Remarks by Fabiola Stuyvesant
109 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 4 of 5
- Play at 12:52
“Yeah. What's going to happen with the emergency pedestrian bridge? Not pedestrian, emergency bridge, because it's apparently being completely defunded with this. And as of it is right now in our budget book, it has high priority. It was supposed to be done by September this year. I know it depends a lot on the FPL. But if we proceed with this, we are completely basically canceling the project.”
City Commission · Jul 16, 2026
- Play at 13:30
“Yeah. It would be to the finance director, but she's not here. So I guess it's to the city manager.”
City Commission · Jul 16, 2026
- Play at 13:46
“No, no, I understand. This is not adding or subtracting from the final number. It's just shuffling. What I don't understand, and I would like to have a clarification, is why are we deciding to completely defund a program that was supposed to be high priority, that we still need to do, that we have an easement, we're selling house for it. We could be getting that from any other account. Let's say, for example, land acquisition, that we have still $4 million there. So this is the thing about the budget that it always makes me uncomfortable, that we are just shuffling numbers between lines, like…”
City Commission · Jul 16, 2026
- Play at 21:07
“okay so this is a much more quick process okay all right commissioners do you have something yeah um in the budget right now we have over 34 million dollars in appropriations but they were not used at all last year or until this year like again we are shuffling between accounts because those allocations are not money that we have spent at all. So that was part of my conversations about the budget, that we need to make sure that the numbers have to make sense. We have a budget of $240 million or so when we are just bringing the bank around $70-plus million. So everything else in this SIP,…”
City Commission · Jul 16, 2026
- Play at 37:39
“I have a question. What does the funding comes from the general fund? And now for future funds or anything else?”
City Commission · Jul 16, 2026
- Play at 38:05
“And I also have the question, why don't we invite the companies that are going to be awarded these contracts, which is going to come to the next contract as well, to just come here and at least be present in case that we have any questions about the product. Because, for example, I'm OK with this, and I will make a motion to approve it. Like I said, safety and security is always, I believe, and I hope it will continue always being our priority. But we have here $30,000 for the product, more or less, and $30,000 for installation, more or less. it is very interesting that we are paying almost…”
City Commission · Jul 16, 2026
- Play at 39:34
“But that was a question, actually, before we go to the next item.”
City Commission · Jul 16, 2026
- Play at 39:39
“Can you clarify your question again? Yes. Why don't we make the people that is going to be awarded this, or at least a request of a requirement to come here to be answering questions that we may or may not have before we are awarding this kind of contract to them? That should be at least a courtesy, because if Any person is going to be getting awarded millions of dollars. The least thing they can or they should be doing is being here and presenting their faces. Unless, like I said, it's so predetermined that this is going to be a just by default and we are just sitting down here to rubber…”
City Commission · Jul 16, 2026
- Play at 42:13
“Question before. It's just been the practice of not having the contractors in here or the vendors in here. I remember when I was just elected, we used to have many of those vendors here. And they would just sit down there in case that we need to ask them certain questions. That has disappeared during your administration. And I don't think that's best practices. So I think this should be changing.”
City Commission · Jul 16, 2026
- Play at 44:18
“Do we need a consensus for that? Because, for example, I'm going to bring the same comment twice more during this agenda. So I don't think we need a consensus for that if we want to have the vendor present to ask them certain questions.”
City Commission · Jul 16, 2026
- Play at 44:51
“That's not the way it's written in your contract, by the way.”
City Commission · Jul 16, 2026
- Play at 53:35
“I have a question. Go ahead. I sent a memo through the city manager this morning to be shared with the commission. Was my memo shared with the commission about this specific item?”
City Commission · Jul 16, 2026
- Play at 53:57
“OK, it was really important to be chair when I sent it. Otherwise, I would have made copies here and give it to them right now. So that was the idea for them to see it before. Because again, I'm going to make a motion for this item. I'm totally in favor of the item. However, I did read all the documents in the package. And for example, as far as what I understand, I'm not a lawyer, the price seems that it's provisional. The product is under development. It's not being developed just yet. The delivery date is not guaranteed. The data has to be shared with them. It's one of the terms on the…”
City Commission · Jul 16, 2026
- Play at 57:36
“All right. I'll take a motion. I just want to add one clarification. There are no more renewals after this one, correct? So next time it has to be bid again? OK. I just wanted to put that on the record. So next I have to go out and bid.”
City Commission · Jul 16, 2026
- Play at 1:08:05
“I do. I do have comments. Go ahead. This is the fifth amendment. This contract was originally for $120,000. Now it's $1.2. That's 1,000% more than it was contracted for. So at what point a contract, another amendment, doesn't just become a new procurement? We are not beating this. And I'm going to say the numbers again. Originally, a year ago, it was a, I'm sorry, January 2024, two years ago, we contract this for $120,000. Right now, with this new amendment, is going to $120,000 to $129,000, over 1,000%, like I said. Nobody's being allowed to compete for this. We are basically giving it to…”
City Commission · Jul 16, 2026
- Play at 1:13:01
“No, it's not related. So since November 2023, when we awarded this contract, which it was for preventive maintenance service, Nobody. There is now the contractor that want to give us a price on entering a contract per hour with us. This is almost three years. So this is the only company that is looking forward to provide electrical service to the city. That's exactly what kind of, I want clarification about that. What's the question? OK, since November 2023, According to what I just heard, other companies are being also provided the opportunity to give us a price or enter in a contract with…”
City Commission · Jul 16, 2026
- Play at 1:14:47
“Okay. To my point, so that was November 2023. So if we have only as a reference the second price, we should be going to bid right now. Because this is the Fifth Amendment, and now this contract has spiraled out of control. And we are basing this on a second company that, by all means, could have any kind of agreement with the first one not to be signing. So that's the point. Please do not bring more amendments to this contract and just bid again. And if they are the best one with the best price, they're going to win again. And we're going to continue working with them. But now, there is maybe…”
City Commission · Jul 16, 2026
- Play at 1:16:39
“Got it. All right. Thank you. The approval was $120,000. Now it's $1.2 million. And to the process about how long it takes, that contract originally, the bid was in November 1, 2023. And this contract was signed in January 18, 2024. So it only took three months if we rush, like we said. So we can start right now doing the bid for the electrical for the next year. And I'll be waiting when we have an emergency.”
City Commission · Jul 16, 2026
- Play at 1:28
“no yeah i do have a few questions go ahead so um it's very good to go completely digital um however what now when um a member of the public wants to have access to it because we don't have right now the smart gov capabilities like i said that we're paying for activated so they have to go and do a public record request to see any plans that get submitted”
Local Planning Agency · Mar 19, 2026
- Play at 2:04
“Okay, so that's the only way they can get it. Okay. And then I have another question because we kind of have this issue last year when we have an applicant with a site modification for the state of Aqualina for the parking garage. correct so in that moment it was said that we needed to do the site plan modification because it was not convenient for them not to have a CO on the parking garage and we went ahead and we had a discussion in here however In the event that it wasn't clear who had to pay for the undergrounding of the utilities, it was a recommendation of the staff that then it has to…”
Local Planning Agency · Mar 19, 2026
- Play at 3:17
“Correct, correct. And I voted against it, basically, because when we have very specific conditions, and then later on, which is what we are codifying right now, correct? That when they come, the only way to change those conditions is with some site plan modification. Yep, correct. OK. I just wanted to put on the record that we did it before, that the recommendation was against the public and the residents. Now we have the resident, the taxpayer, had to pay for the underground, which was a condition for the certificate of occupancy of that specific property. Anybody can correct me if I'm…”
Local Planning Agency · Mar 19, 2026
- Play at 4:41
“I went ahead and I did actually review it. That was February 25, if anybody want to check it out. And that's the issue that I have, that we are approving these projects with very specific conditions, and then they come here. Or in this case, I think it was really a big conflict of interest, because they brought it to us after throwing a very lavish party to the mayor. Once again, very conflicted, getting freebies from the developers, and then voting to give them this kind of site conditions approvals, general modifications. So I just wanted to point out on the record that whoever is sitting…”
Local Planning Agency · Mar 19, 2026
- Play at 33:37
“I'm going to read it. So the resolution explicitly states that this document will serve as the, quote, foundation and provide guidance for future amendments to the comprehensive plan and land development regulations, meaning that once it's passed, this document can be used for the pretext to rezone these districts. And they're doing it apparently. Once you read it, you can say that it states specifically that we don't need to do it, that this is just a vision, right? Do we need this document?”
Local Planning Agency · Mar 19, 2026
- Play at 34:39
“So it's not just a guidance. We need this document to then go and make the changes to the comp plan and land development regulations, correct?”
Local Planning Agency · Mar 19, 2026
- Play at 34:55
“So it comes to the process because it's not so much about the product, but how we got here. How much money do we spend on this? So we're working on something that we don't even know how much it costs? Are you asking the city manager? Whoever can answer, yes.”
Local Planning Agency · Mar 19, 2026