Village Council - Regular Meeting

ALL RIGHT, EVERYBODY. WE'RE GOING TO GET STARTED. THE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING FOR TUESDAY, JUNE 23, 2026 IS CALLED TO ORDER AT 720 P.M. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A MOMENT OF SILENT MEDITATION. May I see that roll call, please?

Roll call. Mayor Nickerson. Here. Vice Mayor Martin. Present. Councilperson Erbaum. Present. Councilperson Lightfoot Ward. Council person winters present also present for the record Janice Jacoby village clerk David rules and village manager and Joseph better village attorney you have a quorum.

Thank you very much appreciate that the most to approve the agenda. So moved. Moved by Vice Mayor Martin. Do I have a second? Second. Second by Councilperson Michael Ward. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. Hearing none. Next is good and welfare. If you have anything to say, you come up first and last name for the record and your address and the floor is yours. Good and welfare. Come on up.

Alexandra Baza, 120 Northwest 86th Street. So today is officially nine months since the budget was approved that was supposed to be discussed within the next month. And here we are still waiting for the update. And I understand that a new hire was done for the police and some items. So just a reminder. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Good evening. 173 Northwest 88th Street. I'm Denise White, right? Been here since I was 12. So, you know, The other day, it came up that, well, it's not even the other day. People have been saying it. I haven't experienced it personally, but people have been saying it. And I just want to know if there are other people in the audience who have experienced it, because then that would be unfair. And I don't know about anybody else. Oh, by the way, ooh, Haiti's in the World Cup, right? Hey. Right? OK. Hey, yay, Haiti, right? OK, so yeah, I just want to know if other people have experienced it. But apparently, there's a rumor on the street that says if you come to the city council and you talk a lot of smack, you know, and get on people's nerves, that they then send out some goons called the permit people. And they be permitting people and making people's life I live in hell. Now me, it's never happened to me. I be praying to the universe and doing my dance, you feel me? So energy wise, it hasn't happened to me as yet. But you know me, I like to open my mouth and talk crazy when I'm ready. And yeah, I don't understand that. Why would, because people come and express themselves at the city council, would anybody then over permit kind of permit, throw imaginary permits at people. Like I know we got a little, well I'm not sure if we got a deficit yet. They said they approved the budgets, I'm not sure if we still have a deficit. I gotta look that up yet, I'm not sure. But why would somebody do that? uh... their residents with concerns about these things what concerns the residents you know and my mouth just got to be it you gotta talk and i know not everybody like when my mouth talk i'm sorry for those people who don't like when my mouth talk i see miss edna in the back i'm sorry for what i did miss edna i don't know what i did but i'm sorry for what it is i hope you say hi to me when i say hi to you next time i'm just i'm just saying i am still calling for unity I don't know what's going on with Adam and the Newman people and the church and the little farm. I don't know what's going on right now. I think they're trying to wait us out. But I'm glad that our callers are here, right? So if something does go down crazy here at the city council, we can call out and call those people back. You know, all those people that we had before, I'm sure they'll come back for us. But I am calling for unity. I am asking that if you have differences with your neighbor, that you do find some way to work it out because they want us divided. So we do have to stick together. That is important. And I hope that... if there's a seat of government where people are harassed because of what they say, feel, or express in public, that that is not true. I'm hoping that is just a myth and just a rumor. And that whatever crazy is supposed to go on tonight, you know, that just disappears. I done said my little prayer to the universe. And I'm hoping that everything works out for whoever it is that's seeking something tonight. And that they're not persecuted because of their opinions. persecuted for opinions that sound like communism. But whether we're moving that direction or not, I don't know. I can't speak on that. That's not my business. But I do say, please, to my council, let that not be the case. Because today me, tomorrow you. And what doesn't get passed for somebody today because my council feels a certain way, ooh, you're going to need to get it passed someday. And ooh, elections is coming up, y'all. And I'm sure we have a lot of other people that want to run and what have you, and we all live here and we all want to be good to each other. So let's be good to each other, for real. Amen? Amen.

Thank you.

Good evening, Noel Pace, 206 Northwest 91st Street. Good evening. How are you guys doing? First, I want to mention that, again, I know it's been a topic of conversation now basically since last fall, I know it's not on the agenda, but I do think it's important, especially from my prerogative of being a property owner right across the street from it. But as we see now the vacant Raider Church lot, pretty small area actually, all right? Seems a lot smaller than it did when it had the big church on it, right? With that being said, I do hope that this council continues to look at the community plan, to look at the charrette, to look at our future use map. And to me, I advocate that if it's possible for the village, I know that they talked about putting a school there. I know that that's been proposed. I think they also said if they can't do that, they'll do some sort of live local. I mean, in this particular case, I would like to see it as a park. We, I think that if you look at our neighboring communities, all right, which are our neighbors, but also in a little censored competition, Biscayne Park has a large community park. Miami Shores has large parks on both sides of Northeast Second Avenue. El Portal, a state of Florida bird sanctuary, a place where the original inhabitants had a nation here. I mean, we don't really have any open space, especially in such a great location that is now sort of upon us. So I hope that that's considered. There's plenty of room for development over in Z5. I hope that all of that, the years that went into that community plan, the charrette and so on, is respected by the council. Changing gears, I do want to say that it only comes around every millennium, okay? Once every quarter of a millennium is, you know, our country, our Independence Day, our birthday is 250 years here this year. This village used to have an annual Fourth of July barbecue. And as a military veteran and as someone who represents the veterans in the greater community as a member of the Military Affairs Board, I have to say it's pretty disappointing that I have seen nothing from our community in terms of celebrating our Independence Day, in terms of community events or barbecue or even anything, no concert, no nothing. All the other communities in the area have something planned. but El Portal, for whatever reason, is frigging like a flat line, right? And I'll have to say we'll be celebrating in a different community because there's nothing going on here. So hopefully we can do something about that. Thank you.

Greg steer 120 Northwest 86th Street just a few general comments before addressing the elephant in the room And this is regarding communication and transparency which often feels somewhat lacking for instance public safety I brought this up a month ago at the last meeting and was ignored so I'll bring it up I'll keep bringing it up, but we have not seen a monthly police report since September of 2025 and which ironically was when we adopted a budget giving that department a 26% increase over the previous year. We now spend over $2 million, most of it on salaries. And I understand we just hired another officer. Is this a replacement officer or is this a new hire? If it's a new hire, why? Has there been an uptick in crime? Have there been any homes broken into or cars stolen? We just don't know. Same goes for the budget. Again, not a single update since we adopted it nine months ago. Most multi-million dollar enterprises compile a monthly, at least quarterly P&L, a profit and loss statement showing money coming in and expenses going out and how that compares to the budget projections. Are we overspending, underspending? How much is now in our rainy day unassigned fund, which for eight years has been zero? Where is the annual and mandated independent audit? Again, we just don't know. Finally, where's Waldo? We've been waiting for Adam Neumann to present a definitive developer's agreement for SOFL for months and get nothing but silence. Not even the professional courtesy of an update. Meanwhile, he has not paid a single dime to El Portal in the form of property taxes on any of his properties that he owns here. All have had tax lien certificates issued, meaning someone else paid for them. He rushed in with a lot of hoopla with surrogates to lobby the council and select residents in private and with opaque plans of constructing a high school using a 3D printer but without adequate parking or a sewer connection. But never once did he appear before the council, much less in front of us residents in a town hall. To me, this raises serious doubts, not just about the validity of this project, but about the credibility and authenticity of the developer himself. So the big question is, is he moving forward? And again, we just don't know. I know this is not a full-time position for the council. Part-time compensation doesn't come with a training manual, although you do have a village manager. But it's a $5 million operation that affects 2,000 plus people. And it's not just about curating our tax dollars. This is our home. We live here. And I think we have a right to know, and you have an obligation to inform us, about what is happening of significant impact. There's no newsletter. There's no updates on the website. There's no email blasts. There's no flyers. We're operating in a vacuum. My point is that establishing or improving on the communication flow would go a long way to building trust and confidence in our current leadership and in the direction that the village is headed. Thank you.

Anyone else?

My name is George Alvarez, 165 Northwest 88th Street. I thank the mayor and council for your time. I've been doing some reading recently and it's one of the many systems employed when looking at mass scale projects in pretty much any Western democracy is to look at what their public safety needs are. So this is looking ahead and we all know that a lot needs to be settled and may very well be settled as regards some of the proposed and the not yet proposed projects by Mr. Newman as regards the former Little Farm mobile home park. But when Little Farm was open, it was a significant, a very large majority of our police calls. After Little Farm closed, our number of police calls went down significantly. Now, as Mr. Steer mentioned, some of the police records are not available to us at this point. It would be great to have them a little bit more readily available, but when we project whether it's infrastructure drain, whether it's demographics, whether it is something as simple as gallons of water per person per dwelling unit as we go forward into thinking about what we may be inviting into El Pertel. One of the things that we can definitely look at and project with is our prior police statistics. That is how much time per officer how many transgressions, how many violations, how many arrests happened in what used to be the former Little Form Mobile Home Park. Using those numbers, it should be fairly inferable, able to be inferred. I might have just created a word here tonight. Put that in the dictionary. it might very well be able to be inferred what our public safety needs would be with that number of units spread across that square footage. That in turn gives us a fairly decent, although non-scientific and not exactly exact guide about other drains on our resources as well. The long and short of it, is we should be able to predict what we need to ask of any developer by using certain methodology that infers from from any consistent methodology that we've kept in the past and at the very least we should be able to see whether or not we are heading towards some kind of financial ruin now whether or not soulful is built whether or not uh... any number of live local units are built we're all going to be up to tell we're all going to live with each other we're all going to figure out how to make whatever the results i think we should shake every leaf on every tree we should look at the data we should project into it as much and as reasonably as we can And once again, I would urge El Pratel to join the lawsuit along with Bal Harbor, Weston, Miami Shores, 26 other municipalities, questioning the enforceability and the constitutionality of some of the live local provisions. Because if we are taken over by live local, if there is more live local residential square footage than non-live local, and I'm including other tax-exempt status, then we will be in utter financial crisis. And it's going to happen very quickly after the certificates of occupancy are issued. We have to be thinking about this now. So I urge the council to consider joining this lawsuit because I think whether or not you have a problem with the Soulful School, and I certainly have some problems and misgivings about it. We also have a very bigger play that's happening, and as Mr. Geller explained to us in many ways last month, Tallahassee has figured out that it can do El Pratel better than El Pratel. And I think that we should fight that. Thank you for your time. I know I went over. Thank you.

Thank you. Next for good and welfare. Good and welfare. Going once.

Good evening. Merlin Brooks, 400 Northeast 90th Street. I am a bit late, but based on what the person that just got through speaking spoke about lawsuit, I think we need to consider another lawsuit that we might soon have if we don't take care of it. Coincidentally, I came to the village about two weeks ago just in time to see a crowd of children coming down the street. So I waited for the traffic and then I came over and I followed the kids. They were going into the top lot. I asked where the kids were coming from. Somebody say, Miami Shores. I say, Miami Shores? Why are these kids coming from Miami Shores to El Portal? Anyway, I came inside, and I tried speaking to some of the employees that should know what's going on in El Portal. Now, this has happened in the past 42 years. It happened before. And I was able to stop it. At this time, Jason was the manager. It's happening again. And if we don't take care of it, we will have another lawsuit. What's going on is that the people that works here don't know everything. Because when I questioned them, they said to me, this is El Pertel's school kids. I said, El Pertel don't have a school. They said, yes, it's this such and such and such. I says, El Portal does not have a school. And I came in to question it. Only to find out that this was happening again. Maybe because I'm not that active, I don't see much, I don't come out here often, but that day I saw it. We need to stop Miss Claudia's school kids from coming to our tot lots. Because if these kids, any of these kids get hurt, that's our suit. This is not Miss Claudia's toddler. This is El Portal toddler. And we that pay taxes here in El Portal will be held responsible if we do not take care of this. I question it because I am a taxpayer, and I'm foreseeing what is going to happen. Now, if the village and the council is aware of this, and is okay with it, then we also need to know. Thank you.

My name is Chantal Rodriguez. I reside at 48 Northeast 86th Street. So I think I'm going to take a different type of strategy, okay? Because I always come up and I just reiterate what everyone has to say and, you know, again, sometimes I feel that it's like falling on deaf ears, so I'm not going to do that. How I am going to begin is trying to be the voice of reason and first of all saying, what's going on? What is happening with Al Portel? This is not the Al Portel I moved to. This was a community, serene, peaceful. We did things together. Right now, I just feel like it's like a hostile environment. Who's going to be the next person attacked for whatever the reason? And as residents, I feel that, yes, they should have the opportunity to voice their concerns, correct? What might be a concern for one person might not be for another, but this is what this gathering is about, to speak about the village and things that are happening here. But I just feel like we just need a different approach because it's not moving forward, on the contrary, we're taking one step forward and 10 steps back. And there has to be some type of resolution. I'm not opposed to development, definitely not. I am opposed to development that I feel is not well suited for the village, right? So it has to benefit, whatever comes in has to benefit everyone. Not just one person, but everyone, right? And I think that even the developer has to be able to meet people in the middle. Full disclosure, right? Transparency. When questions are being asked, why not be, you know, I'm not saying that all developers are deceitful, which I think majority of them are, but that's just their way of doing business, right? But if you want to move forward, you definitely need to be honest, to say, because whatever's going to happen is going to happen, whichever way. It doesn't matter, because people are going to find out, right? But let's just find a way to, first of all, get along. This is not the village of El Portal that I've grown accustomed to. I've resided here since 98, so it's been a very, very long time. And I just feel, I don't know, uneasy. This is why you see people not coming to these meetings, because in actuality, they're thinking, well, again, everything is falling on deaf ears, and now who's going to be, what form of retaliation is going to happen? Real quick, for speaking up, but everyone should have the opportunity to voice their concern, but not be held for whatever they say, right? So, you know, Be respectful. Again, disclosure, transparency, that is all people want. And I think that if we're able to do that and people are able to understand and work together, we wouldn't have all of this back and forth. And it's sad because, again, this is not the El Portal that I've grown to love. I'm not going anywhere because even if someone wanted to see me go, guess what? It's just not going to happen. but we need to work together. Please. Okay. Thank you.

Next for good and welfare. Going once. Good and welfare going twice. Good and welfare, three times? Okay. Closing out for good and welfare. Before I turn it over to the council, as far as the police officers, we're down two officers, I believe, Chief? Three. We're down three officers, so these are replacements. okay yeah so these these are replacements these are this is not adding to the budget these are replacements we're good these are replacements as far as retaliation I know I'm not a part of anything like that at all so I will look into that, and if I see that anybody's a part of anything like that, then I'll deal with that. I think people that know me know that I'm a fair person, and I believe in equality and fairness, so something like that I would never stand for, if anything's happening like that. As far as the Fourth of July, ever since, part of the issue is this, and I'm gonna do something real quick in real time also. But the issue is this when it comes to Fourth of July is that from the first year that I was mayor and even the first year Madam Clerk, for the first like two or three years, the public affairs budget was cut totally. It just came back like a few years ago. And so what I have done every year is continue to try to put out all of those little flags that I do in the front yards. I try to do that. It takes a long time for me to do it. House to house is very tiring, but I try to do that. Every year, though, people ride through, because I will put out the flags, and then I'll come out the next day, and there'll be blocks of the flags gone. So people come through and steal our flags every year. Every year, I'm ordering about 300 to 400 more flags. Because during that week, because it's hard for me to put them all out in one day. So it takes me like five days to six days to put them all out. And within that time, people that are driving through El Bertal, they steal our flags. I tried to at least do that in every household. I just, through Amazon, ordered another 400 yesterday. So, but let me show you guys this in real time so you know that just because something is not happening doesn't mean it's not being worked on. So let's do this really quickly. Probably the first time in El Portal history. Let's see if it picks up. yermo talk to me the party the jumping house inside the park or outside we could do it outside the park so this is fourth of july so we're going to do the morning we can do well there's not a lot of room inside there's going to be a lot of kids running around inside so it's better if we do it outside up until I'm thinking, so I'm trying to do an early four for July, so I'm trying to start maybe around like 11 and finish like around three. What time do you need them for your next event?

If you can finish around three, I'll go with you.

Okay, I'm going to call you tomorrow, all right? We'll go through this. I'm going to text you everything, okay? You can do it inside the park and we close it down and I leave it overnight. Okay, all right, thank you. I'm going to call you tomorrow for all the details, okay? I'll text you. Okay, take care, my brother. Okay, bye-bye. There we go. So I have been planning something over the Fourth of July using sponsors because we really don't have the budget. So I'm working on that. So I've been inquiring about the soulful property taxes. Been looking into that, so I've been going through the process and what I'll do is I'll put out something about the steps because they have a certain amount of time that they're able to avoid the taxes until they're penalized. And that time, somebody told me the time, I forgot it was texted to me, I can't find it right now, but there's a certain amount of time before they're penalized. So they have a certain amount of time that they're able to be noncompliant. And then from there, after that certain amount of time is up, then we have our procedures and steps of what we do to hold them accountable. And so that's what that is. Up until this point, when I was looking into this, I don't believe they've reached the non-compliant time period. They're coming up close to it. So when I've looked into this, they haven't bypassed a time to where we can actively do something up to this point. they're almost there. So for us, as far as what is the Village, what are you guys gonna do? Village, what are you guys gonna do? What steps are you guys gonna take? The steps that we're able to take, they haven't reached that point yet from the meetings that I've had so far. Now I'll double check with that, but that's what came out of that, from those meetings that I had about that. So I've been having meetings about that, or I had two meetings about that. and that's what came out. So I'll get more clarification, but I'm just letting you know what happened with the two meetings that I had about it. All right, with the two meetings that I had. If I got wrong information, I apologize, and like I said, this will be something that I'll continue to dive into.

Okay, there you go.

Joining the lawsuit, I've also talked to a couple other managers and mayors from different municipalities, two of the, I think, four or five that you guys named. we don't have a problem with joining the lawsuit. What I will say is, is that we just have to make sure that we can hold up our end of what they're asking of us or requiring from us, and that's all. When it comes to the tot lot, listen you all, the tot lot, even though it's an open tot lot, it's an open space, I will say that, individuals from all over Miami-Dade County, even from out of state, can go to the tot lot. I understand that the tot lot can get crowded at times, but there's no park or public park in any municipality in Miami-Dade County where um well there's a water park but i mean a regular public park right where there's morningside or public park in coral gables or coconut grove where they stop and they say you can't come into this public park um whether it's a city park or a county park or municipal park or things like that right so we just have to be careful with that and i would just say also that The school in question is an El Portal school, so those individuals are going to school in El Portal, those students, I would just say that. That's kind of all that I have. Anybody else from the council want to jump in?

Hey, everyone. Can you hear me? Oh, there he goes. Thanks, everyone, for talking today. I always appreciate it. I wanted to answer some of the things that I heard, just a few of them. Denise White, I am chair of code enforcement. I'm always happy to sit down and talk with you. I hope that no one is abusing the power, and if there is, I would like to find out immediately, so please schedule to meet with me. I do regularly talk with residents about their code enforcement issues, and I always try and help resolve it in the resident's favor. And I would like to think that no one's abusing that power, so please feel free to reach out. Colonel Noel Pace, did he run out the door? Oh, there he is. Hey, I agree with you. Fourth of July, all the different events that we used to do, it was great back when Miss Claudia had events going on here. I would love to see it again, maybe we can, put some budget line items in this October so we can bring back all these things that used to bring people together. Right now, everyone only gets to get together during these meetings, unless they're meeting on their own. But I would like to see some city events, and I think that's important to the health of any community. So I'm there with you, brother, and if you want to talk about it, I will help you work through it, or we can help each other. Let's try and make it happen. Thank you. I appreciate your service as well. Happy Fourth of July. So I did hear someone say that it's not the village that they bought into, they're not seeing the hospitality, the kindness, the neighborly-like that they used to see back in the day, and I think this is something we can assist with by bringing back some of the fence and functions again, get neighbors to be neighborly with each other, not just sit at home and not meet each other. I think that's one of the things I loved about moving to El Portal over 15 years ago. my neighbors leave cookies at my front door and bring me wine bottles and they were just the most welcoming people all the way down the street and you would not see this in other municipalities. I want to bring back the neighborly vibe here at El Portal. So I think budget for more events would be nice, but also if any neighbors want to throw their own events, I think that's always wonderful as well. I've done a few of those and just invite anyone on the street who lives here just to get to know each other's neighbors. Last part here, I just found out recently that I guess they're having a special meeting next week because they forgot to put something on the agenda today about the, I think it's the, resolution for confirming the budget or the line item for the police officers to get the raise that was negotiated for the last few months with the manager. I'd like to hear some more about that since I'm not going to be able to be here next week because it's a special meeting and I guess it's not even being told to everyone yet. So that would be the last thing I'm going to say. Thank you.

Anyone else from the council?

Yeah, just one comment. Regarding the budget, essentially, I guess, but as it pertains to committees, so I take a lot of Councilperson Winters' points, and I would hope that we would start to have a couple of meetings each month again, perhaps like we used to have, meaning one round of committee meetings culminating in the general council meeting at the end of the month so specifically admin and finance public safety addressing the police department issues all the way down to including the public affairs committee which which would address the transparency issues of planning for marketing essentially around the village our I believe it's important we need to protect, for lack of a better word, brand. And what I mean by that is as we move towards more stringent codes regarding new construction and things to that effect, trying to align our code with the Charette, updating the Charette to begin with, all of these efforts, that's what I'm speaking to.

Thank you very much.

Anyone else from the council?

Just a few quick comments. I think I vaguely remember a couple years ago, I think there was a law passed that those who are reporting code violations cannot report it anonymously. So whomever it is that is feeling as though they're being retaliated against, I mean, I think there might be a way to speak to the manager, determine if that is actually happening. Sometimes we perceive things and that is not the reality. But just in case, there is a way that we can make sure that no one is behaving in that way because, of course, we definitely wouldn't support that. This is a place where you are able to come and voice your opinion and you should feel safe in doing so and supported, and maybe not your position, but in the security of the fact that you can be here and tell us what you think and why you think it. As far as the budget, I do remember what the mayor remembers. I think it was during COVID. We weren't necessarily engaging in any sort of communal gatherings. So at that time it made sense to slash that budget. But something that I've learned in talking to so many of my neighbors is that Those events were fond memories for you, were important in shoring up the fabric of the community, and I think it's something that we really need to invest in because we've heard over and over again that it is a priority for those who live here. So I appreciate the mayor taking the effort to go around and put those flags out. My boys love seeing it. It's beautiful, and the fact that you do it alone is a labor of love, so you should be commended for that. And in addition to that, I support your efforts in gathering folks to do whatever it is that you have planned on July 4th. And I encourage you to probably look to your other council members because maybe we might have connections and resources that might add to this great event that you're planning. And we definitely support you in doing so. And then the last one, the tot lot and its usage. You know, I'm a little bit out of the tot lot stage, but I do think that Miami Shores had some sort of limitation on the usage of their tot lot. But I could be wrong, but I'll double check on that. I do think it is a great thing to be welcoming. but I also want to reiterate that I think that there needs to be some sort of use policy that prioritizes the usage and enjoyment of residents of the village of El Portal, right? Because it is in El Portal, it is, through the efforts of the council that this is here and it is a resource for everyone, but we definitely want the residents of El Portal to reap the benefits of the day in and day out labor of love that is being a member of our community and pouring into this project that we are endeavoring on, which is to continue to make El Portal a marquee village. Whatever we can do to that end, I support it. There needs to be a use policy regulating how we use it for birthday parties, who gets priority, what are the discounts as far as fees that residents of El Portal get for using the facilities. And I think the faster we do that, the better. So those are my comments.

Absolutely. Thank you very much, Madam Vice Mayor. When the clerk gets back in, I'll have her address the special meeting situation, because I was not involved in that. That was between the clerk, the manager, and the attorney. So when she gets back in, I'll have her go through that.

So on that topic, I would just like to say that my understanding of the reason for the special meeting is because with Trying to make the meeting manageable essentially and so we should be expecting to have two rounds of meetings each month like I said and so in the in the environment of committee meetings on Essentially a monthly basis matched with the general counsel on a monthly basis that would essentially alleviate the need for special meetings as it were and so my understanding as my discussion with the manager was That it is simply to create a manageable plate for these meetings so that we could achieve some productivity?

Yeah, so I know it's about the contract. And it's a contract, we have to do a resolution for the contract, the contract that was discussed last time. But Madam Clerk, if you can for a second. Just very quickly, the special meeting that was brought up, why are we having a special meeting? I know it's between the manager and the attorney, but the reason why we're having a special meeting is not like it was planned before, it was because of.

No, the special meeting came up right on Monday, actually. This Monday, which was Tuesday. Yeah, this Monday.

Came up yesterday? Yeah. And that was because something couldn't make the agenda?

Because something was not ready for the agenda, no.

Okay. And so you guys, and so you all know that, so if we plan a meeting and we put out the items, it has to be at least two days, at least 48 hours before the meeting. So something that is introduced from them on Monday, today is Tuesday, it can't go on today's meeting. And so it just can't do that. And so that's the reason why I correct the special meeting meeting.

It's a money item, so you guys have to vote on that. And it was presented, I mean, yesterday to be put on the agenda for, but no.

It wasn't ready. It doesn't make a lot of sense because the manager mentioned last meeting that he negotiated the terms. So if we had this known last month, why are we waiting until the day before to ask to put it on our agenda?

Let me jump into this. We had a, Juneteenth was a holiday that we did not work. I take full responsibility for the item not being able to be put into the agenda. I take full responsibility for the item not being on the agenda. Miscommunication between the attorney and myself in terms of the language that needed to be added to to the contract to make it legal, and I ask for your forgiveness. This was something that was totally, you know, due to my newness in the position, but that's exactly what happened. I thought that I had enough time to be able to include it into the resolution, and it didn't happen on time. So we were all, you know, distracted by all the things that we had to tackle and it did not get into the agenda on time to be able to get to you with the 48 hours that it required. So it was a legal process that I did not adhere to, so.

Thank you for the information. Madam Clerk, can I ask you a question? What is the cost for us to have a meeting here? Do we have to do something with the Miami Herald? Are we supposed to notify it?

Not for that one specifically. There is a camera cost, but I'm not too sure of it. That shouldn't be a long meeting. It should be something you guys, remember, when you guys come here, it's to do the business of the village. The business means you guys have to do your homework and study with whatever material I send you, and then you come back with your, educate yourself with the item and all that stuff.

Now, our notice by law, do we have to put it in newspapers, or is it just standard?

No, the notice by law that you need to put it in the newspaper is an ordinance, or anything that comes out of the PNZ and other, I think the attorney's more, he's more involved in that situation, which what has to be noticed or not. But for my concern, it's ordinances that have to be read the second part, and it has to be noticed. The hearing, any public meeting has to be noticed. It's not like you have, that's sunshine, that's the sunshine.

Thank you so much. Attorney, I mean, Councilperson Irvine.

Yeah, just quickly, I just want to say that if you could envision it, there's essentially an infinite pile on top of each and every single agenda. And so it is my belief that if we can get back to a committee schedule. Now, it used to be that we had three weeks of meetings each month, three Tuesdays. because we had six committees, I believe. So I would certainly support combining committees into a three-committee structure or something to that effect where we could accomplish it in a Tuesday evening because we used to have a committee that started at, if I'm not mistaken, 6 p.m. The following committee was scheduled for 6.30, regardless of when the previous committee ended its meeting. then the third committee would be scheduled for 7 p.m. again regardless of when the committee previous would end its meeting so you know it was Tuesday to Tuesday I believe this first and second week of each month third week was a break fourth week again general council meeting so I would certainly support combining those previous six committees into three to accomplish a single Tuesday evening event where we could create the you know idea of some sort of efficient mechanism to filter that pile through the agendas which again would alleviate the need for special meetings thank you very much there's nothing else from the council we're gonna move on okay

All right, moving right along. We're gonna skip the swearing in for now because the police, are they back? Are we good? Okay, I know they were dealing with something outside. They're always working. Okay, so Chief, if you can come on up and get ready. Go to the mic, G. Go to the mic and just kind of introduce him and talk about him real quickly.

Ladies and gentlemen, good evening. I'm happy to be swearing in our newest member, David Robledo. And we had sworn him in a couple weeks ago. We got him on right away. He was a good opportunity for us to take on. And without further ado, I'm going to go ahead and swear him in again.

The Constitution of the United States of America. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

All right, Jacobi, let's get some pictures with them, and then we'll come down, too.

Cheese. Okay.

Rolls-Royce.

DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA? MOVED BY COUNSELOR LIGHTFOOT-WARD. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND BY COUNCILPERSON WINTERS. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED, SAY NAY. HEARING NONE. MOVING RIGHT ALONG, AGENDA ITEM H1, NORTHEAST 86th STREET AND SECOND AVENUE, LEFT TURN RESTRICTION. COUNCILPERSON WINTERS.

SO SOMETHING THAT I'VE SPOKEN WITH. THE CONSENT AGENDA WAS APPROVED.

Yeah, it was approved. Moved by Councilperson Lightfoot-Ward, second by Councilperson Winters. That was instant. Yeah, we're on H1 right now.

So I've spoken with many residents of Sherwood Forest over the last 15 years about this no right-hand turn sign. I mean, right-hand turn only sign, which basically says you can't take a left-hand turn where you're going from west side of Sherwood Forest to the east side towards 2nd Avenue on the... village maintain road northeast 86th street as far as we can tell we can't figure out the purpose for the sign i've talked with every almost every resident in sherwood forest and i 100 believe the sign either should be modified or removed If the sign actually does have an intent or a purpose, like protecting a school or stopping people from cutting through during rush hour traffic, it should be modified so that it basically controls during those hours. Otherwise, the residents should be punished from being able to use the street. So my position is very simple. If there's not a legitimate safety reason for this sign that is located on a street that is maintained by the village, then we should remove it. If there is an actual reason for it, it should be found out and we should modify it according to that. And the reason I brought this to the council agenda instead of working behind the scenes is I did try to contact the manager about this a few times and I did not hear back. So I asked for it to be put on the agenda so it's on the record. And I'm happy to take questions about it if anyone

Are they allowed to? In a second. Let me just, I'll get you one second. We'll open it up to you guys first, then we'll come back to the council. So let's open it up to the residents. So come on, just come on up, come on and say your name and address for the record and go ahead and answer. I know, I know, I know, I know, I know.

Again, Chantal Rodriguez, 48 Northeast 86th Street. There's the same thing in Miami Shores. And what they do is that the sign has specific times. So Monday through Friday, usually it's like during school hours and when it's the busiest. But after that time, you can turn left or you can turn right. So, for example, 103rd Street going to Northeast 6th, you can only make a left turn at a particular time of day. So Monday usually, and I guess because they have both schools there, and I can tell you, because I live on 86th Street, and usually going to work, I take 86, I make the right turn. It is really, really busy. And when you have a lot, the flow of traffic on each side during rush hour, it can be dangerous. But I think after those hours, yeah, why not, for sure. Because then I have to go down Northeast 2nd, make a U-turn, and then come back again. So I would really appreciate that.

Thank you very much. Thank you. So I had the exact same idea as you. And I went all around Miami, El Portel, and I found a sign on North Miami Avenue and 89th Street where we actually modified it ourselves. And it says school days 815 to 930, and then 330 to 430. So we have pre-done this before on others, and I understand. Thank you.

All right, so we're still in public comment. Then we'll come back to the council for responses. Anybody else from public comment?

George Alvarez, 165 Northwest 88th Street. I know I'm the one who likes to talk about, or one of the many who likes to talk about home rule. Is Northeast 2nd Avenue not a county road?

Northeast 2nd Avenue would be a state road. All other roads are county roads. Northeast 2nd Avenue, North Miami Avenue are state.

So there would be a process?

there would be a process. Okay, we love processes here. I do, I do. Okay. I'll speak on that also.

Well, for the record, Councilperson Winters and Mrs. Rodriguez, it sounds like a reasonable suggestion. Thanks, guys.

Thank you. And isn't process spelled T-A-L-L-A something or other?

Anyone else from the audience good and well, not good and well, but public comment for this item?

Hello, good evening. Thomas Pulliam, 205 Northeast 86th Street. I live three houses from that corner, that intersection we're talking about where this sign is on Northeast 2nd Avenue and the combined 85th and 86th Streets. I actually brought this issue up to this public forum on the record. Previous administration, previous manager, Lou, when the conversation was about speeding enforcement on Northeast Second Avenue. I said, that's great, but also right here we have a right turn only sign that never gets enforced. What's up with that? And Google Maps, if you put in an address, it always tells you turn left. It's not obeying that. That has never, all these years, that's never been codified into the default GPS system that everyone uses to navigate. Anyway, I brought that up on the record over a year ago. Again, previous manager. Then maybe about three or four months ago, I contacted Mayor Omar because I was shocked. I was making a left-hand turn there, and I got pulled over by an El Portal police. They gave me a warning, or after they checked my ID and saw that I lived in El Portal on 86th Street, they gave me a warning. I said, okay, but this is strange. It's never been enforced before, but since it's being enforced, I will make the detour. which means I have to go around the corner. Let me pull up what street that is. Hold on one second.

Northeast 3rd Avenue? Most likely.

Yeah, the street that is perpendicular to Sherwood Forest. Yes, Northeast 3rd Avenue. Exactly. So what I've been doing the last three, four months, since ever I was... given that warning, was travel an additional five to 10 minutes to make a left-hand turn on Northeast 3rd Avenue to then make a left-hand turn on Northeast 87th Street, which by the way, the light there doesn't have a left turn signal. So if you're there trying to make a left turn, you're gonna have to wait till all the oncoming traffic comes, because there's no left-hand turn signal at that stoplight. Further, if and when whatever development occurs at the Raider Church property, where the current proposed exit driveway is for the SOFL school, for example, me and everyone on my two streets are being forced to make this detour left onto Northeast 3rd Avenue and then left onto 87th Street, which is already super busy because we have Miss Caudie's Village Academy there. We have an unknown to be determined development that's going to open up across the street. So this right hand only turn sign that we're discussing is forcing these detours, which again, hurt traffic, and all for really no effect, because there's no left-hand turn light there. Furthermore, there's perfect visibility coming from Northeast 85th, 86th Street, turning left onto Northeast 2nd Avenue. If it was dangerous, people, I mean, some people are probably going to try it, but probably not as frequently as now. I've also brought up before, we have no crosswalks there, and that makes it very dangerous as well. So is it a right turn only because we don't have crosswalks there? I doubt it, but I don't know kind of what the root of the right hand sign there is, but it's been creating aggravation for a long while for many people on these streets. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Anyone else, public comment for this item? Going once. Going twice, three times. Let's bring it back to the council. Go ahead, Councilperson Urbano, you wanted to say something.

Sure, so after 15 years thereabouts living here, I have had jobs where I've been working I have driven from anywhere from, I don't know, Sarasota to Naples to Key West, Orlando, Jupiter, Boca, spent a lot of time driving around in Boca, Palm Beach, Fort Lauderdale, Las Olas, all parts of Miami-Dade County. It is my understanding that as a resident of El Portal, the most effective way to ensure that outside traffic is not using El Portal as any kind of a cut through or otherwise shortcut. So I do take shortcuts, however you gotta know the secret about shortcuts. Shortcuts are not about saving time. It's usually net minus two, whatever it is you're measuring, hours, minutes, seconds, doesn't matter. It's net minus two on shortcuts. I have more than, I don't know, 400,000. It's gotta be more than that. I got at least 600,000 miles driving across this country at this point. I got the nickname The Driver at 16. And gone cross-continent several times, et cetera, et cetera. I have to say that creating a labyrinth within El Portal is the way to go. You will create an environment where locals understand the traffic pattern and can navigate it easily, efficiently, and safely. and a pattern that is confusing to outsiders that will prevent them from wanting to attempt it because it is statistically, matrically impossible. Or at least it becomes an evident self, like a negative, a net negative. It's an evident net negative for outside traffic. And so in that spirit, I have to say that preserving this no left turn out of 86th Street is obvious and mandatory.

Thank you very much. Anyone else from the council?

Just a quick comment on that. I do think that Councilman Erbaum has a point. That doesn't negate whatever frustration is being experienced by those who live in close proximity to the sign, but I do think that a lot of planners will tell you that the more, I guess, the more restrictive The less ease the outside driver has in kind of cutting through your streets, it makes it such that you will have less people traveling on your streets in total. I do take very... something that Councilman Winter says, which is that he is unsure as to what was the initial purpose of this being a left hand only sign. So I'm interested in that, in kind of engaging in the analysis as to the pros and cons of doing this. So does the manager have any idea or has had an opportunity to assess what the initial thinking was behind the installation of that sign?

yes absolutely um i just wanted to clarify the record i did act on on your request um as you can see the date of this um email that was generated by the chief to the person who manages uh traffic conditions and these kinds of things for the county uh responded on uh... april uh... twenty third so there was the moment that you asked me for for this i i responded but the county as all of those of those who have dealt with them, they tend to take their time in responding to requests of this nature. Even to this point, she's not sure as to when they will have a response, whether they will agree to make this change. The second thing is that there is a study going on with this assessment, and they will be able to tell us. For those of you who may have, I don't think that the public has a copy of this email, but I will make sure that we have copies and everybody gets it so that you understand exactly what the thinking behind this is. Because it's something that began on 2010. We're talking about 15 years that we have been making that requirement of no left turn at that intersection. I'll just ask you to bear with us until the results of this additional element of the study is obtained, and then we can proceed accordingly. We are not proposing that we drive more we are proposing that we drive safely and i think that this was the original purpose of not having a left turn at the street because the traffic uh coming um north on on sixth northeast second avenue was having the number of crutches to include this remedial effort. So that's basically what is happening here. And I just put in a request to expedite this assessment so that we can give you all an answer that would fit what you would like to see there, which is not having the traffic stop. Sometimes, for engineers, we don't agree with them because they follow different rules than just a visual assessment, thinking that this is the easiest way to do things, and they have their training and their expertise that they apply to these things, and that's why this thing has been in operation in that for the last 16 years. Is there something you'd like to add?

Just very briefly. The fact that 85th and 86th are maintained by us. First of all, the maintenance obligation doesn't necessarily give us control over the traffic pattern. But any way you look at it, the turn is onto Northeast 2nd Avenue. So it's not within our ability to make a final decision. As the manager's done, we can ask that it be looked at. But it's turning onto a pretty major arterial road in Northeast Second Avenue. It is just not something that we can do without permission, at least from the county. We could talk about it as much as we want, but that doesn't change the fact that it requires county permission, and we've asked them to study it.

Thank you so much for the response. First of all, I neglected to review this email before. Well, when I sat down, I saw it, but now that I review it, it does seem to really answer some of those questions. I'm looking forward to seeing what the report holds. It sounds like there is an issue, but the issue isn't necessarily ripe at this moment for analysis and any sort of meaningful determination from the body as to how to proceed. And if we did decide to proceed, it seems like there's a multi-step process that we would have to engage in and determine whether or not we would want to engage in that either. So thank you for taking the first step. And I understand from the people that are living close to the sign that there is an issue, but it doesn't seem as though it is quite ripe yet for us to make a decision.

Thank you very much, Madam Vice Mayor. Council President Irvine.

Yes, so I understand I can be both arrogant and presumptuous sometimes, and I do apologize for that. I want to explain extremely succinctly that the reason that that should not be a point where a left-hand turn is permitted is for two reasons. The first is that the proximity of 86th to 87th, which is a... device controlled intersection meaning traffic light it creates an expectation for drivers passing through that anybody essentially thinking anybody coming out of 86 turning left will be a surprise to almost any vehicle traveling north on second avenue this is not my opinion this is I will put this into a physics model of vehicular momentum to help you understand at feet per second of a car traveling at 40 miles an hour, which is within the limit of what people expect to be moving on Northeast Second Avenue. It is the upper limit, but it is within the limit, 40 miles an hour, feet per second, vehicle weighing 3,000 pounds, 3,500 pounds, 4,500 pounds, And so additionally, the arch of the bridge over the canal ahead of that turnout. Now, I drive a 5.6 liter V8 Triton. It's an automatic. I ship gears in that beast. It's called the beast. I also have a rental car right now. It's a mirage. If you understand the ride height difference between a Mirage and a Nissan Armada, you understand that we're talking multiple feet. We're talking almost two foot difference in ride height. And so people in low profile vehicles, smaller vehicles, low road height vehicles will have a significant decrease in field of vision ahead as they go over the bridge. Now I grew up in a place that had 200 foot valleys and I drove through the Rocky Mountains a whole bunch of times. We don't have changes in elevation like that in Miami. For 25 years here I've always said what I miss the most about living anywhere else is really elevation. If I ever move somewhere else, it's gonna be for a change in elevation. So you don't think of it often. But the elimination of forward field division in a low-ride vehicle coming over that bridge, coupled with the close proximity of 86th to 87th, which again is a controlled intersection that you can see from 71st Street, in terms of I can tell you what color the light is, There is an expectation of vehicles traveling north that creates a momentum of mass that has to have a physical address, meaning a solution to changing its momentum. how much time do you have to break and who's pulling out in front of you and all of this, we are going to see an absolute increase in T bone accidents, which are some of the most fatal. If we allow left turns out of 86th Street, I don't mind asking the county or state for anything I am happy to petition them for whatever we should ask if we need to ask, we should ask if we need to tell we should tell But at 86, it is a physical problem, problem. It is a problem of physics. It is an equation of momentum and mass coupled with behavioral psychology of people who are conditioned to only look at traffic lights.

Anybody else from the council?

Yes, thank you so much. So on the council, we represent the will of the people. It is our job to bring what the people of this village want and what they believe. And I know the reason I brought this up is because I had 100% approval from that short force area that they would like that sign either modified or removed. There was a few things I heard that I want to speak about. Manager, I appreciate you giving us the chief's email about removing the sign, but would you mind sending me or forward me any emails that you've had in the correspondence as well since that time period? Thank you so much. Mr. Pulliam mentioned something that stood out to me. He mentioned that he got pulled over and was received a warning. He's lucky because I have talked with multiple residents that live on 85 and 86 that did not get so lucky and they were actually given tickets there. And they went to talk to me and they said, Charlie, I've been driving this street for 30 years. I've been driving this street for 20 years. We've never followed a sign. Well, I said, well, that's not something I'm supposed to know about. But I will tell you that's worrisome. Well, we don't see accidents here. We see accidents on 87th Street where there's no left-hand turn signal, where there's been a few accidents that have run into a school there. Those are where the accidents have happened. And none of the accidents have been happening on 86th Street and 2nd. And we've all been turning there for our entire lives. And I'm like, well, Again, don't tell me this stuff. I'm keeping my ears shut, but this is important to understand. Are we actually benefiting the people here, or are we trying to make rules that benefit ourselves for liability reasons? In this case, I don't understand why the sign's there, and if there is a reason for it, I believe that the sign should be enforced. BUT BECAUSE I DON'T SEE A REASON, I WANT TO PUT A MOTION FORWARD AND IT'S GOING TO HAVE TWO PARTS TO IT BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH COUNTY FIRST. THE MOTION WOULD SAY I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO DIRECT THAT THE VILLAGE MANAGER DETERMINE WHETHER THE CURRENT LEFT TURN RESTRICTION ON 86th STREET AND NORTHEAST SECOND CAN BE REMOVED AND IF SO TO PROCEED WITH REMOVAL. If it is determined that the restriction serves a legitimate purpose, such as school-related activity, peak traffic conditions, et cetera, then we should further move that the manager coordinate with the appropriate agencies to modify the restriction so that it's limited to those specific times rather than enforce 24 hours per day.

I'll call the bluff and second the motion. So we have a motion, we have a second. For the record, repeat the terms of the motion.

Okay, terms are the motion. The manager will determine whether the current left-handed restriction at 86 and second can be removed, and if it can be removed, proceed with it. But if it is determined that the restriction serves a legitimate purpose, such as school-related activity, peak traffic conditions, et cetera, then I would move that the manager coordinate with the appropriate agencies to modify the restrictions to work with those agencies so that it's not a 24 hour per day sign.

All right, so that's the motion and that's the second. Before we get to that, let me just say something really quickly. I'm not against this necessarily being on the agenda. So when, Councilperson Winters, so you guys know, the mayor sets the agenda, right? And as I said, I work on it with the clerk. And so last Tuesday, which is, I'm kind of happy we got to this point in a way because it brings more clarity to me. Last Tuesday when this was first brought up, in my return email, I said, are we voting to decide whether we should get rid of the left turn or not? have we already received permission that getting rid of the left turn is acceptable by the county or would we be voting on something where there is not a possibility that we can achieve what we wanted through an approval vote? And so I was kind of making the argument that I thought this was coming to the council very prematurely because in my mind I was thinking that, which he just kind of made that motion, but I was thinking that well, why don't we discuss this? I feel like we were gonna waste time. I said, why don't we discuss this when the county's already said, okay, you guys can remove or can adjust the no left-hand turn. So with that information, then we will come here and then vote on as a council, do we want to remove it or do we want to adjust it? But I figured that putting it on the agenda today, we're just kind of doubling up the same conversation that we're gonna have to have when we finally get the permission to remove the sign, now we have to come back and do it again. and decide as a council if we want it removed or not so i just thought it was very premature to come on but i did understand what comes person winters if he felt that the manager wasn't being um wasn't being wasn't answering him back put it that way and then he said he felt like he wanted to bring it to the agenda for that particular reason uh but i just kind of felt this was premature but i do understand customers when he felt that he wasn't getting the responses that he wanted

um that being said any other questions or comments from the council i have a little bit of a comment i do think making decisions like this is a tad bit irresponsible you do have to do your research and know the why behind it so that we can properly assess whether or not it is a safe thing to do proving a negative is difficult right we don't know how many accidents have been deterred or prevented By having that sign up, definitely I think it's persuasive to have the anecdotal evidence of individuals who live on that street and do a particular thing. We can take that into consideration. But for us to, essentially how I understand this motion is not just, hey, manager, please provide us with this information. There's an action item that's also attached there, there is not this information given, proceed with removing the sign. I think that that is grossly irresponsible. I would hate for someone to do that to me and my kids if there was even a remote risk that I would have them in the back of my car and there would be an increased likelihood of being T-boned. Trust me, I would take the five minute extra ride. I think that it is It is hubris to assume that we know all of the things. We do not know how many accidents have been deterred. We don't know the behavior that will result from having that sign removed, whether or not there will be increased usage of that street, increased likelihood of folks driving recklessly, using it as a thruway. I think that this is irresponsible. I'm only one vote, but I do think that to be a reasonable, measured, effective legislator, you need all of the information. We do not have all the information. but the information is available. If we wait a little while, we will have the information, and then we can make a reasonable decision. So as the motion stands, which is a motion that says, hey, if you find this out, manager, proceed and act, it doesn't say to bring it back to the body, really hesitant on it, and I would... REALLY HOPE THAT THE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL WOULD JUST TAKE A PAUSE ON THIS AND EITHER DEFER IT OR SAY NO TO THE ITEM BECAUSE WE ARE GOING TO GET THE INFORMATION AND THEN WE CAN MOVE I THINK IN A MORE MEASURED FASHION. AND IT MIGHT LAND THE WAY THAT COUNCILMAN WINTERS WANTED TO LAND. THAT'S FINE. I JUST THINK WE SHOULD BE REALISTICALLY AND SOUNDLY LOOKING AT ALL OF THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE.

Any other last questions or comments from the council before we go to a vote?

Do we have a prepared answer from either the mayor, the attorney or the manager as to whether or not the possibility of the front part of this motion would even be conceptually possible?

You mean if, if they say we can't remove it, the manager finds a way to remove it? The second part?

I guess specifically what I'm saying is hasn't there been requests in the past to the county in the state that we change a sign or remove a sign that was an immediate and absolute no without a absolute ridiculously bureaucratic process of dealing with that entity whether it be the county or the state

There has been, all right, so in the past, there has been times where we wanted to remove or place signs or put signs or change things up, and the county, a lot of times, is very strict sometimes about what they allow municipalities to do to their streets.

In fairness, sometimes?

Yeah, most of the time.

Let's discuss rules, not exceptions here.

THAT BEING SAID, I MEAN, WE DO HAVE A MOTION. WE DO HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, SO WE DO HAVE TO TAKE A VOTE ON THE MOTION. CAN ONE LAST TIME, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, CAN YOU REPEAT THE MOTION, PLEASE, FOR US BEFORE WE GO?

YES. I'D LIKE THE MOTION TO DIRECT THE VILLAGE MANAGER To determine whether the current left-hand restriction on 86th Street and Northeast 2nd Avenue, this is the current sign that is going from west to east, because there's another one going from west to, I'm sorry, east to west, because there's another one on the other side between Miami Avenue 2nd. It also says no, right internally, and we're not talking about that one, so we're not confused. We're talking about the one inside Sherwood Forest.

I have a point of order. Can we have the motion as stated, please?

Yes, I would like to make a motion to direct the Village Manager to determine whether the current left turn restriction at Northeast 86th Street and Northeast 2nd Avenue can be removed, and if so, to proceed with its removal. If it is determined that the restriction serves a legitimate purpose, such as school-related activity or peak traffic conditions, and I would further move that the manager coordinate with the appropriate agencies to modify the restriction so that it is limited to those specific times rather than enforce 24 hours per day.

That's the motion. You have one last comment before we vote?

All right, Madam. I said second.

Yes, yeah, he seconded before. Yeah, Madam Clerk, we have a motion, we have a second. Can we please have a roll call, please?

Roll call. Roll call, Councilperson Winters.

Yes.

Councilperson Lightfoot-Ward. Yes. Councilperson Erbaum.

Yes, let's find out.

um vice mayor martin no mayor nickerson no motion passes three to one i mean three to two okay all right let's move right along i think we're still premature when it comes to that uh that item you guys um because essentially we just passed that I don't even think we even spoke to the correct length of even if we felt like we wanted to do it. I think that right now what we just did, we just passed that if it can be done, that it's removed, which I guess is fine, but then if it can't be done, and there is a reasonable reason, then the manager has it adjust to that reason. So I'm assuming if they say we can't remove it, then the item is dead then, I'm assuming. If they come out and just say we can't remove it, and there's no reasonable reason, then I guess it's just dead at that point.

That is clear and understood, yes.

all right all right you guys um moving on to the next item this is uh 205 northeast 86th street the building department and management uh mr pulliam this is can i have a public comment on just the previous item no we're closed on that okay so i need to say that for good and welfare there's no good in welfare at the end okay so i guess i'll bring it up next time Yeah, yeah, no problem. So this is 205 Northeast 86th Street. Mr. Pulliam, this is your address. You can just come up to the, yes, come up to the podium, please. And the floor is yours.

Thank you.

Okay, Thomas Pulliam, 205 Northeast 86th Street. Good evening, everyone. Ricardo Lima, 205 Northeast 86th Street. uh... i'd really you know don't wish to be here right now consuming my time consuming everybody's time it's on a subject matter that we've been discussing for over two years now that everyone be should be familiar with i'm only coming in front of the council today because i have been completely stonewalled by this current administration Um, no, no responses to anything. I have sent certified letters. I have talked to the manager in person three times. He has lied to my face telling me he's looked looking into it and has never gotten back to me. Um, I have a spiel I'm going to get into regarding this topic before I get into that spiel. I want to share a couple of reflections just from the good and welfare of this morning. Um, first of all, I am one of those people. My property has been targeted for code complaints. The last two code complaints on the record are for things that the village inputted. It wasn't some neighbor who I pissed off. It was the village staff and administration. Both have had to be rescinded because they were erroneous, not accurate. I've had to work with Winters as the code enforcement chair regarding these issues. One was for a gravel top off I did in my driveway a couple months ago. And the other, which has to do with the spiel I'm about to go into, has to do with the coral rock installation that I did at my property. I'm sure all of y'all remember I came up here twice seeking a variance. It was denied both times. Y'all said... Your property, the way your property is, if you want to do it by right, 25 feet setback, you're able to do it by right within the code at six feet high. So if you want to do that, go do that. So I applied for the permit. The permit was approved by our building department, specifically labeled non-structural. They marked engineering not applicable during their review. They had me pay for the permit, stamped it, stamped February 2025, last year. I built it as of March, March of that year, I receive a NOSI saying that I had no building permit. What is this coral installation at that time? It was fits. It was a manager Lou. I called them up, said, I don't know what this is about. I'm confused. Here's my permit number that I have for my coral installation. They said, you know what? You're right. We're taking this away. We're removing this. Sorry. Sorry to bother you. Um, So that's the preamble. Let me get into my prepared spiel now. Okay, so I'm standing before everyone here tonight because the administrative apparatus of this village has crossed a dangerous legal line. Over the past 15 months, my attempt to close out a simple non-structural permit for a beautiful Oolite coral installation has been met with shifting goalposts. But what occurred on my property today transitions this matter from mere municipal incompetence into a coordinated bad faith campaign of targeted harassment by the village administration. Today I exercised my rights under a permit I fully paid for. I scheduled a routine final building closeout inspection through the village portal. Instead of performing the structural building inspection, the building department hijacked the appointment as a tactical Trojan horse to run an unrequested zoning finishing expedition under the verbal directives of the building official Pedro Martinez of Binder Cap Government, which is owned by Bureau Veritas, a multi-billion multinational company based in France. Before I show you the evidence, which I have here, I'm going to share with you all, enter into the public record. I want to call out the exact strategy being used against me over these past couple years. The building department's ultimate weapon is institutional chaos. For over a year, my file has been deliberately riddled with clerical contradictions, shifting dates, and a manufactured board of rules and appeals catch-22. That's the Miami-Dade County level BORA, which you can appeal building decisions to. They haven't given me any final agency notice or any paperwork I can actually go to make the appeal. yet have been telling me to continuously go to this appeal, which they haven't set me up for. But today they overplayed their hand. They didn't just leave a sloppy trail. They officially committed an act of egregious administrative deception directly into the public record. The inspector handed me a physical document on my porch today, which I have here to submit to the clerk as exhibit A. Ricardo, if you could please pass this to them. Yeah, mm-hmm. Yeah, and for the official record. Thank you. Okay, so what you're looking at here is what I received today during my final inspection, which I also recorded. I have sent it to all the council members before this meeting. I know a few of you have watched it. I've also brought it here tonight to show. I don't know, it seems like we're having technical difficulty with the screen here. So I might, if any of you all are interested, I would like to share that on my personal laptop when we get to that point. But for here, for Exhibit A, what you're looking at here

Point of order, hold on, point of order. Have we established that it's simply, I mean, like, do we know how long it would take to rectify the situation of having it be available on the screen, or do we know? Yeah, it's not, we were trying for like a half an hour.

It's not gonna work on the screen. Yeah, we tried. Unfortunately.

but I'm able to put it up here for y'all who have not seen it. So anyway, this is what I received today, and if you look at the official cap...

Excuse me, Mayor. I'm sorry to interrupt, but let me just clarify. Somebody from council who wants to look at the video may do so, but we don't have the video that has not been seen by anyone. I have the video, and it's been seen by several council people. Excuse me, sir. I was in the middle of a sentence. Pardon me. The video is not something that's gonna be displayed publicly when we don't know what's in it. I certainly can't say to any member of council that they're not permitted to look at it, but it's not something to be displayed publicly in front of the public when we don't know what the contents are. but the council certainly may look at it and accept Mr. Pulliam's proffer that he wants you privately to look at it.

So it can't be viewed here in those chambers?

No.

Okay, because my interest in asking was for the public benefit.

I would like to ask a legal point of clarification. What is the specific law that bars that?

the video is not previewed. We had, there are a number of concerns that would expose the village to possible liability by allowing it to be viewed. And if there is, I don't know what's in it. I don't know if it violates someone's privacy. I don't know if it has anything in it that's a scandalous or accusatory or if it's in the nature of something that is, um, uh, potentially defamatory so absent some review it's not displayed to the public however the public is not voting on it anyway if any member of council chooses to look at the video they are certainly free to do so as long as it's not done in a matter that displays it to the public that's all

So point of clarification, that's the village attorney's legal advice to the council as their client or that is a state law for my benefit?

It's my advice to the council to protect the village from possibly being sued and having a liability for allowing something to be displayed when we have no clue what's in it. Okay, there's a liability issue there. And yes, that's my opinion given to the council. And since the council is who's gonna be voting on anything that needs to be done, That opinion does not in any way impede your ability to present what you want to present to the council if it's something that the council or individual council members want to see. You can present it to the people who will be voting. And if they choose to look at it, they are free to do so. And that allows you to present to them anything you want to present. I'm simply saying it's not something, without knowing what's in it, that the village is going to have displayed publicly to the entire world, basically, since this is being videoed and being put out. That's all.

Okay. Uh, so just further clarification. Um, this, the video has already been shared with some members of the public. So y'all are aware. Um, so there would be an information asymmetry as well. Um, for you guys to be aware of further, I know the mayor and council person winters have both reviewed it in length. I don't know about the rest of you. And I would also like to inquire what is the process for entering the video into the public record, please.

So usually to enter the video into the public record, things usually have to go through the clerk. Now, I guess what Attorney Geller is saying is that for a legal purpose, if the legal attorney of the village has not previewed it first, I guess, or previewed it yet, he doesn't think that it should be shown in a public forum because he hasn't yet reviewed it. That's what I'm getting from this.

Just to add to it, the fact that you've shown it yourself to some members of the public, you've done that essentially privately. Anybody that you want to show it to, you want to show them something and they want to look at it, that's perfectly fine. That's not having the village quote, publish, close quote, whatever is contained therein, which is where the village could have liability. Anybody you've shown it to privately that wanted to look, that's fine. And if members of the council have individually seen it, that's fine. And any others who want to see it, that's fine. But the village does not... publish to the world something when we don't know if it's appropriate, if there's something improper with it, if it's defamatory, or if it exposes the village to liability.

So again, what is the process for entering into the public record? I need to send it to the clerk and you to review. It just happened today, so granted there hasn't been the time. But some people have reviewed it.

I'd be happy to review it, Mr. Pulliam, considering that there are no other extraneous factors that I'm unaware of. I'd certainly be happy to review it, Mr. Pulliam, and see if it is suitable to be entered into the public record.

So you are the gatekeeper on that? There's not like a legal framework for this?

I didn't understand your question.

You are the gatekeeper of what goes into the public record? There is no legal framework that you can cite regarding this where I can go look it up?

You can look up anything you want to, sir.

I'm asking you to cite what the legal framework is.

The court and I will look at the document, whatever you want to submit, and make a determination as to whether it is something that is appropriate to be entered into the public record. Thank you.

Okay, so I guess that will be one of my calls to action that I request of the council when we get to that point. Sorry for that interlude. Let me get back to... Exhibit A. So this is what was delivered to me today. This is what is on the video. It's a 16-minute video. Actually, the video shows more than what's in front of you today because they actually made three revisions to this that they kept handing to me and then changing. Uh, which is recorded on the video. It's not gonna, you know, this is just the last one that they gave me. Um, but anyway, this exhibit a, um, this exhibit a is also not posted to the village portal, the cap government permit portal, which is required to be by law. They handed this to me. They handed me, um, they uploaded other documents to the portal, which will be my other exhibits, which I will be showing soon. So Exhibit A does not exist on the official record. They just handed this to me really off the books. If I wasn't recording it, there wouldn't be any evidence of this, you know, three-paper switch and whatnot either. Because, again, Exhibit A is not on the portal. So, you know, I was recording them. Of course, they were, you know, acknowledged they were being recorded. And, you know, they... I assert that they didn't upload this to the portal, because I called out several things. When you look at this, look at the top right. Everything about this is wrong or disinformation. Inspection type, driveway final. This was not a driveway inspection. What is that? I don't know what that is. Look at the work description. None of this is information I entered in. This is information that they put themselves. I don't know what Wood Fence 55 linear feet is. I don't know what Oolite Block Wall and Wood Gate 73 linear feet is. My property is 50 by 128 feet. This extension revoked since resident did not show up to BORA meeting earlier this year. That's the catch-22. I never got a final agency notice. I never got anything. I never got a list of discrepancies. I asked all of them for it. I sent a certified letter to the manager May 19th. Asking for you know, can you respond in the next two weeks? He literally told me at the end of last meeting I went up to him like hey manager Have you had a chance to investigate like you told me you would he told me he was busy with the police stuff This was gonna be the next thing on his agenda then radio silence for another month The last thing on here as well in the work description is A per building official permit extended to June 21st, 2026 to give resident more time to attend board hearing. Again, I can't attend a board hearing without a final agency notice, which they haven't delivered. And this is incorrect too. June 1st, today's June 23rd. They sent me emails last week that said the file's going to expire July 1st. So just in this one document they handed me today is like riddled with issues. And then you look at the next field where they did by hand on site, right? So they didn't mark any of the boxes on the left, which they're supposed to. And I was asking them on video, did this pass? Did this fail? Did this need correction? How do I close this out? No response. They literally walked away. Inspector comments, you can read here, it says, this inspection is to check from the outside wall to the interior building wall, measure 49.32 feet. I don't know what that means. They couldn't explain anything to me. There's no form-based code cited here, which is legally required, and also what I would take to a possible BORA meeting, which they have not given me. You also see here, it says, Inspector Jose Negrin at the top left, Um, I don't know if Jose Negrin was there or not. There was one cap government person. He refused to give his name on camera and was not wearing a name tag, had no badge. So I don't know if Jose Negrin was at my property or who it was. All this is captured on camera. Furthermore, this inspection, they had Jose Negrin, whoever that is, do a measurement where they got this calculation, 49.32 feet. But he's with CAP government building. Scarlett was there. Scarlett is our zoning official. Why did she not take the measurement? Nor did they document the methodology or the points where they were measuring, which is required by law and was recorded. By the way, the video, I initially say, this is being recorded. This is the permit number for public records. And I also told them, you know, as you probably know, this is on the agenda for tonight. And as you probably know from all the emails and certified letters I've sent, you know, what the deal is. But they proceeded to do the final inspection. This is what I got. Moving forward now... So next, if you can pass out this, exhibit C. So this is, Exhibit C is what Jose Negrin or whoever, I don't know, again, no ID, posted to the official CAP government portal at 1.57 p.m. today after the inspection. So this is supposed to be reflective of Exhibit A. It's not. As you can see, it's literally a blank page with no code cited. It just says fail. It doesn't give any information on how to correct it. It literally just says fail.

So this second example, C, you received that after they gave you the A where nothing was marked?

Yeah, so I got this A at approximately 1.30 p.m., and then that was uploaded to the official portal, where that's where all the legal stuff happens, at 1.57 p.m. Okay.

Okay.

OK, and then I don't have to be right here. I don't know. They're actually kind of driving me crazy with all of their errors to try to understand what's going on. But one of my hypothesis is that on exhibit D, which Ricardo is now passing out, This Exhibit D is the last, most recent before today, final inspection that I requested, August of last year. This was done by a different government person named Luigi Leonardo, I believe is his name. And you will see here that with the village's own inspection report, it explicitly states, per building official, final survey as required on previous results is waived. pending verification of Oolite installation only. So back in August, they said, they didn't say anything about setbacks. They didn't say anything about, you know, the construction, anything like that. They said per building official, no form-based code cited. And they waived the the survey and then on exhibit B I

So now they're saying you need a survey.

No, so that's from August last year where they specifically said, I don't need a survey. Now what's being shown to you is what Scarlett uploaded today to the portal at about 3.40 PM that says a survey is required. It also says, and this is news to me, hey, I got the four-foot variance. that the majority of you voted no to. It says, I received the four-foot variance, so this should be a four-foot wall, even though per the permit, it's clearly a six-foot wall. Scarlett was even doing all the paperwork, staff reports, was talking, representing the village in that variance process, determining that variance decision. So that makes no sense to me. This March... So this zoning setback was invented by Pedro March of this year when the new manager came in. When I picked back off from the previous manager, who in August of last year sent an email that will enter into the public record. I don't have a copy right here. I have it shared previously with some of you. But where Manager Alou directed Pedro and the building department to work with this resident to figure out how to resolve it, what is needed, stay in close communication so it can be closed out. They demonstrably have not done that. March of this year, I reengaged this permit with the new manager who told me he would be investigating it, has done nothing, just sat on it, and has allowed the village vendors to really open up a due process and civil rights issue regarding my property use. Because if you don't have a permit closed out, you can't rent your property. You can't rent it long term, short term, nothing. You have to collect taxes on it. with the open permit as well, it puts your title in jeopardy. So like real economic damages at this point as well. Let me go back to my final bit here. So the survey requirement was officially legally waived by this village over 10 months ago by Leonardo, the exhibit D. However, the 3.02 p.m. today zoning failure from Scarlett Hammonds, signed by Scarlett, who did not physically perform the measurements, as you would see on the video, this Jose person did, is now demanding a survey that the village already waived strictly to manufacture a violation hours before this meeting. Or is she even really making me do that? Cause the word is. What is the legal definition of should, am I required to do a survey now? And if so, based on what code or what ordinance it just says, should, how am I supposed to interpret that? Um, so further, uh, my property lot is radial, like so many properties in Sherwood forest. So one side is 127 feet deep. The other is 125 feet on a radio lot. Property depth dramatically changes on an angle. Yet the building inspector stood out there, used an unidentified digital device, and took exactly one single measurement at the shortest possible distance. They completely ignored the radial geometry of my land and survey on the stamped permit. They failed to cite a single section of the form-based code to back up the claim. And they completely ignored the village's own August 2025 inspection report from Leonardo, which explicitly states that the survey requirement is waived. By their own sloppy math, they are attempting to fail my entire permit over a variance of approximately less than four inches. Grant you, this coral installation already sits 40 feet back from the street. And this coral installation as well also sits 10.5 inches inside my previously approved wood side fences, which are also part of this existing permit that I'm trying to close, and a permit that was closed out two years ago. I did the math. I have 127 feet, uh, you know, of property. I reduce that by the 25 feet, which is the setback. That's what I got a permit in 2022 to build the west side of my privacy fence along that side. And this coral installation sits 10 and a half inches inside that on both sides. Um, which is totally ignored by the manager. I sent photos to the building official. I've sent photos, no response. Look at the note that they wrote under penalty of perjury in exhibit B. It says the fence should be located no more than 47 feet from the home and states the applicant should submit a final as-built survey to confirm the fence location. In municipal law, should is a recommendation, not a mandate. They officially logged a legal failure in a government database based on a four-inch recommendation that they explicitly admit they need a professional survey to verify. grant you the measurement they took is, and this is shown on the video is not the setback where my, where the swale is in my property line. It's a measurement they've invented from, um, the inside of the coral installation to the front surface of my house. Scarlett admits on camera, the recording today, they don't know where my property line starts. They don't have a measurement of what the actual setback is. And as you can see in what she wrote, She is just speculating that it doesn't meet the setback either. She doesn't say, you know, it's not, misses the setback by one foot or whatever the measurement is. It's like, you know, again, I don't know how to interpret this. I continue to be confused and baffled. So they do know where the... Okay. Okay, so nobody has to take my word for this. I want everyone to watch the video that I have, and I would like to share that now with anyone who is open to viewing that. Does anybody want to see that, or should I move on?

Just move on, because I'm not sure how we can share it.

You can probably send it to them individually or in a group in an email.

Yeah, we have it. I've seen it.

Just for the record, if you do choose to individually email it to council members, Mr. Pulliam, so it is not published to the general public, there's no objection to your doing that.

Let me jump in, because maybe I can kind of help out a little bit. Okay, so I've seen the video, you all. Go ahead.

But not everyone has.

I understand, I understand, I understand. I'm not gonna talk through the video, but I'm gonna take some points from the video. I got you, my brother, don't worry about it. So, I've seen the video, and What you've noticed, not only in the video, but what I think is something that's been going on from the beginning of this situation is things get confusing because there's not only like a lack of communication, but it seems to be like a drip, drip, drip of information. and i'm going to bring mr martinez up in a second um also but so so just to kind of like quickly kind of summarize everything so a while ago mr pulliam came before the planning and zoning committee and he applied for variance and what he wanted to do was he wanted to put a wall four feet where like no everybody else kind of has like their things like you know up to the front where like the whatever his property line like not on his property line but behind it but kind of where everybody's kind of frontage would be let's say if he had a right-of-way right if he had like a sidewalk and like you know a swell area where somebody would normally put a fence or bushes that's where he wanted to put his wall okay so for that he needed a variance so he asked for a variance for a forefoot when we went through that excuse me we went through that um when we went through that vote um it didn't pass all right what we were told at that particular time was we either can vote for him to have a variance right for a four-foot wall at that area or because his house is is is different and i'm saying it because He has, instead of people having their house in a normal space and then they have a large backyard, he's one of the houses that has almost no backyard and a huge front yard. Okay, so the house is set way far back. So because the house is set that far back, we were told, look, either you guys give him a variance for a four foot wall, right, in like the normal area, or because this house is so far back, he can put a six foot wall 25 feet back from the property line. Okay? By right. So that's what we were told. So exactly what it is. That's exactly what that is. So he did that. So he was like, since you guys, you know, voted no to the forefoot, you know, in a normal area, I'm going to do the six-foot wall where I have right, by right, where I have to do the six-foot wall. So that's what he did. When he did that, and I remember this like it was yesterday. I'm going to give it right back to you, Opal. When he did that, he applied for the permit. In the red, it says six by six foot wooden fence, then it says the wooden gate, and then it says the coral wall in green. This green you see here is the coral wall. This was the permit that he applied for. It shows the wall. This is where the problem started. His permit was approved. I remember this like it was yesterday. His permit was approved. There was no issues. Then one day he calls me and he's like, Mayor, why are they saying that I can't put these things up and it's illegal to put up my wall and now I have to take the whole wall down? And I'm like, what are you talking about? So apparently, so then when I went to go talk to the staff, They were like, yeah, Mayor, it was approved, but we didn't realize that the wall was part of the approval. Well, that's not the resident's fault. It's not the resident's fault. And not only that, but since then, what the issue has been, and I'm gonna bring you up in a second, Mr. Martinez, but since then, what the issue has been is, it's been like every couple or every few months, it'll be like, well, did you also do this? And he's like, well, why am I hearing this now for the first time? So it's kind of like, you know, residents rely on the village to be the experts, right? They don't know, you know? So it's like, why don't we give them all the information up front? You have to have this and this and this and this. And so I'm kind of speeding through things, but Mr. Pullen, was that three, four months ago we went to your house? Yeah. March, so he reached out to me, so I kind of organized the staff to go, because there was a lot of emails going back and forth, and I was like, look, you guys, let's just all go out there and talk. So one day I was here, took the village manager, took Mr. Martinez, the building supervisor who was here, we're gonna bring him up in a second. I took both code enforcement officers out there. Oh, you're good, okay, sorry. I took both code enforcement officers out there. It was a lot of us. I might be missing even a member of the staff. So we were all out there. So kind of like what I'm going through with you guys now, we went through the story about everything. And I made the example. I said, you guys, I looked at the staff that was there. We went through everything. We saw everything. And I was like, this is like, because what they were saying at that time was, well, you need an engineer now to come out and to go through the wall and make sure it's safe and make sure this and make sure that. You need an engineer to kind of verify your wall now. Which wasn't told in the very beginning, right? But my point was, I said, and at that meeting we were out there, that's when it came up for the very first time about zoning. Very first time was at that meeting, correct? So for the very first time, they're like, oh, and zoning now has to get involved. You have to get started out there to see if through planning and zoning, if it was done correctly. This was when we, it got so bad, we went out there in person. We were told that for the first time at that particular meeting, right? That zoning now had to get involved. So when I was there, my sentiment was You guys, if we went to anywhere, Home Depot, anywhere, and we got something or we purchased something, and it was supposed to be a certain thing or a certain service, and then it's like two months later, well, you have to also submit this to get the full service. And it's like, I was there two months ago, and I purchased a service. And then six months after that, it's like, well, there's also something else that you should be doing to keep the service. It's like, why didn't you tell me that in the beginning when I first got the service? And so my sentiment was, that shouldn't be on the resident. That should be on the village. So the resident shouldn't have to pay for an engineer to come out. The resident shouldn't have to pay for those things. It should be on the village, because Why, if we didn't give them all the information in the beginning, why are we then holding them accountable? If we keep telling them new information and, oh, by the way, but did you do this? Or, but did you do this? Or did you do this? Three months later, six months later. And so that was kind of like my sentiment with the whole thing. I'm gonna open up for the residents in a second, but let me first bring up Mr. Martinez. I have a couple, just a few more things. Oh, okay, go ahead, go ahead, go ahead.

So yeah, great point about, so the whole engineering story, is gone as well. So the inspections they did today, whether it be the paper they handed me in person or the two uploaded, don't say anything about, you know, kind of the construction of it being defective. So I don't know where that has gone. That whole story for the past year that they've been using to push this down the line has just, I guess, evaporated into smoke. But I have been asking them, and included in the certified letter to the manager, can you, like... You know, you need to do something. If you have a code-based reason, go ahead and reclassify it as structural if that's what you got to do. And then I can do a chapter 558 against my certified general contractor who has to build things by code. And if for some reason they didn't do whatever your new requirements are, then their insurance or that general contractor will, you know, be liable to repair it. Ultimately, you know, I'm protecting my pocketbook. It's not going to come from me. But I haven't received anything official from the village citing building codes or anything that would allow me to appeal to BORA to go after my certified general contractor. Literally nothing. And they've missed the chances to reclassify as well under equitable estoppel when they sent me the NOSI in March of last year saying, hey, you didn't even have a building permit for this. By the village rescinding that, you guys are legally acknowledging that my permit there is valid. And my issue is not just about what's personally happening to me But you know all the taxpayers and our very precarious small budget village Is this really a battle that the village wants to go into a fee shifting federal section 1983 civil rights? lawsuit against where even if I'm not awarded economic damages the village or the vendors are still have to pay for my legal fees and And civil rights attorneys, if you know them, that's their playbook. That's their business model. They're looking for open and shut cases to take to them where they know they can do the fee shifting and get hundreds of thousands of dollars. So I'm really concerned not just about the malfeasance happening here, but how this plays out at a macro level and how it affects other aspects of the village that we may not be considering. But further, just a couple more things. Since I'm not playing the video here, I did want to call out three specific points from it that you will notice if you watch it. So first, the inspector from CAP government flatly refuses to provide his name or show his credentials after I asked multiple times, and he knows it's being recorded. He also steps away and talks to Pedro on his cell phone. And it keeps telling me, oh, he's just doing what Pedro was telling him to do. He doesn't know the history of the file, why he's there. He's just there to do what Pedro tells him to do. And he steps away, talks to him on the phone, interchanges the exhibit A, which I've handed you, three times, which you'll see on the video. They changed the numbers. At one point, they measured a number of 66. which now it's reflected as 49. You would see this on the video, but it's like, it's so incoherent. I don't know where to begin, to be honest. So all of that's in the video.

It was 66 until the phone call was made.

Yes, it was 66 and the phone call was made and now it's 49.3, but they haven't documented how they made the measurement. I don't know why it was cap government, not Corradino group, et cetera, et cetera. And you'll hear in the video when I ask specifically what code section they are enforcing. They explicitly stayed on camera. I don't know. You have to talk to Pedro and tells me I need to call Pedro. I'm like, I'm not the employee. You just talked to him on the phone. Why are you here? You don't know what's going on. Um, So ultimately, there's a legal choice point here. This is obviously a targeted personal campaign. If you reflect back historically, I've complained about Pedro on the dais before. Formal complaints to the previous manager, Alou. I even had to call the CEO of CAP government several times. This was previously, some of you may know, I did a big gut renovation on my property for several years. So I've done multiple permits. And Pedro gave me a hard time about other things in the past with wrong information as well I've had to complain to all those various people I even explained to the manager three months ago in person that I feel like this is a personal targeted attack Which he has done nothing regarding Or I would actually like to hear what his stance is on that. That would be great to hear because because I don't know it's been radio silent and So, um, again, the previous village manager Lou is on the record, August, 2025, explicitly instructing Pedro to tell me exactly what was needed to close this permit. Pedro ignored that directive for seven months only to suddenly invent this brand new setback issue of March of this year. when a new manager took office. Meanwhile, an identical unpermented coral stone wall sits down the street completely untouched at 388 Northeast 85th Street, per my public records request. That's right by the Indian Mound. They have no permit on file. Village isn't going after them. They don't have a structural or non-structural anything. Yet I'm being targeted for trying to do everything right. Coming for a variance is rejected. OK, what can I do by right? OK, I built that. Now you're throwing everything in the kitchen sink at me, including this latest thing March of this year about a setback invention. And meanwhile, all these engineering win calculation plans that you have been asking for for the past eight months, there's no mention of that anymore. What gives? I don't know. So I have several calls to action here to resolve this matter tonight without federal litigation. I'm demanding that this council immediately instruct the village manager to execute the following directives. I would like the council to direct the manager to override this rogue operation and instruct the building department to officially pass and close out my permit PB25-0004 as it is completed, as it is stated, as it is approved, as I have shared with all of you here. Um, secondly, I would like to ask the council to direct, uh, to issue a formal written cease and desist to Pedro and the building department regarding any further undocumented verbal or unauthorized enforcement actions on my property. There's been so much wild stuff off the books that they're not uploading to the portal that I have in emails that I have in verbal conversations. It's supposed to all legally be on the portal. It's not. So it's just harassment. I would love a cease and desist from Pedro and building department regarding that. Thirdly, I'd like the council to direct the village attorney to launch an immediate internal investigation into the building department's use of hidden files, ghostwritten inspection records, reports, and targeted harassment of residents. I know Darien Martin, Mayor Omar, you said earlier when we started this session that you guys have no tolerance for people being targeted, for things being done off books. Um, et cetera. So I would really look specially to both of you, um, to, to be a stand to kind of investigate this and, and root it out again. I wouldn't be here asking this if the manager or the building official had responded to any of my requests, including certified letters, three in-person meetings. Um, I see Pedro's here tonight. He was not the one at my property today. I don't know who was there again. No name tag, no identification. So that's where I'm at. Thank you for your time and for listening to this.

Thank you very much. Appreciate it, Mr. Pulliam. I'm going to bring up Mr. Martinez. If we need to bring you back up, we'll bring you back up, Mr. Pulliam. Okay, thank you. Mr. Martinez, is there anything that you want to say? Okay, come on.

Good evening, good evening, I'm Pedro Martinez, building official. I would like to clarify several other points spoken against me and my department tonight. On the starting, the main reason for all this confusion is Mr. Pulliam, he may have forgotten he applied for a fence permit by owner, owner builder, fence. The fence permit had the drawing of a wall, a line representing a wall, a coral rock wall, woolite wall, in a specific position. And he presented with the application, you probably have it there, the standard drawings for a wood fence. So he applied for a wood fence, presented a wood fence, Zoning saw the line for the coral rock and requested from Mr. Pulliam where's the coral rock located to make sure it was in the right place. Mr. Pulliam replied to zoning, the coral rock is 25 feet away from the property line. And without answer from Mr. Pulliam, zoning approved. Because they were not going to approve a coral rock in the wrong location. The building department enforces a building code for safety mainly, but we also enforce the local regulation. Now for safety, the location of our coral rock doesn't make a difference for me, our coral wall. But this is, a wall was built with a fence permit. Just to make it clear, he applied as owner builder, not with a, let me speak, not with a GC, by himself, with an honor ability application that you probably have, he signed, notarized, I brought a copy. It says, I'm personally responsible for knowledge of all applicable laws and regulations. What are the regulations? When you build structural, after we met with Ms. Alou, I sent you a long email with all the structural requirements of the building code. You just happened to forget that. Mr. Mayor, you received a copy of that. You received a copy of that email. Mr. Manager, you also have a copy of that email. All the chain of emails with Ms. Alou in that email, In that chain of emails, I am requesting him because I am not in possession of all the truth. So the way the building code works is the building official decides nobody else has jurisdiction to overwrite my decision in the city. Not even a judge has that jurisdiction, cannot change my decision. I said, you need structural calculations. It could be a design or a calculation demonstrating the wall is in correct position. As many permits, many people, for example, apply for a house, and the site plan includes a pool, includes a driveway, and those are called deferred submittals. So we approve the fence, and then, yes, yes, we try to be nice and accept it, accept it, Please, can you have respect for other people? Yes, very good. Accepted, accepted. I proposed and accepted the idea of accepting a revision to receive the drawings or the calculations for the wall, which was built with no inspection. So we would have found out, we would have discussed the position of the wall at the moment of the foundation inspection. The building code states when you build a wall, you need to have a foundation inspection. Violating number one, Mr. Pulliam said he knows the application of the regulations. He did not call, he just put the wall in place with no inspection whatsoever. No, he declared the wall for you to see what it is. is slabs of coral rock cut eight inches thick, a stone about this tall, in a trench one foot deep, just one foot deep. All I want is to demonstrate that that one foot deep will not fall on somebody, because this is my job. I don't care if it's you I'm protecting or if it's somebody I like a lot. I'm protecting you. You live there. The resident lives there. But also, the person may sell the house and the new owner 20, 30 years from now will not know that wall is unsafe. I need demonstration that the wall is safe as building official. Now, if I'm wrong, I sent Mr. Pulliam the contact information, phone number, and link for Borah so he can present his case in Borah and Borah can say, yes, Mr. Martinez is wrong. You can put the wall like that. You are right. You applied for a fence, but you can build a wall with no inspections. Borah can make that decision. If you don't like it, if Borah says, I am wrong, I will learn something. And I'll go by what Borah says. But do not, I have told you repeated times, he tried to force Ms. Alou. to force me to close the permit. Ms. Halu being an attorney said, It is true. No, it's not. Ms. Alou, and I several times said, Ms. Alou did not do that, did not violate the Florida statutes.

Ms. Martinez, do not go back and forth with the resident.

Yeah, but I'm explaining how the whole story goes back and forth, back and forth, back and forth. No, I understand, keep going. Back with the same thing. He has a long list of code, specific code pending issues with the wall. which is the most important part for me. Even if I'm not the building official 30 years from now, that wall has to be safe for me to sign on on it. So if I get calculations that say I'm wrong, A good engineer can make the calculation. You say a shovel, the length of a shovel, and you pull it out, and you take some soil with you. As a matter of fact, a friend of mine is a volunteer firefighter. One of his friends lost his life last year for an unsafe wall just like that. They were climbing the wall to save a couple inside the wall, killed the young guy. He was like 25 years old. So I am adamant on that. Go through a proper channel. Do not force. this commission to make a decision where they don't have any jurisdiction. You have seen it, Mayor. You have seen that in my emails. And go to board. Board is the proper channel. I gave some extensions at your request so they can go. The board does not take long. They're very expeditious. You apply with them. Within five days, you're in the next agenda. And this has been since August last year.

So let me just ask something really quickly, and I'm gonna open it up to the council. It seems that the problem is, you wanna know if the wall is safe, right? So structural calculations that require engineer.

They require an engineer, but I cannot propose, even if I wanted, because it would be a conflict of interest. I cannot inspect and approve my own calculations. So that's why the owner, every owner in the city by the way do you see all the residents here complaining against me or or has it been only one complaining against me all the time he said he said that i did because i really want to be safe we do not retaliate sir we do not retaliate we protect every resident if it was for retaliation i would look the other way hope the wall falls on him or kills or breaks his car no It doesn't matter who's doing it. I need to make sure things are safe, and this is my job.

Understood, I appreciate that. I get complaints all the time from different residents about different building things and different code things all the time. So, but I mean, not for this particular issue. I'm gonna bring you back up in a second, Mr. Porter. Not for this particular issue, but I get complaints on a fairly consistent basis about different things. But I'm trying to get at where we go from here. So I understand the Bora situation. But our goal is for this thing to kind of be done with. Our goal is to figure out if it's safe or not. That's the goal, right? Whether it's Bora, whatever it is, the goal is to figure out if it's safe or not. That takes an engineer, right? Does CAP government not have engineers that they inspect, they do inspections?

Again, it would be a conflict of interest. We cannot be in the same country.

So CAP government never uses CAP engineers to inspect? No. What do the CAP engineers, what do they use for?

CAP engineers do revise the calculations sent to us by another engineer. Another engineer presents a design with calculations. We have a structural engineer that verifies the numbers are correct. They verify the safety factors of what the code requires. and then they approve or disapprove, but we don't decide. We verify the sign.

So I understand what you're saying about conflict of interest, but if a separate CAP engineer that's not you, there's still a conflict.

There's still a conflict. May I jump in just for one moment? Yeah. This is obviously a pretty complicated situation. Mr. Pulliam spoke at quite some length. notwithstanding that mr polliam chooses to represent himself which is his privilege he's not required to have an attorney to represent him in regard to these matters but he does raise matters which are serious in nature now as part of village administration it is our job when appropriate to support the village staff. And it is a fact, as the building official says, he has a personal statutory responsibility that is not subject to interference by the council. or by the village manager or by the village attorney, but he does have to exercise that appropriately. I'm not sure if I go as far as Mr. Martinez's statement that even a judge cannot overrule that. I'm less certain of that. without researching that particular issue because I've never seen that actually come up but I mean Mr. Pulliam has raised issues related to what he considers to be violations of 42 U.S. 1983 which is a very serious statute which is something typically litigated in federal court so I want to be certain that he's not ignored, but also there are two sides to every story. That does not make both sides to every story equal to each other though. One side can be right and the other cannot be. And I just, for what it's worth, wanna say having worked with Mr. Martinez, I know him to be a very conscientious professional. I personally would be, more than surprised if his actions are related to any personal animus having worked with him but the what's before the council it seems to me i mean i i would not urge you i mean you follow advice if you choose to but i would not urge you to take some of the action items that Mr. Pulliam urged at this moment, but clearly this is a situation that demands some solution. Mr. Pulliam asserts that he cannot go to Bora the County Board of Rules and Appeals because of what he believes to be a technical deficiency in the manner in which the building department and the building official have issued rulings. I'm not personally certain that Borah is as much of a stickler for what can come in front of them as Mr. Pulliam believes, but I cannot say to you, sitting here, that he is incorrect, and in fact, It seems to be the case that the building official has given the information on Borah to Mr. Pulliam, has suggested that he goes to that supervisory appellate body, and has in fact given some extensions to allow Mr. Pulliam to go before Borah. I'm reasonably confident that if Mr. Pulliam is correct, and I cannot sit here and tell you he is not, that if he is correct that the record created by our building department is not sufficient for him to go to Borah, I am reasonably confident that upon some investigation with Borah, which I would be prepared to undertake, I could certainly work with the building official to modify what he has done, what has been issued by the building department that would enable Mr. Pulliam to present his case to BORA. We're certainly not here. to suggest to him that that's where he goes, but to create some catch 22 that prevents him from doing what the building official has suggested. So that's one possible exit ramp here, is that we speak with Mr. Pulliam, to find out what exactly he believes is missing in what he terms final agency action, a term I'm very familiar with from my own practice of administrative law. We speak with BORA to determine exactly what it is that they need if what exists is sufficient or what would need to be modified. And we speak with our building official who has suggested that route to make sure that what is provided is adequate for Mr. Pulliam to go to BORA. That is one exit ramp. The other exit ramp is there certainly seems to be some failure to adequately communicate back and forth. I mean, whoever you believe and if you believe everything or nothing that you've heard from anyone, it's very clear that the building official has concerns and that Mr. Pulliam has concerns and they're not hearing or understanding each other. Again, Mayor, no one has the ability to order the building official not to perform his duty. That's a statutory duty and it's one of the highest order. But that doesn't mean that a resident is supposed to be caught in again, some catch 22, where there is no resolution. The preferred resolution is not the Borough route, but that is an available resolution. The preferred resolution, which you tried to do Mayor, when you went there, which I know that our manager has attempted to do, and the previous manager attempted to do. But the building official, I mean his license, his livelihood depends on him properly protecting the public. That is a very high order obligation. Though I take much less joy in the prospect than you can possibly imagine I would certainly be happy to work together with our manager, and if necessary, if we have to bring in an outside engineer as a mediator as well as a professional to get this situation resolved, It would be preferable if we could find a way to get this resolved internally in the village in a way that will protect the obligations that the building official has, but also find a clear solution that the resident can follow that can be put in writing and not subject to further change that fosters allegations of improper conduct. I would urge you, this is manifestly not something that is going to be solved tonight with you sitting at the dais. I would suggest that if it becomes necessary that the council could address this at a special meeting since one is being contemplated anyway, but I'm not sure that there really is council action necessary or even appropriate to resolve this, but there are at least two identifiable off ramps here that can get the resident out from under this ongoing problem that is so clearly extremely disturbing to him that still protects the building officials right to do his job and the village's obligation i would urge you to frankly not spend all the rest of tonight on this but to allow myself and our estimable manager to either find a way to get these parties on the same page if necessary by bringing in an outside engineer and possibly using that person as a mediator or in the alternative to work with both of these parties and Borah in a way that if nothing else will make Mr. Pulliam confident that he has an ability to go to Bora if we can't reach some other solution. That's exactly what Mr. Martinez has suggested, and I'm very confident that we can find a way to be sure that Mr. Pulliam has the ability to go before Bora. I know that each of these gentlemen could easily speak to you for another hour apiece, but I don't think it's gonna assist you in reaching a solution tonight. And because this is, I mean, Mr. Pulliam made very many assertions about what is or is not legal, and without disagreeing with him, which I am not here to do at this moment, but this is legal in nature and at least in part. And I think that together with our manager, we can work with both the resident and the building official and find some way where if we can't solve it between them, we can at least be certain that Mr. Pulliam gets the appellate review before Borah to which he is clearly entitled.

All right, so this is how we're gonna do this. Councilperson Irvine's gonna speak, Mr. Pulliam's gonna come back up, and then we're gonna go to the audience, all right? We'll go to the residents, and then we'll come back to the council.

You know, candidly, Mayor, I mean, you can hear from residents if you choose to do so, but this is not as much a matter of public policy. This is a matter where one private individual has a concern with the village and he wants and needs at least, at least the relief that he can go before the Board of Rules and Appeals. So, I mean, that's your choice if you want to take...

it's not entirely appropriate for you to do that but that's your choice now for every agenda item I like to open it up okay I'm gonna go to council person urban the only thing I was saying before is the only thing I continue to think is that there's only two choices right the two choices it seems it's coming out of this is the borer thing or to get an engineer to go out there and do the study but I just don't think the resident should be THE ONE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ENGINEER AND THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I STAND AND THOSE THAT'S WHAT I SEE AS FAR AS THE TWO CHOICES COUNCIL COUNCILPERSON URBAN AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO GO PULL IT OH YOU WANT ALL RIGHT PLEASE YEAH JUST JUST TO PUT THIS IN VERY VERY QUICKLY

We, at the beginning, requested a survey for the wood fence because the neighbor to the east side had damage to his papers. He was complaining that the fence was not in the right position, the wood fence. So we're requesting proof that the wood fence was in the right position with a survey because we don't have measurement. A survey is a legal instrument. The neighbor agreed to have the papers repaired and the fence finished without requiring the survey. So for that reason, I waived the requirement for the survey. We're still talking about the wood fence that was done before. Suddenly, somebody came to us and said, hey, there's a coral rock wall there. we are ready to do a final inspection on the wood fence and the core rock wall appeared there. So I just wanted to put that in context, not that we're getting it drop by drop. The wall was built without inspection, without plans, without anything. We tried to be flexible to allow Mr. Pulliam to get the plans or get the calculations, demonstrate it's safe. Now, the location of the wall, I sent Jose because he's taller than Scarlett. Scarlett's too short, and she couldn't reach to the top and get an accurate measurement. He got nervous. Jose got nervous. He told me, oh, it cannot be 66. You have the drawing there. The survey shows the distance from the front wall to the property line. The property line is invisible. The front wall is visible. So we're measuring the distance from the wall to the front wall. from the coral rock wall to the house wall that should have been 47 and change feet to be close enough to the house so it would be 25 feet away from the property line. The inspector measured 49 feet, which is about almost two feet missed. He missed the mark by about two feet. We cannot be held responsible for that, but it's not safety. The city may want to bend the rules and allow him to keep the wall in that position. In my position, as long as you can approve that, it's not safety. As long as somebody shows me that wall is not falling today, not in 50 years, not hurting somebody. That is what I need to approve the wall.

Sure, thank you very much. Councilperson Erbom and then, thank you Mr. Martinez, then we'll bring Mr. Pulling up, then we're going to the residents.

Okay, I have one statement, three questions. I'll start a timer on myself and keep it to under three minutes here. All right, here we go. My statement is I am frustrated with the problematic reality of the potential of a permit that was approved that should not have been approved regarding the four feet versus six feet statement there. Now, my questions, firstly, HERE IN EXHIBIT A AS PRESENTED BY THE RESIDENT, FEBRUARY 25TH, EXTENSION REVOKED SINCE RESIDENT DID NOT SHOW UP TO BOARD MEETING ON FEBRUARY 25TH, 2026. THAT'S THIS YEAR, FEBRUARY LATE. NOW, JUST A WEEK LATER, IT LOOKS LIKE, PERHAPS TWO WEEKS, SOMETHING OF THAT EFFECT, INTO THE SECOND WEEK, MARCH 4TH, EARLY MARCH, PER BUILDING OFFICIAL PERMIT EXTENDED TO JUNE 1ST, NOT 21ST, BUT IN PRINT HERE IT SAYS JUNE 1ST. most of March all of April all of May to give resident more time to attend board hearing now my question is there was a name of a document identified by the resident in his initial presentation I believe it was final something or other that he was saying he was missing to be able to take to Bora to complete that process what was the name of that document he's looking for final

agency action which is a document that is a sufficiently identifiable decision by any agency that allows an appeal to wherever an appeal from that agency goes. And final agency action is a correct legal term whether what occurred here did not or did constitute final agency action would require a review of the documents, but Mr. Pulliam asserts clearly that he believes that what was given was not final agency action to enable him to appeal to Borah. Whether Borah concurs with him, we can't know without asking Borah.

I have an answer to that. Okay, so in that example, the final agency action, the agency is the Village of El Portal? Yes. Okay, so. I have in front of me. In a technical sense it's the building department. I have in front of me exhibit A, I have in front of me exhibit B, and these are the exhibits that present essentially the basis for the failed inspection. My curiosity is with these being both dated June 23rd, meaning today, I would like to know if any representative of the agency, meaning either CAP government manager or attorney would know of a date prior to June 1st, which was the expiration of the extension to arrive at Borah, I would like to know if there was any final agency action presented or if anyone can verify that there would or would not have been a final agency action presented before June 1st.

We would need to review the record to see if there's anything else in the record, the entire record is not here. And we would need to check with Bora. Mr. Pulliam clearly feels strongly that what's been issued is insufficient to go to Bora, whether he's made that determination himself, or that's been made by Bora. I mean, I don't know the answer to that. But I did hear unless I misheard that the June 1 deadline is extended again, and it's now July 1.

And where did you hear that from, I suppose, I guess, in my last question?

I think I heard that here said tonight. Is that not correct?

Is that accurate, sir? And then... June 30th, excuse me.

So it's still current, it's still open, but the fact that the time is available does not mean that whatever the village has issued... constitutes final agency action. Mr. Pulliam thinks that it does not. I can't say he's wrong without a examining all the documents and be talking also to Bora, uh, to their attorney and asking, is this that we've got sufficient for you or what is deficient about it and how can that be cured? So the gentlemen, He absolutely has a right to go to Bora. And if we're not issuing the right document, then we need to issue the right document so he can go.

Okay. So I'm not sure if I'm happy with the answer, but I understand the answer. And then my final question before I allow Mr. Pulliam to make his points is, in the event of an otherwise erroneous approval, what, if any, remedy would there be Sorry, Madam Clerk, I just need to, sorry. So in the event of an erroneous approval of a permit, what, if any, remedy is there to revisit that permit? That is an overarching question that I have about this entire situation.

The building official may, upon proper showing revoke a permit that was issued improvidently but conversely, if the building official feels that something was denied, and upon further review determines that it can be viewed as proper, those adjustments can be made. If he refuses on a proper showing, that's when it's appealed to the Board of Rules and Appeals. That's their function. But if there is some procedural impediment that prevents the resident from getting the appellate review that he is entitled to, it is incumbent upon the village to provide a sufficient final agency action to allow him to appeal. Whether what has been furnished is sufficient, and Mr. Pulliam believes otherwise, I mean, that is the case. Whether he's correct or not is not something that we're going to be able to determine sitting here. But we need to, A, look at the entire file, look at the documents, see what is considered final agency action. And most importantly, talk to the attorney at BORA and say, is this good enough? And if not, what do you need?

OK, several things I'd like to debunk. First of all, I've been asking for this final agency notice or discrepancy so I could take to someone like Bora for over a year, at least since last August, when Manager Alou sent that email directive telling the building department and Pedro, work with me. Tell me exactly what I need to do. Make it clear. Let's wrap this up. Um, that has not occurred. Further, um, the July, uh, the, what does it say? June, June 1st, June 1st deadline. That is another error typo. I got an email last week from the building department that first said, uh, your permit expires July 1st. You're not going to get any extensions. Okay. Then I get an email a couple days later, oh, we decided you can do an extension if you want. I don't want an extension. I've been asking for the information I can take to close this out for at least eight months, if not longer. And that has not been provided for me. Further, everyone saw my permit that's approved that I'm seeking to be closed out. It is for both a six-foot wood fence on the side and the coral installation. They're arbitrarily trying to split a building permit, which they have not cited a code for. This permit approved says structural not applicable, engineering civil not applicable, approved by Planning and Zoning. They have not reclassified this permit. They have not rescinded the permit, even though they had that NOSI mix up over a year ago saying, hey, we didn't have a permit. Pedro was here just five minutes ago saying, oh, we thought it was only a wood fence. Then we show up and it's this coral installation. We don't know what this is. You all saw the permit. The permit clearly shows the coral installation. And again, the village last March rescinded that NOSI. Legally establishing once again the validity of this permit on that date now We're like 15 months later, and they're inventing a setback violation that they're claiming for the first time three months three months ago and they're claiming Which I'm so confused because you see the three exhibits I gave you what was posted today what I was handed in person and what was posted online and None of it says anything about we're reclassifying it to structural, and here's the form-based code. Pedro was just up here saying that. Oh, for me, it's a wall. It's structural. Well, how come you haven't reclassified any of this? That reclassification is what I would need to go to someone like Bora or get my certified general contractor on the line. The village has not done anything in that regard. And with all the messages I have been sending to the administration, again, this would not be in front of the village and the council if they had not been stonewalling me for so long. I have an email from, this was my last email, June 2nd, to Mayor Nickerson, Manager Roseman. The clerk was copied on it. Pedro responded and copied the attorney. So the attorney has been on the full thread since at least June 2nd. And this is what I asked and what they did not respond to at all. I say, I acknowledge the August 27th email from Pedro. Sorry, one other thing. There's so much information off the books, like when does it expire or not. I first saw this June date today when it was handed to me. That's never been communicated before. The emails I had last week say something different. What was issued to me today is not uploaded to the portal. You know, what am I supposed to take, an empty page that says fail? What am I contesting? It doesn't make sense. Anyway, June 2nd, the email that everyone's copied on, including the attorney, I said I acknowledge the August 27th email from Pedro where he cites Florida Building Code Sections 105.41, 107.4, 1603.1, and 1604.4. while these sections, where he's talking about wind calculations and that sort of stuff. And I say, while these sections govern structural design for regulated structures, they do not establish the antecedent determination that an installation approved under this permit, Finsgate structural engineering not applicable for decorative coral, should now be retroactively reclassified as a structural wall. Is that antecedent that they have not provided whatsoever, as well as no building codes on the documentation you see in front of you and what's there. I further said, the village's current position appears to retroactively split a single approved project into permitted and unpermitted components. Without identifying a code-based threshold for this determination, I respectfully request the following in writing within 10 business days. I ask for nine things. Code basis for reclassification. The specific code definition or threshold used to treat an approved decorative installation as a wall, subject to structural design requirements. I asked, what is the code basis for project splitting? The authority to split a single approved permit into separate permitted and unpermitted components after the fact, the wood fence and the coral installation. I asked, what is the nature of the asserted error? If the village maintains the permit they issued here, was an error under the building code because it's supposed to be structural. Please clarify if this was classification error at intake, either cured by amending the record or a deviation from approved documents under Florida building code. I also asked for specific setback data, the specific code section and exact dimensions claim to violate setbacks given that the installation sits 10.5 inches in board of fences previously permitted and closed. under PB22-0143 from the year 2022, which they did not acknowledge or respond to. I also asked about vested rights and equitable estoppel. The village's legal position regarding my vested rights, I have incurred over $15,000 in total costs in good faith reliance on the village's approved status and not applicable structural engineering determination. I also asked... I also asked for a notice of final agency action, and I gave them this intent to escalate. They knew this was going to be coming before you if they did nothing, and they've been sitting on their hands from at least March, if not the previous year in the previous administration. I asked, again, June 2nd, notice of final agency action and intent to escalate. If the village is unable to provide the code-based justifications requested above, please treat this as a formal request for a written notice of final agency action. This notice is required for me to exhaust my administrative remedies and proceed with a formal appeal to Miami-Dade County Board of Rules and Appeals, BORA, to validate what they're saying. I'm also going to pursue doing a formal complaint, Florida DBPR, against Pedro's license and other folks who I've been harassed by. So that is that. Also, in regards of is it dangerous or not, that doesn't make sense at all either. If it is dangerous, why has the village not condemned it? Why have they extended it and offered to continue extending the permit for over a year? It's been standing in place for over a year. If it's so dangerous, why is it not condemned to reclassified already? Why am I not already in front of BORA months ago? That doesn't make sense.

Have they made any demands of you to provide the engineering calculations?

Only over email, which is off the books. So not on the portal. And that's also, you can't take something off the books just in an email. Not certified letter, not on the portal. And they did not answer the antecedent of, but what code base are you reclassifying from non-structural to structural?

Right. So my thought process on that is that, for example, with just take like the wood fence, right? Or just just fencing, right? Just traditional fence, right? So as I'm sitting here thinking about it, we have a, a number of styles, or specific designs, I should say not styling, but design offense, right? That match with county approved designs that allow for when to pass through so that the fence does not act as a sail in tropical storms and greater, right? And so one of the reasons that we don't have a requirement for engineering documents for say the wood fence is because there's already a limited number of designs of fence allowed because those calculations essentially have already been done based on the design. So in my brain, I understand the reason it may not, you know, you still need some sort of calculation for a wall because maybe that design is not, you know, specifically prescribed or calculated already by the county. I do not know that to be a fact. It's just in my brain. That's how I'm thinking about it. I don't believe in logic or reason. There's just my logic and my reason, your logic and your reason. I'm certainly in the weeds here along with you. It seems like we're in the weeds. I had one more point. I had one more point.

So regarding safety, I've offered the manager and billing department, okay, if it's so life-threatening, how about I sign a hold harmless to remove any liability from the village, if that's what you're so concerned about. It's set back 25 feet on my property, so if it did fall, It's going to fall on my property. There's not pedestrians there. It's 40 feet from the street. So if it's such a life issue, liability issue, why has the village since at least March of this year stonewalled completely not answer anything about the hold harmless or what their stance is on that, either yay or nay? For me, they're talking out of both sides of their mouth. Oh, it's a safety issue, but We haven't made any redetermination in 15 months and we're not reclassifying it.

That reminds me of one more question. So in Mr. Martinez's explanation of the fact that this is an owner-builder permit, meaning the owner is saying that they are the builder, my question, I guess, is did you build this wall?

I hired a certified general contractor and I supervised while they were doing work. You can see the August inspection from last year where they're asking for photos and whatnot. That's another administrative violation. They can't ask for that if it's not a structural permit. If you're gonna ask for that, reclassify this to a structural permit, which they have not done, refused to do. I brought it to all of their attentions for months and months and months. The attorney's sitting here saying, oh, this is news to me. I haven't heard anything. I need to go investigate it for a period of time. Sure, but that's why I'm here today, because they've had no action, again, for months and months and months. There's this catch-22. It's not clear for me at all how to proceed. I would like the council to investigate what happened today, why all these discrepancies in, you know, the paperwork that was issued today. What's that all about? Because that has not been answered either. And again, this paperwork you see today, there's nothing in there that says, oh, This is structural. This needs to be reclassified. They cite no building codes. All of that is required to go to BORA. I've called BORA when he first told me about it. They said, you need a final agency notice or something that says fail. The only thing that says fail is the document I gave all of y'all that has no information on it whatsoever by the guy who wouldn't say what his name was when he showed up today.

I'm almost ready to make a motion. If anybody wants to make a motion, they probably should hurry up. I want to open up to the very soon. Yeah, I want to open up to it.

Before we do that, a really quick question. Go ahead. All right, so before you make a motion, I had one or two questions. Maybe one of you guys can answer this. Is there evidence that this is able to be an after the fact variance by the council or is that, because it was also an agenda item and it was published and noticed, right? If it's possible or if it's not, that's all.

Well, but a variance is not required. So by right he had, he's able to do the 25 feet back with the six foot. That's what we were told at the planning and zoning back then.

So a variance for an eight inch ornamental wall that's six feet tall.

Oh, you're saying... Can we clarify the record, though? Yeah. The original variance was approved for four-foot frontage.

It wasn't approved. And then it was... The original variance was approved for... It was denied.

The original variance for the frontage fence. I'm not talking about the...

It was denied. For the original variance, when he came, he wanted a four-foot coral wall at the regular setback.

It was not just the height of that cross line. It is the entire cross line that was an error in that permit approval?

Yeah. I'm ready to make a motion. Go ahead, Council Member. I just wanted to know. I'm going to open it up to you guys, the residents. Come up, first and last name and your address for the record. Three minutes, you guys.

Alexandra Baza, 120 Northwest, 86th Street. The reason why I stayed all this time, I don't disagree that it's a pretty solid wall and probably needs some structural revision, but it is absolutely unacceptable the way that the process is set up, that they keep moving the wall. If the building department doesn't have the structure the structure together and they keep changing the rules on the residents, that is on them. If they don't have any right or order or anything how they do things, like how they approved the demolition of the Raider Church, we don't notice because they just pull things out of thin air. That is another thing. But the way I saw the video, and despite of what Mr. Geller says, this is a public matter. How residents are being treated by the consultants is absolutely unacceptable. I was so upset how in your property, you have no right to ask what's the name of the person that is there. With a laser, like trying to guess what angle are they trying to measure. It's absolutely unbelievable how they're treating the residents. The zoning official is saying, oh, I don't know. I have to figure it out. After a year or something? Are you kidding me? It's absolutely irresponsible the way that, and now he's like, oh, I have to defend the building and the public. Absolutely not. You're trying to do whatever you feel like doing. That's what you're trying to do.

Thank you very much.

Next. Hey, Denise White, 173 Northwest 88th Street. Oh, that was a lot. My ADHD kicked in. I started to sit there. I was getting twitchy. I was like, oh, what's happening here? Right, that was a lot. Number one. So the man's been, first of all, she's right in the fact that why he had to bring this here. If he was in touch with Mayor, if he was in touch with Keller, and you know I love you, Mr. Roseman, but my city manager as well. If he was sending so many emails, why did he have to bring it here? Mr. Mayor, you had people go over to his house to say, hey, hey, hey, what we doing, how we gonna do it? And still, he's here. Right? So that's a little confusing because why couldn't we have just said, look, even if it was like, ooh, you know that man a pain in the ass, come on, y'all. Let's sit it down. Let's try and figure it out because, you know, if he come, you know, he know all the laws. All them big words. Y'all was using big words. You and Mr. Geller, big words. I got to get a thesaurus or a dictionary or something. Anyway, what you call it? At what point did somebody say, hey, hey, hey, hey, y'all, let's just get together because, you know, You know he gonna be a little pain. So let's fix it. Why don't we do that? That I don't understand, right? Okay, cool. But there are other things like, Okay, so it ended up being a wall. It wasn't a fence. It was a wall. People were confused about that. Why didn't we, what do you call it, rezone it? My boy also said, if you told him what he needed to fix, he would go sue his contractor, blah, blah, blah, make sure it wasn't coming out of his pocket and fix it. From what I understand, I'm back there asking Mr. Martinez some questions. From what I understand, a six-foot wall can't be one foot deep. It's going to fall over like they do when you got, what you said, Mr. Martinez, he said when you go to the cemetery and the tombstone is put through that, and then when the hurricane comes, he flop over. Oh, shoot, Daddy, we're going to have to fix that, right? So he says it should be down, and we chat GPT'd it too, me and Violet. We chat GPT'd it, and they say about three feet. Now, why somebody didn't tell that man, hey, you need two more feet to go down before we can approve this wall, that don't make no sense either. So it seemed like there was a whole bunch of little simple things we all could have got together way before this meeting, you know what I'm saying? And that's why he feels quite possibly he's being picked on. Mr. Martinez in the back going, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, it got to go deeper. The wall got to go deeper. Or give me some calculations to say it's deep and that this soil can hold this at one foot. That's what he said. Why two people, three people, or five or six people couldn't have gotten these two men to communicate better? I don't know. I'm sorry, hence the frustration, right? Right. Now he's utterly frustrated. He don't give a damn. He think Mr. Martinez is the most evilest man in the entire world. And he talked to everybody. So he has a right to kind of feel that way. So now he wanna say, sue y'all discrimination. I don't know why it came to this point. Like that part, Alexandra's frustration, I get that too. Like, I don't know why it had to come to this point. I think, and I'm sorry, Mr. Tom, that they're gonna have to sit now and get together and figure it out, because that's what they're gonna have to do right now. Because now they're like, wait a minute now, we don't want, no, no, no, they're gonna do it now. I know they're gonna do it now, because Mr. Geller said, we don't want them problems, you bring it. You threatened us like that man over there, Adam Newman. We was like, oh, shit, right? So we don't want them problems. So they're going to sit down now and get it together. So I'm hoping by next month your stuff will be figured out, and at least you'll know who you're going to sue besides us because we don't need no more. We don't have a lot of money, Mr. Tom. We don't have a lot of money. Right. We have so much non-money that I just looked at the flyer. Thank you, Mr. Winters, but he want us to fix our own streets. That's how much money we don't have. So that's crazy. So please, Mr. Tom, don't sue us. Mr. Mayor, you look like you were on the right track. You just got to pull more people together to get it solved so that everybody can be happy. I don't think Mr. Martinez is grievous. I just think they're really bad at communication. And hopefully his department will get better at that. You know, we're going to pray for them. Lord, help. Right. Also, I'm going to ask the universe to please help Mr. Tom resolve this before September because it's too long now and he's too frustrated. I don't think it was one or two or three people. I just think it was a hot topic and nobody knew what to do. Right? But hopefully now... We gonna figure out what to do, Mr. Tom. And I'm gonna ask the universe to please do that so we don't have this issue. And like I said, we gonna fix our own streets so we don't have no money.

Velvet Connelly, 355 Northeast 87th Street. This is the first I was hearing about this issue today, or I think the mayor had mentioned it, about the agenda, and I am grateful that we have a mayor that would put something like this on the agenda, but I just am flabbergasted at the lack of shame like this is to me like a shameful thing that something like this would have to be litigated at a council meeting and we as residents have to sit through this because whoever on the administration didn't take care of the issue so that it could be resolved in the proper channel because the fact that something like this would even have to come into a forum like this should be a shameful thing that that should be counted as a shameful indictment of like how did we get here and the fact that this is being treated with some level of normalcy like this is a conversation that residents should have to sit through at 10 o'clock at night and for me that's the issue that i've been raising every time i come to the meetings is like a lack of accountability in our government there's a lot of money being paid out to the employees that work for our government but it's not a lot of protection for the residents and a lot of times it feels like That's the source of a lot of the angst in the community is like the people that we're hoping to protect us are the ones that we have to kind of be fighting against. And there's a real issue with that. There's a real issue with that. And I'm not saying that to place blame because I don't, again, I just heard about this tonight. So I don't know what all the... The details were what they explained, but I don't know who's really to blame. But I just know this should never come into a forum like this. And every time when something, the ball gets dropped, it's us, the residents, who somehow end up having to bear the cost. And that's the part that I'm just not clear. How does that continue to keep happening? And nobody seems to think that that's problematic. Everybody just acts like this is normal. This is not normal. And I'm just trying to understand what happens from here. It's not even, obviously, Tom, I want you to get this resolved. And I hope that this gets resolved expeditiously. But the fact that it got to this point says that real swift action needs to be taken around who's in charge here? What's the chain of command? Where does the responsibility lie and who is accountable in situations like this that we can address and say, okay, what's gonna be done now? The fact that even now I'm not clear, what is the solution for him? After we've sat here and heard all this, I'm personally not clear, what is his solution? And I know I had a similar situation when I first moved here with a permit on my own home that the village tried to come after me over after giving me a certificate of occupancy to purchase the home and then coming back and trying to come after me with code violations for things that were pre-existing me, right? And it was a similar issue and there was no accountability about it. And I had to do the same thing and threaten a lawsuit and then all of a sudden it went away. That's unacceptable. And that was three, four years ago. And to see that stuff like that is still happening now, how? How? So for me, I'm going to continue to call for accountability and I'm going to continue to call for order to be restored in this government. And I'm not really sure, like I said, where it lies or whose feet it lies at. But I definitely know every time this happens, for me, this is just a stronger and stronger case being built. There has to be some accountability. It can't just keep being like, well, this is just how things are done in the village of El Portal. That's not acceptable.

Hi, Elida, 12 Northeast 90th Street. This is very typical, and this is why all the residents absolutely have a disbelief how our village runs. It's all the time, the inconsistency, it's constantly. Every single neighbor that you talk to, you do not understand what are the rules, what are the regulations. We saw it coming up very, very clearly, with the development, where the developer came to introduce their plan. It wasn't their fault, it's actually how our village operates. So it was given him the permit, but okay, if it was done incorrectly, could you go back, find a solution, give him an engineer, go check it out, at least take some responsibility for what was done. Maybe ask him to cover some costs, maybe you ask, but find a solution. But then we sit here, and the way he was treated from the attorney, the way he was spoken, the attorney spoke when he was speaking, but Tom could not speak when everyone was speaking. So, I mean, it's just this inconsistency constantly. Certain rules apply to certain people. Certain rules apply to certain people. And yes, I'm another... The reason why I've been coming here for the past year every single day, because for the past year, I'm another individual that I've been suffering the consequences of getting a violation on my property, six violations, again, through the inconsistency. They came into my property and I don't understand. After 13 years, my property has gotten better and better and better. But no, they came into my property and they said, you do not have grass on your swell. Why?

where I parked my car.

OK. I looked around. My neighbor, the entire swale does not have a piece of grass. But my property was sent a violation. You have discoloration of the roof. Look around. There's a boarded house in front of my house. So this inconsistency, we see it over and over again. That's why we're coming here. We're not coming here to attack you. Mr. Martini has assured us that you are talking to these experts. We know you are not talking to experts, because his conversation is very familiar to many of us. Many, many of us. Every time you go, you ask, what is the density for a school to come into our neighborhood? Oh, we don't know. You have to give them the special exception. Why? Where are our professionals? Where are these experts? You see, this is where the distrust exists, and that's why he feels irritated. He heard the attorney speaking for one hour just to cover the back of this village, but he does not have a solution. He still needs to sit here and... And he's still going to go home more confused, more angry. And this is very typical of our village. I'm sorry, but it might as well not exist, in my opinion.

Hello, Eric, 311 Northeast 86th Street. This has been going on for years, like many, many years. And we all know here, like I know so many people who are here with me, that this was a coral wall. They were denied their variance. Everybody knows it was a coral wall. Like, I wasn't the only one here. I recognize so many people that knew that they were building a coral wall. They were denied their variance. I was the one who told Tom, let it go. Don't pick a fight with the city. Go be happy. Build a six-foot wall the way they told you that you could do. This was told here if you go and check the cameras. This will be recorded so like everybody knew, including all of you here, council members, that this was a Coral Wall because this went on for many, many years. And I also want to say that because it's hard to see my neighbors in such a Kafka situation in which nothing can get resolved. And I've seen their efforts to try and solve this. I've seen Tom take a step back. to try and become level-headed with a situation that is very stressful, and nothing works. Nothing works. And by the way, I've met the guy who installed the coral wall. It's beautiful. They planted native plants with flowers for the bees. They care about what Sherwood Forest is about. We care about nature. They did it all for our village. They improved the value of the village. And I've seen that they dig a very deep hole to bury a big chunk of those coral walls. It was so deep that I don't see that falling. And I chit-chat with the guy who was building the fence. And he told me that he does that for many, many years. And he explained the situation. This is ridiculous. And this is clearly personal. You don't need much to see that. It's like obvious, as anybody can see. It's obvious that it's personal. And that's why I'm coming here. Everybody knew that this was a color wall. And it wasn't just one day. It was many, many days going on for many, many years. Thank you.

Thank you. I'll try to be brief. I'm George Alvarez, 165 Northwest, 88th Street. The reason we hire these third-party consultants is for efficiency. It's for budgetary reasons. It's to make your lives easier. The reason that we have Attorney Geller, the reason that we have CAP government, the reason that we have the Corradina Group, occasionally Blue Serbia, such as their duties are, is to inform you impartially. And so that we, a village of a small budget, don't have to hire dozens and dozens of employees and to pay them salaries and benefits. The theoretical benefit of hiring CAP government and those other third parties that I mentioned should be manifest. It seems like a very wise move that the mayor kept during his, uh, during his term. But if we're hearing this absolute rhetorical rat's nest of verbal and mental gymnastics, then something is wrong. And it's not to lay the blame and in a personal way on PR on Mr. Martinez, he seems, he seems like a solid guy and I have no doubt that his intentions are good. But you know what? We all have very good intentions. This room is filled with people with great intentions who sometimes have difference of opinions. Now, the efficiency and the efficacy with which CAP government and any other pertinent parties has to address Mr. Pulliam's question, query, let's put it that way, should be quick. It should be easy. It should not be mental gymnastics. It shouldn't be deferred accountability as one of my friends in the audience said. If this is not going as well as it should, then the council and the manager need to instruct capped government along lines, which should be legal, of course, and that's where the attorney gets involved, to make things streamlined. We hire these third parties to streamline our government to the benefit of our individual residents. not to the benefit of theoretical law out there or potential developers who may or may not come with their fantastic ideas into El Pratel because they know that they have the billions that we don't. So let's at least draw a bit of a line and focus, I mean it, let's focus on what our current residents' needs are. I think that the efficiency to which the answer as to whether or not there was an incorrect approval issued, I think that should be quick. Because the law is the law. And if Mr. Pulliam has to deal with a law, that is his duty. But if he has to deal with a law that was misconstrued, passed through God knows how many confusing emails, That's a problem, and that's on all of us for maintaining a system that purports to be efficient, but instead wastes our time and soaks our tax money. Thank you.

Anyone else for this item?

Hey, I just wanted to clarify a few things for the record.

First, again, I passed this out already, but this is the original permit. You can see January, sorry.

I think we did all see that as we were discussing. Just announce the dates into the microphone so it can be on the record. I know that we did all. I have a chance to look at that while you're making your initial statements, but in the microphone.

Sure, there was misinformation then spoken afterwards. So January 22nd, 2025, as my permit was going through review, Corradino Group, Kimberly Barra asked, what is the distance, like where is the coral going to be placed and what is the height of the coral fence? I answered January 22nd, 2025. The proposed decorative coral blocks, um, is 25 feet from the property line and per the application site plan, the coral blocks are 72 inches. Then two weeks later, the building official Leonardo Luigi or the gory on February 6th, 2025, uh, about two, three weeks later. approved this permit as is, knowing that information. Further, as you were saying earlier, oh, maybe they're confused because wood, you know, you have a county level form you can submit and then this coral, maybe that was an oversight. If you look at this original permit, another blatant error is it lists building code here Building Code FB, Florida Building Code 2017, which specifically has to do with if something is structural and kind of the strength of it. However, on the same permit that cites that building code, they're marking structural and civil engineering not applicable. Building code and then not applicable, not applicable. Good.

I saw that.

Share that around.

That's all.

I just wanted to correct that. So there's more errors on the actual permit.

And, again, they knew January 22, 2025, even if they did not read this correctly. I literally answered their question. Per the application site plan, the coral blocks are 72 inches high. They still proceeded to mark it not applicable. Building Department approved it three weeks later, February 2025. Thank you.

you very much uh mr pulliam before you sit down um come back is anybody else we're good in welfare you guys good we good i mean public comment everybody we good okay all right so we're gonna close public comment for a second uh mr pulliam because i understand the concern about how this got here um Mr. Pulliam, just answer these questions for me, if you could, please. First of all, everybody understands that the mayor puts things on the agenda, right, so that's how I got here. Mr. Pulliam, even when we were at your house, Mr. Pulliam, when I spoke earlier and I gave the example about you guys, this is the way I feel, you know, if a store did something, it's on the store, it's not on the resident. Mr. Pulliam, didn't I give that same speech when we were at your house in front of everybody?

You did, and the manager verbally said, you're right, Mayor, I'll investigate and look into it, and I'll get back with you, Mr. Pulliam. Three months of follow-ups, no response, just stonewalling and allowing it to get to this agenda item today to take up hours of everyone's time.

Correct. So I just want to make the point that I think a lot of times, and this may be my fault, right, because I'm such an active mayor, but I think a lot of times people think as mayor I can make decisions the decision, right, and that comes here. I'm not a strong mayor, right? We have a manager form of government, so I can't make those decisions. As a matter of fact, I do everything I can. I mean, I even go to the line, sometimes over the line, trying to be as active as I possibly can, you guys, you know, but there's only so much I can do. And to make things move forward, once I get through everything, I have to find some other way to make these things move forward. The last thing I'll ask you, Mr. Pulliam, and you won't know the exact number, but correct me if I'm wrong, but on numerous occasions have I not told you, man, if I was a strong mayor, this would have been solved a long time ago.

Yeah.

Yeah. It was a long time ago. So that's just the way our government is set up. And so there's just so much I can do before I have to go through other routes. And that's the reason why we're here.

And I've worked with both managers, previous manager Lou. Again, she directed the billing department to do something in August. They never followed through. New manager got on board and gave him a couple months, met with him in March. He's been stonewalling ever since. So it's been 15 months in total now.

Thank you very much. Let me just say this also. Thank you very much, Mr. Putnam. I appreciate it. I get all the calls, pretty much. I'm sure you guys get calls also. I get all the calls from residents with problems, inconsistencies, building department, code enforcement, this, that, this, that. I do as much as I can. And like I say, I go to the line, sometimes over the line. I do as much as I can myself when there is not other things being done through other routes, right? But you have to understand that the makeup of how our government is, and that's just kind of like the way it is. Anybody else from the council before I ask for anything else?

I just, you, how many emails did you send out that were not returned?

I sent out three to four emails. to the manager over a period of time. I also called his office several times. He did not answer. I left voicemails not returned. I engaged with him in person. three times where he told me he was going to be investigating and then he never did. Most recently, the end of last council meeting where he told me, oh, sorry, I've been busy with the police negotiations. I'll get to it. Which, you know, honestly is acceptable response. I don't know why he didn't say, I'm busy right now. I'm going to get to this in, I don't know, September. That would have been acceptable to me. But he's literally told me three times to look into it and hasn't. So I really have had, you know, I can't go to BORA because I don't have a final agency action. So this is my only venue right now.

You would be fine waiting until September? Would that require an extension? Sorry? You just said you'd be fine waiting until September, but that requires extension, right?

Um, no. So since I had an inspection today, the law, um, get, uh, gives you 180 additional days whenever anything active happens, uh, on your permit. Um, so no, but I also don't want an extension. I've again, I've been trying to close this, close this out for about a year. Okay. Thank you.

I do have one question, if you can stick around. What is your position on going to BORA if the attorney and manager do work with you to make sure that you have what you feel is a final agency action that can be acted upon?

I mean, I would rather not.

But would you?

Um, of course that would be, I mean, I don't know what other remedy I would have. So I would do that. And then the decision of that, when Bora, uh, overturns the villages decision would then then use that also as evidence for the federal section 1983 case. Okay.

Thank you for letting me know your position on board. Yeah.

And I would love to know the village's position, why they haven't provided that final agency notice, why everything is off the books, the things they put on the books. I can't take it to Bora. So I'm literally asking, can the things they put off the books be on the books? And why have they been operating that way illegally for over a year, if not longer?

Thank you. Any other questions?

Yes, I don't want to extend this more than needed, but the final notice was given on August 26, 2025. That inspection had a partial approval, states the wood portion is approved, the oolite coral rock wall is disapproved, and we need proof of it. That was the notice. That's the notice. You could have taken two more. It was given on August 26, 2025.

A year ago. Almost a year ago. So the notice was there. It was good. Thank you very much. Appreciate it.

Yes, in the email I read to you from June 2nd, I acknowledged that email from August 26th, 27th that I read. Again, that was an email not officially on the portal, not certified letter to me. I can't take an off-the-books email, and he never cited or addressed the antecedent question of why are you reclassifying this from non-structural permit, which is what my permit is, to now structural. And he's just demanding engineering calculations, all this stuff that they're saying, oh, maybe we should have asked you that at the beginning, but we didn't. So now it's all on you.

So is there any correspondence from Bora stating that that the email was insufficient as a final agency action?

So I called them on the hotline, and that's what they told me. Interestingly, I hadn't brought this up before, but another wild thing, after that March meeting, actually, no one gave this instruction, but Pedro voluntarily, after telling me I need to contact Bora, he took on his own initiative to contact Bora off the books, sent it to me over an email, it's not on the official portal, where he is lying to Bora saying, this person didn't have a permit. have a permit you know so and it said other issues within that but strangely he went to go get a non-official staff report from Bora which wouldn't even be a decision-making body anyway because that's like a like a council who votes on it not just like a staff member but he took that on his own initiative back in March when he invented the setback issue as a new thing that was never on the books prior. And yeah, he went to Bora and said, this person doesn't have a permit, am I right? And they basically respond back, this is an official, but there's pros and cons to both sides. So that has been a communication that Pedro has initiated with Bora, which I'm confused about why and also why that's off the books and not on the official portal and permit.

Thank you very much. Mr. Mayor.

Mr. Mayor, I've been working diligently to try to solve this situation the moment that you brought us to Mr. Pullen's house. Pedro and I have been looking for ways to solve this as quickly as we possibly can. I have spoken with you, and I have told you exactly what my issues have been, that I need to go through the building official to make sure that what we're saying is something that we can hold in court. So I can't say to you something that I will, as the mayor said, I don't have the ability to just sign off and say, and force Pedro to solve the problem. I have to go through the established channel to be able to do this. One of the things that is missing here is the fact that you signed in your owner permit the fact that you said that you had knowledge of all the ground rules and regulations that conducted and that forced and that structured building something like this coral wall. So you did not know this. We told you this is something that you needed to provide factory plans for that coral wall that you never provided. So there were things that were missing. Now, one of the things that I have instructed Pedro to do is moving forward, that every time somebody comes in saying, I know how to build this, I'm gonna build it myself, that we have a conversation with that resident and saying, you need to sign here that you are aware of all the restrictions and all the knowledge that you need so that if this ever comes before this body again, we can say, Mr. Pullen, you signed on this day, on that particular time, something that said that you knew how to do this. Now, one of the things that I think you know, issue with, is that you continue to give dates that confuses my administration with the previous manager. When you talk about, you know, July this date, I would appreciate if you mentioned the year when this was happening, because all of this time, and I acknowledge that there may have been a mistake that was made in not forcing you to sign that you knew what you were doing when you decided to build this yourself. Or you did not have someone, a contractor, a licensed contractor, to whom you could appeal that they didn't build this thing correctly. You mentioned this, that you did have a contractor, but you don't have a contract with that contractor to build the wall. You said that you supervised. Well, this is not what you said on the record. You said that you supervised. Okay, but this is what happened. No back and forth. So this is the kind of thing, you know, once you bring my name into the situation, I would appreciate it if you did it correctly and you, you know, fix the facts. The fact that I did not respond to your situation does not mean that I did not act on it. Pedro did what he did, directed by me. I said, we need to find a solution to this problem. We need to find a solution to this problem right away. No one here is against you, Mr. Poland. We have no issue. I don't know you until that day. I have never laid eyes on you. So I do take exception when someone comes in and takes ownership of something that they are not getting their way and saying that we are all in cahoots and we're sitting here in some dark room planning on how we're going to have actions by the village to affect your property. nothing gives you that kind of impression because nothing of that nature has happened. I have worked very hard to try to find a solution with Pedro and the rest of the CAP team to find a solution. But according to their calculations, that wall has a very shallow foundation. Okay, but it sounds to me, Mr. Pullen, let me say this, because I'm very frustrated by this conversation. But it sounds to me that you are more comfortable in having a structure in your house that could fall on a child and kill them than correcting the situation. The whole homeless is not something that I can sign, because you are not going to be saying in your whole homeless that this is going to be a property that you will keep. So ten years from now?

It's attached to the property.

How do I know? How does anybody know here in the village that that's going to be the case? It's going to be on the record.

Why haven't you explored this the last 15 months?

Why is this a conversation right now? 15 months David Roseman was not here, okay? 15 months David Roseman was sitting at the City of Miami trying to find housing for the homeless. Exactly. I mean, in those three months, you see I've done nothing. But, you know, I've moved Pedro to say, let's deal with Borac. I don't know. I don't know exactly what the results of today were. But this happened today.

All right, you guys.

This happened today, so I'm saying work with us and we will help you. The attorney is saying, I'd be happy to sit with Pedro and the manager to try to find a solution that is suitable for you and for the law. But one of the things that we're not going to do is going to be taking on all of this responsibility. When you have signed documents that say that you knew what you were doing, when you clearly did not. So this is, I'm sorry, but this is how I see it.

Respectfully, he's changing the goalposts once again. So... I'm changing the what? Changing the goalposts once again. I'm not changing anything. If you had been so active, how come I had received no communication whatsoever from you regarding this? I wouldn't be an agenda item if we were working on it. I want to be here today if you were working on it. And further, the assertion that it's only one foot deep, where is the proof of that? That is an assumption made by Pedro. It's not on the village portal. There's no documentation of it. Do you see on your exhibits today where it says, oh, this wasn't built deep enough, cited by this code? No, it doesn't exist. They've invented all of it in this moment tonight. And asking for more time...

I'm not asking for more time. You are, you said. We're going to sit with you and talk to you. I've tried three times. I'm sorry. All right. I'm providing more time. I authorized the extension of your permit to give us more time to work on a solution. I don't know what else do we need to do to come to a conclusion that you will be happy with. I don't know where that certified letter is.

At some point, we have to stop it.

All right.

We have to stop it. This is too much.

all right i'd like i'd like to make a motion if i may okay let me make a motion yeah yeah we're going to do we're going to do that in a second um we want to make sure that the motion we can like legally make it i'm not sure what attorney gill is going to say about that so we want to make sure we're that because i heard a lot of legal stuff going on today um just want to say for the record you guys that uh as far as signing off on things and this may be something that the manager cannot sign off on but managers do have administrative approvals and administrative adjustments. Manager Alou used to do it frequently. Administrative approvals and administrative adjustments. And when I would get calls from residents and there'd be situations, and I would take them to Manager Alou, she would do administrative approvals and administrative adjustments to kind of close the situation out and to stop everything from going on. Let me say something really quick about the checklist. Manager Roseman is right about the checklist, but I just want to say for the record, though, that came from me. When we all was leaving your house, got back in the car, I said, you guys, we need to have something to where when people come and apply for things, they get a checklist. You have to do this and this and this and this. So two months later, three months later, won't be like, oh, did you do this? I said that when we got in the car, okay? Another thing is, and this is like maybe an overall, more of a macro thing, is the communication. I remember even with Manager Lou, who you guys know, we got a long, great. Even with Manager Lou, I would always bring up things like, hey, I get residents calling me like, Mayor, I've been living here for 25 years. Like, if my permit was about to expire, couldn't you guys have at least given me a phone call? And for years, and I know recently we've established the email thing, the automatic email, which I appreciate, but for years I would say, you all, we're a small village. Why can't we have more boutique type of interaction with our residents? Why can't we, hey, Send an email, hey, I just sent you an email, heads up, your permit expires in a month. Hey, in two more weeks, your permit expires. Hey, you have five more days left. If it expires, then you're gonna have this type of penalty, you'll have to re, like, those simple things, and every time, just to be frank, that I would do these type of things and bring it up with code enforcement building and things like that, I was always told, you're the mayor, you're legislation, you're stepping across the line, you're not administration.

All right, so what do I do then?

What do you want me to do? So like I said, I always go to the line, sometimes over the line, but I'm trying to do everything I can do, but I can only do so much. Back to the council, we have, in my opinion, we have two, pathways right we have the the bora and we have the engineer structural calculations getting the engineer to come in there as i said before personally i don't believe that the resident should have to pay for an engineer to do that but that's what i see are the two pathways that we have i'm opening up to you guys

I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION. I AM OBVIOUSLY OPEN TO AMENDMENTS. I'M NOT A LAWYER. I WILL TRY TO USE AS EXACT LANGUAGE AS POSSIBLE. HERE WE GO. I MOVE TO TEMPORARILY INDEMNIFY THE RESIDENT FROM ACTION REGARDING HIS PROPERTY AS IS UNTIL JULY 28TH AT THE GENERAL COUNCIL MEETING FOR JULY OF THE VILLAGE OF VILLE PORTAL AT WHICH TIME THE MANAGER WOULD PRESENT A REPORT TO THE COUNCIL BASED ON COLLABORATION WITH THE ATTORNEY AND OUR BUILDING OFFICIAL TO INFORM THE COUNCIL WHETHER OR NOT A SOLUTION HAS BEEN ARRIVED AT THROUGH THE BORA PROCESS OR WHAT ACTION THE MANAGER IS RECOMMENDING TO THE COUNCIL BASED ON HIS AUDIT OF THE OFFICIAL RECORD

that is a proper motion I'll second it all right we have a motion we have a second madam clerk roll call please roll call council person Winters yes council person Lightfoot Ward council person Erbaum yes vice mayor Martin yes mayor Nickerson yes motion passes 5 to 9 thank you very much was it extended It's 11 o'clock. We need to move to a stand for a determined time.

One of you guys, will you guys make a motion?

We have an item ahead of us. I'll move to extend the meeting 30 minutes.

I'll second it. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed say nay. Hearing none. Next agenda item.

So the next agenda item is about an initiative I'm trying to put together as a neighborhood work together. I'm addressing in this agenda item a known hazardous condition in a practical and timely manner. These are called fatigue cracks. You see them all throughout El Portal. And the fatigue cracking present is right now, I'd like to try a proof of concept in one location. So this is not resurfacing. This is not reconstruction. This is not pot over here. I'm not doing any recommendation for anything structural, something that will affect our, we're talking about limited crack filling in the walking areas of Sherwood Forest using the DOT approved material perma patch. The areas we're addressing are minor. Most cracks are approximately a quarter inch deep with the deepest around one inch. So these are not structural failures. They are surface defects that impact daily use. They impact daily use for those with strollers, those with wheelchairs, those who are trying to take a scooter or bicycle down it. We're not talking about all the structural potholes here. So the residents walk these streets every day because there are no sidewalks. We have parents with strollers, bicycles, scooters navigating these rough conditions. These small defects are exactly what cause trips, instability, and difficult and everyday use, and they've been here for decades. The permit patch is not a niche or an experimental product. It is Department of Transportation approved. It has been used by cities. It's a cold patch, meaning you do not use any heat for it. It kind of works like kinetic sand, where it just turns into a blob and it falls into a hole. The material is routinely used in roadways maintenance, parking lots, musical repairs across the country. It is specifically designed for real world application without specialized equipment. In one of the how-to videos it says the mother can just pour it in the crack and drive it over with her tire and it becomes a hard surface. Now it's also been proved that it also lasts longer than asphalt. So it requires no mixing. It's placed directly into the crack. It becomes traffic ready almost immediately. The installation is simple, controlled, and can be completed across the walking areas in approximately two hours of short force. It is widely used because durable perform, The installation is simple, controlled, and can be completed across the walking areas in approximately two hours. It is widely used because it's durable and performs well in these applications. This work would be conducted in a controlled environment with proper maintenance of traffic measures, including cones, signage, police presence. So we can also require participants to sign waivers and coordinate with the public's works for oversight, along with any right of way or permittings that are required. So I have been asked by the attorney to bring this before council, and that's what I'm here doing. I am fully prepared to conduct this in a safe and controlled manner, including police presence, proper traffic control waivers, coordination with the public. I also want to clarify that before I brought this item to council, I did send an email on May 11th to the manager requesting guidance on how to proceed. And then I didn't hear back. Then I followed up again with the manager on June 12th on how to proceed. I did not receive a response again. So then I spoke with the village attorney who advised verbally that the matter should be brought before the council. but I didn't get a written response of why he had to come to the council for a legal basis, since we're not doing a structural repair to the road and I'd be using my discretionary funds. So the council, But I did hit a wall, sorry, no pun intended, Mr. Pulliam. The mayor stated this can be placed on the meeting agenda for the council approval, which is why we're here tonight. So there was also mention that this involves a county-owned street, but based on documentation presented earlier tonight in the first agenda items, the village maintains northeast 85th and 86th Street. We're not going anywhere near 2nd Avenue, so we're only staying on the roads that are maintained by the Village. So the repairs are not occurring on 2nd, just 85 and 86. And to be clear, it's not a resident free for all and not a precedent for residents to repair roads on their own. This is a council person initiated, controlled, supervised event to address a condition that has existed for decades and everyone complains about. So my question tonight is simple. What is the path to move forward? if there's a specific requirements, whether that is an MOT approval, a right of way review, or administrative permitting, I'm prepared to meet them. I just need clear direction so that I can move forward from this discussion to action. So everyone agrees that the roads need repair. So the current condition presents a risk. Improving the condition reduces that risk. So this is a simple, immediate, low-cost way to improve safety for residents who use these streets every day. And doing nothing is not a solution, obviously. But I'm simply trying to create a volunteer initiative to use my discretionary funds at my discretion to help the everyday people in El Portal.

Thank you very much, I'm gonna let you guys jump in a second. The first thing is, so everybody understands, Northeast 2nd and North Miami Avenue are state-controlled. Everything else is county-controlled. There's nothing that's elk or towel-controlled, right? So, go ahead, Attorney Geller.

Manager, after some discussion with me about this, looked into this further. I expressed when I spoke to the council, Councilman Winters, look, he's proper to bring it. And that's why I advised it needed to be set on the agenda. We are officially aware now because of the emails that there is a hazard. The village is responsible for maintenance. And there is a hazard. We cannot ignore it. So in that sense, this is entirely appropriate in terms of what Councilman Lenders has brought. I sent him earlier actually during the meeting, but the manager reached out very wisely to our insurer with the League of Cities to ask, did we need some kind of special insurance? How could this work? This is a matter of public record, and I'm not going to read the whole thing, especially considering the hour. But among other things, Michael Morrill from our league insurer said he thanked the manager for addressing this before it was done instead of afterwards and saying, oops, and said... Thank you for thinking about risk management. Now, he calls it a pothole repair. And I'm clear that Councilman Winters has said, no, it's not a pothole, okay? It's smaller. But he said that even pothole would fall within the scope of our existing general liability coverage through the League of Cities. But there were a few particular considerations, and I'm going to read one of them into the record. Who performs the work? If repairs are made by village employees or public works staff, standard employment and general liability coverage applies. Great. If volunteers or elected officials are performing the physical work, that introduces additional questions around volunteer status, workers' compensation exposure, and whether the work meets professional standards. I mean, Councilman Winters, that's basically exactly what I told you was my concern. Then it goes on to say quality of the repair. A substandard patch that later causes a vehicle, unlikely, or pedestrian incident can create more liability than the original pothole. Ensuring repairs meet accepted road maintenance standards is important both operationally and from a coverage standpoint. And he says the village has to document what was repaired when, by whom, and to what standard for both liability defense and general records. And then it says if non-municipal equipment or privately sourced materials are used, that introduces additional questions worth reviewing. And he said, you know, yeah, by all means, it sounds great to get this fixed, but public works has to be involved both so that the road is done right and in a claims context, basically. So this is very simple, Mayor. There's a problem. We're on notice. It needs to get fixed. And it's laudable. that the councilman is looking for a way to do this at low cost, but the bottom line is that cost savings could get us sued. And rather than get sued, we need, the village needs, as quickly as it can do it, and we may have somebody that's already on a continuing contract for general repairs, We need to pay to have this done either by a contractor or by our public works employees. Now if Councilman Winters is in a position to contribute some discretionary funds and If this particular substance that he wants to use is half of what it's cracked up to be, then the village should buy it through its normal procurement policy. And it can be done either by Public Works employees or it can be contracted out. We have to do it. We should do it promptly. We should do it before anybody gets hurt. But we need to do it in a way that doesn't expose us to somebody coming along, getting, you know, a high heel stuck in a repaired crack, falling, breaking an ankle or a leg. and saying this wasn't done to proper professional standards and have our insurance company say you're not covered. So it's a great idea, but we need to listen to what our insurance agent is telling us. We need to bite the bullet. I know this is a tough, you know, fiscal year. I get it. But we need to bite the bullet, do it right, do it in a way that will protect the insurance coverage that we're paying for and you know kudos to the councilman for bringing this forward it is a problem needs to be done and if he's in a position to contribute some discretionary funds and we you know buy that particular substance which is great so much the better but doing it with volunteers is playing Russian roulette with the village's liability. It's not the way to do it.

So I've got to interject on...

Attorney Geller, report. In anticipation to this, I directed Adam, our public work coordinator, to get quotes for the kind of work that you envision doing with volunteers. And I spoke to Mike this afternoon. Actually, he called me back after he had left. I said, we have a combination of both contracted work and volunteers, this is absolutely. But you just have to make sure that there are signed waivers by those volunteers who are not covered by the contractor hired to do this work, that they agree to assume any kind of responsibility if they were to get hurt in the process of doing this work. Attorney Geller said the total opposite of what you're saying right now, Mr. Manager.

With deference though, Mr. Manager, you're correct that that would keep us from having workers' compensation claims from anybody who got hurt, my concern would still be, based on what Mr. Morrill said, that if the repair itself was done part by volunteers, the amount that we would save does not, in my opinion, justify the risk of having our insurance coverage voided. I bet this is not tremendously expensive when you see the roads, and you know, the materials still have to be bought, maybe the councilman's discretionary funds can go and help with the purchase, but he shouldn't be purchasing it. It should be purchased through the village procurement, but he can help defray that cost. And if we're going to do professionals in charge and professionals doing most of the work, the savings of a few volunteers to do part of the work, I just think it's... I don't disagree with what he said to you, but I think it's still a risk. And just, you need to fix it. Bite the bullet, get it done.

I just want to repeat the first exact sentence I said is that this is throughout El Portal. I'm trying to prove a concept in Sherwood Forest. Everyone here has cracks all throughout the streets. It's all over El Portal. I can't provide with my discretionary fund to fix the streets with this, though it's an inexpensive way to do it. But luckily I am not a building expert. We have one here today. Pedro Martinez is here and he knows a little bit about the substance, which in my opinion is foolproof, but maybe Pedro can come to the stand and tell everyone what he knows about the perma patch and basically understanding that The ease of use and knowing how it works can make life easier to understand.

Councilman, it's not the validity of the substance. I have no doubt that you're correct. The substance is probably very well suited. The issue is our insurer is telling us that if it's applied by volunteers and not by contracted employees or professionals, it may void our insurance coverage if someone makes a claim, and it could result in somebody being hurt because it wasn't applied properly by somebody with the best of intentions.

Pedro, would you spread any of your knowledge you might have on it?

No, but I see you're both right. You're both right. You were trying to use the proper material. And the attorney is advising about the insurance consequences. So you're both right. So maybe you can work out a way to do volunteers like the manager says and do something that you can get.

I just want to fix the roads. I know it's very expensive. And Sherwood, of course, is a little thing. But all of El Portal needs it. And I'm trying to do my little part, which I appreciate you both working towards getting it done. even if it goes around me and you don't use my volunteers, fine, but it is something that we need to address.

You see in the news, the attorneys, you fall, you fell, we'll go for you, you get millions, constant advertising. That's what the attorneys try to protect.

Yeah, I just know it's much more unsafe right now than it would be after it's done.

But you're both right. I'm sorry, but thank you for your confidence anyways.

Thank you. Lastly, the earlier on the record email from Ron Nelson, Department of Transportation and Public Works, specifically noted that 86th Street is city maintained. It's on the map down here.

So whenever we do anything on the streets, like for example, we do something like that, we have to go through the county. If we do something on Northeast 2nd or North Miami Avenue, it's F dot Florida Department of Transportation, state. It's just the way it is. So it could be city, whatever, it could be whatever it is, you do something on the street, if it's city whatever, that would mean that if there's a stop sign right here that doesn't touch the Northeast 2nd or North Miami Avenue, you can remove the stop sign. You can't just remove a stop sign. If you wanna put a stop sign, you can't just put a stop sign. Who do you have to get permission from? The county. You gotta get permission from the county. If you wanted to take that street and re-mill it, Elberthal just can't re-mill a street. 88th Street, 89th Street, we gotta go through the county to do the rebuilding of the street. We gotta get permission. So it could be owned by whatever is owned, we still have to get permission from the county for those streets.

Mayor, this is regarding this item. Mayor, I understand. Mayor, the proper motion

to accomplish most, if not all, of what Councilman Winters wants to do would be a motion to direct the manager to, I got this one, would be a motion to direct the manager to obtain quotes to purchase proper materials, investigating the one particular material that Councilman Winters said, but to obtain quotes to obtain proper materials and to get the work done as quickly and inexpensively as possible without voiding our insurance coverage. And if it turns out that there's a way to do that, that in some fashion, incorporates volunteers that's covered by the motion it just says in a way that won't void our potentially void our insurance coverage and if they can work something out with the insurer that allows it to be properly professionally done or supervised but there's some role that volunteers can play that would be covered by the suggested motion

So the only thing I would say is this. I would say that we should make a motion to gather the information on it and then come back to the council to vote on it. There's a lot of things we have to decide on. For example, since, when did I first send this out? What is this, January? Since January, I've gotten our engineer to do all the specs and everything to fix that road that's over there by Shorewood Forest Park, where the street is actually disappearing. That needs to be fixed also. So Elbertown, unfortunately, we don't have the big budget, everybody else does, so we have to decide where we're gonna put our funds. And decide.

Mayor, your motion is entirely, your take on the motion, entirely proper. And it just says, direct the manager get it said to gather all information necessary to about purchasing materials, getting the work done in a way that doesn't void insurance company, and to bring as expeditiously as possible. And to bring all of that back to the council. For final Adam for Adam for that would be the motion that somebody wanted to make.

I would like to pay two cents for 45 seconds of your time.

Okay, this is my 45 second take on the flyer here.

One, one of the committees we used to have was Public Works. If we bring back a committee structure that encompasses those actions, we'd be able to address this in a Public Works committee in an organized discussion. Two, Permapatch is a plastics product. I will not support any plastics products whatsoever for the rest of all of human history. F plastics and every form of it for life. In the special needs community, they say God doesn't give you more than you can handle, but guess who does? Dow Chemical Company, DuPont Chemical Company, ExxonMobil, Bayer, Monsanto. There are people who give you a lot more than you can handle, and God has nothing to do with it. This plastics product for me, now, now, now. This is interesting to be discussed in the Public Works Committee. This particular product is primarily sold on Amazon and Walmart through a private equity firm, and so I definitely think there's a better product out there. And the last thing that I have about this form is as a no-party affiliation registered since 2002, I take issue with somebody that also puts Libertarian Party of Miami-Dade County on the form and then putting independent. I'm sorry, I'm an independent, and I can prove it.

All right, thank you very much. Anybody else from the council? I'm gonna go up to you guys in a second. All right, let me open it up to you guys really quickly for this particular item.

I'm back. Denise White, 173 Northwest 88th Street. What do you call it? Okay, so the first thing I was wondering as you spoke about Mr. Erbaum was is it environmentally okay? I was worried about that. It sounds great. You just put it down. You run over it. Now, am I for fixing streets since I got here? That's all the people wanted to do is fix their streets. But it's got to be all the streets. And I know you said Sherwood Forest and beyond, but El Portal is not Sherwood Forest. Sherwood Forest is a part of El Portal. We're talking all of El Portal. And over there on the east side over here on the east side yeah we get forgotten all the time right so we have cracks and holes and stuff like that too I do like that you brought it to everybody's attention though that is hot you understand that is very hot but if it is plastic that's not going to do we have enough plastic plastic is everywhere in fact they said now it's in me and I gotta eat kimchi to get rid of microplastics in my gut and who does that right did you guys hear about that right so not that's I'm not I'm with you mr. urban enough plastic but I do like that the council member is listening to us and he did bring it to the attention that hey it is but the Sherwood Forest make me think that you only like Sherwood Forest mr. Winters and I know you like all the airports how but it can't just be Sherwood Forest yes I have no problems with your affiliations, though. You back whoever you want to back. That's fine. As long as you fix my roads, you handle that. Amen?

Amen. Thank you very much. Anyone else?

I'm so sorry. I'm so sorry. I'm in love with my manager. I know he's not perfect. He is perfectly imperfect, but I'm in love with my manager and my attorney, Mr. Geller. I'm in love with both of y'all. Y'all can go ahead and be imperfect if you want to be, but, you know. Sometimes, Mr., maybe you might want to email. If you need help emailing them, you call me. I'll come to your office.

Anyway, amen. Anyone else good in welfare for this particular item? Going once, going twice, back to the council. Okay, so Attorney Geller made a suggestion, which is they go, they gather all the information, and get everything ready to bring back to us at another meeting, whether it's public safety or whether it's, I mean, whether it's Public Works or whether it's a council meeting. We'll decide that later. But is that a motion someone wants to make?

Before we do that, a few things. I did mention that this is a problem all throughout Opertel, and I said short force was going to be a proof of concept. I was not at all trying to focus there. I said that multiple times. Second is, it's late. I forgot what I was going to say, but the main thing is, I want to make sure that we can make that motion that the attorney recommended that we put a specific date on it so that it just doesn't hang in limbo until next year. Like if we're going to do it, you know, let's do all the research and bring it back in July. Obviously we have no actual things going on in August, right? This time maybe. And, um, and the other thing, I don't know. I'm tired. I'll let it go.

Do you guys feel like staff, that July is enough time to gather all information? Do you feel like it's July or do you want to wait until September? I mean, we can do a special meeting another time, like if it comes down to it. We can have a special meeting in August or something if we need to. Yeah, I'm just saying what you think y'all's capability is. Okay. Okay.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you.

All right. So, so we have a motion to bring back all the necessary information to make a decision on moving forward with this or not. By the July council meeting. All right, somebody want to say yes to that?

I'll make the motion. I just don't know how to repeat it all.

We're good. We're gonna make a motion to that and then we have a second.

Okay, so Winters is making that motion?

I'll second. All right, so motion by Councilperson Winters, second by Councilperson Erbom. Madam Clerk, may I please have a roll call, please?

Roll call. Councilperson Winters.

Yes.

Lightfoot Ward, I'm gonna come back to her. She was sitting for a discussion, she must vote. So I'll come back to her. Councilperson Erbom.

Yes.

Vice Mayor Martin. Yes. Mayor Nickerson. Yes. We have to vote, we have to wait for her.

So I remember my last comment was while we're waiting for her. The actual thing that got passed out tonight was my personal proof of concept to the manager. I did not mean to have ChatGPT put Libertarian Party on it. If I had something passed out to the residents, it wouldn't say that. But it was something that obviously slipped through the cracks as it was showing the manager how the process worked.

I don't take issue with Libertarian Party being on it. It's the word independent with a political party. It's oxymoron. Yeah.

Maybe we can discuss other stuff while you wait.

She's here. All right. She's coming. She's coming.

She can actually vote from where you're at.

All right. Very good. Councilperson Lightfoot Ward.

Councilperson Lightfoot Ward.

Oh, my Lord. If you guys look there, you see my manager, my mayor's report. If you have any questions, contact me. Attorney Geller? Attorney Geller, do you have a – Attorney Geller, is there an attorney report?

Yes.

Yes.

Councilperson Lightfoot-Ward?

Yes.

Motion passes five to none.

Mr. Attorney?

Mayor, there's one matter. I received a communication from someone from the Weiss-Sorota Law Firm. They have filed on behalf of a non-profit a lawsuit against the state challenging the recently passed proposed referendum to more or less eliminate a great deal of all of the residential property taxes that they've sought to put on the ballot, challenging that the summary is misleading, that it's contradictory, that it's poorly drafted, and that it's not designed to accomplish what it claims. They've done stuff like that before, and I brought some of it to you. Typically, they ask for some financial contribution. This is an exception. They've said that the lawsuit is fully funded by They're non-profit, they're inviting municipalities to sign up as additional plaintiffs at no cost whatsoever. I should point out that if the suit is completely unsuccessful, there is a small likelihood that there could be a cost judgment that would be shared equally by a whole lot of different cities signing up. It's the nature of the lawsuit challenges the way it's drafted. It doesn't require extensive amounts of depositions or experts or witnesses of any kind. It's pretty much based on the drafting. Any cost judgment would be likely to be quite small. So I'm presenting it to you. We don't have to make a decision tonight. I know you are just hearing about it. I got the communication very recently. But if you want to join in the lawsuit to block this totally ill-advised attempt to essentially kill property taxes as a method of funding local government, you have the opportunity to do so at this time at no cost. You could do it by motion now, or I'd be happy to address it to you further if you have some other meeting coming up, perhaps a special meeting that's being considered.

We'll do that in another meeting just because to vote on it, it should probably be on the agenda in some form. All right, Mr. Manager, Mr. Manager, do you have anything you want to say as far as a report, are you good? I'm good. Okay, thank you very much. Do I have a motion to adjourn? All right, motion moved by Councilperson Erbaum, second by Councilperson Winters. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed say nay, hearing none. The council meeting for Tuesday, June 23rd is adjourned at 11.37 p.m.