City Commission - Regular Meeting

Thank you. Thank you.

Yes, we're ready.

All right. Good evening, everyone. Hi. Calling the meeting to order. Mauricio?

Commissioner Joseph?

Present.

Commissioner Syveson? Here. Commissioner Lama? Here. Vice Mayor Vizcarra? Here. Mayor Svecin? Here. All members present.

All right. If you could please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Would you do us the honor, Commissioner Joseph? Sure. 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. I believe we do not have an invocation.

No, we do not today.

All right. Are there any changes to the agenda?

None, Mayor.

OK.

So the first assignment we will be considering.

Is there an echo? Yes.

There is a little bit of echo.

Are we playing any statement?

No, we don't have the statement for today.

Okay.

We're just going to go straight into the order of business. So the first item on the agenda that the commission will be considering is 3A, a resolution adopting the city of Sunny Isles Beach tentative ad valorem tax millage levy rate at 1.6514 mills per 1,000 of taxable assessed value, which is equal to the rollback rate of 1.6514 mils for fiscal year 2026-2027. Okay. Thank you. Mr. City Manager. That's fine.

Mayor, this establishes our millage rate. And this is the fourth year in a row we've lowered the millage rate. And this sets our millage rate as the lowest in all of Dade County.

OK, thank you. Do we have any public speakers?

No, ma'am.

All right, I will take comments or questions to the commission. Commissioner Joseph?

Yes, I would just like to say that it's so awkward that we have the millage rate now at the 1.65 et cetera. And it's like with no issue as far as, oh, we're going to have to cut this and this on the budget. And then last year, when the millage rate was made to 1.7, it was like the biggest calamity that I had started. So I just think it's very strange and it just makes it that last year's hole after the fact, hoo-ha, was just all fabricated. Thank you.

All right. Any comments from the commission? Yes, I will comment.

Please, Vice Mayor. Commissioner Joseph is referring to my comments. Last year, I was upset. Not only yours. I am speaking, and I was very public about my opinion then. It was not fabricated. My concerns came true this year. And then at the last meeting, you said, oh, but you voted for it twice. I did vote for it twice, not because I thought it was a good idea, but because if I didn't, the default would be worse. And so this year, we're basically at that default. And my concern last year was all the talk of possible legislation that was going to be damaging to municipalities and that we needed to plan ahead. And now we have Amendment 3 that is doing exactly that. So my concerns came true this year. And I don't support lowering the millage rate for that reason. We don't know how it's going to play out. And I find it irresponsible to lower the millage when we don't know if Amendment 3 is going to pass.

OK. Thank you. Anyone else? I'll take a motion then.

Motion.

I need a second.

Second.

Marissa we do. You don't want to all right, I don't need for for this all in favor. Any opposed me OK there we go, thank you next item.

Next item is 3 B which is an ordinance of the city commission of the city of sunny hills Beach Florida adopting an operating capital improvement budget for fiscal year commencing October 1st 2026 through October 30th 2027 pursuant to section 200.65 of the Florida statutes. authorizing expenditures of funds established by the budget, authorizing encumbrances, authorizing issuance of checks, providing for grants and gifts, providing for local and federal law enforcement trust funds, providing for post-audit, providing for survivability, and providing for an effective date.

Okay. Thank you. Mr. City Manager, please go ahead.

Mayor, Vice Mayor, Members of the Commission, as you know, we've stated several times, we currently have the lowest millage rate in all of Dade, Broward, and Monroe counties. We have lowered the millage rate every year during my tenure as City Manager. This year, we are reducing it to the full rollback rate of 1.6514. Over the past few years, we've accomplished great things at Your suggestion and through your direction, we've added police officers and equipped them with the greatest tools to keep our community safe. We now have both an accredited police department and building department, as well as a USLA-certified ocean rescue division. We've expanded programming for teens and seniors, and we've also used technology for parking enforcement. All of this and so much more while still reducing the millage rate. This could not be done without the dedication and professionalism of our entire city staff. They consistently work day and night to ensure that Sunny Isles Beach remains the highest quality place to live and thrive. With that, I'm going to ask our finance director, Tiffany, please come up and give our budget summary for you.

Thank you.

Good evening, mayor and commission. So I'm going to give a brief summary of our budget using the budget overview page. Actually, I'm going to start with the millage rate, even though we've already done the tentative adoption. So I'm going to move to page 39. And just for the general public, the proposed budget is online. And so this is our property value and millage summary page. So we've talked about the millage rate being at the 1.6514. But what I want to talk about a little bit more is not only the city's millage rate, but also all of the other agencies, because they're on the tax bill as well. So you're going to have your school board, and their proposed rate is 6.623, which actually represents about 40% of the total tax bill. You have the county, which is 4.9677, which represents almost 30%. The fire department, which is 2.3965, that represents close to 15% at 14.4. The city's millage rate at the 1.6514 actually is just under 10% of the total tax bill. We have the other agencies, which include the Environmental and Children's Trust. That's 0.7209 for about 4.33%. And then we have the library at 0.2812, which is just shy of 2%. And so when we talk about the millage, one mill is equal to $1 of taxes. And it's per $1,000 of taxable value. So on a $200,000 home, if the mill was just one, it would be $200, just to give an example. For a $200,000 home with the city of Sunny Isles Beach being at the 1.6514, it equates to $330. of a total tax bill of $3,300. So that kind of just gives you an idea of the city's portion of your tax bill. Let's see.

There we go.

So you can see, over the years, the operating village for the city has declined from 1718 at 2.3, and now at 2627, we're at the 1.6514. And but even with the decline in the millage, and one of the reasons, I guess, that the millage was able to be reduced is because the tax roll grew. So it went from $11.1 billion to $19.5 billion. And that's from 1718 to 2627. And so you're able to see that taxable value growth in that slide. So now I'm going to direct you to the budget overview, which is on page 46. So currently, the total budget for all funds is $200,983,153. That, for the operating funds only, so that's the general fund and the special revenue funds, that represents a 2.6% increase over the prior year. Last year's budget was slightly more than that at $232 million in total.

Let's see.

So now I'm going to talk a little bit about the changes that occurred from the tentative to now, the proposed. So at tentative, we actually had a total budget of $348,417,577. In the general fund, we had a slight increase in our beginning fund balance and reserves of $2 million. Total revenues decreased by about $2 million. And part of that was due to the reduction in the millage rate for about a million. There were some updates to the intergovernmental revenues with the state and the fines and forfeitures, and that totaled about $250,000. And then, as we mentioned in the other workshop, in the last workshop that we had, the administrative charges went down in the building fund by $843,000. Commission expenditure, reduction of 69,225. City manager expenditure, a reduction of 148,515. City clerk, a reduction of 5,897. Media expenditure, a reduction of 39,031. Finance, a reduction of 10,172. Human resources, a reduction of 69,261. Procurement. a reduction of $4,310. City Attorney, a reduction of $25,000. Innovation and technology expenditure actually went up due to adding in the OpenGov software renewal. So they had an increase of $5,209, offset by other reductions in that department. Police expenditure went up $175,589. Ocean Rescue went down $39,080. Code compliance went up just minimally $780. Planning and zoning went down $34,740. 744, parking compliance went up 57,127. And that was due to the FDOT revenue sharing fees for the additional parking revenues. Public Works Administration went down 10,846. Facilities Maintenance went down 64,634. Fleet Maintenance, 14,876. Public Works, 30,881. Parks maintenance went down 120,613. Gateway Park Center, 37,609. Pelican Community Park, 7,821. Athletics went down 6,099. Visitor Center went down 9,489. And Culture and Community Services Administration went down $37,081. In addition, transfers out, in order to support the capital projects fund, transfers out went up 27 million. And so that is a transfer from the general fund to the capital projects fund. The ending fund balance as a result, primarily of the transfers out, went down 26 million, 414,631. Those are all the general fund changes. And the special revenue funds beginning fund balance increased $207,852. Total revenues increased $310,711. $210,000 of that was, again, due to the state revenue sharing estimates that were updated. And the transit system surtax, the funds that we get from the county, were updated for $133,924, and then an increase to special review fees in the building fund of $100,000. In the building department, expenditures went down $345,037. In the streets construction and maintenance department, it went down $195,531. Transportation went down $53,994. And ending fund balance increased by $1.1 million. and the capital projects fund. The revenues decreased due to the removal of the debt issuance for $175 million, but adding in the transfers end up $27 million. So the net decrease was $148 million. The proposed expenditures decreased by $143,150,000 due to the removal of the PCP redevelopment or actually a modification, changing it from a redevelopment to a renovation for $100 million, along with just the prioritization of other projects and capital project carryovers for $43,150,000. Ending fund balance reduced by $4,850,000. Enterprise funds, very minimal. Beginning balance increased by $8,123. And operations expenditures decreased by $2,034. And ending fund balance increased by $10,157. And that gets us to our proposed budget number. So the next or potentially last thing that I will discuss is going to be the building fund. This is just another graph of the millage and the taxable value, which we've kind of discussed. It just shows that the city of Sunny Isles Beach has the lowest millage rate. And this is small, but what it does show is from 2021, From 2021, it shows a beginning fund balance in the building fund of $7,436,238. It shows revenues in that year for $4,479,510.81. It shows total expenditures. There's a line item for total revenue plus fund balance, which is the total of those two amounts, $11,915,748.81. I'm going to kind of skip over those and really focus on beginning fund balance revenues, expenditures, and ending fund balance. For total expenditures for that year was $3,468,985.65 for an ending fund balance of $8,446,763.16. The change in fund balance that year was $1,010,525.16. As it relates to the statute, there is a four-year average of budgeted expenditures that may be carried over. The four-year average at that point in time was $3,605,107. So the excess for that year was $4,841,656.16. In 2022, Beginning fund balance, which was ending for 2021, $8,446,763.16. Revenues came in that year for $3,779,000. 055 and 47 cents. The total expenditures for that year was 3,969,213.03. Ending fund balance, 8,256,605.60. The change in fund balance that year was a negative or a deficit of 190,157.56. The four-year average budgeted expenditure, $3,668,407.24. The excess for that year, $4,588,000. 198, 37. At the beginning of 2023, beginning fund balance, $8,256,605.60. Revenues for that year, $3,445,384.13. Total expenditures for that year, $4,415,377.34 for an ending fund balance of $7,286,612.39. The change in fund balance that year was almost $1 million, reduction $969,993.21. The four-year average budgeted expenditures, $3,811,616.73. The excess for that year, $3,474,995.66. For 2024, the actual beginning fund balance, $7,286,612.14. Revenues that year, $4,819,167.52. Total expenditures, $5,806,254.01. Ending for fund balance, $6,299,525.65. Lost my place, one second. So the change in fund balance for that year, again, almost a million dollar reduction, $987,086.49. The four-year average for that year, 4,278,143.42. So the excess balance, just shy almost 2 million, 2,021,382.24. So now we move on to 2025, beginning fund balance, $6,299,525.65. We brought in revenues of $5,077,767.87. Expenditures were $6,719,584.52 for an ending fund balance of $4,657,709. The change in fund balance that year, $1,641,816.65 And the excess for that year, there was no excess. It was actually under the threshold by $734,638.53. And now we get to our projected, which is here in our budget document. We have a beginning fund balance, $4,657,709, revenues of $6,644,000, total expenditures of $10,085,422. For a projected ending fund balance of $1,216,287, The change in fund balance, the projected change, is $3,441,422 with the four-year average being $7,354,876.54 and being below the threshold of $6,138,589.54. And so the graph, because the numbers are hard to read, the graph shows the revenues are in blue, the expenditures in orange, and the fund balance is in, am I seeing that right? One second. Yes, revenues in blue, expenditures in orange, and the ending fund balance is in blue.

Green. Green. It's in green. Right?

I'm sorry. Green with the blue outline. Thank you. Yes. Yes. Sorry about that. And then this is just a different graph showing the fund balance, the balance versus the four-year spending threshold. So it does show the excess in the early years and then in the 20, 2025 year and then the 2026 projected budget. The blue line is the ending fund balance. The green line is the four-year average of budgeted expenditures. And then the actual bars are the excess or deficit below the threshold. I think that's all I have to present. Okay. If there are any questions.

We're going to take public comment first, and then Tiffany, if you don't mind, then we'll go to the Commission for questions, so don't go far. Okay. I just want to remind, because we didn't do an opening statement, but now that there's more people here, I want to remind you that you can sign up to speak if you would like. Once the public comment is closed, there is no more public comment. You have three minutes. Please address all comments directly to me, the chair, and, you know, please maintain decorum as we always try to do here. So do we have public speakers? We do. Okay.

Go ahead, Mauricio. Steven Hirsch.

I know you've been here before, but please, your name and address for the record.

Steven Hirsch, 17201 Collins. Last September, I spoke at both budget hearings before this commission where I was pushing for adoption of performance-based budgeting. This year, I return with greater urgency, suggesting our city implement this tool so that the commission and the city manager can evaluate on an ongoing basis all the programs that we have in place. I reviewed the 371-page budget that you'll be voting on tonight on first reading. And I find the central fiscal issue is the structural relationship between recurring revenues and recurring operating expenditures. The general fund revenues declined to approximately $56 million, while expenditures increased to approximately $66.7 million. This does not mean that the city is losing about $10 million, because municipal budgets, of course, contain transfers, reserves, prior year funding, balances, and other But it does reveal one important trend that I think we need to be cognizant of. The regular general fund expenses are growing faster than regular general fund revenues. And this commission and all future commissions need to monitor this closely. Every fiscal year, there is unpredictable expenses that may affect the revenue stream, whether it be a decrease in property values, or this year we have to deal with Amendment 3, or inflation that we have no control over. The city already uses OpenGov, as Tiffany mentioned in her presentation. And it's budgeting software that supports performance-based budgeting. With proper measures, we should be able to utilize that to see what taxpayers receive for their money. But the most important point I want to try to make before I run out of time is that this commission can mandate performance-based budgeting after the annual budget is adopted. Performance standards and management are management policies and requirements. They're not appropriations. The Florida Municipal Budget Statute does not prohibit additional management and reporting requirements during the fiscal year. I suggest the Commission adopt by resolution a performance-based budgeting and management policy after adopting the budget. The Commission should not wait until next year. They can use this year as establishing baselines and report them in the quarterly fiscal reports that the city already issues. Then make next year's budget the first, and funding requests are formally tied to the preceding year's measured results. This will help the city manager and the commission obtain the best return on every tax dollar. And one last thing, if I may, Madam Mayor.

Please just finish your sentence, please.

The point being that if you do not reach your metrics, it is not an immediate reduction of that department's budget. It's just one factor that the city manager and ultimately this commission can look at along with other circumstances in determining where necessary cuts need to be made. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

No other speakers.

OK. So I know that many of you have been here before, and there's people watching on TV. But I'd like to remind everyone about the process and how we get here. So if either the city manager or deputy manager can just very briefly go through the calendar of when we start The budget process how many meetings we've had because we've actually added additional meetings as well just to make sure that all members of the Commission as well as the Residents have access to the information. I think it's on one of the beginning pages. I

Thank you, Mayor. We started the budget process back in February of this year with a philosophical discussion with all of you to give us some sort of a framework of how to put our budget together. So based on that, we then begin the process of going through the budget and the general outline, meeting with the departments. And then we have follow-up meetings with you all in forms of a workshop. All of the processes are open, and the public is invited to attend. And at the workshop, we delve into really the specificity of the different line items and departments. And you give us a direction about where you want to add or take away. At some of those initially, we had proposed a substantial project for Pelington Community Park where we were proposing to redevelop that entire essentially block. And we received feedback from you all that You wanted us to look at something other than that, which we did. So after those couple of workshops, we also had some one-on-one meetings with you where we received feedback about the budget. And you provided us with your notes throughout the process. And then after those two workshops, we had a special budget workshop request from Commissioner Stuyvesant, where we held that, received more feedback, and we incorporated all of those different bits and pieces from each of you into the budget that led us to where we are today, all keeping in mind that we had to build the budget based on the direction of the lower millage rate. So we really couldn't add any substantial projects while we are maintaining or lowering the millage rate, which is what led us here today.

OK, so the calendar for anyone that's following along is on page 36. And we're at the end of that, September 8. That's today. And then the last hearing will be the September 15. And just for the benefit of the public, there was questions that were asked, I believe, of the city manager and as well as the attorney. Were all those questions resolved or answered, rather?

We answered them to the best of our ability, yes.

OK. OK. Perfect. OK.

I just need one clarification.

One second, please. OK. So at this, public comment is closed. I'm going to give everyone who wants an opportunity to speak to speak. So please, Commissioner Stevenson, you go ahead.

You're claiming that all the answers were given to me or to whoever asked? Because most of the questions that I asked have not been answered. OK. So I want you to clarify your comment and your assertion. My comment?

Mine is not a comment. It's a question of the manager if the questions were answered.

No, you are the one who said that all the answers were given. And I want to make sure that on the record, the answers that I had been asking since July, on the record, most of them had not been produced.

OK. So can you provide the manager with the numbers that were not produced? Absolutely.

I don't have it with me right now. But yes, I will, before the next meeting.

OK. Mr. City Manager, because I want to make sure that we close this once and for all, since we can't keep going back and forth. So you believe that the answers were provided, correct? Commissioner Stubeson is saying they were not. So if we can please make sure that we are on the same page, that would be great.

Yes, we have reviewed and provided the best answers available. Some of the questions or statements that we received are more questions or opinions. So we'll be happy to look at anything that you would like to provide further.

I will do so.

All right. So we'll start with questions from the commission. Tiffany, would you mind coming up, please? Because I'm sure there would be some questions. So Commissioner Stuyvesant, please go ahead.

I can give the opportunity to somebody else. Do you want me to be the one to start? No, please go ahead.

I know that you have a lot of questions.

Yes. So I'm going to start with your building department analysis, explanation. So we were on excess for many years of the cap that literally or legally we can have, correct?

There was an excess. That is correct.

How many years? And that is contrary to what the statute said that we should?

Well, the statute says that if you have an excess, you can use it to refund customers. You can use it. This was prior to 7-1, because the statute has now changed.

Yes, yes, yes.

Prior to 7-1, you could use it to construct a building for the staff enforcing the building code. You could use it for software and hardware technology costs. And then you could use it for that staff, for those staff members. And you could use it for training for the same staff members for the building.

I'm sorry, just one caveat to that, too, also. With regards to construction, prior to July 1st, since the amendment, once you determined that money was going to be used for construction, you have four years to hold that. That's correct. It gets confusing because it's a four-year average that deems what you can carry over. But once you determine there's a construction project that fits within the statute, you can carry that fund for four years.

OK, but the point is that we were over the cap year after year and after year. In 2024, you guys hired a consulting firm to study also the building permit fees. What happened with that firm? What happened with the scope? Why we never received anything about it?

For 2024, I'm not aware of a firm. We hired one in 2020 that I'm aware of, but I'm not aware of a firm in 2024.

OK, I have here purchase order 24-02049 to benchmark construction, permit fee, utility. Yes, study deposit. So you guys pay $10,000, check 5A7, 2024. I don't know if anybody remember the company, Benchmark Construction, to study the permit fee study. That's the name that it has here. 2024. Yes. Benchmark Construction.

I'm not aware of a building study being done in 2024.

So your question is? So I don't know if that was labeled incorrectly.

No, I mean, we pay a company to do the study of the permit fee utilization. We pay for it. And we never got anything about it, as far as I know, unless you guys have it and have not shared that with us. So that really is a question to the city manager's office.

Mr. City Manager, can you clarify what studies have been done in order to determine the permit fees?

The only one that I recall is the one that Tiffany is referring to back in 2020. I'm not sure what that specific is. I'd have to look it up.

Okay, thank you. Can you please clarify, Commissioner Stubison, exactly what it is we're looking for?

It is purchase order 24-02049, benchmark construction permit fee, utilization study deposit of $10,000. Then they have another payment of $5,000 that got voided a year later, November 25, 2025. All this is from the data you guys submitted to me.

If I can add also, I don't have the executed contract, which is always the governing document, so I'll preface that. But a contract was written in 24. It was for... Hermit fees utilization study, the terms were compensation upon execution agreement was $10,000 to do the study and $5,000 for the delivery of the report. That's how it was set up. But again, caveat, I don't have the executed agreement, so it could have changed.

Yeah, well, to my point, we paid $10,000 and we never got the report back, or we got it and I don't know what happened. However, now in June of this year, Mr. City Attorney, Barry Dunn. Barry Dunn, B-E-R-R-Y-D-U-N-N. We hired another company to do another study. This under $50,000 threshold, it was $48,640. So my question is, again, the same.

That one is currently being done. That is in progress right now.

So we don't have anything from them just yet.

I will defer.

They just started. So they're currently gathering the information. And then they're scheduling meetings. They've had one meeting with our building department. And then they're going to schedule meetings with everyone else.

So my question, we don't have anything, any report from them just yet. So the amount that we put here for the fee of around $800,000 instead of 1.6, like we had it before, had nothing to do with the study. We just pick the number. Or is it based on their initial findings?

Tiffany, can you clarify how that number is, how do you come to that number, please?

I'm sorry, which number are we talking about?

I think she's referring to the admin chargeback.

The 800? Yes.

Is that right, Commissioner Susan? Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's right? Yeah.

So that was reduced. And again, I explained that in the budget workshop, that that number is likely not an accurate number, because the study is not done yet. But it was based upon the building department moving to the annex. And in their budget now, they've got certain utilities, building maintenance, other things that they will be paying directly. being over in the annex. But again, it was an estimate. We don't have the final study numbers. And I will likely be coming back to you with a budget amendment once those numbers are finalized.

OK. And that brings me to something that overall, when I open the documents, we find over and over again. And it's the big amount of contracts over $50,000. Just remember for the clarification, those contracts, they don't come to the commission. So we are not aware of those contracts. We are not aware of the scope or anything about those. So last year, actually, a year ago, in September meeting, the administration tried to increase that threshold from 50,000 to 100,000. And it didn't pass.

We denied it.

It didn't pass. But, however, you guys were supposed to come back to us with a study, with a workshop about what the numbers should be and also the amount of exemptions that we have. Because anything that it deems necessary for the city, it can be exempted. So that is something that I find also when reviewing the data. There are contracts for $49,990. contract for $49,899, $49,800, millions of dollars in contract, just pennies under the threshold. That's not transparency. I'm sorry. I'm not accusing anything of anyone, but it's just not transparency.

Commissioner Stevenson, if you can just keep it to the questions you have of Tiffany.

Well, I will keep it to my comments, yes. So OK.

If you've got specific contracts that you would like to be discussed because you believe that there was some sort of fraud, is that what you're implying?

Well, I put it on the record last September, and nothing was done. A contract was the same person that was divided in two, which is a friend of you. So that happened already. And I give the information, and no information came back to us. So now before. Also, just to finish with the building fund. This year, we are going to have record of inspections, according to the number here, over 20,000 inspections. And instead of hiring people, we, or the administration, decided not to hire those inspections, but continue outsourcing those. So hiring those inspectors that we claim we cannot find, but apparently the consultant, they can, it would cost us reducing the budget in around $239,000. However, in the outsourcing, we're paying over $1 million. Again, we are building a state of the art building. We can hire the people, and we're paying over three or four times what it would cost us to have the people in house. Again, makes no sense. That's about the building department. But I want to talk also about the public arts fund. City attorney, can you please clarify how the money of the public art program can be spent? the public arts fund, restricted fund. Because I got also here the data of the public fund of the last few years. And we've been spending the money left and right, even for Home Depot, for Publix. We pay over $20,000 to one vendor just to pick up and deliver. a certain art, I guess. We've been paying also artists $4,000, $4,000, $5,000, $7,000. That's from the public art fund. That's the data you guys gave me. So my question will be, as far as I understand, this is also a restricted fund that the monies can be spent. And I'm going to paraphrase the law. After the recommendation of the committee, do we have a standing committee right now for the art fund? Whoever can answer. No, we don't. OK. So how can we be spending the money that cannot be spent according to our own charter, our own rules, unless it's recommended by the committee? Your microphone's not on, Mr. Yeah, so please clarify.

Your ordinance is? And I'll say respectfully to whoever drafted it.

Yeah, please do.

Hardly written. It's sort of a mishmash of what the county had and then added on some additional. So it seems the premise behind your ordinance is related to art in public places and art fund related to construction, new construction, both government construction, which mirrors Miami-Dade County, and then you added a component with commercial construction. It would take me probably two hours to explain. But the work in art and public places program, your ordinance is inconsistent. And it is absolutely unclear as to the finance director manages the fund. The way it's written, it appears, and people can argue, but that the committee is strictly for the approval of the art for the construction, both private and public, and for expenditures related to that art. But it's really silent in regards to any sort of, it talks about placement of artwork. Obviously, the whole program that you can pay in lieu of artwork has to be part of your construction project, and so on and so forth. But it's unclear as to

That's not what I'm referring to. That's not what I'm talking about.

No, I know that's not what you're talking about, but that's what your ordinance says. And it doesn't have a dedicated area clearly stating with regards to art, because your definition of art, and again, I wasn't ready to get into a whole dissertation about this, but your works of art and your works of art in public places and your definitions is intangible creations by artists exhibiting the highest quality of skill and aesthetic principles to be executed on an appropriate scale and for general public access in public places and to give diversion to public environment, including but not limited to paintings, sculptures, stained glass, statues, engravings, carvings, frescoes, mobiles, fountains, monuments, murals, collages, tapestries, photographs, base release, designs and drawings of architecturally designed public spaces and functional element either of the integral parts of the larger project as a separate entity. When it gets into the committee, It says, the committee consisting of individuals created by the city commission by resolution, the committee shall consist of at least five members. The committee shall be responsible for making recommendations to the city commission for works of art required by this chapter for public and private projects. So it seems they're relegated strictly to the approval of projects that are related to construction. Candidly, there are inconsistencies in your code, but that appears to be the mandate for your

No, I still not. So if I may finish.

Yeah, go ahead.

I was trying to answer your question. No, OK. 104.2 says the committee shall be responsible for making. I'm sorry, what section? 104.2 shall be responsible for making recommendations to the city commission for works of art required by this chapter for public and private projects. And then 104.41b says public art money. shall be used solely for expenses associated with the selection, commission, acquisition, installation, maintenance, administration, removal, and insurance of works of art of public education or programming of the public art program. The point I try to make is that we bought tables from Home Depot, groceries from Publix, catering, party rentals, Costco, Dollar Tree, et cetera, with the money of the public art fund. And here, I think it's kind of simple that says that it has to be associated to what we read before. And all the money has to be spent by recommendations of the committee that we do not have. So that is another fund that we have spent millions of dollars without even having a committee, which is the one that is supposed to oversee, and then recommend, and then spend.

Can you just clarify, because I'm looking.

I won't argue the point, but we looked at this. It would take, there's a lot of back and forth between sections of your code that are completely inconsistent when it comes to this. So it's very difficult. I can do it in writing for you, and I can clarify it for you, do the best I can. But there's a lot of inconsistencies in your code.

OK, by the way, one second. Commissioner Schiff, you just said millions of dollars were spent. Because I want to make sure that we're all looking at the same thing you're looking at. What million dollars were spent?

You will have to check the data that we received with my answers like a month ago.

Over $3 million. OK? So you can check the data that we have. So my point is. One second. Because we're making a lot of accusations, I want to make sure that we keep up with it.

I'm not making any accusations. I'm talking about the fund.

I understand that. Could we get some clarification on the public arts program and how that generally works?

So when this was first established, there was actually a former consultant for the city presented to the commission a public art playbook that included, there was also a cultural arts plan or whatever that we paid a different consultant for. And in that, even back then, they paid for pop-up, a little pop-up symphony at Town Center Park, things like that. So events were always understood to be part of the public art program. Mm-hmm. And since that time, Art on Court, Poetry in the Park, those things, the Gateway Artway, which is public art that is actually created by the community. The photo contest? Those are the things. No, I don't believe the photo contest is because that preexisted. But those are the things that have been paid for out of this fund. Okay. As well as maintenance of our current pieces that are outside.

Correct.

Please go ahead, Commissioner Susan. Okay. So like I was saying, the meditation garden, which was over $800,000, everything came from that fund. $150,000. No, but one of the portions of it. So like irrigation, walkway drainage, landscaping, all that. The code restricts this fund to the work of art in its installation, maintenance, whatever, not to build a park. We use the fund to build the park. And another question that I have, and nobody has been able to answer to me, who picks the artists that we feature in all those projects? Because we pay tens of thousands of dollars just to move the art. We pay the insurance. We pay the catering. We are basically creating a whole event for that specific artist. So who picked the artist? Because it has never come to a vote to us. And this is kind of what we are here elected to do, which is oversee the money of the people. So my question is very specific. Who picked the artists that get featured in these events that they cost tens of thousands of dollars to the city and to the taxpayers? Which event? All of the last event of the last three years. OK, so if you can, deputy manager.

Well, ultimately, the city manager's office, but through the cultural and community services department. OK, so staff. They manage the events, yes.

OK, so we are giving our job, what we are supposed to be doing, we are relating that to the staff. And we just get invited once you guys decide who you are going to feature. And it never come even to us unless we request the cost of it. Like I said, only moving one of these exhibits to one vendor, we pay over $20,000. It is a local. OK, so I continue.

Mayor, if I may. Please, go ahead. I just want everyone to understand that it was our interpretation, as the city attorney had pointed out all along, the selection of performance events has always lied with staff. um when it was for art in public places such as the sculptures the those things as the pack the public art advisory committee as part of the site plan as part of they would um those were the things that came to the commission um

And so historically, so that, again, people that are here could understand, our code requires an art component when there is a site plan. And there's either, just to make a very generic statement, you can either pay off or make a donation to the city, or you can propose a piece of art. And those are the pieces of art that we have throughout the city that is meant for the public to have access to. When we had those pieces, we had a PAC, Public Arts Committee, that they would, based on their expertise, make a recommendation of the art, and that would come in front of the commission, that part of it, not who's chosen for the symphony, who's chosen for the contest for the pieces that we have throughout the city, the poetry, so on and so forth. That has always historically been done by staff.

Right. And the example of public art purchase that was approved by the PAC is the piece of artwork that is currently installed at the Meditation Garden. That silver piece went before the PAC and it went before commission. I think that was the last one. That's the last one that I recall, yes. Right. OK. Go ahead, Commissioner.

Like I said, that's not what the code says, how this money has to be used. And right now, we're talking about the budget. That's why I'm bringing this. Because maybe historically, we've been doing things wrong, but we should start doing it right. And you've been here for 10 years, and this really, you keep saying that everything is in the hands of the experts. So 10 years in government, and people, or you guys still don't understand the code? OK, I continue.

I would just like to verify, how long has it been since we have not had a PAC?

One second, please. If you can write down your questions, Commissioner Joseph, it would be helpful so that we don't lose. I don't know. Right now, Commissioner Stubison has the floor. Let her finish. You could just write that question down.

I have then another question. Because from the first book that we got a couple of months ago, To this book, $325 million in debt disappeared. They just went out. So to say that the budget is fluid will be like an understatement. So my question is about the $175 million that we were supposed to be borrowing this year, who make that determination, and then who make the determination of taking it out of the budget. Because that never came to us for a vote or anything else. So if somebody can walk us through the process of when it was printed, it was $175 million and then $150 million, $325 million altogether between two years of debt. So that's my question. And maybe it's not for you, Tiffany. Maybe it's for the city manager's office. But that is what I want to understand. Because what we put here in this book is really important. And like you guys said, it takes a lot of time, a lot of effort, a lot of hours to put it together. So it is interesting that between the first book to this one, like I said, $325 million of proposed debt just disappeared.

Please, Mr. City Manager, if we can also get clarification on what disappeared means.

Okay, so when we produce a budget, it's tentative. So it has to be able to be changed because ultimately you approve it. Every item that we bring before you has to be accounted for, and it is. So we had proposed a substantial project in Pelican Community Park, essentially building a state-of-the-art facility that would encompass most of the block, updated, brand-new facility, including a parking garage. So when we brought that forward, we have to have a way to finance that project versus we don't have those kinds of funds set aside in our budget. Part of our proposed financing was a bond. So as part of our workshop and going back and forth, the commission directed us that that should be removed, and it was.

OK. So it was removed.

Well, we never even had the chance to recommend to be removed. We were just asked questions. If it was going to be a referendum, how we were going to pay, what was the price tag of it. We actually never even had the opportunity to discuss, because from the first to the workshop, then, like I said, it got removed. But it was not by our direction. So it was never our direction to put it,

to remove it. Let me just stop you for a second. Again, I want to make sure that this is clear. Because whatever accusations are being made, I want to make sure that the manager or whomever the accusations is towards can respond to it. Our input is not always in as a group. We speak to the manager individually. But collectively, the manager makes those decisions based on what the majority of the commission is inclined to vote for. So I may not like something that the majority may vote for, but it doesn't mean that it's wrong. It just means that I didn't get my way. So Mr. City Manager, could you please clarify as far as the change to the project, the major change that was made, how did you come about making that decision to no longer move forward with that project?

Right. Ultimately, the budget is mine, and I have to take the feedback from all of you, including individually, and build that into our budget. So my belief is that the consensus was you did not want to have a bond, nor did you want to do a substantial construction project, especially in light of your direction to lower the millage. So based on that, it was removed. If it was in the budget, My feeling would be that you would not approve the budget at all.

Thank you.

Mayor, if I can just add also procedurally and statutorily, the city commission's role basically starts to see, I mean, you can always make recommendations, but to the city manager's point, it's his budget up until the time. There's a statutory process where you can make amendments to the budget which are statutorily advertised and scheduled pursuant to floor statute 20.065. So you can't deviate from that. So prior to that, certainly you give recommendations to the city manager. He can take them or not take them. That's up to him. But ultimately, it's his budget. And this is really the first time you actually get to vote. Prior to this, you can't vote on the budget. we can make recommendations. MARTHA MINOWSKI.

Right. This is the first time we're voting. I'm just going to give an opportunity for some other members of the commission to have the floor so that Commissioner Joseph and then Commissioner Lama.

ROBERT J.

So I have one question regarding the original bond amount that was proposed to us. City manager came up with that number. And how did you get to that number? Did you have a vision of what might be created for that number? I'm trying to understand where that $250 million came from, how you got to that number.

The $250 million was an estimate for doing this entire project.

But did you have a vision for what that project would be? You can't just put numbers on something. What was the vision?

An entire new Pelican Community Park, multi-story facility with basketball courts, gymnasium, space for the children, new baseball field or new play field, along with a multi-story parking garage.

Now, this is the first that anyone on this commission is hearing your vision. Did you speak to an architect to get any figures or anything? No, this isn't the first.

Commissioner Joseph, this is based on the parks master plan that we all discussed at length. But could we just try to keep the questions to Tiffany so then she doesn't have to keep standing here? And then do you have another question? Because I want to give Commissioner Lama an opportunity.

I have a question regarding the Intracoastal Park that was just opened. OK, please. OK, so I noticed the other day that now this park was built with resident funds for the residents. Is that correct?

Is this part of the budget? Is this a budget question that we're currently voting on?

I'm getting to it.

All of our projects that we do are for residents.

OK, so I noticed that we have hotel guests are, there are fees that hotel guests can pay to use the parks. How did that occur?

Which? Which hotel?

It just says hotel guests. There's a fee for hotel guests.

For the opinion of the city attorney, we cannot make a park completely private for residents only when taxpayer dollars are used to fund it, to build it.

But I think the question is, if I understand you, you're asking if hotel guests can pay the city to use parks?

We have rates established for, so residents are free, hotel guests who contribute to this economy pay another rate, and then non-residents pay another rate.

Okay. Now, to those same hotels that you're allowing to use our park, to the exclusion, possibly, if there were that many hotel guests... you know, that would not allow for residents to use the park in our, you know, because we don't have lights. So there's only so many. Are there lights? Are there lights? Oh, there are lights? Yes, sir. There's lights. Okay. Open until 10 p.m. Until 10 p.m.? Yes, sir. So the tennis courts and basketball are open until 10 p.m.? Yes, sir. Okay. So, okay. So...

So residents have an opportunity to make a reservation in advance. Hotel guests cannot. They can do it the day of.

Right. They have to show up in person. Correct. And make a reservation.

Correct.

Yes. Okay. So Sunny Isles Beach residents do not have the reciprocal rights to use amenities at those same hotels. So how do you justify that?

When it's private property, you can't dictate what. This is public property. Public and private property. You can't dictate what a hotel does.

It's private property.

Yeah, but the whole thing makes no sense that we have resident funds, Sunny Isles Beach resident funds that paid for this park.

But it can't be exclusive for your residents. It's a 14th Amendment violation. You'll have the ACLU knocking on your door pretty quickly.

So Aventura is doing that. So they are breaking the law. Because you go to Founders Park with your kids to the water park. And if you don't have an Aventura ID, you cannot use it.

You have a 14th Amendment problem there. Cities have tried. And there's one in California, I can't remember, a few years ago. But yeah, it's a 14th Amendment violation.

I appreciate this conversation. And it's very interesting. But could we just stay to the budget, please? I'm going to let Commissioner Lama ask his question.

This will be for another day to resolve this issue.

I think it's a fair question. So let's just stick to the budget, please.

Regarding the issuance of debt, I don't know if you remember, but we had the workshop and we did discuss and it was mentioned that that line item was taken off and I came back and we asked what was left there and there was a line item left there for the repair of PELICAN PARK. AND THEN I DISCUSSED ALSO THAT I STILL WANTED TO SEE A, YOU KNOW, ALL ENCOMPASSING COMMUNITY CENTER. I THINK WE DO NEED IT BUT THAT WE NEEDED TO PROBABLY, YOU KNOW, DIVE DEEPER INTO THE COST OF THESE, OF SUCH A PROJECT. Yeah, we discussed it. I mean, we discussed it during the workshop. So I just wanted to refresh your memory.

Actually, thank you for reminding me. You were supposed to go to Doral and take pictures.

Yeah, yeah, I haven't been able yet. But I have it on my to-do list, yes, and I will do that.

All right, thank you.

Doral and some other ones.

All right, so Commissioner Stevenson, you have the floor again. All right.

So about the software. I don't have no question for you, Tiffany.

It's me, at least me. So I don't know about anybody else. Thank you, Tiffany.

All right. So about the software. We have OpenGov. We pay. around $250,000 for that software. And we still don't have the credentials. And also the transparency portal that is supposed to be open for the public is not switched on. I mean, we don't have access to the commission. The people don't have access, I do believe, because one of the reasons when it came to us for the first time, which I believe was in 2023, it was because of how user-friendly it is, and because of the transparency portal. So OpenGov should be open for the people. The same thing with SmartGov. That's the one that we use for the building department. I had this conversation over the years. I've been asking for the staff to give us a presentation about the capabilities of both of those BOTH OF THEM THEY HAVE A CITIZEN SEARCH PORTAL AND THOSE FEATURES CONTINUE BEING LOCKED FOR THE PEOPLE. SO IT IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE WE ARE APPROVING THE BUDGET AND WE ARE APPROVING TO CONTINUE THE SOFTWARE WITH OPEN GOV AND WITH SMART GOV AND THEY HAVE THE OPEN CHECKBOOK AND EVERYTHING AND AGAIN IT'S NOT AVAILABLE FOR THE PEOPLE AND THAT IS NOT REALLY RESPONSIBLE LEADERSHIP OR TRANSPARENCE.

That's a good example.

I put that example back in the days, that if you go into the Durham portal of the county, you can even read the emails between the Durham people and any unit owners. So everything is out there. the staff is choosing not to allow the people to have access to those features. And again, that is not transparency. And another thing I wanted to point out about the things that were taken out of the budget between the first one and this one, it is the renovation of the restrooms in . And I would like to have a clarification about what was taken out.

Deputy manager? I believe it was just reduced. I know that they're still planning to do it. It's still in the budget. For how much? $40,000. OK.

Which line item?

It's on page 207.

OK, perfect. So it was reduced. With respect to that, that restroom in every single public restroom in the city should be a priority in this budget. I have seen me, myself, the parents running from the soccer field in to McDonald's to take the kids to the restroom. is a health hazard. So it should be priority to redo, renovate, or do anything necessary for those restaurants to be clean and to be I mean, even compliant. So the structures usually are not functioning. And this is something that our people is going to be using on a daily basis. And like I said, $40,000, when we are putting their $30,000 just to celebrate whoever wins the election, that doesn't make any sense. So the priorities and the fiscal responsibility we have, it is upside down. With that and so much more, I do believe that this budget does not reflect the needs of the people of Sunnyhurst.

Thank you. Just a reminder that the priorities are set by this body. All right. Would anyone else like, Vice Mayor, you haven't had an opportunity to speak? Okay.

Go ahead.

GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER LAMA.

REGARDING THE BATHROOMS, WE ALL HAD THAT DISCUSSION AND WE ALL DIRECTED STAFF TO EITHER FIX ALL THE BATHROOMS, IMPROVE THE VENTILATION AND TO REMODEL THOSE. SO I THINK IT'S JUST A MATTER getting it done um obviously we'd like to get it done as of yesterday and then regarding town center are are those bathrooms going to be improved or are we going to wait for um the the redevelopment of town center park the one we we discussed to happen

It's waiting for the full redevelopment. There's a whole new, there's a whole different design for them to have more than what we have.

Can we, just for the meantime, improve ventilation in the bathrooms so we could?

I can see what we can do without a large investment. Yes.

Regular ventilation or, I don't know.

There's fans. Let me make sure.

Just a reminder to everyone, we approved a complete redesign of the town center, which includes brand new bathrooms. So it's a little bit of a balancing act when something needs to really be changed by wanting to improve it, spending money on improving it versus just waiting to put in a new one. Absolutely. Okay. Commissioner Lama, is there anything else?

No, no, not at this time.

Okay, well, this is your time.

No, no, if we could just, you know, see how we could speed up the process of remodeling these bathrooms, and if possible, in the meantime, you know, because by the time we get, you know, a contractor, et cetera, I just wanted to see if maybe the ventilation can improve.

Okay, I think that there's no one that would disagree on that, so, okay. Vice Mayor? Okay, Commissioner Joseph?

I do have a comment about the bathrooms and the restrooms and renovations because it's very interesting that to renovate the restrooms of the people is so complicated. However, last year, the restroom on the fourth floor, your restroom, your restroom, was renovated. Beautiful new restroom. So the bathroom of the mayor can be renovated immediately, but the bathroom of... The people do not getting renovated. I'm going to post a picture of the restaurant on the fourth floor, and then you can also compare to the other restaurants. For that one, we don't need anything. We just go one day, they do it, and it's beautiful. But the rest of the children of this city, For that, we need to have a whole procurement process. Excellent.

One second, one second, one second. I need to answer that, because that's a ridiculous statement. The difference between putting in an actual building outside versus a renovation of the fourth floor, which this body approved, I do not have my own bathroom. That's a restroom for the entire floor. I don't even understand why that comment would be made. But obviously, those are two very different things. And everything that is spent is, again, approved by this commission. Just because one commissioner or two commissioners don't agree with it doesn't mean that there's something nefarious going on.

Please go ahead. And that is also not a real statement. Because things, many, most of the things, they don't even come to us. Like I'm saying, there are millions of dollars in procurement and purchase orders under $50,000. They never come to us. So now everything that gets spent, it comes to us for approval. Correct. We do not approve. But I have the floor. No, hold on, hold on. But I do have the floor. We do not approve every Amazon. So now you are going to be the one that is going to be.

Commissioner Stubeson. I have the floor. No, you don't. Because I'm going to tell you something. If you're going to make accusations, you need to be very, very careful with your language. Because you're making accusations against finance. You're making accusations against procurement. I am not. You just did.

That your interpretation. And you're saying in the record shows there are millions of dollars in procurement and purchase orders under $50,000 that never come to us.

We approve the budgets. We don't approve every single item. We don't approve if a pencil is purchased. That would be ridiculous.

Well, obviously, it would be ridiculous. But it's being abused as it is.

That is an accusation. Who? Who are you saying is abusing it?

That is not an accusation. That's not an accusation. That is actually accurate. It's absolutely an accusation. OK. So that's your interpretation. And then the funny thing is that you are saying that we are the ones setting priorities and setting the policy. EVERYTHING IS IN THE BUDGET AND THE CITY MANAGER JUST SAID THAT THE BUDGET BELONGS TO HIM. SO WE ARE RATIFYING WHAT THE CITY MANAGER IS TELLING US THAT Like I said, the priorities are the restaurants. The priorities are the things that are going to improve the life of the citizens, that they are the ones using the money for this budget. So we are not setting policies or priorities. We're just ratifying whatever is brought to us with big numbers in this budget. This is a budget of $200 million. And like you said, everything is in there. No. Everything is just going to be spent the way it's being spent. And like we said before, our fund is being misinterpreted for years, and it continues. The same thing with the building fund. Contrary to what the statute said, the cap for many, many years until it was brought to our attention. And now suddenly the building fund is going to end up almost negative.

All right. Commissioner Joseph, you have the floor. And then we need to move to vote on this.

I just want to make a comment regarding what Fabiola just said, Commissioner Stuyvesant. If we had all budget issues come to us below $50,000, the city would be totally stymied.

OK?

We could never have that happen. That just shows that you don't have a concept of running a business, because you have to have daily business occurring, purchases You can't have a city stymie having to run to a commission for items under $50,000. We had the proposal come to us to raise it to $100,000. We denied it. It made sense. I also would not want to have the limit up to 100,000. I think in our overview that having it at 50,000 is the correct number. But it falls back on the city manager. If anything occurs that's not correct, Those purchases below $50,000 fall back on the city manager that he has to answer to. And that's how a city moves forward day to day.

All right. Thank you. All right. With that, I will take a motion.

I'll make a motion.

Thank you. I need a second.

We're voting on the budget, right? Yes, we are.

Second. Thank you. Mauricio?

Commissioner Joseph. Yes. Commissioner Lama. Yes. Commissioner Stuyvesant. Vice Mayor Biscara.

I'm going to be a no, not because I think it's a bad budget. I think it's a good budget given the restrictions that were created. I just feel very strongly we shouldn't have lowered the millage, and this is crafted on the millage. And so the budget is fine for the millage, but I just don't think we should have done it. So I'm a no. OK. Thank you.

Mayor Svetchen?

Yes.

The ordinance passes 3-2.

I would just like to say that I believe that the 60% threshold on this vote in November is very high and I have faith in the fact that knowing that there are so many unions and Others against it that it will not pass. Okay.

We just have to be careful remember Commissioner. We can't Say anything for or against it Individually you can as a body you can right?

Okay, you can't expend money in that regard all right your opinion your personal opinions on it Absolutely.

Absolutely, and I don't disagree with you. So Okay, and then for the public the final reading of the budget is commercial and

It's September 15th, next Tuesday at 5.30.

Okay, next item, please.

Next item is 4A, a resolution providing a merit salary adjustment for City Manager Stanley Morris.

Okay, Mr. City Manager.

Mayor, if I may, I, according to my contract, should be reviewed each year. And I'm always looking for ways to improve from you all. As you've seen through the budget process, it's very difficult sometimes to put something together and get consensus. So I have to constantly be updating and prioritizing the different projects that we do. Some of the things that I wanted to bring to your attention over these past now four and a half years for me, based on the direction that you all gave me, In the beginning, public safety being number one priority. So there's a couple of things that I want to show you. This won't take any more than five minutes. But I wanted to tell you that these are some of the things that I put together. I'm very proud of the accomplishments that we've done together over these past four and a half years. First, I think, The work with the police department is something that I'm most proud of. But I wanted to say that we've lowered the millage rate for the past four consecutive years to now being the lowest millage rate in all of Dade County, which is substantial. uh as part of this and the police department work i was responsible and i i have to take credit for these things because frankly it falls under me so if i'm going to be held responsible then i have to bring it forward the police chief hiring is something that i brought and i think it's been a great success having chief santiago the assistant police chief hiring, procurement director hiring, building official hiring, the assistant building department director, public works director, assistant public works director, police department accreditation. We've achieved full staffing in the police department with 69 sworn officers for the first time. in the city's history. We hired a total of 29 new police officers through promotions and hiring. Ocean Rescue fully staffed with 25 full-time and 12 part-time employees. The building department accreditation and both the police department and Ocean Rescue Division certified autism centers. National Accreditation for Ocean Rescue Division by the United States Life Saving Association. We've expanded resident access to government services through Family Resource Day, Constituents Day, monthly DVPR drop-in sessions, and monthly mobile DMV services that we've brought to the city. I wanted to share with you, because we've talked about the police department I wanted to share with you a brief clip of the PBA gala. And Stedman Stahl is the president of the PBA, recognizing the work that we've done here. So I asked them to play it for you tonight.

STEDMAN STAHL, JR.: The signing out of that, General, Stan Morris. He has really set the tone for a lot of things. A lot of these things out there are on sale right now about Stan Morris. He thinks he's done just what he's done, which he has to be with. And I'd like to say thank you for that.

So what he's saying there is he's recognizing the work that we've done with our PBA and working with our police department and really elevating our police department to being number one, not just in Dade County, but I consider in the states and the work that we've done here. So that's the first thing. And then recently, within the past week, I asked them to put a copy of it. I was notified by the American Society of Public Administrators that I have been awarded the Presidential Award for the work that we've done here. And they're having a gala, and I would like to invite all of you to attend that. So based on that, I recognize that my good work, first of all, it's a little bit difficult to make mention of the accomplishments on my own because nothing I have done has been without the help of the staff, Susan, our city attorney, but especially the leadership and direction for all of you. So based on that, I just wanted to say thank you.

OK, thank you. Do we have public speakers?

No, ma'am.

OK, so public comment is closed. Commissioner Joseph, please go ahead. You have the floor.

OK, thank you. So this item was, again, dropped on us with very little time. I submitted today for information, questions to be answered, and I received nothing back. So I ask at this time that this motion be deferred to a later date.

We don't have a motion yet.

Well, I'm making a motion. OK. For this question of pay increase to be a review and pay increase to be deferred to a later date.

OK, we have a motion on the floor. Is there a second? Okay, motion. Don't let everybody else have their comments. No, he made a motion. There's a motion on the floor, so.

Well, you guys are always changing the rules because many times. No, please don't interrupt me. It's a procedural motion. Please do not interrupt. Many times we've been here before when somebody make a motion, we continue discussing, and then we go back to the motion. So it cannot be sometimes it's okay and sometimes it's not, okay?

All right, thank you. So there's a motion on the floor.

Is there a second? Well, I have a comment before making a second, okay? The comment is that, like Jerry said, for me, this was a budget hearing. It was about the trim notice, and it was about adopting the budget. Very simple. It was very little scope. I do believe that the city manager should be bringing this in a regular commission meeting that we're going to have next week. So I don't even understand why we're discussing right now this resolution when, like I said, it was very specific. This is a budget hearing. And like that is the way it is even on everywhere that was published. It's the first hearing about the budget. Nothing to do with resolution. Thank you.

Was this agenda publicly noticed?

Yes, ma'am.

Okay. When?

It was published on Friday.

Okay. Is that consistent with what we've done in the past?

It is.

OK. Thank you. All right. So I have a motion.

I'm sorry. I just wanted to clarify a point by the commissioner. But it's in my contract that it should be part of the budget discussion.

I understand. And I get it. But please, I'm trying to stick with the procedural motion. So there is a motion. Is there a second? It doesn't mean that you can't make another motion later.

I'll make a second. Yes.

So defer the item until next week. All right.

I'll ask for a roll call. Thank you. Commissioner Joseph. Yes. Commissioner Stuyvesant?

Yes.

Commissioner Lama? No.

Your microphone's on.

No. Vice Mayor Vizcarra? No. Mayor Svecin? No. The motion fails two to three.

All right. So now we're discussing the items. Can I ask you a question, Commissioner Joseph? The questions that you requested of the manager, is that something that you can share right now? Are these any questions that can be answered right now?

Well, I don't know. We can go over them, and we'll see if anyone else thinks they're relevant.

When were they sent? Today. When? Today?

Starting from this morning.

All right. So while you're looking for that, Mr. Stevenson, did you have anything else to add?

But I have to say that in March, the city manager brought before the commission just out of the blue that he asked for an increase. And we said that this was out of the blue, that we needed to have a deferral for him to prepare a list of his accomplishments, his sole accomplishments, to present to the commission in order for us to recognize or not whether he was due an increase. And that never occurred. And today was another issue that he brought up, which was not for an increase. I guess it would turn out to be an increase, but the review And I was also questioning why we're now in 2026. What happened to the review? Why did you not pursue the review from 2024 and 2025? And now you're asking for something to be retroactive.

OK, Mr. City Manager, I cut you off before. I just want to make it clear that you are correct, that a increase would be part of the budget discussion. But please answer that question so we can get clarification. And then if you can just reiterate what your contract stipulates, because you're not the only charter officer that has a stipulation as far as increases.

The contract stipulates that I'm supposed to be reviewed annually as part of the budget process. And the reason for the past two years is all of the accomplishments that I shared with you, we were just too busy and involved with budget and all of those various things and bringing things to you. So I brought it up. I mentioned it in March. And Commissioner Joseph's correct. He asked that it be brought back. And this is it. And I've provided you with a list of the accomplishments.

OK. Thank you.

Those weren't your accomplishments. Those were department accomplishments.

Correct. The department's report to the manager. Commissioner Lama, would you like to add something or ask any questions?

Yeah, so I see percentages here. For me, and I do recognize obviously the accomplishments, but I would like to see the numbers. I see percentages, so I would like to see the numbers before I can vote on this. Or maybe we could vote on it as amended. I'm not sure. But yeah, I would like to see the actual numbers.

OK. Is that something that you can provide right now, or are you suggesting what was requested earlier, which was to defer the item?

No, if they could be provided.

Do we have the numbers right now?

After the fact, I mean.

After the fact, I think you're asking us to vote on something that then is going to be changed? I'm not comfortable.

So if he could provide with the numbers now.

What is the actual number?

And then vote on it as amended and put in the resolution.

I understand now. Thank you.

The number is currently 285201.74. It would be adjusted to 302570.53.

That's with the two 3%, the two?

Correct. That's the final numbers? Yes, yes, it is.

Okay.

Any other, wait, wait, wait, let's just, let's do this correctly. Any other questions, Commissioner Lama? You keep your microphone on because.

Yeah, I'm going to check the map.

Check them out. Thank you. Commissioner Joseph?

Yes. How does your current salary compare to cities around us? Do you know?

Please go ahead.

As part of this original draft, the town of Golden Beach is at 347,018. City of North Miami is at 380,500. And Belle Harbor is at 325,500. And yours is how much you said? 285. 285,201.74. Mm-hmm.

And do you happen to know North Miami Beach or North Miami, which are much larger cities?

I don't. The ones I put together are ones that are very similar to our city and oceanfront.

I believe we don't have enough information to vote on this right now. I pull out here the contract. And the contracts stipulate not only when we are going to be voting annually, but also it says that work in conjunction with mayor and city commission. Keep the mayor and city commission informed in all matters approved by the city commission. Copy mayor and city commission of all correspondences pertaining to matters approved by the city commission. Provide biweekly reports to the mayor and city commission. Many of the stuff that also says the contract, it is not happening as it is right now. And I know this is going to sound maybe another way people want to hear it, but if we have two commissioners that are going to be here for the next three months, I think it's inappropriate for them to be right now voting in the salary of the city manager that is going to be effective for so many more time than them. So on this, really, we should be having this discussion with more information and allowing the people to come and make their comments next week when we have a regular commission meeting, and not right now, just as fast as we're doing it. This is inappropriate. If I may?

Yes. One second. Let Vice Mayor speak. This is for 2024 and 2025. So new commissioners would not be qualified to vote on that.

OK. Commissioner Joseph?

I would just like to say that we have a, I had made a no confidence motion last month at the commission meeting. I'm expecting Hopefully in January that we'll have other votes to change the city manager I just want the Commission to know that if you Increase the city manager's salary now. It's going to cost the residents additional in releasing this city manager Okay, so that's to be considered.

All right. Thank you Any other comments? I think

You left out the fact that you are a credentialed city manager. I think you're the only credentialed city manager we ever had. And I've been very open about, we talked about this the last time, I think you've done a wonderful job. So I'm certainly supportive.

OK. Anyone else? Commissioner Lama?

No.

No questions. As long as we're talking about and the city manager has not presented any accomplishments of his own, I would like to bring up things that he has not done well. For instance, since I've been on the commission, I have not had the city manager propose any resolution to the Center Island flooding that has cost the city millions of dollars in amounts due to inflation, that even if this would have been sought out and gone after in 2022, the inflation rate was so much less, even though it was right after COVID. Still, we're four years later, and with inflation and cost for These same pumps, we're talking about another at least $20 million. It was up to the city manager, who was the supervisor of projects in this city, to propose those items to be worked on and presented to the commission for funding and that never occurred. That's only one issue. We have projects that have had overruns that even though when the city bids out a project and there is a contractor, the city manager is over the contractor. It's for the city manager to keep the contractor's nose to the grindstone and keep that project moving along. And I have not seen this from this city manager in any city project that we've had going the Intracoastal Park, had overruns and time overruns. The undergrounding in Golden Shores has been a debacle. We still have one resident that for some odd reason, and there's no lawsuit any longer so I can talk about this,

There was never any lawsuit even to talk about. We were just coordinating dates, which occurs actually. They're going to do the house tomorrow.

When is this happening? Tomorrow. OK. So I had to push and push and push to have this one resident have her electricity CONNECTED IN THE MANNER THAT FPL WANTED TO DO ACCORDING TO THEIR PLAN AND THE CITY TO SAVE A FEW DOLLARS WAS BLOCKING IT FOR OVER A YEAR.

I'M SORRY. I HAVE TO INTERRUPT BECAUSE When the commissioner first brought this up in March, there were no issues before between me and the commissioner. But the reality is, and the history is, Because it all relates to the extended construction hours. And once I inform the commissioner that we had a disagreement regarding the extended construction hours, you know what I'm talking about. And I'm gladly going to bring it up next meeting. I'm talking about Mr. Deezer's project in particular. So once... We had a disagreement about that, and you didn't want them to have construction hours ever since then. You've consistently brought up things.

You're trying to make that a personal issue. All right, all right, listen.

No, I'm sorry, but since we're discussing it, it absolutely is.

Absolutely not. All right, so I'm going to.

I have to just finish this, because at the last statement.

Don't interrupt each other, please. Commissioner Joseph, let the manager finish.

There was a group text regarding that statement. came through Commissioner Joseph's household asking the residents to come out to stop the construction. The commissioners repeatedly asked me and sent me videos of I'm not sure what, but I complained for the commission, all related to the extended construction hours. Beyond that, he's asked me for a badge, which I did not give a badge. He's asked for a number of people for a badge. He's told me that there's a number of people that are complaining, yet it's not come to me. So I question the motives, and all of a sudden him questioning my decision, which is counter to all of the things that I presented to you. absolutely the manager. You can't hold him responsible for things and departments and then say, oh, his department's success have nothing to do with him. It's all related to the people that I've put in place. So it's incorrect, and I do question your motives in this. It's only because of that that it started.

Well, you are absolutely incorrect, and I will I invite you on every issue that you bring up regarding... And that's what you've done.

You're correct. That's exactly what you've done.

No, on every issue now that you say that I'm against you on, you're incorrect. Because I have voted... for Deezer on his pouring of his concrete. He has issues with me. He's put up millions of dollars to defeat me. I have no issues. My only issues with Deezer is regarding what he's trying to do on Dumbfounding Bay to pollute the bay. OK? I have issues regarding, you know, Just regarding the construction, the residents in the city have a right to peace and quiet. And I don't understand. And I asked in one of my questions. I'm glad to bring it up. I'm not finished. Neither am I. I asked in one of my questions that I wrote to Mauricio, please let me know what other cities allow construction and banging until 2 in the morning. One or two in the morning. Right.

What project are you referring to?

Please let me know.

What project are you talking about? Yeah, which one in particular?

I'm talking about the Bentley.

Okay. All right, so here's... And you've asked me about eminent domain for those properties that he owns. So if we're going to bring everything forward, let's bring it out.

Is there construction that goes on at the Bentley until 1 and 2 in the morning? Yes or no?

Yes, there is.

There is. So is that a logical hour for people who work the next day have to work to have banging and construction?

Do you want to extend the project out for two years? Do you want to extend the project?

That's nonsensical, because they always have another project that they're working on. So that just makes no sense. Let's go faster so that they can start the next project. That makes no sense.

All right, so here's what I'm going to do. People have a right to peace and quiet in the evening. Commissioner Joseph, for the purposes of this item and because there's more information that's needed, like for instance, I just pulled up the salaries of the various city managers.

These are all of my.

No, no, no. I know that. So I think that it's important that everyone has those questions and that the community is able to come out for or against. And I would be very. This is not personal. Commissioner Joseph. No, I understand. I have plenty of issues.

No, it's not personal to me either. But I'm going to show at the meeting when I bring the documents your request. And that's your right. Right. Your request at a budget workshop specifically to block Mr. Deezer's extended hours.

All right. So here. Specifically from you.

Yes, sir.

You. OK. I am passing the gavel. I am making the motion to defer this to our commission meeting next week. Do I have a? So my motion is to defer this item to our commission meeting to allow for the questions. You can just change the vote. Change your vote.

Right. You could just do a reconsideration of the previous motion.

That's what I'm doing then.

Well, actually, one of the proponents technically needs to make the motion again as we consider it.

I'll redo my second, yeah.

OK. OK. Did we do this correctly? Give me my pencil.

And for me, it's just about the process, nothing to do with the merits of the issue. I don't like these things as a surprise. So let's have a nice, good, decent discussion next week.

All right. So I don't think any of this was a surprise. Here's where I'm understanding that there is confusion and there is frustration. And I hear it. And I think that this is on both sides or on many sides. So I want to give everyone an opportunity to come to our commission meeting. now that you've all been here, to participate in this for or against. This is your money. But also allow some of the questions that were raised by my colleagues on the dais to be answered, but also give the opportunity for the manager to properly present his accomplishments. Let's vote on it, and then I have a few more words that I want to add.

Mayor, if you could just very, I apologize for the formality, but can we vote first on the motion for reconsideration?

Right, that's what I'm asking for.

And then we can.

So do we have a motion for the reconsideration?

From Commissioner Steveson.

A second.

I'll make a second.

All in favor?

Aye. Any opposed?

So the motion passes four to one.

OK.

So now a motion to defer.

Now I'll make the motion to defer to next week.

Actually, did you pass the gavel? Sorry. No, I didn't mean literally. I didn't know if you said it.

There we go. Yes, I'm making a motion. Vice Mayor, you need to ask for a second.

Is there a second? Thank you.

Yes, I'll second.

Thank you.

All in favor? Aye.

Any opposed? I guess that's me. Commissioner Lama?

OK. Motion to defer is approved 4 to 1. OK.

That's the last of our items?

Yes, ma'am.

I just want to add, before we close the feed, and for those that are here, our finance department, our procurement department, our police department, all of our departments, and I shouldn't have started naming any because now I'm leaving some out, but are exceptional. I am personally very lucky to live here, and it is my great honor to be the mayor of this city. I don't think that there's any city better anywhere else, not just in South Florida, not just in Florida, in the entire country. So many people are moving here. So I want to commend Tiffany and her staff for all the work that they've done on the budget. I want to commend all of the department heads. And ultimately, those people all report to the managers. So I want to make sure that we have a fruitful and respectful conversation next week. I welcome everyone to please come to the commission meeting. If you can't, then watch it and participate. It's important for you to be part of the process. So thank you. With that, meeting adjourned.