City Commission - Regular Meeting

Welcome, everyone. Welcome, welcome. And thank you for joining us today. Welcome to the Pembroke Pines City Commission meeting of June 17, 2026. How fast time flies. Thank you so very much for being here with us today. And Mr. Clerk, if you would, please call the roll.

Commissioner Goode. Vice Mayor Hernandez?

Here.

Commissioner Rodriguez? Here. Commissioner Schwartz? Here. Commissioner Castillo?

Here.

City Manager Dodge?

Mr. Dodge, are you on the line? He'll be on the line shortly.

Assistant City Manager Bonilla?

Here.

City Attorney Gorn?

I'm here.

We have a quorum.

Thank you very much. So two quick announcements before we go to the pledge. Today I had the pleasure of swearing in six heroes here in the city of Pembroke Pines, three who were promoted to police sergeant and three who were promoted to police captain. And I have to tell you, the entire room was filled. It was standing room only. Chief August did a wonderful job putting that together. Let's give our police officers a great round of applause. Congratulations to all who were promoted. We're proud of you. We're proud of your brothers in the fire department as well. I didn't see you guys at the promotion, but that's all right. I know you were busy. I know you were busy. They were busy. And we want to thank you all for everything that you do. Mr. City Attorney, I want to congratulate you and your beautiful wife, Shelly, on the birth of your newest granddaughter. Yes, thank you. Thank you very much. She and my grandson are about the same age. They are. I think they'll be play dates. I don't know. We'll try.

What did you think I was going to say? Something else.

OK. All right. With that, I just want to say, did you have something? With that, I just want to say that Gabriela Perez-Ortega is here. She is Miss Broward County Teen and a former Miss Pembroke Pines, and she's going to lead us in the pledge and in the national anthem. Would you all please stand?

indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

¶¶ . . .

Beautiful, beautiful job. Thank you so very, very much. Thank you all. Announcements of items to be pulled from the agenda?

Item 13 has been pulled by administration.

Thank you very, very much. And that brings us to presentations. Thank you so very, very much. So this is a presentation to Dennis Mastropalo. Is he here? Come on up, please. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a proclamation of the city of Pembroke Pines, Florida, honoring Dennis Mastropolo. Whereas Dennis Mastropolo has demonstrated exceptional leadership, dedication, and commitment to student athletes through his service as athletic director for the Pembroke Pines Charter School's Middle School Athletic Program. And whereas at a recent Broward Middle School Athletics Association Awards, Mr. Mastropolo was recognized as a recipient of the prestigious Athletic Director of the Year Award, an honor bestowed upon individuals who exemplify excellence in athletic administration and student development. Whereas under his leadership, Pembroke Pines Charter Schools have cultivated a culture of sportsmanship, teamwork, academic achievement, and athletic excellence that positively impacts students both on and off the field, whereas His unwavering dedication has contributed significantly to the continued success and recognition of the Pembroke Pines Charter Schools athletic programs, bringing us pride and distinction throughout the City of Pembroke Pines. Now, therefore, I, Angelo Castillo, Mayor of the City of Pembroke Pines, together with the City Commission, do hereby recognize and honor Dennis Mastropalo for his outstanding achievements and congratulate him on being named Broward School's Middle School Athletics Association Athletic Director of the Year, with appreciation for exemplary service to the students and families of our community. Congratulations. Would you like to say a few words?

I would like to thank City of Pembroke Pines for opening a school that I've worked at for over two decades, all of the administrators that I've had, past and present, and most importantly, the kids, the student athletes, and their parents, because they sacrificed and they worked, and this is theirs. It's not mine. It's their work that I'm getting recognized for, and I appreciate them all. Thank you.

And don't go away, there's more. OK. So they have a rubber band around it. Proclamation of the City of Pembroke Pines, Florida, whereas Pembroke Pines Charter Middle School's Boys and Girls Sports Programs has consistently demonstrated excellence in athletic competition, and this recognition marks the fourth time the girls and boys team has earned this distinction, and the third time the Boys Sports Program has received this honor within the past 10 years, reflecting a sustained tradition of excellence. They were awarded the 2025-2026 Best Overall Sports Program Award. These achievements are a testament to the hard work and dedication of the student athletes, coaches, administrators, staff, families, whose commitment continues to elevate Pembroke Pines Charter Schools to serve as a source of pride for the entire community. And now therefore, I, Angelo Castillo, Mayor of the City of Pembroke Pines, together with the City Commission, hereby congratulate the Pembroke Pines Charter Middle School's Boys and Girls Sports Program, I'm being named 2025-2026 Best Overall Sports Program and commends all student athletes, coaches, and supporters for representing our community with pride, sponsorship, and excellence. And I'd like all of you to join us for a photo, please.

Yes. Any of the student athletes that are here?

Any of the student athletes here? Raise your hand. Come on up.

Come on up. If you played a sport for the school this year, come on up.

And we're glad you're here. They must be dedicated because this is vacation.

They must be dedicated because they're on vacation.

Principal Castellano, you wanna hold this? Thank you. Huh? Okay. And the charter people, you're going to be first on the agenda, so we're not going to hold you. Okay, this is a proclamation. Is Albert Salve here? Come on up. This is a proclamation of the city of Pembroke Pines, Florida, declaring World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. Whereas older adults deserve to live in dignity, safety, respect, and independent, yet millions of seniors experience some form of physical, emotional, sexual, financial abuse or neglect each year. And whereas elder abuse is often underreported and remains a serious public health and human rights issue that threatens the well-being and security quality of life for older Americans. Now, therefore, I, Angelo Castillo, Mayor of the City of Pembroke Pines, together with the City Commission, do hereby proclaim June 15, 2026 as World Elder Abuse Awareness Day in the City of Pembroke Pines and encourage all residents to learn the signs of elder abuse, support efforts that protect older adults, and help build a community where seniors can age with dignity, safety, and respect. And I just want to thank you for everything that you do for our community. In every way, lift our spirits. And you're an example of a great, great citizen. And we simply want to thank you for all that you do.

Hold on to this. I'd just like to say a word on this. Yes, yes.

Well, first of all, Mayor, thank you. This is not going to be long. But I want to make everybody aware, I'm with AARP. I'm a volunteer. I live, I'm a resident of Pine, Westside. And I think this is such an important tribute, because a lot of times this goes unnoticed. In a year, we have over 5 million elderly people get abused or exploited or scammed. It's one of the largest fraud segments of the United States, which is oppressing seniors over the age of 60. The funny thing is, one in 24 cases are always reported. So there's really not a lot of statistics on it. But yet, you have a lot of seniors suffering in quiet, in isolation, away from their families. Sometimes the oppressors are the family members. So what we're asking you with this Awareness Day that was enacted by the United Nations in 2006, June 15, 2006, which is World Elder Abuse Day, is to just be on the lookout. If you see a neighbor that's got a mood swing or just isolated or is just being kind of kept, you know, away from people, or you see them changing their behavior, just notify. There's a report hotline that you can report. And you can do an online form that I have a on my declaration that can tell you what to report if you see that. But just keep an eye out for the seniors, because a lot of times they don't have a voice. A lot of them alone. You know, I visit a lot of seniors. I go to the hospitals. I visit them. They have no family. And it's just something that we just, they're just human beings. And sometimes we forget about them. So again, I'm asking for everybody to take notice of our seniors that are living alone and making sure you check on them and that they're well taken care of. And the last thing I want to say, and Mike, you know this, I want to commend our police department. And I personally want to commend especially two specific officers. One, and I told the other officers, Agustin Lopez and Officer Espinosa. And the reason I want to commend those two specific officers, because they're bringing a change of behavior in this city unlike anything I've ever seen. Prior to me, 10 years ago when I moved here, I haven't been here that long. I'm an import. There was parking for people with disabilities. Now you go anywhere, you can't find parking. It's so bad that it's resorted me to drive a scooter, so I can't even drive because when I go to a place like a Costco, a Publix, a BJ's, I can't park. So there's no sense in me going around 25 times looking for space when I got a 20-year-old parking in a disabled spot. OK, no offense to 20-year-olds. Or they're going into a gym. And it's just unfair. But with the help of Officer Agustin Lopez and Officer Espinosa, they're getting a message clear as day that they are definitely going to be enforcing this. along with speeders, and it's going to make Pembroke Pines just a quality of life for everyone, including myself, people with disabilities. So again, I want to thank those specific officers. Thank you, chiefs and the police department. And I also thank my fire department, which are a great team out there. So I got a lot of support in the city. And our commission and mayors, mayor and commissioners, everybody is a great team, and I love Pembroke Pines. Thank you so much.

We love you. Thank you very, very much. Vice Mayor, are you ready to present? Is Jason here? This is your presentation.

OK.

So it was the Saturday that we were at the YMCA, I think this was in May, that I went to visit. I was speaking with Christina Golding, our assistant city manager. The chief came up to me and said, by the way, we're having this event at the training facility out on 208th. You know, there's alligators and there's a training facility. It's that way. you should come out. And I did. I went out there and he pointed out that we had concrete that had been laid for what will be part of the expansion of the training center. I said, oh, that's really good that we got that there. Who put that? He mentioned, and I'll introduce him now, somebody that 26 years ago on June the 2nd, he and I graduated high school together. So we have to take a photo for Westminster, by the way. And Jason, who is a former Pembroke Pines firefighter, but still very supportive of our guys, guys and gals, excuse me, of our department, used his personal resources within his very successful company to be able to lay that concrete, literally laying the foundation for an expansion of our training center. the chief didn't ask me to do this. I said, no, we got to do this. We got to recognize Jason. We have to, or let me call you Mr. Goff. Excuse me. We're old now. We're in our 40s. So we can say that. So I did want to mention what it is that we're presenting.

Forget the talking points. I'm just going.

So to Jason Goff, on behalf of the Pembroke Pines Fire Rescue Department, thank you to you and Florida Concrete Unlimited for your generous donation in support of our department. Your contribution, including the forming, placing, and finishing of the concrete pads has significantly enhanced our training facility project. This initiative supports our ability to train and develop our firefighters, ensuring they are well prepared when serving our community. I'm adding of 172,000 residents. The project will provide lasting value for our organization. and the service that we provide for years to come, we also extend appreciation to CEMEX for donating the concrete materials that made this project possible. The ongoing support from FCU Unlimited and its president, Jason Goff, reflects a strong commitment to public safety. Please accept the City of Pembroke Pines and our Fire Department, their sincere gratitude for your generosity, professionalism, continued support, and continued support of the Pembroke Pines Fire Rescue Department. It is signed by the chief, but you could very well add the mayor and our four commissioners thanking you for your service to our city past and present and into the future. So thank you, my friend. Is there anything you'd like to say? You sure? Your family's right over there. Maybe they want to take a video. You want to say anything at all?

Uh, you know, I haven't been, I haven't been a fireman for over 20 years, but these guys hold a special place in my heart. Uh, so does the vice mayor. And I thought it's the least I could do. Give back to, to the guys that gave something to me.

Wow.

Chief. Just real quick. Cause you summed it up just perfectly, uh, commissioner or vice mayor. Um, Jay, it gives me a great personal privilege as well as a professional to award you, um, to provide you with this award. And this recognition because you know how much gratitude I have toward you and the entire FCU family. So, brother, thank you very much. And that's it.

Amen.

All right. Now we have National Parks and Recreation Month. Jonathan, you want to come up? We have a great parks and recreation program. This is a proclamation of the city of Pembroke Pines declaring National Parks and Recreation Month, whereas parks and recreation programs are essential to building healthy, vibrant, and resilient communities by providing opportunities for wellness, recreation, education, and social connection for residents of all ages. And whereas, since 1985, America has celebrated National Parks and Recreation Month each July through the National Recreation Park Association, to recognize the vital contributions of parks, recreational professionals, seasonal staff and volunteers who maintain and enhance our parks and recreational spaces. Whereas the City of Pembroke Pines Recreation and Cultural Arts Department has planned an exciting lineup of free activities and events throughout July under the theme Get Outside, Get Active, get connected in Pembroke Pines Parks, encouraging residents to enjoy healthy lifestyles, strengthen community connections, and create memorable experiences. Now, therefore, I, Angelo Castillo, Mayor of the City of Pembroke Pines, together with the City Commission, do hereby proclaim the month of July 2026 as National Parks and Recreation Month in the City of Pembroke Pines, encouraging all residents to participate in the many activities and events offered throughout the month and to recognize the positive impact parks and recreation has on our community. Congratulations and thank you for all you do. We have one more question?

You want to come up?

I don't know which way to turn. I don't want to be my bad. Good evening, everyone. It is a pleasure to be here tonight. My name is Naeema Khan Ghani, and I represent the Muslim Students Association for Midland High Schools. And we're here tonight to recognize a well-deserving commissioner, Commissioner Maria Rodriguez, who has been a friend to our community and a friend to all of us here at Pembroke Pines. So before we present her award, I just want to read a couple things that we think that she really embodies as a commissioner and as a resident of the city of Pembroke Pines. So true inclusion is not about simply opening doors. It is about creating a warm and inviting space where every individual feels valued, respected, and empowered. It is about embracing diversity, fostering empathy, and nurturing a culture that celebrates the uniqueness of every person. Inclusion is a transformative force that breaks down barriers, invites hearts, and unleashes the boundless potential that lies within us all. Commissioner Maria strives for a community where everyone's voice is heard, everyone's story is acknowledged, and everyone can thrive knowing that they belong. Thank you for building bridges, embracing diversity, promoting equity, and engaging in courageous conversations. And with that, I'd like to present this Community Service Award on behalf of the Muslim Students Association for Midland High Schools to Commissioner Maria Rodriguez, City of Pembroke Pines. In recognition of your outstanding leadership, dedicated public service, and unwavering commitment, your vision and integrity continue to inspire positive change. So let's give it up for Commissioner Maria. Many often our commissioners and our elected officials, they really get the shorter end of the stick. And we really hold them accountable, which we should hold them accountable. I'm not against that. But sometimes it's good to celebrate the good things that we see, the positive things that is happening in our community. So thank you, Commissioner. It's a pleasure.

I just want to say thanks, Naima. I was supposed to attend an award ceremony you guys had. And unfortunately, I was out of town. So thank you so much for making the exception to come all the way here. Much appreciated. And I know I really appreciate this Muslim Student Association. They do some amazing, amazing work.

Thank you so much. It is an honor. So good luck.

Well done.

Thank you all. Mr. City Attorney, we'll be taking items 37 and 38 out of order without objection so that our principals can get back to their activities. on what promises to be a long agenda. So if you could read, please, item 37.

Thank you, Mayor. 37, for the record, is a motion to adopt proposed resolution number 2026R-11, which is a resolution of the city of Pembroke Pines, Florida, adopting the budget for the Pembroke Pines slash Florida State University Charter Elementary School for the charter school fiscal year beginning on July 1, 2026, in the amount of $11,356,801, providing for a conflict, providing for severability, providing for an effective date. Item number 37, which is 2026R-11, on the floor for consideration for your review and consideration. Mayor?

I move the item.

Motion made by the Vice Mayor. Is there a second? Second. Seconded by Commissioner Rodriguez. Any discussion? Any from the public? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Show passes unanimously. Thank you, Madam Commissioner. Thank you for all that you do at this great school, and good luck next year.

Yes, I know. Item 38. 3949 is the permanent number, Mayor. The next up is item number 38, for the record, is a motion to adopt proposed resolution number 2026R-12, which is a resolution of the City of Pembroke Pines, Florida, adopting the budget for the City of Pembroke Pines Charter Schools, sponsored by the School Board of Broward County, Florida, for the charter school fiscal year beginning on July 1, 2026, in the amount of $80,195,533. providing for conflicts, providing for severability, and providing for an effective date. That's item number 2026R-12 on the floor for your review and consideration. Thank you, Mayor. Number 38.

Motion to approve.

Moved by the Vice Mayor. Is there a second? Second. Seconded by Commissioner Rodriguez. Any discussion? Hearing none. Any from the public? Seeing none. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Show passes unanimously. Thank you very, very much.

Mayor, that number is 3950. That's the permanent number 3950. Thank you, Mayor.

Yes. Thank you very much. OK. Items at the request of the public. I have one person signed up, Skyler Thomas. Mr. Thomas, are you here? Oh, ma'am, please come forward. Is it Skyler? Skyler. Your name and address for the record, please. There's a button there that says yes. You're on, if you could just bring that down.

Hello? You're a pro. OK. You're on. Scarlett Thomas, address is 9810 Southwest 16th Court, Pembroke Pines, Florida.

Yes. OK.

This is really quick. This is a concern to request for the city of Pembroke Pines to raise the wall on Pembroke Road. There's several other communities, but I can only speak for Tanglewood South. Lately, you guys have been improving Pembroke Road. So because of that, a lot of traffic from Pines is going to Pembroke Road. So the issues we're having is more pedestrian traffic, a lot more traffic on that road. So we have more of a noise nuisance that's happening. So sleepless nights because of loud vehicles, And I think you guys are supposed to be increasing Pembroke Road again, going west, correct? That's going to bring even more traffic. So is there any way the city can assist with raising the wall? The wall now, I think, is about maybe three to four feet tall.

Well, I know your district commissioner is on top of everything in that district, Commissioner Good. Okay. Would you like to contact him? Have you spoken about this? No.

This is the first.

But Mr. Mayor, this community has been sounding the alarm, and particularly they just recently did that with the FDOT because of the DOT project that they have at the Honeywoods community. So they presented some very good points of concern. I mean, that wall was somehow impacted when they did the original improvements to Pembroke Road. Correct. we're gonna wait for the DOT people to come back and find out whether they're gonna be able to incorporate that into their project. If not, then this is gonna be an issue we're gonna talk here.

Yeah, I think that that's the best solution is to, as Vice Commissioner, if you don't mind taking it on, it's in your district, The coordination of this, I'm not familiar with the wall or the specifics of the wall. I don't know who owns it. I don't know what ground it's located on, all that. All has to be figured out. But certainly, we're very thankful that you came forward to talk to us about it. We'd like to see what, let's see what's possible. Okay?

So am I contacting Mr. Good to follow up?

Yes, you are. Thank you. Okay. And thank you very much for coming forward. Okay. There's no commission order to report tonight?

None, Mayor.

Appeals of the Board of Adjustment Decisions?

None, Mayor.

Under announcements and board and committee appointments, I believe Commissioner Schwartz wishes to make an appointment.

Thank you, Mayor. Mr. McKenzie, come on down. Come on down. Mr. McKenzie, there's no... He's been serving with us on another board. He was in the audience a couple weeks ago when Mr. Tiwari was making his plea. Mr. McKenzie has stepped forward once again to serve his community. Please introduce yourself once again to the community, Mr. McKenzie, and thank you for serving.

You're on.

Thank you. Irvins McKenzie, been a member of Pembroke Pines pretty much since eighth grade, well into my mid-30s now. So I love this city. I appreciate you, Commissioner Schwartz and everybody else here. You guys are great.

Thank you very much. So Mr. McKenzie and I, we worked together in a different capacity for I think it was about three years. And we got to know each other. The other advisory board had an opening. I reached out to him. I said, you should consider doing it. So now he's telling me that he wants to do the environmental. And it's a real good fit. So welcome aboard, and thank you for representing.

Thank you. Thank you very, very much. OK. Commissioner's consent agenda consists of items 1 through 32, though 13 has been pulled. So it's items. 1 through 12, and 14 through 32. What is your pleasure?

Mayor, I have five. I want to pull. 14. Hold on. Five? No, I have five pulls.

OK, hold on one second.

OK. 14. Hold on.

Yep.

16. Yep. 20. Yep. 22. And 24. Yep. 24. Is that correct? Yes, sir.

And Mr. Mayor, I have a couple of pools too.

OK.

So pool number nine. Hold on. Go ahead. 18. Uh-huh. And 28.

And 28. Anyone else? Not much left. There's a lot still. It's a big one. OK. Then any from the public? Seeing none. So the consent vote would be on items 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 8 10 11 12 15 17 19 21 23 25 26 27 29 30 31 and 32 is there motion

Motion to approve.

Move by the vice mayor. Is there a second? Second. Second by Commissioner Rodriguez. Any discussion on those items? Any from the public? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Show passes unanimously. And the first one will be item number nine. Commissioner Good, you are recognized.

Yes, and thank you, Mr. Mayor. And just some quick questions on this one. So motion to approve the first amendment to the professional service agreement with Miller Lake and Associates Incorporated for professional environmental and support services, increasing the annual contract amount to an amount not to exceed $260,000. Is there a second? Second.

Second by the Vice Mayor. Commissioner Good.

Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. So again, a little concern. I know that one of my other colleagues also did make a notice to the increase in the contract. This isn't a $60,000 increase one time. This is a $60,000 on an annual basis. This is a five-year contract. That means we've got another four years on this contract. So we went from $200,000, which is a million dollar contract, to about $1,250,000. So not saying that it's not needed, but I can't understand why we're approving going forward for the additional years, the additional $60,000 per year. That's 25% of the contract cost. I don't know how this could have been really missed in this regard. I mean, this is a task or something that was submitted. And we had estimates. And we got certified engineers making these decisions. And to have a 25% miss is concerning to me. The other thing is that there is There's no sufficient backup to justify why this increase is needed. All we received was the First Amendment and the original agreement. And we have a write-up from staff saying, well, it needs to be increased. But there's no documentation, verification from Miller, Legge, and Associates identifying what is causing them to ask for an increase from us for the next several years to the tune of a 25% increase on this contract. So in the absence of any of that information, Mr. Mayor, I'm just going to say that I can't support this item.

Mr. Bonilla?

Yes, sir.

What say you?

No problem. The reason for the increase is because this is the contractor that we're utilizing, the consultant that we're utilizing for the project, the resolved project that we have going on out west. With that said, we're working on various land partials that we need to do various mitigation for wetlands. The heavy part, the front load part of the work is being done now in the first and second year. Hence the reason, while the contract is for four years, which add up to $800,000, we're asking for 260 for the first and second year. What if I may propose that maybe instead of just doing an annual basis of $200,000 to $260,000, we could just combine the amount, the total contract amount of $800,000 as a total, from therefore it would allow us to be able to, again, complete the work for the first and second year, and then therefore we're estimating that the third and fourth year will be much less work that services that will be needed from the consultant.

So you're not asking for any increase in the contract, you're just asking that the distribution be different?

The original amount that we have in here, we were asking for an increase up to $260,000. My revised recommendation is now to just glop up the total amount that's needed for the agreement of $800,000 so we can utilize the amount upfront and therefore less amount in the following years.

Okay, so you're not asking for more than $800,000?

No, he is, Mr. Mayor. He's asking the remaining amount of the contract as it exists today is about $600,000. He's asking for the increase as well.

Is that correct? What I am revising on the day is my recommendation is that if the conversation is that we have an issue about moving it up to $260,000, what I am recommending is that since I know that the total amount of work that's being done for the first two years of this contract is going to be more than $200,000, what I am saying is that I would like add up the total amount of the contract amount, which is $800,000, with no cap on the yearly amounts. Right now, it is capped at $200,000 per year. What I'm saying is allow us to be able to work with the $800,000 for the entire four-year term of the contract. Does that make sense?

Can I just jump in for a second? Sure. Commissioner, you mentioned $600,000 as the total amount. Is it $600,000 as the total amount for the four years, or is it $800,000?

It is $200,000 for a four-year contract. That's $800,000.

So as a clarification to my colleague, I said it was a five-year. It actually is a four-year. And I did catch that. So it's an $800,000 contract that is now being increased by an additional $180,000. However, there's $600,000. The first year has been expended. We've gone through the first year. There's three more years that are left on the contract, which is equivalent to $600,000 over a three-year period. What the assistant city manager is saying is he wants to bring it up to $800,000. Is that correct? $800,000?

For the entire term of the contract, which is four years. That's correct. Right now, as it was presented.

So that's more than the $60,000 increase per year that's being asked because that would be $180,000. So $6,000 plus $180,000 is $780,000. He's going to $800,000, which is another $20,000 on top of that.

I think what he is saying, if I can clear, if I understand that, The assistant city manager is saying 800 for the totality for all four years, even though we've already passed one year. I think that's where it's coming in. That is correct. With that, I agree that if we're going to lump it, it would be the 800. I don't believe that insinuates an increase because it means that the total will always be 800, has been 800, but we're placing the chunks in different spaces.

That is correct.

So if I may ask a question, and so are you saying that we have not spent $200,000 yet?

We're getting to the $200,000. That is the reason why we're asking for the request. Yes, sir.

So you're asking for $800,000, which would mean that there would be a total amount of $600,000 plus some change left over.

As it stands right now, we've utilized approximately $200,000 for the first year. We're going to go over that amount. Therefore, hence the reason why we were asking for the increase. What we're saying is that how the current contract reads is that we're capped at $200 per year. What I am recommending, because I know that the total overall of the contract is $800,000, what I'm saying is that do not allow us to have the limit up to $800,000 for the entire four-year term. which is the same amount that we had when we passed the agreement a year ago.

And allow you to allocate at your discretion because some of it is front-loaded.

That is correct. Yes, ma'am.

Okay. So, Mr. Mayor, I just want to clarify because I'm not disagreeing with what is being said. So this contract now is going to have to be amended to not be a... Well, it's a four-year contract. Total amount is $800,000. However, $800,000 in the contract would be available from the very beginning instead of $200,000 a year, meaning going from this point forward, we would not be spending more than $600,000 over the next three years. Is that correct?

That is correct, sir.

OK. So we would need to have a motion.

Mayor, can I ask a question? Yes, go right ahead. Assistant City Manager. This front load, does this happen relatively about the composting and the project out there?

With the parcels, yes, sir.

OK. And this commission has not yet received any information with respect to some of the concerns that we asked about. I am hesitant. to put any dollars into this area until this commission has an opportunity to green light the actual project. Because if we spend the money, whether it's $200,000, $260,000, or $800,000, If this project is going to stink up the neighborhood, it is not going to receive my support. So until we get that information to us, I believe this might be premature. Perhaps we can give the administration an opportunity over the summer break to get us up to speed on where we're at with the composting project. There were certain requests that this commission made to the city commission to bring back to us. I was hoping we would have it sooner rather than later, but if that means it's gonna be the first meeting of August in order for us to know which way to move forward, I would feel more comfortable deferring this item until the administration gives us the opportunity to digest what options we have. There were specific asks. There were communities that we needed to reach out to to get that information. If we move forward, if we green light the project, then of course the billings make a whole lot of sense. I'm not opposed to front-loading the contract. I just want to make sure that the dollars are being spent in the proper order.

Not a problem. So can I respond?

Yeah, I'd like to respond to that. Everyone here agree that if there's a smell problem, this isn't something that any one commissioner is illuminating for us. We all agreed that that was an issue. These engineers need to come up with the answers so that we will know what the situation is. You can't ask a question and then deny the process to get you the answer. So this is before us so that the engineers can actually look into these matters and come back to us with information. That's what they do.

That's why we hired them. Mayor, I would agree with you. However, to Commissioner Good's point, the backup doesn't speak to that specific ask. It talks about environmental permit applications in Holly Lake.

Well, but that's how you get it. The engineers have to look at the project to see whether or not even an application would work. Forget about that we don't want it to create a noxious situation. It wouldn't get permitted if it did that. So I really think that what we need to do is understand what the request is. The item is absolutely in order. It's a chicken and egg matter. You have to go to the engineers before you have your answers. That's plain to see. All that the city administration is asking for is within the same $800,000, Mr. Bonilla, correct me if I'm wrong, over the same four-year period that we authorized, they want to move some monies out of potentially year four into years two and three. It's the same amount of money, but a different distribution. That's all that's ahead of us. And then they, the engineers, will go out and do their work and come back to us with the answers that we all see. That's the purpose of this item. Is it not?

I think in clarity, it does say First Amendment. We already approved the total amount for this project to continue. So while I agree with your commentary, the contract was already approved. It is whether the internal allocations of year to year, that's what's in question in number nine. So we can't really go back in time to, un-approve something we've already approved if this is simply the First Amendment.

OK. So that being clarified, I'm looking for what the motion needs to be.

So Mr. Mayor, if I may. Yes, sir. So I'm satisfied that the cost of this project is not going to increase. I do understand the dialogue here about having the need to have funding available now as opposed to later. So I'd like to make an amendment to the item such that we consolidate years two, three, and four funding, and that the contract does not exceed a total of $800,000.

Is that acceptable?

Thank you.

Yes, sir. Second. Is that acceptable? Yes, sir. Okay. Thank you. Any further discussion on the amendment? Any from the public on the amendment? All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Show passage unanimously. Thank you, Commissioner. Good. On the item as amended, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. That one's done. Thank you so very, very much, Commissioner. All right. Now, the next item on the queue is item 14, Commissioner Schwartz.

Thank you, Mayor. So before I read the item into the record, all five have the same theme to it. If you just give me 30 seconds to explain. I attended six out of the eight town halls.

The residents.

Which town halls? For the ones that the city advertised that you hosted, Mayor.

Most recently?

Most recently, yeah. Go ahead. So the ones I attended, and the ones that I listened to when I wasn't in attendance, the same theme was the concern about the state's proposed exemptions.

Commissioner?

It's very close. You're right on the edge. I'm totally on the edge. I get that. Bring it home. So I'm trying to, I'm looking at a few different things. I reached out to our finance director, who provided me the current balance of our restricted capital fund, which is currently sitting at 56 million. All five items will be coming out of the restricted fund. I am trying to put public safety first. My general concern, and this is a general concern, and I can get to all the items here, is that with the competing ballot language in November... Sir, you're now off topic.

This is a motion for replacement projects at various parks.

You're taking us on a... My motion would be to defer all five.

Yeah.

Until November the 4th.

OK. Is there a second to that motion?

It dies for lack of a second.

Anything else on item 14?

Well, let me read into the record, because I certainly don't want to vote against children. But I do have concerns about how we're going to pay for it if we have the result we don't want to see in November actually occur.

Thank you very much.

So now that that's on the record, motion to award IFB RE2508 Pavilion Replacement Project at various parks to the most responsive responsible bidder. advanced recreational concepts in the amount not to exceed $211,470.46, which includes a 10% owner's contingency in the amount of $18,714.20 and a payment and performance bond in the amount of $5,614.26. Is there a second?

Second by Commissioner Rodriguez.

Any further discussion? So, yes. So what this is going to do is it's going to reduce the total of five equals $1.3 million. The what? The total of the five that I'm reading is $1.3 million. I'm sorry. I cannot make out what you're saying. The five total that I'm going to read into the record is $1.3 million that we're taking out of the restricted capital fund. I just want to put that on the record. Anything else? Call the question.

Thank you very much. Anything further on item 14? Any from the public? OK. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously. Thank you very much. Commissioner Schwartz, item 16.

16, motion to approve the purchase and installation of playground equipment at Silver Lakes North as identified in the city's strategic plan in the amount not to exceed $767,000, $330.84, through Play Corps Wisconsin Corporation, DBA Game Time. CO Dominica Recreation Products Incorporated utilizing Omnia Partners Contract Number 201-700-1134 pursuant to Section 3518 of the City Code of Ordinances. Is there a second? Second by Commissioner Rodriguez. Discussion? Yes, Mayor. So this is one of five. When we get to District 2, this is the entire city. This is also coming out of the capital reserves. I just want to have that on the record.

Thank you. Yes. We voted for that.

We did vote for it before the governor placed a ballot. That's correct.

And we voted for it. And if somebody wants to make a motion to reconsider, the strategic plan, because this could be our last chance to take care of the children that you say you want to support. This could be it. So I'm going to support moving forward with it. And I'm also going to support our other efforts here to do what we can for the city. The days of kicking the can down the road on capital projects are over. We need to move forward and move this city forward. There is a motion and a second. Correct? Any further discussion on that item? Any from the public? Thank you very much. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Show passes unanimously. Commissioner Schwartz, number 20.

Motion to approve a work order authorization with CPA. H Consulting LLC for professional engineering, surveying environmental and related services for strategic plan. Rec 11, Pembroke Pines Recreation Center North parking lot renovation in the amount of $158,910.

SECOND IT'S IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GOOD YOUR DISCUSSION ON THIS YES MAYOR I'M GLAD THE PARKING LOT IS FINALLY BEING REDONE I THINK I THINK IT WAS THE REAGAN ADMINISTRATION THE LAST TIME THIS WAS DONE SO HAPPY TO SUPPORT THE ITEM OKAY WE DON'T HAVE TO PULL ITEMS FOR THAT PURPOSE BUT THAT'S FINE THANK YOU VERY MUCH IT IT SIMPLY ABSORBS TIME ANYTHING ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON ON ITEM 20 ANY FROM THE PUBLIC Thank you. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Show of passes unanimously.

Item 22, a motion to approve a work order. I'm sorry? 18. 18 is first, ma'am. 18. I'll defer that to Commissioner Goode.

Oh, I'm sorry. I jumped over 18. Commissioner Goode, number 18.

We're on a roll, so we need to get through it. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

So 18, motion to approve.

Mike, Mike.

Item 18, motion to approve the 10th Amendment to the Trustee Partnership Agreement with the Miramar Pembroke Pines Regional Chamber of Commerce Incorporated for an expansion for a restaurant initiative program in an amount not to exceed $15,000.

Can I have this motion, please?

Yes, thank you.

Motion made by Vice Mayor, seconded by Commissioner Rodriguez. Go right ahead.

Yes, and thank you, Mr. Mayor. I appreciate you allowing me to speak to this item. So I'm not opposed to the item. I did have the opportunity to participate in a program that you, well, more like a listening session that you called for chamber restaurants that are members, that are restaurants. And I found it to be very, very helpful. It truly is something very, very important that we have in the city because, as we all know, as we all get stressed with our available dollars, we eat out less, right? And now that we're in the summer, it's even more of a challenge. My only concern is that because this was a, it's an economic-driven issue, that it did not ever get to make it before the Economic Development Advisory Committee that we have. And I didn't understand why it didn't go there. I'm not gonna ask for any follow-up to that right this moment because of the fact that it is an item that is needing to have action tonight. But I really believe that any time that our staff is working on issues that are relevant for our advisory boards, that they at least bring it to them and let them know that at least they're working on it, so at least they might be able to get some input. Sometimes ideas come from most unusual places, right? But that's why we have them. And this was an item I thought should have been brought before them just for them to have conversation and discussion. It didn't stop the fact that whether we were going to move forward with the $15,000 in the amendment. But that's the reason why I pulled the item because I needed to highlight that. And I think what you did on this, Mr. Mayor, was very relevant. So appreciate that.

And I want to thank you for that comment. I agree with it. I think that bringing this to the Economic Development Board is very important. Mr. Stamm and I met with the chamber chair and with the chamber's president after the meeting that you attended with the restaurants. Restaurants are important. essential ingredient in what makes Pembroke Pines a great place. They are suffering right now. They may suffer more. And part of what they're asking for is for government to work with them in a partnership that doesn't cost a lot of money, but would generate a great deal more restaurant excitement in terms of bringing people out of their homes into restaurants. Mr. Stamm and Ms. Archer are involved in crafting a strategic plan. Mr. Stamm, do you want to come forward? And I don't know whether it was Mr. Stamm's plan to present that strategic plan once it's completed to the Economic Development Board, but... Getting this rolling I think is very, very important for economic development in the city. And Mrs. Stamm, do you want to speak to these items?

Mike Stamets is city manager, mayor, commissioners. So after we had our restaurant roundtable, we did present the restaurant roundtable to the Economic Development Board. In fact, Miss Fabiana was at the restaurant roundtable, and she's on the Economic Development Board. We also have three members of the Chamber of Commerce serve on the Economic Development Board. So we discussed it there, and then we also talked about it at our chamber board meeting, which I'm a member of. We've been giving the Board regular updates. This final version didn't make it to the Board, obviously because of timing. As it's mentioned in the Monday memo, we're looking at this program almost kind of like a version of Miami Spice. When restaurants are at the slowest, that's when they kind of need as much exposure as possible. So working with the Chamber, the goal is to drive traffic to those restaurants, work on a give-back program for our residents that participate in those, and also possible non-for-profits in the area. Separately.

So your answer here says this item is being proposed as a result of the Mayor's Restaurant Roundtable, although not formally presented to the Economic Development Advisory Board in its current form. The board has seats on the Chamber of Commerce as members and staff discuss the roundtable and conceptual plans with the board members during recent meetings. So you're saying you haven't formally presented to them. The final trustee. But there's been discussion.

There's been some discussion, yes, sir.

So at what point are you going to go, as Commissioner Good rightly says, and present this to them formally?

Once the commission passes this item, the plan is to implement immediately because we don't meet again, obviously, during the month of July.

So this had to happen before you could do that?

Absolutely. That was our plan.

All right.

Mayor, if you notice in the agenda item, one thing I need to mention, all the commissioners. Mr. Mayor, if I may.

Yes, sir. I just don't agree with the fact that we should be doing things and then giving it to our advisory boards. I think the advisory boards should see things first before they come to us. So I just want to make that clarification. I'm not okay with that, but I'm okay with voting for this.

Okay. Okay. Mayor, let me mention one last thing. This, as you mentioned, it's a collaboration. So there's items that the planning and economic development staff, their code amendments that will be coming along with this. So this is only one component of the overall program. We will be working on a joint advisory board meeting with our economic development board, our planning and zoning board, who'll have to be part of that, and our board of adjustment that'll come along with that also. I must note that historically, and again, if it's a different policy from the commission to bring items to those advisory boards like this, then we'll take that step. Only the planning and zoning board and the board of adjustment typically have quasi powers, and Sam can refer to those where they make a recommendation to commission. Most of our advisory boards typically recommend you during their annual reports. But if the commission wants us to change those policies and bring some of these items there, I'm ready and willing.

We don't have to go that far. The commissioner was crystal clear.

Absolutely.

Okay. He'd like to see the boards advised sooner rather than later, before rather than after. As I understand it, In this particular case, because he understands the issue, he's going to go along with it. But he'd like to see, and I don't think that there's anything wrong with that. I can't imagine anyone else would object. Go see the boards when we come up with these ideas. That's why they're there. It's not a problem. And then from there on in, you know, We don't have to create rules for every time we make a point, all right? So I think we've got enough there. Anything else on this item? Anyone else wanna be heard? Okay, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Show of passes unanimously. Thank you very much. I know you'll be busy now doing your strategic plan. We wanna thank the Chamber for being a great partner with us in this matter. I know the restaurants will, be very, very happy that their city took an interest in making them more successful. So thank you very much, and thank you, Commissioner Good. OK, item 20, Commissioner Schwartz.

20 or 22? 22. 22 is next? Yeah.

I keep stumbling over these pages. Go ahead.

Motion to approve a work order authorization with CPZ Architects for the Architectural and Engineering Design Services for Rec. 05, Simmon Place Park, complete park renovation in the amount of $225,972. Okay. Is there a second? Second.

Okay. Go ahead, Commissioner Schwartz.

Again, just coming out of restricted funds, so just want to put it on the record.

Yes, all of these are coming out of the restricted funds. That's how we voted to fund these projects. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Thank you very much. Without objection, item 22 is passed unanimously. And then there is item 24.

24, motion to approve a work order authorization with CTS Engineering for professional engineering and surveying services for strategic plan project REC 13, Bend 4 in D&L Park, pedestrian pathway improvements in the amount of $151,870. Is there a second? Second.

Second by Commissioner Rodriguez, go ahead.

This is one where the district commissioner let staff know that there is no interest within the community for this project. I would ask my colleagues to support the district commissioner and vote no on this project and defer until November the 4th. This does not have to be done immediately.

Ms. Storenstam, Goulding, could you come forward please? And I'll trigger your memory. My understanding is that this project was part of the parks master plan project. Is that not correct?

CHRISTINA GOLDING, assistant city manager. That is correct.

And during the last administration, during the last commission, the master plan was brought to us and everyone loved it, including the district commissioner. Is that correct?

The master plan was approved by the commission in 2024, December of 2024.

So what is the objection now to improving Ben Furin Dino Park, Commissioner Schwartz?

I like how you phrased that.

Well, you're asking us not to fund this park. Because I know that there are three other commissioners here who are about to raise their hands and say, I'll take his money. So tell me what it is about Benfire and Dino Park that you don't want to improve.

I like how you phrased the question. Well, OK. It's quite articulate how you did that. OK, thank you. Trying to prove a double negative is not how we talk about it.

That's my question to you. What is it about this project that offends you?

See, there you go again. It's not about me. It's about the people who I represent, sir. And who I represent. do not want to have a pedestrian walkway. This is something that I have expressed to administration not once, not twice, when it came up, when Vice Mayor Seifel's traffic plan, pedestrian plan, we've discussed this at length. We've looked at it. I took time during the workshop to basically say that concrete through Ben Forndino Park is not welcomed by the community that resides directly next to it. I'm on the record for that. What would they like? Well, they like to leave it like how it is. That being said, there can be more natural gradient walkway improvement. Okay, the administration put together a master plan. Certainly I supported it, but that doesn't mean that everything in the plan I'm going to support. So I would like to be able to defer this item, defer this item until November 4th. Okay.

If I can get that, I'll be very happy. Ms. Goulding, has the commissioner ever spoken to you about his concerns in this process?

Yes, sir. He did. And I've spoken with the architect about the commissioner's concern, and it was relative to Cedarwood, which is directly to the north of this park. And the concern that he said came from the residents was that by adding a walk path, you're welcoming people into that community, and they didn't want that. And so in talking to the engineers, the walk path, it's not going to invite people into Cedarwood. It's just going to connect. to the existing sidewalk that's already on Taft Street. Because right now what happens is when people come into the park walking, the sidewalk ends, and then it's a mulch path, and then the mulch path ends in the parking lot.

I don't even know how that's not an ADA violation.

It's ADA mulch, so it complies. But what happens is people go for a walk, and they end up walking in the grass along Taft Street once they leave because there's no parking. pathway to connect to Palm Avenue.

Commissioner wants to defer this item, and that would require a second. Is there a second to Commissioner's request to defer?

Second.

Okay. There's a second.

Any further discussion on the referral to the next meeting? I can tell you, first I'm hearing that the architect has a different pathway.

This is a time-certain deferral, so... November 4th. November 4th, okay. So there's no further discussion.

All those in favor of... No, I want to discuss, I just... Well then, let's...

Let's understand what we're doing. So the commissioner has made a time certain deferral. Does that, city attorney, cut off discussion?

That is correct.

OK, so commissioner. What can I do to allow my colleagues to leave? I'm going to allow, I'm going to break the rules.

No, I don't want to comment if it's the deferral till November.

No, no, I don't want to silence my colleagues. Let me withdraw my deferral. Can I do that under Robert Shultz?

Mayor, if you'll accept the motion to withdraw the request.

I would like to have my colleagues weigh in, please.

Okay, go right ahead. There's no motion on the floor, Mr. Mayor. Go right ahead.

Okay. I'm looking at point number five, and I guess the justification for why we're looking to improve this park. It says, improve pedestrian accessibility, ADA compliance, walkability, and connectivity through Benferino Park by creating a continuous pedestrian pathway connecting the park to the surrounding sidewalk network. In the bullet points, it says, I assume what the specific job tasks are. Site data collection and topography serving, development of pathway alignment and ADA compliance Evaluation of drainage conditions, preparation for conceptual layouts, which I'll point out later, development of probable construction cost estimates, coordination in South Broward Drainage District, permitting requirements, bid and procurement support services. I think if we'd like to consider and maybe do some more community outreach into what the commissioner from that district is pointing out, I would support it. But I don't necessarily want to extend it all the way to November 4th because I think it is essential for all of our parks to have walkability. One of the issues in a lot of the areas, mostly because they're HOA oriented anywhere in our spaces, is the fact that there are sidewalks to nowhere. And I don't want any of our parks to have that. Because even if we, like even at the new Dream Park, The sidewalk from the outside of the park leads into the roadway into the park. There is no connectivity there either, which I'll point out later on. So I don't want to defer the walkability perfecting the walkability of a park till November 4th if The conversation is simply to have more community input from the commission. So I'm okay with deferring something like this to I Guess next meeting from whenever the next August meeting in order to meet the recommendations but to put it as far as November and delay increasing walkability and pedestrian safety for the residents of that district, whether we represent them or not, I'm not okay with that. Plus, I really want to get this ADA compliance for all of our parks.

Understood. Is that a motion? No, I'm going to, it's not a motion, but I'm seconding everything Commissioner Rodriguez just said. Right.

Okay, so if, may I have the floor again? Yes, sir. So this is an anticipated eight to 10 month project. That's bullet point six. I'm a little disappointed that administration didn't share the updated plan, which would certainly satisfy Commissioner Arriga's need to have this done a little bit sooner.

Can I comment on that?

So if administration can commit, to bringing it forward and sharing it with the district commissioner, then I have no issues bringing it back on the first meeting of August.

Commissioner, I don't have a plan. It was a discussion during the scoping meeting expressing your concern to the architect and the engineer that the residents of Cedarwood had a concern about the entrance and inviting people in. And they said to me, looking at it, we think that we have an idea that we can come up with that would make it so that it's not inviting, but it's just connecting.

And is this one or two people in Cedarwood? Or is this everyone in Cedarwood? Did the Cedarwoods? HOA contact you about this? Was there a resolution about this?

I've represented this community. And that's not my question. Well, if you let me finish, how about that? Let me answer, please. For 14 years, I worked with the HOA. This is one of the priorities for them. It's a constant reminder when I meet with them. So yes, it is the top of mind. I'm representing the people who put me here.

OK. Why don't we go to Cedar Woods? with the ideas and talk to them.

Well, right now we have a concept of a plan that was only through a verbal discussion. So may I ask, through the Assistant City Manager, can we somehow memorialize their thinking, at least maybe a sketch. Sure. So we can move it forward. Can we do that by August? I can do that. And take that to Cedarwoods? We don't need to go to Cedarwoods. I need to take a look at it, and I'll take it back to them. Because I know what they're looking for. And if it's something... I can envision where that dovetail may occur. I can see that. I did raise my objections to we don't want people walking across Taft Street without a crosswalk. But I can see where it could possibly go. OK. So I mean, listen, Ben Forandino Park, it's a gorgeous park, Mayor. I don't recall the commissioner who nominated Mayor Forandino for that park. That was me. But I do remember in 1987, 1988, 1989, standing at City Hall in Ben Forandino Park. OK, voting and everything else that was going on in there. So this is a park that is incredibly important to this district. It is really one of the only green spaces that we have. I think we have more geese than people that go to the park. With that being said, I think I have an idea of where they're thinking. I just need to have that conversation.

I would like to see the plans as well. Sure.

I'm just going to sketch it out for you all on Google Maps.

I want to make sure that the Cedarwood HOA gets to see it. So if there's a meeting that's scheduled there, I'd like for it to be posted, because I'm sure all of us would like to go and hear what the good people at Cedarwood, what their concerns are. No one has contacted me regarding Benfier and Dino Park and concerns that they wouldn't want the better walkability that this plan is offering. Walking past is the number one thing? I'm very interested personally in seeing what those plans are. So as you provide the commissioner with that, please let us all see what that item is. uh one way or another we're going to get to the cedar woods hoa make sure that they understand as the community most impacted that we're there to uh improve their park not to create a problem for them can i ask for a clarification here please yes you're asking to defer the item until august

That's it. That's what I'm hearing.

In that time, because I heard a couple things. Are you asking for me to coordinate community input on this park? Not yet.

I need to see the sketch. We want to see the sketch, and then we'll go from there.

OK. Mr. Mayor, so I do agree with my colleague. At least he should be communicated with by staff, because I understand the importance of park space on the east side of town. And I think that what he's asking for is something that I'm very passionate about as well. I can't help but to do nothing but support a deferral to your August and get your input.

As will I.

And can I just say for clarification that all of these projects that are coming before you are design and architect projects only. All of it will come to each of you in a schematic design for your input and your ideas. This is not something that is, once you say yes today, that that's the end of it. This is just step one of many, many steps.

Okay. Okay, now the other thing that I was going to mention is that I'm looking at the Monday afternoon memo, and I don't see item 24 there. And I'm going to ask commissioners, please, to bring these items to the attention of the staff. When you see an item on the agenda that you're uncomfortable with, please write them an email so that they can provide the answer so that we don't have to hear things for the first time at the city commission meeting. That's what the purpose of this is in a legal way is to give us an understanding so that when we gather here in this sort of odd, because if we were at dinner, we would never sit this way, odd sort of shaped room that we're not hearing these issues for the first time. So thank you very, very much. There's a motion to defer on the table. And Commissioner Good, you've seconded it? Yes, I've seconded it, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Until the meeting of the first meeting in August. First meeting in August. Perfect. That's a set date. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? The item is unanimously deferred. And the next item is item 28. Commissioner Goode.

Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Item 28 is motion to approve a work order authorization with Kimley, Horne & Associates Incorporated for engineering design services related to converting the city-owned electrical services at Health Park to Florida Power and Light FPNL electrical services served by new utility distribution infrastructure in the amount of $160,555. Is there a second?

Second.

Seconded by Commissioner Rodriguez. Commissioner Good.

Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. So I did place this request to staff. And the request was basically, so my colleagues are a little familiar, if I may, for a moment. FP&L has a very unique way of operating. They have what they call tariffs. I don't know if you're familiar what tariffs are. Tariffs. T-A-R-I-F-F. Tariffs.

Is that where they charge us a lot of money and then?

That's their sort of schedule of charges for all the different things they do, inclusive of charging you for electricity. So if you were going to put a street light out, well, there is a tariff that spells out how a street light gets installed in the city and how it gets charged over a period of time. So this right here, what's being asked is to provide services to separate buildings. I can only assume that the reason why the city owns electrical lines is because there is a main service junction outside the property, and it sort of serves very similar to the way water utilities do. If we're familiar with water utilities, you can have a big development, and they bring you a big line. They put a big meter there, and they say, you all take care of it from there. Or it could be a single family home where they run all the stuff up to the meter. Anything past the meter, you do. Anything before the meter, it's them. FP&L does the same exact thing with electricity like they do with water. And so one of the things that I was looking at was like, well, why are we even paying for any of this service if they're going to break them down and they're going to give services to individual buildings? So that means they're going to run an electric line up and you put a meter on it. Anything past the meter, it's the building owner's responsibility, anything before that. But yet we're doing all design work. And what's happening here, too, is that this is not the end of the project. This is just design. So it's going to have to come into construction and material costs and all that other good stuff. So there's going to be additional charges that are associated with this. My thought when I looked at this was, why didn't we just let FP&L do turnkey project and we just pay them for everything? Let them do the design. Let them figure out all the loads. Let them do where they're going to do the construction and then do the probable costs and tell us all this and that and the other.

And then we pay them.

But we're not doing that. And I asked, did we ever ask them to do that? And the answer basically was no. We had talks with them, but we never asked them for a cost estimate to do design work. Additionally, what happens when you do design work is you basically get it done and you give it to FPNL and say, OK, here's the design. Build it. Because FPNL doesn't necessarily let anybody do their work unless it's Pike, right? Pike is the guy that normally does their stuff. They'd rather do it, but occasionally it might be done differently. But I look in here and I see that this company that's doing design work has put in like $28,000 worth of charges for things that are for bid and construction services. So they're going to help us with a bid, and they're going to help us do construction. I don't quite understand that when FPNL normally does that themselves. And so we're paying out of this amount $28,000 for a bid in construction. I'd prefer that we actually ask FP&O what it would cost us to have them do turnkey on this before we even make this decision to let go of a contract for $160,000, which we might not need.

Mr. Bernier?

Yes, sir. Thank you. be willing to ask for a deferral to get that information for the commissioner, to allow our staff, public services, to work with FPL to get that cost estimate to see what that approximate cost. I know that it's going to be, FPL's costs, as the commissioner mentioned, are pretty extensive. So if we could do that, that would be great.

If, Mayor, if I may, before we get to the deferral, I just want to ask a question. Mr. Bonilla, what buildings at the health park is the City of Pembroke Pines providing electrical services to? Do we have, like, are we billing people for electricity at the health park?

So as the commissioner mentioned, that's a good question. As the commissioner mentioned, it works, the state hospital, when it was built many, many moons ago, had a one circuit, and that circuit was connected to FPL, and then individually, the different buildings had their own sub-meter, and that sub-meter was the responsibility of the city to bill the tenants there.

So, okay, so the... public utilities is on campus, right? So there's, do we pay, do we charge, do we bill the city for electrical services?

There's a bill that gets costed for the entire complex and then we divvy based on kilowatts because we have sub meters, we bill back the tenants of those particular locations.

Okay, I guess what I'm trying to get to is we have the state hospital, okay, that's a different agency paying electric. We have the Howard Foreman campus, buildings, the affordable housing, those are individual units. They pay. How do we handle billing ourselves for electricity, let's say, for utilities or our veterans housing? Are we charging the veteran housing residents power as well?

There are sub-meters for those specific items that are still on the old grid from the state hospital. So what this will do is that it will essentially build FPL's grid into the health park to provide meters specific that are tied to FPL, not sub-meters.

So this whole time FPL just had? Are we paying FPL anything over these years or are we basically on our own? Like they're sending us the electricity and then we get to bill it? Like how does that work?

Correct. That's exactly how it would work. We, it goes to a main circuit and then from there it gets divvied up to the different sub meters. Those sub meters, the bill for those sub meters are paid by the tenants.

Okay. And then we collect that money, and then we send that revenue to FPL.

That's correct.

Yes, sir. So how do we handle repairs? If a meter at a building goes down, who does that work?

That's a very good question. That's exactly why we're trying to enhance this grid. This grid now is being maintained by our public services team, and its part is past its useful life, and the components are very expensive or obsolete. So therefore, that's what this project will do.

So if a power line, if there's a tree laying on a power line, and the power line goes down, who does that work?

It would be if it's well-farmed meters. Is it the city? Yes.

Just like a water meter. Anything past the meter, it's yours. And the master meter is probably on the outside of the property somewhere.

So like hurricane, I'm just thinking of just If we lose the grid during a storm, right now we're responsible for putting it back up.

That's the purpose of the item, Commissioner.

But all these years it's been like that.

All these years since we assumed the lease. Correct. There's parts of the compound that our FPL has already gone into. But this will complete the 18 existing electrical services that we need to bring back into that.

All right. However Commissioner Good wants to handle the item, I'll support him on it. But Mr. Bernier, could you send us a diagram of the properties that it's basically the city of Pembroke Pines? Can you send a sketch or identify by address? We'll be able to provide that. I mean, that's crazy. that we're actually doing poll work, but okay.

So Mr. Mayor, if I may, if I can ask for a deferral on this item to give staff enough time at least to communicate with the FP&L to see what it would cost us to let them have a turnkey project.

A motion to defer non-time specific has been made. Is there a second? Second. Seconded by the Vice Mayor. Any discussion on the deferral? Any from the public? All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously. Thank you very much, Commissioner Good, for that catch. Okay. We are now on first reading.

Thank you, Mayor. Item number 33 for the record is a motion to pass proposed ordinance number 2026-0 for on first reading. It reads as follows. Proposed ordinance number 2026-0 is an ordinance of the City of Pembroke Pines, Florida pursuant to Section 8.03 of the City of Pembroke Pines Charter authorizing the execution of an agreement to enter into a sub-sub-lease attached here to Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference for a real property generally located at 8103 South Palm Drive, references Tower 1, 8210 Florida Drive references Tower 2 and 8203 Florida Drive references Tower 3 collectively referred to as Pines Place and described in Exhibit B which property is subleased by the City from the State of Florida Department of Children and Family Services and owned by the State of Florida through the Board of Trustees of the Internal Trust Fund of the State of Florida. authorizing the closing of the transaction contemplated in the agreement effective upon the filing by the city manager with the city clerk of a certificate confirming that the closing requirements in the agreement have been satisfied, the form of which is attached to Exhibit C, subject to the terms and conditions as set forth in the agreement. authorizing the proper city officials to execute all necessary documents and to take all action necessary to close the transaction consistent with the authority granted herein, providing that any amendments extending the review period to the agreement to enter the sub-sub-lease may be approved by a... Resolution, duly executed resolution of the City Commission, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, and providing for an effective date. This is item number 33, references 2026-04 on the floor for consideration for you, Mayor and Commission. Thank you very much.

Is there a motion on the item?

Motion to approve.

Motion made by Commissioner Good, seconded by the Vice Mayor. Commissioner Good, before I turn to you, I just simply want to say a couple things about this item. This is... This is an important project for the city of Pembroke Pines, not just for the tenants, but financially for the entire city. We have had the opportunity now, each of us, to speak directly with the potential new owner of this facility, who has assured us that no one will be displaced, that rents will be contained inside of what the requirements are for affordability, that it will be an affordable housing asset that the city can count on, and that they will use the list of referrals that the city has of both seniors and workforce housing people that it maintains from our own residents. This will continue to be. affordable housing in Pembroke Pines for Pembroke Pines in association with an owner. The sales proceeds will be used for public purposes that are essential to the health, safety, and welfare of the city without having to raise taxes. This project came up once before. It received the unanimous approval of the city commission. The person who we were doing business with had difficulty getting financing, and the project fell apart. In comes the next applicant to take the spot of the former. The contract was easy to craft because we were already there. All of the work had been performed. A significant partnership with the state of Florida was reached, where they provided through statute a tax advantage, which would be essential in order to be able to make this project work. I am very, very hopeful that we can find a way to continue to have a unanimous support of this project, because I believe it will be good for the residents, good for Pembroke Pines. It will help us to solve a great deal of problems, and it will hurt no one. It hurts no one, especially the taxpayer. This is smart business. This is Charlie's master plan. idea. Charlie Dodge, at his best, came up with this elegant solution, a solution that wasn't available to us at the time that the original bond discussion occurred, but evolved after. And I know that it was deferred so that we could get more information from the potential new owner. And we've all had that opportunity. So this is the time now for us to report out what we've learned, report out anything that we might have extracted to make the deal even better. And I hope that we were able to do that and move forward because Pembroke Pounds is counting on this. So with that, Commissioner, I think you made the motion. So I'll turn to you first.

And thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I do want to say that I am thankful to my colleagues for allowing this item to be deferred so that we could have just a little bit more contact time with the issue. So I did have a good conversation with the Reliant leadership. And in general, I'm pretty satisfied with what they are doing. The company they check out, they've been doing this for a while. What I do like is that they also are intending to bring in some services that sort of help some of the people there that may experiencing some rental increases and things, and possibly even some guidance for health and human services. I know we already do things like that in the city, but they also have a corporation that is going to be there assisting them with residents who actually live there. I'm very, very thankful for that. There was one question that I did have in the conversation with Reliant, and it dealt with language on there because this is a very complicated agreement, so to say, because we have two landlords ourselves. We're going to be the third landlord. And And part of what Reliant is committing to is accepting responsibility for all the prior lease agreements that have come before. And the one question that I did have was that it was about auditing. And is Reliant subject to audits by the city? And I guess that's directed to the attorney.

May I respond, Mayor? Well, he's not there. Mr. Vice Mayor, I'm sorry. Mr. Vice Mayor, the answer is yes. The sub-subtenant will have a continuum of relationship, if approved, with the City of Pembroke Pines, which is a public body. And auditing is not an objectionable issue in the lease. You can ask that of Mr. Kakar, who's on the line. but to the extent legally appropriate, they certainly would be open to audit and would be subject to audit because the relationship is continuing through the life of the sublease, which would be the life of the city's, strike that, the sub-sublease would be the life of the sublease the city has with the state of Florida until 2090.

And then what is the limit? Because I know that we can't just sit there and say we're going to audit them. I mean, we can only audit, what would the parameters be?

The length and breadth of an audit would have to be contained in the actual sub-sub-lease document. You'll note that before the commission at the last meeting and before you this evening is the agreement to sub-sub-lease, which subjects the parties to negotiating a final sub-sub-lease document. And if the perfection of auditing is an issue that needs to be concluded, that's an issue which would have to be included as a special condition. If it's not already in there, I'll have it in front of me to the extent possible. So that's an item which is obviously of concern to you. Let me restate also. Thank you. I'm sorry. No, go ahead. The sub-sublease is not a done document. That's something which is required during the negotiating period, the due diligence period. So if auditing and the perfection of auditing is an issue which the commission would direct us to consider in the drafting of that document, it could be a special condition. Bearing in mind, though, that the sub-subtenant is a private entity, and there may be some limitations on access to private data that would not otherwise be available if we, the city, were the subtenant.

Thank you, and I believe I have a follow-up for you, and I'll do that offline. Sure. Thank you. The other concern that we had in conversation was, and it was expressed at the commission meeting that we defer the item, were that there were increases that were going to be associated with the tenants, meaning 100% of the units were going to be brought up to the 80% AMI. And then after 10 years, 50% of the units would be brought up to 100% of the AMI. And so it was rather loose. There was no description on how that process would take place. We had conversation about that. And then, of course, I turned to staff and I asked staff to see if there was a way that it could be done administratively to address those concerns or would that have to be done at the dais. And so I do recognize that we have a revised document that does spell out that any of the tenants that are currently there that are getting an increase in their rent will not get more than a 10% increase per year, which is good. Still a lot probably for some folks, but still wasn't a, you know.

You nailed it down.

Yeah, it got down. And then in regards to the 50% of the units going up to 100% of the AMI, that was only going to be done on new units that get turned over. So that means if it stayed 100% occupied past 10 years, none of the units would go up to 100% because they're occupied. But once they turn those units over, that's when they'll go up to 100% of the AMI. So I thank Reliant. I thank staff for defining that process. It was very, very helpful. And I think it makes better partners for us to be able to work through those things. The other things that I want to make comment to are the appraisals. And so the appraisals, when you first look at it, the first feel is that you get a high and a low appraisal value. And it's really not a high and a low appraisal value. It's an appraisal if you have to pay taxes, and it's an appraisal if you do not have to pay taxes. So if you have to pay taxes on the building, then it's the lower number in the appraisal. And if you don't have to pay taxes, it's the higher number. Now, I do take a little exception to the fact that we're taking a look at the numbers that are really related more towards the building with taxes, but we know that we spent a substantial amount of dollars and a substantial amount of time with the prior proposal in order to get the state statutes to accept this facility to be operating without having to pay taxes. So I would have expected that we go to the higher number, but we didn't. And I will say that... And I can come to terms with that and agree to it, because first and foremost, property assets, building assets in particular, have really gone up a lot over the last several years. And so we probably made a lot of ground with the appreciation of building assets. And so those numbers still are, probably pretty good. And the other thing that I take into consideration is that these buildings are occasionally subsidized by the city, because we're constantly seeing items come before us, which are maintenance. And the maintenance isn't just, hey, sweep the floor. It's like, replace the refrigerator, the cabinets, the countertops, and all these things. And I know that some of that gets paid out of the rent, but there is also that potential of us subsidizing. And recognizing that we're going in through this tax reform, I don't know that we can afford to go forward subsidizing facilities when we could still keep that affordable housing component in our city. So I've made terms with that, and I'm OK with that. what the sale price is. I do want to, though, ask my colleagues, if you're interested still, the first go-round, we had a carve-out for a reservation for affordable housing, you know, support, you know, leveraging these dollars. I don't know how much we would be able to leverage now, considering the potential of what we're going to experience when it comes to tax reform. But if there is an interest to retain some amount, I'd like to hear from my colleagues what you think that would be. And so we could have a little bit of conversation about how to retain and leverage a little bit of that for additional affordable housing programs within the city. And the other thing that really I'm very thankful for my colleagues, again, for allowing this to be deferred, is that I think we've actually been able to protect ourselves from being charged with any sort of malfeasance. Because one of the things that has been expressed to us, and I've been asking this question over and over again, and staff has been very tuned in to the questions I've been asking, and we're gonna see another item later that's probably gonna resolve some of the issues that I have. But we have a charter that says any asset that is valued more than 15% of our budget is... Operating budget, Commissioner.

Operating.

The approved budget. The operating budget. It would be having to go out for a referendum. So approving this item doesn't have anything to do with the referendum issue, so I'm okay with this item. What does have an issue, though, is is our budget large enough to allow a $90 million deal be less than 15%, which then would say it would not require a referendum. And if it is more, it would require a referendum. But the language itself in our charter, it says very clearly that it's the annual operating budget. And that's what we approve. And we approved it at $561 million. That's what we publicly put out. However, we have another item here that will allow us to consider amending our budget. And it may make that situation a little bit better. But that's not here or there. But I just want to thank you for it, because at least staff listened. That information got disclosed. It's transparent. I'm very comfortable now knowing going forward that we're doing process-wise as well the right thing in the right way. And we've protected ourselves from anything in the future. So Mr. Mayor, I'm willing to vote on the item. And I thank you for allowing me the time.

Thank you.

Anyone else? Vice Mayor. I wanted to first thank Reliant for spending an hour with me, or maybe a little bit more, via Zoom to answer my questions. I am question number one on the Monday night memo simply because and I know some folks roll their eyes at me because I'm constantly thinking in terms of how do we better communicate information, in particular with this building with, I believe it's 614 units, roughly 800 residents. And I ask this of both Reliant and of administration, which I'll talk about in a second, mainly because I feel it's important, especially nowadays, we are flooded with information on these devices, computers, et cetera, I just would like there to be an emphasis made, if this goes through, God willing, that everything that the mayor said before and Commissioner Good said after, which is how would this impact residents? In previous jobs, I haven't been a developer. I've worked communications for major development projects, other parts of the state, other parts of the country. there is a thing as misinformation and oftentimes residents hear that they believe that that is accurate and it becomes an issue with the most precious asset they have which is their home so I asked the gentleman from Reliant please undertake this extensive effort it's not just a a tweet or social media. It's knocking on doors. It's connecting with residents, assuming this goes through, God willing. But making sure that you assuage your fears that if it even takes sometimes there are folks, believe it or not, who do not have access to electronics as readily as many of us do, even if it means printing it out on a piece of paper with Q&As and actually dropping it at a door. Make sure those residents know fact from fiction. Last time, Commissioner Good, before we deferred it, I mentioned amenities. I wanted to know, how are you going to enhance the quality of life beyond what we could do as a city for these residents. Again, 800 of them, roughly, in our city. Thank you, Reliant, for everything that you provided me and how you went through that entire process. Commissioner Good, whenever you bring up the point about affordable housing restriction or reservation, I'll wait to hear from you. So I don't really have a comment on that right now. I remember 2024, and I was supportive of it. It seems like 50 years ago, but it was 2024. So I wait for you on that. I do want to thank, and I don't think he and his team get enough thanks. It's Mr. Sam Gorin and his firm, Saturday morning, Sunday morning, they were working on this. They were available to answer questions. This is a monster of a deal. I mean, it is a lot of paperwork. And I know it's not easy. And they have all the other city business to deal with, putting items on the agenda, dealing with five of us, et cetera. So to Mr. Gorin and your firm, and also, of course, to Mr. Dodge, which I know he's available by phone, Mr. Bonilla, and the entire administration, thank you for your diligent work. your patience in answering questions, because, again, there are five of us. And I do think that if this moves, unlike the last issue we had, I think we're going to be a better city for it. I really believe it. It's not my district. It's Commissioner Good's district. But it doesn't matter. geopolitical lines, I think this will benefit our entire city, no matter where we live. So thank you all. And Commissioner Good, thank you for asking us to defer it. Thank you for taking more time to research it. You're incredibly prepared when you come to these meetings And this is a big agenda, so I thank you because I sit up here And I I do learn from you even if I'm up here voting with you you bring up points that I don't always Think of so I'm letting you know publicly that I appreciate it.

So thank you anyone else I Yes.

I do, when I had my meeting with Reliant as well, brought up the concept of communications and I don't, I want our residents to feel like this, if this goes through, that it's not just this entity coming in and telling them X, Y, and Z. I want that transition and that communication to feel like a partnership because if, for lack of better terms, this is a random person to all those tenants, yet they know our city officials and they know us, well, obviously a little bit more their district commissioner and they know our staff and things like that. So those community meetings, all of that part of it, I think it's better served for the community that we also partake in that communication process, that they know they have a trusted group of us that they've gotten to learn and work with over the last couple of years, and that we're not simply just saying, hey, Reliant, take this communication forward, because they're going to still come to us like, do we believe them? Do we hear them out? What is the consensus on the dais? That kind of stuff. So I want, if we are able to implement such a thing as this community outreach, which in my conversations with Reliant, they said that they would do this kind of outreach, that the city also commits to doing that outreach with them so that residents feel like they're not just being added to this company, rather, that we are kind of holding their hand through the transition as a city. And I think that that's our responsibility and one of the biggest ones we have for this to go well for all of the residents there.

I like to just add, because definitely I agree with the direction that you're going. The question is, when can that be done? Because the complications with this, there's a delivery period. What is that period? You call it a cu- Inspection period. Well, there's a series of deliverables that have to be done. It's the due diligence period, correct. And some of this is contingent upon going back to the DCF, who actually owns, who we actually got our lease with, who they have it with the trust fund, the state of Florida. And the question is, and I ask, how long has that taken? And it could be, I don't know. Right? And do you do a communication with people prior to knowing that all those approvals are going to be done? Because what if somebody says no, or they throw some kind of a condition in there, And that's what I think is conditions precedence, what I was thinking of. So when could that be, which is very, very important, because I think it needs to be done absolutely.

I was just going to chime in, commissioners, because I think we're all on the same page with respect to that. And the response that I got both in this city hall and from of the developer was the time to do that is after we approve the first reading because now we have we actually have something concrete to talk about it's not just a bunch of words it's an act by the city that we'd like to we'd like to see this work so this would now be the great time and i have to tell you that reliant has been in fact when i spoke to them about it eager to organize the residents and have conversations with them to not just ameliorate their concerns, but eliminate them in terms of what product they're going to get, that they're not going to be priced out of their units, that no one is going to be displaced, and so forth. I think that that is essential. And I have to tell you, you will recall that with the last vendor, we had that. They went to this location, and they had that meeting. But this is a new player, and they need to do the same thing, and they were only too eager to do it. The step for that is after tonight. So even as they go after their long list of things that they have to do before it comes back to us and then before it goes to closing, One of those things needs to be that they will be meeting with the staff. If any of you wish, the company is present. Their president is present. And he can talk to you about all that. But I think each of us in our own way, directly, had that conversation with Reliant. It's very, very important. the residents to be welcoming of this change because it's actually good for the building. It's good for them. And it's not intended to hurt anyone. I recall when it was me, Ortis, Seiple, Schechter, and McCluskey who took the bold step of wanting to, of approving this project. Only I'm left here sitting, but I see my former colleague is here, former Commissioner McCluskey. And from the start, the design for this, the operational design for this building was that the rents cover the expenses, plus I believe it was a 10% reserve, something along those lines. that would pay for the incidentals and would also create a fund from which repairs would happen, other kinds of things would happen. And that that number would grow because all affordable housing has increases. And I want to give you kudos because When I saw the revised language, obviously I wouldn't know that it was you, but I guessed because it had your fingerprints all over it in terms of what you extracted, the clarity of what you extracted in terms of when this would be allowed, when it wouldn't be allowed, how the vacancies would be approved is such a pleasure to read it because it's so much more clear. And I want to thank you for that. Because you extracted that. And you added value to the contract. But as time goes on and costs escalate, you also have these rents that are contributing to this reserve. So there really shouldn't be this need for subsidizing. Not under the model. And I'm not aware of any. The model that works in Pembroke Pines is we bond these projects, we build them or acquire them. The rents pay the debt service, and they also fund a reserve. And from that reserve, you deal with the capital needs as they come up in terms of the building and anything else. In terms of supportive housing, That is ripe for grants. There are grants at HUD for that. There are grants at the state for that. We'll see if they continue to exist. But in the affordable housing arena, those supported housing elements and components are typically, that's where they typically come from. There's also the ability to leverage against social work, because most of it is case work, case management and social work, financial case management. There are different models. Some of it is a job placement and stuff. This is typically for different populations. But you can leverage it against your existing social services structure at the senior center. I mean, that's a natural combination. So I really think that what we have is a thing that can work And it's an exciting prospect for the city in so many different ways. My only remaining question is to make sure that we're clear. So, Mr. Attorney, in terms of the 15%, I want to be clear because the commissioner was correct in pointing out this charter provision. Are we in any way, shape, or form in violation of that provision with this deal?

May I respond, Mayor? Yes, sir. The short answer is no, we are not. And to the extent that there is extensive review and information in the backup that the commissioner requested, Commissioner Good requested quite a bit of information, not only produced by our office that provided legal advice with regard to Section 8.03 of the charter, but also our finance director, Lisa Chung, her professional staff, and her review of all of the calculations and the numbers to get to the answer which was requested, which is does the proposed sale price of the buildings violate The answer is it does not.

Okay. Okay.

All right. Are there any other comments on this? Commissioner Schwartz.

Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Commissioner Good, for continuing to represent the most vulnerable in the city. The majority of the residents that live in this area. Started off, you had to be 55 and over. We couldn't fill it and went to 18 and over. And Commissioner Good and I sit on the city's affordable housing committee. And we've done that for several years now. I see this complex is extremely personal to me. Mr. Bonilla, a two-bedroom, square footage, approximately. I don't need you down to a foot, but approximately how many square feet?

I don't have that information readily available, but I can try to get it.

So my mother and I grew up in 760 square feet, me, my mom, and my sister, on government assistance from elementary school through high school. This project is personal to me. A 10% increase. is not possible from one year to the next year to the next year. Five years, you're 50% increase. Families cannot do that. Before second reading, I'm going to need to see Reliant tighten up that pro forma. 10% a year is just not doable. We had a great conversation. I want to thank Reliant for it. I learned a little bit, because Commissioner Good and I learned about Reliant while we were sitting on the committee. I think we had a presentation about the things happening in Miami. And Reliant and I, we spoke about their project down in Miami-Dade County. However, this is going to be the first time their land is actually sitting on government property, because they're a for-profit company. They purchase the land. They build the project. So this is first for them. I've gone back and forth. Relia and I, we had the conversation. They deferred it to the city attorney's office. I'd like to have certainty, and the state of Florida has yet to see this. We have the tax bill. We did our part, but the application has not been in front of the state of Florida. I asked the city attorney's office if we can get a conditional closing if certain things were checked off, like let's get their approval before we can move forward, because a closing, if it's going to move forward, needs to happen for the purposes of things that could benefit the public at a much greater scale. The amenities that Reliant would like to put in is to improve the quality of life for children who may be living within that complex. That's important to me. So I'm hopeful that we're able to move forward, but we are reliant upon the state of Florida to do its part. We have no, I'm only positive about this, we don't control that outcome. We've done everything we possibly can, and now it's gonna be up to those in Tallahassee to get us to the finish line. The closing of that process, we don't control. City Attorney, correct me if I'm wrong. We don't control when the state of Florida would move the cheese, would be able to move it forward. It's my hope that based upon a due diligence period, which we heard two weeks ago is 90 days, will now put us in September after our second reading of budget ahead of a November election. And when the state of Florida checks that box off, we don't control that outcome. That's the one thing that is making me uncomfortable not having that known answer. The previous project never saw the state of Florida either.

That's not exactly true. The contract that we have in front of us, Commissioner, and that preceded it, but did get the state's approval. So there was very close coordination with the state.

City attorney. The Hayden Glade project was ever presented in front of DEP for approval?

May I try to respond, Mayor?

Yeah.

The document before you this evening is an ordinance to authorize the approval of an agreement to sub-sub-lease. And it has many conditions, and you've been through the conditions. You discussed them on the dais moments ago. as an adjunct to doing so is the actual sub-sub lease itself, which is a document which must be reviewed by the state DEP and by the DCF. Those are the two entities that control our relationship as a city with that land. To answer your question, Commissioner Schwartz, the DEP general counsel and Their district manager only saw a draft of the sub-sub lease on Hayden Glade. It was not a final document. It was a preliminary document. It was not approved. They don't approve sub-sub leases per se. They approve the associated documents that give the sub-sub tenant the assurances that they can finance the transaction.

Okay, which is a clear distinction. Draft versus...

There was no final document. That's all they asked for. There was no final document, but the response.

This is standard business. It's the way these projects are done.

Mayor, with all due respect.

No, I don't want it to appear like the state is going to see this for the first time or that they have had these deep objections that we're ignoring. That is not the case.

Mayor, we independently have conversations with the administration and the city attorney's office. Right. And? So just as I'm describing my understanding of events, You are in those meetings.

And so I that's and that's why we're trying to clarify it here You just said that the state hasn't seen it and this is causing you Concern and I'm trying to ameliorate your concern by explaining to you that our council has been working hand-in-glove with state DEP with their general counsel and with their district director and they are very much aware of what's going on and There have been documents that have gone back and forth during the previous period. And they are in a zone right now. They sort of understand one another. really think it's appropriate to say that you have these concerns, like that the state is going to... You can certainly summarize your opinion on my thoughts.

Well, I mean...

I mean, you have the right to do that, but what I've asked for... What you said was a big thing, so I'm asking the attorney, do you have a sense, based on what you know and based on the work that you've done with the general counsel... And with DEP that there's something that was missed here that they're going to say, oh, no, this is totally out of line. Or have they been sort of briefed at every step along the way with respect to the contents of the contract?

If I may respond, Mayor? Yes. When, as in if, the city commissioner approves this agreement, there will be a sub-sub-lease that has to be finalized between the parties, which has to be reviewed by the Department of Environmental Protection and associated documents. That has not happened yet. Have we had our conversations with the state of Florida? Absolutely have. Have we begun those discussions? Absolutely. My law partner Mike Cirillo and I had a conference call with them in recent days. They are aware that a transaction is pending. condition upon a commission approval. The driving force to get to the sub-sub lease is the agreement before you, which requires two readings. And with due diligence, we will do that. And this provision also, by the way, the agreement before you that permits and allows, although not in privity with the state of Florida, does allow Reliant and their councils or others to have communication with the state so long as the state wants to have them in communications. And Reliant has agreed to that, that that's part of the agreement, part of what we've agreed to as well. But the city has its direct legal relationship. It's called privity of contract with the state of Florida. We don't intend to breach that, but we do intend to support the opportunity should there be questions that we can't answer that could be answered by Reliant. Thank you.

Commissioner Schwartz. So with that being said, because we had deferred the item, I had discussion with the city attorney about advertising requirements so that we don't lose any more time than necessary in order to allow Reliant to do their due diligence period, to allow the state to have their comprehensive review, and be able to turn this around back to us with a little bit more certainty. I would ask the mayor and my colleagues to be able to have a special meeting at the end of this month pending the proper notification with legal advertisement so that we're able to get to a second reading this month in lieu of potentially delaying it any further than it needs to.

Commissioner, I would call a special meeting if the parties agreed to it. but I am not going to be forcing a date on them or anything.

I had a conversation with Reliant.

Okay, well, then they know that if they need a special meeting, this mayor will call it. Mr. Mayor. And earlier better than later, however, I'm not going to agree to call a special meeting on this evening for a date certain before... it's potentially before, wine before it's time.

It would be the second reading that requires fourth, fifth, so we have more certainty.

I totally understand your point.

Reliant doesn't have that control. Had we approved this at first reading two weeks ago, we would have had second reading tonight.

Sir, that has to happen between the parties, and they will manufacture our course of action, and our job is to... They've already heard from us that we'd like to see this done with all due speed. That's not a nuance that has escaped their attention. When they're ready, they will come back.

Well, let me ask Reliance since they're on the call here. Good evening, sir. It's good to see you again. Their president is present. the discussion about getting to second reading sooner rather than later. We had a discussion that July was off the table due to City Hall being on summer break. A YEAR AGO LAST YEAR WE HAD A SPECIAL MEETING CALLED AT THE END OF JULY TO MOVE THINGS FORWARD. WE HAD THAT DISCUSSION WHILE WE WERE ON THE CONFERENCE CALL. WOULD YOU PREFER US TO WAIT FOR SECOND READING TO COME IN AUGUST OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE US DO THIS THIS MONTH?

THIS MONTH WOULD BE EXCELLENT FOR US AND I THINK GOOD FOR YOU BECAUSE THE TIME The DD doesn't start until the second reading's city commission approves the deal.

Right. So you can't move forward unless we get the second. Is that correct? Mayor, does that change your viewpoint on how quickly we can get this done?

My viewpoint is that I take the advice of my city attorney and of my city commissioner, a city manager who are doing business with this fine company, and they are aware of this entire commission's preference to move this along fast as possible. However, when they ask me to call a special meeting, that meeting will be called. And that's what we can do tonight. We cannot pick a date. based on the many things that they have to do. And now we've just added a thing to their list, quite rightly so, which is outreach to the community. So I understand your eagerness. I respect your eagerness. I share your eagerness. However, when they are ready to have the meeting, they will tell me and I will call it.

Mr. Mayor.

That's it.

Mr. Mayor, if I may. Yes. Briefly. To the extent that there needs to be a second reading, one of the key factors of Commissioner Good's legal research and operational research was very, very important. Because as an ordinance, this approval requires a specific public hearing under state statute chapter 166, one of the transparency issues that he spoke to earlier this evening. Having said that, if the commission approves this document this evening, this ordinance for first reading, I've inquired of the clerk only because of the fact that the question might have arisen on the dais, and I sought to ask the question. We know under Florida law there must be not less than 10 days between first and second reading of an ordinance. It has to be publicized. The public has to be given a right to know that it's out there and has a right to be here during the course of that public hearing when it's set. Tonight, I can't know the answer, nor can the city clerk. But if you approve this ordinance on first reading, the clerk can confirm or make the effort to confirm with the Sun Sentinel when the publication could occur and to get a target date that you, the Commission, could then subscribe to for a special meeting. I don't know what that date is this evening and the clerk might not know the answer either because even though we know we have a 10-day fuse, there's also X number of days on the front end that may be required to get it to the Sun Sentinel, their publication requirements, etc. I'm trying to find a way to give the Commission some guidance and the best answer I can offer to you is if the clerk can check tomorrow with the mayor and commission's concurrence as to when this item could be potentially advertised, that would be the time when the mayor could call a special meeting knowing when the date is. I don't know what that date is tonight. It could be June 30. It could be July 15. I don't know. But I do know what the process looks like. And what it looks like is finding out when the target date could be confirmed by the Sun Sentinel tomorrow to allow the mayor to know when to call a meeting.

I think the point's been covered. Is there anything else?

I want to thank the city attorney codifying the conversation that I've had with him over the last several days about this exact process. My intent is to not wait any longer than is necessary. The only thing holding the calling of a special meeting is advertising requirements. So when the clerk and the city administration sometime after tonight can identify what would be the earliest date that the mayor could be notified at which point this commission can reconvene. That's all I'm saying, Mayor. You call the special meeting.

I've explained to you that when the administration asks me to call a meeting, a special meeting on this matter, it shall be called. I'm waiting for them in their negotiations with this party to tell me when. And we've also instructed them that sooner is rather than later. That's our preference. I think that's everyone's preference. So I think we've beat the issue to death. When they ask me to call the meeting, I'm happy to call it. There won't be a second thought about it, OK? Anything else on this item?

Mr. Mayor, just one quick housekeeping item, if you will. In the Monday night memo as amended today, The document that Commissioner Good was referring to is the Declaration of Restrictive Covenants, which specifically, as you also mentioned, Mr. Mayor, has the language regarding rental issues, compliance with AMI, all of the conditions that are in that document. And that's the item that we're voting on. Well, you're voting on the contract before you with the insertion of that document, which is Exhibit K, to the agreement, which contains the language which Commissioner Good had requested. which was offered up by Reliance Legal Counsel, which we agreed to was not substantive, but was corrective as a matter of clarity. So if and when you approve the ordinance on first reading, you're approving an agreement, which will include a revised Exhibit K, which you have in front of you. And I know that Reliance has agreed to it because their lawyers helped to prepare it.

Yes. Okay. Anything else? Anything from the public? Seeing none. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Aye. It passes unanimously. Thank you very much. Let's move forward with this as quickly as we can. The next item is item 34.

Mayor, if you will, thank you very much. 34, for the record, is a motion to pass proposed ordinance number 2026-06 on first reading. It's an ordinance proposed to the City Commission of the City of Pembroke Pines, Florida, amending ordinance number 2052, providing for amended budget for fiscal year 2025 through 2026 for the City of Pembroke Pines, Florida, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, providing for an effective date. Item 34, which is 2026-06 on the floor for consideration. Thank you, Mayor and Commission.

Thank you very much. And I want to thank the administration for putting together yet another budget that for the 11th year, I thought it was 12th, but for the 11th year in a row, actually will not increase the millage rate. Actually, there's a reduction there. We didn't reduce it in every one of the 11 years. But we didn't increase it in every one of the 11 years. And this millage, which comes up later, associated with this budget, I find that it's very much in order. And I believe that the residents will appreciate the reduction. Does anyone want to move the budget?

Mr. Mayor, are we on the budget or are we on?

We're on item 34.

to amend what our current year budget is.

Yes, I know, I know, but I just wanted to make it clear. Okay, it's moved by Commissioner Boone. Second. Seconded by the Vice Mayor. Any discussion? Yes, Mr. Mayor. Yes, sir.

So, yeah, this is really actually a very important part of the prior conversation that we had. One of the things that was expressed was that we have WHEN THE QUESTIONS WERE COMING UP ABOUT WHAT IS OUR BUDGET VERSUS, YOU KNOW, ARE WE AT THE 15%? AND SO AT A 561 MILLION, 581 MILLION, 90 MILLION OVER 581 IS GREATER THAN 15%. SO THAT WOULD REQUIRE US TO GO OUT FOR REFERENDUM IN ORDER TO LET THIS ASSET GO. amended budget is basically what was described as me as part of what was utilized in the calculation of what our budget was. And it was called a working budget. It was not called our annual operating budget. Our annual operating budget is what we approve. So this item is an amendment, which has basically taken all the rollovers and other things that might have occurred in prior years. And typically, the way it was explained to me is that this is normally not done until two months after the fiscal year. So normally, we wouldn't see this item until, probably November of 2026, in order to amend this year's budget. But we need to amend this year's budget in order to be able to add to the budget amount, which would take it a higher level, which then would put the asset value less than 15%. So what's interesting is that this actually opened my eyes to a much bigger issue for me. in terms of how we go about doing our budget, because these are, that means we have $100 million that's available right now in projects that we did not approve yet, but we're gonna approve it potentially tonight. That's why it's here before us, because it needs to be approved to amend our budget. There's, again, another charter item related to these appropriations. at the end of the year, section 507 of our charter, says all appropriations shall last at the end of the budget year to the extent that they shall not have been expended or lawfully encumbered. And all lapsed appropriations shall be used by the city manager in appropriating money for the budget of the next fiscal year. So the way I interpret that is that those dollars that didn't get used last year should be available to us pretty much during our budget cycle. And so if we have $100 million that we haven't approved yet that's out there, we should know about that in advance of us even doing the budget. So one of the things that I'm going to ask certainly Mr. Mayor is that we at least have an under, you know, we should probably be approving these rollovers as part of our budget process, not just accepting them.

So my understanding of this money, because I asked this question, is that the vast majority of it is already encumbered on projects. So it's earmarked for a purpose. But this isn't just like a bunch of extra money. There's sometimes a surplus that's within a reasonable percentage. But the majority of these funds are already encumbered. But there have been delays. in the ability to actually spend them down. Mr. Bondini, is that not correct?

That is correct, sir. The majority of these items, the majority of these funds are carryovers from the previous fiscal year that are set forth for specific projects that were approved in the prior year that we were not able to formalize in that year that now we're formalizing in the current year.

So Mr. Mayor, if I may do a point of clarification. Yes. So the word encumbered is very important. You used a very important word. And Mr. Bogny had just used a word that did not encompass the word encumbered. Encumbered means that you actually have a PO, a contract, something already signed saying we're promising you the money. What he just said was these were projects that were approved. Now, the question is, are we under contract for $100 million worth of projects? And I don't believe that we are. I believe that we have projects that were approved. They just never gotten to that point of being brought forward for some sort of contract, a guarantee for services we would pay. I don't think that happened yet for $100 million. And on top of that, the only other legal way of allowing those monies to automatically roll over, because these monies don't automatically roll over. They have to be approved by us, which is why it's before us tonight, are bond money issues. So I don't think this $100 million makes up any bond money either. So I'm not denying the fact that maybe we need to do this, I think the timing is very important, and this is part of what happened in the questioning that I was asking, because now what's happening is we're being presented with all the rollovers so that it could be a part of the budget this year. It's not a part of our operating budget.

I get it, I get it. Mr. Buendia, do you wanna answer this, or do you wanna bring up?

I'd like to call Assistant City Manager Lisa Chong to come explain a little bit more thoroughly. Let's get to the bottom of this.

While she's coming up, because I also had a very similar question. I was asking where this $100 million came from. And the example that I received that gave me a little bit of clarity is that this is carrying over from 24-25. So for example, in my district, the road resurfacing that happened out in the trails and on 172nd was part of the 24-25 budget. However, and not part of this current year's budget, however, because we weren't able to spend that fund in 24-25, we rolled it over to this year. And those are an example of some of the projects being currently worked on and just recently actually finishing up. So that was an example that I was given. I don't know if that gives a little bit more clarity. And maybe you can let me know if I'm on the right track or wrong on that as well.

Good evening. Lisa Chong, Assistant City Manager. And just to clarify, yes, these are funds that have been encumbered, some of it, as well as projects.

How much is some of it?

The encumbered amount of that is . I have here that the encumbered amount is $17,760,000.

Which is a far cry from $100,000.

The other projects that are available are normally, they could be a myriad of things. They could be in the process of the bid and have not been brought before commission. Some of them are projects that were approved in the previous year's budget that are still in that, there's no contract and there is no bid, but that project was something that the departments and the city manager thought was important to be able to carry over.

I guess the question is, are these dollars that you need that are already earmarked for specific things?

Yes, they are earmarked.

The entire amount?

Yes.

Okay.

And Mr. Mayor, I don't disagree with that.

Again, there's... Is there a specific existing accounting of how many dollars are going to where totaling, equaling the total of what you're asking for? Yes, we have details on that. And have you distributed that to the commission? Yes, it's part of the backup.

No, it's not. It's not.

Let's go to the back.

Well, the backup only has a summary.

OK. Let's take a look. $30 million in general fund. What is $30 million? Hold on. Let's get to it. Hold on. 34. Show me. What item in the backup of 34 has that account?

We should have a list that says, because I'm sorry, I didn't print it that way. There should be a summary that says carryovers. Hold on. Behind that is seven pages. Do you have a book? I don't have a book, John. Hold on.

Carryovers. These are purchase order carryovers.

Right. Can you go down? Could you go to the next page? OK. And here you have the detailed listing of all the purchase orders. And beyond that are the detailed listing of all the projects of the what we call available funds that are not purchase orders.

And that adds up to $17 million.

So the purchase orders will add up to $17 million.

OK. Keep going, if you keep going. And then you've got $9 million for the water service line and so forth.

OK, keep going. You're still on purchase orders. OK.

And at the end of all these projects, the total is $53.6 million.

And here you start funds carryovers. Funds carryovers are anything that are not purchase orders, that we are carrying over the funds, but there is a specific project that we're carrying over. OK. And it's detailed. I guess they did it by magnitude in this case. So we're starting off with the water sewer distribution, and then it goes all the way through.

So that accounts for $53 million. Where's the rest of it?

You keep going. It shows subtotals for each fund, subtotals by the department. You keep going.

No, that's the last item I have in my backup.

Go all the way. Not in what was carried over online. What they're showing on here is part of the online backup that was imprinted.

Okay. And what's the total? Because I asked all these questions. And what's the total? Show me the total. That's the 53. Where's the rest of it?

Plus 17 from the PO. So out of the $100 million, you have 70 that we can account for that are associated with POs that are $17 million and 53 that are available balances that were earmarked already right for specific projects okay 70 million of the hundred so therefore that remains that leaves uh 30 million right and then therefore the um uh the use of the restricted fund balance for the strategic plan both recreation and road improvements that right there is approximately 10 million right so that's 80 million right and then there's another 8 million but those are grants

Those are all the grants that we have, like HUD and CDBG grants. So we didn't detail that because those are grants that we carry over all the remaining funds every year.

They're still short. Where's the rest of it?

That should be everything that I have. How much is being asked for total?

$100, sir. OK. So about $20 off.

So Mr. Mayor, if I may, my point's been made. I mean, you can go through all this. It's clearly in the language of the charter. They have to be lawfully encumbered. And otherwise, you have to approve. And that's what they're doing. They're bringing it to us to approve. But one of the things I was going to ask is if we can defer this item so that we can have a better understanding of the numbers. Because I'm having a really difficult time. Because I will tell you. When you look at even deeper details, it is some of these projects have been rolling over for years, and they're not encumbered. They're in funds like this, this fund. This fund rollover is not an encumbered account.

I think your point is well taken.

So if I may, can I ask that we defer this until at least the first meeting up after our break?

But let's give specific instructions to him. So there is some dissonance that I'm hearing here between the total amount that's being asked for and the accounting for it. That's going to have to be crystal clear. We're going to have to be clear about what the earmark is and what the encumbered is. We're going to have to be clear about all of these things and whether or not it relates to the previous matter in any actionable way with respect to the charter. You understand the assignment?

Absolutely, sir.

OK. So can we bring this back for the next meeting, please?

Absolutely.

All right. Can we do it by consensus?

And Mr. Mayor, no, I guess we'd have to make a motion to defer because it is an item.

Well, please make your motion.

So that I make a motion that we defer until the first meeting after the break.

Before you do that, can we give our colleague, she was, I don't know.

Sorry, one of the questions, and that's what I was asking if it'd be appropriate, would this not then impact the, other project that we were just talking about?

Let's cross one bridge at a time. Let's ask the first question, and then city attorney will give us his opinion on the second. There's nothing that we did with the first item that can't That would be impacted by this. Let's go through this. OK. Let's go through this, and then we'll look at that. OK? And the city attorney will give us his opinion on this.

Before that, so I just want to understand the difference, and maybe it's my lack of understanding for the names of all the funds and things like that. Because in exhibit three, in what is printed, it does add up to the $100 million. So I'm a little confused as to how then it's not adding up to the $100 million.

The details behind, so we have what we call carryovers. So the carryovers are $70 million. of carryovers. Then we would have other commission items that happened during the year that increased the budget. So one of those things was when you voted to use the restricted surplus or reserves for the strategic plan projects, that had to be done through a budget adjustment, basically increasing the fund. So that wasn't a carryover. That was a commission item. action item that increased the budget.

But those are delineated as like...

So they're delineated other than carryovers. So in the general fund, let's say that page one, $30 million of that was carryovers. But then there are other items that increased the general fund budget that were not carryovers. So the strategic plan projects was one of those things. The contribution to the Boys and Girls Club was another thing. So that increased the budget above and beyond. So those are just other items that happened during the year.

But does that add up? Because we were at $80 million.

She said the grants weren't included. Let's let them come back to us with a clearer accounting so that we can see it.

And I agree. And when you do, I just want to understand if this equates to 100, then why is it what we talked about equating to 100? That would be my question for her, I guess.

OK. I have a question about this. Yes. Ms. Shawn, good evening. Good evening. So the capital restricted fund that was 66 and now is down to 56 million. Yes. Is that operating, or has that already been banked as a reserve?

It's part of the reserve, but in order for us to actually segregate it, we have to take it out of the general fund. Accounting can be strange, I'm so sorry. But it's just one of those things. We had to actually take that money out of the general fund. In order to do that, we had to increase the general fund budget and we had to put the money in what we call municipal construction funds. So we were segregating it out, we took it out of the reserve, yes.

Okay, I understand, moving it in order to pay for things. But we approve an operating budget And the reserves aren't a part of the operating budget. The city manager has always said that you can't, he never recommends using reserves for operating because you have to replace it. I've been sitting here for too long.

Can I clarify on that?

There are a lot of different definitions when we ask about operating budget.

That's not how city finance works.

Your total budget, you could be referring to your total operating budget that you need for the entire city. Or you could be specific when you talk about operating expenses, which are different from capital expenses. So when we're talking about the operating budget on a whole, we're talking about the entire city's budget.

I'm going to have to stop it now. There is a motion to defer. And so the questions need to be on the motion to defer. We will get our accounting and we can ask all our questions.

Mayor. Yes. I'm sorry. Just for clarification purposes. I'm going to round these numbers, and we'll go from there. $100 million is what we're asking for to amend the budget from the adopted budget to the working budget. So we've got to account for $100 million. As stated before, $70 million is associated with carryovers. Approximately $9 million is associated with grants that we received that in order for us to account and revise our adopted budget, we have to increase our budget, hence amending the budget. That brings us to approximately, again, rounding numbers, $80 million. Then you have $10 million associated with the monies that we utilize from the reserve to account for capital projects under the strategic plan. That brings us from 80 to $90 million, okay? That is, in detail, our amount. And you may ask, well, why do you have $100 million? Well, this particular, in exhibit three, the last page of exhibit three, shows that we're moving monies from our general reserves to a 321 strategic plan fund recreation and strategic plan fund wrote so it's being counted twice but the reason for that is because in order for us to amend the budget to account for those specific projects and have them under a specific fund we had to include them again that is the reason why you see a hundred million dollars

That makes sense.

Does that clarify the questions that we have at hand?

And yet there are questions about it. So the motion to defer is what's before us, and a better accounting will come. that will meet the satisfaction of this body, okay?

So- You need a second.

Yes, is there a second to the motion? Second. Okay, Vice Mayor seconds the motion, and we will see this again. This is not of the essence. It doesn't have to happen right now, and we will bring it back. Additionally, the city attorney will take a look at this transaction to decide whether it has any bearing whatsoever, and he will report that out at the next meeting, okay? It's all clear. Everyone's clear. All those in favor of deferral signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously. Thank you very much. The next item is item 35, Mayor.

35. Would you please read? It's my pleasure, Mayor. Thank you. Number 35 is a motion to adopt proposed resolution number 2026R07, which is a resolution of the city commission of the city of Pembroke Pines, Florida, approving the city's action plan for community development block grant, that's the CDBG program, for the year 2026, directing the city manager to submit the action plan to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, including any amendments thereto, and authorizing the city manager to execute all required documents. Providing for conflicts, providing for severability, providing for an effective date, number 2026R-07904 for consideration, Mayor.

Thank you very much. Is there a motion on the item?

I move the item.

Moved by the Vice Mayor, seconded by Commissioner Rodriguez. Any discussion on CDBG? Any from the public? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously.

The record of the permanent number is number 3951. Next item, 36, Mayor.

We did... We did... Oh, I'm sorry, 36.

36 is a motion to adopt proposed resolution number 2026R-10, which is a resolution of the City Commission of the City of Pembroke Pines, Florida, approving the amendment to the Community Aesthetic Feature Agreement, that's the CAFA, by and between the Florida Department of Transportation, that's the FDOT, and God bless you, City, for the installation of a replacement gateway monument sign on State Road 823, better known as Flamingo Road, north of Pembroke Road, and authorizing an existing unpermitted gateway entry monument sign on State Road 817, also known as University Drive, south of Sheridan Street, affirming the city's intent to fund all costs for the design, installation, and maintenance of the project, directing the appropriate city officials to take any and all action necessary to effectually obtain the resolution, provided for conflicts, provided for survivability, and provided for an effective date.

Motion, please. Motion moved by Commissioner Rodriguez. Is there a second? Second. Seconded by the Vice Mayor. Any discussion? Hearing none, any from the public? All those in favor, say aye.

Aye. Passes unanimous. We recommend, Mayor and Commissioner, the permit number is number 3952. Thank you. Item 39. Item 38. Next up is number 39. Thank you, Mayor. Number 39 is a motion to adopt the fire assessment proposed resolution number 2026R-13, which is a resolution of the City Commission of the City of Pembroke Pines, Florida, number 2026R-13, which is a resolution of the City Commission of Pembroke Pines, Florida, relating to the provision of fire rescue services, facilities, and programs in the City of Pembroke Pines, Florida, describing the method of assessing fire rescue assessed costs against assessed property located within the city of Pembroke Pines, directing the preparation of an assessment role, authorizing a public hearing, and directing the provision of notice thereof, and providing for an effective date.

Thank you. God bless our firefighters. Is there a motion on this item?

Motion.

Moved by all of us. Seconded by all of us. Moved by Vice Mayor. Seconded by Commissioner Good. And, Rodriguez, any discussion on this item? Any from the public? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously.

Mayor and Commission, permit number is number 3953. 3953, number 39. Mayor May I proceed? Yes. Number 40 for the record is as follows. It's a motion to establish the millage rate to be advertised in the TRIM, that's T-R-I-M, notice published by the As you know, our friends at the Broward County Property Affairs Office, which is due by Tuesday, August the 4th, 2026. That's the motion on the floor, number 40 for the record, Mayor. Thank you. 40.

Is there a motion? Motion. Moved by Commissioner Rodriguez. Is there a second? Second by the Vice Mayor. Any discussion? Any from the public? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously.

Thank you, Mayor. Next item up for the record is item number 41. 41. Is discussion of possible action to approve two items. A is a motion to approve the request to advertise RFP number 8026-01. References operation and management of the building department and B which is a motion to approve the 13th amendment to the professional services agreement with Calvin Giordano Associates extending the agreement for an additional six months from June 30 2026 to December 31 2026 Both of these items are segregable. They are all part of item number 41 for the record Thank You mayor number 41 their motion on 41

Move by Commissioner Rodriguez. Is there a second?

Second.

Seconded by the Vice Mayor. Any discussion?

One question. Did you say segregable? Which word did you use?

Segregable. They can be segregated. In other words, we can vote for A and then separately vote for B, but the way it's been presented, it's A and B.

That's correct. I would have used the word bifurcate, but I guess that doesn't work.

You can do that too.

Similar. If it's legally sufficient, you just tell me.

As long as it gets spelled. It's good.

I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you.

As long as it can be spelled, we're good.

Yeah. Does anyone have an objection to doing that? No, I actually prefer that you do that. Okay. Separate. So, yeah, well, segregable.

Without objection, we're going to segregate and we're going to have 41A is in front of us. Okay. Okay.

I'm OK with A. It's whoever else.

Well, then let's vote on it.

I think the commissioner.

I'm not OK with A. OK. So 41A is in front of us. Go right ahead.

So Mr. Mayor, I got to say that I have a lot of questions still with this RFP. I know that we did the workshop. I know we did a lot of communication. and what we got in return was certainly a response to that workshop, but also I picked up on some things that probably didn't get addressed that I thought would get addressed, and there's some additional language in there that I'd still like to be able to have an opportunity review. I really need to have a conversation with you all with these things.

Because there's nothing in the memo for item 41.

I did my very best. Okay. All right. I understand.

You were busy. I'm just saying, every time we do this, it gums up the works.

Commissioner, good. You're right and I'm wrong. I reversed it. I was okay with B, not A, so... Thanks for taking it up.

So I mean, and Mr. Mayor, and this took me a long time to review. And I mean, I was still even reviewing it today to even come here. And I didn't even get to finish it. And I said, you know, I'm just going to have to just ask for some extension of time. And let me just share a few things of what I'm concerned about.

Well, if we're going to defer it, then let's share it then. Because it's not in front of us. Yeah.

I understand, but I'm going to ask of the same, that I need more time, but also to get to that more time. I had a meeting with Mike Stamm, and I was able to get a lot of the questions asked. And some of the things that came to that are in the red line document do connect to what we talked in the workshop. Others are additional. Those things that are additional, I'd like to hear my colleagues' perspective, get consensus on it as well, so that when it does come back in the deferral, we have a full document that we all feel comfortable sending out.

Okay, if you all feel that way, let's talk about 41A.

So I'd like to defer it, but I want to have a quick comment about something that needs to be addressed so that we can all deal with this appropriately. So we just received this past week information from the attorney's office regarding new state statutes that deals with the building permits. Is that correct, Mr. City Attorney? We published a memo. That's correct. And I believe there were two items of particular interest to the city. One is the, what do they call it, the private provider component, which means that now developers, even single-family home people, can hire a private developer, and that does not require any inspection or any There's a limitation on what the city can do with regard to those private providers. And the second thing is there's a cap on how, or there's more strict requirements on how you can charge permits. Permits used to be based on the dollar value of the project. Well, it ain't that way no more. What it is based on is the actual cost. And one of the things that I'm concerned about in here is that part of what we're evaluating is a split on the permit fees, which is x percent goes to The contractor, x percent goes to the city. So the x percent that goes to the city, certainly I would like the attorney to weigh in on this, not tonight, but to be thinking about this before this comes back, is does the city have to prove that it's an actual cost as opposed to just giving it a percentage of what we want off the permit fees? because that's going to have a big deal on how we look at some of these issues in here. So those two state statutes that have been signed off by the governor, is that correct? That's correct. They need to be factored into this, because this bid did not incorporate any of that information. And so I'd like to know how that plays in as well, as my colleague Commissioner Rodriguez said, too, that there's just some additional stuff that we all just need to have conversation on. But I needed to get that out, Mr. Mayor.

Yes, sir. I appreciate it. That's why we're deferring. Commissioner Rodriguez.

Mayor, if I can, just quickly for the record, to supplement Commissioner Good, you are correct. 803, House Bill 803 goes into effect July 1. Correct.

Okay. To preface, I will have... I, myself, am looking to get consensus, understanding from the dais as to some of the commentary and some of the questions that I had. If everybody else didn't question it or doesn't agree to my perspective on it, we can consider that that not necessarily needs to be changed or things like that. But I do want to point some things out so that I can get an answer from my colleagues as to the directive that we'd like this document to go to. So mine will be a bit of lengthy conversation because I want all of us to chip into some of the questions that I had. So first I want to thank staff for actually listening to a lot of the workshop books. A lot of the things that I mentioned in the workshop and that we all mentioned, I saw reflected on here. Again, the comment of there are certain things like the bill, the 803 bill and a couple of things. I did see a portion of that being reflected. I have to go back. maybe to see if anything was missing from my understanding. But some of it, which I'll go through, was reflected in the document. Let me get to all my points. One of the big things that I wanted to see in this I'm glad it's here. It's the bifurcation of the building officials in that top line versus the clerical staff. I didn't want any vendor that is coming here to be stumped and to say and to feel like they can't, at some point, more efficient with their time with their staff and everything like that whether it's through technology other kinds of things and Making sure that they have the opportunity even though in here. It's after a year to propose that they have a reduction in stuff because I think that's really important to incentivize some of the vendors that we have whether it's in this contract in particular to be more efficient with what they have, because if it's a lower cost in the end for those services, we get a portion of that savings as well. One of the things on page 18 is the enforcement and remedies for kind of the liquidated, it encompasses the liquidated damages. This may be part of not necessarily this portion of it, but the contract. And under enforcement and remedies, it's one through four, four being termination for agreement of cost. I'd like that to be amended to be a scale, or like this happens, and this happens, and this happens, and then termination happens, rather than termination being, in theory, a number one option.

A cure process.

Okay, cure process, didn't know that was the name for it, but I called it a scale, a ladder, cure process, perfect. So for that one, that's my preference. I don't think, because it can become subjective if it's not that, and it could just be termination for whatever reason. The other clarity that I wanted and I got from staff was that we award the contract, we get to take it away as well, and that while it's delineated that staff can start these that termination or things like that we are the final say but by that you mean the commission yeah okay so that's number one point and i wanted to know if we agree that that might be something that can be changed in this

fundamentally that would potentially, it's a charter question, city administration has the ultimate authority to run the day-to-day business. Now, given the size and importance of a vendor like this, it would be appropriate for the administration if, instead of firing off a cancel for convenience clause, that they would come to the commission to seek approval. I embrace that concept. The question is, can we write it into a bid without conflicting with our charter?

Well, I think that's separate. Whether it's administration or us, that's a little bit different from the cure process that I'm talking about.

I have to tell you. These points are essentially descriptive of how, as in my view, Pembroke Pines has and does do business. So we have a certain style historically in Pembroke Pines, and that's we negotiate like lions, and then we lay down like lambs with the people that we do business with. They become part of the family. And if we have a particular problem with them, of course they're given an opportunity to cure. The only time that people are brought here to cancel a contract, to start with someone else, is when that relationship gets to where we just don't trust them enough to do business with them anymore. This very rarely happens in Pembroke Pines. Our structure is one where the people that we use under contract are very closely linked with the professional staff here. And they're overseen by the contract managers. in terms of their performance and in terms of their pleasability in terms of what they do for us. So I think much of that is already covered. We could put that in the RFP, but I don't know whether that helps or hurts us in the long run because, you know, We don't need to create rights for people that we pay when it comes to issues like that. The way we do business is if you come here and you do your job and you stay within your budget and you keep your nose clean, you get to hang around. And if you don't do those things, we get rid of you. Everybody sort of understands that.

I agree, but if I'm reading this as a vendor, if I don't understand the culture and kind of the nuances of the city of Pembroke Pines, it could be interpreted that any little thing that they do wrong can be cause for termination. And whether that's part of the contract or this RFP.

I don't know that people read it that way, but if it's the will of the commission to drop that in there, that's fine.

But you know that's what we should be doing, but we heard that because I'm Yeah But that could be something that we could talk about I don't have a problem with your process I don't know that I don't know that every since I don't know that every scenario calls for it.

I

No, I don't think so either. But that's what I'm bringing up because I had the interpretation. And while I don't own a business that would be a building department, my interpretation of it is that anything could be subjectively to termination. And I don't think that that's very inviting to any kind of vendor, whether we here internally understand that there would be some kind of process to get to that point. And so I want to be as clear as possible, whether it's here or in the contract, but I don't want any vendor to think any tiny thing can't be worked out or come to a conclusion on, rather they just get terminated. So that's the point on that.

If I could, from a historical perspective, Mayor, I'll be quick. We had a vendor that ran our water department And they called me begging me to change Mayor Ortiz's mind. He was going to place an item on the agenda to terminate them as a commission item. And I said, listen, I don't recall another contract outside of that one in all the years I've been in these chambers on both sides, that we have not had administration notify the commission of issues and work through them. I think the closest level of great concern was the most recent garbage contract when we were having bulk issues and we were having pickup issues. I mean, it was extremely concerning. And it wound up being a staffing issue. because industry was just picking off people left and right to go work for another firm. And we got that worked out when we went back out to bid, and we kind of fixed that. And it worked out really well how we fixed it. Mayor, I don't recall if you, I mean, think hard. Can you think of a vendor of this size that we haven't been able to work through a process and give them every opportunity to do it.

I can't think of one. Not before we pull the plug. That's just not how we do business.

It's not how you do business. And you understand that from a historical perspective because you have both been here for a while. However, I bring a different perspective because I haven't been here all that long. can feasibly interpret that a vendor could see this as something different. So I'm simply stating that the culture and the way that we do things with contractors be specifically outlined in whether it's here or in the contract because someone may interpret otherwise because they don't have that perspective.

I don't have an objection to that. I do not have an objection to it, so long as it doesn't bind us to, because there's some times where a vendor will do something, like an employee will do something, and you say, sorry, this can't be fixed. I have to pull the plug. So long as it doesn't bind us or obligate us to a particular process, we can tell people, you can expect that if something goes wrong, we will give you an opportunity to fix it. Well, that's exactly what we do with- I don't know that we should obligate ourselves that way. I don't know if that's good public policy. So I think it's in the wording.

Yeah, okay. We can work, then that's why we need more time to work on the wording and maybe staff can come back to us with something that kind of binds.

But here's the thing. Well, the conversation that we're having now is a general procurement conversation, okay? And we really have to separate these issues because we have a building department to run. So either we want to bring the procurement Ordinance, which the ink on it is just drive back for review on these kinds of policy matters, and that's fine. Or we want to deal with the buildings department issue. But to do them both at the same time, it's just, it's.

But I didn't bring up anything on the procurement process. I'm talking specifically to page 18 in this document.

Okay.

I'm going to go on because I think. Yes, ma'am. We killed that one. Page 21. What is this? 4.7 under personnel C, point D. And all of this isn't new to staff. I have brought it up to Mike Stamm on it as well. So it says, during this agreement, no individual performing services under this agreement shall provide, perform, supervise, review, or participate in any private provider services within the city of Piper Plains or within one mile radius of the city. With my conversation with Mr. Stamm, I understand the concept of we do not want, especially because we have right above it number B4, saying that we are going to ask this vendor to have branded vehicles that have their name and the city of Pembroke Pines, as we do for Jacobs and our water contract. So I understand the point of somebody not work, somebody who, in theory, could go do some other kind of work outside of the business hours I do I don't want that I want them to be within the business hours and I want them to be and I don't want them to be doing that in a car that's or in a vehicle that's branded with the city of Pembroke Pines cash that you know they could be doing something one one miles Cooper City or Davey or whatever and they're in the vehicle but I don't believe that the one mile constraint is something that we should be putting on a business, because a business outside of the city of Pembroke Pines can do whatever they'd like to do. So I'd like to find a balance. Let me finish. I'd like to find a balance between the concerns that staff has with them working during that time frame and in a branded vehicle, but not restrict them so much that they are limited in where they can work, because I don't feel that that's fair of us to request.

Commissioner Rodriguez, I'm actually on the same page with you. I had discussion with... Here's the fix to this. The one mile radius needs to be taken out, period. Two things have to happen. One, prohibit the vendor from doing private provider unless it's outside of normal business hours within Pembroke Pines. Two, the only way this can actually be effective from a conflict of interest standpoint is the third party vendor would have to be the chief building officer. We could not have a chief building officer as an employee of the city, because the way that the private provider works is you have to ask permission. So it would be a conflict. if a private provider who had a CBO within their organization, you can't ask to go outside within your own organization. But if you have the CBO as a city employee, then that can actually allow a private provider to occur.

We have a motion to defer. And we're getting into this discussion. No one has had these conversations with staff so that they could tell you why this language is in there. No, I've had this conversation with staff. And what did they tell you? Why did they want one mile radius? Why?

What was the answer? What they explained to me was that they wouldn't want, if they're out to do a job, and then across the street, they could go do another job and then come back. The double dipping. So I get that, and it's justifiable. However, I don't believe that that gets cured by a one mile radius, because it could be one, two, three, four, five. It's pretty easy to get across town, and that's five miles within a time where you wouldn't get caught doing the double dipping. I don't think that that is for what they're trying to justify and what they're trying to explain to us as to why they put the one mile. I don't think makes any sense because we can limit and restrict that by putting in something regarding time and the branded vehicles. And we were under the under, I hope Mr. Stamm understood what I was asking, and he agreed that's something that could be changed. Why I'm bringing it up is because I'd want to understand if it's just my silly idea, okay.

There's no consensus.

So that's why I'm bringing it up now. It's not that we didn't talk about it.

Okay. And just again, remember, the state statute now requires permits to be based on actual costs. So that could be a factor into what you're talking about.

Exactly. I think maybe their fear is that we're paying them full time, and then they end up side hustling. On a side hustle, where they're also getting paid, and we end up on page six because we didn't listen to their one mile radius rule. But I don't know.

But I don't think that the one mile, whether it's one or two or three, that is sufficient. That's not sufficient enough to remedy that concern. And I think the way to remedy that concern is putting in a provision regarding time on the clock and the branded vehicles. Whether it's one through a million miles, that doesn't really fix the issue that we're trying to fix.

And the CBO would have to be third party. The CBO would have to be third party in order for that to work.

They're paying us.

Well, the permit holder is paying. They're paying us rent, and they give us an admin fee. That's what we get out of this deal.

Mayor, I thought there was a consensus that we were going to be able to workshop this before it hit live. I thought we did that.

No, no.

The five of us gave input. My recollection is that we asked the administration to look at all of it and come back to us. It's coming back to us in the form of an RFP with Redline without, to Commissioner Rodriguez's point, We didn't vote in the workshop. It was just everyone put things on the table and staff put it in the document. But the five of us never actually agreed.

Well, that's why I think this is the perfect opportunity for all of us to bring up some of the things. And I'm not opposed to doing a workshop. I know that I put in the effort to bring this up now so that maybe we wouldn't have to go to something else. It's important that we get this one right, because I think it's a great example of the way that we should be looking at contracts and the priorities that we put on this. Right here, I see a huge priority on the communications, on the customer service side of this contract, and I hope that we can kind of get this right so that in the future we can use this as something that we reflect on and kind of come back to as a sort of template. It's very specific what a building department does, but the focus and the priorities of communication, customer service, flexibility on possible technology, all of that is extremely crucial as we move forward to other contracts, whether they're bigger or smaller than this one.

Would it be possible for commissioners to write down their notes? I can do that. And we can share. Well, we can't share them. But we can give them to the city manager. And the city manager can call a workshop to go through the answers. Or he could put out a memo saying, a special Monday night memo saying, Why are we doing the one-mile rule?

Well, can they at least put a list out of the comments that were made, sort of like the way we do a Monday night?

I think so. And I think that that would suffice. And that's a good reason to defer the item. But we have to provide them with the input, because they got a job to do.

But I don't feel comfortable putting things on a list without talking about it, because we come to the same scenario unless we commit to doing a workshop.

We can do a workshop. I don't have a problem doing the workshop and going through the list. I kind of prepared for this. So I'm going to keep going. But that's fine. But this would not be the time to do it because we're not set up for doing it. If I could just. We're going to defer the item, take the time. I'll come up with my list. You'll come up with your list. Let's submit it in.

I would like to continue with my list so that you guys have some knowledge when you do yours to know that we've already talked about some of these items. Could I just make a quick comment?