City Commission - Special Meeting

Good afternoon, everybody. Welcome to the City Commission budget meeting this 14th day of September. I know, it's a Monday. I know, it's been a long day. Thank you all for being here. We appreciate it. Tomorrow will be our regular commission meeting, which will begin at 1 o'clock. We have a number of items to discuss. We have 10 budget items. So, Mr. Clerk, could you please call the roll? Commissioner Herbst? Present.

So, are there any preliminary remarks you'd like to make, City Manager? No, sir. Okay. So, we'll begin tonight's meeting with addressing each of the budget items. We'll begin with budget number one. which is the Central Region Wastewater Large User Rate. Would someone please introduce the resolution approving the fiscal year 2027 Central Wastewater Region Large User Rate. Introduced. The resolution has been introduced. Anyone have any questions? No one has signed up to speak. Please call the roll.

Yes. And that item is approved. Moving on to budget two. This is capital improvement plan Someone please introduce in the resolution adopting the final five-year capital improvement plan for the period beginning October 1st 2026 and ending September 30th 2031 Resolution has been introduced. No one has signed up to speak.

YES. AND THAT ITEM IS NOW APPROVED. WORKING ON BUDGET 3. So this is the public hearing on the Stormwater Management Program assessment. The purpose of the hearing is to receive questions and comments regarding the City's Stormwater Management Program non-ad valorem assessment for the fiscal year 2027. The public hearing is now open. The acting city manager will now present the stormwater management program assessment report. Mr. City Manager.

All right, so this is the time for anyone in the public to speak or ask any questions about the Stormwater Management Program assessment. No one has signed up to speak. Did you sign up? WHAT'S THAT IN YOUR HAND? OKAY. COME ON UP. THIS IS ON BUDGET 3, RIGHT? OKAY. AND JUST STATE YOUR NAME. CAN YOU PUSH THE BUTTON AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SPEAKER?

You want to finish filling out that card so we have a record that you had spoken today? Great, thank you.

Mayor, is it okay if we ask the city manager just to address that? I was going to ask staff. Okay, thanks.

This is to help pay for the infrastructure for the, is it eight more neighborhoods? No, she said the second tranche. So it's an additional, I believe, seven more after the first eight, correct?

And so every year, I think you had presented a report a number of meetings ago in which the increases were staggered over time. So this year it happens to be 20%, but it goes down in the future. Over time, it eventually goes down. Correct. But all of it is to pay for the infrastructure. Correct. Which is now materializing in many of the neighborhoods throughout the city.

Yes. Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak on this item? Okay. There being none, do I hear a motion to close public hearing? Moved. Second. We've moved and seconded. Please call the roll.

Yes. And public hearing is now closed on this item. So the final stormwater management program assessment rate will be equal to the estimated cost paid by the city to operate the stormwater management program with the assessment area as provided in the resolution approving the stormwater management program assessment. Someone please introduce the resolution adopting the stormwater management program assessment role for fiscal year 2027. Introduced. The item has been introduced. Please call the roll.

Yes. And that item is now approved. Budget four. This is the public hearing for the Lauderdale Isles Water Management District non-advalorum assessment and budget. The purpose of this hearing is to receive questions and comments regarding the Lauderdale Isles Water Management District non-ad valorem assessment and the budget for fiscal year 2027. The public hearing is now open. The Acting City Manager will now present the Lauderdale Isles Water Management District non-ad valorem assessment and budget. Mr. City Manager.

Thank you. This is the time for anyone in the public to speak or ask any questions about the Lauderdale Isles Water Management District non-invaluable assessment and budget. No one has signed up to speak. Does anyone wish to speak on this item? There being none. No further comment. Would someone please move to close public hearing? Second. Moved and seconded. Please call the roll to close public hearing.

Yes. And public hearing is now closed. So the final Lauderdale Isles water management non-advalarm assessment for fiscal year 2027 will be 15 per parcel for properties within the district someone please introduce the resolution approving waterdale isles water management district non-advalor assessment and the budget for fiscal year 2027.

Mayor introduced and with appreciation for everyone who serves on the Lauderdale-Allis Water Management District and the success they feel like we're having and improving our waterways all over, but especially there. They're really seeing marked improvements. So thank you all for the support.

Oh, yes Yes, and that item is now approved budget five This is the public hearing on the utility undergrounding non-advalorum assessment. Purpose of this hearing is to receive questions and comments regarding the city's utility undergrounding assessment for fiscal year 2027. The public hearing is now open. The acting city manager will now present the utility undergrounding non-advalorum assessment report.

So this is the time for anyone in the public to speak or ask questions about the utility undergrounding assessment. No one has signed up to speak. Anyone interested to speak on this? There is nobody. So someone please move to close public hearing. Moved. Second. Moved and seconded. Please call the roll.

Yes. And public hearing is now closed on budget five. So the final utility undergrounding assessment rate for fiscal year 2027 will be $1,720.04 per equivalent benefit unit. Someone please introduce the resolution approving the utility undergrounding assessment rate for fiscal year 2027.

Introduce, and I will also say that it has made quite a difference on those seven streets, Los Olos Isles. Yes. It's Los Olos Isles section. The neighborhood looks really very different and very improved. So I want to thank Steph. I know that was a long, arduous process, and thank you for everyone that was involved in that. But it really has made a huge difference in that neighborhood in terms of all those utility lines buried, the landscaping, the roadways. It looks really nice. Thank you. Okay, great.

Yes. And that item is now approved. Budget six. This is the public hearing on the Beach Business Improvement District non-advalorum assessment. Purpose of the hearing is to receive questions and comments regarding the city's Beach Business Improvement District assessment for fiscal year 2027. Public hearing is now open. The acting city manager will now present the Beach Business Improvement District non-advalorum assessment report. Mr. City Manager.

So this is the time for anyone in the public to speak or ask any questions about the Beach Business Improvement Special District, excuse me, Beach Business Improvement District Special Assessment. No one has signed up to speak. I don't wish to speak on this item. There being no one, there be no further comment someone please move to close public hearing move second move the second did please call the roll Commissioner Herbst yes Commissioner Glossman yes Commissioner Beasley-Pittman yes Vice Mayor Sorenson yes Mayor Trentals yes so the final beach business improvement district assessment rate

Budget four, this is the public hearing for the fire assessment. The purpose of the hearing is to receive questions and comments regarding the city's fire assessment for fiscal year 2027. The public hearing is now open. The acting city manager will now present the fire assessment report. This is city manager.

This concludes my report. Thank you. So this is a time for anyone in the public to speak or ask questions about the fire assessment. Did you give me it? Which number's right here? Yep. So, Mr. Gonzalez? Just a second. Yeah. Is there a Mr. Gonzalez here?

Oh. You sign up to speak on this item as well, correct? This is the fire assessment? Correct. Could you push the, oh, it's already pushed. Okay, very good. It's already pushed.

May I also ask either the Chief or Laura or someone to explain the justification for the increase and also to talk about efficiencies overall because we just heard about looking at everything in totality. So is there a way that we can explain and talk about the $12 million we did find in efficiencies this year just to make sure that our budget was as lean as possible? That would also be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

So for those that might have questions, and I certainly appreciate Mr. Gonzalez coming here with these questions. They're valid questions. I just want to make sure that when we go through the exercise of looking at the budget, we do start almost a year in advance of this. And all of those joint meetings with the Budget Advisory Board, all of the discussions that you have with staff, is it true that we do look at the total picture as opposed to, And I know what Mr. Gonzalez is saying, that it's an increase here, it's an increase there. Fire assessments, $41 over last year. But do we not, or may

$15 a month? Yes. And that includes everything that we're dealing with in terms of the growth in our city and population and services required because of that growth in population, $15 a month.

And then something that I find myself explaining to a lot of people when they think of their taxing situation every year, and again, I know the answers to this, but maybe if you could just explain to folks, when they get their tax bill, how many taxing agencies, like 8, 10?

When people get their trim notice, we're one portion of how many taxing agencies? Eight or ten?

And actually, out of the eight or ten taxing agencies... I'm glad you get that answer.

Right. So the number one is the school board, correct? Correct. And they've been exempt from the ballot proposal in terms of Amendment 3, even though they are the largest chunk of tax that folks will see on their bill, correct? And then second is Broward County. And then third is the city of Fort Lauderdale. And roughly we are 24%, you said, of the overall tax bill. Correct. Okay, thank you.

Laura, while you're up there, so I'd like to kind of address that too. So the question was asked, What have we done in terms of achieving efficiencies? So I know we've carved $12 million out of the budget. A big chunk of that was financial engineering. So we rejiggered our pension plan and we did some other stuff. So more power to you for doing that. How much of that $12 million savings, to answer the gentleman's question, was achieved through efficiencies and operations as opposed to just financial budget maneuvers?

Keep going. Those are empty positions, non-efficiency. I'm going to beat you up here, so go ahead.

Respectfully, it's not. You carry vacant positions for years on end, and then we cut them, we redline them. Non-efficiency. Go ahead. Payroll attrition. Non-efficiency. People leave. Non-efficiency. Keep going.

Not efficiencies. Okay, so we didn't achieve a significant amount in efficiencies. I love that we're applying for grants. I love that we're finally budgeting for interest income because, and by the way, this is not a good thing that interest rates are going up. So that affects us all in a very bad way. I love that we're doing financial engineering. I love that we're redlining vacant positions that we've kept in the budget for years. All good things. So I call that truth in budgeting. None of that's efficiency. So to your question, sir, we've done virtually nothing to achieve efficiencies in ou

Well, if I might ask the question, what efficiencies should we be looking at or what are the ways? I always like to have solutions, not just point out issues, but what would be the solutions for us to cut in terms of fire or any other place in the budget? What should we be looking at that we have not looked at?

Well, to your point, Commissioner, that's what they should have been doing for the last year. You said we've had all these meetings of the Budget Advisory Board. I know that Mr. Cale has spoken up about all kinds of ways that we could achieve more efficiencies. And I don't think that those got sufficient evaluation. So I'm not going to do that tonight on the day. So I'm simply agreeing with the gentleman that, you know, efficiencies have not been addressed. What we have done, and I, again, commend the budget staff for doing this, is find ways to balance our budget. But to suggest that we've do

Well, again, I would assume that that was the exercise that the Budget Advisory Board went through after a whole year of meeting with every department chair and every department head and every person in the city that had something to do with the budget, correct me if I'm wrong, but what they proposed to us, and I know that you mentioned one of the Budget Advisory Board members, but that was in a, he's way in the minority on that Budget Advisory Board in terms of his approach and in terms of his suggestions and in terms of his looking at the budget, so That was not the consensus of the Budget A

Okay, let's move forward. So we've closed public hearing. We have not. Someone please move to close public hearing. Do I hear a second? Second. Moved and seconded. Please call the roll on closing public hearing. Commissioner Herbst?

Commissioner Glossman? Yes, although we did hear from the fire chief who I think is very important, especially in terms of talking about public safety. Why don't we close public hearing and then we can ask him that question. He's not a member of the public, that's right.

So please vote on closing public hearing.

Yes. So public hearing is now closed. Now, do you have a question?

I do. I'd like to hear from the fire chief because this is very important and I want to make sure that anyone's questions are answered. I also want to make sure that people feel confident. AND UNDERSTAND WHY THE FIRE ASSESSMENT FEE IS INCREASING $41 A YEAR OVER LAST YEAR. AND WHERE HAS, PERHAPS... WELL, I WANT TO HEAR FROM THE CHIEF, IF YOU DON'T MIND. THAT'S OKAY. I JUST WANT TO HEAR FROM THE CHIEF, BECAUSE HE DEALS WITH THE NITTY-GRITTY MAYBE MORE THAN LAURA ON A DAILY BASIS. AND I'D LIKE TO KNOW, BECAUSE WE ARE BUILDING MORE FACILITIES, that doesn't come free. And I just want people to feel that these efficiencies have been looked at and that what is the reason for the increase in the fee?

Thank you for that. I will tell you one question that I do get a lot. My district, I represent many condominium associations in District 2, and each one of those units gets that exact assessment that a single-family home is assessed, correct?

So you might have 150, 200 apartments in a building footprint that really might not even be that much larger of a footprint than a single family home. But yet when you do the math and you multiply 150 times, well, now $441, that's a lot of money coming out of one building. Any thought or is that typical in terms of how those are assessed? Are there other municipalities or other agencies where you would find that a building would not be assessed per unit to come up with an unbelievable number of what you're paying when probably the visits to a building are not that much in terms of how many vis

Okay, I guess what I'm just trying to say is that many people always wonder why, in a building, why each individual unit owner is assessed the same rate as a single-family home. I guess because of the fact that, again, you look at the footprint of the building, you look at the footprint of a single-family home, the money that's coming out of, let's say, one condominium with, let's just say, 100 units, 200 units, you multiply that 200 times 441, it's a very high number that's coming out of one place. I'm not sure, I know, but I'm just making that point. I get asked that question a lot.

So if you carry that logic forward, That would – you're suggesting that we should just assess a building the same amount that a single-family home would be. No. That would mean – okay, well, I don't know where the logic is going because otherwise you'd just be covering the lobby of the building and you've got, you know, 40 floors above it. Each unit is equally at risk of catching fire, and therefore, you know, in order to be able to – to respond to any particular unit, you have to have the equipment and the manpower and all the response programs in place to be able to address it. So the fact t

I'm not understanding the logic. I understand. I'm not saying that it would be the same assessment. Like, I wouldn't say one building, $441, but I'm saying that there must be some sort of middle ground between $441 versus... Half a million dollars. That's all. I'm just saying, I was just wondering if other places have different rates for apartments versus single family homes. That's all.

THANK YOU FOR THAT INFORMATION. I APPRECIATE THAT. IT WILL BE HELPFUL FOR ME WHEN I GET TO ASK THAT QUESTION TO EXPLAIN THAT. SO THEN JUST THE LAST QUESTION. SO IS IT TRUE THAT EVERY YEAR OR NOT TRUE THAT YOU ACTUALLY DO AN EXERCISE WHEREBY YOU ARE LOOKING FOR EFFICIENCIES BEFORE THAT FIRE ASSESSMENT FEE IS CONCLUDED?

And has new equipment been purchased this year or anticipated in the next fiscal budget, which we're working on right now?

Thank you. And you attribute some of this also to the fact that the city is growing in population and therefore there are more demands in our services, especially when it comes to public safety.

Excellent. Thank you for the answers. I appreciate it.

Chief, thank you. Calls for service. Can you give us a sense of the delta of calls for service last year versus this year?

And is that one of the, in terms of call volumes for cities, how does that correspond to other municipalities in the state?

An advantage for being at those standards is being able to have availability of engines so that you don't have to have two vehicles responding to one service call. Is that right?

Right. Thank you. Chief, as I understand, most of these calls for service, though, aren't they EMS calls, not necessarily fire suppression calls?

I apologize. You talked about the increase in the calls for service as a larger, as a holistic number. So I'm saying I know it historically has been roughly two-thirds of our rollouts are EMS related. I assume that percentage hasn't changed over time. If anything, it's probably increasing for EMS versus fire response.

And there's a large ongoing debate nationwide, not just here locally, about three men on a truck versus two men on a truck. Certainly, three men on a truck is a more efficient response. Two men on a truck and responding with two vehicles is a much more cost-effective response. So we know this statistically. The numbers are there. This case has been amply proven over and over and over again. So there's a difference between efficiency and economy so we just need to recognize that as we talk about that but i don't think the gentleman's comments were necessarily directed to fire in general as i th

Thank you. Chief, just one more. I'm sorry. It's important, though. I think people really look for the education. I'd like to know, what is the total personnel this year number of how many people in the fire rescue? It's at 485.

520. And where does that stack up in terms of the city our size? Obviously, not just the residential population, but also how we balloon during season. I mean, a lot more people are here. How does that compare to, if you know that, to other municipalities of our size or especially a city that's known for tourism where those numbers just swell like crazy during season?

Would you say, though, if you had to guesstimate that we are somewhere on the high end or in the middle or low in terms of numbers of personnel versus the population that's being served, including the visitors?

Okay. But safe to say you don't feel that we're overstaffed.

Thank you. I really appreciate that information, and I think you guys are doing an amazing job. Thank you to you for your work. Thank you for the entire fire rescue team. as well as police, I think our first responders are outstanding. And I think that you do actually look for efficiencies. And I think that I don't see any bloat there at all. So thank you.

Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you, Laura. So the fire assessment rate will be $444 annually for each residential property, and the final fire assessment rate for non-residential properties will be as shown on the detailed rate schedule provided in the resolution approving the fire assessment. Someone please introduce the resolution adopting the fire assessment rate and roll for fiscal year 2027.

Resolution has been introduced. Please call the roll.

Yes. And Budget 7 is now approved. Moving on to budget eight, this is the second of two public hearings as required by law on the Sunrise Key Neighborhood Improvement District millage rate and budget for fiscal year 2027. Purpose of the hearing is to receive questions and comments regarding the Sunrise Key Neighborhood Improvement District's budget and to explain the budget and any amendments thereto. So the public hearing is now open and the acting city manager will now present the final millage rate and final budget.

So this is a time for anyone in the public to speak or ask any questions about the millage rate or budget concerning the Sunrise Key neighborhood improvement district. No one has signed up to speak. Anyone have any questions, comments? There being none. So there are going to be two votes, one regarding the millage rate and one regarding the budget. So do I hear a motion to close public hearing? Second. It's been moved and seconded. Please call the roll.

Yes. So the final millage rate for the Sunrise Key Neighborhood Improvement District will be 1.0 mil, which represents an increase of 1.62% over the rollback rate of .9841 mils. Will someone please introduce the resolution adopting the final millage rate for the Sunrise Key Neighborhood Improvement District for fiscal year 2027? Introduce. The resolution has been introduced. Please call the roll.

YES, AND I WANT TO THANK THE DIRECTORS OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR THE INCREDIBLE WORK THEY DO ON A VOLUNTEER BASIS. JUST TO SAY THANK YOU. YES.

Yes. And so the final millage rate has been approved. Now, will someone please introduce a resolution adopting the final budget for the Sunrise Key Neighborhood Improvement District for fiscal year 2027? Introduced. The resolution has been introduced. Please call the roll.

Yes. And the final budget is now approved. Moving on to Budget 9. This is the second of two public hearings as required by law on the millage rates for fiscal year 2027. Purpose of the hearing is to receive requests and comments regarding the city's millage rate and to explain any amendments thereto. The public hearing is now open and the acting city manager will now present the final millage rate on which the fiscal year 2027 budget is based. Mr. City Manager.

So this is the time for anyone in the public to speak or ask any questions about the final millage rates. I have two people sign up to speak. Robert Thye, is it? T-H-Y-E. And followed by Mr. Gonzalez. Good evening. No. You're on. No, you were on. Push it again.

Great, thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak on this item? There being none, someone please move to close public hearing. So moved. Second. I've been moved and seconded. Please call the roll.

Yes. And public hearing is now closed on this item. So the recommended millage rate to be levied for all general city purposes exclusive of debt service will be 4.1193, which represents a 4.53% increase in the millage rate over the rollback rate of 3.9408 mills. The aggregate final millage rate, including dependent districts, is 4.1228, which results in an increase of 4.52% above the aggregate rollback rate of 3.9444 mills. The recommended millage rate for debt service for the 2015 general obligation refunding bonds is .0165. The recommended millage rate for debt service for the 2011A general

I agree with the public comments that we should be doing the rollback rate, so my vote is no.

Yes. And Budget 9 is now approved. This is the second of two. This is now moving on to the last item, Budget 10. This is the second of two public hearings as required by law on the City of Fort Lauderdale's budget for fiscal year 2027. The purpose of the hearing is to receive requests and comments regarding the City's budget and to explain the budget and any amendments thereto. The public hearing is now open. The acting city manager will now present the final budget. Mr. City Manager.

So this is the time for anyone in the public to speak or ask any questions about the final budget. We have four people who signed up to speak. and invite you to come up to the podium. First, we'll start with Ada Nassimi. Is Ada here? Did I pronounce that correctly? Aida. Aida. Aida. Aida. OK. Good evening.

Mayor, if I could, thank you. Thank you for being here. Being a small business owner myself, I'm very focused on business growth in the city. And I started my business here many years ago when I had much less gray hair. So I completely agree, very important. How do we create a Fort Lauderdale that attracts businesses, right? Attracts employers. So I think you'll be proud to hear that really for the first time ever, in the city of Fort Lauderdale, we're bringing together all the key agencies and entities that seek to attract businesses. So Greater Fort Lauderdale Alliance, The chamber, the DDA,

Well, thank you so much, Ryan. Thank you. Thank you. Hold on. I just want to keep going.

You can take a seat. You can take a seat. Thank you. So you'll be really happy to hear that in terms of incentives, I completely agree. So for the first time in many, many years, this city commission has approved a significant tax incentive, the Fortune 500 company, to relocate right here in Fort Lauderdale. It's an IT company. It is going to be a game changer for our downtown. So that's another example. When you talk about public-private partnerships, completely agree. So you're a fan of public-private partnerships. Absolutely. One of the things this commission did, which I'm really excited a

Mayor, if I could, first of all, I want to congratulate you on your viewpoint article that was published in the Sun Sentinel recently. I thought it was excellent. So thank you for that. And I just want to say one thing, because some of the things that you said, I'm not quite sure ring true for me. I represent Flagler Village. And when I go to the meetings there, or when I even just go to events in that part of our district, I do see an influx of young people. When I go downtown and I'm along the Riverwalk, I see an influx of young people with baby strollers and their pets. And maybe I'm not se

Okay, thank you. Mayor, I would like to expound on this as well. Sure. Thank you very much for your comments. I am one who enjoys and invites and encourage young generations to come and give their viewpoint because I am, I usually say I'm uncomfortable speaking for a generation that I'm not even going to be around to represent. So I appreciate you coming. I encourage the generations to come and be before us. Generation Z, Alphas, come and let us know what it is. I had a great concern. I said this many times when we were taking information about our new city hall, what's going to be in the city

So thank you so much. You're very welcome. Thank you. Mr. Gonzalez, followed by Ted and Sarah.

Ted, thanks for being here. Who's saying don't vote for Amendment 3?

I'd like to just know when I said that exactly, though. I mean, you're an ICU together with the... No, I never have taken a position to tell people whether to vote for or against. All I say is be educated. So I need to just correct that. Facts do matter. I know what I've said. I know what I have not said. And I have never said that. Thank you.

All right, I'll take your word for it, I guess. And also, Ted, the city is, and city attorney, correct me if I'm wrong on this, but the city's barred from saying vote for or against Amendment 3. Am I articulating that right?

Cut back on your spending. Wait a minute. Let me speak. Sure. You had a lot of minutes now. Is it wrong to tell people what the pros and the cons are of a certain proposal that's now before the voters? Is it? Just answer the question. I just started to and you stopped me.

So you didn't answer my question. What was your question again, sir? I said, is it wrong for someone to state what the pros and the cons are of a certain budget amendment that's before the voters?

Thank you so much for knowing what I can say. But to correct you, I've never taken a position one way or the other. I've always pointed out the pros and the cons of the impact of what voting for Amendment 3 will do.

So just for a point of clarification, so Madam City Attorney, you said the city cannot take a position. That doesn't mean an individual commissioner can't take a position, right? That is correct. So I could advocate all I like one way or the other. Okay, just wanted to make sure.

Got it. Okay, good. Okay, is there anyone else who wishes to speak on this item? There being none, would someone please move to close public hearing? Been moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Herbst?

Yes. And public hearing on budget 10 is now approved. Excuse me. The closing of public hearing is now approved the final So now the final total of all funds budget for the city of Fort Lauderdale is 1 billion 283 million three hundred twenty seven thousand one hundred and six dollars Which will fund the various operations of the city of Fort Lauderdale for the fiscal period beginning October 1st 2026 and ending September 30th 2027 so before I ask someone to introduce the item I just want to respond a little bit to what people have said and You know, in tonight's budget, excuse me, tonight's ag

Anyone else have any comments or questions?

Yes, Mayor. I categorically reject the idea that we can't support a fiscally prudent and responsible government without saying that we don't support our public safety personnel. That's not true. We can support our public safety personnel. We can support our employees. And at the same time, we could also ask, are we right-sizing our staff? Are we right-sizing our government? Are we doing the things that we're supposed to be doing? Are the projects that we're undertaking with those capital investments the right ones? So I think those two things can be true at the same time, and I just want to le

It's always a special day for me when I can find myself on the same side of an issue as Ted and Sarah. I'm sorry he left, but I vote no.

Commissioner Glassman? I don't find myself on that same side. I vote yes.

We're seeking efficiencies, so we've got to get them started right now.