Regular City Commission Meeting - Regular Meeting

Alright. Thank you. Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to City Hall here in the City Of Hollywood. Today is 02/18/2026. It's just a little bit after 01:00. Welcome to our regular city commission meeting. There is never, though, any regular meeting because it's always important and interesting items on our business for today as is today. So we begin each meeting with a moment of silence followed by the pledge of allegiance. So please rise for a moment of silence followed by the pledge.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you all. At the start of each meeting, we take an important minute to recognize our veterans, active service personnel, and their families. So if you are a veteran of the US Armed Forces or a family member thereof or a active serviceman or person, please rise. We'd like to recognize you.

All right. Clerk, let's go ahead with roll call, please.

Commissioner Quintana.

I'm catching up on the mics here. Go ahead.

Here. Commissioner Schuham? Here. Commissioner Hernandez?

Here.

Vice Mayor Caleri? Commissioner Gruber?

Here.

Commissioner Biederman? Here. Mayor Levy?

Here. I'd like to now ask for a motion to accept Vice Mayor Caleri's participation virtually today.

Motion to accept Second. Vice Mayor Caleri.

All right. Motion by Commissioner O'Nannon, second by Commissioner Biederman. All those in favor, aye. Aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, the motion carries six-zero. Commissioner Coleri, if you can hear us, if you just let us know when you'd like to speak.

Not yet, but give me a sec because something just

JULIE: Technical issue?

Jumped out of

JULIE: All right.

Well, she'll participate virtually. And when she would like to speak, she'll let us know. All right. Today's consent agenda includes items five through 15. These are items that don't usually require individual discussion. However, if there's a comment card by the public or a request by the dais, we're happy to remove an item for discussion. Pat, I understand there are some comment cards for some consent items.

Yes, item five only.

Item five, Okay. We'll take that up at the start of our regular agenda then.

To approve

Commissioner that seven Clari is now on the line.

Hi, commissioner Kaleri. Thank you for participating virtually. We already had the undertaken a motion to accept your participation. Thank

you.

Consent item five has been removed by a public comment. We'll take that up later. Are there any other Seven. Item five? Item seven. Seven. Item seven. Five and seven. I will accept the motion to approve the balance of the consent items. Motion to approve.

Second. Second.

Motion from commissioner Hernandez, second from commissioner Xuam to approve items six and eight through 15. Six and eight through 15. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed?

Hearing none, show those items six and eight through 15 passing unanimously. Alright. Onto item 16 as an ordinance. Ordinance of the city commission, city of Hollywood, amending chapter 98 of the code of ordinances entitled marine and waterway regulations, Boats and Other Vessels, by creating a section of the code as provided in the title entitled Overnight Anchoring Limitation and Revising the Penalty Provisions Providing for Severability Clause and Repealer. This is an item by the Hollywood Police Department on first reading.

Welcome to Assistant Chief Laskowski. If you could just activate the mic, Paul. Should be a button right there and speak into the mic if you can.

Got it right the second time. All right. Good afternoon, mayor, vice mayor, commissioner, city manager, city attorney. Paul Liszkowski, police department, assistant chief of police. The purpose of this is by adding a section to chapter 98 of the Marine and Waterway regulations, the overnight anchoring limitations.

Essentially, we want to establish clear enforcement framework for managing long term vessel anchoring within the city of Hollywood. The intent is to ensure consistent, defendable enforcement by the police department, marine unit, and also other agencies that could be in our waterways. Basically, this came about in 2025. The Florida legislator authorized municipalities to regulate anchoring outside mooring fields. This will allow us to regulate vessels anchored overnight to no more than thirty days within the six month period.

With that being said, the hours are basically overnight, half hour after sunset and a half hour before sunset and an hour or more in duration for a maximum of thirty days. One of the unique provisions is it does allow the person to relocate the vehicle for a short period of time and come back to the same location and say the clock starts over again. So this gives us that ability to continue that clock unless they could prove a substantial period of time they were outside of this anchoring area to come back in. Otherwise, we still continue with the clock with it. There are some fines that are associated with it.

The biggest one is after the third, basically, offense. If they're found guilty, it could be a criminal offense punishable by up to a $500 fine or sixty days in jail. So it gives a little bit more teeth when we're dealing with people who are a little less compliant, that there's a little bit more behind that aspect of it. Basically, this is going to go from the forty five days down to the thirty days. And it's just going to give a clear direction to everybody involved with this. So not only within the city of Hollywood, anybody else that comes in, it clearly outlines how we're going to enforce the anchor limitations.

Great. Well, think here the state even went further than we were able to get them to do initially. And so this is a better result, a little more teeth. I'm going go ahead and open up public hearing. Are there any speaker cards on item 16?

No cards.

All right. Public hearing is now closed. Commissioner Schuham.

Thank you, mayor. I just really wanted to thank HPD and our staff because Hollywood was really on the cutting edge of this issue many years ago. It took a long time for us to work with the state, help create the first state legislation on this issue, have it passed at the county level in Broward County, and then the city level. So with everyone's help, our lakes look so different than they did eight years ago, seven years ago. It's really miraculous.

And so it is rewarding to see that after all of that effort by our police department and others, that those results have now been extended at the state level. So I motion to approve. And thank you to you and your team.

Thank you, Commissioner.

All right. We have a motion for Commissioner Schuham, a second from Commissioner Gruber to approve the ordinance on first reading. I'll invite the city attorney to read the ordinance, and we'll call the roll call vote.

ANNETTE ordinance of the City Commission of the City of Hollywood, Florida, amending chapter 98 of the City Of Hollywood Code of Ordinances entitled Marine and Waterway Regulations, Boats and Other Vessels, by creating section 98.015 of the code of ordinances entitled Overnight Anchoring Limitation and Revising the Penalty Provisions, Providing for a Severability Clause and a Repealer Provision.

Commissioner Quintana?

JULIE Yes.

Commissioner Shuham? Yes. Commissioner Hernandez?

Yes. Vice

Mayor Kalari?

Yes.

Commissioner Geruber? Yes. Commissioner Biederman? Yes. Mayor Levy?

Yes. Let's show the ordinance passing unanimously on first reading. Thank you, assistant chief. Alright. So let's take up the two items from consent. Item five, if I'd like to invite, city manager, perhaps Alison can come up, the resolution of the city commission amending the established partnership for engaged neighborhoods program. Alison, if you could since we have speaker cards, then we could just introduce the item, tell us what the topic is for the benefit of the public, and then we'll hear the comments, and we'll entertain the item.

Good afternoon, mayor, vice mayor, commissioners, city manager, city attorney, and staff. Alison Safold, civic affairs administrator, city manager's office. This item is a resolution to change the requirement for the Partnership for Engaged Neighborhoods program, the requirement for the PENN funds only. To become a member of PENN, we ask our civic associations to register via our website and submit their bylaws, a list of their meetings for the past year, a list of their board members. And we provide them with support.

They support us by promoting our events and activities. We are asking that moving forward, if this resolution passes, that they submit a list of the names of their board members, names and addresses of the board members, directors, and officers so that we would verify that they live within the boundaries of the Civic Association. That would make them eligible to receive the $1,000 moving forward.

Thank you, Allison. All right. Here are the speaker cards. If you're here to speak on this item, there's Pat, our city clerk. Please fill out a comment card, and I'll call them in the order that I receive them. Let's begin with Terry Cantrell, followed by Lynn Smith.

Thank you, Mayor Terry Cantrell, President probably for life of the Hollywood Lakes Civic Association, and here today speaking on behalf of the HLCA and all the other Penn members as well that will be here to speak as well. When we brought this idea forward a couple of years ago to the city, we were thrilled that Alison embraced it, And city staff and the city manager did as well. We got some resistance, most particularly from a couple other civic associations. The Beach Civic Association, particular, Frank Darisi, president back then, was adamantly opposed to this. Because he said, you know, the city commission, I mean, the city can try to run our organizations for us.

And I assured him that can't possibly happen. We're independent five zero one(three) and four corporations. We have our own bylaws. We have our boards. And they can't tell us what to do. How wrong I was. Oh, boy. And by the way, the money was Allison's idea. We never asked for the $1,000 grant. It's just a bonus. And it's a very, very nice thing to do, too. So I mean, our board of directors, not only do you have to be a Lakesian resident to be on our board, you also have to live in The Lakes to even be a member of the Civic Association. And our board members are published every issue four times a year and on our website. If anybody is interested in where these people live, get on Marty Cares website and look them up. They all live in the Lakes.

Our bylaws state they must live in the lakes. So there's no question about that, too. And we work very closely with staff. We respect staff, we feel they respect us. We have no more influence than any other civic association. We're nothing special. And we're very solvent. We have hundreds and hundreds of members. So this isn't necessarily about the HLCA. It's about other civic associations that are struggling, that do need help.

So I don't understand what this is all about, quite frankly. I mean, this is very much like the state taking away our home rule, just like taking your home rule. I mean, is no different. You don't want to do like we say, then we're going to tell you how it's going to be. Or worse yet, how about the federal government taking away funding if they don't like some city or some private groups? So this is no different than that. And there's just no reason for it. And, Mary, you were the president of Hollywood Hills site. Would you have liked this back then for the city to tell you how you're going to run your board? I don't think you would have, too.

Of course, oddly enough, the two groups that have this situation that were in question today are both in District 2. Go figure. Liberia and Downtown Parkside. And they're the ones that are going to be hurt by this. Mean, can you understand this is all about?

While we have time, could you speak to the issue of the integrity of the representation? Because that was the driving force by the proposal, was to make sure that the integrity of the voice coming from the Civic Association represented people who lived in the neighborhood. But that would be reflected through a requirement that actually people who live in the neighborhood are the ones that are serving on the board and speaking for the association, so to speak. So maybe you can speak to that, your perspective.

JOSHUA Sure. The only reason why there are boards that don't have 100% resident memberships is because they can't get the people to do it. That's all. It's not that they're they have the bylaws. They're legal corporations. That's the number one requirement. Why does it matter if a couple of the board members live right across the street in a different district, which isn't the case what Lynn Smith will tell you? I mean, should that really STEINER: matter? I mean,

So you don't feel like it injures the integrity of

the system? JOSHUA Absolutely not. I mean, they're still legal corporations. You're trying to tell us, legal Florida registered corporations, five zero one(three) or four, how to run your business. I don't understand why we would even do that. And by the way, let's not forget, too, that there are two new Penn members now, Driftwood and Playland of States. They probably could use this money. Do they have all their members in the bank? I don't know. Hopefully they do. But if they don't, they don't. And the bottom line here is that let's not forget Commissioner Linda Sherwood. You let her serve on your board when she moved to Georgia, all because of 1301. I mean, is this hypocritical or not? So I thank you very much for the time.

I'm going to go sit down and brace myself for what's coming.

Commissioner Hernandez, go ahead. Terry, if you could. Yeah. Question for my commissioner.

If you don't mind. Yeah. I remember when I first became a commissioner that I would go to different associations and I would join on the association. And I joined the Hollywood Lake Civic Association. I paid my $20 I got a note from you and my $20 back saying, if you don't live here, you cannot be a member of the association.

Thank

you. Just by this statement that you just made. But how hypocritical on your behalf to say that it's okay for you guys to do it, but that we as a commission have to accept everybody else not to be, not to adhere by their bylaws. So that's the part that I look at it, that it's gotta be a two way street. And we're not trying to run anybody's association. They can do whatever. But some of the association that you mentioned, we're not living by their own bylaws. They change their bylaws in order to abide by now we can have the bylaws. I don't have an issue when it comes to that. The issue here is the taxpayers money.

And that's all we're doing. We're not given unfunded mandates like the state does. Or we're not trying to say we're gonna take away your funding if you don't do what we say. What we'd say is, do as your bylaws says that you're going to do. That was how this whole thing got started. But your association is a model. Why can't every other association do the same thing? And I would imagine that you would want to support what your association does because you guys had no problem telling a commissioner, here's your money back. We don't want your membership because you don't live in our neighborhood.

When people donate when people outside of the Lakes boundaries try to join our organization, we offer the money back or you can leave it we'll take it as a donation. Most people say, go ahead and keep the money. We like what you do.

I didn't that option.

You sent

me a note and sent me my money. What I'm just trying to say

is But that was the right thing for us to do. That's our bylaws. That's why That may not be other people's bylaws. It may not be other people's bylaws.

My point is that is a true association.

Right.

That it's a civic association from the people in the area for the people in the area. And to me, to, I guess, some of the commissioners, the majority of us feel that that's how we should be. And that's all. That's all we're trying to do.

Listen, you can posture it, know, Harvey. The bottom line is that if there are civic associations, smaller ones that are struggling to try to get going and they need help from people that may not live directly within their boundaries, why would we penalize them? It's punitive. I mean, it doesn't make any sense.

Thanks, Thank

you.

Let's keep going with the cards and then we'll have time for discussion. Lynn Smith, followed by Claire Garrett. Into the mic, please.

Hello? Okay.

Just identify yourself and the association, maybe.

These are money that we spent our Penn money for. So I wanted you to see this and change the energy in here for a minute. And this is our sign. We've got 25 double sided signs. I know you see them all over the place. So just to know and I made little packages. I'm coming back. I'm coming back. One of them is a postcard that goes into businesses downtown. We leave them so people can see them.

The other one is a door hanger. And then we have plain business cards that say board of directors. So that's where our funding that we used for this year went to. So I wanted to let you know. Okay, since I seem to be one of the ones that you guys are discussing, I have to tell you that limiting who can be on our board would be horrible for us. And we would have to give up the money because we have one of our members that has been there. I have this big thing to read. And it was mostly to begin about Peter Hernandez, who helped us at the beginning. And I went to Peter, he said, just wait. And then we waited, and then we started.

And Peter even named it. He said, include everybody's neighborhoods so that everybody would know to come. Because we have downtown, we have business members, we have renters, we are not going to fit those guidelines. And sadly, we've had such a good time with the Penn program and enjoyed meeting all the people that are staffing of the city in a casual way. I don't understand why you want to take that away from us now.

And if it means giving up $1,000 I funded this thing, and our board members funded it all the way since 2018. We will continue to do that. But I want to know why. What happened? And Peter, you surprised me a lot because you know more than anybody about our neighborhood and our board members.

And we're just not going to we're not going to change. If somebody comes to me and says if they live in Hollywood Hills and they say, we love the downtown, we want to see what's going on, we want to be on your board, well, our board is going to say yes because you guys have no idea about what we go through now, especially with our political environment, getting people to come on the board. Never mind just come on the board and work. And Commissioner Biederman, you were talking about president with term limits. Nobody even wants to do that.

Most of these civic associations' presidents stay, not because they always want to, but because nobody wants to do this work. We do this for nothing. I spend hours and hours during the month working. My board thank god, I have a good board. But they still have lives. They still have businesses. They have things to do. So in the end, hello, I'm here. And I've been president since 2018. And thanks to Peter, he got us going and saw that our first meeting had 40 people at it. Well, our meeting in October had five people. And I called Peter on the phone that night. And I said, Peter, what am I going to do? Nobody wants to come. Nobody wants to come.

Well, we were in the armory. Now we now move back to Littmann Center. And thank God for Josh. He brought in a really good crowd. We were interactive. So you guys can't just pick this thing and want to change what we decide on and how we run our businesses. We're not going to let it happen.

Mayor? Go ahead. Lynn? So you think that I'm trying to hurt the associations, even though all I've done is help you create the association

Oh, you did.

And help you whenever you need anything. Absolutely. Associations, help you when the neighborhood needs anything. And I ask you to encumber all of the areas so that there would be the ability for people from the area to serve on your board. So I don't understand why you think I'm out to hurt the association.

I don't know, Peter.

Because I am not. So I don't know where you interpret what I'm trying to do as hurting the association. But it

doesn't happen. Doesn't happen, Peter. You can want all you want, but it I'm doesn't

able to finish what I have to say. My interest is from the people from the area to represent the association for the people in the area. That's what a civic association does.

Exactly.

Unless you're saying that there's a void or are you saying that the people around the area don't have an interest, And I don't believe that's the case. Who from the association doesn't live in your area, if I may ask?

Angel Williams. She's been with us since 2018 when we started. And she lives two blocks west. And I believe that Beamfur recommended her to come to our board.

She's Two blocks been on our west of

Of the railroad tracks.

Correct. Right. That's not in a different district. That's within two blocks.

The Kellens District.

Does your homeowners, does your civic association says that they can be outside of

your GREGORY my board?

No, you can say they have a business in the But

you're not saying that. You're saying that they

have We're not trying to run your association. If you have look, if

It feels like it, Peter. It feels like

No, no. Let's That's Okay.

It's all right. I just wanted to say something. But I see how you guys pay back. Thank you.

MARY No, payback was great. That's not fair, Peter.

MARY If I could.

The whole thing, which I didn't even say, about how much you helped us and how you were there the night when we only have five people there. And now, instead of making it easier for us, you're making it harder by some ridiculous if somebody from Hollywood Hills wants to come on our board and you know what I say to everybody all over the civic associations? If you think that the beach and the downtown just belongs to us, you are wrong. West Hollywood needs to belong they need to come in and see what's happening downtown. We have wonderful things, all kinds of things happening downtown. And everybody thinks it just belongs to us. And so if somebody from West Hollywood wants to come on my board and the board accepts them, they're coming. That's not fair.

Thank you, Lynn. Let's continue on with the comment cards. Claire Garrett, followed by Siobhan McLaughlin.

GREGORY Hello, mayor and commissioners. Claire Garrett, program director of Park East Civic Association. This pen amendment is perceived by many as a knee jerk response to some kind of grievance that some city commissioners seem to have about certain civic associations. According to the original 2023 resolution, the PENN program was established to, quote unquote, strengthen community bonds and encourage civic engagement. The Penn grant was described as follows, and I quote again, a one time per year grant of up to $1,000 may be provided to eligible civic associations to assist with community events that encourage residents to help beautify their neighborhood or to enhance membership.

Projects must be approved by the city, end quote. Registered civic associations are encouraged to consider and possibly this is also a quote and possibly plan events that will engage neighborhood residents, both full time and seasonal, to help beautify their community and engage in other community enhancing projects. To disqualify a civic association from receiving reimbursement for expenses related to community enhancing projects not only punishes that specific civic association for the fatal flaw of having just one board member who lives across the street from the official boundaries of that civic association, But it also discourages associations from undertaking more of these community enhancing activities to the detriment of the entire city. Since project expenses already must be approved by the city, that is the city's guarantee that grant money reimbursement to a civic association is being spent wisely and for the benefit of the city. The home address of a Civic Association board member is truly irrelevant to the value of the reimbursable expense of the project.

In closing, Park East Civic Association does not have a dog in this fight, as all of our board members live within our boundaries. But we feel compelled to stand with those civic associations that will be adversely affected if this resolution amendment passes. And we want to remind you that it will not be just those civic associations that will be punished. But it will also punish the very communities that those civic associations so selflessly serve. Thank you for considering this alternate point of view.

Thank you, Claire. Siobhan McLaughlin, followed by Doctor. Basil Phillips.

Good afternoon, Commissioner. Siobhan McLaughlin, 1409 Rodman Street. I'm director of the Hollywood Lake Civic Association. I'm also a member of Park East and North Central, because I believe that civic associations are very important. I'm urging you to vote no to reject this amendment. People far more eloquent than I, especially Claire just now, gave you really good reasons. I think you also need to understand the hypocrisy of a city that basically rails against the state imposing rules trying to do this. We understand there is oversight. You have the names. You have the addresses.

And the civic associations provide the bylaws. If they are abiding by their bylaws, then by all means, you should leave them to do their good work. Our civics association, as pointed out, also does not have a dog in this fight. And as the membership director, I would have actually called Commissioner Hernandez and asked if he wanted his membership donation as a donation or as and return it to him. And that's been our policy.

If I were asked, and now that I take care of my mother, my time is much more limited. But I would also serve as a director on another board if they needed the help. It has been amazing, this program, to meet the other active people in the community, the leaders, Share ideas. Be able to explain how we do things. And it is a tremendous gift. It is a wonderful program. Allison and the city manager for putting it together deserve incredible, incredible thanks from all of us. I urge you not to change a program that's working. This resolution is essentially a solution looking for a problem. Thank you.

Let's go to Doctor. Basil Phillips. And the last speaker will be Andre Brown.

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, mayor, commissioners. Basil Phillips, the president of the Liberia Civic Association. I believe not only do we have a dog in this fight, we are the dog. The reason I'm stating that is because we've been isolated for so long. And now, part of what the city is dealing with is a civic association that's empowering the community.

But, not only empowering the community, empowering the city of Hollywood. We've had three spelling bee competitions in Hollywood. And next year, we're going to have the City of Hollywood spelling bee competition. We have individuals who are dealing with sickle cell. And we're dealing with individuals who, because of the community not that area, but the community have supported it.

We were able to give $5,000 to individuals who were ill. I was here one day, we talked about the park, Henry Graham Park, and the fact that people were abusing the park and sleeping in the park. And now, we have a community walk in support of sickle cell. And we have a farmer's market after the walk, where we provide fruits and vegetables. And we have 50 to 60 people show up.

I could go on and on and on. But, more importantly, what I have is a paperwork here that states that there's another Liberia Civic Association. And this civic association was registered by Marty Jami, or Jami Marty. I have no idea who this gentleman is. But, if someone goes on social media, they will see Liberia Civic Association with individuals that we have no idea who they are and why it says Liberia Civic Association. Too often, individuals have tried to find our Liberia Civic Association, and they were confused with the one that's already on there. So we're asking one that not only deny this, but give us an opportunity to prosper. Thank you.

Thank you, Doctor. Phillips. Liberia Association is doing some great work, as you highlighted, so really appreciate it and exemplary. Mr. Brown.

May our commissioners, city managers, and to all my brothers and sisters, number one, the pin, No one puts me under their umbrella, United Neighbors of South Hollywood. I don't take orders from no one that's in the pin. I don't. No one owns me at the end of the day. No one tells me what to do or my association.

If anybody wanna run theirs a different way, let them run it. But United Nations is not gonna be stomped on or anything like that because Beam Ferd divided us. He divided us over there. So y'all want me to keep talking? Just wait.

Y'all gonna see it during the elections. The other thing too is is that we're not gonna put up with it. Someone in the ACCA wrote their name and falsified criminal, and Helen gonna get with you, chief. She gonna file a police report up there to the Florida where you sign in for the association, took her name off of it. Somebody better explain something.

Well, guess guess what? The big dog is here. I'm gonna make sure that this be criminal and taken care of. By the way, I've seen on Facebook a few minutes ago, we got a coward who put something on the Facebook with all the commissioner, except you, Shuham, the rest of y'all, except you, the rest of y'all was on Facebook. But coward enough to put that on Facebook and talk talk all kind of noise, but where is he at now?

Be a man with balls. Come on up here if you got something to say, because I I'm gonna come up here and say what I'm gonna say. And by the way, if Beam Ferdinand wouldn't have divided our community, and I'm Liberia, y'all didn't know nothing about this. The man divided my community. And he can't say he didn't. He's two faced it, and he's not a real leader to me because y'all community wouldn't have been still flooding after all those years, and and we had the massive plans that they never went by. That's true. That's true. Don't let everybody confuse now. That's true.

I got all of them. I got all the master plans. Look at them. Whose names are in there? That's why your community is still like that.

The bible say put no trust in man, and that's true. I see why. Because a den of thieves. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Andre. That concludes the public comments on this item. Clearly, there's some passion from the perspective of those who spoke some of them who spoke that they'd not want this requirement promulgated on the civic associations that $1,000 goes far and that for their operational reasons sometimes they'll accept a board member or even a president. I think I'm learning now in the case of Basil Phillips, who lives outside of Liberia but otherwise was selected by the Liberia Association to be the president and has a good track record of outcomes to show for it in terms of how he's elevated the civic association's ability to do its work and to provide a benefit to people who live in Liberia.

That's an example, a successful one. I think what Commissioner Hernandez, when he proposed this item, really was looking to prevent is that when you allow for board members not members, but board members are to serve on a civic association and influence its prioritization, its work, and they don't live in the neighborhood, then it could be looked at as outside influence looking to interfere with what the everyday resident in that association would otherwise want to prioritize as and appeal to the city to help them with. And so I think that was probably the main concern is the outside influence issue Because we've seen in cases where not necessarily your association that there seems to be a feeling that there is that influence and that it injures the integrity and accountability for people of that neighborhood feeling like people from their own neighborhood are the ones on the board. They understand the issues of the neighborhood because they live there. And so therefore, they're accountable for what they do or don't do for the association because they live there, they have a stake in it, and that their priorities are not affected by an agenda that comes from the outside.

That's the rationale and what I think in good faith Commissioner Hernandez, through this proposal, was looking to assure is that the representation of the neighborhood retains its integrity through the fact that the people who are serving on the board actually live there, know the pain points, and can speak in an accountable and lived experience way. So I don't want him to if you guys feel like he's had bad intentions, because it's not bad intentions. He wanted, through this proposal, the idea that the associations have authentic representation at the board level from people who live in the association. So that's where it's coming from. On the other hand, sometimes we talk about unintended consequences.

I personally feel like the Liberia example is an example of a situation where there is an outside a president who happens to live outside and probably just can't sell his house and move to Liberia for the financial reasons that we all share about selling a home and finding a replacement. But that is doing a great job. So I don't know how we're going to talk this through and balance it. I wonder, Commissioner Hernandez, what your perspective is, whether you can see both sides and kind of how you feel about and look, we do when we know that there could be an association that's influenced from outside board members, if in the end there's transparency and we know that, then we can take that into account when they come in and they speak before us, too. So you know, the $1,000 you know, Lynn showed goes to their marketing for Liberia.

It goes for the same eligible expenses of the PEN program. So I'm willing to listen. I can see both sides of the matter. So Commissioner Hernandez, go ahead.

Thank you, Mayor. I can certainly see both sides, but you said one key word, transparency. By the way, Liberia was never the dog, as you call it. It was not the target. I knew all along that you didn't live in, not only you didn't live in Liberia, you didn't even live in the district. You lived in District 3. Liberia is in District 2 and the association is all the way on the other side of Sheridan Street. You were never the target. I appreciate what you do for the association. I know that the treasurer lives on the other side on Pembroke Road.

That's not the representation of that particular area. So, I am happy to accept whether they reside or own a business in that particular general area that they're looking to represent in order for them to maintain the funding. That's not the issue. But now that you mentioned Liberia, their associations bylaws did not allow somebody that didn't live in the association area to be on the board. And yet he was.

That just changed recently. And that's okay. No, I'm just saying, you were not the target, but you single yourself out. Let's go about what we know and what we don't know and what we tolerate and what we don't tolerate. No, hang on. There is other individuals who hide, which Mr. Brown kind of highlighted that, who hide and throw all kinds of rocks, yet they live in a glass house. They're not here today. You were not the target. We're looking to help you and I've said it publicly, whatever you guys need, I'm here to help.

You change your bylaws in order for you to be able to guide. I'm okay with tweaking whether you live or whether you have a business in the area. If you have a business in the area, you're affected by what happenings there. What I like to encourage and what I want to see growth, is people from that area be mindful of their civic duties and be able to join and to create the room for them to be able to be part of that association. Unless you have something like this, there's an incentive for the association to look for local people.

You're not gonna do it. So this is my intent, this is my purpose. I have helped every association that I've come across. Whether it been a donation, whether it been by joining them. And I've joined them and I paid them not their dues. And I paid them every time I went there because I wanted to make sure because before the Penn existed, Peter existed. An association would tell you that I will go by and every month I would pay. I would pay my $20 I would pay my fee. So for some people that don't, as they said, they don't have anything to say. To come out and bash what we're trying to do is because it's convenient for them to do so.

And I'm okay with that. The reason I'm not here is because people ask me to represent them. And the people that I represent have asked me, we want the people from the area to represent the people from that area. I have no problem tweaking and I like to make that amendment to accept if you guys are okay with that, people to live or have a business in the area where the Civic Association represent. Do you guys support that? That's a motion.

Let's Okay. All right. We have a motion to adopt the resolution with that

With that amendment.

In that form.

That form.

So you can be a director or officer of an association and still be eligible for the Penn grant through its other requirements by virtue of living in the association area or owning a business therein?

Correct. Owning or working or Owning or working. If you work in the area, you're affected by what's going on in there. I just I don't want somebody because if the way people are speaking, Okay, if you live in Miramar and you live in Pembroke Pines, you can be part of this association. Where is the civic part of that?

And you're not referring to membership. You're talking about I'm talking about or a member or a officer. Correct. Yeah. All right. Just a minute. We have to continue here in the order. And then if you're called on, you'll have an opportunity. All right. We do have a motion on the floor. Let's continue down the queue. Excuse

me, Mayor. Who made the second?

Commissioner Biederman. Thank you. Let's go to Commissioner Schuham and then buzz in other commissioners if you'd like to speak.

Thank you, Mayor. So as I said the first time this came up, I completely disagree with this. I think I couldn't have said it any better than Claire. And then it was funny, in my notes preparing for today, I had written to myself, this is a solution in search of a problem, which is exactly what Siobhan said. I think that what's being missed in the discussion is that these boards operate as their own entities.

If they felt that someone on their board wasn't doing a good job, they would vote that person off. And so for us to say, personally, I don't have a huge problem if somebody lives in Miramar. What if their grandmother or their mother lives in the lakes? And that person can't make it to all the meetings, but they want their daughter that lives in Miramar to be an active part of the association. I think that's fantastic. And if that person from Miramar isn't doing a great job for the city of Hollywood, they'll be voted off the board. I also raised last time the beach. We have a ton of snowbirds. I live in a condo. The president of my condo lives in Kentucky.

She is a great president for our condo. She has the best interest of our condo at heart. So, I think for me, the bottom line is why are we interfering in any way in the operation of these organizations? And why would we penalize them by taking away $1,000 over which the city has control, to enhance their operations and gain members and publicize the good work that they're all doing. I think, the point that this is a solution in search of a problem, it is my understanding that not a single resident, not a single association, not a single citizen has made a complaint about this issue.

If that were the case, we can address it. But that's not the case. This is coming from this commission. This isn't coming from the active members of these associations. And with respect to integrity, transparency, all these things, we should let these associations govern themselves.

And the other point that I made when this first came up the other day is the crazy burden that we'd be putting on our staff. So now, not only would Allison have to see where everyone lives, she has to see where everyone works, and she has to see all the businesses they own. I mean, it's crazy. I think what the solution that we have in place to allow the Penn program to review the request for the $1,000 really alleviates that problem. To shift it, I just feel like it will take all the joy out of it for Allison.

I don't want her to stop doing this. But that would really be an awful for her to be in. Say, because on your board, Terri Cantrell, because you have somebody's granddaughter who's offering to help be on your board, we're going to take the thousand dollars away from you, to have that fall on Allison's shoulders, I don't really get it. So, I certainly don't support this. I think that bylaws control these organizations.

The $1,000 should be granted to any organization that satisfies the Penn program. We have some organizations that don't accept the $1,000 for whatever reason. The other point that the last point, which I forgot to make, which is the boundaries of the association. The city didn't divide these neighborhoods up. These neighborhood associations, just like Lynn was crediting you for, you know, including all the various neighborhoods in her association, The boundaries are set by the association.

So the other unforeseeable thing I could see happening is in the case of Lynn, she has somebody that's great on their board that lives two blocks away. We would be forcing her then to come to Allison and say, I have to shift the boundaries of my organization. It just doesn't seem worth it. I think the checks and balances are already there to make sure that the money is being spent in an appropriate way, to your point, to really reflect and enhance that association community. And with that, I'd like to hear what my colleagues have to say. But I could not support this.

Thank you. Let's go to Commissioner Quintana, followed by Commissioner Biederman. Commissioner Quintana.

Thank you, mayor. My concern with this is that I remember when I was first starting my civic association that I had the opportunity to meet Terry Cantrell and the then president of the Parkland Civic oh, Parkland yours, Commissioner Gruber, Playland Estates. And I was given an opportunity to talk to both so that I could learn about what it took to start up an association. I had never even heard of a civic association. I mean, it was really a primer for me for what that meant.

I didn't want to charge any dues because I know the people in my neighborhood don't have the resources. And I wanted to do it for free. But as I learned, as I went, it does take money to do the things that a civic association does. And I think that, unfortunately, the neighborhoods that would need the $1,000 the most are the ones where the residents are busy in survival mode and unable, in many cases, to be civically engaged. Like I often say, it's not that I don't care about every single part of our city, but we have parts of our city that have excellent advocacy and excellent engagement, people who help us get the message out to their neighbors, because you know they listen to their neighbors more than they listen to us.

The ones that don't have someone to spread the word, to help us with get accurate information out, are the ones where the residents are not engaged. They're not involved. And they don't have the money to spread information about why a civic association is important. I'm just thinking that the ones that would be hurt the most by taking away the $1,000 option would be those neighborhoods. So I as it stands right now, I mean, me, trying to get the Johnson Street Business District going initially was an idea that the small businesses there would have an investment in the neighborhood that they serve because I couldn't get all the engagement from the people who live there.

And I thought if I combine them, then maybe we can actually get something going that, you know, mutual interest in a good area. Let me tell you, it was a heavy lift with me paying a lot when I had no money, paying a lot out of my pocket to make it happen. So, I mean, I wish I had had something like Penn back then. And I have not been able to get engagement from my neighborhood since I stopped being the Civic Association president. So for me, it's like anything we can do to help those neighborhoods be engaged, we should do. We should encourage, not discourage. So that's enough.

Yadama, could you speak to the issue of neighborhood representation, though? It sounds like in your growth in your civic life, you were looking for people in the neighborhood and other associations and positions in office. You typically have to live in the district where you're running or otherwise trying to represent. That's a common ideal in this country for the purpose of for true representation through the person that lives on the boundaries. Because that's really where this is coming from.

I was just kind of wondering, because back then when I was starting, I remember going to a there was a national program for training civic leaders. And I don't I have to see if somebody from that time remembers what that organization was. Because I think as long as everyone is clear on the intention, the intent and the purpose for a civic association, it should be okay. It shouldn't be something where it's a adversarial relationship with our city. It should be a collaborative relationship.

And as long as everybody understands that that's their role, I don't see why it has to be someone who lives within the I guess

the best example is when the city of Hollywood changed itself to district elected offices for the purpose of having representation that lives in each district that can really express the needs and the priorities of that area because they live there. And that because they live there, they kind of know it best. I think that's kind of like where this is that was the this is the intent behind it.

I think, again, if it's clear on the purpose for the civic association to benefit that area, then it shouldn't matter. I mean, my understanding is, again, there are parts of our city that have always had strong advocates and then other parts of our city that when we didn't have districts, were really not represented because they didn't have people to speak for those areas. And that's my understanding of why districts happened. So the pattern has remained where there are some areas where there's a lot of representation and a lot of vocal advocates and other areas in our city where that's not the case. But at least now I'm here, right? Before, I wouldn't have been.

That's the intent of Commissioner Hernandez. He's trying to say, hey, let's make sure that these civic associations have the right representation and not represent it at law.

And that's great. It's just the question of, like, who determines what is the right representation. That's, you know, I agree with him. Yeah, I agree with you, Peter, that that should be the right representation. But, like, who defines that? It should be them who define that.

Okay. Commissioner Biederman? We're trying to define that right now. So, I mean, I agree that we should be building civic engagement within our neighborhoods. And my issue is the same, is that you can't have an outside influence. Commissioner Quintana, when you say how the we're trying to build associations to be in a unified position with the city, that's not what we're having here. We're having an adversarial relationship. Some of the associations build their membership on creating that adversarial relationship by saying the city's not doing it right. We think they should do it differently. That's how they build their membership.

That's how you get people out to a civic association meeting by creating that hate and division. So I think we need to have our associations should be represented by the residents that are in that area the same way our districts are, Don, the same way that you are here. It's because we have districting. If if we didn't have districting, you wouldn't be here, I might not be here. But we are and and it's the same associations that are ad in an adversarial relationship that don't want districting either.

Charter review, there were certain members of our community that were advocating against districting because they want to be able to control the dais and not have a voice of every single district or every single area of the city. I think the hypocrisy is the not realizing your own hypocrisy sometimes. And Commissioner Xue him, when you talk about the Penn program is to promote the good things of our city, some of our associations only promote the bad stuff and only create the way if it's not done their way, it's the wrong way.

You have to say who it is.

We have decorum Lynn, you can't interfere.

You have to say who it is.

Lynn, you can't interfere with I

think people know who it is. Listen.

It's not fair. You're talking

about something. Lynn, if you continue interrupting, I'm gonna have to ask you to leave. So please don't.

What does Michael Jackson say? Look at the man in the mirror sometimes. Penn was supposed to promote the good things of the city and it's not sometimes. It's promoting, you know, the negativity. And as Andre said, some people aren't in this room, but they have no problem going on social media talking about how we don't know what we're doing up here and the only two people that know what they're doing is the two people that are siding siding with them all the time or throwing cover for them or defending them or anything of the fact.

I think that if we have to live by term limits and we have to live within the districts that we are living in, then we should hold the associations that hold us accountable should hold themselves accountable. That's the issue I think that I have. That's the issue that Commissioner Hernandez has. Although I don't want to speak for him. I think that if we're going to, you know, the federal government, we might not like it, but the federal government, in order to save lives, said, we think every state should have seat belt law and every state should have speeding limits or you're foregoing your FDOT fund, your DOT funding. That's what the Penn program is. If you want to have

an

association and you want to do good things for your neighborhood and do good things for the city, people that, it should be self governed by the people that live in that neighborhood, we're willing to reward that with a financial aid of helping you build your membership capacity. And listen, I'm all for, you know, people say I don't like civic associations, but I all love civic associations. I was complimented by Terry Cantrell because I'm the only one that puts my civic associations in my New Horizons article or on my newsletters. I always promote the associations. And to be told that I'm against civic associations is just hypocritical and wrong.

And I advocated for and supported the boot camp that we did several years ago to build the next generation of leaders. But unfortunately, some of the existing generation don't want to build that next generation. So that's why I think term limits are important. I think residency is important. If you want to open it up to anybody that lives in Hollywood for your civic association, Great.

At least live in Hollywood. Don't live in Miramar or Pembroke Pines or Pembroke Park. So, you know, I didn't really wanna talk on this, but I I wanted to make my voice heard because apparently, I was thrown out on social media today that I am against civic associations or whatever it is that's being said. I'm not against civic associations. I'm for transparency and I'm for civic activation.

I mean, I've been doing civic activism my entire life. That's what brought me into this seat. I didn't just move into a district and decide to run for commissioner in that district because somebody in another district wants to control another voice on the dais here. So I'm here for the right reasons. I know I'm here for the right reasons. And when people you know, they say, when you have critics, you know you're doing the right job. I know I'm doing the right job. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Biederman. Commissioner Gruber, you don't have a chance to speak yet and there's others going for a round too, so I'll let you go ahead.

Thank you. A lot lot of lot of feelings with this. I think I have less baggage when it comes to it as far as the feelings towards it, but I'm very, very pro civic association. Playland Estates, as you all know, is the only civic association in my district aside from Driftwood, which I have a sliver that just got a new president and, you know, they're revamping and I'm happy to help them. I can't speak on their behalf, but I'm gonna assume that I don't think they would want board members from District 1 joining or other districts, but I think they want representation from Playland Estates.

However, and I did support this in the beginning and I'm just like the mayor said, there are unintended consequences like we see with Doctor. Phillips, who's doing great work there. And that does concern me. The intent of what you proposed, I totally agree with it. We don't want people on a civic association that are bringing their views and their wants that don't align with the majority of the people in that neighborhood.

I get that. Commissioner Schuham, you brought up that the president of your condo association doesn't live there full time. I don't think that's a fair comparison because that's a condo association and they own property there. So, you know, I wouldn't compare that. I think this is different. So what I'm hearing is they can't you wouldn't be allowed to join the board, but let me just clarify, you'd still be able to be a member and receive Penn money. So a member could come to all meetings, I'm asking, to all meetings and still participate at those association meetings. Is that correct?

We're only talking about the board membership, the people that actually but as far as membership, Just like, and by the way, I think we're losing the gist of what this was. Everybody has become adversarial when in fact, quite the contrary is the intent. Civic associations in the past knew the business owners from their area because they went out and worked with them to see what the business owners needed. And in return, the business sponsor some of their events and some of their things. This is what I think civic association should be going back to.

Just like what you said when you started going out. Because when you started, by the way, my business was in Johnson Street and you were very territorial. You didn't go West Of 441. And we were West Of 441, we're West Of The And we respected that and we still support you because we felt that what you were doing was needed. And you laugh because I know, I remember we had this conversation. So at the end of the day, the key is we wanna go back to our roots. We wanna go back to be able to be civic about the people we represent. And that is engaging your businesses. Look, Frank Vidal from Sheridan Lumber, He would love to be able to sponsor something. Nobody has gone to talk to him, okay?

Coffee Cult, the same thing. They help people. What's wrong with asking the people that have the time to go talk to those people? This is not to put somebody out, but to give them a way up. And the way you do that is you get engaged with the people that you're from that neighborhood.

So, and if there's gotta be an exception, hey, put the exception on your documents because what has transpired since I started talking about this, to the association that were violating their own bylaws, expanded their bylaws to be able to comply. And that's, to me, that's a plus. Now, if there's more than it's needed, let's talk about it. Let's get it done. This is not about excluding people or punishing them. This is about helping them do what the community really needs, which is engagement. Talk to the businesses from Liberia. How many local businesses from there support their association? Talk to them, get engaged. That's what it's been happening.

So that's what I'm looking forward to do. And that's why I'm supporting this. And based on what I heard, you have somebody from two blocks away. Okay, expand your association. The other association is not gonna be a problem. Make an exception. That's what I'm looking for. I'm looking to add, not to subtract. But I don't wanna just add for the sake of adding. And by the way, I think that some of the comments regarding somebody from Pembroke Pines and Miramar.

I don't think any residents of the city Of Hollywood vote for anybody for city commissioner just because they were a great businessman and they lived outside the city. And we said we want him to lead the city of Hollywood because he's got a great mind or something like that. The residents of the city of Hollywood will go insane for doing something like that. So the fact that you have somebody that you want to help your association, there's nothing taking that away. They don't have to be on the board to help the association. I'm not on any board and I help them all.

Right, so now, but as far as if it's in the bylaws that somebody can live outside of the boundaries, we're still penalizing them with what

we Well, if if we talk on their board Right. Yes, not as as a member.

So that I kinda I I kinda have a little issue with because if it is in their bylaws that they can have somebody from outside of the boundaries, I I would I would be okay if that's if that's what they wanna do. I mean, look, we up here have to sift through the nonsense. If there's a couple of people that live so far away and they're pushing some agenda. I think we've been able to see that on several occasions. So if it's in their bylaws, I think I'd be okay with that.

And listen, a lot of times, it's hard to get participation in civic associations. I get it. And let's not fool ourselves. It's just that most people don't wanna do it. And the trick for us up here, and we sometimes get adversarial back and forth, is that to look through a civic association that has a handful of people speaking for thousands of people.

And when we speak to some of those people outside of these walls, they're saying something different. And then it becomes we have to go back and forth and see is a civic association that needs to go outside of Hollywood to get a board member really speaking on behalf of the majority in that area. So, you know, it's tough. You know, I'm having a little heartache with it the way it is. I think if the bylaws say that the civic association wants somebody from or allows people from outside, I'd be okay with that.

Commissioner Schuham mentioned also, what if, you know, what if my, my mom was living in an area and she's not mobile or whatever, a situation like that, I wouldn't have a problem with somebody's child being able to join the civic assistance.

You want to add relatives to that?

What's that?

JOSHUA You want to add relatives to that?

JOSHUA Well, I'm saying,

look, this is a work in progress. JOSHUA Yeah, yes.

MACHT: want that if they want to put in in their their bylaws, bylaws, let them put in their bylaws.

Put in their bylaws that somebody can live outside of their geographical area, it's Okay. That's what the bylaws would

I think that should be up to them. I don't agree with it. Know?

If I would say

I had my civic association, which I don't have one where I live, I would say we would prefer that it's people living here. And then the other thing is a person living a block outside. I think

And I'm not

Whether I agree with it or not, I don't necessarily think we should police it.

All right. Fair fair enough. Let's give commissioner Caleri an opportunity if she's currently able to speak.

I'm here. I am just listening to all of it. And, you know, I'm in a really challenging predicament here because I'm not present, and I'm sure I can't witness the emotions being felt by both the audience and the commission themselves. And it's really sad, I have to say, that there is this division. You know, our ultimate goal or at least mine was to create synergy and unity and not this division that you can cut with a knife just from sitting online.

It's very sad. But while we're talking about it, you know, we're in this situation because of the vision that was presented, not because of it's a division, and we've spoken about it. I mean, if we're gonna call an ace an ace, it's division. We have, I personally feel that there has been, you know, a a undecided vote. I called it, you know, shadow governing from outside, and that's so sad.

That's so hard to even say because ultimately, at the end of the day, we just all care, or at least I hope that we all care about our city and what we do. But the respect part has been definitely misplaced. And I think that ultimately, at the end of the day, we all need to find that level of respect and value opinions and not try to control. And I think that that's really where this whole conversation on both sides goes to. You know, I just did a quick math, and I've been in this, position now for over thirteen years and three civic associations that I've attended.

And just, of course, with the exception of missing meetings because of work or other obligations, but on a general, a general overall haul for the past thirteen years, it's over nine hundred and thirty six hours that I've dedicated outside of doing everything else that we do as commissioners to attend these civic associations to be involved and to be there to listen and to help. And I think that at the end of the day, that's what we're all here to do. But somewhere, that power has been or the those positions have been mistaken. And and it's just tough to to even sit up here and have these discussions. And I'm not sitting there.

I'm just sitting behind the scenes right now. But, I hear everybody's opinion, and I hear everybody's expression. But the the split tongue and the slashing of of both parties really has just got to stop, guys. At the end of the day, we just gotta find a way to make all of this work. And and I don't know what that answer is, so I'm gonna leave it up to you guys, and I'm here listening.

But we've gotta find a way that we gotta compromise. We gotta work together, and we have to understand that we're all in this together, and it's not what one party's, what one side says. And the one thing I will say, it's so unfair to have our volunteer civic leaders in the communities bash the commission. It's just really disingenuous. And then to have you fight for certain things, it just really, is hurtful.

And then I'm sure that you're feeling the same from us, but let's just find a common denominator. Let's figure out how we can move forward and work together as a team through all the civic associations and the commission as one instead of the bickering, the back and forth, the he, she, she, say, the social media nonsense. And, really, we have to support one another, and we have to we have to walk through these challenging times together. It has nothing to do, Terry, about 13 o one. I am very, saddened to hear that.

It's just that that's where the differences lie, and I think that that's where all of this has come from. And I hope that we can find a way to move forward as a team with all the civic associations. That's all I have.

Thank you, Commissioner Cleary. All right. Look, at some point, we're gonna take a vote on this motion unless it's withdrawn. And so I do have a second round opportunity on the queue, and then we'll we'll take a vote. Commissioner Quintana?

Thank you, mayor. Commissioner Kalari said some of what I was gonna say. I just I don't know when it happened that we, as a people, lost the idea of civility, the idea that we could disagree with one another without making enemies of one another or without personally attacking each other just because we have different opinions or a different perspective. From my point of view, the fact that we have people on this dais who are not always unanimous when making policy is what makes for better policy. The fact that we can express a difference on opinion is not the same thing as saying the two that cover.

What did they say? The two that provide cover. And I think that because we're on the dais, we have an extra burden of responsibility to be civil, even when residents are not. But that said, I think that what might be helpful is, again, some kind of training for residents about how to disagree with our positions without bashing us, as Commissioner Kalari just said. I don't think that the role of a civic association is to always agree with our positions.

And I think they can come here and disagree. We do need to make the hard decisions, like Commissioner Kalari often says. We do sometimes need to take votes that are not popular with residents. But I think that having dissent is part of democracy. So we might sometimes hear things from them that we don't like.

They just need to be said respectfully and without them calling into question our integrity. And I'm catching myself in saying them and us, them and our, because I think that's part of our mistake. I think we have to set a tone, even when it's really hard to do so, even when it's really painful to be mistreated, when we all know that our intentions are good. But we have to set that tone. It's painful.

It's a big sacrifice. I wasn't territorial about my civic association. I was at home, not working. We were a single family income household with a child with a life threatening illness. And I was taking time to knock on individual doors of people I didn't know by myself. And West Of 441, I did not feel was as safe as East Of 441. I didn't want to walk those doors by myself. And that's why I could only do so much alone And that's why I didn't reach out to the businesses West Of 441. It wasn't because I was being territorial, just to be clear. I feel bad that I have to explain myself.

But because it was directed at what I did wrong about being territorial, I felt like I had to say that. And again, you know, is it possible for us to disagree with one another without making enemies or personal attacks on each other's character? That's what I ask, I think, both of our residents and of ourselves. That's it. Thank you.

Thank you. So I think at the heart of the issue is the desire from Commissioner Hernandez and Commissioner Biederman to express support about the idea of preserving and ensuring that a neighborhood association actually represents the people who live in the association. And maybe we can find a compromise by agreeing that at least a 75 majority of the officers and board members of an association live within the association. That could be a compromise. And you know what?

And if an association has a number of outspoken or adopts positions that we can see are influenced by because we attend the meetings by the members who might have an outside agenda or are visibly influencing the association. If it comes to the city commission and we take that into account, then we can take that into account. We can observe the dynamics of what's happening. And whether or not we question the integrity of the association and its positions because of that, then we can still do that. And so if the idea is, again, not wanting to lose the contribution of the Penn program with the $1,000 maybe we can find a way to ensure that integrity in a compromising way that won't affect any of the existing associations, but at the same time show them that it's important to us that their association maintain that representation for people who live there.

Thank you. I'm good with the 75%. Look, this is about bringing the topic out in the open in what's happening. Two associations were not complying with their own bylaws. They're complying with their own bylaws. To me, that's already a success. I'm Okay with the number of 75%. This is about talking it through and getting it better. And by the way, commissioner, I didn't think and didn't mean to say that you did anything wrong. I thought you were being territorial because of the fact that everybody has phones and the businesses in the areas are listed.

Hispanic person is trying to do something to highlight the business area, we would have been more than happy to support. And I don't know how dangerous you think West Of 441 is. Back then, back then. Well, yeah, but I started back in the day, back in 1978. And my wife worked our store back then, the time that you're talking about, by herself.

We never had one issue. But perception is reality to people and I'm okay with that. I'm good with amendment my motion to 75%, with amendment my motion within the bylaws. I just want to make sure that they follow the bylaws and they're even. So the bylaws doesn't says, no one from the neighborhood can be there, but yet somebody from outside the neighborhood because it's cool, they can do it.

Just follow the bylaws, 75%. We can even have a relative in the area. If you're looking out for the best interest of that area, that is my purpose. So I amend my motion, if it's okay with the second of that motion, to include 75% of the board, not the membership. The membership can be outside because some of the businesses be outside. And if you have a relative in the civic area that we're talking about, I'm good with that as well. And that will probably fall within the 25% outside of the scope as well. So I'm just asking you guys that are questioning whether you support this or not, would that be something that would be okay with you?

I'd support that.

Okay. So I amend my motion to be that. The seconder of the motion is Commissioner Beetemer. Are you okay with that? I

really don't First of all, I think that it becomes cumbersome on staff as was talked about earlier. Secondly, I think it's just changes out of convenience. I mean, do you measure 75%? Do you measure it on the number of positions you have on your board or do you measure it on the number of positions that are filled on your board? I mean, so it's the same way we have a quorum here on some of our boards. Is it measured by the filled positions or is it measured by the total positions? So I think that it gets very cumbersome.

Well, me ask

think you

that the

original was good. I think that, yes, normally I'm all for a compromise. I don't believe this compromise MARTINEZ: is going to be Okay with the

opposition to

And that's Okay. I'm not looking to make the opposition happy.

No, but I don't believe in compromising on one way. I believe uncompromising is a compromise. And both sides have to give and take a little

bit. So if you're not giving any

compromise on one way, then it's got to be compromised on both ways.

By the way, we're not compromising with anybody else except our colleagues here. At the end of the day, we're trying to do Which have a pattern

of Look, one way let's

just stick to what the issue is right now. And that is to try to pass something that we can all live with and the association realize that we're not out to hurt them. We're out to support them. But we wanted to be the person that has been out there saying everything and whether it's true or not, that it's irrelevant. And then they say, oh, by the way, this is a private communication. Don't tell anybody. Okay, I think that's pretty interesting. And it's coy, but it's interesting. It's hypocrisy. Whatever it is, my my issue is you the person who second my motion, I'm amending my motion, I'm hoping that you continue to second.

In the spirit of moving along, sure.

Thank you. And the reason that I say that is because the message that Commissioner Kaleri said that we kind of seem to be struggling with, we want unison and we want the message for the association to realize that that's the case. But we also have boundaries. Stay within the boundaries that you create and you will be united together. If you start straying away from that, then don't go out and here's one thing. What's the root of all evils? Seems to be money, right? Three years ago, the city didn't give any money to any association. Everything was peachy, ginkgo, hunky dory. All of a sudden for the last three years, they talking about it, they become dependent on this money.

That's not true. But does it help? Yes. We're trying to continue that help. But there are some people that no matter what we do, they're gonna be happy with. I'm okay with that. I'm not looking to make everybody happy. I'm looking for us to set guidelines. And I don't believe that Allison is going to have any extra work when it comes to the fact that it's very simple to see who's what and where. They just got to provide the information. That's all.

Thank you. I think the good thing about this compromise is in the example of Liberia with Doctor. Phillips being the president. Clearly, the rest of the board members live in Liberia, or at least 75% do. And so it doesn't injure his opportunity to help the community of Liberia.

And so it doesn't injure that success that they're building on. And I don't think any other association has more than 25% of their board members living outside of the neighborhood. But it does, as commissioner Hernandez mentioned and commissioner Biederman, you know, humbly recognized, it does, at the same time, let the associations know that it's important for us that your board membership represent the neighborhood through the betterment of actually and the benefit of living in the neighborhood or working in the neighborhood. So I think you can all probably accept the rationale there. So we have an amended motion and a second. I'm ready to take a vote. Commissioner Schuham, is that Okay?

You can take the vote, but I don't really understand. What about if they work, if they own a business? What about all that?

That was part of my original amendment. You have a business by the way, if you have more than 25% of your membership in the association that live outside the area, you're not really representing the area.

Right. Now this is about the board and the officers. DANIEL Correct.

As

I said before, we're not going to make everybody happy.

DANIEL I know. And I agree with what you said completely, which is this Penn program has helped clean things up by forcing associations to abide by their bylaws or amend their bylaws. And I agree with you completely, that's a positive.

Which that wasn't happening because as Adam would tell you, the first conversation I had with him, we didn't even

We never looked at them.

We never even asked them for their bylaws because there was some pushback regarding some of those issues. Then we asked him for the bylaws. We realized that some of the bylaws were not being followed. They changed the bylaws.

They're starting

to follow everything. All it is

Let's run it, Carol. Let's stick with the 75% motion on the We table

have really mushed things up a lot. Because there was never a motion to force a board to have 75% of the board members or all the board members be residents. It was only about the $1,000 right?

No, no. This is still the time for the $1,000

It's still that. Yeah. Right. So to me, this has nothing to do with representation. Because the board can be if the bylaws say, you don't have to live here, then a board can be completely not from the neighborhood. They just can't get the $1,000 And so we're talking about representation. This has nothing to do with representation because we're not imposing this on the board. And I certainly don't think we should. What we are saying is, if you abide what I would totally support is, in order to get the $1,000 you have to abide by your bylaws. I think that's reasonable.

And the only way we would know that somebody wasn't abiding by their bylaws, probably, is if a member of an association complained about it, which would be fine. So I would support something that says the $1,000 is subject to abiding by your bylaws. But we're not changing representation. We're changing the ability of an association and I can't remember which, I think it might have been Commissioner Quintana who said, it's going to be the most needy of these associations that suffers. Because they're going to have to have people, maybe even more than 75, that don't live in the neighborhood.

And they're not going to get the $1,000 So I just I don't know what we're doing. I think that we should let the associations govern themselves. And I like the $1,000 program to help them promote what they're doing, encourage membership, etcetera.

Thank you.

That's it.

All right. Thank you. So we do have a motion on the floor to approve the resolution that requires, in order for a civic association that is a member of the Penn program, in order to be eligible for the $1,000 stipend, that at least 75% of their officers and directors combined live within or work within or own a business within the boundaries of the civic association.

That is correct.

Or relative. Or relative.

And that's fine. Think that Okay. As long

as All right. That's the

5%.

That's the motion. All right. So I think it makes good sense. It's a good balance. It ensures a level of neighborhood representation that I think should be the minimum of what you all know your association anyway provides. At the same time, it ensures to the commission that your voice as a civic association represents duly the people who live there or work there. So all those in favor of the resolution and the motion on the floor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Opposed. Motion carries six to one. All right. Thank you all so much. I think we've reached a good compromise, and we can all move forward. Thank you so much.

Alright. Moving on. Moving on to item seven. From consent, this is from the Department of Design and Construction Management. Hello, Jose.

Hi. How are you?

A resolution of the City Commission, City of Hollywood approving authorizing the city to execute a progressive design build services agreement with Finfrock Construction LLC to provide design build phase one design and preconstruction services for the Harrison Street parking garage, which is a capital improvement project for a total of $481,000 and change. Welcome, Jose. And I see that you have a presentation ready for us.

Yes. Good afternoon, mayor, commissioner, city manager, and city attorney. This is a presentation about the designed built parking garage for the Harrison project. We brought to you resolution back in October to begin negotiations with FinFrog for the parking garage in downtown. So what we're bringing to you today is that agreement to get to a 30% design development that would allow us and will allow them to provide the city a guaranteed maximum price for the project.

And I'll share with you on the scope what that is. A couple of things regarding the scope of the project. So the scope of the job will involve creating a parking garage with approximately three fifty parking spaces, some offices for the parking department. And that's basically the height of the parking garage and how many floors, how many stories, all of that, none of that have been done yet until we begin putting some pen to the paper with FinFrog. We think it might be between seven and eight.

But we still are trying to get the maximum amount of parking spaces providing the right level of functionality in a way that is cost efficient and provides the maximum amount of parking spaces. So it's kind of what the scope of work is going to be. The site, if you see, is pretty constrained. It's not a huge site that allows to do a lot of different things in there. Actually, it's about 160 by 120 feet.

So it will probably be a two bay parking garage with one ramp and that kind of will be factoring into what the final design is going to be for the project. And you kind of seen some of the team members, they're still the same. We worked through putting this thing together. And what you are seeing in the resolutions so that you all kind of get an idea of $310,000 will be that 30% design criteria. Yeah, we don't want to go to 100% design because we want to make sure that whatever is being designed, we can afford it and that we agree with that price.

Otherwise, we're going to use that design criteria package to go out to the market and get a better price. So we still have that flexibility in the agreement and the contract allows us to do that and to actually retain some of the information and the contractors and people that will be working on the design with them. And then we have obviously geotechnical engineering. That's an allowance. I think it's going to cost less than that.

Then pre construction, we have to develop a price for the project. Community outreach is going to be necessary as part of the development review process, which we're going to be engaging through this period of time. And some owner contingency in the event we have to do any kind of study or additional environmental things. Want to have that money there for that purpose. I think that kind of does it from a I'll go back a little bit here, so give you a little bit of idea on timeline.

We don't have a final design yet. So it's kind of hard to tell you, hey, this is what the timeline is going to be. We think it'll take about eighteen months to get to a point where we will have a full set of permitted drawings. Yeah, it's going to take them about four months once we give them the go ahead to develop the 30%. Andrea and I and Russell have spoken about how do we kind of expedite the process for the review process.

We have to rezone the site and we also have to do the development review. We're trying to integrate that. But when you put it all together, it's about eighteen months from the time we give them the go ahead to the final go ahead. We think that by the end of the year, if things go well with the review process and we don't find anything that might throw the schedule away, we should be able to get close to what that GMP is going to be. Getting close to the end of the year gives us about four months, eight months to get to the development review process.

I think that's the right time to get the GMP number. We don't want to get to a GMP and then determine that we have to do changes to the structure of the facade of the building. So, at that time, we'll bring the GMP and then it'll take them another four months to get to permitting. Our goal will be that once we get to the final permitting that we're trying to get, we will work on getting an early release package so that we can start doing foundational work before the final, final permit is done. So I think we can take advantage of three months of overlap between the final permit and doing some site foundation development.

And then the rest of the project will be about a year to complete. So I'm thinking by June, May, June 2028 as we stand today, yeah, with the scope that we have in our hands. So with that, I'll be open to any questions you may have.

Commissioner Hernandez.

Yes, sir. Thank you, mayor. The reason I pulled the item, not was because of the timeline of the design, was because I wanted to know how the commission feels about being able to utilize that space in order to have some work for housing that it's much needed in the city of Hollywood. I believe one the caveats in the contract when we purchased this was that we are allowed to have up to two stories of housing. And Ray Lynn or Jovan can correct me if I'm wrong.

As long as we meet a minimum of two fifty parking spaces. And I think we can definitely meet the minimum of the two fifty parking spaces. I like to be able to maximize the space and have a couple of floors of at least, or however many units we can do without violating the contract that we did of workforce housing, whether it's people, firefighters, police officers that are just coming in, or with individuals that actually work on the beach. They won't have to travel much. Or even better, they work in the downtown area. So that was the reason I pulled this, is for that consideration before we start drawing something and then have to go back and pay for it again.

I guess the question is, what would that entail in terms of budget? Obviously, would be very expensive to build the units on top of the garage versus what the rental revenue from the units would be without state tax credits and things. So we're going to end up spending, or unless we unwind this and do a P3 proposal to come through. I don't know how the math. I'm worried about the math. Like the idea.

I get it. And I've spoken with staff about that. And from what Ray Lynn has told me was, we need to have to partner up with somebody that can address it in that aspect in order for it to be fruitful. But I just don't want to rush to do something similar to what happened with the SunTrust building in the downtown, where originally I wanted to make sure that we had a couple of floors of public parking. That didn't happen. And I wasn't around at the time. I just want to bring it up to your attention so that we don't miss that opportunity. Because once you do it and you build it, you're not going to be able to change it. So that's what that is about. I wonder how the commission feels about something like that.

SPEAKER Commissioner Biederman, and then maybe we can ask staff if they've looked into this, too. Go ahead.

SPEAKER I think that would be great. I would support that. What if we were to, when we, this goes out to design, part of the design instructions could be to design it that will hold additional floors, the same way the library across the street was built, the same way Joe DiMaggio was built. Let's build a parking pedestal that can handle multiple floors of housing.

What go through the bulk of the expense and not finish it and wait expensive to do it. I just want to know the concept of something like that, rather than to approve this right now. Right.

Can we approve this and simultaneously do because whatever work they do is going to be needed no matter what project we're going to do. So what if we were to simultaneously issue out there an RFP for somebody to build housing as part of this project?

Might be designed in a different way if housing was a part of it. That's why we would kind of pause if we were going to go down that road. And Jose, I don't know if you are aware enough in terms of being familiar with the potential most likely layout of the garage, how efficient or not it is, if there's wasted space because of any configuration, where right now we're thinking of workforce housing only on top. But what if, for purposes of not it wouldn't lose maybe a lot of benefit if the first two floors that are fronting Harrison Street were a strip of the workforce housing along the first, second, and third level, let's just say, and the garage was behind and up. There could be different ways to lay out the housing to not really injure the number of spaces available.

And it doesn't necessarily only have to be stacked on top. So don't know if we ever really look at this. And also, while we're talking about it, there's an alley in the back. I and I think the Red Building owns the alley. I don't know how the school uses it or not. Does that if we were to somehow get an ability or an easement to use that alley or the air rights above the alley, does that improve the efficiency of this potential garage by a certain great amount because those extra seven, eight, ten, twelve feet really make a big difference to a whole another row of parking all the way up? I don't know the answers to that, but maybe you can shed some light on those issues.

Yeah. Yeah, I will. So a couple of things. If the city commission and you all have an interest in looking at, can we put housing and how can we make that work? Yeah. And the good thing is, is it ideal for you to get the parking spaces you need quickly enough in there at a price that makes it quicker? No. And that's going to take a little bit of time to get there. Can they make an evaluation? They actually do some residential too as part of the work they do.

So I don't think I think it will be very we could sit down through the process and have them do a comparison. I would agree that probably if you want to do residential in here, you want to probably put it on the lower floors because it will be more expensive to do it on the higher floors. But I can sit with them and look at our different options and come back to City Commission with some ideas about whether or not that could be affordable. In terms of the air rights, I did hear about that possibility. I think it was either from Keith or someone.

Soon as we bring them on board, we'll evaluate that too because maybe six inches or half a foot will do something better for the efficiency of the parking garage. Bringing them on board with this item would allow us to skin the cat in many different ways that you can evaluate and say, hey, this makes sense or it doesn't.

Okay, so they're not going to be drawing anything into it comes back to us?

Well, they will.

But that's what I'm saying.

Look, if we give them direction now to show a If

that's what you want.

Before maybe you get to 30 as part of if it's possible to do it as part of this process, and Finfrock is in the business of building units as well into the garage as possible. If it comes out to be an efficient way that it could be applied into the garage, I think we want to hear about it and learn about it, really. If it's not, then it's not.

Absolutely. So I think what Jose is suggesting is that FINFROC does have some expertise and knowledge in this area to assess the site and look at this possibility for you all. And then we would need to bring that assessment back to you to share with you what we found. Are we in a position where we would need to be seeking an outside partner? Does the site work for this?

How much more costly are we talking about? At least get some ideas of that and bring that back to you. Because at that point in time, you'll be better able to decide, are we potentially starting over with a completely different concept than where we are right now? And it is a different concept. I understand it would still obviously be a parking garage, but the addition of residential and or commercial at this level would change significantly what this is.

It is a constrained site. It's not a very large site. It is not the most efficient garage. But we would be wanting to look at some of those issues, access those kinds of things, bring that back to you so that you have full information about the impacts. And then you all can really make a decision, I think, based on that. And I think FINFROC has the expertise to help us guide that discussion. And we'll make that part of the first phase of conversation before we draw up a design for a garage.

And that was my point, to bring it up in time so that we don't

Absolutely. And we'll come back to you all with that. So as we work through, we get the contract, we go forward here, we'll be looking at that as well.

Based on that understanding, motion to approve.

Second.

All right. We have a motion and a second to approve the resolution with the discussed evaluation of the residential addition. Before we let you go, Jose and team, about this garage, I just do want to mention that I've heard a number of times from some people who have a unit in the home building next door to the West. And they, obviously, they don't have any parking spaces that are, you know, on their fee simple property there. And so clearly, would be a customer for the garage.

And they wanted to inquire as to whether or not a direct connection or a skywalk into their building was doable. Obviously, they understand it would cost them something. So I just didn't want us to go through the complete design exercise and then hear from them afterwards, well, what about connection for us? Maybe there could be engagement. There ought to be engagement.

Let them know what that potential cost could be. Maybe get them to a commitment if we are going to go down that road. So if we can solve issues, neighborhood issues, then we want to do the same. And maybe, to whatever extent, of course, speak with the school next door and see if they need any special integration of the garage to make it easy for teachers to walk to and from. Maybe it's just an opening in the wall.

What the safe way would be, maybe a covered canopy way, because I think they have a stake in this garage as well because we anticipate and we're going to require that they won't be able to park in the Van Buren garage anymore. That's one of the benefits of this garage is that Van Buren will be relieved of 100 and something passes that the staff of HAS right now use the garage for because they have nowhere else. They'll be buying passes or otherwise enrolling in whatever program we create at this garage during the day, during school days, which will make the garage very busy during the week when it's not peak weekend usage and what have you. So I think it aligns the usage of the garage really well with these primary users, the workday users, the school, the home building. Art and Cultural Center will be a heavy user during the weekend, etcetera, downtown events during the weekend.

So we know this is well placed and it'll clear up areas from Van Buren. So just while we're all here, let's engage with Haas. Let's engage with home building and see if that impacts the design in a beneficial way that in the end will lead to a better customer experience and a customer for the garage.

And by the way, whenever we do that regarding parking for some of the large customers, if you would, we have to make sure that the parking doesn't just get gobbled up by those individuals for pennies on a dollar based on the investment we just made. So it's got to be a holistic approach with the parking department to make sure that we get our investment back and they get what they need.

Any other closing comments? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, the item carries unanimously. Thank you.

All right.

Let's see where we are. Onto our regular agenda. I feel like we need a five minute break. You wanna guys do that? Five minute break, and we'll come back for item 17.

All right. Thank you all so much. We are resuming this meeting right after our quick recess. Now that we've all had an opportunity to drink some water, let's go ahead and tackle just three items on our regular agenda, and then we'll be back at some point at 5PM for citizen comments. All right.

So item 17 is a presentation by Andrea Windjett. Andrea, please come on up. She's the director of development services. She'll talk about a pilot project to one way South 19th Avenue and South 20th Avenue from Washington Street to Jackson Street in the downtown CRA area to it says here, increase and legalize on street parking and provide a bike lane. That's a that's one way to frame it, Andrea. Welcome.

Thank you. Thank you for the introduction, Mayor. So I'll jump right into it. I say lately, over the last several months, the commission has really been challenging staff to just think outside of the box, look at other ways in which we can make improvements to the city without looking through it through our traditional lens. So with that in mind, we decided to take a look at 19th And 20th Avenue between Washington And Jackson Street.

If you go out there today, it currently has two way traffic, north south. There's parallel parking. There's sidewalk and swales out there. What we're looking to do is we're looking to propose a pilot project on the two streets, 19th And 20th Avenue. This pilot project would modify the traffic circulation to one way on 19th And 20th Avenue.

And we would be adding parallel parking. And we would also be adding a bike lane. It's important to note that the parking spaces that are out there today that are on street are substandard in width. So you might notice if you drive by out there or you looked at the pictures, some of the times people who are parking in this area may be parking a little bit on the street and a little bit on the swale. It's a little bit of a tight configuration with the two way traffic and the parallel spaces that are out there.

So by one waying 19th And 20th Avenue, we would be doing this within the existing asphalt limitations. We would not be modifying the sidewalks or the swales that are out there. And the East West Streets will remain with the two way traffic flow. We would create a transition point at Jackson Street by adding a stop sign there for an always stop. And Washington Street already has a stop sign.

Looking at a sample block of 19th Avenue, this shows the parallel parking on the east side of the street with the 10 foot drive lane and the bike lane on the west side. One of the other things that we were looking at as part of this pilot, we laid out I cannot even tell you the amount of iterations and just brainstorming that we did between staff, the CRA, engineering, parking, just to look at different options. And how can we maximize parking, legalize the on street parking spaces and do our best to keep the costs down for the project. So on 19th Avenue, we are maintaining the same number of parking spaces that are out there today that are 38 spaces, but we are able to widen them. When we take a look at 20th Avenue, it's really just a mirror image of 19th.

So you'll notice the parallel parking have switched to the west side of the street along with the change in direction flow. And we're able to add four additional spaces on 20th Avenue. If we take the same pilot project and we just look at some cross sections, here on the screen you'll see the existing cross section of 19th And 20th Avenue with the two way traffic, the substandard width in the parking spaces. And with the proposed pilot, you will see the legalized on street parking that is wider, the one way travel lane, along with a bike lane on each street.

I do like the muscle cars and the sketches. I see an old Camaro. See a

I'll let our designer know. So I should have probably started off with a little, I'm doing this presentation to the commission as a stopping point. I want to let you know of this thought process that we're having that we have started to lay out some designs, see where we're at. We've started to lay out some of the costs in order to do this. The cost would be about $630,000 as an estimate.

The funding has already been provided for as part of the CRA's budget. And I'm really just here to give you an update on the project, let you know where we're at, see if there's a consensus for us to continue moving forward with the design and implementation of this. So having said that, we have had some informal, some conversations with some of the community members out there. We wanted to present this to you today. We believe that this is an improvement to what is out there today in terms of legalizing the parking spaces.

Those parking spaces really need to be addressed in terms of the size of them that are on street. This is a way for us to achieve that through testing this. We will continue to work in house and with police and others to see if we could come up with some measurable goals for the pilot project in terms of how many people are using the parking spaces, the bike lanes traveling through here. How has it modified our traffic flow? Or is there an increase in accidents in this area? What are we seeing out in the field once we implement this? And that concludes.

Thank you, Andrea. Pat, are there any speaker cards on item 17?

No cards.

So Commissioner Hernandez, I know that you've been working on this for many years. But if you could put the map back on with regards to the circulation, maybe one versus the other.

Let me go back.

So clearly, this is obviously better for purposes of enlarging and widening the parking spaces, And there is obviously some good engineering sense as to why they should be wider and why maybe the rules of a call out for them to be wider than they are today. Though the condition that there is today has been improved with some striping. I think traditionally there hasn't been striping, but we've added Peter striping on nineteenth and twentieth. Let me activate your mic a lot. Go ahead.

The striping was already there. As a matter of fact, there has been few accidents of people running into parked cars. And that's the reason that people actually park on this well versus the other.

So let me I just want to ask you a couple

of Yes, yes.

Because I know like, for example, we know that this will obviously impact circulation, right? Because when you take a street that's two way and make it one way, obviously, that's a limitation on the movement of traffic. It's going to cause people to have to go through the blocks in order to get to the avenue that goes in the direction they want. So it's going to modify the circulation here somewhat. And so I remember, though, when you were talking about 21st And Dixiepeter, and you were saying, hey, if the county were to look at making the current one way in each direction two way, wouldn't that be better for circulation?

And I shrugged and say, wow, you might have a point. We should look into that. Here, I know for the benefit of the parking, we're looking at doing the opposite and actually creating that condition on these two avenues, albeit for a pilot and for a limited number of blocks. So I want to talk it out and just hear your perspective on that. Because obviously, that's an impact. How do you kind of vet that?

Well, I can tell you that my main concern is safety. If you drive on any one of those avenues at dusk or when it's raining, you're taking a risk of having a head on collision. Trucks, tractor trailers and straight trucks have been using 19th Avenue as a shortcut to be able to get to Pembroke Road and vice versa into the downtown area. Right now, if you go back to the and by the way, the reason that staff chose 20th Avenue heading south and 19th Avenue heading north is because 21st Avenue actually goes north. So if you naturally go for one block, you can go the other way and vice versa with 19th Avenue.

And this could be a model that could be used throughout the city and some of the areas that we currently have safety issues, including the lakes, including your district, Quintana, when it comes to that. If you go back and you put the slide that actually has the configuration of what we're looking to do. Okay. If you look at the bottom right or bottom left, either one, propose one of those, You can see how wide the car is. If you look on top, the current parking space is only seven feet wide, a foot and a half short of illegal parking space.

If you look in the bottom, it actually creates illegal parking space and it creates a six feet, six inch bike lane with a meteor deviation. So people can actually ride a bike, ride a tricycle, even a golf cart, which you're not supposed to, but they can safely with the flow of traffic. And I think it would enhance the flow of traffic rather than have a potential head on collision because currently the roads are nine feet wide, not 10 feet. So this increased the travel lane to 10 feet.

So just a question to staff with regards to the width of the parking space. Where in the regulatory scheme is that? Is that a code that really is a requirement? And these are nonconforming spaces? What's the world of that? Or is that a best practice? Or is that a code requirement?

So when you're looking at the right of way, it's really at the discretion of the code of ordinance and the city engineer. We regulate private property standards. Within this area of the city, the regulation for private property is the eight and onetwo by 22, which is what we're trying to meet in this area. Because we have found, as the commissioner said, that there has been a few accidents. And the configuration of how people are parking doesn't seem to be adequate based on the volume of traffic and the size of the travel lanes out there.

I got you. And we're actually generating extra

parking.

More and more, yeah.

Yeah. I got you. Listen, I'm

And by the way, the staff has spoken to the Civic Association's president. And they all seem to be on board with this. I don't believe that we had any pushback. Is that correct?

That's correct, Commissioner. We didn't receive any negative feedback from the association or the community leaders.

And there's always going to be an educational time frame. The people are going to have to learn what it looks like. And just like multiple times I see on Harrison Street, people going the wrong direction. And we have had major accidents when it comes to that, because everybody's going forty, fifty miles an hour. I don't foresee that the case being here. And we're increasing the safety of bicycles so they don't have to be on the sidewalk competing with pedestrians.

So this is a pilot, Andrea. What period of time do you believe we would want to have this demonstrate either a good result or the opposite? Just anticipating it would be a good result. Would the idea be, maybe Peter, to extend this to Pembroke?

Well, that's the idea, is to bring it all the way to Pembroke and also to Gauge because at some point we will be redoing the roads to see if we actually need to encompass the swell areas on both sides in order to have perpendicular parking rather than parallel parking to create even more parking for the downtown. This is like a trial base, not only for this, but to see if we have the room to generate more parking and at that time bring in the drainage that it's necessary for the area.

I like it. I'm convinced. I will tell you there's other places in the city that I know that, for example, are townhome heavy, where there aren't enough spaces for the households. And they've been makeshift parking along the streets. And they have conflict with the parking division because of that. And one of the solutions that I kind of thought of, well, if this street was one way and we can create parking, to your point, could that solve the problem? Because the households are the households and the parking spaces are what they are. And it's not like people can get rid of their cars. And so this is probably a pilot for that section of the city, too. So I like it.

It's a pilot that it could be modeled citywide. It's just a matter of getting the right configurations and getting the right flow. As the staff, they designated that, you know, one will go one way because the current main power goes in So one this way, you don't impede the flow.

Yep, I like it. All right, Commissioner Schuh, and then Quintana.

I think it's great. And if your residents, this is something they want and need and like, I think it's terrific. And definitely gives us not only a trial of this configuration, but a trial of a trial. Like, how does a pilot work? The MPO used to have something we talked about called tactical urbanism, where you would just come in and paint. They lost their funding for basically what this is, where we're going to come in. And even though it does not look like a low number, it's a relatively low number for something like this. Paint and see how it goes. So I think it's great. We have similar conditions to this at the beach.

And the other thing, to your point, it's all about safety. It definitely slows people down, I think, on one way streets. The only curiosity I have, if you go back, Andrea, to the slide that shows all the cross streets. Like, this is fine. Like, Monroe, Madison, Jefferson, are they all two ways?

Yes.

Okay. So, and it's not a suggestion to try this, but I'd be curious, maybe in a different location, if you kept the larger arteries two ways, but like you have at the beach, the cross streets become one way. And it probably doesn't work for you because you're aiming for parking.

No, actually it would. However, that got pushed back years back. That was the one thing that got pushed back a year back. If people

People don't want to live on the one way street. Gotcha, gotcha. So that is the condition at the beach. And it does permit some more parking. But all in all, I think it's great. I think it should be extended. And, you know, until you get comfortable with the pilot program, maybe it needs to go a little longer.

I'm okay with that. I think staff is the one who suggested that this be a pilot to see what kind of reaction we get from the residents when they actually have to drive it. But, and I told staff, to me, it makes more sense to bring it all the way to Pembroke Road. And they said, let's not be so ambitious. Let's just go here and see how it works and then we'll go from there. And it's all about the educational part when it comes to the people that live in the neighborhood. And yes, agree with you that the East West Streets would generate actually twice the amount of parking and safer transit through. But let's see what, how this is taken, and then we'll go from there.

So let me just throw this at you. So Monroe Street has a light from Dixie, and it goes all the way through to US 1 with a traffic light. And so if there is concern about how this might create more of a drive around to get to downtown, not wanting to hurt, like, access to downtown going in or going out, have you considered having the pilot be from Monroe to Washington so that we don't give up circulation in the immediate south part of the downtown core? Jackson versus Monroe, what was the thought there?

You to bring the parking and the people closer to the downtown rather than to stop it at the Monroe Street. It's more of a walk. And we're trying to get that. And at the same time, whenever we do this, we're going to have the ability to visit and revisit the traffic pattern the walk traffic parting pattern sorry and the lighting in the area as well. So it'll be a holistic type approach when it comes to this.

I guess if the shift happens at Jackson Street here, from two way north of this to the one way, then I guess Jackson Street might see some additional East West traffic in between these avenues. If that is a largely large multifamily I'm looking at the blocks of the buildings. It looks like is that like the South Part Of Jefferson?

We wanted to make sure that Van Buren and Harrison Street had the ability to have Circulate. Circulate two ways because that's where the density is at this time in the downtown area.

All right. Commissioner Quintana.

So Commissioner Hernandez, I'm so excited about this pilot. I really appreciate all of the thought that you've given to this because, as staff knows, I've had many conversations with them about how this is an issue. I mean, not just in your district and mine. Of course, downtown has a specific need. But parking is a citywide issue.

So I'm really interested in learning what we discover as we do this. What I see on 56th Avenue, when we put in the bike lane and it's a heavily traveled two lane road. And people, when their traffic is stacked up, totally ignore the bike lane paint and just use the bike lane as a passing lane, which is why we have many places with really deep divots on the edge of the road. Because when the road the ground is wet and people repeatedly drive on there I'm going on a tangent. But two things.

I'm wondering if we how we might consider some additional, like, I don't know, bumps in the road or something for the bike lane so that when a driver is veering off into the bike lane, they feel it. And then I think I talked about it in the one on one that the curbing right there is really low. It's almost the same height as the road. So it does lend itself to having people park partially on the swale, destroying that as a place for drainage. I love that you're saying that drainage is coming.

That won't depend on swales. So I mean, one thought is how to keep the cars off the bike lane, and then another, how to keep the cars off the swale even after this wider parking spaces happen. What you said about educating people and changing habits of driving. So in my neighborhood, when early on I was advocating for sidewalks, we didn't have sidewalks. Through an MPO grant, we were able to get sidewalks in my neighborhood.

Initially, the people in my neighborhood refused to walk on the sidewalk. They continued to walk in the middle of the street because they weren't used to having sidewalks. And some homeowners didn't want anybody walking on the sidewalk in front of their house. But over time, people are using the sidewalks. They're not walking in the middle of the street. It's a beautiful thing. So like some of it is just kind of, you know, as people get used to something new, expecting that in the beginning, they might want to keep doing things the way they did before. But knowing eventually, hopefully, behavior will change.

Thank you for bringing it up. I brought up by the way, you don't have to thank me. I've been looking for this, but you really have to thank the engineering department. Clarissa did a great work. Andrea has done a great work.

They're awesome.

They have all worked together to bring this together. Javon, Ray Lynn, we all worked together to try to get this. So I can't take any credit

Fantastic.

Other than to say, can we please do this? It's been up to them to do it. I've had the same concern regarding people wanting to pass on the one way street and actually taking over the bike lane being so wide. I said, can we make the traffic lane wider and the bike lane smaller? They said no because then that would encourage more speeding rather than have the 10 foot lane and clearly delineate the bike lane.

And I don't know what, we can do, double lane, double lines, double yellow lines on the one side to make it clear that you're not supposed to be there. And there's going to be educational, but there's also going to be enforcement. If people continue to park on the swell, we will work with parking for them to get notification as a courtesy at the beginning. You're not supposed to park on this well. That's where the parking is as wide as it is.

Please park on the road. And as we strike that, we can and I haven't had this conversation with them, but I've seen areas where there's an issue. They put the markers on the road that are reflective. You can actually see the marker from far away that it's red and white that actually jumps out. If you take I'm going to use US 27 now.

All of the new roads, even when you drive on the opposite side, is immediate and everything else, you can see the red lights from the other side. And when you drive on your side, white clearly. So the demarcations would be there for that. And I'm being told that we can have the same demarcation on the double yellow line separating the bike lane from the traffic lane. But if people are going to do crazy things, I have people run over the sidewalk and even over a tree to get to the other side. And that way the enforcing comes in. And I'm not sure there's just going be a warning at that point.

All right. Well, sounds like those that were interested in speaking on the presentation are in support. And so I'm looking forward to this moving forward.

Do we need to make a motion to

It's just a presentation. So we're going to continue to move forward with the project on some of your upcoming agendas. You'll see us bringing forward our wheel for pavement and concrete services. And then if need be, we'll bring forward the specific contract for the job.

Thank you

so much.

Thank you.

Thank you, Andrea. All right. Next on our agenda item 18 is a resolution of the city commission appointing six members and two alternate members to the affordable housing advisory committee and revising the end of the terms to March to align with the new appointment cycle. Welcome, Ryan. Pat, did you have a slate for us prepared, like a grid or no?

I handed it out already.

I don't have one in front of me. So if you could hand one to me. Gruber had two. So maybe that's yep. All right. He's got three. He's got four. Anybody need a slate?

That's all one.

Oh, I'm sorry. Okay. No, well, you did have two. Yeah.

Yes.

Brian, please welcome.

Good afternoon, mayor, vice mayor, commissioners, city manager, city attorney. Ryan Kuk, community development division. So just to provide some context for why we're here now, as opposed to being in June, July, Commissioner Gruber made a recommendation to the commission sometime last year about the AHAC in particular. This is the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, which is a statutory board by the state of Florida that dictates our ability to receive our SHIP funding, which plays a big role in our ability to provide resources for our low to moderate income residents. He recommended that this board, because of the work that they have to do to be in compliance, which requires a report that goes to the state at the end of the year, in December, every year, be moved up earlier in the year, so new members have the opportunity to really digest, understand what they're doing, so that they can make informed decisions before we send something off to the state.

We are here now because that recommendation was made possible. And with the clerk's and her team's logistic assistance, we were able to bring this item forward right now. So, Commissioner Gruber, for those of you who don't know, is the actual elected official that serves on our board, and so does Commissioner Hernandez as the alternate. Before you, you see a slate of several people. If you'll notice, the vast majority of those categories are actually filled. And there's some extremely qualified candidates this year. We have to really give a shout out to C Med and the CD staff for engaging people in these areas to gain their interest to be a part of this committee. You'll notice one particular area, which was You're looking really slim?

Me?

That you're looking slim?

I'm trying, I'm trying, I'm trying.

I do notice.

Thank you. You know, you'll notice one particular area, whereas the citizen actively engaged as an advocate for low income persons in connection with affordable housing is a hard position to fill. And we actually have two qualified candidates. One of which, does not live in the city, and one does. But the candidate that lives in the city, can serve in two capacities.

So, one of our One of my trusted counterparts that I work with, and someone I really rely on, came to me, Donna Biederman, came to and said, Hey Ryan, there's a strategic opportunity here. And I would like to present that to the commission to consider, as you're reviewing these candidates. Alright? Miss Tobin, even though she does not live in Hollywood, fits that category. Mr. Librand fits two categories. He would make more sense as an alternate. Let me explain. As an alternate, he's almost like a swing man in the NBA. Is anybody familiar with basketball?

A swing man can take two positions on the court. Shooting guard, or the small forward. He's a valuable component to a basketball team. Mr. Librand would be our swing man. Right? He would then fall put be placed in a position where he fits that criteria, to ensure we are able to continue doing our work and maintain compliance with the state, so we don't put our jeopardy at funded.

I think Coach Walker totally gets it. Yes, yes,

he does.

So, they understand the swing man analogy. Thought I was going to get lost on that one, but this is what this is our strategic consideration for this board, as you make a decision. However, whatever decision the commission decides, we'll be able to work with. But, this is just for your consideration that he would be better in that position. And alternates are extremely important, as you can tell by Commissioner Hernandez. Alternates are extremely important. Just because they're alternates, doesn't mean they play a role in moving the mission forward. They play a huge role in it. But, in this situation, because we have such great candidates this year, he fits two positions. So, if somebody falls off the board or they decide, as life happens and people leave boards, then we're stuck and we have to come back to you guys again two months later to appoint more people, we can slot him in in the position, and make it work, and still be in compliance with the state.

So, with that, I will rest. And if you have any questions, I'm here.

Alright. Commissioner Gruber, I'm going to offer to you, without objection from the commission, to make a motion on this. Do we have any speaker cards? We do not.

Commissioner Gruber.

No cards. Go ahead and walk us through your sheets.

You want to just go through the whole thing or one can

Yeah, go through the whole thing and we can

Excuse me. Into the mic, please.

Sorry. Let's see. So the obvious ones, representative for banking and mortgage industry. We have Michael Pena, actively engaged as an advocate for low income persons. I'm going to go with Ryan's recommendation and ask for Sandra Tobin.

Representatives actively engaged for profit provider of affordable housing. Angie Miranda, the only one there. Citizen of the Hollywood resides in the jurisdiction. I'm going to go with Odalis Delgado.

Excuse me. Instead of putting him in that category, in the next page,

you'll notice

Odalis? Yes. Yep.

She's the only one in the next category. Yeah.

But then we for Peter Liebrand, who Ryan recommended

You can

Oh, she's the only one in the next category. My bad. My bad. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Sorry. I actually had that marked. Yeah. Pick another one. And Ryan had recommended Peter for alternates.

So if you cross out Peter So

the options for this category that aren't able to serve in another category would be Stephen Baker, Susanna Gregor, Alejandro Grigorescu, Jean Kingston, Edward Moldovan, and Ernestine Bennett Wright.

Correct. Everybody but Peter Liebrand and Odalis Algado. Yes,

correct.

Okay.

I want to ask for two minutes to go back to my notes. Is that Okay? I'll come back to this category.

Okay.

Yep.

Do you wanna

Let's go to the rest. Okay.

Next one, Odalis Delgado. Right. And the alternate would be Peter. Alternate. The basketball player. Peter. And then we have a second swing over at the alternate number three. Second swing, Steven Baker. Okay. So if you cross out Steven Baker from that two minute hold, then you have Susanna Grigori, Alejandro Guerescu, Jean Kingston, Edward Moldovan, and Ernestine Bennett Wright.

Have you worked with any of these people before? They ring a bell or no? I have not. Any member of the commission know the qualities of Ryan, do you have insight into these candidates that we've just in terms of the resident who lives in the jurisdiction, aside from Baker, Delgado, and Liebrand?

These candidates are all residents of Hollywood. They have not served on any board right now, but they're residents of Hollywood.

But do you have any familiarity with their resumes or anything with regards to this committee?

Well, when we reviewed all their resumes, they both Well, they're The people who we have laid out in the different categories meet those specific areas that are laid out by the state. These people, even though their resumes are impressive, they may not necessarily fit within a certain category that the state requires. They're all on here because they met the basic criteria for board membership and their impressive resumes. Those who weren't, they weren't brought.

Resizing Alright. Does any member of the body have a feeling about one of these remaining folks in this citizen who resides in the jurisdiction category? Commissioner Biederman, go ahead.

Sure. I think part of the key and I didn't mark it down in my notes for the resumes but I think it's important that they attended some meetings if we want to take a break and go through it. But I see that Alejandra Grigeres is like an Allstate agent. So that's part of our business one:

community. So I mean, that's the only input I would have. Do you recommend her? Possibly.

It's the only thing that stuck out. But I would want to go back and look to see that they met the qualification of going

to a meeting. Okay. It's the only category left.

Yeah, it's the only category left. So I'm happy to take a little two minute recess and let folks take a look. We'll let's just do that. Yep. Alright.

We're resuming our meeting. Commissioner Gruber and then Biederman on on the category of citizen

who resides in the jurisdiction. Hollywood. Commissioner Biederman, go ahead. So based on what I just saw, out of the five residents, one of them attended a SAC meeting, which isn't a city meeting. And another one has attended five according to the answers in the questionnaire, five city advisory board meetings. That's Susanna Gregor. So I would pick her as the

Commissioner Gruber, are you good with that?

Yep. I'm good with that.

Alright. So why don't you go ahead?

Just to confirm, though. I I just have a real quick question before I go with that one.

Go ahead.

We're picking Peter as or the suggestion was Peter as alternate member number two, and then Steve Baker is alternate member three?

Yes. Yes, that's what Commissioner Gruber had offered.

So contrary to what normally I would, my opinion would be, I'm okay with those.

Okay. Pat, do need us run think through it

because typically this is very weighted in district number one.

I gotcha. All right, so we do have a slate that Commissioner Gruber offered, Commissioner Biederman offered. Is there a motion for that slate? We have a motion from Commissioner Schuham, second from Commissioner Quintana. Commissioner Quintana, did you have anything else?

No. That's good.

All those in favor, aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Hearing none.

Aye.

Motion carries unanimously. Alright. Item 19, our final item on the regular agenda is a resolution of the city commission authorizing the city to execute a change order to the blanket purchase agreement with Enterprise Trust, a Delaware statutory trust, for a comprehensive fleet maintenance services to increase the contract from 3 to 7,600,000.0 for the first three years of a five year agreement by public works to buy some police cars and more. Joe, welcome.

MAYOR, Vice Mayor. Commissioners, Joseph Crow, Director of Public Works. As you mentioned, it's an item for you as a BPA to increase it for enterprise trust for your consideration. I'm in the audience. I do have Enterprise Representative Daniel Kalina for any questions you may have after my presentation.

So a little background. So the Public Works Fleet Division is responsible for the replacement, maintenance, and repair of all the city vehicles, which is about 800 of them in multiple departments. Historically, the city didn't really have a comprehensive replacement plan. We just got vehicles as we thought that we needed. Having a long term comprehensive replacement program is important, keeping the fleet in top shape.

In November 2022, there was a request for proposals for a comprehensive fleet management service. We got three proposals that came in. And they were ranked. On June 24, on 2024, the city commission approved the resolution, twenty twenty four-one 177 to give Enterprise FM Trust as the city's comprehensive fleet management provider and authorizing a blanket PO for $3,000,000 to start the program. This program spreads vehicle replacement costs evenly over time.

It reduces budget volatility with vehicles being replaced in a timely manner. It lowers maintenance costs. And more importantly, it has a better resale value. So we currently have replaced three zero eight vehicles over the last two years, 176 vehicles in 2024, and 132 vehicles in 2025. On '26, '27, and '28, these are all estimate replacements, which is, of course, with budget approval.

So we can do the numbers higher or lower, depending on what's available in the budget. So this is a comparison, whether we borrowed the money to pay for the vehicles, we purchased them outright, or on our lease program that we're on right now. With the help of Dave Keller, put together the cost comparison for borrowing the money at 3.91%. As you can see, if we borrowed the money to pay for the vehicles that we purchased in the first year alone, it'd be 10,000,006. If we outright purchased, it'd be 9,000,005.

And then our lease option, it's 7.8. So there is a considerable savings with the lease program that we're on right now. This graph here just wanted to show program impact. So before we started the program, the average age of our vehicles was about 16 years old. As we purchased the first round in 2024, it brought us down to 12 years in age.

And then last year, with the 132 vehicles that we purchased, it brought us down to ten years. So as we move in this program closer to the end of the five year program, our vehicle age will be four to five years old, which was the goal of getting the program in the first place to have our vehicles reliable. So on this chart here, and I want to concentrate on the fiscal year '24. So the cost for the 176 vehicles that we purchased or leased was $1,577,000 Now that would be each year for the five year contract, which totals up to the $7000000.7800000.0 In fiscal year 'twenty five, it was $1,530,000 for the 132 vehicles. And we have to add that to the year.

Because every year you have to pay for the lease. And then the following year when you buy it, it accumulates. So in 'twenty five, it was $3,150,000 And in 'twenty six, it'd be 4,600,000.0 So I

want

to make sure that you understand that it isn't the $7,600,000 we're paying. It's 4,600,000.0 We already paid the $3,000,000 for the first two years. And then any questions?

Commissioner Biederman.

Joseph, thank you. So when we entered into this whole aggressive plan of newer fleet and the whole deal with enterprise, part of it was not just to have more reliability but to save on maintenance costs and to be more efficient in our fleet management department. Do we have numbers on what that savings might have been or the reduction in our maintenance department expenses?

JOSHUA Yes. So because the first order of vehicles we ordered in 2024 was really late into the year, The savings that we saved in fiscal year twenty twenty five was about $140,000 because it was a short year. I'm assuming or estimating that the following year, as we get more vehicles in the fleet, the savings will be more.