| |
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
MINUTES PREPARED BY:
|
| |
| |
REPORT:
Jos� Soto, Commission Reporter (305) 375-1294
|
|
|
1A
|
INVOCATION
|
| |
| |
REPORT:
City of Miami (City) Chairwoman Christina King, convened the meeting at 10:10 a.m.
Board of County Commissioners (Board) Chairman Gilbert III led the invocation followed by a moment of silence.
|
|
|
1B
|
ROLL CALL
|
| |
|
1B1
|
Roll Call by the City of Miami Clerk for the Miami City Commission
|
| |
| |
REPORT:
The following City of Miami (City) Commission members were present: City of Miami Commission Chairwoman King (District 5), City Commissioner Miguel Angel Gabela for District 1, City Commissioner Damian Pardo for District 2, City Commissioner Joe Carollo for District 3, and City Commissioner Manolo Reyes for District 4.
In addition to the City Commission, the following City staff members were also present:
City Manager Arthur Noriega; Deputy City Manager Zerry Ihekwaba; City Attorney Victoria M�ndez, Chief Deputy City Attorney John Greco, Deputy City Attorney George Wysong; and City Clerk Todd Hannon.
|
|
|
1B2
|
Roll Call by the County Clerk for the Board of County Commissioners of
Miami-Dade County
|
| |
| |
REPORT:
The following Miami-Dade Board of County Commissioners (Board) were present:
Chairman Gilbert III, Vice Chairman Rodriguez, and Commissioners Hardemon, Regalado, Gonzalez, Bastien, Cabrera and Bermudez, McGhee, and Senator Garcia.
In addition to the Board members, the following staff members were also present:
Office of the Mayor, Chief Operations Officer Jimmy Morales; County Attorney Geri Bonzon-Keenan; Assistant County Attorneys Bruce Libhaber and Lauren Morse; and Deputy Clerks Kerry Khunjar Breakenridge, Chester Rodriguez and Jos� Soto.
Miami-Dade County Attorney Geri Bonzon-Keenan announced that today�s (3/6) joint public meeting between the City of Miami (City) and Miami-Dade County (County) related to a conflict resolution proceeding initiated by the City against the County regarding the County�s adoption of ordinances, enacting and amending Chapter 33C of the County Code, and expanding the Rapid Transit Zone (RTZ). She continued that State of Florida law required the City Commission (City Commission) and the Miami-Dade Board of County Commissioners (Board) to have a joint public meeting to consider the statement of issues, seek an agreement, and schedule additional meetings with the entities in conflict to continue seeking a resolution to the conflict.
Miami-Dade County Attorney Bonzon-Keenan stated that the County amended Chapter 33C of the County Code in 2019 to create and amend new sub-zones and expand the RTZ through the sub-zones to take regulatory jurisdiction over certain properties identified in ordinances. She further reported that on November 17, 2022, the City Commission initiated conflict resolution proceedings against the County because the City contended that the County�s actions had abrogated the City�s constitutional and home rule authority and violated the Florida Constitution, Florida law, and the County�s home rule charter.
County Attorney Bonzon-Keenan stated on December 20, 2022, the City and County Administration held a conflict assessment meeting, in which the City presented a statement of issues which contended that the County�s RTZ ordinances impacted the City�s planning and building departments, public works projects, fire rescue services, collection of impact fees, and alcohol regulations, with an overall fiscal impact to the City.
County Attorney Bonzon-Keenan pointed out that since the December 2022 meeting, both parties had attempted to resolve the conflict, but negotiations had been unsuccessful. She explained that if a conceptual agreement to resolve the conflict was reached in today�s (3/6) meeting then legislation would be prepared for approval at each parties� next available regular meetings. County Attorney Bonzon-Keenan noted that if a conceptual resolution was not reached then the next step would be to continue negotiations or mediations.
Deputy City Attorney George Wysong provided a PowerPoint presentation which detailed the purpose of today�s (3/6) meeting, identified the conflict, the impacts the RTZ ordinances had on the City�s departments, fiscal impacts to the City, and the next steps for both parties.
Mr. Wysong contended that the RTZ expansion was intended to encourage the use of the Metrorail but the County had used this reason to expand the boundaries of the RTZ and preempt the City�s regulations regarding land use and zoning, municipal fees, building standards and fire safety standards with Miami-owned lands not connected to mass transit. He argued that the County was attempting to usurp the City�s regulatory authority over properties located in the municipality through the RTZ legislation.
Mr. Wysong reiterated that the purpose of today�s (3/6) meeting was to resolve the conflict between the City and the County.
Mr. Wysong highlighted an excerpt from Chapter 33c of the County Code in the presentation, which included the County�s jurisdiction over the following:
-Regulatory decisions which included comprehensive planning, district boundary changes, special exceptions, site plan approvals, compliance with environmental regulations, historic preservations, issuance of building permits, building inspections, construction-related fire permits and inspections;
-Compliance with the Florida Building Code and the Florida Fire Prevention Code;
-Issuance of certificates of occupancy, building and zoning moratoria and other types of planning;
-Zoning, subdivision or building functions performed by departments, boards and entities;
-Water and sewer installations; and
-Street maintenance.
Mr. Wysong pointed out that the RTZ differed from the County�s Strategic Miami Area Rapid Transit (SMART) Corridor Program because the SMART Corridor allowed municipalities to retain jurisdiction over regulatory decisions.
Mr. Wysong stated that the RTZ conflicted with the Comprehensive Development Master Plan (CDMP) because the CDMP would not supersede municipal authority. He maintained that the County inappropriately added private City properties that were within a 5-minute walking distance to the RTZ at the request of private property owners and explained that the addition of these private properties made it difficult for the City to provide municipal services to the properties.
According to Mr. Wysong, per the County Charter, the County had the right to legitimately take over or grant franchises to operate any municipal service, but an election or referendum had to be held beforehand. He added that the County had not held any elections or referendums related to the RTZ. Mr. Wysong expressed his concerns that the County would continue to take away more regulatory authority from Miami.
Mr. Wysong noted that property owners and developers would be affected if courts ruled that the County illegitimately approved any building or development agreements in Miami that were not in compliance with State law.
Mr. Wysong stated the RTZ would impact the operations of the City�s Building Departments by creating a new municipality in the City under the County�s jurisdiction, which would prevent the City�s municipal services from operating in the new municipality. He stated the RTZ would also prevent application of the City Codes Sec. 10-3 and 2-207, which required the enforcement of Florida Building Code July 28, 1896 and Zoning certificate of use, respectively. Additionally, the RTZ would impact City Code 2-208 and would prohibit new permits on non-homestead properties. Mr. Wysong contended that an unknown number of properties or parcels could opt into the RTZ, and land use requirements, impact fees and other entitlements would be open to negotiation leading to individual zoning being altered for only one property. He further stated that the City would no longer be the permitting and compliance authority for land development within its boundaries.
Mr. Wysong commented on the City�s zoning and building regulations noting that the City had unique permit requirements for high-rise buildings, which included structural peer reviews for structures over 60 feet tall. He pointed out that the City�s floodplain development standards were more demanding than the rest of the County and the City also had the largest inventory of buildings in the State that required recertification. Mr. Wysong noted that the City participated in an active agreement with the State for the delegation of statutory authority to regulate and enforce elevator safety; enforced a special events program review, which included a permitting and inspection process with police and fire services for the events. He advised that Chapter 17 of the City Code had higher standards than the County for environmental resources and Tree Trust Funds collected under the RTZ may not be utilized within city limits. Mr. Wysong contended the RTZ jeopardized outdoor advertising and billboard agreements and the City�s building inspections, private provider and unsafe structures programs would be disrupted by its uncertainty.
Mr. Wysong outlined concerns raised by the City�s Resilience and Public Works Departments which included apprehensions that Miami�s subdivision regulations would be usurped by the County, certificates of occupancy could be issued by the County without the completion of street and stormwater improvements, and prior City projects would not be reimbursed.
Mr. Wysong noted that the City was excluded from reviewing or approving a tentative plat of the Monorail Transit Subdivision. He continued that properties within the RTZ would not be required to adhere to the City�s Stormwater Master Plan, but would benefit from allocation of City Bond dollars. Mr. Wysong also commented that these properties in the RTZ would be vulnerable to large storm events and Miami was unable to properly report to the State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection about stormwater utility.
Mr. Wysong stated that the city would be unable to review the traffic impact from new developments, or be able to require mitigation measures to decrease traffic from the RTZ projects. He also noted that Miami was unable to implement City-approved master plans.
Mr. Wysong said that with RTZ�s non-standard improvements allowed by the County, the City was preempted from requiring utility permits and inspections on City rights-of-ways and no longer was able to track maintenance on the stormwater system.
Regarding the RTZ impact on the services of the City of Miami Department of Fire Rescue (Fire Rescue), Mr. Wysong reported that the service operations would be challenged by the County�s certificate of use inspections and building permits. He noted that the City�s Fire Rescue vehicles would have difficulty gaining access to buildings in the RTZ because of height distances. Mr. Wysong added that the population density in the RTZ would affect demand for Fire Rescue services, while the city would not be able to participate in future planning for the city, and the RTZ could negatively impact the City�s Class 1 Rating from the Insurance Services Office.
Mr. Wysong pointed out that when the RTZ was first created and implemented, the City helped the County with developing the Metrorail, but within the past 10 years collaboration and cooperation between the two (2) parties had diminished. He expressed concerns that the City did not have any input with current RTZ developments and cited instances where there was a lack of coordination between the County and City regarding interlocal agreements, zoning planning, noting future plans for the RTZ or analysis reports had not been provided to the City.
Mr. Wysong noted that although there was no impact from the RTZ on school concurrency, the City was unable to determine if additional classroom spaces would be needed in the RTZ because it was unable to get information from the County about school capacity. He added that the City should be involved in RTZ-related school concurrency application mitigations.
Mr. Wysong reviewed the RTZ�s effect on zoning impact fees collected for municipal services. He noted that the County only collected impact fees related to municipal roads and voiced concerns about if no impact fees were not collected in the RTZ, the properties would still receive municipal services provided by the City with no mechanism for funding.
Mr. Wysong detailed how the RTZ affected alcohol regulations, general services, stormwater utilities, CU processes, code enforcement, architecture platform permits, bond-funded infrastructures and staffing for police and fire services in Miami.
Addressing the options available to the parties, Mr. Wysong noted in the event an agreement was not reached at today�s meeting, additional meetings would be scheduled to continue negotiations. He also advised that mediation between the two (2) parties could be scheduled, and in the event these negotiation and mediation attempts were unsuccessful, the matter would be litigated.
Mr. Wysong stated the City would be amendable to any of the following County actions:
-A repeal by the Board of portions of Chapter 33C of the County Code that preempted the City�s regulatory authority;
-The County could enter into a proposed interlocal agreement with the City that was proposed to and rejected by the Administration to eliminate the requirements of preemption;
-The County could recognize the City as the authority having jurisdiction for land use, public works, planning, zoning, and municipal services for development sites within its municipal boundaries; and
-Both parties could collaborate to achieve common goals.
Mr. Wysong emphasized that the City was willing to negotiate and collaborate with the County to complete its RTZ goals.
|
|
|
1C
|
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
|
| |
|
1D
|
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
240370
|
Special Item
|
|
| |
|
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES RELATED TO THE CONFLICT RESOLUTION PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY THE CITY OF MIAMI AGAINST MIAMI-DADE COUNTY PURSUANT TO CITY RESOLUTION NO. R-22-0468
|
|
|
1E
|
REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO HEARD AS PROVIDED
IN RULE 6.06
|
| |
| |
REPORT:
City Commission Chairwoman King opened the reasonable opportunity to be heard; seeing no one come forward to speak, the reasonable opportunity to be heard was closed.
|
|
|
2
|
DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION BY THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AND THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
|
| |
|
2A
|
|
| |
240361
|
Discussion Item
|
|
| |
|
| |
CONSIDERATION OF THE STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES BY THE CITY COMMISSION AND THE BOARD
|
Presented
|
| |
REPORT:
Miami-Dade County (County) Commissioner Regalado noted that the Rapid Traffic Zone (RTZ) was limited to Metrorail stations when it was first created and developed by the Miami-Dade Board of County Commissioners (Board) in consultation with the League of Cities and the County�s municipalities, including the City of Miami (City). She stressed that the Board sought participation from the municipalities in drafting legislation related to the RTZ and that the City actively participated in the development of Grove Central, one of the RTZ nodes.
County Commissioner Regalado pointed out that school concurrency and traffic were not under the purview of the County to negotiate, since school issues were determined by the Miami-Dade School Board and the State of Florida had oversight over traffic. She pointed out, however, that the County could negotiate traffic impact fees and enforcement.
County Commissioner Regalado emphasized that the County did not want to create a municipality within a municipality. Addressing comments regarding the ability of private property owners to petition for the inclusion of their properties in the RTZ, she noted these applications went through a rigorous notice and approval process which required the District Commissioner sponsoring the item and staff�s recommendations.
|
|
|
2B
|
|
| |
240371
|
Discussion Item
|
|
| |
|
| |
DISCUSSION OF ANY RESOLUTION OF THE DISPUTE
|
Presented
|
| |
REPORT:
County Commissioner Regalado proposed a County moratorium of 18 months to the addition of more City properties to the Rapid Transit Zone (RTZ) with the exception of County Commission District 2. She explained this gave both parties time to negotiate new agreement terms and resolve outstanding issues.
County Commissioner Regalado reiterated that the goal of the RTZ was for transit-oriented development (TOD). She pointed out that she was currently in discussion with the City of South Miami about increasing the population density for two (2) parcels located in the municipality that were situated adjacent to the Metrorail but not added to the RTZ.
County Commissioner Regalado proposed that the City should be a reviewing agency and submit recommendations for future RTZ nodes and reasoned that this would allow the City to participate more in RTZ development within its boundaries and be able to set fees for reviews. County Commissioner Regalado clarified that the County would continue to set deadlines for the submission for review.
County Commissioner Regalado also proposed that the City should be authorized to review subdivision platting applications. Additionally, she suggested the County authorize the City to conduct its normal certificate of use process, which included annual fire and elevator safety inspections under the condition that the City accepted the County�s final zoning designations.
Regarding impact fees, County Commissioner Regalado acknowledged that there had been meetings about them between government officials from the County and the City and added that the County was willing to clarify the fees under Section 33C 2F of the County Code, as well as the City�s municipal fees.
Commissioner Regalado reiterated that the County did not intend to create a new municipality within the City and asked the City Commission to consider the success of TOD throughout the County as it expanded mass transit.
City Commissioner Reyes voiced his concerns about the impact to the City�s zoning rights because the requirements were established by the County without consulting with the City and commented on the absence of any true analysis about the negative impact construction on the RTZ had on adjacent neighborhoods, particularly single-family homes.
City Commissioner Reyes opined that not every city resident who lived near Metrorail stations would utilize the Metrorail, which would worsen vehicular traffic in Miami.
City Commissioner Reyes also expressed concerns that mass transit routes would not be extended for buses, and any agreements would only apply to rail service. He commented on how walking distances from properties to Metrorail stations were determined and pointed out that walking distances varied on the individual capability of pedestrians, as such this component needed additional clarification.
City Commissioner Reyes expressed his hope that litigation would be avoided but stressed his commitment to act in the best interests of City residents and minimize the negative impact of the RTZ.
City Commissioner Reyes voiced his support for the moratorium proposal, and requested clarification regarding the proposed effective date and the exception component.
County Commissioner Hardemon pointed out that the Board had not actually agreed to the moratorium proposal made by his colleague, County Commissioner Regalado. He opined that today�s (3/6) meeting should be used to voice concerns and to introduce resolutions to the conflict.
County Commissioner Hardemon recommended the City should be able to administer the County�s zoning and planning regulations in properties located in the RTZ. He pointed out that this would provide the City with the authority to administer its own services, and collect revenue, while maintaining the County�s oversight regarding the RTZ. He also suggested the Board discuss these proposals at a later date.
City Commissioner Carollo voiced concerns regarding the County�s zoning processes and its impact on the City. He explained that developers would often obtain permits from the County for construction in Miami because the City would not grant them. He cautioned that much of the new growth was located in and around the City�s waterways, and were not appropriately studied, which created severe traffic issues.
City Commissioner Carollo pointed out that increased development would negatively impact the City�s infrastructure and commented on its contribution to climate change. He contended the increased density, would require the City to plan and fund increased municipal services.
City Commissioner Carollo stressed that appropriate planning for developments was needed, and its effect on traffic and infrastructure had to be studied. He suggested the City Commission and Board convene a joint meeting to discuss the public housing issue in Miami and added that the zoning changes would only worsen the situation with public housing because developers were focused on constructing high-end housing. City Commissioner Carollo cautioned both parties from focusing solely on high-end housing developments while ignoring public housing; and opined this increased the cost of living for local residents who were the core of the City�s community and were not serviced adequately by the government.
City Commissioner Carollo also recommended that the City partner with the County, the State of Florida and the federal government to provide sufficient affordable housing units in the County. He added that if it was not possible to develop affordable housing in the City then the housing would have to be constructed elsewhere in the County where the land was more affordable.
City Commissioner Carollo noted that key issues with public transportation had to be resolved promptly to enable residents living outside of the City to commute for work. He advised that light rail service could be used for public transportation because it was affordable and could connect with the Metrorail and bus services. City Commissioner Carollo suggested expanding the Miami Omni Community Redevelopment Agency (Omni CRA) to service the County�s Unincorporated Municipal Service Area (UMSA) with assistance by other government entities.
City Commissioner Carollo proposed the City Commission and the Board schedule another meeting soon to continue discussions about resolving the RTZ conflict and to explore his suggestion to expand the Omni CRA to service UMSA.
County Commissioner Senator Garcia recognized the merits of his colleagues� proposals. He also acknowledged that the affordable housing issue was Countywide and intertwined with public transportation, which the RTZ was supposed to address. He opined that litigation should be avoided because it would negatively affect residents. Senator Garcia urged for both the Board and the City Commission to negotiate a resolution.
In response to Senator Garcia�s question as to the next steps, Miami-Dade Board Chairman Gilbert III recommended both parties hold an informal mediation to reach an agreement, to which City Commission Chairwoman King voiced her agreement.
City Commissioner Pardo voiced concerns that the RTZ quickly increased population density in Miami. He pointed out that other areas of the City, such as Brickell, had a lack of infrastructure that affected traffic and flooding. City Commissioner Pardo opined that the increased density added to the infrastructure issues; and urged the Board and the City Commission to negotiate a solution, and if applicable, conduct a referendum.
County Commissioner Gonzalez concurred with City Commissioners Pardo and Carollo and added that effective planning by both parties was essential.
City Commissioner Gabela voiced concerns with overdevelopment in the RTZ and opined that the City Commission would have to deal with these consequences.
County Commissioner Bastien voiced her optimism that the underlying issue would be resolved given the cordial tone of today�s (3/6) meeting and welcomed future discussions about issues regarding the RTZ, such as zoning, density and expanding the RTZ. She also commented on the importance of resident input on the matter.
County Commissioner Cabrera supported Commissioner Hardemon�s proposal regarding the City�s administering municipal services to properties added to the RTZ.
County Commissioner Bermudez noted that traffic and transportation were issues that impacted everyone in the County and the issues raised about the RTZ would be faced by other areas of the County. He commented that the solution would serve as the blueprint for the County�s negotiations about the RTZ with other municipalities and areas throughout the County. County Commissioner Bermudez spoke about the importance of conducting the appropriate studies and recommended the Board and the City Commission reconvene to continue discussions.
|
|
|
2C
|
|
| |
240372
|
Discussion Item
|
|
| |
|
| |
CONSIDERATION BY THE CITY COMMISSION AND THE BOARD OF ANY PROPOSED MOTIONS FOR A CONCEPTUAL RESOLUTION OF THE CONFLICT RESOLUTION PROCEEDINGS, OR IF NO CONCEPTUAL RESOLUTION IS REACHED, THE GOVERNING BODIES ARE REQUIRED TO SCHEDULE MEDIATION TO BE CONDUCTED BY THEIR REPRESENTATIVES TO CONTINUE TO SEEK RESOLUTION OF THE CONFLICT
|
Presented
|
| |
REPORT:
Miami-Dade Board of County Commission (Board) Chairman Gilbert III stated the Rapid Transit Zone (RTZ) was created following a two-year effort with active input from the municipalities, and clarified that it was not the County�s intent to usurp the City of Miami�s (City) authority. He stressed the importance of improving mass transit in the County, which required intensifying density along transit corridors.
Board Chairman Gilbert III opined that the City bore the brunt of density in the County because improper planning in the past, and concluded that other areas of the County needed to increase density. He explained that the increased revenue from the RTZ properties would be used to fund mass-transit operations and noted that the RTZ would help address elements of the improper planning issue because the County could not afford to improve its mass transit without increasing property values along the mass-transit corridors.
Board Chairman Gilbert III noted that the Board represented all residents throughout the County. He added that the County needed to grow through investment in housing without increasing vehicular traffic. Board Chairman Gilbert III recognized the challenges associated with construction of RTZ projects but noted they were necessary for the development of the County as a whole.
Board Chairman Gilbert III indicated his desire to resolve the issue amicably and reiterated the County�s intent was never to usurp the City�s authority. He also emphasized the need for transparency with residents on the nature of the RTZ projects and their cost. Board Chairman Gilbert III urged staff from both parties to stay engaged in devising solutions and called for the Board and City Commission to reconvene a meeting in short order to further discuss the matter.
City of Miami Commission (City Commission) Chairwoman King concurred with the comments made by the respective parties. She emphasized that both parties had to work together to devise an amicable solution to the RTZ situation.
City Commission Chairwoman King expressed her concerns about the lack of community input and noted that City residents would have appeared at today�s (3/6) meeting to provide input if it was properly noticed.
City Commission Chairwoman King opined that increased density would create more vehicular traffic and there was not enough space for vehicles on the City�s roadways. She added that although more housing was needed, City residents did not want density to be increased.
City Commission Chairwoman King thanked everyone for attending today�s (3/6) meeting and emphasized that both parties must prioritize the development of a solution including community input.
Board Chairman Gilbert III and City Commission Chairwoman King indicated their intent to schedule a follow-up meeting to further discuss the proposals made at today�s (3/6) meeting with the appropriate notice to follow.
|
|
|
|
ADJOURNMENT
|
| |
| |
REPORT:
There being no further comments or questions, the Joint Public Meeting between the City of Miami and Miami-Dade County adjourned at 12:00 p.m.
|
|
|
3
|
CONSENT AGENDA
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
| 8/7/2026 |
|
|
|
Agenda Key: 5062 |