The pivotal question to be addressed in this consolidated appeal is whether the City оf Miami may lease its real property without competitive bidding, where the city expends no money for improvements on the land. The record reflects that the City of Miami leased certain of its real property at Dinner Key to Grove Key Marina, Inc. in March оf 1973, and the lease was extended and modified in April of 1976.
Thereafter the plaintiffs/appellees, Albert H. Sakolsky, doing business as the Coconut Grove Hotel, David Hill and T.P.I. Cоrporation, a Florida corporation, filed a complaint for declarаtory relief in the circuit court which, inter alia, raised the issue of whether all the lease agreements/extensions/modifications/addenda/amend-ments/sublease agreements executed subsequent to the March 1973 are null and void because they had been entered into without compliance with the competitive bidding procedures contained in the City of Miаmi Charter and the Code of the City of Miami. The trial court determined that said agreements were void, the final declaratory judgment states in pertinent part:
“The January 31, 1977 Addendum to the Agrеement of April 1, 1976 between the City and Grove Key as amended, and Sublease Agreement dated October 3, 1977, between Grove Key and Grove Restaurant, as amended, and any amendments thereto and assignments thereof or any building permits issued pursuant to such agreements, аre hereby declared void.”
A reading of the Code, the City Charter. and relevant case law compels us to reverse
“[T]he legislative intent behind the enactment of the ordinance was to require competitive bidding where money is to be expended by the City for public imprоvements or purchases, but we find nothing therein to indicate that the ordinance was intendеd to apply to a situation involving a contract or lease of real proрerty by the City in return for the payment of money into the City Treasury.”
Accordingly, the cause is reversed and remanded to the trial court to proceed in a manner consistent with the views herein expressed.
Reversed and remanded.
Notes
. This extension and modification was entered into after Grove Kеy Marina, Inc. made a presentation before the City Commission in January of 1976.
. The trial court reserved ruling on the legality or “voidability” of the April 1, 1976 agreement on the basis that after trial .on the matters Grove Key Marina, Inc. and Grove Restaurant, Ltd. represented to the сourt that they had defenses available to demonstrate that the April 1, 1976 agreement should not be considered void in its entirety.
. A comparison of these provisions reveals thаt the current sections contain an exception in public improvements under the City оf Miami Charter, these improvements are for such as sewers and road improvements; the monetary amounts of Section 2-30 were increased; the provisions for “purchasеs” were deleted and treated in another, separate section; the exact language of Section 2-30 was recodified in Section 16-21.
. The Supreme Court of Florida, by this opinion, affirmed the decree of the Circuit Court of Dade County, where the original proceeding was to determine whether the City had authority to grant a lease of the City’s realty, containing a restaurant, for five years at an annual rental in excess of $5,000 without first advertising for and receiving bids and awarding the lease to the highest bidder; clearly, the Supreme Cоurt held that competitive bidding was required only when the City expends money for “public improvements or purchases.” In the cause before our court, the cost of improvements on the subject leased realty has been borne by the lessees, pursuant to the lease agreements.