R10B-Closed Attorney-Client Session- CMB V 1747 Bay Road Properties LLCMIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Members of the City Commission
Interim City Manager Kathie G. B
" February 6, 2013 --"
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:
City of Miami Beach v. 1747 Bay Road Properties, LLC
Appellate Case No.: 13-019 AP
Therefore, a private closed Attorney-Client Session will be held during the lunch
recess of the City Commission meeting on February 6, 2013, 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; Interim City Manager Kathie G.
Brooks, City Attorney Jose Smith, and First Assistant City Attorney Rhonda Montoya
Hasan.
JS/RMH/mmd
F:\A TTO\SMIJ\attorney client sessioni.A.ttorney-Ciient Session City of Miami Beach v. 174 7 Bay Road Properties, LLC.doc
476
Agenda Item RIOB
Date 2.~" ·13
NEW CASES -RMH
13CMB00020-2447 CityofMiami Beach v. 1747 Bay Road Properties, LLC: This is an appeal to
the Circuit Court, Appellate Division, which was recently filed by the City from a Special Master
case. The genesis of the Special Master case is a building department violation; work done without
permits. The Special Master erroneously dismissed the case, arguing that the City was required to
serve the registered agent of the corporate entity, notwithstanding the clear language of Florida
Statute Chapter 162 requiring certified mail be sent to the property owner as listed in the property
appraiser's records. However, all notice requirements of Chapter 162 were met in this case. City
Administration was consulted and authorized the timely filing ofthe appeal. Case law supports the
City's position regarding Chapter 162. Approximately $140,000 in fines were dismissed.
477