Okay, good evening everybody and welcome to the City Commission meeting this July 2nd, 2026.

This will be our last meeting before our summer break.

So we have a lot to talk about tonight, and uh a lot of good things are happening.

So we're very excited.

Uh I just want to remind everybody that uh tomorrow, the the excuse me, on Saturday, the city not tomorrow, on Saturday, the city will be celebrating the 4th of July, and it will take place on Fort Lauderdale Beach near uh Los Olas Boulevard.

We'll have uh fun and games for families and kids starting from 12 noon into the evening, and uh our concert would begin at 7:30, and uh fireworks will begin when it gets dark, probably like 8:30, quarter to nine.

We have fireworks and there you go, and uh for the first time in our history a drone show, um so we can uh save the ears on our animals and uh uh those who are sensitive to noise.

So uh, very excited about that, hoping uh everyone from the community can join us on Saturday again, beginning at 12 on the beach and going throughout the day into the evening.

So, having said that, um, for those of you who are here for the first time, thank you and welcome to our city commission meeting.

Uh, we begin our meetings with a pledge of allegiance.

So, tonight we get to ask Shauna Roberts and Zuri and Zoe Williams.

Where are you folks?

Where are you?

Where are they there already?

Uh okay.

May I ask you all to please rise.

Ready to go.

Don't forget to change the view.

Okay.

Okay.

Take your hand, your right hand, you put it on your heart, your right hand.

Yep, no, your right hand.

Yes, and that's it.

And you can begin.

And two of the stands, one day shut on the guy, and it is vote, and they have a Tess for all.

We are good to all of you.

Thank you so much for doing it.

And I hope you can join us on Saturday on the beach to see the fireworks and the drone show.

Alrighty.

Thank you so much.

I'll take a picture with mom.

Yeah.

Come on, turn around.

There you're looking at it.

There you go.

Okay.

One, two, three, looking here.

Perfect.

Modern family.

Just go right to that.

Oh, yeah.

Wait, come this way.

Okay.

Teach them young.

Okay.

So, um, tonight I would like you to uh all join me in a moment of silence, and in that moment, I'd like you to uh express your uh prayers and your thoughts on behalf of um uh those who have passed away.

We this past week an icon of the city of Fort Lauderdale, um uh Dottie Mancini passed away.

And uh uh very sad to see her go.

Yeah, she passed away.

Yeah.

Oh, I thought you knew.

Oh, yeah, okay.

Um, we found out uh this week uh that uh Chrissy Evert our Florida star, uh her cancer has returned.

So please share in our prayers and hoping that she enjoys a quick recovery from that.

Okay, thank you.

Excuse me.

Mayor, can I say something before?

Please, yeah.

Um, just to stay in a positive mode, this is just something I do.

Um, when we are giving good thoughts for individuals, I never say they are cancer came back, the cancer because we don't own that that invades our bodies.

So just uh a word from all of us when we're thinking positive about anyone going through something, don't claim that disease or situation for them.

It is just a situation.

Okay.

I'm sorry, I just want to.

It's okay.

I appreciate you.

I hope I never have to say it again.

Yes, exactly.

But it's it makes a difference.

Words matter, right?

Yeah, I agree.

So at this time I also want to announce some uh retirements of long-term employees.

First of all, we have uh uh Sareman.

Uh I know I'm gonna butcher your name.

Uh Sareman uh Semailis.

She's been a uh Serena has been a facilities worker uh in our parks and maintenance department and has been with us for 20 years.

So congratulations, thank you so much for your service.

And normally 20 years is our cutoff day when we when we uh take this moment to thank long-term workers, but we're gonna make a special exception tonight because we're also going to announce the retirement of uh George Huska, who's been in development services for uh a mere 19 years, but everybody knows George and everybody knows what an amazing angel he has been in our community.

So thank you, George.

And they'll be he'll be working with us until September, and there'll be retirement party uh for him in the next few days.

But I just want to uh uh express the city's thoughts and thanks on behalf of everybody in the community for his retirement.

So thank you so much, George.

So having said all that, uh Mr.

Clerk, please call the role.

Commissioner Herbst, Commissioner Glossman here, Commissioner Beasley Goodman, present, Vice Mayor Sorensen, Mayor Trentals.

Thank you.

So we have uh a couple of agenda of announcements.

There's gonna be one walk-on resolution regarding the city manager, and then there's an agenda item revision.

Uh CR1 corrections were made to pages 17, 18, and 21 of the CAM.

M8 corrections were made to the resource impact section shown on pages 910 of the CAM and M9 corrections were made to the resource impact section shown on page 22 of the CAM.

So would someone please move to approve the minutes of the previous meeting and the current agenda as amended?

So moved.

Second.

Moved and seconded.

Please call the roll.

Commissioner Beasley Pittman.

Yes.

Vice Mayor Sorensen?

Yes.

Commissioner Herbst?

Yes.

Commissioner Glossman?

Yes.

Mayor Trentals.

Yes, and the uh minutes and the agenda as amended are now approved.

We have two presentations tonight.

City of Fort Lauderdale recognizes individuals, organizations or events, and takes um takes this moment.

And tonight we have two presentations.

The first one uh regarding employer support of the Guard and Reserve to present the U.S.

Department of Defense's Seven Seals Award to the City of Fort Lauderdale, and the incoming chair and retired United States Army Sergeant Major Ken Judy, and accompanied by the ESGR volunteers, Rebecca and Peter Caspari.

Want to please join us?

There you are at the podium.

Good evening.

Push the button at the bottom of the speaker.

Great.

All right, uh Mayor, I'm gonna invite you down in just a couple seconds, but I did uh prepare uh some short remarks.

Um good evening, Mayor Tritalis, uh, commissioners, and uh city manager and distinguished guest.

My name is Kenneth Jude, and I have the privilege of serving as the incoming Florida Chair for the Employer's Port of the Guard and Reserve, also known as ESGR.

A Department of Defense program that promotes cooperation and understanding between civilian employers and members of the National Guard and Reserve.

As a retired United States Army Sergeant Major, I understand firsthand the importance of community support for those who serve in our National Guard and Reserve forces.

It's an honor to be here this evening to present the Seven Seals Award to the City of Fort Lauderdale.

The Seven SEALs Award is the broadest and most inclusive recognition presented by ESGR.

It recognizes organizations and community leaders who support significantly benefits members of the National Guard and Reserve, veterans, and military families.

The award symbolizes a commitment to those who serve and to the partnerships that help make military service possible.

Our National Guard and Reserve members occupy a unique role in our nation's defense.

They balance civilian careers, family responsibilities, and military service while standing ready to respond to national disasters, national emergencies, and overseas deployments.

Their ability to answer that call depends greatly on the support they receive from employers, community leaders, and local governments.

When a community demonstrates support for Guard Reserve Service members, it strengthens military readiness and reinforces the bond between those who serve and the communities they protect.

The city of Fort Lauderdale has demonstrated commitment through its support of service members, veterans, and military families.

This recognition reflects the city's understanding that supporting those who serve is not only an investment in individuals and families, but also in the strength, resilience, and security of our nation.

On behalf of the Department of Defense and ESGR, I want to thank the mayor, commissioners, city leadership, and employees for their continued support for our military community.

Your leadership helps ensure that members of our National Guard and Reserve can continue serving our nation while remaining connected to the communities they call home.

It is now my distinct honor to presence to present the Seven SEALs Award to the City of Fort Lauderdale.

Congratulations, and thank you for standing with those who serve our nation.

Mayor, if you can join me up here, I appreciate you.

And I'd like the members of the commission to come and join us.

Yes, I'm shot.

How are you doing?

I'm good.

I'm just going to read this real quick.

So the seven seals, for those of you who don't know what the seven seals are, these are these are the coat of arms, the seals of each branch of our armed forces.

And uh put this proudly in our office.

So thank you so much.

Okay, that was very nice.

Thank you so much.

And we appreciate the men and women of our armed services, and of course, the vice mayor is the reservist in the Navy.

So we thank you for your service.

Thank you for all the members.

Anyone else?

Anyone else who's uh a veteran here in our communities, please stand up so we can recognize you.

Anyone in the audience?

Please stand up.

Again, thank you for your service.

Uh now I'd like to invite the vice mayor to present a proclamation regarding uh July 2026 as Park and Recreation Month here in the City of Fort Lauderdale.

And if the uh Parks and Recreation Department Director Carl Williams and the department's management team, if they can please join him at the podium.

Thank you, Mayor.

And Parks and Rec Advisory Board, Chair Joy Oglesby.

You here?

Come on up.

She's not here.

Okay, okay.

Great.

Well, this is your excellent parks and Rec team.

So, in recognition of parks and Rec month, whereas parks and Recreation plays an essential role in enhancing the quality of life for residents and visitors and communities across the nation.

And whereas Parks and Rec promotes health and wellness for residents.

And to reflect this commitment, the city has earned national accreditation from the Commission for accreditation of park and recreational agencies.

And whereas the Parks and Recreation Department encourages time spent in nature through programs like the city's Circle of Life Experience at Snyder Park, which is great, offering monthly nature tours and children's activities, and Club 55 Plus, supporting 800 members with social and wellness opportunities.

Whereas Parks and Rec promotes active lifestyles through sports leagues, Fort Lateral Dive team at the Conic Aquatic Center, where a total of four world records were set over the last year.

And whereas Parks and Rec supports childhood development by serving more than 53,000 snacks, 61,000 meals through the summer program, enrolling 478 children that play after school program.

And whereas Parks and Rec are vital to the infrastructure of our community.

That they provide to over 960 acres of beach and parkland that protects natural resources, strengthens community connections, and creates lasting opportunities for residents.

Therefore, we as city commissioners of the City of Fort Lauderdale proclaim July 2026 as Parks and Recreation Month in the City of Fort Lauderdale, dated this day, the 2nd of July, signed by your mayor Dean J.

Trantellis.

Carl, turn it over to you.

All right, thank you, Vice Mayor.

Carl Williams, Parks and Recreation Director.

This is a truly special month for us and our field.

You know, Parks and Recreation provides so much joy to families and outings that we provide and experiences because that's what we provide our neighbors and our citizens.

So I do have a brief uh synopsis here, but before I actually start, I would like to recognize several of our outstanding leadership team here.

Uh and they are, and if you can't just kind of wave, uh Dr.

Nancy Gassman, uh Amy Jean Baptiste, Enrique Sanchez, Glenn Hadwin, Judy Erickson, Laura Boat, Leona Osamour, Susan Riestra, Mark Almy, and Kim Pearson.

So this acknowledgement reflects the work of an extraordinary team that serves our neighborhood every day.

Our parks, programs, and public spaces strengthen this city.

They support the health and wellness, create safe spaces for play, build community, and improve the quality of life for all those who call Fort Lauderdale home.

I want to express my sincere appreciation to our team, which is represented with some here today, uh seasonal employees that we also help provide the services that we do.

It's our commitment to keeping our parks welcoming, vibrant, and maintained.

Their work often happens behind the scenes, but its impact is felt throughout every neighborhood.

Thank you for this recognition and your continued support, and we look forward to celebrating Parks and Recreator Month.

Parks and Recreation Month all month this month.

Thank you.

Rob Dexter.

You want us to stand?

All right, stand up.

You can have to hold that a minute.

You're going to have to hold that phone up higher.

You gotta hold it up higher.

There you go.

Congratulations.

He's everywhere.

He's everywhere.

He's everywhere.

Okay, so uh thank you very much, and thank you, folks, all the great work you do throughout the year.

I think it's parks in wreck every day.

There's such uh so many great things happening in our city.

Um so we have a walk-on item which I'd like to uh bring up now, if I could.

Um this is a matter um last Sunday um I got a phone call from uh good friend of mine, Gene Pettis, he's an attorney here in town, and he called to say he needed to talk to me about something that's very important.

So I said, Well, what is it?

And he said, No, I have to meet you in person.

So on Tuesday morning, uh Gene and I met and we sat down and he started he said, Well, I just here to tell you that your city manager wants to conclude her work here in the city.

She um and uh and uh it came as a surprise to me that she wanted to to leave the city, and um so anyway, since then um we received a request by the city manager uh for the terms that she would like us to conclude her employment with, and um in the backup in the back up to the uh agenda item, you'll see a mutual separation and first amendment to the city manager's employment agreement, which constitutes um um the terms and conditions that she submitted to our city attorney who in turn put this together for us, and um, and we're here to discuss it and uh to determine if these terms are agree are agreeable to the commission in something we will now vote on.

Um mayor, I'm sorry if I can interrupt you.

Yeah, go ahead.

Um I'm accustomed to the walk-on thing at the end of the meeting, and um I would like to see it remain there.

That would give opportunity for our city manager to conduct business as we are um accustomed to and not throw off the rhythm for our meeting tonight.

Well, I don't think that we be uh direction we should go in.

Okay.

Well, uh it's up to the commission.

I just thought I'd bring it up because I know there are a number of people who are here regarding this, and I don't want them to have to wait till the very end of the meeting.

Um I thought it would be disrespectful to have them wait if if this meeting lasts, you know, very, very late.

I didn't want them to have to wait very, very late, but it's up to the commission what they would like me to do.

Uh Commission, do you want it brought up now?

Do you want it brought up later?

Uh anyone have an opinion one way or the other?

I'm fine with taking it now.

Okay.

Um Commissioner Glassman.

Well, I understand what Commissioner BZ Pittman is saying.

I'm I'm really fine either way.

Thank you.

Well, I need an I need an opinion.

Not an either way.

Okay, so so let's do it now.

Okay.

Uh Commissioner uh Vice Mayor.

Um I'm fine to wait till later.

All right, well, um the majority wanted to move forward with it now, so let's do that.

Um, so uh all of you have seen the terms and conditions uh that have been presented by the city manager.

Um, Raquel, is there anything you want to add to this or a comment on it to um explain anything that uh you feel might need uh further explanation with regard to the terms that are here?

It's a it's a seven-page document.

I think it might be best uh for the city attorney to outline any any terms, but I would like to start by saying thank you to Mayor Tantalis, Vice Mayor Sorensen, Commissioner Glassman, Commissioner Beasley Pittman, Commissioner Herbst, for the tremendous opportunity to serve the residents of the city of Fort Lauderdale.

It has been a true pleasure and privilege.

I also want to thank the dedicated members of city staff who have embraced my leadership approach in pushing for integrity and delivering excellence and raising the bar.

So I want to thank each and every one of them for their service during my tenure.

I have seen nothing but great people who are dedicated and hard working.

Also, want to thank the members of our community who have been very supportive over the past several months.

I truly appreciate the opportunity to engage with you.

Uh, all of the association meetings, all the city events, uh, every opportunity that I've had to engage has been very positive.

And I think that my time with the city of Fort Lauderdale has allowed uh the organization to advance even further and to build on its success.

And I am forever grateful.

Thank you.

All right, all right, thank you.

Okay, does anyone on the commission uh have any questions or comments with regard to the uh any of the terms of this agreement?

I know I don't know how much time you've had to look at it.

I'm sorry, not uh not a lot, but that's okay.

I'm sorry, go ahead.

Okay, um, so much of it reflects the terminology that was in her original employment agreement.

It's just uh it's now just been incorporated in a separation agreement.

And would you like me?

Pardon me, Mayor, would you like me to give an outline of the material terms?

Yeah, I was just gonna I was just gonna pass it off to you, yeah.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Commission.

Um, the material terms uh to this agreement are that uh this is a mutual separation, and the manager will have 60 days notice and be paid through the notice period.

She will immediately cease her manager duties and turn in city equipment.

She will be entitled to 20 weeks severance, which is the maximum amount uh allowed under Florida law.

She will then be on unpaid administrative leave from September through December and be available as needed to assist with the trend with the transition with the uh new or interim city manager at the end of the unpaid leave period, which is uh December 1st.

He will be paid her severance, all accrued vacation and sick time and sick leave and other any other benefits to which she is entitled, those are the material terms.

Okay, um Raquel, are there any uh any other modifications or additions that you feel you want to make to this?

No modifications to what is before you.

Okay.

So this contains all the terms and conditions that you requested.

I'm satisfied with the terms as proposed.

Okay.

Ma'am, if I could ask one just one question of the city attorney, uh and again, I apologize because I just read this very quickly.

So on number four, unpaid leave of absence, it says in the event the manager is engaged by city to perform work during the unpaid leave period, she will be compensated for such work time at the hourly rate equal to her then applicable aggregate-based salary on the effective date of this agreement.

So, who actually would make that decision?

Is that a commission decision to hire the city manager to engage her to perform and work?

Or is that the decision of the interim or subsequent city manager?

That is correct, Commissioner.

The contemplation is that the manager would be available to assist an interim city manager in the transition and in any other way uh he or she would need, and and that person would contact her exclusively.

Okay, so that would be the interim manager's decision.

That's correct.

Okay, thank you very much.

Any other questions or comments?

Yeah, Mayor.

Um is there gonna be public uh comment now or public participation?

Yeah, I have one person who signed up to speak, so I will allow that person to speak, but I want to first give the commission an opportunity to make any uh comments or questions with regard to this.

Sure.

So I don't know if everyone knew about this, so I think we we gotta give a chance for folks to um you know participate.

We are giving them more broadly participating.

Uh so one person to sign up to speak.

Um anyone else have any comments or questions from the commission?

Um comments now.

Yeah, okay.

I don't know if you want to wait until after.

Well, we can wait.

There's one person, Vanessa Apothecary.

Is it Vanessa still here?

Okay.

Mayor, it's my understanding that there's an overflow room that has been uh opened up.

So I'm not sure.

But only one person has signed up to speak.

I'm just mentioning that I don't know if that speaker is in that overflow room.

Well, she oh, she is in the overflow room.

So can someone can someone go to the overflow room and try to change I can't hear Beverly Chambers.

Beverly chambers.

I have one person who's signed up to speak.

I can't hear Vanessa Apothecker.

Okay, in the meantime, um, uh Commissioner Beasley Pittman.

If you want to uh say something now, yes, I do.

I um when I got notification that this would be the direction of our meeting tonight, I did prepare a statement that I wanted to share.

Um, first I want to say to you, city manager, thank you, for accepting uh uh um a position here at the city.

You were what we were looking for, someone who would come with integrity, be willing to give transparency and to give 100%.

I applaud you from even from your contract that you initially um put into place with the city.

You came with intentions for longevity.

Um, everything in your contract had opportunity for um a relationship that would have been long term.

Unfortunately, there's some things that transpired that changed that, but even through that from May, I believe it was when the conversation and in my opinion shift, you be you remained the person of integrity.

You continue to represent this city without any um remorse, without any um I would say any um back biting, you stood as a person who would represented the city with all of your heart.

You 100%, you know.

Um I watch you balance this position as a a wife as a mother with young ones, and you were there when sometime we were not there.

So I want to thank you for that.

But for my um documented statement that I have here.

I have it is my view that manager Williams elevated Fort Lauderdale at a higher level of business, the next level of business, more professional, more transparent, and with more respect.

I felt it in the room.

I saw it through our neighbors, and I saw it on many occasions.

From her elevation and her experience, I want to share some her, some of her highlights of what she did bring to our city.

In regards to labor and stability, public safety and um investment.

Um she led negotiations that has brought the Fort Lauderdale professional firefighters, IAFL, um local 765, into a contract that would be eradicated, something that we hadn't seen in the city for a period of time, and they're prepared to take that negotiation for their contract before their body.

Also, I saw her streamline public safety overtime.

That was by partnering with our Fort Lauderdale Police Department along with the Office of Management of Budget, cutting overtime at a percent of 20% or equaling 1.2 million dollars.

I'm proud to see the recruitment and the graduation of the largest fire rescue class since 1999, which included 35 firefighters, and that is an investment into our safety and the future of our safety.

In regards to neighborhood enhancement, I appreciate the implementation of enhancement for our preparation for hurricane season.

Before Ms.

Williams got here, I had a conversation and said it several times about being proactive preparing for our hurricane season.

And with that, she came in and put into place an opportunity for our neighbors to receive pre-filled sandbags before the storm.

Right now, in the middle of our hurricane season, once a month, you're able to go and get those free bags that are prepared for our neighbors.

Last year, there the city provided 4,400 pre-filled sandbags for our neighbors, eliminating the need for residents to fill them themselves and then stand in the line once a hurricane watch was declared.

Being physical responsible and innovative, I've watched her reduce the city personnel budget growth from 8.1 to 7.5.

Also, there was a decrease of 5.8 that's coming up in our physical year, that's projected for fiscal year 27.

Also, we are on track for revenue to be generated in the amount of 2.6 million dollars.

That's new revenue without raising property taxes.

In regards to professional culture, I want to thank you personally for your early mornings, your late nights, and those 10-day work weeks.

Thank you for ensuring agendas were posted online timely.

Thank you for creating and maintaining a professional atmosphere within the city of Fort Lauderdale.

City Manager for the last 15 months, you challenged complacency, and you delivered results.

I wish you well, God bless you, and I know there's much more for you and your career.

The next city that picks you up, bravo.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Thank you.

Vanessa followed by uh Beverly Chambers, followed by Barbie Pearson.

Hi, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners, Raquel, City Manager.

I have not anything prepared because this was very last minute, but um, and there's like 40 people in an overflow room right now, so that's why I wasn't able to get it.

Uh is the district for a rep for the council of Fort Lauderdale.

I've heard so many positive things about your leadership, and I'm here as the Tarbon River president and the D4 rep for the council just showing wanting to express to you all of the positive things I've heard about you and all of the support we've been so happy and appreciative of from you.

You're a role model to myself, my daughters, my I'm um just here to show our love for you and our support, and we will miss you so much.

And um, I think that's it.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Is Beverly Beverly Chambers here?

And Beverly, if you could press the bottom of the speaker, the bottom of the speaker.

Where it says, Yeah, there you go.

One, two, one, two, my kids.

You're good.

Two minutes.

Okay.

I thought it was three.

Two.

There you go.

Come on.

Miss Williams.

I love you.

You have excel way beyond most expectations.

I had a whole different thing that I wanted to say to you, but I'm gonna just come off the cuff.

Please do not believe that everybody, as you know, does not feel the same way as the people that put you in this position today.

Because I believe you had to make a very intelligent decision as to whether you were going to do your job, and you were doing it and doing it well, or sacrifice your family.

Your family comes first, so I understand your decision.

I understand you got pushed against the wall and you didn't even fight because you had that spirit of humility.

You are an anointed woman, you are a woman of God, don't let the evil fool you and make you believe that this position that you're leaving today because of this is the decisions to um keep your family healthy, will stop you.

You have so many people that will encourage you, you need to be encouraged, keep up the good work.

I love you, and please, by all means, please remember you have an anointing.

Don't ever let nobody try to take that away from you.

They can slow you down, but they cannot stop you.

All they can do is slow you down.

To God be the glory and the best wishes and praise for you and your family.

You are awesome.

Is Barbie here?

Oh, Barbie.

Hey, and followed by Tina DeMarco.

Is anyone else wish to speak?

Okay, Tina would be the last person.

Did you sign up?

Yeah, you need to sign up.

Go.

You have to go right at the front desk.

At the front desk.

Hi, Rick.

Um, everybody on the diesh and everything, and Raquel.

I want to thank you for being here in Fort Lauderdale and helping guide us through.

You were really special.

I I don't know what to say.

I just we're gonna miss you.

You work so hard to get us all on track, and you work with everybody, and you're a special lady, and we I wish you the best.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Uh Tina, Tina DeMarco.

Good evening.

Good evening.

I just found out about this two hours ago.

I want to read something to Raquel from the residents.

I know we don't get a vote on this, but as one resident in the city, one of the thousands you've served.

I'm saying it anyway.

I do not accept your resignation.

Not because you owe us more, you've given plenty.

I'm saying it because the city is losing exactly the kind of public servant it claims it wants.

Steady professionalism, focused on work instead of the noise.

Earlier this year, when it mattered, the civic associations of this city stood up for you.

Not out of politics, but out of respect for how you do the job.

That respect hasn't gone anywhere.

If anything, it's grown.

I won't pretend the last few months have not been ugly, they have.

But it's always the darkest before the dawn, and the dawn doesn't come for the people who walk away in the dark, it comes for the ones who hold on a little longer.

That seems reasonable.

True leaders aren't made in the easy stretches.

They're foraging exactly the kind of storm you've been standing in.

We fall, we get up.

The whole story of anyone worth remembering.

So it is my ask and some other residents.

And I know it's a big one to reconsider.

Not for the commission, not for the city hall, but for the neighborhoods.

For the people that don't have a seat on the Dallas.

And every decision that's made.

You've done more support out there than the loudest voices would have you believe.

Just one second.

And if your decision is final, if it really is goodbye, then no, you leave with the gratitude of residents who saw what you carried and how you carried it.

But I hope this isn't the end.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Amanda.

Amanda Wilson.

Thank you very much.

I wasn't prepared to speak this evening.

I wasn't sure this was even happening, but I know from my own personal experience how much that you've even helped the Affordable Housing City of Fort Lauderdale.

And I've heard so many wonderful things about you from HOAs and other people.

And now I'm a little confused because you come with such a great reputation.

And how and how many city managers have we had in the last seven years?

I mean, it's been an open-door policy.

And now I'm starting to think, geez, is there a problem with the commissioners and the mayor?

You know, I mean, I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens, but I think this is a really sad day, and all I can do is wish you the best.

And I think all the voters out there, you have to think of who you're putting on the commission, who you're making mayor, and maybe it's time for a change.

Okay, anyone else wish to speak on this item?

Uh, there appears to be nobody else, so someone like to um so the the uh the request here as I read this is the city manager would like this to be effective tomorrow.

Uh and uh so whoever makes the motion, I just want everyone everyone to understand that that's the requirement, and and we also have to determine who the uh the interim or acting city manager is going to be, and um we'll do that in a separate item.

Um so do I hear Mayor I've comments, yeah.

Thank you.

Um City Manager, this is a sad day.

Uh it's a sad day for the city of Fort Lauderdale.

You have acted with intention.

You've acted with excellence, you've driven an effective budgetary process, you have done an incredible job of navigating through complex union negotiations.

You have done a fantastic job uh realigning the city organization, departments, staffing.

Uh you've done that all with grit and dedication.

Um we as a city commission have not supported you as we have should.

And really sad, um, not only have you led with excellence, but your family served right alongside you.

I know your husband Fionn is here.

Thank you for your commitment to this, and your children's uh having to support a mom who works long hours in dedication to the city of Fort Lauderdale.

Every day, and I've seen it, you get up, and you work to fight for the residents of Fort Lauderdale.

And you drive a tough bargain, and you seek the best for our city.

And I am so grateful for that.

Um I'm grateful for all you've done for so many neighborhood leaders across the city, across all the districts regularly.

Come up to me and say, Hey, city manager is doing a fantastic job.

She's coming out, she's supporting us, she's hearing us.

So you don't just talk it, you walk it.

Uh this is going to be a loss for the city.

It's gonna be a loss for us on the commission, and uh a loss most importantly for all the people in the city of Fort Lauderdale.

So I thank you for all you've done, and um I wish you all the best, and I am so thankful, especially to all those who have supported you and um seen the vision and the ability that you have, and I'm I'm appreciative of that.

Thank you.

Okay.

Uh anyway.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um would someone like to uh introduce the resolution?

Mayor I would, but I I'd like to just say a few words also thank you, I appreciate it.

Um I I want to echo that thank you.

You know, Raquel, and I want to make sure that folks understand that are watching this meeting because I was getting a lot of text messages this afternoon uh from people that were telling me that we were terminating the city manager.

Uh and that's just not what is happening right now.

Um when the city manager did call me Tuesday evening, I I expressed to her um that I was surprised that she was giving me this information, that she was telling me what her plans were going to be.

And as I said to her that evening, uh I was surprised because I really did think that we were turning the corner.

Uh we had some issues, uh, but we were turning.

So that did surprise me when she called and I'm assuming that she spoke to everyone that evening or or that day.

So I I just want to also wish you the very best.

Um I will always remember our conversations.

I will always remember the fact that we had pretty much open door policy.

Uh we've been very honest with each other, uh, and I just want to wish you uh and your family uh all the very best and thank you.

This is not an easy job, uh, but I do want to thank you for your service.

Uh it's meant a lot.

And for those folks that didn't have a chance, I just basically read this myself very quickly because we just we just really received this before the meeting today.

Um, this is I think uh in terms of looking at a separation agreement because you did have a contract uh a little over a year ago where everything was spelled out in terms of what would happen uh if you were terminated, what would happen if you resign.

And I'm very happy to say that when I look at this separation agreement, um I think this is as good as possible because it really in terms of your contract, looks at it almost as if you did not voluntarily resign because the terms are much better for you, and I'm happy that we're able to be that generous.

You know, this is a this is a time when we are looking to almost try and save the taxpayer nickels and dimes everywhere, even this afternoon.

Uh Commissioner Herbst talked about being frugal by nature uh and making sure that we're prudent, financially prudent uh when we consider the choices for our residents and our taxpayers.

Um that aside, I think that we I think that we treated you uh with this separation agreement uh I I think really well for you.

Uh and I'm happy to see that because I think it shows that appreciation for the work that was done.

I think it also shows the respect for you because these these are these are good terms.

I think these are generous terms uh that enable you to continue with the city in the capacity as stated in the agreement.

Uh so I just want to say thank you, uh, and I'm glad that we could be uh as as giving as this separation agreement calls for.

So thank you.

Okay, anyone else wish to speak?

Commissioner Glassman.

Anyone else wish to speak on this from the commission?

Okay, I I need uh two things.

I need someone to introduce a resolution, and I need to ask in that resolution uh what would be the the day that this um this takes effect isn't that an articulated mayor in this agreement?

The date this takes effect.

I say it again.

Isn't this isn't that included?

City attorney isn't it is not included in the it's a suggested date.

It is but you're you're free to and the suggested date city attorney, July the third tomorrow.

Is tomorrow okay?

I'm happy to introduce the motion with the uh with the uh suggested date.

Okay, so the resolution has been introduced.

Uh please call the roll.

A resolution, city commission of the city of Fort Lauderdale, Florida approving a mutual separation agreement and first amendment to the employment agreement between the city of Fort Lauderdale and the city manager Raquel Williams authorizing the mayor to execute the separation agreement on behalf of the city, providing for an effective date and providing for related matters.

Commissioner Beasley Pittman?

Yes, standing on agreement with what the city manager has requested.

Yes.

Vice Mayor Sorensen?

No.

Commissioner Herbst.

Yes.

Commissioner Glossman?

Yes.

Mayor Trentals.

Yes, and that resolution is now approved.

So we'll continue until until midnight.

I'll try to make the meeting go before.

And before midnight.

We appreciate all the work that you did on behalf of the city.

Um you set an example for a lot of people in the city, and we uh and we thank you for that.

Um I know it was your decision to move on, and uh, but I know there are a lot of reasons for it, and we don't really need to go into all those.

I know many of them were personal, and um, and I do think that uh uh you brought a lot of good people with you and uh and um you know you've helped move the city forward.

Um so that resolution is now a couple of mayor.

If I could I would just like to say thank you as well, Raquel.

You and I have uh had a lot of opportunities to chat about this, and uh and I know that this is the right move for you and your family.

This has been a tough uh couple of months, and I don't envy you.

I've always said city manager is the worst job in the world.

That's why I keep turning it down, and uh I I don't recommend anybody ever apply for it.

So thank you.

I do appreciate everything you've done and the partnership and collaboration that uh that you've shown to make.

So thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Herbs, and thank you, Mayor Transalis.

You're welcome.

Um, so uh upon the uh the effect, uh we need to have a city uh and it would be an interim city manager or an acting city manager.

Yeah, I'm not I don't know what the the charter change has not passed yet, so I it's currently uh interim.

Interim.

Okay, it's currently it's currently acting.

Okay, so we need to appoint an acting city manager.

I recommend our deputy city manager, Chris um uh uh be uh um Chris, you're standing there in the back.

Chris, is this something that you'd be uh willing to take on?

Good evening, mayor commissioners.

Uh before I answer, I'd just like to also acknowledge Manager Williams uh personally.

Uh she has afforded me great opportunities here with the city.

I've been here for a while, and to be in the position I am today is largely due to her support.

So I'd like to just thank her, you know, in this moment.

Um and to answer your question, yes.

Okay, all right.

So um do I hear a motion to approve uh Chris as our uh acting city manager?

So move second.

Move the second, okay.

Uh please call the question.

Just the a resolution.

However, it does say effective July 2nd on it.

So it's July 3rd.

Yeah, and I'm sorry, it was a so it's a resolution.

It's a resolution.

Okay, so who who is the person who first moved?

I believe I I heard three people.

I'll I'll move the resolution.

Okay, introduce the resolution.

Introduce the resolution as amended for July 3rd.

As amended for July 3rd.

Thank you.

A resolution of the city commission of the city of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, appointing Christopher Cooper as acting city manager of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and providing for an effective date.

Um Commissioner Beasley Pittman?

Yes.

Vice Mayor Swanson?

Yes.

Commissioner Herbst?

Yes.

Commissioner Glossman?

Yes.

Mayor Trentals.

Yes.

Unanimous.

Okay.

Thank you so much, Chris, for doing this, and we appreciate it.

And let us continue with the meeting.

Thank you.

Um and Commissioner Beasley Pittman, I I appreciate your letting and put that behind us and we can get on with the meeting.

Um now comes the consent agenda.

Um, the consent agenda in our meeting where uh where the each member of the commission is uh asked if they would like to pull an item and vote on it and discuss it separately.

Otherwise, we vote on on these items all at once and and uh with a single vote.

So and if there's anyone who wishes to speak on any of these items, um they can do so now.

No one has signed up to speak on any consent agenda item.

So let me begin with uh Commissioner Herbst.

Do you have any consent agenda items that you wish to pull?

Uh Commissioner Beasley Pittman?

None.

I have none.

Commissioner Glassman?

None Vice Mayor?

None.

None with regard to all the consent agenda items.

Do I hear a motion to approve?

Moved, second.

They move and seconded, please call the role.

Commissioner Beasley Pittman.

Yes.

Vice Mayor Sorensen?

Yes.

Commissioner Herbst?

Yes.

Commissioner Glossman?

Yes.

Mayor Trentals.

Yes, and all the consent agenda items are now approved.

So if you hear on any of those items, your item has now been approved, and you're certainly welcome to stay for the rest of the meeting.

Um moving on to M1, motion approving a change order number three to task order number twelve, Joseph C.

Carter Park Improvement Project.

Uh AECOM Technical Services.

Um would someone like to move the item?

I'll move.

Please call the roll.

Commissioner Beasley Pittman?

Yes.

Vice Mayor Swanson?

Yes.

Commissioner Herbst?

Yes.

Commissioner Glossman?

Yes.

Mayor Trentals.

Yes.

Is that Commissioner Beamfer?

I didn't see you back there.

Are you leaving already?

Oh, okay.

Yeah.

And that's been approved.

Okay.

Moving on to M2.

Um motion approving the final ranking of firms, negotiated fee schedules and agreements for requests for qualifications, transportation and public spaces, planning and engineering continuing services.

This is a three-year estimated aggregate amount.

But this is this is just a contract for the first year, correct?

Correct?

Correct.

There are renewals contemplated in this item.

Right.

Okay.

So do I hear a motion to approve M2?

Moved?

Second.

It moved and seconded.

Please call the roll.

Commissioner Beasley Pittman.

Yes.

Vice Mayor Sorensen.

Yes.

Commissioner Herp?

Yes.

Commissioner Glossman?

Yes.

Mayor Trentals.

Yes.

And M2 is now approved.

M3, motion approving a change order number 35 for construction management at risk, at risk services phase two for the new police headquarters, Moss and Associates.

So City Manager, this is for things that we have come up with that we want changes to the property.

Is that basically what M3 is about?

There are some city-directed changes that are a part of this change order.

There are also some changes that we feel uh should have been captured in the design of the project, and we're working through that with our vendors.

And uh some of the items here also are under warranty, so uh there's a multiplicity of change order items in here, they don't all have the same origin.

So it but is the 1.19 million 1.191 million, um covering those other items as well.

So there are several items in this change order, and the totality is valued at that 1.19 million.

I'm gonna ask Anthony Fajardo to come up and share any additional details.

Yeah, because we're not paying for those.

We're not paying for warranty items or things that we thought should have been in the original design.

Mayor, no.

Anthony Fajardo, Director of development Services.

So the items that are in here, the some of the bigger items that are uh relate to the dumpster enclosure that we had to revise to some fencing for the Sally port, those types of things.

Anything that falls under an errors in emissions, we're putting in that bucket.

Anything falls under warranty, we're dealing with that way.

So that's not really that's not part of this.

Okay.

So that's not really part of this.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

I just wanted to make sure.

Um Barbara's turning you ask to speak on this.

Uh thank you, Mayor, Commissioners, uh, Ben.

I here again, I'm I'm glad that there was clarification to make sure where we are.

Because I don't think we've seen an update on where we are on errors and omissions and with these change orders.

It's a little bit concerning that we keep coming back.

Um, and I know there's gonna be more because we've now heard about additional problems at police headquarters.

There's a design issue from what I understand with the AC.

So when when the IAC dies, it shuts down throughout the system.

I've understanding that there are issues with the exhaust and the shooting range.

If these are all design flaws and we're getting change orders again and again, how is this being addressed?

And have we learned from our mistakes?

But we're gonna be dealing with city hall and the parking garage in holiday park soon.

We need a peer review study to make sure that the plans are done properly the first time, but it is concerning to keep hearing about change orders that come back due to design flaws.

So I'm um just hoping that we get that squared away and that we get our money that we're supposed to be getting back as we're approving these change orders, and this is nothing against Moss, they do a great job.

I know that these design um problems come from a different entity.

Um, mayor, I just also want to take a point of uh privilege earlier tonight.

We had a moment of silence.

Um I just want to mention as well the lives that were lost and the destruction in Venezuela and um for the community who's gathering support and materials.

One of our very own partners at FXE W Aviation, they've been collecting supplies.

I know they've sent information, so they've got their planes, they're bringing down supplies down there, they're doing everything, and they're such a great partner for the city that if you have point uh some point this evening, it'd be nice if we give some recognition or put out that information that was emailed around the city.

Uh Commissioner Herbs, I know that's in your district, but it's great.

They have the plane.

We should be taking advantage of those resources.

W Aviation and Commissioner Herbs, I don't know if you want to fill in with more information.

Sure.

No, thank thank you, Barbara.

So yeah, so W Aviation and Ignacio, the CEO has undertaken this effort to uh to assist in disaster relief.

So again, anything we can do to gather more supplies and and assist them in this effort, I think would be just uh greatly appreciated by everybody.

Thank you.

Thank you for bringing it up, Barbara.

I had read that they were having issues getting the supplies into Venezuela.

Has that been taken care of now?

I noticed that they I had read that there was a real big backup and because they just did not have the ability to get everything to the country.

Has that changed at all?

From my understanding, W Aviation is not having any issues.

Um they have a lot of boots on the ground.

I know we've got a lot of our firefighters around there too during rescue efforts.

Um the stories that you're hearing not even remotely close to how devastating it truly is.

Um, so any kind of aid and support, even if there's a delay an extra day, something, everything helps.

Um, and I know they should they shared information with the city.

I know the city we just put out a blast about resources and what we're doing, and I just think it would be great to utilize one of our own resources here.

They've got the planes, they're taking supplies down, and I I think we as a city need to step up and take advantage of that if we can.

Great, thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, uh M3 is has been moved and seconded, so it has not been moved and seconded.

Would someone like to move M3?

Moved, second, okay.

M3 has now been moved and seconded.

Please call the role.

Commissioner Beasley Pittman.

Yes.

Vice Mayor Sornson?

Yes.

Commissioner Herbst.

Commissioner Glossman, yes.

Mayor Trentals.

Yes, and M3 is now approved.

M4, motion approving the final ranking of firms, negotiated fee schedules, and agreements for requests for qualifications, structural engineering, continuing services with BCC Engineering.

Um, would someone like to move the item?

Moved, second.

To move and seconded.

Anyone have any questions?

No one to sign up to speak?

Please call the role.

Commissioner Beasley Pittman?

Yes.

Vice Mayor Swanson?

Yes.

Commissioner Herbst.

Yes.

Commissioner Glassman.

Yes.

Mayor Trentals.

Yes.

And M4 is now approved.

Moving moving on to M5, motion approving the final ranking of firms, negotiated fee schedule and agreement for requests for qualifications, construction engineering inspection services for fire station number 13 and emergency medical station number 88.

Someone please move the item.

So move.

Second.

Be moved and seconded.

Please call the roll.

Commissioner Beasley Pittman.

Yes.

Vice Mayor Swanson?

Yes.

Commissioner Herbst.

Commissioner Glossman.

Yes.

Mayor Trentals.

Yes, and M5 is now approved.

M6 motion for the city commission to accept grant funds from the Federal Aviation Administration for construction of the runway 27 bypass taxiways project at the Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport.

No one is signed up to speak.

Move.

Second.

Move and seconded.

Any questions?

Please call the roll.

Commissioner Beasley Pittman.

Yes.

Vice Mayor Sorensen.

Yes.

Commissioner Herbst.

Commissioner Glossman.

Yes.

Mayor Trentals.

Yes, an M6 is now approved.

M7, motion approving the final ranking of firms, negotiated fee schedules, and agreements for requests for qualifications, design of sidewalk improvements citywide.

No one has signed up to speak.

Someone like to move the item.

Moved.

Second.

But moved and seconded.

Please call the roll.

Commissioner Beasley Pittman.

Yes.

Vice Mayor Sorensen.

Yes.

Commissioner Herbst.

Yes.

Commissioner Glassman?

Yes.

Mayor Trentals.

Yes.

M7 is now approved.

M8.

This is a motion approving an interim agreement with Holiday Park Parking Partners, LLC, for the holiday park parking project.

Has everyone had a chance to review it?

We have a few people who sign up to speak.

Okay, so representing the River Oaks Republic.

We have Seth and Sarah followed by uh Cody Kice.

Wait, she has you down here.

Okay.

Good evening, everybody.

My name is Ted and Sarah President of the United States.

What is STP?

Is that the I'm going to explain?

S oil stands stands for Same Ten People, which was actually brought up years ago with our former city manager Greg Chevraria, who called myself and Vanessa Apothecker nothing but STPs, the same 10 people that show up and speak up at meetings that we really don't care about, which was kind of a degrading uh statement.

And then the STP statement was brought up again last week.

So the more things change, I guess the more things stay the same.

But uh the same ten people are speaking up, and uh and the officials just do not pay much attention as like it's happening right now, but uh I'm sorry, I thought SCP was a sexually transmitted disease.

I'm sorry.

Well, David, what does he want?

David Solomon thought it was Stone Couple Pilots, so it has I'm not calling it as many connections.

I don't know what I'm recalling.

But what I'm here to speak about on the garage, is I know holiday park needs a garage.

There's no doubt about it.

What I don't understand is why do we need a garage and a surface lot?

To me, that says it's bad planning on the garage, just to make it taller or make it be able to park on the roof where you in some time in the way future.

You have the verte port where uh flying taxis are supposed to land on it.

But right now, I mean you have an opportunity.

Right now, the urban forestry, we're supposed to have a 33% uh by 2040 is what our goal is, and right now you keep making decisions that are sending us backwards from that from that goal.

Right now we have a 25.3 percent urban canopy, which I think is higher than it should be, and we have a perfect uh perfect time to take back a little bit of holiday park.

It's now turning into the holiday complex because it's nothing but buildings now that are being uh constructed on it.

Take the same area.

You don't need a parking garage and an enormous flat surface area.

Either put another uh uh floor on the parking lot, let people park on the garage, let some of our great parks and recreation people that were here earlier have do their thing over there, and uh make a nice park, plant trees, have it up with some streets or some uh benches.

I just don't okay, your time is up.

Thank you, thank you.

Mayor, could I ask Quentin to come up?

That's okay.

Thanks, Clinton's coming up.

Uh, because I like to counter misinformation, it's important to make sure people have facts all the time, not just you know, words.

Um, so uh help me understand.

By the way, uh as the District 2 commissioner who represents Holiday Park, I want you to know that the neighborhoods that I go to for meetings constantly in and around that park, are thrilled with what's happening in Holiday Park, thrilled.

Um, and they don't look at it as as it was just described at all.

In fact, it's a it's a beautiful place for our city to have to recreate and to enjoy so many amenities.

But we just heard that the surface parking lot is going to destroy uh the greenery uh of the park and just add to you know something that some people think is not a good thing.

I want you to tell us so the public understands the landscaping that is going in and around where that surface lot is going to go.

I know there's a list, I'd like to hear that list.

I know the list because I've been working on this project for a while, but if you could let the public know, again, just to counter the misinformation that all we're doing is putting in an asphalt parking lot.

Do you have that list that you can tell me about in terms of all of the different types of trees and hedges and bushes and everything else around that 300 space surface parking lot?

I can.

I gotta go back to my notebook, but um good evening, Quinton Pew, assistant city manager.

Uh roughly we're bringing in about 60 uh canopy shade tree uh trees at this particular location.

We also have about 46 understory um and flowering trees that are coming in.

Thank you, even how many are there now?

None.

There's some on the outskirts, but there's not a lot.

But um this project is bringing in um a very healthy uh landscaping um approach to this project again.

About 60 canopy trees, uh roughly about 46 understory or flowering trees.

Um some of those species for the canopy trees include uh live olive, cold levels, ball cypress, mahoganies, red maple, and again that total is roughly 60.

Uh the flowering trees consist of the uh cabbage palms, satin leaf.

Um there's a pink, there's a few pink trumpet trees um as far as those palms.

So um, you know, there's other shrubs and ground covers and things like that associated with this project, but um, so at least a hundred, at least a hundred trees, hundred plus, almost half flowering trees.

Correct.

And then in addition to the shrubs and the hedges and the greenery around the surface lot.

That is correct.

And right now that surface lot is gravel and what else?

Can you describe it for the public?

Right now it's gravel in just general ground cover.

I mean, it's there's nothing there.

Nothing there.

And it's really kind of hazardous actually when people do park there.

Um, and I will tell you that I believe that we need every one of those 300 spots in addition to the one hundred to the 1,000 spots in the garage, because there are so many events happening now in Holiday Park.

Uh wonderful events happening.

Uh right now we have every Friday night the Starlight Musicals.

The Panthers have done an amazing job uh with the ice rinks.

One open for the public, one for the team.

Uh the odd is again doing events there.

Uh these this 1,300 spots needed.

Um PACA, the Broward Center for the Performing Arts Group, needs it for the Parker Playhouse that's doing a wonderful job there in terms of arts and culture.

Uh so I'm all in favor of the 300 spots, but I wanted to make sure that the public understood that we are not taking up green space.

We're taking up gravel space, uh, a muddy gravel space, and we're turning it into, yes, a surface parking lot, but one that is going to be uh basically uh surrounded by a lot of lush landscaping that is not currently there, correct?

You are correct, Commissioner.

Thank you.

And if I'm not mistaken, didn't we um wasn't this a compromise because we were looking to build a structure there as well, and we decided not to build a structure there because we were trying to take away structures from from the holiday park, and we that's why we made the other parking garage taller so that we could have a surface parking lot with with uh landscaping which would uh which was a less imposing um opportunity for for parking without having to have two big structures there for parking.

So, so this actually would I recall is that was the compromise approach and also it provides parking more immediately than the parking garage was going to take a couple years and and families who go to the Iceplex and go to holiday park and go to the parker um currently suffer and you know their cars are my car I mean how many times I've you know thrown the alignment out just trying to park in that in that so called service uh parking space so um when do we expect this to be uh completed do you know off the top of your head yeah so we anticipate this project being completed uh fall 2027 um you know should you approve the interim agreement this evening uh we plan on completing the plans and um obtaining those permits and turning over those plans to the proposed developer um by the end of this calendar year and um immediately from there you know start that construction sometime in january and complete it by fall 2027 okay thank you right thank you for clearing up the misinformation cody uh cody kys you just for um for questions okay and marriage i'm gonna jump in quinton sequentially what i think we're planning is doing the surface lot first and then the parking garage right and so that while the surface lot is being built the parking deck area will be available for parking is that still what we're planning yeah that's accurate commissioner yeah phase one uh we're not trying to do both of these projects phase one and phase two at the same time but yes phase one will be done first um once that's completed then um if everything lines up correctly we plan on starting phase two great and why that matters too mayor is because even with athletic events on the holiday park field we're out of parking near the athletic uh fields and so we need added parking and that's what this will also help with and it's at a a uh premium in holiday park one of other components we've talked about Quinn and I know there are maintenance and cost implications but we've explored some degree of semi-permeable permeable material for that surface parking lot are we still heading in that direction?

Yeah those those plans are still being refined we've had those discussions uh we're floating in between that 60 to 90 percent uh completion with the plans but um they're still under um you know further discussion it does affect the pricing we're trying to keep this at uh you know particular figure um but yes we we have had those discussions internally okay great thank you okay thank you quenton thank you uh garry olson Gary here followed by um I guess that's it just Gary good evening is it on yes okay Gary Olson big fan of green space and holiday park if you vote vote to approve the proposed interim agreement tonight the paved surface parking lot phase one is a done deal holiday park will lose almost five acres 4.82 acres of green space the equivalent of over three and a half football fields including end zones you will be paving nearly five acres of paradise putting up a massive paved parking lot shout out to Joni Mitchell uh to add insult to injury Fort Lauderdale taxpayers will lose almost five million dollars to fund this boondoggle.

All of the FTL War Memorial businesses are told to quote, please use the field across from the FTL War Memorial for parking.

The FTL war memorial businesses have basically converted the five-acre parcel into their own private parking lot.

There is no rationale for Fort Lauderdale taxpayers to pay five million dollars for FTL War Memorials paved business parking lot.

Commissioner Herbst, Holiday Park desperately needs your help.

At the City Commission conference meeting on December 16th, 2025, you addressed and debunked the arguments for a surface parking lot.

Starting at the 5750 mark, you addressed why you never understood the point of the surface parking lot, stating that you were a big fan of green space instead.

Commissioner Herbst, the public overwhelmingly agrees with you.

In July 2025, Change.org had if I could go just local.

Just finish your finish your thought, please.

In July 2025, Change.org had a petition entitled Help Protect the Grassy Green Space at Holiday Park.

The petition got over 500 signatures, including mine.

In September 2025, the petitioner was convinced by a city commissioner or commissioners that the surface parking lot plans were moving forward, and the surface parking lot was a done deal.

There was nothing further the petitioner could do, so she dropped the petition.

City commissioners represent the public interest and reject the proposed interim agreement.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Well, I want to thank you for bringing history back around.

And I'm happy to say I still think it's a very bad idea.

And the reason for that was when we committed to build a multi-level garage over there.

The purpose of that was to was to eliminate the parking on the grass.

The whole idea was to create more open space for the park users.

It wasn't to have two, it wasn't to have a surface lot and a multi-story garage.

I agree with comments that have been made that if we need more parking, we should have gone up another floor on the on the garage.

It's it's asinine to me that we are going to take away green space, put up a multi multi-level garage, and then turn around and pave over green space.

It never made sense to me.

It was not the original intent when we did the park spond.

The intent was always to free up green space that was being utilized for parking for events over a parker playhouse and so forth.

So I don't understand why we're doing this, and I certainly don't support it.

Commissioner Hurst, if I could am I still louder, can I respond?

I really think your comments have concluded.

And we appreciate what you had to say, so thank you so much.

Thank you, Commissioner Hurts.

Anyone else wish to speak on this item?

There being none.

Uh anyone have any other comments or questions with regard to this item.

I like to uh what does your neighborhood say about this?

I've heard actually I've been meeting regularly, obviously, with the Victoria Park, which is right there at Holiday Park and Flagla Village, right across the street from uh Federal Highway from it.

Uh, and I've heard absolutely nothing but positive comments uh looking forward to it.

Uh they're looking forward to the concept of a verte port on the roof of the building, and they agree that uh they need the extra parking.

They also agree that this parking garage is not taking up the space that the surface parking lot is.

The surface parking lot is further south, right?

Sort of opposite uh Wall Memorial Auditorium, the garage is to the west and um north of uh of this spot.

So it these are different spaces, different places, uh, and I've heard nothing but support from both uh Flagler Village and also Victoria Park.

I have a question in regards to the parcel that's gonna be paved that it's it's being called the green space, and not to be disrespected, but I've been here all my life and have only known that to be place where people parked.

I don't recall grass being there.

Um, because someone is that a fact because I've only known it to be uh unleveled area that was used for parking.

Right.

That's true.

So are we actually taking away green space?

No.

It's basically been a dirt site, gravel.

That's that's all I've remembered from graduations from from 1975, the first graduation I went to.

Right.

So I'm um, if I can reply to that, because it's a good question.

So the whole intent was to return that to green space.

It was acknowledged that it had been utilized for parking for generations, to your point, and the idea was we would go vertical with parking so that we could restore that and actually make it an open playing field for people to use as passive recreation as opposed to, you know, one of the things that we have with most of our parks is active recreation.

We've got ball fields, we've got dog parks, we've got soccer fields, moving football fields, pickleball.

Can't for can't forget the roller skating rink that became pickleball.

You know, now we have ice skating rings.

So we've got you know jogging trails and fitness trails and basketball courts and assorted other uh active uses in our parks.

We have very few spaces that are just passive use where you can just go out there, put out a blanket and relax and have a picnic and enjoy you know the open space and being in in nature.

Not everybody wants a field, not everybody wants a playground, not everybody wants a basketball court.

Some people just want to sit out there and listen to the birds.

And the idea was that we would recapture this space and return it to the public use.

You know, one of the most famous places in Central Park is the Sheep's Meadow, which is just a big open space where people throw frisbees and fly kites and have picnics and just enjoy being out on the grass.

And that was the plan when we decided to incorporate this funding into the park spawn.

I will tell you the biggest mistake that we made was we picked a round number for the park spond of 200 million dollars, not because that was the amount of money that we needed to complete all the projects, but it sounded good.

And that only included $7 million for the parking garage.

And we knew the day that we did that, that it was a $30 million project, and there was never been any funding, and that's why we've waited, you know, all these many years to be able to get the project done.

That's why we had to go the P3 route because the funding wasn't there.

So had we actually done some truth in budgeting and and put a $225 million bond in front of the public and gotten the appropriate level of financing that we needed to build this, we would have had it done at the same time Parker Playhouse was being renovated.

I talked to the folks from the performing arts center who begged me to come back because I sat on the finance committee there, begged me to come back to the city and allow them to build it because candidly they can get it done a lot faster and a lot cheaper than we could, because they were already mobilized and out there, and we couldn't move quickly enough and we didn't have the financing because we only had seven million dollars.

That being said, the idea was always to return that restore it and return it back to public use.

So I agree with you.

It it it is a gravel parking lot, but it shouldn't be.

All right, but wait, wait, let me just say something.

Let me just say something.

You know, the wonderful thing about Holiday Park is it's a big park, and for all the uses that you described, the active uses, there's plenty of space for passive use.

Holiday Park is a big place, and all the times I've passed by or walked through uh holiday park, I never saw anyone felt like they were crimped in their uh their wanting to throw a frisbee or walk their dog or or or lay a blanket out, and that's to and that's a wonderful thing because the park is something for everybody, and and I believe one of the reasons why we wanted to put the surface parking lot there was as a convenience for those who are using the isoplex because the parking garage is uh is not not across the street from the iceplex, and it's a convenience for families who go there either uh either whenever they go there, but oftentimes late at night, so they have that they have that option.

And again, I do recall the conversation of of not putting a structured parking s uh garage on that site, um, in order to keep it more open and not have more structures in holiday park and only have a structured parking garage next to the parker.

So um I you know, with the hundred more plus trees happening there, I I I feel that it's a compromise that that we've achieved, and I think that we should move forward, and I believe that this is in the best interest of the city and certainly in the best interest of the community.

And Mayor, it's not actually that surface lot is actually not taking up that entire space that you might want to label green space.

There still is green space um to the south of where that surface lot is going to be that'll still be green space.

I just wanted to make one correction though.

If memory serves me correct, when we were contemplating the park spot, actually the one fifty.

Right.

We actually, Commissioner Herbst, increased that number uh because we thought we might need some additional funds.

It didn't go up, maybe almost 50, 50 million from 150 million to 200 million ballot, which the voters voted on, but that was a very conscientious decision to increase that number.

Uh and we did that in conjunction with all of our partners that were working on that uh bond with us.

With with the with the exception, Commissioner Glassman, of the requisite amount of money needed to build the garage.

We knew from day one that seven million dollars wasn't going to get the job done.

That basically barely covers a surface lot, let alone a four-story parking garage.

With with I will remind everybody, a a contractually guaranteed 600 spaces for Parker Playhouse.

We knew we had to build at least a 600 space garage to begin with.

And average price of of a parking space is $30,000 a space at a bare minimum for for that.

So 7 million, we're never gonna get the job done.

I can do the master, it doesn't get it.

I understand.

I just wanted to correct the records of the amount on this on the bond.

Okay.

Let's move on.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh, the motion's been made and seconded.

Yeah, I uh someone like to move the item.

Yes, I'd like to move the item to approve the interim agreement with Holiday Park parking partners.

Okay.

I need a second.

Move the seconded.

Please call the roll.

Commissioner Beasley Pittman.

Yes.

Vice Mayor Sornson?

Yes.

Commissioner Herb.

Cost of the surface parking lot?

No.

Commissioner Glossman?

Yes.

Mayor Trentals.

Yes, and M8 is now approved.

Moving on to M9.

This is a motion approving an interim agreement with FTL City Hall Partners, LLC for the City Hall project.

I have a number of people signed up.

Um Cody, this is just for questions.

Did you want to say did you want to speak?

At the end?

Okay.

Um let's see, Robert Kelly.

Robert.

First of all, thank you, Mr.

Mayor and Commissioners for letting me uh speak.

Um some of this might not make as much sense because I should have probably gone later on in the presentation.

Other people can speak, but I'll make the uh the best out of it.

So what I do is um I should um program for Layuna training, which is located here in Broward County, and that's the train labor is for local 1652.

And I'll kind of explain how it could still help some of your constituents, for example.

Uh the our apprenticeship program is uh recognized by the state of it requires a hundred and forty-four hours of training by say me and some other trainers, and then they get two thousand hours of on the job training, which they get paid for.

Okay, and they have to do that for two years, so it's two hundred and eighty-eight hours of training with me, four thousand hours of OJT on the job training again, which they get paid for.

So it's like pay, you know, as you learn.

Uh the other thing is we don't charge the participants anything for training.

Okay, it's free.

So a lot of this training would be very expensive if they ever tried to take from an outside provider.

Uh and the idea of all the training is obviously if we improve the skills of people, it improves their uh opportunities out there.

It's good for both your constituents that are interested in the program, and it's also good for the contractors that are out there, the employers out there.

Uh, just to name a few things we train in our emphasis is always on safety, but we do OSHA 10, OSHA 30.

Can you speak to the item?

The item is about the city hall uh interim agreement.

Can you speak to that issue?

Well, this is this is kind of what I was told to speak about the the aspect of like what we train people in that would be maybe helping do that.

So you feel that that the people that work within your union would be able to contribute to the construction and development of the site?

Yeah.

In the sense of, yeah, that's what we do.

Like, concrete.

I mean, I'm almost done.

Okay.

Go ahead.

I mean, like we train people in concrete placement and finishing.

Obviously, you know, if you look around Florida, what's mostly concrete, right?

Placing and finishing, or it's uh cinder blocks, right?

And with mason tending, scaffold building, we do Florida DOT, we're approved for that, and pipeline, show work, stuff like that.

Yeah, or members are.

We train them in that.

It would be maybe somebody interested, like some younger people that want to learn, become apprentices that you guys represent, uh, we would give that opportunity.

It's not gonna cost them anything.

So thank you for your time.

All right.

Well, thank you so much for coming to it.

Um I have uh Paul Gibbs, followed by uh is it Andre Shrelly, followed by Christian Kristen Reed.

You should seven.

Okay.

Good evening.

Good evening, Commissioner.

My name is Paul Gill.

I've been in labor for a number of seventeen years, and I'm a member of Local 1652.

I just in this part of South Florida, who drive on building, you walk in.

Some of them I could point to right now.

I came here tonight because I want to help build a new city hall too.

Not only because it's work, though the work matter to my family, I want to build it because I know what it takes to do it to do a job right and watch it stand for 30 or 40 years.

That is what this city deserves.

A city hall built once by people who take pride in it.

We go more than 30 years without a real city hall.

Your staff have been working out a borough offices.

Haven't had one place to go, that is a long, that is long enough, it's time to build, and when you build it, build it with local hands, give it to the men and women who live who live here, who know this climate, who will still be in this country long after the job is finished.

We were treated like because in a way it is.

You're paying for it, I'm not here against anybody.

I'm here for something.

Good work done right by local on building this community.

We use uh Deck King, thank you for your time and thank you for moving it forward.

Thank you.

Yes, Andrew, hello, Mr.

Mayor.

Good evening, um, commissioners.

How are you doing this evening?

I'm here to, you know, talk about the necessities and the convenience of having this project here in Broward County in Fort Lauderdale.

I'm here to just uh bring notice to you that we want to push forward with this project, that it's not only the project for uh the the commission or or the the staff, but it's for the community and the residents of the community, and we're here as residents of the community that we want to participate into the building of this new city Hall.

We hope that you guys look for it because as you say, in order to stop crying, give someone a job, a job stops crying.

So this city is just not only for for just the the beautifulness of it, but to bring down tribes because it there will be a situation where when your residents look at it, especially those local residents who actually lives in this area that's able to participate in this building, they'll be able to look and say I build that.

And in that sense, it helps build generations, it helps families of uh of men and women in this community to participate in their community with working their community.

So we're here to say that we're pushing forward into building this project and dealing it with a responsible contract.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, everybody.

Uh my name is Cody Keys, and I'm the managing partner of FTL City Hall Partners and President of Core Construction.

Not going to take up too much of your time, but I just wanted you all to see that you know we talk a lot about the reports and about square footages and budgets, but I wanted you guys to see tonight just a glimpse of some of the people that would be participating in this project should it moves forward.

So if you're here tonight supporting the new city hall, would you mind standing real quick?

These are real people with real faces with real mortgages.

We'd be happy to work on a project like this, whether it's uh styles construction or architectural partners, everybody that's here.

So I just wanted you all to see what actually goes into a project and gets us this point.

And I also wanted to thank the staff that's worked with us for the last year through this entire process.

Thank you.

You guys have a seat.

Thank you.

Cody, quick question.

Thank you.

Thanks for being here.

Will Layuna be part of the city uh holiday park parking garage?

Will they be working on that?

Yeah, so core uh ourselves have been partners with Leona since uh the late 70s, and they've been a part of our projects all across the country, and we work with the apprenticeship program uh with us, and they will have a seat at the table to competitively bid all of the work that we have going on.

Great.

Including uh uh substations, every project that we work on, yes.

Thank you absolutely.

Kristen Reed.

Is Kristen here?

Uh Mark Tickerman.

Mark, haven't seen you in a while.

Oh, name is Mark Tickerman, community activist, city of Fort Lauderdale.

I'm here to speak in favor of the project.

The city needs a city.

We need a city hall, we need to meet in a regular city hall.

The design is beautiful.

I think the partnership with City Hall Partners, aka Core is a great partnership for the city, and I think we're gonna end up with a wonderful building, something that the city can be proud of for the next 30 years.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Let's hope it's a hundred years, but not 30.

Is there a rich D?

Richie Geralmo.

It just says Rich D.

Oh, it's easier than the Geralmo.

Oh is he here?

Oh okay.

Oh, there he is.

Followed by Sylvester Robinson, followed by uh Bobby Henry.

Is this on?

Nope.

It's on.

I wanted to make your life easy.

My name's uh Rich DJ Alamo.

I serve on the City Buzzer Advisory Board, the Affordable Housing Committee, the Five Wood Village Civic Association as well.

Uh very heavily involved in the city.

I care about a lot.

Um tonight, though, I'm solely speaking on behalf of myself as a constituent and a commercial real estate professional.

I spend every single day working with developers, investors, institutions, and business owners buying and selling commercial real estate assets, such as these large city halls across the country.

And City Hall is not just an office building, it's a physical symbol of our city.

It should reflect who we are ambitious, innovative, creative, entrepreneurial, resilient, forward-thinking, and world class.

That's what our city is.

It should be a building our residents can be proud of, honors Fort Lauderdale's rich history and character while boldly representing the exciting future we're building together.

Next week I'm closing a transaction with a developer who actually built the first large-scale uh office building conversion in my home town of Philadelphia, go Eagles, uh back in the day.

Uh, it's about a thousand units, and uh they no longer do that.

Last week they just raised 700 million dollars, and none of that is allowed to go towards office conversions.

Once they did that one project, they basically got said, Hey, we're not doing these anymore.

Uh, I asked them why, and they said they're messy, they're risky, they're too expensive, and they're heavily subsidized for a reason.

So if the developer that helped pioneer one of the country's largest first-scale projects that decide not to be to ask ourselves why.

Uh, City Hall is extremely specialized building, as we all know, the people in this room know that the city staff knows that unique security technology, public assets, and uh operational requirements.

Very, very unique.

Uh, we have a once-in-lifetime opportunity here to build a new city hall that honors Fort Lauderdale's history while serving the needs today and reflecting the city will become for the next 50 plus years.

We shouldn't settle for adapting a building designed for a completely different purpose.

We have the opportunity to create something worthy of our residents, our amazing city staff, and our city's future.

If we don't buy, if if we don't buy these buildings, nobody will.

There's no market for these buildings, just as plain as it is, nobody else is buying this.

The private market has cast their vote.

I think we need to cast our vote accordingly.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So that's so that's uh Robinson is Sylvester here.

Oh, there you are, sir, and followed by Bobby Henry, followed by um Tina DeMarco.

Uh good evening, everyone, commissioners.

Uh I just wanted to speak in support of this project.

I think it's going to be great for the citizens of Broward County, uh, our community, especially uh the African American community as well.

And I also believe that uh the services provided will support our growth as we continue to be the best uh county in state of Florida.

So I support this uh City Hall building wholeheartedly.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um Bobby Henry, I'm sorry, speaking for each other because I'm not even good evening.

Did you get all dressed up for us?

Thank you very much.

Thank you very much.

Look at you, all dressed up tonight.

Let's see here.

Wow, what a crowd.

The diversity, I like it's very important that we have diversity, but what's much more important than that is that we respect diversity and not step on it.

Good evening, the greatest city manager in all the world.

How are you?

Thank you.

Good evening, mayor, vice mayor, and commissioners.

My name is Bobby R.

Henry Sr., publisher of the Westside Gazette newspaper.

That's Broward County's oldest and largest black owned newspaper.

I'm not a racist, I'm a realist.

And I understand and I support that.

I'm here tonight to support moving forward with the proposed new Fort Lauderdale City Hall.

Is this thing on?

Am I here?

Okay, I talked that loud.

I'm here to support that, and I'm sure there are those uh along with me who support this as well.

This decision is about much more than a building, it is about what kind of city we want to leave for the next generation.

Over the past several months, the commission asked difficult questions.

You requested independent appraisals, you directed staff to compare existing buildings, you asked for costs to be reduced, you sought greater transparency and public input.

The revised proposal reflects that work.

According to the city's presentation, the revised interim agreements reduce and re reduce the project delivery costs from approximately.

Eliminates the developer fees, it removes and lowers the city's projected annual financial impact.

Just as important, the evaluation of existing buildings demonstrates that buying and renovating another property is not the bargain some believe it would be.

Once acquisition and renovations costs are combined, each alternative approaches are in and in some cases exceeds the cost of building the new city hall while still requiring significant code ADA, resilience, and infrastructure upgrades, meaning that there's no need for us to try to retrofit an old building to fit our new needs.

We should not spend tomorrow's dollars trying to fix yesterday's buildings.

Fort Lauderdale deserves a city hall that is welcoming, accessible, secure, resilient, efficient, and reflective of the city we are becoming.

Those principles were established through months of a community engagement, workshops, services, conditions from the infrastructure task force.

Oh, hold tight here.

Come on back here.

Technology is something else.

I kept adding to your time, Bobby.

But can you truly appreciate that?

Could you please conclude your remarks?

I'm gonna try my best to.

Okay.

As someone who has spent decades advocating for community involvement, I appreciate that this process has not been perfect, but I also recognize that this commission asked for revisions and meaningful revisions were made.

Every generation has an opportunity, that will serve citizens for the next 50 years.

This is one of those moments.

Feels welcome and respected.

It is about creating a place where government is accessible, transparent, and prepared for the future.

We cannot continue to delay in the process while opportunity to slip away.

Leadership requires careful study, but it also requires the courage to decide.

Tonight, I respectfully ask that this commission move to this pro move this project forward.

Let history record when Fort Lauderdale hill for the future, its elected leaders chose vision over fear, preparation over postponement, and progress over paralysis.

Our children and grandchildren would not remember every debate held in these chambers.

Let's give them a city worthy of Fort Lauderdale's future.

Move this project forward.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor, Commission.

I'm gonna be the oddball here.

I'm going to ask that we be fiscally sound and defer moving forward with the new city hall or anything until after the property tax bill in November is voted on.

We need to be fiscally sound.

We have no money for this city hall.

If we had 950 million dollars, great build it, but we don't.

Next year's budget, we will be 27 million dollars in deficit, and we're talking about over 30 years spending almost a billion dollars as a taxpayer.

That's a ridiculous amount of money, and we're footing the bill.

You want to talk about your children and your grandchildren?

They'll be paying for this.

Thank you.

Is Jack here?

There you are.

Is anyone else wish to speak on this item?

Okay.

Take your time, take your time.

Well, good evening.

I first want to thank you people at the table up there for giving up your time and your commitment to make Lauderdale a better place.

My name is Jack Trainer.

I'm a retired teacher at Fort Lauderdale High School and probably the best baseball coach in Florida.

Because I beat the Cubans in Miami to go to the state playoffs.

But they hit the ball to my shortstop, and he was a Cuban.

If it hit anybody else, we've been a loss.

Now I'm up here to speak about the Fort Lauderdale and the students at Fort Fort Lauderdale, whose parents went to Lauderdale.

Their grandfather, their great-grandfather, made this city the city it is.

And I go to their reunions.

They invite myself and my wife to all their reunions.

And I had six kids that graduated from Lauderdale.

And I talked to them on Friday night when they all get together and on Saturday night to have a dance and have a little uh dinner and all.

Every student I talk to does not live in Fort Lauderdale because they cannot afford it.

I don't think this city, if you want to go with a big city, go to Miami.

Go to West Palm Beach.

We want to stay small.

We want a budget and go to the fi to the uh city hall.

The architect that drew that drawing went to high school with me in Fort in Huntington, West Virginia.

He is not known as an architect.

He is known for running across Parker Playhouse stage with nothing on.

So that's what he's famous for.

You can look up and see his.

I won't give you his name.

It's famous for.

And I so I don't think the building is that bad because he was a pretty good architect knowing he came from West Virginia.

And for any of you people are on the board, if you know the words to uh oh, I'm supposed to stop.

Okay.

You you're cutting me off.

Well, please conclude your remarks.

Okay.

Give us a punch.

I came to Fort Lauderdale in 65, brought my wife a five with five children.

I came here at the uh in March of 55 and fell in love with Lauderdale.

I love it.

My problem is I live on a house, the dirt's rate worth eight hundred thousand.

My escrow went up double in the last three years.

And you and your your property taxes went up, and so I'm penalized.

Well, is that your homestead?

Pardon me?

Is that your homestead?

That's my homestead.

I've got all the exemptions that I could get, but uh so your your value of your house can't go up more than three percent.

It's my a lot more than right.

So my six kids will get something.

Yeah, but I want to stay there because next month I'll be 91 years old.

Well, happy birthday.

All right, thank you.

And the secret the secret is Mary marry the right woman.

She's eighty-seven, and the other sticky uh secret is in West Virginia you need to keep him pregnant, okay.

That concludes your remarks.

Thank you so much.

Okay.

Thank you so much.

Yes, please, please.

Think about the budget.

We have, thank you.

Okay, well, the plumber, the guy that uh has the time clock, he can't afford to stay here.

That's not true.

One more thing.

I lost a piece on my shifter.

I went to have it fixed.

The piece cost four dollars and ninety-five cents.

The labor was five hundred and ten dollars because that's what they had to pay the mechanic to live in Fort Lauderdale.

All right, thank you, sir.

Help me, thank you.

Help them.

Thank you.

Thank you for the time.

Okay, have a good night.

Okay, uh M9 has been the motion's been made and seconded.

Please call the roll.

The motion's not been made and seconded.

Someone please move.

Uh M.

I think I did make the motion.

I thought he did.

I did.

Second.

Is there a second?

I have to move and second.

Yeah, second.

Thank you.

Mayor, before we take the vote, if I could ask, so are we choosing a uh I'm I would rather not choose a design tonight because that's a whole different subject.

Okay, all right.

Um, please call the roll.

Commissioner Beasley Pittman.

Um first I want to say um thank you to um the teams of finance um department budget that went through and gave us a great presentation this afternoon, explaining and answering a lot of questions that um made it easier for me to make this decision to say yes.

Uh Vice Mayor Sorensen?

No.

Commissioner Herbst.

So this is very difficult.

CORE has done a great job of trying to address many of the concerns that I've raised during this process, and I commend them for that.

They've come back with what I think are some greatly improved design features.

But I'd like to support this, but if we're not choosing a design, if we're not choosing a design, Mayor, please, me earlier, so I'll do the same thing to you.

Okay.

It goes both ways.

So if we're not going to choose a design, then I have to vote no.

I would like to support them.

I would vote yes, and then we can go to the next level.

Absolutely not.

Absolutely not.

I need to know what I'm voting on tonight before I vote to approve an agreement.

So no, this is not this is not an agreement to agree later.

This is an agreement to enter into into the comprehensive agreement with them, and I simply can't do that.

I've asked several times for us to choose one of the options, and without knowing which option it is, I can't approve it.

So thank you.

Okay.

Please proceed.

Commissioner Glossman.

I just want to count on that by saying the reason I don't think we have to choose the design this evening, is this is just an interim agreement, interim.

This is not the comprehensive agreement.

This is not the final agreement.

We typically have between three and twelve months to work out all of those details, the design, uh every single penny, every single space, every single use in the building.

We have that time now.

Uh so I then I want to reiterate again.

I think we did a great job as a commission uh bringing the cost way down.

I think this is a very fiscally prudent project.

Uh when you look at other cities in Broward County, again, if Oakland Park can build a new city hall, if sunrise can build a new city hall, if Miami down Miami Dave can build a new city hall, if Pompano Beach can build a new city hall, then Fort Lauderdale can build a new city hall.

So I vote yes.

And Mayor Trentalis.

Yes, and that's approved.

Thank you.

Okay, guys, get to work.

I think we're I think we're losing our audience.

Okay, moving on to M 10 appeal.

Let's wait till they leave.

Okay, so we're moving on to M10.

This is an appeal of the chief procurement officer's denial of protests submitted by Communications International on the recommendation to award request for proposals regarding radio communications system refresh replacement rebid motor solutions.

Um, thank you, Mayor.

Uh, during the last please proceed.

Thank you.

So at the last city commission meeting, I recommended that the city commission reject all bids pursuant to this RFP process.

Uh, based on the discussion that ensued that evening in your absence.

Uh we are here today to discuss an appeal of the chief procurement officer's denial of a protest submitted by one of the proposers.

Communications International Inc.

I'm gonna call forward our team, inclusive of our chief procurement officer, to highlight some of the observations.

Alright, so Glenn, uh let's put this in the posture that we can all understand.

Okay, so an RFP went out to solicit um uh proposals from vendors out there to replace our communication systems for our police and fire departments, and um and we we we uh we received responses and your your you and your staff uh your committee uh ranked different different uh vendors and you came back with a proposal to the commission um and I understand that uh as the city manager said uh she recommended a rejection of all bids so that we could come back because there was some concern about the review process um but Motorola has appealed that and now we are being asked whether or not the appeal should go forward.

Yeah, so was that I summarize it okay?

So CI was the one who appealed CI recommendation forward to Motorola.

Okay, so see so the award went to Motorola.

So the recommendation the recommendation it for for the entire system for the infrastructure as well as the radios, that is correct.

Okay, and just to clarify, mayor, it was an intent to award to Motorola.

We never officially made a recommendation to the commission to award.

Okay, got it.

So um uh so and the city manager suggested, hey, let's just throw everything out and start all over again.

What's the status of this appeal?

Um thank you, Mayor.

Appeal is the it is of the determination, whether to affirm or deny, or some other motion uh affirming his appeal, or rather affirming his denial of the appeal, rejecting it.

So he denied the appeal, correct.

And on grounds that he found legally sufficient to deny the appeal.

I would be happy to have him explain, but but in a nutshell, I'll make it as simple as I can.

Uh there were there were two points made that stated that the response of uh bidder was not in fact responsive because of two items that were not sufficient.

They did not accurately two items.

Chief procurements officer's team and the uh consultant reviewed and determined that the opposite, that in fact they did not uh air and they were indeed responsive.

Therefore, the chief procurement officer denied that appeal.

It is now before you for your consideration.

So I can clarify, go ahead.

Glenn denied the appeal of CI.

Correct.

Right?

Same correction.

The protest.

The appeal is now before you.

I denied the protest.

Right.

So there's a protest and there's an appeal.

So there's so that's just the nomenclature they use.

So there was a protest by CI, and now there's an uh which was denied by Glenn by Glenn, uh, which is which is his prerogative.

And then and now it's coming to the commission, the full commission, as an appeal of that uh denial.

Yep.

Great.

And we have to make a decision tonight as to whether or not to accept the appeal, deny the appeal, or um throw the whole thing out and start all over again.

Well, your decision, your consideration based on the evidence that you've had uh is to affirm Glenn's decision.

Right.

Uh you may reject his decision, reverse it, or you could do something else, and that something else could be rejecting all bids.

Right.

Okay.

Very good.

All right, so a number of people have so Glenn, if you uh give us a chance to let these folks speak and then we can make a decision the commission can make their decision.

So we'll start.

I'll name three in a row.

Mark Stempler, followed by Rajou, followed by Danielle Sanabrid.

Is Mark Sempler here?

Oh, there's Mark.

Try to keep it to a couple minutes if possible.

You're here on behalf of Motorola?

Yes, and I think I could do better than that.

So I'm really here to respond if the commission is going to hear the protest appeal.

I'll respond on behalf of Motorola.

Well, we're here to we're here to uh get testimony as to what what our and that's what should we do tonight?

What do you recommend the commission do tonight?

Deny the appeal.

Um look, CI has raised a couple of issues.

Issues that have been denied entirely by the city, issues that have been denied entirely by TUSA, the city's consultant, and which have been refuted by Motorola.

Uh we have filed responses to their responses to all of their post protest um correspondence that was outside of the protest period, and the issues that they've raised in their protests are simply without merit.

It really boils down as the city attorney said to two of them.

Uh one has to do with um whether Motorola met the RFP's requirements for um their their whether their proposal required a waiver from the FCC in order to meet the compliance with with the RC, they needed this waiver from the FCC.

They stated so in their proposal, uh tingent upon this, but it's been determined not only by the city but by its consultant that for all of the proposers.

So that's simply not a non-responsive issue.

Motorola's RFP satisfy the requirements without without fail.

Uh VenCI claimed that Motorola is on all infrastructure and end user equipment.

Uh but Motorola's RFP response, it's proposal clearly demonstrated that it had.

Not only did Motorola's proposal include such a warranty, it exceeded the RFPs.

Uh so you know, we stand here tonight uh urging the commission's appeal to move forward with the we can start these critical communication services.

Okay, thank you.

Um, good evening, Mayor Commissioners.

With all due respect, the last time you did an appeal, the um the purchasing officer is our appeal, so we are asking to provide our presentation.

What did you do at the last meeting?

Was there a previous question?

I'm just saying that was the protocol from the last time you did an appeal.

There was not.

No.

There was no I think it makes sense, Mayor.

I'd like to uh let me ask uh city attorney, is this a de novo hearing on the merits of this app of this application?

Um Mayor, it is your job to consider the record presented to you.

Right.

So it it is not a hearing, it needn't be a hearing, but it is your discretion to hear whatever testimony you want.

And that testimony for your consideration needs to relate to the items raised narrowly in the appeal.

Will there be any information that we don't already have in all of the extensive backup that we've already read?

We've read letters from both parties, we've read our procurement rather's uh basically his take on it, our consultants' take on it.

So will there be new evidence if we go through all the I've read already?

Is there anything new?

Commissioner, you have the record.

Uh you could take testimony, but I caution you that the appeal or other is focused on in the appeal submitted to or the procurement officer.

So if you were to hear other items, other testimony related to different complaints that are beyond the four corners of the appeal, I would recommend that you, in fact, I urge you to not consider them.

It's not within the purview of your review.

All right, thank you.

How much time do you think you need?

Ten minutes.

Go ahead.

We're waiting for our slides to be posted.

Good evening, Mayor, Commissioners.

My name is Pratima Raju.

Rational along with my colleague, took the time to speak with us and ask thoughtful questions about this appeal.

Before Danielle addresses the merits, I would like to briefly answer two questions that came up since they provide important context for the record you're about to hear.

Next slide.

Can the commission consider the supplemental evidence and public records?

I filed the protest and appeal.

CI complied with every requirement, every deadline in the city's procurement code, even though it did not yet have the complete procurement record.

The city continued to move forward with MOTA's negotiations and open discussions with CI's protest with openly discussed CI's protest with them.

When CI learned of the negotiations, we promptly requested those records, including transcripts.

Oops, sorry.

Including transcripts.

Before producing those readily available records, the chief procurement officer denied CI's protest.

Respectfully, this commission cannot disregard evidence simply because the city produced it after our appeal was due.

The city cannot now ask the commission to ignore or unsee the very record that resulted from your own process, especially when those records confirm the protest CI has maintained from day one.

Moto provided a non-responsive proposal.

Should be to decide on the complete record of your own process and timeline and your own materials.

The next question, would CI have been selected if price was not considered?

The answer is yes.

Four out of five committee members ranked us first on the technical merits, including police, including fire.

But respectfully, that's not what this appeal decides.

The question is whether the city may lawfully award a contract to a proposal that failed to comply with the mandate with your own mandatory requirements of the solicitation.

Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Commissioners.

Danielle Snabri on behalf of communications international.

At the core, this uh appeal asks one simple question.

Can the city knowingly award a public safety contract to a proposal that failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of its own solicitation?

Respectfully, the answer is no.

Okay, let's stop right there and I'm stopping the clock.

City attorney, what does that mean?

What did she just say?

Can the city knowingly award a public?

This is the this is the this is the question on appeal.

Can the city knowingly award a public safety contract to a proposal that failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of its own solicitation?

Mayor that is not the question on appeal.

That's their question.

There's their question to you.

Because uh, as the presentation is suggesting, there uh was information supplied to the chief procurement officer post their submission of their appeal.

And our process has a a strict timeline to submit a protest, and accordingly, when that information is provided, that constitutes the protest, and therefore the is what you're reviewing today.

And so you're reviewing the items presented in the protest.

You may hear other things, apparently you are in your hearing.

And I don't know.

Are we going that far back?

Is that that was the error that they are alleging uh that was meaning that that was the problem with Motorola's bill uh protest, their opinion the should have agreed with.

So city attorney's.

I get it, I get into that.

City attorney, if you so we should be considering as we evaluate this, the appeal should be sustained.

Your chief procurement officer with a legal or procedural obligation in rendering his denial of their protest.

Okay.

Um, well, I it is not for me to answer that for you because also that's a question you need to answer.

Um perhaps uh manager, if you would would you want the chief procurement officer to speak to this.

He certainly can if that's the will of the commission.

Again, I remind the commission that I recommended to reject all bids because I do feel like there were some irregularities, process and the information provided, which I believe caused some misinterpretations of what was being requested, and therefore the submittals from each proposer uh really didn't meet um what we were asking for or intending to ask for.

So again, my recommendation was and is to reject all bids, but didn't but didn't with that recommendation and say we did not want to reject all bids and we wanted to hear the appeal.

That is correct.

That is why it's on the agenda today.

Uh I cannot support what is on the agenda today.

My recommendation has and is to reject all bids for the reasons I've laid out.

Well, just to take everyone back to the meeting, I know the mayor you were not here, but I think one of the reasons we decided to hear the appeal and not reject all bids and begin from scratch.

Uh we heard a very I thought uh important testimony uh from Keith Costa, um the president of the fire union, talking about we really can't delay this anymore.

We're talking about life safety here.

We're talking about something that is really really crucial to move forward, rejecting all bids as we just heard would take us back to I mean, months and months and months and months and months to do this.

I I I and you know, and I trust me, I I have heard from both sides.

CI makes a great case, Motorola makes a great case for me though, and I want to ask this question to the city attorney.

For me, it boils down to, and we we did get a little bit of information from the city attorney's office today in terms of this process, it says from a city attorney to prevail CI's protest must prove to comply obligation.

Issues raised, non-responsive because one response was conditional if FCC approved, number two, warranty did not meet requirements.

Any evidence or legal argument presented that was not presented in CI's letter of protest should not be considered by the commission.

But CI is saying that's not true.

So that's where I'm stuck.

Because you're saying that uh if it was not presented in their letter of protest, saying that's not true.

So help me help me figure this out.

It is it is my opinion that you must remain focused on the four corners of the of the protest, and that you should not consider information that is provided or presented today or any other time that is beyond the four corners of the protest.

Okay.

May I ask a follow-up on that?

So I, you know, uh I'm not a lawyer, I don't play one on TV, but if the city failed to turn over how is it referred to?

Exculpatory uh information, um, isn't that usually a basis for an appeal in in most types of cases?

So if we had information in our possession that would have been relevant to their appeal, and they would have raised that in their appeal had it been provided timely by the city, um we had an obligation to turn it over to them.

We failed to turn it over to him.

So that's not accurate.

Okay, there was not the problem with timeliness of information whatsoever.

So uh let me let me revisit that because I I thought you requested information.

The information wasn't provided until after the appeal was I'm sorry, until after the protest was already denied.

Is that I I want to know if that's factually correct.

That is factually correct, and also negotiations had not yet occurred, which the most egregious violations happen there, and those violations are not the basis of our proposal of our protest.

Our protest has always maintained that Motorola submitted a non-compliant proposal.

And my question before you is a question that applies to the city commission at all times.

You cannot legally, the city commission cannot legally award a contract that is not responsive to the requirements and is not lawful.

And I actually, quite frankly, did not even need to file a protest.

Once the city knowingly came upon those those deficiencies, it has an obligation to find that proposal non-responsive.

All right, so it's my understanding.

If I can continue that question, I uh if I may, mayor, thank you.

So speak to those issues.

It is their argument that they did not meet a standard and their position that it is therefore not legal.

That is not our position, that is certainly not my position.

Understood.

So but if I understand the if I understand the process, so there was a protest to the bid award.

He determined that it was responsive, they're appealing that conclusion that Glenn reached, okay.

And is that not the question that they just raised there?

If we go back and look at that slide?

No, because you have should it have been awarded in the first place.

In order to get there, you would have to determine that he inappropriately made the award or or recommendation of award.

But but uh but I'm I'm just want to go back to you know the slide that they put up there that the question we have to ask is: was the city obligated?

Thank you.

Can the city knowingly award a public safety contract that fails to meet a mandatory requirement of our solicit of its solicitation?

Their procurement department is effectively saying yes, we can do that.

No, well, they're saying is that it did not not meet the mandatory requirement, that they did in fact meet the requirements.

This is an argument that they are making, because it's not fact, respectfully.

If you let me do my presentation, the transcripts could hang on the right at the you you you can.

Um I'm happy to let you uh address that right now.

I I just want to understand, I want to understand the advice from my attorney.

So you're saying the dispute is not, so you're saying that that the city's position is that we did not knowingly award a contract that failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of the solicitation.

Correct, that was the conclusion of our chief procurement officer, right?

And so, so then if if I understand this correctly, then you're saying that are in your in your in your perspective, they are appealing his conclusion.

Yes, they're appealing to his conclusion.

Okay, exactly.

Okay, I just I just want to make sure I understand it.

Because that that seems to me like what we're talking about, and you're saying, okay, so I I think we're getting into a matter of semantics here.

Can the city knowingly award a public safety contract?

And you're saying we didn't knowingly award a public safety contract.

Um so the question is, should we have known?

That's that's sort of their their argument.

The question would be, is it?

Is it right?

Not should we have known?

That assumes that it was.

Okay, good.

Fair point.

Fair point, thank you.

Okay.

Is it did we knowingly award a contract?

Um, did we do we agree?

It did not meet the mandatory requirements of the solicitation.

So is isn't that the essence of the question that we're trying to get to?

Yes, and your chief procurement officer uh and his consultants said that it did in fact the items.

So in our review, is it to determine if that conclusion that wait, wait, wait, wait.

And what what the this the question is not whether or not the uh the uh Glenn had uh made a right decision.

Right.

The question is was he within his authority as a procurement officer reviewing a protest, the exercise of authority.

Did he comply with legal or with law and procedure?

So we don't have to go back to the mandatory requirements were met.

Okay, we have to go back to did he exercise his authority in a legal way in making his decision.

Okay, and that's what I'm trying to get to, thank you.

So I'm trying to understand what the nature of the question actually is.

It's not whether his whether his conclusion was in fact correct.

Right.

It's whether he believed it was correct at the time he made it, and did he act within the scope within his authority.

Did he follow the knowing believing it was believing his conclusion was correct?

Did he have the authority then to act in that?

Now you understand the nuanced right.

So I want to make sure that I want to make sure what is what is being argued and debated.

Thank you.

Let me just add it.

Make sure I'm clear.

Not only did he act within his capacity, but did he comply with law?

So it's precisely it's all of the above.

Correct, right?

In denying the CI protest.

Correct.

Saying that right?

That's ultimate the question.

Yes, okay, great.

Thank you.

You may proceed.

Thank you.

And we're all gonna take a procurement one-on-one crash course soon.

So I also hear the concern that delays in public safety radio system procurement can create risk for the city, right?

CI does not dispute that.

The city's public safety radio infrastructure needs to be replaced.

The question is not whether the city should move forward.

The question is whether the city can move forward by awarding this contract to a proposal that failed to comply with the city's own mandatory public safety requirements.

Respectfully, it cannot.

No one is asking the city commission to compromise public safety.

We are asking the commission to uphold the standards it adopted to protect public safety.

Those are not competing principles.

Those are the same principles.

It is how public safety is protected.

This appeal is not about whether Motorola is a respected company, it's not about whether Motorola can eventually build a compliant system.

It's about whether every proposer was required to compete under the same mandatory rules.

Those rules exist were submitted.

They applied equally to every proposer, CI complied with them, Motorola did not.

The evidence you'll see today leads to one unavoidable conclusion.

Motorola's proposal failed to comply with most of the solicitation.

And I'd like to start with the city's own procurement rules.

So before we look at the record, I want to ground this appeal in three basic rules.

First, proposals must comply with the mandatory requirements of the RFP.

Second, proposals cannot be materially modified after the submission deadline.

And third, the city cannot knowingly accept a proposal containing material deviations.

That's important.

CI's rules, these are the city's rules.

And the question before this commission is whether those rules were followed.

Actually, we would just we were just told it's not whether the rules were followed, it's whether or not the the procurement officer in denying the protest did so within the scope of his authority.

Correct.

He needs to follow the rules too.

Everybody needs to follow the rules.

So what rules did he not follow in denying the protests?

I'll get there.

The record will show that Motorola's proposal failed to comply with multiple mandatory requirements of the solicitation.

The city, it will show that the city recognized those deficiencies during negotiations, but instead of rejecting Motorola's proposal as non-responsive, the city attempted to negotiate those deficiencies after proposals had already been submitted.

And despite those material deviations, the city ultimately recommended Motorola for award.

Everything I'm about to show you comes directly from the procurement record.

Before we examine the individual deviations, the principle that governs this appeal.

The commission is not being asked to decide whether Motorola again is a capable company.

It's basically or being asked to decide which proposal it prefers.

The question is whether the city followed the procurement rules it established in the solicitation and in denying this appeal.

Florida courts have made that standard abundantly clear.

The legality of a procurement decision turns on whether the public entity complied with its own solicitation requirements.

And that is exactly what we're going to examine.

Did the city follow its own rules?

Rule number one proposals must comply with mandatory requirements.

That's straightforward.

Those requirements are not suggestions, they're not preferences, they're conditions of responsiveness that apply to equally to every proposer.

Every proposer, including CI, uh and Motorola are required to compete under the same set of rules.

The next question: if a proposal does not comply, can those deficiencies be negotiated away?

The answer is no.

Negotiations have an important role in public procurement.

They can finalize contract terms, they can clarify implementation, and they can resolve issues consistent with the proposal that was submitted.

But negotiations have legal limits.

Florida law does not allow a public entity to material to accept a materially noncompliant proposal and then negotiate it in it into compliance after proposals have been submitted.

In other words, negotiations may finalize a contract, they may not create a compliance proposal.

Rule number three.

That brings us to the third rule.

Once proposals are submitted, proposers are competing based on the proposals they actually submitted, not proposals they wish they submitted and not later.

If one proposer is allowed to materially change its proposal after the deadline, every other proposer is placed in a competitive disadvantage.

The final legal principle is perhaps the most important.

Under Florida law, the city cannot waive a material requirements once a material deviation is true, and it cannot award the contract despite it.

And that's an that's important because you do not have to agree with us on every issue that we raised.

If you conclude that Motorola's proposal contained even one material deviation from a mandatory solicitation requirement, the law does not permit an award to Motorola.

Our original protest alleged that Motorola's proposal was materially non-responsive.

That remains true today.

The negotiations and the transcripts that that come that follow don't create those violations, it exposed them.

And now I want to show you what the city's own record actually says.

So let's start with warranty and support.

The city told Motorola the MSI response was inconsistent with the RFP.

Motorola responded, we'll change that.

Mayors, commissioners, this exchange is the case in a minute.

The issue is not what happened during negotiations.

The issue is what Motorola submitted.

If Motorola had changed had to change his proposal to comply, then it did not comply when submitted.

The negotiations didn't create that.

They revealed that the city recognized it.

The same pattern repeats across multiple requirement after requirements, the old one.

So on project timeline, the city said Motorola's response was inconsistent with the RFP and Motorola on parts availability.

The city said Motorola's responding on RFP.

The word again matters.

This was no longer isolated.

Um Motorola responded, we'll review this and get it back to you.

Acceptance testimony.

Are you coming to you're coming to the end of your time?

Is you are you pretty much summarized your your position?

I don't think so, Mayor.

If you would allow the remainder of the presentation, I think it's how much more time do you need?

Can I have six minutes?

How much?

Six minutes.

Thank you.

Just to let you know.

Okay.

Um sorry, I'll skip forward to.

Sorry.

So these violations show a repeated pattern.

It shows that the city knowingly um accepted and allowed Motorola the opportunity to bring its proposal into compliance.

It's a parts.

Okay.

So the issue becomes even more significant here because the f this is the first time they hear you hear directly from your chief procurement officer.

The city's consultant tells Motorola, you're not doing physical plant modifications.

This is a Motorola requirement.

Then the chief procurement officer says it should have already been included.

Motorola response.

Understood, Glenn.

That statement matters.

The chief procurement officer is not asking Motorola for something new.

He's saying this requirement should have already been included in Motorola's proposal.

That means Motorola's proposal omitted something the city believed the RFP required.

It's not ambiguity.

And that omission matters because plant modifications has obvious cost implications.

If these costs should have been included in Motorola's proposal, but were not, then Motorola's price was not being evaluated on the same basis as every other proposer.

And that goes directly to mere materiality.

It affects scope, it affects price, it affects the fairness of competition.

And again, that's not my interpretation, that's the chief procurement officer's own words.

The same official who later denied CAA's protest acknowledged during negotiations that Motorola's proposal should have included the requirement from the beginning.

Okay, so hold on, I have a question.

So mayor, if you can just pause the time for a moment.

So city attorney, what I'm seeing here, discussions, post intent to award to Motorola.

Is that am I saying that right?

These are transcripts from negotiations that these are not legal questions, and perhaps your chief procurement officer might want to answer some of these for you.

Okay, sure.

Glenn, do you want me to just let Glenn come up?

Squen, am I capturing the timing of this correct?

Is these are communication?

To award to Motorola.

It's during negotiations, it is during negotiations, post intent to award, not be protested and should not be brought in front of the commission.

What you're seeing here in front of you is a lot of persuasion, persuasive arguments in order for us to get the best Motorola.

But CI is trying to go out and trying to limit our authority, and I can tell you, Commissioner, you take that away from us, we're not going to be able to negotiate any any further city contracts from this point forward.

So I think that we they're trying to establish new precedent, and I can assure you that if we move forward with anything else but awarding to Motorola, it's gonna be extremely difficult to negotiate any future contracts, even if it's with CI.

They're gonna have they're gonna do the same thing as we're seeing right now, and so again, I can I can not employ you implore you or the commission enough to understand the basis of what's going on here.

They know this and they're still doing it.

It's a consistent pattern that's been done even after the protest was filed, they continue to target, they continue to um make further arguments, understanding the fact that the first two arguments within the four corners of the protest was was not um sustained.

I denied it, so they continue to try additional arguments to see what sticks.

That's what you have in front of you.

So Glenn, just to follow up with uh the vice mayor, so um an award was made to Motorola, correct?

That's the recommendation.

That is the recommendation recommendation, okay.

And um, and that would that included um the doubt included the pricing as well, correct it it did and now they're trying to even remove that criteria let me wait let me let me just finish so what they showed us on the screen was that their company came in number one before pricing now does pricing skew the rate the the ranking that much um the pricing was I believe it was uh 30 percent right so it's all encompassing now they cannot argue no no I'm just asking you in general the screen they showed us was that in four out of the five categories they came in number one and then the but that was pre-twas before the pricing uh part of the ranking so but once pricing was uh you're saying that Motorola came in number one that is correct okay and that uh and that that that's your ranking and the committee decided that Motorola was number one they protested that and yet you still continued negotiating with come into compliance with the RFP or was that to try to still get a better deal for the city do you understand my question if just one thing I just does have a presentation that we can provide after I understand but it's and it outlines exactly what was put in Motorola's presentation compared to the that their proposal was aligned with the RFP requirements as the was was aligned was aligned.

Okay we have our technical expert here as well who did the initial review of their proposal response who can also clarify anything that you submission that was provided as the manager stated there were some ambiguities in our RFP document which led to some confusion in how people answered specific questions our technical consultant reviewed each and every one of those and provided a response to indicate that Motorola's proposal was aligned with the R though their interpretation was a little bit different as it related to some of the technical specifications and so if you would like I understand that the proposer is providing some information related to the negotiation session but really this uh protest is about the proposal that was submitted and the alignment with the RFP requirements well that was the that was their protest right but you made it you and Glenn your committee made it they made the determination that there was alignment and that the mandatory requirements were fulfilled at the time of the award that is correct okay so their question that they're trying to resurrect that question and saying that the mandatory requirements were not met by Motorola and therefore they should not have been given that award but from your interpretation they were met and that's why the protest was denied for a the interpretation of the evaluation committee as well as our technical consultant who reviewed the proposal response that was the final conclusion that was made um and so yes that is the conclusion that was drawn in the denial of the protests that help does that answer your question vice mayor yeah yeah that's part of it mayor yeah thanks and and you're you're getting to the so Glenn as you evaluate a protest you have to follow certain laws and procedures in evaluating a protest right so if you would walk me through what are those laws and procedures that you have to follow evaluating a protest.

So the issue within not the written protest um stated the specific facts and laws of the ordinance and whether it any of either the state or the city including the fact our own violated our own procurement process.

And the answer is absolutely not.

And the question being those during what period?

Just narrow that down to the competitive process, not negotiations.

Okay, so that matters during the competitive process and what for laymen describe what's the competitive process, not negotiations.

So from the time of issuance of the solicitation, all the way to proposals uh received by the city, those forwarded to the evaluation committee.

The evaluation committee looking at those proposals, including demonstrations.

Once the committee makes its decision, that concludes the competitive uh process.

A notice of intent to award is posted, and any aggrieved or perceived agreed proposer can protest the award, the intent to award, and they have five.

So the communication we're seeing is post-notice to intent to award.

That is correct, and during that time, post notice of intent to award, negotiations happen, right?

That's some of the language we've seen here in the discussion.

And what I'm hearing you say is during that negotiation process, the laws and procedures are different than prior.

Is that right?

That is correct.

We have more discretion to try to get the best value out of the high-ranked responsive and responsible firm.

Okay.

And so what you're seeing before you is negotiations to get us to that point.

It also allows during the negotiations that if there's any other of Motorola's response where perhaps it's not clear, they may they made statements such as comply with clarifications, which by the way, CI went ahead and did the same thing.

During negotiations, I have the ability, compliance there.

So that's exactly what the city went ahead and did.

We want to make sure that there were they were complying.

At that particular point, Commissioner, if we would find out through negotiations that they're not going to comply, we would we would have terminated the negotiations and perhaps negotiated with CI.

So that's that's the actual process.

Great.

And again, just to reiterate, evaluating whether you failed to comply with law and procedure and design the protest is based on your action from the start of this process.

Yes, sir.

Nothing after.

Nothing after.

So this communication post intent toward is not relevant to our question before us.

That is correct.

Exactly.

City attorney, is this accurate?

Yes, thanks, Mayor.

Okay.

So we need to then to evaluate your actions.

Yes, sir.

Great.

Thank you.

Mayor, thanks.

Thank you.

Glenn, do me a favor.

On the top right, that should be December 5, 2025.

Tully noted.

I have it in my notes.

Thank you.

Yes.

Is such a way to touch back on the skills?

Yeah, editor skills.

The teacher.

What are we waiting for?

My presentation.

Okay, sorry.

I stopped the clock just so that you I saw I saw time take down though.

Who's doing it?

We have some technical difficulties here.

This is the city's presentation.

Yeah, no.

Are we?

Do we know that we're supposed to be uploading a screen here?

Okay.

We should have a commercial break here now, right?

Okay.

I'll I'll click through from here.

Thank you.

A new logo.

We've had it for about a month now.

You get around the city once in a while.

Maybe I should.

Sorry.

You've been around the block.

I'm telling you, I sure have.

I'm going to tell you.

You have to read the LT.

Okay.

I'm ready whenever you are.

I'm ready.

Okay.

Thank you.

So I want to take the opportunity really quickly to clarify something.

Negotiations are entirely part of the protest.

I'm entirely part of the procurement process.

The only dangerous rhetoric on here is that negotiations are allowed to bring proposals into compliance.

Negotiations are intended, a good negotiation will add additional value.

Get you a better price.

They do not bring proposals into compliance.

That is against the law.

But they said that they had already been in compliance with the mandatory requirements in response to the RFP, even before even before the protest was filed.

And quite respectful very fast, respectfully, mayor, the words on the page are not consistent with that point of view.

They're not consistent.

They're not that that's not employee, that's not um attorney rhetoric, that's not flair, that's the city's own words in writing, confirming that the proposal deviates, was not compliant, was not what the city asked for.

And then on record asking them to come into compliance.

Okay.

The law does not allow that.

Okay.

So this uh system configuration is probably the most significant issue in the procurement because this is not just a technical deviation.

This is capacity.

And in a public safety radio system, capacity matters most when the system is under stress.

So capacity determines how many simultaneous communications the system can handle when police, fire, EMS, mutual aid, and emergency responses are all operating at the same time.

The city understood that, uh, and that is why the city representative told Motorola the system needed at least 16 channels.

Motorola proposed 10.

And the chief procurement officer said the key sentence.

It should have already been included in your proposal.

That sentence matters.

The city was not asked adding asking Motorola for additional value.

The city was saying this was part of the system Motorola should have proposed from the beginning.

A 10 channel system is not the same product as a 16-channel system.

It's not the same capacity, it's not the same price, it's not the same safety performance.

CI and other proposers had to price the system the RFP required when proposals were due.

Motorola submitted a smaller configuration, received the benefit of a lower evaluated price, and then was given the opportunity after proposals were open to decide what it could add, revise, or absorb.

This next excerpt moves the issue from technical compliance to the procurement fairness.

The chief procurement officer says he is speaking from a procurement standpoint.

And then he says, I know for a fact that all other proposers went along with the city's position on this.

Again, this isn't ambiguity in language.

He continues.

Each and every proposer said each and every proposer that responded to this had agreed to the city's position and the system configuration aspect.

That is a critical admission.

He was that again, not ambiguity.

According to the city's own chief procurement officer, every other proposer followed what the city was asking for.

Motorola did not.

That is an unequal playing field.

Every other proposer had to price the city's required system.

When proposals were due, Motorola did not.

Was that a mandatory requirement?

Absolutely.

Okay.

This is one of the most important excerpts in the entire record.

The chief procurement officer says the protester is going to get a copy of these negotiations.

Then he says, they're going to play this in front of the commissioners.

And what did he know CI would point out?

He knew CI would point out that the city's intent was 16 channels.

He knew CI would point out that the city had moved forward with something lesser than what it expected.

And he knew CI would point out that.

Sorry.

He I'm sorry, he would he wouldn't that point out that the city had moved forward with something lesser than what it expected.

And he knew CI would point out the CI had provided what he called an optimal solution for, and I quote, everything we asked for.

That is not CI's hindsight.

That is the chief procurement officer during negotiations, identifying the very problem now before you.

The very problem that we identified in our protest.

Okay.

That concludes your comments.

Does it I've given you I've given you a lot of time and you needed to pace yourself.

But I I think we got the point.

All right, thank you.

Um Joe Carpenter's part of your group.

Mayor, Vice Mayor.

Joe Carpenter, I'm um resident of the city of Fort Lauderdale.

Also I I'm uh on the board of a condominium here in Fort in Fort Lauderdale, and I'm on the board of CI.

So I've been following this RFP since the beginning.

The facts really are not in dispute.

There's an RFP, there were timely responses, there was a recommendation to Motorola, and a competing vendor CI filed a timely protest with the chief procurement officer, alleging that Motorola's proposal was materially noncompliant with the RFP.

During the pendency of the protest, the chief procurement officer began to negotiate with with MSI or Motorola.

That in itself was a violation of your procurement procedures where they were supposed to be state pending the decision of the protest.

He specifically told them when he started, I'm here because there is a protest.

And during those negotiations, the chief procurement officer while denied the protests while at the same time invited, suggested, and required Motorola to change its answers to comply with the requirements of the RFP.

This happened time and time again.

The transcript of the negotiations are damning and they document just what we're saying.

To accept Motorola's position now, you this commission must ignore the facts that have been uncovered.

The RFP process was fatally flawed.

The commission sitting as the appellate review authority can do nothing other than uphold the appeal, or it will become too an active participate participant and an improper and illegal action.

I respectfully suggest commissioners, you only have one choice.

Uphold the appeal and instruct the city to move forward with the highest ranked compliance bidder.

Let me ask you a question.

If the city commission were to throw out all bids, like the city manager had recommended, so we're back to square one.

Uh your company would your company would make a proposal, Motorola make a proposal, so all the all the the um issues that Motorola had to will say correct in the process will now be part of the uh the initial uh uh proposal.

How do you gain in that situation?

I I think if you look at what the city manager responded early on in this whole process, I think it was two meetings ago, what she said was she was go she was going to recommend to reject all, and because of the issues that had arisen in the interpretation of the RFP and the competing uh interpretations of that, there were going to be more clarified specifications that would be bid, but because both Motorola and CI had bid this twice already, she felt, and I believe I believe I speak for CI when we say we feel it can be turned around relatively quickly and get a true apples and apples.

Right, but you're not answering my question.

To answer my question, you know, if there were deficiencies, yes.

You're saying there were deficiencies of Motorola's response, correct?

And you feel that as a result of those deficiencies, they should not have been awarded the contract, right?

Okay, or the recommendation should not have been made uh in the on their behalf.

So if we if if we do what the city manager recommended, which was to throw out all protests.

Now we have now we're starting from square one, and now CI will make its its uh response, Motorola will make its response with all the corrections.

Correct.

Okay.

How does that advance CI's uh uh uh application?

Because we we believe, and we did, in fact, what we were pointing out, we bid a much more robust system that than Motorola did.

And Apples and Apples uh RFP where we're both bidding the same thing, we'll compete on price.

Well, based on the history of this process, you actually think that's gonna be the result.

I do.

I do.

I think there are a series of clarifications that can be.

You've already spoken, so I can't have you come up again.

Yeah, there's a series of clarifications that can be made to the RFP that would make it much easier and much less subjective on this whole thing.

Okay, thank you, sir.

Um the other people that have signed up to speak are on behalf of Motorola.

Joe Warner, uh Josh uh Trifiletti, and uh Ellen Bogdanov.

Is uh is there is you don't have a presentation.

Do you have a presentation or you just want to respond to certain points?

And will are any of these other folks, Josh or or um Joe, are they just gonna appoint you to to make these minutes so?

Mayor, Commissioners, thank you.

Ellen Bogdanov for Motorola.

I just want to clarify a couple of things, and then Mark Stempler's actually here as the attorney who responded uh to the protest, and he may need to come up if you have any questions, but you know, to CI's credit, they've done a phenomenal job of mudding up the waters, and I just want to kind of clarify a couple of things.

The response for Motorola was out there, and they had the opportunity to add those to their protest.

And I'm just gonna use one example, this whole 10-channel versus 16 channel thing.

The RFP put in requirements.

This is what we need.

Tell us how many channels you need in order to accomplish this goal.

They said ten.

Your consultant, who is your expert, who I probably would suggest you call up, said that is in compliance.

CI decided, well, we're gonna do 16.

That also complies.

Doesn't mean the 10 didn't comply.

And with all due respect, what happened in the negotiations, which should not even be considered, is what we call in sales puffing.

And to Glenn's credit, um, he extracted another 3.5 million.

So if I'm in negotiations and I say to you, wow, you've complied with everything, you did everything to the letter of the law, but I want more.

I'm gonna look at you and say, No.

What he did is he kind of used language that they took advantage of because he wanted to extract more from Motorola.

Okay, so your position so your position is uh Motorola's position is that they comply with the they complied with the mandatory requirements of the RFP, and that and that during these negotiations, post-award negotiations, that um that Glenn was uh or someone on his staff was able to exact additional uh benefits that were not otherwise in the response.

Correct.

But they still they still you're saying they still complied with the with the RFP for the mandatory elements of the of the RFP.

Correct.

And if we remember when they when they filed their protest, they only brought up two issues that were summarily dismissed.

Not only by your procurement director, which were the which were the two.

Uh the two were and I'm gonna ask you to come up because they're they added they can't they kept all right.

Uh Glenn, do you recall one response was conditional if FCC approved and also warranty did not meet requirements?

The warranty requirements, and then the actual uh system, uh the actual range of the system, right?

Are the two issues that were brought forth and they were both denied?

I did not act in the vacuum mayor.

I went ahead and consulted consulted with the city's consultant, and so we looked at the protest, and from a technical point of view, they failed on the merits.

So those two you felt were were compliant, those two elements you thought they were compliant with the RFP.

Yes, based upon um discussion with the city's consultant.

Absolutely, those two were were in compliance with the RFP requirements.

And those are the only two elements in their protest.

The original protest, yes.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, Glenn, while you're up there, I apologize for interrupting.

Okay, I need this clarified.

Is it true that other than pricing that CI received four out of five first place votes?

Was it simply the pricing that changed the award?

Commissioner, I would have to go back to do that analysis.

What I can say is that Motor Waller was recommended by the EC, and your public safety um officials ranked Motorola number one.

So I think you would have to take that into account and consideration.

But doing the analysis that they did, of course.

They're gonna do an analysis that's gonna favor you know their position, but they're actually now almost rewriting the RFP requirement and criteria.

So now what they're doing is they're acting arbitrarily and capricious.

Now, if I would have done that, I would have been in violation of law.

But now they're coming before you using persuasive arguments, which I did during negotiations.

Now they're saying that wasn't allowed, but yet now they're doing some of the same thing to convince you otherwise.

Thus I do uh concur with um Ellen, they're muddying up the waters.

And so I implore the commission that you should not listen to some of the things that they're raising, because once again it's outside the four corners of the original process.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

I I I I uh I kind of finished.

I think I think we got it all.

Okay, I mean I again.

If we have any questions, okay.

Let's leave it up to the commission now.

No one else is signed up to speak.

We need to move on.

So um uh commission, um what's your what what's your pleasure?

What would you like to do?

So right now the posture again is uh is to whether or not to uh allow the appeal of the denial of the protest.

Is you understand that?

Appeal of the denial of the protests.

That's what we're asked to consider.

And and the and the basis upon which this appeal rests is whether or not the denial of the protest exceeded the authority of um the procurement officer in his uh denial of the protests.

Did he go outside the bounds of his authority in the basis of his uh denial of the protest?

So um, shall I so I I think um that there are infirmities in the process.

Uh I don't I don't ascribe any ill intent to any of the parties.

I think Motorola is a great company, I think CI is a great company, and I think Glenn did his best to get the best deal for the city.

So, again, not not casting aspersions to anybody involved in this process, but I do think there are infirmities in how it was conducted, and I think the city manager's recommendations to uh start over again is the best path forward.

I think it's puts the city uh on on the most secure legal grounds.

I don't want to see us engage in litigation over this because that'll slow this down a lot more than taking three months to put it out to bid well.

We can do this very quickly.

We already have all the specs.

We're we're not starting from scratch.

This isn't going to be months and months and months and months and months.

It'll be three months.

Start to finish, we could do this by the time we get back from summer break.

So I I really think that the best posture and the safest posture for the city is to go with the city manager's recommendation.

We reject all bids, put it back out there.

We know who's gonna respond.

They've already put their responses together.

It's no work for them to do this, and you know, something was brought up uh earlier uh by that uh we talked about how there was some confusion in the RFP.

So part of my consulting practice is working with companies responding to RFPs with the federal government, and we have pre-bid conferences, and the reason for pre-bid conferences is to clarify ambiguity.

That's why we do it that way.

So any questions that any respondent has is clarified in the pre-bid conference and the FAQs that get put out.

That's the purpose of that.

So I I don't think we should get to the point where we're clarifying ambiguity after award.

So I think the safest posture for the city is to uh reject all bids, and that would be my motion.

Okay, uh, is there a second to that motion?

Okay, no second yet.

Okay.

I'll have a question before making that.

We're going through this process, what's gonna be different with what's being presented?

That's the point.

You know, everyone, both teams know exactly what's um put in that RFP.

So what's gonna be different this time that's gonna make a change in the results?

That's that's why that's what I asked the uh CI representative.

I said, even if we go back, where is that going to put us all?

We're just going to go back.

Everyone knows what the other par uh what the other party has submitted.

Uh each side um has has uh has now presented their their best offer uh unless CI is gonna say okay I can give 26 channels, you know.

I don't I don't know how that works.

All I know is that I don't know how far ahead that gets us, uh or how far ahead the the applicants get us uh because um because i they're just gonna resubmit the same offer.

Well I I think mayor, if I if I may, I think it gives us an opportunity to clarify those ambiguities uh and confusing details like do we need a shed?

How many channels do we actually need as a as a minimum requirement for for the submittal?

Um if there were if there was any issues that apparently were not clear to the bidders, a rebid is an opportunity to put out a document that everybody understands.

So we don't find ourselves going through this a third time.

Well, actually, it's is this the third or fourth?

I I just have to I think I have to disagree with that approach and again at the last city commission meeting, the commission rejected that approach.

That's why that is why this is in front of us tonight because we said at the last meeting that we did not want to reject all bids and start all over.

That's what we said as a commissioner.

Again, why do we always have this pattern where we make a decision and then all of a sudden we have amnesia and we forget and we go back and we change our mind and let's just be consistent.

All right, so do you have a motion?

So if I may though, so I'd like to answer that because I think that's a very good point, because I think we did it without benefit of this presentation.

Had I had we gone through this presentation, we may not have come to that same conclusion.

I I would disagree.

Did you meet with I I met I met multiple times with both parties.

I had I have had all of this information for over a month.

You haven't had that information for over a month?

I have, but it's a lot it's a lot more powerful to see the presentation, hear the back and forth, have an opportunity to have this dialogue, and by the way, in front of the public in a transparent manner.

Not not a one-on-one conversation that I have with them behind closed doors.

Well, I think it's a good dilama in my head just by reading the information.

So I think it's I think it's important that the public gets to hear this as well.

This is a very important decision.

It's a major contract, and I think the public has a right to hear how we're making these decisions.

Alright, would someone like to introduce uh uh provide another motion?

There was a motion made, didn't get a second.

Is someone wanted what kind of motion now we have the question is uh the appeal uh this is an appeal of the chief procurement officer's denial of the protest.

So someone like to make a motion whether or not to deny the appeal or accept uh the appeal.

Well, I again this is a difficult one.

First of all, I want to commend both parties.

You guys are all experts.

If I had my way, I would split the baby and I'll let one one party do the infrastructure and one party do the infrastructure.

But that obviously is not gonna happen.

But that that being said, both parties, and I agree with what Commissioner Beasley Pittman is saying.

What would be different if we threw out everything and started?

Okay, so let's move this thing along.

Okay, I am gonna move this thing along.

Calm down.

So what I really feel like I I want to say is considering all of the record evidence, everything we've read, everything we've heard, everything we've seen, um, I I just believe that the commission needs to affirm the chief procurement officer's decision uh and deny the protest.

That's exactly what I think.

Deny the appeal.

Deny the appeal.

Right.

Okay.

All right.

Is there a second to that?

Second.

Okay.

It's been moved and seconded.

All right.

So uh here we go.

So the item here before us now is to deny the appeal of the chief procurement officers' uh denial of protest.

Um any further questions or comments?

Repeat that.

Okay.

So the motion that has now been seconded is to deny the appeal of the chief procurement officers' denial of the protests.

I rephrase that for you, Mayor.

Yes, you rephrase that for you.

Um I believe and Commissioner Glassman is I believe what you are saying is that you wanted to affirm your chief procurement Officer's denial of the appeal.

Is that your motion?

Yes, that's what I said.

Thank you.

It is what I said, isn't it?

Yeah, but I okay.

I I either way, it's it's it's not the chief procurement officer didn't have the appeal.

He had the protest.

You're affirming his denial of the protest.

The appeal is considering exactly denial and display.

Get rid of the word appeal.

Right.

Okay.

Well, it happens to be on the motion.

All right.

It's been moved and seconded.

Please call the role.

Commissioner Beastly Peppin.

Yes.

Yes.

Commissioner Herbst.

Commissioner Glossman?

Yes.

Yes.

And I don't know what it is.

The motion's approved, whatever it was.

All right.

Let's take it.

Let's take a ten minute break.

City Commission evening meeting will now reconvene.

R1 appointment of board and committee members.

Mr.

Clerk, could you please where's Mr.

Where's the clerk?

Right there.

We've got a lot of people here for R7, so we got to get through R one R six pretty quick.

Thank you, Mayor.

For tonight's uh resolution.

We have for the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, Chantel Jerome, nominated by Commissioner Herbst, Aviation Advisor Board, Kelly Gordon, nominated by Commissioner Beasley Pittman.

Beach Business Improvement District Advisor Board, Jeanette Alvarez, alternate member representing Hotel Marin.

Parks Recreation and Beaches Board, Joy Oglesby, nominated by Commissioner Beasley Pittman.

And Sustainability Advisor Board, Suzy Bailey, nominated by Mayor Trentalus.

And we did I sent or our office sent out an email last night with regards to adding an additional name for the Central City Redevelopment Advisory Board, Charlene Gunn, nominated by Commissioner Glossman.

If we could add that to the resolution.

Resolution has been introduced.

Please call the role.

And that's as amended.

As amended.

Thank you.

A resolution of the city commission of the city of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, appointing or nominating, if applicable, board and committee members as set forth in the exhibit attached here to made a part here of Commissioner Beasley Pittman.

Yes.

Vice Mayor Sorensen?

Yes.

Commissioner Herbst.

Yes.

Commissioner Glassman?

Yes.

Mayor Trentals.

Yes.

And those uh board and committee members are now approved, and I want to thank them for their commitment to our community and uh for the betterment of the city of Fort Lauderdale.

Moving on to R2 resolution approving a landscape maintenance memorandum of agreement for State Road 845 and the Florida Department of Transportation for Landscape Improvements.

Would someone like to introduce the resolution?

Introduce introduced.

No one is signed up to speak.

Any questions?

Please call the roll.

A resolution of the city commission of the city of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, approving and authorizing the execution of a Florida Department of Transportation, District 4 Landscape Maintenance Memorandum of Agreement between the City of Fort Lauderdale and the Florida Department of Transportation for the Installation and Maintenance of Landscape Improvements within the right-of-way of State Road 845 and an assumption of liability and hold harmless agreement between the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and Gallagh LLC and providing for an effective date.

Commissioner Beasley Pittman?

Yes.

Vice Mayor Sorensen?

Yes.

Commissioner Herbst?

Yes.

Commissioner Glassman?

Yes.

Mayor Trentals.

Yes.

And that item is now approved.

R3 resolution approving a 22nd amendment to the landscape maintenance maintenance memorandum of agreement for State Road A1A and the Florida Department of Transportation for landscape improvements.

Someone like to introduce the resolution.

Introduced.

It's been introduced.

No one is signed up to speak.

Anyone have any questions?

Mr.

Clerk, please call the role.

Memorandum of agreement between the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and the Florida Department of Transportation for the installation maintenance of landscape improvements within the right-of-way of State Road A1A and an assumption of liability and hold harmless agreement between the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida and Broward County, Florida, and providing for an effective date.

Commissioner Beasley Pittman?

Yes.

Vice Mayor Swanson?

Yes.

Commissioner Herbst.

Yes.

Commissioner Glassman?

Yes.

Mayor Trentals.

Yes, and R three is now approved.

R 4 resolution authorizing the issuance of stormwater utility systems special assessment revenue bonds.

Not to exceed $333 million.

Okay.

No one has signed up to speak.

Anyone have any questions?

I know bond council are here.

If you have any questions, there being no questions.

Someone like to introduce a resolution.

Resolution has been introduced.

Please call the roll.

A resolution of City Commission of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, authorizing the issuance and sale of stormwater utility systems special assessment revenue bond series 2026 in the aggregate principal amount of not exceeding 333 million for the purpose of paying a portion of the cost of improvements to the city's stormwater utility system, including without limitation reimbursement to the city for cost of such improvements advanced by the city from its internal funds and paying the cost of issuance of the series 2026 bonds delegating authority to the city manager to determine the terms of the series 2026 bonds within the perimeters set forth herein, authorizing the public sale by competitive bid of such series 2026 bonds, approving the form of the official notice of bond sale authorizing the city manager to award the series 2026 bonds within the perimeters set forth herein, authorizing the execution and directing the authentication and delivery of such series 2026 bonds authorizing the printing and use of a preliminary official statement and the execution and delivery of an official statement with respect to said series 2026 bonds, approving uncertificated book entry only registration of said series 2026 bonds with the depository trust company providing for the application of the proceeds of said series 2026 bonds, appointing a paying agent and bond register and a disclosure dissemination agent for the series 2026 bonds, approving the form of and authorizing the execution of a paying agent and bond register agreement covenant covenant and to provide continuing disclosure in connection with such bond such series 2026 bonds in accordance with Rule 15 C two-12 and approving the form of and authorizing the execution of a continuing disclosure commitment with respect there to authorizing other required actions and providing for an effective date.

Commissioner Beasley Pittman.

Yes.

Thank you.

I was gonna say read it again.

Don't you care?

Commissioner Herbst.

Yes.

Commissioner Glassman?

Yes.

Mayor Trentals.

Yes, um, couple things.

Now this is to cover all 12 projects.

Is that the is that the intent?

The 333 million.

So we're going to start design work for the first batch of those projects.

First eight, yeah.

Okay.

But I mean, this does this cover construction as well.

It does not cover construction.

We're going to have issuances in the years to come.

If we were to draw down all the money at one time, it would put a significant burden on our users.

I understand that.

So this is just covering design for the for the first tranche.

I see our public works directly.

Good evening, Mayor.

So the money that is allocated for this set funding is approximately 200 plus million is to go to complete phase one of Fortify, and then about a hundred and ten to a hundred and twenty million will go to design of the first three projects in phase two.

Okay, so phase one, if I'm not mistaken, goes up to is it number seven or number?

Which all of the projects listed one through twelve, those are part of Fortify Lauderdale phase two.

These are phase two projects that are listed.

So this is for design for phase two.

Okay.

Right, and it'll finish the aisles, it'll it'll finish Victoria Park, and it will finish uh Melrose and Riverland.

It's construction, construction.

Okay, all right.

All right, we'll spend it wise.

I need you to specify.

I'm sorry.

Merrose Park.

I apologize, Commissioner.

We'll spend it wisely.

We don't want it to go down the drain.

And mayor, we've planned for the net issuance to continue along the Fortify Lauderdale initiative in 2029.

So we are planning on continuously issuing debt as we complete projects to fund the next phase of the project.

And I understand the process.

I just wanted to know what the 333 million dollars was covering because it's a lot of money.

Okay.

All right.

Uh moving on to R 5 resolution approving the first amendment to the interlocal agreement between the city of Fort Lauderdale and the Lauderdale Community Redevelopment Agency to add capital improvement master plan project for the central city community redevelopment area.

No one has signed up to speak.

Um someone would like to introduce the resolution.

Introduced.

Resolution has been introduced.

Any questions?

Please call the roll.

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

Commissioner Beasley Pittman?

Yes.

Vice Mayor Sorensen?

Yes.

Commissioner Herbst?

Yes.

Commissioner Glossman?

Yes.

Mayor Trentals.

Yes, and R5 is now approved.

R6 resolution approving the appointment of special bond council and special disclosure council for the issuance of water and sewer revenue bonds, uh series 2026 and funding improvements to the water and sewer utility system and prescribing compensation.

Uh no one has signed up to speak.

Uh someone would like to introduce the resolution.

Introduce.

Resolution's been introduced.

Any questions?

There being none, please call the roll.

A resolution to the commission of the city of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, appointing Albert Del Castillo of Greenberg Tarag PA as special bond counsel and Steve Bullock of Steve E.

Bollock PA as special disclosure counsel to the city of Fort Lauderdale, Florida in connection with the issuance of water and sewer revenue bonds series 2026 for improvements to water and sewer utility system prescribing the compensation to be paid to such special counsel and providing for an effective date.

Commissioner Beasley Pittman?

Yes.

Vice Mayor Sewens?

Yes.

Commissioner Herbst?

Yes.

Commissioner Glassman?

Yes.

Mayor Trentelles.

Yes, and R6 is now approved.

Okay, now moving on to R7.

This is the resolution to adopt the first amendment to the interlocal agreement for solid waste disposal and recyclable materials processing authority have any introductory, Florida.

Number of people sign up to make or do you want to just go into public comment?

I'm going to defer to our public works director, Brad Cain, and I know there's a companion item as well.

R8, correct.

Okay, Brad, please.

Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, fellow commissioners.

So to start with, I'll give a little update um of where the process uh went with the uh solid waste governing board on June 15th.

The board met and they made some modifications to the second amendment uh for the opt-out provisions that uh after consideration from other municipalities' inputs, um, they took that and they put that in the agreement.

And what those two provisions do is one, it will allow uh any municipal member to get out uh prior to the pricing that comes back through a competitive selective RFP process in 2027, and there will be another provision that allows any municipality to get out of the agreement um in 2048, 20 years through the agreement, because it's a 40-year agreement.

With that, so you know this reminds me of like a prenuptial agreement, right?

You want to get married, but you're already planning the divorce.

Okay.

What is the thinking there?

What I mean, what is the why are we talking, why are we focusing on on timetables to get out?

What is the benefits of getting in?

That's what we really need to hear about.

Well, I'm gonna I'm gonna I'm just gonna talk about a little of these things first, and then I will get into that for sure as well.

Um so to clarify also, so this in order for the second amendment, and that's relate relating to R8 tonight, um, to be in effect, all members who are of the SW who've passed the facilities amendment, and I believe it's approximately 20 cities at this point, but we have staff from SWA that can correct me or update me because it does change quite frequently, have to pass the second amendment in order for those provisions and opt-outs to be uh eligible for any of the members.

If any city who has passed the SWA uh facilities amendment and then they that does not pass the second amendment, it dies.

And what that means is then any municipality who has passed this facilities amendment will be in that agreement for 40 years.

I think it's just an important thing to understand uh when we're talking about uh moving forward, but those provisions with all of the cities passing it at a hundred percent, we have an ability to opt out once the pricing comes in next year, staff can evaluate it and see if we like the pricing on the different waste streams and recycling, and then we can make a decision if we want to, you know, go forward or not.

So do we have to make the decision as to whether or not to participate before or after the second amendment is voted on?

That's a very interesting question.

So the two items tonight, one is to pass the facilities amendment and go forward, and the second and the second item R8 has to do with the um second amendment, which also needs to be passed, and obviously we we wanted the cities passing it, but to be transparent, August 14th is the deadline.

So if all of the other cities do not pass the um second amendment and we sign on to the agreement, and perhaps any time after that happens, one city for whatever reason doesn't pass it, we are locked into this agreement for 40 years irrespective.

So mayor, what uh so an option that we can prevail ourselves of if we want, is to say we will support be in favor of the first amendment amendment on the condition that the second amendment passes unanimously.

Thus, if it doesn't pass unanimously, we can opt out.

We we in other words, we don't we are not um part of the SWA in agreement with the first amendment.

Is that option being given to us?

I think it's a legal question, and we would have to kind of work through that between the SWA and North the City Attorney's Office.

I'm not sure exactly how that proposal would work.

Um, you know, if we can conditionally uh enter it with that provision or not.

I don't believe any other municipality has done that.

So this is kind of a first.

So I I think we would have to work through that.

The other municipalities are already part of the of the group, so they're already they're already in it.

We're not in it yet, but they're pr there in order to entice uh other members to participate, they are proposing the second amendment, which makes it more palatable for cities like Fort Lauderdale to participate and be part of the be part of the group, right?

So right, but some cities that do pass it at this point that have passed it, I I they have not passed it with any proviso like that.

They've just passed it.

Well, because that's the because the second amendment hadn't been invented yet.

It's just now coming up.

Correct, exactly, mayor.

Exactly.

And a lot of the cities who have already passed the first amendment might not feel as strongly as we do about having the opt-out post RFP.

Right.

Right.

And so it could further entice other cities who may be on the fence like us to say, hey, now that there's a second amendment with an opt-out provision, we're gonna work we might consider it, and or we might those other cities might do exactly what we're suggesting, which is conditional approval of the first dependent on passage of the second.

Mayor, could I offer some historical background on this?

So please, so commissions through my through my 20 years here have repeatedly passed uh passed things with conditional approval.

I know in many instances when I was the auditor, we would pass an item and it was conditioned upon the auditors' review and approval of extra documents that had not been provided.

So we've done this before.

So with there is past practice of this, and I and I agree with uh with the vice mayor.

Um I'm not a huge fan of this, but one of the things that the opt-out provision allows us to do is continue to work on some of the things that I think you are not quite in our favor at this point in time, but we can't get these resolved between now and August.

But there are certain things that I would like to see in the future agreement, and that's a guaranteed seat on the executive committee and some things like that.

But there's no way we can get those things resolved in the time frame that we have for this, and I don't want it to die for that issue.

So, you know, I trust that uh that whoever is sitting up there for the next year will be able to get those provisions put in there, we could amend the bylaws, do whatever we need to do to come up with an agreement that better suits the needs of Fort Lauderdale.

Um, but it it gives us time to do that if we approve this on a conditional level.

If we don't have if all the cities don't approve, as the vice mayor was saying, that second amendment, it's the second amendment that has the opt-out.

Exactly.

So so I I completely concur that we need to we need to make our our approval tonight if we so decide to go in that direction, conditional upon the second amendment being adopted by all the cities.

Otherwise, uh I think it it fails for us.

Okay, agree, and just one additional point, Mayor to Commissioner Herp's point, is if we do that, if the second amendment passes, we can opt out post RFP for any reason we want within a year.

Once RFP comes back, yeah, exactly.

So it doesn't have to be price determinative is why we opt out the Commissioner Herp's point.

It could be because we haven't secured a permanent seat, or it could be any host of other issues as we decide.

Okay, all right, that's good to know.

All right, continue.

No, so just going back to a couple of the points you made.

The the um being part of the SWA offers a lot of uh benefits because there are pricing that they get on a most favored nations provision for different um uh disposal streams of waste.

Uh first and leave for solid waste, because obviously we're in the interlocal agreement now with the county, uh, so we will get you know really good pricing on disposal.

And you know, some of our as we did in our comparison, some of the pricing we're getting on our own disposal systems are very similar, so um, you know, we'd like to obviously see what their recycling processing numbers are gonna come in.

So there's there's benefits to that and and being you know partners with all the other cities, they provide education for recycling and things like that as well.

So, you know, there are some positive benefits to being in the SWA.

Okay.

Do you have any further any further that's okay?

So um let us now hear from the public and of course I'm gonna want to hear from our commissioners first.

So um uh commissioner beam for the U.S.

Chair, well, that I don't know.

Who is the chair?

Oh chair take a seat.

No, no, go ahead.

Okay, this is Mayor Michael Ryan from Sunrise.

Mayor, uh, Vice Mayor, Commissioners.

Uh first of all, uh, thank you.

Thank you.

Tell the truth, the whole thing.

I want to begin on behalf of my colleagues, municipal colleagues, and thank you for the CLE on procurement.

Uh we learned a lot tonight, and once again, Fort Lauderdale has led and allowed us to maybe avert some of the shoals.

I stand here as mayor, of course, and as chair, but most importantly, as your colleague on the governing board of the Solid Waste Authority.

And it's ironic that I stand here tonight because it was over 10 years ago that it was Sunrise in Fort Lauderdale that took on the county when the RRB was collapsing.

We made the decision together, one and two, to take on the county to protect the assets, and we filed suit.

Commissioner Herbst was our was our auditor in that process.

And we fought together for all the cities, even those that didn't join us in the litigation.

And today we stand here with the opportunity, a once in a generation opportunity to correct decisions that occurred 50 years ago and 40 years ago and 30 years ago that we were not part of, that destined us to this environmental and economic crisis that we face in trash.

We have the ability to do what the county said we could not do, and that was to work together as cities to govern ourselves.

To the credit of the county, they have stepped aside.

This has been a city-led effort.

The Solid Waste Working Group, which you were a part of, and by the way, just like you did tonight, you corrected the date from uh 2026.

You had your red pen out the whole time, correcting commas and otherwise.

And we fought together with sharp elbows.

I know I I know him.

I'm surprised it took that long to raise it, actually, in the presentation.

But we have the opportunity together to make those once-in-a-generation decisions to take on this crisis.

Do we need the county?

Don't we need the county to be part of this?

And they are part of this.

And to their credit, what they did is said, and it is absolutely true.

If this fails, if we do not live past August 14th, it will not be because of the county.

No, but do we need the county's resources and participation in order to be able to create that um that critical mass to be able to uh negotiate for best pricing in order to uh have the funding for facilities that would create waste to energy um of uh um uh what do they call those um burners?

Plant of it's a yeah.

Uh I mean I I just came from a mayor's I just came from a mayor's conference.

Uh it was the world mayors conference, and all anyone talks about is waste to energy.

Um, and and how's all these different countries are so far ahead of us in in the technology and making this a reality.

And so don't we you say this is a city-led uh effort, but don't we need the resources of the county?

You need the county, and I am glad they are at the table.

They have participated in this process, not only through the concepts of their staff and the ability to galvanize, particularly as it comes to county uh enforced ordinances or otherwise as we move forward.

They are a welcome partner.

But my point is, unlike the RRB, we had an advisory board participation.

The county led this, they made all the decisions.

We had no involvement.

We now all have a guaranteed seat on the governing board.

The SWA is the cities that participate.

So what's so what's the role of the county then?

The county is participating, and there there are features that are important.

For instance, the BIC and what happens with what certain aspects are one vote.

They are just one vote.

Okay, mayor, put your mic on.

Mike, your mic, mic, my mic.

Mike, mic, bike, mike.

I'm sorry.

So so our collective mayors, um, so one of the things that that I I recall from my past here, uh, sadly, is that it's the county that actually has responsibility under the state for solid waste disposal facilities.

So I believe they have to be a part of this, don't they?

They have to be, but they don't have the responsibility for disposal.

They have a responsibility to provide the opportunity for disposal.

Right.

That's all they do.

So they have to create.

They have to create basically waste planning, um, they do waste management, recycling, all that reporting that they have to do with the municipalities, handle daily residential garbage collection.

So it's why I think that partnership matters, right?

It does, it absolutely matters, and it matters in the sense that when the county says that the option for cities is the SWA, they have met their obligation.

And I put that in context, because for cities who do not participate, they face the risk, as was said by Mr.

King, of not only not having most favored nation, but not even participating in the disposal options that we will be taking.

And I want to be really clear, we've talked to other cities about this.

There is finite capacity at waste energy, there's finite capacity at the landfill.

For those who do not participate, they are going to be faced potentially with finding their own disposal.

And that's fine.

But for the cities that do participate, as you know, and you've been participating, the focus is, and Commissioner Herbst understands this on a most favored nation to make sure that we are managing our own environmental and economic destiny as the cities together.

And so the first time, unlike the RRB, we all have a vote.

And I want to just address two issues.

The Second Amendment, this was a product of the discussions that we had with Fort Lauderdale with open and transparent, honest discussions about it.

And in the first instance, it was not clear that that would pass.

There were some cities that did not want to have any opt-out.

They felt it sent the wrong message to the market and it sent the wrong message to our colleagues.

You said it.

We're planning for the divorce.

And they felt principled against it.

But what came out of that process through the discussions we had is that if we have faith in what we're doing, we do not fear December 2027 and what decisions cities will make because it's our obligation to prove this is the right system.

And when it came back, and I brought it back, when it came back as a proposed amendment, it passed unanimously of all cities.

So this fear, and I think it's a one of these theoretical, bit more than asteroid striking, but what lawyers do best, right?

As a lawyer and one who slept at Holiday and Express, is that we worry about the things that could happen.

But every city agreed at the governing board on this opt out, and there's no principled reason not to.

What we're doing now is going back to the 15 who originally uh agreed to this and getting it on their agenda.

Sunrise has already passed it, a number of other cities have already passed the second because it makes no sense to go against it.

That's the second amendment.

Correct.

So we've already done that, and that's what the work of the SWA staff has been, as well as the members on the governing board, is to get that back to send the message for you all that we are committed.

Right, but you need unanimity in the United States.

And we're gonna get there.

Okay.

We're gonna get there.

I mean, can I promise you that lazy lakes can meet over the summer?

I can't promise you that.

But we I are they signers?

Yes, they have, and and they are working to put the second amendment on it because let me let me make it clear.

They understand the importance of what the message has been sent, and they will do it.

And the second part is Commissioner Herbstead, we have the opportunities because we are the cities, we are the governing board to address any of the issues between now and December of 2027, and it includes what it looks like.

And I I have a proposal I'm ready to provide that will guarantee a seat, will give you the voice on the executive committee you want, but I will just end with this.

As uh Commissioner Sorensen pointed out, every member of the governing board who shows up to an executive committee meeting is treated like a member of the executive committee.

We do not constrain dialogue.

We I think it's because, in part, we're colleagues.

We understand what it is to have a voice, and we understand the criticisms that have been raised before that we can't govern ourselves.

Does the executive board have any authority to make decisions that don't include the entire group?

No, and that's an incredibly important point.

The executive committee's decisions, even on budget or otherwise, are pure recommendations to the governing board.

And we have seen on occasion, very rarely, where the executive committee has raised and pushed along, and the governing board has said time out, we want more information.

It has not been a rubber stamp, and I think it's fair to worry sometimes that uh working groups or executive committees can be you know the actual place where everything is done.

That in in not only deference, but in uh I would say accommodation and a compliment to our colleagues on the governing board.

They treat that role seriously, and they do not rubber stamp the executive committee.

And so I think that this is the opportunity for us to send a message that we will control our own environmental and economic destiny, that we will do it together.

And this has been one of the first instances where we have galvanized not just environmental groups that are here and the League of Women Voters, but the Broward Workshop, Florida Panthers, City Furniture, Corporate America saying we have to move forward together on this.

Because if we don't do this together, the fragmented system we have we're stuck with will continue to be a failure.

But you know, mayor, none of those none of those um entities have tax paying constituents that they have to answer to.

We do.

You do, of course.

Right?

Of course.

So, you know, and we have to make sure that that we're gonna get the the biggest bang for the buck.

Agreed, in terms of in terms of what we what we charge our ratepayers.

So um, so it's great that all these business groups are you know going rah-rah rah, you know, please pull this together and make it happen.

But you know, we have to be very careful about that this is going to be more the more c cost effective than if we we do it independently.

I agree with you, but there's another component why they've come to this.

We are running out of space, and at the point at which we do not have disposal options, we will be held over the barrel by the market.

We have already seen those market forces that drive pricing.

We live through that through the RB and the post-RB.

And there are players out there that are chirping in the ears of elected officials to say don't get behind this, don't get behind this because they own disposal facilities, because they are worried about their ox being gored, because they know when we put our tonnage together and we work together, we will get the best pricing, and we will not be held over the barrel because once we control tonnage and time, the market forces have to bend to our desires, not us bending to the market forces.

And so I implore you to give this thought to not only pass this tonight, but to continue in your leadership.

From the seagrass to the sawgrass, we have been taking this on, and we've been doing it for 15 years together.

And it was it was let me just say, it was born out of, you may not remember this, it was born out of when the strikers came back and we were standing there supporting the strikers in Fort Lauderdale, and we said from the seagrass to the sawgrass, we support soccer here in Brower County, long before Messi decided to show up.

So anyway, all right.

So I thank you for your consideration.

So, I mean, a lot of other people have signed up to speak, but can we assume that uh mayor Ryan has uh stated the case?

Yeah, okay, all right.

So um, so now I'll leave it up to the commission.

I'm gonna ask some questions.

Very thank you.

Thank you for your time and accommodation.

Thank you.

Thank you.

But before the mayor steps away, can could I just ask you?

I want you to start with the questions.

Well, uh great.

Well, before he leaves.

So are are you comfortable with with the the concept that I proposed about a conditional approval?

So I want to make sure that that we are signaling to everybody that we want to be part of this, but there's always that one of those things.

I just want to make sure that we're that you're okay with that as a as a as a way for us to move forward and get this done tonight.

Commissioner Herbst, I welcome that, and I thank you for raising it because it is a way for us to move forward.

I'm confident we're gonna pass the second amendment unanimously.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Commissioner Harps.

All right, uh Commission, it's uh bumping up to 10 o'clock.

I need to I ask the mayor a question.

No, I need a motion to extend away.

You're gonna we're gonna need 60 minutes, yeah.

I'm trying to encourage a sense of haste and urgency.

All right, so move there's a motion to 11 o'clock.

A second, second.

Please call the role.

Commissioner, do you think that's the President of Swords?

Yes, yes, Mr.

Crossman?

Yes.

Yes, okay, thank you.

Now go ahead, Commissioner.

Thanks.

Mayor, thank you.

I appreciate it.

Can you just let us know where this is now in the process with regards to all of the percentages?

I mean, what's the percentage right now of cities that have taken on the saying yes?

I know you have to get to 80% of the population by August 14th, correct?

How are we doing?

We're doing really good.

Um Lauder Hill is putting it back on the agenda.

Everyone who's considered has passed it so far, and and so we are hopeful.

Uh, next week we have Hollywood, uh, we have Miramar coming up, and we have Lauder Hill coming up.

And at that point, we'll be over the 80 percent.

So those four cities will put it over the 80 percent.

Yes, okay, great.

Thank you.

Anyone else have any questions to Mayor Ryan?

Yeah, uh, not for Mayor Ron.

Thank you, Mayor.

I appreciate it, appreciate your leadership.

Um, city attorney, just want to track our concept of conditional approval based on second amendment.

And as much as Mayor Ryan accepted that as an option, yes.

Okay, no problem.

Great.

So we don't have anything to lose at this time.

Exactly, Mayor.

So what do you think?

Commissioner Beasley Pittman.

Oh, I'm in agreement.

I think we should take advantage of being a part of the process.

Um, don't want to be closed out of this generational opportunity.

Generational opportunities.

Okay, so Mayor, I'll I'll make a motion.

Resolution.

Uh, so how do we want to introduce so uh you want to introduce a resolution to adopt the first amendment subject to condition?

Commissioner Herbst, you want to phrase the how the resolution is the state.

Certainly, thank you.

So yes, I I would I would suggest that we introduce a resolution to approve the uh agreement subject to the adoption of the first amendment, the adoption of the second amendment, right?

The first amendment is uh is the one that gets us uh basically.

No, I'm saying you want to adopt the first amendment.

Right, adopt the first amendment subject to the approval of the second amendment by all the participating cities.

Okay, second.

Okay, just a technical question.

City attorney, we have a companion agenda item to this, don't we?

Yes, it's the next item.

It's the next item.

Okay, thank you.

Um does anyone else wish to speak on this item?

I know a lot of people signed up.

I just want to foreclose anybody on this.

Okay, very good.

Okay, um, all right.

Please call the roll.

A resolution of the city commission of the city of Fort Lauderdale, Florida approving the first amendment to the interlocal agreement for solid waste disposal and recyclable materials processing authority of Broward County, Florida, authorizing the city manager to execute the first amendment to the interlocal agreement, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, and providing for an effective date.

Commissioner Beasley Pittman?

Yes, Vice Mayor Sorensen.

Sir, hold on.

But uh is is that implied city attorney that it's conditional to the second amendment?

Even though he didn't say that, no, he did say it.

It was in the motion.

Oh, sorry, but he didn't the city clerk.

It was in the introduction.

So I just want to make sure that's good.

David, did you say you said that in the introduction?

He did not say conditional to the second.