[0:00] av650(Cc1) #2114
[0:03] av650(Cc1) #2114
[0:06] av650(Cc1) #2114
[0:09] av650(Cc1) #2114
[0:12] av650(Cc1) #2114
[0:15] av650(Cc1) #2114
[0:18] av650(Cc1) #2114
[0:21] av650(Cc1) #2114
[0:24] av650(Cc1) #2114
[0:27] av650(Cc1) #2114
[0:30] av650(Cc1) #2114
[0:33] av650(Cc1) #2114
[0:36] av650(Cc1) #2114
[0:39] av650(Cc1) #2114
[0:42] av650(Cc1) #2114
[0:45] av650(Cc1) #2114
[0:48] av650(Cc1) #2114
[0:51] av650(Cc1) #2114
[0:54] av650(Cc1) #2114
[0:57] av650(Cc1) #2114
[1:00] av650(Cc1) #2114
[1:03] av650(Cc1) #2114
[1:06] av650(Cc1) #2114
[1:09] av650(Cc1) #2114
[1:12] av650(Cc1) #2114
[1:15] av650(Cc1) #2114
[1:18] av650(Cc1) #2114
[1:21] av650(Cc1) #2114
[1:24] av650(Cc1) #2114
[1:27] av650(Cc1) #2114
[1:30] av650(Cc1) #2114
[1:33] av650(Cc1) #2114
[1:36] av650(Cc1) #2114
[1:39] av650(Cc1) #2114
[1:42] av650(Cc1) #2114
[1:45] av650(Cc1) #2114
[1:48] av650(Cc1) #2114
[1:51] av650(Cc1) #2114
[1:54] av650(Cc1) #2114
[1:57] av650(Cc1) #2114
[2:00] av650(Cc1) #2114
[2:03] av650(Cc1) #2114
[2:06] av650(Cc1) #2114
[2:09] av650(Cc1) #2114
[2:12] av650(Cc1) #2114
[2:15] av650(Cc1) #2114
[2:18] av650(Cc1) #2114
[2:21] av650(Cc1) #2114
[2:24] av650(Cc1) #2114
[2:27] av650(Cc1) #2114
[2:30] av650(Cc1) #2114
[2:33] av650(Cc1) #2114
[2:36] av650(Cc1) #2114
[2:39] av650(Cc1) #2114
[2:42] av650(Cc1) #2114
[2:45] av650(Cc1) #2114
[2:48] av650(Cc1) #2114
[2:51] av650(Cc1) #2114
[2:54] av650(Cc1) #2114
[2:57] av650(Cc1) #2114
[3:00] av650(Cc1) #2114
[3:03] av650(Cc1) #2114
[3:06] av650(Cc1) #2114
[3:09] av650(Cc1) #2114
[3:12] av650(Cc1) #2114
[3:15] av650(Cc1) #2114
[3:18] av650(Cc1) #2114
[3:21] av650(Cc1) #2114
[3:24] av650(Cc1) #2114
[3:27] av650(Cc1) #2114
[3:30] av650(Cc1) #2114
[3:33] av650(Cc1) #2114
[3:36] av650(Cc1) #2114
[3:39] av650(Cc1) #2114
[3:42] av650(Cc1) #2114
[3:45] av650(Cc1) #2114
[3:48] av650(Cc1) #2114
[3:51] av650(Cc1) #2114
[3:54] av650(Cc1) #2114
[3:57] av650(Cc1) #2114
[4:00] av650(Cc1) #2114
[4:03] av650(Cc1) #2114
[4:06] av650(Cc1) #2114
[4:09] av650(Cc1) #2114
[4:12] av650(Cc1) #2114
[4:15] av650(Cc1) #2114
[4:18] av650(Cc1) #2114
[4:21] av650(Cc1) #2114
[4:24] av650(Cc1) #2114
[4:27] av650(Cc1) #2114
[4:30] av650(Cc1) #2114
[4:33] av650(Cc1) #2114
[4:36] av650(Cc1) #2114
[4:39] av650(Cc1) #2114
[4:42] av650(Cc1) #2114
[4:45] av650(Cc1) #2114
[4:48] av650(Cc1) #2114
[4:51] av650(Cc1) #2114
[4:54] av650(Cc1) #2114
[4:57] av650(Cc1) #2114
[5:00] av650(Cc1) #2114
[5:03] av650(Cc1) #2114
[5:06] av650(Cc1) #2114
[5:09] av650(Cc1) #2114
[5:12] av650(Cc1) #2114
[5:15] av650(Cc1) #2114
[5:18] av650(Cc1) #2114
[5:21] av650(Cc1) #2114
[5:24] av650(Cc1) #2114
[5:27] av650(Cc1) #2114
[5:30] av650(Cc1) #2114
[5:33] av650(Cc1) #2114
[5:36] av650(Cc1) #2114
[5:39] av650(Cc1) #2114
[5:42] av650(Cc1) #2114
[5:45] av650(Cc1) #2114
[5:48] av650(Cc1) #2114
[5:51] av650(Cc1) #2114
[5:54] av650(Cc1) #2114
[5:57] av650(Cc1) #2114
[6:00] av650(Cc1) #2114
[6:03] av650(Cc1) #2114
[6:06] av650(Cc1) #2114
[6:09] av650(Cc1) #2114
[6:12] av650(Cc1) #2114
[6:15] av650(Cc1) #2114
[6:18] av650(Cc1) #2114
[6:21] av650(Cc1) #2114
[6:24] av650(Cc1) #2114
[6:27] av650(Cc1) #2114
[6:30] av650(Cc1) #2114
[6:33] av650(Cc1) #2114
[6:36] av650(Cc1) #2114
[6:39] av650(Cc1) #2114
[6:42] av650(Cc1) #2114
[6:45] av650(Cc1) #2114
[6:48] av650(Cc1) #2114
[6:51] av650(Cc1) #2114
[6:54] av650(Cc1) #2114
[6:57] av650(Cc1) #2114
[7:00] av650(Cc1) #2114
[7:03] av650(Cc1) #2114
[7:06] av650(Cc1) #2114
[7:09] av650(Cc1) #2114
[7:12] av650(Cc1) #2114
[7:15] av650(Cc1) #2114
[7:18] av650(Cc1) #2114
[7:21] av650(Cc1) #2114
[7:24] av650(Cc1) #2114
[7:27] av650(Cc1) #2114
[7:30] av650(Cc1) #2114
[7:33] av650(Cc1) #2114
[7:36] av650(Cc1) #2114
[7:39] av650(Cc1) #2114
[7:43] av650(Cc1) #2114
[7:46] av650(Cc1) #2114
[7:49] av650(Cc1) #2114
[7:52] av650(Cc1) #2114
[7:55] av650(Cc1) #2114
[7:58] av650(Cc1) #2114
[8:01] av650(Cc1) #2114
[8:04] av650(Cc1) #2114
[8:07] av650(Cc1) #2114
[8:10] av650(Cc1) #2114
[8:13] av650(Cc1) #2114
[8:16] av650(Cc1) #2114
[8:19] av650(Cc1) #2114
[8:22] av650(Cc1) #2114
[8:25] av650(Cc1) #2114
[8:28] av650(Cc1) #2114
[8:31] av650(Cc1) #2114
[8:34] av650(Cc1) #2114
[8:37] av650(Cc1) #2114
[8:40] av650(Cc1) #2114
[8:43] av650(Cc1) #2114
[8:46] av650(Cc1) #2114
[8:49] av650(Cc1) #2114
[8:52] av650(Cc1) #2114
[8:55] av650(Cc1) #2114
[8:58] av650(Cc1) #2114
[9:01] av650(Cc1) #2114
[9:04] av650(Cc1) #2114
[9:07] av650(Cc1) #2114
[9:10] av650(Cc1) #2114
[9:13] av650(Cc1) #2114
[9:16] av650(Cc1) #2114
[9:19] av650(Cc1) #2114
[9:22] av650(Cc1) #2114
[9:25] av650(Cc1) #2114
[9:28] av650(Cc1) #2114
[9:31] av650(Cc1) #2114
[9:34] av650(Cc1) #2114
[9:37] av650(Cc1) #2114
[9:40] av650(Cc1) #2114
[9:43] av650(Cc1) #2114
[9:46] av650(Cc1) #2114
[9:49] av650(Cc1) #2114
[9:52] av650(Cc1) #2114
[9:55] av650(Cc1) #2114
[9:58] av650(Cc1) #2114
[10:01] av650(Cc1) #2114
[10:04] av650(Cc1) #2114
[10:07] av650(Cc1) #2114
[10:10] av650(Cc1) #2114
[10:13] av650(Cc1) #2114
[10:16] av650(Cc1) #2114
[10:19] av650(Cc1) #2114
[10:22] av650(Cc1) #2114
[10:25] av650(Cc1) #2114
[10:28] av650(Cc1) #2114
[10:31] av650(Cc1) #2114
[10:34] av650(Cc1) #2114
[10:37] av650(Cc1) #2114
[10:40] av650(Cc1) #2114
[10:43] av650(Cc1) #2114
[10:46] av650(Cc1) #2114
[10:49] av650(Cc1) #2114
[10:52] av650(Cc1) #2114
[10:55] av650(Cc1) #2114
[10:58] av650(Cc1) #2114
[11:01] av650(Cc1) #2114
[11:04] av650(Cc1) #2114
[11:07] av650(Cc1) #2114
[11:10] av650(Cc1) #2114
[11:13] av650(Cc1) #2114
[11:16] av650(Cc1) #2114
[11:19] av650(Cc1) #2114
[11:22] av650(Cc1) #2114
[11:25] av650(Cc1) #2114
[11:28] av650(Cc1) #2114
[11:31] av650(Cc1) #2114
[11:34] av650(Cc1) #2114
[11:37] av650(Cc1) #2114
[11:40] av650(Cc1) #2114
[11:43] av650(Cc1) #2114
[11:46] av650(Cc1) #2114
[11:49] av650(Cc1) #2114
[11:52] av650(Cc1) #2114
[11:55] av650(Cc1) #2114
[11:58] av650(Cc1) #2114
[12:01] av650(Cc1) #2114
[12:04] av650(Cc1) #2114
[12:07] av650(Cc1) #2114
[12:10] av650(Cc1) #2114
[12:13] av650(Cc1) #2114
[12:16] av650(Cc1) #2114
[12:19] av650(Cc1) #2114
[12:22] av650(Cc1) #2114
[12:25] av650(Cc1) #2114
[12:28] av650(Cc1) #2114
[12:31] av650(Cc1) #2114
[12:34] av650(Cc1) #2114
[12:37] av650(Cc1) #2114
[12:40] av650(Cc1) #2114
[12:43] av650(Cc1) #2114
[12:46] av650(Cc1) #2114
[12:49] av650(Cc1) #2114
[12:52] av650(Cc1) #2114
[12:55] av650(Cc1) #2114
[12:58] av650(Cc1) #2114
[13:01] av650(Cc1) #2114
[13:04] av650(Cc1) #2114
[13:07] av650(Cc1) #2114
[13:10] av650(Cc1) #2114
[13:13] av650(Cc1) #2114
[13:16] av650(Cc1) #2114
[13:19] av650(Cc1) #2114
[13:22] av650(Cc1) #2114
[13:25] av650(Cc1) #2114
[13:28] av650(Cc1) #2114
[13:31] av650(Cc1) #2114
[13:34] av650(Cc1) #2114
[13:37] av650(Cc1) #2114
[13:40] av650(Cc1) #2114
[13:43] av650(Cc1) #2114
[13:46] av650(Cc1) #2114
[13:49] av650(Cc1) #2114
[13:52] av650(Cc1) #2114
[13:55] av650(Cc1) #2114
[13:58] av650(Cc1) #2114
[14:01] av650(Cc1) #2114
[14:04] av650(Cc1) #2114
[14:07] av650(Cc1) #2114
[14:10] av650(Cc1) #2114
[14:13] av650(Cc1) #2114
[14:16] av650(Cc1) #2114
[14:19] av650(Cc1) #2114
[14:22] av650(Cc1) #2114
[14:25] av650(Cc1) #2114
[14:28] av650(Cc1) #2114
[14:31] av650(Cc1) #2114
[14:34] av650(Cc1) #2114
[14:37] av650(Cc1) #2114
[14:40] av650(Cc1) #2114
[14:43] av650(Cc1) #2114
[14:46] av650(Cc1) #2114
[14:49] av650(Cc1) #2114
[14:52] av650(Cc1) #2114
[14:55] av650(Cc1) #2114
[14:58] av650(Cc1) #2114
[15:01] av650(Cc1) #2114
[15:04] av650(Cc1) #2114
[15:07] av650(Cc1) #2114
[15:10] av650(Cc1) #2114
[15:13] av650(Cc1) #2114
[15:16] av650(Cc1) #2114
[15:19] av650(Cc1) #2114
[15:22] av650(Cc1) #2114
[15:25] av650(Cc1) #2114
[15:28] av650(Cc1) #2114
[15:31] av650(Cc1) #2114
[15:34] av650(Cc1) #2114
[15:37] av650(Cc1) #2114
[15:40] av650(Cc1) #2114
[15:43] av650(Cc1) #2114
[15:46] av650(Cc1) #2114
[15:49] av650(Cc1) #2114
[15:52] av650(Cc1) #2114
[15:55] av650(Cc1) #2114
[15:58] av650(Cc1) #2114
[16:01] av650(Cc1) #2114
[16:04] av650(Cc1) #2114
[16:07] av650(Cc1) #2114
[16:10] av650(Cc1) #2114
[16:13] av650(Cc1) #2114
[16:16] av650(Cc1) #2114
[16:19] av650(Cc1) #2114
[16:22] av650(Cc1) #2114
[16:25] av650(Cc1) #2114
[16:28] av650(Cc1) #2114
[16:31] av650(Cc1) #2114
[16:34] av650(Cc1) #2114
[16:37] av650(Cc1) #2114
[16:40] av650(Cc1) #2114
[16:43] av650(Cc1) #2114
[16:46] av650(Cc1) #2114
[16:49] av650(Cc1) #2114
[16:52] av650(Cc1) #2114
[16:55] av650(Cc1) #2114
[16:58] av650(Cc1) #2114
[17:01] av650(Cc1) #2114
[17:04] av650(Cc1) #2114
[17:07] av650(Cc1) #2114
[17:10] av650(Cc1) #2114
[17:13] av650(Cc1) #2114
[17:16] av650(Cc1) #2114
[17:19] av650(Cc1) #2114
[17:22] av650(Cc1) #2114
[17:25] av650(Cc1) #2114
[17:28] av650(Cc1) #2114
[17:31] av650(Cc1) #2114
[17:34] av650(Cc1) #2114
[17:37] av650(Cc1) #2114
[17:40] av650(Cc1) #2114
[17:43] av650(Cc1) #2114
[17:46] av650(Cc1) #2114
[17:49] av650(Cc1) #2114
[17:52] av650(Cc1) #2114
[17:55] av650(Cc1) #2114
[17:58] av650(Cc1) #2114
[18:01] av650(Cc1) #2114
[18:04] av650(Cc1) #2114
[18:07] av650(Cc1) #2114
[18:10] av650(Cc1) #2114
[18:13] av650(Cc1) #2114
[18:16] av650(Cc1) #2114
[18:19] av650(Cc1) #2114
[18:22] av650(Cc1) #2114
[18:25] av650(Cc1) #2114
[18:28] av650(Cc1) #2114
[18:31] av650(Cc1) #2114
[18:34] av650(Cc1) #2114
[18:37] av650(Cc1) #2114
[18:40] av650(Cc1) #2114
[18:43] av650(Cc1) #2114
[18:46] av650(Cc1) #2114
[18:49] av650(Cc1) #2114
[18:52] av650(Cc1) #2114
[18:55] av650(Cc1) #2114
[18:58] av650(Cc1) #2114
[19:01] av650(Cc1) #2114
[19:04] av650(Cc1) #2114
[19:07] av650(Cc1) #2114
[19:10] av650(Cc1) #2114
[19:13] av650(Cc1) #2114
[19:16] av650(Cc1) #2114
[19:19] av650(Cc1) #2114
[19:22] av650(Cc1) #2114
[19:25] av650(Cc1) #2114
[19:28] av650(Cc1) #2114
[19:31] av650(Cc1) #2114
[19:34] av650(Cc1) #2114
[19:37] av650(Cc1) #2114
[19:40] av650(Cc1) #2114
[19:43] av650(Cc1) #2114
[19:46] av650(Cc1) #2114
[19:49] av650(Cc1) #2114
[19:52] av650(Cc1) #2114
[19:55] av650(Cc1) #2114
[19:58] av650(Cc1) #2114
[20:01] av650(Cc1) #2114
[20:04] av650(Cc1) #2114
[20:07] av650(Cc1) #2114
[20:10] av650(Cc1) #2114
[20:13] av650(Cc1) #2114
[20:16] av650(Cc1) #2114
[20:19] av650(Cc1) #2114
[20:22] av650(Cc1) #2114
[20:25] av650(Cc1) #2114
[20:28] av650(Cc1) #2114
[20:31] av650(Cc1) #2114
[20:34] av650(Cc1) #2114
[20:37] av650(Cc1) #2114
[20:40] av650(Cc1) #2114
[20:43] av650(Cc1) #2114
[20:46] av650(Cc1) #2114
[20:49] av650(Cc1) #2114
[20:52] av650(Cc1) #2114
[20:55] av650(Cc1) #2114
[20:58] av650(Cc1) #2114
[21:01] av650(Cc1) #2114
[21:04] av650(Cc1) #2114
[21:07] av650(Cc1) #2114
[21:10] av650(Cc1) #2114
[21:13] av650(Cc1) #2114
[21:16] av650(Cc1) #2114
[21:19] av650(Cc1) #2114
[21:22] av650(Cc1) #2114
[21:25] av650(Cc1) #2114
[21:28] av650(Cc1) #2114
[21:31] av650(Cc1) #2114
[21:34] av650(Cc1) #2114
[21:37] av650(Cc1) #2114
[21:40] av650(Cc1) #2114
[21:43] av650(Cc1) #2114
[21:46] av650(Cc1) #2114
[21:49] av650(Cc1) #2114
[21:52] av650(Cc1) #2114
[21:55] av650(Cc1) #2114
[21:58] av650(Cc1) #2114
[22:01] av650(Cc1) #2114
[22:04] av650(Cc1) #2114
[22:07] av650(Cc1) #2114
[22:10] av650(Cc1) #2114
[22:13] av650(Cc1) #2114
[22:16] av650(Cc1) #2114
[22:19] av650(Cc1) #2114
[22:22] av650(Cc1) #2114
[22:25] av650(Cc1) #2114
[22:28] av650(Cc1) #2114
[22:31] av650(Cc1) #2114
[22:34] av650(Cc1) #2114
[22:37] av650(Cc1) #2114
[22:40] av650(Cc1) #2114
[22:43] av650(Cc1) #2114
[22:46] av650(Cc1) #2114
[22:49] av650(Cc1) #2114
[22:52] av650(Cc1) #2114
[22:55] av650(Cc1) #2114
[22:58] av650(Cc1) #2114
[23:01] av650(Cc1) #2114
[23:04] av650(Cc1) #2114
[23:07] av650(Cc1) #2114
[23:10] av650(Cc1) #2114
[23:13] av650(Cc1) #2114
[23:16] av650(Cc1) #2114
[23:19] av650(Cc1) #2114
[23:22] av650(Cc1) #2114
[23:25] av650(Cc1) #2114
[23:28] av650(Cc1) #2114
[23:31] av650(Cc1) #2114
[23:34] av650(Cc1) #2114
[23:37] av650(Cc1) #2114
[23:40] av650(Cc1) #2114
[23:43] av650(Cc1) #2114
[23:46] av650(Cc1) #2114
[23:49] av650(Cc1) #2114
[23:52] av650(Cc1) #2114
[23:55] av650(Cc1) #2114
[23:58] av650(Cc1) #2114
[24:01] av650(Cc1) #2114
[24:04] av650(Cc1) #2114
[24:07] av650(Cc1) #2114
[24:10] av650(Cc1) #2114
[24:13] av650(Cc1) #2114
[24:16] av650(Cc1) #2114
[24:19] av650(Cc1) #2114
[24:22] av650(Cc1) #2114
[24:25] av650(Cc1) #2114
[24:28] av650(Cc1) #2114
[24:31] av650(Cc1) #2114
[24:34] av650(Cc1) #2114
[24:37] av650(Cc1) #2114
[24:40] av650(Cc1) #2114
[24:43] av650(Cc1) #2114
[24:46] av650(Cc1) #2114
[24:49] av650(Cc1) #2114
[24:52] av650(Cc1) #2114
[24:55] av650(Cc1) #2114
[24:58] av650(Cc1) #2114
[25:01] av650(Cc1) #2114
[25:04] av650(Cc1) #2114
[25:07] av650(Cc1) #2114
[25:10] av650(Cc1) #2114
[25:13] av650(Cc1) #2114
[25:16] av650(Cc1) #2114
[25:19] av650(Cc1) #2114
[25:22] av650(Cc1) #2114
[25:25] av650(Cc1) #2114
[25:28] av650(Cc1) #2114
[25:31] av650(Cc1) #2114
[25:34] av650(Cc1) #2114
[25:37] av650(Cc1) #2114
[25:40] av650(Cc1) #2114
[25:43] av650(Cc1) #2114
[25:46] av650(Cc1) #2114
[25:49] av650(Cc1) #2114
[25:52] av650(Cc1) #2114
[25:55] av650(Cc1) #2114
[25:58] av650(Cc1) #2114
[26:01] av650(Cc1) #2114
[26:04] av650(Cc1) #2114
[26:07] av650(Cc1) #2114
[26:10] av650(Cc1) #2114
[26:13] av650(Cc1) #2114
[26:16] av650(Cc1) #2114
[26:19] av650(Cc1) #2114
[26:22] av650(Cc1) #2114
[26:25] av650(Cc1) #2114
[26:28] av650(Cc1) #2114
[26:31] av650(Cc1) #2114
[26:34] av650(Cc1) #2114
[26:37] av650(Cc1) #2114
[26:40] av650(Cc1) #2114
[26:43] av650(Cc1) #2114
[26:46] av650(Cc1) #2114
[26:49] av650(Cc1) #2114
[26:52] av650(Cc1) #2114
[26:55] av650(Cc1) #2114
[26:58] av650(Cc1) #2114
[27:01] av650(Cc1) #2114
[27:04] av650(Cc1) #2114
[27:07] av650(Cc1) #2114
[27:10] av650(Cc1) #2114
[27:13] av650(Cc1) #2114
[27:16] av650(Cc1) #2114
[27:19] av650(Cc1) #2114
[27:22] av650(Cc1) #2114
[27:25] av650(Cc1) #2114
[27:28] av650(Cc1) #2114
[27:31] av650(Cc1) #2114
[27:34] av650(Cc1) #2114
[27:37] av650(Cc1) #2114
[27:40] av650(Cc1) #2114
[27:43] av650(Cc1) #2114
[27:46] av650(Cc1) #2114
[27:49] av650(Cc1) #2114
[27:52] av650(Cc1) #2114
[27:55] av650(Cc1) #2114
[27:58] av650(Cc1) #2114
[28:01] av650(Cc1) #2114
[28:04] av650(Cc1) #2114
[28:07] av650(Cc1) #2114
[28:10] av650(Cc1) #2114
[28:13] av650(Cc1) #2114
[28:16] av650(Cc1) #2114
[28:19] av650(Cc1) #2114
[28:22] av650(Cc1) #2114
[28:25] av650(Cc1) #2114
[28:28] av650(Cc1) #2114
[28:31] av650(Cc1) #2114
[28:34] av650(Cc1) #2114
[28:37] av650(Cc1) #2114
[28:40] av650(Cc1) #2114
[28:43] av650(Cc1) #2114
[28:46] av650(Cc1) #2114
[28:49] av650(Cc1) #2114
[28:52] av650(Cc1) #2114
[28:55] av650(Cc1) #2114
[28:58] av650(Cc1) #2114
[29:01] av650(Cc1) #2114
[29:03] av650(Cc1) #2114
[29:18] >>
[47:02] >> good, good.
[47:04] Well, this is the
[47:05] presentation portion of
[47:06] the agenda.
[47:09] I am commissioner oliver
[47:13] gilbert, our CHAIRMAN Is
[47:13] rodriguez.
[47:19] Mayor levine cava is on
[47:19] her way down.
[47:20] What we do in these
[47:21] presentations as we
[47:22] recognize extraordinary
[47:26] people, extraordinary
[47:26] organizations who have
[47:27] done things that go above
[47:27] and beyond.
[47:28] Today, we have some
[47:29] presentations.
[47:32] First, I give the
[47:32] microphone to your
[47:34] CHAIRMAN, you all give him
[47:42] applause, anthony
[47:42] rodriguez.
[47:44] [Dog barking]
[47:47] >> dog barking for you.
[47:48] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[47:51] america, powerful read.
[47:52] Good morning, good
[47:52] morning.
[47:53] We got all the puppies.
[47:54] I love it.
[47:57] I should've brought my
[47:58] daughter to work with me
[47:58] today if I would've known
[47:59] you all would've brought
[48:02] the dogs.
[48:03] I probably didn't know
[48:04] that and I still would
[48:10] have bring her.
[48:11] We're not going to start,
[48:12] we are going to start with
[48:13] some very important folks
[48:15] that are here here today.
[48:16] We have this morning some
[48:16] very distinguished guests
[48:24] and members of the
[48:25] consulate court of canada,
[48:25] right?
[48:27] We have the counsel
[48:30] general of canada, the
[48:31] honorable sylvia
[48:38] cesaratto. Cersaratto
[48:38] more or less.
[48:39] I'll let you correct me in
[48:39] a minute.
[48:40] And MISS Shannon
[48:41] eisenhut. I think I said
[48:44] thatt okay.
[48:45] The us state department
[48:46] regional director for the
[48:48] office of foreign
[48:48] missions.
[48:54] So it is my privilege to
[48:55] recognize two outstanding
[48:56] leaders whose dedication
[48:56] to diplomacy and
[48:57] international
[48:57] collaboration has
[48:58] strengthened our global
[48:59] partnerships.
[49:00] And today we are honored
[49:03] to present certificates
[49:04] of appreciation to the
[49:05] honorable sylvia
[49:07] cesaratto and MISS
[49:08] Shannon eisenhut, the
[49:09] regional director of the
[49:10] uss department of state
[49:17] office of foreign
[49:17] emissions.
[49:18] And because I keep messing
[49:19] up the name probably, I'm
[49:22] going to let my olleague
[49:22] continue to mess up the
[49:24] name for me.
[49:30] So.
[49:30] [Laughter] And then of
[49:31] course I imagine the mayor
[49:32] is can I have some words
[49:32] to say as well and we'll
[49:37] let gerard if he has
[49:38] something to say as well.
[49:38] Commissioner?
[49:39] >> thank you, MR.
[49:39] CHAIRMAN.
[49:40] I'll be really brief.
[49:41] One thing that's special
[49:42] about our interaction with
[49:45] the world is our counselor
[49:48] here is a very large
[49:48] consulate court.
[49:57] Its symbolic of the idea
[49:58] that we are an
[49:58] international city.
[49:58] E
[49:59] live -- international in
[50:00] the sense that we are the
[50:06] gateway to the americas
[50:06] and to south and central
[50:07] american and caribbean.
[50:08] We're the first people
[50:09] they see when they come to
[50:09] the country, where the
[50:10] last people they see if
[50:14] they are in this part of
[50:14] the hemisphere.
[50:15] We have great working
[50:15] relationships who not only
[50:16] foster cultural
[50:17] connections but business
[50:18] connections and that
[50:19] happens through our
[50:19] wonderful partners in
[50:20] canada and also the state
[50:21] department has done an
[50:33] excellent job at keeping
[50:33] us connected to folks.
[50:33] S
[50:34] our honor and privilege to
[50:35] actually honor you all
[50:36] today and to recognize you
[50:37] and recognize your public
[50:37] service because people
[50:38] will not actually see you
[50:38] all.
[50:39] They'll see the prime
[50:40] minister and secretary,
[50:40] they'll see the PRESIDENT,
[50:41] ambassadors.
[50:42] They don't see the people
[50:42] that come every day and
[50:43] sit down with business
[50:44] leads and show them how to
[50:45] make connections and help
[50:45] people through their
[50:46] immigration problems.
[50:50] They y don't see those
[50:51] people.
[50:51] You're the people that do
[50:52] that work on behalf of all
[50:53] those people you serve,
[50:56] all those businesses you
[50:57] enable, miami-dade says
[50:57] thank you.
[50:58] They are?
[50:59] >> any other commissioners
[51:04] want to speak on --
[51:05] >> Mayor Levine Cava:
[51:05] general, you are a front.
[51:06] Thank you so much for your
[51:11] friendship and support.
[51:12] As commissioner gilbert
[51:13] said, I personally have
[51:14] been working with the
[51:14] consulate general of
[51:15] canada, your predecessor,
[51:15] your self.
[51:22] it is amazing the kind of
[51:23] work that you're doing
[51:23] here.
[51:24] So many canadians living
[51:24] and working here.
[51:25] I'm just grateful that I
[51:26] can serve now in this role
[51:28] as your commissioner to
[51:29] help, you know, foster all
[51:29] the great relationships
[51:30] you have worked so hard to
[51:32] do so.
[51:33] So thank you.
[51:33] >> I've gotta say ditto.
[51:40] We've known each other,
[51:41] prior counsel in.
[51:41] I think I was one of the
[51:42] first people that was
[51:42] visited by you.
[51:43] Thank you for the great
[51:44] job you have done and
[51:44] continue to do both of
[51:45] you.
[51:45] Obviously, ditto to my
[51:50] colleague to the left.
[51:51] >> well, I must say that
[51:54] for me this is a personal
[52:00] loss and I have seen too
[52:01] many consular corps
[52:05] members leave.
[52:06] We normally have one of
[52:06] the largest consular
[52:07] courts, we have the best
[52:09] in the country and we're
[52:09] very proud of that and it
[52:13] speaks to our global ties.
[52:14] I will also say that I
[52:15] lived in canada.
[52:17] I lived in vancouver as a
[52:20] child and so I feel very
[52:22] attached to that at nation
[52:31] and I vacationed in canada
[52:32] in the wilds of canada and
[52:33] we will not be charging
[52:34] any tariffs to canada here
[52:35] in miami-dade county, just
[52:35] to make that very clear.
[52:36] Am I right?
[52:36] H, a policy
[52:37] decision.
[52:37] i'm gonna say it's a
[52:38] business decision.
[52:43] No tariffs for miami-dade
[52:43] county.
[52:44] We value your leadership,
[52:51] we value your friendship.
[52:52] You been here not just on
[52:53] behalf of canada, you've
[52:53] been here on behalf of the
[52:54] globe and the country.
[52:55] You've stood up on so many
[52:55] issues.
[52:56] So many our environment
[52:56] issues.
[52:57] You've been at the
[52:58] forefront and we are very
[53:03] proud and sad to lose you.
[53:04] And to our state
[53:04] department, you have not
[53:05] just handled all the
[53:06] logistics for people who
[53:12] need help navigating, you
[53:13] facilitated these men and
[53:13] women from our team to go
[53:17] to venezuela and I know
[53:18] you're personally very
[53:20] proud of that fact.
[53:20] You joined us there and
[53:24] greeting them and we're
[53:25] very, very grateful for
[53:28] your incredible dedication
[53:28] and service.
[53:29] With the best possible
[53:30] role that state department
[53:34] could serve is to provide
[53:34] assistance to our
[53:37] neighbors in need, so
[53:37] we're very grateful and
[53:45] this is well deserving.
[53:45] Thank you.
[53:46] >> all right, mayor.
[53:47] Thank you so much.
[53:47] Now commissioner bastien.
[53:48] >> Marleine Bastien:
[53:53] thank you very much..
[53:54] Good morning, everyone.
[53:55] Just want to join my
[53:56] colleagues and mayor to
[53:57] thank you for all of your
[53:57] service.
[53:58] often times, this job is
[53:59] being unrecognized, yet
[54:00] you have such an impact on
[54:00] people's lives, so I want
[54:02] to thank you for that and
[54:02] also thank you for
[54:05] reaching ut to my office
[54:06] and coming to meet with me
[54:08] often to give feedback on
[54:12] the immigrant situation
[54:12] not only for me but for
[54:13] others.
[54:14] Thank you so much.
[54:15] Appreciate you.
[54:19] >> all right.
[54:19] Commissioners --
[54:20] >> ditto.
[54:21] Exactly.
[54:22] >> thank you, MR.
[54:22] CHAIRMAN.
[54:24] Just want to say that
[54:28] we're definitely going to
[54:29] MISS Consular general.
[54:33] I think she has done an
[54:33] amazing job keeping
[54:34] florida, keeping
[54:41] miami-dade connected to
[54:42] canada.
[54:42] And to MISS Eisenhut, we
[54:43] always call upon her on
[54:44] everything when we have
[54:44] foreign delegation.
[54:45] He's
[54:45] smiling right now.
[54:47] I can tell you that she
[54:47] knows.
[54:48] We are going to MISS Both
[54:50] of them tremendously, but
[54:51] thank you very much.
[55:05] [Applause]
[55:05] >> would like you to say a
[55:10] few words as well both of
[55:10] you.
[55:11] >> this is unscripted.
[55:12] Firstly, thank you all so
[55:17] very much for the sponsors
[55:17] and all of you for your
[55:18] kind words.
[55:19] It's been a true privilege
[55:21] for me to be in florida
[55:32] and here in miami
[55:32] representing canada these
[55:33] last four years.
[55:34] Firstly, let me thank you
[55:34] for those wearing red.
[55:35] It looks wonderful on you.
[55:36] Canadian colors.
[55:36] I have had five
[55:37] international postings, so
[55:38] my career is quickly
[55:40] coming to an end sadly,
[55:44] but I will take away very
[55:44] fond memories of my time
[55:47] here in miami because
[55:48] everyone has been so
[55:52] gracious in receiving us
[55:53] and everyone has a good
[55:54] story to tell about their
[55:59] relationship with canada.
[56:00] Despite what's happening
[56:00] at the federal level and
[56:01] in the media, at the end
[56:02] of the day we remain
[56:03] neighbors.
[56:07] Canada isn't moving.
[56:08] We are not going anywhere.
[56:10] Friends and allies and the
[56:11] strongest of friends and
[56:12] allies.
[56:14] We share the biggest
[56:15] trading relationship
[56:19] between any two countries
[56:19] in the world.
[56:20] We share the longest
[56:21] border between any two
[56:24] countries in the world
[56:25] that is jointly managed.
[56:26] We are completely
[56:26] integrated economically,
[56:27] but more than that we
[56:31] share the same values for
[56:32] peace and prosperity and
[56:32] security.
[56:35] Is been a real honor.
[56:36] I have to tell you
[56:40] everywhere I've been there
[56:40] isn't an evening or even
[56:41] somebody doesn't tell me
[56:42] they've been to canada or
[56:50] they have canadian roots
[56:51] or good canadian friends
[56:51] or even canadians in their
[56:52] family and the reverse is
[56:53] true.
[56:58] All I can say is thank you
[56:59] for the warm welcome, the
[57:00] friendship, the
[57:00] partnership.
[57:06] I'm going back home.
[57:07] I hope to see you there
[57:08] one day, mayor,
[57:08] congressman potentially.
[57:09] All of you.
[57:09] Vicki, we didn't get you
[57:10] in your role, but maybe
[57:12] from your new perch.
[57:16] I just want to recognize
[57:16] ger for his support and
[57:17] his team.
[57:23] So thank nk you.
[57:24] >> good morning, everyone.
[57:31] First of all, it's my
[57:31] absolute pleasure to be
[57:32] here as a florida native
[57:33] and to be signed here in
[57:34] miami back home, which is
[57:34] really nice.
[57:35] As sylvia said, after
[57:47] many, many years, 20+ just
[57:48] in government, but
[57:49] actually 35 years being
[57:49] international and
[57:50] representing our nation,
[57:50] it's so wonderful to
[57:51] finally be back home and
[57:52] to work with all of our
[57:53] local, state, and federal
[57:56] counterparts has been
[57:56] incredible.
[57:57] Unprecedented especially
[57:58] this year as we know
[57:59] concluding the world cup
[57:59] and working with all of
[58:00] our partners and leading
[58:05] up to the g 20, which is
[58:06] going to be just a perfect
[58:07] way to cap off a very,
[58:08] very exciting crazy year.
[58:08] Also, I want to say thank
[58:09] you to all my law
[58:10] enforcement partners.
[58:10] As a diplomatic agent, not
[58:23] only did I serve -- very,
[58:23] very precarious places.
[58:24] I just want to say thank
[58:25] you to all of your
[58:25] service.
[58:26] Really, I know what it
[58:26] means to have that
[58:27] dedication and to get up
[58:30] there and work in some
[58:31] really austere
[58:31] environments, so I just
[58:32] want to say thank you.
[58:33] It's been my honor.
[58:33] Not only do I get to work
[58:36] with so many people in the
[58:36] consular court, which is
[58:39] the largest consular
[58:39] court.
[58:50] My office we cover puerto
[58:51] rico to the virgin
[58:51] islands.
[58:52] The international
[58:52] community that space here
[58:53] is incredible and it's
[58:53] growing.
[58:54] So I'm glad that I get to
[58:59] be here to support not
[59:00] only all of our partners,
[59:00] but the local community.
[59:01] As I say, we need to
[59:01] connect, create, and
[59:02] contribute and definitely
[59:03] get back to community.
[59:03] Thank you so much.
[59:04] It is my honor.
[59:04] Also retiring.
[59:05] I want to stay home in
[59:07] florida for a little
[59:07] while.
[59:08] Thank you so much.
[59:09] Really a pleasure.
[59:11] [Dog barking] [Applause]
[59:18] >> you see they are
[59:19] excited as well, too.
[59:20] We have a special
[59:20] presentation and
[59:21] certificate to present.
[59:21] You want to help me with
[59:22] one of these?
[59:24] You want to hold on -- see
[59:25] the other one.
[59:25] So as commissioner and on
[59:33] behalf of the mayor to my
[59:34] left and the board of
[59:35] county commissioners and
[59:36] the residents of
[59:36] miami-dade county, nearly
[59:37] 1.28 million + or minus, I
[59:37] take great pleasure
[59:42] imprisoning this
[59:43] certificate of
[59:43] appreciation to you in
[59:44] recognition of your
[59:45] valuable punch missions to
[59:45] our community and wish you
[59:46] the best as you mark your
[59:49] tenor enor with the
[59:49] miami-dade consular
[59:51] courts.
[59:51] S.
[59:52] Shannon eisenhut.
[59:55] Congratulations.
[59:56] >> the search of get of
[1:00:00] appreciation is presented
[1:00:01] to the honorable sylvia
[1:00:02] cersaratto, the counsel
[1:00:04] general for canada in
[1:00:05] miami.
[1:00:06] Congratulations and thank
[1:00:07] you for your service.
[1:00:08] >> thank you so much.
[1:00:40] [Applause]
[1:01:00] >> thank you so much.
[1:01:08] Yes.
[1:01:10] Eventually, eventually.
[1:01:12] Thank you for your work
[1:01:15] it's been a pleasure.
[1:01:20] My office is still there.
[1:01:43] >> thank you.
[1:01:50] >> yes.
[1:01:58] >> all right.
[1:01:59] Let's take the chatter to
[1:02:03] the side.
[1:02:06] Mayor.
[1:02:14] All right, guys.
[1:02:15] We have our second
[1:02:15] presentation of the day.
[1:02:16] I think our last, right?
[1:02:18] all right, we have two
[1:02:18] today.
[1:02:19] So now for our second
[1:02:24] presentation, we have our
[1:02:35] -- why are you so bossy?
[1:02:35] I was going to say
[1:02:36] something mean.
[1:02:36] I was gonna say something
[1:02:37] mean regarding the dc.
[1:02:38] This is the congress
[1:02:38] slide.
[1:02:39] These are already -- this
[1:02:49] is actually always him.
[1:02:49] So today, we proudly
[1:02:50] recognize -- and we quiet
[1:02:50] down, please.
[1:02:51] Today we probably
[1:02:52] recognize the
[1:02:52] extraordinary courage,
[1:02:55] professionalism, selfless
[1:02:56] service of miami-dade fire
[1:02:56] rescue urban search and
[1:02:57] rescue team florida task
[1:02:58] force one.
[1:03:00] Thank you for being here.
[1:03:06] [Applause] [Applause] I
[1:03:07] want to first think all of
[1:03:08] my colleagues for being
[1:03:10] here this morning for this
[1:03:11] special presentation.
[1:03:13] Specifically those that
[1:03:16] cosponsored it with me.
[1:03:16] Commissioner bermudez,
[1:03:20] lopez, and steinberg so
[1:03:21] far.
[1:03:21] Know there's more
[1:03:22] coming, for joining me as
[1:03:24] cosponsors for the special
[1:03:25] presentation honoring the
[1:03:27] brave members of florida's
[1:03:28] task force one.
[1:03:33] Following the devastating
[1:03:34] earthquakes that struck
[1:03:35] venezuela in JUNE, florida
[1:03:35] task force one answered
[1:03:37] the call to serve.
[1:03:38] At the request of the us
[1:03:39] apartment of state, the
[1:03:44] team deployed in a 80
[1:03:44] member task force, there's
[1:03:45] not 80 here today, but
[1:03:46] there's a lot.
[1:03:49] Including six canine
[1:03:50] search teams, medical
[1:03:51] hazardous logistics and
[1:03:52] structural engineering.
[1:03:57] Are these some?
[1:03:58] Did they all go?
[1:03:58] Nice.
[1:03:58] All six of them.
[1:04:01] It was over eight days you
[1:04:01] guys were there?
[1:04:02] So over eight days they
[1:04:09] worked alongside
[1:04:09] conducting search and
[1:04:10] rescue operations and
[1:04:11] bringing hope to
[1:04:15] communities affected by
[1:04:15] this tragedy.
[1:04:16] And their dedication and
[1:04:17] compassion earned
[1:04:18] recognition elmar national
[1:04:19] recognition including the
[1:04:26] venezuela metal in
[1:04:27] gratitude for their
[1:04:27] exemplary service.
[1:04:28] Today, we proudly honor
[1:04:39] chief brandon webb.
[1:04:39] You can come on up with
[1:04:39] us.
[1:04:40] And every member of
[1:04:41] florida task force one for
[1:04:42] representing miami-dade
[1:04:43] county with courage,
[1:04:43] excellence, and an
[1:04:44] unwavering commitment to
[1:04:50] saving lives.
[1:04:51] I'm going to call you guys
[1:04:51] all up in a second, so
[1:04:52] don't worry.
[1:04:52] Stand next to me, man.
[1:04:53] At this time, I'd like to
[1:04:54] turn our attention to the
[1:04:55] video being played by me
[1:04:56] for a short clip on this
[1:04:58] mission.
[1:05:05] [Music]
[1:07:14] [Pause]
[1:07:19] >> all right.
[1:07:19] [Applause]
[1:07:20] >> I imagine the stories
[1:07:22] andi hope you share some
[1:07:24] of that with us when you
[1:07:24] speak here in a few
[1:07:30] minutes, chief web.
[1:07:31] I imagine being over there
[1:07:32] was probably the most
[1:07:32] emotional portion of this,
[1:07:33] but this last clip kind of
[1:07:42] giving -- getting you guys
[1:07:42] back home.
[1:07:43] Glad to have you guys back
[1:07:43] home.
[1:07:43] I want my colleagues to
[1:07:44] say a few words and have a
[1:07:46] special presentation.
[1:07:47] Commissioner lopez, you
[1:07:47] want to lead?
[1:07:48] > Vicki Lopez: thank
[1:07:49] you, MR. CHAIRMAN.
[1:07:52] Some of you know I was
[1:07:53] the budget chair in the
[1:07:54] florida house when it came
[1:08:05] time to fund you and it
[1:08:06] was touch and go to the
[1:08:07] very last minute and I
[1:08:07] never gave up because I
[1:08:08] know the importance of
[1:08:08] your work.
[1:08:09] And so in the final
[1:08:10] moments of that budget
[1:08:10] conference, we were able
[1:08:11] to get you $4.8 million to
[1:08:12] do what you do best.
[1:08:17] And it was the greatest
[1:08:18] honor and privilege to be
[1:08:19] able to have my hand and
[1:08:20] fingerprints on that.
[1:08:20] So just want to tell you
[1:08:21] it's for that very reason
[1:08:22] that we all support you.
[1:08:23] And I am moved by saying
[1:08:24] you in action because
[1:08:29] often times, you know, we
[1:08:30] are funding things we
[1:08:31] don't know what we're
[1:08:32] funding, we don't know
[1:08:32] what you do.
[1:08:33] You have proven your worth
[1:08:33] and every penny and what
[1:08:34] you do.
[1:08:36] Thank you so much for your
[1:08:41] service.
[1:08:41] [Applause]
[1:08:42] >> often times, we don't
[1:08:46] think about the value, the
[1:08:52] importance, and the
[1:08:52] sacrifices that you have
[1:08:53] to make to do this work.
[1:08:53] And in watching the clips
[1:08:55] and watching you get ready
[1:08:57] to deport and knowing that
[1:09:01] you are, you know,
[1:09:02] fathers, mothers.
[1:09:03] You're leaving everything
[1:09:06] behind to help those in
[1:09:06] need.
[1:09:07] So we cannot thank you
[1:09:08] enough because you are
[1:09:08] ambassadors when you are
[1:09:18] out there doing GOD's
[1:09:19] work.
[1:09:19] You are ambassadors.
[1:09:20] It's enough for us to see.
[1:09:20] Thank you.
[1:09:21] Thank you for your
[1:09:22] sacrifices, thank you for
[1:09:22] your services.
[1:09:26] Thank you.
[1:09:26] [Applause]
[1:09:32] >> I will reiterate what
[1:09:32] my colleagues said.
[1:09:33] Thank you so much, you and
[1:09:34] your families, for the
[1:09:44] sacrifices and also our
[1:09:44] friends here.
[1:09:45] Thank you very much.
[1:09:46] You're the best
[1:09:46] representation of
[1:09:47] miami-dade county.
[1:09:47] I know many of you have
[1:09:48] been around the world.
[1:09:49] It's not just venezuela.
[1:09:54] Happen to represent a
[1:09:54] district that has the most
[1:09:55] -- in miami-dade county
[1:09:56] and we are very thankful.
[1:09:57] I know all the residents
[1:09:57] are very thankful for
[1:09:58] having miami-dade county
[1:09:59] present.
[1:09:59] Many times the elected
[1:10:03] officials get pictures in
[1:10:04] that, but you're probably
[1:10:05] the best representation of
[1:10:09] what this county is and as
[1:10:09] my colleague said, you are
[1:10:13] not only ambassadors, but
[1:10:14] you are the representation
[1:10:17] of the love this county
[1:10:18] has for the rest of the
[1:10:22] world whenever there is a
[1:10:22] crisis.
[1:10:23] In this case, it happened
[1:10:24] in one of our sister
[1:10:24] countries in this
[1:10:36] hemisphere, which made it
[1:10:37] an incredible time more
[1:10:37] important than all.
[1:10:38] And I know it means time
[1:10:38] away from your families,
[1:10:39] so that's why we have to
[1:10:40] thank you our families and
[1:10:41] loved ones because it's
[1:10:41] not easy to be away for a
[1:10:42] period of time.
[1:10:42] You probably saw many
[1:10:43] things that many of us
[1:10:44] will never get to see you,
[1:10:45] but I'm sure the people of
[1:10:47] venezuela and the people
[1:10:48] of this hemisphere and all
[1:10:48] around the world, because
[1:10:55] we can talk about the
[1:10:56] places you've been, have
[1:10:57] seen the best
[1:10:57] representation of
[1:10:58] miami-dade county, so
[1:10:58] thank you again.
[1:10:58] Od
[1:10:59] bless.
[1:10:59] [Applause]
[1:11:07] >> all right.
[1:11:08] So first and foremost,
[1:11:08] thank you.
[1:11:09] I know not too long ago we
[1:11:10] were here also honoring
[1:11:11] you in your courageous
[1:11:17] acts elting in the call of
[1:11:17] duty.
[1:11:18] you run to it.
[1:11:18] Unfortunately, we have
[1:11:19] these horrible disasters.
[1:11:21] Hope to not be
[1:11:22] recognizing you last year
[1:11:24] because every time we do
[1:11:25] we know we put you out re
[1:11:33] in the he most harrowing
[1:11:33] circumstances.
[1:11:34] We thank you so much.
[1:11:35] There's not many words we
[1:11:35] can say because what you
[1:11:41] experience is something
[1:11:42] that, it's like I said
[1:11:42] last time, things of
[1:11:42] nightmares.
[1:11:43] I just want to make sure
[1:11:44] that if you all need
[1:11:45] anything, you let us know
[1:11:45] as well because we want to
[1:11:46] be here for you just like
[1:11:49] you were there for
[1:11:49] everybody else.
[1:11:51] Thank you.
[1:11:51] [Applause]
[1:11:54] >> I'll reiterate what my
[1:11:55] colleagues said.
[1:11:57] Listen, you're what
[1:11:58] american exceptionalism
[1:12:01] actually looks like when
[1:12:03] folks really need us.
[1:12:10] When folks really need us,
[1:12:11] you're in amber of hope, a
[1:12:12] flicker of light to
[1:12:12] someone who's trapped
[1:12:13] under something, to
[1:12:16] someone who just needs
[1:12:17] something to hang onto,
[1:12:18] something to pull them out
[1:12:27] back into a world that
[1:12:28] might not be perfect, but
[1:12:28] it's a world to live in.
[1:12:29] What you do is
[1:12:29] exceptional.
[1:12:30] You leave your homes and
[1:12:30] your families.
[1:12:31] You put yourselves at
[1:12:31] risk.
[1:12:32] Ou go into
[1:12:32] situations that we could
[1:12:41] never imagine and you do
[1:12:42] it in the name of this
[1:12:43] county, all of the great
[1:12:43] residence, but you do it
[1:12:44] in this country.
[1:12:45] So to those folks that you
[1:12:46] save and you help, you are
[1:12:53] american and you represent
[1:12:53] us well.
[1:12:54] Thank you so much.
[1:12:54] [Applause]
[1:12:54] >> thank you.
[1:12:55] Thank you, MR. Chair, for
[1:12:56] sponsoring this very
[1:12:57] important presentation.
[1:13:19] There is no way to thank
[1:13:19] you all.
[1:13:20] What you do is selfless.
[1:13:21] You deploy every single
[1:13:21] day to serve our
[1:13:22] community.
[1:13:22] As they stay when folks
[1:13:23] are running away from an
[1:13:23] emergency and danger, you
[1:13:24] all run towards it.
[1:13:25] So there's no way to thank
[1:13:25] you all for you do and to
[1:13:26] thank you or families for
[1:13:27] the sacrifices they do
[1:13:27] every day to keep us safe.
[1:13:28] So thank you for serving
[1:13:29] in this way.
[1:13:29] Thank you for going over
[1:13:30] to venezuela during this
[1:13:31] tragedy and thank you for
[1:13:32] serving our community of
[1:13:33] miami-dade county.
[1:13:33] Thank you so much.
[1:13:33] [Applause]
[1:13:34] >> I want to thank the
[1:13:35] chair for putting this
[1:13:35] together.
[1:13:36] Guys, we're recognizing
[1:13:36] you today.
[1:13:38] But I know that you don't
[1:13:42] do it for the recognition.
[1:13:43] Because you're built
[1:13:43] different.
[1:13:45] You represent the best
[1:13:47] part of humanity.
[1:13:50] after jesus is ascended
[1:14:00] into heaven, the disciples
[1:14:01] are left ear, right?
[1:14:01] And then you have peter
[1:14:02] and john that they are
[1:14:03] walking towards pentecost.
[1:14:04] They were walking and they
[1:14:05] see a disabled beggar.
[1:14:06] And the guy is literally
[1:14:10] sitting in front of the
[1:14:11] temple asking for money
[1:14:12] and then peter looks at
[1:14:15] him and he says money I
[1:14:16] don't have to give you.
[1:14:16] But I will give you
[1:14:18] everything I have in the
[1:14:21] name of my lord jesus
[1:14:21] christ.
[1:14:27] And he tells him get up
[1:14:27] and walk and the guy jumps
[1:14:28] up and he sprints into the
[1:14:29] temple and he talks about
[1:14:30] the great things that
[1:14:40] peter through jesus -- why
[1:14:44] do I bring up the story of
[1:14:44] peter?
[1:14:45] Because you guys give up
[1:14:46] everything you have every
[1:14:46] single day, and it's not
[1:14:47] just you.
[1:14:47] It's a talent that GOD
[1:14:50] gave you.
[1:14:54] It's hard to.
[1:14:55] You're willing to lay down
[1:14:55] every single day, and it
[1:14:56] doesn't matter if it's for
[1:15:00] folks in venezuela,
[1:15:00] residents in miami-dade
[1:15:03] county, new york, chicago,
[1:15:07] you do it for humankind
[1:15:07] because that's how you're
[1:15:08] built and that's an
[1:15:09] example you're always
[1:15:12] setting, and for that we
[1:15:12] will always thank you.
[1:15:13] These are one of many
[1:15:17] awards you'll probably get
[1:15:18] in your career and your
[1:15:18] life, but you have to
[1:15:19] sometimes sit back and
[1:15:20] accept those accolades
[1:15:28] because we appreciate you
[1:15:29] and love you so much.
[1:15:29] Thank you.
[1:15:30] MR. Chair?
[1:15:30] [Applause]
[1:15:31] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[1:15:32] hold it just a second.
[1:15:38] We are going to hear fromm
[1:15:38] our mayor then chief webb,
[1:15:39] do a presentation, and
[1:15:40] then call everybody up as
[1:15:40] well.
[1:15:40] MADAME Mayor?
[1:15:41] >> Mayor Levine Cava:
[1:15:42] thank you, MR. Chair, and
[1:15:42] thank you for making the
[1:15:43] time for this very
[1:15:43] important tribute.
[1:15:45] I was eight months into my
[1:15:45] first term as mayor when I
[1:15:49] saw you in the action.
[1:15:52] A lesson I will never ever
[1:15:52] forget.
[1:15:56] That is when I realized
[1:15:57] this is not a job, this is
[1:16:00] a calling.
[1:16:01] Being a firefighter, of
[1:16:04] course, very respected.
[1:16:07] So many want to join the
[1:16:07] ranks.
[1:16:08] On top of that, to be our
[1:16:09] florida task force one and
[1:16:12] to stand up and help
[1:16:19] without cease when
[1:16:20] disaster strikes.
[1:16:20] That's who you are.
[1:16:21] It's in your bones, it's
[1:16:22] in your blood.
[1:16:26] As I said then and I saw
[1:16:26] it in venezuela in the
[1:16:27] clips, we have to tear you
[1:16:27] off the piles because
[1:16:30] you're so motivated to do
[1:16:31] everything in your power
[1:16:42] to help with the rescue,
[1:16:42] with recovery, with
[1:16:43] providing hope to those
[1:16:44] who are in a moment of
[1:16:44] total despair.
[1:16:45] i know this job is not
[1:16:47] easy, but you wanted it.
[1:16:48] You sought it.
[1:16:48] We work together with our
[1:16:50] state department to ensure
[1:16:52] you could be the very
[1:16:53] first to go on behalf of
[1:16:59] our nation to help our
[1:16:59] neighbors.
[1:17:00] Ou do this
[1:17:01] work not just for here at
[1:17:01] home, but around the
[1:17:03] world, as has been said.
[1:17:05] This tragedy is beyond any
[1:17:05] imaginable.
[1:17:08] We're up to over 5000
[1:17:15] identified as lost and
[1:17:16] still so many missing.
[1:17:17] And the, what do they say,
[1:17:19] 10,000 serve sites was a
[1:17:19] quote that I saw.
[1:17:21] So we know that it affects
[1:17:23] you as well and we are
[1:17:28] here for you.
[1:17:28] I am proud that you have a
[1:17:32] great chief who is not a
[1:17:38] part of usar. He was, he
[1:17:38] is.
[1:17:40] Sorry about that.
[1:17:40] Okay.
[1:17:47] But he's not ot jumping
[1:17:48] out of the planes anymore.
[1:17:49] Ut he is leaving with
[1:17:52] that same passion, that
[1:17:53] same integrity, that same
[1:17:53] dedication to never give
[1:17:57] up while we need to fight
[1:17:57] the fight.
[1:17:58] And also for those of you
[1:18:04] who served fighting the
[1:18:05] fires in the everglades,
[1:18:05] which I know is a good
[1:18:06] number of you, that is
[1:18:07] another good exhaust
[1:18:08] disaster that you tackled
[1:18:13] with the same success.
[1:18:13] Thank you on behalf of all
[1:18:21] of us and e going to give
[1:18:22] it to our chief, task
[1:18:22] force one florida.
[1:18:36] [Laughter] [Applause]
[1:18:36] >> good morning, ladies
[1:18:37] and gentlemen.
[1:18:37] Great crowd here.
[1:18:38] First and foremost,
[1:18:39] members of the great
[1:18:39] commission, thank you for
[1:18:40] the recognition of
[1:18:41] miami-dade rescue search
[1:18:41] team.
[1:18:46] Commissioner, you said it
[1:18:46] best.
[1:18:47] One, we don't do this job
[1:18:48] for the recognition, for
[1:18:49] the accolades, but for
[1:18:49] today, the 80 members, and
[1:18:54] I know it's just a
[1:18:54] fraction here today, but
[1:18:55] the members of the florida
[1:18:56] task force one and the six
[1:18:58] canines that did respond,
[1:18:59] another round of applause
[1:19:00] because day in day out for
[1:19:06] 24 hours for eight days
[1:19:07] they did respond search
[1:19:07] and rescue operations.
[1:19:08] Yes, MADAME Mayor, I
[1:19:09] didn't get deployed on
[1:19:09] this one.
[1:19:10] There was this little
[1:19:12] thing called fifa going on
[1:19:13] that I had to stick around
[1:19:27] and make sure.
[1:19:27] Yeah.
[1:19:28] Just a whole thing.
[1:19:29] But what I do want to
[1:19:29] mention is for 41 years
[1:19:30] miami-dade fire and rescue
[1:19:31] has been answering the
[1:19:31] call for urban search and
[1:19:32] rescue.
[1:19:32] 41 years we have been
[1:19:33] responding to local,
[1:19:35] state, nationally, and
[1:19:36] international disasters
[1:19:36] man-made and, of course,
[1:19:37] you know, the natural
[1:19:38] disasters.
[1:19:41] This one is a special one
[1:19:42] for us.
[1:19:42] e requested to
[1:19:43] go to venezuela because we
[1:19:44] have so many venezuelan
[1:19:46] members of this community
[1:19:56] and we asked to get
[1:19:56] deployed.
[1:19:57] They gave us the green
[1:19:57] light, and while the
[1:19:58] members of florida task
[1:19:59] force one were conducting
[1:19:59] search and rescue
[1:20:06] operations conducting
[1:20:07] structural engineering of
[1:20:08] the buildings that had
[1:20:08] collapsed, rendering
[1:20:09] medical care to those that
[1:20:10] were injured, here while
[1:20:20] they were abroad, here
[1:20:21] locally we were assisting
[1:20:22] with the warehouses with
[1:20:22] the logistics and getting
[1:20:23] the goods that were
[1:20:23] necessary to get to
[1:20:24] venezuela so with that, I
[1:20:25] want to say a job well
[1:20:25] done.
[1:20:26] Keep your heads up high,
[1:20:26] and to the members of our
[1:20:27] great commission, MADAME
[1:20:28] Mayor, thank you for
[1:20:33] championing public safety,
[1:20:33] but on behalf of
[1:20:34] miami-dade fire and
[1:20:43] rescue, thank you.
[1:20:44] [Applause]
[1:20:44] >> all right.
[1:20:44] Thank you, chief, for
[1:20:45] that.
[1:20:46] Go ahead and present the
[1:20:47] official proclamation for
[1:20:47] chief webb.
[1:20:49] All of us to you guys and
[1:20:49] then chief, we want to
[1:20:54] hear a couple of words.
[1:20:55] I know you have a lot to
[1:20:55] say.
[1:20:56] I'm messing with you.
[1:20:57] Be it resolved that on
[1:20:57] behalf of the mayor,
[1:21:03] levine cava, my -- myself
[1:21:17] and miami-dade county and
[1:21:17] plus or minus its
[1:21:18] residents, we do hereby
[1:21:19] proclaim JULY 21, 2026, as
[1:21:19] miami-dade search and
[1:21:20] rescue team florida task
[1:21:21] force one day.
[1:21:22] Congratulations, chief.
[1:21:28] Use]
[1:21:29] >> good morning.
[1:21:31] So humbly I would describe
[1:21:42] to you this group as
[1:21:43] humble servants and myself
[1:21:43] among them.
[1:21:44] I am very humble and very
[1:21:45] proud to represent all of
[1:21:45] the folks that are here
[1:21:46] today and we recognize
[1:21:49] that a lot of people would
[1:21:51] go out and do what we do
[1:22:03] and many would not, but it
[1:22:04] is a matter of pride and
[1:22:04] privilege that we get to
[1:22:05] go out and represent all
[1:22:06] of you and the citizens of
[1:22:06] the united states.
[1:22:07] In trying to alleviate
[1:22:08] human suffering wherever
[1:22:10] we can, right, many times
[1:22:10] we're asked why do we go
[1:22:30] to other cities around the
[1:22:30] us?
[1:22:31] Why do we go outside the
[1:22:31] country to assist other
[1:22:32] people when our job is
[1:22:32] here?
[1:22:33] And the reason for that is
[1:22:33] that we developed the
[1:22:34] knowledge, skills,
[1:22:35] ability, and the comfort
[1:22:36] level at other people's
[1:22:36] disasters that we bring
[1:22:37] back to miami-dade county
[1:22:43] and our challenge that if
[1:22:43] we were to have a disaster
[1:22:44] here that this group of
[1:22:45] people have seen and done
[1:22:46] things outside of the
[1:22:46] community that we can
[1:22:47] manage just about anything
[1:22:48] here comfortably on behalf
[1:23:02] of the citizens of
[1:23:02] miami-dade county.
[1:23:03] So with that, I want to
[1:23:04] thank the chief, chief
[1:23:04] palmer, MADAME Mayor, all
[1:23:05] the elected officials for
[1:23:06] continuing to allow us to
[1:23:06] do what we do because
[1:23:07] we're proud to represent
[1:23:08] and we're proud to go out
[1:23:09] and do it, so thank you
[1:23:09] very much.
[1:23:09] Chief?
[1:23:10] [Applause]
[1:23:10] >> all right.
[1:23:11] We're going to do one
[1:23:18] photo with the folks up
[1:23:18] here and then I'd like to
[1:23:19] get, I know there's a
[1:23:19] couple of you, but would
[1:23:20] like to get as many in the
[1:23:21] photo as well.
[1:23:21] With these folks, godfrey?
[1:23:24] There you go.
[1:23:24] Godfrey, from now on
[1:23:25] you're in charge, so let
[1:23:31] us know where to stand.
[1:23:32] >> all right, can you
[1:23:33] shuffle this way?
[1:23:34] Please shuffle this way?
[1:23:34] Yes, perfect.
[1:23:38] Thank you.
[1:23:54] All right.
[1:23:56] Big smiles, big smiles.
[1:24:00] Right here, big smiles.
[1:24:03] One, two.
[1:24:29] >> I'm sorry, if you can
[1:24:32] step back.
[1:24:34] Dogs in the front.
[1:24:41] Dogs in the front.
[1:24:48] You have room in the back?
[1:25:26] All right.
[1:25:31] Let's go right here, let's
[1:25:31] go right here.
[1:25:33] Step back, step back, step
[1:25:33] back.
[1:25:35] Big smile, big smile, big
[1:25:38] smile.
[1:25:42] And one more.
[1:25:43] macaroni and --
[1:25:47] >> cheese.
[1:25:50] [Laughter]
[1:26:39] >> ready, everybody?
[1:26:47] One, two, three.
[1:26:48] >> thank you guys for
[1:26:54] everything.
[1:27:00] Family, any other family?
[1:27:06] Can we have you go on this
[1:27:09] side?
[1:27:15] [Music]
[1:32:56] >> MADAME Mayor?
[1:33:06] MADAME Mayor?
[1:33:07] Airport, cport, adrian.
[1:33:08] [Laughter] All right,
[1:33:09] let's take a seat, guys.
[1:33:17] Let's get this show on the
[1:33:18] road.
[1:33:18] >> good morning.
[1:33:24] All right.
[1:33:24] Thank you all.
[1:33:25] If we can please as
[1:33:26] quietly as possible stand
[1:33:41] for the invocation given
[1:33:41] this morning by father
[1:33:42] manwell of our lady of 11
[1:33:43] nine maronite catholic
[1:33:43] church of miami at the
[1:33:44] invitation of commissioner
[1:33:45] lopez followed by the
[1:33:46] pledge of allegiance by
[1:33:47] commissioner lopez.
[1:33:48] >> MR. CHAIRMAN, board of
[1:33:48] commissioners, thank you
[1:33:56] for the invitation,
[1:33:56] especially commissioner
[1:33:57] lopez.
[1:34:12] Et us pray.
[1:34:12] Almighty GOD, source of
[1:34:13] all wisdom and justice, we
[1:34:14] thank you for the gift of
[1:34:15] this day and for the
[1:34:16] opportunity to serve our
[1:34:16] community.
[1:34:17] We ask you to bless the
[1:34:18] members of this board with
[1:34:18] wisdom in their
[1:34:19] deliberations and
[1:34:19] integrity in their
[1:34:35] decisions, courage to
[1:34:36] pursue what is right and
[1:34:36] courage for every person
[1:34:37] whose life is affected by
[1:34:38] their work.
[1:34:38] Help us to remember that
[1:34:39] every person possesses
[1:34:40] inherent dignity and
[1:34:41] deserves to be treated
[1:34:42] with respect and fairness.
[1:34:42] MAY our differences become
[1:34:43] opportunities for
[1:34:45] dialogue, our challenges
[1:34:45] become occasions for
[1:34:46] cooperation, and our
[1:34:47] shared responsibilities
[1:34:47] lead to the flourishing of
[1:34:48] all who call this county
[1:34:49] home.
[1:34:51] Grant these our neighbors
[1:34:51] and neighborhoods.
[1:34:52] Thanks to those who serve
[1:34:55] the public, comfort to
[1:34:57] those who suffer and hope
[1:35:03] to all who seek a better
[1:35:03] future.
[1:35:04] And as everything said and
[1:35:09] done today contribute to
[1:35:10] the common good.
[1:35:10] We bless you oh lord jesus
[1:35:13] christ now and forever.
[1:35:14] Amen.
[1:35:23] >> I pledge allegiance to
[1:35:23] the united states of
[1:35:24] america and to the
[1:35:24] republic for which it
[1:35:25] stands, one nation under
[1:35:28] GOD, indivisible, with
[1:35:29] liberty and justice for
[1:35:29] all.
[1:35:30] >> all right.
[1:35:33] You all MAY be seated.
[1:35:38] All right.
[1:35:38] Please find a seat if
[1:35:39] you're in the back.
[1:35:53] There should be no one
[1:35:54] standing up in the back
[1:35:55] unless you are media or
[1:35:55] sergeant-at-arms or law
[1:35:56] enforcement.
[1:35:56] All right.
[1:35:57] madame attorney.
[1:35:57] Good morning, all.
[1:35:58] We have what appears to be
[1:35:59] a lengthy meeting today,
[1:36:03] so let's keep that in mind
[1:36:03] as we move the meeting
[1:36:03] forward.
[1:36:04] MADAME Attorney, in order
[1:36:05] for me to move into
[1:36:06] reasonable opportunity for
[1:36:07] the public to be heard at
[1:36:07] this time?
[1:36:08] >> good morning.
[1:36:08] Yes.
[1:36:09] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[1:36:09] all right.
[1:36:23] I'm gonna been it up for
[1:36:24] reasonable opportunity for
[1:36:25] the public to be heard.
[1:36:25] Id I do roll call
[1:36:25] already?
[1:36:26] I did not.
[1:36:26] I'm that fast.
[1:36:27] Let's do roll call.
[1:36:28] >> good morning to all.
[1:36:29] The clerk's office has
[1:36:29] been notified that
[1:36:30] commissioner hardemon
[1:36:31] will be absent from
[1:36:31] today's meeting.
[1:36:32] Commissioner bastien.
[1:36:33] >> Marleine Bastien:
[1:36:33] here.
[1:36:34] >> commissioner bermudez.
[1:36:34] >> here.
[1:36:39] >> senator garcia.
[1:36:40] Commissioner gilbert.
[1:36:41] >> Oliver Gilbert: here.
[1:36:42] >> commissioner gonzalez.
[1:36:43] >> Roberto Gonzalez:
[1:36:43] here.
[1:36:50] >> commissioner orbis.
[1:36:51] Commissioner steinberg.
[1:36:52] Vice-CHAIRMAN Mcghee.
[1:36:52] CHAIRMAN Rodriguez.
[1:37:06] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[1:37:07] I'm here.
[1:37:07] >> we have nine members
[1:37:08] present.
[1:37:08] We have a quorum.
[1:37:09] >> so now reasonable
[1:37:10] opportunity for the public
[1:37:10] to be heard is open.
[1:37:11] I will call your name.
[1:37:12] Please state the item you
[1:37:13] are speaking on and your
[1:37:13] name and address and we
[1:37:14] have a fairly long list of
[1:37:25] speakers.
[1:37:26] And we have -- all right.
[1:37:27] We are trying to get
[1:37:27] people.
[1:37:28] Some of us are trying to
[1:37:28] skip the line of
[1:37:29] reasonable opportunity, we
[1:37:30] are not going to do that
[1:37:30] right now.
[1:37:38] First up I have
[1:37:39] commissioner tran back
[1:37:39] here.
[1:37:40] Please line up on the side
[1:37:49] of the rows and approach
[1:37:49] of the well.
[1:37:50] I have sergeant kelly,
[1:37:51] miles davis, mary atkins
[1:37:52] durrant, peter marino,
[1:37:52] eleanor quigley?
[1:37:56] John elizabeth, laura
[1:38:01] reynolds, fernando --
[1:38:07] [Listing names]
[1:38:07] Commissioner.
[1:38:09] >> Public Speaker: good
[1:38:18] morning, commissioners and
[1:38:18] MADAME Mayor.
[1:38:19] I represent district 4 in
[1:38:20] the city of miami which
[1:38:21] includes close to 1 mile
[1:38:21] of lupton trail.
[1:38:22] I'm here today to thank
[1:38:23] commissioner orbis and
[1:38:25] mayor levine cava for
[1:38:26] sponsoring a selection for
[1:38:28] design firm to get --
[1:38:28] built.
[1:39:29] This project is something
[1:39:30] that's been a dream for
[1:39:31] many people for many
[1:39:31] years.
[1:39:32] I'm excited to see this
[1:39:32] moving forward at the
[1:39:32] city.
[1:39:33] We are doing our part.
[1:39:34] We are approving second
[1:39:35] reading, and item that
[1:39:35] incentivizes developers
[1:39:36] building within walking
[1:39:37] distance of the trail and
[1:39:38] other trails within the
[1:39:38] cities to contribute
[1:39:39] dollars for construction
[1:39:40] and maintenance.
[1:39:40] More importantly, today, I
[1:39:41] am personally committing
[1:39:42] on behalf of the city and
[1:39:43] development community
[1:39:44] within the trail corridor
[1:39:45] area that we will match
[1:39:46] your county, state, and
[1:39:46] federal dollars to the
[1:39:47] project with the city and
[1:39:48] private dollars so we can
[1:39:48] get it built.
[1:39:49] I urge you to vote on 14 a
[1:39:49] 3. Let's get it done.
[1:39:50] >> thank you,
[1:39:51] commissioner.
[1:39:51] And anyone that registered
[1:39:52] to speak but doesn't
[1:39:53] necessarily need to
[1:39:53] anymore, feel free to just
[1:39:54] wave in support or
[1:39:54] whatnot.
[1:39:54] Ir?
[1:39:55] >> Public Speaker: yes,
[1:39:56] sergeant kelly, west palm
[1:39:56] beach.
[1:39:57] I want to urge you guys to
[1:39:58] vote against the kelly
[1:39:59] tractor development in the
[1:39:59] everglades, historical
[1:40:00] everglades, function
[1:40:01] everglades something that
[1:40:01] protects thousands of
[1:40:02] acres of everglades,
[1:40:03] farmland.
[1:40:04] There's homestead miami,
[1:40:05] rural communities, crops,
[1:40:05] all this stuff would be
[1:40:06] threatened by allowing
[1:40:07] kelly tractor to be one of
[1:40:08] the initial ones to build
[1:40:08] in the everglades.
[1:40:09] It is a huge problem.
[1:40:09] We know you guys have
[1:40:10] gotten money for packs
[1:40:11] related to kelly tractor.
[1:40:11] We urge you to vote
[1:40:12] against it.
[1:40:13] There's plenty of land
[1:40:13] within the urban
[1:40:14] designation of miami and
[1:40:15] homestead in this whole
[1:40:15] area.
[1:40:16] The gators, herons,
[1:40:16] manatees, the wildlife of
[1:40:17] the everglades should not
[1:40:18] be impeded by another
[1:40:18] development that has
[1:40:19] further stressed the urban
[1:40:20] boundary, which is
[1:40:20] something that the voters
[1:40:21] passed, that the people
[1:40:21] support.
[1:40:31] Obviously wild
[1:40:31] florida supports it as
[1:40:32] well and it should not be
[1:40:33] impeded for the sake of
[1:40:34] one company to begin a
[1:40:34] tidal wave that will be
[1:40:35] followed by other
[1:40:36] companies either by direct
[1:40:36] lawsuit or your
[1:40:37] invitation.
[1:40:37] Once again, please vote
[1:40:38] against kelly tractor's
[1:40:39] everglades development.
[1:40:39] Thank you.
[1:40:40] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[1:40:40] thank you, sir.
[1:40:41] All right, john?
[1:40:46] >> good morning, CHAIRMAN,
[1:40:47] MADAME Meggers.
[1:40:48] My name is john allemande
[1:40:48] with jacobs.
[1:40:49] I'm here on 14 b 1. Jacobs
[1:40:51] of had the pleasure of
[1:40:51] serving -- we have served
[1:41:01] as your owners rep nd I'm
[1:41:02] here today with
[1:41:02] representatives of the
[1:41:03] broader engineering,
[1:41:04] construction, and small
[1:41:05] business community that
[1:41:46] helps deliver the critical
[1:41:47] instructional program, and
[1:41:48] I ask them to please
[1:41:48] stand.
[1:41:48] Thank you.
[1:41:49] We appreciate that rate
[1:41:50] decisions are difficult.
[1:41:50] Every year this board
[1:41:51] balances affordability
[1:41:52] with the responsibility to
[1:41:53] maintain critical systems
[1:41:53] that residents,
[1:41:54] businesses, senators, and
[1:41:55] future development all
[1:41:55] depend on.
[1:41:56] Reliable water and
[1:41:56] wastewater services you
[1:41:57] know is essential to
[1:41:58] protect public health,
[1:41:59] protect the bay, housing,
[1:41:59] growth, and the daily
[1:42:00] quality of life for every
[1:42:01] person in miami-dade
[1:42:01] county.
[1:42:02] Miami-dade is advancing
[1:42:03] one of the largest water
[1:42:03] and wastewater capital
[1:42:04] programs in florida.
[1:42:05] While that program does
[1:42:06] support engineering,
[1:42:07] construction, suppliers,
[1:42:08] small businesses, and a
[1:42:09] skilled workforce in
[1:42:09] florida, more importantly,
[1:42:10] it keeps projects --
[1:42:11] before they become
[1:42:11] emergencies.
[1:42:12] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[1:42:12] you're done.
[1:42:12] Sorry.
[1:42:12] Sir?
[1:42:13] >> good morning, my name
[1:42:14] is peter and I represent
[1:42:15] friends of loveland trail,
[1:42:16] a group advocating for
[1:42:16] linear park on the
[1:42:17] abandoned railway
[1:42:17] property.
[1:42:18] The property is 100 feet
[1:42:18] wide by 5.6 miles running
[1:42:19] from miami international
[1:42:19] airport.
[1:42:20] We have the opportunity to
[1:42:21] turn over 70 acres of the
[1:42:21] fenced off green space
[1:42:22] into an iconic linear
[1:42:23] greenway in the heart of
[1:42:23] miami.
[1:42:24] I ask that you pass the
[1:42:25] resolution approving the
[1:42:49] contract for professional
[1:42:49] services.
[1:42:50] At first, I thought the
[1:42:51] budget was very high for
[1:42:51] this project, but then I
[1:42:52] read the entire
[1:42:52] resolution.
[1:42:53] This five year
[1:42:54] professional services
[1:42:54] agreement covers design,
[1:42:55] permitting, bidding
[1:42:55] assistance, and
[1:42:56] construction oversight.
[1:42:57] This is a comprehensive
[1:42:57] design through
[1:42:58] construction
[1:42:59] administration, contract
[1:42:59] and substantial project
[1:43:00] management duties.
[1:43:01] Expectations are high and
[1:43:01] friends of loveland trail
[1:43:02] will keep the vendor
[1:43:02] accountable.
[1:43:04] This is a huge opportunity
[1:43:04] for miami to get this
[1:43:04] right.
[1:43:05] The trail will connect
[1:43:06] neighborhoods with five
[1:43:06] schools, three parks
[1:43:07] adjacent to the trail, and
[1:43:08] terminates in the south
[1:43:16] where it meets the north
[1:43:16] metrorail station.
[1:43:17] Once completed, the trail
[1:43:18] will connect more than
[1:43:18] 34,000 residents that live
[1:43:19] on or near the trail.
[1:43:20] it will be a world-class
[1:43:20] --
[1:43:21] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[1:43:21] thank you, sir.
[1:43:22] Thank you.
[1:43:22] Ma'am?
[1:43:23] >> laura reynolds, 6820
[1:43:26] sw. 64th court with the
[1:43:26] hold the line coalition
[1:43:27] and friends of biscay bay.
[1:43:33] A lot of items to talk
[1:43:34] about in just a minute,
[1:43:34] but we applaud the effort
[1:43:35] on 11 a 11.
[1:43:36] Commissioner regalado
[1:43:44] andnd anyone who has
[1:43:45] cosponsored that item.
[1:43:46] We have to close the text
[1:43:46] amendment loophole because
[1:43:47] we can't let developers
[1:43:48] write their own rules.
[1:43:54] Our cdm p is really
[1:43:55] important and the task
[1:43:56] force amendments that are
[1:43:57] coming from the task force
[1:43:57] will strengthen our cdmp.
[1:43:58] We are still opposed to
[1:44:26] the kelly tractorproject.
[1:44:27] We are talking about the
[1:44:27] largest proposed wetland
[1:44:28] destruction in 30 years.
[1:44:29] This can't be taken
[1:44:29] lightly and frankly that
[1:44:30] it's gotten this far is
[1:44:30] concerning.
[1:44:31] We should absolutely be
[1:44:32] passing rules to
[1:44:32] strengthen our wetlands,
[1:44:33] to study our wetlands just
[1:44:34] like we did for
[1:44:34] agriculture to see how
[1:44:35] many we need to perform
[1:44:36] those ecosystem services
[1:44:36] moving forward.
[1:44:37] Now the watershed board
[1:44:37] did look at this.
[1:44:38] I urge you today to not
[1:44:39] take this wetland
[1:44:39] destruction lightly.
[1:44:40] Vote no --
[1:44:40] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[1:44:41] thank you.
[1:44:53] Thank you..
[1:44:54] >> Public Speaker: a 6%
[1:44:55] increase.
[1:44:55] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[1:44:56] ma'am?
[1:44:56] >> Public Speaker: good
[1:44:57] morning.
[1:44:57] My name is mary aikins and
[1:44:58] I'm here behalf on quality
[1:44:59] florida in support of
[1:44:59] commissioner lopez motion
[1:45:00] 6b1 to sir clarification
[1:45:01] on florida's
[1:45:01] anti-diversity law.
[1:45:01] His
[1:45:02] law hasn't even taken
[1:45:03] effect yet, but it's
[1:45:03] already changing decisions
[1:45:04] in city hall's and county
[1:45:18] commissions across the
[1:45:19] state.
[1:45:19] Not because they've been
[1:45:20] told those things must
[1:45:20] end, but because they are
[1:45:21] unsure what the law
[1:45:22] actually requires.
[1:45:22] We've already seen
[1:45:23] proposed cuts affecting
[1:45:24] organizations serving
[1:45:25] black, hispanic, asian,
[1:45:26] and lgbtq floridians
[1:45:26] reversed after it became
[1:45:27] clear that those codes
[1:45:28] were not required by law.
[1:45:28] That's why getting answers
[1:45:29] now matters.
[1:45:30] No community should lose
[1:45:31] something valuable because
[1:45:32] the law was unclear.
[1:45:32] Miami-dade has the
[1:45:45] opportunity to law was
[1:45:45] unclear.
[1:45:46] Miami-dade has the
[1:45:46] opportunity to take a
[1:45:46] step.
[1:45:47] This will help local
[1:45:47] leaders know what is
[1:45:48] required, understand the
[1:45:49] authority they still have,
[1:45:50] and continue serving their
[1:45:51] residence effectively.
[1:45:52] Miami-dade has always been
[1:45:53] strengthened by the many
[1:45:54] communities that call this
[1:45:54] county home.
[1:45:55] Our cultural traditions,
[1:45:56] community partnerships,
[1:45:57] and local organizations
[1:45:57] help make this one of the
[1:45:58] most vibrant places in the
[1:45:58] community.
[1:45:59] Before partnerships and --
[1:46:19] are changed, residents
[1:46:20] deserve -- when the
[1:46:20] consequences are real and
[1:46:21] important legal questions
[1:46:22] remain unanswered, seeking
[1:46:23] clarity is responsible
[1:46:23] leadership.
[1:46:24] Miami-dade has the
[1:46:25] opportunity to lead by
[1:46:25] asking for that clarity
[1:46:25] now.
[1:46:26] We respectfully ask you to
[1:46:27] support commissioner
[1:46:27] lopez's motion.
[1:46:28] Thank you.
[1:46:29] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[1:46:29] thank you so much, sir?
[1:46:30] >> Public Speaker: good
[1:46:31] morning, chair and
[1:46:32] commissioners.
[1:46:32] I'm here to speak on item
[1:46:33] 6b 1. My name is miles
[1:46:33] davis.
[1:46:34] I serve in safe, south
[1:46:34] florida legal organization
[1:46:35] to projecting lgbtqia+
[1:46:35] people.
[1:46:36] I want to thank you for
[1:46:54] bringing this forward for
[1:46:54] discussion.
[1:46:55] The senate bill creates
[1:46:55] uncertainty about how
[1:46:56] miami-dade MAY continue
[1:46:57] operating partnerships,
[1:46:57] advisory boards, and
[1:46:58] public initiatives that
[1:46:59] serve residents across
[1:46:59] this county.
[1:47:00] He county
[1:47:00] should not rush to
[1:47:01] eliminate lawful work
[1:47:02] simply because the statute
[1:47:02] is broad or unclear.
[1:47:03] Doing so could disrupt
[1:47:04] services, waste taxpayer
[1:47:05] investments, and weakens
[1:47:05] long-standing
[1:47:06] partnerships.
[1:47:07] We urge the commission to
[1:47:07] instruct the attorney --
[1:47:08] identify what can legally
[1:47:09] be observed, and
[1:47:34] communicate clearly what
[1:47:35] affected organizations MAY
[1:47:36] experience before any
[1:47:37] changes are made.
[1:47:37] The county should also
[1:47:38] seek judicial
[1:47:39] clarification so decisions
[1:47:39] are based on the law's
[1:47:40] actual requirements and
[1:47:41] not fear or speculation.
[1:47:41] A careful transparent
[1:47:42] approach always protects
[1:47:43] taxpayers and strengthens
[1:47:44] local controls, and most
[1:47:44] portly, will allow
[1:47:45] miami-dade to continue
[1:47:46] serving all residents
[1:47:46] within the law.
[1:47:47] We thank commissioner
[1:47:48] lopez for bringing this
[1:47:48] forward and we thank you
[1:47:49] all for your service to
[1:47:49] the community.
[1:47:50] >> good morning.
[1:47:50] I'm here to support item
[1:47:51] 14 b 1. Holding rights
[1:47:52] black today MAY black
[1:47:53] today MAY appear to help
[1:47:53] residents, but the
[1:47:54] unintended consequence
[1:47:55] will be far higher cost
[1:47:55] later shutting down the
[1:47:56] projects is not free.
[1:47:57] Regulatory penalties,
[1:48:11] development moratoriums,
[1:48:12] and facility services that
[1:48:13] miami-dade family and
[1:48:14] businesses depend on every
[1:48:14] day.
[1:48:14] Canceling projects,
[1:48:15] claims, shutdown and
[1:48:16] commission costs, stranded
[1:48:17] assets and lost value from
[1:48:17] works, the county has
[1:48:18] already paid to advance.
[1:48:19] Projects and designs that
[1:48:19] are put on hold will cost
[1:48:20] more in the future, not
[1:48:21] just higher construction
[1:48:22] costs, but added design
[1:48:44] costs as verify or worse
[1:48:45] if contracts expire and
[1:48:46] new designers start from
[1:48:46] scratch.
[1:48:46] He real threat
[1:48:47] to long-term affordability
[1:48:48] is not this modest rate
[1:48:48] adjustment.
[1:48:49] It is a consequence of
[1:48:50] underfunding the system
[1:48:50] today.
[1:48:51] We respectfully urge the
[1:48:51] commission to approve the
[1:48:52] rate adjustment and keep
[1:48:53] this critical capital
[1:48:54] program moving forward.
[1:48:54] The investment today
[1:48:55] protects the affordability
[1:48:56] of water and sewer in the
[1:48:56] future.
[1:48:56] Thank you.
[1:48:57] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[1:48:57] thank you.
[1:48:57] Ma'am?
[1:48:58] >> good morning.
[1:48:59] Chair and commissioners.
[1:49:17] My name is allie quickly.
[1:49:18] To the commissioners today
[1:49:19] and those that preceded
[1:49:19] you, thank you to her
[1:49:20] vision and dedication you
[1:49:20] underlined making it a
[1:49:21] reality.
[1:49:21] You created a space that
[1:49:22] brings people together
[1:49:23] while creating a safe and
[1:49:24] healthy way for people to
[1:49:24] move through the city.
[1:49:25] I hope that the trail will
[1:49:26] receive the same attention
[1:49:26] for the visitors of
[1:49:27] miami-dade county.
[1:49:27] The trail will be an
[1:49:28] important transportation
[1:49:29] affordable corridor
[1:49:30] connecting people to best
[1:49:30] routes at sunset, miller,
[1:49:31] eighth street, flagler
[1:49:32] while providing access to
[1:49:35] the metrorail and the
[1:49:35] underlying.
[1:49:37] It will connect commuters,
[1:49:37] students, shoppers,
[1:49:38] workers, and visitors to
[1:49:39] more safer and convenient
[1:49:40] transportation options
[1:49:41] prefer the trail will also
[1:49:41] serve many important
[1:49:42] community destinations at
[1:49:44] every node including in
[1:49:44] dadeland -- south miami
[1:49:45] middle school magnet,
[1:49:47] senior hi, barnes park for
[1:49:54] the rescue park, robert
[1:49:55] king park, miami --
[1:49:55] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[1:49:56] thank you.
[1:49:58] >> merchandise park.
[1:49:59] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[1:50:00] thank you so much.
[1:50:00] Ppreciate it.
[1:50:02] Did eciate it.
[1:50:09] Did william.
[1:50:14] Fernando and then everyone
[1:50:24] else] Fernando and then
[1:50:25] everyone else that I'm
[1:50:26] going to call is here for
[1:50:27] the same item 14 b 1. It
[1:50:27] also has four in favor.
[1:50:28] If you want to waive, you
[1:50:28] are welcome to.
[1:50:36] I have.
[1:50:37] Name] Michael perez.
[1:50:37] Michael perez.
[1:50:38] is that you coming down,
[1:50:38] michael?
[1:50:39] All right.
[1:50:46] Sebastian alvarez.
[1:50:47] Sebastian alder is?
[1:50:47] All right, I got you
[1:50:48] waving.
[1:50:51] Joshua alvarez waiving.
[1:50:54] Julian becker?
[1:50:56] Julian?
[1:50:57] Julian.
[1:50:59] Valerie dennett?
[1:51:07] Valerie dennett?
[1:51:11] Aneto fernandez?
[1:51:14] Waiving. Damien jesus.
[1:51:18] Joseph roga.
[1:51:20] Joseph rocha.
[1:51:22] Cardinal alfonso?
[1:51:31] Cardinal difonzo?
[1:51:31] Juan romez?
[1:51:32] >> CHAIRMAN, a lot of
[1:51:33] people are stuck
[1:51:33] downstairs.
[1:51:35] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[1:51:36] thank you for that,
[1:51:36] though.
[1:51:37] Appreciate the public
[1:51:38] service announcement.
[1:51:43] Juan romez? Juan romez?
[1:51:47] Nicole lozano? Nicole
[1:51:55] lozano? Luis suarez?
[1:51:56] Evelyn rodriguez?
[1:51:57] Maria molina?
[1:52:06] Maria, thank you.
[1:52:07] Arcturo? Okay, and again,
[1:52:08] just to make sure all of
[1:52:08] you guys are waiting in
[1:52:14] support of the wasty
[1:52:15] report.
[1:52:15] Pedro?
[1:52:15] All right.
[1:52:17] Thank you.
[1:52:23] And rick?
[1:52:23] All right.
[1:52:24] Those are all the public
[1:52:32] speakers I have for
[1:52:33] reasonable opportunity
[1:52:34] registered.
[1:52:34] Is there anyone that just
[1:52:35] walked upstairs from
[1:52:36] downstairs that signed up
[1:52:36] to speak?
[1:52:37] See a couple
[1:52:37] of people walking in.
[1:52:38] Is anyone registered to
[1:52:38] speak in reasonable
[1:52:39] opportunity?
[1:52:40] I want to make sure I get
[1:52:41] to you before I close out.
[1:52:41] No?
[1:52:43] All right.
[1:52:45] There's a gentleman?
[1:52:47] You can come up.
[1:52:50] Come on up.
[1:52:55] >> through the chair?
[1:52:56] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[1:52:56] MADAME Mayor?
[1:52:57] >> Mayor Levine Cava:
[1:52:58] apparently COUNCILMAN
[1:52:59] Kevin burns is here that
[1:53:03] wassigned up to speak, so
[1:53:04] I just want to make sure
[1:53:05] you are aware he is here.
[1:53:06] > CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[1:53:06] but as he signed up to
[1:53:07] speak on public hearing or
[1:53:08] reasonable opportunity?
[1:53:09] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: >>
[1:53:10] Mayor Levine Cava:
[1:53:10] reasonable opportunity.
[1:53:11] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[1:53:12] okay, then you can
[1:53:14] approachh the podium as
[1:53:14] well.
[1:53:19] Approach the well.
[1:53:20] You both can -- there's
[1:53:20] two wells.
[1:53:21] I mean, don't all rush at
[1:53:23] the same time.
[1:53:23] Go ahead, you're up.
[1:53:27] >> Public Speaker: good
[1:53:28] morning, MADAME Mayor and
[1:53:28] commissioners.
[1:53:40] It's great to see a lot of
[1:53:41] you here today.
[1:53:42] I don't very often come
[1:53:42] down here.
[1:53:42] My name is kevin burns,
[1:53:43] COUNCILMAN With the city
[1:53:44] of miami, former mayor.
[1:53:45] i'm here today to support
[1:53:45] commissioner lopez's
[1:53:46] recommendation for a
[1:53:56] judicial review of the
[1:53:56] diversity bill, I'll just
[1:53:57] say that item.
[1:53:58] As somebody who spent four
[1:53:58] or five weeks in
[1:53:59] tallahassee going to the
[1:54:00] hearings both in the house
[1:54:03] and the senate and
[1:54:04] listening to the makers of
[1:54:05] this ordinance, this law
[1:54:06] not be able to answer
[1:54:06] questions of what it
[1:54:07] actually meant, they could
[1:54:21] not answer what they were
[1:54:22] trying to accomplish by
[1:54:23] this law and going from
[1:54:23] the senate and over to the
[1:54:24] house back and forth.
[1:54:25] And you know if a bill has
[1:54:25] 24 cutouts that it's not
[1:54:25] good.
[1:54:27] You all add amendments to
[1:54:28] some of your things, but
[1:54:29] you've never done 24
[1:54:30] amendments, so you know
[1:54:30] something is wrong.
[1:54:46] I've been in conference
[1:54:47] calls with city attorneys,
[1:54:48] county attorneys, all
[1:54:48] different organizations
[1:54:49] are going to be affected
[1:54:50] by this.
[1:54:50] Nobody can give a clear
[1:54:51] answer of what you can do
[1:54:52] and cannot do and I'll
[1:54:53] tell you right now I don't
[1:54:53] want to be a guinea pig as
[1:54:54] an elected official
[1:54:54] because I gave a
[1:55:21] particular group a
[1:55:21] proclamation supporting
[1:55:22] their heritage, so please
[1:55:23] support their item.
[1:55:23] Hank
[1:55:23] you.
[1:55:24] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[1:55:24] all right.
[1:55:25] i got MR. Ron Mcgill if
[1:55:25] he's -- ron Mcgill, you
[1:55:26] are on the list.
[1:55:26] Come on up, sir.
[1:55:27] I knew you were retiring.
[1:55:28] You see, it was a false
[1:55:28] alarm.
[1:55:28] All right, ma'am.
[1:55:29] >> Public Speaker: hello,
[1:55:30] my name is carol coombs.
[1:55:31] I'm a resident in miami
[1:55:31] beach.
[1:55:32] I also worked for miami
[1:55:32] beach pride as the
[1:55:33] director of grants, so I'm
[1:55:34] actually here today in
[1:55:35] support of commissioner
[1:55:35] vicki lopez.
[1:55:36] I fall under district 5
[1:55:42] and sb 3011 4 and I'm
[1:55:43] asking the commission to
[1:55:44] investigate a lot of do
[1:55:45] not know what's going on
[1:55:45] with this sb 11 34.
[1:55:45] Oes
[1:55:46] a proclamation count as
[1:55:47] promoting di?
[1:55:47] Does a rainbow flag going
[1:55:48] up count as promoting di
[1:55:53] or is that first
[1:55:53] amendment?
[1:55:54] I'm here today because
[1:55:54] miami pride stands to lose
[1:56:10] money and grant funding
[1:56:11] even though its impact is
[1:56:12] granting hundreds and
[1:56:13] hundreds of jobs for small
[1:56:13] businesses in miami beach.
[1:56:14] So my ask is please
[1:56:15] investigate, please
[1:56:15] support vicki lopez's
[1:56:16] district 5 recommendation.
[1:56:17] And I will tell you we are
[1:56:32] brave and resilient in the
[1:56:32] lgbtq community, the 19th
[1:56:33] addition of miami beach
[1:56:34] pride is going to happen.
[1:56:35] The family picnic is on
[1:56:35] saturday, APRIL 3, the
[1:56:36] pride weekend is APRIL 10
[1:56:36] and 11th.
[1:56:37] Lock your dates.
[1:56:37] I'll see you in the
[1:56:38] parade.
[1:56:38] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[1:56:39] thank you so much.
[1:56:39] MR. Mcgill.
[1:56:40] >> Public Speaker: good
[1:56:41] morning, MADAME Mayor.
[1:56:42] Thank you for the
[1:56:52] opportunity to be keer.
[1:56:53] For years I thought the
[1:56:53] flamingo wasn't a native
[1:56:54] bird.
[1:56:54] It wasn't until all the
[1:56:55] hard work done by
[1:56:55] conservationists that they
[1:56:56] said yes, it's a native
[1:56:56] bird.
[1:56:57] Isten, I know I
[1:56:57] got limited time, so
[1:56:58] here's the deal.
[1:56:58] He
[1:56:59] american film ego is more
[1:56:59] than just a beautiful
[1:57:00] bird.
[1:57:11] It's a symbol of
[1:57:12] resilience after
[1:57:12] persecution is a symbol of
[1:57:13] hope.
[1:57:14] After disappearance, it
[1:57:15] represents everything that
[1:57:15] florida is.
[1:57:16] It represents how nature
[1:57:17] can come back, can reclaim
[1:57:17] itself when given the
[1:57:18] opportunity.
[1:57:18] I can think of no other
[1:57:19] bird that better tells
[1:57:20] florida's story.
[1:57:20] If florida wants to
[1:57:21] celebrate its great
[1:57:22] natural heritage, I can
[1:57:42] think of no better
[1:57:42] ambassador than the
[1:57:43] greater flamingo.
[1:57:44] Okay, this bird is
[1:57:44] amazing.
[1:57:45] It's the only -- it's a
[1:57:45] species found only in
[1:57:46] florida as a native
[1:57:46] species, nowhere else in
[1:57:47] the country.
[1:57:48] Is a bird that represents
[1:57:48] the resilience of florida.
[1:57:49] It's everything that --
[1:57:50] it's just an amazing bird
[1:57:50] that's come back.
[1:57:51] The bottom line is this,
[1:57:52] folks.
[1:57:52] The flamingo has returned
[1:57:53] home.
[1:57:54] It's time for florida to
[1:57:54] celebrate and recognize it
[1:57:55] as one of its own.
[1:57:56] Thank you very much.
[1:57:56] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[1:57:57] thank you, rob.
[1:57:58] Appreciate the enthusiasm.
[1:57:59] [Applause] Mama?
[1:57:59] >> Public Speaker:
[1:58:00] probably not gonna be as
[1:58:00] enthusiastic, but
[1:58:01] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[1:58:01] we'll take it.
[1:58:02] >> Public Speaker: my
[1:58:23] address is -- and I'm
[1:58:23] speaking today on behalf
[1:58:24] of biscayne bay --
[1:58:25] >> MR. CHAIRMAN, point of
[1:58:25] order.
[1:58:26] If we can just have the
[1:58:26] chambers be quiet while
[1:58:27] she's speaking.
[1:58:28] I can barely hear her.
[1:58:29] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: go
[1:58:29] ahead, ma'am.
[1:58:30] >> Public Speaker: thank
[1:58:30] you.
[1:58:31] I'm here to represent
[1:58:31] biscayne bay.
[1:58:32] We recognize that an
[1:58:32] increase in utilities
[1:58:33] affect residents and
[1:58:34] affordability is an
[1:58:34] important consideration,
[1:58:35] but this item is
[1:58:36] ultimately about
[1:58:36] protecting clean water and
[1:58:52] public health in biscayne
[1:58:53] bay.
[1:58:53] The underinvestment in
[1:58:54] water and wastewater
[1:58:55] infrastructure contributed
[1:58:56] to overflows,
[1:58:57] environmental harm to
[1:58:57] biscayne bay, violations
[1:58:58] of the clean water act,
[1:58:59] and ultimately the federal
[1:58:59] consent agree.
[1:59:00] Today, that consent agree
[1:59:01] program is approximately
[1:59:01] 89% there.
[1:59:02] We are almost there.
[1:59:03] And it's really not the
[1:59:03] time to slow down.
[1:59:04] Delaying these investments
[1:59:05] does not eliminate costs,
[1:59:05] it increases the
[1:59:06] likelihood of
[1:59:06] infrastructure failures,
[1:59:07] sewage bills, and even
[1:59:08] larger costs in the
[1:59:08] future.
[1:59:08] For the average
[1:59:09] residential customer, the
[1:59:10] proposed adjustment is
[1:59:10] approximately $0.12 per
[1:59:13] day, which is a price to
[1:59:14] pay for clean water.
[1:59:15] It supports the completion
[1:59:16] of critical wastewater
[1:59:16] improvements.
[1:59:18] I respectfully urge you to
[1:59:19] support item 14 b 1.
[1:59:20] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[1:59:21] thank you so much.
[1:59:21] So we were able to get you
[1:59:27] guys up from downstairs.
[1:59:28] Know obviously
[1:59:28] encourage you guys to
[1:59:29] speak, but some of you
[1:59:37] guys did waive in
[1:59:37] support of an item.
[1:59:37] Ou
[1:59:38] have been bamboozled ling
[1:59:38] me here a bit.
[1:59:40] Go ahead, have at it.
[1:59:44] >>MR. CHAIRMAN, as people
[1:59:45] finished speaking, maybe
[1:59:46] it would be wise for them
[1:59:46] to leave --
[1:59:47] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[1:59:48] they are.
[1:59:48] They are going to be taken
[1:59:50] back downstairs after they
[1:59:51] speak, yes.
[1:59:51] Go ahead, sir.
[2:00:10] >> Public Speaker: hello.
[2:00:11] I live at 5256 nw. Third
[2:00:12] avenue.
[2:00:12] I came here to speak in
[2:00:13] favor of this item, this
[2:00:14] water bill 14 b. Studying
[2:00:14] these water topics are a
[2:00:15] correct and responsible
[2:00:16] use of our tax funds.
[2:00:17] I have seen improvements
[2:00:17] in my city using tax
[2:00:22] funds, so I have no doubt
[2:00:22] that we will be able to
[2:00:23] use these resources to
[2:00:24] improve our water quality,
[2:00:25] research them, make more
[2:00:25] responsible decisions.
[2:00:26] Water quality is paramount
[2:00:28] to our health and wellness
[2:00:29] current and future
[2:00:30] generations.
[2:00:30] It is a human right and
[2:00:31] something so important.
[2:00:39] No corporation or private
[2:00:39] interest can thrive
[2:00:40] without prioritizing the
[2:00:40] genuine needs of human
[2:00:41] rights, which is clean
[2:00:42] water which comes first.
[2:00:43] We all know that wetlands
[2:00:43] provide our freshest water
[2:00:44] source and natural
[2:00:44] filtration for our
[2:00:47] community and you as
[2:01:38] reppert adding the highest
[2:01:39] moral standards, making
[2:01:40] the correct decisions for
[2:01:40] our generations, so I hope
[2:01:41] we can make the best
[2:01:42] decision representing the
[2:01:42] people.
[2:01:43] So thank you.
[2:01:43] thank you so much.
[2:01:45] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:01:45] thank you, sir.
[2:01:46] >> Public Speaker: good
[2:01:46] morning.
[2:01:46] I live at 869 sw. 149th
[2:01:46] court.
[2:01:47] I'm here in support of 14
[2:01:48] b 1 because I believe
[2:01:49] studies into our water
[2:01:49] quality and filtration are
[2:01:50] a good use of taxpayer
[2:01:51] dollars.
[2:01:51] Water is something
[2:01:52] essential entirely to
[2:01:52] life.
[2:01:52] We should be doing
[2:01:53] everything we can to
[2:01:54] preserve and multiply,
[2:01:54] especially in our coming
[2:01:55] times of ai technology.
[2:01:56] Improving and improving on
[2:01:57] with so much more hunger
[2:01:57] for our clean drinking
[2:01:58] water, as times move on,
[2:01:59] we lose more and more of
[2:01:59] not only our drinking
[2:02:00] water, but also naturally
[2:02:01] occurring methods of
[2:02:02] filtration like our
[2:02:02] wetlands that act as a
[2:02:03] part of natural water
[2:02:04] management system they
[2:02:04] slow and stormed
[2:02:05] stormwater allowing to
[2:02:05] migrate with
[2:02:06] microorganisms before it
[2:02:07] moves through surrounding
[2:02:07] hydraulic systems like the
[2:02:08] biscayne aquifer also
[2:02:09] known as southwest florida
[2:02:10] primary source of drinking
[2:02:10] water.
[2:02:10] Protecting the natural
[2:02:11] ability of these lands to
[2:02:12] store filter and recharge
[2:02:13] water is especially
[2:02:13] important to water quality
[2:02:14] and quantity.
[2:02:15] I strongly encourage we
[2:02:28] move with 14 b 1.
[2:02:29] >> Public Speaker: good
[2:02:29] morning, commissioners.
[2:02:30] My name is joshua reyes.
[2:02:31] I live in burkle and I'd
[2:02:32] like to voice I'm in favor
[2:02:32] for motion 14 b 1. Stable
[2:02:33] access to clean water
[2:02:34] isn't a privilege, it's a
[2:02:35] natural human right.
[2:02:35] People come from all walks
[2:02:40] of life to have a chance
[2:02:41] to live here in our great
[2:02:41] city, so the least we can
[2:02:42] do is make sure our vital
[2:02:43] source for living is
[2:02:43] available to all, free
[2:02:44] from michael prout sticks
[2:02:45] and other pollutants.
[2:02:52] Research will help --
[2:02:53] prove that continued
[2:02:54] building past the urban
[2:02:55] development boundary would
[2:02:55] be hazardous for the
[2:02:56] growing future of miami.
[2:02:57] Thank you and happy parks
[2:02:57] and recreation month.
[2:02:58] > CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:02:58] thank you.
[2:02:59] Go ahead, sir.
[2:03:05] >> Public Speaker: good
[2:03:05] morning.
[2:03:06] Hello, commissioners.
[2:03:07] I'm here in support of
[2:03:07] item 14 b 1. I believe
[2:03:08] that studies on water
[2:03:12] quality are very important
[2:03:13] for the well-being of our
[2:03:14] community and surrounding
[2:03:14] wildlife.
[2:03:15] Structures are being built
[2:03:37] over acres of land
[2:03:38] occupied by precious
[2:03:38] wildlife and the
[2:03:39] structures create
[2:03:39] unnecessary pollutants
[2:03:40] that normally affect the
[2:03:40] wildlife, but our own
[2:03:41] health.
[2:03:42] That's why I'm here to ask
[2:03:42] you for your support on
[2:03:43] these issues that are
[2:03:44] incredibly important to me
[2:03:44] and my colleagues.
[2:03:45] Thank you very much for
[2:03:46] your time.
[2:03:46] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:03:47] thank you.
[2:03:47] Sir?
[2:03:48] >> Public Speaker: good
[2:03:49] morning, commissioners,
[2:03:49] and a special good morning
[2:03:51] to commissioner regalado.
[2:03:51] I'm here to speak on
[2:03:52] commissioner 14 b as well
[2:03:53] as my friends here to
[2:03:54] speak on water quality and
[2:03:54] the importance of it.
[2:03:55] And I'd also like to
[2:03:55] mention it is a tuesday.
[2:04:03] Sorry, not tuesday.
[2:04:04] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:04:04] name and address, please.
[2:04:05] >> Public Speaker: name
[2:04:06] is joseph welcome and I'm
[2:04:06] in west kendall.
[2:04:07] >> we need your actual
[2:04:07] address.
[2:04:09] >> Public Speaker: 1672
[2:04:24] sw.
[2:04:25] 51st street.
[2:04:25] The reason I bring up the
[2:04:26] day of the week is it is
[2:04:27] 9:00 A.M. In the morning
[2:04:27] and unlike many of the
[2:04:28] people here I have a job
[2:04:29] to attend to and have to
[2:04:29] for the sake of my family
[2:04:30] and everybody else here.
[2:04:31] I say that because not
[2:04:32] everybody who I know who
[2:04:32] wanted to be here is here,
[2:04:33] so know that we represent
[2:04:35] a lot more people than
[2:04:36] just the 15 brave souls or
[2:04:37] so that you see here.
[2:04:37] Again, I'm here to speak
[2:04:38] on the fact that the water
[2:04:46] quality as well as our
[2:04:47] wetlands are incredibly
[2:04:47] important to the
[2:04:48] everglades and incredibly
[2:04:49] important to the people of
[2:04:50] miami and the young people
[2:04:51] in miami who are a growing
[2:04:51] population, a working
[2:04:53] population, and smart
[2:04:54] population that votes and
[2:04:54] stays active in their
[2:04:55] community, so please keep
[2:04:55] that in mind.
[2:04:56] Thank you.
[2:04:56] > CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:05:09] thank you, sir.
[2:05:10] >> Public Speaker: hello,
[2:05:10] commissioners.
[2:05:11] My name is damien.
[2:05:12] I hope you are all well.
[2:05:13] Me and my friends are here
[2:05:13] today in support of this
[2:05:14] item 14 b 1. Water is
[2:05:47] life, therefore we must
[2:05:47] preserve it.
[2:05:48] Many ai data centers are
[2:05:49] an attack on our resources
[2:05:49] and many water needed to
[2:05:50] run these centers is
[2:05:51] harmful.
[2:05:51] Developing on these lands
[2:05:52] will also affect the water
[2:05:52] quality.
[2:05:53] So please vote yes on this
[2:05:54] item and have the same
[2:05:54] energy for the upcoming
[2:05:55] ones to help preserve our
[2:05:56] lands, animals, and more
[2:05:56] importantly, our water and
[2:05:57] our health for floridians.
[2:05:58] Thank you for your time.
[2:05:59] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:05:59] thank you, sir.
[2:06:00] >> good morning,
[2:06:01] commissioners and people
[2:06:02] who represent today.
[2:06:02] My name is.
[2:06:03] [Name].
[2:06:03] I live at 1150 sw. 14th
[2:06:04] street.
[2:06:04] I came here to comment in
[2:06:05] favor of 14 b 1. I believe
[2:06:06] this is a great use of
[2:06:06] taxpayer money.
[2:06:07] These studies -- just for
[2:06:09] the sake of some money.
[2:06:10] And going over important
[2:06:10] laws that were placed
[2:06:11] there for a reason such as
[2:06:24] the clean water act and
[2:06:25] they put in danger the
[2:06:26] people by leaving the
[2:06:27] company is the biscayne
[2:06:27] aquifer, which is a
[2:06:28] primary source of drinking
[2:06:28] water to 5 million
[2:06:28] floridians.
[2:06:29] This doesn't only hurt the
[2:07:13] people, but also cost
[2:07:14] money to the state because
[2:07:15] they have to replace the
[2:07:15] water that are lost.
[2:07:16] Thank you very much.
[2:07:17] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:07:17] thank you, sir.
[2:07:18] >> Public Speaker: hello,
[2:07:19] commissioners.
[2:07:19] My name is michael perez.
[2:07:20] I live at 15330 sw. 155
[2:07:20] court west kendall.
[2:07:21] I'm here in support of 11
[2:07:22] a 1 because water is
[2:07:23] extremely important.
[2:07:23] To all of us young people
[2:07:24] who should appear today,
[2:07:25] it's a key part of our
[2:07:26] politics in florida.
[2:07:26] This study is rather
[2:07:27] important.
[2:07:27] I think it's important
[2:07:28] that our wastewater gets
[2:07:29] studied, water quality
[2:07:30] gets studied because it's
[2:07:31] getting attacked from so
[2:07:31] many sides across the
[2:07:31] county.
[2:07:32] There's so many data
[2:07:33] centers that have been
[2:07:34] approved in miami-dade
[2:07:34] county which are not only
[2:07:35] increasing electric costs,
[2:07:36] but also using water
[2:07:36] resources.
[2:07:37] What happened to
[2:07:37] protecting biscayne bay?
[2:07:38] Halting saltwater
[2:07:38] intrusion.
[2:07:39] We have so much more to
[2:07:40] say and many other items I
[2:07:40] want to speak on today,
[2:07:41] but this is where we are
[2:07:42] putting our energy today.
[2:07:43] Just think for future
[2:07:43] generations, whenever land
[2:07:44] gets paved, lands flood.
[2:07:45] Mpervious surfaces
[2:07:46] affect all of us,
[2:07:46] especially those proximal
[2:07:46] to krome avenue.
[2:07:48] And as seas rise,
[2:07:49] limestone will fill with
[2:07:50] water, so every time we
[2:07:50] have an impervious
[2:07:51] surface, it's going to
[2:07:52] flood a whole lot easier.
[2:07:52] Thank you and have a
[2:07:53] wonderful day.
[2:07:54] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:07:54] thank you.
[2:07:54] Ma'am?
[2:07:55] >> Public Speaker: hello
[2:07:56] and good morning.
[2:08:06] My name is nicole speaking
[2:08:07] on behalf of 14 b 1. I'm a
[2:08:08] 20-year-old student
[2:08:08] majoring in sustainability
[2:08:09] which is the primary goal
[2:08:10] of sustaining the earth
[2:08:11] for future generations
[2:08:23] which this water study
[2:08:24] greatly contributes
[2:08:24] exactly to that.
[2:08:25] Our wetlands in the
[2:08:26] maintenance/tracking of
[2:08:27] the water quality is
[2:08:27] crucial to our lives.
[2:08:28] The wetlands are a main
[2:08:28] source of drinking water
[2:08:29] and without studies such
[2:08:30] as these we wouldn't be
[2:08:31] able to keep up with our
[2:08:43] livelihoods regarding
[2:08:43] freshwater.
[2:08:44] I and many others are in
[2:08:44] favor of taxpayer money
[2:08:45] going towards these water
[2:08:46] studies for the overall
[2:08:47] betterment of our beloved
[2:08:47] everglades.
[2:08:47] Hank you
[2:08:48] very much.
[2:08:48] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:08:49] thank you.
[2:08:50] >> Public Speaker: hello,
[2:08:50] commissioners and
[2:08:51] CHAIRMAN.
[2:08:51] My name is sophia myers
[2:08:52] address -- today I wanted
[2:08:59] to speak on item 5t on the
[2:09:00] importance of affordable
[2:09:00] housing.
[2:09:00] Abitat for
[2:09:01] miami is an organization
[2:09:02] that helps the community
[2:09:02] build affordable housing.
[2:09:03] Big issue in miami is
[2:09:04] how unaffordable
[2:09:05] everything is, especially
[2:09:05] housing.
[2:09:05] Decent
[2:09:42] one-bedroom apartment --
[2:09:43] including increasing rents
[2:09:44] after lease agreements.
[2:09:45] Many residents face daily
[2:09:46] struggles of skyrocketing
[2:09:47] housing prices that our
[2:09:47] salaries cannot afford.
[2:09:48] There needs to be more
[2:09:49] affordable options
[2:09:50] available for family and
[2:09:50] residents.
[2:09:51] Miami should move towards
[2:09:51] affordability in all
[2:09:52] aspects of life, walk
[2:09:53] ability, accessible
[2:09:53] communities, quality of
[2:09:54] life for our environment.
[2:09:55] Samplings provide
[2:09:55] freshwater, flood
[2:09:56] protection, biodiversity,
[2:09:57] and balance for all of us.
[2:09:58] Developments for housing
[2:09:58] such as kelly track that
[2:09:59] deserved for the rights to
[2:10:00] exist but not at the
[2:10:00] expense and destruction of
[2:10:01] wildlife and vital
[2:10:01] habitat.
[2:10:02] We need our environment
[2:10:03] just as much as we need
[2:10:03] affordable housing and
[2:10:04] quality of life for all
[2:10:04] residents.
[2:10:05] This is not meant to be
[2:10:06] slandered toward anyone
[2:10:06] present today, but instead
[2:10:07] accountability for
[2:10:07] responsibility --
[2:10:08] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:10:09] thank you so much, ma'am.
[2:10:09] Hank you.
[2:10:10] >> Public Speaker: hello,
[2:10:11] my name is cardinal
[2:10:11] alfonso.
[2:10:12] I live at 14229 sw.
[2:10:12] 7th
[2:10:12] terrace.
[2:10:34] I'm here because I was
[2:10:35] originally going to talk
[2:10:35] about the kelly tractor,
[2:10:36] but as expected, public
[2:10:37] comment is closed.
[2:10:37] I'm still here because I
[2:10:38] care about our waters.
[2:10:39] All of us speaking here, I
[2:10:40] would like to mention that
[2:10:40] we are not here to waste
[2:10:41] your time.
[2:10:41] We take time out of our
[2:10:42] day to be here to tell you
[2:10:43] how we all feel because we
[2:10:43] truly care about this.
[2:10:44] I believe funding this
[2:10:45] study is a great use of
[2:10:45] our taxpayer money instead
[2:10:46] of building more ai data
[2:10:47] centers, which takes our
[2:10:48] water and damages our
[2:10:48] ecosystems.
[2:10:59] We should be using our
[2:10:59] taxpayer money for
[2:11:00] something that is
[2:11:00] beneficial to all of us
[2:11:01] and our nature.
[2:11:02] As you all know, our water
[2:11:02] quality is extremely
[2:11:03] important not only for us
[2:11:04] but our future
[2:11:04] generations.
[2:11:05] Funding the study of water
[2:11:06] quality will ensure our
[2:11:06] water is free of micro
[2:11:07] plastics and other
[2:11:07] pollutants that are
[2:11:08] harmful to us all.
[2:11:08] This is extremely
[2:11:09] important and we urge you
[2:11:10] to support the funding of
[2:11:10] our water studies.
[2:11:11] Thank you.
[2:11:11] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:11:12] thank you.
[2:11:12] Sir?
[2:11:26] >> Public Speaker: oh,
[2:11:27] it's my turn?
[2:11:27] Good morning, my name is
[2:11:28] jules.
[2:11:28] I live in 13 506 ne. 24th
[2:11:29] place.
[2:11:29] I'm a north miami
[2:11:30] resident.
[2:11:30] Before anything, I want to
[2:11:31] extend my thanks for all
[2:11:32] of you guys for showing up
[2:11:32] today.
[2:11:33] We have a pretty good
[2:11:33] turnout, as I see.
[2:11:34] Yes, I want to speak about
[2:11:45] the water quality
[2:11:45] situation.
[2:11:46] As a miami local, I've
[2:11:47] seen firsthand how
[2:11:48] important it is to protect
[2:11:48] our environment.
[2:11:49] With rising sea levels and
[2:11:49] temperatures globally, I
[2:11:50] think this is a very
[2:11:51] important way of
[2:11:51] contributing to our
[2:11:52] environment as well as
[2:11:53] using our resources
[2:11:53] correctly.
[2:11:54] i think just it's really
[2:12:13] important that we take a
[2:12:13] moment to think about how
[2:12:14] this will affect our
[2:12:15] future and how our city's
[2:12:15] landscape will look 10,
[2:12:16] 20, 30 years from now.
[2:12:17] So many young people care
[2:12:18] so much about this because
[2:12:19] it will land on us
[2:12:19] effectively.
[2:12:20] So yeah, I do hope you
[2:12:20] take everything that
[2:12:21] everyone said with --
[2:12:22] sorry, ran out of time.
[2:12:22] Okay.
[2:12:22] Hank you.
[2:12:23] I appreciate it.
[2:12:24] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:12:24] all right.
[2:12:25] We are now officially
[2:12:28] closed with a reasonable
[2:12:28] opportunity.
[2:12:29] And amount of attorney,
[2:12:32] should we set the agenda
[2:12:32] at this time?
[2:12:38] >> yes, MR. Chair.
[2:12:38] I have a number of
[2:12:38] changes.
[2:12:39] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: I
[2:12:40] imagine so.
[2:12:40] Let's do it.
[2:12:44] >> 2b5, add this item to
[2:12:46] the pole list.
[2:12:53] 2b6, commissioner aneto
[2:12:54] -- regalado adds this
[2:12:55] item to the pole list.
[2:12:57] Commissioner lopez and
[2:12:58] commissioner cohen
[2:12:58] higgins, add this item to
[2:13:01] the pole list.
[2:13:10] 2b10, commissioner
[2:13:11] regalado pulls the item.
[2:13:12] To be 12, 3b2 and 3b5,
[2:13:15] commissioner lopez adds
[2:13:15] these three items to the
[2:13:19] pool st.
[2:13:20] MR. Chair, I do have some
[2:13:28] request to furcate first
[2:13:29] reading items, so I'll run
[2:13:30] through them now and tell
[2:13:30] you again when we're
[2:13:31] there.
[2:13:34] 4b, senator garcia,
[2:13:35] 14a1, five, six, seven
[2:13:41] commissioner regalado. I
[2:13:42] requested bifurcate public
[2:13:43] hearing items 5a,
[2:13:48] commissioner bastien,
[2:13:49] 5f, 5g, 5h commissioner
[2:13:50] regalado, five ella
[2:13:53] commissioner bermudez --
[2:14:05] senator garcia cia and 5u,
[2:14:05] senator garcia.
[2:14:06] I also have requested
[2:14:07] bifurcate second reading.
[2:14:08] 7b is commissioner lopez
[2:14:09] and 7d and 7e commissioner
[2:14:19] regalado.
[2:14:20] 8f1 senator garcia adds
[2:14:21] this item to the pool
[2:14:21] list.
[2:14:22] 8f 2, commissioner
[2:14:22] bermudez adding this item
[2:14:23] to the pool list.
[2:14:33] Eight g5, commissioner
[2:14:33] orbis adds this item to
[2:14:34] the pool list.
[2:14:34] 810 one, CHAIRMAN
[2:14:35] Rodriguez adds this item
[2:14:35] to the pool list.
[2:14:37] MR. CHAIRMAN, item 8k2,
[2:14:49] the this item will be red.
[2:14:50] 8k 4 and item 8 and seven
[2:14:51] commissioner gilbert adds
[2:14:52] these items to the pool
[2:15:01] list.
[2:15:02] Senator garcia adds this
[2:15:03] item to the pool list.
[2:15:03] Items 802, 803, and 804
[2:15:04] are being ulled by
[2:15:07] commissioner bermudez.
[2:15:11] Nine a 5 also being pulled
[2:15:12] by commissioner bermudez.
[2:15:22] MR. Chair, items 1oa1 and
[2:15:23] go she no longer wishes to
[2:15:24] deferred these two items.
[2:15:29] That's items 10a1 and
[2:15:30] 10a2. With the setting of
[2:15:30] these agenda items, these
[2:15:34] will be approved.
[2:15:35] 11a1, commissioner lopez
[2:15:36] adds this item to the pool
[2:15:39] list.
[2:15:40] 11a13 and its
[2:15:45] supplements, commissioners
[2:15:45] are adding this item to
[2:15:46] the pool list.
[2:15:50] And that was 11a13 and
[2:15:51] its supplements and its
[2:15:57] senators garcia, lopez, --
[2:15:58] 11 a capital 14,
[2:16:03] commissioner steinberg
[2:16:04] regalado pull this item.
[2:16:05] 11 a 16, commissioner
[2:16:07] steinberg and commissioner
[2:16:16] higgins are pulling this
[2:16:17] em.
[2:16:17] 11a20, these are being
[2:16:25] pulled.
[2:16:26] 11a24, commissioner
[2:16:27] regalado is pulling this
[2:16:27] item.
[2:16:33] 11a25, CHAIRMAN Rodriguez
[2:16:34] adds this item to the pool
[2:16:34] list.
[2:16:34] 14a2 and 14a3,
[2:16:39] commissioner regalado are
[2:16:39] pulling these items.
[2:16:40] 14a4, commissioner cohen
[2:16:45] higgins. 14a1 -- I'm
[2:16:46] sorry, commissioner
[2:16:51] regalado is pulling 14a1
[2:16:51] as well.
[2:16:52] 14b5, CHAIRMAN Rodriguez
[2:17:04] and -- pulling this item
[2:17:05] and 15 b 1 CHAIRMAN
[2:17:06] Rodriguez and senator
[2:17:06] garcia are pulling these
[2:17:07] items.
[2:17:07] I have additional request
[2:17:08] for cosponsorship.
[2:17:26] Item 7e, commissioner --
[2:17:27] with the additions and
[2:17:34] cribner rors in the items
[2:17:34] I just mentioned.
[2:17:35] The commission will
[2:17:35] approve all these items by
[2:17:38] single boats except items
[2:17:42] 2b1, item 2b2,
[2:17:43] ordinances for first
[2:17:44] reading public hearings
[2:17:50] items 6a1 discussion
[2:17:51] regarding the status of
[2:17:52] the county electric fleet,
[2:17:53] item 61 discussion item
[2:17:58] regarding sb 1134 official
[2:17:59] actions of local
[2:17:59] governments, di ordinances
[2:18:05] set for second reading.
[2:18:12] Items which are your
[2:18:13] commercial commercial
[2:18:14] service lists are not on
[2:18:15] your pool list and have to
[2:18:15] be voted on separately and
[2:18:17] the following items.
[2:18:34] 2b5, 2b6 -- 8f1, 8f2,
[2:18:44] 8n7, 802, 803, 804, 9a5,
[2:18:49] 11a14, 11a26, 11a20,
[2:18:50] 14a1, that's a first
[2:18:54] reading item.
[2:19:01] 14a2, 14a5 and 14a8,
[2:19:02] those items are first
[2:19:07] readings.
[2:19:08] 14b1, motion to set the
[2:19:12] agenda items.
[2:19:19] >> vice-CHAIRMAN?
[2:19:20] >> Vice CHAIRMAN McGhee:
[2:19:21] thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN.
[2:19:22] Can you please add to that
[2:19:26] list 11a15 b
[2:19:26] mike I'll
[2:19:27] be pulling those.
[2:19:28] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:19:30] any additional pull items?
[2:19:30] I'll entertain a motion to
[2:19:32] set the da.
[2:19:33] >> can you please repeat
[2:19:35] those?
[2:19:35] >> Vice CHAIRMAN McGhee:
[2:19:38] I got a point of -- I
[2:19:42] know, but it's kind of
[2:19:42] loud.
[2:19:43] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:19:44] I'm very uncomfortable in
[2:19:53] ways, go ahead, vice
[2:19:53] chair.
[2:19:54] >> Vice CHAIRMAN McGhee:
[2:19:55] MADAME Attorney, the items
[2:19:56] I referred to were 11a15,
[2:19:57] 8p9, and 14b1. Those
[2:20:00] are the items I'll be
[2:20:00] pulling.
[2:20:12] >> the point of
[2:20:13] discomfort.
[2:20:13] I refuse to believe that
[2:20:14] we pull this entire
[2:20:14] agenda.
[2:20:15] >> this is JULY.
[2:20:16] This is the JULY meeting.
[2:20:20] >> I refuse to believe
[2:20:20] there are that many
[2:20:21] controversial things on
[2:20:21] the agenda.
[2:20:22] >> we're politicians.
[2:20:23] That's what it is.
[2:20:24] >> we have nothing else to
[2:20:24] do.
[2:20:28] >> you all packed a lunch.
[2:20:28] >> and we got a meeting
[2:20:30] tonight.
[2:20:33] >> MR. Chair?
[2:20:33] I want to add to
[2:20:48] commissioner gilbert's
[2:20:49] 8p8. I want to pool 8p8.
[2:20:49] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:20:50] 8p8.
[2:20:50] With that, I'll entertain
[2:20:51] a motion to set the agenda
[2:21:01] and all itss pulled items.
[2:21:01] All in favor signify by
[2:21:02] saying aye.
[2:21:03] Everything that jerry
[2:21:03] mentioned happens with the
[2:21:04] sitting of the agenda.
[2:21:05] Can we quiet down in the
[2:21:05] back, please?
[2:21:08] Before I get into first
[2:21:08] readings, I'm going to
[2:21:09] recognize the mayor for
[2:21:10] two appointments.
[2:21:11] We'll start with 2b1,
[2:21:13] which is the mayoral
[2:21:15] appointment to the
[2:21:20] director of the cport
[2:21:20] department.
[2:21:21] We have jonathan daniels
[2:21:21] serving as the new
[2:21:22] executive director --
[2:21:26] well, he was serving as
[2:21:26] the director of M.P.A.
[2:21:27] And the port of baltimore
[2:21:37] and the 11th busiest
[2:21:38] tonnage port in the united
[2:21:38] states.
[2:21:39] And I know that he's here
[2:21:39] this morning.
[2:21:44] Welcome and with his wife,
[2:21:44] adrian.
[2:21:45] So thank you for being
[2:21:45] here, adrian and MR.
[2:21:46] Daniels.
[2:21:46] All right, MADAME Mayor,
[2:21:47] do you want to do a brief
[2:21:48] introduction of our
[2:21:50] newport director?
[2:21:51] >> Mayor Levine Cava:
[2:22:14] yes, I do, but thank you
[2:22:15] for leading it off.
[2:22:15] That was wonderful.
[2:22:16] We are very pleased that
[2:22:17] we found MR. Daniels,
[2:22:17] jonathan daniels.
[2:22:18] Please if you would
[2:22:19] approach the well here to
[2:22:19] be our next director and
[2:22:20] ceo of the port miami.
[2:22:20] We all know that port
[2:22:21] miami is one of the most
[2:22:22] important economic
[2:22:22] engines.
[2:22:23] It supports jobs across
[2:22:23] florida, $61 billion in
[2:22:24] economic impact and so
[2:22:25] strong leadership is
[2:22:25] essential to its continued
[2:22:26] success.
[2:22:26] He brings more than three
[2:22:27] decades of experience
[2:22:28] leading some of the
[2:22:37] nation's most significant
[2:22:37] seaports.
[2:22:38] He manages complex
[2:22:38] logistics operations.
[2:22:39] He's overseen
[2:22:40] multibillion-dollar
[2:22:40] capital investments.
[2:22:41] He's built a reputation
[2:22:42] and delivers results, and
[2:22:43] by the way, he comes from
[2:22:43] a longshoremen family,
[2:23:01] father and grandfather.
[2:23:02] Before that, he led right
[2:23:03] here port everglades and
[2:23:16] he advanced -- as port
[2:23:17] miami continues to grow
[2:23:18] and invest in critical
[2:23:18] infrastructure,
[2:23:19] strengthens its position
[2:23:20] as the cruise capital of
[2:23:21] the world and the cargo
[2:23:27] gateway of the americas,
[2:23:27] jonathan has the
[2:23:28] experience, vision, and
[2:23:29] city leadership to build
[2:23:30] on that momentum.
[2:23:30] We are really delighted
[2:23:31] that he's chosen to be
[2:23:31] with us.
[2:23:32] Thank you and welcome to
[2:23:43] jonathan.
[2:23:43] [Applause]
[2:23:44] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:23:44] anyone that takes this job
[2:23:45] deserves a round of
[2:23:45] applause.
[2:23:46] And he brought his wife
[2:23:46] with him.
[2:23:47] That's like a double
[2:23:47] whammy.
[2:23:49] Go ahead, you got the
[2:23:50] floor.
[2:23:54] >> I am humbled and
[2:23:54] honored to be standing
[2:24:05] before you this morning.
[2:24:06] When we talk about the
[2:24:07] cargo gateway to the
[2:24:07] americas, when we talk
[2:24:14] about the cruise capital
[2:24:15] of the world, they are
[2:24:15] promises that we as a
[2:24:16] port, as port miami, make
[2:24:16] to the stakeholders.
[2:24:22] Who are utilizing our
[2:24:22] facilities and utilizing
[2:24:23] port miami as their
[2:24:23] gateway.
[2:24:24] That 8.5 million passenger
[2:24:25] moves that we engaged in
[2:24:28] just last year is a solid
[2:24:34] number, but we have put
[2:24:35] ourselves in a position
[2:24:36] where we stepped back a
[2:24:36] little bit.
[2:24:37] There is another port to
[2:24:49] the north of us that shall
[2:24:49] remain nameless right now
[2:24:50] that has taken over that
[2:24:50] position.
[2:24:51] I am absolutely
[2:24:52] enthusiastic about where
[2:24:52] we stand right now with
[2:24:53] the incredible staff that
[2:24:53] we have.
[2:25:04] I had the opportunity to
[2:25:05] meet with the directors
[2:25:05] yesterday.
[2:25:06] One of the reasons why
[2:25:06] this position was so
[2:25:07] appealing because I've had
[2:25:08] the opportunity to work
[2:25:08] with many of them in the
[2:25:09] past.
[2:25:09] And the view and the
[2:25:10] vision that they have to
[2:25:11] be able to continue to
[2:25:11] move the port forward
[2:25:20] whether it's cruise or
[2:25:20] cargo.
[2:25:21] I sat down with them
[2:25:21] yesterday for about an
[2:25:22] hour, hour and 1/2.
[2:25:22] After that meeting, all I
[2:25:26] wanted to do was sit back
[2:25:27] in the office and get to
[2:25:27] work.
[2:25:28] This is a team that is
[2:25:34] prepared to move forward.
[2:25:35] Yes, we have challenges in
[2:25:35] front of us.
[2:25:36] A report in america, every
[2:25:36] port in the world has
[2:25:37] challenges.
[2:25:37] As the mayor had
[2:25:38] mentioned, I have had the
[2:25:38] opportunity to work
[2:26:01] through challenges whether
[2:26:01] it's rebuilding after
[2:26:02] hurricane katrina, whether
[2:26:03] it's taking on the third
[2:26:04] largest cruise during the
[2:26:04] pandemic or six months
[2:26:05] after my arrival in
[2:26:06] baltimore and getting the
[2:26:07] call at the 1:30 in the
[2:26:07] morning that the francis
[2:26:08] key scott fridge has gone
[2:26:09] into the river.
[2:26:09] Are all of those issues
[2:26:10] unexpected, all of those
[2:26:11] issues allow us the
[2:26:11] opportunity to be
[2:26:12] creative, to utilize the
[2:26:13] team approach, to utilize
[2:26:14] a creative approach and
[2:26:14] ultimately come out the
[2:26:14] other side.
[2:26:15] We have set records after
[2:26:16] each of those instances
[2:26:32] and that is the passion
[2:26:33] and drive I want to bring
[2:26:33] to this team.
[2:26:33] Gain, I've
[2:26:34] had the opportunity to
[2:26:35] work with many of them,
[2:26:35] work with many of them in
[2:26:36] leadership, and to stand
[2:26:37] before you now in
[2:26:37] consideration of my
[2:26:38] appointment, again, I am
[2:26:39] honored and humbled to be
[2:26:40] part of the miami-dade
[2:26:40] family.
[2:26:40] As many people have
[2:26:41] pointed out to me, but
[2:26:42] more importantly, to the
[2:26:43] professional and team that
[2:26:47] is at port miami that
[2:26:48] leads with professionalism
[2:26:49] and integrity like no
[2:26:50] other port I've had the
[2:26:50] opportunity to work with
[2:26:50] and work for.
[2:26:51] I've had the opportunity
[2:26:53] to speak to a few of you
[2:26:54] on this commission thus
[2:26:55] far, but I would be happy
[2:26:56] to answer any questions
[2:26:58] you MAY have in
[2:26:59] consideration of the
[2:26:59] appointment.
[2:27:00] >> and just through the
[2:27:06] clipr to clarify, his
[2:27:06] official first day was
[2:27:07] AUGUST 10, so we wanted to
[2:27:08] have an opportunity for
[2:27:12] him to come here and meet.
[2:27:18] >> thank you, MR. Chair
[2:27:19] and thank you, MADAME
[2:27:19] Mayor.
[2:27:20] Welcome and
[2:27:20] congratulations on the
[2:27:21] appointment.
[2:27:26] I just wanted to say a few
[2:27:27] words of your role and the
[2:27:28] size of it and magnitude
[2:27:29] over the work you are not
[2:27:29] going to do here for us in
[2:27:30] the community not only
[2:27:31] focusing on passenger
[2:27:31] volume and those numbers,
[2:27:38] but with a particular
[2:27:39] emphasis on the amazing
[2:27:39] community you are now a
[2:27:40] key member of and the over
[2:27:41] 300,000 jobs that rely on
[2:27:42] port miami every day to
[2:27:46] feed their families.
[2:27:47] I know you are equipped
[2:27:47] and experienced.
[2:27:48] We also look forward to
[2:27:51] working with you and I
[2:27:52] would be remiss if I
[2:27:53] didn't say very
[2:27:54] passionately that you have
[2:27:59] very big shoes to fill.
[2:28:00] Our former director was an
[2:28:01] extraordinary member of
[2:28:01] our team.
[2:28:05] E MISS Her and
[2:28:06] wish her well, but just
[2:28:06] wanted to share welcoming
[2:28:12] remarks, but also remarks
[2:28:12] saying that the job is
[2:28:12] huge.
[2:28:13] We know you're going to do
[2:28:14] a wonderful job.
[2:28:23] Miami-dade is such a
[2:28:24] unique and extraordinary
[2:28:24] community.
[2:28:25] we look forward to your
[2:28:25] leadership here.
[2:28:26] Once again,
[2:28:26] congratulations and
[2:28:26] welcome.
[2:28:27] Thank you, MR. Chair.
[2:28:28] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:28:29] congratulations, MADAME
[2:28:29] Mayor.
[2:28:32] Congratulations and we
[2:28:32] hold you to the fire.
[2:28:33] >> absolutely.
[2:28:34] Look forward to it.
[2:28:40] >> commissioner, future
[2:28:40] director.
[2:28:41] Hold on.
[2:28:41] Don't go so far.
[2:28:49] We've got some more.
[2:28:50] >> yes, I don't know
[2:28:51] whether to say
[2:28:51] congratulations or
[2:28:52] condolences, but I hope
[2:28:52] you stick around for our
[2:28:53] conversation over the port
[2:28:53] bond.
[2:28:54] It will be interesting.
[2:28:55] >> absolutely.
[2:28:55] Yes.
[2:28:58] That was it?
[2:28:58] Gonzalez.
[2:29:12] >> Roberto Gonzalez: I
[2:29:13] think it's clear it's not
[2:29:14] going to be an easy role,
[2:29:14] but I have looked at some
[2:29:15] of the things you've done
[2:29:16] at port everglades and
[2:29:16] port everglades is one of
[2:29:17] the things we have done on
[2:29:18] our heels.
[2:29:18] Almost feels like the
[2:29:19] miami heat right now and
[2:29:20] I'm glad to have you on
[2:29:20] this team.
[2:29:22] >> thank you.
[2:29:22] >> Roberto Gonzalez: it
[2:29:27] won't be easy, but I know
[2:29:27] you're up to the challenge
[2:29:34] and I look forward to
[2:29:35] working with you.
[2:29:35] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:29:36] items 2b2, your director
[2:29:41] of the department of
[2:29:42] cultural affairs.
[2:29:42] We have ashley k thomas, a
[2:29:43] miami native with deep
[2:29:44] ties to the miami
[2:29:57] community, a strong --
[2:29:58] more than 25 years of
[2:29:59] experience across the
[2:29:59] arts, nonprofit
[2:30:00] leadership, and public
[2:30:00] administration.
[2:30:01] Please intro our new
[2:30:02] director of cultural
[2:30:02] affairs.
[2:30:03] > thank you, MR. Chair.
[2:30:03] Once again, thank you for
[2:30:04] being prepped.
[2:30:04] Ashley thomas is a local
[2:30:05] star.
[2:30:05] Homegrown.
[2:30:15] She has risen up through
[2:30:15] the arts world.
[2:30:16] She started her career in
[2:30:17] liberty city and she
[2:30:17] trained with MR. Marshall
[2:30:21] at the african cultural
[2:30:22] heritage center and where
[2:30:22] she learned dance.
[2:30:28] She went on to be a
[2:30:29] professional dancer.
[2:30:30] She went on to write her
[2:30:30] own productions.
[2:30:31] She traveled the world,
[2:30:36] performed in los angeles,
[2:30:37] produced in australia, and
[2:30:38] came here to us in
[2:30:38] miami-dade.
[2:30:39] She has advanced through
[2:30:39] the ranks.
[2:30:44] She has actually advanced
[2:30:45] productions at our own
[2:30:45] arts center, so she has a
[2:30:46] diverse set of experiences
[2:30:47] in the arts and culture
[2:30:55] and she has received rave
[2:30:56] reviews from her cultural
[2:30:56] arts partners.
[2:30:57] So we did a national
[2:30:58] search and it brought us
[2:30:58] right back home.
[2:30:59] I have to say that we
[2:31:00] discovered we have a star
[2:31:08] in our midst and we have
[2:31:09] every confidence that
[2:31:09] under ashley's leadership
[2:31:10] that arts and culture will
[2:31:11] continue not only to
[2:31:11] thrive, but actually to
[2:31:12] even ascend to higher
[2:31:12] heights.
[2:31:22] Very very excited to
[2:31:23] introduce her to you if
[2:31:24] you have not had a chance.
[2:31:25] Just to under score a
[2:31:25] couple of things she has
[2:31:26] managed as interim
[2:31:26] director.
[2:31:26] Guess what?
[2:31:28] Coconut grove playhouse.
[2:31:28] We will have one.
[2:31:46] Thank you, commissioner
[2:31:47] regalado. She has been
[2:31:47] instrumental in that.
[2:31:48] She has also helped us to
[2:31:48] get through some difficult
[2:31:49] budget times here in the
[2:31:50] county with our cultural
[2:31:51] affairs, so I am very
[2:31:52] confident that because of
[2:31:52] her background, her
[2:31:53] character, her
[2:31:53] personality, her
[2:31:54] knowledge, she will be the
[2:32:01] leader that we all are
[2:32:01] striving for, and I'm
[2:32:02] delighted to present to
[2:32:03] you ashley thomas as our
[2:32:03] new director of cultural
[2:32:04] affairs.
[2:32:04] > CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:32:05] welcome aboard.
[2:32:09] [Applause] All right.
[2:32:10] All right, ashley.
[2:32:10] You're loved.
[2:32:11] You got much less time
[2:32:25] than the cport director.
[2:32:26] He certainly went over his
[2:32:27] time and abused his time,
[2:32:27] but we're going to give it
[2:32:28] to him.
[2:32:28] Go ahead.
[2:32:29] >> thank you, CHAIRMAN
[2:32:29] Rodriguez and MADAME
[2:32:30] Mayor.
[2:32:30] Deputy mayor and to the
[2:32:31] community for this
[2:32:33] opportunity.
[2:32:34] I am local, homegrown, and
[2:32:35] I'll say that art is
[2:32:36] essential to the soul and
[2:32:37] we continue to celebrate
[2:32:37] it and will continue to
[2:32:39] represent the county to
[2:32:40] its full level, so thank
[2:32:41] you, thank you, thank you.
[2:32:42] I'm honored to be here and
[2:32:42] continue the work.
[2:32:50] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:32:50] that was short.
[2:32:51] Two rounds of applause.
[2:32:53] Stop, stop, you're talking
[2:32:54] about long meetings.
[2:33:09] >> that's the difference
[2:33:09] she knew to say something
[2:33:10] real quick answer down.
[2:33:11] She knew exactly what to
[2:33:11] do.
[2:33:12] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:33:13] cut my man jonathan some
[2:33:13] slack.
[2:33:14] I was giving him a hard
[2:33:14] time because his wife is
[2:33:15] in the room.
[2:33:16] MADAME Attorney, can we do
[2:33:16] the aviation items before
[2:33:22] we go into first readings?
[2:33:23] And I understand we have
[2:33:23] some releases as well.
[2:33:24] >> yes, MR. Chair.
[2:33:24] I have one release.
[2:33:25] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: go
[2:33:26] ahead, let's do the
[2:33:26] release.
[2:33:27] >> I have 8g5 is pulled.
[2:33:28] She was the only pulling
[2:33:31] commissioner.
[2:33:31] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: so
[2:33:32] 8g5, commissioner
[2:33:35] gonzalez moves 8g5
[2:33:36] seconded by commissioner
[2:33:36] gilbert.
[2:33:42] All in favor say aye
[2:33:42] signify by saying aye.
[2:33:45] All opposed, nay.
[2:33:45] Passed.
[2:33:46] >> we have seven, the
[2:33:55] first item is eight a1.
[2:33:56] >> Mayor Levine Cava:
[2:33:57] seconded by gilbert.
[2:33:58] All in favor signify by
[2:33:58] saying aye.
[2:33:59] All opposed, nay.
[2:34:00] >> 8a2.
[2:34:01] >> Mayor Levine Cava: all
[2:34:02] in favor say aye five by
[2:34:08] saying aye.
[2:34:09] All opposed, nay.
[2:34:09] >> 8a3.
[2:34:10] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:34:11] moved by cohen higgins,
[2:34:15] seconded by gilbert.
[2:34:16] All in favor say aye.
[2:34:16] So it passed.
[2:34:16] A4.
[2:34:17] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:34:22] moved bycohen higgins,
[2:34:23] seconded by gilbert.
[2:34:24] All in favor say aye aye.
[2:34:28] Show it passed.
[2:34:28] 8a5.
[2:34:29] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:34:37] moved by same, seconded by
[2:34:37] saying.
[2:34:38] It passes.
[2:34:38] >> 8p1.
[2:34:39] >> Mayor Levine Cava:
[2:34:40] moved by same, seconded by
[2:34:42] same.
[2:34:42] All in favor say aye five
[2:34:48] by saying aye.
[2:34:48] Show it passed.
[2:34:49] All in favor say aye five
[2:34:52] by saying aye.
[2:34:53] Opposed, nay. And was not
[2:34:53] the last one?
[2:35:08] >> yes.
[2:35:09] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:35:10] all right.
[2:35:10] We got the aviation items
[2:35:10] out.
[2:35:11] Ow MADAME Attorney,
[2:35:12] can you please read the
[2:35:13] first reading items
[2:35:13] including the 14 letter
[2:35:14] first readings as well?
[2:35:15] > yes, MR. CHAIRMAN.
[2:35:16] The first item is 4a in
[2:35:16] the incorporated and
[2:35:17] unincorporated areas
[2:35:17] amending section of the
[2:35:18] code providing approval of
[2:35:23] nonrecorded institutional
[2:35:24] controls with no further
[2:35:25] action for conditions,
[2:35:25] side closures in
[2:35:26] conjunction with site
[2:35:27] cleanups under certain
[2:35:28] circumstances, making
[2:36:11] technical and clarifying
[2:36:12] changes and an effective
[2:36:12] date.
[2:36:13] 4b is an ordinance
[2:36:13] relating to hospital
[2:36:14] payments amending article
[2:36:15] 4 chapter 18 of the code
[2:36:16] revising definitions
[2:36:17] authorizing electronic
[2:36:18] signatures and electronic
[2:36:18] delivery of documents
[2:36:19] recognizing waivers
[2:36:20] granted by the centers for
[2:36:20] medicare and medicaid
[2:36:21] services expanding the
[2:36:22] scope of medicaid
[2:36:22] supplemental programs
[2:36:23] revising petition review
[2:36:24] and notice positions
[2:36:24] authorizing payment plans,
[2:36:25] authorizing suspension or
[2:36:26] termination of mandatory
[2:36:27] payments by resolution,
[2:36:27] making technical and
[2:36:28] conforming changes and
[2:36:29] providing severability of
[2:36:30] the code and to an
[2:36:30] effective date.
[2:36:31] 4c is relating to the
[2:36:31] rapid transit development
[2:36:32] zone.
[2:36:32] amending the metro members
[2:36:33] sums and other rapid
[2:36:34] transit zones providing
[2:36:34] severability, inclusion of
[2:36:35] the code and an effective
[2:36:36] date.
[2:36:36] 4d changing the boundaries
[2:36:37] and amending the city
[2:36:38] municipal charger to
[2:36:38] provide for the annexation
[2:36:40] of certain lands pursuant
[2:36:40] to section 604b and
[2:36:41] chapter 20 of the code of
[2:36:41] miami-dade county florida
[2:36:42] related to the
[2:36:43] unincorporated area with
[2:36:43] proximate outer boundaries
[2:36:44] on the north by southwest
[2:36:45] 328 by southwest 1/92
[2:36:45] avenue on the sxsw 344
[2:36:46] street and 191 avenue
[2:36:57] providing resolution
[2:36:57] providing for county
[2:36:58] retention of residential
[2:36:59] garbage disposal requiring
[2:36:59] payment of outstanding
[2:37:00] debt service attributable
[2:37:01] to the annexation area
[2:37:02] providing for county
[2:37:03] jurisdiction over certain
[2:37:03] areas and facility of
[2:37:04] countywide significance,
[2:37:05] providing for contingent
[2:37:06] effective date inclusion
[2:37:07] in the code and an
[2:37:18] effective date, 4e is an
[2:37:18] ordinance advisory board
[2:37:19] creating article 172 of
[2:37:20] chapter 2 of the code
[2:37:20] providing for the
[2:37:21] composition and duties of
[2:37:21] the board and other
[2:37:25] related matters providing
[2:37:26] severability inclusion in
[2:37:27] the code and an effective
[2:37:27] date.
[2:37:28] 4f district in the county
[2:37:28] generally found in the
[2:38:04] north by southwest on the
[2:38:04] south by c102 canal and
[2:38:05] known and described as
[2:38:06] co-port west street
[2:38:07] lighting special district
[2:38:08] identifying services to be
[2:38:09] provided authorizing and
[2:38:09] directing the mayor
[2:38:10] doesn't need to provide
[2:38:11] for the installation of
[2:38:12] streetlights approving a
[2:38:13] streetlight agreement with
[2:38:14] florida power and light
[2:38:14] and authorizing the mayor
[2:38:15] designee to execute the
[2:38:15] agreement.
[2:38:16] And providing for
[2:38:17] exclusion from the code
[2:38:17] and an effective date.
[2:38:18] 4g creating a special
[2:38:19] district -- by theoretical
[2:38:20] southwest 325 street on
[2:38:21] the east sxsw and sxsw 328
[2:38:21] street and on the west
[2:38:22] sxsw richard road known
[2:38:23] and described as harmony
[2:38:24] homes multipurpose special
[2:38:25] tax district identifying
[2:38:26] services to be provided
[2:38:27] authorizing and directing
[2:38:35] the mayor designee to cost
[2:38:36] improvements and to
[2:38:36] provide for the
[2:38:37] installation of
[2:38:37] streetlights approving a
[2:38:38] street vending agreement
[2:38:39] with florida power and
[2:38:40] light and authorizing the
[2:38:40] mayor designee to execute
[2:38:41] the agreement resolution
[2:38:42] and providing exclusion
[2:38:43] from the code and an
[2:38:43] effective date.
[2:38:44] 4h is an environment
[2:38:45] protection amending
[2:38:52] sections 425-18 of the
[2:38:54] code revising a definition
[2:38:55] authorizing administrative
[2:38:56] approval of emergency
[2:38:57] generators for healthcare
[2:38:57] facilities and food stores
[2:38:58] within a protection area
[2:38:59] subject to certain
[2:39:00] conditions providing
[2:39:01] severability conclusion in
[2:39:05] the code and an effective
[2:39:05] date relating to
[2:39:06] environmental utility
[2:39:07] service fee amending
[2:39:07] section 24-34 of the code
[2:39:08] establishing loan program
[2:39:09] for purposes of
[2:39:10] environmental remediation
[2:39:10] the means of existing
[2:39:11] requirements.
[2:39:22] Without changing some
[2:39:22] requirements.
[2:39:23] Creating requirements and
[2:39:24] procedures for said loan
[2:39:25] program, providing
[2:39:25] severability and an
[2:39:26] effective date.
[2:39:27] 14 a 1 is relating to the
[2:39:27] operation and delivery
[2:39:28] services of mobile
[2:39:28] carriers and that
[2:39:29] incorporated and
[2:39:30] unincorporated areas of
[2:39:30] the county providing
[2:39:31] regulations for safe
[2:39:32] delivery devices and
[2:39:32] carriers providing
[2:39:52] legislative applicability
[2:39:53] -- providing for
[2:39:54] enforcement of civil
[2:39:54] penalty providing
[2:39:55] severability in the code
[2:39:56] and an effective date.
[2:39:57] 14 a 5 is relating to
[2:39:57] county procurement
[2:39:58] multiple recommendations
[2:39:59] from the final report of
[2:40:00] the special task force to
[2:40:01] reduce inefficiencies and
[2:40:01] procurement relating to
[2:40:02] bid protest amending
[2:40:03] section of the code
[2:40:03] relating to protest
[2:40:04] procedures amending
[2:40:04] implementing order 3-21
[2:40:05] directing the mayor
[2:40:06] designee to create an
[2:40:06] automated online portal
[2:40:07] for use in the protest
[2:40:07] process and coordination
[2:40:08] with the clerk of the
[2:40:13] board requiring a report
[2:40:14] and exclusion from the
[2:40:15] code and an effective
[2:40:15] date.
[2:40:16] 14 a 6 is an ordinance
[2:40:16] relating to county
[2:40:17] procurement multiple
[2:40:18] recommendations from the
[2:40:19] final report of this
[2:40:20] special task force
[2:40:21] amending section 2-11.1 of
[2:40:22] the code relating to the
[2:40:23] cone of silence or
[2:40:51] presentations and
[2:40:52] procurements consistent
[2:40:53] with an exemption of
[2:40:54] florida law and permitting
[2:40:54] orders 3-34 and 3-39
[2:40:55] establishing requirements
[2:40:56] for competitive
[2:40:56] composition scoring
[2:40:57] training and conflict
[2:40:58] tracks creating large
[2:40:59] local employer category
[2:40:59] relating to evaluation
[2:41:00] scoring and acquisition of
[2:41:01] professional services
[2:41:02] agreements limiting use of
[2:41:02] technology and oral
[2:41:03] presentations and
[2:41:04] providing severability and
[2:41:04] exclusion from the code
[2:41:05] and an effective date.
[2:41:08] 14 a 7 relating in part
[2:41:09] multiple recommendations
[2:41:10] from the final report of
[2:41:11] the special task force to
[2:41:12] reduce inefficiencies and
[2:41:13] procurement relating to
[2:41:13] small business and local
[2:41:14] preference requirements
[2:41:15] amending sections
[2:41:21] 2-10.4.01, two-8.1.1.1.1,
[2:41:22] two-8.1.1.1.2 and 2-5 of
[2:41:22] the code relating to small
[2:41:23] business architecture and
[2:41:24] engineering program
[2:41:24] requirements, small
[2:41:25] business enterprise small
[2:41:45] business enterprise local
[2:41:45] headquartered -- small
[2:41:46] business remedies and
[2:41:47] related procurement
[2:41:47] policies.
[2:41:48] Directing and authorizing
[2:41:49] the mayor to make
[2:41:49] conforming changes to and
[2:41:50] permitting orders and
[2:41:51] providing severability
[2:41:52] inclusion and exclusion
[2:41:53] from the code and an
[2:41:53] effective date.
[2:41:54] 14 a as an ordinance
[2:41:55] relating in part multiple
[2:41:56] recommendations from the
[2:41:56] final report of the
[2:41:57] special task force to
[2:41:58] reduce procurement.
[2:41:59] Relating to the conflict
[2:41:59] of interest and code of
[2:42:00] ethics ordinance section 2
[2:42:08] point -- section
[2:42:08] 2-8.1.1.1.1 of the code
[2:42:09] relating to the small
[2:42:10] business enterprise
[2:42:10] services program.
[2:42:11] Section 2-8.1.1.1.2 of the
[2:42:12] code relating to the small
[2:42:12] enterprise code program.
[2:42:26] Relating to related
[2:42:27] parties and bid inclusion.
[2:42:27] And section 10-330 to 1 of
[2:42:28] the code relating to bids
[2:42:29] precluded from related
[2:42:30] parties repealing
[2:42:30] resolution r6314 requiring
[2:42:31] certain due diligence
[2:42:32] affidavits providing
[2:42:33] severability, exclusion
[2:42:34] and inclusion and an
[2:42:34] effective date and
[2:42:35] requiring a report.
[2:42:35] Hose
[2:42:46] are your first reading
[2:42:46] items.
[2:42:47] >> attorney, we have some
[2:42:48] bifurcations.
[2:42:49] We have 4b and 14 a 5-14 a
[2:42:49] 8.
[2:43:05] >> and 14 a 1 as well.
[2:43:05] >> MR. Chair?
[2:43:06] Who was that, commissioner
[2:43:06] regalado?
[2:43:07] >> Raquel Regalado: I
[2:43:08] pulled the procurement
[2:43:08] ones.
[2:43:09] I guess 14 a 5.
[2:43:09] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:43:10] and 14 a 8.
[2:43:11] >> Raquel Regalado: I'm
[2:43:11] happy to release those.
[2:43:15] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: so
[2:43:16] 14 a 5 and 14 a 8
[2:43:16] released.
[2:43:17] And you need to pull
[2:43:17] something?
[2:43:18] Show commissioner cohen
[2:43:37] higgins pullingng motion
[2:43:37] 4d.
[2:43:38] Can I have a motion on the
[2:43:38] first reading items?
[2:43:39] >> MR. Chair, I had
[2:43:40] commissioner regalado
[2:43:41] notice also pulling 14 a
[2:43:41] 1. It appears she did not.
[2:43:42] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: 14
[2:43:43] a 1 is part of the motion
[2:43:43] now.
[2:43:45] Commissioner -- seconded
[2:43:46] by commissioner lopez.
[2:43:47] Adame clerk, please call
[2:43:47] the roll.
[2:43:55] >> Clerk: commissioner
[2:43:55] bastien.
[2:43:56] >> Marleine Bastien: yes.
[2:43:57] >> Clerk: commissioner
[2:43:57] cohen higgins. Senator
[2:43:58] garcia.
[2:43:59] Commissioner gilbert.
[2:44:00] Commissioner gonzalez.
[2:44:02] >> Public Speaker: for.
[2:44:03] >> Clerk: commissioner
[2:44:04] regalado.
[2:44:07] >> Raquel Regalado: yes.
[2:44:08] >> Clerk: vice CHAIRMAN
[2:44:09] Meek Mcghee.
[2:44:09] >> Vice CHAIRMAN McGhee:
[2:44:10] yes.
[2:44:15] >> Clerk: chairmann
[2:44:16] rodriquez.
[2:44:16] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: I
[2:44:17] vote yes.
[2:44:23] Senator garcia on 4b,are
[2:44:24] you trying to waive it or?
[2:44:26] >> this is the house bill
[2:44:46] funding bill done previous
[2:44:47] times because of proper
[2:44:48] constraint time, so want
[2:44:48] to make sure it's on the
[2:44:49] agenda for the next.
[2:44:50] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:44:51] what meeting exactly did
[2:44:52] you wanted to go on?
[2:44:52] >> the SEPTEMBER 2
[2:44:52] meeting.
[2:44:53] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:44:53] SEPTEMBER 2.
[2:44:54] >> if we can do 15 d 1,
[2:44:55] that would be great.
[2:44:56] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: so
[2:44:56] you will move 4b for the
[2:44:57] second meeting with all
[2:44:58] proper notices.
[2:44:58] MADAME Attorney?
[2:45:01] >> we can do that as a
[2:45:02] procedural motion.
[2:45:03] 4b needs to be approved
[2:45:03] first.
[2:45:04] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:45:05] senator garcia moves 4b.
[2:45:09] Seconded by senator
[2:45:09] regalado. Clerk, please
[2:45:10] call the roll.
[2:45:18] >> Clerk: commissioner
[2:45:19] bermudez. Commissioner
[2:45:20] gilbert.
[2:45:20] Commissioner gonzalez.
[2:45:21] >> Roberto Gonzalez: for.
[2:45:24] >> Clerk: commissioner
[2:45:24] regalado.
[2:45:25] >> Raquel Regalado: yes.
[2:45:26] >> Clerk: commissioner
[2:45:30] steinberg? Vice CHAIRMAN
[2:45:30] Mcghee.
[2:45:31] >> Vice CHAIRMAN McGhee:
[2:45:31] yes.
[2:45:34] >> Clerk: motion passes
[2:45:35] unanimously.
[2:45:35] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:45:36] you want to make a motion
[2:45:37] at this time to waive the
[2:45:46] rules or whatnot?
[2:45:47] >> so moved to SEPTEMBER 1
[2:45:48] meeting.
[2:45:49] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:45:49] moved by senator garcia.
[2:45:50] Jerry, go ahead?
[2:46:08] >> can we go ahead and
[2:46:09] read that motion?
[2:46:10] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: go
[2:46:10] ahead.
[2:46:11] >> senator garcia moves to
[2:46:12] want to suspend the rules
[2:46:12] and waive committee review
[2:46:13] as to item 4b to amend
[2:46:14] item 15 b 1 to set second
[2:46:14] reading on item 4b at the
[2:46:15] SEPTEMBER 1, 2026 board of
[2:46:16] commissioners meeting, to
[2:46:17] redirect set appropriate
[2:46:29] notices and clerk of the
[2:46:30] board publish all
[2:46:30] necessary notices.
[2:46:31] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: we
[2:46:32] have a motion by senator
[2:46:32] garcia, seconded by
[2:46:33] commissioner lopez, all in
[2:46:34] favor signify by saying
[2:46:34] aye.
[2:46:35] All opposed nay. Show it
[2:46:35] passed.
[2:46:36] Can you read my motion
[2:46:36] along the same lines as
[2:46:37] well?
[2:46:37] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriguez
[2:46:38] moves to want to suspend
[2:46:43] procedures and waive to
[2:46:44] amend item 15 b 1 to
[2:46:45] suspend public hearing and
[2:46:45] second readings for these
[2:46:46] items at the SEPTEMBER 1,
[2:46:47] 2026 board meeting and
[2:46:48] direct the clerk of the
[2:46:48] board to post all
[2:46:58] necessary items delmer
[2:46:58] notices related to these
[2:46:59] items.
[2:46:59] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:47:00] seconded by commissioner
[2:47:01] steinberg. All those in
[2:47:02] favor signify by saying
[2:47:02] aye.
[2:47:02] All opposed, nay.
[2:47:03] Commissioner Mcghee moves
[2:47:03] 4d.
[2:47:08] Seconded y commissioner.
[2:47:08] And I know you bifurcated,
[2:47:13] but you can't speak on it.
[2:47:13] Clerk, please call the
[2:47:13] roll.
[2:47:22] >> Clerk: mission or
[2:47:23] cohen higgins.
[2:47:23] >> Danielle Cohen Higgins:
[2:47:23] no.
[2:47:25] >> Clerk: senator garcia.
[2:47:25] Commissioner gilbert.
[2:47:26] I'm sorry?
[2:47:31] Commissioner gonzalez.
[2:47:32] >> Roberto Gonzalez: for.
[2:47:33] >> Clerk: commissioner
[2:47:33] lopez.
[2:47:33] Ommissioner
[2:47:35] orbis. Commissioner
[2:47:35] regalado.
[2:47:36] >> Raquel Regalado: yes.
[2:47:43] >> Clerk: commissioner
[2:47:43] bastien.
[2:47:44] >> Marleine Bastien: yes.
[2:47:45] >> Clerk: vice CHAIRMAN
[2:47:45] Mcghee.
[2:47:46] >> Vice CHAIRMAN McGhee:
[2:47:46] yes.
[2:47:52] >> Clerk:: CHAIRMAN
[2:47:52] Rodriquez.
[2:47:53] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:47:53] yes.
[2:47:54] Thank you very much.
[2:47:54] That concludes our first
[2:47:55] reading items.
[2:47:55] MADAME Attorney..
[2:48:02] I will recognize first --
[2:48:03] I'm gonna go ahead and
[2:48:05] recognize commissioner
[2:48:06] gilbert for a motion.
[2:48:07] I was gonna start
[2:48:18] somewhere else, but we'll
[2:48:19] start there.
[2:48:20] Commissioner gilbert, you
[2:48:20] are recognized to make a
[2:48:21] motion.
[2:48:22] >> Oliver Gilbert: thank
[2:48:22] you, MR. CHAIRMAN.
[2:48:23] I have a motion to
[2:48:24] reconsider on the port
[2:48:24] item that we determined we
[2:48:30] decided at our last
[2:48:31] meeting there's some
[2:48:31] technical changes that
[2:48:32] came to light after we
[2:48:33] engaged the consultant
[2:48:34] expert that we need to
[2:48:34] make, so I'm going to make
[2:48:38] a motion to consider.
[2:48:39] >> second.
[2:48:42] >> it's been moved to
[2:48:43] reconsider seconded by
[2:48:52] commissioner regalado.
[2:48:52] Seconded by commissioner
[2:48:53] cohen higgins. It's a
[2:48:54] little -- they sound
[2:48:54] alike.
[2:48:55] I thought it was a good
[2:49:09] day.
[2:49:10] Not today.
[2:49:10] >> I mean not today,
[2:49:10] satan.
[2:49:11] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:49:12] all in favor say aye the
[2:49:13] reconsideration signify by
[2:49:14] saying aye.
[2:49:14] Opposed, nay. Show it
[2:49:15] reconsidered.
[2:49:15] >> I moved item as
[2:49:15] amended.
[2:49:22] We have some technical
[2:49:23] things --
[2:49:23] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: if
[2:49:24] the attorneys could read
[2:49:25] the amendment.
[2:49:26] >> they are going to read
[2:49:26] it to us.
[2:49:27] >> commissioner regalado.
[2:49:28] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: I
[2:49:28] just asked him to read it.
[2:49:29] I literally heard that
[2:49:30] before I heard you say
[2:49:30] your self on the
[2:49:31] microphone.
[2:49:32] Go ahead and read the
[2:49:33] amendment.
[2:49:33] >> to replace exhibits a
[2:49:35] and b with new exhibits
[2:49:38] that have been filed with
[2:49:43] the clerk on page mdc 0122
[2:49:44] -- three incorporate the
[2:49:45] amendments and authorize
[2:49:48] the mayor mayor designee
[2:49:56] to correct -- alter the
[2:49:57] property interest to be
[2:49:57] acquired.
[2:49:58] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:49:58] all right.
[2:49:59] We have a motion and
[2:50:08] second.
[2:50:09] >> the reason for us is
[2:50:10] because we are amending
[2:50:13] the legalal description.
[2:50:14] We are amending the legal
[2:50:15] description again.
[2:50:36] Is is this making it
[2:50:37] smaller or bigger?
[2:50:38] Because we have a few
[2:50:38] easements on here.
[2:50:39] There's a different
[2:50:40] description, but does this
[2:50:40] increase of the footprint
[2:50:41] that we have from the
[2:50:42] prior item or decrease it?
[2:50:43] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:50:43] the attorneys are
[2:50:44] recognized to answer the
[2:50:44] question.
[2:50:45] >> it's the same easement.
[2:50:46] >> so it's just ownership?
[2:50:47] >> no.
[2:50:47] There is a discrepancy
[2:50:58] between the he easement
[2:50:59] that should be clarified.
[2:51:00] For our benefit really
[2:51:01] during the litigation, but
[2:51:02] the intention is not to
[2:51:02] change the easement that's
[2:51:03] been used, so it's the
[2:51:04] same as what's been used
[2:51:04] all along.
[2:51:05] >> so in terms of the size
[2:51:05] of the parcel, we're still
[2:51:06] staying within the
[2:51:11] existing footprint of what
[2:51:12] t we need for the fuel
[2:51:12] facility, which was the
[2:51:13] prior amendment?
[2:51:14] >> that is correct.
[2:51:14] >> thank you.
[2:51:15] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:51:15] with that, all in favorite
[2:51:16] of the motion signify by
[2:51:16] saying aye.
[2:51:17] All imposed, nay.
[2:51:18] Show that item passed with
[2:51:19] two no votes.
[2:51:20] All right.
[2:51:24] Now I will take up 7d,
[2:51:30] the calorie -- tractor
[2:51:31] application.
[2:51:31] MADAME Attorney, let's go
[2:51:35] ahead and take that item.
[2:51:36] >> yes, MR. Chair.
[2:51:37] I need to read this item.
[2:51:38] One second.
[2:51:51] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:51:52] you got your time.
[2:51:52] >> 7d is an ordinance
[2:51:53] relating to miami-dade
[2:51:54] comprehensive development
[2:51:55] master plan providing
[2:51:55] disposition of application
[2:51:56] number cdm p 23 13 located
[2:51:57] west of northwest 1/37
[2:52:02] avenue and sr836 filed by
[2:52:02] kelly tractor company in
[2:52:03] the MAY 2023 cycle to
[2:52:04] amend the county
[2:52:08] comprehensivefilament
[2:52:09] master plan providing
[2:52:10] severability exclusion
[2:52:11] from the phot delmer code
[2:52:14] and exclusion
[2:52:15] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:52:16] was that the supplement
[2:52:17] and second supplement as
[2:52:17] well?
[2:52:26] >> that's witht's with
[2:52:27] three supplements.
[2:52:28] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[2:52:28] all right.
[2:52:29] i have the item before us,
[2:52:29] public hearing has been
[2:52:30] had on this item already.
[2:52:30] >> I'll move it.
[2:52:32] >> commissioner bermudez
[2:52:33] moves the item seconded by
[2:52:35] commissioner gonzalez.
[2:52:35] Commissioner you are
[2:52:36] recognized.
[2:52:38] >> thank you.
[2:52:39] I just want to walk
[2:52:39] through the changes.
[2:52:40] I know that we discussed
[2:52:52] this item a lot and I 't
[2:52:53] want to belabor the point,
[2:52:53] but I think the changes
[2:52:54] made to date have really
[2:52:55] changed dramatically this
[2:52:56] item and I hope that the
[2:53:03] board will consider these
[2:53:03] requirements in the future
[2:53:04] because I think that it's
[2:53:05] a way for us to change the
[2:53:06] conversation in terms of
[2:53:07] preservation.
[2:53:07] First and foremost, I
[2:53:08] filed that item to change
[2:53:22] the text amendment, so I
[2:53:23] think many were concerned
[2:53:24] the tax amendment would be
[2:53:24] abused, so I hope this is
[2:53:25] the last one we see that
[2:53:26] chooses the vehicle
[2:53:27] without the parameters.
[2:53:27] That being said, as part
[2:53:28] of this application we
[2:53:29] added a lot of those
[2:53:29] parameters even though the
[2:53:30] tax amendment did not
[2:53:31] require them, and I want
[2:53:38] to thank the applicant for
[2:53:39] walking through that with
[2:53:39] us.
[2:53:40] For those of you that have
[2:53:41] had the opportunity to
[2:53:41] read the final memo by
[2:53:42] staff, we do have staff in
[2:53:43] favor of a lot of the
[2:53:47] changes that we've made.
[2:53:47] First and foremost, i
[2:53:48] think one of the lessons
[2:53:49] learned from this
[2:53:49] application is that land
[2:53:56] that is coveted can later
[2:53:57] many years later after it
[2:53:58] is preserved there could
[2:54:05] be a request to move that
[2:54:05] company and one of the
[2:54:06] things this application is
[2:54:07] doing is we are asking for
[2:54:08] ownership by the county
[2:54:08] specifically heal for
[2:54:08] those properties.
[2:54:27] And I think that that is
[2:54:28] the best path forward.
[2:54:29] I think if we truly
[2:54:29] believe that these lands
[2:54:30] are important, we are
[2:54:31] asking a developer to
[2:54:32] preserve and restore them,
[2:54:33] we should have ownership
[2:54:33] and one of the things this
[2:54:34] application does is not
[2:54:35] only grant ownership to
[2:54:36] the county should the
[2:54:36] county want it because
[2:54:37] there could be a world in
[2:54:38] which the county does not
[2:54:38] want to preserve land, but
[2:54:59] it also has a maintenance
[2:54:59] fee baked into the
[2:54:59] agreement.
[2:55:00] So if we could just have a
[2:55:01] clarification from the
[2:55:02] applicant as to how that
[2:55:02] would work because as many
[2:55:03] of you know our program is
[2:55:04] desperately underfunded.
[2:55:05] This would go under the
[2:55:05] yule portfolio and we want
[2:55:06] to make sure that neil has
[2:55:07] the ability to maintain it
[2:55:08] properly.
[2:55:08] >> sure, commissioner.
[2:55:09] Hrough the chair, if I
[2:55:10] MAY, I just wanted to
[2:55:24] clarify.
[2:55:24] We have two options.
[2:55:25] We can maintain it
[2:55:26] ourselves to alleviate
[2:55:26] some of the burden on
[2:55:27] yule, otherwise we would
[2:55:28] preserve some funding
[2:55:28] mechanism to make sure it
[2:55:29] is taken care of
[2:55:30] perpetually, but the
[2:55:31] applicant is open to doing
[2:55:31] maintenance on it
[2:55:32] themselves on that land.
[2:55:33] >> so we're assaying the
[2:55:46] application now says if
[2:55:46] the county has the ability
[2:55:47] to reject ownership if the
[2:55:48] county decides not to do
[2:55:49] it, then you have the
[2:55:49] obligation to preserve it,
[2:55:50] but I really want the
[2:55:51] county to own it.
[2:55:51] I really think that's the
[2:55:52] best path forward to us.
[2:55:53] N page 12 of the
[2:55:53] declaration of
[2:55:54] restrictions, and for
[2:56:00] those that are watching I
[2:56:01] just want to say this
[2:56:02] information is in the
[2:56:02] actual covenant.
[2:56:03] It's on page 13.
[2:56:05] But on page 12 number
[2:56:06] seven for the preservation
[2:56:07] area, so we're talking
[2:56:35] about two different
[2:56:36] parcels, right?
[2:56:37] We're talking about the
[2:56:38] existing preservation area
[2:56:38] and number seven says if
[2:56:39] the owner wishes to convey
[2:56:40] the reservation area the
[2:56:41] owner shall convey the
[2:56:41] reservation area at no
[2:56:42] cost to the county and
[2:56:43] provide a mechanism that
[2:56:43] maintains the preservation
[2:56:44] area, correct?
[2:56:45] That's what you have on
[2:56:45] 12?
[2:56:46] >> that is correct.
[2:56:46] >> I would like it to be
[2:56:47] that in verse just as it
[2:56:52] is in the next page.
[2:56:52] the next page has the
[2:56:53] owner shall dedicate and
[2:56:54] convey these additional
[2:56:54] off-site wetland
[2:56:55] preservation areas to
[2:56:55] miami-dade county eel
[2:56:56] program at no cost to
[2:56:57] miami-dade county and in
[2:56:59] natural freestate of
[2:56:59] vegetation.
[2:57:00] In seven, I would like the
[2:57:00] same.
[2:57:01] I don't want the owner to
[2:57:02] decide if they're going to
[2:57:03] give the presentation to
[2:57:03] evil.
[2:57:17] I want neil to have the
[2:57:18] first right of refusal.
[2:57:19] If yule doesn't want them
[2:57:20] than the owner would
[2:57:20] maintain them and preserve
[2:57:20] them.
[2:57:21] So could we have that same
[2:57:22] language that we have on
[2:57:22] page 13 on page 12?
[2:57:23] >> yes, that's fine.
[2:57:24] > wonderful.
[2:57:24] Thank you.
[2:57:36] On page 14 we also added
[2:57:37] if there is a need for a
[2:57:37] pump station that is
[2:57:38] required for water and
[2:57:38] sewer agreement on the
[2:57:39] request property, the
[2:57:40] owner shall install a
[2:57:40] public sanitary pump
[2:57:41] station at the owner's
[2:57:42] expense to provide service
[2:57:43] to propose development
[2:57:43] subject to any applicable
[2:57:44] our er and we have the
[2:57:45] pump session should we
[2:57:48] need it.
[2:57:49] Later, the one issue
[2:57:49] that's not on here that I
[2:57:50] think is important --
[2:57:51] well, let me get to
[2:57:51] another easy one.
[2:58:19] On page 1611 community
[2:58:19] education and training
[2:58:20] program, I want to thank
[2:58:20] you.
[2:58:21] It's very robust.
[2:58:21] It reflects a lot of the
[2:58:22] meetings we had in terms
[2:58:22] of how we want to use this
[2:58:23] site for economic
[2:58:24] development specifically
[2:58:25] for training, but I take
[2:58:25] issue with one word.
[2:58:26] In the third sentence we
[2:58:31] say the first owner agrees
[2:58:31] to participate in
[2:58:31] educational training
[2:58:31] program available to
[2:58:31] postsecondary and high
[2:58:31] school students in
[2:58:31] miami-dade county which
[2:58:32] MAY include but shall not
[2:58:32] be limited neuro-
[2:58:33] divergent people?
[2:58:33] Can we make that MAY a
[2:58:34] must?
[2:58:34] Because that's what we
[2:58:35] talked about.
[2:58:35] Thank you.
[2:58:51] Now going back o page 15.
[2:58:51] One of the reasons that
[2:58:52] this application is so
[2:58:53] different from everything
[2:58:53] else that this board has
[2:58:54] seen is because of kelly's
[2:58:55] involvement in our
[2:58:55] emergency response at all
[2:58:56] levels.
[2:58:56] On page 15 paragraph 10 we
[2:58:57] speak about the county
[2:59:14] emergency management.
[2:59:15] Is it possible to give
[2:59:15] miami-dade county
[2:59:16] government a priority in
[2:59:17] terms of access to kelly
[2:59:34] equipment should there be
[2:59:34] an emergency?
[2:59:35] Because I know you guys
[2:59:35] get a draw from everyone.
[2:59:36] Is that something we can
[2:59:36] bake in?
[2:59:37] I know obviously it would
[2:59:38] be, as long as we're not
[2:59:39] violating existing
[2:59:39] contracts.
[2:59:39] >> that's okay.
[2:59:40] >> okay, and this is
[2:59:41] important, folks, because
[2:59:41] whenever we have a
[2:59:48] hurricane, everyone draws
[2:59:48] we are going to be talking
[2:59:49] about trash and trash
[2:59:49] pickup later, but I want
[2:59:50] our county response teams
[2:59:51] to have first priority
[2:59:52] when it comes to kelly and
[2:59:52] access to the
[2:59:53] infrastructure that is so
[3:00:00] necessary during emergency
[3:00:00] response.
[3:00:01] The wetland mitigation
[3:00:02] program I think is very
[3:00:02] good.
[3:00:03] I really want to thank you
[3:00:04] all for spending the time
[3:00:04] with us to work through
[3:00:05] how to include the
[3:00:13] wildlife and a wildlife
[3:00:13] corridor.
[3:00:14] I really believe this is
[3:00:14] something that others
[3:00:15] should consider when we
[3:00:37] look at these types of
[3:00:37] plans.
[3:00:38] And then finally, I know
[3:00:39] we had some back and forth
[3:00:39] and I want to thank staff
[3:00:40] for also requiring it.
[3:00:41] We are not double dipping
[3:00:41] here on mitigation, right?
[3:00:42] It's separate and apart.
[3:00:43] You are going to use other
[3:00:44] land for your stormwater.
[3:00:53] To the board, in terms of
[3:00:53] your presentation area and
[3:00:54] mitigation we're
[3:00:54] requiring, I want to read
[3:00:55] a part to you because it
[3:00:56] was important when we were
[3:00:57] negotiating it and I think
[3:00:57] it's something we should
[3:00:58] consider moving forward
[3:00:59] when we talk about
[3:01:00] replicating these
[3:01:07] requirements in other
[3:01:08] applications.
[3:01:18] On page 13, the owner
[3:01:19] shall dedicate and convey
[3:01:20] these additional off-site
[3:01:21] wetland preservation areas
[3:01:28] to miami-dade eagle county
[3:01:29] in the natural free
[3:01:29] vegetation, we talked
[3:01:30] about that, but this is
[3:01:31] the part I think is
[3:01:31] important.
[3:01:32] The owner agrees to
[3:01:58] provide a funding
[3:01:59] mechanism -- everybody
[3:01:59] okay over here?
[3:02:00] The owner agrees to
[3:02:01] provide a funding
[3:02:01] mechanism that fully funds
[3:02:02] the maintenance of the
[3:02:03] off-site wetland
[3:02:03] preservation areas in
[3:02:04] perpetuity and any other
[3:02:05] obligation of such
[3:02:05] off-site wetland
[3:02:06] preservation area.
[3:02:06] Should the county and its
[3:02:07] discretion elect not to
[3:02:08] accept such -- restrictive
[3:02:08] covenant.
[3:02:09] And the other thing that
[3:02:09] was required here that we
[3:02:10] talked about, I think it
[3:02:20] was in the second time
[3:02:21] this application came to
[3:02:22] us is that the mitigation
[3:02:23] weather provided and land
[3:02:23] to the county or by
[3:02:24] mitigation credits will be
[3:02:25] in miami-dade county.
[3:02:26] This is not mitigation
[3:02:26] land that's going to occur
[3:02:27] in orlando or north
[3:02:27] florida.
[3:02:28] This is the first time
[3:02:29] that we're keeping
[3:02:29] everything in miami-dade
[3:02:30] county.
[3:02:30] So to my colleagues, this
[3:02:31] is a very different
[3:02:53] application from what was
[3:02:53] presented to us.
[3:02:54] I think that kelly is
[3:02:54] unique.
[3:02:55] I think it's a text
[3:02:55] amendment.
[3:02:56] I think we cleared up the
[3:02:57] issues of a text
[3:02:57] amendment.
[3:02:58] We are not moving in the
[3:02:58] line.
[3:02:58] Currently, this land, as
[3:02:59] has been mentioned, what
[3:03:00] is preserved we're
[3:03:00] preserving, but there is
[3:03:01] an entire area out there
[3:03:02] that has not been
[3:03:03] restored, is not being
[3:03:03] preserved, and will be
[3:03:04] preserved because of this.
[3:03:05] This when we own it,
[3:03:05] there's a dramatic change
[3:03:08] in our ability to do
[3:03:08] bccer. The county can go
[3:03:09] to the federal government
[3:03:10] and ask to start working
[3:03:10] on this basin.
[3:03:11] So with that, I would like
[3:03:12] to move as amended.
[3:03:13] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:03:13] all right.
[3:03:17] We have a -- well, we had
[3:03:18] a motion, right?
[3:03:29] To move it by bermudez
[3:03:30] seconded by gilbert and
[3:03:31] now there's an amendment?
[3:03:32] >> they made amendment, so
[3:03:33] just as long as the motion
[3:03:33] says as amended.
[3:03:34] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: so
[3:03:43] the motion as amended.
[3:03:44] Are you good with that?
[3:03:44] O -- go ahead.
[3:03:45] >> MR. Chair, if I can
[3:03:46] just confirm the original
[3:03:46] motion, it would be a
[3:03:47] motion to adopt per staff
[3:03:52] recommendation with the
[3:03:53] various changes that have
[3:03:54] been outlined in staff's
[3:03:54] memorandums.
[3:03:55] With the acceptance of the
[3:03:59] proffer covenant and with
[3:04:00] the 10 calendar days, the
[3:04:01] 10 day commission to
[3:04:11] provide and executed
[3:04:12] sufficient covenant
[3:04:13] opinion and title.
[3:04:13] My understanding is
[3:04:14] there's -- well, there
[3:04:15] were amendments in
[3:04:15] addition to that.
[3:04:16] > CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:04:17] all right.
[3:04:17] So are we good?
[3:04:31] I'm sorry, attorney is
[3:04:32] whispering in my ear, so
[3:04:33] did you say something that
[3:04:33] needed my attention?
[3:04:34] I apologize.
[3:04:34] >> no, MR. Chair.
[3:04:35] I was just restating the
[3:04:36] motion for the record.
[3:04:39] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:04:39] that said, I have no
[3:04:40] further discussion on
[3:04:40] item.
[3:04:41] T is moved as
[3:04:41] amended with all the
[3:04:46] different motions and good
[3:04:46] stuff.
[3:04:47] We have second by
[3:04:48] commissioner gilbert.
[3:04:50] Commissioner steinberg,
[3:04:51] are you wanting to be
[3:04:51] recognized?
[3:04:55] >> Micky Steinberg:
[3:04:56] briefly.
[3:04:58] I will remain a no.
[3:05:00] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:05:08] clerk, please call the
[3:05:08] roll.
[3:05:09] >> if we can have a
[3:05:10] clarification of the
[3:05:10] acreage that the county
[3:05:11] could potentially own just
[3:05:12] so that we can have it on
[3:05:18] the record.
[3:05:18] To the applicant.
[3:05:32] >> to the acreage that's
[3:05:33] in the paragraph -- one
[3:05:34] second.
[3:05:34] That's in paragraph five,
[3:05:35] the off-site wetland
[3:05:36] preservation area is a
[3:05:36] total at least 20 acres.
[3:05:38] And then mitigation.
[3:05:55] >> and then mitigation we
[3:05:56] don't know.
[3:05:56] >> we do not know at this
[3:05:57] point, yes.
[3:05:57] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:05:58] all right.
[3:05:58] So, MADAME Attorney,
[3:05:59] because I'm just doing a
[3:06:00] quorum count of sorts.
[3:06:01] I don't think we have the
[3:06:01] sufficient members in the
[3:06:02] chamber at this time to
[3:06:07] take a vote based on
[3:06:07] requirements.
[3:06:08] I know that we need nine
[3:06:08] votes for this in general
[3:06:09] and I can see it based on
[3:06:11] the history of this.
[3:06:18] So can I -- I don't know
[3:06:19] if officially say table
[3:06:20] it, but can I move on to
[3:06:21] the rest of the agenda and
[3:06:35] come back at this time?
[3:06:35] Because I know we have a
[3:06:36] very long agenda and some
[3:06:37] folks do need to leave.
[3:06:38] If we don't get this item
[3:06:38] today, doesn't
[3:06:39] automatically roll over to
[3:06:41] my next agenda?
[3:06:41] >> yes, MR. Chair.
[3:06:42] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: I
[3:06:56] want to try to get it
[3:06:57] today, but just in case we
[3:06:57] run out of time.
[3:06:58] That said, I know we had a
[3:06:59] lot of good conversation,
[3:07:00] commissioner regalado.
[3:07:01] Thank you for all of that.
[3:07:02] The motion still stands
[3:07:02] and all of that, but we
[3:07:03] are going to move on to
[3:07:03] the rest of our agenda
[3:07:20] just because I don't have
[3:07:20] enough members.
[3:07:21] I can see it.
[3:07:22] Commissioner gilbert,
[3:07:22] you're recognized.
[3:07:23] >> Oliver Gilbert: I just
[3:07:24] want to commend
[3:07:25] commissioner regalado on
[3:07:25] the work she put into
[3:07:26] this.
[3:07:26] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:07:27] thank you very much.
[3:07:27] >> that so cute.
[3:07:28] Is that a new congressman
[3:07:29] type of behavior?
[3:07:29] > Oliver Gilbert: no,
[3:07:30] no, not at all.
[3:07:31] >> Raquel Regalado: he
[3:07:31] knows that if he doesn't
[3:07:37] thank me I get upset early
[3:07:37] .
[3:07:38] >> Oliver Gilbert:
[3:07:39] positive reinforcements.
[3:07:39] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:07:40] get upset now, get upset
[3:07:40] later.
[3:07:41] Let's move to public
[3:07:42] hearing, MR. Attorney.
[3:07:43] If you can read all of the
[3:07:43] public hearing items and
[3:07:44] once you do I'll go ahead
[3:07:45] and open up public hearing
[3:07:45] for the public.
[3:07:46] >> yes, MR. Chair.
[3:07:47] Five a is a resolution
[3:07:54] naming the library and its
[3:07:54] supplement.
[3:07:55] 5b and c are deferred.
[3:07:55] Operation of micro
[3:08:21] mobility devices electric
[3:08:22] vehicles and motorized
[3:08:22] scooters in the
[3:08:23] incorporated and
[3:08:24] unincorporated areas
[3:08:25] re-incorporating section
[3:08:25] of the code providing
[3:08:26] regulations for operation
[3:08:27] micro mobility devices,
[3:08:28] electric vehicles, and
[3:08:28] motorized scooters on
[3:08:29] rights-of-way providing
[3:08:30] for applicability and
[3:08:31] definitions providing
[3:08:32] mechanism for municipal
[3:08:33] enforcement regulations
[3:08:33] providing for enforcement
[3:08:35] by civil penalty providing
[3:08:35] severability and inclusion
[3:08:36] in the code and an
[3:08:40] effective date and
[3:08:41] supplement authorizing
[3:08:42] issuance not to exceed
[3:08:42] $350 million miami-dade
[3:08:43] county florida transit
[3:08:44] system bonds pursuant to
[3:08:45] section 208 ordinance
[3:08:45] number 0548 as amended for
[3:08:46] pain cost of certain
[3:08:47] transportation transit
[3:08:48] projects providing that
[3:08:48] details, terms, and other
[3:09:03] matters related to such
[3:09:04] bonds as drawdown bonds
[3:09:05] under a drawdown bond
[3:09:06] program be determined in
[3:09:07] subsequent resolutions
[3:09:08] authorizing undertaking of
[3:09:08] transportation and
[3:09:09] transportation projects of
[3:09:09] peoples transportation
[3:09:10] plan authorizing and
[3:09:11] directing agents to take
[3:09:12] all actions necessary to
[3:09:12] effectuate the purposes of
[3:09:13] this ordinance and
[3:09:14] ordinance number 0548 as
[3:09:15] amended and providing
[3:09:15] severability exclusion
[3:09:16] from the code line an
[3:09:17] effective date.
[3:09:17] Issuance of miami-dade
[3:09:18] county capital asset
[3:09:19] acquisition special
[3:09:19] obligation bonds from time
[3:09:20] to time in a more serious
[3:09:21] aggregate amount for
[3:09:28] purpose of renovating
[3:09:29] and/or equipping certain
[3:09:30] capital assets and
[3:09:30] projects providing details
[3:09:31] of said bond be determined
[3:09:32] in one or more serious
[3:09:33] resolution providing for
[3:09:34] exclusion from the code
[3:09:34] and an effective date.
[3:09:49] 5g is an authorization --
[3:09:50] not to exceed $350 million
[3:09:51] for purpose of paying
[3:09:51] certain capital project
[3:09:52] cost and pain cost of
[3:09:53] bonds pursuant to certain
[3:09:53] terms and conditions
[3:09:54] finding necessity for and
[3:09:55] authorizing negotiated
[3:09:55] sales bonds.
[3:09:56] 58 is a resolution
[3:09:59] authorizing not to exceed
[3:10:00] miami-dade county florida
[3:10:01] public facilities revenue
[3:10:02] bonds jackson hill system
[3:10:03] in one or more serious for
[3:10:03] pain cost of certain
[3:10:04] series funding debt series
[3:10:05] reserve fund's if
[3:10:11] necessary authorizing sale
[3:10:12] by competitive public bid
[3:10:13] not to exceed $700 million
[3:10:14] aggregate principal amount
[3:10:15] of miami-dade county
[3:10:29] florida seaport revenue
[3:10:30] bonds in one or more
[3:10:30] series on a senior basis
[3:10:31] to pay cost of certain
[3:10:32] improvements and capital
[3:10:33] expenditures and to refund
[3:10:34] all or portion of
[3:10:35] commercial paper notes.
[3:10:36] 5j is a resolution
[3:10:36] authorizing acquisition
[3:10:37] special obligation fund
[3:10:38] and aggregate principal
[3:10:38] amount not to exceed $480
[3:10:51] million providing that
[3:10:52] bonds should be payable
[3:10:53] solely from revenues at
[3:10:53] the county covenant to
[3:10:54] budget appropriately
[3:10:55] annually.
[3:10:55] 5l is an ordinance
[3:10:56] approving adopting and
[3:10:57] ratifying assessment
[3:10:57] rules, rates, and
[3:10:58] assessments for 219
[3:10:59] certain streetfighting
[3:11:01] special taxing districts
[3:11:01] for the fiscal year
[3:11:02] commencing OCTOBER 1, 2026
[3:11:02] and ending SEPTEMBER 30,
[3:11:03] 2027 and providing
[3:11:04] exclusion -- ordinance
[3:11:07] granting petition of
[3:11:08] establishment of a
[3:11:09] community district
[3:11:20] generally -- tennessee
[3:11:21] road southeast 12th avenue
[3:11:22] on the sxsw 328 street
[3:11:22] lucy street and on the
[3:11:33] west sxsw sixth avenue
[3:11:34] creating and establishing
[3:11:35] community district
[3:11:35] providing for land duties
[3:11:36] providing description
[3:11:37] boundaries providing board
[3:11:38] of supervisors accepting
[3:11:39] proper covenant
[3:11:39] restrictions providing
[3:11:46] exclusion from the code
[3:11:47] and adopting and ratifying
[3:11:47] non-ad valorem rates and
[3:11:48] assessments for the solid
[3:11:49] waste collection service
[3:11:52] area of miami-dade county
[3:11:52] florida providing
[3:11:58] severability exclusion by
[3:11:59] vote approving the waiver
[3:11:59] of plat 6301 sw. 27th
[3:12:08] street llc approving --
[3:12:09] approving the plat of q rt
[3:12:09] northwest residences filed
[3:12:10] by miami-dade county.
[3:12:13] 5r approving -- 5s is a
[3:12:13] resolution approving the
[3:12:24] plat of -- resolution
[3:12:24] approving the plat of
[3:12:25] habitat for humanity of
[3:12:26] greater miami inc.
[3:12:26] Approving the waiver of
[3:12:28] plat approving the plat of
[3:12:29] habitat for humanity of
[3:12:30] greater miami inc.
[3:12:31] Approving the waiver of
[3:12:31] plat 82105b is approving
[3:12:36] issuance of industrial
[3:12:37] development authority of
[3:12:37] revenue bonds in an amount
[3:12:38] not to exceed $40 million
[3:12:56] for the benefit of true
[3:12:57] north academy inc. Those
[3:12:58] are your public hearing
[3:12:58] items and at the
[3:12:59] appropriate time I do have
[3:13:00] some requests to
[3:13:00] bifurcate.
[3:13:01] >> thank you to the
[3:13:01] attorney.
[3:13:02] At this time we are going
[3:13:02] to open public hearing on
[3:13:03] all five items on our
[3:13:03] agenda.
[3:13:04] [Name] If you could
[3:13:05] approach, cornell whites,
[3:13:05] please approach, sophia
[3:13:06] amaya please approach.
[3:13:07] I don't see anyone
[3:13:07] approaching.
[3:13:08] Public hearing is now open
[3:13:09] on our five numbered items
[3:13:19] on our agenda.
[3:13:20] To the clerk, we have a
[3:13:20] quasijudicial item.
[3:13:20] T we
[3:13:21] have a speaker.
[3:13:22] At the appropriate time,
[3:13:22] please swear in this
[3:13:35] sophia amaya.
[3:13:38] Is sophia amaya present?
[3:13:43] I don't see sophia amaya.
[3:13:44] To those I called present,
[3:13:45] please approach the well.
[3:13:52] >> good morning,
[3:13:52] commission.
[3:13:53] My name is tangela
[3:13:56] dorsett.
[3:13:56] Good morning again.
[3:14:08] I'm the daughter of
[3:14:09] commissioner doran, the
[3:14:09] late commissioner.
[3:14:10] On behalf of the entire
[3:14:11] family, my sister is here,
[3:14:12] evette and my brother
[3:14:16] damon, he couldn't make
[3:14:16] it.
[3:14:17] We are extremely thankful
[3:14:17] and honored.
[3:14:32] My dad enjoyed his tenure
[3:14:32] and service of the
[3:14:33] community.
[3:14:33] He was a leader and he was
[3:14:34] passionate about his work.
[3:14:35] We look forward to the
[3:14:35] dedication of the ceremony
[3:14:36] of the library, and in the
[3:14:37] words of the late
[3:14:37] commissioner role,
[3:14:38] commission, you've done
[3:14:38] good.
[3:14:42] >> you done good.
[3:14:43] [Applause]
[3:14:43] >> my name is carnell
[3:14:48] white miami, florida and I
[3:14:57] am so pleased that proud
[3:14:58] to be able to stay here
[3:14:59] today and stand in front
[3:15:15] of everybody that
[3:15:16] commissioner road was my
[3:15:16] dear friend, my brother,
[3:15:17] my friends, my colleague.
[3:15:18] We go back to the first
[3:15:19] time I saw him in 1966 at
[3:15:19] florida a&m university
[3:15:20] campus.
[3:15:20] I appreciate you and thank
[3:15:21] you for doing this, for
[3:15:28] honoring an honorable man.
[3:15:29] Commissioner bastien, my
[3:15:30] commissioner, have you
[3:15:46] know I am yours.
[3:15:47] You are my commissioner.
[3:15:48] Position he served in for
[3:15:48] many, many years and I
[3:15:49] thank you for sponsoring
[3:15:49] this.
[3:15:50] I watch you from afar and
[3:15:51] sometimes closer than you
[3:15:51] know.
[3:15:52] When you are doing things
[3:15:59] with the most vulnerable
[3:15:59] of our citizens, thank you
[3:16:00] so very much.
[3:16:01] >> thank you, MR. White.
[3:16:01] Thank you so much.
[3:16:02] MR. Dewey knight, you are
[3:16:02] recognized.
[3:16:03] >> Roberto Gonzalez:
[3:16:05] thank you very much.
[3:16:05] I am grateful to be here
[3:16:06] today to celebrate.
[3:16:14] We thank commissioner
[3:16:14] bastien. It takes me back
[3:16:28] to when the gop bond was
[3:16:29] passed and he was
[3:16:30] successful in lobbying the
[3:16:30] commission to make this a
[3:16:31] priority.
[3:16:31] The library and the police
[3:16:32] station because people in
[3:16:37] that community had a
[3:16:37] digital divide.
[3:16:38] They didn't have wi-fi.
[3:16:39] Those poor kids were
[3:16:39] trying to go to school and
[3:17:02] didn't have access.
[3:17:03] Commissioner road brought
[3:17:04] so much safety to that
[3:17:04] community.
[3:17:05] A lot of commission was
[3:17:05] mad because he got his
[3:17:05] done first.
[3:17:06] So we are grateful that
[3:17:07] you would honor him today
[3:17:08] and remember the good work
[3:17:08] that he did.
[3:17:08] Thank you.
[3:17:09] >> thank you, MR. Knight.
[3:17:10] Last call for MISS Sophia
[3:17:10] amaya.
[3:17:11] Public hearing is now
[3:17:11] closed.
[3:17:12] To the attorneys, what
[3:17:13] items are being
[3:17:13] bifurcated?
[3:17:21] >> yes, we have come MR.
[3:17:21] Bastien on five a. And I
[3:17:30] have on 5l, commissioner
[3:17:36] -- senator garcia.
[3:17:36] And I also have some
[3:17:38] requests to cosponsor five
[3:18:00] a from commissioners ert
[3:18:00] and hardemon.
[3:18:01] >> I'll entertain a motion
[3:18:02] on the fives that were not
[3:18:02] bifurcated.
[3:18:03] >> I'd like to add 5d for
[3:18:03] a quick friendly
[3:18:04] amendment.
[3:18:04] >> 5d is also bifurcated.
[3:18:05] It's been moved.
[3:18:06] It's been moved, it's been
[3:18:06] seconded.
[3:18:07] Clerk, please call the
[3:18:07] roll.
[3:18:08] >> senator garcia.
[3:18:08] >> aye.
[3:18:13] >> commissioner gilbert?
[3:18:14] >> I vote yes.
[3:18:15] >> commissioner gonzalez?
[3:18:15] >> for.
[3:18:17] >> commissioner gonzalez.
[3:18:18] Commissioner regalado?
[3:18:33] Commissioner steinberg.
[3:18:34] Commissioner bastien.
[3:18:35] >> Marleine Bastien: yes.
[3:18:36] >> commissioner bermudez.
[3:18:37] Commissioner cohen
[3:18:37] higgins.
[3:18:38] >> Danielle Cohen Higgins:
[3:18:38] for.
[3:18:39] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:18:40] vice-CHAIRMAN Mcghee.
[3:18:41] >> Vice CHAIRMAN McGhee:
[3:18:41] yes.
[3:18:48] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez.
[3:18:48] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:18:49] yes.
[3:18:49] All right.
[3:18:50] MADAME Attorney, on the
[3:18:50] bifurcated items, isn't
[3:18:51] five a the first one?
[3:18:51] >> yes.
[3:18:52] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: so
[3:18:53] that's bifurcated by
[3:18:53] bermudez.
[3:18:54] >> commissioner bastien,
[3:19:02] I think, was bifurcating
[3:19:02] item 5 a.
[3:19:03] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:19:03] you're recognized.
[3:19:04] >> thank you, MR. Chair.
[3:19:05] As most of you know, the
[3:19:13] late commissioner road was
[3:19:13] a commissioner for
[3:19:14] district 2 for 12 long
[3:19:14] years.
[3:19:16] Like myself, he was a
[3:19:16] mental health professional
[3:19:19] and a social worker, so
[3:19:19] before he was even elected
[3:19:23] to the miami-dade
[3:19:23] commission, he has been
[3:19:30] providing lifeline,
[3:19:30] lifesaving services to his
[3:19:31] community.
[3:19:32] Through the organizations
[3:19:36] that provided wraparound
[3:19:42] services for the residents
[3:19:43] of district.
[3:19:44] He served for 12 years, as
[3:19:44] I indicated.
[3:19:50] As a result of his latest
[3:19:51] -- the library was
[3:19:52] approved in 2008.
[3:19:55] So I'm honored to really
[3:20:02] support this legislation
[3:20:04] and I pulled the item for
[3:20:18] very brief amendment -- so
[3:20:18] please read the motion.
[3:20:19] >> commissioner bastien
[3:20:20] moves to assert the word
[3:20:21] branch so that the new
[3:20:29] library would be the --
[3:20:30] library.
[3:20:30] >> thank you.
[3:20:31] And I'd like to share that
[3:20:31] the families here, you
[3:20:34] heard them.
[3:20:34] Commissioner role was
[3:20:35] cherished by many members,
[3:20:43] so I hope that you support
[3:20:43] this, and thank you to
[3:20:44] those who sponsor.
[3:20:45] >> CHAIRMAN, I'll sponsor.
[3:20:59] >> vice chair, when you're
[3:21:00] recognized.
[3:21:01] >> I wanted to briefly say
[3:21:01] because the family is here
[3:21:02] from district 12, thank I
[3:21:03] think this is a great day.
[3:21:04] Commissioner road was
[3:21:04] always very respectful to
[3:21:05] me.
[3:21:05] The governor was always
[3:21:06] very kind to what became
[3:21:13] of the city of durell.
[3:21:14] Was always very caring and
[3:21:14] listening to my argument,
[3:21:15] so I'm very supportive of
[3:21:31] this item and its
[3:21:31] well-deserved.
[3:21:32] >> vice-CHAIRMAN.
[3:21:32] >> thank you, MR.
[3:21:33] CHAIRMAN.
[3:21:33] I, too, echo the
[3:21:34] sentiments by my
[3:21:34] colleagues.
[3:21:34] I'd also like to be listed
[3:21:35] as a cosponsor.
[3:21:36] Let me say this to the
[3:21:36] family.
[3:21:37] Thank you for loaning to
[3:21:43] this great county the guv.
[3:21:44] He stood for great things
[3:21:44] for us.
[3:21:44] The idea that we now will
[3:21:45] have his name top of the
[3:21:49] library, everyone can see
[3:21:50] that remind every each and
[3:21:51] last one of us that
[3:21:51] knowledge and opportunity
[3:21:57] are the two -- who came
[3:21:57] through this community
[3:21:58] looking for, you know,
[3:21:59] understanding and
[3:22:20] appreciation and things of
[3:22:20] that nature.
[3:22:21] To commissioner bastien,
[3:22:22] hopefully, you know, we
[3:22:23] get that invitation to the
[3:22:23] ribbon-cutting.
[3:22:24] Definitely want to be
[3:22:24] there.
[3:22:25] Just thank you so much for
[3:22:25] leading the charge on
[3:22:26] behalf of this great man
[3:22:27] and great family.
[3:22:27] >> Marleine Bastien:
[3:22:28] thank you, vice chair.
[3:22:29] Are you trying to speak?
[3:22:34] Just keep in mind you all
[3:22:35] should learn from him,
[3:22:36] what he used to say.
[3:22:36] Talk long, talk wrong.
[3:22:37] [Laughter] Commissioner
[3:22:38] gilbert.
[3:22:38] >> Oliver Gilbert: he
[3:22:54] used to say he was also
[3:22:54] going to take a skinny
[3:22:55] minute.
[3:22:55] I just want to thank
[3:22:57] commissioner bastien for
[3:22:57] bringing this item.
[3:22:58] Knew the governor, I knew
[3:22:58] him.
[3:22:59] He was a good man.
[3:23:00] He loved to this
[3:23:00] community, he loved this
[3:23:00] county.
[3:23:08] I think this is overdue.
[3:23:09] It's fitting and it's
[3:23:09] overdue.
[3:23:10] Thank you very much for
[3:23:10] doing this.
[3:23:11] Thank you, commissioner
[3:23:11] bastien.
[3:23:12] >> thank you, MR.
[3:23:13] CHAIRMAN, and thank you
[3:23:32] commissioner gilbert for
[3:23:33] reminding us about the
[3:23:33] governor.
[3:23:33] When I was in legislator I
[3:23:34] worked with him on a
[3:23:35] couple of different issues
[3:23:36] and there's no doubt he
[3:23:36] really did care about his
[3:23:37] community, loves his
[3:23:38] people, and fought
[3:23:38] tirelessly for them every
[3:23:39] single day.
[3:23:40] Whether you agreed with
[3:23:40] him or not, one thing you
[3:23:41] could be certain of is he
[3:23:42] really did love his
[3:23:42] people.
[3:23:43] Commissioner gilbert,
[3:23:44] thank you so much for
[3:23:44] bringing this forward to
[3:23:45] us.
[3:23:45] >> please add me.
[3:23:46] > we can cosponsor all
[3:23:46] the way around.
[3:23:48] All right.
[3:23:48] Okay.
[3:23:51] So with that, clerk,
[3:23:52] please we have a motion
[3:23:52] and a second.
[3:23:56] With that, clerk, please
[3:23:56] call the roll.
[3:24:01] >> commissioner gilbert.
[3:24:02] Commissioner gonzalez.
[3:24:29] [Roll call]
[3:24:29] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:24:34] 5d, steinberg told that
[3:24:35] bifurcated.
[3:24:35] Go ahead, commissioner
[3:24:38] steinberg on 5d.
[3:24:38] >> Micky Steinberg:
[3:24:46] listen, I support the
[3:24:46] ordinance.
[3:24:47] I know it's a great
[3:24:48] ordinance and it's broadly
[3:24:49] written enough, but it
[3:24:49] really is a narrow
[3:24:58] ordinance and really
[3:24:59] impacts, my question and
[3:24:59] what I would like to
[3:25:00] proffer is the ability for
[3:25:01] other municipalities to
[3:25:01] opt in to this ordinance
[3:25:03] should they want to be
[3:25:03] interlocal and being that
[3:25:04] the title is broad enough,
[3:25:05] I would ask the county
[3:25:14] attorney to let me know
[3:25:15] that would be an
[3:25:15] opportunity again not
[3:25:16] mandating anything, not
[3:25:17] doing anything other than
[3:25:18] if another city wants to
[3:25:18] opt in, give them the
[3:25:20] ability to do so because
[3:25:20] we are giving them the
[3:25:21] regulations to do so and
[3:25:22] this is the model for what
[3:25:32] we are doing.
[3:25:33] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:25:34] commissioner regalado.
[3:25:35] >> Raquel Regalado: I
[3:25:36] have been requesting this.
[3:25:36] This ordinance is a lot of
[3:25:37] work and as many of you
[3:25:39] know, we were waiting for
[3:25:39] the state to really
[3:25:39] regulate it.
[3:25:40] This was done as a
[3:25:41] placeholder as the state
[3:25:41] regulated and
[3:25:45] unfortunately the governor
[3:25:45] vetoed.
[3:25:46] We had over a dozen
[3:25:53] meetings to make sure that
[3:25:55] everybody understood this.
[3:25:55] The reason for this
[3:25:56] ordinance because many of
[3:25:57] you know I'm a big
[3:25:57] supporter of microbe
[3:25:58] mobility.
[3:26:03] But on FEBRUARY 14, 2024
[3:26:04] we had -- died.
[3:26:05] She was killed by a
[3:26:12] 12-year-old on in the e
[3:26:12] bike.
[3:26:17] Killed by a 14-year-old on
[3:26:18] an e bike picker this is a
[3:26:19] big issue for east
[3:26:19] biscayne.
[3:26:31] I don't want to amend
[3:26:31] this.
[3:26:32] I would tell you all to
[3:26:32] bring your own items but
[3:26:33] to have your own public
[3:26:34] meetings so you can inform
[3:26:34] everyone on the breadth of
[3:26:35] this.
[3:26:38] We landed on this in
[3:26:39] collaboration with key
[3:26:40] biscayne and this is an
[3:26:40] extension of what has
[3:26:51] already been existing.
[3:26:52] I don't want to add other
[3:26:53] cities without them kind
[3:26:54] of going through the work
[3:26:54] of it.
[3:26:55] >> if I MAY clarify.
[3:26:55] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:26:56] you absolutely MAY, yes.
[3:27:12] >> it's just giving a
[3:27:13] mechanism for another city
[3:27:14] to enter into a local with
[3:27:15] the county so that they
[3:27:15] can also avail themselves
[3:27:16] of the good work that's
[3:27:17] been done on this
[3:27:17] ordinance.
[3:27:18] This is nothing to do with
[3:27:18] changing the ordinance
[3:27:19] were -- by the way,
[3:27:20] cities, some of them have
[3:27:21] adopted their own
[3:27:21] regulations.
[3:27:41] To the extent they can.
[3:27:42] Just you know, maybe the
[3:27:43] attorney can explain a
[3:27:44] little further so it
[3:27:44] doesn't touch the
[3:27:45] ordinance and the essence
[3:27:45] of it.
[3:27:46] >> this is about the
[3:27:46] rickenbacker, which is
[3:27:47] unique as a street.
[3:27:48] So the speed and
[3:27:50] everything are very, very
[3:27:51] different from other
[3:27:51] county owned streets.
[3:27:52] So I would say it would be
[3:27:53] better to do something
[3:27:53] separately for other
[3:27:54] county owned streets
[3:27:55] because the rickenbacker
[3:27:55] is a highway and this is
[3:27:56] about the rickenbacker.
[3:27:57] That's what I said it's
[3:27:58] very particular to what it
[3:28:08] was created for.
[3:28:09] >> I did pass legislation
[3:28:10] in the state that allowed
[3:28:11] local governments to
[3:28:11] regulate micro mobility
[3:28:12] devices and that is in
[3:28:13] statute now.
[3:28:19] Any municipality that
[3:28:20] wishes to do so can.
[3:28:20] Its specific.
[3:28:20] O
[3:28:21] commissioner steinberg's
[3:28:22] question, any municipality
[3:28:23] today under state statute
[3:28:23] can actually pass a
[3:28:24] statute.
[3:28:24] What commissioner
[3:28:29] regalado is saying, she
[3:28:30] and I both worked very
[3:28:30] hard because the village
[3:28:34] of key biscayne is banned.
[3:28:34] The one she's referring to
[3:28:40] is the crandon boulevard.
[3:28:41] This is so specific to key
[3:28:41] biscayne.
[3:28:44] Mission or steinberg, and
[3:28:47] a municipalities, mission
[3:28:54] or steinberg and I share
[3:28:55] miami beach and they are
[3:28:55] looking to expand the
[3:28:56] state statute in this
[3:28:57] coming session, so
[3:29:04] hopefully that will be
[3:29:05] something that we can work
[3:29:06] towards, but currently any
[3:29:06] municipality in the state
[3:29:07] of florida can regulate
[3:29:10] micro mobility devices.
[3:29:11] >> and I appreciate that.
[3:29:12] This is just an
[3:29:13] opportunity because it
[3:29:20] does say county roads.
[3:29:21] While it doesn't reference
[3:29:22] the areas in key biscayne,
[3:29:22] because it's broad enough
[3:29:23] in the title but it's
[3:29:24] specific enough to what
[3:29:24] you were doing.
[3:29:25] I know how contentious
[3:29:44] these things can be, but
[3:29:46] in light of what's been
[3:29:47] happening, the regulatory
[3:29:48] framework is here and it's
[3:29:49] just giving them the
[3:29:50] option if they want to opt
[3:29:51] into something like this.
[3:29:51] It MAY not be what they
[3:29:52] want.
[3:29:52] It MAY go further than
[3:29:54] what they want to do.
[3:29:54] I would just ask the
[3:29:55] attorneys is there a way
[3:29:56] to do this where it
[3:29:57] doesn't touch the item or
[3:29:57] keeps the essence?
[3:29:58] Because she did bring up a
[3:29:59] good point about it being
[3:30:00] specific to the type of
[3:30:01] road, the causeway.
[3:30:02] >> the only thing I would
[3:30:02] add, and I'm happy to work
[3:30:10] with you on the item.
[3:30:11] I think you need to
[3:30:11] establish parameters.
[3:30:12] And I would say a certain
[3:30:13] number of public meetings,
[3:30:13] outreach.
[3:30:14] I did all those things
[3:30:26] before this, you know,
[3:30:27] this has been working for
[3:30:28] a long time and has been
[3:30:28] an extension of this
[3:30:29] happening.
[3:30:29] I'm happy to work on an
[3:30:30] item that creates a way
[3:30:32] for them to request that
[3:30:33] we extend their
[3:30:33] limitations to county
[3:30:34] roads, but I think there
[3:30:36] has to be a very
[3:30:37] compelling reason.
[3:30:37] So I would be happy to
[3:30:42] work with you on a
[3:30:43] paradigm.
[3:30:43] >> in order for a city to
[3:30:44] opt in, they would have to
[3:30:52] pass a resolution which
[3:30:53] would then be a public
[3:30:53] hearing at the city.
[3:30:54] I thought it was an
[3:30:55] opportunity so that we
[3:30:55] don't all have to bring
[3:30:58] items forward and it would
[3:31:01] be more streamlined.
[3:31:04] Opportunistic moments
[3:31:04] where we are doing this
[3:31:24] legislation, why not give
[3:31:25] them the ability to opt in
[3:31:25] if they want to.
[3:31:26] This was just an
[3:31:27] opportunity to say listen,
[3:31:27] we have this framework, we
[3:31:28] want to opt in.
[3:31:29] These are the steps you
[3:31:29] would have to do to
[3:31:30] actually formally opt in.
[3:31:31] You can't just say here
[3:31:31] you go.
[3:31:31] That's fine.
[3:31:32] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:31:33] it's been moved and
[3:31:52] seconded.
[3:31:53] >> is there a code that is
[3:31:54] not specific to key
[3:31:54] biscayne or is this the
[3:31:55] only ordinance in
[3:31:56] miami-dade county that
[3:31:57] specifically speaks to
[3:31:57] micro mobility devices,
[3:32:18] electric by hopecles, and
[3:32:18] motorized scooters?
[3:32:19] >> yes, commissioner.
[3:32:20] This is the only ordinance
[3:32:20] currently in the code that
[3:32:21] speaks specifically to
[3:32:22] micro mobility devices.
[3:32:23] >> how many municipalities
[3:32:23] do we have in miami-dade
[3:32:24] county?
[3:32:24] 32, 34?
[3:32:24] If any of the 32 or 34
[3:32:25] municipalities within
[3:32:26] miami-dade avail
[3:32:26] themselves of this
[3:32:27] ordinance that we just
[3:32:53] spoke to, we have deaths,
[3:32:54] GOD forbid, any other
[3:32:55] municipality suffers the
[3:32:56] way key biscayne has, we
[3:32:56] are not able to create
[3:32:57] some sort of agreement to
[3:32:58] help them opt into this
[3:32:58] more easily?
[3:32:59] I'm confused as to the
[3:32:59] position that's currently
[3:33:00] being taken by the board.
[3:33:01] Hy wouldn't we allow our
[3:33:02] municipalities to avail
[3:33:03] themselves to an ordinance
[3:33:03] that saves lives, that
[3:33:04] have a ton of work and
[3:33:05] that we all applaud?
[3:33:05] I do not understand that.
[3:33:06] >> if I can respond to
[3:33:06] that.
[3:33:07] What I'm saying is there
[3:33:08] is a lot of public meeting
[3:33:08] and input to come to this
[3:33:09] ordinance.
[3:33:09] It has very rickenbacker
[3:33:10] specific penalties and it
[3:33:11] doesn't speak to all the
[3:33:26] meetings everything that
[3:33:27] came before the ordinance.
[3:33:27] What I'm saying is I'm
[3:33:28] happy to draft an
[3:33:28] ordinance for cities to
[3:33:29] opt in, but it needs to
[3:33:30] have a lot of the things
[3:33:30] that are not in the
[3:33:31] ordinance because the
[3:33:32] ordinance came after two
[3:33:33] years of working with key
[3:33:33] biscayne.
[3:33:34] I'm happy to work with
[3:33:35] commissioner steinberg or
[3:33:36] whoever wants to do it to
[3:33:37] amend this ordinance and
[3:33:37] another item that gives
[3:33:38] the municipality and put,
[3:33:39] speaks to the hearings and
[3:33:40] everyone so that it can
[3:33:40] opt in.
[3:33:40] >> thank you for that.
[3:33:41] O
[3:33:41] the attorneys, what would
[3:33:42] be the difficulty of
[3:33:43] allowing the
[3:33:43] municipalities to opt in
[3:33:44] or whatever the proper
[3:33:48] language is a way that
[3:33:49] commissioner steinberg
[3:33:49] just requested?
[3:33:50] >> commissioner, that
[3:33:51] would require an amendment
[3:33:58] to section 2a as it is
[3:33:59] currently written.
[3:34:00] It is narrow to the
[3:34:00] crandon park boulevard.
[3:34:01] That section would need to
[3:34:11] be amended to expand.
[3:34:12] >> okay, it would need to
[3:34:13] be amended to expand
[3:34:13] applicability countywide
[3:34:14] or.
[3:34:14] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:34:15] the opportunity for
[3:34:17] existing municipalities to
[3:34:17] adopt and should they be
[3:34:18] able to do so?
[3:34:18] I'm not trying to expand
[3:34:19] it countywide.
[3:34:20] That wasn't the question.
[3:34:21] The question was to what
[3:34:26] commissioner steinberg
[3:34:27] referenced multiple times
[3:34:27] very clearly.
[3:34:37] >> it would be amended to
[3:34:38] apply countywide with opt
[3:34:39] in language.
[3:34:39] >> so it wouldn't apply
[3:34:40] countywide unless
[3:34:41] municipalities elected to
[3:34:54] enter into some sort of
[3:34:55] interlocal agreement
[3:34:56] opting in, correct?
[3:34:56] >> I understand that to be
[3:34:57] the request that this
[3:34:58] board or commissioner
[3:34:59] steinberg was requesting
[3:34:59] for an amendment to have
[3:35:00] it apply countywide but
[3:35:01] allow the municipalities
[3:35:01] to opt in.
[3:35:02] So it wouldn't apply as a
[3:35:05] matter of right, as a
[3:35:06] matter of law.
[3:35:07] Each municipality would
[3:35:08] have to take an
[3:35:08] affirmative step to opt in
[3:35:09] after, you know, after
[3:35:10] reviewing the ordinance.
[3:35:10] >> MR. Chair?
[3:35:15] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:35:16] hold on.
[3:35:16] You still have the floor.
[3:35:17] Are you done?
[3:35:18] >> I'm watching
[3:35:32] commissioner steinberg and
[3:35:33] it doesn't seem that
[3:35:34] reflects what she was
[3:35:34] trying to accomplish.
[3:35:35] I'm trying to understand
[3:35:36] if there was a vehicle to
[3:35:37] reflect what the
[3:35:38] commissioner specifically
[3:35:38] stated.
[3:35:39] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:35:39] commissioner steinberg.
[3:35:40] >> right.
[3:35:40] My intent wasn't
[3:35:41] necessarily to have this
[3:35:47] blanket countywide
[3:35:47] language.
[3:35:48] It was more the ability to
[3:35:49] have municipalities opt in
[3:35:49] or districts opt in where
[3:35:50] now we are thinking about
[3:35:51] it with maybe the
[3:35:51] unincorporated areas MAY
[3:35:52] want to have some of this
[3:35:53] regulation as well, but
[3:35:53] ultimately was specific
[3:35:54] and minor to allow for an
[3:35:54] opt in motion, but maybe
[3:36:03] at this time I'm happy and
[3:36:04] I appreciate the line of
[3:36:05] questioning, commissioner
[3:36:06] higgins.
[3:36:06] I think I'm happy to bring
[3:36:07] -- by the way, does
[3:36:12] anybody have a hold on
[3:36:13] this?
[3:36:13] I want to make sure if I
[3:36:14] bring something forward
[3:36:15] that I'll actually be able
[3:36:17] to bring it forward
[3:36:18] because can the attorneys
[3:36:19] maybe draft something and
[3:36:56] we have something today?
[3:36:57] >> to the attorneys --
[3:36:58] well, go ahead and answer
[3:36:59] that question.
[3:36:59] The same way you were
[3:37:00] saying we could amend it
[3:37:02] to say this applies
[3:37:02] countywide with an opt in,
[3:37:03] we can amend it by saying
[3:37:04] not apply countywide and
[3:37:05] we would have, you know,
[3:37:06] basically interlocal's
[3:37:06] allowing for
[3:37:07] municipalities to opt in
[3:37:08] to the attorneys, so my
[3:37:08] question is specific.
[3:37:09] I'm asking you whether the
[3:37:10] inverse of what you
[3:37:10] proposed is possible.
[3:37:12] Instead of saying we want
[3:37:13] this to apply countywide,
[3:37:14] we want to instead give
[3:37:14] municipalities by local
[3:37:15] interest we represent a
[3:37:16] lot of municipalities that
[3:37:16] MAY want to opt in.
[3:37:16] S
[3:37:17] that language a
[3:37:17] possibility?
[3:37:18] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:37:18] you're recognized to the
[3:37:19] attorneys.
[3:37:19] > commissioner, I want
[3:37:22] to be clear I understand
[3:37:22] your question.
[3:37:23] Can I kindly ask you to
[3:37:24] repeat that?
[3:37:24] >> absolutely.
[3:37:25] You proposed having the
[3:37:26] ordinance amended to apply
[3:37:33] countywide with an opt in
[3:37:35] by the municipalities.
[3:37:35] The commissioner that made
[3:37:36] the original request,
[3:37:37] instead what I was
[3:37:37] requesting his language
[3:37:47] allowing specific
[3:37:48] municipalities to opt in
[3:37:49] should they desire to do
[3:37:49] so.
[3:37:49] It's taking the proposal
[3:37:50] you made and creating the
[3:37:51] inverse of that proposal.
[3:37:52] My question is a simple
[3:37:52] one.
[3:37:55] Is that possible?
[3:37:56] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:37:57] yes, commissioner.
[3:37:58] >> it is possible, so what
[3:37:58] is the downside then of
[3:37:59] including that language in
[3:38:01] the ordinance considering
[3:38:02] the lives that it saves,
[3:38:08] the work it's done
[3:38:09] applauding the work.
[3:38:10] I represent -- what if
[3:38:11] they want to be included?
[3:38:12] I don't understand why we
[3:38:17] would want to wait months
[3:38:18] and months for a simple
[3:38:19] item that essentially
[3:38:20] could be accomplished here
[3:38:21] via a simple amendment,
[3:38:22] which is what I wanted to
[3:38:22] clarify through the
[3:38:41] attorneys whether that
[3:38:42] amendment was possible.
[3:38:43] >> if I could clarify,
[3:38:43] commissioner, this
[3:38:44] amendment only applies to
[3:38:44] county roads.
[3:38:45] >> we understand that.
[3:38:46] I don't think anybody is
[3:38:46] confused.
[3:38:47] >> for the entire road
[3:38:47] network within the
[3:38:48] municipality, just wanted
[3:38:48] to be clear.
[3:38:49] >> thank you.
[3:39:10] To respond to that
[3:39:11] question, my concern is
[3:39:12] notice and litigation.
[3:39:12] As we work through this,
[3:39:13] we dealt with a lot of
[3:39:14] individuals that did not
[3:39:15] agree with this ordinance,
[3:39:15] but we had a series of
[3:39:16] public meetings and we
[3:39:16] worked through it to
[3:39:17] ensure that the county
[3:39:18] would not enter into
[3:39:19] litigation as a result.
[3:39:19] There is a reason the
[3:39:20] governor vetoed it.
[3:39:21] There is a group of humans
[3:39:21] who did not want this type
[3:39:22] of limitation to micro
[3:39:23] mobility, and while this
[3:39:28] gives some notice to the
[3:39:29] municipalities, it does
[3:39:30] not give them notice that
[3:39:30] an item speaking
[3:39:31] countywide would give.
[3:39:32] Also, if you amended it
[3:39:32] this way, you're focusing,
[3:39:33] it's rickenbacker focused.
[3:39:34] There's different county
[3:39:35] roads with different
[3:39:37] speeds and different
[3:39:37] modalities and the
[3:39:38] ordinance speaks to the
[3:39:38] rickenbacker and crandon,
[3:39:39] which is a different road
[3:39:40] than a lot of county owned
[3:39:40] roads.
[3:39:41] Inally, we then
[3:39:41] have to deal with the
[3:39:42] issue of what we would do
[3:39:57] in terms of -- for cities
[3:39:58] for this prohibition on
[3:39:59] county roads, then we need
[3:40:00] a vehicle for this board
[3:40:00] in terms of our county
[3:40:01] roads.
[3:40:12] Unincorporated is mainly
[3:40:13] all county roads.
[3:40:13] So that's why the
[3:40:14] rickenbacker is different
[3:40:15] because of the speeds.
[3:40:15] It is the highway.
[3:40:17] That's what I would
[3:40:18] caution you, and I'm happy
[3:40:18] to work on a comprehensive
[3:40:19] item that really covers
[3:40:20] this, but you need to
[3:40:21] cover the speed, the size,
[3:40:21] the cost.
[3:40:29] This is very particular to
[3:40:30] the rickenbacker and you
[3:40:30] need to have public
[3:40:31] meetings and bake that
[3:40:31] into the process.
[3:40:32] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:40:33] hold on.
[3:40:34] Commissioner gilbert,
[3:40:35] you're recognized.
[3:40:36] >> Oliver Gilbert: at the
[3:40:37] risk of agreeing with
[3:40:37] commissioner regalado
[3:40:42] twice, I think she's
[3:40:43] likely right on this.
[3:40:44] And I think that it
[3:40:56] actually came through
[3:40:57] transportation.
[3:40:58] And so the reason why it
[3:40:59] passed through the
[3:40:59] transportation committee
[3:41:00] was because like it did
[3:41:02] was because of its limited
[3:41:02] nature.
[3:41:03] This board can broaden it
[3:41:03] if you'd like, but let's
[3:41:04] be clear we do have a
[3:41:05] committee process for a
[3:41:05] reason.
[3:41:06] This broad of an item
[3:41:12] would have been treated
[3:41:13] differently in committee.
[3:41:14] So listen, I think that
[3:41:17] the notice requirement is
[3:41:18] a significant thing.
[3:41:19] There are people who don't
[3:41:20] agree with this.
[3:41:21] While I do and
[3:41:24] commissioner steinberg,
[3:41:25] there are residents who
[3:41:27] might have chosen to be
[3:41:28] heard on this item in
[3:41:31] committee had it -- it was
[3:41:32] postured like this.
[3:41:35] I would caution us about
[3:41:41] changing something so
[3:41:42] substantially at the board
[3:41:43] level on an item that has
[3:41:44] gone through committee,
[3:41:45] MR. CHAIRMAN.
[3:41:46] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:41:47] okay.
[3:41:55] Senator garcia.
[3:41:56] >> Rene Garcia: I agree
[3:41:57] with everything that's
[3:41:58] being said, but the
[3:41:58] request is an opt in
[3:41:58] provision.
[3:41:59] It's opting into the rules
[3:42:04] that are being established
[3:42:05] by the municipalities.
[3:42:12] I get it's specific to the
[3:42:12] road.
[3:42:13] I get that it went through
[3:42:14] the committee process, but
[3:42:15] at the end of the day we
[3:42:22] are representatives of the
[3:42:22] people.
[3:42:23] Think it's incumbent on
[3:42:24] the municipality itself
[3:42:38] that wants to opt in to do
[3:42:39] what they need to do for
[3:42:40] their municipality, but I
[3:42:40] don't see a problem with
[3:42:41] having municipalities opt
[3:42:41] in.
[3:42:42] We are not even pushing
[3:42:42] anything on anyone.
[3:42:43] E
[3:42:43] created this law, you
[3:42:44] understand?
[3:42:45] There's some limitations
[3:42:45] to it, but you can use the
[3:42:49] parameters to apply it to
[3:42:50] ur constituency.
[3:42:50] I am perfectly fine with
[3:42:51] seconding the amendment
[3:42:52] and trying to get this
[3:42:52] moving forward.
[3:42:53] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:43:11] sub itself, but as
[3:43:12] amended, but hold on.
[3:43:16] I have commissioner -- I
[3:43:16] have gonzalez in the queue
[3:43:19] and I will go to lopez.
[3:43:30] >> Roberto Gonzalez:
[3:43:31] thank you, MR. Chair.
[3:43:32] I do appreciate
[3:43:34] commissioner regalado's
[3:43:34] explanation of the
[3:43:35] complexity of how this was
[3:43:35] brought forward.
[3:43:36] I think it's something
[3:43:43] that was very much needed.
[3:43:44] However, there is
[3:43:45] something the county
[3:43:46] attorney said really
[3:43:46] caught my attention and
[3:43:47] that was that this was
[3:43:47] only applicable to county
[3:43:48] roads.
[3:44:06] And so from what I
[3:44:08] understand, commissioner
[3:44:08] steinberg was requesting
[3:44:09] that the amendment apply
[3:44:10] if, and correct me if I'm
[3:44:11] wrong, commissioner
[3:44:11] steinberg, if it passes
[3:44:12] through the municipality.
[3:44:13] I think of it went through
[3:44:14] a municipality, logically,
[3:44:15] and a municipality had
[3:44:15] noticed hearings and a
[3:44:17] municipality voted to have
[3:44:19] municipal roads engaged in
[3:44:19] something similar, I think
[3:44:20] that what you were trying
[3:44:30] to do is, since those
[3:44:32] municipal roads within the
[3:44:32] municipality that had
[3:44:33] those public hearings have
[3:44:34] adopted it for the
[3:44:34] municipality, perhaps they
[3:44:35] can just opt in so that
[3:44:36] the county roads are
[3:44:42] applicable as well.
[3:44:42] I think that that would
[3:44:43] solve the issue with
[3:44:44] public notice along with
[3:44:55] the issues of speed and
[3:44:56] the discrepancies as to
[3:44:57] whether the notice had to
[3:44:57] be heard here.
[3:44:59] I don't know if you want
[3:45:00] to continue, but I think I
[3:45:32] would be supportive of an
[3:45:33] amendment.
[3:45:33] >> MR. Chair?
[3:45:34] >> Vicki Lopez: thank
[3:45:35] you, MR. CHAIRMAN.
[3:45:35] I just -- I have a quick
[3:45:36] question.
[3:45:36] I have been dealing with
[3:45:37] this as a state rep, but I
[3:45:38] have a question.
[3:45:38] In the case of key
[3:45:39] biscayne, it banned all
[3:45:40] micro mobility devices on
[3:45:40] their own streets.
[3:45:41] The only one that runs
[3:45:42] through the village is
[3:45:42] crandon boulevard.
[3:45:43] It is a county road.
[3:45:48] So despite whatever a
[3:45:48] municipality MAY or MAY
[3:45:49] not do with their roads, I
[3:45:50] believe the question here
[3:45:51] is about what to do with a
[3:45:51] county road that runs
[3:45:52] through a municipality,
[3:45:53] whether they do anything
[3:45:54] or they don't, right?
[3:46:15] i don't know, and this is
[3:46:17] a question to commissioner
[3:46:17] regalado, if her item --
[3:46:18] because I know this item
[3:46:19] was introduced two years
[3:46:19] ago.
[3:46:20] It was sunset.
[3:46:20] So the question is are the
[3:46:21] regulations, are the rules
[3:46:22] governing the right of
[3:46:23] ways and speed limits and
[3:46:24] all of that, is that
[3:46:25] specific to key biscayne?
[3:46:25] Because if it is, I don't
[3:46:26] know how you would allow
[3:46:27] another municipality to
[3:46:27] opt in because you would
[3:46:28] be asking every
[3:46:28] municipality to comply
[3:46:29] with what key biscayne
[3:46:30] decided.
[3:46:41] Is that true?
[3:46:42] >> yes, it is specific to
[3:46:43] key biscayne as are the
[3:46:43] penalty amounts and the
[3:46:44] understanding of the speed
[3:46:45] based on the roads.
[3:46:45] That's what I was saying
[3:46:46] if we are going to do
[3:46:47] something that is broader
[3:46:47] than this, I'm happy to
[3:46:48] draft something, but it
[3:46:49] would have to have
[3:46:50] different categories for
[3:46:51] different types of roads
[3:46:52] that have different
[3:46:53] speeds, different
[3:46:54] sidewalks, and you would
[3:46:54] have to have different
[3:46:55] pricing for the
[3:46:55] violations.
[3:46:56] His is built
[3:46:56] specifically for
[3:46:57] rickenbacker and crandon.
[3:47:10] >> if I MAY, I think I
[3:47:10] have an idea.
[3:47:11] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:47:12] yes, but one second.
[3:47:13] Commissioner cohen
[3:47:13] higgins, you're
[3:47:14] recognized.
[3:47:14] >> Danielle Cohen Higgins:
[3:47:15] to the sponsor of the
[3:47:17] item, section 5 of the
[3:47:18] item says enforcement by
[3:47:18] municipalities.
[3:47:19] A municipality MAY upon
[3:47:20] approval of the board of
[3:47:31] county commissioners as it
[3:47:32] relates to roads within
[3:47:32] the boundaries of said
[3:47:33] municipality.
[3:47:34] The agenda item approving
[3:47:34] such agreement shall be
[3:47:35] sponsored by a district
[3:47:37] commissioner in whose
[3:47:38] district any portion of
[3:47:39] such municipality lies.
[3:47:39] So it's already in the
[3:47:57] ordinance.
[3:47:58] We're talking about this
[3:47:59] being rickenbacker and key
[3:48:00] biscayne specifically, but
[3:48:00] there's section 5, section
[3:48:01] 6 enforcement talks about
[3:48:02] municipality.
[3:48:02] Ection 6d,
[3:48:04] a municipality entering
[3:48:05] into a local agreement as
[3:48:05] provided in this section
[3:48:06] MAY provide for
[3:48:07] enforcement in accordance
[3:48:07] with its own procedures.
[3:48:08] And then section 7
[3:48:08] entirely speaks to
[3:48:09] specific language.
[3:48:09] I don't know how the
[3:48:21] question that the
[3:48:22] commissioner really baked
[3:48:23] into the ordinance, which
[3:48:24] is why many of us found it
[3:48:24] extremely difficult to
[3:48:25] understand how this
[3:48:25] ordinance could not have
[3:48:26] an opt in so much so that
[3:48:40] is already built into the
[3:48:41] ordinance.
[3:48:42] >> MR. Chair, if I can
[3:48:42] respond to that.
[3:48:43] >> is that accurate?
[3:48:44] >> commissioner, section 2
[3:48:45] a identifies the
[3:48:45] applicability of the code
[3:48:46] provision itself.
[3:48:47] It says that this section
[3:48:47] shall be applicable to
[3:48:48] crandon boulevard between
[3:48:49] the village of key
[3:48:49] biscayne to accomplish
[3:48:50] what commissioner cohen
[3:48:52] higgins is suggesting
[3:48:53] would just require either
[3:48:55] a deletion or modification
[3:49:05] of 2 a to broaden that
[3:49:05] definition.
[3:49:07] >> MR. Chair, if I can
[3:49:07] explain?
[3:49:08] Several times I've brought
[3:49:08] items and we've had
[3:49:08] questions about the
[3:49:09] language of the ordinance
[3:49:10] and that's because time
[3:49:16] and time again our county
[3:49:16] attorneys tell us that we
[3:49:17] cannot draft something
[3:49:18] that is hyper specific to
[3:49:29] an area, that it must
[3:49:30] further back to the entire
[3:49:31] code and then get specific
[3:49:31] in the body.
[3:49:32] I am not doing anything
[3:49:33] that everyone doesn't do
[3:49:33] in a single item.
[3:49:34] In fact, when we suspended
[3:49:36] the cra that we are going
[3:49:37] to visit tonight, it had
[3:49:38] language that applied to
[3:49:53] everyone and specified
[3:49:55] that this is only for --
[3:49:55] because this is what the
[3:49:56] county attorneys tell us
[3:49:57] we need to do so as not to
[3:49:57] create anomalies inside
[3:49:58] the code.
[3:49:58] I have to bring an item
[3:49:59] that complies with the
[3:50:00] entire code of miami-dade
[3:50:00] county.
[3:50:01] That's why it refers back
[3:50:01] to those pieces.
[3:50:15] i cannot create a vehicle
[3:50:17] for the acceptance of an
[3:50:17] interlocal that is
[3:50:18] different from the general
[3:50:19] rules of how an interlocal
[3:50:19] is accepted for any other
[3:50:20] modality or purpose in
[3:50:21] miami-dade county.
[3:50:21] So no, the item is not in
[3:50:22] conflict with itself, but
[3:50:24] it is specific to key
[3:50:24] biscayne as are the
[3:50:25] penalties that were
[3:50:25] negotiated with the
[3:50:26] residents of key biscayne
[3:50:26] and the village.
[3:50:27] And again, I'm happy to
[3:50:28] add to this ordinance with
[3:50:28] a separate item.
[3:50:40] I would ask that it had
[3:50:41] meetings and discussions.
[3:50:42] I don't think that we
[3:50:42] should amend this so that
[3:50:44] a municipality passes
[3:50:45] something and all the
[3:50:45] sudden there's a county
[3:50:46] road that prohibits this
[3:50:46] type of modality because
[3:50:47] it is really far-reaching
[3:50:49] and what it will do is go
[3:50:50] in the other direction and
[3:50:51] get as preempted when it
[3:50:52] comes to these types of
[3:50:52] regulations.
[3:50:53] >> to the attorneys
[3:50:53] because now I want
[3:50:54] clarification because both
[3:51:05] are making a good
[3:51:06] argument.
[3:51:06] It's not even an argument.
[3:51:07] One is making an argument,
[3:51:08] one is reading straight
[3:51:08] out of the item, which is
[3:51:09] very clear to me.
[3:51:09] So which is it?
[3:51:10] Can it be done today per
[3:51:11] the item already or is it
[3:51:17] specific only and
[3:51:18] exclusively to key
[3:51:18] biscayne and the
[3:51:19] rickenbacker and all that
[3:51:19] stuff?
[3:51:21] Which one is it?
[3:51:21] >> the item could be
[3:51:22] amended today if it's the
[3:51:22] will of the board.
[3:51:23] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:51:24] okay, but that doesn't
[3:51:24] answer my question.
[3:51:35] >> let me just bring it in
[3:51:36] because I brought this up.
[3:51:36] >> I'm sorry, I didn't get
[3:51:37] that part because the item
[3:51:38] is written in the
[3:51:39] applicability section.
[3:51:40] The applicability section
[3:51:49] is narrowed to key
[3:51:50] boulevard in key biscayne.
[3:51:51] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:51:51] it's not open to everyone
[3:51:52] even though it reads that
[3:51:53] it is, but it's tricky and
[3:51:54] you guys figure it out.
[3:51:54] Ommissioner steinberg,
[3:52:00] you're recognized.
[3:52:01] >> Micky Steinberg: I
[3:52:02] just want to back it up.
[3:52:03] Y intention was to back
[3:52:04] it up and give it the
[3:52:04] ability.
[3:52:04] I want to thank my
[3:52:05] colleagues because
[3:52:06] obviously the section you
[3:52:09] read is what prompted the
[3:52:10] whole initiation of
[3:52:11] wanting to have other
[3:52:12] cities because it said it
[3:52:12] there I'm not an attorney.
[3:52:44] I spoke to the attorney
[3:52:44] yesterday.
[3:52:44] He said yes,
[3:52:45] we can broaden it.
[3:52:46] I didn't think it would
[3:52:46] have a broader impact in
[3:52:47] that way.
[3:52:47] I was trying to do
[3:52:48] something to help
[3:52:49] municipalities regulate on
[3:52:49] their county road.
[3:52:50] Having said that, being
[3:52:51] that commissioner lopez
[3:52:52] did bring up the type of
[3:52:53] speed limit that could
[3:52:53] potentially be slightly
[3:52:55] different, I would ask my
[3:52:56] colleagues for the support
[3:52:57] to waive the rules and let
[3:52:57] me at least have the
[3:52:59] ability to work on almost
[3:53:00] an amendment to this item
[3:53:00] so that we can bring
[3:53:01] something forward that MAY
[3:53:02] also want to help the
[3:53:02] unincorporated areas, I
[3:53:03] don't know.
[3:53:03] That way I'm not going to
[3:53:04] be blocked from bringing
[3:53:05] something because someone
[3:53:06] MAY have a hold on them.
[3:53:07] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:53:07] okay, so let's do this.
[3:53:28] That works for me, too, so
[3:53:30] let's take a vote on this
[3:53:31] item 1st and if there's no
[3:53:32] further discussion on it
[3:53:33] and I'll entertain the
[3:53:34] motion from commissioner
[3:53:34] steinberg on if it exists.
[3:53:35] There MAY not be a hold on
[3:53:36] it, but if there is, waive
[3:53:36] the rules to --
[3:53:37] >> shall it.
[3:53:38] >> Raquel Regalado: it's
[3:53:39] been moved by commissioner
[3:53:39] regalado, seconded by the
[3:53:40] vice chair.
[3:53:40] Clerk, please call the
[3:53:40] roll.
[3:53:41] >> commissioner gonzalez.
[3:53:42] >> for.
[3:53:51] [Roll call]
[3:53:52] >> I thought it was gonna
[3:53:53] be a skinny minute, but
[3:53:53] the answer was yes.
[3:54:00] >> chairmann rodriguez.
[3:54:01] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: I
[3:54:01] vote yes.
[3:54:02] >> Mayor Levine Cava: now
[3:54:03] commissioner steinberg
[3:54:04] moves in the event
[3:54:16] necessary, but moves to --
[3:54:16] jerry?
[3:54:17] >> CHAIRMAN, point of
[3:54:17] order.
[3:54:18] If she just brought an
[3:54:18] item, and then if there
[3:54:19] was a hold, her bringing
[3:54:20] in item would've
[3:54:20] eliminated the hold.
[3:54:21] Somebody else might have a
[3:54:28] hold.
[3:54:29] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:54:30] jerry, is there --
[3:54:30] >> we don't know if there
[3:54:31] is a hold, but all she is
[3:54:32] saying she would like to
[3:54:32] work on an item amending
[3:54:33] this one, so to the extent
[3:54:34] the board waives the rules
[3:54:35] to allow her to work on
[3:54:40] that item.
[3:54:41] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:54:42] it's been moved, it's been
[3:54:42] seconded.
[3:54:43] Ll in favor
[3:54:43] say aye say aye.
[3:54:44] >> aye.
[3:54:44] >> so we just placed
[3:54:59] steinberg in first place
[3:54:59] now?
[3:55:00] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: we
[3:55:01] did on that one item, so
[3:55:01] congrats to steinberg.
[3:55:02] Vice chair, do you want to
[3:55:03] take a point of privilege
[3:55:04] to recognize some of your
[3:55:13] interns?
[3:55:14] >> thank you, MR.
[3:55:14] CHAIRMAN.
[3:55:14] Today we have the future
[3:55:15] of america sitting here in
[3:55:16] the chambers and I'm going
[3:55:17] to ask those young lady
[3:55:17] and young men who have
[3:55:18] been interning in my
[3:55:19] office to stand up and be
[3:55:19] recognized.
[3:55:20] Ladies and gentlemen,
[3:55:21] these are the future
[3:55:45] interns.
[3:55:45] [Applause]
[3:55:46] >> Vice CHAIRMAN McGhee:
[3:55:47] MR. CHAIRMAN, I have the
[3:55:48] honor and privilege of
[3:55:49] actually representing
[3:55:50] these young individuals,
[3:55:50] but they represent the
[3:55:51] community and there are a
[3:55:52] total of 21 of them
[3:55:52] working out of our office.
[3:55:53] Each year we have at least
[3:55:54] 20 interns, so each year
[3:55:55] we try to show the force
[3:55:55] of what the future is
[3:55:56] going to look like by way
[3:55:57] of these individuals, so
[3:55:58] thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN.
[3:55:59] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:55:59] thank you all for being
[3:56:00] here today and being
[3:56:00] interns for the vice
[3:56:01] chair.
[3:56:01] Ll right, moving
[3:56:02] on with our list.
[3:56:02] I've got is 5f next?
[3:56:03] >> yes.
[3:56:03] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: so
[3:56:07] I'll entertain nationain a
[3:56:08] motion.
[3:56:08] Seconded by commissioner
[3:56:22] lopez and then
[3:56:22] commissioner regalado?
[3:56:23] >> Raquel Regalado: point
[3:56:24] of privilege, I just want
[3:56:25] to make sure that the
[3:56:25] attorneys had that vote
[3:56:26] for also 11 a 24.
[3:56:26] The two of them went
[3:56:27] together.
[3:56:27] Don't know if
[3:56:28] they read it they said
[3:56:28] that.
[3:56:43] That's why we pooled it so
[3:56:43] it could go together.
[3:56:44] >> we did not, but I mean,
[3:56:45] we could do it now at the
[3:56:45] chairs discretion.
[3:56:46] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:56:47] we'll take it in a second
[3:56:48] because I already have a
[3:56:48] motion and second on 5f.
[3:56:49] You are recognized,
[3:56:50] regalado.
[3:56:51] >> Raquel Regalado: go to
[3:56:52] 5f and come back.
[3:56:53] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: I
[3:56:53] already have a motion and
[3:57:09] a second, so.
[3:57:10] >> Raquel Regalado: so on
[3:57:10] 5f, I just want to mention
[3:57:11] something to the board
[3:57:12] just to give you some
[3:57:12] numbers.
[3:57:12] We have a lot of bond
[3:57:28] items that were added to
[3:57:28] this agenda and I want to
[3:57:29] speak a little bit later
[3:57:30] specifically about the
[3:57:30] ports one, but just to
[3:57:31] give you an idea on the
[3:57:32] number, if you combine all
[3:57:33] these items, you get in
[3:57:33] this agenda alone we're
[3:58:00] drawing down or
[3:58:00] authorizing $1.7 billion.
[3:58:01] We have 5p that is the
[3:58:02] transit for 35 million.
[3:58:03] We have 5f, 38 million for
[3:58:03] capital that we're
[3:58:04] discussing now.
[3:58:04] We have 5g 35 million for
[3:58:05] general obligation.
[3:58:06] We have public facilities
[3:58:06] and 5h, 275 million.
[3:58:07] We have 5I, which is the
[3:58:08] one I'm most interested
[3:58:09] in, 700 million.
[3:58:09] We have 5j, 480 million.
[3:58:10] And the total is 2.1
[3:58:20] billion, but then you back
[3:58:21] out what we are paying
[3:58:22] down for debt that we
[3:58:22] already issued.
[3:58:23] This particular one, it's
[3:58:23] a little concerning
[3:58:24] because this is the one
[3:58:27] that functions a little
[3:58:27] bit like a credit card,
[3:58:28] and I just want everyone
[3:58:29] to understand that a,
[3:58:30] we're drawing down at a
[3:58:42] time where interest rates
[3:58:43] are very high.
[3:58:43] B, we can continue to the
[3:58:44] way we've been doing it
[3:58:44] with the short-term
[3:58:45] financing.
[3:58:45] We don't know what's going
[3:58:46] to happen with property
[3:58:47] taxes and all of this
[3:58:48] impacts our debt
[3:58:48] financing, so debt
[3:58:49] financing goes up.
[3:58:57] This is a lot of drawdown.
[3:58:58] You know, everybody wants
[3:58:59] to be a fiscal
[3:59:00] conservative.
[3:59:01] I'm not against some of
[3:59:01] these, but it is a lot of
[3:59:13] money that we're drawing
[3:59:13] down.
[3:59:13] Looked at the
[3:59:14] programming.
[3:59:15] Some of it is good, some
[3:59:15] of it when we talk about
[3:59:16] the ports, I disagree with
[3:59:17] you given everything
[3:59:17] that's happening there,
[3:59:18] but I think we should all
[3:59:19] be very mindful of the
[3:59:21] impact that this amount of
[3:59:21] drawdown is going to have
[3:59:22] on next year's budget
[3:59:22] specifically on the debt
[3:59:28] financing aspect and what
[3:59:28] we're paying.
[3:59:29] We are pushing this out 30
[3:59:29] years and in many cases we
[3:59:38] are paying over a 6%.
[3:59:38] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[3:59:39] all right.
[3:59:39] MADAME Mayor?
[3:59:40] >> Mayor Levine Cava:
[3:59:40] yes.
[3:59:41] Thank you, MR. Chair.
[3:59:42] I just want to say I
[3:59:42] utilize my prerogative
[3:59:43] under the charter to put
[3:59:46] in item on the agenda
[3:59:47] today that actually
[3:59:47] addresses this very issue,
[3:59:49] but because it wasn't
[3:59:49] pooled by any
[3:59:52] commissioner, it's not on
[3:59:53] any of your discussion
[3:59:54] sections.
[4:00:09] I would like to highlight
[4:00:10] for you what we've been
[4:00:11] able to do with our credit
[4:00:12] rating and bonds in the
[4:00:12] county.
[4:00:12] Since I've become mayor.
[4:00:13] I'm extremely proud of
[4:00:14] this fact and that's why I
[4:00:15] put together the report
[4:00:16] for you and it underscores
[4:00:21] our strong financial
[4:00:22] decision, policy
[4:00:22] effectiveness, and
[4:00:23] transparent governance
[4:00:23] profile.
[4:00:24] N fact, we have
[4:00:25] saved as of the last count
[4:00:25] $800 million of taxpayer
[4:00:26] money because we have been
[4:00:52] able to renegotiate 13
[4:00:53] credit rating upgrades and
[4:00:53] we have consistently
[4:00:54] strong across multiple
[4:00:55] credits from the national
[4:00:55] rating agency.
[4:00:56] Obviously, when they give
[4:00:57] us those ratings and we
[4:00:58] are able to negotiate our
[4:00:59] bonds favorably, that's
[4:00:59] because they look at our
[4:01:00] policies and they feel
[4:01:00] confident.
[4:01:01] I just wanted to let you
[4:01:02] know that yes, of course
[4:01:02] we have to be mindful of
[4:01:03] how much money we borrow.
[4:01:04] We also know that if tax
[4:01:07] reform passes that will
[4:01:07] compromise our ability, so
[4:01:08] that is something to be
[4:01:09] mindful of looking ahead,
[4:01:10] but we have one of the
[4:01:10] strongest ratings anywhere
[4:01:11] in the country, so I think
[4:01:12] we should be very proud of
[4:01:13] that and because it has
[4:01:19] not been an official
[4:01:20] regular report to the
[4:01:21] board, I commend to you
[4:01:21] item 2b 14.
[4:01:22] Please look at it.
[4:01:22] We have our bond leader,
[4:01:23] alyssa would, with us
[4:01:23] here.
[4:01:32] She has won the national
[4:01:33] bond, I don't want to call
[4:01:34] her council, the counsel
[4:01:34] of the year and went to
[4:01:35] washington, dc to receive
[4:01:36] that prize last year.
[4:01:40] We have very strong fiscal
[4:01:40] -- in the county.
[4:01:41] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:01:42] we're good.
[4:01:42] Clerk, these call the
[4:01:48] roll.
[4:01:49] >> commissioner lopez.
[4:01:49] >> yes.
[4:01:50] > commissioner
[4:01:50] regalado.
[4:01:52] >> Raquel Regalado: no on
[4:01:52] this one.
[4:01:53] >> commissioner steinberg.
[4:01:55] Commissioner bastien.
[4:02:06] Commissioner bermudez.
[4:02:06] Commissioner cohen
[4:02:06] higgins.
[4:02:07] >> Danielle Cohen Higgins:
[4:02:08] for.
[4:02:08] >> commissioner gilbert.
[4:02:09] >> Oliver Gilbert: yes on
[4:02:10] this one.
[4:02:15] >> commissioner gonzalez..
[4:02:15] Vice-CHAIRMAN Mcghee.
[4:02:16] >> Vice CHAIRMAN McGhee:
[4:02:29] yes, not to this one.
[4:02:30] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez.
[4:02:31] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: I
[4:02:31] vote yes.
[4:02:31] All right.
[4:02:32] 5g and 5h, commissioner
[4:02:33] regalado, you bifurcated
[4:02:33] both of them.
[4:02:34] I don't know if you want
[4:02:35] to speak on them
[4:02:48] separately.
[4:02:48] I think it was you.
[4:02:49] First I'll entertain a
[4:02:50] motion on 5g and 5h.
[4:02:51] Commissioner regalado,
[4:02:51] you're recognized.
[4:02:52] >> I'm fine.
[4:02:53] I mean, I think the ad
[4:02:53] valorem is the bigger
[4:02:54] issue because of the
[4:02:55] impact it has on the debt
[4:02:55] service.
[4:03:11] I think we're paying down
[4:03:11] some of it and we are
[4:03:12] still pulling down a lot,
[4:03:13] but I looked over the list
[4:03:14] and it's not agree just.
[4:03:14] So happy to move it.
[4:03:15] > it's been moved, it's
[4:03:15] been seconded.
[4:03:16] Clerk, please call the
[4:03:17] roll on 5g and h.
[4:03:29] >> commissioner
[4:03:30] steinberg.
[4:03:30] Commissioner bastien.
[4:03:31] >> Marleine Bastien: yes.
[4:03:32] >> commissioner cohen
[4:03:33] higgins.
[4:03:33] >> Danielle Cohen Higgins:
[4:03:34] for.
[4:03:34] >> senator garcia.
[4:03:35] Commissioner gilbert.
[4:03:36] Commissioner gonzalez.
[4:03:37] >> Roberto Gonzalez: for.
[4:03:38] >> commissioner lopez.
[4:03:38] >> Vicki Lopez: yes.
[4:03:39] CHAIRMAN Rodriquez.
[4:03:40] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: I
[4:03:40] vote yes.
[4:03:41] I'll entertain a motion on
[4:03:45] 5l moved by commissioner
[4:03:45] bastien seconded by
[4:03:46] commissioner gilbert.
[4:03:52] I have commissioners
[4:03:53] bastien and orbis
[4:03:53] bifurcating the item just
[4:03:54] to vote no.
[4:03:55] Clerk, please call the
[4:03:55] roll.
[4:03:57] >>.
[4:04:31] [Roll call] Motion passes
[4:04:31] 7-5.
[4:04:32] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:04:35] I'll entertain a motion on
[4:04:35] 5I.
[4:04:41] You want to bifurcate?
[4:04:42] >> 5I was bifurcated.
[4:04:43] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:04:43] okay.
[4:04:44] I didn't have it on my
[4:04:50] list, but 5I.
[4:04:51] We also need to go back
[4:04:53] and take that other one?
[4:04:54] Let's take that vote that
[4:05:24] goes with what's the other
[4:05:24] one?
[4:05:25] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: 11
[4:05:25] a 24.
[4:05:26] >> so it's been moved by
[4:05:27] commissioner regalado,
[4:05:28] seconded by commissioner
[4:05:28] gilbert.
[4:05:28] Is that a roll call?
[4:05:29] No, right?
[4:05:29] That's a voice vote.
[4:05:30] All in favor say aye five
[4:05:31] by saying aye.
[4:05:31] All opposed, was 5I
[4:05:32] bifurcated?
[4:05:32] It was not bifurcated.
[4:05:32] It already past.
[4:05:33] >> I do not show it as
[4:05:34] bifurcated, but the board
[4:05:34] can discuss.
[4:05:35] >> I'm going to vote no
[4:05:35] and discuss it.
[4:05:36] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:05:37] the thing is already past,
[4:05:38] so we need to reconsider
[4:05:41] the whole.
[4:05:42] We can discuss it, I think
[4:05:43] you can change your vote
[4:05:44] with the clerk, right?
[4:05:44] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:05:45] okay, so it is a public
[4:05:46] hearing item.
[4:05:47] If the board wishes to
[4:05:47] reconsider it, it would
[4:05:48] have to be notice.
[4:05:49] we are past that item.
[4:05:49] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: so
[4:06:02] we are not doing that.
[4:06:03] Can you change your vote
[4:06:04] with the clerk?
[4:06:04] >> she can change her
[4:06:05] vote.
[4:06:05] What I would suggest
[4:06:06] though is because we have
[4:06:07] moved on we would have to
[4:06:07] waive the rules to allow
[4:06:08] her to change her vote and
[4:06:14] record it as a no.
[4:06:15] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: so
[4:06:15] we could do that.
[4:06:16] Are we okay with that for
[4:06:17] purposes of the vote?
[4:06:18] >> I want to discuss it.
[4:06:18] I pulled it.
[4:06:18] I don't know what
[4:06:19] happened.
[4:06:19] T's on my
[4:06:19] list.
[4:06:31] I even mentioned itt with
[4:06:32] the port director that it
[4:06:33] was on here, so I don't
[4:06:33] know where the disconnect
[4:06:34] is, but.
[4:06:34] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:06:35] I'm not doubting it.
[4:06:35] I'm just not opening
[4:06:36] public hearing because
[4:06:37] some folks MAY have left
[4:06:37] already.
[4:06:38] >> but we don't have to
[4:06:38] open public hearing --
[4:06:39] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:06:40] she can still discuss it
[4:06:40] without me opening up
[4:06:41] public hearing?
[4:06:41] >> yes.
[4:06:42] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:06:43] you want to do a motion on
[4:06:43] five a so you can record
[4:06:44] your no vote?
[4:06:45] All in favorite of that
[4:06:46] signify by saying aye.
[4:06:58] All opposed, nay. Now do
[4:06:58] I need the item again?
[4:06:59] Now you can discuss 5I.
[4:07:18] >> all right.
[4:07:19] 5I, I just want to mention
[4:07:20] a few things on 5I that I
[4:07:20] find concerning.
[4:07:21] I understand we are
[4:07:22] retiring the outstanding.
[4:07:23] I have no issue with the
[4:07:23] 200 million for that.
[4:07:24] This is a common vehicle
[4:07:25] and the interest rate is
[4:07:25] fine.
[4:07:26] My concern with this item,
[4:07:35] which is 700 in total, is
[4:07:35] the 380 million for a
[4:07:36] series of projects.
[4:07:37] The projects, unlike many
[4:07:37] of the other items, do not
[4:07:38] have the amounts.
[4:07:57] If you go through the item
[4:07:57] in exhibit a in particular
[4:07:58] you can figure out what
[4:07:58] they are.
[4:07:59] Some of them we've heard
[4:07:59] about before.
[4:08:00] For example, the new birth
[4:08:01] and 10 terminal t
[4:08:01] expansion.
[4:08:02] Rail and gate expansion,
[4:08:03] the gantry cranes, which
[4:08:03] we've been asking for a
[4:08:04] very long time.
[4:08:05] What is the cost of those?
[4:08:26] There is no enumeration on
[4:08:26] that.
[4:08:27] A lot of these items when
[4:08:27] I went and I compared it
[4:08:28] to the capital plan and
[4:08:29] the other report items,
[4:08:29] there were numbers.
[4:08:30] I think the reason why
[4:08:31] there's no numbers in this
[4:08:32] item is because this item
[4:08:32] also includes the fuel
[4:08:33] facility property.
[4:08:34] So in this item, we are
[4:08:34] drawing down for that
[4:08:35] purchase.
[4:08:35] We are currently in
[4:08:36] litigation for a taking on
[4:08:36] that and I don't
[4:08:37] understand why we're
[4:08:37] drawing down without
[4:08:38] specificity because we
[4:08:39] cannot put a number on
[4:08:39] that.
[4:08:43] I think that given the
[4:08:44] litigation and everything
[4:08:45] that's happening at the
[4:08:46] port, we should continue
[4:08:46] financing with commercial
[4:08:47] paper and wait for us to
[4:08:48] have an actual number
[4:08:48] before we draw down.
[4:08:52] Specifically in terms of
[4:08:53] the current market
[4:08:53] conditions, you know,
[4:09:04] right now muniz have
[4:09:04] flooded.
[4:09:05] While I agree with the
[4:09:05] mayor that we have been
[4:09:06] able to save by
[4:09:14] restructuring our debt as
[4:09:15] in the case of the transit
[4:09:15] item, I do not believe
[4:09:16] that this is the case with
[4:09:16] this item.
[4:09:17] This item is being done
[4:09:18] this way so that the
[4:09:37] county has access to
[4:09:37] funding that this board
[4:09:38] then has to approve and I
[4:09:39] think that we should wait
[4:09:39] for this board to approve
[4:09:40] that because we are
[4:09:41] putting the cart in front
[4:09:41] of the horse.
[4:09:42] E have a
[4:09:42] litigation.
[4:09:43] We haven't decided on a
[4:09:43] price and now we are
[4:09:44] drawing down money just to
[4:09:45] have it there at a very
[4:09:45] high cost to the county.
[4:09:46] And the fact that the port
[4:10:10] is an enterprise fund
[4:10:11] doesn't remediate the
[4:10:11] issue that we're approving
[4:10:12] a bond that does not have
[4:10:13] numbers attached to these
[4:10:13] projects.
[4:10:14] it is very fungible.
[4:10:15] And I don't understand why
[4:10:16] we are doing this at this
[4:10:16] moment.
[4:10:16] This can wait.
[4:10:17] We can continue having
[4:10:18] commercial paper.
[4:10:18] The port leadership is
[4:10:19] currently in position.
[4:10:20] Today, we hired a new
[4:10:20] director, so why are we
[4:10:21] doing this without waiting
[4:10:22] for that director to
[4:10:22] determine what exactly
[4:10:23] needs to be done at the
[4:10:23] port?
[4:10:24] I think part of the
[4:10:24] problem here is we
[4:10:25] continue to run port miami
[4:10:26] as if there's no problems
[4:10:26] even though there's a
[4:10:27] million problems.
[4:10:27] Ne
[4:10:27] last issue I want to point
[4:10:28] out here is included in
[4:10:29] this list of issues of
[4:10:30] projects that we're going
[4:10:30] to fund is the connection
[4:10:31] to, you know, the
[4:10:34] connection that we did at
[4:10:45] the port, the shore power
[4:10:46] and I want some
[4:10:46] information from our
[4:10:47] attorneys regarding short
[4:10:47] power.
[4:10:48] I don't understand why we
[4:10:49] are still talking about
[4:10:54] short power.
[4:10:54] Brian -- we now have to
[4:10:55] look at everything that
[4:10:56] has to do with green
[4:10:56] energy.
[4:10:57] Shore power was way more
[4:11:28] expensive than what we
[4:11:29] were originally told.
[4:11:30] Now we are drawing down
[4:11:31] money to extend a program
[4:11:31] that I think we're going
[4:11:32] to be prohibited from
[4:11:33] doing at the port because
[4:11:33] of its high cost.
[4:11:34] Short power has ended up
[4:11:35] being more expensive to
[4:11:36] the cruise lines than the
[4:11:36] other alternatives and I
[4:11:37] don't think that we should
[4:11:38] draw down for short power.
[4:11:39] We need actual numbers on
[4:11:39] what short power has cost.
[4:11:40] If this was electric
[4:11:41] buses, everyone would be
[4:11:41] hair on fire.
[4:11:42] Short power is no
[4:11:42] different.
[4:11:55] So you know, we can't keep
[4:11:56] making the same mistake.
[4:11:57] The only thing I asked the
[4:11:57] administration is to make
[4:11:58] different mistakes.
[4:11:59] On this particular one we
[4:12:00] know that short power is
[4:12:00] problematic, so why is it
[4:12:00] on here?
[4:12:01] If the attorneys could
[4:12:02] speak a little bit as two
[4:12:03] short power and if we've
[4:12:03] made a determination as to
[4:12:04] its applicability given
[4:12:04] the state law that
[4:12:05] recently asked us to
[4:12:05] scrutinize these projects
[4:12:06] in terms of their return
[4:12:07] on investment.
[4:12:08] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:12:08] thank you.
[4:12:08] All right.
[4:12:09] 5o.
[4:12:09] >> he has to respond.
[4:12:10] We are waiting for the
[4:12:10] response there.
[4:12:11] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:12:12] what was the question?
[4:12:12] > county attorney?
[4:12:14] On short power?
[4:12:15] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:12:20] you can respond and then,
[4:12:20] yeah.
[4:12:23] Speed as to the net than
[4:12:38] that zero legislation is
[4:12:39] actions of the county
[4:12:39] government or state
[4:12:40] governments are
[4:12:41] problematic if it's solely
[4:12:41] in advance of the net zero
[4:12:42] policy.
[4:12:43] If there are other reasons
[4:12:43] or considerations, even
[4:12:44] reasons that does not make
[4:12:52] the actions or the
[4:12:52] policies --
[4:12:53] >> what about the
[4:12:54] requirement of return on
[4:12:55] investments in terms of
[4:12:55] the cost?
[4:12:56] >> we'll get back to you
[4:12:56] on that.
[4:13:05] >> thank you.
[4:13:06] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:13:06] all right.
[4:13:07] I'll entertain a motion on
[4:13:07] 5 capital zero?
[4:13:10] It's been motioned by
[4:13:10] cohen higgins seconded by
[4:13:11] garcia.
[4:13:15] >> it's in my district.
[4:13:16] I wanted to state
[4:13:16] something on the record.
[4:13:21] I had deferred at this
[4:13:21] item twice and I
[4:13:22] understand is
[4:13:22] quasijudicial, but that's
[4:13:32] because it's an
[4:13:33] administrative item, as I
[4:13:33] understand.
[4:13:34] I just wanted to ensure
[4:13:34] that the residents that
[4:13:35] live adjacent to this
[4:13:36] property or parcel were
[4:13:43] aware of what was coming
[4:13:44] to their neighborhood and
[4:13:45] that they had an
[4:13:45] opportunity to express
[4:13:46] their concerns.
[4:13:46] I understand that the
[4:13:47] administration has reached
[4:13:48] out and notified them
[4:13:48] because it's very
[4:13:58] important for me to let
[4:13:59] the constituents know when
[4:13:59] a change like this is
[4:14:00] coming to their
[4:14:00] neighborhood.
[4:14:01] Ith that,
[4:14:01] thank you, MR. Chair.
[4:14:02] I have no further comments
[4:14:02] on this.
[4:14:03] > CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:14:04] thank you, commissioner.
[4:14:04] And commissioner garcia.
[4:14:05] No?
[4:14:05] Clerk, please -- are you
[4:14:14] supportive, commissioner
[4:14:14] orbis?
[4:14:15] >> Natalie Milian Orbis:
[4:14:16] I'm not really, but from
[4:14:17] what I understand it's
[4:14:18] quasijudicial, so we can't
[4:14:23] -- I'm okay with it.
[4:14:24] I'll be a no.
[4:14:24] That's okay.
[4:14:25] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:14:26] ,please call the roll.
[4:14:35] >> commissioner steinberg.
[4:14:36] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:14:36] it's been moved and
[4:14:37] seconded, yes.
[4:14:48] >>.
[4:14:48] [Roll call].
[4:15:17] [Roll call] Motion fails
[4:15:28] I'll entertain a motion on
[4:15:28] 5u.
[4:15:29] Senator garcia, you are --
[4:15:29] okay, clerk, please call
[4:15:30] the roll.
[4:15:30] >>.
[4:16:01] [Roll call]Motion passes
[4:16:01] 11-1.
[4:16:02] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:16:02] MR. MADAME attorney, is
[4:16:23] that it for the public
[4:16:23] hearing items?
[4:16:24] >> yes.
[4:16:24] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:16:25] before we get into second
[4:16:26] reading items, I'm going
[4:16:26] to pull some from the item
[4:16:27] reading list.
[4:16:28] As I understand, some
[4:16:28] folks are here for this.
[4:16:29] I'm going to pull 11 a 14,
[4:16:30] 15, 16, 17, and 20, which
[4:16:31] are the charter review
[4:16:31] ballots.
[4:16:34] And I have some pooling
[4:16:34] commissioners.
[4:16:35] I'm going to go ahead and
[4:17:05] take them up one by one.
[4:17:06] Regalado?
[4:17:06] >> Raquel Regalado:
[4:17:07] flipping through.
[4:17:08] By the way, I have an
[4:17:08] airport item.
[4:17:08] I hope we can take it up.
[4:17:17] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:17:18] we are going to get to all
[4:17:19] of them.
[4:17:19] E are going to
[4:17:20] get to kelly tractor even.
[4:17:20] I promise.
[4:17:21] >> Raquel Regalado: okay.
[4:17:23] So this was 11 a 14.
[4:17:24] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:17:25] yes, it's a charter
[4:17:27] review.
[4:17:28] Ballot recommendations
[4:17:37] from the task force.
[4:17:38] >> Raquel Regalado: they
[4:17:39] were added late, so it's
[4:17:50] not on this one.
[4:17:51] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: 11
[4:17:52] a 15, commissioner vice
[4:17:54] CHAIRMAN, you are the one
[4:17:55] pulling commissioner on 11
[4:17:57] a 15.
[4:18:05] You're recognized.
[4:18:06] >> thank you, MR.
[4:18:06] CHAIRMAN.
[4:18:07] Just wanted to hear from
[4:18:08] the sponsor what this item
[4:18:09] seeks to do.
[4:18:12] >> what this item seeks
[4:19:02] to do.
[4:19:02] No?
[4:19:03] You go ahead.
[4:19:03] >> MR. Vice chair, this is
[4:19:04] one of the
[4:19:05] recommendations.
[4:19:05] Currently, the charter
[4:19:06] provides that an
[4:19:07] individual who wants to
[4:19:07] run for district
[4:19:08] commission seat has to
[4:19:08] reside within the district
[4:19:09] for at least six months
[4:19:10] prior to the election.
[4:19:11] This would increase the
[4:19:11] requirement so an
[4:19:12] individual would have to
[4:19:13] reside within the district
[4:19:13] for at least a year before
[4:19:14] being eligible to run for
[4:19:14] office.
[4:19:15] >> vice CHAIRMAN?
[4:19:16] >> thank you to the county
[4:19:17] attorney for the answer.
[4:19:18] My follow-up question is
[4:19:18] is it the same in broward
[4:19:19] county and palm beach or
[4:19:20] do they have six months or
[4:19:20] do they have a year and
[4:19:21] how are we looking to the
[4:19:22] south of us in monroe
[4:19:22] county?
[4:19:23] >> vice chair, I do not
[4:19:24] have the answer to that
[4:19:24] question.
[4:19:25] I would have to do some
[4:19:25] research, and I can do
[4:19:26] that now while the
[4:19:26] commission deliberates.
[4:19:27] >> my next question is
[4:19:28] also to will there be a
[4:19:29] financial impact to the
[4:19:29] county as it relates to
[4:19:33] this particular item?
[4:19:34] >> I'll leave it to the
[4:19:41] administration to answer.
[4:19:55] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: it
[4:19:56] seems like they are
[4:19:56] nodding their heads.
[4:19:57] To you guys want to
[4:19:58] actually acknowledge and
[4:19:58] say no?
[4:19:59] >> I know there was
[4:20:00] substantial discussion
[4:20:00] about all of this.
[4:20:01] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:20:02] come on up.
[4:20:02] You're up.
[4:20:03] We always love to have you
[4:20:03] in our chamber.
[4:20:03] Questions specific.
[4:20:07] Shall this charter review
[4:20:15] recommendation have a
[4:20:16] fiscal impact on the
[4:20:16] county?
[4:20:17] >> I'm sorry, this is
[4:20:18] about the qualifying
[4:20:48] period?
[4:20:49] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:20:50] this is the qualifying
[4:20:50] period.
[4:20:51] >> yes, we did not
[4:20:51] specifically discuss that
[4:20:52] at the charter review
[4:20:53] process, but I don't
[4:20:53] believe it would.
[4:20:54] There's no additional
[4:20:55] money to be spent whether
[4:20:55] someone made this six
[4:20:56] months or years before.
[4:20:57] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:20:57] you're still an attorney,
[4:20:58] managed to
[4:20:58] >> by the way for the
[4:20:59] record, dennis here as the
[4:21:00] chair of the charter of
[4:21:01] the task force.
[4:21:01] If I could just take a
[4:21:02] second to thank of course
[4:21:02] the mayor and all of you
[4:21:03] for your support
[4:21:03] throughout the process and
[4:21:09] the sponsor commissioner
[4:21:10] cohen higgins.
[4:21:11] >> dennis, the next
[4:21:11] question is do we know
[4:21:12] what's happening to the
[4:21:13] north of us, to the south
[4:21:13] of us, and to the west?
[4:21:14] Are other counties doing
[4:21:16] this exact same thing?
[4:21:19] Is it six months, is it a
[4:21:19] year?
[4:21:20] Where are we?
[4:21:26] >> during our
[4:21:27] deliberations, I don't
[4:21:27] think we had information
[4:21:28] specifically looking the
[4:21:42] other counties to see what
[4:21:42] they were doing.
[4:21:43] This was an item brought
[4:21:44] by one of the task force
[4:21:44] members and we briefly
[4:21:45] discussed the concept of
[4:21:46] it being good to be in the
[4:21:46] district for longer.
[4:21:47] But there were other items
[4:21:48] that had a comparison
[4:21:49] where staff had done
[4:21:49] research, this was not
[4:21:49] one.
[4:21:50] >> I'm just asking a
[4:22:01] question because it's
[4:22:03] going from six months to a
[4:22:03] year.
[4:22:04] And I'm sure it's a state
[4:22:05] law or something, but I'm
[4:22:05] just trying to figure out
[4:22:08] why now?
[4:22:10] Specifically, why this?
[4:22:11] What happened?
[4:22:13] Something triggered this.
[4:22:14] >> there wasn't a specific
[4:22:17] event.
[4:22:19] It was a discussion from
[4:22:20] one of the members.
[4:22:21] I believe it was mayor
[4:22:22] lauzon or that would be
[4:22:30] required in the minutes,
[4:22:31] but I wouldn't have that
[4:22:32] memorized.
[4:22:33] That's since we were
[4:22:33] looking at the charter and
[4:22:34] making changes and making
[4:22:35] qualifying and other
[4:22:37] municipal election and
[4:22:37] issues.
[4:22:38] That was one of the ideas
[4:22:45] that was brought up.
[4:22:51] >> on 11 k 14, I know --
[4:23:08] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:23:09] all in favor say aye five
[4:23:10] by saying aye.
[4:23:14] All opposed, nay.
[4:23:23] >> no.
[4:23:23] >> I want to thank
[4:23:24] everyone who participated
[4:23:28] in the charter review.
[4:23:29] And I know that one of the
[4:23:29] things that was mentioned
[4:23:39] was either increase the
[4:23:40] time or the pay and I wish
[4:23:41] we would have chosen
[4:23:42] increase the time and the
[4:23:58] reason for that is anepa
[4:23:58] takes 10 years and eight
[4:23:59] years is not enough for
[4:24:00] someone to finalize a
[4:24:00] large-scale project.
[4:24:01] What's happening to us
[4:24:02] time and time again is
[4:24:02] that whenever you're at
[4:24:03] the end of something
[4:24:04] someone hits the reset
[4:24:04] button.
[4:24:05] I think that the salary on
[4:24:24] the ballot when not going
[4:24:25] to be in support of this.
[4:24:26] I don't think this is the
[4:24:26] right time for anyone to
[4:24:27] raise their salaries
[4:24:28] including the board of
[4:24:28] county commissioners.
[4:24:29] I think we all need to
[4:24:35] tighten our belts.
[4:24:36] I think it's going to be
[4:24:37] poorly received and we
[4:24:38] need to do everything we
[4:24:38] can to reflect that we are
[4:24:39] conscious of the
[4:24:40] tremendous need there is
[4:24:40] in our community, so I
[4:24:57] made no on his.
[4:24:58] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:24:59] I'm gonna not say what I
[4:24:59] wanted to say.
[4:25:00] >> I'm gonna say what I
[4:25:00] want to say.
[4:25:00] Laughter]
[4:25:01] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:25:02] that's a great talking
[4:25:03] point, but we get paid
[4:25:03] $6000 a year.
[4:25:04] I'm happy to exempt myself
[4:25:04] from it moving forward,
[4:25:05] but what's right is right
[4:25:10] and this is supposed to be
[4:25:11] a part-time job and it's
[4:25:12] full-time over time and
[4:25:12] all the times.
[4:25:13] So I don't know, it's
[4:25:13] great for campaign and all
[4:25:14] of that, but it's not
[4:25:14] realistic.
[4:25:15] Where the largest county
[4:25:20] in the state of florida.
[4:25:35] We have a 16, of florida.
[4:25:36] We have a 16, 17,017
[4:25:37] billion-dollar budget.
[4:25:37] We get paid $6000 a year.
[4:25:38] Commissioner cohen
[4:25:38] higgins, I'm gonna
[4:25:39] recognize you first
[4:25:39] because you are the
[4:25:40] sponsoring commissioner,
[4:25:45] but we got a list of folks
[4:25:45] who want to speak.
[4:25:46] >> regarding the timeframe
[4:25:47] for commissioners, you all
[4:25:56] recommended that you bring
[4:25:57] that when?
[4:25:58] >> we recommended that
[4:25:59] that come in the next
[4:25:59] election cycle, 2028.
[4:26:00] >> that's reflected in the
[4:26:01] report that's on the
[4:26:01] agenda today?
[4:26:02] That's coming in the
[4:26:05] future.
[4:26:06] I want to be clear
[4:26:07] regarding the salary
[4:26:08] commission that was
[4:26:09] recommended by the charter
[4:26:09] review task force, it's
[4:26:13] entirely possible that the
[4:26:14] commission can recommend a
[4:26:15] lower salary, is that
[4:26:16] correct?
[4:26:16] >> that is correct.
[4:26:17] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:26:18] commissioner bermudez,
[4:26:41] you're recognized.
[4:26:42] 16 I thank you very much
[4:26:43] for taking the time to do
[4:26:44] public service and come up
[4:26:45] with this.
[4:26:45] We are not approving a
[4:26:46] salary increase here.
[4:26:46] We are putting it to the
[4:26:47] voters.
[4:26:47] The CHAIRMAN Correctly
[4:26:48] pointed out that most
[4:26:49] other counties including
[4:26:49] the one directly to the
[4:26:51] north which has part-time
[4:26:52] commissioners uses
[4:26:52] population to pay
[4:26:53] themselves and I'm not
[4:26:54] going to talk about what
[4:26:54] they get because they get
[4:27:00] a **** a lot more, but
[4:27:00] the problem is the fact
[4:27:03] that this was created when
[4:27:09] we became a charter
[4:27:10] county, it's a great
[4:27:11] political talking point.
[4:27:12] Nobody wants to give
[4:27:12] politicians more salary
[4:27:13] because nobody likes
[4:27:19] lawyers and politicians.
[4:27:19] Having said that, I have
[4:27:20] won elections because I've
[4:27:23] been very straightforward
[4:27:24] and it's a lot better to
[4:27:25] give it to a commission to
[4:27:48] determine whether it has
[4:27:49] as commissioner cohen
[4:27:50] higgins said, maybe less,
[4:27:50] maybe more.
[4:27:51] I don't know.
[4:27:51] Be careful what you wish
[4:27:52] for.
[4:27:52] The main thing I want to
[4:27:53] point out is I did not
[4:27:54] have a chance because I
[4:27:54] actually have to work and
[4:27:55] that is one of the things
[4:27:56] that the public needs to
[4:27:56] understand.
[4:27:57] This is a very, as the
[4:27:58] CHAIRMAN Said, it is a
[4:27:58] very difficult job.
[4:28:12] Besides the constituent
[4:28:13] services, it takes a lot
[4:28:13] of time.
[4:28:14] Later this afternoon I'm
[4:28:15] going to be in -- with
[4:28:15] some of my colleagues.
[4:28:16] Yes, I will be there at
[4:28:16] 6:00.
[4:28:17] I will be there because we
[4:28:18] will be sitting as the cra
[4:28:18] for that community and a
[4:28:19] lot of times in this
[4:28:24] county it's always what
[4:28:26] sounds good as a
[4:28:26] soundbite.
[4:28:27] Trust me, there's a lot of
[4:28:28] county commissioners that
[4:28:28] I maybe didn't like in the
[4:28:29] past, but I always felt
[4:28:32] that they certainly it
[4:28:32] wasn't fair.
[4:28:34] As commissioner moss once
[4:28:35] said, you know, all those
[4:28:35] years and the amount that
[4:28:36] he technically got every
[4:28:42] year was a minimal amount.
[4:28:43] So I want to thank you
[4:28:43] guys for the work.
[4:28:44] I'm going to support it
[4:29:03] because it's -- if the
[4:29:03] voters decide no, then
[4:29:04] they will decide know as
[4:29:05] they have in the past,
[4:29:05] which is their true
[4:29:06] democracy, which is the
[4:29:08] way it should be, okay?
[4:29:09] And that is fine.
[4:29:09] Probably half the people
[4:29:10] here move to broward --
[4:29:10] no, I'm just kidding.
[4:29:18] But the bottom line is it
[4:29:19] is not, you know, whether
[4:29:20] it's three terms or two
[4:29:20] terms.
[4:29:21] A lot of these things will
[4:29:21] never get done in our
[4:29:22] time.
[4:29:22] One of the reasons we
[4:29:41] haven't been able to pass
[4:29:42] some transportation, some
[4:29:43] of the things on
[4:29:44] transportation we need to
[4:29:44] pass is because, guess
[4:29:45] what?
[4:29:45] As I said ad nausea him in
[4:29:46] 2003, there was a smart
[4:29:47] plan, everybody liked it.
[4:29:47] we sit here today and 2026
[4:29:49] and we are still talking
[4:29:50] about the same thing.
[4:29:51] So I don't know if two
[4:29:51] terms or three terms will
[4:29:52] make a difference, but I
[4:29:53] will tell you this.
[4:29:53] Do
[4:29:53] think this group of
[4:29:54] people, and I served on it
[4:29:55] in 2012 where senator
[4:29:55] garcia was the vice chair
[4:30:10] and we proposed anything
[4:30:11] to the county commission
[4:30:12] including many ethical
[4:30:12] reforms that did not pass,
[4:30:13] but there were certain
[4:30:14] things that did pass
[4:30:14] including term limits.
[4:30:15] One of the things that is
[4:30:16] important is to allow the
[4:30:16] voters in miami-dade
[4:30:17] county to decide.
[4:30:18] The chances of it passing
[4:30:20] are probably almost as
[4:30:21] good as cape verde
[4:30:22] actually winning the world
[4:30:22] cup, but the fact is it's
[4:30:23] up to the voters and I
[4:30:37] don't want anybody quoting
[4:30:39] us saying that voting for
[4:30:39] this is an increase in
[4:30:40] salaries because it's not.
[4:30:41] It is a vote to put it in
[4:30:42] front of the voters.
[4:30:43] By the way, most of us
[4:30:43] including me probably
[4:30:44] won't be around to see the
[4:30:45] benefits of it.
[4:30:45] The point is, if there are
[4:30:47] any, the bottom line is
[4:30:48] thank you for your
[4:30:49] service.
[4:30:49] I served on the prior
[4:30:50] charter review committee
[4:30:51] within senator -- I guess
[4:30:58] I still got to call him
[4:31:00] senator.
[4:31:00] I thank you for your time
[4:31:01] because I know it takes a
[4:31:01] lot of time and a lot of
[4:31:02] effort and I know you guys
[4:31:03] were well thought-out and
[4:31:08] went through a very let's
[4:31:09] call it difficult process
[4:31:10] and it's not easy to
[4:31:11] submit these things to the
[4:31:11] county commission and it's
[4:31:14] not easy for this body to
[4:31:15] take a vote putting it to
[4:31:16] the voters, but it's
[4:31:16] probably our obligation to
[4:31:23] do it.
[4:31:24] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:31:25] and on that note before I
[4:31:26] recognize commissioner
[4:31:27] gilbert, thank you dennis
[4:31:27] for leaving this charter
[4:31:28] task force and the vice
[4:31:28] chair.
[4:31:50] Speaker designate for the
[4:31:50] house.
[4:31:51] You all gave your time in
[4:31:52] addition to the other
[4:31:52] charter task force members
[4:31:53] that participated, so
[4:31:54] thank you all for your
[4:31:54] time on this.
[4:31:55] This is something that we
[4:31:55] do every several years and
[4:31:56] it's very important for
[4:31:57] our county, so appreciate
[4:31:57] that.
[4:31:58] Commissioner gilbert?
[4:31:59] >> Oliver Gilbert: thank
[4:31:59] you, MR. CHAIRMAN.
[4:32:00] It's my understanding this
[4:32:01] is going valid in 2028?
[4:32:02] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:32:02] the ones we are discussing
[4:32:03] are now.
[4:32:03] Here was a
[4:32:04] question about term limits
[4:32:05] being extended and that
[4:32:08] will be in the ballot on
[4:32:08] 2028.
[4:32:09] All of these are going to
[4:32:09] be on the ballot this
[4:32:09] year.
[4:32:10] >> Oliver Gilbert: mr.
[4:32:11] chairman, I don't have any
[4:32:12] objection to letting the
[4:32:16] voters decide.
[4:32:17] What we did in miami
[4:32:18] gardens in my city is our
[4:32:18] charter was actually
[4:32:20] modeled after the county's
[4:32:20] charter on salaries and
[4:32:21] put salaries in the
[4:32:21] charter.
[4:32:25] On my way out I actually
[4:32:26] sponsored the item so that
[4:32:27] it would affect them not
[4:32:32] because I needed more
[4:32:32] money but I needed to
[4:32:33] structurally make
[4:32:33] leadership and public
[4:32:35] service more available to
[4:32:39] more people.
[4:32:40] We have this conversation
[4:32:41] because we have in the
[4:32:41] context of the people who
[4:32:56] are here, and we are all
[4:32:57] politicians, we are all
[4:32:58] elected officials right
[4:32:58] now.
[4:32:59] I was thinking when I left
[4:33:00] miami gardens in terms of
[4:33:01] the people who could
[4:33:01] serve, so realistically
[4:33:04] could folks who aren't
[4:33:05] professional and have
[4:33:06] independent source of
[4:33:06] income before to serve,
[4:33:09] could teachers really just
[4:33:11] really afford to serve on
[4:33:11] this council?
[4:33:33] Could some blue-collar
[4:33:33] workers?
[4:33:33] These are things that I
[4:33:34] ask myself.
[4:33:34] So when we look at the
[4:33:35] type of public servants
[4:33:36] that we have, it's in
[4:33:36] large part it's dictated
[4:33:37] by the framework of public
[4:33:38] service that we create.
[4:33:38] And so I wanted to give
[4:33:39] the voters of miami
[4:33:50] gardens an opportunity to
[4:33:51] actually have their say on
[4:33:52] it.
[4:33:52] Independently have their
[4:33:53] say.
[4:33:53] In the interim, what I did
[4:33:54] was I went out with a
[4:33:55] camera and I asked people
[4:33:55] questions.
[4:33:56] I said how much do you
[4:33:56] think the mayor makes?
[4:33:57] And we got all these
[4:33:57] wonderful answers.
[4:34:11] It was like $300,000 and
[4:34:11] $400,000.
[4:34:12] You would say back then it
[4:34:13] was $42,000 and they were
[4:34:14] all completely shocked.
[4:34:14] Nd I say how much do you
[4:34:15] think a city counsel
[4:34:15] person makes?
[4:34:16] And they would say
[4:34:17] $100,000 and then when you
[4:34:18] told them it was $1000 a
[4:34:19] month, they were all
[4:34:19] shocked.
[4:34:20] That was the entirety of
[4:34:21] the campaign.
[4:34:21] I didn't ask them to vote
[4:34:22] for anything.
[4:34:22] I just simply took
[4:34:39] campaign money and
[4:34:41] educated them.
[4:34:42] This is what actually
[4:34:42] happens, this is what they
[4:34:43] actually make.
[4:34:43] I don't know what the
[4:34:44] voters will do if we put
[4:34:44] this before them.
[4:34:45] I do know that somewhere,
[4:34:46] somehow we have to make
[4:34:46] public service more
[4:34:47] accessible to people who
[4:34:55] aren't professional or
[4:34:56] independently wealthy or
[4:34:56] entrepreneurs who can take
[4:34:57] the time off.
[4:34:57] We have to make this
[4:35:11] full-time job have a
[4:35:12] full-time compensation so
[4:35:12] that the vast majority of
[4:35:13] the residents of
[4:35:14] miami-dade county, it
[4:35:14] actually becomes
[4:35:15] accessible to them.
[4:35:15] O
[4:35:15] right now I don't feel
[4:35:20] like it is and you know,
[4:35:21] we'll sit here and we talk
[4:35:22] -- we pass union contracts
[4:35:22] all the time.
[4:35:23] Ask yourself could allot
[4:35:24] of the members of unite
[4:35:37] here actually afford to be
[4:35:39] a county commissioner with
[4:35:39] the time that it takes and
[4:35:40] the money that it pays and
[4:35:41] their obligations still to
[4:35:42] their families.
[4:35:42] Those are the questions I
[4:35:52] ask myself when I consider
[4:35:52] these.
[4:35:52] When I did it in miami
[4:35:53] gardens, I did it on my
[4:35:54] way out so it won't affect
[4:35:54] me.
[4:35:55] This won't affect me
[4:35:55] either.
[4:35:56] I'm very comfortable
[4:35:56] putting this to the
[4:35:56] voters.
[4:36:02] Hank you,
[4:36:03] commissioner.
[4:36:04] >> thank you, MR.
[4:36:04] CHAIRMAN.
[4:36:05] I have a question for
[4:36:05] dennis.
[4:36:05] What was the denison in
[4:36:06] this item?
[4:36:06] I'm just curious.
[4:36:07] >> one of the topics we
[4:36:08] had set out in the
[4:36:10] beginning to discuss was
[4:36:11] commission salaries.
[4:36:12] For exactly the reasons as
[4:36:15] commissioner gilbert and
[4:36:17] commissioner bermudez
[4:36:17] articulated and the chair.
[4:36:42] The concern about making
[4:36:44] sure it was possible for
[4:36:45] people to serve, a broad
[4:36:45] variety.
[4:36:46] So the question has become
[4:36:46] how to achieve that.
[4:36:47] We know that having the
[4:36:48] number in the charter was
[4:36:50] a problem, but replacing a
[4:36:51] number with a number was a
[4:36:51] problem.
[4:36:52] We looked at formulas and
[4:36:52] commissioner moss was
[4:36:53] actually the one who was
[4:36:54] the genesis of this idea
[4:36:54] of let's create a process
[4:36:55] and that got the consensus
[4:36:56] among the task force
[4:36:57] members that this, if we
[4:36:59] replace the number with a
[4:36:59] process, that MAY be more
[4:37:00] palatable with the voters
[4:37:01] especially given the
[4:37:13] composition of the voters
[4:37:14] >> so it was in keeping
[4:37:15] with what commissioner
[4:37:15] gilbert said?
[4:37:15] >> yes.
[4:37:16] >> there was concern that
[4:37:17] not just anyone could
[4:37:22] serve as a commissioner
[4:37:23] because of the $6000
[4:37:23] annual salary.
[4:37:24] >> yes.
[4:37:24] >> interesting.
[4:37:38] Was there consensus on the
[4:37:38] commission?
[4:37:39] >> I believe it passed
[4:37:39] unanimously once we
[4:37:40] coalesced around the idea
[4:37:41] of salary commission.
[4:37:42] >> was there public input
[4:37:42] regarding this particular
[4:37:43] issue?
[4:37:43] >> we had numerous public
[4:37:48] meetings.
[4:37:49] Every meeting was public
[4:37:50] and we occasionally had
[4:37:51] speakers.
[4:37:51] I don't specifically
[4:37:52] remember that.
[4:37:53] >> do you recall anyone
[4:37:54] opposing the idea of the
[4:37:55] salary commission?
[4:37:55] >> no.
[4:37:56] >> thank you, MR.
[4:37:56] CHAIRMAN.
[4:37:57] I don't doubt anything
[4:38:13] that commissioner gilbert
[4:38:13] said.
[4:38:14] I think you're absolutely
[4:38:15] right, if you want to have
[4:38:16] more people interested in
[4:38:16] running, then I think we
[4:38:17] need to make sure they are
[4:38:18] compensated appropriately.
[4:38:19] However, when we decided
[4:38:19] to brun, this board
[4:38:22] decided to run, we knew
[4:38:23] what the compensation
[4:38:23] package was.
[4:38:24] I think I have no problem
[4:38:25] for it going to the
[4:38:25] voters.
[4:38:27] However, it should be
[4:38:27] something that should not
[4:38:28] be self serving.
[4:38:29] For me, when would this go
[4:38:32] into effect?
[4:38:33] >> this one as drafted
[4:38:34] would go into effect
[4:38:51] immediately upon being
[4:38:51] drafted.
[4:38:52] >> the only way I would
[4:38:53] support this is it does
[4:38:54] not go into effect until
[4:38:54] after the current board is
[4:38:55] here.
[4:38:55] I find it a little
[4:38:56] self-serving for us to
[4:38:57] vote for something.
[4:38:58] It goes to the voters, I
[4:38:58] get it.
[4:38:59] But it needs to be
[4:38:59] something that should not
[4:39:00] affect me or anyone on
[4:39:01] this board because when we
[4:39:03] ran for office, we ran
[4:39:05] with the understanding
[4:39:06] that we were being
[4:39:06] compensated for.
[4:39:11] That's my only objection
[4:39:12] to the item.
[4:39:13] and I hate to vote against
[4:39:15] an item because it does go
[4:39:15] to the voters and we
[4:39:19] should never take the
[4:39:21] voters rights away, but it
[4:39:21] should not be something
[4:39:23] self serving.
[4:39:25] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[4:39:26] commissioner or the vice
[4:39:26] chair?
[4:39:38] No?
[4:39:39] Commissioner regalado.
[4:39:40] >> Raquel Regalado: I
[4:39:41] have a question, dennis.
[4:39:41] You have the two issues
[4:39:42] and the reason that you
[4:39:43] all suggested that the
[4:39:43] term limits should go
[4:39:46] later is so that it
[4:39:47] wouldn't apply to us.
[4:39:47] So I'm glad that was one
[4:39:48] of the conversations was
[4:39:49] the applicability.
[4:39:50] I maintain that we should
[4:40:02] consider putting term
[4:40:03] limits and then having it
[4:40:04] applied to the next round
[4:40:04] of humans.
[4:40:05] I think we can still do
[4:40:06] that and I agree with
[4:40:16] senator garcia that it's
[4:40:16] interesting that the logic
[4:40:17] that was used on the term
[4:40:18] limits was the board of
[4:40:19] county commissioners shall
[4:40:19] not put something on the
[4:40:20] ballot that would extend
[4:40:21] their time on the board of
[4:40:47] county commissioners, but
[4:40:49] yet when it came to the
[4:40:50] salary, because you
[4:40:50] created another entity
[4:40:51] that would in theory make
[4:40:51] the decision, then it was
[4:40:52] perfectly fine for us to
[4:40:53] put something on the
[4:40:53] ballot that would adhere
[4:40:54] to our benefit.
[4:40:55] I don't think that either
[4:40:55] of them should adhere to
[4:40:56] our benefit.
[4:40:57] I think that really does
[4:40:57] change the very nature of
[4:40:58] charter reform.
[4:40:59] I think that anything that
[4:40:59] we change should be moving
[4:41:00] forward, and to the
[4:41:01] senator's point, we all
[4:41:03] ran with a clear
[4:41:04] understanding of the
[4:41:04] benefits and timing was.
[4:41:05] In terms of the term
[4:41:06] limits, why did you all
[4:41:07] make the recommendation to
[4:41:07] have that during the
[4:41:08] presidential?
[4:41:08] The other thing here is
[4:41:09] what questions are going
[4:41:10] to go in a gubernatorial
[4:41:11] and what questions are
[4:41:11] going to go in a
[4:41:11] presidential?
[4:41:12] >> we weren't thinking of
[4:41:13] it as a discussion on
[4:41:15] gubernatorial or
[4:41:16] presidential.
[4:41:17] It was which one should go
[4:41:17] first and which one we
[4:41:18] think should go second.
[4:41:29] We were just certain they
[4:41:30] should not both be on the
[4:41:30] same ballot.
[4:41:31] >> Raquel Regalado: okay.
[4:41:32] >> if I could add a little
[4:41:32] context on the difference
[4:41:33] of why one wouldn't apply
[4:41:36] right away and this one
[4:41:36] would.
[4:41:37] When we first started this
[4:41:37] discussion before we
[4:41:38] coherent around the salary
[4:41:42] discussion, the
[4:41:44] conversation had been it
[4:41:44] shouldn't apply to anyone
[4:41:45] who is currently sitting.
[4:41:46] We had some discussions.
[4:41:47] But when it became a
[4:41:52] process with independent
[4:41:53] -- with independent board
[4:41:54] members or commissioners
[4:41:55] who could also take into
[4:41:56] account what your current
[4:41:57] packages are and deciding
[4:41:59] what the salaries should
[4:42:00] be, we didn't think it was
[4:42:07] as significantly knowing
[4:42:08] that it would ultimately
[4:42:09] be up to this board
[4:42:09] whether you thought it was
[4:42:10] significant to say it will
[4:42:11] apply to immediately or
[4:42:13] should be deferred to a
[4:42:15] later effective date, but
[4:42:16] that was part of the
[4:42:16] discussion.
[4:42:17] >> Raquel Regalado: thank
[4:42:17] you.
[4:42:19] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: so
[4:42:21] I want to call a vote, but
[4:42:24] here's -- here's the
[4:42:25] problem.
[4:42:29] O commissioner
[4:42:30] bermudez's point about
[4:42:33] soundbites.
[4:42:34] Unfortunately, those that
[4:42:35] report the soundbites
[4:42:55] often don't do due
[4:42:57] diligence.
[4:42:57] They don't put in the
[4:42:58] work.
[4:42:58] For lack of better terms,
[4:42:59] they are often lazy.
[4:43:00] You know, it's easy --
[4:43:01] yeah, he's one of the ones
[4:43:01] I'm talking about.
[4:43:02] Here's the thing.
[4:43:02] It's easy to say that,
[4:43:03] that this shouldn't apply
[4:43:03] to me.
[4:43:04] I would support it.
[4:43:05] But the reality is that
[4:43:05] before my time on the
[4:43:06] board four years or so
[4:43:07] ago, there was an item on
[4:43:15] this board that passed to
[4:43:15] increase benefits to
[4:43:16] commissioners and some
[4:43:17] that are still sitting on
[4:43:17] this board voted no on it,
[4:43:18] but took the benefits.
[4:43:19] you could -- you could opt
[4:43:19] out of them.
[4:43:30] So the same thing applies
[4:43:31] to this very charter.
[4:43:31] If you don't want it to
[4:43:32] apply to your self, opt
[4:43:33] out, but don't just give a
[4:43:34] soundbite because that's
[4:43:34] what's going to be tweeted
[4:43:35] about were written about
[4:43:36] and you could go say I
[4:43:39] didn't support it.
[4:43:40] No, you did support it
[4:43:40] because you took the
[4:43:40] money.
[4:43:46] Ome of us might
[4:43:46] not actually take the
[4:43:47] money because we have
[4:43:48] other businesses, we don't
[4:43:48] need it.
[4:43:50] But if you took it and
[4:43:50] there is no difference.
[4:43:55] So I understand the
[4:43:55] so I understand the soundbites
[4:43:58] from some of my colleagues.
[4:43:58] Some of them were on this board
[4:43:59] at that time four b
[4:44:00] five years
[4:44:00] ago. It was right before I got
[4:44:03] on the board. And voted no and
[4:44:12] still took it. So I appreciate
[4:44:13] it but I'm with bermuda on
[4:44:14] this. Let the voters decide
[4:44:15] and gilbert let the voters
[4:44:16] decide what they want to do
[4:44:20] with our compensation and then
[4:44:21] it doesn't end there. Then it
[4:44:26] goes to another task force or
[4:44:29] another committee that is
[4:44:30] non-interested parties to
[4:44:31] decide what is the most fair
[4:44:35] compensation package for the
[4:44:39] elected officials that
[4:44:40] represent over 2.8 million
[4:44:41] residents. The largest county
[4:44:43] in the state of florida with
[4:44:44] the lowest salary. That
[4:44:51] doesn't -- does a lot of things
[4:44:52] that were not talking about on
[4:44:54] this dais. It is a devises
[4:44:55] elected officials to have side
[4:44:59] gigs, it is sent divide is
[4:45:04] there -- incentivizes show they
[4:45:07] have a reasonable, appropriate
[4:45:11] salary, they MAY stick to what
[4:45:12] they are doing. And focus on
[4:45:17] that. Feel passionate about
[4:45:18] this because I am with gilbert.
[4:45:19] I think we need to open up the
[4:45:21] pool of candidates to be able
[4:45:24] to qualify and be able to take
[4:45:31] on a roll of this magnitude to
[4:45:32] the very same workers and
[4:45:33] caliber of folks that he just
[4:45:33] brought up. The blue color,
[4:45:37] the teachers a lot of very well
[4:45:39] educated folks that otherwise
[4:45:40] cannot afford to sit on this
[4:45:45] dais. Not own businesses like
[4:45:48] myself, not all have other jobs
[4:45:49] like others here and they
[4:45:56] cannot afford it if it is not
[4:45:57] for that. I understand this is
[4:45:58] not on one particular person or
[4:45:59] the other. The reality is if
[4:46:00] you do not agree with it, if
[4:46:02] you do not agree with the
[4:46:03] voters, I mean it is almost
[4:46:04] hypocritical. Let the voters
[4:46:06] decide. And you're right
[4:46:10] commissioner, it MAY not pass.
[4:46:10] It just MAY not pass. The
[4:46:13] rhetoric is going to be here
[4:46:14] are the commissioners trying to
[4:46:18] give themselves a raise. But
[4:46:19] if someone took the time or the
[4:46:20] effort or the investment to do
[4:46:21] the campaign that commissioner
[4:46:31] gilbert did and folks realize
[4:46:31] that we do not get paid $1000
[4:46:32] per month we get paid $500 a
[4:46:33] month. Managing the largest
[4:46:34] local budget in the entire
[4:46:38] state of florida and larger
[4:46:39] than 22 different states. We
[4:46:42] have a larger budget then 20
[4:46:45] something different states in
[4:46:46] the entire country. I think
[4:46:47] they would think differently
[4:46:51] about that rhetoric of the
[4:46:51] commissioners or the
[4:46:52] politicians are trying to give
[4:46:54] themselves a raise. I disagree
[4:47:00] with those folks that spoke
[4:47:00] against it. It is leaving it
[4:47:04] up to the voters to decide.
[4:47:04] Commissioner and then
[4:47:07] steinberg.
[4:47:10] >> I was listening to you guys
[4:47:11] and I have news for you. Very
[4:47:12] few people believe that we are
[4:47:14] only make $6000 a year. Very
[4:47:22] few. I agree with commissioner
[4:47:23] gilbert on this because not
[4:47:24] only that we need to make sure
[4:47:27] we opened the doors for other
[4:47:30] folks and commissioner gilbert
[4:47:33] mentioned teachers, organizers
[4:47:35] and all that we forgot the
[4:47:38] young leaders. Look at the
[4:47:39] young leaders sitting here. We
[4:47:43] would like to create a space
[4:47:49] where they would decide to
[4:47:50] become a commissioner. We need
[4:47:51] young voices, we need to open
[4:47:54] up spaces for young voices. I
[4:47:55] am comfortable with the fact
[4:47:55] that the voters will decide.
[4:47:56] But I believe also that there
[4:48:00] has to be some real education
[4:48:01] because I am telling you and I
[4:48:05] am serious. Commissioner, you
[4:48:06] are making all of this money
[4:48:11] and they really believe that.
[4:48:12] We are making a lot of money
[4:48:13] like $100,000 a year. So there
[4:48:19] has to be some kind of
[4:48:20] education and to make sure that
[4:48:21] the voters go to vote they know
[4:48:22] what they are voting for.
[4:48:38] Right now most of the people
[4:48:39] when I tell them what I make
[4:48:40] they do not believe me. $6000
[4:48:41] a year, that is not true. They
[4:48:42] don't believe it. I'm
[4:48:42] comfortable with the fact that
[4:48:43] the voters will decide that
[4:48:44] they have to be educated. They
[4:48:45] have to be informed. Out reach
[4:48:46] would play an important role.
[4:48:47] thank you so much.
[4:48:48] >> thank you commissioner.
[4:48:49] >> I want clarity to put it
[4:48:50] into posture, this is not about
[4:48:50] any sort of salary. This is
[4:48:51] just about taking the ability
[4:48:54] and the charting today for the
[4:48:55] people to vote on whatever
[4:48:58] salary would be. I am putting
[4:49:02] it in a separate commission.
[4:49:03] None of this other stuff I just
[4:49:03] want to make clear is that
[4:49:07] correct?
[4:49:08] >> it is correct.
[4:49:09] >> thank you.
[4:49:18] >> anyone else? Seeing none
[4:49:19] all in for in favor signify the
[4:49:20] same aye. All opposed say nay.
[4:49:22] Show the item passes. You got
[4:49:27] them? 11 a 16. I have
[4:49:29] commissioner from district 4
[4:49:35] and from district 8. You
[4:49:35] recognize that mike recognized.
[4:49:36] >> I would like to defer to
[4:49:44] the commissioner who sponsored
[4:49:44] and then I will make my remark.
[4:49:45] >> thank you MR. Chair and
[4:49:46] thank you commissioner
[4:49:47] steinberg. I do have a brief
[4:49:48] amendment to the item hopefully
[4:49:50] we will address potentially
[4:49:51] commissioner steinberg. With
[4:49:52] the attorney please read
[4:49:56] amendment.
[4:49:57] >> commissioner cohen higgins
[4:50:01] to amend the proposed changes
[4:50:06] to 6.08 of the homeroom charter
[4:50:07] attachment eight will take
[4:50:08] effect on JUNE 1, 2027 rather
[4:50:10] than immediately following the
[4:50:11] 2026 general election. The
[4:50:11] county attorney is hereby
[4:50:13] directly to make conforming
[4:50:19] change, ballot language and
[4:50:20] legally for the effective date.
[4:50:22] >> it came from the league of
[4:50:23] cities indicating that
[4:50:24] apparently certain dates had
[4:50:32] already been published for
[4:50:33] their upcoming municipal
[4:50:34] elections. We wanted to amend
[4:50:35] it to allow a later start date
[4:50:35] so they would not have to
[4:50:38] republish those election dates.
[4:50:39] Thank you MR. Chair and I move
[4:50:40] 11 816.
[4:50:41] >> it has been moved and
[4:50:49] seconded as amended. And
[4:50:50] commissioner steinberg you are
[4:50:51] recognized.
[4:50:51] >> we are dealing with I think
[4:50:52] one of the most important
[4:50:55] questions because this is going
[4:50:59] to come up more often as we
[4:51:00] have term limits. This is a
[4:51:01] great items I want to commend
[4:51:03] dennis and everybody worked on
[4:51:08] the board on the task force for
[4:51:09] the charter review committee.
[4:51:10] Our charter is the most
[4:51:13] important thing and you will
[4:51:14] see, I pulled a lot of this
[4:51:15] items because I feel like it
[4:51:16] required a time. Only because
[4:51:17] this is the most important
[4:51:23] document that we have. The
[4:51:24] chart is very important and the
[4:51:25] only way to change a charter is
[4:51:26] by a vote of the people. We
[4:51:27] need to make sure we are really
[4:51:28] being thoughtful what we put
[4:51:29] forward. And in this case, I
[4:51:30] think this is a really great
[4:51:31] example of giving the
[4:51:32] commission flexibility to
[4:51:38] actually allow for a feeling of
[4:51:38] a vacancy with an election.
[4:51:39] Right? This is a wonderful
[4:51:41] piece of item to put forward.
[4:51:45] Having said that, I wanted to
[4:51:47] get a little clarity because I
[4:51:55] love the amendment that you
[4:51:56] made commissioner cohen
[4:51:56] higgins. There are other
[4:51:57] cities that get caught in this.
[4:51:58] This is really the spirit of
[4:52:05] debris -- to run for the state.
[4:52:06] To make the determination at
[4:52:07] the right time that we can't
[4:52:08] piggyback an election as
[4:52:18] opposed to it coming up at some
[4:52:19] other time and then we are left
[4:52:19] with less option. This gives
[4:52:20] us flexibility. We can still
[4:52:21] appoint if we want to but it
[4:52:22] does give us the ability to
[4:52:23] have an election. But because
[4:52:24] you have municipalities that
[4:52:24] also have elections in odd
[4:52:25] years which really I think this
[4:52:27] would cover I was wondering if
[4:52:28] you all would be amenable to
[4:52:33] striking the language of the
[4:52:33] qualifying mayor cava update so
[4:52:34] it truly align so we are not
[4:52:40] tied into changing 30 other
[4:52:40] municipal charters who MAY have
[4:52:41] their qualifying date to
[4:52:44] change. So is still states
[4:52:46] with the. -- spirit of the
[4:52:51] item. Without having
[4:52:52] unintended consequences of the
[4:52:53] charters of municipalities that
[4:52:54] MAY have not been thought of.
[4:53:02] Would you commissioner cohen
[4:53:03] higgins be amenable? It
[4:53:03] doesn't change any of the items
[4:53:04] except it strikes out the
[4:53:05] conforming of the 70 b
[4:53:05] 84.
[4:53:08] What is the language again?
[4:53:11] >> your proposed amendment
[4:53:17] 4-1-1 a 16 to eliminate the
[4:53:18] minimal municipal and remove
[4:53:18] the qualifying changes to 6.08
[4:53:22] of the homeroom charter shown
[4:53:23] in section a.
[4:53:23] >> the reason I say this is
[4:53:26] because my only concern is that
[4:53:27] we are still going to have a
[4:53:28] situation. I will use one of
[4:53:31] the cities I represent. They
[4:53:32] have elections in NOVEMBER
[4:53:33] cities I represent. They have
[4:53:34] elections in NOVEMBER 2027.
[4:53:37] The qualifying isn't until
[4:53:38] SEPTEMBER. This will move them
[4:53:39] to an AUGUST qualifying. Okay?
[4:53:40] What happens if the
[4:53:43] commissioner wants or anybody
[4:53:45] or maybe we had a situation
[4:53:48] with miami recently. There is
[4:53:50] a qualifying from when they
[4:53:56] submit the note. That will
[4:53:57] make it so that now they are
[4:53:58] qualifying is going to be in
[4:53:59] AUGUST. If you have a NOVEMBER
[4:54:00] election based on our
[4:54:01] guidelines, we would have to
[4:54:02] force them to have their
[4:54:08] qualifying in AUGUST which MAY
[4:54:09] work for some. But then we are
[4:54:10] going to have to have a special
[4:54:11] meeting in AUGUST which I am
[4:54:12] happy to do. I want everybody
[4:54:14] to know what the domino effect
[4:54:15] of that could be. When make it
[4:54:17] easier for us to be able to
[4:54:18] fill with an election but I
[4:54:20] want to make sure we do it with
[4:54:22] that in our forefront.
[4:54:25] >> all right so.
[4:54:29] >> I am totally confused.
[4:54:32] This is totally confusing.
[4:54:33] Listen, if I MAY MR. Chair? My
[4:54:36] question is because now I'm
[4:54:41] very confused. Is it our job
[4:54:46] if someone wants to run for one
[4:54:46] of these position is protected?
[4:54:47] I don't think so with respect
[4:54:49] to the league of cities. I
[4:54:50] don't think it is our job
[4:54:55] personally. Number two, I am
[4:54:56] going to support the memo
[4:54:56] because there seems to be a
[4:55:00] reason the league has spoken to
[4:55:01] commissioner. This is
[4:55:06] basically saying and you know
[4:55:07] unfortunately or fortunately
[4:55:08] some of you have been here that
[4:55:09] have been appointed. Some of
[4:55:13] you have not and some of us
[4:55:14] have not and that is the way
[4:55:15] goes. In the long run this
[4:55:17] will lead to this body saying
[4:55:18] okay there's going to be in an
[4:55:26] election in a certain time
[4:55:27] period. How does this bring
[4:55:28] into is somebody in the cities
[4:55:32] that want to run? In there is
[4:55:33] any of you leaving so I can be
[4:55:34] with you? Truthfully because
[4:55:35] it is really confusing to me.
[4:55:38] I don't understand how we got
[4:55:42] into this municipal aspect of
[4:55:43] it?
[4:55:44] >> no, I think the impetus is
[4:55:48] that there were many different
[4:55:49] items that they found over the
[4:55:50] years that they have been able
[4:55:58] to fix in terms of feeling of
[4:55:59] vacancy. One thing that was
[4:56:00] overlooked was feeling a
[4:56:01] vacancy and I do not want to
[4:56:02] speak with the sponsor for the
[4:56:02] board and maybe dennis you want
[4:56:03] to give us some of the
[4:56:04] background? It is to give us
[4:56:04] before when you submitted your
[4:56:15] your -- dear revocable letter
[4:56:16] of resignation, we were not
[4:56:17] able to call a timely election
[4:56:18] to piggyback on what was
[4:56:19] happening. Okay? This gives
[4:56:21] us the flexibility to be able
[4:56:22] to do that. This is a good
[4:56:26] piece of an amendment having
[4:56:27] said that taking a closer look
[4:56:30] at the maybe perhaps we want to
[4:56:34] take away another impediment of
[4:56:35] windows qualifying dates or
[4:56:36] others will be? If we fill the
[4:56:37] vacancy here it is just to fill
[4:56:43] the vacancy here. It is fine
[4:56:43] if you want to keep it with the
[4:56:44] effective date. Maybe dennis
[4:56:45] you can give us some clarity?
[4:56:49] >> yes commissioner. So this
[4:56:55] sleight of amendments was
[4:56:55] actually occasioned by an
[4:56:56] occurrence during our
[4:56:57] deliberation which was the city
[4:56:59] of miami elections and
[4:56:59] appointment on this site. The
[4:57:02] work discussions about how to
[4:57:02] handle that for the future to
[4:57:05] make sure that there was time
[4:57:06] for the county commission
[4:57:09] should it want to hold an
[4:57:13] election rather than
[4:57:13] appointment to have time to
[4:57:14] line up with the election that
[4:57:17] was going rather than have to
[4:57:18] doing it at a special day.
[4:57:21] This was a reaction to an
[4:57:24] occurrence. By the way do
[4:57:25] credit to iris who was the one
[4:57:34] who led these amendments.
[4:57:34] Since I'm giving credit to
[4:57:35] other task force members. This
[4:57:37] was a package. These two
[4:57:44] worked together to make sure
[4:57:45] that this board has the ability
[4:57:46] to call an election that is
[4:57:48] aligned with the already
[4:57:49] scheduled general election.
[4:57:51] Which was unable to be done
[4:57:54] with the city of miami. I know
[4:57:59] other supervisor counsel is
[4:57:59] here if you have question that
[4:58:00] you want to direct them, they
[4:58:04] have more technical input on
[4:58:04] it. That was the genesis of it
[4:58:05] so it was very much a package
[4:58:05] deal.
[4:58:16] >> okay all right commissioner
[4:58:16] bermudez.
[4:58:17] >> cities have their own
[4:58:18] charters and I just want to be
[4:58:19] clear. If anybody in a
[4:58:24] municipality, it is not ours
[4:58:25] possibility to change their
[4:58:26] charter. It is the citizens of
[4:58:26] those cities as they did in
[4:58:29] miami gardens and they changed
[4:58:30] the charter after the fact that
[4:58:32] they show choose. Just one
[4:58:38] last thing commissioner
[4:58:39] steinberg the most important
[4:58:40] part of our charters the bill
[4:58:43] of rights. Being one of the
[4:58:50] few lawyers that sued over the
[4:58:50] bill of rights I think that is
[4:58:52] the most important part of this
[4:58:52] charter. It gives citizens 10
[4:58:57] points that they are very clear
[4:58:57] that the user charter when
[4:58:58] asked the question that the
[4:59:00] weight is body on the mayor
[4:59:01] operates. To me that is the
[4:59:03] most horton part of the
[4:59:03] charter.
[4:59:08] >> all right so we have it
[4:59:09] moved by commissioner cohen
[4:59:10] higgins as amended and we have
[4:59:17] a second by, you amended it?
[4:59:18] >> she amended it to change
[4:59:19] the effective date.
[4:59:21] > all right moved by you
[4:59:23] but amended and seconded by
[4:59:24] commissioner bermudez. Are we
[4:59:26] good? All in favor signify by
[4:59:28] saying aye.
[4:59:29] >> aye.
[4:59:30] >> all opposed say nay. Show
[4:59:38] it pass. We have steinberg
[4:59:39] commissioner regalado and
[4:59:41] garcia.
[4:59:44] >> and by the way I will say
[4:59:45] they are both important
[4:59:48] documents, I agree. Which one
[4:59:53] is this one?
[4:59:54] >> annexations.
[4:59:55] >> yes, okay. So that's when
[5:00:02] I thought was very interesting.
[5:00:03] I can support it in a form to
[5:00:04] place in the charter for a few
[5:00:12] reasons. One is that we have
[5:00:12] currently have a planning and
[5:00:13] zoning board that deal with
[5:00:16] these issues already. Now we
[5:00:16] are going to create another
[5:00:18] board to deal with this? And
[5:00:19] then is going to happen every
[5:00:25] three years. Sometimes I feel
[5:00:26] like some of these things come
[5:00:27] up before three year cycles and
[5:00:28] we want to have these
[5:00:29] discussions. And then there is
[5:00:30] another issue that I feel that
[5:00:31] now we are also giving weight
[5:00:31] to MAY be some property owners
[5:00:36] that by the way should have a
[5:00:36] stake in this. But we are
[5:00:39] taking away more of the
[5:00:44] resident voice. By putting it
[5:00:45] in this manner. I don't know I
[5:00:45] can support something that is
[5:00:46] going to in my mind we can some
[5:00:47] of the residential voices on
[5:00:59] whether or not they want
[5:01:00] annexations. And by the way
[5:01:00] today we do it by ordinance.
[5:01:01] This goes into the charter. If
[5:01:02] you ever want to change this
[5:01:03] again had to go back out to the
[5:01:04] people to change it. We don't
[5:01:06] have that flexibility to see
[5:01:07] where we want to go in terms of
[5:01:13] these issues. For those
[5:01:14] reasons, I can't support it in
[5:01:15] this form. Thank you.
[5:01:16] >> commissioner from district
[5:01:17] 7, you are recognized.
[5:01:21] >> I think to mickey! The
[5:01:26] situation with the annexation
[5:01:27] is already complicated enough.
[5:01:27] I feel like we are doing
[5:01:28] another thing. I said it
[5:01:31] before if we want to do a
[5:01:32] moratorium let's do a
[5:01:33] moratorium. If you want to
[5:01:38] change the roach -- rules,
[5:01:38] change the rules. Another
[5:01:40] thing that will accommodate the
[5:01:45] situation, again we had these
[5:01:45] issues term limits where
[5:01:46] lingers for years and years.
[5:01:47] It seems to be another way to
[5:01:51] further complicate the
[5:01:51] situation. I am a no on this
[5:01:53] one.
[5:01:59] >> senator.
[5:02:00] >> thank you MR. Commissioner
[5:02:02] for the same reasons I think
[5:02:06] that when we look at annexation
[5:02:14] think the process is obligated
[5:02:15] enough. We have safeguards in
[5:02:16] place and it is adding more
[5:02:17] hurdles and making it more
[5:02:19] difficult for municipalities to
[5:02:26] annex I think this is an
[5:02:27] overreach to put that in the
[5:02:27] charter and it will make it
[5:02:28] more difficult for
[5:02:29] municipalities to try to create
[5:02:32] annexations. So I too will be
[5:02:32] a no on this one.
[5:02:34] > thank you senator I will
[5:02:41] have commissioner from district
[5:02:42] 6. Next thank you MR. Chair. I
[5:02:43] have a question for dennis.
[5:02:44] What was the rationale from the
[5:02:45] task force from removing it
[5:02:57] from the planning advisory
[5:02:57] board and creating a separate
[5:02:58] boundary commission?
[5:02:59] >> the planning board already
[5:03:00] have a lot of responsibilities.
[5:03:01] The idea was have one body that
[5:03:02] is charged with giving a
[5:03:03] comprehensive review of
[5:03:04] whatever is pending. We went
[5:03:05] through different iterations of
[5:03:06] how long the cycle should be.
[5:03:07] The idea was to have one body
[5:03:08] that is experienced with the
[5:03:13] boundary change procedures and
[5:03:14] the incorporation procedures
[5:03:15] and issues to look at it
[5:03:16] countywide to be able to say
[5:03:16] maybe it makes sense to move
[5:03:17] here maybe not here want to
[5:03:21] balance it out. And that
[5:03:27] should be done on a three-year
[5:03:28] cycle so this board can get a
[5:03:29] comprehensive report of
[5:03:29] everything that is pending.
[5:03:30] >> thank you.
[5:03:33] >> I have commissioner from
[5:03:42] district 12. And I am going to
[5:03:43] one and then vice chair.
[5:03:44] >> MR. Chair, thank you. I
[5:03:45] was going into this but
[5:03:50] commissioner steinberg has
[5:03:51] convinced me to go to the other
[5:03:54] direction. With her points.
[5:03:59] And let me tell you and why
[5:04:00] replacing the plan advisory
[5:04:04] board? When I was the plan
[5:04:05] advisory board they voted 6/1
[5:04:09] to incorporate or to move
[5:04:11] forward and collect the two
[5:04:15] cities to get out in the county
[5:04:16] and then give the owners an
[5:04:17] opportunity to add least weigh
[5:04:20] in. I would appreciate
[5:04:21] commissioner regalado who came
[5:04:22] up with an ordinance subsequent
[5:04:25] to that to at least take a
[5:04:25] non-binding pole of the
[5:04:30] business owners. At that point
[5:04:31] the city of sweetwater which is
[5:04:31] growing by more than double in
[5:04:34] size took over the largest
[5:04:37] commercial area that the money
[5:04:44] went directly to his county.
[5:04:45] Dennis, you have a great
[5:04:54] committee. I agreed with
[5:04:54] probably everything else. But
[5:04:55] this one the more I think about
[5:04:56] it and the more I hear my
[5:04:57] colleagues, I got to be honest
[5:04:58] with you. I think that this
[5:04:59] body when you were here as an
[5:05:00] attorney on many occasions
[5:05:02] going back as far as 2002 had
[5:05:05] looked at full incorporation of
[5:05:06] the county. But to have
[5:05:08] municipalities cherry pick
[5:05:11] their remainder of the parts of
[5:05:18] the county that provides blue
[5:05:19] lagoon for example. It is not
[5:05:21] in my district. The largest
[5:05:24] corporate park that we have.
[5:05:26] And the city of miami did try
[5:05:28] one point to make it a part of
[5:05:37] the city of miami. I think
[5:05:38] that pab can handle it.
[5:05:38] They're not that busy. They
[5:05:39] don't appear to be a visit.
[5:05:40] Abby remembers and she is back
[5:05:41] there somewhere. They weren't
[5:05:43] that busy to make decisions on
[5:05:46] other things. I think that the
[5:05:48] real frank discussion we should
[5:05:55] have at one point is what type
[5:05:55] of county do we want to be? Is
[5:05:56] it half unincorporated and half
[5:05:57] incorporated? And by the way
[5:05:58] this whole vote in NOVEMBER MAY
[5:06:02] give us or MAY eliminate
[5:06:03] cities. We MAY have to take
[5:06:05] them over. The reverse MAY
[5:06:07] happen. They MAY actually
[5:06:08] cease to exist because they
[5:06:15] cannot function and provide for
[5:06:16] the security of the people in
[5:06:17] that area. And you know who's
[5:06:17] going to be responsible? It is
[5:06:26] going to be us. I am going to
[5:06:27] agree with my colleagues and be
[5:06:28] a no on this one. Just because
[5:06:29] if we ever talk about
[5:06:29] annexations and incorporation
[5:06:30] in all of this wonderful thing,
[5:06:31] we need to have a real frank
[5:06:33] discussion. And I want to say
[5:06:34] what nobody ever wants to say.
[5:06:35] The biggest city that is not a
[5:06:37] city is kendall. And if
[5:06:41] kendall ever incorporate the
[5:06:42] gig is over. This county is
[5:06:43] going to have to really deal
[5:06:46] with issues.
[5:06:47] >> not going to happen.
[5:06:52] >> I have heard it is not
[5:06:53] going to happen. What I am
[5:06:54] trying to say that is the
[5:06:55] reality. Sometimes we sit here
[5:06:58] because I mean really it brings
[5:06:58] headaches to all of us to a
[5:07:01] certain extent. I agreed with
[5:07:05] what now ambassador cabrera
[5:07:10] said. The bigger his
[5:07:12] ambassadors always say and they
[5:07:14] don't -- [Indiscernible]. The
[5:07:22] millage rate goes up higher
[5:07:23] than other municipalities. I
[5:07:24] represent sweetwater so I am
[5:07:25] happy for them and GOD blessed
[5:07:26] them. But okay when we make
[5:07:29] these decisions, it impacts
[5:07:32] people who own businesses and
[5:07:33] most that live in this county.
[5:07:35] Just because they are business
[5:07:38] owners small, intermediate and
[5:07:42] large is not make it right to
[5:07:43] disregard their point of view.
[5:07:44] The last time when the example
[5:07:47] I gave you happened it was
[5:07:48] disregarded and the pab was
[5:07:50] disregarded because the
[5:07:58] CHAIRMAN. It wasn't one of my
[5:07:59] mayors and wanted sweetwater.
[5:08:00] That is all that happened.
[5:08:01] There was nothing else and
[5:08:02] sorry abby I had to bring bad
[5:08:12] memories for you. The bottom
[5:08:13] line is let's be frank when we
[5:08:14] talk about these things. I am
[5:08:14] going to be a no because I
[5:08:15] think if we want to talk about
[5:08:16] annexation and incorporation
[5:08:17] let's sit down and talk about
[5:08:18] what type of county do we want?
[5:08:18] Are we going to be like other
[5:08:19] counties like broward that has
[5:08:20] full incorporation?
[5:08:23] Practically 99.9%. Or are we
[5:08:24] going to be like we are which
[5:08:32] is the exception to the rule.
[5:08:33] It MAY have been hit in the
[5:08:34] 1960s but it is now. The
[5:08:35] bottom line is to me and by the
[5:08:36] way the rest of the state and
[5:08:37] you can correct me commissioner
[5:08:38] lopez since you were there the
[5:08:38] rest of the state doesn't go
[5:08:40] through incorporation through
[5:08:42] its commission. That is not
[5:08:44] the way it works. We are the
[5:08:50] only county that ever created
[5:08:50] mitigation. Yes, I remember I
[5:08:51] haven't forgot dennis. I like
[5:08:52] you but I haven't forgotten.
[5:08:53] Mitigation, we have created all
[5:08:54] of these of the rules and I
[5:08:58] think that, I think it is
[5:09:07] important when we talk about an
[5:09:08] issue like annexations and
[5:09:09] incorporation that there is not
[5:09:10] a confusion. I'm going to tell
[5:09:11] you what the citizens of some
[5:09:12] of the cities of hard to say.
[5:09:12] They're going to use it
[5:09:13] politically at some of these
[5:09:14] mayors of the cities. We want
[5:09:23] that part. We want the
[5:09:24] wonderful area that they
[5:09:25] represent that is the largest
[5:09:25] corporate park that the county
[5:09:26] has remaining offices. What
[5:09:27] are you going to say to the
[5:09:29] citizens of miami? Coral
[5:09:29] gables?
[5:09:30] >> you can't have it.
[5:09:31] >> you don't need those
[5:09:35] headaches because it is an
[5:09:35] unfair analysis of the issue.
[5:09:37] because nobody is asking what
[5:09:39] about the survival of the
[5:09:45] county that provides the
[5:09:46] service to all of the residents
[5:09:47] of miami-dade county? I am
[5:09:47] going to vote no. Maybe you
[5:09:51] can convince me but the
[5:09:52] citizens bill of rights is
[5:09:53] still important.
[5:09:56] >> MR. CHAIRMAN?
[5:09:58] >> yes.
[5:10:07] >> I'm going to add you to the
[5:10:08] list commissioner. I'm going
[5:10:09] to have district one, vice
[5:10:09] chair.
[5:10:10] >> MR. CHAIRMAN I am doing
[5:10:12] some rough, first of all the
[5:10:13] people to my left could stop
[5:10:16] talking that is the airport
[5:10:17] people your airport items are
[5:10:18] gone. If you cannot be quiet
[5:10:19] in the chambers leave the
[5:10:30] chambers. Can we do that? MR.
[5:10:31] Chair a rough count would be a
[5:10:36] lot of no on this kind. If we
[5:10:36] let the dead horse die?
[5:10:40] >> I'm good with that. Vice
[5:10:41] chair everybody that is
[5:10:45] pending? It has been moved by
[5:10:47] senator garcia and seconded by
[5:10:48] commissioner lopez for a vote
[5:10:50] purpose. Are you good with
[5:10:54] that vice chair? All in favor
[5:11:05] signify the same aye. It is
[5:11:06] not to kill it, it is a vote.
[5:11:07] You cool kill it. Right now it
[5:11:07] is to pass it. If you are in
[5:11:08] favor signify by saying aye.
[5:11:11] All opposed, nay. This charter
[5:11:13] review task force item does not
[5:11:21] exist. It cannot move forward.
[5:11:22] >> just as a point of personal
[5:11:23] privilege on this, I think that
[5:11:24] we should all consider some of
[5:11:25] the things that were mentioned
[5:11:29] here. Because for example and
[5:11:30] we have talked about this
[5:11:30] before jc gets triggered when
[5:11:31] we talk about this issue. We
[5:11:33] have talked about how the
[5:11:34] applications should speak to
[5:11:37] the broader issue and not just
[5:11:38] the area and the fiscal impact.
[5:11:40] And I can tell you when south
[5:11:41] miami came with an application
[5:11:47] that they wanted to take dave,
[5:11:48] I said no. I think we need to
[5:11:49] take some of these ideas and
[5:11:52] maybe incorporate them into our
[5:11:53] process.
[5:11:53] >> I think that is fair.
[5:11:55] >> thank you dennis.
[5:11:56] >> thank you dennis for that,
[5:12:01] I appreciate it. 11 a 20. I
[5:12:06] will take a motion on 11 a 20.
[5:12:09] I have him motion and seconded.
[5:12:16] You are recognized on b7.
[5:12:17] >> I have a friendly amendment
[5:12:18] that might help. In my prior
[5:12:19] life as a school board member,
[5:12:27] I worked on advertising at our
[5:12:28] schools. One of the biggest
[5:12:28] complaints that miami-dade
[5:12:29] county public schools received
[5:12:30] and I still receive as a county
[5:12:31] commissioner are the horrible
[5:12:37] banners that the school
[5:12:37] district puts around the
[5:12:38] schools. Everybody hates them
[5:12:39] and I was against them. I
[5:12:40] tried to limit them when I was
[5:12:42] there. It is a constant issue.
[5:12:45] I appreciate that we are going
[5:12:48] to do some advertising in our
[5:12:49] parks because we want to
[5:12:53] increase revenue. But I do not
[5:12:54] want to have those banners
[5:12:56] around the parks that we see at
[5:13:01] our school district. So it
[5:13:02] doesn't speak to it, it is very
[5:13:05] broad. So I wonder if there's
[5:13:06] something that we can amend to
[5:13:10] ensure that it doesn't happen.
[5:13:15] >> I agree. I can't stand it.
[5:13:16] I don't know if it is an
[5:13:17] unincorporated thing or it
[5:13:17] happens everywhere but it is
[5:13:20] ridiculous. That is something
[5:13:21] that I discussed with the
[5:13:22] attorneys to add in here.
[5:13:24] purposely left it out to have
[5:13:25] it as a matter of policy for
[5:13:51] this board if it gets approved
[5:13:52] by the voters. As a matter of
[5:13:53] policy this board, this is just
[5:13:54] to open up so that the
[5:13:55] advertisement can exist.
[5:13:56] Really the intent is digital.
[5:13:57] It is not banners and I do not
[5:13:57] want banners because it irks
[5:13:58] me. I wanted to be a matter of
[5:13:59] policy of this for what is
[5:14:00] allowed and what is not. Maybe
[5:14:01] we can limit sizes. We don't
[5:14:02] want us completely say you can
[5:14:02] put a small banner somewhere.
[5:14:03] It makes sense. I appreciate
[5:14:04] that. I think people will vote
[5:14:05] against this is that is not
[5:14:05] clarified. So many people hate
[5:14:08] the banners around the schools
[5:14:09] that I think when they see
[5:14:10] parks and advertising that is
[5:14:11] going to come up. I appreciate
[5:14:12] that we do the policy
[5:14:12] afterwards I think it is going
[5:14:13] to hurt its ability to pass.
[5:14:19] >> it was part of something I
[5:14:20] discussed with attorneys and we
[5:14:21] opted to take it out. I am not
[5:14:21] entirely opposed to it. I do
[5:14:26] not want to limit something, I
[5:14:26] want to limit 1000 banners on
[5:14:27] the fence. That I do want to
[5:14:28] limit. I don't want to limit
[5:14:29] the potential of one banner or
[5:14:32] two banners at a baseball field
[5:14:33] if they are sponsoring a game
[5:14:38] or something like that. By
[5:14:39] putting it in the charter I
[5:14:40] think it prohibits us from the
[5:14:49] type of policy. I am with you
[5:14:49] on the intent of what you are
[5:14:50] saying. I don't know if we
[5:14:51] want to tie the hands of
[5:14:54] potential income.
[5:14:55] >> my friendly amendment would
[5:14:56] be too speak to the fencing and
[5:15:02] maybe a percentage.
[5:15:03] >> do you have something
[5:15:03] drafted?
[5:15:12] >> no. If there's fencing you
[5:15:13] can't cover more than 25% of
[5:15:14] the fence and that way you can
[5:15:15] put a banner. You can't wrap a
[5:15:16] park. The issue is the wrap a
[5:15:16] park.
[5:15:21] >> I am fine with that. That
[5:15:22] would be a friendly amendment.
[5:15:23] I do not want banners at all.
[5:15:24] I was still like, I guess
[5:15:24] here's the question if we do
[5:15:28] that, can we still as a matter
[5:15:29] of policy of this board come
[5:15:30] back later and say, we don't
[5:15:38] want any banners offenses at
[5:15:39] all? Can we go stricter than
[5:15:40] the charter amendment?
[5:15:41] >> you absolutely can.
[5:15:42] >> I am okay with the language
[5:15:43] of no banner advertisement to
[5:16:00] exceed 25% of linear footage.
[5:16:01] >> it is the fence. The issue
[5:16:02] is the fence. I think you have
[5:16:04] to specifically speak to the
[5:16:05] fence because that is what the
[5:16:06] voters are going to think
[5:16:07] about. They are going to think
[5:16:07] about the school district in
[5:16:08] the fence.
[5:16:09] >> exterior fence. So no
[5:16:10] advertisement shall be in the
[5:16:11] form of fence banners
[5:16:18] encompassing over 25% of
[5:16:19] exterior fencing. Some version
[5:16:20] of that. Do you want to clean
[5:16:20] that up?
[5:16:21] >> MR. Chair would be possible
[5:16:22] since it relates to the ballot
[5:16:26] question and changes need to be
[5:16:27] made if we can move on to
[5:16:28] another item we can work on
[5:16:35] drafting language presented to
[5:16:36] you and we can come back to
[5:16:37] this item?
[5:16:37] >> absolutely. Let me get
[5:16:38] input from the rest of the
[5:16:39] commissioners in case they want
[5:16:45] to add stuff to it. I am open
[5:16:45] to it.
[5:16:46] >> this is the last item.
[5:16:46] >> is it though?
[5:16:51] >> are we still on the last
[5:16:52] item MR. Chair?
[5:16:53] >> yes, we are still on item.
[5:16:54] >> when I have a chance I want
[5:16:56] to add something.
[5:16:57] >> first of all I want to say
[5:17:01] that I appreciate the intent of
[5:17:02] creating new funding
[5:17:03] opportunities for our parks so
[5:17:04] thank you CHAIRMAN. But I do
[5:17:12] believe we need to proceed with
[5:17:13] caution and establish clear
[5:17:14] guardrails before we move
[5:17:15] forward. In its form today I
[5:17:16] will not be supporting this
[5:17:18] item. Because I think that we
[5:17:19] need the legal framework first
[5:17:24] before we put it out to -- I
[5:17:25] know you can do it after. I
[5:17:25] understand that. I think there
[5:17:26] are too many concerns that I
[5:17:36] have that maybe others will
[5:17:37] share. I think we need to
[5:17:38] think beyond today's
[5:17:39] intentions. With this policy
[5:17:39] look like in five years? 10
[5:17:40] years? 15 years? I do not
[5:17:43] doubt -- want to see
[5:17:43] consequences. The community
[5:17:47] that bears the impact should
[5:17:48] receive the benefit. Which is
[5:17:49] I know something that maybe is
[5:17:57] not in this. If history is an
[5:17:58] indication of how the county
[5:17:59] negotiated things in the past,
[5:18:00] I don't really have a lot of
[5:18:01] real sense of what that is
[5:18:01] going to look like in the
[5:18:05] future. So let me just go to
[5:18:08] my points really quickly.
[5:18:09] Because the parks were going to
[5:18:12] have advertisement so they are
[5:18:13] going to shoulder that burden.
[5:18:18] But then I don't know what kind
[5:18:18] of commercial activity or
[5:18:19] visual impact it is going to
[5:18:20] be? What does that look like?
[5:18:24] So they should see directly
[5:18:24] investment if they are going to
[5:18:25] have to shoulder the burden. I
[5:18:27] also think that we haven't
[5:18:36] fully explored all of a sudden
[5:18:37] I was told by the parks
[5:18:38] department and by the county
[5:18:38] attorney's office that
[5:18:39] sponsorship opportunities are
[5:18:40] now no longer running afoul
[5:18:43] with the charter with article 7
[5:18:44] such as capital improvement
[5:18:44] sponsorship, philanthropic
[5:18:48] donations. Those we had to
[5:18:49] explore, what does that look
[5:18:59] like? So I am concerned about
[5:19:00] opening up the door. You just
[5:19:01] talk about banners, I had not
[5:19:02] thought about banners. I was
[5:19:03] thinking are we going to allow
[5:19:03] digital? Are we are going to
[5:19:10] loud -- allow billboards? Can
[5:19:11] this lead to advertising
[5:19:12] associated with other things?
[5:19:20] I have so many questions
[5:19:21] because the park is also a
[5:19:22] beach, what does that mean?
[5:19:22] Can we exempt maybe waterfront
[5:19:23] parks because those have unique
[5:19:24] issues? They are going to bear
[5:19:25] a lot of this and what does
[5:19:26] that look like? So I support
[5:19:31] and I and wearing green and I
[5:19:38] support parks and you can adopt
[5:19:39] two trees at various locations
[5:19:39] throughout the county. We want
[5:19:41] to support our parks. As we
[5:19:45] are going for new revenue
[5:19:46] streams I don't want have
[5:19:46] consequences that permanently
[5:19:51] change the parks or dictate
[5:19:52] what belongs in our public
[5:19:53] spaces and the people's public
[5:19:53] spaces. What I don't want to
[5:19:54] see is all over turn into
[5:20:08] nascar venue. By the way being
[5:20:09] consistent on advertisement.
[5:20:09] Anybody who knows me I have
[5:20:10] concerns about advertisement.
[5:20:11] I just wanted to put that out
[5:20:12] there. I appreciate where this
[5:20:13] is coming from but that is why
[5:20:14] I can't support it. I don't
[5:20:15] know if their ideas to make it
[5:20:16] so that we tighten it even
[5:20:16] further. Those are my thoughts
[5:20:17] at this time. Thank you so
[5:20:17] much.
[5:20:21] >> I respect that
[5:20:24] commissioner. This is very
[5:20:28] simple for me. I am trying and
[5:20:29] I thought of this to come up
[5:20:31] with revenue sources when
[5:20:32] property taxes are being
[5:20:34] reformed. It is the talk of
[5:20:38] the town. It is one of the
[5:20:43] highest most impacted
[5:20:44] departments in our county and
[5:20:45] it is important to our
[5:20:45] community. It's funny you said
[5:20:47] that because one of the points
[5:20:49] you said because I actually the
[5:20:52] original form and I amended it
[5:20:53] in committee. The original
[5:20:55] form of this item had so
[5:21:03] wherever the advertisement took
[5:21:04] place the funds remained in
[5:21:05] that park. Working with the
[5:21:05] parks department director we
[5:21:09] actually amended that out so
[5:21:10] because there's a lot of
[5:21:17] community parks that MAY be
[5:21:18] some folks MAY not want to
[5:21:18] advertise. We don't want them
[5:21:19] to be left out. I did however
[5:21:20] place a hold to come back to
[5:21:25] the board and maybe create
[5:21:26] regions. Not necessarily that
[5:21:27] the money stays in a particular
[5:21:35] park but create regions. The
[5:21:36] regions are not going to be
[5:21:37] districts, commission districts
[5:21:38] it could be the south, central
[5:21:39] and north region. It's still
[5:21:40] encompasses most of it and
[5:21:41] everyone gets their fair share.
[5:21:43] I agree with your mindset of
[5:21:44] they should stay in the park.
[5:21:54] I understand parks concerned
[5:21:55] with it and the administration
[5:21:55] concern with it. And it is a
[5:21:56] real one by the way. I was
[5:21:57] amenable to amending that out.
[5:21:58] I do have a hold on policy to
[5:21:59] implement some sort of
[5:22:01] framework to maintain it. I
[5:22:02] could earn your support on it
[5:22:06] because it is one way to
[5:22:11] generate revenue for our parks
[5:22:12] department in a time when we
[5:22:13] need it. I understand of
[5:22:15] course and respect your
[5:22:15] position.
[5:22:18] >> I don't have county parks
[5:22:29] in my district unfortunately.
[5:22:30] I want to caution I have had a
[5:22:31] lot of issues in my district
[5:22:32] with digital signs. And the
[5:22:33] way to residential communities
[5:22:34] view them. You MAY want to
[5:22:35] consider should this past
[5:22:36] during the implementation of
[5:22:41] this to potentially exclude
[5:22:42] digital signs. A lot of our
[5:22:43] county parks are in residential
[5:22:46] areas. You just have to see
[5:22:52] what that looks like at night.
[5:22:53] With the lights, you will have
[5:22:55] the same problem I had in my
[5:22:57] district with digital signage
[5:23:05] in the urban area and how was
[5:23:06] impacting my residence. Would
[5:23:12] it be digital etc. And I
[5:23:13] realize I have been struggling
[5:23:15] with digital signs of my
[5:23:15] district and it does impact
[5:23:17] residential. I am supportive
[5:23:17] of this item because I do
[5:23:18] believe we are going to need to
[5:23:24] have some revenue stream for
[5:23:25] parks especially since they are
[5:23:26] so important to our county.
[5:23:26] Thank you MR. Chair.
[5:23:31] >> it is not the issue that
[5:23:31] you're having, it is not the
[5:23:36] big billboards at all. It is
[5:23:37] more like the kiosk that you
[5:23:46] see in coral gables small kiosk
[5:23:47] throughout the park that served
[5:23:48] multi-purposes. It is not just
[5:23:49] an advertisement mechanism, it
[5:23:50] has access to dial 9-1-1
[5:23:51] emergency services if your
[5:23:52] phone run out and he could
[5:23:55] charge her phone. It is
[5:23:56] telling that you are standing
[5:23:56] here and this is what is around
[5:23:57] the park. These are the
[5:23:59] restaurants nearby. It is not
[5:23:59] billboards it is more of a
[5:24:00] kiosk. It can generate
[5:24:03] revenue. I haven't forgot you
[5:24:04] mme. Mayor. I'm going to you
[5:24:07] in a second. Just one second.
[5:24:10] The idea is to have digital
[5:24:11] signs and not have the banners
[5:24:16] that do make it at times ugly
[5:24:16] throughout the park. I want to
[5:24:18] say once again a lot of the
[5:24:20] concerns brought up or
[5:24:21] something that would be
[5:24:23] discussed as a matter of policy
[5:24:27] of this board shall this past
[5:24:33] by the voters. And so we will
[5:24:34] be having this discussion at
[5:24:40] some point shall it pass. Go
[5:24:41] ahead thank you MR. Chair. And
[5:24:42] to commissioner lopez this
[5:24:49] point the city of miami opted
[5:24:51] out of ladybird. It is a very
[5:24:51] different situation. We do not
[5:24:52] have an opt out of ladybird.
[5:24:53] Irrespective of this, we cannot
[5:24:54] do the things that the city of
[5:24:55] miami does. We talk about
[5:24:57] digital signing, it is very
[5:24:59] different conversation to the
[5:25:00] chair! It is about finding
[5:25:01] similar to what we approved
[5:25:03] that the underlying that
[5:25:06] provides people with
[5:25:07] information and some
[5:25:08] advertising. Our rules are a
[5:25:09] lot different from the city of
[5:25:12] miami. We say digital signage,
[5:25:13] it is very different from when
[5:25:21] the city of miami say digital
[5:25:22] signage. They opted out of
[5:25:22] ladybird. That is a federal
[5:25:23] issue and has nothing to do
[5:25:24] with us. We cannot go as far
[5:25:25] as they have gone without an
[5:25:26] opt out which would be very
[5:25:28] complex.
[5:25:38] >> mme. Mayor? Let me finish
[5:25:39] with the board that is okay?
[5:25:40] Do you want to input on some of
[5:25:40] the stuff?
[5:25:42] >> yes of course.
[5:25:43] >> I do think it is important
[5:25:44] for you to hear from the parks
[5:25:44] department.
[5:25:51] >> we are not stopping the
[5:25:53] conversation until we hear from
[5:25:53] you all. Let me finish with
[5:25:54] the board.
[5:25:55] >> thank you MR. CHAIRMAN.
[5:25:56] I do have, I appreciate what
[5:25:56] you're trying to do. I get
[5:25:57] this. We are in a time where
[5:25:59] we are having financial
[5:26:00] constraints and it becomes more
[5:26:01] difficult and we need to raise
[5:26:02] money and I get that. That is
[5:26:05] admirable. One of the issues
[5:26:06] that I do have is that we can
[5:26:12] put up banners and so forth for
[5:26:13] sponsorships. It is the
[5:26:18] advertisement. We live in a
[5:26:19] world where it is hyper
[5:26:20] advertisement. Everywhere we
[5:26:21] go everywhere we look somebody
[5:26:25] is showing something out his.
[5:26:25] I find that our parks should be
[5:26:26] our sanctuaries. Our parks
[5:26:27] should be somewhere we can go
[5:26:31] and get away from the crazy and
[5:26:32] the noise that we face every
[5:26:36] day. I look at what happens at
[5:26:38] the park and I think about what
[5:26:38] we have in creating these trees
[5:26:41] to make sure that we have a
[5:26:42] place that people can feel
[5:26:47] comfortable and walk on the
[5:26:47] walkways and be one with
[5:26:48] themselves and the creator and
[5:26:53] GOD. And we are going to open
[5:26:54] social where we have
[5:26:54] advertisement thrown their way.
[5:26:55] I think this was put in the
[5:26:58] charter for a reason. Unless
[5:26:59] we can find a way to modify
[5:27:00] some of this, just don't know.
[5:27:04] MR. CHAIRMAN I hate to do this
[5:27:05] but I don't know if I can
[5:27:05] support this at this time. I
[5:27:08] think it is just or cumbersome
[5:27:09] and I appreciate what you're
[5:27:10] trying to do. I don't know if
[5:27:15] I can do this at this time.
[5:27:15] Thank you.
[5:27:16] >> I understand, senator I do
[5:27:17] understand what you're saying
[5:27:18] and I agree. Some of the
[5:27:22] concerns is what commissioner
[5:27:23] regalado was speaking to of the
[5:27:23] banners and keeping it as a
[5:27:28] sanctuary. The difficulty is,
[5:27:28] I don't think it is that per
[5:27:32] se, I think it is more
[5:27:33] regulated thing. I understand.
[5:27:38] And I am not calling out the
[5:27:38] atomic bomb but the reality is
[5:27:45] some of these parks and
[5:27:45] certainly the programs can
[5:27:46] cease to exist if we don't
[5:27:48] start to monetize the different
[5:27:54] options. That is not me saying
[5:27:55] babies are going to die, that
[5:27:59] is just a reality. That is not
[5:28:00] me doing fear tactics, it is
[5:28:01] reality. I don't see shutting
[5:28:03] down parks but programs can
[5:28:05] suffer as a result of funding
[5:28:10] issues. Look, I understand it
[5:28:11] is not ideal but it is also the
[5:28:12] idea is that if you have a nice
[5:28:14] kiosk that is a wayfinder that
[5:28:18] allows you to call. It
[5:28:19] circulates a couple nearby
[5:28:21] restaurants that are across the
[5:28:21] street from the park or
[5:28:27] something like that I think it
[5:28:27] is very amenable and doable. I
[5:28:28] respect what you're saying.
[5:28:30] Vice chair?
[5:28:32] >> thank you MR. CHAIRMAN.
[5:28:34] First of all let me just
[5:28:38] publicly say thank you for
[5:28:39] allowing the modification of
[5:28:43] the original language. The
[5:28:44] modification that you made
[5:28:56] allow for the funding that is
[5:28:57] captured now to be used in our
[5:28:58] parks throughout the county.
[5:28:59] So I take my hat off to you on
[5:28:59] that. Secondly, I am not quite
[5:29:06] sure if we will have the same
[5:29:07] number of interest in certain
[5:29:14] districts in this county to
[5:29:15] advertise a certain parks. The
[5:29:16] demographics are different.
[5:29:16] The impact on the revenue would
[5:29:17] be different. But more than
[5:29:19] anything there are a majority
[5:29:20] not the majority but there are
[5:29:24] quite a few parks that are
[5:29:25] currently not receiving any
[5:29:26] attention as we speak. The
[5:29:28] programs, the parks, they are
[5:29:33] deplorable. And asking us to
[5:29:35] take the sanctuary and turn it
[5:29:41] it to an advertisement
[5:29:43] situation where people can
[5:29:46] actually promote to certain
[5:29:47] people certain products and
[5:29:53] certain items, I do believe
[5:29:53] certain communities will be
[5:29:54] left out. This is not
[5:29:55] something I am just saying just
[5:29:56] to say it. But if you
[5:30:00] currently look at areas now
[5:30:04] where there are a majority of
[5:30:06] parks, you will see the huge
[5:30:18] difference between parks and
[5:30:19] parks and municipalities. You
[5:30:20] will also see where people are
[5:30:20] willing to spend their money.
[5:30:21] I doubt if I get the same
[5:30:22] advertisers to come to district
[5:30:33] 9 and advertise in district 9
[5:30:34] parks. Because district 9
[5:30:35] parks still have buildings that
[5:30:36] were built in the 1940s and
[5:30:37] 1950s and we haven't seen any
[5:30:37] major updates to actually
[5:30:38] invite people into the
[5:30:39] neighborhood to discuss
[5:30:40] advertisement opportunities.
[5:30:41] Lastly let me just say this, I
[5:30:42] am totally in support of
[5:30:44] finding another way to generate
[5:30:47] revenue for our parks. But I
[5:30:48] think the equity argument has
[5:30:52] to be at the forefront.
[5:30:52] Currently it is not at the
[5:31:02] forefront and currently where
[5:31:03] you find dilapidated parks, you
[5:31:04] also see a correlation of
[5:31:04] crime. Not just crime but
[5:31:05] higher crime. And not just
[5:31:06] higher crime, grotesque crimes.
[5:31:08] And not those grotesque crimes
[5:31:08] but you also find trauma
[5:31:11] induced behaviors because there
[5:31:17] aren't places where people who
[5:31:17] are already struggling to
[5:31:18] survive and make it in this
[5:31:19] county that they can just go
[5:31:20] and find solitude. It is
[5:31:22] impossible to do that where you
[5:31:25] have communities that have been
[5:31:29] begging for parks to be
[5:31:30] modified to fit today's
[5:31:31] environment. And unfortunately
[5:31:36] we add on the idea that
[5:31:40] property taxes modifying that
[5:31:43] area of revenue MAY have a huge
[5:31:46] impact on parks. The fact of
[5:31:50] the matter is if it has a huge
[5:31:55] impact on parks in coral
[5:31:55] gables, it is going to destroy
[5:31:59] those parks that are already in
[5:32:00] dilapidated communities where
[5:32:01] communities have shown no love
[5:32:02] for their parks. If you're
[5:32:05] really talking about generating
[5:32:08] revenue, we need to talk about
[5:32:09] allowing for there to be a
[5:32:12] sliding scale. And that
[5:32:13] sliding scale should begin with
[5:32:15] if we make money in one part of
[5:32:21] e-town that has more
[5:32:22] opportunities to get greater
[5:32:26] investors into these
[5:32:27] advertisement apparatuses then
[5:32:28] we should begin with the parks
[5:32:34] that are already struggling to
[5:32:36] keep its doors open along with
[5:32:36] the programs and those monies
[5:32:37] should go there first. I do
[5:32:38] not believe that this
[5:32:39] particular moment that we have
[5:32:44] arrived to that position that I
[5:32:45] have just announced. For those
[5:32:46] reasons I do believe today I
[5:32:48] will be a know until we
[5:32:49] actually get a formula in place
[5:32:52] that would allow for equity to
[5:32:56] be had across the board and
[5:32:56] particularly in the communities
[5:32:59] where the median income and
[5:33:02] where the majority of the folks
[5:33:03] traveling to find a place to
[5:33:05] have that quiet moment that
[5:33:06] can't afford to go to places
[5:33:09] like a sky zone or a bigger
[5:33:13] park where they can take the
[5:33:14] kids on go carts. Until those
[5:33:15] things happen I will have to be
[5:33:20] a no on this. I trust you and
[5:33:21] I believe you but I do not
[5:33:22] believe that the end result
[5:33:25] will meet the expectations that
[5:33:28] you are seeking when you're
[5:33:28] pushing this piece of
[5:33:32] legislation.
[5:33:33] >> thank you vice chair.
[5:33:34] Mcnamara?
[5:33:36] >> thank you MR. Chair. So I
[5:33:37] briefly want to say of course
[5:33:44] we want to raise revenue.
[5:33:45] There were some changes made
[5:33:53] that was appreciative. Our
[5:33:54] parks director want to speak
[5:33:55] briefly on concerns about being
[5:33:58] too specific at this point and
[5:33:59] as much as possible mean more
[5:34:00] to and implementing order
[5:34:03] should it pass public scrutiny.
[5:34:04] It would address some of the
[5:34:07] details of what signage is more
[5:34:11] aesthetically appropriate us as
[5:34:19] well as -- [Indiscernible].
[5:34:20] With that if we could allow her
[5:34:20] to say a few words please?
[5:34:22] >> sure christina. As you do
[5:34:25] the attorneys have come to tell
[5:34:26] me they have an amendment
[5:34:31] prepared based on commissioner
[5:34:32] regalado concerns. It is in
[5:34:33] the middle of what commissioner
[5:34:34] regalado said and what you are
[5:34:36] about to say. So I think it
[5:34:37] MAY cover what you are about to
[5:34:38] say. Go ahead and say it
[5:34:39] anyway we will hear the final
[5:34:40] verdict of the lawyers on what
[5:34:49] they recommend.
[5:34:50] >> good afternoon MR. Chair
[5:34:51] and commissioners. Christina
[5:34:51] white director I am
[5:34:52] appreciative of this
[5:34:53] conversation. Because of
[5:34:53] course as parks director I am
[5:34:54] very thankful to hear there are
[5:34:55] some regulation that MAY be we
[5:34:57] are talking about doing and
[5:35:03] seeing. But we also understand
[5:35:04] that the economic times are
[5:35:05] what they are and all ideas for
[5:35:06] revenues are welcome. As the
[5:35:06] mayor said, I just wanted to
[5:35:07] put my concerns on the record
[5:35:19] about being too specific in the
[5:35:20] charter. The charter as
[5:35:21] everybody knows is very
[5:35:22] difficult to change in the
[5:35:22] future. We don't know what
[5:35:23] will happen in five, 10, 15
[5:35:24] years from now. To be specific
[5:35:25] of what we are going to allow
[5:35:26] could end up locking us or
[5:35:26] boxing us in these restrictions
[5:35:27] in the future. Not just from
[5:35:34] the revenue perspective but
[5:35:35] also practical concerns. Such
[5:35:35] as tournaments that goes on
[5:35:36] right now, soccer, football,
[5:35:39] baseball that do exist. We do
[5:35:40] allow banners to go up during
[5:35:42] those. If we start restricting
[5:35:42] how much can go up then we're
[5:35:43] going to start having problems
[5:35:47] with what we allow within our
[5:35:48] parks. What I wanted to
[5:35:50] suggest if the board was going
[5:35:51] to move forward with this item
[5:35:57] is to have it be general
[5:35:58] however you see fit. And we do
[5:35:59] come back as we have been
[5:36:00] talking about a committee and
[5:36:01] otherwise with follow-up
[5:36:01] legislation and internal
[5:36:02] procedures to put in those
[5:36:05] additional restrictions that
[5:36:06] you all see fit.
[5:36:12] >> thank you director. If the
[5:36:13] attorneys can bring up the
[5:36:13] amendment that they have I
[5:36:16] think it will give you ease to
[5:36:17] commissioner regalado concern.
[5:36:19] Go ahead.
[5:36:25] >> chair moved to amend 11 820
[5:36:26] that all advertising must be
[5:36:27] consistent with standards
[5:36:28] established by ordinance of the
[5:36:34] board. And that will be added
[5:36:35] to the charter and to the
[5:36:35] ballot language we would figure
[5:36:36] out how to put the ballot
[5:36:37] language to include that. This
[5:36:40] would essentially not allow the
[5:36:41] advertising to occur until you
[5:36:41] establish standards by
[5:36:43] ordinance.
[5:36:44] >> it doesn't say the fencing
[5:36:47] on the charter so it is still
[5:36:48] the same issue of the voters
[5:37:02] MAY not be too clear on it. It
[5:37:03] clearly states that we can't do
[5:37:04] anything until this board
[5:37:05] adopts. It is not that it is
[5:37:06] going to happen automatically.
[5:37:07] When it passes we have to take
[5:37:09] action and adopt an ordinance
[5:37:09] surrounding that before they
[5:37:10] can go out and advertise.
[5:37:11] >> I appreciate that. My
[5:37:12] issue is that my residents
[5:37:13] absolutely hate the ads on the
[5:37:22] fences. And to christina! --
[5:37:23] christina's point. I don't
[5:37:31] think that would impact that.
[5:37:32] I can't support it with that.
[5:37:33] I don't think it will pass
[5:37:34] without speaking to this issue
[5:37:35] because the advertising on
[5:37:37] school sites is so hated by so
[5:37:40] many residents. I want it to
[5:37:41] past which is why I think we
[5:37:46] need to deal with this issue.
[5:37:47] Every resident that I have
[5:37:48] spoken to about advertising in
[5:37:49] our parks the first question
[5:37:50] has been, are you going to do
[5:37:52] with the school district does
[5:37:57] and if so, no. I think given
[5:37:58] what the school district has
[5:38:04] done this is our biggest hurdle
[5:38:04] in order to get support. We
[5:38:05] have so many parks that are
[5:38:06] directly adjacent to
[5:38:07] single-family homes. And just
[5:38:08] like the schools, they hate
[5:38:09] seeing all of those ants.
[5:38:16] >> -- ads.
[5:38:22] >> I am open to it. What I'm
[5:38:23] hearing is it is too specific.
[5:38:24] I am okay with what
[5:38:25] commissioner regalado is
[5:38:26] saying. I understand it is
[5:38:29] restrictive so if it doesn't
[5:38:32] pass and the owners don't see
[5:38:33] the benefit of private revenue
[5:38:34] to offset a shortfall of
[5:38:38] taxpayer dollars we can only
[5:38:43] take the horse to the lake. If
[5:38:44] you don't want to drink the
[5:38:46] water we can't force them to.
[5:38:47] I am comfortable with that
[5:38:51] amendment. Gilbert, I would
[5:38:55] like to call a vote on it.
[5:38:56] >> MR. CHAIRMAN thank you. On
[5:39:01] just a couple of points and
[5:39:02] your voters MAY not be okay
[5:39:02] with that. I don't know if I
[5:39:04] have heard that complaint. We
[5:39:05] have had advertisements around
[5:39:06] parks and schools around miami
[5:39:13] gardens and we haven't had the
[5:39:14] complaint. Everything has to
[5:39:15] be relative to the other thing.
[5:39:16] We are going to have no money
[5:39:16] for parks. Are they okay with
[5:39:18] hiring to vent -- higher rental
[5:39:28] fees? In an ideal world we
[5:39:29] would do it. We are not in an
[5:39:30] ideal world. We are going to a
[5:39:32] less ideal world. And with
[5:39:33] regards to vice CHAIRMAN, i
[5:39:35] agree with him but I don't
[5:39:38] think the answer is not putting
[5:39:39] the item before the voters.
[5:39:40] When it comes back to this
[5:39:42] board making sure that the
[5:39:45] money is distributed in a way
[5:39:46] that helps everyone. The
[5:39:49] reason why we changed it in
[5:39:50] committee and you change in a
[5:39:52] committee was because, we have
[5:39:58] invested our general dollars
[5:39:59] our general fund dollars and
[5:40:00] parks. It has been everybody's
[5:40:04] money was been infected --
[5:40:04] invested in the parks. It
[5:40:14] would be fair to actually take
[5:40:14] the profit and keep it in that
[5:40:15] area. We understood that and
[5:40:16] that is why the item was
[5:40:17] amended. I think this item
[5:40:18] should go forward and I think
[5:40:19] we should be able to advertise
[5:40:20] to the greatest extent possible
[5:40:22] that is not completely
[5:40:23] offensive. We have to be
[5:40:24] serious about finding ways to
[5:40:26] offset the looming budget hold
[5:40:32] that already exist in parks. I
[5:40:38] moved this item.
[5:40:39] >> commissioner regalado you
[5:40:45] are still a no? We will remove
[5:40:46] the memory. All in favor
[5:40:47] signify by saying aye.
[5:40:47] >> aye.
[5:40:51] >> all opposed say nay. See
[5:40:53] the item pass. Back on two
[5:41:01] reading items. MR. Or turning?
[5:41:02] >> MR. Chair if I MAY? I was
[5:41:03] advised by the county attorney
[5:41:11] that I had to risk it --
[5:41:11] reconsider 5.0.
[5:41:12] >> show 5.0 and seconded by
[5:41:15] commissioner gonzales. Signify
[5:41:16] by saying aye. Show it
[5:41:20] reconsider. Mdm. Attorney?
[5:41:21] >> this item to be
[5:41:22] re-advertising it will come
[5:41:23] back in the SEPTEMBER 1 agenda
[5:41:25] to be voted on to either
[5:41:27] approve or deny.
[5:41:30] >> is there any action I need
[5:41:31] to be taken by the commission?
[5:41:36] >> no MR. Chair.
[5:41:37] >> we are onto the second
[5:41:37] reading.
[5:41:38] >> with the airport item if we
[5:41:39] could do a real quick? If I
[5:41:40] can have the attorneys read the
[5:41:45] airport motion?
[5:41:51] >> you can read it go ahead.
[5:41:56] Aviation item.
[5:41:57] >> one second, we will get
[5:41:57] that.
[5:41:58] >> MR. CHAIRMAN can I
[5:42:01] recognize my interns?
[5:42:02] >> yes.
[5:42:09] >> are these separate?
[5:42:10] >> they are leaving and they
[5:42:11] have to go back to the district
[5:42:12] to get some work done. Text
[5:42:13] this is separate from the youth
[5:42:13] engagement program?
[5:42:15] >> yes. We would like to
[5:42:21] recognize and thank allison
[5:42:21] reyes, alan sanchez for their
[5:42:23] help and support in our office
[5:42:29] and internship program. They
[5:42:30] are right back here.
[5:42:30] [Applause]
[5:42:33] I like it. It is worth it.
[5:42:34] >> are the youth engagement
[5:42:35] program students can you all
[5:42:40] stand up? All right.
[5:42:44] [Applause]
[5:42:45] You can stay standing up for a
[5:42:46] second. This is the second
[5:42:49] year that we have the youth
[5:42:50] engagement program ran by our
[5:42:51] intergovernmental affairs team.
[5:43:04] I see if -- a new. We cannot
[5:43:05] keep up. We had over 50
[5:43:06] applications this year. I told
[5:43:07] him this one I went to speak to
[5:43:08] them last week. You are
[5:43:09] fortunate and should be honored
[5:43:11] to know that you were selected
[5:43:15] among several others about
[5:43:16] double the amount that made the
[5:43:17] cut. Congratulation. This
[5:43:20] particular class and last
[5:43:26] year's class was great. It
[5:43:27] will be a class that I remember
[5:43:28] it was the inaugural class.
[5:43:33] This class is extremely,
[5:43:34] extremely smart, educated,
[5:43:34] polished. They asked all the
[5:43:35] right questions. I was
[5:43:36] surprised to hear as many
[5:43:37] questions. I understand there
[5:43:48] is one particular student who
[5:43:49] is leading the way with others
[5:43:49] and has encouraged others to
[5:43:50] start podcasts. Because she
[5:43:54] has one of her own and folks
[5:43:55] are trying to ask parents to
[5:43:57] buy them recording equipment
[5:43:58] and broadcast equipment. So
[5:43:59] congratulations. But honestly
[5:44:01] all of you have led the way. I
[5:44:03] would've never thought in a
[5:44:12] million the years to do what
[5:44:13] you guys are doing so
[5:44:13] congratulations.
[5:44:14] >> I actually want to thank
[5:44:15] you for putting this program
[5:44:16] together. You have the
[5:44:21] foresight to do so to help
[5:44:22] shape the next generation of
[5:44:23] leaders. I know last year and
[5:44:24] this year both of the
[5:44:26] appointments that were for
[5:44:34] district 4 found it
[5:44:35] immeasurably interested in
[5:44:36] everything that we are doing.
[5:44:37] Before it wasn't on the radar.
[5:44:38] I want to thank you for putting
[5:44:38] this forward.
[5:44:42] >> thank you commissioner.
[5:44:44] >> congratulations. This is a
[5:44:45] great deal and it gets these
[5:44:46] kids involved in government and
[5:44:47] understand what they can do if
[5:44:51] they actually speak up. And
[5:44:52] from district 13 and it is the
[5:44:56] best one. Josc garcia, are you
[5:44:57] there? Thank you so much.
[5:45:03] Congratulations.
[5:45:10] >> they are all wonderful. I
[5:45:15] democrats I question district
[5:45:20] 13 is the best one.
[5:45:20] >> they are all good.
[5:45:21] >> it is not all true. Not
[5:45:22] everybody is the same. Some
[5:45:23] parents will tell you that but
[5:45:27] not everybody is the same.
[5:45:27] Everyone is love and care for
[5:45:31] but different. Yeah, I know
[5:45:35] right. Senator garcia has
[5:45:37] experienced in the legislator
[5:45:43] such as lopez and vice chair
[5:45:44] mcghee. This is something that
[5:45:45] the state legislature does as a
[5:45:48] program. All my kids all
[5:45:49] through my kids have done the
[5:45:54] program for several years in
[5:45:55] the state legislature. The
[5:45:56] amount of information they have
[5:46:00] learned and gathered from it
[5:46:01] has been very very helpful. In
[5:46:03] fact they have learned things
[5:46:03] there that they did not learn
[5:46:07] from their own dad. And their
[5:46:07] dad is in government. I think
[5:46:08] it will take a lot out of this
[5:46:09] and make sure you soak it all
[5:46:11] up. Congratulations.
[5:46:17] [Applause]
[5:46:18] Mme. Attorney are we ready with
[5:46:21] the motion by commissioner
[5:46:21] regalado?
[5:46:22] >> commissioner regalado moves
[5:46:26] to amend r 1234 b
[5:46:26] 25 which
[5:46:27] approved the purchase of
[5:46:29] certain real property rights
[5:46:31] pursuant to the proposed
[5:46:34] amended lease agreement between
[5:46:37] miami-dade county and miami llc
[5:46:38] for airport property to offer
[5:46:41] as a county mayor to eliminate
[5:46:42] the provision draft amended
[5:46:43] agreement requiring the lessee
[5:46:48] to pay additional monthly --
[5:46:51] [Indiscernible]. Rental will
[5:46:54] be paid.
[5:46:55] >> it has been moved by
[5:46:56] commissioner regalado and
[5:46:59] seconded by commissioner lopez.
[5:47:02] Any discussion on the motion?
[5:47:03] Seeing none all in favor
[5:47:11] signify by saying aye. Show
[5:47:12] that motion passes.
[5:47:15] Congratulations. We already
[5:47:16] had the reconsideration and
[5:47:16] emotion so now onto second
[5:47:24] reading items. Do I have does
[5:47:25] the attorney need to read all
[5:47:25] of the items?
[5:47:26] >> yes. I will read them
[5:47:32] quickly. Amending sections
[5:47:33] amending sections 30 3c b
[5:47:33] two.
[5:47:34] And 3.3 of the code expanding
[5:47:38] the smart sub zone of the --
[5:47:39] [Indiscernible]. Southwest.
[5:47:42] 27th avenue and southwest. 28th
[5:47:43] ln. Located within a
[5:47:44] quarter-mile of a public
[5:47:46] transit station dividing
[5:47:47] inclusion in the code and an
[5:47:49] effective date. Ordinance
[5:47:52] relating to the rapid transit
[5:47:53] system section 30 3c of the
[5:47:53] code amending the metro sub
[5:47:56] zone of the rapid transient
[5:47:59] zone providing inclusion in the
[5:48:04] cone and an effective date.
[5:48:05] 7d, we are going to get back
[5:48:18] to. And and 7d, requiring the
[5:48:19] county mayor doesn't need to
[5:48:20] develop and implement same-day
[5:48:21] permitting program for certain
[5:48:24] permit applications for certain
[5:48:25] residential products. Provide
[5:48:25] reports every six months
[5:48:26] providing severability
[5:48:27] inclusion in the code in an
[5:48:28] effective date. I have a
[5:48:31] request to bifurcate 7b by
[5:48:32] lopez and by commissioner
[5:48:39] regalado.
[5:48:40] >> can I have a motion on the
[5:48:40] remainder of the items? Moved
[5:48:43] by commissioner gonzalez and
[5:48:46] seconded by commissioner and
[5:48:47] clerk please call the role.
[5:48:55] >> senator garcia.
[5:48:56] >> commissioner gilbert?
[5:48:57] >> commissioner lopez.
[5:48:58] >> yes.
[5:49:05] >> commissioner regalado, yes.
[5:49:07] >> commissioner steinberg, yes
[5:49:07] .
[5:49:09] >> vice chair mcghee, yes.
[5:49:12] >> chair rodriguez, yes.
[5:49:18] >> you are recognize on d.
[5:49:35] >> -- [Indiscernible].
[5:49:38] Correct the map graphical
[5:49:41] depictions property on 6th
[5:49:42] street. It is not within the
[5:49:46] rtc but erroneously on the map.
[5:49:51] >> MR. CHAIRMAN I would like
[5:49:52] to put my comments on the
[5:49:55] record. Don't know if everyone
[5:49:59] has been following in the urban
[5:50:00] area we have very little green
[5:50:02] space. These two parcels that
[5:50:06] I am removing from the rtc zone
[5:50:08] is because they are the
[5:50:10] traditional allen morris park.
[5:50:13] There was a contention around
[5:50:15] what would be happening to
[5:50:24] those to -- two parcels. They
[5:50:25] have been considered a park
[5:50:25] over the years. This will
[5:50:30] return it back and I am not
[5:50:30] accepting them into the rtc.
[5:50:31] It will go to miami permitting
[5:50:32] process. I think the real
[5:50:33] issue was the trees. What
[5:50:34] happened to all of the trees on
[5:50:35] the property? The city of
[5:50:40] miami has a huge issue with
[5:50:45] tree permits. Some are
[5:50:45] residents expressed a lot of
[5:50:46] concerns about him moving into
[5:50:51] the rtc where there wouldn't be
[5:50:52] the same protections for the
[5:50:53] trees. I have agreed to remove
[5:50:56] them from the rtc.
[5:50:57] >> it has been moved the
[5:51:03] second and, all in favor of
[5:51:04] that item is a minute signify
[5:51:04] the same aye.
[5:51:07] >> aye.
[5:51:08] >> please call the role.
[5:51:13] >> commissioner.
[5:51:17] >> senator garcia? X
[5:51:19] commissioner gilbert.
[5:51:22] >> commissioner gonzalez?
[5:51:25] >> commissioner lopez, yes.
[5:51:27] >> commissioner regalado?
[5:51:32] >> commissioner steinberg,
[5:51:33] yes.
[5:51:36] >> vice CHAIRMAN.
[5:51:41] >> chair rodriguez, yes.
[5:51:47] >> a motion on 7e. Seconded
[5:51:48] by commissioner lopez from
[5:51:49] districts avenue are
[5:51:50] recognized.
[5:51:50] >> I have a question for her
[5:51:51] on this. I remember we did
[5:51:54] some of this already and the
[5:51:55] city of miami actually is now
[5:52:00] copying what we did. So I
[5:52:01] think this is codifying some of
[5:52:03] the things that already exist.
[5:52:10] What is new here? So we can
[5:52:11] put it on the record?
[5:52:11] >> it is codifying a lot of
[5:52:20] things that we do already so it
[5:52:21] can't be changed.
[5:52:22] >> when I read it we actually
[5:52:22] do this already.
[5:52:23] >> we do most of it, yes.
[5:52:24] Codifying all of it and maybe
[5:52:25] adding a couple of little
[5:52:25] things. But yes they are
[5:52:26] currently implementing some of
[5:52:27] it. I don't know the actually
[5:52:28] keep it to one day. Sometimes
[5:52:39] it goes two b
[5:52:39] four days. We
[5:52:40] are making restricted 24 hours.
[5:52:41] >> that is fine. I am happy
[5:52:42] to support.
[5:52:43] >> we have a motion in the
[5:52:43] second all in favor signify the
[5:52:44] same aye.
[5:52:44] >> aye.
[5:52:45] >> all oppose -- please call
[5:52:46] the role.
[5:52:47] >> senator garcia.
[5:52:50] >> commissioner gilbert?
[5:52:53] >> commissioner gonzalez?
[5:52:58] >> commissioner lopez, yes.
[5:52:59] >> commissioner, yes.
[5:53:00] >> commissioner regalado, yes.
[5:53:02] >> commissioner steinberg,
[5:53:03] yes.
[5:53:05] >> commissioner?
[5:53:09] >> commissioner bermudez, yes.
[5:53:10] >> commissioner?
[5:53:13] >> vice chair mcghee.
[5:53:16] >> chair rodriguez, yes.
[5:53:27] >> mme. Attorney bypassing the
[5:53:28] discussion items can we move
[5:53:30] into the pool list? Then we
[5:53:31] will go back to discussion
[5:53:37] items afterwards.
[5:53:38] >> would you like to go in
[5:53:38] order?
[5:53:39] >> are there any releases at
[5:53:39] all?
[5:53:44] >> we have one release. There
[5:53:45] MAY be others.
[5:53:45] >> we have 3700 pulled items.
[5:53:47] >> senator garcia is the only
[5:53:48] pulling commissioner for
[5:53:49] commissioner for 8f1 he is
[5:53:53] releasing that item.
[5:54:06] >> eight f1 lightspeed. And I
[5:54:16] will release 11, eight, 25. I
[5:54:16] was going to add some stuff to
[5:54:22] it. Do I have an amendment
[5:54:28] prepared? I will release it
[5:54:33] with a cosponsorship. 11,
[5:54:34] eight, 25. Senator garcia is
[5:54:37] reading eight f1 and then eight
[5:54:42] and eight.
[5:54:45] >> 95. I would like to
[5:54:51] cosponsor it because that is
[5:54:51] something that came about with
[5:54:53] a combination of something in
[5:54:56] my district and her district.
[5:55:07] >> if that -- is that okay for
[5:55:08] him to cosponsor it?
[5:55:08] >> absolutely not. [Laughter]
[5:55:09] >> it has been released and
[5:55:10] cope arms. We will entertain a
[5:55:18] motion on eight f1, 985, 11 825
[5:55:19] and there was another one,
[5:55:19] jerry?
[5:55:20] >> eight and eight.
[5:55:21] >> eight and eight. It has
[5:55:24] been moved by lopez and
[5:55:29] seconded by gonzales. All in
[5:55:30] favor signify the same aye.
[5:55:33] All opposed, nay. So the item
[5:55:41] the four past. 2b5
[5:55:44] commissioner from districts
[5:55:45] five you are recognized.
[5:55:46] >> thank you MR. CHAIRMAN. I
[5:55:47] just wanted to say I am
[5:55:49] grateful for the information
[5:55:52] that was given to us but it was
[5:55:53] not what I was looking for at
[5:55:54] all. Here's what I was looking
[5:55:56] for when it comes to cbo
[5:56:00] funding. I was looking for the
[5:56:00] name of the organization, how
[5:56:01] much money they receive
[5:56:08] federally, state, and locally?
[5:56:09] And how many years they have
[5:56:10] been receiving funding? I
[5:56:15] think that this was a good
[5:56:16] start but it is missing so much
[5:56:17] information that I would like
[5:56:18] to work with the
[5:56:20] administration. I think at
[5:56:21] least how I read the resolution
[5:56:25] that was passed that generated
[5:56:26] this report there was a lot
[5:56:26] more that we requested didn't
[5:56:30] get sent to us. So I would and
[5:56:34] I looked here, this was a good
[5:56:39] overall picture of some of the
[5:56:43] cbo's. I am just curious when
[5:56:46] we will have a much more deeper
[5:56:51] dive into every single cbo that
[5:56:52] refund? That is a question for
[5:56:59] the administration.
[5:57:00] >> through the chair I would
[5:57:01] like to recognize ray baker.
[5:57:02] There are two reports and I
[5:57:06] think he can help clarify.
[5:57:07] >> director baker you are
[5:57:07] recognized for a response.
[5:57:08] >> good afternoon. There are
[5:57:10] two reports. Two b5 is a
[5:57:10] report card that will required
[5:57:15] to submit. 14 b2 would be the
[5:57:16] one that is the response to the
[5:57:16] resolutions that you are
[5:57:18] referring to.
[5:57:26] >> does that item show me
[5:57:27] complete details and the number
[5:57:28] of years we have been funding
[5:57:29] them? Where they get their
[5:57:29] funding? That is what I am
[5:57:33] looking for.
[5:57:34] >> I don't believe that was
[5:57:35] called for the request but we
[5:57:35] can certainly provide that to
[5:57:36] you.
[5:57:39] >> I guess to help us during
[5:57:40] the budget even though I know
[5:57:43] the mayor has kept the cbo's
[5:57:47] held harmless, I still think
[5:57:52] that we have to understand,
[5:57:53] what are our priorities as a
[5:57:54] commission? What do we want to
[5:57:55] fund? In order to make those
[5:57:56] decisions, we need to
[5:58:05] understand every single cbo
[5:58:06] that is funded and where they
[5:58:07] are getting their money? How
[5:58:08] much do they get the from the
[5:58:08] federal government? How much
[5:58:09] do they get from the state
[5:58:10] government? How many years we
[5:58:11] have we been funding them? How
[5:58:12] many people do they serve? I
[5:58:14] know this is a big item of
[5:58:19] discussion last budget cycle
[5:58:23] but I can't imagine me being
[5:58:26] able to make any decisions
[5:58:27] based on cbo funding without
[5:58:30] all of that information. I am
[5:58:34] hopeful within the next month,
[5:58:35] I will be able to review that.
[5:58:38] Because I think certainly the
[5:58:43] committee that commissioner and
[5:58:43] I chair would be very
[5:58:46] interested in drilling down to
[5:58:53] the absolute detail. Because
[5:58:54] they are matching funds as well
[5:58:54] and I would like to know how
[5:58:57] much? This is the process at
[5:58:58] the state level. We ask how
[5:58:58] much matching funds do you have
[5:59:02] from anyone? Who is that? Is
[5:59:03] it a private foundation? Is it
[5:59:04] a private organization? Is it
[5:59:05] federal grants? Is it state
[5:59:08] grants? We get a lot of
[5:59:12] request at the state level to
[5:59:13] fund projects. We call through
[5:59:17] them specifically every single
[5:59:18] request. And we make decisions
[5:59:23] based on the kind of
[5:59:24] information and that data. I
[5:59:25] was hoping that we would be
[5:59:26] able to get that for every
[5:59:26] single cbo that has been
[5:59:27] included in the budget this
[5:59:29] year.
[5:59:32] >> through the chair? I want
[5:59:38] to indicate in addition to ray
[5:59:38] we have dan wall. Dan wall has
[5:59:39] been leading on the nonprofits
[5:59:43] for 30 years or something like
[5:59:45] that. I actually had a large
[5:59:50] role to play and having him
[5:59:51] hired by a predecessor.
[5:59:51] Because we needed to have
[5:59:52] somebody to help us maximize
[5:59:56] federal and state dollars and
[5:59:57] dan was hired for that purpose.
[5:59:58] If he doesn't know the answer,
[5:59:59] he will get it. If you would
[6:00:06] allow him to say --
[6:00:07] >> the information you
[6:00:08] reference on the information
[6:00:09] that was required in the
[6:00:09] legislation is in that at all
[6:00:17] report 14 b2.
[6:00:18] >> I appreciate that.
[6:00:19] Remember when we fund things
[6:00:20] like I have had cbo say to me,
[6:00:20] if you do not fund me that I
[6:00:24] will lose the matching funds
[6:00:25] from the federal grant that we
[6:00:26] have. Those are important
[6:00:26] decisions to make because
[6:00:28] obviously we are able to
[6:00:31] maximize funding from other
[6:00:32] sources to be able to fund. I
[6:00:38] still look at a lot of this
[6:00:39] asked, what are the priorities
[6:00:40] that we want to be funding?
[6:00:45] What areas? Is it vulnerable
[6:00:46] populations? Is it elderly and
[6:00:47] young children? For me to make
[6:00:54] the decisions, it is very
[6:00:55] difficult based on what I have.
[6:00:56] I will get that item and if I
[6:00:57] have for the request, I will
[6:00:58] make sure to pass those on to
[6:00:58] you. Thank you so much.
[6:00:59] >> we are going to meet with
[6:01:06] all of you shortly. Within a
[6:01:07] couple of weeks or three weeks
[6:01:08] to go through in more detail of
[6:01:08] the questions that have been
[6:01:11] raised at the various
[6:01:12] committees this past week and
[6:01:13] make sure you have all the
[6:01:15] information you need to make
[6:01:15] informed choices.
[6:01:20] >> I am going to take up item
[6:01:21] 14 b2.
[6:01:25] >> and give us a chair and to
[6:01:26] the commissions who requested
[6:01:32] this report. To allow to see
[6:01:33] what the cbo dollars are going
[6:01:34] and how they are being spent.
[6:01:38] On on on 2b5 there are number
[6:01:45] cbo*color coded with both
[6:01:46] yellow and red indicating five
[6:01:46] or more instances of
[6:01:49] noncompliance and receiving a
[6:01:50] suspension that has since been
[6:01:50] resolved are any number of
[6:01:52] instances of noncompliance or
[6:01:56] payment suspension. Are those
[6:01:58] yellow and red coated cbo's
[6:02:00] included in the upcoming
[6:02:03] proposed budget?
[6:02:09] >> you are recognized.
[6:02:10] >> office of management and
[6:02:11] budget. Yes, commissioner the
[6:02:15] yellow coded had a number of
[6:02:21] findings as per I/o three b
[6:02:21] 15
[6:02:22] required a yellow rating. They
[6:02:23] have subsequently submitted a
[6:02:24] corrective action plan that
[6:02:25] have all been clear. There
[6:02:29] were three with a red
[6:02:30] designation. One of them was
[6:02:32] able to successfully clear
[6:02:37] their corrective action plan.
[6:02:38] One, the contract was
[6:02:39] terminated for lack of
[6:02:40] performance. And the third one
[6:02:41] , they declined the funding
[6:02:54] this year. The current year
[6:02:54] monitoring because this is
[6:02:55] looking back a year, the
[6:02:56] current year monitoring is
[6:02:57] happening right now. I am
[6:02:58] pleased to report knock on wood
[6:02:59] that we have no suspensions to
[6:02:59] date so far.
[6:03:00] >> thank you. I'm glad you're
[6:03:06] pleased to report that. I
[6:03:07] however am looking at this
[6:03:08] report carefully for those that
[6:03:09] are noncompliant in any way
[6:03:10] especially when funding is as
[6:03:11] tight as it is. I would find
[6:03:14] it where there are instances
[6:03:15] higher than five. I will be
[6:03:18] taking a closer look at those
[6:03:18] as we move into our budget.
[6:03:20] Thank you for the acclimation
[6:03:20] regarding but we have been
[6:03:21] including in our proposed
[6:03:23] annual budget moving forward.
[6:03:26] Nothing for -- further MR.
[6:03:27] Chair.
[6:03:28] >> commissioner?
[6:03:33] >> thank you MR. Chair. I am
[6:03:41] going to report -- refer to
[6:03:41] 2b5. What constitutes a
[6:03:42] violation for these
[6:03:46] organizations? Why is the
[6:03:48] threshold five? That they are
[6:03:50] allowed to do five violations
[6:03:55] before they get action taken
[6:04:03] against corrective action?
[6:04:04] >> to your first question,
[6:04:05] what constitutes a violation?
[6:04:06] They are not in compliance with
[6:04:07] one of the many terms and
[6:04:08] conditions in the contract. It
[6:04:10] could be from, they lack
[6:04:14] programmatic records. They
[6:04:15] lack financial records. Or it
[6:04:17] could be something small like
[6:04:23] they failed to submit their
[6:04:24] continuity of operations plan
[6:04:26] on an annual basis. It is any
[6:04:28] instance of noncompliance with
[6:04:31] the contract. And the numbers
[6:04:33] that were determined by the
[6:04:40] board are outlined in a bowl
[6:04:41] three b
[6:04:41] 15.
[6:04:42] >> okay, is it per fiscal
[6:04:42] year?
[6:04:43] >> yes.
[6:04:49] >> violations could be five
[6:04:50] violations in a year? Is it
[6:04:50] every time they apply? How do
[6:04:51] you keep track of that?
[6:05:00] >> it is an annual monitoring.
[6:05:01] They can submit a corrective
[6:05:02] action plan. They clear that
[6:05:03] or not. And next year we go
[6:05:03] out a fresh set of eyes and
[6:05:04] look again. There could be
[6:05:05] anywhere from zero b
[6:05:09] one. Two
[6:05:12] commissioner cohen higgins some
[6:05:20] of these organizations are
[6:05:20] smaller cbo's that lack
[6:05:22] capacity. So there's a lot of
[6:05:22] work that goes on with a
[6:05:23] separate team working in
[6:05:24] conjunction with their
[6:05:25] contracts officer to provide
[6:05:28] capacity building technical
[6:05:29] assistance on an ongoing basis.
[6:05:34] >> the corrective action is
[6:05:37] complying with what they were
[6:05:37] missing? What is the
[6:05:43] corrective actions?
[6:05:44] >> it can be all of those
[6:05:44] things. You didn't do this and
[6:05:53] explain why? Give us your plan
[6:05:54] for correction. By when are
[6:05:55] you going to do it? Or you
[6:05:56] failed to provide me this
[6:05:57] document, provide the document
[6:05:58] now. It is the combination of
[6:05:58] those things.
[6:05:59] >> is there a certain point
[6:06:02] where you say this organization
[6:06:03] has noncompliant and we are no
[6:06:04] longer going to recommend
[6:06:09] funding for them? Or are they
[6:06:10] continue having violations and
[6:06:11] correcting them over and over
[6:06:14] and continue receiving funding
[6:06:15] from the county?
[6:06:19] >> the answer to your
[6:06:19] question, no they are not
[6:06:25] allowed to continue.
[6:06:26] >> is a three strikes and
[6:06:26] you're out?
[6:06:39] > we submit a monitoring
[6:06:40] report to them. We give them
[6:06:41] an opportunity to submit a
[6:06:42] corrective action plan. We
[6:06:43] reviewed that, we MAY negotiate
[6:06:43] back and forth with that. We
[6:06:45] MAY say it is not sufficient
[6:06:45] and you need to provide more
[6:06:46] documentation. But no as I
[6:06:50] indicated previously one of the
[6:06:51] three red was not able to
[6:06:52] submit a corrective action
[6:06:53] plan. And so we terminated the
[6:06:53] agreement for lack of
[6:06:54] performance. That was based on
[6:06:55] the one year. Looking back at
[6:06:59] the agency, they had a track
[6:07:00] record of difficulty leading up
[6:07:01] to that. It was technically
[6:07:02] within that one year. And
[6:07:05] another way of doing it is, we
[6:07:07] will not execute a current year
[6:07:09] contract until they have
[6:07:10] submitted that corrective
[6:07:13] action plan for the prior year
[6:07:14] and it has been approved by the
[6:07:14] county.
[6:07:19] >> okay so that continuing the
[6:07:20] example of that organization, I
[6:07:21] don't know which one it is.
[6:07:22] Would they be allowed to
[6:07:23] reapply in the next fiscal
[6:07:28] year? Are they done receiving,
[6:07:29] do they have to start over?
[6:07:29] How does it work?
[6:07:35] >> if there was a new
[6:07:36] solicitation, they will be
[6:07:37] eligible to apply. They would
[6:07:38] have to speak to their track
[6:07:41] record in their proposal. But
[6:07:42] if it is continuation funding,
[6:07:43] we will not continue. Even if
[6:07:48] the board has them on the list
[6:07:49] because at the time the list is
[6:07:49] generated they MAY be working
[6:07:50] through corrective action plan.
[6:07:51] If they do not successfully
[6:07:52] clear that corrective action
[6:07:53] plan with the county, we would
[6:07:55] not execute the subsequent year
[6:07:56] agreement.
[6:07:58] >> okay. I think it would be
[6:08:03] helpful as commissioner lopez
[6:08:03] said to have some of that
[6:08:04] information as we go into the
[6:08:06] budget season. To have that
[6:08:10] included in the report or the
[6:08:10] information we are considering
[6:08:16] looking at the cbo's.
[6:08:17] >> commissioner from district
[6:08:17] 7?
[6:08:19] >> thank you. And look I
[6:08:23] appreciate what we were
[6:08:24] provided. I have two
[6:08:25] recommendations very similar to
[6:08:25] what other folks are
[6:08:26] mentioning. First, I think we
[6:08:33] should have a distinction for
[6:08:34] noncompliance. So if it is
[6:08:35] noncompliance for not providing
[6:08:39] financials, that is very
[6:08:40] different from noncompliance
[6:08:40] for not sending a form or
[6:08:42] sending a form late. So I
[6:08:43] would appreciate if we broke
[6:08:53] the noncompliance into
[6:08:53] actionable. That would give us
[6:08:54] a little bit more information.
[6:08:55] I am more concerned with a
[6:08:56] nonprofit that is not providing
[6:08:57] financial information or
[6:08:58] programming information or
[6:09:00] attendance information. Then
[6:09:02] someone who sent a document in
[6:09:04] late. To your point they are
[6:09:09] new to this and some have been
[6:09:10] doing this for a long time.
[6:09:13] Some have staff, some don't.
[6:09:14] So I think we need to break
[6:09:15] down the noncompliance. I
[6:09:16] would like the yellow and the
[6:09:17] red. I think that works.
[6:09:18] Within the noncompliance, I
[6:09:21] would like a type a and a type
[6:09:22] b of noncompliance. Number
[6:09:29] two, I think I understand it is
[6:09:30] annual. But one of the things
[6:09:31] we try to get people to
[6:09:32] understand here is, it is okay
[6:09:37] to make a mistake. Just make
[6:09:38] the same mistakes over and over
[6:09:39] again. If someone is making
[6:09:40] the same mistakes over and over
[6:09:44] I would like to know. And so
[6:09:44] while you are providing this
[6:09:45] with annual information, I
[6:09:46] think it would be beneficial
[6:09:48] for the board to see in an
[6:09:51] exhibit 5 years back. And flag
[6:09:52] anyone that has committed the
[6:09:57] same mistake. Again, okay with
[6:09:58] new mistakes but it is the same
[6:09:59] mistakes. If you have not
[6:10:01] submitted your financials in a
[6:10:05] timely fashion for two or three
[6:10:06] years, I think that is
[6:10:08] important. Even that got you a
[6:10:09] yellow because it shows a much
[6:10:12] bigger issue. That I think the
[6:10:14] board needs to consider when
[6:10:15] providing funding. Those would
[6:10:17] be my two recommendations.
[6:10:21] Thank you.
[6:10:22] >> vice-CHAIRMAN?
[6:10:26] >> thank you MR. CHAIRMAN.
[6:10:26] Thank you MR. Wall for
[6:10:27] everything you have done and
[6:10:29] continue doing the great work
[6:10:30] you do. Just a quick question
[6:10:34] as it relates to the report?
[6:10:37] What does it mean in terms of
[6:10:41] the color coding that we are
[6:10:42] seeing here? Are we saying
[6:10:46] that many of the legacy cbo's
[6:10:49] that you engaged with are in
[6:10:51] compliance, noncompliance or is
[6:10:52] there a mixture? X is a
[6:10:59] mixture. --
[6:11:00] >> it is a mixture. Greenwood
[6:11:01] state they are in good
[6:11:02] standing. Yellow there are a
[6:11:11] number of findings as per 803 b
[6:11:12] 15 requiring is possible
[6:11:13] suspension or hold placed on
[6:11:14] their payments until they
[6:11:15] resolve their corrective action
[6:11:19] plan and read this is serious
[6:11:25] violent -- violations where was
[6:11:28] it resolved. This report card
[6:11:31] you have 117 organizations of
[6:11:39] which 114 received -- I'm
[6:11:40] sorry. 104 received a green
[6:11:45] rating. 100 and 4/17. 19 were
[6:11:46] yellow and three were red. Of
[6:11:49] the three cents the time this
[6:11:54] report was issued one has
[6:11:55] resolved it and converted from
[6:11:55] red to yellow. One has the
[6:11:58] contract has been terminated
[6:12:02] and one declined funding.
[6:12:04] >> thank you so much. I asked
[6:12:20] that question because in
[6:12:22] reviewing this memo, it is
[6:12:25] almost as if this is a
[6:12:30] vindication from the cbo's who
[6:12:31] was pretty much tarnished with
[6:12:37] the perception that they were
[6:12:38] not being in compliance with
[6:12:39] the counties requirements. But
[6:12:41] it is also a great indicator
[6:12:41] that not only should we
[6:12:43] continue the funding and
[6:12:45] continue watching over these
[6:12:46] cbo's to ensure that they do
[6:12:50] the right thing. But it is the
[6:12:51] very reason I stated before and
[6:12:55] I will say it again that cbo's
[6:12:56] in miami-dade county should
[6:13:01] have their own trust fund that
[6:13:03] would allow for them to receive
[6:13:04] funding that they do not have
[6:13:08] to compete with other buckets
[6:13:08] and pots of money within
[6:13:11] miami-dade county. When this
[6:13:17] proposal was first made, I
[6:13:18] sought to get clarification
[6:13:22] because of the rumor mill that
[6:13:28] consuming the air that cbo's in
[6:13:29] miami-dade county didn't
[6:13:36] deserve the money or they
[6:13:37] should go out and raise their
[6:13:38] own funds. Or they ship pulled
[6:13:39] themselves up by their own
[6:13:40] bootstraps. In my humbling
[6:13:40] opinion is a form of
[6:13:44] vindication that should say to
[6:13:45] the cbo's not only have you
[6:13:47] been vindicated by the counties
[6:13:48] research, not only have you
[6:13:50] vindicated by the counties in
[6:13:51] depth research, but you have
[6:13:53] been vindicated because you
[6:13:54] have been doing the right
[6:13:56] thing. And I am going to
[6:13:59] continuously push and I hope
[6:14:02] that one day this item becomes
[6:14:03] part of the law in miami-dade
[6:14:06] county. That cbo's should be
[6:14:10] allowed to have its own trust
[6:14:11] fund to fund it. I think this
[6:14:15] is a great starting point so we
[6:14:17] can have that discussion. And
[6:14:24] thirdly, let me publicly's --
[6:14:25] publicly say it. She has been
[6:14:26] one of the greatest advocates
[6:14:28] for ceos. And I thank you for
[6:14:32] hearing us and ensuring part of
[6:14:33] the budget that they are
[6:14:34] restored and what you did and I
[6:14:38] can tell you by the meetings we
[6:14:39] have had with the cbo's they
[6:14:42] are truly thankful to you and
[6:14:44] for you for doing this. But at
[6:14:47] the same time I also understand
[6:14:49] that with the cbo's lack a
[6:14:54] clear line as it relates to
[6:15:03] receiving funding, it creates
[6:15:04] havoc with not only their
[6:15:05] funders but whether or not they
[6:15:06] are going to be able to carry
[6:15:06] forth the programs that they
[6:15:07] are doing now into the near
[6:15:11] future. So I say with this
[6:15:13] report did and said what I
[6:15:18] figured it would say. That
[6:15:19] these cbo's are doing well and
[6:15:20] the legacy cbo's and lastly I
[6:15:21] do not believe that this
[6:15:26] particular point farm share
[6:15:27] should be included into the
[6:15:28] legacy cbo's. I think farm
[6:15:29] share should be a separate
[6:15:32] item. That allow for us to
[6:15:32] fund it like we fund other
[6:15:33] items separately where they do
[6:15:34] not have to compete for
[6:15:36] funding. I can never
[6:15:37] understand why is it that we
[6:15:41] are asking an organization like
[6:15:41] farm share that feeds the
[6:15:44] majority of the people were
[6:15:45] struggling to survive in
[6:15:50] miami-dade county, where
[6:15:51] pitting them up against other
[6:15:52] cbo's for funding. If we are
[6:15:53] going to fund and take care of
[6:16:01] the people who are least lost
[6:16:02] and sometimes left out because
[6:16:03] a policy, not because of their
[6:16:04] own volition but because of
[6:16:05] policy. We should at least
[6:16:06] identify the fact that farm
[6:16:07] share should not be competing
[6:16:09] for funding. Farm share should
[6:16:10] be a source of income that will
[6:16:14] always be there each and every
[6:16:17] year so they know exactly how
[6:16:18] many more people they would
[6:16:19] need to feed in order to make
[6:16:27] those people whole again as it
[6:16:27] relates to their ability to
[6:16:28] provide a quality of life for
[6:16:29] themselves. So publicly MR.
[6:16:30] Wall I want to publicly say,
[6:16:31] thank you. You have always
[6:16:32] been there every time I have
[6:16:33] called. Your work is
[6:16:34] impeccable and I just hope this
[6:16:35] becomes the foundational point
[6:16:36] when discussions are going to
[6:16:38] be had that really goes to the
[6:16:41] quality of life for people in
[6:16:44] our community. That is it.
[6:16:48] >> all right so we've got
[6:16:48] commissioner?
[6:16:51] >> I like to make sure that I
[6:16:55] agree with commissioner lopez
[6:17:05] 1000%. Whatever you give her
[6:17:06] an commissioner from the
[6:17:06] committee that you provide. I
[6:17:07] do not have a problem with
[6:17:08] cbo's. I do think we have a
[6:17:11] whole department which is
[6:17:18] amazing to me. Yet to monitor
[6:17:19] them and make sure they are
[6:17:20] doing what they're supposed to.
[6:17:29] As commissioner lopez said, we
[6:17:29] have to see are there getting
[6:17:30] federal and state grants where
[6:17:31] is the money coming from?
[6:17:32] They're good cbo's and bad
[6:17:33] cbo's like there is good people
[6:17:34] and bad people. I think we
[6:17:34] have an obligation to look at
[6:17:35] that annually actually. I
[6:17:36] would like whatever numbers you
[6:17:37] provide to the commissioner
[6:17:38] lopez that you could provide it
[6:17:41] to the rest of us?
[6:17:42] >> through the chair at the
[6:17:51] report we are referencing this
[6:17:51] agenda item 14 b2. It is about
[6:17:53] 60 pages so we are happy to
[6:17:56] supplement and we are taking
[6:17:57] copious notes of the
[6:17:57] recommendations and
[6:17:58] suggestions. Thank you.
[6:17:59] >> I am going to continue a
[6:18:04] motion on 2b5. It has been
[6:18:08] moved by the vice chair and
[6:18:09] signified by st. Aye. All
[6:18:14] opposed, nay. Show 2b5 and 14
[6:18:17] b past. I am going to take a
[6:18:23] item 8k1 for a floor amendment
[6:18:24] if the county attorney can
[6:18:24] read
[6:18:36] it?? 8k1.
[6:18:41] >> amend item 8 k1 on page 031
[6:18:49] exhibit c reduced 273,000 b
[6:18:50] $300,000. The recapture
[6:18:58] community develop block grant
[6:18:59] from district 10. From
[6:19:00] miami-dade county housing and
[6:19:01] community development for
[6:19:02] economic development
[6:19:03] activities. On page mdc 035
[6:19:11] exhibit d for the recommended
[6:19:13] amount of reallocated community
[6:19:14] development block grant commits
[6:19:15] tradition funds from district
[6:19:15] 10 miami-dade county community
[6:19:16] services department for the
[6:19:17] district 10 housing
[6:19:18] beautification rehabilitation
[6:19:19] program. On page mdc zero 25
[6:19:25] exhibit a remove the
[6:19:26] recommendation to award
[6:19:27] $126,570 of community
[6:19:28] development block grant.
[6:19:34] Commission district community
[6:19:35] services department for housing
[6:19:36] beautification rehabilitation
[6:19:46] services in district 10. On
[6:19:47] page mdc zero 18 exhibit a
[6:19:48] increase from $408,000 b
[6:19:48] $508,000 the funding
[6:19:49] recommendation for county
[6:19:50] housing community development
[6:19:51] service. On page mdc zero 18
[6:19:55] exhibit a increase from zero 18
[6:19:56] exhibit a increase from
[6:19:56] $171,990 b
[6:20:04] $198,501 the funding
[6:20:05] recommendation for miami-dade
[6:20:06] county community development
[6:20:07] economic development housing
[6:20:09] public facilities and capital
[6:20:09] improvements. And a conforming
[6:20:10] changes to resolution and
[6:20:10] title.
[6:20:11] >> I will entertain a motion.
[6:20:12] Vice chair moves it and
[6:20:15] seconded by commissioner
[6:20:15] gonzales. All in favor signify
[6:20:17] by st. Aye. All opposed, not
[6:20:26] nay. -- all opposed, nay. I
[6:20:30] have eating commissioners. I
[6:20:35] am going to skip and let's go
[6:20:41] to and let's go to and let's go
[6:20:42] to 2b8. Commissioner from
[6:20:45] district 5 are you here?
[6:20:50] Commissioner from district 8?
[6:20:51] >> I can take mine which one
[6:20:51] do you have?
[6:20:59] >> let's take up 2b6.
[6:21:00] >> it is really quick. We
[6:21:05] talked about this at transit
[6:21:06] committee. I just wanted to
[6:21:07] mention it again. I appreciate
[6:21:08] the report on the electric
[6:21:09] buses. I really think that we
[6:21:11] need an update of what is
[6:21:12] happening with the litigation
[6:21:14] and the bankruptcy and all of
[6:21:19] that. I am happy to move it.
[6:21:20] >> moved by commissioner
[6:21:21] regalado and seconded by vice
[6:21:26] chair. All in favor signify by
[6:21:27] st. Aye. All opposed nay.
[6:21:30] Show it passes. 2b 10
[6:21:32] commissioner from district 7.
[6:21:41] >> 2b 10. I appreciate the
[6:21:42] report. Only thing I think we
[6:21:43] should reconsider when we do
[6:21:44] this report is also evaluating
[6:21:44] our lobbyist. We changed the
[6:21:46] way that we hired our lobbyist
[6:21:47] this last time around. There
[6:21:55] were a lot of expectations and
[6:21:56] I know that it was a difficult
[6:21:57] session but we have had two
[6:21:58] difficult sessions. So I think
[6:21:59] moving forward we should have a
[6:22:03] postmortem and really look at
[6:22:04] how people did so we can use
[6:22:06] that to inform our decisions
[6:22:07] when we choose our lobbying
[6:22:10] team for the next year. I am
[6:22:11] happy to move it.
[6:22:22] >> it has been moved by
[6:22:23] commissioner regalado and
[6:22:24] seconded by vice chair. All in
[6:22:25] favor signify by st. Aye. All
[6:22:26] opposed, nay. Charlotte
[6:22:34] passed. 2b8.
[6:22:34] >> thank you so much MR.
[6:22:35] Terman. I have a quick
[6:22:36] question. I noted we have $525
[6:22:37] million in outstanding county
[6:22:38] debt as of last year. So my
[6:22:40] question is a couple of things
[6:22:41] and if you don't have it, you
[6:22:46] can certainly get it to me.
[6:22:47] How long has this debt been
[6:22:47] outstanding? It is almost and
[6:22:48] a half $1 billion.
[6:22:51] >> through the chair the
[6:22:52] director of internal
[6:22:52] compliance.
[6:22:56] >> I'm director of internal
[6:22:58] compliance. The current
[6:22:59] collection division falls under
[6:23:03] me. Actually the county with
[6:23:07] the team we collect accounts
[6:23:08] that are older than four years
[6:23:09] old usually and up to probably
[6:23:11] 30 years old. So it is a very
[6:23:14] long outstanding debt that we
[6:23:15] collect on behalf of not just
[6:23:17] county departments but also
[6:23:18] jackson health system.
[6:23:21] >> okay as a follow-up
[6:23:23] question so I know that
[6:23:24] commissioner cohen higgins
[6:23:28] passed a resolution to see if a
[6:23:29] third party could do better
[6:23:39] than we are doing. I noted
[6:23:40] that you said that only 8% you
[6:23:40] thought were eligible for sale
[6:23:41] to third-party collection
[6:23:42] agencies. Then you went on to
[6:23:45] say this was based on legal
[6:23:46] risks, data validation
[6:23:47] challenges and impacts to
[6:23:48] constituent services. I don't
[6:23:49] understand that only because
[6:23:55] there is lots of doctor offices
[6:23:56] that have lots of confidential
[6:23:57] information and always send the
[6:23:59] receivables out to a third
[6:24:00] party. Can you expand as to
[6:24:04] why only 8% to be sent to a
[6:24:05] third party for collection?
[6:24:06] >> great question. So this
[6:24:09] report the way it was directed
[6:24:10] to the administration was to
[6:24:13] not include jackson health.
[6:24:19] This does not include the
[6:24:20] physicians or the hospital
[6:24:21] bills. This balances for
[6:24:22] county departments. With the
[6:24:24] county departments there is
[6:24:30] compliance. It is not just the
[6:24:31] collection we do, we will work
[6:24:32] closely with the county
[6:24:32] departments to have to
[6:24:38] effectuate compliance along
[6:24:39] with this outstanding amount.
[6:24:40] >> so the $525 million
[6:24:41] includes jackson or does not
[6:24:41] include?
[6:24:41] >> does not.
[6:24:42] >> do you have what jackson's
[6:24:43] that is?
[6:24:46] >> about $2 billion.
[6:24:47] >> 2 billion?
[6:24:53] >> yes.
[6:24:54] >> you can imagine why I am
[6:24:55] somewhat stunned by these
[6:24:57] numbers especially when we are
[6:24:58] struggling to find revenue
[6:25:02] streams. What is jackson doing
[6:25:06] to collect its $2 billion? Do
[6:25:06] you have any idea?
[6:25:11] >> we are not in close contact
[6:25:12] with jackson. We are actually
[6:25:13] their tertiary collector. So
[6:25:16] they have an in-house
[6:25:17] collector. They also have
[6:25:18] another set of outside
[6:25:20] collectors along with us as a
[6:25:21] tertiary collector for them.
[6:25:23] So they do have some efforts to
[6:25:24] collect their own debt.
[6:25:26] >> so at what point do we
[6:25:29] write off bad debt? You're
[6:25:38] telling me 30 years at some
[6:25:39] juncture and I am an accountant
[6:25:40] by trade, I do not understand
[6:25:41] any of this.
[6:25:42] >> we are in conversation with
[6:25:46] them because they are where it
[6:25:51] limits us for collect up to
[6:25:52] three years. We are working to
[6:25:59] understand them better. They
[6:26:00] do recall accounts often from
[6:26:01] us when they are not deemed
[6:26:01] collectible. So we work
[6:26:02] closely with them.
[6:26:04] >> can you provide me with the
[6:26:11] amounts that are four years or
[6:26:12] five years?
[6:26:13] >> we can provide that to you
[6:26:13] separately.
[6:26:14] > separate them from
[6:26:15] jackson and county. I would
[6:26:18] urge my colleagues --
[6:26:22] >> can we have silence while
[6:26:24] the commissioners speaking?
[6:26:28] >> thank you MR. CHAIRMAN. I
[6:26:29] think these are very large
[6:26:34] numbers. Clearly, $2 billion
[6:26:35] from jackson and happy billion
[6:26:39] for the county departments. At
[6:26:40] some juncture we either have to
[6:26:41] collect this or we have to
[6:26:43] write it off. But we can't
[6:26:49] continue to carry this kind of
[6:26:50] huge collectibles. They are
[6:26:51] receivables are they are not
[6:26:56] receivables. At this point I
[6:26:57] don't know anymore. Thank you
[6:26:58] so much MR. CHAIRMAN.
[6:27:03] >> thank you commissioner.
[6:27:04] Commissioner cohen higgins?
[6:27:13] >> thank you commissioner
[6:27:14] lopez for your line of
[6:27:15] questioning. When these
[6:27:16] numbers were brought to my
[6:27:17] attention when I asked for this
[6:27:18] report sometimes ago, I don't
[6:27:19] remember of the date of the
[6:27:19] report. It was quite some time
[6:27:25] ago. I was to -- surprised by
[6:27:26] the numbers. Jackson was
[6:27:27] excluded because you all
[6:27:28] advised me that jackson
[6:27:28] essentially needed to be
[6:27:29] excluded that you were the
[6:27:30] absolute final stop for
[6:27:31] jackson. For whatever reason
[6:27:32] selling jackson's debt was
[6:27:39] nothing there not -- not
[6:27:40] feasible for you to do. You
[6:27:45] also mean jackson had to be
[6:27:46] excluded and so just to clarify
[6:27:47] regarding the line of
[6:27:48] questioning with commissioner
[6:27:56] lopez so let's remove the $2
[6:27:56] billion not saying that we
[6:27:57] should but assuming that the
[6:27:58] guidance that I was given is
[6:27:59] accurate and there's tons of of
[6:28:00] supporting information as to
[6:28:01] why we would need to exclude $2
[6:28:05] billion. We had $500 million
[6:28:05] that is old to miami-dade
[6:28:06] county. This report says as
[6:28:09] you already reticulated
[6:28:09] commissioner lopez only of
[6:28:10] fractional percentage is
[6:28:17] somehow valid or viable to be
[6:28:18] sold to a third party. I know
[6:28:19] it has been a long time since
[6:28:20] we have engaged with or
[6:28:30] solicited or entertain the idea
[6:28:31] of utilizing a third-party
[6:28:32] service. But it has also been
[6:28:33] a long time since we have been
[6:28:33] in a financial position in
[6:28:34] miami-dade county. If you
[6:28:35] represent in this report a $40
[6:28:40] million is viable or legit to
[6:28:41] potentially be sold on the
[6:28:42] third market, I will take it.
[6:28:43] Let's start there. If we can
[6:28:47] sell $40 million of old age
[6:28:48] debt for 10 or $20 million, I
[6:28:49] will take it. I will take it.
[6:28:53] And so I would like an to the
[6:28:54] attorneys and assuming
[6:28:55] obviously I want to hear from
[6:28:56] my colleagues if they are
[6:29:01] supportive of this? This is
[6:29:02] simply report and you all do
[6:29:03] not take the next step two out
[6:29:04] and find a third-party to try
[6:29:09] and sell a very fraction is the
[6:29:11] debt that we can sell. I want
[6:29:12] you to take it further. We
[6:29:13] need the money. What do I need
[6:29:16] to do assuming the support of
[6:29:17] my colleagues to actually
[6:29:20] trigger you all going out and
[6:29:24] making the effort to sell that
[6:29:25] debt? And again we are just
[6:29:26] talking about a universe of $40
[6:29:28] million.
[6:29:29] >> just some clarification.
[6:29:30] There was $41 million in the
[6:29:31] market our understanding is
[6:29:37] that the return is a penny to
[6:29:38] five cents on the dollar. So
[6:29:38] the return in the market could
[6:29:42] be around $410,000 b
[6:29:42] $2 million
[6:29:45] for that $41 million. The
[6:29:46] county with our collectors that
[6:29:48] we have in-house, I will give
[6:29:50] you an example to date we have
[6:29:51] collected about $21 million
[6:29:56] gross. That represents the
[6:29:59] referred amount to us from the
[6:30:00] referred department. I want to
[6:30:01] clarify those are not our
[6:30:03] receivables. It started at
[6:30:09] departments and we don't carry
[6:30:09] receivables from my department.
[6:30:10] it is on behalf of someone
[6:30:11] else. I will give you an
[6:30:12] example. Today we have
[6:30:14] collected $21 million of gross.
[6:30:17] We distribute 70% of money
[6:30:18] directly to departments and
[6:30:26] jackson. The original amount
[6:30:27] was about $42 million. So that
[6:30:28] represents that we are
[6:30:33] collecting 51% of this money
[6:30:34] that has been outstanding. So
[6:30:34] that is why we caution instead
[6:30:35] of selling it to a third party,
[6:30:37] we believe that our department
[6:30:38] can do much better. We can
[6:30:42] also provide the direct service
[6:30:43] to our constituents. Instead
[6:30:46] of a third-party trying to
[6:30:47] collect this money from the
[6:30:49] residence. The other factor
[6:30:54] for the departments in the
[6:30:55] county, it is not just
[6:30:56] collecting money, it is also
[6:30:57] making sure that they are in
[6:30:59] compliance with whatever it is
[6:31:03] that initiated a fee or a code
[6:31:06] compliance that was issued to
[6:31:07] the resident or the business.
[6:31:08] >> thank you for that
[6:31:13] explanation. I am perplexed.
[6:31:14] You are representing your
[6:31:16] department has a 50% collection
[6:31:16] rate of all debts that you all
[6:31:18] collect for?
[6:31:22] >> as jackson as an amount and
[6:31:28] I'm referring to this fiscal
[6:31:29] year what we have done to date.
[6:31:30] >> you are collecting $20
[6:31:31] million not on $40 million over
[6:31:32] your collecting $20 million on
[6:31:32] what aggregate number?
[6:31:53] >> that represents about $41
[6:31:54] million. As the accounts come
[6:31:55] in they get referred to our
[6:31:56] collectors and the collectors
[6:31:57] handle them as files on the
[6:31:58] desk. That is what we do
[6:31:58] internally.
[6:31:59] >> what is the number of the
[6:32:00] $2 billion and the 500 million?
[6:32:01] what is it that your collecting
[6:32:02] on $2 billion in the $500
[6:32:02] million?
[6:32:03] >> that is collected all of
[6:32:04] the files are brought into our
[6:32:04] system that we manage in-house
[6:32:05] and we allocate the collected
[6:32:06] amounts to our collectors and
[6:32:07] that is what they do on a daily
[6:32:08] basis. The reach out and we
[6:32:09] also send letters.
[6:32:10] >> this is not particularly
[6:32:23] complex at all. You
[6:32:24] represented that your
[6:32:25] collection rate is at 50% and
[6:32:26] that you have collected $21
[6:32:27] million to date. What is being
[6:32:28] eliminated is the other very
[6:32:28] important number. I'm just
[6:32:29] trying to get with that number
[6:32:30] is. You're presented that
[6:32:32] there's $2 billion in
[6:32:33] outstanding debt service for
[6:32:34] jackson alone and $500 million
[6:32:35] countywide. I don't understand
[6:32:36] how you represent the $21
[6:32:36] million as a 50% collection
[6:32:38] rate. I'm trying to understand
[6:32:44] the math is not working.
[6:32:45] >> let me try to explain it a
[6:32:46] different way. Let's say we
[6:32:54] get referred on a daily basis
[6:32:55] on 1000 accounts. On a daily
[6:32:56] basis we get 1000 accounts with
[6:32:57] an amount attached to it.
[6:32:57] Those accounts come into our
[6:32:58] system that we hold in-house
[6:32:59] and we allocate it to our
[6:33:03] collectors. They are allocated
[6:33:04] as files and that is what they
[6:33:05] have to collect. They go to
[6:33:06] the files on their system and
[6:33:07] they can have 5000 files at a
[6:33:09] time. They act on those
[6:33:17] collections. But our inventory
[6:33:18] is the big dollars that you
[6:33:19] see. We are actively trying to
[6:33:20] collect on that inventory.
[6:33:23] That is sitting in our system.
[6:33:27] So it is in the aggregate.
[6:33:30] >> so here's the thing. I am
[6:33:31] going to yield the floor to my
[6:33:34] colleagues. The vice CHAIRMAN
[6:33:35] Has a gavel. I'm going to
[6:33:36] yield the floor because I see a
[6:33:41] lot of -- I'm not sure the
[6:33:42] question that I asked has been
[6:33:45] answered. And again I think
[6:33:46] michael has been crystal clear
[6:33:49] on this for the 6 and a half or
[6:33:57] eight and nine wants to --
[6:33:57] months that we have been
[6:33:59] working on this. Resale of the
[6:34:03] time the mayor is the ceo of a
[6:34:04] $17 billion corporation. We
[6:34:09] use that analogy frequently.
[6:34:10] If we have this much debt on
[6:34:11] our books and the director of
[6:34:12] the department charged with
[6:34:13] collecting the debt is making a
[6:34:14] public representation on the
[6:34:15] record that your collection
[6:34:16] rate is 50% and that is $21
[6:34:19] million annually, two things
[6:34:26] can -- can't be true at the
[6:34:26] same time. It will be $40
[6:34:31] million and I am not math
[6:34:31] inclined I am a lawyer.
[6:34:33] Numbers don't necessarily make
[6:34:37] sense to me. This at the most
[6:34:38] basic level does. I asked you
[6:34:44] a number of different times
[6:34:44] essentially the same thing what
[6:34:45] is I believe is a simple
[6:34:46] question. I'm not sure why I
[6:34:47] am not getting a response to
[6:34:47] what I think is a simple
[6:34:51] question. To me it yields what
[6:34:52] I think is an even greater need
[6:34:57] to consider using third parties
[6:34:58] to collect our debt. Thank you
[6:35:00] MR. Chair.
[6:35:06] >> we understand there is
[6:35:07] confusing information we are
[6:35:08] trying to make it clear.
[6:35:09] Because obviously by mentioning
[6:35:10] half a million she is confusing
[6:35:18] what the total amount of
[6:35:18] payments versus what is not
[6:35:19] collected. We just need to
[6:35:23] clarify that. If paul can take
[6:35:31] a second to clarify?
[6:35:32] >> go ahead and clarify that
[6:35:33] and commissioner gilbert is
[6:35:33] going to come in on that one
[6:35:34] after that.
[6:35:36] >> I think director was saying
[6:35:40] of the $42 million that they
[6:35:41] were collecting, they were able
[6:35:49] to collect $21 million.
[6:35:52] >> one second. Listen
[6:35:53] everyone we are going to do
[6:35:56] this in order. I know this is
[6:36:01] an exciting topic, please come
[6:36:02] back quickly. Clear up the air
[6:36:05] and then we will give the
[6:36:06] microphone over to commissioner
[6:36:08] gilbert.
[6:36:11] >> the total outstanding debt
[6:36:13] for the county is over $500
[6:36:17] million. Or $400 million. Of
[6:36:20] the 41 of the $41 million that
[6:36:27] the staff was collecting and
[6:36:28] issuing the letters they were
[6:36:29] able to collect $21 million.
[6:36:31] That is why she is saying --
[6:36:33] >> just stop please.
[6:36:39] >> no no no listen guys we are
[6:36:40] going to do this in order.
[6:36:42] We're going to get there.
[6:36:50] Please come back to the podium.
[6:36:53] I apologize. You are going to
[6:36:56] be fine trust me on this one.
[6:37:01] If you can repeat what you
[6:37:02] stated and then I am going to
[6:37:04] refer to commissioner gilbert
[6:37:06] for questioning and then we
[6:37:07] will go down the line for other
[6:37:08] question. But I want to give
[6:37:08] you that respect. Let's try
[6:37:11] that again. Repeat the numbers
[6:37:13] and then if someone has
[6:37:14] questions, we will get those
[6:37:16] questions answered.
[6:37:19] >> of the $42 million staff
[6:37:23] was able to get $21 million.
[6:37:26] So approximately 50% that is
[6:37:27] what the director was saying.
[6:37:31] >> excuse me, I do have
[6:37:31] clarification.
[6:37:42] >> mme. Mayor give me one
[6:37:43] second. Let me go around the
[6:37:44] board. It is getting away from
[6:37:44] us.
[6:37:45] >> I have one number to give
[6:37:45] you. She is only talking about
[6:37:46] the parts that are in active
[6:37:47] collection. The rest of the
[6:37:48] money yes of course we are
[6:37:51] still billing. But the active
[6:37:52] collection she is saying when
[6:37:53] they assign a case for active
[6:37:54] collection they are receiving
[6:37:54] 50% back.
[6:37:55] >> thank you mme. Mayor. I am
[6:37:59] going to say this like not an
[6:38:05] accountant. This $500 million
[6:38:06] that is owed to us. Out of the
[6:38:07] 500 million there is only
[6:38:07] working on around this year
[6:38:13] they're working on $42 million
[6:38:14] of it. Because they do not
[6:38:15] have enough people to work on
[6:38:16] all $500 million at the same
[6:38:18] time. So what they are working
[6:38:25] on is $42 million of the $500
[6:38:26] million. Of the $42 million
[6:38:27] they have assigned, they have
[6:38:30] collected $21 million. Thus
[6:38:35] the 50% of collections recovery
[6:38:35] of what they're actually
[6:38:39] working on when they finish and
[6:38:40] they clear a new file then they
[6:38:41] add another file to it because
[6:38:43] they are working within the
[6:38:53] confines of their personnel.
[6:38:53] And so they do not have 1000
[6:38:54] people to collect the debt.
[6:38:55] They have a very specific
[6:38:56] number. That is how you are
[6:38:56] getting to the 50%. That is
[6:38:58] how you get there without
[6:39:03] sounding like that.
[6:39:04] >> thank you commissioner,
[6:39:11] give me one second. District 5
[6:39:12] you are next. It sounds like
[6:39:13] if you are going at this rate
[6:39:13] they are going to hit $250
[6:39:17] million in collection --
[6:39:18] collections which is a great
[6:39:25] number at 50%. Commissioner
[6:39:25] lopez?
[6:39:26] >> I guess I would argue if
[6:39:30] you have $525 million that is
[6:39:30] outstanding. And you only have
[6:39:35] so much personnel to do $41
[6:39:36] million right now. Here's the
[6:39:38] question, is the receivable
[6:39:47] amount actually real back
[6:39:48] because if it is 30 years old I
[6:39:49] am going to argue, you're
[6:39:50] probably not going to get it.
[6:39:51] Which is why I asked for the
[6:39:52] aging. As an accountant that
[6:40:03] is what we do. We look at
[6:40:04] receivables and we look at
[6:40:05] aging. We say, that is
[6:40:06] probably now going to be a bad
[6:40:06] debt. You write it off as
[6:40:07] uncollectible. I don't know
[6:40:08] that $525 million is actually
[6:40:09] receivables. I get what
[6:40:10] commissioner gilbert said, it
[6:40:11] is a great clarification of
[6:40:12] what they are doing. Until I
[6:40:15] get an aging, I as an
[6:40:16] accountant can't make sentence
[6:40:17] of this number. And that is
[6:40:18] all I have asked for. Now I
[6:40:26] recognize that we haven't even
[6:40:27] touched jackson and I don't
[6:40:28] know why we haven't touched
[6:40:29] jackson. That is another story
[6:40:30] to be discovered further on
[6:40:31] down the line. Currently, I
[6:40:31] want to know the aging of the
[6:40:32] $525 million and how it came to
[6:40:39] be that only 8% were decided
[6:40:40] that those were the ones.
[6:40:44] Hopefully those are the ones
[6:40:44] that are current that you think
[6:40:45] you might get it. Obviously
[6:40:52] with 50% of success MAY be so.
[6:40:53] I am still not convinced it is
[6:40:55] $525 million.
[6:40:56] >> thank you commissioner. To
[6:40:57] the administration why hasn't
[6:41:01] she received the aging request
[6:41:01] that she made? That is a
[6:41:07] simple question.
[6:41:08] >> through the vice chair. My
[6:41:09] understanding the request was
[6:41:10] just made. If you look at the
[6:41:12] table that is in the memo we
[6:41:15] actually do list the average
[6:41:16] age with the active balances.
[6:41:19] And then we give a percentage
[6:41:20] or proportion of what is
[6:41:22] actually collectible based on
[6:41:26] the benchmarks in the industry.
[6:41:27] And so our team is actually
[6:41:31] exceeding the benchmarks for
[6:41:32] collections of their age. I do
[6:41:40] agree I think commissioner
[6:41:41] gilbert said it very well and
[6:41:42] eloquently. We are working at
[6:41:43] capacity. Greater capacity
[6:41:44] give you greater opportunity.
[6:41:46] However, there is a variable in
[6:41:56] their which is the age and
[6:41:57] likelihood of collecting. Just
[6:41:57] adding people don't necessarily
[6:41:59] result in the quality of that
[6:42:00] product being delivered. And
[6:42:05] so we have maximized our
[6:42:06] potential. We are exceeding
[6:42:07] benchmarks in the area of
[6:42:09] collections. Financially if
[6:42:11] there were more resources
[6:42:11] available at an earlier point
[6:42:16] in time than some of these
[6:42:17] things MAY not get to age. To
[6:42:18] the point of jackson, jackson
[6:42:20] actually comes to us as their
[6:42:24] last resort. So they try to do
[6:42:25] everything they can to collect
[6:42:28] the debt. And then as opposed
[6:42:30] to just saying nevermind it is
[6:42:32] bad debt, they say can your
[6:42:35] team take one last try? As of
[6:42:37] today I believe we have
[6:42:39] collected about $2 million for
[6:42:44] jackson. And so that is bad
[6:42:45] debt that they probably would
[6:42:49] not have gotten because they
[6:42:50] had exhausted their other
[6:42:51] resources and have seen the
[6:42:52] capacity of our team to collect
[6:42:59] with compassion within our
[6:43:00] values and to help families who
[6:43:01] might be out of compliance or
[6:43:02] in a bad spot to find
[6:43:05] resources. That is the
[6:43:06] difference between us and a
[6:43:06] collection agency.
[6:43:07] >> thank you so much.
[6:43:08] Commissioner gonzales?
[6:43:10] >> thank you so much MR.
[6:43:14] Chair. I will -- I think we
[6:43:18] should probably put forward a
[6:43:19] motion to deem her and
[6:43:22] commissioner gilbert our
[6:43:23] official accounting
[6:43:25] translators. That was
[6:43:29] fantastic. However, to
[6:43:30] commissioner lopez and
[6:43:37] commissioner regalado's point
[6:43:38] this is what we are trying to
[6:43:44] get to. To the chief point
[6:43:45] there is some debt that perhaps
[6:43:46] can be deemed uncollectible.
[6:43:47] The director made a good
[6:43:51] analysis because I have seen
[6:43:51] debt collection in the past
[6:43:52] through the legal field.
[6:43:54] Sometimes you can only sell it
[6:43:55] on pennies to the dollar.
[6:43:56] Perhaps an analysis can be made
[6:44:01] to that debt that we deem
[6:44:01] uncollectible. We don't have
[6:44:05] to expend resources on people
[6:44:06] that could be collecting
[6:44:07] collectible debt and rather we
[6:44:17] might be able to commissioner
[6:44:18] regalado's point to sell the
[6:44:18] collectible that even if it is
[6:44:19] pennies on the dollar. Because
[6:44:22] we are going to get something.
[6:44:22] The new debt that is coming in
[6:44:24] if we are getting a 50%
[6:44:28] turnaround on that then we need
[6:44:30] to expand all resources on the
[6:44:34] new debt analyzed the debt and
[6:44:37] sell that. I do not want to
[6:44:43] speak for commissioner lopez
[6:44:44] but that is why we are trying
[6:44:45] to go with this. It would be a
[6:44:46] great idea to get something.
[6:44:48] Thank you MR. Chair.
[6:44:55] >> thank you.
[6:44:56] >> my original point I was
[6:44:57] going to make on the debt is
[6:44:58] just a couple of things to the
[6:45:04] folks. We can do on this body
[6:45:05] and we vote. Some of the
[6:45:13] statuses on what people
[6:45:14] actually need. When they use
[6:45:15] humane collection, what we are
[6:45:16] saying that some of our debt
[6:45:17] like people who water gets
[6:45:18] turned off for a lack of
[6:45:23] payment. People need water to
[6:45:23] live. Sometimes people don't
[6:45:28] have money to pay for water.
[6:45:30] And so I think that let's just
[6:45:35] be mindful we go forward
[6:45:36] assigning these things to
[6:45:38] collection agencies. That we
[6:45:39] are collecting some of these
[6:45:41] collections are against our
[6:45:44] residents. For stuff that they
[6:45:49] actually need and they might
[6:45:52] not be able to pay for by no
[6:45:55] fault of their own. I just
[6:45:56] want us to be mindful of that.
[6:46:00] And also we got on the road of
[6:46:03] bringing someone to collect on
[6:46:05] that, I would prefer them not
[6:46:09] collect or us not assigned gets
[6:46:10] to them where we have a lever
[6:46:18] to push. What is a good --
[6:46:19] what is a good example.
[6:46:19] Ultimately if you are still
[6:46:20] living in a place we have
[6:46:21] something we can do to you to
[6:46:22] actually compel you to pay.
[6:46:24] That debt is a lot more
[6:46:25] recoverable. Let's not sell
[6:46:32] that or sign that out to a debt
[6:46:32] collection agency. I just want
[6:46:33] us to be careful because we do
[6:46:37] need money but remember these
[6:46:38] debts a lot of them could be
[6:46:39] against a group of people who
[6:46:42] we all acknowledge don't have a
[6:46:44] lot of money to give.
[6:46:46] >> thank you. Commissioner
[6:46:51] regalado?
[6:46:52] >> I was going to say almost
[6:46:52] exactly that. The only thing i
[6:46:53] was going to add is that unlike
[6:46:57] debt collectors and some of
[6:46:58] these debts, we have the
[6:46:59] opportunity to collect more
[6:47:03] even though it is over a long
[6:47:04] period time when the individual
[6:47:05] comes back to open an account
[6:47:13] to get a permit to have service
[6:47:14] at jackson. That is a
[6:47:15] different situation if we sell
[6:47:16] it and get pennies on the
[6:47:23] dollar. It does not harm us to
[6:47:24] hold that debt for a long
[6:47:24] period of time if what we are
[6:47:29] going to receive is so much
[6:47:30] larger than the sale minus the
[6:47:31] profit that a company is going
[6:47:32] to make. I understand how on
[6:47:34] paper it MAY look very
[6:47:34] attractive but you should
[6:47:48] consider that as a county we
[6:47:49] actually win in some cases by
[6:47:50] holding it longer. Because
[6:47:51] when they come in, they have to
[6:47:52] pay all of it in order to
[6:47:52] continue the process with us.
[6:47:53] I think some of that have been
[6:47:54] lost in the translation here.
[6:48:01] And to commissioner gilbert
[6:48:02] point these are human beings
[6:48:02] and these services are
[6:48:03] necessary services. That being
[6:48:04] said I think the administration
[6:48:07] has clearly heard of what the
[6:48:10] board believes. What I would
[6:48:21] recommend is an exercise for
[6:48:22] the establishment of what is
[6:48:23] uncollectible debt? That is
[6:48:24] really what we are talking
[6:48:24] about. Separate and apart from
[6:48:25] the sale and what you MAY or
[6:48:26] MAY not think is the value of
[6:48:27] the debt. Should we have a
[6:48:28] vehicle where at some point we
[6:48:33] determine it uncollectible and
[6:48:34] then it can go somewhere. As
[6:48:35] opposed to us making that
[6:48:38] determination without the data.
[6:48:39] I would recommend that the
[6:48:41] administration go back and kind
[6:48:47] of bring us some parameters for
[6:48:48] a determination of
[6:48:49] uncollectible. That will make
[6:48:51] everyone feel a lot better and
[6:48:52] address some of the concerns.
[6:48:52] Thank you.
[6:48:56] >> commissioner bermudez?
[6:49:01] >> I will be brief. I agree
[6:49:02] with commissioner lopez that
[6:49:02] this huge debt is obviously
[6:49:04] something and I agree with
[6:49:10] commissioner gilbert that the
[6:49:11] administration statement of
[6:49:12] collecting with compassion is
[6:49:14] fair. There's nothing wrong
[6:49:16] with combining two things. The
[6:49:17] work we have from the
[6:49:19] department MAY be some
[6:49:23] collection getting something
[6:49:27] back 10% of something is better
[6:49:28] than 0%. I don't think that
[6:49:29] every collection agency and I
[6:49:31] don't have one and I'm not
[6:49:33] involved in one necessarily is
[6:49:38] not compassionate. I just
[6:49:39] think there's nothing wrong I
[6:49:40] just want administration to
[6:49:41] know there's nothing wrong with
[6:49:42] a mix between one and the
[6:49:48] other. I think that is what
[6:49:49] some of my colleagues was
[6:49:50] saying. Let's look at what we
[6:49:51] can get back even if we don't
[6:49:53] have to add additional staff.
[6:49:57] Then it will be a cost. That
[6:49:58] is it and that is all I have to
[6:50:01] say. I hope we can and that
[6:50:06] doesn't mean we still can't be
[6:50:06] compassionate even if it is
[6:50:07] outsourced to somebody else.
[6:50:17] >> thank you commissioner.
[6:50:18] >> thank you MR. CHAIRMAN.
[6:50:19] Thank you chief for pointing
[6:50:20] out the chart. I will give you
[6:50:21] a perfect example. There are
[6:50:21] 10 accounts under public works.
[6:50:24] It totals $64 million and it
[6:50:27] has been 30 years. It is 10
[6:50:30] accounts. I'm pretty sure that
[6:50:34] we can probably say I'm should
[6:50:34] administration can tell us the
[6:50:36] number of hours they have spent
[6:50:42] trying to collect them over the
[6:50:43] 30 years? This is a perfect
[6:50:44] example of the kind of thing
[6:50:45] you would send to a third
[6:50:46] party. Because either they get
[6:50:47] pennies to the dollar and we
[6:50:50] get something because so far 10
[6:50:53] accounts have been outstanding
[6:50:54] to the tune of $64 million for
[6:50:56] 30 years. That is only point I
[6:50:58] was trying to make as an
[6:51:01] accountant. That you have to
[6:51:02] make a decision whether or not
[6:51:10] after all of your efforts for
[6:51:11] 30 years you have not been able
[6:51:12] to collect it. Maybe somebody
[6:51:13] can get his pennies on the
[6:51:14] dollar. That is what you do.
[6:51:15] That doesn't mean you're not
[6:51:16] being compassionate. That
[6:51:20] means that for 30 years 10
[6:51:21] accounts have decided not to
[6:51:25] pay us. And if you take it to
[6:51:26] a third party and they can't
[6:51:26] collect any of it, it is
[6:51:31] written off as a bad debt.
[6:51:31] Although I would tell you that
[6:51:32] no accountant would allow you
[6:51:35] to carry this receivable on
[6:51:36] their books for 30 years.
[6:51:41] There is not an accounting --
[6:51:42] accountant that would allow
[6:51:43] that. I'm looking at the next
[6:51:44] level lx accounts in our er
[6:51:55] totaling 15 million has been
[6:51:55] outstanding for 21 years.
[6:51:56] Again, if you have tried to
[6:51:57] collect it and you have done
[6:52:05] all you could for 21 years
[6:52:06] there are 60 accounts that
[6:52:07] someone can get his pennies to
[6:52:07] the dollar. That is only point
[6:52:08] I was trying to make. Because
[6:52:09] the aging tells the story.
[6:52:16] That alone should tell us
[6:52:16] something.
[6:52:17] >> thank you commissioner. Do
[6:52:18] we have a motion to move this
[6:52:23] report? One moment.
[6:52:24] >> thank you to my colleagues
[6:52:26] on the conversations. What are
[6:52:30] we doing? Are we going to get
[6:52:31] another report just to be clear
[6:52:33] to the administration are we
[6:52:33] going to get a subsequent
[6:52:36] report?
[6:52:41] >> we will provide the aging
[6:52:42] report as requested. I think
[6:52:50] we will clarifying some of this
[6:52:52] discussion because clearly when
[6:52:52] it was presented it wasn't
[6:52:53] clear as it could have been.
[6:52:54] We want make sure we have that
[6:52:55] correct information. We will
[6:52:56] give you the aging information
[6:52:56] and will also make a
[6:52:57] recommendation as to how long
[6:53:03] we should carry that debt
[6:53:03] versus selling it for pennies
[6:53:07] on the dollar. Absolutely.
[6:53:08] >> the conversations in the
[6:53:09] comments that have been made
[6:53:10] these are the conversations we
[6:53:12] have to make. Because as we
[6:53:16] enter budget season number of
[6:53:25] us have communicated our
[6:53:26] intentioned but we can keep
[6:53:26] saying we need to make tough
[6:53:27] decisions while simultaneously
[6:53:28] saying that we are not willing
[6:53:29] to collect on $2.5 billion
[6:53:30] worth of debt. Something has
[6:53:35] to give at some point. I
[6:53:36] believe there is a universe
[6:53:40] where we can use an agency that
[6:53:41] engages with the compassion
[6:53:43] that we require. That we can
[6:53:52] collect as much of this money
[6:53:52] in addition to what the
[6:53:53] department is doing and is
[6:53:54] doing a great job. I'm looking
[6:53:55] to complement not to replace.
[6:53:56] I want to make a very very
[6:53:56] clear. If your capacity is
[6:53:57] only giving you the ability to
[6:53:58] work on $40 million at a time
[6:54:05] when we have $2.5 billion
[6:54:06] clearly help is necessary. And
[6:54:06] help is necessary in that
[6:54:07] department help is necessary
[6:54:14] without budget issues. I'm
[6:54:15] looking forward to with the
[6:54:16] subsequent report and hopefully
[6:54:17] we can get greater percentages
[6:54:22] of the dollars collected.
[6:54:23] >> thank you MR. Chair. Just
[6:54:24] to add on what everybody said,
[6:54:25] I know you are going to include
[6:54:26] the aging and the memo and the
[6:54:27] report that is coming back.
[6:54:28] Can we get the categories of
[6:54:29] the type of debt? And the
[6:54:31] likelihood of collection. I
[6:54:32] know that is in your
[6:54:35] recommendation. Historically,
[6:54:36] what have you seen that you
[6:54:37] have been able to collect?
[6:54:39] Over the last 20 or 30 years if
[6:54:43] we have that data? If we could
[6:54:44] also get the type of debt that
[6:54:49] would be great?
[6:54:50] >> yes.
[6:54:50] >> okay, thank you.
[6:54:51] Commissioner gonzales?
[6:54:52] >> I would like to piggyback
[6:54:53] of what the commissioner said.
[6:54:58] I do appreciate the mayor's
[6:54:59] comments. They are diligently
[6:55:00] taking notes on this
[6:55:01] conversation but perhaps it
[6:55:04] would be good for the county
[6:55:07] attorney's office to give us
[6:55:12] more of a narrow instruction so
[6:55:13] that there is no confusion. By
[6:55:19] the time the administration
[6:55:19] comes back with a report, they
[6:55:20] are not left with coming up
[6:55:26] short. I love the fact that
[6:55:27] you said we should have
[6:55:28] categories. I definitely think
[6:55:29] we should have categories. I
[6:55:31] want to hear from commissioner
[6:55:32] lopez and commissioner cohen
[6:55:33] higgins. We definitely want
[6:55:34] categories in one identify how
[6:55:38] long the debt has been
[6:55:39] uncollected? Perhaps it would
[6:55:44] be a good idea to include how
[6:55:47] many attempts have been made so
[6:55:50] that we can then decide hey, we
[6:55:54] are spending x amount of money
[6:55:55] and this is where we should
[6:55:57] stop. I would like to get the
[6:55:59] administration's recommendation
[6:56:02] on debt they deem this is
[6:56:03] uncollectible. This is not
[6:56:06] something that we are probably
[6:56:07] ever going to collect. So if
[6:56:10] anything this is debt that you
[6:56:10] should probably consider
[6:56:19] selling. Those are my two
[6:56:20] cents. I don't know if my
[6:56:20] colleagues want to add anything
[6:56:21] else? That way we can narrow
[6:56:22] the scope of what is going to
[6:56:23] come back to us and we can all
[6:56:24] be happy with the results.
[6:56:32] >> thank you commissioner. It
[6:56:33] has been moved by commissioner
[6:56:33] lopez all in favor moving the
[6:56:34] report?
[6:56:34] >> can we get the
[6:56:35] clarification before we vote
[6:56:36] though?
[6:56:37] >> give me one second.
[6:56:38] Commissioner gonzales asked for
[6:56:40] clarification. Were they taken
[6:56:43] down?
[6:56:45] >> thank you. We have
[6:56:47] summarized that information in
[6:56:48] the report that you have but we
[6:56:54] will also detail and we are
[6:56:55] absolutely in agreement that we
[6:57:01] should look at the debt and
[6:57:02] getting it into the market. We
[6:57:03] also believe that the debt that
[6:57:03] is not marketable, we can
[6:57:06] continue what we are doing.
[6:57:09] Which is being the last mile
[6:57:10] and trying to collect it. We
[6:57:14] are exceptionally good at
[6:57:15] collecting the last mile debts
[6:57:16] that no one else wants. But we
[6:57:18] absolutely agree with the
[6:57:19] sponsoring commissioner of the
[6:57:23] item yourself that the debt
[6:57:25] that somebody can do a better
[6:57:26] job than as we should explore
[6:57:30] that.
[6:57:31] >> chief, I would like to add
[6:57:32] because I have seen debt
[6:57:34] collection through the legal
[6:57:35] field in the past. There some
[6:57:36] third-party companies that will
[6:57:38] probably purchase a marketable
[6:57:44] debt just to be able to say
[6:57:45] that they are collecting debt
[6:57:46] from miami-dade county. I'm
[6:57:46] just going to throw that out
[6:57:47] there.
[6:57:48] >> thank you commissioner.
[6:57:49] Did that satisfy your request?
[6:57:51] All in favor of the item? All
[6:58:02] against? Item passes. Next up
[6:58:02] 2b 12.
[6:58:03] >> thank you MR. CHAIRMAN.
[6:58:04] This has been the item that I
[6:58:05] have been following since I was
[6:58:09] in the house. As you all know
[6:58:11] we appropriate funds to begin
[6:58:12] in the fiscal year beginning
[6:58:18] JULY 1. I am always in awe
[6:58:18] over the fact that we don't
[6:58:20] sign contracts for six months
[6:58:21] with the recipient of funds.
[6:58:25] So now I am finding this item
[6:58:27] that we still have outstanding
[6:58:32] items from 2024 legislative
[6:58:33] session as well as 2025. I
[6:58:35] guess I would like to know, I
[6:58:41] want to be helpful. In making
[6:58:42] sure the monies that are
[6:58:42] appropriated to the county
[6:58:43] actually come to the county so
[6:58:45] that we can do the work that we
[6:58:48] have requested the legislature
[6:58:50] to fund it. I am beginning to
[6:58:51] wonder how much of this is our
[6:58:54] fault? Because when I talked
[6:58:57] to state agencies they will say
[6:58:58] they didn't provide the right
[6:58:59] information. Other times it is
[6:59:00] because the state agency hasn't
[6:59:04] done its job in getting the
[6:59:05] contracts to the recipient in
[6:59:11] time. I just want to make sure
[6:59:11] that we don't wait to bring
[6:59:15] these things to the commission.
[6:59:15] if there is an item for
[6:59:16] instance there has been
[6:59:19] appropriations done in 2026
[6:59:26] session. We are now in JULY.
[6:59:27] So all of those appropriations
[6:59:28] took effect on JULY 1. I would
[6:59:30] like to get a report because I
[6:59:31] am already seeing this report.
[6:59:36] Which brings me great
[6:59:37] discomfort. Because we are
[6:59:38] expecting to get those funds
[6:59:39] and somehow the state agency
[6:59:40] isn't doing its job or we are
[6:59:41] not doing our job. I do not
[6:59:45] want to look back although I am
[6:59:46] going to take this to the
[6:59:46] appropriations staff in the
[6:59:47] house. And tell them exactly
[6:59:50] so I would like lots of detail
[6:59:51] here so I can tell the
[6:59:52] appropriations staff this is
[7:00:03] not yet been, it was
[7:00:04] appropriated but it has not
[7:00:05] been contractual with the
[7:00:06] county. So sometimes they can
[7:00:07] help move the agency along if
[7:00:08] it is the agency's problem. In
[7:00:08] the future I would like very
[7:00:18] much to know of all of our
[7:00:19] appropriations currently. It
[7:00:20] took place on JULY 1, how long
[7:00:21] is it taking? Let's not wait
[7:00:21] until the end of the year to
[7:00:22] tell me that. Tell me now as
[7:00:30] we move along how many
[7:00:31] contracts are coming along from
[7:00:32] the agencies and how many are
[7:00:33] not? So I will make the calls.
[7:00:33] I think it is outrageous that
[7:00:34] we make a request for
[7:00:35] legislature appropriates it and
[7:00:36] then executive agency doesn't
[7:00:37] enter into the contract as the
[7:00:38] recipient of those funds. That
[7:00:39] is my only point and I will
[7:00:39] move the item.
[7:00:42] >> we have a second? Second
[7:00:45] by commissioner bermudez.
[7:00:53] >> I had a brief comment is
[7:00:53] the vice chair. I want to
[7:00:54] thank commissioner because I
[7:00:55] have been involved in some of
[7:00:56] those negotiations which have
[7:00:57] been extremely difficult with
[7:01:06] executive agencies. Sometimes
[7:01:07] there is blame on our side but
[7:01:08] there's also a lot of
[7:01:09] challenge. I would very much
[7:01:10] welcome the opportunity to work
[7:01:10] with you. Thank you.
[7:01:11] >> all against? Item passes.
[7:01:14] Next, we have 3b2. It looks
[7:01:15] like you again commissioner
[7:01:16] lopez?
[7:01:22] >> I have a quick question on
[7:01:22] 3b2. We entered into a
[7:01:25] contract with microsoft
[7:01:27] licensing the nonprofit
[7:01:28] licensing because there was an
[7:01:31] emergency situation. I'm
[7:01:32] curious why we would enter into
[7:01:34] one for three years as opposed
[7:01:40] to a shorter period of time to
[7:01:41] address the emergency? That is
[7:01:42] the only question I have of the
[7:01:42] administration.
[7:01:45] > we wanted to make sure we
[7:01:47] locked in pricing and that is
[7:01:49] where we landed with microsoft
[7:01:58] and to ensure we did have a
[7:01:59] massive escalation of pricing
[7:01:59] as we continue to explore
[7:02:00] different options.
[7:02:01] >> thank you. I will move the
[7:02:01] item.
[7:02:04] >> do we have a second? A
[7:02:05] second by commissioner
[7:02:06] gonzales. All in favor? Hold
[7:02:06] on. Discussion?
[7:02:11] >> actually have a question on
[7:02:11] actually have a question on
[7:02:13] 3b2. I know we have had many
[7:02:15] issues with microsoft having to
[7:02:21] work with us on the issues that
[7:02:22] are specific to what we need
[7:02:27] for the libraries. What is the
[7:02:28] plan moving forward? Right now
[7:02:29] this is an emergency contract.
[7:02:30] If they are not willing to
[7:02:33] adhere to the conditions that
[7:02:34] are just not as it is state law
[7:02:34] what happens?
[7:02:39] >> you are recognized.
[7:02:40] >> that is an excellent
[7:02:45] question. When your colleague
[7:02:46] commissioner gilbert as many
[7:02:46] times the staff has been
[7:02:47] directed to start looking for
[7:02:48] plan b. We have found that
[7:02:51] microsoft has been difficult at
[7:02:52] best particularly around this
[7:02:58] issue. It was not unique to
[7:02:59] miami-dade county. This was a
[7:02:59] policy they put in place
[7:03:00] nationally that change the
[7:03:01] definition of a nonprofit.
[7:03:04] That impacted our libraries.
[7:03:05] So staff has been directed to
[7:03:09] look at what we would do in the
[7:03:10] future. Three years gives us
[7:03:11] time. As you all know we have
[7:03:15] been using microsoft for very
[7:03:16] very long time. I will not be
[7:03:19] a smoother easy transition if
[7:03:20] we are unable to negotiate with
[7:03:22] them. And have defined a
[7:03:27] different resource.
[7:03:33] >> so it has been moved by
[7:03:33] commissioner lopez and seconded
[7:03:37] by commissioner gilbert.
[7:03:37] Signify the same aye. All
[7:03:40] opposed nay. We still have a
[7:03:45] very long pool list. Unless
[7:03:46] you want to come into our
[7:03:47] backup meeting which is an
[7:03:47] AUGUST. I suggest we start
[7:03:48] getting through this. I am
[7:03:55] good for the AUGUST meeting.
[7:03:56] 3b5. Commissioner from
[7:03:57] district 5 year recognized on
[7:03:58] the miami foundation.
[7:04:00] >> a question to the
[7:04:02] administration with regards to
[7:04:03] getting grant funding from the
[7:04:08] miami foundation or any other
[7:04:08] organization to fund the
[7:04:09] operations and activities of
[7:04:12] the department of cultural
[7:04:13] affairs. Is this something
[7:04:14] that happened before? Is this
[7:04:15] a pattern where we get grant
[7:04:17] money to pay for operations?
[7:04:20] >> through the chair? Last
[7:04:22] year when we weren't looking at
[7:04:28] ways that we could come in with
[7:04:29] a balanced budget, we look at
[7:04:34] how we could reduce possibly
[7:04:35] through some general fund
[7:04:36] reduction in arts and culture.
[7:04:39] At the time the art community
[7:04:42] art donors stepped forward and
[7:04:42] wanted to be helpful. From
[7:04:46] that comes this grant.
[7:04:47] >> thank you I will move the
[7:04:48] item.
[7:04:48] >> and has been moved and
[7:04:51] seconded by commissioner all in
[7:04:52] favor signify the same aye.
[7:04:57] All opposed nay. Commissioner
[7:05:02] bermudez retake up 7d.
[7:05:06] >> 70 I made a motion.
[7:05:08] However, since commissioner is
[7:05:10] not here and I would like a
[7:05:15] full body we need a full body
[7:05:16] to make a decision on this. I
[7:05:16] do not believe as attorneys
[7:05:19] clarified because it impacts
[7:05:23] emp we have an ability to defer
[7:05:27] it to the full body is here to
[7:05:28] move it along for another
[7:05:33] deferral until the full body is
[7:05:34] here SEPTEMBER 1.
[7:05:38] >> show it defer to SEPTEMBER
[7:05:47] 1. All opposed nay. Show it
[7:05:47] for SEPTEMBER 1. Commissioner
[7:05:49] from district 12 you are
[7:05:57] recognized. Super sisters?
[7:06:01] >> I think this one is the one
[7:06:05] that I have an amendment. I
[7:06:06] don't know if the attorneys
[7:06:08] want to read it?
[7:06:17] >> substitute the landlord's
[7:06:18] name in the mayor's memorandum.
[7:06:19] The title and section one of
[7:06:20] the resolution to reflect the
[7:06:23] current property owner as 4106
[7:06:28] in place of three super sisters
[7:06:29] corporation. And to substitute
[7:06:34] the least -- lease agreement
[7:06:35] with a similar lease executed
[7:06:38] by 4106. The air by reflecting
[7:06:48] the new landlord's name.
[7:06:49] >> is basically a technicality
[7:06:50] MR. Chair. As much as I love
[7:06:51] the super sisters because I
[7:06:52] have three daughters the
[7:06:52] reality is the property where
[7:06:55] we are actually leasing the
[7:06:56] owners is now 4106 llc. It is
[7:06:58] the corrected technicality. In
[7:06:59] between the time period I guess
[7:07:05] it started.
[7:07:06] >> seconded by commissioner
[7:07:07] gilbert. All in favor signify
[7:07:10] by saying aye. Show the item
[7:07:14] passes amended. 8k for an
[7:07:23] eight in -- n7.
[7:07:25] >> ak for my question was why
[7:07:27] the ta need folks social
[7:07:34] security numbers? I know why
[7:07:35] we need it and sending
[7:07:36] information but I don't know
[7:07:36] why they need it? I didn't
[7:07:40] really I wasn't providing on
[7:07:41] that portion of it.
[7:07:43] >> attorneys, is there a
[7:07:46] reason?
[7:07:47] >> I believe the property
[7:07:51] appraiser is here. They are
[7:07:52] supposed to be here to answer
[7:07:53] the question.
[7:07:54] >> somebody from the property
[7:07:55] appraiser's office in the
[7:08:03] chamber?
[7:08:04] >> he is in the building if
[7:08:05] you can give him a few minutes?
[7:08:06] >> we can come back to it if
[7:08:17] necessary. Eight and seven
[7:08:19] commissioner from district 1.
[7:08:24] >> we all know, we do not have
[7:08:25] to guess about this. I just
[7:08:35] want to say I am going to come
[7:08:36] I don't know what you all would
[7:08:37] say give me credit. Give me
[7:08:37] credit for putting this on the
[7:08:38] agenda. Transportation and
[7:08:39] getting it out of committee.
[7:08:40] To stacy miller, I am -- and
[7:08:46] able director and they both did
[7:08:47] their tedious early morning
[7:08:51] calls lobbying for this item.
[7:08:52] It is before the board so you
[7:08:52] all can pass it. I am going to
[7:08:58] vote no on this. I understand
[7:08:59] why needs to pass.
[7:09:00] Fundamentally understand what
[7:09:00] we are doing. We are giving
[7:09:06] money to complete an asset that
[7:09:07] we are going to build that is
[7:09:08] going to be managed by someone
[7:09:16] else was going to use those
[7:09:17] resources. When he took public
[7:09:18] money to build it up for people
[7:09:19] in this specific place. That
[7:09:20] is what is going to happen.
[7:09:21] That is what happens in the
[7:09:22] underlying and substantially
[7:09:26] different. It is substantially
[7:09:26] different and how it operates.
[7:09:27] I just want to put that out
[7:09:28] there because sometimes we
[7:09:30] wonder why we have areas of the
[7:09:31] haves and have-nots. They have
[7:09:33] and have-nots happen in votes
[7:09:36] just like this one we allocate
[7:09:39] no extra money. The money is
[7:09:40] within the contingency of the
[7:09:42] contract. I had the problem
[7:09:43] with the original contract. I
[7:09:46] obviously have a problem now.
[7:09:47] With exercising contingency.
[7:09:49] Thank you.
[7:10:03] >> seconded by commissioner.
[7:10:04] You are recognized.
[7:10:05] >> thank you MR. Chair. What
[7:10:06] department does this money come
[7:10:10] out of?
[7:10:13] >> yes, direct of
[7:10:16] transportation.
[7:10:18] >> this come out of the
[7:10:20] department of transportation
[7:10:26] and public works?
[7:10:27] >> stacy miller director and
[7:10:28] ceo of the department of
[7:10:29] transportation and public
[7:10:30] works. Yes.
[7:10:30] >> the total contract value
[7:10:31] you are extending this is $8.2
[7:10:33] million?
[7:10:35] >> for the cei inspection
[7:10:36] services.
[7:10:40] >> I guess a newer section?
[7:10:49] >> it is an x police active
[7:10:50] section that is currently under
[7:10:51] construction.
[7:10:52] >> this is to complete the
[7:10:53] construction that is already
[7:10:53] underway?
[7:10:54] >> correct.
[7:10:55] >> how much is in your budget
[7:10:55] aside from this item to
[7:10:56] complete the underlying whether
[7:10:57] it is under construction or
[7:10:58] not?
[7:11:04] >> 'sit is $8 million how much
[7:11:05] is in your budget to complete
[7:11:06] the underlying whether under
[7:11:11] construction or not?
[7:11:12] >> we have an available budget
[7:11:12] of $2.7 million.
[7:11:13] >> 2.7 that is all that is
[7:11:16] left in order to allocate to
[7:11:17] the underlying to finish the
[7:11:19] construction?
[7:11:20] >> we have already come to you
[7:11:25] with our last extension for
[7:11:26] construction and this is our
[7:11:26] last extension request for the
[7:11:29] cei which is in concert with
[7:11:31] the approved construction
[7:11:33] extension. We anticipate no
[7:11:33] further request.
[7:11:36] >> the on this one and the 2
[7:11:41] million that you just
[7:11:41] discussed?
[7:11:42] >> yes, ma'am.
[7:11:46] >> we need a second. We need
[7:11:51] a second by commissioner lopez.
[7:11:53] All opposed, nay. Show the
[7:12:00] item past reflecting two no.
[7:12:01] Commissioner from district 12 I
[7:12:11] am going to call up and you are
[7:12:12] the pulling commission on all
[7:12:13] three items. You MAY speak on
[7:12:13] them all together. 82, 83, 84.
[7:12:14] >> I want to make comments
[7:12:16] about the change orders. It is
[7:12:22] a bad policy and sometimes it
[7:12:23] is warranted. This always cost
[7:12:24] us more money. If it is
[7:12:25] estimated mistakes then we
[7:12:29] should know. I think one of
[7:12:29] these things has 112 trees or
[7:12:30] something. But we really need
[7:12:33] to evaluate these contracts. I
[7:12:36] am going to vote for them all
[7:12:44] three. MR. CHAIRMAN I have to
[7:12:45] come in on all three. It is
[7:12:45] bad policy to have change
[7:12:46] orders constantly.
[7:12:48] >> I have a quick question.
[7:12:58] >> I need a motion. You are
[7:12:59] recognized for a question.
[7:12:59] >> I have a question on 804
[7:13:00] because the work was completed
[7:13:05] in 2025. But the payment
[7:13:06] wasn't issued. We are seeing
[7:13:08] the change order dated MARCH
[7:13:10] 2026. Was there a reason why
[7:13:13] we have over a year from when
[7:13:20] the work was completed?
[7:13:23] >> j was the director. When
[7:13:27] the work is complete they are
[7:13:28] still closed out. There's not
[7:13:30] on negotiation --
[7:13:34] [Indiscernible]. It takes a
[7:13:36] matter of months to get on the
[7:13:42] agenda to hear for the vote. I
[7:13:43] don't have answers to the exact
[7:13:44] timeline on the delay but I do
[7:13:44] know it takes time.
[7:13:45] >> I appreciate that but a
[7:13:46] year and three months is a
[7:13:51] little bit more in than what we
[7:13:52] usually see here in terms of
[7:13:53] closeout. But yes, I am happy
[7:13:54] to support it. I think we
[7:13:54] should be mindful of the time.
[7:13:55] I know it takes a while to get
[7:14:01] on the agenda. I think a year
[7:14:01] and a few months is a long
[7:14:02] time.
[7:14:05] >> all signify the same aye.
[7:14:08] All opposed, nay. Say 802803
[7:14:12] and 84 passed by this boat. --
[7:14:18] vote.
[7:14:19] >> I am going to support it
[7:14:19] again but I'm going to make
[7:14:20] some comments. This reminds me
[7:14:24] of the other agreement with the
[7:14:25] airport people here. I still
[7:14:27] have the answer from the first
[7:14:32] agreement. Let me go through
[7:14:33] MR. Redd and MR. Gold and I
[7:14:37] know you are watching. And the
[7:14:37] lobbyists and I'm sure there
[7:14:38] are watching and one of them
[7:14:44] was here. I think it is bad
[7:14:45] policy and this better be a
[7:14:50] clear transparent process for
[7:14:51] the contract at the airport
[7:14:52] because it wasn't last time. I
[7:14:53] have a problem with it. I am
[7:15:01] going to be watching like a
[7:15:01] hawk and like white on rice I
[7:15:02] am going to be on you guys. I
[7:15:03] want to know that the process
[7:15:04] is fair to the businesses of
[7:15:05] miami-dade county and across
[7:15:06] the country and it is a
[7:15:07] national vendor. It is not
[7:15:11] particularly for anybody in
[7:15:15] particular so that is my
[7:15:15] comment. I am going to support
[7:15:18] it because the sponsor laid it
[7:15:19] out well. I do want to make
[7:15:24] sure that this gets done the
[7:15:25] right way with clear
[7:15:26] transparency for all of us.
[7:15:29] >> moved by commissioner cohen
[7:15:30] higgins and seconded by
[7:15:41] commissioner lopez.
[7:15:52] >> thank you MR. Chair and
[7:15:53] commissioner bermudez. I share
[7:15:54] those concerns and I wanted to
[7:15:55] eliminate the fact that this
[7:15:56] award and the airport can
[7:15:57] correct me if I am wrong. It
[7:15:58] is an entirely new company that
[7:15:59] has never been in our airport
[7:16:00] before. So talk about allowing
[7:16:01] new opportunity and not having
[7:16:04] the same cabal continue to come
[7:16:06] back to us to occupy spaces. I
[7:16:08] am with you and this is the
[7:16:13] first time we have offered
[7:16:14] concession opportunities in a
[7:16:15] very long time in his county to
[7:16:16] an entirely new company. So I
[7:16:17] echo your sentiments. Thank
[7:16:18] you MR. Chair.
[7:16:24] >> all in favor signify by
[7:16:24] saying aye. All opposed nay.
[7:16:29] Show that item passing. Vice
[7:16:30] chair on ap nine you are
[7:16:30] recognized.
[7:16:34] >> I'll be withdrawing my
[7:16:40] pool.
[7:16:41] >> seconded by commissioner
[7:16:42] gilbert. Signify the same aye.
[7:16:43] All opposed nay. Show it
[7:16:50] passing. I've got 95 was
[7:16:53] released or no? 95 was
[7:16:54] released in the past that
[7:17:03] already? I have 11 a one.
[7:17:04] >> thank you very much MR.
[7:17:05] CHAIRMAN. I just wanted to
[7:17:10] congratulate commissioner, she
[7:17:11] is the chair of the housing
[7:17:12] committee. She has done an
[7:17:13] amazing job on median income.
[7:17:14] I'm grateful to see this item
[7:17:18] come before us. I will say
[7:17:19] that even within my commission
[7:17:20] district and I think it is
[7:17:22] important that we know that the
[7:17:27] report calls for them to do ami
[7:17:28] by commission district. I
[7:17:29] would almost say you have to
[7:17:38] drill down even further. So
[7:17:39] brickle and little havana or
[7:17:40] contiguous communities. The
[7:17:41] ami and brickle is not the same
[7:17:42] as the ami in little havana.
[7:17:43] As you move around my district
[7:17:46] and I'm sure that the same goes
[7:17:47] for your districts. My
[7:17:48] district is incredibly diverse
[7:17:53] and the ami within my district
[7:17:54] is really something that I have
[7:17:55] been struggling with. And so
[7:17:56] hopefully as we drove down for
[7:17:57] this item by commission
[7:18:01] district that maybe we will get
[7:18:02] census tracts or zip codes.
[7:18:08] Honestly it has been incredibly
[7:18:09] hard to say that the ami is the
[7:18:10] same. It is not. I look
[7:18:12] forward working with
[7:18:14] commissioner and she can just
[7:18:15] there continues her work
[7:18:24] leading the discussion on ami.
[7:18:25] >> MAY I be added as a sponsor
[7:18:25] please?
[7:18:32] >> yes. Show as a sponsor.
[7:18:35] We have a motion and a second.
[7:18:36] A motion by commissioner lopez
[7:18:41] and second by gilbert. All in
[7:18:42] favor signify by saying aye.
[7:18:50] All opposed nay. Show it
[7:18:51] passed.
[7:18:52] >> there's someone here from
[7:18:52] the pa's office.
[7:18:53] >> made the person from the pa
[7:19:09] office approach on ak four.
[7:19:10] That would be you. Please say
[7:19:14] her name. And title. And we
[7:19:21] have a question for you on ak
[7:19:22] four. Commissioner gilbert you
[7:19:25] are recognized for q&a clicks
[7:19:25] --
[7:19:39] >> we are going to be sharing
[7:19:40] social security numbers with
[7:19:44] you. I am told that you need
[7:19:50] that to do what?
[7:19:50] >> first of all good
[7:19:51] afternoon. Thank you for
[7:19:52] waiting for us. We were on our
[7:19:55] way down. Typically we do have
[7:19:59] social security number. The
[7:20:00] reason why we are requesting
[7:20:01] this is because we need to
[7:20:03] match what we have in existence
[7:20:05] in our records with what they
[7:20:06] can give us. Basically
[7:20:10] determine if they are in
[7:20:11] compliance or not in
[7:20:15] compliance. This already we
[7:20:17] had in the past this agreement
[7:20:20] with pa cd. It was in 2013
[7:20:29] when our office became
[7:20:29] constitutional. We need a
[7:20:30] memorandum or agreement
[7:20:31] basically that is why we are
[7:20:33] here. Was already approved and
[7:20:34] the solution is there but we
[7:20:34] were basically expanding a
[7:20:35] little bit more to include a
[7:20:38] couple of extra items.
[7:20:42] >> I am not sure that actually
[7:20:44] answered the question why you
[7:20:47] need social security numbers.
[7:20:57] Because you always had them.
[7:20:58] >> we have on our records the
[7:20:59] social security numbers of
[7:21:00] every individual requesting and
[7:21:00] receiving exemption benefits.
[7:21:01] The subsection provides voucher
[7:21:02] program and all of that and
[7:21:08] provides landlords and tenants
[7:21:08] --
[7:21:09] >> guys can we lower the
[7:21:14] chatter in the back from staff?
[7:21:15] Even us on the dais cannot hit
[7:21:16] the gentleman. Continue
[7:21:16] please.
[7:21:20] >> and then we get this
[7:21:21] information from pa cd and we
[7:21:25] can verify the landlords are
[7:21:27] claiming homestead exemption
[7:21:29] present that my pretending they
[7:21:42] are homestead when they are
[7:21:43] renting it out to the program.
[7:21:44] The only way to identify the
[7:21:45] individuals and situations is
[7:21:46] through the social security
[7:21:47] numbers. We already have the
[7:21:48] social security numbers and
[7:21:48] besides it is required by law
[7:21:49] by statute.
[7:21:50] >> that is not the only way.
[7:21:51] I can think of one way almost
[7:21:52] immediately if someone list a
[7:21:55] homestead with an address and
[7:21:56] that address is also listed on
[7:22:05] a voucher, you know there is an
[7:22:06] inconsistency and you could do
[7:22:07] it without a social security
[7:22:08] number. You do not need a
[7:22:09] social security number for
[7:22:09] that.
[7:22:16] >> it is in the statute 196 11
[7:22:16] the department of revenue
[7:22:17] implemented this in 2001 so we
[7:22:18] collect the social security
[7:22:19] numbers. This one of the ways
[7:22:20] exactly as you are saying.
[7:22:25] However, we could risk finding
[7:22:25] someone improperly because
[7:22:28] there is mistakes, the name
[7:22:29] sometimes it could be a mistake
[7:22:30] with the names. Or something
[7:22:36] like that. The homes said is
[7:22:36] individual not necessarily in
[7:22:43] the property could be multiple
[7:22:44] individuals in the homestead
[7:22:45] exemption could belong to one
[7:22:45] of them and not the whole
[7:22:46] household. Therefore we need
[7:22:47] to know who is the one
[7:22:55] violating if that is the case.
[7:22:56] And the best identifier is a
[7:22:57] social security number which by
[7:22:58] the way I mentioned before we
[7:22:59] already have this with pa cd.
[7:23:00] The only reason why we are here
[7:23:01] every --
[7:23:08] >> I appreciate that you have
[7:23:09] always gotten this and now it
[7:23:10] is before us and I am reviewing
[7:23:11] it and I've no if you actually
[7:23:12] need it to do what you're
[7:23:14] saying you do what you need to
[7:23:19] do. If you're giving them who
[7:23:20] has vouchers for housing and
[7:23:22] you want to check it versus
[7:23:26] someone who is claiming
[7:23:27] homestead almost directly line
[7:23:28] from point a to point b is
[7:23:30] actual address. And so I get
[7:23:33] what you are saying. Are you
[7:23:35] telling us the statute require
[7:23:36] us to give you a social
[7:23:36] security number?
[7:23:40] >> it requires it?
[7:23:43] >> it requires it.
[7:23:48] >> if it doesn't require it
[7:23:49] and I'm going to call the
[7:23:52] attorneys and their going to
[7:23:53] tell me if it requires us to
[7:23:54] give the social security
[7:24:03] number?
[7:24:04] >> what I said is the statute
[7:24:05] requires that the property
[7:24:05] appraiser's office collect the
[7:24:06] social security numbers before
[7:24:07] giving an exemption to anybody
[7:24:08] else. So what I'm saying is
[7:24:13] that is the best identifier for
[7:24:14] us to determine who is in
[7:24:15] violation. Because the
[7:24:15] property by the address could
[7:24:16] be in violation but many
[7:24:21] household members we don't know
[7:24:22] the social security number
[7:24:25] associated with the exemption.
[7:24:26] >> moved to different and
[7:24:31] second. All in favor of a
[7:24:32] deferral please signify by
[7:24:34] saying aye. All opposed nay.
[7:24:38] Show ak four is for the next
[7:24:49] bcc meeting. I've got 11 h 13
[7:24:50] supplement. I am going to
[7:24:52] start with senator garcia is
[7:24:53] not just the pulling
[7:24:54] commissioner but the sponsor of
[7:24:58] the item. Senator garcia?
[7:25:00] >> MR. CHAIRMAN I think we
[7:25:07] have seen this item before. It
[7:25:08] was to address some of the
[7:25:08] concerns that were brought up
[7:25:09] at the last county
[7:25:10] commissioner. It has to do
[7:25:14] with the truck parking. I know
[7:25:15] commissioner bermudez has
[7:25:16] serious reservations for it
[7:25:19] because it is in his district.
[7:25:21] We are making the amendment to
[7:25:22] ensure that we don't violate
[7:25:25] the law but give flexibility to
[7:25:26] the administration to ensure
[7:25:30] that we use the connection of
[7:25:37] different parcels to meet the
[7:25:37] letter of the law as it relates
[7:25:38] to the 10 acres. When we look
[7:25:39] back in history, we look at the
[7:25:40] study that was conducted some
[7:25:42] years ago where they said where
[7:25:52] the administration said they
[7:25:53] need a number of acreage to
[7:25:54] satisfy parking would have been
[7:25:55] 2 acres. Obviously, we went up
[7:25:55] to 10 acres from minimum
[7:26:00] parking. The reality is
[7:26:01] members is that we had a back
[7:26:02] and forth and I see this really
[7:26:03] as a battle between david and
[7:26:05] goliath. This is the issue
[7:26:05] that we have before you and
[7:26:06] this is why you see this
[7:26:07] substitute amendment that is
[7:26:14] before you. It is to vote up
[7:26:14] or down and I'm sure
[7:26:17] commissioner bermudez is going
[7:26:24] to have something on this.
[7:26:25] >> I have a lot to say MR.
[7:26:26] Chair. Thank you senator, I
[7:26:27] have a lot to say. Let's
[7:26:33] begin. Let's begin by this.
[7:26:34] These are the records from the
[7:26:34] court cases that this county
[7:26:35] has had reference to the
[7:26:37] particular group that has led
[7:26:41] to this item. So the narrative
[7:26:42] you MAY have heard is that this
[7:26:49] is about helping small truck
[7:26:50] parking because they are
[7:26:50] operating illegally because
[7:26:51] they did not meet the 10 acre
[7:26:52] requirement. By the way I was
[7:26:53] not here when the take10 acre
[7:26:59] requirement was voted. I know
[7:26:59] that we want to paint it as
[7:27:00] david versus goliath. Small
[7:27:03] acreage versus large acreage
[7:27:04] operators. If this was only
[7:27:11] issue, I would not be so
[7:27:12] opposed respectfully. It goes
[7:27:13] far beyond that. First this is
[7:27:14] an issue that primarily impacts
[7:27:15] my district is item clearly
[7:27:16] states it seeks to allow
[7:27:20] commercial vehicles to storage
[7:27:21] of the turnpike by aggregating
[7:27:26] parcels that is at least 40
[7:27:27] acres in size. Second, we
[7:27:27] would be directing staff to
[7:27:30] file an application on behalf
[7:27:31] of a group of private
[7:27:32] individuals who are engaging
[7:27:34] not only in illegal truck
[7:27:41] parking operations but who have
[7:27:41] numerous egregious
[7:27:42] environmental violations
[7:27:43] spanning decades some as early
[7:27:46] as 2007. Where are you
[7:27:47] reynolds? The majority of
[7:27:48] these operations are under
[7:27:52] multiple degrees -- decrees
[7:27:56] such as unpermitted underground
[7:28:00] base for performing on trucks.
[7:28:13] It has electable service, and
[7:28:15] proper disposal of hazardous
[7:28:16] materials in liquid waste such
[7:28:16] as motor all, antifreeze, and
[7:28:17] holding tanks filled with an
[7:28:18] identified look will attached
[7:28:19] to mobile homes, paving with
[7:28:20] apartments and best of all this
[7:28:21] has been done and truly
[7:28:22] environmental sensitive wetland
[7:28:24] areas. Not like some where we
[7:28:25] approve applicants that have
[7:28:27] appeared in front of us. So
[7:28:42] why is there no outreach? In
[7:28:43] essence where directing staff
[7:28:44] to file ac dmp application that
[7:28:45] will be a text amendment
[7:28:46] outside the you to be
[7:28:46] legalizing these illegal
[7:28:47] operators who have been blaming
[7:28:48] engaging in violating all land
[7:28:49] use zoning and environmental
[7:28:50] relations. This is not about
[7:28:54] equity. If it was about
[7:28:55] fairness I would be in favor of
[7:28:56] this. But it is not, it is not
[7:28:57] about fairness or equity. It
[7:28:58] not only enables bad actors, it
[7:28:59] legitimizes them. We are
[7:29:01] sending a clear message to them
[7:29:02] keep doing what you're doing.
[7:29:03] We don't care. We changed the
[7:29:04] rules for you. That appears to
[7:29:04] be with her attorney said
[7:29:05] before I get into what the
[7:29:06] judge said. Do you think this
[7:29:10] is going to encourage somebody
[7:29:11] who hasn't taken care of these
[7:29:13] issues since the year 2019 at a
[7:29:16] minimum? To do anything? No.
[7:29:20] We are going to instruct staff
[7:29:21] even the legal proceedings that
[7:29:22] I am going to get to in a
[7:29:23] second. So we are telling the
[7:29:25] people and of this county those
[7:29:30] that don't follow our rules
[7:29:31] hey, don't follow the rules.
[7:29:31] And those that invest and
[7:29:34] follow the rules hey, it
[7:29:35] doesn't pay to follow the
[7:29:36] rules. After all all you have
[7:29:37] to do is go to the board of
[7:29:45] county commissioners and we
[7:29:46] will figure out a way to
[7:29:46] satisfy it. I would expect the
[7:29:47] mayor to veto this. I want to
[7:29:48] touch upon something that is
[7:29:49] really really important. I
[7:29:50] have given you a copy of the
[7:29:51] hon. Judge jason demetri's
[7:29:57] most recent hearing. I am
[7:29:58] going to start by the fact on
[7:30:04] his ruling. Instead she is
[7:30:05] interested for political favors
[7:30:06] to allow her to continue
[7:30:07] destroying the environment and
[7:30:10] violating clear requirements.
[7:30:11] Okay and we had our attorneys
[7:30:15] at the hearing. So because her
[7:30:18] attorney and his or her utmost
[7:30:19] knowledge the board of county
[7:30:20] commissioners they are going to
[7:30:23] take care of it. And this is a
[7:30:26] quote from the hon. George
[7:30:30] jason demetri's. This is a
[7:30:31] case of a defining conducting
[7:30:32] unpermitted activity from the
[7:30:36] beginning and continually
[7:30:36] promising to work towards
[7:30:37] compliance. But instead
[7:30:38] containing doing to further
[7:30:43] violate with virtually no
[7:30:44] apparent effort to remedy the
[7:30:44] situation. It is clear to the
[7:30:56] court that the defendant has no
[7:30:57] interest or had no interest in
[7:30:58] remedying the situation except
[7:30:59] to violating and accepting rent
[7:31:00] for the trucks and violating
[7:31:01] the counties requirements and
[7:31:02] her own agreement. From 2019
[7:31:05] by the way which is the time
[7:31:06] and 2021 entered an agreement
[7:31:07] still do not comply. Again
[7:31:22] quoting the judge that the
[7:31:23] defendant cannot take money to
[7:31:24] illegal activity and simply
[7:31:25] collecting the money while
[7:31:26] continuing violations and claim
[7:31:27] the defense in his is a
[7:31:28] difficult situation and is in
[7:31:29] compliance. I am not going to
[7:31:30] get into the numbers that were
[7:31:31] found because there was no
[7:31:31] difficult situation for
[7:31:32] payment. Except to say that
[7:31:33] she seeks to continue contact
[7:31:34] the collecting money so she has
[7:31:35] no entry -- interest to follow
[7:31:38] the rules. She denied the
[7:31:44] county inspectors access in
[7:31:45] AUGUST 2025 required that they
[7:31:51] take pictures through a fence.
[7:31:52] This is after numerous
[7:31:52] violations. That does not
[7:31:53] suggest someone who is
[7:31:54] attempting to come into
[7:31:56] compliance. That is suggesting
[7:31:57] someone who is doing their part
[7:31:58] to avoid compliance. She
[7:31:59] failed to send a check for 5000
[7:32:00] by JUNE 2025. She failed to
[7:32:09] send a check for $1000 by JUNE
[7:32:10] 20 25. She failed to send a
[7:32:11] $10,000 check to our er. She
[7:32:12] allowed asphalt to be used as
[7:32:24] unclean filled against wetland
[7:32:24] requirements. All of these
[7:32:25] violations into tightly are
[7:32:26] clearly all of these are bio
[7:32:27] relations in totality are
[7:32:29] obviously made willfully. She
[7:32:29] has the money and resources and
[7:32:30] she showed no effort. She so
[7:32:33] no interest in obstructing the
[7:32:35] counties ability to investigate
[7:32:36] and proceed. She has done
[7:32:39] everything she could do to
[7:32:40] delay as soon as possible. Of
[7:32:41] course. The court assumes that
[7:32:45] was to get this to the county
[7:32:45] commission meeting where she
[7:32:46] can make an attempt to do a run
[7:32:51] around and that has now failed.
[7:32:51] So this is not about david
[7:32:54] versus goliath with all due
[7:32:55] respect to my colleagues
[7:32:58] senator garcia. This is about
[7:32:59] people who have violated for
[7:33:02] over seven years. Over seven
[7:33:09] years. I wish laura reynolds
[7:33:10] was here because she has not
[7:33:11] talked about this young he has
[7:33:20] talked about other projects.
[7:33:22] In sensitive areas and laughed
[7:33:22] at us and says no I'm not going
[7:33:23] to do what you say. I'm not
[7:33:24] going to let the inspectors in.
[7:33:25] We spent hours and hours and
[7:33:26] our attorneys have had to go to
[7:33:27] try to make them comply. But
[7:33:27] this is about, I'm sorry this
[7:33:29] is about changing the rules.
[7:33:30] This is not about equity. It
[7:33:32] is not about justice. It was
[7:33:37] it would be a different story.
[7:33:38] The quality of life of the
[7:33:41] people in this county was one
[7:33:42] of and I was not here when some
[7:33:43] of these changes were made. I
[7:33:44] believe it was 10 acres. And
[7:33:45] the bottom line is whether it
[7:33:49] was 10 acres or four or 15
[7:33:51] whatever number it is there is
[7:34:03] no way in this world that some
[7:34:04] of you would stay silent and
[7:34:05] said okay this is a great
[7:34:06] runaround on our rules and
[7:34:07] laws. Because this is what it
[7:34:08] is. This is what it is so
[7:34:08] everybody is going to come
[7:34:09] around and say, at this point
[7:34:15] if we are going to amend this,
[7:34:16] I'm not going to get into the
[7:34:18] fact that it is in my district.
[7:34:19] I am the one impacted. The
[7:34:24] easiest thing for me is to be
[7:34:25] is to go along to get along.
[7:34:26] Like I said the other day when
[7:34:28] commissioner gilbert we were
[7:34:35] saying the early goodbye to him
[7:34:35] when we honored him the other
[7:34:36] day. I don't go along to get
[7:34:40] along. I don't go along to get
[7:34:41] along. Because this is not
[7:34:42] about fairness and justice.
[7:34:45] Think of the message you guys
[7:34:46] will be sending. Think of the
[7:34:51] message, he looks good on that
[7:34:52] one. The bottom line is if you
[7:35:00] want to -- listen. We're going
[7:35:01] to end up on whatever that is.
[7:35:02] I'm going to tell you right now
[7:35:05] if we do this, we are sending
[7:35:08] the wrong message to the people
[7:35:09] of this county. Break the
[7:35:12] rules, break the laws and you
[7:35:15] can get away with it. Again, I
[7:35:16] hope and I guess they are all
[7:35:20] gone because after all, guess
[7:35:24] they're all gone. The wetlands
[7:35:25] is apparently I don't know
[7:35:32] maybe I will have to find out
[7:35:33] what the everglades foundation
[7:35:34] defined as wetlands. You have
[7:35:35] somebody who is violating our
[7:35:38] wetlands and violating the
[7:35:39] rules taken our attorneys time.
[7:35:43] Denying our code compliance,
[7:35:44] our officers from going in and
[7:35:45] taking the pictures. And we're
[7:35:48] going to say, okay, yes. There
[7:35:51] was a movie maybe before some
[7:35:53] of your time but it is about
[7:35:58] vietnam called apocalypse now.
[7:35:59] The guy says oh the horror.
[7:36:04] When I said, the horror. In my
[7:36:05] district with all due respect
[7:36:06] somebody comes in and says this
[7:36:21] is going to be it is about
[7:36:22] equity and david versus
[7:36:22] goliath. It is not about david
[7:36:23] versus goliath, it is about the
[7:36:24] right and wrong thing. What is
[7:36:25] right is right and what is
[7:36:25] wrong is wrong. If you guys
[7:36:26] want to change that is fine.
[7:36:27] But I am voting no, no and
[7:36:31] double no. You will forever
[7:36:31] make sure that the attorneys to
[7:36:32] represent us will never be able
[7:36:33] to enforce some of these
[7:36:34] things. Because the excuse is
[7:36:36] always going to be the same.
[7:36:37] I'm just going to figure out a
[7:36:40] way around it. Through changes
[7:36:41] of the county commissions. And
[7:36:46] that to me is not the reason I
[7:36:47] was elected. Again, if it was
[7:36:48] fairness and equity I will be
[7:36:49] more than happy to say yes.
[7:37:00] But it is not. It just doesn't
[7:37:03] make any sense and on this one
[7:37:03] --
[7:37:05] >> commissioner steinberg was
[7:37:09] wondering if you were a yes, or
[7:37:11] a no on this one. [Laughter]
[7:37:19] What did you say? It is
[7:37:19] getting late it is going to be
[7:37:22] almost 4:00 pm. I understand
[7:37:23] and I'm going to recognize my
[7:37:25] colleagues to speak of course.
[7:37:26] I'm sure senator garcia want to
[7:37:32] speak at the end. First of all
[7:37:38] I understand what you're saying
[7:37:39] commissioner bermudez and I
[7:37:40] agree with a lot of it. I
[7:37:41] think I am not here to defend
[7:37:48] senator garcia area we -- . I
[7:37:50] think people circumventing and
[7:37:54] coming to us they're never
[7:37:55] going to stop that. That is
[7:37:56] what the body is here for her
[7:38:00] to legislate. The district
[7:38:01] thing, can see that and I can
[7:38:01] also see the argument of this
[7:38:14] is a countywide issue or some
[7:38:15] dialogue should have happened.
[7:38:16] The wetlands and all that good
[7:38:21] stuff so let's go to
[7:38:21] commissioner regalado.
[7:38:22] >> thank you MR. Chair. I'm
[7:38:23] going to echo some of my
[7:38:27] colleagues points. I
[7:38:28] appreciate persistence and you
[7:38:30] brought this items many many
[7:38:31] times. The last time he came
[7:38:32] before us we brought up the
[7:38:38] point that this particular that
[7:38:39] this was being moved by
[7:38:39] particular actor. And that
[7:38:40] this actor had a series of
[7:38:41] violations. Since then we have
[7:38:42] a lot more information. This
[7:38:47] is a particularly egregious
[7:38:48] case. The county commission
[7:38:49] spent a lot of time with staff
[7:38:51] stamps in the room and that
[7:38:52] rule establishes a particular
[7:38:53] acreage. And also other rules
[7:39:01] that have to be followed.
[7:39:02] People have paid a lot of money
[7:39:03] and going through a very
[7:39:03] complex process in order to
[7:39:04] have truck parking. Now we
[7:39:05] have this one particular bad
[7:39:08] actor and my favorite quote
[7:39:12] from the judge is, that in this
[7:39:13] case the defendant is
[7:39:13] attempting to change the law
[7:39:16] instead of her conduct. I
[7:39:17] really think that is what this
[7:39:18] is about. This is a bad actor
[7:39:25] who has time and time and time
[7:39:25] again violated our wetland
[7:39:26] rules. When we talk about
[7:39:30] wetlands I will say this, it is
[7:39:30] important because it impacts
[7:39:31] the OCTOBER water line. It is
[7:39:36] important because this type of
[7:39:37] complete and total blatant
[7:39:38] disregard for what should be
[7:39:40] happening in that area, it
[7:39:52] hurts our water. I understand
[7:39:53] they MAY not agree with the
[7:39:54] decision that was made. But a
[7:39:55] lot of people are complying.
[7:39:56] Why can't this person comply?
[7:39:56] What we are doing here is not
[7:39:57] only giving a bad actor a
[7:39:59] windfall, we are changing this
[7:40:00] for no reason. Because we have
[7:40:16] yet to determine other than
[7:40:17] this particular person is short
[7:40:18] and acre. What the reason is
[7:40:19] for changing the rules? In
[7:40:20] fact the rules were established
[7:40:20] because of the turning radius
[7:40:21] and the importance of having a
[7:40:22] particular size in order for
[7:40:23] those trucks to be able to get
[7:40:24] in and out. It wasn't an
[7:40:25] arbitrary decision. It was a
[7:40:25] decision that was bought out
[7:40:26] and made with the industry.
[7:40:27] And of course when that
[7:40:28] decision was made there were
[7:40:29] people left out. And that
[7:40:29] always happens. So while i
[7:40:33] understand the chairs point
[7:40:34] people are coming to change the
[7:40:35] rules there's always got to be
[7:40:36] someone that is left out of a
[7:40:37] regulation. And in this case
[7:40:41] it is not just one left out of
[7:40:42] a regulation and they want to
[7:40:49] artificially do their property
[7:40:49] value this is a bad actor.
[7:40:50] Just on that point I hope that
[7:40:51] this is the last time we get
[7:40:53] this item. Because it is
[7:40:54] absurd. There are other people
[7:40:59] that are doing a better job.
[7:41:00] Durham works very hard and so
[7:41:01] does our er. The fact that we
[7:41:02] keep bringing this up in trying
[7:41:03] to allow this person to
[7:41:06] monetize their abuse of the
[7:41:07] system it's always going to be
[7:41:17] a no for me on this one.
[7:41:21] >> if I MAY? Appreciate the
[7:41:28] comments and concerns and
[7:41:29] commissioner bermudez you are
[7:41:30] not far off. In your district
[7:41:31] absolutely there is a lot of
[7:41:32] illegal parking. There is a
[7:41:44] lot of agree -- you have
[7:41:45] trucking and parking that is
[7:41:46] out there. You have the rock
[7:41:47] miners that are out there.
[7:41:48] With so when we talk about
[7:41:48] wetlands, you can't talk about
[7:41:49] picking and choosing what
[7:41:50] wetlands are good and what
[7:41:51] wetlands are not. These are
[7:41:51] between two properties. Two
[7:41:56] properties that are designated
[7:41:58] but they have not been able to
[7:42:00] meet the 10 acreage lot. The
[7:42:04] whole thing the whole genesis
[7:42:05] of this is not just about one
[7:42:10] individual. I like how we try
[7:42:11] to make this about one
[7:42:12] individuals. They are the ones
[7:42:13] that brought this to me
[7:42:14] absolutely. But it is not just
[7:42:18] because of their failure to
[7:42:19] comply. The reality is that we
[7:42:20] have a report before us that
[7:42:21] says we need more truck
[7:42:22] parking. We brought the
[7:42:23] resolution and I brought an
[7:42:25] item before us and we
[7:42:26] bifurcated and commissioner
[7:42:28] rodriguez made a motion to
[7:42:29] separate both items because we
[7:42:33] do need more truck parking area
[7:42:34] and now what I have been able
[7:42:45] to do based on suggestions --
[7:42:55] we are good and you win. The
[7:42:56] realities is that we need more
[7:42:57] truck parking in his community.
[7:42:58] We do need it. The truck
[7:42:59] parking just make sure we have
[7:42:59] the people that live in my
[7:43:02] district. The people that live
[7:43:03] in your district and the people
[7:43:03] that live in our district to
[7:43:05] make sure they can afford truck
[7:43:05] parking. We have truck parking
[7:43:06] that are huge. It is going to
[7:43:09] cost more money to park their
[7:43:20] trucks. I do agree with you
[7:43:21] that he should have come into
[7:43:21] compliance and that is why did
[7:43:22] look into it. They have
[7:43:23] removed the asphalt and they
[7:43:24] have removed the trucks. They
[7:43:25] are doing a water retention.
[7:43:25] That is one parcel. The
[7:43:27] reality is that we need more.
[7:43:27] What we look at the study and
[7:43:30] when we look at some of the
[7:43:31] comments that were made, we
[7:43:37] don't need them anymore. You
[7:43:38] know why we don't need any more
[7:43:39] truck parking because it is the
[7:43:40] big guys that are out there.
[7:43:41] All these big facilities that
[7:43:42] are investing the money and
[7:43:43] they do not want to do it over
[7:43:43] here. All of us every single
[7:43:49] one of us has been lobbied by
[7:43:50] one side. Because they have
[7:43:51] the money. They have the
[7:43:56] lobbyist. That is what they
[7:43:57] have. But the reality is when
[7:43:58] we look at the study when we
[7:44:01] look and by the way the people
[7:44:02] that are lobbying are my
[7:44:06] friends too. But is trying to
[7:44:07] figure out how do we make this
[7:44:07] happen? How do we make it
[7:44:08] work? The reality is this
[7:44:10] study right here the result in
[7:44:16] truck parking can accommodate 2
[7:44:32] acres per site. It has been,
[7:44:33] all you need is 2 acres. It is
[7:44:33] facilitated folks. I get the
[7:44:34] arguments that you're making
[7:44:35] but the reality is that this is
[7:44:41] a david against goliath. When
[7:44:42] we look at the arguments that
[7:44:44] have been made, we don't need
[7:44:45] to do this. We are giving
[7:44:53] someone special protection. We
[7:44:54] do it all the time and we bring
[7:44:55] a variance to the board. Every
[7:44:56] time we bring a variance to
[7:44:57] board we are giving somebody a
[7:44:58] favor or doing a favor for
[7:44:58] someone. That is exactly what
[7:45:07] it is. I know we have been
[7:45:08] lobbied on this. I get it. I
[7:45:09] get the issue. But it is a
[7:45:10] conscious decision we have to
[7:45:10] make on this. It is whether or
[7:45:12] not to we go ahead and try to
[7:45:14] help? Bermudez is absolutely
[7:45:15] right. They have come back and
[7:45:17] they brought compliance to the
[7:45:17] property. And just remember
[7:45:18] the people that we have out
[7:45:24] there, we have one to the left
[7:45:25] and maybe we have rock miners
[7:45:26] to write. It is simple as
[7:45:27] that. So to use the
[7:45:29] environment to issues when we
[7:45:30] see all these things that are
[7:45:32] happening out there it is a red
[7:45:37] herring. MR. CHAIRMAN I ask
[7:45:38] for your consideration and your
[7:45:44] indulgence. I am bringing this
[7:45:45] item before this board and at
[7:45:46] the end of the day we do need
[7:45:47] and want to reiterate the part
[7:45:50] about the truck parking. We
[7:45:51] need more truck parking as
[7:45:52] simple as that. If we can help
[7:45:53] this group come into compliance
[7:45:54] and we can help them with this
[7:45:56] for this legislation it would
[7:45:57] increase and it is not changing
[7:45:58] the law about the 10 acres.
[7:46:01] All we are doing is asking. We
[7:46:02] are bringing this one person
[7:46:04] into it but the reality what we
[7:46:05] are doing with this is saying
[7:46:08] it is 10 acres. Let's give the
[7:46:09] administration sums flexibility
[7:46:14] as to how we meet the 10 acres.
[7:46:15] At least one parcel has to be
[7:46:19] at least 4 acres. MR. CHAIRMAN
[7:46:26] I asked for the vote.
[7:46:26] >> I have a question but that
[7:46:27] is fine. All in favor signify
[7:46:31] by saying aye. All oppose nay.
[7:46:43] Can I get a roll call vote? I
[7:46:44] have a question but I refrained
[7:46:45] from asking. Do you really
[7:46:46] want to ask because then I want
[7:46:47] to ask? Roll call please? I'm
[7:46:52] sorry? Can you just do the
[7:46:52] roll call?
[7:46:56] >> commissioner gilbert, no.
[7:46:57] >> commissioner gonzales, no.
[7:47:00] >> commissioner lopez, no.
[7:47:04] >> commissioner, no.
[7:47:09] >> commissioner, no.
[7:47:14] >> commissioner bermudez,
[7:47:15] note.
[7:47:18] >> commissioner cohen higgins,
[7:47:24] no bikes senator --
[7:47:35] >> senator garcia, no but I
[7:47:36] need a second to reconsider.
[7:47:41] >> no, that is what you should
[7:47:41] do.
[7:47:42] >> I am going to vote yes.
[7:47:43] >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I do not want
[7:47:44] him to be alone. I can vote
[7:47:46] yes.
[7:47:49] >> I am going to support him
[7:47:54] just to not leave him alone.
[7:47:55] Don't give me the mean mug face
[7:47:56] commissioner bermudez. I am
[7:47:57] going to support my colleague
[7:47:59] so he will not be the only yes.
[7:48:05] >> vice chair mcghee.
[7:48:09] >> you vote yes, sir no i
[7:48:13] don't take it personal. It is
[7:48:14] just the same what is happening
[7:48:21] here but it is what it is.
[7:48:26] >> you can record me as, yes.
[7:48:27] I will tell you why, I don't
[7:48:32] necessarily agree with you.
[7:48:32] Renc
[7:48:33] your argument that a
[7:48:34] variance is basically doing a
[7:48:36] favor for someone that deviates
[7:48:38] from the rule I never thought
[7:48:44] about it like that. That is
[7:48:44] true you all. Every time we
[7:48:46] grant a variance we are
[7:48:49] allowing someone an exception
[7:48:53] to the rule. Rule that we have
[7:48:57] established is the best policy
[7:48:58] for the county. And so I don't
[7:48:59] necessarily agree with this
[7:49:01] project and I don't agree with
[7:49:03] you doing it in his district.
[7:49:11] I don't agree with that. That
[7:49:12] was probably the best argument
[7:49:12] you have ever made in support
[7:49:13] of something. [Laughter]
[7:49:15] That was amazing. It was
[7:49:18] amazing. Like it was amazing,
[7:49:19] senator it was amazing. It was
[7:49:20] really good. It was profound
[7:49:27] and it was true. When I was
[7:49:28] going to ask question I was
[7:49:29] actually going to talk about
[7:49:30] the comments that you were
[7:49:32] making.
[7:49:33] >> they can't go through
[7:49:34] variance because in a variance
[7:49:35] you are following the law. You
[7:49:36] are asking us after you follow
[7:49:36] the law and you pay and you
[7:49:38] come to a hearing that is what
[7:49:41] you do.
[7:49:45] >> after-the-fact permitting.
[7:49:50] We do after-the-fact permitting
[7:49:53] so my point is that it is not
[7:49:54] something. First of all I
[7:49:55] think this is a bad actor so we
[7:49:57] should not reward this level of
[7:49:58] bad acting. As a effect that
[7:50:01] is horrible. This isn't
[7:50:03] something that is beyond the
[7:50:04] scope of something that we have
[7:50:09] done previously. So I do not
[7:50:10] want it to seem like we have
[7:50:11] never done anything like that
[7:50:12] before. Oh yes we have. Yes,
[7:50:18] we have. I am comfortable with
[7:50:21] the results. Very good
[7:50:26] argument though. Hold on. I
[7:50:30] don't remember anything I said
[7:50:31] before, yes we have.
[7:50:38] [Laughter]
[7:50:39] >> I am going to look that up
[7:50:39] because we have to go back to
[7:50:40] 2019 to see how many people
[7:50:42] broken rule.
[7:50:43] >> please continue with the
[7:50:46] roll call. Please record is a
[7:50:49] yes.
[7:50:52] >> motion fails 4/8. You
[7:50:54] mentioned that you were a yes.
[7:50:57] >> you are on it, clerk. The
[7:51:02] office is on it. I am going to
[7:51:02] call him let him know his
[7:51:05] office is on it. Motion fails
[7:51:10] but you got more yea than you
[7:51:11] thought. Congratulations or
[7:51:21] whatever. Commissioner from
[7:51:22] district h? Commissioner from
[7:51:26] district 8 on 8 on 1484.
[7:51:29] Housing.
[7:51:33] >> I think this is an
[7:51:36] extension, no? To the
[7:51:40] attorneys did we just passed an
[7:51:46] item on limiting the extensions
[7:51:48] back this seems to be in direct
[7:51:49] contradiction to the ordinance
[7:51:51] that we just past regarding
[7:51:58] extensions on the housing
[7:52:00] program. I think the original
[7:52:05] allocation on this was 2019. I
[7:52:06] could be wrong that is why am
[7:52:07] asking the attorneys.
[7:52:11] >> while she looks it up I
[7:52:12] will say commissioner, yes I
[7:52:15] believe it is as it pertained
[7:52:16] to the ordinance we passed.
[7:52:21] This was already in process
[7:52:21] submitted to the system. It
[7:52:22] was a whole system that we use.
[7:52:23] This was in the process so that
[7:52:30] is why I put it on the agenda.
[7:52:31] Go ahead and ask and you can
[7:52:31] answer.
[7:52:32] >> yes, commissioner this was
[7:52:33] originally submitted from the
[7:52:35] mars committee. The ordinance
[7:52:36] the past allows two extensions.
[7:52:37] One year each. This particular
[7:52:45] item would be the second
[7:52:46] extension. But the first
[7:52:47] extension was for two years and
[7:52:48] this extension is for two
[7:52:48] years.
[7:52:49] >> when was the first
[7:52:50] extension awarded on this
[7:52:50] particular group of parcels?
[7:52:51] >> the first extension for
[7:52:53] this parcel was was JUNE 21,
[7:52:57] 2023 and expired in was JUNE
[7:52:58] 21, 2023 and expired in MARCH
[7:52:59] 27 of this year. And they
[7:53:06] submitted the request prior to
[7:53:06] that termination of that
[7:53:07] extension.
[7:53:09] > they submitted for the
[7:53:10] second extension prior to the
[7:53:12] first extension?
[7:53:13] >> it wasn't due to expire
[7:53:17] until MARCH?
[7:53:18] >> it wasn't due to expire
[7:53:18] until MARCH 2026 and they
[7:53:23] submitted the request in
[7:53:24] OCTOBER 2025.
[7:53:24] >> thank you.
[7:53:25] >> I have a motion by
[7:53:26] commissioner, vice chair and
[7:53:30] second by commissioner.
[7:53:31] Signify by saying aye. All
[7:53:35] opposed nay. District 7 I have
[7:53:37] you on 14 82. In a separate
[7:53:40] item I will call of the next
[7:53:58] one. 14 82. ---- 14 a2.
[7:53:58] >> I am happy to move it.
[7:54:06] >> seconded by commissioner.
[7:54:07] All in favor signify by saying
[7:54:08] aye. All opposed nay. Show it
[7:54:09] passed.
[7:54:13] >> I wanted to say something.
[7:54:13] I want to thank the
[7:54:14] commissioner for bringing the
[7:54:20] item. I know the friends of
[7:54:21] leiden have been working hard
[7:54:22] on this. I am glad to see
[7:54:22] there is a path forward. The
[7:54:23] only thing I would say it is
[7:54:25] also in my district. I
[7:54:26] appreciate that we are moving
[7:54:28] it forward. I hope that we can
[7:54:32] figure out a way to do it
[7:54:33] together. I am little
[7:54:48] concerned about parks doing it
[7:54:48] and the timing. The hopefully
[7:54:49] this will get it done. We have
[7:54:50] been waiting for it for a long
[7:54:51] time. One of the things that I
[7:54:52] mentioned to the groups that I
[7:54:53] met with is the underlying team
[7:54:54] is going to be done in OCTOBER.
[7:54:55] It would make a lot of sense to
[7:54:55] take that team to help. Given
[7:54:56] their expertise. If we decided
[7:54:57] to keep it in parks so be it.
[7:55:03] But there is a group of people
[7:55:04] that have been dealing with a
[7:55:05] lot of these issues inside
[7:55:06] public works. I hope that we
[7:55:07] take some of the lessons
[7:55:08] learned from fdot and the
[7:55:08] underlying so we can expedite
[7:55:11] it.
[7:55:17] >> commissioner gilbert?
[7:55:18] >> me saying take the
[7:55:18] underlying team do you mean
[7:55:28] take the team or the concept?
[7:55:28] What do you mean?
[7:55:29] >> I am talking about irene
[7:55:30] and the folks that have been
[7:55:31] working on the underlying. The
[7:55:32] underline is done in OCTOBER.
[7:55:33] They have a particular
[7:55:33] expertise that would be helpful
[7:55:40] to in israel.
[7:55:41] >> it is telling us one thing
[7:55:42] and charging and I do not want
[7:55:43] them to do that again. Thank
[7:55:43] you.
[7:55:44] >> we have a motion by
[7:55:49] commissioner and a second by
[7:55:50] commissioner cohen higgins.
[7:55:51] All in favor signify by saying
[7:55:52] aye. All opposed nay. Show it
[7:55:56] passed. I got 14.
[7:56:13] >> Chair Rodriguez: -- . Mdm.
[7:56:14] Mayor you like to be
[7:56:14] recognized?
[7:56:15] >> I wanted to thank everybody
[7:56:16] who came here today to speak on
[7:56:17] it. I really appreciate the
[7:56:20] community members that came
[7:56:21] out. And for those who have
[7:56:22] been working on it for many
[7:56:30] years. I appreciate the great
[7:56:31] showing that we have from our
[7:56:32] constituents in our community.
[7:56:33] Thank you so much.
[7:56:34] >> thank you so much for that
[7:56:34] comment. Thank you for
[7:56:35] everyone who came out and
[7:56:36] supported it. Mme. Mayor on
[7:56:37] your report 14 mayor on your
[7:56:37] report 14.
[7:56:43] >> Chair Rodriguez: -- 14 b
[7:56:46] number one.
[7:56:49] >> I will summarize the
[7:56:51] report.
[7:56:56] >> deputy mayor?
[7:57:00] >> roy works better.
[7:57:06] >> dm, run dmc.
[7:57:07] >> whatever you say will be
[7:57:13] the rule.
[7:57:13] >> you have a lights. I
[7:57:14] really like you. I got your
[7:57:15] back I don't care what they say
[7:57:20] about you. [Laughter]
[7:57:20] It doesn't matter what the
[7:57:25] mayor says I have your back. I
[7:57:26] got my coffee and extra whip
[7:57:26] cream on the side. And also
[7:57:30] the sugar and has a mocha and
[7:57:37] we are good.
[7:57:38] >> thank you MR. CHAIRMAN. In
[7:57:39] summary of this item the bottom
[7:57:40] line is about 30 years ago the
[7:57:41] board of county commissioners
[7:57:42] was sued by the federal
[7:57:42] government and the state
[7:57:43] government for violation of the
[7:57:45] clean water act. As a result
[7:57:47] of that sued the board entered
[7:57:55] into a consent decree
[7:57:56] committing to a list of
[7:57:56] projects. They did not fund
[7:57:57] those projects and the plan was
[7:58:01] to fund them yearly as the
[7:58:02] projects were being executed.
[7:58:04] We are about two years away
[7:58:04] from finishing the entire
[7:58:06] consent order if were able to
[7:58:14] continue on our path. We are
[7:58:15] under federal oversight that
[7:58:16] cost us money recently here
[7:58:17] that we would like to see
[7:58:18] ended. In addition to the
[7:58:19] consent order in 2007 the state
[7:58:20] passed legislation that called
[7:58:24] the ocean outfall legislation
[7:58:25] requiring us to reduce the use
[7:58:31] of ocean outfalls of our
[7:58:32] wastewater plants. The same
[7:58:33] thing there the board was
[7:58:33] required by the state to submit
[7:58:39] a plan to dep which they did.
[7:58:40] Committing to compliance again
[7:58:40] without committing the money
[7:58:41] saying we will raise it each
[7:58:48] year as needed. The rate
[7:58:48] increase that has been proposed
[7:58:49] in the mayor's budget and has
[7:58:57] been explained in this report
[7:58:58] is the amount required to go to
[7:58:59] the bond market to raise money
[7:59:00] for this year's bills. It is a
[7:59:03] 6% rate increase that will
[7:59:03] ultimately parlay into a bond
[7:59:08] yield of $435 million. That is
[7:59:09] 100% for capital improvements
[7:59:12] only no operations money. The
[7:59:13] department has done an amazing
[7:59:20] job through cutting positions.
[7:59:21] >> can we quiet down to listen
[7:59:25] to the deputy mayor? Staff?
[7:59:26] Can we quiet down because I can
[7:59:26] hear him myself. Thank you.
[7:59:29] >> the water and sewer
[7:59:30] department has done an
[7:59:36] excellent job cutting costs
[7:59:37] whether or not asking
[7:59:39] operations so the money will be
[7:59:39] for raising capital. In the
[7:59:42] event the board chooses not to
[7:59:46] approve the mayor's
[7:59:47] recommendation we have provided
[7:59:48] the report the list of projects
[7:59:51] that cannot go forward. There
[7:59:52] is a list of ocean outfall
[7:59:53] projects, consent order
[7:59:55] projects and other capital
[7:59:56] improvement needs that simply
[8:00:01] will have to be delayed or
[8:00:02] canceled. We put that in the
[8:00:03] report. We also have a letter
[8:00:04] that was distributed to you
[8:00:09] earlier today from our bond
[8:00:10] engineer who has reported that
[8:00:10] this is the minimum amount of
[8:00:17] increase to support the capital
[8:00:18] improvement needs. Our bond
[8:00:19] engineering consultant is here
[8:00:20] today if anyone wants to
[8:00:21] question them of how they
[8:00:25] helped us to determine that
[8:00:25] information. We did this
[8:00:26] report and we are happy to
[8:00:29] return at a later date with the
[8:00:36] resolution for your voting on
[8:00:37] it or we are happy to deal with
[8:00:38] it during the budget. We will
[8:00:39] take your direction on that and
[8:00:40] happy to answer any questions.
[8:00:41] >> thank you for that deputy
[8:00:48] mayor. Commissioner cohen
[8:00:49] higgins on the point of order.
[8:00:50] >> point of order that is
[8:00:54] before us is the report. So I
[8:00:54] am trying to understand
[8:00:55] procedurally what is before us?
[8:01:23] It is a report asking making a
[8:01:24] recommendation for 6% increase
[8:01:25] in fees. Is that accurate? It
[8:01:26] is a report.
[8:01:27] >> it is a report explaining
[8:01:28] the necessity of 6% in fees.
[8:01:28] It is not an official vote
[8:01:29] request today. That is why we
[8:01:30] would be more than happy to
[8:01:31] return with the resolution or
[8:01:32] in the project process.
[8:01:32] >> I see. We are having a
[8:01:33] discussion were not taking a
[8:01:34] vote on this is that correct?
[8:01:35] are you having someone move if
[8:01:36] we move the report as listed it
[8:01:40] is not an adoption of the
[8:01:41] recommendation. I want to make
[8:01:41] sure procedurally that is
[8:01:42] accurate. This is for
[8:01:42] discussion?
[8:01:43] >> this is a report only
[8:01:44] today. We will happily take
[8:01:45] the direction to come back in a
[8:01:46] resolution form or just to vote
[8:01:47] on it during the budget private
[8:01:48] -- process. Whatever the board
[8:01:48] wants.
[8:01:53] >> deputy mayor, my question
[8:01:54] is we talked about how that
[8:01:57] consent agreement impacted
[8:01:58] small businesses and put in
[8:01:59] particular small restaurants
[8:02:02] through the fall aspect of it.
[8:02:11] Month to get there -- months
[8:02:11] ago at that point you indicated
[8:02:12] if we needed to get the support
[8:02:13] obviously of the state and the
[8:02:14] federal government who I think
[8:02:20] will be supportive and
[8:02:21] particularly small businesses
[8:02:21] because the restaurants are
[8:02:22] having a very difficult time
[8:02:23] still. When are we going to
[8:02:25] get that report?
[8:02:35] >> you have been provided a
[8:02:36] report on fog. There has not
[8:02:37] been a report when the feds
[8:02:38] would consider changing the
[8:02:40] realizations -- regulations.
[8:02:47] We MAY finish the consent order
[8:02:48] and have the consent order
[8:02:48] retired quicker than we can get
[8:02:50] the answers. We have people in
[8:02:51] atlanta with epa that have told
[8:02:52] us they would consider they
[8:02:55] would respond to any fog
[8:02:57] request that we have.
[8:03:01] >> what is going to continue
[8:03:02] to happen in this county is
[8:03:05] somebody that does shakes is
[8:03:05] going to have to pay $100,000
[8:03:09] to be able to comply with what
[8:03:10] they have to comply with. We
[8:03:11] are basically going to go to
[8:03:25] broward county. I suppose is
[8:03:26] that is what you're telling us?
[8:03:27] >> no, that is not exactly
[8:03:28] what I am saying. Epa eight
[8:03:29] has indicated they have an open
[8:03:30] ear and will consider our ask
[8:03:36] about changing the floor -- fog
[8:03:37] portion of the consent order.
[8:03:38] What I am saying is we make the
[8:03:39] asking we don't get answers
[8:03:39] very quickly. It will take
[8:03:40] time for them to respond as to
[8:03:41] what exactly we are asking for.
[8:03:42] I am suggesting the most
[8:03:47] important thing that we can do
[8:03:48] is finish the consent order
[8:03:48] projects and get the whole
[8:03:49] order lifted because what you
[8:03:50] are mentioning is one impact of
[8:03:51] the consent order that has
[8:03:52] everyone hands tied.
[8:03:56] >> it is impacting the small
[8:03:57] businesses in our community.
[8:03:58] My question would be the
[8:04:03] following, which one
[8:04:04] consultants can we actually
[8:04:05] talk 2 to see if anything could
[8:04:12] happen with epa? It is great
[8:04:13] that you think it is going to
[8:04:17] be two years that is fantastic
[8:04:18] but that doesn't solve the
[8:04:19] problem now for the restaurants
[8:04:20] trying to open up in miami
[8:04:22] gardens for example. They MAY
[8:04:23] have to come up with an
[8:04:23] incredible amount of money and
[8:04:32] is not going to be able to and
[8:04:33] sometimes as been happening
[8:04:34] with you so we had a hearing
[8:04:34] even a gentleman from north
[8:04:35] carolina was trying to open up
[8:04:36] a restaurant. It is
[8:04:37] practically impossible and I
[8:04:38] MAY have to go to another
[8:04:39] county in florida. I'm all for
[8:04:41] complying but I think at least
[8:04:45] I think we have a fighting
[8:04:46] chance with the PRESIDENT Of
[8:04:47] the epa. Number one and number
[8:04:48] two nothing precludes us from
[8:04:52] making because you can amend an
[8:04:53] agreement. As long as the
[8:04:54] parties agree to do so and
[8:05:01] still continue with the rest of
[8:05:04] the consent decree and a couple
[8:05:06] of years on the road we can
[8:05:08] hopefully lift it from the 30
[8:05:13] year situation. I am not going
[8:05:16] to belabor the point. I think
[8:05:17] there's a way we can get this
[8:05:19] done. It is really killing the
[8:05:24] small businesses right now and
[8:05:25] it is just not a good thing.
[8:05:26] >> we agree with you
[8:05:30] commissioner bermudez and they
[8:05:34] have been leading a cost
[8:05:38] department to reduce the cost
[8:05:39] of the way the law is written
[8:05:48] today. And also seeking relief
[8:05:49] from the epa. So I can commit
[8:05:50] to you that is active and going
[8:05:51] on now. We can meet and give
[8:05:52] you separate reports on all of
[8:05:52] the things that he is doing in
[8:05:56] that space. But it is a good
[8:05:57] point to highlight that problem
[8:05:58] isn't going to go away with epa
[8:05:59] as long as we are under consent
[8:06:02] orders.
[8:06:03] >> through the chair I want to
[8:06:04] add a point here. I am
[8:06:05] checking whether a federal
[8:06:06] lobbyists are working on this
[8:06:12] case. Obviously, we support it
[8:06:13] but we do not want to
[8:06:14] compromise our ability to get
[8:06:15] out from under this. But as
[8:06:16] far as being more active and
[8:06:18] promoting that change, we
[8:06:19] certainly will look into that
[8:06:23] and I would like to do that.
[8:06:24] >> all right. Any further
[8:06:25] discussion on the report?
[8:06:31] >> I will move the report.
[8:06:32] And I guess we will have this
[8:06:32] back in SEPTEMBER? Is that
[8:06:33] correct?
[8:06:36] >> as you MAY direct
[8:06:37] commissioner. It can be in
[8:06:37] september as a resolution or in
[8:06:38] the budget however you direct.
[8:06:41] >> to clarify, we would need
[8:06:44] action on the part of the board
[8:06:47] to increase the fee. We also
[8:06:51] want to note that solid waste
[8:06:55] is today the deadline if you
[8:06:56] were to increase solid waste.
[8:06:57] I just put it out there.
[8:06:59] >> can be in the budget?
[8:07:04] >> apparently solid waste we
[8:07:04] learned last night from the
[8:07:07] county attorney, we can only
[8:07:15] decrease we cannot increase it
[8:07:16] if we held it flat which is the
[8:07:17] current status and maybe we can
[8:07:18] ask them to clarify. There
[8:07:20] were any inclination to address
[8:07:21] some of the concerns that have
[8:07:22] been raised about having to cut
[8:07:24] illegal dumping enforcement and
[8:07:25] other items this would be the
[8:07:31] date to do it.
[8:07:32] >> can we first deal with the
[8:07:32] water?
[8:07:33] >> I think the water is
[8:07:34] something that can come in the
[8:07:34] budget right?
[8:07:36] >> in the budget or separate
[8:07:38] resolution however you direct.
[8:07:39] >> is it okay for you to move
[8:07:42] the item just to adopt the
[8:07:43] report? In whatever
[8:07:44] recommendation comes in a
[8:07:48] budget is that fair?
[8:07:51] >> I'm looking to the
[8:07:53] administration to make sure we
[8:07:54] don't jeopardize the dunns
[8:07:54] creek.
[8:08:03] >> we spoke earlier with the
[8:08:04] chair about dealing with a lot
[8:08:05] of these rate increases without
[8:08:06] bogging down the budget. That
[8:08:12] is why we brought these early
[8:08:13] to you. We are happy to stay
[8:08:14] on that path and bring it at
[8:08:15] the next meeting a form of a
[8:08:15] resolution or we can change if
[8:08:17] you'd rather not having a
[8:08:18] separate budget. We are trying
[8:08:18] to keep it from being such a
[8:08:19] time consumption and budget a.
[8:08:21] >> to not tie your hands in
[8:08:24] any direction today if we adopt
[8:08:30] the report and don't direct in
[8:08:30] the form of a resolution on the
[8:08:31] budget is it at your discretion
[8:08:32] how you would like to bring it?
[8:08:35] >> how ever you want us to we
[8:08:35] will.
[8:08:40] >> let's discuss it.
[8:08:41] >> it is reflected in the
[8:08:41] proposed budget.
[8:08:42] >> okay perfect. With that
[8:08:47] there's a motion by
[8:08:48] commissioner steinberg and
[8:08:49] second by commissioner gilbert.
[8:08:53] >> just be mindful if you
[8:08:54] include this in the proposed
[8:08:59] budget if you do decide to
[8:08:59] adopt something that is not in
[8:09:00] the proposed budget, we are
[8:09:01] going to be forced to change it
[8:09:03] on the fly during the
[8:09:04] discussion. That is why the
[8:09:05] resolution is probably
[8:09:08] preferred so the resolution
[8:09:09] then allows them to work and
[8:09:11] what we have said into the
[8:09:13] budget to a balanced budget. I
[8:09:15] am not telling you all how to
[8:09:17] do it but if we get into a
[8:09:22] situation where they put it in
[8:09:23] the proposed budget at 6% and
[8:09:26] we decide to do 2% or 3% or 1%
[8:09:29] or nothing then they are going
[8:09:30] to force a recalculation of
[8:09:33] that budget on the spot. And
[8:09:37] so that is probably not in us
[8:09:42] being efficient and doing stuff
[8:09:43] expeditiously on budget time.
[8:09:44] I would encourage us to do the
[8:09:47] resolution at some point.
[8:09:48] > you are right but for
[8:09:49] every year that happens. On
[8:09:53] different things. And then
[8:09:54] they are going to be prepared
[8:09:55] either way to make adjustments
[8:09:58] that they. I hear you. Again,
[8:09:59] by not doing anything they can
[8:10:03] still bring a resolution. It
[8:10:04] is not preventing you from
[8:10:05] bringing a resolution and
[8:10:06] placing it on the agenda.
[8:10:07] Awesome, sounds good. Over
[8:10:09] motion by commissioner
[8:10:12] steinberg a second by gilbert.
[8:10:13] Signify by saying aye. All
[8:10:16] oppose nay. She'll the report
[8:10:22] adopted. -- show the report
[8:10:29] adopted. He doesn't want to
[8:10:30] adopt the report that is his
[8:10:32] prerogative. That is it for
[8:10:33] the polis right?
[8:10:37] >> do you want us on the solid
[8:10:39] waste item or no? We had an
[8:10:44] item today.
[8:10:44] >> no, go ahead.
[8:10:50] >> I think probably were not
[8:10:51] able to clarify before now is
[8:10:53] that because the solid waste if
[8:10:57] we choose to increase the solid
[8:11:11] waste fee -- [Indiscernible].
[8:11:12] We can go lower or stay the
[8:11:12] same but since it was
[8:11:13] determined by this board that
[8:11:14] we were not going to raise the
[8:11:15] solid waste fee they have been
[8:11:15] a number of people voiced
[8:11:16] concerns about what cuts are
[8:11:17] coming in solid waste area so
[8:11:18] in full transparency we are
[8:11:19] happy to go forward raising it
[8:11:19] or not.
[8:11:20] >> I will entertain a
[8:11:22] conversation on it. Go ahead.
[8:11:27] >> thank you. Everyone is
[8:11:27] getting tired. On the solid
[8:11:28] waste we really haven't had an
[8:11:30] opportunity to work on the
[8:11:31] budget. The reason I brought
[8:11:33] the item as a flat item is
[8:11:35] because I think that there are
[8:11:38] certain changes to our solid
[8:11:44] waste department that we can
[8:11:45] bring in order to keep it flat.
[8:11:46] I have been working with my
[8:11:47] district about making some
[8:11:50] changes. I think throughout
[8:11:51] the budget process we can show
[8:11:51] how we can do both things. We
[8:11:59] would have to change some of
[8:11:59] the things that we do in solid
[8:12:00] waste but it would not impact
[8:12:01] our ability to pick up solid
[8:12:02] waste. So that is the reason
[8:12:04] why I brought the item for
[8:12:05] flat. Last year you know it
[8:12:17] was all very -- we spent time
[8:12:18] on the solid waste fee. It's
[8:12:19] something that people feel
[8:12:19] strongly about. This year it
[8:12:20] will be the same but I am happy
[8:12:21] to work on it like we did in
[8:12:22] AUGUST. When I don't recommend
[8:12:25] is for us to agree on raising
[8:12:26] it and then to lower it.
[8:12:27] Because the trim is where
[8:12:28] people see. We had this issue
[8:12:31] last year which is why this
[8:12:33] year I brought it flat.
[8:12:38] >> commissioner cohen higgins?
[8:12:42] >> thank you MR. Chair.
[8:12:44] Again, procedurally the item
[8:12:55] past flat, correct? We are
[8:12:56] discussing it because today
[8:12:56] essentially is the deadline
[8:12:57] you're basically sending us
[8:12:58] caution, right? Today is the
[8:12:59] deadline should there be a
[8:13:01] discussion about entertaining a
[8:13:02] potential increase in the solid
[8:13:03] waste fees which is what you
[8:13:04] all have recommended correct?
[8:13:06] In that spirit and you all are
[8:13:19] doing things differently now
[8:13:20] and I have noticed it. You are
[8:13:21] doing it on the water and
[8:13:22] sewer. You did it all solid
[8:13:23] waste. You did on waste to
[8:13:23] energy. You're issuing these
[8:13:24] memo saying this is what is
[8:13:25] going to be cut should you not
[8:13:26] adopt our recommendation.
[8:13:27] Right? I would like for you to
[8:13:28] go over what it is that you all
[8:13:32] are representing will be cut
[8:13:32] from solid waste as a result of
[8:13:33] you all night getting the
[8:13:34] recommended rate increase that
[8:13:35] you all are requesting. I
[8:13:38] think we need to understand and
[8:13:44] digest what it is that you are
[8:13:44] saying or what you all are
[8:13:45] proposing will be lost as a
[8:13:46] result of your recommendation
[8:13:47] are being adopted by this
[8:13:47] board?
[8:13:50] >> while you pull that up I
[8:13:58] think the same could be made
[8:13:59] for water and sewer memo.
[8:14:03] >> it is extraordinarily
[8:14:05] detailed and again these are
[8:14:12] projects. We are not confused
[8:14:13] about the necessity of these
[8:14:14] projects. You all are
[8:14:15] messaging differently. I hear
[8:14:18] you. I understand. If you're
[8:14:19] asking us to essentially
[8:14:19] reconsider what has already
[8:14:22] been passed, a flat rate speak
[8:14:31] to us of what will be affected
[8:14:32] should the rate stay flat.
[8:14:33] >> we issued a memo about $4.6
[8:14:37] million in cost reductions that
[8:14:38] we would have to achieve. 1.5
[8:14:39] million of that was illegal
[8:14:41] dumping and homeless encampment
[8:14:47] program. A million for code
[8:14:48] enforcement in several hundred
[8:14:49] thousand litter pickup.
[8:14:52] $900,000 in training,
[8:14:53] accounting and $500,000 in
[8:14:54] capital projects is what we
[8:15:01] would not do this year at a
[8:15:01] flat rate.
[8:15:02] > and that is a result of
[8:15:03] you still having funds in your
[8:15:04] carryover account that can't
[8:15:05] cover those costs? I want to
[8:15:07] be clear.
[8:15:09] >> I'm not sure the question.
[8:15:12] We have reserves but our
[8:15:13] reserves are low. There still
[8:15:18] money reserves but we believe
[8:15:19] our reserves need to be added
[8:15:21] to considering the situation
[8:15:35] with epa now and with fema over
[8:15:36] any hurricanes we are expected
[8:15:37] to have a higher portion of the
[8:15:38] cost. We think we need to add
[8:15:39] more to the reserve. We did
[8:15:40] not consider taking money from
[8:15:40] reserves to pay operating
[8:15:41] costs.
[8:15:42] >> was the percent increase
[8:15:43] that passed last year for solid
[8:15:43] waste?
[8:15:44] >> I think it was about one.
[8:15:55] I don't remember the exact
[8:15:56] number. I think it was a 0.7.
[8:15:57] >> this year you are
[8:15:58] recommending what percent
[8:15:58] increase?
[8:15:59] >> we brought an item for 2%
[8:16:00] because the board previously
[8:16:01] directed us to bring an item to
[8:16:01] you for cpi. We brought you an
[8:16:02] item for 2% even though our
[8:16:05] actual cost of operation
[8:16:05] exceeded 2%. We found cost
[8:16:06] savings and cuts to get it down
[8:16:07] to the 2% cpi that the board
[8:16:08] directed us to bring. So we
[8:16:09] can meet all of our obligations
[8:16:13] at 2% anything less there has
[8:16:13] to be something cuts.
[8:16:18] > the 2% represent the $4.6
[8:16:19] million that you ran off the
[8:16:19] list of items that would be
[8:16:25] cut? But service like trash
[8:16:26] collection and pickup would not
[8:16:27] be impacted?
[8:16:28] >> we will continue to pick up
[8:16:28] trash it is the ancillary
[8:16:31] service and enforcement.
[8:16:40] >> the list you enumerated is
[8:16:41] in consideration of what we
[8:16:42] have talked about on previous
[8:16:43] budget conversations I.E.
[8:16:43] Salary staying flat going into
[8:16:45] the next fiscal year? What's
[8:16:46] that is correct. We have
[8:16:47] accounted for zero increases in
[8:16:48] salaries in our budget.
[8:16:48] >> thank you MR. Chair.
[8:16:56] >> commissioner gilbert? You
[8:16:57] are recognized.
[8:16:59] >> thank you MR. CHAIRMAN. We
[8:17:05] struggled with this every year
[8:17:06] and I understand why we
[8:17:11] struggle with it every year.
[8:17:12] It is not necessarily that
[8:17:13] complicated especially when we
[8:17:15] bring back recommendations and
[8:17:20] the administration brings back
[8:17:21] recommendations that ally with
[8:17:26] the cpi. -- align with the
[8:17:31] cpi. The gas goes up for the
[8:17:32] trucks it cost more to operate
[8:17:33] the trucks. It cost more to
[8:17:40] pick up the garbage. If our
[8:17:44] labor costs go up for the
[8:17:47] people who operate the trucks
[8:17:50] that the gas went up than the
[8:17:56] cost to pick up trash goes up.
[8:18:00] It is a fee driven system. I
[8:18:03] do not want to pay more. But
[8:18:07] what this board did that
[8:18:15] addressed years of imbalance
[8:18:15] was bring the rate back in
[8:18:17] alignment. I think we did that
[8:18:23] two years ago. It might seems
[8:18:23] like a little bit now because
[8:18:27] it is they are recommending 2%
[8:18:28] and you want to keep it flat,
[8:18:29] is no big deal it is just $4.6
[8:18:31] million. It doesn't seem like
[8:18:34] that but it probably did not
[8:18:36] seem like that to prior
[8:18:37] commissions when they did it
[8:18:41] also. And the aggregate effect
[8:18:43] of years of not doing that
[8:18:51] placed our system in the rears.
[8:18:52] And the future commission it
[8:18:55] was his this time and it will
[8:18:56] be someone else the next time
[8:19:02] had to make a really big
[8:19:02] increase. And so let me just
[8:19:06] suggest that we are not being
[8:19:06] when we do that. We are not
[8:19:10] being fair the future rate
[8:19:16] payers. Because they are going
[8:19:17] to have to absorb the cost at
[8:19:23] some point for the increase in
[8:19:24] gas and labor this year. We're
[8:19:25] going to have to make up the
[8:19:26] money at some point. We will
[8:19:27] trim some down and then we will
[8:19:33] not be able to anymore. Then
[8:19:34] we don't want to cut service
[8:19:35] because people are used to two
[8:19:36] pickups a week. People still
[8:19:40] want illegal dumping picked up.
[8:19:41] People still want code
[8:19:41] enforcement and people still
[8:19:42] want these things. And so at
[8:19:43] some point you will have to
[8:19:46] reduce the service or you will
[8:19:47] have to make an adjustment to
[8:19:47] align the service with the
[8:19:57] feet. -- fee. We can do
[8:19:58] whatever the board's pleasure
[8:20:00] is. I am always intrigued by
[8:20:04] commissioner regalado
[8:20:04] proposition by I can find ways
[8:20:10] to reduce and it is always
[8:20:10] interesting how her and
[8:20:11] demonstration get together and
[8:20:12] it always comes back somewhere
[8:20:13] like in between what they said
[8:20:18] and what she said. But if you
[8:20:21] set the rate today and you
[8:20:31] can't go any higher than
[8:20:32] whether the cpi ends of being,
[8:20:33] we know the cpi something the
[8:20:34] matter with the cut is. The
[8:20:36] cpi has to be something. Even
[8:20:37] though they are reduced in some
[8:20:38] areas they are saying it is
[8:20:40] already reduced. That is fine,
[8:20:40] okay. So right now they are
[8:20:44] asking for 2% even though it is
[8:20:45] technically more than 2%.
[8:20:47] Let's say she is a brilliant
[8:20:54] cutter and making things
[8:20:55] efficient and she could stand
[8:20:56] in half, it is still 1% and you
[8:20:57] have left the system and
[8:21:00] balanced. And so I just want
[8:21:01] us to appreciate the fact that
[8:21:03] sometimes being fiscally
[8:21:05] conservative means you actually
[8:21:10] figure out what the actual cost
[8:21:13] is and charge it. Because
[8:21:18] there's a component of being
[8:21:19] fiscally conservative and that
[8:21:20] means you are being fiscally
[8:21:21] responsible. So they really
[8:21:26] want to be responsible -- so if
[8:21:27] you really want to be
[8:21:30] responsible and they cut the
[8:21:35] fee, the residents if you
[8:21:38] really want to do that and say
[8:21:40] this is all we are willing for
[8:21:47] this fee to be, what can you do
[8:21:48] with this? They reduces
[8:21:49] services and we go from there.
[8:21:50] The problem is that is every
[8:21:50] year they will have to reduce
[8:21:53] the services more. That is
[8:21:57] going to be the challenge so
[8:22:00] this is more a philosophical
[8:22:00] conversation that we probably
[8:22:02] should and we did address when
[8:22:05] we told them to bring us back
[8:22:09] the recommendation of cpi. I
[8:22:10] was going to say what we should
[8:22:13] have this philosophical
[8:22:14] conversation but we did have
[8:22:15] this philosophical
[8:22:20] conversation. And so now they
[8:22:21] are bringing us back what we
[8:22:22] told them to bring us back
[8:22:26] after they cut and we are
[8:22:27] saying we still won't do it.
[8:22:30] And so that is the challenge
[8:22:31] that puts the administration
[8:22:40] and it puts us where we have
[8:22:40] the exact same conversation
[8:22:42] every year. I guess it might
[8:22:45] not be insanity even though we
[8:22:51] say it is.
[8:22:52] >> commissioner, let's move
[8:22:53] on. Here's what we can do. We
[8:23:01] can move on or we can
[8:23:01] reconsider what we approved
[8:23:02] earlier on the flat rate. And
[8:23:03] have it re-notice and we
[8:23:06] discussed it on first --
[8:23:09] SEPTEMBER 1. We can move on
[8:23:10] with what we approved today
[8:23:27] which is a five letter n. I
[8:23:28] will encourage we make a
[8:23:29] decision on what direction we
[8:23:30] want to go in.
[8:23:31] >> I get it and I appreciate
[8:23:32] that commissioner gilbert. We
[8:23:33] always have this conversation.
[8:23:34] Last year we got the department
[8:23:34] to make some cuts. I think
[8:23:35] this year we have to get the
[8:23:36] department to change the way it
[8:23:37] does certain things and hasn't
[8:23:38] done that. I brought a lot of
[8:23:39] items asking this department to
[8:23:40] make more revenue and it is
[8:23:40] going to take something like
[8:23:41] this to push them into that
[8:23:42] uncomfortable space. The
[8:23:43] reality is while we talk about
[8:23:46] all the things that are want to
[8:23:47] be cut, I was upset when I
[8:23:48] found out that we ended up
[8:23:52] paying for the city of miami's
[8:23:53] fifa trash. We were not
[8:24:01] obligated to do that. It was
[8:24:02] over $300,000 that we are
[8:24:03] paying. I think we should get
[8:24:04] that back from the city of
[8:24:04] miami. That is one of the
[8:24:05] things that we need to discuss
[8:24:06] because we approved this budget
[8:24:10] and we are giving this
[8:24:11] draconian list of things.
[8:24:12] There are other things. There
[8:24:13] are other revenues that we
[8:24:14] talked about. There's many --
[8:24:15] many dumps and changing the way
[8:24:16] we do things. There is this
[8:24:16] constant pushback on changing
[8:24:19] the way that we do solid waste.
[8:24:23] I think this year we hold them
[8:24:24] flat and make the changes. 4.6
[8:24:30] is not back -- not that big of
[8:24:31] a deal. If we change some of
[8:24:37] the ways we do this by
[8:24:38] naturally curtail some of the
[8:24:39] illegal dumping in some of the
[8:24:40] things were spending money on.
[8:24:41] I would tell you to hold it
[8:24:46] this is different from water
[8:24:46] and sewer and it is not a
[8:24:47] federal issue and not a consent
[8:24:48] issue. This is choices that we
[8:24:54] are making a solid waste to do
[8:24:54] certain things a certain way.
[8:24:55] There are other options and we
[8:24:56] could do better. We are not
[8:24:57] being pushed to do better.
[8:25:00] >> that said yes commissioner
[8:25:01] steinberg?
[8:25:02] >> I think there are benefits
[8:25:05] in having this conversation. I
[8:25:09] think it is important for us to
[8:25:10] look at all sides of this. I
[8:25:11] guess this is a question for
[8:25:13] the administration or the
[8:25:15] attorneys. If we were to
[8:25:25] reconsider the item in
[8:25:26] SEPTEMBER I think SEPTEMBER 1
[8:25:26] that still gives us time
[8:25:27] because the tram notices
[8:25:28] SEPTEMBER 15 is the deadline
[8:25:28] correct?
[8:25:32] >> it is not the tram, the
[8:25:32] statute that we travel to put
[8:25:35] it on a tax bill and that
[8:25:41] requires to adopt it on
[8:25:41] SEPTEMBER 15.
[8:25:44] >> it has been a long day with
[8:25:57] cream or whatever he got. If
[8:25:58] he were to reconsider to have
[8:25:58] the discussion in full in
[8:26:02] SEPTEMBER could be earmarked to
[8:26:07] commissioner regalado! -- 14b1
[8:26:12] -- 14b1 point and you mentioned
[8:26:13] something about the reserves.
[8:26:13] We don't have any reserves
[8:26:15] right now. We could go to that
[8:26:29] cpi and put a portion of that
[8:26:30] into the reserves that they
[8:26:31] cannot touch until we also
[8:26:33] figure out about better policy
[8:26:34] moving forward and that is
[8:26:35] something we have a discussion
[8:26:36] about. That is my thought
[8:26:36] about maybe we stay flat. We
[8:26:38] are not committing to anything
[8:26:38] but I think that is one reason
[8:26:39] that we can look at is to the
[8:26:40] reconsideration.
[8:26:44] >> I guess this is a question.
[8:26:47] We are all on the same page and
[8:26:48] understand and we have to pay
[8:26:53] for it. It is fairly
[8:26:54] disheartening when we hear
[8:26:55] everything keeps on going up
[8:26:56] but we keep everything flat and
[8:27:01] still of cost to the residents
[8:27:02] and still cause and we have to
[8:27:03] bear it. There are times where
[8:27:07] we need to see change and we
[8:27:08] need to ensure they come back
[8:27:12] with these changes. I agree
[8:27:13] with you that we have asked
[8:27:14] previous times to come up with
[8:27:17] certain changes to the way that
[8:27:18] we try to monetize and collect
[8:27:21] trash. And we haven't seen a
[8:27:22] lot of traction on that.
[8:27:27] However, there has to be
[8:27:29] somewhere to land his plane.
[8:27:31] We do have to be honest with
[8:27:38] our voters. Maybe if we can
[8:27:39] get this administration to come
[8:27:40] back with a different plan from
[8:27:41] here to SEPTEMBER we can try to
[8:27:46] monetize. I am with you
[8:27:47] commissioner steinberg. Maybe
[8:27:48] that is the path that we go
[8:27:49] compressing the time and by
[8:27:52] SEPTEMBER they should come up
[8:27:52] with a plan for us and that
[8:27:53] gives us flexibility to see
[8:27:54] whether or not. I am okay with
[8:27:58] going back to my taxpayers and
[8:28:02] to the voters and asked for an
[8:28:03] increase when there are changes
[8:28:04] on our end. I would hate to go
[8:28:07] back to the voters of hialeah
[8:28:10] and asked for an increase
[8:28:11] anywhere when we haven't done
[8:28:12] any changes. We haven't made
[8:28:18] any movement forward to make
[8:28:19] sure that we are better
[8:28:20] stewards of the money we
[8:28:21] collect. To your point
[8:28:24] commissioner, they MAY be a
[8:28:25] happy medium and maybe you guys
[8:28:25] can help me articulate that and
[8:28:32] we could try to do that.
[8:28:35] >> are we doing this?
[8:28:39] >> just a quick comment. I
[8:28:47] know our committee the one that
[8:28:48] commissioner and I chair has
[8:28:52] decided to take a deep dive
[8:28:53] into all of the departments
[8:28:53] including solid waste. Despite
[8:28:58] the fact it is an enterprise
[8:28:59] fund, we said that is the one
[8:28:59] that gives us the most
[8:29:03] heartburn. And so you're
[8:29:04] committed MR. CHAIRMAN to doing
[8:29:06] that in AUGUST. Remember we
[8:29:07] said we wouldn't take a recess
[8:29:08] because we really wanted to
[8:29:09] look at all of the county
[8:29:12] departments that touch general
[8:29:13] revenue but also this one in
[8:29:16] particular. We are excited to
[8:29:19] do that work and I'm sure we
[8:29:20] are going to find ways in which
[8:29:22] things can change because we
[8:29:23] agree things have to be done
[8:29:26] differently. Unless we explore
[8:29:30] that, we are not being faithful
[8:29:32] to our fiduciary duty. I just
[8:29:35] wanted to point out that is
[8:29:36] what we will be doing in
[8:29:36] AUGUST.
[8:29:41] >> okay so here is what I
[8:29:43] don't want to do. I do not
[8:29:48] want to spend another two hours
[8:29:52] in SEPTEMBER 1. What I will
[8:29:52] suggest is let's take a
[8:29:53] struggle if there's an appetite
[8:30:00] to change. Reconsidering is
[8:30:01] one thing and I think we have
[8:30:03] the votes to reconsider. Is
[8:30:05] there an appetite to actually
[8:30:06] increase anything other than a
[8:30:15] flat rate on solid waste? We
[8:30:16] could do by raise of hands.
[8:30:17] Who has an appetite to even
[8:30:20] discuss the possibility?
[8:30:21] You're not saying you are going
[8:30:22] to increase it but the
[8:30:23] possibility of increase in
[8:30:24] anything over a flat rate for
[8:30:27] solid waste? By show of hands
[8:30:28] is there anyone that would like
[8:30:32] to have a conversation? We
[8:30:33] don't have a report but there's
[8:30:34] no one that is inclined to hear
[8:30:39] when out why discuss it for two
[8:30:40] hours if at the end it is not
[8:30:44] going to happen?
[8:30:44] >> I said it clear in the
[8:30:45] record I am willing to
[8:30:54] entertain it as long as there
[8:30:55] are changes from demonstration
[8:30:56] it comes to the board.
[8:30:57] >> that is what I'm saying.
[8:30:58] You said it right. There some
[8:30:59] that with the right
[8:30:59] recommendations are not going
[8:31:00] to entertain a rate increase.
[8:31:01] I'm sure that gilbert might
[8:31:04] entertain it because he said or
[8:31:05] alluded to it. Senator garcia
[8:31:07] you have alluded to it so that
[8:31:10] is three. I see commissioner
[8:31:15] regalado saying no. I don't
[8:31:19] see it. It is not that I don't
[8:31:24] want it, I don't see it. Let's
[8:31:25] avoid a two hour conversation
[8:31:26] on SEPTEMBER 1 and move on with
[8:31:30] our life. That said, I have
[8:31:31] some motions pending and then
[8:31:34] we have discussion items.
[8:31:36] Let's do the discussion items.
[8:31:41] We will do motions after.
[8:31:48] Let's do discussion items. 6a
[8:31:51] one is an item I put on the
[8:31:56] agenda to discuss the ev fleet.
[8:31:57] We supported an item today and
[8:32:02] we voted on an item today and
[8:32:03] commissioner regalado spoke on
[8:32:03] it for second and we had a
[8:32:04] discussion item. If you wanted
[8:32:05] to jump in it but I put this on
[8:32:09] just because I think most of my
[8:32:12] colleagues share the same
[8:32:12] sentiment and the mayor shares
[8:32:17] it to that it is frustrating to
[8:32:18] have the experience of having
[8:32:20] gone through what we are going
[8:32:21] through with all of these
[8:32:22] vehicles that are just parked
[8:32:26] in a lot. What is it like 69?
[8:32:30] Right? And maybe last time I
[8:32:30] checked only three b
[8:32:31] five of
[8:32:31] them were operational out of
[8:32:35] the 69? Deputy mayor and or
[8:32:44] the mayor if you can give us a
[8:32:45] brief kind of a summary as to
[8:32:46] where we are? I MAY have
[8:32:47] questions of the attorneys
[8:32:47] thereafter but if you can give
[8:32:49] us an update to where we are?
[8:32:51] Ultimately, the underlying
[8:32:54] sentiment on my end anyways is
[8:32:56] just hurts to have all of this
[8:32:59] money parked in a parking lot.
[8:33:00] I know I am not alone in my
[8:33:05] sentiment. What are our
[8:33:05] options? What can we do? Can
[8:33:08] we sell them for parts? Give
[8:33:09] us the lay of the land of where
[8:33:10] we are today? Some articles
[8:33:15] have come up and there hasn't
[8:33:15] been discussion publicly other
[8:33:16] than the reporter. Can you
[8:33:17] bring us up to speed?
[8:33:22] >> yes MR. CHAIRMAN. Let me
[8:33:23] provide historical facts that
[8:33:24] are important for the
[8:33:24] conversation. In 2018 the
[8:33:26] board of county commissioners
[8:33:27] directed the then mayor to
[8:33:33] increase its electric bus
[8:33:34] fleet. The following year in
[8:33:40] 2019 that then mayor
[8:33:40] recommended to the commission
[8:33:41] that approved purchasing these
[8:33:44] buses. The bottom line is the
[8:33:45] pro terra buses the company
[8:33:49] went bankrupt because they were
[8:33:50] failed technology. I will go
[8:33:52] so far to say this is it
[8:33:53] excellent example of how we
[8:33:55] need to be more careful buying
[8:33:57] technology. Clearly the mayor
[8:34:07] at the time on a cutting edge
[8:34:08] technology and it was bleeding
[8:34:09] edge. The company went
[8:34:10] bankrupt and the buses don't
[8:34:10] run. We have a few still
[8:34:11] running. Subsequent to that
[8:34:12] the county did by 100 electric
[8:34:13] buses from another manufacturer
[8:34:19] and their performing
[8:34:20] outstandingly. They're doing a
[8:34:20] fine job. It is not the fact
[8:34:21] that they are electric that
[8:34:22] they are the problem the
[8:34:23] problem is we bought buses from
[8:34:26] an unproven company and they
[8:34:27] failed miserably. Where we
[8:34:28] stand today more to your
[8:34:28] question a lot of the buses
[8:34:35] were purchased with federal
[8:34:36] dollars. The department
[8:34:37] requested permission from the
[8:34:38] federal government to dispose
[8:34:39] of these in some way to give us
[8:34:40] some benefits and we are
[8:34:40] waiting on their answer. In
[8:34:41] the meantime we have a handful
[8:34:42] of buses running and we are
[8:34:43] using the majority of them to
[8:34:45] scavenge parts to keep running.
[8:34:50] So yes the department and the
[8:34:51] county attorney has filed suit
[8:34:52] on our behalf. We are
[8:35:01] chastened lawsuits to try to
[8:35:01] recover money. It is a
[8:35:02] bankrupt company so I don't
[8:35:03] know how much we are going to
[8:35:04] recover. We are chasing that
[8:35:05] and looking for the feds to
[8:35:06] lead us to pose -- dispose of
[8:35:06] the buses.
[8:35:09] >> the vast majority and I
[8:35:11] don't know what the percentage
[8:35:14] is was purchased with federal
[8:35:14] dollars needless to say the
[8:35:15] federal dollars could've been
[8:35:19] implement elsewhere. We are
[8:35:23] not responsible for paying the
[8:35:24] federal dollars right?
[8:35:32] >> not that I am aware.
[8:35:33] >> it is wasted money we
[8:35:34] could've invested elsewhere and
[8:35:35] a lot of it. We do not have to
[8:35:36] repay it right?
[8:35:37] >> to be clear MR. Chair we
[8:35:38] have made the application and
[8:35:39] we have had some positive
[8:35:40] responses. But it has not been
[8:35:42] formally concluded. Bruce, do
[8:35:44] you want to add to that?
[8:35:45] >> MR. CHAIRMAN typically when
[8:36:00] you get fta grant to buy buses,
[8:36:01] you agree to utilize buses for
[8:36:02] the use for life. That depends
[8:36:02] on the type of bus 10 years b
[8:36:03] 12 years etc. We are in the
[8:36:06] process and we have applied for
[8:36:07] fta to allow us to retire these
[8:36:12] buses that are not operating.
[8:36:13] Prior to what would have
[8:36:14] normally use of life without
[8:36:15] penalty and without having to
[8:36:17] reimburse fta we have not
[8:36:29] received an official response
[8:36:29] or approval yet.
[8:36:30] >> this is a national problem
[8:36:31] to the commission. We are not
[8:36:32] the only city that experienced
[8:36:33] this. We have been attempting
[8:36:34] to repurposed parts and we
[8:36:35] could give more detail about
[8:36:36] that from our director. But
[8:36:36] obviously we want to do
[8:36:43] everything in our power. We
[8:36:43] also sued the company as you
[8:36:44] know when the company went
[8:36:45] bankrupt there was a successor
[8:36:46] company. We were working with
[8:36:52] them and I -- they provide some
[8:36:53] spare parts but eventually we
[8:36:54] did a lawsuit.
[8:37:00] >> one with -- when was that
[8:37:04] to forgive the timeline and
[8:37:05] allow us to dispose of that?
[8:37:09] >> I attended a meeting a few
[8:37:11] weeks ago but I don't know when
[8:37:15] it was actually submitted.
[8:37:16] >> it has been several months
[8:37:17] we have been working through
[8:37:22] the request to relinquish the
[8:37:24] federal interest on the buses
[8:37:27] that were funded through the
[8:37:31] federal transit administration.
[8:37:32] We have had successful meetings
[8:37:34] but we are still waiting for
[8:37:35] their final response. It has
[8:37:37] been several months where we
[8:37:38] have been interacting with fta
[8:37:41] for them to release their
[8:37:42] financial interest.
[8:37:46] >> I don't know if my
[8:37:47] colleagues have any questions
[8:37:49] on this discussion. Up until
[8:37:50] some resolution is given can we
[8:37:52] receive to the administration
[8:37:56] can we receive quarterly
[8:37:59] reports? Is that fair?
[8:38:00] Quarterly reports on the status
[8:38:03] update? I think I know this
[8:38:04] gets a little trickier but if
[8:38:07] we can also receive some sort
[8:38:14] of safeguard guardrails for
[8:38:15] future purchases of this kind
[8:38:17] so that we don't repeat
[8:38:19] history? And of course that is
[8:38:27] the policy the -- decision.
[8:38:30] Can we have maybe a memo
[8:38:33] establishing recommended
[8:38:34] guardrails to when we make
[8:38:35] these policy decisions and
[8:38:41] directives up here, I know what
[8:38:42] gilbert is thinking don't tell
[8:38:42] us how to govern. But I think
[8:38:49] we need some measures, right?
[8:38:50] As soon not allow history to be
[8:38:58] repeated. As we move forward
[8:38:59] even things outside of
[8:38:59] transportation and outside of
[8:39:00] buses and things of that
[8:39:01] nature. But we are coming up
[8:39:02] not coming up we are here today
[8:39:13] in a world where ai is ever
[8:39:14] changing, technology and we are
[8:39:15] going to be making these
[8:39:16] decision of his investing in a
[8:39:17] lot of new technology. We are
[8:39:18] doing it already and we're
[8:39:18] going to continue doing it. We
[8:39:19] have to do it smartly and with
[8:39:20] the right consultants and the
[8:39:23] right expertise. If we can
[8:39:24] have some sort of guardrail? I
[8:39:25] know it is tricky because
[8:39:26] everything is changing so
[8:39:30] often. If that is feasible
[8:39:31] matter mayor?
[8:39:31] >> thank you MR. Chair.
[8:39:32] Obviously, there's a lot of new
[8:39:47] things in the market place. We
[8:39:48] are always being asking in a
[8:39:49] solid ways and many vendors
[8:39:49] have new ideas. As was
[8:39:50] mentioned by deputy mayor, we
[8:39:51] want make sure there's a track
[8:39:52] record. We do not want to be
[8:39:53] the guinea pigs. In this
[8:39:54] particular case going backwards
[8:39:55] in time, I was a commissioner
[8:39:56] at the time. The company was a
[8:39:57] leader and batteries but not in
[8:39:58] buses. So the company that
[8:39:59] actually did the buses was
[8:40:00] rejected and the company that
[8:40:01] focused on batteries was
[8:40:02] accepted. Under our
[8:40:03] procurement we would always
[8:40:09] have experience, track records,
[8:40:10] performance data and that sort
[8:40:15] of thing. But we can look at
[8:40:16] those criteria and see how we
[8:40:17] can beef them up to make sure
[8:40:18] we don't make mistakes of this
[8:40:18] sort.
[8:40:19] >> thank you MR. CHAIRMAN. In
[8:40:24] the spirit of guardrails, I
[8:40:25] think probably an appropriate
[8:40:27] standard would be making sure
[8:40:32] some things is agnostic enough
[8:40:33] it is not usable by the vendor
[8:40:40] that we get it from. That is
[8:40:41] probably how we need to look at
[8:40:42] it because I appreciate the
[8:40:43] mayor's position but we won't
[8:40:48] always be in a position where
[8:40:48] we can wait. That is not
[8:40:50] realistic. It is cool to say
[8:40:52] but from our perspective we
[8:40:55] will have to be at some point
[8:40:57] make some decisions where we
[8:41:03] don't know their is enough.
[8:41:11] There is 45 counties but if you
[8:41:11] use technology that is agnostic
[8:41:12] in a way but such that company
[8:41:15] goes out of business, you can
[8:41:17] still actually work with other
[8:41:20] folks. And so I think about it
[8:41:27] in terms of transit, rapid mass
[8:41:28] transit. We don't know we
[8:41:28] change the lpa for the north
[8:41:36] corridor to be elevated fixed
[8:41:37] guideway. We changed it
[8:41:37] because he wanted to be open to
[8:41:38] different technologies and not
[8:41:39] elevated heavy rail. Heavy
[8:41:40] rail is too expensive for us.
[8:41:41] We change fixed guideway
[8:41:44] technologies or new
[8:41:46] technologies. How can we use
[8:41:50] them. We use them by doing a
[8:41:51] fixed guideway that allows for
[8:41:57] other modes so that one doesn't
[8:41:58] work we can still replace it.
[8:41:59] I think that is how we need to
[8:41:59] probably approach our
[8:42:00] procurements when we are
[8:42:04] looking at that and when we are
[8:42:09] evaluating that. What it is
[8:42:10] proposed and what it can be
[8:42:11] used for. I think that is an
[8:42:12] appropriate guardrail to look
[8:42:15] at. MR. CHAIRMAN thank you.
[8:42:17] >> thank you MR. CHAIRMAN I
[8:42:20] think I am going to borrow a
[8:42:23] quote from our colleague. I'm
[8:42:24] not going to tell you I told
[8:42:26] you so but I told you so.
[8:42:28] Years ago when I was in
[8:42:33] tallahassee I organized the
[8:42:38] leaders to push against forcing
[8:42:41] a mode of transportation
[8:42:42] particularly the crt against
[8:42:46] the wishes of the people. I
[8:42:47] stood there at that podium and
[8:42:49] we had all the research we
[8:42:50] needed to convince the
[8:42:54] commission then that going
[8:42:55] opposite of what the people
[8:42:59] want it was truly going to be a
[8:43:02] disaster. We stood at that
[8:43:04] podium and gave a reason why it
[8:43:09] should have been the preferred
[8:43:10] choice for the folks down
[8:43:11] south. And also we told them
[8:43:15] they should have used that
[8:43:15] opportunity to connect the
[8:43:16] north and the south bar rail.
[8:43:23] We thought opportunity was
[8:43:24] presenting itself at that
[8:43:26] particular moment it was right.
[8:43:30] We were told that we were wrong
[8:43:33] that deals had already been
[8:43:34] made in conversations that
[8:43:37] already been had and the issue
[8:43:40] was over and done with.
[8:43:41] Subsequently I came back and I
[8:43:43] said hey, I think we have more
[8:43:46] problems with these companies
[8:43:47] particularly with their
[8:43:49] financial stability.
[8:43:49] . We were
[8:43:56] told no that is me overlooking
[8:43:57] particular documents that I
[8:43:59] should simply mind my own
[8:44:02] business in so many words. The
[8:44:06] correlation in south dade south
[8:44:07] for both the north and the
[8:44:10] sound but we ended up and was
[8:44:13] told that electric buses that
[8:44:17] have been sitting in this
[8:44:17] graveyard and that is what we
[8:44:18] should call it is a bus
[8:44:23] graveyard. They were going to
[8:44:24] be the answer to save the south
[8:44:25] dade people from misery. I
[8:44:31] then took a trip over to the
[8:44:31] department of transportation
[8:44:32] and had an opportunity to see
[8:44:36] the buses. They were dead then
[8:44:39] as they are dead now. So now
[8:44:46] the question really begun what
[8:44:47] do we go back and tell people
[8:44:48] of the south dade community and
[8:44:48] the people in north dade
[8:44:49] community about whether or not
[8:44:51] their choices were overlooked
[8:44:57] due to other reasons that they
[8:44:57] had no privy to? Why do I
[8:45:04] bring all that up? I am sure
[8:45:05] that there were deals that were
[8:45:12] never made available to the
[8:45:13] people. The deals they had
[8:45:15] information about they would
[8:45:16] have rallied against all of
[8:45:21] this. They would have called
[8:45:22] for resignations. They would
[8:45:23] have called for investigations.
[8:45:25] But we are here now. And I
[8:45:27] have full faith in my mayor, I
[8:45:29] have full faith in this
[8:45:30] commission that we are going to
[8:45:33] do the right thing. Because at
[8:45:35] the end of the day let's be
[8:45:39] absolutely clear, we still need
[8:45:40] the rail down south. I am
[8:45:45] telling you, have said bart was
[8:45:46] the wrong choice then and I am
[8:45:49] telling you it is still the
[8:45:50] wrong choice and I'm telling
[8:45:51] you simply by looking at what
[8:45:55] is going on today by these
[8:45:56] reports, it echoes exactly what
[8:46:05] I have been saying. That it
[8:46:05] was an inside job and it was
[8:46:06] that inside hit on the great
[8:46:07] people of south dade that
[8:46:08] affect the people of north
[8:46:09] dade. At some point we have to
[8:46:10] come to realize that when we
[8:46:10] were calling for the real to
[8:46:11] the south bay community was
[8:46:16] less than $1 billion. When we
[8:46:17] called for it it was less than
[8:46:23] $600 million. Now we are stuck
[8:46:24] with the possibility and
[8:46:27] looking for a rail to the now
[8:46:28] we are stuck with the
[8:46:29] possibility and looking for a
[8:46:30] rail to the s. Somewhere way
[8:46:31] beyond $3 billion. And now we
[8:46:33] are dealing with this bus
[8:46:40] fiasco. Buses that are found
[8:46:41] at a graveyard that is taking
[8:46:42] up space. That we can't get
[8:46:49] our money back. Information we
[8:46:50] had readily available at the
[8:46:51] time we made the decision to
[8:46:52] make this purchase. But again
[8:46:53] I have full faith in my mayor,
[8:46:53] I have full faith in our
[8:46:54] commission that we are going to
[8:46:55] do the right thing and not
[8:46:56] allow this debacle to be the
[8:47:05] face of our transportation
[8:47:05] system. I do have a lot of
[8:47:06] faith and our director who is
[8:47:07] going to get us through it
[8:47:08] because she has been on the
[8:47:08] frontline doing the right
[8:47:09] things. I just wanted to put
[8:47:10] that on the record. Again I am
[8:47:11] not going to say I told you so
[8:47:13] but I told you so.
[8:47:17] >> I have a question because
[8:47:18] I'm a little bit for the
[8:47:18] attorneys. Do we have to
[8:47:21] reimburse the federal
[8:47:22] government on this grant or
[8:47:25] not?
[8:47:30] >> currently, no.
[8:47:44] >> it is yes or no?
[8:47:45] >> you can get the consent
[8:47:45] from fda to retire them early.
[8:47:52] Dtw is not retarded them but is
[8:47:54] asking fda concurrence to allow
[8:47:54] us to retire them early. If we
[8:47:55] get the concurrence we can
[8:47:57] retire them and move them use
[8:47:57] it for scrap metal. If we
[8:47:58] don't either we reimburse the
[8:47:59] federal government at a pro
[8:48:05] rata portion or they would
[8:48:06] either going to service or sit
[8:48:06] there.
[8:48:10] >> as it stands now keeping it
[8:48:17] for the full life 10 b
[8:48:17] 15 they
[8:48:18] are not working but we can keep
[8:48:19] them. They could be sitting
[8:48:20] where they sit right now
[8:48:21] everybody can take pictures and
[8:48:24] what a fiasco. If we do have
[8:48:35] that agreement then we would be
[8:48:36] able to do whatever we want
[8:48:37] with them. We can sell them
[8:48:38] for scrap metal, we can sell it
[8:48:38] to the city of miami. I am
[8:48:39] just getting. We can do
[8:48:40] whatever we want with it
[8:48:40] correct?
[8:48:49] >> yes, depending on the terms
[8:48:50] the fda would give. If they
[8:48:52] allow us to retire or dispose
[8:48:53] of them, we could do with it as
[8:49:00] we please, yes. They would rig
[8:49:03] -- relinquish it.
[8:49:04] >> I do not want to impact the
[8:49:11] litigation. It is our feeling
[8:49:11] are understand that the entity
[8:49:12] is no longer viable and they
[8:49:13] have declared bankruptcy is
[8:49:14] that correct?
[8:49:15] >> the original manufacturer
[8:49:22] who delivered the bus it --
[8:49:24] buses -- [Indiscernible]. They
[8:49:32] filed assume the contract so we
[8:49:33] have terminated and filed suit
[8:49:36] with them.
[8:49:37] >> in that contract with the
[8:49:42] original entity if there was an
[8:49:43] amendment with phoenix was
[8:49:44] there any clause for liquidated
[8:49:46] damages if in fact they were
[8:49:48] not able to provide the service
[8:49:50] that they would able to
[8:50:00] provide?
[8:50:01] >> I have to look into it. I
[8:50:01] do not want to give an answer
[8:50:02] without having the contract in
[8:50:07] front of me. The issue is not
[8:50:08] the delivery of the buses. The
[8:50:13] issue would have been on the
[8:50:14] warranty. The buses were
[8:50:14] delivered. So I need to look
[8:50:15] and see if there was a specific
[8:50:16] damage provision as it pertains
[8:50:21] to warranty. And parts that
[8:50:22] were not provided.
[8:50:23] >> the final question is, do
[8:50:26] you have a timeline on where
[8:50:27] you would expect the federal
[8:50:35] government to respond by?
[8:50:36] >> I would defer to the
[8:50:37] director on the issue.
[8:50:38] >> we would hope they would
[8:50:39] have already responded. They
[8:50:39] came with a few more questions
[8:50:40] that we are answering. So we
[8:50:41] are anticipating within the
[8:50:47] next awfully month or two we
[8:50:48] can get resolution with fda
[8:50:48] regarding their financial
[8:50:50] interest.
[8:50:51] >> when do they come back with
[8:50:54] questions? When did they come
[8:50:55] back with questions?
[8:50:57] >> I believe it was last week
[8:50:59] or the week before last. It
[8:51:01] was within the last two weeks
[8:51:03] that they requested additional
[8:51:04] information and we have been
[8:51:06] corresponding with them.
[8:51:11] >> so essentially we are
[8:51:12] hoping that after we answer the
[8:51:13] questions we will get a final
[8:51:19] response. But there's a
[8:51:20] possibility they MAY ask more
[8:51:20] questions correct?
[8:51:21] >> there is. We had a very
[8:51:22] productive meeting with them a
[8:51:23] few weeks ago. We thought we
[8:51:28] answered all of their questions
[8:51:29] and we are waiting for their
[8:51:30] final response. When they did
[8:51:34] come backs -- come back with
[8:51:35] additional questions. It is
[8:51:36] possible that they can come
[8:51:38] back with additional questions
[8:51:38] it is their prerogative.
[8:51:42] >> it MAY have been the chair
[8:51:43] that said it, we need to be
[8:51:45] updated periodically on this in
[8:51:48] a shorter time period than a
[8:51:51] longer one. It has been going
[8:51:51] on for a while.
[8:51:54] > I am -- we are happy to
[8:51:55] do that.
[8:51:58] >> quarterly are as new
[8:52:01] information becomes available.
[8:52:05] I have tried it.
[8:52:11] >> to follow up with what
[8:52:12] commissioner bermudez was
[8:52:13] saying I think we should make a
[8:52:14] motion to provide air support
[8:52:17] to the department by tasking
[8:52:18] our federal lobbyist to make
[8:52:20] this their number one priority.
[8:52:22] I think that is what we need to
[8:52:25] do. GOD bless them their
[8:52:26] calling in there doing their
[8:52:26] thing that we have a federal
[8:52:30] lobbying team. They could
[8:52:31] help. I think every day that
[8:52:33] we lose on this we lose an
[8:52:35] opportunity to do something
[8:52:41] with these buses. I think we
[8:52:42] should make this a priority for
[8:52:43] our federal lobbying team.
[8:52:44] >> I don't think we need a
[8:52:44] motion for that. Just direct
[8:52:48] our federal lobbying team to
[8:52:49] engage with transportation to
[8:52:55] do that. That definitely
[8:52:57] should be done for sure. In
[8:52:57] collaboration with our
[8:53:00] director.
[8:53:01] >> in terms of the lawsuit i
[8:53:02] just have some questions for
[8:53:06] our attorneys. I think the
[8:53:07] disposition from the fda is
[8:53:08] important because then we have
[8:53:09] the secondary conversation as
[8:53:15] to what we do with those buses.
[8:53:16] Right now without determination
[8:53:17] from fda they are just sitting
[8:53:18] there. They are sitting there
[8:53:19] we are using the opportunity to
[8:53:19] monetize them in terms of
[8:53:20] selling them for parts scrap or
[8:53:22] will fixing them. In terms of
[8:53:26] the lawsuit obviously a lot of
[8:53:27] people are involved and we
[8:53:28] talked about that it is a
[8:53:33] national issue. Have we looked
[8:53:34] at doing anything with these
[8:53:38] buses could impact that
[8:53:39] lawsuit? My understanding is
[8:53:47] that is not the cut -- case.
[8:53:48] One thing is the fta allows us
[8:53:50] to do another thing is the
[8:53:50] buses?
[8:53:55] >> it would be the fta impacts
[8:53:57] the lawsuit either way.
[8:53:59] >> in terms of the lawsuit
[8:54:02] what are your timing
[8:54:04] predictions for that? How long
[8:54:05] ? There are a lot of people
[8:54:07] and involves and that is always
[8:54:13] complicated.
[8:54:21] >> litigation was initiated
[8:54:21] recently and I believe their
[8:54:22] response is due in the next two
[8:54:22] b
[8:54:28] three weeks. We are at the
[8:54:29] front end of the litigation so
[8:54:30] I can give you a timetable
[8:54:31] because it will be a schedule
[8:54:32] in order issued by the court.
[8:54:33] I realistically can give you a
[8:54:39] timetable at the time on when
[8:54:40] the matter would be resolved.
[8:54:41] >> okay. Alright I agree that
[8:54:42] we should take some sort of
[8:54:46] policy decision. Make
[8:54:47] different mistakes and while I
[8:54:48] understand what commissioner
[8:54:49] gilbert is saying in terms of
[8:54:53] swapping out parts, I think
[8:54:54] there are two separate things
[8:54:55] going on. Number one is how
[8:54:56] long has technology been out
[8:54:57] there? Was it demonstrated
[8:55:01] somewhere? Is the technology
[8:55:02] one where we could swap out
[8:55:13] parts?
[8:55:14] >> thank you MR. Chair. I am
[8:55:15] listening diligently to all of
[8:55:15] my colleagues. In
[8:55:16] acknowledging this report there
[8:55:17] are two things that are
[8:55:18] happening here. So the first
[8:55:21] one is past mistakes. I think
[8:55:22] it is important to put on a
[8:55:23] record that the protector issue
[8:55:25] is an issue that affected the
[8:55:26] entire united states.
[8:55:28] Attorneys are not saying this
[8:55:31] it is almost a defraud men that
[8:55:46] happen not only on miami dade
[8:55:47] county but many counties
[8:55:47] throughout florida, texas,
[8:55:48] washington north carolina,
[8:55:49] michigan and wyoming. I like
[8:55:50] the course of action we have
[8:55:51] taken with the lawsuit and
[8:55:52] consulting with the federal
[8:55:53] government to make sure that we
[8:55:54] are able to recoup some of
[8:55:55] these funds and able to move
[8:55:56] forward doing something that
[8:55:58] works. But number two we don't
[8:56:06] make this mistake again. And
[8:56:07] that we go after this company
[8:56:07] and all of these bad actors
[8:56:09] with the furthest extent of the
[8:56:10] law and all options available
[8:56:11] from what I understand
[8:56:15] administration is already in
[8:56:16] that course and I do appreciate
[8:56:18] that. The second thing we have
[8:56:27] to contemplate is what we are
[8:56:28] going to do in the future. I
[8:56:29] think the CHAIRMAN Was already
[8:56:30] alluding to that. We do need
[8:56:30] guardrails and I am currently
[8:56:31] working on legislation that I'm
[8:56:32] putting together to put some of
[8:56:33] these guardrails in place so
[8:56:34] that in the future we don't
[8:56:37] purchase any of these
[8:56:41] technologies without
[8:56:41] understanding what the return
[8:56:42] on investment is. One thing
[8:56:44] that I did take from the report
[8:56:50] is that even now so the pro
[8:56:53] tara issue is different. These
[8:56:55] are buses that are actually
[8:56:58] working. These buses did see
[8:57:00] the report said it is too early
[8:57:07] to determine the new flyer
[8:57:08] fleets overall return on
[8:57:09] investment. Before we continue
[8:57:10] to go down this route, I am not
[8:57:11] saying this is not going to
[8:57:13] work but we do need to
[8:57:14] understand what that return on
[8:57:15] investment is before we
[8:57:16] purchased more of these
[8:57:19] electric buses. That is my two
[8:57:22] cents and I am working on
[8:57:22] legislation to put a pause on
[8:57:23] this so that we can understand
[8:57:29] that it does in fact produce a
[8:57:30] return on investment before we
[8:57:31] move forward. Thank you MR.
[8:57:35] Chair.
[8:57:36] >> thank you MR. Chair and to
[8:57:42] my colleagues for working on
[8:57:43] legislation regarding these
[8:57:44] guardrails that clearly we
[8:57:45] need. This was voted in
[8:57:45] octoberfor working on
[8:57:46] legislation regarding these
[8:57:47] guardrails that clearly we
[8:57:48] need. This was voted in
[8:57:54] OCTOBER 2019 if I am not
[8:57:55] mistaken. Now we are in 2026.
[8:57:55] To the attorneys of
[8:57:56] administration has there been
[8:57:57] any policy implemented by this
[8:58:01] board finding out that this pro
[8:58:01] tara catastrophe took place?
[8:58:02] Has there been any policy
[8:58:03] speaking to this issue
[8:58:10] regarding new technologies? To
[8:58:11] my memory I have not seen any
[8:58:12] legislation. Do you know of
[8:58:13] any legislation that we have
[8:58:21] advanced?
[8:58:22] >> I am not aware of any
[8:58:23] legislation. What I can tell
[8:58:24] you is the administration has
[8:58:25] this issue front of mind.
[8:58:25] Every time a new technology
[8:58:26] comes to the svd and evaluating
[8:58:27] it in the department directors,
[8:58:30] we all say this is not another
[8:58:41] pro tara is it? We have taking
[8:58:42] a beaten we promise there's a
[8:58:42] way this will work. If you can
[8:58:43] show where it works somewhere
[8:58:44] else we are not interested.
[8:58:45] >> I am happy to hear that.
[8:58:46] We get lobbied obviously
[8:58:47] frequently as well. We are too
[8:58:52] big of a county to be a guinea
[8:58:53] pig for any company. Yes, we
[8:58:54] want to implement new
[8:58:55] technologies but we can only
[8:58:56] afford to implement proven
[8:58:56] technologies. And so I know
[8:58:58] there are red flag policies in
[8:59:08] place that commissioner sosa
[8:59:09] has brought before. If you're
[8:59:09] working on the legislation
[8:59:10] whether red flag type of
[8:59:11] warnings and procurement would
[8:59:14] be appropriate here? Where
[8:59:15] there is some sort of a
[8:59:16] disconnect between what the
[8:59:19] company is proposing and their
[8:59:19] actual track record and with
[8:59:20] the actual spend that is being
[8:59:24] proposed here. So something to
[8:59:25] consider because I think a red
[8:59:26] flag during the program and
[8:59:29] progress -- process would've
[8:59:31] been helpful. In 2019 this was
[8:59:36] competitively procured right?
[8:59:36] There were other companies that
[8:59:38] bid on this and somehow this
[8:59:39] company advanced to the top and
[8:59:40] received a recommendation from
[8:59:42] the administration and passed
[8:59:45] at the bcc. So my question is
[8:59:48] have we since finding out about
[8:59:49] this done an internal look at
[8:59:54] either the selection committee,
[8:59:55] internal procurement
[8:59:55] department? I am perplexed as
[8:59:59] to how a spend as high as $70
[9:00:03] million went through a full
[9:00:03] procurement and we have not
[9:00:05] looked at ourselves to say,
[9:00:07] what have we done here to allow
[9:00:12] this much money? How do we get
[9:00:12] the file? If it happens in
[9:00:25] other products of the country
[9:00:26] how to a county as large as we
[9:00:27] are allow for defrauding to
[9:00:28] take place in the tune of $70
[9:00:29] million? If the question is we
[9:00:30] have not looked at ourselves
[9:00:30] internally my ask is a simple
[9:00:31] one. How is it that something
[9:00:37] like this advanced at that
[9:00:38] time? What is even more
[9:00:39] concerning since 2019 there is
[9:00:42] no policy in place currently to
[9:00:42] prevent it from happening
[9:00:44] again. What is our strategic
[9:00:45] procurement department doing
[9:00:45] right now not just talking
[9:00:47] points on a microphone or news
[9:00:49] interviews and different
[9:00:49] articles, what are we doing
[9:00:52] right now to make sure that
[9:00:55] this doesn't happen again
[9:00:59] internally? I know it was big
[9:01:00] and it was a lot simple
[9:01:01] question, have we looked at
[9:01:05] ourselves, the internal
[9:01:06] department and what they did
[9:01:07] toward this contract? Somebody
[9:01:11] made a ton of money off of
[9:01:12] this. I am not suggesting us.
[9:01:21] There were lobbyists involved.
[9:01:21] Somebody made a bag of money
[9:01:22] and we are holding the bag.
[9:01:23] Have we done an internal
[9:01:24] investigation of ourselves?
[9:01:25] >> I think it was the only
[9:01:26] person on the dais who was here
[9:01:26] at the time. I do remember
[9:01:30] very well how heavily this was
[9:01:36] lobbied. I do remember
[9:01:37] difficulties in making a
[9:01:38] decision. I think it is very
[9:01:41] fair to say we should look back
[9:01:46] at the tapes and the records to
[9:01:47] just see exactly what happens.
[9:01:49] Let's be clear, we have a very
[9:01:54] active lobby core. They
[9:01:55] represent clients and they come
[9:01:59] to us with choices. I take
[9:02:00] great pride and I have to tell
[9:02:04] you in our strategic
[9:02:07] procurement director who I
[9:02:18] appointed. I also separate in
[9:02:19] the procurement department. It
[9:02:20] used to be a part of ist. I
[9:02:20] wanted those decisions to go
[9:02:21] more directly to my office.
[9:02:22] Because there were decisions
[9:02:28] that were made that were buried
[9:02:29] inside internal services. I
[9:02:30] wanted them to be more directly
[9:02:31] reporting to the mayor. I
[9:02:32] think you see the work of her
[9:02:33] team and they are very
[9:02:34] thorough. Changes have been
[9:02:37] made, the CHAIRMAN Has just put
[9:02:38] forward first reading items
[9:02:39] that comes out of the script.
[9:02:42] We spent our team spent a lot
[9:02:45] of time that body provided a
[9:02:48] lot of recommendations. Many
[9:02:49] of the things that were adopted
[9:02:51] by that group were things that
[9:02:53] were already changes that have
[9:02:54] been made by the procurement
[9:02:55] department. Our procurement
[9:02:57] department has won national
[9:03:00] awards. I mean national
[9:03:05] awards. I think we are really
[9:03:05] progressing well and to the
[9:03:10] work of strip some of the
[9:03:10] bureaucratic delays and things
[9:03:11] like that have been addressed
[9:03:12] as well as the selection
[9:03:13] committee issues. More to be
[9:03:16] discussed but I do think it
[9:03:17] would be worthwhile to go back
[9:03:18] and look at that particular
[9:03:21] procurement is exactly how we
[9:03:22] went down that path.
[9:03:23] > thank you for saying
[9:03:28] that. I know improvements have
[9:03:29] been made sense and I look
[9:03:30] forward to the script committee
[9:03:31] items as they move through the
[9:03:33] legislative process. I will do
[9:03:33] I will look into that also
[9:03:38] because I just can't understand
[9:03:39] how something this large got as
[9:03:40] far as it did leaving us in
[9:03:41] this position area and so I
[9:03:44] look forward to working with
[9:03:45] you on that matter mayor.
[9:03:49] >> commissioner you are
[9:03:49] recognized.
[9:03:56] >> I have a quick question.
[9:03:57] So when a car breaks down with
[9:03:58] a mechanic. When these buses
[9:03:58] break down do we have a
[9:03:59] technician that works on them?
[9:04:00] Do we report them broken and we
[9:04:01] have to wait for someone like a
[9:04:02] specialist to maintain them?
[9:04:03] >> the challenge with the
[9:04:06] buses have rendered in
[9:04:09] operable. They have software
[9:04:12] issues and it is for priority
[9:04:20] issues and there's no one to
[9:04:21] provide that to us which
[9:04:21] renders them and operable. We
[9:04:22] have software issues and even
[9:04:23] the buses that we have all of
[9:04:25] the buses are the exact same.
[9:04:26] There is actually at least two
[9:04:26] different types of programming
[9:04:30] so one bus can break and parts
[9:04:30] are not interchangeable in the
[9:04:32] same group of buses. It is
[9:04:41] just a complete terrible
[9:04:41] situation that we don't have
[9:04:42] the service available. We
[9:04:43] don't have the software and the
[9:04:44] technicians and it is not
[9:04:44] offered by anybody.
[9:04:45] >> the bus breaks down to get
[9:04:46] hauled and stored away? Ask in
[9:04:47] general of course we have the
[9:04:54] maintenance department. The
[9:04:55] new flyer buses are being
[9:04:56] repaired it's needed by our
[9:04:57] mechanics. These particular
[9:05:01] buses are being repaired
[9:05:01] initially but as across the
[9:05:02] country these buses were
[9:05:03] failing, it overwhelm the
[9:05:05] company. It is reminding me
[9:05:07] that the ceo passed away
[9:05:15] suddenly in 2021 and was just
[9:05:16] 44 so the company had a major
[9:05:17] challenge from that. There was
[9:05:18] a lot of customization of the
[9:05:19] buses. There were over there
[9:05:21] beyond their capabilities
[9:05:23] basically. We did the repair
[9:05:24] during the time that they were
[9:05:30] still in business when there
[9:05:30] was a successor company. We
[9:05:31] did get some help with the
[9:05:32] repairs but eventually they
[9:05:36] were not able to perform that
[9:05:37] is why we filed the lawsuit.
[9:05:38] >> do we have someone in house
[9:05:39] that can repair these
[9:05:42] currently? The old ones are
[9:05:42] the new ones or do we need to
[9:05:44] bring in someone from their
[9:05:46] company to repair it?
[9:05:55] >> through the chair. The pro
[9:05:55] terra buses and I'm going to
[9:05:56] speak to them. The blunderbuss
[9:06:07] is we have maintenance staff
[9:06:08] who were well prepared to deal
[9:06:09] with our other parts of our
[9:06:10] feet. Our new flyer fleet
[9:06:10] which are under warranty are
[9:06:11] being serviced as needed. In
[9:06:12] the instance of our pro terra
[9:06:13] fleet there were certain
[9:06:14] components that started
[9:06:16] breaking down that were under
[9:06:17] warranty. Parts of those were
[9:06:19] not things we could readily
[9:06:20] repair. The batteries were not
[9:06:22] things that we had the
[9:06:25] opportunity to repair. There
[9:06:29] were gears that needed to be
[9:06:30] replaced every manufacturers
[9:06:31] those are things that we can
[9:06:38] repair. So with the part of
[9:06:39] the fee that is still
[9:06:40] functioning, we are actually
[9:06:40] ourselves repairing the buses
[9:06:42] and making sure that the small
[9:06:43] number that do function that we
[9:06:48] keep them in use. We are
[9:06:49] pulling other items from the
[9:06:52] buses that aren't functioning
[9:06:53] to make sure we keep a few
[9:06:54] buses running. But the main
[9:06:55] components of the buses that
[9:07:00] were failing were not things
[9:07:00] that we can repair. They had
[9:07:01] to physically be replaced.
[9:07:07] >> do we have the expertise to
[9:07:09] do those repairs the ones that
[9:07:09] we are doing?
[9:07:10] >> we are repairing them
[9:07:10] ourselves.
[9:07:12] >> okay, thank you.
[9:07:17] >> that is that. We're going
[9:07:18] to get the reports quarterly or
[9:07:19] more often when it becomes
[9:07:22] available. We are going to put
[9:07:25] parameters and guardrails to
[9:07:26] prevent this from occurring.
[9:07:30] With that our next disc session
[9:07:45] is 6b1. Commissioner lopez you
[9:07:46] are the sponsor of the site.
[9:07:47] >> thank you MR. CHAIRMAN and
[9:07:48] thank you for placing this
[9:07:49] discussion on the agenda. A
[9:07:49] number of advocacy groups have
[9:07:50] asked me about the implications
[9:07:51] of senate bill 1134 which is
[9:07:52] known as the di bill. The
[9:07:55] impact on the county, it
[9:07:56] doesn't take it into the effect
[9:07:57] until JANUARY one of 2027 but
[9:07:58] that falls within the fiscal
[9:07:58] year of the 2026 27 budget that
[9:08:00] were currently reviewing and
[9:08:01] will take up in SEPTEMBER and
[9:08:05] the 1st and second budget
[9:08:06] hearings. The same advocacy
[9:08:07] groups have expressed concerns
[9:08:09] about the impacts have
[9:08:10] expressed the desire for the
[9:08:16] county to challenge or to seek
[9:08:17] further clarification of senate
[9:08:18] bill 1134. I can tell you it
[9:08:19] is incredibly vague and the
[9:08:20] consequences of being accused
[9:08:25] of being either malfeasance of
[9:08:28] removal office or sued by a
[9:08:33] resident of miami-dade
[9:08:33] . If you
[9:08:34] think we MAY overcorrect or
[9:08:40] under correct given the
[9:08:41] vagueness of the bill. I know
[9:08:42] I county attorney's office have
[9:08:43] spent a considerable amount of
[9:08:44] time on this issue. And
[9:08:45] because of the nature of the
[9:08:46] bill and the possibility of
[9:08:47] legal action it is best that we
[9:08:49] limit our discussions regarding
[9:08:59] senate bill 1134. Those
[9:09:00] discussions in public for that
[9:09:01] reason. If you have any
[9:09:02] questions such as I have been
[9:09:02] working with the county
[9:09:03] attorney's office for month
[9:09:06] since the build -- the bill was
[9:09:07] fine. I would ask that you all
[9:09:10] consider a motion to direct the
[9:09:15] county attorney to research the
[9:09:16] counties ability.
[9:09:17] > if you all can quiet down
[9:09:26] in the back please?
[9:09:27] >> I would move to direct the
[9:09:28] county attorney's office to
[9:09:29] research the counties ability
[9:09:30] to challenge the validity of
[9:09:38] senate bill 1134 or
[9:09:39] alternatively ask the court to
[9:09:40] clarify how it applies to the
[9:09:40] county and brief each
[9:09:41] commissioner individually
[9:09:42] regarding the results of their
[9:09:43] research. I continue to feel
[9:09:53] very uncomfortable about the
[9:09:54] law. I have read it so many
[9:09:54] times as has the county
[9:09:55] attorney's office and it
[9:09:56] continues to give me lots of
[9:09:57] reasons to be concerned.
[9:09:58] Especially since the law is
[9:09:59] specific on promoting directly
[9:10:02] or indirectly any activity or
[9:10:03] program that MAY fall within
[9:10:03] this law. And so that goes for
[9:10:05] not only us but our staff. I
[9:10:07] think it is important that we
[9:10:11] get some clarification and
[9:10:12] often time the only way to do
[9:10:15] so is to go to the courts.
[9:10:20] >> I agree that we need to
[9:10:21] find a way to challenge it.
[9:10:22] I'm trying to figure out the
[9:10:23] best way. I guess I have some
[9:10:26] conversations and we need to
[9:10:27] have questions about what we do
[9:10:30] here. Are we asking for, you
[9:10:35] are asking us to seek --
[9:10:36] >> to have the county
[9:10:37] attorneys to explore
[9:10:40] declaratory challenge of sorts.
[9:10:43] >> through the chair through
[9:10:51] the attorney, is that a viable
[9:10:55] path?
[9:10:57] >> commissioner, we have been
[9:11:00] reviewing this for quite some
[9:11:02] time. We do think there MAY be
[9:11:04] some challenges with that
[9:11:05] approach. We will continue to
[9:11:09] look at it if that is the
[9:11:10] directive of this board. And
[9:11:12] see what options are available.
[9:11:14] Our preference would be to do
[9:11:17] that and to brief each of you
[9:11:19] individually so you can
[9:11:20] understand the issues. Not
[9:11:28] just any potential challenges
[9:11:29] to the validity or seeking
[9:11:29] clarification but also we would
[9:11:30] like to brief you just on the
[9:11:38] impact of this legislation on
[9:11:38] the day-to-day matter. It is
[9:11:39] our intention to reach out and
[9:11:40] do that with each of you
[9:11:41] individually and AUGUST before
[9:11:42] the budget hearings as
[9:11:42] possible.
[9:11:43] >> so okay CHAIRMAN MAY I
[9:11:52] continue? So how this works
[9:11:58] with the community groups is
[9:11:58] that we won't be able to fund
[9:12:01] some people because of what
[9:12:03] their name is or what they do?
[9:12:05] The population they serve.
[9:12:07] That group will then be
[9:12:13] adversely affected. The reason
[9:12:15] why we won't be able to do that
[9:12:19] is because of the state law.
[9:12:27] They should sue us. I think
[9:12:36] that is probably -- no. I'm
[9:12:37] saying the group should sue us
[9:12:40] and the state would have to
[9:12:41] intervene to defend their
[9:12:45] statute. If they didn't
[9:12:47] intervene to defend the statute
[9:12:49] then we would settle.
[9:12:54] >> let's not say on the record
[9:12:55] that we want anybody to sue us.
[9:13:02] It is not are doing here.
[9:13:06] Obviously it was requested by
[9:13:09] senator lopez. Let's be
[9:13:10] mindful that this MAY go into
[9:13:13] litigation at some point. Be
[9:13:14] mindful of that. I think it is
[9:13:15] important for you all to listen
[9:13:27] to what jerry just very -- over
[9:13:30] the next month and brief us
[9:13:31] individually as to what
[9:13:34] recourses we have. Because I
[9:13:36] think you're right. For us to
[9:13:41] do some sort of lawsuit to the
[9:13:46] state of any capacity is not
[9:13:52] risky but
[9:13:52] >>
[9:13:53] >> MR. CHAIRMAN, was going
[9:13:54] on, I don't think we have
[9:13:54] standing.
[9:13:56] That's the llenge.
[9:13:59] Somebody challenging us.
[9:14:00] I think that's how we get
[9:14:04] before the court.
[9:14:04] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:14:05] all right.
[9:14:05] Vice chair perkins
[9:14:06] >> Vice CHAIRMAN McGhee:
[9:14:07] thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN.
[9:14:10] I think it DR. King who
[9:14:14] said an unjust law is no
[9:14:15] law at all.
[9:14:17] And this is one of the
[9:14:21] most ridiculous pieces of
[9:14:26] legislation that could
[9:14:26] have easily passed the
[9:14:27] legislators.
[9:14:31] I think there should be a
[9:14:31] lawsuit against miami-dade
[9:14:32] county.
[9:14:34] I think every that's going
[9:14:37] to be impacted should come
[9:14:38] together, hire one of the
[9:14:39] greatest attorneys in
[9:14:40] miami-dade county to
[9:14:41] represent them and find
[9:14:46] themselves a great firm
[9:14:47] and sued the county and
[9:14:48] force the state to
[9:14:49] intervene similar to what
[9:14:49] commissioner gilbert
[9:14:50] stated.
[9:14:51] But I also understand that
[9:14:51] doing so is going to cost
[9:14:53] some monies and I'm
[9:14:56] prepared for it.
[9:14:57] The fact of the matter is
[9:14:58] there are going to be so
[9:15:02] many organizations out
[9:15:02] there who we are
[9:15:03] responsible in part for
[9:15:05] ensuring they have a voice
[9:15:06] in this community that
[9:15:13] once this, you
[9:15:14] takes effect there's
[9:15:20] possibilitiessome of you
[9:15:20] will be removed from
[9:15:21] office because of the
[9:15:22] teeth that this piece of
[9:15:23] legislation has.
[9:15:35] So I simply say to the
[9:15:36] voters out there listening
[9:15:37] if you feel like you're in
[9:15:37] a be impacted, if you feel
[9:15:38] like you need assistance,
[9:15:39] I think you should find
[9:15:39] yourself an attorney, make
[9:15:40] sure you're prepared to go
[9:15:41] the long haul and sued the
[9:15:42] county and force the state
[9:15:42] to intervene.
[9:15:43] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: so
[9:15:44] I might -- I might end up
[9:15:44] cutting this short.
[9:15:45] Think it is entirely
[9:15:54] negligent for any of us up
[9:15:55] here to encourage a
[9:15:55] lawsuit against myself
[9:15:56] because I am a taxpayer of
[9:15:57] this county and that will
[9:15:58] be me paying for that
[9:15:58] lawsuit and anyone else
[9:16:06] that's a property owner
[9:16:07] paying property taxes.
[9:16:08] So commissioner gilbert
[9:16:08] and vice chair I think
[9:16:09] it's entirely negligent to
[9:16:10] encourage anyone to sue
[9:16:10] this county whether it is
[9:16:11] a philosophical
[9:16:12] ideological, personal, or
[9:16:26] not, whatever it is, you
[9:16:27] just -- I think it's
[9:16:27] completely -- senator
[9:16:28] garcia, you're not one to
[9:16:29] -- [Laughter] I mean, you
[9:16:30] are not one to correct --
[9:16:31] I mean, out of everyone up
[9:16:31] here, that was -- I'm not
[9:16:36] gonna say what the word
[9:16:37] is, but look, I think as I
[9:16:37] continue recognizing the
[9:16:38] rest of you, be mindful
[9:16:39] that we are not
[9:16:40] encouraging anyone to sue
[9:16:40] themselves if they are
[9:16:41] property owners because
[9:16:45] this is -- I mean, it's
[9:16:46] just complete me negligent
[9:16:46] to say that.
[9:16:47] I understand the sentiment
[9:16:47] behind it.
[9:16:51] I understand that that
[9:16:52] might be a recourse for us
[9:16:53] to turn around and get the
[9:16:53] state to intervene, but we
[9:16:59] are not encouraging that
[9:16:59] to be the case at all.
[9:17:00] That is not a policy of
[9:17:01] this board, that is not
[9:17:02] where we are going with
[9:17:05] this.
[9:17:06] But, commissioner
[9:17:06] regalado, you're
[9:17:07] recognized.
[9:17:07] >> Raquel Regalado: thank
[9:17:08] you.
[9:17:15] mission or lopez, I
[9:17:16] appreciate that there's a
[9:17:17] lot of organizations that
[9:17:17] want a declaratory
[9:17:18] judgment.
[9:17:20] We would not have standing
[9:17:20] or an injury.
[9:17:35] We just t want because
[9:17:36] there's a million reasons
[9:17:37] why we would not put
[9:17:37] someone in a budget.
[9:17:38] How would you prove that
[9:17:39] it is because of this?
[9:17:39] O
[9:17:39] it's a very complex thing
[9:17:40] to throw us in the mix.
[9:17:46] I think organizations that
[9:17:47] receive government funding
[9:17:47] should challenge this law
[9:17:49] and request a declaratory
[9:17:51] judgment or clarification.
[9:17:52] I think that is -- is the
[9:17:53] most viable path forward
[9:18:09] to use us as a way to not
[9:18:10] pay an attorney, but using
[9:18:10] our attorneys is a whole
[9:18:11] different thing, but we
[9:18:12] would be kicked out
[9:18:13] because of standing
[9:18:13] because of an injury.
[9:18:14] Now, if we were to fund
[9:18:14] and then we were removed,
[9:18:19] that would be a different
[9:18:19] conversation, right?
[9:18:20] But to date we have not
[9:18:21] even established how we
[9:18:22] are going to interpret
[9:18:23] this statute.
[9:18:31] So I agree with you.
[9:18:32] We've all read it and we
[9:18:33] have a million questions.
[9:18:34] It was poorly drafted,
[9:18:34] respectfully, for those of
[9:18:35] you that were part of the
[9:18:36] legislator, one of the
[9:18:36] poorly drafted items that
[9:18:41] come from tallahassee.
[9:18:42] Tallahassee.
[9:18:42] Port drafting seems to be
[9:18:43] the norm, not the
[9:18:43] exception.
[9:18:44] That being said, it needs
[9:18:45] to bear itself out and
[9:18:47] there a lot of impacted
[9:18:53] organizations that should
[9:18:54] ask for clarification.
[9:18:55] We are not the best suited
[9:18:55] to do that.
[9:18:59] Presently, we have to
[9:19:00] evaluate it, take an
[9:19:00] evaluation based on our
[9:19:09] risk, and move forward on
[9:19:10] our budget.
[9:19:10] But even then, it's going
[9:19:11] to be very difficult to
[9:19:12] prove causation and our
[9:19:16] injury and our standing
[9:19:17] are very different from
[9:19:18] their injury and they were
[9:19:18] standing.
[9:19:18] O I appreciate
[9:19:19] that we want to help, but
[9:19:20] for us it's a very, very
[9:19:21] different situation than
[9:19:29] for those that are
[9:19:29] impacted.
[9:19:30] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:19:30] commissioner cohen
[9:19:31] higgins.
[9:19:32] >> Danielle Cohen Higgins:
[9:19:32] thank you, MR. Chair.
[9:19:33] The kind of echoed the
[9:19:40] concerns, please don't sue
[9:19:40] us.
[9:19:40] I don't know if you saw
[9:19:41] our county attorney space
[9:19:42] when that message was
[9:19:42] being advanced.
[9:19:43] Please comment to be
[9:19:44] clear, don't sue us.
[9:19:56] But I think the message is
[9:19:56] one that we need to
[9:19:57] seriously consider.
[9:19:57] We are the largest county
[9:19:58] in miami-dade -- in the
[9:19:59] state of florida.
[9:20:00] We are a donor county, and
[9:20:00] more important we are a
[9:20:01] majority minority county.
[9:20:08] And so it is not -- it is
[9:20:09] right for our residents to
[9:20:10] look for us for leadership
[9:20:10] on this issue and they are
[9:20:11] saying help us because
[9:20:12] this is going to affect us
[9:20:12] come JANUARY.
[9:20:13] So I look forward to the
[9:20:14] conversations we're going
[9:20:14] to have.
[9:20:15] Jerry, I am wondering,
[9:20:16] because it is a discussion
[9:20:16] item.
[9:20:17] Are not as much interested
[9:20:17] in speaking as a
[9:20:18] litigation item.
[9:20:18] I don't think that's the
[9:20:19] path forward for a number
[9:20:20] of reasons, but why can't
[9:20:31] we as a board through
[9:20:31] either our homely charter
[9:20:32] powers, or own
[9:20:32] policymaking decisions as
[9:20:33] a body create something
[9:20:34] that allows us to maneuver
[9:20:35] around this the way that
[9:20:37] we have in so many other
[9:20:37] areas?
[9:20:38] So they passed a poorly
[9:20:53] worded statute that we can
[9:20:54] draft our own ways around
[9:20:55] potentially or can we add
[9:20:55] something to our charter
[9:20:56] that speaks to this?
[9:20:57] I believe today is the
[9:20:57] deadline to get something
[9:20:58] on the ballot come
[9:20:59] NOVEMBER.
[9:20:59] Is there something we can
[9:21:00] write into our charter
[9:21:01] that speaks to this issue,
[9:21:02] and if the answer is no, I
[9:21:03] accept that as well, but I
[9:21:04] think when the state
[9:21:04] passes a law we are forced
[9:21:05] to comply with that we
[9:21:07] don't agree with that has
[9:21:08] consequent is in it as
[9:21:08] great as being removed
[9:21:09] from office that we need
[9:21:20] to get very creative as
[9:21:21] the largest, most
[9:21:21] powerful, most diverse
[9:21:22] county in miami-dade -- in
[9:21:23] the state, excuse me.
[9:21:23] I keep saying miami-dade.
[9:21:24] To put our heads together
[9:21:25] and say essentially we
[9:21:34] can't protect our
[9:21:35] community because that's
[9:21:36] essentially what our
[9:21:36] community is asking us to
[9:21:37] do here because there are
[9:21:38] so many that rely on those
[9:21:38] dollars.
[9:21:39] That's a question to the
[9:21:39] attorneys.
[9:21:40] I don't know that you have
[9:21:41] those answers crafted for
[9:21:42] us as we sit here today,
[9:21:42] but I have to believe
[9:22:07] there's something we can
[9:22:08] use the of the power of
[9:22:08] our pen to craft something
[9:22:09] to help serve our majority
[9:22:10] minority massive county of
[9:22:11] miami-dade.
[9:22:11] And if you answer and say
[9:22:12] actually, the answer is
[9:22:13] no, then I'll accept that
[9:22:13] as well and go back to the
[9:22:14] drawing board, but I want
[9:22:15] to be clear that I don't
[9:22:16] support encouraging
[9:22:16] anybody, community groups,
[9:22:17] individuals, to sue us on
[9:22:17] this.
[9:22:18] Our resources are already
[9:22:19] extremely thin in our
[9:22:19] litigation and attorneys
[9:22:20] office.
[9:22:20] We do not want you to sue
[9:22:21] us, but equally, we are
[9:22:22] looking at this, we are
[9:22:23] trying to figure this out,
[9:22:23] we are our very diverse
[9:22:24] community.
[9:22:24] We haven't figured out a
[9:22:25] path forward yet, but I
[9:22:26] believe we are going to be
[9:22:26] working with you all very
[9:22:27] closely to achieve that.
[9:22:28] So is there an opportunity
[9:22:29] after all, and you MAY say
[9:22:30] yes, generally, or you MAY
[9:22:30] say no to either pin
[9:22:31] something that in any way
[9:22:36] allows us to, you know, to
[9:22:37] circumvent this.
[9:22:37] If the answer is no,
[9:22:38] preemption is preemption.
[9:22:39] Is there anything we can
[9:22:40] put into a charter
[9:22:42] potentially, any
[9:22:42] litigation you all would
[9:22:43] consider that you might be
[9:22:44] able to advise us even if
[9:22:45] it's generally and we'll
[9:22:50] have specific
[9:22:51] conversations come
[9:22:51] SEPTEMBER or AUGUST.
[9:22:52] >> commissioner, we do not
[9:22:53] believe that the charter
[9:22:54] is a vehicle for amending,
[9:22:55] you know, or preempting
[9:22:55] state law at this point in
[9:22:56] time.
[9:23:12] However, we do understand
[9:23:13] the impact that this will
[9:23:14] have on the county's
[9:23:14] operations going forward
[9:23:15] both from the promotion
[9:23:16] standpoint as well as the
[9:23:16] funding standpoint and on
[9:23:17] the community and we have
[9:23:18] been meeting I would say
[9:23:19] at least three times
[9:23:19] weekly some days three
[9:23:20] times daily because the
[9:23:21] breadth of this statute is
[9:23:22] expensive and it will
[9:23:24] touch many areas of this
[9:23:25] county and the way we
[9:23:26] operate in ways people
[9:23:26] maybe have not even
[9:23:51] considered as of yet and I
[9:23:51] just want to pledge to you
[9:23:52] that we've taken it
[9:23:53] seriously and we
[9:23:53] understand what this means
[9:23:54] to the community and we
[9:23:55] will stand ready to speak
[9:23:56] with each of you about any
[9:23:56] options that you all have
[9:23:57] going forward hopefully
[9:23:58] before the budget hearing
[9:23:58] in SEPTEMBER.
[9:23:59] >> and final question.
[9:24:00] Ou mention the budget
[9:24:00] hearing come SEPTEMBER
[9:24:01] because what we adopt in
[9:24:02] SEPTEMBER, I understand
[9:24:03] this will not take effect
[9:24:04] until JANUARY 1, but we're
[9:24:04] gonna pass a budget in
[9:24:05] SEPTEMBER that MAY or MAY
[9:24:06] not include dollars that
[9:24:07] MAY be ineligible come
[9:24:07] JANUARY potentially.
[9:24:14] So anyway, a lot of
[9:24:15] questions I look forward
[9:24:16] to working with you, but I
[9:24:16] just want to make clear I
[9:24:17] share the sentiment that I
[9:24:18] feel like we have a moral
[9:24:19] and potentially legal
[9:24:19] obligation to stand up as
[9:24:20] a county on this issue and
[9:24:22] make our voices heard as
[9:24:22] possible in our lack of
[9:24:23] support.
[9:24:30] Thank you very much, MR.
[9:24:30] Chair.
[9:24:31] >> thank you,
[9:24:31] commissioner.
[9:24:32] You hit the nail on the
[9:24:32] head there.
[9:24:38] It was a good segue.
[9:24:38] So in addition, of course,
[9:24:39] to the countless
[9:24:40] conversations with the
[9:24:41] county attorney's office
[9:24:52] on this topic, the mayor
[9:24:53] and myself has had several
[9:24:53] conversations.
[9:24:54] We've actually rolled up
[9:24:55] our sleeves and I think
[9:24:55] this is a good moment to
[9:24:56] allow and to say to the
[9:24:57] community that we are not
[9:25:28] just taking what the state
[9:25:28] passed and the governor
[9:25:29] signed and blindly
[9:25:29] implement thing it.
[9:25:30] We are rolling up our
[9:25:31] sleeves and we are seeing,
[9:25:32] we are digging deeper and
[9:25:32] seeing what other services
[9:25:33] these organizations offer,
[9:25:34] who they help in our
[9:25:35] community, what larger
[9:25:35] groups that are not just
[9:25:36] one minority group.
[9:25:37] We are not trying to
[9:25:37] circumvent the law, we are
[9:25:38] not trying to find a
[9:25:38] loophole, but we are
[9:25:39] trying to dig deeper and
[9:25:40] see what broader service
[9:25:40] do these organizations
[9:25:42] help fund and support and
[9:25:42] the entire community, not
[9:25:43] just any minority portion
[9:25:44] of it, in order to make
[9:25:44] sure that we can maintain
[9:25:45] some of these services.
[9:25:46] The mayor has been an
[9:25:46] advocate of that since
[9:25:59] this was even a discussion
[9:26:00] prior to being signed by
[9:26:00] the governor.
[9:26:02] And again, we had several
[9:26:02] conversations where we've
[9:26:03] actually discussed this.
[9:26:04] Again, it is not something
[9:26:05] that we are just blindly
[9:26:05] implement thing something
[9:26:06] that the state passed.
[9:26:07] We are exploring all
[9:26:08] options obviously jointly
[9:26:08] with the county attorney's
[9:26:09] office.
[9:26:09] We want to make sure we
[9:26:10] run no fowls here.
[9:26:10] And we are in this
[9:26:11] particular case, and some
[9:26:12] MAY disagree with this one
[9:26:13] word, but we need to be
[9:26:14] conservative because there
[9:26:15] are personal repercussions
[9:26:15] that the state can take on
[9:26:26] this body including I
[9:26:27] believe removal is one of
[9:26:28] them, right?
[9:26:28] So we're making sure we
[9:26:29] run no fowls, but that we
[9:26:30] definitely explore all
[9:26:42] options on this.
[9:26:42] Guys, I'm not changing
[9:26:43] subjects, we are not into
[9:26:44] kindergarten.
[9:26:44] I got you all.
[9:26:45] But they are, if you want
[9:26:46] to kind of address that
[9:26:46] because it was a segue to
[9:26:47] what we've been working
[9:26:47] on.
[9:26:48] >> Mayor Levine Cava:
[9:27:00] thank you so much, MR.
[9:27:01] Chair, and I completely
[9:27:01] agree with how you've
[9:27:02] characterized it.
[9:27:02] We've been looking at
[9:27:03] other counties, other
[9:27:04] cities, other commissions,
[9:27:04] other organizations and
[9:27:05] what actions they are
[9:27:05] taking.
[9:27:06] A lot of people obviously
[9:27:06] trying to figure out how
[9:27:07] to proceed.
[9:27:09] Will during
[9:27:10] our budget briefings share
[9:27:11] some ideas that I have not
[9:27:11] only for nonprofits, but
[9:27:12] for our own internal
[9:27:13] operations, ways that we
[9:27:16] can ensure that community
[9:27:16] voices can still be heard.
[9:27:17] Thank you, MR. Chair.
[9:27:18] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:27:18] all right, so I've got
[9:27:19] commissioner from district
[9:27:21] 4. Commissioner.
[9:27:27] >> okay, dislike and
[9:27:27] recurring --
[9:27:29] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: is
[9:27:29] either you or you lose
[9:27:30] your spot.
[9:27:30] >> all right.
[9:27:39] So I want us to just take
[9:27:39] a moment.
[9:27:40] If you look around the
[9:27:40] room, look around this
[9:27:40] dais.
[9:27:41] This bill affects every,
[9:27:42] in some form, in some
[9:27:42] capacity, effects
[9:27:56] everyone of us, us, okay?
[9:27:57] This is such an expansive
[9:27:57] bill.
[9:27:57] You MAY think oh, it's
[9:27:58] some bill that won't
[9:27:59] affect me, but it does.
[9:27:59] But it does because it
[9:28:00] affects every one of us up
[9:28:01] here to some degree.
[9:28:01] That's how broadly this
[9:28:07] bill is written.
[9:28:08] To that, I want to first
[9:28:09] of all thank you,
[9:28:09] commissioner lopez, for
[9:28:10] bringing this forward.
[9:28:10] I think it's important
[9:28:11] that we have this
[9:28:12] conversation, of course
[9:28:12] mindful of the
[9:28:13] conversation because we do
[9:28:34] have our attorneys over
[9:28:34] there, and we do want to
[9:28:35] make sure we put ourselves
[9:28:36] in the best posture
[9:28:36] possible.
[9:28:37] So I just want clarity in
[9:28:37] exactly what you want us
[9:28:38] to try to resolve today or
[9:28:39] give direction with, but I
[9:28:40] will say this.
[9:28:40] We do need to be careful.
[9:28:41] Mean, we can look at
[9:28:42] this through many
[9:28:43] different lenses and I for
[9:28:43] one obviously because
[9:28:44] there's so much ambiguity,
[9:28:45] I would take advantage of
[9:28:45] that ambiguity,
[9:28:46] personally.
[9:28:46] But as they look at me,
[9:28:47] but I do think that, you
[9:28:48] know, to have the
[9:28:49] attorneys explore and come
[9:29:07] back to us individually I
[9:29:08] think is the smart first
[9:29:08] step.
[9:29:08] That way we get as much
[9:29:09] clarity and we can have
[9:29:10] these conversations
[9:29:11] because if we do end up in
[9:29:11] any sort of situation in
[9:29:12] the future, I want to make
[9:29:13] sure that we, again, put
[9:29:14] ourselves in the best
[9:29:14] posture forward.
[9:29:15] CHAIRMAN, I do think if
[9:29:15] that was a motion, just
[9:29:16] rephrase it, I'm happy to
[9:29:17] second that motion.
[9:29:17] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:29:18] all right, so is that the
[9:29:18] motion?
[9:29:19] >> it was.
[9:29:19] I will rephrase it to
[9:29:20] direct the county attorney
[9:29:21] to research the county's
[9:29:22] ability to challenge the
[9:29:23] validity of senate bill 34
[9:29:26] or alternatively asked the
[9:29:27] court to clarify and brief
[9:29:28] each commissioner
[9:29:29] individually regarding the
[9:29:33] results of their research.
[9:29:33] >> MAY I?
[9:29:34] >> its order, though.
[9:29:50] It's either or.
[9:29:51] >> just want them to
[9:29:52] research it and get back
[9:29:52] to us individually to let
[9:29:53] us know what our options
[9:29:53] are.
[9:29:54] >> because let me tell you
[9:29:55] one concern of the route
[9:29:55] of just going straight to
[9:29:56] the board is that -- well,
[9:29:57] I don't know legally what
[9:29:57] we can and can't do in
[9:29:58] terms of standing, but
[9:29:59] that's for them to figure
[9:30:16] out.
[9:30:17] You know, I don't want to
[9:30:17] have them determine for
[9:30:18] us, like, I'd rather us
[9:30:19] create our positions.
[9:30:19] What if they are looking
[9:30:20] at other municipalities
[9:30:21] and other counties and
[9:30:22] they are also being
[9:30:22] affected of this up and
[9:30:23] down the coast of this
[9:30:23] wonderful state.
[9:30:24] So what's gonna happen is
[9:30:25] some MAY have a more
[9:30:26] liberal interpretation and
[9:30:26] I don't want to then hurt
[9:30:27] those municipalities or
[9:30:28] counties because now we're
[9:30:29] seeking some sort of
[9:30:30] rendering from a court
[9:30:30] that MAY look at it
[9:30:31] through anymore, as the
[9:30:32] term was used,
[9:30:32] conservative lens, and we
[9:30:33] MAY now hurt maybe some
[9:30:50] other municipality in the
[9:30:50] state.
[9:30:51] So I don't know.
[9:30:51] So I like the idea of
[9:30:52] supporting the direction
[9:30:53] to explore.
[9:30:53] I need to know more about
[9:30:54] it before, so maybe you
[9:30:55] can restate that to say --
[9:30:56] >> okay, then I'll restate
[9:30:56] it to explore the options
[9:30:57] available to us of the
[9:30:58] impacts of senate bill
[9:30:58] 1134 and get back to us
[9:31:09] individually.
[9:31:09] Yes.
[9:31:10] >> with options including
[9:31:10] --
[9:31:10] >> all options.
[9:31:11] I would say all options.
[9:31:12] >> I think all options
[9:31:13] should be on the table.
[9:31:13] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: we
[9:31:14] got a motion, we got a
[9:31:15] second by commissioner
[9:31:16] steinberg, and
[9:31:16] commissioner gilbert,
[9:31:17] you're still recognized.
[9:31:17] I stripped you from the
[9:31:18] conversation because you
[9:31:19] were talking about
[9:31:20] lawsuits and stuff.
[9:31:21] >> Oliver Gilbert: it was
[9:31:22] a comma and then it was
[9:31:22] a period.
[9:31:23] I don't want people to
[9:31:24] come after us for money,
[9:31:24] but if we createe an
[9:31:25] application process for, I
[9:31:47] don't know, our, you know,
[9:31:47] community-based
[9:31:48] organization funds, money
[9:31:49] that we give out, and for
[9:31:49] instance, some of the
[9:31:50] groups that are affected,
[9:31:50] they apply but we don't
[9:31:51] accept their application
[9:31:52] because we can't under the
[9:31:53] new law, then they get to
[9:31:54] seek declaratory judgment
[9:31:54] against us.
[9:31:55] That's how you get to
[9:31:55] court.
[9:31:56] Faster.
[9:31:56] That's just how you get to
[9:31:57] court faster.
[9:32:02] We -- I appreciate we
[9:32:02] can't -- it's gonna be
[9:32:03] hard for us to sue you, so
[9:32:04] if you want to get to
[9:32:08] court before JANUARY, I
[9:32:08] think that's -- and we
[9:32:09] need somebody to tell us
[9:32:11] how to interpret this
[9:32:12] because, to your credit,
[9:32:23] MR. CHAIRMAN, there's
[9:32:24] peril here for elected
[9:32:25] officials and public
[9:32:25] officials who actually go
[9:32:26] against this statute.
[9:32:26] So it's dangerous.
[9:32:27] I think we create a
[9:32:31] process because they won't
[9:32:32] be able to receive funds
[9:32:33] under that process because
[9:32:33] of the statute.
[9:32:40] They look at it, I mean,
[9:32:41] that's -- now, the other
[9:32:41] route, I don't know if
[9:32:42] this is possible.
[9:32:46] We can also just give all
[9:32:47] of our money for these
[9:32:47] type of events to the
[9:32:48] miami foundation and let
[9:32:55] them administer it.
[9:32:56] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:32:56] well, I think it goes
[9:32:57] further than just cbo's,
[9:32:57] though.
[9:32:58] Its departments.
[9:32:58] Is everything.
[9:33:00] >> Oliver Gilbert: we can
[9:33:00] start by doing something
[9:33:01] like that and see if it's
[9:33:01] legal.
[9:33:02] You never know.
[9:33:04] We could start doing
[9:33:05] something like that.
[9:33:05] I think but those are
[9:33:06] options.
[9:33:20] I'm not advocating that
[9:33:20] they sue us for money.
[9:33:21] I'm advocating that we
[9:33:22] need to actually get in
[9:33:22] front of a judge and
[9:33:23] that's probably the
[9:33:24] quickest way for a judge
[9:33:24] to tell us whether this
[9:33:25] law is binding or not.
[9:33:26] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:33:27] commissioner from district
[9:33:27] 12.
[9:33:28] >> I'll be brief.
[9:33:29] I'm fine with the motion
[9:33:29] because we need to get
[9:33:30] their opinion, but I just
[9:33:31] want to remind this AUGUST
[9:33:31] body that during the
[9:33:32] double taxation, triple
[9:33:42] taxation days, mitigation,
[9:33:42] some of you were here,
[9:33:43] king george, you know who
[9:33:44] he was, and the commission
[9:33:50] that was a bill passed in
[9:33:50] tallahassee eliminating
[9:33:51] mitigation, not making it
[9:34:00] a one county issue because
[9:34:01] that was the issue they
[9:34:01] had to get around, and the
[9:34:02] county sued.
[9:34:03] The county sued over that
[9:34:03] state law.
[9:34:10] Eventually, we reached an
[9:34:11] agreement, king george and
[9:34:12] I, and mitigation was
[9:34:13] given up by the county
[9:34:13] because legally this was
[9:34:14] state law, but the county,
[9:34:26] the county went into the
[9:34:27] courts, first lost at the
[9:34:28] beginning because it was
[9:34:29] in tallahassee and then
[9:34:30] brought it down to a local
[9:34:31] judge here in miami-dade
[9:34:31] county who had once been a
[9:34:32] county attorney.
[9:34:33] So all I'm telling you,
[9:34:33] because I agree with our
[9:34:43] CHAIRMAN That these are
[9:34:44] different times in a
[9:34:45] different world and I do
[9:34:45] think that we have to be
[9:34:46] very smart in the way that
[9:34:46] we deal with the reality
[9:34:48] of what's happening from
[9:34:48] tallahassee, but the fact
[9:34:49] that if the county has an
[9:34:50] opinion on a certain law
[9:34:50] that MAY impact the
[9:34:56] county, the excuse that
[9:34:57] that's not one -- MAY not
[9:34:57] be the best option, MAY
[9:34:58] not be the one you guys
[9:34:58] recommend, but in the
[9:35:01] past, you did sue over a
[9:35:05] state law that was passed.
[9:35:06] That supported
[9:35:12] municipalities because I
[9:35:13] was the one on the other
[9:35:13] side that had to fight
[9:35:14] you.
[9:35:15] I can tell you that's not
[9:35:26] impossible.
[9:35:26] Now, whether that will
[9:35:27] place you in the same
[9:35:27] position as an
[9:35:28] organization that is
[9:35:29] impacted directly, that we
[9:35:29] can debate.
[9:35:30] but when you look at
[9:35:30] these, when you look at
[9:35:31] these cases, I'm gonna ask
[9:35:33] you then why the ****
[9:35:33] did you sue me back in
[9:35:34] 2006 because truthfully
[9:35:35] that was a state law that
[9:35:36] was passed bipartisan
[9:35:38] signed by the governor.
[9:35:39] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:35:39] all right.
[9:35:41] Vice CHAIRMAN About to
[9:35:46] call a motion.
[9:35:47] >> Vice CHAIRMAN McGhee:
[9:35:48] thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN.
[9:35:49] What I'm about to say is
[9:35:50] probably not going to be
[9:35:54] popular, but I am putting
[9:35:54] the county attorney's
[9:36:03] office on notice.
[9:36:04] I'm also putting the state
[9:36:05] on notice.
[9:36:05] ****, I'm putting
[9:36:06] everybody on notice.
[9:36:07] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: as
[9:36:08] a personal person, not as
[9:36:11] a commissioner on this
[9:36:11] body.
[9:36:12] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:36:13] >> Vice CHAIRMAN McGhee:
[9:36:13] correct.
[9:36:14] If removal is what it's
[9:36:15] gonna take, especially for
[9:36:26] those in my districtwho
[9:36:27] are going to be affected,
[9:36:28] if removal is the option
[9:36:28] of the state of the
[9:36:29] governor, then removal
[9:36:30] it's gonna have to be.
[9:36:31] I intend to encourage my
[9:36:33] residents and those who I
[9:36:34] support to break this law.
[9:36:35] I intend -- come on,
[9:36:35] please.
[9:36:35] Lease.
[9:36:39] I intend, if possible, to
[9:36:47] fund organizations that
[9:36:48] support uplifting this
[9:36:48] community.
[9:36:49] And if that is making some
[9:36:49] people uncomfortable,
[9:36:52] well, I believe those in
[9:36:53] tallahassee should have
[9:36:54] thought it through because
[9:36:54] now they are making us
[9:37:02] feel uncomfortable and I
[9:37:03] am not going back to my
[9:37:04] district facing the people
[9:37:05] who put me in office to
[9:37:05] represent their voice and
[9:37:06] their position and tell
[9:37:06] them that they are
[9:37:30] representative chose to
[9:37:31] hold onto a seat as
[9:37:31] opposed to fighting for
[9:37:32] their position.
[9:37:32] So I'm just putting
[9:37:33] everyone on notice I
[9:37:34] intend to encourage a
[9:37:35] different result from many
[9:37:36] up here, but I'm not going
[9:37:36] to back down on this one.
[9:37:37] This is the one where we
[9:37:38] put the flag into the
[9:37:38] ground.
[9:37:39] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:37:39] all right.
[9:37:40] I got a motion, we got a
[9:37:40] second.
[9:37:41] All in favor signify by
[9:37:41] saying aye.
[9:37:42] All opposed, nay. Show it
[9:37:42] passed.
[9:37:43] Nonattorney or MR.
[9:37:43] Attorney, there's a motion
[9:37:44] that I have and then
[9:37:45] we're them a go around the
[9:37:46] room for motions, but will
[9:37:59] you start with mine,
[9:37:59] please?
[9:38:00] I have two or three?
[9:38:00] >> are we going to make it
[9:38:01] to -- what's the plan?
[9:38:02] >> vicki lopez to the
[9:38:02] miami river commission.
[9:38:03] > CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:38:04] all right.
[9:38:05] Commissioner gonzalez
[9:38:06] moves that item for me,
[9:38:07] seconded by commissioner
[9:38:07] regalado. All in favor
[9:38:08] say aye five by saying
[9:38:12] aye.
[9:38:13] All opposed, nay.
[9:38:13] Show it passed.
[9:38:14] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriguez
[9:38:15] moves to -- to cancel the
[9:38:19] JULY 23, 2026 zoning
[9:38:19] meeting.
[9:38:20] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:38:21] this is this thursday's
[9:38:22] meeting.
[9:38:22] We've got on it about,
[9:38:34] like, three items.
[9:38:35] We will just be sending it
[9:38:35] to the very next zoning
[9:38:36] meeting.
[9:38:37] It's been moved by
[9:38:37] commissioner gonzalez,
[9:38:37] seconded by the vice
[9:38:38] chair.
[9:38:38] All in favors signify by
[9:38:39] saying aye.
[9:38:44] All opposed nay. Show
[9:38:45] that meeting canceled and
[9:38:45] the motion passed. Is
[9:38:46] that all for me?
[9:38:47] >> that's all I have for
[9:38:47] you, MR. CHAIRMAN.
[9:38:48] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:38:49] commissioner bermudez,
[9:38:55] you'ree recognized for a
[9:38:55] motion?
[9:38:56] >> Juan Carlos Bermudez:
[9:38:57] yeah, I have three
[9:38:57] motions.
[9:38:58] You guys can read them?
[9:38:58] >> I have two for you,
[9:38:59] commissioner bermudez.
[9:39:00] Would you like me to go
[9:39:13] ahead and read the otion?
[9:39:14] Commissioner bermudez
[9:39:14] does move to direct the
[9:39:15] county mayor doesn't need
[9:39:16] to include the district 12
[9:39:17] of the membership of the
[9:39:18] new airport policy and
[9:39:18] institutional advisory
[9:39:19] committee reference in the
[9:39:20] mayor's JUNE 20 memorandum
[9:39:21] regarding the feasibility
[9:39:30] of creating a new airport
[9:39:30] capability of
[9:39:31] accommodating general
[9:39:32] passengers and general
[9:39:32] aviation activity.
[9:39:33] >> Juan Carlos Bermudez:
[9:39:34] 90% of the county's
[9:39:34] commercial and 100% of
[9:39:35] it's other activities, but
[9:39:36] 90% commercial probably is
[9:39:37] coming out of the airport
[9:39:38] to not have district 12 on
[9:39:39] there when all of the
[9:39:39] businesses are in the area
[9:39:40] are directly impacted by
[9:39:45] the airport.
[9:39:46] Obviously, I think
[9:39:46] district 12 should be
[9:39:47] included.
[9:39:47] There's a lot of
[9:39:55] businesses in district 12.
[9:39:56] Good part connected to the
[9:39:56] airport.
[9:39:57] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: so
[9:39:57] you move --
[9:39:58] >> Marleine Bastien: in
[9:39:59] yeah, it's just to be
[9:39:59] included in what's it
[9:40:00] called again?
[9:40:03] Membership of the airport
[9:40:03] advisory committee.
[9:40:04] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: I
[9:40:05] missed it because I was
[9:40:05] being spoken to.
[9:40:06] What is the thing you want
[9:40:06] to do?
[9:40:07] >> Juan Carlos Bermudez:
[9:40:16] the airport policy
[9:40:17] committee which is
[9:40:17] referenced in the JUNE 30,
[9:40:18] 2026 memorandum which
[9:40:19] regards the feasibility of
[9:40:19] creating a new airport
[9:40:27] capable of of -- general
[9:40:28] aviation activities, the
[9:40:29] district most impacted by
[9:40:30] the airport with all due
[9:40:30] respect to districts six
[9:40:31] which is also impacted
[9:40:32] which is district 12, and
[9:40:38] I think we should have a
[9:40:39] position on that board or
[9:40:39] whatever it is.
[9:40:40] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:40:41] this is which board?
[9:40:41] The one I created?
[9:40:42] The cares act or is this
[9:40:42] the other one?
[9:40:43] >> Juan Carlos Bermudez:
[9:40:44] the new airport policy and
[9:40:45] institutional advisory
[9:40:45] committee.
[9:40:46] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:40:47] the that when she no
[9:40:48] longer -- that one is
[9:40:48] dismantled.
[9:40:56] Oh, got that's okay.
[9:40:57] So it's been moved, it's
[9:40:57] been seconded by the vice
[9:40:58] chair.
[9:40:58] >> I'd like to piggyback
[9:41:02] on that and get an
[9:41:02] appointment as well.
[9:41:03] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: I
[9:41:04] think that you are.
[9:41:05] I think that you are on
[9:41:11] it.
[9:41:11] >> okay.
[9:41:12] >> wait, hold on, hold on,
[9:41:12] because I was being asked
[9:41:13] about the range of
[9:41:14] meetings and stuff in the
[9:41:17] back and.
[9:41:17] Hold on.
[9:41:18] This is my item, right?
[9:41:19] >> no multitasking after 5
[9:41:23] pm.
[9:41:24] This is my directive to
[9:41:25] create, was this my thing
[9:41:33] to create -- it was the
[9:41:34] mayor's, but it was based
[9:41:35] on my directive to explore
[9:41:45] different airport matters,
[9:41:45] right?
[9:41:45] Okay yes, so and then
[9:41:46] right now the way it
[9:41:47] stands, the way we did
[9:41:47] this is that each member
[9:41:48] that has an airport has a
[9:41:49] seat on it?
[9:41:49] What's the current
[9:41:50] structure today versus
[9:41:51] what bermudez is trying
[9:42:03] to add to it?
[9:42:04] >> Danielle Cohen Higgins:
[9:42:04] it did not have 12.
[9:42:05] I don't know if six was on
[9:42:05] there.
[9:42:06] Six MAY be on there, but
[9:42:07] the businesses in district
[9:42:08] 12 are deeply impacted by
[9:42:08] this.
[9:42:09] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:42:44] okay.
[9:42:45] Nothing is being done this
[9:42:46] very second.
[9:42:46] Can we table that motion
[9:42:47] until it comes up like the
[9:42:48] next meeting?
[9:42:48] Because I think we still
[9:42:49] need to discuss with the
[9:42:50] mayor some details on it.
[9:42:50] Let's just -- it doesn't
[9:42:51] matter -- everyone can
[9:42:51] have an input.
[9:42:52] It's not that.
[9:42:53] I don't want to have what
[9:42:53] gonzalez just did, which
[9:42:54] he is already on it.
[9:42:55] He didn't even know he was
[9:42:55] already on it.
[9:42:56] It can't become like the
[9:42:56] wild wild west here.
[9:42:57] >> Juan Carlos Bermudez:
[9:42:58] I'm gonna make it easy for
[9:42:58] you.
[9:42:59] I'm willing to wait out of
[9:43:00] respect for you, but right
[9:43:00] now thomistic --
[9:43:01] commission district 7,
[9:43:02] eight, nine my argument
[9:43:02] would be six and 12 should
[9:43:11] be on there.
[9:43:12] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: I
[9:43:13] agree that six and 12
[9:43:13] should be on there.
[9:43:14] >> chair, through the
[9:43:14] chair --
[9:43:15] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:43:15] yes, MADAM Mayor.
[9:43:16] >> Mayor Levine Cava: I'm
[9:43:17] very happy to accommodate
[9:43:18] representation from
[9:43:18] district 12.
[9:43:19] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:43:19] and six because six has --
[9:43:20] >> Mayor Levine Cava:
[9:43:21] sure, six and 12.
[9:43:21] The airport in district 6.
[9:43:22] Sorry, I didn't hear that.
[9:43:35] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:43:35] let's bring it back, let's
[9:43:36] do it so we can see with
[9:43:37] the right structure is,
[9:43:37] but it's not a big deal.
[9:43:38] It should be fine.
[9:43:39] You have more, though.
[9:43:40] >> what's the next one?
[9:43:40] >> county mayor designate
[9:43:41] to enter into a grant
[9:43:42] agreement with nbc
[9:43:42] universal or its
[9:43:43] subsidiary or affiliate to
[9:43:56] provide a grant of
[9:43:57] $1,020,000 in legally
[9:43:58] general funds originally
[9:43:58] allocated for film
[9:43:59] incentives for the
[9:43:59] production of miami vice
[9:44:00] 85 provided the production
[9:44:01] complies with the grant
[9:44:01] agreement and further
[9:44:02] moves to authorize the
[9:44:03] county mayor designate to
[9:44:04] execute the grant
[9:44:05] agreement and exercise the
[9:44:05] provisions therein
[9:44:06] following approval by the
[9:44:07] county attorney's office
[9:44:08] for form and legal
[9:44:08] sufficiency.
[9:44:09] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:44:09] this is miami vice movie,
[9:44:10] okay, don't everybody get
[9:44:10] excited.
[9:44:11] And telemundo nbc would
[9:44:11] bring production.
[9:44:12] I think it's hundreds of
[9:44:15] thousands of
[9:44:15] .
[9:44:16] The impact would be over
[9:44:19] $35 million of of stuff
[9:44:20] to miami-dade county.
[9:44:30] >> second that.Cond that.
[9:44:31] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:44:32] moved by commissioner
[9:44:32] bermudez --
[9:44:32] >> if I MAY?
[9:44:33] >> clarification.
[9:44:34] >> Mayor Levine Cava:
[9:44:35] [Indiscernible]
[9:44:36] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: so
[9:44:37] it's been moved, it's been
[9:44:47] seconded.Nded.
[9:44:48] Commissioner garcia, if
[9:44:49] you're asking to have a
[9:44:50] part in the movie, we're
[9:44:50] gonna have to discuss
[9:44:50] that.
[9:44:51] >> it MAY be a part in the
[9:44:52] movie where I have to kill
[9:44:52] someone after.
[9:44:53] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:44:54] you are the filmmaker,
[9:44:54] though.
[9:44:55] You are the film guy.
[9:44:55] >> and this is what
[9:44:56] happens when people don't
[9:45:04] have
[9:45:04] >> I'm starving.
[9:45:05] I'm starving here.
[9:45:06] MR. CHAIRMAN, this is part
[9:45:06] of the film incentive
[9:45:07] program that we've been
[9:45:08] working -- that we worked
[9:45:08] on.
[9:45:09] Unfortunately, last year
[9:45:09] we voted to scale back the
[9:45:13] incentives and right now I
[9:45:13] don't think this is an
[9:45:14] appropriate time to move
[9:45:15] forward with this and
[9:45:15] clarify exactly how this
[9:45:16] incentive oral work, so
[9:45:17] I'm going to ask
[9:45:17] commissioner bermudez if
[9:45:33] he could withdraw it.
[9:45:34] I've already spoken to him
[9:45:35] and I think we could
[9:45:35] sunshine it together, you
[9:45:36] could get the part in the
[9:45:37] movie because obviously
[9:45:38] you are movie star looks
[9:45:38] could get you a little
[9:45:39] further, but the reality
[9:45:40] is we need to do it
[9:45:40] quickly because I don't
[9:45:41] want to MISS The
[9:45:42] opportunity to bring this
[9:45:47] much work to miami-dade
[9:45:47] county.
[9:45:48] >> you won't MISS The
[9:45:48] opportunity.
[9:45:49] We've been having some
[9:45:49] conversations and we'll
[9:45:50] get this right back on
[9:45:50] track.
[9:45:59] >> I'm fine doing this and
[9:46:00] getting it all together.
[9:46:01] >> to me, my go to guy for
[9:46:01] film is senator garcia,
[9:46:02] right, as far as he has
[9:46:03] made himself the film king
[9:46:15] and actually advocated to
[9:46:16] even move this under
[9:46:16] office of the chair.
[9:46:17] It was moved over without
[9:46:18] proper funding, but it's
[9:46:18] here and now we're getting
[9:46:19] it, but I would.
[9:46:20] And I see that because
[9:46:20] they reach out to me as
[9:46:20] well.
[9:46:35] I'm sure they reached out
[9:46:35] both of you.
[9:46:36] That's why you're making
[9:46:37] the motion and having
[9:46:37] communication.
[9:46:38] If someone wants to
[9:46:38] approach the well, if
[9:46:39] there's anyone here from
[9:46:40] that's requesting this
[9:46:40] funding --
[9:46:41] >> I don't think they are
[9:46:41] here today.
[9:46:42] MR. Chair, just to be
[9:46:42] clear, I'm saying it
[9:46:43] probably came to me.
[9:46:44] Not because I have the
[9:46:44] movie star looks of
[9:46:45] senator garcia.
[9:46:45] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: if
[9:46:46] they are not here, they
[9:47:01] are not here.
[9:47:02] If you're both agreeing to
[9:47:03] that, and I imagine you
[9:47:03] know something I don't
[9:47:03] know.
[9:47:04] It's not like a timeframe
[9:47:05] issue.
[9:47:05] There's not a timeline
[9:47:06] they were going to go
[9:47:33] somewhere else.
[9:47:34] It's not necessarily the
[9:47:35] next meeting.
[9:47:35] You guys can make the
[9:47:47] motion at any time.
[9:47:48] Have a little sunshine
[9:47:49] about it.
[9:47:49] >> we can sunshine it.
[9:47:50] The next one I'll read.
[9:47:50] >> MR. Chair?
[9:47:51] >> Juan Carlos Bermudez:
[9:47:52] I would move that the
[9:47:52] board urged the united
[9:47:53] states congress and donald
[9:47:54] j trump to reinstate tps
[9:47:55] for nationals of
[9:48:01] venezuela, haiti,
[9:48:02] honduras, and any other
[9:48:02] caribbean or latin
[9:48:03] american country from
[9:48:04] which tps status was
[9:48:04] revoked and direct the
[9:48:10] court -- speaker of the us
[9:48:11] house of representatives,
[9:48:12] the PRESIDENT Pro tem of
[9:48:12] the U.S. Senate and
[9:48:13] members of the florida
[9:48:14] congressional delegation
[9:48:20] and direct the county
[9:48:21] lobbyist to advocate for
[9:48:22] the foregoing and direct
[9:48:22] office of
[9:48:23] intergovernmental affairs
[9:48:23] to amend 2026 federal
[9:48:24] legislative package to
[9:48:25] include this item.
[9:48:25] It's just in urging, but
[9:48:30] listen, commissioner
[9:48:30] cohen higgins said
[9:48:31] correctly.
[9:48:31] We are a minority majority
[9:48:32] county.
[9:48:38] Right now, in the
[9:48:39] venezuelan community, the
[9:48:39] haitian community is going
[9:48:40] through one of the most
[9:48:42] difficult, difficult
[9:48:43] situation when it comes to
[9:48:43] being able to work here.
[9:48:49] I know the mayor and
[9:48:50] commissioner bastien
[9:48:50] will be having a
[9:48:51] conversation because so
[9:48:52] many people are employed
[9:48:52] here.
[9:48:53] I think if it moves this
[9:48:58] commission to speak out in
[9:49:12] no more than it's at least
[9:49:13] important to us.
[9:49:13] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:49:14] okay, there's a motion and
[9:49:15] second by commissioner
[9:49:15] gilbert.
[9:49:16] If there's cosponsor, add
[9:49:17] me as cosponsor on that as
[9:49:17] well.
[9:49:18] Lopez as well, orbis as
[9:49:18] well, tps.
[9:49:19] Vice chair, dais.
[9:49:20] Let's wrap it up, guys.
[9:49:21] The whole what is it.
[9:49:26] Give me a good model.
[9:49:26] I don't want to mess up
[9:49:33] the word again, senator.
[9:49:33] The whole --
[9:49:34] >> that's what I was
[9:49:34] looking for.
[9:49:35] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:49:35] you see?
[9:49:36] Thank you, orbis.
[9:49:36] Someone had lunch around
[9:49:37] here.
[9:49:40] >> we packed our lunch,
[9:49:40] people.
[9:49:43] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:49:44] all in favor say aye five
[9:49:44] by saying aye.
[9:49:54] you got one.
[9:49:55] Bermudez, you got one.
[9:49:55] You're not batting very
[9:49:56] well, but you got one.
[9:49:57] >> Juan Carlos Bermudez:
[9:49:58] I'm very honored to have a
[9:49:58] sunshine with senator
[9:50:04] garcia.
[9:50:05] It's going to be
[9:50:05] wonderful.
[9:50:06] District 12 and 13 working
[9:50:06] together.
[9:50:07] > MR. Chair?
[9:50:08] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: do
[9:50:08] we have any motions or
[9:50:09] appointments?
[9:50:09] >> I have a motion.
[9:50:10] I will have the accounting
[9:50:11] attorneys actually.
[9:50:16] >> commissioner --
[9:50:17] relating to the amendment
[9:50:18] to the easement agreement
[9:50:23] between miami-dade county
[9:50:23] and the lion miami terrace
[9:50:24] llc for a portion of
[9:50:25] loveland trail adjacent to
[9:50:26] southwest eighth street,
[9:50:45] the easement agreement, to
[9:50:45] authorize county mayor
[9:50:46] mayor designate an
[9:50:47] ordination revise the
[9:50:47] easement agreement
[9:50:48] regarding the county
[9:50:49] default and rights
[9:50:49] provided that the
[9:50:50] provisions do not result
[9:50:50] in any additional
[9:50:51] obligations to the county.
[9:50:52] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez: I
[9:50:52] like that.
[9:50:53] Moved by commissioner
[9:50:54] orbis, seconded by
[9:50:54] commissioner lopez.
[9:50:54] Ll
[9:50:55] in favor signify by saying
[9:50:57] aye.
[9:50:57] All opposed, nay. Show
[9:50:58] the motion carries.
[9:50:59] Commissioner regalado,
[9:51:00] you have any motions or
[9:51:00] appointments?
[9:51:01] >> Raquel Regalado: for
[9:51:01] the sunshine meeting,
[9:51:02] grand theft auto the next
[9:51:03] one is going to be in
[9:51:05] miami, through that --
[9:51:06] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:51:06] that's a real life movie.
[9:51:07] >> Raquel Regalado: next
[9:51:08] grand theft auto they are
[9:51:17] picking sitess in miami
[9:51:18] county.
[9:51:18] Grand theft auto, pay
[9:51:19] attention.
[9:51:19] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:51:20] what's this whole thing
[9:51:21] people are doing like
[9:51:22] netflix documentaries.
[9:51:22] What's this whole
[9:51:22] movement?
[9:51:23] It's so cute.
[9:51:24] Was yours about, like what
[9:51:29] was the whole -- the yard
[9:51:30] signs?
[9:51:30] >> it's like when you were
[9:51:31] issuing the little babies.
[9:51:32] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:51:33] just waiting to see my
[9:51:33] documentary when they are
[9:51:34] stealing my signs, so
[9:51:35] yeah.
[9:51:36] All right.
[9:51:37] Commissioner gonzalez, any
[9:51:38] motions or appointments?
[9:51:38] Commissioner cohen
[9:51:47] higgins? Steinberg?
[9:51:48] >> Micky Steinberg: no, I
[9:51:49] will say commissioner
[9:51:49] bermudez, one year ago
[9:51:50] tomorrow, we are so happy
[9:51:51] you are with us and we do
[9:51:51] like you, believe it or
[9:52:08] not.
[9:52:08] [Laughter]
[9:52:09] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:52:09] what's the one year
[9:52:10] anniversary tomorrow?
[9:52:11] >> Micky Steinberg: it
[9:52:11] was one year ago tomorrow
[9:52:12] that he had his health
[9:52:12] issue.
[9:52:13] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:52:14] it's funny you bring that
[9:52:15] up, and we are all blessed
[9:52:15] that you're here with us,
[9:52:16] you really came back a
[9:52:17] changed man and I love it.
[9:52:17] You are the funniest
[9:52:18] member of this dais and I
[9:52:19] mean that.
[9:52:19] You give zero cares, you
[9:52:20] give zero cares and you
[9:52:21] just say what's on your
[9:52:21] mind and I love it.
[9:52:22] I couldn't eat it up a
[9:52:23] more.
[9:52:23] Commissioner gilbert,
[9:52:24] motions or appointments?
[9:52:25] >> Oliver Gilbert: I have
[9:52:36] a motion and an
[9:52:37] appointment if they can go
[9:52:38] ahead and read them from
[9:52:38] eight.
[9:52:39] >> with respect to the
[9:52:40] following developers that
[9:52:40] have been conveyed certain
[9:52:41] properties through the
[9:52:42] miami-dade initiative
[9:52:43] program, commissioner
[9:52:44] gilbert moves consistent
[9:52:44] with ordinance 21-80 to
[9:52:45] increase the maximum sales
[9:52:46] price from the 205,000 to
[9:52:46] the current maximum sales
[9:52:49] price pursuant to
[9:52:50] ordinance 21-80 through in
[9:52:50] accordance with the
[9:52:51] housing program further
[9:52:51] listed in the motion that
[9:52:52] was distributed by the
[9:52:55] clerk it is on file -- and
[9:52:56] reflects the portfolios
[9:52:56] for 34 ways foundation and
[9:52:59] 11 folios for palmetto
[9:53:00] homes.
[9:53:03] Commissioner gilbert moves
[9:53:08] pursuant to section 125.11
[9:53:08] florida statutes the
[9:53:09] developer identified
[9:53:16] herein for the properties
[9:53:16] identified herein
[9:53:17] following approval by the
[9:53:18] county attorney's office
[9:53:19] in order to effectuate the
[9:53:20] sales price increase to
[9:53:21] authorize the -- exercise
[9:53:22] any and all rights set
[9:53:22] forth in the deeds
[9:53:36] including but not limited
[9:53:36] to after conducting all
[9:53:37] due diligence title
[9:53:37] searches and environments
[9:53:38] will review and three
[9:53:39] direct the county mayor
[9:53:40] mayor designate to provide
[9:53:40] copies of the amended
[9:53:41] deeds to the property
[9:53:42] appraiser record amended
[9:53:42] deeds and provide copies
[9:53:43] of amended deeds to the
[9:53:44] clerk of the board.
[9:53:45] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:53:47] all right, we have a
[9:53:48] motion by commissioner
[9:53:48] gilbert, a second by
[9:53:49] commissioner bermudez.
[9:53:50] All in favor signify by
[9:53:50] saying aye.
[9:53:51] All opposed, nay.
[9:53:52] >> yes, I'd like to
[9:54:00] appoint john williams to
[9:54:00] the commission on
[9:54:01] disability issues.
[9:54:02] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:54:02] MR. Williams to the
[9:54:03] disability commission.
[9:54:04] Seconded by senator
[9:54:04] garcia.
[9:54:05] All in favor signify by
[9:54:05] saying aye.
[9:54:07] All opposed, nay.
[9:54:14] And senator -- hold on.
[9:54:14] Just one statement.
[9:54:15] And I'm kind of, like,
[9:54:22] bunning my business to
[9:54:23] something that's not our
[9:54:24] business but sort of my
[9:54:24] business.
[9:54:25] We have a cra meeting that
[9:54:26] starts in five minutes.
[9:54:34] none of us are going make
[9:54:35] it in five minutes.
[9:54:36] I don't think it's fair to
[9:54:36] have residents waiting for
[9:54:37] us 40 minutes, 50 minutes
[9:54:38] to get down south.
[9:54:38] If the two cochairs --
[9:54:39] it's more probably close
[9:54:39] to an hour.
[9:54:40] I don't know if this
[9:54:41] meeting can be canceled.
[9:54:42] It's a whole different
[9:54:42] body.
[9:54:42] Of course the cochairs,
[9:54:49] vice chair Mcghee and
[9:54:50] cochair cohen higgins.
[9:54:50] Isn't something we can
[9:54:51] cancel from this dais or
[9:54:52] reschedule?
[9:54:55] I'm using the wrong,
[9:54:56] surprised senator garcia
[9:55:05] did not correct my
[9:55:05] terminology.
[9:55:06] >> it's just one.
[9:55:06] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:55:07] but I don't think we can
[9:55:08] do it as this body, but
[9:55:08] the cochairs are present.
[9:55:09] By the way, I'm butting
[9:55:10] into something that's not
[9:55:11] my -- but we're just not
[9:55:11] gonna make it.
[9:55:22] We're ot gonna start a
[9:55:23] meeting at 7-7:30 P.M. To
[9:55:24] the attorneys, you want to
[9:55:25] respond at least to my
[9:55:25] concerns?
[9:55:26] >> MR. Chair, if you know
[9:55:26] you won't have a quorum at
[9:55:28] the meeting and quorum
[9:55:28] requirement for that, I
[9:55:45] believe it's five members.
[9:55:46] Then the meeting can be
[9:55:46] canceled.
[9:55:47] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:55:47] okay.
[9:55:47] All right.
[9:55:48] Again, I don't think
[9:55:48] anybody is going to make
[9:55:49] it.
[9:55:49] it's an hour and and a
[9:55:50] half if you just check
[9:55:50] mapquest or whatever the
[9:55:51] new map system is these
[9:55:51] days.
[9:55:52] >> it's called google.
[9:55:53] You should have lunch.
[9:55:53] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:55:54] waze.
[9:55:54] Vice chair, do you want to
[9:55:55] opine since it's your
[9:55:55] meeting?
[9:55:56] >> Vice CHAIRMAN McGhee:
[9:55:57] I don't want to
[9:55:57] inconvenience anyone here,
[9:56:01] but at the same time I do
[9:56:02] know there are -- at the
[9:56:02] same time, I do know there
[9:56:03] are some individuals that
[9:56:06] are there.
[9:56:06] I guess my question is to
[9:56:07] the county attorney to the
[9:56:08] administration, do we have
[9:56:13] to suspend this meeting
[9:56:14] and then bring forth the
[9:56:14] cre meeting right now in
[9:56:18] order to reschedule?
[9:56:22] When is the next tre
[9:56:23] meeting scheduled?
[9:56:39] >> it's up to the cochairs
[9:56:40] of the cra to
[9:56:40] reschedule.
[9:56:41] >> but when is the next
[9:56:41] rescheduled meeting?
[9:56:42] >> we are not aware of
[9:56:42] that.
[9:56:43] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:56:44] all right, so we're not --
[9:56:44] okay, sounds good.
[9:56:45] With that, commissioner
[9:56:47] lopez, any appointments?
[9:56:48] MR. Garcia, you are
[9:56:48] recognized.
[9:56:49] >> monica brown for the
[9:56:50] black affairs advisory
[9:56:53] board.
[9:56:54] Bruce oros to the film
[9:57:02] and entertainment board,
[9:57:03] christine lamera to the
[9:57:04] community citizens board,
[9:57:04] and I do have a motion
[9:57:13] that I would like to read.
[9:57:14] >> senator garcia moves to
[9:57:14] authorize the county mayor
[9:57:15] county mayor's designee to
[9:57:16] negotiate and execute an
[9:57:17] interlocal agreement with
[9:57:18] the children's trust
[9:57:25] filing to provide real
[9:57:26] estate services to the
[9:57:27] trust in connection with
[9:57:27] the trust potential
[9:57:28] acquisition of real
[9:57:29] property and furtherance
[9:57:29] of its mission.
[9:57:30] Services shall include but
[9:57:30] not be limited to
[9:57:31] performing services
[9:57:35] necessary to evaluate the
[9:57:36] property, negotiating a
[9:57:37] purchase agreement and
[9:57:37] shall be provided at the
[9:57:38] same or similarly
[9:57:39] negotiated rate or fee
[9:57:39] schedule charged
[9:57:40] accounting administered of
[9:57:41] departments and/or the
[9:57:41] public health trust.
[9:57:42] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:57:42] all right.
[9:57:43] It's been moved, seconded
[9:57:44] by commissioner regalado.
[9:57:45] >> Raquel Regalado: sure.
[9:57:46] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:57:50] all in favor signify by
[9:57:51] saying aye.
[9:57:51] All opposed nay.
[9:57:52] Show it passed. Was that
[9:57:53] everything?
[9:57:56] All right.
[9:57:57] >> do we agree on
[9:57:59] rescheduling of the cra?
[9:58:00] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:58:01] they are going to figure
[9:58:03] it out.
[9:58:04] They are going reschedule.
[9:58:05] >> hold on, hold on --
[9:58:05] >> CHAIRMAN Rodriquez:
[9:58:07] show us adjourned.
[9:58:13] Show us adjourned, guys.