was identified as
an opportunity to continue the partnership between the City and Cat Network to this reach this
goal. The City applied for this grant in partnership with the Cat Network.
On October 11, 2011 the City received notification that it has been selected to receive the
requested grant amount ($40,000 per year for two years, or a total of $80,000). Staff has been
working with the City Attorney's office on the particulars of the grant agreement. Once the grant
agreement with PetSmart Charities® is executed, the City would be able to start expending
funds. It is necessary to have an agreement in place with the Cat Network for such.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Pursuant to the grant application, the Cat Network will perform the following activities:
• Identify and secure veterinarians to provide low cost (max of $45) spay/neuter services
• Schedule, in coordination with the City of Miami Beach, at least two (2) spay/neuter
events each month
o Work with City to identify location to park Spay/Neuter Mobile Unit
o Work with City to identify storage needs
• Coordinate volunteer efforts for trapping
o Develop training program for volunteers
o Coordinate volunteer efforts for each spay/neuter event
• Provide, as available, traps to be used by volunteers
• Secure additional medications necessary for spay/neuter events, as well as to address
common feral cat illnesses
• Promote, in coordination with the City of Miami Beach, the bi-monthly spay/neuter events,
including placement of the spay/neuter events in the Cat Network Website.
• Provide monthly reports to the City on the number of spays/neuters performed the prior
month, and since grant inception and all other documents and reports, as required by the
grant.
101
Commission Memo Cat Network
January 11, 2012
Page 3of3
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission authorize the Mayor and
City Clerk to execute an Agreement between the City of Miami Beach, Florida, and Cat Network,
Inc., to provide low-cost spay/neuter services for stray, homeless and abandoned cats; in the
estimated amount of $80,000, funded by the PetSmart Charities®. The execution of the
Agreement between the City and the Cat Network would be subject to the execution of the grant
agreement between the City and PetSmart Charities®.
102
RESOLUTION NO.----
A RESOLUTION WAIVING, BY 5/7THS VOTE, THE COMPETITIVE BIDDING
REQUIREMENTS, FINDING SUCH WAIVER TO BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF
THE CITY, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN
AGREEMENT WITH THE CAT NETWORK, INC., TO PROVIDE LOW-COST
SPAY/NEUTER SERVICES FOR STRAY, HOMELESS AND ABANDONED CATS;
HELPING MEMBERS IN THEIR EFFORTS TO PLACE ADOPTABLE CATS IN
LOVING HOMES; AND ADVOCATING NON-LETHAL POPULATION CONTROL
AND HUMANE PUBLIC POLICY, IN THE ESTIMATED ANNUAL AMOUNT OF
$80,000, TO BE FUNDED THROUGH A GRANT FROM THE PET SMART
CHARITIES; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT APPROVAL AND EXECUTION OF
SAID AGREEMENT SHALL BE SUBJECT TO EXECUTION OF THE GRANT
AGREEMENT WITH PET SMART CHARITIES.
WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Commission, at its September 14, 2011 meeting,
adopted Resolution No. 2011-27007, which retroactively approved and authorized the City
Manager, or his designee, to submit an application to PetSmart Charities, in the approximate
amount of $80,000, to fund the City's cat spay/neuter program; and
WHEREAS, the free-roaming cat grant offered by PetSmart Charities is intended to
provide funding, strategic planning and mentoring for a comprehensive trap-neuter-return
program for free-roaming cats; and
WHEREAS, the goal is to build a program that is community-wide in scope, effective in
reducing the local feral and stray cat population, efficient in its use of resources, measurable in
impact and sustainable over a period of years to come; and
WHEREAS, the City has been collaborating with Cat Network, Inc. for approximately
two (2) years to address animal issues in the community; namely spay and neutering of pets;
and
WHEREAS, the Cat Network is dedicated to providing low-cost spay/neuter services
for stray, homeless and abandoned cats; helping members in their efforts to place adoptable
cats in loving homes; and advocating non-lethal population control and humane public policy;
and
WHEREAS, the proposed agreement with the Cat Network, in the amount of $80, 000,
will be subject to the execution of the grant agreement with Pet Smart Charities.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City
Commission hereby waive, by 5/7ths vote, the competitive bidding requirements, finding such
waiver to be in the best interest of the City, and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute
an Agreement with the Cat Network, Inc., to provide low-cost spay/neuter services for stray,
homeless and abandoned cats; helping members in their efforts to place adoptable cats in
loving homes; and advocating non-lethal population control and humane public policy, in the
estimated annual amount of $80,000, to be funded through a grant from the PetSmart Charities;
provided, however, that approval and execution of said agreement shall be subject to execution
of the grant agreement with Pet Smart charities.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 14th day of December, 2011.
ATTEST:
ROBERT E. PARCHER, CITY CLERK
T:\AGENDA\2011\12-14-11\CatNetworkdReso.docx
103
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
104
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution Approving An Agreement Between The City Of Miami Beach, Florida And Barry University To Be The
Provider Of Home Visiting Services For The Parent-Child Home Program, In Accordance To The Children's Trust
Contract# 1128-1090, In An Estimated Amount Of $73,326.00.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Enhance learning opportunities for youth.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.):
74% of residents rated the City as doing an excellent or good job meeting expectations with the services they provide.
Issue: I Shall the Commission adopt the resolution?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
The City, in partnership with Barry University, submitted a grant application to The Children's Trust on February 23, 2011 in
response to its Request For Proposals for Early Childhood Development Programs. The Commission approved the grant
submission (Resolution 2011-27589) at its February 9, 2011 meeting. The Children's Trust authorized the award effective
August 1, 2011 (The Children's Trust Contract# 1128-1 090).
The Parent Child Home Program is a home-based, early literacy and parenting program designed to increase language and
literacy skills, enhance social and emotional development, and strengthen the parent-child relationship for children aged 16
to 71 months. Enrolled families are visited twice weekly for a minimum of 23 weeks by a trained Home Visitor. Each week,
the Home Visitors will provide participants with a free book or toy for the family to keep. Barry University, the sub-contractor,
will provide the Home Visits, with program administration by the City. The sub-contractor budget consists of $49,612.50 for
tuition remission for nine (9) graduate students; $16,891.20 for mileage reimbursement; and $6,822 for administrative/in-
direct costs. The total sub-contractor budget does not exceed $73,326.
It is recommended that the Mayor and City Commission approve an agreement between the City of Miami Beach, Florida
and Barry University, for Barry University to be the provider of home visiting services for the Parent-Child Home Program, in
accordance to The Children's Trust Contract# 1128-1090, in an estimated amount of $73,326.00.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
IN/A
Financial Information:
Source of !. . ........... ·. .Amount AcQount..... ... ..•. ... .·.· ~~~~~~~~----;-~~~~~~~--~~~~~~~~~~--~~~ Funds: ; . }.y. $ 73,326.00 143-5620-000349
~~++4-------------4-------------------------------------------~
>•··••••··I··
OBPI to tat
Financial Impact Summary:
Clerk's Office Le islative Trackin
Maria Ruiz, x7491
AssistantCit
T:\AGENDA\201211-11-12\Agreementwith Barry U • PCHP Summary 01112012.doc
MIAMI BEACH
105
AGENDA ITEM -~~7 B=---
DATE f-/f,-/2_
= -MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager G ~
January 11, 2012 U U
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA AND BARRY
UNIVERSITY TO BE THE PROVIDER OF HOME VISITING SERVICES
FOR THE PARENT-CHILD HOME PROGRAM, IN ACCORDANCE TO
THE CHILDREN'S TRUST CONTRACT# 1128-1090, IN AN ESTIMATED
AMOUNT OF $73,326.00.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
FUNDING
$73,326.00-Funding for the contract is budgeted via The Children's Trust Contract #1128-
1090.
ANALYSIS
At its February 9, 2011 meeting, the Mayor and Commission approved Resolution 2011-
27589 authorizing the submission of a joint application between the City and Barry University
to The Children's Trust in response to its Request For Proposals for Early Childhood
Development Programs.
On June 13, 2011, the Board of The Children's Trust awarded the City $150,000 for
implementation of the Parent-Child Home Program (PCHP) commencing August 1, 2011.
The Parent-Child Home Program is a home-based early literacy and parenting program
designed to increase language and literacy skills, enhance social and emotional development,
and strengthen the parent-child relationship for children aged 16 to 71 months. PCHP has
been awarded evidence-based best practice status by Child Trends, a nationally recognized
researcher of childhood programs. For 23 weeks, participant families receive twice weekly
visits by a trained Home Visitor who provides them a free toy or book each week. Families are
visited for a minimum of 23 weeks within the program year.
City staff underwent three days of training by the Parent-Child Home Program in Garden City,
New York in August 2011. The training ensures that staff is prepared to deliver this best
106
Page 2 of2
Barry University Agreement-PCHP
practice program while providing fidelity towards expected outcomes. In turn, City staff
provided training to Barry University graduate students who will serve as Home Visitors.
The City recruits participating families and conducts an initial assessment of the child and
family including the Ages and Stages Questionnaire-Ill and the Ages and Stages Social-
Emotional Questionnaire.
After the initial assessment, City staff introduces families to their respective Home Visitor who
then establishes a visiting schedule to ensure that families are seen twice per week. The
Home Visitors model positive parent-child interaction during the first weekly visit. The second
visit serves as a review and sets the stage for the parent to take the lead and model the
behavior introduced at the prior visit. Home Visitors are required to complete a home visit
record after each visit that documents the interaction between the child and parent as well as
others in the household.
Barry University, the City's sub-contractor, will be paid $31.88 per home visit, or $1,466.52 per
year, per family served. The total sub-contractor budget will not exceed $73,326. The contract
ends July 31, 2012.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission authorize the Mayor
and City Clerk to execute an agreement between the City of Miami Beach, Florida and Barry
University, for Barry University to be the provider of home visiting services for the Parent-Child
Home Program, in accordance to The Children's Trust contract# 1128-1090, in an estimated
amount of $73,326.00.
JMG/HMF/MLR/cd
T:\AGENDA\2012\Jan1112\Consent\PCHP Barry University Contract.doc
107
RESOLUTION NO.-----
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA AND BARRY
UNIVERSITY TO BE THE PROVIDER OF HOME VISITING SERVICES
FOR THE PARENT -CHILD HOME PROGRAM, IN ACCORDANCE TO
THE CHILDREN'S TRUST CONTRACT# 1128-1090, IN AN
ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $73,326.00.
WHEREAS, The Children's Trust issued a Request For Proposals for Early
Childhood Development Programs in January 2011;
WHEREAS, the City partnered with Barry University, a member of the Miami Beach
Service Partnership, to develop a response to the Request For Proposals that would
provide services to toddlers, an underserved population in our City;
WHEREAS, the City and Barry University evaluated various best practice programs
before agreeing to the Parent-Child Home Program as the service delivery model to
collaboratively pursue in response to the Request For Proposals;
WHEREAS, the City and Barry University submitted the response to The Children's
Trust Request For Proposals establishing the City as the lead applicant providing program
administration, and Barry University as a sub-contractor providing home visiting services;
WHEREAS, The Children's Trust approved the joint application and awarded the
City a grant, in the amount of $150,000, via Contract# 1128-1090;
WHEREAS, The Children's Trust authorized services under Contract# 1128-1090
as of August 1, 2011; and
WHEREAS, the Administration now recommends the execution of an agreement
between the City and Barry University to be the provider of home visiting services for the
Parent-Child Home Program, in accordance to The Children's Trust Contract# 1128-1090,
in an estimated amount of $73,326.00.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City
Commission hereby approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an
agreement between the City and Barry University to be the provider of home visiting
services for the Parent-Child Home Program, in accordance to The Children's Trust
Contract# 1128-1090, in an estimated amount of $73,326.00.
PASSED and ADOPTED this __ day of January, 2012.
ATTEST:
MAYOR
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
& Ff)t=l XECUTION
108
,t..-1~-1\
DatA
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution approving a second amendment to the purchase and sale agreement between the
City and the Housing Authority of the City of Miami Beach for the purchase of a perpetual
easement over the property located at 1231-1251 1ih Street for the purpose of constructing the
West Avenue Bridge, extending the Due Diligence period until May 1, 2012.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Maintain or Improve Traffic Flow
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): Residents in the 2007 Community
Satisfaction Survey cited traffic congestion as the second most import factor affecting their
quality of life in the City.
Issue:
I Should the City Commission approve the resolution?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
On July 14, 2010, the Mayor and City Commission approved a Purchase and Sale Agreement between
the City and HACMB, for the purchase of a perpetual easement through the HACMB Parcel for
construction of the project. The purchase price of the easement is $1.635 million.
The Agreement provided the City with a one (1) year "Inspection Period" (commencing upon execution of
the Purchase and Sale Agreement) to do its due diligence, including whatever inspections and
investigations it needs to make to determine whether or not it wants to proceed with the purchase of the
City Easement, and/or whether or not the Easement is suitable for the development and construction of
the proposed West Avenue Bridge Project. Additionally, the City has the right to terminate the Purchase
and Sale Agreement during the Inspection Period if it determines, in its sole opinion, that the property is
not suitable or feasible for the Project.
On September 14, 2011, the Mayor and City Commission approved Amendment No. 1 to the
Agreements, extending the Inspection Period and Due Diligence Period for a period not to exceed six (6)
months, until March 15, 2012. On September 20, 2011, the HACMB board approved an extension of four
(4) months, or January 15, 2012, and further requested that the City Administration provide the HACMB
board with a status update at their December meeting. On December 13, 2011, following the status
report by the Administration, the HACMB board approved an extension of the Inspection Period and Due
Diligence Period until May 1, 2011, in order to allow the City to complete the PD&E study.
The City is in the process of performing the West Avenue Bridge Project Development and
Environmental (PD&E) study. Public involvement is a significant portion of the PD&E study. A Public
Involvement Program (PIP) has been created to generate public participation. The overall goal of the PIP
is to ensure that the study reflects the values and needs of the community. As part of the due diligence
for the purchase of the easement, the City and the PD&E consultant will collect and review the public
input and commentary prior to the PD&E's Public Hearing which will take place in April2012.
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission adopt the resolution and approve
the Second Amendment to the Purchase and Sale Agreement.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
N/A
Financial Information:
Source of Funds: n/a
OBPI
Total
islative Trackin
109
AGENDA ITEM _C_7_C __
DATE 1-//-12.
~ MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager ~ ~
January 11, 2012 U
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE: 1) AMENDMENT NO.
2 TO THE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT, DATED JULY 14,
2010, BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH AND THE HOUSING
AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH (HACMB), FOR THE
PURCHASE OF A PERPETUAL EASEMENT OVER THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 1231-1251 17TH STREET, MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA,
FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING A BRIDGE CONNECTING
WEST AVENUE AND DADE BOULEVARD; SAID AMENDMENT
EXTENDING THE "INSPECTION PERIOD", AS DEFINED THEREIN,
UNTIL MAY 1, 2012; AND 2) AMENDMENT NO 2. TO THE
ACCOMPANYING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
CITY AND HACMB, HAVING A COMMENCEMENT DATE OF
SEPTEMBER 15, 2010; SAID AMENDMENT EXTENDING THE "DUE
DILIGENCE PERIOD", AS DEFINED THEREIN, UNTIL MAY 1, 2012.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
ANALYSIS
In 1999, the City Commission approved the Municipal Mobility Plan (MMP). The West
Avenue Bridge Project (the Project) was developed from MMP Project #30, which
envisioned corridor improvements to the intersection of Dade Boulevard at 17th
Street/Bay Road, to be combined with a connection between Dade Boulevard and West
Avenue through the construction of a new bridge. The MMP suggested that this
crossing could serve to relieve congestion at nearby intersections.
The implementation of the Project requires that the City acquire a right-of-way through a
parcel presently owned by the Housing Authority of the City of Miami Beach (HACMB),
located at 1231-1251 17th Street. Current funding for the Project includes federal funds,
the use of which requires an environmental impact study (EIS). The estimated cost of
the Project, including land acquisition and the EIS, is approximately $6.5-7 million.
110
Commission Memorandum
January 11, 2012
Housing Authority of Miami Beach -Amendment to Easement Purchase
Page 2 of3
On July 14, 2010, the Mayor and City Commission approved a Purchase and Sale
Agreement, for the City's purchase of the City Easement, in the amount of $1 ,635,000,
over a portion of the HACMB property to develop the West Avenue Bridge Project, and a
Development Agreement, setting forth the City and HACMB's respective rights and
obligations pertaining to the City's development and construction of the West Avenue
Bridge Project, and HACMB's development and construction of an affordable housing
project (the HACMB Project).
On June 22, 2010, the HACMB's Board considered both agreements and passed a
resolution approving the same, and on July 14, 2011, the Mayor and City Commission
adopted Resolution No. 2010-27451, approving the Purchase and Sale Agreement in
substantial form. The Purchase and Sale Agreement was finalized and subsequently
executed by the parties with an effective date of September 15, 2010. On September 15,
2010, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2010-27490, approving
on second and final reading the Development Agreement which also has a
Commencement Date of September 15, 201 0.
The City also has the right during the Inspection Period/Due Diligence Period, to
terminate the Purchase and Sale Agreement and the Development Agreement if, in the
City's sole opinion, the City Easement property is not suitable or feasible for the City's
intended purpose of developing the Project, or that such development and use may be
unusually expensive. The Inspection Period and Due Diligence Period will both expire on
September 15, 2011. ·
The City is still in the process of inspecting and investigating the City Easement
property, including the performance of a Project Development & Environmental (PD&E)
study on the West Avenue Bridge Project, which will consider the construction of the
project with the following goals:
• Improve multimodal transportation connectivity across Collins Canal and offer an
alternative to driving on Alton Road;
• Support economic development in the Sunset Harbor neighborhood and vicinity;
• Enhance transit, pedestrian and bicycle use and safety across the Collins Canal
and Dade Boulevard.
On September 14, 2011, the Mayor and City Commission approved Amendment No. 1
to the Agreements, extending the Inspection Period and Due Diligence Period for a
period not to exceed six (6) months, until March 15, 2012. On September 20, 2011, the
HACMB board approved an extension of four (4) months, or until January 15, 2012, and
further requested that the City Administration provide the HACMB board with a status
report on the PD&E process at their December meeting. On December 13, 2011,
following the status report by the Administration, the HACMB board approved an
extension of the Inspection Period and Due Diligence Period until May 1, 2011, in order
to allow the City to complete the PD&E study and public hearing in April 2012.
Public involvement is a significant portion of the PD&E study. A Public Involvement
Program (PIP) has been created to generate public participation. The overall goal of the
PIP is to ensure that the study reflects the values and needs of the community. As part
of the due diligence for the purchase of the easement, the City and the PD&E consultant
conducted the kick-off meeting on September 13, and the second public meeting, which
was Alternatives Workshop, took place in December.
111
Commission Memorandum
January 11, 2012
Housing Authority of Miami Beach -Amendment to Easement Purchase
Page 3 of3
CONCLUSION
Currently, the Inspection Period and Due Diligence Period under the Purchase and Sale
Agreement and Development Agreement between the City and HACMB expire on March
15, 2012. Since the HACMB board has approved an extension of the Inspection Period
and Due Diligence Period until May 1, 2012, a second amendment to the Agreements is
necessary to conform the dates to those approved by the HACMB board.
The Administration recommends that the City Commission approve the Second
Amendment to the Purchase and Sale Agreement and Development Agreement
between the City and HACMB, providing for an extension until May 1, 2012, of the
Inspection Period and Due Diligence Periods under the Agreements and, if approved,
that the City Commission further authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the
corresponding amendments to the Agreements.
JMGIJ~KP
T:\AGENDA\2011\9-14-11\Housing Authority Amendment Memo.docx
112
RESOLUTION NO.-----
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING RESOLUTION NO.
2011-27713, WHICH APPROVED AND AUTHORIZED THE MAYOR
AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE: 1) AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE
PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT, DATED JULY 14, 2010,
BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH AND THE HOUSING
AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH (HACMB), FOR THE
PURCHASE OF A PERPETUAL EASEMENT OVER THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 1231-1251 17TH STREET, MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA,
FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING A BRIDGE CONNECTING
WEST AVENUE AND DADE BOULEVARD; SAID AMENDMENT TO
EXTEND THE "INSPECTION PERIOD", AS DEFINED THEREIN; AND
2) AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE ACCOMPANYING DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND HACMB, HAVING A
COMMENCEMENT DATE OF SEPTEMBER 15, 2010; SAID
AMENDMENT TO EXTEND THE "DUE DILIGENCE PERIOD", AS
DEFINED THEREIN; SAID AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION NO. 2011-
27713 TO REFERENCE THE ACTUAL DATES OF THE EXTENSIONS
TO THE INSPECTION AND DUE DILIGENCE PERIODS, AS GRANTED
BY THE HACMB, TO MAY 11, 2012.
WHEREAS, in 1999, the City Commission approved the West Avenue Bridge
Project as Municipal Mobility Plan (MMP) Project #30, which envisioned corridor
improvements to the intersection of Dade Boulevard at 1 th Street/Bay Road, to be
combined with a connection between Dade Boulevard and West Avenue through the
construction of a new bridge (the West Avenue Bridge Project or the Project); and
WHEREAS, the implementation of the Project requires that the City acquire a
right-of-way via the City's purchase of an easement (the City Easement) through
property presently owned by the Housing Authority of the City of Miami Beach (HACMB);
and
WHEREAS, current funding for the Project includes federal funds, and the
estimated cost of the Project, including land acquisition and the planning and design, is
approximately $6.5-7 million; and
WHEREAS, the Administration and City Attorney's Office worked with HACMB
and its counsel to develop 1.) a Purchase and Sale Agreement, for the City's purchase
of the City Easement, in the amount of $1,635,000, to develop the West Avenue Bridge
Project; and 2.) a Development Agreement, setting forth the City and HACMB's
respective rights and obligations pertaining to the City's development and construction of
the West Avenue Bridge Project, and HACMB's development and construction of an
affordable housing project (the HACMB Project); and
WHEREAS, on June 22, 2010, the HACMB's Board considered both agreements
and passed a resolution approving same, and
WHEREAS, on July 14, 2011, the Mayor and City Commission adopted
Resolution No. 201 0-27 451, approving the Purchase and Sale Agreement, in substantial
form; the Purchase and Sale Agreement was finalized and subsequently executed by
the parties with an effective date of September 15, 201 0; and
113
WHEREAS, on September 15, 2010, the Mayor and City Commission adopted
Resolution No. 2010-27490, approving, on second and final reading, and authorizing the
Mayor and City Clerk to execute, the Development Agreement; the Development
Agreement was executed with a Commencement Date of September 15, 201 0; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the terms of the Purchase and Sale Agreement
and the Development Agreement, the City was permitted an Inspection Period (under
the Purchase and Sale Agreement) and Due Diligence Period (under the Development
Agreement), within which to inspect and investigate the physical and other conditions of
the City Easement property, as well as the HACMB property, as it deemed appropriate,
in order to determine whether or not to proceed with the purchase of the City Easement,
and the development of the proposed West Avenue Bridge Project thereon; and
WHEREAS, the City has the right, during the Inspection Period/Due Diligence
Period (as such terms are defined, respectively, in the Purchase and Sale Agreement
and the Development Agreement), to terminate the Purchase and Sale Agreement and
the Development Agreement if, in the City's sole opinion, the City Easement property is
not suitable or feasible for the City's intended purpose of developing the Project, or that
such development and use may be unusually expensive; and
WHEREAS, the Inspection Period and Due Diligence Period expired on
September 15, 2011; and
WHEREAS, the City is still in the process of inspecting and investigating the City
Easement property; as part of its ongoing due diligence, the City has also retained a
consultant to perform a Project Development & Environmental (PD&E) study on the
West Avenue Bridge Project; and
WHEREAS, the PD&E study will evaluate if the Project will improve
transportation connectivity; support economic development; and enhance transit,
pedestrian and bicycle usage; and
WHEREAS, public involvement is a significant component of the PD&E study;
and
WHEREAS, a Public Involvement Program regarding the Project has been
created and is still underway to ensure that the PD&E study reflects the values and
needs of the community; and
WHEREAS, in order to ensure that the City obtains sufficient information, which
includes collecting sufficient public comment as to its proposed purchase of the City
Easement and development of the Project, an extension of the Inspection Period, under
the Purchase and Sale Agreement, and of the Due Diligence Period, under the
Development Agreement, was necessary; and
WHEREAS, the City requested that the HACMB grant an up to six (6) month
extension of, respectively, the Inspection Period and Due Diligence Period, in order for
the City to review and consider the recommendations identified in the PD&E study; and
WHEREAS, on September 14, 2011, pursuant to Resolution No. 2011-27713,
the Mayor and City Commission approved Amendment No. 1 to the Purchase and Sale
Agreement, and Amendment No. 1 to the Development Agreement, extending the
114
Inspection Period and Due Diligence Period therein for a period not to exceed six (6)
months, until March 15, 2012; and
WHEREAS, on September 20, 2011, the HACMB board approved an initial
extension of the Inspection Period and Due Diligence Period for four (4) months, or until
January 15, 2012, and reserved its rights to grant the full (i.e. 6 month) extension
requested by the City, pending the City Administration's providing the HACMB board
with a status report on the PD&E process at its December HACMB board meeting; and
WHEREAS, on December 13, 2011, following the requested status report by the
City, the HACMB board approved the extension of the Inspection Period and Due
Diligence Period, until May 1, 2011, in order to allow the City to complete the PD&E
study and conduct a public hearing on the West Avenue Bridge Project in April 2012;
and
WHEREAS, accordingly the Administration recommends that the City
Commission approve an amendment to Resolution No. 2011-27713, to reference the
actual date that the City and HACMB have agreed upon with regard to extending the
Inspection Period and Due Diligence Periods under, respectively, the Purchase and Sale
Agreement and Development Agreement between the City and HACMB; said extension
until May 1, 2012; and
WHEREAS, the Administration further requests that the City Manager and City
Attorney's Office be authorized to take such action(s), as they deem necessary, to
memorialize the extension date (of May 1, 2012), and authorize the Mayor and City
Clerk to execute such corresponding amendments to, respectively, the Purchase and
Sale Agreement and the Development Agreement.
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 amend Resolution No. 2011-27713, which approved and authorized
the Mayor and City Clerk to execute : 1 )Amendment No. 1 to the Purchase and Sale
Agreement, dated July 14, 2010, between the City of Miami Beach and the Housing
Authority of the City of Miami Beach (HACMB), for the purchase of a perpetual
easement over the property located at 1231-1251 1ih Street, Miami Beach, Florida, for
the purpose of constructing a bridge connecting West Avenue and Dade Boulevard; said
amendment to extend the "Inspection Period:, as defined therein; and 2) Amendment
No. 1 to the accompanying Development Agreement between the City and HACMB,
having a commencement date of September 15, 201 0; said amendment to extend the
"Due Diligence Period", as defined therein; with this amendment to Resolution No. 2011-
27713 having the purpose of to referencing the actual dates of the extensions, to the
Inspection and Due Diligence Periods, as granted by the HACMB, to May 11, 2012.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of January 2012.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
T:\AGENDA\2012\1-11-12\Housing Authority Amendment Reso.docx
115
MAYOR APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
116
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, Florida,
amending the City's investment policy and procedures, as adopted by Resolution No. 95-
21726 and amended by Resolutions No. 97-22315 and No. 2007-26602 by adding Israeli
bonds as authorized investments, adding maximum percentage per issuer and replacing the
investment committee with the investment advisor.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Improve the City's overall financial health and maintain overall bond rating.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): As required by the Florida
Legislature, Florida Statutes 218.415. ·
Issue: I Should the Mayor and City Commission approve the Resolution?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission amend the City's
Investment Policy and Procedures, as adopted by Resolution No. 95-21726 and amended by
Resolutions No. 97-22315 and No. 2007-26602 by adding Israeli bonds as authorized
investments, adding maximum percentage per issuer and replacing the investment committee
with the investment advisor.
Adviso Board Recommendation:
Financial Information:
Amount Account Approved
Source of Funds: N/A
OBPI
Total
Ci Clerk's Office Le islative Trackin
Patricia Walker, Chief Financial Officer
Si n-Offs:
Department Director
JMG
T:\AGENDA\2012\January 11\Regular\lnvestment Policy Change FY12-Summary Memo.docx
(9 MIAMIBEACH 117
AGENDA ITEM C. 7 [)
DATE /-// -12...
~ MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
Mayor Matti Bower and Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager ex
January 11, 2012 u
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CITY'S
INVESTMENT POLICY AND PROCEDURES, AS ADOPTED BY
RESOLUTION NO. 95-21726 AND AMENDED BY RESOLUTIONS
NO. 97-22315 AND NO. 2007-26602 BY ADDING ISRAELI BONDS
AS AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS, ADDING MAXIMUM
PERCENTAGE PER ISSUER AND REPLACING THE INVESTMENT
COMMITTEE WITH THE INVESTMENT ADVISOR.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
KEY INTENDED OUTCOME SUPPORTED
Improve the City's overall financial health and maintain overall bond rating.
BACKGROUND
On November 18, 1987, the City passed and adopted Ordinance No. 87-2588 which amended
the Code of the City of Miami Beach by creating Chapter 18A entitled "Investment of Surplus
Funds." This Chapter authorized the City to invest and reinvest any surplus public funds in such
investments as US Government obligations, banker's acceptances, certificate of deposits,
obligations issued by any state or territory of the United States, and other types of investment
instruments.
On September 16, 1992, the City amended Ordinance No. 87-2588 by passing and adopting
Ordinance No.92-2793 which added commercial paper rated A-1 and P-1 from Moody's and
Standard & Poor's as another allowable investment.
The City again amended Chapter 18A on March 15, 1997 by passing and adopting Ordinance
No. 97-3074 which added corporate notes and bonds, money markets and mutual funds, fixed
income mutual funds, mortgage-backed securities, external managed investment funds, and
interest rate swaps agreements to the list of allowable investments instruments.
118
Commission Memorandum
Investment Policy
January 11, 2012
Page 2 of 3
The City's Investment Policy and Procedures were officially adopted in writing on September 27,
1995 with the passage and adoption of Resolution No. 95-21726. This was a result of the
passing of Chapter 218.415 of the Florida Statutes that required the adoption of a formal written
investment policy by local governments.
On March 5, 1997, the City passed and adopted Resolution No. 97-22315 which adopted the
percentages of the City's funds which may be invested in each investment category.
The last amendment to the Investment Policy was done in 2007 by the request of then Mayor
David Dermer who wanted to add certain investments that the City should not invest in. He
wanted to incorporate the State's "Protecting Florida's Investment Act" to the City's policy. This
Act prohibited the investment of public funds managed by the City in any "Scrutinized
Companies" with active business operations in Sudan or Iran, as listed by the State Board of
Administration (SBA) on a quarterly basis. Thus, this Act was incorporated into the City's
Investment Policy by the adoption and passage of Resolution No. 2007-26602 on July 11, 2007.
ANALYSIS
The State of Florida, in the passing of Chapter 218.415, has allowed the investment in Israeli
bonds. Chapter 218.415( 16) specifically states that "(t)hose units of local government electing
to adopt a written investment policy ... may by resolution invest and reinvest any surplus public
funds in their control or possession in: .... (f) rated or unrated bonds, notes, or instruments
backed by the full faith and credit of the government of Israel."
Due to the State allowing investments in Israeli bonds, the City recommends the addition of
Israeli bonds to the list of authorized investments in the City's Investment Policy and Procedure.
In addition, we recommend the removal of Section L-lnvestment Committee from the Investment
Policy and replacing it with Investment Advisor. The City has for several years now had
Cutwater Investor Services Corp. ("Cutwater") (formally known as MBIA Municipal Investors
Services Corporation) as its Investment Advisor. They have provided the City with numerous
investment opportunities especially in a market of declining interest rates. They also had the
foresight of advising us not to investment in the Florida Local Government Investment Pool
which froze all deposits/withdrawals in November 2007 that resulted in many governments from
retrieving 100% of their investments.
Cutwater continuously works with the City Administration to refine our investment strategies and
assist us in insuring the fiscally responsible and prudent investment of all City funds. They have
recently made recommendations to modify the City's Policy that will assist us in maintaining a
strong portfolio of investments as well as update the language and terminology to conform the
policy to current government industry best practices. Cutwater has recommended the addition
of a maximum percentage per issuer for each type of investment which will reduce the risk of
over-investing in any one particular issuer.
The City's Investment Policy has been reviewed by our Investment Advisors and the City, and
we have made other minor changes to bring it into a more current status. The revised
Investment Policy and Procedures are included herein as Exhibit A.
119
Commission Memorandum
Investment Policy
January 11, 2012
Page 3 of 3
At the December 6, 2011, meeting of the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee, the
Committee voted to recommend approval of the proposed revisions to the City's Investment
Policy and Procedures and that the Policy be updated, at a maximum, every five years to more
accurately reflect conditions in the market.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission amend the City's
Investment Policy and Procedures, as adopted by Resolution No. 95-21726 and amended by
Resolutions No. 97-22315 and No. 2007-26602 by adding Israeli bonds as authorized
investments, adding maximum percentage per issuer and replacing the investment committee
with the investment advisor.
JMG/PDW
120
RESOLUTION NO.-----
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CITY'S
INVESTMENT POLICY AND PROCEDURES, AS ADOPTED BY
RESOLUTION NO. 95-21726 AND AMENDED BY RESOLUTIONS
NO. 97-22315 AND NO. 2007-26602 BY ADDING ISRAELI BONDS
AS AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS, ADDING MAXIMUM
PERCENTAGE PER ISSUER AND REPLACING THE INVESTMENT
COMMITTEE WITH THE INVESTMENT ADVISOR.
WHEREAS, the City of Miami Beach has followed investment policies and
procedures established by the Finance Department, as presented to the Mayor and
Commission in 1985, as an informational item; and
WHEREAS, effective October 1, 1995, all local governmental entities in the
State of Florida were required to adopt an investment policy as required by Chapter
218.415 of the Florida Statutes; and
WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 95-21726
on September 27, 1995, which adopted said policy for the City of Miami Beach; and
WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 97-22315
on March 5, 1997, which increased the number of authorized investments options and
added the percentage of the City's funds which may be invested in said additional
categories; and
WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2007-
26602 on July 11, 2007, which incorporated in the City's Investment Policy the State's
"Protecting Florida's Investment Act", prohibiting the investment of public funds managed
by the City in any "Scrutinized Companies" with active business operations in Sudan or
Iran, as listed by the State Board of Administration (SBA) on a quarterly basis; and
WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Commission have determined that Israeli
Bonds be added to the list of authorized investment options in addition to adding a
maximum percentage by issuer and replacing the investment committee with the
investment advisor.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED THAT THE MAYOR AND
CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the amended
City of Miami Beach Investment Policy and Procedure, attached hereto and incorporated
herein as exhibit "A", be approved and adopted by the Mayor and City Commission.
PASSED and ADOPTED this -----day of _____ .2012.
MAYOR
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
CITY CLERK
121
'" CUTION
"J.. .... (L-
\,.. J
Date
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
INVESTMENT POLICY
AND PROCEDURE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
INVESTMENT POLICY AND PROCEDURE
122
SUBJECT
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
INVESTMENT POLICY AND PROCEDURE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Background ............................................................................................ .
General Overview .................................................................................... .
Investment Objectives .............................................................................. .
Investment Ethics..................................................................................... 2
Investment Process.................................................................................. 2
Authorized Investment............................................................................... 3
Prohibited Investments............................................................................. .. 6
Maturity & Liquidity Requirements.................. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. 7
Portfolio Composition................................................................................ 7
Custodial Account.................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Master Repurchase Agreement.................. .. . .. .. .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... 8
Investment Transaction Authority.................................... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. .. .. 8
Internal Controls........................................................................................ 8
Investment GommitteeAdvisor... ........... ... ... ......... ... ... ... ... ...... ... ......... ... ... ... ... ... ...... .... 9
Investment Reporting................................................................................. 10
Recordkeeping and Performance Measurement.............................................. 10
Pension Investments................................................................................. 11
Bond Funds............................................................................................. 11
123
I. Background
The Florida Legislature passed CS/SB 2090 (CS/HB 1795) on May 4, 1995. Among other provisions of
this legislation each local government entities required to create, adopt and maintain comprehensive
investment policies, incorporating fourteen required elements.
The City has operated under investment guidelines adopted by Resolution 95-21726 on September 27
1995. Due to the amendment of City Code Section 18A-1, these policies have been amended
accordingly.
II. General Overview
The City of Miami Beach has established policies relating to the investment of excess funds. Excess
funds are defined as funds not required to meet short term expenditures of the City. Excess funds are
placed in two general categories of investments. The first category is "cash management investments".
Cash management investments are defined as investments whose terms are less than five~ years.
Those funds placed in cash management investments include all daily operating fundsoapital projects
fw:IEI&, debt service funds and various deposits. The second category is "long termfl city investments".
Long term city investments are investments whose terms are five...af more than one years. The policy
governing long term city investments is set forth below after the description of cash management
investment policy.
Ill. Cash Management Investment Policy
Short term expenditures are defined as all daily operating expenditures excluding payroll and debt
service which are invested based on their payment cycle. For short term expenditures, the City
maintains an overnight ft.~nds sweep a continuous investment program. a Municipal NOW account.
collateralized by P:full P:faith and credit instruments of the U.S. Government and its Agencies . held by
the State of Florida, with the City designated as collateral beneficiary. The City complies with the State
of Florida "Public Deposits Law" Chapter 280 Florida Statutes. Chapter 280 insures the City against
investment principal loss on certificates of deposits and demand deposits in excess of $.:1-0250,000 per
institution. FDIC insurance covers demand deposits up to $.:1-0250,000 per institution. The City will
utilize only financial institutions qualified under Chapter 280, a listing of which is received by the City
and reviewed on a quarterly basis. The City also complies with Chapter 280 by filing all required
reports annually with the State.
This investment policy shall be reviewed no longer than five (5) years from the last review date or at the
time of any significant accounting pronouncement or change in the City's market treasury services.
124
A. Investment Objectives
The City of Miami Beach's investment objectives are set forth below in order of importance:
1. Safety of capital
2. Return en Liquidity of capital
3. Liquidity ofReturn on capital
Investment returns are important and can make a significant contribution to the City's operations
and capital projects. Therefore, every effort is made to select the most advantageous
investment vehicle and term of investment to maximize earnings. However, safety and liquidity,
in that order, take precedence over the return. In this regard, the City has delineated, through
ordinance, certain permissible types of investments, with a view to meeting the criteria se-t_out
above.
B. Investment Ethics
The City of Miami Beach selects all investments by means of a bidding process. In no case
does the City invest funds or place idle funds in financial institutions as compensating or
courtesy balances. The standard of prudence to be applied by the investment officer shall be
the "prudent person" rule, which states: "Investments shall be made with judgment and care,
under circumstances then prevailing, which persons of prudence, discretion and intelligence
exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for investment.
considering the probable safety of their capital as well as the probable income derived." The
"prudent person" rule shall be applied in the context of managing the overall portfolio.
The investment officer and staff, acting in accordance with the written procedures and
exercising due diligence, shall not be held personally responsible for a specific security's credit
risk or market price changes, provided that these deviations are reported immediately and that
appropriate action is taken to control adverse developments.
C. Investment Process
The formal bidding process for investment instruments consists of the following procedures
(Steps #1 through #4 are performed by Investment Advisor):
1. M.M.aintain a bid list of approximately five major financial institutions qualified under
Chapter 280 and two major brokerage firms. This bid list is adjusted periodically to
125
delete bidders who are non-responsive or non-competitive over a period of time,
replacing such institution(s) with other qualified institutions which have expressed an
interest to bid on City funds. Qualified institutions are defined as financial institutions
governed by Chapter 280 of the Florida Statutes with a branch location in Miami-Dade
County, Florida.
Brokerage houses must maintain an office in Miami-Dade County, Florida and are
selected based on the amount of equity in the firm, number of years the firm has been in
operation and reputation.
2. Place telephone calls requesting a bid from each institution on the bid list either on the
day of the transaction or the afternoon immediately preceding the transaction date.
3. Receive and note all bids on a standard form designated for this purpose and retain on
file for each transaction.
4. Select the highest winning bid
5. Transfer funds in exchange for evidentiary receipt from winning bidder.
The purpose of this process is to ~ prevent influence being experienced by either
City personnel or the financial institution in the selection of the institution chosen for the
purchase of City investments.
D. Authorized Investments
The City has established a list of authorized types of investments. The authorized cash
management investments are descried in Chapter 18A of the City Code and are further
limited as follows:
1. Time Deposits
Duration N/A
Maximum % of Portfolio 100%
Maximum per Issuer 25%
Ma*iffl~Ffl % ef GeffleiAee .~sset GFG~JE! ~GG%
2. Certificates of Deposit
Duration 1-3 yrs
126
3.
Maximum % of Portfolio
Maximum per Issuer
Maximum % of combined Asset Group
U. S. Treasury Bills
Duration
100%
25%
100%
N/A
Maximum % of Portfolio 100%
Maximum % of Combined Asset Group 100%
4. U. S. Treasury Notes
Duration
Maximum % of Portfolio
Maximum % of Combined .A.sset Group
0-7 yrs
100%
100%
5. U.S. Government Agency and Instrumentality Securities
Duration 0-7 yrs
Maximum % of Portfolio 50%
Combined Asset Group 50%
Maximum per Issuer 40%
Maximum% of
6. Rated or unrated bonds. notes. or instruments backed by the full faith and credit of the
government of Israel.
Duration 0-7 yrs
~M~a~x~im~u~m~~~o~o~f~P~o~rt~fo~li~o~ _____________ 5%
~M~a~x~im~u~m~p~e~r~ls~s~u~e~r _________________ 5%
eZ. Obligations issued by any state or territory of the United States, which are fully insured
or rated in one of the two highest rating categories by both Moody's Investors Service,
Inc. and Standard and Poor's Corporation or their successors.
7§.
Duration 7-10 yrs
Maximum % of Portfolio
Maximum per Issuer
Maximum % of Combined /\sset Group
Fixed Term Repurchase Agreements
Duration
Maximum % of Portfolio
Maximum per Issuer
Maximum % of Combined /',sset Group
Overnight Repurchase Agreements
50%
10%
50%
0-3 yrs
20%
25%
100%
127
Duration N/A
Maximum % of Portfolio 100%
Maximum Qer Issuer 25%
Maximum % of Combined Asset Group N/A
109. Bankers Acceptances
Duration N/A
Maximum % of Portfolio 20%
Maximum Qer Issuer 20%
Maximum % of Combined Asset Group 30%
110. Commercial Paper with a rating of A-1 or P-1 only, rated by Moody's or Standard &
Poor's
Duration N/A
Maximum % of Portfolio 20%
Maximum Qer Issuer 1 0%
Maximum % of Combined Asset Group 30%
1 ~.:t. Corporate notes, corporate bonds, medium term notes, Yankee notes, and Yanke9"
oowith temms of one year or less rated by 2 of 3 designated rating agencies in one of
the l'.vo highest rating categoriesas follows:
Maturity
Maximum % of Portfolio.:t
Maximum per Issuer
0-21%_m
20%
5%
Maximum % of Combined Asset Group~
a. Moody's AA3 higher
b. Standard & Poor's AA-or higher
c. Fitch AA-or higher
12~. Corporate notes, corporate bonds, medium team-term notes, Yankee notes, and Yankee
OOfiEI& with terms Gf-in excess of one year with a maximum of 5.0 years rated by 2 of 3
designated rating agencies as follows: in one of the two highest rating categories.
Duration d-7 ..1:§ yrs
Maximum% of Portfolio 20%
Maximum Qer Issuer 5%
Maximum % of combined Asset Group 30%
a. Moody's AA3 higher
b. Standard & Poor's AA-or higher
c Fitch AA-or higher
128
Formatt_t!~' .. !ndent: Hanging: 0.5'' .
[---·-·----,
Formatted: Indent: Hanging: 0.5'' I
1 ~-Money market mutual/trust funds which substantially conform with this policy as follows: •
Duration N/A
Maximum % of Portfolio
Maximum per Issuer
100%
50%
Maximum % of combined /\sset Group 100%
a. State of Florida Local Government Surplus Funds Trust Fund
b. Mutual/trust funds sponsored by the Florida League of Cities
c. Private money market mutual funds backed entirely by "Full Faith and
Credit" U.S. Government Securities not to exceed 25%
d. Intergovernmental investment pools rated "AAAm" authorized pursuant to
Florida State Statutes. 163.01, F.S.
14§. Fixed income mutual funds sponsored by the Florida League of Cities which
substantially conform with this policy as follows:
Duration N/A
Maximum % of Portfolio 25%
Maximum per Issuer 25%
Maximum % of combined Asset Group 25%
1a§. Mortgage-backed securities collateralized by first mortgages (or deeds of trust) and•
asset-backed securities collateralized by consumer or business receivables with a
maximum duration of 3.0 years at time of purchase and structured as either
collateralized mortgage obligations or unstructured pass-through securities and rated by
2 of 3 designated rating agencies as follows:
Group 50%
Maturity
Maximum % of Portfolio
Maximum per Issuer
a.
b.
c.
Moody's
Standard & Poor's
Fitch
3-5 yrs
15%
20%Maximum % of combined 1\sset
AAA3 higher
AA-or higher
AA-or higher
1eZ. Externally managed funds requiring specific approval by Commission with investment§. •
limited to City policy and rating criteria"
129
[Fc;;;----------,
Formatted: Indent: Hanging: 0.5'' ;
r----------------------------------------------.----
l Formatted: Indent: Hanging: 0.5" -----·---------~----~----·--· --·'.
Duration
Maximum % of Portfolio
1~-7 yrs
100:W%
20% Maximum % of combined /\sset Group
17~. Interest rate Swap agreements between the City and a counter party to pay/receive a-
fixed interest rate payment in exchange for a variable rate payment over a specified term
with the requirement that all "Swap" agreements be approved by City Commission prior
to execution.
Duration N/A
Maximum % of Portfolio 10%
Maximum % of combined 1\sset Group 20%
All repurchase agreements are fully collateralized and the collateral is held in the City's name by
a third party custodian. Repurchase agreements must be collateralized at minimum mark-to-
market value of 102% in U.S. Government securities.
Derivatives (defined as a financial instrument the value of which depends on, or is derived from
the value of one or more underlying assets or index of asset values) shall be utilized only if
specifically authorized as part of the investment plan and the Finance DirectorChief Financial
Officer or his designee has sufficient understanding/expertise to invest in derivatives. All
proposed derivative investments (including "SWAPS") will be analyzed by the City's Financial
Advisor and will be presented to the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee and the City
commission for approval. Repurchase Agreements (an agreement between an investor and a
security dealer whereby dealer agrees to buy back the security at a specified price in the future)
will be limited to transactions in which the proceeds will be used to provide liquidity. Any
investment which is not issued in "Book Entry Only" form is physically held by the City in a
secure vaulted area and surrendered only when invested funds and earnings are received by
the City at maturity.
E. Prohibited Investments
Funds to be invested in cash management investments may not be invested in the following:
Common Stock Private Placements
Preferred Stock
Convertible Bonds
Venture Capital
Options and Futures
Warrants
Unregistered or Restricted Stock
Margin Trading
Limited Partnerships
Oil and Gas Wells
10 or PO strips or inverse floater
mortgage backed securities
130
Foreign Exchange Commodities
Short Selling
Real Estate
Any Inverse Floating Rate Securities
_in a~diti()n t() thE! a!)ove prohibited investments, funds should not be invested in any scrutinized·
companies with active business operations in Sudan or Iran as listed by the State Board of
Administration (SBA) on a quarterly basis, which is outlined in the Protecting Florida's
Investment Act (F.S. 215.442 and 215.473).
F. Maturity and Liquidity Requirements
The City selects investments whose terms compliment the need to make the majority
expenditures set forth below.
1. Biweekly Payrolls
2. Periodic Debt Service Payments
3. Capital Project Needs
For each expenditure event, investments are selected whose maturities occur at a date close to
the date that funds will be needed. Investments also are selected based on the highest yield for
the particular type of investment. In the case of capital projects, in which the exact date that
expenditures will need to be made is unknown, the City selects several investments with varying
maturities so that monies are available each month to cover all capital expenditures. Any
unused capital investment funds are then placed in investments of one year or more to
maximize return potential.
/\s mentioned earlier, the City maintains an overnight investment program of approximately $9,000,000,
which provides ft:Jnds needed to cover daily operating expenses, exclt:Jding items #'s 1 a aeove.
Interest yields on these investments are competitive thot:Jgh somewhat lower than longer term
instrt:Jments.
G. Portfolio Composition
Diversity of investment types is highly desirable. To promote diversity, no security or individual
cusip shall exceed 5% of the City funds. Such diversity is necessary in cases where securities
are traded frequently and not held to maturity and where volatile securities are traded.
H. Custodial Account
131
All City investments, except for swap agreements, must be held in an independent custodial
account within the trust department of a major financial institution with a branch located in
Miami-Dade County, Florida. The custodian will not be utilized to buy or sell investments for the
City. All City investments must be registered in the City's name in book entry form evidenced by
transaction tickets maintained by the custodian with a copy provided to the City. Physical
possession of securities by the City should be avoided. The investment held by the custodian
must be reconciled monthly to the City's general ledger. The City will carry investments at cost
but will maintain a record of portfolio market value each month. However, investments are
recorded at fair value in the annual financial statements in accordance with GASB Statement
#31.
I. Treasury Management Services Master Repurchase Agreement
A "Treasury Management Services Master RepurohasAgreemenf' has been developed,
reviewed and accepted by the City and is part of the contract established with the City's main
depository bank. This agreement is a standard Public Securities Association ("PSA") form
agreement offering all recommended protection to the City. This agreement is scheduled to be
in effect for the duration of the contract with the City's main depository.
J. Investment Transaction Authority
The Finance OireoterChief Financial Officer has designated the Treasury Manager as the
individual responsible for managing the City's investments. The Treasury Manager discusses
investments with upcoming maturities with the Assistant Finance Director and the Fffian.Ge
GireotefChief Financial Officer if! there is a question as to new maturity target dates or type of
investment vehicle to be used. Based on these discussions, the Treasury Manager executes
the transaction and completes an "Investment Transaction Report" for each investment
transaction. Funds related to each investment are transferred according to authorized funds
transfer procedures and limits established under the provisions of the City's contract with its
main depository bank.
K. Internal Controls
The City has established a number of internal controls to prevent loss of funds by fraud,
employee error, misrepresentation by third parties, or imprudent actions by employees of the
City. The internal controls are as follows:
132
1. Investment transactions authority is limited to specific persons within the Finance
Department.
2. Wire transfer of funds authority is restricted to specific individuals with specific
dollar limits within the Finance Department. All non-repeat type wire transfers
require confirmation authorization by a second individual specified in wire
authority documents executed with the City's main depository.
3. All investment transactions require the approval of the Treasury Manager in
consultation with the Assistant Finance Director or Chief Financial Officer.
4. A monthly report is prepared by the Assistant finanse Direstarlnvestment
Advisor and distributed to the finanse DirestarTreasury Manager early in the
subsequent month for review. In addition a Financial Analyst in the Finance
Department receives a copy of this report and reconciles these investments with
the City's general ledger on a monthly basis.
5. An Jl.ssaunt Clerk IIA Financial Analyst Ill in the Finance Department reconciles
the City's general depository account on a monthly basis by comparing the City's
general ledger with the applicable bank account statements. The reconciliation
of the general depository account would reveal any difference in investment
transaction recording and the actual movement of funds.
6. Each month, the Assistant finanse DirestarFinancial Analyst Ill and the Treasury
Manager reconciles investments reflected in the custodial statements with the
City's records.
7. Each year both internal auditors and the City's external auditors review existing
internal controls as well as investment transactions by examining data on a
random basis.
L. Investment CommitteeAdvisor
The City engages the services of an investment advisor with regard to the management of its
investment program. Investment Advisors shall be registered with the Securities Exchange
Commission under the Investment Advisors Act of 1940. Advisors shall be selected usmg the
City's authorized purchasing procedures for selection of professional services and shall be
133
subject to the provisions of this Investment Pol1cy. Under no circumstances shall the advisor
take custody of any City funds or securities.
/\n investment committee will be established to exercise oversight responsibility concerning
types of investments and maturity of investments. The Committee •Nill consist of the follov:ing
individuals:
---F-inance Directof-Or his/her designee
Chairman of the Capital Improvements/Finance Committee
City Manager-ef-h.is/her Designee
City's Financial /\dvisor
Five members of the local banking/investment community
The committee will meet at least quarterly to discuss investment objectives, terms and choice of
investment alternatives ror the ~:~pcoming quarter. The Committee will assist in establishing
tirnelines for expenditure of capital project funds and for investment of any extraordinary rece$1
~eview portfolio perrormance for the previsions quarter and composition of the
investment~
M. Investment Reporting
As discussed previously, the Finance Department maintains several types of information and
reports on investments. The records relating to investments are as follows:
1. Investment Transaction Report - A recording/approval form for each investment
transaction, regarding both active and matured investments. This form also
indicates all bids obtained where applicable.
2. Investment bid sheet, where applicable, for each investment.
3. Investment be§-Monthly Statement-a document listing, in chronological maturity
order, pertinent information on each investment.
4. Investments by Banks/F1:1nas report generatea monthly ana reconciled 'l':ith tho
City's general leelgerlnvestment monthly statement is reconciled with the City's
general lodger.
5. Annual summary of average investment returns (which are included in the
monthly Investments Statements) which is subjected to external audit for
reasonableness of average stated yield for the fiscal year.
134
N. Recordkeeping and Performance Measurement
Comprehensive records of each investment transaction are maintained in the Finance
Department. These records include bid sheets where applicable, investment transaction
reports, investment bank advices, the aAfl!lal-monthly investment ~statements, and a quarterly
compilation of total returns for the preceding fiscal quarter by City fund type (e.g., General Fund,
Capital Projects, Enterprise, Internal Service). Annually, the City's external auditors review the
calculation of investment yields prepared by the Finance Department for comparison to indices
and comparative data maintained by the external auditors. They then determine the
reasonableness of the average yield calculated by the Finance Department. If no problem is
indicated, the Finance Department then compares its average annual yield to yields of
surrounding local governments when such information becomes available.
While yield is not the primary concern of the City's investment manager, it should be noted that
the City has consistently enjoyed an average yield competitive with other major local
governmental entities while assuming lower risk.
0. Pension Investments
The City does not manage the cash or investments of the City's fGI,ff-two pension systems. Each
pension system has elected or appointed members to its pension Board of Trustees who exercise
oversight over money managers engaged to manage pension fund investments in accordance with
policies and guidelines established by each pension system. The Boards, therefore, have oversight
authority over investments for pension systems and the City does not actively participate in this
process.
P. Bond Funds
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in City Code Chapter 18A or these investment
guidelines the provisions pertaining to investment of monies under all ordinances, resolutions, trust
indentures and agreements adopted or entered into by the City in connection with bonds issued by the
City or other dept incurred by the City will control and supersede the provisions herein contained with
respect to the investment of such monies.
135
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
136
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution retroactively approving a month to month extension to the Services Framework
Agreement between Parkeon, Inc. and the City; said extension commencing on December 24, 2011
and expiring no later than June 30, 2013.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Improve process through information technology.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): N/A
Issue:
Shall the City Commission Adopt the Resolution?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
On July 16, 2008, the Mayor and City Commission approved Parkeon Inc., as the sole source vendor
for Parkeon parking equipment, which is the provider of the City's multi-space pay stations for on-
street and off-street facilities. Subsequently, on December 24, 2008, the City entered into a Service
Framework Agreement with Parkeon Inc for technical support services. These services included;
Parkfolio (online pay station management system); online credit card processing; and extended
hardware warranty, for a term of three (3) years, which expired on December 24, 2011.
On September 23, 2011, the Mayor and Commission approved the issuance of RFP No. 46-10/11 for
the Purchase and Installation of Multi-Space Pay Stations for the City's on-street and off-street
facilities. The purpose of this RFP is to purchase, install, and/or upgrade the City's existing multi-
space pay station inventory and this new system will be under warranty. However, there will be a
transition period while all new multi-space pay stations are ordered, set-up, and installed. During the
transition period, the existing equipment will continue to need service from Parkeon, the manufacturer.
This transition is estimated to take 18 months; therefore, a month to month extension of the Parkeon
Services Framework Agreement for the Parkfolio Management System/online credit card processing
and hardware extended warranty is necessary to maintain the system operational.
The month to month extension shall contain the same terms and conditions of the existing agreement
during the 18 month extension. The monthly fee for Parkfolio Management Services/online credit card
processing is $24,500 and the monthly fee for hardware extended warranty is $12,173. These
expenses are already included in the Parking Department's operating budget.
The cost for the management system/online credit processing and extended hardware warranty will
continue with the existing vendor/system until such time that a new vendor/system is selected, if
applicable, as the current vendor/system has also submitted a proposal. This expense will gradually
transition from the current vendor/system to the new vendor/system as the new pay stations are
installed. The warranty expenditure will eventually cease when all pay stations are replaced and are
under the initial warranty of the new vendor/system. Adopt the Resolution.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
IN/A
Financial Information:
Source of Amount Account
Funds: 1
I I
2
3
OBPI Total
Financial Impact Summary: N/A
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
Saul Frances, Parking Director Ext# 6483
Assistant City Manager
JGG
F:\PING\$ALL\SAUL\Commission Items January 11, 2012\ParkingParkeonAgreement.sum.docx
MIAMI BEACH 137
AGENDA ITEM --:-C--=7_£ __
DATE /-//-/2.
ttl MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the Cit Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: January 11, 2012
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, RETROACTIVELY APPROVING
A MONTH TO MONTH EXTENSION TO THE SERVICES
FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND PARKEON
INC. FOR TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES, PARKFOLIO AND
ONLINE CREDIT CARD PROCESSING, MAINTENANCE, AND
EXTENDED HARDWARE WARRANTY; SAID EXTENSION
COMMENCING ON DECEMBER 24, 2011, AND EXPIRING NO LATER
THAN JUNE 30,2013.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
KEY INTENDED OUTCOME
Improve process through information technology.
ANALYSIS
On July 16, 2008, the Mayor and City Commission approved Parkeon Inc., as the
sole source vendor for Parkeon parking equipment, which is the provider of the
City's multi-space pay stations for on-street and off-street facilities.
Subsequently, on December 24, 2008, the City entered into a Service
Framework Agreement with Parkeon Inc for technical support services. These
services included; Parkfolio (online pay station management system); online
credit card processing; and extended hardware warranty, for a term of three (3)
years, which expired on December 24, 2011.
On September 23, 2011, the Mayor and Commission approved the issuance of
RFP No. 46-10/11 for the Purchase and Installation of Multi-Space Pay Stations
for the City's on-street and off-street facilities. The purpose of this RFP is to
purchase, install, and/or upgrade the City's existing multi-space pay station
inventory and this new system will be under warranty.
However, there will be a transition period while all new multi-space pay stations
are ordered, set-up, and installed. During the transition period, the existing
equipment will continue to need service from Parkeon, the manufacturer. This
138
Commission Memorandum
January 11, 2012
Multi-Space Pay Station (Parkeon) Service Framework Agreement -Extension
transition is estimated to take 18 months; therefore, a month to month extension
of the Parkeon Services Framework Agreement for the Parkfolio Management
System/online credit card processing and hardware extended warranty is
necessary to maintain the system operational.
The month to month extension shall contain the same terms and conditions of
the existing agreement during the 18 month extension. The monthly fee for
Parkfolio Management Services/online credit card processing is $24,500 and the
monthly fee for hardware extended warranty is $12,173. These expenses are
already included in the Parking Department's operating budget.
The cost for the management system/online credit processing and extended
hardware warranty will continue with the existing vendor/system until such time
that a new vendor/system is selected, if applicable, as the current vendor/system
has also submitted a proposal. This expense will gradually transition from the
current vendor/system to the new vendor/system as the new pay stations are
installed. The warranty expenditure will eventually cease when all pay stations
are replaced and are under the initial warranty of the new vendor/system.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission
retroactively approve a month to month extension of the services framework
agreement with Parkeon Inc., said extension commencing on December 24,
2011 and expiring no later than June 30, 2013.
JMG/JGG/SF/RAR
t:\agenda\2012\ 1-11-12\parkingparkeonagreement.cme.docx
139
FEDERALAPD
Federal Signal Corporation
Tuesday, April 06, 2010
To:
From:
Re:
City of Miami Beach
Attention: Mr. Saul Francis
Scott Fox
Regional Manager
Federal APD Distributor
Florida
To all doing business in South Florida, in regards to Federal APD products and services our authorized
Federal APD Distributor has been and will continue to be only Consolidated Parking Equipment located
Miami, Florida.
Federal APD Authorized Distributors are companies in a local area that market, sell, service, install and
maintain Federal APD products and services. Distributors maintain adequate stock of equipment, parts,
and supplies to effect service issues that relate to the system and equipment installed in the area they are
assigned. In addition all Federal APD Authorized Distributors staff Federal APD Factory Trained
Technicians and genuine parts. Consolidated Parking Equipment meets and exceeds these requirements.
Only F APD Distributors are authorized to purchase products, service support, replacement parts, software
and firmware that may either be uploaded, downloaded or provided via CD and other related equipment
and parts necessary for F APD products and services to function properly.
If you require additional information regarding this matter or we may be of any further assistance please
do not hesitate to contact us. (214) 205-3'800.
Sincerely,
Scott Fox
Regional Manager
cc: Jack Provencher, F APD District Manager
773 Kirkman Road, Suite 116
Orlando, FL 32811-2039 • (407) 299-0731 • (407) 578-1597
140
RESOLUTION NO.------
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, RETROACTIVELY
APPROVING A MONTH TO MONTH EXTENSION TO THE
SERVICES FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY
AND PARKEON INC. FOR TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES,
PARKFOLIO AND ONLINE CREDIT CARD PROCESSING,
MAINTENANCE, AND EXTENDED HARDWARE WARRANTY;
SAID EXTENSION COMMENCING ON DECEMBER 24, 2011,
AND EXPIRING NO LATER THAN JUNE 30, 2013.
WHEREAS, on July 16, 2008, the Mayor and City Commission approved
Parkeon Inc., as the sole source vendor for Parkeon parking equipment, which is the
provider of the City's multi-space pay stations for on-street and off-street facilities; and
WHEREAS, on December 24, 2008, the City entered into a Service Framework
Agreement with Parkeon Inc. for technical support services which included; Parkfolio
(online pay station management system); online credit card processing; and extended
hardware warranty, for a term of three (3) years, which term expired on December 24,
2011;and
WHEREAS, on September 23, 2011, the Mayor and Commission approved the
issuance of RFP No. 46-10/11 for the Purchase and Installation of Multi-Space Pay
Stations for the City's on-street and off-street facilities; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of this RFP is to purchase, install, and/or upgrade the
City's existing multi-space pay station inventory and, upon award, a service framework
agreement will not be necessary as the new equipment will be under warranty; and
WHEREAS, during the transition period (while all new multi-space pay stations
are ordered, set-up, and installed), the existing Parkeon equipment will continue to need
service from the manufacturer, Parkeon; and
WHEREAS, the transition period is estimated to be a period no longer than 18
months; therefore, a month to month extension of the Parkeon Services Framework
Agreement is necessary until no later than June 30, 2013; and
WHEREAS, the month to month extension shall contain the same terms and
conditions of the existing agreement during the 18 month extension and the monthly fee
for Parkfolio Management Services/online credit card processing is $24,500; and the
monthly fee for hardware extended warranty is $12, 173; and
WHEREAS, these amounts are already included in the Parking Department's
operating budget; and
141
WHEREAS, the cost for the management system/online credit processing and
extended hardware warranty will continue with the existing vendor/system until such
time that a new vendor/system is selected, if applicable, as the current vendor/system
has also submitted a proposal; and
WHEREAS, this expense will gradually transition from the current
vendor/system to the new vendor/system as the new pay stations are installed;
therefore, the warranty expenditure will eventually cease when all pay stations are
replaced and are under the initial warranty of the new vendor/system.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND THE
CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and
City Commission hereby retroactively approve a month to month extension to the
Services Framework Agreement between the City and Parkeon Inc. for technical
support services, Parkfolio and online credit card processing, maintenance, and
extended hardware warranty; said extension commencing on December 24, 2011, and
expiring no later than June 30, 2013.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this ___ day of------' 2012.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK MAYOR
JMG/JGG/SF/RAR
t:\agenda\2012\ 1-11-12\parkingparkeonagreement. res.docx
/
(
142
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution authorizing the Administration to issue purchase orders in the amount of $225,000 for
the maintenance and repair of the gated revenue control equipment for the City's Parking Garages
from the sole source provider, Consolidated Parking Equipment.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Improve process through information technology.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): N/A
Issue:
Shall the City Commission Adopt the Resolution?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
The gated parking revenue control system is an extremely important tool that the City's Parking
Department utilizes to operate and manage all of its parking garages. The system is provided and
maintained by Consolidated Parking Equipment (CPE) and it is comprised of software, hardware, and
equipment which monitors, processes, and provides audit trails for all parking transactions, including
transient and monthly parking uses.
We are now requesting the approval to open purchase orders for the maintenance and repair of the
exiting garages in the annual amount not to exceed $225,400. Funds for these expenses are already
appropriated and included in the Parking Department's Annual operating budget.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
Financial Information:
Source of Amount Account
Funds:
1 $115,500.00 480-0463-000325 -Parking
/" 2 $11,500.00 142-6976-000325-7m Street
/\ 3 $18,500.00 463-1990-000325 -Anchor
I \ .....-" 4 $31,500.00 467-1996-000325-Penn Avenue
1/ ·v, '( 5 $29,500.00 480-0463-000342 -Parking
I \ 6 $9,500.00 142-6976-000342-7'n Street
f 7 $4,500.00 463-1990-000342 -Anchor
8 $4,500.00 467-1996-000342-Penn Avenue
OBPI Total $225,000.00 TOTAL
Financial Impact Summary: N/A
Clerk's Office Le islative Trackin
Saul Frances, Parkin Director Ext# 6483
Assistant City Manager City Manager
JGG
T:\AGENDA\2012\1-11-12\ParkingRevenueControiCPE-MAINTENANCE.sum.docx
MIAMI BEACH 143
AGENDA ITEM _(_7_F __
DATE /-//-/2..
ttl MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager <\~ f
DATE:
SUBJECT:
January 11, 2012 U
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATION TO
ISSUE PURCHASE ORDERS IN THE AMOUNT OF $225,000 FOR THE
MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF THE GATED REVENUE CONTROL
EQUIPMENT FOR THE CITY'S PARKING GARAGES FROM THE SOLE
SOURCE PROVIDER, CONSOLIDATED PARKING EQUIPMENT.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
KEY INTENDED OUTCOME
Improve process through information technology.
FUNDING
Funding is available in the FY 2011/12 Parking Department Budget as follows:
$115,500.00 480-0463-000325 12TH, 13TH, 17TH, 42ND & CHG
$11,500.00 142-6976-000325 7TH ST GARAGE
$18,500.00 463-1990-000325 ANCHOR GARAGE
$31,500.00 467-1996-000325 PENN GARAGE
$29,500.00 480-0463-000342 12TH, 13TH, 17TH, 42ND & CHG
$9,500.00 142-6976-000342 7TH STREET GARAGE
$4,500.00 463-1990-000342 ANCHOR GARAGE
$4,500.00 467-1996-000342 PENN GARAGE
$225,000.00 TOTAL
ANALYSIS
The gated parking revenue control system is an extremely important tool that the City's
Parking Department utilizes to operate and manage all of its parking garages. The
system is provided and maintained by Consolidated Parking Equipment (CPE) and it is
comprised of software, hardware, and equipment which monitors, processes, and
provides audit trails for all parking transactions, including transient and monthly parking
uses.
PURCHASING AUTHORITY
On July 27, 2005, the City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2005-25959 which
approved Consolidated Parking Equipment (CPE) as the sole source provider of Federal
144
Commission Memorandum
January 11, 2012
Gated Parking Revenue Control Equipment Parking/CPE
APD gated revenue control equipment, pursuant to Section 2-367 (d) of the Miami
Beach City Code. This resolution also authorized the Administration to open purchase
orders for maintenance and repair in the total amount of $110,000 annually. Since the
approval of this memo in 2005, we have opened three (3) additional garages and added
equipment to the existing garages resulting in an increase to the annual maintenance
and repair expenses.
We are now requesting the approval to open purchase orders for the maintenance and
repair of the existing garages in the annual amount not to exceed $225,000. Funds for
these expenses are already appropriated and included in the Parking Department's
Annual operating budget.
CONCLUSION
Based on the aforementioned the Administration recommends that the Mayor and City
Commission authorizing the Administration to issue purchase orders in the amount of
$225,000 for the maintenance and repair of the gated revenue control equipment for the
City's parking garages from the sole source provider, Consolidated Parking Equipment.
JMG/JGG/SF /RAR
t:\agenda\2012\ 1-11-12\parkingrevenuecontrolcpe-maintenance.cme.docx
145
FEDERALAPD
Federal Signal Corporation
Tuesday, April 06, 2010
To:
From:
Re:
City of Miami Beach
Attention: Mr. Saul Francis
Scott Fox
Regional Manager
Federal APD Distributor
Florida
To all doing business in South Florida, in regards to Federal APD products and services our authorized
Federal APD Distributor has been and will continue to be only Consolidated Parking Equipment located
Miami, Florida.
Federal APD Authorized Distributors are companies in a local area that market, sell, service, install and
maintain Federal APD products and services. Distributors maintain adequate stock of equipment, parts,
and supplies to effect service issues that relate to the system and equipment installed in the area they are
assigned. In addition all Federal APD Authorized Distributors staff Federal APD Factory Trained
Technicians and genuine parts. Consolidated Parking Equipment meets and exceeds these requirements.
Only F APD Distributors are authorized to purchase products, service support, replacement parts, software
and firmware that may either be uploaded, downloaded or provided via CD and other related equipment
and parts necessary for F APD products and services to function properly.
If you require additional information regarding this matter or we may be of any further assistance please
do not hesitate to contact us. (214) 205-3'800.
Sincerely,
Scott Fox
Regional Manager
cc: Jack Provencher, F APD District Manager
773 Kirkman Road, Suite 116
Orlando, FL 32811-2039 • (407) 299-0731 • (407) 578-1597
146
RESOLUTION TO BE SUBMITTED
147
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
148
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution approving and appropriating funding for the sole source purchase of software upgrades
to the gated revenue control equipment from Consolidated Parking Equipment for the City's Parking
garages, in an amount not to exceed $30,250.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Improve process through information technology.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): N/A
Issue:
Shall the City Commission Adopt the Resolution?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
The gated parking revenue control system is an extremely important tool that the City's Parking
Department utilizes to operate and manage all of its parking garages. The system is provided and
maintained by Consolidated Parking Equipment (CPE) and it is comprised of software, hardware, and
equipment which monitors, processes, and provides audit trails for all parking transactions, including
transient and monthly parking uses.
On December 14, 2011, the City Commission awarded the Parking Mobile Application RFP to Parking
in Motion (PIM). This mobile application will provide information on the availability of parking in the
City's garages. In order to retrieve this information from the gated revenue control equipment, CPE will
need to upgrade and install the space count application interface. The cost for the interface is
$30,250 and includes all municipal garages.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
Financial Information:
Source of Amount
Funds: 1 $18,150
~ 2 $3,025
3 $3,025
4 $3,025
5 $3,250
OBPI Total $30,250
Financial Impact Summary: N/A
Clerk's Office Le islative Trackin
Saul Frances, Parking Director Ext# 6483
MIAMI BEACH
Account
480-0463-000312-Parking Fund
142-6976-000312-7"' Street Garage
463-1990-000312 -Anchor Garage
467-1996-000312-Penn Avenue Garage
484-0470-000312-5m & Alton Garage
TOTAL
149
AGENDA ITEM _C_7:.....G-=--
DATE /-//-/2._
(9 MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
MEMO# COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the Cit om mission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: January 11 , 2012
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND
APPROPRIATING FUNDING FOR THE SOLE SOURCE PURCHASE
OF SOFTWARE UPGRADES TO THE GATED REVENUE CONTROL
EQUIPMENT FROM CONSOLIDATED PARKING EQUIPMENT FOR
THE CITY'S PARKING GARAGES, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$30,250.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
KEY INTENDED OUTCOME
Improve process through information technology.
FUNDING
Appropriate funding as follows for the equipment upgrade:
$18,150.00 Fund 480 12th, 13th, 17th, 42nd & CHG
$3,025.00 Fund 142 7th St Garage
$3,025.00 Fund 463 Anchor Garage
$3,025.00 Fund 467 Pennsylvania Ave Garage
$3,025.00 Fund 484 5th and Alton Garage
$30,250.00 TOTAL
ANALYSIS
The gated parking revenue control system is an extremely important tool that the
City's Parking Department utilizes to operate and manage all of its parking
garages. The system is provided and maintained by Consolidated Parking
Equipment (CPE) and it is comprised of software, hardware, and equipment
which monitors, processes, and provides audit trails for all parking transactions,
including transient and monthly parking uses.
150
Commission Memorandum
January 11, 2012
Gated Parking Revenue Control Equipment Parking/CPE
On December 14, 2011, the City Commission awarded the Parking Mobile
Application RFP to Parking in Motion (PIM). This mobile application will provide
information on the availability of parking in the City's garages. In order to retrieve
this information from the gated revenue control equipment, CPE will need to
upgrade and install the space count application interface. The cost for the
interface is $30,250 and includes all municipal garages.
PURCHASING AUTHORITY
On July 27, 2005, the City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2005-25959
which approved Consolidated Parking Equipment (CPE) as the sole source
provider of Federal APD gated revenue control equipment, pursuant to Section 2-
367 (d) of the Miami Beach City Code.
CONCLUSION
Based on the aforementioned the Administration recommends that the Mayor
and City Commission approve and appropriate funds for the sole source
purchase of software upgrades to the gated revenue control equipment from
Consolidated Parking Equipment for the City's Parking garages, in an amount not
to exceed $30,250.
JMG/JGG/~RAR
t:\agenda\2012\ 1-11-12\parkingrevenuecontrolcpe-pkgapp.cme.docx
151
FEDERALAPD
Federal Signal Corporation
January 14, 2008
To: Whom it may concern
From: Scott Fox
Regional Manager
Re: Federal APD Distributor
Florida
To all doing business In South Florida, in regards to Federal APD products and services our
authorized Federal APD Distributor has been and will continue to be Consolidated Parking
Equipment located Miami, Florida.
Royce Parking as of March 9, 2008 will not be a authorized Federal APD Dealer or
Distributor.
Federal APD Authorized Distributors are companies in a local area that market, sell, service,
install and maintain Federal APD products and se.rvices. Distributors or Dealers maintain
adequate stock of equipment, parts and supplies to effect service issues that relate to the
system and equipment installed In the area they are assigned. In addition all Federal APD
Authorized Distributors or Dealers staff Federal APD Factory Trained Technicians.
Consolidated Parking Equipment meets and exceeds these requirements. Only FAPD
Distributors or Dealers are authorized to purchase products, service support, replacement parts,
software and firmware that may either be uploaded, downloaded or provided via CD and other
related equipment and parts necessary for FAPD products and services to function properly.
If you require additional information regarding this matter or we may be of any further
assistance please do not hesitate to contact us. (972) 871·0214.
Sincerely,. . . . j} /J(I~-J eft
Scott Fox
Regior:-al Manager
cc: Jack Provencher, FAPD District Manager
11126 SHADY TRAIL, SUITE 109, DALLAS, TX 75229 • (972) 243·5821 • (972) 243-5508
152
RESOLUTION TO BE SUBMITTED
153
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
154
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, Florida, Approving and Authorizing the
Mayor and City Clerk to Execute Amendment No. 1 in a Negotiated Not-To-Exceed Amount of $164,102.94, to an
Existing Agreement between the City of Miami Beach and ValleyCrest Landscape Development, Dated October 13,
2010, for Landscape Maintenance Services on the Boardwalk, Beachwalk, Street ends, and Spoil Areas Citywide,
Said Amendment for the Inclusion of the Miami Beach Soundscape.
Key Intended Outcome SuJ!ported:
Ensure well-maintained infrastructure
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): The 2009 Customer Satisfaction Survey indicated that
79% of businesses rated recently completed capital improvement projects as "excellent" or "good."
Issue:
I Shall the Mayor and City Commission approve the issuance of the RFQ?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
The construction of Miami Beach Soundscape was completed on January 23, 2011, with the Parks and Recreation
Department's Greenspace Management Division providing site management since January 24, 2011. The
landscape, porter, restroom services and pedestrian/seating surface pressure cleanings, are currently provided by
ValleyCrest Landscape Development, the general contractor for the SoundScape project. Their continued
maintenance services were secured after the initial 90-day maintenance period through the City's Development
Manager for the project, Hines, as noted in the Request for Proposal summary letter addressed to Assistant City
Manager Jorge Gomez dated January 21, 2011, and Memorandum No. 006-2011 dated June 12, 2011.
The work includes, but is not be limited to, litter retrieval and waste disposal, mowing, edging, landscape
maintenance, herbicide/insecticide/fertilizer application, turf management, irrigation system operation maintenance,
and repair and replacement of plants as required. The price for the services to be provided includes all labor,
equipment and materials needed to perform those duties.
ValleyCrest was contacted by the Parks and Recreation Department Greenspace Management Division
(P&RGMD) on December 5, 2011, to reaffirm its current price for on-going services at the Miami Beach
Soundscape, with the intention to formally amend the City's existing agreement with Valleycrest (as selected
through ITB 35-09/10 -"Landscape maintenance services on the Boardwalk, Beachwalk, Street ends, and Spoil
Areas Citywide") for the remainder of their term, which expires on June 10, 2013, to include the continued servicing
of the SoundScape at the current levels provided. On December 6, 2011, ValleyCrest confirmed its current pricing
for SoundScape ($164, 102.94). On December 12, 2011, two of the full-service landscape providers currently
contracted to maintain public areas citywide (and currently in good standing), Superior Landscaping and Lawn
Service Inc. and Everglades Environmental Care, Inc., were contacted by (P&RGMD and asked to submit price
proposals in order to verify current market pricing for the services being provided. (P&RGMD received price
proposals of $ 236,632 and $205.410, respectively. Following review of the pricing submitted, Parks staff
recommended ValleyCrest be contracted to to continue with the current delivery of service provided at the annual
price of $164,102.94, and amend Contract No. 35-09/10 to add the Miami Beach SoundScape location to the
"Section 3.1 -Scope of Work" of VallyCrest's existing landscape agreement.
The quality of the landscape services currently provided by ValleyCrest is to the level specified in the scope of work
for ITB 35-09/1 0 and the plant material is in vigorous healthy condition. The site was also recently assessed under
the Cleanliness Index Program during the third and fourth quarters of FY 2010/11 and rated an average score of
1.42 which exceeded the City's cleanliness goal of 1.5.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
IN/A
Financial Information:
Source of Amount
Funds: 1 N/A
OBPI Total
Financiallm_pact Summary: N/A
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
John Oldenburg ext. 6820
T:\AGENDA\2012\1-11-12\Consent\Soundscape Maint.
MIAMI BEACH 155
Account
AGENDA ITEM~~......._ __
DATE -.!-!.'--..!...>oo:::;,_
~ MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager?L </
January 11, 2012 0
A RESOLUTION OF THE M~ OR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 1, IN
A NEGOTIATED NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $164,102.94, TO AN
EXISTING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH AND
VALLEYCREST LANDSCAPE DEVELOPMENT, DATED OCTOBER 13,
2010, FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES ON THE
BOARDWALK, BEACHWALK, STREET ENDS, AND SPOIL AREAS
CITYWIDE, SAID AMENDMENT FOR THE INCLUSION OF THE MIAMI
BEACH SOUNDSCAPE.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
KEY INTENDED OUTCOMES SUPPORTED
Ensure well-maintained facilities
FUNDING
City Center RDA 168-9966-000312
BACKGROUND
The construction of Miami Beach Soundscape was completed on January 23, 2011, with the Parks
and Recreation Department's Greenspace Management Division providing site management since
January 24, 2011. The landscape, porter, and restroom services, along with the pedestrian/seating
surface pressure cleanings, are currently being provided by ValleyCrest Landscape Development, the
general contractor for the project. At the conclusion of the maintenance period following installation of
the landscaping (90 days), their continued maintenance services were secured through the City's
Development Manager for the project, Hines, as noted in the Request for Proposal summary letter
addressed to Assistant City Manager Jorge Gomez dated January 21, 2011, and Memorandum No.
006-2011 dated June 12, 2011 (Attachment A), and as further explained in the Memorandum to
Commission issued on June 12, 2011 (Attachment B)
SCOPE OF SERVICES
The Miami Beach Soundscape boundaries extend from the front edge of the western curb of
Washington Avenue to the east, west to the property line adjacent to the New World Symphony, north
156
Amendment to ValleyCrest Landscape Development Maintenance Services Contract
January 11, 2012
Page 2 of2
to the edge of the roadway (including curbs) at the south side of 17th Street and south to the front
edge of the curb on the of Lincoln Lane. The location is currently serviced daily from 9:00 a.m. to
midnight on Fridays and Saturdays and 9:00a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Sundays through Thursdays. The
work includes, but is not be limited to, litter retrieval and waste disposal, mowing, edging, landscape
maintenance, herbicide/insecticide/fertilizer application, turf management, irrigation system operation
maintenance, and repair and replacement of plants as required. The price for the services to be
provided includes all labor, equipment and materials needed to perform those duties.
COST COMPARISON PROCESS
ValleyCrest was contacted by the Parks and Recreation Department Greenspace Management
Division on December 5, 2011, to reaffirm its current price for on-going services at the Miami Beach
Soundscape, with the intention to formally amend the City's existing agreement with Valleycrest (as
selected through ITS 35-09/10 -"Landscape maintenance services on the Boardwalk, Beachwalk,
Street ends, and Spoil Areas Citywide") for the remainder of their term, which expires on June 10,
2013, to include the continued servicing of the SoundScape at the current levels provided. On
December 6, 2011, ValleyCrest confirmed its current pricing for SoundScape.
On December 12, 2011, two of the full-service landscape providers currently contracted to maintain.
public areas citywide (and currently in good standing), Superior Landscaping and Lawn Service Inc.
and Everglades Environmental Care, Inc., were contacted by the Parks and Recreation Department
Greenspace Management Division and asked to submit price proposals in order to verify current
market pricing for the services being provided at the Miami Beach Soundscape. The Parks and
Recreation Department received the following price proposals by December 19, 2011:
Annual Price
ValleyCrest Landscape Development $164,102.94
Everglades Environmental Care, Inc. $205,410.00
Superior Landscaping and Lawn Service Inc. $236,632.00
Based on the above analysis, it was concluded to be in the best interest of the City to continue with
the current delivery of service provided by ValleyCrest Landscape Development at the current annual
price of $164,102.94, and amend Contract No. 35-09/10 to add the Miami Beach SoundScape
location to the "Section 3.1 -Scope of Work" of VallyCrest's existing landscape agreement.
it is important to note that the quality of the landscape services currently provided by ValleyCrest is to
the level specified in the scope of work for ITS 35-09/10, and the plant material is in vigorous healthy
condition. The site was also recently assessed under the Cleanliness Index Program during the third
and fourth quarters of FY 2010/11 and rated an average score of 1.42, which exceeded the City's
cleanliness goal of 1.5.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission execute Amendment No.1 in a
negotiated not-to-exceed amount of $164,102.94, to the existing Agreement between the City of
Miami Beach and ValleyCrest Landscape Development, dated October 13, 2010, for "Landscape
maintenance services on the boardwalk, beachwalk, streetends, and spoil areas citywide," to include
landscape, porter, and restroom services, along with the pedestrian/seating surface pressure
cleanings, at SoundScape.
JMG/HMF/KS/JO
157
RESOLUTION NO. -----
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI
BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY
CLERK TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 1, IN A NEGOTIATED NOT-TO-EXCEED
AMOUNT OF $164,102.94, TO AN EXISTING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
MIAMI BEACH AND VALLEYCREST LANDSCAPE DEVELOPMENT, DATED
OCTOBER 13, 2010, FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES ON THE
BOARDWALK, BEACHWALK, STREET ENDS, AND SPOIL AREAS CITYWIDE,
SAID AMENDMENT FOR THE INCLUSION OF THE MIAMI BEACH SOUNDSCAPE.
WHEREAS, on September 15, 2010, the Mayor and City Commission accepted
the recommendation of the City Manager pursuant to Invitation to Bid (ITB) No. 35-
09/1 0 for landscape maintenance services on the boardwalk, beachwalk, street ends,
and spoil areas Citywide (the ITB); and
WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Clerk executed agreements with Luke Sawgrass
Landscape, Superior Landscaping and Lawn Service, Inc., and ValleyCrest Landscape
Development, on October 13, 201 0; and
WHEREAS, the Miami Beach Soundscape has been included as part of the list
of facilities noted in the scope of work in the ITB; and
WHEREAS, ValleyCrest Landscape Development submitted the lowest bid to
maintain the Miami Beach Soundscape.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City
Commission hereby approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute
Amendment No. 1, pursuant to Invitations to Bid (ITB) No. 35-09/10, in a negotiated not-
to-exceed amount of $164,102.94, to an existing Agreement between the City and
ValleyCrest Landscape Development; dated October 13, 2010, for landscape
maintenance services on the boardwalk, beachwalk, street ends, and spoil areas
Citywide; said Amendment for the inclusion of the Miami Beach Soundscape.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
PASSED and ADOPTED this __ day of ____ , 2012.
158
MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
~. &f'OR~ION -11 ~ '('t.-1,$ CitY~ Date
AMENDMENT NO. 1
TO
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA (CITY)
AND
VALLEYCREST LANDSCAPE DEVELOPMENT (CONTRACTOR)
FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES ON THE BOARDWALK,
BEACHWALK, STREETENDS, AND SPOIL AREAS CITYWIDE,
DATED OCTOBER 13, 2010.
This Amendment No. 1 to the above subject Agreement is made and entered into this
11TH day of January, 2012, by and between the CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA,
and VALLEYCREST LANDSCAPE DEVELOPMENT; and hereby amends the
Agreement as follows:
1. In addition to the listed areas, the Contractor must maintain the Miami Beach
Soundscape as defined in Invitation to Bid (ITB) No. 35-09/10. The Miami Beach
Soundscape boundaries extend from the front edge of the western curb of
Washington Avenue to the east, west to the property line adjacent to the New
World Symphony, north to the edge of the roadway (including curbs) at the south
side of 17th Street and south to the front edge of the curb on the of Lincoln Lane.
The location is to be serviced daily from 9:00 a.m. to midnight on Fridays and
Saturdays and 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Sundays through Thursdays. The
Contractor shall include the Miami Beach Soundscape at the annual cost of
$164,102.94.
2. The City and the Contractor agree that all other provisions of the Agreement shall
remain unchanged and in full force and effect. This Amendment supersedes and
governs any prior negotiations, correspondence, or conversations applicable to
the matters contained herein, and there are no commitments, agreements, or
understandings concerning the subject matter of this Amendment that are not
contained in this document.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be
executed by their appropriate officials, as of the date first entered above.
FOR CITY:
ATTEST:
By:
Robert Parcher
City Clerk
FOR CONTRACTOR:
ATTEST:
By:
Signature
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA
By:
Matti Herrera Bower
Mayor
VALLEYCREST LANDSCAPE DEVELOPMENT
By:
Signature
Print Name/Title Print Name/TitiPPftOVED AS TO
t::ORM & LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
/.-
159 Date
• l
···Rilles
·.
l .
ATTACHMENT A
21,2011
Gomez
t City Manager~ City of~i BeacQ ; .
Convention Center Drive ·
i Beach. Florida 33139 .
ami Beach SoundScape Landscape and Porter Services
As. evelopment ~ger for the City of Miami Beach SoundScape project, Hines
has provided. bid services for the long term landscape maintenance and porter
· ce for the restroom facility. within the newly constructed park and adjacent
ylvania Garage facility. A coroprehensive request for proposal was issued to
fo qualified landscape contractors on Pecember 17, 2010. The scope· of services
uict ded in the request for p!oposal include full service of l$1dscape, c).caning and
·sto · g of the park restroom (six daily), project wide·d~bris pickup (six daily) and .
ure cleaning of all ~cape with in the par~·and garage gro~ weekly.
request for proposal included two options: ·Option one includes pricing for
e project areas-within the. ;New .World Symphony Ciunpus · ·Expansion
(P ylvania Garage, Alley, New World Symphony, ·&;nd SoundScape). Option
TW includes pricing which assumes ·:all four areas are to .be awarded to a single
~J;raetor. The areas would be separately contracted by New World Symphony Inc
y and New World Symphony building) and City of Miami Beach (Garage and
). Option Two allows for reduce cost of maintenance (8-10% discount) and
. co . uity in maintenance operations. It is our uhderstanmng that New· World .
S phony In~ supports the award of contract to ValleyCrest for the Alley and New W*-1 d S~pbony Building grounds as described i1;1 Option Two. . ·
W . ~ve received bids from. three of the .four fums invited to ~ubmit a propos.al.
V leycrest Landscape.. Maintenance, Vila and Son Landscape and Supenor.
dscape submitted. bids~ Si.gnature Palms and Landscape declined. We. have
ewed the bids and recommend an awarded of mahrtenance and porter. -services
tract to ValleyCrest Landscape Maintenance who· is low bid following
otiation affinal pricing. ·
eyCtest Option One bid for· SolindScap~. is .$164,102:94 and for the
nsylvania Gatage $14,204 . .3-5 or total of $178,307 annually. ValleyCrest Option
T bid for $QlJndScape is $151,071.42 and·. for the Pennsylvania Garage
$1 ,031.52 ·or total of $164,102.94 annually. We recommend the City accept
I Va leyCrest Option Two combined bid price of $164,102.94 annually and enjoy a ·j sa: · gs of $14,204.06 or 9% p~r contract year. Tenn of -contract provided. in the ·
• Re uest ·for Proposal is the city standard three years with tWo year optional
.. t ·.
I
;:
160
..
...... ·.
. :
Val eyCrest bas submitted the most reaSonable and responsive bid. YalleyCrest is
the qal Contractor for the park project and as such )las the best vantage point
fro which to quantify the requirements ilecessary .to achieve the level of service
. . ed by the speCifications. The attached bid tally proyid.es additional 4etail.
In dition to the· monetary consideration, award to ValleyCrest for long term
• tenan~ also brings signifi~ value in terms of continuity for the project
.. ·V eyCrest is provi~ing a 90 day extended maintenance period following
pleti.on of the construction phase and will ·therefore be responsible for the
truction and maintenance period which would -seamlessly transition into the
ted long term maintenance.
.1'
losing while . all three bidders are qualified . to adequately provide ~ervices
ibed in the request for proposal. ValleyQ-est provide$ a· complete range of
s · ce for a .fee !bat represents low· bid for this projeet. VaUeyCrest is adequately
.st~e~ in the Miami area ~d ~s eager to co'?-tinue their p~p with C:ity of
Mi Beach's SoundScape proJect and the adJacent.Pennsylvama Garage proJect.
W have. provid~ John Oldenburg with of all proposals. and a complete line. item
bid ~ly. PI~ let us know if. we can be of fUrther. assistance.
· Shine .
Co struction Manager
. .
Cc KeVin Smith
John Oldenburg
Kent Bonde
Bruce Cijnton
.David Phillips
Matthew Barry
A hments:
40~ i.,.nccln Roao. 306
M;abi Beach. FL 33139
p 3~5.;>35 ~284 ,y.,. ....
.
.·
161
·.
..
'
UNIT PRICE BID FORM SOUND SCA.PE
..
Bid Tally and R.eeouunendation
·Rewed .. Original Bid Recommended . . .
~ESCRIPTION OF S ~RVIC'E ValleyCrest vnan89n Superior V.illeyCrest
FULL SERVICE VISIT s 18,200.00 s 17,316.00 s 73,600.00 s 15.600.00
Ai>DmONALMOWINO VISIT s 8,750.00 s 10,989.00 NIA s 7000.00
BOUGAINVILLEA TRIMMING I h1E $ 7,045.12 $ 456.00 s 6.000.00. s 2,048.00
PALM TRIMMINO s 19,608.00 ·$ 16,842.00" s 2,400.00 s 7,224.00
TREE tRIMMJNO s. 2,250.00 $ . 450.00 s 900.00 $ .1.800.00
BOUGAINVILLEA FER.TILJZA.i ON $ 420.00" s 18.00' $ 1,nBO.OO s 381.82
~ Pa~TIUZATION WIPRE MEROHER.B $ 1,324.08 s 3.586.00 s 5,940.00 s 1.203.71
TURP FERTIZATION WIINSEC'l CIDE · s 735.60 $ 3,81•6.00 s 2.400.00 s 668.73
TIIR.F FER.TR.IZA TION. . ·s . 588.48 $ ·1,638.00 s· 4;050.00 s 534.98
PALM 'P£RTtLIZATION $ 4,540.8.0 $ 5.376.00 $ 3960.00 $ 2,752.00
TREE PERT{LIZA TION . $ 540.00 $ 108.00 s 990.00 $ 490.91
WEED CONTROL ·s 4.550.00 ·s 3,600.00 s '5,096.00 s 2,316.36
~~jCALCONTROLPLAN $ 4.SOO.OO s . 3,600,00 $ s 040.00 ·s 3,1SC;OO ..
·MULCHING $. .. 2,640.00 s 7.535.50 $ 8,400.00 $· 2000.00
1 iluuOA TION .lNSPECl'IONS (in. iuru. l'enn.ir coSt) s 5.280.00 s· t.soo.oo $ 16.640.00 s 4.800.00 ., . . .
PRESSURE CL.EANINO $ 33.800.00 s 20,488.00 $ 33280,00 $ 26000.00
,. 'RESTROOM CLEANlNOISTOC INO s 62,415.00 s· 34,944.oo· s . 68,640.00 $ 37.230.00
R.EMOV AL OF DEBRIS $ 54,487.20 $ 27.300.00 $ 36,400.00 s 26.280.00
AER.fFICA TION s 2,400.00 $ 480.00 $ 2.800.00 ·s 2 181.82
tTOP.ORESSlNO .. .. $ S,OOO.OO s l,600.00. $ . 6..800.00 s 4.545.45
SPll<JNQ I s 3 150.00 $ 3,456.00 $ 5,400.00 $ 2.863.65
. Total Bid PiiceOption l s l4ll24.l8 s 165.098.50 s 29071~.00 $ 164,102.94
. Total Bid PAce Option 2 $ .229.973.00 $ 151,890.00 $ 290,716.00 $ 151,0?1.42
..
Not,!s: ..
L :Porter .Servicc-ltestro9m cteanu l;~ing includes 2190 visits or 6 daily. Includes cleaning and·paper suj_jplies.
2. Porter Service-Debris removal • eludes complerecleanup of park grounds including dumping of all~ b~ls.2190 visits or fl dally. Incllldes-supplies
. snd monthly pressure~ oftras contain~
3. rull service visit includes mowi ~ edging, weedq1ter work, blow down and wipe down of all signs, light poles ~once. ..yeeldy. Includes gtounds.inspec:tion
4. Additional mowing includes 5e4 j)nd weekly mowing -mow and blow dciwn only. ..
s. Pressure washln~ includes weel ty service cleaning111l hard surtb.ces, resn-oom building. ~<1. benches. Includes sruffiti remoYiii.()JI all surfil.ces.
Rbcommend,ation: RecoDlJ end Cl\'m contract with V aUeyCrest for maintenance. contract: V lllleyCrest bas .sUbmitted the
most complete and respon 've bid.
.•.
. Pr.ida.y lapullfY 22, 2(}11
)
..
162
; ..
'
\. , . ~·
l"NIT .PRICE BID FOR.'\'1 PE...l\lNSYL V A.t'IIA GARAGE
Bid Tally and Recommendation ..
.. : Revised
Original Recommended
DESCRIPTION () FSERVICE BidV~leyCrest VUai n Son S11perior ValleyCrest
FtJLt SERVICE V£SIT $ 1.950.00 s . 984.00 s 5.200.00 s t.m.7.3
PALM TRJMMING I s . .340.00 $ 65l.OO ·$ 3,200.00 $. 309.09
TR.EJ! TRIMMING $ 935.00 .$ 700.00 $ 450.00 s 850.00.
SflRUB FER.T1LIZATION $ 360.00 s 120.00 .$ 270.00 .$ 327.17
Thi'Rf FERTU.IZATION W:P R£ Etv(ERG HERB $ -s -$ 240.00 $ -
TURF FER.TIZATfON. WIIN5 ~CTICIDE s -$ -s 288.00 $ -
TURF. FERTILIZATION $' -$ -$ 180.00 ·.
..
$ -
l' ALM' FERTILIZATION · $ 204.00 s 146.00 s 720.00 s 185.45
. TREE FER.T.II..IZA TION s 99.00 $ . i48.00 s '135.00 s 90.00
WE£D CONTROL s 2,184.00 $ '480.00 s . 2.188.00 ·s 655.20
CHEWCALCONTRQ[. Pt.A N s t,080.00 s l20.00 $ 2,1'60.00 s 490.9l.
. MULCHING $ . 380.00' s 495.00 $ 6 720.00 .s 345.45
I
mRrO..A.TION INSPECTION {include repair cost) s 1,040.00 $ s4o.oo $ 6,240.00 s· 1,8S4.SS.
PRESSURE CLEANtNG $ 15,080.00 ·S 600.00 s 40,040.00 s 4,160.00
' [R.£MOV AL OF DEB'tUS $ 4,SSS.~ $ 4;562.50 s l3.832.00 s l,990.9l
Total Option L · . s 29,107.21)-'$. 14.411.00 s 81..,963.00 s 14,204.35
Total Option 2 s 27,000.00 s .. 13,258.00 s 81.,963.00 $ ll,D31.5l
·Notes:
: ..
. ·
1. Bid docum¢nts required we ~ldy pressure wa.shing and debris pickup 6 times daily.· .
2. Bid include.~ ~ntenance c fan ~ ex.terior to building.
..
. RecouUBendation: Rec mmend CMB contract with ValleyCrest for maintenance c:ontr.act
·, ..
. .
. •
'l :
.
' :
:
163
.!
.·,
mn"r PRICE Bm FORM l\fiAMI BEAcH souND scAPE rAR:K ·· ..
SERVICES BID FORM TO BE COMPLETED BY BIDDER
DESCRIPTION" OF SERVICE QUANTITY
, FULi SERVICE VISI lEA
1 EA:
..
BOUGINVILLEA £\.ILYZMMm,u.'I•GiTIE 64.
P.ALM 'TIUMMING 344
· TREE PR!JNING 9
BOUGINV1I.LEA FER.1~TION 1400
. 73,560
73,560
73,560
fALM FER.TILIZATIO 344
9.
WEED CONTR.QL 3,500
CHEMICAL CONTROl PLAN 75,000
M()LCHING: lEA
llUUGAUON INSPEC' ~ONS (include repair cost) 1 EA
PRESSURE CLE.AN.IN< lEA
RESTROOM rli='.A.NTh G/STOCKING · lEA
REMOVAL OF D.EBRl ·lEA
A.ER.JFICATION lEA
TOPDRESSING LEA
SPII<lNG tEA
ANNUAL
FRl..QUENCY
52
35
32 .
3
UNIT
PRICE
300.
200
7
2'00
'6 .045
2 ... 008
2 .oos-
2 .0()4
4 .2
3 · . lS.'jg.
52 .013 :· ...
12 .0035
1 .2,000
:
12 .~0.
52 500
TOTAL.
15,600
7,000
7,224
1,800
381.82 .
1,203.71
668.73
.534.98
. 2,752
490.91
2,316.36·
3,150
.. 2,000
4,800
.26,000
2190 17 37,230
2190 12' 26,280 ..
1,090.91 . . '2,181.82
2 . 2,272.73 4,545.45
6 477 .. 27 2,863.64
We are 1=0nfi: en'C tbat you woul:l benefit IJ):."e&ttY £::0111 ou:r: eftor.:e to creaee beAUty l..Q l:be
· appearar~e of your.landscape. Thr~ugh ou:r: vae'C ~pe:ience ·ot simiiar projects we would like che
·oppoz:tun.ity t( cb.ec:ass potential c:os: saving op.t:.i.ons. ·
OPTION 1 Al'lNUAL BIJ> TOTAL $ J64.102,?4
OPT.ION 2 AL~NUAL BID TOTAL $ 1St.071A2
Sound Scape Pa ~ RFP
164
c "' c ... -•
·.{
) .
UNIT PRICE BID FORM PENNSYLVANIA GARAGE.
:~------~--~~----~-------+----------4-----------4--------+----~---4
· · we ,are confidant that you would benefit greatly fxom our effoz:ts to create beauey in· the
appearance of youz landscape. Thxouqh ouz vast experience of similar projects we ·Would lika the
opportunit~ to ~iscuss potential cost saving options.
·SOund Scapc Pa k RFP
OPTION 1 ~"fNlrAL BID TOTALS 14,204,35
OPTION 2 A...l\INUAL BID TOTAL S13.031,S2
..
165
ATTACHMENT 8
~· MIAM BEACH ~:.~-,
City. of Mia~i Beac , 1~00 Con~ntlon-Center Drive~ Miami Beqch, Florida 3?139, www.rni~~i~~-~'Jee
MEMO NO. oo6 2011
TO: Comm ssioner Jonah Wolfson
FROM: Jorge . Go~lez. City Manager\ ,;.-c;
June 1 , 2011 U ..
..
DATE:
. MEf-4~~-J2M\{14; ~~~
.-..... :. ~.:..r.i::\n'W':.c"':.Qf,f'.\CE. ~~".(" ,-~~~ . : . ~-\ t· •.( .. ~ ....
, ......
· :· SUBJECT: MIAMl EACH ·soUNDSCAPE LANDSCAPE AND OTHER RELATED OPERATIONS ·
0 '• •
).'
. .
As 'per your li uest, attached please fmd the inform$tion you r~quested liegarding the· curlient
landscape mai tenance, porter and restroom facility ,services proyided on behalf of the City by
VaUeyCrest Lan scape Developmen~. · · ~ . . ·
As you may re -all, -a ninety (90} day maintenance period was incorporated as a :Component of the :
Miami ~Gh .s undScape ~nstruction Proj~ct. Upon final aeceptanee of the project by the City,
Hines managed all facets of the operation and maintenance of this site in cooperation with t!Je Parks·
and Recreation · apartment for this period. This maintenance phase began on January 24, 2011 and
ended on April 4, 2011. The interim maintenance was intended· to p,rovide an opportunity for the
city finaHze pen ing operational issues $8sociated with the long term managem·ent of this facility and
ensure Fa smoot. transition to long. term operations. •
: .
At the request f the Administration, Hines coordina~ed a process· to obtain request ·for proposals.
· ·from four fuH. se ice landscape maintenance companies. Three of the proposers provided service to ..
the city at the ti e under existing maintenance aglieements with the city, and the fourth participated
in the constru ion of the site. Hines used. the Parks and Recreation Department's landscape
specifications · use citywide, and co-developed t.he porter, hardscape and restroom service as
detailed in ·th RFP. The cost to provide landscape maintenance· at the newly completed
Pennsylvania GJa~ge was also requested, to ensure continulzy of maintenance and identify possible
benefits from e nomy of scale opportunities. · . · · . ·
The lowest ove II price quote for the prescribed service was received from ValleyCrest Landscape
Developmer}t a d Hines recommended the a®eptance of this quote as detailed in the letter which
i~cluded the ~i . results sent ~o City on January .21, 2011 (see attached). As the lowest responsive ·.
bidder, the pro osal from ValleyCr~st was accepted and they began successful service delivery as .
detailed above. When the end of the maintenance period. approached, the long-term operatfonal
issues for this I cation Were still in development In !iecognition of this situation, on April 25, 2011,
Miami Beach S1undScape was inCluded as an additional si~e to the existing agreement between the
.City and Valle Crest Landsc![ipe Development· as prescribed under terms Of the Bid # 35-09/10
Landscap~ M ntenance Services for the Beachwalk, Boardwalk, Street-Ends & Spoil Areas
·Citywide, sectit 2.4.3.3 paragraph C, Price Adjustments for the Addition of Sites. .
. The.prices·:. te~·and con~itions detailed within .the provided p;oposal·~~e ·in effect until the end. of.
the contract Pf?rjod speqified in bid '# 35-09/10 which is JUne 10, 2013, unless thi~ location is
removed from the above referenced contract as also prescribed in the agreement. · · ·
.. · P.lease.adVise J you h$ve addiHonal. questions or concSms. . .
cc: Mayor Jatti Herrera Bower and City Commissioners
Jose S~th, ·CityAttorney ·
Kevin Sf ith, Parks an~ Recreatio~
. !
166
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution Approving A Federal Equitable Sharing Agreement With The United States Department
Of Justice And The United States Department Of The Treasury, And Authorizing The Mayor And The
City Clerk To Execute The Agreement.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Increase resident ratings of public safety services.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): According to the Center for Research
and Public Policy, and Business Residential Satisfaction Survey of the City of Miami Beach,
residents in 2009, indicated that their three most important areas for the City of Miami Beach to
address in an effort to improve public safety throughout the City are: Preventing Crime 44.9%,
Enforcing Traffic Laws 36.1% and increasing Visibility of Police in the Neighborhoods 32.4%.
Issue:
j Shall the City adopt the Resolution?
Item Summary}Recommendation:
The Miami Beach Police Department (MBPD) periodically conducts investigations with a variety of
federal law enforcement agencies. During joint investigations where property (such as cash, vehicles,
and other real property) is seized and forfeited, the assets are shared by the agencies which
participated in the investigation.
As a prerequisite to receive MBPD's share of assets seized and forfeited, the United States
Department of Treasury, requests that the participating agency sign the Federal Equitable Sharing
Agreement in order to continue participation in the Asset Sharing Program.
The City will benefit financially through the MBPD's continued participation in the Asset Sharing
Program. The current Agreement has expired and renewing this agreement will ensure participation
in this program.
The Administration recommends approving the resolution.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
Financial Information:
Source of Amount Account
Funds: 1
D 2
3
OBPI Total
Financial Impact Summary:
N/A
Assistant City Manager City Manager
T:\AGENDA\2012\1--12\COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARYFederaiEquiitableSharing.docx
167
AGENDA ITEM L 7 I.
DATE 1-/1-rz .... MIAMI BEACH
ttl MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager . ~
January 11,2012 ) Q
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING A FEDERAL EQUITABLE
SHARING AGREEMENT WITH THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE AND THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY,
AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND THE CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE
THE AGREEMENT.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
ANALYSIS
The Miami Beach Police Department (MBPD) periodically conducts investigations with a
variety of federal law enforcement agencies. During joint investigations where property
(such as cash, vehicles, and other real property) is seized and forfeited, the assets are
shared by the agencies which participated in the investigation.
As a prerequisite to receive MBPD's share of assets seized and forfeited, the United
States Department of Treasury, requests that the participating agency sign the Federal
Equitable Sharing Agreement in order to continue participation in the Asset Sharing
Program.
The City will benefit financially through the MBPD's continued participation in the Asset
Sharing Program. The current Agreement has expired and renewing this agreement will
ensure participation in this program.
JMG/~
T:IAGENDA \2012\ 1-11-12\CommissionMemoFederaiEquitableSharing.docx
168
RESOLUTION NO.----
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING A FEDERAL
EQUITABLE SHARING AGREEMENT WITH THE UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND THE UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, AND AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR AND THE CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT.
WHEREAS, the City of Miami Beach wishes to enter into a Federal Equitable Sharing
Agreement with the United States Government Department of Justice and the United States
Department of the Treasury to provide a protocol for the City to receive the monies from the
Miami Beach Police Department's participation in joint criminal investigation where assets are
seized and forfeited; and
WHEREAS, the attached Agreement outlines the terms and restrictions governing the
use of federal forfeited property, or proceeds from such property to be shared with the Miami
Beach Police Department.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City
Commission herein authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the attached Agreement with
the United States Department of Justice and the United States Department of the Treasury.
PASSED and ADOPTED this ___ day of January, 2012.
ATTEST BY:
MAYOR MATTI HERRERA BOWER
ROBERT PARCHER, CITY CLERK
169
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
170
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution Authorizing The City Of Miami Beach, On Behalf Of The Miami Beach Police Department, To
Accept A Donation Of A T3 Motion Series ESV Three Wheel Electric Vehicle, With An Approximate Value
Of $9,000.00, From Mr. Adam Rose, Which Will Be Utilized For Specialized Patrol Along Walkways,
Beachwalks And Mall Areas.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Maintain crime rates at or below national trends.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): Pursuant to the 2009 Community Survey by
The Center For Research and Public Policy residential respondents reported the following as their top
three most important public safety areas for the City: Preventing Crime 44.9%, Enforcing Traffic
Laws 36.1% and lncreasinQ Visibility of Police in Neighborhoods 32.4%.
Issue:
Shall the Administration adopt the Resolution?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
Mr. Adam Rose, a City of Miami Beach resident wishes to donate a new T3 Motion Series ESV three
wheel electric vehicle to the Miami Beach Police Department. This vehicle has an approximate value of
$9,000, and will be used to patrol walkways, beachwalks and mall areas.
The Miami Beach Police Department is a strong proponent of community oriented policing which involves
high visibility patrol and significant interaction with residents, business owners and tourists. In this
community policing effort, the Miami Beach Police Officers utilize, bicycles, all terrain vehicles, and
segways to more effectively patrol areas frequented by residents and tourists that are less accessible than
standard patrol vehicles. The T3 Motion Series ESV vehicle will be housed and charged in the Miami
Beach Police Department Headquarters Station and since it is a fully electrical vehicle maintenance costs
will be minimal. The acquisition of this vehicle will further the effectiveness of police officers patrolling
residential and commercial areas most suited for this type of patrol vehicle.
The Administration recommends approving the resolution.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
Financial Information· .
Source of Amount
Funds: 1
D 2
3
OBPI Total
Financial Impact Summary:
NA
Assistant City Manager
T:\AGENDA\2012\1-11-12\CommissionltemSummryDonationT3MotionESVthreewheelvehicle.doc
MIAMI BEACH 171
Account
City Manager -
AGENDA ITEM ___,_C--,-,-7 _J" __
DATE I-ll-( 2-
ttl MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager ~~
January 11,2012 U U
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, ON BEHALF
OF THE MIAMI BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT, TO ACCEPT A DONATION
OF A T3 MOTION SERIES ESV THREE WHEEL ELECTRIC VEHICLE, WITH
AN APPROXIMATE VALUE OF $9,000.00, FROM MR. ADAM ROSE, WHICH
WILL BE UTILIZED FOR SPECIALIZED PATROL ALONG WALKWAYS,
BEACHWALKS AND MALL AREAS.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Approve the Resolution.
ANALYSIS
Mr. Adam Rose, a City of Miami Beach resident wishes to donate a new T3 Motion
Series ESV three wheel electric vehicle to the Miami Beach Police Department. This
vehicle has an approximate value of $9,000, and will be used to patrol walkways,
beachwalks and mall areas. The Miami Beach Police Department is a strong proponent
of community oriented policing which involves high visibility patrol and significant
interaction with residents, business owners and tourists. In this community policing
effort, Miami Beach Police officers utilize bicycles, all terrain vehicles, and segways to
more effectively patrol areas frequented by residents and tourists that are less
accessible than standard patrol vehicles. The T3 Motion Series ESV vehicle will be
housed and charged in the Miami Beach Police Department Headquarters Station, and
since it is a fully electrical vehicle, maintenance costs will be minimal. The acquisition of
this vehicle will further the effectiveness of police officers patrolling residential and
commercial areas most suited for this type of patrol vehicle.
JMG/rl,/fkrJ6
T:IAGENDA\2012\1-11-12\CommissionMemoDonatilonofT3MotionSeriesESV.docx
172
RESOLUTION NO.---------
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZ1NG THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, ON BEHALF OF THE MIAMI BEACH
POLICE DEPARTMENT, TO ACCEPT A DONATION OF A T3
MOTION SERIES ESV THREE WHEEL ELECTRIC VEHICLE,
WITH AN APPROXIMATE VALUE OF $9,000.00, FROM MR.
ADAM ROSE, WHICH WILL BE UTILIZED FOR SPECIALIZED
PATROL ALONG WALKWAYS, BEACHWALKS AND MALL
AREAS.
WHEREAS, the Miami Beach Police Department is a strong proponent of
community oriented policing, which involves the high visibility of Miami Beach Police
Officers, who significantly interact with local residents, business owners and tourists; and
WHEREAS, the Miami Beach Police Department utilizes bicycles, all terrain
vehicles, and segways to more effectively patrol those areas which are frequented by
residents and tourists as part of this community policing effort; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Adam Rose, a resident of the City of Miami Beach, wishes to
donate a new T3 Motion Series ESV three wheel electric vehicle (the "Vehicle") to the
Miami Beach Police Department, which will allow Miami Beach Police Officers to patrol
residential and commercial areas that are less accessible by a patrol vehicle; and
WHEREAS, the Vehicle is ideally suited to patrol walkways, beachwalks and mall
areas, and will be housed at the Miami Beach Police Department with minimal expense
to the City of Miami Beach for the maintenance of the Vehicle.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, authorizing the City of
Miami Beach, on behalf of the Miami Beach Police Department, to accept a donation of
a T3 Motion Series ESV Three Wheel Electric Vehicle, with an approximate value of
$9,000.00 from Mr. Adam Rose, which will be utilized for specialized patrols along
walkways, beachwalks and mall areas.
PASSED and ADOPTED this ___ day of January, 2012.
ATTEST BY:
MAYOR MATTI HERRERA BOWER
ROBERT PARCHER, CITY CLERK
173
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
174
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution To Consider Setting A Public Hearing For The February 8, 2012 City Commission Meeting,
To Consider Granting A Revocable Permit To 1790 Alton Holdings Lie, As Owner OfThe Property Located
At 1790 Alton Road, To Allow A Concrete "Eyebrow'' To Extend Into The Public Right Of Way On 181
h
Street And The Service Road Adjacent To Alton Road, And A Minimum Of 14 Feet Above The Sidewalk
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Maintain Miami Beach public areas and rights of way Citywide
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): N/A
Issue:
I Shall the City Commission grant the revocable permit?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
The property is a small triangular parcel located west of Alton Road between Dade Boulevard and 18'"
Street. The owner is developing a new modern commercial building on this site.
The design of this building has incorporated concrete "eyebrow" as an architectural element. These
"eyebrows" extend 12 inches outside of the property line and are at a minimum of 14 feet above the public
sidewalk. Concrete "eyebrows" are signature architectural features commonly found on many buildings
throughout Miami Beach.
The criteria for a revocable permit are satisfied per Miami Beach City Code Section 82-94, to allow an
encroachment over the City's right-of-way. The request is in harmony with the intent and purpose of the
City Code, and will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. The
permit will provide the applicant with a reasonable use of the property.
THE ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDS ADOPTING THE RESOLUTION.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
IN/A
Financial Information:
Source of Amount Account
Funds: 1
I I 2
OBPI Total N/A N/A
Financial Impact Summary: N/A
Si n-Offs:
Department Director City Manager
ORB
T:\AGENDA\2012\1-11-12\Revocable Permit 1790 Alton Road Summary.doc
MIAMI BEACH 175
AGENDA ITEM L 1 V(
DATE /:f/-f?,-
~ MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: January 11, 2012
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE
FEBRUARY 8, 2012 CITY COMMISSION MEETING, TO CONSIDER
GRANTING A REVOCABLE PERMIT TO 1790 ALTON HOLDINGS LLC,
AS OWNER OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1790 ALTON ROAD, TO
ALLOW A CONCRETE "EYEBROW" TO EXTEND INTO THE PUBLIC
RIGHT OF WAY ON 181 H STREET AND THE SERVICE ROAD ADJACENT
TO ALTON ROAD, AND A MINIMUM OF 14 FEET ABOVE THE
SIDEWALK.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
The Administration recommends adopting the resolution.
BACKGROUND
The property is a small triangular parcel located west of Alton Road between Dade Boulevard
and 181h Street. The owner is developing a new modern commercial building on this site.
The design of this building will incorporate a concrete "eyebrow" as an architectural element.
These "eyebrows" will extend 12 inches outside of the property line and will be at a minimum of
14 feet above the public right-of-way (attachment). Concrete "eyebrows" are signature
architectural features commonly found on many buildings throughout Miami Beach.
ANALYSIS
Pursuant to the criteria established under Section 82-94 of the City of Miami Beach Code of
Ordinances for the granting/denying of revocable permits, the City has analyzed the criteria and
issues the following conclusions:
1) That the applicant's need is substantial.
Satisfied. The proposed building has been designed to express an architectural style that is
contextual with the existing architecture of Miami Beach. The use of "eyebrows" as an
architectural element will be incorporated into the design to express horizontality. The design
is in conformance with the Design Guidelines of the City of Miami Beach Planning & Zoning
Department.
176
City Commission Memorandum-1790 Alton Road
January 11, 2012
Page 2 of3
2) That the applicant holds the title to an abutting property.
Satisfied. A copy of the title has been submitted as part of this application, which indicates
the applicant holds title to this property.
3) That the proposed improvements comply with applicable codes, ordinances, regulations, and
neighborhoods plans and laws.
Satisfied. The applicant will obtain all necessary building permits for the encroachments.
4) That the grant for such application will have no adverse effect on government/utility
easements and uses on the property.
Satisfied. The "eyebrows" will be placed at the height that will not impact vehicular access to
the property.
5) Alternatively:
a. That an unnecessary hardship exits that deprives the applicant of a reasonable use
of the land, structure or building for which the Revocable Permit is sought arising out
of special circumstances and conditions that exist and were not self-created and are
peculiar to the land, structures or buildings in the same zoning district and the grant
of the application is the minimum that will allow reasonable use of the land,
structures or building.
b. That the grant of the revocable permit will enhance the neighborhood and/or
community by such amenities as, for example, enhanced landscaping, improved
drainage, improved lighting and improved security.
Satisfied. b: This property is currently an empty lot on an important intersection that is the
eastern entrance to a commercial district. This project is key to expressing an entrance by
activating the eastern boundary of this neighborhood and enhancing the urban fabric. In
addition, the proposed "eyebrow" encroachments will provide some protection to pedestrians
from the sun and rain.
6) That the granting of the revocable permit requested will not confer on the applicant any
special privilege that is denied to other owner of land, structures, or building subject to similar
conditions.
Satisfied. Throughout the City's commercial district there are many examples of similar
conditions where concrete "eyebrows" on the front facades of the building extend over the
property line/public sidewalk. The applicant is not requesting consideration for anything that
has not been afforded to other commercial property owners on Miami Beach. Granting this
revocable permit will in no way impact access to or past the property.
7) That granting the revocable permit will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of
Article Ill of the City Code, and that such revocable permit will not be injurious to surrounding
properties, the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.
177
City Commission Memorandum-1790 Alton Road
January 11, 2012
Page3of3
Satisfied. The overhead "eyebrow" will be located at a minimum of 14'-0" above the sidewalk.
These "eyebrows" will enhance the sidewalk by providing pedestrians some protection
against the sun and rain. The "eyebrows" will be high enough to avoid conflict with vehicular
traffic, and provide no condition that could be considered hazardous or injurious.
The analysis above shows that the criteria for a revocable permit are satisfied per Miami Beach
City Code Section 82-94, to allow existing encroachments into the City's right-of-way to remain.
The request is in harmony with the intent and purpose of the City Code, and will not be injurious
to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. The permit will provide the
applicant with a reasonable use of the property.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission set a public hearing for the February
8, 2012 Commission Meeting, to consider granting a revocable permit to 1790 Alton Holdings
LLC, as owner of the property located at 1790 Alton Road, to allow a concrete "eyebrow" to
extend into the public right of way on 18th Street and the service road adjacent to Alton Road,
and a minimum of 14 feet above the sidewalk.
Attachment:
A. Sketch of the proposed encroachments
T:\AGENDA\2012\1-11-12\Revocable Permit 1790 Alton Road Memo.docx
178
RESOLUTION NO.----
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE
FEBRUARY 8, 2012 CITY COMMISSION MEETING, TO CONSIDER
GRANTING A REVOCABLE PERMIT TO 1790 ALTON HOLDINGS LLC,
AS OWNER OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1790 ALTON ROAD, TO
ALLOW A CONCRETE "EYEBROW" TO EXTEND INTO THE PUBLIC
RIGHT-OF-WAY ON 18TH STREET AND THE SERVICE ROAD ADJACENT
TO ALTON ROAD (AND A MINIMUM OF 14 FEET ABOVE THE
SIDEWALK).
WHEREAS, 1790 Alton Holdings LLC (Applicant) is the owner of property located at
1790 Alton Road; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant is developing a new commercial building on the property,
which is a small triangular parcel located west of Alton Road, between Dade Boulevard and 18th
Street; and
WHEREAS, the design of the building incorporates a concrete "eyebrow" as an
architectural element, which is a signature architectural feature commonly found on many
buildings throughout Miami Beach; and
WHEREAS, the aforestated "eyebrow" extends approximately twelve (12") inches into
the public right-of-way, on 18th street and the service road adjacent to Alton Road; and
WHEREAS, Applicant is requesting a revocable permit from the City to maintain the
encroachment on public property; and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Department is in receipt of Applicant's completed
application for a revocable permit and, accordingly, a public hearing must be set for the City
Commission to consider the request.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City Commission hereby set a
public hearing for the February 8, 2012 City Commission Meeting, to consider granting a
revocable permit to 1790 Alton Holdings LLC, as owner of the property located at 1790 Alton
Road, to allow a concrete "eyebrow" to extend into the public right-of-way on 18th Street and the
service road adjacent to Alton Road (and a minimum of 14 feet above the sidewalk).
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of January, 2012.
ATTEST:
Robert H. Parcher, City Clerk Matti Herrera Bower, Mayor
T:\AGENDA\2012\1-11-12\Revocable Permit 1790 Alton Road Reso.doc
179
....lo, 00 0 w :J z w > <( 1-(/} w ~ " I / ------------------------------I I I I I I 1!1 EXISTING EXTERIOR PARKING Ill I / I / I // I / / l // "~/ 1!1 18th STREET r-----------------1!1 @ I <l\) / '-l ""-,-/' 0"'<(,_,// ~0 ,/ / 1!1 / / / \)<(,_ ,/ \ ~~-/ v--/ 1!1 ~!S.~:-?SED SITE PLAN CD SITE LEGEND m I.NIDSI:N'£111\EA. [ll EX!Sn!GPAflli!NG-IISPHN.TPAVEMetlf I!J NEWC\Jila.euTIPAAKINGEtfTRV.SXIT I!J EXISTIHGliflliiFtelllOIW.. I!) PhOI'OSEDr.OCOI«:.MIJROwOVEIIllo\NG J!l EXIS11NG0.1'COKCRETECUfUI !!J EICISTIHGCQNCREtt$JDeWAllt. I!]EXISTJ«::PJI!J.Iml:E I!J!XISTJIGMI'fW.TPIIVE~. OJ EXISTIIIGQIAINLINKf'ENCll !lJNEW~S!OEWAUt Dl E:()&f«<UG»TPO\ .. ETOBEREL~lEO. [!) EXJSTJiGCOMI.I£1\CW.BLDG. [!I NEW 1!0U 00WN 9ECURI1Y G.'llE. 81 ROU..uf>OOOR. bd~--.... ,~ ...... p •. tl>ll._ / / / "'EYEBROW" TO EXTEND INTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY ON 18TH STREET AND THE SERVICE ROAD ADJACENT TO ALTON ROAD, AND A MINIMUM OF 14 FEET ABOVE THE SIDEWALK. z~~ i3 ~i 0 •• :2; ~~ t:l'o.o.TE" REVISitiH LOCATION PLAN SllEErmJ!SP~ 1 Q 1 I' ·I • • h q h p d n u q • fi q ~ 1 ~ d D R I' .I r ~ q b ij B p ~ d d n ;:x::. 1-3 1-3 ;:x::. \.l ::t: ::s: ~ 1-3 ;:x::.
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
Resolution authorizing the City Manager and the City Attorney's Office to proceed with the process of
condominiumizing the City-owned property located at 1661 Pennsylvania Avenue, Miami Beach, Florida.
Ke Intended Outcome Su orted:
Ensure well-maintained facilities.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.):
The 2007 Community Satisfaction Survey noted 82% of North Beach residents rated recent capital
ro·ects com leted as "excellent" or" ood" com ared to 89% of residents ci ide
Issue:
Should the City of Miami Beach proceed with the condominiumization of the Pennsylvania Avenue
ara e?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
On October 10, 2010, the City completed the construction of the Pennsylvania Avenue Garage, located at
1661 Pennsylvania Avenue. This project included 550 public parking spaces, as well as approximately 7,655
square feet of retail space available for lease. Through the City's broker, a potential private tenant for the retail
space was identified, and on April 13, 2011, the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach
approved a retail lease agreement between the City and Penn 17, LLC, for use of the ground floor retail
space .. So as not to jeopardize the tax exempt status of the parking garage, the Administration recommends
separating the retail area of the building from the garage portion of the building via a condominiumization
process, similar to what has been structured for other City-owned facilities containing retail and/or commercial
tenants, including 1701 Meridian Avenue and 1130 Washington Avenue. The private tenant is responsible for
paying any real estate taxes assessed for their space,
The City Attorney's office is in the process of finalizing the necessary forms to proceed with the
condominiumization of the retail space, pursuant to which the City would retain full ownership of the
condominium unit; the Mayor and Commissioners will serve as the condominium association board.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
I n/a
Financial Information:
Source of Amount Account Approved
Funds: 1 n/a
D 2
3
4
OBPI Total
Financial Impact Summary:
Ci Clerk's Office Le islative Trackin
ent Bonde, Asset Management Ext #6363
Si n-Offs:
Department Director Assistant City Manager City Manager
AP HF JMG
an11\consent\Condominiumization 1661 Penn Ave.doc
MIAMI BEACH AGENDA ITEM __ G_7_f-__
DATE (-/(-/2-181
MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager J1( January 11, 2012
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI
BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE TO PROCEED WITH, AND TAKE ANY AND ALL REQUIRED ACTIONS
RELATIVE TO THE CONDOMINIUMIZATION OF THE CITY-OWNED PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 1661 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
BACKGROUND
On October 10, 2010, the City completed construction of the Pennsylvania Avenue Garage, located
at 1661 Pennsylvania Avenue. This project included 550 public parking spaces, as well as
approximately 7,655 square feet of retail space available for lease. Through the City's broker, a
potential private tenant for the retail space was identified, On April 13, 2011, the Mayor and City
Commission approved the execution of a retail lease agreement between the City and Penn 17,
LLC, for use of the ground floor retail space.
ANALYSIS
As a municipal parking facility, the structure should remain exempt from having to pay property
taxes, comparable to other municipally-owned parking facilities and buildings that serve a public
purpose. However, because of the commercial retail space on the premises, the entire structure can
be deemed to be subject to property taxes. So as to ensure the continued tax exempt status of the
municipal parking garage, the retail portion of the building needs to be separated via a
condominiumization process. This process has been implemented in the past for other City-owned
facilities that also contain retail and/or commercial tenants, including 1701 Meridian Avenue and
1130 Washington Avenue. Under this process, property taxes are levied only for the
retail/commercial portions, which in some cases have been subdivided to accommodate tenant
needs; the retail tenants are responsible for the payment of property taxes. The retail tenant for
1661 Pennsylvania Avenue is, likewise, responsible for any property taxes levied for their retail
space.
The City retains full ownership of the condominium unit(s), with the Mayor and Commissioners
serving as the condominium association board.
It should also be noted that in the past, the City has used outside counsel to prepare and submit the
necessary Declaration of Condominium applications to file with the State of Florida. This time,
however, the City Attorney's office has been able to complete this work in-house at a significant cost
savings for the City. It is anticipated that the only cost associated with filing this application will
involve the filing and recording fees (estimated at $1 0,000).
182
January 11, 2011
City Commission Memorandum-Condominiumization -1661 Penn garage
Page 2 of2
CONCLUSION
The condominiumization of the 1661 Pennsylvania Avenue Garage will ensure that the public
parking garage portion of the building remains tax exempt.
JMG/HF/AP/kob
T:\AGENDA\2012\Jan 11\City\Condominiumization 1661 Penn Ave Memo.doc
183
RESOLUTION NO:--------
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE
ADMINISTRATION AND CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO PROCEED
WITH, AND TAKE ANY AND ALL REQUIRED ACTIONS RELATIVE TO
THE CONDOMINIUMIZA TION OF THE CITY -OWNED PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 1661 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, MIAMI BEACH,
FLORIDA.
WHEREAS, the City is the owner of the Pennsylvania Avenue municipal
parking garage located at 1661 Pennsylvania Avenue; and
WHEREAS, in addition to containing 550 parking spaces that serve a public
purpose, the garage building also includes approximately 7,655 square feet of ground
floor retail space; and
WHEREAS, on April 13, 2011, the Mayor and City Commission of the City of
Miami Beach approved a retail lease agreement between the City and Penn 17, LLC,
involving said retail space, for a term of nine (9) years and 364 days, commencing on
October 13, 2011 and terminating on October 12, 2021; and
WHEREAS, the conversion of said retail space to condominium status is
recommended in order to maintain (and/or otherwise support) some or all of the tax
exempt status of the facility.
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 Administration and City Attorney's Office to proceed with,
and take any and all required actions relative to the condominiumization of the
City-owned property located at 1661 Pennsylvania Avenue, Miami Beach, Florida.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 11th day of January, 2012
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
JMG/HF/AP/~
T:\AGENDA\2012Van 11\consent\Condominiumization 1661 Penn Ave Reso.doc
184
MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, Florida, retroactively
approving and authorizing the appropriation of a contribution of $60,000 from the Ocean Drive
Association and Orange Bowl Committee in support of the 2011-2012 New Year's Eve celebration.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Increase community ratings of cultural activities.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): The 2009 Community Satisfaction Survey reported
more than one-fifth of all resident respondents feel there are "too few" family friendly activities (24.6%) and
cultural activities (24.1 %). Additionally, on average, residents attended 10.61 cultural activities per year and
7.19 family friendly activities per year.
Issue:
Shall the City Commission accept a contribution from the Ocean Drive Association and Orange Bowl
Committee of $60,000 $30,000 each for the New Year's Eve celebration?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
Similar to the prior ten (10) years, the Ocean Drive Association (ODA) approached the City to request
participation and sponsorship of a free fireworks show on the beach east of Lummus Park at midnight on
New Year's Eve. Furthermore, ODA requested to close Ocean Drive to vehicular traffic beginning the
morning of Friday, December 30, 2011, reopening on Monday, January 2, 2012 at 7:00a.m. This year, the
Orange Bowl Committee also created a New Year's Celebration entitled Orange Drive. As part of the
celebration, the Orange Bowl Committee also agreed to contribute toward the Ocean Drive closure and
fireworks.
Additionally, many Miami Beach nightclubs and hotels hosted special New Years events. The City worked
with the area hotels and nightclubs to ensure that resources and security were appropriately allocated for
this weekend.
In the past, the City has assisted in defraying costs associated with New Year's Eve on Ocean Drive,
primarily associated with the fireworks show for the public and other ancillary City services. Because this
provides an enhanced experience for both our residents and visitors, the City Commission authorized cost
sharing for the road closure, fireworks and other related staffing costs for the past ten (10) years. This
year, the Ocean Drive Association and the Orange Bowl Committee covered the costs of the fireworks
display. Additionally, each organization also agreed to contribute $30,000 each toward the cost of the
closure.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
IN/A
Financial Information:
Source of Amount Account Approved
Funds: 1 $ 37,897.71
I I
2
4
OBPI Total
Financial Impact Summary: The Ocean Drive Association and Orange Bowl Committee have
each agreed to contribute $30,000 (for a total of $60,000) of the total cost of $97,897.71 for the street
closure for New Year's Eve on Ocean Drive.
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking: I MaxSklar
Si n-Offs:
Department Director Assistant City Manager City Manager
AGENDA ITEM _C._· ..~.-7.,..1'1 __
DATE J-J/-{7.--MIAMI BEACH. 185
MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miomi Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM:
DATE:
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager\){·~~
January 11, 2012 U"'"'-()
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH,
FLORIDA, RETROACTIVELY APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE APPROPRIATION OF A
CONTRIBUTION FROM THE OCEAN DRIVE ASSOCIATION AND ORANGE BOWL
COMMITTEE OF $60,000 IN SUPPORT OF THE 2011-2012 NEW YEAR'S CELEBRATION.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
BACKGROUND
Similar to the prior ten (1 0) years, the Ocean Drive Association (ODA) approached the City to request participation
and sponsorship of a free fireworks show on the beach east of Lummus Park at midnight on New Year's Eve. South
Beach has become a popular destination for New Year's Eve, and the fireworks show enhances the experience for
both our residents and visitors. In addition, Ocean Drive has previously been closed to vehicular traffic during the
New Year's Eve period, allowing for an enhanced pedestrian experience, which includes expanded sidewalk cafes.
As you are also aware, Miami-Dade County is home to the Orange Bowl college football classic, one of the Bowl
Championship Series (BCS) events. Over the years, events have been held in the City associated with the Orange
Bowl game and various ancillary events associated with the Orange Bowl.
ANALYSIS
This year's New Year's Eve events included the customary fireworks show and street closure. This year was also the
second year of the Orange Bowl Committee's New Year's Celebration entitled Orange Drive. The Orange Drive
event consisted of the following performances:
FRIDAY, December 30th Show Time 7-11pm
5:45-6:00pm Ribbon Cutting Ceremony
6:00pm Pete Wentz and Black Cards, Boyz II Men, Gym Class Heroes
SATURDAY, December 31st NEW YEAR'S EVE
8:00pm DJ lrie, Jason Derulo, Ne-Yo, NYE Countdown and Fireworks, Jermaine Dupri (DJ Set)
SUNDAY, January 1st
5:00pm Samantha Ronson (DJ Set), Cobra Starship, Cee Lo Green
TUESDAY, January 3rd
6:00pm School Bands, Cheerleaders and more! Travis Tritt
Additionally, many Miami Beach nightclubs and hotels hosted special New Year's Eve events. The City worked with
the area hotels and nightclubs to ensure that resources and security were appropriately allocated for the weekend.
City resources were allocated to support the events, as follows:
Police/Fire/Parking/Sanitation/Code Staffing
The City implemented enhanced staffing levels for Police, Fire, Parking, Sanitation and Code Compliance during the
New Year's Eve weekend in the entertainment district. This is in addition to the off-duty staffing secured (and paid)
by the Orange Drive program to support the activities and impacts associated with their event.
The Police Department had significant enhanced staffing throughout the weekend. In addition to the Orange Drive
Concert series and the Ocean Drive street closure, the department had officers on foot patrols, bicycle patrols and
ATV patrols throughout the Entertainment District, as well as undercover Crime Suppression Team officers. The
Police Department also conducted DUI Saturation Patrols throughout the weekend.
186
New Year's Eve
Ocean Drive Closure
City Commission Meeting
January 11,2012
Page 2 of2
The City also enhanced their enforcement of our current laws and regulations with respect to open containers and
public consumption of alcoholic beverages, in order to ensure that residents and visitors had a safe and enjoyable
experience in the City. In anticipation of the weekend, businesses ere hand-delivered letters reminding them of the
City's laws, and asking for their assistance in curbing public consumption of alcohol. The City's goal was to work in
partnership with our businesses to curtail the public consumption of alcoholic beverages throughout our city, which
sometimes results in negative and unwanted behavior. Signagewas developed by the City and offered to businesses
(free of charge) to help in educating their patrons about our laws.
Traffic & Parking Restrictions
Ocean Drive (5 to 14 streets) was open to pedestrians only (no vehicles) from Friday, December 30 at 7:00a.m.
through Monday, January 2, 2012 at 7:00a.m. in anticipation of large crowds during the holiday weekend.
Parking
All municipally operated parking facilities were open. The following lots had extended hours until 4:00 a.m. on
December 31/January 1:46 Street, South Pointe Park, Convention Center & Fillmore. Special event flat rates ($15-
$20) applied at most garages. Residential parking zones citywide were enforced, and valet operations normally on
Ocean Drive were relocated to Collins Avenue.
Extended Hours
Pursuant to current City Code, requests for extended hours were received and reviewed; if all criteria was met, they
were approved for extended hours until7:00 a.m. on Sunday, January 1, 2012 and Monday, January 2, 2012.
Expenses
The following were the expenses associated with this year's New Year's Eve events. As part of the celebration, the
Orange Drive event agreed to contribute toward the Ocean Drive closure and fireworks. As a result, the City's actual
costs were less than $38,000.
Ocean Drive Closure: Fri, Dec 30 (7am) -Mon, Jan 2 (7am)
EXPENSES
Police $ 53,928.00
Fire $ 35,969.71
Sanitation $ 8,000.00
TOTAL $ 97,897.71
REVENUES
ODA Contribution $ 30,000.00
City's Contribution $ 37,897.71
Orange Bowl Contribution $ 30,000.00
TOTAL $ 97,897.71
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends adopting the attached resolution, accepting contributions from the Ocean Drive
Association and Orange Bowl Committee of $30,000 each toward the costs of closure of Ocean Drive for New Year's
Eve events, as these events benefited the community and our visitors.
JMG\HMF\MAS
T:\AGENDA\2012\1-11-12\New Year's Eve 2011-2012.MEM.doc
187
RESOLUTION NO., ____ _
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, RETROACTIVELY APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING
THE APPROPRIATION OF A CONTRIBUTION FROM THE OCEAN DRIVE
ASSOCIATION AND ORANGE BOWL COMMITTEE OF $60,000 IN SUPPORT
OF THE 2011-2012 NEW YEAR'S CELEBRATION.
WHEREAS, similar to the prior ten ( 1 0) years, the Ocean Drive Association approached the
City requesting participation and sponsorship of a free fireworks show on the beach, east of
Lummus Park, at midnight on New Year's Eve; and the closure of Ocean Drive to vehicular traffic
beginning on the morning of Friday, December 30, 2011 reopening on Monday, January 2, 2012 at
7:00 a.m.; and
WHEREAS, the Orange Bowl Committee created a New Year Celebration entitled Orange
Drive and has also agreed to contribute toward the Ocean Drive closure and fireworks; and
WHEREAS, the City worked diligently with the area hotels and nightclubs to ensure that
resources and security were appropriately allocated for the weekend; and
WHEREAS, due to the popularity of New Year's Eve and its occurrence this year on Friday
evening, occupancy levels in Miami Beach were strong, and as result, many visitors enjoyed the
closure of Ocean Drive; and
WHEREAS, in the past, the City has assisted in defraying costs, primarily associated with the
fireworks show for the public and other ancillary City services.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City Commission of the City of
Miami Beach, Florida, hereby retroactively approve and authorize the appropriation of $60,000 from
the Ocean Drive Association and Orange Bowl Committee toward support of the City's costs for
2011-2012 New Year's celebration.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 11th day of January, 2012.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
JMG\HMF\MAS
T:\AGENDA\2011\1-19-11\New Year's Eve 2010-2011.RES.doc
188
MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
ltom~~ Date
R2
COMPETITIVE BID REPORTS
189
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
Request For Approval To Issue A Request For Qualifications (RFQ) For The Development Of The Miami Beach Convention Center
District.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Improve the Convention Center Facility
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): The 2009 Community Satisfaction Survey indicated that residents
attended events at the convention center 2. 7 times per year.
Issue:
I Shall the Mayor and City Commission approve to issue the RFQ?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
At its October 19, 2011 meeting, (pursuant to resolution No. 2011-27778) the City Commission authorized the Mayor
and the City Clerk to execute an agreement between the City and Strategic Advisory Group (SAG) to assist the City
with the expansion and enhancement of the Miami Beach Convention Center campus district.
During the May 20-21, 2011 City Commission Retreat, the Commission discussed and agreed to look at broader
development opportunities in the area beyond the Convention Center concept plan, and expressed a desire to find
ways to address the impact on traffic, mobility and to the surrounding neighborhoods, as well as maximizing green
space. Based on the potential development opportunities of the area immediately surrounding the Convention Center
(eg. approximately 6.2 million sq.ft. of FAR), and the potential expansion project cost, it was again determined that it
would be beneficial to develop the most effective strategy to solicit the right mixed-use development team for the
project, with a goal of ensuring the highest level of private-sector participation, and the best proposed design for the
expansion project to address our Convention Center needs.
As part of SAG's scope of services, SAG is to prepare a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) to select the development
team for the project. The RFQ is the first step in an effort to create funding options for convention center improvements
through a mixed-use master development of City-owned properties surrounding the convention center that would
create new revenues to the City. These incremental revenues could be used to fund potential convention center
improvements and/or provide operating funds.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
Financial Information:
Source of Funds:
I I
OBPI ~~~·~----------~------------+---------~
Financial Impact Summary:
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
Si n-Offs:
:\AGENDA\2012\1-11-12\MBCC-RFQ Summary.doc
MIAMI BEACH
191
JMG
AGENDA ITEM R~l\
DATE J-II-12-
~ MIAMI BEACH "'="'"
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City mmission
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager\\
January 11, 2012 ()
REQUEST FOR APPROVAL TO ISSUE A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS
(RFQ) FROM QUALIFIED DEVELOPERS FOR A PUBLIC-PRIVATE MIXED-USE
DEVELOPMENT IN MIAMI BEACH FOR THE ENHANCEMENT OF THE MIAMI
BEACH CONVENTION CENTER CAMPUS/DISTRICT, INCLUDING THE
EXPANSION OF THE MIAMI BEACH CONVENTION CENTER AND
DEVELOPMENT OF A CONVENTION CENTER HOTEL
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Approve the issuance of the Request for Qualifications (RFQ).
BACKGROUND
In October 2001, Convention Sports & Leisure (CSL) was commissioned by the Greater Miami
Convention and Visitors Bureau (GMCVB), in partnership with the City, to prepare a report that
concluded that the Miami Beach Convention Center (MBCC) was best positioned to serve the greater
Miami region given its geographic draw. However, the report also recommended that improvements,
including a multi-purpose general assembly/banquet hall, should be made to increase the
marketability of the Convention Center. In 2004, the Building Better Communities General Obligation
Bonds Program was approved Countywide, and included a total of $55 million for Convention Center
enhancement and expansion.
At the April 11, 2007 City Commission Meeting, the City Commission passed a motion supporting a
proposed MBCC expansion (to include a ballroom, retrofit of space to accommodate new meeting
rooms, and renovations to the northwest ballroom to create a "junior ballroom"), subject to the County
funding all costs associated with the project, and the County managing the renovations/ construction
process.
In April 2008, the City and County, in conjunction with interested Stakeholders, developed a long-term
vision and Master Plan for the MBCC. As part of this new Master Plan, CSL prepared a new study
that identified the following needs for the MBCC to be competitive: Multi-Purpose/Ballroom Space;
additional Meeting Space; Unique Features (e.g. outdoor terrace); the Development of a Convention
Center District; and the inclusion of an adjacent/nearby Convention Center Headquarters Hotel. A
competitive process was issued for the selection of the Master Plan architect to create a vision for the
implementation of those needs, and others that might be identified. Arquitectonica was competitively
selected as the Master Plan architect.
192
MBCC District RFQ
January 11, 2012
Page 2 of 5
Arquitectonica developed a preliminary Master Plan which included key features, including a
reorientation of the Convention Center entrance, additional exhibit space, ballrooms, meeting rooms,
and a 1 ,500 space parking garage. The master plan also identified potential locations for an adjacent
convention center hotel. Arquitectonica's Master Plan was designed within the existing zoning
restrictions for the expansion area (as they had been directed to proceed). The result was a design
that addressed the issues and needs identified by CSL and the Stakeholders, but that involved a
substantial level of massing on the available space.
On February 24, 2011, the Finance and Citywide Projects (FCWP) Committee met to consider the
Master Plan Report, including the option of a Convention Center hotel. The FCWP Committee
recommended to conceptually endorse the renovation and expansion of the MBCC to address the
needs identified in CSL's report, including the development of an adjacent Convention Center Hotel.
In addition, the FCWP Committee supported the engagement of an outside expert/firm to assist the
City with conceiving a broader development concept that would maximize the City's resources and
assets, and attract private sector investment.
On March 9, 2011, consistent with the FCWP Committee's recommendations, the Mayor and City
Commission passed and adopted Resolution No. 2011-27620, which endorsed and supported, in
concept, the project to renovate and expand the Miami Beach Convention Center, including an
adjacent Convention Center hotel, but did not approve the proposed master plan concept design. The -
Commission also ratified the FCWP Committee's recommendation to secure any necessary expertise
required to assist with the project, and authorized the City Manager to issue a Request for Proposals
(RFP) to secure those services.
During the May 20-21, 2011 City Commission Retreat, the Commission further discussed and agreed
to look at broader development opportunities in the area beyond the Convention Center concept plan,
and expressed a desire to find ways to address the impact on traffic, mobility and to the surrounding
neighborhoods. There was also a desire to maintain sensitivity for the historic district, while
maximizing green space. Based on the potential development opportunities (eg. approximately 6.2
million sq.ft. of FAR), and the potential expansion project cost, it was again determined that
assistance from a firm with experience and expertise in the development and implementation of
similar projects (including similar Private/Public Partnerships, PPPs) would be beneficial in developing
the most effective strategy to solicit the right mixed-use development team for the project, with a goal
of ensuring the highest level of private-sector participation, and the best proposed design for the
expansion project to address our Convention Center needs. On May 24, 2011, RFP No. 33-10/11 was
issued. After an evaluation process, Strategic Advisory Group (SAG) was deemed the most qualified
firm to assist the City with this process, based on their experience with similar projects in Florida and
throughout the Country in Convention Center and Convention Center Hotel Development, public
private partnerships, capital structuring, tax-exempt asset financing, tax revenue projection and bond
offering due diligence. SAG has a broad range of experience in overall transaction management with
private sector investment, identifying potential private partners, negotiating partnerships, executing
transactions, monitoring private partner progress, and communicating the project's costs and benefits
(economic impact, jobs, taxes, etc.). SAG is to serve as an extension of staff in the project
development process.
On September 14, 2011, via Resolution No. 2011-27738, the City Commission authorized the City
Manager to negotiate with Strategic Advisory Group and, subsequently,on October 19, 2011, via
Resolution No. 2011-27778, the City Commission authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into an
agreement between the City and SAG for services relative to the expansion and enhancement of the
MBCC District, pursuant to Request for Proposals (RFP) No 33-10/11 in an amount not to exceed
$175,000, including all reimbursable expenses.
193
MBCC District RFQ
January 11,2012
Page 3 of 5
REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ)
As previously reported, SAG's scope of services includes drafting a Request for Qualifications (RFQ)
from developers for the master development of the MBCC District. The RFQ is the first step in an
effort to create funding options for convention center improvements through a mixed-use master
development of City-owned properties surrounding the convention center that would create new
revenues to the City. These incremental revenues could be used to fund potential convention center
improvements and/or provide operating funds.
As part of SAG's effort to have a better understanding of the scope of the project, SAG met with City
staff, toured the convention center and surrounding area, and reviewed the "Master Plan" and other
related information. Also, SAG, as the City's primary advisor, has met with members of the hotel
industry and convention bureau, as well as other stakeholders, to further understand their concerns
and other related project issues. Through these recent industry discussions, it was determined that
the Center needs, at a minimum, a "Class A" renovation, a new ballroom and a new Convention
Center hotel to make the Center competitive and attract the high-end conventions to the region.
Referendum Requirement
The expanded development site, referred to as the MBCC District, is approximately 52 acres that
encompasses the convention center facility, adjacent surface parking lots, City Hall, a parking garage ·
(1ih Street), and other related city offices (555 17 Street/1701 Meridian Building). The combined area
allows for up to approximately 6.2 million square feet of FAR. All developers and other interested
parties will be informed that any sale, exchange, conveyance or lease of ten(1 0) years or longer of
any or all the City-owned properties in the MBCC District requires approval by a majority vote of
residents in a City-wide referendum, pursuant to Section 1.03(b)(2) of the Miami Beach City Charter.
City Priorities
In addition to the improvement and expansion of the MBCC, the RFQ also will highlight additional City
priorities for the master development, including increased outdoor public space, a walkable district
providing connectivity between the Convention Center and Lincoln Road and the City's historical and
cultural district, iconic architecture in keeping with the City's history of significant design, sensitivity of
massing adjacent to existing residential neighborhoods, and optimal economic and community
benefits to the City.
RFQ Submittal Requirements
RFQ Proposers can be master developers or development teams. The Proposers will be required to
submit a package of material, including information about their teams, key personnel, company
history, financial capabilities, relevant development experience and references. The complete
response requirements will be detailed in the RFQ document.
RFQ Evaluation Process
In preparation for the RFQ process, SAG met with approximately 30 interested local, national and
international development, hotel, and construction companies. The RFQ will focus on Proposers that
will act as the master developer, and less so on construction or design companies, unless these
companies are acting as financial partners.
Key to the evaluation of the RFQ responses will be the firm's relevant experience in undertaking
similar master development projects, and its financial strength to carry out a development of the
magnitude contemplated. The Proposers' relevant experience should include large mixed-use
developments with a combination of retail, hotel, convention center, entertainment, residential and
other commercial uses. Proposers will be requested to summarize at least five development projects
of comparable size and scope as the MBCC District proposed development, the role it played in each
194
MBCC District RFQ
January 11, 2012
Page 4 of5
of the representative developments, and the professional experience of each key personnel that will
be involved with the proposed MBCC project. Firms can work together to submit joint qualifications to
satisfy the requirements for relevant experience.
Each Proposer also must provide information that demonstrates financial capability to take on the
proposed MBCC development. Proposers will be required to summarize its broad approach to
financing the various components of the proposed development. The RFQ response should include
a summary of the Proposer's role in the capitalization of the project, relationships with capital sources,
and the Proposer's commitment to provide all or a portion of the financing. In addition, the Proposers
must describe any requested public financing participation.
An Evaluation Committee appointed by the City Manager will evaluate Proposers based on relevant
experience and financial strength, and recommend to the City Manager a group of shortlisted
Proposers that will proceed to the next phase of evaluation.
Criteria for Relevant Experience will include experience with the following types of developments:
• Convention Center
• Hotel
• Retail/Restaurant
• Entertainment
• Other Commercial or Residential
• Public Spaces I LEED Sustainable Development
Criteria for financial strength will include the following:
• Approach to Project Financing
• Relationships with Capital Sources
• Demonstrated ability to finance similar projects
• Years in business
The City Manager will request the Commission's approval of the recommended shortlisted Proposers,
and request authorization to negotiate Letters of Intent (LOis) with some or all of the shortlisted
Proposers. Once given Commission authorization, the Administration, with SAG's assistance, will
negotiate Letters of Intent (LOis) with each of the accepted shortlisted Proposers. These terms will
later be presented to the City Commission for its consideration and direction.
The shortlisted Proposers, as part of the next stage of the evaluation process, will be required to
prepare a detailed proposal for the MBCC District. The detailed proposal will include a master plan for
the site, project renderings, a breakdown of proposed uses and square footages of each use including
public open spaces, renovation and expansion plan for the convention center facility, proposal for the
convention center hotel, a phasing and absorption plan, the financing plan, any request for public
assistance, a summary of projected new City revenues to be generated by the proposed
development, and additional information outlined in the RFQ document. These also will be some of
the terms that will be negotiated in the LOis.
This phase, as part of the preparation of the detailed proposal, will include community involvement to
gain input on local needs and concerns. To initiate the public outreach, the City will arrange a
community workshop which will be professionally facilitated by a third party. Proposers will be
encouraged to hold additional, subsequent community meetings if they deem it helpful in the
preparation of their proposal.
195
MBCC District RFQ
January 11, 2012
Page 5 of5
The Administration will provide the City Commission additional details regarding the next phase of
evaluation, such as the selection schedule and evaluation criteria, when the Commission considers
approval of the recommended shortlisted Proposers.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission authorize the Administration to
issue a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) from qualified developers for a public-private mixed-use
development in Miami Beach for the enhancement of the Miami Beach Convention Center
Campus/District, including the expansion of the Miami Beach Convention Center and development of
a Convention Center hotel.
T:\AGENDA\2012\1-11-12\MBCC RFQ Memo.doc
196
R5
ORDINANCES
197
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
An Ordinance Amending Chapter 110 Of The City Code, Entitled "Utilities," By Amending Article
IV, Entitled "Fees, Charges, Rates And Billing Procedure," By Amending Division 3, Entitled
"Billing Procedure," By Amending Section 110-191, Entitled "Payment Of Bills," By Amending
110-191(B) By Changing The Penalty For Late Utility Bills From Ten Percent Of The Current Bill
To 0.833% Per Month Of The Late Outstanding Balance ...
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Increase community satisfaction with City Government.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): 87% of residents rated Miami Beach as
an excellent or good place to live.
Issue:
I Shall the Mayor and City Commission approve the Ordinance?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
The Administration recommends that the City Commission adopt the alternative method proposed or refer it
to the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee for clarification.
At the July 13, 2011, City of Miami Beach Commission meeting, a discussion item regarding the reduction of
a utility bill's penalty percentage was referred by Commissioner Jonah Wolfson to the F&CWPC. Presently,
a one-time ten percent penalty is added to the current portion of all past due water, sewer and stormwater
utility bills (utility bills). No additional interest or penalties are charged.
On October 19, 2011, at a meeting of the F&CWPC, the Committee unanimously recommended removing
the one-time 10% penalty on the current portion and instead adopted a recurring monthly charge of 1.5% on
any portion of the account balance that is past due.
This recommendation came after penalties and interest from other utility companies were presented. The
Committee recommended charging 1.5% per month to be consistent with other utility companies, such as
Florida Power and Light and TECO -Peoples Gas.
At the December 14, 2011 City of Miami Beach Commission meeting, upon first reading, the Commission
unanimously voted to remove the one-time 10% penalty on the current portion and instead adopt a recurring
monthly charge of 1.5% on any invoice that is past due, up to a cap of 1 0% per invoice.
We have consulted with our EDEN Utility Billing System software provider, Tyler Technologies who advised
that most utilities add a flat fee or a percentage to the past due bill. As a result, their software is able to add
a percentage fee to past due bills or charge a flat past due fee but can not accomplish the proposed
percentage cap by invoice.
An alternative method that could be used to achieve a similar result would be to charge .083% per month on
any past due balances. Using this method the annual interest rate would be 10%.
Board Recommendation:
Source of Amount Account
Funds: 1
I I
2
3
OBPI Total
Financial Impact Summary:
Clerk's Office Le islative Trackin :
Patricia D. Walker T:\AGENDA\2012\01-14-12\UTB CH 110 Ordinance Penalty -Summ 2nd Reading
Department Director Assistant
POW
MIAMI BEACH 199
AGENDA ITEM _R_;...5_A __
DATE [-lf-1 2-
MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachH.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the Ci ommission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: January 11, 2012
SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APTER 110 OF THE CITY CODE,
ENTITLED "UTILITIES," BY AMENDING ARTICLE IV, ENTITLED "FEES,
CHARGES, RATES AND BILLING PROCEDURE," BY AMENDING DIVISION
3, ENTITLED "BILLING PROCEDURE," BY AMENDING SECTION 110-191,
ENTITLED "PAYMENT OF BILLS," BY AMENDING 110-191{B) BY
CHANGING THE PENALTY FOR LATE UTILITY BILLS FROM TEN
PERCENT OF THE CURRENT BILL TO 0.833% PER MONTH OF THE LATE
OUTSTANDING BALANCE; PROVIDING FOR REPEALER, SEVERABILITY,
CODIFICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission adopt the alternative method proposed or
refer it to the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee for clarification.
BACKGROUND
At the July 13, 2011, City of Miami Beach Commission meeting, a discussion item regarding the
reduction of a utility bill's penalty percentage was referred by Commissioner Jonah Wolfson to the
Finance and Citywide Projects Committee (F&CWPC).
Presently, a one-time ten percent penalty is added to the current portion of all past due water, sewer
and stormwater utility bills (utility bills). No additional interest or penalties are charged.
ANALYSIS
On October 19, 2011, at a meeting of the F&CWPC, the Committee unanimously recommended
removing the one-time 10% penalty on the current portion and instead adopted a recurring monthly
charge of 1.5% on any portion of the account balance that is past due.
This recommendation came after penalties and interest from other utility companies were presented.
The Committee recommended charging 1.5% per month to be consistent with other utility
companies, such as Florida Power and Light and TECO -Peoples Gas.
Previously, the Committee increased the days allowed for payment from 15 to 21 to be consistent
with other utility companies.
200
UTB CH 100 Qrdinance Revision
Page 2 of2
At the December 14, 2011 City of Miami Beach Commission meeting, upon first reading, the
Commission unanimously voted to remove the one-time 1 0% penalty on the current portion and
instead adopt a recurring monthly charge of 1.5% on any invoice that is past due, up to a cap of 1 0%
per invoice.
Patricia Walker, Chief Financial Officer was not certain that the Eden software system used for utility
billing could place a percentage cap by invoice and it was agreed that that the software company
would be contacted between first and second reading to determine if the proposed method was
feasible.
We have consulted with our EDEN Utility Billing System software provider, Tyler Technologies ,who
advised that most utilities add a flat fee or a percentage to the past due bill. As a result, their
software is able to add a percentage fee to past due bills or charge a flat past due fee but can not
accomplish the proposed percentage cap by invoice.
An alternative method that could be used to achieve a similar result would be to charge .0833% per
month on any past due balances. Using this method the annual interest rate for past due bills would
be 10%.
If this method does not achieve the Commission's goal, then it is recommended that the item be
referred back to the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee for clarification.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission adopt the alternative method proposed or
refer it to the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee for clarification.
JMG/PDW/mm
T:\AGENDA\2012\01-11-12\UTB CH 110 Ordinance 1.5% Penalty-Memo 2"d Reading
201
ORDINANCE NO. ______ _
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 110 OF THE CITY CODE,
ENTITLED "UTILITIES," BY AMENDING ARTICLE IV, ENTITLED
"FEES, CHARGES, RATES AND BILLING PROCEDURE," BY
AMENDING DIVISION 3, ENTITLED "BILLING PROCEDURE," BY
AMENDING SECTION 110-191, ENTITLED "PAYMENT OF BILLS,"
BY AMENDING 110-191(B) BY CHANGING THE PENALTY FOR
LATE UTILITY BILLS FROM TEN PERCENT OF THE CURRENT BILL
TO 0.833% PER MONTH OF THE LATE OUTSTANDING BALANCE;
PROVIDING FOR REPEALER, SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATION AND
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, on July 13, 2011, the City of Miami Beach Commission referred a
discussion item regarding the reduction of a utility bill's penalty percentage to the
Finance And Citywide Projects Committee; and
WHEREAS, presently, a one-time ten percent penalty is added to the current
portion of all past due water, sewer and stormwater utility bills; and
WHEREAS, on October 19, 2011, at a meeting of the Finance and Citywide
Projects Committee, the Committee recommended removing the one-time ten percent
penalty on the current portion and instead adopted a recurring monthly charge of 1.5%
on any portion of the account balance that is past due; and
WHEREAS, this recommendation came after the Finance and Citywide Projects
Committee analyzed and compared penalties and interest from other utility companies;
and
WHEREAS, on December 14, 2011, the City of Miami Beach Commission, upon
first reading, unanimously voted to remove the one-time 10% penalty on the current
portion and instead adopt a recurring monthly charge of 1.5% on any invoice that is past
due, up to a cap of 10% per invoice; and
WHEREAS, our Chief Financial Officer was not certain that the Eden software
used for utility billing could place a percentage cap by invoice and it was agreed that the
software company would be contacted between first and second reading to determine if
the proposed method was feasible; and
WHEREAS, after consultation with the City's Eden Utility Billing System provider,
Tyler Technologies, who advised that most utilities add a flat fee or a percentage to the
past due bill, and as a result their software is able to add a percentage fee to past due
bills or charge a flat past due fee, but cannot accomplish the proposed percentage cap
by invoice; and
WHEREAS, an alternative method that could be used to achieve a similar result
would be to charge .0833% per month on any past due balances; and
202
WHEREAS, using this method, the annual interest rate for past due bills would
be 10%; and
WHEREAS, if this method does not achieve the Commission's goal, it is
recommended that the item be referred back to the Finance and Citywide Projects
Committee for clarification.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: That Chapter 110 of the City Code, Article IV, Division 3, Section 110-
191 (b), of the Miami Beach City Code is hereby amended as follows:
Sec. 110-191(b).-Payment of bills.
(b) All water, sewer, and stormwater utility bills, ... , shall be paid within 21 days from the
date of the bill. A teR 0.833 percent penalty shall be added to the past due balance of
all water, sewer, and stormwater utility bills ... , if not paid within 21 days from the date of
bill. .. A teR 0.833 percent penalty shall be added to the past due balance of all bills
rendered ...
SECTION 2. CODIFICATION.
It is the intention of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, and it is hereby
ordained that the provisions of this ordinance shall become and be made part of the Code of the
City of Miami Beach, Florida. The sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or relettered
to accomplish such intention, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section", "article", or
other appropriate word.
SECTION 3. REPEALER.
All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be and the same are hereby repealed.
SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY.
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance is, for any
reason, held invalid or unconstitutional, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and
independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the
remaining portions of this Ordinance.
SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Ordinance shall take effect on the ____ day of ______ , 2011, which is 10
days after adoption.
PASSED and ADOPTED this _____ day of ______ ,, 2011.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
I Letters or numbers that are stricken through are deletions from existing mance.
Letters or numbers that are underlined are ad!9&s to existing ord\nance. City Attorne {F Date
1_6NE I THURSDAY, DECEMBER 29, 2011 MiamiHerald.com I THE MIAMI HERALD
~ MIAMIBEACH
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
NOTICE OF PUBLIC. HEARINGS
NOTICE IS HEREBY given that second readings and public hearings will be held by the Mayor and City Commission
of the City of Miami Beach, Florida, in the Commission Chambers, 3rd floor, City Hall, 1700 Convention Center Drive,
·Miami Beach, Florida, on WEDNESDAY, January 11, 201'2 to consider the following:
11i:15a.m.
Ordinance Amending Chapter 11 0 Of The City Code, Entitled "Utilities," By Amending Article IV, Entitled "Fees, Charges,
Rates And Billing Procedure," By Amending Division 3, Entitled "Billing Procedure," By Amending .Section 110-191,
Entitled "Payment Of Bills," By Amending 110-191.(B) By Changing The Penalty For Late Utility Bills From ren Percent
Of The Current Bill To 1.5% Per Month Of The Late Outstanding Balance.
Inquiries may be directed to the Anance Department at (305) 673-7 466.
10:20a.m. ..
Oroinance Amending Chapter 26 Of The Miami. Beach City Code Entitled "Civil Emergencies," By Amending Article II,
Entitled "State Of Emergency," By Repealing Section 26-32, Entitled "Automatic Emergency Measures" Due To The
Preemption Of The Entire Field Of Regulation Of Firearms To The State Of Florida; By Amending Chapter 70, Entitled
"Miscellaneous Offenses," By Amending Article I, Entitled "In General," By Repealing Section 70-2, Entitled "weapons;
Discharging," Due To The Preemption OfThe Entire Reid Of Regulation Of Arearms To The State Of Florida; By Amending
Chapter 1 06 Of The Miami Beach City Code, Entitled '"Traffic And Vehicles," By Amending Article Ill, Entitled "Parades,"
By Amending Division 2, Entitled "Permit," By Amending Section 1 06-375(A)(1) To Repeal Language Regarding The
Regulation Of Firearms That Is Preempted By Tlie State Of Florida, And To Provide That Weapons Shall Not Include Any
Destructive Device ·or Firearm As Defined Under Florida Law,
Inquiries m&Y be directed to the Legal Department at (305) 673-7470.
10:25a.m. _
Ordinance Amending Chapter 10 Of The Miami Beach City Code Entitled "Animals," By.Amending Section 10-10, Entitled
"Animals Prohibited In Public Parks And On Beaches" To Cross-Reference Language In Section 1 0-11 Regarding
Off-Leash Areas For-Dogs; By Amending Section 10-11, Entitled "Running At Large Prohibited," By Extending The
Pilot Program 'Off-Leash Area For Dogs In South Pointe Park Until July 15, 2012, By Providing O,ff-Leash Hours In The
Designated Area In The Morning From Sunrise To 10:00 A.M. Daily And Between 4:00 P.M. And ·7:00 P.M. Monday
Through Friday, And Relocating The Off-Leash Area To The South And East OfThe Washington Avenue Entry Plaza.
Inquiries may be directed to the Parks and Recreation Department at (305) 673-7730.
5:00p.m.
An Ordinance Amendifl!fThe Land Development Regulations Of The :Code Of The City Of Miami Beach, By Amending
-Chapter 142;: "Zoning Districts And Regulations," ArticlE~ If, "District Regulations," Division 18, "PS Performance
Standard District", Section 142-696 "Residential Performance Standard Area Requirements"_To Modify The Maximum
Height Requirements For Residential Apartment Structures; By Amending Section 142-697 ·:setback Requirements In
The R-PS 1, 2, 3, 4 District," To Modify The Setback Requirements For Oceanfront Buildings.
Inquiries may be directe_d to the Planning Department at (305) 673-7550. ·
5:o5p.m.
Ordinance Granting To Florida Power And Light Company, Its Successors And Assigns, An Electric Franchise Imposing
Provisions And Conditions Relating Thereto, Providing For Monthly Payments To The City Of Miami Beach:
Inquiries may be directed to the Public Works Department at (305) 673-7080.
INTERESTED PARTIES are invited to appear at this meeting, or be represented by an agent, or to express )heir views in
writing addressed to the City Commission, c/o the City Clerk, 1700 Convention .Center Drive, 1st Floor, City Hall, Miami
Beach, Florida 33139. Copies of these ordinances are available for public inspection during normal business hours
in the City Clerk's Office, 1700 Convention Center Drive, 1st Floor, City Hall, and Miami Beach, .Florida 33139. This
meeting may be continued and under such eircumstances additional legal notice would not be provided.
Robert E. Parcher, City Clerk
City of Miami Beach
Pursuant to Section 286.0105, Fla. Stat., the City hereby advises the public that: if a person decides to appeal any
decision made by the City Commission with respect to any matter considered at its meeting or its hearing, such person
must-ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence
upon ·which the appeal is to be based. This notice does not constitute consent by the City for the introduction or
admission of otherwise inadmissible or irrelevant evidence, nor does it authorize challenges or appeals not otherwise
allowed by law.
. -~-J
To request this material in accessible format, sign language interpreters, informatiol:} on ;at;cess for persons with
disabilities, and/or any accommoC!ation to review any document or participate in any city-sponsored proceeding,
please contact (305) 604-2489 (voice), (305)673-7218(ITY) five days in advanca to initiate your request. TIY users
may also call 711 (Florida Relay Service).
Ad#686 204
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATIORNEY
JOSE SMITH, CITY ATIORNEY COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower
Members of the City Commission
City Manager Jorge M. Go lez
FROM: City Attorney Jose
DATE: January 11, 2012
SECOND READING
PUBLIC HEARING
SUBJECT: Ordinance Repealing Various Provisions in the Miami Beach City Code
Regarding the Regulation of Firearms due to Preemption by the State of
Florida.
The attached Ordinance amends the City Code to comply with the new state law preempting the
regulation of firearms to the State of Florida. Based upon prior City Attorney opinions that the
City Code provisions regarding firearms were preempted by state law, the Administration was
proactive in changing the City's beach "no firearms" signs prior to the enactment of the new
state law. Due to amendments to Section 790.33, Fla. Stat., the Florida legislature has now
made clear that local governments are preempted form regulating firearms. The new State law
further provides penalties for officials and local governments that enforce any such preempted
local ordinances, administrative rules, or regulations.
The Ordinance was referred to the Neighborhoods and Community Affairs Committee at the
November 2, 2011 Commission meeting by Commissioner Jerry Libbin. At the Neighborhoods
and Community Affairs Committee meeting, the proposed Ordinance was discussed and the
Committee moved this item to the full Commission for consideration. The City Commission
approved the Ordinance on First Reading on December 14, 2011.
DT/sc
205
Agenda Item R 55
Date l-11-l2-
ORDINANCE NO.------
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 26 OF THE
MIAMI BEACH CITY CODE ENTITLED "CIVIL EMERGENCIES," BY
AMENDING ARTICLE II, ENTITLED "STATE OF EMERGENCY," BY
REPEALING SECTION 26-32, ENTITLED "AUTOMATIC EMERGENCY
MEASURES" DUE TO THE PREEMPTION OF THE ENTIRE FIELD OF
REGULATION OF FIREARMS TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA; BY
AMENDING CHAPTER 70, ENTITLED "MISCELLANEOUS
OFFENSES," BY AMENDING ARTICLE I, ENTITLED "IN GENERAL,"
BY REPEALING SECTION 70-2, ENTITLED "WEAPONS;
DISCHARGING," DUE TO THE PREEMPTION OF THE ENTIRE FIELD
OF REGULATION OF FIREARMS TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA; BY
AMENDING CHAPTER 106 OF THE MIAMI BEACH CITY CODE,
ENTITLED "TRAFFIC AND VEHICLES," BY AMENDING ARTICLE Ill,
ENTITLED "PARADES," BY AMENDING DIVISION 2, ENTITLED
"PERMIT," BY AMENDING SECTION 106-375{A){1) TO REPEAL
LANGUAGE REGARDING THE REGULATION OF FIREARMS THAT IS
PREEMPTED BY THE STATE OF FLORIDA, AND TO PROVIDE THAT
WEAPONS SHALL NOT INCLUDE ANY DESTRUCTIVE DEVICE OR
FIREARM AS DEFINED UNDER FLORIDA LAW; PROVIDING FOR
REPEALER, SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATION, AND AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, during the 2011 session of the Florida Legislature, HB 45 was adopted,
effective October 1, 2011, which preempted the entire field of regulation regarding firearms to
the State of Florida; and
WHEREAS, HB 45 also provides for civil fines up to $5,000.00, as well as other
penalties, for the enactment or enforcement of local laws or regulations in conflict with the new
State law and which makes local governments, and their elected and appointed government
officials, liable therefor; and
WHEREAS, there are various provisions in the Miami Beach City Code which must be
repealed or amended in order to comply with HB 45.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1.
That Section 26-32 entitled "Automatic Emergency Measures" of Article II of Chapter 26
of the Miami Beach City Code is hereby repealed as follows:
Chapter 26
CIVIL EMERGENCIES
206
* * *
Article II. State of Emergency
* * *
Sec. 26 32. A~:~tomatic emergency meas~:~res.
Whenever the city manager declares that a state of emergency exists, pursuant to
section 26 31, the follo¥.'ing acts shall be prohibited during the period of emergency throughout
the city:
(1) The sale of or offer to sell 'l.'ith or without consideration, any ammunition or gun
or other firearm of any si2:e or description.
(2) The intentional display, after the emergency is declared, by or in any store or
shop of any ammunition or gun or other firearm of any si2:e or description.
(3) The intentional possession in a public place of a firearm by any person, except a
duly authori2:ed la•.v enforcement official or person in military service acting in the
official performance of his duty.
SECTION 2.
That Section 70-2 entitled "Weapons, discharging," of Article I of Chapter 70 entitled
"Miscellaneous Offenses" of the Miami Beach City Code is hereby repealed as follows:
Chapter 70
MISCELLANEOUS OFFENSES
* * *
Article I. In General
* * *
Sec. 70 2. 'Neapons; discharging.
It shall be unla•Nful for any unauthori2:ed person to discharge, fire or shoot within the city
any firearm or other weapons, including air rifles, air pistols, slingshots or ·.veapons of the kind
usually called "BB gun," from which 'iveapon any bullet, shot or pellet of lead or other material is
discharged or expelled, or for any person to discharge, fire or shoot in the waters within the city.
SECTION 3.
That Section 106-375 entitled "Prohibited activities," in Article VIII under Chapter 106 of
the Miami Beach City Code is hereby amended as follows:
Chapter 106
TRAFFIC AND VEHICLES
207
* * *
Article VIII. Parades
* * *
Division 2. Permit
* * *
Sec. 106-375. Prohibited activities.
(a) Any participant in a demonstration, rally, picket line or parade within the city who is
observed carrying or possessing any of the objects specified in subsections (1) through
(10) shall immediately dispose of or discard the object(s) upon the request of a law
enforcement officer. The willful refusal to dispose of or discard of the object(s) shall
constitute a violation, punishable in accordance with section 1-14 of this Code.
It shall be unlawful for any person participating in a demonstration, rally, picket line or
parade, to exhibit, display, possess, carry or wear any of the following:
(1) Any weapon. For purposes of this section, "weapon" shall mean any pistol, rifle,
shotgun or other firearm, whether loaded or unloaded, air rifle, air pistol, paintball
gun, paintball rifle, explosive, blasting cap, knife, hatchet, ax, slingshot,
blackjack, metal knuckles, fA.aGe, iron buckle, ax handle, crowbar, or any other
instrument customarily use or intended for use as a dangerous weapon-:-but.
shall not include any destructive device or firearm as defined under Florida law.
SECTION 4. REPEALER.
All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be and the same are hereby
repealed.
SECTION 5. SEVERABILITY.
If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is held to be invalid or
unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, then said holding shall in no way affect
the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
SECTION 6. CODIFICATION.
It is the intention of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, and it is
hereby ordained that the provisions of this ordinance shall become and be made a part of the
Code of the City of Miami Beach, Florida. The sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or
re-lettered to accomplish such intention, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section,"
"article," or other appropriate word.
208
SECTION 7. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Ordinance shall take effect the day of-------' 2011.
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of--------' 2011.
ATTEST:
ROBERT PARCHER, CITY CLERK
MATTI HERRERA BOWER
MAYOR
Underline denotes additions and strike through denotes deletions
F:\A TIO\TURN\ORDINANC\Firearms Ordinance.docx
209
1_6NE I THURSDAY, DECEMBER 29, 2011 MiamiHerald.com I THE MIAMI HERALD
i? MIAMIBEACH
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
NOnCE OF PUBLIC. HEARINGS
NOTICE IS HEREBY given that second readings and public hearings will be held by the Mayor and City Commission
of the City of Miami Beach, Florida, in the Commi~sion Chambers, 3rd floor, City Hall, 1700 Convention Center Drive,
Miami Beach, Florida, on WEDNESDAY, January 11, 201'2 to consider the following:
10:15a.m.
Ordinance Amending Chapter 110 OfThe City Code, Entitled "Utilities," By Amending Article IV, Entitled "Fees, Charges,
Rates And Billing Procedure," By Amending Division 3, Entitled "Billing Procedure," By Amendirig.Section 110-191,
Entitled "Payment Of Bills," By Amending 11 0-191{B) By Changing The Penalty For Late Utility Bills From Ten Percent
Of The Current Bill To 1.5% Per Month Of The Late Outstanding Balance.
Inquiries may be directed to the Rnance Department at (305) 673-7 466.
10:20a.m.
"
Ortlinance Amending Chapter 26 Of The Miami Beach City Code Entftled "Civil Emergencies," By Amending Article II,
Entitled "State Of Emergency," By Repealing Section 26-32, Entitled "Automatic Emergency Measures" Due To The
Preemption Of The Entire Field Of Regulation Of Firearms To The State Of Florida; By Amending Chapter 70, Entitled
"Miscellaneous Offenses," By Amending Article I, Entitled "In General," l3y Repealing Section 70-2, Entitled "Weapons;
Discharging," Due To The Preemption OfThe Entire Reid Of Regulation Of Firearms To The State Of Florida; E\Y Amending
Chapter 1 06 OfThe Miami Beach City Code, Entitled "Traffic And Vehicles," By Amending Article Ill, Entitled "Parades,"
By Amending Division 2, Entttled "Permi~" By Amending Section 106-375(A)(1) To Repeal Language Regarding The
Regulation Of Firearms That Is Preempted By The State Of Florida, And To Provide That Weapons Shall Not Include Any
Destructive Device Or Firearm As Defined Under Florida Law.-
Inquiries m&y be directed to the Legal Department at (305) 673-7470.
10:25a.m. _
Ordinance Amending Chapter 10 OfThe Miami Beach City Code Entitled "Animals," By Amending Section 10-10, Entitled
"Animals Prohibited In Public Parks And On Beaches" To Cross-Reference Language In Section 10-11 Regarding
Off-Leash Areas For.Dogs; By Amending Section 10-11, Entitled "Running At Large Prohibited,"By Extending The
Pilot Program 'Off-Leash Area For Dogs In South Pointe Park Until July 15, 2012, By Providing qff-Leash Hours In The
Designated Area In The Morning From Sunrise To 10:00 A.M. Daily And Between 4:00 P.M. And -7:00 P.M. Monday
Through Friday, And Relocating The Off-Leash Area To The South And East OfThe Washington Avenue Entry Plaza
Inquiries may be directed to the Parks and Recreation Department at (305) 673-7730·.
5:00p.m.
An Ordinance Amendifllf.The Land Development Regulations Of The :Code Of The City Of Miami Beach, By Amending
-Chapter 142;. "Zonirig Districts And Regulations," Article If, ''District Retjulations," Division 18, "PS Pertormance
Standard District", Section 142-696 "Residential Pertormance Standard Area Requirements".To Modify The Maximum
Height Requirements For Residential Apartment Structures; By Amending Section 142-697 ·~setback Requirements In
The R-PS 1, 2, 3, 4 District," To Modify The Setback Requirements For Oceanfront Buildings.
Inquiries may be directe.d to the Planning Department at (305) 673-7550. ·
5:o5p.m.
Ordinance Granting To Florida Power And Light Company, Its Successors And Assigns, An Electric Franchise Imposing
Provisions And Condttions Relating Thereto, Providing For Monthly Payments To The City Of Miami Beach:
I ,
Inquiries may be directed to the Public Works Department at (305) 673-7080.
INTERESTED PARTIES are invtted to appear at this meeting, or be represented by an agent, or to express ~heir views in
writing addressed to the City Commission, c/o the City Clerk, 1700 Convention .Center Drive, 1st Floor, City Hall, Miami
Beach, Florida 33139. Copies ofthese ordinances are available for public inspection during normal business hours
in the City Clerk's Office, 1700 Convention Genter Drive, 1st Floor, City Hall, and Miami Beach,.Fiorida 33139. This
meeting may be continued and under such circumstances additional legal notice would not be provided.
Robert E. Parcher, City Clerk
City of Miami Beach
Pursuant to Section 286.0105, Fla. Stat., the City hereby advises the public that: if a person decides to appeal any
decision made by the City Commission with respect to any matter considered at its meeting or its hearing, such person
must· ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence
upon -which the appeal is to be based. This notice does not constitute consent by the City for the introduction or
admission of otherwise inadmissible or irrelevant evidence, nor does tt authorize challenges or appeals not otherwise
allowed by law. ·
. . ;-~ .
To request this material in accessible format, sign language interpreters, information on ~access .tor persons with
disabilities, and/or any accommoCiation to review any doc'Ument or participate in any citY-sponsored proceeding,
please contact (305) 604-2489 (voice), (305)673-7218(1TY) five days in advanca to initiate your request TrY users
may also call 711 (Florida Relay Service).
Ad#686 210
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
An Ordinance amending Chapter 10 of the Miami Beach City Code entitled "Animals" to cross-reference language in Section 10-
11, entitled "Running At Large Prohibited" by extending the pilot off leash program for dogs in South Pointe Park until July 15,
2012 and by providing off leash hours in the designated area in the morning from sunrise to 10:00 A.M. daily and between 4:00
P.M. and 7:00P.M. Monday through Friday and relocating the off-leash area to the west lawn, south and east of the Washington
Avenue entry plaza; providing for repealer, severability, codification and an effective date.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Increase satisfaction with family recreational activities
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): Miami Beach Customer Survey indicates 84.9% of
residents rated the City's Recreation programs as either excellent or _good.
Issue:
Should the City Commission amend the City Code to extend the dog off leash pilot program in its present location and expand its
current hours in South Pointe Park?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
SECOND READING -PUBLIC HEARING
There have been several Commission/Commission Committee discussions concerning dogs off leash in South Pointe
Park. On September 9, 2009, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Ordinance No. 2009-3646, authorizing a
designated off-leash area in South Pointe Park for a six-month pilot program from sunrise to 9:00 a.m.(Mon-Fri). On
February 3, 2011, the Neighborhoods/Community Affairs Committee (NCAC) recommended extending the trial period to
include two (2) additional hours in the evening (Mon-Fri). This action was approved and accepted by the City Commission
at the March 9, 2011, Commission meeting. On October 19, 2011, The Mayor and City Commission approved an
ordinance on second/final reading that extended the pilot off-leash program until January 1, 2012, and added two (2) hours
in the evening from 5:00 P.M. To 7:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. In light of the pending expiration of the in South
Pointe Park Dogs Off-Leash Pilot Program, at the December 8, 2011, NCAC, a discussion was held on: 1) whether the
program should be extended/made permanent; and, if so, 2) what the location of the site should be. There was general
agreement to extend the program; however, Commissioner Libbin expressed concern with extending the program if it did
not include a hedge of some sort. There was also general agreement, including from community members present, to
keep the current location (portion of west lawn). Following discussion and community input, the Committee members
recommended to: 1) extend the South Pointe Dog Off-leash Pilot Program for six (6) months in its current location, and
add one hour in both the morning and the afternoon; and, 2) prepare a site plan of the South Pointe Off-leash area in its
present location, and a cost estimate for the installation of a hedge (appropriate species and height), to enclose the area,
including obtaining any required approvals. On December 14, 2011 this ordinance amendment was approved on first
reading and the City Commission scheduled the public hearing and final reading for January 11, 2012.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
NCAC meeting on 12/8/11; recommendation to proceed with ordinance amendment to extend off leash area, and to look at
hed e for the recommended location on west lawn.
Financial Information:
Source of Amount Account
Funds: 1
OBPI Total
Financial Impact Summary: Enforcement will continue to be handled by on-duty Code Compliance staff. Should the
Commission eventually approve the installation of a hedge, and the hedge receive DRB approval, funding will need to
be identified to cover the costs of the hedge.
Ci Clerk's Office Le islative Trackin
Kevin Smith, Director of Parks and Recreation
Si n-Offs:
Department Director City Manager
Amendment Off Le
MIAMI BEACH 211
AGENDA ITEM R 5 c...
DATE J-Il-l '2.-
MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager ~<. /
DATE: January 11, 2012 u SEQND READING PUBLIC HEARING
SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 10 OF THE MIAMI BEACH
CITY CODE ENTITLED "ANIMALS," BY AMENDING SECTION 10-10,
ENTITLED "ANIMALS PROHIBITED IN PUBLIC PARKS AND ON
BEACHES" TO CROSS-REFERENCE LANGUAGE IN SECTION 10-11
REGARDING OFF-LEASH AREAS FOR DOGS; BY AMENDING SECTION
10-11, ENTITLED "RUNNING AT LARGE PROHIBITED," BY EXTENDING
THE PILOT PROGRAM OFF-LEASH AREA FOR DOGS IN SOUTH POINTE
PARK UNTIL JULY 15, 2012, BY PROVIDING OFF-LEASH HOURS IN THE
DESIGNATED AREA IN THE MORNING FROM SUNRISE TO 10:00 A.M.
DAILY AND BETWEEN 4:00 P.M. AND 7:00 P.M. MONDAY THROUGH
FRIDAY, AND RELOCATING THE OFF-LEASH AREA TO THE SOUTH AND
EAST OF THE WASHINGTON AVENUE ENTRY PLAZA; PROVIDING FOR
REPEALER, SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATION, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
The Administration recommended the City Commission adopt the proposed Ordinance.
KEY INTENDED OUTCOME SUPPORTED
Increase satisfaction with recreational programs.
BACKGROUND
For the past several years there have been ongoing discussions as to how the City can find the
proper levels of services that address the needs of our residents and guests who own dogs with
those who do not. These discussions have focused on the development of "bark parks" (fenced in
areas in parks specifically designed and designated for dogs to run off leash): access for the dogs to
water from a beach or park edge; the provision of dog bag/ waste stations that are located
throughout the city's parks, rights of way, Lincoln Road, the Beach walk and other public areas; and
the establishment of off-leash access in the parks to areas which are unfenced/ unsecured where
dogs would run off leash and beyond their owner's control.
To date there are a total of five (5) fenced dog parks within the City's parks. These include Belle Isle,
Flamingo, North Shore Open Space Park (under construction), Pinetree, and Washington Avenue
(two sites). Additionally, at the September 14, 2011, Commission meeting the Administration was
directed to install a temporary fenced dog park on the Par 3 Golf Course; this has been put on hold
at the request of the residents. These dog parks are heavily utilized and our residents tell us that this
is a welcomed amenity. The increased number of City dog parks is a direct result of a number of
discussions that were held in the community and, more specifically, at past
Neighborhoods/Community Affairs Committee (NCAC) meetings.
212
Ordinance Amendment To Chapter 10-Section 10-11 Running At Large Prohibited (second reading public hearing)
January 11, 2012
City Commission Meeting
Page 2of4
At the January 28, 2009, City Commission meeting, the Administration requested that the matter of
dogs off leash in City parks and other public properties in general, be referred to the NCAC for
discussion. This request was made for the purpose of seeking direction as to the future
management, control and levels of enforcement of dogs (both on and off-leash) in our parks and
other public properties; to discuss what, if any, additional resources should be dedicated to the
service levels provided for owners and their dogs; and for guidance on whether modifications were
needed, if any, to our existing City Code related to dogs in public areas.
Subsequently, there were on-going discussions concerning various dog-related issues. One of these
discussions focused on the development of a dog park within South Pointe Park, an enclosed area
similar to the dog parks in Flamingo, Pinetree, or Belle Isle, or one without a fence. The conclusion
of the discussion was to build out a larger dog park on Washington Avenue, diagonal from the then-
existing dog park on Collins Avenue and 2nd street. It was also recommended that the City look at
whatever amendments would be needed to permit a pilot, off-leash area in a designated section of
South Pointe Park, with limited hours of use. The designation of an off-leash area was not only
prohibited by City Code, but it was also prohibited by County Code.
On September 9, 2009, the City Commission approved on second reading, an Ordinance amending .
Chapter 10 of the Miami Beach Code entitled "Animals" to allow the City Commission to designate
specific off-leash areas for dogs in public parks, specifically for South Pointe Park. The September
9th action established morning off-leash hours (park opening (sunrise) to 9:00 A.M.) only in a
specific, unenclosed area of South Pointe Park located in the triangular area where the public art
would be sited (south and west of the Washington Avenue entry plaza). The item was amended to
clarify that an off-leash program at South Pointe Park would be for a trial period of six months,
commencing only if/when Miami-Dade County amended Section 5-20 of their Code pertaining to
animals. At the time of the City Ordinance approval, County Code prohibited dogs off leash except in
authorized park areas.
City staff worked with the City Attorney's office, and the County's Animal Services Division and
County Attorney's office, to draft amendment language to County Code that would allow
municipalities to designate off leash areas, if they wished. With the help and sponsorship of County
Commissioner Bruno Barreiro, the legislation was vetted through the appropriate County
Commission Committee and heard at two readings. The County Commission adopted the ordinance
amendment at their May 4, 2010 Miami-Dade Board of County Commissioners meeting.
Consequently, on June 1, 2010, the Administration began the program as planned. The City (Code
Compliance and Security Alliance LLC) monitored the pilot program for violations for the six months
as directed and developed a summary for the period of June -November 2010. The results found a
total of 290 incidents ranging from dogs observed off-leash outside of the permitted area, to dogs
observed within the approved area outside of approved hours. The greatest observed non-
compliance occurred within the approved location in the afternoon hours, outside of the approved
times (Sunrise-9:00A.M. daily).
A follow-up discussion was held at the February 3, 2011, NCAC meeting regarding the Off-Leash
Trial Program. Following the discussion, the Committee moved to recommend extending the trial
period, to include the addition of two (2) hours in the evening (hours to be determined) on Monday
through Friday only. The Committee also discussed the temporary location of the off-leash area
once construction of the public art began. A location on the western edge of the west lawn was
approved, with the understanding that discussion of a permanent location would occur when the
extended trial period expired and a determination was made to continue the program. This action
was approved 2-0. This action was subsequently reported and accepted by the City Commission at
the March 9, 2011, Commission meeting. Following the public discussion held at the February 3,
2011 NCAC meeting, and acceptance of the report by the City Commission at the March 9, 2011
213
Ordinance Amendment To Chapter 10-Section 10-11 Running At Large Prohibited (second reading public hearing)
January 11, 2012
City Commission Meeting
Page 3of4
meeting, the Administration determined the Monday-Friday evening hours to be 5 P.M. - 7 P.M.,
and modified the signs in the off-leash area to reflect the same.
In reviewing the Off-Leash Ordinance during a discussion regarding a potential off-leash area at the
Par 3 golf course during the July 20, 2011, Land Use Committee meeting, it was determined that
approval of the extension of the pilot program, and the additional hours, was required through an
ordinance amendment.
The Mayor and Commission approved the following ordinance amendment at the October 19, 2011
City Commission meeting, following a public hearing:
"An Ordinance Amending Chapter 10 Of The Miami Beach City Code Entitled "Animals,"
By Amending Section 10-11, Entitled "Running At Large Prohibited" By Extending The
Pilot Program Off-Leash Area For Dogs In South Pointe Park Until January 1, 2012 And
By Adding Two (2) Hours In The Evening From 5:00 P.M. To 7:00 P.M. On Monday
Through Friday; And Providing For Repealer, Severability, Codification, And An Effective
Date.
Language regarding an off-leash area at the Par 3 was removed by the Commission at the first
reading.
ANALYSIS
In light of the pending expiration of the in South Pointe Park Dogs Off-Leash Pilot Program, a
discussion item on the program was placed on the December 8, 2011, NCAC Meeting for purposes
of obtaining direction on:
1) whether the program should be extended/made permanent; and, if so,
2) what the location of the site should be
On the latter, the Administration explained that It was concluded at the time of the Committee
discussion earlier this year that we would return to Committee after the installation of the public art,
and if the off-leash program was approved to continue, to discuss whether the off-leash area should
move back to the original site, or remain at the current location (portion of west lawn). See
Attachment A for a map detailing the current location.
The Committee was also provided documentation relating to levels of off-leash-related code
violations documented by the City's Code Compliance Division and the contracted private security
company, Security Alliance, for the periods of June-November 2010 (first trial period) and January
-October 2011 (See Attachment B). There were a total of 305 violations noted by the City's Code
Compliance Division and Security Alliance, LLC, the city's security team in the park, during the most
recent trial period (January to October, 2011).
The Committee discussed both issues. In terms of the continuation of the program, there was
general agreement to extend the program. However, Commissioner Libbin expressed concern with
extending the program if it did not include a hedge of some sort surrounding the "off-leash" area. In
terms of location, there was general agreement, including from community members present, to
keep the current location (portion of west lawn), rather than move the off-leash area back to where
the public art piece has now been installed.
Following a discussion and community input, the NCAC members recommendedto:
• Extend the South Pointe Dog Off-leash Pilot Program for a six (6) month in its current
location (approximately 18,000sf in the west lawn, south and east of the Washington Avenue
entry plaza, bordered to the south by the cutwalk, and a pathway on the east and north
sides), with an additional one (1) hour of off-leash time in both the morning and the
afternoon. This extension requires an amendment to the current city code (via amendment to
214
Ordinance Amendment To Chapter 10-Section 10-11 Running At Large Prohibited (second reading public hearing)
January 11, 2012
City Commission Meeting
Page 4 of4
the ordinance). At present, the pilot program was scheduled to expire on January 1, 2012;
and
• Prepare a site plan of the South Pointe Off-leash area in its present location and secure a
cost estimate for the installation of a hedge, of the appropriate species and height, to enclose
the "off-leash" area. The installation of a hedge will require:
o Presentation of the proposed site plan with the hedge to the Design Review Board.
o Identification of funding to implement this hedge, should it be approved by the Design
Review Board.
The recommendations were approved by all Committee members present at the meeting.
This Ordinance Amendment was presented, discussed and adopted by the Mayor and Members of
the City Commission on first reading at the December 14, 2011 meeting. It was further requested
that the Administration prepare a cost estimate for the installation of the hedge and provide it to
Commissioner Libbin prior to proceeding with any actions necessary to install it.
CONCLUSION
The proposed ordinance amendment to extend the off-leash area in South Pointe Park is presented
for second reading and public hearing following the approval of the proposed amendment at the-
Neighborhoods/Community Affairs Committee (NCAC) at the December 8, 2011 meeting and the full
City Commission at first reading on December 14, 2011. Included in the first reading approval was
the NCAC's recommendation that the off-leash area continue in its current location (approximately
18,000sf in the west lawn, south and east of the Washington Avenue entry plaza, bordered to the
south by the cutwalk, and a pathway on the east and north sides), and that an additional hour be
added to both the morning and afternoon designated hours.
This amendment is necessary to continue the off-leash program in South Pointe Park, as the current
program was scheduled to expire on January 1, 2012.
The determination of the placement of a hedge remains pending the obtaining of cost estimates,
identification of funding, and proceeding with obtaining the necessary regulatory board approvals.
JMG/HMF/KS
F:\RCPA\$ALL\Previous\KEVIN\Commission 2012\1-11-12\Animal Ordinance Amendment Off Leash 2nd rdg MEMO 1-11-
12.doc
215
N ~ 0) 1 ~ Temporary Unenclosed Dog Off-Leash Location Approx. 18,000 + SF -----)> ~ 0 ::c s: m z -t )>
ATTACHMENT B
i#'lh ~ mornlng]during permlttedhouJ:S} outslclethe~pecffl~ a~· I 6 :·~; $ .2. J~,: 1.1' .42
..
#fin the' momlngatter·s AM.;til ttie-.s'P!Jclfie!i ~~ . f :II :-2: 't. i ·,;: ·I)'. :g
tMn the-morning after.~ A'M_lil;tl!eiunspecitled·area.c· I. .. :t :i.; ~-t 6. '.2: ~i·
#.:hi' tne afternoon In the'speclfled a !')iii! l r!l ·.20, ~-2ci 2o ''i!l. ;dlt'
# lil'the afternoon·· in the-un'speclfietl'atea r ,U) ·'3. ;tt. ·4. ·5 ,18;.
'• ,si.
~.of Vlola~lcins_ nOte.c!.but. ncit:issued·-~·no 14en.tlfiC:Iiltlo.n:• .. leave slfe "I -i:i :9 Iz~ 5 :5. :6.: -~t
l#·onotat Violations tickets.IS,sued)by··Montti
'·
.!# '.'5. ~: i ii . <1.' .'li:
I# ofTotal Y.ioliltlons byMontli. l 37 ~ '6f; '~ ,'iilf :liO: .290;;
NCAC AGENDA PAGE 54
217
SOUTH POINTE PARK DOGS OFF LEASH PILOT PROJEcT VIOLATIONS SUMMARY January-November 2011 Monitoring Agency City of Miami Beach -Code Co~f!pliance/Security Alliance. LLC:: . _ ., . . . ...... ·:. :: . ~ -·--· . ·-~ -·: ... ··. ···::::· -. .'' . . . . ... .. . . ... . . .. . '• •' ... . EXHIBIT II _,' ii :}~-----~-···--·-_ = •. & ·····• i l . ~ ::~ c . '--.c -_... -----... . >-c ~-0) . c.--s s ·?.·. / ·•· •• ·: <>:4J:;,:;.:.--_,:>:.;:Lf,. ;,;:_ -~.:--.::~,-:,~,._--::IL 5.-: .--5.· <.i -: .-_g_ --~ ~ # In the morning (during permitted hours) outside the specified area 11 2 -3 9 5 13 6 5 1 8 63 # In the morning after 9 AM in the specified area 3 1 1 1 1 2 0 3 0 0 12 # In the morning after 9 AM in the unspecified area 3 0 0 3 2 3 3 2 0 1 17 # In the afternoon in the specified area 14 18 6 11 5 3 3 1 2 3 66 # In the afternoon in the unspecified area 26 29 24 17 8 4 2 4 1 8 123 # of Violations noted but not issued -no Identification -leave site 3 1 2 3 2 3 5 3 2 0 24 Total violations 60 51 36 44 23 28 19 18 6 20 305 .. '" ···-·--··----·-"-----·-·-·-····-··--········-····-·--·······-·······--··-···----····--. ·······-··--·-·· ····-···--·----------------·---· .. co "'C""" N
ORDINANCE NO.------
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 10 OF THE
MIAMI BEACH CITY CODE ENTITLED "ANIMALS," BY AMENDING
SECTION 10-10, ENTITLED "ANIMALS PROHIBITED IN PUBLIC
PARKS AND ON BEACHES" TO CROSS-REFERENCE LANGUAGE IN
SECTION 10-11 REGARDING OFF-LEASH AREAS FOR DOGS; BY
AMENDING SECTION 10-11, ENTITLED "RUNNING AT LARGE
PROHIBITED," BY EXTENDING THE PILOT PROGRAM OFF-LEASH
AREA FOR DOGS IN SOUTH POINTE PARK UNTIL JULY 15, 2012,
BY PROVIDING OFF-LEASH HOURS IN THE DESIGNATED AREA IN
THE MORNING FROM SUNRISE TO 10:00 A.M. DAILY AND
BETWEEN 4:00 P.M. AND 7:00P.M. MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY,
AND RELOCATING THE OFF-LEASH AREA TO THE SOUTH AND
EAST OF THE WASHINGTON AVENUE ENTRY PLAZA; PROVIDING
FOR REPEALER, SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATION, AND AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 5-20 of the Miami-Dade County Code, "a dog may be
unrestrained and shall not be deemed at large if it is supervised by a competent person and is
(i) in a park area in which dogs are specifically authorized by a municipality or by the County to
be unrestrained ... "; and
WHEREAS, on September 9, 2009, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Ordinance
No. 2009-3646 which specifically authorized dogs to be unrestrained and off-leash in South
Pointe Park for a six month pilot program in the triangular area south and west of the
Washington Avenue entry plaza from sunrise to 9:00A.M. daily, or during such hours as may be
specifically designated by a resolution of the City Commission after a public hearing; and
WHEREAS, on October 19, 2011, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Ordinance
No. 2011-37 43 which extended the pilot program in South Pointe Park until January 1, 2012,
and extended the off-leash hours in South Park by adding two (2) hours in the evening from
5:00P.M. to 7:00P.M. on Monday through Friday; and
WHEREAS, on December 8, 2011, the Neighborhoods and Community Affairs
Committee discussed the off-leash pilot program in South Pointe Park and recommended a)
that the off-leash hours be extended by one (1) hour daily in the morning from 9:00 A.M. to
10:00 A.M. and one (1) hour in the evening from 4:00 P.M. to 5:00 P.M. on Monday through
Friday, b) that a hedge be installed around the perimeter of the off-leash area, c) that the matter
of the hedge be referred to the City's Design Review Board for its consideration; and d) that the
off-leash pilot program be extended for an additional six months; and
WHEREAS, due to the installation of the Tobias Rehberger Art in Public Places
lighthouse project in the area south and west of the Washington Avenue entry plaza, the off-
leash dog area should be relocated to the south and east of the Washington Avenue entry
plaza; and
219
WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Commission wish to amend the off-leash pilot program
set forth in Section 10-11 of the City Code as provided in this Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, Section 10-10 of the City Code should also be amended to cross-reference
language in Section 10-11 that provides for off-leash areas for dogs.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1.
That Chapter 10, Section 10-10 of the Miami Beach City Code is hereby amended as follows:
Sec. 10-10. Animals prohibited in public parks and on beaches.
It shall be prohibited for any person to take any animal into, or to keep any animal in or upon,
any public park or public beach in the city, except for enclosed public park areas specifically
designated for dogs by the city manager or in off-leash park areas specifically designated for
dogs as provided in section 1 0-11. Animals under the custody and control of a law enforcement
officer and service dogs accompanying a disabled person are excluded from this section.
SECTION 2.
That Chapter 10, Section 10-11 of the Miami Beach City Code is hereby amended as follows:
Sec. 1 0-11. Running at large prohibited.
It shall be prohibited for the owner or person in control of any animal to permit the animal to run
at large. All animals, when not on the premises of their owner or of the person in control, must
be on a leash or contained in a carrier device and under the control of a competent person,
except that in South Pointe Park, in the triangular designated area south and west east of the
Washington Avenue entry plaza, dogs may be off-leash from sunrise to -S;QG 10:00 A.M. daily
and from §.;.00 4:00P.M. to 7:00 P.M. on Monday through Friday, or during such other hours as
may be specifically designated by a resolution of the city commission after a public hearing, until
January 1, July 15, 2012.
SECTION 3. REPEALER.
All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be and the same are hereby
repealed.
SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY.
If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is held to be invalid or
unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, then said holding shall in no way affect
the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
2
220
SECTION 5. CODIFICATION.
It is the intention of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, and it is
hereby ordained that the provisions of this ordinance shall become and be made a part of the
Code of the City of Miami Beach, Florida. The sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or
re-lettered to accomplish such intention, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section,"
"article," or other appropriate word.
SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Ordinance shall take effect the day of-------· 2012.
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of--------' 2012.
ATTEST:
ROBERT PARCHER, CITY CLERK
MATTI HERRERA BOWER
MAYOR
Underline denotes additions and strike through denotes deletions
F:\ATTO\TURN\ORDINANC\South Point Off-Leash Area 2012.docx
3
221
1_6NE I THURSDAY, DECEMBER 29, 2011 MiamiHerald.com I THE MIAMI HERALD
~ MIAMIBEACH
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
NOTtCE OF PUBLIC. HEARINGS
NOTICE IS HEREBY given that second readings and public hearings will be held by the Mayor and City Commission
of the City ot Miami Beach, Florida, in the Commi;sion Chambers, 3rd floor, City Hall, 1700 Convention Center Drive,
Miami Beach, Florida, on WEDNESDAY, January 11, 201'2 to consider the following:
10:15a.m.
Ordinance Amending Chapter 11 0 Of The Clty Code, Entttled "utilities," By Amending Article IV, Entitled "Fees, Charges,
Rates And Billing Procedure," By Amending Division 3, Entitled "Billing Procedure," By Amending .Section 110-191,
Entitled "Payment Of Bills," By Amending 11 0-19l(B) By Changing The Penalty For Late utility Bills From Ten Percent
Of The Current Bill To 1.5% Per Month Of The Late Outstanding Balance.
Inquiries may be directed to the Finance Department at (305) 673-7 466.
10:20a.m. ..
Ordinance Amending Chapter 26 Of The Miami. Beach City Code Entitled "Civil Emergencies," By Amending Article II,
Entitled "State Of Emergency," By Repealing Section 26-32, Entitled "Automatic Emergency Measures" Due To The
Preemption Of The Entire Field Of Regulation Of Firearms To The state Of Florida; By Amending Chapter 70, Entitled
"Miscellaneous Offenses," By Amending Article I, Entitled "In General," By Repealing Section 70-2, Entitled "Weapons;
Discharging," Due To The Preemption OfThe Entire Field Of Regulation Of Firearms To The State Of Florida; ~Y Amending
Chapter 1 06 Of The Miami Beach City Code, Entitled "Traffic And Vehicles," By Amending Article Ill, Entitled "Parades,"
By Amending Division 2, Entitled "Permit," By Amending Section 106-375(A)(1) To Repeal Language Regarding The
Regulation Of Firearms That Is Preempted By T6e State Of Florida, And To Provide That Weapons Shaii'Not Include Any
Destructive Device ·or Firearm As Defined Under Florida Law,
Inquiries may be directed to the Legal Department at (305) 673-7470.
10:25a.m. .
Ordinance Amending Chapter 10 Of The Miami Beach City Code Entitled "Animals," By Amending Section 10-10, Entitled
"Animals Prohibited In Public Parks And On Beaches" To Cross-Reference Language In Section 10-11 Regarding
Off-Leash Areas For Dogs; By Amending Section 10-11, Entitled "Running At Large Prohibited,"By Extending The
Pilot Program 'Off-Leash Area For Dogs In South Pointe Park Until July 15, 2012, By Providing qtf-Leash Hours In The
Designated Area In The Morning From Sunrise To 10:00 A.M. Daily And Between 4:00 P.M .. And ·7:00 P.M. Monday
Through Friday, And Relocating The Off-Leash Area To The South And East Of The Washington Avenue Entry Plaza.
Inquiries may be directed to the Parks and Recreation Department at (305) 673-7730.
5:00p.m.
An Ordinance AmendiOlfThe Land Development Regulations OfThe:Code OfThe City Of Miami Beach, By Amending
· Chapter l42,. ''Zoning Districts And Regulations," Article If; "District Re~ulations," Division 18, "PS Performance
Standard District", Section 142-696 "Residential Performance StandardArea Requirements".To Modify The Maximum
Height Requirements For Residential Apartment Structures; By Amending Section 142-697 ·~setback Requirements In
The R-PS 1 , 2, 3, 4 District," To Modify The Setback Requirements For Oceanfront Buildings.
Inquiries may be directed to the Planning Department at (305) 673-7550. ·
5:o5p.m.
Ordinance Granting To Florida Power And Light Company, Its Successors And Assigns, An Electric Franchise Imposing
Provisions And Conditions Relating Thereto, Providing For Monthly Payments To The City Of Miami Beach:
Inquiries may be directed to the Public Works Department at (305) 673-7080.
INTERESTED PARTIES are invtted to appear at this meeting, or be represented by an agent, or to express their views in
writing addressed to the City Commission, c/o the City Clerk, 1700 Convention .Center Drive, 1st Floor, City Hall, Miami
Beach, Florida 33139. Copies of these ordinances are available for public inspection during normal business hours
in the City Clerk's Office, 1700 Convention Center Drive, 1st Floor, City Hall, and Miami Beach, .Florida 33139. This
meeting may be continued and under such circumstances additional legal notice would not be provided.
Robert E. Parcher, City Clerk
City of Miami Beach
Pursuant to Section 286.0105, Fla. Stat., the City hereby advises the public that: if a person decides to appeal any
decision made by the City Commission wtth respect to any matter considered at its meeting or its hearing, such person
must ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence
upon ·which the appeal is to be based. This notice does not constitute .consent by the City for the introduction or
admission of otherwise inadmissible or irrelevant evidence, nor does it authorize challenges or appeals not otherwise
allowed by law.
. ~
To request this material in accessible format, sign language interpreters, inforrnatio"" on 'a~cess for persons with
disabilities, and/or any accommoctation to review any document or participate in any city-sponsored proceeding,
please contact (305) 604-2489 (voice), (305)673-7218(TTY) five days in advance. to initiate your request TrY users
may also call 711 (Florida Relay Service).
Ad#686 222
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
An Ordinance Of The Mayor And City Commission Of The City Of Miami Beach, Florida, Amending
Chapter 90 Of The Miami Beach City Code, Entitled "Solid Waste," By Amending The Definitions In Article
I, Entitled "In General," By Amending Section 90-2, Entitled "Definitions"; By Amending Article li, Entitled
"Administration" By Amending The Penalties For Solid Waste Violations And To Provide Provisions And
Penalties Relative To Recycling For Multifamily Residences And Commercial Establishments; By Creating
Article V, To Be Entitled "Citywide Recycling Program For Multifamily Residences And Commercial
Establishments," To Provide Provisions For Recycling Requirements And Enforcement, A Public Education
Program, A Warning Period, An Enforcement Date, Collector Liability, A "Red Tag" Noticing System,
Penalties, And Special Master Appeal Procedures; Providing For Repealer, Severability, Codification, And
An Effective Date.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Enhance the Environmental Sustainability of the Community.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): The waste haulers operating in the City have
reported that approximately 1 ,558 multifamily and commercial establishments within the City of Miami
Beach are currently not participating in the County-required Recycling Program.
Issue:
I Shall the Mayor and City Commission defer the Ordinance?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
At the July 13, 2011, Commission Meeting the item was referred to the Sept. 26, 2011 Finance and Citywide
Projects Committee (FCWPC) meeting. The FCWPC directed the administration to conduct a Recycling
Workshop, held on October 24, 2011.At the Workshop, Commissioner Gongora indicated that the item would
be further discussed at the Sustain ability Committee prior to referral to the FCWPC to discuss funding. At the
November 15, 2011, meeting of the Sustainability Committee, a vote to revise the ordinance to more closely
reflect the Miami-Dade County ordinance passed with the following recommendations:
• Include a robust educational program
• Reduce the fine amounts
• Introduce an enforcement component; although the County ordinance provides for enforcement, no
enforcement is provided by the County.
Based on the above, recommendations, the proposed revised ordinance will undergo significant modifications
and the Administration therefore recommends that: this item be opened and continued; the City Commission
direct the Administration to rewrite the ordinance; and that the revised ordinance be presented to the FCWPC
before First Reading.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
Land Use and Development Committee at its December 13, 2010 meeting recommended approval of
this Ordinance. Finance and Citywide Projects Committee at its June 23, 2011 meeting
recommended approval of this Ordinance with the above mentioned recommendations.
Financial Information:
Source of Amount
Funds: 1
OBPI Total
r Assistant
DRB
MIAMI BEACH 223
Account
AGENDA ITEM
DATE
MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager ~. /
January 11, 2012 l) D
FIRST READING
DATE:
SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 90 OF THE
MIAMI BEACH CITY CODE, ENTITLED "SOLID WASTE," BY AMENDING
THE DEFINITIONS IN ARTICLE I, ENTITLED "IN GENERAL," BY
AMENDING SECTION 90-2, ENTITLED "DEFINITIONS"; BY AMENDING
ARTICLE II, ENTITLED "ADMINISTRATION" BY AMENDING THE
PENAL TIES FOR SOLID WASTE VIOLATIONS AND TO PROVIDE
PROVISIONS AND PENAL TIES RELATIVE TO RECYCLING FOR
MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCES AND COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS;
BY CREATING ARTICLE V, TO BE ENTITLED "CITYWIDE RECYCLING
PROGRAM FOR MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCES AND COMMERCIAL
ESTABLISHMENTS," TO PROVIDE PROVISIONS FOR RECYCLING
REQUIREMENTS AND ENFORCEMENT, A PUBLIC EDUCATION
PROGRAM, A WARNING PERIOD, AN ENFORCEMENT DATE,
COLLECTOR LIABILITY, A "RED TAG" NOTICING SYSTEM,
PENAL TIES, AND SPECIAL MASTER APPEAL PROCEDURES;
PROVIDING FOR REPEALER, SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATION, AND AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATDN
At the July 13, 2011, Commission Meeting the item was referred to the Sept. 26, 2011 Finance and
Citywide Projects Committee (FCWPC) meeting. The FCWPC directed the administration to
conduct a Recycling Workshop, held on October 24, 2011.At the Workshop, Commissioner
Gongora indicated that the item would be further discussed at the Sustainability Committee prior to
referral to the FCWPC to discuss funding. At the November 15, 2011, meeting of the Sustainability
Committee, a vote to revise the ordinance to more closely reflect the Miami-Dade County ordinance
passed with the following recommendations:
• Include a robust educational program
• Reduce the fine amounts
• Introduce an enforcement component; although the County ordinance provides for
enforcement, no enforcement is provided by the County.
Based on the above, recommendations, the proposed revised ordinance will undergo significant
modifications and the Administration therefore recommends that: this item be opened and
continued; the City Commission direct the Administration to rewrite the ordinance; and that the
revised ordinance be presented to the FCWPC before First Reading.
224
City Commission Memo -Recycling Ordinance, First Reading
July 13, 2011
Page 2 of7
BACKGROUND
Commissioner Jonah Wolfson worked with the City Attorney's Office and City Administration, as well
as members of the City's Sustainability Committee, on a proposed ordinance that would require
mandatory recycling for multifamily residences and commercial establishments in the City, via the
establishment of a City of Miami Beach Mandatory Recycling Enforcement Program.
Currently, Miami-Dade County Code (Sections 15-2.2 to 15-2.4) requires multifamily and commercial
establishments to have a recycling program. However, as a result of multiple issues, including fiscal
constraints at the County level, the County Code requirement to demonstrate a recycling program is
not adequately or comprehensively enforced. It is believed that approximately 1 ,558 multifamily
residential buildings and commercial establishments within the City of Miami Beach are currently not
participating in the County-required recycling program. This is approximately 30% of all known
commercial and multfamily accounts.
The proposed ordinance (Attachment A), which is an amendment to Chapter 90 of the City Code,
would establish more stringent requirements than the County and require multifamily residences and
commercial establishments in the City to recycle pursuant to the requirements of a City of Miami
Beach Recycling Program. This proposed program would require that multifamily and commercial
establishments not only have a recyling program in place, but it would also mandate that recyclables
be recycled. Multifamily and commercial establishments would receive fines if recyclables were
found coming led with their solid waste or vice versa. The County Code (Section 15-2.5) gives the
City the authority to establish and enforce its own Ordinance, provided such Ordinance is equivalent
to or more stringent that the County's provisions.
Single-family homes and multifamily buildings with eight (8) units or less are already provided weekly
recycling services via Miami-Dade County's Curbside Recycling Program, which was done through
an Inter-Local Agreement (Agreement) entered into on June 14, 1990. The Agreement authorizes
the County to act on the City's behalf in the administration of the contractforthis recycling service in
the areas of municipal jurisdiction. The current number of households served by Miami-Dade
County within the City of Miami Beach is 6,498 units. The contractor that currently provides the
service to Miami Beach through the Agreement is World Waste Services.
Commercial facilities and multifamily residences with nine (9) or more units are required by Miami-
Dade County to hire, by means of a contract, a private hauler for their regular trash pick-up,
recycling and bulk pick-up. Miami-Dade County Code Chapter 15 entitled "Solid Waste
Management", Sections 15-2.2 through Sections 15-2.5 requires the following:
• Owners/Property owners of commercial establishments in Miami-Dade County must provide
a recycling program for their employees and tenants, using the services of an authorized
waste hauler or private recycling hauler.
• The program must recycle three (3) items from the following list often (1 0): high-grade office
paper, mixed paper, corrugated cardboard, glass, aluminum, steel, other scrap production
metals, plastics, textiles, and wood.
• Modified Recycling Programs -those that incorporate modifications, substitutions or
reductions to the requirements stated above -may be submitted to the Department of Solid
Waste Management for review and approval.
DEMOGRAPHICS
The City has approximately 85,536 residents, and 66,327 total households; of which approximately
6,498 households are on City solid waste and recycling service, which would be excluded from the
requirements of this Ordinance. The remaining 60,000 units are contained in approximately 1,500
multifamily residential buildings with eight (8) units or more, which would be subject to the
parameters of the multifamily residential component of the ordinance. The City has approximately
225
City Commission Memo -Recycling Ordinance, First Reading
July 13, 2011
Page 3 of7
3,624 commercial units.
CURRENT ENFORCEMENT
On September 1, 2009, the Miami-Dade County Multifamily and Commercial Recycling
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Miami Beach and Miami-Dade County-
Department of Solid Waste Management (SWM) was approved. Under the MOU, the County
agrees to enforce recycling under County Code Chapter 15, Sections 15-2.2 through 15-2.5 within
the City of Miami Beach. When facilities are found to not have a recycling program, the County
issues the offending party a warning notice followed by a notice of violation that may include fines as
delineated in Miami-Dade Code Chapter ace-entitled "Code Enforcement". In 2007 -Oa, the County
collected a total of $11 ,550 in fines Countywide for non-compliance with their recycling ordinance.
On March 29, 2010, the City provided Miami-Dade County Solid Waste Management (SWM) with a
list of 434 addresses from the waste haulers' multifamily and commercial accounts that were not
recycling. In August 2010, the County initiated a proactive inspection approach to enforcement.
Since August 2010, the County has inspected a total of 203 multi-family residences and 27
commercial establishments. If facilities were found to not have a recycling program, the facilities
were issued a warning notice followed by a notice of violation that may include fines delineated in
Miami-Dade Code Chapter ace entitled "Code Enforcement". However, in October 201 0 the
County returned to a compliant-driven approach with an emphasis on education. In January 2011,
the City franchise waste haulers provided the Public Works, Sanitation Division, with an updated list
of Miami Beach commercial facilities and multifamily residences that do not have a recycling
program in place. The list included the 1 ,55a establishments previously noted, which represents
30% of known commercial and multifamily accounts that are estimated not to have a recycling
program. The percentage of non-compliant facilities that have received fines since January 2011 is
unknown. Based on SWM complaint-driven approach that focuses more on education than issuance
of fines, this number is anticipated to be low.
PROGRAM ANALYSIS
The proposed Ordinance seeks to establish a comprehensive and aggressive Citywide Recyling
Program for multifamily residences and commercial establishments. The proposed Ordinance, is
more stringent than the County's requirements because it expands the scope of required recylables.
The City would develop a process by which all multifamily residences with nine (9) units or more
would be required to use a single-stream recycling process that includes all five (5) of the following
recyclable materials: newspaper, glass, metal food and beverage containers, other metal containers,
and plastics. In addition, at least three (3) of the following recyclable materials must also be
recycled: corrugated cardboard, magazines and catalogs, telephone books, office paper or organic
material. Commercial establishments would be required to recycle at least three (3) materials from
the following: mixed paper, glass, metal food and beverage containers, other metal containers,
plastics, textiles, wood or organic materials.
The proposed Ordinance stipulates that it is a violation for multifamily residences or commercial
establishments to have recyclable materials in any place other than in a recycling container. In
addition, the existence of recyclable materials inside a recycling container for seven (7) consecutive
days constitutes evidence that a multifamily residence or commercial establishment is not providing
regular recycling service that would be required by the provisions of this ordinance. In addition, the
absence of recyclable materials in a recycling container for seven (7) consecutive days constitutes
evidence that a multifamily residence or commercial establishment is not separating recyclables
from their solid waste stream and is thus in violation of the provisions of theOrdinance.
Enforcement of the proposed Ordinance would require recycling inspectors to inspect the contents
of both the solid waste and recycling containers in order to ascertain compliance. These
enforcement efforts can be driven on a complaint basis, through a proactive inspection schedule, or
226
City Commission Memo -Recycling Ordinance, First Reading
July 13, 2011
Page 4of7
through a combination approach. The Sustainability Committee recommended that a hybrid
approach be utilized to achieve the greatest level of compliance.
The proposed Ordinance also includes a "red tag" noticing system. Waste contractors and recycling
contractors are required to notify their customers with a "red tag" identifying incorrect materials found
in the either the solid waste or recycling container. After issuing two (2) tags, the contractor may
refuse collection service and include on the subsequent tag a description of the action that must be
taken for the materials to be collected. If the recycling contractor continues to find incorrect materials
in a collection container, it is required to report the customer that has violated the separation
requirements to the City. The proposed Ordinance provides that the contractor would be subject to
fines and penalities if it collects such commingled materials and waste.
According to the parameters of the proposed recycling Ordinance, if commercial establishments,
multifamily residences, or waste haulers are found to be in non-compliance with the proposed
amendments, the following penalties would be prescibed:
a) For the first violation, a warning or a fine up to $350.00.
b) For the second violation, a fine of up to $500.00.
c) For the third violation, a fine of up to $1 ,000.00.
d) For the fourth and subsequent violations, a fine of up to $5,000.00.
The proposed Ordinance does not include a fine accrual provision, which is found in many of the
City's similar fine structures. The Administration recommends that the Committee explore the
possibility of adding an accrual provision to encourage compliance.
The proposed Ordinance calls for one ( 1) year of Public Education Program followed by a six (6)
month warning period before penalties would be issued. During the education and outreach period,
the City would implement an aggressive public education campaign to inform the public of the new
requirements. This would entail comprehensive community outreach through the Chamber of
Commerce, local schools, business associations, and homeowner and condominium associations.
In addition, the City would disseminate information about the new program through TV, website,
social media, and printed media. After the year of extensive education and outreach, the six (6)
month warning period (or pre-full implementation period) would take place, where only warning
notices without monetary fines would be issued.
In addition to the outreach and educational efforts associated with a program ofthis magnitude, the
proposed Ordinance also includes an educational "tag program." The City would require recycling
contractors to place informational tags and/or stickers on the recycling dumpster to further educate
the public regarding allowable recyclable materials and proper recycling procedures. Only after the
education and warning period are complete (18 months from commencement of the program) would
the City issue Notices of Violation with accompanying monetary fines to companies and/or
individuals that fail to adhere to the provisions of this Ordinance.
The proposed Ordinance has been reviewed, analyzed, and commented upon by the Sustainability
Committee (at its October2010 and November2010 meetings). Two (2) versions of the Ordinance
were presented for review and consideration by the Land Use and Development Commmittee
(LUDC): Option "A" is the version developed by Administration and Option "8" is the version
developed by the Sustainability Committee.
The only significant differences that emerged between the Administration's version (Option "A") and
the Sustainability Committee's version (Option "8") were:
1. The dollar amount of the fines. The Sustainability Committee's recommendation for first and
second offenses did not include a warning and the dollar amounts were higher; and
227
City Commission Memo -Recycling Ordinance, First Reading
July 13, 2011
Page 5 of7
2. The duration of the overall warning period. The Sustainability Committee recommended a
three (3) month warning period instead of a six (6) month warming period during which only
warning citations and not actual moretary or other penalties would be issued.
On December 12,2010, the LUDC passed a motion recommending Option "A", the Administration's
version of the Ordinance, and moved it to the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee (FCWPC)
for discussion.
On June 23, 2011, the FCWPC passed a motion recommending that the City Commission pass
Option "A" with the stipulation that the program is revenue neutral, and is funded through the
commercial waste hauler contributions and/or Sanitation Reserves. The FCWPC also required that
no funding from the General Fund be used to support the Recycling Program. To be revenue-
neutral, the enforcement needs to be more complaint driven than pro-active inspection. Therefore,
the Ordinance as written must be modified.
PROGRAM COMPARISONS
Staff conducted research to identify and compare similar programs established in other
municipalities across the US. Some of the cities contacted included the localities of Austin, Texas;
Gainsville, Florida; Miami-Dade County; Montgomery County, Maryland; San Diego, California; San
Fransisco, California; and Seattle, Washington.
Levels of community compliance and enforcement vary between municipalities. For example, when
Seattle began its mandatory recycling program, there was a high level of compliance from the
beginning; more than 90% of Seattle's 150,000 apartments and businesses complied with the
requirements of the new ordinance within weeks of implementation without the issuance of fines.
Similarly, San Francisco has seen an approximate 55% rate of compliance with its mandatory
com posting and recycling ordinance. San Francisco publicized that it would be strictly enforcing
multifamily com posting and recycling in order to increase the public dialogue; however, their focus is
still mainly on compliance through outreach rather than issuance of fines.
Jurisdictions such as Gainesville, Austin, San Diego and Montgomery County have focused efforts
on providing education and extensive technical assistance rather than issuing fines to achieve
compliance. Gainesville has concentrated its efforts on a comprehensive educational campaign that
includes onsite assessment and recycling guidance to its residents and businesses. However,
Gainesville is planning to begin attaching fines to facilities' electric bills in order to increase recycling
compliance.
Similarly, Austin's current ordinance includes a fine of $500 per day. To date, Austin has elected to
focus on education rather than to issue fines for non-compliance. However, Austin is in the process
of developing a more stringent ordinance with stricter enforcement and fines, which is scheduled to
come into effect in October 2012.
Montgomery County has been focusing their efforts on providing education and technical assistance
to multifamily residences and commercial facilities. These facilities are required to complete an
Annual Waste Reduction Report that estimates the amount of recyclable material generated
annually. This allows Montgomery County to conduct audit inspections to verify the Waste
Reduction Report and determine if the facility requires further technicalassistance. If outreach is
found to be unsuccessful, Recycling Investigators respond with verbal warnings followed by
citations; however, further fines and enforcement is uncanmon.
The research also showed that the program staffing levels at a number of the locations varied in
terms of the scope of work and goals. Programs varied from a staff of four (4) Waste Diversion
Planners in Austin, Texas to more complex programs such as Montgomery County, which has a
total of 18 employees (1 Section Chief, 2 Program Coordinators, 2 Compliance Managers, 1
Community Outreach Coordinator, 8 Educational Specialists, and 4 Recycling Investigators). San
228
City Commission Memo -Recycling Ordinance, First Reading
July 13, 2011
Page 6of7
Fransisco's recycling and com posting program relies heavily on community volunteers to conduct
door-to-door neighborhood outreach. In addition, San Fransisco received funds from the Federal
Stimulus Package Jobs Now program that allowed it to employ 50 Environmental Outreach
Assistants, whose duties included various environmental initiatives including recycling outreach.
From the Jobs Now program, 18 Outreach Assistants have remained as full-time employees and
now supplement the Zero Waste Division's 11 employees (3 Residential Recycling Coordinators, 3
City Government Recycling Coordinators, 3 Commercial Recycling Coordinators, 1 Construction &
Demolition Recycling Coordinator, and 1 Division Program Manager).
STAFFING REQUIREMENTS-CITY ORDINANCE (OPTION A)
Based on the requirements and parameters set forth in the proposed Ordinance, Code Compliance
Officers (CCO) would need to inspect and assess 3,624 commercial units and approximately 1,500
multifamily residential buildings with more than eight units in order to determine compliance.
Staff has had several discussions regarding the level of enforcement that would be required for this
proposed Ordinance and how to effectuate inspections to encourage compliance. In order to
achieve the level of compliance expected to be achieved with this Ordinance, the Administration
would recommend quarterly pro-active inspections for the commercial establishments, and is
assuming a 50% compliance rate, which would require additional inspections for non-compliance.
For the multifamily residential buildings, the Administration would recommend two (2) proactive
inspections per year, again with a 50% compliance rate assumption, and additional inspections for
non-compliance. These assumptions do not include any inspections required as a result of
complaints or as notices provided by the haulers based on their observations and issuance of "red
tag" warnings. Variation from this implementation plan would impact the estimated staffing
requirements, operational costs and potential revenue from fines presented herEin.
It should be noted that recycling Ordinance enforcement staffing would be done with additional
positions, not within the current staffing plan of the Code Compliance Divison of the Building
Department, as current staff does not have the capacity to implement this program with current
Code Compliance demands. An additional administrative support position would also be required in
order to implement this program.
Using the assumptions outlined above, a total of eleven (11) additional full-time staff would be
required in the Code Compliance Division to effectively address the parameters of the proposed
recycling Ordinance. This includes nine (9) CCOs, one (1) Recycling Manager, and one (1)
Administrative Aide I. The CCOs would be deployed by zones (South, Middle, and North), reporting
to a Recycling Administrator, who in turn would report to a Recycling Manager. Assignments would
be adjusted based on workloads. The Recycling Manager would be responsible for supervising the
program and coordinating continued community outreach and education efforts.
The ongoing annual operating costs are projected to be approximately $630,611. This includes
salaries and fringe benefits associated with full-time employment in the amount of approximately
$592,993 as well as minimal operating costs in the amount of $37,618. This estimate does not
include one-time costs such as the purchase of computers, vehicles, and office furniture, which are
estimated to be in the range of $123,600, for a total implementation cost of approximately $754,235.
It should be noted that the staffing and operating costs associated with this program can be phased
in, as the educational program and initial warning period would be for a combined period of 18
months. Thus, the entirety ofthe costs would not need to be funded at the inception ofthe program.
POTENTIAL RECOVERY OF EXPENDITURES /ISSUANCE OF FINES
It is difficult to estimate the revenues generated from fines collected by implementing such a
program, as there is no experience with a strictly enforced recycling program. The Administration
229
City Commission Memo -Recycling Ordinance, First Reading
July 13, 2011
Page 7 of7
projects a 50% compliance rate, based on data obtained from the County; the County reports a 47%
compliance rate on their ordinance. Assuming a 33% collection rate on the fines issued to the 50%
of the non-compliant commerical and multifamily units, the City would collect approximately
$550,000 with this program. The 33% is the average/typical collection rate for code compliance
violations.
If fine collection turns out to be higher than anticipated, the revenue stream would increase. Of
course, the reciprical is also true. Additionally, if compliance is greater than anticipated, which would
be the ultimate goal of the program, the revenues would be less than anticipated.
PUBLIC EDUCATION PROGRAM
The proposed Ordinance specifies that the City would establish a Public Education Program that
informs the public of the new requirements and provides guidance on proper recycling procedures.
An exensive twelve (12) month education and outreach period will then be followed by a six (6)
month warning period before penalties would be issued. In order to maximize the success and
exposure of the Public Education Program during this period, prior to commencing enforcement, it is
recommended that a consultant be retained to communicate the new Recycling Program to the
community. The consultant can assist the City with developing a marketing plan, designing effective
educational materials, and administering workshops and creating information packages for
commercial and multifamily facilities.
FUNDING
Recommend funding for FY2012 Public Education Program to be provided from the waste haulers
contributions or through Sanitation Reserves. A source of funding for the enforcement component
of the Recycling Program has yet to be identified, other than the revenues discussed herein
associated with the fines.
CONCLUSION
At the July 13, 2011, Commission Meeting the item was referred to the Sept. 26, 2011 Finance and
Citywide Projects Committee (FCWPC) meeting. The FCWPC directed the administration to
conduct a Recycling Workshop, held on October 24, 2011.At the Workshop, Commissioner
Gongorra indicated that the item would be further discussed at the Sustainability Committee prior to
referral to the FCWPC to discuss funding. At the November 15, 2011, meeting of the Sustainability
Committee, a vote to revise the ordinance to more closely reflect the Miami-Dade County ordinance
passed with the following recommendations:
• Include a robust educational program
• Reduce the fine amounts
• Introduce an enforcement component; although the County ordinance provides for
enforcement, no enforcement is provida:l by the County.
Based on the above, recommendations, the proposed revised ordinance will undergo significant
modifications and the Administration therefore recommends that: this item be opened and
continued; the City Commission direct the Administration to rewrite the ordinance; and that the
revised ordinance be presented to the FCWPC before First Reading.
Attachments:
A. Proposed Recycling Ordinance
DRB/FHB/RWS
T:\AGENDA\2012\1-11-12\Recycling Ordinance Memo.doc
230
ORDINANCE NO.--------
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 90 OF THE MIAMI BEACH
CITY CODE, ENTITLED "SOLID WASTE," BY AMENDING THE DEFINITIONS
IN ARTICLE I, ENTITLED "IN GENERAL," BY AMENDING SECTION 90-2,
ENTITLED "DEFINITIONS"; BY AMENDING ARTICLE II, ENTITLED
"ADMINISTRATION" BY AMENDING THE PENALTIES FOR SOLID WASTE
VIOLATIONS AND TO PROVIDE PROVISIONS AND PENAL TIES RELATIVE
TO RECYCLING FOR MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCES AND COMMERCIAL
ESTABLISHMENTS; BY CREATING ARTICLE V, TO BE ENTITLED
"CITYWIDE RECYCLING PROGRAM FOR MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCES AND
COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS," TO PROVIDE PROVISIONS FOR
RECYCLING REQUIREMENTS AND ENFORCEMENT, A PUBLIC
EDUCATION PROGRAM, A WARNING PERIOD, AN ENFORCEMENT DATE,
COLLECTOR LIABILITY, A "RED TAG" NOTICING SYSTEM, PENAL TIES,
AND SPECIAL MASTER APPEAL PROCEDURES; PROVIDING FOR
REPEALER, SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATION, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, nearly everything we produce, use or consume leaves behind some kind of
waste and the treatment and disposal of waste can be a source of water, land, and air pollution;
and
WHEREAS, by managing solid waste and conserving material resources through
reduction, reuse, and recycling, the City will help minimize impacts to the quality and safety of
the local environment, reduce costs of waste disposal and decrease the carbon foot print
associated with the production and the use and disposal of materials; and
WHEREAS, the recycling of recyclable materials is in the best interest of the
environment, the residents, and the environmental footprint of the City of Miami Beach; and
WHEREAS, the City seeks to establish a Citywide Recycling Program for multifamily
residences and commercial establishments that provides standards that are equivalent to or
exceed the minimum recycling requirements of Miami-Dade County; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 15-2.5 and 15-2.7 of the Miami-Dade County Code,
the City and Miami-Dade County have agreed that the following Citywide Recycling Program
meets the minimum standards set forth in section 15-2.6 of the Miami-Dade County Code and
have accordingly entered into a Memorandum of Understanding so that the City may implement
said Program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That Article I, entitled "In General," of Chapter 90 of the Miami Beach City Code,
entitled "Solid Waste," is hereby amended as follows:
231
CHAPTER 90
SOLID WASTE
* * *
ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL
Sec. 90-2. Definitions.
The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this chapter, shall have the
meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different
meaning:
* * *
Commercial establishment means an establishment dealing in an exchange of goods or
services for money or barter. For purposes of this chapter, the term shall include churches,
synagogues and schools.
* * *
Multifamily residence means a building occupied or intended to be occupied by two (2)
or more families living separately, with separate kitchens in each unit.
* * *
Offense means a notice of violation that has not been appealed timely or a finding of a
violation by a special master following the appeal of a violation.
* * *
Premises means real property and includes any buildings or structures thereon.
* * *
Recyclable material§. means those materials capable of being recycled and which would
otherwise be processed or disposed of as solid waste. Any recyclable material mixed with solid
waste shall be considered to be solid waste.
Recycling means any process by which recyclable materials are collected, separated, or
processed to be reused or returned to use in the form of raw materials or products.
Recycling container means a container approved by the city manager for collection of
recyclable material by a recycling contractor.
Recycling contractor means a private contractor licensed by the city who collects
recyclable materials and transports same to a state or county-licensed recycling facility for
processing. Recycling contractors must provide their customers with a separate recycling
container for recyclable materials.
2
232
Single-stream recvcling means a process by which certain recyclable materials are
mixed together instead of being sorted into separate recycling containers in the collection
process.
SECTION 2. That Article II, entitled "Administration," of Chapter 90 of the Miami Beach City
Code entitled "Solid Waste," is hereby amended as follows:
CHAPTER 90
SOLID WASTE
* * *
ARTICLE II. ADMINISTRATION
Sec. 90-36. Enforcement of chapter; notice of violation.
(a) The city manager is hereby authorized and directed to enforce all the provisions of
this chapter regulating and governing the accumulation, collection .. and disposal of solid waste.
The city manager shall have the power to delegate duties to employees working under his
authority (including, without limitation. the city's public works director) in the enforcement of the
provisions of this chapter.
(b) Upon presentation of proper credentials, an inspector designated by the city
manager may enter any building, structure, lot or other premises for the purpose of inspection,
or to prevent violations of this chapter.
(c) The existence of solid waste shall be prima facie evidence that the same was
created or placed there by the occupant of the dwelling or commercial establishment; or the
owner; or the operator or manager. The existence of the same garbage inside the same
garbage containers for four (4) consecutive days upon premises serviced by a private waste
contractor shall be prima facie evidence of a violation of this chapter by the contractor. For
purposes of this section premises serviced by a private waste contractor shall not include
accounts that have been discontinued by the contractor when notice of discontinued service has
been mailed to the owner, occupant; or operator or manager, as well as to the city, prior to the
accumulation of the garbage.
(d) Whenever a designated city inspector observes a violation (or violations) of this
chapter regarding solid waste or an accumulation of solid waste that creates a health hazard,
environmental hazard, or nuisance, the inspector shall order the violation(s) to be corrected
within a specified period of time by serving a written notice of violation(s) upon the person
causing, or responsible for, such violation and/or health hazard, environmental hazard, or
nuisance. Such person shall immediately cease or abate the violation(s).
(e) A +Ae notice of violation shall be served personally or by certified mail upon the
property owner or upon the person.(§} in lawful possession of the premises, and/or upon the
pri'.~ate waste contractor servicing the premises. If the person addressed with such notice
cannot be found by the city after making reasonable good faith effort, such notice shall be sent
by certified mail to the last known address of such person, and a copy of the notice shall be
posted in a conspicuous place on the premises. Such notice shall be deemed the equivalent of
personal service.
3
233
(f) The notice shall specify any fine(s) that may be due in connection with the
violation(s)... the time specified by the inspector to correct the violations, and the procedure for
timely payment or appeal of the fine(s).
(g) If the inspector determines that the conditions constitute an immediate threat to the
health, safety or welfare of the public, he/she may order the immediate correction of the
violation(s) at the expense of the occupant; owner; or operator or manager and the city shall
have the right to recover such expenses as provided in section 90-4-Je 37.
{h) The enforcement of the recycling requirements for the citywide recycling program for
multifamily residences and commercial establishments provided for in Article V of this chapter,
and the penalties for violations of Article V. are provided in sections 90-345 and 90-347 through
90-348 of this chapter.
Sec. 90-37. Removal of waste by city; penalties for violations.
If the person served with a notice of violation pursuant to section 90-36 does not correct
the violation within the specified time, the city manager may do the following:
(1) For violations involving failure to remove solid waste, the city manager may
cause the waste to be removed from the premises and charge the actual costs to
the owner; occupant; or operator or manager, on a force account basis. Any fine
due pursuant to section 90-39 or 90-40 shall also be charged to the owner;
occupant; or operator or manager. Failure to pay such costs and fines or to
appeal pursuant to section 90-38 within fifteen (15) days of receipt of the notice
shall result in the imposition of a lien upon the property, in the amount of such
costs and fines. Such liens shall be treated as special assessment liens against
the subject real property and, until fully paid and discharged, shall remain liens
equal in rank and dignity with the lien of ad valorem taxes, and shall be superior
in rank and dignity to all other liens, encumbrances, titles and claims in, to or
against the real property involved. Such liens shall be enforced by any of the
methods provided in Ch. 86, Florida Statutes; or, in the alternative, foreclosure
proceedings may be instituted and prosecuted under the provisions of Ch. 173;
Florida Statutes; or the collection and enforcement or payment thereof may be
accomplished by any other method authorized by law. The owner; occupant; or
operator or manager shall pay all costs of collection, including reasonable
attorneys fees incurred in the collection of fines, and other charges, penalties,
and liens imposed by virtue of this chapter.
(2) For violations of this chapter for which no fine is specified in sections 90-39
and 90-40, the city attorney may prosecute the violators pursuant to section 1-14.
Fines for such offenses shall be as follows:
a. First offense, $350.00.
b. Second offense, $500.00.
c. Third offense, $1 ,000.00.
d. Fourth or subsequent offense. $5,000.00.
4
234
(3) For violations which present a serious threat to the health, safety or welfare
of the public and/or violations that are continually repeated constitute a fourth or
subsequent offense by the same violator, the city attorney may seek injunctive
relief and/or, in the case of commercial establishments, revoke the business tax
receipt and/or certificate of use of the establishment and/or premises.
Sec. 90-38. Appeal to special master.
(a) Any person receiving a notice of violation pursuant to section 90-36 and/or .anotice
of fine pursuant to section§. 90-39 and/or 90-40 may request, within fifteen (15) days of receipt
of the notice, an administrative hearing before a special master, appointed as provided in article
II of chapter 30, to appeal the decision of the city inspector resulting in the issuance of the
notice. Procedures and application fee for the scheduling and conduct of the hearing shall be as
provided in sections 102-384 and 102-385. Failure to appeal within the prescribed time period
shall constitute a waiver of the violator's right to an administrative hearing. A waiver of the right
to an administrative hearing shall be treated as an admission of the violation, as noticed, and
fines and penalties may be assessed accordingly.
(b) Timely filing of a notice of appeal pursuant to this section shall toll the imposition of
a lien pursuant to section 90-37 or 90-136, or enforcement procedures pursuant to section 90-
36, until thirty (30) days after the issuance of a written determination by the special master. Any
amounts of money due the city pursuant to such determination must be received by the city
within thirty (30) days after the issuance of the determination, or a lien shall be imposed upon
the property in question, and any other enforcement or collection procedures commenced, as
provided by this chapter or under state law.
SECTION 3. That Article V, to be entitled "Citywide Recycling Program for Multifamily
Residences and Commercial Establishments," of Chapter 90 of the Miami Beach City Code,
entitled "Solid Waste," is hereby created as follows:
CHAPTER 90
SOLID WASTE
* * *
ARTICLE V. CITYWIDE RECYCLING PROGRAM FOR
MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCES AND COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS
Sec. 90-340. Recycling required for multifamily residences.
As of ( DATE ) rNOTE: DATE SHOULD BE ONE YEAR FROM EFFECTIVE
DATE OF ORDINANCE], every multifamily residence shall be required to use a single-stream
recycling process to recycle recyclable materials and every multifamily residence shall be
serviced by a city and state licensed recycling contractor .
.@} At a minimum, multifamily residences must recycle at least five (5) of the
recyclable materials listed below:
1l Newspaper-used or discarded newsprint, including any glossy inserts;
5
235
_g} Glass-glass jars. bottles. and containers of clear. areen or amber
(brown) color of any size or shape used to store and/or package food and
beverage products for human or animal consumption. and/or used to
package other products. which must be empty and rinsed clean of
residue. This term excludes ceramics. window or automobile glass.
mirrors. and light bulbs;
ID Metal food and beverage containers-all ferrous and nonferrous (i.e.
including. but not limited to. steel, tin-plated steel, aluminum and bimetal)
food and beverage containers (i.e. including. but not limited to. cans,
plates. and trays) of any size or shape used to store and/or package food
and beverage products suitable for human or animal consumption. which
must be empty and rinsed clean of residue;
~ Other metal containers-all other ferrous and non ferrous containers used
to package household products including, but not limited to. paint cans
and aerosol cans. which must be empty and rinsed clean of residue;
§l Plastics-all high density polyethylene (HOPE) and/or polyethylene
terephthalate (PET) bottles. jugs. jars. cartons. tubs, and/or other
containers. and lids, of any size or shape used to package food.
beverages. and/or other household products. or crankcase oil. which must
be empty and rinsed clean of residue. This term excludes all plastic film.
plastic bags, vinyl. rigid plastic (i.e. toys). and plastic foam materials; and
.(Ql At least three (3) of the following recyclable materials:
1l Cardboard -clean. unwaxed corrugated cardboard boxboard and/or
similar corrugated and kraft paper materials; food, beverage, and/or other
household cardboard boxes. cartons and/or other containers (i.e. cereal
boxes. paper egg cartons. rolls. and bags. milk, juice and other beverage
cartons and/or boxes. spiral-wound containers such as orange juice.
dough and potato chip containers. tissue boxes. and toilet tissue and
paper towel rolls); and any other corrugated and/or non-corrugated
materials made from cardboard. all of which must be empty and cleaned
of excessive amounts of contaminant such as adhesives. metals and
plastics;
_g} Magazines and catalogues;
ID Telephone books and/or directories;
~ Office paper -used or discarded high-grade white paper and Manila
paper including, but not limited to. paper used for file folders. tab cards.
writing. typing, printing, computer printing, and photocopying (i.e. writing
paper. stationary, letterhead, notebook paper. copier paper. typing paper.
tablet sheets. computer print-out paper. and all paper of similar quality);
regular mail and junk mail; envelopes without wax liners or adhesive
labels; and paper gift wrap and cards. This term shall not include carbon
paper. self carbonizing paper. coated or glossy paper. and envelopes
with windows or adhesive labels.
Organic Materials -A multifamily residence that recycles organic materials in a separate
bin that is serviced by a city licensed recycling contractor shall be deemed to satisfy one of the
three(3) recyclable materials options in this subsection (b). The following items shall be
deemed to be organic materials for purposes of this section: All food materials. including but
not limited to fresh. frozen. dried. cooked and prepared foods and leftovers; fruit and vegetable
6
236
scraps; pasta, bread, and cereal; meat and fish products; egg shells; coffee grinds and filters;
and tea bags.
Sec. 90-341. Recycling required for commercial establishments.
As of ( DATE ) [NOTE: DATE SHOULD BE ONE YEAR FROM EFFECTIVE
DATE OF ORDINANCE], every commercial establishment shall be required to recycle
recyclable materials and shall be serviced by a city and state licensed recycling contractor, or
the city. At a minimum, commercial establishments must recycle at least three (3) recyclable
materials from the list below:
1.l Newsoaoer: Cardboard; Magazines and catalogues; Telephone books and/or
directories; and Office paper -(with said terms having the same definitions, and
including the same type(s) of recyclable materials as provided in Sections 90-
340(a) and (b) hereof);
.£} Glass-(with said term having the same definition and including the same type(s)
of recyclable materials as provided in Section 90-340(a) hereof);
~ Metal food and beverage containers -(with said term having the same definition
and including the same type(s) of recyclable materials as provided in Section 90-
340(a) hereof);
~ Other metal containers -(with said term having the same definition and including
the same type(s) of recyclable materials as provided in Section 90-340(a) hereof,
but also, for purposes of this subsection(4), including scrap metal, which shall
mean used or discarded items suitable for recycling. consisting predominantly of
ferrous metals. aluminum, brass. copper, lead. chromium, tin, nickel or alloys
thereof including, but not limited to, bulk metals such as large metal fixtures and
appliances (including white goods such as washing machines, refrigerators, etc.),
but excluding metal containers utilized to store flammable or volatile chemicals.
such as fuel tanks.;
§l Plastics -(with said term having the same definition and including the same
type(s) of recyclable materials as provided in section 90-340(a) hereof);
§l Textiles;
Zl Wood -clean wood waste and/or pieces generated as byproducts from
manufacturing of wood products and wood demolition waste (i.e. lumber,
plywood, etc.) thrown away in the course of remodeling or construction. It
excludes clean yard waste and clean waste (i.e. natural vegetation and minerals
such as stumps, brush, blackberry vines. tree branches. and associated dirt,
sand. tree bark. sand and rocks). treated lumber. wood pieces, or particles
containing chemical preservatives. composition roofing. roofing paper, insulation,
sheetrock, and glass,
Organic Materials -A commercial establishment that recycles organic materials (as
defined in Section 90-340 hereof) in a separate bin that is serviced by a city licensed recycling
contractor shall be deemed to satisfy one of the three(3) recyclable materials options in this
subsection.
Sec. 90-342. Unauthorized collection of designated recyclable materials.
Only those recycling contractors that have been authorized by the city and the state to
collect designated recyclables in the city shall be authorized to collect recyclable materials
under this article.
7
237
Sec. 90-343. Public education program; warning period and enforcement date.
ID Beginning ( DATE l rNOTE: DATE SHOULD BE 10 DAYS AFTER
ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE]. the city shall engage in public education efforts and
the city shall not prosecute individuals who unknowingly fail to separate recyclable
materials from all other solid waste materials required to be separated by this article
until as provided in subsections (d) and (e) of this section.
b) All recycling contractors must appropriately designate the recycling collection
containers they provide to customers. The containers must contain the appropriate
signage and information. as shall be established and approved by the city pursuant
to subsection (c) below. that allows users to clearly and easily identify the container
for recycling.
btc) The city shall establish an educational tag program whereby appropriate
information. in the form of tags. stickers. or other signage approved by the city
manager. shall be required to be placed on all recycling containers. informing the
public of proper recyclable materials and procedures. The city shall also provide
information on its website regarding what materials are acceptable as recyclables
under this article .
.Ql Beginning ( DATE ) [NOTE: DATE SHOULD BE ONE YEAR FROM
EFFECTIVE DATE OF ORDINANCE] the city shall provide for a six (6) month
warning period. through and including ( DATE ) rNOTE: DATE SHOULD BE
18 MONTHS AFTER EFFECTIVE DATE OF ORDINANCE). in which warning tickets
shall be issued to persons who fail to separate recyclable materials from solid waste.
regardless of knowledge or intent.
G}e) Beginning ( DATE ) rNOTE: DATE SHOULD BE 18 MONTHS AND 1
DAY AFTER EFFECTIVE DATE OF ORDINANCE]. this article shall be enforced
and penalties shall be applied and imposed for violations of this article.
Sec. 90-344. Liability of contractors.
(a) All recycling contractors shall comply with all applicable state and city laws and
regulations. Any recycling contractor who reasonably believes that a person from whom
he/she/it collects has violated the separation requirements of article V of this chapter. shall not
collect the same. and shall notify the director of public works to report the violation. If the
contractor collects such waste. the fines and penalties set forth in sec. 90-347 shall be issued
and imposed against him/her/it. Additionally, contractors shall assist and notify the director of
public works in identifying persons that unlawfully mixed solid waste with recyclable materials.
which were later delivered to a resources recovery facility. transfer station. landfill. or other solid
waste facility.
(b) "Red Tag" Noticing System.
1) If a recycling contractor finds materials that are not the correct type as
designated for that container (such as recyclables in a sold waste
container. or solid waste in a recycling container). the contractor shall then
leave a tag on the container identifying the incorrect materials.
8
238
2) If the contractor continues to find incorrect materials in a collection
container after the contractor has left a previous tag for that customer and
that type of container, the contractor must leave another tag on the
container identifying the incorrect materials and send a written notice to (i)
the person and/or entity who subscribes for that collection service. and (ii)
the director of public works.
3) If the contractor continues to find incorrect materials in a collection
container after the contractor has already left two (2) or more tags for that
customer and that type of container, the contractor may refuse to empty
the container. If the container is not emptied, the contractor must leave a
tag and send a written notice to (i) the person and/or entity who
subscribes for the collection service, identifying the incorrect materials and
describing what action must be taken for the materials to be collected, and
(ii) to the director of public works; provided. however. that a contractor
may not refuse on this basis to empty containers from multifamily or
commercial establishment properties with multiple tenants and joint
account collection services.
4) The contractor shall. provide to the director of public works a list of the
names and addresses of those persons and/or entities who have received
tags or notices. or whose containers have not been emptied due to non-
compliance with this article. or copies of the tags or notices issued by the
contractor. The contractor shall also provide to the director. upon request,
a list of the names, addresses. and service levels of the contractor's
customers and any additional information required by the director.
Sec. 90-345. Enforcement.
(a) The city manager is hereby authorized and directed to enforce all the provisions of
this article regulating and governing the accumulation. collection. recycling, and disposal of
recyclable materials. The city manager shall have the power to delegate duties to employees
working under his authority in the enforcement of the provisions of this article.
(b) Upon presentation of proper credentials, an inspector designated by the city
manager may enter any building, structure, lot, or other premises for the purpose of inspection,
or to prevent violations of this article.
(c) The existence of recyclable materials in any place other than in a recycling
container, shall be prima facie evidence that the same was created or placed there by the
occupant of the multifamily residence or commercial establishment, or the owner. operator, or
manager of the premises. The existence of recyclable materials inside a recycling container for
seven (7) consecutive days or more shall be prima facie evidence of a violation of this article by
the recycling contractor. The absence of recyclable materials in a recycling container for seven
(7) consecutive days or more upon the premises shall be prima facie evidence of a violation of
this article by the multifamily residence or commercial establishment. For purposes of this
section. premises serviced by a recycling contractor shall not include accounts that have been
discontinued by the recycling contractor when notice of discontinued service has been mailed to
the owner, occupant, operator. or manager of the premises, as well as to the city, prior to the
accumulation of the recyclable materials.
(d) The director of the department of public works shall develop warning notices and
notices of violation forms with which to impose penalties on violators that are in violation of this
9
239
article. The city shall issue warning notices and notices of violations notices to property owners,
tG person(s) in lawful possession of the premises, or to the recycling contractor servicing the
premises. In addition, contractors may issue warnings at the request of the director of the
department of public works.
(e) Whenever a designated city inspector observes a violation (or violations) of this
article, or an accumulation of recyclable materials that creates a health hazard, environmental
hazard, or nuisance, the inspector shall order the violation(s) to be corrected within a specified
period of time by serving a written notice of violation(s) upon the person causing, or responsible
for, such violation and/or health hazard, environmental hazard, or nuisance. Such person shall
immediately cease or abate the violation(s).
(f) A notice of violation shall be served personally or by certified mail upon the property
owner or the person(s) in lawful possession of the premises, or upon the recycling contractor
servicing the premises. If the person addressed with such notice cannot be found by the city
after making a reasonable good faith effort, such notice shall be sent by certified mail to the last
known address of such person, and a copy of the notice shall be posted in a conspicuous place
on the premises. Such notice shall be deemed the equivalent of personal service.
(g) The notice shall specify any fine or penalty that may be due in connection with the
violatton(s), the time specified by the inspector to correct the violation(s), and the procedure for
timely payment or appeal of the fine or penalty.
(h) If the inspector determines that the conditions constitute an immediate threat to the
health, safety or welfare of the public, the inspector may order the immediate correction of the
violation(s) at the expense of the property owner, occupant, operator, manager, or other
person(s) in lawful possession of the premises, and the city shall have the right to recover such
expenses as provided in section 90-37.
Sec. 90-346. Exception.
A property owner may seek a waiver from the director of public works of all or portions of
this article, if the applicant submits documentation, using a form specified by the city that
includes a signed affidavit under penalty of perjury, that shows that the property does not have
adequate storage space for containers for recyclables or solid waste or other hardship. In
cases where. after on-site verification. space or other limitations are determined to exist, the
director shall evaluate the feasibility of sharing containers for recyclables or solid waste with
contiguous properties. and, where feasible. may require container sharing in lieu of providing a
waiver. or such other suitable solutions as deemed appropriate by the director.
Sec. 90-347. Removal of Recyclable Materials by City/Penalties.
(1) For violations involving failure to remove recyclable materials from a recycling
container by a recycling contractor. the city manager may cause the recyclable materials to be
removed from the premises and charge the actual costs of removal to the owner. occupant,
operator, manager. or other person(s) in lawful possession of the premises.
(2) Penalties for violations of this article shall be as follows:
a. For the first violation. a warning or a fine up to $350.00.
10
240
b. For the second violation, a fine of up to $500.00.
c. For the third violation, a fine of up to $1 ,000.00.
d. For the fourth and subsequent violations, a fine of up to $5,000.00.
(3) Any penalty due pursuant to this article shall also be charged to the owner,
occupant. operator, manager, or other person(s) in lawful possession of the premises. Failure
to pay such costs and penalties. or to appeal pursuant to section 90-348 within fifteen (15) days
of receipt of the notice of violation shall result in the imposition of a lien upon the premises, in
the amount of such costs and penalties. Such liens shall be treated as special assessment
liens against the subject real property and, until fully paid and discharged, shall remain liens
equal in rank and dignity with the lien of ad valorem taxes, and shall be superior in rank and
dignity to all other liens, encumbrances, titles and claims in, to or against the real property
involved. Such liens shall be enforced by any of the methods provided in Ch. 86, Florida
Statutes; or, in the alternative, foreclosure proceedings may be instituted and prosecuted under
the provisions of Ch. 173; Florida Statutes; or the collection and enforcement or payment
thereof may be accomplished by any other method authorized by law. The owner, occupant.
operator, or manager of the premises shall pay all costs of collection, including reasonable
attorneys fees incurred in the collection of fines, and other charges, penalties, and liens
imposed by virtue of this chapter.
(4) For violations which present a serious threat to the health, safety or welfare of the
public, and/or violations that constitute a fourth or subsequent offense by the same violator, the
city may seek injunctive relief and/or, in the case of commercial establishments, revoke the
business tax receipt and/or certificate of use of the establishment and/or premises.
Sec. 90-348. Appeal to Special Master.
(a) Any person receiving a notice of violation pursuant to this chapter may request,
within fifteen (15) days of receipt of the notice, an administrative hearing before a special
master, appointed as provided in article II of chapter 30, to appeal the decision of the city
inspector resulting in the issuance of the notice. The procedures and application fee for the
scheduling and conduct of the hearing shall be as provided in sections 102-384 and 102-385.
Failure to appeal within the prescribed time period shall constitute a waiver of the violator's right
to an administrative hearing. A waiver of the right to an administrative hearing shall be treated
as an admission of the violation, as noticed, and fines and penalties may be assessed
accordingly.
(b) Timely filing of a notice of appeal pursuant to this sectioc shall toll the imposition of
a lien or enforcement procedures pursuant to section 90-~47, until .thirty (30) days after the
issuance of a written determination by the special master. Anv costs or penalty'amounts due
the city pursuant to such determination must be received by flie; City within "thirty' (30) days after
the issuance of the determination, or a lien shall be imposed upon the premises, and any other
enforcement or collection procedures may be commenced, as provided by this chapter or under
state law. · • ---;
11
241
SECTION 4. REPEALER.
All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be and the same are hereby repealed.
SECTION 5. SEVERABILITY.
If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is held to be invalid or
unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, then said holding shall in no way affect
the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
SECTION 6. CODIFICATION.
It is the intention of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, and it is
hereby ordained that the provisions of this ordinance shall become and be made a part of the
Code of the City of Miami Beach, Florida. The sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or
re-lettered to accomplish such intention, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section,"
"article," or other appropriate word.
SECTION 7. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Ordinance shall take effect the day of--------' 2011.
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of-------' 2011.
ATTEST:
MAYOR MATTI HERRERA BOWER
ROBERT PARCHER, CITY CLERK
Underline denotes additions and Strike through denotes deletions.
F:\ATIO\AGUR\RESOS-ORD\Recycling Program Ordinance-Option A Administration Version {7-1-ll).doc
12
242
MIAMlBEACH
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARI.NGS
NOTICE IS HEREBY given that second readings and public hearings will be held by the Mayor and City Commission of thffe,'ty
of Miami Beach, Florida, in the Commission Chambers, 3rd floor, City Hall, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beac~. Florida,
on WED~ESDAY, OCTOBER 19thTH, 2011, to consider the following: .
10:15a.m. . . . 4 . .
Ame~dments To The Roofing· Material Ordinance . . . .
Ordinance Amendirlg Tlie Land Development Regulations Of'fhe Code Of. The City Ot Miami Beach, ·ayAmendirig Chapter 142,
"Zoning Districts And Regulations•, Article iV, "supplementary District Regulations'~; Section 142-875 ".Roof Replac.ements" To
tylqdity,An<f.Expant;l, T~e'Requirements. For-Roofing Materi@ls ln)l.ll Districts.
Inquiries may be directed to th~ Plannj0g Department at (3Ci5) 673-7550. ·
10:20 a:ln.
Stay Of Work.And Proceedings On Appeal:·
Ordinance Amending The Land Qevelopment Regulations Of The CitY Code. By Amending Chapter 118, "Administrative And
Review Procedures," Article II, "Boards," Division 5, "Board Of Adjustment," Section 118-137, "Stay Of Work And Proceedings On
Appeal," Clarifying And Amending The Stay Provisions Applicable To Matters On Appeal To Th-;, Board Of Adjustment
l~quiries may be directed to the Planning Department at (305) 673-7550.
10:25a.m.
Ordinance Amen(ling Chapter 10 Ot The Miami Beach City Code Entitled "Animals,'' ·By Amending Section 10-11, Entitled "Running
At Large Prohibited" By .Extending The Pilot Program Off-Leash Area For Dogs in South Pointe Park Until January 1, 2012 And By
Adding Two (2) Hours In Th(1 Ev~ning From 5:00 p.m. To 7:00 p.m. On Monday Through Friday; Pro~iding For An Off-Leash Area
On The Par 3 Golf Course From Sunrise To 9:00 A.M. Daily And From 5:00 p.,m. To 7:00 p.m. On Monday Through Friday Until
Construction Commences On The Par 3 Golf Course.
Inquiries may be directed to the Parks and Recreation Department at (305) 673-7730.
10:30a.m,
Minimum Unit Size And Parking Requirements For Affprdable Housing Projects_
An Ordinance Amending The Code Ot The City Of Miami Beach, By Amending Chapter 130 ''Off-Street Parking," Section 130-32
"Off-Street Parking Requirements For Parking District No. 1 ,"And Section 130-33 "Off-Street Parking Requirements For Parking
Districts Nos. 2, 3, And 4,'' By Adding Parking Requirements For Housing For Low And/Or Moderare Income Non~Eiderly Persons;
Chapter 142 "Zoning Districts And Regulations," By Amending Article IV. "Supplementary District Regulations," By Amending
Division 6. "Housing For Low And/Or Moderate Income Elderly Persons,'' By Including Non-Elderly Persons In The Regulations;
Arrlenditig.Se~ti01'l,_ t42,1181, ''Purpose,'' Section 142-1182 "Definitions,''.Section 142-1'183, "L!nit Siz~> And Section 142-1184
"Mandato,.Y Crrre~ia;'' Amending 'Qivlslon 3. "Residential Mul!ffamily Districts," Subtliilision II. "RrvH Residential Multifamiiy Low
Intensity;• Subdivision IV. ''RM-2 Residential _Multifamily; Medium Intensity,'' Subdivision·v. "RM-3 Residential Multifjtmily, High
Intensity," Divisi6n 4.;cD-1 Commercial, Low Intensity District," D<vi§iOn 5.'''CD-2 Commercial, Medium Intensity District," Division
6. "CD-3 CommerCial,' HighJntensity-District,: And Divisio,n 18. "PS Performance Standard. District," BY Including References To
Division 6. "Ho~sing.Fo,r Low ll,nd/Or Mbdeta!~ lncome:Non-Eiderly And Elderly P.ersons.".
lnqujries may be directed to the Planning Department at (305) 673-7550.
10:35a.m.
Recycling Ordinance:·
An Ordinance Amending Chapter 90 Of The Miami Beach City Code,.Entitled "Solid Waste,". By Amending The Definitions In Article
I, Entitled "In General," By' Amending Section -90-2, Entitled "Definitions"; By Amending Article II, Entitled "Administration" By
Amending The Penalties For Solid Waste Violations And To Provide Provisions And Penalties Relative To Recycling For Multifamily
Residences And Commercial Establishments; By'Crea:ting Article V, To Be Entitled "Citywide Recycling Program For Multffamily
Residences And Commercial Establishments," To Provide Provisions For Recycling Requirements And Enforcement, A Public
Education Program, A Warning Period, An Enforcement Date, Collector Liability, A "Red Tag" Noticing System, P'enalties, And
Special Master Appeal Procedures. ·
Inquiries may be directed to the Public Works Department at (305) 673-7616.
INTERESTED PARTIES are invited to appear at this meeting, or be represented by an agent, or to express their views in writing
addressed to the City Commission, c/o the City Clerk, 1700 Convention Center Drive, 1st Floor, City Hall, Miami Beach, Florida
33139. Copies of these ordinances are available for public inspection during normal business hours in the City Clerk's Otfice, 1700
Convention Center Drive, 1st Floor, City Hall, and Miami Beach, Fl0rida 33139. This meeting may be continued and under such
circumstances additional legal notice Would not be provided.
Robert E. Parcher, City Clerk
City of Miami Beach
• Pursuant to Section 286.0105, Fla. Stat., the City hereby advises the public that: if a person decides to appeal a~y decision
made by the City Commission with respect to any rnatter considered at its meeting or its hearing, such person must ensure that
a vertiatim record of ttie proceedings is made, which record includeS the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be
based. This notice does not constitute consent by the City for the introduction or admission of otherwise inadmissible or irrelevant
evidence, no~ does it authorize challenges or appeals not otherwise allowed by law.
To request this material in accessible format, sign language .interpreters, information on access for persons with disabilities, and/
or any accommodation to review any document or participate in any city-sponsored proceeding, please contact (305) 604-2489
(voice), (305)673-7218(TTY) five days in advance to initiate your request. TTY users may also call711 (Florida Relay Service).
Ad #670
243
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
244
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
Amendment to the Height Limits in the RPS-4 Zoning District
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Maintain strong growth management policies; Protect historic building stock
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.):
While nearly half, 47.6%, suggested the effort put forth by the City to regulate development is
"about the right amount," nearly one-third, 29.6%, indicated "too little" effort is being put forth by the
City in this area.
Issue:
Should the City Commission adopt an Ordinance Amendment that modifies the maximum allowable
height requirements for residential structures located in the RPS-4 zoning district, subject to Historic
Preservation Board review and approval?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
SECOND READING PUBLIC HEARING: The Administration recommends that the City Commission
adopt the Ordinance upon second reading public hearing.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
On July 20, 2011, the Land Use and Development Committee referred the Ordinance to the Planning
Board, with a favorable recommendation.
On October 25, 2011, the Planning Board transmitted the subject Ordinance to the City Commission,
with a favorable recommendation.
On November 8, 2011, the Historic Preservation Board reviewed the proposed ordinance and
recommended approval.
On December 14, 2011, the City Commission aj:>_proved the proposed ordinance on first reading.
Financial Information:
Source of Amount Account Approved
Funds: 1
D 2
3
4
OBPI Total
Financial Impact Summary:
The subject ordinance is not expected to have any fiscal impact.
Clerk's Office Le islative Trackin
Richard Lorber or Thomas Mooney
Si n-Offs:
Department Director
MIAMI BEACH 245
AGENDA ITEM R£" E
DATE 1-J )-1'2-
MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager ~~
January 11, 2012 UsEcBND READING PUBLIC HEARING
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, BY
AMENDING CHAPTER 142, "ZONING DISTRICTS AND REGULATIONS",
ARTICLE II, "DISTRICT REGULATIONS", DIVISION 18, "PS
PERFORMANCE STANDARD DISTRICT", SECTION 142-696
"RESIDENTIAL PERFORMANCE STANDARD AREA REQUIREMENTS" TO
MODIFY THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS FOR RESIDENTIAL
APARTMENT STRUCTURES; BY AMENDING SECTION 142-697
"SETBACK REQUIREMENTS IN THE R-PS1, 2, 3, 4 DISTRICTS", TO
MODIFY THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR OCEANFRONT
BUILDINGS; PROVIDING FOR REPEALER, CODIFICATION,
SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission adopt the proposed
Ordinance upon second reading public hearing.
BACKGROUND
A discussion of a proposed amendment to the RPS-4 district regulations, in order to
increase the maximum allowable height for residential apartment structures on
oceanfront lots from 75' to 100', was commenced by the Land Use and Development
Committee on May 18, 2011. The RPS-4 district is located south of Fifth Street, along
the Atlantic Ocean and Government Cut; that portion of the RPS-4 district between First
and Fifth Streets is also within the boundaries of the Ocean Beach Local Historic District.
This district contains both residential apartment structures and hotel structures; all of the
hotel structures have accessory uses.
In 2002, pursuant to Ordinance 2002-3386, the City Commission established a
maximum height limit of 75' for all structures in the RPS-4 district that are within the
confines of the Ocean Beach Local Historic District. At the time, the purpose of these
height limits was to control the aggregation of lots and to limit the impact of new
construction on the low scale character of the west side of Ocean Drive.
Recently, the property at 321 Ocean Drive was purchased by a developer who is
seeking to build a residential-apartment project. Unlike the previous project proposed for
this site (Bijou Hotel), the new,owner is not seeking to build a hotel structure with
246
January 11, 2012
Commission Memorandum
RPS-4 Heights Ordinance
Page 2of 5
controversial accessory uses. The developers concept proposal, which has yet to be
brought forward formally for development approval and permitting, has been met with
support and enthusiasm from neighboring residents. The main reason for this initial
support is that the development proposal is for a purely residential, as opposed to hotel
structure. Given the number of existing transient uses (hotels) and associated accessory
uses in the area, the residents of South Pointe have become increasingly concerned
with a lack of balance between permanent residential uses, and transient type uses with
accessory restaurants and destination type uses. Permanent residential structures are
seen by residents of the South Pointe area as providing a better balance to existing
commercial uses in the area.
In order to encourage and foster residential apartment type uses along the oceanfront
lots in the RPS-4 district, a proposal has been put forth to increase the maximum
allowable height for residential apartment buildings.
ANALYSIS
The RPS-4 residential-performance standards district is designed to accommodate high
density residential development, including hotel development and multi-family residential
development. Section 142-691 of the Code specifies, in part, that 'performance
standards development will allow for modification of requirements affecting certain
individual lots, greater flexibility, particularly for large-scale development, and incentives
for provision of certain amenities and for conformance with specified objectives, thereby
encouraging more flexible and innovative design and development, in accordance with
the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan and the redevelopment plan'.
The proposal put forth to increase the allowable height for new residential apartment
structures in the RPS-4 district is consistent with the district purpose defined above and
does have tangible benefits from a planning and urban design standpoint. In this regard,
the proposed ordinance would provide more latitude for the distribution of the allowable
volume for the site within a taller, slimmer structure, as well as require a separation of
the tower volume, which is a better design alternative than a horizontal 'bar' building.
This would lessen the impact on existing, adjacent structures, allow for better view
corridors, and provide the potential for more dynamic architecture. The proposal for the
increased height would also be consistent with the majority of the built context along the
east side of Ocean Drive from First to Fifth Street, as more particularly illustrated in the
massing studies provided.
Notwithstanding these compatible attributes, after careful study and evaluation of the
entire RPS-4 area as a whole, staff identified some concerns with the initial proposal.
Specifically, while the proposal to increase the maximum building heights of residential
apartment structures in the RPS-4 district is consistent with the established heights of
the majority of the residential structures along the east side of Ocean Drive between
First and Fifth Streets, it could present potential conflicts with the lower scale structures
along the west side of Ocean Drive. Additionally, there are some concerns that the
proposal could be limited in application.
In order to address these concerns, and for the proposed increase in height to be
consistent with and sensitive to the built context of the immediate area, staff has
recommended that the proposed allowable increase in height be at the discretion of the
247
January 11, 2012
Commission Memorandum
RPS-4 Heights Ordinance
Page 3of 5
Historic Preservation Board. Additionally, the allowable heights should not exceed 6
stories I 60 feet for the first 60 feet of lot depth and 11 stories I 1 00 feet thereafter, and
only under the following conditions, as proposed in the Ordinance recommended by the
Planning Board and as suggested to be modified by staff:
1. The property shall be an oceanfront lot with a minimum lot width of 1 00 feet.
2. The property shall not contain a contributing building.
3. The sixth level of the front portion of the new construction shall meet a line-of-
sight, which for the purpose of this section, is defined as not being visible when
viewed at eye-level (5'6" from grade) from the opposite side of the Ocean Drive
right-of-way.
4. The proposed building shall be sited and massed in a manner that promotes and
protects view corridors. At a minimum, a substantial separation of the tower
portion of any structure shall be required.
5. For lots greater than 50' in width, the front portion of the structure shall
incorporate a separation in the center of the structure, which is open to sky, and
is at least 10 feet in width and 25 feet in depth; the exact location of such
separation shall be subject to the historic preservation board, in accordance with
certificate of appropriateness criteria. Alternatively, the massing and
architectural design of the front portion of the structure shall acknowledge the
historic pattern of residential structures along Ocean Drive.
6. The proposed building shall not contain accessory uses permitted under section
142-902(2)e.
7. The proposed building shall only permit rentals that are no less than 3 months,
not to exceed 3 times per calendar year.
8. The maximum residential density is 60 units per acre.
9. All required off-street parking for the building shall be provided on site; required
parking may not be satisfied through parking impact fees.
10. A restrictive covenant, running with the land, or other similar instrument
enforceable against the owner(s}, acceptable to and approved as to form by the
city attorney, shall be executed and recorded prior to the issuance of a building
permit, to ensure that the building remains as a residential apartment building for
a minimum of 30 years.
The oceanfront properties on Ocean Drive, south of Fifth Street, consist of a mix of
residential condominiums and hotels with accessory uses. While hotels, some with
accessory uses, have been a part of the Ocean Drive corridor over the last century,
areas such as this evolve over time, as do the uses and the intensity of the uses. In this
particular instance, the intensity of accessory uses within hotels has begun to impact the
quality of life of the residents of the area. While the proposed Ordinance does have an
intended goal of fostering more residential-apartment type uses, as opposed to hotel
with accessory uses, there are also other tangible benefits from an urban design and
planning standpoint.
First, it is important to note that under the current code (75' height limit) the actual
density for the properties on Ocean Drive in the RPS-4 district is very high, given the
FAR of 2.0. Under the proposed ordinance, the density would be reduced to a maximum
of 60 units per acre. As an example, for the property at 321 Ocean Drive, under the
existing code, over 90 units could be permitted under the existing code; under the
248
January 11, 2012
Commission Memorandum
RPS-4 Heights Ordinance
Page 4of 5
provisions of the proposed ordinance, the total number of units for the site would be
limited to 55. This is a very tangible benefit as it will result in a reduced impact on the
City's infrastructure and require substantially less required parking. Additionally, the
development projects proposed under the new ordinance would not be able to
incorporate accessory uses, which further increase the intensity of a development site.
This will also have a positive impact on the City's infrastructure.
Although the height of a proposed structure could increase under the proposed code, the
total square footage would not. Additionally, with the density and accessory use
limitations, the amount of non-FAR space required for parking would be substantially
reduced. Staff believes that the additional height allowed will be mitigated by the re-
distribution of the allowable volume of the proposed structure and that the actual
massing scheme will be much better than a standard 75' rectangular box running the
depth of a substantial portion of the site. Additionally, the scale, massing and additional
height would be at the discretion of the Historic Preservation Board and subject to the
appropriateness criteria in the City Code.
On July 20, 2011, the Land Use and Development Committee referred the proposed
amendment pertaining to RPS-4 height limitations to the Planning Board with a favorable
recommendation. As part of the discussion and recommendation, the Land Use
Committee recommended the following, which have been included in the Ordinance:
• The issue of 'Short Term Rentals'; rentals would be no less than 3 months, and
not exceed 3 times per calendar year.
• The maximum residential density would be limited to 60 units per acre.
• The proper accommodation of all required parking spaces on site (no fees in lieu
of providing the parking).
• Changes to the Ordinance to address any issues with 'Spot Zoning'.
LAND USE BOARD ACTION
On October 25, 2011, the Planning Board transmitted the subject Ordinance to the City
Commission, with a favorable recommendation, by a 5-0 vote. The Planning Board
recommended a minor change to the Ordinance requiring that the expanded heights be
applicable to lots 100 feet in width or greater, while allowing for a slight increase in
overall height for properties 50 feet in width or less. These changes have been
incorporated into the Ordinance.
On November 8, 2011, the proposed ordinance was reviewed and recommended for
approval by the Historic Preservation Board. Some members of the Historic Preservation
Board did have a concern with the revised height limits, but concluded that the
comprehensive safeguards within the text of the Code change would ameliorate any
negative impacts. The Historic Preservation Board also recommended that the City
Commission consider removing the 'No Contributing Building' requirement and that the
minimum rental period be 6 months plus 1 day, and include a comprehensive
enforcement mechanism.
On December 14, 2011, the City Commission approved the proposed ordinance on first
reading.
249
January 11, 2012
Commission Memorandum
RPS-4 Heights Ordinance
Page Sof 5
reading.
SUMMARY
The Administration is confident that the proposed ordinance addresses the issues and
concerns identified by the Planning Board, the Land Use Committee and the Historic
Preservation Board. After reviewing the changes recommended by the Historic
Preservation Board, the Administration has concluded that the Ordinance recommended
by the Planning Board would be the best fit (including the exclusion on properties
containing contributing buildings, as properties with 'Contributing Buildings' should not
be eligible for an increase in height).
Regarding the issue of including in the ordinance a subsection requiring a minimum
rental period, the City Attorney's office is concerned that a mandated limitation on short
term rental time periods in the proposed ordinance would violate HB 883, adopted by the
State Legislature in 2011. Minor modifications to this part of the ordinance have been
proposed by the City Attorney's office to address this concern, and to be consistent with
Section 142-1111 of the City Code, pertaining to the short term rental of apartments and
townhomes. In conjunction with the requirement that a restrictive covenant be submitted
ensuring that the building remains solely as a residential apartment building for a
minimum of 30 years, the Administration believes that there is ample protection against
the any structure availing itself of the proposed ordinance from becoming a hotel or other
type of transient use.
Finally, the Administration has added language to the proposed Ordinance regarding the
voluntary proffer of an easement for a future beach walk.
FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed ordinance is not expected to have a fiscal impact upon the City.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission adopt the Ordinance upon
second reading public hearing.
g'"I..-JMG/JGG/RGL/TRM
T:\AGENDA\20121 1-11-12\RPS-4 Heights 2011-MEMO.docx
250
RPS-4 Heights 2011
ORDINANCE NO.------
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, BY
AMENDING CHAPTER 142, "ZONING DISTRICTS AND REGULATIONS",
ARTICLE II, "DISTRICT REGULATIONS", DIVISION 18, "PS
PERFORMANCE STANDARD DISTRICT", SECTION 142-696
"RESIDENTIAL PERFORMANCE STANDARD AREA REQUIREMENTS"
TO MODIFY THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS FOR
RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT STRUCTURES; BY AMENDING SECTION
142-697 "SETBACK REQUIREMENTS IN THE R-PS1, 2, 3, 4 DISTRICTS",
TO MODIFY THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR OCEANFRONT
BUILDINGS; PROVIDING FOR REPEALER, CODIFICATION,
SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Miami Beach continually seeks to update and clearly define the
requirements of the Land Development Regulations of the Code of the City of Miami Beach as they
pertain to zoning districts and regulations; and
WHEREAS, the City of Miami Beach recognizes the benefits of encouraging and
incentivizing residential apartment development in the South Pointe area; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Miami Beach has adopted regulations pertaining to the height and
setbacks of structures in the RPS-4 district; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Miami Beach desires to modify the maximum building height and
setback requirements for new residential apartment structures in the RPS-4 district; and,
WHEREAS, these amendments will allow increased height in the district, creating an
incremental traffic burden, an increased cost in services, and affect the aesthetics of the district; and
WHEREAS, the restrictions and conditions imposed as part of this ordinance are intended to
mitigate these effects, and in addition to the design restrictions imposed, require the owners whose
properties are enhanced by the increased height to provide an easement to extend the Beachwalk to
the east of their structures, which will mitigate the incremental traffic burden and improve the
district's aesthetics; and
WHEREAS, the amendments set forth below are necessary to accomplish all of the above
objectives.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA.
SECTION 1. That Chapter 142, Entitled "Zoning Districts and Regulations", Article II, Entitled
"District Regulations ", Division 18, Entitled "PS Performance Standards District" of the Land
Development Regulations of the Code of the City of Miami Beach, Florida is hereby amended as
follows:
Sec. 142-696.-Residential performance standard area requirements.
251
\
The residential performance standard area requirements are as follows:
1 Residential Subdistricts
,-----------------------·-·····-·-i··-·······--··----------------------------~r ,---------------------------------~-~~~--
Performance 1 R-PS1 ! R-PS2 ' R-PS3 ' R-PS4
Standard i i : ,•«~•~•••"<••~~••••••••••E•••••"<••~·~~•~••·•~•••••~•••.-n~~---~-~~~~---·-·;----~·-----·----•--•--•••••~•~'-'•--·~}·~"'""-•~~.~"'""~"""~•••~•~•~"----~-.~! ~-...·----~--··-•••-•••-••·-•••••••••••••·••J
Minimum lot area 15,750 square feet 15,750 square feet )5,750 square feet )5,750 square feet
crv1~i~~~-i~!-~-dth---T5o--~-~i--------·-····-·········--····---rsa·i~~t~----------~5o-fe~1------------·-------·····--··-'5·ai~~i-· · -
·-R~q~i-~~-d--~p~~------~T0.60, See se~ti~~----!0~65.-s~~--~-~~ti~~-----·-·Ta·:?o:s~~ section ---:o~?o.--8-~e section 142-
space ratio i 142-704 ! 142-704 i 142-704 i 704
Maximum building 145 feet . -----·-·····-···!45t-;;~----50 feet -j"N~-~-o~;~~f~~~t·~--8~6--.
height* I Lots 50 feet wide or I Lots 50 feet wide or Lots 50 feet wide or jfeet;
i less-35 feet Jless-35 feet less-35 feet i Oceanfront-1 00 feet;
i except that in the
10cean Beach Historic
District 35 feet for the
first 60 feet of lot
depth, 75 feet
thereafter, subject to
the line of sight
analysis of section
1142 697(d)
I Lots 50 feet wide or
i less -35 feet ;··---~---····· .. ············--·····•«•••·······.,,··--·-·····--·"··~-«~---~~-~-~~~-~---~~----·--.----·----~----~~----&·----~--~~~------~··········~·-··-··-~·-··········~····-------····~~...-.~·:.--... <"<" .. ~~.~~ .... -~~---~·-·· .. -·-·
Maximum number i5 !5 !5 !Non-oceanfront-8
of stories !Lots 50 feet wide or !Lots 50 feet wide or jLots 50 feet wide or !Oceanfront-11
! less-4 lless-4 / less-4 I Lots 50 feet wide or
1 I I jless-4
1 i 11n the Ocean Beach
i_· !Historic
1 ' I I i I i !District-7 1 ~~~~~~-n~;;~---Ji.2s······ -····-········--l1.so·····~~----y.7s ---------12.0-------~-~
, ............. , ............ "··---~--------·~: --~-------------·---~--------------------------·-···-·r.·----------'"---~
Minimum floor :New construction-1 New construction-1 New construction-I New construction -550 !
area per 1700 650
1
1600 !Rehabilitated buildings I
apartment unit !Rehabilitated Rehabilitated Rehabilitated 1-400 '
(square feet); ibuildings-400 buildings-400 lbuildings-400 i
except as provided 1 1 1 I
in section 142-i I !
1183 for elderly ' I
housing 1 1 -~~------·-·--t-------------------------t------------I . ------------·
Mi~i~~;;-(k;~-~--------+N/A-._: N/A -----l15%-= 300-335 ----~1 15% = 300 -335
area per hotel unit I I square feet square feet
(square feet) · ; 85% = 335+ square 85% = 335+ square l feet feet r-······---------------------+---------· --------' ~mum parking J_Pursuant to -~~~e!~!._13~--~~~-section 142-705 requirement. __________ j
Minimum off-street \Pursuant to chapter 130, article Ill. i
-~~-~~g ____________________ L __ .. __________ ·~~-------------------------------~---~J
252
! Signs ; Pursuant to chapter 138.
---··---····~·-------···· ····-·--·-··---·r::······-····----·----····--··-··------··----·---·-··--·---------·-----~---~--~--~~~-----·-· -~ ...... ,}
Suites hotel ! Pursuant to article IV, division 3 of this chapter.
·~~~------~---* Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions regarding maximum building height, in the Ocean Beach
historic district, as defined in subsection 118-593(e)(11), the maximum building height for a lot
located in the R-PS1, R-PS2, or R-PS3 zoning districts
(i) With a lot exceeding 50 feet, and
(ii) Upon which there exists a contributing structure which has not received a certificate of
appropriateness for demolition (or any such approval has expired), shall be 35 feet.
1. Notwithstanding the above height restrictions, existing structures within a local historic district are
subject to section 142-1161.
2. In the R-PS4 zoning district, within the Ocean Beach Historic District, when an existing
contributing structure is nonconforming with respect to the height regulations in section 142-696,
such structure may be repaired, renovated or rehabilitated regardless of the cost of such repair,
renovation or rehabilitation, notwithstanding the provisions of chapter 118, article IX,
"Nonconformances."
3. Lots at a width of 50 feet or less aggregated with adjacent parcels after November 3, 2002, shall
have a maximum height of 35 feet and shall not be allowed the increased height for parcels wider
than 50 feet.
4. Notwithstanding the above height restrictions. in the R-PS4 zoning district, within the Ocean
Beach Historic District. for lots 100 feet or more in width, the maximum height shall be 35 feet for the
first 60 feet of lot depth. 75 feet thereafter. subject to the line-of-sight analysis of section 142-697(d).
However. for residential apartment buildings, on lots 100 feet or more in width, the historic
preservation board. in accordance with certificate of appropriateness criteria. may allow an increase
in the overall height. not to exceed 6 stories. 60 feet for the first 60 feet of lot depth and 11 stories.
100 feet thereafter. and on lots 50 feet wide or less may allow an increase in overall height not to
exceed 35 feet for the first 60 feet of lot depth and six stories 60 feet thereafter. provided all of the
following conditions are satisfied:
a. The property shall be an oceanfront lot.
b. The property shall not contain a contributing building;
c. The sixth level of the front portion of the new construction on lots 100 feet or more in width shall
meet a line-of-sight. which for the purpose of this section. is defined as not being visible when
viewed at eye-level (5'6" from grade) from the opposite side of the Ocean Drive right-of-way, and on
lots 50 feet or less wide shall be subject to the line-of-sight analysis of section 142-697(d);
d. The proposed building shall be sited and massed in a manner that promotes and protects view
corridors. At a minimum. a substantial separation of the tower portion of any structure shall be
required;
e. For lots greater than 50 feet in width. the front portion of the structure shall incorporate a
separation in the center of the structure. which is open to sky, and is at least 1 0 feet in width and 25
feet in depth; the exact location of such separation shall be subject to the historic preservation
board. in accordance with certificate of appropriateness criteria. Alternatively, the massing and
architectural design of the front portion of the structure shall acknowledge the historic pattern of
residential structures along Ocean Drive;
f. The proposed building shall not contain accessory uses permitted under section 142-902(2)e.
g. The proposed building shall only permit rentals that are no less than 3 months, not to
exceed 3 times per calendar year.
h. The maximum residential density is 60 units per acre.
i. All required off-street parking for the building shall be provided on site; required parking may not be
satisfied through parking impact fees.
253
j. The owner restricts the property to permit only rentals that are no less than 6 months and
one day per calendar year, through language in its condominium or cooperative documents,
and by proffering a restrictive covenant. running with the land, or other similar instrument
enforceable against the owner(s), acceptable to and approved as to form by the city attorney, which
shall be executed and recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit. to ensure that the building
remains solely as a residential apartment building for a minimum of 30 years. that the minimum
rental period shall not be less than 3 months, no more than 3 times per calendar year. and
that no uses under section 142-902(2)e are permitted on the premises during that time period.
k. Accepting that the value in the increased height. and the incremental traffic burden and
effect on aesthetics in the district are offset by the conveyance of an easement for an
extension of the Beachwalk east of their structures, the owner provides an easement.
acceptable to and approved as to form by the City Attorney, for a public beachwalk on the
easterly portion of its property, as more specifically provided in the plans on file with the
City's Public Works Department.
Sec. 142-697.-Setback requirements in the R-PS1, 2, 3, 4 districts.
(a) The setback requirements in the R-PS1, 2, 3, 4 districts are as follows:
lF~~~-----------I Side, ~~ Side~---T
I : Interior Facing I I 1 a Street 1
Rear
r·--···-·-·-··········-····--··············--·~5~~~~---·-----·---;-·---···-·----·-···-·~----+--
At-grade 5 feet 15 feet :5 feet II' Non-oceanfront lots-5 I I
parking lot 1 1 feet
(below ; I I I oceanfront lots-50
building) I I ! ifeet from bulkhead line
;--~~----·~~~----~~--~---·«•-~---·····-···-~·--··---~'---~--------~·---:~----~-------·-··-~· ····---~----·------~~~--~----~--~~-"'---~~~~---5--.-.----~--------------· --·· ..................... .,
Subterranean 15 feet 15 feet is feet 1Non-oceanfront lots-0
1 j i feet
I ! i Oceanfront lots -50 I i i feet from bulkhead line I ,··----·---·····-----·--···""-·""''"'"''""'"""1.-~~----------~------··-"······•·"--·-·---·--,--. --··--·---·····---·---1
Pedestal 15 feet. 17.5 feet, i 5 feet Non-oceanfront lots -
J except ! 1 0% of lot depth
when
1
Oceanfront lots -20%
section (e) of lot depth, 50 feet
below minimum from
applies.:. bulkhead line.
1 Lots 50
! feet wide
i mle~-5 1·.~. ~~~ever.
residential
apartment
I structures I seeking
il
l !approval
under
1 Jsection
l 1142-696.4
-----···--··-·-···-··--·--·--····----·J··~~~------''-~-~~-ve. on
254
~----···. ... ... ..... . ..... ····----.... -· -----··· .•.. T--······---~----................. ................ !
1 greater
---~---~r------------·-------~----~ ..... r···-·>o·~--·-~~-~~·~~~--~--~~~~--~------··--------------
J than 50
feet in
width. 15
feet for
any portion
I
I of the
!Pede5tal
/above 35
1
I !feet in
\height. I
~ j Non-oceanfront lots -
_____________ j
Tower 50 feet,
except that
in the R-
PS4 within
!the Ocean
1Beach
!Historic ! District, the
\minimum I shall be 60
!feet;
i however. for
i residential
I apartment
.,. structures
seeking
iapproval
1under
I section 142
696.4
above~ the
tower
setback
shall be
determined
by the
!Histone
-
' iThe
Jrequired
I pedestal
1
setback
!plus 0.10
,the height
I of the
building;
however~
for
residential
apartment
structures
I
seeking
approval
under
section
142-696.4
above~ 15
feet.
!The
required
I
pedestal
setback
I plus
!o.10the
!height
jofthe
!building
I
!
1
15% of lot depth
!Oceanfront lots-25%
!of lot depth, 75 feet
minimum from l bulkhead line;
however. for residential
apartment structures
seeking approval under
section 142-696.4
above. the tower
setback shall be the
1
same as the pedestal
1setback.
I
I
I
i
i
!
{
~
I
I
II Preservation
Board.
---------·-···-·········--·····---------------------~~
___________ _j
(b) All required setbacks shall be considered as minimum requirements except for the pedestal front
yard setback and pedestal side yard facing a street setback which shall be considered as both a
minimum and maximum requirements.
(c) For lots greater than 100 feet in width the front setback shall be extended to include at least one
open court with a minimum area of three square feet for every linear foot of lot frontage.
(d) In the R-PS4 zoning district, within the Ocean Beach Historic District, the tower portion of
ground-floor additions to contributing buildings, or new construction shall meet a line-of-sight, which
255
for the purpose of this section is defined as not visible when viewed at eye-level (5'6" from grade)
from the opposite side of the adjacent right-of-way.
(e) In the R-PS4 zoning district within the Ocean Beach Historic District, when an existing
contributing structure has a minimum 5-foot sideyard setback, the setback of new construction in
connection with the existing building may be allowed to follow the existing building line. The
maintenance of the existing setback shall apply to the linear extension of the existing building.
SECTION 2. CODIFICATION.
It is the intention of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, and it is hereby
ordained that the provisions of this ordinance shall become and be made part of the Code of the City of
Miami Beach, Florida. The sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such
intention, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section", "article", or other appropriate word.
SECTION 3. REPEALER.
All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be and the same are hereby repealed.
SECTION 4. NONSEVERABILITY.
It is the intention of the City Commission that all provisions of this Ordinance are integral to and
dependent upon all other provisions thereof, and thus if any section, subsection, clause or provision of this
Ordinance is held invalid, the remainder shall not be severable from the portion declared invalid. Therefore,
in the event any portion of this Ordinance is declared invalid, the entirety shall be declared invalid, and this
Ordinance shall be returned to the City Commission for reconsideration. During this interim period following
such declaration of invalidity, the land development regulations this Ordinance amended shall be reinstated
as they existed prior to the adoption hereof.
SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Ordinance shall take effect ten days following adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this __ day of _______ , 2012.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
First Reading:
Second Reading:
December 14, 2011
January 13, 2012
Verified by: -------------=--=----
Richard G. Lorber, AICP, LEED AP
Acting Planning Director
Underscore denotes new language
Strike Thru denotes deleted language
BOLD denotes changes to Planning Board Version
12/05/2011
MAYOR
T:\AGENDA\2011\12-14-11\RPS-4 Heights 2011 -ORO First Reading.docx
256
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
An Ordinance Granting To Florida Power And Light Company, Its Successors And Assigns, An Electric
Franchise Imposing Provisions And Conditions Relating Thereto, Providing For Monthly Payments To The
City Of Miami Beach, And Providing For An Effective Date.
Ke Intended Outcome Su orted:
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.):
Issue:
Shall the City Commission approve the ordinance granting FPL a franchise agreement?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
At the December 14, 2011, Commission Meeting the Ordinance was approved on first reading and referred to the
Neighborhood/Community Affairs Committee between first and second readings. Since the Committee doesn't meet
until January 30, 2012, the Administration recommends that the item be opened and continued. Additionally, this will
also allow the City Manager to meet with representatives from the Sunset Islands Nos. 3 & 4 Homeowners
Association regarding their proposal that certain costs associated with this undergrounding project be either waived
or absorbed by the City. In order to accommodate the City's process, FPL has agreed to a one-month extension on
the existing franchise agreement, so that the current franchise will expire February 21, 2012 if it is not renewed and
accepted prior to that time. Since January, 2011, representatives of the City Manager and City Attorney's Office
(with the assistance of specialized outside counsel) have been negotiating the terms and conditions of a new
franchise agreement with FPL. An attached table provides a comparison between the terms and conditions of the
current with those initially proposed by FPL, and the final negotiated terms and conditions. It should be highlighted
that there are some significant gains that the City has made compared to the terms and conditions of the current
agreement. The most significant are as follows:
• Most Favored Nation (MFN) Clause -If FPL enters into a franchise with any other city or county in either Miami-
Dade, Broward, or Palm Beach County offering a franchise rate greater than 6.0%, then, at City's request, FPL will
match such rate for City. Additionally, since the Miami-Dade County franchise is coming up for renewal in 2019, if
the County negotiates a new franchise with more favorable terms and conditions {beyond just the rate) than the
City's franchise agreement, then the City can also avail itself of those.
• Franchise Fee -At the September 14, 2011, City Commission meeting, the Commission directed the
Administration to negotiate a franchise fee that would not result in an increase to residential customers (i.e. the
direction was to essentially keep the fee "flat"). Following this direction, the formula for this scenario was adjusted so
that total FPL payments to the City for the franchise fee, permits and fees maintain the net effective franchise rate
charged to customers and remitted to the City at 5.29% of the revenue that FPL collects from the sale of electricity.
• Right-of-Way (ROW) Relocation -Requires FPL to remove or relocate its facilities within 30 days if they
unreasonably interfere with the safe, continuous use, maintenance, improvements, extension or expansion of a
public road, or if FPL facilities interfere with reasonable egress/ingress to abutting property.
• Indemnity-For the first time, FPL has agreed to include the City's indemnity language (rather than FPL's standard
provision), which affords the City broader protection and survives termination or expiration of the Franchise
Agreement.
• Right to Purchase Power from Others -For the first time, however, the non-compete clause will contain certain
exceptions, to the extent that the City will have the right to purchase power from others for its own facilities, provided
FPL has the right to match the third party offer.
• Renewable Energy Purchases -For the first time, the City will have the right to purchase any technology
recognized as "renewable electrical energy" under Florida State Statutes that is developed within City limits; or to
have FPL distribute, to City facilities, renewable electrical energy that is developed within City limits.
The Administration recommends the item be opened and continued.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
I None
Financial Information:
Source of I I Amount I Account I Approved
Funds: 1<=:--__ 1 __,_l ______ l...__ ________ __,_l ______ -1
Financial Impact Summary:
Ci Clerk's Office Le islative Trackin
Assistant Ci
MIAMI BEACH 257
~ MIAMI BEACH ""'="'
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager ~ .,.,-'-/ SECOND READING
tr 0 PUBLIC HEARING
DATE: January 11, 2012
SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE GRANTING TO F/ RIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY,
ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, AN ELECTRIC FRANCHISE IMPOSING
PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS RELATING THERETO, PROVIDING FOR
MONTHLY PAYMENTS TO THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, AND PROVIDING
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
At the December 14, 2011, Commission Meeting the Ordinance was approved on First Reading
and referred to the Neighborhood/Community Affairs Committee between First and Second
Readings. Since the Committee doesn't meet until January 30, 2012, the Administration
recommends that the item be opened and continued and the Ordinance approved on a Second
Reading Public Hearing at the February 8, 2012, Commission Meeting. Additionally, this will
also allow the City Manager to meet with representatives from the Sunset Islands Nos. 3 & 4
Homeowners Association regarding their proposal that certain costs associated with this
undergrounding project be either waived or absorbed by the City. In order to accommodate the
City's process, FPL has agreed to a one-month extension on the existing franchise agreement,
so that the current franchise will expire February 21, 2012 if it is not renewed and accepted prior
to that time.
ANALYSIS
The City's current thirty (30) year non-exclusive franchise agreement with FPL expires on
January 22, 2012. Since January, 2011, representatives of the City Manager and City Attorney's
Office (with the assistance of specialized outside counsel) have been negotiating the terms and
conditions of a new franchise agreement with FPL.
At the September 14, 2011, meeting of the City Commission, the vote on the first reading of the
proposed new franchise agreement was deferred, and a recommendation made to schedule a
public workshop, as initially recommended by Commissioner Weithorn, to further discuss the
terms of the proposed new agreement.
The subject public workshop, moderated by Commissioner Weithorn, was held on November
28, 2011, at the Miami Beach Golf Course Clubhouse, and attended by Miami Beach residents,
non-residents (including the Mayors of the Village of Pinecrest and the City of South Miami,
respectively), FPL representatives, and City staff.
The workshop commenced with presentations by FPL and the City, respectively, regarding the
terms of the proposed new agreement, including identifying those issues where the City was
able to negotiate better or new terms in the new agreement than those contained in the current
agreement. Following the presentations, Commissioner Weithorn entertained questions and
comments from the public. At the workshop, residents (including the aforementioned officials
from Pinecrest and South Miami), expressed their opinions on the franchise agreement. A major
258
Commission Memorandum-FPL Franchise Agreement
January 11, 2012
Page 2 of3
concern was the 30-year term, which, notwithstanding the City's continuous efforts to reduce,
FPL indicated could not be modified.
Residents from the Sunset Islands 3 & 4 neighborhood addressed concerns regarding the
difficulties surrounding the process of undergrounding, and recommended that the City
Commission consider enacting some type of legislation which would dedicate a percentage of
the funds collected from the franchise fee to be set aside for use toward the underground
placement of overhead utilities.
At the end of the workshop, Commissioner Weithorn recommended that an item regarding the
calculation of current and proposed franchise payments be scheduled for discussion at the next
Finance and Citywide Projects Committee meeting.
The City has made significant gains in the proposed new franchise agreement (when compared
both to the terms of the existing franchise, and what was initially proposed by FPL). The most
significant are as follows:
• Most Favored Nation (MFN) Clause -If FPL enters into a franchise with any other
city or county in either Miami-Dade, Broward, or Palm Beach County offering a franchise
rate greater than 6.0%, then, at City's request, FPL will match such rate for City.
Additionally, since the Miami-Dade County franchise is coming up for renewal in 2019, if
the County negotiates a new franchise with more favorable terms and conditions (beyond
just the rate) than the City's franchise agreement, then the City can also avail itself of
those. Per FPL, this is the first time it has agreed to such an expanded MFN claim (among
its 177 franchises).
• Franchise Fee -At the September 14, 2011, City Commission meeting, the
Commission directed the Administration to negotiate a franchise fee that would not result in
an increase to residential customers (i.e. the direction was to essentially keep the fee
"flat"). Following this direction, the formula for this scenario was adjusted so that total FPL
payments to the City for the franchise fee, permits and fees maintain the net effective
franchise rate charged to customers and remitted to the City at 5.29% of the revenue that
FPL collects from the sale of electricity. In this case, the total revenue figure upon which
the franchise fee payment is based was adjusted to deduct un-collectables. As a result of
the proposed new agreement, there would be no change in the average residential electric
bill as a result of the franchise fee. A comparison of franchise fee calculation follows:
Revenue Ty12e Current Agreement New Agreement
Residential: $59,989,154 $59,989,154
Commercial: 84,245,585 84,245,585
Industrial: 112 193 112 193
Total Revenue: (1) $144,346,932 $144,346,932
Less Un-collectables: {1} 245,255
Net Revenue: $144,346,932 $144,101,677
% of Revenue Applicable to
FPL Payments to City: 6.00% 5.29%
6% of Revenue: $8,660,816 $7,622,979
Other payments by FPL:
Permits/Fees: ($4,175) ($4,175)
Pro12erty Taxes: (1,041,983}
Franchise Fees Payment to CMB: $7,614,658 $7,618,804
259
Commission Memorandum-FPL Franchise Agreement
January 11, 2012
Page 3 of3
Difference:
$7,614,658
$4,146
(1) Franchise revenues and uncollectible amounts are actua/12 months ending June 2011.
• Right-of-Way (ROW) Restoration -The new franchise agreement requires FPL to remove
or relocate its facilities if they unreasonably interfere with the safe, continuous use,
maintenance, improvements, extension or expansion of a public road, or if FPL facilities
interfere with reasonable egress/ingress to abutting property. If FPL fails to perform the
removal or relocation within thirty (30) days, then the City may proceed with removal or
relocation and charge back to FPL.
• If a City ROW is excavated, damaged, or impaired by FPL (or its contractors), the
franchise agreement requires FPL to restore within a reasonable time. However, pursuant
to subsequent discussions between the City's Public Works Department and FPL, the City
has determined, and FPL has agreed, that it can require FPL (or its contractors) to post a
bond or cash security as a condition of obtaining a use permit for doing work on the City's
ROW.
• Indemnity -For the first time, FPL has agreed to include the City's indemnity language
(rather than FPL's standard provision), which affords the City broader protection and
survives termination or expiration of the Franchise Agreement.
• Right to Purchase Power from Others -Typically, all of FPL's franchises contain a "non-
compete" clause, whereby the county or municipal government granting the franchise
agrees not to sell or distribute electric capacity and/or electric energy to "retail customers"
(i.e. in competition with what FPL does). For the first time, however, the non-compete
clause will contain certain exceptions, to the extent that the City will have the right to
purchase power from others for its facilities, provided FPL has the right to match the third
party offer. Additionally, the City will also have the right to purchase and/or distribute
power to serve its own facilities; . to engage in wholesale transactions; and, of course, to
utilize generators and/or other electricity or energy-generating equipment during
emergencies.
• Renewable Energy Purchases-One of the policy concerns going into negotiation of the
new franchise was that the City wanted the opportunity, and certain flexibility, with regard
to its ability to be able to avail itself of new technologies that may become available during
the term of the new franchise agreement. Accordingly, for the first time, the City will have
the right to purchase any technology recognized as "renewable electrical energy" under
Florida State Statutes that is developed within City limits; or to have FPL distribute, to City
facilities, renewable electrical energy that is developed within City limits.
Conclusion
The Administration recommends that the item be opened and continued and the Ordinance
approved on a Second Reading Public Hearing at the February 8, 2012, Commission Meeting.
Additionally, this will also allow the City Manager to meet with representatives from the Sunset
Islands Nos. 3 & 4 HomeoVI(ners Association regarding their proposal that certain costs
associated with this undergrounding project be either waived or absorbed by the City.
Attachments:
Attachment 1: Table-FPL Franchise Agreement Overview
JMG/DRB/FHB
T:\AGENDA\2012\1-11-12\FPL Franchise Agreement-MEMO.doc
260
N 0) ~ FPL FRANCHISE AGREEMENT OVERVIEW ITEM CURRENT FRANCHISE Term (Years) 30 Installation Standards None ROW Restoration Within a reasonable time Following FPL Work Indemnity FPL's standard indemnity language Franchise fee+Property Tax+ Franchise Payment Permits/fees= 6% of collected revenue FINAL NEGOTIATED TERMS OF NEW FRANCHISE 30 FPL's facilities on City Right-of-Ways (ROW's) must be consistent with the FOOT Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards for Design, Construction, and Maintenance for Streets and Highways. 1) If City requires removal or relocation of FPL facilities because they interfere with the use of a road or egress/ingress to an abutting property, and FPL fails to complete within 30 days, then the City may handle and charge back to FPL. 2)FPL must restore damage to the ROW within a reasonable time. While not in Franchise Agreement, City may require FPL, or its contractors to post cash security or bond in order to assure timely restoration of the ROW. City successfully negotiated inclusion of its own indemnity language, which affords City broader protection, and survives termination or expiration of Franchise Agreement. While FPL's actual property tax is still being paid to the City, it has been dropped from the formula and uncollectible amounts have been added. Thus, in order for the City to receive the same franchise fee payment and for the FPL customer to pay the same rate for a franchise payment, the amount of collected revenue has been dropped from 6% to 5.29%. The Agreement also contains language that allows the City to increase the Franchise fee rate up to 6%, and to lower the rate down to 1% of collected revenues. > rt rt Ill () g (f) ::l rt .......
N 0) N ITEM Non-Compete Clause and Exceptions Most Favored Nation Clause CURRENT FRANCHISE City will not engage in the business of distributing and selling electricity during the life of this franchise. No FINAL NEGOTIATED TERMS OF NEW FRANCHISE PROHIBITIONS: 1)City cannot engage in distribution or sale of electricity in competition with FPL to any ultimate consumer of electrical utility service (i.e. a "retail customer"), or to any electrical distribution system established solely to serve retail customers that were formerly served by FPL. 2) City can't participate in proceedings or contractual arrangements that would have the purpose of obligating FPL to transmit or distribute electricity from any third parties to retail customers. EXCEPTIONS: 1) City can engage in "wholesale" transitions. 2) City can utilize generators or other generating equipment during emergencies. 3)City can (if permitted by law) purchase electricity from third parties to power City facilities, or have FPL transmit or distribute electricity purchased by City from third parties to power City facilities, provided that before it proceeds to do so, City notifies FPL and gives FPL right to match the third party's offer. If FPL matches the offer (or makes a better one), City obligated to use FPL. 4) Renewable Energy: City can purchase "renewable electric energy" (as defined by Florida Statues), produced within City limits from third parties (including other utility companies) to power City facilities, or require FPL to transmit or distribute renewable energy to power City facilities; provided, however, that if City issues a competitive solicitation for a renewable energy purchase, FPL has right to bid on it as well. 5) Customer-owned Renewable Generation: Nothing in the Franchise Agreement prevents individual FPL customers in the City from offsetting part or all or their electricity requirements by installing and utilizing "customer owned renewable generation" technologies (such as solar and wind energy systems) on their premises, and then interconnecting with the FPL system. FPL customers are also permitted to utilize customer owned renewable generation to offset their on-site electricity consumption through the process of "net metering". Yes. If FPL enters into a franchise with any other city or county in Miami-Dade, Broward, or Palm Beach Counties offering a rate base greater that 6.0%, then, if City requests, FPL will match such rate for City. Additionally, since the Miami-Dade County franchise is coming up for renewal in the next decade, if the County negotiates a new County franchise with more favorable terms and conditions, then the City can avail itself of those as well.
N 0) w ITEM FPL's Right to terminate if FPL is placed at competitive disadvantage through deregulation or the granting of additional franchises by the City FPL's right to terminate for City's breach City's right to terminate for FPL's breach Additional (New) Sections included as a result of City's negotiations CURRENT FRANCHISE N.A. N.A. City has right to terminate. FINAL NEGOTIATED TERMS OF NEW FRANCHISE 1)1f the City grants a right, privilege or franchise to construct, operate or maintain electric power facilities within areas in which FPL may serve, and if FPL determines that those terms are materially more favorable than the Franchise Agreement, FPL shall give the City at least 180 days advance written notice of its intent to terminate. If, following negotiations, those terms and conditions are not remedied within 120 days by the City, FPL may terminate the Franchise Agreement by delivering written notice to the City Clerk. 2)1f as a result of a change in laws, any person or utility is permitted to provide electric service within City to customers then being served by FPL, and FPL determines that it's placed at a material competitive disadvantage as a result or same, it can be provide the City with 120 days notice of intent to terminate. City and FPL have 120 days to remedy the material competitive disadvantage or else FPL can terminate. 3}1n either situation, City has legal right to contest termination. (Note: "termination" of Franchise Agreement does not mean that FPL will cease to continue to provide power to CMB customers. It means that it's not obligated to pay City the franchise fee). 4)"0ther" breaches to terms or Franchise Agreement by City, while not resulting in termination, may give FPL right to go to court and, as a remedy, request that the court withhold franchise fee payments to City until breach is cured. (It means that it's not obligated to collect from residents or pay the City the franchise fee) None. However, FPL has the right to go to court to ask the court to determine whether and to what extent franchise fees may be withheld until the City cures. IF FPL violates the terms of the franchise agreements, City has rights to terminate but , if FPL contests termination, then City can't terminate until a final court determination (including appeals) holds that FPL did, in fact breach the franchise. 1) Section affirming City's position in favor of undergrounding utilities; 2) Section affirming/promoting meters using "smart grid technology", and providing that if FPL implements this technology, it will use best efforts to provide it to its retail customers in the City; 3) FPL received Florida Public Service Commission (PSC) approval for, and will proceed to implement, a plan which includes strengthening feeders delivering power to critical infrastructure facilities, including those located within City limit.
ORDINANCE NO.-------
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING TO FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT
COMPANY, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, AN
ELECTRIC FRANCHISE, IMPOSING PROVISIONS AND
CONDITIONS RELATING THERETO, PROVIDING FOR
MONTHLY PAYMENTS TO THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, there is currently in effect a franchise agreement between the City of
Miami Beach ("City") and Florida Power & Light Company ("FPL"), the terms of which are
set forth in City of Miami Beach Ordinance No. 82-2294, passed and adopted January 20,
1982, and FPL's written acceptance thereof dated January 22, 1982, granting to FPL, its
successors and assigns, a thirty (30) year electric franchise ("Current Franchise
Agreement"); and
WHEREAS, FPL and the City desire to enter into a new agreement ("New
Franchise Agreement") providing for the payment of fees to the City in exchange for the
non-exclusive right and privilege of supplying electricity and other electricity-related
services within the City of Miami Beach free of competition from the City of Miami Beach,
pursuant to certain terms and conditions; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission deems it to be in the best interest of the City of
Miami Beach and its citizens to enter into the New Franchise Agreement prior to expiration
of the Current Franchise Agreement.
1
264
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA:
Section 1. There is hereby granted to Florida Power & Light Company, its
successors and assigns (hereinafter called the "Grantee"), for the period of thirty (30)
years from the effective date hereof, the non-exclusive right, privilege, and franchise
(hereinafter called "Franchise") to construct, operate, and maintain in, under, upon, along,
over, and across the present and future roads, streets, alleys, bridges, easements, and
rights-of-way (hereinafter called "Public Rights-of-Way") throughout all of the incorporated
areas, as such incorporated areas may be constituted from time to time, of the City of
Miami Beach, Florida, and its successors (hereinafter called the "Grantor"), in accordance
with the Grantee's customary practice with respect to construction and maintenance,
electric light and power facilities, including, without limitation, conduits, poles, wires,
transmission and distribution lines, and all other facilities installed in conjunction with or
ancillary to all of the Grantee's operations (hereinafter called "facilities"), for the purpose of
supplying retail electricity service and other electricity-related services incidental thereto
(which other electricity-related services are defined as FPL's facility-to-facility data
capabilities over the lines to identify faults, load information, and other data necessary or
helpful to the provision of electric service, and which do not include any services that are
sold to others) to the Grantor and its successors, the inhabitants thereof, and persons
beyond the limits thereof.
Section 2(a). The facilities of the Grantee shall be so located, re-located, installed,
constructed, and erected as to not unreasonably interfere with the convenient, safe,
continuous use, or with the maintenance, improvement, extension or expansion of any
2
265
public "road," as defined under the Florida Transportation Code, nor unreasonably
interfere with reasonable egress from and ingress to abutting property.
(b) To minimize such conflicts with the standards set forth in subsection (a)
above, the location, relocation, installation, construction, or erection of all facilities shall be
made as representatives of the Grantor may prescribe in accordance with all applicable
federal, state, and local statutes, laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations, and pursuant to
Grantor's valid rules and regulations with respect to utilities' use of Public Rights-of-Way
relative to the placing and maintaining in, under, upon, along, over, and across said Public
Rights-of-Way, provided that such rules and regulations shall be
(i) for a valid municipal purpose;
(ii) shall not prohibit the exercise of Grantee's rights to use said
Public Rights-of-Way for reasons other than conflict with the
standards set forth above;
(iii) shall not unreasonably interfere with Grantee's ability to furnish
reasonably sufficient, adequate, and efficient electric service to
all its customers while not conflicting with the standards set
forth above; or
(iv) shall not require relocation of any of the Grantee's facilities
installed before or after the effective date hereof in any Public
Rights-of-Way unless or until the facilities unreasonably
interfere with the convenient, safe, or continuous use, or the
maintenance, improvement, extension, or expansion, of such
Public Rights-of-Way.
3
266
(c) Such rules and regulations shall recognize that above-grade facilities of the
Grantee installed after the effective date hereof should, unless otherwise permitted, be
installed near the outer boundaries of the Public Rights-of-Way to the extent possible, and
such installation shall be consistent with the Florida Department of Transportation's
Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards for Design, Construction and Maintenance for
Streets and Highways, as same may be amended from time to time.
(d) When any portion of a Public Right-of-Way is excavated, damaged, or
impaired by Grantee, or any of its agents, contractors or subcontractors, because of the
installation, inspection, or repair of any of its facilities, the portion of the Public Right-of-
Way so excavated, damaged, or impaired shall, within a reasonable time and as early as
practicable after such excavation, damage, or impairment, be restored to its original
condition before such excavation, damage, or impairment by the Grantee at its expense.
(e) The Grantor shall not be liable to the Grantee for any cost or expense in
connection with any relocation of the Grantee's facilities required under this Section,
except, however, the Grantee may be entitled to reimbursement of its costs from others
and as may be provided by law.
(f) In the event the Grantor requires removal or relocation of Grantee's facilities
because the facilities unreasonably interfere with the standards set forth in subsection (a)
hereof, and Grantee fails to remove or relocate such facilities at Grantee's expense within
thirty (30) days after written notice from Grantor, then Grantor may proceed to cause the
facilities to be removed or relocated and the expense therefore shall be charged against
the Grantee.
4
267
Section 3. The Grantor shall in no way be liable or responsible for any accident,
injury, or damage, whether to persons or property, that may occur in the construction,
installation, location, relocation, reconstruction, maintenance, repair, or operation by
Grantee of its facilities hereunder. Accordingly, acceptance of this New Franchise
Agreement by Grantee shall be deemed an agreement on the part of the Grantee to
indemnify and hold harmless Grantor, and its officers, employees, agents, servants,
contractors, or subcontractors, from and against any and all liability, loss, costs, damages,
attorneys' fees, or expenses (including, without limitation, those for or related to any
accident, injury, personal injury, wrongful death, or other damage to persons or property),
including Grantor's reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in defending itself
against any claims for such liabilities, losses, costs, damages, or expenses asserted
against Grantor by others which may accrue to or be incurred by or charged or sought
against Grantor, or any of its officers, employees, agents, servants, contractors, or
subcontractors, by reason of construction, installation, location, relocation, reconstruction,
maintenance, repair, or operation of Grantee's facilities, or by any acts or omissions of
negligence, gross negligence, strict liability, products liability, or intentional torts, default, or
misconduct of the Grantee, or any of its officers, directors, agents, servants, employees,
contractors, or subcontractors. The indemnity hereunder shall include not only the
reasonable costs, expenses, and attorneys' fees incurred by the Grantor in defense of any
third party's claim (prior to and during all phases of litigation, including trial and post-trial
and appellate proceedings), but shall also include the reasonable costs, expenses, and
attorneys' fees incurred by the Grantor in the event it must enforce the terms of this
indemnity prior to and during all litigation, including trial, post-trial, and appellate
5
268
proceedings. This indemnity shall survive expiration or other termination of this New
Franchise Agreement.
Section 4. All rates and rules and regulations established by the Grantee from time
to time shall be subject to such regulation as may be provided by law.
Section 5. As a consideration for this Franchise, the Grantee shall pay to the
Grantor, commencing ninety (90) days after the effective date hereof, and each month
thereafter for the remainder of the term of this Franchise, an amount which when added to
the amount of all licenses, excises, fees, charges and other impositions of any kind
whatsoever (except ad valorem property taxes and non-ad valorem tax assessments on
property) levied or imposed by the Grantor against the Grantee's property, business or
operations, and against the property, business, or operations of the Grantee's subsidiaries
that are directly involved in supplying electricity and other electricity-related services as
defined in Section 1 of this New Franchise Agreement, during the Grantee's monthly billing
period ending sixty (60) days prior to each such payment, will equal 5.29 percent (five and
two ninths percent) of the Grantee's billed revenues, less actual write-offs, from the sale of
electrical energy to residential, commercial, and industrial customers (as such customers
are defined by Grantee's tariff) within the incorporated areas of the Grantor for the monthly
billing period ending sixty (60) days prior to each such payment, and in no event shall
payment for the rights and privileges granted herein exceed 5.29 percent of such
revenues for any monthly billing period of the Grantee.
The Grantor understands and agrees that such revenues as described in the
preceding paragraph are limited, as in the Current Franchise Agreement, to the precise
revenues described therein, and that such revenues do not include, by way of example
6
269
and not limitation: (a) revenues from the sale of electrical energy for Public Street and
Highway Lighting (service for lighting public ways and areas); (b) revenues from Other
Sales to Public Authorities (service with eligibility restricted to governmental entities); (c)
revenues from Sales to Railroads and Railways (service supplied for propulsion of electric
transit vehicles); (d) revenues from Sales for Resale (service to other utilities for resale
purposes); (e) franchise fees; (f) Late Payment Charges as described in Grantee's tariff;
(g) Field Collection Charges as described in Grantee's tariff; (h) other service charges
permissible under Grantee's tariff.
Section 6. Grantee recognizes and agrees that the City Commission may, once
each calendar year, upon one hundred twenty (120) days advance written notice to
Grantee, prospectively reduce the percentage rate of the franchise fee which is identified
in Section 5 above, to a rate which is not less than one (1.0%) percent, and that the City
Commission may also, upon providing the same period of notice to Grantee, once each
calendar year prospectively increase the percentage rate of the franchise fee up to, but not
in excess of, a rate of six (6.0%) percent. In the event this adjustment option is exercised
by the City, the formula to be used in calculating the franchise fee to be remitted shall be
and remain the formula specified in detail in Section 5 of this franchise agreement, with the
exception of the adjusted franchise fee percentage. Further, in the event the City elects to
exercise this adjustment option, such option shall be exercised by the adoption of an
ordinance, a certified copy of which must be delivered to the Grantee no later than ninety
(90) days before any such increase or reduction is to become effective, which ordinance
identifies the adjusted franchise fee rate. Such ordinance shall provide that the Grantee
shall pay to the Grantor, no later than ninety (90) days after the end of the Grantee's first
7
270
billing period and no later than ninety (90) days after the end of each succeeding monthly
billing of the Grantee during the term of the franchise, franchise fees at the adjusted
franchise fee percentage rate, using the same formula (with the exception of the adjusted
franchise fee percentage) delineated in Section 5 above. In no event may the Grantor
increase the amount by more than two (2.0%) percent from the percentage then being
collected in any given year. The Grantor shall also have the option to reduce the amount to
be paid by the Grantee to any percentage between six (6.0%) percent and one (1.0%)
percent without any restriction or limitation on the size of that reduction, but in no event
shall the Grantor have the option to increase the percentage used to calculate the amount
to be paid by the Grantee as consideration for this franchise to any percentage which is
greater than six (6.0%) percent, or to reduce the percentage used to calculate the amount
to be paid by the Grantee as consideration for this franchise to any percentage which is
less than one (1.0%) percent. The Grantor's option hereunder shall be limited solely to the
percentage to be used in the calculation of the amount to be paid by the Grantee as
consideration for this franchise and as specifically set forth in this subsection, and no other
section or provision of this franchise ordinance, aside from the percentage identified in
Section 5 above, may be altered, amended or affected by the Grantor without the
concurrence of the Grantee. Nothing herein shall require the Grantor to exercise its option
hereunder
.Section 7. As a further consideration, during the term of this Franchise, the
Grantor agrees: (a) not to engage in the distribution and/or sale, in competition with the
Grantee, of electric capacity and/or electric energy to any ultimate consumer of electric
utility service (herein called a "retail customer") or to any electrical distribution system
8
271
established solely to serve any retail customer formerly served by the Grantee; and (b) not
to participate in any proceeding or contractual arrangement, the purpose or terms of which
would be to obligate the Grantee to transmit and/or distribute, electric capacity and/or
electric energy from any third party(ies) to any other retail customer's facility(ies); provided,
however, that the Grantor shall not be considered a "third party" or an "other retail
customer" for purposes of this provision. Nothing specified herein shall prohibit the
Grantor from engaging with other utilities or persons in wholesale transactions which are
subject to the provisions of the Federal Power Act, or from utilizing generators and/or other
electricity or energy-generating equipment during emergency situations. Nothing
specified herein is intended to restrict the Grantor from providing services other than retail
electricity service, which is the subject of the Grantor's agreement not to compete set
forth in this paragraph.
Nothing specified herein shall prohibit the Grantor, if permitted by law: (i) from
purchasing electric capacity and/or electric energy from any other person or utility; or (ii)
from seeking to have the Grantee transmit and/or distribute to any facility(ies) of the
Grantor electric capacity and/or electric energy purchased by the Grantor from any other
person or utility in compliance with applicable laws and regulations; provided, however,
that before the Grantor elects to purchase electric capacity and/or electric energy from
any other person or utility, the Grantor shall notify the Grantee. Such notice shall include
a summary of the specific rates, terms and conditions that have been offered by the other
person or utility and identify the Grantor's facility(ies) to be served under the offer. The
Grantee shall thereafter have ninety (90) days to evaluate the offer and, if the Grantee
offers rates, terms and conditions which are equal to or better than those offered by the
9
272
other person or utility, the Grantor shall be obligated to continue to purchase from the
Grantee electric capacity and/or electric energy to seNe the previously-identified
facility(ies) of the Grantor for a term no shorter than that offered by the other person or
utility. If, within such ninety (90) day period, the Grantee does not offer rates, terms and
conditions that are equal to or better than those offered by the other person or utility, then
the Grantor shall be free to consummate such purchase transaction with such other
person or utility, and all of the terms and conditions of this Franchise shall remain in
effect.
Nothing herein shall prohibit the Grantor: (i) from purchasing renewable electric
energy, which may include either or both of electric capacity or electric energy that is
produced within Grantor's corporate limits using any technology recognized as renewable
under Section 377.803 or Section 366.91, Florida Statutes (as same may be amended
from time to time), or any applicable successor statute(s) that defines renewable energy,
from any other person or utility in compliance with applicable laws and regulations; or (ii)
from seeking to have the Grantee transmit and/or distribute to any facility(ies) of the
Grantor renewable electric energy produced within the corporate limits of the Grantor and
purchased by the Grantor from any other person or utility in compliance with applicable
laws and regulations; provided, however, that if Grantor seeks to purchase such
renewable energy from any other person or utility by conducting a competitive solicitation
process for the provision of such renewable energy, then the Grantee shall have the right,
but not the obligation, to participate in such competitive solicitation process on the same
basis, under the same terms and conditions, and with the same opportunity to be awarded
the contract to provide the renewable energy sought by the City, as any and all other
10
273
proposers or bidders participating in the process. All of the terms and conditions of this
Franchise shall remain in effect without regard to whether the Grantee, or any other
vendor, is awarded the contract to provide renewable energy to the Grantor, provided the
Grantor awards the contract pursuant to its competitive solicitation process, or alternatively
awards the contract in accordance with Section 2-367 of the Code of the City of Miami
Beach (as same may be amended from time to time) or any successor ordinance(s)
without going through the competitive solicitation process. Grantee agrees that it will not
initiate any territorial complaint or territorial dispute litigation against any supplier of
renewable energy with which the Grantor contracts following such competitive
procurement process or following the award of the contract without going through the
competitive solicitation process in accordance with Section 2-367 of the Code of the City of
Miami Beach or any successor ordinance(s).
Section 8. If during the term of this New Franchise Agreement the Grantee enters
into a franchise agreement with any other municipality or county government located in
Miami-Dade County, Broward County, or Palm Beach County, Florida, the terms of which
provide for the payment of franchise fees by the Grantee at a rate greater than 6.0
percent of the Grantee's residential, commercial and industrial revenues (as such
customers are defined by Grantee's tariff), under the same terms and conditions as
specified in Section 5 hereof, then the Grantee, upon written request of the Grantor, shall
negotiate and enter into a new franchise agreement with the Grantor in which the
percentage to be used in calculating monthly payments under Section 5, using the same
terms and conditions as specified in Section 5 hereof, shall be the greater rate provided to
the other Miami-Dade County, Broward County, or Palm Beach County, Florida
11
274
municipality or county; provided, however, that if the franchise with such other Miami-Dade
County, Broward County, or Palm Beach County, Florida municipality or county contains
additional benefits given to Grantee in exchange for the increased franchise rate, and such
additional benefits are not contained within this New Franchise Agreement, then Grantee
shall have the sole discretion to include within such new franchise agreement with Grantor
the additional benefits found within the triggering franchise (i.e., the franchise that triggers
the operation of this Most Favored Nations provision) which Grantee may choose to
include in the new franchise agreement with Grantor.
In addition to the foregoing, if during the term of this New Franchise Agreement the
Grantee enters into a franchise agreement with Miami-Dade County on terms and
conditions that the Grantor reasonably determines are materially more favorable to Miami-
Dade County than the terms and conditions contained herein, then the Grantee, upon
written request of the Grantor, shall negotiate and enter into a new franchise agreement
with the Grantor that contains the terms and conditions that the Grantor has identified in
the Miami-Dade County franchise as being materially more favorable to Miami-Dade
County; provided, however, that if the franchise with Miami-Dade County contains
additional benefits given to Grantee in exchange for the materially more favorable terms
and conditions, and such additional benefits are not contained within this New Franchise
Agreement, then Grantee shall have the sole discretion to include within such new
franchise agreement with Grantor the additional benefits found within the triggering
franchise (i.e., the Miami-Dade County franchise that triggers the operation of this Most
Favored Nations provision) which Grantee may choose to include in the new franchise
agreement with Grantor.
12
275
Section 9. If the Grantor grants a right, privilege or franchise to any other person
or utility or otherwise enables any other such person or utility to construct, operate, or
maintain electric light and power facilities within any part of the incorporated areas of the
Grantor in which the Grantee may lawfully serve or compete on terms and conditions
which the Grantee reasonably determines are materially more favorable than the terms
and conditions contained herein, the Grantee may at any time thereafter terminate this
Franchise Agreement if such terms and conditions are not remedied within the time period
provided hereafter. The Grantee shall give the Grantor at least 180 days advance written
notice of its intent to terminate, and the Grantor and Grantee agree to negotiate in good
faith toward a mutually acceptable resolution of Grantee's claimed disadvantage during
this 180 day period. Such notice shall, without prejudice to any of the rights reserved for
the Grantee herein, advise the Grantor of such terms and conditions that it considers
materially more favorable. The Grantor shall then have 120 days in which to correct or
otherwise remedy the terms and conditions complained of by the Grantee. If the Grantee
reasonably determines that such terms and conditions are not remedied by the Grantor
within said time period, the Grantee may terminate this Franchise Agreement by delivering
written notice to the Grantor's Clerk and termination shall be effective on the date of
delivery of such notice. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as constraining
Grantor's rights to legally challenge at any time Grantee's determination of "materially
more favorable terms or conditions" leading to _termination under this Section.
Section 10. If as a direct or indirect consequence of any legislative, regulatory or
other action by the United States of America or the State of Florida (or any department,
agency, authority, instrumentality or political subdivision of either of them), any person or
13
276
utility is permitted to provide electric service within the incorporated areas of the Grantor to
a customer then being served by the Grantee, or to any new applicant for electric service
within any part of the incorporated areas of the Grantor in which the Grantee may lawfully
serve, and the Grantee reasonably determines that its obligations hereunder, or otherwise
resulting from this Franchise in respect to rates and service, place it at a material
competitive disadvantage with respect to such other or utility person, the Grantee may, at
any time after the taking of such action, terminate this Franchise Agreement if such
material competitive disadvantage is not remedied within the time period provided
hereafter. The Grantee shall give the Grantor at least 120 days advance written notice of
its intent to terminate. Such notice shall, without prejudice to any of the rights reserved for
the Grantee herein, advise the Grantor of the consequences of such action which resulted
in the material competitive disadvantage. The Grantor shall then have 120 days in which
to correct or otherwise remedy the material competitive disadvantage, and the Grantor and
Grantee agree to negotiate in good faith toward a mutually acceptable resolution of
Grantee's claimed disadvantage during this 120 day period. If such material competitive
disadvantage is, in the reasonable determination of Grantee, not remedied by the Grantor
within said time period, and if no mutually acceptable resolution of the matter is reached
through negotiation, the Grantee may terminate this Franchise Agreement by delivering
written notice to the Grantor's Clerk and termination shall take effect on the date of
delivery of such notice. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as constraining
Grantor's rights to legally challenge at any time Grantee's determination of "material
competitive disadvantage" leading to termination under this Section.
14
277
Section 11. Failure on the part of the Grantee to comply in any material respect
with any of the provisions of this Franchise shall be grounds for forfeiture. In the event
Grantor reasonably determines that it will invoke this forfeiture provision, Grantor shall give
the Grantee at least 180 days advance written notice of its intent to invoke the forfeiture
provision, and the Grantor and Grantee agree to negotiate in good faith toward a mutually
acceptable resolution of the claimed basis for the forfeiture during this 180 day period.
Such notice shall, without prejudice to any of the rights reserved for the Grantor herein,
advise the Grantee of the substance of the alleged failure of Grantee to comply in a
material respect with the provisions of this Franchise that Grantor considers to be the
basis for the forfeiture. The Grantee shall then have 120 days in which to correct or
otherwise remedy the claimed basis for the forfeiture. If the Grantor reasonably
determines that such claimed basis for the forfeiture is not remedied by the Grantee within
said time period, the Grantor may invoke this forfeiture provision by delivering written
notice to Grantee's Corporate Secretary and forfeiture shall be effective on the date of
delivery of such notice. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as constraining
Grantee's rights to legally challenge at any time Grantor's determination of the claimed
basis for the forfeiture leading to termination under this Section. The Grantor maintains
the right, at its discretion, to grant such additional time to the Grantee for compliance as
necessities in the case require.
Section 12. Failure on the part of the Grantor to comply in substantial respect with
any of the provisions of this Franchise, including but not limited to: (a) denying the
Grantee use of Public Rights-of-Way for reasons other than as set forth in Section 2
hereof; (b) imposing conditions for use of Public Rights-of-Way contrary to Florida law or
15
278
the terms and conditions of this Franchise; (c) unreasonable delay in issuing the Grantee a
use permit, if any, to construct its facilities in Public Rights-of-Way, shall constitute breach
of this Franchise and entitle the Grantee to withhold such portion of the payments provided
for in Section 5 hereof as a court of competent jurisdiction has, upon action instituted by
Grantee, determined to be equitable, just, and reasonable, considering the totality of the
circumstances, until such time as a use permit is issued, or a court of competent
jurisdiction has reached a final determination (after the expiration or exhaustion of all rights
of appeal) in the matter. The Grantor recognizes and agrees that nothing in this New
Franchise Agreement constitutes or shall be deemed to constitute a waiver of the
Grantee's delegated sovereign right of condemnation and that the Grantee, in its sole
discretion, may exercise such right as provided by law. The Grantee recognizes and
agrees that nothing in this New Franchise Agreement constitutes or shall be deemed to
constitute a waiver of the Grantor's delegated sovereign right of condemnation and that
the Grantor, in its sole discretion, may exercise such right as provided by law, provided
that the Grantor shall not exercise such right so as to violate the Grantor's covenant, set
forth in Section 7 hereof, not to compete against the Grantee in the distribution and/or sale
of electricity to retail customers.
Section 13. The Grantor may, at its option, upon reasonable notice to Grantee,
within 180 days after each anniversary date of this Franchise, at the sole expense of
Grantor, examine the books and records of Grantee as such books and records relate to
the calculation of the franchise fee payment to the Grantor for the calendar year preceding
such anniversary date. Grantee shall use a system of accounts and form of materials as
prescribed by applicable law or regulation. Grantee shall attach to each payment to
16
279
Grantor a statement of its gross revenues against which the franchise fee is to be
calculated as to all residential, commercial, and industrial accounts. Acceptance of
payment by Grantor shall not stop Grantor from asserting that the amount paid is not the
amount due. Grantee shall make available for review all accounts and records of Grantee
that Grantor may reasonably request or require relative to calculating the franchise fee.
Such examination of books and records of Grantee by Grantor shall be made during the
regular business hours of the Grantee at the general office of the Grantee. Records not
prepared by the Grantee in the ordinary course of its business may be provided at the
Grantor's expense and as the Grantor and the Grantee may agree in writing. Additionally,
where copies of Grantee's records may be properly obtained by Grantor for purposes of
this Section, said copies will be made at the Grantor's expense. Information identifying the
Grantee's customers by name or their electric consumption shall not be taken from the
Grantee's premises. Such audit shall be impartial and all audit findings, whether they
decrease or increase payment to the Grantor, shall be reported to the Grantee. The
Grantor's right to examine the records of the Grantee in accordance with this Section shall
not be conducted by any third party employed by the Grantor whose fee, in whole or part,
for conducting such audit is contingent on findings of the audit. Records shall be retained
by Grantee for a period of five (5) years. The provisions of this Section shall survive
termination of this New Franchise Agreement.
Notwithstanding the preceding paragraph, Grantor shall have one (1) year following
the expiration of the Current Franchise Agreement within which to conduct the
examination and audit contemplated by this Section, as to such Agreement; such
17
280
examination and audit to cover the last three (3) years of the Current Franchise
Agreement.
Section 14. Notwithstanding any provision of this New Franchise Agreement,
nothing herein shall prevent, prohibit, or in any way restrict the Grantor's ability to take
advantage of all applicable services set forth in Grantee's tariffs as those tariffs are
approved from time-to-time by Grantee's regulators, and nothing herein shall prevent,
prohibit, or in any way restrict the Grantor's ability to avail itself of all rights accruing to
Grantor as a retail customer of Grantee under Florida law and the rules and regulations of
the Florida Public Service Commission.
Section 15. Should any section or provision of this New Franchise Agreement or
any portion hereof be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a whole or any part hereof,
other than the part declared to be invalid.
Section 16. Grantee understands and acknowledges that Grantor's policies
strongly favor undergrounding of utilities and improvement of safety and aesthetics.
Grantee has filed a tariff and has adopted a Mechanism for Governmental Recovery of
Undergrounding Fees (MGRUF), along with other undergrounding tariffs. Requests made
by Grantor for undergrounding shall by implemented by Grantee in accordance with the
applicable tariffs in effect on the date of Grantor's request.
Section 17. Grantee acknowledges that Grantor's policies strongly favor the
widespread dissemination of meters featuring "smart grid technology" which utilize an
interactive monitoring network capable of providing real time electrical energy usage
information to both Grantee and Grantee's retail customers via an advanced, two-way
18
281
communication device. If this technology is implemented by Grantee, Grantee shall utilize
its best practicable efforts to provide such technology to retail customers located in the
incorporated area of Grantor consistent with good and prudent utility practice.
Section 18. Grantee understands and acknowledges that Grantor's policies
strongly favor strengthening electric utility infrastructure. Grantee has filed and received
Florida Public Service Commission (FPSC) approval for a plan which includes
strengthening feeders delivering power to critical infrastructure facilities, including feeders
located within the Grantor's boundaries. Subject to continued FPSC or regulatory
approval, Grantee will implement its infrastructure hardening plan within the Grantor's
boundaries.
Section 19. Grantor acknowledges it is fully informed concerning the existing
franchise granted by Miami-Dade County, Florida, to the Grantee herein, and accepted by
the Grantee as set out in Ordinance No. 60-16, adopted on May 3, 1960, and
subsequently renewed and accepted by the Grantee as set out in Ordinance No. 89-81,
adopted on September 5, 1989 by the Board of County Commissioners of Miami-Dade
County, Florida. Grantor agrees to indemnify and hold Grantee harmless against any and
all liability, loss, cost, damage and expense incurred by Grantee in respect to any claim
asserted by Miami-Dade County against Grantee arising out of the franchise set out in the
above referenced ordinances for the recovery of any sums of money paid by Grantee to
Grantor under the terms of this New Franchise Agreement. Grantee acknowledges and
Grantor hereby relies on the Dade County Resolution No. R-709-78, adopted on June 20,
1978, in the granting of this Franchise.
19
282
Section 20. As used herein, "person" means an individual, a partnership, a
corporation, a business trust, a joint stock company, a trust, an incorporated association, a
joint venture, a governmental authority or any other legal entity of any nature whatsoever.
Section 21. Ordinance No. 82-2294, passed and adopted January 20, 1982 and all
other ordinances and parts of ordinances and all resolutions and parts of resolutions in
conflict herewith, are hereby repealed.
Section 22. As a condition precedent to the taking effect of this Ordinance, the
Grantee shall file its acceptance hereof with the Grantor's Clerk. Grantor and Grantee
agree and acknowledge that Grantee shall deliver its Acceptance to Grantor on or before
January 20, 2012, provided that this Ordinance has passed on first and second reading on
or before January 20, 2012, and in that event the effective date of the New Franchise
Agreement shall be the date on which said Acceptance is delivered to the Grantor's Clerk
by Grantee.
PASSED on first reading this day of ______ , 2011.
PASSED AND ADOPTED on second reading this day of
-------' 2012.
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA
By: -----------------------
ATTEST:
By: --~----------------------City Clerk of the City of Miami Beach, Florida
20
283
(SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
&fOA EXECUTION ,•
~···Jk~
ate
1_6NE I THURSDAY, DECEMBER 29, 2011 MiamiHerald.com I THE MIAMI HERALD
l£l MIAMIBEACH
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
NOTICE OF PUBLIC. HEARINGS
NOTICE IS HEREBY given that second readings and public hearings will be held by the Mayor and City Commission
of the City of Miami Beach, Florida, in the Commission Chambers, 3rd floor, City Hall, 1700 Convention Center Drive,
Miami Beach, Florida, on WEDNESDAY, January 11, 201'2 to consider the following:
10:15a.m.
Ordinance Amending Chapter 11 0 Of The City Code, Entitled "Utilities," By Amending Article IV, Entitled "Fees, Charges,
Rates And Billing Procedure," By Amending Division 3, Entitled "Billing Procedure," By Amending .Section 110-191,
Entitled "Payment Of Bills," By Amending 110-191.(B) By Changing The Penalty For Late Utility Bills From len Percent
Of The Current Bill To 1.5% Per Month Of The Late Outstanding Balance.
Inquiries may be directed to the Rnance Department at (305) 673-7 466.
10:20a.m.
Ordinance Amending Chapter 26 Of The Miami .Beach City Code Entitled "Civil Emergencies," By Amending Article II,
Entitled "State Of Emergency," By Repealing Section 26-32, Entitled "Automatic Emergency Measures" Due To The
Preemption Of The Entire Field Of Regulation Of Firearms To The State Of Florida; By Amending Chapter 70, Entitled
"Miscellaneous Offenses," By Amending Article I, Entitled "In General," fly Repealing Section 70-2, Entitled "Weapons;
Discharging," Due To The Preemption OfThe Entire Reid Of Regulation Of Firearms To The State Of Florida; ~y Amending
Chapter 1 06 Of The Miami Beach City Code, Entitled "Traffic And Vehicles," By Amending Article III,Entitled "Parades,"
By Amending Division 2, Entitled "Permit," By Amending Section 106-375(A)(1) To Repeal Language Regarding The
Regulation Of Firearms That Is Preempted By The State Of Florida, And To Provide That Weapons Shall Not Include Any
Destructive Device ·or Firearm As Defined Under Florida Law, · ·
Inquiries m&Y be directed to the Legal Department at (305) 673-7 470.
10:25a.m.
Ordinance Amending Chapter 1 0 OfThe Miami Beach City Code Entitled "Animals," By.Amending Section 10-1 0, Entitled
"Animals Prohibited In Public Parks And On Beaches" To Cross-Reference Language In Section 10-11 Regarding
Off-Leash Areas For Dogs; By Amending Section 10-11, Entitled "Running At Large Prohibited," By Extending The
Pilot Program 'Off-Leash Area For Dogs In South Pointe Park Until July 15, 2012, By Providing Qff-Leash Hours In The
Designated Area In The Morning From Sunrise To 1 0:00 A.M. Daily And Between 4:00 P.M. And -7:00 P.M. Monday
Through Friday, And Relocating The Off-Leash Area To The South And East Of The Washington Avenue Entry Plaza
Inquiries may be directed to the Parks and Recreation Department at (305) 673-7730.
5:00p.m.
An Ordinance Amendinlf:rhe Land Development Regulations Of The Code Of The City Of Miami Beach, By Amending
· Chapter 142,. "Zoning Districts And Regulations," Article II, ''District Regulations," Division 18, "PS Performance
Standard District", Section 142-696 "Residential Performance Standard Area Requirements" .To Modify The Maximum
Height Requirements For Residential Apartment Structures; By Amending Section 142-697 ~Setback Requirements In
The R-PS 1, 2, 3, 4 District," To Modify The Setback Requirements For Oceanfront Buildings.
Inquiries may be directed to the Planning Department at (305) 673-7550. ·
5:o5p.m.
Ordinance Granting To Florida Power And Light Company, Its Successors And Assigns, An Electric Franchise Imposing
Provisions And Conditions Relating Thereto, Providing For Monthly Payments To The City Of Miami Beach:
Inquiries may be directed to the Public Works Department at (305) 673-7080.
INTERESTED PARTIES are invited to appear at this meeting, or be represented by an agent, or to express :lheir views in
writing addressed to the City Commission, c/o the City Clerk, 1700 Convention Center Drive, 1st Floor, City Hall, Miami
Beach, Florida 33139. Copies of these ordinances are available for public inspection during normal business hours
in the City Clerk's Office, 1700 Convention Center Drive, 1st Floor, City Hall, and Miami Beach,.Fiorida 33139. This
meeting may be continued and under such circumstances additional legal notice would not be provided.
Robert E. Parcher, City Clerk
City of Miami Beach
Pursuant to Section 286.0105, Fla. Stat., the City hereby advises the public that: if a person decides to appeal any
decision made by the City Commission with respect to any matter considered at its meeting or its hearing, such person
must ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence
upon ·which the appeal is to be based. This notice does not constitute consent by the City for the introduction or
admission of otherwise inadmissible or irrelevant evidence, nor does it authorize challenges or appeals not otherwise
allowed by law.
,j
To request this material in accessible format, sign language interpreters, inforrnatiof.} on 'a~cess for persons with
disabilities, and/or any accommmlation to review any document or participate in imy city-sponsored proceeding,
pleas·e contact (305) 604·2489 (voice), (305)673-7218(TIY) five days in advanca to initiate your request. TIY users
may also call 711 (Florida Relay Service).
Ad#686 284
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATIORNEY
JOSE SMITH, CITY ATIORNEY COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
CC:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Mayor Matti Herrera Bow
Jose Smith, City Attorn y
Jorge M. Gonzalez, Cit
January 11, 2012
of the City Commission
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 66,
"MARINE STRUCTURES, FACILITIES AND VEHICLES," ARTICLE IV,
"VESSELS," SECTION 66-151, "LAUNCHING AND HAULING," TO
PROHIBIT DOCKING, SECURING, EMBARKING OR DISEMBARKING
VESSELS AT MUNICIPAL OR PUBLIC SEAWALLS, WHARFS, DOCKS
OR BULKHEADS IN SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS, CREATING
EXCEPTIONS, PROVIDING FOR REPEALER; CODIFICATION;
SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
The attached ordinance was prepared at the request of Commissioner Weithorn, and was
referred to the Neighborhoods and Community Affairs Committee by the City Commission on
October 19, 2011. On December 8, 2011, the Committee recommended its adoption to the City
Commission.
The ordinance prohibits persons from docking or securing vessels, and embarking or
disembarking, at any public seawall in a single family neighborhood, except in case of
emergency involving safety to life or property.
The ordinance is within the authority of the City to enact under its police power, in order to
protect the public health, safety and welfare. It would reduce crime and trespass to abutting
private property. Enforcement of the ordinance would be in response to citizen complaints. The
ordinance is not affected by recent State legislation limiting the city's authority to regulate
anchoring in navigable waters.
FISCAL IMPACT
In accordance with Charter Section 5.02, which requires that the "City of Miami Beach shall
consider the long term economic impact (at least 5 years) of proposed legislative actions," this
shall confirm that the City Administration evaluated the long term economic impact (at least 5
years) of this proposed legislative action. The proposed ordinance, if enacted, would not have
any economic impact.
JS/GMH/DT /mem
T:\AGENDA\2012\1-11-12\Docking memo First Reading 1-11-2012.doc
· Agenda Item R5 6-
we are committed to providing excellent public service and safety to all who live, work, and play in our vi bran _--:;....;;......._=----Date___.,{.......:-J...:..../--=-/~2._-
285
ORDINANCE NO. __ _
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 66,
"MARINE STRUCTURES, FACILITIES AND VEHICLES," ARTICLE IV,
"VESSELS," SECTION 66-151, "LAUNCHING AND HAULING," TO
PROHIBIT DOCKING, SECURING, EMBARKING OR DISEMBARKING
VESSELS AT MUNICIPAL OR PUBLIC SEAWALLS, WHARFS,
DOCKS OR BULKHEADS IN SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS,
CREATING EXCEPTIONS, PROVIDING FOR REPEALER;
CODIFICATION; SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City Code, Chapter 66, provides for the regulation of vessels
and docking, including limitations on docking at public and private land within the City, as
permitted by State law; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission has received complaints about persons
docking at public seawalls in single family neighborhoods causing problems and
concerns in such neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, the City Attorney drafted an ordinance at the request of
Commissioner Weithorn that addresses the problem by prohibiting such dockage, with
certain exceptions; and
WHEREAS, the ordinance was presented to the Neighborhoods and Community
Affairs Committee on December 8, 2011, which recommended its adoption; and
WHEREAS, the amendments set forth below are necessary to accomplish the
above objectives.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Chapter 66, "Marine Structures, Facilities and Vehicles," Article IV, "Vessels,"
Section 66-151, "Launching and hauling," is hereby amended as follows:
Sec. 66-151.-Launching.~. aRd hauling, and docking at public seawall, etc.,
prohibited.
No person shall launch or remove any vessel from the waters of the city over any public
seawall, sidewalk, street end, or public property except at locations where a regular
business of launching and hauling vessels is conducted, which has the necessary
equipment to do such work, or in areas designated and posted for such purpose by the
city. No person shall dock or otherwise secure any vessel. or embark or disembark any
passengers or charter parties. at any municipal or public seawall, wharf. dock. or
bulkhead. in a single family neighborhood. except in case of emergency involving safety
to life or property.
SECTION 3. Repealer.
All ordinances or parts of ordinances and all sections and parts of sections in conflict
herewith be and the same are hereby repealed.
1 of 2
286
SECTION 4. Codification.
It is the intention of the City Commission, and it is hereby ordained that the provisions of
this ordinance shall become and be made part of the Code of the City of Miami Beach as
amended; that the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to
accomplish such intention, and that the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section" or
other appropriate word.
SECTION 5. Severability.
If any section, subsection, clause or provision of this Ordinance is held invalid, the
remainder shall not be affected by such invalidity.
SECTION 6. Effective Date.
This Ordinance shall take effect ten days following adoption.
PASSED and ADOPTED this __ day of _________ , 2012.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
First Reading:
Second Reading:
Underscore denotes new language.
Strikethrough denotes deleted language.
MAYOR
T:\AGENDA\2012\1-11-12\Docking ordinance Single Family First reading 1-11-2012.doc
2 of2
287
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
288
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
Amendment to the noticing requirements for public hearings conducted by the City's four Land
Use Boards (Planning Board, Board of Adjustment, Design Review Board, and Historic
Preservation Board.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Maintain strong growth management policies; Protect historic building stock
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.):
While nearly half, 47.6%, suggested the effort put forth by the City to regulate development is
"about the right amount," nearly one-third, 29.6%, indicated "too little" effort is being put forth by the
City in this area.
Issue:
Should the City Commission adopt an Ordinance Amendment that would require re-noticing of Land
Use Board public hearings that were continued, after the first continuance?
Item SummaryjRecommendation:
FIRST READING: The Administration recommends that the City Commission approve the proposed
Ordinance on first reading and set a second reading public hearing for February 8, 2012.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
On April 21, 2011, the Land Use and Development Committee referred the Ordinance to the Planning
Board, with a favorable recommendation.
At the Planning Board meeting of September 20, 2011 the ordinance was reviewed and by a vote of 4-
3, the Board recommended that the City Commission not adopt the ordinance. The reasons cited
were that the Board believed the ordinance was burdensome and costly and it would add unnecessary
expense to an applicant.
Financial Information:
Source of Amount Account
Funds: 1
D 2
3
4
OBPI Total
Financial Impact Summary:
The subject ordinance is not expected to have any fiscal impact.
Clerk's Office Le islative Trackin
MIAMI BEACH 289
Approved
City Manager
AGENDA ITEM R~ H
DATE 1-\1-12..
MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager(\ fi-T~
January 11, 2012 J U FIRST READING
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI BEACH AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, BY AMENDING CHAPTER
118, "ADMINISTRATIVE AND REVIEW PROCEDURES," ARTICLE II,
"BOARDS," DIVISION 5, "BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT," SECTION 118-134,
"NOTIFICATION OF HEARINGS;" ARTICLE IV, "CONDITIONAL USE
PROCEDURE," SECTION 118-193 "APPLICATIONS FOR CONDITIONAL
USES"; ARTICLE VI, "DESIGN REVIEW PROCEDURES;" ARTICLE X,
"HISTORIC PRESERVATION;" AND ARTICLE XI "NEIGHBORHOOD
CONSERVATION DISTRICTS (NCO) ;" TO CLARIFY THAT
CONTINUANCES SHALL BE NOTICED BY MAIL AFTER THE FIRST
CONTINUANCE GRANTED BY A LAND USE BOARD; PROVIDING FOR
REPEALER; CODIFICATION; SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission approve the proposed
Ordinance on first reading and set a second reading public hearing for February 8, 2012.
BACKGROUND
A discussion of the notice requirements for all Land Use Boards, (specifically, the
requirement to send follow-up notices to residents after an initial meeting), was referred
to the Land Use and Development Committee by the City Commission on January 19,
2011, at the request of Commissioner Wolfson.
This referral was made due to concerns that when land use board hearings are
repeatedly deferred or continued, and when they finally occur, the public is unaware of
the hearing and final outcome. Land use boards will often direct additional noticing by
mail to be undertaken when an item is continued repeatedly. However, typically, when
an item is opened and continued to a date certain, it is not re-noticed.
The Committee discussed an amendment allowing one continuance without re-noticing,
and then after that requiring full notice for any additional continuances. Staff also
discussed the costs associated with additional newspaper advertising, citing an extra ad
every month may be required.
On April 21, 2011, the LUDC requested through a motion made by Commissioner
Gongora and seconded by Commissioner Exposito (approved by a 3-0 vote), that an
290
January 11, 2012
Commission Memorandum
Ordinance -Noticing Requirements for Continuances
Page 2of 3
ordinance be prepared and forwarded to the Planning Board for review and comment
wherein one continuance may be permitted without mail notice, but further requests for
continuance shall be fully noticed by mail.
The Committee also requested that any alternatives recommended by the Board should
be presented to the Land Use Committee prior to Commission.
ANALYSIS
The City Code requires notice to be given of public hearings for the City's four Land Use
Boards. These notice requirements were recently amended to extend them from 15
days to 30 days (see attached ordinance). Public hearings are noticed by newspaper
and mailed notice to surrounding property owners within 375 feet of the subject property.
However, as many things may come up at the public hearing, sometimes a Board will
continue a matter for one or more months. Generally, these subsequent hearings are
not the subject of Code required legal notice, as they were notified of the initial hearing
and could presumably follow the progress of subsequent continuances or deferrals.
Planning Department staff has in the past generally advertised the continued items along
with new public hearings in the monthly newspaper notice. Mailed notices have also
been sent out in some cases as a courtesy notice, but not to fulfill legal requirements.
However, now that the required legal notice has been extended to 30 days, staff is
required to advertise the following month's hearing prior to the current month's hearing
taking place, precluding the ability to include in the notice any items that were continued.
This is a result of the new 30 day notice.
The 30-day notice requirement for all land use board applications has broadened the
timeframe for noticing upcoming public hearings, thereby increasing community
awareness and the ability to respond to potential concerns. However, this longer
timeframe for board applications has the potential to become burdensome to applicants
with special hardships. For instance, if a building permit plan review finds that a minor
variance is necessary for approval, the ability to obtain such a variance quickly has been
reduced.
One approach, which was referred by Commissioner Tobin and will be the subject of a
future discussion, might be to reduce the notice requirement for a selected list of
variances, perhaps limited to single family homeowners, which might include minor
variances for things such as swimming pools and decks, air conditioning units and
generators, or small additions, while still requiring the full thirty (30) day notice for major
projects. The goal would be to find the proper balance between enhancing adjacent
property owner and/or neighborhood notification on the one hand, and improving
efficiency and streamlining governmental procedures on the other. Staff is working on a
list of minor variances for which the required notice could potentially be reduced, as per
a previous committee referral.
Another alternative put forward by staff to the LUDC was that if re-noticing was desired
in all cases, the minimum notice period that would permit enough time for continued
cases to be advertised in the newspaper for the following month's hearing was
291
January 11, 2012
Commission Memorandum
Ordinance -Noticing Requirements for Continuances
Page 3of 3
determined to be twenty-one days. However, the LUDC discussed and rejected this
concept in favor of the subject ordinance.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION
A proposed ordinance had been presented to the Planning Board at its July 2011
meeting where several issues were raised, i.e.
• Board requests supplemental information or more research;
• Less than a quorum or less than a supermajority number of board members are
present, or the exact minimum number of members required for approval are
present (typically called a short board);
• Request precedes the opening of the item;
• Affected party requests continuance; or
• Applicant requests a continuance.
The ordinance was revised, but only with language clarifying that the agenda items that
the board cannot consider due to the absence of a quorum should be automatically
continued to the board's next regular meeting without further required notice.
At the Planning Board meeting of September 20, 2011 the ordinance was reviewed
again and by a vote of 4-3, the Board recommended that the City Commission not adopt
the ordinance. Several reasons were cited, among them stating that the ordinance was
burdensome and costly and it would add unnecessary expense to an applicant.
FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed ordinance is not expected to have a fiscal impact upon the City.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission approve the proposed
Ordinance on first reading and set a second reading public hearing for February 8, 2012.
JMG/JGG/RGLfTRM
T:\AGENDA\2012\1-11-12\Noticing Requirements for Continuances MEMO.docx
292
"CONTINUANCES BY LAND USE BOARDS"
ORDINANCE NO. ______ _
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, BY
AMENDING CHAPTER 118, "ADMINISTRATIVE AND REVIEW
PROCEDURES," ARTICLE II, "BOARDS," DIVISION 5, "BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENT," SECTION 118-134, "NOTIFICATION OF HEARINGS;"
ARTICLE IV, "CONDITIONAL USE PROCEDURE," SECTION 118-193
"APPLICATIONS FOR CONDITIONAL USES"; ARTICLE VI, "DESIGN
REVIEW PROCEDURES;" ARTICLE X, "HISTORIC PRESERVATION;"
AND ARTICLE XI "NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICTS
(NCO);" TO CLARIFY THAT CONTINUANCES SHALL BE NOTICED
BY MAIL AFTER THE FIRST CONTINUANCE GRANTED BY A LAND
USE BOARD; PROVIDING FOR REPEALER; CODIFICATION;
SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the TRAC Committee recommendations make the Land
Development Application and Review Process more transparent and accessible to the
public; and
WHEREAS, an important recommendation of the Committee was to extend the
required mailed and newspaper notice for all four land use boards from 15 days to 30
days minimum; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission adopted an ordinance requiring 30 days mailed
notice on December 8, 2010, Ordinance No. 2010-3711; and
WHEREAS, the Land Use and Development Committee believes that any
continued item before any of the land use boards, either at a board or an applicant
request should also be noticed by mail; and
WHEREAS, the amendments set forth below are necessary to accomplish all of
the above objectives.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That Chapter 118, "Administration and Review Procedures," Article II,
Boards, Division 5,"Board of Adjustment," Section 118-134, "Notification of hearings" is
hereby amended as follows:
Sec. 118-134. Notification of hearings.
The board of adjustment shall not vary or modify any regulation or provision of these
land development regulations or hear an appeal of an administrative decision until a
public hearing has been held. At least 30 days prior to the public hearing date, a
description of the request, and the date, time and place of such hearing shall be
(i) posted on the property,
1 of7
293
(ii) advertised in a paper of general paid circulation in the community, and
(iii) given by mail to the owners of record of land lying within 375 feet of the
property. This mailed notification requirement shall be the responsibility
of the applicant. Where the application is for an appeal of an
administrative decision the preceding information shall be supplemented
by an explanation of what is being appealed.
The board may continue an application to a date certain at either the request of the
applicant or at its own discretion. with notice through a verbal announcement at the
public meeting at the time of the board vote approving the continuance only one time.
All further continuances of the same application shall be noticed at least 30 days prior to
the public hearing date. in accordance with the provisions of (i) through {iii) above. The
mail notification requirement shall be the responsibility of the applicant. . Agenda items
that the board cannot consider due to the absence of a quorum shall be
automatically continued to the board's next regular meeting without further
required notice.
Section 2. That Chapter 118, "Administration and Review Procedures," Article IV,
"Conditional Use Procedure," Sec. 118-193. "Applications for conditional uses" is hereby
amended as follows:
Sec. 118-193. Applications for conditional uses.
* * *
Applications for approval of a conditional use shall be submitted to the planning
department, which shall prepare a report and recommendation for consideration by the
planning board, and when required, by the city commission. Within a reasonable time,
but in no instance less than 30 days after receipt of a completed application, the board
shall hold a public hearing, at which parties in interest and citizens shall have an
opportunity to be heard. At least 30 days prior to the public hearing date, a description
of the request, and the_date, time and place of such hearing shall be:
ill posted on the property,
.illl advertised in a paper of general paid circulation in the community, and
(iii) given by mail to the owners of record of land lying within 375 feet of the
property. This mailed notification requirement shall be the responsibility
of the applicant.
The board may continue an application to a date certain at either the request of the
applicant or at its own discretion. with notice through a verbal announcement at the
public meeting at the time of the board vote approving the continuance only one time.
All further continuances of the same application shall be noticed at least 30 days prior to
the public hearing date. in accordance with the provisions of (i) through {iii) above. The
mail notification requirement shall be the responsibility of the applicant. Agenda items
that the board cannot consider due to the absence of a quorum shall be
automatically continued to the board's next regular meeting without further
required notice
2 of7
294
Section 3. That Chapter 118, "Administration and Review Procedures," Article VI,
"Design Review Procedures," is hereby amended as follows:
Sec. 118-254. "Decision of design review board"
* * *
(b) At least 30_days prior to the public hearing date, a description of the request, and
the date, time and place of such hearing shall be:
(i) posted on the property,
(ii) advertised in a paper of general paid circulation in the community; and
(iii) given by mail to the owners of record of land lying within 375 feet of
property. The mail notification requirement shall be the responsibility of
the applicant.
Additionally, courtesy notice shall also be given to any state nonprofit community
organization which has requested of the director in writing to be notified of board
hearings.
* * *
Sec. 118-257. Deferrals, continuances, and withdrawals.
(a) An applicant may defer an application before the public hearing only one time.
The request to defer shall be in writing. When an application is deferred, it shall be re-
noticed at the applicant's expense as provided in section 118-254. The applicant shall
also pay a deferral fee as set forth in this article. In the event that the application is not
presented to the design review board for approval at the meeting date for which the
application was deferred, the application shall be deemed null and void. If the application
is deferred by the board, the notice requirements shall be the same as for a new
application as provided in section 118-254, and shall be at the city's expense.
(b) The board may continue an application to a date certain at either the request of
the applicant or at its own discretion, with notice through a verbal announcement at the
public meeting at the time of the board vote approving the continuance only one time.
All further continuances of the same application shall be noticed at least 30 days prior to
the public hearing date. in accordance with the provisions of (i) through (iii) above. The
mail notification requirement shall be the responsibility of the applicant. Agenda items
that the board cannot consider due to the absence of a quorum shall be
automatically continued to the board's next regular meeting without further
required notice.
Section 4. That Chapter 118, "Administration and Review Procedures," Article
X, "Historic Preservation," is hereby amended as follows:
Division 3. Issuance of Certificate of Appropriateness/Certificate to Dig/Certificate of
Appropriateness for Demolition"
3 of7
295
* * *
Section 118-563, "Review procedure"
* * *
(c) All applications for a certificate of appropriateness for the demolition or partial
demolition of any building, structure, improvement, significant landscape feature, public
interior or site individually designated in accordance with sections 118-591, 118-592 and
118-593, or located within an historic district and all applications for a certificate of
appropriateness for new building construction, alteration, rehabilitation, renovation,
restoration or any other physical modification of any building, structure, improvement,
significant landscape feature, public interior or site individually designated in accordance
with sections 118-591, 118-592 and 118-593, or located within an historic district shall
only be considered by the board following a public hearing. At least 30 days prior to the
public hearing date, a description of the request with the date, time and place of such
hearing shall be:
(i) posted on the property,
(ii) advertised in a paper of general paid circulation in the community, and
(iii) given by mail to the owners of record of land lying within 375 feet of the
property. The mail notification requirement shall be the responsibility of
the applicant.
The board may continue an application to a date certain at either the request of the
applicant or at its own discretion, with notice through a verbal announcement at the
public meeting at the time of the board vote approving the continuance only one time.
All further continuances of the same application shall be noticed at least 30 days prior to
the public hearing date. in accordance with the provisions of (i) through (iii) above. The
mail notification requirement shall be the responsibility of the applicant. Agenda items
that the board cannot consider due to the absence of a quorum shall be
automatically continued to the board's next regular meeting without further
required notice
* * *
Division 4. Designation
Sec. 118-591. Historic designation procedure.
* * *
(f) Public hearing; notification. A public hearing on a proposed historic preservation
designation shall be conducted by the historic preservation board after the date a
designation report has been filed. The property owners of record within 375 feet of the
property proposed for designation shall be notified by mail of the public hearing at least
4-a 30 days in advance of the hearing. This notification requirement shall be the
responsibility of the applicant.
4 of7
296
(g) Designation procedures initiated by owners of single-family homes in single-
family districts. Notwithstanding the above, the following shall apply to any request by
property owners for the individual designation of their single-family homes as historic
structures:
* * *
(2) Public notice requirements. At least 30 days prior to the public hearing date for
the subject designation, a description of the request with the time and place of the public
hearing, shall be advertised in a paper of general paid circulation in the community.
The board may continue an application to a date certain at either the request of the
applicant or at its own discretion. with notice through a verbal announcement at the
public meeting at the time of the board vote approving the continuance only one time.
All further continuances of the same application shall be noticed at least 30 days prior to
the public hearing date. in accordance with the provisions of (i) through (iii) above. The
mail notification requirement shall be the responsibility of the applicant. Agenda items
that the board cannot consider due to the absence of a quorum shall be
automatically continued to the board's next regular meeting without further
required notice.
Section 5. That Chapter 118, "Administration and Review Procedures," Article XI.
"Neighborhood Conservation Districts (NCO)" is hereby amended as follows:
Sec. 118-705. Procedures for adoption of specific NCO overlay districts.
* * *
(b) Preliminary review.
* * *
(2) Notification of the preliminary public hearing shall be advertised in accordance
with section 118-164(2)(b) regardless of acreage and, in addition, all property owners
within the proposed district as well as within a 375-foot radius of the proposed district
shall be notified by individual mail notice with a description prepared in plain English,
and postmarked 30 days in advance of the hearing.
* * *
(d) Discussion and recommendations by the design review board.
* * *
(2) Notification of this public meeting shall be advertised in a newspaper of general
circulation 30 days prior to the meeting.
5 of7
297
The board may continue an application to a date certain at either the request of the
applicant or at its own discretion. with notice through a verbal announcement at the
public meeting at the time of the board vote approving the continuance only one time.
All further continuances of the same application shall be noticed at least 30 days prior to
the public hearing date. in accordance with the provisions of (i) through (iii) above. The
mail notification requirement shall be the responsibility of the applicant. Agenda items
that the board cannot consider due to the absence of a quorum shall be
automatically continued to the board's next regular meeting without further
required notice
Section 6. Repealer.
All ordinances or parts of ordinances and all sections and parts of sections in conflict
herewith be and the same are hereby repealed.
Section 7. Codification.
It is the intention of the City Commission, and it is hereby ordained that the provisions of
this ordinance shall become and be made part of the Code of the City of Miami Beach as
amended; that the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to
accomplish such intention, and that the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section" or
other appropriate word.
Section 8. Severability.
If any section, subsection, clause or provision of this Ordinance is held invalid, the
remainder shall not be affected by such invalidity.
Section 9. Effective Date.
This Ordinance shall take effect ten days following adoption.
PASSED and ADOPTED this __ day of---------' 2011.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
6 of7
298
MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO
FORM AND LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
City Attorney Date
First Reading:
Second Reading:
Verified by:---------
Richard G. Lorber, AICP
Acting Planning Director
Underscore denotes new language.
Strikethrough denotes deleted language.
Bold indicates new language since PB July 2011 meeting.
F:\A TTO\HELG\Ordinances\Notice of Public Hearings\2015 -Ordinance re continuances rev 9-14-20ll.doc
7 of7
299
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
300
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
Amending Section 82-384, "Permitted Sidewalk Cafe Frontage; Requests For Expansion," To Permit
Sidewalk Cafes To Extend Into A Loadin Zone Frontin A Restaurant.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Maintain strong growth management policies.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): While nearly half, 47.6%, suggested the
effort put forth by the City to regulate development is "about the right amount," nearly one-third, 29.6%,
indicated "too little" effort is being put forth by the City in this area.
Issue:
Should the City Commission amend the City Code to allow temporary removal of parking spaces to
ermit the expansion of sidewalk cafes into a loadin zone frontin a restaurant?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
FIRST READING
In order to consider the use of the parking spaces for additional sidewalk cafe for businesses along
Espanola Way between Drexel Avenue and Washington Avenue, the following should be considered:
emergency access, traffic circulation, adjacent land uses and special events.
There are several restaurants that provide sidewalk cafe along Espanola Way between Drexel Avenue
and Washington Avenue that would benefit should the proposed amendment is approved. The
amendment would allow an extension of the sidewalk cafes into a loading zone subject to certain
restrictions such as when the street is closed to traffic during certain days or hours; all equipment
placed in the loading zone is removed at the close of business each night; a permit is required and a
fee is paid. Notwithstanding, the Administration has concerns relative to emergency access, traffic
circulation, and the ability of adjacent land uses to utilize the street for accessibility and connectivity to
other streets.
The Administration does not recommend adoption of the proposed amendment based on the concerns
expressed in the Analysis portion of this memorandum.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
At its May 18, 2011 meeting, the LUDC recommended to refer this item to the full Commission; the
recommendation was submitted with the Committee afteraction at the June 1, 2011 City Commission
meeting.
Financial Information:
Source of Amount Account
Funds: 1
D 2
3
OBPI Total
Financial Impact Summary:
In accordance with Charter section 5.02, which requires that the "City of Miami Beach shall consider
the long-term economic impact (at least 5 years) of proposed legislative actions," this shall confirm
that the City Administration evaluated the long-term economic impact (at least 5 years) of this
proposed legislative action, and determined that there may not be a measurabl~ impact on the City's
budget by not enacting the proposed ordinance.
City Clerk's Office Legislative Trackin_g_:
Richard Lorber I Mercy Lamazares
Sign-Offs:
partment Director
MIAMI BEACH 301
AGENDA ITEM R 5 I
DATE J-11-/2...-
ttl MIAMI BEACH "'="'"
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: January 11, 2012 FIRST READING
SUBJECT: Temporary Removal of Parking Spaces
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CODE OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH BY AMENDING CHAPTER 82, "PUBLIC
PROPERTY," AMENDING SECTION 82-384, "PERMITTED
SIDEWALK CAFE FRONTAGE; REQUESTS FOR EXPANSION," TO
PERMIT SIDEWALK CAFES TO EXTEND INTO A LOADING ZONE
FRONTING A RESTAURANT; PROVIDING FOR REPEALER,
CODIFICATION, SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission fully discuss the merits of this
proposal as recommended by the Land Use and Development Committee and if so
desired, approve the proposed ordinance on first reading and set a public hearing for the
February 8, 2012 City Commission meeting; however, it should be noted that the
Administration does not recommend adoption of the proposed amendments based on
the concerns expressed in the Analysis portion of this memorandum.
BACKGROUND
September 27. 2010: The Land Use and Development Committee (LUDC) discussed
strengthening the process by which permanent parking spaces may be removed from
City inventory, by limiting the purpose and/or requiring Commission approval. At the
meeting the Committee voted to direct City staff to prepare the ordinance and send to
the full Commission and to come back to the Committee with a discussion on the
temporary removal of parking spaces by adjacent commercial uses (e.g. sidewalk cafe
uses).
April 13, 2011: An ordinance prohibiting private requests for the permanent removal of
parking spaces or loading zones except for the purpose of creating access to an off-
street parking facility or other vehicular access to the property was adopted by the City
Commission.
May 18. 2011: The LUDC discussed the street section being reviewed at that time -the
portion of Espanola Way between Drexel Avenue and Washington Avenue. According to
information provided by the City's Public Works Department, Espanola Way is
302
City Commission Memorandum
Temporary removal of parking spaces
January 11, 2012 Page2
approximately 14 feet from curb to curb, with 5-foot sidewalks between the cafes and the
buildings. The street also offers commercial loading zones (parking bays) at two specific
locations on the north side and one on the south side. All the parking loading zones are
restricted between the hours of 6:00 AM to 6:00 PM (30 minutes maximum) from
Monday through Friday with no parking any other time. The street remains closed to thru
traffic between 6:00PM and 6:00AM. Espanola Way is also closed to traffic from Friday
at 6:00 PM thru Sunday at 9:00 AM.
Espanola Way between Drexel Avenue and Washington Avenue is classified as a local
street and serves to direct one way traffic on the westbound direction only. The
intersection of Espanola Way and Washington Avenue is controlled by a traffic signal
and offers opportunities for pedestrians to cross on all four legs of the intersection.
Espanola Way at Drexel Avenue is also a four legged intersection but controlled by a
stop sign.
As per Attachment 1, the following restaurants provide sidewalk cafe along Espanola
Way between Drexel Avenue and Washington Avenue:
Restaurant Address #of Seats Area (Square Feet)
Oh Mexico 41 0 Espanola Way 94 1,064
A La Folie 516 Espanola Way 25 159
Hosteria Romana 429 Espanola Way 74 557
Tapas & Tintos 448 Espanola Way 37 310
Boteco Copacabana 437 Espanola Way 20 120
Pizzeria D'Angelo 1446 Washington Ave 50 436
Kane Express 455 Espanola Way 8 37
Segafredo Zanetti 1436 Drexel Ave 64 628
Total 372 3,311
An inventory of the number of seats and area covered by sidewalk cafe that each of
these businesses offer is included in the attached spreadsheet (Attachment 2) provided
by the Public Works Department.
The LUDC recommended to refer this item to the full Commission; the recommendation
was submitted with the Committee afteraction at the June 1, 2011 City Commission
meeting.
ANALYSIS
The Administration has concerns relative to the proposed amendments because of the
following issues:
• Emergency Access
Having the street closed to allow sidewalk cafe usage would impede the ability
for fire trucks and other emergency services to provide an effective response.
• Traffic Circulation
The street is currently used to allow circulation to adjacent uses including other
commercial and residential in addition to serving as a route to provide access for
303
City Commission Memorandum
Temporary removal of parking spaces
January 11, 2012 Page3
pick up and drop off for students attending the Fisher Feinberg Elementary
School.
Deliveries to businesses located on Espanola Way would also have to be
considered as part of the overall plan. Currently deliveries utilize the commercial
loading parking spaces and in some cases for larger trucks, they have been
observed parking on the street often blocking through traffic since other
convenient and accessible parking spaces are not available in the vicinity.
A permanent closure of Espanola Way would require County approval and has to
follow the requirements dictated as part of the Miami-Dade County Traffic Flow
Modification Procedures which include a traffic study, public hearing and a vote
from the residents affected by the modification.
• Adjacent Land Uses
In addition to the sidewalk cafe usage at the ground level along Espanola Way,
there are other uses including residential and commercial that need to be
considered. Those additional uses rely heavily on the ability to utilize Espanola
Way for accessibility and connectivity to other streets.
• Special Events
In case the restaurant owners on Espanola Way would still like to follow up on
the idea of using available parking spaces when not being used as part of the
sidewalk cafe, an option would be to make that happen as part of a special
event, in which case they would have to follow the City's special event permit
procedure.
The proposed amendments would be to Chapter 82, "Public Property," Section 82-384,
"Permitted Sidewalk Cafe Frontage; Requests for Expansions," as follows:
(a) Sidewalk cafes are restricted to the sidewalk frontage of the
restaurant to which the permit is issued or, if the restaurant is an
ancillary and/or secondary use to another type of business
establishment, the sidewalk cafe shall be restricted to the sidewalk
frontage of the building (or portion thereof) of the "primary"
business establishment (within which the restaurant is located).
Only a restaurant whose premises are on a ground floor adjacent
to and fronting the sidewalk may be issued a sidewalk cafe permit.
Sidewalk cafes may be extended into a loading zone fronting a
restaurant as provided in subsection (d) below.
@ Loading zones in front of a ground floor restaurant use with
sidewalk frontage and a sidewalk cafe permit may be used as part
of an expanded sidewalk cafe permit area when the street on
which the loading zone is located is closed to traffic. provided that
the loading zone is within a street area that is regularly closed to
traffic during certain days or hours. a minimum of five days each
week. All platforms. tables and chairs in the loading zone shall be
removed at the close of business each night. A permit
modification will be required before use of a loading zone may
commence. subject to suspension or revocation at the discretion
304
City Commission Memorandum
Temporary removal of parking spaces
January 11, 2012
of the Public Works Director. The fee for the temporary expanded
sidewalk cafe permit area shall be as provided in Section 82-383,
City Code.
CONCLUSION
Page4
In view of the above analysis and the concerns expressed, the Administration does not
recommend adoption of the proposed amendments; however, should the City
Commission desire, it should fully discuss the merits of this proposal as recommended
by the Land Use and Development Committee, approve the proposed ordinance on first
reading, and set a public hearing for the February 8, 2012 City Commission meeting.
Pursuant to Section 2.05, "Procedures for Passing Ordinances Generally," a proposed
ordinance may be read by title, or in full, on at least two (2) separate dates and shall, at
least ten (10) days prior to adoption, be noticed once in a newspaper of general
circulation in the municipality. After the public hearing, the City Commission may pass
the ordinance with or without amendment. The effective date shall not be earlier than ten
( 1 0) days after its enactment.
JMG/JGG/RGLIML
T:\AGENDA\2012\1-11-12\Temporary removal of parking spaces memo.docx
305
Attachment 1
BUSINESS TAPAS & TINTOS BUSINESS HOSTERJA ROMANO INC.
ADDRESS 448 ADDRESS 429
STREET ESPANOLA WAY STREET ESPANOLA WAY
TABLES 17 TABLES 24
SEATS 34 SEATS 74
SQFT 310 SQFT 557
BUSINESS OHME~COAT~OCArn
NUVO
BUSINESS ALA FOLIE
ADDRESS 410 ADDRESS 516
STREET ESPANOLA WAY STREET ESPANOLA WAY
TABLES 31 TABLES l1
SEATS 94 SEATS 25
SQFT 1064 SQFT 159
'-
LUB~85
Attachment 2
BUSINESS PIZZERIZ D'ANGOLO BUSINESS BOTBCOCOPACABANA
ADDRESS 1446 ADDRESS 437
STREET WASHINGTON AVE STREET Espanola Way
TABLES 20 TABLES 8
SEATS 50 SEATS 20
SQFT 436 SQFT 120
BUSINESS SEGAFREDO ZANETTI BUSINESS KONE EXPRESS
ADDRESS 1436 ADDRESS 445
STREET DREXEL AVE STREET Espanola Way
TABLES 20 TABLES 4
SEATS 64 SEATS s
SQFT 628 SQFT 37
ORDINANCE No.-------
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CODE OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH BY AMENDING CHAPTER 82, "PUBLIC
PROPERTY," AMENDING SECTION 82-384, "PERMITTED SIDEWALK
CAFE FRONTAGE; REQUESTS FOR EXPANSION," TO PERMIT
SIDEWALK CAFES TO EXTEND INTO A LOADING ZONE FRONTING
A RESTAURANT; PROVIDING FOR REPEALER, CODIFICATION,
SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, on September 15, 2010, the Mayor and Commission referred the
issue of permanent parking space removals from City inventory to the Land Use and
Development Committee (LUDC); and
WHEREAS, on September 27, 2010, the LUDC held a discussion regarding
strengthening the process by which permanent parking spaces may be removed from
City inventory, for instance by limiting the purpose and/or requiring Commission
approval; and
WHEREAS, at the May 18, 2011 meeting the LUDC discussed the temporary
removal of parking spaces for additional sidewalk cafe seating and recommended to
send it to the full City Commission; and
WHEREAS, on June 1, 2011 the full City Commission ratified this directive from
the LUDC through approval of the LUDC Committee report on the Consent Agenda; and
WHEREAS, the amendments set forth below are necessary to
accomplish all of the above objectives.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA.
SECTION 1. That Chapter 82, "Public Property," Section 82-384, "Permitted Sidewalk
Cafe Frontage; Requests for Expansions," as follows:
(a) Sidewalk cafes are restricted to the sidewalk frontage of the restaurant to which
the permit is issued or, if the restaurant is an ancillary and/or secondary use to
another type of business establishment, the sidewalk cafe shall be restricted to
the sidewalk frontage of the building (or portion thereof) of the "primary" business
establishment (within which the restaurant is located). Only a restaurant whose
premises are on a ground floor adjacent to and fronting the sidewalk may be
issued a sidewalk cafe permit. Sidewalk cafes may be extended into a loading
zone fronting a restaurant as provided in subsection (d) below.
@ Loading zones in front of a ground floor restaurant use with sidewalk frontage
and a sidewalk cafe permit may be used as part of an expanded sidewalk cafe
permit area when the street on which the loading zone is located is closed to
traffic. provided that the loading zone is within a street area that is regularly
closed to traffic during certain days or hours. a minimum of five days each week.
1 of2
309
All platforms. tables and chairs in the loading zone shall be removed at the close
of business each night. A permit modification will be required before use of a
loading zone may commence. subject to suspension or revocation at the
discretion of the Public Works Director. The fee for the temporary expanded
sidewalk cafe permit area shall be as provided in Section 82-383. City Code.
SECTION 2. CODIFICATION.
It is the intention of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach,
and it is hereby ordained that the provisions of this ordinance shall become and be made
part of the Code of the City of Miami Beach, Florida. The sections of this ordinance may
be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such intention, and the word "ordinance" may
be changed to "section", "article", or other appropriate word.
SECTION 3. REPEALER.
All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be and the same are hereby
repealed
SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY.
If any section, subsection, clause or provision of this Ordinance is held invalid, the
remainder shall not be affected by such invalidity.
SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Ordinance shall take effect ten days following adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this __ day of, _______ , 2012.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
MAYOR
APPROVED AS
TO FORM & LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
City Attorney Date
T:\AGENDA\2012\1-11-12\temporary removal of parking spaces-ord.doc
2 of2
310
R7
RESOLUTIONS
311
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution Granting and Authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk To Execute An After-The-Fact Revocable
Permit To ASR Berwick Family Ltd. Partners, As Owner Of The Commercial Property Located At 335 W.
4ih Street, To Retain NC .Units, A Utility Room, And A Trash Enclosure, Currently Placed Within The
Public City Right-Of-Way On West 47 1h Court.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Maintain Miami Beach public areas and Rights-of-Way Citywide
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): N/A
Issue:
I Shall the City Commission grant the revocable permit?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
The Berwick Building, which is located at 335 W. 47m Street, abuts W. 47m Court on the north and west
sides of the property. This two-story commercial building was constructed in 1930 with zero lot lines on the
north, west, and south sides.
On the north side of the property, there are currently ten (1 0) air conditioning units mounted on concrete
pads that approximately five (5) feet into the right-of-way. Further, there is a one-story utility room and
wooden trash enclosure that extend nine (9) feet into the right-of-way. The area of all the encroachments
totals 878 square feet.
The criteria for a revocable permit are satisfied, per Miami Beach City Code Section 82-94, to allow an
encroachment over the City's right-of-way. The request is in harmony with the intent and purpose of the
City Code, and will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. The
permit will provide the applicant with a reasonable use of the property.
THE ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDS ADOPTING THE RESOLUTION.
Advisory Board Recommendation:
I N/A
Financial Information:
Source of Amount Account
Funds: 1
I I 2
OBPI Total N/A N/A
Financial Impact Summary: N/A
Si n-Offs:
Assistant City Manager
DRS
MIAMI BEACH 313
AGENDA ITEM _R_7_A __
DATE 1-JI-12..
~ MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager (\ ~
DATE:
SUBJECT:
January 11, 2012 O
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, GRANTING AND AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AFTER-THE-FACT
REVOCABLE PERMIT TO ASR BERWICK FAMILY LTD. PARTNERS, AS
OWNER OF THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 335 W. 47TH
STREET, TO RETAIN A/C UNITS, A UTILITY ROOM, AND A TRASH
ENCLOSURE, CURRENTLY PLACED WITHIN THE PUBLIC CITY RIGHT-
OF-WAY ON WEST 47th COURT.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
The Administration recommends adopting the resolution.
BACKGROUND
The Berwick Building, which is located at 335 W. 471h Street, abuts W. 4ih Court on the north
and west sides of the property. This two-story commercial building was constructed in 1930 with
zero lot lines on the north, west, and south sides.
On the north side of the property, there are approximately ten air conditioning units mounted on
concrete pads that extend not more than five feet into the right-of-way. Further, there is a one-
story utility room and wooden trash enclosure that extend several feet into the right of way. The
area of all the encroachments totals 878 square feet (Attachment A).
ANALYSIS
Pursuant to the criteria established under Section 82-94 of the City of Miami Beach Code of
Ordinances for the granting/denying of revocable permits, the City has analyzed the criteria and
issues the following conclusions:
1) That the applicant's need is substantial.
Satisfied. The applicant's need for the permit is substantial. The existing building was
constructed at the property line over 80 years ago. Accordingly, minimal encroachment onto
the abutting right of way is necessary to locate the required utilities. The applicant has also
provided an opinion from a registered architect stating that the existing roof is not capable of
sustaining the loading from this equipment (Attachment B).
314
City Commission Memorandum-335 W. 4Th Street
January 11,2012
Page2of3
2) That the applicant holds the title to an abutting property.
Satisfied. The applicant is the fee simple owner of the property located at 335 W. 47th Street.
3) That the proposed improvements comply with applicable codes, ordinances, regulations, and
neighborhoods plans and laws.
Satisfied. The applicant will obtain any required building permits for these encroachments.
4) That the grant for such application will have no adverse effect on government/utility
easements and uses on the property.
Satisfied. The encroachments have been in place for a number of years without impact on
government use of W. 4ih Court. Further, the area is built out. Therefore, there is no need at
this time for additional utilities.
5) Alternatively:
a. That an unnecessary hardship exists that deprives the applicant of a reasonable use
of the land, structure or building for which the Revocable Permit is sought arising out
of special circumstances and conditions that exist and were not self-created and are
peculiar to the land, structures or buildings in the same zoning district and the grant
of the application is the minimum that will allow reasonable use of the land,
structures or building.
b. That the grant of the revocable permit will enhance the neighborhood and/or
community by such amenities as, for example, enhanced landscaping, improved
drainage, improved lighting and improved security.
Subsection a. Satisfied. The construction of the building in 1930 with zero lot lines on
three sides creates a special hardship requiring the mechanical equipment and
portions of the utility room and dumpster enclosure to encroach into the right of way.
6) That the granting the revocable permit requested will not confer on the applicant any special
privilege that is denied to other owner of land, structures, or building subject to similar
conditions.
Satisfied. Any property owner, especially those with a small lot, with an existing or proposed
building placed at or near streets may request a revocable permit. Therefore, granting the
permit will not confer any special privilege on the applicant that would otherwise be denied to
others similarly situated.
7) That granting the revocable permit will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of
Article Ill of the City Code, and that such revocable permit will not be injurious to surrounding
properties, the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.
Satisfied. The applicant is seeking to preserve the existing encroachments that do not
impede use of W. 47'h Court, have not been injurious to surrounding properties, and have not
been detrimental to the public welfare.
The analysis above shows that the criteria for a revocable permit are satisfied, per Miami Beach
315
City Commission Memorandum-335 W. 4Th Street
January 11,2012
Page 3 of3
City Code Section 82-94, to allow existing encroachments into the City's right-of-way to remain.
The request is in harmony with the intent and purpose of the City Code, and will not be injurious
to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. The permit will provide the
applicant with a reasonable use of the property.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission grant and authorize the Mayor and
City Clerk to execute an after-the-fact revocable permit to ASR Berwick Family Ltd. Partners, as
owner of the commercial property located at 335 W. 4th Street, to retain A/C units, a utility
room, and trash enclosure, currently placed within the public right-of-way on west 4th Court.
Attachments:
A -Sketch and Legal description of the encroachments
B -Architect's professional opinion on roof capacity
DRB/FHB/RWS
T:\AGENDA\2012\1-11-12\Revocable Permit 335 47th St Memo.docx
316
.. '
z ::::
t.:l
-' ~
0
::E .... .... g
<:;!
P.o.c./
NE CORNER OF THE S~ OF
THESE~ OFTHENE)I OF
FRACTIONAL SEC. 22·53-42
...... -··-··· .
LOT 11 LOT10 LOT9 LOTS
N8 '20'00'E 219.80'
··-··········-~···----·······--·· ... ·--·-··---·····-----
"--NORTH LINE OF WEST 47TH STREET
LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR EASEMENT
A PORTION OF W 47th COURT AND TRACT B, OF 'AMENDED PLAT OF LOT 13, BLOCK 32, LAKEVIEW SUBDIVISION",
ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 47 AT PAGE 105 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA. ALL LYING AND B'liiNG IN THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, MIAMI·DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA,
AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY.DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
N88'20'00"E
4.50'
COMMENCE AT THe.Ne CORNER OF THE S ~OF THESE~ OF THE NE ~OF FRACTIONAL SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 53
SOUTH, RANGE 42 EAST, AS SHOWN ON 'PLAT OF LOT 13, BLOCK 32, LAKEVIEW SUBDIVISION", RECORDED IN PLAT
BOOK27·AT PAGE 17 OF'THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI·DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE RUN NORTH 1'38'00'
WEST FOR 70.00 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF WEST-47th STREET: THENCE CONTINUE NORTH 88'20'00" EAST, ALONG
THE NORTH LINE OF WEST 47th STREET A DISTANCE OF 219.80 TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE INTERSECTION OF
THE LAST MENTIONED COURSE WITH THE EAST LINE OF LOT7 AS SHOWN ON "PLAT OF LOT 13, BLOCK 32, LAKEVIEW
SUBDIVISION', RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 27 AT PAGE 17 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA;
THENCE NORTH 88'20'00" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 4,50 FEET: THENCE NORTH 01'40'00' WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF ·
49.00 FEET TO THE POINT bF BEGINNING OF THE EASEMENT HeREIN DESCRIBED: THENCE CONTINUE SOUTH 88'20'00'
EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 1.60 FEET: THENCE NORTH 01'40'00" WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 28.61 FEET: THENCE NORTH
88'20'00" WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 18.65 FEET TO A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY AND HAVING A
RADIUS OF 21.48 FEET,'TO WHICH BEGINNING OF CURVE A RADIAL BEARS SOUTH 68'17'49' EAST: THENCE
SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 60'00'00", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 22.49 FEET:
THENCE CONTINUE SOUTH 88'20'00" WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 112.12 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 01'40'00 EAST FOR A
DISTANCE OF 5.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 11 AS SHOWN ON 'PLAT OF LOT 13, BLOCK 32,
LAKEVIEW SUBDIVISION", RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 27 AT PAGE 17 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI·DADE
COUNTY, FLORIDA:'THENCE CONTINUE NORTH 88'20'00" EAST FOR A DISTANCe OF 112.12 FEET TO A TANGENT CURVE
CONCAVE NORTHERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 30,00 FEET: THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE
THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 43'41'41', AN ARC DISTANCE OF 22.88 FEET: THENCE CONTINUE NORTH 88'20'00"
EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 11.66 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 01'40'00" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 19.31 FEET TO THE POINT
OF BEGINNING, OF THE EASEMENT HEREIN DESCRIBED CONTAINING 878 SQ. FT. OR 0.02 ACRES MORE OR LESS.
SURVEYOR'S NOTES:
Bearings hereon are referred to an assumed value ofN88°20'00" East for the North
Right-of-Way line ofWest47t11 Street.
This is not a "Boundary Survey" but only a graphic depiction of the easement shown
hereon.
= ;;
i EXHIBIT
.,,
~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ r:3
l HEREBY.CERTIFYl-hat the survey represented BLAN.CO SSIUNCRE,
1
;:
0
R
5
· INC. f ---· ----
thereon·meets the minimum technical re(ij,_uirements . v .~::. x •
adopted.by.the.STAT.E.OF.F.LORIDA Board of.Land ..
Surveyors pursuant to Section 472.027 Florida
Statutes.
There are no encroachments, overlaps, easements
appearing on the plat or visible easements other than
Englnee~s • Land Surveyors • Planners • LB # 0007059
555 NORTH SHORE DRIVE
MIAMI BEACH, FL 33141
·'"''""'"'rem A.cl ~ SUFAX' L DATE' 9/11/09 ' 7' ~ .
l..-iht:mmll!ll!f!!ll!!l!!!maaADaijki;iS ;.&N.emNmUNiiziEZmmmlillll!llli-~~~~~~-!!i:illl5Mi:iialmois-~12i!ill0~.6~5'::1::=~::::=~~~~~........!·.-.li REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR SC1>ii::E .
(305) 865-1200 Emoll: bloncosurveyorslnc@yahoo.c~m Fax: (305) 865-7810
. STATE.OFFWRIDA#5924 1"= · F.l31aiu,0 11-773
.. ~---· .....
317
LOT LOT LOT LOCATiON SKETCH SCALE:NTS EXHIBIT A 11 9 I I I I I I I I I I tor 8 tor I I I I I I I ~~r:;ae:u~r.~~OIICRmlii.O<KSTRUcruR&.CLF•CHAIIII.INKFEIICI!.PI.""""""'TYLII&.DUI!"""''HAGEUT;.,.WEM<ffl;jp•IRO"lU'E. f•FOUHD. A1C=A1R CONDnlOHER PAD. PIC>PROPERTY CORN!R. DIIPDNI..UO HOlE. Wfqo.()QQEH FEI.JCE. Ms-RESIDEtiCE. ct.-ClEAR, RB•REBAR, \le•UlfUTY EASEMI!ttT. COHC>CONCRETE SLAB. RIW"RIGHT Of W«. DE=DRAII;fAGE EASEfAEHT. Cll.11CEIUER LINE. O:sDWATER. lYP,.T'I'PF"..Al, ~;§i!SiiliB:!l!l!li!lil!!il!li3!i!!ili!i!!•!5~$!!i!i!J M-IA&ASURiiiD. A•RECORDED. ENCRaii'ICROACHroiEHT, COMP=COMPUT£R, ASH-ASPHALT, HID-tii\IL & DISC. S•$El; FEEaFH$1-1 Ft.OOR EI.EVAl'Oil. ~ HOT VAUD UNLESS EMBOSSED WITH OISaOPFSET.PW•POY.ERPOlE.oti"~POw;RLJHe.w.I-W\ TERUETER . SU[Iil]RVEYOR'SSEAL 5:.';,'?;,:\>,!.,;§L.I.,;t .. ,\s.!,;;! .•.• <.l ~~~A~c:~4BA~EE~,~~4L~C9-,# 3223 E IMttllEIIANCE&DRAIHAGEEASa.liHT•M&O.E. L v. .. lYPE OF SURVEY: I!OUNOA:rf SURVEY S\JRI/EYOR'S NOIES· 1) OWNERSHIP SUBJECT TO OPlNION OF mLE. 2) I~OTVAUD \MTHOUT THE SIGNATURE AND RAISED SEAL OF A FLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER. 3) THE SURVEY DEPICTED HERE IS N:rT COVERED BY PROFESSIONAL LIABIUTY INSURANCE. 4) LEGAL DESCRIPTION PRC11111lED BY CLIENT. 5) UNDERGROUHO ENCROACHMENTS NOT LOCATED. 6) ELEVATIONS ARE eASED ON NATIONAL GEODF.lC 1§}----------i!lVERTICAL DATUM OF 1929. 7) OWNERSHIP OF FENCES ARE UNKNOWN. 8) THERE MAY BE ADDITION'II. . REVISED: ~~1~~-l~~~~~=~T_!.l~~g~~~~MA~~~y~~~~E~~~~o;81~~~~~~~iri! INFORMATION. 10) EXAMINATION OFTHEABSTRACTOFTITLEVolll HAVE TO BE MADE TO DETERMINE RECORDED INSTRUMENTS, IF ANY,AFFECnNG THIS PROPERTY. . BEARING~ WHEN SHOWN ARE REFERRED TO AN ASSUMED VALUE OF SAID PB.lL.._PAGE .11_ 7 10RTJONOF I.DT 6 :Sj: .,c. a:~ :-~ ..... !'J~ (D WEST 47th STREET Propcfly Address: 335 W. 47111 Sl. Miami Beach, FL. 33140. ~ • Legal Description: Lols 7, 8, 9, 10, and II, as s!IO\m oo a Pial entiUed "Plat of Lot 13 in Bloc!: 32 of lake View Subdivisloo" as recorded in Plat Book27 at 17, of the Public R.tcords of Miami-Dade County. florida. Also A porlioo of Lot 6, os said Lol6 is showa recorded in Pt.! Book 27 at Pnge 17 of tile Public Records of Miami-Dade County, Floriila; boi1lf! described in Deed Book 1706, at Pnge342, aad Deed Book 1367, at Page 18, oflbcl'ld>lic Records ofMimni·Dade County, I Florida os follows: From an lroa pipe atlbc N.E. comcrofd10 S 1/2 oflbc S£ I' oflbc NE I' ofFradioaal Scdlotl22, To•mllip 53 South, Ran;c42Eost, run North along the East line ofS«<ion 22, boarlng of said scclion line boi1lf! North 1"38' West,"' sl101m] mop Clllitlcd "Mop ofdmtporlioo ofTownsldp 53 Sooth, Rllngc 42 East ,lying-BisenyneBay aad lbc AllanticOCCIIR in Mimn;.[)adc County, Florida, Bliss aod Watson, Eosiaem', dated Febnlmy 1918, ~in Plat Book 5, at Pnge40, Public R ..... ds ofMimni·Dadc Cout~ Florida, a clistlR<c of70 f<et talbc North Haa ofWcst47" St""~ thence rna North 88'20' East, along lbc North line ofWc.si 47' Sheet a-of219.8 feet to a point, said point bcinalbc intcncctlon ofd~elasl BICOiloaad "'""'"with diC East llac of Lot 7 os siiCwn m plat oaddcd "Plat of Lot 13, Block 32, LAKEVIEW SUBDIVISION, ....aded hi PI t book 27ot Page 17 of the Public Reccrds of Miami-Dade County, Florida, soid point boi1lf! lbc·point ofbaglnning ofd!C Uac< oflll)d herein dcsal'bcd; lbence continue North 8rl0' East, • dislan~ or 4.5 feet lo I point; tbcnco ruD North J 11140' West a distDnce or 61)31 feet to apoinl.i lbcncc run South 881120' West a c&slance of J I.GS feet to a point; thence run South 7DJ8'38"' Ensl a distance of68.68 feet to the: point of beginning. • I ERTIFY Thai lhe survey represented lhareon meets the minimum lechnical requirements adopted by lhe STATE OF FLORIDA Board of Land Surveyors pu!$uant to Section 472.02.7 Florida Sletules. BLANCO SURVEYORS lNG. Engineers • Land Surveyors • Planners • LB # tJ007059 565 NORTH SHORE DRIVE There are no encroachments. overlaps. easements appealing on the ptatorvislbJe easements other than asshownhemo~ lt.J~-. ADIS H. NUNEZ REGISTERED LAI~D SURVEYOR STATE OF FLORIDA 115924 (305] 865·1200 ----··-·-.. -·~-·--~-~·" '"'" \"W/vvw-•••, "'::;:" JsUFFIX:*i."¥>ii+JM§=n1}TI'7og BAS~~ -, co "C""" M
ATI'ACHMENT B
JSK ARCUI1'ECTURAL GROUP
mx:hltect.~ -co~str\!.cd~;n ~rmnf;tgrn:"' interior dcsigttm
AA00Jl1!1 Aft (H6351 {X}Ol27671
November 25, 2011
Mr. Fred Beckmann
Public Works Director
City <lf Mrami Beach -Public Works Depattrnen!
1700 Convention center Drive
Miami Beach, FL 33139
Re.: Ber'fA<ick Bui!djng·335 West 47 Street
ASR Berwick Famlly Limited Partnernhip
Dear Mr. Beckmann
We ha;•:e been retained to perfoml an inspection of the property IOceated at the above
referenced address to make an initial as;sessment of opportunftles to relocate alf of the
mechanical equipment currently focated on the first floor, along the north end of the
property.
On November 23, 2011 W'e conducted such vislllll insplilctlon and came vp with the
following fnftial conclusions:
The building was built in 1930, and it consist of a first floor with commercial occupancies
and apartment units on the second floor, the v.<l'lole building Is about 35'·0" high !o the
roof parapet, the roof structure com;ist of wooo Joisls and Florida pine lilheeling and it
stands at about 32' above street level.
The llital number of rnechanical units, as referenced <Jhove and currently located on the
first floor is nine, (G) with the followi/19 break down: tlve, {5) large condensing units part
of air condttioning split systems feeding the commercial units on the first lfoor, three, (3)
large compressor units reeding rofrigeratlon equipment for the oonsetlratlon of food, also
for the commercla! units on the firs! floor and one, (1) tan coil terminal unit !hat appearll
to be part of a aeparale spfi! air conditioning Sy-~!lem in the building.
To the best of our knowledge and profe&.sional abilities: an initial conclusion is that, as
per current Florida Building Code requirements for wind solicitations, tile present age,
137 Oinllda Avenue, CurnJ Gables. Fl.. 33 L\4 Ph.: 305·448·1986 Fax: 775,1:06-:lml
iDf.9Jllilt1ioot\l)j1Km:f.lJJNqw_l\!SiJlll • ~lUP1ilitSLW:illl\t<:!\JP£!llil
319
condition and structural systems of !he bui!t:lfng; it w>:~utd not be capabfa of absorbing the
reactions of up rift forces int;ooucad as a result or relocation all of the des<:ribed ·
equlpmon! to the rool deck.
Should you have any question please do not ht:~sitate to contact us.
U7 G!r~ldll.Avenue, Com! Oahlll1>,l'L .. :Ul34 Ph.: >05-443·1986 Fa.\: 77S·201i-2139
JJ!J\tU:llilti!l:l\lij'd;iau!'hii«-tura!.tQl.IJ -llY1f.i~k..'IIc1Jili\!l[~
320
RESOLUTION NO. ___ _
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, GRANTING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR
AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AFTER-THE-FACT REVOCABLE PERMIT
TO ASR BERWICK FAMILY L TO. PARTNERS, AS OWNER OF THE
COMMERCIAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 335 WEST 47TH STREET, TO
RETAIN A/C UNITS, A UTILITY ROOM, AND A TRASH ENCLOSURE,
CURRENTLY PLACED WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT -OF-WAYS ON WEST 47th
COURT.
WHEREAS, ASR Berwick Family Ltd. Partners (Applicant) is the owner of a commercial
property located at 335 West 4th Street (Property); and
WHEREAS, the two-story commercial building was constructed in 1930 with zero lot
lines on the north, west, and south sides; and
WHEREAS, there are currently ten (10) air conditioning units mounted on concrete pads
that extend approximately five (5) feet into the adjacent City right-of-way on West 4th Court, as
well as a one-story utility room and wooden trash enclosure that extend nine (9) feet into the
City's right-of-way on the north side of the Property; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has made application to the City for an after-the-fact
revocable permit to be allowed to maintain the aforestated encroachments upon the right-of-
ways; and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Department is in receipt of Applicant's completed
application; and
WHEREAS, at its December 14, 2011 meeting, the City Commission set a public
hearing for its January 11, 2012 meeting to consider Applicant's request; and
WHEREAS, following such duly notified public hearing, the City Commission hereby
finds that Applicant has satisfied the City's criteria for granting revocable permits, as set forth
in Section 82-94 of the City Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City Commission hereby grant
and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an after-the-fact revocable permit to ASR
Berwick Family Ltd. Partners, as owner of the commercial property located at 335 West 47th
Street, to retain A/C units, a utility room, and a trash enclosure, currently placed within the
public right-of-ways on West 4th Court.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of January, 2012.
ATIEST:
Robert H. Parcher, City Clerk
v· 3-tv
Date
T:\AGENDA\2012\1-11-12\Revocable Permit 335 47th St Reso.~2 1
Matti Herrera Bower, Mayor
MJAMIBEACH
NOTICE IS HEREBY given that a public hearing will be held by the City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, in the Commission
ChamberS, 3rd floor, City Hall, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida, on .Wednesday, January 11,2012 at 10:30 A.M.,
To Cdrfsider An After-The-Fact Revocable Permit To ASR Berwick Family LTD. Partners, Owner Of The Commercial Property Located
At 335 W. 47th Street~ To Retain AIC Units, Utility Room, And Trash Enclosure, Currently Placed Within The Public City Right Of Way
On West 47'" Court. ·
Inquiries may be directed to the Public Works Department at (305) 673-7080.
INTERESTED PARTIES are invited to appear at this meeting, or be represented by an agent; or to express their views in writing
addressed to the City Commission, c/o the City Clerk, 1700 Convention Center Drive, 1st Floor, City Hall, Miami Beach, Florida
33139. Copies of these ordinances are available for public inspection during normal business hours in the City Clerk's Office, 1700
Convention Center Drive, 1st Floor, City Hall, and Miami Beach, Florida 33139. This meeting may be continued and t,mder such
circumstances additional legal nofice would not be provided.
Robert E. Parcher, City Clerk_
City of Miami Beach
Pursuant to Section 286.0105, Fla. Stat., the City hereby advises the public that: if a person decides to appeal any decision made by
the City Commission with respect to any matter considered at its meeting or its hearing, such person must ensure that a verbatim
record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. This
notice t;loes not constitute corisentby the City for the introduction or admission of otherwise inadmissible-or irrelevant evidence, nor ~
does it authorize challenges or appeals not otherwise allowed by law.
To request this material in accessible format, sign language interpreters, information on access for persons with disabilities, and/or
an}l·o~modation ~o7revi,ew_any ?ocumet'lbo~ partic_ip_ate !n any ciiy-spof!S?J'~dtproseemirngi pJ,ea~e comtact (~0~) 6,04;24~9, (wo~ce),
(305)673-7118(TTY) ftve days 1n advance to 1n1t1ate your request TTY users ma.v al~~l\\ 7o1'~ (Fionda Relay Service).
,_ • · -~~ O'l.~,'!j•\ }'~•--1,"'\,1 ~c:·1f-~rJ• ~~~ ,~ .... -.~~.'h,~ 1 , . J;,_'!.>.,..:~.':f''
NE
------------~------------------.. ------------------
322
R7 -Resolutions
R7B Amendments To FY 2010/11 And 2011/12 Budgets
1. A Resolution Adopting The Second Amendment To The FY 2010/11
General Fund Budget And The First Amendment To The Enterprise,
Internal Service And Resort Tax Funds Budgets For Fiscal Year (FY)
2010/11.
2. A Resolution Adopting The First Amendment To The General Fund,
Enterprise, Internal Service And Special Revenue Funds Budgets For
Fiscal Year (FY) 2011/12 To Appropriate Encumbrances And Prior
Appropriations Carried Forward From FY 2010/11 And To Appropriate
Funds Carried Forward For Special Revenue Budgets
(Budget & Performance Improvement)
(Memorandum & Resolutions to be Submitted in Supplemental)
· Agenda Item R 7 B
Date 1-ll-12..
323
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
324
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution accepting the recommendation of the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee at their October 27,
2011 meeting to extend the current management agreement with Greensquare on a month-to-month basis until the
new Flamingo Tennis Center is nearing completion and issue a new Tennis Centers Operations and Management
Request For Proposals (RFP) in time to have the selected operator in place to coincide with the grand opening of the
new Flamingo Park Tennis Center Facility and authorizing the issuance of the above referenced request for proposals
as described.
Ke_y Intended Outcome Supported:
Increase satisfaction with family recreational activities
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): Miami Beach Customer Survey indicates 84.9% of
residents rated the City's Recreation programs as either excellent or good.
Issue:
Should the City Commission accept the recommendation of the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee to extend
the current management agreement with Greensquare until the new Flamingo Tennis Center is nearing completion
and issue a new Request For Proposals (RFP) to have the selected operator in place for the grand opening of the
new Flamingo Park Tennis Center Facility?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
This matter was referred by the City Commission to the F&CWPC on July 13, 2011. The current agreement with
Greensquare Inc., expires in April, 2012. It has been the Administration's intention to issue an (RFP) in a manner to
avoid any break in quality management operations or services at the tennis centers.
On October 27, 2011, the Committee discussed the matter. The discussion focused on the timing of the issuance
of this RFP, and the anticipated tennis center reconstruction in the near future. The Committee was advised that the
construction plan anticipates phasing the work to ensure there are banks of courts available for play to the patrons.
However, this goal presents some potentially challenging issues that may benefit from having a management team
familiar with the tennis center's patrons and the conditions of the current tennis center and programs. Additionally,
because of fewer available tennis courts there is an expected reduction of tennis revenue during the construction
period that will impact the tennis centers' management. It is unclear how this may impact the responses to the RFP,
including the subsequent negotiations with the selected operator. Following a discussion that included the Committee
members, resident tennis players and the Administration, the Committee members recommended that the RFP for
the selection of the operator of the City's tennis facilities not be issued at this time, but that the RFP be issued with
sufficient time for the selected operator to be able to assume operations of the tennis facilities concurrent with the
opening of the renovated Flamingo Park Tennis Center. As such, they recommended the extension of the current
Agreement with Greensquare, Inc. on a month-to-month basis until such time as that competitive process is
complete.
Financial Information:
Source of · .. ··•·. '> .... AmQ~'t ...
Funds: · )l
~~~--------------4-------------------------------------------------~ OBPI "'~-Utl.
Financial Impact Summary: N/A
Ci Clerk's Office Le islative Trackin
Kevin Smith, Director of Parks and Recreation
Si n-Offs:
KS
F:\RCPA\$ALL\Previous\KEVIN\Commission 2
MIAMJBEACH AGENDA ITEM Rrz c..
DATE (-tf-12-
325
MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manage~
January 11,2012 Q U
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, ACCEPTING THE
RECOMMENDATION OF THE FINANCE AND CITYWIDE PROJECTS
COMMITTEE AT THEIR OCTOBER 27, 2011 MEETING TO EXTEND
THE CURRENT MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT WITH GREENSQUARE
ON A MONTH-TO-MONTH BASIS UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE NEW
FLAMINGO TENNIS CENTER IS NEARING COMPLETION AND
COORDINATE THE ISSUANCE OF A NEW TENNIS CENTERS
OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
(RFP) IN A MANNER TO HAVE THE SELECTED OPERA TOR IN
PLACE TO COINCIDE WITH THE GRAND OPENING OF THE NEW
FLAMINGO PARK TENNIS CENTER FACILITY AND AUTHORIZING
THE ISSUANCE OF THE ABOVE REFERENCED REQUEST FOR
PROPOSALS AS DESCRIBED.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
KEY INTENDED OUTCOME SUPPORTED
Increase satisfaction with recreational programs
BACKGROUND
This matter was referred by the Mayor and Members of the City Commission to the Finance and
Citywide Projects Committee at the July 13, 2011 Commission meeting.
The current agreement with Greensquare Inc., for the management and operations of the City's
tennis centers is due to expire in April, 2012. It has been the Administration's intention to issue a
Request For Proposals (RFP) in a timely manner to avoid any break in quality operations or
services to the City's tennis-playing residents and guests.
The RFP is intended to secure a qualified professional management company for the operation of
the City's two public tennis facilities, to include the operation at each facility of the tennis courts;
pro shop; a food and beverage concession; and other tennis-related operations as approved by
the City. Services also include those customarily associated with the operation of a public tennis
center, including permitted special events related to the tennis center activities.
326
January 11, 2012
Resolution Extending the Current Tennis Centers Management Agreement
Page 2 of 3
The final price and terms for the contracts would be negotiated after the City Commission approves
authorization to negotiate with the selected entity. The new management agreement is expected to
be for a three (3) year term, with two (2) one-year renewal options at the City's option. Attached,
please find a draft of the proposed Scope of Services and Evaluation Criteria for the RFP.
ANALYSIS
On October 27, 2011, the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee held a discussion pertaining
to the "Issuance of the Request For Proposals (RFP) for the Comprehensive Professional Tennis
Management and Operations Services at the City's Flamingo Park and North Shore Park Tennis
Centers".
The discussion focused on the issues related to the timing of the issuance of this RFP, taking into
consideration that the Flamingo Park Tennis Center was anticipated to be under complete
reconstruction in the near future. At the time, the Commission had taken the actions necessary to
secure the construction company to provide the GMP pre-construction and construction services
for the Flamingo Park Tennis Center project. It was also reported at that time it was anticipated
that the demolition and construction of the Flamingo Park Tennis Center would begin in January,
2012. It was further reported that the construction would take approximately one year, with an
expected completion date of January, 2013. Since that meeting, this schedule has now been
modified with the commission action to award the GMP (Guaranteed Maximum Price) anticipated
to be no later than March, 2012 and construction beginning in April, 2012.
The Finance and Citywide Projects Committee was also informed that the Flamingo Park Tennis
Center construction plan anticipates phasing the work to ensure there are always banks of courts
available for play to the patrons. However, the goal of keeping the tennis center open while under
construction and continuing to provide quality customer service for our residents and guests
presents some potentially challenging issues that may benefit from having a management team
familiar with the tennis patrons and the conditions of the current tennis center and programs.
Some of these challenges include, but are not limited to:
• Anticipated complaints from current tennis center members and guests trying to obtain a court
reservation with approximately 50% fewer courts available for play
• Assuring a delicate balance of member play, non-member play, private lesson and clinics,
given the reduction of available courts between the Flamingo and North Shore Tennis Centers.
• Continue the existing and expand the successful youth programs currently underway.
Additionally, as a result of fewer available tennis courts there is an expected negative financial
impact to the tennis center and a reduction of tennis revenue during the construction period that
will impact the tennis centers' management. It is unclear how this may impact the responses to the
RFP, including the subsequent negotiations with the firm awarded the agreement.
Following a discussion that included the Committee members, resident tennis players and the
Administration, the Committee members recommended extending the current agreement with
Greensquare on a month-to-month basis until such time as the new Flamingo Park Tennis Center
is nearing completion and at such time coordinate the issuance of the RFP in a manner to have the
selected operator in place to coincide with the grand opening of the new facility. The Committee
also recommended that an item regarding the creation of a Tennis Advisory Committee be added
to a Commission agenda.
The October 27, 2011, Finance and Citywide Projects Committee recommendations were included
in the December 14, 2011, City Commission agenda, item C6C -Report of The Finance And
Citywide Projects Committee On October 27, 2011, and approved by the full Commission.
327
January 11, 2012
Resolution Extending the Current Tennis Centers Management Agreement
Page 3 of 3
CONCLUSION
Following discussion of the issue at their October 27, 2011 meeting, the Finance and Citywide
Projects Committee recommended that the RFP for the selection of the operator of the City's tennis
facilities not be issued at this time but, rather, that the RFP be issued with sufficient time for the
selected operator to be able to assume operations of the tennis facilities concurrent with the
opening of the renovated Flamingo Park Tennis Center. As such, they recommended the extension
of the current Agreement with Greensquare, Inc. on a month-to-month basis until such time as that
competitive process is complete.
JMG/ HMF/KS
328
DRAFT
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH COMPREHENSIVE PROFESSIONAL TENNIS MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS
SERVICES AT THE CITY'S FLAMINGO AND NORTH SHORE PARK TENNIS CENTERS.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
A. Premises to be managed: The City-owned Flamingo Tennis Center located at 11th Street and Jefferson
Avenue, and the North Shore Tennis Center located at 501 72nd Street, together with all buildings,
improvements and fixtures located thereon.
B. Services to be provided: Services shall include those customarily associated with the operation of a public
tennis center, and permitted special events related to the tennis center activities. Services shall include but
not be limited to:
• Provide, promote and instruct lessons in the game of tennis by certified and licensed
tennis professionals to individuals, groups and clinics. Said services shall offer the
tennis patron a choice of instructor levels and hourly fee commensurate with the
instructor's level.
• Provide the City of Miami Beach Parks and Recreation Programs: two (2) courts at each
center twice per week for two (2) hours on a schedule to be determined by the City, to
provide free instructional lessons to after school participants, at no cost to the City.
• Coach tennis teams sanctioned and approved by the City's Parks and Recreation
Department, such services to be provided for a coaching fee or free, depending on
mutual advance agreement of the City.
• Offer demonstrations and instruction on all aspects of the game of tennis in promotion
of the Center. Such demonstrations may be either for a fee or free of charge,
depending on mutual advance agreement of the City.
• Operate a "pro shop" at each facility, to include providing adequate and appropriate
inventory, and commensurate with pro shops at other publicly-owned tennis facilities.
• Operate a food and beverage concession at each facility, commensurate with food and
beverage concessions at other publicly-owned tennis facilities.
• Pursue, Establish and/or manage tournaments, as requested by the City or facility
tennis patrons, including participation in establishing specific needs for individual
tournaments.
• Promote junior tennis by establishing a junior tennis team or league (s).
• Provide advice to the City of changes regarding the tennis industry in general, tennis
rules and regulations, equipment and promotional methods associated with the
operation of public tennis facilities.
• Provide Seasonal group clinics to the community.
• Provide overall Tennis Center Management in accordance with City directives and
policies, including but not limited to:
a. Manage and maintain a computerized Tennis Court reservation system to include
proper monitoring of court use and court time.
b. Daily and routine maintenance of the buildings, facilities/courts/ grounds as
determined by the City, and at a level commensurate with other publicly managed
tennis facilities. To include, but not limited to: complying with the City's facility and
courts' maintenance standards as established by the City and the tennis courts
manufacturer's standards and guidelines for hydro-courts or other tennis court
systems to be installed; quarterly maintenance inspection by City approved outside
independent certified tennis court builder/manufacturer to ensure courts are up to
industry standards, such inspections to be paid by the Management Company, for as
long as it is required by the City or as necessary to assure consistency by the
Management Company; implement any corrective actions when identified.
c. Develop and implement ongoing Marketing, promotion and advertising of the City's
Tennis Centers to residents, day guests and Miami Beach hotels.
d. Develop and Provide summer and specialty camps based on the established
Recreation Division format.
329
f. Adhere to all City of Miami Beach established tennis center fees, regulations and
rules.
g. Hire, train and supervise appropriate staff to support the Tennis Center operations,
including, but not limited to: 1) hiring Tennis instruction professionals that possess
appropriate licensing and credentials commensurate with tennis instruction
professionals employed at other public tennis facilities. ; 2) using certified
background investigations, in a format acceptable to the City), for all employee hires;
3) developing a drug screening process and protocol; 4) developing specific job
descriptions for the hiring of personnel; 5) ensuring appropriate levels of staffing at
all times at the facility; 6) Designated staff will be required to attend industry standard
training on court maintenance as mandated by the City and as required; and 7)
ensuring all staff is properly identified (uniforms, etc).
h. Develop, implement and maintain a revenue collection system and revenue and
expense reporting process, to include the provision of monthly and annual financial
reporting.
C. Fee Structure: The Proposer shall submit their proposed fee structure, including the proposed minimum
guarantee and percentage of gross revenues. This fee proposal shall include, as may be applicable, the
corresponding fees for the services to be provided (e.g. pro shop revenues, food and beverage revenues,
lesson/program revenues, court usage revenue, etc). Proposers are advised that an escalator on the
minimum guarantee (greater of CPI or 3%) will be required.
D. Term: Three (3) years, with two (2) one-year extensions on a year to year basis at the City manager's
option. Additionally, the City shall have the option to terminate this Agreement at its convenience and
without cause and/ or any time at the City's convenience and without cause with sixty (60) days written_
notice to the Management Company. It shall also be the City's option to suspend the terms and conditions
of this Agreement during the period the Flamingo Tennis Center is under construction and resume it when
the Center reopens, with no impact to the City or the Management Company.
E. Customer Service Standards: City employees have been trained and are expected to perform to the City
of Miami Beach's customer service standards. All vendors and contractors that are partnered with the City
are also expected to perform and comply with these customer service standards. The customer service
standards are provided below and are segmented based on different forms of customer interactions.
Information is also provided on how these customer standards are monitored.
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
In order to be deemed qualified for consideration, the proposing Management Company must:
1) Have a minimum of five (5) years of verifiable experience within the last ten (1 0) years in the following
tennis related fields:
a. Management and/or operation of a tennis center of similar quality, facilities and amenities of the
Flamingo or North Shore Tennis Centers.
b. A minimum of five (5) years of experience within the last ten (1 0) years in the provision of
professional tennis lessons (private, group, and clinic) for youth and adults. The City will require the
Head Teaching Professional to be certified Tennis Professional by USPTA and/or USPTR. All
assistants must demonstrate a knowledge and experience in tennis instruction and related activities.
The Head Tennis Professional and/or Center Manager(s) must demonstrate knowledge and
experience in tennis instruction and related activities, facility management, tennis court maintenance
and related activities, as well as, knowledge of the legal requirements that are involved in this type of
operation. All personnel must be hired according to specific qualification as stated in the Job
Descriptions. The Management Company shall provide full resumes of the key personnel assigned
to this project and must meet the qualifications stated in said job descriptions.
c. Pro shop operations, including scheduling or management of tennis lessons, equipment repairs,
food and beverage and merchandise sales.
d. Documented evidence of tennis (hard surface and clay) courts maintenance experience and
operations.
2) Possess and demonstrate a record of financial responsibility commensurate with the obligations
contemplated under this RFP.
3) Possess a competent record of employment or history of contract service in the operation of a similar tennis
facility business as verified and supported by references, letters, and other necessary evidence from all
employers and/or public agencies, including but not limited to disclosure of all non contract renewal for
330
management and/or operation of tennis facilities.
4) A Performance Bond or irrevocable Letter of Credit in the amount of $50,000 shall be required prior to
the final execution of the Agreement. The Performance Bond may be reduced later at City choice.
5) Operating Plan: The Management Company shall describe the operating policies and procedures to be
employed by the Management Company. Describe any proposed initiatives which would improve the
revenue to the City. The Operating Plan shall at a minimum include the staffing levels, maintenance
procedures, operating procedures, maintenance plan, and food and beverage operations.
EVALUATION PROCESS
The procedure for Proposal evaluation and selection is as follows:
1) Request for Proposals issued.
2) Receipt of proposals.
3) Opening of responses and determination if they meet the minimum standards of responsiveness.
4) An Evaluation Committee, appointed by the City Manager, shall meet to evaluate each proposal in
accordance with the requirements of this RFP. The Management Company may be requested to make
additional written submissions or oral presentations to the Evaluation Committee.
5) The Evaluation Committee shall recommend to the City Manager the proposal or proposals acceptance of
which the Evaluation Committee deems to be in the best interest of the City.
The Evaluation Committee shall base its recommendations on the following factors, for a total of 1 00 possible
points:
1) Fee proposal (35 points}
2) Qualifications of the Management Company and key personnel proposed as part of the Team (25 points).
3) Corporate Responsibility (Community Involvement/Clinics/Tournaments) (10 points}
4) Strengh and Sustainability of the Operating Plan (15 points}.
5) Interview of management company key personnel (5 points).
6) Past Performances based on number and quality of the Performance Evaluation Surveys (10 points).
After considering the recommendation(s) of the Evaluation Committee, the City Manager shall recommend to the
City Commission the response or responses, acceptance of which the City Manager deems to be in the best
interest of the City.
The City Commission shall consider the City Manager's recommendation(s) in light of the recommendation(s) and
evaluation of the Evaluation Committee and, if appropriate, approve the City Manager's recommendation(s). The
City Commission may reject the City Manager's recommendation(s) and select another response or responses. In
any case, City Commission shall select the response or responses, acceptance of which the City Commission
deems to be in the best interest of the City. The City Commission may also reject all proposals.
Negotiations between the selected respondent and the City take place to arrive at agreement terms. If the City
Commission has so directed, the City may proceed to negotiate an agreement with a respondent other than the top
ranked respondent if the negotiations with the top ranked respondent fail to produce a mutually acceptable
agreement within a reasonable period of time.
A proposed contract or contracts are presented to the City Commission for approval, modification and approval, or
rejection.
If and when a contract or contracts acceptable to the respective parties is approved by the City Commission, the
Mayor and City Clerk sign the contract(s) after the selected respondent(s) has (or have) done so.
331
RESOLUTION TO BE SUBMITTED
332
R9
NEW BUSINESS
AND
COMMISSION REQUESTS
333
:::0
<.0
!\!\ II-\ /\1\ I
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.mjamibeachfl gov
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK, Robert Parcher, City Clerk
Tel: (305) 673-7 411 , Fax: (305) 673-7254
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager ~
January 11, 2012 (\ vf" 0
BOARD AND COMMITTEES U
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
That appointments be made as indicated.
ANALYSIS:
Attached are the applicants that have filed with the City Clerk's Office for Board and
Committee appointments.
VACANCIES
BOARD OR COMMITTEE: TOTALMBRS. APPOINTED BY: TOTAL VAC PAGE
Affordable Housing Advisory
Committee
Art in Public Places
Capital Improvements Projects
Oversight Committee
Committee for Quality Education in
MB
Committee on the Homeless
11
7
9
16
9
City Commission 9 Page 1
City Commission 1 Page 3
City Commission 2 Page7
Commissioner Jorge Exposito 1 Page9
Commissioner Deede Weithorn 1 Page 11
Commissioner Michael G6ngora 1
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower 1
i
i
i Agenda ltem___.:..B...~-'Z.LL.A..L-_
We are committed to providing excellent public service and safety to all who live, work and play in oJ Date _ _,_/_-....,//._-..... /..;;..J_~-
335
BOARD OR COMMITTEE:
Community Development Advisory
Committee
Community Relations Board
Convention Center Advisory Board
Design Review Board
Disability Access Committee
Fine Arts Board
Golf Advisory Committee
Hispanic Affairs Committee
Historic Preservation Board
Housing Authority
Marine Authority
VACANCIES
TOTALMBRS.
14
17
7
7
7
14
12
7
7
5
7
APPOINTED BY: TOTALVAC PAGE
Commissioner Deede Weithorn
Commissioner Jonah M. Wolfson
Commissioner Michael G6ngora
Commissioner Jerry Libbin
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
Commissioner Ed Tobin
City Commission
Commissioner Jorge Exposito
Commissioner Deede Weithorn
Commissioner Jonah M. Wolfson
1 Page 12
1
1
1 Page 14
2
1 Page 16
3 Page 18
1 Page 20
1 Page 21
1
Commissioner Michael G6ngora 1
Commissioner Jonah M. Wolfson
Commissioner Deede Weithorn
Commissioner Ed Tobin
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower
City Commission
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower
336
1 Page 23
1 Page 26
1
1
1 Page 27
1 Page 28
1 Page 30
VACANCIES
BOARD OR COMMITTEE: TOTALMBRS.
Miami Beach Commission For
Women
Miami Beach Cultural Arts Council
Miami Beach Sister Cities Program
Personnel Board
Planning Board
Police Citizens Relations Committee
Production Industry Council
Single Family Residential Review
Panel
Visitor and Convention Authority
Waterfront Protection Committee
Youth Center Advisory Board
21
9
24
10
7
17
7
3
7
10
10
APPOINTED BY: TOTAL VAC PAGE
Commissioner Deede Weithorn
Commissioner Ed Tobin
Commissioner Jerry Libbin
City Commission
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower
City Commission
City Commission
Commissioner Deede Weithorn
Commissioner Michael G6ngora
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
City Commission
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower
Commissioner Jonah M. Wolfson
337
1 Page 31
1
1
3 Page 32
6 Page 34
1 Page 38
1 Page 39
1 Page 40
1
1 Page 42
3 Page44
1 Page 48
1 Page 49
1 Page 50
VACANCIES
BOARD OR COMMITTEE: TOTALMBRS. APPOINTED BY: TOTALVAC PAGE
Attach;fJf"eakdown by Commissioner or City Commission:
JMG:REP/Ig
338
City Commission Committaas
Committoa rwstNama
Finance & Citywide Projects Committee
Chairperson Commissioner Deede Weithorn
Vice-Chair Commissioner Jorge Exposito
Member Commissioner Jonah Wolfson
Alternate Commissioner Edward L. Tobin
Liaison Patricia Walker, Chief Financial Off.
Land Use & Development Committee
Chairperson
Vice-Chair
Member
Alternate
Liaison
Commissioner Jonah Wolfson
Commissioner Michael Gongora
Commissioner Jorge Exposito
Commissioner Jerry Libbin
Richard Lorber, Acting Planning Dir
Neighborhoods/Community Affairs Committee
Chairperson
Vice-Chair
Member
Alternate
Commissioner Edward L. Tobin
Commissioner Jerry Libbin
Commissioner Deede Weithorn
Commissioner Michael Gongora
Liaison Barbara Hawayek, Building Depart
Appointad by
Mayor Bower
Mayor Bower
Mayor Bower
Mayor Bower
Mayor Bower
Mayor Bower
Mayor Bower
Mayor Bower
Mayor Bower
Mayor Bower
Mayor Bower
Mayor Bower
Tuesday, January 03, 2012 Page 1 of 1
339
NON-CTIY COMMISSION COMMITIEES
Ricky Arriola Term ending May 2014
Mitchell Kaplan Term ending September 2012
Richard Milstein Term ending July 2014
The Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts Center Trust
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower
Citizens Oversight Committee
Greater Miami Convention and Visitors Bureau
Tourism Development Council
Hilda Fernandez, Assistant City Manager
Miami-Dade County Homeless Trust Board
Commissioner Edward L. Tobin
Metropolitan Planning Organization
Vacant
Dade Cultural Alliance
Commissioner Deede Weithorn
Miami Dade League of Cities
F:\CLER\$ALL\a City Commission\NON-CITY COMMISSION COMMITTEES.doc
340
MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM:
DATE:
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager <..... ['
January 11,2012 ~IY I)
SUBJECT: BOARD AND COMMITIEE APPOINTMENTS-CITY COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Make appointments as indicated.
BOARDS AND COMMITTEES
1. Affordable Housing Advisory Committee
2. Art in Public Places
3. Board of Adjustment
4. Capital Improvements Projects Oversight Committee
5. Design Review Board
6. Health Advisory Committee
7. Historic Preservation Board
8. Miami Beach Cultural Arts Council
9. Miami Beach Human Rights Committee
10. Personnel Board
11 Planning Board
12. Visitors and Convention Authority
F:\CLER\$ALL\MARIA-M\B & C\Commission Memo B & C FOR 01-11-12.doc
341
Agenda Item R 9 h I
Date I-ll-f2....
Board and Committees Current Members
Affordable Housing Advisory Committee Sec. 2-167
Composition:
The committee shall consist of eleven (11) voting members with two (2) year terms appointed at
large by a majority vote of the Mayor and City Commission:
One citizen:
1) actively engaged in the residential home building industry in connection with affordable housing;
2) actively engaged in the banking or mortgage banking industry in connection with affordable
housing;
3) two at-large who have resided in one of the city's historic districts for at least one year, and have
demonstrated interest and knowledge in urban design and the preservation of historic buildings.
4) actively engaged as a for-profit provider of affordable housing;
5) actively engaged as a not-for-profit provider of affordable housing (Housing Authority member);
6) actively engaged as a real estate professional in connection with affordable housing;
8) actively serving on the local planning agency pursuant to Florida Statute § 163.3174 (Planning
Board member);
9) who resides within the jurisdiction of the local governing body making the appointments;
10) who represents employers within the jurisdiction;
11) who represents essential services personnel as defined in the local housing assistance plan.
Members of the Loan Review Committee, members of the Community Development Advisory
Committee (CDAC), Planning Board and Miami Beach Housing Authority may be appointed to fill any
of the eleven (11) categories and serve as ex-officio voting members on this committee. If due to
conflict of interest by prospective appointees, or other reasonable factor, the City is unable to appoint
a citizen actively engaged in these activities in connection with affordable housing, a citizen engaged
in the activity without regard to affordable housing may be appointed.
City Liaison: Richard Bowman
Appointments To Be Made :
Michael Burnstine (7) Real Estate Prof. 12/31/2011 City Commission 12/31/13
Vacancy:
To replace (3) Rep. Labor Home Bl 12/31/2012 City Commission
Stephanie Berman
To replace (8) Local Planning Boar 12/31/2012 City Commission
Jonathan Fryd
To replace Roberto (6) Not For Profit 12/31/2012 City Commission
DaTorre
To replace Clark .(9) Res. Juris. Local Gvt 12/31/2013 City Commission
Reynolds
To replace Dr. (1 0) Rep. Empl. with/ju 12/31/2013 City Commission
Barry Ragone
To replace Ada (4) Low-Income Advoc. 12/31/2013 City Commission
Llerandi
To replace Brian (tl) Res. Home Bldg. 12/31/2012 City Commission
Ehrlich
To replace Lianne (11) Rep. Essential Serv 12/31/2013 City Commission
Pastoriza
To replace Robert (5) For Profit 12/31/2012 City Commission
Saland
Members:
Name Last Name Position/Title Term Ends: Appointed by: Term Limit:
------------------. ----·--------------
Tuesday, January 03, 2012 Page 1 of 50
342
Board and Committees Current Members
Juan Rojas (2) Banking/Mortgage 12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/16
Position/Title Applicants Position/Title Applicants
Amy Perry
Arian Adorno
Karen Fryd
Mark Wohl
----·---------------------
Andrew Fischer
Dr. Barry Ragone
Marie Towers
Roberto DaTorre
~~~~--~-~0<·-------------=·------------------~--------~--~~----Tuesday, January 03, 2012 Page 2 of 50
343
Board and Committees Current Members
Art in Public Places
Composition:
Two (2) year term.
Appointed by a minimum of 4 votes.
Sec. 82-561
Seven (7) members to be appointed by a majority of the entire City Commission, and who shall
possess a high degree of competence in evaluation of art history and architectural history, art,
architecture, sculpture, painting, artistic structure design and other appropriate art media for display
or integration in public places.
City Liaison : Dennis Leyva
Appointments To Be Made :
Lisette Olemberg Golds 12/31/2011 City Commission 12/31/14
Rhonda Mitrani-Buchman (TL 12/31/2012) 12/31/2011 City Commission 12/31/12
Vacancy:
To replace Flavia
Lowenstein
Members:
Name
Elizabeth
James
Janda
Megan
Applicants
Last Name
Resnick
Lloyd
Wetherington
Riley
---
Adrian Gonzalez
Annette Fromm
Brian Levin
Claire Warren
Elizabeth Schwartz
Francis Trullenque
Kathleen Kowall
Leslie Tobin
Lisa Austin
Mark Alhadeff
Molly Leis
Pamela· Palma
Robert Barrera
Silvia Ros
Wetherington Janda
Zarco Cyn
Position/Title
(TL 12/31/2012)
Position/Title
12/31/2013 City Commission
Term Ends: Appointed by: Term Limit:
12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/12
12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/16
12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/16
12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/16
Applicants Position/Title
Ana Cordero
Anthony Japour
Britts Hanson
Dale Stine
Emma DeAibear
llija Mosscrop
Larkin Menezes
Lisa Austin
Maria Rodriguez
Merri Mann
Mykel (Michael) Tulloch
Patricia Fuller
Rosemarie Likens
Stella Gelsomino
Xavier Cortada
Zoila Datorre
~-----------------~--,------~--------------~--------------------------~-=--~---··------Tuesday, January 03, 2012 Page 3 of 50
344
Board and Committees Current Members
Board of Adjustment
Composition:
RSA 1-2 Sec 118-
Two (2) year term.
Appointed by a 5/7th vote.
1'!11
Seven (7) voting members composed of two members appointed as citizens at-large and five
members shall be appointed from each of the following categories (no more than one per category),
namely: Law, Architecture, Engineering,· Real Estate Development, Certified Public Accountant,
Financial Consultation, and General Business. The members representing the professions of law,
architecture, engineering and public accounting shall be duly licensed by the State of Florida; the
member representing general business shall be of responsible standing in the community, and each
member shall be bound by the requirements of the Conflict of Interest Ordinance of the city and shall
be subject to removal from office for the violation of the terms thereof. No member shall have any
financial or other interest in any matter coming before the board.
Members shall be apppointed for a term of two years by a five-seventh vote of the city commission.
Members of the Board of Adjustment must be either residents of or have their principal place of
business in Miami Beach; provided, however, that this amendment shall not affect the term of existing
members of the Board of Adjustment.
City Liaison: Antonieta Stohl
Appointments To Be Made :
Alexander Annunziato At-large
Bryan Rosenfeld CPA
Sherry Roberts General Business
Lior Leser Financial Consultation
Members:
Name Last Name Position/Title
12/31/2011 City Commission
12/31/2011 City Commission
12/31/2011 City Commission
12/31/2011 City Commission
Term Ends: Appointed by:
12/31/13
12/31/15
12/31/13
12/31/13
Term Limit:
--------------·-···----------------------
Andrew
Joy
Richard
Applicants
Alan Fishman
Brent Coetzee
Brian Gilderman
Gabriel Paez
Josh Gimelstein
Noah Fox
Robert Newman
Roger Houle
Resnick
Malakoff
Pre ira
----·----------~ Tuesday, January 03, 2012
Real Estate Developer
At-Large
Law
Positionffitle
12/31/2012 City Commission
12/31/2012 City Commission
12/31/2012 City Commission
Applicants
Avi Ciment
Brian Ehrlich
Dov Konetz
Jessica Conn
Micky Ross Steinberg
Rafael Velasquez
Roberta Gould
Scott Needelman
Positionffitle
12/31/15
12/31/16
12/31/16
-"1'-.m ~"' "'"'~;,a .,..., ... ~~-------------""--"'""",_""' PageS of 50
345
Board and Committees Current Members
Capital Improvements Projects Oversight Committee 2-190-127
Composition:
The Capital improvement projects oversight committee shall consist of nine (9) voting members, eight
(8) of whom shall be appointed by the city. commission as a whole (at-large-appointees), and one (1)
member appointed by the Mayor or designee, and one (1) non-voting ex-officio member selected
from three nominees. The membership of the committee shall further be comprised as follows:
1. The mayor or his/her designee, who shall sit as a voting member of the committee, and shall also
serve as chair person of the committee;
2. At least two (2) members shall be selected with experience in one of the following technical fields:
a. engineering;
b. architecture and/or landscape architecture; or historic preservation;
3. At least two (2) members shall be selected with experience in one of the following technical fields:
a. construction/general contractor; or
b. developer;
4. Two (2) members shall be selected with experience in the following technical field and/or the
following category:
a. capital budgeting and/or finance; or
b. citizen-at-large; and
5. The remaining two (2) members shall be selected from any of the technical experience categories
set forth in subsections (2) or (3) above.
6. One (1) non-voting ex-officio member shall be either a member of the disabled community or a
person with special knowledge of Americans with Disiabilities Acts (ADA) issues in order to provide
accessibility-related input to the committee.
City Liaison: Fernando Vazquez
Appointments To Be Made :
Saul Gross (1) Mayor Designee
Christina Cuervo (C5) Developer
Eleanor Carney (C4) At-large
Elizabeth Camargo (C2) Architect
Vacancy:
Members:
To replace Fred (C3) Developer
Karlton ,
To replace Richard (C5) Engineer
(Rick) Kendle
12/31/2011 Mayor Matti Herrera Bower
12/31/2011 City Commission
12/31/2011 City Commission
12/31/2011 City Commission
12/31/2013 City Commission
12/31/2012 City Cf>mmission
12/31/15
12/31/13
12/31/15
12/31/13
Name Last Name Position/Title Term Ends: Appointed by: Term Limit:
Dwight
Stacy
Tony
Applicants
Kraai
Kilroy
Trujillo
Tuesday, January 03, 2012
(2) Engineer
(C3) Const/Gen Contrac
(C4) Cap.Budg/Finance
Positionffitle
12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/13
12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/13
12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/16
Applicants Positionffitle
= ....,. o: • 01 '"* =""'"'""---
Page 7 of 50 (Continued ....
346
Board and Committees Current Members
Annsheila Turkel Brian Ehrlich
Cheryl Jacobs Christian Folland
Dominique Bailleul Gerhard Rima
lvette Isabel Borrello Jacobs Jacobs
James Lloyd Jason Green
Josh Gimelstein Michael Laas
Rima Gerhard Ronald Starkman
1'01--liii .. N""'I:IOIIf W.•---"""'' ___ ,IO'liiK1'<3-RII'IiU.IO:"Q~.~·-------------------
Tuesday, January 03, 2012 Page 8 of 50
347
Board and Committees Current Members
Design Review Board
Composition:
Two (2) year term.
Appointed by a minimum of 4 votes.
Seven (7) regular members and two (2) ex-officio members.
The seven (7) regular members shall consist of:
two (2) registered architects,
Sec. 118.71
one (1) registered architect or a member of the faculty of a school of architecture, urban planning or
urban design in the state, with practical or academic expertise in the field of design, planning, historic
preservation or the history of architecture, or a professional architectural designer or professional
urban planner
one (1) registered landscape architect,
one (1) registered architect, professional designer or professional urban planner,
and two (2) citizens at-large.
One person appointed by the City Manager from an eligibility list provided by the Disability Access
Committee shall serve in an advisory capacity with no voting authority. The Planning Director, or
designee and the City Attorney or designee shall serve in an advisory capacity.
Residency and place of business in the county. The two (2) citizen-at-large members and one of the
registered landscape architects, registered architects, professional designer or professional urban
planners shall be residents of the city.
City Liaison: Thomas Mooney
Appointments To Be Made :
Seraj Saba Landscape Architect
Jason Hagopian Registered Architect
Vacancy:
Members:
To replace Thomas Reg. Architect
DeLuca
To replace At-large
Gabrielle Redfern
To replace Michael Urban Planner
La as
12/31/2011 City Commission
12/31/2011 City Commission
12/31/2013 City Commission
12/31/2013 City Commission
12/31/2012 City Commission
12/31/13
12/31/15
Name Last Name Position/Title Term Ends: Appointed by: Term Limit:
Carol
Lilia
Gary Held
Richard Lorber
Vacant
Applicants
Beth Dunlop
Daniel Garcia
Gilbert Squires
Jane Gross
John Stuart
-------------··---------------------·--·-·---------·---------
Heusen
Medina
At-large
Urban Planner
advisory/City Attorney Designee
advisory/Acting Planning Director
ex-officio/Disability Access Committee
Positionffitle
12/31/2012 City Commission
12/31/2012 City Commission
Applicants
Britta Hanson
Elizabeth Camargo
Ileana Bravo-Gordon
Jessica Conn
Larkin Menezes
Positionffitle
12/31/16
12/31/15
_,.._
1 011
-------~---· -" -<U _____ ..,...,_,.,_IO!l __ U_IIOl_"' _________ ....., __ ~---
Tuesday, January 03,2012 Page 18 of 50 (Continued ....
348
Board and Committees Current Members
Leonard Wien, Jr.
Pamela Palma
Scott Needelman
Tuesday, January 03, 2012
Leslie Tobin
Ray Breslin
Zarco Cyn
349
Page 19of50
Board and Committees Current Members
Health Advisory Committee Sec. 2-81 2002-
Composition:
Eleven (11) voting members. Appointed by the City Commission at-large, upon recommendations of
the City Manager:
One (1) member shall be the chief executive officer (CEO's) or a designated administrator from Mount
Sinai Medical Center,
One (1) member shall be the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) from Stanley C. Myers Community Health
Center or his/her designee administrator;
Two (2) member shall be an administrator from an Adult Congregate Living Facility (ACLF). And/or an
Assisted Living Facility (ALF);
One (1) member shall be a representative from the nursing profession;
One (1) member shall be a health benefits provider;
Two (2) members shall be physicians.;
Two (2) members shall be consumers consisting of:
1) one (1) individual from the corporate level and;
2) one (1) private individual.
One member shall be a physician or an individual with medical training or experience.
There shall be one (1) non-voting ex-officio representative from each of the following: The Miami
Dade County Health Department, the Health Council of South Florida, and the Fire Rescue
Department. The director of the Office of the Children's Affairs shall be added as a non-voting ex-
officio member of the board.
City Liaison: Cliff Leonard
Appointments To Be Made :
Tobi Ash Nursing Profession
Harold Foster Private Individual
Shaheen Wirk Private Individual
Baruch Jacobs M.D. Health Provider
Members:
Name Last Name Position/Title
Anthony Japour ACLF
Dr. Andrew Nullman Physician
Dr. Jay Reinberg Physician
Dr. Stacey Kruger Physician
Kathryn Abbate CEO MB Community Health
Rachel Schuster ACLF
Steven Sonenreich CEO/Mt. Sinai/MH (NTL)
Maria Ruiz
Marisel Losa
ex-officio, Director of Children's Affairs
Rep. from the Health Council of South Fla
Applicants
Caroline Cardenas
Daniel Brady
Jared Plitt
Paul Venetie
Todd Narson
Position/Title
12/31/2011 City Commission 12/31/15
12/31/2011 City Commission 12/31/15
12/31/2011 City Commission 12/31/15
12/31/2011 City Commission 12/31/15
Term Ends: Appointed by: Term Limit:
-·----··-·-
12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/16
12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/14
12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/16
12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/16
12/31/2012 City Commission
12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/16
12/31/2012 City Commission
Applicants Position/Title
Charlotte Tomic
Eli Strohli
Michael Baum
Samuel Reich
350
Board and Committees Current Members
Historic Preservation Board
Composition:
Two (2) year term. Appointed by a minimum of 4 votes.
Seven (7) members. There shall be a member from each of the following categories:
1) A representative from the Miami Design Preservation League (MDPL);
Selected from three names nominated by the League.
2) A representative from Dade Heritage Trust (DHT);
Selected from three names nominated by the Trust.
Sec. 118-1 01
3) Two at-large member who have resided in one of the city's historic districits for at least one year,
and have demostrated ineterest and knowledge in urban design and the preservation of historic
buildings.
4) An architect registered in the State of Florida with practical experience in the rehabilitation of
historic structures;
5) A registered architect, registered landscape architect, professional designer or professional urban
planner with practical experience in the rehabilitation of historic structures; or an attorney, or a
licensed engineer who has professional experience and demonstrated interest in historic preservation.;
6) A member of the faculty of a school of architecture in the State of Florida, with academic expertise
in the field of design and historic preservation or the history of architecture, with a preference for an
individual with practical experience in architecture and the preservation of historic structures.
City Liaison: Thomas Mooney
Appointments To Be Made : "
David
Henry
Vacancy:
Members:
Name
Dominique
Herb
Jane
Josephine
Applicants
Andrew Fischer
Daniel Garcia
Jeffrey Cohen
John Stuart
Morris Sunshine
Wieder
Lares
To replace
Norberto
Rosenstein
Last Name
Bailleul
Sosa
Gross
Manning
Attorney
Faculty Member
Reg. Architect
Position/Title
At-large
MDPL
Dade Heritage
At-large
Positionffitle
Tuesday, January 03,2012
12/31/2011 City Commission
12/31/2011 City Commission
12/31/2013 City Commission
12/31/15
12/31/13
Term Ends: Appointed by: Term Limit:
12/31/2012 City Commission
12/31/2012 City Commission
12/31/2012 City Commission
12/31/2012 City Commission
Applicants
Beth Dunlop
Elizabeth Pines
Jessica Jacobs
Josh Gimelstein
Raymond Adrian
351
Positionffitle
Page27of50
12/31/16
12/31/15
12/31/16
12/31/14
Board and Committees Current Members
Miami Beach Cultural Arts Council
Composition:
Three (3) years term.
Vacancies submitted by slate of candidates provided by the council.
Sec. 2-51
Eleven (11) members to be appointed at-large by a majority vote of the Mayor and City Commission.
Effective December 31, 2001, concurrent with the expiration of the terms of six (6) members of the
council, and the resulting vacancies thereon, three (3) members shall be appointed for three (3) year
terms each, provided that one of those appointments shall be to fill the vacancy of the one (1) year
term expiring on December 31, 2001, and three (3) members shall be appointed for two (2) year
terms each. Additionally, effective December 31, 2002, no council member may serve more than six
(6) consecutive years.
City Liaison: Gary Farmer
Appointments To Be Made :
Zoila
Ed a
Gregory
Vacancy:
Members:
Datorre
Valero-Figueira
Melvin
To replace Ileana
Bravo-Gordon
To replace
Solomon Genet
To replace Israel
Sands
12/31/2011 City Commission
12/31/2011 City Commission
12/31/2011 City Commission
12/31/2012 City Commission
12/31/2013 City Commission
12/31/2013 City Commission
12/31/14
12/31/14
12/31/15
Name Last Name Position/Title Term Ends: Appointed by: Term Limit:
--------
Beatrice Hornstein 12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/15
Daniel Novela 12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/15
Isadore Have nick 12/31/2013 City Commission 12/31/13
Ma~orie O'Neill-Butler 12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/15
Nina Duval 12/31/2013 City Commission 12/31/p
Applicants Position/Title Applicants Position/Title
Annette Fromm Brian Levin
Calvin Kohli Darin Feldman
Elizabeth Pines Eugenio Cabreja
George Durham Janda Wetherington
Jean Fils Jonathan Parker
Karlene Mcleod Kumar Prakash
Maria Cifuentes Marrero Mark Alhadeff
Melvin Brazer Merle Weiss
Michael McManus Molly Leis
Monica Harvey Monica Minagorri
Nathaniel Korn Oliver Oberhauser
Patti Hernandez Paul Venette
Rebecca Diaz Robert Barrera
Robert Newman Tamra Sheffman
Wetherington Janda Zarco Cyn
__ .... ----·--~------~-.. -·.-· .. -· -·-.. ----~~-----.. 0 M Tuesday, January 03,2012 Page32 of 50
352
Board and Committees Current Members
Miami Beach Human Rights Committee 2010-3669
Composition:
The committee shall consist of a minimum of five (5) and a maximum of eleven (11) members, with
one (1) out of every five (5) members, to be a direct appointment by the Mayor, and with the
remaining members to be at-large appointments of the City Commission.
The members of the committee shall reflect as nearly as possible, the diversity of individuals
protected under the City's Human Rights Ordinance. In keeping with this policy, not less than two (2)
months prior to making appointments or re-appointments to the committee, the City Manager shall
solicit nominations from as many public service groups and other sources, which he/she deems
appropriate, as possible.
At least one (1) of the committee members shall possess, in addition to the general qualifications set
forth herein for members, a license to practice law in the State of Florida; be an active member of
and in good standing with the Florida Bar, and have experience in civil rights law. The attorney
member shall also serve as chair of the committee.
City Liaison: Ralph Granado
Appointments To Be Made :
Walker Burttschell
Elsa Urquiza
Alan Fishman
Elizabeth Schwartz Law
Michael Andrew
Members:
Name Last Name Position/Title
·--------
Carlos J Ortuno
Dr. Barry Ragone
Rafael Trevino
Todd Narson
Applicants Position/Title
-------------------------
Erik Carrion
Michael Perlmutter
12/31/2011 City Commission 12/31/16
12/31/2011 Mayor Matti Herrera Bower 12/31/16
12/31/2011 City Commission 12/31/16
12/31/2011 City Commission 12/31/16
12/31/2011 City Commission 12/31/16
Term Ends: Appointed by: Term Limit:
12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/16
12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/16
12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/16
12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/16
Applicants Position/Title
Ivana Vento
Monica Harvey
~----~--~~~-----~------------------------------~~~~~--------Tuesday, January 03, 2012 Page 33 of 50
353
Board and Committees Current Members
Personnel Board Sec. 2-190.66
Composition:
Ten (10) members appointed by a 5/7 vote.
Six (6) of which shalll be citizens of Miami Beach not in the employment of the city, each having a
different vocation;
and three (3) regular employees of the City of Miami Beach, to be elected by the probationary and
regular employees of the city and who shall be elected from the employees of regular status in the
respective groups:
Group I shall consist of the employees of the Police Department, Fire Department
and Beach Patrol Department,
Group II shall consist of employees who are in clerical and executive positions,
Group III shall consist of all other employees,
The Personnel Director is a non-voting member.
City Liaison: Ramiro Inguanzo
Appointments To Be Made :
Michael Perlmutter (TL 12/31/2012)
Rosalie Pincus
Vacancy:
To replace Barbara
Patchen
Members:
12/31/2011 City Commission
12/31/2011 City Commission
12/31/2013 City Commission
12/31/12
12/31/15
Name Last Name Position/Title Term Ends: Appointed by: Term Limit:
-·----------------------------------------
David Alschuler (TL 12/31/2012) 12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/12
Gabriel
Mojdeh
Christopher Diaz
Evette Phillips
George castell
Ramiro Inguanzo
Applicants
Paez 12/31/2012
Khaghan 12/31/2012
elected 07/20/2011 exp. 7/31/2014-Group I
elected 06/26/2009 exp. 7/31/2012 Group III
elected 07/23/2010 exp. 7/31/2013 Group II
Human Resources Director
Position/Title Applicants
City Commission
City Commission
Position/Title
Brent Coetzee
Carlos Condarco
Elsa Orlandini
Raquel Elejabarrieta
Bryan Rosenfeld
Darius Asly
Tuesday, Ja11uary 03, 2012
Gail Harris
Richard Preira
354
Page38of50
12/31/15
12/31/16
Board and Committees Current Members
Planning Board Sec. 118-51
Composition:
Two (2) year term. Appointed by a minimum of 4 votes.
Seven (7) regular voting members. The voting members shall have considerable experience in
general business, land development, land development practices or land use issues.
The board shall at a minimum be comprised of:
one registered architect or a member of the faculty of a school of architecture in the state, with
practical or academic expertise in the field of design, planning, historic preservation or the history of
architecture, or a professional architectural designer or professional urban planner,
one developer,
one attorney who has considerable experience in land use and zoning issues,
and one person who has education and/or experience in historic preservation issues. For purposes of
this section, the term "education and/or experience in historic preservation issues" shall be a person
who meets one or more of the following criteria:
(1). Has earned a college degree in historic preservation
(2). Is responsible for the preservation, revitalization or adaptive reuse of historic buildings; or
(3). Is recognized by the city commission for contributions to historic preservation, education or
planning. No person except a resident of the city, or an individual having their main business interest
in the city shall be eligible for appointment to the Planning Board.
City Liaison: Katia Hirsh.
Appointments To Be Made :
Jonathan Bel off Attorney
Jonathan Fryd Developer
Henry Stolar General Business
Vacancy:
To replace Seth General Business
Frohlich
Members:
Name Last Name
Daniel Veitia
Leslie Tobin
Randy Weisburd
Applicants
Avi Ciment
Brian Ehrlich
Charles Urstadt
Frank Kruszewski
Gilbert Squires
Jeffrey Cohen
John Stuart
Leonard Wien, Jr.
Maria Gomez
Michael Bernstein
Scott Needelman
Position/Title
Historic Preservation
Architect
General Business
Position/Title
12/31/2011 City Commission 12/31/15
12/31/2011 City Commission 12/31/13
12/31/2011 City Commission 12/31/13
12/31/2013 City Commission
Term Ends: Appointed by: Term Limit:
12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/14
12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/16
12/31/2012 City Commission 12/31/13
Applicants Position/Title
Beth Dunlop
Bryan Rosenfeld
Daniel Garcia
Gary Twist
Jane Gross
Jessica Conn
Joy Malakoff
Lior Leser
Mark Alhadeff
Rebecca Diaz
~-----·-~·----· .. ----~---------------.. --~---~--~----~~~---~----~--~---~~~~-------Tuesday, January 03,2012 Page 39 of 50
355
Board and Committees Current Members
Visitor and Convention Authority
Composition:
Two (2) year term. Appointed by a minimum of 4 votes.
Seven (7) member who shall be permanent residents of Miami-Dade County.
Sec. 1 02-246
The seven (7) members of the authority shall be representative of the community as follows:
1) Not less than two (2) nor more than three (3) members shall be representative of the hotel
industry;
2) and the remaining members none of whom shall be representative of the hotel industry, shall
represent the community at-large. Any member of the authority or employee therefore violating or
failing to comply with provisions of this article shall be deem to have vacated his office or position.
City Liaison: Grisette Roque.
Appointments To Be Made :
Jaqueline Hertz At-large
Jeff Lehman Hotel Industry
Micky
Keith
Vacancy:
Members:
Ross Steinberg At-large
Menin Hotellndustry
To replace Elsie
Sterling Howard
At-large
12/31/2011 City Commission
12/31/2011 City Commission
12/31/2011 City Commission
12/31/2011 City Commission
12/31/2012 City Commission
12/31/13
12/31/13
12/31/15
12/31/15
Name
Aaron
Steven
Last Name
Perry
Adkins
Position/Title
At-Large
At-large
Term Ends: Appointed by:
12/31/2012 City Commission
12/31/2012 City Commission
Term Limit:
12/31/16
12/31/14
Applicants
Brian Richard
Christopher Todd
Eric Lawrence
George Castillo
Ileana Bravo-Gordon
James Lloyd
Joy Malakoff
Karlene Mcleod
Margaret (Peggy) Benua
Mykel (Michael) Tulloch
Nesip Toykan
Steven Gonzalez
Position/Title
---------------------Tuesday, January 03,2012
Applicants
Calvin Kohli
Diana Fontani Martinez
Frank Kruszewski
Harold Foster
Israel Sands
Jeffrey Graff
Karen Brown
Leif Bertrand
Mark Tamis
Natalia Datorre
Prakash Kumar
Zahara Mossman
356
Position/Title
Page48of50
R9 -New Business and Commission Requests
R981 Dr. Stanley Sutnick Citizen's Forum. (12:30 p.m.)
R982 Dr. Stanley Sutnick Citizen's Forum. (5:30 p.m.)
AGENDA ITEM: R981-2
DATE: Hf-fZ..
357
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
358
MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachA.gov
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager r6'
January 11, 2012 ~
SUBJECT: COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE-AUDIT COMMITTEE
BACKGROUND
The "Committee Of The Whole" serves as the City's audit committee to review the following
items:
• The External Auditors' reports.
• Internal Audit's annual risk areas I plan.
• Annual Review of Internal Audit findings and status.
Typically, the Committee reviews the status of the City's audits in the spring; however since
the external auditor reports are not usually finalized until July, these reports are typically
discussed around this time along with a discussion of the City's Internal Audit's annual risk
areas I plan.
1. External Auditor's Reports for FY 2009/10 (Previously distributed via LTC on
July 22, 2011)
The City's External Auditors are responsible for issuing an opinion after conducting an audit
of the City's financial statements in accordance with Generally Accepted Auditing Standards
and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in the Governmental Auditing
Standards.
The City contracts an external independent audit firm of licensed certified public accountants
to prepare and issue an auditor's opinion after conducting an audit of the City
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) in accordance with Generally Accepted
Auditing Standards and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in the
Governmental Auditing Standards, issue by the Comptroller General of the United States.
The current firm under contract is McGiadrey & Pullen, LLP.
The audit is conducted and an opinion expressed on the governmental activities, the
business-type activities, the aggregate discretely presented component units, each major
fund, and the aggregate remaining funds information of the City except for the retirement
and pension funds which are audited by other auditors. Florida State Statues requires this
annual audit. The external auditors also perform a Single Audit separate from the CAFR
audit to satisfy the audit requirements imposed by the Single Audit Act and the U.S. Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-133 and the Florida Single Audit Act in
accordance with and Florida Rules of the Auditor General, Section 10.550.
The external auditors issue a separate management letter which addresses any
recommendations to improve financial management, accounting procedures, and internal
Agenda Item R q C.
359 Date {-l/-I'L
control. Their report on internal controls included any reportable condition and material
weaknesses in the system of which they became aware as a result of obtaining an
understanding of the City's internal controls and performance of tests of internal controls.
The report of compliance addresses any material errors, fraud, violation of compliance
requirement and other responsibility imposed by state and federal statutes and regulations
which they may be aware. For the past several years, the external auditor's management
letters contained no reportable conditions and/or material weakness only minor
recommendations to improve financial management, accounting procedures and internal
controls.
Further, the external auditors issue separate opinions on the Miami Beach Redevelopment
Agency, (RDA), the Parking Service Fund, the Miami Beach Convention Center and Jackie
Gleason Theater, the Visitor and Convention Authority (VCA), City of Miami Beach Safe
Neighborhood Parks Bonds Projects, the City of Miami Beach Building Bond Communities
Bond Projects, and the City's Children Trust Fund.
Annually, a Letter to Commission is sent to satisfy the auditors' required communication with
management. Information forwarded with this letter included their Management Letter, the
Single Audit Report, the City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and the auditors
required communication with management. Attached as Exhibit 1 is LTC 187-2011 dated
July 22, 2011 containing the required reports for communication with the City Commission.
2. Internal Auditor's Reports
The City's Internal Audit Division, a component of the Office of Budget and Performance
Improvement, is responsible for ensuring:
• Compliance with Resort Tax Ordinances by auditing Miami Beach businesses;
• Compliance with City policies and procedures and financial integrity and sufficiency
of internal controls by Departments and Not-for-Profits;
• Supporting and special projects assisting other City areas; and
• Integrity of performance measures reported Citywide.
The Division is comprised of nine full time staff including four auditors, four field agents and
one office associate. Three field agents are responsible for auditing business required to file
resort taxes and one is responsible for sanitation audits of franchise haulers and roll-off
operators and administrative functions of the City's Cleanliness Assessment program.
Additionally, resources are shared between resort tax and internal audit functions for the
Internal Auditor, Assistant Internal Auditor, and the office associate.
Resort Tax Audits
The majority of resources in the Division are dedicated to auditing the Miami Beach
businesses required to report and remit resort taxes. This effort is supported by
approximately half of the positions in the Division as well as by outside contract auditors.
Resort tax generated for the fiscal year 2010/11 was $49,011,381.
Scheduled audits are based upon the type of business, actual resort tax receipts received,
and the frequency of the last audit. There are approximately 1,802 businesses registered to
collect resort taxes. Our goal is to audit the 733 businesses consisting of hotels,
restaurants, nightclubs, and bars at least once every 4 years, approximately 183 per year.
New accounts are to be audited soon after they are opened. The remaining 1 ,069 accounts
representing apartments having less risk are audited much less frequently.
In fiscal year 2010/11 the Division completed 205 resort tax audits (82% of our total goal) of
which 120 were hotels, restaurants, nightclubs, and bars. The 205 audits resulted in
2
360
additional tax assessments of $411 ,438. This represented 2.54% of the total resort tax
reported for these 205 entities over the multi-tax year audited and approximately 0.84% of
the total resort tax generated for fiscal year 2010/11. More importantly, the audits serve as a
deterrent to ensure compliance with the City's resort tax ordinances.
Internal Audits
Scheduled audits are those areas targeted by the Internal Audit Division based on a risk
assessment approach. Audits are classified as to high, medium or low risk. Higher
assigned risk areas are subject to more frequent audits, and lower risk areas are often less
frequent. The Parking Department is considered particularly high risk due to the
considerable revenues received and the manner of collection and therefore has resources
dedicated for ongoing audits. The review of waste franchise contractors and roll-off haulers
for compliance with the City's sanitation ordinance also has been made a priority over the
past several years. In addition, inputs for audits in other Departments are obtained from
Directors and the City Manager. In general, our internal audit goals are as follows:
• Audit 90% of the high risk areas approximately once every five years
• Audit 75% of the medium risk areas approximately once every seven years
• Audit 60% of the low risk areas approximately once every ten years.
However, special circumstances are taken into account which may lengthen or shorten the
period. In addition unplanned projects may impact the schedule in any given year. Annually
required audits include those mandated by City Code and State Agreements, as well as
providing assistance to the City's external auditors.
At previous Finance and City Wide Projects Committee meetings, the Committee
recommended that the administration present a report annually on the status of Department
and Not-For-Profit Internal Audits within the City. Attached is our Status of Audit Areas
through Fiscal Year 2010/11 (Exhibit 2). Audits completed in 2011 are shown in bold.
Overall, twenty-five Department and Not-For-Profit audit areas were completed during fiscal
year 2010/11. The represents 89.2% completed out of twenty-eight audit areas initially
targeted for the year. Out of the audit areas completed, one audit was added during the
year. The remaining four audits were carried forwarded to next fiscal year. This was
accomplished by a staff of five, including 4 continuous monitoring audits in parking and
sanitation by two of the staff. Attached is Summary of Internal Audit Activities (Exhibit 3) for
the past fiscal year.
The Finance and Citywide Projects Committee suggested that Committee members have
the opportunity to review the Internal Audit Reports on-line. Reports are listed on-line on the
City's website at http://web.miamibeachfl.gov/obpi/scroll.aspx?id=36612.
Fiscal Year 2011/12 Risk Assessment Areas /Audit Plan
Areas highlighted on the Status of Audit Areas report represent those areas considered for
audits based upon the projected frequency. These highlighted areas are a primary source in
developing the annual audit plan. However, the comments provided also indicate reasons
why areas may not be audited within the projected frequency.
The Division continues to take on more supporting projects and other activities relating to
OBPI objectives. These areas include coordinating a revision of City-wide policies and
procedures for posting to intranet and developing a coordinated approach for contract
management reviews for all citywide contracts.
JMG:KGB:JJS
F:\OBPI\$AUD\INTERNAL AUDIT FILES\DOC11-12\AUD COM\Discussion of Audits Comm of the Whole 1-11-12.doc
3
361
Exhibit 1 -LTC 187-2011
362
MIAMI BEACH
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
NO LTC# 187-2011
TO COMMISSION
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and
Members of the City Commission
FROM:
DATE·
SUBJECT: External Auditor's (McGiadrey & Pulen} Audit Report on the City of Miami
Beach (the City) for the period ended :se1tne1mD1er 30, 2010
Attached for your information is the external auditor's on the City for the fiscal year ended
September 30, 2010. This package includes the following:
A. The Report to the Mayor and Members of the City ~nnuni•C!coi,,.... discussing the Auditor's
required communications to the Mayor and City summary of recorded audit
adjustments, accounting estimates and, recently governmental accounting standards.
The Report also includes the following:
• Exhibit A ~ Certain written communications hl'>tw,.,~n management and the Auditors -
Representation letter;
• Exhibit 8 -McGiadrey & Pullen's lndten,~ncJtant auditor's report on compliance with
requirements applicable to each major federal and state project and on internal
controls over compliance in accordance with Circular A ... 133 and Chapter 10.550,
Rules of the Auditor General of the State of and Schedule of Expenditures on
Federal Awards and State Financial and
• Exhibit 8-McGiadrey & Pullen's management
Auditor General of the State of Florida, to
Commission.
, in accordance with the Rules of the
Mayor and Members of the City
B. The City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Rl'>r'\t1lrt (CAFR) for the fiscal year ended
September 30, 2010.
If you have any questions or need additional information pte1~se contact Patricia Walker at 305-673-
7574
JMwr
McGiadrey
The City of Miami Beach
MtG!i'ldr-ey & Pullen, U.P
Certif1ed Public Accauntant'ft
Report to the Honorable Mayor and the Members of the City Commission
September 30, 2010
MrGia<lwy I• Ill< bt>>'<l urnl~< w~nl> RSM MtG!.,tlMy,ln,. ond ll<kGkdr<')l & P•ll~<>. UP'"'"" (i!t'nt>'l>\.t<.IM~' n«>th.
Tht twQ (!rm-. op~f~'lr~ ~& i~pgtat-e I(><(J<l~ u-ntithtlS ao .tn .:&it~rthl-t~~ pr~"',tk:it 'Hructuw,
364
~mt"Wt nfRSM~nt~trt~ticr..al nNWM>...~ nt:-twor!-1. of
tnd~nt~<!'~H ,\f!o;_mttn'}. t..1:t anti t:on;~.dtmg fmm..
lad
The City of Miami Beach, Florida
1700 Convention Center Drive
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
Attention: The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission
IVh:G!adrey & Pullen, i.i.P
Certihe-d P'ublu: Auountant~
We are pleased to present this report related to our audit of the financial statements of The City of Miami
Beach, Florida (the City} for the year ended September 30, 2010. In addition to our report on your
financial statements which was modified to refer to the use of other auditors related to the City of Miami
Beach Florida Employees' Retirement Plan, the City of Miami Beach Florida Pension Fund for Firefighters
and Police Officers, the Firemen's Relief and Pension Fund, and the Policemen's Relief and Pension
Fund (collectively, the Plans), the Visitor and Convention Authority and the Miami Beach Convention
Center as managed by Global Spectrum, we have provided, under separate cover, a letter, dated March
30, 2011, concerning whether there were any significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in internal
control that we noted during our audit of the City of Miami Beach, Florida's (the "City") basic financial
statements for the year ended September 30, 2010. This report summarizes certain matters required by
professional standards to be communicated to you in your oversight responsibility for the City's financial
reporting process. Also included is a summary of recently issued accounting standards that may affect
future financial reporting by the City.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Mayor and Members of the City
Commission and management and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than
these specified parties. It will be our pleasure to respond to any questions you have regarding this report.
We appreciate the opportunity to continue to be of service to the City.
Miami, Florida
March 30, 2011
McG!~r~y i~ the-twmrl tmdQ-r whkh .HSM Mt.<d..'l.dt<Jy. toe M<d !th.Gbduw & Pt<ll~1n. UP w~\!~l r.n~~nH-'bu\hh"?'§~ ~:.h.
{h~,. tw~ fnra;~ QPf..'t;,h• ,a, ~~p-.u.u.H~ h:Q>Jt .ttr.t~tii?fl in J:~ .l!te-~n~tive-pt~'H,~!r.~ 'l:in~s:H.l!1t'.
365
M&mh<~f ui RSMtrnrun:.lttt.tn~li nHwark, .a rum•:ar~ cf
itH.h.,..._..H:·ndet\t il:{C~unttnq. ~~~ <.lnd o:.onfluhi~q: f~m:~..
Contents
Required Communications
Summary of Accounting Estimates
Recently Issued Accounting Standards
Exhibit A-Certain Written Communications Between Management and Our Firm
Representation Letter
Exhibit B-Single Audit Reports in Accordance with OMS-Circular A-133 and the Florida
Single Audit Act and Management Letter in Accordance with the Rules of the Auditor
General of the State of Florida
366
1-2
3-4
5
Required Communications
Statement on Auditing Standards No. 114 requires the auditor to communicate certain matters to keep
those charged with governance adequately informed about matters related to the financial statement
audit that are, in our professional judgment, significant and relevant to the responsibilities of those
charged with governance in overseeing the financial reporting process. The following summarizes these
communications.
Area
Auditor's Responsibility Under
Professional Standards
Accounting Practices
Comments
Our responsibility under auditing standards generally
accepted in the United States of America Government
Auditing standards issued by the Comptroller General
of the United States; the provisions of the Single Audit
Act; OMB Circular A-133; OMB's Compliance
Supplement; has been described to you in our
arrangement letter dated October 26, 2006.
Adoption of, or Change in, Accounting Policies
• GASB Statement No. 51, Accounting and
Financial Reporting for Intangible Assets.
This Statement provides guidance regarding
how to identify, account for and report
intangible assets. The new standard
characterizes an intangible asset as an asset
that lacks physical substance, is nonfinancial
in nature and has an initial useful life
extending beyond a single reporting period.
• Statement No. 53, Accounting and Financial
Reporting for Derivative Instrument. This
statement improves financial reporting by
requiring governments to measure derivative
instruments at fair value in their economic
resources measurement focus financial
statements. The changes in fair value of
hedging derivative instruments do not affect
investment revenue but are reported as
deferrals. On the other hand, the changes in
fair value of investment derivative instruments
(which include ineffective hedging derivative
instruments) are reported as part of
investment revenue in the current reporting
period.
Significant or Unusual Transactions
We did not identify any significant or unusual
transactions or significant accounting policies in
controversial or emerging areas for which there is a
lack of authoritative guidance or consensus.
Page 1
367
Area
Management's Judgments and
Accounting Estimates
Financial Statement Disclosures
Audit Adjustments
Uncorrected Misstatements
Disagreements with Management
Consultations with Other Accountants
Significant Issues Discussed with
Management
Difficulties Encountered in Performing the
Audit
Certain Written Communications Between
Management and Our Firm
Comments
Alternative Treatments Discussed with
Management
We did not discuss with management any alternative
treatments within generally accepted accounting
principles for accounting policies and practices related
to material items during the current audit period.
Summary information about the process used by
management in formulating particularly sensitive
accounting estimates and about our conclusions
regarding the reasonableness of those estimates is in
the attached "Summary of Accounting Estimates."
In our meeting with you we will discuss with you the
following items as they relate to the neutrality,
consistency and clarity of the disclosures in the
financial statements:
• Adoption of accounting standards
• Results of the Single Audit
There were no audit adjustments.
There are no uncorrected misstatements.
We encountered no disagreements with management
over the application of significant accounting
principles, the basis for managemenfs judgments on
any significant matters, the scope of the audit, or
significant disclosures to be included in the financial
statements.
We are not aware of consultations management had
with other accountants about accounting or auditing
matters.
No significant issues arising from the audit were
discussed or were the subject of correspondence with
management.
We did not encounter any difficuHies in dealing with
management during the audit.
Copies of certain written communications between our
firm and the management of the City are attached as
Exhibit A.
Page2
368
The City of Miami Beach
Summary of Accounting Estimates
Year Ended September 30, 2010
Accounting estimates are an integral part of the preparation of financial statements and are based upon
management's current judgment. The process used by management encompasses their knowledge and
experience about past and current events and certain assumptions about future events. You may wish to
monitor throughout the year the process used to compute and record these accounting estimates. The
following describes the significant accounting estimates reflected in the City's September 30, 2010
financial statements:
Area Accounting Polley Estimation Process Comments
Depreciation of Depreciation on capital Capital assets are We have audited the
Capital Asset assets is provided recorded at historical underlying data supporting
using the straight-line cost or estimated the estimate and believe
method. Leasehold historical cost and the resulting estimate to
improvements are depreciated using the be reasonable.
amortized on a straight-line method
straight-line basis over over the estimated
the shorter of the lease useful lives of the
term or estimated related assets.
useful life of the
assets.
Allowance for All trade and other Receivables are We have audited the
Doubtful Accounts receivables are analyzed for their underlying data supporting
reported at net collectability based on the estimate and believe
realizable value. the creditors' ability to the resulting estimate to
pay (i.e. financial be reasonable.
condition, credit
history, and current
economic conditions).
Other post· The net OPEB The City has informed We have audited the
employment benefit obligation/( asset) us they used all the underlying data supporting
reported for the relevant facts available the estimate and believe
difference between the to them at the time to the resulting estimate to
annual required determine the be reasonable.
contribution and the assumptions used by
actual contributions the actuary in
made by the City. calculating the City's
Annual Required
Contribution and have
approved the results of
the actuarial
determination.
Page3
369
The City of Miami Beach
Summary of Accounting Estimates
Year Ended September 30, 2010
Rls k Management
Pension Plans
The City is partially
self-insured for general
and auto liability,
property, workers'
compensation, and
employees' health and
dental. The accrued
liability for estimated
claims represents an
estimate of the
eventual loss on claims
including claims
incurred but not yet
reported.
A net pension
obligation/(asset) is
reported for the
difference between the
annual required
contribution and the
actual contributions made
by the City.
370
Management with input
from its Risk actuary
developed the actuarial
assumptions based on
relevant criteria.
Management reviewed
and approved the
financial statement
estimates derived from
the Risk actuarial
report.
The City has informed
us that they used all the
relevant facts available
to determine the
assumptions used by
the actuary in
calculating the City's
Annual Required
Contribution and have
approved the results of
the actuarial
determination.
We have audited the
underlying data supporting
the estimate and believe
the resulting estimate to
be reasonable.
We have audited the
underlying data supporting
the estimate and believe
the resulting estimate to
be reasonable.
Page4
City of Miami Beach
Recently Issued Accounting Standards
Year Ended September 30, 2010
GASB Statement No. 59, Financial
Instruments Omnibus
GASB Statement No. 60, Accounting
and Financial Reporting for Service
Concession Arrangements
GASB Statement No. 61, The
Financial Reporting Entity:
Omnibus-an amendment of GASB
Statements No. 14 and No. 34
This Statement, issued June 2010, will be effective for the City
beginning with its year ending 2011 (effective for periods
beginning after June, 15, 201 0) The objective of this Statement
is to update and improve existing standards regarding financial
reporting and disclosure requirements of certain financial
instruments and external investment pools for which significant
issues have been identified in practice.
The Statement, issued November 2010, will be effective for the
City beginning with its year ending 2013 {effective for periods
beginning after December 15, 2011.)The objective of this
Statement is to improve financial reporting by addressing
issues related to service concession arrangements (SCAs),
which are a type of public-private or public-public partnership.
The Statement, issued November 2010, will be effective for the
City beginning with its year ending 2013 (effective for periods
beginning after June 15, 2012.} The objective of this Statement
is to modify certain requirements for inclusion of component
units in the financial reporting entity. This Statement also
amends the criteria for reporting component units as if they
were part of the primary government (that is, blending) in
certain circumstances. This Statement also clarifies the
reporting of equity interests in legally separate organizations. It
requires a primary government to report its equity interest in a
component unit as an asset.
GASB Statement No. 62, Codification This Statement, issued December 2010, will be effective for the
of Accounting and Financial City beginning with its fiscal year ending September 30, 2013.
Reporting Guidance Contained In Pre-The objective of this Statement is to incorporate into the
November 30, 1989 FASB and A/CPA GASB's authoritative literature certain accounting and financial
Pronouncements reporting guidance that is included in the following
pronouncements issued on or before November 30, 1989,
which does not conflict with or contradict GASB
pronouncements: (1) Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) Statements and Interpretations; (2) Accounting
Principles Board Opinions; and (3) Accounting Research
Bulletins of the American Institute of Certified Public
Accountants' (AICPA) Committee on Accounting Procedure.
PageS
371
Exhibit A-Certain Written Communications Between
Management and Our Firm
372
tt::. i\ /\' ! /\ = :' •! \ -=-
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Cenler Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33 139, www.micmibeochll.gov
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
Tel: 305-673-7466, Fox: 305-673-7795
March 30, 2011
McGiadrey & Pullen, LLP
801 Brickell Avenue, suite 1050
Miami, Fl 33131
In connection with your audit of the basic financial statements of the City of Miami Beach,
Florida, (the "City") as of and for the year ended September 30, 2010 we confirm that we are
responsible for the fair presentation in the financial statements of financial position, changes in
financial position, and cash flows in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in
the United States of America.
We confirm to the best of our knowledge and belief, as of March 30, 2011 the following
representations made to you during your audit.
1. The financial statements referred to above are fairly presented in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
2. We have identified for you all organizations that are part of this reporting entity or with
which we have a relationship, as these organizations are defined in Section 2100 of the
Governmental Accounting Standards Board Codification of Governmental Accounting
and Financial Reporting Standards that are Component units. The City's Blended
Component Units and two Discrete Component Units are properly presented in the
financial statements.
3. We are not a component unit of any other government, as this term is defined in Section
2100 of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board's Codification of Governmentat
, Accounting and Financial Reporting Standards.
4. We do not meet the definition of an other organization, as defined in Section 2100 of the
Governmental Accounting Standards Board's Codification of Governmental Accounting
and Financial Reporting Standards.
5. We do not have a joint venture relationship with any other organization, as defined in
Section 2100 of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board's Codification of
Governmental Accounting and Financial Reporting Standards.
6. We are not a jointly governed organization, as this term is defined in Section 2100 of the
Governmental Accounting Standards Board's Codification of Governmental Accounting
and Financial Reporting Standards.
7. We have identified for you all of our funds, governmental functions, and identifiable
business-type activities.
8. We have properly classified all funds and activities.
373
9. We have properly determined and reported the major governmental and enterprise funds
based on the required quantitative criteria.
1 0. We are responsible for compliance with laws and regulations applicable to the City
including adopting, approving, and amending budgets.
11. We have identified and disclosed to you all laws and regulations that have a direct and
material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts including legal and
contractual provisions for reporting specific activities in separate funds.
12. We have made available to you:
a. All financial records and related data of all funds and activities, including those of all
special funds, programs, departments, projects, activities, etc., in existence at any
time during the period covered by your audit.
b. All minutes of the meetings of the governing board and committees of board
members or summaries of actions of recent meetings for which minutes have not yet
been prepared.
c. All communications from grantors, lenders, other funding sources or regulatory
agencies concerning noncompliance with:
(1} Statutory, regulatory or contractual provisions or requirements.
(2} Financial reporting practices that could have a material effect on the financial
statements.
13. We have no knowledge of fraud or suspected fraud affecting the entity involving:
a. Management or employees who have significant roles in the internal control.
b. Others where the fraud could have a material effect on the financial statements.
14. We have not received any communications from employees, former employees,
regulators, vendors or others of any allegations of fraud or suspected fraud affecting the
City.
15. We acknowledge our responsibility for the design and implementation of programs and
controls to provide reasonable assurance that fraud is prevented and detected.
16. We are aware of no significant deficiencies, including material weaknesses, in the design
or operation of internal controls that could adversely affect the entity's ability to record,
process, summarize, and report financial data, except as reported in your compliance
and internal control letters.
17. There have been no communications from regulatory agencies concerning
noncompliance with, or deficiencies in, financial reporting practices.
18. We have no plans or intentions to engage in any activity that may materially affect the
carrying value or classification of assets and liabilities.
19. The following have been properly recorded and/or disclosed in the financial statements,
where applicable:
a. Related party transactions, including those as defined in Section 2100 of the
Governmental Accounting Standards Board's Codification of Governmental
Accounting and Financial Reporting Standards, and interfund transactions, including
interfund accounts and advances receivable and payable, sale and purchase
transactions, interfund transfers, long-term loans, leasing arrangements and
374
guarantees, all of which have been recorded in accordance with the economic
substance of the transaction and appropriately classified and reported.
b. Security agreements in effect under the Uniform Commercial Code.
c. Any other liens or encumbrances on assets or revenues or any assets or revenues
which were pledged as collateral for any liability or which were subordinated in any
way.
d. The fair value of investments.
e. Amounts of contractual obligations for construction and purchase of real property or
equipment not included in the liabilities or encumbrances recorded on the books.
f. Any liabilities which are subordinated in any way to any other actual or possible
liabilities.
g. Debt issue provisions and bond refunding amounts.
h. All leases and material amounts of rental obligations under long"term leases.
i. All significant estimates known to management which are required to be disclosed in
accordance with the AICPA's Statement of Position 94-6, Disclosure of Certain
Significant Risks and Uncertainties. Significant estimates are estimates at the
balance sheet date which could change materially within the next year.
j. Risk financing activities.
k. Deposits and investment securities categories of risk.
I. Pollution remediation obligations as required under GASB Statement No. 49.
m. Defined benefit plans and other post employment benefit plans.
n. Line of credit or similar arrangements.
o. Authorized but unissued bonds and/or notes.
p. We have adopted the following GASB Statements:
GASB Statement No. 51, "Accounting and Financial Reporting for Intangible
Assets," and
It is management's decision not to disclose the following GASB Statements which
have been issued, but not yet adopted, due to the fact that these statements will not
have a material effect on the financial statements of the City until upcoming fiscal
years:
GASB Statement No. 59, Financial Instruments Omnibus
-GASB Statement No. 60, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Service
Concession Arrangements
GASB Statement No. 61, The Financial Reporting Entity: Omnibus
GASB Statement No. 62, Codification of Accounting and Financial Reporting
Guidance Contained in Pre"November 30, 1989 FASB and A/CPA Pronouncements
20. We are responsible for making the accounting estimates included in the financial
statements. Those estimates reflect our judgment based on our knowledge and
experience about past and current events and our assumptions about conditions we
expect to exist and courses of action we expect to take. In that regard, adequate
provisions have been made:
375
a. To reduce receivables to their estimated net collectable amounts.
b. For risk retention, including uninsured losses or loss retentions (deductibles)
attributable to events occurring through September 30, 2010 and/or for expected
retroactive insurance premium adjustments applicable to periods through September
30,2010.
c. For pension obligations, post-retirement benefits other than pensions and deferred
compensation agreements attributable to employee services rendered through
September 30, 2010.
No provision is required:
a. To reduce obsolete, damaged, or excess inventories to their estimated net realizable
values.
b. To reduce investments, intangibles, and other assets which have permanently
declined in value to their realizable values.
21. There are no:
a. Material transactions that have not been properly recorded in the accounting records
underlying the financial statements. For purposes of this representation, we consider
items to be material, regardless of their size if they involve the misstatement or
omission of accounting information that in light of surrounding circumstances makes
it probable that the judgment of a reasonable person relying on the information would
be changed or influenced by the omission or misstatement.
b. Violations or possible violations of laws or regulations whose effects should be
considered for disclosure in the financial statements or as a basis for recording a loss
contingency. In that regard, we specifically represent that we have not been
designated as, or alleged to be, a "potentially responsible party" by the Federal
Environmental Protection Agency or any equivalent state agencies in connection with
any environmental contamination.
c. Other material liabilities or gain or loss contingencies that are required to be accrued
or disclosed by Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 5 and/or GASB
Statement No. 10.
d. Guarantees, whether written or oral, under which the Government is contingently
liable.
e. Arrangements with financial institutions involving compensating balances or other
arrangements involving restrictions on cash balances.
f. Agreements to repurchase assets previously sold.
g. Debt issue repurchase options or agreements, or sinking fund debt repurchase
ordinance requirements.
h. Special and extraordinary items.
i. Impairment of capital assets.
j. Material losses to be sustained in the fulfillment of, or from the inability to fulfill, any
service commitments.
k. Material losses to be sustained as a result of purchase commitments.
I. Arbitrage liabilities.
376
m. Derivative financial instruments.
n. Mater:ial environm&r.:Jtal cl8aR up oblisatiene. nv/
22. In connection with your audit, conducted in accordance with Government Auditing
Standards, we confirm:
a. We are responsible for:
i. Compliance with the laws, regulations, and provisions of contracts and grant
agreements applicable to the City.
ii. Establishing and maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting.
b. We have identified and disclosed to you:
I. All laws, regulations, and provisions of contracts and grant agreements that have
a direct and material effect on the determinations of financial statement amounts
or other financial data significant to audit objectives.
ii. Violations (and possible violations) of laws, regulations, and provisions of
contracts and grant agreements whose effects should be considered for
disclosure in the auditor repository or noncompliance.
c. We have no violations of provisions of contracts or grant agreements that have been
reported.
d. We have a process to track the status of audit findings and recommendations.
e. We have identified for you previous financial audits, performance audits, or other
studies related to the objectives of the audit being undertaken and the corrective
action taken to address significant findings and recommendations.
23. We have no direct or indirect, legal or moral, obligation for any debt of any organization,
public or private or to special assessment bond holders that is not disclosed in the
financial statement.
24. We have satisfactory title to aU owned assets.
25. We have complied with all aspects of contractual agreements that would have a material
effect on the financial statements in the event of noncompliance.
26. Net asset components {invested in capital assets, net of related debt; restricted included
and not limited to excess building permit fees; and unrestricted} are properly classified
and, if applicable, approved.
27. GASB 54 establishes fund balance classifications (nonspendable, restricted, committed,
assigned and unassigned) that comprise a hierarchy based primarily on the extent to
which a government is bound to observe constraints imposed upon the use of the
resources reported in governmental funds. Fund balance for governmental funds in
each of the aforementioned categories is properly classified and disclosed in accordance
with GASB 54 and if applicable, approved.
28. Expenses have been appropriately classified in or allocated to functions and programs in
the statement of activities, and allocations have been made on a reasonable basis.
29. Revenues are appropriately classified in the statement of activities within program
revenues and general revenues.
377
30. Capital assets, including infrastructure assets, are properly capitalized, reported, and
depreciated.
31. Required supplementary information is properly measured and presented.
32. There are no unasserted claims or assessments that our lawyers have advised us are
probable of assertion and must be disclosed in accordance with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 5 and/or GASB Statement No. 10.
33. We are responsible for and have reviewed and approved the proposed adjustments to
the trial balances identified during the audit and will post all adjustments accordingly.
34. The City has complied with the provisions of Section 218.415, Florida Statutes regarding
the investment of public funds.
35. The City is not in a state of emergency based upon the conditions described in Section
218.503(1}, Florida Statutes.
36. Management has assessed the financial condition of the City and noted no deteriorating
financial condition.
Except for the issuance of Parking revenue refunding bonds on November 16, 2010, and the
authorization of a line of credit not to exceed an aggregate principle amount of $30 million on
January 19, 2011, there are no events or transactions that have occurred subsequent to the
balance sheet date and through the date of this letter that would require adjustment to, or
disclosure in, the financial statements.
During the course of your audit, you may have accumulated records containing data which
should be reflected in our books and records. All such data have been so reflected.
Accordingly, copies of such records in your possession are no longer needed by us.
The City of Miami Beach, Florida
Patricia D. Walker
Chief Financial Officer
378
(9 MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convenlion Center Drive, Miami Beoch, Florido 33139, www.miomibeochll.gov
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
Tel: 305-673·7000 Fox: 305.673.7795
June 24, 2011
McGiadrey & Pullen, LLP
801 Brickell Avenue, suite 1050
Miami, Fl 33131
In connection with your audit of federal awards and state projects as of and for the year ended September 30,
2010 conducted in accordance with OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit
Organizations, and Chapter 10.550, Rules of the Auditor General, we confirm:
1. a. We are responsible for complying, and have complied in all material respects with the
requirements of Circular A-133 and Chapter 10.550, Rules of the Auditor General.
b. We have prepared the schedule of expenditures of federal awards and state projects in
accordance with Circular A-133 and Chapter 10.550, Rules of the Auditor General and have
Included expenditures made during the period being audited for all awards provided by federal
agencies in the form of grants, federal cost·reimbursement contracts, loans, loan guarantees,
property (including donated surplus property, cooperative agreements, interest subsidies,
insurance, food commodities, direct appropriations, and other assistance.
c. We are responsible for establishing and maintaining, and have established and maintained,
effective internal control over compliance for federal programs and state projects that provides
reasonable assurance that the City is managing federal awards and state projects in compliance
with laws, regulations, and the provisions of contracts or grant agreements that could have a
material effect on our federal programs and state projects.
d. We are responsible for complying with the requirements of laws, regulations, and the provisions of
contracts and grant agreements related to each of the City's federal programs and state projects
and have complied, in all material respects, with those requirements.
e. We have identified and disclosed to you the requirements of laws, regulations, and the provisions
of contracts and grant agreements that are considered to have a direct and material effect on
each major program.
f. We have provided you with our interpretations of any compliance requirements that have varying
interpretations.
We ore commilledlo ptoviding excel/enl public seiYice one/ i!Oiely looN w/10 live, work, and play In our vibloni. tropical. /Jistoric community
379
McGiadrey & Pullen, LLP
Page2or3
g. We have made available all contracts and grant agreements (including amendments, if any) and
any other correspondence that has taken place with federal agencies or pass-through entities
related to federal programs and state projects.
h. We have identified and disclosed to you all amounts questioned and any known noncompliance
with the requirements of federal awards and state projects, including those resulting from other
audits or program reviews.
i. We have charged costs to federal awards and state projects in accordance with applicable cost
principles.
j. We have made available to you all documentation related to the compliance requirements,
including information related to federal program and state projects financial reports and claims for
advances and reimbursements.
k. Federal program and state projects financial reports and claims for advances and reimbursements
are supported by the books and records from which the basic financial statements have been
prepared.
I. The copies of federal program and state projects financial reports provided to you are true copies
of the reports submitted, or electronically transmitted, to the federal and state agency or pass-
through entity, as applicable.
m. We are responsible for and have accurately prepared the summary schedule of prior audit findings
to include all findings required to be included by Circular A-133 and Chapter 10.550, Rufesofthe
Auditor General.
n. We have provided you with all information on the status of the follow-up on prior audit findings by
federal awarding agencies and pass-through entities, including all management decisions.
o. We have accurately completed the appropriate sections of the data collection form.
p. We have disclosed all contracts or other agreements with service organizations.
q. We have disclosed to you all communications from service organizations relating to
noncompliance at those organizations.
r. We have disclosed any known noncompliance occurring subsequent to the period for which
compliance is audited.
s. We have disclosed whether any changes in internal control over compliance or other factors that
might significantly affect internal control, including any corrective action taken by management
with regard to significant deficiencies (including material weaknesses), have occurred subsequent
of the date as of which compliance is audited.
t. We have monitored subrecipients to determine that they have expended pass-through assistance
in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and have met the requirements of Circular A-
133 and Chapter 10.550, Rules of the Auditor General.
u. We have issued management decisions on a timely basis after our receipt of subrecipients'
auditors reports that identified noncompliance with laws, regulations, or the provisions of contracts
or grant agreements, and we have ensured that subrecipients have taken the appropriate and ..... \
timely corrective action on findings. \fi'
~?
We ate commilfecl 10 ptoviding exceDem public s91Vice and safely Jo aM wl1o live, w01k, and ploy in OU£ vibronl, ltopic:al, bi$1CJ1ic COIIIIIIUilily
380
McGiadrey & Pullen, LLP
Page 3of3
2. Unless disclosed to you, there have been no complaints filed with or concerning our compliance with
the provisions of:
a. Davis-Bacon Act relative to payment of prevailing wage rates.
b. Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Polices Act of 1970 relative
to acquisition or real property and the relocation of occupants of acquired property.
3. We have acknowledged the findings as described in the single audit report and the management letter
and have provided responses and planned corrective actions accordingly.
The City of Miami Beach, Florida
Patricia D. Walker
Chief Financial Officer
Allison R. Will!~
Chief Accountant
We o1e commilled lo pto111rling exceUenl public service ond 5ofety Jo oH who live. wane. and play in ovt vibtonl, ltopi<::al, l!isla•ic COtiiiiKJIIily
381
Exhibit B -Single Audit Reports in Accordance with OMS-
Circular A-133 and the Florida Single Audit Act and
Management Letter in Accordance with the Rules of the
Auditor General of the State of Florida
382
City of Miami Beach, Florida
Single Audit Reports in Accordance With OMB Circular A-133 and
Chapter 10.550, Rules of the Auditor General of the State of Florida
September 30, 2010
383
Contents
Independent Auditor's Report
on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit
of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance With
Government Auditing Standards
Independent Auditor's Report
on Compliance With Requirements That Could Have a Direct
and Material effect on Each Major Program and State Project
and on Internal Control Over Compliance in Accordance
With OMB Circular A-133 and Chapter 10.550,
Rules of the Auditor General, State of Florida
Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and State Financial Assistance
Notes to Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and State Financial Assistance
Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs
Schedule of Prior Year Audit Findings
384
1-2
3-5
6-8
9
10-18
19-20
IMcGiadrey
Independent Auditor's Report
on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit
of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance With
Government Auditing Standards
The Honorable Mayor and City Commissioners
City of Miami Beach, Florida
We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, the aggregate
discretely presented component units, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of
Miami Beach, Florida (the "City") as of and for the year ended September 30, 2010, which collectively comprise the
City's basic financial statements and have issued our report thereon dated March 30, 2011. Our report included
references to other auditors. We conducted our audit In accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the
United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing
Standards. issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Other auditors audited the financial statements
of the Visitor and Convention Authority; the Miami Beach Convention Center as managed by Global Spectrum
("Global Spectrum"); the City of Miami Beach Florida Employees' Retirement Plan; the City of Miami Beach Florida
Pension Fund for Firefighters and Police Officers; the Firemen's Relief and Pension Fund; and the Policemen's Relief
and Pension Fund, as described in our report on the City's financial statements. This report does not include the
results of the other auditors' testing of internal controls over financial reporting or compliance and other matters that
are reported on separately by those auditors. The financial statements of Global Spectrum, the City of Miami Beach
Florida Employees' Retirement Plan; the City of Miami Beach Florida Pension Fund for Firefighters and Police
Officers; and the Miami Beach Policeman's Relief and Pension Fund, audited by other auditors, were not audited in
accordance with Government Auditing Standards.
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City's internal control over financial reporting as a basis for
designing our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements, but not for
the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's internal control over financial reporting.
Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's internal control over financial reporting.
A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or
employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct
misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal
control such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the entity's financial statements will
not be prevented, or detected and corrected on a timely basis.
McG"'drey Is the brand unclor which IISM Mc:Gladr.y, Inc. and McGiodr.y • Pullen, UP sorve clients' bu•ln•os nee<lo.
The two firms opmotlng u separat. leg•lentl~sln on •lternatlve practice struclllre.
385
Member of IISM lnt.motlonal network. • network of
lndop&ndent ICCGUIItlng, ta and consulting fir,..
Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose described in the first
paragraph of this section and would not necessarily identify all deficiencies in internal control that might be significant
deficiencies or material weaknesses. We did not identify any deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting
that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above.
Compliance and Other Matters
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City's basic financial statements are free of material
misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant
agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial
statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance wHh those provisions was not an objective of our
audit and, accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of
noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards.
We noted certain matters that we reported to management of the City in a separate letter dated March 30, 2011.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Honorable Mayor, the Members of the City
Commission, management of the City, the Auditor General of the State of Florida, federal and state awarding
agencies and pass-through entities, and is not intended to be, and should not be used by anyone other than these
specified parties.
Miami, Florida
March 30, 2011
2
386
IMcGiadrey
Independent Auditor's Report
on Compliance With Requirements That Could Have a Direct
and Material effect on Each Major Program and State Project
and on Internal Control Over Compliance in Accordance
With OMB Circular A·133 and Chapter 10.550,
Rules of the Auditor General, State of Florida
The Honorable Mayor and City Commissioners
City of Miami Beach, Florida
Compliance
We have audited the City of Miami Beach, Florida (the "City") compliance with the types of compliance requirements
described in the OMB Circular A-133 Compliance Supplement and the requirements described in the Department of
Financial Services' State Projects Compliance supplement, that could have a direct and material effect on each of the
City's major federal programs and each of its major state projects for the year ended September 30, 2010. The City's
major federal programs and state projects are identified in the summary of auditor's results section of the
accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs. Compliance with the requirements of laws, regulations,
contracts, and grants applicable to its major federal programs and state projects is the responsibility of the City's
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the City's compliance based on our audit.
We conducted our audit of compliance in accordance wtth auditing standards generally accepted in the United States
of America; the standards applicable to financial audits contained In Government Auditing Standards, issued by the
Comptroller General of the United States; OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit
Organizations; and Chapter 10.550, Rules of the Auditor General, State of Florida. Those standards, OMB Circular
A-133 and Chapter 10.550, Rules of the Auditor General, require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether noncompliance with the types of compliance requirements referred to above
that could have a direct and material effect on a major federal program or major state project occurred. An audtt
includes examining, on a test basis, evidence about the City's compliance with those requirements and performing
such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a
reasonable basis for our opinion. Our audit does not provide a legal determination of the City's compliance with
those requirements.
In our opinion, the City complied, In all material respects, with the compliance requirements referred to above that
could have a direct and material effect on each of its major federal programs and its major state projects for the year
ended September 30, 2010. However, the results of our auditing procedures disclosed instances of noncompliance
with those requirements, which are required to be reported in accordance with OMB Circular A-133 and Chapter
10.550, Rules of the Auditor General, and which are described in the accompanying schedule of findings and
questioned costs as items CF 2010-01 through CF 2010-03.
MG>Iad"'llls the brand ubdor which RSM f*Gfadnly,lnc. and McG!ad,.y • Pullen, UP "''"" clients' Mlnaa needs.
lhe IWD flnns operating as separate legal 11>lltlts In an altetM1lve practice suuc:tura.
3
387
M11111bor of RSMin-tlonll-rk.a neiWolk of
Independent accounting. laX and consulting firms
Internal Control Over Compliance
The Management of the City is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over compliance
with requirements of laws, regulations, contracts, and grants applicable to federal programs and state projects. In
planning and performing our audit, we considered the City's internal control over compliance with requirements that
could have a direct and material effect on a major federal program or major state project to determine the auditing
procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on compliance and to test and report on internal control over
compliance in accordance with OMB Circular A-133 and Chapter 10.550, Rules of the Auditor General, but not forthe
purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of internal control over compliance. Accordingly, we do not
express an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's internal control over compliance.
A deficiency in internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation of a control over compliance
does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or
detect and correct, noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program or state project on a
timely basis. A material weakness in internal control over compliance is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies,
in internal control over compliance, such that there Is a reasonable possibility that material noncompliance with a type
of compliance requirement of a federal program or state project will not be prevented, or detected and corrected on a
timely basis.
Our consideration of internal control over compliance was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of
this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in Internal control over compliance that might be
deficiencies, significant deficiencies or material weaknesses. We did not identify any deficiencies over compliance
that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above. However, we identified certain deficiencies in internal
control over compliance that we consider to be significant deficiencies as described in the accompanying Schedule of
Findings and Questioned Costs, as items IC 2010-01 through IC 2010-06. A significant deficiency In internal control
over compliance is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over compliance with a type of
compliance requirement of a federal program or state project that is less severe than a material weakness in Internal
control over compliance, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance.
Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and State Financial Assistance
We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, the aggregate
discretely presented component units, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City as
of and for the year ended September 30, 2010 and have issued our report thereon dated March 30, 2011. Our audit
was performed for the purpose of forming our opinions on the financial statements that collectively comprise the
City's basic financial statements. The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal awards and state financial
assistance is presented for purposes of additional analysis as required by OMB Circular A-133, and Chapter 10.550,
Rules of the Auditor General, and is not a required part of the basic financial statements. Such information has been
subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly
stated, in all material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole.
The City's responses to the findings identified in our audit are described in the accompanying schedule of findings
and questioned costs. We did not audit the City's response and, accordingly, we express no opinion on it.
4
388
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Honorable Mayor, the Members of the City
Commission, management of the City, the Auditor General of the State of Florida, federal and state awarding
agencies, and pass-through entities, and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these
specified parties.
Miami, Rorida
June 24, 2011, except for the
Schedule of Expenditures of Federal
Awards and State Financial Assistance
which is dated March 30, 2011
5
389
City of Miami Beach, Florida
Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and State Financial Assistance
Year Ended September 30, 2010
Federal/State Grantor/Pass· Through Entity
Program Title
Federal Grants:
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development:
Oirect Programs:
Corrmmity Development Block Grantl£ntitlement Grants
Home Investment Parllletship Program
Community Development Block Grants_ Section 108 Loan Guatantees
ARRA-Community Development Block Grant Reoovery ARRA Entitlement Grants
(CDBG-RJ Recovely Act Funded
ARRA-1-Iomeless Prevention and Rapid Rehousing Program
Pass-through Dept. Canrnunity Affairs-Pass tlllough -Miami Dade County:
CFDAI
CSFA
Number
14.218
14.239
14148
14.253
14.257
Grant/Contract
Number
B-XX·MC-12.0014
M·XX-MC-12.()()14
B-94-MC-12.Q014
8-09-MY-12..()()14
SQ9..MY-12..()()(l7
Supportive HoUSing Program 14.235 FL 148800034 & FL0177B40000802
Community Development Block Grant·DRJ.ViUa Marla
Community Development Block Grani·DRI Flamingo Park Neighborllood Improvements
Pass-through Department of Communfty Affairs:
Community Development Block Grants-Neighborhood StallUizatlon Program
Total u.s. Department of Housing and
Urban Development
u.s. Oeparlmeot of JustiCe:
Oirect Program:
Part E -Developing, Testing and Demonstrating Promising New Programs -Juvenne Justice
and Delinquency Prevention -Teen Club
Part E -Developing, Testing and Demonstrating PromiSing New Programs-Juvenile Jusuce
and Delinquency PreventiOn -Teen Club Salaly
ARRA-Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance (JAG -CADJRMS)
Community Oriented Policing Services:
Public Safety Parlnershlp and Community PoriCing Grants-Child Sexual Predator Program
NationallnstilUie of Justice:
NationalinsHiute o1 Justice Research, Evaluation, and Development-Pofice Homicide Cold Case
Bulletproofvest Parlnarship/Body Armor Safety lnltlative
Buftetproof Vest Parlllership Program
BuHetprool Vest Parlllership Program
Pass-ThroUgh State of Aorida/Miam~Dade County:
Edward Bynne Memorial JustiCe Assistance Grant Program -Bynne Criminal Justice Records
Total u.s. Department of Justice
(Continued)
6
390
14.228 OSDB·D3-11·23-01·A01
14.228 08-DB-03-11-23-01-AOI
14.228 10DB-4X-11-23-01-F16
16.541 2008-Jl-FX-0481
16.541 2009-01-BX-0291
16.804 2009-SB-89-2634
16.710 2009CSWX0004
16.560 21J09.DN-BX-K009
16.607 OMS# 1121·0235
16.607 OMB# 1121·0235
16.738 NfA
Expenditures
s 1,534,050
1,548,407
7,063
91,G86
359,G82
62,460
398,250
58,900
7,154,374
7,611,524
11,214,672
205,317
192,232
397,548
32,686
111,378
70,1)20
4,631
2,200
6,131
14.437
687~
City of Miami Beach, Florida
Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and State Financial Assistance (Continued)
Year Ended September 30, 2010
CFDAI
Federal/State Grantor/Pass· Through Entity CSFA Grant/Contract
Program Title Number Number
U.S. Department ol Energy:
Otrect Program:
ARRA-Energy Efficiency and Conse!Vation Block Grant 81128 OE.SC0003489
Total U.S. Department of Energy
Pass-lhl'ougll Slate of Florida:
OffiCe of Attorney General
Crime VJClim Assistance-VOCA 16.575 V09027
Total Office of Altomey
Pass-lhrougll Stale of Florida:
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
Cooperative Forestry Assistance -Urban and Community Foreslly 10.664 015154
ARRA-Recovery Acl of 2009: Wildland Fire Management: Forest Health Improvement Initiative \0.688 015956
Total Qepartment of Agriculture and Consumer Services
U.S. Department ofT ransportation:
Federal Transit Administration
Direct Program:
Fedetal Transit-Capital Investment Grants-Electrowave Shul\le Service 20.500 FL-0~0233
Federal Transit -Capital Investment Grants -Electrowave Shuttle Service 20.500 FL$0245
Fedetat Transit-Capital investment Grants-Electrowave Shul\le Service 20-500 FL-90-X487-00
Pass-through Slate of Florida:
Florida Department of Transportation
Highway Planning and Construction-Beachwalk II 20.205 412796-1
ARRA-Highway Planning and Construction-Sunset Dr, Bridge 20.205 426501·1 ( ARRA-453)
ARRA-Highway Planning 8lld Construction-Sunset Or. Bridge 20.205 426502-1 [ ARRA-454)
ARRA-Highway Plannillg and Construction-Hanedon Ave. Bridge 20.205 426497.1 ( ARRA·339)
Total U.S. Department of Tr111sportatlon
U.S. Oepa1melltofHomeland Security:
Direct Program:
Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program -
EFSPhase27 97.024 159400.076
Emergency Food and SheRer National Board Program -
EFSPhase28 97024 159400-076
Total U.S. Department of Homtland Security
Pass-through Slate of Florida:
Florida Department of Community Alfairs
Pass-through Miami Dade County
Office of Domestic Preparedness
Homeland Security Grant Program-Urban /lteas
Security Initiative 2007 97.067 OSOS-24-t 1-23-02-011
Homel811d Security Grant Program-Urban Areas
Security Initiative 2008 97,067 100S-48-11·23-02-195
Pass-througll Slate of Aorida:
Florida Department of Com!TIInity Alfairs
Disaster Grants-Public Assistance-FEMA-Oisaster ReHel Funding Agreement 97.,036 06-Wl-&K-11-23-02-567&
Hazard Mitigation Grant 97.039 08HM-6G-11-23-02-050
Total State-Peas-Florida Dept of Community Affairs
Total Expenditures of Federllf Awards
(Cootinued)
7
391
!l!e!!nditures
197.438
197,438
52,927
52,927
15,000
18,000
33,800
735,121
377,951
800,000
117131m
34,626
2&9,458
254,014
199,834
757.924
2,471,69&
7,739
9,675
17,414
228,037
15,000
243,037
68,466
59,831
371&!!!
15,048,389
City of Miami Beach, Florida
Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and State Financial Assistance (Continued)
Year Ended September 30, 2010
CFDAI
Federal/State Grantor/Pass· Through Entity CSFA Grant/Contract
P~amTitle Number Number
State Granls:
Florida Department of Health:
Pass-Through Miami-Dade County:
Emer{lency PreviPrep/Response-EMS County Grants 64.005 C-9013
Florida Department of Heat Ill:
Emergency Prev/Prep/Response-EMS County Grants 64.003 M9273
Department of Management Services
Pass through Mami-Oade County:
E911 State Grant Program 72.002 52-08-10·5
Florida Department of State:
Division of Historical Resources:
Historic PreservatiOn Grant-Fire Station No 2 45.031 SC114
Division of Cultural Alfails:
Cultural and Museum Grants/Culture Bu~ Florida-Sleepless Night 2009 45.058 NIA
Florida Department of Environmental Protection:
Florida Recreation Development Assistance Program-Flamingo Park Tennis Renov. 37.017 A08187
Florida Housing Finance C01poration:
Slate Housing lnillaUves Partnership Program 52.001 NA
Florida OepartmentofTransportatiOn
Slate Highway Project Reimbursement-Indian Creek SR A 1A 41st-26th Slreet 55.023 AOY48
16th Street Corridor 55.012 ANH65
Total ExpencliturH of State Rnanclal Assistance
Total Expendltum of fecletal Awards and
State Financial Assistam:e
See Notes to Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and State Financial Assistance.
8
392
Exe!!!ditures
$ 49,794
14,42$
467,324
81,91&
25,000
178,910
1,039,266
939,803
27,165
2,823l06
$ 17,a701095
City of Miami Beach, Florida
Notes to Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and State Financial Assistance
1. General
The accompanying Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and State Financial Assistance (tl1e "Schedule")
presents the expenditure activity of all federal awards and state projects of the City of Miami Beach, Florida (the
"City") for the year ended September 30, 2010. The City's reporting entity is defined in Note 1 of the City's basic
financial statements. All federal awards and state financial assistance received directly from federal and state
agencies, as well as amounts passed through ot11er government agencies are included in t11e accompanying
Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and State Financial Assistance. Because the schedule presents only a
selected portion of the operations of the City, it is not intended to and does not present the financial position or
changes in net assets of the City.
2. Basis of Accounting
The accompanying Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and State Financial Assistance is presented using
the modified accrual basis of accounting for grants which are accounted for in the governmental fund types and on
the accrual basis of accounting for grants which are accounted for in the proprietary fund types. The information in
the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and State Financial Assistance is presented in accordance with the
requirements of OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations and
Chapter 10.550, Rules of the Auditor General. Therefore, some amounts presented in this schedule may differ from
amounts presented in or used in the preparation of the basic financial statements.
3. Subrecipient Awards
Of the federal awards and state financial assistance presented in the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards
and State Financial Assistance, the City provided the following amounts to subrecipients:
Name of Program/Projects
Federal:
Community Development Block Grant
Community Development Block Grant-DRI
Community Development Block Grant-Neighborhood Stabilization Grant
Home Program
ARRA-Community Development Block Grant Recovery
Total Federal
State:
State Housing Initiatives Partnership Program
9
393
CFDAICSFA
Number
14.218
14.228
14.228
14.239
14.253
52.901
Amount
Provided
to Subrecipient
$ 909,386
398,250
7,057,456
1,447,860
91,086
$ 9,904,038
$ 1,023,370
City of Miami Beach, Florida
Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs
Federal Awards Programs and State Projects
Section 1-Summary of Auditor's Results
financial Statements
Type of audito(s report issued:
Internal control over financial reporting:
Material weakness(es) identified?
Significant deficiency(ies) idenlifJed that are
not considered to be material weakness(es)?
Noncompliance material to financial statements noted?
Federal Awards
Internal control over major program:
Material weakness(es) identified?
Significant defiCiency(ies) identified that are not consfdered
to be material weakness(es)?
Type of auditor's report issued on compliance for
major programs:
Any audit fllldings disclosed that are required
to be reported in accordance with Section 510(a)
of Circular A-133?
Identification of major program:
Federal CFDA No.
14.218
14.228
14.257
20.205
20.500
Dollar threshold used to distinguish between type
A and type B programs:
Auditee qualified as low-risk auditee?
Yes ----
Yes
----Yes
Yes ----
X Yes _....;..;..._
X Yes _.......;..;___
Unqualified
_......;x.;.__No
_......;x.;.__No
_.....;X.;.__ No
X No
____ None reported
Unqualified
____ No
Name gf Federal Prooram or Cluster
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development:
Community Development Block Grant
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development:
Community Development BloCk Grants-Neighborhood Stabilization Program
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development:
ARRA-Homeless Prevention and Rapid Rehousing Program
U.S. Department of Transportation:
ARRA-Hlghway Planning and Construction
U.S. Department ofTransportation:
FTA section 5309-Eiectrowave Shuttle service
$451,392
X Yes -~~-No ----
10
394
City of Miami Beach, Florida
Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs (Continued)
Federal Awards Programs and State Projects
State Financial Assistance
Internal control over major projects:
Material weakness(es) Identified?
Significant defiCiency(ies} identified that are
not considered to be material weakness(es)?
Type of auditor's report issued on compliance for
major projects:
Any audit findings disclosed that are required
to be reported in accordance with Chapter 10.550,
Rules of the Auditor General?
IdentiFICation of major projects:
State CSfA No.
52.901
55.023
72.002
Dollar threshold used to distinguish between type
A and type 8 programs:
Yes ----X No __ __,;..;..._ __
X Yes ______ None reported ----
Unqua&fied
X Yes No ----------
Name of State Pro!ects
Florida Housing Finance Corporation:
State Housing Initiatives Partnership Program
11
395
Florida Department of Transportation:
State Highway Project Reimbursement-
Indian Creek SR A1A 41st-26th Street
Department of Management Services
Pass through Miami-Dade County:
E911 State Grant Program
$300,000
City of Miami Beach, Florida
Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs (Continued)
Federal Awards Programs and State Projects
Section II-Financial Statement Findings
A. Internal Control
None reported.
B. Compliance
None reported
Section Ill-Federal Awards and State Financial Assistance Findings and Questioned Costs
A. Internal Control over Compliance
Federal Awards
IC 2010·01 Subrecipient Monitoring
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)-
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG){CFOA No. 14.218)
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD}-
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG){CFDA No. 14.228)
~: OMB Circular A-133, and the subrecipient agreements, requires that a pass-through entity be
responsible for monitoring subrecipient activ~ies and that the subrecipient is administering federal awards in
compliance with federal requirements. A control system should be in place to ensure subrecipient
monitoring activities occur on a timely basis.
Condition: Monthly and/or quarterly reports were not prepared and/or submitted in a timely manner by the
subrecipients to the City. It was noted that the following reports were not submitted correctly by the
subrecipients:
• One out of twelve required monthly reports was submitted for the Miami Beach Community
Development Corporation -N. Beach Scattered Site project.
• Five out of twelve required monthly reports were submitted for the Housing Authority Rebecca
Towers N. Elevators. Additionally of the five, December 2009, January 2010, March 2010, were
submitted past their due date project.
• One out of four required quarterly reports was submitted for the Miami Beach Community
Development Corporation -Home Ownership project.
• One out offour required quarterly reports was submitted for Miami Beach Community Development
Corporation -Rehab Rental Housing project.
• Eight out of twelve required reports were not submitted for Miami Beach Community Development
Corporation-Neighborhood Stabilization Program.
12
396
City of Miami Beach, Florida
Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs (Continued)
Federal Awards Programs and State Projects
Questioned costs: Undeterminable.
Context We selected five of the eighteen subrecipients who received CDBG funds. See relationship of
findings to the population tested in the condition above.
Effect: Subrecipients may not be administering the activities funded by the program in accordance with the
provisions of the program requirements and grant agreements which may result in repayment of awards.
~: The City has not developed formal policies and procedures on subrecipient monitoring and report
review.
Recommendation: We recommend the City establish formal policies and procedures for monitoring and
reviewing the activities of the sub-grantees of the program. A spreadsheet should be maintained for all
subrecipients to track the timely submission of the reports.
Views of resPOnsible officials and planned corrective action: Policies and Procedures were developed in
January 2011 and are being reviewed for implementation. These include moving to quarterly reporting
versus monthly reporting for all new sub recipients. Monitoring requirements for Real Estate, Housing &
Community Development (REHCD) staff is also included and staff training will be conducted once they are
finalized and implemented.
IC 2010·02 Reporting
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)-
Community Development Block Grant "CDBG" (CFDA No. 14.218)
Criteria: By the 15th of each quarter, a Federal Cash Transaction Report is to be submitted to the agency.
The City must have an internal control policy in place to review each Federal Cash Transaction Report and
ensure compliance with the reporting requirements.
CondiUon: There were no procedures in place to monitor and ensure compliance with the reporting
requirements of the CDBG Program. As a result, the required report for one quarter was submitted
approximately 5 months past due by the City to the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Questioned costs: Undeterminable.
Context: In fiscal year 2010, the City submitted the Federal Cash Transaction Report for the quarter ended
9/30/10 on March 2, 2011, approximately 5 months past due.
Effect: City's non compliance with grant requirements may result in repayment of award monies.
~: The City has not developed a procedure to ensure compliance requirements are being adhered to.
13
397
City of Miami Beach, Florida
Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs (Continued)
Federal Awards Programs and State Projects
Recommendation: We recommend the City establish a formal policy and procedure to notify City
employees on pertinent due dates relating to grant awards. A tracking system should be developed to track
the timely submission of the reports.
Views of responsible officials and planned corrective action: A procedure has been established which
includes the designation of responsibility for this requirement, and the inclusion of deadlines for the Federal
Cash Transaction Reports on the Division's master calendar of required reports. Additionally, staff is
reviewing current contract tracking/monitoring software options for feasibility of implementation.
IC 201 0·03 Procurement & Suspension and Debarred
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)-
Community Development Block Grant "CDBG" (CFDA No. 14.218)
Criteria: local governments shall use their own procurement procedures provided that they conform to
applicable Federal law and regulations and standards identified in the A-102 Common Rule. Additionally,
Non-Federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions
to parties that are suspended or debarred or whose principals are suspended or debarred. "Covered
transactions• including those procurement contracts for goods and services awarded under a
nonprocurement transaction (e.g., grant or cooperative agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed
$25,000 or meet certain other specified criteria.
Condition: In fiscal year 2010, the City did not have a system in place to verify whether vendors under
contract were suspended or debarred.
Questioned costs: Undeterminable.
Context: In fiscal year 2010, four of the five covered transactions/contracts that were entered into on behalf
of the City, were not reviewed for the suspension and debarred requirement.
~: City's non compliance with grant requirements may result in repayment of award monies.
Cause: The City has not developed a procedure to ensure compliance requirements are being adhered to.
Recommendation: We recommend the City establish a formal policy and procedure to notify City
employees on pertinent requirements relating to grant awards and to ensure compliance requirements are
being adhered to.
Views of responsible officials and planned corrective action: Policies and Procedures (PAP) were
developed in January 2011 and are under review. A procedure will be included In the PAP requiring the
confirmation and documentation by the City's sub-awardees that parties that they will contract with have
been screened by them to ensure that none have been suspended or debarred/have principals that have
been suspended or debarred, prior to the City's sub-awardee receiving any allocations of funding from the
City relating to that contracted entity.
14
398
City of Miami Beach, Florida
Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs (Continued)
Federal Awards Programs and State Projects
IC 2010-04 Davis Bacon Act
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)-
Community Development Block Grant "CDBG" (CFDA No. 14.218)
~: According to Department of Labor Regulation 29 CFR Part 5 and the OMB Circular A-11 0, all
laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors to work on construction contracts in
excess of $2,000 financed by Federal assistance funds must be paid wages not less than those
established for the locality of the project (prevailing wage rates) by the Department of Labor.
Condition: In fiscal year 2010, wages for three work classifications were noted to be under the Miami-Dade
County minimum requirement.
Questioned costs: Undeterminable.
Context: In fiscal year 2010, wages for three work classifiCations were noted to be under the Miami-Dade
County minimum requirement.
Effect City's non compliance with grant requirements may result in repayment of award monies.
Cause: The City has not developed a procedure to ensure compliance requirements are being adhered to.
Recommendation: We recommend the City establish a formal policy and procedure to notify City
employees on pertinent requirements relating to grant awards and to ensure compliance requirements are
being adhered to.
Views of responsible officials and planned corrective action: Policies and Procedures (PAP) were
developed in January 2011 and are being reviewed for implementation. The PAP will delineate the
requirements for the monitoring of construction projects and establishes criteria for use by contract monitors
to ensure compliance with all federal requirements, Including the Davis-Bacon Act.
15
399
City of Miami Beach, Florida
Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs (Continued)
Federal Awards Programs and State Projects
State Awards
IC 2010·05-Subrecipient Monitoring
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
State Housing Initiatives Partnership "SHIP" (CFSA No. 52.901}
Criteria: Florida statutes, Sections 420.907 through 420.9079 over the SHIP grant and Chapter 67-37.007
Florida Administrative Code, stipulates that a pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring subrecipient
activities and that the subrecipient is administering state awards in compliance with state requirements. A
control system should be in place to ensure subrecipient monitoring activities occur on a timely basis.
Condition: There were no procedures in place to monitor and ensure compliance with the subrecipient
requirements of the SHIP Program. As a result, monthly reports were not prepared and or submitted in a
timely manner by the subrecipient, Miami Beach Community Development Center, to the City as required by
the subrecipient's agreements.
Questioned costs: Undeterminable.
Context: In fiscal year 2010, there was one subrecipient who received SHIP funds. We tested the one
subrecipient and noted for the months of January, February, April, July, and August of 2010 the reports
were submitted past the due date of 10 days after month end.
Effect: Subrecipients may not be administering the activities funded by the program in accordance with the
provisions of the program requirements and grant agreements which may result in repayment of awards.
~: The City has not developed a formal policy and procedures on subreciplent monitoring and site visit
review.
Recommendation: We recommend the City establish a formal policy and procedure for monitoring and
reviewing the activities of the sub-grantees of the program. A spreadsheet should be maintained for all
subreclpients to track the timely submission of the reports.
Views of responsible officials and planned corrective action: Policies and Procedures (PAP) were
developed in January 2011 and are being reviewed for implementation. The PAP will delineate the
requirements for contract monitoring. In addition, staff is reviewing current contract tracking software options
for feasibility of implementation to assist In tracking compliance requirements.
However, it should be noted that the Florida Housing Program Administration Manual, which are the rules
for the SHIP program, does not require monthly or quarterly reporting from sub-recipients, only the
submission of an annual report by the City to the State. However, the City's Fiscal Year 2009/2010 contract
with the City's sub-recipient required quarterly status reports containing information derived from each
reimbursement request submitted by the sub-recipient.
16
400
City of Miami Beach, Florida
Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs {Continued)
Federal Awards Programs and State Projects
IC 2010..()6-Reporting
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
State Housing Initiatives Partnership "SHIP" (CFSA No. 52.901)
~: Each county of eligible municipality shall submit to the Florida Housing Finance Corporation
(FHFC) by September 15 of each year a report of itS affordable housing programs and accomplishments
through June 30th. The City must have an internal control policy in place to review each housing project
and ensure compliance with the reporting requirements.
Condition: There was no procedure in place to monitor and ensure compliance with the reporting
requirements of the SHIP Program. As a result, the required report was submitted two days late by the City
toFHFC.
Questioned costs: Undeterminable.
Context: In fiscal year 2010, the City submitted the Annual Report for fiscal years 2007-2008, 2008-2009,
and 2009-2010 on September 17,2010, two days past due.
Effect: City's non compliance with grant requirements may result in repayment of award monies.
Cause: The City has not developed a procedure to ensure compliance requirements are being adhered to.
Recommendation: We recommend the City establish a formal policy and procedure to notify City
employees on pertinent due dates relating to grant awards. A tracking system should be developed to track
the timely submission of the reports.
Views of resoonsible officials and planned corrective action: The annual SHIP report was sent on the due
date, September 15, 2010, via electronic correspondence to Florida Housing Finance Corporation, but was
not accepted as a timely submission due to the new online submission requirement. A procedure and new
time-line has been established and calendared to complete and file the annual SHIP report as required by
program rules. This procedure will be memorialized in the Policies and Procedures manual.
17
401
City of Miami Beach, Florida
Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs (Continued}
Federal Awards Programs and State Projects
B. Compliance Findings
Federal Awards
CF 2010.01 Reporting
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)-
Community Development Block Grant "CDBG" (CFDA No. 14.218)
See IC 2010-02
Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: See IC 2010-02 for detailed view of
responsible officials and planned corrective action.
CF 2010.02 Davis Bacon
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)-
Community Development Block Grant "CDBG" (CFDA No. 14.218)
See IC 2010·04
Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: See IC 2010-04 for detailed view of
responsible officials and planned corrective action.
State Financial Assistance
CF 2010..03-Reporting
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
State Housing Initiatives Partnership "SHIP" (CFSA No. 52.901)
See IC 2010..06
Views of resoonsible officials and planned corrective actions: See IC 2010-06 for detailed view of
responsible officials and planned corrective action.
18
402
City of Miami Beach, Florida
Schedule of Prior Year Audit Findings
Federal Awards Programs and State Projects
Finding # Finding Title
Findings related to financial statements:
CF 2009-01 Subreclpient Monitoring (CFDA No.14.218)
StatU$
Monthly reports were not prepared and/or Not Corrected
submitted in a timely manner by the subrecipients
to the City as required by the subrecipient
agreements. in addition, no evidence of
monitoring visits were found in several
subrecipient's files.
CF 2009..02 Earmarking (CFDA No.14.218)
There was no procedure in place to monitor and Corrected
ensure compliance with the earmarking
requirements of the CDBG Program, therefore, the
City exceeded the allotted amount during fiscal
year2009.
CF 2009..03 Special Test (CFOA No.14.218)
An environmental review was not completed for the Corrected
Miami Beach Community Development
Corporation -AHen House Apartments.
CF 2009-04 Subreclplent Monitoring (CFDA No.14.239)
Monitoring of subrecipent activities was not
conducted during fiscal year 2009 for the Miami
Beach Community Development Center-
Community Housing Development Organization.
CF 2009-05 Reporting (CSfA No. 55.901)
There was no procedure in place to monitor and
ensure compliance with the reporting requirements
of the SHIP Program. As a result the required
report was submitted forty-nine days late by the
City to FHFC.
Corrected
Corrected
19
403
Explanation
The City agrees that fOOTial policies and procedures
for monitoring and reviewing activities are necessary.
The City concurs that a formal process must be
implemented for monitoring visits and other program
compliance. The City is currently undergoing a
review of all files and developing monitoring tools for
each subrecipient file which will document
responsibilities, contract deliverables, and deadlines.
Furthermore, The City is in the process of notifying all
subrecipients that failure to file monthly reports is a
defauH under their contracts.
The City corrected the specific finding in fiscal year
2009.
The City corrected the specific finding in fiscal year
2009.
The City corrected the specific finding in fiscal year
2009.
The City corrected the specifiC finding in fiscal year
2009.
City of Miami Beach, Florida
Schedule of Prior Year Audit Findings
Federal Awards Programs and State Projects (Continued)
CF 2009-06 Special Test (CSFA No. 55.901)
There was no procedure in place to monitor and
ensure compliance with the earmarking
requirements of the SHIP Program. As a result,
the City aid not meet any of the required
earmarking requirements during fiscal year 2009
for the closing year of fiscal year 2006-2007.
CF 2009-07 Subreelplent Monitoring (CSFA No.55.901)
There was no procedure in place to monitor and
ensure compHance with the subreclplent
requirements of the SHIP Program. As a result,
monthly reports were not prepared and or
submitted in a timely manner by the subrecipient,
Miami Beach Community Development Center, to
the City as required by the subreciplent's
agreements. Additionally, monitoring of
subrecipent activities was not conducted during
fiscal year 2009 by the aty.
Corrected
Corrected
20
404
The City corrected the specific finding in fiScal year
2009.
The City corrected the specific finding in fiScal year
2009.
City of Miami Beach, Florida
Management Letter in Accordance with the Rules of the
Auditor General of the State of Florida
September 30, 2010
405
Contents
Management Letter in Accordance with the
Rules of the Auditor General of the State of Florida
Appendix A-Current Year's Recommendations to Improve Financial Management,
Accounting Procedures and Internal Controls
Appendix B -Prior Year's Recommendations to Improve Financial Management.
Accounting Procedures and Internal Controls
406
1-2
3-4
5
IMcGiadrey
Management Letter in Accordance with the
Rules of the Auditor General of the State of Florida
To the Honorable Mayor and City Commissioners
City of Miami Beach, Florida
We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, the aggregate
discretely presented component units, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of
Miami Beach, Florida (the "City") as of and for the year ended September 30, 2010, which collectively comprise the
City's basic financial statements, and have issued our report thereon dated March 30, 2011. Our report was modified
to include a reference to other auditors.
We conducted our audtt in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America;
the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller
General of the United States; and OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments and Non-Profit
Organizations. We have issued our Independent Auditor's Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting and
on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audtt of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with
Government Auditing Standards dated March 30, 2011, and Independent Auditor's Report on Compliance with
Requirements Applicable to Each Major Federal Program and State Project and on Internal Control over Compliance
and Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs dated March 30, 2011. Disclosures in those reports and schedule
should be considered in conjunction with this management letter.
Additionally, our audit was conducted in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 10.550, Rules of the Auditor
General, which governs the conduct of local governmental entity audits performed in the State of Florida. This letter
includes the following information, which is not included in the aforementioned auditor's reports or schedule:
Section 10.554(1)(i) 1., Rules of the Auditor General, requires that we determine whether or not corrective actions
have been taken to address findings and recommendations made in the preceding annual financial audit report.
Corrective actions have been taken to address findings and recommendations made in the preceding annual
financial audit report, except for those reported below under the heading "Prior Year's Recommendations to Improve
Financial Management, Accounting Procedures and Internal Controls" listed in Appendix B.
Section 1 0.554(1 )(1)2., Rules of the Auditor General, requires our audit to include a review of the provisions of Section
218.415, Florida Statutes, regarding the investment of public funds . In connection with our audit, we determined that
the City complied with Section 218.415, Florida Statutes, relating to local government investment policies.
Section 10.554(1)(i)3., Rules of the Auditor General, requires that we address in the management letter any
recommendations to improve financial management The recommendations to improve the City's financial
management have been addressed In Appendix A -Current Year's Recommendations to Improve Financial
Management, Accounting Procedures and Internal Controls to this report.
MeGiadtey Is the brand undor which RSM McGioldlwy,lnc. and McGiadrey 6 PuHen, LlP serve chent•' buslneu needs.
'l'lle twO ftrms operotlng as separate legal entitles In an alternative priCtlc:e tiJU<IU"'·
407
Member of RSM lntemolloMI network. a network of
Independent accounting, IIX and consulting flrms
Section 10.554(1)(i)4., Rules of the Auditor General, requires that we address violations of provisions of contracts or
grant agreements, or abuse that have occurred, or are likely to have occurred, that have an effect on the financial
statements that is less than material but more than inconsequential. In connection with our audit, we did not have any
such findings.
Section 10.554(1)0)5., Rules of the Auditor General provides that the auditor may, based on professional judgment,
report the following matters that have an inconsequential effect on financial statements, considering both quantitative
and qualitative factors: (1) violations of provisions of contracts or grant agreements, fraud, illegal acts, or abuse, and
(2) deficiencies in internal control that are not significant deficiencies. In connection with our audit, we did not have
any such findings.
Section 10.554(1){1}6., Rules of the Auditor General, requires that the name or official title and legal authority for the
primary government and each component unit of the reporting entity be disclosed in this management letter, unless
disclosed in the notes to the financial statements. The information is disclosed in Note 1A to the financial statements.
Section 10.554(1)(i)7.a., Rules of the Auditor General, requires a statement be included as to whether or not the local
governmental entity has met one or more of the conditions described in Section 218.503(1), Florida Statutes, and
identification of the specific condition met. In connection with our audit, we determined that the City did not meet
any of the conditions described In Section 218.503(1 ), Florida Statutes.
Section 10.554(1)(i)7.b., Rules of the Auditor General, requires that we determine whether the annual financial report
for the City for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2010 filed with the Florida Department of Financial Services
pursuant to Section 218.32(1)(a), Florida Statutes, is in agreement with the annual financial audit report for the fiscal
year ended september 30, 2010. In connection with our audit, we determined that these two reports were in
agreement.
Pursuant to Sections 10.554(1)(i)7.c. and 10.556(7), Rules of the Auditor General, we applied financial condition
assessment procedures. It is management's responsibility to monitor the City's financial condition, and our financial
condition assessment was based in part on representations made by management and the review of financial
information provided by same.
Pursuant to Chapter 119, Florida Statutes this management letter is a public record and its distribution is not limited.
Auditing standards generally accepted In the United States of America require us to indicate that this letter is
intended solely for the information and use of the Honorable Mayor, City Commissioners, management of the City,
the State of Florida Office of the Auditor General, federal and state awarding agencies, and pass-through entities,
and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
Miami-Dade County, Florida
March 30, 2011
2
408
City of Miami Beach, Florida
Appendix A
Current Year's Recommendations to Improve Financial Management,
Accounting Procedures and Internal Controls
Year Ended September 30, 2010
No.
2010-1
Current Year's Observations
Self-Insurance Fund Deficit and
Actuarial discount rate of the
Self-Insurance Program
2010·1 Self-Insurance Fund Deficit and Actuarial discount rate
Criteria: Proprietary funds (which include internal service funds) should be accounted for on a cost reimbursement
basis. Also, actuarial assumptions used to estimate the City's self insurance liability should be reasonable and reflect
current market related conditions.
Condition: The City's self-insurance fund reported a net asset deficit of approximately $7.0 million, as of
September 30, 2010. Additionally, it was noted, it may not be appropriate for the City to use a 5% rate for
discounting the loss reserves, since the City's self-insurance fund has no assets and does not earn any investment
income.
Cause: The rates established to charge each participating fund of the City were not adequate enough to reimburse
the cost of insurance.
Effect: The City's may not have enough resources accumulated to fully liquidate insurable liabilities as they become
due. In addition, by not property allocating these charges to the various funds and functions, the City might not
incorporate all of the City's cost that would be applicable in order to accurately establish rates and fees for services
that are charged by the City to external parties.
Recommendation: We recommend that the City evaluate its self-insurance program, to not only help ensure that the
level of amounts charged to user funds are sufficiently balanced to sustain the self-insurance program, but to help
ensure that reserves will be replenished In order to fund the deficit. The total charge by the internal service fund to
the other funds should be based on a systematic method and adjusted over a reasonable period of time so that
internal service fund revenue and expenses are approximately equal.
Views of responsible offiCials and planned corrective actions: The deficit in the Risk Management self insurance fund
decreased from $8.985 million at September 30, 2009 to $6.811 million at September 30, 2010, a decrease of
$2.17 4 million. It is the City's intention to continue to increase revenues and thus reduce the deficit in future years. In
addition, the City considers, subject to commission budget approval, an annual contribution to reduce the Fund's
defiCit.
As w~h all other local governments, Fiscal Year 2010 was a diffiCult budget year, as is Fiscal Year 2011.
Furthermore, Fiscal Year 2012 is expected to be even more challenging due to continued declines in property values
through January 2011 and increased pension contribution requirements primarily because pension investments have
not met actuarial assumptions in the last two years. As a result, for the short-term, the City has elected to use year-
end surplus in the General Fund as carry-forward to future fiscal years, rather than to fund deficit increases in the self
insurance fund. It is anticipated that property values will stabilize in the coming years and then resume normal
historical increases and that investment returns will return to historical levels, thereby reducing the stress on the
budget. It is therefore anticipated that, in the longer term, the City will once again be in the position to reduce the risk
deficit as it has done in prior years.
3
409
City of Miami Beach, Florida
Appendix A
Current Year's Recommendations to Improve Financial Management,
Accounting Procedures and Internal Controls (Continued)
Year Ended September 30, 2010
In FY 2010 the City decreased the rate for discounting toss reserves from 6% to 5% and plans to further decrease it
to 4% in FY 2011. At September 30, 2010, the City had $13.989 million in IBNR liabilities and $9,850 million in
pending insurance claims liabilities. We feel that this is sufficient to liquidate any insurable liabilities that become
due.
4
410
City of Miami Beach, Florida
Appendix B
Prior Year's Recommendations to Improve Financial Management,
Accounting Procedures and Internal Controls
Year Ended September 30, 2010
No. Prior Years' Observations
2009-1 Complexity of Passwords
2009-3 Budget Compliance
2002-2 Self-Insurance Fund Deficit
see current year's comment at 2010-1
5
411
Observation is
Still Relevant
X
Comment No
Longer Relevant
X
X
Exhibit 2-Audit Areas
412
Exhibit 2 -Audit Areas for FY201 0/11
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
INTERNAL AUDIT DEPARTMENT
Audit Areas
Areas highlighted are considered for audit based on projected frequency. Comments provided indicate reasons why area
may not be audited within the projected frequency.
Department • Audit Area
Mayor and City Commission
!operations
Administrative Support Services
Audit Areas 2011 Final
Last
Audit
Risk
~ Comments
' external
these financial areas annually within the scope
their comprehensive financial audit of the city.
-::-:-""'1'"'"'"~ this does not constitute a detailed internal
413
the controls are being reviewed. The City
consultant study underway to update the
of determination for management fees.
01/04/2012
Exhibit 2 -Audit Areas for FY201 0/11
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
INTERNAL AUDIT DEPARTMENT
Audit Areas
Areas highlighted are considered for audit based on projected frequency. Comments provided indicate reasons why area
may not be audited within the projected frequency.
Department -Audit Area
Human Resources
Operations includes Labor Relations
Review of Benefits Formulas
Pension Time Purchased by Leave Hours
Health, Dental and Life Insurance
Citv Clerk
Operations, Record Retention I Public Requests I
Special Masters I
Election Invoices I
City Attorney
!operations
Economic Dev. & Cultural Events
Audit Areas 2011 Final
etc.
Last
Audit
Risk
~
2005 L
2008 L
2010 L
I 2011 I L I
I 2010 I M I
I 2008 I L I
2
414
Comments
year, external auditor reviews internal
controls over IT functions in their annual audit.
Contract calls for annual certified statement of
revenue. Audit reviewed 2008 year revenues in
4/2009.
I
I
I
01/04/2012
Exhibit 2 -Audit Areas for FY201 0/11
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
INTERNAL AUDIT DEPARTMENT
Audit Areas
Areas highlighted are considered for audit based on projected frequency. Comments provided indicate reasons why area
may not be audited within the projected frequency.
Department -Audit Area
Plans Review, Application Fees
Operations
Audit Areas 2011 Final
Last
Audit
Risk
~
2009 H
2008 H
3
415
Comments
"nrnnl<>t.,.rt in 2009. Procurement of new n<>r·mi1~in,,l
system in 2009.
Code Compliance system being procured in 2010.
Department is reviewed
of Florida and HUD.
by the
01/04/2012
Exhibit 2 -Audit Areas for FY201 0/11
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
INTERNAL AUDIT DEPARTMENT
Audit Areas
Areas highlighted are considered for audit based on projected frequency. Comments provided indicate reasons why area
may not be audited within the projected frequency.
Department • Audit Area
Parks and Recreation
Golf Mana~:~ement A~:~reement Miami Beach Golf
Golf Management Agreement Normandy Shores
Greenspace Management
Landscaping Agreements
Overtime (Parks & Recreation)
Recreation fees I Cashier functions
Tennis Centers Agreement
Audit Areas 2011 Final
Last
Audit
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
4
I
416
Risk
~
M
M
L
M
M
M
L
H
Comments
Course under renovation, completion in FY
2008/09.
Contracts are effectively monitored by Parks
Greenspace Mgmt and Procurement. Results are
shared with Internal Audit.
components were reviewed in
with reimbursement requests made
prior hurricanes.
01/04/2012
Exhibit 2 -Audit Areas for FY201 0/11
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
INTERNAL AUDIT DEPARTMENT
Audit Areas
Areas highlighted are considered for audit based on projected frequency. Comments provided indicate reasons why area
may not be audited within the projected frequency.
Department • Audit Area
p k" ar ma
Attended Parking Lots Monitoring
Boat Show Parking
Cashiers & Attendants Agreement(Parkina)
Coin Room (Monitoring) Meter Collection
County Court Fines Parking
Meter Collection Agreement
Parking Debit Card/In Car Meters
Parking Enforcement Reviews (Meters)
Parking Permits (Non-Revenue)
Parking Permits (Revenue)
~ace Rentals -Meters
Space Rentals -Parking Garages
Towing Fees· Parking Department
Valet Parking Agreement (Gold Star)
Fl M eet anagement
Fuel distribution
Inventory & Processing
Operations /Internal Service Charges Billings
Vehicle Purchases
Public Safety
Audit Areas 2011 Final
Last
Audit
2011
2008
2010
2011
2003
2009
2010
2011
2011
2007
2008
2009
2009
2011
2009
2010
2011
2007
5
417
Risk
~
H
M
M
H
L
M
M
H
L
M
M
M
L
M
M
L
L
L
Comments
Completed 4 reviews during the year.
As of 8/2009 audit reauired annuallv.
Completed 4 reviews of coin room during the year.
Continuously monitored throughout year. 24
separate reviews performed.
Audited vehicle purchasing process.
no exceptions
Internal Audit assisted police in reviewing new
procedures for false alarm. Police in process of
new software for
01/04/2012
Exhibit 2 -Audit Areas for FY201 0/11
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
INTERNAL AUDIT DEPARTMENT
Audit Areas
Areas highlighted are considered for audit based on projected frequency. Comments provided indicate reasons why area
may not be audited within the projected frequency.
Works, Parks,
Audit Areas 2011 Final
Last
Audit
6
418
Risk
~
Study
completed in 2009. Procurement of new permitting
system in 2009.
funding reviewed by City Econ Dev.
Periodically reviewed by Federal HUD. Areas
reviewed by external auditors through the Single
Report under OMB Circular A-133.
01/04/2012
Exhibit 3 -Summary of Internal Audit Activities
419
Summary of Internal Audit Activities for Fiscal Year 2010/11
Internal Audits -Available On Line
Cultural Arts Council
First Class Parking, LLC Valet Parking Operational Audit -Art Basel 2010
Internal Audits-Pending Final Reports
Accumulated Leave Liability
Special Events Fees
State Beachfront Management Agreement
Boucher Brothers Miami Beach, LLC Beachfront Concession Agreement
Concurrency Mitigation Fees
Non-Revenue Municipal Parking Permits
State Forfeited Funds
Public Works Department's Warehouse Inventory
Sanitation Fees Residential Billing and Service Agreement
Sanitation Impact Fees
Sanitation Fines and Forthwiths
Storm Water Review
Water and Sewer Billings
Water and Sewer Impact Fees
Procurement Division Operations
City Clerk Operations
Fleet Management Division -Internal Service Charge Billings
Public Works Right of Way Permit Fees
Miami Beach Gardens Conservancy -Management Agreement
For fiscal year 2010/11 internal audits to date included the following recommendations:
• Additional safeguards over inventory processing for areas of Public Works;
• Revisions to update several departmental procedures and improve controls for
Sanitation, Procurement and City Clerk offices;
• Changes in procedures to comply to reporting requirements of approved grant funds
distributed by the Cultural Arts Council;
• Improve internal control processes and clarification of charges for Water and Sewer
Impact Fees, Sanitation Impact Fees, Concurrency Mitigation Fees, Public Works
Right of Way Permit Fees, Special Event Fees and Sanitation Fines;
• Improve process and verification of charges for Water and Sewer, Storm water, and
Sanitation Residential billings;
• Strengthen oversight of compliance to the Beach Concession agreement;
• Improvement of internal controls over Fleet Division internal service charges; recording
and processing State Forfeited Funds;
• Improve controls over donated leave and leave buy-back provisions;
• Confirmation of funds forwarded to Miami Beach Conservancy to be used for proper
agency purpose and recommendations for improvement in internal controls;
• Verification of performance of valet parking operations and attended lots, and
compliance with Parking Department procedures for Non-Revenue parking Permits.
420
Parking Monitoring Reviews
In the Parking area, the Division completed twenty-four meter, four attended lot cash operations
and four coin room reviews during the past fiscal year. While our parking meter reviews
identified an improvement in enforcement over the previous fiscal year, areas of enforcement
still fell short of desired benchmarks. Operational procedures for attended lots were found to
comply with the city's guidelines. In addition, coin room operations were functioning in
accordance the city's procedures.
Sanitation Audits
In FY 2006/07 our part time position was expanded to a fulltime position dedicated to monitoring
and auditing waste haulers. This effort led to the issuance of seven audit reports in fiscal year
2010/11 resulted in $41,7 44 of audit assessments
Other Support
Additional support was directed to performing non-audit activities.
• Assistance was provided for Cleanliness Assessment Program
o Input of Daily Assessment results.
o Preparation of Quarterly reports.
o Testing new automated assessment system and reports.
• Hurricane related grant monitoring responsibilities for the past fiscal year included:
o Assisting FEMA and the State with their ongoing closeout for Hurricane Wilma 2005.
o Preparation of Quarterly Reports to FEMA (still ongoing for Hurricane Wilma projects).
o Monitoring each open project for completion and requested reimbursement.
o Assisting Office of Inspector General with audit of FEMA funding received for
Hurricanes Katrina and Wilma.
Additional monies recovered during the past fiscal year for these claims amounted to $260,777
for Hurricane Wilma. Additional funds are pending as projects are completed. We anticipate
that in fiscal year 2011/12 additional time will be spent on completing the request for payments
and final closeouts for the 2005 storms.
421
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
422
R9 -New Business and Commission Requests
R9D The Committee Of The Whole Will Meet During Lunch Recess In The City
Manager's Large Conference Room To Discuss The Community Satisfaction
Survey.
(Budget & Performance Improvement)
423
, Agenda Item I~ q D
Date \-\\-\2-
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
424
!9 MIAMI BEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
FROM: Ed Tobin, Commissioner
DATE: October 14, 2011
SUBJECT: Agenda Item for October 19th City Commission Meeting
Please place on the October 19th, 2011 Commission Meeting Agenda a discussion
and update regarding the Tennis Management Contract RFP.
If you have any questions please contact, Dessiree Kane at Extension 627 4
ET/dk
We are commirted to providing excellent publiC service and safety to all who live. work, and play in o\ Agenda Item R q E
11
425
Date 1-11-12
......
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
426
MIAMI BEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
FROM: Jonah Wolfson, Commissioner
DATE: November 7'h, 2011
SUBJECT: Agenda Discussion Item
Please place on the December 14'h, 2011, Commission meeting agenda a discussion
item for the City Commission to talk about the creation of a Tennis Committee.
If you have any questions, please contact Leonor Hernandez at extension 6437.
JW/Ih
Agenda Item R q F
We are committed to providing excellent public service and safety to all who live, work, and play in our vib Date 1-//-l '2,_
427
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
428
MIAMI BEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Jorge Gonzalez, City Manager
FROM: Michael Gongora, Commissioner
DATE: December 7, 2011
SUBJECT: Agenda Item for December 14, 2011 Commission Meeting
Please place on the December 14, 2011 Commission Meeting agenda as a
discussion item regarding an ordinance on creating a committee entitled the Tennis
Advisory Committee. The mission of the committee would be to improve the lives of
the residents by promoting the development and sound management of public
facilities dedicated to the sport of tennis in Miami Beach. The powers and the duties
of the committee would be to provide reports and make recommendations as to the
use, management, and development of public tennis facilities to the appropriate city
officials. The committee would consist of a seven member committee each
appointed by the Mayor and Commission. Please see attached ordinance. Another
alternative is to combine the Golf Advisory Committee and Tennis Advisory
Committee and then the Mayor and Commissioners can have two appointees to the
newly created Golf and Tennis Advisory Committee. If you have any questions,
please contact Diana Fontani Martinez at extension 7103.
Attachment
MG/df
429
Agenda Item 1~ q G-
Date 1-1/-12....
ORDINANCE NO.------
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE
MIAMI BEACH CITY CODE BY AMENDING CHAPTER 2,
ENTITLED "ADMINISTRATION," BY AMENDING ARTICLE Ill,
ENTITLED "AGENCIES, BOARDS AND COMMITTEES," BY
CREATING DIVISION 33, TO BE ENTITLED "TENNIS
ADVISORY COMMITTEE," AND BY CREATING SECTIONS 2-
190.148 THROUGH 2-190.153 THERETO TO CREATE A
TENNIS ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND PROVISIONS
ESTABLISHING THE COMMITTEE AND ITS MISSION,
POWERS, DUTIES, COMPOSITION, AND SUPPORTING
DEPARTMENT; AND PROVIDING FOR REPEALER,
SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATION, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, tennis is a popular recreational sport enjoyed by many residents and
visitors in the City of Miami Beach; and
WHEREAS, in order to improve the lives of the residents in the City of Miami Beach by
promoting the development and sound management of public tennis facilities, a Tennis Advisory
Committee should be created.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1.
That Chapter 2, Article Ill, of the Miami Beach City Code is hereby amended to create Division
33 thereof, and Sections 2-190.148 through 2-190.153 thereto, as follows:
DIVISION 33. TENNIS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Section 2-190.148. Establishment.
There is hereby established the Tennis Advisory Committee. whose mission. powers. duties.
and composition are set forth below.
Section 2-190.149. Mission.
To improve the lives of residents by promoting the development and sound management of
public facilities dedicated to the sport of tennis in Miami Beach.
Section 2-190.150. Powers and Duties.
To provide reports and to make advisory recommendations as to the use. management. and
development of public tennis facilities to the appropriate city officials who may include the City
Commission. the City Manager. the Historic Preservation Board. the Capital Improvements
Projects Office. and/or any other applicable committees or boards whose policies influence the
sport of tennis in Miami Beach.
430
Section 2-190.151. Composition.
The Committee shall be composed of seven (7) members. each of whom shall be voting
members who have demonstrated a high degree of interest, participation. and/or expertise in
the sport of tennis. The Mayor and City Commissioners shall each make one direct
appointment.
Section 2-190.152. Other Committees.
The chairperson of the Tennis Advisory Committee. or his or her designee. shall serve as a
nonvoting, ex officio member of the Parks and Recreational Facilities Board.
Section 2-190.153. Supporting Department.
The supporting department of the committee is the Parks and Recreation Department.
SECTION 3. Repealer.
All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be and the same are hereby
repealed.
SECTION 4. Severability.
If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is held to be invalid or
unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, then said holding shall in no way affect
the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
SECTION 5. Codification.
It is the intention of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, and it is
hereby ordained that the provisions of this ordinance shall become and be made a part of the
Code of the City of Miami Beach, Florida. The sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or
re-lettered to accomplish such intention, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section,"
"article," or other appropriate word.
SECTION 6. Effective Date.
This Ordinance shall take effect the day of December, 2011.
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of December, 2011.
ATTEST:
ROBERT PARCHER, CITY CLERK
Underline denotes additions
MATTI HERRERA BOWER
MAYOR
F:\atto\TURN\ORDINANC\Creating Committee-Tennis Advisory Committee.doc
2
431
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
432
~ MIAMI BEACH
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jorge M. Gqnzalez, City Manager
FROM: Ed Tobin, Commissioner
DATE: December 5, 2011
SUBJECT: Agenda Item for December 141h Commission Meeting
Please place on the December 14th, 2011 Commission Meeting Agenda a request for a
discussion and update of the City Wide Dunes Maintenance Plan.
If you have any questions please contact, Dessiree Kane at Extension 627 4
ET/dk
We are committed to providing excellent public service and safety to all who live, work, and play in our
433
Agenda ltem----~.R~qL.t.H+--
Date__._}_,-l..~....l-...~..lL-.::...__
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
434
R10
CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS
435
lD MIAMI BEACH -=-
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT: City Attorney's Status Report
LAWSUITS FILED BY OR AGAINST THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH SINCE THE LAST
REPORT
1. Sanctuary South Beach Condominium Association. Inc. vs. Jacob Sopher. et al., Case
No. 11-18584 CC 25 (County Court-11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County,
Florida)
This is an action to foreclose a condominium assessment lien on real property located at
1745 James Avenue, Unit 208, Miami Beach, Florida. The Summons and Complaint
were served on the City on November 30, 2011.
The City's Answer and Affirmative Defense, asserting priority for any special
assessments, including, but not limited to, utility water and sewer services, demolition or
board-up liens, and resort taxes was filed on December 16, 2011.
2. The Pavilion Condominium Association of Miami Beach, Inc. vs. Mireya Glavez et al.,
Case No. 11-39153 CA 22 (Circuit Court -11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade
County, Florida)
This is an action to foreclose a condominium assessment lien on real property located at
5601 Collins Avenue, Unit 1208, Miami Beach, Florida. The Summons and Complaint
were served on the City on November 30, 2011.
The City's Answer and Affirmative Defense, asserting priority for any special
assessments, including, but not limited to, utility water and sewer services, demolition or
board-up liens, and resort taxes was filed on December 16, 2011.
3. Sanctuary South Beach Condominium Association. Inc. vs. William H. Demps, et al..
Case No. 11-17328 CC 05 (County Court-11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade
County, Florida)
This is an action to foreclose a condominium assessment lien on real property located at
1745 James Avenue, Unit 209, Miami Beach, Florida. The Summons and Complaint
were served on the City on November 30, 2011.
437
Agenda Item RIOA
Date 1-11-12-.
City Attorney's Report
January 3, 2012
Page2
The City's Answer and Affirmative Defense, asserting priority for any special
assessments, including, but not limited to, utility water and sewer services, demolition or
board-up liens, and resort taxes was filed on December 16, 2011.
4. Sanctuary South Beach Condominium Association. Inc. vs. James Omotosho, et al.,
Case No. 11-08278 CC 26 (County Court-11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade
County, Florida)
This is an action to foreclose a condominium assessment lien on real property located at
1745 James Avenue, Unit 112, Miami Beach, Florida. The Summons and Complaint
were served on the City on November 30, 2011.
The City's Answer and Affirmative Defense, asserting priority for any special
assessments, including, but not limited to, utility water and sewer services, demolition or
board-up liens, and resort taxes was filed on December 16, 2011.
5. The Pavilion Condominium Association of Miami Beach, Inc. vs. Robert Rosell. et al.,
Case No. 11-39917 CA 32 (Circuit Court-11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade
County, Florida)
This is an action to foreclose a condominium assessment lien on real property located at
5601 Collins Avenue, Unit 1516, Miami Beach, Florida. The Summons and Complaint
were served on the City on December 2, 2011.
The City's Answer and Affirmative Defense, asserting priority for any special
assessments, including, but not limited to, utility water and sewer services, demolition or
board-up liens, and resort taxes was filed on December 16, 2011.
6. The Pavilion Condominium Association of Miami Beach, Inc. vs. Arquimides Castro. et
.§L Case No. 11-18275 CC 05 (County Court-11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-
Dade County, Florida)
This is an action to foreclose a condominium assessment lien on real property located at
5601 Collins Avenue, Unit 618, Miami Beach, Florida. The Summons and Complaint
were served on the City on December 2, 2011.
The City's Answer and Affirmative Defense, asserting priority for any special
assessments, including, but not limited to, utility water and sewer services, demolition or
board-up liens, and resort taxes was filed on December 16, 2011.
7. The Pavilion Condominium Association of Miami Beach, Inc. vs. Roberto F. Gonzalez. et
.§L Case No. 11-18276 CC 05 (County Court-11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-
Dade County, Florida)
This is an action to foreclose a condominium assessment lien on real property located at
5601 Collins Avenue, Unit 1724, Miami Beach, Florida. The Summons and Complaint
were served on the City on December 2, 2011.
The City's Answer and Affirmative Defense, asserting priority for any special
assessments, including, but not limited to, utility water and sewer services, demolition or
board-up liens, and resort taxes was filed on December 16, 2011.
438
City Attorney's Report
January 3, 2012
Page3
8. Bank of America. N.A. vs. Felipe Herrera. et al., Case No. 11-40158 CA 42 (Circuit Court
-11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida)
This is an action to foreclose mortgage on real property located at 1500 Bay Road, Unit
11 04S, Miami Beach, Florida. The Summons and Complaint were served on the City on
December 5, 2011.
The City's Answer and Affirmative Defense, asserting priority for any special
assessments, including, but not limited to, utility water and sewer services, demolition or
board-up liens, and resort taxes was filed on December 15, 2011.
9. Thamyris Cardelle; Raymond F. Chambers! Hanes F Harley; Andrew J. Kuncas;
John McCabe; James V. Muro; Jess M. Metzgar; Joseph Prevish; Michael Prvor;
Pedro Rodriguez; Bernie Ruder; Garfield Taylor; William Young; Eliseo R.
Zacarias v. Miami Beach Fraternal Order of Police William Nichols Lodge No. 8
and City of Miami Beach, Miami Dade County, FL Case No. 11-24273-CIV-
ZLOCH/ROSENBAUM (United States District Court for the Southern District of
Florida)
This is an age discrimination Complaint by 14 current or former police officers
against the City and their union, the FOP. The Plaintiffs claim that several
changes to the most recent collective bargaining agreement and other actions
violate the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and the Florida Civil Rights
Act. The Plaintiffs had filed charges with the EEOC which did not find any
evidence of discrimination. This suit in federal court will be vigorously defended
by the City which is in the process of filing a Motion to Dismiss.
10.Marilyn Serene v. City of Miami Beach, et al #11-39961 CA 31 (Circuit Court-11th
Judicial Circuit Court-11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County)
The City was served with this complaint on December 8, 2011 alleging that on
March 1, 2008, the plaintiff, Marilyn Serene, was an invitee of the Miami Beach
Convention Center attending the Graphics of the Americas Expo when she
sustained serious bodily injuries after she tripped and fell due to the existence of
an uneven floor surface which consisted of overlapping carpet that was
inadequately maintained. We have sent out a demand letter to the insurance
carrier for the center requesting representation and indemnification. We have
also requested a 30 day extension from January 8th 2012 to February 8th 2012 to
respond to the complaint pending answers to our demand from the insurance
carrier.
11. Eliseo La Bruno v. City of Miami Beach, and Jose Reina, Case No.11-39972
CA09 (Circuit Court-11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida)
This is a state court lawsuit by an individual against the City and one of its police
officers for state claims, including use of excessive force and battery, and federal
civil rights violations. The incident occurred in December 2007 in which the
Plaintiff had a dispute with a taxi driver. The Plaintiff fled and eventually was
439
City Attorney's Report
January 3, 2012
Page4
shot by the police officer. The Plaintiff plead guilty to one of the criminal charges
against him. This case will be removed to federal court from state court. The
City is in the process of responding to the Complaint.
12. Fabrio Gravaghi. First on Lincoln 102 Corp .. Giammy & Chiara. LLC First on
Lincoln 106 Corp. Federico Olivieri. and First on Lincoln Condo Association. Inc.
v. City of Miami Beach, Case Nos. JC1100708-1100711; JC11000737-1100742
and JC11 0007 44 (Circuit Court-11 1h Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County,
Florida)
The Petition for Writ of Certiorari involves a decision of the City of Miami Beach's
Special Master finding that Fabio Gravaghi, First on Lincoln 102 Corporation, et.
al. (the "Petitioners") violated the terms of the City of Miami Beach's Land
Development Regulations by leasing residential units in the condominium
building that is located at 1619 Lennox Avenue. The Petitioners have alleged
that their due process rights have been materially violated by the Special
Master changing his decision from the oral ruling announced at the Hearing
without conducting additional quasi-judicial proceedings. The City Attorney's
Office is reviewing the legal merits of the Petition for Writ of Certiorari.
13. Aurora Bank FSB vs. Alison D. Brungart. et al.. Case No. 11-41083 CA 42 (Circuit Court
-11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida)
This is an action to foreclose mortgage on real property located at 710 Washington
Avenue, Unit 310, Miami Beach, Florida. The Summons and Complaint were served on
the City on December 14, 2011.
The City's Answer and Affirmative Defense, asserting priority for any special
assessments, including, but not limited to, utility water and sewer services, demolition or
board-up liens, and resort taxes will be timely filed.
14. M. Vila & Associates. Inc. v. City of Miami Beach Case No. 11-42534 (Circuit
Court-11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida)
This suit was recently served on the City, along with multiple discovery
documents. Plaintiff was a contractor which was terminated by the City for the
project known as the City Center Right of Way Infrastructure Improvement
Project #9A due to non-performance issues.
15. Tower Group. Inc. v. City of Miami Beach Case No. 11-41518 (Circuit Court -11th
Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida)
This suit was recently served on the City, along with multiple discovery
documents. Plaintiff was the general contractor for City's multi-purpose
municipal parking garage. The City has not paid the contractor the retainage due
to defects and other outstanding items. A motion to dismiss will be filed shortly
due to defective service on the City.
F:\ATTO\AAOFF\AAOFF\FILE.#S\Status report CAO 01112.doc
440
~ MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower
Members of the City Commission
City Manager Jorge Gonz
January 11, 2012
Closed Attorney-Client Session
Pursuant to §286.011, Florida Statutes, the City Attorney hereby advises the Mayor
and City Commission that he desires advice concerning the following pending
litigation matter:
The City of Miami Beach, vs. Hargreaves Associates, Incorporated, et
.9.L. Eleventh Judicial Circuit of Florida, Case No. 10-61979 CA 03,
11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida.
Therefore, a private closed Attorney-Client Session will be held during the lunch
recess of the City Commission meeting on January 11, 2012 in the City Manager's
Large Conference Room, Fourth Floor, City Hall, to discuss settlement negotiations
and/or strategy related to litigation expenditures with regard to the above-referenced
litigation matter.
The following individuals will be in attendance: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower;
Members of the City Commission: Jorge Exposito, Michael Gongora, Jerry Libbin,
Edward Tobin, Deede Weithorn and Jonah Wolfson; City Manager Jorge Gonzalez,
City Attorney Jose Smith, First Assistant City Attorney Steven Rothstein, Special
Counsel Richard Lydecker, and Special Counsel Meredyth Cooper.
JS/SR!Ir/mem
F:\A TIO\AAOFF\AAOFF\LUPITA\COMMISSION ITEMS\Attorney-Ciient Session-Hargreaves r
Agenda Item RIO B _....:......;....:;,_:::::.....__
Date I-ll -1 '2-
_.o...-..;....;..,.__;~-
441
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
442
~ MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower
Members of the City Commission
City Manager Jorge Gonzalez
January 11, 2012
SUBJECT: Closed Attorney-Client Sessions
Pursuant to §286.011, Florida Statutes, the City Attorney hereby advises the Mayor
and City Commission that he desires advice concerning the following pending
litigation matter:
1) 1100 West Properties, LLC v. City of Miami Beach, Circuit Court Case
No. 09-70789 CA 23
2) City of Miami Beach v. 1100 West Properties, LLC, Circuit Court
Appellate Division Case No.: 11-505 AP
Therefore, a private closed Attorney-Client Session will be held during the lunch
recess of the City Commission meeting on January 11, 2012 in the City Manager's
Large Conference Room, Fourth Floor, City Hall, to discuss settlement negotiations
and/or strategy related to litigation expenditures with regard to the above-referenced
litigation matters.
The following individuals will be in attendance: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower;
Members of the City Commission: Jorge Exposito, Michael Gongora, Jerry Libbin,
Edward Tobin, Deede Weithorn and Jonah Wolfson; City Manager Jorge Gonzalez,
City Attorney Jose Smith, and First Assistant City Rhonda Montoya Hasan.
JS/RM/mem
F:\A TTO\SMIJ\attorney client session \Attorney-Client Session-Mondrian.doc
Agenda Item RIDC.
Date 1-11-/2
443
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
444
= -=-MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
Mayor Matti Herrera Bower
Members of the City Commission
City Manager Jorge Gonzalez
City Attorney Jose
January 11, 2012
Attorney Client Session
Pursuant to §286.011, Florida Statutes, the City Attorney hereby advises the
Mayor and City Commission that he desires advice concerning the following
pending litigation matter:
Museum Walk Apartments v. City of Miami Beach, Eleventh Judicial Circuit
of Florida, Appellate Jurisdiction, Case Nos. 11-058-061; 068-074; 076-084;
086-087; 115-124; 662; and 670
Therefore, a private closed Attorney-Client Session will be held during the lunch
recess of the City Commission meeting on January 11, 2012 in the City
Manager's Large Conference Room, Fourth Floor, City Hall, to discuss
settlement negotiations and/or litigation strategy with regard to the above-
referenced litigation matters.
The following individuals will be in attendance: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower;
Members of the City Commission: Vice Mayor Deede Weithorn, Edward Tobin,
Jorge Exposito, Michael Gongora, Jerry Libbin and Jonah Wolfson; City Attorney
Jose Smith, City Manager Jorge Gonzalez, First Assistant City Attorney Rhonda
Montoya Hasan and First Assistant City Attorney Steven Rothstein.
JS/RMH/SR!Ir
Agenda Item R \0 D
Date 1-11-I'L
445
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
446
REPORTS
AND
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
447
-::::s
0' --CD
3
tn
Reports and Informational Items
{see LTC #004-2012)
449
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
450
451
:::c c
)>
MIAMI BEACH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution of the Chairperson and Members of the Miami Beach Redevelopment Agency adopting the First
Amendment to the FY 201 0/11 Operating Budgets for the City Center Redevelopment Area, the Anchor Shops and
Parking Garage and adopting the Budget for the Pennsylvania Avenue Shops and Garage for FY 2010/11.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Improve the City's overall financial health and maintain overall bond rating
~upporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.):
One of the City's Key Intended Outcomes is to ensure well designed and well maintained capital projects and
infrastructure. In keeping with this goal, approximately 50 percent of actual expenditures in FY 2010/11 were allocated
towards capital expenditures including new capital projects and renewal, maintenance and replacement of existing RDA
capital infrastructure.
Issue:
Should the RDA Board adopt the proposed first amendment to the FY 2010/11 Operating Budgets for the City Center
Redevelopment Area, the Anchor Shops and Parking Garage, as well as adopt the Budget for the Pennsylvania Avenue
Shops and Garage for FY 201 0/11?
Item Summary/Recommendation:
The year-end budget to preliminary actual comparisons for the RDA reflect that there is an operating budget surplus of
$669,452 (1.8%) in the RDA, overall. However, because the RDA budget was adopted at a category level, a budget
amendment is required to address certain expenditure categories that are over budget. Similarly, garage revenues at the
Anchor Garage in FY 2010/11 came in approximately $709,000 greater than budget, which is more than sufficient to
offset the resulting $78,837 increase in revenue-sharing obligations with Loews, to cover lower than expected retail
revenues (due to the loss of a tenant earlier in the year) and unanticipated but necessary renewal and replacement costs
totaling $96,274 (e.g. HVAC replacement for three retail tenants, elevator repairs). The Pennsylvania Avenue Garage
opened during Fiscal Year 2010/11 and revenues and expenses for the facility were not adopted as part of the FY
2010/11 budget. The parking garage generated $478,583 in revenues in FY 2010/11, which more than adequately covers
the $394,068 in related operating expenses for the facility.
In order to address instances where actual expenditures for budgeted categories exceeded the adopted budget for the
reasons described in the related commission memorandum, the Administration recommends adopting a First
Amendment to the FY 2010/11 Operating Budget for the City Center Redevelopment Area and the Anchor Shops and
Parking Garage, and retroactively adopting the Budget for the Pennsylvania Avenue Shops and Garage for FY 2010/11.
Advisory Board Recommendation: I N.A.
Financial Information:
Source of Amount
Funds: 1
I I 2
OBPI
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking_:
Kent Bonde, Laura Aker and Kathie Brooks
Si n-Offs:
KOB
RDA
Coordinator
T:\AGENDA\2012\1-12-12\Budget
MIAMI BEACH 453
Account
AGENDA ITEM __.:../_,_A.:.__ __
DATE J-11-l "2-
MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miomi Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEMORANDUM
TO: Chairperson and Members of the Miami Beach Redevelopment Agency
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, Executive Director
DATE: January 11, 2012
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE MIAMI BEACH
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ADOPTING AND APPROPRIATING THE FIRST
AMENDMENT TO THE OPERATING BUDGET FOR THE CITY CENTER
REDEVELOPMENT AREA AND THE ANCHOR SHOPS AND PARKING GARAGE FOR
ITEMS THAT ARE OVER-BUDGET; AND, RETROACTIVELY ADOPTING AND
APPROPRIATING THE BUDGET FOR THE PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE SHOPS AND
PARKING GARAGE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010/11.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
ANALYSIS
The year-end budget to preliminary actual comparisons for the RDA are presented in Exhibit A
Highlights are provided below. These comparisons show that there is an operating budget surplus of
$669,452 (1.8%) in the RDA, overall. However, because the RDA budget was adopted at a category
level, a budget amendment is required to address certain expenditure categories that are over budget.
In addition, it is recommended that a budget of $394,068 is retroactively adopted to cover operating
expenses at the Pennsylvania garage, which opened during fiscal year 2010/11.
Operating Budget-Revenues .
Overall, revenues in the RDA are $518,956 over budget. This is primarily due to increased contributions
from the Resort Tax fund, which is based on 50% of the 1% Resort Tax revenues collected.
Contributions from the Children's Trust are also above budget, although this is directly offset by the
remittance of the ~ mill tax levy back to the Children's Trust. Additionally, the "other
income/adjustments" line item reflects the inclusion of rent proceeds from the Miami City Ballet; these
revenues are in turn used to offset capital maintenance costs related to the facility.
The overall increase in revenues is partially offset by continued declines in interest earnings and
increased adjustments to the City and County tax increment from 2008.
Operating Budget· Expenditures
The total admin/operating expenditures are estimated at $150,496 below approved budget. However,
management fees (including salaries and benefits) are slightly above budget due to the final actual
salary costs of staff that provides administrative support to the RDA, as well as professional (legal) fees
454
January 11, 2012
Redevelopment Agency Memorandum
First Amendment to the FY 2010111 Operating Budget for City Center
Page 2 of2
incurred in connection with unanticipated settlement-related costs on prior-year RDA projects. Debt
service costs were also above budget; this amount is the difference between the initial transfer to the
RDA debt service fund and the actual amount that is required to be paid.
Anchor Shops and Parking Garage
Garage revenues at the Anchor Garage in FY 2010/11 came in approximately $709,000 greater than
budgeted. This is more than sufficient to offset the resulting $78,837 increase in revenue-sharing
obligations to the Loews. Retail revenues only came in slightly below forecast, despite the loss of a
tenant earlier in the year. However, the additional overall revenue is more than sufficient to cover
unanticipated and necessary renewal and replacement costs totaling $96,27 4. These generally
included the replacement of three of the tenant's HVAC systems and elevator repairs.
Pennsylvania Avenue Shops and Garage
The Pennsylvania Avenue Garage and shops opened during fiscal year 2010/11. Revenues and
expenses for the facility were not adopted as part of the FY 2010/11 Budget. During fiscal year
2010/11, the parking garage generated $478,583 in revenues and incurred $394,068 in related
operating expenses for the facility.
In consideration of the fact that the Pennsylvania Avenue Shops and Garage was built by the RDA on
City-owned property, the operation of the facility has been structured in the form of a ground lease
between the City and the RDA, providing terms for both the garage and retail operations. Expenditures
for the garage include ground lease rent payments, an administrative fee (consistent with that of the
Anchor Garage) and the Parking Department's operational fee.
CONCLUSION
In order to address the existing and future obligations in the Redevelopment Area, it is recommended
that the Redevelopment Agency adopt the attached Resolution, which amends the operating budgets
for the City Center Redevelopment Area, and the Anchor Shops and Parking Garage; and the adopts
the budget for the Pennsylvania Avenue Shops and Garage for FY 2010/11.
JMG/HF/KB/lA/KOB
Attachment
T:/Agenda/2012/1-11-12/RDA First Amendment 201 0_11 Memo.doc
455
Exhibit A.
Miami Beach Redevelopment Agency
City Center Redevelopment Area
Adopted FY 201 0/11 Adopted Operating Budget to Actual
FY 08/09 FY09/10 FY1DI11
Actual ~ 8Ud9;!t
Revenues and Other Sources of Income
Tax Increment~ City Millage 6.2155 $18,345,335 $16,946,393 $18,377,816
Proj Adjustment to City Increment for FY 2008 Tax Roll (2) (1,111,989) (1,178,873) (1,200,000)
Tax Increment~ County Millage 5.4275 15,808,032 14,496,500 16,047,879
Proj Adjustment to County Increment for FY 2008 Tax Roll (3) {961,565) (954,605) (1 ,000,000)
50% Contribution from Resort Tax 3,908,668 3,460,000 3,578,067
'1/2 Mill Children's Trust Contribution (4) 1,366,290 1,498,222 1,225,249
Interest Income 58,626 365,057 200,000
Fund Balance Reallocation: (Non-TIF) 0 0 0
Other Income/Adjustments: 1,344 0 0
TOTAL REVENUES $37,412,741 ~ $37,229,011
Admln/Operating Expenses
Management fee (salaries & benefits) $464,775 $489,584 $988,563
Advertising & promotion 0 1,000 0
Postage, printing & mailing 1,420 3,500 4,123
Office supplies & equipment 2,941 3,000 2,900
Meetings & oonferences 1,799 4,000 1,351
Dues & subscriptions 0 1,000 1,260
Audit fees 0 8,500 9,000
Professional & related fees 57,157 55,000 47,000
Miscellaneous expenses 4,223 _____1MQQ_ 5,000
Total AdminiOperating Expenses $532,315 $575,564 $1,059,197
Project Expenses
Community Policing $2,693,942 $2,871,494 $3,052,215
Capital Projects Maintenance (5) 3,456,896 3,050,775 3,332,673
NWS ProjecVLincoln Park Complex Contingency 0 3,060,189 0
NWS Project-Grant-in-Aid 0 0 15,000,000
Transfer to Capital Projects (6} 20 319,813 13,170,050 136,758
Total Project Expenses $26,470,651 $22,152,508 $21,521,646
Reserve and Debt Service Obligations
Debt Service Cost-2005 + Parity Bonds $8,376,443 $8,393,267 $8,393,254
Current Debt Service-Lincoln Rd Project (7) 1,205,288 1,086,961 $1,094,176
Current Debt Service-Bass Museum (8) 506,108 506,531 505,859
Reserve for County Admin Fee (9} 222,697 203,128 225,718
Reserve for CMB Contribution (1 0) 258,500 236,513 257,667
Reserve for Children's Trust Contribution (11) 1,366,290 1,498,222 1,225,249
Repayment-Prior Yr Fund Balance 0 0 2,946 246
Total Reserve and Debt Service Obligations $11,935,326 $11,924,622 $14,648,168
TOTAL EXPENSES AND OBLIGATIONS $38,938,292 $34,652,694 $37,229,011
REVENUES • EXPENSES ($1,525,551) ($0) $0
Note #1 Based on Preliminary Tax Increment Adjustment worksheet received from MDC on 6/30/10
Note #2 Adjustment for final FY 08/09 Tax Roll -Estimate based on pric
Note #3 Adjustment for final FY 08/09 Tax Roll-Estimate based on pric
Note #4 1/2 Mill Children's Trust pmt to RDA per lnterlocal
Note #5 Separate detail for capital maintenance items from PW
Note #6 Reflects appropriations for CIP & PW projects
Note #7 Payment of Lincoln Road current debt service on Sunshine Stat
Note #8 Payment of Bass Museum current debt service on Gulf Breeze
Note #9 County admin fee @ 1.5% of County's increment revenue
Note #10 CMB TIF Contribution@ 1.5% of City's increment revenue
Note #11 1/2 mill Children's Trust Contribution
FY10/11
Actual
$18,377,816
(1,475,726)
16,047,879
(1,262,384)
4,492,075
1,474,830
9,291
0
84,186
$37,747,967
$989,313
0
2,658
2,195
12
788
5,388
70,903
1,388
$1,072,844
$2,746,495
3,127,883
0
15,000,000
136,758
$21,011,136
$8,498,087
$1,094,176
505,859
221,782
253,531
1,474,655
2,946,246
$14,994,538
$37,078,515
$669,452
Budget
Variance
From FY 10111
Adoeted
$0
($275,726)
$0
($262,384)
$914,008
$249,581
($190,709)
$0
$84,186
$518,956
$750
$0
($1,265)
($705)
($1,339)
($472)
($3,613)
$23,903
($3,612)
$13,647
($305,720)
($204,790)
$0
$0
$0
($510,510)
$104,833
$0
$0
($3,936)
($4,136)
$249,606
$0
$346,368
($150,496)
$669,452
Adopted FY 2010/11 Anchor Shops and Parking Garage (16th Street Parking Garage) Operating Budget
Budget
FY 08/09 FY 09110 FY10/11 FY10/11 Variance
From FY 10/11
Revenues: Actual ~ Budget Actual Adoeted
Parking Operations $2,585,000 $2,632,000 $2,388,000 $3,077,007 $709,007
Retail Leasing 683,779 696,489 714,150 704,365 ($9,765)
Interest Pooled Cash 46,100 ~ 39,216 23,998 ($15,218)
TOTAL REVENUES $3,314,879 $3,374,589 $3,121,388 $3,805,370 $684,004
Operating Expenses:
Parking Operations $1,700,768 $1,802,864 $1,704,823 $1,313,809 ($391,014)
Garage Use Fee (To Loews) (1) 342,000 355,208 281,288 360,125 $78,837
Retail Leasing Management Fee 55,000 60,000 95,433 76,917 ($18,516)
Management Fee (Garage Ops) 0 158,129 189,074 189,074 $0
Renewal and Replacement Anchor Shops 0 0 0 96,274 $96,274
Reserve Future Capital-Parking Operations 563,832 375,922 219,415 0 ($219,415)
Reserve Future Capital-Retail Operations 653,279 ~ 631,333 0 ($631,333)
TOTAL EXPENSES $3,314,879 $3,374,589 $3,121,366 $2,036,199 ($1,085,167)
NET $0 $0 $0 $1,769,171 $1,769,171
(1)-Based on 28% of annual gross parking revenuues in excess of $1,390,000. (Includes contingency amount)
FY 2010/11 Pennsylvania Ave. Shops and Parking Garage Operating Budget
Budget
FY 08109 FY09/10 FY1DI11 FY10/11 Variance
From FY 10/11
Revenues: Actual ~ Budget Actual AdoE:ted
Parking Operations so $0 $0 $478 583 $478,583
TOTAL REVENUES $0 ---$-0 $0 $478,583 $478,583
Operating Expenses:
Parking Operations $0 $0 $0 $300,727 $300,727
Parking Base Fee so $0 $0 $30,073 $30,073
Garage Ground Lease $0 $0 $0 $23,552 $23,552
Garage Management Fee $0 $0 so $39,716 $39,716
TOTAL EXPENSES $0 ---$0-$0 $394,068 $394,068
NET $0 $0 $0 $84,515 $84,515
456
RESOLUTION TO BE SUBMITTED
457
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
458