- Filters
- FL
- Miami-Dade County
- 3/18/25
- 03/18/2025
- 44 Minutes
- Noteworthy
- Highly Noteworthy
- Routine
Overview: The North Miami Commission for Women held a meeting where they introduced the “Empower Her” mentorship initiative, a program designed to support over 30,000 women and girls in North Miami by creating pathways for success and professional growth. The meeting also saw the appointment of a new vice chair and discussions on upcoming events and initiatives.
- FL
- Miami-Dade County
- 3/12/25
- 03/12/2025
- 144 Minutes
- Noteworthy
- Highly Noteworthy
- Routine
Overview: The Biscayne Park Code Compliance Board meeting focused on resolving complex property violation cases, notably granting a significant lien reduction for a property on Northeast 111th Street. This decision came amidst discussions about permit compliance, fee clarifications, and ordinance interpretations.
- FL
- Miami-Dade County
- 3/11/25
- 03/11/2025
- 175 Minutes
- Noteworthy
- Highly Noteworthy
- Routine
Overview: The North Miami City Council meeting covered a range of topics, with a focus on transportation initiatives funded by a half-penny sales tax and issues surrounding a city-owned Brownfield site. The meeting also celebrated Women’s History Month, acknowledging the vital roles women play in the community, and addressed concerns about the city’s water treatment plant and pension plans.
- FL
- Miami-Dade County
- 3/11/25
- 03/11/2025
- 52 Minutes
- Noteworthy
- Highly Noteworthy
- Routine
Overview: The North Miami Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) meeting focused on significant initiatives such as a vocational training program in partnership with Florida International University (FIU) and the redevelopment of the Northwest 7th Avenue corridor.
- FL
- Miami-Dade County
- 3/10/25
- 03/10/2025
- 136 Minutes
- Noteworthy
- Highly Noteworthy
- Routine
Overview: The Biscayne Park Planning and Design Review Board meeting on March 10, 2025, focused on a contentious variance request for a front yard fence on Northeast 107 Street. The homeowners argued that the fence was necessary for safety due to speeding vehicles and past theft incidents, while the board questioned the uniqueness of their circumstances and the necessity of the fence for reasonable property use. The board ultimately recommended against the variance.
