Good afternoon, everybody, and welcome to the city commission meeting this uh Tuesday, May 19th, 2026.

I want to thank you all for being here.

We have a long agenda today, this afternoon, tonight, a lot of fun things to discuss.

And uh so why don't we begin with our conference meeting?

We have um we have a communication.

Mayor Hello Mayor, uh we have the CRA that was scheduled for one third.

Um, CRA was scheduled for 130.

Okay, right.

Okay, so why don't we begin with that?

Uh Mr.

Clerk, could you please call the role?

Commissioner Herbst.

Commissioner Glossman, here commissioner Beasley Pittman here, Vice Chair Sorensen here, Chair Trentals.

Yes.

And uh these microphones a little sensitive.

Yeah.

Okay.

Um so to begin our meeting, we have uh several motions.

Uh M1, motion approving the minutes for the May 5th, 2026 CRA agency uh board meeting.

Would someone like to move the item?

So moved, second.

Move and seconded, please call the rule.

Commissioner Herbst, Commissioner Glossman, yes, Commissioner Beasley Pittman, yes, Vice Chair Swordson, yes, Chair Trentals.

Yes, and M1 is now approved.

M2, this is a motion approving a third lease agreement with FPA2 LLC to extend the lease term to September 30th, 2026, for the uh CRA uh current office space.

Um do I hear a motion?

Moved second moved and seconded.

Anyone have any questions?

There being none, please call the roll.

Commissioner Herbst, Commissioner Glossman, yes, Mr.

Beasley Pittman.

Yes.

Vice Chair Sorensen, yes, Chair Trentals.

Yes, and M two is now approved.

M3, this is a motion approving an office space lease for the uh uh for the CRA.

Um located at 501 Northwest Seventh Avenue.

Uh, someone like to move the item.

So move seconds and seconded.

Does anyone have any questions?

There being none, please call the role.

Commissioner Herbst, yes, Commissioner Glossman.

Yes.

Commissioner Beasley Pittman.

Yes.

Vice Chair Sorensen, yes, Chair Trentals.

Yes, and that's approved.

Moving on to resolutions, R1 resolution appropriating and authorizing funding in amount not to exceed 200,000 for capital improvement master planning services with ALTA planning and design and amending the interlocal agreement with the city of Fort Lauderdale to include funding for design and construction services and implementing the capital improvement master plan for the central city community redevelopment area.

Someone like to introduce the resolution.

Introduce.

Does anyone have any questions or comments?

There being none, please call roll.

A resolution of the Board of Commissioners of the Fort Lauderdale Community Redevelopment Agency approving an amendment to interlocal agreement between the Fort Lauderdale Community Redevelopment Agency and the City of Fort Lauderdale adding capital improvement master plan project for the Central City Community Redevelopment Area authorizing and appropriating funds in the amount not to exceed 200,000 for planning services related to the same providing for an effective date.

Commissioner Herbst?

Yes.

Commissioner Glossman?

Yes.

Commissioner Beasley Pittman?

Yes.

Vice Chair Sorstman?

Yes.

Chair Trentals.

Yes, and that resolution is now approved.

Is there any further business of the CRA?

Nothing further.

Okay.

That meetings concluded.

We'll now move on to the uh conference meeting, which um begins with a communication from the sustainability advisory board.

Is there anyone here for that?

City manager.

I believe a representative from that board is here.

Okay, great.

Hi.

You want to push the button at the bottom of the speaker?

Okay.

Great.

Is this working?

Okay, great.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Commissioners.

My name is Aida Nassimi, and I'm here on behalf of the Sustainability Advisory Board.

The board reviewed the city's exposure to single use plastics, and we're bringing you our recommendations today.

Nine in total.

Six are amendments to the code of ordinances.

Three are operational and policy strategies.

They can be adopted one at a time or as a package.

First, this the six code amendments.

One, regulate single use plastic food product services, food service products used by vendors and event permittees on city property and require compostable or reusable alternatives.

Two, prohibit unencapsulated polystyrene in floating docks, platforms, and buoys as city facilities.

Three, codify the existing glass container ban on our public beaches.

Four, strengthen the public straw ordinance to include stirrers with a hardship waiver for small businesses.

Five, reinforce the polystyrene rules with documentation, clear consequences, and public signage.

Six, prohibit the intentional outdoor release of balloons, confetti, and glitter.

Then the three operational strategies.

One, align the city's green purchasing policy with these provisions.

Two, expand education and outreach, staff training, community campaigns, and beach signage, three, update the city's event and vendor agreements so that way we so that way we can enforce them.

Two points the board wants to be direct about.

First, every recommendation stays within the city's authority.

We know the state preempts citywide bans.

This is city property, city facilities, and cities owned contracts and procurement.

Second, implementation is phased, and education first.

Compostable alternatives can cost more per unit, but national guidance shows total program costs are manageable through standardization and less waste hauling over time.

This is a practical and forcible path.

It protects our waterways and beaches, supports a resilient tourism economy, and it shows real leadership and coastal stewardship.

On behalf of the sustainability advisory board, we respectfully ask the commission to receive these recommendations and direct staff to begin advancing them.

Thank you so much, and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Okay, great.

It's pretty comprehensive.

Anyone have any questions or comments?

Yes, Commissioner Beasley Pittman.

Good afternoon.

Thank you for your presentation.

Um impact and um execution.

If we go in this direction, what is the timeline that you see we could accomplish this?

Um I'm gonna have one of my cohorts assess me to answer this question.

Um thank you.

Um Glenn Hadwin Sustainability Manager.

We've been working with the board on this topic for quite a while, and there are our six recommendations.

The ordinances, as you probably know, take considerably longer, and um some of the administrative ones we're already looking at, like we've been working as we do new vendor agreements with the parks department and putting language in there to uh reduce single use plastic.

So some of the things we can do, you know, right away in the next you know six months to a year ordinances are probably, you know, take a year plus to do.

Thank you.

So Glenn, I'm sorry.

How many of these do you think you can actually knock out in the shorter term versus the ordinance one?

I think the administrative ones, the three, which are um the amending the contract language doing the education and outreach, we can do in the next you know, six to um, you know, start in the next six months and to a year, have them pretty far along.

So half of them could be short-term.

Yes, okay.

Yeah, thanks.

Um, I'm I'm I'm seeing some.

I'm seeing some contradictions in these recommendations.

It seems to me that the a lot of these recommendations are to try to move the city away from the use or the allowing of the use of plastics.

Yet, in number three, you want us to memorialize the prohibition of glass containers on the sandy portion of the beaches.

So, what's the alternative?

Well, that's actually a slightly that brings in a different issue, and I'll let our sustainability coordinator Sylvia Dukeania speak to that.

Okay.

Thank you, Mayor Commissioners.

I'm Silvia Lucas, sustainability coordinator.

Um, I understand your question, and I believe uh a good way to explain it is we were working together with other groups um in staff for the city and thinking um solely on protecting our beaches and waterways as one of the biggest assets that we have in the city.

Glass is a hazard for safety on not only for people but for the animals.

So I do understand it's not necessarily related to single-use plastics, but it was in these um same line of working towards more safety and less um debris on our beaches.

That sorry, mayor if I mean so I go to the beach and I want and I'm bringing you know a jug of uh high you know uh Kool-Aid, okay.

And how am I supposed to drink that?

Out of the jug?

You don't want plastic, you don't want glass, we don't want styrofoam.

So how do you drink that?

With multiple use plastic cups, for example, reusable washing.

Something that you wash and you use again.

Okay, that's really counterproductive, because that's gonna get thrown away also, and uh in other words, I'm just trying to make sense out of this.

You know, people say you can't have glass, well you can't have plastic, well have you know have more expensive plastic, you know, multiple use where you wash it and take it home.

I've seen a lot of things thrown on the beach, all the beach cleanups I've been a part of over the years, um and I've seen these uh uh multiple use plastic containers uh thrown on the beach, so it's not a deterrent just because it's a multiple use uh uh uh utensil, but you know, you know, you're trying you're asking us to make ordinances and we're trying to make sense out of this, okay?

And um as far as um number four, you want us to strengthen the plastic straw or ordinance, and you want us to include this plastic stirrers, but if someone can't afford to do it in their business, you want us to exempt them.

I don't want to exempt anybody.

What would be the basis for an exemption?

You know, you buy them you buy the buy them out of a box, right?

So what's the basis for an exemption?

So the basis for the exemption was our team reviewed a series of other ordinances from different jurisdictions in Florida.

We saw that as a relatively common practice, and the idea is to uh let's say be more flexible with enforcement with smaller businesses, understanding as um, give me an example, someone who can't give me an example of where plastic uh uh the substitute for plastic is more expensive than the plastic.

This is what you're talking about, right?

Yes, exemption if they can uh demonstrate financial hardship.

So give me an example where where paper straws are more expensive than plastic straws.

Give me an example.

Is that the case?

If I go out on a s if I go to Walgreens or CVS and I want to buy paper straws, they're gonna be three times as much as plastic straws.

I mean help me out here.

Which I mean, these all sound like great ideas, but they don't make they don't they tell we're trying to do we're trying to understand what what the ultimate goal is here.

Right.

In the documents that in the attachment to the communication, there's a a research paper that's that staff prepare towards the back of that.

I think it's labeled page 16 and 17 are examples of common single-use plastics and the alternatives and unit pricing.

So direct me if you can to the straws.

The straws are at the bottom of page sixteen.

Sixteen.

Let's go to sixteen.

So a single use plastic straw is one cent to five cents.

Uh I don't see paper here.

Where's paper?

I see wheat, so sugar, glass, silicone, rice, and bamboo.

Where is paper?

Well, the rice-based, it's it's paper, cocktail straw.

Well, right paper doesn't have to be rice based.

What's your favorite paper?

Paper paper.

Okay.

Paper doesn't have to be any of these.

So I think you're s you're throwing the argument off by suggesting that the only alternative is a super expensive um substitute that you you but you fail to include just regular paper.

Right.

Th this isn't these examples aren't meant to be all inclusive.

But but they're pushing us to to follow an agenda, okay, except expecting us to believe that this is the these are the only options when we know that these aren't the only options.

And I don't want to the point that I'm trying to make is I don't want to give anyone an excuse not to uh not to use uh alternatives to plastic.

I want I do not we as a commission uh years back say we do not want to seize straws anymore.

Okay, pay plastic straws, and now you're giving people an excuse not to have them.

We don't want that excuse, okay?

That's all that's all I'm saying.

Okay.

Um so back to the other point of uh back to the other point of um uh glass on the beach, glass containers.

Same thing, you know.

You can't you you can have all these lofty ideas, but when you try to um put them into practical use and to see what the ultimate impact is going to be, uh you know, you you've got to help us out, you know, as a commission to figure out what you're really getting at here.

So what are encapsulated expanded polystyrene?

What is that?

Is that is that what is that styrofoam?

Yes, sir, exactly.

It's styrofoam, that's the fancy name for styrofoam?

Yes.

Okay.

We don't allow that as floating docks, do we anymore?

Um who's here?

I don't know which department that would be, but we don't allow styrofoam docs anymore.

We worked on that specific point with Marco Aguilera.

Um, you pull the microphone closer to you.

We worked with Marco Aguilera on that specific point.

Um he was acting as a chief water waste officer until recently.

Um he did say that was a common practice, and the suggestion is to prohibit them.

Um but I don't think we uh it's not common in our city.

You can say it's a common practice, but it's it is.

Do we allow do we allow we don't allow styrofoam docs anymore?

I thought we outlawed that a long time ago.

So good afternoon, uh Mayor Carl Williams, Parks and Recreation Director.

So um to your question, I believe you are accurate, but I would like to research that matters to ensure that we are all aligned.

Okay.

And what we can also do is work with our sustainability board here and and come back with a better uh more refined uh approach here to address some of the concerns you just brought forth.

Okay.

All right, those are the only comments I have.

I I appreciate your patience and thank you.

Anyone else have any comments or questions?

Yeah, Mayor.

Thank you.

Um I think City Manager, I thought I thought we were already working on number one.

Isn't that in progress?

We've talked about that before.

Yes, we are working on number one.

And last time we talked about one, I think we also talked about the same prohibition applying to city permitted events.

Do I have that?

My memory serving me right.

That could be an approach.

Uh there's also an approach that could be solely for city sponsored or city produced events as opposed to city permitted events.

Okay.

So yeah, so I'd be interested in not only the current language for one, but also city permanent events, which would include city events and and outside vendor events.

Noted.

Okay.

And um Carl, the for number three is the inference that glass containers are currently prohibited per parks, city park rules, right?

Yes, sir.

Okay.

And I think that's for correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm assuming it's for a the danger of it breaking and then injury, right?

Safety related, yes.

Okay, so it would be codifying the exist that existing rule.

Okay.

Great.

But but but uh Vice Mayor, yeah.

So what's the alternative?

The alternative, um, well, when you bring your your Kool-Aid, uh, I think you could bring it in a uh metal container.

I know there's, you know, kind of yeti like containers.

Okay, um, one idea, I don't know.

Uh doesn't taste the same.

It's not the same.

It's not the same.

It's just Stanley Cup.

Stanley Cup.

What's that?

Yeah, big Stanley.

Uh those are those are papers.

But but if I can interject with that, Vice Mayor, that's a really good point though, right?

So if if I'm bringing something from home, you know, I will probably be bringing it in some type of uh yeti or a igloo cooler or something like that.

If I stop and buy something along the way, it's going to come in the package that I buy it in.

I'm not going to buy it and then transfer it into something else when I'm on the way to the park.

So I think we need to be talking about this in terms of practicality for our guests or visitors, people who are trying to, you know, engage in recreation.

Not everybody's coming from home.

Not everybody is, you know, gonna mix up that batch of Kool-Aid and bring it to the beach from home.

I think if they are, yeah, they might be doing that.

I'll bring mix up a jug of ice tea and bring it with me.

But if I'm stopping at 7-Eleven along the way, I'm going to be bringing whatever particular type of container I happen to be buying my beverage in.

It may be glass, it may be plastic, it may be a single use plastic.

It will be whatever it comes in.

And I'm not going to bring along a separate container to then transfer it into and then dispose of that glass or plastic somewhere along the way.

So I think we need to be talking about practicality here.

So if so then that would require, if you're suggesting then that would require us to change the park's rules to allow glass, I think is what you're going.

And I also think there's probably a difference between glass at a beach where you know you may be walking around barefoot.

I've never experienced a lot of folks walking around the parks barefoot.

So, you know, maybe we need to bifurcate this a little bit.

Again, I'm all about practicality, right?

So I think glass, a glass container at a park is different from a glass container at the beach.

So again, I I I I try to introduce the concept of reasonableness into what we do and an expectation of what daily life activities actually look like.

Please proceed, Vice Mayor.

Okay.

Great.

Um let's see.

That that's all I have for the okay, but thank you for your work on this.

This is great.

I think we're we're heading in a good direction.

Um, just wanted to add one other um element to the conversation.

Um, when we're talking about the opportunities where they are city sponsored events and things that we as the city are um putting on.

Um, when you talk about, you know, right now we're drinking out of plastic bottles.

Um being familiar with what they call the box water, you have that option.

Um, juice boxes, um, Perrier comes in a glass bottle.

So, and who knows they may come to a box that has where I haven't looked, but yeah.

But just saying there are some other um avenues.

There is box wine, yeah.

Yes, yeah.

You can away my button, but you don't drink it from the box.

You you pour it into something.

I've tried it doesn't work out.

I've seen those bong cards and things.

I'm a mayor, they do have some smaller ones now.

So you do have a little personal box wine.

Oh, single double.

It just depends on how much you want to be.

How much you want to drink.

But um, just adding to the conversation.

If we could um I understand the direction we're trying to get to and what we're trying to achieve.

Right.

But also in the conversation, let's look at the opportunity for box water, box juices, um, especially in those um opportunities where we, the city, are initiating.

Well, yeah, I think our own events we can certainly try to curb the use of these unwanted uh uh materials, but all right, just I'm I'm I guess city staff you kind of hear what we're saying, so do the best you can.

Yes, they will work on that.

Okay, but practicality is the key.

And thank you for your.

I I do think we're headed in the right direction.

Just need a little refining, and but thank you for that.

All right, thank you.

Great, thanks.

Alright, so uh we decided we're gonna continue to keep uh commissioner force at the beginning, correct?

Yeah, I think that's where we are headed.

Mayor, I have one suggestion or idea for this as we we think about city commission reports.

Um, and I just on my agenda meeting.

Keep it to five minutes.

Yeah, yeah, exactly.

That's basically where I'm going.

But here's an idea for those of us who want to share more.

Um so I think in our generally in our city commission reports, there's two main topics we cover.

One are things that we'd like the city manager to work on or we have concerns about, um, as well as things that we'd like to discuss amongst ourselves.

So topics, right?

New topics or things we like to discuss.

So I'm gonna put that in one bucket.

The other bucket, I think, is um sharing of what we've done, where we've been, you know, great highlights about kind of our last couple weeks and and things that are upcoming.

That I'll put that in the second bucket.

What I was hearing from neighbors is they would really like to try to keep that first the the commission reports at the start of the meeting as concise as possible.

So one idea I had is that at the beginning of the meeting we would just share those items we'd like to share with the city manager or items we'd like to discuss as a body, and then at the end of the conference meeting, then share our kind of full updates and things where we've been and and so forth.

That could possibly shorten that upfront time.

So it's just an idea, Mayor, for consideration.

I think it makes a lot of sense.

I would endorse it.

So, but but when it comes like you say, when it comes to substantive items of policy, I think we should have latitude on that, but when it comes to where we what we've done and what we're doing, I mean, look at my page.

I could be a half-right, a lot to share.

Do a lot of stuff.

That's right.

I know you've got a busy guy.

Okay.

A lot of Kool-Aid to drink.

All right, so start with now.

The person who has observed this uh religiously over the over the years has been Commissioner Herbst uh in abbreviating his uh his attendance at things.

So your number you're going first today.

Absolutely, and and and thank you, Vice Mayor, for for sharing that.

But that has always been my approach, and through the years, through various commissions, the approach to reports has varied, and I have always seen them as an opportunity as us to share amongst ourselves those topics which we can't discuss in private.

Right.

Um, I've never I've never viewed it for me to share what my calendar is.

I think if I want to do that, I have a different format for that.

But in that uh in that vein, there is one thing I do want to bring up, and this is something that came up during one of my uh agenda briefings, and it's something I have talked with staff about before in the past, and I think it's kind of in in the spirit of what we're talking about.

So under state law, if you have a disabled parking pass, you can park for free at any metered parking space on a street.

There is an exception under state law where a municipality or a county may charge you if you are in a municipal or county parking lot.

And I think the rationale behind that is the cost for a lot is separate and distinct from providing the cost for on-street parking.

Um so I have had residents who are disabled who have brought to me the request that we consider not charging for disabled parking in city parking lots.

I've raised this issue with staff in the past.

I had hoped that it would come up and we'd be able to get that resolved.

We've not gotten to that point, so I want to bring it up to the commission as a matter of policy.

So we have a set-aside number of disabled parking spaces that uh that we do charge for in our city parking lots.

There is a cost associated with this.

I know I've talked to Ben Rogers in the past about that, and he's looked at some of the numbers.

Um I don't remember offhand what they are, but I I've had this as an ongoing request from folks who are disabled who would like us to have parity between parking on the street and parking in a city parking lot with respect to uh not charging them to do that because if you are disabled, you may not have very many other options as to where you can park.

Ben, would you like to sort of address that?

Thank you.

Yeah, good afternoon, Mayor and Commissioner Ben Rogers, assistant city manager.

Uh in my time as the director of transition mobility, this has come up uh a few times, uh, Commissioner Herbst directly.

Uh, uh the last time I believe there was a memo that we put together that kind of analyzed the state uh legislation, the options that we had and the financial impact.

So uh if you if the board if the commission desires, we can go back and and research that, update it for today's consideration and bring it back for future consideration.

Thank you.

So back in 2011, um, I had the misfortune of flipping my Harley and shattering my leg, and I spent a year of uh of being completely disabled.

So I was in a wheelchair, I was on crutches, I was not in weight bearing for the better part of a year.

And so I had the unfortunate experience of discovering what it means to be disabled in our community.

And it's extremely challenging to negotiate uh doors and a lot of our environment when you're you're trying to deal with that, and so it gave me a very, very explicit uh appreciation for the challenge that our disabled community has.

And things like having close parking and so forth is something that is very, very important for folks who have navigability problems, and I'd like us to really give this some serious thought as a policy issue.

So thank you very much.

Commissioner, I have a question on that.

So um, so would that be the handicap parking spots in on a city lot or in a city garage, right?

So that'd be one.

And to park in those is would the requirement be to have the hang tag a disabled.

You would either have a handicapped placard, which hangs from your your mirror or is in your dashboard, or you would have a handicapped plate.

Okay, so one or the other.

So the handicap plate is for permanently disabled, the handicapped placard, or for those who are temporarily disabled, and those are renewed every five years.

Okay, great.

And then one additional question is: if all those handicapped spots are full, having the allowance for them to park in a regular parking spot and not be charged there either.

Is that that is still the case for on-street parking?

And I would recommend that we consider again parity with ones.

Okay, so both.

Thank you.

Yep.

Makes sense.

So if it's a private parking lot, that doesn't apply.

You're absolutely correct, Mayor.

The the handicapped spaces in a private parking lot are merely a set aside, but does not remove the obligation to pay for those.

All right, something to think about.

Um I think that makes a lot of sense, um, so we can work on that.

Okay.

Thank you.

Anything more, uh, Commissioner?

Okay.

You reserve your time for uh, my colleagues uh use the C C.

Okay.

Um my question was Are we um we just had a discussion about um the two buckets being um items that we discussed as a commission and then also our activities.

What are we doing today?

So I I think what the vice mayor suggests so we should we could you know start start from now, you know, abbreviate our appearances and you know, and if we have any any substantive items we want to talk about, you know, that would now's the time to bring that up because we don't have any other time to do that because government in the sunshine.

So um just pace yourself accordingly.

Okay, um I'm gonna share um one accomplishment um through um our students at Dillard High School.

I'm gonna use my time for that this afternoon.

On my on May 8th, in Jackson's Jacksonville, Florida.

Over the last six years, the Dillett track team has established itself as one of the premier programs in this throughout the state of Florida.

Consistent excellence and outstanding athletic achievement.

On the boys' side, the team has earned one state champion and a state runner-up finisher.

On the girl side, the program has secured a state runner-up finishing along with three consecutive district and regional championships.

During the six-year span, Diller has produced some of the state's top athletes, um, naming those that we will share with us.

Chris Johnson was named as runner of the year and can and currently holds the state record for both the 100 meter and the 200 meter race.

Christina Coleman earned three consecutive runners of the year's honors and hold the school's record in the Mao, two Mao, and cross-country.

Alexia Reid set school's records in both the Hudders event.

She also ranks the champion of the new balanced national title in the 100 meter.

Also, most recently, Desiree Fraser became the school's record holder in the 400 meters.

In addition to these athlete success, Coach Davidson Gill has received Coach of the Year's honors in all six seasons.

He's also become recognized as the two dairy farm coach of the year award and has been honored as the Hall of Fame Coach of the Year by Sun Sentinel.

These accompliments reflect the dedication to discipline and the excellence of the continued that's continued to define the Dillish track team and track and field program.

So I wanted to share that.

If we can give them a great hand.

Well, I'd rather do more than give them a great hand.

I wonder if there could be uh an evening where we can invite them to a commission meeting and and uh recognize them here at a full meeting.

That is the goal.

Um I just wanted because tonight we're gonna recognize the girls basketball team.

Okay, and I wanted to give them a separate platform, but with this happening most recently, and being that um we're coming to the end of the school term.

We're trying to make sure that we can get them before the commission before um some of these individuals graduate.

So I wanted to have their names and recognize their achievements.

Got it.

So thank you for the time.

All right, that's it.

That concludes your that concludes my part.

Okay.

Um Commissioner Glassman.

Thank you, Mayor.

Good afternoon, everybody.

Uh, so we're just doing now items that we'd like to bring up for discussion or future.

Everything.

Oh, including events?

Yeah.

Oh, I didn't realize that.

Okay.

I thought we were saving that for after.

But we're so we're sticking to the old process now, and then try to abbreviate your visits and your appearances to the five minutes and anything else, there's no limit.

Okay, thank you very much.

All right.

Thank you very much.

First of all, um, I always wanted to commend um the FLPD and FOP.

Uh the fallen officers memorial ceremony is probably one of the most moving things that we do all year.

Uh I am always just so incredibly taken aback by that ceremony, and I wanted to thank anyone that had anything to do with that.

Uh that was recently held in Esplanade Park.

Again, so important, so important to pay tribute to those that sacrificed their lives for service to our city, and I wanted to thank everyone from FOP, FLPD for that.

May 7th, uh, had a great time speaking with the Chairman's Circle at the reception at the International Swimming Hall of Fame.

These were, I guess, the Chamber of Commerce's top uh big, big, big membership uh of the chamber.

Uh we had some great exciting updates on the swimming hall of fame project.

Uh, and also iShop signed their first athlete, James Lichtenstein, who is the top male diver in the United States.

Actually, I think in the world right now.

Uh, and then he led a group of divers in a high diving show.

Um, that peninsula continues to amaze me, and whenever people are there at events, uh it does the same with them also.

So I wanted to thank the chamber for that and the International Swimming Hall of Fame.

Uh, May 8th, uh, Mayor, as you know, we've been talking about services in communities like Flagler Village neighborhoods like that, uh, the type of services that really create a sense of community.

Uh, and we were happy to be at the uh ribbon cutting for Go Grocer.

Uh, this is a chain out of Chicago.

This is their first foray into the state of Florida.

Uh really nice little market and so important for folks uh that live in the Flagler Village section of District 2 and our city.

Uh, really nice event.

Um, May 9th and 10th, of course, was the air show.

Uh, I had the privilege of welcoming all of the folks on the beach on Sunday, uh, May 10th, and what an amazing show.

Uh, Thunderbirds capped it off in in really incredible fashion.

Um, I wanted to thank FDOT for holding um several educational uh workshops, both virtually and uh in person at ArtServe.

Uh, this is for the work that's happening on the Los Olas Bridge over the intracoastal as well as the Sunrise Bridge.

It's really important that we do all we can to communicate with the residents that use those bridges uh on a daily basis.

Uh very important, and the work there is very important.

Uh the Sunrise Bridge one actually is not like the Las Olas, and it's not just confined to the bridge areas, but actually goes all the way from Birch Road on the Barrier Island uh to in Middle River.

So it's quite an extensive project.

That project alone uh is 40 million dollars.

So again, I wanted to thank FDOT for the communication and for the education so that we can keep our residents informed.

May 13th, it was a great day along with Sistrunk Carter.

We had three building groundbreakings for uh affordable housing.

We had the pantry lofts on 6th, we also had the Aldridge and the Larimore.

Uh that was great, and that connection between District 2 and District 3.

Uh, was happy to join Commissioner Pam Beasley Pittman uh at those three buildings.

Uh those are great projects and so important.

Uh and it was really nice to see the community turn out uh for those events as well.

Uh May 14th, I had the pleasure of addressing the Central Beach Alliance that evening, always incredible turnout.

They must have had about a hundred people over at the Beach Community Center.

Um May 15th wanted to say congratulations to Dan Lindblade on his retirement.

Were you there?

I was.

I actually had the honor of being one of the three roasters of Dan Lindblade at the First Baptist Church.

You notice that was good.

Um, yeah, I had a lot of fun actually.

Um, and I hope everyone had a lot of fun.

Uh, but it was a great tribute to a man who spent 19 years as the head of the chamber of commerce.

Uh, and on his retirement, he was honored as the downtowner of the year.

Uh, always a great crowd, about 400 people show up uh for a luncheon event, and uh again, I I I think it was a lot of fun.

Um May 16th at the Ritz-Carlton, I had the pleasure of joining the Broward Partnership for the homeless.

Uh, this was a salute to business, uh, a really well attended function again over at the Ritz Carlton on the beach.

And uh again, the incredible work that Broward Partnership does.

Uh that evening uh top honors went to Senator Nan Rich, well deserved.

Uh, a great turnout, great stories of folks that have gone through their service uh and the incredible work that they do.

I wanted to salute uh Broward Partnership for their work all year and for the event this past Saturday night.

Uh May 20th, I'll be addressing the Flagler Village Civic Association.

Um, May 22nd this Friday, we have the Broward Alliance mid-year lunch out at the Hard Rock coming up this Saturday, May 23rd on our beach, the Great American Beach Party and the Walk of Fame ceremony.

Um, and uh as we know, this week also we have the IPW conference, lots of delegates from all over, a huge tourism conference, and I know that people have been uh really rolling out the red carpet for them and the welcome mat.

I think it's a great community effort for that.

May 28th, we have the River Walk Tribute.

Um, May 29th, I'll be attending several functions, several groundbreakings in Holiday Park in District 2.

Um, and that's it for events.

I try to go through them really quickly.

Now a couple of comments uh and some things that I'd like us to discuss and just be aware of.

So, City Manager on May 7th, we received the update on assessment of existing building options for City Hall.

I just want to make sure that we're all comfortable with this because when I when I put on my memory cap, I remember on February 17th, this commission as a whole said we don't want to spend the money looking at the older buildings.

We don't want to spend the money looking at the appraisals on these buildings, and we don't want to do that.

But then then again, the commission as a whole changed its mind.

I did not change my mind, but we did as a commission.

So we received this memo on May 7th, the update.

I want to make sure that my colleagues are comfortable with the fact that we went on February 17th to spending no money to now spending a half a million dollars on appraisals and work looking at these three buildings.

I want to make sure that that's really clear for the public and for us that we changed our mind and we went from not spending any money to now spending a half a million dollars.

A hundred thousand dollars just on the appraisals.

Um, and I just want to say a few words about that.

I looked at the scope, I see what this we deferred that item to June 2nd to come back to us to talk about um the interim agreement for City Hall on June 2nd.

But then at the last meeting, we were told we might not be able to have all of the data that we need on June 2nd, we might have to go to July 2nd.

So I've been thinking about this, and I've been talking to friends of mine in the construction industry and the development industry.

And I believe that even when we get the information that we are going to get for the extra 400,000 dollars on top of the 100,000 for the appraisals, we're still not really gonna have an idea if this is going to work for us as a city hall.

And I'm going to tell you why.

These are non-invasive engineering reports we're going to get.

We're going to have real no detail about the structural integrity of these buildings, nor will these buildings, nor will these reports confirm or will they deny what our renovation is going to be in these buildings because to really really properly ascertain if we're going to make this work, we would have to have uh we would have to have a full set of construction drawings of what we're going to be doing in our city hall.

We would have to know exactly what we're identifying.

We would have to know all of the loads, the distribution of the loads.

We are not going to have that information because we're not going to have anything to compare from the reports that we're going to get, which are going to be cursory.

We're not going to have that detail to really look at what we're going to try to do as a city hall.

Um the only way to properly investigate these older buildings would be able to find the older structural drawings of those buildings and then look and put that on top of what it is we think that we're going to do to determine whether or not these older buildings between 25 and 50 years old are going to be able to handle what it is we're going to do.

So I think that any survey, any engineering report we're going to obtain at this time will not be worth the paper that it's written on.

But most importantly, I want to make sure that we're all in agreement that we went from no, we don't want to even do an appraisal on these old buildings to okay, now we're going to spend $500,000.

And that's all I'm going to say about that after I read the May 7th letter to the commission.

Quentin, can you come up to the microphone?

So, in response to the comments by the commissioner, um tell us a little bit about you know the depth to which these studies are going to be done and what kind of decision we're going to be asked to make based on the uh the the level of inquiry that's going to be undertaken for this amount of money we've allocated.

Good afternoon, mayor, vice mayor, commissioners, quintet Pew, assistant city manager.

So the report that you're going to receive on July 2nd is a high-level summary report.

It's not going to provide any recommendations to you, but it will provide high-level summary findings for things such as the condition of the buildings, building systems, the structure, the envelope, the mechanical system, plumbing, electrical is going to confirm available square footage for office.

We did do some programming, some space programming for the city hall project.

So that information will be transferred over into the summary findings and whether the space is adequate or not.

It's also going to provide you with a preliminary rough order of magnitude on certain elements that are of interest to this commission, such as the commission chambers, whether or not that can fit in any of these buildings, what it would take to construct those facilities in that estimated uh rough order of magnitude.

Um there will be a side-by-side comparison table for the building conditions as well as the upgrades that are needed for these uh facilities.

So assessment of the windows, um, things of that magnitude will be evaluated.

The roof system will be evaluated in that side-by-side comparison.

It will provide pros and cons uh for each building.

Again, it won't be a recommendation to you, but all of this will be in summary findings and it should be enough information for you all to have a deliberate conversation about whether or not there's one or more of these buildings you want to proceed for further detail and technical um information.

What uh will there be a cost associated with each of these um observations?

Yes, there is a cost associated with it.

It's just under 370,000 dollars.

No, no, no, no.

I'm sorry, I didn't explain myself right.

Will there be so if if you do an analysis of the mechanicals and the plumbing and electrical and space considerations in the uh and the retrofitting and so forth, will you be able to assign a cost necessary to, if if it's found necessary to upgrade or to retrofit what what the costs are going to be, or is that is that an element of this inquiry that's gonna be that's gonna uh say take part in a phase two of your analysis?

They will provide a rough order of baggy too.

It wouldn't be detailed out, but it will provide you with the range of the estimated cost for that particular upgrade, whether it's the windows, uh the electrical system, fire, whatever it may be, they're gonna provide you with the rage or rough order of magnitude that it will cost to do that.

Okay.

If I could add Mayor, on July 2nd, we also anticipate having the appraisal information uh ready and prepared to share with the commission as well as uh preliminary uh budget.

That was one of the things that the commission asked us to take a look at in terms of how we could identify resources for the cost of city hall.

Okay.

Now that you just said July 2nd, I know that we deferred this item from last month to June 2nd.

What are we going to have on June 2nd when we had deferred this item to?

Thank you, Commissioner.

Uh, when it was raised that you would like staff to come back within 60 days or that June 2nd time period, I did share verbally at the meeting that if we did need more time, that I would share that with the commission via letter to the commission.

I have done so via that LTC as well as verbally at the last meeting.

It is anticipated that if the commission wanted to take up the interim agreement, which was deferred, uh, that the commission could do so on June 2nd, but the commission would not have the other information as requested on the existing properties.

Will we have a an interim agreement coming back to us on June 2nd, which is the date we deferred that to, with the elimination of what we all did come to consensus on in terms of the equity piece, things like that.

In other words, will we have a revised interim agreement on June 2nd when we deferred the item to?

I anticipated that the commission might want to look at those options in totality in terms of a revised interim agreement as well as the findings of the uh research done on the existing properties, uh, but we serve at the pleasure of the commission, and if a revised interim agreement is something that the commission wants to see sooner than July 2nd, uh we could work toward that.

However, we were instructed to pause on the new build project, and I know that the developer has been you know looking at approaches to the new build project, uh, but we have not been fully engaged in the manner that we were before with having those weekly meetings with the various working groups, uh, as the direction was more so to pause until we had the information on the existing properties.

So, if we do, and I am in favor of seeing a revised IA on June 2nd, because that is the date that we actually defer the item to, but will there be will those appraisals be available on June 2nd for the three structures?

It is possible that we could have the appraisal information.

It might not make the publishing date for the June 2nd meeting as we think we'll likely have it at the very end of this month.

So it could be something that is shared via letter to the commission or uh as an add-on to the printed agenda or the published agenda.

I also want to, and I again, Quentin, I don't know if you were able to answer this question or not, but will any of these will any of this engineering work be invasive or will it all be non-invasive in the structure?

It will be non-invasive.

Um, and so that's my point.

I I don't think that's helpful to us.

I mean, with a brand new building, the police headquarters, we went through a lot of issues with loads and columns and structural integrity.

We went through a whole exercise with that, and we know what that was all about.

Um, but now when we're thinking of a city hall for our future, we're willing to do this very cursory, non-invasive engineering report on three very old structures.

We don't have, we don't have any kind of uh construction drawings for what it is we want to impose in these old buildings.

We don't even know if we're gonna be able to get the structural plans from those old buildings, and yet we're willing to spend $375,000 doing this exercise plus a hundred thousand dollars for appraisals on these old buildings, which to me is incredible.

I I I don't know why we're doing that, but I will tell you one thing.

What I do know is in that IA that came to us that we kicked down the road to June 2nd, and now I'm hearing July 2nd most likely.

Uh we were asking the development team to give us about $350,000, right?

As a line of credit that we they were giving to us to make sure we were keeping them in line with us, right?

So we were asking them for $350,000, which is almost what we're going to spend now on this non-invasive studies of of these buildings.

And what uh what always strikes me is um so we're gonna give all that money away and do this work, but then I come back to the original P3 process that we went through.

These older buildings did a little sales pitch on us, and some of us were intrigued by that.

But you know what they didn't give us?

They didn't give us the $25,000 that the other teams gave that went through the process, and yet we've just forgotten that.

They're in the mix, they're in the mix, they didn't pay $25,000, they didn't have to do any of that, but now they're in the mix.

For the life of me, I do not understand what we're doing with this P3 process.

I find it highly irregular.

Uh I find it just incredible that we're now spending not only are they in the mix in terms of skin in the game and $25,000 to pay.

They didn't have to go through the presentations, God knows what those five, what do we have?

Four or five four teams out of six we had presentations from.

They had to spend a good chunk of change on those presentations for staff time, resources, research, the the presentations that they made.

These older buildings that are now in the mix, they didn't do any of that.

They didn't do any of that.

They didn't pay $25,000, and now they're on equal footing with a team that we selected.

What are we doing?

What are we doing?

Can someone answer that question?

City manager.

Oh, I I think I'm not sure.

Actually, I'd like, yeah, no, I'd like to comment on that.

So having been through this quite a few times, there's a standard process for a due diligence progression.

The first step in a due diligence progression is a non-invasive property condition assessment, which is what we're exploring right now.

Based on a non-invasive property condition assessment, we decide if we're going to move forward with a targeted invasive testing.

Um we certainly would not undertake targeted invasive testing until we've done the non-invasive property condition assessment, which may tell us that we don't want to move forward on it.

So I think this is the first step.

It's a preliminary step.

It may tell us that this is not something we want to do.

Uh we certainly wouldn't want to undertake extensive engineering testing without having done at least a preliminary analysis, and I think this is the appropriate first step in the process.

Great.

So now what I'm hearing is we might actually decide as a commission to do further studies making it invasive after we've gone through the non-invasive.

That's what I'm hearing.

And I'm just put tuck that away, everybody, because that's coming next.

Uh again, that's incredible to me.

And you know, you know, Commissioner Herbst, you are the financial guy up here.

If you're comfortable spending a half a million dollars looking at non-invasive engineering reports on the three old buildings plus the hundred thousand dollars for the appraisals, then so be it.

But I'm just bringing this to everyone's attention because I want people to remember we we typically seem to have amnesia when it comes to what we do, because we we do one thing and then oh, there's a change of heart, and we go in a different direction.

And I you know, I can name, I can name Los Oulas median as an example.

Uh we make one decision, then another decision, back to another decision.

City Hall is an example, we make one decision back to another decision, back to another decision, pickleball and basketball on the beach, we make one decision on a site plan, we make another decision, we go back to another decision.

We seem to have a pattern here, folks, of like just changing our mind and going in a different direction, and I, for one, find it really frustrating.

That's all I'm gonna say.

So I will leave you with a quote from John Maynard Keynes who said, When the information changes, I changed my mind.

What do you do, sir?

That's an excellent quote, thank you.

Uh, I would just say that the information doesn't really change, that people's opinions change.

I'm good.

I'm good, Mayor.

Okay.

Uh thank you.

I one more item, and I want to mention this too while I'm on a while I'm on my list here.

I've been getting a lot of feedback, and I want to know, I want to know going forward, um, when we review charter officers.

When we review charter officers, and maybe Jerome, if he's around, can help me from an HR perspective.

I'm getting a lot of comments made to me about the the last event that we had in terms of the review of the city manager.

I want to know if it's customary or even correct from an HR perspective.

Do we do we call up people to the podium to testify under oath and discuss the people that they report to?

I find that highly irregular.

I've been getting a lot of comments, not just from staff, but also from the public, finding that that was a very uncomfortable situation.

That was a uncomfortable situation, perhaps untenable situation, and and highly irregular.

I don't remember the years I've been sitting here, it's over eight now.

I don't remember ever having a review of a charter officer, uh, clerk, auditor, uh, you know, city manager, city attorney, where we've actually called people up to testify that report to that particular person that we are reviewing.

Is that kosher, Jerome?

Is it customary?

Is it something we should maybe think about in the future when we do future uh reviews of charter officers?

What's your opinion on that?

Well, from the HR perspective, um, this is the third municipality I have worked for, and I have to admit, I have never seen that done before um in my career.

That's not to say it can't happen.

Uh it's really up to the commission how they want to handle uh the review of the charter officers uh going forward.

So it's you've never seen it done, but there's nothing that prohibits it, and it's it's okay.

I you're asking several questions.

There's nothing.

Take it one at a time.

There's nothing that prohibits it.

Whether it's okay is up to opinion.

Okay.

All right.

I just want to know.

So let me let me let me pick up on that.

So I think that the police chief and the fire chief hold unique positions within any uh municipal organization.

And um, and I and I do think that they that they represent very important roles.

Uh I think their ability to be objective is paramount.

And clearly, when you're asked to opine about your superiors' uh um approach to work, it becomes obviously jaundiced when you're having to be in public and you're you're being asked to comment on how your boss behaves themselves, right?

Um I think that that there needs to be a special relationship between our police chief and our fire chief, but I don't think that can be achieved when they're subordinates.

Um so I've been giving some thought since we're doing charter amendments.

I've been giving some thought about why don't we consider making the police chief and the fire chief charter officers and put that on the ballot for this coming election, adding it to the other charter amendments.

If the people approve it, fine.

If they don't, fine.

But I do think that that the idea of objectivity is really important, and I think that we we were losing that, which was demonstrated as you pointed out, Commissioner, was we were losing that sense of objectivity when we um when we find ourselves in situations where um where that kind of relationship between uh their the chiefs and the commission and the management staff becomes compromised under these circumstances.

So anyone have any comments on any thoughts?

Mayor, actually, I'd love to weigh in on that.

So um Commissioner Glassman, I I agree with you completely.

You know, I I spent first third of my life in the corporate sector, and one of the prime things that you have in the corporate sector is 360 reviews.

And the preeminent factor in a 360 review where employees review their supervisor is that it's anonymous.

The only way to get candid feedback is in an anonymous environment.

You can't expect folks to give a realistic, candid uh uh feedback on their boss in an environment where everybody is listening in.

So I agree with you.

I was uncomfortable during that presentation myself.

Um and actually, mayor, I I also agree uh very strongly with your suggestion.

I I kind of like that.

You know, I think it would be very important for for the police chief and the fire chief to report directly to the commission.

You know, I've been through several iterations in my many years here with the city.

At one point, we had an assistant city manager that was over public safety.

At another point, another city manager elevated them to the point where they reported directly to him.

Um I've seen a variety of ways in in which we have managed the public safety function, but I have always felt as a charter officer, as somebody who reported directly to the commission, that that direct line of reporting was actually crucial.

You know, being able to speak candidly to the elected officials as a charter officer gives you a different flow of information, it gives you a different relationship with the commission.

And I think that's a great idea, and I'm glad you brought that up, Mayor.

I would absolutely support it.

All right, uh, Commissioner Beasley Pittman, do you have any thoughts on that?

Um I would like um just a little bit more discussion on this because understanding that it will change the um direct conversation of of how we interact with um the police chief right now, police chief and fire chief uh directly reporting to city manager, and it's what now say they are reporting or um able to directly communicate with SS Commission, correct?

Correct.

Okay.

So with that, how do we um also keep a balance?

Because you're talking about five voices up here.

How do we keep it back?

Well, it's a it's uh we there are five voices, but um, as with any charter uh officer, um we we have direct line of communication with them.

Uh and and and I bring it up because I think um I think that the comments that uh Commissioner Glassman uh spoke about highlight the importance of trying to establish the integrity of the officers that we're talking about.

And um, and I feel that to some extent it and it's not the first time I've seen it in years past, where I believe that the police chief and the fire chief often their integrity is challenged when you know, because they're put in a certain position.

Now we wouldn't be the only I know the city of Sunrise, for example, their police and fire chief are charter officers, so we wouldn't be the only ones.

Um but that's another large city which practices the same way, and it's been very successful over the years.

And I and I the more I thought about it over the weekend and um, you know, I'm thinking, you know, we've talked about it before, and uh, and I just feel that you know, maybe now that we're talking about putting charter amendments and we we have a deadline to do it, uh we're gonna be talking about it tonight.

Um I would like to instruct the city attorney to put together a resolution to put it put those on the charter, uh charter uh amendment uh uh resolution and see see what the people think.

But I I personally feel that um I respect our police chief and our fire chief positions uh to such an extent that I think they need to be elevated to the point of charter officers.

Um mayor, before you go on, um you cited um sunrise.

Is there any other uh municipalities?

Um, well, I don't know if you could um someone could clarify for me.

Sunrise, are they a strong mayor or is it?

They're a weak mayor form of government.

Okay.

The only strong mayor form of government in Broward is plantation.

Okay.

And do we know how plantation is there, police chief and um well they all they all report to the mayor?

Okay, yeah.

All right.

I agree with if I may, I was just looking it up while you're talking, Commissioner uh Beasley Pittman.

So Jacksonville and Miami, just two other ones.

So Jacksonville, the sheriff is independently elected, um, but in Miami, the chief reports to the city manager administratively, but to the elected commission uh and mayor exerts it says influence through appointment and contract power.

So there's different there's different varieties of but there are actually a lot of the cities where the uh where the chief of police would report directly to the elected official.

So it's a fairly common model from what I'm reading.

Thank you for that information.

Um Vice Mayor, do you have any thoughts on this?

Yeah, thank you.

Um so I think you know, charter uh considerations are are good to to weigh.

Um as we've been following our charter revision process.

We have uh a great robust process with the charter revision board, um, with public engagement.

So I think when you're thinking about substantive charter changes, worthwhile to explore, and I think we follow the the proper path to ensure charter revision board.

I don't has charter revision board evaluated this.

Do we know?

I don't think it's I don't think it's come up, but but they haven't met since I don't know when the last time they met.

When is uh um city attorney, what's our deadline for proposing charter changes?

Mayor, uh, we need to address this this evening on first reading.

Tonight would have to be a first reading, correct.

And if I could add, I'm sorry, uh Vice Mayor.

So having been involved with a lot of the charter revision board meetings through the years when I used to sit up there as an ex officio, they typically are dealing with the things that are already in the charter more so than something like this.

I think those kinds of initiatives are typically driven by the commission.

That's a policy change that we've usually brought forward through the years.

That's generally been the you know, sort of the avenue for that type of a thing.

The the charter revision board is usually focused on you know making ministerial type corrections like you've seen come out of them or things that the commission has talked about or to bubbled up from like the council of civic associations and so forth.

They haven't really focused through the years that I've watched them on coming up with major policy changes like that.

So thanks.

So I've actually sat on the charter revision board for the city.

So I recall.

Yeah, yeah.

So we actually did come up with we'd have robust conversations about uh host of topics not directed by the city commission and and outside of the charter and um uh a wide range of act of um uh topics, which is really good because we'd you know put them on the agenda.

We would allow for public engagement, communication, discussion.

We'd have some actually very good robust communication at the uh charter revision board meetings with the public, and so that's worked really well, and so I think this is uh you know a great possibility to to add to their agenda as they can start considering it.

So when is it when is their next meeting?

We've got to give them time and yeah.

When is their next meeting uh city attorney?

Do you know?

Uh I do not believe they have one schedule.

They don't have one schedule.

The charter you're trying to come with the chair advisory board.

I do not believe there is one schedule.

May I I we I don't think we have time for that.

I'm just gonna we don't.

We don't because uh and I I agree with what Commissioner Herbst is saying about how this is a policy decision of the commission more than it is a recommendation of changing something in the charter like that.

But here's the deal.

Um at the end of the day, the residents will be the final deciders on all of this.

Every single ordinance would change it.

Everything we're putting on the ballot is up to the citizens of Fort Lauderdale, not really us.

So I again I I am in favor of your idea.

Uh I will agree with you and Commissioner Herbst that we should have a walk-on item to change those roles of the police and fire chief as to be charter officers.

Well, I I didn't I I'm gonna make it plain I'm not in agreement with this.

Um this damn this belief I'm the conversation when we invited the chief and the police, um, fire and chief police were invited by one of us from the day.

So if we did something that was out of our policy, does that mean that we need to change the whole um charter to address something that maybe we did not realize that we shouldn't have um went in that direction?

So I bring this up not because of a single incident, but because of I've you know, in years of being on this commission, um years uh I see where the police chief and the fire chief uh have a special role, special place in our governance, and um uh and ever and every so often it uh their their role seems compromised in various situations.

So this is this isn't so much triggered by any one event, but it does but events do remind me of of uh opportunities that we've had in the past to be able to restructure our city government in such a way that it works better.

Uh I think it would work better if the police chief and the fire chief were constitutional officers.

Um we could put it on as a walk-on tonight, um, but it's the only first reading, and between now and the next meeting, we could invite the public to come and speak uh on behalf of on behalf of the issue, either for or against.

Um so since the charter revision board is not going to be convening any meetings between now and then, I guess it would be up to us to make the decision.

I see we have three votes so far, but I'd like to I'd like to be there to be more of a consensus, but if not, then I do believe we should move the item forward.

Before we uh move forward, could um I have a comparison of what the change would be constitutional or charter officer versus non-charter.

Uh huh.

Could we have that um in this space right now explained and defined not only for me but even for our our neighbors so we can understand what what we are suggesting the change to be.

Well, city attorney do you want to explain to the commissioner how that would work?

Um as I understand what the mayor is suggesting, um those two individuals, those two positions would become charter officers just as I am, the auditor is, the city manager is, and the clerk is.

So they would report uh directly to you all.

More to that than just reporting, right?

Is it just that's the only um, they are their own yes, ma'am.

They're but if you could break it down because I'm I'm if it's the difference is only who we report to.

Um I'm I'm thinking it's more than just who they're reporting to.

Correct.

They they're responsible for their own budget, um, they are independent and act independently and our officers in the sense that they're direct, not just direct reports, but they're their own little agency, if you will.

You could think you could think of it that way.

As the auditor has his department and I have my department, so would they.

Okay, so at this point, um, as non charters, do they uh do they not have their own budget?

They have their budget, but uh it is they're under the purview of the city manager.

This is the city manager's budget.

Okay and of course a portion is allocated to each of those departments.

And the thing is, uh, Commissioner, um we have we are answerable to our people, right?

We're directly responsive to the people we represent and so forth.

And I think that this creates a greater sense of of responsibility towards our our fire and police chiefs who will now have more direct responsibility.

They have to answer to us, and and I think that that by being answerable to a city manager, there's a level of separation between the people and uh their roles as public servants.

And I think that if we continue to um if we can move in the direction of greater accountability, that would be the next and best step going forward.

And that's why I feel the more I think about it, and the more I I see the possibilities here, it just seems to make more sense, and I'm surprised more cities haven't thought of that as well.

But um I just feel that you know there the direct the direct accountability between the people we represent and the chiefs would certainly make them more accountable to the public.

Mayor, can you help me understand a little bit more what this what problem this solves?

Um I'm not tracking what's what issue are we having that this fixes.

I think that as I mentioned earlier, I think that it's important that the police chief and the fire chief have this uh this objective uh role in which they can perform their responsibilities in a way that I feel um stifles them because of the current structure.

And I think in conversations with both of them, um not just in the recent period but in years past with other police and fire chiefs.

Um I've spoken with them and there and there's a sense that where they don't have that freedom of that ability to be able to be uh responsive to the public as much as that they would be as charter officers.

Right now, working under a city manager, um and the ability to interact with the city manager is compromised because they're basically the her employee or his employee, whoever the city manager happens to be, and whereas we they will answer to us, and I think the public as you know as tensions continue to rise in in our societies, um we're seeing more and more of it on on TV and and on the internet.

I just feel that the um that those departments need to be answerable to us as opposed to anyone else and that's why I'm proposing it.

Okay.

So if I'm hearing you right you're saying our currently our police chief and fire chief feel stifled and compromised as a result that that's uh what you're hearing from them.

Yeah.

Okay.

Okay.

And that's um that's um hard hard to hear.

Um and they're compromised as a result of the reporting structure is that what you're saying mayor because they have to report to the city manager so that's compromising them.

I think it I think it it takes away from their ability to to interact with the city manager's office in a way that gives them the ability to fulfill their role as public servants and as public safety officers and I think that uh making them charter officers will give them that extra uh that freedom and that ability to be able to work in their role in a in a much more productive way.

Okay.

And other department heads do you if they feel compromised then i should we think about other department heads being charter officers as well because well they might feel compromised.

I don't want to answer that because I don't know the answer to that.

Okay.

I haven't thought about that and uh um I think right now I think the police department and the fire department hold unique positions in our city uh there's significant roles they make up more than half of our budget and uh and I do think that they're deserving of having that status and that's why I'm proposing it uh this afternoon.

Okay.

Okay.

Um city manager any feedback on this or thoughts think about this.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Uh I I would hope that the police chief and fire chiefs um perhaps want to go down this path uh it is their lives uh their roles their jobs and I assume that they are supportive of this venture because it has so much to do with their day-to-day but I'm not sure I have not had that conversation I will say that if that change were to be made uh I would certainly want to understand you know what if the voters were to approve that uh what the effective date would be because a lot of I think there's a lot of planning and coordination that would need to come along with that.

I do think that the police and fire chief role as a charter officer is something very rare uh in South Florida.

Not very many examples of that.

You mostly find it in a strong mayor type of government.

So I'm not as familiar with that reporting structure, but I'm sure it is something that if the commission saw fit as well as the voters that that's something that I would be able to adapt to.

So I I really don't have a lot of feedback on this I would just want to know the logistics and semantics as it relates to uh budget preparations and you know how that coordination would work.

Thank you.

If I could add something to this so you know I'm not going to be up here post November so whatever the voters decide is not going to have an impact on me but I always like to think about this is not about our current city manager it's not about our current commission and it's not about our current chiefs of police and fire.

And I look at this the same way I always looked at things when I was the auditor in terms of internal controls as I used to tell prior city managers I'm not designing internal controls for you.

I'm designing it for the person that comes after you and after them.

And I think this structure where we have a future chief of police and a future city manager and a future commission is probably a good one.

I think accountability to the city commission of the two most important functions that I believe the city has, I've always said uh that public safety is the number one reason we constitute local government.

It's not for parks.

It's it's not for streets and drainage and everything else.

It is for public safety.

That is why we have local government.

And I think as an elected official, having that direct line of communication and reporting to me is very valuable.

Um I'd like to be able to say to my chief of police, this is what I want you to do.

Now I have to say to whomever the city manager is, this is what I would like.

And it gets filtered through the city manager to the chief of police or to the fire chief.

Um, I think the accountability of having them report directly to the elected officials is uh is a valuable tool.

Um and again, this is not for me, I won't be here.

Uh it it won't even necessarily be just for y'all up here, but it'll be for commissions to come after this.

And I I think that's how you really need to look at this.

This is this is something that you're really doing for future governance of the city.

Again, it's like internal controls.

We don't do it for today, we do it for the future.

Thank you.

All right, so uh city attorney, if uh and we could discuss it again tonight since it's gonna be an agenda item.

And uh if you could put together some kind of resolution to this effect.

Well, well, mayor, um thank you.

We would have to prepare an ordinance, okay, um, for each, and then they would have to be presented to you.

We're doing the charter things tonight.

Okay, as you're aware.

And it'll be included potentially in the packet.

Um, and if you would like that done, we will we will set up.

I think the majorities agree to agreeable to that, but I think we'll it it does deserve more discussion, and we can be able to do that more tonight as well.

Then we'll get a draft for first reading.

Thank you so much.

And one thing I would encourage you, because this came up when they did the creation of the city auditor's office.

There were certain aspects of the city charter that were overlooked in the creation of a separate charter officer, and we had to go back and do a separate uh charter amendment at a point down the road.

So try and think about the variety of areas that will get touched upon when you do this.

Um you won't be able to do that obviously by tonight, but between first and second read, try and think of all the various things that's in there.

So, for example, you know, in personnel rules and procurement rules, and you know what what aspects of what already exists.

You know, the city manager, for example, has a policy and standards manual.

You know, what aspects of that?

What aspects of the personnel rules are going to apply?

A lot to think through, but you know, up in Tallahassee they have a glitch bill.

You know, they pass a bill and then they come back later and do a glitch bill.

Let's try to avoid that.

Let's try to think through everything that will have a downstream impact when we do this.

What might this touch in terms of the organization?

So just between first and second read, try and think about that.

Thank you, Commissioner.

All right, Commissioner Glassman, do you have anything further?

Uh no, that does it for me.

I'm really glad that we're cutting way back on the time for the commission reports tonight.

This is working really well.

Thank you.

Well, all right, whatever.

Uh Vice Mayor.

Thank you.

Yeah, just one last point on that.

I think we're really short-changing public engagement.

I think it's it's the right thing to do to have a discussion with charter revision board, bring it to the Council of Fort Laura Civic Associations.

I think robust public conversation about what we're considering matters, but um that that'd be the case.

I'm I'm clearly in the minority on that.

Um, couple uh items just to uh celebrate deputy chief uh bottings, retirement ceremony.

It's fantastic.

Uh let's see.

Uh Commissioner Beasley Pittman, I think you were there.

Who was there?

Was that Commissioner Beasley Pittman?

I forget the mayor.

Um, yeah.

Mayor gave some kind words to the chief who's heading to Deerfield Beach to become the chief there, which is awesome.

Um and then Habitat for Humanity has a great uh BBI Village opening, which is really exciting to to be part of Commissioner Beasley Pittman and I know, is there for that.

Um couple items.

One, I know we're gonna talk about the SWA later, but um, I think I don't think we selected a permanent appointee from the city commission to the SWA.

I thought we might have, but I checked with the clerk, he doesn't think we did.

So I think that'd be helpful to do, Mayor.

To the solid waste authority.

Cause I'm uh, that's not you.

It's not me.

It's not me.

Uh, haven't been fully ventured.

Sure, yeah.

Yeah.

Wait a minute, wait a minute.

Yeah.

I think we believe in it.

Happy to take nominations.

Can you get us your resume?

Yeah, I'll send you my resume happen happily.

Are you declining it?

So no, I'd I'd be happy to do it.

Okay.

If that's a will of the body.

Case closed.

To be the okay.

Thank you.

Vice Mayor.

Yes.

I do think we may need a resolution to that effect to make that official.

So we can prepare that.

Okay.

Great.

Thank you.

Um lastly, we've we've done I think a great job, especially this last year or so, really moving forward with our improving our waterways in the city, and really from, you know, securing pump out boats to um to uh the planting of mangroves uh to increase in our waterway testing sites with Miami water keepers, um, to passing the first reading of the living seawall ordinance.

I mean, just fantastic work.

One of the as I talk to waterway experts, one of the additional opportunities is the desire to really create a almost countywide, but ultimately just initially just starting with the city of kind of real-time waterway testing.

And the waterway experts uh all tell me that it'd be very helpful if we were able, in addition to the testing that we're doing through Miami water keepers, but to additionally test for or monitor the temperature, salinity, and turbidity uh of the waterway so that we can have kind of real-time results uh around those metrics, and then that helps the experts really identify what's going on with our waterways, changes, um ways to improve and so forth.

So I was wondering, City Manager, if we can explore that possibility of that type of testing.

I don't know if Miami Waterkeepers has that functionality or capability, but exploring that in addition to the current testing that we're doing with the water keepers.

Before you answer that, salinity.

So how can we impact the salt water?

So that's one of the metrics that waterway experts really it helps identify the brackish water, the increase in salinity, decrease in salinity, that then has an impact on marine life.

Yeah, but how do how can we change that by dumping more salt if it's not salty enough, or we we can't remove the salt.

So how does that what would be the purpose of gauging that is my question?

Sure.

So it's and maybe Todd might be able to speak more eloquently to me to to it uh than I will, but it's part of the understanding the overall health of our of our waterways and waterway systems and then how that's impacting animal life.

But Todd, I'll turn it over to you.

Sure, to us, yes.

Thank you, Vice Mayor Todd Hycu, Deputy Public Works Director.

Currently, Miami Waterkeeper does collect that data when they sample.

Um as we report, I was pretty much on just on the fecal indicator bacteria, but they do collect pH.

They do collect salinity, so they already do collect that when they sample twice, twice a week.

Great.

Do they collect temperature as well?

They do collect temperature, so I can start reporting out on that.

Yeah, okay.

So I can capture that.

Salinity really helps you to make sure you're targeting the right fecal indicator bacteria, because there's a different metric for preameter and freshwater versus salt water.

And then it can also also tell you if there's increased salinity from um salt water intrusion for our waterways and things like that.

So you can indicate if our waterways are getting saltier and things like that.

But how do we change that?

It's really not to change, it's really just to observe to capture trends in the water quality, and then potentially make recommendations if something starts getting out of uh like we can't change temperature.

You can't change temperature, but again, it's also to see if there's a trend upper trend in temperature in waterways, um things things like that.

So it's really the purpose of water fly preamper is that you can start collecting all this data to determine trends.

Okay, and so I guess we're already doing that.

Yeah, sounds great.

We just haven't been reporting it.

So I guess it's they've reported on a fact sheet, but the primary interest previous has been just in the um bacteria.

So that's what's been reported on.

Okay, great.

And have has the source tracing do we do we have that data already for the first testing?

We do the microbial source tracking has been completed once the first month great should get the second month at the end of this week so that has been at the at the five sites great and is that coming to us or that will come to you in a letter to commission great on the water quality issues we've been working on.

Okay.

And that's only a monthly sample so they're only collecting monthly sample at five sites yeah for for this for this next year.

Okay great thank you if I can piggyback off of your your um questions in regards to um the Miami time keepers and the reports that we receive basically by monthly um I've been noticing um in the um Sweeting River Sweeting water area that the numbers have significantly gone down.

I I'm gonna be honest with you when I thought when I saw it I was like I said it's a typo you know that the numbers are usually extremely high which area um Sweden is my question is um we're talking about trends is it water temperature what what is making this change which is positive and I'm I'm I'm I'm on the fence I'm really thinking it's a um uh odd reading you know so if you can expound on that for me so what we've been seeing is primarily the indicator for increased bacteria counts in our waterways is pretty much precipitation when you get the runoff on the streets into the drains into the waterways that's when you seem to see an increase in um bacterial counts to I would love to have an exact answer for you why we we've been seeing that um but again one snapshot in time it's hard to it's hard to uh ascertain why we're seeing that you have to look at over a longer period of time it was also interesting the microbial source tracking is that all that'll peel another layer of the onion to kind of see what the source of bacteria in our waterways at what concentrations and then we can also um make management decisions based on those so it's gonna be really this is gonna be a really interesting year to continue the monitoring trend the mountain the water weekly water quality testing we've been doing then adding the MST the microbial source tracking to it to see kind of see how these two correlate together um so this time next year we'll have another you know layers of the onion peeled back to kind of see exactly the what's impacting our waterway quality.

Also helps to you know we have a strong street sweeping program strong um inlet cleaning program so getting those materials out of our water out of the upland system prior to entering the waterways that's also a big contribution to keeping our waterways clean and improving all right thank you.

And mayor one other just to clarify city attorney city manager that SWA reso will be tonight.

Is that right?

We anticipate just having a conference discussion and sorry the sorry the me being the permanent or the full member I think that we were thinking about the next meeting but if you would like that for tonight we could get the let's do it tonight please city attorney all right yes vice mayor okay great thanks and then mayor just a suggestion for the agenda I know we have several folks here for SWA I don't know if it'd be possible to move that up ahead of the P card which which solid waste authority.

Yeah I see that if that's possible.

Yeah yeah of course mayor.

Is that concludes your comments?

Yes thank you mayor great uh just have a couple things I want to bring up is instead of going through all the different things that we've attended um uh I have been attending some of the aquatic center events and I have to tell you that we've really upped our game and uh it's it's really wonderful to see so much activity at uh at our aquatic center um not just the the uh the qual the quantity of activity, but the quality.

International and national events are taking place there.

The best swimmers and divers in the world are are back to competing in Fort Lauderdale and um and it's what we all, you know, why we invested in it.

And uh and we're and we're seeing our our investment uh finally coming uh coming to to our community and and I'm very very happy to see that.

So thank you everybody who's involved with that.

Uh and we really appreciate uh the continuing effort that you make to uh to have Fort Lauderdale be the destination of choice in the aquatic world.

Um and that that um dovetails to the fact that uh commissioner uh Glassman and I both attended um a swimming hall of fame events this weekend this past weekend.

He attended, I believe a Friday night event.

I attended the Saturday night uh honorea ceremony at the war memorial auditorium.

Um my event, there are hundreds of people who attended.

It was really great to see the the aquatic world come out and uh recognize uh the the leaders and the and those who are so accomplished in their field.

Um I want to mention the fact that on Monday, Memorial Day, uh we're having our Memorial Day ceremony at the uh Lauderdale Memorial uh cemetery.

So we appreciate uh everyone coming out there to honor our the our fallen um uh men and women who have served in in uh in our armed forces and uh um it's a great honor to be able to participate in that every year as we as we as we have that ceremony.

It's at nine o'clock at Lauderdale Memorial, and then that's followed at eleven o'clock at the Sandy Ninager statue where the local American Legion helped sponsors a recognition of of those men and women who have served in our armed forces.

Um a couple things.

Um City Manager, you sent to us a uh a memo on the uh on the transportation mobility site.

Um now, I recall maybe uh maybe Mr.

Rogers.

If you can come up to the podium in our meeting yesterday, I specifically asked, you know, what's going on there, and I didn't uh now city manager you you indicated to my chief of staff that you that you said something to me about this.

I don't remember hearing anything about this, and then all of a sudden we get a letter saying that you're an active conversations with uh interested parties.

So you want to tell me what's going on here?

Um are we what's what are we doing and are we responding to these parties because remember we talked about putting it out to the civic association to see you know what they would like to see in their neighborhood?

What what was the genesis of this letter and how why was it why was it not discussed in our meeting?

So, Mayor, during the meeting uh that we had, I think it was yesterday morning.

I did share with you, and I'm not sure if you did not hear me.

I did not I did not hear it.

But aside from that, I shared that we would have a letter to the commission about the topic of the transportation mobility department.

Uh we have been uh engaged over the years from various private parties seeking information on a potential purchase of the property or a land swap, and I think I've discussed that with you in the past, and we did do an appraisal of the property in 2023.

Uh, in particular, as we've been talking about the City Hall project, which was one of the things we discussed at the meeting, uh, the potential value of that property and whether or not transportation mobility employees would be partially or fully uh going into the new city hall.

That was one of the discussion points during the meeting.

And so I did share out loud that there would be a letter to the commission coming later that day, and so that's the result.

So I know that Ben and Milo should have had different conversations with folks that are interested in the property, whether via land swap or some uh direct purchase.

We did provide them with information as to what that process looks like, it would have to go through an appraisal, what the charter provisions require, um, all the details that would go into some sort of action that the commission would have to take.

So that was an attempt to share that information with the commission that we have again on an ongoing basis been approached by folks interested in that property.

Alright, well, I recall that the commission did direct uh city staff to go ahead and allow you to determine what the value of it was, and uh and and that was it.

Um I don't recall our authorizing spending any more money on this, uh having meetings, uh, it was just to get a temperature as to what the what the value of the property was, and I know that there are people that have approached me who've been unsolicited who came to me saying, you know, they're trying to assemble property, and this would be great for their future development project.

But you know, the civic association needs to, you know, members of the civic association have come to me and said, gee, it would be great if that were an open space, you know, a new building on bell is about to uh uh go under construction, and it would be great for those those hundreds and hundreds of people that can be living there to have an open space.

So, and frankly, I don't know why you couldn't have told me the contents of the letter at our meeting.

It was, it wasn't a secret.

Uh I felt like you know, I asked the direct question what's going on.

I got I got no answer uh substance just to say, oh well, a letter's coming out, wait and see.

You know, uh you shouldn't hold back when a person's asking for information.

You know, this is not this is not something that you know needs to be um, you know, uh, you know, surprise I don't like surprises like this, especially when I ask a very direct question like what is happening with this property.

So going further, I'd like to see ask the commission what is the uh what is the appetite of the commission going forward on this.

Uh do we want to sell it?

Do we want to ask the city uh the civic association whether or not they want open space?

This is your district, Commissioner Glassman.

What is what are your thoughts on this and where are we going with this?

I don't want to spend any more money unless I know where we're going on this.

Right, and I I'm actually going to be uh speaking with the Flagler Village Civic Association, I think, coming up this week.

Uh actually tomorrow, I'm what am I saying?

Uh so that is a good topic of conversation for us to have.

Um I we just got that memo yesterday, I believe, let it to the commission.

So I I have not had time to really talk to people about it.

I just have not.

Okay, and I so, Mayor, I would also say that I I was not given any information about I I had no idea.

Okay.

So just to clarify, we have not spent any additional dollars on investigating uh this property or to provide any information related to the property or its value.

That appraisal was from 2023, and that information has been provided to the commission as an FYI.

Uh people do approach staff all the time looking for potential opportunities or uh seeking city assets or properties for their own ventures.

And so just wanted to share that with the commission.

The question that I was asked during the meeting uh with the mayor was as it relates to the personnel uh that are operating in the TAM building and whether or not they would be going into the new city hall.

What I've shared uh with the commission at the last meeting was that we were looking at uh bifurcation of the TAM personnel, whereas the parking division personnel um may or may not uh transition into the new city hall, is something that we've been considerate of in terms of looking at the square footage of the new building.

And so we were looking at opportunities.

Uh I did mention at the last commission meeting that there could be an opportunity for uh that division to go to the DSD building, uh, but all of that is yet to be determined, and of course the commission will continue to weigh in on those aspects of the city hall project in terms of um the programming and where personnel would go.

Yeah, all that is true, manager, but but that wasn't our entire conversation.

All that was with regard to the city hall, but uh but it triggered my interest in wanting to know what was going on with that site, and and I never got anything that approached anything near what you put in your letter.

And all I was really asking was what activity has been taking place on on that site, and I got no response.

And now you're saying, Well, we actually did respond to you, but you really didn't.

So, and and the reason why I bring that up is because it's just reminiscent of what happened with the City Hall thing.

You know, um the city commission uh had a goal setting session in January.

Um we we responded to the community res uh community uh report which said that they wanted all these things in a new city hall.

We moved forward.

The city commission voted to accept a uh unsolicited proposal to move uh with a new construction project, all the while you were communicating with uh other part parties about uh existing buildings uh and you and substituting a new construction for an old construction.

And I just don't want to keep finding myself um uh here on the here in a city commission meeting and amongst my colleagues on the commission moving forward with trying to set policy when you're doing other things without fully disclosing them to us.

And here's just another example of my feeling like you were there was more to report, you didn't report on it, and and then we get a letter in the afternoon.

Oh, by the way, yes, we have been talking with people.

That's all I needed to know.

It's no no big deal.

Just let me know what's going on.

Be responsive to my to my inquiries.

So I just I just feel that there needs to be open communication, uh, especially when I ask for it specifically, and if you wish to communicate by by letters to the commission and all that, that's fine.

But when we have one-on-one meetings, we should at least be able to communicate all the information rather than saying, well, you'll you'll be seeing in a letter from me.

It's just not the way we need to be dealing working together when we're trying to move the agenda forward.

That's all I'm saying.

Thank you for that feedback, Mayor.

And I wanted to ensure that I didn't elongate the meeting that we were having, and I knew that that letter to the commission was on its way.

Uh it had already been approved with staff uh to put it out prior to the meeting that we had.

I'll allow Ben Rogers now to follow up with any additional details.

Thank you, manager.

So, Mayor, I just wanted to confirm that you know there's been a lot of activity or interest in this parcel since my time as the TM director.

Uh there's always, as you said, an interested developer coming for that parcel.

I think the city had different thoughts uh and ideas.

At one point, I think there was a concept to put a storage facility there.

I think there was a fire station facility at one point.

Um in 2023, we actually did a solicitation uh to seek interest for a 50-year lease, uh, which we responded with uh two proposals.

Um and as the ownership changes of some of the uh parcels around the two ninety parcel.

Uh I think we have constantly just had uh inquiries, not not uh actions that the city staff has gone out and looked for, not interest in the city staff's perspective, but really just responding to developers who come and say, hey, we would like uh to assemble land swap or understand how we could uh acquire this parcel.

So uh from my perspective, nothing different has uh happened in the in the last six months or the last year compared to the last five to eight years.

Um but I do think that with the conversations that city hall's been having uh with what happens to the transportation mobility uh team as part of the city hall planning.

Uh it was an opportune time to make make uh you aware that there's a new uh owner at the Jason parcel who has been reaching out.

Okay, thank you.

I have nothing further.

If you don't mind, I don't mean to interrupt, but just some thoughts on that.

So um a couple of thoughts.

Uh first of all, do we need uh a park so close to Peter Feldman Park?

So we're talking Fourth Street versus Sixth Street.

Does it does it make sense to have a park two blocks away from another park?

I'll tell you why, because we're going to be not opposed to it, just a question.

Yeah, I understand.

Just just looking at it holistically, we're adding so much new housing between those two parks that I don't think Peter Feldman Park can in itself accommodate the amount of traffic that would be generated by all the new construction.

So that's why I'm suggesting it.

Okay.

And then my second question, Ben, when you talk about a land swap, it it it has always been my experience that a land swap is usually done to our detriment.

Uh so what we get in the exchange is never equal in value or utility to what we give up.

So why would we be considering a land swap?

What are we getting that we need?

And part of the reason I'm saying that is if we're going to divest ourselves of of what would otherwise be surplus property, it ought to go towards reducing the financial impact of the new city hall on the city and on the residents.

So if we're going to do something with it that's not turning it into green space for, you know, in perpetuity, I would like to see that reduce the cost of city hall to the residents.

So tell me about a land swap and uh because I haven't had a chance to read the letter yet.

You've gone there.

That's the whole point.

We're not even there yet.

I'm just curious as to what what what land swaps are being proposed and and why.

I mean, and I think it's a great point, and that just shows that we're not taking a proactive role in this.

Uh, we're providing the options to development teams when they come in on how they could acquire city property in the past.

Um, we land swap seems to be the easiest or the fastest for the developer, who usually is uh in the interest of time.

Uh and we explain to them what that takes and what that means.

It doesn't mean that we just get a parcel of land and they build a building on it for us, uh, that we still have procurement rules and and things we have to take in consideration.

And so uh as part of those conversations for land swap, we've more or less referred to the 2023 solicitation that said if there was an interest on the city's half uh be on behalf, we would need to have a facility that needs all the requirements uh for our transportation mobility team to continue operating.

Here's kind of the boundaries of the area that we would want to be seeking, but uh there has not been any proactive conversations on trying to uh pursue a land swap opportunity.

Okay, thank you.

If I could follow up, mayor.

Uh, one of the things that we're working on administratively is a standard operating procedure for when we are approached by an entity either seeking to do uh an unsolicited proposal or an offer uh to the city for the purchase of property so that we can address like what are the steps that we would take to engage with them, inform the commission.

If it's that anyone approaching city staff for information or wanting to meet with us about anything, we could always say to them no, we're not going to meet with you until we share with the commission that you're interested in meeting with us because you know we try to be responsive and we try to sort of vet information or filter information, uh, but we really don't have guidelines or a process, whether legislatively or administratively for how this is handled.

So this is something that we are actively working on, and I think we will have a draft of that administrative standard operating procedure uh by the end of this month so that there's no ambiguity uh as to city staff's intent in um engaging with private entities or with how we communicate with the commission.

We want to create some order around that so that we're all on the same page with expectations.

Excuse me, thank you so much.

Uh any other comments or questions from the commission, if not a city manager, your report.

Thank you, Mayor.

I just want to highlight some members of our team.

First, our finance department, as well as a huge shout out to the city auditor's office.

Uh, we are received a certificate of achievement for the 48th government finance officers association for our ACFER or our annual comprehensive financial report based on the quality of the content in that report.

And so I'm really proud of uh Linda Short, director of our finance department, as well as the entire team, and Yvette Matthews with her supervisory leadership over that department.

I just want to give them a huge shout out.

So thank you so much, Linda.

Uh, we also have three members of our team uh that were recognized by the engaging local government leaders organization, and those are Ashley Desard, Morgan Dunn, and Erica Johnson.

So thank you so much for your contributions and for being recognized for what you do for our city and our community each and every day.

Thank you.

And that concludes my report.

Okay, great.

Thank you so much.

Um City Attorney, do you have any report?

I do not, Mayor.

Okay, great.

We'll move uh we'll skip to business one.

Uh uh Brower Solid Waste Authority staff uh presentation.

Who will be doing that?

Oh, Brad.

Push the button, yes.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mayor Trentales, Vice Mayor Sorensen, fellow commissioners.

Um on May 5th, the uh Solid Waste Authority of Broward County leadership along with County Commissioner Bean Fur and attendance gave a presentation on uh why the city of Fort Lauderdale should be part of the authority going forward um in 2028.

Today we're gonna give a presentation from staff, just a little bit of a background, and then have a discussion uh about considerations going forward uh for the city at this point in time.

So I will I will try in the essence of time and our long agenda to go through this pretty quickly.

Um and if anyone has any questions, I'll be happy to answer them.

So just the background on the Salt Waste Authority of Broward County is intended to support post-collection processing and disposal activities.

Uh the city uh, as I said previously, will maintain responsibility for all hauling and collection programs, whether or not it joins the SWA in the future.

Um starting uh in 2019, the SWA working group uh it resulted in an interlocal agreement that was approved in 2023.

There are 28 of the 31 Broward County cities that are municipal members, which represents about 1.7 million people.

There are three cities that do not participate in this, and that is Hallendell Beach, Pembroke Fines, and Pompano Beach.

Uh fundamental conditions are required for adoption and continuation of the ILA, and they are nearing deadlines, and that's why you know this item is is before us today.

Uh the facility amendment was approved on March 20th, 2026 by the SWA governing board, and it must be approved by the participating cities representing at least 80% of the population and the county itself by resolution.

The county has already passed it, and some other municipalities have as well.

The master plan was also approved on April 17th, 2026 by the SWA Governing Board.

The background.

And I'm gonna just talk a little bit about this and then turn it over to the vice mayor uh for a minute on this.

Uh this includes flow control requirements, economic assessments, tipping fees, rate surcharges, um, for regulatory purposes, the municipal ordinance are in compliance with ILA terms and conditions, and with way streams, members were required to use authority facilities.

Uh and the master plan really lays all of this out and how the authority will work.

Uh, the facility amendment, which we will eventually have to pass if we are going to enter the SWA going forward.

It details the end of life language and how to deal with the authority-owned assets and liabilities, and it also includes intermification provision uh where members are not liable.

What I'm gonna bring up right now is um yesterday where there was a meeting of the governing board uh and the executive committee uh that looked at um some options that were raised by municipalities about having the ability to exit at different points and times of the SWA, and one of the um options that we had shared was to be able to opt out at the point when the um bids are all received through an RFP process next year uh and also at another point in time to 20 years out, which would be I believe 2048, to have those abilities at the 20-year point of halfway through the agreement if we wanted to opt out.

There were originally three selection choices that were uh presented originally, and then yesterday at the meeting, there were a couple of additional ones that were added to the process.

Um there was a vote taken uh at the executive committee and that was passed, and then it went on to the governing board, and by a vote of 10 to 8, there was an option three that was passed, which allows opt-outs for both only if the award is in excess of the market uh protections, which is like the maximum cap that are estimated in the facilities amendment by the SWA.

So that basically means uh the only way that uh the city of Fort Lauderdale, if we were in it could get out, is if the pricing at its cap exceeded uh the numbers that they anticipated.

Anything with added or lower, there is no ability to opt out, and also you do not have the ability to opt out at the 20-year mark as well.

So basically, unless the numbers come in high, there are no options at that point for any municipality.

And I want to point out and add as well.

On this second amendment, it needs to be passed by a hundred percent of the cities uh to just just for even option three to be in play at this point in time who are going to be part of the SWA.

And I will now defer to the vice mayor as he took part in this process yesterday.

Uh I'm sure he would like to share his thoughts on the matter.

Sure, sure.

Thanks.

Uh thanks, Brad.

Appreciate it.

Yeah, I think Brad captured it well.

So one of my concerns at the meet the SWA meeting yesterday was there's going to be an RFP pre RFP process where they're going to go out to the market, get bids, which will come back with price, terms, other stipulations, as you all well know, the whole RFP process in general.

And so my ask of the SWA was once those RFPs come back and you get those you've gone to the market, so now you have private contractors saying, here's the terms we're comfortable with, here's a price, here's other stipulations.

Allow cities to then evaluate that response, and then determine, Mayor, is that a good fit for the city.

And as Brad articulated, what they said is, hey, when all that comes back, you will only be able to opt out if the price that comes back to us from the marketplace through the RFP process is above the existing price level that the SWO has already created.

So it severely limits municipalities' ability to opt out based on any number of factors.

I mean, just one factor.

We have the state legislature, as we all well know, may be considering property tax reform.

That could have a significant impact on us financially.

There are a host of other factors that could be at play when this RFP process comes back that we would not be able to indicate uh this that whatever that reason might be for a reason why we don't feel like this is a good fit for us.

So it's very limited the opt-out provision.

Thus, I voted against this uh opt-out provision, as did seven other members.

So, as Brad articulated, eight of us were against this provision, um, ten were in favor of it, which is a pretty divided group, and and uh eight were opposed to it for I think various reasons.

Um so that's I just want to touch on that.

And then lastly, I also brought up to the SWA that I think it I think it makes sense that the two or three most populous municipalities have permanent seats on the executive committee.

So we're not on the executive committee right now.

There's an election member Horlin think you brought up that there's an election possibly where we could, and I said to the entire SWA, um, you know, I think it's only fair that the two or three most populous cities uh have representation on the executive committee, and that was not met with uh enthusiasm either.

Uh, just more of a we'll we'll talk about it down the road.

Does that have to be unanimous?

I think uh does it have to be unanimous.

To make that happen, that change.

The ILA, yeah.

I think so.

So maybe if you could just help us understand a 10-8 vote is obviously tight, but you said divided.

There are on the governing board, there are 28 cities or 29.

I think I think it's 28, and then the county is why were the other 10 cities just absent from the meeting?

It seemed like there were many that were not there.

Um, only 31 cities.

I think 28 we know how we know several.

So 28 cities, so 10 cities were not even there.

That sounds yeah, I think it was what was the argument of the 10 cities that passed that that obviously we were not on that side, you voted against it, but what was the argument why they felt that was a good idea?

Which one?

Which one?

The 10 cities about the opt-out.

So and I'll defer to Commissioner FERC and maybe articulate this better than I can, but the argument was if you allow for an opt-out after the RFP process, that diminishes the scale and leverage of the ability to almost collectively bargain, as it were.

You have to have a critical mass in order to be able to secure the pricing.

Right.

And if you start siphoning off participants, then it reduces the leverage that you have to achieve that pricing uh um bargaining position.

And that's what this is all about.

So I think that there was some discussion about opting out within the first year or something like that.

And then after that, so long as there's a there's a window, a high uh like the a box where you there's a high end and a low end, and as long as if everyone agrees on that high end and low end, as long as the pricing remains within that framework, then you can't opt out.

It has to exceed that that range in order for a city to be able to opt out.

And as but as well as Brad said, as long as you're within that frame, which is a which is a frame that we would have to agree to to participate in this, then we would maintain our participation through the length of the term of the agreement.

Understood.

Maybe you could also help me understand.

Can I say that right, Dan?

Yeah.

Very good.

You should be our alternate.

So you can be the permanent.

So I know nothing.

I have a question.

So you said that when you recommended that larger cities should have a spot on the on the executive committee.

What was that?

You said they didn't go back.

Yeah, the response was basically, you know, interesting.

We can talk about it at another meeting.

That was it.

Um, and the only other comment was there's an election in I think maybe it's June.

Um, and so myself, if I'm a permanent member, could run for that election for that vacant seat on the executive committee, and there would be probably other people running.

Um so that would be an option as well.

But not interest in moving forward with um kind of designated seats on the executive committee, more just a conversation.

What about um I guess some cities have already adopted the master plan?

Is that several?

I mean, maybe 10, 12, 12, Brad.

They did that, even that much yet.

They did that before that amendment, right?

They did that before this amendment was passed.

How does that how does that fly?

I mean, if why shouldn't all those cities then go back and vote again?

Because you if you keep changing the plan and amending it, how does that affect those that have already weighed in?

I'm not sure about that.

In order for that option three that was passed yesterday to have, you know, any legs to it, it they would have to go back to all of the SWA cities that are participating, and they would have to pass that.

I I believe it's by resolution to their uh commissions in order for that uh option to be um you know eligible for it to go in the SWA agreement.

So they do get a chance to weigh in after they've already voted or and that's my understanding, and I don't think there's as rigid a time limitation to pass that ILA amendment.

Oh, correct opt-out amendment.

So they have thank you.

So where does that leave us now?

Could we have Brad continue with the presentation, Mayor?

Say it again.

Could Brad continue with the presentation?

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Yeah, there's only 18 more pages.

I'm trying, I promise.

Okay, just just recapping um just some stuff for everybody's edification about the services we have currently.

Uh, as it puts up there, we have twice a week solid waste services, once a week yard waste, once a week recycling, we do monthly bulk service, we have curbside e-waste pickup, curbside tire pickup, and we participate in a co-op for household hazardous waste events.

Uh, in our commercial, we have open markets for solid waste and recycling and open markets for construction and demolition as well.

Um, again, for us, the disposal and processing, what we do currently is flow control via the ILA, which we currently have for disposal with Broward County, and that goes to through the FCC waste energy facility, and we are currently in that till July 2nd, 2028.

We have a separate yard waste disposal agreement, and it's all to a waste management uh recovery center where it's screen process for mulch and composting.

And that is done through our collection contract.

Bulk waste also in a collection contract is hauled to waste management's material recovery center where it's sorted for recoverable materials, i.e., metals, concrete, wood, and the residues are taken to a landfill.

We have recycling through our uh solid waste contract as well, uh, and it's hauled to a state-of-the-art facility owned by waste management, and it's sorted bail to be marketed for post-consumer use as well.

Uh electronics are sent to urban mining as an e-steward certified recycler where valuable materials metals, I'm sorry, are captured for recycling as well.

Just some statistics, and I think this is some you know another important slide just to pay attention to.

You know, Fort Lauderdale, we make up 11 and a half percent of the total population that's represented in the SWA as it relates to population and 11.3 as it relates to estimated tonnage, and then just so some of our numbers, and we put it in 23 because that's when all of this first went into play originally, and that's why we're looking at the 23 numbers.

Obviously.

Would it be great if we got 11% of the uh one cent sales tax money?

I'm sorry.

I would I concur, I think that would be changed the subject.

I didn't mean to change the subject.

Sorry.

Please proceed.

I didn't mean to direct you.

It's okay.

Uh, these are just uh, you know, again, I'm not gonna get too deep into this one.

These are just some of the uh master plan scenarios that were considered ABC and D.

Scenario A is what was recommended by the SWA governing board.

Um, and you'll see here there's a these are just some of the highlights of the scenario A programs that they had that they were proposing in it.

I'm not gonna get again too deep into it, just for everyone's edification.

It's a lot of crap.

Um so getting on moving on more to next steps going forward.

Um, some of the things that uh were being considered as well were commercial recycling ordinances that were mandatory, mandatory construction and demolition recycling ordinances, curbside yard waste compost collections, harmonized recycling standards, drop-off locations, centralized education and outreach, and some of those things were all in the previous slides.

Um that would be stuff that the SWA would be doing going forward, just some key points to the facility amendment.

Um, the SWA allows some transfer stations uh to make it easier for cities to uh get material to and from places.

They also have recycling facilities, they're proposing eight drop-off centers for household hazardous waste on organic processing facility, um, governance and rate controls.

Uh, just you know, these are just some basic things, inspection rights at your own expense as a city if you want to make sure everything is being followed and correctly being done.

Uh the county helps with technical review authority.

Um there's a maximum service charges are set in the master plan with any increases uh requiring executive committee and governing board approval.

Municipalities represent two-thirds and the county as well.

Uh amendments need 80% of the population approval by the SWA members to own a solid waste disposal facility, and those are kind of like items that would be you know down the road if that is ever contemplated.

Again, this is just some highlights of uh entity takeover option A.

I don't like again, nothing anything different from the previous slides, just some of the points to it.

These are just some of the maximum uh tipping fee charges as we talked about uh in terms of numbers, uh, and it's important to understand that uh us as a city, and you'll see in some comparison slides, you know, we have uh contracts already in place for some of these services.

Um, these are just the ones for members that they would get.

These charges cannot exceed um these fees, and they would only go up based upon CPI, as you see there, producer price index for solid waste collection uh in the future.

These are just some of the costs that um you know we've paid in so far as a member contribution totals around 919,000 for three years.

Those are some future charges as well.

Um, they get added on to the um program.

Um this is just a breakdown.

I think this is just an important slide for everyone to understand, and I just took it out.

We did it only based on disposal.

Uh, nothing to do with the collection components of our contracts, but I want it's important to see that you know, the yard waste, recycling and bulk, those are uh contracts that we have.

The recycling is part of our hauling agreement for residential with waste management, but we have a separate processing agreement with bulk and yard waste, which currently are lower uh than the SWA costs.

The cost for disposal is what we're paying as part of the ILA, and then you can see what the maximum SWA cost is going forward, and a little note on the bottom there important to note is there's a $2.22 cents per ton tipping fee surcharge that's subject to annual adjustments based on the PPI for solid waste index, as I stated before.

So the costs are not really that different.

Why is there such a huge significance though between recycling charges?

That's what's throwing this whole graph off.

Their numbers, this is what their estimated numbers are.

We can only go by what we're currently paying for processing of recyclables, which that market is very high.

Most municipalities just to break it down, pay over a hundred dollars, some a hundred and fifty per ton per ton, not you know, per home, but per ton.

So um, you know, the costs are they're saying uh their maximum estimates uh you know shouldn't exceed two dollars and fifty-seven for home on the disposal component.

Don't know if that's accurate or not.

You know, we have to see what the numbers come back in next year, but I can tell you the recycling processing market is not cheap, and that's why municipalities at some point totally scrapped some of their programs for uh recycling and have just take their material to either um you know the waste energy or or they go to a landfill and they don't recycle it all because of the cost of processing.

Because in every other category, it's it's in addition, it's uh it's more than what we pay.

It's just that one recycling.

And I'm just I'm just wondering if that's an accurate one or if it's um if it just happens to be um you know a temporary cost that they're ultimately going to hit a wall and have to pay more.

I'm not gonna speak specifically for them on what their estimated costs are.

I can just tell you what our numbers are, but I can tell you the market in recycling processing is very high.

The costs are high for disposal.

They're not under a hundred dollars a ton in any city that I'm aware of.

Got it.

Brad, yes, sir.

You've already pointed this out, but our costs right now for bulk and yard waste are lower than what's proposed, correct?

That is correct.

Well, I I think the bigger number is a tipping fee.

What is our tipping fee now about a year?

A little around $300,000.

Are you asking overall?

Because we have them by different services.

Do we have a tip of total on that?

Total.

Total tipping fee is about $300,000 we pay.

Commissioner, I apologize.

Can you clarify the question for me?

I didn't hear the commodity you were referring to for the benefit of the company.

We were talking about I'm sorry.

Sorry, Melissa.

We were talking about the comparison cost between the SWA and what our current costs are right now, and we've already established that in terms of the bulk and yard waste, we're lower right now.

Correct.

So I wanted to just go to tipping fees, what we pay now and what that could be.

Sure.

So I think the easiest comparative, if I could, and for the benefit of the public and our commissioners on the dias Melissa Doyle uh sanitation operations for public works.

Um it's probably easier to take it um instant by instant or commodity by commodity.

So starting with solid waste or MSW, they are proposing that it would be essentially the same fee plus a $2.22 surcharge, which is the differential that you see translated to our average residential rate.

And that's the that's the cost that I'm curious about as surcharge fee what we pay now versus what we might have to pay with SWA.

So it's about a million dollar delta once the tipping fee surcharges kick in over the entirety of our tons, which is that four hundred and sixty thousand tons annually.

And that tipping fee surcharge is intended to apply towards all tons, including recycling and commercial um uh construction and demolition debris.

So you're saying that would be about a million under SWA?

It would, it would be about a million dollars in tipping fee surcharges that would go to the Solid waste Authority from the city of Fort Lauderdale's generated tons.

And what is that tipping fee surcharge our cost right now, just doing what we do?

We don't currently have a tipping fee surcharge.

We do pay an annual fee to the Solid Waste Authority, and that's about 280,000 a year.

And we pay that now.

We do.

And we have been paying it since I believe 2023.

So you're saying it would go up from 280,000 to a million?

It would begin in 2028 when that tipping fee surcharges scheduled to uh kick in.

Okay, thank you.

Yes, sir.

Brad, don't we also get a rebate for recycling?

That based on composition, I think of right, Melissa.

We do, Vice Mayor.

Um, when you look at the comparative again that we did uh director, could I ask you to go back to the uh residential slide with the tip fees?

Um this excludes the average material value, which are the benefits of those recovered materials that are sold at market.

And the city gets the benefit of those dollars against the processing fee.

What you see here is a hundred and ten dollars, which is what the authority believes will be their maximum uh processing fee per ton.

We are currently paying north of that at about a hundred and fifty-six dollars per ton.

But that excludes the benefit of those materials being applied towards that processing fee.

So it is an apples to apples, right?

So that brings our so if you go could you go to that slide that's SWA City Right.

So that's that delta.

Just let me see if I'm explaining this right.

So, Mayor, that three dollars fifty-nine cents is not inclusive of the rebate we get back.

So our cost for recycling is actually less than three dollars and fifty-nine cents.

Am I saying that right?

You are correct.

Okay, so that throws off the whole analysis thing, because it so it would show that our current city costs would be significantly less than the SWA costs.

It currently it currently reflects just the processing fee versus the Solid Waste Authority maximum processing fee.

So to pull the average material value which would be anticipated to apply in both scenarios, that has been excluded.

So it is simply looking at the processing fee that we would pay underneath the Solid Waste Authority versus the processing fee that we currently pay through our agreement with waste management.

So look, do we have a net number with rebates and costs and tipping fees and all that?

I can certainly speak to that for you, Mayor.

Would you please?

I'd be happy to.

So, for instance, this month we had an average material value that dropped our per ton processing fee to about $90 per ton, and that varies based on the market value.

That scenario would also apply to the Solid Waste Authority model, and we would pay a processing fee that would have a maximum cap as they have proposed at 110, and then any of that material value would apply and be a rebate against that processing fee to the city.

So if the value of that material for simple math was sixty dollars, we would pay a delta of fifty dollars per ton in a processing fee at a hundred and ten dollars per ton.

Does that help?

No, because I garbage is simple except it isn't.

I'm on my mind is even simpler.

So um, you know, I'm looking at these numbers here.

Yeah, where it says solid waste, yard waste recycling in bulk.

Yep.

And this vice mayor brought up rebates and things like that.

So what what in an apples to apples comparison with rebates and all of that um how much would it cost the city versus the uh solid waste authority costs using this graph?

The expected rebate would be the same under either model, and that value changes on a monthly basis because the commodity prices change on a weekly basis.

So do does the SWA have the benefit of the rebate as well?

It would come to us.

That would be a benefit back to the city, and we would pay that delta, which is why we took the option uh by the director um to do just a comparative of processing versus processing, because that's really the difference.

It would be what their rate would be proposed as a cap versus what we are currently paying.

So vice mayor, do you want to interpret this?

I don't know if my math is good enough, Mayor.

Um, uh a related question mayor to this is Brad.

When we think about the so in the option that the SWA passed, uh the opt out is if you're above the the price guarantee.

Are these the numbers of the price guarantee?

It is Melissa.

Melissa's saying yes.

Yeah.

These are their maximum numbers on both sides, yes.

Yep, okay, great.

And then the question, just to try to answer your question, Mayor.

The sorry, if you could go back to that.

How does this chart relate to the other?

I I'm getting tofer to breath.

This is in tons.

This is what the cost is in tons.

Okay.

And this cost um on the other slide here is basically an annual cost per unit per homeowner, what it equates to.

Okay, so this is all I'm interested in.

Is what is costing our homeowner, right?

So is this a net number with all rebates?

Melissa spoke about rebates.

She spoke about opportunities that would reduce the costs to uh to the city.

Is this the net cost?

No, uh and and and I as ex as explained the reason it's hard to do that, is number one, those numbers estimates from the county uh from the SWA, it's like excuse me, they're estimates.

We don't really know what that cost is going to be.

Let's take it at face value.

Let's just take it.

Let's assume that those are accurate numbers at face value.

So, but I'm saying, like, for example, the recycling cost per to per um uh homeowner, uh is that going to be adjusted in any way because we get rebates?

It just lowers or just lowers the net.

Right.

So this is a net then, you know.

This is gross it's what it costs per current.

Right.

So and that value changes every month.

So it's it's a right.

Uh, okay, but I mean, so I mean what would it says 44 cents difference?

You know, 44 cents over you know 10,000 homes is a lot.

Right, on an estimate based on the numbers that we have from SWA.

One of the mayor, one of the nuanced questions is Brad, if you can go to the tonnage slide again, please.

I don't know the answer to this question, right there.

The recycling fee.

So, Mayor, what I'm looking at the recyclable materials 10.

So the question for that is is it a flat fee or does that include the the um rebate?

So it doesn't I think I'm Brad, am I reading that right?

It does not include the rebate, basically, is what it's saying.

And so then the per household SWA cost of recyclables equally does not include the rebate, right?

Okay, okay.

So the recycle so I think I mean Brad Kumaker, if I'm wrong, but is it fair to say now go back to the per household that it's likely the per household recycling rebate, SWA, and city would be a similar percentage?

Is that likely Melissa's saying yes?

Yeah, okay.

On that now, is the cost gonna be similar?

I'm not, you know, again, based upon what I see in the marketplace.

I do I think that number is a little aggressive.

Probably so, based on just I know what we pay and what other municipalities pay.

So again, without you know those numbers actually coming in, it's you know, we're just making the best estimated guesses that we can on the information we have.

Then another question that I don't know uh on this as well is this is what is the guarantee the SWA guarantee price of this ceiling for how many years?

Things permanently.

So the maximum cost will escalate annually by CPI, and that is the expectation.

Yeah.

So then the next question would be does our cost increase by CPI annually?

It does.

Ours does as well.

It does, with the exception of our yard waste contract and our bulk contracts are actually bid separately, and those have a hold for the first initial term of the contract, and then it's eligible for CPI upon renewal.

Great.

And in both cases, city and SWA is the CPI the max increase allowance.

The city allows for a CPI, and I believe we have a cap at 5%.

It would be my expectation that the Solid Waste Authority would follow that model.

That's fairly typical in solid waste.

Okay, but we don't know.

We don't know, correct.

And would that be part of the RFP process for the Vice Mayor?

That would be my expectation, yes.

Yeah, and Mayor, that's just another concern that I have about the RFP process is maybe in the R I don't know.

I mean, we'll we'll we'll hear from the experts, but in the RP process, they could have a greater allowance of CPI every year, thus a greater increase every year, more so than we have.

I just don't know.

We don't know.

Well, okay, they may be able to answer that.

I'm just not sure.

Let's let uh Brad conclude his uh, yeah, just a couple more slides left.

So just considerations I think going forward.

Um, and I'm just putting those up there as we discussed.

You know, it's basically a 40-year commitment at this point in time.

Uh the tipping fee surcharge, maybe higher as tons, maybe overstated.

Um, the most favored nations provision clauses and existing disposal and processing contracts.

Uh, we have those in ourselves.

Um, the alternative considerations if the FWA doesn't meet formation conditions or if the city opts out to participate of not participating in the SWA, city can enter into a cooperative purchasing effort with other municipalities to maximize non-SWA volumes and deliver stronger pricing.

We could continue to participate in a Broward County disposal ILA should the SWA not meet formation conditions, and the city can also look at doing its own solicitation process relating to disposal as well.

Um, just some of the timelines for everybody, but really the one to focus in on the most is uh basically I we will only have till the July 2nd meeting to make a decision if we are going to decide to opt in or opt out because we will need to pass the facilities amendment by then.

That's the last meeting that we'll have.

All right, great.

Um there are a couple people signed up to speak.

Uh uh Commissioner Fur, did you want to say anything?

Thank you for coming here today.

It feels like garbage 101.

Unfortunately, first of all, good afternoon, Mayor, commissioners, city manager, city attorney.

Uh, glad to be here today.

Um glad to see the the uh presentation.

Um it does give uh a lot of food for thought.

And you know, I think um when I look at that, there's a couple things that I wanted I wanted you to know.

First of all, we did have a be a meeting yesterday.

Ben was there, added a whole lot to the conversation, and I think the SFA was trying to listen to um some cities that were concerned about being locked in if the RPs went too high.

Um that's that's you know, and that's why that amendment was was presented.

Even though it was 10 to 8, though a lot of those people, those cities that voted against it, they didn't want to change anything.

Uh uh Denise Horlin who's here from the Broward League of Cities was one of those no votes.

That's because she believes in exactly the way it was already done.

And that's that was a there was a lot of people that felt that.

They felt like the 40 year was was good because it gave us gave us an opportunity if we needed to build any assets, as well as we just it's one of those things where you don't want to keep kicking the can down the road and never get started.

So this was like a finite date.

Um, when I see the uh some of the the numbers up there and then and I and I saw you kind of concentrating on the numbers the one thing that I want to to hone in on two things.

One the yard waste and maybe can you put that back up is that possible okay.

The yard waste one I think what's being used there yeah that one yeah thank you.

The the yard waste one there's a very good chance that at the in the Broward County landfill is that we'll be building a yard waste facility there.

When Broward County builds it they are not going to be trying to make a profit much like your utilities or your enterprise funds where they just simply whatever it costs I think that's what you can expect for that on for both benefit for both disposal and beneficial use.

I think what the and I have my issue with our consultant on this a little bit and SCS was our consultant is that they used our spot zoning number at the big at the Broward County landfill right now we charge quite a bit at the landfill right now because we're trying to discourage money uh I mean uh yard waste coming from Miami Dade and we're kind of trying to have it only for um Broad County so we only have it we have it there the second thing is that what's not in here at all is there's no and Fort Lauderdale doesn't do this and nobody really does it on a large level is 34% of our waste stream is is organic 17% of that is food waste a lot of that is if in Fort Lauderdale's you all aren't handling that at all right now why is that important?

Because we've taken it out of the landfill we've taken the organics out of the landfill because of greenhouse gas effects we've we've decided to compost all of that everything that we can source separate that means we're gonna be taking all the food waste from the schools from the hospitals from from hotels from the cruise industry everybody and composting all that that's not being done anywhere.

Why are we why do we have to do that couple reasons we have to preserve landfill space and we have to preserve space in the waste energy plant because we're we're looking toward the future what needs to be done.

Those are those are very big things that are you know I want you to be thinking in terms of big picture because that's for the future of this county.

Commissioner Herbst was talking about when you're plan when you're planning things it's not for now it's for the future and that's what this is it is looking toward toward the future so we don't run out of those space we signed a twin a very long-term agreement with waste management this last year to take the to take those organics out of the landfill and to allow for all that composting as much as we want as much as we deliver to Okeechobee and be composted and then that compost and those mulching material those mulch can come back to you.

What we're trying to do is build a circular economy where you're able to use that material you're able to use that compost you've got tons of parks golf courses you got everything where you can be you you can use that.

Well all those all those feed stocks from plastic all those things think of all the plastic wood that you use in your parks and you're in your everywhere you build you want those things to be all coming back coming back to you through the ILA at a reduced rate.

So it so it's a bigger picture than just this it is prices and I know everybody concentrates on that but do think about the bigger picture in terms of environmental picture as well as as well as a circular economy and the entire future for the county that's what I would that's what I would I would count on.

And our our executive director is oh there you sam I don't know if you want to add anything, Sam.

Sam's Sam's been a public works director for what, 40 years?

40 years, yeah.

Forty years.

And we we appreciated him coming on because we needed that kind of um that kind of background.

And I think you can under you know I just want to clarify a couple things.

And good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners, City manager, City attorney, City clerk, the city clerk's here, but I just want to a couple things to clarify on your total uh charges on your surcharge per year.

And I know there was a there was a slide up there that had like three million dollars, but that three million dollars represents the total tonnage, including all of the commercial tonnage for your commercial, um, including the C and D that's coming that's going back to your um uh to the Monarch Hill, um your heavy, heavy C and D, and yes, they will be charged a tipping fee, but um uh for that C and D that's going back there, but your commercial people will be charged for their dumpsters, will be charged about eleven cents per cubic yard.

So if you have a a dumpster that's got say four cubic yards in there and it's being emptied twice a week, you're looking at eighty-eight cents a week.

There'll be a charge on top of what they're being charged right now through a um a tipping fee at the um at the disposal facility.

Um for the residential portion of it.

Right now they're paying right now it's being paid about uh 229,260, I think, for is what's slated for FY27, and based on your tonnages and your population, your residential units, you're looking at somewhere um in the range of a hundred and fifty thousand dollars per year.

So you're looking at an additional thirty cents per month added on to that fourteen dollar charge that you had up there that your monthly charge for your disposal portion for the residential portion.

The rest of that will be picked up by the commercial people.

So um, so I just wanted to bring that out.

And right now is it's two twenty-nine that's going to the city, and I think it's just being paid by the city, whether you're putting it on the solid waste assessment or through your utility bill or however you're doing that.

Um it's not being dispersed out to the commercial side of it.

Um and one thing too, just to add that the um uh what um the public works director is right that if we are being very aggressive on on our um what we were thinking our maximum service charges will be per ton.

There's no doubt about that.

If they come back in higher, that's when you'll have the o option to opt out at that time.

You know, if they said, hey, they just didn't, they they thought they were gonna be able to get it in at 5256 for yard waste and 5749.

If they if we don't do it and it comes in at sixty dollars, then that's when you guys can say, hey, you know what, we think we can do it better than that.

But just thinking that you can do better than that, and thinking you can join other people around you.

There's two cities that are on either side of you on the north side and the south side that are large cities that are not part of that interlocal agreement now with the county.

Um and the county thing's gonna be going away in about five or six years at the at the very most.

Uh they have this 2028 with a five-year extension on it.

But um those two cities are both paying about five dollars more per ton than that fifty-seven forty-nine right now.

They're paying about right around sixty-two dollars somewhere in that range there.

So just know that negotiating on your own with those other two cities may not be the best thing.

You know, they may be able to get a better rate than that, but they're looking at the SolidWays authority also to come on.

One of them, especially the other one is not a member, but um, but they're certainly interested.

So anyway, that's all I have to say for you.

Thank you very much for your time and attention.

And great, thank you.

Okay, is Stephanie Joffey here?

And uh followed by Julie Long.

And then Linda.

Hi, my name is Stephanie Jovi.

I live at h 5880 Southwest 37 Terrace in Fort Lauderdale.

Um I wrote you all a letter today.

I guess some people haven't had a chance to read it.

Um, but I'm gonna change you you can read my letter.

Um, but what I really wanted to do now right now is respond to seven things I heard in the meeting.

Um the big thing is that 44 cents.

Not a big difference, but what I think that forty-four cents, one of the most important things that 44 cents will accomplish, is trying to create a behavior change in the population, educating our population, our students, our residents, our businesses, about why we're doing what we're doing and how to do it properly.

You could have a lot of recycling you want, all the composting services you want, all the yard waste you want, but if people don't know why it's important to comply, and if people don't comply, it doesn't matter.

You may as well not have them.

So we need to educate our population.

And 44 cents to me is a real good deal for doing that.

Um, the education outreach group has already rolled out an amazing plan that's going into our schools, going into our businesses.

It's it's it's really impressive.

Um, the other thing is that I think one of your concerns is that Fort Lauderdale isn't being listened to, and they really are.

That the proposal yesterday would never have come up if Mr.

Sorensen hadn't raised his concerns.

So I think people are listening to Fort Lauderdale, and we appreciate how important Fort Lauderdale is to making this whole process work.

Um they don't even listen to me, and I'm a nobody.

So Fort Lauderdale's there, that'll make a big difference.

Um we need to teach people also how to divert their solid ways, how to reuse, how to, you know, if Fort Lauderdale had a program, which some cities do, where they provide containers for restaurant takeout, and those containers go back to central place, get rewashed and brought to restaurants.

We could do some of the things they're talking about diverting plastic on the beach.

I mean, that would be awesome.

I eat in Fort Lauderdale all the time, and I bring my own containers, but if they had containers there, I wouldn't feel like so much of a freak.

It would be really nice.

That was generally accepted.

Um, so those are important things.

Also, in terms of escalating costs, I think we keep costs down as a group much more than we can as individual cities.

If we're negotiating together, the economies of scale, we'll just all get a better deal.

So I think that's that's really important.

Um, we also recognize how involved, for example, Commissioner Herbst has been in the past.

Um we've just we have just used, I'll just say we've you've we've used your concerns.

They've been on everybody's mind as we go forward.

It's it's it's contributed to your concerns have already contributed to this plan, whether you were there or not, because we heard them.

Thank you so much.

Julie Long.

Followed by um, hello, thank you very much for the opportunity, Mayor, Commissioners.

Um, my name is Dr.

Julie Long.

I live at 972 West Tropical Way in Plantation, Florida.

I'm here to ask Fort Lauderdale to support the First Amendment to the SWA master plan, known as the Facilities Amendment.

When the ILA was formed in 2023, it was expected that new facilities would need to be built.

However, after years of study, it has been determined that new cities will not, new facilities will not be needed in the near future because of improved management of the waste stream included in the plan.

I've attended many of the SWA meetings for the last three years and have been impressed by the dedication of the participants, including the executive and governing board, as well as the public and industry representatives.

They have all worked together to benefit the county and make the plan better.

It's been a wonderful example of how government can function to serve people.

I'm also glad to see Commissioner Sorensen participating in the meetings.

We are better together is a common theme.

There is concern that this plan will be too costly given the projected population increase of 250,000 residents in the next 10 years, the fact that the landfills are near capacity with the existing use and that the incinerator is almost at capacity.

The only way to control costs will be to leverage economies of scale by joining together.

At Commissioner Sorensen's Zoom meeting last night, a thoughtful resident mentioned the costs that Miami Dade is paying to ship their trash out of the county.

We must do better than that.

Fort Lauderdale is the fourth wealthiest municipality in Broward County and benefits from the economic activity of local tourism.

All the residents and municipalities of Broward County need to join together to manage and reduce our waste to protect our water, air, and resources.

Thank you very much.

Okay, thank you.

Linda.

Thank you so very much, Mayor and Commissioners.

This is such a dedicated group, and it has really been an honor to listen to all of you today.

It's also been a great honor to attend as a League of Women Voters member and a CR club member to attend the many, many meetings of the Solid Waste Authority.

Many of you have participated in this issue for many years, if not months, and um as a member of these organizations and the public and a proud browed resident, we all have our jobs to do.

We need to look closely at the numbers, crunch the numbers, do what is in the best interest of our residents.

But standing back from the numbers we're hearing crunch today, I think we have a real challenge ahead of which is to overcome the distrust, perhaps the misperceptions, getting caught up in our own histories, the mistakes of the past.

We have a real opportunity to move forward together, and I desperately sincerely hope that we will do this because our Broward County residents need to know that we live in a county where we can come together with a with a plan that is thoughtful, forward-looking, and will in the long term serve our mutual interests and our address this looming crisis that we know we all have.

We can put best practices into place.

We don't need there is no longer any uh other place to ship our trash.

We need to work together to take advantage of our tools, our mutual enormous experience and expertise that we have present before us.

I I look to you for your leadership.

Please come together, please support one another, please work together.

There are issues, valid issues on the table, leadership, other issues of structure, cost.

Yes, let's address those, but please let's come together for the good of all of our communities.

Thank you so much.

I appreciate all of you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Did you sign up to speak?

Okay, please go ahead.

Good afternoon.

Uh my name is Grant Smith.

I'm here for questions only, so I'm sorry.

All right.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Uh Mayor Commissioners, my name is Grant Smith.

Um, in addition to representing waste connections, one of the disposal partners of several cities here in the county.

I'm also a 30 plus year resident of the city of Fort Lauderdale.

Um, once you sign on to this, you're signing on to something with a 40-year time horizon.

As you heard today, there's no gonna there's not going to be an opt-out any time into the future once you opt in.

You become part of this structure, and exiting the structure will be very difficult if not impractical.

And it's adding another layer of government.

That two dollars that they're quoting is adding to another structure that you're going to be supporting, and there is no maximum charge on that.

That can be changed by the executive board, that can be changed by the vote of the SWA into the future as to what it takes to run their facilities.

There's a lack of pricing certainty, as you as been talked about.

They can't promise anything, they don't know what the pricing is going to come in at.

But we've been here before, Commission.

In 1991, I may not look like it.

I'm old enough to remember what happened in 1991.

In 1991, the city signed on to a 30-year agreement, and the price at the end of that 30 year agreement got to over a hundred dollars per ton.

If you take the compounding effect of CPI on a $58 dollar number at 3%, that comes out to 100 and hundred and eighty-five dollars in 40 years, and in at a 4% CPI, it comes out to $278 dollars in 40 years.

That's the compounding effect of CPI.

What that means is that in that 40 years, because there is no opt-out, the city will not have an opportunity to go back out to bid.

If the if the RFP goes out for a 40-year term for a new provider, then you're stuck with that for 40 years and you're stuck with the compounding effect of CPI for 40 years, which is what happened in 1991, which is why the ILA broke up again, I'm sorry, in 2013.

One more thing, I'd just like to stress as a city resident, you don't know where those facilities are going to be, so your hauling contracts don't know where they're going to be taking the waste into the future.

Those could be somewhere else, and they could ultimately increase the cost of hauling, because right now there is no defined facility plan.

So I had a lot more to talk about, but that is but isn't but but aren't those aren't those um isn't the the uh the price point range going to protect us we can opt out if it is if it starts to exceed a certain uh certain price point it only when the prices come in in 2027 if you don't opt out in 2027 you're subject to it for 40 years because the SWA yesterday turned down the opportunity to get out in 20 years, so you would then be subject to the ILA to the ILA escalating costs of the CPI.

So if in twenty if in 2032 it exceeds the the promised range of the cost range, then we don't we can't get out.

So my understanding, and I and by the way, I've been doing waste uh law since my very very first waste client, 1991 here.

BFI I am.

I'm just letting you know I I know from what I speak on this.

We we appreciate your background.

The answer to the question is that if the price starts out, let's say fifty-eight dollars and increases by CPI every year, then and it exceeds whatever the $58 plus the CPI, you know, what your expectations were, no, you will not have an opportunity to get out of this agreement, period.

I mean, I've heard that clearly, and I don't think they can tell you any differently.

Okay, so if it if the if it were to go up if if the CPI was calculated in the and the cost and then it had to go up another 20 percent for whatever reason, we could not opt out.

We're stuck forever.

That is my understanding, but I think you can talk to well, I think that correctly.

I think Ms.

Doyle and Mr.

Kane are nodding in agreement.

Got it.

And under the current system, while it's imperfect, there can be bids and the interim basis and not locked in for 40 years.

So you can say I want a disposal contract for 10 years, and you live with that for 10 years, and then you do it again.

Under this under this regimen that they're proposing, you're stuck for 40 years.

Okay.

We're stuck for 40 years as a resident.

Thank you.

Anyone else wish to speak on this item?

City manager, what is our what is your recommendation?

Well, this discussion was intended to get feedback from the city commission in terms of moving forward or not moving forward with participating in the SWA or any uh recommendations that the commission would want us to engage with the board on.

Uh we anticipated that by the July second meeting, there would be some determination by this commission as to next steps.

Yeah, um I like the construct and idea of working together, and I think there's a lot of positive around that.

My concern remains the the pricing uh component, and um, so that's kind of where I am at the moment.

Well, it sounds to us, it sounds to me at least that um that we're going to be uh a captured entity uh in years ahead despite what the costs are, and we can't get out of it.

That's not a position I think that makes sense for any any city.

So, how does this arrangement make sense to you?

If we should decide to participate in this, what would, you know, are we going to be are we going to be strangling our our, you know, property owners with a bill that we have no control over?

Um I'll just say this.

Uh I think yesterday we were hoping for a different outcome as a related to what the different provisions were at points in time to be able to get out of the agreement.

Um I have concerns being in any agreement for 40 years, so many things can change.

The facility itself currently is 35, 40 years old.

Um there are just a lot of different variables.

And to not be able to have at least the options to get out at a couple of points.

Uh first of all, certainly after you see what the numbers are, only if they exceed the uh maximum numbers that they're putting in.

Um that was concerning to me, and also uh it was concerning to not be able to get out at the halfway point if we feel for any reason that um we chose to do that.

Um so I think those are from a staff perspective, I think those are the the biggest concerns we have is not having that flexibility and tying us into something for another 40 years that you know there are just things in there that you totally can't control.

Mayor, if I could ask maybe Sam or Commissioner Fur, d the price increase, the CPI, is there any is that a real unchecked, unknown year after year they could increase.

I mean, is there any protection around that?

Vice Mayor Sam May, executive director for the Browser Solid Waste Authority.

Yes, there is the the governing board can um always vote by two-thirds vote to get out of any agreement that they want to.

So there's an opportunity, it's not everybody's not locked in.

The authority is made up of all the you know, one elected fish official from each city.

That's what the board is.

So if the board says, hey, these prices are just going through the roof, you know, it's like we're way over industry standards, and everybody can say, look, let's just either get out of it or or or get out of the contract.

So I don't think that's gonna happen.

Nobody's gonna the entirety of the cities in Broward County aren't gonna just be stuck into something that's gonna be you know really bad for them.

So but we're we're but we're subject to the majority vote.

You're you are correct.

However, with Fort Lauderdale, you're subject to it, but it's based on population, where Fort Lauderdale, as you said, has 11% of the people.

So we have this weighted voting is yes.

So you have it's based on population.

So you have more of a vote than other people have, let's just say it's kind of that's the way it's structured.

That's but but but why wouldn't I but why wouldn't we why wouldn't you structure this transaction to protect everybody without having to face uh the whim of a majority?

In other words, if in fact we find the costs like if this whole arrangement is to save money, and if in fact it's not saving money, why wouldn't we just dissolve it?

You know, uh you can just dissolve it.

No, the majority can, but why why would why would we want to go down that down a rabbit hole here with uh increased cost you know the whole idea is to save money, right?

So if we're not saving money, then why shouldn't we just be able to get out of it?

You say we can.

Well, that's what the agreement that was that was brought forward to everyone that was that was agreed upon that was what was brought forth in the ILA originally.

Right, but I'm saying that's not been agreed upon now.

Well, you have to move forward with the facilities amendment to make it effective, but there is a way out.

The the way out is just if it's just got got to be too much for everyone, then everyone could just say, hey, this isn't working out for us.

But if it's too much for one party, they're stuck.

I think that if it's too much for one, it's too much for all.

No, no, disagree with you.

Okay, a city that's five thousand people is not gonna be the same as a city for two hundred thousand people.

You're correct.

You're correct, but you have a couple of those cities that are 200,000 people, and then you say this is, you know.

Oh, you let the commissioner speak on behalf of that, if you don't mind.

Alright, so you're going to go ahead.

Yes, hi.

Sorry, Mayor Denise Horlin, President of the Broward League of City, City Council president, city of Plantation.

I just want to correct something that you said.

This is not just about saving money.

We are in a waste crisis.

It's not about saving money.

No, it is not.

We are in a waste crisis in Broward County.

Our landfill is nearing capacity, and our waste to energy plant is nearing capacity.

So a very large part of this solid waste authority is about diversion.

And again, yes, we're stronger together when it comes into pricing.

We know that prices for all of us are gonna continue to rise over the next 40 years.

Those prices you see are that we're all paying in our cities are not going to remain static.

What we have to talk about, and from what I heard uh Vice Mayor Thorenson addressed this last night, and I've been talking about this.

Uh Miami Dade County is spending $65 million this year alone to track track to to haul their trash to Okeechobee.

That's unsustainable financially, it's unsustainable from an environmental standpoint.

So I think that we also have to look at what happens.

We know what happened in the past.

We we don't want to repeat those mistakes, but we also don't want elected officials 40 years from now to look back and say, why didn't they address it?

Why didn't they take care of it?

Because we have limited capacity to deal with this.

So I just wanted to correct that.

Wait, wait, wait, wait.

You're saying so you're saying this is not about saving money, it's about finding ways to dispose of of solid waste.

Why why couldn't the city of Fort Audale contribute to any processing plant that you have without being part of this uh SWA?

We're not building processing bands.

So why are you so what do you get what's your point then saying that it's not about saving money then?

What is it about?

Well, we we want to make sure that we don't have escalating costs.

We are going to be stronger together to contain the costs, Mayor, but we need to talk about capacity.

There's not going to be another waste to energy plant built, and there's not going to be another landfill.

So what do we do?

So we answer your question.

So what do we do?

What do we do?

What we're trying to do right now is the composting of the organics, which beam for uh had addressed earlier, Commissioner Fur.

We're talking about C and D with the ordinance, keeping that uh commercial uh construction demolition debris out of the waste stream and getting that into the circular economy.

We're looking at diverting.

Also getting the cities that are not currently recycling into a recycling program.

But we're doing all that.

We're recycling.

Um we can still contribute to whatever processing procedures you have.

There's nothing that's gonna limit us, right?

Are you gonna say no?

We don't want yourself.

No, what I'm saying is you continue to say that it was just about saving money, and I want us to look at the global picture.

We're also looking at this from an environmental standpoint, because really there will be nowhere else for us to take our trash and a recycling in the future.

So we can't contribute to your composting program.

Well, I hope that you do.

I hope that we can be part of the SWA.

Right.

But we're saying globally the 31, we're hoping it's gonna be the 31 cities, not just 28 cities, but we we need to be moving in the right direction to get together.

So I appreciate for the time for me to jump up.

I just wanted to say it's also about the environmental and sustainability of Broward County.

Okay, thank you.

Mayor, let me just say the best example of saving the money has been the global the global agreement between the 21 cities now in the waste energy.

Those are contained, those have been the most contained costs.

That's why you're that's why your price right now is is the lowest on the market.

You're not seeing an X.

Yes, the reason the reason um I think granted talked about that escalation was because it was paying off a bond.

It was an escalation factor.

That doesn't mean every contract's gonna have that.

It's not.

In fact, when we when we write an RFP, we're gonna have we're gonna have controls on that.

And the global agreement is a very good example of that.

You're a benefit of uh Fort Auto benefits from that now, as does 20 cities.

That those prices have not escalated that much, and they will not escalate for the next uh for the foreseeable future up to 2033.

Because those can those are contained costs.

That's kind of what you're gonna be seeing on a big picture.

Okay, okay.

Mayor, uh suggestion here.

Um, City Manager, the date we have to make a decision by is what?

Do you know offhand?

August 15th?

August 15th.

Um, so one possibility, Mayor, is having gotten a lot of information here today.

I'd like to debrief with city staff to talk through and just kind of see thoughts and reactions and then maybe have us come back and make a decision.

And you know that makes sense.

Whatever you think, Mayor, uh, let's see.

Our next meeting is June 2nd.

So it could be June 2nd or June 16th or whatever.

I won't be here June 16th.

By the way, um, I understand that uh I had to I had kind of circulated a request to see if we could um have the meeting and it's the eighteenth instead of the 16th, but I think a couple of people aren't gonna be here.

Is that what I heard?

It's no one can we have the meeting on the Thursday instead of the Tuesday.

I can't.

I'll make myself available.

I'm available.

I can't do it.

Thank you.

All right.

Okay.

But maybe mayor, we could bring it back July 2nd or whatever.

Yeah, we can while we do that.

Okay.

Whatever you like.

Okay.

Mayor, before this item concludes, I just want to circle back to the representation on the board.

I know that Vice Mayor Sorensen has been selected as the representative.

Is there an alternate as we prepare the documentation to come forward later this evening?

We would rather not have a blank line, but is there someone who would want to do that?

Don't all speak up at once.

We'll just leave it, I guess, with Commissioner Sorensen right now.

Vice Mayor.

Thank you.

Thank you, Vice Mayor, for your work on this.

Thanks, Mayor.

Thank you.

So if I can, Mayor, so just a couple of thoughts that I have on this.

Um so I've obviously I've got a lot of experience with the RRB going back for quite a few years, and and you know, I appreciate the comments.

I I've I've you know addressed some of what I've heard from folks in the community.

The the two things that are concerning to me uh at this point, I mean there's a lot of issues, but I think the two main points for me is not being able to get out of the second point in time.

I I do think we we need to have a secondary exit.

Um, and it's it it should be for us to decide, not not a group exit.

Um I I don't want to be held captive.

And the second thing, and I I've I've expressed this to anybody who's asked, is that I think based on our size and the amount of flow that that we will be contributing to this, I I strongly believe that a seat on the executive committee is not subject to a vote.

Um it needs to be mandatory for Fort Lauderdale.

I wouldn't consider moving forward with this agreement without that being in place, and I don't think we should even consider it until that is that is made a permanent part of it.

So I I don't think that should be negotiable on our side.

I think that needs to be a precondition to any consideration of us participating in this agreement.

I don't want to agree to this and then have it come up for a vote and they decide once again that no, we don't think so.

Um we are you know, for for better or worse, the 800-pound gorilla in terms of directing flow to this and our participation on the executive committee, whomever that representative is going to be over the next 40 years.

Um uh again, I think our our participation just needs to be predicated upon our having a seat on that executive committee that is a guaranteed seat.

So thank you.

So when you say, you mean the 40-year opportunity for I like the word perpetuity, but for the 40 year extension.

Just as a precondition to any participation in this ILA whatsoever.

Whatsoever.

Okay.

Um I think the vice mayor has enough to go with from now, and we'll then we'll hear back on July 2nd.

Okay, very good.

Thank you so much.

Thank you for thank you.

Appreciate your staying with us this afternoon.

Um, let's jump back to uh CF1 performance audit of the procurement procurement P Card program, City Auditor's Office.

Um Pat, before you begin, City Manager, I don't think we're gonna have time to finish the entire uh conference meeting agenda this afternoon.

Um we have to uh um well we'll see how long this this item goes, but I guess we're just gonna have to push those to the evening agenda, or do you want to take it at a later time?

I think for business four, if we were to defer it to the June 2nd meeting since it's still pretty early in the hurricane season.

I think it would still have relevant information if that was one to be considered for deferral.

And and maybe one other.

I would hope that we could get through the we're not going to.

So that's the master plan.

Get through it tonight, but not this afternoon.

Okay.

Well, perhaps the sidewalk master plan could go to this evening.

You would put that this evening, which is business three.

Okay.

Well, we'll do what we can.

Um, but you you say the business four will push to uh a later meeting.

June 2nd.

Okay, great.

Mayor.

Yeah.

We have had residents here waiting for business two.

Also, they've been here patiently all day, and I I would hate to see us not even deal with that either this afternoon or this evening.

This is the Parks Bond program.

Well, we're gonna do CF1 and then we can go to business two.

Okay, great.

I just next thing on the agenda.

Perfect.

Thank you.

Mr.

Riley.

Patrick Riley, City Auditor.

Good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Commissioners.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide a summary of our performance audit of the procurement P Card program, which uh included 15 month audit period and included life cycle testing during 2025.

This uh audit report is part of our annual audit plan.

Today I would like to uh walk through the objectives of the audit and overall conclusions, key findings and the recommendations we feel that will improve the internal controls over the city's um environment over P Cards.

The P Card program is a uh critical role in the city's procurement process.

It supports decentralized purchasing of thousands of transactions each year and contributes to meaningful rebate of approximately eight hundred and seventy thousand dollars annually.

That is based on PCARD transactions of totaling spending of sixty-three million dollars, of which 12 million was spent by employees using a physical P-Card.

Our objectives were to determine that whether internal controls over the city's P Card program were properly designed, implemented, and effective.

After reviewing the program's internal controls and performance, our conclusion is our office found that the internal controls relating to the PCAR program were not adequately improved and maintained since the prior audit.

Notably property controls over attractive items.

P card administration controls, record keeping, and supervisory approvals were also uh lacking as far as controls.

And um prohibited and questionable P Card purchases occurred representing non-compliance with PSM 9.13.

These are issues collectively create these issues collectively create a persistent vulnerability to fraud waste and operational efficiency.

Several conditions were remediated by the city manager and management that were brought to the attention during our the audit period, such as ERP enhancements that improve P Card documentation and on in for software uh updating the P Card PSMs and uh file retention updates that were needed.

Also, um we obtained reverse charges from city's P Card issuing bank related to a compromise P card identified by my auditor, and this was a third-party fraud incident.

I'd like to go over some of the uh key findings, which were all prior audit repeat findings from a prior audit that was done in 2019.

Finding number one, property control is not fully compliant to four attractive items purchased with a P card.

We found that the city still lacks a compliant complete inventory system for attractive items, which are high-risk property items value valued below for five thousand dollars, such as laptops, appliances, expensive tools, and EV chargers.

Specifically, property records were incomplete, lack of physical inventories, disposal procedures were not clear and outlined and outdated.

And many of the PCART items purchased from our sample testing were found only after extensive efforts to locate items from limited with limited records.

Finding number two basically is administration of the actual P Card issuance to PCARD agreements and P card cancellation.

We noted missing or incomplete P card applications and PCARD agreements, but the key item was delays in canceling P Cards from separated employees.

And we feel that the underlying issue that continued continued reliance on manual paper-based processes and insufficient coordination related to some of the problems with the administration of those those documents.

Finding number three, recording and supervisory approvals need strengthening.

This includes issues with non-detail P card receipts, P Card statements, and digital retention.

Our audit found that seven percent of all tested PCAR receipts were missing or lacked itemized detailed information.

What am I mean there is like the receipts should at minimum have what is the item description, uh, what the quantities are, what the unit price is, and a lot of often that was missing.

7% of all tested P Card receipts were missing that itemized detailed information, and extrapolating that equates to roughly 2,000 non-compliant transactions annually.

Also nearly one-fifth of the monthly P Card statements tested were never submitted to finance storage files.

These weaknesses impair the city's ability to purchase to verify purchases, enforce accountability, and ensure compliance with mandatory retention rules.

Finding number four, prohibited and questionable purchase.

We identify both prohibited transactions and transactions that raise concern about propriety and documentation.

Prohibited purchases are items that didn't conform with the city's policies and standards manual.

The prohibited purchase included vehicle repair, split transactions, duplicate payments, non-travel charges on travel cards, other restricted categories for the P Card PSM.

Questionable purchases include large gift purchases for third parties, substantial spending routed through unnecessary intermediaries, and what I mean by that is still having sales people providing sales rather than using better uh methods to obtain smaller goods and services that they needed.

There's also unitomized construction invoices, unsupported expenditures tied to weak work order documentation.

And so those kind of a quick summary of the four findings.

Um we had several recommendations that we provided.

We believe that we need to implement a COSO aligned risk-based internal control system.

We need to strengthen property controls over attractive items.

We need to modernize our workflows with digital forms and automated controls.

We need to integrate HR IT system to automate P Card cycle changes, and uh we would believe that deploying AI-based exception monitoring will help.

And I believe speaking with um Linda Short that we're in the process of obtaining that type of um software or not software, but of availability of on using the AI type of a function to look at our functions of what is approved, what is allowable for our PSMs and identify um that documentation is is adequate before payment is finalized.

And lastly, I think we one of the probably the bigger things is require annual internal controls training for coordinators and uh relevant staff based on on the thought that really a lot of our our offices and departments are are kind of silos, so they need to be the kind of the heavy on deciding you know what is the the right uh control over uh attractive items as far as what what's reasonable they need to track based on what kind of purchases they have and how they issue it and how they dispose of it.

So I think we need some improvement on that.

So um that completes my audit presentation.

I will uh address any questions at this time.

Okay, thank you first of all, Pat.

Thank you so much.

It seems like you did a very thorough analysis.

I got a copy of your report, I read it thoroughly.

Um city manager, um, what would be your response to what the auditor has uh has provided here today?

Thank you, Mayor.

I want to uh echo the sentiments of thanks towards our city auditor's office uh in terms of the depth and breadth of this uh audit report uh for the audit period of October 2023 through December 2024.

Uh we have been putting certain elements into place to strengthen our controls and our processes, and I look forward to continuing that dialogue with the auditor's office as we implement those protocols.

I know that our IT department has implemented an inventory tracking system.

Our parks and rec department is using a new work order system, our PCART audit program has received more funding, and so we're gonna be uh strengthening that as well.

Uh we are promoting compliance through uh employees, both with training and with ensuring that uh specific positions are filled that relate to this, and the AI expense management tool that uh Pat mentioned, uh we are looking into that.

So thank you so much for pointing out areas where we can definitely take a look and you know be more responsive.

And so I look forward to continuing the efforts to strengthen our transparency and compliance.

So let me ask you, um, did you send a memo to the city commission indicating that there were no instances of fraud and that there was no violation of section two eighteen point thirty three of the Florida statutes?

You would see that memorandum to the auditor as part of the management response.

I mean, I'm I'm just under trying to understand since the city auditors specifically said there were instances of fraud and that there were violations of section two eighteen point thirty-three.

I'm trying to understand the response saying that there were none.

So which is which is correct.

And I'm gonna call Linda short and yvette Matthews for to add some clarification.

Well, Pat, before before before Pat, can you please stay at the podium?

Yes.

So your find you you there was multiple findings, um, and according to your report, in fact, there's a very extensive report, um, in which you uh in which you made findings and and in your parlance a finding is a serious thing, right?

And uh and and Commissioner Herbst.

If you could uh help us out on this, um did you have an opportunity to review to review on what Pat has submitted and the findings that he's that he provided us?

I didn't I've also had a conversation with Pat regarding the audit report and some of his concerns and um and why he felt uh felt the need to also provide a rebuttal back to the report.

So typically, you know, when we have uh an audit report, we have two categories we have findings and then we have observations, observations, or what we deem in the profession to be opportunities for improvement.

A finding is something where we say this is inconsistent with existing rules, policies, or standard um procedures in the profession.

And so if Patutes as well.

Statutes, ordinances, policies, and and generally recognized um internal control standards.

Uh Pat references COSO, for example.

There are other ones that are that are standard, for example, segregation of duties and things like that.

And so when we find something that is inconsistent with those with those rules, regulations, ordinance, and so forth, that would rise to a level of a finding, and then we make a determination as to whether it's material or not, and uh and we report it as such.

Um we also look at areas where we think there are just opportunities for staff to improve how they do things and we put those down as observations.

Um at the end of the day, when we have our exit conference with staff, we will share that information with them with the goal of trying to make sure that when we're reporting our findings, that there is no disagreement as to matters of fact.

We can disagree on recommendations, and I've always said to you know my audit uh clients, you know, feel free to disagree with my recommendations, but we should never disagree as to as to the factual findings that are in a report.

And the exit conference is the opportunity for us to work those out before it gets into the final report.

And um, if there is something that comes back from the city manager, I'm not particularly referring to any city manager, but to a city manager, uh that I disagree with when I was the auditor, we would on occasion put a rebuttal in there where I thought it was fundamentally challenging the the conclusion of the finding, and I think that's what Pat had to do.

And that is a little concerning.

So I I don't like to see that in an audit report.

If you're disputing uh if you're disputing facts, that needs to be resolved.

It is either factually correct or factually not correct.

You can always disagree with the recommendation.

You may find that a recommendation doesn't meet the cost benefit of implementation.

Um, you know, you may find it is impracticable to to put uh to put in place, whatever that may be.

You can certainly, as a charter officer responsible for operations, simply disagree, and then it's a policy question for us as the as the uh commission to say whether we agree with you or we agree with the auditor's recommendation.

But um, but I I don't like to see that in an audit report where we're disagreeing on on the on the nature and substance and context of the findings themselves.

Thank you, Commissioner.

And just want to highlight that uh we did share in that memorandum that we concur with the findings.

It seemed to me though that there was some back and forth.

Like we agree, and then we sort of disagree.

Pat, do you want to sort of discuss that?

Yeah, the there were responses to the four um findings that basically said they concurred, but in the in the letter going out to us, there were there were two paragraphs that included one statement that said during the audit period, no instances of fraud were identified reflecting the progress staff has made in establishing a system of controls to ensure purchases are properly reviewed and validated.

Well, I mean, that's like saying, Well, you didn't have you didn't find any fraud, so you know, we have everything in place.

And uh, you know, I learned a line today saying, you know, absence of evidence is not absence is not evidence of absence.

And that's really true, but you may be looking at stuff, but the the intention of this audit was really to tighten up the internal controls, not really necessarily looking for fraud, although uh I can tell you a red flag to me is when you have a P Card purchase and it's not broken down as to what what the detail of it is and it's just a lump sum amount.

That's that's a a bad uh control to have where it it the risk of of problems is when you have that.

And so I I think it I felt that it was trying to say that everything looks good, so we're you know, we had no fault because we no fraud fraud was found on in this situation of this report, but we did find uh some fraud there.

Uh we had a we had a um a compromise um card, uh P card that uh action wasn't taken to correct that, which uh my auditor did locate that in his sample, and we got $20,000 back from our um bank uh when he he when that got processed.

And so to me, there was at least four sets of eyes that should have seen that.

That the the uh individual who had that um should have looked at the um the bank statement statement for the P Card, the the P Card coordinator should have said, Well, where are all the receipts for this 20,000?

And then the the the supervisor signing off should have been able to say, Well, everything's here, and in every department needs to do that process with that has that has P cards out there so that that was uh another red flag that was a concern to me so I think we do need some improvements in in the areas of how we were administering the P cards.

I think maybe we just got a lax in some of the areas, but again, since so many departments are kind of siloed out there, it's really important that you know there's some training on how the internal controls for P Cards should be handled.

And then the other item um, you know, it just says, you know, we we pointed out four findings that related to um not complete compliance with with uh Florida statutes um two eighteen, which really you know requires that that you have to maintain an internal control process in place so you try to prevent you know the risk of fraud mis misuse and so forth.

So that's really clear, but I think where we we we lost that um commitment to to follow that is a forest Florida administrative code on the attractive items.

You know, I'm not arguing about what's the right amount, you know, attractive items are items somewhere between a thousand and five thousand that we've decided on, but whatever it is, uh you know, we we ran into situations where something was purchased, we asked where the records are on it, they couldn't uh locate them.

Initially they said we we got rid of them, and then later on we were able to find in in one case um EV chargers that were being held at at the uh the vet the vendor, and um then it was later transferred over to um sustainability and they used them.

So, you know, we we have some control problems relating with the disposable items that really clearly should be should be done.

But the the comment management concludes that the city remains in compliance with requirements of section two eighteen.

We we just have to you know disagree with that because I I think it kind of gives negative assurance that everything is correct, but I think some corrections need to be made.

And it's you know, I don't think there's anything that's that's not you know easily fixable, but we need to control that because this PCAR is 28,000 transactions a year.

Like again, based on our Tampa, we we're we're extrapolating that probably at least you know uh a big portion of you know two thousand um transactions, you know, uh could be uh, you know, a problem with it.

So we we just want to really tighten that.

We spent twelve million dollars.

I see two issues here.

The first issue is the evidence that you uncovered of the possible misuse of the P card and the types of things that were being purchased.

The second issue is why the management office um did not properly reflect the findings that you uh that you just that you uncovered in in making his communication to the city commission why the city why the management said city remains in compliance with the requirements and that there were no instances of fraud when you specifically point out four instances of fraud.

So that that concerns me.

Why why would we sugarcoat it when in fact it needs to be investigated?

What are your thoughts?

And just to clarify, um Mayor, sorry, Yvette Mathieu's assistant assistant city manager.

Um, just to clarify, the document wasn't did not point out four instances of fraud.

And I completely agree with Pat that there are a number of findings in here that really detail the need for the city to enhance our safeguards around the P Card program.

Um what Pat identified.

A lot of the things that we get during these internal audit reviews are before the report even comes out, he's sharing with our team some of these weaknesses for us to continue to enhance those um safety, the internal controls and safety.

And so we we value the work, and I you know, one of the things that I've shared with Pat already is that the management response was not intended to diminish the work that the auditor's office did.

It was not to diminish the uh findings that were outlined.

And for each one, we took that interview as an opportunity to really talk through exactly what the auditor's office had identified, whether or not there were additional circumstances that we needed to keep in mind.

Our finance director really went through step by step.

I think that interview was almost two hours long.

It was scheduled for 30 minutes, it ended up being almost two hours long.

And I think that's representative of the city staff's um goal, which is to hear the auditor's office ensure that we're receiving the information.

We recognize those shortfalls, and our response was intended to indicate that yes, there is work to be done, but some work has already been done, and we are already doing some addition taking some additional steps based on the preliminary feedback that Pat provided.

So if there was any, you know, misinterpretation of the way that that response was provided.

I've already shared with Pat that I apologize if that's the way he interpreted it, but the intent was never to diminish the work that the auditor's office had done.

We really took it to heart and have already taken action to ensure that the city is safeguarding those resources.

Is that your is that your understanding, Pat, that there that that measures have already been taken to to prevent this stuff from happening in the future?

I mean, have you seen visible?

As I mentioned, we uh during the audit, we did recommend some things that uh were um taken care of by management that that we hoped that they would do.

There's you know other things we didn't, but I did want to clarify I didn't say we had four audit um uh frauds in this situation.

I also I was what I was saying is there was one related to a third party, not an employee, but a third party fraud that we really didn't take care of.

That that's what what the problem is, what I wanted to point out, and that through the process of the normal P Card evaluation and approval, we we should have we should have caught that.

But you know, well, that was a substantial instance, 20 grand, you know.

And then for the for the management office to say there were no instances of fraud, you know.

Well, I I don't uh the only other thing I want to do too is say is like you know, um I met with with management and they asked us a lot about finding number four as far as the questionable items and uh prohibited items, and we provided all that information to them, and I didn't get any response that there was any issue with with the documentation on that.

So we did that.

But my my comment is just simply that the two comments on the response to me.

Like were a negative assurance that nothing is wrong, and the other point was that there's nothing wrong with with um the way we followed.

And I I just I just we agreed to disagree on that.

Okay.

Linda, did you want to say something?

Good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor Commissioners, Linda Short, Director of Finance.

So I want to just share just a little bit of context on the fraud, the $20,000 in fraud.

So finance views fraud in a different way.

So when I think about fraud, I think about things that have happened where someone is trying to defraud the government.

All the time everybody has their card gets stolen, and someone tries to take money from the city, and we fight and dispute the information and get the money back.

So when I thought about the fraud as in fraud where someone from the city committed a fraudulent act and stole money from the city, like they did in 2019, we found no instance of that this year.

But what we did have, which we have all the time, is someone trying to somehow getting the city's card number, making charges, and we review the charges and dispute them and get the money back, which is what happened in this case.

Someone used somebody's card, and the person didn't report it to us timely.

We found out about it, contacted the vendor, got all our money back because it was a fraudulent actor who got a hold of one of the city's account numbers and tried to take money from the city, but it wasn't someone from the city initiating fraud.

And I just wanted to make a distinction between the two.

Well, I think when it comes to definitions, yeah, we need to be less subjective about what what we think it is as opposed to what it is.

Got it.

No problem.

Thank you for that.

All right.

All right, so does that complete your report, Pat?

Yes.

Does anyone have any questions of the uh of the auditor?

Thanks, Mayor.

Thank you, Pat.

It's a very thorough report.

A lot of concerns.

It's very concerning this report.

And I and I'm hoping, and I'm just saying this.

So that last audit was 2019, and then we have this.

I I think that we should immediately start looking at January 2025 through today.

I mean, I don't think we should wait a long time until we do this again.

Uh, this particular issue seems very, you know, concerning.

Uh, and I'm hoping that we can get some information about from January 25 to present day.

And I think that we're just taking too much time in between um the audits of this uh PCAR program.

That's all.

Thanks.

And Commissioner, thank you for that feedback.

One of the things that we did realize is when you look at doing after-the-fact audit, there's often long delays between the time a transaction happened and the time in which you're able to remedy whatever that shortfall was.

And so the finance team is already investigating a tool that will allow us to do more real-time audits of our PCARD program, ensuring we're in compliance with the city's various procurement requirements, but also making sure that we're um doing active reviews so that it's not just one person or the audit office doing it a year or two years after the fact.

But we really want to be able to use technology to ensure that we're keeping real-time pulse on where our P Card program lies.

Thank you.

I think that's really important.

Thank you.

Just one thing I want to add is is in with the PCAR program, it really is important to have a continuous kind of audit um activity because of the volume, because of the nature of how this can be done in the and because of the nature of items that could be purchased and and easily sold on on eBay.

So, there's a lot of purchases, even small ones that over time could be a lot.

But one thing I want to make sure clear is we did a 15 month audit that covered the beginning of the of the 20 the October 2023 all the way to December 2024, but also included the the year of 2025 where we were looking at cycle um our you know those life cycle testing where we say okay, something purchased in 2024.

Where is it?

Do we still have it?

Does that other records are?

So it was kind of a three-year audit that covered that.

I don't want to think that we looked at too far back, and it took, you know, you need to look into the a year or so after the purchases to see if especially the attractive items.

If we had them, what happened to them?

And we and we had a tough time really finding a lot of the items, very poor records related to what was purchased, who had them and how we disposed of them.

So that's the main thing of this audit that I think really needs to be cleaned up a bit.

Okay, any other questions or comments?

There being none.

Thank you so much, Pat.

We appreciate it.

Moving on to business two, city manager.

We have a Quentin P.

Assistant City Manager and Colette Satchel, Director of Capital Projects.

Good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners, Quentin Pugh, Assistant City Manager.

Also joining me and co-presenter is Colette Satchel, Capital Projects Director.

Today's presentation is about bringing greater clarity, structure, and predictability to the parks bond program.

We will we will provide a quick walkthrough um of what's been done, what's underway, and what's coming, as well as some other relevant information about the Parks Bond program.

The Capital Projects Department was established with the adoption of the FY26 budget and handles all vertical bills, including public facilities, uh parking, mobility, streetscapes, and of course the parks bond program.

Project examples include the recently completed Las Olas parking garage lighting improvements and the new um Bass Park Community Center that is under construction.

The foundation of this program goes back a decade when the comprehensive parks master plan was approved.

When residents voted to authorize the issuance of 200 million dollars in bonds, they were approving a plan they had already helped shape.

Implementation kicked off during the pandemic in 2020, and when staff re-engaged the community in 2021, residents' priority still lined up with the 2016 master plan.

In the past five years since that engagement, a few projects in every district have been moved from planning to construction completion.

When Tranches within Tranches 1 and 2, some project funds were appropriated immediately, while others were phase to match project readiness.

Roughly $59 million of funds within Tranches 1 and 2 have been spent.

Approximately 24% or 14 million of the expenditures to date are related to planning, design, and program management with AECOM.

Tranch 3 funding isn't tied to a fixed release date.

Staff is working to draw down Tranch 1 funds, which is a key trigger that helps advance it.

The Capital Projects Department is reassigning projects across more project managers and multiple consultant firms in order to accelerate project deliveries.

Some parks were already in good shape and didn't need bond funded work.

The inventory was also smaller back then.

The FY 2018 adopted budget listed 104 total parks in the city, whereas today is 112.

Every park listed here has a real project tied to it.

Several are complex, phased, andor require coordination with outside agencies.

The seven segments listed here are part of the tier one network, and once completed, we'll deliver approximately five of the 12 miles.

Tier 1 was identified as the starting point in the Lauder Trail Master Plan because it connects the key destinations.

It also provides strong pedestrian and bicycle connectivity, has fewer conflicts, and requires minimum right-of-way acquisitions compared to tier two.

Many of these segments are already in design and permitting phases.

Segment 1D is supported by grant funding, and the environmental assessment is underway.

Approximately 1.12 miles.

Staff will continue to explore funding opportunities such as surtax-generated funds, grants, park impact fees, CIP decision packages, and packaging trail scroll into nearby P3 projects.

Take the Holiday Park Park and Garage P3 project as an example.

Staff is currently in discussions to package the shared use path along Northeast 8th Street into that project, connecting Federal Highway to the main entry of Holiday Park.

7.5 million was allocated evenly across all four districts for land acquisition.

Notable acquisitions have been completed in every district, with roughly 3.6 and 3.9 million remaining in districts 1 and 2, respectively.

Park impact fees come from new development.

They help the city keep up with added demand on the parks as the community grows.

These fees also give us another funding source to help close project gaps and move improvements forward.

Today, fees split 50-50.

Half goes into the citywide regional park bucket, and the remaining half into the district-specific park fund where the fee was generated.

Think of a citywide regional park as one that draws residents from across all four districts.

Signature parks like Holiday and Carter and special use facilities like the Aquatics Complex and Fort Lauderdale Beach Park.

Older district regional park funds were collected before October 2024 and split evenly across the four districts for signature, citywide or special use projects.

Each district was allocated roughly $2 million.

The city has leveraged part, the city has leveraged bond dollars to secure over $5.5.4 million in outside grant funding.

Extensions have been requested on the first two grants, Lauder Trail Segment 1D, and Cooley's Landing.

We are also, we also will be requesting an extension for the Carter Park grant listed on the third line item as we anticipate that project being completed, late FY28 or FY29.

A few projects in each district have been delivered.

Restroom renovations and athletic field lighting upgrades at Bayview Park in District 1, Tennis Center's tennis center renovations at Holiday Park in District 2.

In District 3, golf course and athletic field lighting at Oswald Park, and community center renovations and new playground improvements at Riverside Park in District 4.

Credit goes to a wide team.

First and foremost, the residents for Stand Engage, the City Commission for their support and direction, the city manager for her leadership, ACM Ben Rogers, the Parks and Recreation Director Carl Williams, and Deputy Director Enrique Sanchez for their past hard work on the Parks Barn program.

Want to give a shout out to Mr.

Glenn Markles, procurement director for helping us push these projects forward.

And to our very own senior project manager, Mark Isaac.

I'm now going to turn it over to Colette Satchel, who's gonna uh let us uh take you a little bit in a dive with the project sequencing and what's ahead.

Good evening, everyone.

Um, we looked at many criteria in determining how the projects would be sequenced, and one of them is what we call construction readiness, which would be do we have permits?

Are the drawings completed?

Are drawings required?

We also look to see if all the projects are adequately funding.

Do we have to go out and seek funding elsewhere?

We look at grants that are available and those timelines.

So project some projects may be brought forward in order to meet these grant deadlines.

We also look at commission priorities, life cycle readiness, which is the life cycle of the equipment that is in place in these parks, as well as interaction with other improvements.

We do take an inventory of projects that are ongoing on the different site to make sure that we are not going to be impeded with by any of the other projects.

So we've categorized the projects based on anticipated construction start date.

And what you're seeing in the first slide is FY projects that started construction are scheduled to start in FY26.

Um, Sunrise Middle School phase one and two is well underway.

Phase one is well underway, and phase two is about to start in the next two to three weeks.

Uh Warfield Park is under construction.

We had some delays, but work has resumed, and we should pick up very quickly and get that one completed.

Happy to say that Holiday Park, we issued notice to proceed for the contractor last Monday, yesterday, and you should see the fence going up very soon.

Also in FY26, we have work ongoing at Bass Park, Mills Pond Park.

Um, we started work on Esther Davis Wright Park last week, and Harbordale Elementary and Harberdale Park are very soon behind.

Uh projects anticipated for FY27 include uh completing some of the work that we've started at Sunrise Middle School or Lifsheet Ocean Park, Cooley's Landing Marina, Holiday Park, what we're calling phase three, um, Ludina Park, Virginia SY Elementary School.

Also in FY27 would be Joseph C.

Carter Park, Mills Pond Park Phase 3, Garthway Blake Park, Sunset Park Phase 2, just to name a few.

Oswald Park is also scheduled to start.

Um, that one is actually out for base right now, and we should start construction in the late fall, early winter.

Um Cross State Park is on schedule to go ahead and get that one out for Bates in 2027.

Lauderdale Isle Park likewise.

We have some funding challenges there, but one of the one of the things that we've done through this process is trying to identify where we need funds and then work to see how we can secure those funds.

Um, Florence Hardy Park.

Of course, that one has a grant funding that we're waiting approval on.

Um, as soon as that one's approved, we plan to get construction underway.

Gorbett's Park is a favorite that we get a lot of input for.

We are working on that one to see how quickly we can get that one motivated just based on interest.

But notice that it's not totally funded until Tranch 3.

Uh we could look at Palm Air Village Park, phase two.

Um, there's some work that we'll start there.

Doteman Sini Park, So for FY28, also we have Sisterong Park, Fort Lauderdale Beach Park Phase 4.

That's the pickleball courts, which I know we've had some input on that one.

And our idea is we're gonna go ahead right now and finalize the designing and procurement of both phases three and four.

And then see how we can implement the initiation of that work as quickly as possible.

Rather than doing two phases, we're looking for options that would expedite the pickleball courts for which we've had some input on.

Riverland Park is another one that we get feedback on that's scheduled for FY28.

Chateau Park, Colli Hammock Park as well, are scheduled for FY28.

So I wanted to remind everyone that even though we say start of construction of FY28 or 29 that you're going to see coming, we are actively working on these projects, trying to see how we can engage the consultants.

We've widened our pool of consultants to make sure that we have enough consultants to engage in these projects.

And you know, we started the project initiation process by engaging new consultants.

So Floyd Hall Park, we uh on May 5th received additional funding.

Thank you very much to the commission for approving that.

We've started the design process, and that is ongoing with our consultants.

Um Strana Hunt Park is on board, Lewis Landing and Snarter Park is one that we also got funded for.

It's not funded totally right now, so we requested additional funding to make sure we had enough to take us through the design and permitting process.

Thanks again.

Um, George English Park phase two is scheduled for FY29, Beach Community Center, Palm Air Park, Cooley's Land and Marino, Lockerhead Park.

We recently got some feedback on that as well.

Um Middle River Terrace Park, Vista Park, Willenham Park, North Fork Riverfront Park, are all scheduled for FY 2029.

Of course, the work at the Riverfront Park is also going to pending a grant application match for design phase.

Lauderdale Manor's Park is scheduled for FY29.

And so also for FY29, we have uh Hector Park, Brian Penny Park, uh Smoker Park, Stranah Landing, uh Francis Ella Brue Place for to name a few.

And so we've presented this plan to the Parks and Rec Advisory Board, and we've received their input.

I think they're supportive of us trying to proceed in an organized way.

So our goal really is to look at how we can prioritize these projects and continuously re-evaluate them to see how we can prioritize and deliver as expeditiously as possible.

Um, we do plan to come back periodically to provide an update of our progress and and you know our challenges as well to see how we can continue to expedite this process.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Is that complete your presentation?

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

Quentin, do you have any additional comments you'd like to make?

No, sir.

We're available for any questions.

First of all, thank you for the good work you're doing, and we appreciate uh you have obviously your hands full and a full plate going on, so thank you both for uh your good work.

Anyone from the commission have any questions?

I do, Mayor.

Go ahead.

Actually, comments and questions.

So thank you very much.

Um, very encouraging to hear that little bit of news tonight.

I caught it about expediting the design and moving forward with phase three and four together in Holiday Park.

I really appreciate that because we have made promises to the community, and we have told folks that things would be in place this year.

Obviously, they're not.

So I'm really happy about that, and I encourage you to keep moving forward with that.

Find that space for the folks that are in that social center that needs to be demolished.

You know, we have a Y down the street.

I'm sure that we can find space and we can get moving on that because those people over in that area really are really excited about that happening.

Uh, I know they're really also looking forward to the groundbreaking of the playground next week, so thank you for that.

I really appreciate it.

Um, I did want to also mention to you two other things.

Um, I'm hoping that we'll be able to find some funds for the shortfall on Cooley's Landing.

Uh, that was a great pro a great project that we were not able to take advantage of some of the grant funding uh that we did receive for a variety of issues.

Um, but I really want to see us finish that entire project.

It's a beautiful marina in Sellboat Bend, and I think we really need to push and to see what we can do to come up with some sort of alternative funding sources, whatever it's going to take.

I just think that that's really important.

And then I also wanted to mention Warfield Park in the South Middle River.

Um that park is actually a year older than our city.

Uh so I think we need to do a little bit more.

Um, there is a dirt patch area there that I think we can get five more parking spaces out of.

Um I think we can perhaps also fence in that area as well.

Uh, because it's I think it's important to have that.

Maybe we can work with the school board because that is sort of part of the the joint use uh project that we also do.

Um, but I think that's really important.

And I think lastly, we have to add some more uh Florida native trees.

I think we have to beef up the landscaping there.

I know that the neighborhood, South Middle River Civic Association has written to us about that, uh, and I concur uh with all of their requests.

I don't think it's a big ask.

I know that I think I did just give some of my park impact fees to complete the work that we're doing there to the tune of about $200,000, I think that we use uh for my share of park impact fees for that.

Happy to do it.

Um please let's just continue to find funding sources so that we're able to just you know tie Warfield Park up.

Um I'd also like to see us pursue some more work with.

I know that I still have land acquisition funds.

Um I think just District 1 and District 2 have land acquisition funds remaining.

Um I really want to see us step up with that.

Um I believe that we can do more.

Um, you know, prices are a little depressed now.

Um I'd like to see us do more in the Middle River Terrace area and in the South Middle River area, those are the two neighborhoods I believe in my district that could use some more park space, uh just some more places where people can come and enjoy.

So if we can check out with colliers uh what that real estate portfolio looks like so that we can perhaps just find some opportunities, uh I would really appreciate that if we could do that uh for both the Middle River Terrace area and and the South Middle River area.

Uh and I think, Mayor, um those are those are my only concerns.

Um again, thank you for your work on this.

Uh it's much more encouraging.

We got up to such a slow start.

Uh, we really are making up for lost time.

Uh, and I'm hoping that we can just keep accelerating the pace uh and get this done for uh actually not just my district uh but for the entire city.

Thanks.

Okay, and we have several people signed up to speak, but is anyone else from the commission have any questions?

Yeah, thanks, Mayor.

Um, thank you both for your work and and continued efforts as much as possible.

Maybe this is city manager question.

When we look to project starting FY29 as much as possible, I'd really like to see if we can start moving those up a little bit earlier so that 29 is now starting in 28 as much as possible to really drive this because part of my concern is just our continued diminishing purchasing power with the limited bond dollars we have.

Thank you for that feedback, Vice Mayor.

We will certainly do so.

Thank you.

And do we actually have a plan or are we crafting a plan to make up for the obvious budget shortfalls that we will be experiencing as these move forward for the next couple of years?

You guys all working on something now to you know cobble together funding sources for that what's gonna be the inevitable shortfall.

So as we audit each project, we're looking at what the need is and reaching out to see where these funding can come from.

Cooley's landing, one of the ones you mentioned, we've actually devised a plan where we can go back to find in January and reapply for design funds and for additional construction funds in the following year to help us get this project done completely correctly the way it should be done.

Um, you know, so we're working with every single project to see if the project is waterfront, we can go back to find.

If it's uh something that we have a trail, we could go to recreational trail.

So we're really looking at different sources.

We're looking at impact fees.

The numbers that you saw on the impact fees go back to October of 2025.

So we're hoping that we've collected some more money and seeing how we can use those to help the projects.

Great.

No, thank you.

And for those that might you know okay great it's a little confusing when you say we're gonna find it, but I just want people to know a find is the Florida inland navigation.

So that we're gonna try to get money from Fine.

We're not finding money.

We're not finding money, but we're going to find we're going to the Florida inland navigation district thank you thank you great thank you um uh so uh so please be seated and we're gonna have a few people sign up to speak um Ed uh Catalano are you still here Ed there you are and followed by Olga Zamara and then um Ted and Sarah and then Barbara Stern.

If there's anyone else who wishes to speak on this item please sign up.

Good evening sir.

No you just turned it off go ahead my name is Edward Catalano I'm the former president of the South Meadow River Civic Association and I'm here to speak to you about Warfield Park.

I moved to Fort Lauderdale about 12 years ago and the one thing I noticed was there was a beautiful park two blocks from my house but I noticed as the time went on we had little or no access to the park since the park is part of the Northside school the school uses that property for most of the time what we would hope is that you're able to get some more access for our residents to be uh able to use that park this past weekend there was a big uh a uh I guess you would call call it a uh a a group of people where they had a bounce house they had all kinds of things in Warfield Park it was the greatest thing I've seen in my whole time here were two hundred people there in that park it was so overwhelming that it just opened my whole outlook of the park and we hope that you can give us a few more parking spots as well which we need as well as a use and access to the park that's what we're asking for.

Okay great thank you so much Olga Zamora yes good evening everybody uh thank you I'm here in my personal capacity thank you for this opportunity to speak I echo everything that Ed has said as a longtime resident of South Middle River specifically in the central city CRA area neighborhood I'm a fairly new resident and Commissioner Glassman you hit all the points thank you.

That's exactly what we wanted what I wanted as a new resident and as a longtime resident essentially we want to activate I would love to see the park activated with act with activities just like that activity that was not city sponsored this past weekend we would love to have neighbors from other neighborhoods throughout the city come to the park to activate it to bring vibrancy and life to it and then a note on the fencing because we are in the central city CRA area we want to also I would like to see beautification of the area as well as safety and that's why the fencing is important especially the type of fencing so that not only the children from Northfolk who Northside who use the park can be safe but also that the residents can feel safe ideally there would not be fencing but the reality is that we need to have that fencing so improved fencing would be great so thank you Commissioner Glassman for saying everything that you did because additional funding would be so necessary and that's my request thank you for your time thank you.

Ted and Sarah President of River Oak Civic Association.

Are you ready mayor ready the uh I would like to thank our uh city manager Raquel Williams first uh for driving this thing forward because it's been just going on for way too long I've heard excuses of COVID I've heard excuses of oh I wasn't your commissioner back then and uh which is just unacceptable but you know what I remember it not here but in that room across mayor when when you were giving your acceptance speech on your last election the theme I don't know if you remember but I do your theme of your speech was checking boxes getting stuff done you said there was too much adding to the list and not enough stuff getting done I understand that being a chef in the restaurants because that was the thing you have a prep list you circle what you're doing you scratch it off when it's done and uh and and this has just been lingering way too long the fact that uh we are getting the sunrise middle school god bless them their track and field long jump and uh things being resurfaced before any neighborhood parks are being done I've been promised that Gore Betts Park years ago would have been moved up to the top of the list I sent videos of kids playing in the dark this is on Southwest Ninth Avenue right in between Riverhoods and Croyson Park lots of new families coming in there I promise families that when this playground hey is going to be redone we're gonna have swings with buckets for your toddlers well now these toddlers are graduating Groyson Park elementary school from the sixth grade and they're the same kids and we still have the same swing set.

The fact too also I went to a lot of these public outreach which were listed on the city's sites of all these different parks which were great Gore bets I attended the Lockhart I contended the uh the ones in Riverland they were all listed but I wondered why that the Fort Lauderdale beach park which gets one point two million dollars there was no public outreach for that thing it was all total by Michael Gayhard and his EDSA Incorporated design where was the public outreach and design and input for that park when it does get money from this park bond 1.2 million all right thank you so much Barbara Stern good evening thank you mayor commission um I'm very happy to see that money has been found for Carter Park um Commissioner Pigley Pittman and maybe you could fill me in I have not been over there in about five months or so it's a community I think it's a community room is the ceiling still falling in and is there still standing water on the ground for that one room that well that that particular room is gonna be demolition with the new design so it has been addressed and as you said we have been able to identify the funding and thank you city manager and and all of those who have worked to identify those funds so we are moving in the direction to start.

Great so um it it's it's on site to be demolished it hasn't been demolished.

Not at this point no okay so it's very upsetting that that has remained standing I have been over there numerous times and I just want the city to understand in the times that I've seen it over a two year period and it had existed this way long before ceiling tiles falling down insulation falling from the ceiling standing water on the ground there's things that we could have done it's not in use because it's a health hazard so I'm happy to hear that it's finally moving forward it never should have taken this long to start doing something.

We've heard about a request to expedite the parks in district two and district four please city expedite this job in district three because they've been waiting way too long I'm glad you found the money this park needs attention now not in 2028 or however long down the road it is they need the attention now so I humbly request for those members of the community and that park is used by everybody if you've been down for Carter Park Jams if you've been there for meetings if you've seen football games there it's used by everybody and it is a shame that we allowed it to sit that way for so long that never would have existed if it were downtown or on the beach and uh with that thank you.

As a side note um commissioner uh classman I'm so sorry I missed your uh your debut performance for your stand-up comedy I I heard it was quite a trip and uh no hard feelings.

I just have a gift for you.

Okay, anyone else who wishes to speak on this item?

A special moment, thank you.

Okay, what is this?

Is it more than five dollars?

Just checking it out.

I know.

So the gift the gift laws in in Broward County, 50.

I'm not a lobbyist, so it should be fine.

But with all the discussion about apples to apples, it just seems fit.

Just check if it's ticking, please.

So City manager, can we just check if it's ticking?

We have business three, the sidewalk master plan.

We'll have to take that up at the end of the meeting.

And we're gonna defer the storm season preparedness.

Okay.

Thank you, Mayor.

All right, so we will uh suspend the continuation of the conference meeting and we will resume our evening meeting at 6 15.

This meeting is now concluded.