City Commission - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon, everybody. Welcome to the City Commission meeting this Tuesday, 05/19/2026. I want to thank you all for being here. We have a long agenda today, this afternoon, tonight, a lot of fun things to discuss. And so why don't we begin with our conference meeting. We have we have a communication.

Mayor.

Hello? Mayor. Yes. We have the CRA that was scheduled for winter.

And CRA was scheduled for 01:30? Okay. Right. Okay. So why don't we begin with that? Mister Clerk, could you please call the roll?

Commissioner Herbst. Commissioner Glassman. Here. Commissioner Beasley Pittman. Here. Vice chair Sorensen. Here. Chair Turntellis.

Yes. And are these microphones a little sensitive? Yes. Okay. So to begin our meeting, we have, several motions. M one, motion approving the minutes for the 05/05/2026 CRA agency, board meeting. Would someone like to move the item?

So moved. Second.

Moved and seconded. Please call the roll.

Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley Pittman?

Yes.

Vice chair Sorenson? Yes. Chair Trent House?

Yes. And m one is now approved. M two, there's a motion approving a third lease agreement with FPA2 LLC to extend the lease term to 09/30/2026 for the CRA, current office space. Do I hear a motion? Moved. Second. Moved and seconded. Anyone have any questions? There being none, please call the roll. Commissioner Herp. Yes.

Commissioner Glossman. Yes. Commissioner Beasley Pittman. Yes. Vice chair Sorensen. Yes. Chair Trentellis.

Yes. And m two is now approved. M three, this is a motion approving an office space lease for the for the CRA located at 501 Northwest 7th Avenue. Someone like to move the item.

So moved.

Second. We move the second. Does anyone have any questions? There being none, please call the roll.

Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley Pitman? Yes. Vice chair Sorenson? Yes. Chair Trentales?

Yes. And that's approved. Moving on to resolutions. R one, resolution appropriating authorizing funding in amount not to exceed $200,000 for capital improvement master planning services with Alta Planning and Design and amending the inter local agreement with the City of Fort Lauderdale to include funding for design and construction services and implementing the capital improvement master plan for the central city community redevelopment area. So I'd

like to introduce the resolution. Introduce.

Does anyone have any questions or comments? There being none, please call the roll. A resolution of the

Board of Commissioners of the Fort Lauderdale Community Redevelopment Agency approving an amendment to interlocal agreement between the Fort Lauderdale Community Redevelopment Agency and the City of Fort Lauderdale adding capital improvement master plan project for the Central City Community redevelopment area authorizing appropriating funds in the amount not to exceed 200,000 for planning services related to same providing for an effective date. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley Pittman?

Yes.

Vice Chair Sorenson? Yes. Chair Trentalis?

Yes. And that resolution is now approved. Is there any further business in the CRA?

Nothing further.

Okay. That meeting is concluded. We'll now move on to the conference meeting, which begins with a communication from the Sustainability Advisory Board. Is there anyone here for that city manager?

I believe a representative from that board is here.

Okay, great. Hi. You wanna push the button at the bottom of the speaker? Okay. Great.

Is this working? Okay. Great. Good afternoon, mayor and commissioners. My name is Aida Nasimi, and I'm here on behalf of the Sustainability Advisory Board. The board reviewed the city's exposure to single use plastics, and we're bringing you our recommendations today, nine in total. Six are amendments to the code of ordinances. Three are operational and policy strategies. They can be adopted one at a time or as a package. First, the the six code amendments.

One, regulate single use plastic food product services food service products used by vendors and event permittees on city property and require compostable or reusable alternatives. Two, prohibit unencapsulated polystyrene in floating docks, platforms, and buoys at city facilities. Three, codify the existing glass container ban on our public beaches. Four, strengthen the public straw ordinance to include stirs with a hardship waiver for small businesses. Five, reinforce the polystyrene rules with documentation, clear consequences, and public signage.

Six, prohibit the intentional outdoor release of balloons, confetti, and glitter. Then the three operational strategies. One, align the city's green purchasing policy with these provisions. Two, expand education and outreach, staff training, community campaigns, and beach signage. Three, update the city's event and vendor agreements so that way we so that way we can enforce them.

Two points the board wants to be direct about. First, every recommendation stays within the city's authority. We know the state preempts citywide bans. This is city property, city facilities, and city own contracts and procurement. Second, implementation is phased and education first.

Compostable alternatives can cost more per unit, but national guidance shows total program costs are manageable through standardization and less waste hauling over time. This is a practical, enforceable path. It protects our waterways and beaches, supports a resilient tourism economy, and it shows real leadership in coastal stewardship. On behalf of the Sustainability Advisory Board, we respectfully ask the commission to receive these recommendations and and direct staff to begin advancing them. Thank you so much, and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Okay. Great. It's pretty comprehensive. Anyone have any questions or comments?

Yes.

Commissioner Beasley Pittman.

Good afternoon. Thank you for your presentation. Impact and execution, if we go in this direction, what is the timeline that you see we could accomplish this?

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

Thank you. Glenn Hadwin, sustainability manager. We've been working with the board on this topic for quite a while and there are our six recommendations. The ordinances as you probably know take considerably longer and, some of the administrative ones we're already looking at like we've been working as we do new vendor agreements with the parks department and putting language in there to reduce single use plastics. So some of the things we can do right away in the next six months to a year ordinances are probably take a year plus to do.

Thank you.

So Glenn, I'm sorry, how many of these do you think you can actually knock out in the shorter term versus the ordinance one?

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

So half of them could be short term?

Yes.

Okay.

Thanks. I'm seeing some contradictions in these recommendations. It seems to me that a lot of these recommendations are to try to move the city away from the use or the allowing of the use of plastics. Yet in number three, you want us to memorialize the prohibition of glass containers on the sandy portion of the beaches. So what's the alternative?

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

Okay.

Thank you, mayor commissioners. I'm Sylvia Duque, sustainability coordinator. I understand your question, and I believe a good way to explain it is we were working together with other groups, in staff for the city and thinking, solely on protecting our beaches and waterways as one of the biggest assets that we have in the city, glass is a hazard for safety not only for people but for the animals. So I do understand it's not necessarily related to single use plastics, but it was in this, same line of working towards more safety and less, debris on our beaches.

Sorry, So may I go to the beach, and I want and I'm bringing, you know, a jug of high you know, of Kool Aid. Okay? Alright. And how am I supposed to drink that? Out of the jug? You don't want plastic. You don't want glass. You don't want styrofoam.

No. So how

do you drink that?

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

Use plastic cup.

Something that you wash and you use again. Okay.

That's really counterproductive because that's gonna get thrown away also. And in other words, I'm just trying to make sense out of this. You know, people say you can't have glass, well, you can't have plastic, well, have, you know, have more expensive plastic, you know, multiple use where you wash it and take it home. I've seen a lot of things thrown on the beach, all the beach cleanups I've been a part of over the years. And I've seen these multiple use plastic containers thrown on the beach.

So it's not a deterrent just because it's a multiple use utensil. But you're asking us to make ordinances and we're trying to make sense out of this, okay? And as far as number four, you want us to strengthen the plastic straw ordinance and you want us to include this plastic stirrers, but if someone can't afford to do it in their business, you want us to exempt them. I don't want to exempt anybody. And what gives and what would be the basis for an exemption? You buy them out of a box, right? So what's the basis for an exemption?

So the basis for the exemption was our team reviewed a series of other ordinances from different jurisdictions in Florida. We saw that as a relatively common practice. And the idea is to, let's say, be more flexible with enforcement with smaller businesses, understanding as

Well, give me an example of someone who can't give me an example of where plastic, the substitute for plastic is more expensive than the plastic. This is what you're talking about. Right?

Yes. Correct.

Exemption if they can demonstrate financial hardship. So give me an example where paper straws are more expensive than plastic straws. Give me an example. Is that the case? If I go out on if I go to Walgreens or CVS and I want to buy paper straws, they're to be three times as much as plastic straws. I mean, help me out here, which I mean, these all sound like great ideas, but they don't make they don't they we're trying to we're trying to understand what what the ultimate goal is here.

Right. In the documents that in the attachment to the communication, there's a research paper that's that staff prepared. Towards the back of that, I think it's labeled page sixteen and seventeen are examples of common single use plastics and the alternatives and unit pricing. So Right. So direct me if you can to the straws. The straws are at the bottom of page 16.

16. Let's go to 16. So a single use plastic straw is 1¢ to 5¢. I don't see paper here. Where's paper? I see wheat, sugar, glass, silicone, rice, and bamboo. Where is paper? Well, the rice based, it's it's paper, cactus straw. Well, paper doesn't have to be rice based. What's your favorite paper? Paper paper.

Okay.

Paper doesn't have to be any of these. So I think you're you're throwing the argument off by suggesting that the only alternative is a super expensive substitute, but you fail to include just regular paper.

Right. This isn't these examples aren't meant to be all inclusive.

But they're pushing us to follow an agenda. Okay? Expecting us to believe that this is the these are the only options when we know that these aren't the only options. And I don't want the point that I'm trying to make is I don't want to give anyone an excuse not to not to use alternatives to plastic. I want I do not we as a commission years back said we do not wanna see straws anymore. Okay? Okay. Plastic straws. And now you're giving people an excuse not to have. We don't want that excuse.

Okay? That's all that's all I'm saying. Okay? So back to the other point of back to the other point of glass on the beach, glass containers, same thing. You can't you can have all these lofty ideas, but when you try to put them into practical use and to see what the ultimate impact is going to be, you've got to help us out as a commission to figure out what you're really getting at here.

So what are encapsulated expanded polystyrene? What is that? Styrofoam?

Yes, sir. Exactly.

It's Styrofoam. That's the fancy name for Styrofoam? Yes. Okay. We don't allow that as floating docks, do we anymore? Who's here? I don't know which department that would be, but we don't allow Styrofoam docks anymore.

Specific point with Marco Aguilera.

Can you

hold the microphone closer Yes. To you

worked with Marco Aguilera on that specific point. He was acting as a chief waterways officer until recently. He did say that was a common practice, and the suggestion is to prohibit them.

Right. But I don't think we it's not common in our city. You can say it's a common practice, but do we allow do we allow we don't allow Styrofoam docks anymore. I thought we outlawed that a long time ago.

So good afternoon, mayor. Carl Williams, Parks and Recreation Director. So to your question, I believe you are accurate, but I would like to research that matter Okay. To ensure that we are all aligned. And what we can also do is work with our sustainability board here and come back with a better, more refined approach here to address some of the concerns you just brought forth.

Okay. All right. Those are the only comments I have. I appreciate your patience and thank you. Anyone else have any comments or questions? Yes,

Mayor. Thank you. Think City Manager, I thought we were already working on number one. Isn't that in progress? As we've talked about that before.

Yes, we are working on number And

last time we talked about one, I think we also talked about the same prohibition applying to city permitted events. Do I have that my memory serving me right?

That could be an approach. There is also an approach that could be solely for city sponsored or city produced events as opposed to city permitted events.

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

Noted.

Okay. Carl, number three, is the inference that glass containers are currently prohibited per parks, city park rules. Right?

Yes, sir. That's correct.

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

Right? Safety related. Yes.

Okay. So it would be codifying the exist that existing rule. Okay. Great.

But but but vice mayor Yeah. So what's the alternative?

The alternative well, when you bring your your Kool Aid, I think you could could bring it in a metal container. I know there's, you know, kind of yeti like containers. Okay. One idea, I don't know. Doesn't taste the same. It's the same. It's not the same.

It's Stanley Cup.

Stanley Cup. What's that? Yeah. Your big Stanley.

But those are those are paper. But but if I could interject

with that advice, Mary, that's a really good point though, right? So if I'm bringing something from home, I will probably be bringing it in some type of a Yeti or Igloo cooler or something like that. If I stop and buy something along the way, it's going to come in the package that I buy it in. I'm not going to buy it and then transfer it into something else when I'm on the way to the park. So I think we need to be talking about this in terms of practicality for our guests, our visitors, people who are trying engage in recreation, not everybody is coming from home, not everybody is going to mix up that batch of Kool Aid and bring it to the beach from home.

I think if they are, yeah, they might be doing that. I'll mix up a jug of iced tea and bring it with me, but if I'm stopping at seven Eleven along the way, I'm going to be bringing whatever particular type of container I happen to be buying my beverage in. It may be glass, it may be plastic, it may be a single use plastic. It will be whatever it comes in, and I'm not going to bring along a separate container to then transfer it into and then dispose of that glass or plastic somewhere along the way. So I think we need to be talking about practicality here. So

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

And I also think there's probably a difference between glass at a beach where you may be walking around barefoot. I've never experienced a lot of folks walking around the parks barefoot. Maybe we need to bifurcate this a little bit. Again, I'm all about practicality, right? So I think glass a glass container at a park is different from a glass container at the beach. So again, I try to introduce the concept of reasonableness into what we do and an expectation of what daily life activities actually look like.

Please proceed, Vice Mayor.

Okay, great. Let's see, that's all I have for the but thank you for your work on this. This is great. Think we're

heading in a good direction.

Just wanted to add one other element to the conversation. When we're talking about the opportunities where they are city sponsored events, the things that we, as the city, are putting on, when you talk about, you know, right now we're drinking out of plastic plastic bottles, being familiar with what they call the boxed water, you have that

option, juice boxes. Well, Perrier comes in a glass bottle, so

And who knows? They may come to a box now as well. Haven't looked. But, yeah. But just saying, there are some other avenues. There is boxed wine. Yes. Yes. You're giving away

my But but you don't drink

it from the box. You you pour it into something

else. Tried. It doesn't work out.

Seen those bongoes of yours. Mayor, they do have some smaller ones now.

They're all personal bongoes. Single doubles. It just

depends on how much you want to be.

How much you want to drink. How much you want to drink.

But just adding to the conversation, if we could I understand the direction we're trying to get to and what we're trying to achieve. But also in the conversation, let's look at the opportunity for boxed water, boxed especially in those opportunities where we, the city, are initiating

Well, yeah, I think our own events, we can certainly try to curb the use of these unwanted materials. But all right, just I guess, Citi staff, you kind of hear what we're saying. Do the best you can.

Yes, sir. We'll work on that.

Practicality is the key.

And thank you, Fior. I do think we're headed in the right direction. Just need a little refining, thank you for that.

All right. Thank you.

Great. Thanks. All right. So we decided we're going to continue to keep commission reports at the beginning, correct?

Yes. I think that's where we are. And then Mayor, have one suggestion or idea for this as we think about City Commission reports. I just on my agenda meeting Keep

it to five minutes? Yes, yes, exactly. That's basically where

I'm going. But here's an idea for those of us who want to share more. So I think in our generally, in our City Commission reports, there's two main topics we cover. One are things that we'd like the city manager to work on or we have concerns about as well as things that we'd like to discuss amongst ourselves. So topics, right, new topics or things we'd like to discuss.

So I'm going to put that in one bucket. The other bucket, I think, is sharing of what we've done, where we've been, great highlights about kind of our last couple of weeks and things that are upcoming. I'll put that in the second bucket. What I was hearing from neighbors is they would really like to try to keep that first the commission reports at the start of the meeting as concise as possible. So one idea I had is that at the beginning of the meeting, we would just share those items we'd like to share with the city manager or items we'd like to discuss as a body.

And then at the end of the conference meeting, share our kind of full updates and things where we've been and so forth. That could possibly shorten that upfront time. So it's just an idea in there for consideration.

I think it makes a lot of sense.

I would endorse it.

But when it comes like you say, when it comes to substantive items of policy, I think we should have latitude on that. When it comes to what we've done and what we're doing, I mean, look at my page. I could be 100

There's thousand a dollars lot

to share.

Do a lot of stuff. That's right. Busy guy.

A lot of Kool Aid to drink.

All right. So start with now the person who has observed this religiously over the years has been Commissioner Herps in abbreviating his attendance at things. So you're going first today.

Absolutely. And thank you, Vice Mayor, for sharing that. That has always been my approach. And through the years through various commissions, the approach to reports has varied. And I have always seen them as an opportunity as us to share amongst ourselves those topics which we can't discuss in private.

Right. I agree.

Never viewed it for me to share what my calendar is. I think if I want to do that, I have a different format for that. But in that vein, there is one thing I do want to bring up, and this is something that came up during one of my agenda briefings, and it's I have talked with staff about before in the past and I think it's kind of in the spirit of what we're talking about. So under state law, if you have a disabled parking pass, you can park for free at any metered parking space on a street. There is an exception under state law where a municipality or county may charge you if you are in a municipal or county parking lot.

And I think the rationale behind that is the cost for a lot is separate and distinct from providing the cost for on street parking. So I have had residents who are disabled who have brought to me the request that we consider not charging for disabled parking in city parking lots. I've raised this issue with staff in the past. I had hoped that it would come up and we'd be able to get that resolved. We've not gotten to that point, so I want to bring it up to the commission as a matter of policy.

So we have a set aside number of disabled parking spaces that we do charge for in our city parking lots. There is a cost associated with this. I know I've talked to Ben Rogers in the past about that and he's looked at some of the numbers. I don't remember offhand what they are, but I've had this as an ongoing request from folks who are disabled, who would like us to have parity between parking on the street and parking in a city parking lot with respect to not charging them to do that, because if you are disabled, you may not have very many other options as to where you can park. Ben, would you like to sort of address that? Thank you.

Yes. Good afternoon, Mayor and Commissioner Ben Rogers, Assistant City Manager. In my time as the Director of Transportation Mobility, this has come up a few times, Commissioner Herbst directly, the last time. I believe there was a memo that we put together that kind of analyzed the state legislation, the options that we had and the financial impact. So if you if the Board as the Commission desires, we can go back and research that, update it for today's consideration and then bring it back for future consideration.

Thank you. So back in 2011, I had the misfortune of flipping my Harley and shattering my leg, and I spent a year of being completely disabled. So I was in a wheelchair, I was on crutches, I was non weight bearing for the better part of a year, and so I had the unfortunate experience of discovering what it means to be disabled in our community, And it's extremely challenging to negotiate doors and a lot of our environment when you're trying to deal with that. And so it gave me a very, very explicit appreciation for the challenge that our disabled community has, and things like having close parking and so forth is something that is very, very important for folks who have navigability problems, and I'd like us to really give this some serious thought as a policy issue. So thank you very much.

Commissioner, I have a question on that. Would that be the handicap parking spots in on a city lot or in a city garage, right? So that'd be one. And to park in those is would the requirement be to have the hang tag a disabled?

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

Okay. So one or the other? Right.

So the handicap plate is for permanently disabled. The handicap placard are for those who are temporary disabled and those are renewed every five years.

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

That is still the case for on street parking, and I would recommend that we consider again parity with on street For both.

Okay. So both.

Thank you.

Yes, makes sense.

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

You're absolutely correct, Mehrot. The handicap spaces in a private parking lot are merely a set aside, but does not remove the obligation to pay for those. All

right, something to think about. I think that makes a lot of sense, so we can work on that. Okay, thank you. Anything more, Commissioner? Okay. You reserve your time for Okay. My

question was, are we we just had a discussion about the two buckets being items that we discussed at the commission and then also our activities. What are we doing today?

So I think what the Vice Mayor suggested, we could start from now, abbreviate our appearances, if we have any substantive items we want to talk about, now is the time to bring that up because we don't have any other time to do that because government in the sunshine. So just pace yourself accordingly.

Okay. I'm going to share one accomplishment through our students at Dillard High School. I'm going use my time for that this afternoon. On May 8 in Jacksonville, Florida, over the last six years, the Dillard Track team has established itself as one of the premier programs throughout the state of Florida, consistent excellence and outstanding athletic achievement. On the boys' side, the team has earned one state champion and a state runner-up finisher.

On the girls' side, the program has secured a state runner-up, finishing along with three consecutive district and regional championships. During this six year span, Dillard has produced some of the state's top athletes. Naming those that, we will share with us, Chris Johnson was named as runner of the year and and currently holds the state record for both the 100 meter and the 200 meter race. Christina Coleman earned three consecutive runners of the year's honors, and hold the school's record in the mile, two mile, and cross cross country. Alexia Reed set school's records in both the Hurters event.

She also ranked the champion of the New Balance national title in the 100 meter. Also, recently, Desiree Fraser became the school's record holder in the 400 meters. In addition to these athletes' success, coach Davidson Gill has received coach of the year's honors in all six seasons. He's also become recognized as the two Dairy Farm coach of the year award and has been honored as the Hall of Fame Coach of the Year by Sun Sentinel. These accomplishments reflect the dedication, the discipline, and the excellence of the continued that's continued to define the Dhillis Track Team and track and field program.

So I wanted to share that. If we can give them a great hand

Well, I'd rather do more than give them a great hand. I wonder if there could be an evening where we can invite them to a commission meeting and recognize them here at a full meeting.

That is the goal. Okay. I just wanted because tonight we're going to recognize the girls basketball team.

Okay.

And I wanted to give them a separate platform. Okay. But with this happening most recently and being that we're coming to the end of the school term, we're trying to make sure that we can get them before the commission, before some of these individuals graduate. So I wanted to have their names and recognize their achievement.

Got it.

Okay. So thank you for the time.

All right. That's it. That concludes your remarks.

That concludes my part.

Okay. Commissioner Glassman.

Thank you, mayor. Good afternoon, everybody. So we're just doing now items that we'd like to bring up for discussion or future Everything. Everything. Oh, including events?

Yes.

Oh, I didn't realize that. Okay. I thought we were saving that for after. But so we're sticking to the old process now and then? Try to

abbreviate your visits and your appearances to the five minutes and anything else, there's no limit.

Okay. Thank you very much. All right, thank you very much. First of all, I always wanted to commend the FLPD and FOP. The fallen officers memorial ceremony is probably one of the most moving things that we do all year. I am always just so incredibly taken aback by that ceremony and I wanted to thank anyone that had anything to do with that. That was recently held in Espolon Park. Again, so important, so important to pay tribute to those that sacrificed their lives for service to our city. And I wanted to thank everyone from FOP, FLPD for that. May 7, I had a great time speaking with the Chairman's Circle at the reception at the International Swimming Hall of Fame.

These were, I guess, the Chamber of Commerce's top big, big, big membership of the chamber. We had some great exciting updates on the Swimming Hall of Fame project. And also, iShop signed their first athlete, James Lichtenstein, who is the top male diver in The United States, actually I think in the world right now. And then he led a group of divers in a high diving show. That peninsula continues to amaze me and whenever people are there at events, it does the same with them also.

So I wanted to thank the chamber for that and the International Swimming Hall of Fame. May eight, May as you know, we've been talking about services in communities like Flagler Village, neighborhoods like that. The type of services that really create a sense of community and we were happy to be at the ribbon cutting for Go Grocer. This is a chain out of Chicago. This is their first foray into the state of Florida.

Really nice little market and so important for folks that live in the Flagler Village section of District 2 and our city. Really nice event. 05/09/2010, of course, was the air show. I had the privilege of welcoming all of the folks on the beach on Sunday, May 10, and what an amazing show. Thunderbirds capped it off in really incredible fashion.

I wanted to thank FDOT for holding several educational workshops, both virtually and in person at Artserve. This is for the work that's happening on the Los Alos Bridge over the Intracoastal as well as the Sunrise Bridge. It's really important that we do all we can to communicate with the residents that use those bridges on a daily basis, very important and the work there is very important. The Sunrise Bridge one actually is not like the Los Oles and it's not just confined to the bridge areas, but actually goes all the way from Birch Road on the Barrier Island to Middle River. So it's quite an extensive project.

That project alone is $40,000,000 So again, I wanted to thank FDOT for the communication and for the education so that we can keep our residents informed. May 13, it was a great day along with the strong corridor. We had three building groundbreakings for affordable housing. We had the pantry lofts on 6, we also had the Aldridge and the Larimore, that was great And that connection between District 2 and District 3 was happy to join Commissioner Pam Beasley Pittman at those three buildings. Those are great projects and so important.

And it was really nice to see the community turnout for those events as well. May 14, I had the pleasure of addressing the Central Beach Alliance that evening, always an incredible turnout. They must have had about 100 people over at the Beach Community Center. May 15, wanted to say congratulations to Dan Lindblade on his retirement.

Were you there?

I was. I actually had the honor of being one of the three roasters of Dan Lindblade at the First Baptist Church. You noticed. Noticed. That was good. Yeah, I had a lot of fun actually, and I hope everyone had a lot of fun. But it was a great tribute to a man who spent nineteen years as the head of the Chamber of Commerce. On his retirement, he was honored as the Downtowner of the Year. Always a great crowd, about 400 people show up for a luncheon event, and again, I think it was a lot of fun. May 16, at the Ritz Carlton, I had the pleasure of joining the Broward Partnership for the Homeless.

This was a salute to business, a really well attended function, again, over at the Ritz Carlton on the beach. And again, the incredible work that Broward Partnership does. That evening, top honors went to Senator Nan Rich, well deserved. A great turnout, great stories of folks that have gone through their service and the incredible work that they do. I wanted to salute Broward Partnership for their work all year and for the event this past Saturday night.

May 20, I'll be addressing the Flagler Village Civic Association. May 22, this Friday, we have the Broward Alliance mid year lunch out at the Hard Rock coming up this Saturday, May 23 on our beach, the Great American Beach Party and the Walk of Fame ceremony. And as we know, this week also we have the IPW Conference, lots of delegates from all over, a huge tourism conference, and I know that people have been really rolling out the red carpet for them and the welcome mat. I think it's a great community effort for that. May 28, we have the Riverwalk Tribute.

May 29, I'll be attending several functions, several groundbreakings in Holiday Park in District 2, And that's it for events. I've tried to go through them really quickly. Now, couple of comments and some things that I'd like us to discuss and just be aware of. So, City Manager on May 7, we received the update on assessment of existing building options for City Hall. I just want to make sure that we're all comfortable with this because when I put on my memory cap, I remember on February 17, this Commission as a whole said, we don't want to spend the money looking at the older buildings.

We don't want to spend the money looking at the appraisals on these buildings, and we don't want to do that. But then again, the Commission as a whole changed its mind. I did not change my mind, but we did as a Commission. So, we received this memo on May 7, the update. I I want to make sure that my colleagues are comfortable with the fact that we went on February 17 to spending no money to now spending $500,000 on appraisals and work looking at these three buildings.

I want to make sure that that's really clear for the public and for us that we changed our mind and we went from not spending any money to now spending $05,000,000 $100,000 just on the appraisals. And I just want to say a few words about that. I looked at the scope, I see what this we deferred that item to June 2 to come back to us to talk about the interim agreement for City Hall on June 2. But then at the last meeting, were told we might not be able to have all of the data that we need on June 2, we might have to go to July 2. So, I've been thinking about this and I've been talking to friends of mine in the construction industry and the development industry.

And I believe that even when we get the information that we are going to get for the extra $400,000 on top of the $100,000 for the appraisals, we're still not really going to have an idea if this is going to work for us as a City Hall. And I'm going to tell you why. These are non invasive engineering reports we're going to get. We're going to have real no detail about the structural integrity of these buildings, nor will these buildings nor will these reports confirm or will they deny what our renovation is going to be in these buildings. Because to really, really properly ascertain if we're going to make this work, we would have to have a full set of construction drawings of what we're going to be doing in our City Hall.

We would have to know exactly what we're identifying. We would have to know all of the loads, the distribution of the loads. We are not going to have that information because we're not going to have anything to compare from the reports that we're going to get, which are going to be cursory. We're not going to have that detail to really look at what we're going to try to do as a City Hall. The only way to properly investigate these older buildings would be able to find the older structural drawings of those buildings, and then look and put that on top of what it is we think that we're going to do to determine whether or not these older buildings between twenty five and fifty years old are going to be able to handle what it is we're going to do.

So, I think that any survey, any engineering report we're going to obtain at this time will not be worth the paper that it's written on. But most importantly, I want to make sure that we're all in agreement that we went from, no, we don't want to even do an appraisal on these old buildings to, okay, now we're going to spend $500,000 And that's all I'm going to say about that after I read the May 7 letter to the commission.

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

Good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners Quentin Pugh, Assistant City Manager. So the report that you're going to receive on July 2 is a high level summary report. It's not recommendations to you, but it will provide high level summary findings for things such as the condition of the buildings, building systems, the structure, the envelope, the mechanical system, plumbing, electrical. It's going to confirm available square footage for office. We did do some programming, some space programming for the City Hall project, so that information will be transferred over into these summary findings and whether the space is adequate or not.

It's also going to provide you with a preliminary rough order of magnitude on certain elements that are of interest to this commission, such as the commission chambers, whether or not that can fit in any of these buildings, what it would take to construct those facilities in that estimated rough order of magnitude. There will be a side by side comparison table for the building conditions as well as the upgrades that are needed for these facilities. So assessment of the windows, things of that magnitude will be evaluated. The roof system will be evaluated in that side by side comparison. It will provide pros and cons for each building.

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

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

Yes, there is a cost associated with it. It's just under $370,000

No, no. I'm sorry. I didn't explain myself right. Will there be so if you do an analysis of the mechanicals and the plumbing and electrical and space considerations and the retrofitting and so forth, will you be able to assign a cost necessary to if it's found necessary to upgrade or to retrofit what the costs are going to be? Or is that an element of this inquiry that's going to be that's going to, say, take part in a Phase two of your analysis?

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

If I could add, Mayor, on July 2, we also anticipate having the appraisal information ready and prepared to share with with the commission as well as a preliminary budget. That was one of the things that the commission asked us to take a look at in terms of how we could identify resources for the cost of City Hall.

Okay. Now you just said July 2. I know that we deferred this item from last month to June 2. What are

we going to

have on June 2 when we had deferred this item to?

Thank you, Commissioner. When it was raised that you would like staff to come back within sixty days or that June 2 time period, I did share verbally at the meeting that if we did need more time that I would share that with the commission via letter to the commission. I have done so via that LTC as well as verbally at the last meeting. It is anticipated that if the commission wanted to take up the interim agreement, which was deferred, that the commission could do so on June 2, but the commission would not have the other information as requested on the existing properties.

Well, we have an interim agreement coming back to us on June 2, which is the date we deferred that to with the elimination of what we all did come to consensus on in terms of the equity piece, things like that? In other words, will we have a revised interim agreement on June 2 when we deferred the item too?

I anticipated that the commission might want to look at those options in totality in terms of a revised interim agreement as well as the findings of the research done on the existing properties. But we serve at the pleasure of the commission and if a revised interim agreement is something that the commission wants to see sooner than July 2, we could work toward that. However, we were instructed to pause on the new build project. And I know that the developer has been looking at approaches to the new build project, but we have not been fully engaged in the manner that we were before with having those weekly meetings with the various working groups as the direction was more so to pause until we had the information on the existing properties.

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

It is possible that we could have the appraisal information. It might not make the publishing date for the June 2 meeting as we think we'll likely have it at the very end of this month. So, it could be something that is shared via letter to the commission or as an add on to the printed agenda or the published agenda.

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

It will be invasive. Non invasive.

And so that's my point. I I don't think that's helpful to us. I mean, with a brand new building, the police headquarters, we went through a lot of issues with loads and columns and structural integrity. We went through a whole exercise with that, and we know what that was all about. But now, when we're thinking of a City Hall for our future, we're willing to do this very cursory, non invasive engineering report on three very old structures.

We don't have any kind of construction drawings for what it is we want to impose in these old buildings. We don't even know if we're going to be able to get the structural plans from those old buildings. And yet we're willing to spend $375,000 doing this exercise plus $100,000 for appraisals on these old buildings, which to me is incredible. I don't know why we're doing that. But I will tell you one thing.

What I do know is in that IA that came to us that we kicked down the road to June 2, and now I'm hearing July 2 most likely, we were asking the development team to give us about $350,000 right, as a line of credit that they were giving to us to make sure we were keeping them in line with us, right. So we were asking them for $350,000 which is almost what we're going to spend now on this non invasive studies of these buildings. And what always strikes me is, so we're going to give all that money away and do this work. But then I come back to the original P3 process that we went through. These older buildings did a little sales pitch on us and some of us were intrigued by that.

But you know what they didn't give us? They didn't give us the $25,000 that the other teams gave that went through the process. And yet we've just forgotten that. They're in the mix. They're in the mix. They didn't pay $25,000 They didn't have to do any of that. But now they're in the mix for the life of me. I do not understand what we're doing with this P3 process. I find it highly irregular. I find it just incredible that we're now spending, not only are they in the mix in terms of skin in the game and $25,000 to pay, they didn't have to go through the presentations.

God knows what those five what do we have, four teams out of six we had presentation from? They had to spend a good chunk of change on those presentations for staff time, resources, research, presentations that they made. These older buildings that are now in the mix, they didn't do any of that. They didn't do any of that. They didn't pay $25,000 and now they're on equal footing with a team that we selected. What are we doing? What are we doing? Can someone answer that question?

City manager?

Think, I

I'd like to comment on that. So having been through this quite a few times, there's a standard process for a due diligence progression. The first step in a due diligence progression is a non invasive property condition assessment, which is what we're exploring right now. Based on a non invasive property condition assessment, we decided if we're going to move forward with a targeted invasive testing. We certainly would not undertake targeted invasive testing until we've done the non invasive property condition assessment, which may tell us that we don't want to move forward on it.

So I think this is the first step. It's a preliminary step. It may tell us that this is not something we want to do. We certainly wouldn't want to undertake extensive engineering testing without having done at least a preliminary analysis, and I think this is the appropriate first step in the process.

Great. So now what I'm hearing is we might actually decide as a commission to do further studies making it invasive after we've gone through the noninvasive. That's what I'm hearing, And I'm just put tuck that away everybody because that's coming next. Again, that's incredible to me. And you know, Commissioner Herbst, you are the financial guy up here.

If you're comfortable spending a million dollars looking at non invasive engineering reports on the three old buildings plus the $100,000 for the appraisals, then so be it. But I'm just bringing this to everyone's attention because I want people to remember, we typically seem to have amnesia when it comes to what we do because we we do one thing and then, oh, there's a change of heart and we go in a different direction. And, you know, I can name I can name Los Oles Median as an example. We make one decision, then another decision, back to another decision. City Hall as an example, we make one decision, back to another decision, back to another decision.

Pickleball and basketball on the beach, we make one decision on a site plan, we make another decision, we go back to another decision. We seem to have a pattern here, folks, of like just changing our mind and going in a different direction, and I for one find it really frustrating. That's all I wanna say.

So I will leave you with a quote from John Maynard Keynes, who said, when the information changes, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?

That's an excellent quote. Thank you. I would just say that the information doesn't really change, the people's opinions change. I'm good. I'm good, Mayor. Okay. Thank you. I I want a more item and I want to mention this too while I'm on a I'm on my list here. I've been getting a lot of feedback and I want to know going forward, when we review charter officers, and maybe Jerome, if he's around can help me from an HR perspective. I'm getting a lot of comments made to me about the last event that we had in terms of the review of the city manager.

I want to know if it's customary or even correct from an HR perspective. Do call up people to the podium to testify under oath and discuss the people that they report to? I find that highly irregular. I've been getting a lot of comments, not just from staff, but also from the public finding that that was a very uncomfortable situation. That was an uncomfortable situation, perhaps untenable situation and highly irregular.

Irregular. I don't remember the years I've been sitting here, it's over eight now. I don't remember ever having a review of a charter officer, clerk, auditor, city manager, city attorney, where we've actually called people up to testify that report to that particular person that we are reviewing. Is that kosher, Jerome? Is it customary? Is it something we should maybe think about in the future when we do future reviews of charter officers? What's your opinion on that?

Well, from the HR perspective, this is the third municipality I have worked for and I have to admit, I have never seen that done before in my career. That's not to say it can't happen. It's really up to the commission how they want to handle the review of the charter officers going forward.

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

You're asking several questions.

It one at a time.

There's nothing that prohibits it. Whether it's okay is up to opinion.

Okay. All right. I just want to know

So let me pick up on that.

Go ahead.

So I think that the police chief and the fire chief hold unique positions within any municipal organization. And I do think that they represent very important roles. I think their ability to be objective is paramount. And clearly, when you're asked to pine about your superior's approach to work, it becomes obviously jaundiced when you're having to be in public and you're being asked to comment on how your boss behaves themselves, right? I think that there needs to be a special relationship between our police chief and our fire chief, but I don't think that can be achieved when they're subordinates.

I've been giving some thoughts since we're doing charter amendments. I've been giving some thought about why don't consider making the police chief and the fire chief charter officers and put that on the ballot for this coming election, adding it to the other charter amendments. If the people approve it, fine. If they don't, fine. But I do think that the idea of objectivity is really important, and I think that we were losing that, which was demonstrated, as you pointed out, Commissioner, we were losing that sense of objectivity when we find ourselves in situations where that kind of relationship between the chiefs and the commission and the management staff becomes compromised under these circumstances.

So, anyone have any comments on that, any thoughts?

Mayor, actually I'd love to weigh in on that. So, Commissioner Glassman, I agree with you completely. I spent first third of my life in the corporate sector, and one of the prime things that you have in the corporate sector is three sixty reviews. And the preeminent factor in a three sixty review where employees review their supervisor is that it's anonymous. The only way to get candid feedback is in an anonymous environment.

You can't expect folks to give a realistic, candid feedback on their boss in an environment where everybody is listening in, so I agree with you. Was uncomfortable during that presentation myself, And actually, Mayor, I also agree very strongly with your suggestion. I kind of like that. I think it'd be very important for the police chief and the fire chief to report directly to the commission. I've been through several iterations in my many years here with the city.

At one point, we had an assistant city manager that was over public safety. At another point, another city manager elevated them to the point where they reported directly to him. I've seen a variety of ways in which we have managed the public safety function, but I've always felt as a charter officer, as somebody who reported directly to the commission, that that direct line of reporting was actually crucial. You know, being able to speak candidly to the elected officials as a charter officer gives you a different flow of information. It gives you a different relationship with the commission. And I think that's a great idea. And I'm glad you brought that up, Mayor. I would absolutely support it.

Alright. Commissioner Beasley Pittman, do you have any thoughts on that?

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

That's what

we're saying. Okay. So with that, how do we also keep a balance? Because you're talking about five voices up here. How do we keep a balance?

Well, it's a it's a we there are five voices, but as with any charter officer, we have direct line of communication with And I bring it up because I think that the comments that Commissioner Glassman spoke about highlight the importance of trying to establish the integrity of the officers that we're talking about. And I feel that to some extent and it's not the first time, I've seen it in years past, where I believe that the police chief and the fire chief often their integrity is challenged when because they're put in a certain position. Now we wouldn't be the I know the city of Sunrise, for example, their police and fire chief are charter officers. So we wouldn't be the only ones. But that's another large city which practices the same way and has been very successful over the years.

And I the more I thought about it over the weekend and I'm thinking, we've talked about it before, and I just feel that now that we're talking about putting charter amendments and we have a deadline to do it, we're going be talking about it tonight. I would like to instruct the city attorney to put together a resolution to put those on the charter amendment Resolution and see what the people think. But I personally feel that I respect our police chief and our fire chief positions to such an extent that I think they need to be elevated to the point of charter officers.

Mayor, before you go on, you cited Sunrise. Is there any other municipalities? Because what well, I don't know if you could someone could clarify for me. Sunrise, are they a strong mayor or is it No. They're a weak mayor form of government. Okay.

Yeah. And The only strong mayor form of government in Broward is Plantation.

Okay. Do we know how Plantation is their police chief and

Well, all they all report to the mayor. Okay. All right. If

I may, was just looking it up while you're talking Commissioner Beasley Pittman. So Jacksonville and Miami, just two other ones. So Jacksonville, the sheriff is independently elected, but in Miami, the chief reports to the city manager administratively, to the elected commission and mayor exerts it says influence through appointment and contract power. So there's different varieties of it. But there are actually a lot of the cities where the chief of police would report directly to the elected officials. So it's a fairly common model from what I'm reading.

Thank you for that information.

Vice Mayor, do have any thoughts on this?

Yes. Thank you. So I think charter considerations are good to weigh. As we've been following our charter revision process, we have a great robust process with the Charter Revision Board, with public engagement. So I think when you're thinking about substantive charter changes, worthwhile to explore. And I think we follow the proper path to ensure Charter Revision Board has Charter Revision Board evaluated this? Do we know,

I don't think it's come up, but they haven't met since I don't know when the last time they met. When does city attorney, what's our deadline for proposing charter changes?

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

Tonight would have to be a first reading?

Correct.

If I could add, I'm sorry, Vice Mayor, so having been involved with a lot of the Charter Revision Board meetings through the years when I used to sit up there as an ex officio, they typically are dealing with the things that are already in the Charter more so than something like this. I think those kinds of initiatives are typically driven by the commission. That's a policy change that we've usually brought forward through the years. That's generally been sort of the avenue for that type of a thing. The Charter Revision Board is usually focused on making ministerial type corrections like you've seen come out of them or things that the commission has talked about or that bubbled up from like the Council of Civic Associations and so forth.

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

So thanks. So I've actually sat on the Charter Revision Board for the city.

I recall.

Yes, yes.

So we actually did come up with we'd have robust conversations about a host of topics not directed by the city commission and outside of the charter and a wide range of topics, which is really good because we put them on the agenda. We would allow for public engagement, communication, discussion. We have some actually very good robust communication at the Charter Revision Board meetings with the public. And so that's worked really well. And so I think this is a great possibility to add to their agenda as they can start considering it.

So

when is their

next meeting? We've got to give them time and yes.

When is their next meeting, city attorney? Do you know?

I do not believe they have

They don't have one schedule?

The charter you're talking about the charter advisory I do not believe there is one schedule.

May I I don't think we have time for that. I'm just going We put it out don't because and I I agree with what Commissioner Herbst is saying about how this is a policy decision of the Commission more than it is a recommendation of changing something in the charter like that. But here's the deal, at the end of the day, the residents will be the final deciders on all of this. Everything we're putting on the ballot is up to the citizens of Fort Lauderdale, not really us. So again, I am in favor of your idea. Will agree with you and Commissioner Herps that we should have a walk on item to change those roles of the police and fire chief as to be charter officers.

Well, I

I didn't I I'm gonna make it plain. I'm not in agreement with this. Okay. This stem this belief the conversation when we invited the chief and the police, fire and chief police were invited by one of us from the dais. So if we did something that was out of our policy, does that mean that we need to change the whole charter to address something that maybe we did not realize that we shouldn't have went in that direction?

So I bring this up not because of a single incident, but because of, you know, in years of being on this commission, years, I see where the police chief and the fire chief have a special role, special place in our governance. And every so often, their role seems compromised in various situations. So this isn't so much triggered by any one event, but it does but events do remind me of opportunities that we've had in the past to be able to restructure our city government in such a way that it works better. I think it would work better if the police chief and the fire chief were constitutional officers. We could put it on as a walk on tonight, but it's the only first reading.

And between now and the next meeting, we could invite the public to come and speak on behalf of the issue, either for or against. So since the Charter Revision Board is not going to be convening any meetings between now and then, I guess it would be up to us to make the decision. I see we have three votes so far, but I'd like to be there to be more of a consensus. But if not, then I do believe we should move the item forward.

Before we move forward, could I have a comparison of what the change would be constitutional or charter officer versus non charter. Uh-huh. Could we have that, in this space right now explain and define not only for me, but even for our our neighbors so we can understand what what we are suggesting the change to be.

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

As I understand what the mayor is suggesting, those two individuals, those two positions would become charter officers just as I am, the auditor is, the city manager is, and the clerk is, so they would report directly to you all.

More to that than just reporting, right? Is it just that's

the only are their own yes, ma'am.

They're But if you could break it down because I'm I'm if it's the difference is only who we report to, I'm I'm I'm thinking it's more than just who they're reporting to.

Correct. They they're responsible for their own budget. They are independent and act independently and are officers in the sense that they're direct, not just direct reports, but they're their own little agency, if you will. You could think of it that way. As the auditor has his department and I have my department, so would they.

Okay. So at this point, as non charters, do they or do they not have their own budget?

They have their budget, but it is they are under the purview of the city manager. It's the city manager's budget. And of course, a portion is allocated to each of those departments.

And the thing is, Commissioner, we have we are answerable to our people, right? We're directly responsive to the people we represent and so forth. And I think that this creates a greater sense of responsibility towards our fire and police chiefs who will now have more direct responsibility. They have to answer to us. And I think that by being answerable to a city manager, there's a level of separation between the people and their roles as public servants.

And I think that if we continue to if we can move in the direction of greater accountability, that would be the next and best step going forward. And that's why I feel the more I think about it and the more I see the possibilities here, it just seems to make more sense. And I'm surprised more cities haven't thought of that as well. But I just feel that the direct accountability between the people we represent and the chiefs will certainly make them more accountable to the public.

Mayor, can you help me understand a little

bit more what this what problem this solves? I'm not tracking what issue are we having that this fixes? I think that as I mentioned earlier, I think that it's important that the police chief and the fire chief have this objectives role in which they can perform their responsibilities in a way that I feel stifles them because of the current structure. And I think in conversations with both of them, not just in the recent period, but in years past with other police and fire chiefs, I've spoken with them and there's a sense that where they don't have that freedom of that ability to be able to be responsive to the public as much as that they would be as charter officers. Right now, working under a city manager and the ability to interact with the city manager is compromised because they're basically her employee or his employee, whoever the city manager happens to be.

And whereas they will answer to us, and I think the public as tensions continue to rise in our societies, we're seeing more and more of it on TV and the Internet. I just feel that those departments need to be answerable to us as opposed to anyone else, and that's why I'm proposing it.

Okay. So if I'm hearing you right, you're saying currently our Police Chief and Fire Chief feel stifled and compromised as a result. Is that what you're hearing from them? Yes. Okay. Okay. And that's hard to hear. And they're compromised as a result of the reporting structure. Is that what you're saying, Mayor, because they have to report to the city manager, so

that's compromising them? I think it takes away from their ability to interact with the city manager's office in a way that gives them the ability to fulfill their role as public servants and as public safety officers. And I think that making them charter officers will give them that extra that freedom and that ability to be able to work in their role in much more productive way. Okay. And other department heads, do you if they feel compromised, then should we

think about other department heads being charter officers as well because Well, they might feel

don't want to answer that because I don't know the answer to that. I haven't thought about that. And I think right now, I think the police department and the fire department hold unique positions in our city. There are significant roles. They make up more than half of our budget. And I do think that they're deserving of having that status, and that's why I'm proposing it this afternoon.

City Manager, any feedback on this or thoughts as we think about this?

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

I do think that the police and fire chief role as a charter officer is something very rare in South Florida, not very many examples of that. You mostly find it in a strong mayor type of government. So I'm not as familiar with that reporting structure, but I'm sure it is something that if the commission saw fit as well as the voters that that's something that I would be able to adapt to. So I really don't have a lot of feedback on this. I would just want to know the logistics and semantics as it relates to budget preparations and how that coordination would work.

Thank you.

If I could add something to this. So I'm not going to be up here post November, so whatever the voters decide is not going to have an impact on me. But I always like to think about this is not about our current city manager, it's not about our current commission, and it's not about our current chiefs of police and fire. And I look at this the same way I always looked at things when I was the auditor in terms of internal controls. As I used to tell prior city managers, I'm not designing internal controls for you.

I'm designing it for the person that comes after you and after them. And I think this structure where we have a future chief of police and a future city manager and a future commission is probably a good one. I think accountability to the city commission of the two most important functions that I believe the city has, I've always said that public safety is the number one reason we constitute local government. It's not for parks. It's not for streets and drainage and everything else.

It is for public safety. That is why we have local government. And I think as an elected official, having that direct line of communication and reporting to me is very valuable. I'd like to be able to say to my chief of police, this is what I want you to do. Now I have to say to whomever the city manager is, this is what I would like and it gets filtered through the city manager to the chief of police or to the fire chief.

I think the accountability of having them report directly to the elected officials is a valuable tool. And again, this is not for me, I won't be here. It won't even necessarily be just for you all up here, but it'll be for commissions to come after this. And I think that's how you really need to look at this. This is something that you're really doing for future governance of the city. Again, it's like internal controls. We don't do it for today, we do it for the future. Thank you.

All right. So city attorney, and we can discuss it again tonight since it's going to be an agenda item. And, if you could put together some kind of resolution to this effect.

Well, Mayor, thank you. We would have to prepare an ordinance for each, and then they would have to be presented to you. We're doing the charter things tonight as you're aware. Those will be included potentially in the packet. And if you would like that done, we will set

up I think get that the majority is agreeable to that, but I think it does deserve more discussion and we can be able to do that more tonight as well.

Then we'll

get a draft Okay, for first

Thank

And you so one thing I would encourage you because this came up when they did the creation of the city auditor's office, there were certain aspects of the city charter that were overlooked in the creation of a separate charter officer and we had to go back and do a separate charter amendment at a point down the road. So try and think about the variety of areas that will get touched upon when you do this. You won't be able to do that obviously by tonight, but between first and second read, try and think of all the various things that's in there. So for example, in personnel rules and procurement rules and what aspects of what already exists. The city manager, for example, has a policy and standards manual, what aspects of that, what aspects of the personnel rules are going to apply.

A lot to think through, but up in Tallahassee, they have a glitch bill. They pass a bill and then they come back later and do a glitch bill. Let's try to avoid that. Let's try to think through everything that will have a downstream impact when we do this. What might this touch in terms of the organization? So just between first and second, trying to think about that.

Thank you, Krishna.

Alright. Commissioner Glassman, do you have anything further? No, that

does it for me. I'm really glad that we're cutting way back on the time for the commission reports tonight. This is working really well. Thank you.

Well, all right, whatever. Vice Mayor?

Thank you. Yes, just one last point on that. I think we're really shortchanging public engagement. I think it's the right thing to do to have a discussion with Charter Revision Board, bring it to the Council of Fort Lauderdale Civic Associations. I think robust public conversation about what we're considering matters, but that would be the case. I'm clearly in the minority on that. A couple of items just to celebrate Deputy Chief Bodding's retirement ceremony. It's fantastic. Let's see, Commissioner Beasley Pittman, I think you were there. Who was there?

Was that Commissioner Beasley Pittman? I forget the mayor. Yes, the mayor gave some kind words to the Chief who's heading to Deerfield Beach to become the Chief there, which is awesome. And then Habitat for Humanity has a great BBI village opening, which is really exciting to be part of Commissioner Biese Pimenton, know was there for that. A couple of items. One, I know we're going to talk about the SWA later, but I think I don't think we selected a permanent appointee from the City Commission to the SWA. I thought we might have, but I checked with the clerk, he doesn't think we did. So I think that'd

be helpful to do, Mayor. To

To the Solid Waste Authority. Because I'm

a That's not you? It's not me. It's not me.

I haven't been fully ventured I'm just sure I thought that was you. Wait

Wait a minute. Yes.

I think we both benefited.

Happy to take nominations.

Can you get us your resume? I'll send Are you my resume

you declining

it? So no, I'd be happy to do it if that's the will of the body.

Case closed.

To be that. Okay. Thank you.

Vice Mayor? I do think we may need a resolution to that effect to make that official. So we can prepare that.

Okay. Great.

Thank you.

Lastly, we've done, I think, a great job, especially this last year or so, really moving forward with our improving our waterways in the city and really from securing pump out boat to the planting of mangroves, to increase in our waterway testing sites with Miami water keepers, to passing the first reading of the Living Seawall Ordinance. I mean, just fantastic work. One of the as I talked to waterway experts, one of the additional opportunities is the desire to really create a almost countywide, but ultimately just initially just starting with the city of kind of real time waterway testing. And the waterway experts all tell me that it would be very helpful if we were able, in addition to the testing that we're doing through Miami Water Keepers, but additionally test for or monitor the temperature, salinity and turbidity of the waterway so that we can have kind of real time results around those metrics. And then that helps the experts really identify what's going on with our waterways, changes, ways to improve and so forth.

So I was wondering, City Manager, if we can explore that possibility of that type of testing. I don't know if Miami Water Keepers has that functionality or capability, but exploring that in addition to the current testing that we're doing with the water keepers.

Before you answer that, salinity, so how can we impact the saltwater?

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

Yes. But how can we change that by dumping more salt if it's not salty enough or we can't remove the salt. So how does that what would be the purpose of gauging that is my question?

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

Thank you, Vice Mayor Todd Haiju, Deputy Public Works Director. Currently, Miami Waterkeeper does collect that data when they sample. As we report out, it's pretty much on the fecal indicator bacteria, but they do collect pH, they do collect salinity. So they already do collect that when they sample twice a week.

Great. Do they collect temperature as well? They do collect temperature. Great.

So I can start reporting out on that? Yes. So Okay. I can capture that. Salinity really helps you to make sure you're targeting the right fecal indicator bacteria because there's a different metric for parameter in freshwater versus saltwater. And then it can also tell you if there's increased salinity from saltwater intrusion to our waterways and things like that. So you can indicate if our waterways are getting saltier and things like that.

But how do we change that?

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

Like we can't change temperature.

You can't change temperature. But again, it's also to see if there's a trend, upper trend in temperature of your waterways and things like that. So it's really the purpose of water quality parameter is that you can start collecting all this data to determine trends.

Okay. I guess we're already

doing it.

Yes. It sounds great. We just haven't been reporting it. So I guess They've

reported on a fact sheet, but the primary interest previous has been just in the bacteria. That's what's Okay, been reported

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

We do. The microbial source tracking has been completed the first month. It should get the second month at the end of this week. So that has been at the five sites.

Great. And is that coming to us or

That will come to you in a letter to commission on the water quality issues we've been working on.

Okay.

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

Great.

Thank you. Vice May,

if I can piggyback

on your

regards to the Miami timekeepers and the reports that we receive basically bimonthly, I've been noticing in the Sweeney River, Sweeney Water area that the numbers have significantly gone down. I'm going be honest with you, when I thought when I saw it, I was like, is this a typo? You know, because the numbers are usually extremely high. Which area? Ms. Sweetness State. Ms. Sweetness State. Yes.

Yeah. They're very

My question is, we're talking about trends. Is it water temperature? What what is making this change which is positive? And I'm I'm I'm I'm I'm on the fence. I'm really thinking it's an odd reading, you know, so if you can expound on that for me.

So what we've been seeing is primarily the indicator for increased bacteria counts in our waterways is pretty much precipitation. When you get the runoff from the streets into the drains into the waterways, that's when you seem to see an increase in bacterial counts. Two, I would love to have an exact answer for you why we've been seeing that. But again, one snapshot in time, it's hard to ascertain why we're seeing that. You have to look at it over a longer period of time.

And what's also interesting with the microbial source tracking is that will peel another layer of the onion to kind of see what the source of bacteria in our waterways, at what concentrations, and then we can also make management decisions based on those. So going to be really interesting year to continue the monitoring trend, the weekly water quality testing we've been doing, then adding the MST, the microbial source tracking to it to see kind of see how these two correlate together. So this time next year, we'll have another layers of the onion peeled back to kind of see exactly what's impacting our waterway quality. It also helps to we have a strong street sweeping program, strong inlet cleaning program. So getting those materials out of our water out of the upland system prior to entering the waterways.

That's also a big contribution to keeping our waterways clean and improving.

All right. Thank you.

Mayor, one other just to clarify, City Attorney, City Manager, the SWA RESO will be tonight. Is that right?

We anticipate just having a conference discussion

Sorry, the me being the permanent or the full member.

I think that we were thinking about the next meeting, but if you would like that for tonight, we Yes, could get

that that's all Let's do it tonight, please. City attorney, is that right?

Yes, Vice Mayor.

Okay, great. Thanks. And then Mayor, just a suggestion for the agenda. Know we have several folks here for SWA. I don't know if it'd be possible to move that up ahead of the P Card. Which one? Solid Waste Authority. Is that a way of Commissioner Furr here and

Yes, see that. If that's possible. Yes, yes, of Thanks, Mayor. Does that conclude your comments?

Yes.

Thank you,

Mayor. Great. I just have a couple of things I want to bring up instead of going through all the different things that we've attended. I have been attending some of the aquatic center events, events, and I have to tell you that we've really upped our game, and it's really wonderful to see so much activity at our aquatic center, not just the quantity of activity, but the quality. International and national events are taking place there.

The best swimmers and divers in the world are back to competing in Fort Lauderdale. And it's what we all why we invested in it. And we're seeing our investment finally coming to our community, and I'm very, very happy to see that. So thank you everybody who's involved with that. And we really appreciate the continuing effort that you make to have Fort Lauderdale be the destination of choice in the aquatic world.

And that dovetails to the fact that Commissioner Glassman and I both attended a Swimming Hall of Fame events this past weekend. He attended, I believe, a Friday night event. I attended the Saturday night Honorea ceremony at the War Memorial Auditorium. My event, there are hundreds of people who attended. It was really great to see the aquatic world come out and recognize the leaders and those who are so accomplished in their field.

I want to mention the fact that on Monday, Memorial Day, we're having our Memorial Day ceremony at Lauderdale Memorial Cemetery. So we appreciate everyone coming out there to honor our fallen men and women who served in our armed forces. And it's a great honor to be able to participate in that every year as we have that ceremony. It's at 09:00 at Lauderdale Memorial. And then that's followed at 11:00 at the Sandy Niniger statue where the local American Legion to help sponsors a recognition of those men and women who have served in our armed forces.

Couple of things. City manager, you sent to us a memo on the transportation mobility site. Now I recall maybe Mr. Rogers, if you can come to the podium. In our meeting yesterday, I specifically asked what's going on there. And I didn't now, City Manager, you indicated to my Chief of Staff that you said something to me about this. I don't remember hearing anything about this. And then all of a sudden, we get a letter saying that you're in active conversations with interested parties. So you want to tell me what's going on here? Are we what are we doing?

And are we responding to these parties? Because remember we talked about putting it out to the civic association to see, you know, what they would like to see in their neighborhood. What what what was the genesis of this letter, and how why was it why was it not discussed in our meeting?

So, Mayor, during the meeting that we had, I think it was yesterday morning, I did share with you, and I'm not sure if you did not hear me,

but I did not

hear you.

But aside from that, aside

from that.

I shared that we would have a letter to the commission about the topic of the Transportation Mobility Department. We have been engaged over the years from various private parties seeking information on a potential purchase of the property or a land swap And I think I've discussed that with you in the past and we did do an appraisal of the property in 2023. In particular, as we've been talking about the City Hall project, which was one of the things we discussed at the meeting, the potential value of that property and whether or not transportation mobility employees would be partially or fully going into the new City Hall, that was one of the discussion points during the meeting. And so I did share out loud that there would be a letter to the commission coming later that day, and so that's the result. So I know that Ben and Milos have had different conversations with folks that are interested in the property, whether it be a land swap or some direct purchase.

We did provide them with information as to what that process looks like, it would have to go through an appraisal, what the charter provisions require, all the details that would go into some sort of action that the Commission would have to take. So that was an attempt to share that information with the Commission that we have again, in an ongoing basis, been approached by folks interested in that property.

All right. Well, I recall that the commission did direct city staff to go ahead and allow you to determine what the value of it was, and that was it. I don't recall our authorizing spending any more money on this, having meetings. It was just to get a temperature as to what the value of the property was. And I know that there are people that have approached me who have been unsolicited, who came to me saying they're trying to assemble property and this would be great for their future development project.

But the Civic Association needs to members of the Civic Association have come to me and said, gee, it would be great if that were an open space, a new building on Bell is about to go under construction and would be great for those hundreds and hundreds of people that are going be living there to have an open space. So and frankly, I don't know why you couldn't have told me the contents of the letter at our meeting. It wasn't a secret. I felt like I asked a direct question, what's going on? I got no answer of substance just to say, oh, well, a letter is coming out, wait and see.

You shouldn't hold back when a person is asking for information. This is not something that needs to be I don't like surprises like this, especially when I ask a very direct question like what is happening with this property. So going further, I'd like to ask the commission what is the appetite of the commission going forward on this? Do we want to sell it? Do we want to ask the city, the Civic Association, whether or not they want open space? This is your district, Commissioner Glassman. What are your thoughts on this and where are we going with this? I don't want to spend any more money unless I know where we're going on this.

Right. And I'm actually going to be speaking with the Flagler Village Civic Association, I think coming up this week actually tomorrow, what am I saying? So that is a good topic of conversation for us to have. We just got that memo yesterday, I believe, letter to the commission. So I have not had time to really talk to people about it. I just have not. Okay. And I so, Mayor? I would also say that I was not given any information about I had no idea. Okay.

Just to clarify, we have not spent any additional dollars on investigating this property or to provide any information related to the property or its value. That appraisal was from 2023, and that information has been provided to the commission. As an FYI, people do approach staff all the time looking for potential opportunities or seeking city assets or properties for their own ventures. And so just wanted to share that with the commission. The question that I was asked during the meeting with the mayor was as it relates to the personnel that are operating in the TAM Building and whether or not they would be going into the new City Hall.

What I've shared with the commission at the last meeting was that we were looking at a bifurcation of the TAM personnel, whereas the parking division personnel may or may not transition into the new City Hall. Is something that we've been considerate of in terms of looking at the square footage of the new building. And so we were looking at opportunities. I did mention at the last commission meeting that there could be an opportunity for that division to go to the DSD Building. But all of that is yet to be determined. And of course, the commission will continue to weigh in on those aspects of the City Hall project in terms of the programming and where personnel Yes. Would

All that is true, Manager, but that wasn't our entire conversation. That was with regard to the City Hall, but it triggered my interest in wanting to know what was going on with that site. And I never got anything that approached anything near what you put in your letter. And all I was really asking was what activity has been taking place on that site and I got no response. And now you're saying, well, we actually did respond to you, but you really didn't.

So and the reason why I bring that up is because it's just reminiscent of what happened with the City Hall thing. The City Commission had a goal setting session in January. We responded to the community report, which said that they wanted all these things in a new City Hall. We move forward. The City Commission voted to accept an unsolicited proposal to move with a new construction project, all the while you were communicating with other parties about existing buildings and substituting a new construction for an old construction.

And I just don't want to keep finding myself here in a city commission meeting and amongst my colleagues on the commission moving forward with trying to set policy when you are doing other things without fully disclosing them to us. And here is just another example of my feeling like you were there was more to report, you didn't report on it, and then we get a letter in the afternoon, Oh, by the way, yes, we have been talking with people. That's all I needed to know. It's no big deal. Just let me know what's going on.

Be responsive to my inquiries. So I just feel that there needs to be open communication, especially when I ask for it specifically. And if you wish to communicate by letters to the commission and all of that, that's fine. But when we have one on one meetings, we should at least be able to communicate all the information rather than saying, well, you'll be seeing in a letter from me. It's just not the way we need to be working together when we're trying to move the agenda forward. That's all I'm saying.

Thank you for that feedback, Mayor. And I wanted to ensure that I didn't elongate the meeting that we were having, and I knew that that letter to the commission was on its way. It had already been approved with staff to put it out prior to the meeting that we had. I'll allow Ben Rogers now to follow-up with any additional details.

Thank you, Manager. So Mayor, just wanted to confirm that there's been a lot activity or interest in this parcel since my time as the TAM Director. There's always, as you said, an interested developer coming for that parcel. I think the city had different thoughts and ideas. At one point, I think there was a concept to put a storage facility there.

I think there was a fire station facility at one point. In 2023, we actually did a solicitation to seek interest for a fifty year lease, which responded with two proposals. And as ownership changes of some of the parcels around the 290 parcel, I think we have constantly just had inquiries, not actions that the city staff has gone out and looked for, not interest in the city staff's perspective, but really just responding to developers who come and say, hey, we'd like to assemble land swap or understand how we could acquire this parcel. So from my perspective, nothing different has happened in the last six months or the last year compared to the last five to eight years. But I do think that with the conversations that City Hall has been having with what happens to Transportation Mobility team as part of the City Hall planning, it was an opportune time to make you aware that there's a new owner at the adjacent parcel who has been reaching out.

Thank you. Have nothing Can

I chime if you don't mind? Don't mean to interrupt, but just So some thoughts on a couple of thoughts. First of all, do we need a park so close to Peter Feldman Park? So we're talking 4th Street versus 6th Street. Does make sense to have a park two blocks Well, away from another I'll

tell you why because we're going to I mean, I'm opposed to it, just a question. Yes, I understand. Just looking at it holistically, we're adding so much new housing between those two parks that I don't think Peter Feldman Park can in itself accommodate the amount of traffic that would be generated by all the new construction. Construction. So that's why I'm suggesting it.

Okay. And then my second question, Ben, when you talk about a land swap, it has always been my experience that a land swap is usually done to our detriment. So what we get in exchange is never equal in value or utility to what we give up. So why would we be considering a land swap? What are we getting that we need? And part of the reason I'm saying that is if we're going to divest ourselves of what would otherwise be surplus property, it ought to go towards reducing the financial impact of the new City Hall on the city and on the residents. So if we're going to do something with it that's not turning it into green space for in perpetuity, I would like to see that reduce the cost of City Hall to the residents. So tell me about a land swap and because I haven't had a

chance to read the We letter haven't gone there. That's the whole point. We're not even there yet.

No, I'm just curious as to what land swaps are being proposed and why.

Mean I think it's a great point and that just shows that we're not taking a proactive role in this. We're providing the options to development teams when they come in on how they could acquire city property. In the past, we land swap seems to be the easiest or the fastest for the developer who usually is in the interest of time. And we explained to them what that takes and what that means. It doesn't mean that we just get a parcel of land and they build a building on it for us, that we'd still have procurement rules and things we have to take in consideration.

And so as part of those conversations for land swap, we've more or less referred to the 2023 solicitation that said, if there was an interest on the city's on behalf, we would need to have a facility that meets all the requirements for our transportation mobility team continue operating. Here's kind of the boundaries of the area that we want to be seeking, but there has not been any proactive conversations on trying to pursue a land swap opportunity.

Okay. Thank you.

If I could follow-up, Mayor. One of the things that we're working on administratively is a standard operating procedure for when we are approached by an entity either seeking to do an unsolicited proposal or an offer to the city for the purchase of property so that we can address like what are the steps that we would take to engage with them, inform the commission. If it's that anyone approaching city staff for information or wanting to meet with us about anything, we could always say to them, no, we're not going to meet with you until we share with the commission that you're interested in meeting with us because we try to be responsive and we try to sort of vet information or filter information, but we really don't have guidelines or a process whether legislatively or administratively for how this is handled. So this is something that we are actively working on and I think we will have a draft of that administrative standard operating procedure by the end of this month so that there's no ambiguity as to city staff's intent in engaging with private entities or with how we communicate with the commission. We want to create some order around that so that we're all on the same page with expectations.

Thank you so much. Any other comments or questions from the commission? Manager, your report.

Thank you, mayor. I just wanna highlight some members of our team. First, our finance department as well as a huge shout out to the city auditor's office. We received a certificate of achievement for the forty eighth Government Finance Officers Association for our ACFR or our annual comprehensive financial report based on the quality of the content in that report. And so I'm really proud of Linda Short, Director of our Finance Department as well as the entire team and Yvette Matthews with her supervisory leadership over that department.

I just want to give them a huge shout out, so thank you so much Linda. We also have three members of our team that were recognized by the Engaging Local Government Leaders Organization, and those are Ashley Dassard, Morgan Dunn and Erica Johnson. So thank you so much for your contributions and for being recognized for what you do for our city and our community each and every day. Thank you. And that concludes my report.

Okay, great. Thank you so much. City attorney, do you have any report? I do not, Mary. Okay, great. We'll move we'll skip to business one, Broward Solid Waste Authority staff presentation. Who will be doing that? Oh, Brett. Push the button. Yes. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mayor Trentitellis, Vice Mayor Sorenson, fellow commissioners. On May 5, the Solid Waste Authority of Broward County leadership, along with County Commissioner Bean Fir, in attendance gave a presentation on why the City Of Fort Lauderdale should be part of the authority going forward in 2028. Today, we're going to give a presentation from staff, just a little bit of a background and then have a discussion about considerations going forward for the city at this point in time. So I try in the essence of time and our long agenda to go through this pretty quickly. And if anyone has any questions, I'll be happy to answer them.

So just the background on the here we go, on the Solid Waste Authority of Broward County is intended to support post collection processing and disposal activities. The city, as I said previously, will maintain responsibility for all hauling and collection programs whether or not it joins the SWA in the future. Starting in 2019, the SWA working group resulted in an interlocal agreement that was approved in 2023. There are 28 of the 31 Broward County cities that are municipal members, which represents about 1,700,000 people. There are three cities that do not participate in this, and that is Hallandale Beach, Pembroke Pines and Pompano Beach.

Fundamental conditions are required for adoption and continuation of the ILA, and they are nearing deadlines, and that's why this item is before us today. The facility amendment was approved on 03/20/2026, by the SWA Governing Board, and it must be approved by the participating cities representing at least 80% of the population and the county itself by resolution. The county has already passed it and some other municipalities have as well. The master plan was also approved on 04/17/2026 by the SWA Governing Board. The background.

The initial forty year term comes with two ten year extensions as well for this. And I'm going to just talk a little bit about this and then turn it over to the Vice Mayor for a minute on this. This includes flow control requirements, economic assessments, tipping fees, rate surcharges. For regulatory purposes. The municipal ordinance are in compliance with ILA terms and conditions.

And with waste streams, members were required to use authority facilities. And the master plan really lays all of this out and how the authority will work. The facility amendment, which we will eventually have to pass if we are going to enter the SWA going forward, it details the end of life language and how to deal with the authority owned assets and liabilities, and also includes an indemnification provision where members are not liable. What I'm going to bring up right now is yesterday, there was a meeting of the Governing Board and the Executive Committee that looked at some options that were raised by municipalities about having the ability to exit at different points in times of the SWA. And one of the options that we had shared was to be able to opt out at the point when the bids are all received through an RFP process next year and also add another point in time to twenty years out, which would be, I believe, 2048 to have those abilities at the twenty year point of halfway through the agreement if we wanted to opt out.

There were originally three selection choices that were presented originally, and then yesterday at the meeting, were a couple of additional ones that were added to the process. There was a vote taken at the executive committee, and that was passed. And then it went on to the Governing Board and by a vote of 10 to eight, there was an option three that was passed, which allows opt outs for both only if the award is in excess of the market protections, which is like the maximum cap that are estimated in the Facilities Amendment by the SWA. So that basically means the only way that the City of Fort Lauderdale, if we were in it, could get out is if the pricing at its cap exceeded the numbers that they anticipated. Anything with added or lower, there is no ability to opt out.

And also, you do not have the ability to opt out at twenty year mark as well. So basically, unless the numbers come in high, there are no options at that point for any municipality. And I want to point out and add as well, on the second amendment, it needs to be passed by 100% of the cities just for even Option three to be in play at this point in time who are going to be part of the SWA. And I will now defer to the Vice Mayor as he took part in this process yesterday. I'm sure he would like to share his thoughts on the matter.

Sure, sure. Thanks. Thanks, Brad. Appreciate it. Mayor, Commission.

Yes, I think Brad captured it well. So one of my concerns at the SWA meeting yesterday was there's going to be an RFP process where they're going to go out to the market, get bids, which will come back with price, terms, other stipulations, as you all well know, the whole RFP process in general. And so my ask of the SWA was once those RFPs come back and you get those you've gone to the market, so now you have private contractors saying, here's the terms we're comfortable with, here's the price, here's other stipulations, allow cities to then evaluate that response and then determine, Mayor, is that a good fit for the city? The SWA did not support that suggestion of mine. And as Brad articulated, what they said is, hey, when all that comes back, you will only be able to opt out if the price that comes back to us from the marketplace through the RFP process is above the existing price level that SWO has already created.

So it severely limits municipality's ability to opt out based on any number of factors. I mean, just one factor. We have the state legislature, as we all well know, may be considering property tax reform. That could have a significant impact on us financially. There are a host of other factors that could be at play when this RFP process comes back that we would not be able to indicate this, that, whatever that reason might be, for a reason why we don't feel like this is a good fit for us.

So it's very limited, the opt out provision. Thus, I voted against this opt out provision as did seven other members. So as Brad articulated, eight of us were against this provision, 10 were in favor of it, which is a pretty divided group. And eight were opposed to it for, I think, various reasons. So that's I just want to touch on that.

And then lastly, I also brought up to the SWA that I think it makes sense that the two or three most populous municipalities have permanent seats on the Executive Committee. So we're not on the Executive Committee right now. There's an election member, Horland, thank you, brought up that there's an election possibly where we could. And I said to the entire SWA, I think it's only fair that the two or three most populous cities have representation on the Executive Committee, and that was not met with enthusiasm either. It was just more of a we'll talk about it down the road.

Does that have to be unanimous, I think?

Does that have to be unanimous?

To make that happen, that change?

The ILL, yes. I think so.

So maybe if you could just help us understand a ten-eight vote is obviously tight. You said divided. There are on the Governing Board, there are 28 cities or 29?

I think it's 28 and then the county is 29.

Where were the other 10 cities just absent

from meeting? It seemed like there were many that were not there.

It was only 31 cities.

But I think 20 We know eight, twenty how we know several cities. So 28 cities. So 10 cities were not even there.

That sounds yeah.

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

Yeah. Which

one? Which one?

The 10 cities about the opt out. Right. He just discussed. Why why was

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

You have to

have a critical mass in order to be able to secure the And if you start siphoning off participants, then it reduces the leverage that you have to achieve that pricing, marketing position. And that's what this is all about. So I think that there was some discussion about opting out within the first year or something like that. Then after that, as long as there's a window, box where you there's a high end and a low end. And as long as if everyone agrees on that high end and low end, as long as the pricing remains within that framework that you can't opt out.

It has to exceed that range in order for a city to be able to opt out. And as Brad said, as long as you're within that frame, which is a frame that we would have to agree to, to participate in this, then we would maintain our participation through the length of the term of the agreement.

Understood. Maybe you could also help me understand.

Did I say that right, Dan?

Yes. Very good. Yes. You should be alternate. You can be the permanent. I'll support

you as

alternate. So I have a question. You said that when you recommended that larger cities should have a spot the executive committee. What was that? You said they didn't go back Yes.

The response was basically, interesting, we can talk about it at another meeting. And the only other comment was there's an election in, I think, maybe it's June. And so myself, if I'm a permanent member, could run for that election for that vacant seat on the Executive Committee. There would be probably other people running. So that would be an option as well, but not interested in moving forward with kind of designated seats on the executive committee, more just a conversation.

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

That okay? Several. I mean maybe ten, twelve, Brad? Did that before

the amendment, right? They did that before this amendment was passed. How does that fly? I mean, shouldn't all those cities then go back and vote again? Because if you keep changing the plan and amending it, how does that affect those that have already weighed in? I'm not sure about that.

In order for that option three that was passed yesterday to have, you know, any legs to it, they would have to go back to all of the SWA cities that are participating, and they would have to pass that. I believe it's by resolution to their commissions in order for that option to be eligible for it to go in the SWA agreement.

So they do get a chance to weigh in after they've already voted

That's my understanding. And I don't think there's as rigid a time limitation to pass that ILA amendment. Correct. Opt out amendment. They opt

Thank you.

So where does that leave us now?

Could we have Brad continue with the presentation,

Mayor? Please say it again.

Could Brad continue with the presentation?

Yes, yes, yes. There's only 18 more pages, Scott. I'm trying.

I promise.

Okay. Just recapping, just some stuff for everybody's edification about the services we have currently. As it puts up there, we have twice a week solid waste services, once a week yard waste, once a week recycling. We do monthly bulk service. We have curbside e waste pickup, curbside tire pickup, and we participate in a co op for household hazardous waste events.

In our commercial, we have open markets for solid waste and recycling and open markets for construction and demolition as well. Again, for us, the disposal and processing, what we do currently is flow control via the ILA, which we currently have for disposal with Broward County, and that goes through the FCC waste energy facility. We And are currently in that until 07/02/2028. We have a separate yard waste disposal agreement and it's hauled to a waste management recovery center where it's screening process for mulch and composting. And that is done through our collection contracts.

Bulk waste also in a collection contract is hauled to Waste Management's material recovery center where it's sorted for recoverable materials, I. E, metals, concrete, wood and the residues are taken to a landfill. We have recycling through our solid waste contract as well, it's and hauled to a state of the art facility owned by Waste Management and it's sorted bail to be marketed for post consumer use as well. Electronics are sent to urban mining as an E Stewart certified recycler where valuable materials metals, I'm sorry, are captured for recycling as well. Just some statistics, and I think this is another important slide just to pay attention to.

Fort Lauderdale, we make up 11.5% of the total population that's represented in the SWA as it relates to population and 11.3% as it relates to estimated tonnage. And then just so some of our numbers and we put it in 23% because that's when all of this first went into play originally. And that's why we're looking at the 23 numbers.

11% we make up of the population?

11.5% of the total population of the SWA cities. That's correct. That's just 400,000,000

Wouldn't it be great if we got 11% of the $01 sales tax money? Oh, I'm sorry.

I concur. I think that would outstanding.

Sorry. Change the subject. I didn't mean to change the subject. Sorry. Please proceed. I didn't mean to interrupt

you. Yes.

It's okay. These are just again, I'm not going to get too deep into this one. These are just some of the master plan scenarios that were considered A, B, C and D. Scenario A is what was recommended by the SWA Governing Board. And you'll see here, there's these are just some of the highlights of the Scenario A programs that they had, that they were proposing in it. I'm not going to get, again, too deep into it, just for everyone's edification.

So

getting on moving on more to next steps going forward. Some of the things that were being considered as well were commercial recycling ordinances that mandatory, mandatory construction and demolition, recycling ordinances, curbside yard waste compost collections, harmonized recycling standards, drop off locations, centralized education and outreach and some of those things were all in the previous slides. That would be stuff that the SWA will be doing going forward. Just some key points to the facility amendment. The SWA allows some transfer stations to make it easier for cities to get material to and from places.

They also have recycling facilities. They're proposing eight drop off centers for household hazardous waste on organics processing facility. The governance and rate controls, just these are just some basic things, inspection rights at your own expense as a city if you want to make sure everything is being followed and correctly being done. The county helps with technical review authority. There's a maximum service charge that are set in the master plan with any increases requiring executive committee and governing board approval.

Municipalities represent two thirds in the county as well. Amendments need 80% of the population approval by the SWA members to own a solid waste disposal facility, and those are kind of like items that would be down the road if that is ever contemplated. Again, this is just some highlights of entity takeover option A. I know again, nothing anything different from the previous slides, just some of the points to it. These are just some of the maximum tipping fee charges as we talked about in terms of numbers.

And it's important to understand that us as a city, and you'll see in some comparison slides, we have contracts already in place for some of

these

services. These are just the ones for members that they would get. These charges cannot exceed these fees, and they would only go up based upon CPI, as you see there, producer price index for solid collection in the future. These are just some of the costs that we've paid in so far as a member contribution, totals around $919,000 for three years. Those are some future charges as well.

And they get added on to the program. This is just a breakdown. I think this is just an important slide for everyone to understand, and I just took it out. We did it only based on disposal, nothing to do with the collection components of our contracts. But I want it's important to see that the yard waste, recycling and bulk, those are contracts that we have.

The recycling is part of our hauling agreement for residential with waste management, but we have a separate processing agreement with bulk and yard waste, which currently are lower than the SWA costs. The cost for disposal is what we're paying as part of the ILA. And then you can see what the maximum SWA cost is going forward. And a little note on the bottom there, important to note is there's a $2.22 per tonne tipping fee surcharge that's subject to annual adjustments based on the PPI for solid waste index, as I stated before. So the costs are not really

significance though between recycling charges? That's what's throwing this whole graph off.

Their numbers, this is what their estimated numbers are. We can only go by what we're currently paying for processing of recyclables, which that market is very high. Most municipalities, just to break it down, pay over $100 some $150 per tonne, per tonne, not per home, but per tonne. So the costs are they're saying their maximum estimates shouldn't exceed $2.57 per home on the disposal component. Don't know if that's accurate or not.

We have to what the numbers come back in next year. But I can tell you the recycling processing market is not cheap. And that's why municipalities at some point totally scrap some of their programs for recycling and have just take their material to either the waste energy or they go to a landfill. They don't recycle at all because of the cost of processing.

Because in every other category, it's more than what we pay. It's just that one recycling. And I'm just wondering if that's an accurate one or if it's if it just happens to be a temporary cost that they're ultimately going to hit a wall and have to pay more.

I'm not going to speak specifically for them I on what their estimated costs can just tell you what our numbers are, but I can tell you the market in recycling processing is very high. The costs are high for disposable. They're not under $100 a tonne in any city that I'm aware of.

Got it. Brad? Yes, sir. You've already pointed this out, but our costs right now for bulk and yard waste are lower than what's proposed, correct? That is correct. But I think the bigger number is the tipping fee. What is our tipping fee now about a year? A little around $300,000

Are you asking overall because we have it by different services? Total. We have a total on that?

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

Commissioner, I apologize. Can you clarify the question for me? I didn't hear the commodity you were referring to No, were for the benefit of the talking about

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

Correct.

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

Sure. So, I think the easiest comparative, if I could, and for the benefit of the public and our commissioners on the dais Melissa Doyle, sanitation operations for public works. It's probably easier to take it instant by instant or commodity by commodity. So starting with solid waste or MSW, they are proposing that it would be essentially the same fee, plus a $2.22, surcharge, which is the differential that you see translated to our average residential rate.

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