City Commission - Regular Meeting

All right, let's go ahead and call this Pompano Beach CRA meeting to order September 15th, 2026 at one o'clock. If I could ask everyone to please silence your cell phones or put them on vibrate so we don't get disrupted during the meeting by someone getting a phone call, that'd be great. So please silence those cell phones. Irvin, let's go ahead and call the roll.

Here. I can ask everyone to please rise to the Pledge of Allegiance.

Thank you. Can I get a motion approving the CRA board meeting minutes of July 21, 2026? So moved.

Opposed? Motion carries unanimous. Thank you. Mr. Harrison, any changes to our agenda? No, sir. Very good. Can I get a motion approving the agenda as printed? Moved and seconded. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries unanimous. Are there any items the Commission wishes to pull from the consent agenda? Hearing none, all items on the consent agenda are open for discussion during audience to be heard. Very good. Thank you for that. That takes us up to audience to be heard. Mr. Alford, anyone signed up?

All right. Just name and address the record and please limit your comments to three minutes.

Okay, that's your first warning. Okay. We're not going to make this personal. Thank you.

Thank you. And, of course, just for the record, Commissioner Smith was elected by the people of District 5. Thank you. Just to correct the record, she was not elected. Mr. King, your time is over. No, no, no. Please, Mr. King. No, no, no. You waited until I left. Final warning. BSO, please escort this gentleman out. Okay. Escort him out with me. Escort this gentleman out. Thank you, sirs. Anyone else? Mr. Alfrid? Very good, thank you. Yes, Commissioner Perkins.

I think as the chair of this commissioner meeting, When someone walks up to speak, I think you need to be or I know you need to be very fair with everybody on the same level. I've had people to walk up to that podium and give personal attacks on me. And you sit there or you sit here next to me and you said nothing. You allowed it. So I just want you to really think about being fair to everyone across the board. when someone walks up to that podium and speak. Thank you.

Very good. Thank you, Commissioner. All right, that takes us up to Commissioner Fessick.

Just one thing. Commissioner Perkins, I hear you. And I also have had that happen to me. But what I'd like to make sure that we do is potentially maybe we have to look at how our rules of conduct and how they're being applied. are if they are in line with the freedoms that certain people have to speak. So I think maybe that's something worth looking at again at another point in time. But I just want to put it on record that many times we have had people say things and you allow them to speak. And as soon as somebody questions decisions that were made, I don't feel that somebody's feelings rela

Very good. All right. Is there a motion to approve items one? Item one.

One is consent. Consent. I'd like to pull number one.

Oh, you'd like to pull number one for discussion. Very good, all right. Item number one is a resolution.

Thank you, Ms. McKenna. Appreciate it. All right. Mayor? Yes, Commissioner Perkins?

In yesterday's meeting, I brought up the word consulting or consultants simply because we are trying to cut back on the budget to try to save money to put in other places. And I brought up the fact of consultants because I didn't see anywhere Listed where we were cutting back on consultants in any area, but I could see in different departments We're reclassifying positions and we were talking about cutting some positions in the city So that was the reason that I brought up Consultants in ways of cutting back on the on the budget. Thank you.

Good All right takes us up to item number one as a resolution. I

Second. Moved and second for discussion. This item was pulled by Commissioner Perkins. Commissioner?

Yes, thank you, Mayor. I 100% support Finley's Restaurant for the sub-lease agreement. I just wanted you to just give us a little update and background for those that are listening.

And I support it. Also, I wanted to thank staff because I've been complaining about the landscaping around the 731 restaurant. And I could see great things happening there, so that's a good thing.

Thank you. Very good. This is a public hearing. Is there any input from the public on this item? Seeing none, public input closed. Commission discussion, questions, concerns? Seeing none, let's call the roll.

Yes. Thank you. That takes us up to our regular agenda. Item number two is a resolution.

Second. Move to add second for discussion. Ms. Vasquez, good afternoon.

Very good. Thank you for that. This is a public hearing. Is there any input from the public on this item? Being none, public input closed. Commission discussion. Questions, concerns? Vice Mayor.

Thank you. I have some concerns with this because at prior meetings we've talked about code compliance issues and ensuring that we don't have those issues for this grant money. And it just seems like this entire process is a little nontraditional. Do we have any precedent where we have done it like this, given or approved the grant money to a property that is not in compliance on the contingency that it will come into compliance?

It seems to me like a little more time might make sense here for them to get everything in order. I'm worried about setting a precedent in doing this.

Okay, and I appreciate the amount of work that it must take when you purchase a property like this to deal with the tenant issues, the code issues, and that they are trying to improve it. This grant money is, I mean, something that we have set parameters around for what is required. And I'm just worried about the precedent this sets here. So my concern is that maybe just if they have a little more time, we would feel more comfortable doing this. But the recommendation of the advisory committee is to just make it contingent on the code cases being resolved.

Further commission discussion? Commissioner Fessick.

Thank you. So what happens if by suggestion, by this, if we approve this today with these parameters in place, what happens if they fail to bring those things into compliance?

Okay. I agree that we have to be very mindful about if we set parameters or set the rules that are in place and that would disqualify somebody from applying for these that as painful as it is, we have to abide by the rules that we set. Is there a reason or have they given us a reason to staff that they can't do this work or wait to do this work until after they bring the property into compliance?

Please come forward. Just give your name and address for the record. Of course, your relation to the property.

So there were two tow violations, one from July of this year and one from November of last year. What was the other one? Do you know?

And so basically this is not this is just a tow violation not for one particular vehicle.

Okay, so the issue is that some of the parking or dumping is occurring on city property?

I appreciate you taking the time to explain that. And I'll just let you know, if it's approved, as long as it's compliant with those stipulations, the parking, which we are absolutely on board with.

Is it fair, and this is probably not for you, but is it fair to put a timeline on needing to be compliant?

So it's roughly about within six months then? Yes.

uh over the past 10 years with the previous owners well thank you i appreciate you coming again today and um thank you for your investment in pompano we appreciate you guys very good commissioner secret thank you mayor um well i have to say that anytime that we can improve the look of dixie highway as as it's been in a lot of senses, very dilapidated. I am all for that. It's also right next to the brand new, beautiful medical center as well. So although it's not what we usually do, I'm gonna support it because This is an eyesore. I drive Dixie all the time. So it would be great to see the impr

Very good. I'll be honest with you. I look at it a little differently. I've never said anything before about our rules and regulations, but I think tying an inducement like this to code compliance issues is a bigger lever to end compliance and keep compliance. So I don't have a heartburn with this at all. I think it's a great way to try and ensure that we keep good partners in the city. So yeah, I support it. Further, Commissioner Perkins?

Yeah, one question. I just wanted to know, what year did you purchase the business? This year. This year, 2026? April. April of this year, okay.

I want to just say thank you for investing in Pompano, and I totally understand you putting up $300,000 is a large investment in addition to purchasing the property, and us supporting you with the $200,000 grant, with the stipulations, is fine with you. I feel that we need to move forward and encourage the redevelopment of that area, because it is ugly. So thank you for what you're doing. The pictures already show improvement, and I appreciate that.

Thank you. Very good. Anything further? Seeing none, let's go ahead and call the roll.

All right. This is a public hearing. Is there any input from the public on this item? Seeing none, public input closed. Commission discussion. Questions? Commissioner Fessick.

Thank you. I really don't have a question so much. It's just a statement that Minuteman Press, when I saw this come across, they've been a pillar in the Pompano Beach community and have invested for quite some time. So I know that they have grown substantially over the years and outgrew their former space. So I'm, one, excited to see that they've been able to move and would love to continue to support them because they've obviously been supporting Pompano Beach for decades. I don't want to give away how many decades, but decades. Thank you. All right.

Yes, this is a old business, I would say, at Pompano Beach. You've been in Pompano about, what, 30? 49 years. 49 years, wow. So this is a welcome move. So yes, I support this 100%, and the renderings look very nice on Atlantic Boulevard. So welcome again. Oh, are you having a grand opening for 50 or something, or what? Okay, all right, let us know, we like to be there.

Very good, further commission discussion. Seeing none, let's go ahead and call the roll.

Moved and second for discussion. Once again, Ms. Vasquez.

Good. Thank you. This is a public hearing. Is there any input from the public on this item? Seeing none, public input closed. Commission discussion, Vice Mayor.

Thank you. So I'm happy to support these funds to renovate and modernize this building and for this business to double their space. The only disappointment, obviously, is it's going from District 3 to District 1. I'll take it. That's okay. But this really is an example of how these... SMALL GRANT PROGRAMS CAN, I THINK MS. VESCA SAID REUSE TOO, LIKE ENABLE THESE BUILDINGS TO BE UPGRADED, MAKE OUR CITY LOOK BETTER IN SMALL WAYS AND FACILITATE GROWTH AND RETENTION OF LONGSTANDING BUSINESSES. SO HAPPY TO SUPPORT THIS EVEN THOUGH WE'RE LOSING MINIMUM PRESS IN DISTRICT THREE. THANK YOU.

Yeah, I think it's going to be a great addition to Atlantic and welcome.

Thank you. All right. Anything further? Seeing none, let's call the roll.

Moved and second for discussion. Once again, Ms. Vasquez.

Very good. Thank you for that. This is a public hearing. Is there any input from the public on this item? Seeing none, public input closed. Commission discussion, questions, concerns?

Yes. I want to say thank you for investing in Pompano. I think we're gonna, we have, you're at the beginning of something that'll be very successful in the future. I'm gonna support this. Thank you.

Very good. Further commission discussion? Like Commissioner Perkins? Like Commissioner Fessick?

Please come forward. Just give name and address of the record.

Okay, so, excuse me, what type of business do you plan to...

All right, so Ms. Vasquez, I, okay, thank you. When I saw the pictures here, it brought back some old memories. This property, is this the same property that was owned by RMA? That is correct, yes. You purchased the property from RMA in 2026? Correct. Okay. I remember when RMA purchased this property, they were under contract with the city to, the city and the CRA to redevelop that area. And, no, no, no, you don't have to come back. I've always felt that this property should have been city property but of course rma purchased the property and as you just stated sold it in february of 2026 and

Okay. Yeah, I just, like I said, my concerns have really nothing to do with you.

Right. Well, again, this has nothing to do with you, but when RMA purchased this property and they were under contract with the city They didn't purchase it for a million, but they're doubling what they purchased for it. That's what I'm saying. It has nothing to do with you. So it was kind of flipped. And I'm just, I don't feel comfortable with this at all, which has nothing to do with you. It has everything to do with RMA and the way the process transpired.

Right, yeah, I always felt that when the property was purchased by RMA, they would let that property sit there. Until everything around it is somewhat building up. Was assembled, right. And they can sell it and make more money for it, that's what they do, and that is my concern, so. I am not happy with this one, but thank you, Mayor.

Thank you. Yes, so I also have pains related to not you. I only had really... One question about this. So you started your LLC, the new one, and you purchased the property. Was it both in February of this year?

Okay. Do you have or have you had any prior ties to...

Yeah, so my concern isn't with... I never like to punish a new property owner for the sins of a previous one, necessarily, right? I want to thank you for your investment. Anything I say further is not going to be about you. I would... agree with Commissioner Perkins that the purchase of the property from RMA ages back. And looking at how many repairs are necessary and having them make a profit and leaving so much undone, if you will, basic stuff like roof stucco repair while they were under contract to redevelop and renovate our city. That's the part that gives me heartburn. Yeah, that doesn't

I think that's our purpose. So I have pain points related to them, but I do not have pain points related to you, and I wish you the best with your business.

Thank you. Thank you so much. Vice Mayor.

Thank you. I have a couple questions also. So we have heard about the conditions of these buildings. I've heard everything from hermit damage that was almost unfixable, or I've heard tear down. I've heard a lot about these buildings. So I just want to ensure we're not throwing good money after bad, right? So what exactly, and this is probably the next item with the interior, but what is your assessment of the condition obviously you when you purchased it you probably did an inspection you have a pretty good idea of what this is going to take what can you give me an idea of what the condition a

As long as I share the reservations of my fellow commissioners about the chain of custody here, but that is not your problem.

And what type of business do you think you will end up with? You talked about going and talking to businesses. Is this going to be a full build-out?

Thank you. Very good. Commissioner Smith?

Yes. The other property that you own is the one that's immediately to the south?

Yes. Yeah. I'm just excited that you're coming and you're investing in an old town. Yeah, so are we. So much potential in that area, especially with downtown coming in across the street. So thank you for doing that, and I look forward to patronizing new businesses.

Thank you, sir. Further commission discussion? Seeing none, let's go ahead and call up Commissioner Perkins.

Yeah, so I was looking for the date, and I want this to make it very clear and to go on record by saying this is the property and the reason that RMA resigned or I should say Kim Briesmeister and Chris Brown resigned because of this property. At the time, Kim Briesmeister was executive director of the CRA for the city. And because she purchased this property while she was under contract, She resigned and she was supposed to be really redeveloping that whole area This is what this is about and like I said, it has nothing to do with you But I've been waiting to see how long it was gonna take her

Very good. Anything further? Let's go ahead and call the roll.

Moved and second for discussion. Once again, Ms. Vasquez.

All right, thank you. This is a public hearing. Is there any input from the public on this item? Please come forward. Just name and address for the record.

Very good, further input from the public. Seeing none, public input closed. Commission discussion, questions, concerns? Commissioner Perkins.

Yes, just for the record again, this is the second location that RMA Kim Briesmeister and Chris Brown purchased during the time they were under contract with the city to redevelop that area. And I just wanted to make sure that's for the record. Thank you.

All right. Anything further? Seeing none, let's go ahead and call the roll.

So moved. Second. Moved and second for discussion. Mr. Tran.

Please come forward. Just name an address for the record.

I'm sorry, Mr. O'Bell, can you come forward? Ms. Jackson, can you move aside so Mr. O'Bell can answer the questions? Sorry. Thank you. Mr. O'Bell, I believe the question is, what is the sale price for the units? So it's $500, okay, for the three tubes. I'm sorry, what was that?

Very good. Thank you, sir. I don't go too far. There's probably going to be other questions than commission, but yeah, let's give it back to the public now. Thank you. She just asked what the selling price was. Go ahead, Ms. Jackson.

Okay. All right. No, no, no, no, no. This is your time.

All right. Thank you for that. Appreciate your comments. Okay. Further input from the public?

So when you see the product that that mr. Obell and mr. Diaz did build they are beautiful units so that they are upgraded units Okay, mr. Obell if you care to give this three minute three minute pitch before we get into Commission questions and all that that's fine because remember the public as well Let me just say this as someone who have a global perspective

Thank you. Thank you. Any further input, please come forward.

We've got more members of the public who want to speak. So if you can sit down now. Oh, you want me to sit? Okay. Take a seat. Come on, come on down. Just give your name and address for the record.

Mayor, question. Mr. Perkins, ma'am, ma'am, ma'am. Excuse me, are you saying you are against the rental? Yes, I am against it. You want the homeowners?

THANK YOU, MA'AM. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. MS. JACKSON, PLEASE. CAN YOU PLEASE? MS. JACKSON, PLEASE. PLEASE. MS. JACKSON, I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO BE QUIET. THANK YOU. YOU HAD YOUR OPPORTUNITY. THANK YOU. FURTHER INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC. YES, REALLY. FURTHER INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC. SURE. PLEASE. PLEASE, COME ON FORWARD. JUST GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS TO THE RECORD.

Please direct your comments to the chair, sir. Thank you.

All right, very good, thank you. Further input from the public? I'm sorry, sir, you've already had your opportunity. Further input from the public? Anybody who hasn't gone before? Very good. All right, let's go ahead and close the public. Now open it up for commission discussion questions. I've got Commissioner Smith first, followed by Vice Mayor Fournier, followed by Commissioner Seegerson-Eaton.

You need to look to the left. I've had my hand up before you finish.

I've got Commissioner Smith, followed by Vice Mayor Fournier, followed by Commissioner Seegerson-Eaton. Go ahead, Commissioner Smith.

Mr. Abel, could you explain how the rent-to-own is going to work, what percentage of the rent will be going towards a down payment, and you're helping them out with the $25,000. Can you just kind of give us an idea of what you're expecting to do?

I'm sorry, Mr. O'Bell, can someone please silence their cell phone? Thank you. I apologize, Mr. O'Bell.

So a percentage of the rent that they pay for those two years will go towards the down payment?

financial responsibility. And in this education of financial responsibility, we're hopeful they will start to save and that savings will be the down payment.

I am not familiar with them, so I'd like to know a little bit more about them. Because I guess I just had the vision that rent-to-own would mean that part of the rent would be going towards the down payment over those two years, and at the end of the two years, maybe the down payment was made. That was just my assumption, so my assumption is wrong.

Okay, thank you. Thanks for answering my question. Thank you, Mayor.

Hold on one second. I'm sorry, Mr. O'Bell, this isn't the time to.

There's a lot in this amendment, so I want to go through it because we are effectively changing the rules of the game here. You haven't closed on any yet, but it is a different... Structure and what you're contemplating is different than what was approved before it.

I want to speak Okay, and then I'm good. I have some questions for you and I'm sure but I there's there's a lot in here so Initially or prior to the amendments that we're looking at today. It was a five-year It's all All the units are for sale, only for sale, no rentals to start out with, and it was a five-year restriction on renting a property, correct? Okay, so in here, we're being asked to go from a five-year rental restriction to a two-year rental restriction on ownership, on people who purchase the units. They have to owner-occupy it for two years, not five, correct? so if you really look

So I am trying to get my head around what this will look like for people who live there relative to what we thought it was going to be, which was all units would be purchased and you had to live there for five years. Now it is going to be a very hybrid. where we will have people who purchase outright, if they can, and they have a two-year restriction before they can rent it, but after two years they could rent the units. And that applies if they sell it, so if there's a resale, it resets the clock and there's a two-year restriction again? Okay, so that's one of the things in here, going from f

The 5 for a 3-2, and you're giving... And for the 2-2s, it's $469,000. So the net there would be $475,000 on a 3-2. No. It's a $500,000 purchase price. It's a $500,000 purchase price. Remember, it was $550,000. So what is the $25,000 in here then? This is what we include...

Okay. So the $25,000 is gone, and it's just a purchase price reduction to $500,000?

What happens during, so if someone does want to participate in the rent-to-own program, which I agree with Commissioner Smith, it's more like an education and we'll help you out along the way, but less of a traditional rent-to-own program. They will pay market rent. So you can pay your mortgage and you will work with them during that two-year period to get their financial condition in shape to save in order to purchase the property within that two-year period. And if they can't after two years, do they have to leave?

Or they lost their job or had some other financial setback or a health issue, whatever it is. Just trying to, like I said, understand what the living conditions here will be versus what we thought it was when this was approved. So you could really have people living there for two years their situation changes, they have to move, and then you could have someone else renting.

I'll give you a chance at the end, but I'm just trying. There's a lot in here, and I just want to make sure that I'm covering all of it. So people would have to move if they weren't able to close on the property after two years. And then why did this expire? What happened there? Did we just not get it on an agenda? Was it, what happened?

They are. So they are ready, okay. So really the rent to own program is really just giving people more runway to get their financial situation in order though, that they can purchase it. Yes, I mean, go ahead.

Right. But if they don't end up making it through the program, they just have to leave. So can you and can you give us a little bit more background on how we got to this five year covenant? Because obviously this board decided this at some point. So unwinding this, I think we'd have to have a different intent here if we do that.

That is helpful. And you had mentioned that this would provide an opportunity for Pompano residents. Is there some restriction on this program to Pompano residents?

But I just want to be clear, this is not just for Pompano residents either.

So I hear you and I share your priorities and with homeownership opportunities and your concerns about affordability and getting people there. But in some ways, it's like a... We're trusting in you, right? And the partnerships that you have and you build. Do you have restrictions on what you can do with it if you sell some of these and then lease or start your rent-to-own program? Could you somehow sell this?

I understand what you're saying. I'm not talking about individual units. I'm saying, let's say you sell four of them and you rent the rest, and then in a year, you're like, this is, you know. This is a lot of work. Can they sell? There's no restriction on that.

And I have complete confidence that that is what you are doing, and that is your intention. And I hear the pitch, and I buy it. I'm just trying to think about what could happen here. And so part of it is you're asking us to trust you and that this is how this is going to work, because there's no I mean, there's no real program written down here on this rent to own, and it does change the properties intended in one way with this restriction, and now it does change it. So I believe it is a bit of where you're asking us to trust you. You're going to do all the work up front on these people to ens

Very good. Commissioner Seegerson-Eaton.

Okay, so I have some specifics. And I agree with Mr. Trans. It's the down payment that is the hardest part. To be able to buy down that mortgage. And is this going to be a situation where you're actually going to have the loan? You're holding the paper? Okay, so they're gonna be making payments to you going forward. Rent to own has been a concept. I remember it 30 years ago or so. There were situations where in a condo you could rent to own or apartment you could rent to own in another area of the country, which is the ultimate goal of what you're trying to achieve. Homeownership. So will you

Yeah, and obviously affordability and homeownership are the two biggest issues. and is difficult to buy a home. Not so much in Pompano, we have pretty affordable prices. The ultimate goal is to be homeowners. So.

Sure. And I was on the dais when we talked about this sort of five year, And I think the reason then was that it was then easy for, if it was less, it was easier for investors to come in, purchase it, and then rent them out. If you don't have some sort of covenant, often that's what happened. It's good for the developers because you're selling your properties, but in the sense the community strives for more. fee simple properties, home ownership. It's great. And the market has changed. I think it has slowed down. So, but I have been to your townhouses. I have toured them. And they are super ni

So then you're foreseeing that they are going to qualify for a mortgage.

Okay, did you want to add anything to that? Okay, thank you.

Thank you. Looking at the program, so when you mentioned that there was five year restriction market value, but there was with the CRA a separate program, or is it linked to this? Is the program completely separate for down payment assistance?

Okay, we do not have it existing currently? No. Okay, and are there restrictions on those funds as per the plan for the down payment assistance?

Okay, I'm gonna probably ask you a lot more questions than that when it's time. Understand the concept and I and I and I also have been to the site and been to the properties and I think that they're lovely My question is how does this rent-to-own program differ from a lease purchase agreement?

Sorry, make sure you're in the microphone so we can hear you. It's terminology.

Right, that's what you can do. So with a standardized lease purchase agreement, you can put addendums with citing that you will work with you. You can make those addendums to a standardized Florida. The only heartache I have on this isn't, I love your intention, right? But from developer getting involved in a legal purchase process that's supported from a CRA funding mechanism, that doesn't have, like, we don't have the program right now, right? So the cleanest way to do it, even if you do remove the restrictive period and lower that, the cleanest way to do it, in my opinion, is to go with a s

Okay, and with our proposed down payment assistance program, what is the cap that we're looking, what's our maximum on that, and is it a matching assistance of any kind?

Have we looked into, in other cities, I know in Greenville, South Carolina, there's neighborhoods where their CRA has basically created these, the CRA has essentially funded neighborhoods and communities where they can offer home ownership, but the property, underlying property, is still owned by the city, or the CRA in the city, essentially. And then home ownership is actually, just like you would buy a co-op, essentially, or a condo. You own that portion, but the underlying, that holds the note to everything else. Is there an option for us to look at some of that? Because my concern is this

Okay. And then, Mr. Roble, your project, obviously you took this on, are you subject to a construction loan because now you're 90% clean? Is there a timeline in which this needs to happen for you personally? Okay. Do you let us know what that looks like?

And then what happens at the three months?

I'm just trying to understand what is the underlying thing? Would an extension of allowing a time, would that help you in any way or would that not help? Would that not satisfy your construction loan?

Have you figured out what, I mean, well, I guess that's not. Newen, do we have, is this because it's a public property partnership kind of thing, is the cost, the build cost built into something that is public record or no?

I... I think that the intentions are good here, do. And I love the idea of getting people into homes. And I recognize that you're trying to come up with different ways based on your, different ways to solve the problem, based on your needs also from finishing construction and then having, you know, once they're CO, there's a construction loan that needs to be paid. And your basis usually is to sell the properties in order to pay that off. At the same time, you know, having one of your proposed purchasers say that they are opposed to a rent program is concerning to me because I would hope that

But legally, legally with, with you cannot be discriminatory in terms of leasing to somebody. So that sets you up for certain things, right? So you have to have the parameters or we have to know the parameters of what that rent to own program would look like before we could say, or cross check it against from like a legality standpoint before we could say that we could vote on it. Do you understand where I'm going with this? Like, cause we're held to a certain standard as well.

Again, the intent is separate from the logistics. The intent is good. I'm on board. I fully think we need to get people into affordable homes. I'm on board with finding ways that we can make properties in our city more accessible to people who want to revitalize areas and put roots down here. I'm also on board with the two-year restriction period being less than, because I feel like there's a lot that can happen in essentially four years, right? You graduate, your high school is four years, you know, college is four years, unless you take the extended plan. You know, so those are parameters th

All right, thank you, Mayor. I've toured the property there, and I've been working with Mr. Michael Bill, basically with the school teachers in those surrounding areas. And I guess with most of the teachers that I sent over to him, most of the problems were credit. Credit, credit, credit. So I'm listening to what everybody's saying, and everybody has an expertise from my listening in real estate and all of that, but what I'm really hearing is that he wants to give people a chance. So I have about, I want to say about six, maybe more, new town homes, rental developments in the Northwest or in m

Okay, so yeah, I will support it 100% right now, but in the meantime, I would like to talk to you along the way as you're going about everything.

Thanks, just a quick question. Does that 30-day, condition need to be a motion to be part of this or not? No.

But if we wanted to mandate some 30-day return, then it wouldn't necessarily be an approval today, correct?

Otherwise, as Commissioner Perkins did, she's got a commitment for someone to return. Right, exactly. But you can still vote yes on this, and this is approved, but then has a commitment to get information back from the developer. But that's just a commitment, personal commitment, which he's not bound to, correct? Right, exactly.

Thank you. Mayor. Commissioner Fessick has the floor.

Mr. Fasig. Thank you very much. So another, because I'm trying, like I said, I'm with you a lot of the way here, but I do have concerns about the program itself. Would it be possible to, in order to not limit you, would it be possible to approve just the five-year to two-year restrictive period today?

How long does it take to close on one of your properties?

Can somebody speak into the microphone so we can hear? We have two that are ready to close now.

And how long does that process take to close?

Okay. So you just got the CO September 3rd for all of the units or for the units that they... For the first four-unit building. Okay. And so the ones that you have, there are two that you have that are ready to purchase. What stage are they in that process? If you called your title company tomorrow and they had availability, could they close tomorrow?

Okay, so that's what I was trying to find out. Like, where does the timeframe look like? Is it longer than a month or is it less than a month, right? So would some of those... Okay, let me see. I guess I'll just, that's not a question. I really feel strongly, I like what you're doing, but I really feel strongly I think we should come back at this. I don't want to see this opportunity pass by because I really like this idea. I just want to see the parameters in place. And that's why I say I really would support the reduction of the timeframe because I think that's important for prospective buye

Commissioner Fessick has made a motion to postpone until the next meeting. Okay? Is there a second on the motion to postpone? Motion dies for lack of second. Mr. Fessick, you still have the floor.

Can I ask a question, Ms. McKenna, based on this?

I did see, yes, Vice Mayor, and then Commissioner Seegers-Sneeden.

So I agree with Commissioner Fezzik. There's one part of this that bothers me. The developer, so it's item 4.6.24. The developer and its successors were assigned rights to implement a bona fide rent-to-own program approved by the CRA prior to initial conveyance. So Ms. McKinnick, if we wanted to reinstate their rights and go to the two years, Can we just pass this item without that one section? 4.6.2, sub-item 4. I think takes out the rent-to-own program, and then we can revisit that. But we would pass everything else. Could we make a motion to pass the resolution without...

If that effectively passes and allows them to record it, close their sales, but.

The motion needs- I'd like to make a motion to modify the Fourth Amendment and reinstatement agreement to delete provision 4.6.2, Roman numeral four. Yes.

Okay, so it's been moved and seconded to delete that section, which deals with the rent-to-own program, and that would leave everything else intact and reduce.

It's clarification. You said 4.2. 6.2 from Rule 4, which reads the developers and or its successors or assigns rights to implement a bona fide rent-to-own program approved by the CRA. But it still includes the, it goes down to the two-year owner occupancy requirement from 5, and it reinstates their rights.

Which I think we're all interested in, but we need more information on.

Modify the motion to also amend the First Amendment to the Declaration to... Elite provision C, A, restricted use of properties, subsection C, developer rent-to-own program.

Still second that? Second. And seconded by Commissioner Perkins. Okay. All right, we've got a motion and a second on the floor. Is there any input from the public? And you are part of the public.

Yes, yes, that is correct. The Rent Your Own program is coming out at this point in time. That's the answer to your question.

Done? Done. Okay, thank you. Can you vacate the podium? Okay, I'm sorry. This is time for public input, so I've got to take other public. Okay. Thank you. Please come forward. Just name and address the record. This is on the motion.

Or will it still be in place? We can't speak to hypotheticals what might happen in 30 days. All we can do is speak to what we've got.

Thank you. Further input from the public. Don't be shy.

Good. Thank you. Next speaker, please come forward.

Very good. Further input from the public? Being none, public input closed. Commission discussion on the motion. Commissioner Sigerson, then Fessick.

And then we have Commissioner Smith down here who raised her hand. Okay. So, and I'm, you know, I need some clarification. Nguyen, or Ann, or Claudia... Give me the history of this property. I believe we dedicated, the CRA dedicated this land for a consideration of $10 or what were the parameters?

Okay, great. So we really don't own the land anymore?

Thank you. Very good. Commissioner Fessick.

Thank you. So I just want to make sure that we're clear. This is about proving pretty much 95% of this at the moment, and then asking Mr. Olbell and his team, essentially, to come back maybe in the next 30 days or whenever you're ready. and come back with a plan related to the rent to own so that we can discuss that as a solid plan and on its own merits. And if that requires either an amendment to this, I'm assuming, then we can discuss that portion at that time. I'm trying to, in my opinion, I feel like this is a great way to solve the majority of the problems so you're not, we try to remove

I guess it's a question for, but yeah, but it's more so if it would, if I feel this way, and I... I'm just asking, I'm hoping that he'll come back in 30 days with a plan. And I will say, maybe look at some other cities or some other rent-to-own programs that are tied into different CRAs. Look how they've been structured. I know Nguyen has said that they're happy to work with you and try to find ways that the other cities or other CRAs

And I think maybe this might actually take on, it could potentially take on a life of its own, especially since you're talking, which we'll talk about at a later date or later today, related to the proposed downtown assistance portion of the Northwest CRA plan. And perhaps maybe if we're doing something like this in partnership, maybe we can do something that we can approve from a policy that we can apply this, and he could basically be our guinea pig for this process, right? That we could apply to other potential properties in the Northwest District, right?

Yeah, but you know, there's a new museum. But no, but that would be where you can work out the kinks to find out in real world applications what will work and what the challenges may be. Of course, we can always modify it. But if you're already saying you'd like to try to find a program that works to help people, he wants to help people, I think that would be the best outcome.

I agree. Thank you. Excuse me, Mayor. What was your question to Mr. Bell?

My question was just I wanted to see if that was something, if he was willing to participate in that next 30 days to come back at us with a more solid or come back at us at any point in time with a more solid plan for the rent-to-own portion.

So that is a question for the developer? Yes. Okay. Does the developer wish to answer? Please come forward. Otherwise, we can't hear you and the public can't hear you.

And I know that you want to continue to do that. And my goal is to just help you get across the finish line. Yeah.

Thank you. Commissioner Smith and Vice Mayor.

I, too, feel that rent to own has strong potential. I was disappointed that it wasn't what I assumed it was, so I'm looking forward to hearing the details of what the plan is. And I was looking for Housing of America to read up on the structure that you were working with, and I can't find it, so I'd like to have that link to read up on that prior, or maybe part of the packet that we all look, we look at between now and the next CRA meeting. But I do think there's some strong potential, and I think this is some, breaking area that we can get into that can help other developments going forward.

Thank you. I have a question for Ms. McKenna. The item that we took out, 4.6.2, item four, it says, that developer has a right to implement a bona fide rent to own program approved by the CRA prior to the conveyance of a townhouse unit to initial purchaser. So that already says to me that whatever rent to own program needed to be approved by the CRA. Right. So we're just saying they need to come back for approval. We're almost saying the same thing, correct? We really are, yes. So that's what I'm trying to say. We're giving you everything we can today and kind of taking that out, which was alr

Very good. Further commission discussion. Commissioner Fessick.

just wanted to clarify that that's approved by the cra or approved by the cra board because those two things could be interpreted differently so right so i think that this is a better option with having it come back the cra is the board right but just we've been interpretations where certain people have made authorized decisions before so i just want to make sure that that was clear in the contract as well thank you further commission discussion seeing none let's call a roll we're calling the roll on the um amendment

Okay, because I don't remember what it actually was. If it's to approve the resolution with the changes, fine, we'll do that. Yes. It's fine by me.

Right, thank you. She said, and that's what she said. Providing it's approved in the minutes. Go ahead.

Commissioner Sigurdsson? Break. Break. Sure, let's take a 10 minute break. Come back at 3.44.

Bring this meeting back to order. Pompano Beach CRA meeting September 15th, 2026 at about 3.46. Item number eight is a resolution.

So moved. Second. Moved and second for discussion. Ms. Vasquez.

Very good. Thank you. This is a public hearing. Is there any input from the public on this item? Please come forward. Just name an address for the record.

Well, I'm not going to, I can't like tackle you and stop you, but I'd prefer you wait until the presentation for the Northwest. I mean, it's coming up right after this one, but if you. That's okay. Further input from the public?

seeing none public input closed commission discussion on the e-c-r-a commissioner fessick thank you i have a few questions and the first one is the hundred-percent construction that you said that for the knap property that you're a hundred percent percent done with construction project or the drawings and ready to go to bid that is correct we have a hundred percent construction drawings on this project okay and Since, I mean, my pain point here is that we have asked for well over a year to have regular updates and meetings and discussions about this to have input, and we have been sufficiently

Property acquisition. Could you please go back to that page? And So I see expenditures is the three million which properties are The CCRA owned and city owned but which what are your proposed? expenditures there

Okay. Are these property acquisitions related to the McNab House presentation that we've seen before? and the site plan we've seen before.

Okay. I seem to remember another few properties that were included in the public meeting with identification, and I just want to know if those are still in play as part of this 3.7. the other the other side i believe you're talking about is what we refer to as the old wells fargo drive-through site no no i'm referring to the ones that are that were listed in the july the january 2025 um public meeting that was held where there were there were two properties specifically that we were that we were looking to acquire

So I guess I understand Ms. McKenna's reasoning here to try to not tip anybody off, but because we've publicly disclosed the locations of the properties that we were actively seeking for parking, I think we should make sure that it's known on record that their two properties were owned, that they were potentially owned by People who are involved with the Economic Development Council and our former mayor. So those are two separate properties and they're affiliated businesses. So for the sake of clarity, I want to make sure that that's clear and on the record. Is that still the case as per the s

I don't want to sit through a seven-hour meeting like we did last year. So I'm going to keep it short and sweet for the most part. But I'm going to just go on record that, again, I feel like this entire project has been ridiculously flawed and full of a lot of issues from the get-go. I know I brought it up with the city. We have a lease path for the property itself that has unresolved issues, in my opinion. And Mr. Berman seems to disagree. and think that construction costs, much like he did in the 88-page document from Vice Mayor Fournier related to other properties and building, that somehow

Thank you. That is not the question I asked. Do we have currently a clear title to the McNabb property?

And I seem to remember that there was a concerted effort to collect THE DOCUMENTATION AND CREATE A DOCUMENT OF A STATEMENT OF FACTS AND THAT WAS THEN RETITLED AN AFFIDAVIT OF FACTS RELATED TO THE MCNAB PROPERTY.

And that affidavit was done last year or the year before, 24 or 25?

So at the time that that was created, when were the quit claim deeds signed?

Okay, and that was in the city that you're saying that the city owned McNab Park as per your, it was designated as a park, the city owned the park as per what you're telling me.

I don't want to rush it. I just wanted to make sure we're clear. Okay. I'll wait for that one for a second. I'll move to the next question. Do we currently have anybody who has publicly positioned themselves or has reached out to the CRA as the intended operator for the future park or botanical gardens?

Are you aware that there is a Facebook page and a website that is set up specifically related to being in support of this project and ideally hosting events and donate, et cetera, for the CRA?

Right, for this project. There is specifically a webpage set up and there's a Facebook page currently set up.

I just want to bring that to your attention. Are you aware that this same organization publicly positioned itself as being interested as an intended operator at the site plan approval process through our planning and zoning member, Robert Hartzell, as being a new pro bono client of his?

Okay. And I was just recently made aware that he has now been, since the original directors of the organization were two former commissioners and a family member of the former commissioner. There's now been a board change somewhat recently, and Mr. Hartzell has taken the place of one of those former commissioners who is running for reelection. So I'm just wondering if that verbal conversation and the support from this Facebook page and this new website, the website's new, I just found that recently, and by mistake, actually, is related at all or part of this plan in any way, shape, or form?

Okay. No. Well, that's a different... That's a different thing. But do we have any sort of rules or regulations surrounding the involvement of either planning and zoning or members or directors or with being a director of something, a nonprofit that would be in, I guess, alliance with the CRA project?

I think that would be a question for Ms. McKenna.

What was your question? Commissioner Fessick was asking.

I'll ask it. Thanks. So is there any sort of, is there anything, you know, with FIRM as counsel and FIRM as a partner on a board, is there anything that would be appropriate, or is there anything that we would have to make sure we cross-check if we are going to have some sort of disclosure for that, if that moves forward?

There's a historic alliance of Pompano Beach, as is what has, they own the Facebook page, or they appear to own the Facebook page, as it links to their website. And I'm just a little concerned about the overlap in, there's nothing official from the CRA plan, but if we're saying we're looking for an operator and there's something going out and there's been verbal conversations, or maybe there's something in writing and maybe there's not, they have an active Facebook page and they have an active website and they've made an attorney at the time.

I understand that. And so, okay, so I'm just making sure that the private organization that has connections to our planning and zoning board who voted on the site plan and is now the director on Slater of that project, of that independent organization, does that have any sort of, Do we have any disclosures that need to be filed for that if in case they decide to bid on this or be a part of this project?

I made it very clear that they had an interest in operating during the site planning.

Not the restaurant, the botanical garden.

I appreciate that. I appreciate that. I'm just saying I'd like this is we're looking at the whole plan and we're saying go, go, go and spend, you know, and take out, potentially take out a bond and approve this project or approve this plan that has this project in it. And there's a lot of open, there's a lot of questions for me aside from the financials. We've just had earlier today, we had a, DISCLOSURE OBVIOUSLY ON THE RECORD THAT THAT AGAIN OUR CONSULTANTS HAVE HAD INTEREST IN OLD TOWN PROPERTY AND I DO KNOW THAT AGAIN IT'S BEEN ON THE RECORD BEFORE THAT THEY HAVE AN INTEREST IN THE THAT TH

Right. I didn't say it was. I just want to make sure that it was clear so that when... Some of these decisions, again, some of these decisions and the working together, it might not be illegal, it might not be unethical, it's just something that we should be aware of. And I don't think there was at any point in time, and maybe correct me if I'm wrong, I don't know if there was a disclosure when that first happened either.

Ms. McKinnon, can you correct that record?

Right, that's for the property purchase or after the purchase, but not for the property. Not for the family member being on the project?

I did not say that. In fact, I said the opposite. I said I'm not insinuating that it could be either or. I did not say that. So what I am questioning is, in that situation, is it appropriate for people whose families have interests to sit on advisory boards related to decisions made on those projects and on that property?

I appreciate it. We don't have to go and make this a long thing. I'll end there for now. I do have a question related to, I'll get off of the, well, I'm gonna start with this before I finish. I'll finish with the McNabb on this one. If we take this, if we say yes to this plan, and we move forward with selecting a vendor to build this out, and we then have the bond decision come to us, what I'm concerned about is how many times What parameters, at which point will certain things come to us, or at which point will things just happen? And then we're going to hear, it's because you approved this p

Mayor, thank you. Which one specifically? Only the bond and only the contract once it comes back to us with the approval for the vendor, correct?

Okay. This particular plan has that project in it.

And you are asking us to approve a budget and continue with the same plan?

Thank you. So basically, by approving this budget, we're essentially we're essentially, as it's written, we're essentially putting into motion the ability for the CRA to go out and shop a bond.

neither here nor there at the moment. So I understand that we have a statutory duty to adopt a budget, but it doesn't require this board to adopt this budget. So there's some, the reason why I say this is because there's some pretty big things that we've discussed over the past almost two years at this point that have not been addressed. And that is, again, that comes down to our leadership that has actively decided to not listen to many commissioners and their concerns about people in the district and what's happening and the costs. This is, I mean, I'll probably repeat myself again for the E

So we can yell and scream until the cows come home, but there's, you know, and I would actually say that I would challenge somebody to actually just open it up so we can have a conversation about the plan, but that's going to be neither here nor there, but. Secondly, so the McNabb is only one portion of this. I have a question about, and maybe you can help me, like the money that we have coming in specifically related to the fishing village. Do you have a, for our budget, you know, there's money that comes in and there's money that how we're spending money. Do we have agreement with the fishin

Because I know that it's a CRA project or that was a CRA project, so I wasn't sure where that was allocated.

Okay. Do we have a, is the CRA, does the CRA, as Palm Beach CRA and their social media program, Do they have an agreement or a partnership with either the city or with the fishing village to require or to have a certain number of marketing opportunities or posts that they make or whatever for the fishing village as a whole? Is there something structured there or is this just at discretion of the CRA office?

Okay. We do promote businesses and entities within the fishing village.

Okay. One thing I would like to make sure that is just also noted that I would like to see in the year moving forward that there is a concerted effort to a little bit more equal in some of the posts. There's quite a few posts related to, if you look at it as a whole, it's a little bit unbalanced at the moment. And so I would just offer that as a suggestion. There are several businesses that are within the ECRA district that feel, and business owners have said to me, that they feel like they're essentially being ignored or passed over and they've noticed the differences between certain business

I would also like to, I'm just going to do it anyway. So the last thing I'm going to do is just make a motion to amend the East CRA plan and have a real conversation about it. And so I'm going to make a motion, too, that we should look at amending the East CRA plan.

I mean, do you want to just spell out what you want to amend?

No, I want us to be able to talk about it. So this is a very simple question.

You want to have a workshop on the ECRI?

No, I would like us to have it on the agenda that we will amend the ECRI plan. That's what Ms. McKenna just said. We have the right to ask.

That would be a city commission matter? Well, I guess CRA recommends first.

Okay, so I'd like to amend my motion to re-align, to amend the CRA plan to sunset the CRA in 2031 as originally planned.

That's been seconded by Commissioner Perkins. Was that Commissioner Perkins? Okay. So it's been moved to amend the plan to sunset the ECRA in 2031, seconded by Commissioner Perkins. All right. This is a public hearing. Is there any input from the public on this item? Being none, public input closed. Commission discussion. Vice Mayor.

Thank you. As Ms. McKenna pointed out at the beginning of this meeting, I have consistently opposed the extension of the East CRA since it was put on the agenda here and recommended for commission approval in 2024. I do not believe that this CRA should extend past 2031 when we lose matching funding from the county and the hospital district. I think most of the East CRA has been invested and keeping it going with all the overhead that it has just to sustain debt service for the McNabb project is not a good use of taxpayer dollars. So I was very happy to see the alternate five-year financing and

Thank you, Mr. Tran. Further commission discussion is what we're on. I've got hands raised. Vice, did you?

So we've been back and forth on this for years with pay as you go. It's been six years since we moved the house. I get the same questions. When is it happening? I do not believe that we're going to blink and have this done in a year anyway. So I actually think that $30 million over the next two and a half, three years is... It seems like a pretty good chunk of this coming from TIFF. And that is, you know, We also don't, as I've always said, need what I call this grandiose plan. It is beautiful. I love the renderings, too. It's absolutely amazing. But it is going to be expensive to maintain. We

Thank you. Well, in your mind, it's extremely risky, but as details become clear, as things move forward, it becomes much less risky. I've got Commissioner Fessick.

Well, it is on the motion because this is important. That's what we're discussing is the motion. And McNabb, this project itself is a big portion of that plan. And the reason why I made the motion is because this project makes us, issuing that bond, we will not be able to sunset the ECRA until that bond is paid off. So basically what we're doing is we're essentially handcuffing us and future commissions to having this ECRA be in its existence by borrowing money we don't have. I still think this should be a scaled back version as well. We've moved the house. It cost more than we thought. We mov

As long as it's paid for, right. So I think that the other portion of this that's important is that money, whatever the tax roll looks like, whether we have it or we don't, that money, it's a 95-5 split within the ECRA zone. So all of this, and the majority of these projects, if I'm hearing you correctly, are apartments and not necessarily condos or hotels, not necessarily somebody who would be taking advantage of that homeowner's I'm sorry, homesteading advantage, right?

I don't, so I'm going to go ahead and disagree with you. You just said that there's some money coming in, but that's fine. There's money coming in and pending coming in. What I'm looking at is not about northwest and east, because I know that's where your head is, but that's not where my head is. My head is citywide. And we have these vehicles and these mechanisms where we can direct and fund projects in both of those areas. We're specifically talking about the east right now. The victory lap is that we do see, instead of borrowing money against future tax funds, if we complete the project and

Very good. Ms. McKinney, you wanted to chime in?

Thank you for that clarification. I certainly wouldn't characterize playing with taxpayer dollars either. Further discussion on the motion to amend the plan?

I just want to address a couple things Nguyen said, too, and I can feel your loss. When you talk about it, it feels personal. You're like, oh, but all this money is coming in from the W, and we're going to lose it. The CRA would, but we sit on both boards and wear both hats and answer to everyone in this city. And we're not losing it. I view it as a gain, actually, because the W is still coming. All the economic development around that will still exist. Again, you succeeded. It's great. All that economic activity is coming. It's just the tax revenue from that will go to the city when we lose t

Further, I've got Commissioner Seegerson-Eaton.

Thank you, I'd like to have a chance. I disagree completely with both of Commissioner Fessick's and Vice Mayor Fournier's analysis. I disagree with their financial plan. The taxpayers are always at the heart of my decisions, and I hate it when I'm being characterized otherwise, which is unfair and sort of a low blow, so I am not gonna support sunsetting the CRA. Again, I think we've talked about this so many times, so many times, and I think all of the answers and the information have been given, but it appears to me, especially with Commissioner Feistich, she just doesn't like the answers. So

Thank you. Okay, first of all, I disagree completely. It's not that I don't like something. It's that I'm elected to represent the residents whom I serve. And that means watching out for their bottom line. I have heard from residents specifically that this is a waste of time and money, and they are not for it. They want something done to that park. They want it redeveloped. We're on the same page there. There are amazing things that the CRA could do with this property that we could work together to achieve. And for almost two years, I've been saying exactly that, and I have not wavered. I do n

Thank you. Just want to also just follow up. You support the CRA. You did not support the parking garage that the residents and businesses have been longing for. And... calling for. And so I feel that honesty is the best policy. And in your campaign for your reelection in November, perhaps you should come out boldly against a parking garage. and against the botanical gardens and event center and restaurant. I think you should tell the residents the truth. Thank you.

I'm going to respond to that. You should. You really should. I actually have said many times. First of all, this is a city commission discussion regarding the parking garage. and i have said many times that i do support a parking garage i did not support that version of a parking garage at that cost it was not the right project and it was not done the right way in my opinion that is why i voted that way i do support a parking garage i do support finding another alternative and i was begging at that point in time to have somebody compromise and nobody decided to do that thank you okay any more

Thank you. All right. Let's go ahead and call the roll on the motion.

Chair Hardin? No. We're still on item number eight. Commissioner Fessick, I believe you had the floor.

No, I am done with number eight. Thank you. I think I'm actually, before I say I'm done, I will say this. I think that this year we have just set the tone for exactly how we can expect this to go. Thank you. We're not going to beleaguer this meeting any longer. Thank you.

FORTHER DISCUSSION. I'M NOT ALREADY. YES. MR. PERKINS.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. FROM A DIFFERENT NOTE, BEFORE WE GO TO THE NORTHWEST, I FEEL THE FRUSTRATION SITTING ON THIS DIAS WHEN A MISSIONER NEXT TO ME GOES ON AND ON AND ON AND ON. I ALSO HEAR HER ASKING FOR ANSWERS. And you really shouldn't be upset with her. You should be upset with the city manager because he's the one that's not communicating and allowing his staff to do the same thing. We are the way we're up here doing what we do because of the city manager. When did he leave? He didn't tell us. You're just sitting in his chair. He does that all the time. He just left. He's never at work. He ma

Oh, I sent you that a year ago. Remember, we voted on that. That's what staff does because they have the permission of the city manager to do so. And then everybody wants to know, why is it 3-3? That's why. If you communicate with everybody, this commissioner sitting next to me is just asking questions. So somebody is sitting home going, let me find a little something that she's saying wrong. Oh, she used that wrong word. I'm coming back at the next meeting and come back at her. That's what we do. Just heard Claudia. Claudia said, I was listening from home and you said this and you said that y

So you don't want to hear all this stuff going on up here simply because Smith, Eden, and Rex already know the answers. You know, they don't have to sit up here and ask a lot of questions. They already know. And if they don't, they can just pick up the phone or email and they got it, snap of a finger. It's not that easy for the three of us. Thank you, Mayor.

Very good. I have to go on record. I disagree with your characterization.

What I just said, I was speaking from my experience. I really don't care whether you disagree or not, because my experience is not right or wrong. It's how I was treated. and the way things really are from the way I see it, you're gonna see it totally different. That's why you disagree. You have all the information, I get that. So go ahead and disagree.

Thank you, thank you, Commissioner. I mean, I don't wanna get into that.

I just wanted you to know, I'm not speaking in terms of trying to belittle or down anyone. I'm saying the biggest problem in this city is our city manager and communication. We can't continue without communicating. That's all I'm saying. Now, you can speak if you want for the city manager, but he should be sitting over in that chair to speak for himself, and he's not there.

Commissioner Perkins, I'm not trying to speak for the city manager. I was speaking for myself. As I said, I disagree with your characterization.

Thank you, Commissioner. Thanks for letting me speak. I disagree with your characterization and a lot of the information, the questions that are asked sometimes.

if i said a you'll say b if i said c you'll say d i'm done i i don't i don't need to debate okay that's fine um anything further on on this issue vice mayor sure go ahead i'll be brief but i hear what you're saying commissioner perkins and i i feel it also like just watching the shenanigans that go on around here and i blame it on the city manager also the culture that he instills like we hear what goes on like don't think that we don't hear what goes on on the fourth florida city hall or other places we we hear it um we see it here you are correct commissioner McMahon has been sitting there w

I'm not playing stupid at all, Vice Mayor. Like I said, I disagree with the characterizations made. City Manager can come and go as he pleases as long as he does his job to the satisfaction of the City Commission.

Who are we voting on the- Number eight. Number eight?

Yes. So, Ms. McKenna, where does that leave us?

Have to reopen item number eight, is that it? Yes. Okay.

Okay. How about we move on to nine then? We'll do that. That... Can I work for the commission?

Sure. Okay. Item number nine is a resolution.

Second. Moved and seconded for discussion. Ms. Vasquez.

Yes, I'm trying to, oh wait, hold on. Okay, go ahead, I have it now.

Very good. Thank you. This is a public hearing. Is there any input from the public on this item?

The roving ambassadors you're talking about? Yeah, the security personnel we used to have out there.

I think what he needs to know is I think the majority of us voted against the security because basically the security was pretty much protecting, moderating the buildings that CRA owned or leasing out. That was it. So we didn't see the benefit or the effect of them really securing the community. And I think that was the reasoning of why.

All right, thank you. Next speaker. Commissioner Smith.

I just want to say that three of us voted for the security and three voted no. That's why it failed.

I voted in favor of the security. Commissioner Smith voted in favor of security, and the mayor voted in favor of renewing their contract. I don't believe he did. Yes, he did.

I can't remember. Wait a minute. To do away with it, we had to have a 4-2.

That's right, because we sat here for like an hour and a half. And the mayor, and in order to not, it was a 3-3 split every single time. We all wanted... the mayor, Darlene, and I all wanted to renew the security contract. But we sat here for an hour listening to the other three commissioners go on and on, and it was just like, we're over this. Okay, the mayor voted in favor so that it would pass. I'm the bad guy. Not agree with it. I like the fifth or sixth vote.

Thank you. Very good. Excuse me. I've got Vice Mayor, then I've got Commissioner Fessick. See what you started.

It didn't have to be a four to two. Just to be clear, it didn't have to be a four to two. It was put back out to bid, and we were presented with a renewal of the FPI contract, and we did spend quite a bit of time debating it as a board because They only cover certain areas, like Commissioner Perkins pointed out, so it's very targeted to Old Town, not in the whole northwest CRA. And a lot of us have seen more of the FBI folks in their cars just sitting there than actually getting out and doing the type of work that we expected or wanted them to do. And my recollection, which I'll look up in a s

I'm guilty, I guess. I don't know. I can't remember.

Guilty. And we kept the funding. So to be clear, we set the funding and said, we need to figure out something, right? But we weren't. I think some of us, we all have different reasons. I'm not going to speak for anyone else. But some of us were dissatisfied with the scope and where FPI services were being provided and what services were being provided and what we're looking for maybe different alternatives.

Sounds a lot like backpedaling, but Commissioner Fessick.

No, you can go. You can look for yourself, but the biggest issue was the cost analysis of what we saw based on what the services we were getting. That's not for me. And the fact that in many cases, what the protocol was, so let's say something was happening in either the East or the Northwest District, and what was stated is that they would see it, and what they would do is we were paying them to essentially just call BSO to come out anyway. So we're essentially double paying for the same job. And I had heard from some deputies. I've heard from some fire rescue. They said, hey, listen, they ju

Okay. Now, further input from the public.

Go ahead. That's not even worth it. It's not worth it. Further input from the public. Please come forward. Just name an address for the record. How everybody doing? Doing well, doing well. Okay. This is on the Northwest CRA budget.

Sir, what did you say you do at the 731 building? I didn't hear the beginning.

Okay, okay. I just didn't hear the beginning.

Thank you. Further input from the public? Anyone? Seeing none, public input closed. Commission discussion? Who wants to lead off?

That's the case. I guess we're ready to go to a vote.

Yes. All right. Let's go back now. Item number eight is a resolution.

so moved again second moved and second for discussion um shall we have the presentation again up to the commission no no no no don't need the presentation again sorry miss vasquez okay no problem i'm talked out thank you hang tight in case there's questions on anything we'll we'll do okay um and so this this is a public hearing is there any input from the public on this item Seeing none, public input closed. Commission discussion. Commissioner Fasik.

Thank you. So I just want to say one thing here, and I want the record to reflect this, and this is why I'm currently still at my no vote. So one, I acknowledge that under the Florida Statutes, Chapter 189, that the CRA is a dependent special district and its board is required to adopt a budget. I acknowledged that last year, and I acknowledge it again today. I also acknowledge that the funds have to stay appropriate to a project in the CRA plan, and that they stay with that project unless the project is amended, redesigned, or delayed as part of the plan, as Ms. McKenna has stated. Two, that

Thank you, Commissioner Fed. I just want to chime in for just a minute in response to what you were just talking about. And you're right. You have wanted... Certain things changed, modified, deleted, almost since the day you were elected. And that's fine. You were elected, and you represent District 1. Well, all of us were elected up here, and we all represent different constituencies. But the key is this body speaks with one voice. So the mere fact that you have wanted something almost since the day you were elected, it's important, of course it is, but that doesn't trump the importance of th

Thank you. I'm going to respond to that. And you're going to believe it. Yes, you can groan all you want, Commissioner Sigurdsson-Eaton. My job is not about getting my way. And I want to make sure that's really clear. And first of all, there's a lot of accusations that you just made in my direction. And I don't know where you came up with more than half of it, if not all of it. I have been very vocal for the residents I serve. And I want you to just think about one thing. Take a little bit of your own advice here. You said you can't always get your way, and you can't throw a little hissy fit w

Very good. Okay. For the record, I didn't have a hissy fit, but go ahead, Ms. McKenna.

Mr. Tran, let's focus on the McNabb Park project. Assume this budget passes tonight, and you've been directed as staff to move forward with the McNabb Park project. But there's steps that have to come back before this board for approval, correct? Before the thing gets built, before the money gets spent.

and not move forward without those other steps. That's what I'm looking for. The McNabb Park project basically is dead in the water unless there is consensus agreement amongst this board to approve certain things in the future. Would that be accurate?

The mere fact that something is in our plan, we could still all vote against it. Yes. I'm sorry, Commissioner Perkins.

Commissioner, what is it you want to modify?

I think that it would be a great idea to...

I'm sorry, Commissioner Perkins, I thought you had an issue.

I do. I'm trying to resolve this so we can vote, and it passed.

Okay, well, that's what I was trying to get across.

You all are going back and back with this.

I just want to make sure that people are clear that by passing this budget, we are not.

All right, so, Commissioner, what is it you want to modify?

I believe that I think there's still a lot of open-ended questions related to the McNabb project. And I would like to table all spending or halt all spending until we have more information that we need. And I would prefer if this is revisited and the plan is revisited. But for the sake of passing this, if we would be able to table the McNabb expenditures and the bonds associated with it until we are able to have that conversation. and I would be able to do that. I understand, I hear I can't, I can't, you can't over here. But the reality is is that this is what the residents have asked me. I do

Okay, so can you make a motion on what you want to modify? I mean, that's a... And see if the commissioners agree or not.

I don't know how the motion would be made to... if you want part of it.

MS. MCKINNEY, CAN WE AMEND THE CRA PLAN And vote to pass the budget? No. Can't do that.

So what part based on what commissioner was talking about, what parts can be modified where we can still pass the budget?

So what else do we have that's not appropriated other than new TIFs?

What's our deadline for passing the budget for the CREs?

So September 30, if that gives staff enough time to meet with the commissioner to compromise or inform or communicate or educate

GOOD MORNING. OKAY, WELL, LET'S DO IT. WE CAN PROBABLY DO IT AROUND 12 NOON.

I'm trying to come up with a time first. Before we go there, I just want to say I agree with you. I think that last time we felt pressured into doing something because we have to do things. But this staff has had a year to, and my fellow commissioners have had a year or so to hear some of these things and work together. And what I see happening is exactly what I predicted would happen. is that we push things to the last minute and then we're sitting here and then we're told we have to, we have to, we have to. And I still would very much appreciate working with and bringing back a plan that hav

Right. And how many times has Mr. Harrison and Mr. Tran and everybody heard what some of our pain points were here? And we are, I understand that it's a majority, but the reality is that we are still three commissioners who do have to represent our districts. And so that's, again, on Mr. Harrison. You know, Mr. Harrison, that it's his job to direct staff to at least be willing to have conversations with us, and then it's his job to help us work together as a group in terms of, hey, you know what, because we can't have these conversations unless they're in these meetings. So, all right, thank y

I'm getting called from all ends. I've got Mr. Tran. I've got the Vice Mayor. Mr. Tran.

I mean, I'm guessing you could probably say better than I can what it is I want to happen. I'm pretty clear with you, and I've been very clear this entire time. I'm worried about firefighter pension costs, employee benefit costs, everything, infrastructure, drainage projects. I'm worried about the future of the city longer term. So, Ms. McKenna, yes, the plan is extended now to facilitate this bond that everyone knows I can't stand. could we take the bond out of the budget? Because it was in last year's budget and we didn't issue it. So it didn't happen anyway. So those funds aren't necessaril

I hear your position and what you read. I actually think I would be guilty of everything you described if I voted for this, and I never have because I don't agree with the plan. I don't agree with the bond. The McNab House project, as I've always said, it's fine. Let's slim it down, pay as we go, and do the right thing for your city. And so I represent... My constituents, I represent We vote on things citywide here, obviously, and now we have our CRA hats on. But I would think I was neglectful of my duty if I voted to take on this amount of debt and extend the East CRA.

Exactly. It's already appropriate, but I've never voted to do that. I understand. So if we could modify the plan to pay for the McNabb House differently, go for it. But you're saying you give us no pathway to get anywhere besides 100,000, I mean, besides throwing Commissioner Perkins like the smallest little bone I've ever heard. I mean, it's almost pathetic how you describe. WHAT WE CAN DO.

for right now because you have appropriated they stay with what they're appropriated for and then we all know this conversation is is effectively pointless when you say when you get your colleagues to do this when no one no one here can get that so and so it is a structural problem with this board that creates the this issue we all know this this is but here we are so i

I've got Commissioner Perkins, then Commissioner Fessick.

So I feel as though we're going to be back and forth all day. It's a little bit after 6 and we're going to go back and forth. Everybody's trying to make their point. but I'm just gonna throw it out here. Yes, no, maybe so, but I'd like to make a motion that we postpone the East CRA budget till September 22nd at 1 p.m. That will give staff a little time to work with the district commissioner and perhaps work out whatever could be modified, but it's just not gonna be done here today. I don't know what can be and what cannot be.

But if you're working with the, excuse me, Commissioner Eden. No, we can't work with... I understand that. Listen, listen, listen. So what I'm saying is, if we postpone it now, That will give you time to talk with the district commissioner, and she brings that back to us on the 22nd.

It can't be that- Whatever it is, she'll bring it back to us on that particular date, the 22nd. We can't do that either?

I know you can't. What I'm saying, we can modify the plan on the 22nd, right?

No, but that's not going to happen here tonight. It's just going to be 3-3. We'll be sitting here talking to 12 midnight. Nothing is going to change tonight, so we've got to do something. Nothing is going to change the 3-3 unless you give the district commissioner a little bit of what she wants or something.

I understand that. But what I'm saying is it's her district. And I guess we're pretty much following her district. That's her vote. It's a city-wide project. So if you said, if you came up with A and B, Commissioner Eaton going to say C&D. Rex going to say C&D. Smith going to say C&D. And we'll be at a 12 o'clock tonight.

So is there anything we can move around for new TIF for you, Commissioner? Is there anything we can move around for the new TIF?

I've got just a question here from Vice Mayor.

Ms. McKenna, are you saying that if we could come to an agreement now to modify the plan, that we could have that on our commission agenda on the 22nd, modify the plan, and then pass a budget?

Was that challenging or no? You're saying we can't do it.

The commission has to do that before the 23rd.

Now, Commissioner Fessick, you were next. Then I've got Commissioner Seegerson-Eaton.

I'm just going to make a point. So this is exactly the situation that we're going to find ourselves in because look at the time. Here we are at the 11th hour, and so everything we've said doesn't really matter. And, yes, I have to represent my district, and that's what I have to do, and that's my job to do that. Mayor, you represent the entire city, so... are five districts if three of the three of the five are saying that they wish that there was some sort of change then it's probably on you to to take the approach that would be the compromise because you represent all districts and so if And

OKAY. SO I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING TO AMEND THE ECRA PLAN. For 2027, or moving forward, I guess not for 2027, but so the ECRI plan, order to direct staff to do that.

Mayor, point of order. I haven't even gotten a chance to speak on the first thing before another motion is put on the table. And I don't think that's fair.

Can you hold your motion? Commissioner Seegerson-Eaton. Okay, Commissioner Seegers. An unprofessional.

Okay, so I think maybe for the seventh or eighth time we learned that we cannot modify the budget. We cannot change the plan. We don't have enough time. And so I think, I hope everybody has that and doesn't have to ask that question again. You know, we need to pass a budget. We shall. That means it's mandatory. We've heard what the ramifications will be Okay, and we haven't, this isn't just the 11th hour in my opinion. It's not the 11th hour. We've been working on our budget since April. And also, as a resident of District 2 and the representative of District 2, I also have a responsibility to

You think that's funny? I said, oh my god.

Yeah, you're bullies. If you don't get your way, I do agree with the mayor, if you don't get your way, you probably would stomp out of here like a small child and have a fit. So I'm not available for any special meeting, period. And I'm not going to do it again to have another meeting on the budget because I don't want to sit for another six hours and have the same thing explained over and over and over again. So, thank you.

All right, Ms. McKinney, you've got your hand up again.

The discussion item doesn't have any... any ability to make a decision or a change, as far as I remember, correct?

Well, actually, let's just put it this way. You've told us your position based on the plan that was there before I was elected. Commissioner Perkins and Vice Mayor Fournier, they both, if I remember correctly, with the exception of last year, both had voted against this particular plan when it was brought up in 2024, if I remember correctly, and I've gone back to look somewhat recently. How does that, I mean, I guess this is a good more city charter sort of conversation. How does that allow us to effectively do our job and if the plan hasn't been able to be changed, you're basically saying you

OK. Further commission discussion? Seeing none, let's call the roll again. Item number eight.

Moved and seconded for discussion. Does anyone in the commission want the presentation again before we get into discussion? No? Okay. I've got Commissioner Fessick.

Ms. McKenna, I have a question for you. Is it possible and to, so basically I think we know where we all stand on this one, so this is kind of crazy. So if tonight's vote fails continually, this board should probably reconvene and I know that Commissioner Segerstein doesn't want to have any more time spent on this. However, I would like the opportunity to consult outside council about some options because Even if it's on my own, but I would like us to all ask some questions about finding ways because this can't be the way that good governance works. And I just don't see where you say you have

I appreciate that. You have sat here with us for the most part, and you have heard what three of us have concerns we've all had, right? Not just East, but also Northwest CRA. And my question is then, why in all of this time, now you're being helpful to try to find solutions, right? But if in all this time you knew we were approaching this date and you knew likely what was going to happen in terms of people feel very passionate about what they believe, right? Why is it that this wasn't brought forward to us as a board to say, hey, listen, I've heard what you guys are saying. If we don't, you kn

So taking a trip down memory road, Lane, somewhere, I believe the way we resolved this last year was to take the $2 million of TIF and not allocate it, right?

Right, new TIF. Did we ever allocate that? I'm sure you did over the course of the year. I don't remember that ever coming. It's still sitting in contingency. So we still have another $2 million that's unallocated. Correct. So there is more in this that's unencumbered here. So that's what we did last year.

But we never did go back and allocate them.

Yeah, Ms. McKenna, when you used that example of the roving ambassador money as non-allocated, you weren't saying that's the only money that was in the budget, correct? Oh, no.

Right. So it could be much more than $164,000. It's just that was an example. Very good. Thank you. Commissioner Fessick.

Thank you. I have a question about this. So how much, Ms. Vasquez, is the TIF money being allocated to something specific this year?

Just the one part, because Ms. McKenna brought up the $168,000. How much, I guess, how much is the total dollar amount that we, of new TIF funds? That's the only thing we can change in the plan.

And what is our admin cost? The admin cost is 2.1. 2.1, okay. I think we might be able to find a way to work this out. So that would leave 4.9 that would be allocated to other projects. Is that correct, roughly?

Okay. Well, parking is part of the McNabb project. So that's, I mean, even though it's not, it's adjacent to. Okay. So here's something. So Ms. McKenna, you said that we could potentially we could potentially do something with new TIF and new TIF only, right?

Okay, so I will, so what are the dollar amount that's not appropriated then? I would have to go through it page by page.

So you guys have decided to allocate everything except for another 2.2 million?

I'm trying here. I'm trying to find a way to work.

Okay, so, and that 2.5 in reserve, nothing can be done with it until it's brought forward to us, correct? No spending out of that?

Doesn't really address the whole main problem, but I would like to make, I think I'd like to think on this for just a little bit. I'll let somebody else go. Thank you.

Okay, well, let's just take a 10-minute recess. We're back. This meeting is resumed now. Ms. McKenna, you had something?

OK. Thank you for that clarification. All right. We're back on discussion. I believe Commissioner Fessick, you were going to mull over some items or something. You're good? Okay. All right. We're still up for further discussion on item number eight, which is, of course, the East CRA Finance and Implementation Plan. Anybody have anything to add? Okay. Looks like we don't. Now we vote again. What do you think, Kervin? Let's give it a try. Item number eight.

Yes. I guess they call this a votorama in Washington, right?

MOVED AND SECOND FOR DISCUSSION. DOES ANYONE ON THE COMMISSION WISH TO SEE THE PRESENTATION MS. VASQUEZ DID PREVIOUSLY? NO. OKAY, MS. VASQUEZ, YOU CAN SIT DOWN.

Doom and gloom, absolutely. Well, any further discussion? Any further input from the public? I mean, we're revisiting the issue. Just name an address for the record.

Further input from the public? Seeing none, public input closed. Mayor. Commissioner Seegerson.

All right. I think it's worthwhile to remind everyone, including the public, that we are doing what the law mandates that we do. It's mandatory to press a budget. And if I would like to have Ms. McKenna again go over those facts in the interest of the public. Thank you. Ms. McKenna.

I'm done the same way. I don't know what's and who's bidding in my district, because they don't tell me as well, but I think that's something that staff should have already been working with the district commissioner on, with the contractors with that project. Because it's time to vote, here it is.

suggesting is that we let you see that request for proposals that we will be issuing to the universe of contractors i just had this talk with with tran similar to tran the other day um i get it i'm just saying i think it's something should be done with all the commissioners when it comes to that in their district not just when it's time to vote for the budget that's all i'm saying i don't disagree with you How do you feel about it, Commissioner?

No thoughts. I am where I am. Thank you.

Commissioner Perkins, I've got Commissioner Seegerson-Eden next. Oh, hi. Yeah. Done? Yes, I'm done. OK. Commissioner Seegerson-Eden.

So is this something we can do as a CRA board?

Correct. And we still, okay, so that's the first thing that needs to happen. Second thing is the bond issue that would need to happen. Correct? Yeah. So there are other bites at this apple.

OK. Further commission discussion? Anybody? Commissioner Smith?

I know that Ms. McKenna's trying. Would that be something that this board could support so that we could move ahead? I'll make the motion that all procurement wording or whatever way you labeled it.

Did that come back to you? Before it ever goes out to the general contracting public, that it comes back to us for approval. And that would be definitely stopping point for everything. That's correct. I'll second that motion.

Okay, there's been a motion and a second to bring back the procurement documents.

I know, but she just reiterated, I just asked her the question, did she go with it, and she says no, and then you make the motion.

No, but I think it's two different things. What Ms. McKenna's suggesting is something that would stop everything. If we go ahead with the budget, the procurement wording, they can't go out to a contractor, to the contracting world without this, and it would have to come to us for approval before it would move forward. Yeah. To us as a board, not to an individual, but to us as a board.

Thank you. So I think Ms. Vasquez said earlier that before we put anything out to bid for a general contractor, we'd have to have the bond, because if we don't have the money to do it, we can't go out to bid. So we already have to approve a bond, and then we'd already have to approve the contractor that comes back to the bid. So you're adding another step in between. But I don't think that's satisfying. I don't think it gets, I mean, adding additional gating items, while I appreciate it and I think we should be looking at it anyway, and I definitely support the motion, it doesn't change anythi

Basically, it's not about... checks and balances. It's about, no, I just don't want this project and I won't vote for this. And I won't vote for this budget unless.

Do not put words in my mouth. I have been very clear for three years about, I didn't say the project should change. How we pay for it should change. because we have other obligations in this city that I'm more worried about than this risky development project that you're asking us to take on debt for and extend the CRA for. I've been saying this for years. Do not put words in my mouth.

It just, Vice, it just appears that it's not about the budget. It's about the project.

It's about the budget. I asked if we could take the bond out of this and pay as we go. I actually like the project. You actually haven't listened to a damn word I've said, it sounds like, because I've been saying all along, let's pay as we go and do the project. Maybe slim it down a little, but let's do the project. But what I don't like is issuing all this debt that's scheduled out till 2060 or 2061 the debt is not well okay the cra is that it's correct it's not yeah but it is debt is only going to be 15 or 20 depending on the issuance either way that the concept of the the cra being extended

It sure sounded like it was about the project. Yeah, right. It's OK.

Right. Calm down, Vice. I'm sorry about that. Yes.

Claudia, let's talk about the CRE extension, because that's part of the plan. Yeah. I'm hearing 2031, and then I'm hearing 2060-something, right?

THE REASON WE'RE SAYING 2061 JUST IN CASE THE BOND HAS TO BE EXTENDED.

Excuse me for cutting you off. Where did the number come from, 2061?

So who came up with 2061? If the statute allows 30 years, because I know we had... We started in what?

Yeah, but the motion would be 3-3 again, so it would fail.

I think that's the biggest issue you have right there, Commissioner, is the sunset, 2031 and 2061.

It's the money. It's the bond money. It's the bond. It's the bond money. It's the plan, right? It's all of everything. It had to end with the bond, yeah. I still believe, yes, we should sunset the ECRA. I think we should definitely do something with that park. Everybody wants that park activated. But I think that we, again, could have a scaled back version of what was pitched and proposed, and maybe it doesn't have to be to the, again, I actually agree with Vice Mayor, it doesn't have to be exactly what it was, and we don't need to, but we have to have that conversation, and today's not the ni

Okay, Commissioner, just explain to me how do you feel about the bond? Because, of course, we can't do the project without the bond.

I have been very clear from day one that—and I remember the meeting— That's probably one of the reasons why I ended up sitting and running for office the first time because I was so absolutely frustrated that- Because of the bond? No, the whole project and the borrowing money and the extension of the CRA, I felt that that was not what residents were screaming about. I'm in this exact same place I've been for the past few plus years. I do not feel comfortable putting taxpayers on the hook for all this money. And I understand that tonight's not the vote, but if you remember last year and- previo

Can somebody call the city manager and tell him we need help? Maybe he can come up with a solution that we could vote on. I'm serious. Somebody give him a call.

What kind of help do we want? Maybe he can think of something we're not thinking of. Because we're all putting our heads together, but we're not getting anywhere. Another one wouldn't help.

Honestly, it's baffling to me. You say it's about the project, and yet you have the... the reins in your hands to stop the project, and yet you still won't vote for the budget with the full knowledge that you can stop the project, which you freely admit it's about the project. Really, that's what I mean. It baffles me. You've got the capability.

It doesn't baffle me. Let me tell you why. Listen, let me tell you why. We don't do enough to respect commissioners in the district they represent.

We don't do enough of that. I've always said that, even before I got elected, that I believe in collegiate voting. There are so many projects that came through my district. For my first six years, everybody up here said no for everything. No problem. No. when it came to everybody's district and what you wanted, I always voted yes. So now I know it's budget time, but I'm listening to the district commissioner because she had this issue before and we didn't resolve it then. And here we are again with the budget, which the city managers should have sat her down and talked to her and listened to h

All right. Well, let's keep going. Yeah. I still suggest somebody call Greg Harrison.

I am. You need to be talking to the commissioner, what's on her mind, what she wants, what she does not want, what she's having problems with, what she's not having problems with, what she can work with, what she can't work with, why you haven't worked with her, why you should work with her. All those questions need to be answered and they're missing.

Like I said, perhaps baffled was the wrong word, but I just don't understand if you've got an issue with something and you have in your power to stop that thing, then what the issue then is.

Well, the issue is the city manager and staff has not worked with the commissioner in the way that they should have.

So here we are. You all want to call Greg? Let me see if he'll pick up his phone.

Yeah. Commissioner Seegerson-Eaton, I think you, did you have your hand up?

Yeah, you're on speaker, Greg. Okay, but we'll look at something.

I'm just going to say, um, I think Ms. McKenna, at some point here, I mean, we've pointed out that the bond doesn't go through, it doesn't go forward. If at the procurement level, we don't hire a contractor, it stops the project. Well, Commissioner Perkins, I give you the courtesy of, and I just don't wanna hear your. I just said. Thank you. Okay, good. You agree with me, that's good. Wasn't even said. No. Okay, so. Means I agree. There we are. And this, I feel, is getting, I don't know exactly what the right word would be, but it seems like we are at an impasse. And I think that if we're at a

It doesn't matter what you said. It's your actions. However, I have the floor, so if you don't mind.

I think we should hear the ramifications of what happens, not just with the CRA, but with the entire city. Because we cannot, no, I want to hear them again. For the record, excuse me, you don't dictate. You don't dictate. So I want to hear it again, and then I said we should call another vote. Thank you.

Can I ask, are you finished? Yes. That's just the CRA side of it.

Right, but if we don't pass the CRA budgets, we know that we cannot pass the city budget. Is that a true statement?

Okay, so what I'm asking is what happens if we don't pass, can't pass the city budget?

Okay, no one, in other words, we can't write any checks? No. Nobody gets paid? What? The doors close. The doors close. The doors close.

Okay, so I'd like to say in the spirit of compromise, somebody please vote yes for the budget. And I want to call the vote, so let's call the vote.

Thank you. Yes. I want to make sure that I say on the record that there have been a lot of personal interpretations of my personal thoughts and and reasons why some people think that they or they think they know my why why I feel certainly or my actions I have been very consistent over the past two years and Any intention or any attempt to put words in my mouth or try to assume that you may or may not know what I'm thinking other than what I have publicly stated is is not a not a good thing. In general, it makes me feel like you are attempting to either intimidate or coerce me, and this contin

So I'm just curious that that was a pre-prepared long list of how we're going to, one of us who feels a certain way about certain things should abandon all, abandon ship about how you feel you're supposed to represent and with all of the things that are basically held where we are now the bad guys essentially for holding our ground because we do not believe in the way that the budget has been presented and we do not believe that that is the right thing for the city and we have been blocked at every attempt to try to maneuver around that and try to be cooperative and try to be working together,

Right, we had to reconvene last year, so it seems like there's diminishing returns here. So can we reconvene this year like we did last year?

Why would we want to go through this again? Another four or five hours. We've exhausted every single possibility. None of it has worked. Why would we want to sit up here on this dais? Okay.

Does she have the floor right now? You asked a question. That was it.

I was looking at Ms. McKenna. Certainly not Rhonda if I wanted answers.

Okay, okay, okay, okay, okay. Everybody quiet down now. If the question was Ms. McKenna, I'm sorry.

It was not clear, honestly. I'll be honest with you.

I mean, perhaps it's rhetorical, but we can. It's to Ms. McKenna, obviously. Can we adjourn and reconvene?

So wasn't there a proposal to reconvene at noon or something on the 22nd? I'd like to make a motion to reconvene at noon on the 22nd. Second.

I've already made that motion. I made one. I don't think we voted on that. Claudia said that we could not.

Okay, so there's been a motion to recess and reconvene on the 22nd.

At noon, 1 o'clock. Which is it? Make your motion clear. My motion is to adjourn this meeting and reconvene at noon on September 22nd. Okay.

22nd you have a City Commission meeting you don't have to come Rhonda Okay, it's been moved in then there was a second Commissioner Perkins was that yes Commissioner fessick seconded. Okay. It's been moved in second. There's a motion on the floor Is there any input from the public on this item? Seeing none public input closed Commission discussion. I'll lead it off. I can't I can't make that meeting I could do the 21st, but not the 22nd

Not the 22nd, no. Not that that matters, right? I can't do the 21st. Can't do the 21st?

Okay, then 21st sounds like is out. Any other options?

Oh, no. Commissioner Smith has a surgical appointment in the morning.

What about the 18th around? Nope. Four? I could do the 18th. Nope. Around, well, probably could do it before four. Say between one and four. The 18th?

Tomorrow. One o'clock on September 18th. 23 is out. I'm sorry, what? I think the proposal right now is one o'clock on September 18th. I can do that. No, I cannot do the 18th at all.

Oh, okay. 18th is out. I don't even have a calendar open. Sounds like we're running out of time.

Just give me any date. I'll compromise. How about that? As long as I'm not in the hospital, I can come. I'm available. I can clear my schedule.

That's a start. So, I heard what you just said, but Mayor, you said you're not available on the 22nd? So, will you be available for the shade meeting?

Oh, yeah, because that's later, yeah. Of course, commission meeting, yeah.

Okay, so you're not even available for two on that same day?

The shade meeting is at 430 or 445. Oh, I thought it would.

I mean, if we do our meeting and, like, I mean, I could show up an hour early, but that's about it. Yeah, that's the thing. I can't promise that.

No. 2 o'clock won't work on that same day? Okay, I can see what's going on now. Okay, I get it.

We have a shame, like the mayor said, at 4.30. So unless there's going to be an epiphany and somebody changes their vote, you're only going to have, let's say, two to three, an hour and a half, and obviously nobody's changing their vote, so why bother?

That would be a question for Commissioner Fessick, Perkins, and Vice Mayor Fornia, I would think.

I've been very clear about how I feel about things and I, that's it, thanks.

It's for the budget. I don't support this version of this budget in its current iteration and for a multitude of reasons. And so, but I do not want to feel coerced to change my vote and go against what I believe and who I was elected to represent.

I asked for a secondary opinion. I asked for other outlets. And you had a memo prepared that you anticipated this. And so from my view at this point, it makes it feel like, to me, that staff was actively prepared for what may happen if somebody didn't agree. So the 11th hour trying to resolve something to me, I would love to work it out. I offered multiple solutions, all of which were told no and voted against as well. And for months and years, actually, at this point. So I don't know what to tell you. I'm not going to go against what I believe to be the right thing. And I understand what you'

We didn't get here just today, we all know that, right? So there were motions to do workshops, there's been motions for all kinds of things related to this project that you can blame us we can we blame you because no one no one no the other three will never compromise either during the rest of the year to have a workshop on the topic miss mckenna so you can read that memo that was i also agree feels very orchestrated that commissioner eaton asked you to read the memo that you already have um she she didn't know about the memo she at she was asking me to read the statute again i chose to read t

I want to say I won't be scolded by you or the mayor or anyone about this because I feel like I spent the last year, like Commissioner Fessick did, trying to talk about these projects, have a workshop on it, get my thoughts through to the CRA director on what I – what I believe we should do with this. And none of it was heard. And the other three just kicked the can down the road. Same thing that they did the year before, not taking the concerns seriously. So if you know you've got an even commission like this, Where is the leadership? Where is the compromise going into this? If I was sitting

There is a pending motion. Yes, there is. Reconvene on the 21st, right?

I will still second it because I think, yes. It was the 22nd at noon. Second.

It was at noon. It was at noon. At noon? It was at noon. I can't do that. He can't do two either. Can't do any of them.

He couldn't do any of them. But there's a motion. He can't either. Neither one of them can, so that's a waste.

Have we convened? Who can't convene on the 21st?

Eric, I already mentioned that three times.

We're not going to do it. Like I said, I could do later, but that's.

What day are we talking about now? 22nd. Okay, the commission. We have the shade meeting at 4.30.

I would also argue the shade meeting is probably less important than this now. If that had to get moved a day or two or something, that... That's true. We should replace the shade meeting with this and reschedule the shade meeting.

Is there a noticing issue with the shade meeting? Oh, yes, yes.