Apr 15, 2025 Land Use and Sustainability Committee

AND ALSO, ITEM NUMBER 13 IS BEING DEFERRED.

THIS COMMISSIONER BO, WAS THE PRIME SPONSOR OF THE ITEM.

UM, MR. DIRECTOR, LET'S CALL ITEM NUMBER THREE.

ITEM NUMBER 13, SIR.

WHICH, WHICH ITEM? 13.

SO WE WILL, SO, SO THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA S PRINTED WITH A DEFERRAL OF ITEMS NUMBER 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, AND 17.

AND THE WITHDRAWAL OF ITEM NUMBER 23, IF THAT.

IS THERE A MOTION TO SET THE AGENDA? I MOVE SECOND.

AND BY ACCLAMATION WE CAN SHOW THE AGENDA AS SET.

UM, THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA IS GONNA BE ITEMS NUMBER THREE AND 15 WILL BE TAKEN OUT OF ORDER, FOLLOWED BY THE PRIORITY AGENDA AND THEN THE REGULAR AGENDA AS PRINTED.

SO WITH THAT,

[3. DISCUSSION REGARDING POSSIBLE AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 54, ENTITLED “FLOODS,” ARTICLE III, ENTITLED “RESILIENCE STANDARDS FOR TIDAL FLOOD PROTECTION” TO ENHANCE ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY AND QUALITY OF LIFE]

ITEM NUMBER THREE IS DISCUSSION REGARDING POSSIBLE AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 54 ENTITLED FLOODS.

ARTICLE THREE ENTITLED RESILIENCE STANDARDS FOR TITLE FLOOD PROTECTION TO ENHANCE ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY AND QUALITY OF LIFE.

$300 TO $500 PER LINEAR FOOT.

AND I SEE WE HAVE OUR CHIEF RESILIENCY OFFICER, AMY KNOWLES, ON THE DAYS, WHO HAS BEEN WORKING HARD ON THIS ITEM TO ADDRESS THE RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH TITLE FLOODING DUE TO RISE AND SEA.

SO WE ARE EXPERIENCING IN MANY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, WE'VE DRAFTED AN ORDINANCE THAT'S BEFORE US TODAY TO, UH, ADDRESS OVERLAND, UH, FLOODING OF PRIVATE PROPERTY AND IMPACTS ON PUBLIC PROPERTY.

SO, AMY, IF YOU COULD WALK US THROUGH THE AMENDMENTS BEFORE US TODAY.

UM, SO BACK IN 2021, THE CITY ADOPTED ITS FIRST SEA WALL ORDINANCE, WHICH ESTABLISHED MINIMUM ELEVATIONS.

AND THIS WAS A VERY GOOD ORDINANCE, BUT WE HAVE IDENTIFIED SEVERAL IMPROVEMENTS SINCE THEN.

UM, THIS ITEM WAS HEARD IN NOVEMBER IN FRONT OF THIS COMMITTEE, AND SEVERAL THINGS DISCUSSED, WHICH HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED.

SO I WILL BRIEFLY REVIEW THOSE.

UM, AS YOU KNOW, 91% OF OUR SEAWALLS ARE, UH, PRIVATELY OWNED.

SO IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE ADEQUATE ORDINANCES, AND THEY'RE AN INCREDIBLE PROTECTION, NOT ONLY TO PROTECT THE PROPERTY FROM, YOU KNOW, JUST EROSION, BUT JUST FROM SEA LEVEL RISE AND STORM SURGE AND, AND KING TIDES.

SO SOME OF THE CHANGES THAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING IS REALLY TO BE MORE CLEAR ON THE TYPE OF PROGRESS THAT'S NEEDED FROM OUR RESIDENTS AS THEY ARE WORKING ON SEA WALLS AND MAY RECEIVE A CITATION TO CLARIFY A BUNCH OF THE LANGUAGE, AND TO, UH, MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY AS A CITY TO ADDRESS THINGS DIFFERENTLY IF THE PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNER DOESN'T.

SO, FIRST, AS WE'RE LOOKING AT A NEW 60 DAY REQUIREMENT, AND THEY HAVE TO DEMONSTRATE SPECIFIC PROGRESS IF THEY'VE RECEIVED, UM, A CITATION, FOR EXAMPLE, OBTAINING PROPOSALS, SECURING FINANCING, AND APPLYING FOR PERMITS.

SO THIS WILL ALLOW US AS A CITY TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE MAKING SOME PROGRESS AGAIN, AFTER THEY HAVE RECEIVED A NOTICE OF VIOLATION.

UH, PROPERTY OWNERS WILL HAVE SIX MONTHS TO SUBMIT PERMIT APPLICATIONS TO THE CITY AND TO MIAMI-DADE COUNTY AT WHICH GIVES, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY STILL HAVE 730 DAYS TO COMPLETE THE FULL SEA WALL IMPROVEMENTS.

BUT WE WANNA SEE A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION TO SHOW THAT THEY'VE MADE PROGRESS.

THE THRESHOLD FOR SUBSTANTIAL REPAIRS HAS BEEN RAISED, UM, FROM

[00:05:01]

AND WHAT THAT DOES IS IT HELPS THE RESIDENTS SO THAT THEY'RE NOT HAVING TO ELEVATE TO THE HIGHER ELEVATION IF THEY'RE JUST DOING MORE MINOR REPAIRS.

AND THAT'S TO BE MORE IN ALIGNMENT WITH CURRENT MARKET COSTS.

BECAUSE TODAY, IF SOMEONE IS MAKING A REPORT THAT'S A REPAIR THAT'S OVER A HUNDRED DOLLARS, THEY NEED TO PRETTY MUCH, PRETTY MUCH REPLACE THE ENTIRE SEAWALL.

RIGHT? RIGHT NOW IT'S $300 AND THIS WOULD ELEVATE IT TO $500.

AND, AND I'M GONNA ASK OUR ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, DO WE HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING MORE OR LESS AS TO WHAT THE GOING RATES ARE FOR REPLACING SEAWALL PER LINEAR FOOT? DOES A BALLPARK 'CAUSE I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS HOW SUBSTANTIAL THIS IS.

NEW SEA WALLS ARE PROBABLY SOMEWHERE IN THE, DEPENDING ON THE COMPLEXITY, ANYWHERE FROM TWO TO $4,000 A SQUARE, A LINEAR FOOT.

SO, SO, UH, KEEPING THIS THRESHOLD OR INCREASING THIS THRESHOLD FROM THE 300 TO THE $500 BRINGING UP TO THE CURRENT CURRENT STANDARDS REALLY NOT ONLY, UH, HELPS OUR, OUR, OUR RESIDENTS, UM, BUT IT REALLY ENCOURAGED THEM TO FIX THEIR SEAT WALLS, UH, THROUGH THE PERMITTING PROCESS, UH, AND NOT AVOID THE PERMITTING PROCESS.

AND THERE WAS A THIRD AND THERE'S ANOTHER, UH, AMENDMENT THAT WE'RE BRINGING TO THIS ITEM.

OR AT LEAST MAKE IT CONTINGENT UPON HOW LARGE YOUR SEAWALL IS.

AND THE OTHER THING IS THAT MINOR MAINTENANCE WORK, SUCH LIKE RIP WRAP REPLACEMENT, CAN BE EXEMPT FROM ELEVATION REQUIREMENTS.

AND THAT IS A BENEFIT TO THE RESIDENTS.

AS LONG AS THE ENGINEERING REPORT SHOWS THE SEA WALL HAS STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY, THEN THEY CAN BE EXEMPT FROM, FROM THE ELEVATIONS.

UM, NOW PROPERTY OWNERS WILL NOW NEED AN ITEMIZED COST OF CONSTRUCTION SPECIFIC TO SEA WALL WORK TO HELP US WITH EVALUATING THE REPAIRS NEEDED.

AND THEN THE OTHER, YOU KNOW, SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IS THAT IF THERE'S OVER TOPPING AND IT IMPACTS THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, THE CITY MAY NOW REQUIRE PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS TO INSTALL TEMPORARY TITLE FLOOD BARRIERS.

AND IF THE OWNER DOESN'T COMPLY, THE CITY MAY TAKE ACTION AND INSTALL THE BARRIER THEMSELVES AND SEEK PAYMENT FOR THE COST FOR THAT.

AND THAT'S THE EXAMPLE OF WHAT HAPPENED WITH US OVER AT THE PALM VIEW NEIGHBORHOOD, WHERE WE HAD TO COME IN BECAUSE OF THE NUISANCE THAT WAS OCCURRING OF THE TIDAL FLOODING, NOT ONLY ONTO THE PRIVATE PROPERTY, NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, AND THEN ON TOP OF THAT TO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, WHICH WAS THE ORIGIN OF THIS ORDINANCE, ALL THE CHALLENGES WE WERE FACING OVER IN THE, THE PALM VIEW ON NEIGHBORHOOD.

AMY, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR, FOR, FOR WORKING WITH MY OFFICE ON, ON THIS ORDINANCE.

I THINK THESE, THESE UPDATES, UH, ARE GONNA HELP TREMENDOUSLY AND ALSO TO MY CO-SPONSOR, COMMISSIONER LAURA DOMINGUEZ, FOR, FOR, FOR TEAMING UP WITH US ON THIS, UH, COMMISSIONER SUAREZ, ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS ON THE ITEM? UM, SO THE THRESHOLD FROM THREE TO $500, SO IF, IF ANYONE WERE TO MAKE ANY ADJUSTMENT THAT'S UNDER $500, IT WOULDN'T, IT WOULDN'T TRIGGER MAKING YEAH, REBUILDING A WHOLE SEAWALL, RIGHT? SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO, TO BRING THE SEAWALL TO FOUR FEET NAVD, BUT THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO BRING IT TO 5.7 FEET SO THEY CAN, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S A LESS OF A COST.

IT'S 500 SEEMS STILL VERY, VERY LOW.

UH, CONSIDERING THAT TWO TO 4,000 PER LINEAR FOOT IS, IS JUST FOR ONE FOOT.

SO, I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER, IF THERE WAS GONNA BE ANY SORT OF REPAIR, I THINK IT WOULD BE AT LEAST A THOUSAND DOLLARS THOUSANDS OF RANGE.

SHOULD WE MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE GENEROUS? WELL, WE DID, DID WE LOOK AT PERMITS BEING SUBMITTED, UH, TO PUBLIC WORKS, UH, FOR SEA WALL REPAIRS? AND WHAT DID THAT TELL US? YES.

AND, AND ACTUALLY THIS WAS BROUGHT TO US BY OUR PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING TEAM THAT REVIEWS PRIVATE SEA WALLS.

AND THEY FELT THAT THE TYPES OF REPAIR THERE'S, THAT THEY'RE SEEING COME THROUGH AS THEY'RE DOING PLAN REVIEWS, UM, YOU KNOW, THE $500 IS MORE REASONABLE BECAUSE YOU COULD HAVE SOMEBODY THAT MIGHT BE JUST, YOU KNOW, DOING MORE MINOR REPAIRS.

IT'S DIFFERENT KIND OF LIKE SPACKLING OR SOMETHING THAT IS, IS, DOESN'T REACH THE LEVEL THAT THEY HAVE TO FIX THE ENTIRE THING.

AND SO IT REALLY IS KIND OF A BENEFIT TO THE RESIDENTS IN LIGHT OF THE CONCERNS WITH INCREASING COSTS.

I DON'T, I DO NOT OBJECT TO THE IDEA OF GOING BEYOND THE $500.

THIS, YOU KNOW, WE DO DEAL, EVERYTHING RESPONDS TO THE MARKET AND I KNOW THAT A LOT OF TIMES WHEN I'M DOING WORK AT MY HOUSE, I'LL FIRST GIVE MY PARENTS' ADDRESS OUT IN WEST AID, AND THE 3 3 1 7 5 ZIP CODE GETS A DIFFERENT QUOTE THAT THE 3, 3 1 4 OH ZIP CODE.

UM, BUT THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN WHEN YOU TELL SOMEONE YOU'RE DOING WORK IN, IN, UH, IN, IN MIAMI BEACH, ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY WANT, THEY WANT TO CHARGE YOU THREE TIMES AS MUCH.

SO I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THE IDEA OF INCREASING THIS LIMIT.

I THINK MAYBE 5,000, UH, WOULD BE A, A DECENT NUMBER BECAUSE IF, IF FOR ONE LINEAR FOOT IT COSTS 5,000, A THOUSAND, I MEAN, IF YOU HAVE A 90 LINEAR FEET OR 60 LINEAR FEET, YOU'RE GONNA BE REPAIRING ONE FOOT.

NOT TO SAY YOU'D JUST BE REPAIRING ONE FOOT, BUT YOU KNOW,

[00:10:01]

YOU KNOW, MAYBE A THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR A VERY 10 FEET OF SEAWALL.

UM, SO IT'S, IT'S REALLY BASED ON COST PER LINEAR FOOT.

RIGHT? SO WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS IF SOMETHING IS LESS THAN $500 A LINEAR FOOT, THEN YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T, UH, THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO BRING IT UP TO 4.0.

AND LET ME ASK YOU THIS, BETWEEN, IF IT'S MORE THAN THAT, IT WOULD BE 5.7 BETWEEN TODAY AND FIRST RATING OF THIS ORDINANCE, COULD WE EXPLORE THE POSSIBILITY OF, YOU KNOW, WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE TO GO BEYOND THE $500 GOING UP TO A THOUSAND DOLLARS PER LINEAR FOOT? UH, SO THAT WITH THE FEEDBACK OF THE, OF THE COMMITTEE, WE CAN CONSIDER THAT AS PART OF THE ORDINANCE OF THE FIRST RATING ORDINANCE.

I THINK WE'D BE HAPPY TO LOOK AT THE DATA.

AND SEE, AND SEE WHAT IT SAYS.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THE ITEM, MR. ATTORNEY? ARE THERE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? NO, THERE ARE NOT.

SEEING, NO ONE IN PERSON WISHING TO TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, UH, ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD ON THE RECORD, AMY? NO, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER SOAR, IF YOU MOVE THE ITEM, I'LL BE HAPPY TO SECOND I'LL MOVE.

UH, MOVE FORWARD TO OUR C LEVEL RISE VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT ITEM NUMBER 15.

SECOND, THEN WE CAN SHOW THIS ADOPTED BY ACCLAMATION.

AND WITH THAT, LET'S,

[15. DISCUSSION TO PRESENT AND DISCUSS THE DRAFT SEA LEVEL RISE ADAPTATION PLAN FUNDED BY THE RESILIENT FLORIDA GRANT PROGRAM]

AND THIS ITEM IS BEING SPONSORED BY COMMISSIONER DOMINGUEZ.

I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE COMMISSIONER DOMINGUEZ ON THE LINE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

I THINK THIS IS ITEM 15.

15.

UH, COMMISSIONER DOMINGUEZ, WELCOME.

UH, YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE WELCOME TO INTRODUCE YOUR ITEM.

UM, SO THE ADMINISTRATION IS SHARING A DRAFT OF THE SEA LEVEL RISE ADAPTATION PLAN FOR CONSIDERATION RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAYOR AND OUR COMMISSION TO ACCEPT THE ITEM FOR THEIR PLANNING PURPOSES.

IT'S, UH, A, A DRAFT ADAPTATION PLAN.

IT PROVIDES FLEXIBLE FORWARD-THINKING STRATEGIES, AND IT INCLUDES FIVE CORE ADAPTATION THEMES, KEEPING WATER OUT, LIVING WITH WATER, NATURE-BASED PROTECTION, STRATEGIC RELOCATION, AND UPDATED PLANS AND POLICIES.

AND AMY IS THERE, UM, SHE CAN TELL YOU MORE ABOUT THE ITEM.

AMY, THANK YOU.

YOU'RE WELCOME TO THE ITEM.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.

AND THEN STRATEGIC RELOCATION.

UM, AND IF PIA COULD BRING UP, WE HAVE A SHORT PRESENTATION 'CAUSE I THINK IT WOULD REALLY HELP TO WALK US THROUGH THIS.

UM, IT IS AN IMPORTANT ITEM AND IT'S A, IT'S, IT'S A BIG REPORT, SO I THINK IT'S GREAT TO JUST TAKE A MOMENT.

UM, THIS IS A DRAFT SEA LEVEL RISE ADAPTATION PLAN.

IT'S NOT SOMETHING YOU SEE EVERY DAY.

AND AS USUAL, YOU KNOW, MIAMI BEACH IS LEADING THE WAY ON THESE EFFORTS.

UM, WE DO HAVE A NEED TO ADAPT.

AND SO THE, THE RESILIENT FLORIDA PLANNING PROGRAM, UH, FUNDED BY THE STATE, ACTUALLY REQUIRES CITIES TO DO VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENTS TO, UH, FOR THEIR PUBLIC ASSETS AND CRITICAL ASSETS FOR THE YEARS 2040 AND 2070, CONSIDERING SEA LEVEL RISE.

AND AS PART OF THAT, WE ALSO ADDED ON AN ADAPTATION PLAN.

SO LET'S NOT JUST LOOK AT WHAT'S WRONG, LET'S LOOK AT WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENT WAYS THAT WE CAN REALLY THINK ABOUT WE LONG TERM.

SO THE, UM, TIMEFRAME THAT WE BEGAN THIS PROCESS, IT WAS WINTER 2022, AND WE'RE FINISHING UP IN SPRING 2025 FUNDED BY RESILIENT FLORIDA GRANT.

SO THE GOAL, AGAIN, TO PRIORITIZE THE ASSETS MOST AT RISK FOR FLOOD HAZARDS AND MAINTAIN ELIGIBILITY FOR FUTURE GRANTS.

SO WE'VE BROUGHT IN ABOUT $80 MILLION SO FAR THROUGH THIS GRANT PROGRAM, AND IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US THAT ALL OF OUR PROJECTS ARE IDENTIFIED IN HERE.

SO WE COMPLETED PHASE ONE, THE VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT.

WE ARE NOW COMPLETING PHASE TWO, WHICH IS ADAPTATION PLAN, AND THEN WE MOVE INTO IMPLEMENTATION.

UM, A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE NEED TO ADAPT, AND I KNOW THAT YOU'RE VERY FAMILIAR, BUT WE DO, AND MIAMI BEACH, UH, HAVE VULNERABILITIES TO DIFFERENT TYPES OF FLOODING, COMPOUND FLOODING.

AND THAT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE THE TYPES OF STRATEGIES WE USE, UM, NEED TO BE MATCHED WITH THE TYPE OF FLOODING.

YOU KNOW, WE ALSO KNOW THAT WHEN WE HAVE MORE THAN ONE TYPE OF EVENT, IT CAN BE MUCH WORSE THAN IF IT HAD JUST HAPPENED BY ITSELF.

SO THIS TYPE OF PLAN HAS BEEN IMPORTANT AND IS EVIDENT, YOU KNOW, THROUGHOUT THE, UH, C LEVEL RISE ADAPTATION PLAN.

SO WHAT KIND OF C LEVEL RISE HAVE WE BEEN SEEING? YOU KNOW, WE KNOW THAT OVER THE LAST CENTURY THERE WAS ABOUT 11 INCHES OF C LEVEL RISE, AND WE'VE SEEN SIX INCHES MORE SINCE THE YEAR 2000.

SO THERE HAS BEEN AN ACCELERATION.

AND WE KNOW BY 2040 WE'RE LOOKING AT 0.3 TO 1.3 FEET AND 0.9 TO 4.1 FEET BY 2070.

AND THE FIGURES THAT YOU SEE, UH, OUR CITY HAS ADOPTED, UH, THEY WERE PUT TOGETHER BASED ON NOAH AND, UM, ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEER PROJECTIONS.

WE MADE SURE TO REACH OUT TO THE CITY QUITE A BIT THROUGH THIS EFFORT.

WE'VE HAD SENSITIVITY FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEWS WHERE WE INVITED ALL OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS TO COME AND TELL US THEIR THOUGHTS ABOUT FLOODING AND WHAT THEY'D LIKE TO SEE.

WE HAD EIGHT, UH, SMALL VIRTUAL, LIKE I MENTIONED, WE HAD NORTH, MID AND SOUTH AS WELL AS THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY.

AND LO LOCAL SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS.

WE HELD POP-UP

[00:15:01]

WORKSHOPS AT EVENTS.

WE WANTED TO MEET PEOPLE WHERE THEY WERE AT, UH, THE KIND OF PEOPLE THAT MAYBE WOULDN'T COME TO A REGULAR GOVERNMENT MEETING.

AND WE ASKED THEIR OPINIONS AND HAD THEM REALLY, UM, SHOW US ON AN ACTUAL MAP WHERE THEY LIVE AND WHERE ARE SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT THEY SEE.

WE HAD A COMMUNITY MEETING, UH, WITH UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI AND FIU TO TALK ABOUT, UM, THIS PLAN.

AND, UM, WE'VE HAD A LOT OF DIFFERENT TOPICS FROM EXPERIENCES WITH FLOODING, IMPACTS TO COMMUNITY SPACES, THEIR CONCERNS AND WHAT THEIR PRIORITIES ARE FOR FLOOD PROTECTION.

WE'VE ALSO ENGAGED THE SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD RESILIENCE PROJECTS COMMITTEE, OUR FEMA COMMITTEE, AND THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.

WE'VE BEEN TO ACTUALLY TWICE, AND I JUST PRESENTED LAST MONTH AS WELL.

WE'VE HEARD MANY DIFFERENT THINGS, BUT I WOULD SAY THE BIGGEST THEME IS THAT PEOPLE ARE ALREADY COPING AND ADAPTING IN DIFFERENT WAYS.

AND, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE, THEY'RE CLEAR THAT THERE'S EXPERIENCES THAT THEY HAVE AND THEY'RE ADJUSTING THEIR DAY TO DAY PEOPLE, PERHAPS BUYING AN SUV INSTEAD OF A LOWER CAR.

UM, PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, NOTICING TIDES GOING OVER THEIR SEA WALLS MORE THAN WHEN IT USED TO.

AND, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE REALLY WANTING OUR CITY TO, TO REALLY DEAL WITH THIS.

AND TO MOVE FORWARD A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT, UM, WE RANKED OVER 67,000 ASSETS.

AND SO AS A CITY, WE NOW HAVE A REALLY NICE, UM, I WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW, DATABASE OF ALL THE ASSETS AND INFORMATION ABOUT THEM AND DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WE CAN DO.

UH, WE LOOKED AT EXPOSURE, SENSITIVITY, AND CONSEQUENCE, AND ALL THE, UM, ASSETS CAME UP WITH A SCORE.

AND WE'LL USE THIS TO APPLY FOR FUTURE GRANT FUNDING AS WELL.

BUT THIS INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE TO FACILITIES, PUBLIC WORKS, AND ALL OF OUR TEAMS. SOME OF THE, THE MAJOR TAKEAWAYS IS THE WEST SIDE OF OUR ISLAND.

IS THAT THE GREATEST RISK OF FLOODING JUST DUE TO LOWER ELEVATIONS? UM, OUR COASTAL DUNE SYSTEM AND BEACHES PROVIDE A WONDERFUL NATURAL BUFFER, ACTUALLY ESTIMATED ABOUT $20 MILLION A YEAR IN VALUE, BUT HURRICANES CAN STILL FLOOD THE CITY.

UM, MANY OF OUR WATER AND WASTEWATER PIPELINES ARE OVER 70 YEARS OLD, WHICH CAUSES CHALLENGES WITH THAT DELIVERY.

IF WE LOOK AT A FOOT OF SEA LEVEL RISE, OVER HALF OF OUR ROADWAYS CAN EXPERIENCE FLOODING DURING A HEAVY RAINFALL EVENT IN KING TIDES.

AND THEN BY 2040, WE'RE LOOKING AT COMBINED EVENTS CAN CAUSE FLOODING AT IMPORTANT AREAS LIKE COME AT SINAI POLICE HEADQUARTERS, UM, SAIL BOARD SUBSTATION AND FIRE STATION ONE, AND THEN 2070, WE KNOW THIS NUMBER WILL INCREASE.

THE FULL REPORT IS AVAILABLE ONLINE.

WE HAVE A REALLY NICE WEBSITE WITH ALL OF THIS INFORMATION, AND WE'RE ALSO PUTTING TOGETHER AN ESRI STORY MAP SO THAT PEOPLE CAN CLEARLY SEE WHAT THE CHALLENGES ARE, BUT ALSO WHAT WE'RE DOING ABOUT IT.

AND IT HIGHLIGHTS A LOT OF OUR KEY PROJECTS.

NOW, UH, THE ADAPTATION PLAN IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT'S THE ONE PLACE IN THE CITY WHERE YOU CAN LOOK AND SEE ALL OF THE DIFFERENT EFFORTS THAT WE ARE DOING FOR SEA LEVEL RISE.

SO EVERYTHING WE'VE DONE, YOU KNOW, OVER THE MANY YEARS FROM THE STORMWATER MODELING AND MASTER PLAN, UM, TO THE WORK FROM JACOBS TO, UM, OUR RESILIENT 3 0 5 WORK.

UM, AND SOME OF THE THINGS THAT IT LOOKS LIKE IS OUR ADAPTATION NEEDS, THEY MAY CHANGE OVER TIME.

SO IT'S NOT A TRADITIONAL PLAN, IT'S BASED ON THE WORK FROM THE NETHERLANDS, AND IT IS REALLY LOOKING AT SEA LEVEL RISE FROM DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES.

FIRST, TRYING TO KEEP THE WATER OUT.

SECOND, TRYING TO LIVE WITH THE WATER USING FLOATABLE DESIGNS.

THIRD, USING NATURE BASED PROTECTIONS SUCH AS THE USE OF, YOU KNOW, NATURAL ECOSYSTEMS AND PROCESSES TO REDUCE FLOOD RISK.

SO THERE MAY BE CERTAIN ASSETS THAT WE WEIGH ON A MOVE OVER TIME.

AND THEN POLICY UPDATES.

HOW DO WE UPDATE THINGS OVER TIME SO THAT IT MAKES SENSE TO THE CONDITIONS WE'RE SEEING? UM, NOW THIS IS A, A VERY FLEXIBLE APPROACH TO ADAPTATION.

SO IT'S NOT BASED ON YEARS, IT'S BASED ON THE FEET OF SEA LEVEL RISE AND IT IDENTIFIES A RANGE.

AND ONCE THAT, THAT STOPS KIND OF WORKING FOR US, IT IDENTIFIES THE NEXT THING THAT, THAT WE CAN MOVE TO.

SO THERE'S SIX PATHWAYS FROM THE BAYFRONT TO THE OCEAN SIDE, AND THEY HAVE A LOT OF DIFFERENT STRATEGIES FROM ROADWAYS AND CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE, CRITICAL FACILITIES AND STORM WATER.

SO EVERYTHING FROM DUNE ENHANCEMENT AND BEACH RE NOURISHMENT TO OFFSHORE PROTECTIONS OVER ON THE, ON THE BAY SIDE, REALLY LOOKING AT HOW TO ELEVATE SEA WALLS MORE OVER TIME, ADDING ON LIVING SHORELINES AND OVER TIME, POTENTIALLY MORE NATURAL SHORELINES, UM, INLAND AND, AND FOR FACILITIES, WE'RE LOOKING AT FLOOD-PROOFING, WE'RE LOOKING AT INCREMENTAL ROADWAY, ELEVATIONS, STORM WATER, AND DIFFERENT WAYS TO INTEGRATE BLUE AND GREEN.

AND ALL OF THIS WE HAVE BEEN DOING, SO WE, WE ARE ALREADY HAVE SO MANY PROJECTS DOING THIS, SO WE'LL HAVE TO CONTINUE TO BUILD.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I JUST WANNA TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY AND, UH, HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU, AMY.

UH, COMMISSIONER DOMINGUEZ, UH, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD ON THIS ITEM? UH, NO, I'D LIKE TO, UH, MOVE IT TO THE FULL COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION.

I KNOW I CAN'T MOVE IT, SO IF ONE OF YOU WOULD, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

SO OURS HAS MOVED IT, THE, THE ITEM, AND I'LL SECOND IT.

AND AMY, UH, JUST FOR THE PUBLIC'S, UH, PURPOSE, HOW THIS IS ALIGNED WITH OUR CDMP AND OUR LAND USE REGULATIONS?

[00:20:01]

WELL, I MEAN, IT'S IN VERY MUCH ALIGNMENT.

OUR CDMP ALREADY HAS A, RAN A LAND USE AND RESILIENT ELEMENT THAT CALLS FOR US TO ADAPT TO SEA LEVEL RISE, TO PROTECT, UM, AND, AND TO DO THESE EFFORTS.

SO THIS MORE, YOU KNOW, ADDS SOME MORE DETAIL.

OUR RESILIENCE CODE IS REALLY LOOKS FORWARD FOR PRIVATE PROPERTIES AND THIS TAKES THAT INTO CONSIDERATION, BUT EXPANDS IT TO OUR CRITICAL FACILITIES AND TO OUR PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE.

AND I THINK THIS WILL BE A GREAT, UH, TOOL FOR, FOR US TO, TO USE AS WE LOOK AT THE FUTURE OF LAND USE AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT AND COMPATIBILITY, UH, WITH OUR DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS.

SO THANK YOU SO MUCH, AMY AND COMMISSIONER DOMINGUEZ.

UM, MR. ATTORNEY, ARE THERE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? THERE'S NO ONE ON ZOOM.

I'M SEEING NONE IN ZOOM AND NONE IN PERSON.

WE CAN SHOW THE ITEM ADOPTED BY ACCLIMATION.

LET'S CALL ITEM NUMBER ONE.

ALRIGHT, UM, MR. DIRECTOR,

[1. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE CONSTRUCTION, PARKING, AND TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN (CPMP) REQUIREMENT IN CHAPTER 106 OF THE CITY CODE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE SUSPENSION OF A BUILDING PERMIT OR ISSUANCE OF A STOP WORK ORDER; AND DISCUSS PROACTIVE ENFORCEMENT EFFORTS BY THE POLICE, CODE COMPLIANCE, AND PARKING DEPARTMENTS WITH REGARD TO PARKING OR TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS RELATING TO CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS.]

ITEM NUMBER ONE IS TO DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE CONSTRUCTION, PARKING AND TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN REQUIREMENT IN CHAPTER 1 0 6 OF THE CITY CODE, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE SUSPENSION OF A BUILDING PERMIT OR ISSUANCE OF A STOP RECORDER, AND DISCUSS PROACTIVE ENFORCEMENT EFFORTS BY THE POLICE CODE COMPLIANCE AND PARKING DEPARTMENTS WITH REGARD TO PARKING OR TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS RELATED TO CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS.

THANK YOU, MR. DIRECTOR.

THIS IS AN ITEM I'VE PLACED ON THE AGENDA BECAUSE WE'VE SEEN INSTANCES IN WHICH CONSTRUCTION TRUCKS, UH, AND VEHICLES ARE OBSTRUCTING THE PATH OF EMERGENCY VEHICLES IN OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.

UM, WE'VE, AND WE'VE TAKEN MEASURES TO MAKE SURE THAT, UM, THAT ROADS IN OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS ARE NOT OBSTRUCTED TO A LEVEL THAT BECOMES UNSAFE.

FOR EXAMPLE, OUR RECENT PARTY HOUSE ORDINANCE SPECIFICALLY AIMS TO CURB A LOT OF THAT ACTIVITY THAT BLOCKS, UH, THE ROADWAYS IN OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.

THIS ADDRESSES IT FROM A VERY DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE.

CONSTRUCTION PROJECT WITHIN OUR, OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS ARE SUPPOSED TO ABIDE BY CONSTRUCTION, PARKING AND TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN.

BUT WHAT WE'VE SEEN OVER TIME IS THAT THEY'RE NOT FOLLOWING THOSE PLANS.

AND I'VE ASKED STAFF TO CONSIDER WAYS OF ENHANCING THE PENALTIES ON THOSE WHO ARE OBSTRUCT, OBSTRUCTING THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC IN OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.

AND WITH THAT, I SEE WE HAVE JOSE, UH, GONZALEZ AND ALBERTO VENTURA HERE TO PRESENT ON THESE ITEMS. WELCOME.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS JOSE GONZALEZ, TRANSPORTATION AND MOBILITY DIRECTOR AND INTERIM PARKING DIRECTOR.

SO OUR CITY CODE REQUIRES THAT ANY CON, A CONSTRUCTION PROJECT WITH A VALUE OF GREATER THAN $250,000, OBTAIN A CONSTRUCTION PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN OR A-C-P-M-P, AS WE CALL IT, IN ORDER TO OBTAIN A BUILDING PERMIT.

THE CPMP PLANS ARE REVIEWED BY THE PARKING DEPARTMENT AND THEY ARE ENFOR AND APPROVED BY THE PARKING DEPARTMENT, AND THEY ARE ENFORCED BY THE PARKING CODE AND POLICE DEPARTMENTS.

UM, NOW OVER THE PAST, UM, SEVERAL MONTHS, MAYBE A YEAR, WE HAVE SEEN AN UPTICK IN THE NUMBER OF CONCERNS FROM DIFFERENT RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS WITH REGARD TO A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY OCCURRING ON RESIDENTIAL STREETS AND CONTRACTORS PARKING THEIR, THEIR VEHICLES EITHER BLOCKING A LANE OR, OR TAKING UP, UH, SOME, SOME PARKING SPACES.

UM, IN TERMS OF THE OFFENSES, UH, WE, WE HAVE, THE PARKING DEPARTMENT HAS ONE PERSON THAT'S DEDICATED TO, TO INSPECTING AND, UH, HELPING TO ENFORCE VIOLATIONS OF THE CP MPS.

THE CODE ALLOWS FOR A $5,000 FINE FOR THE FIRST OFFENSE, A $10,000 FINE FOR THE SECOND DEFENSE, AND A $15,000 FINE FOR THE THE THIRD OFFENSE.

UH, WE WENT BACK AND CHECKED OUR RECORDS, AND OVER THE PAST 10 MONTHS, FROM JUNE OF 2024 TO DATE, THERE HAVE BEEN A TOTAL OF 90 FINES ISSUED.

AND THE BREAKDOWN IS 71ST, EXCUSE ME, 71ST OFFENSES, 16 SECOND OFFENSES, AND FOUR THIRD OFFENSES FOR A TOTAL OF 90.

AND I'LL, I WANNA INTRODUCE ALBERT VENTURA, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, WHO'S GONNA ALSO, WE'RE GONNA TAG TEAM ON THIS ITEM.

GOOD.

A COMMISSIONERS, THANK YOU.

OVER THE PAST YEAR, ALSO OUR ENGINEERING ASSISTANT WHO OVERSEES THE PROJECT, HE'S PROACTIVELY DONE ABOUT A HUNDRED INSPECTIONS THROUGHOUT THE CITY ALONG WITH AN PARKING ENFORCEMENT OFFICER SO THEY COULD TAKE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS.

WE'VE HAD HAD A COUPLE OF DO DOZENS OF COMPLAINT CALLS FROM RESIDENTS IN REFERENCE TO VEHICLES BLOCKING, BLOCKING THE RIGHT OF WAY.

AND WE ALSO GO AHEAD AND RESPOND TO THOSE COMPLAINTS AS WELL.

[00:25:01]

THEY'RE HAPPENING IN OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.

AND MY CONCERN IS THAT WE HAVE 71ST TIME OFFENSES, AND THOSE ARE THE OFFENSES THAT WE GOT TO.

AND NOW WE KNOW THAT IF THERE ARE 70 OFFENSES THAT WE RESPONDED TO, WE KNOW THAT THERE'S PROBABLY A LOT MORE THAT WE DIDN'T GET TO.

'CAUSE THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT PEOPLE CALLED THE PEOPLE REPORTED.

AND THESE OFFENSES, FOR THE MOST PART, THEY'RE NOT HAPPENING IN COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS.

THEY'RE HAPPENING WHERE PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO GET TO WORK OR GET BACK HOME FROM WORK OR TO SCHOOL OR JUST NAVIGATE THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS.

UM, SO JOSE, I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AS TO THINGS THAT WE COULD DO TO ENHANCE PENALTIES ASSOCIATED WITH THIS TO TRY TO DETER EVEN THE FIRST TIME OFFENSE? SO, UH, MR. CHAIR, WE DID EXPLORE VARIOUS MEASURES THAT WE CAN, UM, POSSIBLY TAKE THE CITY CAN TAKE TO, TO MORE, UH, EFFECTIVELY AGGRESSIVELY, IF YOU WILL ENFORCE THIS.

UM, AND I'M, I'M HAPPY TO SEE THAT VINCE, UH, SEHA OR BUILDING DIRECTORS HERE AS WELL.

UM, BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE LEARNED, UH, RECENTLY IS ONE OF THE MEASURES THAT, THAT WE WERE LOOKING INTO WAS A STOP WORK ORDER.

SO, IF, YOU KNOW, ENFORCEMENT GOES OUT THERE, SEES THAT THERE IS A CONTRACTOR THAT IS WORKING OUTSIDE OF THEIR CP APPROVED CPMP PLAN, UM, WE CAN TAKE, UH, POTENTIALLY TAKE THAT MEASURE OF A STOP WORK ORDER SOONER RATHER THAN LATER.

OUR CURRENT CODE ACTUALLY, UH, ALLOWS FOR A, A STOP WORK ORDER AFTER THE THIRD OFFENSE.

SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE LOOKED INTO.

AND I HAD A VERY RECENT CONVERSATION A LITTLE WHILE AGO WITH, WITH VINCE, WHERE UNLESS THE CONTRACTOR IS PERFORMING UNSAFE ACTIVITIES AND THE SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC IS IN DANGER, IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO ISSUE A STOP WORK ORDER.

THERE'S ACTUALLY IMPLICATIONS WITH THE, UH, SOUTH FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, UM, WHERE THE, THE, THE CITY WOULD BE, UH, CHALLENGED FOR SURE IF IT ATTEMPTED TO ISSUE STOP WORK ORDERS FOR REASONS THAT ARE NOT, UH, SAFETY OR BUILDING CODE RELATED.

UM, THE CP AND WHAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED, UH, UNDER THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, UH, A SAFETY REASON WHY TO STOP THE, UH, PERMIT OF SOMEONE THAT IS, YOU KNOW, A PRETTY MUCH USING THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAYS FOR THEMSELVES, UH, UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA BUILDING CODE SECTION ONE 15, THAT'S WHERE I COULD ISSUE A STOP WORK ORDER.

NOW, THE PROVISIONS THERE ALLOW ME TO REMOVE, UH, OR ISSUE THE STOP WORK ORDER OR SUSPEND THE PERMIT COMPLETELY, IF THEY ARE VIOLATING OR CREATING AN UNSAFE CONDITION FOR THE PUBLIC.

SAFEGUARDS TO THE PUBLIC IS CHAPTER 33.

SO IF YOU WOULD, ON A HIGH RISE, YOU, YOU'VE SEEN THE CATWALKS WITH THE OVERHEAD PROTECTION FOR ANYTHING, ANY FALLING DEBRIS TO PROTECT THOSE PEOPLE USING THAT, THAT WALKWAY.

NOW, IN THE SCENARIO THAT WAS DESCRIBED BEFORE, IF AN EMERGENCY VEHICLE COULD NOT GET THROUGH, UH, OR THEY WERE PREVENTING OR DIDN'T HAVE, LET'S SAY, PD ON THE SCENE, YOU KNOW, WITH LIGHTS TO DIVERT TRAFFIC AND WHATNOT AND, AND GIVE PEOPLE ANOTHER MEANS OF, OF MOVEMENT IN THAT CASE, THEN, UH, THE FIRST CASE WOULD BE ISSUE A FINE, GIVE 'EM THE OPPORTUNITY TO, TO CORRECT THE VIOLATION.

BUT IF THEY CONTINUE TO BE BAD ACTORS, IF YOU WOULD, UH, AT THAT CASE, I COULD ISSUE A STOP WORK ORDER UNTIL THEY COME INTO COMPLIANCE.

TYPICALLY, IT'S A SECTION IN THE BUILDING CODE, UH, FOR WORKING UNSAFE, UM, NO EGRESS, UH, A LACK OF ILLUMINATION FOR THE WORKERS, A LACK OF SANITATION FOR THE WORKERS, PORTA JOHNS, UH, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

THAT WOULD BE A VIOLATION OF THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE.

IN THIS CASE, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE SOME KIND OF BLOCKAGE OR LACK OF ACCESS, UH, OR DAMAGE, UH, THAT WOULD CREATE AN UNSAFE CONDITION BLOCKING A, A HYDRANT, FOR EXAMPLE, THINGS OF THAT NATURE WHERE FIRST RESPONDERS COULD NOT RESPOND TO AN EMERGENCY.

BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TRAFFIC.

YEAH, TRAFFIC.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS THAT WERE BUILT A HUNDRED YEARS AGO THAT WERE NOT BUILT TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, TRUCKS FOR YOUR CONSTRUCTION PROJECT BLOCKING AN AMBULANCE FROM GETTING TO A NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE OR BLOCKING A FIRE ENGINE FROM GETTING TO SOMEONE'S HOUSE.

AND WE HAVE 70 INSTANCES OF THIS IN OUR CITY, FOR ONE THAT HAVE REACHED ONE VIOLATION.

WE'VE HAD A TOTAL OF 90 VIOLATIONS OVER THE PAST YEAR, AND WE PROBABLY HAVE MANY MORE THAT WE JUST HAVEN'T, YOU KNOW, GOTTEN TO.

AND SO, AND SO THE FACT THAT WE'VE HAD 71ST TIME VIOLATIONS TELLS ME THAT THERE'S A PROBLEM, AND THAT, THAT THE PENALTIES ARE NOT STRICT ENOUGH TO DETER

[00:30:01]

THE ACTIVITY FROM OCCURRING.

COMMISSIONER SUAREZ, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

UM, YOU, I I LOOK AT THIS A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY.

I THINK A LOT OF THE TIMES THESE CONTRACTORS JUST SIMPLY DON'T KNOW.

UM, AND THEY RULES MAY BE VERY LAX IN OTHER MUNICIPALITIES, BUT, UM, I, I THINK BEING REASONABLE ON THE FIRST OFFENSE, BUT BEING VERY HEAVY HANDED ON THE SECOND IS, IS SOMETHING I'M COMFORTABLE WITH.

UM, YOU KNOW, I CERTAINLY DON'T WANT TO, IN A ROUNDABOUT WAY RAISE PRICES IN MIAMI BEACH BECAUSE, UM, WARD GETS AROUND THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE YOUR WHOLE PROJECT STOP BECAUSE YOUR TRUCK WAS BLOCKING THE ROAD.

NOT TO SAY THAT THAT'S, YOU KNOW, YOU SHOULDN'T BE DOING THAT, BUT THEY, THEY NEED TO BE EDUCATED ON IT.

AND, AND I THINK GIVING A, A VERY STERN WARNING, UH, AND LETTING THEM KNOW THAT, LOOK, YOU DO THIS ONE OR MORE, OR TWO MORE TIMES, YOUR WHOLE PROJECT'S GONNA BE, UH, AT A LOSS.

AND I THINK THERE SHOULD ALSO BE NOTICE GIVEN TO THE OWNERS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, SOME, LIKE I'M UNDER CONSTRUCTION SOMETIMES, UNFORTUNATELY, MY CONTRACTORS, I DON'T KNOW, OR COMING AND THEY BLOCK THE ROAD AND I HAVE TO TELL THEM.

SO MAYBE AS A FIRST WARNING, IT GOES TO THE HOMEOWNER AND NOT NECESSARILY TO THE CONTRACTOR WHO MAY NOT WANT TO TELL THE HOMEOWNER BECAUSE HE, HE MAY NOT WANNA SAY.

SO THE VIOLATIONS ARE ISSUED BOTH TO THE CONTRACTOR AND TO THE PROPERTY.

IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH.

IS THAT, THAT'S THE AMENDMENT AS AN AMENDMENT IS, IS THAT NO, THAT'S THE CURRENT CODE.

IF I MAY, I'M SORRY IF I MAY ADD SOMETHING AS WELL ON THE FIRST, BY THE WAY, OF, OF THOSE 70, HOW MANY WERE SECOND REPEAT OFFENDERS? YOU HAD? 20, 16 OF THEM.

16.

THAT'S, I MEAN, THAT'S PRETTY GOOD, RIGHT? I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT, THAT, THAT SHOWS THAT THE FIRST WARNING IS, IS, IS GOOD.

I, I THINK PERSONALLY, IF YOU HAVE A, UM, A WARNING WITH A, A STERN WARNING ON THE FIRST WARNING SAYING THAT IF YOU DO THIS AGAIN, THIS IS WHAT YOU CAN EXPECT, THEY USUALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON AND ARE, ARE, ARE ACCOMMODATING.

I'M SORRY, WHAT I WANTED TO ADD WAS THE FIRST OFFENSE DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THEY WERE BLOCKING THE CITY'S RIGHT OF WAY, WHAT WE CALL CITY'S RIGHT OF WAY.

IF THEY PARK ON A, ON A SWALE, WHICH IS NOT IN FRONT OF THEIR CONSTRUCTION, THAT'S ALSO, WE ALSO ISSUE THEIR FIRST OFFENSE.

SO THESE ARE NOT ALWAYS FOR BLOCKING THE RIGHT OF WAY, BUT RATHER FOR PARKING ON THE CITY'S RIGHT OF WAY, WHICH IT MAY BE A REGULAR PARKING SPACE, IT COULD BE IN AS WELL, OR IT COULD BE IN THE LANE OF TRAFFIC.

SO THOSE ARE, THAT'S WHAT WE CONSIDER THE CITY'S RIGHT OF WAY.

SO IT'S NOT ALWAYS THE STREET.

SO WE HAD 16 SECOND OFFENSES.

AND HOW MANY THIRD OFFENSES? FOUR.

FOUR.

SO IT HAPPENS THAT WE TRACKED AND, UH, 20 ADDITIONAL TIMES AFTER THE FIRST OFFENSE.

THAT'S OVER THE COURSE OF ONE YEAR? YES.

I THINK IT'S, I MEAN, YOU'RE RECENT.

YEAH, I THINK IT'S, I THINK IT'S WORKING.

I MEAN, SO AGAIN, WITHOUT HAVING IN FRONT OF ME, YOU'RE, YOU'RE, WHAT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION? WELL, WE, WE, UH, WE WANTED TO EXPLORE THE STOP WORK ORDER, BUT I KNOW THAT THERE'S SOME LIMITATIONS, UH, VINCE JUST MENTIONED IF IT, IF IT IS A SAFETY ISSUE WHERE, FOR EXAMPLE, A FIRETRUCK CAN'T GET IN, THAT THAT IS ELIGIBLE FOR A STOP WORK ORDER AT THAT POINT.

CORRECT? CORRECT.

WHAT DO YOU MEAN AT THAT POINT? IT'S JUST, JUST FOR THAT DAY? OR IS IT STOP WORK ORDER UNTIL THEY, FOR THAT DAY? OKAY.

IT'S FOR THAT DATE.

SO, SO VINCE, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND YOU RIGHT.

SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT OUR CODE CURRENTLY AS WRITTEN IS NOT, IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STATE STATUTE? NO, I'M NOT SAYING THAT IT'S NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE STATUTE.

WELL, BUT OUR CODE SAYS THAT FOR EACH ADDITIONAL AND SUBSEQUENT VIOLATION AFTER THE THIRD, A ONE DAY STOP ORDER IS ISSUED BY THE CITY'S BUILDING DEPARTMENT.

BUT THAT, BUT WHAT GUARANTEE DO YOU HAVE THAT THAT, UH, SUBSEQUENT ONE AFTER THE THIRD IS A LIFE SAFETY VIOLATION.

AND, AND THAT'S PART OF THE SITUATION WHERE WE FIND OURSELVES RUNNING A FOLLOW OF EACH OTHER.

HOWEVER, IF THE APPROVAL FROM THE PARKING DEPARTMENT OR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IS RETRACTED, I COULD EVEN REMOVE MY APPROVAL FOR THE PERMIT.

SO IF ZONING, FOR EXAMPLE, THEY DID SOMETHING THAT RUNS AMISS OF THE ZONING REGULATION AND THE CONDITIONS OF THEIR APPROVAL, THEY COULD RETRACT THAT APPROVAL AND THAT CASE I COULD REMOVE MY PERMIT.

WELL, BUT WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT REMOVING PERMITS.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, DOING, YOU KNOW, STOPPING WORK FOR A DAY, PARKING ON A SWALE DOESN'T ELEVATE TO AN UNSAFE CONDITION.

HOWEVER, BLOCKING A FIRE HYDRANT, BLOCKING A STREET WITHOUT PROPER POLICE PRESENCE TO DEVIATE TRAFFIC, THAT'S AN UNSAFE CONDITION.

AND I COULD USE THE PROVISIONS, WELL, I, CHAPTER THREE, I GET CALLS WHEN I GET THE CALLS FROM OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, I'M GONNA SEND THEM TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT BECAUSE I GOT A LOT OF THESE CALLS AND I'LL BE LOOPING YOU IN ON THOSE EMAILS BECAUSE THOSE ARE PERFECTLY

[00:35:01]

FINE.

IT'S A, IT'S A CHALLENGE THAT WE HAVE AND IT'S AFFECTING PEOPLE'S QUALITY OF LIFE AND A LOT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, IT'S A BUILT UP.

IT'S DIFFICULT.

I JUST HAVE A, A QUESTION FOR, FOR THE BUILDING OFFICIAL, WOULD YOU NEED TO RELY ON THIS ORDINANCE IN CHAPTER 1 0 6 TO ENFORCE THE BUILDING CODE IN THE, IN THE WAY YOU LAID OUT? FOR INSTANCE, IF IT, IF THE VIOLATION OF THE, IF CONSTRUCTION PARKING PLAN WAS A LIFE SAFETY ISSUE, YOU WOULDN'T NEED THIS ORDINANCE TO DO THAT, WOULD YOU? NO, BUT I WOULD NEED SOMEONE TO PROVOKE ME TO GET OUT THERE AND BE ABLE TO INVOKE AND ENFORCE IT.

IN OTHER WORDS, ONE OF OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT, UH, PERSONNEL, PUBLIC WORKS, PERSONNEL PARK PERSONNEL FROM THE CITY DOCUMENTING, TAKING PICTURES OF SOMEONE BLOCKING A HYDRANT OR, OR ILLEGALLY BLOCKING THE STREET WITHOUT THE, THE CORRECT PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND, AND POLICE REPORT.

IN THAT CASE, THEN I CAN GO OUT AND ISSUE MY STOP WORK ORDER UNDER, BUT I NEED TO UNDER CODE, I'VE GOTTA BE CALLED OUT.

SO PUBLIC BLOCKING THE STREET? YES.

SO, SO WITH BLOCKING THE STREET, WE CAN, YOU KNOW, WE CAN SEEK AN ENHANCED, UM, PENALTY OF JUST A MONETARY FINE.

CORRECT.

BECAUSE AGAIN, IT'S PROHIBITING THE FIRST RESPONDERS FROM GETTING TO THE SITE AND PRO, YOU KNOW, PROVIDING THEIR LIFESAVING, UH, OR FIRST RESPONDER CAPABILITIES MM-HMM .

SO UNDER THOSE PROVISIONS, YES.

NOW, IF THEY HAVE A PERMIT TO BLOCK THE STREET, THE PROPER SIGNAGE AND NOTIFICATION, NO.

WHAT'S HAPPENING IS THAT THEY DON'T, AND SO I THINK AFTER THEY GET THAT FIRST WARNING, AND I, AND I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER SUAREZ, YOU KNOW, FIRST TIME PEOPLE MIGHT NOT KNOW, RIGHT? PEOPLE MIGHT NOT KNOW, AND YOU HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, GIVE THEM AT TIMES THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT.

UM, BUT THAT SECOND AND THIRD OFFENSE, IF THEY'RE BLOCKING THE STREET, THAT THAT IS A, IT IS A PROLIFIC, PROLIFIC PROBLEM IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.

AND THEY ALREADY KNOW NOT TO DO THIS BECAUSE THEY ALREADY HAVE THIS PLAN AND THEY KNOW WHERE THEY NEED TO PARK.

THEY HAD TO SIGN, THEY NEED, THEY HAD TO SIGN FOR PERMITS, THEY HAD TO APPLY FOR PERMITS, AND THEY HAD TO COME AND, AND GET THAT PERMIT, BUT THEY'RE CHOOSING NOT TO ABIDE TO BUY IT.

AND SO AND SO, YES, THE FIRST ONE, YOU KNOW, YOU GIVE THEM A VI, UH, UM, A FINE.

UM, BUT MOVING FORWARD FOR THE SECOND AND THIRD OFFENSES, YOU KNOW, I REALLY DO THINK WE NEED TO COME DOWN HARD ON THIS BECAUSE WE'RE ONLY SEEING MORE AND MORE OF THESE PROJECTS, AND WE JUST CAN'T HAVE, WITH THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT WE HAVE IN OUR CITY, WE JUST CANNOT HAVE OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS GET FURTHER CLOGGED BY VEHICLES THAT HAVE A DIFFERENT PLACE TO BE, AND THEY HAVE A PROPER PLACE TO PARK.

IT'S JUST THEY'RE CHOOSING NOT TO.

SO, COMMISSIONER SUAREZ, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU WOULD FEEL FOR THE SECOND AND THIRD OFFENSE, PERHAPS GOING A LITTLE BIT STRICTER, UH, WHERE IF THEY'RE BLOCKING THE STREETS, THEN AT THAT POINT WE LOOK AT STOPPING THEIR WORK FOR THE DAY.

WHAT'S THE FINE CURRENTLY FOR FIRST OFFENSE, 5002ND OFFENSE, 10003RD OFFENSE? 15,000.

SO $5,000 FOR BLOCKING THE STREET FOR A FIRST OFFENSE OF WHATEVER THE VIOLATION OF THE CP MP THAT AS IT IS NOW CURRENTLY? YES.

MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I MAY, I, I FEEL OBLIGATED TO TELL YOU THAT IF, IF WE ARE AMENDING THIS ORDINANCE, WE WOULD NEED TO AMEND THOSE FINES, UM, TO COMPLY WITH THE LIMITATIONS IN, IN STATE LAW.

UM, SO, AND IF YOU'D LIKE, I CAN GO THROUGH THOSE, MR. CHAIR.

YEAH, YEAH.

I MEAN, WE HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE STATE LAW.

SO UNDER STATE LAW AND, AND FOLLOWING A, A, A COURT DECISION A FEW YEARS AGO, A FIRST VIOLATION FOR A CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFENSE COULD BE NO MORE THAN 1000 FOR REPEAT VIOLATION.

IT WOULD BE 5,000 PER DAY.

UM, AND IF A SPECIAL MAGISTRATE FOUND A VIOLATION TO BE IRREPARABLE OR IRREVERSIBLE, IT COULD BE UP TO 15,000.

UM, I THINK THAT IS, THAT'S SEPARATE AND APART FROM WHAT, WHAT VINCE HAS LAID OUT, WHICH IS, UM, THAT IF A VIOLATION OF THIS PLAN WOULD GIVE RISE TO A LIFE SAFETY VIOLATION UNDER THE BUILDING CODE, THAT, UH, THAT HE WOULD HAVE AUTHORITY TO STOP WORK.

SO WHY DON'T WE KEEP THIS ITEM IN COMMITTEE AND LET YOU GUYS COME BACK LOOKING AT CONFORMING THE CURRENT LANGUAGE WITH, UH, STATE, UH, REGULATIONS.

THIS CAME OUT OF OUR, UH, SHORT, SHORT-TERM RENTAL POLICIES, IF I RECALL PROPERLY.

THAT'S RIGHT.

SO, JUST TO BE CLEAR, OUR MUNICIPAL LAW IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW, BUT THIS PARTICULAR ORDINANCE PREDATED, UH, A, UH, A, A COURT DECISION.

UM, SO LET'S KEEP THIS IN, IN, IN COMMITTEE, UH, ALLOWING YOU GUYS TO WORK FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ON AN UPDATED PENALTY SCHEDULE, UH, THAT NOT ONLY CONFIRMS TO THE FINES, UH, PROVIDED BY THE STATE, BUT BUT ALSO ENSURES THAT FOR THE SECOND AND THIRD, WE REALLY TAKE, UM, YOU KNOW, A MORE AGGRESSIVE APPROACH TO CURBING THIS, THIS, THIS BEHAVIOR.

[00:40:02]

OH.

UM, THAT WOULD REQUIRE US TO, TO LOWER ANY, SO ANY SORT OF CHANGE THAT WE WOULD HAVE, WE WOULD HAVE TO NOW GO BACK AT THAT TIME.

I WOULD ALSO WANT TO, TO CLEAN UP THE ORDINANCE.

WELL, YEAH.

AND I, AND I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I, I, I UNDERSTAND THE CHANGE ISN'T BECAUSE WE'RE UPDATING THE ORDINANCE, IS THAT THE ORDINANCE TODAY, IF WE CAN'T ENFORCE IT THE WAY THAT WE'RE ENFOR THE WAY THAT IT'S WRITTEN TO TODAY, I COULDN'T SPEAK TO ANY INDIVIDUAL, UH, CODE ENFORCEMENT CASES THAT MAY BE DECIDED OR PENDING.

UM, BUT I WOULD RECOMMEND CONFORMING THE ORDINANCE MOVING FORWARD.

GOT IT.

I'LL MOVE TO CONTINUE THE ITEM.

YEAH, LET'S CONTINUE TO NEXT MONTH.

DIRECTOR, LET'S INTRODUCE ITEM NUMBER TWO.

UM, MR.

[2. REFERRAL TO THE LAND USE AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE TO DISCUSS POSSIBLE CONVERSION OF 7605 COLLINS AVENUE INTO A MARINE SCIENCE EDUCATION CENTER AND MUSEUM.]

ITEM NUMBER TWO IS, UM, A DISCUSSION REGARDING POSSIBLE CONVERSION OF 76 0 5 COLLINS AVENUE INTO A MARINE SCIENCE EDUCATION CENTER AND MUSEUM COMMISSIONER BARR, THIS IS YOUR ITEM.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

SO, I, UM, I'M, I'M APPARENTLY THE TURTLE COMMISSIONER AND THIS, UH, THE OLD BETSY PEREZ HOUSE, UM, IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK WOULD BE A GREAT LOCATION FOR A MARINE SCIENCE, UM, SCHOOL EDUCATION CAMP AND, AND LEARNING CENTER FOR, UH, OUR COMMUNITY.

WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING LIKE IT.

UH, IT'S THE PERFECT LOCATION SINCE IT'S ON THE BEACH.

IT'S EAST OF, UH, COLLINS AVENUE.

AND, UH, I BROUGHT THIS PROPOSAL TO THE, UH, QUALITY, THE QEC, UH, UNANIMOUS SUPPORT FOR IT.

UM, AND I'D LIKE TO SEE IF I HAVE SOME SUPPORT WITH MY COLLEAGUES TO, TO, TO DO THAT BEFORE MOVING FORWARD.

JASON, IF YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND GIVE US AN UPDATE ON SURE.

SOME OF HOW THE FINANCES ARE.

YEAH, SURE.

UH, UH, THANK YOU, UH, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONER.

SO JUST, YOU KNOW, WHERE WE ARE TODAY IS, IT STARTED ABOUT ONE YEAR AGO WHEN THE CITY BEGAN TO EXPLORE THE CONCEPT OF, UH, ACQUIRING THE 67 0 5, UH, PROPERTY.

UM, AND AT THAT TIME, I, I WAS TASKED WITH, YOU KNOW, FINDING AN AVAILABLE FUNDING SOURCE.

UH, THE CITY ENDED UP ACQUIRING IT.

UH, IT STARTED A DISCUSSION IN JANUARY OF 2024, A COMMISSION.

IT WENT TO, UH, THE FINANCE COMMITTEE, WHICH DISCUSSED, UH, THE VIABLE OPTIONS TO FUND THIS.

AND OBVIOUSLY THE FUNDING SOURCES REALLY ATTACHED TO A, GENERALLY TO A USE.

AND WHAT CAME OUT OF FINANCE AND WAS, UH, ENDORSED BY COMMISSION AT THE MARCH 13TH, 2024 COMMISSION BY RESOLUTION 2024 DASH 3 2 9 4 5 WAS FOR THE CITY TO ACQUIRE THE PARCEL, UH, THE BUILDING AT 60, UH, 76 0 5 COLLINS AVENUE, UH, FOR THE PURPOSE OF, UH, BY, FUNDED BY THE CITY'S BUILDING FUND FOR THE PURPOSE OF CREATING THE NORTH BEACH PERMITTING CENTER, UH, WITH A POSSIBLE, UH, ASSOCIATED, UH, CITY SERVICES SUCH AS CASHIERING FOR PARKING, UTILITY BILLS, CO COMPLIANCE, AND PARKING STAFF.

BASICALLY, THE CONCEPT WAS TO SORT OF CUT YOU OFF, JASON, THROUGH THE CHAIR.

UH, I WAS ALWAYS IN THE IMPRESSION THAT THIS, THE, THE USE FOR THE OLD BETSY PEREZ HOUSE WAS NOT SET IN STONE.

IT WAS, WE WERE GONNA DISCUSS IT, SEE WHAT THE BEST USE IS.

I, I WASN'T ON THE FINANCE COMMITTEE AT THE TIME.

UM, AND I, I, I DON'T NECESSARILY REMEMBER IT GOING TO COMMISSION SAYING THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE A BUILDING DEPARTMENT FUNCTION.

I THINK IT'S, I THINK IT'S A LITTLE RIDICULOUS TO HAVE A BUILDING DEPARTMENT, UM, FUNCTION ON THE BEACH NEXT TO A PARK.

I THINK THERE'S BETTER USES FOR IT FOR THE COMMUNITY.

UM, SO THIS ACTUALLY PASSED COMMISSION WHERE THAT'S A FUNDING SOURCE.

SO IT WAS A, SO CORRECT, SO FUNDING SOURCE, I THINK WE, WE, WE, WE DID OUR BEST TO FIND THIS, THE FUNDING FOR THIS HOUSE, BUT THE COMMISSION WASN'T DEAD SET ON WHAT THE BEST USE WAS.

WE DID, THERE WAS A VERY DETAILED DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT USE BECAUSE IT BEING FROM THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT'S FUND AND THE COMMISSION, OR A FINANCE, A FINANCE AND COMMISSION.

UH, NOW THE IMPORTANT THING TO NOTE IS THAT THERE WAS A, UH, CAPITAL PROJECT ADDED TO THE, UM, THE COMMISSION ADDED A YEAR OR TWO PRIOR TO ACQUIRE SOME TYPE OF BUILDING FOR A NORTH BEACH PERMITTING, UH, CENTER.

SO WHEN THIS CAME UP ABOUT ACQUIRING THIS BUILDING, THE KIND OF THE TWO ITEMS WERE MARRIED TOGETHER, UM, MR. CFO, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU.

HOW MUCH DID THE BUILDING ENTERPRISE FUND PAYING FOR THIS PROPERTY? UH, 6 MILLION, UH, $6.53 MILLION WAS THE ACQUISITION PRICE.

WHAT WAS GOING TO BE THE FISCAL IMPACT TO THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH FOR THE 2% COMMISSION THAT THE MIAMI-DADE TAX COLLECTOR WAS INTENDING TO CHARGE OUR CITY, THE 2%, UH, TAX COLLECTOR FEE WAS ESTIMATED TO BE SIX TO $7 MILLION.

LET ME ASK YOU THIS,

[00:45:01]

UM, AND THAT IS, AND SINCE THEN, THE TAX COLLECTOR HAS WITHDRAWN HIS PROPOSAL ON THAT, UH, ON THAT FEE.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.

AND, BUT WE STARTED OUR BUDGET, ASSUMING THAT WE WERE GOING TO BE FACING, UH, NEARLY $7 MILLION HIT, UH, FOR, FOR THE COMMISSION TO THE TAX COLLECTOR.

IS THAT CORRECT? WE WERE PLANNING ON IT, BUT IT'S BEEN REMOVED, OBVIOUSLY, WELL, AT THIS POINT.

SO OUR CURRENT SERVICE LEVEL, UH, BUDGET WE'LL PRESENT IN MAY, WON'T WE, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT PERHAPS THE CITY COMMISSION SHOULD CONSIDER, UM, YOU KNOW, GIVEN THAT WE WERE ENTERING THIS BUDGETING SEASON, ASSUMING THIS, THIS, THIS FISCAL IMPACT OF ALMOST $7 MILLION FROM THE TAX COLLECTOR AND THAT WAS BEING REMOVED, WE SHOULD STILL ASSUME THAT, SO THAT, SO THAT WE CAN USE THAT $7 MILLION TO REIMBURSE THE ENTERPRISE FUND AND BE ABLE TO HAVE THIS PROPERTY FOR MORE OPEN USES, UM, THAT MIGHT BE MORE PROPER FOR THE LOCATION THAN A BUILDING DEPARTMENT PER PERMITTING CENTER.

YEAH, I, IF YOU'RE ASKING ME, MR. CHAIR, I, YES.

I THINK, AGAIN, THE, THE INTENT OF BUYING THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY WAS NOT TO PUT A PERMITTING CENTER ON THE BEACH .

I THINK, UH, THERE WAS DISCUSSIONS OF LIKE, WHAT THE BEST USE IS.

I THINK THERE WAS A SURVEY THAT WENT OUT.

UM, UH, IF YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT YOU WANNA PUT A PERMITTING PROCESS CENTER IN THE MIDDLE OF A PARK ON THE BEACH, I, I, I, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THE COMMUNITY'S GONNA SIT WELL WITH THAT.

SO, UM, IF, IF I THINK COMMISSIONER MR. CHAIR, I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA.

IF WE CAN JUST OUT, LOOK, WE'RE ALL ONE CITY, RIGHT? I MEAN, AT THE END OF THE DAY IT'S, IT'S TAXPAYER DOLLARS, RIGHT? SURE.

THE BILLING DEPARTMENT WAS THE ONE THAT FOUND THE MONEY FOR IT, BUT ULTIMATELY, WE'RE THE ONES UP HERE TO DECIDE WHAT'S BEST USE FOR THAT, FOR THAT.

BUT NOW WE CAN ABSORB THE IMPACT NOW THAT THE TAX COLLECTOR'S TAKING AWAY HIS PROPOSAL, WE CAN ABSORB THAT IMPACT NOW, UM, WITH, WITH, WITH THAT, WITH THAT DECISION, IT'S THE FUNDING THAT WE NEED, AND THAT WAY WE'RE NOT LIMITED ANYMORE, UM, IN, IN, IN HOW WE USE THE PROPERTY.

SO, THROUGH THE CHAIR, JASON, HOW, WHAT WOULD, WHAT WOULD BE THE BEST WAY TO GO ABOUT DOING THIS IF THE COMMISSION WAS INTERESTED IN CONVERTING THAT FROM THE, FROM THE, UH, APPROVED USE TO THIS USE? UH, YEAH, WE WOULD UTILIZE, UH, YOU KNOW, $6.53 MILLION OF THE, YOU KNOW, THE CITY'S, UH, RESERVES FOR THE ACQUISITION.

THEN THERE WOULD BE THE BUILD OUT, THE BUILDING.

THE FUND HAD HAD APPROPRIATED A MILLION, OR THE COMMISSION APPROVED A MILLION DOLLARS FOR RENOVATION OF THEIR, UM, STRUCTURAL WORK AND A LOT OF RENOVATION WORK.

UM, SO I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE BUILD OUT OF CONVERTING THIS INTO A, UH, MARINE SCIENCE CONSERVATION EDUCATION CENTER WOULD BE, BUT LET'S SAY THAT MIGHT BE ANOTHER MILLION, MILLION AND A HALF.

AND THEN THE PARKS DEPARTMENT HAD KIND OF GUESSTIMATED, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON IF THERE WAS, UH, WITH STAFF OR THROUGH A THIRD PARTY, COULD BE SOMEWHERE BETWEEN A HALF A MILLION TO A MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR IN OPERATING EXPENSES.

I THINK, I THINK ALSO THE BEAUTIFUL THING ABOUT MAYBE, YOU KNOW, CONVERTING THIS INTO A MARINE SCIENCE PARK, MAYBE WE CAN PARTNER WITH, UH, AN ACCREDITED UNIVERSITY AND GIVE THEM A, A SORT OF, UH, UH, A LONG TERM DEAL, NOT LONG TERM.

MAYBE, I DON'T KNOW, FIVE TO 10 YEARS WHERE, YOU KNOW, THEY GET THE PROPERTY AND THEY HAVE A PLAN IN PLACE FOR A REAL, UH, SCIENCE CENTER.

MAYBE SOMETHING WHERE, UH, IT, IT ENCOURAGES THE COMMUNITY AND EVERYTHING ABOUT MIAMI BEACH FOR NATIVE, UH, SPECIES, PLANTS, ANIMALS, UM, UH, MARINE AND, AND, AND HAVE AS, AS PART OF THEIR PROPOSAL, THEY HAVE TO RENOVATE THE, THE, THE STRUCTURE.

SO IT REALLY DOESN'T COME AT TO ACCOST WITH US.

UH, AND THE REASON I, I LIKE A UNIVERSITY INSTEAD OF PERHAPS LIKE A, A NONPROFIT.

AND I THINK WE'VE ALL REALIZED NONPROFITS END UP ASKING US FOR MORE MONEY.

A UNIVERSITY .

OH, UNIVERSITIES DO TOO.

YEAH, THE TWO.

TWO IGU, LIKE ONE , TWO IGU INTO ONE.

UM, BUT, WELL, SONIA, THEY PASSED US FOR MONEY AND FAR IN THE PAST .

BUT I THINK IF WE TEAM UP WITH A, UH, A UNIVERSITY PERHAPS, UM, UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA AND, AND MAKE IT A REAL SCIENCE CENTER FOR THE COMMUNITY AND FOR THE BETTERMENT OF MIAMI BEACH WILDLIFE, UH, AND MARINE WILDLIFE, WE COULD, WE COULD KILL TWO BIRDS WITH ONE STONE.

WE DON'T WANT KILL BIRDS.

SO IF THE CONCEPT NO BIRDS KILL, UM,

[00:50:01]

SO THERE YOU GO.

SO IF PERHAPS, IF, IF, UH, THE, THE COMMITTEE IS INTERESTED IS THEN TO SEND IT BACK TO COMMISSION WITH, I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK HERE, A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION FOR, UH, TO BE CONSIDERED DURING THE 26TH BUDGET PROCESS.

I THINK AS THE CHAIR SAID, UH, FOR THE, UH, THE CITY TO ACQUIRE, UH, FROM THE CITY'S BUILDING FUND, UH, THE 76 0 5 COLLINS AVENUE BUILDING, UH, FOR THE PURPOSES OF CREATING A MARINE SCIENCE AND EDUCATION CENTER, AND THUS, AND THEN TO, FOR THE ADMINISTRATION TO SEEK AN OPERATING PARTNER, PERHAPS WITH THE UNIVERSITY TO, UH, BUILD OUT AND OPERATE SIDE FACILITY AND THE, AND THE OTHER, ON THE OTHER INPUT.

I WOULD ADD TO THAT, UM, I THINK, I THINK WE SHOULD, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE, UM, THE WATER TESTING THAT'S GOING ON THERE AS WELL, THAT'S GONNA BE GOING IN THERE.

AND SO I DON'T THINK WE JUST SHOULD LIMIT IT.

I THINK THIS IS A GREAT USE, BUT I THINK THERE MIGHT BE, YOU KNOW, ANCILLARY, YOU KNOW, SMALL ANCILLARY THINGS.

WE CAN IRON THAT OUT.

YEAH, I THINK THE MAIN THING, SYNERGY, I THINK THE MAIN THING OUT OF THIS DISCUSSION, QUITE FRANKLY, IS GETTING THE PROPERTY OUT OF THE ENTERPRISE.

WHICH OPENS THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO DO, YOU KNOW, THESE OTHER, UM, USES NOT RELATED, UH, TO, TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.

SO WE CAN SHOW THAT THAT'S A GOOD DIRECTION.

I'LL MOVE IT.

YEP.

AND I, LET'S DO THAT WITH A UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THE COMMITTEE.

ARE THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM Y YES, MR. CHAIRMAN, THE FIRST CALLER IS OMAR JIMENEZ.

OMAR, WELCOME.

HEY, THANK YOU.

UM, SO I THINK THIS IS A GREAT ITEM.

UH, THIS ITEM WAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION THROUGH OUR ONGOING RESIDENT, UH, DRIVEN COLLABORATION HERE IN NORTH BEACH.

UH, WE ACTUALLY WERE THE ONES THAT RAN THE SURVEY THROUGH THE PARKVIEW ISLAND SUSTAINABLE ASSOCIATION A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO THROUGH OUR NEWSLETTER WHEN THIS ITEM WAS FIRST, UM, KIND OF BEING LOOKED AT.

AND, UH, 50, OVER 50 RESIDENTS RESPONDED TO OUR SURVEY WITH, UM, THE TOP TWO USES SUPPORTED BY THE COMMUNITY BEING, UM, EXACTLY WHAT THIS, UH, COMMITTEE HAS DISCUSSED TODAY, ESPECIALLY AS SEA TURTLE CONSERVATION CENTER AND AN ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER WITH A WORKING LAB FOR A ENVIRONMENTAL, UM, ORGANIZATION, UM, SO THAT THEY CAN, THEY CAN KEEP, UH, MONITORING THE, THE WATER QUALITY IN THE AREA.

AND BASICALLY, WE THINK THIS WOULD BE A GREAT SITE BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY THE SITE FOR THE SEA TURTLE FEST, WHICH JUST HAPPENED THIS PAST SATURDAY, UM, IN THE ALTOS, THE ADJACENT ALTOS OF MAR PARK.

IT'S WITHIN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE BEACH, THE SHORELINE, WHERE HUNDREDS OF TURTLES ARE ALREADY NESTING, UM, ALONG OUR SHORELINES.

AND THEY WOULD CREATE EDUCATIONAL ENGAGEMENT AND VOLUNTEERING OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESIDENTS AND YOUTH IN OUR COMMUNITY, UH, WHICH PERFECTLY FITS WITH THE RESIDENTS VISION FOR A MORE HEALTH, HEALTH AND WELLBEING FOCUSED, RESILIENT AND SUSTAINABLE COASTAL LIVING LIFESTYLE FOR NORTH BEACH.

UH, WE, WE SUPPORT GETTING IT OUT OF THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT FUND AND, UM, US BEING ABLE TO DO, UM, YOU KNOW, THE BEST, WHAT'S BEST FOR THE COMMUNITY.

SO, UM, THANK YOU FOR DISCUSSING THIS TODAY.

WE'RE FULLY IN SUPPORT OF THIS PROJECT.

THANK YOU, OMAR, FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION AND YOUR COMMENTS AND FOR YOUR ACTIVISM IN SUPPORT OF OUR ENVIRONMENT UP IN NORTH BEACH, AND ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

WE HAVE TWO MORE CALLERS.

UH, THE NEXT ONE IS ELIZABETH LATON.

ELIZABETH, WELCOME.

HI, GOOD AFTERNOON.

UM, FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SUAREZ FOR THIS.

AND, AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HE AND I HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR MANY, MANY MONTHS.

UM, IT WAS SORT OF HATCHED WITH LARRY SCHAFER AND TRYING TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT WOULD, UH, UTILIZE THIS SPACE IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE GREEN SPACE IN THE BEACH.

I DEFINITELY DO NOT THINK THAT THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, UH, IS A GOOD USE.

I DON'T THINK THAT WE'VE ALREADY GOT A PERMIT OFFICE THAT'S DOWN THE STREET ON NORMANDY.

UM, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THE TURTLE TANKS ARE STILL THERE AND WE COULD UTILIZE THOSE AS WELL AS THE SURF RIDER, UM, UH, WATER TESTING.

I THINK IT'S A FANTASTIC IDEA.

YOU COULD EVEN CONVERT THE POOL INTO SOME SORT OF, YOU KNOW, INTERACTIVE KIDS ZONE KIND OF THING.

I JUST, I THINK THIS IS A FANTASTIC IDEA.

SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY I APPRECIATE IT AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU, ELIZABETH.

ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, MR. ATTORNEY? YES.

OUR NEXT CALLER IS KENT ROBBINS.

KENT, WELCOME.

HISTORIC DISTRICT, BUT I BELIEVE THIS PARTICULAR BUILDING IS ACTUALLY CUT.

HI, THANK YOU FOR, UH, ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK.

I HAVE ONE MAJOR QUESTION CONCERNING THE POTENTIAL ADAPTIVE REUSE OF THE SITE.

UM, I BELIEVE IT'S ADJACENT TO THE ALTA DELMAR

[00:55:01]

THE HISTORIC SITE BOUNDARIES ARE CUT AROUND IT, BUT I'D LIKE TO HAVE A CONFIRMATION OF THAT FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY.

UH, IN RESPONSE TO WHAT I'M ASKING, I DO HAVE A QUESTION.

GIVEN MY EXPERIENCE IN AN ACTUAL EXPERIENCE OF CONVERTING RESIDENTIAL USES OR RES SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, UM, PROPERTIES INTO COMMERCIAL USES, I'VE FOUND THAT TO BE EXTRAORDINARILY DIFFICULT TASK AND A VERY EXPENSIVE, AND ALTHOUGH I THINK THE SITE IS EXCELLENT CHOICE FOR PLACING, UH, SUCH A, UM, PROJECT ON THAT SITE, I'M CONCERNED THAT IT'S NOT REALLY PRACTICAL FOR ADAPTIVE REUSE FOR THE PURPOSES THAT YOU DISCUSSED.

AND WHILE I WOULD ENCOURAGE IT, IF IT COULD BE DONE, I THINK BEFORE WE START GOING IN THAT ROUTE, I THINK THAT WE REALLY NEED TO HAVE A ARCHITECT, UH, KNOWLEDGEABLE IN THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OR IN RESTORATION HISTORIC HOMES OR HOMES THAT ARE, ARE, THAT COULD BE DEEMED CONTRIBUTING.

I THINK IT'D BE APPROPRIATE TO DETERMINE WHETHER IT'S EVEN FEASIBLE TO CONVERT THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT FOR SUCH A COMMERCIAL USE.

UM, I WISH IT COULD BE DONE.

I'M JUST WONDERING IF WE'RE GETTING INTO SOMETHING THAT MIGHT BE, BE SO EXPENSIVE THAT IT WOULD THEN END UP DETERRING AND END UP NOT GOING FORWARD WITH THAT PARTICULAR PROJECT.

HAVING SAID THAT, AND WANTING TO SAVE THAT HOME, 'CAUSE I THINK IT DOES CONTRIBUTE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

UM, THERE MAY BE OTHER WAYS OF, OF PLACING SOME PROJECT ON THE SITE, NOT WITHIN THE STRUCTURE ITSELF, BUT ADJACENT TO IT AS PART OF THE AREA BETWEEN, BETWEEN THE, UH, THANK YOU MR. ROBINSON FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION.

AND CERTAINLY WE WILL ALWAYS BE CONFORMING WITH OUR ZONING LAWS AND COMP PLAN.

AND IF NECESSARY, WE'RE ALWAYS HAPPY TO UPDATE OUR COMP PLAN TO REFLECT THE PROPER USE OF THE PROPERTY.

UH, ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

SEEING NONE IN ZOOM AND NONE IN PERSON.

UM, WE CAN SHOW THIS ITEM, THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE COMMITTEE ADOPTED, UH, AND WITH A KEY PART OF IT IS MAKING SURE THAT, UH, NOW THAT WE HAVE RELIEVED FUNDING, UH, GIVEN THE CHANGE OF DECISION BY THE TAX COLLECTOR, THAT PERHAPS WE, WE IDENTIFY AND SET ASIDE THOSE FUNDS TO RELEASE, UM, THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT OR REIMBURSE THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT FOR ITS INVESTMENT ON THE PROPERTY.

AND MR. ATTORNEY, PLEASE SHOW ME AS A CO-SPONSOR HAPPY TO SUPPORT COMMISSIONER SUAREZ AND HIS EFFORT.

GOOD.

SO MR. CHAIRMAN, ON THAT ONE, WE'LL SHOW THAT ITEM IS CONCLUDED WITH A RECOMMENDATION TO THE COMMISSION THAT ALTERNATIVE USES BE EXPLORED.

MR. CFO, WHEN WOULD IT BE AN APPROPRIATE TIME TO SEND THIS BACK TO THE COMMISSION TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE THE PROPER, UH, FEEDBACK FROM THE CITY COMMISSION AS WE DEVELOP THE BUDGET FOR NEXT FISCAL YEAR? I WAS GONNA, UH, NOT NECESSARILY RATE THIS SECOND, BUT IT WAS, THIS IS MY ITEM, SO I WAS GONNA GO BACK AND WORK ON THE ITEM TO BRING THE RESOLUTION BACK TO THE COMMISSION, UH, TARGETING THE MAY COMMISSION MEETING.

SO OUR MAY IS MAY SUFFICIENT TIME, BECAUSE I KNOW WE HAVE A BUDGET WORKSHOP.

UH, OUR FIRST BUDGET WORKSHOP IS MAY OR JUNE, MAY, THE RETREAT, WE DON'T SPECIFICALLY TALK ABOUT ENHANCEMENTS.

WE DON'T TALK ABOUT THE ENHANCEMENTS UNTIL JUNE, JUNE AND JULY.

SO MAY WILL STILL BE SUFFICIENT TIME, RIGHT.

UH, WITH, TO BE ABLE TO DISCUSS THIS WITHOUT CAUSING A DOMINO EFFECT ON THE BUDGET.

WE HAVE THE MAIN COMMISSION APPROVAL.

IF WE GET COMMISSION APPROVAL IN MAY, THEN WE GO AHEAD AND CREATE THAT, UM, ENHANCEMENT, UH, TO THE, TO THE CAPITAL BUDGET.

UH, THE QUESTION IT, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU WANNA HAVE SOME COMMIT DISCUSSION, THE COMMISSION.

SO I SHOULD, YOU WOULD LIKE THIS TO BE AN R SEVEN ITEM? I'M OR C SEVEN.

I'LL LEAVE THAT TO THE SPONSOR AND TO THE CITY ATTORNEY AND I'LL CHECK WITH SPONSOR ON THAT.

YEAH, I'LL, I'LL, I'LL WORK ON THAT RIGHT AWAY AND GET THAT BACK TO COMMISSION RIGHT AWAY.

I THINK LET'S DISCUSS IT.

IT'S WORTH A DISCUSSION AND MAKING SURE.

ALRIGHT, I'LL DO WAS AN R SEVEN RESOLUTION.

I WOULD SAY THAT'S PRUDENT.

WE, THERE'S SOMETHING, A CHANGE TO SIGNIFICANCE SHOULDN'T BE A CONSENT ITEM.

THE ONE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT $6 MILLION, THAT IS SOMETHING WORTHY OF DISCUSSION.

AND I THINK, WELL, IT DIDN'T PASS YET, BUT I ENDED NOT GOING DEFER, BUT I, YEAH, WE'LL DO IT AS IN OUR SEVEN.

DIRECTOR, LET'S CALL ITEM NUMBER FOUR.

ALL RIGHT, MR.

[4. DISCUSS AMENDING SECTION 2.1.1.1 OF THE MIAMI BEACH RESILIENCY CODE, WHICH REQUIRES THE DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS BETWEEN APPLICANTS AND THIRD PARTIES IN CONNECTION WITH LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS BEFORE THE LAND USE BOARDS, TO (1) EXPAND APPLICABILITY TO ALSO INCLUDE PRIVATE APPLICATIONS BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION, AND (2) REQUIRE, AT A MINIMUM, THE DISCLOSURE OF THE MATERIAL TERMS OF ANY SUCH SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT.]

SUCH SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT.

ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS TO DISCUSS AMENDING SECTION TWO, ONE OF THE MIAMI BEACH RESILIENCY CODE, WHICH REQUIRES THE DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS BETWEEN APPLICANTS AND THIRD PARTIES IN CONNECTION WITH LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS BEFORE THE LAND USE BOARDS TO ONE EXPAND APPLICABILITY TO ALSO INCLUDE PRIVATE APPLICATIONS BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION.

AND TWO, REQUIRED A MINIMUM THE DISCLOSURE OF THE MATERIAL TERMS OF ANY

[01:00:01]

COMMISSIONER SUAREZ, THIS IS YOUR ITEM.

VICE MAYOR SUAREZ, THIS IS YOUR ITEM.

YOU CALL ME A COMMISSIONER.

IT'S FINE.

UH, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

SO I, I PUT TOGETHER SOME NOTES, UM, LAST NIGHT, AND I'D LIKE TO ALSO SHARE WITH THE STATE ATTORNEY, I DON'T THINK I SHARED THIS WITH YOU.

UM, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WHAT WE ARE, WHAT WE'RE PUTTING HERE, UM, IT REALLY IN, IN INDUCES TRANSPARENCY AND, AND INTEGRITY.

UM, NICK, WHY DON'T YOU START OFF WITH WHAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS RECOMMENDING, AND THEN I'D LIKE TO ALSO ADD IN SOME POSSIBLE AMENDMENTS TO STRENGTHEN THE ORDINANCE.

SURE, I'D BE HAPPY TO.

SO WHAT THE CODE CURRENTLY REQUIRES IS IN CONNECTION WITH ANY APPLICATION TO THE CITY'S FOUR LAND USE BOARDS, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD, AND THE PLANNING BOARD, UM, THAT IN THE EVENT THAT AN APPLICANT ENTERS INTO A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH A THIRD PARTY IN EXCHANGE FOR THAT PARTY'S, UH, SUPPORT OF A PROJECT OR AGREEMENT TO WITHHOLD AN OBJECTION TO THE PROJECT, UM, THAT THAT SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT NEEDS TO, THE EXISTENCE OF THAT SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT NEEDS TO BE DISCLOSED IN WRITING.

AND THE DISCLOSURE, UH, NEEDS TO GENERALLY SUMMARIZE THE NATURE OF THE CONSIDERATION PROVIDED.

UM, AND THE, AND LASTLY, THIS TO THE FULL COMMISSION TO A COMMISSION.

RIGHT NOW, IT'S ONLY, RIGHT NOW IT'S ONLY FOR THE FOUR LAND USE BOARDS.

UH, SO, AND THE LA THE LAST REQUIREMENT IS THAT, IS THAT AN APPLICANT HAS TO MAKE A VERBAL DISCLOSURE AT THE START OF THE, OF THE HEARING.

UM, THIS ORDINANCE WOULD AMEND THE CODE TO ADDITIONALLY REQUIRE DISCLOSURE FOR PRIVATE REQUESTS BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION, WHICH WOULD MEAN IF IT, IF AN APPLICANT HAS, UH, A, LET'S SAY A A A A CODE AMENDMENT, UM, OR A COMP PLAN, AMENDMENT OR REZONING, UH, ANY REQUEST FOR ZONING RELIEF, THAT'S BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION.

THIS, UH, THIS AMENDMENT WOULD REQUIRE THAT, UH, THAT THE DISCLOSURE BE MADE.

UM, AND IT WOULD ALSO REQUIRE THAT, UH, THAT THE MATERIAL TERMS OF ANY SUCH SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN AN APPLICANT AND A THIRD PARTY, UH, BE DISCLOSED AS WELL.

SO RIGHT NOW, YOU, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO, UH, DISCLOSE THE GENERAL TERMS, THE MATERIAL TERMS. YOU ONLY HAVE TO DISCLOSE THAT AN AGREEMENT WAS REACHED AND GENERALLY DESCRIBE THE NATURE.

AND THAT'S ONLY, AND THAT'S TO THE LAND USE BOARD FOR THE LAND USE BOARDS.

SO, OKAY.

SO THE ZONING AMENDMENT TO THE CITY COMMISSION, IT'S NOT COVERED UNDER OUR CODE AT THE MOMENT, BUT THIS WOULD ENSURE THAT AS THE CITY COMMISSION CONSIDERS ZONING AMENDMENTS VARIANCES, WELL, WE DON'T CONSIDER VARIANCES, BUT HEIGHT INCREASES OR CHANGES IN SETBACKS OR INCREASES IN FAR, CORRECT.

THAT WE ARE AWARE OF THEN? THAT'S CORRECT.

AND, AND SO WHAT IS THE PENALTY IF THIS IS NOT FOLLOWED? THE, THE PENALTY, UM, AS DRAFT? WELL, THE PENALTY IN THE EXISTING CODE, UM, IS THAT, IS THAT IT IS THAT ANY APPROVAL THAT RESULTS FROM THAT, OF THAT APPLICATION, UM, IS, IS DECLARED NULL AND VOID.

UM, THE, THE, WHAT HAPPENS IF WE FIND OUT A YEAR AFTER A BUILDING PERMIT'S BEEN APPROVED.

THAT'S THE CHALLENGE IS, IS, IS IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT TO, TO ENFORCE THAT REMEDY AT THAT POINT.

UM, AND SO ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT, THAT, THAT WE ARE MAKING IS, UH, IS TO REVISE THE PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF THIS ORDINANCE.

UM, AND THIS IS SOMETHING WE DISCUSSED WITH, WITH, WITH YOU COMMISSIONER, UM, WHICH IS TO, TO DELAY, UH, ANY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR THAT PROPERTY, UH, FOR A SPECIFIED PERIOD OF TIME.

AND THAT DELAY WOULD APPLY NO MATTER WHAT THE APPLICATION, UH, WHAT NO MATTER WHAT THE FUTURE APPLICATION IS FOR THAT PROPERTY.

SO, AND THROUGH THE CHAIR, THIS IS WHY I HAVE SOME OTHER AMENDMENTS I'D LIKE TO RUN BY YOU.

EXCLUDING CRITICAL INFORMATION.

UM, AND SEE IF THERE'S AN APPETITE FOR THIS.

UM, YOU KNOW, 'CAUSE WHEN I RE REVIEWED THIS, I, I DON'T THINK IT WAS STRONG ENOUGH, UM, FOR LIKE THE TRANSPARENCY AND ENFORCEABILITY, UH, AND ESPECIALLY ACCOUNTABILITY FOR, UM, FOR, FOR WHAT, WHAT TAKES PLACE, ESPECIALLY IN OUR, IN OUR ZONING AND LAND USE, UM, CHANGES.

SO, UH, SO SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS, I HAVE A FULL DISCLOSURE OF ALL AGREEMENTS.

UM, THIS ORDINANCE SHOULD REQUIRE A SUBMISSION OF A VERBATIM COPY OF ALL RELEVANT AGREEMENTS, UH, NOT JUST THE SUMMARY OF THE MATERIAL TERMS, UM, ALLOWING APPLICANTS TO DETERMINE WHAT IS MATERIAL RISKS,

[01:05:01]

UM, SO I THINK THE FULL AS, FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN, WHEN WE WERE HERE FOR THE, UM, THE STANDARD HOTEL, UH, I HAD A COPY OF THE AGREEMENT.

THAT'S SIMPLY BECAUSE, UH, THE OWNER GAVE ME A COPY.

UM, I THINK THAT SHOULD BE, UM, REQUIRED, UH, THE FULL TERMS, ANY, BASICALLY ANY SIGNED COPY.

UM, THE EXPANDED DEFINITION OF COVERED AGREEMENTS.

SO DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS SHOULD APPLY TO ANY AGREEMENT RELATED TO THE APPLICATION WRITTEN, ORAL, FORMAL, OR INFORMAL.

UH, THAT INVOLVES A, ANY MONETARY OR ANY CONSIDERATION OR BENEFIT, OR INVOLVES AN AGREEMENT TO SUPPORT OR NON OPPOSE AN APPLICATION.

AND, AND THIS WOULD INCLUDE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS, OBVIOUSLY, UH, AGREEMENTS WITH RESIDENTS OF MIAMI BEACH, UH, NEIGHBORS, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, COMMUNITY GROUPS, OR ADVOCACY ORGANIZATIONS.

UM, AND AGAIN, THIS IS JUST, THIS IS JUST TRANSPARENCY.

WE WANNA KNOW IF THERE'S BEEN ANY DEALS WITH ANY OF THESE PARTIES, UH, PRIVATE AGREEMENTS FOR SERVICES, UM, AND NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS.

YOU KNOW, NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS MAY BE EXCLUDED FROM FULL DISCLOSURE, BUT MUST BE LISTED PERHAPS ON AN INDEX, UH, OF ALL AGREEMENTS SUBMITTED WITH THE APPLICATION.

SO IF THERE IS A NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT, LET SAY THAT THERE IS A NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT, UM, THAT, THAT, THAT IS, THAT IS WRITTEN, UM, AND, AND MUST BE PROVIDED ONCE IT, IT CAN BE DISCLOSED, UM, RETROACTIVE APPLICABILITY.

I THINK, UM, YOU KNOW, TO AVOID PROCEDURAL LOOPHOLES, THE AMENDED ORDINANCE SHOULD NOT APPLY, SHOULD APPLY RETROACTIVELY TO ALL APPLICATIONS BEFORE THE CITY BOARDS, UH, OR THE CITY COMMISSION.

IF WE ADOPT THIS TODAY, I THINK ANYTHING THAT IS, UH, IN THE PROCESS NOW SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO DISCLOSE ANY SORT OF, UM, UH, AGREEMENTS, UM, SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS THAT, THAT I JUST DISCUSSED.

UM, AND I DON'T, I CERTAINLY DON'T THINK THAT ANY FURTHER REVIEW SHOULD OCCUR UNLESS ALL THE DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE.

UM, AND WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ENFORCEABILITY, UH, I THINK WE NEED TO BE A LITTLE BIT STRONGER ON THAT.

UM, SO BROAD SANCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS AND THE PRINCIPALS.

UM, SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF THERE IS A VIOLATION FOUND A YEAR AND A HALF AFTER A BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED, LET'S SAY THE BUILDING'S ALREADY UP, UH, AND WE, AND AN ASSIGNED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WAS FOUND WHERE THEY DIDN'T DISCLOSE IT, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE PERHAPS A TWO YEAR BAN, UH, ON SUBMITTING ANY NEW APPLICATION BY THE APPLICANT, THE DEVELOPER, UM, ANY ENTITY WHICH THE APPLICANT HAS A DIRECT OR INDIRECT INTEREST, UH, ANY OWNER, OFFICER, OR PRINCIPAL OF THE APPLICANT, AND ANY ENTITY IN WHICH SUCH AN INDIVIDUAL HOLDS A DIRECT OR INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST.

UM, AND FOR EXAMPLE, IF THERE IS A, A DEVELOPMENT THAT IS IN THE PROCESS AND THEY HAVE NOT DISCLOSED THAT THERE IS A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WHILE IT'S, UH, UNDER REVIEW, THEN THAT APPLICATION SHOULD BE NULL AND VOID.

UM, ALSO, I I, I JUST HAVE A QUESTION, NICK.

HAVE YOU REVIEWED THESE? 'CAUSE I KNOW I, I HAVE NOT OTHER LEGISLATION, YOU'VE TOLD ME SOME OF THIS STUFF WE CAN'T DO.

SO I JUST WANT YEAH, NO, AND, AND I THINK, UH, UH, COMMISSIONER, I'D LIKE TO, YOU'RE TAKING NOTES AND, AND YEAH, WE'LL, WE'LL GO BACK AND FORTH.

I MEAN, THIS IS, BECAUSE THIS IS SUBSTANTIVE, RIGHT? AND, AND THIS IS A LOT, THIS IS A LOT.

AND THAT, AND THAT'S GOOD.

AND I WANTED TO RUN IT THROUGH THE COMMITTEE, UH, TO MAKE, TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE AN APPETITE FOR.

IT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT I, I'D LIKE TO GET DONE.

UM, BUT, AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, UM, YOU KNOW, I, I ALSO WANT TO HAVE A LIABILITY FOR THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES, UH, FOR THE LOBBYISTS.

SO IF A DEVELOPER, UM, OR BUSINESS OWNER HIRES A LOBBYIST, UH, A LAW FIRM OR LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE THAT APPEARS BEFORE ANY CITY BOARD OR THE CITY COMMISSION ON BEHALF OF AN APPLICANT, APPLICANT SHALL, UH, AUTOMATICALLY ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY, UH, FOR ENSURING THAT THE APPLICANT'S COMPLIANCE WITH DISCLOSURE, UH, FOR REQUIREMENTS, IT SHOULD BE ALSO SUBJECT TO THE SAME SORT OF SANCTIONS AS THE APPLICANT, IF ANY VIOLATION OCCURS, UH, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE FIRM HAD ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE.

AND BE PROHIBITED FROM REPRESENTING IN ANY APPLICATION BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION AND BOARDS FOR AT LEAST TWO YEARS IF FOUND THAT THEY HAVE VIOLATED THIS DISCLOSURE.

UM,

[01:10:01]

SO, LOOK, I, THIS IS A LOT.

THIS IS SORT OF THROWING THE, UM, THIS IS, THIS IS, THIS IS GOING, THIS IS PUSHING THIS IN A VERY RESTRICTIVE MANNER.

BUT I THINK WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ACCOUNTABILITY AND, AND, UM, TRANSPARENCY AND INTEGRITY, ESPECIALLY IN OUR, IN OUR ZONING, UH, LAWS WHERE WE HAVE CONSISTENTLY SEEN, UH, DEVELOPERS AND BUSINESS OWNERS TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE CITY, UH, THROUGH BACKROOM DEALS, I WANT TO END THAT TODAY.

I WANT TO, TODAY SHOULD BE THE START OF WHERE WE SORT OF END THAT.

AND EVERYTHING IS TRANSPARENT IN THE OPEN.

UM, THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE CAN BE A DEAL THROUGH A DEVELOPER WITH A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TO BUY THEIR SUPPORT, UM, I, I THINK IS, IS IS WRONG.

AND THERE NEEDS TO BE PENALTIES FOR THAT.

UM, NOT ONLY I, I THINK WITH ALL THE PARTIES INVOLVED.

AND SO, UH, I THINK IF WE WANT TO HAVE A MORE TRANSPARENT CITY WHERE EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT'S GOING ON, UH, I THINK THIS IS THE STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

SO NICK, IF, AND THROUGH THE CHAIR, IF YOU DON'T MIND, UM, DID YOU HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH ANY OF THESE, UM, POINTS THAT I'VE RAISED? UM, COMMISSIONER, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE MAYBE KEEP THIS IN COMMITTEE SO THAT WE CAN MEET SOME OF THESE ISSUES WE'LL NEED TO RESEARCH.

UM, BUT JUST TO, JUST TO, YOU KNOW, JUST TO FRAME THE ISSUES, UH, GENERALLY SPEAKING, PRIVATE PARTIES HAVE, UH, HAVE THE RIGHT TO CONTRACT, UH, ON ANY, YOU KNOW, ON ANY RANGE OF MATTERS.

AND WE'RE NOT STOPPING THAT OF MATTERS.

AND WE'RE NOT STOPPING THAT.

WE'RE STOPPING THAT.

WE JUST SAY THE CITY WANTS TO KNOW.

ANYTHING THAT WE DO IN THIS CONTEXT IS GONNA BE, UH, IN THE REALM OF DISCLOSURE IS, IS, IS WHAT CAN WE REQUIRE DISCLOSURE OF.

UM, BUT I, ARE WE ALLOWED TO DO RETROACTIVITY, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.

'CAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING HAS BEEN, AND I'VE TRIED IN THE PAST TO DO RETROACTIVE RIGHT.

LDR AMENDMENTS, AND I'VE BEEN TOLD OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN, WE CAN'T GO RETROACTIVE.

AND, AND, AND IN THIS ONE IN PARTICULAR, WOULD BE CONCERNED WITH THE FACT THAT THIS APPLIES TO CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIPS.

TYPICALLY, UM, A SUBSEQUENT LAW CANNOT IMPAIR, UH, RIGHTS UNDER AN EXISTING CONTRACT.

SO, UM, SO, BUT ANYTHING IN ANYTHING CURRENTLY UNDER REVIEW, SO IF IT'S BETWEEN, UH, A LAND USE COMMITTEE AND FIRST READING, OR FIRST READING AND SECOND READING, AND IF THIS LAW PASSES, CAN WE REQUIRE THAT DISCLOSURE BE MADE? I THINK WE WOULD, THIS WOULD, BEFORE ANSWERING ON THE RECORD, I'D LIKE TO RESEARCH THAT, BUT THIS WOULD PROBABLY NEED TO APPLY PROSPECTIVELY.

AND I KNOW I'M PUTTING YOU ON THE SPOT, BUT IF WE'RE ASKING FOR A DISCLOSURE AND THE APPLICANT LEGAL ENTITY OR ANYONE INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS WILLINGLY NO.

DOES NOT PROVIDE THAT DISCLOSURE, ARE WE ABLE TO IMPOSE A PENALTY? WE'LL, HA WE'LL HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT.

UM, I, I, I THINK THAT, UH, THAT WE, YOU KNOW, ANYTHING IN OUR CODE WE WANNA MAKE SURE WE CAN ENFORCE, BUT I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE, UH, THAT WE DRAFT ANY PENALTIES IN A MANNER THAT IF WE WERE CHALLENGED, THE, THE, THE ORDINANCE WOULD, WOULD WITHHOLD, WOULD WITHSTAND SCRUTINY.

SO I, I WOULD WANNA LOOK VERY CAREFULLY, ESPECIALLY IF WE INCLUDE, UH, ANY OF THESE, THESE AMENDMENTS THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING.

THIS, UH, THIS CONVERSATION TO, TO THE NEXT MEETING.

MR. CHAIR, HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT SOME OF THESE? UM, I, I AGREE WITH, WITH A LOT OF THEM.

I, I, I AGREE WITH THE TRANSPARENCY.

I THINK THAT THERE IS A NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WHICH PARTIES ARE ALLOWED TO ENTER INTO.

THE BEST THING IS FOR THERE TO BE A DISCLOSURE OF IT.

AND THAT'S SIMPLY WHAT IT IS.

UM, AND I, YOU KNOW, THE RETROACTIVE APP APPLICATION IS SOMETHING THAT I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK WITH LDRS IS APPROPRIATE, BUT I DEFER TO, TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, AND YOU READ THAT PRETTY QUICKLY, AND IT'S A LONG LIST.

I THINK YOU HAVE THERE LIKE TWO PAGES OF THINGS THAT YOU READ PRETTY QUICKLY.

SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, I HAVEN'T HAD, OR THREE PAGES, I HAVEN'T HAD THE BENEFIT OF READING IT THROUGH.

AND AS YOU KNOW, I LIKE TO READ THE, WHAT I'M GONNA GET FEEDBACK ON BEFORE I SPEAK ABOUT IT ON THE AGENDA.

LISTEN, OVERALL, I, I BELIEVE THAT, YOU KNOW, THESE THIRD PARTY AGREEMENTS NEED TO BE DISCLOSED, UM, AS IT RELATES TO THE PENALTIES AND ALL THAT.

I'M GONNA GIVE DEFERENCE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY TO GUIDE US ON THIS, AND I THINK WE'RE GONNA NEED TO CONTINUE

[01:15:01]

UM, I, I DO HAVE A QUESTION ON, YOU KNOW, THIS SPEAKS A LOT ON WHAT HAPPENS BEFORE, UM, A VOTE IS DONE, BUT WHAT HAPPENS AFTER A VOTE IS TAKEN OR AFTER A DECISION IS MADE? BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WHAT HAPPENS A LOT OF TIMES IS, YOU KNOW, ASSUMING THAT WE ADOPT THIS, PEOPLE ARE GONNA FIND, TRY TO FIND THE LOOPHOLE, WHICH IS ALWAYS WHAT HAPPENS WITH, WITH, WITH GOVERNMENT, ESPECIALLY WITH GOOD GOVERNMENT POLICIES.

AND THEN WHAT HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE IS, YOU KNOW, THEY'LL MAKE A CONTRIBUTION AFTER THE FACT, UH, OR, YOU KNOW, THEY'LL JUST AVOID FALLING UNDER THE GUIDELINES OF, OF THE REGULATION.

SO, NICK, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IN A SITUATION WHERE A VARIANCE IS CONSIDERED, A VARIANCE IS GRANTED BY A, BY A COMMITTEE, OR A ZONING AMENDMENT IS REQUESTED BY THE COMMISSIONER, AND A ZONING AMENDMENT IS GRANTED BY THE CITY COMMISSION.

BUT THEN AFTERWARDS, THE CONTRIBUTION TO A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, LET'S SAY, HAPPENS, OR TO, YOU KNOW, A, A RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION OR TO A SCHOOL, WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE, IT'S USUALLY A GOOD CAUSE.

UH, BUT WHAT HAPPENS AT THAT POINT IF IT, IF IT'S DISCLOSED, IF IT'S HAPPENED, A IF IT OCCURS AFTERWARDS, I THINK THAT, UM, THAT EVEN IF ANY PAYMENT IS MADE AFTERWARDS, AS LONG AS THE INITIAL AGREEMENT WERE REACHED BEFORE, BECAUSE THIS APPLIES AS IT'S CURRENTLY DRAFT, AS AS IT'S CURRENTLY STATED IN THE CODE, IT IT, IT APPLIES EVEN TO A VERBAL AGREEMENT.

RIGHT? SO THE DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT WOULD APPLY.

THE CHALLENGE IS THAT ONCE THE BOARD, UH, THE RESPECTIVE BOARD HAS, HAS, HAS APPROVED A PROJECT, OUR OPTIONS ARE, ARE VERY LIMITED BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, APPLICANTS, GENERALLY SPEAKING, HAVE VEST RIGHTS IN THEIR, IN THEIR DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS AND, AND, UM, IN WHICH INCLUDES LAND USE BOARD ORDERS, BUT ALSO INCLUDES BUILDING PERMITS.

SO THAT'S WHERE WE WILL HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL WITH, UH, WITH ENFORCEMENT.

WE CAN KEEP THIS IN COMMITTEE AND NICK, WE CAN DISCUSS SURE.

PRIVATELY, YES.

AND, UM, BUT GOOD, I MEAN, I, I WANTED TO CHECK THE TEMPERATURE OF MY COLLEAGUES HERE.

I MEAN, JUST VERY SUPERFICIALLY, I HAVEN'T READ THESE ALL, BUT SUPERFICIALLY, I'M, I'M, I'M INCLINED TO SUPPORT THE, THE, THE INTENT OF THESE.

UH, I DON'T LIKE RETROACTIVITY WHEN IT COMES TO LDRS.

I THINK THAT THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S CHALLENGING.

AND I THINK IN THE PAST WE'VE EVEN GOTTEN OURSELVES IN TROUBLE WITH RETROACTIVE APPLICATIONS, SO WE'VE LEARNED NOT TO DO THAT.

UH, BUT YEAH, I LOOK FORWARD TO JUST FOR THE NEXT MEETING, IF IT COULD JUST BE AS PART OF THE MEMO JUST SO THAT I CAN DO MY HOMEWORK OVER THAT.

WE DO, OF COURSE.

ALEX DOES HIS HOMEWORK.

UH, ARE THERE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, SEEING NONE IN PERSON? ARE THERE ANY OF VIA ZOOM? YES, WE HAVE ONE ON ZOOM, KENT ROBBINS, ACTUALLY TWO ON SOON.

MR. ROBBINS, WELCOME.

WITHOUT NECESSARILY HAVING A PENALTY.

HI, UH, MY NAME'S KEN.

UH, I HAVE TO TURN OFF THE, MY NAME IS KENT ROBBINS, AND I HAVE, UH, BEEN INVOLVED IN SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS, UM, PROBABLY DOZENS OF TIMES OVER THE YEARS.

I ALSO WAS INVOLVED IN THE WRITING OF THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE, COMPELLING THE, UH, THE DEVELOPERS TO DISCLOSE THESE TYPE OF, UH, THIRD PARTY NEGOTIATIONS.

I WORKED VERY HARD WITH JOSE SMITH WITH THAT, WHO IS THE CITY ATTORNEY AT THE TIME ON THE LANGUAGE FOR THE ORDINANCE.

I THINK IT'S, I, I APPLAUD, UM, COMMISSIONER SUAREZ TO BRING THIS FORTH AND TO TRY TO ADDRESS PROBLEMS. THERE ARE, AS FAR AS LOOPHOLES OR WHERE PERCEIVED AS LOOPHOLES IN THE AGREEMENT.

AND I STRONGLY SUPPORT A STRONGER ORDINANCE WITH RESPECT TO, UM, RETROACTIVE APPLICATION.

I DON'T THINK THAT THE DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT AND ITS RETROACTIVE APPLICATION FOR, FOR DISCLOSING THE AMOUNT IS TRULY A RETROACTIVE IN, IN EFFECT, BECAUSE THE MERE DISCLOSURE IS, IS, UM, IDENTIFYING FACTS THAT ARE IN PLACE.

NOW, THE SECONDARY ISSUE OF WHETHER OR NOT YOU CAN PENALIZE FOR NEWLY DISCLOSED, UH, DOCUMENTS IS A SEPARATE ISSUE.

AND WHATEVER PENALTIES ARE DECIDED, THAT'S ANOTHER ISSUE.

BUT I, YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO PENALIZE RETROACTIVELY FOR NON-DISCLOSED MATTERS IF THOSE DISCLOSURES WERE NOT REQUIRED AT THE TIME OF THE ORIGINAL APPROVALS OF THE PROJECT.

HOWEVER, I DON'T SEE THAT THERE IS ANY LAW THAT WOULD BE VIOLATED SHOULD YOU COMPEL DISCLOSURE

[01:20:02]

AND THOUGH YOU MAY NOT HAVE THE WEIGHT OF LAW TO ENFORCE A PENALTY AT THAT POINT, THE THE NEED FOR SOMEBODY TO MAKE A, UH, REPRESENTATION.

MR. S THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION.

ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? I SEE NONE ON ZOOM.

WITH THAT, UM, WITH THAT, UH, MR. DIRECTOR, I WAS GONNA SUGGEST MR. CHAIR, THAT WE CONTINUE THIS TO THE, UH, JUNE MEETING, UM, JUNE, IF THAT'S OKAY.

SO THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO WORK WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY AND THEN WORK WITH THE SPONSOR.

THAT'S FINE.

LET'S GO TO ITEM NUMBER FIVE.

THAT'S FINE.

LET'S SHOW THIS ITEM CONTINUED TO THE JUNE MEETING.

THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR SUAREZ.

WITH THAT,

[5. REQUIRE APPLICANTS FOR ZONING INCENTIVES TO BE IN GOOD STANDING WITH THE CITY PRIOR TO FILING A COMPLETED APPLICATION, INCLUDING RESOLVING ALL OPEN CODE VIOLATIONS, PAYING ALL OUTSTANDING FINES, FEES, OR OTHER BILLS TO THE CITY, AND PROHIBITING HABITUAL OFFENDERS WITH A PATTERN OF CODE VIOLATIONS DURING THE PRECEDING FEW YEARS FROM APPLYING UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES.]

ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS A REQUIREMENT FOR APPLICANTS FOR ZONING INCENTIVES TO BE IN GOOD STANDING WITH THE CITY PRIOR TO FILING A COMPLETED APPLICATION, INCLUDING RESOLVING ALL OPEN CODE VIOLATIONS, PAYING ALL OUTSTANDING FINES, FEES, OR OTHER BILLS TO THE CITY, AND PROHIBITING HABITUAL OFFENDERS WITH A PATTERN OF CODE VIOLATIONS DURING THE PRECEDING FEW YEARS FROM APPLYING UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES.

THANK YOU, MR. DIRECTOR.

AND THIS IS AN ITEM I PLACED ON THE CITY COMMISSION AGENDA BECAUSE WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF GOING THROUGH THE DISCUSSIONS OF MANY ZONING INCENTIVES, INCLUDING LONG-TERM RESIDENTIAL INCENTIVES AND OTHER THINGS THAT, THAT, UH, THAT, THAT WE'RE WORKING ON AS, AS, AS A COMMISSION.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, MANY PROPERTY OWNERS AND DEVELOPERS HAVE LEFT THEIR PROPERTIES VACANT.

THEY DO IMPROPER FENCING, THEY DO BAD LANDSCAPING, UH, THE PROPERTIES ARE IN NEED OF PAINT, OR THEY'RE IN SOME OTHER FORM OF DISREPAIR.

AND THESE PROPERTIES WHEN CONCENTRATED IN ONE AREA, CAN LEAD TO A PERCEPTION OF BLIGHT.

UM, AND UNFORTUNATELY, THESE CONDITIONS EXIST IN SOME OF OUR PREMIER RETAIL CORRIDORS.

AND SO I WANTED TO SEE WHAT CAN WE DO, UM, TO REALLY PENALIZE THOSE HABITUAL OFFENDERS AND PROHIBIT THEM, IN ESSENCE, PENALIZE THEM WITH SOMETHING THAT IS OF MUCH GREATER VALUE THAN A SIMPLE CODE VIOLATION THAT THEY NOT BE ABLE TO NOW QUALIFY FOR THE INCENTIVES THAT WE ARE WORKING ON.

THAT IF THEY ARE A BAD PROPERTY OWNER THAT HAS ABANDONED THEIR PROPERTY TO SUCH DISREPAIR THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO REWARD THEM WITH ZONING THAT IS OF VALUE TO THEM.

SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO RECOGNIZE, UH, OUR, OUR DIRECTOR TOM MOONEY, TO PRESENT THE ITEM BEFORE US.

HOLDING ONTO THAT PROPERTY BEFORE THEY'RE ABLE TO QUALIFY TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION, BECAUSE THAT CARRYING COST THE WEIGHT THAT THE COMMUNITY HAS HAD TO CARRY THEIR BLIGHT, THEIR NUISANCE.

UH, MR. CHAIR, BASED UPON, UM, THE PROPOSAL IN THE, UM, IN THE, UM, REFERRAL MEMO, WE'VE DEVELOPED A, UH, DRAFT TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE LDRS.

AND IT WOULD BE UNDER CHAPTER TWO, ARTICLE FOUR, PERTAINING TO AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN THE TEXT OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.

AND UNDER THIS SECTION, WE'VE ADDED A PROVISION THAT STATES THE FOLLOWING FOR AMENDMENTS SPECIFIC TO A PRIVATE PROPERTY UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT SITE OR OTHER DEVELOPMENT.

THE PROPERTY OWNER SHALL CERTIFY, UM, THE FOLLOWING PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF THE AMENDMENT BY THE PLANNING BOARD.

SO IN OTHER WORDS, IF IT'S A PRIVATE APPLICATION THAT IS BEING FILED, OR IF IT'S, UH, AN APPLICATION THAT'S BEING REFERRED BY THE COMMISSION TO THE PLANNING BOARD BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD CAN CONSIDER IT FOR TRANSMITTAL, NUMBER ONE, THERE SHALL BE NO OPEN ZONING CITY CODE AND OR BUILDING VIOLATIONS AT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

SO ANY OF THOSE WOULD HAVE TO BE RESOLVED.

AND NUMBER TWO, THERE SHALL BE NO OUTSTANDING FINES, FEES, OR OTHER OPEN BILLS DUE TO THE CITY.

SO AGAIN, BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD COULD CONSIDER AND TRANSMIT AN AMENDMENT AND OUTSTANDING FINES, FEES, OR OPEN BILLS WOULD HAVE TO BE MADE WHOLE.

OKAY? NOW, THE CHALLENGE THAT I HAVE WITH THAT IS THAT WHILE THIS IS A GOOD PROPOSAL HERE, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IS THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO ABANDON THEIR PROPERTIES AND THEN RIGHT BEFORE THE CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT THAT THEY'RE GONNA WANT, THEY'RE GONNA RUSH TO PAY WHATEVER THEY OWE, WHICH IS FINE, BUT THEY SHOULD BE PROHIBITED FROM A C CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME FROM THE MOMENT THAT THEY PAY OFF THOSE VIOLATIONS, THEY NOW NEED TO HOLD ONTO THE PROPERTY FOR THREE MONTHS, SIX MONTHS.

THEY NEED TO CARRY THE COST, THE WEIGHTS OF

[01:25:01]

NOW THEY NEED TO CARRY AND GIVE JUSTICE BACK TO THE COMMUNITY FOR WHAT THE, FOR, FOR, FOR, FOR WHAT THEY'VE DONE.

AND THE WORST PENALTY IS THAT NOW THEY HAVE TO CARRY THE PROPERTY, THE INTEREST, THE TAXES, THE INSURANCE, AND HAVE TO SIT ON THAT FOR SIX MONTHS OR, OR, OR A YEAR AFTER THEY, UH, PAID THOSE VIOLATIONS.

I STRONGLY FEEL THAT THAT IS THE TYPE OF PENALTY THAT UNLESS WE, WE PUT PENALTIES LIKE THAT, WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET THE ATTENTION OF THE HABITUAL CODE OFFENDERS WHO ARE BLINDING OUR COMMUNITY VICE MAYOR SUAREZ, AND THEN, UH, TO THE CITY ATTORNEY.

SO THERE WOULD, SO, UM, JUST SO I UNDERSTAND YOU CORRECTLY, THERE WOULD BE A, A SORT OF BAN ON FOR HOW LONG A YEAR I, IF YOU ASK ME, BUT I'M GONNA DEFER TO STAFF AND, AND THE CITY ATTORNEY IF YOU ARE DEFINED TO BE AN HABITUAL OFFENDER.

AND I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS WE NEED TO DO WITH THIS ORDINANCE IS CREATE A DEFINITION FOR A HABITUAL OFFENDER.

AND IF YOU'RE FOUND TO BE AN HABITUAL OFFENDER THAT YOU NOT BE ABLE TO SUBMIT A ZONING AMENDMENT, REQUEST A VARIANCE REQUEST, ANYTHING THAT IS NOT ASSET RIGHT.

OR BENEFIT FROM ZONING INCENTIVES THAT YOU'RE NOT ENTITLED TO FOR AT LEAST SIX MONTHS OR A YEAR TO JUST THE PROJECT OR ANY PROJECT.

WELL, FRANKLY, THE WAY THAT I WOULD DO IT, I SEE THE CITY ATTORNEY TELLING ME JUST THE CURRENT PROJECT, BUT THE WAY THAT I WOULD DO IT, HONESTLY, THE WAY THAT I WOULD DO IT WITH SHORT-TERM RENTAL VIOLATIONS, MR. ATTORNEY, HOW DO WE HANDLE SHORT-TERM RENTAL VIOLATIONS? IT'S THE VIOLATION ONLY ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, OR DOES IT APPLY TO OTHER PROPERTIES IN WHICH THE OF, IN WHICH THE OWNER OF A SHORT TERM RENTAL HAS AN OWNERSHIP INTEREST ON? MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD NEED TO CHECK THE CODE ON THAT.

IT MAY DEPEND ON THE FINE, IT MAY DEPEND ON THE SPECIFIC TYPE OF VIOLATION, BUT I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.

MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE THAT BECAUSE THESE ARE, THESE ARE ISSUES THAT RELATE TO A PARTICULAR PROPERTY THAT THE, THE PENALTIES WOULD APPLY TO THAT PROPERTY.

WELL, WELL, FOR EXAMPLE, LET'S TAKE A CASE, NOT TO SAY THAT THIS WOULD APPLY, BUT YOU KNOW, FOR THE, FOR THE VILLE, THE MORELLO'S HAVE LEFT THE VACANT LOT, UH, NOT IN THE BEST SHAPE WHEN THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN LEAVING IT IN A PARK-LIKE EXPERIENCE.

UM, IF THE MORELOS HAD ANOTHER PROJECT ON THE BEACH OR ANOTHER, COULD WE SAY THAT SINCE YOU NEGLECTED THIS PROPERTY, ANY SORT OF ZONING ENHANCEMENTS THAT YOU'RE REQUESTING FROM US CANNOT BE, UM, GRANTED FOR ONE OR TWO YEARS UNTIL YOU'VE GOT THE PROPERTY, UH, IN PROPER ORDER? WE CAN, WE CAN LOOK AT THAT.

I WOULD NOT WANNA GIVE EITHER OF YOU AN ANSWER, UH, WITHOUT, WITHOUT RESEARCHING IT.

BUT AS A GENERAL RULE, UM, YOU, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE PURPOSE OF A PENALTY IS TO, IS TO HOLD LIABLE THE, THE, THE ACTOR WHO, UH, WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE VIOLATION.

AND, AND, YOU KNOW, I WOULD SAY AS A STARTING POINT, I WOULD, I WOULD FOCUS ON THE, ON THE PARTICULAR PROPERTY.

BUT WE WILL LOOK AT, AND, AND ANOTHER THING, AND YOU KNOW, I'M JUST PLAYING DEVIL'S ADVOCATE, BECAUSE IF THERE IS A, IF THERE, IF THERE IS A PROPERTY THAT IS, THAT CERTAINLY NEEDS TO BE FIXED UP, OR A DEVELOPER GOT IN PART OR, OR, OR BECAME ASSOCIATED WITH THE, WITH THE PROPERTY TO, TO DEVELOP IT, AND IT'S BEEN BLIGHTED FOREVER.

AND FINALLY, IF SOMEONE'S READY TO MOVE FORWARD AND, AND, AND DO, IT COULD, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S AN APPETITE FOR THIS, BUT COULD THEY PAY, YOU KNOW, INSTEAD OF WAITING A YEAR OR OR TWO, UH, TO, AS A PUNISHMENT, CAN THEY PAY 10 TIMES THE AMOUNT OF FINES TO THE CITY AS, AS A, AS A WAY TO, UM, AVOID THE YEAR OR TWO YEAR WAIT? UH, WHAT I WOULD, WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND, UM, IS, IS TO, IS THAT PAY LIKE AN EXORBITANT AMOUNT.

LIKE ALL RIGHT, WE'LL PAY YOU 10 TIMES, 10 TIMES ON THE DOLLAR OF WHAT WE OWE, JUST SO THAT WE CAN GET THE, THE PROJECT FINISHED.

AND, AND THAT GOES TOWARD A, A FUND THAT WE CAN DECIDE, YEAH, THE, THE SAME LIMITATIONS ON CODE ENFORCEMENT PENALTIES THAT, THAT, UM, THAT WE DISCUSSED AS PART OF THE CONSTRUCTION PARKING ITEM, NUMBER ONE, UM, WOULD APPLY IN THIS CONTEXT.

SO I WOULD SAY IF, IF YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT A, A WAITING PERIOD, LIKE A SIX MONTH,

[01:30:01]

OR LET'S SAY A SIX MONTH WAITING PERIOD, UM, PERHAPS YOU'D WANNA INCLUDE A WAIVER IN THE EVENT THAT, LET'S SAY, YOU KNOW, WHAT, IF YOU HAVE A NEW APPLICANT, NEW OWNER WHO'S COME IN, UM, AND TAKING OVER A PROPERTY AND, AND, AND, AND PROPOSED, UH, CODE AMENDMENTS FOR THAT PROJECT, UM, THE, THE, THE CITY MAY WANT TO CONSIDER, UH, WAIVING THE, THE MANDATORY WAITING PERIOD, UM, YOU KNOW, IN, IN UNDER SPECIFIC CIRCUMSTANCES.

I THINK YOU SHOULD BUILD THAT IN.

BUT WITH THE CHAIR SAYS, WE DON'T WANT TO GET INTO A SITUATION WHERE THEY SELL THE PROPERTY TO A FRIEND AND THEY THEREBY SKIRTING THE RULES OF, UH, OF BEING ACCOUNTABLE FOR BLOGGING YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS INCLUDE TRANSFER OF INTEREST, UH, RIGHT.

AND SO, UH, WHERE WAS, WHERE I WAS GETTING AT THIS WAS MAKING, REQUIRING THEM TO PAY AN EXORBITANT AMOUNT, UH, THAT ENDS UP BENEFITING THE CITY.

UM, BECAUSE NOT ONLY ARE THEY PAYING THE FINES, BUT THEY'RE PAYING IT 10 TIMES IN ORDER TO AVOID THE ONE OR TWO YEAR, UM, PROHIBITION ON, ON DEVELOPING.

I JUST WANT, YOU KNOW, AND THAT'S SOMETHING YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT NOW.

I MEAN, YOU CAN COME BACK AND JUST GENERALLY SPEAKING THOUGH, WE'RE SUBJECT TO THE SAME LIMITATIONS ON THE AMOUNT OF FINES IN, BUT THIS ISN'T EVERY STATE LAW.

THIS ISN'T A FINE, THIS IS, THIS IS A, UH, SORT OF PAYMENT FOR OR, OR A WAIVER, UM, FOR NOT HAVING TO WAIT A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME.

IT'S NOT A FINE, THE FINES ARE SET.

THEY'VE BEEN, THEY'VE BEEN ASSESSED.

BUT IF THEY ARE ASKING US TO WAIVE A SORT OF LIMITATION ON HOW LONG THEY CAN DO ANYTHING WITH THE PROPERTY, THEN UH, THAT'S GONNA COME AT A COST.

MM.

NICK, I'LL LET YOU, PERHAPS WE SHOULD KEEP THE SIGN ON MY COMMITTEE SO THAT WE CAN FURTHER RESOURCES.

I'LL TELL YOU, I HAVE AN ITEM COMING TO THE, UM, APRIL 23RD CITY COMMISSION MEETING, HAVING TO DO WITH PREDATORY BUYOUTS, UH, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT HAS, YOU KNOW, HURT A LOT OF HOMEOWNERS, BUT PREDATORY BUYOUT OF, OF CONDOMINIUMS. AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK SOME OF THE PENALTIES BEING DISCUSSED HERE WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE COULD, YOU KNOW, INCORPORATE INTO, AS PART OF THE PENALTY PROVISIONS ON THAT.

UM, SO PERHAPS YOU COULD GET WITH COMMISSIONER SU SUAREZ UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT MORE, UM, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT HIS IDEA IS.

SO YOU CAN GET, GIVE US, UH, SOME MORE INSIGHT ON THAT FOR, FOR THE NEXT MEETING.

I'D BE HAPPY TO.

BUT I, I THINK AT MINIMUM, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO PUT A PAUSE ON THEIR ABILITY TO GET A PERMIT APPLICATION FOR A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME, UM, BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE REAL PENALTY IS.

AND, YOU KNOW, IF WE CAN MULTIPLY, UH, FOR A WAIVER, YOU KNOW, MULTIPLY TO A CERTAIN EXTENT, UH, THE FEE, IF THEY'RE CHOOSING TO DO THAT, IT'S NOT THAT THEY HAVE TO, BUT IF THEY CHOOSE TO DO THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN EXPLORE, WHICH I GUESS IS THE POINT THAT YOU'RE MAKING.

YEP.

UM, ARE THERE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? YES.

ELIZABETH LATON.

ELIZABETH, WELCOME.

HI, .

I SAW THE SMILES OVER THERE.

UM, I HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING THE PROPERTIES IN NORTH BEACH AND, AND FRANKLY ACROSS THE BEACH THAT ARE IN DISREPAIR AND HAVE LIENS AND VIOLATIONS AND ARE JUST JUMPED UP AS IT IS NOW.

HOW, HOW CAN WE RESOLVE THOSE ISSUES RIGHT NOW? UM, BECAUSE IT, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, OUR CODE REQUIRES ALL OF THESE LOTS TO BE KEPT IN GOOD REPAIR, TO BE IN, UM, A QUOTE PARK-LIKE EXPERIENCE.

AND THEY'RE NOT.

AND I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND, UM, HOW THE CITY PLAYS A PART IN THAT FOR OUR OWN PROPERTIES, BECAUSE HONESTLY, THE WEST LOTS AND A LOT OF OTHER THINGS ARE PRETTY BAD.

SO MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT COULD BE ADDRESSED AS WELL.

I WOULD SAY THAT IT NOT BE, UH, THAT THEY HAVE TO KEEP ALL OF THEIR PROPERTIES IN GOOD CONDITION.

UM, IF YOU'RE, IF YOU'RE EXPERIENCING A, UH, IF YOU'RE GOING TO APPLY FOR A PERMIT AND YOU HAVEN'T APPLIED FOR THE, THE WHOLE BUILDING PERMIT AND YOUR PROPERTY IS IN A STATE OF DISREPAIR, UM, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE NOT KEEPING THE REST OF YOUR THINGS TOGETHER WHILE YOU'RE WAITING ON ONE, I MEAN, MAYBE THAT SHOULD BE LOOKED AT TOO.

JUST SOME SUGGESTIONS.

ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SAY NONE IN PERSON, ANY VIA ZOOM.

INCORPORATES, UH, THE FEEDBACK THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED TODAY.

WITH THAT, UM, NICK, I'M GONNA ASK YOU TO PLEASE WORK WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND MY COLLEAGUES TO BRING BACK AN ITEM THAT

[01:35:01]

UH, I THINK A HABITUAL OFFENDERS, THE PENALTY NEEDS TO BE STRICTER.

I THINK WE NEED TO, THERE HAS TO BE A CLASSIFICATION OF AN HABITUAL CODE OFFENDER.

WE NEED TO ESTABLISH THAT, AND THOSE NEED TO BE HELD TO A HIGHER PENALTY THAN JUST PAYING OFF THEIR FEES.

UH, WHEN THEY, THEIR FINES, WHEN THEY APPLY FOR A PERMIT, NO, THEY NEED TO NOT ONLY PAY OFF THEIR, THEIR FINES, BUT NOW THEY HAVE TO SIT ON THE PROPERTY FOR SOME TIME BEFORE THEY'RE ABLE TO APPLY FOR A PERMIT, UNLESS IT'S WAIVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION.

AND IF THEY'RE ASKING TO WAIVE TO GET THAT WAIVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION, UH, I'M OPEN TO THE IDEA THAT PERHAPS THAT IT NEEDS TO BE STRONGER, IT NEEDS TO BE A STRONGER PENALTY, OR MAYBE, OR MAYBE THERE'S A CRA, MAYBE IT'S A CONTRIBUTION TO A CRA OR, OR WHATEVER IT MAY BE.

UH, BUT I THINK THERE ARE WAYS OF, OF, UH, OF, OF DOING THIS.

AND TO THE EXTENT THAT, UM, THAT, THAT WE CAN INCORPORATE ALSO THE SPIRIT NOT ONLY OF, YOU KNOW, CODE ENFORCEMENT, BUT ALSO THE, THE, THE ISSUES WITH THE CONDO PREDATORY PRACTICES THAT WE'RE GONNA BE DISCUSSING APRIL 23RD.

I THINK WE SHOULD DO THAT.

AND TO THE, TO, TO COMMISSIONER SCHWARZ'S POINT SHOULD APPLY TO OTHER PROPERTIES, NOT JUST THAT ONE PROPERTY.

AND I THINK WE USED TO, WE USED TO DO THAT.

AT THE VERY LEAST, I THINK WE USED TO DO THAT IN HER.

AND IF YOU COULD COME TO, TO THE PODIUM WITH STR, SO THE SHORT-TERM RENTALS, WHEN THERE WAS A VIOLATION ON A BTR WITH A SHORT-TERM RENTAL, DIDN'T IT ENCUMBER THE OTHER INTEREST WHEN THE PERSON HAD A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF INTEREST, UH, ON THAT, ON THAT BTR? DIDN'T IT ENCUMBER SOME OF THEIR OTHER, UH, SHORT-TERM RENTAL BTRS? OKAY, GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR.

MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, HERNAN CARINO CODE COMPLIANCE.

UH, THERE IS A PROVISION IN OUR ORDINANCES THAT TALKS ABOUT PERCENTAGES OF OWNERSHIP AND ANOTHER BTR OR ANOTHER ENDEAVOR, UM, AND WHERE THAT MAY BE, UM, PROHIBITED, UH, IF THERE WERE VIOLATIONS ON YOUR PRIOR BTR AND SO AND SO AND SO, AND SO, YOU KNOW, THAT CROSS-REFERENCING IS WHAT'S GONNA DETER THE BEHAVIOR.

AND THEY KNOW, OKAY, IF MY BAD BEHAVIOR ON THIS ONE PROPERTY IS NOT GOING TO BE CROSS-REFERENCED WITH MY INTEREST IN OWNERSHIP ON OTHER PROPERTIES AND LIMIT WHAT I CAN DO, IT'S THE ONLY WAY WE'RE GONNA GET PEOPLE TO RESPECT OUR CITY.

AND THAT'S WHAT, AND THAT'S WHAT'S LACKING HERE.

WE ARE, WE RESPECT THE PUBLIC'S NEEDS, WE RESPECT THE NEEDS OF PROPERTY OWNERS, AND WE CONSIDER THE RELIEFS THAT THEY ASK OF US, BUT THEY NEED TO RESPECT THE CITY AS WELL, AND THE NEIGHBORS, UH, OF, OF DIFFERENT AREAS.

SO, THANK YOU HERNAN.

AND, UH, WE'LL BRING THIS ITEM BACK.

UH, NICK, PLEASE, UH, WORK WITH THE PLANNING DIRECTOR ON THE SOUP, BRING BACK SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT MORE ROBUST.

INTRODUCE ITEM NUMBER SIX.

AND, AND, UH, WE'LL, UH, GO AHEAD AND SCHEDULE IT TO COME BACK AT THE JUNE MEETING.

[6. REFERRAL TO THE LAND USE AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE TO DISCUSS AN ORDINANCE INCREASING FINES AND PENALTIES FOR FREQUENT CODE VIOLATIONS THAT AFFECT RESIDENT QUALITY OF LIFE.]

ITEM NUMBER SIX IS, UM, A DISCUSSION ON AN ORDINANCE, UM, TO INCREASE FINES AND PENALTIES FOR FREQUENT CODE VIOLATIONS THAT AFFECT RESIDENT QUALITY OF LIFE.

THERE'S NO ITEM HERE, MR. ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, WHY DO I NOT HAVE AN ITEM IN FRONT OF ME? WHO IS THIS, UH, MR. CHAIR.

I CAN SPEAK TO THAT.

SO THIS ITEM WAS ACTUALLY DORMANT SINCE JUNE WHEN IT WAS REFERRED, UH, BY THE CITY COMMISSION, UH, BY YOU SPONSORED BY YOU, UH, TO THIS COMMITTEE.

OH, THE ITEM WAS REFERRED TO THIS COMMITTEE BACK IN JUNE OF LAST YEAR, CORRECT.

SO ALMOST A YEAR AGO.

AND IT JUST COMES UP ON THE AGENDA NOW.

AND, UH, WE SUBMITTED THE ITEM LATE, AND SO THAT'S WHY IT WASN'T APPROVED AND NOT IN YOUR AGENDA ITEM, BUT IT IS A DISCUSSION ITEM.

AND SO WHAT WE STARTED, UM, PUTTING TOGETHER IS AT LEAST THE TOP 10 CITYWIDE VIOLATIONS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION ON WHETHER OR NOT THOSE ARE THE ORDINANCES THAT YOU WOULD WANT AMEND A FINE SCHEDULE WHERE A FINE SCHEDULE DOES EXIST.

WE, AFTER A MEETING AND THEN WORKING ON, ON THESE AGENDAS A MONTH IN ADVANCE.

YES, SIR.

AND AFTER THE PLANNING DIRECTOR PROVIDES MY OFFICE WITH A DRAFT AGENDA, AND I TRY TO PROVIDE STAFF WITH MULTIPLE WEEKS NOTICE TO GET THEIR MEMOS IN ON TIME, I'M NOT GONNA DISCUSS AN ITEM HERE THAT I DON'T HAVE A MEMORANDUM ON.

SO FOR NEXT MONTH, LET'S PLEASE UNDERSTOOD.

AND I ACCEPT FULL RESPONSIBILITY.

I, I UNDERSTAND YOU GUYS WERE VERY BUSY DOING VERY GOOD WORK DURING SPRING BREAK, UH, AND YOU CONTINUED DOING GRADE WORK.

SO I UNDERSTAND IT WAS A VERY DIFFICULT MONTH WHERE EVERYONE WAS PULLING ALL-NIGHTERS, ESPECIALLY IN YOUR DEPARTMENTS.

[12. DISCUSS REMOVING THE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR PAINTING RESIDENTIAL, MULTI-FAMILY AND COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.]

ITEM NUMBER 12.

REMOVING THE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR PAINTING RESIDENTIAL, MULTIFAMILY, AND COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.

ITEM NUMBER 12 IS DISCUSS

[01:40:01]

AND I'M GONNA RECOGNIZE THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PRESENT THIS ITEM FOR ME, MR. CHAIRMAN.

I WOULD ASK THAT THE, UH, THAT THE PLANNING DIRECTOR PRESENT THIS ONE.

IT, HE'S MOST FAMILIAR WITH THE, UH, THE PAINT REQUIREMENTS IN OUR, IN OUR CODE .

ALL RIGHT, TOM, YOU'RE WELCOME TO.

OKAY, MR. CHAIR, UH, WE, WE, WE DRAFTED THE MEMO, SO, UM, AND THE, UH, REFERRAL, UM, ENDEAVORS TO DISCUSS POTENTIALLY REMOVING THE REQUIREMENT FOR APPROVAL OF EXTERIOR SURFACE COLORS FOR, UM, RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY AND COMMERCIAL, UH, PROPERTIES.

IN THE MEMO, WE HAVE PROVIDED A SUMMARY OF THE CURRENT REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO EXTERIOR THE COLOR OF EXTERIOR SURFACES FOUND IN THE LDRS, WHICH IS SECTION 7.17.

AND WE'VE ALSO PROVIDED A, UM, SUMMARY OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR GETTING A PERMIT FOR OUR PRE-APPROVED COLORS, AS WELL AS FOR NON PRE-APPROVED COLORS.

FOR PRE-APPROVED COLORS.

IT'S BASICALLY PRETTY SIMPLE.

UM, THERE'S NO FEE, THE PERMIT IS ISSUED ELECTRONICALLY, UM, AND THERE'S NO INSPECTIONS FOR NON PRE-APPROVED COLORS.

LET ME JUST ASK YOU, IF SOMEONE DOES NOT GET THAT ONLINE PERMIT, DO THEY GET A VIOLATION IF IT'S, UH, IF IT'S A PRE-APPROVED COLOR, IF THEY PAINTED ONE OF THE COLORS, IF SOMEBODY, UM, LIKE SAY A NEIGHBOR FILES A COMPLAINT THAT THEIR NEIGHBOR IS PAINTING THEIR HOUSE AND THERE'S NO RECORD OF THEM OBTAINING A PRE-APPROVED COLOR, THEN THEY COULD BE REQUESTED TO DO THAT IF THEY'RE PAINTING IT A PRE-APPROVED COLOR.

UM, SO THAT'S WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF NOBODY MAKES A COMPLAINT AND IT'S A PRE-APPROVED COLOR.

SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO STOP WORKING, AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO GET A PERMIT DEPENDING UPON WHEN THE VIOLATION WAS ISSUED, IF A NEIGHBOR MADE A COMPLAINT.

DO THIS SIMPLE TOUCH UP TO, TO THE AESTHETICS OF THEIR PROPERTY.

AND THEN FOR NON PRE-APPROVED COLORS, UM, AS LONG AS THE COLOR PROPOSED, UM, IS WITHIN THE RANGE OF THE PRE-APPROVED COLORS, THOSE CAN BE APPROVED.

UM, ALSO ADMINISTRATIVELY, THEY WOULD REQUIRE AN INSPECTION, UNLIKE THE NON PRE-APPROVED COLORS, JUST TO ENSURE THAT THE, THE HOME OR THE BUILDING IS BEING BY COLOR IN THE RANGE.

AND WHAT HAPPENS IF THE COLOR IS NOT IN THE RANGE OF THE PRE-APPROVED COLORS.

SO FOR, FOR NON PRE-APPROVED COLORS THAT EXCEED THE INTENSITY OF THE CLOSEST CORRESPONDING COLOR ON THE PRE-APPROVED COLOR CHART APPROVAL BY THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD OR HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD WOULD BE REQUIRED.

SO I'LL TELL YOU WHERE I STAND ON THIS.

AND THE REASON WHY I'VE PLACED THIS ON THE, ON THE AGENDA, THERE ARE SO MANY PROPERTIES IN OUR CITY THAT NEED TO BE PAINTED AND ARE NOT PAINTED.

AND I WANT TO REALLY ENCOURAGE THEM AND INCENTIVIZE THEM TO BE ABLE TO PAINT AND TO, YOU KNOW WHAT I GET WHY WE HAVE THESE, YOU KNOW, I SEE, I, I, BUT I SEE THESE POLICIES JUST BEING RED TAPE THAT DISCOURAGE PEOPLE FROM MAINTAINING PROPERTIES.

AND IT'S WHY WE SEE SO MANY JUST WHITE BOXES AROUND, UH, OR BEAUTIFUL HISTORIC BUILDINGS THAT HAVEN'T BEEN TOUCHED IN YEARS, BECAUSE THEY JUST DON'T WANNA, THEY, THEY JUST AVOID THE CITY AT ALL COSTS.

AND SO, IF ANY WORK THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS TO DO REQUIRES SOME GOING BEFORE THE CITY, THEY JUST ARE NOT WILLING TO DO IT.

THEY'RE JUST NOT WILLING TO, THEY, THEY DON'T WANT TO DEAL WITH THE BUREAUCRACY.

THEY DON'T WANT THE RED TAPE.

THERE'S THIS PERCEPTION, PERCEPTION, WELL, WHETHER RIGHT OR WRONG THAT THEY'RE JUST GONNA GO INTO A RABBIT HOLE THAT IS JUST NEVER ENDING.

THERE'S THAT PERCEPTION IN THERE.

SO I WOULD LIKE US TO, TO WAIVE, UH, THE PAINTING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR A PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO PAINT THEIR PROPERTY.

JUST PAINT YOUR PROPERTY, DO US A FAVOR.

THIS IS WHERE A LOT OF OUR RESIDENTS LIVE.

THIS IS A LOT OF OUR HISTORIC PROPERTIES.

EVEN A LOT OF PROPERTIES IN SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS, PEOPLE HAVEN'T, HAVEN'T PAINTED THEM IN IN YEARS JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE SCARED OF DEALING WITH THE CITY.

AND LET'S HAVE IT FOR SIX MONTHS AND HAVE THE ORDINANCE SUNSET AFTER SIX MONTHS AND SEE IF, SEE IF IT'S ENCOURAGED ANY OF OUR RESIDENTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS TO JUST

[01:45:01]

COMMISSIONER SCHWARZ, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU FEEL.

YEAH, I, I, YOU KNOW, I FREQUENTLY WALK EVERYWHERE, AND I, IT WOULD, IT'D BE GREAT TO SEE A LOT OF THESE BUILDINGS BE INCENTIVIZED TO, TO REPAINT.

UM, I, I THINK THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO PAINT EVERY FIVE YEARS, RIGHT? UM, THAT'S JUST, THAT'S JUST STANDARD PRACTICE FOR UPKEEP OF A, OF A PROPERTY.

UM, AND ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE CAN THINK OF.

I, I KNOW COMMISSIONER ROSE GONZALEZ HAD SOMETHING WHERE THE CITY MATCHED UP TO, I THINK, 20,000 HAVING TO PAY SOMEONE $20,000 TO PAINT THEIR PROPERTY.

I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S A WONDERFUL PROGRAM SHE HAS, BUT YOU KNOW, HOW ABSURD IT IS THAT WE'RE HAVING TO PAY PEOPLE TO PAINT THEIR PROPERTY.

SO, YOU KNOW, TOM, DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER SUGGESTIONS ON GETTING OWNERS, UH, TO PAINT THEIR PROPERTY? I MEAN, UM, MOST PEOPLE IN, IN OUR EXPERIENCE, WHEN THE PAINT REACHES A POINT WHERE IT'S PEELING, UM, AND IT BECOMES A NUISANCE, THEY WILL TYPICALLY WANT TO RESEAL AND REPAINT THEIR BUILDING OR THEIR HOME BECAUSE IT, IT PROTECTS THE HOME AND IT PROTECTS THE BUILDING.

IF THERE'S AN ISSUE WITH A BUILDING BECOMING DILAPIDATED BECAUSE OF LACK OF PAIN, THEY COULD POTENTIALLY BE SUBJECT TO A VIOLATION.

UM, IN MY EXPERIENCE, UM, I'M NOT SURE IT'S THE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS, PARTICULARLY IF SOMEBODY'S WILLING TO PAINT IT A, A PRE-APPROVED COLOR, THAT'S DISCOURAGING PEOPLE.

BUT, UM, TO THE SPONSOR'S POINT, IF, UH, YOU WANTED TO EXPLORE A SIX MONTH SUSPENSION, WE COULD WORK WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY TO COME BACK WITH AN ORDINANCE THAT WOULD FACILITATE THAT.

HOW WOULD WE, HOW WOULD WE SEND NOTICE TO THE OWNERS? WE COULD SEND, UH, AN EMAIL BLAST TO EVERYBODY THAT'S ON CONSTANT CONTACT.

UM, I BELIEVE THAT WOULD REACH MOST BUSINESSES AND, AND RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS.

WE COULD ALSO SEND A WRITTEN NOTICE TO EVERY PROPERTY NOTIFYING THEM THEM OF THIS.

OKAY, YEAH, LET'S DO IT.

LET'S, LET'S CUT THE RED TAPE.

DO A YEAR.

LET'S DO A YEAR.

LET'S GIVE PEOPLE A YEAR.

A YEAR.

LET'S GET EVERY PROPERTY.

IMAGINE THE JUST NEIGHBORHOODS ARE GONNA LOOK BETTER.

AND FRANKLY, IT'S YOUR PROPERTY.

I DON'T CARE WHAT COLOR YOU PAINT YOUR PROPERTY.

AND I'LL, AND I'M GONNA TELL YOU, SOMETIMES THERE ARE BOLD COLORS OUT THERE, AND I KNOW STAFF MENTIONED THAT IN THEIR, IN THEIR, IN THEIR ITEM.

BUT I'LL TELL YOU SOMETHING.

ONE OF THE MOST BEAUTIFUL HOMES ON FLAMINGO DRIVE, IT IS PAINTED BLACK WITH A CORAL TRIM ON THE WINDOWS.

AND SOMEONE TOOK THE CREATIVE STEP TO DO SOMETHING REALLY BOLD.

AND YOU KNOW WHAT? IT IS BEAUTIFUL.

IT IS BEAUTIFUL.

WHO ARE WE TO DICTATE WHAT COLOR YOU OR ANY ONE OF US CAN PAINT OUR HOMES AND MUCH LESS THE TAXPAYERS WHO, WHO, WHO HAVE PLACED THIS IN THIS TABLE TO SERVE THEM.

SO LET'S CUT THE RED TAPE AND LET'S DO THE BLUE TAPE ORDINANCE.

AND I LIKE, I JUST CAME UP WITH THAT.

NO, THE BLUE TAPE ORDINANCE.

NO TAPE, NO TAPE.

WELL, NO, WE WANT BLUE TAPE.

'CAUSE BLUE TAPE IS A PAINT THAT THEY USE FOR PAINTING.

THAT'S TRUE.

WE WANT BLUE TAPE.

UM, MR. CHAIR, WOULD YOU LIKE US TO BRING AN ORDINANCE BACK TO THIS COMMITTEE, OR DO YOU WANT US TO DRAFT SOMETHINGS FOR A REFERRAL TO THE PLANNING BOARD? LET'S, IF THE COMMITTEE AGREES, IF THE COMMITTEE AGREES, LET'S SEND IT TO COMMISSION.

WE'LL BRING IT AS A C FOUR ITEM FOR A REFERRAL TO THE PLANNING BOARD, AND WE CAN WORK WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IN TERMS OF THE BEST WAY TO DRAFT THAT ORDINANCE STRUCTURALLY.

THE BLUE TAPE ORDINANCE.

BLUE TAPE ORDINANCE, YES.

ARE THERE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? I SEE NO ONE ON ZOOM.

I DIDN'T SAY OH ONE ONE COLOR.

MITCH NOK.

MITCH, WE MISSED YOU.

YOU HAVE TWO, MISS.

HEY.

HI.

I MISS, I MISS YOU TOO.

MI MITCH NOVIK HERE.

I'VE PAINTED, I PAINTED BOTH MY BUILDINGS, UH, THIS PAST YEAR, UH, ON MIAMI BEACH.

UH, I'M JUST WONDERING, UH, YOU GOTTA BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR.

AS YOU SAID, UH, UH, I DON'T WANNA SEE, OR IT MIGHT BE INTERESTING TO SEE, UH, BUILDINGS AND ALL V VERY BOLD COLORS, WHICH, UH, MAY BE SHOCKING TO THE CONSCIENCE, AND THAT'S IT.

BUT I, I, I, I LIKE THE SPIRIT OF, OF WHAT YOU'RE DISCUSSING, AND, UH, ANYTHING TO, UH, MINIMIZE THE FINANCIAL IMPACT ON RESIDENTS OR TAXPAYERS OF THIS CITY IS WELCOME.

THANKS AGAIN.

ITEM 14, I INTENDED TO DEFER ITEM NUMBER 14, UH, BECAUSE YEAH.

AND, AND MITCH, YOU'RE, UM, THE NOVI, THE NOVIK RIGHT ACROSS FROM THE SOUTH SHORE COMMUNITY CENTER, IT IS ALWAYS SO WELL MAINTAINED, AND IT'S SO BEAUTIFUL.

AND I THINK YOU HAVE LIKE, EVEN HINTS OF YELLOW THERE.

[01:50:01]

UH, AND IT LOOKS GREAT.

AND JUST ALLOWING YOU TO, YOU KNOW, EXPRESS YOUR VISION FOR YOUR PROPERTY, I THINK IS JUST A BASIC RIGHT THAT PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE.

SO, BUT THEN, UH, THANK YOU, UH, FOR, UH, COMM COMMISSIONER SUAREZ FOR YOUR SUPPORT ON THIS ITEM.

YOU CAN ADD ME AS A CO-SPONSOR, PLEASE.

[14. PROVIDE A PRESENTATION OF THE OCEAN DRIVE CORRIDOR PROJECT STATUS AND FUTURE DIRECTION. ]

SO LET'S SEE HERE.

UM, ITEM NUMBER

[16. BI-MONTHLY UPDATE ON CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES, AND THE STATUS OF SPECIAL MAGISTRATE CASES, INVOLVING PROPERTIES AND/OR BUSINESSES LOCATED IN NORTH BEACH AND TO ADDRESS ANY ONGOING CONCERNS AND NEW DEVELOPMENTS IN NORTH BEACH.]

16, MR. DIRECTOR.

OKAY, SO NUMBER 14, WE'RE DEFERRING TO THE, UM, MAY MEETING.

AND WE'LL CALL ITEM NUMBER 16, WHICH IS A BIMONTHLY UPDATE ON CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES AND THE STATUS OF SPECIAL MAGISTRATE CASES INVOLVING PROPERTIES AND OR BUSINESSES LOCATED IN NORTH BEACH.

AND TO ADDRESS ANY ONGOING CONCERNS IN NEW DEVELOPMENTS IN NORTH BEACH.

HEARD AND WE'RE WELCOME TO INTRODUCE THE ITEM.

UH, SO MR. CHAIR, THIS IS, UM, THIS IS A BIMONTHLY REPORT THAT, UH, AT YOUR REQUEST AT THE COMMISSION MEETING, UH, ON DECEMBER 11TH, 2024, UH, REQUESTED THAT CODE COMPLIANCE COME TO THIS COMMITTEE AND, UH, MAKE BIMONTHLY REPORTS ON THE, UH, STATUS UPDATES FROM NORTH BEACH ON OUR INAUGURAL, UH, REPORT ON FEBRUARY 20TH, UH, TO THIS COMMITTEE, UM, THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, UH, AND YOURSELF ACTUALLY ASKED FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE MOST FREQUENT VIOLATORS IN NORTH BEACH.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE PROVIDED HERE TO YOU TODAY IN THIS MEMORANDUM FOR BOTH, UM, COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL.

UH, SINCE OUR BRIEFING, UH, LAST NIGHT, I KNOW WE HAVE TO, UH, PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

I THINK WE'RE LOOKING TO ADD WHETHER, UH, THESE PROPERTIES ARE MULTI-FAMILY OR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, AND WE ALSO NEED TO ADD WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE PRIVATE OR COMMERCIAL CONDOS OR RENTALS.

WHAT CAN WE DO TO GET, SO I SEE MANY OF THESE PROPERTIES, SOME WITH 18 VIOLATIONS FOR PROPERTY MAINTENANCE VIOLATIONS.

EXPLAIN TO ME, WHAT, TELL ME WHEN, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PROPERTY MAINTENANCE VIOLATION, WHAT ARE WE REFERRING TO? SO THAT COULD BE, UH, WHAT WAS JUST DISCUSSED.

IT COULD BE, UH, PAINTING, STUCCO, COULD BE, UM, LANDSCAPING, UH, OVERGROWN LANDSCAPING ON THE RIGHT OF WAY.

UM, IT COULD BE GRAFFITI.

WHAT WE DID GLEAN FROM THE INFORMATION IS THAT IN OUR RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, UH, ABOUT 27% OF THOSE VIOLATIONS ARE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE ISSUES.

UH, IN OUR COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS, UH, IT'S ABOUT 27% ALSO.

BUT THEN WE HAVE 34% UNDER CITY CODE VIOLATIONS, WHICH ENCOMPASSES, AGAIN, LANDSCAPING, GRAFFITI, UM, AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

AND I SEE WE HAVE A LOT OF SAN SANITA, UH, SANITATION VIOLATIONS.

YES, SIR.

AND THAT COULD BE, SO EXPLAIN THAT TO ME.

YEAH, THAT COULD BE OVERFLOWING GARBAGE.

THAT COULD BE, UH, GARBAGE OUTSIDE THE BINS.

UH, THAT COULD BE ILLEGAL DUMPING, WHICH WE GET A LOT.

AND, YOU KNOW, AND, AND I SEE SOME PROPERTIES, YOU KNOW, NINE, UH, NINE FIVE, SOME HAVE O 11 SANITATION VIOLATIONS OVER, OVER THE PAST YEAR.

IT, IT, DO WE SEE A HIGHER OCCURRENCE OF SANITATION VIOLATIONS IN THIS PART OF THE CITY THAN IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY? I'D HAVE TO RESEARCH THAT INFORMATION, BUT WE DID PULL SOME, UH, DATA BEFORE AND IT, UH, SUGGESTED THAT CITYWIDE OUR TOP CATEGORY FOR VIOLATIONS, UH, WAS SANITATION AND ILLEGAL DUMPING.

WHAT FEEDBACK HAVE WE ENGAGED THESE PROPERTY OWNERS TO FIND OUT, LIKE WHAT IS LEADING THEM TO ENGAGE OR HAVE THESE SANITATION VIOLATIONS OR OTHER CODE VIOLATIONS OR GET THEM, YOU KNOW, WHY IS IT THAT THEY'RE NOT CORRECTING THIS? DO WE, HAVE WE EVER RECEIVED SOME FEEDBACK FROM THESE PROPERTIES? YES, SIR.

PROBABLY ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS, ESPECIALLY WHERE WE HAVE RECURRING ILLEGAL DUMPING.

UH, WE ENGAGE THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS WITH SUGGESTIONS ON ENCLOSURES, UM, CAMERAS, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

SO IT'S ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.

BUT I, IT'LL BE, IT'LL BE HELPFUL TO KNOW WHICH ONES ARE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND CONDOS, ET CETERA.

GET ME SOME, SOME, UH, PLEASE GET ME SOME UPDATED IN INFORMATION AS TO THE NATURE OF THESE, UH, PROPERTIES.

WHICH ONES ARE CONDOS, WHICH ONES ARE APARTMENT BUILDINGS, WHICH ONES ARE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, SO THAT WE CAN, UH, DO MORE UPDATES, MORE FOLLOW UP ON THIS.

VERY GOOD, SIR.

WILL DO.

I THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT TO DO OUTREACH TO, TO THESE PROPERTIES TO UNDERSTAND THEIR CIRCUMSTANCES.

UM,

[01:55:01]

YES, SIR.

SO WE'LL SHOW THAT AS CONTINUED TO THE FOLLOWING MONTH.

NOW THIS IS A RECURRING ITEM.

YEP.

ITEM

[18. DISCUSS THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A CONSENT AGENDA FOR LAND USE BOARD MEETINGS]

NUMBER 18.

ITEM NUMBER 18 IS TO DISCUSS THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A CONSENT AGENDA FOR LAND USE BOARDS.

VICE MAYOR SUAREZ, THIS IS YOUR ITEM.

YEAH, I THANK YOU MR. CHAIR.

I THINK THE LA I WAS, I DON'T BELIEVE I WAS HERE THE LAST TIME THIS WAS, UM, HEARD.

I THINK WE KEPT IT IN COMMITTEE.

I THINK COMMISSIONER BOT HAD SOME, SOME ISSUES, UH, WITH IT.

I'M NOT, IF I RECALL CORRECTLY, UM, AGAIN, THIS IS TO PUT, UM, A, A METHOD FOR OUR LAND USE BOARDS TO HAVE A CONSENT AGENDA SIMILAR TO WHAT WE HAVE.

SPEED UP THE PROCESS, REMOVE RED TAPE.

UM, I UNDERSTAND THERE'S ALREADY SORT OF A PROCESS FOR THIS.

I THINK SO.

UM, BUT IT WOULD BE NICE TO REQUIRE, UH, THAT THIS IS AVAILABLE.

UM, EVEN IF IT'S JUST ONE OR TWO ITEMS, I, I THINK WOULD GO A LONG WAY.

UM, YOU KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, LIKE RAILINGS, YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE WAS THIS PORT PROPERTY ON LIKE, I THINK IT'S EIGHTH AND MERIDIAN THAT THE RAILINGS TOOK YEARS TO, TO PROVE.

AND, AND I THINK IF, UM, IF YOU COULD REACH OUT TO THE BOARD MEMBERS, EXPLAIN TO THEM, UH, AS A PROPERTY MANAGER THAT THIS IS THE RAILINGS WE WANT, AND YOU PUT IN A CONSENT AGENDA AND YOU COULD POSSIBLY SAVE YEARS OF, OF, OF, OF DELAYS.

WELL, I GOT ONE BETTER FOR YOU.

LET'S HEAR IT.

WELL, HOW ABOUT IF WE GOT THOSE ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED? MR. PLANNING DIRECTOR? YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S ACTUALLY PART OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE, UM, AD HOC COMMITTEE.

HISTORIC PRESERVATION.

REVIEW CODE AD HOC COMMITTEE THAT WE CONVENED.

IT'S ONE OF THE MANY RECOMMENDATIONS.

I THINK IT'S COMING UP FIRST READING ON THE 23RD.

IS THAT CORRECT, NICK? OF THE BILLING ON THE, UH, THE B THE BALCONY RAILING APPROVAL? I DON'T THINK FOR REFERRAL, YES.

FOR REFERRAL TO THE PLANNING BOARD.

TO THE PLANNING BOARD, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT.

REFERRAL TO THE PLANNING BOARD.

WE, WE DON'T KNOW THE NEXT RAILING QUOTE UNQUOTE ISSUE.

IT COULD BE RAILINGS, IT COULD BE WINDOWS, IT COULD BE, UH, YOU KNOW, ANYTHING.

AND SO, UM, I THINK IT'S JUST, I, I, I, IT'S THERE.

LET'S, LET'S, LET'S TELL OUR, OUR BOARDS THAT THIS IS AVAILABLE, UM, AND, AND MAKE IT PART OF THEIR PROCESS.

YEAH, I'M FINE WITH IT.

I, I THINK, I THINK THE MECHANISM IS ALREADY THERE AND I THINK THIS JUST CODIFIES PRACTICE, UH, IT'S NOT REQUIRING THEM TO HAVE A CONSENT AGENDA.

IT'S ALLOWING THEM, IF THE BOARD CHOOSES TO HAVE A CONSENT AGENDA, UH, IN CONSULTATION WITH A PLANNING DIRECTOR TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT IF THEY FEEL IT CAN MAKE THEIR BUSINESS, THEIR, THE, YOU KNOW, THEIR PROCESS MORE EFFICIENT.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.

SO WE CAN MOVE IT TO THE COMMISSION.

CORRECT.

ARE THERE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? THERE'S, UH, ONE CALLER, KENT ROBBINS.

MR. ROBBINS, WELCOME.

THAT IS ADVISORY IN NATURE THAT IS NOT, UH, A CROSS-SITE JUDICIAL MATTER THAT COULD BE ON A CONSENT AGENDA IF THE, IF THE CHAIR OR THE COMMITTEE OR THE PLANNING DIRECTORS SO CHOOSE, WOULD THAT, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.

UH, THE ISSUE HERE IS WHETHER YOU WOULD BE DENYING DUE PROCESS TO PERSONS AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THE ISSUE.

AND THERE IS A REQUIREMENT TO HAVE A QUASI JUDICIAL HEARING UNDER THE, UH, ORDINANCES.

AND I DON'T SEE HOW YOU CAN GET AROUND THE REQUIREMENT OF A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING IF IT GOES BEFORE A BOARD.

HOWEVER, I STRONGLY SUPPORT THAT MINOR CHANGES COULD BE REVIEWED ADMINISTRATIVELY AND NEVER HAVE TO BE REFERRED TO A BOARD AND NEVER PUT ANYBODY THROUGH THE BURDEN OF MAKING, GOING THROUGH THAT APPLICATION PROCESS.

SO I SUGGEST THAT WE LOOK AT WHAT YOUR, WHAT WOULD BE PROPOSED AS A CONSENT ITEM, AND THEN DEFINE THOSE AS ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS.

UH, THE ALTERNATIVE WOULD BE A DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS, WHICH EVERY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WOULD BE ENTITLED TO.

AND I'M SURE THAT YOU WOULD NOT WANT TO TAKE THAT DUE PROCESS RIGHT AWAY AND WOULD CERTAINLY DIMINISH THE POWER OF THE PUBLIC TO INTERVENE AND TO SPEAK ON PROJECTS.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.

THANK YOU, MR. ROBBINS.

AND I THINK CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S VOLUNTARY AND IT'S NOT MANDATED.

AND, AND I FEEL PRETTY CERTAIN THAT WHEN MATTERS ARE OF ACROSS THE JUDICIAL NATURE, WHERE A DUE PROCESS IS ENTITLED, THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY WOULDN'T ALLOW FOR SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO BE PLACED ON A CONSENT AGENDA, UH, OR PROHIBITED OR ANYONE FROM THE OPPORTUNITY TO CROSS EXAMINE OR DENY THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK ON, ON AN ITEM OR THE COMMITTEE TO VET ANY RELEVANT CRITERIA THAT MIGHT BE SUBJECT TO, TO THEIR APPROVAL PROCESS.

UM, BUT FOR EXAMPLE, THINGS THAT MIGHT BE FOR, FOR EXAMPLE, A SIMPLE LEGISLATIVE CHANGE

[02:00:01]

AND, AND I THINK IN ORDER FOR A BOARD TO APPROVE AN ITEM LIKE THAT, UM, AS PART OF A CONSENT AGENDA, UH, THERE, THE, THE THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD, FOR INSTANCE, COULD CONFIRM FIRST WHETHER THERE'S ANYONE IN THE PUBLIC WHO, WHO WISHING TO, WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THE PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. UM, AND IF THERE WERE NOT THEN, THEN THE APPLICATION COULD BE APPROVED.

BUT ABSOLUTELY THE PUBLIC WOULD STILL BE AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK DURING A PUBLIC HEARING.

AND DOES THIS ALLOW FOR THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO PULL AN ITEM? FOR EXAMPLE, IF THERE IS AN ITEM ON A CONSENT AGENDA, WOULD FOR EXAMPLE, A MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD OR THE MEMBER OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD BE ABLE TO PULL THE ITEM TO, FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO ENGAGE IN QUESTIONING OR DEBATE AS THEY MAY DEEM NECESSARY? YES, THERE IS.

AND AGAIN, THIS IS NOT REINVENTING THE WHEEL.

THIS THE PROS.

THIS IS ALREADY EXISTS, IT'S JUST NOT CODIFIED.

SO, ALRIGHT.

SO WITH THAT, WE CAN SHOW THAT ADOPTED BY ACCLAMATION.

SEND NUMBER 19 TO THE NEXT MEETING.

UM, I THINK WE CAN

[19. MONTHLY UPDATES ON HISTORIC HOTEL REDEVELOPMENT ON COLLINS AVENUE BETWEEN 14TH AND 20TH STREETS, INCLUDING AN OVERVIEW OF PENDING PERMITS AND PROGRESS UPDATES FROM DEVELOPMENT TEAMS.]

CONTINUE THAT TO THE NEXT MEETING.

UM, COMMISSIONER MAGAZINE IS

[20. DISCUSS SETTING PARAMETERS FOR PROPERTY OWNERS TO PRESENT CREATIVE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS TO THE CITY ADMINISTRATION AND CITY COMMISSION, AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO INVOKING THE PREEMPTIONS IN THE LIVE LOCAL ACT, TO ENCOURAGE LONG-TERM NON-TRANSIENT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (INCLUDING WORKFORCE HOUSING) THAT IS MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.]

NOT HERE FOR HIS ITEM ON ITEM NUMBER 20.

SO I'M GONNA JUST DO, WE KNOW IF ITEM NUMBER 20 IS, IF, IF THE COMMISSIONER WOULD LIKE TO BE PRESENT FOR THIS ITEM.

HE DIDN'T INDICATE.

UM, IF YOU'D LIKE, I COULD REACH OUT TO HIM BEFORE, OUT OF RESPECT.

LET'S CONTINUE TO THE NEXT MEETING.

UM, LET'S CALL ITEM

[21. DISCUSS AND IDENTIFY POTENTIAL SITES FOR THE INSTALLATION OF “THE GLORY OF OLD GLORY”, A SERIES OF MURALS BY ARTIST ENZO GALLO, WHICH WERE REMOVED, PRESERVED, AND DONATED TO THE CITY PRIOR TO THE DEMOLITION OF THE WELLS FARGO BANK ON ALTON ROAD.]

[22. PENDING DISCUSSION ON THE INSTALLATION OF "THE GLORY OF OLD GLORY," A SERIES OF MURALS BY ARTIST ENZO GALLO, TO UPDATE AND EXPAND THE LIST OF POTENTIAL INSTALLATION SITES.]

NUMBER 21 AND 22.

ITEM NUMBER, UH, 21 IS TO DISCUSS AND IDENTIFY POTENTIAL SITES FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THE GLORY OF OLD GLORY.

A SERIES OF MURALS BY ARTIS ENZO GALLO, WHICH WERE REMOVED, PRESERVED, AND DONATED TO THE CITY PRIOR TO THE DEMOLITION OF THE WELLS FARGO BANK OF ALTON ROAD.

AND ITEM NUMBER 22 IS PENDING DISCUSSION ON THE INSTALLATION OF THE GLORY OF OLD GLORY SERIES MURALS BY ARTISAN OG GALLO TO UPDATE AND EXPAND THE LIST OF POTENTIAL INSTALLATION SITES.

UH, UH, COMMISSIONER, I BELIEVE THIS IS YOUR ITEM.

UH, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR.

I'M, I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO IT.

, WELL LET, HOW ABOUT WE HAVE STAFF TEE UP .

GO FOR IT.

MR. CHAIR.

UM, VICE MAYOR, UM, RON MONT, DIRECTOR OF FACILITIES AND FLEET.

UH, WE'VE LOOKED AT SEVERAL LOCATIONS, UM, TO PLACE THE MURALS.

UM, I, I THINK RIGHT NOW THE, THE RECOMMENDATION IS AT THE 72ND STREET, UH, PROJECT.

AND I, I THINK, UM, OUR PARTNERS WITH CIP HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO PROVIDE ON THAT.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR.

MR. VICE MAYOR, DAVID GOMEZ, DIRECTOR OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS.

UM, WE HAVE BEEN IN CONVERSATIONS WITH, UH, FACILITIES AND FLEET.

THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO INCORPORATE THIS PIECE IN 72ND.

WE'RE NOT QUITE SURE EXACTLY WHERE OR HOW, BUT IT'S SOMETHING WE CAN CONSIDER AND TAKE BACK TO THE DESIGNERS AND THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER TO GET THEIR INPUT.

UM, THE ACTION THAT YOU WOULD NEED FROM THIS COMMITTEE IS IN ESSENCE OF A MOTION BACK TO THE CITY COMMISSION, I GUESS DIRECTING THE ADMINISTRATION TO CONSULT WITH THE ARCHITECT, UH, WITH A CONSULTANT RISK, THE CONSULTANT MANAGER? YEAH, THAT'S CORRECT.

THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER.

THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER, AND THE CONSULTANT.

AND THAT WILL DETERMINE THEN WHETHER IT'LL BE FEASIBLE TO INCORPORATE IT INTO THE DESIGN OF, OF THE BUILDING AND POTENTIALLY EVEN A RECOMMENDATION ON LOCATION? ON THE LOCATION.

UM, THEY PORTRAY ABRAHAM LINCOLN.

LISTEN, I, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE MANY OPPORTUNITIES TO, I MEAN, THIS IS A CIVIC BUILDING.

THIS IS A CIVIC BUILDING.

IT'S GONNA HAVE A LIBRARY.

IT'S MORE THAN JUST A GARAGE.

IT'S MORE THAN JUST A POOL.

THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER ACTIVITIES THAT ARE GONNA BE GOING ON THERE.

UH, AND THESE ARE BEAUTIFUL MURALS THAT, UH, THAT I WAS PROUD TO WORK WITH MDPL IN, IN SAVING.

UM, THEY PORTRAY,

[02:05:01]

THEY, THEY PORTRAY THE LANDING ON THE MOON AND THEY PORTRAY BETSY ROSS.

THEY ARE BEAUTIFUL MURALS AND THEY DESERVE TO BE IN A CIVIC ENVIRONMENT.

AND WE'RE SO GRATEFUL.

I'M PERSONALLY GRATEFUL TO CITIZEN M THAT, UM, THAT, THAT THEY ENDEAVORED TO SAFETIES ON BEHALF OF THE CITY AND GAVE THEM TO THE CITY.

AND THE CITY HAS BEEN, UH, KEEPING THEM IN STORAGE, BUT THEY DON'T DESERVE TO BE IN STORAGE.

THEY TO SERVE, TO BE IN A BEAUTIFUL SETTING.

AND IT'S NOT EVERY DAY THAT IN THE CITY WE ARE BUILDING A BRAND NEW BUILDING OF THIS NATURE WHERE IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.

I FEEL IT WOULD BE A FITTING SPACE, UH, FOR THIS TYPE OF ART.

NOW THERE'RE GONNA BE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES FOR ART AND PUBLIC PLACES IN THE 72ND STREET GARAGE.

THIS WOULDN'T, THIS WOULDN'T TAKE AWAY THOSE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.

THE PROJECT HAS ALREADY ISSUED A CALL TO ARTIST FOR AN ART AND PUBLIC PLACE PIECE.

AS PART OF THE PROJECT.

UM, SO THIS WOULD BE IN ADDITION TO THAT.

UM, SO WITH THAT, I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO DIRECT STAFF, UM, TO TALK WITH A CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT RISK AND WITH THE CONSULTANT TO SEE, UM, WHERE IT COULD BE INCORPORATED AND TO COME BACK, UH, TO COMMITTEE WITH THAT FEEDBACK.

YEAH, I REMEMBER THE MURAL.

IT WAS BEAUTIFUL.

BEAUTIFUL.

UM, AND IT, IT, IT BELONGS FROM THE CITY.

SO PLEASE ADD ME AS A CO-SPONSOR.

WILL DO.

ARE THERE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? I SEE NO CALLERS ON ZOOM.

WHEN WOULD YOU LIKE THIS TO COME BACK TO YOU? I WOULD, I WOULD ASK TO GO TO THE, TO COME BACK IN JUNE.

AND MR. CHAIR, DO YOU WANT THESE TO REMAIN AS SEPARATE ITEMS OR DO YOU WANT TO COMBINE THESE INTO ONE? I THINK LET'S KEEP, WELL, I THINK LET'S COMBINE THEM OKAY.

INTO ONE, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD KEEP THE ITEM HERE PROBABLY.

UH, SO THAT, SO THEN WE CAN GO TO THE COMMIT TO THE COMMISSION WITH THE DIRECTION TO TALK TO THE, TO, TO THE ARCHITECT AND TO THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER.

UH, AND SO THAT WHEN THAT FEEDBACK COMES BACK, WE ALREADY HAVE AN ITEM HERE THAT WE CAN BUILD ON.

AND MR. DIRECTOR, I THINK THAT IS IT FOR TODAY.

THAT IS IT FOR TODAY, MR. CHAIR.

AWESOME.

ANY OTHER MATTERS, UH, FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER? NO, WITH THAT WE ARE ADJOURNED.