Loading...
12-11-1934 Regular Meeting MINUTES OF A MEETING OF MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE COUNCIL December .11, 1934. The regular monthly meeting of Miami Shores Village Council was held at the village offices on Tuesday December 11th, 1934, at 7:30 P.M. All members of the Council were present and the village attorney and village clerk were also present. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and approved. Mr. L. C . Herrick appeared before the council with a request in behalf of Miami Shores Community Church for a donation of funds for the improvement of the Church property. All members of the council considered this a worthy cause but after discussion and on advice of the village attorney it was decided that the village could not make such a contribution as it was to be used on property owned by a private corporation in which the village had no legal interest. The question of the purchase of a lighted traffic sign to be located at the intersection of N . E. 2nd Avenue and 96th Street was discussed and the village manager was authorized to place an order for such sign, the cost of which not to be in excess of $100.00 plus cost of erection. A written report of the village attorney was presented, read and approved and incorporated in the aninutes of the meeting. No further matters being presented for discussion t �ingKw d j urned. APPROVED BY THE C 0NC • By As V i age Manager & Clerk ayor. GEORGE EDWARD HOLT tl:T�^._"t:CYAT LAZA/ M,iN►111,F�^_�pA REPORT TO COUNCIL OF MIAJI SHORES VILLAGE. I beg to report that pursuant to the request of the Council I have succeeded in having E. B. Elliott & Company remove the last bill board from the Village in accordance with its agreement with the Village, which bill board had been left standing at the intersection of Sixth Avenue and Biscayne Boulevard. This completes in full the contract between the Village and E. B. Elliott & Company. Pursuant to the request of the Council I sent out letters to the owners of all improved property located veithin the Village urging them to pay their taxes before their property went into the Villa,-e foreclosure for 1933-34. I also urged payment of the 1934-35 taxes which became due and payable November 1, 1934, but which do not become in default until April 1, 1935. In cases where it was required I also urged payment of the taxes for 1932-33. I have had several responses from these letters and I believe that within a few days all of the improved property owners will have paid their taxes or made some satisfactory arrangement for the payment of the same. In the meantime I am handing to the abstractor a list of the lots which I have just completed for the purpose of tlze abstract for the foreclIsure, less the property which is improved with the understanding that if at the time the abstract is nearing completion payment has not been made or satisfactory arrangement by improved property owners, these latter can be added to the abstract work and included in the foreclosure. Mr. LeogC. Herrick inquired of me for a legal opinion concerning the possibility of the Village donating $1000.00 to the Community Church, eit'.zer in the form of money or the furnishing of necessary supplies thereto, and he advised me that this request was made in order that this objection could be taken care of before application was made to t-ae Council. After considering the matter it is my opinion in view of the fact that the property is owned by Biscayne Boulevard Company or New 1liami Shores Corporation, that such GEORGE EDWARD HOL.t A7=7&*43YAT L.AW a donation, either in money or kind, would be outside the powers of the Village, and that any taxpayer could enjoin payment of the same. Mr. Herrick made the suggestion that if the Village did not own this property, that a nominal lease could be procured from the Biscayne Boulevard Company or New Miami Shores Corporation, and then the Village in turn could lease it to the Church, and upon such basis the validity of such a donation could be sustained. In my opinion this also is invalid and such a donation even with thesefacts .exist- ing would be contrary to law. Pursuant to the request of the Council I communicated with H. E. Wolfe Construction Company, contractors building the Federal Highway north of Aliami Shores Village, concerning the mainte- nance of detours, mainly on Northeast Sixth Avenue within the Village and requested them to advise me as to their attitude concerning proper repair of the same. They informed me they were not liable for the maintenance of detours and such responsibility rested with the State Road Department. A similar request was therefor, sent to the State Road Department and I have heard from the resident engineer here, who although disclaims liability advised me he would take the matter up with the Chief Engineer and advise me within a few days. I have been infDrmed that the Village Court now has two automobiles in its custody, left with it as security for the payment of costs and fines assessed and not collected. Request has been made of me by your Village Manager and Village Judge for an opinion as to the proper way to dispose of these automobiles at public sale and at the same time protect the Village from any liability. At present there is no ordinance concerning this particu- lar matter and the only authority to which I can refer is that con- tained in the charter in the following words: ItTo levy on property of any person or corporation in the Village and sell the same in the same manner as sales under =u ;1aL MY9AfiD KOLT "-,r.:1D `YATt.AV7 •, ^.LEPWRIDA execution are conducted in order to collect fines or penalties due the Village or to enforce a judgment of the Village Court. ?' The Village now occupies this position - an ordinance passed to-night could have no retroactive effect in so far as the two cars are concerned. The only authority under which we can proceed, if at all, is that cited. If the Council desires, it can in my opinion have the Village Judge issue an order directed to the Marshall of the Village to seize the cars mentioned and offer them for sale at public auction on a Rule Day, to wit, the first Monday in a month, after publication for four consecutive weeks in a newspaper of Dade County, Florida. At such sale if the 1111age is the purchaser thereof it then becomes the owner of the car. However, if there are any outside purchasers the proceeds of the sale should be first applied to the payment of the costs and ad- vertising of the holding of such sale; secondingly, costs of storage of the car, and third, the fine imposed by the Village. Any balance which may remain over to be given to the proper party entitled thereto. However, the question arises as to the possession of the holder of retain title contract on these cars. If demand is made for the return by such retain title holder, then and in that event the Village can refuse to turn over the cars to such persons or corporations and compel them to bring replevin in order to pro- cure possession of thecar. If the retain title holder is the pur- chaser at the sale, of course the Village can not recover its fine as retain title constitutes a prior lien and interest which is superior to the right of the Village, however, such purchaser must pay the costs of the sale and cost of storage of the car. The position of the lillage is somewhat delicate with reference to these cars as it must be extremely careful to take all necessary steps to avoid liability as you well know most litigants prefer to sue a municipal corporation, especially one that is as solvent as Miami Shores Village. The liability of the Village, if any, has already risen as to the two cars which it now holds, if do GEORGE EDWARD HOLT ATM,-O=YAT L.Avi such a retention of them is illegal. I have not had the opportunity to fully brief the matter and arrive at a definite conclusion, but the foregoing is my opinion as of this date. It seems to me that precipitate action concerning disposition of these cars should be avoided and yet at the same time promptness should be the most important element in disposing of this most vexing question. Respectfully submitted, Vi a A Corney 4