Village Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening. I'd like to call the meeting to order. Vice Mayor Cantor, would you lead us in a moment of silence in the Pledge of Allegiance?

If we could please bow our heads for a moment of silence. If everyone would please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Madam Clerk.

Council Member Burch. Present. Council Member Devaney. Present. Council Member Walensky.

Here.

Vice Mayor Cantor. Present. Mayor Charles.

Here. Are there any additions, deletions, or deferrals at this moment for the agenda?

I just wanted to bring up...

Could you tell us what additions are allowed and what are not allowed as far as Sure, so usually additions are permissible as long as there wouldn't be any notice violations associated with those additions, so I wouldn't necessarily say something that's a quasi-judicial item or something of the sort would be permissible as being an addition to the agenda. But for the most part, you can walk items onto the agenda as long as you don't necessarily violate any public notice requirements. And so those public notice requirements vary depending on what type of item we might be dealing with. So additions, I would say, are generally permissible. And so case by case, we'll kind of evaluate it when one does come up.

Thank you.

Through the chair. While we're discussing that, maybe can we just make the distinction between a discussion and actually taking action on something?

So discussion and possible action items, I won't give you the impression that you could never take action on an item if you walk it on. You can't. That's not something that can't be done. Best practice would be that you wouldn't, but in certain circumstances it's possible you could. But again, I don't want to give you some blanket legal advice without it being case-specific. Because it depends on what type of item we're talking about.

Thank you. Madam Clerk.

Item 5A, recognition of Officer Noel Allen and Officer Luis Cotoperes for their life-saving efforts. This item is brought forth by the Chief of Police.

Good evening, everyone, mayor, council, members of the community. I'm proud to stand here today and with my co-director, Angie Dorney from Parks and Recreation, to recognize two individuals who helped save a life here in the community a short time ago. It's my pleasure to introduce Officer Noel Allen of the Miami Shores Police Department and United... And United States Coast Guard Petty Officer Luis Cato Perez. On April 27, 2026, a medical emergency occurred at the Miami Shores Community Center tennis courts. According to several witnesses, a pickleball player collapsed to the ground, prompting bystanders and recreation staff to urgently call 911. United States Coast Guard Petty Officer Luis Cato Perez, who was present on the court playing pickleball, immediately turned toward the commotion and observed an individual lying on the ground unresponsive. Recognizing the severity of the situation and without hesitation, Petty Officer Cato Perez ran to the individual. One witness stated he was jumping over the nets to reach him. and immediately he began administering CPR through chest compressions. Shortly thereafter, Miami Shores Police Officer Noel Allen arrived on the scene. Officer Allen quickly assessed the patient's condition, recognized the immediate need for an automatic external defibrillator, and ensured that the device was promptly applied. Within seconds, he delivered a shock with the AED. Chest compressions continued until Miami-Dade Fire Rescue Engine 30, led by Captain Anderson and the engine team, arrived and assumed advanced life-saving measures. The team's professionalism, urgency, and expertise were evident throughout the incident as they worked extensively to stabilize the patient and prepare him for transport to the hospital. Miraculously, the patient recovered and was ultimately discharged. A review of this incident, including witness statements and video footage, determined that without the immediate coordinated and decisive actions of Petty Officer Luis Cato Perez, Officer Noel Allen, and the Miami-Dade Fire Rescue and others involved, the individual likely would not have survived. Petty Officer Cotto Perez's willingness to act without hesitation during a critical moment exemplifies the highest ideals of public service, courage, and civic responsibility. Likewise, Officer Noel Allen's calm, quick, and decisive actions reflect the vision, mission, and values of the Miami Shores Police Department and demonstrate an unwavering commitment to preserving life and serving the community. And due to this, Petty Officer Luis Cato Perez will receive a Citizen Recognition Award, and Officer Noel Allen will receive the Department's Lifesaving Award. And I will tell you, the person who was saved is here this evening. On behalf of the Miami Shores Police Department and the Parks and Recreation Department, we're pleased to present you with that award. And Officer Allen, we're pleased to present you with the life-saving award and the life-saving pin to wear on your uniform. Thank you.

who they helped save. Can I take a couple pictures with them? Yeah, definitely.

just just final for me just these awards are presented on behalf of the village on behalf of the mayor and the entire council and with that I'd like to give an opportunity to anyone who would like to speak well as you can imagine I a little bit emotional so I don't know how many

Just give me a minute, please. That's fine. Take your time. So obviously, I never expected this was going to happen to me, especially at my age, 57. But I am glad that Luis and Officer Allen were there to basically save my life. And that's all I can say right now. I'm just really emotional. Thank you.

Do you want to introduce her?

Good evening, everyone. Petty Officer Cotto Perez, Luis Alberto Cotto Perez for Coast Guard. I've been in Miami Shore around already for years because I'm servicing the Tacklet law enforcement unit for the Coast Guard and played peek-a-boo around two years already. So that day, when the situation happened, I'm glad for being there, honestly, because that's knowing my plans for that moment, because I'm playing softballs on Mondays, and that happened on a Monday, and... But I'm glad I'll be there. I'm glad to take the quickly response. And everyone can help in that moment. Call the 911. The person called the 911 and the officer Allen and then the other part of their response people help Mario as well. And what I told before him, I'm glad he's alive. I'm glad he's continuing with us. I'm glad he had the opportunity to enjoy his family and take a picture for his life now and doing whatever he wants to do and don't hesitate because that's an advertisement. So that's the most important thing is be alive, love your ones, and prepare. Always prepare. You never know when you can't help someone in the same position that you.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you, Mayor, Council.

Thank you. We appreciate it.

Next item is 6A, Library Board of Trustees Annual Report to Council for Fiscal Year 2025-2026. It's presented by Chairperson Christine Gay.

I know. As Alice said, that's a tough act to follow there. My name is Christine Gay. I am the outgoing president chairperson of the library board. It's been my great pleasure to serve on the library board for eight years. I'm now term limited, so you're not going to have to hear from me any longer. But I do just want to say thank you to all of you for your continuing support of the library. Also thank you to Deputy Village Manager who attended many of our meetings. We are very happy to have her as one of our supporters as well. And I think you all have the annual report. It looks like this. The library had another incredible year. I just wanted to reiterate what Michelle always says, which is that everybody comes to the library for books, for physical books, for activities we have in the library, for programming. Our community still loves to be in the library and to actually read physical books. This past year, a Brockway membership approached a total of 8,000 cardholders and circulated more than 40,000 library materials, which is pretty incredible in a village of our size. So I also just wanted to note that we called out our collaboration of the year, which is a longstanding mother-son duo, Nicholas Jachinko and Angelique Suarez. who have an offering called Senior Tech Connect where they help people learn how to use their phone, apps, websites, really practical things like how to park on the app on your phone and pay for parking and things like that. very appreciative to them they've been doing this program since 2023. so we have all of the highlights the stats and the figures um in our library report our annual report which you have and i just want to um call out especially our lovely director michelle brown who does so much for us every day so thank you very much and it's been a pleasure to serve on this board

next item is managers update good evening everyone to the mayor and council I have one item that I'd like to just bring to the fore and the intent this evening it's just so that we can discuss it and we can move on from this if at all we can when I first got to the villages there's a lot of conversation about a seawall And at that time, there was a conversation about whether or not there was water access to the seawall. There was a conversation about having a park and a new seawall. So a lot was happening at the time. The one thing that was missing from all the conversations as we went about looking for an RFP to do this was... It was access to water, which is what FIND kept on talking about. To put it in its historic sense, we, as a village, the village had long voted against having any, what's it called? Kayaking, yes. They had long departed from that. So what was being discussed was the wall. But there's one thing that I didn't see. I did not see a report that spoke to the structural integrity of the wall. So I was like, certainly this is something that we should look at. And while we looked at it, the engineers came back and said that they saw something that was rather risky to the southern end of the wall. And so... I brought that to council. They saw the report. And it was full steam ahead. Guess what? Forget all this conversation, all the debate about everything else. Let's move ahead and fix the wall. And we started in that process. I am a manager who enjoys and relishes the input of residents in most things. I don't have to, because after all, the council or the sitting seat of elected officials do give managers that okay to do certain things. But I like to hear residents' input. And so I insisted at the time that in choosing the company that would do a design for a seawall, that I would have two residents from the community who would sit and select the company that we would use. that happened I'm really thankful for them I think the the body was quite patient because these are two fine folks who who traveled but they came back if I'm not mistaken they're both engineers and they they came back we waited on them and the firm that was selected to do this was Chenmore and Associates. Brought it to council, it was accepted by council, and they proceeded to work on a design. Now here we are several months after we have left behind all the conversation that I think everybody has been looking forward to when this wall will be constructed and it will finally be over. From the part of administration, we look at it as having achieved something that needed to be done, and we're really looking at a flagship and a staple, something for which we should be quite proud within this community, because now it has even a live-in seawall, and that makes us the envy of most municipalities. fact of all because there aren't there aren't any other municipalities especially in Miami-Dade County that has a live-in seawall I can tell you that the company that provided a live-in seawall they have been writing several white papers on our seawall as a model and so for that I'm quite proud but I It seems as if we have, and I described it best, that the only thing I could think of is as a stationary front. That's where we are right now, where it's just swirling and swirling and swirling, and we can't move, we can't advance this along because there's a certain, we're just stuck in, are we doing this right? Or rather, more pointedly, we are not doing this right. And I... We could move ahead with this, but I just want, for ease of conversation, so everybody is at rest and that we get a consensus on this, that we revisit those things, because it's taken on a life of its own now, where there are many people who are asking about the seawall, and many people are doubting what it is that the engineers have designed, that the FDEP others have said this is a good design are we okay in fact last week we had some one of those agents that came out just to look at what it is that we're doing and blessed it but there just seems to be this constant front that's just doubted what is happening so mayor council I took the opportunity just to say let's have this conversation once and for all. Let's discuss what it is that we have to discuss here on this dais so we can move ahead. Bearing in mind that the construction of that wall is tied to ARPA dollars. It needs to be done by December 31st of this year. It's also tied to a pending refund from I think it's FDEP for well over a million dollars. So we can't afford to just stay and just talk and just berate this project while time is passing by and this thing just needs to be done. So I'm bringing it here. I know some of the things that have been said. We have the engineer from Chenmore who's here, and we have... Delroy Peters, who is another civil engineer and our director of public works. And I'm hoping that by having these two folks here and having an open and candid conversation, we can put the swirling front to rest and we can move on with this project. It really, really would be my delight if we could get this done. And I'm pretty sure there are other people within this community who would like to see this thing addressed and done once and for all, and we can move along with the construction of that seawall and a sidewalk that is a part of this entire project. So thank you very much. I think there is a PowerPoint presentation. Delroy, are you going to lead this, or? Yes, sir. Thank you.

So good afternoon, Mr. Mayor and Councilman, Madam Attorney, Madam Clerk. So as the manager said, there is one little challenge we have that is kind of preventing us from really bringing the seawall to a close. The project is scheduled to be completed in November, but we have kind of reached a stalemate because we want to be sure that when we move forward that everybody is on board. And so the one thing that has challenged us that we have been kind of dancing around for a number of weeks is the sidewalk that forms a part of the seawall. And so it is that issue that we want to address even at this time. So I want to use the opportunity, and again I thank Patrick from Chenmore, who is the initial designer, to be here. So I want to kind of step back, this is more education than it is anything else. So I want to step back in history. Now this particular sidewalk that is at the seawall, probably about 40 years ago, they discovered that they were having some challenges here in the village with the sidewalk as they consider the seawall integrity and so on. And so they discovered that Behind the seawall, they were having soil loss. And so fine granular material in the field was going under the seawall and was actually being leached out. And as a result of that, the sidewalk would sink, or there's a possibility that it would altogether collapse. And so the engineers back then, of course, I have no idea who was in the village alive, or that was 40 years ago. I was not here by any means. But they were using Lodovic and Orange as a consultant engineer, and they're the ones who are working on trying to remedy this challenge that they were having. And so they provided four solutions. I won't be giving out four, but just to say that the solution that they came up with was called Scheme 1. And Scheme 1 was essentially to build a bridge, literally making a sidewalk into a bridge which is independent of any leach or soil loss that would occur. And so this bridge essentially cause a sidewalk to remain stable for 40 years. But they did say, they were attempting to see how they could have a sidewalk stable with the soil loss that was inevitable going to happen. So they predicted that the soil loss would remain, or just continue, but the bridge or the sidewalk would remain. And so the engineers finally made this conclusion after they came up with what they believed was the perfect solution. From an overall standpoint, this is my opinion, says the engineer, that the solution presented in the attached sketch scheme one, and I'll show you that shortly, yields the highest probability of mitigating the effect of soil-less migration and providing the walkway stability, and at the same time provides a strengthening of the bulkhead that would compensate for deterioration of the stability of the bulkhead that has occurred over the years. And so we are focused on the walkway. So the walkway was going to remain stable. This is a scheme that they provided. And by the way, the seawall that we have there are comprised of two segments. One segment is 710 feet long, which is of coral rock. It was a gravity wall made of coral rock. And the other segment is 180 feet. That is more southwest of the seawall. The seawall goes from north to south. So the south section, 178 feet, is comprised of seawall panels. So this is a schema that they came up with. And the schema essentially, if you look at the top, really you can see a sidewalk. So they built a structure at the top, and then to the side is what we call a skirt beam. And then below the skirt beam are some piles. So the skirt beam is sitting on the piles, and then the skirt beam is tied to this sidewalk structure. So it doesn't matter what happens underneath, even if there's soil loss, that structure, that complete system was going to remain. And indeed, it did. But I just want to move on and show you something else. So this is a structure that they built. Now, when we design our seawall, we didn't have this information at all. I had no clue. There were no as-built, of course, it was 40 years ago, nothing. So we thought that this sidewalk was simply a four-inch sidewalk. That's all we thought. That's all the designers knew. That was it. And so they designed it for the sidewalk to be demoed, because that deteriorated. It was looking bad. There were centerline cracks. So it was, yes, sir?

Mr. Mayor, may I just ask a quick question? What is an as-built?

Okay, so an as-built are the joints that after a system has been designed and constructed, the final joints, the engineers look at it, okay, were there any changes? And the final, final set of joints which says this is how the system was built would be now called, the plans would be now called as-built. And those are kept for record so that later on, if you need to do anything on the system, you can go back and look and say, okay, that's what it is. So sorry if I never explained that. So anyway, so we thought that we'd be removing a simpler 4-inch sidewalk. Then the information came to us, and Councilman Birch was instrumental in this, that in fact, there was more than a 4-inch sidewalk. So we agreed with the engineer that we ought not to remove that sidewalk. It so happens that that information, though it was conveyed was not changed in the plans. And the reason is when we discovered it, the plans were already with the county being approved. And we thought that if we were to pull those plans, it would delay the project. But we were knowledgeable of it when we had the pre-con meeting before the construction. This was the contractor. But when the contractor was ready to do construction, The contractor looked at the plans themselves. And the plans did not say, don't demo. So the contractor began the demo off the sidewalk. It so happened that Jorge Lor, who was our project manager, was out there the morning when they started that and realized that was an error, because they should not have demoed it. So he stopped them immediately. But this is a result of breaking into the sidewalk, is that we actually saw something that was significant. This was not to have been. Well, they discovered that true to form that there were voids underneath that sidewalk. Just as the engineer said, then there were voids. There were significant soil loss. But indeed, the concrete sidewalk had stayed. Now, so the question is, what do we do? We have broken the sidewalk. In fact, not only did we break the sidewalk, but the contractors also removed one of the piles So now what do we do? The structure now is now an unstable structure. Not only that too, but as they examined the structure, the reason why they were comfortable removing it was that we discovered that the structure had cracks, centerline cracks, which suggests that over time, and it has been 40 years, and every structure has a lifespan, that there may be some bending of the structure itself. So we deem the structure to be unstable as we look at it. I don't know if Patrick wants to chime in. Anything else we discovered with the structure at this point?

No, I don't think that's accurate. Also, the salt water over time can cause corrosion of the reinforcing and weaken the structure.

And that's another thing we discovered. So these are some of the theories that the engineers determined. They were evidence of the predicted voice, as we said. They're also evidence of spalling, which means that the rebar that were in it, those steel that was used to reinforce, the structure itself was deteriorating with salt water. So the rebars, of course, were getting smaller. They had corroded. And when there's that corrosion, then the concrete itself start peeling off from the rebar. So they were spalling. They call it spalling. And also, there are evidence of the centerline crack, as I mentioned. So the question is, what do we do with this? And so we, the engineers, met and they looked at it and we said, please give us a solution as to what we can do. Because obviously this structure as it stands is unstable. It's unpredictable. And by the way, the design that we have said that we were supposed to put two feet of filled material on top of that structure. and then build another sidewalk on top of that. That was the design. So now that we know that they are voids, that they are cracks, and they are sprawling, we have to now decide what do we do with the sidewalk. And so the engineers got together. And by the way, this is some pictures we took of the existing sidewalk, those rust spots and so on are the evidence of the spalling, the rebar deteriorating. You can see that there are cracks in the center of it. And right along here, that's the center line cracks, which could suggest that there's some torsion bending. And so if the existing sidewalk is allowed to remain and is built on the fill material placed above, it could migrate through the cracks. So if we leave the sidewalk and we just simply put the fill material on it, then the fill material that we put on it could seep through the cracks of the sidewalk. And if that happens, then the sidewalk that would have built above that obviously would be unstable, could sink. So that was a challenge. There's no guarantee, and Patrick can speak to that, that the structure that we have there, that it will not fail. After all, it's 40 years, and every structure has a lifespan. And so the proposed seawall structure is designed. And by the way, the seawall, the new seawall, this is a kind of side point, but a new seawall that is built, by the way, is a seawall that is built independent of the sidewalk. So the seawall will not fail irrespective of what we do. This is just a side point. So the question then is, what do we do? I want to emphasize this, that the structure has a 40-year lifespan. And we can leave the structure as it is. And it may last for another three, four, five years. After 40 years, we have an opportunity to build a new structure. What do we do? Well, the new structure is actually funded already because it's in the project as it stands. We have the money for it. Five, 10 years later on from now, well, I don't know if I'll be here. I don't know. Nobody knows if they'll be here. But we don't know if we'll have the funding to be able to handle it. So we say what a beautiful opportunity it is at this point where we can shore up or seawall structure, build a new sidewalk, and we have a fresh structure that could probably last for another 40 years. If we leave this existing, it certainly will not last. I don't think so, anyway. That will last for another 40 years. But one thing we know for sure, if we do something now which is funded by ARPA dollars and by DEP, that will have a structure that will last us for some time. So the engineers actually proposed that we remove the sidewalk, but not altogether, just the sidewalk portion. And I've been talking so long, I'm going to ask Patrick to just finish this for me so that you can explain how we proposed to fix.

Yes. And for the record, Patrick Amaraj with Chenmore & Associates, the civil engineer record. So on this exhibit, it shows the preferred alternative. which is to take the existing slab, which has shown the cracking and spalling and rust stains, and to saw cut and remove those sidewalk portions, leaving in place the skirt beam and the existing cap I mentioned before, and once you remove those panels out, you can fill that with clean fill, and then that way you have a good foundation subgrade to construct the new sidewalk on. One thing to note also as far as the existing slab and the stability of that, in addition to building on top of that, the actual construction process one, installing a new seawall right next to it, and then two, putting in clean fill and compacting that with a roller and installing formwork and concrete is a very impactful process. And those loads, you know, we don't know the structural integrity of the existing slab, and the weight and the installation procedures of the new sidewalk and the new fill material may damage that even further.

And so these last two slides kind of try to superimpose the sidewalk, the seawall that is there. And by the way, we're not moving the old seawall. What we have done is to build the new seawall in front of the old seawall. So what I did was kind of superimpose and start asking ourselves the question, OK, so what happens if we build a sidewalk, a new sidewalk, and there is migration? Well, let's assume that this red line represents migrate of a single grain of soil. Well, if it does migrate through that, that yellow line is called a filter fabric line. So what they have done is they have placed a filter fabric line. And filter fabric will tend to hold the soil back. So even if there is water that is coming through, and we'll talk about how the water will come from the sea water wards. the water or its side, even if it does come through, then there's a filter fabric that is there to retain any soil. In addition to that, in front of the filter fabric is a new seawall panel that is, and this is, love this, love this word, which is hermetically sealed better than the coral rocks that was there that has holes in it. Hermetically sealed means that these are continuous panels, and the panel butts like this, the panels butt like this, and then between the panel is grout material. which means that that grout material is concrete, essentially, which seals the whole thing as one hermetic structure. So even if the soil does get there, then the soil has to pass through the second seawall panel, which is hermetically sealed better, before it gets out. And then for that to happen, the water would have to come in anyway. And then the water would have to pass through two seawalls, filter fabric. in order to get to a single grain of soil. So we feel that if we, because of how the system is built, that the structure that we're going to have, which is going to be compacted anyway, so specific density, compact materials, it's not going to be easy just to be leached out. Then we have a structure, a whole system that is going to be really robust enough to be able to last for some time. And that's how we have confidence that we can move forward with removing the sidewalk. Put filled material means that it's continuous now. All the voids are gone. And then build on top of that, those compacted materials, a new sidewalk.

I don't know if Jorge has any last final words, because Jorge understands this.

He has been swimming in it literally for a long time.

Jorge, by the way, is our project manager who has been working with the, my apologies, is officially, on Monday, the official new assistant public works director. Congratulations.

Jorge Lord, 289 Northwest 92nd, just to remind everybody that I live here. That's why I'm late, I'm sorry. Yeah, no, we've gone over this, you know, with Patrick and with the final engineers that come in Cedarburg. the construction managers, you know, a very, you know, a big team of engineers that, you know, have kind of studied this and looked at it, and we all really concur with the same conclusion. So, yeah, we've been swimming in this for a while, so, yeah.

Can I ask a question? Sure. So I just want to make sure I understand. The problem with the current sidewalk is, well, first of all, it's supported on the east and the west edge of the sidewalk is supported by structures, structure of some kind, seawall on one side and some piles underneath the ground on the other. But the problem is not the thing supporting it on the east and west side. The problem is the actual sidewalk on the top, right?

Well, the problem is underneath. And the fact that it's eroded underneath.

So the solution we're talking about here is to replace that top sidewalk, still connecting it to the two supports on the east and west side. So the end result will be something similar to what we had before, something that's not going to sink. If land does erode, which we're saying it's not going to, but... Let me just fix one little nuance.

Yeah. And that is the new sidewalk, the old sidewalk is tied into the seawall.

Right.

The old seawall.

The old seawall, that is. So when we saw cut, the new one that we're doing is not going to be tied into the seawall. However, it will be supported by the skirt beam and the piles. Right. that are there. And then it's going to be sitting on material now. Remember, they have voids underneath. So it's going to be sitting on filled material that is compacted to specific densities.

So it's only going to be supported by piles on one side? The pile is only on one side, yes.

Well, the piles and then the seawall on the other side. So they're pretty much the same. The old seawall. The old seawall. So it's the same depth that they both go to, right? The piles on one side.

It's going to be sitting on top of the old seawall? It's going to be sitting on top of the old seawall, yes. Are you leaving? It's not going to sink because it's going to be sitting on top of the old seawall.

Well, on the seawall, two feet of fill, and then the sidewalk.

It's going to abut the new seawall.

You referred to the old one as a bridge. Is the new one going to be a bridge?

The new one is not going to be a bridge, no. It's not going to be a bridge, not with that type of structure as it was built. And why was it built as a bridge? Again, we have to go back why. And that's why I went back to the history. It was built that way because there were soil loss. Now, the way the system is now designed, we don't anticipate that there's going to be significant soil loss. Because for you to have that, you have to walk through two sea walls. So we don't anticipate that.

So the new sidewalk is just going to butt up against the old seawall.

And it's going to be supported on one side by the piles.

So the new sidewalk, it mirrors the same condition where it's flush with the seawall cap. The new seawall cap is about two and a half feet higher. So the new sidewalk is adjacent to the seawall. new seawall cap, two feet higher, and rests on clean compacted fill. So it's not structurally supported or structurally tied into the previous seawall or the previous skirt beam and piles. It overlaps on top of it, so you will have some longitudinal support from what was there before, but the primary support is going to be the compacted fill. And then to elaborate on... If the fill was gone, what would happen to the sidewalk? The sidewalk would subside.

Okay.

Which is not the case with the current sidewalk. Correct, because it's an independent structure. Yeah. But to elaborate more on what Mr. Peters was saying on this new system, so in order for a grain of sand to erode and go out to the bay, it would have to go through the old seawall. It would have to go through about eight inches of gravel. It would have to go through filter fabric. It would have to go through grout. It would have to go through eight inches of new panel. which is reinforced with glass fibers that won't corrode and would have to go through a 14-inch pre-stress.

I don't have any of these environmental challenges in front of my house, but the sidewalk pieces still go like this all over the, you know, over time. That's why I'm concerned. If it was just a solid structure before, and now it's going to be sitting on fill. I know you're saying the fill's not going anywhere. It's going to stay right there. But I'm just curious why, if the old structure was there and the old sidewalk was supported by the old structure, why is the new one? The new one's going to be sitting on top of the old seawall or up against it?

It's above because the new seawall is offset.

But are we saying that between the old seawall and the sidewalk is going to be filled? Yes. But the old seawall is still going to be below?

No, no, no. The old, sorry, the seawall, my bad. I don't know if you want to say seawall or sidewalk. Old seawall is going to be there. I'm interpreting what you're saying as whether or not the old sidewalk is going to be there. Well, you know, you're taking out the old sidewalk. Yes.

Okay. Putting a new sidewalk. Well, we're filling, putting a new sidewalk. But are we saying that the new sidewalk is going to be higher than the old sidewalk? So there's going to be fill between the old seawall and the new sidewalk? Fill between the old seawall and the new seawall.

And just to clarify, though, the existing sidewalk is failing. It's bowed and it's, you know. I've seen it. It's a hot mess. Yeah, exactly. For sure. You know, it's 40 years. It's a long time.

But the things that were supporting that old sidewalk that's falling apart are still there.

Well, we don't know. I mean, I would assume the condition is similar to that of the sidewalk. But I guess it's less exposed to the elements. But. But I mean, we can't really tell that.

But to answer your question directly, what was supporting the sidewalk? The old seawall, the skirt beam, and the piles. Those remain. So even as we build on top of those, put fill, those remain.

Gotcha. Okay. I do have a question also. Just one more, which is...

When this came up before, there was concern about not knowing the extent of the erosion under the sidewalk. And therefore, there was concerns about if we were going to attempt to fill it in, we didn't know how big of a problem. Do we have a better idea at this point of how much fill it's going to take? Or is that?

Well, what we do have is this. We have a cost estimate as to what it's going to take to do this. That's what we have.

Okay. All right. To the chair, two questions. One in the last sentence. At one point you stated it would be two feet higher and then almost in the same sentence you said it would be two and a half feet higher. So my first question is how much higher is this seawall going to be than the one we have now and my second question is if you are putting dirt on top of the old seawall then this dirt is not going to have to go through two seawalls to get outside is it are you putting dirt under on the old seawall as well to come up to your height or are you simply putting concrete there so as far as the the first question

The new cap is, and I'm looking at the detail here, so the seawall elevation will be at elevation 7.55. The existing is approximately 5.3 based on the survey. So we're raising it 2.3 feet, which is 2 feet 4 inches roughly. So that's how much higher the new seawall is going to be compared to the old seawall. I didn't quite follow the second question. Can you repeat that?

So the second question, you're going to put fill in You're going to remove the slab that's there, and you're going to put compacted fill in then in dirt from there. But as far as over the old seawall, is there also going to be dirt put there before you pour this slab for your new sidewalk? Clean compacted fill. Clean compacted fill. So then back to my first question with the picture you showed. You show that grain of sand going through two seawalls. In fact, that's not the case, is it? The dirt that's on top of that is only going to go through one, correct?

Well, it is. When you get to the top, you're talking about going out through the seawall cap.

Right, and then you're going to seal that gap, I assume, at the bottom of the seawall cap against the slab? Right. Yeah, because that's the other way the dirt could get out, right? Especially with the rain and water and whatnot, yeah.

okay one question I have on the on this so you have numbers for what this plan would be but again to the to the demo part of the existing sidewalk is that a complete the whole what was it 480 it's like 898 feet of concrete and rebar we're removing So it says jackhammer, what is the, it's cutting slabs, crane? And then do, and then just take them out in big slabs? And then we have to demo that? Can we use that somewhere else as fill? It seems like a lot of fill.

I mean, we don't, I mean, there are opportunities. Companies will take those and grind them up and make them into fill, but we don't do that. Okay. They will take them away happily.

So when that happens, if somebody goes down there, they're just going to see just the middle part of the existing sidewalk gone. So you're going to cut it, and obviously it's the end cap on the one side of it. It's going to be left behind on the old wall, right? There'll be a void there. I mean, between, you take this out, I know I've seen some pictures, it's like that thick of concrete, right?

Actually, what is it? Four inches plus five, so I think it's, yeah, nine. Nine inches of concrete.

Yeah, I'm almost close enough. But yeah, but it seems like a lot of, it seems like a lot of material here. I mean, it just isn't. I mean, is there an alternative to maybe just scrape like they do I-95 and then do this? I mean, instead of demoing the whole thing? Well, they grind part of it on I-95, and then they fill it back in. They don't take out the whole thing. Right.

I think the issue is the capacity of the existing slab and how that gets compromised if you were to. construct on top of it or grind it.

I think he's referring to the reuse of the material. No, it's both.

It's to grind it down to a point where then you would just put that membrane in and then fill it back in. I mean, it just seems like a lot of aggregate to me. That's all I'm telling you. I mean, it's concrete formed. I get it with rebar and spalling, but it's pretty, I mean, when they did it, it was, they built a bridge, like you said. Now the bridge is failing. So the solution is then do an alternative to the bridge.

We certainly can ask the contractor if there's something that they can do to reuse the material. But I don't know if they would trust. Because when you purchase new material, it has to have a certain integrity. All right. But that's all.

But we don't, until you cut it, you don't know how much that you're going to have to use. Is that correct or incorrect?

Well, we don't know if we can use that. I don't know if it's a satisfied requirement. Patrick can speak to that because it has to be.

No, I'm talking about the new stuff that you're getting. You don't know how much you're getting once you cut this cap off, do you?

You won't know precisely until when you excavate it. From the portion that is exposed, you can extrapolate that out.

But that's, I mean, again, to this conversation, price then and deadline that we have on this, how do we budget for this?

Well, again, we have an estimate, but we have to understand that there could be some change in price, but we do have an estimate. The contractor has given us an estimate.

Okay. Is it the same contractor as doing the wall, or is this a separate contractor? The same contractor.

Okay. To the Chair, one more question. Are we going to put back in, you said how many pilings did we take out?

Are we going to put that back in? we're throwing that away what are we doing was there anything wrong with that piling when you took it out and that that's it's long gone in fact like i mentioned here before there was an error in him removing it so when they removed it they cut it because i mean they're they're gonna as far as they're concerned they're gonna demo so it's long gone but the question is are they gonna put it that you know discussion we can have with them are they gonna put back a pile and that that

Well, I'm only thinking of the future. I mean, if unfortunately this doesn't work and the same thing happens as happened the first time, which is when it did fail due to dirt loss, then if we had that system in there, it would give us something to attach to. So it seems like a great – we spent hundreds of thousands to put those pilings in when they were first put in. And now we're basically abandoning them, but I don't see why throwing them away makes any sense. I mean, I don't, they're buried. I doubt there's anything wrong with them. They're steel and concrete.

That was just one by accident.

We just said one of them came off by accident. So just one of them, not all.

The rest would remain. Right, so the public knows the structure that made the bridge is still the bridge, and what we're doing is replacing the roadway on the bridge, to put it easily.

Essentially. Thank you, sir.

To the chair, Patrick, was this solution unilaterally come up by you alone, or was this a consultation of other engineers at Chenmore as well?

Right. It was not a unilateral decision from me or from Chenmore. We also have our team from Cummins Cedarburg, who's the marine and coastal engineer, the structural engineers for the seawall. So we have their input as well as from the village as well as the contractor team. And as well as AMI, the CEI. So it was a team of about four to five different parties reviewing.

And Patrick, was this agreed, regardless of cost, to be the best decision for durability, best solution for durability and longevity of the new seawall, this solution that we've come up with here? Was that what was decided amongst all of those minds? Right.

And it's what we could trust because it's what we know is there.

So we feel that this solution is the best possible outcome that we could obtain for what we're trying to accomplish over there, correct? That is correct. Wonderful. Thank you.

Well, wait a minute now. We don't want to leave it at that. The best possible combination would be to rebuild a bridge there. That's going to last another 40 years. But I mean, that's not in our budget. That's what the problem is with that.

And if I may, we did ask the... That was a consideration as well. Again, we like to look at all possibilities. And we did ask the engineers to cost it out for us. And we do have a cost for that. So there'd be about $300,000 that we'd spend for the demo and another $350,000 that would build a bridge just for it to be a sidewalk. So those are the additional costs that would be involved. Right now, we're only going to be spending an additional $176,000. just to demo and get it to where we want. Versus demo and another $350,000. And of course, redesign, time, losing that, and possibly losing Apple funding.

And with this set, it will be done in the timeline then back in November, correct?

Yes. In fact, I must tell you that the contract has been waiting anxiously. We have given them a whole lot of deadlines. We'll get the answer to you. I think it's time for us to really enable us to be able to make a decision so we can move forward. And that's what we're asking for. So we do the project or we stop the project. But we can't dance anymore. We have to move forward.

sorry through the chair just one more thing so for obviously to build a new bridge would incur a lot more costs but my question is what is the overall difference in longevity and durability for the solution we came up with versus to build a whole new bridge patrick

It's a very difficult question you've asked, simply because you're asking us to predict what would have happened. The site engineers could not have predicted. In fact, in their statement, they said they believe when they did it in 1984 and 1985, it should have lasted for a long time. They never said how long that was. Now we have 40 years, and we say, okay, so it has lasted for a very long time, but now just looking at it, voids, they're spoiling. So now we know what that long time is. So the question you're asking is, can you tell me how much that long time is? Well, that's a very difficult question.

Sorry, let me get to a more detailed question, I guess. What I guess I'm asking is, solution we've come out up with versus the solution of the complete rebuild are we talking about the solution we've come up with maybe only in the last 20 years and the bridge solution would last 50 years or i guess what i'm trying to get at is obviously you know because we're already spending a lot of money on this project we want it to last obviously as long as possible do we foresee with the solution we've come up with running into problems sooner than originally allotted for what we expect this new build to last for, is what I'm saying. By not doing the full bridge rebuild, are we possibly going to incur some issues much sooner than we would if we did it, quote unquote, the more expensive way?

What I can say is this. If we build a bridge based on experience, that is likely to last a long time. How long that is, I don't know. One thing, though, is that presently we have constraints. We have funding constraints and we have time constraints. And so as we consider what solution we have, we have to consider those constraints. And right now at present, I think If we attempt to build a bridge, whilst it is true that it could last longer, then the constraints would prevent us from even getting to that place because we need the funding and we need the time, the need of which we have.

There's one more. A question to that to clear it up also. In your experience being an engineer and doing the seawalls, how common is it that their bridge is built for 800 feet?

I have not seen that too frequently.

Just because this is the way we've always done it doesn't mean that it's the right way to do it. It seems like there's a lot of seawalls in Florida that don't have bridges and last more than 40 years. Is that correct?

That would seem to be the case. A seawall lasts, but what about a sidewalk in front of it? We're asking about the sidewalk. I don't know how many seawalls have a sidewalk like that. Are they usually independent? Are they usually attached to the seawall?

I think it's important. So the reason the sidewalk previously failed was because of soil loss, correct? So the question essentially, can we project how much soil loss we're going to get in the next X number of years? And based on the design that we currently have, We don't anticipate substantial soil loss because we have that entire system of layers in the way versus a coral wall that's oolite, has very transmissive, and over how many years previously to 1984 of what was built in and cracks and fissures that have happened since then. What we can attest to is what we're putting in the ground, and that's a very robust design.

But it went into the chair, but in fact, it did fail before 1985, which is why we ended up building the bridge in the first place, trying to prevent this from happening again.

That was a coral seawall. The one that failed was a coral seawall. When I moved here, it was coral. This one, then they gun-eyed it that, and then we're putting something in front of that, and with a membrane.

Well, they must not have felt...

And then there's two different designs. I don't know why the Shores did what they said. The first, why we're even here, is the first 178 failed, which was the steel. And that doesn't even have the coral. And then they're saying that at this other end, when they show you pictures where they did the demo, that was actually where there was coral rock. And all that's sublimated. There's stuff missing now, even with the bridge.

So, I mean... Yeah, but the sidewalk right now is still basically level. And it didn't last that long initially, which is why they put the pilings and the railing in in the first place. They didn't do it because they didn't have anything else to do with the money. They did it to try and prevent it happening again a second time.

But they were leaving, they still, all they did was gunite the coral when they did it in 1984.

They gunited the coral, they put in the pilings, and they put in the railing. That was in 1980. But that was the second time that this had happened. But you're right, it was coral, and the first thing they tried was to gunite it. That didn't work.

Well, it was gunite and steel. I mean, the first 178 feet also has a sidewalk, too. You'd sit there and judge what's failing on it. It's spalling all over the place. It does have spalling.

How much fill between the old seawall and the new sidewalk? What's that? Two feet?

When you say how much, you mean...

How much we're elevating it? Another way to say it, how much higher is the new sidewalk versus the old sidewalk?

Yeah, it's at 2.3 feet. You're putting the sidewalk up to the cap. It's flush. Correct. It's mirroring the same condition.

I need to point out there's a small nuance of the design as well, and that is the seawall panel that we're putting in now is sunken into the soil two feet deep. So typically, the sucking action occurs, the wave action, and then it's pulling. Well, the seawall is sunken two feet deep into the soil itself. Then it prevents, as well, that type of sucking motion.

Just less opportunity for- Mr. Mayor, I have a question. When Vice Mayor asked the question, you spoke about time constraints and dollars constraints. I have two questions when we say dollar constraint it's it almost suggests that we're going a very cheap route because we're we don't have the dollars that is not the case is that what it is I mean I mean we have a set amount of dollars that we have for the project but the amount that we're spending on this is by no means something that gives an inferior quality, so to speak, and are less robust. But I have another question to ask. If we were to go a new bridge route for this new sidewalk, does it have any design implications? Does it have any more further going through the different agencies to get approval implications? And what does that do for December 31, 2026?

Well, again, as I mentioned earlier, the time is a constraint as well as the funds. So yes, it would mean that you'd have to do some redesign. You'd have to send it back through some permitting process.

And can that be done in a week? No. So what kind of time are we talking about? Should we decide to go and put in another bridge? What kind of time are you thinking of? How long did it take us to get a design from Durham to build the seawall?

So we started this project in 2023. And it was, what, a year, year and a half to get that through, to get it approved.

I could do some rough math. And it tells me that we would not be able to get a design by December 31st, 2026.

So through the chair, once again, I just want to, for the record, make it clear, the agreed-upon solution based on our funding restraints, time restraints, all the restraints, we are doing the solution that is the best possible option as agreed upon by all of the people that you consulted with for what we have to work with currently, correct? We've selected the number one best option for our current restraints, correct?

Correct.

Okay.

From my perspective.

Yes. And we could, you know, not in this forum, but provide you all the other three alternatives, because we did look at four altogether alternatives, and this was the one that engineers suggested or recommended to be the best Just like they did back then in 1984, we feel that this is the most robust solution at this time.

To the Chair, and you've made your point, and I agree with you, and you're correct. I want to ask you one question. If you went 100 yards from this seawall and you dug a hole in the ground, when it was high tide and low tide, would you be able to see a change in the water level in that hole? And the answer according to a Nobel Prize winner from the University of Miami is yes, if you haven't read any of those. I listened to him down in South Miami. And the thing that creates the suction is not rain or storm water, it's the movement of the tide. And if you don't think that water is going to move through this wall, you can come to my house and dig a yard and dig a hole in the yard and you can watch it. Because that's exactly what happens. Now how the water gets through the yard, mean through the wall I don't know but if you think that that hole won't show you any change we built a swimming pool once and you could watch the water go up for three feet in the pool and then go down three feet in the pool inside of the wall so the water is going to get through there and when it goes through there it carries little fines with it which is why we lose the soil along there, but it doesn't just happen at the seawall. Like I say, I asked him, I said, how far inland can we go and dig this hole? And he said, you can go in a half a mile. It won't go up a foot or two, but you'll see inch changes in it. So, that's all.

I think there are two different things. One is sublimation, going up and down with... In and out. That's the title, in and out, but I mean, the moon pulls, I mean, it's It's just under everybody's piece of property. We just did Shores Estate. The guy was in scuba doing and laying down pipes. Exactly. But it doesn't come in from the canal. It comes in from the bay. It's a sponge. It goes into the bay. It comes out of the bay. We're on a sponge. It's just the aquifer. If you punch a hole in this, the aquifer comes up to Mira Lake. It's punching a hole. There's water underneath us everywhere.

There is, but especially when you're close to the bay and close to a seawall. That water...

There are two different things, though. One is the motion. You don't think that they... No, I do. I hear you. But there's two different things at play. One is actually sublimation underneath that's always there. Digging anybody's backyard. Are they coming in from the bay? Not with the tide.

It won't match the tide. It won't match the tide. You're welcome to comment.

Yeah, but through the chair, the question, the fundamental thing we're trying to get at here, which I think.

You're right. You're right. We don't, we don't have no more time.

Based on what we have to work with. What we have, we have to do it. Period. I'm saying there, for what we have to work with, there is not another solution we didn't go with. We didn't choose number two on the solution list of what we're working with. We chose the very best that we could to deal with what the reality of what we have to, to work with this. I mean, we could build a titanium block the whole way, and that would be a lot better than any of the things we're talking about. But I'm saying for what we're trying to accomplish here to open this wonderful new project and get it completed within the time constraints, it seems that Patrick and the other consultants that he's discussed it with, which seems like many other bodies other than just people from Chenmore, this is the number one solution for our situation, correct? Correct.

Okay. Esmond, did you want to vote on this? I don't have a vote, sir. I ask you if you want one. If I want to vote on this? You want the council to vote on this?

I just want us to get a consensus from us so we could move on and so that also the council would be supportive of us moving together as a unit to get this job done.

I move that we accept their proposal.

I concur. Even more than accepting the proposal that we get back to what we need to do immediately, right?

Well, the other thing with it, I think the public needs to know for serendipity. The project originally did not have – it was just going to be a sidewalk on top of the existing one. So there was a problem underlying it that we went with old data. We found new data accidentally, and now we're fixing it.

New old data.

Well, it's brand new data. The day it happened, and if you went down there, it was surprise data. How's that? Because the original, from the project at the beginning, and there's a newsletter out there, the drawing that you see in the newsletter is from the Parks Master Plan. This is a different project than the Parks Master Plan. This is from the beginning was the wall was an engineering, had engineering failures, and we were to fix the wall. So they're two separate projects. It seems like it's the same thing. People have also said, one, you do the one when you did the other. That's because we were working on a parks master plan, and the wall wasn't part of the parks. It was actually an environmental and public hazard. Just for clarification.

But just to what Vice Mayor Cantor said earlier about the time constraint, that's another thing that I care about is the Parks Master Plan. And we know that the Parks Department has a vision for it. And I mean, we don't think it would be fair to leave it's good to give them a blank slate and this is what a blank slate is and I think you know from a soil underground perspective and I mean I think that the sidewalk would will be if you I mean if you see the renderings I mean that it's not just a sidewalk that I want to build there so or that is proposed to build there so it's gonna be something more robust more you know a little bit more attractive so you know That's also within the time span of this new sidewalk we're building.

Through the Chair, I'd like to just ask, the confounding question is climate change and sea level rise, the longevity of the new wall, but roughly what would be the minimum number of years we can expect that our new wall will be viable? Because the last wall lasted 40 years.

Just for clarity, what I mentioned last at 40 years was the sidewalk.

Okay.

But the seawall is still there. So are you asking about the longevity of the sidewalk or the seawall?

Of the project, yeah, the sidewalk.

Or the whole system?

Yeah.

Roger. All right. I don't want to be 100% locked in because I want to verify with the coastal marine engineer that designed the seawall itself. My understanding is that they're designed for a 50-year lifespan, but that being said, it is two things I want to touch on. One, the seawall panels use the glass fiber polymer reinforcing. So that's not subject to the chlorides and concrete spalling, so there's a longer lifespan associated with that. That's closer to a 100-year lifespan. And also the pilings themselves are designed to accommodate future elevation raising. So if in the future for added resiliency, an additional two feet is already built into the design vertically to account for sea level rise. Thank you.

And an obvious question after that is like, well, okay, well, why wouldn't you just do the right now and the answer is you know the whole point of the park is you know it's a beautiful view and you don't you want the wall that keeps the seawater out but not that you know blocks your view of the bay so this maintains our beautiful view walk path I just want to be clear on something also because the last time we discussed this I think our last meeting I think we kind of left off in a We left it hanging. You could have got the impression that we were just building a wall and there was not going to be a sidewalk, so I'm glad we're doing this now because I didn't like how we left off last time. I meant to clear that up, and we got on another tangent. We are restoring this to what we had before, which was a walking path and sidewalk. Just to speak on the back and forth we've had here with this, where I'm at currently is – This was some overbuilt infrastructure to address a problem that it sounds like we're not going to have, or at least is significantly mitigated compared to what we had before. I'm an eccentric guy. If you dug this up in my yard, I would really want to tie into it and do whatever. But that's me. I think the solution that we had before seems totally fine. And the worst-case scenario is what, that the sidewalk sinks? I mean, so that's a different problem than having a void developing underneath your sidewalk that, you know, you don't know how, you know. In other words, what would be the solution for that? Let's say in 20 years from now, the sidewalk is, you know, sunk in a foot or something. Can we just lay another slab on top of it? Or is that crazy?

you'd probably be in the same position as in 1984 in terms of looking at different solutions. But yes, that would be, if that's a 20-year lifespan, then that would be another 20 years for that to wash out again, theoretically. Maybe accelerated by sea level rise.

Well, until it's sunk enough to hit that old seawall, right? Right. So, all right, yeah, let's get this thing done. Sorry.

I just have one more thing to say. Thank you so very much. I think this conversation needed to be had, and I do appreciate your faith and confidence in this. And we'll go full force ahead to finish this wall and also to do the park before our December event.

Excellent. Very nice.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. before you quit then you said and do the park yes and we have the parks master plan with plans for this particular park when you say do the park what do you mean by that um my my suggestion would be I mean the things that we've gotten through the parks master plan are really conceptual having worked with a parks master plan before I I know that there can be well we have to approach this very measured in terms of cost you know i don't think we we we throw we can be effective in terms of getting um i have gotten folks who have donated design to a park you know so i don't think we should really look at We have $25,000. That may be a drop in the bucket to get some things done, but I don't think that that park needs to be overdone to the point where we're spending a great deal of dollars there. So what we will do, of course, before any of this is done, sir, is to come back to the council and give a kind of conceptual approach as to how we can move ahead to get this thing done. Because it's really not going to look good with us finishing a park. I mean, I'm sorry, finishing a seawall and a sidewalk and just have it linger in there without the place of it. with everything else looks blighted it's been too long and so I mean my goal is to make sure that there is something is beautiful once the apart once the sidewalk and the seawall is done and I will come back to council on that thank you thank you gentlemen thanks guys again thank you very much

it's the time in the meeting for public comment if you do have a public comment it's general comment right now if you have a comment on one of the items later on you could speak on it now but then you can't speak on it when we bring it up plus please state your name and your address and it's a three minute time limit

I'm taking a deep breath. I guess you guys all need to take a deep breath, too, because I'm really switching the topic here. I'm here. My name is Alice Birch. I'm at 1440 Northeast 101 Street. By the way, I thought there was a motion, but I didn't hear a second, and I didn't hear a vote, and I don't know if you want to take one. Anyway.

The manager was just looking for consensus.

Okay. I'm here about the charter school roof. I'm very concerned. As you all know very well, we compete out there. If you read the Miami Shores Living magazine, you notice that our graduates from high school came from 14 different schools. We're in the business of educating the best possible way the students that we have that come to us. We need an intact roof to do that. There is a difference of opinion between a consultant that the doctor's charter school hired and the consultant that the village hired to discuss the quality of the roof. So I'm here to tell you tonight that. and something you already know, which is summer is very short. When you're dealing with a roof leak, you need to take advantage of the summer months in order to get a roof project going. The worst roof we have, we have three buildings, the worst roof is building number one. I know that money is a factor. I also know that there's been some suggestion about collecting in arrears some kind of cola from the charter school i'm here to say that in 2020 as far as my research has been able to reveal in 2020 there was a new version of the same lease agreement signed between the village and the school and if that's the case the responsibility for roof replacement and we believe in this building one that the roof needs to be replaced and we can show you the evidence building one roof needs to be replaced now and i'm asking you for your approval of that that important issue for our students. You know what happens when you have a roof leak and you have these kinds of tiles. They absorb the moisture and then they can actually fall. There is a problem with that. There's also a problem with me as a village resident understanding what we went through to replace the 9900 building roof, which we have now done for a vacant building, And we have 600 students possibly coming through our doors in just a few short months. We need your approval on this. We need to be able to get an agreement between administrations on this issue. And I thank you very much for listening.

Hello, my name is Carlos. I'm from 163 Northwest 101st Street. I've been a resident here for about two years now. Love the village. Just want to let you guys know that. Love the work that you guys are doing. Very interesting to hear about that. I was wondering what happened to that park, but I didn't come here to talk about that. I just wanted to, I found out recently that there might be a change in the tennis and the management of the tennis club at the golf club, so I just came here to, I know sometimes people might be a bit nervous about change, but I just want to come here to give my opinion about the joint venture that won the bidding process. I just want to say I've participated in a few tennis tournaments that they organized in Coral Gables. and just wanna say from my personal experience, they're great, very professional. I've been there I think three, two or three times now to those tournaments, and I just wanna say if we go forward with that change for the village, I think it's a great step up for the village in terms of the level of tennis in general. For those events, and I was told that those events will be moved here, for example, we're talking about a full day of tennis, it's a very fun tennis tournament, all levels, recreational, even almost semi-professional as well, there are different categories, talking about, they even have drones to take pictures of the whole event, they bring there's food, there's drinks, there's a very good social event for residents to get to know each other. And yeah, I just wanted to say from my personal opinion and from my personal experience, they're great, they're very professional. I really think it would be a great step up for our tennis here. Also, if you have kids and maybe you want your kids to go to college or improve their level, I think this is a step in the right direction as well. It will really level up the, not only the recreational level is still gonna be here, people who don't wanna be so serious for attendance, they'll still be able to find that, they can do that as well, but also, you know, On an upper higher level of Tannins as well, it's going to be a great step up. And honestly, this is one of the greatest, it's one of my favorite Tannins real estate in Miami-Dade. And I think it would be, in my personal opinion and my personal experience, it would be a great step up for the village, another great thing for our village to have. And I just wanted to give my opinion. In case there are any doubts and the council is not so sure about this decision, that's really why I came here for.

Thank you.

All right.

Hi, Sue Edmiston, 790 Northeast 95th Street. I'm here, too, to speak about experience with the tennis. As I sat listening to the residents praising the country club's current tennis pros' sterling characteristics at last week's meeting, I believe they could speak also about Guy, who we affectionately call him. Guy has been coaching three members of my family since the youngest was five, learning and playing with his friends. Guy brought fun teaching skills to each lesson and was able to encourage and keep all members of the young group of tennis players engaged. As my grandnephew's tennis skills have improved and developed over the years, so has his love of the game, and that's all through Guy. He plays with Guy three times a week right after school in the heat of the day, and I know this firsthand as I'm usually the one sitting courtside watching and learning. Through the years, Scout has learned many skills and knowledge about the game and how to act on the court. Guy is always willing to answer my questions regarding any methods or skills that he's imparting to Scout. Scout's mom and dad also play and take lessons with Guy, and Dr. Edmiston has even been known to get out his racket and choose to take a lesson. One of Guy's best attributes is his ability to teach multigenerational ages. He knows what each group needs to develop into a player that can enjoy playing the game but also become their best. He creates fun tournaments and activities within each age group and as a group as a whole. I think Guy would bring a new level of experience and excitement to our community through team building activities, events, and his high level of teaching methods. He and his experienced team are excited to bring new ideas and improvements to the club and our community, and I look forward to seeing those results.

Madam Clerk, are there just confirmation? Are there any e-commons?

No, sir, no e-commons.

Thank you.

Requirements of consent agenda?

Motion to approve the consent agenda?

Second. I have a motion to second. All those in favor, signal by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Motion carries. Madam Clerk? Aye.

Okay, so This is where we're at with the electric charging situation.

We've done a lot of research We did some with Frank previous to him leaving I've spent a lot of time talking with Donna reviewing documents that Donna sent me We have a couple ways we can go about this or we can proceed in or not proceed. I'm going to lay out all the information for you tonight. Unfortunately, I was not able to get your handout previous, but I felt that my recap and report of where we're at would be sufficient. Um, if we have any immediate feedback, I would love to hear it from you guys. If not, and you'd like to digest it and then discuss it, discuss what our possible action would be at the next meeting, we can do that as well. So this is the situation. We have three charging stations in the village right now. They are run by FPL. Um, we have several, they're slow charging stations. I believe that from what I've been able to ascertain, they're, far underutilized due to their slow speed. And we have several options, which include City Vi, Smart City, Blink, that would be willing to come in and take over for FPL's position or negotiate out a deal to take over from FPL and replace them with high charging stations that could possibly have some revenue share that we could participate in too. So what my inquiry now to you is, do you think that we should first go back to FPL and say, hey, this is insufficient. The technology has greatly increased. Can we get faster stations here? Can we work out a new, better deal with you? Or should we try to... figure out which one of these companies and they, from what I've been able to deduct so far, each has a few pros and a few cons to them, but they're all basically the same and the revenue share is all relatively the same. So do you think that we should move ahead and try to select a new company to come in and take over the electric charging? Because the other component related to this is a lot of these companies would be willing to bring in chargers at other locations that we don't currently have them existing. However, from what Frank was able to tell us prior to him leaving that the bringing of the electric to new stations that we owned for spots we owned in the village would be approximately $10,000 a unit to do so as far as additional costs would be. Now, I'm saying for any new, so let's say we decided to go with a new company and then we wanted to put up additional charging stations. let's say somewhere here on Northeast 2nd or wherever that was feasible due to the areas. There's actually a map, and I can send it out, or we can send it through the appropriate channels to look at, but that has been clearly designated by Public Works, which are possible areas to do so. The cost of doing that will be approximately $10,000, but my question to you is this. I look at the dais right now. As far as I understand, only one of the four of us drive electric vehicles at this point now. I'm not saying... that's a pulse for what the rest of the community is doing. I know that we're moving in an electric direction for sure, and I know that Miami Shores wants to be on the frontier and on the cutting edge of things that are moving forward as far as technology, environment, et cetera, et cetera. But my question to you is, one, like I said, do you think we should try to renegotiate with FPL to bring a better, more updated technology first before trying to work out some of these deals with the other. And also, I've been trying to figure out what the best solution for identifying the need is. So we could go with a solution and maybe get some new stations and whatever, but if they're not being used or underutilized, then in my mind it's a little bit of a waste of money because I'm not sure that we're at the current point now where we would really – fully utilize those stations, but there's really no way to tell because what our currents makeup and situation is constituent of is not the most current technology and speed. And so they are underutilized. So like I said, if anyone has any immediate feedback based on this data, or if we want to sit on it and bring it back. Um, but I, I just, I kind of feel like I'm hit a wall right now because I think there's a couple ways to dice it, but I don't know what the best solution is, and I don't know what the best way of coming to that answer is at the moment. So I would appreciate colleague feedback. And your research.

Mm-hmm. I just noticed in the, I mean, they redid the Burger King, but then in that parking lot, it seems like it's private. Obviously, it's not ours, but there's new FPL stations. Yeah. And it looks different than the ones that are by the tennis center, so they've, I haven't walked up to it to see which, what level it's at for the, I mean, because everybody just wants the, obviously, the supercharger, the faster one that they can get it.

don't know if those are superchargers or not but i do know that fpl does have new options available way better than what we currently have available so and so for the public since we're discussing it right now on public property it's just the ones by the tennis center uh basketball court the tennis center the there's three um the tennis center the the pool uh the pool, right? And the third one is back here, behind one of these buildings. Right here. So those are our three currently contracted FPL locations, yes.

Through the chair? I'm not worried about the demand and the use, I think, at this point. Electric cars aren't going anywhere.

I think... Was that a pun?

Okay, it is now. I think, as we've discussed in the past, I would like to see it used as a way to maybe draw some foot traffic. Not foot traffic, but... Well, yeah, no, it is foot traffic because we want people to come park their thing, charge up, and then maybe walk around and do some shopping, maybe cafe or get a coffee, whatever. I like that idea I do not want to I don't want to use our public money to charge people's cars but I think to provide the infrastructure I'm okay with I like the idea of the profit sharing that's fantastic but not at the expense of you know having a bunch of digital signage and ads and billboards and that kind of stuff. I don't think that's a right fit for the village. But we've said no to that kind of stuff in the past. I still feel that way.

I would like to hear what our current arrangement is.

As the mayor said, I have noticed around town I don't recall exactly where, but I have noticed some new shiny FPL things around town, which I'm assuming are fast charging. So I'm curious, number one, what our current arrangement is with FPL and what they would be offering in the future going forward. And I don't know, what would be the difference between going with them versus another company?

That's it. So what I'm hearing, and this was kind of my initial thought anyways, is I think that we should go back to FPL first and see what, before we engage, because CityVie, Smart City, and Blink, which are the three companies that offer a non-advertising option with profit sharing, which are the three contracts that Three companies that have other contracts in Florida, which we've reviewed some of the particulars on, which kind of fit the script of what we're looking for here in Miami Shores. But I think that the first step before we try to engage in these companies would be to go back to FPL and see if we can have them bring us up to the current standard. And I believe from what we've been able to understand, and Donna didn't give me a clear answer on this, but I will circle back with her. We don't have a profit sharing situation in the current setup with the FPL contract. I believe they're just used. They just pull up and plug in. George, you have the first whatever and then you have to pay. You get the first whatever free, 30 minutes free, and then you And then it's a charge after that. But I think that's the way it's set up. Like I said, I don't have an electric car I can pull up and test one out with.

Well, again, me either. But the overwhelming response I get when I talk to people about this is all that matters is that you have the latest and greatest. The fast charger. If you don't have the fastest charging technology, then it Your stuff is just going to sit there idle because everybody is queuing up at the, you know, wherever the fast charger is. Right.

And the problem with that is that the fast chargers are 440 volts. And if you look at what FPNL's got in the sidewalk saying going to our street lights or et cetera, in other words, where there would be close electrical connection at road level. Mm-hmm. And that's why it's costing the money to put it in. But I wonder in hindsight, look at Biscayne Park and El Pertel. Where is the closest fast charging station to us here in the shores?

Well, that's not in our municipality, you're saying? You're saying the closest fast charging station that's obviously not in our municipality.

Oh, it's not in our municipality. No, I know. And that's the thing. I mean, what you're saying is true. This is kind of like with our bridge. We have old technology here that, you know, you can charge a car on a wall outlet, but it takes 24 hours. And so, you know, you can halfway charge that. car in 15 minutes if you've got a 440 volt right system so I'm wondering if and the other thing is what wet are we on any websites in other words as you're driving those cars and you hit the button I want charging it gives you a list of where the places are and you know how far away they are and how you get to them are we on any of those websites with the you know, with the machines that we do have. And lastly, FPNL is not giving us any money? Is that the answer?

According to what I've been able to deduct so far, we don't have any profit sharing agreement with the FPNL currently. I don't know if that, I don't know if what a new contract and new technology and stuff could bring. Maybe they're under a different setup right now, but it seems to me as I was diving deeper and deeper into this, and I'm hearing what Jesse's saying about possibly expanding and bringing some new stations in that maybe could bring some foot traffic, but I think that we should first try to see what it's going to take to bring our three current stations, which I think are all at fairly good locations, you got rec center, you have golf and tennis right there at the end by the, I mean, golf and water park there, and Villa Cha. I mean, these are all very central location so i'm saying if we were able to bring those up to a 440 fast charging scenario first let's see how much they're getting used and utilized before we would would what i'm saying is you know go with an expansion plan to further accommodate the trend that seems to be happening with the electric well and the as far as whether you drive to village hall or whether you drive to the tennis court

to charge, it's just not enough of a difference. These facilities make money. It's not a question of, you know, do they make money? They make a lot of money. And that's the reason that, like, individual businesses, barbecue houses and, you know, et cetera, build those in their parking lots because they're, you know, They're making them, but I mean, I don't know the village needs three of them. It would probably be fine with one. I just don't know if we ought to do it as a village because it's a business. Do it as a village or whether we ought to look for a private individual that's already got land and wants to put that there. I was just thinking, because I haven't seen one, and I may be wrong. I don't go up and down every street. I don't know about El Pertel or

Biscayne Park, I don't know where the Mayor was just talking about ones possibly at Burger King now that they're private It's brand new Within the last couple weeks Maybe I'll hop over there and see what's going on with that situation how much conversation with them about what kind of agreement they're under and But like I said, I just wanted some direction because I don't want to invest a ton of time in looking at an expansion plan with the new company if really the root is bringing our current structure up to the speed it needs to be in the first place.

I like the idea of starting out with FPL, see what they have to say about upgrading to the latest stuff. Because it sounds like... It sounds like there's going to be some kind of upgrading that's going to need to take place to the actual infrastructure there. We need more juice going to these locations.

How many phases there are, if it's three phases?

My point being, this is going to involve FPL one way or another, so might as well start with them and see what they have to say. I feel like there's probably the most opportunity there for some kind of... you know, partnership or maybe they'd be willing to, you know, do a lot of the infrastructure, upfront costs maybe. I don't know.

What are those companies again?

The three that have contracts here in Florida are Smart City. That offer no advertising component because there were a couple others too, but the ones that fit our, what I feel like our bill looks like, Smart City, City Vi, which is City V-I-E, and then Blink is the third one. Blink seems to have the most agreements in the state currently of the three, but both the other two have pockets where they seem to have been very successful with coming up with contracts too. So those three rose to the top of the heap in our current research because also, like I said, no advertising aspect I think is important. We don't We don't want to not be in control, one, of the advertising, and two, we don't need any more advertising, I think, in public places right now, personally.

The other aspect, I'm sure, is how involved we want to be. Do we want to own the equipment, or are we going to be responsible for maintaining it? I think we would like to be as hands-off as possible, and if they can send us a check at the end of the month for some profit sharing, that would be really nice, too.

Of course.

All right.

So I'm going to research the situation at Burger King and see what I can find out about whatever private enterprise is going on over there. And also I'm going to go back with Donna and reach out to FPL and see what we can figure out with them to get the latest and greatest and see – but I'm also saying too is – Let's say we bring up one last point I want to make before we move on. Let's say we bring up the three current locations to the latest and greatest. I think that there's a certain level of. patience that has to be taken with understanding even if we have the greatest there how often they're getting used what what it looks like whether whether there's a profit sharing or incentive or not you know if if we have those but they're only getting used a couple times a week to me that's an indicator at this current juncture that expansion of more electronic stations is probably not a great idea well it depends on how much money we're making if you put one for instance in the

far parking lot there at the Country Club on Biscayne Boulevard next to 96th Street, and you've got all those cars coming. If you want to count Teslas one afternoon or any electric car, there are a lot. Now, is that a place where you could make money? You know, it's a business. It's a question of whether the village wants to get into that business. And the other way you're looking at it as a service to the residents that live here, that live in a condo and don't have a garage to pull the car into and have the electric available to charge it. And so, you know, that's your first question is which way are you, what are you really trying to do, right?

i mean i like i like the service aspect of it but i think that the village should only obviously get involved in it as a business venture if it's a business venture that makes us money so otherwise i don't think it's our responsibility at this at this moment to provide that service if it doesn't make sense for the village as well do you ever use the super charging station for tesla on fourth court no the one i well

The one I have ended up using the most just because of the length of the trip is you go down to the Keys and then you turn around to come home again. And depending on which car it is, you don't have the range, which is what everybody's afraid of. Well, again, there's a barbecue stand there and it's got eight spots. And I'll tell you what, there's usually a line. I mean, you don't just get into one of them. You've got to. And I've been there at 1 in the afternoon, 5 in the afternoon. This guy is making money. But, again, I don't know what the next closest one is. And, you know, it's a whole field I don't know anything about. That's why I'm glad you're looking into it.

I'm learning. I'm learning a lot about it. We're all going to learn something. All right. So I'm going to follow up with those questions. I'm going to bring us back to part two with some of that information. And then we can discuss as a council where we want to go from there and what FPL is offering and whether or not maybe one of these other options taking over makes sense, and what kind of actual money the village can make from entering in one of these agreements. Okay.

Appreciate it. Thank you for doing that. Yeah, of course.

Next item is 10B, discussion and possible action regarding the charitable donation request application from the Miami Light Project. This item is brought forth by the Village Clerk's Office. The Miami Light Project submitted a charitable donation request application seeking funding in the amount of $5,000. Miami Light Project is a nonprofit 501 organization located at 9806 Northeast 2nd Avenue in Miami Shores and has operated for approximately 37 years. The requested funds would support Miami Light Project's Technical Fellowship Program, an international cultural exchange program at the Miami Theatre Center. Specifically, the funds would be used to underwrite five student fellows participating in a four-week technical training program focused on lighting design, light board programming, audio and video projection. Funds would also assist the artists in space rental fees associated with a one-week artist residency and public presentation scheduled for September The Miami Light Project served approximately 6,000 individuals in 2025, including an estimated 2,000 Miami Shores residents. The organization, once again, is requesting $5,000. $13,630 remains available from the village's $25,000 charitable donation fund. The item appears before you as a discussion and possible action instead of a resolution to afford the Miami Light Project the opportunity to elucidate what is the nexus between the technical fellowship program and the Miami Shores public purpose criteria. Ms. Boone is present on behalf of the Miami Light Project to answer any questions you may have.

Hello.

Hi. Good evening.

How are you all doing?

Good.

Do you want me to say some things, or do you have some questions for me?

I think we'd like you to start.

all right so miami light project is a cultural organization we were established in 1989 we have lived in very many places in the city and we moved to miami shores village in oh i'm a resident of miami shores by the way i live on 102nd street um and we moved here in 2023 we moved into miami theater center and began to do our programs there one of our acclaimed programs is called the technical fellows program which is where we do workforce training with young people, generally age 18 to 25, who are learning the items that were stated previously about lighting design, technical production, set design, audio and visual, and we recruit from neighborhood schools. So Berry University and Doctors Charter School and Miami Country Day School, and we have students we aim to get 30% of our participants from the Miami Shores village area so that they can have these great activities that take place in the month of August and the first week of September of this year typically we do it in the summertime and this will cover the cost of five of those students that's part of the request the other part of the request is to support international cultural exchange program that we have with a place called the Center for the less good idea which is in Johannesburg South Africa we began a five-year relationship with the center two years ago so we've completed two years we're getting ready to enter into our third year this involves a cultural exchange where we take Miami based artists to South Africa to learn about cultural production with this particular center and each year we have invited three to five of the individuals who work at the center in South Africa to come to Miami all of to Miami Shores all of these activities take place on the Miami Theatre Center main stage and in the studio which most of you know which is adjacent it's our rehearsal studio and which is adjacent to the main stage theater. So we're here to request these resources. I attend the Miami Shores Cultural Alliance, the Miami Cultural Alliance meetings, and Bob Bourne made note a couple of meetings ago that these resources are available and encouraged many of the organizations, all of the organizations who are participant at the Cultural Alliance, Community Alliance meeting to come in and to make a case for the programs that we do. So that's why I'm here. You want me to do a dance?

No, do a dance.

Sure, that's a great idea. We brought a little document here that outlines basically what I just stated, which is of course also in our proposal. This is my colleague, Regina Moore.

Thank you.

Dramatic pauses on stage are always considered to be quite effective I always feel a bit of a need to fill the gap in I'm really happy to answer any questions that you might have about the impact of our programs in the community I believe very strongly that we have added greatly to the vibrancy of the downtown area and Bringing other people from around the county to come see our programs and serving the community of residents who live here so

What is the actual cost of the program that you would estimate per person?

Oh, per person cost?

Well, you have five, and then I would assume that it's $1,000 per student.

Well, it's a six-week course, so twice per week the students, the participants are engaged. The overall cost of the program is about $22,000.

Ms. Moore, if you could address the council on the data space.

Hi, my name is Regina Moore. I just want to address that the $5,000 is not only for the technical fellowship program, but also for the use of the studio, the rental space, and the artist fee during the week that we are going to have the international exchange program.

Okay. But, I mean, to the answer of the question, it's like a fellowship program.

The cost per student for the fellowship is approximately $500. Okay. And they meet twice a week for six weeks for three hours taking this professional course.

Okay. And you said that about 30% of? Miami Shores residents participate?

That's always our goal. We go to Barry and Miami Country Day and to Doctors Charter School in particular because we focus on people who are 16 and above. We really like to get people that are in the 18-year-old spot just because for a variety of reasons having adults participate, legal adults, is good. and we've had success with that and then those the people who participate in the Technical fellows program go on to be our technical personnel at the theater and they are hired by both Miami Theatre Center Which is a separate organization by Miami light project and then by other cultural organizations that make use of Miami Theatre Center they rent it so they are our stage crew our stage managers and technical directors and so forth. So we feel great about this being a workforce development program and adding to the vibrancy of the community as I mentioned.

So I guess I'll start the conversation here. As we talked about last time when Miami Theater Group came, You know, we're at a crossroads right now in general where the arts and theater and music and all those great things are getting less and less funding. They're getting slashed all the time. And, you know, I think we have to be cognizant of other gifts or other donations we've distributed and allowing for still others to come down the pipeline. But, I mean, I'm definitely inclined to... in some way support this cause because you know I think that it's something that's becoming less and less accessible and I think that we as a village should play some role in supporting some of these ventures that you know bring that vibrancy to the downtown and bring it to you know entertaining the community and and kind of you know at least supporting that vein of of who we are as as people so i would be inclined to um you know i obviously everyone comes and requests five thousand dollars i'm not saying that but i think that at the end of the day we shouldn't We should make a donation in that direction for a good cause for our community. I've been to the theater. I've been to some shows. I saw The Harder They Come when it was there a few years ago, which I loved. I like having it in our community, and I like supporting those type of things for our community.

If I may, through the council, I just want to read Section 2 of your... charitable donation ordinance, and I think you should be mindful of it in terms of making your decision tonight. So the donation of any public funds by Miami Shores Village shall promote a public purpose that directly benefits Miami Shores Village residents and property owners. And I only say that to the extent that as you entertain the, or consider rather, consider the request tonight, keeping in mind the similarity of the request you also heard at the last council meeting and the attachment of that to it being for village residents. And so the reason why you don't necessarily have a resolution before you tonight is that particular point of kind of confirmation about the direct public purpose So if we can get a little bit more clarification in that regard, I think would be helpful before you make a final decision. Because I still would need to draft a resolution to support those findings. And as drafted the application as submitted, I was not able to craft a resolution in that regard. And that's why we brought it as a discussion possible action item to see where we can go if we can get to a point where it's a little bit more clear in terms of that direct public purpose.

Beth, I have a question for you. You said that there was multiple locations where Miami Light Project has been in Dade County. Where else were you before you came?

Well, we were born on Miami Beach. We had offices on Lincoln Road, and we did our programming at the Colony Theater for our first 10 years. The next 10 years, we were on Biscayne Boulevard and 30th Street, and we had our operations there. Then we spent 13 years in Wynwood at the Lightbox at Goldman Warehouse was a facility that we developed, and then we moved here in 2023.

And since 2023 and having Miami Shores as your address, is there an impact to your project?

Oh, unequivocally, yes. One of the greatest things about it is that we're in a storefront, and it's a pedestrian walkway. And so people come by the space all the time when artists are in there rehearsing in the morning, in the afternoon, in the evening. I think you might drive by. You see the way it's beautifully lit up. In particular, I'm talking about the rehearsal studio, which is the storefront that's adjacent to the theater. I think the public purpose is very clearly evident, and that is that theaters are places of gathering. It's a 330-seat theater in Miami Theater Center, and we are constantly doing programs there. In the rehearsal studio next door, it seats up to 50 people We have activities going on in there all the time. And our audience is people walking over from their houses. You know, like my whole street, 102nd Street, they come to all of our shows. They walk over. Mary Benton walks over. You know, my friends that live east of Biscayne even bike over to see our program. So the public benefit, I think, is very, very clear. Audiences enjoy going to the theater. They enjoy going to movies and so forth.

Can I just clarify what I meant by public purpose? The application itself is for the $5,000 that's being requested is being tied to the fellowship itself, right? To two things.

It's being tied to the fellowship and to the Open Moment, which is a publicly facing program that we do with the Center for the Less Good Idea, which is the artist company from South Africa. So it's a five-year project. The public is invited to that project. The artists are here for one week doing their work in the studio. And then it culminates in a thing that we call the Open Moment, which is a public performance, which is on the main stage. And the whole community is invited to that. So, one of them is very much focused on education and professional development, and we do focus on people who are resident in the community to participate in that program. It's a more limited number of people. The other element of what we requested is for a publicly facing program that is the language that we use for that is, you know, public engagement, community engagement, and public benefit.

And did you mention that there's some 2,000 Miami Shores Village residents, is that not what you?

That come to our programs. Programs. Audience members throughout the season.

So certainly that's helping the community. And then these five students, are these going to be Miami Shores residents or these are?

Well, that's what we focus on bringing them in. Last year we had three students participating for Miami Shores Village. I keep calling them students. These are young adults, not little kids. And so we are recruiting. We know that that's a value for the village, and it's important to us to be engaged with our neighborhood community. And so we have actively gone into these schools to talk to them about their programs. I mean, we didn't include this in our proposal, but we also provide tickets free of charge for people to come see our programs, which is another community benefit.

through the chair love the organization love the program love the theater very proud to live in a village that we are able to have that and sustain it and I know that we have a lot of residents that are very much into the arts and since our last council meeting I've had some conversations with a few of them I appreciate the attorney I was gonna ask for that read actually I appreciate that because yeah as much as an individual I support this I love this I I don't feel comfortable as I didn't with the last one giving other people's money away for we're getting the scope is getting very broad here like where this is this is for adults yes am I allowed to address you actually in the meeting sure yeah

I don't understand what you don't understand because art and culture is what makes for a community vibrancy. So I just literally would like to have a clarification of when you say give money away, this is money from Miami Shores Village for a purpose of investing in something that benefits Miami Shores Village. So I don't understand how that's – What do you mean maybe?

Because you're asking us to fund five students, five adult students that you said you would like them to be Miami Shores residents but you don't know and also a program that's involving South African exchange students.

A program that has public audiences that includes up to 330 people attending a cultural program.

performance if I brought ten random residents in here and I told them I was gonna give away some of their money for South African we're not getting money to South African artists no we're asking you to give money to Miami light project in order to provide cultural programming for the community yeah I I feel like this is As I said last time, there's a fine line between charity and philanthropy, and if I was a very wealthy person that was trying to give away money for things that I was interested in, my personal interest, this would be a phenomenal thing, but I'm in a position where it's not my money. I'm giving away other people's money, and I don't know if this matches the criteria that I want to stick to going forward. I think it's very broad. think we're in a situation right now where the state is telling us that local government is wasteful that it's incompetent they're going to force us to restrict our budget going forward very soon I don't know how I can how I can justify this in that climate you don't know how you can justify investment in art and culture for the community benefit

I'd like to say, I mean, we're all going to vote, but Neil, I think you're right on the money. What was just said, you know, the money for this type of program is drying up and disappearing. And I mean, is this something that we want to get rid of as a village? Is this something that the residents here don't want? If 2,000 of them came, I think certainly we've only got 11 in the village. It's a pretty decent percentage of people that want to... watch this and support this. So I don't know. We'll see how everybody else feels, but I think it's... Well, tonight is a discussion.

We're not voting on this? This was because when we do this, we need a resolution that's tied to this.

You can still take action on this. I think in this case, it's very abundantly clear the applicant has applied well in advance. So we did this intentionally so she can be heard tonight. I would suggest, or another option, is if there's an appetite to streamline or is there a condition you want to add that it has to be Miami Shores residents, for those five fellows, that's an option. or if there's an option to streamline it to just the programming component, it doesn't have to be a full cell, either I'm for or against, right? You can figure out a way to make it work. If the public purpose, it seems, and what I'm hearing is more so tied to the general cultural effect of the programming and the particular show in this case, if you feel more comfortable with that aspect of it, then you can allocate the funds directly towards that. if you don't feel as comfortable as it relates to the fellowship component of it as you did at the last meeting. And I'm only saying that in terms of setting precedent for other programming. You've already opined on something that's similar in nature but different, and that was tied to the residents. Those scholarships were allocated for Miami Shores residents. So I'll say that, and you all can speak amongst yourselves to figure out where you can Is there a place you can get to? Because I do think that you should take some form of action today so that at minimum, at the next meeting, I'll be able to draft a resolution and just put it on agenda. And we won't have to discuss it again, but we at least know where we're going.

Well, then I'd like to add that I'd like to add two things. One, I'd like these five students to be Miami Shores residents, period. If we're going to pay for it as a village, then that's who we need to be supporting. And unfortunately, as we had to do at the last meeting, I'd cut it in half because we've had to take care of other people that are going to come. I don't know how you all feel about that.

First of all, I like the idea of making it a proclivity to Miami Shore students. I got to say, even though I'm in full support of this, too, I think that because we're probably going to have to entertain other things coming down the pipeline, and I know that colleagues have said in the past just because we've allocated $25,000 to give away doesn't mean we have to give away $25,000 and I do agree with that at the end of the day but I do feel you know like I stated earlier that this is something that I feel like every time I turn around funding for these type of things get slashed and I do feel and I you know maybe I'm not quite as hard-line in the thinking of it, although I do appreciate it at the end of the counter there because I appreciate that every dollar we spend, you know, we have to justify, we have to turn around and answer to the residents, but me personally you know we're elected by the community to make some judgment calls sometimes and I I feel that you know if if doing things like this that been that I feel like benefit residents in the community especially in the arts and culture vein provide an enhanced experience for people here then I feel that it falls in line with with what we're trying to do and I think you know, every all of our time invested is to make the community better in all aspects. And so I would be supportive. I'm going to say I'm not supportive of the 5000, but I'm supportive of a monetary donation, too. But I would like to see all of the participants come from miami shores because you know that way we know that it's people residents that are whether they complete the program and move on to work for the theater or whatever at least we know that they're residents who came up through the program and the participants are getting benefited that are part of our community and i don't think there's anything wrong with that i'd like to also just add that since we've this council that i've been on it kind of shifted on how

It used to be manager's discretion. There was money set aside in the budget, and then it switched to council, and we have a resolution for it. But I've stated from the day as a bunch is that it also gives each one of these charities an opportunity to come before the council that's elected and actually state the state of the union of where they are. And I think it's an opportunity that each one of them that comes before us, an ask is an ask. And if you don't ask, you don't get. And anybody that does not for profit. So I just, I don't want tone here to be that somebody comes here and it's not. It's a good platform. People watch these meetings and it's an opportunity somebody could do a matching, whatever we did, somebody could match just out of their own check for this. So that your organizations come before us and ask for, I think other organizations, I don't mind taking time out of a council meeting for charities that are doing work for the community. That's my personal opinion.

Mr. Devaney, you have any thoughts on this?

Yeah, I was just wondering about The artist fees mentioned in the purpose of request for the open moment, would that be like salaries or wages?

This is an honorarium that we pay to participating artists who are from Miami. We don't pay a single dollar to the artists who come in from South Africa. They are fully funded by an independent grant that covers all of their travel here. the cost of them being here and so we give an honorarium to artists who are Miami based most of whom go through a program that we do called here and now which is a program that's been going on for 27 years where we Commission and develop new work by Miami based artists and then we provide them with professional development throughout their lives and those are the artists that we identify to participate in this one-of-a-kind cultural exchange there are typically about 12 people in the rehearsal studio for that one week where they're developing this new work and then sharing it.

You mentioned a little bit in the technical fellowship program some of the workforce development you connect the students to. Do you have like a broad network of different theaters across the U.S. and Miami?

An extensive network. So Jacob's Pillow, for example, in the Berkshires, which is renowned dance center, Mass MoCA, UCLA arts program, and then many of our technical fellows have gone on to work at the Moss Center down south and at the Adrian Arsch Center and the New World Symphony Center and at the Band Shell. So those who stay in town are employed in town, and the program that we provide is a part of their professional development.

Okay.

Any more discussion? I had a motion and a second. I made a motion, and I think you seconded it.

Well, I think, like I said, I think the motion should obviously require the applicants to be... Five students have to be residents and 2,500.

All right.

I was going to say $2,000, but $2,500 works for me too. I'm just trying to be cognizant of other people. We are in June of this year. We've got six months left. We've already given away half the money at six months. I just want to make sure that we have money to support all of the entities at the end of the day as well.

First of all, with one vote of the council, we can change that amount, and I agree with what Jerome just said, and that is the whole purpose in doing this was to have the people come here and explain to us what they're doing and how it helps this village. It's fantastic to me what we've heard here since the people have started coming. So, you know, I think it's a great program. And if we're not going to support our charities here in this community, I mean, you know, I know Jesse said this the last time. A nonprofit and a charity are two different things.

But we spend other people's money, everything we do here.

You know, whatever, that's just me. But you need a vote.

So let's meet in the middle. My motion is to approve. 2250 with the requirement that Miami Shores students applicants are Miami Shores residents in some capacity second there's a motion in a second all those in favor signal by saying aye aye all those opposed nope Patrick aye

So there'll be a resolution then?

Yeah, we'll draft a resolution, just put it on a consent agenda.

Thank you. We could give you more. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you for your time.

Before we do that, can I just take a five-minute break? Yeah, I've got to use the restroom. Bladder bust. Is that okay?

I could have a lot of...

With alternatives, I'd like to give a little background to put into perspective. Our general employee's retirement plan currently allows for early retirement eligibility with a criteria of age 55 and 15 years of credible service. Normal retirement is at age 62 or with 30 years of service. Employees who become eligible for normal or early retirement would then collect their designated pension, but employees who who don't make it to those tiers are only eligible to collect their contribution plus 3%. The employee contribution, the general employee contribution is 6%. We had a long-serving employee who passed last March. He was 54, and he has served the village for 25.8 years of service. He felt shy from the eligibility for early retirement because he was 54 and not 55. So let's get into breaking this discussion into three segments. The three segments that you requested be brought up to you. One had to do with policy reform. In this section, we will talk about four options, and if you have questions after each one, I welcome them so I could address them. The first option is to do nothing. Leave the plan as is. Currently by that what we mean is allow the beneficiary to collect the 6% plus the 6% that the employee contributed over the 10 year of their time and give them a 3% interest on that. Speaking specifically about that long-term employee who died last year after 25.8 years of service, his contributions plus interest as of today I've managed to reach out to our actuary to compute the 3 percent interest as of tonight. We're looking at a refund. If the beneficiary were to request the funds today, that refund will be $138,591.76 to today's date as far as interest. As the days go by, the 3 percent gets added. If council were to keep it as is, status quo, the manager suggested that perhaps a program or a scholarship or an item over at our Parks and Rec Department be named after him just to memorize his service. So again, option one is leave it as is. No changes, there will be no changes to the pension ordinance, it's status quo. Option two, again, speaking about reform, would be to allow the The similar presentation that you had last time, which was to allow any employee, and that last time it was specific of the one employee, but in this scenario we're saying any employee who has 25 years of credible service or more would be eligible. So this addresses the fairness component that was a concern last time, because in this scenario you would do it for all, not just to the one individual. And allow that individual to collect a pension when he or she would be eligible. This actually was quoted before by GRS and presented in one of the numerous meetings that we have had in reference to the topic. And they cited that this would increase the contribution by the village by 34,827. And they gave, as a percentage of payroll, it was 0.77%. This action would reduce our funding ratio from 93.2 to 91.5. They stated that regardless of that, they asserted us that obviously that the plan will remain well-funded at 91.5% as it compares to other plans. Option two, ultimately the projected actuarial value of it is $362,000. Keep in mind that that number could change. It changes based on the mortality table, it changes based on payroll changes, it changes based on any future investments and our performance with the investments. So, you know, the immediate number, it's the $34,827. Option three entailed adopting a retirement eligibility formula. As presented here, It's intended as an early retirement formula, but this is a planned design. You could apply this to be a death benefit formula, a normal retirement formula, but as far as the presentation as is on the agenda, it was intended with an early retirement formula, simply because during the last conversations at the dais, We felt that there was an interest in calculating at an early retirement rather than full pension, et cetera, et cetera. So what this does, this is the rule of 80 formula. It's very common. Many plans use it, as I stated, as a normal retirement plan option. Others use it as an early retirement. It's a structure. It's how you design it. You could apply it however you want. In essence, what it does, It allows you to combine age and service. And as long as that number totals 80, then you meet the criteria for the formula. So in essence, if someone is 54 years old and has worked 26 years of service, 54 plus 26 equals 80. So in that criteria, that person would meet the eligibility for this purpose. If we want to apply the concept of adding the years and the service, the rule of 80 formula, and we plug in the employee that passed last year, this employee was 54 and four months. And he had worked 25.8 years of service. So if we had this as a eligibility, he would have then been eligible for early retirement. Assuming that you would draft it retroactively as stated by the pension attorney who said it could be done. I'm not an attorney, I'm just giving, not an attorney, not an actuary, I'm just giving an overview example. So this gives you more flexibility gives employees more flexibility because of the combination. You're not tied to a specific age. You're not tied to specific years. It's just a combination of both. Option four, and if you were to do option two, option three, and option four, which I'm about to present, those options require a plan ordinance change from what we currently have. Option four is aligning it closer to that of the police retirement plan. And again, this is just a symbolic option. What we're saying is, yeah, you could do it at 25 years, which was option two, but you could draft it to say 20 years. You could draft it to say 15 years. That's kind of the purpose of identifying that. Those were the four pension-related items that we were providing in light of the time that we were able to come together with. There was also a request to review a non-pension item. There was a conversation specifically talking about a general fund settlement of some kind. I'm not going to use the word settlement, but in concept, taking that concept into account is pretty much writing a check, right? So you could write a check in different ways. You could simply write a check with a flat amount and say you're going to give X, or you're going to do the check based on a percentage of salary or based on years of service. As the attorney mentioned not too long ago, obviously, and the memo indicates, you have It would require a legal review because, again, you're dealing with public funds and you want to make sure that there is a public purpose if you were to do that option. But nonetheless, we just provided different ideas as to how, if you had an appetite in doing that, how you could do that. But, again, going back to the valid purpose, public purpose, and also looking at... statutory restrictions in gifting or additional compensation that could be a factor. The last portion of the request, in looking at our current life insurance benefit, understanding that any changes to our life insurance benefit will not be able to be a factor to help the employee's family that passed. We cannot go back to our insurance and say, well, we're going to change this and let's make this retroactive. That is not an option. So I just wanted that here. With the help of our broker, we've provided you with eight different scenarios of how this could be done. Again, this is very, it's a design. We could request the proposal to be whatever council decides or suggests that we explore. But as an illustration, What we did is provide a table. Does everyone have it in front of you? So we provided what we currently provide. And I'm going to give an overview as to what that is. As of January 1 of last year, we increased our life insurance benefit from $50,000. Everyone December 31st or before was getting $50,000. So on January 1st, we changed it to one times the employee's annual salary. So as of January of last year, our benefit is one times the employee's annual salary with a minimum of $50,000. I got to tell you that the average salary is $68,000, just to put it into perspective as you analyze this. So currently we offer one times our annual salary with a cap of 50, I'm sorry, with a minimum of 50, and it's capped at $200,000. There's no one employee, general employee, that gets any more than the $200,000. We don't have a general employee that makes that high, just for clarification. Our current insurance is set up by different classes. There is a class unique for the village manager as he has his employment agreement and terms within that impact his benefit for the life insurance. There is a class for the village clerk as she also has her employment agreement that sets the terms of her benefits. In speaking tonight, I am not speaking for them. I am highlighting simply the general employees. Another point of reference is that currently we don't offer a life benefit to our police officers. The reason why you have it before you tonight is because as counsel requested the discussion, the statement was of all employees. So when you say all, I have to also include the police. But in essence, what you have in front of you are the current plan and different scenarios if you were to entertain enhancing the life benefits. And I will go over the first column and the second and third, and then you guys tell me if you want me to continue, but you would understand the concept. So if you follow the first column, it says current, right? Class one is the general employees. clearly says excludes police. We have one times our annual to a maximum of 200. And then this costs us 20,617 annualized. That's the last line on the column. If we were to change the one times and make it at two and a half times the employee's annual salary, increasing the maximum from 200 to 250, because now you're doing two and a half times, and making the minimum 100,000, that is 46,254. And again, we're currently paying 20,617. If we were to do two times the employee's annual salary, again, excluding the police department, increasing the minimum from 50 to 75, we're looking at 39,607. Yeah, let me just stop you real quick.

Yes, sir. So with the minimum under – I see there's three – three class one, the third one being the minimum, I'm assuming, right?

No, sir. So class one. No, it's all general.

I'm saying the third class one on all of these is the minimum amount. So, for example, if the village employee makes $50,000, let's say they make $48,000 for the year, they would still get $100,000 payout as a minimum amount.

If you were...

Even if they didn't make that.

If you were... Class 3 is a charter officer. Right. I'm talking about just for clarification. Just for clarification.

Just class 1, though. I'm saying, like, if a general employee under the class 1 made $48,000, if they were to pass, they would get a... Under option 1, they'd get $100,000.

Correct. If they make less... Even though they only made $48,000. If they make less than that, the minimum guarantee that their beneficiary will get will be $100,000.

That's the lowest bar.

That would be if you – so the broker, following the instructions from me, we looked at increasing the base. So the base is 50. So we said, okay, what would it be if you increased it to 100? Or what would it be if you do 75, just increase it 25% from where we are? And that is what these scenarios do. Ultimately, it's a design. We can go back and say, no, we don't want to increase the salary. We only want to increase the minimum. We can get a quote for that, and obviously the numbers will change. But as an illustration, this kind of gives you an idea of where we're at as far as increases if you were to consider changing that benefit. A couple of things is include, not include the police for consideration in your discussions as we don't offer right now, you know. I can tell you, is that a normalcy? Based on my experience, I know police bargains their benefits. It could be a bargaining item. But nonetheless, because the ask was for all, that is why you see all the columns carrying all employees, meaning general and police, and just general employees. Would you like for me to continue with the other options?

I think we understand the concept.

One thing I did not say, and it's important to take into account, actually two things, is that with our plan right now, it allows for an accelerated death benefit payment. We have that in place today. What that is, is if we have any employee with a terminal illness, he or she could cash into their life policy and collect 80% of that value up to $160,000. That is how we have a structure right now. And then second, I mentioned the average salary for a general employee is $68,000. The average salary for a police is $99,000. just to put it into content as you try to apply a one times, one and a half to two and a half to put it into content as to what that could be as far as employees being impacted. Any questions?

I have a quick question about the life insurance. So I'm looking here at the Florida statutes that define groups like the police and a fire department hypothetically as a special risk class and also that that's for like retirement pension and for chapter 185 premium tax revenue so my question would be for the life insurance essentially wouldn't we have to look at different risk tables for like it wouldn't be the same

guess actuarial science right for the general employees versus police so first of all the section chapter 185 that you're referring to has to do with an actual retirement plan yeah this is not a retirement plan this is simple a life policy that we're buying and we providing as a benefit so under 185 it was put into place to allow the police and fire, 175, 185, to enhance, in essence, their retirement benefits. So it kind of, with the funds, and some cities collectively bargain what they do with the funds. Some cities allow the officers to split in some sort of formula the amount that they get from the 185 equally or whatever formula they design. It's a plan design, but In essence, it was put in purpose to help enhance those benefits. And like I said, some cities use the collectively bargain with the unions to be able to take some of that money to pay for that richer benefit, whatever that is. It could be enhancing their multiplier, reducing their resting time, et cetera, et cetera. So it's not what you're asking has nothing to do with this. This is clear insurance policy as you would buy your life insurance policy. And because we have a broker, we have to go through our broker and these are the codes.

Yeah. There are two different things in the memorandum, but it affects, I guess, the way that we frame like option four talks about bringing it in alignment with the police, like 10, 15, 20-year suggested I guess my thing would be for options three and four, we don't really know. how much the effect will be on costs in the future?

Unfortunately, I'm not an actuary. I wouldn't be able to provide that. As presented, it's a discussion. If this is what the council wishes to entertain, I think the next step will be exactly that, asking the consultants, applicable consultants, to cost it out. But I'm not in the capacity or professional to be able to get to that number.

the chair though but for clarification for the life insurance portion option six that we're discussing the total annual premium is listed here that would be the cost that is a cost because insurance is sold by by

let's say by volume. They take into account age. They take into account some salaries and so on. So that is the actual number. It wouldn't change. This is as fresh as it gets for an implementation of October 1. So if council were to... wishes to enhance that benefit, we would make it part of our budget process and budget accordingly. We just need to have an idea as to which option, and if there's an option that's not here that you wish to explore, I can always reach out to our broker who can then request a quote. Yes, sir?

Well in your opinion will this be received by the employees of the village here as far as raising this death benefit as opposed to changing the pension is that something that would be desirable and that it provided immediate income or do you do you see that as a negative?

So, sir, if you are referring to enhancing the death benefit, meaning increasing the pension?

Yeah.

So I can tell you that from my perspective and taking the liberty to speak on behalf of the employees, I don't see an employee rejecting an opportunity to have a much richer benefit. That's one. Two, when you put into perspective, a life policy is not taking into account how many years of service you have or what age you have, in essence, because the benefit is afforded to you. So if you have an employee, we just had a real scenario. We've had two employees recently that went through major surgeries. They were nowhere near the 25-year or the 20-year tier. If this was in place, and something would have gone wrong, their spouses would automatically, immediately, or whomever the designated beneficiary would have already collected in this. Whereas in the pension, you're tying it to age and years of service. A policy such as a group policy like this is immediate. It doesn't look at how many years you've worked. As long as you're already eligible, you could cash in into the benefit. So again, taking the liberty to speak on behalf of the staff, I think that this would really benefit everyone immediately.

And then the second question, of course, the only pitfall, I think this is a great idea. Well, I have two more questions. Which of these options here would you prefer?

Sir, you're putting me on the spot. I cannot make a recommendation because it would be unfair. I would benefit. I'm an employee. But any of the options that you see here are more than appreciative from an employee's perspective. So it's like you're asking me how much you want to make, and I'll tell you a million dollars. I'm not going to say that now. so I apologize I think it's it's up to you that is why we're including the financial impact so you could have an idea of what that would represent and again this will not kick in if if council has an appetite for this until October 1 and the second half of the question this all initiated of course with the situation with the Olson family

which is now a couple of years old. And then Elizabeth had brought up that it needed to be fair. So I would think that if we included option two, which would make it the same for all village employees, if we were going to pursue what we had brought up last council meeting, I mean, this doesn't help Olson any. by increasing this. Am I correct in that?

That is correct. This would be any changes to our current life insurance policy would take effect in October 1 and it cannot be retroactive. It cannot. So this doesn't help the Olson family.

Okay. And so then with the proposal we had, we were, again, assuming the actuarial table and life expectancy, we were looking to give her, I think, 221,000 over her expected lifespan but if we also included in this option too it would make that same set of circumstances available to all village employees instead of just to one is that correct

I cannot confirm the amount, the 200 amount that you just mentioned. I don't have that in front of me, so I don't know that that is necessarily accurate. However, I can tell you the cost. The cost for us is $34,827 year one. But ultimately, as you spread it over the life expectancy, you're looking at that same 34 over the years being 362,000, which, again, could change contingent on mortality tables and everything else you indicated. So these are just estimates, in essence. Any other questions?

I'm curious if you could explain in a little more detail how in regards to option for yes how this plays out currently for the police so let's say we have we have an officer that after 15 years of service, God forbid, dies in the line of duty. Correct. What happens with their...

Their payment. So assuming the beneficiary doesn't withdraw the contributions plus interest.

That would be an option for them?

It's always an option. It's always an option. That beneficiary will be able to collect the deceased officer's retirement when he would have been eligible.

For full retirement?

Correct. What he earned through, you know, there's a formula, the average salary, the multiplier, and the years of service, right? So, right, so you're going to... Get what he earned through the time of... The formula's going to be based on the 15 years of service, what the pay was at... At the time of his death, or her death, but it would be collected when that employee would have reached their normal return.

And that wouldn't start for 10 years?

this case if you're applying if you're applying it it's it's a 15 not not lower so what we're saying is you don't necessarily have to make it 25 years you can make it whatever year you want right lower but as you lowered you know the cost may be more and I'm not an actuary so I cannot tell you how much more lower because

We're adding the potential for...

The qualifiers will be more people. More people. Correct.

the benefits themselves. In other words, it's not like we're stretching out the length of the benefits because the benefits don't start until the retirement date would have been.

Correct.

Okay.

So it doesn't create an immediate relief if you were trying to do an immediate relief. That's not, that would not be an option. Neither does option two because the person would still have to wait until when the person would have been.

What is it for the police currently? It's 15?

I believe so. Let me see. I printed the ordinance. And if I could also, because it's important, it's my responsibility to provide you with information such as this. It's important to note that you will not necessarily have to have it equal to the officers. We talked about the 185. They're in a different class. They have union contracts that... achieve different different results and so on so as presented in the memo it was simply to say well you can you can do that as well you could change a number to be whatever you you wish the number to be that was kind of the purpose so in this system there is such thing as early retirement for the police yes

But it has no involvement in this system of – It has no involvement.

It doesn't have – it's not necessarily tied to an age, whereas for the general employees, you have to be 55 for 15 years.

That's interesting. Okay. I'm talking about – what I mean is this – the benefits that were – that the officer's beneficiary gets, it's based on their full retirement, not any early retirement. We're matching it to the full retirement on the start of when the retirement is.

To the podium and then I think just come to the microphone I

State your name.

Elizabeth Keeley, grants manager, former pension plan administrator. Just to clarify, in essence, the death would be a termination of employment. So if a police officer leaves employment at the 15th year and goes to Miami Beach, at his 25th year he's vested he would be able to collect pension. So it would be the same thing for the beneficiary that they would collect what they would have earned as the beneficiary, right? So they don't get necessarily the full pension. It would be what the beneficiary would have earned had the employee been here at the 25th year, which is what we were trying to do with the general employee plan a couple of years ago. And I brought forward to you that it's the same cost, basically, of doing the same thing for Ms. Olson and having it for all the employees. So in essence, in the case of Mr. Olson, in effect, he would have terminated his employment at the time of his death, and then his beneficiary would be eligible at the 30th year. That's what the board proposed to you, but then none of the other employees have that benefit, right? And it's almost the same cost. So in essence, if you look at it as a termination of employment instead of a death, it's the same kind of parallel. So the police have that benefit where if they leave at 15 years or somebody dies at 15 years, the beneficiary gets the pension at the 25th year, which is when they would be eligible for retirement. unless they have an age, but theirs is 20, it's basically 25 and out. The general employees have age and time together, right? So you have to be age 62 or serve 30 years. The police don't have that. They're all year-based.

In essence, you could have an officer 19 and work 25, and he or she could retire after 25 years, whereas the general employees don't have that because you have to have age and years of service. So in essence, I guess the message is you could tweak it to be whatever you want. Even looking at the whole 30-year perspective, you could reduce it.

I'm going to propose something. You can tell me if it's ridiculous or crazy. It makes no sense. I like the idea of having a beneficiary kind of thing that can happen before retirement. I like that system for the police. I don't like the idea of having it based on the same system as the police where it's after a certain amount. Would it be possible to have that trigger rather than at a 15-year employment, 20-year employment, whatever, but to use this rule of 80 thing not to change the retirement age but to decide when a beneficiary can get

So with the rule of 80, the flexibility that you have, it's infinite. As long as the total number between service and age is 80.

I think what he's asking for, and I think just to interject here, it's when we looked at the ordinance as written, there's a gap. So there's A and B. What I think when I brought this up, it was this is basically not an early retirement because this is how it's written as early retirement, which could actually have a bigger effect on the whole village as a whole. It's more of a death benefit. When we read the ordinance for what death benefit is, the family just missed the death benefit. So changing it to a number where it's a little bit more flexible. And it's still, when you do the math with just human nature, it still doesn't cover 100% of the employees. Correct. It'd just be a change in our policy that was, and it was to other people that brought this up, we've had this happen three times in 30 years or So when I introduced it, it was so that it was a death benefit, so changing B. Otherwise, how we were headed down the path was here we had A, then we had B, somebody suggesting C, then somebody suggesting D, and so on and so forth. So for a death benefit on the pension plan, that's why the rule of 80 was brought up. Does that clarify for you? No. Because there's two different things, because the other one, as it's written and presented us tonight, that's also early retirement.

Correct.

Just for anybody, not just early retirement as it was presented to us.

Correct. Okay, but the option three where we're introducing this rule of 80 concept is this rule of 80 is being applied to when you can retire, the retirement age. I'm saying... I would use this rule of 80 thing not to change the retirement age, but I would use the rule of 80 to decide when you can get your benefit to your beneficiaries.

That's exactly what I'm saying. But sometimes I need somebody else to translate. Does that make sense?

It makes sense. Again, it's a plan design. You could design it however you decide. But yes, it makes sense. Okay.

uh that was b the reason i brought it up and the first one that was b if you read b okay when we read the original ordinance that what happened with the family is that our b didn't cover them this would have but it's not retroactive it's just moving forward so another council and like i said i think if we do the math here whichever number we get somebody give you this will cover 93 percent of all you know capable you know just So you know what you're doing instead of just changing a law for a law purpose, otherwise you just keep the original. But obviously the original had a gap.

But the thing I just said, would that fix Ms. Olsen's situation too?

Not if you don't go retroactive.

But if we made it retroactive?

You would have to make it retroactive. The pension attorney mentioned that it could be done retroactive. I am not an attorney.

In the future going forward, this would be so when you hit this 80 mark hypothetically you would pick a bet you would that you would select your beneficiary you know options at that point yes okay mr. Olsen obviously can't do that

so we would have so how is that so right now if I recall correctly our normal form of payment in the general employees plan is a hundred percent joint and survivor so the assumption is that perhaps the attorney will take and the actuaries will be that.

Okay.

The difference here is, again, whether you apply it as a death benefit or normal retirement or an early retirement will be what is the reduction, if any. And that would be for them to provide.

But as stated before, just like if somebody leaves, it's just early retirement.

Correct.

It's no matter what. I mean, it's the termination date of and it's early retirement.

Correct. And if you want to apply this retroactively to the Olson scenario, he would have been 80.2 years. Right. So he would have been eligible a month before he died. That's why it was included as a reference, if you apply it retroactively.

Through the Chair, could you clarify that the retroactive application under Option 3, it's different from Option 5's non-pension survivor settlement?

Yes, yes. So Option 5, Option 3 requires an ordinance change.

Okay.

option the non-pension is simply writing a check from general fund with whatever criteria you set to write the check whether you want to write it as you want to give the beneficiary $5,000, $10,000 or whatever, or whether you want to apply a formula where you take into account length of service, salary, et cetera, et cetera. So there are two different things. So option, the non-pension does not impact the pension plan. So the beneficiary will still have the option to collect their 6% plus the interest rather than necessarily accepting a

My concern with option five would be exposing us to legal liability as far as dispersing public funds without proving a public good.

So and that is why the memo says careful evaluation of legal authority will be necessary because under Florida local government generally most governments will demonstrate a valid public purpose for expenditures of public funds. So it's kind of supporting what the attorney said not too long ago. So I would advise you to then check with legal as to whether or not there's a public purpose. And besides the public purpose, you look at a statute that could be restricted as it pertains to gifts, if it becomes a gift, or additional compensation, et cetera, et cetera.

So I have a question, then, if we're going to begin to consider option three. We have an employee that's 20 and we have an employee that's 50. Certainly the probability of death for those two people is not the same. How many employees do we have in the village?

Full-time employees?

Or just employees?

Including police. Roughly about 130, 135. So say 130 then. So you'd actually need 130 different estimates then from

the actuary because the probability of death from each one of those people is going to vary depending on how old they are.

So the actuary uses a mortality table when they calculate things and that's actually part of our annual report that they provide at fiscal year end when they do their evaluation. And that mortality table differences not just necessarily age but gender. sure one group lives longer than the other and I don't know what table they're using today but under Florida law you know there it specifies what the table that needs to be utilized I in reference to calculating numbers for each employee I don't know that the actuaries were actually find that necessary as they could In the report just like I told you what the average salary is you would know what the average age is and you could make assumptions based on the average age or the median age of our plan Well, then what would your assumption be as far as cost of doing that as opposed to one of the other plans?

So unfortunately, I'm not qualified to give you that number And then in addition to that we have 34 cities in miami-dade County and What do the other 33 cities do relative to this?

I would have loved to have the time to survey that. Unfortunately, we had to pretty much turn this around. And with the deadline of the agenda, I did not have an opportunity to do so.

Through the chair, can we get legal to weigh in on the validity of option five and whether that's even a possibility to be in it?

It's a payment pretty much out of the general fund. Payment out of the general fund using any formula that they wish to use, whether it's a simple amount, plain amount, flat amount, An amount based on a criteria that council could establish based on years of service based on salary for example X percentage of the salary or X percentage or times each year So if someone has 25 years, then it's a 25,000 check And so on so it's really I just gave ideas since there was entertainment on settlement for a general fund But again, I don't know

whether it's appropriate or not I can't I don't want to give you an answer yes or no without speaking at least to our employment and labor attorneys on that front of whether or not this has been done because I don't know. I don't know whether or not this is a model that we can use to justify it. Whether it serves a public purpose in the sense of what we just discussed, say, like the charitable donation and that direct tie to residents, it's hard to say, right? So that criteria that we use there is a little bit more specific based on what we have not codified, but pass in terms of our resolution in this case I don't know if there's room to make a broader interpretation right because it's not necessarily codified in case law has a little bit more flexibility flexibility as relates to a public purpose and whether those employees is that I don't I don't want to give you a direct yes or no right now I'd have to if that's an option you want to explore that we need to vet it internally to see if that is not.

So if we were to decide, and just a hypothetical real quick to understand what you're saying, if we were to decide to give the employee's benefactor their 6% contribution plus the 3% interest and then let's say $20,000 on top or something like that.

Out of your general fund.

The general fund. You don't know whether that would

I need to verify that Yeah, if that's an if that's something you're Interested in doing then I would want to take that back internally to make sure especially with Most recent legislation so we don't really know whether option five is even an option This so I can't say that we look at that I

Okay. You can assume this council can write checks to people, I think. Yeah. I mean, let's cross the bridge when we get to it here. I mean, I don't know if that's even, you know, what anybody's interested in. But I'm sure if we really want to write it, like solve this by writing a check to somebody, we could figure out a way to, you know, do that. But I'm not sure that there's even an appetite for that solution.

right that's and I think that's the intent of what the manager and through staff has done today is that we didn't coordinate together about these options but if you were interested in one then I think that's when the legal review if it falls within my purview otherwise it might fall within the purview of your outside counsel that you have for this issue So there's been no legal review from our office on any of these points.

I would hate to pay twice.

Chair, according to Mrs. McCloud, the employees are interested in this insurance, which I think is a great idea. It looks to me like it's a pretty big bargain. It gives the employee or their survivor the money immediately. and considering that it's been once in 90 years and I realize that's being argued this you know I don't see why we wouldn't raise this and perhaps make the employees happy and it doesn't cost us that much money to do it it's an alternative it doesn't take care of Olson but it would sure help Any of these incidents in the future, assuming they can wait until October? Nobody else is interested?

No, I'm definitely interested. There's a discussion in budget here in budget time, right? It doesn't need to be decided tonight, but we're going to be in budget workshop. I mean, it was when we got on this council, we were brought. We changed the benefit to be what number one is, right? Correct.

It was 50,000, and we last January changed it to one times the employee's annual salary.

But I thought we were trying to address the gap, and one way to address that gap would be to increase what we're paying from insurance. I like it.

I don't know if anyone's on this. But I think this is again when we go to budget council this is could be discussed You have to make now With your with your insurance or your broker is I mean this would take effect during Re-enrollment

Yes, this will be an effective October 1, but we negotiate insurance ahead of time. So in July, we're already working with a renewal for October. So if there is interest and if there's any indication, we would appreciate it so that we could kind of know what I guess there is consensus that you would want to do this. one does to come back and presented you in the budget I believe through the manager that I think I'll be fine pick one of these options presented then but in essence it's intended for an October one effective through the chair I I see two paths forward that I can get behind one would be modifying a

the survivor benefit not the retirement age but the survivor benefit and I like the idea of implementing this something like this rule of 80 thing to trigger that and I guess making it retroactive to solve the Olson situation the other path would be to adjust the life insurance I think I think that certainly makes sense and closes the gap that we're concerned about also and I would entertain you know in that scenario if that's what our solution is going to be I would maybe entertain doing like a one-time payment of some kind I don't think you would be able to make up for what you know we're proposing here with the life insurance obviously but maybe something Those are two paths that I would entertain, I guess, or some variation there. I mean, and if the first thing, then, you know, maybe as the mayor said, we can address something with this, you know, later on with the budget and some kind of upgrade to this. I'm a little confused about the police part. We have a negotiating process with the police, right?

Yeah, we're about to start bargaining with them later this month.

all right so God bless the police out there but let them you know they want stuff they know how to ask I have a question that I may have misunderstood you I thought you said that you need some kind of answer now

on this insurance because you have to begin negotiating for that so that you have it set for October. Is that not what you said?

That's correct. Especially for budgeting, but mostly for confirmation to the carrier that we're going to proceed with one of the options. And if you prefer a different option from what's in front of you, we could always cost it out through our broker.

I think the question is whether we're thinking of having a plan that includes the police in it or whether we aren't, if that should be negotiated separately in their collective bargaining. But I think one of the things I would like to know, I guess, is how much each plan costs versus how much of the benefit it is for the general employees.

So the cost is on the bottom here at every column.

Okay.

Starting with the first column being our current. So that is what we pay today. And then you see the different scenarios.

But some plans cost more and give less benefit in a way, so then they're worse plans to go with. Correct. That's exactly how it was going. So out of these eight ones, I'm most interested in the ones that give the most benefit for what they cost? Correct.

Just for public comment, I think Ms. Keeley would like to speak. Sure. I did have something written out but after all the presentation by

So a couple of things that option number three as presented to you is a rule of 84 any retirement It isn't specific to the death benefit as I read it and there's no cost So I would just caution you before you say you're moving forward with it to get the cost with it of As a long-term financial analysis of that alternative to just see what the impact is on the future budgets as well And what the pension funding obligations would be if that changes But you could tie it just to upon death that the rule of 80 kicks in so there are two options in that format with the rule of 80 just so that you're not specifically focused on the one presented because that does change retirement for anybody so just to clarify that there was any because you're talking about a lot of different moving parts right that's what I was trying to like and pieces that I like from one thing and right and so some of the options I just want you to note is that there's changing years of service from 30 to 25 years in some of the options presented to you so you are reducing the number of years of service required to retire So if you did go with any of the other options, there was a change in the years of service. And lastly, I just want to mention that statutorily, police do have an accidental death and dismemberment benefit that's required for the village to offer them. So in case there is an accidental death, they do have insurance coverage for that. So they aren't completely without insurance, just to clarify that point. but I think that moving forward I'm very grateful and I'm very appreciative for the effort that you have put into this to address this issue over the last year and a half and I'm just again want to express my thanks for the administration and the council working together to get to this point can you elaborate real quick on what constitutes an accidental death for a police officer

somebody so I can so I'm saying if they get killed as Miss Keely as Miss Keely mentioned statutorily under chapter 112 we're required to carry that and if we had a fire department it would be the same one of the just given a little background upon my arrival here a little longer than a year and a half now, we looked at the accidental death and dismemberment policy as it was only offered to the police department and their personnel, the civilians and the sworn. Through FMIT, we were able to expand that to all of our employees. So right now, all of our employees have a accidental death and dismemberment policy. However, for the general employees, that only applies, in essence, and even for the police, when they're performing their job. In other words, I'm sitting right here and there's an active shooter scenario, I'm speaking, that policy will kick in. If I die of natural causes, that's not covered. So that is why we need to have or the need to have an independent life insurance. As far as what constitutes under the policy, they classify it in three different categories. If you're killed in the line of duty, that's one. If you're pursuing someone on a fresh pursuit and you get killed, that's another category. And then there's a category called unlawful and unintentional death. I can only think of an active shooter scenario to be that. But that is how it's classified. Under that accidental death and dismemberment, putting aside the death component of that, let's look at dismemberment. What does that mean? That means you were working, you lost a finger, a foot, et cetera, et cetera, you went on a coma as a result of that insurance kicks in. For general employees, you have to be in the act of performing your job duties for it to be covered.

That's how it works. That could be why, I mean, let's say you're in finance and you're cutting papers up with scissors and the scissor dislodges and goes through your throat. I mean, is that accidental death? That is performing, you know, it was an accident that you created. That is correct.

That same thing happens at home.

That's not covered.

Of course.

This is an employee calling.

Didn't Mr. Olson die on the job?

No, he did not. He didn't?

No. He didn't die while I was working. No, he did not. Okay. That was a misunderstanding.

And it's not necessarily just on the job. You have to be performing your job. Right, right.

Through the chair, I just want to point out to Ms. Keeley mentioned about the this option lowering the retirement age to 25 that was specifically why I did not want it applying to retirement I like the idea of applying it to the survivor benefits that makes sense I think part of the problem we were having before is that we were basically giving retirement to mrs. Olson rather than survivor benefits and this makes a lot more sense

If applied retroactively. If applied retroactively. Through the chair. Right, right.

So, again, this is not, this has not been gone over by lawyers. This has not been gone over by actuaries. This was Yami.

In a short time, and the manager, it's not an I, it's a we.

No, okay, but you guys did a lot here. There's a lot of stuff, and I think you got, you know, we had experts and people that are You know, I think we asked for something like this and, man, you gave us a lot more to work with here that I think we asked for, and thank you very much. You're welcome. But my point being, we're not, like, selecting a direct word. Trying to narrow down what we're interested in we're gonna get back to us.

You know what's embedded so So I would say that the next step will be that identifying what what you prefer to Costing it out involving the the people that are the experts that doing what they do so that you could have The cost and impacts I'd like to know what the other cities are doing also so we have something to compare ourselves to I'll be happy to, through the manager, I'll be happy to collect data pertaining to death benefits from other cities. I mean, you have to narrow it, because if you want to compare pensions, it could be many elements. No, no, no, no, no. So if we're only looking at death benefits, I would prepare a summary through the manager.

And also the insurance, then, perhaps, what other cities are paying as far as insurance.

It gets harder. I mean, as I've learned dealing with this stuff in the last year or two? You have to look at everything as a whole because if you're just looking at a very narrow piece of the program and then go and try to compare it to other municipalities, That little piece is not, you know, it might be that way for a reason. That's why I don't want to, that's why I'm hesitant to meddle with what the police's situation is because they're negotiating for that. Absolutely. Maybe they didn't want life insurance and traded it for something else that was more valuable to them. For all I know, I don't know I wasn't involved in that negotiation. Correct. I don't want to tinker with it, you know, like if they want to negotiate for it, let them negotiate for it. I don't want to mess with that. So... Yeah, I think it's important to look at all of the benefits as a whole. Sometimes there's a reason things are the way they are, and you don't want to necessarily do it directly.

Yeah, but all the things. We want to look at the death benefit, and we want to look at Olson. Those are the two things that we need to do. We've got to figure out something for her, and then we need to figure out something for everybody else, right?

so the object through the chair the objective is twofold here are we just are we just trying to figure out how we're gonna handle the Olson situation what are we sorry do we have to it's past 10 o'clock because the ordinance right now we have to make a decision are we extending this till otherwise it's we're kind of we have a rule against 10 o'clock sorry that cut you off no it's okay are we gonna vote on it or what yeah just that just to wrap this up I think just what 10 minutes, 15 minutes, or just wrap it up. I'm done. I've said the two paths that I'm interested in. They're extending it past the 10 o'clock deadline.

Do we have to vote on it?

Do you have consensus that you want to extend this, or do you just want to stop it right now? We did it already. We have to put it on the record.

We have an agreement that we're going to talk for 10 minutes more, and that's it. How about that? That's fine.

I'm cool with that.

I agree to that.

I agree with that. But to set the timer.

All right. So through the chair, my question, what is it we're trying to accomplish today? I think that's important to outline here. Are we trying to rectify? I thought that all of this was to rectify the Olson, figure out a way to rectify the Olson situation. If that is what we're trying to do here, then we need to do that. But if we're trying to take a look at the entire situation, the entire death benefit, then I think we've got a lot more. I mean, and I appreciate, obviously, all the time you and the manager and everybody put into this. But to me, all this now is saying is we don't have any of the actual costs to us about any of it. from the legal, from the actuary. I mean, we're shooting in the dark if we even pick anything, in my opinion, because we don't really know. I mean, it could cost us, who knows what it could cost us? Nobody knows. Well, I'm just saying.

We're selecting the ammunition right now.

Right, right. I just, I don't know. And that's why my question is, what are we trying to accomplish here?

And maybe for... To give some ease, maybe it's not necessarily being so solid on one particular choice as much as it is we want to explore this option more. So that could look like now I want to direct the attorneys to give me a little bit more information about option three or four or five or ask staff to go deeper into a certain option. So I don't think you necessarily have to. You're not married to it. You're not going to decide tonight this is the one. But if you wanted to go further on any particular one, you could give that direction.

And if I may, just a reminder, the consultants will provide a study that would accompany whatever ordinance. The Florida Division of Retirements would want to have an impact statement at some point after first reading of an ordinance. So I think there's ample time to get that information. But to get started, you need to request it. And I am not, unfortunately, that professional that can give you those numbers.

I would like to ask for the retroactive part of this, because a lot of this year and a half has been trying to do something retroactively with what's on the book is on the book. And it seems of this discussion back and forth, we're trying to solve something that might not actually even be able to be solved. But moving forward is also why we're having this discussion, was how does the village handle its benefits and compensation? We were asking for direction because we didn't have these. Unfortunately, stuff has been combined instead of We're tackling multiple things at once.

We're walking a lot of roads in my opinion right now.

Also, Mrs. McCloud has said to us I think twice now that she needs to begin negotiations now. So if we have an interest in this insurance, or I will say I certainly have an interest in it, I think it's I think the employees have already said or heard she representing them has said she is that they are interested in that and that would be beneficial and would help to address this gap we need to be think about that before our next council meeting and let's give her some direction so that we don't put her in a position where it's October and we've never come to you know we've missed the negotiation part of that or the opportunity to look at other companies and cetera I'm certainly the chair I'm certainly inclined to explore a couple of these different options that have been laid out here the only

And Jesse makes a really good point You know, we don't originally I was inclined to include the police but you know We don't really know what their bargaining process is. No one talked to the chief about what you know, you know his his take on it is, so we don't really know whether they want to be included or not included, and like I said, if we include it now, they could be losing another benefit that they could be negotiating for down the line that they may find more advantageous to them, and we certainly don't want to take that ability away from them either, and that's why I feel like we're walking too many roads at one time right now, and I feel like we've got to narrow the scope a little bit so we can actually accomplish something. Otherwise, we're just going to be talking about this and talking about this and talking about this and

No, but I mean, what was done that we didn't have before us, and Mr. Walensky also said it, I mean, this is laid out for us, and there's nothing, these are it. from one through six, and that's it.

But not really even, because five is not really actually probably a legally viable option.

But you had to put five out there to say that it's not.

Oh, okay. If that's what we did here, then okay.

You requested it, don't forget. Right, right.

No, it is, because it's been a discussion for a year. So when you see something and the law is the law, okay, then you have to explore it. Otherwise, you don't know. but it now that everything is out there and it's a discussion that needed to be happen or happen yes and it's a lot and it hasn't been looked at in whatever how many years it just needs to be addressed and like you said it's many roads to it but at least we're discussing it no and I think we need to and I think that's healthy and I'm definitely inclined to explore some of these more generous options here but I think a lot more conversations need to be had before we can make a decision on what that even looks like okay

Since option three is one of your main options, at this point from the discussions here you can also consider with option three doing a reduced early retirement benefit or a consideration for that with the rule of 80 and so if you do your cost analysis I think when you ask for that you need to look at different options as far as that death benefit and how to reduce it possibly to do some cost savings I just wanted you to keep that in mind I think that's what I was that I'm pretty sure that's I thought that's what I was asking

okay all right I said it was the same thing as written in the memo except that we're saying early retirement and you're applying it as a right death and if and if I'm understanding correctly that so those three three instances that we've had in the past like that's what we're that's what this would apply to you know in other words we're not we're not meddling with when you can retire When you die. Correct. And the fact that your beneficiaries get your benefit for providing a path.

Correct.

Yeah, I really like that, actually. I think that's great.

I don't know if there's any clarification on this, or people are looking for clarification, or are we wrapping this up?

I would just like to see what that costs.

Okay, so what is that do a summation of what the day is wants from staff? How's that?

I Want to know what the other 33 cities are doing I think we said that that that in reference to their clients look at cost as far as specially then with item 3 although I think that you know, I don't think there's consensus there I don't agree with that but as far as cost of those items if it would be possible you know that's going to require some research legally and financially for us to understand what that's going to cost the village to to do that but we certainly need that information what else do we need

Just clarification on the retroactive.

And that's a biggie because this all started with Olson, and that's what we have not addressed after all of this.

But you have, just on the record again, a manager, not to put words in his mouth, but he did speak up on it, and it's also option one here. So it has been addressed. It just hasn't been voted on.

okay well an option to I thought I actually of course you all didn't agree but the pension board thought that was a fair you know a fair thing for Mrs Olson and then if you change that so that it included all employees that had that specific specific set of circumstances now you're not picking favorites and that would take care of the Olson problem so yeah

If applied retroactively.

If applied retroactively.

Which we have to get a clarification on.

Option two? Yeah.

Okay.

But that was, option two was also brought up to us in 2023.

So just to clarify, that was for 30 years of service. Right. This one's 25.

Okay.

Well, but the advantage to the 30 years was the amount of money she was going to get per month then with her life expectancy.

No, there's two different things. We were just, where I just spoke up and Ms. Keeley responded back was over, when it was presented to us in 2023, it was to 30 years of service, right? Is that correct? And then what you're talking about is what the pension board switched for a death benefit. They're two different things.

But the pension board, we spoke for... 30 years instead of the early retirement at 55 because she got so much more money total from as a benefit, right? That's correct.

Those payments would start at different dates, though.

There was a three-year wait. for her to get a bigger amount of money.

Right, and if you're basing it on the 25 years, the payments start immediately. Actually, Retro, you have to go backwards to do all the rest of the stuff.

Yes, we talked about that at the last meeting. If you multiply that out, Jesse, for the whole, her average life expectancy is 85. She ends up with a lot more total money waiting for the waiting the three years. But who knows?

I mean, maybe she wouldn't live to be 85. She turned off the live stream. Right. We're done. Oh, you haven't turned off the live stream? The meeting has come to an end. Good. By law. Good. Not by motion.