Virginia Key Advisory Board - Regular Meeting

I'm a fellow board member, I'm not staff.

Well, I guess we're asking you as the director of real estate, in your capacity as director of real estate.

Yeah, I mean, we've gotten a lot of comments from different industry folks, from the city attorney's office, from procurement, from the manager, from Commissioner Pardo, from the mayor. So we're trying to incorporate all the comments that we can, that we feel are good and noteworthy. But we're You know, we're not able to provide comprehensive reports on all of the comments and what we did with them to every person that's given us comments. So, like I said, we have the notes based on the discussion that was had last meeting. And, you know, we're talking internally with the department, like I said, as well as with procurement staff to see if any of those can be incorporated or should be incorporated But we appreciate them and just as as we listen to all comments from from industry from manager mayor CFO Other electeds other fellow departments we're just we're trying to balance a lot of interests here and And we're doing the best we can Sorry to interrupt if everybody can speak into the microphone I apologize I

As just a citizen, nothing more, nothing less. And I appreciate that you get comments that are of substance and merit and weighty, and that you get less than that from some persons like myself, mere citizens. Nonetheless, it would be, I think, appropriate, given the responsibility that the City Commission has placed assigned to this board were you, as a fellow board member and head of the operative department, to be able to respond to this board with regard to the comments that this board passed on. And they may all be meritless, which they will land where they land in your review. But I think for continuity of our process, it would be desirable for you to come back to your fellow board members and to respond.

Okay, I can pull up the email and we can talk about it.

You don't need to do it now. Excuse me?

You're making good comments.

Okay, the four points that were captured from rewatching the tape were a question about mention of the boat show. To elaborate on the meaning of design and programming. To clarify the meaning of the term end of show settlement. And some questions regarding IRS. some sections about tax in the boilerplate. So those are the four comments that my staff captured from watching the tape. So we can go through those if you'd like. The mention of the boat show is a holdover from a previous draft and will be deleted, so that's going away. Design and programming, happy to talk about that. I think the idea is that once a private partner is selected, that the city would work with them and use their industry expertise to work to finalize a design that meets both preservation goals and industry expectations. I don't know what that design is at this moment, but that would be a collaborative effort. you know, based on an agreed-upon financial model and the assumptions underlying that about capacity, about square footage, about point-of-sale ratios and things like that. But that's down the road. Programming. Again, I don't know what the programming will be right now, but if you want to have some discussion about that, Happy to do that. End-of-show settlement is just accounting of revenue and expenses from individual shows. Just kind of a documentation thing for the file. Make sure that we have a paper trail that we can review revenue and expenses with the backup. It's pretty typical for... venue management to provide something like that. We have that at the Knight Center. And then the IRS code, I don't know. I'm not a tax expert or lawyer, so I think it's just part of the boilerplate in the RFP language, so... But I'd have to do more research.

So, Andrew, you just got those four comments out of the video that a staffer provided you. Is that right?

Correct.

Yep. Because I think Board Member Lewis made 10 or 12 sort of substantive queries regarding the draft that she reviewed. And even my notes are fairly thorough on what questions she was asking. And I think they would need a little more study. Great. Let's talk about them. Let's talk about them. Well, we're hoping somebody would have come prepared to discuss them based on having either attended the meeting or watching it on videotape.

I'm horribly unprepared and terrible at my job, so we can continue that line of discussion.

Yes, it sounds like a good idea.

Whenever Dream Staff is ready, circulate that 48 hours before our meeting. Give us an opportunity to read it. Have someone from Dream Staff be prepared to respond to our questions based on the track change document.

I'm hoping to have this RFP published well before our next committee meeting. We can talk about it.

Thank you very much for your review. I think at this time I'd like to have a quick presentation from a member of the public. regarding an important item on the history of Marine Stadium Basin and Mooring Field.

Mr. Chairman, my name is Leah Kennard. I'm a regular user of the basin, and I'm not here for that purpose. I want to do a follow-up for the conversation that just occurred because, as you know, I believe very strongly that you are an extremely important advisory board. you're the only place that important topics about Virginia Key can be discussed among yourselves and that we can listen as members of the public. And in the past, all members of this board have sat together and been able to have discussion. And as Mr. Frey just pointed out, he is a member of the board. And respectfully, I would like for him to participate as a member of the board, sit as a member of the board where we as a public can hear his part of the discussion rather than strictly speaking as a staff member. And I know in the past, people in his role have sat as members of the board and also Mr. Evans and he is visible and we can direct our comments where he can be heard. But I would just like that conversation that just occurred was an important conversation that we really couldn't hear everything about it. And so I just want to ask Mr. Frey to consider what he brought up as he is a member of this board and to participate as a member of the board in a discussion. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much, Ms. Kennard.

Mr. Frey, would you mind sitting at the dais with the rest of your board members?

I'm a non-voting member, so I won't be discussing or voting on anything. So I can sit at the dais, but I don't really see the point.

Well, your position as a director, there's a long history of of all the directors sitting on the dais. It seems a reasonable request. Thank you very much. Can we hear from Roger Bernstein from the public regarding an update?

Good evening. I'm Roger Bernstein. I live on Royal Palm Avenue in the city of Miami. And I'm here on behalf of the Virginia Key Alliance along with Leah Kennard. And you're going to get a short course in the meaning of the waters of the state of Florida and a little bit about derelict vessels and a whole lot about the Marine Stadium Basin. Back in June 22 of 2021, this board adopted a resolution strongly recommending that the city commission adopt the necessary steps to create a dedicated rowing and paddling lane and a mooring field of not more than 50 balls. I'm going to... The issue of a potential mooring field in the Marine Stadium Basin was a solution or a proposed solution to the problem that we all know is there. Many, many vessels anchored, abandoned, sinking, derelict, and some decent boats, some transient boats. And back in 2021, we were working within the limitations of the state of Florida, meaning the FWC, which regulates the waters of the state of Florida, looking for a way that we could resolve the issue and get rid of the derelict vessels. And at that time, the Virginia Key Alliance came up with a solution 42 mooring balls and you'll see in this drawing here how they were laid out 42 and under Florida law and it still exists that way if you establish a licensed mooring field then you can prohibit anchoring within a hundred feet of the perimeter of the field And no more. So 101 feet from the field, somebody could drop an anchor and stay there. This was a plan that we thought was a reasonable plan together with some other limitations all under the state of Florida. So now, in 2024, we're now looking at a plan for 186 mooring balls proposed by OCI for the city.

No, not mooring balls, mooring anchors on the seafloor.

What? I'm sorry? Yes, sir?

I said not mooring balls, mooring anchors.

That's what?

Not mooring balls, mooring anchors.

Okay. We'll come back to this. But this proposal would have the effect of essentially wiping out all of the passive water sport activities in the basin. And it would leave about 100 feet on either side and It goes way beyond the 75 mooring balls that are approved by the city commission. We asked for 42 or 50. The commission some years ago approved 75. 75 is a far cry from 186. Now, as I understand the plan for this, they're going to put these mooring anchors down, but only use some of them. And the rest of them won't be used. But they will seek to use this 100-foot perimeter to keep people from anchoring. I've dealt with anchored, derelict, abandoned boats in the Marine Stadium Basin, in Key West Harbor, on Stock Island, and all over the Florida Keys. These people are ornery, and they're smart. They are not going to obey a 100-foot perimeter around a non-existent mooring ball. They're going to come right up there. And even without that fiction, if you have 60 boats illegally anchored in an area and you put a mooring field in, the 60 boats simply migrate to the open areas. They don't disappear into thin air. We think this proposal is outrageous. And we would urge this board to do everything in its power to prevent it from happening. We're happy to sit and talk with OCI. We're happy to see if we can develop something that works. But this is not it.

So here's the good news. There is some good news.

Going back a few years, the best we thought we could do was a combination of a mooring field of some size plus maybe an anchoring limitation area, which requires FWC approval as well, possibly a no anchoring area, which requires FWC approval, and a lengthy expensive process. Now, thanks to the legislature, we can use what's called an anchoring limitation area, which can be imposed by the city on all or a great part of the Marine Stadium Basin by action of the county and the city. No FWC approval is required. If you impose an anchoring limitation area, an ALA, a boat can only anchor for a maximum of 45 days. Then it has to go. And I don't care whether it's a legitimate pleasure boat or a derelict or a liveaboard or whatever. 45 days and they're gone. And they can't just drop the anchor 100 feet away. They're gone. What I've given you now is a November 14, 2023 statement. memo from Mayor Cava to the Board of County Commissioners discussing the anchoring limitation area and setting forth 11 areas in the entire county waterway, including the cities, that could be used. Guess what? Marine Stadium is one of them. They recognize the dangers, the problems, the congestion that exists there, and they say, this is a place we would recommend to do an ALA. Now, you put an ALA in place, you need some signs. You don't need staff. You don't need pump out. You don't need parking on the land. You don't need a dingy dock. What I've given you in this last handout on the second page Florida Administrative Code, these are the regulations that are required if you want to operate a licensed mooring field. The point of this is this is really difficult. This is really expensive. This is really going to cost the city a lot of money. If you do an anchoring limitation area, you don't have that. Now, whether it's a mooring field or whether it's an ALA, we need enforcement. We need someone who can tag these boats and get them out. But I'm suggesting that before the city go to the expense and obligation on an ongoing basis of putting in a money-losing operation, let's try the ALA in the basin. Let's work with the county. Let's put this together. And let's see if it works. If it doesn't work, we can move to another level. But this is easy. And this is cheap compared to a mooring field or anything else we might do. And we're talking about this now because it didn't exist two years ago. It exists now, and we should jump on it. When you read this, you'll see that the city is going to do a pilot program for an anchoring limitation area around 79th Street, where they have serious derelict vessel problems. County Durham will probably be taking the lead on that. But we don't have to wait for the pilot program. Working with the county, working with the city, we can start, let's call it a private effort, but it's really a city effort, to put in an ALA. Hold off on the mooring field. Let's not go down that road. That was fine two years ago. This is better now. This is a lot of information, and you have to go home and read it, particularly the mayor's memo. But we wanted you to understand this, and we wanted you to understand the threat that this mega mooring field poses. Questions?

Any questions from board members?

Terry Milano? Thank you, Roger. So with the anchor limitation area, wouldn't there be still an issue with the rowing community? Because if you have 45

Gary, I'm sorry to interrupt. If everybody can please speak into the microphone.

If you had 45 days to be there, that would need to be monitored as far as, OK, Bode came in on January 1 and still there in March 1. Therefore, enforcement need to kick in, I would assume, to get that.

It's a good question. We don't know. I mean, we have to start and see. I will tell you.

OK. So the other thing is that... Where in the process is the mooring field contract right now?

Where is the mooring field now in the process? Yeah. As far as we know, we've been told, the city wants to get their permits in by the end of this year and start the process of installing, you know, going forward through the agency's Because the mooring field requires FWC approval, but it also requires about four or five other agencies, including some federal.

Have they've gotten funding for the mooring field, the city, through FIND yet?

Well, we know where the funding is going to come from.

No, no, no. Have they obtained funding yet? Have they applied to FIND?

Ask the gentleman over there. I don't know. I think they were going to go in for the funding after they'd gotten the permits.

Yeah, the project is being run out of my department, not OCI. We're in the conceptual design phase right now. We have a preliminary layout, which I think was shown to these individuals. There will be a whole public input process. And, yes, so we have funding. We have funding from FIND. Oh, it's enhanced. Yeah, for a phase one design and engineering and permitting phase, yes. And then construction would be separate.

But once you get into the design funds, you're almost obligated to go to phase two, aren't you? Or you would have to return the funds for that phase two fine.

Yeah, we would certainly like to proceed through with phase two construction.

So the trains left the station as far as the funding goes. The thing that we need to do, and this has happened many, many times with a lot of fine projects. I mean, I can think of four. But the problem is once they get the funding, it's very difficult. To stop the project. Unless you really kind of go to the commission with a really solid plan and be able to answer some of the questions. That is the first question I asked you, which was the enforcement as far as how are you going to manage the derelict vessel issue and how is the rowing community going to be impacted by the ALA in the long term?

So if I'm understanding, I can't sit here and say that the ALA, even if applied to the entire basin, is going to keep a rowing and paddling and a dragon boat lane. The only thing I know is there's no regulation out there now except minimum speed, minimum wake zone. And that took us four years to get. So there's places to row and paddle now, even with the derelict vessels. And it's based on human nature. And that is... The people who either abandon their boats there or the people who use their boats sometime or the people who live aboard use dinghies. They come into the Marine Stadium parking lot. They want to be as close as possible to land. They don't want to be on the north side, which is where the rowing and paddling takes place. So it's open now. It's likely to be open later. And with more of the derelict boats and the abandoned boats out because of the 45-day limit, there should be more space for everybody. But if it doesn't work satisfactorily, then we can think about other things. We could put in a smaller mooring field in the center. Not covering the whole place, but put a small mooring field in the center. Under Florida law, there's something called a rowing and paddling area. That can be designated by going through the FWC. And that means no motorized vessels in there. So let's start with the easiest, cheapest solution and see how it works, work on the enforcement side of it, and then If it doesn't work adequately, go to the next level.

Mr. Bernstein, quick question. Are you working with anybody at the city from Andrew Fry's, the real estate department, to communicate and express?

We are talking to commissioners about this. And we'd be happy to work with Green or OCI or whoever is handling this. But I will tell you, we will not accept this idea of 186 mooring anchors. And oh, trust us, we'll never put the mooring balls in there so you'll have plenty of room to work.

I have a question on the derelict vessels. Is there like a number on these vessels that you can find out who the owners are or something and let them have notice?

Some of them that have FL numbers on them, you can. But if there's a boat that's out there sinking or abandoned and it has FL numbers, the typical dance is... you go, you know, the public agency goes to the records, looks up who owns the boat, contacts the boat owner, and says, your boat is out there and it's in danger of sinking. He says, I sold it.

He had sold it. As of right now, the state, are they still the one that would be determining whether a boat should be there or not be there?

Well, the state used to only get involved when the vessel sunk. And my understanding, these numbers may be outdated, was that if you had a 35-foot sailboat floating and you needed to get rid of it, it was probably going to cost you about $1,500. If that same 35-foot sailboat sunk, it was going to cost you about $15,000. And I saw in the Miami Today that the county has just removed in its 501st sunken vessel in some period of time. So this is a huge expense. It's also a danger. I mean, these boats, when the storms come up, they blow all over the place. They blow into each other. They blow into the docks. We need to get those derelict vessels out of there.

Mr. Chair? Yes. Roger, the issue is your concept is great. we could pause it but we can't pause it the problem is is the city is on the move they've got phase one that's obligating them to go to phase two the construction phase and so what if you want to do something significant maybe this board can get involved if we have the numbers to basically send a resolution over to the city commission and to request that they pause the phase one activities and or return the funds to find. That's the only way because the city just can't spend phase one funds and not produce a phase two. Maybe Andrew can come up with a way that we can do that. If we could, then that would be optimum. But at this point, I think we need to approach the city commission, and discuss pausing the whole project right now. I mean, your concept is great as far as taking time out and doing the ALA, but that's not going to happen if this process continues.

We are working with the city, we're working with the county, and we want to start with the ALA. And we will also put every ounce of effort we have into killing this 186 mooring ball plan. which is effectively going to shut down the Marine Stadium Basin to rowing, paddling, canoeing, kayaking, swimming, and...

It won't.

It won't. I can't hear you.

It won't. It won't shut that down.

Well, when you leave 100 feet on the north side for rowing, it gives you, according to our calculations, four meters of clearance for two boats.

Yeah, I mean, we fully evaluated the ALA approach before we went down this road, and to your point, and to other board members' points, there's no, you know, there's a big problem with enforcement, because an ALA still says anyone can anchor here, right? So right now, we probably have, on an average day, we have a definitely north of 100, usually north of 200, sometimes 250 boats moored in the basin. And we have no idea who they are. We have no way of contacting them. They're parking their cars. They're leaving things in the bushes. One of the folks assaulted one of our security guards in literally picked them up and threw them into the water. So the situation right now is call 200 to 250 boats anchored. And that would still happen under an ALA, right? The ALA still allows you to go and moor there. You can't keep people out. And they can moor wherever they want. And to your point about them being very knowledgeable about loopholes, After 45 days, they pull up anchor, tear up the sea grass, sail 25 feet, drop anchor, and say, what are you going to do?

Look at the statute, and you'll see they can't just anchor right there. They've got to pull off quite some distance. You know, is there one perfect solution for this problem in the basin? As long as The dockage rates here are going up to $2,000, $3,000 a month for a wet slip. No, because people are going to put their boats somewhere. But let's start with the easiest, cheapest solution. Let's work on the enforcement side, and let's see how we do. We are for sure going to clear a lot of boats out of there. Meanwhile, to answer your question, the state of Florida is getting... much more aggressive when it comes to identifying what they call at-risk vessels. They're not waiting until they sink anymore. They've established certain indicia of a vessel that's at risk of sinking. And they have a process where they can come in, tag the vessel, make an effort to notify the owner. But even if they can't find the owner, they can deal with that vessel while it's still floating. So if we put in an ALA, put in some enforcement, and continue with Marine Patrol, FWC, other entities that can enforce these at-risk vessels, then we can stop and take a breath and say, okay, how have we done? Is it better in there? Is it safer in there? Nope. Then we'll move to the next step.

Mr. Bernstein, would it be helpful if you met with Andrew Fry and his department in the next three or four weeks, if that's acceptable to Director Fry?

I'm happy to meet, but like I said, we fully evaluated ALA, and our opinion is that there would be... that there would be no benefit to that and only enforcement impossibilities because somebody would have to sit there with a clipboard and see who's been there for 45 days. Now, if you establish a mooring field, in order to establish a mooring field, you have to have one anchor every 100 feet. That doesn't mean you have to install a mooring ball on every anchor, but you have to place the anchors on the sea floor every 100 feet in order to have a continuous mooring field. And to the gentleman's point, the folks that anchor here know the loopholes. So you have to have, if they find a location that's 101 feet away from an anchor, they're gonna drop anchor there and say, na-na-ni-boo-boo. So we have to place anchors every 100 feet in order to establish a mooring field. We do not have an intention of using all of those anchors. But what that allows us to do is, rather than having somebody sit there with a clipboard looking at boats for 45 days, is any boat that's not tied up to a mooring ball has to deal with Marine Patrol immediately. They have to give their registration, their insurance, their contact information. They'll have to pay a nominal daily fee, just like our mooring field at Dinner Key and the one we're opening on Watson Island. So we'll have great enforcement, easy enforcement. If you see a boat that's not tied up to a mooring ball, it's ticketed. Marine Patrol can enforce that immediately, not 45 days later. And it gives us the flexibility to reconfigure the mooring balls, leaving maybe the north side open for rowers. If there is a regatta and we need to, we're also planning to put some anchors outside of the island so that if we need to clear the entire basin, for a triathlon or a rowing regatta, and some folks who are moored there aren't ready to sail on to whatever the next destination is, they'll be able to go on the outside and also have some places to moor so that when the event is over, they could come back in. If we're able to successfully rehab the Marine Stadium, and we want to put in a floating dock, then we could move the mooring balls to the anchors on the ends of the basin, leaving the center open for the floating stage, but people still able to tie up to those mooring balls and enjoy the concert. So we think that the The mooring field designation with a seafloor anchor every 100 feet but not a mooring ball everywhere gives us predictable enforcement, ability to contact and communicate with the folks that are anchored there, the flexibility to balance the interests of the different stakeholders. and reconfigure depending on the needs of, like I said, if there is a rowing regatta that's using the whole basin and they get a vessel exclusion, what some of these folks do is from the Coast Guard, you can get a temporary vessel exclusion permit for certain events like rowing regattas or triathlons and things like that. And So you can clear out the whole basin. In that case, we could even remove every mooring ball and even use the seafloor anchors maybe even as lane line anchors for rowers. So there's a lot of flexibility that we can do here by placing an anchor every 100 feet but not using every anchor. We'll be able to contact, for example, whether we have a vessel exclusion permit. I remember back in the spring when we had the... the rowing regatta, we had a heck of a time trying to get 250 unknown vessels out of the basin because we had no way to contact them. Now, with the mooring field established, anyone who's in there will be able to have their cell phone number, will have their email. We'll be able to notify them in advance when events are coming, give them a heads up. You know, If they happen to be away for a day or two when the event is coming, but they're in communication with us saying, hey, I'm going to move my boat. then Marine Patrol can focus on maybe some other folks. So I think it's gonna be just a win-win-win to have this mooring field established over the whole basin with an anchor every 100 feet, but not use every anchor with a mooring ball. And I think right now, the cap is 70 mooring balls. For commission, commission regulator or HEP board, it may have been HEP board that that put the 70 number on. I forget where that's coming from. So going down from from 250 unknown pirate vessels today to 70 in the future where you have their contact information and they're configured in a way that balances the interests of the other stakeholders. We felt that that was kind of a win-win-win all around. And the ALA, like I said, we looked at it. Once we realized it doesn't prohibit you from actually anchoring, and you get 45 days and then you have to move and somebody has to keep track of that. And we just don't have, we barely have staff to staff our own marinas properly. We're well below industry levels of staffing for our marinas. So I think that's why we looked at it very thoroughly. We understand there's interest to balance, for sure, different stakeholder groups. That's why Donald, our head of marinas, reached out to a couple folks to show them an early draft. But we think it's a win-win-win.

Thank you very much, Director. A quick question from Lynn Lewis.

Two questions. Well, I'm going to aim at the two of you. Mr. Fry, did I understand you correctly to say that the mooring field's legal requirement is one anchor per 100 feet?

Correct.

OK. You've heard the Virginia Key Alliance and others comment about 180 is too many. And you've responded, we're not planning on putting a ball on 180 anchors. What thoughts have you given to offering assurances to those types of constituents that not all of the 180 will have mooring balls?

I mean, the assurance isn't coming from us. It's coming from a 75 ball cap that was put on by either commission or HEP board. So that's from a higher authority than us.

So let me understand. So your view is that the 75 boring ball cap is a cap, is an immutable cap until the commission, if ever, were to change that, regardless of the number of anchors.

Correct. Yes. That's my understanding is that it's a hard cap until there was a vote to increase it.

Okay. Last question for you. What's your timeline to getting phase two and construction of the mooring field?

As soon as we can get through, you know, some public input and permitting. And they're intertwined, right? So getting public comment is part of the permitting process.

Is that six months or 12 months or more?

I would love it for six months. Because, like I said, it's the Wild West out there. It's unsafe, right? We have folks getting killed on jet skis and assaulting our security guards and things like that. So I want to bring order to this as quickly as possible. But, like I said, balancing the interests.

Understood. Mr. Bernstein, have you spoken with Spencer Crawley, our fine representative?

Not recently.

Perhaps you might.

Well, I had lunch today with Japanese Consul General Nakai, and it reminds me of a Japanese expression. It goes like this. If the only tool you have in your hand is a hammer, then everything looks like a nail. And I would say that as long as there is fine money on the table, for the city, then everything looks like a mooring field. That is not the solution.

Understood.

And this idea of trust us to put 75 mooring balls in, even though we have a permit for more. Have you looked at Regatta Park lately? Does that look like it was supposed to look as it was represented, the uses of it? This is the city of Miami. You can't take what they say to the bank. You can't even take what they say to a pawn shop.

Last question for you. What are your thoughts with regard to the enforcement issue?

Well, enforcement is an issue. I'm being told that one of the vessels from the Miami Marine Patrol is now stationed in Rickenbacker Marina. And if that's true, that's a start. It means every day at the beginning and the end of the day, they are there. And we can build off that. We have people who are on the water in that basin all the time. We can collaborate with the agencies. We can identify the boats. We can photograph the boats. We can timestamp the boats. We can make it work. And understand that if you put in a mooring field, unless you have a high level of enforcement, the same thing could happen, which is that nobody is going to pay attention to it.

I just wanted to thank Roger for coming out tonight. Thank you, Roger.

Thank you.

Chair Peter, I would just like to thank Mr. Bernstein as well, but I think my sense is why weren't we privileged to DREAM's action before it has even gotten funded? And I'm not, I don't expect an answer, but this is a reoccurring theme that I've experienced as a member of this board that that projects are well underway before we even hear the first whisper of them. And I'm sure the public is infuriated. They've had no input to what I'm hearing, no understanding of what's going on in the area that they care deeply about. I think we've all been violated.

I have something to say.

Mr. Chairman, thank you. And I have to control my disappointment, my concern. Dragon boating is the fastest growing team sport in the world. We now have two boats that we've bought. We now have 60 people who are breast cancer survivors that are using the basin on a regular basis. And I feel threatened that we will lose our space in Miami. And so that's a concern. But I have some questions. First of all, why is there a no anchoring sign in the basin? It's been out there for a long time. Can that be enforced? I can also say as a user of the basin, I'm there almost every Wednesday night, every Saturday morning. Enforcement works. We hardly have any problem anymore with jet skis. And it's a Pavlovian experience. People learn that you sometimes get ticketed, you sometimes get fines, you don't want to take your chance. And I think the same thing would work with anchoring. if the no anchoring sign was observed. I would also say that I personally found somebody to do a drone picture a couple of years ago at the height of the use of the basin, and there have never been 250 boats out there. I try to count them on a regular basis. Right now, the count is down pretty far. You can see the signs, the slow speeds, minimum wake signs really well right now You can see them from a distance. There are boats that are sunk along the shoreline. There's an attempt right now to get them removed. They're not a problem generally for us. There is a problem getting around anchored boats because when you're moving on the water, you can't necessarily tell where the anchoring line is because boats move around their anchors. And so that in itself is a problem for us. I cannot imagine us being able to continue to paddle with the plan as Roger presented it, the picture that you have. It is a wonderful idea to put anchors that could potentially be used further out into the bay because that is where boats go. when they have to move out of the basin. And there are boats out there now all the time, anchored. And that would be a great place to put anchors, instead of putting so many anchors in the basin, instead to move them further out where they're out of everybody's way. And I would also, I'm trying to think of what my other thought, is about that. But I do think this problem is solvable, and I remember seeing the meeting where 75 votes were approved by the commission, and I am concerned that this is moving forward that, like you said, without your involvement, without really public involvement, and let me tell you, I promise you, we can get it. This will be another type of situation where it will be, it will not look good because people are using the basin and this is a threat. So anyway, thank you for putting up with my emotion. I really am concerned.

Thank you for showing up. Thank you for your comments. Any other comments before we go to the next discussion item?

Mr. Chair, I just wanted to bring up a point. We've asked in the past that the city come forward with their find applications prior to submittal. And this has never happened. We cannot get the attention of the city people that are in the grants program that develop these based on input from staff. And if we could really get it at that level before they submit the application, and usually these applications are developed in October, November, and submitted, and then January, that's when FINE usually hears them and then approves them or disapproves them. If we could get these in the fall, as far as ideas that are going through the city staff, that are going to be developed into a find application that the city has to sign and execute, and you know the process. If it came to us prior to it going forward to execution through the city commission, then we would have the ability to evaluate projects. And again, this group would just be dealing with Virginia Key projects. I mean, this is happening all throughout the city and all over the place. But anyway, I think it's doable, but I felt a real resistance from the city, especially the grants folks, to come before this board and deal with that because they don't want to have someone looking over their shoulder like this board.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Mr. Evans. Good evening. We have an item on this next commission agenda on Park Department on Thursday for accepting a fine grant for Willis Island. It's located in the Virginia Key Basin for our debris management program. We will be accepting $20,000. There's a $2,000 match from the city, which we'll do in in-kind services for administration of our Leave No Trace program. That's coming up on this next agenda.

Thank you very much. Do you mind telling us exactly where the island is located?

It's in the basin, basically, on your document here. It's in a U-shape on the northern tip of that U. I believe it's probably around here where my finger is or a little bit further north. There's a small, very, very small island that boaters, mostly on the weekends and weekends, People, you know, come up and visit and bring their own refreshments and just enjoy the area. We had an issue with trash, you know, well documented last year or so. But through our Leave No Trace policy, we removed the trash cans off the islands. We shut the islands down for a period of about six weeks. And once we reopened them, we definitely have seen an impact on the amount of trash that's left behind. There's obviously trash left behind because of the high tide situation. We do have a city vendor. It comes out weekly, but with the funding that we have now, we're going to have additional cleaning visits and continue to monitor if we need to increase those as well.

Thank you very much. Thank you for the disclosure.

Mr. Chair, I didn't understand what the proposal was. What is the application for?

Debris management plan, it is for additional site visits. So essentially when we shut the islands down, FIND had a press release saying the city of Miami hasn't even reached out to us for our spoil island enhancement grants that we have available. We have grants available for $20,000 per island that you can apply for annually. There's also other grants, of course, for boats and other things that other departments take advantage of and for restoration projects. So we're using this one to enhance our Leave No Trace program.

So this would be for debris collection and removal. Yes. And are you doing this just on the side for the other islands that the city owns throughout Biscayne Bay?

On Pace Picnic Island, yes. The other islands, no, we have not found a heavy, you know, people leaving a lot of debris on the other islands. It's really focused on Pace and Willis Island because they're essentially the party islands. And just from our observations, a lot of people that are, you know, not necessarily from Miami or from other other municipalities around Miami who come and visit and stay all day and bring their families out. So they're just trying to improve the boating culture on those islands.

It's a great idea. Thank you. Thank you.

We don't have much issue here on these islands here. The boaters really take care of them on Dinner Key, but those two islands are what we can do to make an impact. Thank you very much.

Director Evans. I guess we can go to the next item, which is an update on Virginia Key Landfill. I believe we have an expert on that.

Hi, good afternoon, board members. The update on the Virginia Key landfill, I believe the last meeting that this item was discussed, Hector forwarded to Rafaela, and then Rafaela sent you all the report, the landfill for endangered species. I'm not sure if you guys were able to review it, but if you go to the end of the report to the conclusions, this is a report that was made by a consultant from the county because the county is doing the capping and the remedial action plan for the site. So the county shared the report with us. The report's conclusion is there is two endangered species in that area. One is the Florida bonneted bat. And the other is, let me double check, eastern indigo snake. Now, the county's report mentioned on the conclusion that the park, based on what we have in the master plan, what the city wants to develop, it shouldn't be an impact to the habitat of the Florida bonneted bats. However, even though this report mentions that, we already scheduled a meeting with U.S. Fish and Wildlife. The meeting is going to be on November 6th. So we can ask them. if the development of the Virginia Key landfill will be compatible with a habitat for Florida bonneted bat, and that we understand if there's any regulations, any limitations as to what we can do with the site that will not impact the Florida bonneted bat. Now, another portion of the report, which is key, Let me look at it real quick. Okay. It talks about conservation measures that the county will follow when they are going to do the capping on their end. So if we go a little bit in time, we had a discussion with them. We wanted to preserve trees in the vicinity of the landfill. And we were able, thanks to Gary, to have productive conversations and be able to preserve those beautiful, majestic specimen trees in the area. If you look at the report from the county in page 15, they mention, the project plans to implement the following best management practices in line with the US Fish and Wildlife 2019 and 2024 revised guidelines to further limit any potential impact to the Florida bonneted bat. Number one, conserve the existing mangrove wetland located in the southwest portion of the fence area. So this was never supposed to be touched. We have always discussed with the county that the portion with the mangrove little forest was to be protected. Number two, conserve six Australian pines and adjacent areas that were inconclusive during the roost survey and not impact areas outside of the fence. The county, when they did their Florida bonneted bat acoustic survey, there were six Australian pines that had what appears like little caves. And they determined that it was inconclusive if those were habitat for Florida bonneted bat. So those six Australian pines are going to be preserved, as well as the trees that we were able to discuss with them. Okay, another item is conserve the several large strangled fig trees present in the northeast portion and remove invasive plant species in the area. So this is great because it's even in their report right now that they're going to conserve the strangler figs. Point number four, it says, retain 22 acres not impacted containing significant less invasive plants as well as more open space to serve as foraging habitat exceeding the 0.25 acres per five acres impacted. Areas to retain includes the mangrove wetland, areas outside the fen that contains inconclusive trees, and large strangled fleet areas with potential roost trees. So basically what they're saying is this is going to be protected, those areas to protect habitat for the bats. Five, conduct pre-construction surveys of potential roosting trees within 30 days prior to removal. So the county prior to the removal of the trees. And if you have visited Virginia Key recently, you know that that whole landfill, nature has taken over. So they have to do these surveys before they remove the trees to make sure that there's no impact to the bats. Number six, if evidence of use by any bat species is observed, discontinue removal efforts in that area. So there's areas in which if when they do this survey 30 days before they remove the trees, they find presence of those bats, those trees will not be able to be removed. But this is critical for what we want to do in the landfill area. Now, this coordination meeting is going to be on November 6th. Gary, you know that if Mr. Evans is present on our meetings, I cannot invite any other board member. So if you would like to attend, you will have to have a discussion with Mr. Evans. Any questions or comments so far?

I think it's important. You know, we started this whole process by hiring a contractor to do a plan for the park.

A consultant, yes.

And has that plan been developed yet?

We pretty much told them to not develop anything until we have a consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife. The only thing that they have presented to us is because the master plan per se was designed by students. And they confirmed that to us. They said, what you see there is not necessarily going to work. They have only mentioned to us alternatives for reconfiguration of the areas that you already see in the master plan. No decision has been made. nothing at all. Those three alternatives continue in the table while we have the meeting with Fish and Wildlife. Once we have the meeting with Fish and Wildlife and we will be able to understand what limitations we're facing due to the Florida Bonnet Abad, then the consultant can come here and present the entire work that they have already developed.

The reason why I bring this up is if you were to present them with a plan that includes, as part of the master plan, 85% of that area is going to be restored to native habitat, those people are going to love that. And they're going to see that as mitigating and that it's going to be OK. But see, if you just provide them with a cap, a open area of just dirt, which is all you have right now because you don't have a plan to show them. Then they're going to say, okay, we're going to need to leave these six Australian pines, which are exotics and should be removed because there's going to be native trees there that these animals will migrate to and we'll be providing the habitat for those animals with this restoration that we're going to be doing there. So it's really important for you to present that at this meeting as far as what the master plan for that park is, rather than an open question as far as what we're going to do with that area. Because that's, again, that's the tug here, is that we should have had that plan developed by now so that we could lay it on a table and show them this is what we're going to do, 85 acres of natural habitat. And then they would walk away just smiling. So anyway, please continue on with this landscape contractor to develop that plan because it's very important as we go forward in this process.

Any other comments?

So my understanding is that once they've identified or Fish and Wildlife Service comes in and definitively ascertains that an endangered species is present, then nothing can be done.

Not necessarily. That's why you can always develop the area as long as it is consistent with the habitat for that species.

But you would have to obtain a habitat conservation plan from Fish and Wildlife Service, no?

I am not sure, but I guess when we have the meeting with them, they will inform us as to what will be necessary for us to satisfy their requirements.

Assuming, again, that those... But there's been no definitive. I guess I'm not clear. The bonneted bat has definitively been identified to have roosts there and to...

It was inconclusive.

Inconclusive in the Australian pines if the cavities were roosts. And the acoustic survey, if you would repeat that again, didn't show a definitive presence of the bonneted bat.

My understanding is that it didn't show definitive signs. We can share with you also the acoustic survey. I think in the report there is a link for the acoustic survey.

Okay. That would be great. Helpful. Thank you.

Okay. Any other questions or comments?

Thank you very much. Any other board members have any questions? Thank you for your update.

You're welcome.

Very prepared as usual. New business. Does anybody have any comments they'd like to make? Raffaella, anything we haven't discussed we should bring up?

No, another board member inquired about the November meeting.

Yes, I guess we should discuss when our next meeting is.

It's scheduled for November 26th.

When is Thanksgiving?

The 28th. The 20 what? The 28th.

28. Any board members have any comments on having a meeting on the 26th of November, two days before Thanksgiving?

Likely be yet another meeting without a quorum.

I'd certainly love to have a quorum so we could discuss the item on our agenda dealing with quorum. I guess we could tentatively schedule it for the 26th. Gary, will you be in town on the 26th? Yeah.

Sorry, if everybody can please speak into the microphone. Yeah, the meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, November 26th, and Thanksgiving is Thursday, November 28th.

Up to get a quorum. Any other comments? What do you think, Raphael? What are our chances of having a quorum Tuesday before Thanksgiving? I have a question.

I would think that for some reason, I see a lot of different faces here every time I come, but I try to work by other business and other things that I have around coming to the meeting. I would wonder if a lot of people that's already on the board, because I know we have more than just the people that's here, What's the exact number of board members do we have? And maybe we can start communicating with all the board members to know what's their interest as far as being here and this board. Because I noticed that, you know, our audience is not a lot of audience. And I think that may be one of the reasons why a lot of people are not looking at this as being a very important board to them. So we need to find out what's their interest in being on the board.

One available on the 26th. Really?

You make a very good point. I think we're going to have to work harder to get better turnout. And certainly here are an item that we have on the agenda dealing with quorum. But we have to have a quorum before we can vote on that.

I understand that. And that's the whole thing is that if we keep showing up and it's always one person or two people less to have a quorum, We are stopped from making any moves anywhere or making any decisions on what we want to do. That makes our board not functional. OK, so what we need to do is, like I said, we have enough people that we need to want people that want to be on the board and show up at the meetings. to have a quorum to go over the things that we need to discuss and the things that we need to look at as being the important things that we need to move forward on.

Before our next meeting, we'll all make more of an effort to reach out to every board member and ask them to attend.

Yeah, I send an email before with the agenda, and I ask everybody to respond, but not everybody responds. Not everybody is as receptive to providing information, so it's a little difficult.

In this case of the meeting scheduled for November 26th, would you consider discussing having the meeting Tuesday before the 26th? What do you think, Raffaella?

I would have to see if the chamber is available and then I would have to communicate that with the city clerk's office to see if we can make that change. But if that's the wish of the board, I can go ahead and attempt to do that.

Peter, just FYI, I'm going to be out of town. I'll be out of the city.

Well, I think that even if we do change that date, what we need to do is start having a phone conversation or a phone call to people because I've been called before when they canceled out the meeting somebody called me up so i know that we have the phone numbers to the board members and i think that somebody should call the board members and say hey you know we need to have a quorum we need to know if you're going to be at that meeting or not all right so i i think at the moment the meeting is scheduled for november 26th but you will we will inquire in the next few days about the availability of the week before

Okay, so you want me to proceed to see if it's available the Tuesday before? Yes. Okay.

Yes. Good. Sounds good. Good idea.

Noted.

All right, any other issues? I like the December 2nd one because we can then cancel the Christmas meeting.

There is no meeting scheduled for December. The board voted last year before we did the schedule that there was going to be no meeting in December.

Oh, that's great. So the December 2nd will work perfect. November 2 is looking pretty good if the room is available.

December 2, yeah. December 2. if the room is available. The city attorney?

Yes, so I just wanted to clarify, since the schedule was approved by the board, any changes would need to be, it would need to be unanimous among board members, so if there's any objections, then we'd have to look at that and see if we can actually change this.

Can we take a vote, even though we don't have?

No, here you couldn't, without a quorum, you couldn't take any official action. Yes.

All right. Any other issues? Second? Is there a second? All in favor?

Aye.

Thank you all very much for coming. And city executives, thank you for taking your time.

Thank you.

activity or feel threatened, don't hesitate to contact the Maddie Police Department. Whether it's reporting a hate crime, suspicious behavior, or seeking assistance, our officers are here to help.

A medida que avanza la tecnología, los estafadores han descubierto múltiples formas de usarla para mal. Pueden hacer que se vea y suene como si la compañía eléctrica estuviera llamando sobre su cuenta vencida. Sucede más de lo que piensas, ya que las estafas son cada vez más elaboradas. Puede ser difícil reconocer si es una estafa. Los estafadores saben cómo confundirte y tomar tu información. Los estafadores se están enfocando agresivamente en los clientes de las empresas de servicios públicos en la Florida utilizando tácticas sofisticadas y puede sucederle a cualquiera. En Florida Powered Light Company nunca queremos que uno de nuestros clientes sea víctima de una estafa. Por eso es tan importante que siga estos consejos para su protección. Si recibe una llamada sospechosa y le dicen que es FPL pidiéndole que haga un pago, cuelgue. No importa si el identificador de llamadas muestra el número de teléfono y el nombre de FPL. FPL nunca lo llamará