Town Commission - Regular Meeting

Thank you. Chief if you'll let us lead a please in the pledge of allegiance. Thank you chief of the on to item to to a precision modification ordinance 2024 one 7, 7, 9, amending article 7, I'm going to say a code of ethics and clerk if you'll read the title of the ordinance into the record, please.

Thank you. Can I get a motion to approve as amended? So moved. Second. All right. Public comment. Ms. Salzaura, two minutes, please.

It's three minutes. That's the rule. The public doesn't make a point of order.

Okay, so. Point of order, could the attorney please clarify the time?

Mrs. Salazar, please, you have a minute and 24 seconds. Okay.

Thank you, Mrs. Salzheimer. You're welcome. Mitchell Kinzer, two minutes, please.

Thank you, Mr. Kinzer. Salida Krasner, two minutes please.

Thank you, Mrs. Krenzer. All right, no other speaker cards on this item. Closing public comment. Moving on to commission discussion. Who would like to start?

I think Commissioner Weingart has already moved forward, so.

Ladies and gentlemen, I love Surfside. I love Surfside so much, and thank you for reminding me how much I love it, that when we sat here just a few weeks ago and we heard the town manager's report, the state of affairs that we walked into and what got done in the past two years, Um, I realized just how much there is to get done and we've really, that's why we're moving and we're moving pretty quickly. Um, I sat for hours, hours before getting involved with this, going through many matters, people questioning, you know, Oh, you know, you agree on this item? Well, yeah. And that's why I'm up her

That's all I want to share. Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Valdes-Degue.

All right. So, you know, I believe we're discussing an ethics ordinance. And I, you know, I said earlier, you don't repeal an ethics ordinance unless you're looking to do unethical things. A good starting point here. Look at the 2024 ordinance that's being repealed. Look at it in your agendas. The third whereas clause says why that ordinance was passed. It was passed in the interest of good government. If you look at the whereas clauses for the new ordinance that's being proposed today, you won't find any reason given. Even the spin doctors at the town attorney's law firm couldn't come up with

Well, I made my comments earlier, so yeah, I don't have anything else to add. I appreciate that. Thanks, Mayor.

All right. I want to be very clear. This law was the anti-Jeff Rose law, right? Some of the background on this is, again, it's extremely vague. It was written by the same people that landed us in major lawsuits without thought. This was written by the same people that pushed back when there was a referendum to try to bring clarity and transparency into where commissioners live, right? The same people that got up here opposing this and yell about ethics were the same people opposing a referendum item requiring transparency into where commissioners live in this town. because they knew who that w

Yeah, okay. Yeah, I'm gonna vote no just because I don't, like I would have liked to see like an Excel table or a Word file with a comparison side by side on what's excessive and what's redundant, what could be kept. I didn't see that, so I'm gonna vote no.

These disclosure requirements are stronger than the ones in existing law. That's why we need this. This is making it easier for people to hide money. No.

Yeah, no need to hide anything. And I believe the state, the county and state code of ethics address the standards for elected officials. Therefore, vote yes.

I'm going to vote, but before I do, I want to address the comment by the commissioner. This doesn't make it easier to hide money. The form that we are required to fill out and file with the state every year, the form one is the exact same form that you created here, except with the town of Surfside logo. So again, all that, excuse me, please don't talk over me. This is the exact same form. It requires where you're getting your money and which houses. Look at a form one, look at the form that was created for Surfside. It's the same thing with a different logo on it. So to sit here and say that

Thank you. Moving on to item 2B, rescission modification ordinance 2024-1782, amending section 2-206, public participation. Madam Clerk, if you'll read the title of the ordinance into the record, please.

Thank you. Can I get a motion to pass the ordinance as drafted? Second. All right, public comment, two minutes. Ms. Salazar, please.

All right. Michael Karroukin, two minutes, please.

Salidad Barrija. Seems like you changed your last name since the last time you came up.

Please have a seat. Thank you. Mr. Kinzer, two minutes, please.

Thank you, Mr. Kinzer. Uh, I believe those are the, all the items for this item, all the speakers for this item. So at this point I'll be shutting public comment and moving on to commission discussion. Is there anybody that wants to open this first?

Yeah, I can go. Um, all right. So. I have a few issues with this proposed modification. First of all, yeah, I think that to Mr. Karukin's point, I would like to keep Robert's rules. In place, meaning that if there is something that we as a commission disagree of what you may be doing as a as a mayor, we need to have this ability to to speak up because. That keeps the checks and balances that that we need to keep. I do understand that. Again, this may be potentially less efficient, but I think it's the idea of preserving so to speak, the democracy and the Robert's Rules is more important than e

Right, I'm happy to talk on this topic. I am an expert on the First Amendment. I was a professor of constitutional law for 13 years. I wrote one of the changes that I think is really important here to rule 7.5, the decorum rule. I put in the words incendiary or threatening as the standard for when you could be cut off. And I took out impertinent and slanderous for the very reason that Commissioner Trevani was referring to. The word impertinent can mean rude, but it can also mean not relevant. The word slanderous involves a determination of fact that the chair is not in a position to make, cert

All right. Thank you, Commissioner. Mr. White, got any comments?

Yeah, just briefly. When we chose to run for this position, we could have qualified as a mayoral candidate or a commissioner candidate. And running as mayor has its own ticket, its own set of responsibilities as chair and sitting as a commissioner. We all have equal vote. We're not losing our vote, but there is importance to the structure and leadership, and that's why our charter has a mayoral seat and a chair. It's important that meetings have order. It's important that there, and everyone may not like how that order is, but it's important that there be a leader there. I did not run, I was n

A couple of things. First of all, nobody's taking away anyone's First Amendment rights. Everybody has the right to speak. But this is a meeting and has a process as well, right? It's not a free where everybody can come and scream fire or accuse people of crimes they didn't commit without any sort of proof. And that's accusatory. That's defamation. There's laws that we follow up here. And yes, we volunteered for this role, and we expect a certain amount of heat, so to speak. But we don't also have to be abused and sit up here and do that. I HAVE A VERY DIFFERENT ROLE THAN EVERYBODY ELSE UP HERE

May I say something about that, Mr. Mayor? I'd like to respond to that.

No, I understand you oppose it because you are very... Commissioner, Commissioner.

No, no, no, Commissioner, we're calling the roll. But it's a reversion to practice where people's First Amendment rights were respected until 2022. That's your opinion. Again, that's your opinion, Commissioner.

Commissioner, that is your opinion. And if you want to waste our time and have a personal argument, it doesn't belong up here. Madam Clerk, let's call the roll, please.

Thank you moving on time to see rescission modification ordinance 20 25179 5 replacing section 2 dash 2, 6, a chapter 2 article 2 reserved with section 2 dash 2, 6 commission usage of office in town hall and clerk if you read the title of the ordinance into the record, please.

Thank you. Can we get a motion to approve as drafted?

Second. Mrs. Salzhauer, two minutes, please.

Thank you. Michael Kerrigan, two minutes, please.

At this point, closing public comment, moving on to commission.

Please have a seat, thank you. I love it, it's the same people that scream about the First Amendment get up here and yell for keep going after hours, right? Is anyone being thrown out, is anyone, no. There is a time limit, everybody gets that same time limit and we move on. All right, opening up to commission discussion. Is there anybody that wants to start? Yeah, I'll hop right in. Which one is it?

2C. No, I'm sorry. I'm asking the public. Thank you for the mic. First of all, I'd like to recognize the former honorary junior mayor that's sitting here. Thank you for your continued dedication. And to respond to the comments about my children and family participating, that's commendable. That's not a derogatory point, so I'm not quite understanding that one. Which one is it? Is there a public record created when we meet people out and about? or when we walk into a municipal building with cameras and lots of audience and lots of coming and going where everyone's welcome, it's an open door her

COMMISSIONER TROVANI. BACK TO MR. KARUKIN'S QUESTION. HOW DOES THIS WORK? I don't have the time to look at all the details. So is it like each one of us has got an office or how is this going to work?

There's two offices. If you want the use of an office, there's an office for you.

So there's office for the mayor. Let me be clear.

This is a rescission on the restriction. This restriction made it an offense where you can be recalled and you're violating all kinds of statutes that were made up. This is a rescission on a restriction. You don't have to take an office. If the mayor, like the previous mayor, has no interest in being involved in the town and wants to run for governor, he doesn't have to take an office. If you want to be involved and actually hold meetings, you'll set up meetings. but there's not five offices in this building so the way it was set up previously was it was an office for the mayor and an office f

True, but removing this restriction has some practical consequences, and I'm trying to understand the practical consequences. So, yeah, the...

Assuming two of you are going to vote no on the office, I wouldn't know why you would want access to the office afterwards. So let's see if it becomes an issue.

But if it's, okay, if we're going to vote no, and let's say that no passes, we still have an office that is going to be a space that we can use as needed. Not necessarily. No, because I didn't do meetings here.

You have a conference room where you can reserve with the town, assuming that the town is not using the conference room, and then you can do that, just like anyone else here. Or you can have a dedicated space as an elected official to meet someone that is designed in a different way rather than a public space.

Yeah, I'm confused because, like I said, I did have some meetings here, and there was an office that was available, so...

Yeah. And one day I was having, I mean, I wanted to have a meeting, but the conference was taken. The budget lady was there. So I couldn't meet. I had to basically go into Sandra's office and have a meeting there. No, I want to meet with somebody. Let's have a shared office for all the members of the commission. Whoever they want to meet, let them meet there. Let's have a space for everybody to share. I don't understand what's the, what is the big deal? We don't get paid. We're working voluntarily for the benefit of the town. I don't understand why not having a dedicated space so we can just g

Yeah, and actually, like I said, that's exactly what I was trying to understand. Now, this office has a floor plan, so the town hall has a floor plan. There's many offices. So I really wanted to understand what's going to happen next. Like, okay, what are the two offices that could be dedicated to this? If we repeal this ordinance, I'd like to have a plan on how we're going to – use better or do a better use of the of the of the tunnel yeah I'm not per se against it but it's just that I you know I'd like to have a plan I'm just saying that's tomorrow's problems today is there's a restriction s

Yeah, but we could have done the 2 things at the same time that's what you repeat and then what is this ordinance chain and one is a discussion on policy very 2 different things right you're not everything has to be locked into an ordinance we can sit and as a majority of the Commission direct the town manager to do and set it up any other way, but we can have that Commission that discussion while there is a restriction in place in our box. I'd like to serve of the study spoke up.

No, I have not spoken on this topic. I think respectfully though, I think the Vice Mayor currently and Commissioner Weingart last time when he spoke, I think they are misunderstanding what's going on here with this issue. It's not about whether you have meeting space. The issue here is about preserving the manager commission form of government. In our current system, the idea is the legislators are supposed to leave the building and turn over the management of the town to professionals like Charles Press and Mario Diaz. The ethics case that Commissioner Salzhauer mentioned earlier that's pendi

our commission form of government our commission manager form of government there's no reason for an elected official to be inside of town hall all right thank you commissioner that's not hard work thank you all right so i'm gonna again i kind of spoke on this item this rescinds uh restriction that was in place um how any elected official chooses to do their job provided it is their job is their business and how much time they want to give to this town is their prerogative and to sit and go after someone because they took the time to meet with whether it's companies, residents, dignitaries to

Yeah, again, there's a risk of, please, there's a risk of not knowing what's going to come up next if we repeal that and we don't have something that clarifies what you want to achieve, so I'm going to say no.

Yes, and I'm curious if that means the two of you won't ever reserve the office either, right? I guess we'll see after a second reading. All right, moving on to item, thank you, Madam Clerk. Moving on to item 2D, rescission modification of ordinance 2025-1789, amending chapter 34 and creating section 34-1, sand removal or digging on the dune or beach. Madam Clerk, if you'll read the title of the ordinance into the record, please.

Item 2 D. Thank you, Madam clerk. Can I please get a motion to, um, approve as drafted? Second. Moving on to public comment, item 2D, Ms. Salazar. Two minutes, please.

Thank you, Mrs. Salisauer. Mrs. Krasner, two minutes, please.

Thank you, Mrs. Krasner. Please have a seat. David Karp, 2D.

Thank you, Mr. Karp. All right, seeing no other speaker cards, closing public comment, moving on to commission discussion. Who would like to start?

I haven't started in a while. I can't see who's moved, but I would like to.

Because, again, I think the framing of the law really matters. And earlier, the vice mayor said, you know, this is a one in a billion thing and that people were afraid to play on the beach or afraid to dig holes. I think we need to be very sober here and look at the data. In between the meetings, I looked online. It happens that Professor Stephen Leatherman of FIU, who's like, you know, Dr. Beach, Professor Beach, has written about this. And he said that in one decade from 1997 to 2007, 31 people died from suffocation by sand holes at the beach. Another 21 were so seriously injured that they n

Commissioner Trevani? I'll let others speak before I

Oh, okay. I want to acknowledge the concern and not disregard the terrible tragedy that happened that's being mentioned here as part of the original drafting. However, as we've heard from the crowd and others, and I spend a good deal of time on the beach with our children, is that it's not enforced, it cannot be enforced, and truthfully, I appreciate the comments. I appreciate the comments of Mr. Karp and others. There are other ways of accomplishing this. And, you know, unfortunately, there are much more cases, many more cases of drowning in the ocean constantly. It's constantly in the news a

A question. So what is the reasoning behind your request to repeal this, Mr. Mayor?

I'll speak when I'm ready. You'll hear it.

Yeah, I know, because I'm still thinking about it. That's why I wanted to.

Again, if you read the warehouse clauses, it's overly broad, right? All of that is written in there in what was in the agenda. It's, again, an overly broad law that affects the daily life of every single person that goes to the beach. And I'm going to get into it in more detail when I speak. But this affects how your kids, if they can dig a sandcastle, if they can create a sandcastle, if they can create a moat, if they can bury their feet, all of that would make it illegal. All of the things that already exist. Now, again, these are daily activities of beachgoers that we have restricted now. Y

Okay. All right. That's clear. So I'd be okay with addressing the overreach and above everything, I'm not okay with having ordinances that cannot be enforced or that we're not enforcing. To me, back to Mr. Karp's point, it's pointless. I'LL BE OKAY WITH REPEALING THIS IF WE CAN FIND A WAY BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE THERE COULD BE SOME CONSENSUS ON ADDRESSING THE ISSUE OF BEACH SAFETY. SO MAYBE ADD A DISCUSSION ITEM IN THE NEXT MEETINGS WHERE WE CAN JUST FOCUS ON THAT ISSUE. AGAIN, WE'VE HAD THIS AGENDA AT 5 P.M. I DIDN'T GO THROUGH ALL THE DETAILS. So can we have that, can we decide that we want to

I'm going to remind you, any commissioner can put any item on the discussion.

No, I just wanted to see if there is a consensus, if you guys are amenable to that.

I'm open to every conversation. I'm open to every single thing that we're repealing now to start a conversation if that's what you want. But again, provided you vote no on the item, you can't bring it back. Just remember that for a period of three months. Now, if you want to talk about beach safety and regulations, you're going to have to back it. You're going to have to confirm with our attorneys that we have the capacity to pass certain ordinances and we have the capacity to enforce them. Otherwise, we're creating a process of selection enforcement based on somebody who decides to call on his neighbor because he doesn't like the hole he's digging. Again, these are all things to consider at a later date. Any comment?

Yeah, maybe we should. I agree with Commissioner Trovani. I mean, I've been going to the beach for many, many years with my kids, and just digging a hole of 18 inches, it's a ridiculous depth. It's not. You need to create a danger. You need to dig a hole of like three to five feet at least, not two feet. I did some research. the only town that really took some type of, that was for Lowther Hill. Yes, I was doing some research. Yeah, Lauderdale-by-the-Sea is the only city that did, but there is no other cities doing anything about it. It just doesn't make sense. It's like basically not allowing

All right, thank you. Madam Clerk, let's call the roll, please.

All right. Item 2E, I'll make a motion to lay it on the table since it was addressed already in 2B. The amendments that are presented in 2E were already put into 2B. This makes this item redundant. All right, if you look at 2B in the resolution that we approved, the same lines that are underlined are the same ones that were done in 2E. Each one of these items addresses a specific ordinance that was adopted. However, 2B already covers 2E, so it's redundant. Mr. Krookin, I need you to sit down, please. Thank you.

I called a motion already. There's a second. Sorry, I missed that. The item is laid on the table because it's redundant.

All right, there'll be public comment for the item. Madam Clerk.

We are not discussing the item. We don't have to have public comment on an item that is not being discussed. And I'm taking it off the agenda because it was already discussed in a previous item. I can't do that if 2B wasn't approved yet. Please don't school me on how to run the meeting, thank you. 2EB was approved, that makes 2E redundant. Again, I drafted them, I know what they look like. It's the same item that is underlined, thank you.

We're not passing this ordinance, it's going away. No.

All right, if you look at Ordinance 2B, look towards the end, let me try to get it in front of me.

Yes, Madam Attorney, can you explain to me?

Any changes that we are discussing to, I think it's Rule 705, has already been addressed in 2B. We discussed it. We approved the changes. It's the exact same changes to the exact same item we all spoke about. This item is not being brought forward to the Commission and doesn't require public comment because we are not discussing it. It is being laid on the table because it is redundant and not required. Thank you.

Thank you. Moving on to item 2F. I'm not following the logic that you don't understand. This item was discussed in 2B. That's on you. That's not an us thing. There is no reason for this commission, excuse me, there's no reason for this commission to discuss an item that was discussed and voted on. This is redundant. It is not necessary, sir. Thank you. Item 2F. And we're decision modification of the ordinance 2026 1804 amending chapter 90. Zoning article 2 of the code to require planning and zoning board advice on municipal projects man clerk to read the title of the ordinance please into the

Thank you. Can I get a motion to approve as drafted? Second. Opening a public comment on 2F. Mrs. Salazar, two minutes, please.

Thank you. Yeah, good luck to you. Mr. Kinzer.

Thank you. Mrs. Krasner, two minutes, please.

Thank you, George. All right, seeing no other speaker cards, closing public comment, opening for commission discussion. Who would like to start?

I sponsored the first ordinance, so if I can explain a little bit what it's for, I'd be happy to start. You know, a lot of places that do serious construction like towns or universities have on staff like a town architect or university architect who ensures that the design meets a certain quality and also that it's a consistent design language across the institution. If you step outside the town hall right now, if we had had time to actually prepare properly for this meeting, like I would have liked to, I would have shown some pictures of the streetlights and the signs on 93rd Street. You have

I already mentioned earlier my opinion on this. So I agree with Mr. Koestler's comments and, you know, having been on the Planning and Zoning Board, I mean, it's an expertise that we have. I understand that we want to move quick on things and projects. but we should still use the resources that we have and maybe find other ways to move faster. Yeah, so. Thank you.

So I appreciate the comments and I'll tell you of all of them here and sitting down, this one took me for a longer consideration and really going back and forth on it. I recognize that there are experts and we're not cutting that out. We're simply reinstating how it was previously. So there are experts in different fields and us sitting up here, we're not necessarily expert in every field. We just represent a combination of five of us and our distinct experiences and set of skills. THAT BEING SAID, YOU KNOW, I BELIEVE IT'S MORE THAN A MONTH WHEN THINGS GO BACK TO BOARD. IT GOES BACK AND FORTH

I mean, I agree with Mr. Kuzlos. I 100% agree with David. So this is my question. If we as a commission, we decide to build something, we still have to go and apply for permits and go through the building department. It's not that, okay, let's do it and that's it. We still have to follow protocol and do everything according to What do you mean? We don't have a, we should go to the building department and they approve it and they give us, you know, advice or how does it work?

There's two different things. Like the building department deals with code and I'm planning on zoning board deals with, um, design with the design.

There is no design review for public commissioner.

No, you can't speak until you recognize you had your turn and now the Vice Mayor is speaking, right?

I'm just asking questions so I can have my mind clear in my ideas. But 100% I agree with what David, Mr. Commissioner Wingott said.

All right, so first of all, I want to address a couple of comments which extremely, again, off course about taking away people's rights. I want to highlight the irony of the same five people getting up on the last, every item for the last couple hours claiming that their rights are being taken away and yet they've spoken freely on every single one. The commission, again, this is about the commission should be able to, and I disagree in the sense that if, yes, the commission has a political objective, like sometimes they have to act on it, right? And I can get, you know, before an election they

So ideally I would like to see what's proposed before repealing this, but I have a feeling that this is, that the commission's gonna repeal this anyway. So I'm just gonna vote yes, but just to show the support to the idea of revisiting this in a short time. I mean, I know that we have a lot of stuff that we gotta go through. Let's come up with something better. Yeah, I'm open to that, but let's make it happen soon, because otherwise we have a vacuum that is gonna be open for too long, in my opinion.

Yeah, I just think we could modify the current ordinance rather than repeal it, so no.

Yes and again I want to reiterate that I'm extremely open and I hope that we can engage you know our experts. We've got very very very well respected architects on our board. We have Mr. Chris Lewis that hopefully will stay engaged and I think we can create something that we will all feel that the experts have drafted I'm not an expert in engineering instruction, but we can define again where this comes into play and where it doesn't quite, you know, that's something we can all agree on. So I definitely am committed to bring it back. And with that, I'll vote yes to repeal an ordinance again th