Village Council - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

Yes, he did.

and stuff are capital fruit.

The way the law is carved out, I think that just covers our positions.

I'm going to heal.

At this time, I'd like to call the meeting to order. Vice Mayor Cantor, can you lead us?

If we could take a moment and bow our heads in a moment of silence. Everyone would rise for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Madam Clerk Councilmember Burch president councilmember Devaney Councilmember Walensky will be with us shortly vice mayor Cantor here mayor Charles here. You have quorum.

Thank you Are there any additions deletions or deferrals to this agenda? Hearing as there are none, Madam Clerk.

Item 5A, Florida League of Cities Safety Excellence Award. This item is brought forth by the Village Manager.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And if I could just read something into the record so it's documented properly. The FMIT, Florida Municipal Insurance Trust, Safety Excellence Award recognizes member organizations that demonstrate an exceptional commitment to workplace safety, risk management, employee training, and implementation of best practices that reduce workplace injury and promote a culture of safety. Departments are evaluated based upon their safety initiatives, training programs, loss prevention efforts, and overall commitment to continuous improvement. I'm proud to share that Miami Shores Villages Police Department has earned the gold tier, not silver, not bronze, the gold tier, the program's highest level of recognition and is the first law enforcement agency in Miami-Dade County. I'm sorry, did I say? Okay. They're the first law enforcement agency in Miami-Dade County to receive this prestigious award. reflecting our commitment to the safety and well-being of its employees and the community that they serve. And congratulations to our Human Resources Department, Police Department, that is YAMI, and Chief Gold for this outstanding achievement and for their collaboration in getting this award. We thank you so much. Turn it over to Richard.

Good evening, Mayor, Council, Mr. Manager, Madam Attorney and Clerk, and to the community. What I'd like to do first is if I can – this is Mr. Jonathan Yaramello from FMIT. If I can give him a moment just to say a few words. Thank you.

Excellent. Good evening, everyone. So I'm actually a resident of Miami Shores. So this is actually pretty cool. I'm very happy that this is the first municipality in Dade County that has been able to achieve this. This is not something that's easily achieved. Most police departments are accredited. However, what we have is essentially a benchmark that we set. And then We assess these departments. Not all score very high, but we did. I say we because I'm a part of the village. So yes, I'd like to present this to the chief now, if that'd be OK. Yes? All right. And to the village. And to the village. Chief Gold and Miami Shores Village, I present to you the Level 3 Safety Excellence Initiative Award.

Now, I want to just really say I want to thank Yami, Slate McLeod from HR, who really assisted us with this. And as Jonathan said, being accredited is one step of this. This took us a step higher. The good thing is that since we were accredited, we had already met some of the practices that they required, and then we just had to go a few more steps, modify a few policies, but we made it happen so we could achieve this goal. this recognition and also be following and also to follow best practices for FMIT which help us with our risk and safety standards as well. And it does come with a little bit of a bonus check for us as well that we'll be able to use to purchase some items regarding safety and whatnot for the police department. So thank you for all of your support as well. Thank you.

Item 5B, final annual comprehensive financial report for fiscal year 2025. This item is presented by the independent auditor, CBIZ, through the village manager.

Mr. Mayor, thank you again. I'd like to introduce you to Brandon Lopez. I think probably this is his second or third time at this podium, but he's here to present our annual comprehensive financial report for the year ending, for fiscal year 25. This is, that means we are current. This is, on September 30th, we would have been in the season to prepare the financial report for 2026 but just like to introduce you to Brandon again a partner with CBS and he was the leader and you know, audits.

Thank you, Mr. Scott. Good evening, Mayor, Council Members. My name is Brandon Lopez. I'm a partner with CBIS, and we're your external auditors. And like Mr. Scott mentioned, I'm here today to present the fiscal year end of September 30, 2025 ACFR, Antial Comprehensive Financial Report. And before I get started, I want to mention and make sure I give credit where credit is due, because like Mr. Scott mentioned, this is the first time in years The last three years that the village is current, that they met the state deadline and submitted on time. And that's a big achievement because this audits a lot of work. There's a lot of requests, a lot of information that goes back and forth. And with the help of Mr. Scott Marcy and their team, they were able to get this done and meet that deadline for the first time in three years. So definitely want to make sure I mention that. And I'm going to go through a couple highlights, just key items. And if there's any specific questions, I'd be more than happy to answer them as well. So I'm going to have the presentation and the slides up here. But I'm also, if you have a copy in front of you, I'll mention the printed page. The most important is the independent auditor's report. And that's on printed page one. And this is a section of it here. And this opinion that we provide as the auditor essentially reads as what's called an unmodified opinion. That's a clean opinion. It's the only opinion as the council in a village you want to be associated with. So very happy that the village knows they've received an unmodified, clean opinion. for the year end of September 30, 2025, which means that the financial statement numbers are materially correct and can be relied upon to make decisions. So that's the most important thing that you will want. The next section I like to highlight is what's called management's discussion and analysis. These reports are pretty big, about 150 pages. Not everybody reads every single page, but I always like to mention this is about 17 or so pages that's actually put together by management. And it provides the reader an overview of last year and this year, a comparison between the two and what were some of the fluctuations, what caused some of those changes from the two years. So it gives the reader a good overview of the year. So if you read anything in detail, I always mention this management discussion section is a really good one. So we continue along, and we get to what's called the statement of net position. So with governmental accounting, it's a little bit different than regular corporate entity accounting, because it provides the reader two sets of financial statements. The government-wide is kind of what you're accustomed to seeing. It's your balance sheet, your income statements, full accrual. And this kind of takes into the view of your long-term view of financial statements. So you have your long-term assets, your long-term liabilities. And what I like to highlight here And if you follow, you see what's called the net pension asset and a net pension liability. Those are usually your biggest liabilities for a municipality, right, with your pensions. And I'll show it a little bit later, but the village, as of September 30, 2025, is in a very strong position when it comes to their pensions. So strong. that actually the net of the amounts is not a liability, it's actually an asset, meaning the money that's been put away and has been investing in contributions has, as of September 3rd, exceeds the estimated liability. I always like to mention that fluctuates on a yearly basis, and that's very usual for most municipalities because it's based on how did the market perform, right, as of year end. As we know, some years are stronger than others, so you see that fluctuation, but the most important thing is the trending

on improvement year over year, and we'll see that in the following pages.

The other thing I'd always like to mention and highlight is net position. That's kind of like your equity, the money that's kind of left over. And the most important thing is the unrestricted number. And when you see these numbers here in the governmental and the business type, what I'd like to highlight is it's an improvement, right? Every year you want to see an improvement as opposed to that money being used up and kind of being depleted. So it's a strong position where we're at, and I'll mention some more things a little bit later. The next page is your statement of activities. Again, government-wide, this is essentially your P&L, the money coming in and the money going out. But again, most importantly is a very positive year for the village. Now the next set is what we call our governmental funds. So this is fund accounting. So this is what's unique for governmental entities because this takes more into view of a current year picture. And this is kind of what you use when you're budgeting, right? It's the money that comes in, actual cash, inflows and outflows. So this report, this is your balance sheet, right? You have your assets and your liabilities and our fund balance. As you can see, we don't have those long-term assets. You don't have your capital assets there. You don't have any debt, those long-term liabilities, because this is that current view. And what's important to see here is that the general fund is that first column. Unassigned fund balance, $18 million. That's an improvement from last year, which is a very strong positive thing, because these are monies, funds, that can be used for projects, for improvements, for things like that. based on council's decision. So again, a strong number there. And the reason why that's important is because if one of the compliance reports that I'll get into a little bit later, if there were any deteriorating or any issues, we would have to report that to the Florida Auditor General. But no issues were identified. And I'll highlight that a little bit later. The next statement that we have is essentially your P&L, but at the fund level for the governmental funds. So this is actual funds, cash coming in and funds going out. And this is what is in comparison to the actual approved budget that the council does on their yearly meetings. And again, a positive change in the fund balance for the general fund. So that's something that you want to see on a yearly basis. So again, an improvement from last year. The next set of statements we have is our proprietary funds, our enterprise funds. So the water and sewer, we have our balance sheet and our income statement. Again, just what I want to highlight there, similar to what we saw before, the net assets of the liability, that also flows through there. And again, your net position, positive numbers in the unrestricted category. If we're in the negative, that's where it might raise some alarm bells. But again, positive, strong numbers, again, improvement from the prior year. And again, this is your P&L, the charges for services, the operating expenses. And overall, what you see there is essentially a change in the position that, yeah, we have a loss. But when you look at enterprise funds, the goal there isn't to make money. The goal there is to provide the service to the citizens, to charge fees, to make sure we're covering the operating costs. That's the goal. So what you actually wouldn't want to see there is very big know numbers of profit because that's not the goal of a village it's not the goal of an enterprise fund the goal is to essentially hey what does it take to operate what are they recharging our residents perfect we're essentially breaking even that's the goal so actually Sometimes people see that, oh, we're losing money. You want to be right there on breaking even, maybe a little bit of a profit to save for some repairs in the future. But overall, positive things. The one thing we do see here in the water and wastewater, we do have a negative number, smaller, and we are seeing improvements, but that's something to keep an eye on. Nothing that raised an alarm bell yet, but something that you want to consider and think about for future years. The next section, and we talked about the pensions a lot. So this statement right here, it's essentially a trending report for the general employee's pension plan. And this number you see here at the bottom, the net pension liability, it's a negative, which actually means it's an asset because we have money put away that's being invested and it's being contributed by the village, it's being contributed by the plan participants, and it's earning money based on how the market's performing. Then we have what is the actual liability, the amounts that we're going to owe in the future for these pension payments. And as you can see here, that liability back in 2023, 3.6, down to 2.5. all the way to an actual positive number of $400,000. Again, things do change because we all know how the market's performing in the subsequent year. We're going to probably see it back to a liability. But what you want to see is that funding trend positive. So it's actually a very healthy number, very positive number. Same thing for the police pension plan. Again, 7.9, 5.5, $200,000. Again, positive, right? We want to see that trend. Do I think we're going to maintain around 230? Probably not, because we know how the markets perform. But this is what's important. We're seeing that positive trend. So very good, very, people always ask me, well, what number should we be at? There's no specific number. It's not to say that, oh, you should be at 100%, you should be at 80 or 70. What you want to be is like, all right, how am I doing in comparison to myself? And when you look at 80 to 90%, it's a very strong number. So again, positive. The next sections that I'll highlight is the compliance report. So because we're doing a government audit, we're required to perform on the government auditing standards. So we're not just doing a financial statement audit, we're also doing a compliance audit. We're taking a look at the policies, we're taking a look at the federal awards that are being received by the village to make sure are we spending that money based on the requirements of that award. And as you see here, this is the UG report, the federal single water report. This year we tested the ARPA program, the coronavirus state and local fiscal recovery. There we looked at the funds that came in and what were spent and were they spent in accordance with the agreement. And as you see here, there were no issues identified, which is very important for any future grants that the village applies for, those types of things. That's what they want to see. They want to see, we're giving you that money, and are you spending it on what you were supposed to be? So that's very, very important. And this schedule, I always like to mention it. It's called the Schedule of Findings and Question Costs. It basically gives the reader an overview of all the reports. And as you see here, what type of an opinion? Unmodified. What type of opinion? Unmodified. Were there any findings? And what I like to mention here is, if you remember back to where we were two years ago and last year we had some material weaknesses and some significant deficiencies this year we are down to just one just one recommendation that we have related to a the reconciliations not that they were being performed but we'd like to see them being performed more on a timely basis right so you can have that data And we know a lot of those causes was because a lot of the staff turnover the last couple years, but we envision next year when I'm standing in front of you, we actually should have a completely clean report on the financial statements. But for this year, we did have just one recommendation. And then the last compliance report is the management letter to the Florida General. Like I mentioned before, some of the things that we're required to do is look at compliance with state laws and Florida statutes. And in here is where if there were any deteriorating conditions, it would have to be reporting in this letter. And one of the procedures that we're required to do and we do a trend analysis of the village a five-year trend seeing how we're doing there and then we also compare you to your peers and that listing is given to us by the florida general based on population revenue and property values based on that procedures and those that analysis there is no deteriorating condition no issues were identified so again clean positive report So I know I went through a lot, but really the most important thing is that a very strong, positive year for the Village for 2025, and actually for the first time in three years, the Village is on time and current, which is the most important thing. So I appreciate the time, and I'm here for any questions that you might have.

I just had one question. One of the statements you make towards the end of the report is that the village doesn't have a PACE program.

why didn't you say that so that's a good question so that was added to the management that are a couple years ago so what the Florida General wants to be recorded there is if the village is actually running it themselves we would have to disclose what are the vendors and some other information but the village and other municipalities in Miami-Dade they do a consortium where it's actually run by the county so that disclosure would have to be in the county's financial statements and that's why it's not on the villages so they're part of a consortium that's actually being handled by the county so on the county's report they'll have that data there but on the the villages that's not required thank you my pleasure thank you very much thanks madam clerk

next item is board appointments actually you know it's 9a ordinance on second reading an ordinance of the village council of Miami Shores village Florida amending chapter 16 Parks and Recreation article are we you want to go home early we almost fooled us I have no I have no updates like wow I fell asleep that's right

at this this is a public meeting at this point in time we all open the floor up for public comments it's three minutes come to the podium state your name and address and address the council if you have an item specific you can if you do it now then when we address the item specific it's you can't do it twice But it's general, or if you have items specific and have to go somewhere, it's fine also.

And first time speaking, so a general topic. Okay, thank you. Good evening, everyone, mayor, council members. My name is Yanni Goldberg, resident of Miami Shores. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I'm going to speak about swells. Before I begin, I just want to make sure that everyone understands the world that I'm going to discuss today. Today, permeable pavers can only be installed on a swell if they are connected to a driveway on a private property. In other ones, even if the pavers meet all the drainage goals, they are not allowed on the swell by themselves. Through my own permit applications, I learned about the gap in the ordinance, and over the past few weeks, I've worked with Roy, Jorge, and other people from Public Works. I have to say, they've all been very responsive, very helpful, and the issue today is not with Public Works staff. The issue is simply with enforcing the current ordinance. I want to state that I think we all share the same goals. I understand that we want to protect this world. I understand we want to have more green space. It's all about drainage, and I understand that. I've seen it. I know Miami shows looks like when it rains, so I completely support it. My concern is that the current rule can sometimes produce the opposite result. For example, My request will likely be approved, I hope so, even though I'm speaking tonight about it, is that if I expand the swell into my driveway, and by doing that, then the audience will allow us to do this. And this seems inconsistent with the goal of the audience of improving the drainage capacity. As you know, many residents already park on this road every day. Some places it's been grandfathered, so they already have a parking lot from, I don't know, 20, 30, 10 years ago. And some places they just park on the grass because there's no other options. There's no other street parking that's available. So it's not just my issue, it's a community issue. I also understand that this is tied to Miami-Dade County requirements. So if any change, basically any change that I'm asking you today, probably will require us to work with the county, and I understand that. I'm confident that with the proper solution, we can find something that can improve the drainage while we can change the ordinance. Again, I'm not asking for a special exception for my property. I'm asking council to direct staff to evaluate this ordinance and bring back options for modernizing, because there are new ways, there are new papers that can support the drainage while preserving the village commitment to drainage and green space. And I'll just end with, I think a good law should achieve its purpose, be applied consistently across the village, and be practical for the people who live by it. Thank you for your time. Appreciate it. Thank you.

Are there any other public comments at this time? Madam Clark, are there any comments?

Not for general public comments.

Okay. Next item.

Approval of the July 7, 2026 Village Council Meeting Minutes.

So moved.

Second.

There's a motion, a second. All in favor, signal by saying aye. Aye. Motion carries. Madam Clark.

Item 9A, in ordinance of the Village Council of Miami Shores Village, Florida, amending Chapter 16, Parks and Recreation, Article 1, Section 16-21, Recreation Advisory Committee of the Village Code of Ordinances to reduce the membership of the Recreation Advisory Committee from nine members to seven members, providing for conflict severability, codification, and an effective date. This item is brought forth by the Parks and Recreation Director through the Village Manager. Mr. Mayor, this is a public hearing item.

Thank you.

hi good evening we brought this this ordinance before you at the last council meeting its second reading is to reduce the board the recreation advisory board from nine members to seven due to the struggle of getting a quorum each month it's a little ironic

we finally have enough people to fill those seats tonight but it's the attendance with these meetings the seven-member board is having a hard time but I do appreciate the comedic irony I had a motion on the table for mr. mayor okay This is a second reading of an ordinance. It's a public hearing or a public meeting. Are there any comments on this item?

There's...

Thank you. So moved. There's a motion to move it. Second. There's a motion to second. All those in favor, signal by saying aye. Aye. Motion carries. Thank you. Madam Clerk.

Next item is board appointments. Appointment to the Arts and Culture Board. There is one unexpired vacancy. It's a one-year term. Given that the Village Council received more applications and vacancies during the last appointment cycle which occurred at the last council meeting the three remaining candidates or applicants have been presented to council for consideration if anyone is present who applied to serve on the arts and culture board and would like to briefly introduce themselves this is your opportunity to do so I don't see anyone who applied for the arts and culture board on zoom either mr. mayor okay through the chair madam clerk have we we verify that these people are still interested in available we did send an email we did not receive any opposition to having their candidacy presented to council some of these individuals have expressed interest or serve on other boards as well thank you very much

And the boards that they applied for, there's openings on those too?

Damn it. Yes.

Yes. Ended? Yeah.

Should council be ready to cast their ballots just for the public certification, they will be casting paper ballots. They were located in the upper right-hand corner, and these results will be read into the record. Through the chair, the results yield as follows. One vote from Council Member Burge for Michael Stock. A vote from Council Member Devaney for Michael Stock. A vote from Council Member Walensky for Mr. Stock. A vote from Vice Mayor Cantor for Alice Kang. A vote from Mayor Charles for Michael Stock. Michael Stock has been appointed to serve a one-year term on the Arts and Culture Board.

Thank you.

Next item is the appointments to the Recreation Advisory Committee. Pursuant to the recent ordinance that just passed by council, there are two vacancies on this board. Council received numerous applications. They have all been presented to council for review and any supporting documents. If any of you who are present today and applied for the Recreation Advisory Committee and would like to briefly introduce yourself, this is your opportunity to do so. Please limit your comments to three minutes. Yes Stephanie Daniel did submit an application However, she did withdraw her application for consideration last week, and I sent an email to counsel, but I was going to clarify that Thank you for that. Thank you for bringing that up.

Who was that?

Stephanie Daniels, so she's not on the ballot, but she did see her application at one point because she rescinded after We do have Ms. Pluhar, who's available via Zoom. Amy, could you do pick and pick? Ms. Pluhar, you are audible and visible, so whenever you're ready to provide your comments.

Good evening, Mayor. Good evening, Vice Mayor and Village Council members. Thank you for this opportunity to speak with you this evening. My name is Jessica Puhar, Miami Shores resident, and I'm honored to be considered for another term on the Recreation Advisory Committee. Over the past few years, it's been a privilege to serve our village and work alongside my fellow committee members and the recreation staff. I believe our committee has built a really strong momentum, and I would love the opportunity to continue that work. We, as you know, we are at an exciting point as we advance the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and help shape the vision for a potential new community center that will serve Miami Shores and the generations to come. As a professional and a parent of two young children who actively participate in the REC programs, I bring both strategic and personal perspective to the committee. I stay connected with the community through local parent groups and mom's groups. And this gives me an opportunity to listen to residents and share information and help strengthen the communication between the families and the village. i also bring a unique perspective through my degree in gerontology where i was trained to evaluate programs and community spaces through an intergenerational lens i believe the rec facilities and our program should serve residents of every age from young children to teens adults and older adults and i enjoy thinking about how we can create spaces that bring generations together Finally, I've built a strong collaborative relationship with our rec staff, and I value the partnership that we've developed. And I'd be honored to continue working alongside of them, the committee, and all of you on the council to keep these important initiatives moving forward. Thank you for your time, your service to our community, and for your consideration. I'd be honored to continue serving Miami Shores. Thank you.

Thank you.

good evening to all I didn't prepare anything but just wanted to say thank you good evening to everyone here my name is Elisa Robin I'm a resident of Miami Shores since 2020 I have two children who are also very active in the community both in the schools and with the community center with the rec center and In the past I have served on the board of my building in Brickell years ago where I lived I was the treasurer for that board for several years and participating in the building of playground and a recreation area for the children in that building. I work in investments. I've worked on the bond sales desk for Bank of America in Barclays for about 15 years, so I'm also very experienced in investments and bond issuances and that world, so I know a lot of that is some of the things that we're going to be considering going forward with this new project. I would just be very happy to lend my experience in that world, in the investment world, as well as as a parent here in the community. Thank you. Thank you.

Is there anyone else present that applied to serve on the Recreation Advisory Committee? Seeing none, Mr. Mayor, I did want to clarify a few points. So the Village Clerk's Office received applications from Sandra Benson, Carro, Stephanie Daniel Jordan fish felled Mallory Matson Jessica blue hard Jovan Polanco and Elisa Robin Sandra Benson Caro is term limited however a supermajority vote for fits vote could reappoint her should counsel be interested in reappointing her as vice mayor Cantor mentioned Stephanie Daniel rescinded her application and that's reflected on your ballot you don't see her name there Mallory Matson She applied to serve on one of the board's last council meetings. She's just a little short of that residency, one-year residency requirement by probably a few weeks. So she would also need a forfeits vote should she be appointed to serve on the Recreation Advisory Committee.

Thank you.

Through the Chair, the votes yield as follows. Jessica Pluhart and Elisa Robin have been unanimously appointed to serve on the Recreation Advisory Committee. They will be serving a two-year term.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Madam Clerk.

Next item is 11A, a resolution of the Village Council of Miami Shores Village, Florida, determining the proposed millage rate and the date, time, and place for the first and second public hearings as required by law, directing the village clerk and the village manager to file this resolution if required with the Miami-Dade County Property Appraiser, authorizing the village manager to change the budget hearing dates if needed, and providing for an effective date. This item is brought forth by the finance director through the village manager.

Good evening, Mayor and Council and all others in attendance. The Village is required to submit a proposed millage rate to the State of Florida Department of Revenue by August 4th. The proposed millage rate is 7.800, which remains unchanged from the current fiscal year. Please note that once we submit this millage rate, it may not be increased. during the budget process however it may be reduced by the main council prior to the final adoption one question would you explain to the public the rollback rate sure Okay, so the rollback rate is a rate that will obtain the same amount of revenue as the current year.

Any more questions? Does that increase the millage rate from last year, or...?

to meet the same amount of... Technically, yes, because we're not using the rollback rate. We're proposing the same millage rate as current year, but it is an increase.

Is it?

Yes. Even though we're not increasing the millage rate because we're not using the rollback rate.

Okay.

Anybody? Discussion? We need a public comment on this. Public comment. Public comment.

so my suggestion is to keep it at the seven point eight it can be reduced later but it just cannot be increased we're setting a ceiling tonight right right at this time is there any public comment here and then there's

Yes, from Jen Chase. The village should only approve the rollback millage rate of 7.3492. There is absolutely no need for Miami Shores to add almost a million dollars in tax revenue to its coffers. The village council should prioritize governmental efficiencies and core services while responsibly managing the size and scope of the government. We need the village to stop spending money like drunken sailors hiring assistants and deputies in every department. When is Miami Shores going to post employee salary and benefit data for the residents to see how much the village is really spending? Dade County and the cities of Miami and Miami Beach post these salary details on their websites. When will Miami Shores? This concludes e-comments for this item. Mr. Mayor.

nobody has anything to clarify the if we set the seven point eight millage rate right now we still have the option before the budget is passed if we needed to to adopt the rollback exactly yes

move to approve 11a resolution of the miami shores village council determining the proposed knowledge rate second president do you have a comment did you have a comment um do you have to state and is the oh does the item say it doesn't have it so i think you have to say that you want to maintain uh maintain the seven point there you go time time and place first and second required by law.

And also we're approving the dates, right? The dates? The dates for the first budget hearing, which are September 8th and September 10th. That's the resolution?

I'll read the whole thing if you want. I don't. Let me know. Madam Attorney. Thank you very much.

We're good. There's a motion and a second. All those in favor signal by saying aye. Aye. Thank you.

You're welcome.

Thank you.

Thank you.

11b a resolution of the village council of Miami Shores village approving amendments to the bylaws of doctors charter school of Miami Shores providing for implementation Providing for an effective date this item is brought forth by the clerk's office This item is a housekeeping item in nature. It was presented by the executive director by way of the doctors charter school board to address a To align the bylaws with the adopted ordinance, there are also some other housekeeping administrative changes related to attendance, quorum requirements, and other administrative matters. Representing Doctors' Charter School tonight is Melida Matos, the executive director, and Alice Birch, who's a Doctors' Charter School board member. If council has any questions, you're here to answer.

good evening my name is Melita models and I'm the head of school dr. chatter yes you have any questions regarding the memo memo and the amendments

does anybody in the public want to comment on this item

thank you there's a motion in a second all those in favor signal by saying aye aye motion carries

Thank you. Thank you.

Madam Clerk.

Item 11C, a resolution of the Village Council of Miami Shores Village, Florida, approving and authorizing the execution of a charitable donation agreement between the Village and Jackson Health Foundation, a charitable nonprofit 501c3 organization. Providing for authorization and implementation and providing for an effective date, this item is brought forth by the clerk's office. The clerk's office received an application on behalf of the Jackson Health Foundation, also through the Holtz Children's Hospital, for a charitable donation request of $5,000. The application is to support the Holiday of Miracles Boat Parade of Miami Shores Boat Parade Anchor Watch Party to be held at the Bayfront Park on December 5th. The request, once again, is for $5,000. The village has $11,400 available in its coffers. With us this evening is Kim Juanico, who is here to answer any specific questions Council may have and to provide detailed information about the initiative and the request.

Thank you.

Just quickly my name is Kim one eco Mick Adam. I've been a resident of Miami Shore since 1992 This is my fourth year in front of the council and working with Miami Shores Village for the holiday of miracles boat parade two years ago Yes, well last year and this year will be our second year We were officially adopted by the Jackson Health Foundation which Jessica is here representing the foundation and Our goal for the holiday of miracles boat parade is to provide quality and normalcy for our patients with life-limiting illnesses at Holtz Children's Hospital Holtz is our closest safety net hospital to our residents here in Miami Shores. Miami Shores helped us launch this new tradition. So I feel it is very important for our village to continue to maintain momentum and continue this tradition. It has become larger and larger each year. Last year we raised over $75,000 for Holtz Children's Hospital with over 30 votes involved, police, fire, Coast Guard air rescue It's really amazing to see the community come together What we're asking today is the $5,000 grant to support the anchor watch party along our route We have several watch parties with Miami Shores being one of them And we would like that those finances to go directly back to our Miami Shores village to help support our not only this new tradition that we have but our neighbors and supporting our community again the hospital is what our neighbors are frequently using because we are the closest to Miami Shores so a lot of those villagers the audience whether they're participants in the parade or watching from the anchor watch party are directly affected from Holtz so we greatly appreciate your support over the years and again this year what have we provided in the past in terms of financially we have not received financial support from Miami Shores we have received volunteer support through the police department and through the rec center for helping us get this initiative off the ground, but financially we've never received support for this.

I have donated toys, but unfortunately I have not actually made it out for the event that you guys have had out there yet. So that's why I'm asking because I'm not sure exactly what the logistics have been in the past, what kind of resources we've provided in the past and how that's how this one is different if at all from what we've done in the past and if we're just trying to make that official or do something beyond what we've done in the past you're asking for $5,000 what I'm trying to say is did we provide $5,000 worth of you know community resources in the form of public work staff setting up you know whatever they set up to make this happen and is that what we're being asked for yes

we're really looking to continue to grow this tradition and I think the only way to be able to do that is to add to what we've done from year to year so this year especially with the Bay Park opening hopefully around the same time frame it would be a wonderful way to bring the communities together to celebrate the new Bayfront Park, that's where our parade goes right past Whether it's adding professional lighting or sounding sound a food truck Whatever it may be entertainment wise to really get our neighbors to come out and support Celebrate enjoy the night together as neighbors and a community.

I Would say two things Jesse that might help one is I Last year, because the park was closed, Angie provided bleachers there for the people to sit on, to watch it on that vacant lot that was on the bay. They also invited some food trucks to come. But as you know, this is something I believe in. We have an egg drop, for instance. And the egg drop we have around Easter is so that the children here in the village can come to the athletic field and collect the eggs and whatnot. It's a tradition that the village has. I don't know that this is now, this will be the fourth year. It has been well attended by over a thousand residents each year that it has occurred. I think it's nice that it's the Miami Shores Boat Parade as opposed to the Fort Lauderdale Boat Parade, which of course at this time is more famous and et cetera. But it's another feather in our cap. It's one of the things that the Village has been doing to provide a source of engagement and entertainment for the residents. you know now if you're saying did we did the village provide anything yes it has but did it provide any money no and I realize that there's a limit on the amount of money here but like you know you said at the last meeting that you were interested in the arts and music because you said it's not being funded where is the funding going to come from not that the underlying event isn't worthwhile you're trying to support families with kids with cancer that are going to die so certainly the underlying thing is good but it's also good I think for our village that we're supporting that and sponsoring that because again the funding for that is hard to find or that's my opinion to the chair that was a good segue judge that's listen I

to risk coming off as a monster here as we talk about this. I'm definitely in big support of this cause. I think it's a great cause. I think it's a wonderful thing we do, not only for the community, but for the kids, etc. I just would like to bring attention to the fact that we are in month seven of this voting year. We have 11,900, a little less than 40% of the remaining allotted amount that we put aside. And so that would cut us almost a half left of what we have. No?

We start our budget on October 1st.

Oh, October 1st. So we have three months left. Okay. Like I said, I definitely... So like I said, I support it 100%. I just don't know if $5,000 is the right amount. But if everyone else feels that way, I would be inclined to support it. But like I said... I just want to make sure we're being fair to other organizations. I know that we feel that maybe we haven't been in the past. I'm trying to make sure we stay on the right foot with that. That's all. How about $2,500 then? I was thinking $3,000 personally. Great.

Not that we're negotiating up here, but I'm just saying. Through the chair, I was going to propose since most of What is being asked I think is coming in the form of village support is to maybe call it, you know, like if we can provide in-kind services up to X amount for the event. I don't know if there's an appetite for that or if that's even – I don't know. Maybe I'm making staff crazy with saying that. Is that a practical thing to do?

It's an option for you to do it's part of your charitable donation ordinance as well But those in-kind services are capped at the same amount fine if it was a if it were to be financial So if you wanted to buy for Kate You know if it was three thousand financially and then two thousand and in kind that's a possibility or it could be all in kind All financial, but it just can't exceed the five thousand without a supermajority So I would support

doing up to $2,000 of in kind and $1,000 towards the you know whatever else for the event you guys feel about that so the 3,000 toe now just for clarification should name the in kind even though it's cap does it come out of the same money the same 25 it's not out of a different in kind doesn't come out of a different

referred to the manager I think in the past the in kind for please was kind of hard to track so I don't know how you all handled that previously budgeted wise but I would defer to administration to explain how it will be through the chair whatever the council decides on we'll be able to do that administratively through transfers or the chair is that nature is the this

charitable donations that come out that's the council's budget yes so that's what it is it's the council and on the budget it's just the council paying if it's public works setting up something we're paying public works if it's police out there doing their thing then we're paying to the chair though I'm just trying to understand it it sounds like we've provided these in kind services through the village previously but we haven't provided a financial

donation previously Where do the money Since we didn't have this last year correct. Where did it come from for the in-kind services last year?

Through the chair it did not Can we just get clarification about where that money came from for the in-kind services so we under so we can understand I

We did it. It came from the religious coffers. Okay. From the general fund? Yes. Okay.

This is what I was actually trying. That was the first question I was trying to ask, actually. It was like, hey, are we just making official what we've done in the past and kind of making it more, you know? To grow the event.

To grow the event, we've got to get some money. How about going the other way? How about giving them $2,000? Because all they do there as far as the park, and we don't even know if the park's going to be gone. I rented that lot last year because we needed an alternative place to go to. We may have to do it again this year. Well, I hope not. You're right, Jerome. I hope we'll be done with it. But, you know, I'd rather give them the $2,000 because at the most we're going to set some chairs up. We're going to have... some police there, the food trucks, I don't think we have to pay. Do we to have them to come to an event? Esmond, do you know the answer to that?

Will the police come into an event? No, the food trucks. We don't do that. We would have to, if we asked them to come, we'd have to pay the vendor. If we didn't, then I guess the entity would have to pay for them to be there.

Do you have any idea how much money then you spent in sponsoring that event last year?

I do not, but probably Ms. Dorney and Mr. Peters would. Angela?

So in the past, we have used two public works staff after tree lighting to move bleachers over there and then to pick them up after the event. So it's probably six hours. Well, it's six hours because they get a minimum three hours if they're on overtime. Six hours overtime times two employees. So roughly $600 in public works. Two officers at overtime is?

And what their overtime rate is.

Yeah, it varies. So another $800 and just staff. I mean, bleachers are in-kind. And as far as the food trucks, the food trucks have to, you have to guarantee them a minimum amount of sales, or you do have to pay a food truck vendor to be out there.

Sorry, what was the staff total just now?

About $1,400.

They could use $2,000 pretty easy. Kind of.

That's what it sounds like. So now in light of knowing that we re-begin our financial clock at October 1st, knowing that we don't have meetings in August, I mean, I don't know.

If I may, one more option, just kind of listening to you guys in discussion. If you feel as though this is a situation similar to Green Day where it operated separately and apart and then it became Like this village adopted event and sponsored event and it's kind of budgeted for so that you know in Green Day case They don't come before you and in the charitable donation way Obviously you haven't spoken to the applicant about that option whether that they want that for themselves as well But that's another option maybe not tonight but if you want to consider if it's something that you start to think this is a Miami Shores or you know, really embedded event, that's another route, if and only you think that, you know, you want to make it a village-sponsored event.

Question A, could that be done for this year, or that would have to go into the budget for next year? The event's in December.

The event's in December, so how would you handle that?

Through the chair. The event is going to be in December, which means that it's in next fiscal year. So it would be the budget that we're occurring to prepare in.

um knowing that we only have this is just my two cents knowing that we only have two meetings after this since we're off in august to bring charitable donations knowing that we allotted that money to try to do some things for the community uh from the dais up here i would be inclined to still support the 3000 but if my colleagues don't feel the same we can discuss it obviously

all right all right and I'll second that and then let's see Patrick you have any comments for us I

I mean, I think we should just give them the $3,000 and let them use it the way maybe $1,500 would be in kind, maybe $1,500 would be. I mean, let's not pin them down to have to use it a certain way. Let's give them the full amount and let them use it the way they want to use it, right?

Are we okay with that? Chair, if I may. Since you're considering both things, I think if I, you know, the rules of order say I can make some suggestions here. So I would think if we talk about in-kind, it means it's going to involve staff in some way. It may include labor from the point of staff. But if you go with the straight 3,000, then the entity would then be responsible for that labor. I really would prefer if it's that way. And we could ask our staff to rest.

Matt?

three thousand I'm saying where we don't have to do in kind with staff being a being there to maybe deliver things and to get involved so I mean staff would could really use the time off not not invest their man hours in this project and we just go ahead and give them a straight three thousand so then they would have to find the labor response to that mr. managers you should have said that earlier that one and you'd be happy as well

It's what you said. Okay.

I just want to make sure what I was proposing is the same as what he's recommending.

It's correct. He just talks very eloquently sometimes. Okay. You know. Okay.

All right.

So can we repeat the motion so I understand it? Movement. This 11C, right?

The public comment, just for the record.

Okay. Is there any public comment on this?

Like last year, we had a couple police, I think you said, and Angie was kind enough to bring the bleachers and stuff. And Kimmy's very much trying to get the $5,000 to go right back into the community. And yes, the cash works very well. Do we have to use Miami Shores Police, and do we have to use Angie's workers? Or can we use volunteers? I wouldn't volunteer as a police officer, but If we knew other police officers or if a Miami Shores police officer wanted to volunteer, is that okay? And if we wanted to get a truck and have our volunteers pick up the bleachers ourselves, can we do that instead of having to use the money to pay labor? Does that make sense?

It's a great idea. It was a public comment, but It's kind of loose here, so.

I'm not saying we can't use Miami Shores, I'm saying, but if a Shores police officer wanted to volunteer his time that night, or if we could get our own people to pick up the bleachers.

Let's see if there's any more public comment, and then we can continue the discussion.

Yes.

Okay.

Thank you.

Anybody else, public comment?

Rules of order. No. There's no e-comment on this. No, sir. Thank you. Continue this.

Okay, through the chair. I think that's an administrative thing and not really our department.

We're just here to say yes or no with the money.

So it sounds like Mr. Scott would prefer them to get as much help as they can from the outside. I don't think that applies necessarily to the police, though.

To the chair, with the exception of the police. I was just saying that, yeah.

I don't think that applies to the police, but everybody else, sure, I think I'd probably go for it. But that's not really our department.

So just through the chair, our charitable donation, this resolution is approving the agreement. So the agreement has certain requirements, reporting and things of that nature, how the funds must be used, receipts of what those funds were used for. All that information is going to be required of anybody that receives funds from us. We don't restrict who they need to hire with the use of those funds, just what those funds need to go towards. So there's no restrictions that we normally place as to what vendors need to be hired for anyone. So in this case, just to bring us all right back think what you're about to entertain is simply a motion to approve a $3,000 donation financial donation and that number will be adjusted and reflected in the resolution as well as the charitable donation agreement there's no special conditions that I'm hearing and then it would be like any other donation correct okay one last comment just as usual

remind us all that the $20,000 is a cap. We don't have to spend $25,000. $25,000. We're doing a cap. It's a cap. We don't have to spend. Sounds like we're going to cap it at $20,000 anyways. We have to give away $25,000. We're not required to give away $25,000. It's in our council budget, yes.

Based on the comment, too, I think we should allow them to do whatever they think makes them the most successful event, and obviously that's on us. It's okay with everybody. I'd like to propose... I'm so sorry, Vice Mayor.

I'm sorry. I see the chief is making some eyes at me. He wants to speak on this matter.

I just wanted to make a comment about the use of the police. Really anybody, an officer that's off duty volunteering that you may know or something really doesn't have the authority to be here in the city. And if they took a police action, who's going to cover them for liability or if an issue with an action that they took or whatever. So it really does need to be an on duty Miami Shores police officer and they can be hired through the city and then they would be on duty and be able to work your event.

Thank you. Thank you for that clarification.

I'd like to second Neil's motion.

11C, Resolution Village Council approving and authorizing the execution of our charitable donation agreement between the Village and Jackson Health Foundation in the amount of $3,000.

There's a motion. There's a motion and a second. All those in favor signal by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

motion carries thank you on behalf of Jackson Health Foundation thank you everybody thank you thank you item 11 D a resolution of the Council of Miami Shores village Florida approving and adopting revised departmental fee schedules for the planning and zoning public works parks and recreation and code compliance departments providing for implementation providing for conflicts and providing for an effective date this item is brought forth by the village manager

Good evening, Mayor Charles, members of the council, residents, and colleagues. I'm Christia Alou. I'm the deputy village manager here and a resident. And I am, I guess, speaking on behalf of those departments, those front-facing departments of the municipality that are servicing our community and developers and what have you conducting business every day. We have seen such a change in technology and service demands that we really have not been keeping pace with what is happening in terms of our fee structure, the fee schedule, and what we're charging our residents and developers as they come in and utilize our services. So what you have before you Really addresses the needs for the Planning and Zoning Department Public Works Parks and Recreation and code compliance we have other departments But who are you know also tasked with them considering fee increases like building department, but they aren't quite ready yet So we'll be presenting something in the months to come but for now these departments we want to address with you, just these proposals. And they're outlined in exhibits A, B, C, and D for your reference. And you can see there that the current rate pretty low but it's it's outlined in the item and the proposed rates they're all pretty reasonable but I ask that you consider the the increase so that we can better address the technological needs of those departments staffing staff time we're adding more services That planning and zone is even adding zoning inspections again. These are changing times We have you know, we have wonderful staff members, but they the time that they utilize to really Serve our community is it's a lot so I hope that you will consider these changes again see that they are very reasonable and we've also gone out to other municipalities to see what their fee schedules are they're all in line with that and if you have any questions or you don't want to ask me anything about that we do have a few of the department directors here and I'm here as well to answer any questions I do have a question for the record when was the last time a council increased the fees in Miami Shores it depends on the department but I know that planning and zoning they changed their fees in 2022 that was their last time and I know Public Works started even I don't know if it started that in 2023 that they started charging but if you look at their schedule you'll see that it is woefully lower than any other municipality. So some of them have been even longer than that.

Right, but this will be something the village will keep on addressing as we go along. It's just something that we haven't really kept pace with, like you said, for software has cost more, and back in the day it wasn't software.

Right, and more software is even needed now. We're adding more technology, so that's right, Mayor Charles.

Thank you.

Thank you.

the chair I'd like to ask on some of these there was not a fee before for example zoning permanent inspections was not applicable and then under $25 so on some of these were we like subsidizing or loss leading the cost of the service we weren't doing maybe decades so they were already way out of alignment with services but because the department had been neglected for

quite a bit I shouldn't say neglected but you know we it was it was functioning in a different way under previous administration so now that we have more code officers and have more technology and it's a faster process in terms of just recording and getting notices out and actually responding to I mean we're stumped still not in the in a place where we're able to do Code enforcement on our own. We're really responding to Complaints, but once we get a lot of these things in line in the department, then we'll be able to do that kind of code enforcement But for now just fees will go towards the body camera usage technology Improvements and filing that's required such as scanning and you know the electronic needs of the department So that is a jump, I know, from 50 to 150.

Well, with that said, That's the fine that's after the courtesy notice on something like that So that's the running parking meter somebody has yes, we're cited for let's say a car in a front yard Then the bill for them would go from 1,500 a month approximately with 30 days in a month to 7,500 a month and That is this gonna put more work on the codes appeal. I mean I get that we're doing this and they haven't changed it a lot, but it's 5x from From what it was.

Mr. Mayor, we're going to start charging people $250 for those hearings as currently we're charging zero.

Well, that's fine to sit there and fight what you got wrong. But, again, this is more most of the time even when we have these codes or liens on these houses, they come before code and appeal it.

That's right.

and the numbers are gonna be like historically anybody doing references now it's 5x what it was and it's kind of us I just see from the operational side of this of liens against houses I mean the numbers are gonna be not too long that you know some some I've had residents come up to me that the notification went to their rental house and not their address and they didn't know they had in the meters running because the renter didn't notify the landlord, and then it's some ridiculous bill that we're dealing with. Dealing with something that could have been dealt with in a month, but the bill is going to look crazy now. Some of them are crazy right now, and now you're going to go 5X it.

Here's my problem. I'm pretty sure there's people that come out of those hearings paying less than $250. Mm-hmm. they pay pay early right but now we're and that's what those residents have decided that that person what their punishment was is supposed to be for whatever that violation is and if they're regularly coming up with stuff that's under $250 and we're gonna now set the floor at $250

I don't know. The meeting has a $250 cover charge is what you're saying?

That's what it sounds like. Yeah. And let me ask, how come that one, this is actually why I asked my stupid question earlier, because that particular one is labeled as non-refundable.

Yes.

So they can negotiate. Like are some of these other ones refundable?

No, I don't know why that's labeled non-refundable, but it apparently was not charged in the past. And so I'm assuming that's may be considered administrative fee no matter what because as you said the residents will come to the code board and get a drastic reduction in fees we've actually met with a member of the code board who also supported increase in fine because he they feel that they're it's known that you you know will

to the board and get such a reduction that it really has not a lot of teeth and so they supported the increase if I may just add a little bit in regards to some of your land use zoning items or planning zoning fees so in case of the variance variances generally in Miami Shores truthfully are pretty rare right because rarely are they approved. They're usually denied. So when they are implemented and they do come before you, if they come before you in the form of what traditionally is the case, a residential property, usually I think our cost recovery ordinance exempts residential properties from having to pay cost recovery. And so cost recovery for the members of the public is a form for the village to be able to collect fees associated with the review of those plans, that information, my legal fees. And traditionally in most municipalities, the taxpayer is not expected to pay for the review of a private property owner who wants to do something and develop their land. And so the idea is that not our normal taxpaying dollars would support the legal review, the planning of the review, the traffic review, all those reviews. however in most other municipalities the vast majority of the work done is to commercial properties right and so usually single-family homes is exempt from cost recovery because They're usually administrative in nature very quick reviews and it simply just kind of rolls through our village actually has I would say a different model because we're majority Right, you know single-family home developments or single-family homes and all of the reviews associated that typically you would collect cost recovery for We don't typically collect cost recovery for private for these reviews So the taxpayers end up kind of it's a little it's a little upside down if that makes sense here where taxpayers are kind of paying for the typical reviews of these residential development, so I think I'm assuming I don't want to misspeak for staff, but I'm assuming that in the areas where you are able to capture some of those costs that you aren't. And not to say that we're trying to put more burden on other things than not, because we don't capture reviews for single family. But I do think that for commercial properties, if and when they do come about, I think I have maybe cost recovery here. I don't know. A couple of applications like Barry or when the Chick-fil-A came. Those are the rare times that you'll see us actually recover costs for these reviews. So I just wanted to kind of give you that. general understanding, at least from the planning side of things, that you don't capture a lot of your costs right now because primarily what's being reviewed is single-family homes. You don't cover costs. You don't capture cost recovery for single-family homes.

And just to add to that, these alignments just ensure that the user of the service, like the developer or even the resident, but the one that is directly benefiting from the service is actually paying for its upkeep and just paying because otherwise, I mean, we do know that if we're not getting those recovery costs and the fees are extremely low, that that's coming from all of us as taxpayers. to really make up for those fees for the consultant and for the inspections and the what-have-you so it ensures that there's more alignment with that the chair just so if you come for a variance for residential or commercial and your variance is approved do you still pay the fee

Absolutely. Because you still got to go through the review. The fee is for the review.

So even if you're, let's say, and if you appeal and you're approved, you still pay the appeal fee, right?

The work is, I want to be clear here. What you're paying for is the work, and we can't unring the bell because you did not get approved.

Right, right, right. So they're paying it no matter whether it's approved or not. yes absolutely absolutely also should we maybe Eddie do you have some some comments you'd like to share just because you're the person day in and day out he deals with a lot of this if you have some yeah thank you sir I think the only thing I'd like to add is that variances

essentially we're in the middle of working through the art code right right so a variance is in essence an applicants ability to say village thanks for giving me this regulation I have to be ten feet from the property line but I want a variance of eight feet so as a they would be asking for a relief from the code so in my opinion our opinion a variance is a very unique and special request and i don't feel that the current fee reflects that if someone's going to request a variance they better have a very good reason to do so and there's a set of criteria a hardship criteria that they have to satisfy in order to seek it

Also, I mean, but a person who – if we have a 10-foot setback and a person wants to do 9.6 feet, they still have to come for a variance, right? Technically, yes. Okay. So sometimes it could be a potentially extremely small ask just because they couldn't do 10 feet. They got 9.6 and they got to come ask for it, right?

Your staff takes into account that there's construction, right, like – Come on. A builder, right, if they're going to give me a survey that says 10 feet and they build it 9.8, we're not taking people to task for that, to be very honest.

Oh, I see. So we let things like that slide. We give them a few inches. Okay.

Just because it's construction. It's very, very – you have to be reasonable, I feel. Yeah. I'm with you. So we're not – holding people to task for that, I would say anything above, having been in that situation, anything above six inches, nearing the 12-inch mark, come on, you guys got to do a better job.

Yeah, six inches and less, but I'm saying that, so just to get clear, clarification, we're not being astringent on small wavering on those type of things.

We try our hardest to be flexible and work with folk.

Within... within what we can do because I don't want to give the impression up here that where our code is our code of course and of course and that's what the variance process is for if you want to vary from the code you have to follow the process so it's not a discretionary staff thing at all

We have pre-op meetings throughout the week, and I will tell you the one common theme that comes up in all those meetings is, well, can we just seek a variance? And part of our task is kind of informative. Well, it's not just something that you get out of a cereal box. This is something that you really have to prove, and there has to be evidence that would support it. The hardship.

Right. We have a hardship standard.

We haven't done that. I mean, I didn't. think of one that we you did one so there hardships are the same you know if we're talking about somebody who feels like you know there's some changes that have happened around their property and now you know there are there's privacy concerns that they want some you know modification that's a we might decide that that's valid but that's different than let's say somebody who's coming to us who's handicapped and is trying to put a ramp or something and that wouldn't otherwise be allowed.

That's completely different. I wouldn't even consider that a variance. You're dealing more with ADA and exceptions from that standpoint.

I don't want those people being in the same category.

I don't think that's the case. I think what this kind of boils down to is what's before you is a fee increase and I think the reality is that right now we might not have received many variances based off of staff's pre-apps thorough pre-ops that they do and I think applicants kind of see what the board planning zoning have done in the past what the council has done you can traditionally kind of say like all right this village might not go ahead and accept a variance now that we're making significant changes to the article that will come before you I don't know if that will change or not later so I just want to go on record and preference my previous comment that we don't this doesn't come up that often maybe it will start coming up more often now that we're updating our code I don't know so I just wanted to give you that too just in case because I don't I know you could say well if it doesn't come up that often we don't need to change the amount and I don't want to give that impression so just keep that in mind as you weigh your decision I just want to remind everybody about all of the coyote attacks from the golf course which is why we agreed to change the height of the ice front

man I that's embarrassing I'm usually for the record we might not know about those attacks because the fence is in place and protect oh that's right I'm just saying my last concern is just are we creating a pay-to-play situation here? If the criteria is a hardship that they have to come and prove is legitimate, and if somebody has a legitimate hardship, we don't want to set a number that prevents them from even wanting and coming to try to resolve it either. I don't want to create a barrier to entry where it's like, oh, you can get XYZ around here if you could afford it. Yeah, exactly. But if you can't pay the entry fee, then don't, you know, sorry. You know, I don't know.

I mean, through the chair, just look at all the other adjustments between current fee and amended fee. We're talking about 10%, 15%, some cases 20% maybe. These are all 300, these two items are 300% increases. I just, I really got a problem with that. And, huh? 3.3, 330% increases. I mean, the appeals one is only $100 more from $1,000. That's within the 10% if we want to leave that one as is, but I definitely cannot sign off on the variance ones going up this much.

I mean, it shouldn't affect our decision-making either, but, you know, it's... It puts a lot more weight on us, I'm sorry to say, when my no just means no versus my no also means you just put $6,200 in the trash. Right, like, you know, I don't know. Right, exactly.

Come back again soon. For the record, through the chair, I am down for an adjustment for an increase for the variances, but I was thinking if we're doing 1,000, 2,000 now, to be in line with how much the other items have gone up, fifteen hundred twenty five hundred okay I mean I don't love it but I'll meet I could meet in the middle on those but there's no way I'm getting on board with thirty three and sixty six no disrespect to anybody who put this together but I'm just saying for me personally because of all the labor involved in that variance

The other ones that were on the subject. Okay. Yes. If you just play the one for code. Yes. To go from zero to 250 for the meeting. The person does one day. They get the courtesy, and now they get the fine.

Yes.

Then they stop the meter. They call up, oh, my God, I got a $250 fine. And then they go fight or ask for relief on it. They got to pay 250 to get a meeting.

And I'm sure if they go to the code board I understand I Mean the reality of a situation that's one day Relief of $500

the meter stops at the time of compliance the code officer will check back after a few days so compliance stops the meter

You could be 30 days out, sometimes more.

Or you could do five days out. I mean, the goal for code enforcement or code compliance is compliance. It's not to make money, but it's to get residents to follow the code. And so those who, I know the way the department works, they will, you know, contact you via telephone, email, whatever they've got on file for reaching those residents, they do that. But, or those owners, they'll do what they have to do. But I do know that they have a lot of trouble with some of those people who just look at it as, well, it's just $50 and you're just going to, you know, give me a slap on the hand and I'll go into code.

This is on the record for how it works. On the courtesy notice for, let's say, the dirty brick.

I don't know exactly I'm thinking it's 30 days, but it may be Less maybe 15 days. I do not know for sure, but I can get that information well, you know since I know you guys are looking at some other things and and and in the planning and zoning department in terms of numbers and

let me get back to you about days for the code compliance matter and perhaps you can for that jump for this and one shot there's going to be a lot of emails there's other stuff that we're whether it's the ACES program or doing a major project somewhere the staff time for something like this And again, there's no public comment on this, so I get it.

No public comment there. On this one, there's one. There's one e-comment.

But there's nobody in the public talking about this. They don't know. They don't know. And then all of a sudden, the first... You know, I get it. It is code compliance. And what we're trying to do is we're trying to do curate, not stick. And... 5X is a stick. And then plus the fact of meeting. I hear it. I mean, and also what's coming forward with what the state is doing for municipalities are going to have to find ways to, you know, keep the municipality the way that they want it with less revenue coming in. I get it. I just, this one, on the meeting thing, it's just, it's a double fine to me, is what it is.

Through the chair.

All right.

sir thank you I I think probably we should just withdraw just for a while not to withdraw but to postpone here in this but I just have something in general to say based upon my years in government it's never easy to to look at fees and to make an alignment of fees you know when we had to do the solid waste thing last time that it had taken some time because we just didn't want to bring that forward but we know that there are costs that are involved in when we make recommendations for to recoup fees and the longer we wait as a government or if we just don't look do a comprehensive assessment of our revenues and expenditures if you let them stay there for a long time then it seems as if we're doing a hefty lift because we're not doing it incrementally or we are doing it as we see we're going out of uh... or to walk with what we're what they're actually doing to to recruit class and that's why this is so hefty because we have taken a long time as a government to even look at this i mean i know that there is short of this is coming it blows me i am sorry i spoke about this man both spent time all somebody has to pay us is seventy five dollars to lobby us Miami Shores village that I just can't get over that one and I know that we're working on that to bring that forward but that one just grinds my gears to the to the chair two things and again you know as men inherited a lot of these problems we as a council have inherited a lot of them

But one of the big complaints that I get from residents is go back to the dirty roofs. And so the fellow gets a fine. And you looking up the number of days, I think, is crucially important. Because we need to be able to tell the public, once you get one of these first notices, if you don't correct this problem in X number of days, and that number of days needs to be consistent with everybody, not vary from person to person. But this particular individual got a notice and said, my roof is dirty. And he said, well, that's fine. But he says, come outside with me. Why didn't he get a notice? And why didn't he get a notice? And why didn't he get a notice? Because all three of these roofs are dirty. And so then that becomes a thing. And we can't do it overnight. But we have got to. code enforcement is is something we need to become more active with and if there's a clear understanding and everybody's mind if you're solid waste is wrong if your alley is not clear this is how much time you have to correct it and this is what's going to happen if you don't do it and we need to be consistent with everybody I think absolutely I agree with you and do know that

that's why we've added more code enforcement staff I mean we were limited in terms of funding just all the way around for the village but they now have three code compliance officers with the manager and an administrator who's working feverishly to get those files and get those days lined up because a lot of it is making sure that you follow up with within the prescribed amount of days so As you said, there is so much to that. We have been remiss for several years, and now we're trying to address that now, so I appreciate that.

This is just one for, and I'm glad we're doing it tonight, but this is also one where it's it works better for us to do this and the fees do have to and we explain it to everybody why the fees have to go up and how long that's why I asked the first question was last time we did it and half a decades a long time everything else has gone up with that said this is also an example for all the residents that we represent is sometimes the council or staff there's a way of doing it to people there's for them or with them and this one I would just like a little leeway to do it with them so that it's actually out there. If we made a decision tonight and then these just went into law tomorrow, I'm going to get a lot of emails. I can tell you that right now. I'm getting them just even for the change. We announced and we also did public display for it. We had Public Works, this is before Mr. Peters, come in and show how much cubic feet it looks like to put out your trash. And we had to also explain that our tipping fees have gone up. the county charges us more money so all these things have to be explained and then we did the aces program but even with the aces program we're still getting pushback in and and there's still people not they're wondering why and yeah unfortunately for some of this is it's take the eye off of it for a little while and then just people start doing whatever they want but I would I definitely and have been told fee scheduling is something that we had to look at I'm willing to take on this task is just if we

just look into these and I'd be fine with it under code compliance what is the administrative fee that entails preparing the case the code staff prepares the case and the evidence and then present yes And also whatever the follow-ups may be sometimes there is compliance, but the administrative fee of preparing the case If you get to hearing and that's $250

Well, maybe I can get more clarification on that too if there is a Violation on a commercial property they go before this board also. Yes, they do So

I think we have, we've said we have a problem with the residential variance increase.

Commercial variance. Commercial variance increase.

Oh, the commercial, okay. Two to 60, 600. And then for coding compliance, we need more information about the administrative fee. Yes. I think we're having a lot of questions about the cost of a hearing and if that

we want to go that route um and then the daily amount also did anybody else have any other issues no through the chair i think 98 of these changes are awesome and welcome them 100 but the two variance ones and i also got to say i think going hearing cost zero to 250 we can discuss on but I think daily code enforcement fine from 50 to 200 is a little steep as well I've seen some of these bills as they've been racked out there some of them are in the 60,000 was a million dollars 60 grand so I made though

think per statute recap in terms of that so I don't think it would be like 250 times 30 days in a month if I'm not mistaken so I could verify but I'm pretty sure we're capped in terms of certain fines of code enforcement in that regard once what's the one with the meters running so compliance how do they end up with a lien on their house I mean if it's well if that's the case and the dirty roof was only $50 but the way that I thought it was until you're in compliance the meters running once you're given a violation right

come into compliance that you're breaking a law in the in the village of Miami Shores yes there was no cap on the land at the Boulevard and 105th Street that that fine was over right I had a million dollars he paid it to keep ownership of the land

we can those items that you

expressed to me.

So that would be the items in the planning and zoning portion as well as the items in code enforcement.

We also need just to read into the public record. I don't think the fee count was read in.

The fee increases are so nominal that it's not even worth considering. If the idea is to recoup the actual operational cost, then these fees need to be increased much further. This concludes e-commerce.

every year my wife says we're not charging enough so no the fees

But the question right now is do we want to try to fiddle with these five that we're having an issue with? So we can actually pass this thing.

Let's get some some time from her first get the rest of the information

I think that we shouldn't let this to the chair.

I think I think we should try to pass it up the next meeting though for sure Oh, yeah, it's super important that we make these two readings No, it's a fee schedule We're not seeing you can just defer September 1st Yeah, you don't have to have the information yet though you yeah if you if

think that there's no rush and immediate rush at the moment so you can defer it to September or no date at all and just defer it to stop bring it back yes on this these new fees start today yeah there's no deferred it's effective and I just wanted to correct myself What I was thinking cap-wise was the fees when there's like an irreparable harm, and that's like a $5,000 fee. And so that's that limitation I was thinking of in the statute. But the statute does allow you to do $250 for first-time violations, $500 for repeated violations daily.

Wow. So we went to the max then.

Well, I don't know if I would call it the max. It just says that the law says 250 is allowed. So however you still see the categorize it, you can, but that is what the typical code enforcement fees are associated with.

Okay. Mr. Manager, I think we're trying to figure out if we should put this aside for our next meeting, which is a long time away. or if we should try to get this passed tonight. Otherwise, you're not going to have these increases for over a month from now.

We have had it for over 30, 40 years.

I understand that, but obviously you're bringing it to us for a reason because we're not bringing in enough for what this stuff costs. A month is not nothing.

We wait a month. It gives us time to research things and to make sure that you're better informed. Just based upon the questions that you have asked.

In addition to that, in addition to this, I know our office is working with building on the building fees.

Okay.

Because that's separate and apart. There was House Bill, I think, 803. So we've done a significant amount of research in that regard. So Jose, who handles code here for us from our office, is working with Ish to bring forth something. Okay.

So maybe we can do it all. Bundled together. Correct. That sounds good. Well, since we're talking about 10, can we get library on board to change the fees also? They're collecting a lot of revenue.

Absolutely. We'll revisit that as well. Yes. Yes, sir.

Since we're doing fees. Parks did it. I mean, library.

Before we just kick it down the road, can we give direction on the variance issue, though? I mean, how do we feel about a more accurate adjustment on those two items?

since we're getting more information on code well I see I guess I'm probably stepping toes on staff again adding more work for you but um I don't know if included in the backup was other municipal similar sized

They did. They said 1,000. For all of them except for Sunny, no, Surfside was 5,000.

Surfside is 5,000, right?

5,000. But every other one was lower than 2,000.

So then maybe that can be the, you know, age?

I have no problem with the commercial one, only residential.

I mean, that's $6,600?

That's commercial.

I know, but I'm just saying it's a lot of money.

We have good rules. We do, but like I said – If somebody wants to change one of our really good rules, they're going to pay.

But this is what I'm saying, and this is why the reason I – sorry to belabor this, but through the chair, this is why I brought it up. Because as Eddie says, obviously we take it very seriously, and if it's within a couple, we work with you. But let's say you do need eight inches. That's not a huge ask at the end of the day. I mean if you want three feet, okay, maybe – But, man, if you're coming for a little tiny thing because your lot is shaped in a certain way and that setback looks weird or whatever or you can't really access your property as well because of, like, eight inches – and you're a business, now you have to pay $6,600 to come ask us if that's okay? Well, through the chair, that's not the only way. You talked about pay-to-play, but you talked about pay-to-play.

I have no problem with a business paying for their play. I think there's a huge difference in... We won't necessarily say that, but...

I'm not saying that yet.

But there's a big difference between a business who is making all their decisions are business decisions It's about what is my cost and what is my profit. Whereas when we're dealing with a resident looking for a variance, we're talking about their lifestyle, their living, their home as a taxpayer.

It's also a business decision when you're a homeowner because your home is your largest asset at the end of the day. I mean, not everybody, but a lot of us, our home is our number one asset. So we have to make business decisions based on the ownership of our home and what we're What works if we got to sell it down the line?

If a business is coming for a variance, it's a business endeavor.

What if you're a little small shop that you can fit four people? I mean, $6,600 out of their monthly, I just feel like it's very cheap.

But for a variance.

I have a bigger problem with the time. We had a guy with a car up on cement blocks on – on Miami Avenue, he got a notice that that was illegal and that he needed to get the car moved. Now, does he have two days to do that or 12 days to do it or two months to do it? The problem is he was never told that. Well, it turned out that they gave him like three days. and came back, and of course the neighbors had complained about it, etc. That fine started that day. He went out of town. He's a guy that drives a tractor-trailer to California and back again, and comes back again before he ever really realized this. Two months have gone by at $250 a day for a guy that drives a truck. I'm very interested in what kind of timeframe we're going to put from the time these citations are originally started, and I think we need that information to make a rational decision here.

That's why we have a board that would hear that whole case and then make a decision, and they usually do. That's reasonable sometimes. My problem is now we're going to make a floor of $250. So that gentleman, no matter what, he's going to pay $250.

No, he's going to pay $500. He's already gotten the citation. He's going to pay $250 for day one, assuming that there was a board meeting the next day, and they may not meet for a month. Now he's going to pay the $250 every day until the meeting, plus pay the $250 for the meeting.

I just want to know that we're doing this.

Chair I will just say we will work on getting the dates and times to you and I'll bring the item back to you in September along with supporting information about other municipalities that are like-sized

I may add something to that and that will give you sufficient time and data so you're well informed.

Can we get the comparatives on the commercial variants for others as well?

Absolutely. We have that too. And just one point on the variants. I know the example that's been used is This small Differentiation and whether somebody has to come in for a whole variance another option. This is nothing to do with fees but to most municipalities have administrative variances That if you are within a certain percentage or certain this then you don't even have to go through a public hearing altogether so just food for thought and if that is of genuine concern here, then as you're updating your code, that's something that you can consider adding as well.

Okay.

Thank you, staff. Moving on. Mr. Charles.

Do we need to do anything with this?

No.

Do we need to table it?

Motion to defer. Motion to defer. Motion to defer. Second. All those in favor of deferring it, signal by saying aye. Aye. Madam Clerk, next item.

Discussion and possible action regarding the General Employee Pension Board membership composition. This item is brought forth by the Pension Attorney, Adam Levinson.

Good evening, everybody. Mayor, council members, manager, I think I have a real quick item for you. I'm really here just to answer questions. And the reason why I think it's quick, and I'm hoping it's quick, is because we have a unanimous recommendation coming from my board. And the background is that currently the General Employee Board has seven members. And what they're unanimously proposing is that you keep seven but just change the board composition. There is no right legal answer, and I can give you examples all across the country, all across the state of Florida. Police and fire generally have five. So if you agree with the board, and this requires an ordinance change, and we want to work constructively with the city attorney, it requires two readings, two meetings, and the actuary would have to do an impact statement. It would have no actuarial impact. But the idea is, again, keep the seven, and The change would be, if you follow what the board is recommending, is remove the manager. So the manager would not be an ex officio member. The manager's got other things to do. You could concentrate on other items. And then you would increase the number of city appointees on the board. Right now you only have a smaller number of city appointees. You would increase it to four city appointees. And I think if you were to discuss it, you might say, well, do we have enough residents that are willing to do it? And when I give advantages and disadvantages, that may be something to think about. Do you have enough? Be careful what you ask for. Do you have enough residents who would want to be on the board? We generally meet four times a year. There are some times we have to do special board meetings. I think it's a good stepping stone for people to understand some of the finances and the economics. And, you know, again, we can give examples of other cities that have larger amounts and some that are smaller. but you're not changing the aggregate number, you're just changing the breakdown. Also, you'd be removing a city commissioner or council member on the pension board. Right now you have one council member, so that's where the other city residents would come from. So four city residents, and then you'd also be increasing the number of city employees. So it would be four and three, four city residents, three employees from different levels of the city government, the city employees. So that's the idea, is to increase it. take off the manager, take off an elected official, four residents, three, four residents and three city employees, and again, I'm here to answer any questions, and it's not rocket science, there's no right answer.

Thank you. Is there, anyone have a discussion, public comment first? Okay, yeah, sorry. Is there any public comment on this item? Okay.

Elizabeth Keeley defender of the general employees pension plan. So here I am again in regards to an item that was again brought before you I Believe this issue raised in this memorandum is largely a moot point This focus on the board composition seems to entirely be one member trying to reverse what has already been discussed by the council and had a consensus to have a five-member board The village has consistently experienced difficulty recruiting and retaining volunteers to serve on its boards and committees. Filling the existing seats is already a challenge, and maintaining the seven-member requirement would continue to make it difficult to maintain a fully seated and functioning pension board, which is why you just reduced the number of members on the Recreation Advisory Committee. Additionally, a review of the meeting minutes reflects that these discussions occurred during the public comment portion of the meeting. Not only do the minutes not reflect that Mr. Scott, who is the chairman, it says that he was absent. There was no emergency item on the agenda to elect a temporary chairperson. The minutes also reflect that the pro tem, whoever that may be because it doesn't reflect in the minutes, allowed the public comments to take place and this item to be there. So when you look at the minutes and the fact that these discussions took place during the public comment portion of the meeting, it's really disturbing to me and I'm very upset by this. A matter as significant as changing the composition of the Pension Board should have been specifically identified on the meeting agenda and properly noticed to the public. For the trustees to discuss this issue during the public comment, take a vote, and make a recommendation to the Village Council without the matter being properly noticed is in my view highly irregular and raises serious concerns regarding the transparency and adherence to established public meeting procedures. What is even more concerning is that the Pension Board's legal counsel permitted this matter to proceed in this manner. The Board relies on its attorney to provide guidance on compliance with applicable laws, public meeting requirements, and proper governance procedures. Allowing a discussion, vote, and recommendation on the matter that was not properly noticed raises significant concerns about the legal oversight provided to the Board. Even more concerning, the discussion extended beyond board composition to include the possibility of employees opting out of the pension plan, with the board attorney suggesting that a comparison of alternatives be brought back for future consideration. Such discussions involve significant policy matters that should only occur when they have been properly noticed, placed on an agenda, and are within the board's legal authority to consider. To my knowledge, there has been no request from this village council or the village administration to evaluate changes to the pension plan, nor has there been any publicly noticed agenda item authorizing such a discussion. It is troubling that conversations of this magnitude are taking place without adequate public notice. without a defined purpose or direction and without a clear explanation of the board's legal authority to pursue them. These actions undermine transparency, limit meaningful public participation, and raise legitimate concerns about whether the board is operating within the scope of its responsibilities. More importantly, I believe the board should be more focused on a far more pressing issue, the resignation of the pension plan administrator, which becomes effective on September 30, 2026. That's approximately 10 weeks away. This matter has been known for some time and was even discussed while Mayor Charles served on the board. Despite the advance notice, no request for qualifications has been issued to begin the process of selecting a replacement administrator. Ensuring continuity in the administration of the pension plan should be the board's highest priority as any delay could negatively impact the oversight of the plan and the employees who depend on it. I respectfully suggest that the Village Council direct the board to prioritize the timely procurement of a new pension plan administrator. I am also requesting that tomorrow's meeting be postponed because it has not been properly noticed. This has been a recurring issue that I have as of today. I have not seen the meeting agenda, nor is it posted at Village Hall or made available online for public view. I have raised this concern with the Board on numerous occasions and in the past have agreed to allow meetings to proceed despite these procedural deficiencies. However, the continued failure to comply with the public notice and agenda requirements is unacceptable. Without an agenda, the public is unable to know what business will be conducted or make an informed decision about attending the meeting. These recurring procedural issues demonstrate the need for greater oversight and accountability to ensure the board conducts its business in a transparent, lawful, and consistent manner. Accordingly, I respectfully request the Village Council advise the General Employees Pension Board of its obligation to comply with all applicable public notice requirements, including the timely posting of meeting notices and agendas in accordance with Florida law and the board's governing procedures. And until those requirements have been met, I believe tomorrow's meeting should be postponed. Thank you.

Thank you. So members of the council, there's a lot going on, and I'm just going to point out that I respectfully disagree with a lot of what we've heard, just as an example, and I'm happy to have an offline conversation with you. So a little bit of background, and I don't know that it's appropriate to go into too much detail today, but it is accurate that the administrator, who does not make much money for the pension plan, and they've made it a business decision, to discontinue working for the pension. That's the plan administrator that we've had for many, many years. So what we have done is we sent out an RFP, so that's inaccurate what we heard, And we received from the universe of plant administrators all around the state. And those RFPs are available to the trustees. And the reason why it's important to have a meeting tomorrow is so the trustees can, and here I'm agreeing with you, look at those materials. And not all of the trustees are available tomorrow to vote. So we won't be voting on it tomorrow, but we'll be discussing it. I'm sorry, we'll be discussing it tomorrow and then at the next meeting is when the trustees will vote for both boards on if they want to, they're going to be looking at the range of administrators and these are administrators, some of them are very large, you know, with lots of clients around the state, so the board has a robust list of these administrators. These are packets for them to go through so they can make an informed decision, not tomorrow, but at their next meeting. And I agree with you that we don't want to sit on this, which is why we're moving it ahead. And the other point is that the administrator, even though they gave notice, they're comfortable working through the end of the year. In other words, they're not saying we're walking away. They're giving us notice so we can replace them. So that's a little bit of the background.

with regard to the question about providing notice again this is an administrator that we're replacing and I don't know when the notice was provided it may have been if I made through the chair so I know I've seen an agenda I just the council through the chair just to bring us back to item 12 a for point of order it's discussion impossible action item regarding the general employee Pension Board membership composition that's what you to be discussing I think traditionally we don't comment back and forth with public comment and my understanding that that was public comment okay so with that being said I just want to you know position us back which is Within your right to do public comment. We don't back and forth in public comment the item before you is Discussion and possible action item regarding the employee pension board membership not to say you don't hear public comment you hear it and I think that any legalities regarding it I our office is not your counsel for your pension board but we are for the village so I think that will confirm with the clerk's office in terms of whatever noticing requirements might have been issued but before you tonight and for the purposes of this meeting you'll be discussing item 12 a thank you

I'm picking up on the city attorney's observation on the composition of the board. So just a little bit more perspective. The pension board at best makes recommendations. And it's a topic they've discussed over the last year or so at various meetings. And just because they give you a recommendation, you can agree with it. You could tweak it. You could ask them to do more study and come back to you. So it's not urgent with board composition. But I do know the manager at some point probably wants to cut bait. I don't want to speak for him because he's got other things he can do. And likewise, on village council members, the majority of cities do not have an elected official on their pension board. So again, there's no right answer here, and I could give you examples all across the board in different states, different countries as a matter of fact. It's what we refer to as plan design. And because you don't have unions on this board, it's not anything that has to be negotiated. So we want to inform you. The board wants to give you its input. They think seven, but if you think five, and there are people who can make a good argument on five, then I would have no objection to that. You make that decision. It's in your control. It requires two ordinance readings, and again, the Pension Board wants to work constructively with you.

Thank you. To the Chair, a couple of questions you could answer. If my memory serves me correctly, the recommendation was made by Mr. McCoy, who stated that there were basically three levels of employees in the village, and that it was his opinion that an employee at a given level was more likely to come to an individual in the same situation to discuss concerns that they might have relative to the pension and et cetera instead of going straight to Esmond or going straight to Someone and etc. And so was his recommendation That there be three members of the board one of which would represent each of these levels of employment I also it was mr. Williamson's Recommendation that there not be a council member on the board of And his reason for that was that there were issues that were going to arise that we were going to have to vote on as a council relative to the pension. And that if you'd sat there and listened to those arguments back and forth on whatever they were, then you're privy to that information before anyone else on the council is and that you shouldn't be part of those decisions and then turn around and be voting on them at the same time and that was his argument for eliminating a council person but there was never any discussion about the board being too large or not being able to get people on it we have been very fortunate and that we have three citizens on there now who basically this is how they make a living is in running pensions and private organizations, University of Miami, many of the charitable organizations in Miami, different cities that Dorset has represented. I mean, this is not three people that volunteered and said they like living here and they're trying to help the village. These are people that have got a background in that. And by having four citizens on the board it was believed that they are in turn representing the taxpayers of the village that are going to have to fund these, pay the money and fund these pensions, and that they should be in a position to represent the taxpayers as far as doing that. So that was the logic behind changing the makeup of the board, and the same as not wanting to have council member on there there was also a discussion about having has been on there and one of the concerns is that with that was for instance we were asked Bob Williamson has asked several times I think you'll agree over the past year and a half to explain the difference in cost to the village and having an employee in a 401 a pension plan as opposed to being in the general employee pension plan that has never been answered and so We now have six employees that are in that plan in the village as opposed to in the beginning. Esmond was in it because he came with that from his previous position. So are we paying more to have employees go into that? Are we paying less? The money is coming out of the pension. And it bothers me that that discussion bypassed the pension committee completely. it was brought to council and it was voted on by council but then without them ever having any knowledge of how it affected the plan that they're supposed to be managing not that that was done on purpose it's it's you know but there's some in it if this system is supposed to work correctly then if there is some issue that is coming up with the recreation department that is serious the chair of that committee should come to this council and explain what that problem is and etc and that's true of every one of these committees that we have the problem with esmond coming to this committee to give those recommendations whatever they may be is he already knows both sides of that and he can bring things to council here again where the committee itself has never had a chance to do it I'm not saying there was anything done incorrectly you know but again I know that the employee pension employee board has asked about that one specific thing and they still haven't been given an answer to it Do you agree with any of that, or you don't agree with it?

I agree with the vast majority, Mr. Burch, of what you've pointed out. And I'll just give you a quick example. The board was comfortable with seven. And they're not changing the number, but they're changing the breakdown of that composition. And with regard to the cost, because you're asking a cost issue, tomorrow we're going to be approving, if the board wants to vote on it, that we just receive the actuarial valuation, which you do once a year. So there's more good news in that valuation. So I know exactly what the employer contribution is, because it varies from year to year. So according to the valuation, which I just looked at earlier today, 9.42%. That's what the village pays for employees that are in the general employee pension plan. And it varies from year to year. It's going down this year. because of good financial results, so 9.42. So if you wanted to compare that with the 401 plan, the question is, what is the 401 plan paying? Some cities, they pay 5 or 10, but for the general employee pension plan, it's 9.42. And if you want to compare that with the Florida retirement system, just to tell you how well-funded your plan is, you're basically 100% funded. And I listened to the audit when I was outside earlier today, and I heard the auditor say twice, and usually auditors don't like to use adjectives and adverbs, but I heard the word very twice describing how The pension is very well funded. I don't like to give adjectives, but the numbers speak for themselves. In fact, I don't want to go into too much detail, but when you look at the valuation tomorrow, there's unrecognized gains. So what the actuary showed doesn't give you the full picture yet of the increasing in the funding. So it's a healthy plan. The board has done a wonderful job. The board wants to be constructive with you. They think seven makes sense. But if you want to do five, there are good arguments that could be made. And with regard to who's on the board, and this gets into a lot of discussion on the theory here, but there are advantages and disadvantages either way. I would argue giving both sides. That having someone who's a commissioner, the reason why in the past that was the way it was done is so that the commission had a voice at the pension level. And also when something does come up, that gives some perspective. So again, there's no right answer. It's what do you want, and be careful what you ask for, and make sure you understand what you're doing. And then if you want to change it in the future if it doesn't work, then you can change it. But again, at best, the board is giving you their thinking. And people have different opinions. And no one's necessarily right or wrong, because there are good arguments to think through. It's not urgent to make the change. But they want to be constructive. And I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

So first and foremost, one thing I recall from the council's discussion I don't see mentioned here, is that we wanted the employee representatives to be chosen by the employees. Was that discussed or addressed at all?

So I'm working from memory, but they didn't get into the weeds. And that's the sort of thing that we could do with the city attorney in drafting the ultimate ordinance is the mechanics. And sometimes you're right, the devil is in the details. But most of my cities, it's elected, I agree with that, elected by the membership. And most of my cities, it's a union, and you hold votes. So I think that's something that the board will probably talk about tomorrow. It's an excellent question. And, right, that's a policy decision. Do you want to be appointing the employees, or do you want to have an election?

We already said we don't. No. We are... We were talking about removing two people from the board, basically the manager. Well, no, actually, we wanted to just remove the manager. And then they want a council member. Manager and council member. When we discuss that, yes. Okay, all right. But then they want to add back two more people?

So one extra, so four residents and three employees.

I have a problem with that, too. I don't know why we're weighting it towards residents. I think it's reasonable to require that they are either a resident or an employee. And I would maybe have a minimum for each, but not mandate that it has to be a majority of residents. I don't know why. I believe you said that there are many examples of boards like this where there are no residents, right?

So there's all over the map. I could give you all kinds of examples, but one little clarification, which I think you may be driving at. So for the four residents, the village would appoint the four residents. Of course. But you could appoint a resident who is an employee because you have total control over the residents that you appoint.

That was going to be a question. I think, I mean, I was going to say I think that would be ideal to have at least one person who is a resident and an employee on there. If you could have that person be the fifth or seventh or whatever that would be. I think that would be great, but I don't think it's reasonable for us to make that a requirement because I don't know if you're always going to have an employee resident that wants to do that. Let me ask you, what about former employees that are a part of the pension? Can you give us any precedent on that?

These are excellent questions. So the village would have total discretion to appoint a former employee if they're a resident. And this gets to other designs.

What if they're not a resident? What if they're just somebody who collects the pension.

So if it says resident, then you're right. It would have to be resident. So just to give you some other ideas of how other cities do it, for police pension boards, you have what's called a fifth trustee, and the fifth trustee doesn't have to be a resident. The fifth trustee is chosen by the others, by the other four. So you could decide instead of four, three, and again, that's why this is planned design. There's no right answer. and the different cities have done it differently. So you could have an at-large chosen by the others. You could do a retiree. Some cities have retirees on the board, which is yet another way of looking at it. But the good news is that you care about pensions. I mean, you're spending lots of time thinking about it, and it hasn't been looked at for years, the composition. And that's why I welcome input, and that's why I'm glad we're talking about it, because you're thinking about it.

I mean, my take on this is, in the discussion before, the plans were originally together, police in general. And then it was bifurcated. And police are five. And then this one is seven. That's 12 people assigned to pension in this village. We have five council members. I mean, I understand what they're doing. I understand what the employers are doing. But I attended it for the two-year time that I did it. I saw a lack of we had quorum, but I also saw a lack of attendance from those said residents. I just think the job is super important, but five members is enough to make the decisions. And the decisions that are made there are guiding the pension. The decisions that actually affect the pension more is this council or whatever council is elected. Their scope of work is advisory for that. And, you know, any future council or this council, even if we change it to five, you could still, like I've taken on the task of doing golf course. I mean, somebody, there are four meetings in the morning. And they're public meetings, by the way. And as long as they're noticed properly, I mean, anybody could attend them. So it doesn't mean that, and it's not necessarily that you need to be in that room and have a vote on something. You just have to be aware of what is being discussed with it. And for the most part, it's the update on the plan, and then there's warrants that have to be satisfied, and that's the vote, if you're going to pay the bill or not pay the bill. But financial decisions on it, are mainly done by the council for major changes to it. There are some minor ones, and they can do that. But even like this, for their task instead of us, and I'll ask you, how long was the RFP process? When was it issued, and how many days did you put it out there, and how many companies have ever applied to it?

Sure. So I'm working from memory, but we learned at the pension board meeting that the administrator gave the board notice. And within that week, it may have been the very next day, I sent out the RFP. And in Florida, there's a limited number of administrators that do this job because you can't hire someone off the street. So I want to say, in fact, I'm almost positive that were four RFPs that came in. And then the question is, does the board want to interview all of them? And my recommendation is, yeah, interview them all because it's a worthwhile process to kick the tires. But I'm pretty sure it was four who responded. There were a couple who didn't respond. But that's the universe of plan administrators. You know, an administrator up in central or northern Florida isn't necessarily going to respond to a plan in South Florida.

And the discussion tomorrow is if the four are going to do an oral presentation, is that what they're discussing tomorrow? And the RFP is closed then?

So the RFP is closed, and the trustees will have all the information. It was sent to them, and they all have it. And the discussion tomorrow is they can start reviewing it, looking at it, and they'll decide tomorrow how many they want to actually interview. And my recommendation is, because it's only four, interview all of them. And there are some trustees that can't be there tomorrow, at least one who's traveling. which is another reason why we're deferring it until the next meeting. But the vote will occur not tomorrow but at the next meeting. But we're giving plenty of time for trustees to go through the detailed RFP responses.

Were there any other RFPs requested by the pension board?

The only RFP that went out, which was at the last meeting that same week, was for the administrator, because that's the burning item. As was correctly pointed out, we have to replace the administrator.

Right.

Because they gave notice.

But the board did not ask for an attorney and did not ask for the administrator for the financial?

No, the board may do that. Correct. The board may in the future do other RFPs, but for the time being.

For the time being, the only directive was to do the RFP for the administrator. Correct. Okay.

Is that what we're discussing tonight?

No, we're just – I just wanted confirmation for who's making a decision. It's also just like we did with the other board. It's which board is making – even if we discuss this and it's five, then most of those board members would be the same. We just would have to figure out who's staying and just the composition of it.

through the chair I just want to say my opinion is I I like a five-member board I like that I would like three to be guaranteed employees three to be guaranteed residents and I want the employees to pick their representatives and that fifth that fifth seat um I mean I don't know

the exact language but I think we should try to put in there to the chair I can't understand this you know we had doctors charter school come in and they came in and said this is what we would like for a board we had parks and recreation come in they are the ones that go to the board meetings every meeting they are the ones that have to carry on the business they said this is what we would like to have for a board and we granted that but now for some reason when we have pension we don't seem to care what the pension board wants we're going to tell them what they have to have I don't understand this this push it depends I mean with that board if we we sit there and point another council person and that one goes on there's an elected official could change it and sit there and have another meeting and say five

maybe you want to wait till next April I mean and okay go seven the next April that that board can be these ordinances could be changed at anything and that this council and the efficiencies that we've heard from staff is that it's very hard to recruit people you have a board there and I attended it for two years and if you want to do the attendance for those residents while I was there it was horrible It wasn't. I had four meetings, and I think maybe I had one meeting where those three residents showed up.

And they want to add two more.

No, no, we're not adding, Jesse. There's seven now. We're just keeping seven. You're adding, though. You took away the council member and the manager. Now you're putting four residents to pull off the street to show up.

So if we take away the council person and the manager, it's just the five that are already there. I'd say that.

If you go three and two, though, the way that it's structured right now would be three and two, and you discuss the other way around. But the thing is, is what we said before, I mean, I would hope that a resident who does work for the village would want to volunteer for this board since it's only four meetings. So that one could be, it would be, if it, hear me out.

No, I'm saying how many people are residents and employees? It's probably like two people. Lisa and Jorge. There's four.

No, I can get it right on my hand. There's four or a handful. There are five. I mean, building department, planning and zoning, public works. This is off the top of my head. Code enforcement, and I don't know everybody over at public works. So, I mean, there's more than... Yeah. And also the deputy village manager.

That doesn't necessarily mean one of them wants to sign up for this either.

So I think it's a hard thing to run. And the deputy village manager is another one. So, I mean, we're already to a half a dozen employees out of the 100 and whatever that are residents.

But again, we don't know. We can't make one of them volunteer for this.

I understand that.

So it's hard to make it a requirement. No, I didn't.

I did not say that. I was just saying for the composition of it, if you ask for three employees and the employees elect the three, And that discussion amongst them that are in pension, that's three people. Two residents who are experts in this. What I'm saying is that one for the three that is an employee could also be a resident. That's it. There's no requirement. It's just I would hope that somebody that worked here and then is in the pension fund would be that person that walks both sides of it, both sides of the street. I'm sorry.

But seven people is. I would just say that the board wanted. three employees one for each level of government and if you have three of the if you have three employees you're going to have two residents period so number one you're going to take somebody off of there who is very qualified to be there which is going to be a shame to lose them and second of all I don't understand who is supposed to be representing the taxpayers in this if it's not going to be the residents that are on there. If I could speak to that real quick. They are in a minority.

They're still representing. So you're just saying any board that has five people, two on one side and another, you can't have a discussion and come to consensus? Seriously? And the people's representatives, which is this council, are always going to have a final say.

Well, it hasn't worked very well with the police board, I will say that. And I say that from personal conversation. You have two residents and three policemen, and it has not been a – in fact, I think one of them is quitting, aren't they?

So one of the police trustees is not re-upping to continue to serve. Exactly. But may get appointed as the fifth trustee. So that five composition with three police may continue? But he's not running for election of the police, because that's how they get on the board. But he may want to be appointed by the other four, if that makes sense. But again, you can see there are good arguments that can be made on either side. And I'm sorry, there's a question?

No, no, nothing. I'm just trying to get the chair. thank you so much just a few things just for the record I just wanted to so that my voice is heard in this undocumented I the way it has come across it maybe because I'm into semantics I'm not being thrown off this board I I have requested since day one it excluded from being on this board I find it rather interesting that there are two members on the board who have been on there a very long time may have even served with a former manager and didn't think it prudent at the time to request that the manager be removed from it given the fact that he was also in the pension at the time I'd also like to add because the question has been asked who represents the the residents I would just like it to be considered or the following consideration to be given that these this body is a final voting on anything that boards and committees make recommendations that come to you so who recommend who represents the the the residents is really this body regardless if there are three four five six or even seven on that board at the end of the day they can only recommend this council that has been elected by the residents are the ones who make the decisions for residents I just wanted to add that to it and just ask if you vote support for the manager to be office pension board when does that become effective two readings of an ordinance you're not getting out of that meeting tomorrow

in the morning so let's backtrack saying it sound it sounds like we all wanted to get a five except for George you think it needs to stay at seven right is that what I'm hearing it was a unanimous I mean you know what again it wasn't my idea that came from a village employee named McCoy and that was his and then that was also Bob Williamson's opinion Tom Longman this idea that we didn't have a quorum we've had everybody at every meeting except Esmond missed one I'm sure for good reason but aside from that since I have been going you know every chairs been pulled and you know it's an active board with it one of their responsibilities is again I'm gonna go back to the 401 a thing I mean we as a council made that decision and had no idea what the difference in cost would be the pension board doesn't even know that now you know if we're not going to listen to our committees and to be perfectly honest you know that's been a you have to agree that's been a gripe of mine for a while because it's hard for us to communicate if you don't you actually go if you go to the charter school meeting you know what's going on there because you went to the meeting and you listen to it. You go to resiliency and sustainability and you know what they're thinking. But if we don't go there, we don't get minutes from these committees. You know, the idea this wasn't noticed, I mean, I'm not a lawyer and I don't know what the law is. I received a notice, what, two, three weeks ago on when the meeting was and what the agenda was and et cetera. Now, if that's not on village website somewhere then it certainly ought to be but as far as trying there was you know that's been Yolanda and if she didn't send it to you and you don't have it then you know that's it but it's not that that agenda hasn't been available So I don't know. I mean, I guess I'm only reporting to you what every single person of the seven wanted. It was a unanimous, easy decision. They wanted three village employees and four residents.

Probably five of them were there, though. You're saying the manager wasn't there. I think only five of them were there.

According to the minutes. One meeting, the manager was not there. I think I included this vote for this. So you're telling me that you're saying that the manager voted for this unanimous for this.

I said the committee voted unanimous for it.

They did, but there was only five of them there.

Six.

Six of them there?

I don't have the minutes in front of me. I think I sent them, but it was a unanimous vote of whoever was there.

Well, it matters.

Were there seven or five or three?

Since present, George Birch, Averill Dorsett, Jonathan Hernandez, Jim McCoy, Bob Williamson, absent, Esmond Scott, Thomas Longman. Sorry. No, Longman was present.

Again, his attendance at mine was not very good.

So I'm looking at the minutes that were just handed to me, and it says, at least at the beginning of the meeting, there were five present, two were absent. I don't know if the other two came during the meeting, and I'm going to look to see of the vote, but it was unanimous of those who were there. That's fine.

Okay. None of the others though. Yeah, but it was unanimous. There was three people there. It was unanimous. That's fine.

I wanted to clarify the noticing requirements and the actual operations. As you understand, the clerk's office is tasked with advertising, noticing all the meetings pertaining to the 13 board committees and council meetings. General Employee Pension Board is not an exception to that. We notice on the Bulletin Board, we notice on the Village website in two locations, on the web calendar, and also in Granicus when we post the video. On March 24th, an email was sent by Ms. Shea, the FHATPA representative advising us that the meeting was changed to July 22nd. That email was forwarded to Ms. Slate-McCloud, the HR director, who notified all the general employees in the village that the meeting would take place on July 22nd at 8.15 in the morning. With regards to the agenda and adding topics, I believe Madam Attorney clarified about two meetings ago that with the exception of some type of items like quasi-judicial, Sunshine law does not prohibit a board from adding topics to an agenda. It's not prohibited It sunshine law doesn't even require us to post an agenda even though it's not common, but it does not require a Municipality to post an agenda requires us to put to provide meeting notice to the public We do so by way of electronic means I believe also should be in the newsletter as well as But I also wanted to notify, as far as communicating any meetings and agendas, I think it's also, it would behoove the general employees who represent the general employees to notify them. What is their role? If they're there to represent and advocate for the general employees, I think they should also have a role in notifying the general employees in some way. Otherwise, what kind of advocacy are they proposing other than being a member on the board just wanted to clarify that for the record because it was coming across as if we're in violation of sunshine and we're not this is a discussion impossible action is there any action on this item

See, my other issue real quick.

One thing I keep hearing, and obviously we know, is how well-funded our pension is. And so my only... I definitely sympathize with the inability to get residents to come to the committees. We're dealing with it all the time right now. But it's like, do we really want to... change something that's working really seems not only really well, better than it's working pretty much almost anywhere else, it sounds like. I mean, to be funded so high and to...

If the market turns around and you have five bad years or several bad years of market, then the funding will change.

Of course. But I'm just saying, at the end of the day, I mean, it seems like it's working. It's been working. Nine point something percent is much higher. It sounds like than an alternative representation for those benefits So, you know I Mean I think we all can agree that the manager doesn't want to be on it. We should remove him.

I think we all feel that way the replacement then those are two people that are in the public light and If it ain't broke, don't fix it, right? Right. And you're sitting there then.

But that's my point. It's difficult for that reason. It's doing well, but yet changes need to be made. Right. It's like either way, it's going to alter. And that's what I'm saying. That's my takeaway is how do we know what the right decision is here? We don't. We're guessing. It's a guess.

One question. temporary, if one of the goals is to allow the manager to focus on other priorities, we could very easily amend the ordinance to say, and I don't want to give too many suggestions, that the manager can make an appointment, that he can designate somebody to serve in his seat. So that's a temporary baby step. Another possible thing for you to consider is invite the trustees to come. And then instead of from me, hear from the trustees. Let them come and talk to you. And some of you know who they are. But again, there's no right answer. And even if you make a decision and change the ordinance, you can always change it again.

Through the chair. I don't want to speak for the manager. don't believe and he is very busy but I don't believe the reason he doesn't want to be on the board it's not because he's he doesn't have time for it it's because he feels there's some conflicts there so um I just wanted to say again right on the member size I mean I think I've said how I feel about it but that's not the thing I'm most passionate about here I the thing I care most about with this is that The employees are going to choose their representatives, and I do not agree with us mandating that there has to be a majority of residents. I agree. These are employees that don't have a union. There's no union at all. This is like their opportunity here to have some say in like their, you know. Their investment. Their investment, correct. They don't have anybody negotiating on their behalf. They should have. know this this this council here is has the final say no matter what so the villages residents have their representation I believe that the residents I'm sorry the employees need a chance to you know to have some representation here also I mean unless we want to like you know nudge and push them back towards a union of some kind you know I don't want that either I think you know I like this arrangement here I think as long as we they have a say it's you know so that's how i feel about it um if we get there with seven or five i i don't feel as strongly about that either way um i think we already had a long discussion on it and we liked five um it sounds like we got there with five anyways um yeah all right and through the chair it sounds like we got there with five anyways since two members were absent so it sounds like five's the number

seems that way discussion done here we're gonna make a motion let me say one more I'm sorry if we go with five that means we would have to we would be removing a resident from current yeah because no because one is the manager one is a council member so technically yes council members are residents so yes it is a resident coming off but oh okay but then it would be but it would be three and two weighted towards resident no three to three employees okay

Currently, there's only two residents on the board.

No. Right now, there's three and a council member, which is four residents.

I'm sorry.

Right now, there are two. There's three employees. Well, I mean, the manager's an employee and then two other employees. Four residents because the council member is a resident.

Council member's a resident. Don't count the manager.

The manager's an employee. employees that's three Tom Longwood mr. Williamson mrs. sorry for or sit doors and then the council member mr. Burch for for residents I understand we take the council member we take the manager away we're left with three residents and two employees correct but but a good point through the chair good points being made that the residents also have a layer of representation here

through the council so why that's what so let's wait it towards employees three to two right you have to change the ordinance that's what we're yeah that's what the whole thing because is it right that would mean removing a resident from the board if we went to five yes yes didn't want the residents to have a majority that would mean right yes correct you're just swapping it or like you said though an employee could be a resident just like the council members residents

To the chair if you recall you had directed the village clerk's office to withhold recruiting because of this purpose and

At that time, there were three seats that would have been vacated or reappointed, and that would have been Mr. Set, Mr. Longman, and Mr. Williamson. They were up for reappointment. So those three seats were already going to be up, and then the village council had directed the clerk's office to halt the recruitment process until you had an opportunity to discuss the membership composition.

So it's...

Sounds like what I'm hearing is we're going to go from 7 to 5. We're going to, since all three of these people are up for their seats anyway, so we'll just appoint two of whoever back, and now we'll have three residents. I mean, two residents, sorry, three employees, one of which we will hopefully be a resident employee. But if not, it doesn't matter.

There's three tiers of what they were saying. Mr. McCoy is saying there's three tiers of. But also in the police pension, there's also multiple tiers of police pension, too, and they're voted by union on who goes on the board. So I hear the discussion back and forth for that. Again, to the clerk's point, I would hope that the representation for all the employees that volunteer for this are and notify all their other employees what they're doing and better participation on the employee side of this in their active pensions.

is what we're talking about far off from what the police pension board currently is like so don't they have three they have three police officers who base the police officers select the third seat isn't required to be a police officer seat or residency it's left up to the board to select the four the four

the fourth board the four board members would select the fifth person and that's there's no residency requirement for that fifth seat gotcha you don't have to be a point to the police officers point to and the fifth is appointed by the four board members correct there have been times where you've had more officers than residents but more often than not you've had more residents than sworn officers right now

it's leaning more towards more sworn officers and residents okay so I'm gonna throw it out there is there any reason why we don't just copy the same system that we use for the police board that's what I just I think that's what we're saying right I proposed just now and I'm with you let's

Should we make a motion?

I don't know. I want to hear if anybody has a comment about that.

So two quick observations, if I could. So for police, it's statutory. So that's Florida state statute requires two residents, two that are elected by the membership, and the four choose a fifth, which is what we call the at-large or the fifth trustee, who then gets appointed by the village as an administerial duty. So once the board tells you who it is, you have to appoint them. That's statutory. That's the way it's done for police and for fire. And the other quick observation is that if you were to go across all approximately 500 pension plans in Florida, the most common number, and they're all over the map, but the most common number is five. So that's why if you chose five, you would be consistent with, again, there's no right answer, but that's the most common number. And then you would not be doing exactly what you do for police, because for police, it's two and two, and they choose the fifth. And what you're discussing is a dedicated three employees, which you could get, but you don't necessarily get. Again, these are entirely up to you.

want to do a hybrid of that it would be the general employees elect to and the council likes the two residents and the third and the third employee and that's the residents input kind of like that was the board it's not bad why are we picking the third why are we picking the last seat though just say let's go to the resident you know just for the composition for resident well who's who makes up the board

Through the chair, I thought we agreed that the residents have an extra layer of representation up here with their council, so why do we need to give them a third seat? We still would like to have an employee.

It would just be the people that apply, just like they're going to have to apply for the seats for the employees, two would be voted on by the masses, by the whole employee pool, and then Other people would be in there applying and then come before us and we'll put them on the board.

Okay, but why can't we just mirror the police situation as two residents we select, two employees that are selected by the employees, and then the last member is selected by those four people?

But what's the pool of the fifth person? The other one for the police because it doesn't have to be a police and it doesn't have to be a resident.

The fifth one, right? It's at large. So why don't we just do an at large for the fifth seat picked by the four people, the two that the employees pick, the two that we pick, let them decide on their fifth member together. If they want someone super qualified who's neither of those or whatever, they get to decide. And then the residents, of course, have that. extra layer of protection since they only make recommendations and we have to vote at the end of the day on any changes that happen that we're technically like the third resident or anyway so it's okay does anyone else have any discussion on that or do we feel comfortable with that that's fine like it's just okay so i i know it's discussion possible i can make a motion though right So my motion is to mirror the police model of having two residents we select, two employees selected by the employees, and those four members decide whoever they want as the fifth person. It can be someone who specializes in pension. It can be another employee. It can be an employee resident. But leave it up to them because I think as George's point is, let's trust our committees. We put those people there. Let's trust them to choose the fifth person. That's my motion.

It was a little long, but.

That would be directing the pension attorney to draft an ordinance amendment with that membership composition change. Okay.

Do I have a second?

You have a second from me. Do you want to call a vote? It's not a vote. I think we could just do a consensus.

I don't think it's a vote.

Yeah, the direction would be have the attorney for the pension draft an ordinance with that language that the vice mayor just said.

Can I ask the manager?

if he has any comment on this first no sir I mean it sounds fine to me I was just wondering whether or not there's a is a companion ordinance okay this speaks to the removal of the removal of what there'd be the transfer the change of the other ordinance of the of the council person and the manager oh okay

So real quick, it would be two ordinances. It's one ordinance, but two readings of that ordinance. So it's going to come back to you at least two more times, and the board will be able to weigh in tomorrow if they like it or not. So all you're doing is you're asking for me to give you an ordinance for your next meeting to look at.

Okay. So since there's two readings, we'll have time to address any other issues that arise.

To save the cost right because you're making an ordinance change if you recall last year I had come before you and you directed me to submit items to the village attorney on recommendations to the pension ordinance and that included the consensus you all had for the five-person board, but there are other items that need to be addressed while you're doing a pension ordinance change, and I would like those to be reviewed by the pension board attorney to incorporate into this item so you don't have to have it come back to you again. But also, I would like to recommend, because it hasn't been done, that the pension board attorney review the pension board language and keep it up to date because it hasn't been updated in years. There's been no direction from the pension board for the attorney to do that. So I think that at this time we are deficient in some of the language because it hasn't been done since I think 2002 is probably the last time the board, the pension attorney did any revisions. And you had directed that to happen last year and it still hasn't. So while you're doing this change for the board composition, I would request that all those other changes be considered as Sinead had reviewed them but had sent them to

thank you for clarifying yes because I want to be abundantly clear I brought this item up to you all during the boards and committee workshop era that we had and explained that the changes that were requested were not just simple updates as related to other boards and committees because you had a pension attorney those changes were more appropriately to be made by your pension attorney and so I'm sure in the minutes at some point you'll be pull it back you'll have heard me say that which is why it was never brought forth by my office so the previous direction were to review miss Keely's comments incorporate those and the proposed changes along with the composition update as well that was previous discussion by the council but would it not be correct if those changes are being proposed which I have not seen those would at least be shown to the pension board first and discussed by the pension board would they not be it would be prudent if you would like that to be the case as I say in every other situation most times the the only time where you're required to take a code amendment to a board in the in the village is if statutorily it's required or if in our code we say it's required, or if you as his body tell staff you want it to go to a certain committee first before it comes to you. So if that's the will of this council, which usually it is, then you can certainly ask for that ordinance now that it encompasses more than just a composition change to the membership. If you want that drafted ordinance to be reviewed by the pension board, certainly you can make that direction tonight as well.

Well, again, I think that one of the reasons we have trouble getting people on our committees is because we ignore them. I mean, we have a pension board with some excellent people on it that are knowledgeable in pensions. If we're not interested in their opinion and we're going to decide whatever we are and really don't even want to know what they think, then that's fine. If that's how you all feel, we could do that. We do have a pension board. They are experts, at least three of them in that particular field, and at least we could find out what they think of these proposed changes before we begin to, or whatever, that's what I think. I don't know what you all think.

I'm in for that as well. I don't think they've heard this discussion and the reasons why we're talking about doing it. I mean, it would have been better if there was a joint meeting and they actually showed up. I mean, it's like it's two different silos. They have to be in their own world. This was noticed. This is on the agenda, discussion of possible action. You're the only member here.

No, no, no. But we were talking about two different things. I'm not talking anymore about this motion and the composition of the board. What I'm talking about is what Mrs. Keeley is saying. She's proposing several additional things, right? Right.

It's not necessarily the law that that happens but it should be discussed there Just Because I know we do have a 10 o'clock Technically, you know drop dead time to end the meeting. So just to you know move us back along I think what is the Consensus here possibly is that the five composition be proposed in an ordinance. In addition to that, your pension attorney is also going to take into account the notes that was previously circulated to the council by Ms. Keeley, incorporate those changes as well that will be taken to the pension board for review and recommendation to this body. And then first reading, you review it with their recommendation and you'll make your decision to either accept it or make changes to the ordinance.

And just to be clear, we're well over a month away from any kind of first reading of this?

Well over because, for one, we don't have a meeting next month, and then secondly, that's the first go to their board and then come to you all.

My point is the board is going to have ample amount of time to look at whatever we're doing here. It's not like we're making a change to the pension board tonight.

Correct.

that's correct sounds sounds I really appreciate you considering those additional changes to be included thank you so much

anymore that stuff we already said yeah we've already were on board with that from the process so I want to make that clear also is there any more discussion thank you mr. Turner thank you thank you thank you madam clerk I am 12b discussion impossible action on our temporary political sign ordinance and appropriate changes I'm sponsored by councilmember George Birch

I sure want to make 10 o'clock. We'll make this very quick. I was driving down the boulevard about a week ago and there were seven or eight political signs between the sidewalk and the road for a political candidate. And according to our ordinance, that's not legal. You have a copy of the ordinance here. Shanae said that we are, I'm not interested in rewriting the ordinance. I just don't want Miami Shores to look like North Miami or some of the other cities where every time you go by a lot, there's a... 13 or 15 political signs tacked on to it and especially We know we call ourselves the village beautiful. Those are certainly not Beautiful so Shanae you had a workaround Because she said there's First Amendment rights that we have no problem.

I'll jump in I'll jump in to just speak a little bit more about I think what your issues are so We know that we have certain ordinances in place already that probably predates many of the laws and statutes in general in the village. But particularly, Council Member Burch, I think his issue has been obstructions in the villages right away and swells. And as it relates at least to Chapter 20, I do know we have general regulations that prevents obstructions in our public right-of-ways and our swells. And so it really is a matter of enforcement. I don't really think at least the issue that has been presented to me doesn't really require additional language at this moment. While absolutely we should revisit and review our code in general to see if there's any legal updates required, but I think the particular issue From my understanding and speaking to it, Council Member Burch simply deals with our public right-of-way and our swells and the enforcement of ensuring that only authorized things are located in those right-of-ways. And so I just think it's really just an appetite for enforcement and whether you all want to enforce our code for whether it's signs that's in our right-of-way, whether it's, I don't know, anything else that just should not be in the right-of-way. Chapter 20 does have a prohibition as it relates to that. And so code enforcement will be enforcing Chapter 20.

Hold on one second. Yep. Yes.

All right the next one 12c Discussion impossible action on changes to our peddlers permit sponsored by councilmember George Birch.

All right. This is a this past week. I've had three different people come to the front door and they come to the front door and they Hi, I'm here. Do you need your gutters cleaned or do you need? I'm a Andy, man, anything you want fixed or I'm a painter, would you like your roof painted or whatever? And then another guy came and said, I'm with CARE. And I said, what is CARE? And he said, well, we're an organization and we do this and we do that. and so I asked him I said do you have a peddler's permit and a peddler's permit requires an individual it only cost $10 to come to City Hall and give their name their address a phone number what type of car they're driving in cetera and because the problem is when this these two young kids that came and said they were people that could fix anything And I said, do you have a peddler's permit? And the guy said, oh, yeah, I have one, but it's in my car. It'll take me about a half an hour to go and get it, but I'll come back, which, of course, he didn't. He went right across the street from me and rang the doorbell. Nobody answered it. Then he tried the front door to see if it was open or not or if he could open it. And when that didn't work, they walked around in the backyard and then turned around and came back to the front and went to the next house. I think it would behoove us. It's not a lot of money, and I'm sure it happens to all of you. You get people that are, you know, they want to put on a roof. And this all started... with it with the girl that was here earlier this evening she wanted to put little door tags on people that didn't answer the door as far as the boat parade and let the residents in the village know when it was in what time it was where it was and etc and she called and said is that legal I said I don't know I'll find out and I called and asked and I think it was a belly that gave me the ordinance that we have you have a copy of it there You know, I'm not opposed to people that want to generate business by going to your houses. I don't want people trying to break into houses. If we had the information if we know in getting that peddlers permit as you see in here You've got to say what kind of car you're driving It just so that we would have some access to go back and get to that person So this is something that has not been in enforced at all I don't know if you think it's outdated if you do fine or I just want to know how the council feels to the chair

The thing is, I mean, of course I love the idea of registration for more accountability, but the people who are here to do wrong are definitely not registering, first of all. And the problem is, how are you going to enforce this? I mean, I had an example just like yours the other day. A random guy comes in. He came into my backyard, and I saw him, and he came and knocked on the door. He told me, you know, I do this type of work, whatever. Maybe you're a contractor. I said, I'm good. I have a team, blah, blah, blah. He was relentless. Well, just take my number down, and if they need anybody, blah, blah, blah. But, I mean, like, what do I do? Do I call code enforcement by the time I call? That guy's gone.

I just see their peddler's permit.

Well, that's what I'm saying. People who are there to do wrong, though, are not going to register. Only people who are here to do the right thing are going to register. Therefore, I feel the problem we're trying to address is people doing the wrong thing.

Well, I think the point, okay. No, but for my point, and Mr. Birch might have a point, I think that youth doesn't know what peddler means, so maybe our ordinance is named wrong. I mean, this was probably written when people were selling carpet, they were selling vacuums. There was the fuller brush salesman and selling vacuums door to door. So maybe, I mean, it is peddlers and solicitors, that might be outdated, but I know that hear what you're saying and again enforcement it's it's it's it's we have a law on the books and as we could look through it and just see what's the modern version of this you're not going to enforce it then it don't you know it ain't gonna well that depends I mean we do have police officers this one is not just code this is a police officer could sit there and we have a law against

so I think it's twofold I do think that you all are speaking on the correct issues here which is one the law itself what does it say secondly how are we gonna actually enforce this so these peddler solicitation ordinances are

common are typical and there's the case law surrounding it is similar in a sense of First Amendment protections as it relates to freedom of speech and different things of that nature however when I deal when you're dealing with commercial door-to-door solicitation we do have a little bit more regulation Authority because we're dealing with commercial as opposed to protect it First Amendment rights I will say that in reviewing our ordinance I think the intent is to capture door-to-door solicitation based off of some of the regulations in terms of the hours that you can visit properties based on consent of private owner private property owners however the definition of peddler itself I think is a little ambiguous and so it appears to a competent to encompass public right away and swells and when you are traditionally when you're peddling you are doing so in a public right away you're selling candy you're just passing out flyers and then solicitations kind of look like that door-to-door um, advertisement, so to say. Miami-Dade County has addressed this in the sense that they have a code that's a law that's applicable throughout all municipalities where, um, individuals cannot solicit between the hours of, I think it's 5 p.m. or, no, I'm sorry, 7 p.m. and then 6 a.m. And so we can be more strict if we like. In fact, ours is more strict. The hours of operation, um, varies but section 17-10 I think it might be a typo though because it does says between 12 a.m. and 6 p.m. on Sundays and holiday hours which I think it's not the intent because then we'd be after midnight allowing people to go on private property but nonetheless I do think that this ordinance can be clarified if that is a the will of this body if you want to actually draft a solicitation ordinance then we can do that but it will be modernized and it will take into account any First Amendment protections that would need to be carved out but then that still does not resolve the enforcement component I think we have to be realistic based on other ordinances that we've passed in the village where we we know that yes we're passing this but it's not a priority for the police officers to enforce right so I think we've done that in the past with certain other laws where we're like, yeah, this is, we know we want this, but we also need to be realistic that you calling for a dog off the leash is not going to be the first thing the police officers are going to respond to I think if you approach this in the same manner that yes we probably need it but also you have to acknowledge the enforcement component that it is possible by the time the police officer get there and a person can leave you know through the chair I think it's a little bit different because I think the concern were one of the concerns kind of in the background here is that

some of these people are casing houses to do whatever, thefts, robbery, whatever. And if they're doing that under the guise of offering some kind of service, a commercial thing or whatever, I'm guessing we have Can you give us some idea of where that line is versus who can be? So in other words, if somebody's selling something, that's commercial. But what about somebody who's campaigning or pushing a political agenda?

That's certain protections that's associated with political, charitable, religious. Those are squarely, I'd say, constitutional protected protections.

But it is reasonable to have a solicitor who is doing commercial stuff get a permit for that?

Yes, like we can regulate commercial.

Okay. So if we do that, and let's say I have somebody knock on my door and they're saying, oh, I'm a pressure washer. Do you need any pressure washing going on or whatever? But I think it's kind of suspicious. And I say, well, do you have a solicitation permit? There you go. And they say no. do now I can I call up the police and say hey there's somebody suspicious going around they don't have a permit can you like certainly you could do absolutely I think the enforcement becomes a little if the residents are aware of that and certainly this is something that residents are concerned about lately there's a lot of people knocking on a lot of doors lately around the village and but if they know that they have that ability to ask for that permit and if that person doesn't have the permit, then now they can call up the police and the police are probably going to be interested now because if you're doing something that's on the level, then why not go get the $5 permit or $10 permit or whatever.

Maybe they just don't know, right? Or they don't know. I think that's a fair argument as well. I don't think most people...

Not to say that they should not know you always have constructive notice of these things, but that's something we could put in the magazine Sure, but I mean the solicitor themselves most people might not just assume that I need to go and get a permit But it's the residents that need to know it because if we get that information to the residents Then they're gonna get in the habit of that as more of these people come to the door. Hi. Yes. Thanks for coming. Do you have a permit?

Certainly.

If you don't have a permit, then come back after you get one.

Otherwise, there's no recourse other than I have to wait until they're actually breaking in somewhere for the police to take any kind of action or whatever. If somebody is in my street acting suspicious and they're doing it under the guise of offering some kind of service and they don't have any equipment that they even have with them, they're just going around knocking on doors and seeing who answers. currently I don't think we have any you know there's nothing the police can do other than follow them from a distance and see if they do something you know they're not supposed to whereas with this with the police can come and say oh you don't have a permit you need to stop knocking on doors please stop or go get the permit yeah right I think I'm I think in that scenario if that person stays around one the police now has will interact with them and

Secondly, if the police also agree that this is a high priority for them and they get there, then yes, that interaction can take place. But I guess what I'm trying to convey is that I don't want us to think that this is going to be the magic pill that now solves everything. I want to be realistic, too, is that we can certainly look at this ordinance. And then other measures that I think are important is that residents can also put no solicitation signs up, that's certainly an option as well as to if they don't want any visitors on their property. And so that's what this ordinance really is conditioned upon. It would be conditioned upon the property's owner's consent, right? And so if that consent was never there, then that also, I would say, would be grounds for violation of entering somebody's property that says no solicitation. yeah that's what I was saying like we will modernize it and I you know even as of today within our municipal groups we've been another another one of our attorneys are dealing with this issue and so we're reviewing the most recent language that's been already kind of like

against case law at this point because like I said this is a another First Amendment protected area of the law but I really think we need to in if our if our residents unfortunate they don't know this exists even or I'll say this I didn't know it existed And if they knew that, it could be a common thing. Sure. But first of all, let me see your peddler's permit or your, you know.

Peddler's. Yeah. All right.

Okay. No, you're right. I agree with you. But I mean, let me see your permit.

Let's put it in the newsletter so that we can inform residents they have the ability to say, hey, come back when you have.

I'm not sure we're there yet. Not there yet. I don't think we're there yet. I think the current ordinance is ambiguous.

We can still let people know.

Well, it's going to be in our notes.

I think what we're missing is that I'm not sure the ordinance as of today is clear on that point. the definition of peddler is a little ambiguous and so because of that I don't want to if you want consent if there's some consensus to review for me to review this and update it then I can do that it sounds like there is I actually really like this I feel like it gives us an opportunity to you know to be able to take some kind of action when there's some suspicious activity going on without going over the line of like

harassing innocent people you know that are just trying to make a living either I think it's totally reasonable to have the permit I think the interaction with the with an officer afterwards should be you know pretty straightforward hey like just go get the permit or stop knocking on the doors or if you're still knocking on doors without the permit you're probably up to no good and we can take it from there I like it there's a belly do you need anything else from us with that

I think I'm pretty clear thank you so much okay so this is we got three minutes left real quick this is still back to the peacocks we've already discussed it a couple of times I would like to see us get some signs put up in the main entrances into the village that say Miami Shores is a bird sanctuary Now, fortunately, as you read the ordinance, there's something about if they're a nuisance or I forget the exact language, whatever, and maybe we can do something about the peacocks legally and still be a bird sanctuary, which would be the real goal. How do you all feel about that?

I'm definitely down to put some signage that denotes us as a bird sanctuary. As we know, the birds can't read the signs, so it's really just to inform people that they're in a bird sanctuary. I'm not really sure what the takeaway, and we discussed this a little bit at the sustainability I'm not sure what the takeaway is, other than informing people we are a bird sanctuary. My behavior, when I read that sign, I'm not going to be like, oh, I should drive extra carefully now because I'm in a bird sanctuary. I mean, what is the takeaway? And that's what I'm trying to understand.

Oh, bird feeders, bird waters. You know, maybe a group that, a society. We had robins down here this winter. You know, we've always got mockingbirds.

But the robins are not going to not come just because we don't have birds sanctuary sites.

No, you're 100% right.

You want that one again.

It's like everything else, right? It builds the shores up. It says this is a good place to live and this is a good reason that it's a good place to live. Mr. Birch.

Perhaps you recall, maybe I'm crazy, but when I bought my first house in 2009 in Miami Shores, I recall

there was signs Neil I mean weren't there signs and all over this village one right here to bird sanctuary or something looking at one right now okay so it was done confusion corner now you know in my discussion with staff I was asking about this and then I recalled that there

Mr. Mayor, there were signs that referred to some kind of a birding trail. the past and I know that because when I looked up the great Florida birding trail there's a logo in the top that as soon as I saw it I was like oh my god that was the sign we had signs for a Florida birding trail all over this village and on that website for the Florida birding trail there is certainly no Miami Shores on it so at some point we were a part of a birding trail and now we're not And I don't know what it meant when we were, but we're not anymore. And I don't know what happened to the signs, but they used to be there at some point. I don't know who took them down or where they went, but they're not there anymore. I do recall also there being some kind of, I don't know if it was an Audubon Society or something, but they used to have some kind of meetings and gatherings at the country clubs. if I recall correctly, too. And that was related to the fact that we were either a bird sanctuary or part of some kind of birding trail or something. Now, when you look on the internet, it says currently that our neighbors to the east and west, El Portal and Biscayne Park, are bird sanctuaries. I don't even know what that means, though.

Can I clarify? What does it mean? How does it affect your choices day to day? I'm down for the signs. If your point is to up our bravado about birds, I'm in.

I want to know what the signs mean.

If it just means that, hey, you got to be a little more careful. You're in a bird sanctuary. I don't know. It sounds like.

So in regards to bird sanctuaries, I think there's some in this case, it appears and I haven't done the history. I just asked the clerk today. So she'll take some time to do it. Probably some point. But I don't know how that designation was made in the village, whether it was just a council's choice, but whether it was designated by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation. So the FWC has designated bird sanctuaries. And I don't know if Miami Shores is designated in that way. So if the policy choice here is to still keep this on the books, then that's fine. You can. As related to Council Member Burch's first comment about the peacocks, I think as drafted, this ordinance is abundantly clear that it really is just an exception for starlings or similar birds. And I don't know if we can make the interpretation that peacocks are similar to starlings. Even still in that case, there's certain things we got to do even if we wanted to get rid of those starling type of birds. Now non-native, like there's other alternatives I think that you can, I say all this to say, if we just did this on our own and we see that now, whatever many years later, policy choice is not necessarily beneficial for the village today, then I think you should consider whether you want to amend this to carve out some other means. Obviously we'd have to do a lot of research in this area to make sure that whatever ordinance is drafted is also legally sound and beyond being legally sound like just I think there's a lot of people in the village that might really do love animals and you know our nature so I think that whatever happens here we need to kind of walk slow step it but I first step first I would see first like what does this bird sanctuary is it by the state or if this was just our doing as a village because we love birds and we wanted to just draft an ordinance on the books

Then if that's the case we kind of kind of decide if you want to change a policy decision According to the minutes through the chair the Miami Shores Garden Club proposed that to the council 1958 in the 1958 council Approved an ordinance

Okay, so no official state, right. So it seems as with that being said, it appears that you can make changes to this without having to go through some formal

designation or D designation or something this is effectively well I guess it would only hurt you if you decided to have the signs but you no longer want this policy so I think first establish if you want to keep this as is and if you do

considering you know all things considered then that's fine then sure give direction to staff to add the signs but if you want further discussion around this topic in general then I would hold off on the signs until you get a clear understanding of if you want to even remain a bird sanctuary I don't understand what our intent is I think it's maybe like village spirit knowing that we have you know, or bird sanctuary, let's display that.

If we believe in that, we've got to get rid of the iguanas.

So I don't want to leave us hanging, but is that direction for anything in particular right now?

I'd like to direct the coyotes over to where the peacocks are.

10 o'clock, what's next?

I just have something very briefly which is that last meeting you all wanted bond council meetings or some type of presentation as it related to the park the community center

So that's completely fine, and we're happy to do it. Lori Smith-Lala at our firm is an expert in that. I think what I need direction on first is just whether you want that to be individually meetings like one-on-one set up or whether you want it some type of sunshine meeting presentation.

Which, I mean, but I think priority for –

Yeah, we can do a combined conversation we already have a matter number open for the golf course that we build towards I the community center We never brought forth because I don't think we ever got to the point that we were actually moving forth with a community center project per se and I think you guys had given some, I think Vice Mayor brought up hiring, I guess, the previous company to kind of pursue now a framework. That still is in discussion, so we can kind of wait until then. I don't know. But ultimately, we're ready to mobilize and set up those meetings and give you the updates as you like.

I mean, my opinion of it, because of Sunshine, I would prefer that all five of us were together getting the information at the same time to even then discuss if it's legal. I mean, I would think that this type of thing is allowed. We're allowed to have, like, an administrative meeting on this, right? Which...

Would just have to have a just a public meeting right? It's not like Or a son if you it's just would need to be publicly noticed.

That's all right wherever I mean somewhere in the village Sure, yeah as long as it's publicly noticed however you want to make it a workshop I believe I think for where we're headed as a council and that it is publicly noticed that other I you know, other people moving forward so they understand the borrowing process or us taking out these loans and how it's going to work. I think all of us need to... Okay. I don't, just like the other stuff, it just means that it's noticed there's going to be minutes from it. I'm not saying that I need an audience.

Right.

It is because of sunshine, I just don't want any... that I prefer this type of discussion like we had tonight with these three items that all five of us are here. And I think that's the same thing with this information, especially coming to finance. We just have to, and what's coming down the pipe for us budget-wise and then in the future, that this will be the first for all of us to get this type of advice at all.

I just really I'm looking for a crash course in municipal bonds and that's what I mean I could do that on the phone one-on-one, or I could do that in a meeting with you guys.

It'll be cheaper to do it all in one instead of doing five individual meetings. I don't know about that. Because it's not included.

I have a tremendous amount of knowledge in municipal bonds. That's what I live on.

There's a difference between investing in municipal bonds. So that's the problem, actually. When you look online and you try to get some resources and information... Everything that comes is like investing in municipal bonds and all that kind of stuff. There's not a lot of resources out there for somebody who sits in seats that we sit in that are looking at it from the perspective of going out and, you know. Okay, well then. I would like, if. Okay, so

We established, I guess, that we'll do a joint meeting. And then if there's additional questions, obviously, Lori will be available for you to have your individual questions asked at that point. But in terms of the scope of what that is, are we just talking the golf course renovation?

I'm talking about... Well, there's some of that. I mean, just for simple overlay, even for the residents, the difference between the revenue on a desk and then the geo bond, which is going to be the parks probably. Okay. So it does... Even in that one, it's kind of I've been in meetings where cart before the horse, I'd rather both of them be addressed. The main focus is actually the first one would be the golf course. And if the election, in the election in April, it's immediate following it. I mean, they're both pretty close. If the residents do what the residents do, and then us as a council, they're going to be pretty close.

Okay. That's why I'm in the same meeting with them.

What? I think we should definitely have them in the same meeting. I think the attorney is just advising a municipality on the bond.

Municipal bonds in general, and then we'll put the specific scenarios of us with the community center, us with... All of it. Okay. And so we already have, like I said, the authorization for the golf course. Now that we're moving forward to review of the community center, I just need authorization for a separate matter number on that.

All right. I think it's necessary from the feedback I've got from my constituents of what does that, especially what the state's doing for tax relief, and then this would be, obviously if we do a GEO, it's going to be run through property. So it's just getting that education on that and what we're looking at. The sooner the better, I think.

And clarify what you're asking.

I'm just asking to open up a matter number for bond council which is a specialized review to now work on matters related to the community center I already have authorization for the parks master plan I already have authorization for the golf course So I just wanted to be clear that I have authorization for a community, a parks master plan authorization.

From what the residents are asking me for passing and what we did and we approved the master plan is that the council keeps moving forward with that. Again, for us in the special election for that one, I'll just give you, since we're talking about timelines, On the golf course side of it, the property itself is way overdue for the golf course portion of it. In my research for it, the building is in dire need also. But it's also, when you saw the NGF thing, the total bill was $31 million. The numbers so far coming back from Golf Enterprise Fund are what Kemper bid on and what they're coming back on. it's just in this meeting we'll have to have an honest conversation about what debt services we can do over if it's both the golf course and the figures that we've got because construction's gone up on that it's anywhere and there's a range from 8 million to 12 million for doing what we need to renovate the golf course the the clubhouse itself is another discussion and it might be bifurcated between construction timelines.

Maybe the thing I'm asking comes before all of this stuff that you're talking about. Because I'm just trying to get a crash course in municipal bonds, not before I get into digging into the specific bond and all the intricacies involved with it.

basic overview and education yes that's what we need first yes I need that but it's gonna be but it's also good for that one that the real world thing is exactly what I'm talking about right now and and realistically on numbers and timelines and and the the golf course taking it on and you've in budget discussion tomorrow night or whatever we're doing that the difference between the structure of that and you see that are we're gonna have to explain to the residents why the budget looks so big the The dollar amount we're basing that off of is almost $8 million and then going up. But it's also a liability. It's an enterprise fund, but it's a liability. And that liability is what my concerns are with. I understand what you're saying, what you want to learn about it. But the going rate, that's why I give you a range for the revenue one for what debt services that we could probably pay back from what the business does to stay in the revenue lane for this golf course. get educated on that and borrow money to renovate the golf course and and it's you know also for terms on it which they're going to be two different things the revenue bond for the golf course portion of it should be you should in your head start wrapping around about a 15-year loan because every 13 years 10 to 13 years you have to redo the golf course this is part of the business of doing it And that's why when you're looking at what we can borrow and then the golf enterprise can pay, it's going to give what the redesign of the golf course actually is. And then to what the residents are asking for, for the parks master plan, we do need to have discussions about a geobond and what it would look like and then even millage rates. So they're two different things, but I understand what you're saying, that you need to learn about it. But right before, these are actually stuff that we need to borrow money for. So that's where I'm coming. I don't want to make it that it's dire with the golf course, but the golf course business part of it is dire. I mean, the rate that we charge to play on that course is because the condition it's in right now. And we've been blessed by weather that it hasn't failed. And then if it does fail and we don't have the money set up to borrow, then we've got a liability over there. That's my concern.

great i am i'm just kind of lost on the conversation that we're at we're talking about 15 different things right now basically the only ask is do we do we want the education that's all about the two types of bonds we do want that education yes and we do want them in the same meeting because they're the same expert correct so let's set that up where we all come and we'd sit and learn and then once we know about all the specifics about the bonds we can really be really educated on what comes after, because if we don't know anything about how it works, how can we make decisions on 8 million, 10 million, 15 years? We need the overview first.

Trying to get educated to go buy the car, but you're talking about buying the car.

Let's learn. We're in to learn.

I understand, but I mean, it's also, we have sunshine and all the information I just gave you, did you know that that was a range? You should be wrapping your mind about what we have to spend in the village to get what we want. And we're going to have to borrow. That's my point to bringing this up. It's just stuff to think about now. I mean, it could be an emergency one also, Jesse. That's my point to this. I get what you're saying. You want to get educated on this.

It sounds like you're having a conversation with somebody other than me. I don't know what you're responding to. You keep talking about the details of all this stuff.

No, I'm just trying to put, we are able to speak here, right, in Sunshine. And I'm telling you the information that I have. was given direction to get a bond attorney so we could start talking about it. The reason we're doing that is these two projects. Of course. They're two different things. If you don't, any of this stuff, if you just want to wait for them to tell you what the two different things are, I'm telling you what's actually happening in Miami Shores. If you don't want to hear it, that's fine.

Then we'll go get educated on it. I get it.

I'm not knocking it, but it's also just stuff to think about. We're in it.

I look into the materials that we have and give you some materials as it pertains to that to ready you for the conversation. Thank you.

I like those materials as well. Thank you. Thank you, Shannon. Perfect, perfect. All right. Anything else?

No, sorry. That's it.

We appreciate you. Thank you.

August the next meeting of the village council will be held on Tuesday September 8th and Tuesday September 22nd immediately following the first and final budget hearings at 6 p.m. village hall council chambers I Think that's it.

We're over time. That's fine Motion to adjourn second all in favor