Whereas, Miami International Airport (Airport) Has A Significant Number Of Travelling Passengers That Utilize Luggage Wrapping Plastic Film On Their Checked Baggage To Protect Their Possessions From A Variety Of Variables Including, But Not Limited To, Theft, Damage, Inclement Weather And Mishandling; And Whereas, In July Of 2012, The Airport Began Operating A New $220 Million Dollar In-Line Checked Baggage Handling And Delivery System (Baggage System) In The North Terminal, Which Is A Fully Automated System Outfitted With State-Of-The-Art Explosive Detection Technology, That Screens And Transports 30,000 To 40,000 Bags Per Day, And Consists Of Approximately 14 Miles Of Conveyor Belts That Stretches From The Ticket Counters To The Loading Gates, And Is In The Process Of Installing A New Automated Baggage System In The Central And South Terminals; And Whereas, Passengers Utilizing Wrapping Material That Has Not Been Tested And Approved For Operational Use May Cause Injuries To Baggage Handlers Who Cannot Load Bags Into The Plane Properly Due To Luggage Sticking Together, Can Cause Difficulty In Unwrapping For The Transportation Security Administration (Tsa) During The Checked Baggage Screening Process Leading To Processing Delays, And Could Potentially Causes Jams And Other Problems In The Airports Baggage System And Conveyor Belts Creating System Delays And Shutdowns; And Whereas, Jfk Airports Terminal 4 Has A Similar Policy In Place For Operational Reasons, Which Limits Checked Luggage Wrapped In Plastic Film Into The Baggage Handling System To Those Items Wrapped By The Approved Luggage Wrapping Provider; And Whereas, Miami-Dade County Owns And Operates Miami International Airport In A Proprietary Capacity, And Costs Incurred In The Operation Of Miami International Airport Are Borne Solely By The Miami-Dade Aviation Department (Mdad); And Whereas, The Board Of County Commissioners (The Board) Finds That In The Interest Of Operational Performance And Efficiency Of Miami International Airport, There Should Be Controls On The Type Of Luggage Wrapping Material That Will Be Allowed Into The Airport; And, Whereas, The Authorized Vendor For Luggage Wrapping Services At Miami International Airport Has Been Approved By This Board And Is Required By Mdad And Tsa To Have Its Wrapping Material Tested And Approved Prior To Commencing Operations To Ensure There Will Be No Operational Interference With The Airports Baggage System; And Whereas, The Authorized Vendor For Luggage Wrapping Services At Miami International Airport Must Provide Re-Wrapping Free Of Charge To Those Passengers Whose Luggage Has Been Opened And Inspected By Tsa; And Whereas, This Board Finds That A Policy Should Be Established Limiting Checked Luggage Wrapped In Plastic Film To Standards At Least As Stringent As Those Met By The Authorized Vendor For Luggage Wrapping Services At Miami International Airport, Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved By The Board Of County Commissioners Of Miami-Dade County, Florida, That Section 1. The Foregoing Recitals Are Incorporated In This Resolution And Are Approved. Section 2. The Board Establishes A Policy At Miami International Airport Limiting Checked Luggage Wrapped In Plastic Film To Those Plastic Films That Meet The Same Standards Met By The Current Authorized Vendor For Luggage Wrapping Services At Miami International Airport. This Policy Shall Not Be Enforced Until The County Mayor Or County Mayors Designee Reports Back To Back To The Board On A Recommended Process For Evaluating Plastic Films Utilized By Persons Or Entities Other Than The Authorized Vendor For Luggage Wrapping Services And The Board Considers Such Report, Pursuant To Section 3 Below, Or 60 Days From The Effective Date Of This Resolution, Whichever Comes First. Section 3. The Board Directs The County Mayor Or The County Mayors Designee To Develop A Process By Which Luggage Wrapping Plastic Film Utilized By Persons Or Entities Other Than The Authorized Vendor For Luggage Wrapping Services Can Be Approved For Use At Miami International Airport, And To Submit Such Process To This Board For Approval Within 60 Days; This Process Must Be At Least As Stringent As Those Met By The Authorized Vendor And Must Include Recommendations Related To Community Outreach And Education, Inspections, Re-Wrap, Rent/Fees, Bonding, And Insurance. In The Event That The County Mayor Or County Mayors Designee Concludes That Such A Process Is Not Feasible, The Reasons For Such Conclusion Shall Be Submitted To This Board. Section 4. The Board Further Directs The County Mayor Or County Mayors Designee To Submit A Fiscal Impact Statement Detailing The Costs Associated With Implementation And Enforcement Of The Boards Policy And/Or The Recommended Process For Evaluating Plastic Films Within 60 Days Of The Effective Date Of This Resolution And Place The Completed Report On An Agenda Of The Board Pursuant To Ordinance No. 14-65.
10/20/2015: Veto Sustained (Action By: Board Of County Commissioners)
10/15/2015: Vetoed (Action By: Mayor)
10/14/2015: Assigned (Action By: County Attorney)
10/6/2015: Adopted As Amended (Action By: Board Of County Commissioners)
Contribute Your Insights: Add a Unique Perspective to Political Bills. Your Contribution will be Featured Below the Primary Bill, Ordered by Date Added.
No Reviews found ..