City Commission - Regular Meeting

Tuesday, September 8, 2026

The Pompano Beach City Commission approved several infrastructure contracts, heard presentations on school referendums and child services, and debated air park operations and previous administrative actions.

About this meeting

Government Body
City Commission
Meeting Type
City Commission
Location
Pompano Beach, FL
Meeting Date
September 8, 2026

Transcript

1222 sections

3:59 – 5:12Speaker 1

Thank you. Thank you.

6:17 – 7:01Speaker 38

All right, if we can start taking our seats out there. Taking our seats and into the conversations or continue them out in the lobby, that'd be great. All right. Let's go ahead and call this Pompano Beach City Commission meeting on September 8th, 2026 to order. If I could ask everyone to please silence their cell phones or put them on vibrate during the meeting, that would be great. That way we don't get interrupted by somebody's phone call. That would be fantastic. Thank you. Let's go ahead and call the roll, Mr. Alfred.

7:04Speaker 43

Commissioner Fezzik. Here. Commissioner Perkins. Here. Commissioner Sigerson-Eaton. Here. Commissioner Smith? Here. Vice Mayor Fortier? Here. Mayor Hardin?

7:14Speaker 38

Here. If we could all please rise for the invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. Our invocation today will be given by Pastor Robert Kinchin, the Christ Fellowship Church of God in Christ.

7:23 – 8:27Speaker 1

Pastor? Commissioners, our Father which art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Father, we thank you for this opportunity to come and stand in the midst of this, your people, asking you that let your presence be felt, the spirit of unity, togetherness. We ask that you come and allow the diocese to consider everything concerning our wonderful and great city, the city of Pompano Beach. Look out for the poor in their decision-making, the disenfranchised. Look out for our safety and our well-being. Help our city to continue to grow and be an apex in the area of cities among the world's cities. We ask this, Lord God, in your precious name of your Son, Jesus Christ, our Lord. Amen. Amen.

8:29 – 8:41Speaker 43

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

8:42 – 8:57Speaker 38

Thank you. All right. Can I get a motion approving the City Commission Budget Workshop Minutes of July 20, 2026? So moved. Second. Moved and seconded. All in favor say aye.

8:58Speaker 38

Opposed? Motion carries unanimous. Thank you. Can I get a motion approving the City Commission Budget Workshop Minutes of July 28, 2026?

9:06Speaker 18

So moved. Second.

9:08Speaker 38

Moved and seconded. All in favor say aye.

9:10Speaker 18

Aye. Opposed?

9:11Speaker 38

Motion carries unanimous. Can I get a motion approving the Regular City Commission Meeting Minutes of July 28, 2026?

9:17Speaker 21

So moved. Second.

9:19Speaker 38

Moved and seconded. All in favor say aye.

9:22Speaker 38

Opposed? Very good. Unanimous. Thank you. Mr. Harrison, any changes on our agenda today?

9:29Speaker 38

Very good. Can I get a motion approving the agenda as printed?

9:32Speaker 18

So moved. Second.

9:33Speaker 38

Moved and seconded. All in favor say aye.

9:36Speaker 38

Opposed? Motion carries unanimous. Thank you. Are there any items the commission wishes to pull from the consent agenda?

9:44Speaker 38

Commissioner Fessick?

9:46Speaker 26

I'd like to pull one and... 4 and 11.

9:55Speaker 38

I'm sorry, what was that? 1 and 4 and what?

9:57Speaker 26

1, 4, and 8, please.

9:58Speaker 38

1, 4, and 8. Any other commissioners wish to pull any items?

10:02Speaker 21

I had 4 and 8 on my list.

10:04Speaker 38

Okay. 4 and 8.

10:06 – 10:43Speaker 38

Any other items the commission wishes to pull from the consent? Seeing none. Okay. Then all other items on our consent agenda are eligible for discussion during audience to be heard. Numbers 1, 4, and 8 will be discussed individually when they come up. Thank you. All right, that takes us up to our special presentation. First, we've got special presentation by Broward County Public Schools. Superintendent, Dr. Howard Hepburn, thank you so much, sir, for what you do for us. And Chief of Staff, Mr. John Sullivan, to provide a brief informational presentation regarding the next generation referendum, which will appear on the November 3rd, 2026 general election ballot.

10:44 – 11:20Speaker 42

Superintendent, thank you for being here again in Pompano Beach. Yes, absolutely. Thank you for having me, Mayor, Commissioners. I'm always a pleasure and also want to thank you for your continued partnership with our county public schools and especially schools in the city of pompano to is palpable our partnerships really matter to us we can't get the work done without them also show appreciative for what you've done for our students our schools are our staff and everybody has an impact on every child in our classroom so I don't know if we're actually gonna have the presentation up you know how would you how would you feel about going to that podium over there because that's where we got the presentation okay awesome yet

11:22Speaker 38

Has it already been preloaded? Do we know? No? Does anyone have the presentation? Uh-oh.

11:30Speaker 42

If not, I can go off the iPad and talk through it.

11:35Speaker 38

Apparently it wasn't. Have you got it curving? It should be there? Let's get it queued up here. Just a moment, Mr. Hepburn.

12:05 – 17:05Speaker 42

It's not there? No. So I can go through it. And then we can make sure you actually receive it. So first of all, I've got to make my lawyers happy. We're here to inform and educate, not to advocate. So I definitely want to inform and educate the public as well throughout this presentation. So I'd love to talk about our accomplishments first. We're an A-rated school district for the third year in a row. All right. Thank you. That first time in over a decade was school year 24-25. Also, we have no DNF schools for the third year in a row as well. Our teachers, our school-based administrators, our hundreds of thousands of volunteers, partners such as the City of Pompano, and many more help to maintain that level of accomplishment. It takes a true village to make sure our students are receiving the top-notch quality instruction they're receiving in their schools. Also, the highest graduation rate in 25 years, 97.5% for all of our traditional high schools. When you add in our alternative high schools and also the charter schools, it's 91.4% graduation rate. Also, we're number one in Florida for funding for AP, ACE, IB, dual enrollment, industry certification. What that means for the public is that We receive funding based on student outcomes in those college-level courses and also industry certifications that they earn. So we're number one in Florida because we actually challenge our high school students to enroll in college-level coursework. And they're stepping up to the plate, and they're actually accomplishing and executing with great success. In order to engage in that level of rigor in high school and be successful, we actually expose you at the middle school level with high school coursework. So you can get that exposure with a level of rigor in middle school with high school courses. And when you get to high school, start taking college level courses. And I'll talk about some of the actual outcomes based on that. And also in addition, we're Cambridge District of the Year for 25-26. Our ACE program, which is a college level coursework provided to our students where they earn college credit. We're only one large school district in the whole entire nation that earned that accomplishment last year as well. I'd also like to remind the public and everybody about the scale and the size of Briar County Public Schools. We serve over 236,000 students. Of the 236,000 students, 180,000 of those students are actually in our district-operated schools. The others are in our charter schools across the county. We also have about 325 total schools, and about 86 of those are actually charter schools. And we have 27,000 employees. Also, another outcome for our high school students who graduated with Class of 2026 just this past year, due to their exposure and engagement into college-level coursework and the outcomes that they received, the Class of 2026 earned $617 million in scholarships. That's over $200 million more than Class of 2025. So I know class of 2027 are just as competitive, and they'll probably be beating the class of 2026. So it's a lot of money that our students are earning because we're engaging them in rigorous coursework at the high school level, i.e., college coursework and industry certification that's helping students live out their post-secondary dreams. Also, as I mentioned before, we're 3PA since 23-24 and up to last school year. When I started in April of 2024 as superintendent, the year before we had quite a few DNF schools and a lot of C schools. Since that time, we've reduced our Our F schools, as I said before, 100% zero for the past three years. We've decreased our C schools by over 72% for the past three years as well. We've increased our number of A schools by 130% over the past three years. 87% to date, 87% of our schools are As and Bs. And right now, we're constantly asking... Right now, we're working to actually decrease the number of C schools, right? That's our mark right now. Since we eliminated all our D and F schools, we're trying to decrease our C schools as much as possible to zero as well. The majority of the schools right here in the city of Pompano are A's and B's. Again, thanks for the partnership. We know you and your staff, as far as the residents of the city of Pompano, do a lot to support our students, our teachers, our schools day in and day out, ensuring that we can make ends meet when it comes to the resources and support that they need at each school. And at this time, I'm going to ask Mr. Sullivan, he's going to come up and actually do more of the referendum part so that the public has an understanding of the election date and what the actual ballot language is and how we've used the money in the past and how we're going to use the money in the future if the taxpayers so see fit to pass that in November. All right. Thank you, sir.

17:06 – 17:18Speaker 35

Thank you, Superintendent, and good afternoon. Thanks for having us. We'll make sure to email the PowerPoint to you guys as well, because we know it's a lot of information. We apologize if we don't have it up. So historically speaking, this is a renewal.

17:18Speaker 38

Who are you?

17:19Speaker 35

Oh, John Sullivan, Chief of Staff to the Superintendent.

17:21Speaker 38

Thank you, John.

17:23 – 23:29Speaker 35

So historically, your residents have been accustomed to seeing this since the 2018 cycle during the primary, but due to state statute, it's now in the general. So that's why they didn't see it in August, and they'll see it on November 3rd ballot. So again, this is a renewal. It's not a new tax. This is a tax that's been on the tax rolls now for uh... eight years and this would be a continuation of that if it were to be successful uh... the impact to the schools if this were to pass or not pass would be the twenty seven twenty eight school year it generates three hundred fifty eight million annually across briarwood schools and that does include charter schools as well so they also benefit from the referendum investment uh... it funds three buckets our teacher and staff compensation supplements our school safety program and our mental health professionals We know the city partners with us in many of our schools with our SRO program. We know that's a financial burden to the cities. Since the inception of the referendum, we've been able to go from about $56,000 to about $120,000 in our contribution. If the referendum is successful, we can continue conversations on how we can increase that contributions and lessen the burden to the cities. We do appreciate the city's partnership in keeping all our schools safe. Okay, so again, it funds three buckets. It's about $173 million for Barrett schools for our compensation for our teachers and eligible staff. So think of everyone who interacts with our students, all the way from our principals to the beginning of the day, our bus drivers, our custodian workers, our half or two-year workers. So all the frontline workers really benefit from that referendum supplement. It's important. We all know that inflation and the cost of living has gone up. it's important for our staff to be able to afford where they work and also our neighbors to the south and the north have similar referendums and our employees have options and we're able to compete in terms of recruiting and retaining the best employees because they also have referendums with those supplements and again security 393 school safety personnel and about 1.7 million in safety technology including our panic buttons that we all wear now and which are critical in a case of an emergency in a school or one of our facilities. You press this eight times and law enforcement is activated and they respond immediately. So it saves time. And about 224 of our mental health professionals are also funded out of the referendum. So all those items will continue to be funded if the referendum were successful. I JUST WANTED TO BRIEFLY HIGHLIGHT THE BOND PROGRAM VERSUS THE REFERENDUM. WE KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF NEGATIVE PRESS AND ISSUES AS IT RELATES TO THE BOND. THE SUPERINTENDENT HAS BEEN ABLE TO CLOSE OUT A LOT OF THE PROJECTS AND CONTINUES TO DO SO. BUT THE POINT IS THE BOND IS SEPARATE. THAT'S FOR FACILITIES AND OUR CAPITAL BUILDING ASSETS. THE REFERENDUM IS OPERATIONAL AND IT DOES NOT FUND, THEY DON'T FUND EACH OTHER'S BUCKETS. SO ONE'S OPERATIONS AND ONE'S FACILITIES. And we've had two audits of the first referendum and the current referendum. Both have found that we have spent those referendum dollars according to how the voters approved and intended for us to use it. The board did vote on allocation if the referendum were to be successful. So about 90% would go towards those eligible staff members for supplements and 10% for mental health and our safety apparatus. The referendum is the only mechanism for the district to raise funds. Outside of that, there's no other mechanism outside what we receive from the state. But the board and the superintendent understand that we do have to show to the public that we're taking our responsibility of being good stewards of their taxpayer dollars. So as it relates to our general funds, we reduced our district level staff for this school year versus last school year by a thousand positions. which is about $54 million in reoccurring savings annually. And we restructure our healthcare for our employees, which saves another $46 million annually. And we've closed seven schools as well to deal with declining enrollment. So all that generates about $100 million annually. That really only covers the deficit of the continued reality of losing students. So this year we've lost another 11,000 students. But with that said, the board will be responsible with the general funds that we have received and will continue to take action to address the decline in enrollment. What does this mean for your residents and the average taxpayers annually? These are estimates, so it could be higher or lower depending on your property value. But for the average property value for the house, it's about $408 a year is what we're talking about in terms of investment, which is about $35 a month. For a condominium owner, it's about $230. or about $19 a month, and that, again, generates $358 million across private schools, including our charter school partners. If it's not renewed, again, we would lose that $358 million. The board does not have that in our general funds. We would be having to make very tough decisions. And there's no way that we can continue the level of services in those three buckets. So that's just the reality of it. Our fund balance is right at the 3% required level. So we can't go dip into our general funds. And we do continue to having to address the declining enrollment and budget shortfalls. So it would be impossible to make up the 350 without the referendum. We do have a website, so I'll say for the public, if they wanna take a look, all this information's out there, briowardschools.com forward slash referendum 2026. So briowardschools.com forward slash referendum 2026. and again everything we've said to keep the lawyers happy is for informational purposes only we're not telling anyone how to vote up or down just information that they need to consider when they make that choice for themselves and with that mr mayor we're available for questions very good thank you for that is there any questions from the vice mayor i have one quick question we've been talking a lot about amendments and referendums that are going to be on the ballot in november the threshold for yours is 50 i assume not 60. can you clarify that Yes, ma'am. 50 plus one.

23:30Speaker 38

Gotcha. And just for the public, if the property tax amendment passes this year at the state level, how does that impact the schools?

23:40Speaker 35

It has no impact on the school district. They removed us from that equation. Very good. Thank you.

23:45 – 24:21Speaker 38

Any further questions from the board? Seeing none, thank you guys very much. Appreciate all you're doing for our kids and our communities. Seriously, I mean that in all sincerity. Appreciate the opportunity and the partnership. Thank you. And you will get that presentation to us, correct? Okay, great. That'd be great. Thank you so much. Appreciate that. All right. That takes us up to the annual report of the Children's Services Council of Broward County. Cindy Arnberg-Seltzer, or maybe not, President and CEO of CSC, will present the annual report to the Commission, including programs, services, and investments specific to Pompano Beach. Good afternoon, sir.

24:22Speaker 28

Good afternoon. I think you have our presentation?

24:26Speaker 38

Well, I would not be the right person to ask. It's there. It is there.

24:43 – 33:42Speaker 28

Hello, Ken King. I'm the Director of Communications and Public Affairs at the Children's Services Council. And thank you for the invitation and just kind of getting the opportunity to present here at the City of Pompano Beach. Just to get started, who are we? Children's Services Council is statutorily required. We have been voted by the voters twice here in Briar County in 2000 and in 2014. Up to 0.50 mils, that's 50 cent per every $1,000 of property tax value. That's our millage rate. And we fund organizations that serve children and families across Broward County. What I want to do is bring greetings from our one and only CEO, Cindy Ehrenberg-Seltzer. She's been the CEO president for 25 years. She brings great experience and great veracity to Children's Services Council. Why we were created. Oh, before we get there. We have a council that is statutorily required. Some of them are candidates or people who are on that council. We have someone who represents a school district, the superintendent. We have a school board member, a director at the DCF. We have director from health department, as well as five other gubernatorial appointees. Why CSC was created. There was issues in Broward County, 99-2000. There was a crisis in the child welfare system, high youth referrals and crime and risky behavior, low educational achievement, high teen pregnancy and repeat teen birth rates, and high infant mortality. CSC was built to help Broward act earlier, coordinate resources, invest in prevention, and reduce barriers before problems became more costly. This slide highlights last year's funding, $133 million total. We served nearly 200,000 children and families all over Broward. And the map just shows the zip codes where we serviced children and families all over Broward. How we use that dollar. What we do, 93% of every dollar goes to programs that we fund. 4% to administrative costs, and 3% to taxes and other things that we might need to pay out. So most of the money is going into programming. Here is some CSE outcomes in Broward that we are very, very excited about and want to share. In the area of early care and education, we invested over $11 million last year. A lot of that goes to slots for preschool education so parents can get out and work. 24 million went into family support programs. Those are programs that families need to support their well-being. It could be food mitigation. It could be therapeutic therapy in the house. Those kinds of programs. Youth programs. Any programs that deal with teens and delinquency, job exposure, job experiences. We spent $29 million in that area last year. After school and summer programs, $20 million spent to help parents who need to work have safe places for their children to go to after school and in the summer. Special needs, near and dear to our heart. We spent $19 million in that area. Those areas include special needs preschools, aftercare, respite for parents who might need help, who need care over the weekend for their children who have special needs, all of those areas. So in the beginning, I talked about there being a crisis in Broward at the beginning of CSC in 99, 2000. Here is just the slide that kinds of talk about the work over 25 years. We've seen decline in teen pregnancy in those rates. We've seen a decline in infant mortality. We've seen a decline in delinquency among youth, and we've seen an increase in educational attainment. A lot of attributed to the programs that we fund for children and families here in Broward. For Pompano Beach, we wanted to really hone in to what support or what happens from CSC to Pompano Beach. Last year, we spent over 9 million, our providers provided over $9 million of support here in the city of Pompano Beach, and they served over 16,000 children and families here in the city. Here are just a few of the providers that we know have headquarters here in the city of Pompano Beach. But here's a pie graph of the areas that CSC is supporting providers in here in the city of Pompano Beach. And I'll break that down just a little bit more. In the area of physical health and child safety, We fund school nurses and those visits to the school nurses, and we fund swim lessons. So all of those kinds of things are in that category for physical health and child safety, and your numbers in there were extremely large. The next big area for Pompano Beach was family support programs. That includes programs that build family strengthening, programs in food mitigation, programs for kinship, programs that are really looking at how we can build a supportive family. And in the corner you see HEAL for families that have been affected by traumatic events that we can provide support to over time. This is just a list of all of the CSC providers serving Pompano Beach, and there are a lot. And you'll see agencies like YMCA, Jafco, SunServe, 211, all of those kinds of services that you hear that CSC supports in the city of Pompano Beach. Here's just some highlighted numbers. For 211, the Broward Health Highline, you had 4,876 served in the city of Pompano Beach last year. School nurses, 4,039 school visits supported by CSC in the city of Pompano Beach. Life Net for Families, one of our funded food mitigation programs, you had 2,100 participants who participated in that food mitigation program. We also do some very selective work here in the city of Pompano Beach, and it's our asset-based community development program. And we have two sites here in the city of Pompano Beach. And the next slide will just describe that work. Asset-based community development allows us to listen to the community. We're able to map the assets of those community members and those kinds of things, help them co-create their own program, and we get to invest in those programs. So we get to really look at a neighborhood and look at the assets and give funding to those citizens who really want to create their own network of work. This just gives a listing of all the publications we have at CSC that just give our transparency and talk about all of the work that we do at CSC. And they can be found at our website. And the next slide should be our website. For more information, cscbrower.org. For everybody who's online, you can use the QR code. But definitely check out our website and see all of the work that CSC does. Thank you very much for that opportunity, Mayor. It's time for questions.

33:42 – 33:53Speaker 38

Very good. Thank you for that. Yes. So you talk about you guys, you actually fund folks in the neighborhoods who want to help.

33:53Speaker 28

Yes, through our ABCD work. So they're co-creating projects and those kinds of things that we fund those programs through CSC.

34:03 – 34:19Speaker 38

And the best way to contact you guys for that from the folks in the neighborhood would be to go to the website? Yep. Okay, that's great news. Very interesting. Thank you. Appreciate that. You're welcome. Any questions from the board? Anybody? Well, thank you so much. Appreciate your presentation. Thank you. The work you do, yes.

34:23Speaker 38

All right, that takes us up to proclamations. I'll be right over here. We've got two today for Chiari Awareness Month and also Florida Redevelopment Week.

34:41 – 35:01Speaker 38

All right, the first one is, I'm gonna proclaim September as 2020, September 2026 as Chiari Awareness Month in the city of Pompano Beach. Tiffany Salas, president of Chiari's, Tiffany Salas and Mary Jacobs of Chiari's Little Warriors will be present and receive the proclamation. Are they here? All right, here we go. At least we got one. Come on down.

35:07Speaker 42

Thank you, appreciate it. Let's see. Yup, here we go.

35:11 – 38:13Speaker 38

This is the first one right here. All right. Whereas Chiari malinformation is a serious neurological disorder in which brain tissue extends into the spinal canal due to structural abnormalities at the base of the skull, potentially disrupting the normal flow of cerebrospinal fluid and affecting the nervous system. And whereas Chiari malformation was first identified by Austrian pathologist Hans Chiari and is estimated to affect approximately one in every 1,000 individuals in the United States, although many cases remain undiagnosed or misdiagnosed. And whereas individuals living with Chiari malformation may experience a wide range of symptoms, including severe headaches, neck pain, dizziness, balance and coordination difficulties, vision disturbances, muscle weakness, swallowing difficulties, chronic fatigue, and other neurological complications that can significantly impact quality of life. and whereas Chiari malformation may occur alone or in association with related conditions such as, this is gonna get me, serenomyelia, tethered cord syndrome, hydrocephalus, and connective tissue disorders, often requiring specialized medical evaluation and treatment. And whereas, while advances in diagnostic imaging and medical research have improved understanding of Chiari malformation, continued research, education, and public awareness are essential to improve diagnosis, treatment options, patient outcomes, and ultimately finding a cure. And whereas healthcare professionals, researchers, advocacy organizations, patients, caregivers, and families throughout the nation work tirelessly to promote awareness, provide support, encourage research, and improve the lives of those affected by Chiari malformation and related disorders. And whereas... September is recognized nationally as Chiari Malformation Awareness Month, providing an opportunity to increase public understanding of this often misunderstood condition, honor the strength and resilience of those living with the disorder, and encourage support for ongoing research and advocacy efforts. Whereas, the City of Pompano Beach is committed to fostering awareness of health-related issues that affect residents and families, and joins communities across the nation in recognizing the importance of education, compassion, and support for those impacted by Chiari malformation. And now, therefore, I, Rex Hardin, Mayor of the City of Pompano Beach, on behalf of the entire City Commission and residents, do hereby proclaim September 26, 2026, as Chiari Malformation Awareness Month in the City of Pompano Beach, and encourage all residents to learn more about Chiari malformation, support individuals and families affected by this condition, and recognize the importance of continued research, advocacy, and public awareness done this 8th day of September, 2026. Thank you so much. I appreciate all your efforts. Care to say a few words? Yes, please.

38:13 – 38:52Speaker 14

I just want to say thank you, everyone, from Pompano. We are doing our fourth annual walk right here in Pompano on September 19. So I just want to invite everybody. It's a short walk. It's only a mile. And we will be inside until it comes time to walk. And we're going to have pizza and tacos afterwards. And we would like to invite everybody to come. Part of the money that we do raise that day actually goes to Joe DiMaggio. and we help pay for financial assistance for children that do have Chiari malformation. And we are also working on educating our pediatricians in the local area and even nationally and let them know how important it is to make sure that they know the symptoms of Chiari and to send that child for an MRI to get checked. Thank you, guys.

38:52 – 39:03Speaker 38

Very good. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you. Appreciate you. Thank you. All right, thank you. Hope to see you there. Yeah, absolutely.

39:03Speaker 31

All right. All right.

39:07 – 41:49Speaker 38

Next up, we've got, let's see, we've got Florida Redevelopment Week. I believe we're going to have Nguyen Tran join us up here, director of our CRA. Come on down. Oh, and Whitney Rawls. Come on down, Whitney. Yes, Whitney Rawls. Whitney Rawls. Keeps his finger on the pulse of what happens in Pompano Beach and does all kinds of good things. Whitney, good seeing you, buddy. Thank you. Whereas community redevelopment agencies, CRAs, and redevelopment programs play a vital role in revitalizing neighborhoods, addressing areas of slum and blight, strengthening local economies, revitalizing downtowns, and improving the quality of life for residents and businesses throughout the state of Florida. and whereas redevelopment initiatives encourage private investment, support small businesses, improve infrastructure, enhance public spaces, and expand housing opportunities, thereby fostering vibrant, resilient, and equitable communities. And whereas the Florida Redevelopment Association, FRA, in partnership with municipalities, counties, and community stakeholders promotes best practices, professional education, and collaboration to advance community redevelopment efforts throughout Florida, and whereas redevelopment programs authorized under Chapter 163 Florida statutes provide essential tools for local governments to address infrastructure deficiencies, promote economic development, and support affordable housing and public improvements in designated areas of need. And whereas Florida Redevelopment Week serves as an opportunity to recognize redevelopment achievements, highlight transformational projects, engage residents and stakeholders, and celebrate the economic, social, and cultural benefits of community revitalization. And whereas the observance of Florida Redevelopment Week will raise awareness of the importance of community redevelopment and inspire continued public and private investment in Florida's neighborhoods, downtowns, and commercial corridors. Now, therefore, I, Rex Hardin, Mayor of the City of Pompano Beach, on behalf of the entire City Commission and residents, do hereby recognize and proclaim September 14th, 2026 through September 18th, 2026 as Florida Redevelopment Week in Pompano Beach, Florida, and encourage all residents, businesses, community organizations, and public officials to recognize and celebrate the contributions of community redevelopment programs and to participate in activities highlighting the importance of revitalization efforts across our communities. Done this eighth day of September, 2026. Thank you guys both for what you do to redevelop and foster good things in Pompano Beach. Whitney, care to say a few words? Absolutely.

41:50 – 42:33Speaker 11

Thank you, Vice Mayor, Commissioners, and City staff, CRA staff. On behalf of all those who have served on the Northwest CRA and the East CRA Advisory Committee, and all of our community development, organizations here in the beautiful city of Pompano Beach. I accept this proclamation. And as the mayor has stated, it is important work that we're doing here in our city. Most of you who know me know that I believe in three R's, rapid, responsible redevelopment. That is people focus. I think our city is moving in that direction. With our leadership, we're still continuing to do the work that is set before us. And I'm looking for great gains here in Pompano Beach. Thank you, Mayor.

42:33Speaker 38

All right, thank you. Appreciate that, buddy.

42:35Speaker 11

Nguyen, would you care to add a few words as well?

42:38 – 42:51Speaker 38

He does, okay. I'd also like to point out that Mr. Rawls, he is the chairman of our Pompano Beach Housing Authority also, so he does yeoman's work to try and help the citizens of Pompano Beach and the surrounding community. Nguyen?

42:52 – 45:59Speaker 2

Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. So a little speech because I don't want to leave anything out, and especially our East CRA. Mr. Paul Fisher is our chairman. He could not make it here to accept the proclamation for the East. But thank you. Thank you for recognizing Florida Redevelopment Week. Redevelopment is more than just constructing buildings and improving streets. It's about creating opportunities. It's about strengthening our neighborhoods. It's about supporting local businesses and also preserving our history and ultimately improving the quality of life that people who call Pompano Beach home. In the East, of course, over the years, it's been a remarkable transformation. In the East, what's the most visible and noticeable is the transformation of our beachfront. Once an underutilized area, surrounded by the pier has become the Pompano Beach fishing village as you see today. Supported by the pier parking garage, new streetscapes, restaurants, businesses, public spaces, also significant private sector investment that you see now. We have done and seen new investments along East Atlantic Boulevard, including the Mela Pompano, which brought new market rate and also workforce housing to the district. Soon you will see the breaking of the ground for the W Hotel. All this has taken many, many years to achieve. In the Northwest, we've worked equally hard to bring the investment and opportunity back into this historic heart of our community. The revitalization of Old Town, the creation of Old Town's backyard, the improvements to Annie Gillis Park, investments in our cultural assets like the Bailey, the ally, historic ally. New businesses, new restaurants that we have invested in, housing initiatives. We've done a lot and also the continued progress towards our transformative downtown Pompano Beach. We've helped restore economic activity and opportunity to an area that has experienced years and decades of disinvestment. These projects didn't happen overnight. They're the results of years of planning, strategic public investment, strong partnerships with our private sector, and also most importantly, the involvement and support of our residents and businesses. Redevelopment Week gives us an opportunity to celebrate how far we've come, but also it reminds us that work is not finished. we will continue building upon these successes attracting investments supporting our neighborhoods businesses and ensuring that redevelopment creates opportunities that benefit the entire pompano beach community so thank you very much for recognizing september 14th through the 18th as redevelopment week and your continued support in redevelopment in our community all right thank you sir appreciate that thank you very much

46:15 – 46:37Speaker 38

All right. All right. All right. That takes us up to audience to be heard. Do we have anyone signed up for audience to be heard, Mr. Alfred?

46:38 – 47:06Speaker 43

Yes, Mayor, we do have 12 speakers who signed up. Out of the 12 speakers, two of them are listed on their form that they're here to speak on item number eight on the agenda, which pertains to the ratification of contracts and agreements. So I believe when that item has been pulled and they'll have the opportunity to speak at that point. And those are speakers Marilyn D. Martini and David Vassar.

47:07 – 47:18Speaker 38

Okay. So those two speakers will speak when the item comes up in the agenda, correct? Okay, so those two speakers don't need to speak on audience to be heard. Very good. Let's go ahead.

47:19Speaker 43

First speaker, Ed Phillips, followed by Brandy Zabadow, followed by Roderick Phillips. Ed Phillips?

47:28Speaker 38

Just name and address of the record, and please limit your comments to three minutes.

47:33 – 50:36Speaker 17

I wish I had four. Mayor, Commissioners, my name is Ed Phillips. I currently reside at 384 Northwest 19th Street, Pompano Beach. Mayor, when right stands up, wrong has to sit down with a little help from right. Mayor, the upcoming theme for Tiger Trail Festival 2026-27 will be Courage, Determination, and Fortitude. I stand here with a lot of things to say, but I want to say that we would like to take this opportunity to thank this city for the partnership that you have given us and had with us over the years. But I want to take this personal opportunity to thank you for the participation and assistance of Earl Bosworth as he prepares to lead this city into another venture, which I'm sure he'll do excellent and fine work. Mr. Bosworth, as far as I'm concerned, we had a couple of issues going in some years ago, but he turned out to be a great individual who communicated well to Tiger Trail Festival. Now on to the next couple of things, Mayor. Mayor, I'd like to commend this city in finally getting around to paving some of these roads. I mean, I am just so ecstatic at seeing that, and I do appreciate that. Not only do I appreciate the number of people in this community, even though they don't tell you, they don't say it to you, we appreciate it. Mayor, the next thing is I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you and thank this city, and I want folks to pay attention. for the racial composition of this city. I came in here at a time when there were literally a few African Americans who held positions of worth in this city, and I must tell you that every time I hear folks talk about how racist this city is, I cringe because I think about the staff that at that time, there were no black folks at all. So I need folks to take a look at what is really going on versus what people keep saying. Having said that, Mayor, the next thing is I must say to you emphatically With the building of the EPAT Larkin Center coming, I am emphatically against, if you should decide to do it, placing that center on the side where the Anna Gillis Park is. My feeling is that it will intrude into residential neighborhoods. It will cause you, at some point in time, to have to block off roads, which may cause a problem for Blanty Lee when they have activities and events in that area. Mayor, There's a lot of things I need to say and probably would like to say on a lot of issues. As I begin to close and take my seat, let me compliment this city in bringing forth Stacey Boynton and Associates for being the lead architects on the E. Pat Larkin Center. Once again, when folks start saying nothing of concrete is happening in our neighborhood, it is. Pay attention. Everything that goes on is not a bad thing. Now, as I take my seat, I must say this to you. We do need folks to work hard. Work, work on these projects. I don't want to hear, we don't want to hear that you can't find anybody. We got too many people sitting around doing nothing who wants to work.

50:36Speaker 38

Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. Appreciate it. Good words. Next speaker.

50:46 – 52:39Speaker 25

Hello, good afternoon. I'm Brandy Zabital. I live within the Pompano Beach Highlands. I am also running for city commissioner for District 2, and I also wanted to bring it to your attention that on August 30th at 3 o'clock, which is a Sunday if you check your calendars, Our community was given letters that said that they were unable to feed the animals. And in my community, seeing as how we're the working class, they can barely afford to pay their bills, let alone feed the wild animals that live within our community. As I grew up in this community, I understand that this has been a long, long, long problem. And I don't think that the problem is that the people are feeding the hungry animals, but more so that the city hasn't stepped in to rectify the situation. I am solution-oriented, and I think that it would be fair for us to consider that the people here are just maintaining a problem that the city has yet to address. So seeing as how they're going to be given citations if they continue feeding the hungry animals, I think it's more that... The city of Pompano Beach needs to step in and help trap the animals so that the animals are no longer there. The people who live within our community should not be cited for feeding hungry animals, and let alone on a Sunday. So with that being said, I really hope that we're able to be solution-oriented and focus on a solution, which would be getting the animals under control, and that includes wild coyotes, that includes chickens, that includes rabbits, all of those that live within the Pompano Beach Highlands, and even Cresthaven from time to time. So if we don't get control of it as a city, how do you expect the residents who are unaware of what the rules are that they're playing by? So I think that it's time that we let the residents know what rulebook they're playing by before we start citing them, specifically people who have my signs in their front yard on a Sunday. Thank you very much. You guys have a great day.

52:39Speaker 26

Missed you guys.

52:40Speaker 38

Very good. Next speaker.

52:46Speaker 43

Roger Phillips, followed by David Miller, followed by Mike Serversky.

53:01 – 55:26Speaker 3

Rob Phillips. 2620 Northwest 10th Street, Pompano Beach, Florida. Good afternoon, everyone. I'm here about this event, Exit 36, Substance Abuse, Homelessness, and Mental Health Awareness Day. This is our fifth year where we are, and David Miller here is the host for this event. And for the past five years, we've been having this event to show love and support toward the indigent community of Pompano Beach, Florida. We have to recognize there is a problem here in Pompano whether or not we want to do anything about it or not. Me and a few of my friends have decided that we are going to try to help eliminate some of the homelessness that's going on in Pompano and just one day We are going to feed them and have resources for that day. And we're inviting the commissioner to come out and support, be a part of this event. Of course, all the homeless people don't vote, but a lot of them do have voter registration cards. Because I make sure the ones that can get a card, get a card. So you might have a few voters that you may need to try to come out there and talk to when we have this event. We're going to have a plethora of food, ribs, chicken, mac and cheese, baked beans, hot dogs, apple cobbler, fried chicken, fried fish. We're going to make sure that you be fed that day. Hot dogs, hamburgers, grits, sausage, and all this food is donated. I want to thank the City of Pompano Beach for allowing us and Tran Nugent for allowing us to use that empty lot uh over on third avenue where we can have this event because that empty lot is just sitting there and i want to thank the city of pompano for allowing us to use that that that piece of property just for four hours that day and uh mr miller are you you got anything you would like to say oh sure

55:27 – 56:17Speaker 12

So on October 3rd, that's a Saturday, I'll be there speaking. And we're going to feed you real good is what Rod expressed. I'd like to thank our supporters. That was New Life, Alcohol Anonymous, City Church Resource Center, Fellowship, Circle of Brotherhood, Potter's House, and Our Brother's Keeper. Oh, a special thanks will go to Ms. Jocelyn and Ms. Sharon Stone and even Sarah Peterson. So I appreciate them for acknowledging the work that we do. We have some love out here. Who would have ever thought? But, yeah, this is, like he said, substance abuse, mental illness, and homelessness. That is what this is for. So get some resources and learn about these residents.

56:18Speaker 38

Thank you very much. Good, thank you. Appreciate what you're doing. Thank you so much. Mr. Miller?

56:26 – 59:13Speaker 12

Okay, back again. David Miller, 2621 Northwest 13th Street. I just came to speak a little bit about my district a little bit, the District 5 area. So, Collier City Learning Library will be opening back after a long wait in October for So that means the reopening. We'll have an event and some Halloween activities. Just the month of October, we look to having some major things happening, including the think tanks by your cultural arts ambassador. I wanted to also say that the McNair Center is in need of a digital billboard. It's just a lot of things can happen. I think the city of Pompano will benefit if the information was there, not on a crawling letter sign, but an actual digital billboard. same as the one at the Skolnick, same as the one at Mitchelmore. You know, we probably need one too. That's what I would say. For the light outages, people don't know this, but Collier City actually got their streetlights first section in Pompano with streetlights. And guess what that means? First one to have our lights out. So when we have our, I'm just suggesting, when the firefighters have their hurricane relief or whatever, conversations of safety maybe tell us how to or who to call to get our street lights repaired or back on because on my street there's three out so and on that note I'd like to give a thanks to BSO for some reason there's no shortage whatsoever of police on our streets but another item for Cuyahoga City You guys are working on something for Dorothy Jones, honoring or recognizing her, something like that. I would like to be a part of that because I have worked with her and know about her center before the Capas even moved in. So I'd just like to be a part of that. That was my elder friend. And last, I'd like to say that a long time ago, but this year, not too far back, there was a person that came up here Goals in the mouth are nappier than minds. But very intelligent suggestion. I couldn't believe it. She said, put a construction fence along Westview Community Cemetery. That blew my mind. That was actually a very great idea. I don't know what happened with it or where it's going to go, but I think that we should think of having a construction fence. That shouldn't be too hard to cover that Copens Road for our community cemetery. Yeah, that's all. Thanks, and good seeing you all.

59:14 – 59:35Speaker 38

Thank you, Mr. Miller. Just a couple of items. I don't want to get into a debate, but, of course, the Westview Cemetery is private property, and we can't just put a fence up there. Also, if there are streetlights out, please go to our website. You can report streetlights that aren't working on our city website so we can get them taken care of. Or, of course, you can call your commissioner, call the mayor.

59:35Speaker 20

Mayor, I had a question.

59:37Speaker 38

Commissioner Perkins.

59:39 – 59:55Speaker 20

When you mentioned the digital billboard, are you talking about the football field or the information sign? The information, okay, right. Digital informational sign at McNair. Okay, thank you.

59:55 – 1:02:49Speaker 10

Very good. Mr. Skaworski. Mr. Skaworski, 1630 Southwest Fifth Avenue. One quick comment about the Delvin case last week. Commissioner Smith? You cheated. Where did you find such a good looking lawyer? You actually think the judge was gonna go against her? She was super cute. Is she married? Did you see what she looked like? You weren't paying attention, too bad. All right, well, we've had a lot of people get up and comment about the city manager. I wanna make a couple comments. I've already stated previously I think the pay is ridiculous. I think at a specific age you should retire. And I also think that handing out information on the property values, how much they've gone up, I thought was ridiculous. And last I checked, Pompano wasn't even in the top 100 for property value growth in the last five years. Having said all that, I send the city manager messages and emails. Nobody really knows what the heck I do around here. If there's a problem in the city, he jumps on it immediately. Immediately. Even the one stupid thing in Cypress Harbor got fixed. So I give him credit for that. He is on the ball. And I'm going to state one other thing that no one knows about. You remember when we had that pipe break out west about five, six years ago? Well, what no one knows is, and this is what's called residents first. What no one knows is, I was going out there for about six weeks in Commissioner Perkins' district. There's like a creek over there, and they would catch catfish, and I would hang out with the guys. I would knock on the doors to make sure the neighbors were doing fine and talking to them, this and that. They were all terrific, and they were glad I was coming out there. And one of the days, one of the neighbors that I was talking to said to me, you know, it got me upset. She said, you know, you're the only one that cares about us. You come out here, you knock on the doors, you talk to us, And I said, you mean to tell me nobody from the city has come out and spoken to you whatsoever? And she said to me, yes, we've had one. And I said, well, who was it? She said she didn't know his name. And I said, you don't know who it was? She goes, well, he's a manager. And I said, what'd he look like? And she described him. I said, that's the city manager. I don't forget that stuff. Two people out of 115,000 people cared. That's called residents first. Now, I know when I sit down, somebody might say, well, he's making all this money and Skoworski makes nothing. It doesn't matter. One person up here, she knows how I am. At least he showed up. Good job. Good job. Thank you, sir.

1:02:50Speaker 10

Appreciate that. Do you want to take the last nine seconds? No.

1:02:57Speaker 43

John Bodnar, followed by Clinton Mueller, followed by Delvin King.

1:03:12Speaker 16

Hi, John Bodnar, 521 North Riverside Drive. I'm here again, wondering when my street's gonna finally get paved.

1:03:22Speaker 38

Well, there is a list. but it's a long list, unfortunately. We're still working on those.

1:03:29 – 1:04:13Speaker 16

This is three years now. It's three years that they told us that it was going to get paved, and it never got paved. I mean, just pave the street instead of trying to make it something really gorgeous to put sidewalks in and everything and palm trees. If you just paved the street, that would be a great improvement. Any kind of paving on it's got to improve it. It's like riding a roller coaster. And it continuously floods. And half of it doesn't flood, the other half does. It's too long already. It's like I said, it's been three years that folks have been telling me you're working on this project. When's it gonna come to an end and when are you gonna do it? I keep telling all the people in my building, oh, they're working on it, they're working on it,

1:04:16 – 1:04:44Speaker 38

No, no one response to this. Well, it comes comes down to allocation of resources, sir If we had unlimited funds we could we could fix that Street the way it needs to be done It is on the list. We've been working on this Attempting to get grants and from anybody and everybody to help pay for that project It's a big project to really improve that that whole road, but unfortunately, we're not there yet Well, keep working on it. We are thank you. Thank you Thank You. Mr. Bonner next speaker

1:04:45Speaker 43

Clinton Mueller, followed by Delvin King, followed by Brian Campbell.

1:04:56 – 1:08:08Speaker 34

Clinton Mueller, 1080 Northeast 28th Avenue, Pompano Beach, Florida. Mr. Mayor, Madam Vice Mayor, Commissioners, welcome back. I sent a email to you guys before you went on recess, during which time I was letting you know that we had actually entered into a partnership with the University of Florida to conduct a lead test of the surrounding community here in Pompano Beach. On August the 1st, we actually had over 30 volunteers I'm out in the blazing hot sun here in South Florida and came out and volunteered their time to go around this community taking over 300 plus samples, consolidating into 81 sites. I'm here today as well to let you know that lead was found in our community, but there is not a reason to panic that it is in the community. I was assured by the university that while the levels are elevated, they're not necessitating a call to action, but it is a learning experience for all of us and we have to act to prevent it from becoming a situation that gets more expensive by the day. Now, I'm hoping, I've sent you a follow up obviously to that on Friday, itemizing a couple things and including a request that the professor from University of Florida be put on your agenda for the next meeting, which is the 22nd. He is willing to come down from Gainesville and go through the readings and data that is there. In addition, the local office at the University of Florida here and Davey will also be here to answer questions of what they can do or help with the residents if anyone has any concerns. And there's a great opportunity even beyond that to perhaps collaborate with that university. Beyond that, I also sent you guys as well an email, and we're almost on the anniversary of the FAA workshop that we did last year. During which time, over the last year and a half almost that I've been in here, we have been told continuously that there was nothing that we could do at the airpark. I just sent you an email from two different members of the FAA that shows in totality that that was patently false. There exists a form and a rule that you go through, the 7480 form that has to be filed by the city to the FAA to address altitudes and traffic patterns, that you can get those patterns outside of the residential areas, both east and west, and be able to reach both. And I'll close on one last thing as well, if I may. I also would strenuously recommend adding citizens to the Air Park Advisory Board with no aviation experience, one on the east and one on the west, so both sides are represented.

1:08:08Speaker 38

Thank you, sir.

1:08:10Speaker 38

Appreciate that. Appreciate your efforts there, Mr. Mueller, also. Commissioner Fessick?

1:08:16Speaker 26

Mr. Harrison, do we need a motion to have a presentation put on the agenda for September 22nd, or will you just give us your word that you will allow that time and put it on the agenda?

1:08:26Speaker 29

I'll get with Mr. Mueller and get the gentleman's contact information.

1:08:31Speaker 26

Thank you, but I just want to make sure, aside from getting his contact information, can I have your word that you'll put it on his presentation? He's driving from Gainesville.

1:08:39Speaker 29

If the gentleman is as willing as Mr. Mueller indicates, then there shouldn't be a problem.

1:08:46Speaker 26

Thank you very much. All right.

1:08:49Speaker 20

I just wanted to thank Mr. Mueller for all the hard work. Thank you so much. We appreciate you.

1:08:54Speaker 26

And all the volunteers, too.

1:08:56Speaker 20

And the volunteers, yes.

1:09:01 – 1:09:32Speaker 4

Delvin King according to the District 5 Commission I don't have an address they don't know why I live so I guess I don't need to say an address today so I got a couple of things I wanted to address mr. mayor or any Commissioner that can answer this question what will be the address of the new City Hall Will the city hall address be whatever it is, Dr. Martin Luther King Boulevard, or will we use some other type of address? Do we know that?

1:09:32Speaker 38

I don't know what the address would be, to be honest with you.

1:09:35Speaker 4

So is it based off of Martin Luther King Boulevard?

1:09:40Speaker 38

Nobody knows that?

1:09:41 – 1:12:03Speaker 4

Okay. So that's gonna be a tough question there. We wanna know is the new downtown gonna be based off of Atlantic Boulevard, Dixie Highway, or Martin Luther King Boulevard? Since it's in our neighborhood, District 4, it should represent that community and the address should represent Dr. Martin Luther King Boulevard. So I need to know the answer to that question shortly. And I know a lot of people were talking about the move of E. Pat Larkins. I don't think that it should move. I don't think that our history should be removed out of the new downtown project. It should stay right there, connected with the new downtown. Another thing is, because I'm running out of time. This is for Mr. Berman. Now, Mr. Berman, I seen you at the court case and I seen you doing a lot of things. But now I want to know, You said you did not have anything to do with my case, my felony. It's been all over, tapped in this back the other day, my felony case. But you sent an email to Mr. Gutman, which is the state attorney on my case, and you wanted more information on a pending case. felony case. So I want to know who gave, because you only work under directives, who on this commission gave you directives to talk to the state attorney that's on my case? And I want the residents to know and understand that When you're in this political game, you will be attacked by city employees, and they will go after you any way that they can to make sure that you're destroyed. And I know for a fact, you, Darlene Smith, and Mark Berman, and everybody, Barry Moss, all y'all worked together to make sure I was removed off of that building. Out of the election, but I come to tell you, you may finish and you might be the commissioner again, but just like you ain't do nothing the last two years, you're going to continue not to do anything. And the next two years, we're going to make sure that you're removed from that seat. But Mr. Mark Berman, help me understand, and I'm not leaving this podium, to you help me understand why you emailed the state attorney about my case.

1:12:04Speaker 38

Thank you, sir. Appreciate your input. Next speaker.

1:12:07Speaker 4

I'm not leaving the podium until I understand why Mr. Berman texted, I mean, why he sent the email about my case.

1:12:14Speaker 4

What was the purpose?

1:12:16Speaker 38

Mr. King, your time is up at that podium.

1:12:18Speaker 4

This is your first warning, Mr. Mayor. That's right.

1:12:20Speaker 38

Please leave the podium.

1:12:22Speaker 4

Help me understand. Mr. King, your time is up. This is your second warning, Mr. Mayor.

1:12:25Speaker 38

Please leave the podium. This is your second warning. That's your second warning. Mr. King, please leave the podium. I'm about to give you your last warning.

1:12:32Speaker 10

Your time is up.

1:12:33Speaker 38

That's your third warning. Thank you, sir. Next speaker.

1:12:44Speaker 43

Brian Campbell, followed by Angel Hickens.

1:12:55Speaker 38

Hello, Pastor.

1:12:56 – 1:16:05Speaker 15

Good afternoon. Brian Anthony Campbell, 390 Northwest 15th Street here in beautiful city of Pompano Beach, Florida. Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners, I stand before you today not to really talk about an item on the agenda, but I want to talk about something that I believe affects every item that comes before this commission. I want to talk to you about a number, and that number is 3-3. 3-3, does that sound familiar? A 3-3 vote is not inherently a bad thing. In fact, disagreement is a part of representative government. Six people sitting around this dais are not always going to see an issue the same way. But when 3-3 votes become a recurring pattern, I think residents have a right to ask an important question. Are you simply disagreeing with one another, or are you still working with one another? Because when you look at the issues that have produced some of these three, three votes, they don't appear to be random. They often involve some of the city's most consequential questions, major development projects, large financial commitments, how much control the commission should exercise over the administration. Those are legitimate areas for disagreement, but there's a pattern that's harder to ignore. On certain issues, we repeatedly see the same three commissioners on one side and same three commissioners on the other. And that creates a danger beyond a failed motion. The Bible says a house divided against itself cannot stand. When a commission becomes divided into two predictable sides, the question can quietly shift from what's best for Pompano Beach to which side can get three votes. And those are two very different questions. I don't come before you today asking you to agree with one another all the time. I'm asking you to work harder to understand one another. If three commissioners oppose something, don't simply count the votes in and move on. Ask this question. What would it take for one of those three commissioners to say yes? And if three commissioners support something, ask the same question. What legitimate concern is keeping the other side from joining us? Is this asking too much? Because sometimes the answer isn't that the other side is wrong. Sometimes the answer is that something needs to be changed. So we deserve a commission that knows how to get to four and doesn't just stop at three. So I truly want to encourage you today to allow that 3-3 to be a point of coming together and keeping us apart. Thank you.

1:16:06Speaker 38

Thank you, Pastor. Appreciate that.

1:16:08Speaker 38

Commissioner Perkins.

1:16:10 – 1:18:20Speaker 20

Thank you. That was very interesting about the 3-3. You know, I've been sitting on this dais a while, and no one came up to this podium where you're standing and said anything when I was one vote. For many years. Fighting for my district, fighting for my people. All by myself. And a lot of people sitting up here were voting against things that were actually needed in District 4. No one said a word. But now all of a sudden it's 3-3, there's so much to say about it. The people that are sitting here did not decide on 3-3. I think we're probably the only 3-3 in the county. It wasn't our decision. It just came back to hunt those that put it in place. It just happened to be. So I need you to understand that, because twice sitting on this dais, I've broken that 3-3. With the McNab House, I was popular and loved for one day. I did the same thing before we took the break in August, giving the city manager the authority to run this city hall and make decisions while we were out. So you have to see both sides of it, rather than see one side of how it looks. Because like I said, when we're not here with this camera, you should see how we're disrespected and treated at City Hall. And then we come here and you expect us to be laughing and grinning like we get along great. Respect is deserved everywhere. So we're not gonna like what everybody say, we're not gonna like what everybody do. I tried to do my best to support whatever commissioners wanted in their district. They've never done me like that when I first came on this dais. Everybody was sitting up here, disagreed with everything in District 4 that was needed. I didn't go away, and I didn't stay away. And I'm not going anywhere. So I just ask you to look at the entire picture as you continue to read the Bible and pray for this city and this dais. Thank you.

1:18:21 – 1:18:54Speaker 15

And I do say, and I don't mean to add on to it, but I do, this speech was actually longer, and I did have to cut it down for time's sake. And I do acknowledge that you all do agree on a lot of issues. But as I said, I know it's the major issues that come up where we often see that 3-3 divide. Yes. And I don't expect anybody, any of you, to agree on everything all the time. Right, right. I just want to encourage you all and challenge you all to work together. Thank you, sir. That's all I'm asking.

1:18:54Speaker 20

Some of us have been doing that, trying anyway.

1:18:58Speaker 20

Thank you. Thank you, Pastor.

1:19:02 – 1:20:02Speaker 21

I think we all have a lot of thoughts on this and different levels of frustration. I know that I sit here and I often am a vote on either side. And I do what is right for the people I represent. So we're not sitting here in a public safety crisis right now because I sided with a BSO contract. There's multiple examples like that where I look at We can't do that to the residents of our city. We can't plunge ourselves into a public safety crisis with a 3-3 ungovernable commission. So I would encourage people to look at who's compromising and when, and which people never compromise up here because their views are based on their personal disdain. for the people that they sit up here with versus doing their job, which is doing the right thing for the people they represent.

1:20:04Speaker 38

Good. Commissioner Seegerson-Eade.

1:20:06 – 1:21:40Speaker 18

Yes, I just want to put on the record that I always have voted for what's in the best interest of the community, of the city of Pompano Beach. And I just want to make a couple of reminders. The Learning Center out at Mitchellmore Park, I voted in favor of that. That was a $400,000 project. The track, the additional at Apollo Park and the Ultimate Spark, another million and a half overage because you wanted a track. And you wanted all the bleachers and everything was great. I agree with it, I voted in favor of that. And there are many other things that I have voted in favor of for your district, when in fact, like the Gold Bond, you didn't even support. And I will say that I said at the beginning of my tenure that what is good for the Northwest District is good for the entire city. I've always supported, even though it took away projects from my district. And I vote on my conscience what I believe is right. Not because I dislike you or Vice Mayor Fournier. That's not the reason. I vote the way I feel is right for the city. I always will and I always have. For the record, thank you.

1:21:41Speaker 38

That's not true at all. Commissioner Fessick.

1:21:45 – 1:24:24Speaker 26

Thank you. Thank you. All right. Back to center, guys. Just wanted to just echo the frustration that many of us feel when it's a 3-3. I think that what most people are forgetting is that for many years it was a 5-1 or a 4-2 in an opposite direction. When we keep hearing stories about this 3-3 and it's meant to be something negative, I want everybody to take a break and pause. Remember how we got to these seats. It was not us who put ourselves in these seats. It was the residents who put us in these seats. So when you are trying to say that somebody who was elected by residents, regardless of where, and is doing what they feel is best for the residents that they serve is not serving well enough just simply because there happens to be a disagreement, you're essentially saying to your neighbors, I don't respect your choice. It is frustrating. You're probably the only board that has got this problem. And I would agree that we do need to find ways to work together. I've been arguing that since the beginning and asking for compromise since the beginning. I would like to say, if anybody's a Taylor Swift fan, there's a song she had. She said, hi, I'm the problem, it's me. I'm the one who created this 3-3, but I think it came from an uprising of people finally having enough of not being heard. And I will tell you that from what I've heard in the past year and a half, two years, people are now paying attention to what's happening in the city, and that is a blessing. We are paying attention to what's happening in our backyards, and we are supporting each other regardless of where the district lines cross. So just keep that in mind. Pastor Campbell, I always love your positivity, and you try to bring kindness to the podium whenever you can. And I want to say thank you. And you also send very nice messages sometimes of positivity ahead and prayers of trying to make things go a little bit more smoothly. And I want to thank you for that because it does take a team of all of us working together. I've also heard, and I'll close with this, I've also heard that we're not getting things done. And you have to remember that sometimes not getting things done is actually the goal by representing the residents we serve. So it's making sure we do things correctly for the residents we serve as opposed to just pushing things along for the sake of pushing things along. That's all. Thank you.

1:24:26Speaker 38

Very good. Next speaker.

1:24:37 – 1:27:37Speaker 6

Good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Commissioners. My name is Angela Hickens, 201 South Riverside Drive, and I am one of the plaintiffs in the pending inverse condemnation litigation against the city involving the city's leaking outfall pipe infrastructure located on a private property without an easement. We are represented by both Barry Belmouth, a board-certified attorney with extensive experience in inverse condemnation litigation, together with MacArthur and English. Barry served as lead counsel in the Shaw Farms inverse condemnation case against Broward County, which resulted in a $42 million recovery plus statutory attorney's fees and costs, which has been reported as the largest inverse condemnation recovery in Florida. I mention Barry's experience for one reason. Our position in this litigation and our present settlement proposal have been evaluated with the benefit of highly experienced inverse condemnation counsel. We believe there is a meaningful opportunity right now to resolve this case before both the city and plaintiffs incur considerably more expense in the final trial preparations and trial. We participated in mediation on July 16th. At that time, we made a settlement proposal specifically intended to resolve this matter before depositions began and before substantial additional attorney fees, expert fees, deposition costs, and litigation expenses were incurred. That was specifically a pre deposition settlement opportunity. We asked the city's outside council to present this to the commission before those additional expenses were incurred to our knowledge. And after reviewing the commission agenda, their proposal was never presented to the commission. Accordingly, the matter was not resolved during the pre deposition window and the depositions and additional litigation proceeds proceeded. Substantial additional attorney's fees, expert fees, deposition costs, and other litigation expenses have since been incurred and significant additional evidence has developed that has materially strengthened our position. That earlier prep predeposition settlement opportunity has therefore passed. This case was scheduled for trial to commence on August 31st, but following the city's request for continuance on August 21st, trial is now scheduled to commence November 2nd. We therefore have a relatively short window in which to determine whether this litigation can be resolved before both sides incur substantial additional expense. final trial preparation and trial. Our attorneys are submitting a renewed settlement proposal through the city's outside counsel. I'm respectfully asking this Commission and the appropriate city officials to take the necessary steps so that our settlement proposal can be presented to the Commission for consideration at its September 22nd meeting. I'm not asking to discuss or decide the merits of the litigation today. I'm simply asking that our settlement proposal be brought before you through the appropriate process and so that the commission has an opportunity to determine whether this matter can be resolved before trial. Thank you for your consideration.

1:27:37 – 1:28:04Speaker 36

Thank you. Mayor. Mr. Berman. Obviously, we don't discuss pending litigation in public, but my office is planning to request a shade meeting. There's testing going on. We're not in agreement with, obviously, with all the plaintiffs' position in terms of damages, but we will bring that for the commission as soon as possible when we are ready. We were looking potentially for the first meeting in October.

1:28:05Speaker 38

Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner Fessick.

1:28:09 – 1:28:26Speaker 26

I have a question for Mr. Berman. Because I got an email as well from Mr. Siropoulos earlier this week. Is this in any way, I mean, I think it is. How does our item number 11 impact this? Does it in any way?

1:28:30Speaker 36

No. Not related as far as I know. Okay.

1:28:36Speaker 26

The address is on there, so that was the only reason I was here. Okay, thank you.

1:28:42Speaker 38

Okay. Mr. Alford, I think that concludes audience to be heard.

1:28:45Speaker 43

Yes, that concludes audience to be heard.

1:28:47Speaker 38

All right, that takes us up to our consent agenda. Can I get a motion approving items 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7?

1:28:55Speaker 18

So moved. Second.

1:28:56Speaker 38

Moved and seconded. All in favor say aye.

1:28:58Speaker 38

Opposed? Here's unanimous.

1:29:00 – 1:29:20Speaker 36

Thank you that takes us up to item number one as a resolution resolution of the City Commission of the City of Palmetto Beach Florida approving and authorizing the proper city officials to execute a piggyback agreement Between the City of Palmetto Beach and compass USA Group Inc to purchase unattended micro markets and vending machines providing an effective date So moved second moved and second for discussion.

1:29:20Speaker 38

This item was pulled by Commissioner Fessick Commissioner. I

1:29:23 – 1:29:36Speaker 26

Thank you. Scott, I just had a couple of questions because I always am looking for opportunities for revenue, one. But do we have a projected annual revenue across all 11 sites for these machines?

1:29:37 – 1:29:49Speaker 37

Good afternoon. Scott Moore, Parks and Recreation. No, we do not. I don't know. We have some vending machines at some of our facilities now, but we didn't have a contract with them. So this is pure revenue.

1:29:50Speaker 26

Okay, so these will be self-managed by Parks and Rec then?

1:29:55Speaker 37

By the contractor, we'll take care of them, and then we get a percentage of the revenue each month.

1:30:01Speaker 26

Okay, what is that rev share?

1:30:03Speaker 37

We get 10% for the vending machines and 5% for the micro market.

1:30:07 – 1:30:18Speaker 26

Okay, and are we charging any rent? No. No, okay. And the beach parking garage is on the list as well?

1:30:18 – 1:30:37Speaker 37

It's on the list. None of these, we don't have to put them in any of these spots. These are just places that potentially could be spots that we looked at. We also drove around the city with the vendor to see if there's other spots that we wanted to. So we can add or take away depending on how they do or whether we like them or not. So it's pretty flexible.

1:30:38Speaker 26

Okay. And then the last thing is, I know that the Coral Springs, it said that their contract ended November 1st of this year. Did they already approve an extension?

1:30:47Speaker 37

I'm not sure I asked the same question. I didn't get an answer yet, but I understand that we can still do ours for this extension.

1:30:54Speaker 26

Okay, thank you very much.

1:30:57Speaker 38

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

1:31:12Speaker 27

Vicente, throughout Pompano Beach. Mayor, what type of vending machines are these? Mr. Moore, Scott.

1:31:19 – 1:31:38Speaker 37

Just regular vending machines. We're looking for the ones at our after-school programs and stuff. We want healthy choices, so we can choose what kind of food is in there. So we're not looking for unhealthy choices. We really want healthy options for the kids and our senior center. So we're looking for healthy options.

1:31:38Speaker 27

Okay, and when you say healthy options, not just healthy options, but affordable options for these cities, right?

1:31:46 – 1:32:41Speaker 27

Because you can't be putting machines in our neighborhoods and our communities that people can't afford the actual stuff. And while we're talking about it, Mayor, we need a vending machine here in this city commission chain. Understand? Listen, when y'all go on breaks, y'all go back there and have some coffee and donuts, but what about the people out there who have been waiting and laboring? mayor i'll put it on the list thank you for your input okay yeah exactly people need something to drink nightmare but all serious whoever this company is i hope that we don't we're not just helping a vendor piggyback and make a dollar but we need more partnerships in our in our community centers these vendors we always do this type of stuff but where is the partnership to our children Our children incur a cost when they're playing these after-school activities, so I'm hoping that the food is affordable, is healthy, and at the same time, in the future, we need to look at how do we build more partnerships. Thank you.

1:32:42Speaker 38

Good, thank you. Further input from the public?

1:32:49 – 1:33:21Speaker 24

Good afternoon. Lauren McGee-Weiss, 2401 Southeast 7th Drive. I was... bunch of questions about this because I just went to the biggest retail conference and commercial real estate and in Orlando and there are some really cool concepts coming out that have the refrigerated type vending machines that do have super healthy options with not all the preservatives that weird crunchy moms like I like cringe over but with compass USA did they talk about what kind of machines they are and if they were refrigerated machines or not when it comes to the food

1:33:22Speaker 37

I don't know the answer to that. I did not have a conversation with them about that.

1:33:27Speaker 24

And are they going to be operating these machines and maintaining them and filling them? Yes. So it's just going to be basically a lease to Compass for them to have the machines on property?

1:33:36Speaker 24

Okay. That was my question. There are a couple of really cool companies that are doing the same thing, so I just hope that they reached. Was this an RFP?

1:33:45Speaker 37

We're just piggybacking from Coral Springs. Coral Springs has had good success with them. Okay. So we're using them, and we're going to test it out, because right now we have nothing.

1:33:53Speaker 24

So this is only like a temporary test off?

1:33:56Speaker 37

It's until 2028, I believe, it expires. So we've got a couple years.

1:34:00Speaker 24

I'll send you a couple of the ones. Okay, please. They were just really cool, and I think that they would quell his concerns as well. All right, thank you.

1:34:08 – 1:34:19Speaker 38

Thank you. Further input from the public? Seeing none, nope. Seeing none, public input closed. Commission discussion. Vice Mayor.

1:34:20Speaker 21

Thank you. I had some of these similar questions. First, if we wanted to get out of this because we found a better option, can we get out of this before the two years are up?

1:34:28Speaker 21

Because it's a two-year agreement. And my other question was, is this new or is this replacing something we were doing? And it sounds like the answer is this is kind of a new concept to have.

1:34:39 – 1:34:52Speaker 37

We have some snack, some vending machines at some of our centers, but we never had a contract. So we're getting no revenue for it whatsoever. This is, we're going to get revenue and we do have some control over what's in the machines.

1:34:53 – 1:35:06Speaker 21

So I think this is a good step that we need to evaluate and see how it works. And if something better comes up, we can look out for that in the future. But at least we're going to have some kind of food options for our youth and our seniors. Thank you.

1:35:07Speaker 38

Further commission. Commissioner Fessick.

1:35:09Speaker 26

One last question. How quickly do you think that this will be able to be implemented?

1:35:13Speaker 37

I'm not 100% sure. They seem very eager, so I think it's going to be pretty quickly, but I don't know a date.

1:35:20Speaker 38

Okay, great. Thank you. All right. Any further questions? Seeing no, let's go ahead and call the roll.

1:35:27Speaker 43

Commissioner Fezzik. Yes. Commissioner Perkins. Yes. Commissioner Seegerson-Eaton. Yes. Commissioner Smith. Yes. Vice Mayor Fournier. Yes. Mayor Hartin.

1:35:36Speaker 38

Yes. Item number four is a resolution. Resolution.

1:35:40 – 1:36:18Speaker 36

Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Pompano Beach, Florida, amending the City of Pompano Beach State Housing Initiative Partnership Program Local Housing Assistance Plan, LHAP, for fiscal year 2024 through 2027 to include a strategy that addresses the need... The needs of mobile homeowners in compliance with Chapter 2026-173 Laws of Florida, directing staff to submit the amended Local Housing Assistance Plan for review and approval by the Florida Housing Finance Corporation, and authorizing the City of Pompano Beach to discharge the terms and conditions of the amended plan, providing an effective date. So moved. Second.

1:36:18Speaker 38

Second for discussion. This item was pulled by Commissioner Fessick and Vice Mayor. Commissioner Fessick?

1:36:22 – 1:36:46Speaker 26

Thank you. So I just had a couple of questions because I know that there's a lot less mobile homes, manufactured homes in Pompano. So it says the eligibility was only homes built after 1994, which of course is a state and federal rule. But how much, I guess what percentage of folks that you're looking to serve are in this situation that we could assist?

1:36:46 – 1:37:37Speaker 46

Well, to be honest with you, we're just required to add this strategy to the plan. We're evaluating it now with our Affordable Housing Advisory Committee to see if it's something that we even would like to fund moving forward. This is part of Senate Bill 594, which is effective as of July 1. That's requiring us to add the strategy. So to answer your question, I'm not sure how many people we would help. And I know it's been historically difficult because we had tried in the past to apply for another grant that had something to do, it was a price HUD grant for manufactured homes, and it was very difficult to actually get into those types of mobile home parks. The owners of those parks are very difficult to work with. It's very complicated. But in case of an emergency or something like that, we wanted to have this strategy in our plan so we could fund it as necessary in the future.

1:37:38 – 1:38:09Speaker 26

And then the other thing that I know that we've floated, I believe in some CRA meetings, was related to just the need for affordable housing. And I know that your office is, there's such a hot demand for some affordable housing. Is this something, I think we had floated about potentially changing some rules as a commission to allow for like a tiny home community or something along that realm. Would this be something also that we would be able to use or find additional grants for or assist to offer more affordable housing in the city?

1:38:10Speaker 46

I guess that's up to the commission, whatever they would like to do for that. So yeah, I don't really have an answer for that.

1:38:15Speaker 26

And what is your current need for housing

1:38:19 – 1:38:48Speaker 46

Well, for housing, our current need is primarily low to moderate income households, 0% to 30% AMI, 50% to 80% AMI. We also have a large need for moderate income households that are 80 and above. So we have a lot of our first time homebuyers that come through our program that are in that 80% range. With SHIP, we can go all the way up to 140%, but those funds are extremely limited. We see need across the board. All income levels are in need of assistance for affordable housing.

1:38:49Speaker 21

Okay, thank you very much.

1:38:51Speaker 46

Very good. Vice Mayor.

1:38:52Speaker 21

Thank you. I was able to see the background information, the changes listed in the summary, but it said there was a redline version, and I could not find that.

1:39:02 – 1:39:18Speaker 46

I had uploaded both. One's a Word document, one's a PDF. So the Word document would be that underlined strikethrough format. Really the only change to the LHAP is this particular strategy. So let me see.

1:39:18 – 1:39:31Speaker 21

I see the word document also. That's the one that was labeled revisions and I thought would be the strike through. So maybe you can just email it after. But I can't actually see the changes in here and how they got incorporated. So if you could just email it, that would be great.

1:39:31Speaker 46

Is anybody else having that problem? Yeah. Anyone look? Well, I can send it to the entire commission. I'll send you the written one.

1:39:39Speaker 38

This is a public hearing. Is there any input? This is a public hearing. Is there any input from the public? Please come forward. Just give your name and address for the record.

1:39:49 – 1:40:16Speaker 17

Mayor, Commissioner, my name is Ed Phillips. I currently reside at 384 Northwest 19th Street, Pompano Beach. You know, I always have an issue or concern about housing. And I guess the question would be, When you incorporate, or should we decide to incorporate this into the strategy, is the funding already there, or we'll have to create some

1:40:19 – 1:40:43Speaker 46

This would only be funded with SHIP dollars if we do decide to fund it. This is just a required strategy that every city's LHAP, every county's LHAP, anybody who receives SHIP funds is required to have this now based off of that Senate Bill 594. So we're just complying with the new law to incorporate this strategy into our plan. And if we need to potentially fund it at a later date, we would look into that with SHIP funding.

1:40:43Speaker 17

And if you did do it, you would use the current SHIP funds?

1:40:47Speaker 46

Correct, yeah.

1:40:48Speaker 17

And what's the purpose of the SHIP funds for now?

1:40:51 – 1:41:02Speaker 46

As of right now, we do primarily housing rehabilitation with that, single-family homes, condominiums, things like that. And we also do a first-time homebuyer program with SHIP.

1:41:02 – 1:41:55Speaker 17

Just for point of information, I think I chaired the first SHIP program that they had here in the city of Pompano. I haven't said that. My concern is... when we start talking about the mobile homes and I'm for mobile homes, uh, how hurricanes function. Um, and I think it was pointed that we don't really have a lot of mobile homes, so this would just be like a protocol kind of thing. As long as it doesn't disrupt the ship funding. I don't see any, any problem with it. And the reason I say the ship funding is weird. We're definitely in need of repairs in this area. senior citizens, et cetera, et cetera. So I'm always concerned about anything. And I'm not adverse to mobile homes. Let me say that. But I'm always concerned about anything that's going to disrupt our current funding sources for anything other than what we're looking at in terms of our areas now. Thank you.

1:41:55Speaker 38

Very good. Thank you. Further input from the public? Please come forward.

1:42:03 – 1:42:33Speaker 25

Hello, good afternoon. I just had a quick question. As president of the Pompano Beach Highlands Civic Association, we've been combating this for quite some time. A lot of people within our community, they are now putting in shipping containers, RVs, and they even promote them online as far as their Airbnbs and things like that. Will this program maybe diminish that? No. So will code enforcement start enforcing the law as far as not having RVs or shipping containers in the backyard?

1:42:33Speaker 38

Not as a result of this.

1:42:34Speaker 25

Okay, so why did we get rid of the mobile park homes on Federal Highway conjoining to North Pompano Park if we were just going to bring them back?

1:42:44Speaker 38

Not what this is about.

1:42:44Speaker 46

This strategy has nothing to do with bringing any mobile home parks back. We're not even funding this at this time. We're just required to include the strategy in our plan per state law.

1:42:53Speaker 25

And when do you see this coming to fruition?

1:42:57 – 1:43:15Speaker 46

It's been conditionally approved already. Our LHAP with this strategy has been conditionally approved by the Florida Housing Finance Corporation. It needs to be approved at commission to add the language into our plan, but that's where it really stops. We're not changing any of our programs. There is no program for this right now.

1:43:15Speaker 25

Okay, which communities do you think that this will support?

1:43:19 – 1:43:32Speaker 38

None so far. There's been no allocation of funding. So it's just we have to, we have got to list the category as a potential place that we could fund in the future, but currently we don't have any allocation of funding.

1:43:33Speaker 25

So you have no concept of where this will go?

1:43:36Speaker 25

Okay, got it. Thank you.

1:43:37Speaker 38

Very good. Further input from the public?

1:43:43 – 1:45:23Speaker 24

Hi, Lauren McGee-Weiss again. Um, I have a question much to Brandi's points actually. So I have a friend of mine that lives in Deerfield and they were able to get a small prefab modular home, but they had to put the concrete slab per hurricane requirements and they were allowed to put it in their backyard. They live east of federal in the Cove area of Deerfield. Very similar geological situations in comparison to our city, right? Now, to Brandy's point, because right now I believe that Pompano is one of the only places that you're allowed to park an RV on your property. Many cities don't allow that. But if we were to, to me, this is something that can bring money back into the pockets of every single district. If there was some sort of thing in play that instead of the mobile, and I know that this is just like housekeeping stuff. I get it. But I do want to use this as an opportunity to bring up the optionality of if we were to extend the availability of people to keep RVs on their properties, what if they wanted to put a mother-in-law suite? My friend uses it as her studio and her office, but it's a hurricane-safe structure, not going anywhere because it's on foundation. So the building department would still be able to do their thing as well. but if it's going to use as an airbnb or a mother-in-law suite or whatever it is it's just something that i've thought about in the past this seemed like a good opportunity to bring it up that would help people that have properties on them that want to include a little bit more additional income or become multi-generational and have their family move in so it's to me a win-win but obviously your choice so very good thank you i believe that pompano already allows for additional dwelling units with proper permitting of course further input from the public

1:45:24Speaker 38

Please come forward. Name and address for the record.

1:45:35 – 1:47:14Speaker 41

Good afternoon, Commissioner, Mayor, and City Manager. How are you doing today? Dominic Lewis, District 3. I guess you guys all know where I live. Not necessarily many of you have been in my house. I think you and well Mr. Mayor have come to campaigning at my door every couple of years. I do want to say that one thing I'm just noticing as a common thread. is that when these things are coming up and concerns about putting a modular home and we're having to go through permit, even with me, I own an acre of land in Pompano, yet I can't park my boat on my lot. They said it has to be in the front driveway. It can't be on the adjacent lot. What I feel as a resident of Pompano, that sometimes we just need to be a little bit more empathetic. So sometimes when people are doing these RV homes, yeah, they can be unsightly, but if they're in their back home, back of the yard, who's it really bothering? So I'm with the young lady that just spoke before, that if it's not a nuisance, if it's not an eyesore, then perhaps we need to take that into consideration instead of putting up all this red tape. Last thing I want to mention on empathy Um, I just want to say, I really don't like the way Mr. King was treated and actually saddens me a lot as a resident and also as a leader, because he's also a leader and I don't know the specific about his situation, but Ms. Commissioner Smith, I felt as though you've robbed the people of their choice of who they wanted for your district.

1:47:14Speaker 38

Thank you, sir.

1:47:15Speaker 41

And excuse me, I'm not done yet, Mayor. Please, everyone has a chance. This is my three minutes. I get a chance to talk to you, correct?

1:47:21Speaker 38

On this matter.

1:47:22 – 1:47:34Speaker 41

So again, going back to the threat of empathy with this matter, I think we need to look across the board because there is a common theme I'm seeing, and it's causing me as well as other residents to be quite concerned. Thank you. Thank you.

1:47:35Speaker 38

Further input from the public? Being none, public input closed. Further commission discussion. Commissioner Perkins first, I believe.

1:47:43 – 1:47:55Speaker 20

Yeah, just one point of clarity. What is your, what is your, are you the director of your department? I'm not. Who's the director of your department?

1:47:55Speaker 46

Miriam Galarza.

1:47:57Speaker 20

Okay. Is she in your office every day?

1:48:00Speaker 46

She works remotely.

1:48:02Speaker 20

She works from home.

1:48:03Speaker 46

But she does come into the office, yes.

1:48:06Speaker 20

All right, thank you.

1:48:08Speaker 46

Commissioner Sigerson-Eaton.

1:48:11 – 1:49:44Speaker 18

Thank you, Mayor. Alex, you and I have worked together many times. I have a mobile home park within my district, and it's some of the poorest financially burdened people. There are elderly living on a fixed income, and without these funds being available to do some emergency fixes like air conditioning, windows or leaks, you know we have had to go to charitable organizations that your office and you have searched out to be able to help residents from time to time. It doesn't happen every day or even once a month, but from time to time. So I feel the legislature broaden this, these grants, broaden this field because there's a need for it throughout the state as more people do move into modular because it's affordable, they're only paying land rent, but it's an affordable way for a lot of people to live. And the assistance I think is really, will be helpful. From my experience, it's been great and we won't have to depend on searching for charities if they have the money or other ways to fund it. Thank you, Mayor.

1:49:45Speaker 38

Thank you for the Commission discussion. Vice Mayor.

1:49:48 – 1:50:02Speaker 21

Thank you. So I agree with Commissioner Seegerson-Eaton on that. And my question, though, is about funding. So we're adding this category, but is there an intent to suggest some funding?

1:50:03Speaker 46

Not at this time.

1:50:04 – 1:50:15Speaker 21

And how will you decide if and when fund this? I mean, some of this, like relocation for closure of a mobile home park, you can't necessarily anticipate these things for emergencies.

1:50:17 – 1:50:57Speaker 46

So we would probably convene a meeting with our Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, get some input from the public, have a public meeting, have some sort of engagement, engage with you all, and see if there's a need there to take funds away from very useful housing rehabilitation program or first-time homebuyer program where we do expend all of our dollars we're not having a hard time expending this money we're looking for more money all the time so it would be a decision that would have to be made you know with input from the community and the Commission and in the committee's yeah I mean we do have some mobile home parks in our you've got one

1:50:59 – 1:51:17Speaker 21

In our in our city, so it's some it's definitely something we should spend more time talking about though as I agree that we can't There's a limited pool of money and you can't just you can't move that without having Implications or loss to what we have but we should spend some time talking about this.

1:51:17Speaker 38

Thank you for the Commission discussion Seeing none. Let's go ahead and call the roll Commissioner president.

1:51:24Speaker 43

Commissioner Perkins? Yes. Commissioner Seegerson? Yes. Commissioner Smith? Yes. Vice Mayor Poinier? Yes.

1:51:31Speaker 38

Mayor Hardin? Yes. Item 8 is a resolution.

1:51:35 – 1:51:50Speaker 36

A resolution of the City Commission of the City of Palmetto Beach, Florida, approving and ratifying the agreements entered into by the City during the City Commission's August hiatus to perform and finish such matters as may have been budgeted and authorized, providing an effective date. So moved. Second.

1:51:50Speaker 38

Moved and second for discussion. This item was pulled by Commissioner Fessick and Vice Mayor Fournier. Commissioner Fessick?

1:51:55 – 1:55:13Speaker 26

Thank you. So I have a lot of heartburn about this particular agenda item, simply because to anybody who doesn't click on the little blue link online, 26-518, if you're reviewing this agenda item, you might miss that it's got a lot of things all packed inside it. Things of which are items that I believe a lot of people in the community were would like to be a little bit more involved in. So first off, just kind of to give you an overview, in here it has three, it has six items sort of set forth. It has some football, the Pompano Cowboys Agreement, the Pompano Eagles Agreement, the Pompano Chiefs Agreement. It's got an FEC lease extension. Then it has a grant for the FAA with the new air traffic control tower grant design. So I don't know how many of you were paying attention back in July. It was a long meeting. But one of the last things that we did on July 29 was raise concerns about certain things that were being done It's not just book, it's not just housekeeping. It's not just, it was supposed to be something that had previously, making it easier for the city manager to just kind of do some housekeeping things. Nothing of major, we were assured nothing of, you didn't see anything major coming across this desk. Well, so first off, I think all of these are somewhat major and you may not think that the football stuff is major. I'd like to point out that there's a lot of people who have come here in regards to music on the fields and some back and forth about letting kids be kids. That's one piece of it. So I feel like the new contract were signed while we were gone without the opportunity to discuss. I did notice that there were some differences and it's the first time we've had contracts. So that's one. The FEC agreement is probably the one that I have least heartburn over because it's a one-year deal at a reduced rate. But the third one is related to the air park grant. And this has been an ongoing point of contention since last year. So first and foremost, I can't do anything because I was not on the prevailing side of giving Mr. Harrison the authority to do so. So I can't make any change. We have some serious – I can't make any change or ask anybody to – anybody who is on the prevailing side would be able to maybe bring that back. But I'd like to take each one of these items and make a motion to take each one of these items and discuss them and give the residents the opportunity to discuss them and have them broken apart. In previous years, they were separate agenda items, and here they just seem to be lumped in, hoping we would not see them. And I think that is unfair. So I'd like to make a motion to discuss each of these, just take them apart. We can lump the three contracts, the football contracts together simply because they're roughly the same contract, just in repeat with different vendors. And then talk about the FEC contract and lease extension and the air park finally.

1:55:13Speaker 38

Commissioner, there's no reason for a motion. I mean, you can discuss everything.

1:55:17Speaker 26

Right, I'd like to, but it's easier when it's segmented. Take one at a time.

1:55:24Speaker 38

Let's do it. Well, you don't take each one at a time.

1:55:26Speaker 26

All right, fine, I'll just go for it. All right, so, well, the only reason why is because in order to have audience to be heard, are we going to open that up per?

1:55:35Speaker 38

This is a public, of course, the public's going to have an opportunity to speak.

1:55:37 – 1:56:00Speaker 26

All right, just wanted to make sure. I was trying to keep it organized for everybody so we weren't talking in all different directions. So let's just start with the football. Let's start with football contracts. It came to my attention that there were no formal contracts for a number of years. There was back in, I could find one from 2018, but there were formal contracts for the past couple years. It was kind of like an agreement. Is that true, Mr. Harrison?

1:56:05 – 1:56:28Speaker 29

I was not aware of what you're referring to. Everything that was done on this agenda item had been previously budgeted and authorized by the city commission. That air traffic control tower had been in that plan for 10 years.

1:56:28Speaker 26

I'm on the football schedule right now.

1:56:31 – 1:56:42Speaker 29

Okay, well, I'm just telling you that everything you're talking about had been previously authorized and budgeted. So there should be no question.

1:56:43Speaker 26

Could we please talk about the football schedules? Mr. Moore, you might have more information about this, about the contracts.

1:56:50Speaker 38

I'm sorry, the football schedules?

1:56:52Speaker 26

The football contracts, the Pompano Beach Eagles, Pompano Chiefs, and Pompano Cowboys.

1:57:00Speaker 38

So what's the question? Could you repeat the question?

1:57:02 – 1:57:29Speaker 26

Sure. The question was, this seems to be that there was not a contract that I could find. And maybe it was just for missing it. But the last contract I could find was from 2018, where it was an agenda item. And then while trying to find other contracts, there was a small contract for using vendor services or something like that, or concession. But for the football program itself, there has not been a formal license agreement for a number of years. Is that correct?

1:57:31 – 1:58:14Speaker 37

Good afternoon, Scott Moore, Parks and Recreation. That is correct. We did not have an agreement for a number of years. This past year when I took over as the director, we really looked over the different programs and stuff like that, and I thought it was very important that we did have an agreement moving forward. This did not come to you in July. That's 100% my fault. I tried to get it on the agenda, the last agenda in July, and we were missing some paperwork and some stuff back and forth with the booster clubs. So I missed the deadline to get it on there. And I didn't want to wait till today because our football season has started and I needed to have something signed just to make us feel more comfortable with liability and purposes like that. So my fault it wasn't on in July.

1:58:15 – 2:00:23Speaker 26

and that's what that's ultimately why we we did that so we did but we did this for years prior without i mean and i appreciate that i think it's i think it's important to have let me let me start there i think it is important to have a license agreement especially when we are talking about children who are in contact sports and the city and making sure we have liability insurance i think all that is a well-intentioned and a great idea my concern is the difference between so SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION, THAT DOESN'T FIT THIS MOLD FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO JUST SIGN OFF ON IT. ADDITIONALLY, IT'S A STRUCTURAL REORGANIZATION OF THESE CONTRACTS, AND IN SOME CASES, THE 2018 CONTRACT THAT I DID FIND HAD ALMOST ZERO CONVERSATION RELATED TO MUSIC AND And basically, it was very wide open, assuming that anybody who was in children's sports, you're going to know that you're going to have somebody who's going to announce the game. There's probably going to be music in between things. It's going to be a festive area. There's probably going to be a concession sold. There's going to be activity in a park, right? In this particular contract, and at times three, they're pretty much almost exact, there's multiple things that have me a little bit concerned. So I'm going to pull up the one specifically related to needing prior authorization for sound and needing prior authorization from the city and potentially permits. And so I have questions about how that's going to be applied, not just now, but maybe in the future, because that's a concern that a lot of residents, I feel, have had. And a lot of people here have had that concern. This is where I'd like to hear, I guess, from the folks who I think, I know I talked to a couple on the, I called a couple of the coaches and just said, hey, I'm curious, what was it like before? So I'd like to actually hear from residents related to this and from you how this is going to impact or potentially could impact them being able to operate as usual.

2:00:25 – 2:02:04Speaker 37

I can tell you in 2018 youth football versus 2026 youth football is night and day difference. This is almost professional football now. And back in 2018, there wasn't thousands of people coming to football games and there is. every bit of thousands of people that are coming to youth football games now. So what they have to do is what we ask them to do is go through the public event process, public event application process. So they fill out public event applications for their home games, and that helps us get all the city departments on board, fire, police, environmental services, public works, because we're all there at the games to help out with the home games. So it's just something to help us out with getting the coordination together. with all the games, so that's what they're doing. And it says in there the music and everything else. We've met with the booster clubs and staff specifically about music and PA systems and all that stuff, that it's to be kept at a reasonable level. If we have any issues, we've gone out to some of the home games. Each team's had about three home games at this point. We've gone out with any issues. They've turned it down. We've all worked... That part of the season's been the best for me so far is the communication's been very good, in my opinion. So I think putting this in place along with the agreements where we're just not out there doing whatever we want, there is some parameters that we're both following. I think it's helped our season out quite a bit.

2:02:05 – 2:03:17Speaker 26

I appreciate that, and again, I like structure in organizations, so I'm not faulting the idea of a license, but I am concerned because some of the things that I have heard from people in the community was that there was a commissioner running around in a parked vehicle, running around with their phone, and the teams were sort of scared that there was going to be some sort of repercussion, and so people were acting a certain way, and that was their interpretation as told to me, so I'm not saying it was true or false or whatever, that was just something that was spoken to me. I would really like to make sure that kids are kids, right? And I had four of it. My house was a raging pile of children screaming and whatever else. And so it sort of segues into the air park conversation. So many times we're told that, you know, you live near an air park, you should expect that you're going to hear an airplane. Well, you live near a park, you should expect that you're going to hear kids playing or neighborhoods. It's a trade-off, right? You get this beautiful open space and you're not built on top of you also have to be part of the community and recognize that sometimes that comes with events and things that are... And I didn't mean to cut you off, but I 100% agree with you.

2:03:17Speaker 37

100% agree with you. It's the content of the music and the stuff that goes along with it that I am not going to tolerate, period.

2:03:27 – 2:06:30Speaker 26

I agree with you. I think that there should be just standards. But the one concern I had was I feel like those standards could have been addressed within the contract and maybe even a decibel level within the contract or as per our ordinances. Then that way at least it's not subjective because like everybody has said, sometimes when you don't have it in black and white, that's subjective and be interpreted in a bunch of different ways. And so I would just like to maybe see if we could – have that conversation separately. So that's part one for me. Again, and I would like to hear from anybody, if there's anybody here that's affected by this, I would like to hear from them before sort of wrapping my head around the rest of it, because I haven't had that opportunity. But I will say that I have heard from other people in the community that some people have been promised that this is going to end at certain parks. that's kind of like being the Grinch that stole Christmas for kids who are actively doing something outside. And I want to celebrate children being actively involved in team sports. So I just want to make sure we protect that because it's so hard to get people involved and get them active. So that's part one. Mayor, would it be okay if I open this portion up for audience to be heard? No, so this is why I want to do motions. Okay, cool. Makes sense. All right, so then moving forward, I will just go ahead and for the... I'll skip the FEC for now, but I'm going to jump straight into the air park and the FAA grant. So there's a lot in this one. There's a lot in here. And I have been working on air park issues for well over two years now. It's oftentimes relegated to noise when people want to dismiss us. It is not noise. It is about safety, and it's about working together as a community. It is not against development. It is actually about working together well. So the first thing is I think there's a couple different motions that I wanted to bring forward, so then we can talk about them in in sequence. So number one, we don't have a, we've never had a part 150 noise compatibility program. We did a noise contouring program, which was expired in 2020, I believe. And I'm not gonna pretend to be the expert on air park anything. I have studied a lot of it, but I do know that a lot of other of our peers, different air parks, have participated in the FAA recognized framework. And so I would like to make a motion that we take the time, especially if we're going to be working on the air park, that we take the time to do a part 150 noise compatibility study as is recommended by the FAA.

2:06:34 – 2:06:49Speaker 38

Okay, so you're making a motion that we do a part 150 noise Compatibility. Compatibility study? Okay. So there's a motion on the floor. Is there a second? Motion dies for lack of second.

2:06:49 – 2:08:03Speaker 26

Okay. There's... I have a lot of concerns related to the fact that Mr. Mueller stood up here and said that lead was found when we were studying the soil. And I'm grateful that we are able to have the professor and their team come to study with us and to share with us what they have found. This was at no cost to the city, by the way. So I feel like this is really important for something that we have dealt with for over two years, for so many people to give so much of their time and try to make sure that we can find a way to work together. This is, again, just about safety all around, not one way or the other. It's not about stopping anything, it's about working together. And it's about potentially even making the air park even better than it is today. Mr. Mueller brought up something related to, in our email, about the form 7480 traffic pattern requests. Mr. Rocco, could you tell me about that, please?

2:08:06 – 2:08:55Speaker 40

Steve Rocco, Airport Manager, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners, good afternoon. 7480 form is a FAA form that we fill out when we do request to the FAA to change certain things at the airport. We can absolutely fill out a 7480 form to raise the traffic pattern altitude at Pompano. Currently it's at 800 feet. I believe Mr. Mueller would like to see it raised to 1,000 feet. The reason why our traffic pattern is at 800 feet is because Fort Lauderdale Executive is so close to us. Their traffic pattern altitude is 1,000 feet. They want the separation in the event of a potential collision. But we can submit, if you want, to raise the traffic pattern altitude. Absolutely.

2:08:55 – 2:09:09Speaker 26

I remember in our workshop last year, Vice Mayor had asked about pattern behavior and calm winds and if we had any control over that. And the answer at the meeting was no, the FAA had is in charge of everything and they sort of tell us we have to just follow whatever they say.

2:09:10Speaker 40

They will. When we file the 7480 form, they'll come back and either say yes or no. We have to follow their rules and regulations.

2:09:17 – 2:09:29Speaker 26

Correct. But that was never volunteered to us at the time as being something that was course of action that we could potentially try to work together and find a way to work together as a community. Is there a reason for that?

2:09:30Speaker 40

Not that I recall.

2:09:32Speaker 26

But you know about that form?

2:09:34Speaker 40

Of course, yes.

2:09:36 – 2:10:11Speaker 26

Um, And I'd like to move that the city commission directs the city manager to file through the air park or whatever system is necessary, the FAOEAA system, to basically confirm the existing 800-foot traffic pattern altitude and then maybe request an eastern pattern extension analysis for arrivals and departures to reduce overflights of District 1, so the continuing patterns that we have here, and District 4. They're coming in on both sides in and out of the runways. with staff to return with a filing summary in 60 days.

2:10:13Speaker 38

So you make a motion to what?

2:10:15 – 2:10:31Speaker 26

Make a motion to have the city manager file that form or instruct staff to file that form to come back to us with one, confirm the existing traffic pattern, and then two, request an eastern extension analysis for arrivals and departures over both District 1 and 4.

2:10:31Speaker 38

Well, Commissioner, before you do that, could we find out from the aviation expert if the two are linked or something?

2:10:38Speaker 40

We will not get an answer back from the FAA within 60 days.

2:10:43Speaker 26

Just a filing summary within 60 days.

2:10:45Speaker 40

Filing we can do within 60 days. We won't get an answer back within 60 days.

2:10:50Speaker 26

That's okay. We know the FAA can take its time as well.

2:10:53 – 2:11:08Speaker 38

But, Mr. Rocco, I'm sorry. I'm just trying to get clarification here, Commissioner. The Commissioner was talking about some sort of an elongated traffic pattern or something. Does that have anything to do with Form 74, whatever this form is?

2:11:10 – 2:11:27Speaker 40

All we're doing is, from what I understand, is we're gonna ask the FAA to raise the traffic pattern to 1,000 feet. It's gonna have no effect on aircraft when they're taking off or landing at Pompano Airport. They still have to transit through the airspace to get to that 1,000 feet.

2:11:27 – 2:11:39Speaker 26

Right, and the issue is just making sure that they try to get to that 1,000 feet faster. But the second part of that is to request an eastern pattern extension analysis for arrivals and departures. So that was the second piece of that.

2:11:39Speaker 38

So is that some sort of a thing the FAA does, a pattern analysis?

2:11:45 – 2:12:24Speaker 26

on the form yes they'll do it yes again when we put it into the form they'll look at the pattern they'll look at the altitude they'll look at the direction yes okay so i feel like it's just a great way for us to make sure that we're so the reason why i'm making the motion is simply because this has been a concern of a lot of residents and it shows it shows that we're working together it's a step in the right direction where we're where we're actively saying hey look we're we're going to do things we're going to work together we're going to make sure everything is documented And we're going to find ways to work together, and we're going to do it in a way that is structured through the FAA. It has nothing to do, again, it has everything to do with just making sure we're checking boxes, crossing our T's, dotting our I's, and doing things appropriately.

2:12:25Speaker 38

Your motion is then to request a higher altitude and also check that box in the same form to ask them to look at elongating the pattern.

2:12:34 – 2:12:49Speaker 38

That's it? That's it. It's all part of that same form? Yep. That's the motion? Yes. Okay. Is there a second? Second. It's been moved and seconded to have Mr. Rocco fill out the form. We're going to ask Mr. Harrison to have Mr. Rocco fill out the form and do those.

2:12:49Speaker 40

We'll hire our professional consultant to prepare the form.

2:12:53 – 2:13:12Speaker 26

Well, we also have some recommendations that I know that some of the community has also will probably email to you as well, that they have done some research, and I know Mr. Mueller was one of them, done some research about some of the suggestions for best practices and other airports that have done similar forms.

2:13:14 – 2:13:28Speaker 38

Okay, well, it's been moved and seconded to have this form done. Let's go ahead and this is public hearing. Let's open it up to public. Any public input? On this particular motion.

2:13:29Speaker 20

Okay, so I'll wait.

2:13:33Speaker 38

Just name an address for the record.

2:13:35Speaker 10

Yeah, Skowierski, 1630 Southwest Fifth Avenue. Mr. Rocco. You said you got to hire a public consultant, correct?

2:13:45Speaker 10

How much is that going to cost an hour? That I don't know. How much would you surmise it's going to cost?

2:13:49Speaker 40

I'm guessing it's going to cost us probably $2,500 to fill out that form.

2:13:54Speaker 10

Just to fill out a form? Yes. And then he charges by the hour?

2:13:58Speaker 40

No, no. It's $2,500 flat fee.

2:14:00 – 2:14:13Speaker 10

Flat fee. And didn't you just state that Fort Lauderdale Airport is 1,000 feet and Pompano Beach is 800 feet? And this makes common sense, so we have no collision.

2:14:15Speaker 38

Wake up. Further input from the public.

2:14:29 – 2:17:34Speaker 49

Marilyn Demartini, 1110 Northeast 27th Avenue, Pompano Beach, directly under runway 10. Uh, I'd like to read a summary of a letter that I sent to Steve Rocco in email this morning. And this study, this form that needs to be filled out, shouldn't need to have a consultant. We have an airport director for that. After the last park advisory meeting, I left with more questions than answers. And today I'm asking for those answers on behalf of the residents and taxpayers of Pompano beach. We keep hearing that the air park operates on enterprise funds yet. Now we learned that a $950,000 FAA design grant plus another $250,000 grant from FDOT requires city approval. What exactly are we designing? What will it cost to build and ultimately who is going to pay for it? Residents deserve to know before another dollar is committed. But more important is the issue of safety and noise. Aircraft continue to fly directly over our homes, even with runway 10 closed for construction. We have reported large jets using the wrong runway, aircraft performing stalls over residential neighborhoods, repeated touch and go operations at unreasonable hours. And you tell us to call the FAA ourselves. No, that's your responsibility. It is yours as air park manager. You should be documenting, reporting, and working directly with the FAA and operators to correct safety and noise issues, and probably filling out forms too. And here is something else we know. That form, 7480-1, to request the review of traffic pattern, altitude, or direction, has been in your files and in your knowledge, but we kept hearing, there's nothing we can do. Well, apparently there is. So we're asking you, file the form, let the FAA review the situation to determine if the traffic patterns need to change. Let's use facts, not excuses. And we are also demanding the current Part 150 noise study. That would be funded by the FAA. And we need to know exactly how much noise we are experiencing and need a complete noise contour map that shows every neighborhood and park that's affected, not just the ones that were thrown into the last study that was done. But the bigger question is, where is the air park headed? Why is green space being changed from recreation to transportation, environmentally protected parcels being rezoned? Why is planning and zoning asking for a new business plan to attract the right tenants? These are questions that need to be answered because Pompano Beach Air Park was deeded as a general aviation air park, not a commercial airport. Residents are watching, we're asking questions, and we're not going away. We'll support responsible general aviation. We do not want to become FXE. Very good.

2:17:34Speaker 38

Thank you. Next speaker.

2:17:50 – 2:20:32Speaker 31

Dave Bosser. 1110 Northeast 27th Avenue, directly under runway 10. I've lived in my home in Harbor Village for over 41 years, peacefully enjoying the neighborhood and having the air park as amenity. But in the recent years, since the onslaught of flight schools, There are now six of them, and the air park has become a nuisance and a safety hazard. This is simply too dense of a residential area to have student pilots flying over our homes, even when the air traffic control tower is closed. And no one is taking responsibility for the liability, which we've asked repeatedly, who's responsible if there's a crash? These are LLCs that are just gonna dissolve and run and appear again as another LLC. We get the run around from Steve Rocco on every question we ask. The FAA has told us in letters 75% of the air traffic comes from flight schools. The air park says 60 to 70% and that we need to suck it up because we have a pilot shortage. Pretty wondering about that, being that there's airlines closing, going bankrupt and so forth. We're concerned for the safety and the loss in our property values as these planes continually are flying over our houses, sometimes 45 seconds between, at decibels between 70 and as high as 90 dB. Imagine trying to sell a home in that area and continually the realtor can't even discuss on the outside what's going on with the client that they may bring in. I'm really frustrated that Steve that runs the air park, it's all about commerce. And I thought parks were for recreation and the enjoyment of the residents, not for capitalism. Steve, I really wish you would consider thinking about the residents over the commerce that's going on at the airport. I'm going to close with that.

2:20:33Speaker 38

Thank you. Next speaker.

2:20:43 – 2:21:07Speaker 34

Question. Clinton Mueller, 1080 Northeast 28th Avenue, Pompano Beach, Florida. I do have a question for all of you guys, because I noticed it during the recess as well, that while this stuff was getting on, it didn't appear that any of you guys were on copy of the emails while you guys were on legislative recess. Is that correct? So actions were actually being done and no one up there actually had any idea that it was being done, correct? Yes.

2:21:09Speaker 38

I mean, it's as far as what the city manager was doing?

2:21:11 – 2:22:56Speaker 34

The reason why I'm asking is, so we actually found ourselves here at this exact same place last year. And all six of you up there voted unanimously last year to actually halt construction on runway 10 until we completed a safety assessment. And while all of you were on legislative recess, he executed it and he signed it. not telling any of you what the repercussions are for signing these things with the FAA. They come with a host of grant assurances, and those grant assurances include, by the way, complete, free, unrestricted use of the facility, including a ban on basically taxing Avgas, which is the biggest disperser of lead in the community today. Ban both, just by putting his name on it. And not only that, but now, even if we have a dislike over it, we've now extended that grant out 20 years. That grant assurance commitment is 20 years long. That should have came before the committee, that should have been approved by the committee, and you shouldn't have had authority to sign it while they were away. You know it and I know it, and so do you. In addition to that, Part of the assurance is assurance 24, so then I'm gonna ask you, Mr. Rocco, as part of number 24, the rental structure has to be updated for every single occupier that is there, and modernized to the current market rate. It says right there, number 24. That means American Flyers now pays today's rate when their contract comes due.

2:22:58Speaker 40

We review the contracts every year when they come up. And does American Flyers? No. It's not? Right. They're a subtenant of Pompano Aviation.

2:23:07Speaker 34

That's convenient.

2:23:10Speaker 40

That's the way it's worked out.

2:23:12 – 2:23:57Speaker 34

That's the way it's worked out. So I still don't understand why we're sitting here a year and a half later, and it took me filing three different FAA petitions, which, by the way, just in case any of you guys know, there's actually an active petition that's out there right now on the FAA tower through the OE. that is actually out there. So you're accepting grant money at a time, and you and I sat down in a meeting, and there's a bunch of people here who were present during that meeting, and Kimberly Horn said point blank, the ATC Tower preferred Site 2. You know it and I know it, and you guys decided to go on Site 1 solely for convenience, even though it changes your line of sight and it reduces the visibility off of 624. Okay. Okay.

2:24:01Speaker 34

Thank you. This is about safety, Steve.

2:24:05Speaker 38

Safety. Thank you, Mr. Mueller.

2:24:08 – 2:25:02Speaker 36

Mayor. Yes, Mr. Berman. Can I just respond briefly? Okay, sure. Not getting into the fray too much, I hope. I sign off on authority of the city to enter into the agreement and the authority of the city to enter into an electronic signature agreement. That's it. I don't sign off as to when it's approved, how it's approved. This came to me as a $950,000 grant that needed to be signed off on by August 28th or the city could lose the grant. Read everything. We met the requirements. I sign off. I don't say who it should be approved by, when, or anything else. That's my part in this. That's what I did. So when someone wants to point at me, and make accusations that I intentionally pulled the wool over the commission's eyes, that's not the case. I sign my part as to sufficiency. Thank you, Mayor.

2:25:02 – 2:25:18Speaker 38

Thank you. Very good. Further input from the public on this item? Please come forward. This is just on the motion that Commissioner Fessick made. Go ahead. Come forward, sir.

2:25:22 – 2:25:35Speaker 45

How are you doing? Good. Resident Juan Centron, 657 Northwest 14th Court. I'm going to speak on Article, or I'm sorry, I'm nervous, 8, that we are speaking on the contracts.

2:25:35Speaker 38

Right. Yeah, there's been a motion just to direct staff to fill out this form.

2:25:40Speaker 45

I have a question for Scott. If the contracts have been signed.

2:25:45Speaker 26

He's talking about the football.

2:25:46Speaker 45

The football. It was all together, correct? I'm sorry, what? The contracts.

2:25:52Speaker 21

Yes, if you want to talk about the Eagles or football.

2:25:55 – 2:26:17Speaker 45

Yeah, right Okay My question is for Scott if the contracts have been signed and RJ you said something on miss physics, sorry I'm sorry. I'm just it's sure. Okay upsetting but the contracts have been signed And Scott you

2:26:18Speaker 38

What's the question for Scott?

2:26:19 – 2:26:41Speaker 45

So, Scott, if the contract's been signed, and Ms. Fedrick said it, we had a commissioner, which I've seen Rhonda, and I'm sorry if I said District 2, come out there. We put a special application in, and it's been approved. Why were we trying to get, why were we getting shut down, trying to get shut down? I'm not sure, sir. If we're doing everything that we're supposed to be doing, why?

2:26:41Speaker 38

I'm not sure, sir. Mr. Moore can get with you on that. And that's an operation.

2:26:46 – 2:27:00Speaker 45

I mean, I'm asking, I mean, I want to, I'm addressing everybody because I don't see that from District 4. I don't see it from Perkins. I don't see it from Smith. When football games are going on where a commissioner's riding around trying to shut it down.

2:27:00Speaker 38

Well, commissioners visit all types of facilities all the time. That's immaterial. What district are you in? I'm in District 4. Your district.

2:27:09Speaker 20

A commissioner tries to shut something down there?

2:27:13Speaker 20

It was three weeks ago. Oh, okay.

2:27:15Speaker 45

The commissioner tried to shut her down or Parks and Rec staff? Commissioner. I've seen her myself.

2:27:20Speaker 38

Did the commissioner approach you to try and shut something down?

2:27:23Speaker 45

She didn't approach me, but I've seen her approach BSO. BSO then went to the DJ and went to everybody else and tried to say, oh, she wants the park shut down.

2:27:32Speaker 20

That's Commissioner Eden.

2:27:33 – 2:27:47Speaker 45

Correct. I even brought this off Amazon because there's a sound ordinance, right? There's a sound issue complaining about sound, and it didn't even go over 80-90. So I'm trying to figure out what the real issue is. Okay. If we're doing everything that we're supposed to be doing.

2:27:47 – 2:28:32Speaker 38

Okay, I got it. And I'd ask you to get with staff to find out what the issue was there. I mean, this is the wrong forum. If staff made a mistake in how they administered the rules, then staff will tell you that, and you can come back here and complain about staff all you want, but I don't know the particulars. We don't know the particulars up here. You were there, staff was there. If you could please get with staff on this particular issue, and they can answer your questions. You know, Scott Moore and BSO, they act out there in the field, and they've got parameters that they look at. I don't know what they were, so please, get with them, and yeah, if you feel that you were wrongly persecuted after you get with staff and find out their reasoning behind it then by all means come back and complain but I mean right now I can't answer your question.

2:28:32Speaker 45

No and I understand you guys spoke on section eight which section eight was about everything and then you guys spoke on agreements and everything like that so this is the reason why I'm not speaking.

2:28:41 – 2:28:58Speaker 38

I understand and yes there are agreements that have been signed for all the football type stuff and those agreements get administered at the staff level. Now if you're not happy the way they're administering it, let us know. But I don't know what the particulars were. I can't tell you. Well, it's because you were too glad.

2:28:58Speaker 45

I'm just saying in general, we're speaking on something about contracts being signed and special applications permitting and the permits are being approved.

2:29:06 – 2:29:27Speaker 38

Right. And then we're getting down to the actual very, very granular level of the administration of those contracts at the staff level. We don't do that here. Staff does that. So if you can get with staff and talk with them and find out why there was some problem with BSO and Parks and Rec staff at your game.

2:29:27Speaker 45

There was no issue there. There was an issue with a commissioner trying to shut down.

2:29:31Speaker 38

Sir, sir, sir, there must have been an issue. Otherwise, you wouldn't have had an interaction with BSO.

2:29:36Speaker 45

No, BSO was telling us because of...

2:29:39Speaker 38

Okay, so BSO, what did BSO tell you to do?

2:29:42Speaker 45

BSO didn't tell us nothing because, if I'm not mistaken, Pompano Eagles put an application in for a special...

2:29:49Speaker 38

So if BSO didn't tell you to do anything, I don't understand what the issue is.

2:29:53Speaker 45

There is issue if... We're still having the same issue since January when we came here and spoke about it, about getting shut down.

2:30:00Speaker 38

Were you shut down?

2:30:01Speaker 45

We're not shut down, but obviously somebody has a hidden agenda.

2:30:05Speaker 38

If you weren't shut down, I don't understand what the problem is. When there's smoke, there's fire, correct?

2:30:09Speaker 45

I'm not trying to argue here, sir. I'm just saying when there's smoke, there's fire, correct? When there's smoke, there's fire. That's all I'm saying.

2:30:15Speaker 38

We're not talking about making fire here, sir. I'm sorry, but you came here about some problem with the contract.

2:30:21 – 2:30:37Speaker 45

We're speaking on Section 8. I've seen that you guys spoke on Section 8, and I'm now addressing it. I read it. I'm not saying that. We're saying, okay, if we were doing everything that's needed and we're putting the special applications in and they're being approved, why is a certain commissioner now throwing her power around?

2:30:38Speaker 38

Sir, if they didn't shut you down, they didn't tell you to do anything different, I don't understand what the issue is here. I mean, anybody can show up at a park and look at stuff.

2:30:48Speaker 37

Come see me. We've talked a number of times. Come see me. We'll talk. And if you're not happy, then you can come back.

2:30:54Speaker 45

It's just like another issue. I mean, we can speak on it. I understand. Every time we talk, nothing gets resolved. It's not like it's always brushed underneath the rug.

2:31:03Speaker 38

It doesn't sound like there was any problem. Everything continued? Yeah, so just came over and talked to you.

2:31:08 – 2:31:36Speaker 45

I have respect for you. You know that. Me and you talk. Every time something happens, I come up and speak. And I didn't want to do this. But now it's like, what's going on? Like, honestly, what's going on? We spoke in January. We came up here, Mayor, right? Yeah. Came up here and we spoke. Speaking of, I've seen something on the agenda, Section 8. I spoke on it. Now I see, okay, if we're putting a special application in and we're doing that and we're following the agreement, why are we being kind of...

2:31:36 – 2:31:47Speaker 38

I didn't understand. You just indicated that you weren't kind of... Whatever that is. So please, get with staff. And if there's an issue with the implementation of the contract, absolutely.

2:31:49Speaker 45

Like Ms. Fizik said, the point of putting the application in, if you're... What's the point?

2:31:55 – 2:32:07Speaker 38

Like I said, sir, everybody is free to go to a park. And they can talk to anybody they want to. I'm sorry. That's just the way it is. But it doesn't sound like you had any problems. It is a problem.

2:32:07Speaker 45

She's driving around talking about shutting the park down. It is a problem.

2:32:11Speaker 38

It doesn't sound like anybody got shut down.

2:32:14Speaker 18

Exactly. And for the record, I don't have the authority to do it.

2:32:17Speaker 38

Commissioner Eaton, I'm going to ask you. So, thank you, sir. Yes, Commissioner Perkins.

2:32:26 – 2:33:03Speaker 20

I could hear the frustration in the young man's voice, and we love all of our little league programs, and it's about the children. It's about the sport. The commissioners, and I think he was talking about Commissioner Eden, we do not have the authority to shut anything down. Now I don't know what she said to BSO, but I could hear the frustration in that young man's voice and that generation, we don't want to run them away and say nothing happened. So I could see the frustration that he's having and perhaps Scott can work with him and see how we can work through that.

2:33:04 – 2:33:17Speaker 37

Absolutely, and there was no discussion about closing, shutting something down. We're just trying to follow the agreements as we've written content, volume, and everyone's been wonderful.

2:33:18Speaker 38

Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Seegerson?

2:33:22 – 2:34:04Speaker 18

Yes, thank you. I know you've worked very hard, Scott. There's a balance, and again, for the record, I do not have the authority to shut anything down. Didn't go there to shut it down. I was there at the park observing. So, you know, that's how rumors start. You know, one says something and it's misinterpreted. But no, they weren't shut down. And we do have an agreement. Scott has worked very hard on it. And I want to say that I appreciate it, Scott. And we need, if we enter into agreements, we need to follow them. Thank you.

2:34:04Speaker 38

Very good. Vice Mayor, and then we're going to get back to public input on the motion.

2:34:09 – 2:34:33Speaker 21

Sorry, that's all right. Go ahead. i'm like a time warp right now did we go backwards or forwards i thought we had a motion on the we do okay so is public input still open on that motion yes it is okay so i will wait until you're opening it back to commission discussion on the motion okay on the tape very good further input from the public on the motion please come forward just name an address for the record

2:34:34 – 2:35:05Speaker 25

Hi, my name is Brandy Zabital. I do a lot of things here, but I am a big advocate for the Pompano Eagles. I wanted to just simply add to what Coach Juan said. There was a commissioner that came out and tried to fear mongrel the residents. We are not going to sit back and let this happen. You cannot come to our parks and say that you're going to shut things down. I was there. I was present. It did happen, so I just have a question for Mr. Moore. Are the five games that are home games for the Pompano Eagles, are they already approved as far as this contractual agreement?

2:35:07 – 2:35:19Speaker 25

Okay, so there will be no authority on which the city commissioners would have the ability to stop the Pompano Eagles from playing music or having any vendors with generators. Is that true, yes or no?

2:35:20Speaker 37

Again, we have no intentions of shutting down any football.

2:35:24Speaker 25

That wasn't the question. Okay.

2:35:26Speaker 37

Well, it depends on the content. If the content is inappropriate, I'm going to shut down the content and I'm going to shut down the music. I promise.

2:35:35Speaker 37

I will do that.

2:35:36 – 2:36:14Speaker 25

In addition to that, I wanted to state for the record that the Pompano Eagles do not have a PA system. It was taken out during their renovation and never put back in. The Booster Club actually has to pay $500 each game to have awareness and ability to speak to the entire crowd of people. You're right. The Pompano Eagles are wildly successful and that's not the fault of their own. They're amazing and they have amazing coaches and we deserve a PA system that's operational. If you're concerned about the music, maybe we should start there. Safety is a concern. They need sound support so that they're able to communicate if they're in the event of emergency. This is a major safety concern. that Parks and Rec should address. Thank you.

2:36:15 – 2:36:34Speaker 38

Very good. Further input on the motion. Motion to direct staff to fill out the FAA form. We've gotten far afield. We've gotten far afield. We're actually taking input on the motion to direct staff to fill out the FAA form. Gary Phillips, 1210 Northeast 27th Avenue.

2:36:35 – 2:37:08Speaker 33

I mean, it's just now you see what the problem is with cramming five things into some kind of hiatus. That's just ridiculous. Look, these things are people need to talk about them. What are you doing? What are you, are you trying to sneak things by? I don't get it. One. Two, the guy who's yelling about $2,500 for this, we've spent so much of our own money to get airport stuff looked at and time and effort. $2,500 for him? Just come on. Just please. Just be quiet.

2:37:08Speaker 38

Sir, sir, sir, sir. Sir, that's please.

2:37:16Speaker 33

It's still clicking.

2:37:16Speaker 38

I'm asking for quiet. That's one.

2:37:20 – 2:37:47Speaker 33

The noise study just failed. I guess I didn't even know. We really need that noise study. And the FAA pays for it. People that are doing the airport stuff, what we're asking for is get the FAA to do the noise study. It doesn't take much. They pay for it. Reopen the idea of this tower placement. It can't be where it is now. It has to be moved to the right place. Do the 7018 study, whatever the hell the number was.

2:37:48Speaker 31

Was there anything else on that list? Did I miss anything? This isn't asking for a lot of stuff, is it?

2:37:55 – 2:38:06Speaker 33

But I'm going to be back soon because I'm still mad about you guys taking 44 acres of a beloved, beautiful scrub oak turtles. That's it. Thank you.

2:38:06Speaker 38

Thank you, sir. Further input from the public on the motion to direct staff to fill out the FAA form?

2:38:15 – 2:39:47Speaker 17

That's one of the reasons I don't like to come here and stay that long. It feels 3 to 4 North was 19th Street on the issue of their part mayor commissioners. Over the years I've heard so much concern about the airport and I must tell you that we got a cuisine studies about sound. I don't know why you won't pull some of those studies out. We have a cuisine studies about sound. We really do. I would recommend that you start pulling some of those studies out and give them to folks. If they need to be updated, that's another story. But I would recommend you start pulling some of those studies out because over the years, this city has done a significant number of studies. And the reason I'm concerned and the reason I pay attention is because it was mentioned that those flights do come over the northwest. And I stay in Kendall Lake and I've seen a lot of those flights and they're pretty low. But I think, and this is a layman's opinion, I think that if you have a fortnightly air park that has 1,000 feet and you have a popular air park with 800 feet, listen, if you paid attention to the news these days, there are traffic incidents in the air. And I'm just going to say for me, and again, I'm a layman in this area, it's a no-brainer. Thanks. Thanks.

2:39:47 – 2:40:07Speaker 38

VERY GOOD. FURTHER INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC? SEEING NONE. SEEING NONE. NO SECOND BITES OF THIS APPLE. SEEING NONE. PUBLIC INPUT CLOSED. OKAY. SO WE'RE BACK ON THE MOTION. I HAVE THE LEAD OF VICE MAYOR.

2:40:08 – 2:41:30Speaker 21

THANK YOU. OKAY. There is a lot to discuss here because a lot came up. I'm going to try to stay focused on the motion here. I understand the frustration people feel about having so many items packed into one agenda item because that's the whiplash I think that's resulting that we're all feeling. There are several issues with this. First, I think there's a history here. Last year during the August hiatus, something with the air park came up also and was passed. I think it was a grant application also. And it's just, which is why I made the motion actually to not allow this to happen in August so that we would have to have these items come back before us individually. That didn't pass. So we sit here today with five or six items in one. I actually want to talk about the FEC, the one that you don't. So with respect to this form, I understand the same altitude as FXE is probably not going to work. So have we done this before would be my question to Mr. Rocco. Have we looked at what an optimal pattern altitude would be for Pompano? Have we analyzed the pattern? Have we done this recently?

2:41:31 – 2:42:24Speaker 40

No, because 50 years it's been 1,000 feet at FXE, 800 at Pompano. Pompano has different traffic than FXE does. Pompano has category B2, B1, B2 traffic, which are the small single engine, light twin engine aircraft that you see, piston aircraft that you see flying around. At FXE, they have a lot more jet traffic, corporate traffic. That's the reason for the separation. They are four miles from their center of their airfield to the center of our airfield. Airport boundaries are five miles, so we overlap by a mile on each side. That's why our traffic pattern is 800 feet. We've never requested to change it because of the type of traffic that we have at the Pompano Airport.

2:42:24 – 2:43:36Speaker 21

And I completely understand that. We're a general aviation training airport. FXC has more jet traffic. There's a couple things related to this. First of all, if you're on approach or departure, a different pattern altitude is not going to materially change your experience. If planes are routinely taking off over your house, it doesn't matter if they're climbing to 800 feet or 1,000 feet because they're over your house at something less than 800 feet. So I'm just worried. If there's something actionable we can do, I want to do it. But I'm worried that we had our workshop maybe a year ago, and we haven't reconvened since, and there are some new ideas, it sounds like, and maybe there is a noise study that should be done, and maybe this forum we discuss and decide, it's... It's going to cost money to fill out, although this would come out of the Airpark Enterprise Fund. Correct. Remember, that's not coming out of a general fund. So if there are things that we can do, I want to make sure we're spending the money in the best places. So do you have some other ideas? How do you rate this idea? Do you think we will fail at this? What would you suggest we do, given the issues you know exist?

2:43:37 – 2:43:52Speaker 40

No, we're going to submit the 7480 form. My personal professional opinion is we're gonna fail because of the safety aspects of FXE and Pompano, but we can try, we can ask and have the FAA review it.

2:43:52 – 2:44:05Speaker 21

So when you say that you're going to hire a consultant out of the Airpark Enterprise Fund, that consultant will decide, I mean, I looked at the form, it's one page. So you could fill it out, but I assume you're going to hire someone who's going to fill it out in a way that's going to give you the best chance of success.

2:44:06Speaker 21

And analyze what to ask for and why.

2:44:09 – 2:44:21Speaker 21

Okay. And that's one issue. So that's the form. The tower itself, this grant, where is the tower location?

2:44:22Speaker 40

It'll be next to the existing control tower.

2:44:25Speaker 21

I have concerns with that location also. So was that Kim Lee Horne's decision? Where did that come from?

2:44:34 – 2:45:06Speaker 40

I have a representative from Kim Lee Horne who prepared the tower siting study to answer any questions you may have regarding that. Tom O'Donnell from Kim Lee Horne, Senior Vice President, they prepared the siting study. They did a very professional job. We received $400,000 from the Florida Department of Transportation to perform this study as a grant. So, you know, this was done professionally. They know what they're doing, and he'll be able to explain better as to why we picked the location that we picked.

2:45:06Speaker 21

So have we had that study, or what they've decided, presented, and why that was? I mean, I don't remember seeing that, have we?

2:45:14Speaker 40

I'm sorry, say that again?

2:45:15 – 2:45:30Speaker 21

Has that been presented publicly like we had the workshop a year ago? Have we gone back to the public and presented that study and told people why they have selected the location that they did?

2:45:30 – 2:45:54Speaker 40

We're waiting for the study to come back from the FAA. We've got verbal approval that they have approved it, but we're waiting for them to sign it to give it back to us. At that point, we'll be able to give the study. The study has already been given out. We've already provided it to Mr. Mueller and the team over there. He's gone through it tooth, comb, and nail. He's had many questions. We've addressed his questions. I don't know what else.

2:45:55 – 2:46:35Speaker 21

I get the sense that it's time for some kind of follow-up workshop on this topic since we left it rather open-ended at the end of the last workshop and that nothing we do right now today is going to make a difference. So with respect to the form, I think if we just write on it 1,000 feet, that's going to fail because that's the pattern. Altitude and executive if if someone has a better idea if you have a consultant that has a better idea of how to modify our Pattern then I would be open to doing that. I mean, can you go higher? I doubt you. I mean that doesn't work either. So Okay, thank you for the answers

2:46:37Speaker 38

Very good. I've got Commissioner Fessick, then Commissioner Perkins.

2:46:41 – 2:50:16Speaker 26

Just wanted to be clear that there is a list that will be provided to Mr. Rocco of some suggestions that don't include raising it to 1,000. In fact, one of the recommended things was to leave the height at 800 feet. extend the pattern in both directions. And so there's a couple different ideas or things to talk to a consultant or somebody else or Mr. Rocco or open the door to the conversations rather than just saying we're going to do what we're doing and push forward as opposed to stopping, pausing, getting some feedback, doing the things that are within our rights to sort of moderate the situation. and make sure that it's applicable and it works for everybody. So this is the whole voluntary sort of program of where we work together. for the best outcome, or we're gonna feel like a lot of residents are gonna feel railroaded and feel upset with the city as a whole. So I'm always in favor of opening up the conversation. If there's a valid reason why we cannot do something, that's fine, but what we will not accept anymore is that's just the way it's always been and that's how we're going to do things because as we've found recently after a lot of time, there is an alternate course of action. We just have to be willing to be, able to discuss it openly. And to Vice Mayor's point, no. Providing information to a small group of residents is not the same as having it as an open forum in a commission meeting or in a workshop. We had that workshop, and it was at the air park. And while it was helpful and it was a step in the right direction, it was supposed to be the first step in a walk together. And what we found is that it's sort of just kind of stopped and puttered out um i'm going to just take a step back from and and kind of come all the way go high level again because i don't want to get too granular the biggest issue we have is this i'm going to steal your your terminology from i think back in last year with the uh downtown project it's mashed potatoes on a brownie in this in this this item there's just so many things that don't make any sense being piled together the contracts so I'm gonna just like I said step back to high level the contracts for the football teams they're brand new contracts we haven't had them before it's not something that's been approved or or or budgeted for something we've done but those contracts are brand new so that doesn't even belong in the consent agenda I'm going there that's why I'm doing high level this whole thing with this with this form It's a step in the right direction, and it's just trying to have an olive branch to start working together. Overall, I'm just gonna, just for the sake of brevity, and we have a lot of other things to get to, so for the sake of brevity, I am absolutely livid that the city manager put this on the agenda like this. This is showing a gross disregard for the residents. I think we have a lot more conversations to have. I am not going to support, I know it's free money, there's a way that we could potentially extend, but we're finding ourselves in the same situation that we did last year, and if we say yes and allow him to continue, then basically it sets forth even the citing issue that everybody has concerns with. If we say yes, it sets off a whole other chain of events. It's a domino effect, and we are not going to be able to have the conversation as a whole if we do not make a decision to do it now. Thank you.

2:50:16 – 2:51:38Speaker 43

Mayor, this is Kervin. Yes, Kervin. Yes, Kervin Alford, city clerk. I wanted, as is clear on the agenda, I am the staff contact and the purpose for my involvement on this is to ensure that all contracts were accounted for and presented before the board for review. It was not intended to hide anything and and I wanted to make sure clear that the this is not the city managers suggestion or anything I came and talked with and we talked about how we would go on to make sure that all the contracts were that were approved during the hiatus will be brought before the board so was not mr. Harrison it was actually me that wanted to make sure that nothing gets to the cracks and that all will be able to see in them for the most part ever this we've done this before in consolidating items commissioner fessick this is not in any way to debunk or any way what you're trying to point out but i wanted to make clear that we've done this before with advisory board appointments and trying to consolidate and make it more concise i understand your points that you brought up this afternoon and we'll definitely look to not repeat this again in consolidating it was all an effort to just make sure that everything was accounted for and everything would be presented before the public and also the commission. That's to conclude my comments there.

2:51:38Speaker 38

I appreciate that. So, Commissioner Perkins.

2:51:43Speaker 20

I have several questions. Can we vote on the motion before I bring it up?

2:51:50Speaker 38

Yeah, no, that's what we're supposed to be discussing is our motion, yeah.

2:51:53Speaker 20

Okay, because, okay, I'll bring it up, but it'll be a little bit confusing.

2:51:57Speaker 38

Once we deal with the motion.

2:52:01Speaker 19

It really doesn't have anything to do with the motion.

2:52:03 – 2:52:39Speaker 20

So I voted for the city manager to perform some of the duties of the city while we were away. I'd like to rescind my motion. I mean, I'd like to rescind my vote. And I want to know, can we separate these two items and vote on them separately? Can we vote on the Little League separate from the new air control tower?

2:52:39Speaker 38

Well, let's unpack this a little bit. Let's look to legal here.

2:52:43Speaker 20

Yes, go ahead.

2:52:44 – 2:55:28Speaker 36

The contracts have already been executed and provided to all, whether it's the Cowboys, Chiefs, Eagles, the FEC, and the— traffic control matter. They've all been signed. You can't change that at this point. They've all been done. My understanding is that the three or that the football contracts needed to be signed before the commission got back because the beginning of the season, the city's protected. The $950,000 grant would have expired, I believe, for the air park tower on August 28th. So I'm assuming that's why the execution proceeded with that. I know for the FEC lease extension, that is set to expire. I know Mr. Saunders in my office has been working on that for more than a year with the FEC, maybe two years, with multiple personnel changing over and over the FEC. He finally had a group that was willing to negotiate that was providing even though they're a little bit more expensive providing some more reasonable terms and this involves of course all the the areas plus the bus benches that benefit the residents I think the because of the expiration date of the current and the desire to get this approved before something else changed I just want to make it clear that the fact that it was about to expire was not because city staff or my staff sat back. It's because of the difficulty in communicating with the FEC. So that's why all of these agreements that were time-based and there was a need were all filled out and they're now being brought before you to say, here's what we had to do. And I don't know if the why has been explained. That's why I wanted to get into that a little bit, why they were filled out. There was no effort to avoid, um, the city commission's decision here, but these have already been signed, the football players are playing, the FEC is moving forward, and I believe the air traffic, the Department of Transportation, FAA, is moving forward. This has already been agreed to. And again, my portion that I signed off on was a direct communication from the FAA saying, we need you to sign off by this date. I confer with Mr. Rocco, that we needed this done by the 28th of August when I had returned from my trip and just to make sure this was done. And then I guess Mr. Harrison signed off to make sure. So unfortunately, respectfully, this is a done situation.

2:55:28 – 2:55:57Speaker 20

Okay, so this is an example of giving someone the benefit of the doubt because Pastor Campbell was just here saying 3-3. And I broke that tie and gave in to this, and this is what happens at the airport. That's why we have 3-3. So we can't even undo this. But this was something done while the commissioners were away.

2:55:58Speaker 19

And the reason I voted yes, because I just wanted to give the city manager the benefit of the doubt.

2:56:04Speaker 20

This is what happens. And everybody wonder, why is it 3-3? This is why. This is an example of that.

2:56:13Speaker 29

Commissioner, everything that was done here.

2:56:16Speaker 20

Excuse me, you interrupted. Look, I'm talking. Hello.

2:56:20Speaker 29

I'm just trying to explain.

2:56:21Speaker 20

I didn't ask you to. No.

2:56:22Speaker 29

You don't want an explanation?

2:56:23Speaker 20

No, no, no, no, no, no. Because you interrupted me while I was talking. Don't do that.

2:56:27Speaker 38

Yeah, let the commissioner go.

2:56:31Speaker 20

I will let you know when I'm done and when I'm finished.

2:56:36Speaker 19

You work for me. I don't work for you.

2:56:40 – 2:57:50Speaker 20

So a lot of people sitting on this dais, before they sit here on this dais, they have already been told how to vote and the way to vote. And I don't think that's so with the three of us, because I never know how I'm going to vote based on who's in the audience. Entire place is packed with people that want pets or whatever or cats saved. I'm going with the people. But there are those of us that sit up here, they already know how they're going to vote. And they sing this sad song to everybody about how they care for the residents. Nobody's saying anything about that other three. Smith, Hardin, and Eden. Take it however you like. Nobody says anything about that. So the reason I'm making this point is to say this is my third time trying to break the 3-3 tie. That's my point. And this is what happened when I break it. Now you may speak, Mr. City Manager.

2:57:51Speaker 38

Thank you, Commissioner. You're finished? Thank you.

2:57:54 – 2:58:15Speaker 29

Mr. Harrison? When you say this is what happened... These items that are on number eight had been budgeted and previously authorized by this body. Yes, ma'am, they were. You may not have been here. Some of these may have been before you got elected.

2:58:16Speaker 20

Who you talking to?

2:58:17Speaker 29

She's over there shaking her head at me.

2:58:19Speaker 20

Who is she? Rhonda?

2:58:21 – 2:58:44Speaker 29

Commissioner Fessick. Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead. So anyway... There's nothing wrong with what's been done. You're acting like there's been something wrong that was done and there wasn't. You just heard Mr. Berman. I'm telling you. Scott was telling you. Steve Rocco was telling you. I don't know what more we can do with this conversation.

2:58:50 – 2:59:02Speaker 38

Back on the motion. The motion to direct staff to fill out the form to raise the pattern altitude to 1,000 feet and elongate the pattern also, Mr. Rocco?

2:59:02Speaker 29

Yes, he indicates.

2:59:03Speaker 21

Was the motion to hire someone to optimize how we fill out that form?

2:59:07Speaker 38

I'm sorry, pardon me, I didn't.

2:59:08 – 2:59:19Speaker 21

Sorry, if we could, if the motion could be less to instruct him exactly how to fill out the form, but to work with someone to fill it out in an optimal way.

2:59:19Speaker 38

That's, I mean, he said that he was going to hire somebody to help him.

2:59:21Speaker 21

I understand, but when the motion becomes very specific, like we, again, that's not our role. I'll amend the motion to make sure that it's filled out with professional guidance.

2:59:31 – 2:59:46Speaker 38

I've got a question, though, and I guess it's probably for you, Commissioner Fessick, if you choose to answer it since you made the motion. I'm not clear what purpose would be served by elongating a traffic pattern.

2:59:47Speaker 26

Well, you're the pilot, not me.

2:59:49 – 3:00:55Speaker 38

Like I said, I don't see any positive purpose behind that. It's not going to help the residents on the ground because it's not going to change the the dynamics, the aerodynamics that pilots use when they take off or land, it merely would penalize the pilots further than they are currently by gas prices and rental prices because if it elongates the pattern, it's going to cost a pilot more money to train, which I know that's not a concern of some people, but I'm just looking at it. Those are the only impacts I can see, really no impact for the residents. to help with their visible frustration with the overflights. In fact, it could actually be a detriment for the residents to elongate the pattern, it seems to me, because that way the tower could pack more airplanes in the pattern, and instead of having what they've got now, they could actually have more traffic. So I'm just wondering what the rationale is behind the elongating of the patterns. If you care to explain.

3:00:55Speaker 26

Well, what I actually would, I actually have a question back for you. Are you now a mayor and an airport consultant or air park consultant?

3:01:04Speaker 38

I've never been an air park consultant.

3:01:05 – 3:02:14Speaker 26

Okay, so I'm just saying, I understand you have your pilot's license, but the motion is to fill out the form and work with the residents and or professionals to do these things the right way so that residents and the air park have a, I'm sorry, just a little bit noisy over there, so that residents and the air park and the city as a whole, we work together as a unit for the best of everybody, for the air park itself, for the vendors, for the pilots, and for the residents, all as a whole. This is not a he said, she said. This is not a gotcha moment. This is nothing. This is just working together. And as far as, like I said, I have been working with many people, and Mr. Mueller has been one of them, who's done a lot of research. This has been one of the things he's championed. I would like for him to be involved in the professional with Mr. Rocco, and I would like us to have a more open dialogue about it and not have everything sort of done in these little private meetings. I think it's important that we actually talk about these things. And so I'll even step it back a little bit. Commissioner Perkins, you just said when you were talking, you just said you were in motion to reconsider.

3:02:14Speaker 38

Commissioner Fessick, I had asked a question.

3:02:17Speaker 26

I'm answering your question.

3:02:18Speaker 38

You started talking with Commissioner Perkins.

3:02:21 – 3:02:36Speaker 26

So she had just said she made a motion to reconsider or rescind her vote, and I have a question for Mr. Berman, actually, because maybe we don't even need to waste— Commissioner Fessick, I've got the floor, though. You actually interrupted me while I was speaking to ask me a question. So— No, I didn't. Yes, you did.

3:02:37Speaker 38

I got the floor after the vice mayor. I'm sorry.

3:02:40Speaker 26

Well, if you would like to have me answer the question, I would like to know the answer. Why should we even go through all of this? If that was something that she said, I'd like to know from Mr. Berman.

3:02:51 – 3:03:04Speaker 38

Okay. I'll tell you what, Commissioner, here's what I'll do. It's apparent you don't want to answer my question. That's okay. You're under absolutely no obligation to, but I appreciate your honesty there. Now, I'll give you the floor, Commissioner Fessick. Go ahead.

3:03:05 – 3:03:21Speaker 26

Okay, great. Thanks. So, Mr. Berman, with what Commissioner Perkins said, you made it seem that we're just, again, we have to vote yes, and she can't rescind her vote or reconsider her vote. What are the ramifications of her doing that?

3:03:22 – 3:05:12Speaker 36

Well, we'd be in violation of contracts that we've agreed to that authority was given to city personnel to enter into these contracts. And they did so, the manager did so, because of the time element and the need to get this done before you return. The only other option would have been to call a special meeting or two in August, bring you all in and have you vote on these contracts. So that is the procedure that in the 31, now 31 years I've been here, The manager has always been given authority to not have to call the commissioner in during their hiatus. And of course, all brought back before the commission for your knowledge, but by authorizing him to do that, we've contracted, I mean, we can tell the FAA we don't want their 950,000, I guess. I don't know if any of it's been spent for the new tower or the study, but actually it's a design grant. The football teams are already playing. you can't go back to undue contracts without legal ramifications. And I don't think it's fair to the football teams or would be, and that the fairness of course is a policy consideration for the commission, but FEC as well. We've got the best deal after almost two years of negotiating, we can get from them and to walk away and tell them nevermind. And I don't think there's a legal form for us to do that, quite frankly, to send them something saying, we signed the contract, but we didn't really mean it. I mean, unless there was legal authorization to do it. So at this point, it's really not a possibility to withdraw your vote on this authorization because it was acted upon.

3:05:13 – 3:05:46Speaker 26

So I have three things to ask then. One, do those contracts that have never been in existence before, that were invented, and they had been using the parks, and absolutely, but that was never, this is a brand new contract, something brand new. How does that, Mr. Berman, apply to the letter of what was allowed by being previously budgeted and approved. Because I never saw this before, and this is a brand new contract. Nobody else has seen that before. So this is a new concept that technically doesn't, in my opinion, doesn't fall under the previously budgeted and approved.

3:05:46 – 3:06:29Speaker 36

Well, my understanding is that the form of the contract is the same format that we use for all other similar contracts, so it's not new. It may be new for these organizations, and from what Mr. Moore testified to, they wanted to have some control over the volume and the noise complaints they were getting at these events, and that's how they found a way to have the kids still play and not interfere and have some control to ask them to turn the volume down, and apparently that's what was done. Now, as far as your dissatisfaction with the contract, I'm not aware that these were new. The forms appear to be the same format that we use for all our license agreements or special event agreements. where we license property for others to use for events.

3:06:29 – 3:07:53Speaker 26

They're similar, but they're different. And that was not what Mr. Moore said. He actually said that it was more about having a structure. And so I agree with the structure, and I agree with making sure that certain music that should not be played in public parks should not be played. I fully agree with that. But this is something that was not, in my opinion, under the purview of the city manager anyway. So there's that. And they've been playing without a contract for seasons. So I don't see what the harm is there of them already playing. If they would like to get or change the contract, this may give them an out to reconsider if we do something and turn that around. Secondly, the FAA comes again with lots of different implications. The grant acceptance, as Mr. Mueller had said before, is a 20-year window, a 20-year domino effect. I did see a project number. There's a copy from an email. So signatures must be obtained no later than August 28th. And then it says, is it feasible to extend your deadline of this without jeopardizing the grant? There's a backup contact. There's information. Maybe we could ask them if that's possible so that we can actually take the time and do the work. Last year, we were told, nope, got to do it. This year, I'm a hard no on this until we get the answers we deserve because we've been working on this for a very long time. I would like to know, Mr. Harrison, when were you first made aware of the FAA grant filing?

3:08:01Speaker 29

As far as the filing, we would have done that many months ago.

3:08:07Speaker 26

It was actually at the end of June.

3:08:08 – 3:08:21Speaker 29

As far as the situation with regard to get that information in online, like a day, it was in August.

3:08:23 – 3:10:22Speaker 26

Actually, it was July 30th that you got a reply back. So I'm just saying, I have done my homework on this one. And it seems to me that on the 29th and the 28th, when this was on the agenda for us to give you the permission to sign off on all these things while we're gone, for the second year in a row, you were fully aware of what was coming down the pike, likely in August, as it had done the year before. And this was brought up in the meeting as being a point of contention and a point of concern. And this was something that was a hot point for a lot of residents and has been. And so my concern is, you did know about it. You knew what the timeline looked like. Many people probably did. And yet, when it was executed, by the way, Mr. Mueller had sent an email to me. I was on hiatus, still checking my email. Sent an email to me and copied Mr. Rocco, copied I think Kervin, There's been so many emails. But one of the public records requests he had was related to following up about this particular FAA grant stuff. And I was not copied on the reply through a mistake. I'll just say a mistake of Mr. Alfred's. But I was not copied on a reply that basically had said in verbatim in that email that Mr. Harrison had signed the FAA grant and it would be coming for ratification before the city commission on September 8th. So I didn't get that till much later when I followed up, but I was also not given the courtesy of even an email sent, which is not really bothering somebody on vacation, to let me know when it was definitely something that was very important to every resident I serve. And it was a hot point of contention. It was something that was of interest to not just myself, but many other, to several other commissioners.

3:10:22Speaker 38

Should we get back to you?

3:10:23 – 3:10:57Speaker 26

I'm getting, I'm done now, actually. So I'm just, you know what, we'll make, let's vote on the motion. And as for the FEC, I would like to talk about that, but I believe that I think this, I think what Ms. Commissioner Perkins, if you reconsider, then we can, we'll have to have Mr. Berman figure it out from there. But I've worked with everybody and I've been, Very patient and very kind, but this seems to me like just a gross negligence of an abuse of power, really. So I'm just dissatisfied. I'll vote on the motion for now, and then I have another one to make.

3:10:58Speaker 38

Okay. So we're back on the motion. Finally, the motion that Commissioner Fessick made. I got Commissioner Smith.

3:11:05 – 3:13:04Speaker 23

Okay, this is on the motion for the 7480-1 FAA form. Hearing all the discussion going on in the public coming forward, to me it seems like we're premature on what we want Mr. Rocco to find out from the FAA. We have designs being done for the tower. Does that mean the tower's being built? or we're just getting design, just design. So it sounds like once the design is done, we can have public input and a workshop. So it seems like money well spent to get the design, have the public input of the design and discuss What the public wants, whether it's a 7480-1 FAA form or whatever form it is that we need to do and to bring the consultant in to do that, let's talk about, also pull into there a workshop that includes the tower plans, the forms that need to be done, and the business plan that's been discussed at Planning and Zoning. So let's have a workshop that talks about all of that instead of piecemealing this, Let's move forward with what's been done with the contract and then let's workshop a air park workshop that includes all of that. So that's what I would suggest. I think we're premature picking little pieces because I think it's a much bigger plan that we need to wrap our heads around that would be productive for community because last year's workshop was good. We've covered a lot of things, so that's what I'm thinking that we should do is to back away and let's look at the bigger picture together as a team.

3:13:04Speaker 38

Sir, sir, sir, I'm going to ask you to please be quiet.

3:13:07Speaker 23

Thank you, Mayor.

3:13:08Speaker 38

Number one. Thank you, sir. Commissioner Perkins, then Vice Mayor. Thank you. This is on the motion.

3:13:18 – 3:13:45Speaker 20

Commissioner Smith, you amaze me because you... always have the tendency to have this nice, soft, sweet voice on the end that sum up what everybody has already said and stated, and you make it sound so pretty, and then you vote against us every time with your 3-3. That's how it always ends. You sum everything up, listen to everybody, and then you vote the same way every time.

3:13:45Speaker 38

Commissioner, can't we try and stay on the motion? I'm ready. I'm ready.

3:13:50Speaker 21

Miss Folt. Miss Folt.

3:13:51Speaker 38

Miss Folt. Vice Mayor.

3:13:52 – 3:14:44Speaker 21

I completely agree with you, Commissioner Perkins. I appreciate you always trying to thread the needle and take a little bit of that and a little bit of that and a little pixie dust there and come with some magic pretty package, but it makes no sense ever. So this forum is completely separate than this tower conversation. Completely separate. So it's not like we do this, and then we do a tower, and then we do a form. They're not related. So this form is talking about traffic pattern and an altitude, and can be done completely simultaneous to a tower design, and it's going to take a long period of time. Let's talk about designing things without community input or designing things wrong. There's a couple bridges, let's see. Well, there's a former commissioner here, and there was a bridge that was, a couple years was spent designing a bridge that was six inches higher when the community, well, we're talking about what Commissioner Smith is talking about.

3:14:44Speaker 38

No, no, no, we should be talking, I'm sorry.

3:14:46 – 3:16:00Speaker 21

I am responding to Commissioner Smith, who you let speak. So when we design things without community input, you end up wasting that $950,000 sometimes on the wrong design. And then you find out later that, oh, there's this issue and this issue. And it's a little different here, because this is probably driven more by what the experts and their studies will show. But part of the design process is community input. Same thing happened on McNabb. There was a bridge design that was not much higher, a couple inches higher than the bridge that's being built. And then we had to pay to redesign it four feet higher. So I personally am sick of us designing things and not getting it right the first time and then paying to have to redesign things. So while it sounds great, that's not how it works. We end up having to do things twice or redo things when we just keep pushing things down the line. So this form that we're talking about is unrelated to the design of the control tower. And I think if we're going to be talking about and spending this $950,000 on a control tower, we should be out in the community now talking to them and explaining why the location was picked and why the other alternatives don't work. And we should be having that dialogue now, not forcing it down people's throat in two years. Thank you.

3:16:01Speaker 38

OK. Anything else on a motion? Seeing none, let's go ahead and call the roll on a motion.

3:16:06Speaker 43

Commissioner Fezzik?

3:16:09Speaker 43

Commissioner Perkins?

3:16:11Speaker 43

Commissioner Sigerson-Eaton?

3:16:14Speaker 43

Commissioner Smith?

3:16:16Speaker 43

Vice Mayor Fournier? Yes.

3:16:18Speaker 38

Harden sure, okay, mr. Fessick.

3:16:22 – 3:16:51Speaker 26

You'll have the floor. Thank you so much So the next thing I'd like to talk about is going back to Commissioner Perkins and since we're since we're there I do want to ask before I get started there. What are the grant assurances? that this in this packet here and does that do any of those grant assurances if we accept this Force us to begin essentially construction or force us into construction of that tower. I Obligate us?

3:16:51Speaker 40

Yes. Does? Yes. Okay.

3:16:54Speaker 26

Okay, cool. Thanks. And are we obligated by the design that is approved or that we've submitted?

3:16:58Speaker 40

I'm sorry, say that again?

3:17:00Speaker 26

Are we obligated to a specific design or placement that we submitted?

3:17:05 – 3:17:26Speaker 26

Okay. So by accepting this, not only are we saying that we have to build the tower, but the siting, which is the other issue that a lot of people have had issues with, is automatically locked in because this got signed and approved and we take a penny. $950,000. And then we also chip in $235,000 of airport funds.

3:17:26Speaker 40

And $235,000 of FDOT funding.

3:17:29 – 3:17:41Speaker 26

Got it. So basically, this is not something that is just to accept some money and move on. This is accept money and commit us to doing certain things.

3:17:42Speaker 40

Correct. Thank you.

3:17:45 – 3:18:07Speaker 26

So, Ms. Commissioner Perkins, back to you. I'm going to just turn it over to you, but I will say to you. No, no, no. I'm sorry. Well, no, so I'm just saying, well, I wanted a question for you. Is that still your intent that you choose to either reconsider or rescind or whatever the word needs to be because it's only available to you during this meeting?

3:18:08Speaker 20

Yes, I would like to rescind my vote.

3:18:12Speaker 38

You can't. Not yet. You don't have the floor.

3:18:15Speaker 26

Well, then, I'm done. Thank you.

3:18:16Speaker 38

She asked me a question. No, I got it. I got it. I've got Commissioner Seegerson eating with her hands. I'll go there.

3:18:25Speaker 18

I need to get a little mic time to compete with you all. So, Mr. Rocco, you said you have a representative here from Kimberly-Horne?

3:18:34Speaker 40

Yes. Yes, we do.

3:18:37 – 3:19:00Speaker 18

Great. And can you, one or both of you, sort of speak to the particulars or the peculiarities of designing airport towers? Yes. It's not the same as designing a bridge or a house and then

3:19:03Speaker 18

Just go ahead and start with that. I have a couple other questions.

3:19:06Speaker 40

So I'm going to introduce Tom O'Donnell, who's senior vice president with Kimley Horn, who prepared the air traffic control tower siting study.

3:19:17 – 3:20:13Speaker 39

Thank you, Steve. Good afternoon, Commission. For the record, my name is Tom O'Donnell. My place of business is at 8201 Peters Road in Plantation. I have 26 years of experience in designing infrastructure at airports that includes runways, taxiways, aprons, and vertical structures like hangars and air traffic control towers. I've been doing this since I started. My first month at Kimley Horn, I actually worked on... the construction of the Boca Raton Airport. So that was several years ago. The process of... First, I should start by saying that your current tower has reached the end of its service life. It is very, very old. It needs to be replaced. one way or another, regardless of what's going on here with the community, your tower needs to be replaced. It's just simply, it's in bad shape. Yes, sir.

3:20:13Speaker 18

Yes, ma'am. So does the FAA require us to replace the tower? We don't have a choice.

3:20:19 – 3:26:57Speaker 39

It's to the discretion of you all, but the building is very, very old and needs to be replaced. The new tower that will replace it is much higher and would give a better perspective over the whole airfield and allow a safer environment to operate in. That being said, the process of going through and replacing the tower, as you can imagine, a tower is very expensive. That's why you don't see a lot of them coming online. It takes a long time in order to go through this process. And it's very, very meticulous. It starts all the way back in the master planning of the airport, which is a 20-year document, and the airport layout plan that's included in that. Once you identify that you want to potentially replace your tower, then you have to go through a full-blown siting study with the Federal Aviation Department. Excuse me, Federal Aviation Administration. That process you all started four years ago. And it was a very thorough review of the conditions of your airfield, looking at every inch of your airpark to determine what would be the best location to place a tower, to replace the one that you have right now. Four years ago, we sat down with your tower chief, with Mr. Rocco. I had several of my partners with us as well that are experts in airspace and air traffic control towers. We also had a consultant who specializes in siting towers that was with us. And we reviewed every location on the airfield. And we came up with, I think it was somewhere around six or seven potential sites. Now the FAA, as you can imagine, they have limited time, limited budget. They don't want to look at six sites. So they make you sort of reduce that down. We selected three, working with, again, with your tower chief. And from those three, we created a virtual reality tower for each one of those locations. And we held a meeting with the FAA that was audited by 40, that's not a mistake, 40 experts in aviation and air traffic control towers, as well as the authority of the FAA. Members of your tower were there, members of the air park staff were there, and my team was there as well, including the expert in the sighting study. During that process, I believe it was the gentleman who was in charge of the union that represents your air traffic controllers, he put on a helmet or a set of goggles and he immersed himself into the environment, this virtual reality location. This program that we developed has the ability to rotate the tower It has the ability to increase its height, and we do that for each site. During that process, the third site was rejected immediately because it was found to be not viable. Then we honed in on the two remaining sites. And the controller was looking in the environment and was being asked questions and gone through a thorough review process of each site. The result of that was an increase in height of both the towers that were viable. And the result of the test or the review was that both of these locations could be viable. That is from an air traffic perspective. There are several other things that go into play with regards to selecting an actual site, including the fiscal side, right? So the site one location was relatively close to the existing air traffic control tower. All of the infrastructure to serve, because if you can imagine, these structures need things like utilities, water, sewer, communications, and even more importantly, is the ability to communicate with the infrastructure on the airport. So controlling all the lights, the navigational aids, things of that nature. All that is coming straight into your existing tower as it is today. So the first location, which was shorter than the second location, and by the way, as you go up 10 feet on your towers, it increases the cost of the tower by $100,000 of construction dollars. That is very pertinent. So site one had all of the existing infrastructure related to utilities, telemetry with the airfield, communications all available right there. All it needs to do is just get rerouted and connected. It also has ample parking because the tower's already there, an existing tower's already there, or nearby, excuse me. The second location was encumbered by leaseholds, so you'd have to undo leases with existing tenants The utilities were not as easily accessible. You'd have to run utilities to the site. None of the telemetry for the airport was located there. It would have to get rerouted completely over to that location. And there was no infrastructure with regards to parking and access at all in that location, so that would have to get all built. So the two buckets that you're looking at are from the Federal Aviation Administration side, which, you know, understanding and controlling the airspace, and then the fiscal side. Coming together those two, that's how you make a recommendation. And so on our side, we recommended that location one be selected as that site. Now, that goes through a process with the FAA. They have to agree to that as well. And they have done that. So site one is what the FAA has agreed to. And the study results, as Mr. Rocco has stated, will be coming out shortly. But we have had several conversations over the last four years with the FAA. So it is our understanding that it is moving towards being signed by them. So I think first, sorry, just one more thing, I apologize. Certainly, no worries. It is extremely important to understand that there was no shorter than 45 people that were involved in this process, auditing this whole entire thing, working with your air traffic control tower staff in order to determine the location of these two sites. That's it.

3:26:58Speaker 18

Thank you. So you said that we're going to have to conduct a study after?

3:27:04 – 3:27:15Speaker 39

No, ma'am, I'm sorry. Forgive me. No, that was the study. I just explained the study. It was the study, gotcha. That was completed, yes. Actually, that was completed about a year and a half ago, right? Something like that, yes.

3:27:15 – 3:27:54Speaker 18

Okay, very good. So as far as design goes, Can you talk to me a little bit about design and what the standards are? Are there restrictions? Is there a specific paint color that it can or maybe cannot be painted? How much public input can be taken in something like this specific particular structure? Thank you.

3:27:54 – 3:28:59Speaker 39

So setting aside the airspace matter, so I think we should have a brief discussion about authority, right? The federal government has complete authority over the national airspace system. And so that's where that guidance is coming from with regards to things like the requirements for how tall the tower is and what process you go through in order to get to that point. That part has been completed already. The next step would be more in line with how any other regular building would be constructed and designed in your community. It would have to go through a zoning process. There would be, I would assume, public hearings that are held, workshops to talk about important things like color and things of that nature. There's no prescribed color. Think of the FAA as giving you guidance on how the air traffic controllers are to... their ability to review the sky. They're not telling you what color and what paint, you know, what the facade looks like. You know, it does have to have a certain geometry at the top with the glass because the controllers need to be able to see everything, of course.

3:29:00Speaker 39

But beyond that, it would just be like a regular building that you're, you know, would go through your building department, through your zoning department, you know, workshops, things of that nature.

3:29:09Speaker 18

Okay, and I'm envisioning it as like any air traffic control tower that you see. It's slender and tall, primarily. Correct.

3:29:19 – 3:29:35Speaker 39

Yeah. Yeah, I mean, they would have the shape that you would consider to be the normal shape of an air traffic control tower, yes. They tend to have a similar look to them, but with regards to shape and some of the facade appearances, you have control. Like, I've seen some communities over in Naples

3:29:35Speaker 18

Yeah, that's my next question. Give me an example.

3:29:38 – 3:30:09Speaker 39

Yeah, certainly. So a lot of them end up being the facade and the exterior tend to be driven by the community and what's important to them. So I'll give you a perfect example. Over at Naples, that community appears to have a very patriotic feel to it, and so they put a flag on the outside of the... So there's a massive United States flag on the outside of it with, like, a mosaic. Okay, but, you know, each one of these... would take on the persona of the community and the only way you're gonna be able to do that is through workshops with the community.

3:30:09 – 3:30:34Speaker 18

Sure, we could wrap it with a nice, what's his name, frill, fresco, you know, something like that's very pompano, maybe a big fish. So, yeah, I mean, so I just was curious as to whether there would be an opportunity to actually have public input for it because it's such a particular construction.

3:30:35 – 3:30:58Speaker 39

Other than the airspace matters, it would be very similar to our normal process of going through your... your typical review for a structure. It has to meet all the building code requirements of Florida, and we have very strong requirements with regards to the wind strength of the building and things of that nature. So everything would be exactly like the local community normally does for any other building. The only difference is how high it is and being able to see certain things on the airport.

3:30:58Speaker 18

All right, great. Thank you for now.

3:31:02Speaker 38

Commissioner Fessick.

3:31:03 – 3:31:18Speaker 26

I just want to correct something because I was sitting in a meeting that we had with, I believe you were on the Zoom call or in the office, right? When we were discussing with Mr. Mueller and Mr. Gawley.

3:31:18Speaker 39

If this is the meeting that was in the summer, I was on a Zoom call. I could not see who was in the room.

3:31:22 – 3:31:41Speaker 26

Yes, a Zoom call. So I just remembered your name. So I want to bring up two things. So which, you mentioned that the air traffic controllers, there were two sites that the FAA said were viable. Well, the third one you dismissed. Which site did the air traffic control team decided that they preferred?

3:31:42Speaker 39

The gentleman who was under the goggles, from an airspace perspective, and only an airspace perspective, he preferred the second site.

3:31:50 – 3:33:25Speaker 26

Second site, okay. And we chose site one. But just to... For a number of reasons. I'm not going to... Right, for a number of reasons. No worries. Understood. So the other concern I have, and this sort of throws back to something that was said from one of the audiences we heard, Mr. Phillips, was Kimley Horne is also working as a consultant and was the lead team in also telling us that there was no need for the environmentally sensitive land at the air park and that there was basically, you know, it was basically not environmentally sensitive enough. There wasn't enough useful, I guess, sand pine scrub or gopher tortoises that they felt that it was okay to take away the land use designation. So my concern is we have Kimley Horn telling us we can get rid of our environmentally sensitive land. We have Kimley Horn helping us design a tower. It's a lot of one... sided opinions on a whole large project and as far as the the end of useful life um you know so is our city hall you know and that like you said it's at commission discretion i think we i think i will agree with you i've been on that air i've been in that air tower i think to do something and update it would be absolutely fantastic again going back to something the vice mayor said doing the right project with the correct way to do it through community input and through working together rather than just shoving things along down the line and forcing us into obligations again, that is the part I have a problem with. All right, sorry, I'll let you, thank you.

3:33:26Speaker 38

Okay, further discussion? Okay, I thought you wondered. We're still on item number eight.

3:33:34Speaker 21

Okay, I wanted to talk about the FEC lease extension.

3:33:36Speaker 38

That's what I thought.

3:33:39Speaker 21

So this is, I just, I want, well, do we have an attorney here?

3:33:47 – 3:34:12Speaker 21

So my prior conversations had been with Mr. Berman and Mr. Saunders about this FEC or multiple FEC agreements. So I want a description of what exactly this is and what it's not and a clarification on any negotiations with the FEC about Atlantic and Dixie and what's going on there with that holdup.

3:34:18 – 3:34:37Speaker 21

Is this a very specific lease? What is this? Because there are multiple FEC issues that have been discussed over the years. There's one that is quite expensive that I think this is not that. Well, it could be. It is that. I've been asking about this for years, and then we go away for a month, and here it is.

3:34:39 – 3:36:30Speaker 32

So Rob McComb, Public Works Director. So this specifically is for 13 bus stops on Dixie Highway between Dixie Highway and the railroad track from MLK North to Alamo Sample Road. So it's for all the fixed bus stops for Broward County Transit. So the existing lease that expires in September was for five years. And I think the escalation clause was 3% to 5% per year. So the last year now is $16,000 a year. So we're going to pay, thankfully, the city attorney negotiated. 20,000 a year for this next year. But I think it's in your backup. Potentially, instead of 20,000 a year, it's going to go to 240,000 a year, which is 1100% increase. The following year, it'll go to 460,000 a year. a 2,400% increase. And it's kind of hard to believe how it could increase so much. So it was just extending a lease that we're following the same terms and conditions we've had for five years. But like Mr. Berman said, if we didn't jump on this and let that lease expire, You know, like you mentioned, there are other leases we have with FEC. There's a concern about the Dixie Atlantic. I get that. And this is completely separate, totally separate issues. But we needed to get this one ironed out because there is such a huge risk that is going to increase in the following year.

3:36:31 – 3:37:05Speaker 21

OK. I believe Mr. Saunders wrote me a memo in response to questions about this and other things a year or two ago. And in that memo, it says, FEC proposed to increase the annual rental rate from $15,000 to $207,000 for an interim period, followed by a new annual rate of $414,000. So your numbers are slightly different. It's been a couple of years. But this is that same lease that we're talking about that was $15,000. Correct. And it expired I think in September, right?

3:37:06Speaker 32

Correct, 30 September I think it expired.

3:37:08Speaker 21

Why didn't we wait until this meeting to just bring it to us?

3:37:11 – 3:37:33Speaker 32

Well, I think like Mr. Berman was saying, it has been very difficult to find someone at FEC to discuss, and it's been several years. And so I think when we finally got some people that were in agreement, instead of someone maybe, they left again, and then whoever decided that maybe we could do it another year for a reasonable amount, we would lose the opportunity.

3:37:34 – 3:37:59Speaker 21

So, I mean, I sense that frustration in the memo that I had years ago, but this is just another one-year agreement. It's not really a resolution. Correct. This issue. One year. So this is another, like, Band-Aid or kick the can down the road, and we still have that threat of a $400,000 lease overhead. So this is not resolving it. This is just saying, okay, they gave us one more year, and it went up, what did it go up, 33% or something still?

3:38:02 – 3:38:24Speaker 21

I'm frustrated about this because I've been asking about it for years, and we go away for a month, and it ends up on an agenda here without us having the chance to discuss it. And this one didn't have an August deadline. This was in September. So could it not have come to us in September? If we had passed it today, would that have been a problem with the timeline?

3:38:26Speaker 32

No, if, like we're saying, if that was still a good deal.

3:38:30 – 3:38:42Speaker 21

But if it was a good deal when it was signed by, you know, two weeks ago, I don't think it's going to, my commission is on a recess for the next two weeks. It'll get on our next commission agenda. I mean, is that that difficult?

3:38:43Speaker 20

Well, I don't know. Withdraw.

3:38:47 – 3:39:16Speaker 21

What? Okay, so the answer to this one is this is the lease that I've been asking about, that has been on my mind. There is no backup in here, which is part of why I, there is no additional anything. There's three pages here of the lease, and even the memo that was written years ago talked about the lease, and that's not updated or in here. So this is a one-year extension at a 33% increase, and no resolution to the additional years, whether it's going up to 200 or 400,000.

3:39:18Speaker 21

So we're still negotiating?

3:39:21Speaker 32

Yes, absolutely. We don't want to pay that $240,000. Right.

3:39:25 – 3:39:37Speaker 21

Well, I thought there were, I mean, look, it's a negotiation, so I don't know where the leverage is here, but signing this, I guess, just buys us another year, but okay. Thank you.

3:39:39Speaker 38

All right. More of the discussion on the items.

3:39:43Speaker 21

Oh, there's a motion?

3:39:45Speaker 38

Yeah, there's a motion to approve.

3:39:47Speaker 21

This is the item eight.

3:39:48 – 3:40:16Speaker 20

Okay, wait, before the motion, I wanted to go back. I know Berman said that we've already signed the contract and we've already submitted. Is there any way, Mr. Berman, you can look into withdrawing the contract or see what are the ramifications of withdrawing it at this point?

3:40:17Speaker 36

Which contract would you be speaking of? All of them? One of them?

3:40:21Speaker 20

No, no, just the air park.

3:40:29 – 3:41:13Speaker 36

I suppose we could contact the FAA and let them know that the contract was not approved and risk losing all of the money that we need for the tower. I mean, I think there's a risk involved. I don't know how you can undo a contract, because honestly, the city manager had the legal authority to sign it at the time he signed it, and that's the problem. You're basically creating a breach in legal potential liability, especially if the funds have been expended or forwarded, but there's some issues. that you create that really risk losing the money and also let alone credibility of the city for future grants from FAA.

3:41:13Speaker 20

So it should be okay to just look into it. It doesn't hurt to look into it, right? So what was the exact date that the contract was submitted? Do you know?

3:41:23Speaker 36

I don't know. I know the date. I signed my portion for my certification, but the date the contract was signed, I could take a look.

3:41:34Speaker 43

Yeah, well, you signed on August 20th.

3:41:40Speaker 38

Pardon? Kerwin, I'm saying you signed on August 20th.

3:41:43Speaker 43

It's when you returned, yes.

3:41:45Speaker 20

August 20th. So it had to be submitted after August 20th, after he signed, right?

3:41:50Speaker 20

Do you have the date the city manager signed?

3:41:53Speaker 43

It was much earlier. Same date? Yes, it was not the same date. It was a little bit earlier. August 4th? August 4th, yes.

3:42:00Speaker 36

August 4th. I returned on the 19th and executed mine, I believe, on the 20th.

3:42:09Speaker 20

Okay, I see, okay.

3:42:10Speaker 36

But that wasn't approval of the agreement. That was just certification that the city was authorized to for certain purposes.

3:42:20 – 3:42:32Speaker 20

Okay, well, I just, I don't think I need a motion, but I just would like for you to look into the withdrawal process of it and just get back with us and kind of give us an update on that. That's it.

3:42:32Speaker 38

Okay. All right.

3:42:36Speaker 20

All right, thank you.

3:42:37Speaker 38

Pretty good. Nothing further? Let's go ahead and call the roll. What are we voting on, item eight? Item eight.

3:42:47Speaker 43

Commissioner Fezzik?

3:42:50Speaker 38

The mic is off. Commissioner Perkins?

3:42:51Speaker 20

Okay, so we're voting on number eight.

3:42:56Speaker 20

But I have no problem voting for the Ultimate Sports Park. Not there yet? No.

3:43:02Speaker 38

That's not where we're at. treat them individually.

3:43:05Speaker 20

On item eight.

3:43:07Speaker 38

That's what I'm saying.

3:43:09Speaker 49

You want to carve out the air park part of item eight?

3:43:11Speaker 20

Yes, I want to carve out the air park.

3:43:12Speaker 21

You would need a motion, I assume. Yeah. Yeah, that'd be separate.

3:43:16Speaker 20

Yeah. The attorney's correct. Can we separate it and vote separate, two votes?

3:43:21 – 3:43:45Speaker 36

You could vote on these separately if there's a motion. You can vote on all of them other than the air park if it's carved out for approval. You know, it depends on the motion, but you can look at each one of these individually or just do all the football ones in one shot and then do the FEC one and then do the air park one individually.

3:43:45 – 3:43:56Speaker 20

So I'd like to make a motion that we vote separately for the youth program or the youth sports and the air park.

3:43:57Speaker 38

Separately. About the FEC?

3:43:59Speaker 20

Separate as well. All three then.

3:44:01Speaker 38

So three separate votes. Votes, yes. One for FEC, one for the Air Park, one for the Youth Sports Conference.

3:44:07Speaker 26

Yes, exactly. Second.

3:44:08 – 3:44:50Speaker 38

That's your motion. Yes, that's my motion. We're all seconding. And moved and seconded to separate the items to vote for the youth sports contracts in one motion, the FEC lease agreement in a separate motion, and the air park grant in a third motion. Moved and seconded. Is there any input from the public on this item? Please come forward. Name and address for the record. I'm going to caution folks. We're staying strictly to this motion. We're not talking about your park. We're talking about this motion.

3:44:51 – 3:45:23Speaker 17

I am so glad you clarified that for me because I was going to say, man, I fully do not think that folks understand. Oh, no, that would be insulting. I'm just inquisitive as to the full ramifications of all this stuff going on in here. Because a lot of this stuff is costly and it does not seem to matter here. But having said that, that's all I needed to say. Okay.

3:45:23Speaker 38

What was your name and address?

3:45:28 – 3:45:52Speaker 17

My name is Edward Warfield Phillips, Jr. I currently reside at 384 Northwest 19th Street. I've been away from my business all day in an effort to try to support a friend of mine that we have never gotten to yet. And as soon as his issue comes up, I am leaving, and I would thank y'all for your service that y'all are going to continue to do here today. Thank you, sir.

3:45:52Speaker 38

Next speaker. Anybody? Please don't be shy. Name and address of the record.

3:46:04 – 3:48:19Speaker 34

Clinton Mueller, 1080 Northeast 28th Avenue in Pompano. Just real quick, would you guys be willing to grant me 60 seconds to summarize what we as a neighborhood were looking for? Would that be acceptable to everyone? Is that all right? Because you had questions about what we were specifically asking. Go ahead. Thank you very much. We are asking for a Part 150 survey. We are asking for that first and foremost to be done. We are the only air park in the area that does not have one. We are asking for two separate 7480 measures, not one, two. One, to basically potentially raise it to 1,000 feet. And yes, to the gentleman's point over there, it will be a heavy lift because of the competing airspace with FXE at 1,000 feet. The other 7480 is to actually expand out to the east and the west, avoiding the residential communities in Commissioner Fezzik and Commissioner Perkins' district. Taking that and then going west and going around 95 during that turn when you're going that way, and then going on east, going out over the Atlantic and coming back. By doing that, you avoid in its entirety 80% of the residents that are in here complaining about this situation today. And in regards to the tower, the tower, just so that you guys know on that one where the major contention is, is yes, the ATC preferred tower two, not tower one, because the LOS angle, which is line of sight, was superior from two than one. The other thing was they never considered a midfield site. They never considered it because they disqualified it by saying that they couldn't cross an active runway. It is not a runway, it is a taxiway. The taxiways have been crossed all over this country repeatedly by ATC members, including utilizing golf carts to be able to take care of that. That is what we're asking. We're asking for a position at the table just to have our voice heard, guys. This is something all of you can get behind. I hope now everyone's clear on what we're asking you guys for. Thank you very much.

3:48:22Speaker 38

Further input from the public. Just name and address the record, and please try and limit your comments to the motion.

3:48:33 – 3:49:37Speaker 49

Marilyn Demartini, 1110 Northeast 27th Avenue, Pompano Beach. I'm very happy that you have heard us and understood that this air park issue has been ongoing and needs to be addressed as a separate issue. And we're pleased that you recognize that this form that needs to be filled out is multipurpose, that the location of the tower is another thing, and that Kimley Horn has been repeatedly used as a consultant for the city of Pompano Beach. And we just question whether one consultant company can give us the diversity of opinions that we require. And when you have 950,000 coming from the FAA, 250,000 coming from FDOT and then additional enterprise funds. Are we designing the Taj Mahal? Like this is a working tower. And I appreciate that the city and the presidents will have input. Thank you.

3:49:38Speaker 38

Good. Further input from the public? Seeing none, public input closed. Thank you. Further discussion?

3:49:49Speaker 18

Repeat it, please, Mayor.

3:49:50 – 3:50:08Speaker 38

The motion is to consider this item in three separate motions. The first would be the youth sports contracts. The second would be the FEC lease. And the third would be the air park. So we would need three separate motions to approve them. Would that be the way to do it, Mr. Berman?

3:50:09Speaker 38

Okay. All right. So that's the motion. So first we have to pass this to be able to do that. Gotcha. Thank you. Any further discussion? Vice Mayor.

3:50:16 – 3:50:31Speaker 21

Sorry, just a clarification. Was the third one with the air park item to vote on it, or Commissioner Perkins had asked Mr. Berman to go back and look at whether she could rescind her vote on that? So are we voting on that, or is... No, that's...

3:50:32Speaker 36

My assumption is the motion is you're voting on all three, the first group separately, then the second one and the third one all separately, voting to ratify the approval.

3:50:42Speaker 38

Okay. That's it. So that's it. So we're all clear on what we're voting for right now. Okay. Let's go ahead and call the roll.

3:50:55Speaker 43

Commissioner Perkins.

3:50:58Speaker 43

Commissioner Sigurdsson-Eaton.

3:51:01Speaker 43

Commissioner Smith?

3:51:03Speaker 43

Vice Mayor Fournier? Yes. Mayor Hardin?

3:51:05Speaker 38

Yes. Is there a motion? Mr. Perkins?

3:51:11Speaker 20

Motion just passed.

3:51:13Speaker 38

We need a motion to approve the youth sports.

3:51:16Speaker 38

The first one. To ratify.

3:51:17 – 3:51:28Speaker 20

Yeah. Make a motion to approve the, ratify the sports, youth sports, I don't even know where it is on my paper. I'm getting tired.

3:51:29Speaker 38

So your motion is to ratify the youth sports contracts? Yes, yes, yes, yes. Okay, I'd second that.

3:51:39 – 3:51:53Speaker 38

I second. Okay, so we've got a motion on the floor to ratify the youth sports contracts. It's a motion, so is there any input from the public? Thank you. No public input. Commission discussion. Commissioner Fessick.

3:51:54Speaker 26

Thank you. Just one question. Mr. Harrison, where was this? Can you tell me where this was budgeted and approved as this contract?

3:52:04Speaker 29

I'm sorry. I didn't understand what you said.

3:52:07Speaker 26

As per the directive, can you tell me where these contracts were previously approved and budgeted?

3:52:14Speaker 29

It would have been in this year's budget that was done last year at this time.

3:52:19Speaker 26

And those contracts themselves were approved?

3:52:20Speaker 29

For the contracts for the football teams and all of the supplies and materials and everything would have been part of the parks and rec budget that you all approved.

3:52:32Speaker 26

I think I'd like to see some resolution with the team before I ratify this, but thank you.

3:52:40Speaker 38

Okay. Further commission discussion?

3:52:43 – 3:53:03Speaker 21

vice mayor well mr mr moore is there so i guess i'll ask the question it's so this agreement says that there's no compensation from the city no compensation but we we spend a lot of money on youth football correct so again scott moore parks and recreation

3:53:05Speaker 37

Correct. This is not that.

3:53:10Speaker 21

Can you clarify what this is since it's not that?

3:53:13 – 3:53:41Speaker 37

This is an agreement with the Booster Club to help with expenses regarding the football and cheerleading program. They raise money for... Extra things that happen, which could be jamborees, homecoming, trophies at the end of the year, they help with our total costs. So there is no expense to the city and no revenue to the city from these contracts.

3:53:42 – 3:54:03Speaker 21

So it's not really budgeted for. This is not our programming, our recreational programming for youth tackle football. I mean, the first thing it says, where is the Parks and Rec Department operates and administers a youth tackle football and cheerleading program described here. So that cost and what we budget for that is not what this agreement is.

3:54:03 – 3:54:27Speaker 37

correct again just to be clear this is this was on this is 100 my fault so i just wanted we're going through all this stuff i wanted to get it done i didn't get it done in july and i didn't want to wait till september so i understand i just want to clarify what it is because this is not like some agreement where we're providing tackle football

3:54:28Speaker 21

No, that. To the Eagles and Cowboys, this is not, we provide that program through our budget and through Parks and Rec.

3:54:36Speaker 21

And we spend a lot of money on that. How much do we spend on tackle football a year? A million dollars?

3:54:40Speaker 37

No, not that much.

3:54:41Speaker 21

Okay, well, all right, so I made that up.

3:54:42Speaker 37

Feels like it.

3:54:45 – 3:55:03Speaker 21

But whatever it is, that's not what this is. This is an agreement between each of the tackle football programs and the city so that they can operate their ancillary club services. Correct. And they can make money to help support the program.

3:55:07Speaker 21

And this within this is something about the noise, music or not?

3:55:13 – 3:55:29Speaker 37

It is in the contract because we've had issues last year when we evaluated everything. That was one of the issues that we had along with concessions, food trucks. There was a number of items that we addressed just to make sure we were all on the same page.

3:55:30 – 3:55:43Speaker 21

Got it. So this is more of the guidelines for the programs or the things that are happening around the football programs on game day. Correct. The ways that they can make money. Okay. Thank you. The commission discussion.

3:55:43Speaker 20

It was just an agreement, right? Correct. Okay. Thank you. I'm good with that.

3:55:48Speaker 38

Commissioner Fessick.

3:55:48 – 3:56:17Speaker 26

So it's just an agreement that potentially will limit certain people from doing certain things. But the issue I have with this is just outside of the budget and approved for, right? If it's a contract agreement, it should definitely be an agreement, fully support that. But this was something that was very passionate, people were very passionate about back in February or whatever it was. And for this to kind of come in, even though I understand the reasoning for it, and I even agree with some of the, you know, putting some parameters in place, this is something that doesn't belong in this agenda item. That's all.

3:56:19 – 3:56:46Speaker 37

I can tell you that we met with the booster club presidents and boards each individually, each of the groups. So it wasn't something that was just forced down their throats and they had to sign or anything. We met with them each group individually and gave it to them to review with whoever they needed to review it with and come back and sign it. So that all happened. And again, just not in the timeframe I was looking for.

3:56:46Speaker 26

Can that be amended?

3:56:49Speaker 26

Their agreements.

3:56:52Speaker 37

Can they be amended? Absolutely.

3:56:53Speaker 26

Thank you. That's all I need to know. Mr. Berman, do you want to chime in?

3:56:56 – 3:57:20Speaker 36

I'm just going to point out it also includes indemnification of the city and insurance requirements, things to protect the city, the residents, and that's what you should have in place at least. Yes, it can be amended if necessary, if both parties agree at a later time and the commission agrees to any amendment. But there are protections in place with these agreements that would not have been there or apparently were not there previously. Thank you, Mayor.

3:57:21 – 3:57:32Speaker 38

good. So there was some urgency to get the get the thing finished because football season was about to start for good. Thank you. Any further discussion on this? Okay, let's call the roll on this one.

3:57:33Speaker 43

Commissioner Fezzik?

3:57:35Speaker 43

Commissioner Perkins?

3:57:37Speaker 43

Commissioner Sigurdsson-Eaton?

3:57:39Speaker 43

Commissioner Smith? Yes. Vice Mayor Fournier? Yes. Mayor Hardin?

3:57:44Speaker 38

Yes. Mr. Perkins, you wish to make a motion?

3:57:47Speaker 20

Yes, I make a motion that we vote on the... FEC lease? Yes, the lease amendment.

3:57:54Speaker 38

The lease amendment for the FEC. I'll second that.

3:57:56Speaker 20

FEC, yes. Okay.

3:57:58 – 3:58:18Speaker 38

All right, there's been a motion to approve the FEC lease amendment, or ratify the FEC, correct? Ratify, yes. Yes, ratify the FEC lease amendment. Very good. This is a public hearing. Is there any input from the public on this item? Seeing none, public input closed. Commission discussion. Very good. Let's call the roll.

3:58:19Speaker 43

Commissioner Fezzik?

3:58:21Speaker 43

Commissioner Perkins? Yes. Commissioner Sigurdsson-Eaton? Yes. Commissioner Smith? Yes. Vice Mayor Fortier?

3:58:28Speaker 38

Mayor Hardin? Yes. Commissioner Perkins, would you like to make a motion?

3:58:31Speaker 20

I make a motion that we ratify the new air traffic control tower design.

3:58:37Speaker 38

I'll second that. This is a public hearing. Is there any input from the public on this one? Please come forward. Let's ratify the grant application.

3:58:50 – 3:59:28Speaker 49

Marilyn Demartini, 1110 Northeast 27th Avenue, Pompano Beach. I left each of you a FDOT license that I'd just like for you to note because the date was May 5th when the air park was considered unsafe. There were exceptions made, but I'd just like you to notice that while you're looking at things overall in the airport because again, You know, for years we've been told there's nothing we can do while there is something that we can do. And I'd just like you to take a look at that license, please.

3:59:29 – 3:59:41Speaker 38

Very good. Thank you. Further input from the public? Seeing none, public input closed. Commission discussion. Okay. Let's go ahead and call the roll.

3:59:43Speaker 43

Commissioner Fezzik? No. Commissioner Perkins?

3:59:47Speaker 43

Commissioner Sigurdsson-Eaton?

3:59:52Speaker 43

Vice President Poitier? No. Mayor Hardin?

3:59:54Speaker 38

Yes. All right. That takes care of item eight. Correct, Mr. Berman?

4:00:00Speaker 38

Mr. Alford? Yes. Very good. Let's take a 15-minute recess. We'll come back at 5.10.

4:01:49 – 4:04:05Speaker 1

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

4:16:54Speaker 38

Finished up the consent agenda. That takes us up to our regular agenda. Item number nine is quasi-judicial in nature. Mr. Berman will discuss the procedures we will use. Mr. Berman.

4:17:03 – 4:18:10Speaker 36

Thank you, Mayor. If anyone wishes to testify on item number nine, they must be sworn in and may be subject to cross-examination by the commission or by interested parties. Individuals who address the commission should state their name and whether he or she has been sworn. City staff will make its presentation first, followed by the applicant or anyone else wishing to testify. Following the concluding remarks of the applicant, the hearing will be concluded and the City Commission will make its consideration. Anyone who wishes to testify on item number nine, please stand at this time. Raise your right hand and the City Clerk will swear you in. do you solemnly swear or affirm that the evidence or testimony that you're going to give will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes thank you very good item number nine is the first reading of an ordinance an ordinance of the city commission of the city of pompano beach florida abandoning the western two feet of a 12 foot wide utility easement located on the east side of northwest 27th avenue on property located at 2690 west sample road providing for severability providing an effective date so moved second

4:18:11Speaker 38

MOVED AND SECONDED FOR DISCUSSION.

4:18:14 – 4:19:13Speaker 5

GOOD EVENING, PATRICIA CHASCO, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. THIS ITEM IS A REQUEST TO ABANDON TWO FEET OF A 12-FOOT WIDE UTILITIES MAN LOCATED ON 2690 WEST SAMPLE ROAD AS SHOWN ON THE GRAPHIC PROVIDED. THE APPLICANT HAS AN APPROVED SITE PLAN FOR AN L CAR WASH TO BE DEVELOPED ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. As a condition of the approved development order and according to the Broward County Traffic Waste Plan, the applicant is required to dedicate the western two feet of the property adjacent to Northwest 27th Avenue to the county as right-of-way. The county has requested that prior to right-of-way dedication, the easement located within those two feet should be abandoned. The Planning and Zoning Board has met on July 22nd of this year and unanimously recommended approval with one condition. That condition has been met. Therefore, staff recommends approval from this commission.

4:19:14 – 4:19:28Speaker 38

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

4:19:29Speaker 43

Commissioner Fezzik?

4:19:32Speaker 43

Commissioner Perkins?

4:19:35Speaker 43

Commissioner Sigerson-Eaton? Yes. Commissioner Smith? Yes. Vice Mayor Fournier?

4:19:41Speaker 38

Yes, thank you very much. That ends our quasi-judicial proceedings. Item number 10 is an approval.

4:19:47 – 4:20:09Speaker 36

Approving and authorizing the award of ITB 26-032 for the Ultimate Sports Park to the lowest responsive responsible bidder, Shift Construction and Development Inc. in the amount of $6,590,000 and authorizing the proper city officials to execute the contract as provided in ITB 26-032. So moved. Second.

4:20:09Speaker 38

Moved and second for discussion. Good evening, Mr. or afternoon, late afternoon, Mr. Siropoulos.

4:20:14 – 4:20:58Speaker 44

GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR, COMMISSIONER JOHN, CITY ENGINEER. ON APRIL 6, 2026, THE CITY OF POMPANO BEACH ISSUED INVITATION TO BID NUMBER 26-032 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW ULTIMATE SPORTS PARK LOCATED AT 212 NORTHWEST 16TH STREET. THERE WERE 13 BIDS. SHIFT CONSTRUCTION SUBMITTED THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE AND RESPONSIBLE BID IN THE AMOUNT OF 6.59 MILLION, WHICH ALIGNS WITH THE ARCHITECT'S ESTIMATE. ADDITIONALLY, ENGINEERING HAS HAD PRIOR EXPERIENCE WORKING WITH SHIP CONSTRUCTION ON SEVERAL PROJECTS WITH POSITIVE RESULTS. ACCORDINGLY, STAFF RECOMMENDS AWARDING THIS PROJECT TO SHIP CONSTRUCTION IN THE AMOUNT OF $6.5 MILLION, $5.9 MILLION, WITH A CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE OF ONE YEAR. THANK YOU, AND I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

4:20:59Speaker 38

VERY GOOD. THANK YOU FOR THAT. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANY INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC ON THIS ITEM? PLEASE COME FORWARD. NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

4:21:14 – 4:23:02Speaker 17

Mayor, Commissioner, city staff, my name is Ed Phillips. I currently reside at 384 Northwest 19th Street, Pompano Beach. This project is right down the streets from my house. So two concerns I have. One is there was some time ago where anytime there was construction of this magnitude in and around the area there, we would ask for a goal of 18% African Americans to be working. That was that time. So as you proceed, should you approve this tonight, I would like to see our request that African Americans, and he has nothing to do with this particular part here, African Americans are involved significantly in that project on the workforce. I would request that should you proceed. The second part here is that hopefully, This gentleman and the things that, this is the area of expertise, and I support his area of expertise, because he's been doing this for a long time, helping kids. I would ask that you give us all some idea of the timeframe, should you award this, that this project would begin, because if I recall, this was part of a bond initiative that I helped approve, and that's been some years. And so I do know the longer it takes to start work, the more costly they become. So the concern here, the question here would be, do you have a timeframe by which if this is approved, when you will begin to work?

4:23:02 – 4:23:14Speaker 44

I would have to say by the time the contracts get executed and we go through city permitting and so forth, I would have to say after the new year is realistic that we'd start construction.

4:23:17Speaker 38

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Strapless. Appreciate it. Anything further, Mr. Phillips?

4:23:21 – 4:23:44Speaker 17

Well, again, this is not my area of expertise, but it is right down the street from my house, so I'm always concerned because there's going to be a lot of traffic concerns going on at that time. So that doesn't sound bad to me. If you can stay on that time frame, that really doesn't sound bad to me. But, again, I want to yield. I don't want to say too much because this is his initiative, and I'm here.

4:23:45 – 4:24:04Speaker 38

supported it's just I do have that work concern sure so it says shortly after the new year and it's gonna be about a year for total construction it's correct yes so shortly after the new year and it's about a year for total construction okay I don't have much time I don't guess but I was just mr. mr. mr. Phillips you're finished

4:24:06 – 4:24:20Speaker 17

You know what? I didn't even know I was on the time thing. I thought we were just having a discussion here. Yes, I am through, and I do appreciate, even though it took so long to get to this process, that we are here now, and let's just get it done.

4:24:21 – 4:25:39Speaker 9

Now, sir, go ahead. Just name and address. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, everyone. Yeah, my question is, you know, we speak ultimate. And I've been up here before in front of you just trying to get some clarity at first. But then the project went on and then seemed like it's just been delayed. I don't know the reasons why. But since we're talking ultimate, You know, and Tammy and I, and we work very well together as far as putting things together, and also Mr. Harrison. But one thing we didn't agree on was the field, the turf. And the reason being, we had pros and cons about it. She thought that turf causes a lot of injuries, but... On my experience, it's just the opposite. Correct. And I'd like to see if some kind of way, I don't know if it's included in it or not, we can try to get some turf, because we're talking ultimate, and it's going to be a while if we don't get it now. Everywhere we go now is all turf for kids.

4:25:42Speaker 38

A name, please.

4:25:43Speaker 9

Identify yourself, sir. Joe Ballot, 4821 Northwest 19th Street. Okay, thank you, sir. Appreciate it.

4:25:52Speaker 38

All right. Further input from the public?

4:26:00 – 4:26:13Speaker 10

Skaworski, 1630 Southwest Fifth Avenue. He's correct. Grass, the chances of injuries on the turf are less than on grass. When you're cutting, you can tear up your knees a lot easier.

4:26:14Speaker 40

That's all I got to say.

4:26:15Speaker 10

And it'll just be another park for me to eventually go to. Good. Further input from the public?

4:26:24Speaker 38

Please come forward.

4:26:31 – 4:29:37Speaker 13

Good afternoon, Mayor, Commissioner, everyone. I did speak on this at one of your last meetings, and I still take issue with this procurement. I wanna talk about three things, transparency, fair competition, and the best deal for the city. I understand that the concern has been raised about a delay, but I also wanna caution you that delay is not a procurement method, that it needs to be focused on it being transparent, fairly competitive, and also making sure that the city gets the best deal. Are we awarding the part that the city intends to build? What do I mean by that? Is when you go back to the procurement documents and compare that with what has been promised, what has been intended and what has been discussed about adding to the project after the award, then that removes the possibility of it truly being competitive. I don't wanna lose you in a word, Sally, but the bottom line issue is this procurement process has not been handled with the integrity that this city needs to function in because if additional improvements City purchases Additional contracted contractors are are intended to come in after this award So staff already knows that they plan on doing X but X is not included in the bid Then is it really competitive if you include all items that is intended in the solicitation That's the only way that you can be sure that it is in fact competitive so When you look at the ITB, I'm gonna hit some of my notes. I took the time to write them. It recognizes the importance in section 3.1. It says that the city can waive informalities, but specifically excludes matters involving price, time, and changes in the work. That's not me talking, making up something. That's what your procurement has in section 3.1 of this ITB solicitation. Also, you have Florida statute 255.20 requires competitive award of covered municipal public construction projects and expressly allows the city to reject all bids. That's your authority. That's your right. You can make that decision tonight. But then there's also an attorney general opinion in 2003 Number 29 says a city cannot use a contract modification to avoid competitive bidding requirements that apply to additional work. What does that mean? If staff already knows that the part they intend to bid is not or that that they intend to build is not what they have put in the bid, then it's not fair. It's not competitive. And that's something that this dais has a responsibility to stop from happening. That's my time. Thank you.

4:29:37Speaker 38

Thank you, sir. And your name, your name, sir, for the record, for the record, name and address George rich, 1525 Northwest seven street.

4:29:48Speaker 38

Other input from the public. Seeing none, public input closed. Commission discussion. Questions? Commissioner Perkins, followed by Commissioner Seegerson-Eaton.

4:29:59 – 4:30:40Speaker 20

Thank you, Mayor. So this Ultimate Sports Park has, I think, we've had three bids. So the history is that we received the first bid, I think, in 2019. I think it was from Pompeo. And if I could remember correctly, when the bid was received, he started on the project. He was just a week away from starting the project. And then I was told by Tammy Good that we're going to pull the project from him and we're going to do it cheaper in-house.

4:30:41Speaker 19

That's what I was told.

4:30:43 – 4:32:21Speaker 20

And I think during that time as well, we were talking about adding the, track and field at the same time. So we pulled back and I waited and waited and waited, but when she said we can do it cheaper in-house, the first bid was 6-1, and now we have a bid for 6-5. Now there's a lot that happened in between there, We've gone through a lot with this project and I would love to see transparency. Now, we do know, Tammy, that there was some modifications made. I received it on June 18th for modifying the Ultimate Sports Park. So we were gonna add additional shades and bleachers for the home and away spectators. We were going to add, number two, public address PA system. Number three, electronic school board. Number four, event power and electrical infrastructure. And number five, additional outdoor fitness equipment. Now, when I mentioned this at the last meeting, you said during the meeting that you've already incorporated all of these into the business that received the bid. I'm wondering why is that that way? Do you plan to add these as a change order?

4:32:21 – 4:32:34Speaker 44

No, that's included in the design, in the current design. What was bid? All that's included, and I believe a couple weeks ago, Earl Bosworth and procurement met with you and went over.

4:32:34 – 4:32:47Speaker 20

Yes, we did. Okay. So when the bid was received, BY THE BIDDER. THIS WAS NOT INCLUDED. THIS CAME AFTER.

4:32:48Speaker 44

NO, IT'S INCLUDED.

4:32:52Speaker 20

NO. THIS CAME AFTER. SHOW IT TO ME.

4:32:57Speaker 44

THAT'S WHAT THE MEETING WAS THAT EARL AND PROCUREMENT MET WITH YOU ON.

4:33:01Speaker 20

YOU WEREN'T IN THE MEETING. I WAS IN THE MEETING. IT WAS ME, EARL, AND MARY.

4:33:05 – 4:33:17Speaker 44

CORRECT. All right, so Dr. Good highlighted all those items that you're referencing there on the plans and specs to share with you, to show you that they were included.

4:33:18 – 4:33:31Speaker 20

Okay, so tell me about, and I'm not a track and field person. I mean, I don't know the details about what is needed for track and field. Will we have turf or will we have grass?

4:33:34Speaker 20

Okay, so. Mr. Ballot just said he preferred to have turf. I don't know the cost, maybe.

4:33:44Speaker 44

It's not synthetic.

4:33:46Speaker 20

Okay, so would you prefer turf, you said, right? Mr. Ballot?

4:33:50Speaker 44

No, she's talking about this.

4:33:52Speaker 20

I don't run track. So explain to me about the...

4:34:00Speaker 44

I just want to make sure I'm understanding. Are you referring to the fields or the track itself?

4:34:04Speaker 20

The track itself.

4:34:05Speaker 44

The track is...

4:34:09Speaker 20

I'm up here. I can't hear you. I can't hear you.

4:34:16Speaker 38

He's correct. Mr. Bowler, please speak from the microphone, Mr. Bowler. Thank you.

4:34:19Speaker 20

You can tell he don't want to come up here.

4:34:22Speaker 9

The turf you're talking about?

4:34:24Speaker 9

It has nothing to do with the track.

4:34:26Speaker 20

Okay, so the turf would be inside.

4:34:28Speaker 20

Outside the track.

4:34:30Speaker 20

Okay, got you.

4:34:31 – 4:34:42Speaker 9

And I was just thinking, I don't know if it's been included in there already, the turf. Or they have to be added.

4:34:42Speaker 38

By turf, do you mean artificial turf?

4:34:44Speaker 9

Yes. Oh, gotcha.

4:34:46Speaker 20

So the only difference is the turf, you don't have to at least water it and water it and fertilize it and all that stuff, right?

4:34:53Speaker 9

Yeah, turf is just a permanent design.

4:34:56 – 4:35:10Speaker 20

So tell me about the water. I know when I was at Ely once, you all were saying you were having a situation with the water. On the tracks?

4:35:11Speaker 9

On the grass.

4:35:12Speaker 20

The tracks that you had to go back and forth and get water.

4:35:15Speaker 9

Oh, that was something Tammy and I talked about, a water feed inside of the field.

4:35:23Speaker 9

Rather than have to go outside.

4:35:25 – 4:35:38Speaker 9

And electric. Matter of fact, Blancila just got the same thing done with... Electric feed internally into the field rather than have to run cords and all that kind of stuff.

4:35:38Speaker 20

Got that right. Water feed and the power feed. So your only request right now is just the turf?

4:35:44 – 4:36:00Speaker 9

Yeah. Yeah, that would seem more feasible being ultimate based on, I don't know if it's because of the delay, throwing the thing back up is already in the plan or what. But Tammy and I talked about it, and that's the only thing we really didn't agree on.

4:36:01 – 4:36:30Speaker 20

Okay, all right. So where I am with this, because of the June 18th and all of the items that were added, we've gone through so much with this project, and we definitely want it to be a state of the art ultimate sports park, and there had to be a reason that staff added all of these modifications, which weren't there from the beginning, but they were added later.

4:36:31Speaker 19

You're shaking your head.

4:36:34Speaker 20

So did we have this list when we had Pompeo?

4:36:39Speaker 44

No, during that time.

4:36:41Speaker 20

Did we have this list for Alexander?

4:36:44Speaker 44

Yeah, we did a whole redesign after the pump deal.

4:36:46 – 4:37:03Speaker 20

Can I ask my question? Did we have this list here, the modifications, did we have this list? I have in front of me was Alexander, what is his name? That's his first name and last name. Did he receive these modifications? Yes. Alexander did?

4:37:05 – 4:38:07Speaker 20

Okay. What I would like for us to do is to go ahead and throw all bids out and rebid this again. I think quality is much better than time. It's been a long time. But I want us to get it done right. I'd like for it to be done fair, just, and I'd like for it to have a lot of transparency involved with it. So... I make a motion that we put this back out to bid, sit with Mr. Joe Ballot since this is his track and field and he knows how it work, I don't. Make sure we have everything in place and lined up based on the way he needs to use it or the availability for our children. We don't get the one time to do this. So that's my motion. Second. Thank you.

4:38:10 – 4:38:35Speaker 38

We've got a motion and a second to reject all bids. Well, first, before we start discussion, this is a public hearing. Is there any input from the public on this item? Can I come back up? It's public. It's on this motion. Stay focused on the motion to reject all bids. That's what we're doing. Not the project, the bids.

4:38:36 – 4:39:11Speaker 17

Yeah, Phillips 384, Northwest 19th Street, Pamplona Beach. You know, I'm going to say this. I think, before I respond, Commissioner Perkins, I'm going to say I think you have some information that I don't have, so I'm listening to you in this arena. But having said that... We've been at this a long time, and we got that, what is that skate park that you got over there? We already got that going on over there. That's done.

4:39:11Speaker 21

But there's things we wanted that aren't done, so.

4:39:15 – 4:41:35Speaker 17

Yeah, yeah, but I'm saying that's done. You know, we voted on this some time ago, and we helped take the lead in some cases for that bonding initiative. And we still, I want to use some, some massive choice words but i'm in the arena and that's the other thing i'm going to say i'm not going to be ruled in my requests to give you my opinion because i think the core has has left this arena here but that's a subject for another day so i'm at a crossroads here with what to do with this other than i want us to do something rather than delay because What I've known in my lifetime in our areas, the longer we delay, the less likely it's going to happen. This city is moving right along right now with a number of initiatives. And once again, I'm impressed by saying, Commissioner Perkins, I think you have some information I don't have. So I yield to your concerns in this particular arena. Having said that, once again, I wonder if we could move forward and still address some of these modifications that need to be done. I think that what the question that I hear here is the bidding process and who got the bid and all that. So I do hear that. Y'all iron that out. But in my area, right now, we need this project to move right along because the city is doing an awful lot right now. once again on the state this who ever kisses they need to have some folks in my neighborhood because it makes absolutely no sense to have a project this matter magnitude and i ride by every day and i don't see no people from my neighborhood or anybody working uh... on these jobs you can't you gotta stop telling us you can't find there's too many people around here need jobs that live here that's the point that live here so You've got hard decisions to make. I'd like to see this problem. Again, Commissioner Perkins, I don't know the background stuff, but I still would like to see this project move forward, and let's make these adjustments where we need to make them. Very good. Further public input?

4:41:36Speaker 38

Commissioner Perkins?

4:41:37 – 4:41:54Speaker 20

I understand what he's saying but for me fairness is above time and we just want to see transparency because there's been a lot going on with this project for a while and I'd like for us to just put it out there for the last time and get it right.

4:41:55 – 4:44:25Speaker 47

Thank you. All right, further input from the public. Hello, sir. How are you, Mr. Mayor? Very good. Mr. Mayor, commissioners, for the record, Rod Finer. I'm an attorney with Coker and Finer, 1133 Southeast 4th Avenue in Fort Lauderdale. We are against the motion to re-bid this. I represent Shift Construction, who was the award winner. I'd like to point out a couple of things. At the July meeting when we were there, Commissioner Perkins arranged the same five items saying where they knew. Staff said at that time they were included in the bid set. She said she didn't see it. She wanted a meeting with staff. What you heard today was staff had that meeting with her. Not only did Ms. Good, and you can ask Ms. Good to testify to this or comment on this, I'm sure she would, not only has she said at the last meeting in July, but then at the meeting with Ms. Perkins while she was not there, you heard the city engineer say she highlighted on the plans all the information, the five items or six items, except for turf, which was not part of the bid specs. Nothing here is saying change the bid specs, change the plans to include turf, not grass or anything else like that. So when you're talking about fairness and transparency, what are you doing? Was everything included in the plan specs that people bid upon? The answer from your staff is 100% yes. Everything that was bid on was in the plan specs that everyone had a chance to bid on. Staff has said that. They said that at the July meeting. They highlighted it at the individual meeting with the commissioner, and they said it again here today where Ms. Good was nodding her head yes. So in terms of, oh, they're adding things differently or they're trying to do an end run around it, which is one of what the other gentleman said, that is just 100% basically untrue. The specs are the specs. Schiff bid on the specs. You want to talk about transparency? Schiff was the low bidder. This was a bid. The law on bids is if you're the low price, you get the award. That's what a bid is. It's not RFP. It's not this. It's a bid. SHIFT was a low bidder. It is entitled to have the award. And while the city does have discretion to throw out all bids, there has to be some type of legitimate reason for that. What we've heard here today, with all due respect to you, Commissioner, is there's not a legitimate reason and a legal reason to throw out all bids. The specs were the specs. The specs haven't changed. Shift was the low bidder. It should be given the award. Thank you. Very good.

4:44:28Speaker 20

Mary, can you come up, please? Go ahead. Go ahead.

4:44:30Speaker 38

Go ahead. Sure. Okay. Thank you.

4:44:35 – 4:45:35Speaker 13

Yeah, thank you. Thank you, Mayor. So the gentleman that just left said that it is law to award the lowest bidder. Well, that's incorrect. It's not law. That would be a matter of procurement. Law is that this body has the decision and the authority to throw out bids. it's not just about whether the spec docs included items it is are there items that are intended that are not included in the spec docs and instead of going back and forth why don't we take the enhancement list that tammy goode emailed to earl bosworth that eventually made it to commissioner perkins and throw the designs on the screen and have staff point out every single enhancement on the revised design documents. And if you find mayor, vice mayor and commission that there is any discrepancy, that's your evidence and proof right there. So through to staff, through the mayor, where are the design documents and compare it to the enhancements?

4:45:36Speaker 38

What'd you name for the record, sir? Sir, your name and address.

4:45:42Speaker 13

Georgia Ridge, 1525 Northwest, 7th Street.

4:45:46 – 4:45:57Speaker 38

Thank you. Further input from the public? Seeing none, public input closed. I think Commissioner Perkins has a question. No, no, no, go ahead.

4:45:57Speaker 20

Chairman? No, no, go ahead. Oh, yeah, we'll let her go first.

4:46:01Speaker 20

I just want, Mary, I just want you to give us, when she's done, Vice Mayor's done, just give us a little rundown of the history of the project.

4:46:09Speaker 21

That's what I plan on talking about, too. Okay.

4:46:11Speaker 38

Okay, go ahead. Vice Mayor, it is then.

4:46:13 – 4:46:45Speaker 21

Okay. So I've been on this board for four years. This has been before us countless times. I remember I was here when we awarded this to DiPompeo years ago. I thought we were moving forward with it, didn't realize that what was happening behind the scenes that this had all changed and that that that contract wasn't moving forward. So did we somehow reject that contract or go back to that contractor and say, here's the plans they changed, what's your different pricing, or we just threw that out?

4:46:46 – 4:49:49Speaker 8

Good afternoon, Dr. Tammy Goode, Mayor, Vice Mayor. So just to give you all a little bit of background on the project, initially this was a Go Bon project that was managed by the Go Bon team. And they solicited this project initially via an RFP or an RFQ. And they had chosen De Pompio Construction. At that time, I believe the cost came in somewhere around a little over $6 million. And there were some shortfalls with funding. And I think that was right around the time COVID hit, et cetera. And so Greg asked me to look at the project to see if we could do some value engineering And I felt like, not that we would do it in-house, but I felt like we could redesign it to add a lot of the additional items that the community had asked for and actually competitively solicit for bids and get a cheaper price, in which we did. So we, in fact, doubled the scope. We doubled the building, the concession building. We doubled the parking lot. We added all of the track and field amenities. And the reason the turf is natural grass is because we have this entire lot, lot line to lot line, some pervious or rather impervious landscape material. And our zoning code just doesn't allow us to put any more impervious material. So we had to go with natural grass. So we terminated the contract with DePompio once we redesigned and added double the scope. We then knew that we obviously, as the gentleman was speaking up here, you can't add scope and it'd still be transparent and competitive to all. So we doubled the scope and read re-advertised the project as an RFQ. And at that time, another contractor was selected via the committee, but it was determined that there were some issues, not informalities, there were some formalities that precluded them from being awarded the project. So we had decided at that time to re-bid it. We did not add scope, we didn't do anything to the plans between the second bid and the third bid. We re-bid the project. This time we did it as an ITB to take out all of the bias, to not put the pressure on a panel to select a contractor. We rather selected the invitation to bid a complete competitive process, and we wrote the qualifications that would align with the scope that would be required of this project. And at that time, the current contractor that we would like to award it to was deemed the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. And we are just a few hundred thousand dollars more than the original cost from 2019, with double the scope.

4:49:49 – 4:51:27Speaker 21

OK. So my memory is a little different on some of this, because I was sitting on this board when we awarded this to DePompeo. and then i remember there was a whole discussion about turf or artificial turf or natural grass we had a whole debate about that up here and then the scope started growing with adding a track so this has all been post covids and then i don't so this has been since 2022. And at least some of this is. Some of it has. Sitting here when we awarded it. And I didn't know that when that scope changed that we had pulled the bid back. So I guess it sounds like that was... DiPompio no longer had the project. Yep. And then... I know we went out with an RFP or an RFQ in the fall because we would get the updates from Earl Bosworth and at one point I had a spreadsheet and it said ultimate sports park recommendation to award to, I think it was, what's the name of the company that did the pickleball courts? Alexander. So the spreadsheet says recommend award to that. And there's a ranking. And Schiff is on that. There's a bunch of companies. Something happened there. And we met and talked about this when it was on the agenda the last time, that this ITB, something changed in the scope of this somehow. No, no scope changed from the RFP to the ITB. So then how do we throw out all those bids if nothing is changing? Vice mayor. Yeah, how do we get from here to here if nothing changed in the project?

4:51:27Speaker 44

So, right, there was a protest. There were two protests.

4:51:33Speaker 20

Mayor, I just prefer for the procurement person to explain that process of it rather than these two are, what's your job title?

4:51:42Speaker 44

City engineer?

4:51:43Speaker 20

Engineer. Rather than engineer explain the process of what happened, I prefer someone do it like Mary who's from procurement that would know the details. Thank you.

4:51:53Speaker 38

Let's have procurement. What's the difference? Let Mary talk about the procurement side.

4:52:01 – 4:54:14Speaker 22

Thank you, thank you everyone. Good evening, Mary Ribeiro, procurement. So I think I'm gonna basically say probably the same thing they were gonna say. So we did go out to bid as an RFP. There were two protests, two intent to protests of which one became a formal protest. And after reviewing the protest, I met with Mr. Schiff and I met internally and discussed with legal and other staff members. And it was a decision made by the city to go ahead and reject all bids for that solicitation. And that's why originally what you're talking about, that spreadsheet that I make for the commission, our initial recommendation was to award James Alexander. This was a solicitation on RFP and he had been given the highest points and he was also, in addition to being qualified as the most, with the highest points, he was the lowest bid in addition to that. So after the protest, it was decided by staff to reject all bids. And then engineering came back and changed it from an RFP to an ITB. Though the designs, I believe, remain the same, I'm not really detailed on if anything was added. I don't believe anything was added from when it was an RFP to an ITB. though there were some changes in the qualifications, the minimum qualifications, but I believe we kind of squared that out to make it even. I didn't want to have an ITB that had more requirements from a perspective of experience or past projects, so we kind of made it even to ensure it wasn't a prime that was required, just as the RFP was not a prime requirement. So we made some changes to make sure that it was fair to be the same way as the RFP. It went out and the solicitation as the ITB, the lowest responsive and responsible bidder is shift construction.

4:54:15 – 4:55:19Speaker 21

OK, so I don't remember if you were in the meeting, I think you might have been, when we talked about this. I know John was there before in July. And I said, what was the difference between the RFP and the ITB? And it seemed to me that the answer was, oh, we tighten this up a lot and we change. It sounded like there were changes that made it slightly different project and tightened everything up and now I'm hearing nothing about the actual scope of the project changed. The design drawings, absolutely nothing. Okay, so we rejected all bids and went out with the same exact project again and shift bid both times and somehow because basically the price came down almost five hundred thousand dollars so i thought something came out of the project how does the same company bid nothing changed and it's their bid is 450 or 500 000 less than it was before is that just from the benefit of seeing the other pricing

4:55:20 – 4:56:09Speaker 22

Correct, that is common when there's a solicitation and it's public, everyone gets to see the prices. It's unfortunate at times where there's a disadvantage. I know that was also a discussion that we held internally to see if there was any type of disadvantage from that price that the prior awardee or we had recommended. had given the lowest price. So basically, in efforts to bring out a solicitation as an ITB, it was unfortunate everybody saw the pricing and the good thing for the city is that all the prices for all the vendors went down considerably. In the case of Shiv, he was number five and now he went from five to one and he's being recommended for award this evening.

4:56:10 – 4:56:45Speaker 21

I was really under the impression that something else had changed in terms of the project for us to throw out bids and go back out with the same exact project. I don't under, I guess. So it sounds to me like, like I said, I remember awarding this before and never being told that whoever we, that DiPompio, who we awarded it to, was somehow not doing it and then I remember seeing a spreadsheet awarding it and now we Came to us in July and I asked was this different and it sounded to me like the scope was different So I was like, okay But now I'm hearing it's not any different. So we've I

4:56:48 – 4:57:25Speaker 22

So just to make a clarification point too, it's important to know because someone said that it was the law to award an ITB. An ITB for the city to award an ITB, the vendor that is being awarded must be responsive and responsible in that order. That is what the law is. There is no law that mandates any city, any agency, You must award anything. There is a document and it's written all over our solicitation everywhere that says the city has the right to reject all bids for no reasons at all.

4:57:26Speaker 21

For an ITB and an RFP? For any solicitation.

4:57:29 – 4:58:30Speaker 22

I remember going through this on the Paris Bridge when- Language that is embedded in our solicitation as a city and it's used for protection across any organization. And I have been actively in protest law with DOA and no judge can force you to award. Obviously, if there was issues with the procurement or there were other types of issues, of course, then you have to look at those things, but the city holds the right and it's written everywhere. That's not what I'm suggesting we do here. We're making a recommendation to award it to Shift Construction. They were the lowest responsive responsible bidder and they've won fair and square. But no one can force anyone to make an award or not make an award. The city holds that right. And I'm not an attorney and I guess maybe Mr. Berman can elaborate on that.

4:58:31 – 4:59:40Speaker 21

Okay, so like everyone here, I want to get this project done. This is one of the remaining Geobon projects, but going through the history here, I am very frustrated that what I had believed is not actually the case. It gets to this... We need to fix some of our procurement processes, Mr. Byrne, and we need to reject all bids as a board. We need everything to come to us, whether we're going to do it or not, like awarded or not, we need to know what has happened. And that didn't happen in multiple procurements in the last couple of years that have created confusion and at least the look that we're not doing it transparently. And then I'm also hearing that now we want a turf field, not a sod field. And all the other fields we've done have been turf. So if that's the case, we probably should have fleshed that out. And then I'm frustrated now trying to understand why we threw out a process that showed everyone everyone's pricing. And now, I mean, yes, it's good that we have a lower price product, but it doesn't seem very fair. Thank you.

4:59:41Speaker 38

Very good. Commissioner Fessick.

4:59:45 – 5:00:08Speaker 26

Thank you. I just have a couple questions so that I'm clear about this. So it was mentioned that there was a formal protest. I'm going back through the same line. Maybe it's better for Ms. Rivero from procurement to explain this. What was the formal protest itself? What is that process as per our procurement annual or our process in general?

5:00:09 – 5:02:24Speaker 22

Thank you, that process is written out in our procedures manual. And by law, there are specific things that have to take place after there is a recommendation to award. The statute states you have 72 hours if a vendor wishes to file an intent to protest, of which we had two vendors for the RFP file an intent to protest. Shift Construction was number five, and the second one that filed the protest was the second one, which was MBR. They both filed an intent to protest. I met with both of them. MBR dropped the protest, and after meeting with Shift Construction, they decided not to drop the protest. They filed a bond with a formal protest. It was reviewed. I believe there were five points of which they made regarding they did public records, et cetera, et cetera. And after meeting internally, I think we all agreed that the best route for this would be to reject all bids, to making sure that some of the questions, because on this RFP, the committee had rated the lowest bidder and the most qualified, which was James Alexander. They had given him the highest scores. After we began researching, we identified some technicalities on their responses to their references from the work they had done with other cities of which shift brought to our attention and I believe there were five points of which four I felt comfortable that they were technicalities minor technicalities that I have the ability to I did not know if we were to go to court, how long this would take. Would we win? I know we don't have, and Mr. Berman confirmed here, we don't have the expertise on the protest law. We might have had to hire external counsel. It could have taken another two years with DOA just to get an appointment with DOA. I mean, it takes eight to nine months just to even see the judge for the first time.

5:02:28Speaker 22

DOA, it's the Office of Administration

5:02:34Speaker 36

Department of Administrative.

5:02:36 – 5:04:05Speaker 22

The Department of Administrative Hearings for protest law. Yep. I'm sorry. So that is what our procedures language says basically. So internally we all agreed that it would be best, we did meet with the commissioner, Earl and I met with the commissioner when we decided to reject all bids back then. She did ask me to ensure that the same qualifications requirements that were in the RFP would also be available in the ITB. And that's why I worked with Dr. Good to making sure that it was equal. I didn't want to have additional requirements that would, we had 15 vendors, which was a great turnout. It's great to see that competition. So I didn't want to limit the pool. So we wanted to keep the same requirements which we did. And then we did have another significant amount of vendors respond. It was actually, they were very, very close. All the vendors were, peanuts away from each other was literally $20,000, $30,000 between one after the other after the other. It was a huge competition amongst all of the vendors, which that's good for the city. So after we decided to reject all bids, we went back out to bid as an ITB. We found Shift to be the lowest responsive and responsible bidder.

5:04:07 – 5:04:27Speaker 26

Thank you. Secondary question for that, what's the difference, so if it was an RFQ, right, and then it, who made the decision to change it to, scopes are the same, and who made the decision, and what are the difference between RFQ, essentially, and ITB as they apply to procurement? Like, I know what the acronyms mean, but.

5:04:28 – 5:06:57Speaker 22

So you mean an RFP, not an RFQ. Sorry, RFP, yeah. So an RFP is your request for proposals. Okay. Technically, when you're doing an RFP, you have a prescription is how I like to describe it. So you're looking at requirements, specific, very prescriptive requirements of a project, and obviously it incorporates the price factor. But the price isn't the most important thing. It could be the least important thing. You could have 100 points where you're going to evaluate that and you might have the price being 10% of the 100. Therefore, it's very subjective. It's used for large projects because price is not the only thing. An ITB, on the other hand, is more commodity driven. You're going to get a landscaping company to cut the grass, and they're going to charge you $10 a square foot per grass, and then it's commodity driven. To answer your question, I don't really know who made the decision to go from an RFP to an ITB. As the procurement director, I can tell you that I tried to get involved in kind of giving the recommendation to whether it should be one or the other, but technically... The departments already know how they wanna structure the solicitation. We incorporate the scope of work into the solicitation. We don't always agree. We try to come to terms. I can tell you that there's no rule that says that because you did an RFP, you must do another RFP. So legally, we are allowed to do an RFP, an ITB, and we could have really done anything. But I think, as Dr. Good said, maybe eliminating the subjectivity, though in this case the subjectivity did yield a different vendor. than the one being uh chosen today so you know the itb is just solely on price solely on price and obviously they must have met the minimum requirements which were to have done three projects of similar size and scope and then i guess one final question related to that in your you've done this you said for like 30 years no nobody wants to add those to years in general um but in your experience

5:06:57 – 5:07:27Speaker 26

this level of a ultimate park, in your experience across any city, across any project, this level of scope of work, where does that generally land if you just took everything else away and you just said, hey, I'm looking at this park and it could be in Kalamazoo, right? What would that generally be in your experience from a procurement standpoint with all other voices aside? Where would that land? in an ITB or an RFP?

5:07:28 – 5:07:59Speaker 22

So I'm gonna give you the answer that the city has done. I'm not gonna give you my opinion, but the answer will be with what the city has done before I got here. The skate park was an RFP. These were RFPs. The city has done either an RFQ that in turn yield a hard bid, but first on the qualifications, not on price. All the other ones were RFPs. I'm just giving you the facts. Not my response.

5:07:59 – 5:09:01Speaker 26

Thank you, I appreciate that. So, I mean, look, Commissioner Perkins, I know I have sat there, and again, heard this for a while. This is very important to the community and I remember hearing about it being a Go Bond thing. I know that it's kind of gotten kicked down the calendar a little bit. But when it comes to something that we truly use and I know Mr. Moore is going to probably appreciate this, Parks and Rec has to fight for cash all the time as a department. And so for this to be something that we do right, I would think that price isn't the only objective here. I think that actually it makes sense that you would want somebody with quality work and of course get the best price we can, but that's how we have done things as a city for ages. The scope of work didn't change. I'm a little confused, so I'm just gonna defer to you, I guess the public, and your input based on it's your district. Thank you.

5:09:07 – 5:09:23Speaker 20

Mary. Mary, you were just saying that, you would think the two of them are procurement. You were just saying that you don't know how and when it changed from an RFP to RFQ. Did you just say that?

5:09:24 – 5:09:37Speaker 22

No, it's not that I didn't know when. I know that when we decided as a group to reject all bids when it was an RFP, it was then later decided to come and to do an ITB. Right.

5:09:38Speaker 20

But you don't know who changed it to the ITB. I didn't. Well, you did, Tammy.

5:09:43Speaker 1

Collectively with my team, yes.

5:09:46Speaker 36

Go on the mic. Yeah.

5:09:48 – 5:10:22Speaker 8

As Mary indicated, to take the subjectivity out of it, we decided to go with an ITB, which is my, I'm a fan of ITB, Southeast Six Terrace Bridge, Charlotte J. Burry Center. Tonight we have another item that will come before you that was an ITB. So typically, if I'm up here asking for you to approve an award, it was probably the delivery method chosen would be an ITB. I feel like that gives the city the best value at the lowest price. And of course, as Mary indicated, we ensure that the contractor is not just responsive, but responsible, and that alludes to their qualifications.

5:10:23 – 5:11:20Speaker 20

Okay, so I... There have been so many twists and turns in this project, and I'd just really like for us to get it right. I really don't care who's awarded the bid. I just want it done right. I want it done with transparency, so there's no questions, and I'm not questioning my district about all this stuff. I was just questioning about it Saturday at my breakfast, and I'm like, I just want to get it right where I feel comfortable talking about the process was done there with transparency. So I do believe in learning from your mistakes. We've made some mistakes with this project several times, and when we put it back out there to bid this time, we know what not to do and how to do it correctly without there being any doubt. So this should have been handled like any other bid that we have in the city.

5:11:20Speaker 19

Just with transparency and fairness.

5:11:23Speaker 20

So I'd like for us to put it back out and do it again so that there's no questions and it's a clean, clean bid.

5:11:35 – 5:12:44Speaker 21

Thank you Okay, I've got a voice mayor and then I've got Commissioner Smith Thank you, this is giving me flashbacks to the southeast 6 Terrace bridge situation where Engineering is now deciding what? method we go out and bid with and then they are almost single-handedly deciding responsiveness and responsibility even when it is very clear that a bid is not responsive. When a form isn't filled out, when they're missing half the documents they need to submit, when they didn't even look at a site, there's no equipment, there's no completed projects going to responsibility also. Being strong armed into these situations where engineering, I guess I didn't realize that you were picking the bid method too. We're picking the bid method and then deciding who is responsive and responsible. It does not seem like the job. It seems like the job of procurement at least to determine responsiveness and the type of bid. So that gives me a lot of concerns about this.

5:12:47Speaker 38

Commissioner Smith.

5:12:51 – 5:13:18Speaker 23

On the protest that happened with the RFP, I don't know if you can tell us what the protest was, but the protest issue, whatever that was, did that get removed from the equation by going to the ITB? Is that why we moved to the ITB? whatever was going on with the protest is now removed and we're just going lowest bid?

5:13:19 – 5:16:16Speaker 22

No, no, the protest, there were some issues as an example. So the requirement, you have to have a bid bond and a performance bond and it has to equal the amount of the bid amount. So one of the vendors, for example, and I'm just going to be very generic, one of the vendors bid $6.5 million and their letter for the bonding was up to $5 million. That's a technicality where you pick up the phone and you say, hey, are you only bonded up to $5 million? then there's a problem because you can't afford this. Or, oh, that was a mistake. We can change it, and we'll get the revised document. So there were five items that were brought to our attention. One, I think, was that it didn't have the original stamp of the bond company. a copy it wasn't perforated just again things that at my level i have always had the authority to consider technicalities whether they should be waivable obviously weighing things price time you know i don't make these decisions in isolation either because at the end of the day if i'm going to wave something it has to be uh discussed with the user department and I've had several examples where we've done that and we've made a decision collectively. So the protest had nothing to do with the fact that we chose to do an ITB. Nothing of the protest. whether it could have been an RFP or an ITB because the protest was based solely on documents that may have been missing. Another one where didn't disclose any legal documents Any current legal issues where you had to disclose it? Did the vendor disclose it? No, they failed to disclose it. Do you want to go ahead and get that information from the vendor after the fact? Our bids have it written all over that we can pick up the phone and call and request and review and research and do all these things after the fact. So again, that's really at the procurement's level of whether we want to do technicalities or not. But I think there was a point where I felt that we could not just solely ride this solicitation on technicalities, that it had to be rejected. And that's when we made the decision collectively to reject the bids and had nothing to do with what was chosen after the fact as a new solicitation. It could have been another RFP. It could have been anything else. It didn't have to be an ITB, but it was an ITB.

5:16:17Speaker 23

So the five items that protest was based on, you did not find them waivable?

5:16:25 – 5:17:15Speaker 22

One, only one. Out of the five, I felt one. I wasn't sure how a judge would rule on that one, so I made my comment. The other four were waivable, simple technicalities that have, in my opinion, they don't make a difference. There's a terminology in law, and maybe Mr. Berman can help me, where if it doesn't materialize, you can waive them, but I felt that one of those, I wasn't confident that I can stand in the position to say, no, I know we're gonna win. And I really never lost a protest with DOA, but I didn't want this to be the first either. So I think we all agreed that it would be best to reject all bids.

5:17:16 – 5:17:32Speaker 23

So if we reject this bid and we request that we go out for an RFP and the same people bid, would we have the issue of another protest?

5:17:34 – 5:18:13Speaker 22

So that's a great question and that's, we can be here three months from now having another conversation that we wanna throw out another bid because either something went wrong or we didn't like the vendor or something. I can only make a recommendation. that if it is the will of the commission to go back out to bid, that there would be specific guidance and that we have a broader committee that would be deciding the fate of who gets this bid.

5:18:14 – 5:18:31Speaker 23

And one final question, this is probably for you, Dr. Good. I've heard talk about artificial turf for the football field, and you're saying that we can't do it because of our code, because it would be too much artificial on the property?

5:18:31 – 5:19:47Speaker 8

Correct. And actually, I'm sorry, Mr. Ballard, to put you on the spot, but this is the very first time that I'm hearing about him being disappointed or disagreeing that we had agreed on natural turf versus the artificial. But regardless, we are not able to do it per our zoning code. We do not meet the pervious versus impervious. And if I could, just for edification, I would like to just clarify the delivery method and why I chose the invitation to bid. When we have, as Mary indicated, 10, 15 bidders of which are highly qualified, you know that when we competitively bid a project such as this, which is fairly simplistic, that we're getting the best value from qualified contractors. Going via an RFP, we're ranking them. It's a committee of people, and it is, as Mary mentioned, not based on price. So I feel very confident that because we had so many bidders shown interest in this project and we're all within very few dollars of each other that we got a very good price, competitive price, and delaying this project, putting it back out to bid, whether it's an ITB or an RFP is only going to increase costs and delay the project. Thank you.

5:19:48Speaker 23

Thank you. Thank you, Mayor.

5:19:50Speaker 38

All right. Commissioner Fessick.

5:19:52 – 5:20:04Speaker 26

Thank you. So, Ms. Rivero, can you just, again, your title is procurement director, correct?

5:20:07Speaker 22

Yes, so far. Okay.

5:20:09 – 5:20:34Speaker 26

And so it's in your job description to basically make these decisions for us as a city and adhere to our procurement manual, correct? Yes. And so it's your authority, based on the reason why we hired you for your professionalism, to be able to guide us as a city or as departments to what you feel is the best for the city?

5:20:40Speaker 26

Thank you. Oh, I'm sorry. And that is in your job description, right?

5:20:50 – 5:21:40Speaker 26

Dr. Good, the part that I know that Vice Mayor brought up that she had some issues related to the park, sort of heartburn from the bridge project. I have some heartburn related to a couple other projects we've had along the way. One of them being the parking garage and different sort of what I felt at the time was sort of either an overstep or an intertwining of worlds, which as far as I've understood it, the procurement director and the procurement department sort of exists to create that area where there is that fairness and that transparency and there's that buffer zone of interaction so that we can be almost independent and do things in a way we can check off the list. Are procurement decisions part of the scope of your job description?

5:21:42 – 5:22:03Speaker 8

Well, when you say procurement, selecting the project delivery method is part of my job description. We're the subject matter experts, so we would choose the project delivery method. Procurement scope is to check for the responsiveness, to make sure all the I's are dotted, T's are crossed, everybody's transparent, following the cone of silence, et cetera. But there is a scope of procurement that is under our purview, yes.

5:22:04 – 5:22:25Speaker 26

Okay, and is there a specific reason why, in your opinion, right, because you said you made the decision, why you chose to change the process when every other park we've done has been an RFP for this one to be an ITB when the scope didn't change?

5:22:25 – 5:23:01Speaker 8

Well, I wouldn't say every other park that we've done. The Charlottebury Connectivity Park that's under construction right now was an ITB. I chose the ITB again to take out the subjectivity because we had protests. I just didn't want to put that burden pressure on a committee of people and there be outside pressures. So what way to be more fair and transparent than to do a solicit via a competitive solicitation utilizing an ITB? And it takes everything out of it except for cost and qualifications. And it turned out to yield a lot of bids. And you are...

5:23:05 – 5:23:49Speaker 26

You are capital improvement plan manager? Correct. Okay. I wanted to be sure I understood what the scope of work with everybody was because I have probably the same questions for the next agenda item. And so that's why I had both job descriptions printed off. And I don't see, this is so you can make, you know, INTERNAL POLICIES, BUT I DON'T SEE ANYTHING RELATED TO PROCUREMENT IN ESSENTIAL DUTIES. IT JUST SAYS KNOWLEDGE OF PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES. BUT THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE STAYING IN OUR, WE GET TOLD TO STAY IN OUR LANE A LOT, AND SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE DOING THAT FROM A CITY STANDPOINT AS WELL. THANK YOU.

5:23:52Speaker 38

I GOT VICE MAYOR.

5:23:54Speaker 21

THANK YOU. MS. RIVERO, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU. IS IT YOUR JOB TO DETERMINE

5:24:07 – 5:25:25Speaker 22

It should be my job to determine responsiveness and responsibility, both. But here, prior to my arrival, the practice is different. So I know that it was agreed upon maybe a year and a half ago in a meeting where we were all in the meeting. including the city manager, attorney, city clerk, that it was agreed that specifically with engineering projects, they would determine the responsibility. So when I start a project, when we receive the bids, we make sure that we've crossed all the boundaries teased out of all the eyes of what was required. And then we initiate the reference process by sending out a document to the references. And then we communicate with engineering and ask them if they want to call them because from a Kona silence perspective, they shouldn't be calling anyone. So we do it collaboratively. Sometimes We'll call together, or I've been in situations where John has asked me, well, let's call them to make sure that they're qualified, et cetera. So they do participate in the responsibility aspect.

5:25:26Speaker 21

Responsiveness. Responsiveness. They filled out the form correctly, submitted everything they were supposed to.

5:25:31Speaker 22

That should be me.

5:25:32 – 5:26:23Speaker 21

Okay. And I assume that is to keep... bias out of the process. Procurement is supposed to be an independent process that we can trust. And it is put out, everyone has a fair shot at it, if they submit the right Documents that we have requested then we go from that and we make sure they're qualified at least with an RFP and then decide what to do so I'm getting the sense around here based on these bids and some and the second one on here also and my experience from a couple other procurements that that's not really what's happening and that worries me and that's part of why we went down this path with the Six Terrace Bridge and Ms. Rivera, did you determine that the six terrace better general asphalt was responsive or did engineering?

5:26:26Speaker 22

That was engineering.

5:26:28Speaker 21

Did you have a different opinion? We're not talking about that today.

5:26:34Speaker 22

That ship has sailed.

5:26:36 – 5:26:59Speaker 21

That's all I need. I'm not going to ask you that. That's all I need to know. So if I'm to trust the process, we have to keep the trades and the departments out of it. If you need an expert on something, then yes. But the next bid, I mean, not to jump ahead, but the letter says that it's from Tammy, and it says she determined responsiveness and responsibility in the next one.

5:27:00Speaker 3

There's a letter that says it.

5:27:01 – 5:27:44Speaker 21

That's the next item. Anyway, it's the next item, but it's the same thing that's going on here. And then one other thing that was just said by Dr. Good that bothers me is it's always this threat, right? Oh, you do this and the price will go up. Well, we bid this again and it went down. No, it didn't. And one bidder went down almost half a million dollars, and the other bidder went, I mean, everything went down at least $100,000 or more than $100,000 total because everyone knows everyone else's pricing. So the idea that if we go back out to bid that everything will go up, that threat, doesn't seem to be true if nothing changed in the scope here between the RFP and the ITB. Thank you.

5:27:44Speaker 38

OK. Mr. Siropoulos?

5:27:48 – 5:28:16Speaker 44

Yeah. You got something you want to add? So yeah, I'd just like to clarify that per our procurement manual, we, engineering, the using department, determines responsibility. The procurement department determines responsiveness. In my 15 years here, we have always selected the delivery method. Most of the time, it's always been ITBs. That's it.

5:28:16 – 5:28:27Speaker 38

Okay, thank you. I've got Commissioner Perkins and then Commissioner Sigerson-Eaton. This is on the motion to toss it out.

5:28:27 – 5:28:50Speaker 20

So there's plenty of blame to go around, and I don't want to personally point the finger and blame anyone. As I can say again, I just want to see transparency. But, you know, we're just going back and forward and back and forward and back and forward, and I think everybody is kind of getting the idea of what has transpired and whatever, so I'm just ready to move forward and call the vote.

5:28:50Speaker 38

Go ahead. Okay, Commissioner Seegerson.

5:28:54 – 5:29:14Speaker 18

Except I'd like to weigh in a little bit too. So, well, first of all, let me say that for so many meetings for so long now, Commissioner Perkins, you have been so concerned about this project

5:29:15Speaker 20

I'm concerned about all my projects.

5:29:17 – 5:30:06Speaker 18

Yes, I know. Every last one of them. And I believe it was brought out from what y'all said that the bids were very close and that everyone was qualified, responsive, and responsible. It was very close, it was very competitive. And... Again, this is something that we have wanted to get done for years. And then we had all the add-ons. And the extra, I think it was like the gold bond handed at like four and then COVID hit and then prices were through the roof and we've gone out to bid. Now, I don't know what the, I mean, I've heard, go ahead, John.

5:30:06 – 5:30:26Speaker 44

Yeah, no, I was gonna say the other reason we chose the ITB method was to compress the schedule as well. Because had we gone with the RFP, then you're back out there for a month, then you have to assemble a panel, then they have to review the solicitations and so forth. doing the ITB also expedited it in addition to taking out the subjectivity.

5:30:26Speaker 18

And so with the procurement process, you have a panel of people.

5:30:33 – 5:30:48Speaker 18

That review their portfolio, I assume, their questionnaires, I assume. You do background on other projects they've done. You call around, you ask around, right? Is that right, Mary?

5:30:51Speaker 22

that you mentioned, the calling around, and that's the reference and that's the responsibility part. That's not the responsive part.

5:30:59 – 5:31:22Speaker 18

Well, how did the first time around, and since we had the protest, how did that go? I mean, why did that fall through the cracks if there was an unqualified or non-responsive or non-responsible firm that ended up making a bid. How did that happen? Was that you? No, so that's a great question.

5:31:23 – 5:33:27Speaker 22

So as an RFP, there is no such thing as responsive and responsibility because the solicitation calls for the review of all the documentation and the committee has been granted that authority to review the documents and to make the determination and to evaluate based on the solicitation requirements. We did review the requirements and part of those requirements in specifically with the RFP with the lowest bidder and the one that was chosen by the committee as being the most qualified after the bid, the intent to protest came, one of the references, and I believe it was the city of Miramar, they had told us that yes, they confirmed to us the reference of that bidder or that vendor that did the work for that amount of money. When engineering creates a requirement that says you must have three projects of same or similar scope and same price, you're expecting that when they give you those references and they said, we did a $5 million project with the city of Miramar. which is what I think that requirement was. When we check with the city of Miramar, because we have it in writing, the city of Miramar says, yes, this person, this vendor did a great work, they did the project. After the fact, it was identified that that specific vendor was a sub, which was okay, because it was not a requirement to be a prime, but they hadn't done the $5 million. They had only done 30% of the bid. And that is what then was determined after the fact. After the fact, but the committee that was reviewing the solicitations, we told them that they were qualified because we got the references. It wasn't until after. So all of a sudden you have, you go from- I would say that's a pretty good reason to protest.

5:33:27 – 5:33:58Speaker 18

And I think it's a pretty good reason to put it out for re-bid because what they told you was not truthful. Would that be one way to characterize it? And that is why we rejected all bids. Correct. Okay. Well, I want to see this project off the ground. I'm not going to support throwing all bids out for whatever it's worth. The people in that area have been wanting that park for a long, long time, and it's been promised and promised, and here this is going to delay it God only knows how long. Did you want to add something, John or Tammy?

5:33:59Speaker 18

All right. So that's where I stand. Thank you.

5:34:02Speaker 38

Okay. Further discussion on the motion to throw it out. Seeing none, let's go ahead and call the roll.

5:34:13Speaker 43

Commissioner Perkins. Yes. Commissioner Sigerson-Eaton. No. Commissioner Smith.

5:34:19Speaker 43

Vice Mayor Fournier. Yes. Mayor Hardin.

5:34:21Speaker 38

Yes. All right, it takes us up to item number 11 is an approval.

5:34:28 – 5:34:55Speaker 36

approving and authorizing the award of ITB 26-001 rebid for South Riverside Drive and Atlantic Boulevard stormwater improvements to the lowest and responsible bidder to ENCO LLC in the amount not to exceed $4,797,170 and authorizing the proper city officials to execute the contract as provided in ITB 26-001. So moved. Second.

5:34:55Speaker 38

Moved and second for discussion. Dr.. Good good afternoon.

5:34:59 – 5:36:02Speaker 8

Dr.. Good CIP manager this project consists of installing a stormwater system including a pump station as identified in study area 13 of our 2013 stormwater master plan the geographical area that this project consists of is or encompasses a South Riverside Drive and south of Atlantic Boulevard from Southeast 2nd Street, traversing all the way down to Southeast 10th Street. In April, 2026, we competitively solicited this project via an ITB and received, I believe, 11 bids. The lowest responsive responsible bidder is ENCO LLC in the amount of just about $4.8 million. This project is also funded with state revolving funds. At this time, staff recommends awarding this project to ENCO. Also, I'd like to add that they have completed previous projects for the city successfully, and they're an excellent contractor. And that concludes my comments.

5:36:03Speaker 38

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

5:36:11 – 5:39:22Speaker 10

This is the only reason why I left and came back. Okay, Skrverski, 1630 Southwest Fifth Avenue. There's a few of you that are aware of the Lions Park project and what went on on my block. I'm going to try not to say anything about people. It still bothers me today what happened to me and to what others, and it will bother me for the rest of my life how we got screwed from DBF. thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars. Are there vouchers, at least 100 vouchers right now for people to get car washes? Are there at least now 100 vouchers for people to get their engine cleaned and underneath their motor vehicle? Do you have that ready for people? Probably not. Blacktop surfaces must get redone. If they're damaged, I saw a couple blacktop surfaces, I've already driven this area, This was probably the worst I've ever seen in the history of Pompano Beach, what went on. I'm out tens of thousands of dollars. Giannetti, I would venture to say, has gotten away with at least $150,000 of damage that he never fixed. It was by far the worst. And if anybody up here, you or anybody comments, you were full of crap, okay? You were involved. I heard so many, I'm trying not to name names. I heard so many complaints about certain people. It was so embarrassing what went on. I can't do that to people. I would have quit. I would have stepped down. This wasn't residents last. This was, I can't use the F word, that's what it was to the residents. It was the worst I have ever seen in the history of Pompano Beach, ever. Everybody should be ashamed of themselves for what went on. Now I'm gonna make a suggestion. So I'm the only one that's ever done construction. And I did it for years. We paid a guy $191,000 a couple years ago, and you recall what I said about that. I will be out there for that job every day and pay attention, and I know what has to be done, and I will tell these people what has to be done for $500 a week. That's it. You can vote on it, and I don't want her showing up. I don't want one commissioner showing up. Because I know if a commissioner shows up, she's going to say, look at me on Facebook, look what's going on. This is extremely serious. We had tens of thousands of dollars of losses, and he still has not fixed a lot of stuff. I don't want to hear one comment from you because you really don't know how we all got screwed. And so does somebody else in this room. We were screwed constantly. royally and you cannot do that to people you cannot i will do it for 500 a week and i guarantee you i will do a better job than everybody here that was involved period and if you don't want to vote on it i will ask the city manager because you have no idea how serious this situation was and it'll bother me till the rest of for the rest of my life it's i can't believe people allowed this to happen and they should be ashamed of themselves but you know what

5:39:24Speaker 38

Very good. Next speaker.

5:39:29 – 5:40:22Speaker 13

George Rich, 1525 Northwest 7th Street. I just want to come back up. I was actually about to leave and then I remembered that I did have some comment about this one. This is also an ITB that I believe Tammy admitted that she chose this. But this was actually not the lowest bidder. but according to what's being presented to you, that it is the lowest responsible and responsive bidder, because the lowest bidder was determined not to be responsible, as in their experience wasn't enough. Now this is a storm water project, right? So you recently in your city had a storm water issue. Tammy called that lowest price contractor to come and fix your storm water crisis, but then determined that said contractor was not experienced. That's it, thank you.

5:40:23Speaker 38

Further input from the public.

5:40:30Speaker 11

Good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Commission.

5:40:33 – 5:42:19Speaker 48

My name is James Alexander. I'm the owner of Alexander & Johnson. I'm at 1104 Powerline Road. I was the low bidder on this job, which comes to her bridge. I was here on the bridge. I don't understand. I go to your workshops to find out how to do business with you. the city. I'm very qualified. I can bundle up to $50 million. I do this for 21 years, and I'm deemed not qualified, but you have an emergency break, a sewer line that's 15 foot deep or 16, and your city or engineering utility department calls me to fix it. That's more harder than what this bid is, and we did it in two and a half days, and then they tell me I'm not qualified. I just don't understand. Like, If that's the case, then let's go back to ultimate sports part. It says you have to, the project, you need three projects that are similar. There's only four contractors in the state of Florida that's done tracks. Me, Kauffman Lynn, and Gulf Building, and I can't think of the other one. So I'm so confused of how you be qualified and not qualified and disqualified. It makes someone hard that works hard to get to this level, it just discourages them to even do business with the cities and when the city treats them like that. I just don't think it's fair and that's just my opinion. And I hope I don't ruffle no feathers or make anybody mad, but I'm just stating what keeps me up at night, where I'm thinking, like, why am I not qualified? If I wasn't qualified, my bond company wouldn't give me the bond. Point blank and simple. Thank you.

5:42:20Speaker 38

Thank you, sir. Next speaker.

5:42:30 – 5:44:44Speaker 27

Vincente Thoreau, Pompano Beach. Mayor, this reminds me of my grandfather telling me a story a long time ago about when he was a little kid, how the farmer used to come by and always say to his mama, Oree, you almost out of debt. And he would come by all the time until my grandfather became close to being a grown adult and say, you're almost out of debt. We get sick of always hearing that situation when it comes to black contractors. And contrary to what Commissioner Eaton, you know, Commissioner Eaton, we done been friends for a long time. But sometimes I be wondering, how do you think that everybody has a motive when you used to fight with me on the east side of town with John Racing to make things possible? But I'm saying today that we are tired of being told we almost out of debt. We only got one black contractor, Mayor, that has ever been given a prime contract in this city. And I bet the record would probably show it, we came in count five. Mayor, when are you gonna honor the legacy of your friend, Pat Larkins, and say that you're tired of hearing that we almost out of debt? It's time, Mayor. And honestly, Mayor, I'm gonna be a little personal about this to Ms. Good. Ms. Good, if you can't handle our city in a respectful manner and stop making our Northwest builders feel a certain type of way, you need to step aside. It's either you or it's gonna be somebody sitting in this chair up here. I'm done with it, Mayor. This is not gonna end with me. We are done with it, Mayor. We done been friends a long time, but I'm tired of hearing that we almost out of debt. and you never have heard me come up here and tell you this, but Mayor, it's just that serious. It's just that serious. A young man comes and he gets and does it the right way, and we can't even get a city attorney to step up and say, you know what, stop messing around with it. If it weren't for Pat Larkins, you wouldn't even be there right the other day, too. You wouldn't be there, and you can look down all you want to.

5:44:45Speaker 36

Well, I'm not looking down, mister.

5:44:47 – 5:45:02Speaker 27

Yeah, because you know. And everybody up here know his legacy. What are you doing to keep it? And I'm tired of it, Mayor. We better than this. And we will not go down saying we almost out of debt no more.

5:45:04 – 5:45:17Speaker 38

Very good. Further input from the public? Seeing none, public input closed. Commission discussion. Mr. Fessick.

5:45:18 – 5:45:43Speaker 26

Thank you. I want to just ask Mr. Berman. I brought it up briefly when we had, at the very beginning of our meeting, audience to be heard. I have some questions, and I don't want to get into litigation questions. So I know that we're talking about having a shade meeting. I would even, is there a possibility to table this until our next commission meeting so that we have the time to get the information we may need or to make a decision?

5:45:48Speaker 26

It is, I did look, and the address of the individual who showed up is on the map of this particular project as well?

5:45:56Speaker 8

The scope of work will take place adjacent to the property, but we will not be impacting that property that's currently under litigation. It's completely separate. It has nothing to do with that.

5:46:08Speaker 26

So the outfall, everything there that's on the map itself is not going to be affected?

5:46:13Speaker 8

Correct. Not with this project. Okay. Our outfall is to the north of that property. Okay.

5:46:21Speaker 26

Who did the work, just out of curiosity, who did the work around that area?

5:46:26Speaker 8

I'm not sure. I can get that information for you, though.

5:46:28 – 5:47:02Speaker 26

Thank you. And that could be something that we deal with internally as I kind of dig through this, because I have a little bit, again, of some concerns, and because there are residents that have reached out, and it's not just one, it's several. We do know the stormwater is bad in this area. It's not just the stormwater, it's literally the... just water coming in from the tides. That's right, yep, correct. So I do know these things need to be taken care of, but at the same time, I would like a little bit more information and background, I think, which is the other reason why I'd like to table it. That's all, thank you.

5:47:05Speaker 38

Very good. Further commission discussion? Vice Mayor.

5:47:12Speaker 21

So when I read the memo in the back up here in this one, I was really concerned also.

5:47:16Speaker 20

And then listening to the audience, I can't help but be a little stunned at the feedback.

5:47:26 – 5:50:04Speaker 21

There's clearly more going on here that I didn't realize. There's a memo in the back up from Dr. Good, Mary Rivero, and it says, when you read it, j um alexander johnson is determined not to be responsive or responsible and this is from dr gutt and the responsiveness being turned determined by engineering to me just sounds like a problem and it's over a bond issue have a bond but it's there's no separate verification But then we go down the line and ENCO also has an issue with their bond because it's dated the wrong time, but we somehow remedy that. So it's, I keep going back to the six terrace bridge process that when engineering wants to remedy a bid to make them responsive and responsible, it's because they either, I don't know the reason, I'm not gonna speculate as to why, but then that's what happens. And when maybe they don't, a different process is followed. I put this on you, Mr. Berman, which is why I asked for a memo on the Six Terrace Bridge. That sets a precedent, too. You wrote that memo. It sets a precedent that engineering or whoever can go out and do whatever the heck they want to make a bidder responsive and responsible that clearly was not. And I still struggle with that one. I always will. And this, I don't know what to believe. Did we treat both of these bidders the same? I don't know. I don't know from reading this if we were fair. I can't tell from this letter because engineering's determined one of them not to be responsive, even though it's probably not engineering's job and it's over a bond. But another one, we went back and got more information and they are responsive. Again, this is why there should be, I believe this is procurement's job to determine that. And that's, I think, a precedent that got muddied with the Six Terrace Bridge. And I think we're supposed to have a workshop on procurement at some point a year ago. We never had. getting some of these guardrails like I always talk about in place and these processes working better, where everyone knows their role and there's no overstepping so that people can believe our procurement process, both the bidders and the residents and us, is something we clearly need to work on. This memo combined with what we just saw, combined with the item before, and what I know about the Six Terrace Bridge project has me very concerned about who's running procurement in our city.

5:50:05 – 5:52:33Speaker 36

Thank you. Mayor? Mr. Berman? I'm sorry, if I can respond. Number one, I don't recall my memo stating that that was the right way to do it. My task was to investigate how it was done, and my interview of staff and interview with meeting with Mr. Bosworth and all staff for the bridge project, one party determined who was responsive another party risk determine who was responsible that's the way i was told it was written in our procurement code now in the thirty one years i've been here i have not at least when leader was doing was here uh... i'm just kidding but i i i have not dealt with uh... this amount of uh... bid protest in a short period of time uh... that led me to discuss uh... possibilities with mister bosworth as to looking into the process changing at number one making sure that the bid when you were asking for certain percentage or certain amount of prior experience specify whether you mean as a contractor or subcontractor you know little things that could affected it make sure your bid is going out the way it should be but the other thing was to consider whether one party chooses the procurement method and also checks the references um and goes through i'm not aware and i haven't checked around but we need to see how other cities potentially do this i'm not aware of any other city that that has a split method maybe that was determined to be in our best interest at one time if that's but in terms of the bridge contract to respond to what you said that's what was in the procurement manual that's the way it was handled and that's the way I reported it to you I'm not saying that was correct I'm not saying that's the way it should be done but that's the way that was done and that's the way that those determinations were made I think it's prudent to take a look at our procurement process make sure as you've indicated I'm in agreement with you write it down Get a copy of the video. It never hurts to take a look, meet with our procurement director, meet with engineering, see what other cities do, and let's see if we're doing it the best way that we're doing it. I never suggested that it was the best way. I suggested the review indicated how it was done and why it was done that way at the time.

5:52:35Speaker 38

GO AHEAD, VICE.

5:52:36 – 5:54:24Speaker 21

I APPRECIATE THAT. IT'S 648 ON SEPTEMBER 8th. MARK AGREES WITH ME. BUT I MEAN, THE EVIDENCE AND THE CASES JUST KEEP MOUNTING. AND I DON'T PUT THIS ON Any one department or person? I just think when things are broken, you start to see it, right? It starts spilling out. And we have bidders that are upset. We have commissioners who don't feel like the process is fair. I'm sure we have staff frustrated. And none of that's working. And we all want to get these important projects done in our district in a way that we can be proud of. and feel is transparent and fair. So I do think this is a wake-up call to be looking at these. I don't feel comfortable with this one, and I'm not going to belabor the Six Terrace Bridge, but I think that set a really bad precedent about who was determining what, and yeah, and I just, I think the way that went down, I can't trust any of this, because if only a surety bond, this small thing just makes you not responsive, but and our last fault was responsive on that bridge, and they didn't fill out two full sheets of paperwork. They listed no equipment. They didn't visit the project site. They didn't have a traffic control supervisor there for them. They submitted nothing with it, but they were engineering, or someone was able to cure all of those, was able to cure responsiveness. We have a problem. And then I look at this, and I'm like, it's just the date on a bid, like on a bond. How can, like, that's no big deal. Or this is just a, they didn't, that even had the right data, just there wasn't one backup document. So if General Asphalt was responsive and this company isn't, I don't know how to rectify, remedy that in my brain, and I don't know how to close that gap.

5:54:26Speaker 38

Very good. Ms. Rivera, would you like to add?

5:54:29 – 5:56:26Speaker 22

I would just like for the comfort of the commission, I worked hand in hand with Renuka, our director of utilities, and I would like her to also speak because it is important I'm very vocal about when I think things should be different. And I can reassure you that in this particular case, I personally worked with the engineer of record. Yes, James Alexander was the lowest bidder. And he did, it had nothing to do with the bond. It was simply because the requirement of the solicitation was that you had to have three projects. They presented six. I requested the engineer of record, which was Chenmore, and I worked directly with Renuka because I wanted to make sure that out of those six that they presented, if there was an opportunity for them to make the three because they were the lowest bidders. And I have this in writing. I met with 10 more and they said, Mary, no, they only meet two of the requirements. They only had two projects. That is why they were disqualified. If the scope would have been two projects, not three, they may have been qualified or one project. I don't know. I don't write the scope. I only received a scope from the user department and I incorporate it into the bid template. The reason why the technicality of the number two, which was ENCO, was waived was because it was a scrivener's error. If they would not have provided the bond letter, I would not have allowed it. I would have said, no, they didn't provide the bond letter. And that, for me, is not a technicality. Providing the information and getting clarification is not the same as going out and getting new information. Okay. So for me.

5:56:27Speaker 38

Six Terrace Bridge, new information. Vice Mayor, Vice Mayor.

5:56:30 – 5:57:46Speaker 22

So they did provide it. Yes, they had the wrong date. But again, those are technicalities. I worked closely with Renuka. I don't make decisions in isolation. I've already said that. When I see there's a technicality, what did I do? I approached her. I said, what do you think we should do? We look at the price. We look at everything to make that determination whether it can be waivable. And we determined that it was waivable. I don't know, it was her and I discussing that. So I believe this was completely transparent. There were no issues here despite that there was a protest or an intent to protest and a letter written to the commissioners of all this mumbo jumbo that had no validity because if truly there was a reason for a protest, No attorney is going to give their client a recommendation to drop a protest because they like the city of Pompano Beach. So there was nothing. There were no grounds for a protest, which was evident because there was no wrongdoing other than accepting a change of a document that had a different year. So I have two questions then from what you said.

5:57:46 – 5:57:59Speaker 21

Did you determine that Alexander and Johnson was responsive and not? Were they responsive? They were never responsive because they never had the three. Is that responsible or responsive?

5:58:01Speaker 22

I'm sorry. Yes, they were responsive. Yes, they were responsive.

5:58:05 – 5:58:35Speaker 21

Because the memo from engineering says they weren't responsive or responsible. And what I'm hearing is they were responsive because this bond issue was not an issue because this is a technicality also. But they weren't responsible when you went. And that's what the additional engineering letter said. But yet we have a memo from engineering that says they were neither responsive nor responsible yet. General Asphalt was responsive and I didn't even fill out half of the paperwork.

5:58:36 – 6:00:27Speaker 7

So, Ranuka Muhammad, the Utilities Director. I 100% agree there is procurement issues we have that needs to be addressed. In going through this project, the oversight is done with engineering and procurement, obviously. We are the end user of the product. My responsibility was to make sure going through this that the technicality and the scope was being met. So the engineer of record, Chen Mo, we did request to go back and do a technical evaluation to make sure everything that the responsibility is being met, that the minimum requirements of the bid, that each of these bidders, that we were assured that they met those requirements. Chenmore did go through that process. Alexander and Johnson, I believe, they did not meet the minimum requirements. This specific stormwater project has a pump station, They did not meet the requirements for the pump station requirement. The next lowest bidder, I believe, was ENCO, who had the experience and everything else that comes under that level that we were looking for. So we did work with engineering, we did work with procurement, and we were satisfied that ENCO could meet the requirements. The ITB was selected because it is a SRF project, so it has to be competitively bid. And again, it takes out the subjectivity of everything else. It's just based on price and qualifications. So from the utilities department, the end user who has to have the product and make the product work, we as utilities are satisfied with ENCO. And ENCO, one of the pump projects that they did for the city of Pompano was the Avondale project. So this would be our third pump project in the city of Pompano and with ENCO doing one of them that has been highly successful to date.

6:00:29 – 6:00:55Speaker 21

Okay, so to summarize, both of the top two bidders had some kind of responsiveness issue with the surety bond. One of them we remedied, the other one we didn't, but the top bidder was also deemed not to be responsible, and that's based on working with the engineer of record.

6:00:56 – 6:01:18Speaker 7

So I don't usually work on the responsiveness part. That is with procurement. They have to do the face value of the bid, making sure all the paperwork, the forms, the timing, all of that, the deadlines are met. So that's with procurement. For utilities, we take a look only at the responsible, which is the technical portion. So I would leave that with Mary and with engineering.

6:01:21 – 6:01:39Speaker 21

When I read the memo, it looked like they were both issues with responsiveness relative to the surety bonds, but engineering said that Alexander was not responsive, and even though the date was wrong on what was submitted by ENCO, we went back and got more information and made them responsive.

6:01:39 – 6:02:04Speaker 8

Is that right? So typically, engineering does not check for responsiveness. That is under the procurement. I wrote the letter. There must have been something evident in terms of the responsiveness in addition to the responsibility, which is why I wrote that in my letter or my memo. I believe I also have a subsequent email from Mary regarding the lowest bid or not meeting responsiveness and responsibility. I provide that to you.

6:02:05 – 6:02:22Speaker 21

Okay, I appreciate you, Dr. Good. I wish I could, after the process on 6 Terrace Bridge, I wish I could believe that engineering wasn't playing a role in responsiveness, but I saw it happen. And then when I saw it in the memo here, it was very concerning to me. Okay, thank you very much. My questions are answered.

6:02:23Speaker 38

Very good. Further commission discussion? Commissioner Fessick.

6:02:29 – 6:02:57Speaker 26

Thank you. I just had a quick question related to, so I want to make sure I clarified. So this is for the South Riverside, just so the public, because Riverside is a hot topic right now on the north side, and between paving and infrastructure. So this particular section is just stormwater for South Riverside, south of Atlantic. And this project, from what I'm seeing, is supposed to be completed within, is it 300 days or so?

6:02:59Speaker 8

Yeah, just under a year.

6:03:00 – 6:03:58Speaker 26

Just under a year. I understand the pain points on a lot of these things. I do have some issues with wanting to know some more information about what's going on with the neighboring property, right? But I also know that multiple neighbors have been really, really begging for a solution here. I've seen the pictures and the videos of just the sheer amount of water. And I feel like at this point, it's a daily issue. It's tidal. And as much as I would like to table this, if you're telling me that the property that we're INVOLVED IN LITIGATION WITH IS NOT GOING TO BE AFFECTED BY THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? IS THAT TRUE? THE PROPERTY THAT THE INDIVIDUAL WITH WHERE LITIGATION.

6:03:58 – 6:04:14Speaker 36

THE PROPERTY INVOLVED IN LITIGATION HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS PROJECT. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING IN TALKING TO ENGINEERING AND EVERYBODY ELSE. IT'S AN ISOLATED SITUATION. IT INVOLVED A DRAINAGE PIPE THAT WAS MOVED AND IN PLACE AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT LATER.

6:04:14 – 6:04:39Speaker 26

That's fine. I just want to make sure that that just had your assurance that these were two different things. Okay. And Ms. Rivero, I understand the concept of having two projects as opposed to three. Who set, just out of curiosity, who set the parameters for that, for the ITB, you know, the requirements?

6:04:40 – 6:05:11Speaker 8

That's something that's been in our ITBs for decades. When there's more high profile projects or more projects that are more complex or have unique material or programming relative to the scope, then we may tighten the specs a little bit just to make sure that we We don't get everybody coming out of the woodwork bidding on our jobs, but for the most part, we leave it open enough for everybody to be able to be qualified to bid on our jobs.

6:05:11 – 6:05:55Speaker 26

Okay. And I just want to, just to confirm, if ENCO is the primary contractor, Mr. Sklarski had mentioned he had some pain points with a previous contractor, completely unrelated, but He did mention some things that I thought were important and I do know that he has had some struggles with actually even years later, things sinking and having some major issues there. Do we have vouchers or do we have, what kind of assurances do we have for projects like this for neighbors who may or may not be affected by something that happens, right? Something beyond our control?

6:05:56 – 6:06:22Speaker 8

Actually, I requested on the Lions Park project, I requested the contractor give out car wash vouchers to the affected residents and it worked very well. So I can do the same on this. Hopefully this will take a lot less than the time that the contractor has specified in the bid documents. It's a much, much smaller project. So I don't foresee those kind of issues that we experienced on the Lions Park project that was an entire neighborhood. Very different scope of work.

6:06:23 – 6:06:45Speaker 26

Yeah, I just know that there's that there are some people that are affected on day to day and I and I know that they with the water rising and stuff I think that that would be something that would Make me feel a little bit better about making sure that we are Really working with residents to solve the problem and also make sure that there's some ongoing Participation in ensuring that we take care of them. Sure.

6:06:45Speaker 38

Thank you for the Commission discussion Seeing them. Let's call the roll

6:06:53 – 6:07:16Speaker 43

Commission of peasant yes Commissioner Perkins no Commissioner Sigurdsson Eaton Commissioner Smith yes Vice Mayor Poitier now Mayor Hardin yes All right item 12 is a resolution

6:07:19 – 6:07:33Speaker 36

Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Palmetto Beach, Florida, approving and authorizing the proper city officials to execute a piggyback agreement between the City of Palmetto Beach and Dobbs Equipment LLC to purchase a front bucket loader truck, providing an effective date. So moved.

6:07:35Speaker 38

Dan second for discussion. Good evening, Mr. McConn.

6:07:38 – 6:08:05Speaker 32

Good evening, Mayor, Commissioner Rob McConn, Public Works Director. This asks for approval to piggyback a contract with Dobbs Equipment. We're going to accept the terms and conditions that Dobbs Equipment currently has with the Florida Sheriff's Association. This item was identified in our FY26 capital replacement plan, and the cost is $301,671. That concludes my comments subject to your questions. Thank you.

6:08:05Speaker 38

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

6:08:14Speaker 21

Thank you. It looks like this is about $50,000 over what was in the adopted capital outlay. Where is that coming from?

6:08:23Speaker 31

Well, excuse me.

6:08:25 – 6:08:53Speaker 32

So as you know, we're going through our budget process right now. We have to get these quotes, I think February of last year is when we got the quote. So October 1st, the new contract kicks in. And so there's like a 20 to 25% cost increase. And budget accepts the fact cost may increase, so I think we did add a little bit to it. we can't cover the additional $50,000 for what happened with the new contract.

6:08:54Speaker 21

So where is the money coming from?

6:08:59Speaker 38

That's a good question. Finance?

6:09:05 – 6:09:24Speaker 19

Allison Furtado, Finance Director. Good afternoon, Mayor, Commissioners. We always have contingency when we do our lease agreement, so we bill a contingency for any escalation in prices. Okay, so it's covered by a contingency. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. You're welcome.

6:09:25Speaker 38

The Commission discussion. Seeing none, let's go ahead and call the roll.

6:09:30Speaker 43

Commissioner Fezzik? Yes. Commissioner Perkins? Yes. Commissioner Sigurdsson-Neaton? Yes. Commissioner Smith? Yes. Vice Mayor Fournier? Yes.

6:09:39Speaker 38

Mayor Hardin? Yes. Item 13 is a resolution.

6:09:42 – 6:10:02Speaker 36

A resolution of City Commission of the City of Palmetto Beach, Florida, approving and authorizing the proper city officials to execute a first amendment to the professional consulting agreement between the City of Palmetto Beach and McCafferty Brinson Consulting LLC to incorporate exhibit A1 for additional design phase, construction phase, engineering services, providing an effective date. So moved.

6:10:02Speaker 38

Moved and second for discussion. Ms. Renuka Muhammad.

6:10:06 – 6:12:31Speaker 7

Renuka Muhammad, the Utilities Director. The Utilities Department is requesting approval of amendment number 13, 2, 8, 4 to the professional consulting agreement 12573 with McCafferty Brunson for additional design and construction phase engineering services associated with the city's water treatment improvement plan project. The overall program is being undertaken to position the utilities drinking water system to meet the US EPA PFAS regulation with a compliance deadline of April 2029. The original agreement with McCafferty, Branson, and the city was approved in November of 24, establishing a engineering framework for several major water plant treatment upgrades and rural water improvements. A significant outcome of the work conducted to date saw that the city obtained an increase in the Biscayne Aquifer rural water allocation sufficient to meet projected potable water demands through 2065. As a result, the new flowered-on aquifer reverse osmosis facilities originally contemplated on the task force no longer necessary and is being eliminated from the program. The amendment add task five through 15, adding construction phase engineering for the deep injection well, task five, it's accompanying item after this, corrosion control testing, asset management plan for the new assets, an update to the planning document for RRSP, SRF compliance, design and construction support for the eastern well field improvements and construction phase engineering for phase one of the nanofiltration build out. Each task will require detailed scope and compensation and the consultant cannot proceed without written authorization from the city. Funding will be addressed on a task by task basis utilizing available SRF loans with principal forgiveness, grants, CIP funding and bonds and other appropriate funding sources as necessary. The city will continue to pursue outside funding for those portions of the program for which funding has not yet been identified. The current program is anticipated to extend through approximately December of 2029. Approval of the amendment will maintain continuity of engineering services, maximize available state funding, address aging infrastructure, and support the city's ability to provide safe and reliable potable water through to 2065. That concludes my comments.

6:12:31Speaker 38

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

6:12:42 – 6:13:26Speaker 26

I just had a couple of questions. So when I was looking through the agenda, and I know, just to start, I know we've had extensive conversations about water and the stress of taking on some of these projects with new regulations that have kind of come to you over time. But with this one, 13, you know, so this one it says it's listed as fiscal impact, nothing because we're taking something off but at the same time we're adding a scope of work 5 through 15 and then one of those things is the deep injection well and then in the next item we're dealing with the deep injection well and then and then in item 15 where it's a the

6:13:28 – 6:14:20Speaker 7

contract for Stantec related to well or is it different well I think it's it's yeah so the amendment is just looking at the task at right each task so the original contract the original agreement was task one through four each task we are bringing back to you with a price point for approval so the amendment does not consider price at this point each task will come back for the approval process. So right now the amendment is adding the additional task really on the construction phase on the supplemental components of the nanofiltration to make sure that we meet the 2029 deadline. So you will see task five come before you independently for the deep injection well as task five, which we are going to request approval for.

6:14:21 – 6:14:39Speaker 26

And so, and of course, you know, item 19 is for the actual construction of the well. And then, so for, does, my question is, I guess, what is the total estimated cost of the entire project for tasks, you know, all five through 15? Do we have a number, or a estimate?

6:14:39 – 6:14:56Speaker 7

So we have a planning level cost. It's in the backup. The additional task five through 15 is about $18 million. The total engineering cost for the nanofiltration right now, planning level estimates about $25 million.

6:14:56 – 6:15:18Speaker 26

Okay. And so if we do make this change, are we also going to, like you said, we will be seeing the other things come back to commission? The individual tasks will come back to commission. Okay, great. And how are we paying for all of this? That's the last question.

6:15:18 – 6:15:52Speaker 7

So with task one through four, we did obtain SRF alone with 100% loan forgiveness. So that was 9.9 give or take million. We have also obtained some SRF loans and with forgiveness on the other aspects like the deep injection well. Anything that we currently do not have through SRF funding, through the loan or through a loan forgiveness or a grant, will be put with the bonds.

6:15:54 – 6:16:15Speaker 26

And I know that we had had this conversation. I don't want to put the cart before the horse because I know you don't have final numbers yet. But one of the things I know that obviously won't be handled this budget season perhaps, but since you're in a different, you operate sort of on your own and it's paid for out of the fund that is paid by, for paying their water bills.

6:16:17 – 6:17:17Speaker 26

I would like to maybe just kind of put this on the radar for next year's planning or budget schedule, that we look at ways to help subsidize some of the additional costs that are going to likely be borne by our clients essentially using water for some of these things. Would that be accurate? I'm sorry, can you repeat the question? So I'm concerned about the price of our, for the average user for water and services that is likely going to go up based on the work that needs to be done. And so I'm just putting it on the radar that I'd like to make sure that we try to take a comprehensive look and see what we need to do as a city if we're allocating funds or if we're changing something that maybe we have a longer or a larger conversation about that to make sure that we keep prices reasonable for families while still updating all of the things that we need to update and making sure that the quality stays there. But we may have to have, that's a larger conversation outside of this, but it's a concern because of how much money

6:17:18 – 6:17:42Speaker 7

going to need to spend so we will be working yes with our new great consultant taking a look at our cip taking a look at this project taking a look at regulation everything coming down and yes for a rate discussion in the future yes thank you that's it for the commission discussion

6:17:44Speaker 38

Seeing none, let's call the roll. Sorry, Mr. Alford. Didn't mean to catch you off guard. Sorry about that. Item 13, let's call the roll.

6:17:53Speaker 43

Commissioner Fezzik.

6:17:56Speaker 43

Commissioner Perkins. Yes. Commissioner Seegerson-Eaton. Yes. Commissioner Smith. Yes. Vice Mayor Poitier.

6:18:05Speaker 38

Yes. Item 14 is a resolution.

6:18:07 – 6:18:26Speaker 36

A resolution of the City Commission of the City of Pompano Beach, Florida, approving and authorizing the proper city officials to execute task authorization number five, scope of services to the agreement for phase one concentration disposal deep injection well construction services between the City of Pompano Beach and McCaffrey Brinson Consulting LLC, providing an effective date.

6:18:27Speaker 36

Moved and second for discussion. Ms. Mohamed.

6:18:30 – 6:19:46Speaker 7

Okay, Renuka Muhammad, utilities director. So the utilities department is requesting city commission approval of task authorization number five, the one that you guys, the amendment that you guys just approved, in the amount of not to exceed $1,108,450. Task five provides construction, administration, and state revolving fund compliance services for the water treatment plant improvement projects specifically for the deep injection well number two project, which is a key component of the upgrade. The construction contract is being awarded to Youngquist Brothers under ITB 26-031, which is later on on the agenda. McCafferty Brinson will provide the engineering oversight necessary during construction, along with documentation and compliance services required by the SRF funding agreement. Funding is available from the SRF loans and principal forgiveness programs. Approval will provide the engineering again oversight and SRF compliance necessary to support the deep injection well two project through construction and completion as part of the city's overall water treatment plant improvement program. That concludes comments.

6:19:47 – 6:20:00Speaker 38

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

6:20:01Speaker 43

Commissioner Fezzik. Yes. Commissioner Perkins. Yes. Commissioner Sigerson-Eaton. Yes. Commissioner Smith.

6:20:10Speaker 43

Vice Mayor Fournier. Yes. Mayor Hardin.

6:20:13Speaker 38

Yes, item 15 is a resolution.

6:20:15 – 6:20:40Speaker 36

A resolution of the City Commission of the City of Pompano Beach, Florida, approving and authorizing the proper city officials to execute work authorization number two in the amount of $490,520 pursuant to the continuing contract for professional services and hydrogeological services between the City of Pompano Beach and Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. for construction of a replacement dual zone monitoring well, providing an effective date. So moved. Second.

6:20:40Speaker 38

Moved and seconded for discussion. Once again, Ms. Mohamed.

6:20:43 – 6:22:46Speaker 7

Renuka Muhammad, utilities director. So we are again requesting our city commission approval for work authorization number two with Stantec Consulting Services in the amount not to exceed $490,520 for professional engineering and hydrological services during construction of the city's dual zone monitoring well. The city currently operates a deep injection well at the water treatment plant to safely dispose of concentrate generated by the nanofiltration treatment. The injection well is supported by an existing dual zone monitoring well, which basically monitors groundwater conditions at two depths and is required to ensure that the deep injection well continues to operate safely and in accordance with our FDEP permit requirements. Similar monitoring wells throughout Florida have experienced corrosion in their steel casing, which ultimately results in well failure and require emergency repairs and replacement. In 2022, Stantec evaluated the city's existing monitoring well, and based on that evaluation, the city elected to proactively replace its dual zone monitoring well before failure occurs. Work authorization number two provides, again, engineering and hydrological services necessary during construction for the replacement well, including oversight and documentation, hydrological field services, FDEP coordination, and the preparation of the final well construction and testing report. The construction of the dual zone monitoring well is anticipated to concur concurrently with the city's second to deep injection well, which will be on the agenda later on under ITB 26-031. Coordination of the two projects will allow certain field inspection expenses to be shared, providing for greater efficiency during construction. Funding is available through the SRF loan and principal forgiveness programs, as well as CIP funding. Approval, again, will allow the city to proactively replace this critical monitoring infrastructure, maintain compliance with its FDEP requirements, and continue the support of the city's drinking water system. Thank you.

6:22:46 – 6:22:58Speaker 38

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

6:22:59Speaker 43

Commissioner Fezzik.

6:23:01Speaker 43

Commissioner Perkins. Yes. Commissioner Seegerson? Yes. Commissioner Smith? Yes. Vice Mayor Poinier?

6:23:09Speaker 38

Mayor Hardin? Yes, item 16 is a second reading of an ordinance.

6:23:12 – 6:23:36Speaker 36

An ordinance of the City Commission of the City of Pompano Beach, Florida, approving and authorizing the award of RFP 26-026 to CBiz CPAs PC as the highest ranked proposer, approving and authorizing the proper city officials to execute an independent auditing services agreement between the City of Pompano Beach and CBiz CPAs PC for external auditing and compliance services, providing for severability, providing an effective date.

6:23:37Speaker 38

Second. Moved and second for discussion. Ms. Furtado.

6:23:40 – 6:24:03Speaker 19

Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioner, Alison Furtado, Finance Director. This is a second reading for staff recommendation of the Audit Committee recommendation to approve the agreement with CBIS CPA as our auditors for the next five fiscal year. This concludes my presentation. There has been no changes since the first reading. Thank you.

6:24:04Speaker 38

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

6:24:13 – 6:24:31Speaker 21

Thank you. So I think it was a day or two days after we had the first reading of this, there was acquisition announced of CBiz by Grant Thornton. Did they disclose that, or are we aware of this?

6:24:32Speaker 19

No. I think I was away on vacation, but I haven't gotten any notification regarding that acquisition.

6:24:43 – 6:24:56Speaker 21

So you didn't hear from C-Biz or anyone? No. So the assumption is that, like in a lot of M&A transactions of this size, that they are maintaining their staffing, the same team.

6:24:57 – 6:25:32Speaker 19

Right, I have no documentation of any changes. There's no emails, there's nothing. Does that concern you or not? Not at this time. Because my contract is with CBIS. Until there is a change, just like what happened before when we had Keith, When we came in and did an interest, an amendment to the contract with the new, with their new, with Citroen, it would be the same application. But at this moment in time, I have nothing. Okay.

6:25:32 – 6:25:44Speaker 21

It seems like this space is very active for M&A, and these firms are just getting larger and larger. But the contract is still with CBIS. Yes, ma'am. Okay. Thank you.

6:25:44Speaker 38

You're welcome. Commissioner Fessick.

6:25:49 – 6:26:29Speaker 26

Thank you. I saw that too. I know that we had talked about making sure that we weren't penalizing any companies for doing great work and growing, right? Were we responsive to, I mean, My concern then was also the same. If we're looking at even our procurement contracts from every angle and saying, all right, are we being responsive? Are we being fair? Are we doing things the right way? Do you feel that they, I mean, mergers of this size generally don't happen in two days.

6:26:30 – 6:26:49Speaker 19

Again, nothing was disclosed to us during our negotiation. and they have not changed or submitted any documentation of such change. Until then, I cannot say they have acquired them. I have no documentation, no emails, nothing regarding that acquisition.

6:26:50 – 6:27:09Speaker 26

So my concern is only this, is if we, on other contracts, would... somebody omitted a fact, right, and didn't disclose something that they know to be true, would that, had they disclosed it, would that have disqualified them?

6:27:09 – 6:27:27Speaker 19

No, because Grant thought, well, if they haven't disclosed it, probably yes. But again, there is nothing in writing to state that there was an acquisition in place. And Allison?

6:27:27 – 6:27:57Speaker 21

I can address that if you want. I mean, CBIS is a publicly traded company. You're not going to hear about that until it is finalized. They have ironclad NDAs and stuff, and there will be trading issues. A deal like that, an M&A deal like that won't close for at least a couple quarters. So you would still likely be signing your contract with CBiz and eventually they will be acquired by Grant Thornton, who is, I think, privately held.

6:27:57Speaker 19

Yes, we will take it back to commission for an amendment. They wouldn't be able to disclose something like that.

6:28:04Speaker 26

Right, I just wasn't sure if it was something that had been publicly known or not. No. I don't pay attention in those fields. Thank you.

6:28:12Speaker 38

Very good. Further commission discussion? Commissioner Seegerson-Eaton?

6:28:15 – 6:28:35Speaker 18

Yes, thanks. I just want to add, when this subject was brought up at the last reading, where, again, with the name change, it seemed punitive and prohibitive, where firms did not apply specifically because that clause was in the

6:28:35 – 6:29:03Speaker 19

RFP, so has it been duly noted that, I mean, at least... Grant Thornton has been in business for more than a year, so they would not have been disqualified either. Okay, and it's nothing to do with CBIS. It has to do with other firms who have merged and did not apply. And point taken, in our next five years when we're going through the RFP process, like I stated before, that would be a discussion for the Audit Committee to look at the verbiage in that language.

6:29:03Speaker 18

Oh, the Audit Committee. We have Ms. Fournier here who was on the audit committee. So maybe make a note of that if you're on next year. Thank you.

6:29:13Speaker 21

I think it's five years from now. Five years from now.

6:29:16 – 6:29:41Speaker 38

God save me. Just out of curiosity, on that issue, it was brought up last time, it seems prohibitive for competitive purposes to disallow a company that's had a name change, strictly a name change, to... participate in the bidding process for our auditors. What was the rationale and where did that come from?

6:29:42Speaker 19

It is a standard language.

6:29:44Speaker 38

Standard language from where?

6:29:46 – 6:30:17Speaker 19

for RFPs regarding audit committee. So it's a standard language that we as, for RFPs, that many city uses. So I can't say it was established for GFOA recommended best practices, but I'm assuming it might be best practice. But again, it's something that we can look into and re-examine the language. It's nothing that is set in stone that hey, this is a language we need to use, we can make adjustments to whatever we want to do in our RFPs.

6:30:17Speaker 38

So that language has been in our past?

6:30:21 – 6:30:34Speaker 38

Gotcha. Yeah, it would be interesting to find out where that is. And all the cities has a similar language. Is it recommended by GFOA? Very good, thank you. Further commission discussion? Being none, let's call the roll. Oh, I'm sorry, Commissioner Perkins?

6:30:35 – 6:31:06Speaker 20

Yes, I think I mentioned the last time we discussed this about the five years that's attached to this. And I'm sure you want somebody well qualified, but I think that's a bit much, five years. So there is a lot, if you ask me, that needs to be reexamined in these auditing services. I know, Vice Mayor, you're doing a great job, but just that there are a lot of question marks on this one for me, and I'm not gonna support this one this particular time. Thank you.

6:31:06Speaker 19

What is, can you give me clarity? So you said there is a lot of, can you give me, provide clarity, please?

6:31:14 – 6:31:49Speaker 20

Yeah, you're not gonna change it anyway, but you said you're looking to the language later, but number one, the five years, we need to look into that. Number two, I keep hearing the name change. I don't know whether that's true. And you said you haven't looked into it. We won't know for months or whatever down the road to come. So this is a big, sounds like a big firm that we're dealing with that we have chosen. Yeah, but what is wrong with the five years? I think three years is sufficient. I don't know why we need five. I mean, you want them to be experienced and well-equipped. How long has this language been in place as it is now?

6:31:50 – 6:32:01Speaker 19

Which one, the five years or the language in regards to the qualification of the name change if you change your name within a two years or a three years span?

6:32:01Speaker 20

Has anything changed since you came aboard, been on board?

6:32:06 – 6:32:46Speaker 19

Not the five years and not that particular language. And it's typical for many cities to have a five-year contract for audit services. However, again, your recommendation, we can look into a shorter term. So it's not something that to say, hey, it is not something that we cannot do. Best practice is that we do have someone for five years. But as an audit committee, we can also look into say, hey, instead of five years, we can do three years. There is no restriction on what we would like to see in the RFP. That's what the audit committee is there for. Okay. All right, thank you. You're welcome.

6:32:47Speaker 38

Good. Commissioner Fessick.

6:32:49 – 6:33:07Speaker 26

Would that be something that would be I'm struggling with a lot of these long-term contracts, right, because we touch it one time, five years, and I get that it's best practices. I like to try to find ways where we have, you know, what if we are two or three years in and we...

6:33:08Speaker 19

If we are not satisfied with the contract, we can always terminate. There's a clause in the contract that states that.

6:33:14 – 6:33:43Speaker 26

Right, but the problem is that a lot of times with these contracts, and this is not just for this particular item, this is for multiple items, A lot of times when these contracts, we approve them, right? And then we don't see them again until it's time to renew. There's never that touch point of a sort of like a way that we can track, or the way we have that conversation, are we still happy with the service, or just about anything.

6:33:44 – 6:34:00Speaker 19

And if we're not happy with the services, there are some discrepancies within an audit contract. This is something different from outside of any other contract. It's very specific. If we are having issues with the audit firm, we have the right to terminate the contract.

6:34:01 – 6:34:15Speaker 19

Okay. This is a very restrictive type of a contract or service that the audit firms has to provide to us.

6:34:15Speaker 26

Do we have a timeline in general that we have to... ARE WE, DO WE HAVE TO ACT WITHIN A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME BECAUSE WE NEED. YES. WHAT IS THAT TIME FRAME?

6:34:26 – 6:34:37Speaker 19

NO. I HAVE ONLY SEPTEMBER 30TH IS MY END OF FISCAL YEAR. SO ONCE THIS CONTRACT I HAVE A MEETING WITH THEM TO START OUR PLANNING.

6:34:41 – 6:35:09Speaker 38

I mean, if there was a problem with the interaction between staff and the auditor, staff would make that kind of decision. They wouldn't come back to the commission and say, hey, we're not happy with our auditor, so what do you guys think at the commission? We don't deal with the auditors. I mean, we have interactions with them once a year, but no, staff is the one that would be making those decisions, and it would be a quick decision. It wouldn't linger. They probably wouldn't even take time to bring it to the commission. Very good. Further commission discussion.

6:35:11Speaker 20

Just one question. How many people do you have work in your office? So in the finance department itself? The finance itself.

6:35:20 – 6:35:31Speaker 19

Remember, my finance department comprises of the treasury department, the utility billing, payroll, and admin. I have about 37 staff members, over 37 staff members.

6:35:31Speaker 20

Okay, thank you.

6:35:32Speaker 19

You're welcome.

6:35:34Speaker 38

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

6:35:39Speaker 43

Commissioner Fezzik. Yes. Commissioner Perkins.

6:35:43Speaker 43

Commissioner Singerson-Eaton. Yes. Commissioner Smith. Yes. Commissioner Poitier.

6:35:50Speaker 38

Yes. Item 17 is the first reading of an ordinance.

6:35:53 – 6:36:11Speaker 36

An ordinance of the City Commission of the City of Pompano Beach, Florida, approving and authorizing the proper city officials to execute a lease agreement and a memorandum of lease agreement between the City of Pompano Beach and SELCO Partnership, DBA, Verizon Wireless, providing for severability, providing in effectivity. So moved. Move to add a second for discussion.

6:36:11Speaker 38

Good evening, Mr. Zamoski.

6:36:13 – 6:36:59Speaker 30

Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners, Gene Samosky, CIO. Verizon leases space on our communications tower at 100 Southwest 3rd Street. The current agreement, Ordinance 2114, was for 25 years. That included a 15% rate increase every five years. This current agreement expires this year with an annual rental fee of $41,900, about $42,000. The new agreement will be for 10 years, starting with an annual renter fee of $50,000. The rent will be increased annually by 3%. On this particular tower, we have not just Verizon. We also have T-Mobile and AT&T leasing space on it.

6:37:00 – 6:37:11Speaker 38

Good. Thank you. Good job. Thank you. Increase in revenue. Very nice. Thank you. This is a public hearing. Is there any input from the public on this item? Please come forward. Name and address for the record.

6:37:16Speaker 34

Hi, Clinton Mueller, 1080 Northeast 28th Avenue, Pompano Beach. Just real quick, where's the location of the tower?

6:37:22Speaker 30

100 South West 3rd Street, the BSO main station there.

6:37:29Speaker 34

And is this a 5G tower or is it, How is it structured up and down on that tower there, if you don't mind me asking? Mr. Scaffold.

6:37:37Speaker 30

I am. Well, it's a, imagine a pyramid. Right. You know, with four corners and it's.

6:37:45Speaker 30

Straight up, you know, with metal going across that way and that way. Okay.

6:37:49Speaker 34

And you said it's shared by multiple wireless. If they agree to this, do they have exclusivity or is it still just an agreement?

6:37:57Speaker 30

No, they're just paying for that space. It's like a condo. You're paying for your. Perfect. Apartment.

6:38:03Speaker 34

That's it. No further questions. Thank you very much.

6:38:06 – 6:38:17Speaker 38

You're welcome. Okay. Further input from the public? Seeing none, public input closed. Commission discussion? Commissioner Fessick?

6:38:17 – 6:38:30Speaker 26

It's a quick question. What's the standard like going rate for a market like for that size antenna or in I guess in Broward County? Are we on par with other leases?

6:38:30 – 6:38:41Speaker 30

Yes, I believe we are. So I couldn't find too many that cities that have towers that lease. I did find that the

6:38:44 – 6:39:23Speaker 30

The Florida Department of Transportation has towers going up and down, I guess, to Turnpike and stuff like that. And they collect about $43,000, $44,000 per year. But they have a third party handling their lease. So instead of doing it in-house like we do here, so they only collect 41% of that $43,000. YEAH, THIS IS VERY COMPARABLE TO WHAT OTHER PLACES ARE DOING AND JUST TO, FOR YOUR INFORMATION, THAT IT TOOK A YEAR TO GET TO THIS POINT. SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT WE NEGOTIATED BACK A YEAR AGO, THIS AMOUNT.

6:39:23Speaker 26

THEN THE 3% ESCALATOR, IS THAT, DO WE FEEL THAT THAT'S GOING TO BE A STRONG ENOUGH ESCALATOR?

6:39:32 – 6:40:08Speaker 30

So let's see. Okay, so the previous contract was, like I said before, it was... 15% every three. Yeah, 15% every five years. So let's assume that both contracts, the old one and the new one, started at $50,000, right? So with the 15%, every five years would yield $537,000, and with the 3% annually, it would yield $573,000. The difference is $35,693 more in 10 years if we do it this way.

6:40:08Speaker 26

Yeah, I actually like the year-over-year escalation, especially since they have that six-month clause for cancellation.

6:40:15Speaker 30

That's correct. They could cancel with six months' notice.

6:40:18Speaker 26

Okay, thank you. That answered a lot of questions. Thank you.

6:40:22Speaker 38

Very good, further commission discussion? Seeing none, let's call the roll.

6:40:25Speaker 43

Commissioner Fezzik? Yes. Commissioner Perkins? Yes. Commissioner Sigurdsson-Eaton? Yes. Commissioner Smith. Yes. Vice Mayor Fournier. Yes. Mayor Hartman.

6:40:35Speaker 38

Yes. Item 18 is the first reading of an ordinance.

6:40:37 – 6:40:54Speaker 36

An ordinance of the City Commission of the City of Pompano Beach, Florida, approving and authorizing the proper city officials to execute a fourth amendment to the interlocal agreement between the City of Pompano Beach and Broward County to update the community shuttle service schedules and vehicles within the city limits, providing for severability, providing an effective date. So moved.

6:40:55Speaker 38

Second. Moved and seconded for discussion.

6:40:57 – 6:42:31Speaker 32

Good evening, Mayor, Commission, Rahma Khan, Public Works Director. This is the fourth amendment to our interlocal agreement with Broward County to provide shuttle bus service for our residents, which is provided by Limousines of South Florida. So there's two revisions to the contract, Exhibit A and Exhibit D. In Exhibit A is where we identify the routes, timetables, and schedules for the four bus shuttles. Minor changes, one of particular concern is the Orange Route. We included a stop at Leisureville. In the past, they were provided service by Broward County's, it's called TOPS, I think Transportation Options, which is the, you may have seen the bus around the city. They said they would no longer provide that service. to support Leisureville. So they suggested that we modify one of our routes to stop at Leisureville. So that's the primary, most significant change in the routes. And then exhibit D is just where we identify the shuttles that are used in the contract. We awarded the contract to Limousine South Florida jen i'm sorry july 2025 and it required they provide us new buses so they had to go out and acquire the buses they have they are in service and now we have to make them a part of the contract so those are the two changes those two exhibits and there's no cost change to the city so that concludes my comments subject to your questions thank you thank you this is a public hearing is there any input from the public on this item

6:42:32Speaker 38

Seeing none, public input closed. Commission discussion, questions, concerns? Seeing none, let's call the roll.

6:42:39Speaker 43

Commissioner Fezzik. Yes. Commissioner Perkins. Yes. Commissioner Sigurdsson. Yes. Commissioner Smith. Yes. Vice President Poitier. Yes. Mayor Hart.

6:42:49Speaker 38

Yes. Item 19 is the first reading of an ordinance.

6:42:51 – 6:43:13Speaker 36

An ordinance of the City Commission of the City of Palmetto Beach, Florida, approving and authorizing the award of ITB 26-031 to Youngquist Brothers LLC as the lowest bidder, approving and authorizing the proper city officials to execute the construction agreement between the City of Palmetto Beach and Youngquist Brothers LLC for water treatment plan improvements, providing for severability, providing an effective date.

6:43:16Speaker 38

Moved and second for discussion. Ms. Muhammad, once again.

6:43:19 – 6:45:09Speaker 7

Renuka Muhammad, Utilities Director. The Utilities Department is requesting City Commission approval to award ITB 26-031 for the Water Plant and Treatment Plant Projects Phase 1 to Yonquist Brothers as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder in the amount of $16.925 million and authorize the construction agreement number 13252. The project is an important component of the water facility planned emerging contaminants and includes three major elements, construction of the new deep injection well, number two, construction of the replacement dual zone monitoring well, and plugging and abandonment of the old dual zone monitoring well. The solicitation was issued April 30th, 2026 and closed on June 8th, 2026 with two responsive and responsible bids received ranging from 16.9 million to 18.9 million. Following a comprehensive technical evaluation of qualifications, compliance with project specifications, schedule and references, Stantec Consulting Services, the engineer of record, determined that Youngquist Brothers submitted the lowest responsible and responsive bidder. The procurement and contracts department independently reviewed the bids and concurred with their recommendation. Again, the total construction award is 16.925 million. Of that amount, approximately 11.78 million will be for the deep injection well and will be funded through SRF. Approximately five million for the new dual zone monitoring well and 146,000 for plugging and abandonment. These two will be from the series 2024 water and sewer revenue bonds. Approval will allow the city to proceed with these critical improvements and provide concentrated disposal and monitoring infrastructure necessary to support the nanofiltration expansion. Concludes my comments.

6:45:10 – 6:45:21Speaker 38

Thank you, this is a public hearing is there any input from from the public on this item Seeing none Again put closed Commission discussion questions vice mayor.

6:45:22Speaker 21

Thank you There were two bidders here. This is an expensive project. Is this very specialized work? And what did we expect it to cost? I

6:45:33 – 6:46:04Speaker 7

So yes, it is very specialized cost. And the price came in lower than anticipated. I think we were expecting somewhere close to the $20 million mark. But remember, we tried to consolidate when we went out to this bid for the deep injection well, for the plugging and abandonment of the old well, and then the new dual well. So I think we got the best value by packaging this the way we did, yes. Are you familiar with this company? Yes, they do a lot of this work in Florida. Thank you.

6:46:05Speaker 38

Very good. Further commission discussion? I'd like to point out it's $17 million. No public and very little discussion. It's great.

6:46:15Speaker 21

So it's a big project.

6:46:16Speaker 38

It's a big project. This is only part of it, too. Very good. Let's go ahead and call the roll.

6:46:22Speaker 43

Commission to pass it.

6:46:24Speaker 43

Commissioner Perkins? Yes. Commissioner Sigerson-Eaton? Yes. Commissioner Smith? Yes. Vice Mayor Fournier?

6:46:32Speaker 38

Yes. Item 20 is the first reading of an ordinance.

6:46:34 – 6:47:17Speaker 36

ordinance of the city commission of the city of pompano beach florida approving an authorizing award of itb 26-037 to mayor electric supply company inc the subsidiary of rexel usa inc and rexel usa inc as the lowest responsive and responsive responsible bidder approving and authorizing the proper city officials to execute an agreement between the city of pompano beach and mayor electric supply company inc a subsidiary of Rexel USA Inc. and Rexel USA Inc. for the procurement, manufacture, testing, delivery, commissioning, support, startup assistance, and owner training for substation transformers and pad mounting transformers, providing for severability, providing an effective date. So moved. Second.

6:47:17Speaker 38

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

6:47:20 – 6:49:18Speaker 7

Renuka Mohamed, the Utilities Director. Again, the Utilities Department is requesting City Commission approval to award ITB 26, the pre-purchase of substation transformers and pad-mounted transformers for the electrical master plan phase four improvement project, to Meijer Electric Company, a subsidiary of Rexel USA, in the amount of 2.145 million, and to authorize the execution of agreement number 13251. The procurement is for the advanced purchase of critical long lead time electrical equipment needed to support the Phase 4 electrical master plan improvements. The pre-purchase of the transformers allows the city to secure the equipment ahead of construction, reduce its schedule risk, obtain competitive pricing, and avoid contract and markups on major equipment purchases. The solicitation was issued on April 13, 2026. and the engineer of record, Gamboa Engineering, five bids were determined to be non-responsive because they did not meet the minimum qualifications and or required extended warranty provisions that the city was requiring. The two other responsive bids proposed were Eaton Cooper equipment, but the lead times was approximately 114 weeks, which would not support the project schedule. May Electric supported a bid, of course, of 2.145 million, utilizing equipment manufactured by MGM Transformer Company, which met the criteria for technical and manufacturer qualifications, as well as the warranty requirements, and a significantly shorter lead time of approximately 36 weeks. Therefore, May Electric was determined to be the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. Funding for the project is available through the series 2024 water and sewer revenue bonds. And again, approval will allow the city to secure this critical electrical equipment early and reduce construction delays and overall project costs. That concludes my comments.

6:49:18Speaker 38

Very good. Thank you for that. You certainly are spending a lot of money lately. Okay.

6:49:24Speaker 7

All in support of the nano filtration project. This electrical is not directly related, but it, WE NEED THIS INFRASTRUCTURE IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE THE NANOFULTRATION EXPANSION.

6:49:33 – 6:49:44Speaker 38

CERTAINLY. VERY GOOD. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANY INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, PUBLIC INPUT CLOSED. COMMISSION DISCUSSION. COMMISSIONER FESSICK.

6:49:44 – 6:50:06Speaker 26

THANK YOU. SO I JUST WAS TRYING TO LOOK JUST TO SEE IF THERE WAS A UNIT COUNTS OR UNIT SORT OF PRICING, PER UNIT PRICES ON THIS AT ALL? I think it's for 7 and 6, but I could check that for you. It's just no big deal. Just if you could get that at some point before next reading.

6:50:09Speaker 7

I know there's step-down units. So FBNL no longer does the transformer step-down, so utilities now has to absorb this cost.

6:50:16 – 6:51:39Speaker 26

Okay. And yes, I know that it's a lot of money, but to the mayor's previous comment, I just want to commend you, Ms. Muhammad, because so many times we sit here and we ask questions of staff members about things either missing in backup or not fully understanding the concept of what you're trying to accomplish. And I want to say, I think I've said it a few times, but I want to say it again to you. Every time I see one of your items, The attachment list is substantial. We do try. And I want to thank you again for always taking the time to truly explain, and I know that a lot of people do take the time whenever we reach out, but sitting with you that first, one of the first times where we went over a, for four hours, and we went over the entire scope that you were facing as you came in to tackle this project, you were very organized and very clear about what laid ahead and what your challenges would be, so that's why I feel more confident with several questions, being able to approve $16 million because you've already shown me the path many times. And if I ever have any questions, it's usually in the backup. And then if not, there's very simple questions that you are easily asked and answered. So commending you for a job well done for a very complicated project that you have made us somewhat simple for us as commissioners.

6:51:39 – 6:51:54Speaker 7

I do want to point out it's my team. We do have a very good team at the utilities and working collaboratively to get this project off the ground, and many other projects that are en route, so. Great team, good, great teamwork, thank you.

6:51:55Speaker 38

All right, further commission discussion. Vice Mayor.

6:51:58Speaker 21

I had a question about the lead time. So there were a lot of bids, most of them were disqualified because of the manufacturer, but why is this lead time so much less?

6:52:10 – 6:52:53Speaker 7

So Rexel is a huge electrical manufacturer and distributor in the area. So our contract is with AMEA, who is a subsidiary of Rexel. We do find that right now there is a lot of competition for electrical components on the industry because of Everybody's going through an expansion, you know, to meet PFAS regulation, but also data centers. So the demand is out there. So we've kind of stripped this several different ways to make this project compatible to meet our deadlines. And we have a lot of faith in our electrical contractor that continues to work with us to move this project along. He's been through, I want to say, two or three of the previous phases for the utility that has been very successful.

6:52:54 – 6:53:14Speaker 21

Yeah. I mean, when you see 114-week lead time or something like that, I mean, it's a little scary in some ways if you needed to do something, but it does show that there's a lot of competition for this product. So 36 weeks, while it still sounds like a lot, actually is pretty short in this world. Thank you.

6:53:15Speaker 38

Very good. Further commission discussion? Seeing none, let's call the roll.

6:53:20Speaker 43

Commissioner Fezzik.

6:53:22Speaker 43

Commissioner Perkins. Yes. Commissioner Sigerson-Eaton. Yes. Commissioner Smith. Yes. Vice Mayor Fournier. Yes. Mayor Hart.

6:53:30Speaker 38

Yes. That concludes our regular agenda. We're up to additional audience to be heard. I don't think there is any, correct?

6:53:35Speaker 43

No, Mayor. No additional audience to be heard.

6:53:39 – 6:54:03Speaker 38

All right, our next scheduled meetings shall be September 14th, 2026 at 6 p.m. That's the first public budget hearing, followed by September 22nd, 2026 at 6 p.m., regular city commission meeting, followed by September 23rd, 2026 at 6 p.m., and that's our final budget hearing. That takes us up to reports. Mr. City Manager, Brian Donovan.

6:54:05Speaker 36

No report, Mayor.

6:54:08 – 6:55:57Speaker 36

City Attorney, Mr. Berman. Thank you. Two very quick reports. Number one, the writ of certiorari, the appeal in the Costco case has been filed. We are waiting for an order from the court to respond, and my office will be responding accordingly to the appeal. court action number two pursuant to section two eighty six point oh one one subsection eight a florida statutes governing public meetings i as the attorney for the city of pompano beach i'm announcing that i desire advice concerning litigation in the matter robert plan shed and on jail on jail higgins versus city of pompano beach broward circuit case number c a c e twenty five oh one seven six three eight time requesting that we hold an executive session on tuesday september twenty second twenty twenty six at the uh... commission meeting or prior to the commission meeting in the city commission chambers conference room at four forty five p m or soon thereafter That'll give us an hour and 15 minutes before the commission, which should be adequate. The session will be private. The following persons will be in attendance. The mayor and city commissioners, Greg Harrison, city manager, Mark E. Berman, city attorney, James Saunders, assistant city attorney, who, for the record, handled this litigation for the city, and Jeffrey Hockman, outside counsel for the city, also handling the litigation. And I will appreciate 445 on September 22nd. You'll have to get here a little early. This is the case that the woman came up and spoke in the microphone about that involves a pipe on someone's property and potential settlement of that at this time. That's all I have. Thank you.

6:55:57Speaker 38

Okay. Thank you, sir. Everybody put that on our calendars. 922 at 445 p.m. Very good. Takes us up to city clerk, Mr. Alfred.

6:56:08Speaker 38

All right. Takes us to City Commission. Commissioner Fessick.

6:56:12 – 7:00:24Speaker 26

You're going to be happy. I don't have very much. I only have two things. One, I got introduced to somebody who used to live down the street from me, actually by way of social media, who runs a website called Triple Zippers. I think it's .org. And he... started doing some research based into retirement programs and cities and vacation days and sick days, banked leave, essentially hours. And so he reached out, and we've had a couple conversations. And one of the conversations we were having was the concerns related to potential things we may have to deal with in November if certain amendments pass that we might have to look at how we tighten the reins of what happens in our general fund, or how we're looking at things. So he requested some information. I'm gonna share some of the things that he shared with me, and I'm just gonna give it to you as a handout. I'm gonna leave a copy for the city clerk and for our city manager, simply because one of the things that it discussed was about bank to leave, how we actually have a 1,250-hour sick cap, but it's significantly higher than what the federal standards are. And so I know that we have our agreement and some of the stuff that can't be discussed until we start discussing that again in 2027, perhaps. But I wanted to make sure that we all had the same information that was provided to me so that this conversation, if we do have to face those challenges, that we look at basically ensuring that we're not paying out excessive amounts of funds for leave that should have been taken. Because a lot of times these, as he explained it to me, a lot of times these banked hours, they might be banked when they first started, then they're cashed out at a much higher rate. Right now, the way that it worked out, if all, worst case taxpayer liability, if all 512 employees retired that were in the bank that had banked leave hours, it would be a $12.2 million cost. So I just think it's worth looking into, and I just wanted to share it. I found it kind of interesting from... We're always trying to figure out where we're going to pay for things and how we're going to pay for things and maybe just get a conversation. So I'll leave the handouts there. And for anybody who wants to see them, I'll make sure that I post them on social media. And I'll give a copy of the clerk. He can post it if he wants as well. That's really all I have for that. We do have a significant amount of employees already over our 1,250-hour sick hard cap, so you might want to try to look at some internal modifications to make sure that we're looking at that and monitoring that overall. Secondly, since we are a commission of the majority of women, I just wanted to sort of Note that Ms. Gloria Steinem passed away recently since we've been gone, and I only had a quote from her because it kind of made me laugh. We've been dealing with a lot of things going on, and her quote, for whatever reason, came across as I was looking at memoriam messages to her, and it made me chuckle thinking of some of the things that we've uncovered as we do research. And the quote is, the truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off. So kudos to Ms. Steinem. She was a life force to many and an inspiration to an entire generation and beyond. And, of course, I would be remiss if I didn't say something to Dolly Parton, too, a little memoriam to Dolly Parton as well because she was beloved. So two strong women who are no longer with us but live on forever in the hearts of all of us. Thank you.

7:00:26Speaker 38

Thank you, Commissioner Fessick, but that applies to men, too. Thank you.

7:00:32Speaker 20

Yes, they made a difference in everybody's lives.

7:00:34Speaker 38

Commissioner Perkins.

7:00:35 – 7:01:28Speaker 20

Thank you, Mayor. I had several things, but it's so late, I'll just give you two. I just wanted to inform my district of Clean Streets coming up on September 17th, which is a Thursday, and it will be covering Blanche Ely, Sanders Park, and Connell Point neighborhood. So if you have any used tires, car parts, drywall, sink, towels, you know, put them all side the road on the 17th and the city will pick them up. Lastly, I just wanted to wish Mr. Elijah Wooten a retired school teacher from Pompano Beach Senior High School. I want to wish him a happy 74th birthday. Right. We've been in the meeting so long, I didn't want his birthday to pass. It's just 8 o'clock, so it's still his birthday, his birth night. So that's all I have. Thank you.

7:01:28Speaker 38

Very good. Happy birthday to Mr. Wooten.

7:01:31Speaker 43

Commissioner Perkins? I'm sorry.

7:01:34Speaker 43

Yes, Commissioner Perkins. What was the event for the high school pickup, the date?

7:01:39Speaker 20

Oh, I'm sorry. September 17th.

7:01:43Speaker 38

Very good. All right, Commissioner Seegerson-Eaton.

7:01:47Speaker 18

I just have one. The Crest Haven Civic Association is meeting this Thursday evening, 7 o'clock, at the Charlotte Brewery Center. Thank you.

7:01:57Speaker 38

Very good. Moving on to Commissioner Smith.

7:02:00 – 7:03:50Speaker 23

That was quick. I just want to, you know, something that I think has been really good for all police officers is how proactive the license plate readers and high definition cameras are, and I was disappointed to see the state come down and ask us to remove them from state streets. But I wanna let you know that I asked Major Elwood about them in Pompano Beach, and he's assured me that the only people that get the data from the license plate readers is our BSO personnel, nobody outside of our BSO personnel. And over the last three years, The license plate reader technology has recovered 13 missing people, 90 stolen vehicles, 71 stolen license plates, located 36 wanted people, including individuals wanted for battery on an elderly person, robberies, molestation of minors, and murder, and identified 179 vehicles used in criminal activity, and one of them was just yesterday that we got notice of. In 2025 alone, $1.8 million in stolen property was recovered with the assistance of the license plate readers. So they do a lot for all communities, and they just have to be properly used, which BSO does, and they audit those procedures. I just want to just express my support for what we do with the Real-Time Crime Center and with the license plate readers. And my quote is from Ellen Glaspo, what happens is not as important as how you react to what happens. Thank you, Mayor.

7:03:51Speaker 21

Vice Mayor. Let me see, where do I start? Just kidding, no report.

7:03:59 – 7:04:13Speaker 38

That was good. I've just got one item. I want to say congratulations to Commissioner Smith on her reelection. Very good. Congratulations. Yes, there you go. That's it. This meeting is adjourned. Thank you.

This transcript was automatically generated from the official public meeting video and is presented unedited. It reflects remarks made on the public record by elected officials, staff, and public commenters. Transcript accuracy may vary; view the original recording for reference.