As you prepare to vote, we asked a final set of questions to our Commission candidates. See their responses below:
Did you ever receive a contribution of any kind from the developers (Russell Galbut, Crescent Heights, Extended Galbut Family members, or David Martin Terra Group) and would you accept any contribution directly or indirectly from the developer between now and the end of your campaign?
Andres Asion (Group 4): Did not respond.
Tanya Katzoff Bhatt (Group 4): No and No.
Mitch Novick (Group 5): I have received zero contributions from Galbut or Galbut related entities, nor would I have accepted any. I am self-funding my campaign so that I owe favors to no one if elected commissioner.
David Suarez (Group 5): No and No.
Joe Magazine (Group 6): No. I have never accepted a single dollar from the developers, family members or any related business entities. Nor have myself nor any members of my family solicited his support or financial contributions.
Marcella Novela (Group 6): I have never received any contributions from any of these developers in any form or fashion. I have actually chastised these developers for using their considerable network to encourage financial support for my opponent.
The CHC( Community Health Center) site is currently Zoned for CD2 60 -75ft allowable height. What is the maximum height you would consider accepting for the project?
Andres Asion (Group 4): Did not respond.
Tanya Katzoff Bhatt (Group 4): Without seeing any compelling reason to upzone, I wouldn’t be incluned to upzone.
Mitch Novick (Group 5): 60-75 feet on height, depending on use and applicable, if any, bonus(es)
David Suarez (Group 5): Whatever is currently allowed – 60-75
Joe Magazine (Group 6): For over a year, I urged city staff, elected officials and the developers to come to a solution that kept the project in scale at the 75ft allowable height, which was not supported. I continue to advocate for a maximum allowable height in line with the Federation Tower building and would absolutely be against heights of 200 ft I have seen proposed.
Marcella Novela (Group 6): 75 feet.
Knowing what you know now, do you still support the land swap deal with the county and the community clinic?
Andres Asion (Group 4): Did not respond.
Tanya Katzoff Bhatt (Group 4): No.
Mitch Novick (Group 5): No.
David Suarez (Group 5): It has been already been decided and voted on, my opinion makes no difference.
Joe Magazine (Group 6): The electorate voted in favor of the project with 64% favorability. However, key details were left out of the proposal, such as a a cannabis facility being granted a business permit by the Planning Department prior to the referendum. While it is critical that thousands of our most vulnerable neighbors have a dignified place to receive critical healthcare needs, the project in return MUST be compatible, in scale and respectful of the neighboring community.
Marcella Novela (Group 6): No.
As current capacity is limited, do you support a larger community clinic to better serve its patients?
Andres Asion (Group 4): Did not respond.
Tanya Katzoff Bhatt (Group 4): Yes.
Mitch Novick (Group 5): Possibly, if the community wants it.
David Suarez (Group 5): Yes.
Joe Magazine (Group 6): Yes, I have publicly advocated for a scaled back library and larger health center that can support both current and future capacity requirements.
Marcella Novela (Group 6): Yes.
Do you agree that the new clinic should include a minimum number of parking spaces for staff and patients?
Andres Asion (Group 4): Did not respond.
Tanya Katzoff Bhatt (Group 4): Absolutely
Mitch Novick (Group 5): Yes, with the understanding we need to see and understand the plan.
David Suarez (Group 5): Yes.
Joe Magazine (Group 6): Yes, I have publicly advocated for a scaled back library and larger health center that can support both current and future capacity requirements.
Marcella Novela (Group 6): Yes.
Knowing that the organization which manages the clinic was able to make a very substantial investment for another location across the bay and health care is under the responsibility of the county, should the city and its residents have to contribute to a land swap deal?
Andres Asion (Group 4): Did not respond.
Tanya Katzoff Bhatt (Group 4): No.
Mitch Novick (Group 5): No.
David Suarez (Group 5): No.
Joe Magazine (Group 6): I presented the audited financial records of the organization to the full city commission, showing an unencumbered cash position of over $20mm. I have always advocated, and will continue to do so, that the organization make a financial contribution to the new facility to lessen to impact of the project in return.
Marcella Novela (Group 6): No our contribution should not be tied to a land swap. There are numerous other ways Miami Beach can support and assist in this effort without diminishing our community’s quality of life or exacerbating parking and traffic problems.
If the clinic needs a new site should other locations be considered to better serve its patients and maybe be regrouped with other services like the daycare on 6th street which lost its space. Could the old fire station site at the corner of 11th street and Jefferson be considered?
Andres Asion (Group 4): Did not respond.
Tanya Katzoff Bhatt (Group 4): Love that idea although the old Fire Station site has serious sewer/pump issues which need to be mitigated before any future use is contemplated.
Mitch Novick (Group 5): Yes, the old fire station number 1 should be considered. It could very well be a viable option.
David Suarez (Group 5): It’s a possibility.
Joe Magazine (Group 6): Yes, 100%. This site was negotiated with the county for years with the public never being aware of or involved in discussions. Other alternatives should be explored. I have long suggested the day care center could be included in a new facility.
Marcella Novela (Group 6): There are several other options and sites that should be considered. Expanding access to healthcare does not have to be inextricably tied to massive overdevelopment projects.
Should the developer be required to satisfy his current 5 Park Condo development agreement with the city before any new deal is considered? obligations first under the current 5 Park development agreement with the city? This would include the new pedestrian bridge over 5th street/MacArthur bridge, Floridian parking lot, and completion of the Baywalk /seawall behind Mondrian and Mirador properties.
Andres Asion (Group 4): Did not respond.
Tanya Katzoff Bhatt (Group 4): Absolutely.
Mitch Novick (Group 5): Yes, the developer should be required to hold up his end of the development agreement, including the items you’ve listed.
David Suarez (Group 5): Yes.
Joe Magazine (Group 6): Yes, ABSOLUTELY. I urged exactly this to our elected officials and city staff that fell on deaf ears. Over the years, I have been amongst the most vocal and persistent advocates for both our baywalk and 5th street overpass. I would absolutely mandate these important projects were completed as part of any type of development agreement.
Marcella Novela (Group 6): Absolutely. It does not stand to reason to engage in new agreements while current obligations and promises have not been met. It would actually dis-incentivize the developer from meeting all of his earlier obligations.
