Loading...
08-06-1935 Executive Meeting f EXECUTIVE SESSION OF THE MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE COUNCIL. r August 6, 1935 An executive session of the Miami Shores Village Council was held at the Village office on Tuesday, August 6, 1935, at 7.30 P. M. All members of the Council were present as was the Village Attorney and Village Clerk. y ` The Village Attorney read an opinion as to what would be best to do in allowing a certain proposed Aquatic Garden to be placed in r in Block 23, of E1 Portal section 4, a copy of this report being in- eluded in these minutes . This matter was discussed fully, and on motion of Mr. Lindsey, seconded by Mr. Carlisle, a resolution entitled "RESOLUTION OUTLINING THE POLICY ADOPTED BY MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE COUNCIL CONCERNING CERTAIN PROPERTIES IN THE VILLAGE TO BE USED FOR PUBLIC PARKS. " was unanimously passed. The question was discussed as to what disposition should be made of properties which had been foreclosed by the Village for 1932-33 taxes and on which certificates for subsequent years had been sold. It was the unanimous opinion of the Council that the Suburban Miami Investment Corporation be allowed to purchase the interest of the Village in certain lots in Belvedere Park, on which they hold such subsequent certificates , upon payment of taxes, forec- losure costs and interest, to date of payment. In view of the fact that considerable new residence construction is going on- in the Village at the present time, the committee, named by the Council for the preparation of a Building Code for the Village, was urged to prepare a proposed Code and present it to the Council for approval as soon as possible. The question of allowing a filling station to be erected at the North East corner of 2nd Avenue and 96th Street was discussed. It was the unanimous opinion of the Council that such filling station should be allowed as long as the construction and architecture of the building meets with the approval of the building inspector and the Council. The Council also decided that no change should be made in the amount of the occupational license for filling stations, as provided for in the present license ordinance. The Village Attorney presented the question of what disposition should be made of certificates sold to the Recovery Corporation for 1933-34 and 1934-35 taxes, on properties previously foreclosed by the Village. It was the unanimous opinion of the Council that the money paid by The Recovery Corporation, for such certificates, should be returned to the Recovery Corporation and the certificates be turned back to the Village for cancellation. The Village Attorney read a report of the Legislative Committee meeting held in Jacksonville, August 1st and 2nd, at which the question of an amendment to the State Constitution be passed pro- viding uniform charters for cities of various sizes in the State. A copy of this report is included in .these minutes . The Village Attorney presented an offer of H. L. Clark on certain properties in Asbury Park on which foreclosure proceedings, for nonpayment of taxes, had been started by the Village, said offer being fifty cents on a dollar. On motion of Mr. Lindsey seconded by Mr. Goll, and unanimously passed by the Council this offer was rejected. The Village Attorney was instructed to accept all taxes, forecl- osure costs and interest, up to .and including July 31, 1935, and reconvey Lot A. Government Lot 4, to William Barnott, the original owner. Discussion of further matters of business was postponed to the next meeting of the Council. RESOLUTION OUTLINING THE POLICY ADOPTED BY MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE COUNCIL CON- CERNING CERTAIN PROPERTIES IN THE VILLAGE TO BE USED FOR PUBLIC PARKS. WHEREAS, Miami Shores Village by tax foreclosure and otherwise has acquired title to the following described lots and parcels of land within the corporate limits of said village, LOT BLOCK SECTION LOT BLOCK SECTION 1 18 E1 Portal 20 to 23 20 E1 Portal 2 18 It 24 to 25 20 it 3 to 5 18 " 1 & 2 21 it 6 to 8 18 " 3 & 4 21 it 10 18 " 5 & 6 21 It 1 & 2 19 " 7 21 it 4 19 " 8 21 It 6,7,8 19 " 11 & 12 21 It 10 & 11 19 " 1 22 If 15 19 " 3 to 11 22 It 16 19 " 12 to 20 22 It 17 19 " 23 to 25 22 it 19 to 23 19 't 1 & 2 23 it 25 19 " 3,4,5,6 23 it 1 & 2 20 " 7 to 16 23 it 3 to 19 20 " 31 to 36 23 It 37 to 41 23 If WHEREAS, it is the desire and concensus of opinion of the council of said Miami Shores Village, that the area in which said above described lands are situated should be developed as a municipal park for the advantage and beautification from the standpoint of the health and recreation of the inhabitants of the said. village. THEREFORE, be it resolved that each and every of the above described lots and parcels of land be and hereby are designated and declared to be public parks for the use and benefits of the residents of Miami Shores Village. Regularly passed and adopted by unanimous vote of the council August 6, 1935. J . L. Carothers Frank 0 Pruitt Village Manager and Clerk Mayor :,..'k'1�4:• .�s�_�,�`�• g:� .,-�=x,•:�.. .,�a,nx:,,�avFa rte+.., _ Miami, Florida, August 6, 1935. TO MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE COUNCIL: At the last general election the people of the State of Florida adopted an amendment to the Constitution of the State of Florida amending Section 24, of Article III, as follows: "The Legislature shall establish an uniform system of county and municipal government, which shall be applicable, except in cases where local or special laws for counties are provided by the Legis- lature that may be inconsistent therewith. The Legislature shall by general law classify cities and towns according to -.population., and shall by general law provide for their incorporation, government, jurisdiction, powers, duties and privileges under such classifications, and no special or local laws incorporating cities or towns, providing for their government, jurisdiction, powers, duties and privi- leges shall be passed by the Legislature." At the last session of the Legislature considerable dis- cussion was had concerning what should be done in accordance with this Constitutional Amendment. It was felt that the subject was such a large and complicated one that further study would be necessary before suitable action could be taken thereon. Accordingly the Legislature appointed a committee consisting of five members of the House and five members of the Senate to investigate the entire situation, and report back to the next Legislature its recommendations concerning the same. Pursuant to this resolution the committee was composed of Senators John R. Beacham, Henry C. Tillman, Phillip Beall, Spessard L. Holland and Wallace Tervin, and Representatives S. P. Robineau, A. 0. Kanner, George Westbrook, Jack F. White and Leroy Collins, and met in Jackson- ville, Florida, on August lst and 2nd, 1935, at the call of its Chair- man.. Senator Beacham invited officials and representatives of all the municipalities of the State to be present and assist in its delibera- tions. In addition to the committee named, there were approximately two hundred representatives of the various municipalities of the State, including your Village Attorney. The first session was consumed in discussing solely the classification of the municipal governments of I the State, and your Attorney was called upon to give his views with reference to the municipality which he represented, and the various beneficial powers and restrictions as contained in the Village Charter were explained, together with a desire of the Village to retain its Charter as it now stands in view of the conditions under which the Village must operate and which conditions naturally are not the same with othertowns and cites throughout the State. It was also explained that to arbitrarily classify a town or city in the state and compel it to adopt a Charter suitable to all within its bracket would be an almost impossible job as the problems of each differed greatly on many things. After hearing from other representatives the committee ad- journed and went into executive session and later reported back that it had adopted seven classifications as follows: 1. Cities and towns up to 1000 in population. 2. Cities and towns from 1000 to 3000 in population. 3. Cities and towns from 3000 to 7500 in population. 4. Cities and towns from 7500 to 20,000 in population. 5. Cities and towns from 20,000 to 40,000 in population. 6. Cities and towns from 40,000 to 100,000 in population. 7. Cities and towns of population of 100,00 and over. From the above it was readily seen that the Village fell into the first classification, that of cities and towns of population up to 1000, as the last State' s census disclosed that the population of the Village was 681. Immediately arguments and discussion was had in the next ensuing sessions as to the various classifications, and it was the consensus of opinion of the majority of municipal representatives pre- sent that it would be almost impossible to comply with the Constitutional Amendment. The committee as a whole was of a contrary opinion and in- sisted that the Amendment was the mandate of the people and should be carried out regardless of the effect it might have upon the municipal- ities of the State as now constituted.In an informal discussion with several members of the committee it was suggested that in view of the - 2 - impossibility of the task that its committee recommend to the next Legislature that the Amendment be resubmitted to the people since it was in no way the voice of the people demanding a change as it was submitted along with quite a few proposed Constitutional Amendments, two of which was the well known Homestead Amendment and the repeal of the prohibition amendement of the Constitution of Florida.. It was explained that in voting for or against these two well known and well advertised amendments the voters in using a very complicated ballot voted for or against all proposals of this nature in order that their choice as to the two amendments mentioned might be properly made. This subject was discussed at length by Mr. Imerson, a City Commissioner of Jacksonville, and cited in support -of -his argument that an additional referendum be had before the people on this question as was done on the consolidation of the City of Jacksonville and Duval County. A constitutional amendment calling for the consolidation of these two units was passed by the people of the State of Florida, and on the referendum in Duval County alone it was overwhelmingly defeated. This last voice of the people was the real mandate . and suggestion was made that the same procedure should be followed in respect to the amend- ment under discussion. It was most heartily concurred in by the majority of the representatives present, but the majority of the committee, al- though no vote was taken, adopted a contrary attitude and insisted that the question was entirely limited as to the terms of the amendment as it now stood and nothing else could be considered. At the next session the committee called for discussion from the floor on various parts of the charters of the cities and towns now in existence in the State. Various speakers were heard, and it was again the good fortune of your Village Attorney to be called upon to discuss the method of enforcement of the payment of taxes now in use under the Village Charter. This was received with much interest, and many questions were propounded to your attorney concerning the same. The committee then appointed each representative present as a committee member of the classification which he represented to assist -3 - the committee in drafting model charters for each classification, and requested that an analysis be sent to the committee of the present charter under which the Village is now being operated, and the suggested model charter for the entire classification, after conferring with as many representatives as possible of the cities and towns in the same classification. Miami Shores Village in class one is one of one hundred and twenty-nine incorporated cities and municipalities of the State of Florida. To draft a charter which would fit the needs of each and every of these municipalities and at the same time allow them to retain the advanatages which they have been receiving in the past under their present setup is well nigh impossible. I have with me a list of the cities and towns of Florida properly classified, and to cite you an example, the smallest town in the classification assigned to the Village, is Cocoa Beach, with a population of thirty-three, and the Town of Inverness, the largest town in the classification, with a population of nine hundred and seventy-eight. Another meeting will be held some time in the fall by the committe in conjunction with the meeting of Florida League of Municipal- ities in Orlando at which time further steps will be taken and possibly model charters will be recommended and submitted for discussion. To illustrate the danger of the entire situation let us view the charter under which the Village is now operating. The -restriction on incurring indebtedness in issuing bond has been made very stringent in view of the situation of our surrounding cities and towns, and we believe that we have at la st reached the point of protection which can not be surpassed. The zoning authority and power of the Village is absolutely essential and necessary 'in view of the location of the Village and of the tremendous pressure which has been brought upon the Council to allow business interests to enter. The officials of the Village serve without compensation and it is seriously doubted as to the .feasibility as to incorporating such a provision in a model charter for the others in the same classification. The method of enactment of ordinances is - 4 - peculiar to the Village in view of the fact that the Council meets only at night and normally once a month. To have further restrictions placed upon the method of enactment of the laws of the Village would greatly interfere with the smooth operation of the same. Publication of notice of tax sales and delinquent taxes are not required, and you know that such has been the practice of the majority of the towns and municipalities of the State at great cost to tax payers. Foreclosure of tax certificates and enforcement of taxes of the Village is considered to be the best and most feasible method ever yet devised as witness the results which have been obtained as compared to the cumbersome procedure used by other towns and municipalities and especially the City of Miami, which has to have recourse to the general law, which in the final analysis does not give much aid in this direction. The only reason which has been advanced for the presentation of this amendment to the vote of the people of the Legislature of 1933 was to avoid local bill legislation. Some of the Legislators have been placed in very embarrassing positions due to the enactment of local they measures without notice to the public which/later affected, and as a result of this, determined to put a stop to the passage of local bills concerning municipalities and thus protect themselves from the importun- ities of various cities and towns for such legislation and thereby allow themselves to devote their energy and attention to the major issues con- cerning the state such as the general appropriation bill, pensions, beer and homestead. As was suggested by some of the members of the committee to your Attorney, this evil can be corrected by the Legislature exercising vigilance in the passage of local measures, and further require publica- tion and notice to apply for the passage of a local measure, both of which would be sufficient to protect the Representatives from criticism. Your attorney is now preparing an analysis of the Village Charter and will send it forward to the committee, and will also prepare a model charter for their consideration. It is the opinion of your Attorney that the progress concerning this whole matter must be carefully - 5 - watched, else the Village may be in a position of losing its most important functions and protection with which it has surrounded itse;f in the enactment of its charter and the amendments thereto. In the meantime, however, it is the belief of your Attorney .that if sentiment is properly aroused against this measure in carrying out of its provisions and the various municipalities of the state present a solid front to the committee and the next Legislature, the only sensible and pnly possible thing will then occur, which will be resubmission to the people for final adoption or rejection. Respectfully submitted, it ge Atto ney. TO MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE COUNCIL: The undersigned committee appointed by this Council begs to report its findings concerning the application to erect an acquatic garden and residence on property located at the entrance of the Village on Biscayne Boulevard. We find that the project is eviddntly well financed and that the erection of such a business will not interfere with the beauty of the entrance to the Village, if it is erected and maintained in accordance with the plans and specifications submitted to your committee. If any use of the property situated in this section is to be had other than for strictly residential use, this application should be granted. However, regardless of the condition and use of the property as contemplated, it is still a business and in our opinion would be held to be so by the courts in case property owners desired to contest the same. This naturally would lead to numerous applications from owners of adjoining property in the same locality and it will be very diffi- cult for the Council to deny other applicationsfor business use if the present application is granted. In addition thereto, it would be necessary to amend or change the zoning laws on this section of the Village, and as a result the one thing the council. has sought to avoid since the Village was incorporated will be irretrievably lost and it is not at all improbable that such business invasion would persist up the Boulevard to the very heart of the Village. It is the suggestion of your committee that an immediate survey be made to ascertain the exact quantity of property owned in this section by the Village as the result of the first foreclosure, and with this information in hand, the Council can then determine the cost of taking over the entire section by condemnation proceedings or otherwise, and develop the same into a park and thereby forever dispose of this vexatious problem. It is the opinion of your committee that the permit should be granted to these people if the Council desires to face the resulting possibilities mentioned above. On the other hand, if this situation is not desired, the application should be refused and proper steps taken to convert the entire area into a municipal park, provided the cost of the same will not be excessive. Respectfully submitted, D. V G ddard. Otto H. Goll. In o e EdwTt. ard COMMITTEE. TO IIAMI SHORES VILLAGE COUNCIL: L. SACKETT - NEI 4 of NE4 of NWof NE4, Section 6-53-42 Demand has been made for payment of state and county tax certificates in the sum of $97.00 against the above captioned property. Pursuant to instructions of the Council I find that this property was deeded to the Village November 12, 1933, as a portion of the East 330 feet of the North 340 feet of NI z of NW4 of NEI Section 6-53-42, subject to certain terms and conditions, to wit: The property shall be continuously used for park purposes. The name of the Village shall always remain Miami Shores Village; that the Village shall not be annexed to or merged with any other corporation; that within one year from the date of the deed the Village shall expend or cause to be expended the sum of $3000.00 on this and other property described in the deed; that no billboard shall be erected upon this property without the approval of grantor, The Mortgage Discount Company. Violation of any of the terms and conditions as described nullifies the deed and title reverts back to the grantor, its successors or assigns (read provisions of deed in detail) . The total amount of taxes against this property as I am )informed is $171.64, but I wish to impress upon the Council the fact that the property captioned above is only a portion of the property conveyed to the Village under the deed described (Exhibit attached drawing to show property involved) . This deed was accepted by resolution of the Council, December 1933, along with the deed conveying what is known as_ the"Schilling Tract" . On December , 1933, the Council by resolution granted an option to Surburban Miami Investment Company to purchase all the property described in the two deeds mention after ten years fromdate and not later than fifteen years from date or any part thereof, for a price to be fixed at an appraiserts value at the time of the exercise of the option. (Read remainder of resolution) . So the Village owns this property subject to the terms and conditions of the deed, one portion of which has been violated already and subject to option to purchase to Surburban Miami Investment Company. VERNON C. SEAVER - Exhibit Abstract and present request. ATTACHMENT OF AUTOMOBILES I conferred with Judge Oppenborn with reference to the dispos- ition of auto&obiles now in the custody of the Village. He suggested that the names of the owners or persons interest in these cars be traced by the motor number by application to the Commission of Motor Vehicles of this state, or if such information is not available there to ascertain from the manufacture of the car to whom the car was shipped and through that method the owner thereof finally traced, and after such information has been procured institute attachment suits in his court against such owner based upon creditor-debtor relationship, this between the Village and owner thereof on account of storage of the automobile. Respectfully submitted, Z_) W �'