Council - Regular Meeting

That bike Councilwoman Davis for near.

Thank you very much.

MR. CHAIR.

CAN YOU HEAR ME, MR. CHAIR?

YES. IS THAT COUNCILWOMAN MILLER-ANDERSON?

YES. THEY DID NOT CONNECT ME UNTIL YOU ALL STARTED THE PLEDGE, SO I HAVE BEEN HERE.

OKAY. Please make that note.

We will let the record reflect that Councilperson Miller-Anderson is ill and sent notice that she would appear at the meeting virtually.

Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Miller-Anderson. I hope you get well soon. The next item on the agenda is additions, deletions, or substitutions. Are there any? Hearing none, I entertain a motion to approve the agenda as printed.

I'll move.

Second. It's been moved by Councilwoman Davis-Panier and seconded by Vice Chair Spiritus. Discussion. Is there any discussion on the motion? Hearing no discussion, we'll call the question.

Councilperson Davis-Panier? Yes. Councilperson Lanier?

Yes.

Councilperson Miller-Anderson? Yes. yes chairperson dr spiritus yes shippers and guidance yes unanimous vote okay we're down to i see no consent items tonight is that accurate that is correct mr chair we are now on item six eight presentation to councilwoman shirley d d lanier district three okay and staff Good evening, Chairperson, board members, our city manager, assistant city attorney, attorney assistant city manager, and our residents. My name is Deborah Hall. I am the city clerk, and I am here for the presentation of the ceremonial gavel to Chairperson Emeritus Shirley Lanier. At this time, we recognize Councilperson Shirley Lanier for her distinguished service to the city of Riviera Beach. During 2025, Councilperson Lanier faithfully served as acting mayor during the vacancy in the office of the mayor while simultaneously serving as chairperson of the Riviera Beach City Council for the 2025-2026 term. Throughout her tenure, she provided steady leadership, guidance, and a commitment to the residents of our city while presiding over the business of the council during a significant period in riviera beach's history this evening we are pleased to recognize council person lanier chairperson emeritus immediate past chairperson in appreciation of her dedicated service and leadership as a symbol of our gratitude and in recognition of her time presiding over the city council She will be presented with the ceremonial gavel she used during her tenure as chairperson. On behalf of the mayor, city council, city administration, and the residents of the city of Riviera Beach, we extend our sincere appreciation to Chairperson Emeritus Shirley Lanier for her service, leadership, and lasting contributions to our community. Congratulations, Councilwoman Lanier, and thank you for your dedication to the City of Riviera Beach. We are presenting a gavel to Councilperson Lanier, Rich Reed Shirley D. Lanier. City Council and USD Chairperson 2025-2026, ACTING MAYOR 2025. WE ALSO HAVE ANOTHER PRESENTATION. I AM PRESENTING THIS BEAUTIFUL PLAQUE TO COUNCILPERSON SHIRLEY LANIER WITH THE DATE SHE SERVED AS ACTING MAYOR AND AS CITY COUNCIL CRA AND USD CHAIRPERSON. And it has a quote on here that says, unyielding and unapologetic for what's right.

Congratulations.

I won't say anything much, but thank you so much for this recognition. I know that a lot of times we serve on these councils and these boards and we do a lot, a lot of work. So I'm happy that people recognize that and that not just me, but all of my colleagues do a lot of work for the city and we appreciate it. Thank you.

Bye.

mr chair our next item is item 6b with a presentation to our city council and utility special district chairperson what i will be presenting to you is your gavel that you will use to chair your meeting of the city council and utility special district this one says bruce guyton city council chairperson 2026 And the other one says, Dr. Glenn Spiritus, PhD, USD chairperson.

My colleague said, Councilwoman Lanier, I've been on the City Council now for two and a half years, a little longer, and I'd like to thank the entire council, the city manager, the city staff, and the residents for supporting us during this major revitalization of our city. We've come a long way, we've made a lot of progress, and hopefully we'll make a lot more progress in the years to come. So just thank you all, and thank you everybody for what you're doing for this city, because that's what's important, that we serve the people. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. Thank you. OK, why are he doing that? We're going to move to item eight now.

Mr. Chair, we are on item eight, a ordinance number 43, 16, an ordinance of the City Council of the City of River Beach, Florida, granting to Florida Public Utilities Company It's successors and assigns a non-exclusive franchise for a period of 30 years to sell, distribute, transport, and transit natural, manufactured, or mixed gas in the city of River Beach, Florida, prescribing the terms and conditions under which said franchise may be exercised, making findings, providing severability, providing an effective date upon final passage, and repealing prior ordinance. Mr. Chair, we have one public comment card on this item. The acceptance of cards is closed.

Thank you madam clerk entertain a motion to approve ordinance 4316 so move it's been moved by vice chair spirit. Seconded by councilwoman David for near on discussions that.

Good evening, Chairperson, Council. Bernard Baxinteta, Public Works Director. This is a second and final reading of this ordinance. It is a 30-year franchise agreement with Florida Public Utilities. They provide gas to our residents and businesses. It was approved at the last council meeting for the first reading. So far, we've not had any comments, and we're bringing it for a second and final reading.

Thank you. Madam Clerk, would you call the public comment card folder, please?

Mr. Chair, that will be Lloyd Brown.

Good evening. I really don't have no comments because I read something more on this agenda item on your thing of saying I can't get angry. So Since I can't get angry, show no emotions and all that kind of stuff, I'll just take my three minutes and stand up here in silence.

That's how I'll protest.

Since I can't get angry, I'm happy we getting screwed. I'm glad that the city's not doing pretty good. Makes me really happy. I'm happy, happy, happy. So now I'm going into silence for my three minutes. And I don't want to be interrupted or I'm gonna walk out and I'm gonna get a lawyer.

you

And it's in protest to what I'm going to say. You know, I grew up the youngest in my family. All my brothers and sisters had friends. They were knowledgeable friends. And I learned from all of them. So, like, don't think that you messing with somebody who I might look like I don't know anything. And you may think that, but it's enough in my head to bust your brain wide open. And I'm going to tell you the truth. Y'all are terrible. And it says I can't pick one of you to say anything about. I don't know where you get these rules from because I watch this stuff on TV.

Thank you. Thank you for the comment. Colleague, do you have any comments on this ordinance? Hearing none, might a clerk.

Councilperson David Spanier. Yes. Councilperson Lanier.

Yes.

Councilperson Miller Anderson.

Yes.

Chairperson Dr. Spiridon.

Yes.

Chairperson Guyton?

Yes.

That's an unanimous vote.

Thank you, Madam Clerk. The next item is 8B.

Mr. Chair, we're on item 8B, Ordinance 4317, an ordinance of the City Council of the City of River Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, approving a city-initiated code of ordinance amendment amending the city's code of ordinances, Chapter 13, Parks and Recreation, adding Article 3, entitled Boats, floating structures, live aboard vessels, and other watercraft, adding section 13-56.1, overnight anchoring and mooring limitation, providing for exemptions, providing for enforcement and fines, providing for removal, towing, and disposal, providing for codification, providing for severability, providing for conflicts, and providing for an effective date. Mr. Chair, we have four public comment cards on this item. The acceptance of cards is closed.

Thank you. I entertain a motion to approve Ordinance 43-17. So moved. And moved by Vice Chair Spiridis.

Second.

Seconded by Councilwoman Davis-Preneur. Staff. Mr. Wilkins, who's giving the presentation for this order?

Chair, I could speak on it if you want. Okay. Okay, we've had... Over the last few years, many derelict boats that are sinking in our intercoastal area that we're required to maintain. These boats are getting loose during storms, smashing into people's docks, bulkheads causing a lot of damage. This ordinance is pretty much the same ordinance that North Palm Beach and the town of Palm Beach have passed. We know that Martin County, I believe, passed this already. I believe Miami-Dade is entertaining it right now, and hopefully Palm Beach County will entertain that later on. But this will give our police department, our Marine Division, the tools that they need to start enforcing some of these laws and ridding our area of these unsightly and dangerous boats, dangerous condition. These boats are not moored properly. They impact the environment. the sea grass, which the manatees, obviously, and other species live off of, this is the right thing to do. And if we pass this, eventually we'll look into a mooring field. This will give us the ability to understand what the needs would be for a mooring field, a paid mooring field afterwards. So I recommend, I support doing this project.

Thank you, Vice Chair Spirtus. Madam Clerk, public comment cards, please.

Yes, Mr. Chair. The first speaker is Matt Woods, followed by Lloyd Brown, Dale Green, and then Scott Lewis.

good evening a little nervous about this it's not what i normally do my name is matthew woods i'm a retired plumber i've been in palm beach county since 1985. i've belonged to the palm beach sailing club for 25 years and i've owned boats most of that time responsible boaters like me we are not the bad guys Responsible boaters are simply people that love sailing and boating and it's a great family experience and we have traveled thousands of miles on our boat. With just the wind, it's quite the experience and if you've never done it, I can help you with that. I simply need a place to park the boat normally during hurricane season in between trips. It's my understanding that you want to follow Palm Beach with their 30 days every six months in their waters. I was one of those boats that had to move and at that time I didn't realize there's no place to go within 50 miles of here where I can take my boat. There's simply no space in the marinas and there are no mooring fields. So it's a problem. If there was a marina space, it would cost me about $3,000 a month to keep my boat in your marina. I simply can't afford that because I'm retired. The city can follow Palm Beach's example. They absolutely do not care about the middle class people. We're just there to serve them. They towed registered boats without even contacting the owner, which is horrible. I can't even imagine. Basically, it's theft, in my opinion. I don't believe the city of Riverview Beach is like that, that they are for everybody, the middle class, and not just supporting the really wealthy people. I'm offering a solution not to punch us the good responsible boaters. I'd suggest that the city create its own anchoring permit with the annual fee maybe $500 or so to help cover administrative costs and then have basic requirements like insurance, a pump out no discharge, and keeping the boat seaworthy. Pretty much those are what's going to be required when you have your mooring fields. I realize this can't happen today, but I think a good idea might be to put in a provision in the existing ordinance stating an exception could be to obtain a city authorized anchoring permit. We could iron out the details later. Also, it would be great to be put on a waiting list for the new mooring field, and that way they would have a list of potential customers ready to go, and it might help them organize the construction of it. Anyhow, I want to thank you very much for your time, and I hope that my message got across well. Thank you.

Thank you for your comment.

The next speaker is Lloyd Brown, followed by Dale Green and Scott Lewis.

You know, I was going to be quiet, but let me say something about this. You move the black people from under the bridge, so like the boats over there you're going to move, I don't really care. I mean... You do things that deteriorate like our livelihoods, and then you bring people in to tell you about their livelihoods. I've been here, this man said, 85. I've been here since 1954. That's when the city, they had shell rock roads. We had canals right in the front of our houses and the people were happy. They were really happy. So if you go over there and you want to make them move them boats, hey, go at it. But I'm saying I don't feel bad because most people I know that own boats, black people I know, either they got a boat for bath or they got a boat sitting in the past in the back of their house. It ain't never been in the water for like years. So whatever you do over there, I really don't care because nobody said nothing. See, people want us to join on when it comes to something that it's going to be done for them. But when it comes to us, you don't see anybody coming over and say, why did they move the stuff from under the bridge? Why did they put that stuff there? And those black people who've been living in River Beach for 72 years, been coming over there every day of their life, snorkeling in the morning, up and down. And them boats been out there, maybe not as many. And then now you want to take and charge them people? You should have been doing that. I mean, don't do it. to make me happy because I don't really give a, I don't know if she said I could use that word. I don't give a darn. And I mean, honestly, y'all are terrible. And if I can't come up here, I'm supposed to be happy about my water bill. I'm still, I'm protesting. So I ain't talking about what you're talking about. Why should I come up here happy about a $300 water bill? And if I get anger, that's not even, you know what? I watch these shows. on my phone on the TV about council meeting. Y'all doing something wrong against the First Amendment, right? And you know it. But then I had another friend to tell me he went to jail. You know why? Because his other friend, they turned state. That's all I got to say.

Thank you for your comments.

The next speaker is Dale Green, followed by Scott Lewis.

Hi, thank you for the opportunity. I actually thought this was about the mooring fields, but since I'm here, I would like to say a couple words about any kind of an ordinance to get rid of the derelict boats. I've been living at the present address in between Blue Heron Bridge and Safe Harbor since 1998, so I've had to deal, well, let's see, that's 28 years from the way I add up, with these derelict boats, I'm going to say on a monthly basis. There's something always happening, floating up, I've been fortunate, I'm very fortunate to be living where I am, that location, on the water, but I've had to deal with many of those derrick boats breaking loose, not during a hurricane, just a typical summer storm shows up, and if the wind's blowing the right direction, my wife and I are out there fending off a 30-foot boat. It wouldn't destroy my dock that I built. This gentleman here spoke about the mooring fields. I am for the mooring fields. It might be a temporary thing to help people like that out, but something's got to be done pretty quick, especially the season we're in. I'm talking about derelict boats where people don't come around for years. There's one that just sunk about, I'm saying three months ago. It's been there two to three years, probably about a 36-foot sport fish. Sunk about three months ago. My grandkids took a paddleboard over there during the Fourth of July, and It's on the bottom, but part of it's still above the water. And they got on. I was looking around. They took pictures. And there's so much filth and garbage inside that boat. It was unbelievable. There were roaches. Because at high tide, the roaches all come up. There were roaches crawling around. But that's just one. And anyways, as the tide gets higher, that stuff just slowly but surely comes out. And I'm constantly dipping up trash, which Again, I'm fortunate where I'm living, so that doesn't bother me. But it's the serious damage these things can cause. I've seen one boat break loose. Again, it was a derelict. It went over by the Blue Heron docks. It hit probably about six of those boats that were on lifts. It just boom, boom, boom, until someone ran over there and they kind of pulled it into the slip. I can give you multiple stories where it's been an issue, and other people there's had damage. But anyways, I was here for the mooring fields, but I do want to say that any kind of an ordinance to get these things out of here, the ones that are ship shape, work something out with them. But it's the ones that's been out there for so long, and no one even goes near them. They just put them there until they sink. So thank you.

Thank you for your comments. Next public speaker.

The last speaker, Scott Lewis.

Hi, I'm Scott Lewis, 256 East 22nd Court. You know, raw human sewage doesn't recognize economic barriers, and that's what I got going under my dock all the time. Raw, as in you see it floating. Councilman Lanier has it on her phone. I sent her the video. It's disgusting. You would not swim in that water except thousands of people swim in it at Bill Foster Park and Peanut Island every day. Pass the ordinance. More importantly, please enforce it quickly because hurricane season's here. We're in it. The peak is September 10th. I know I've seen law enforcement out there beginning to put this in effect and monitoring some of the boats, but please enforce it aggressively, quickly. Get them out. Yes, I have some empathy for the people that don't have a place to dock, but that's not a taxpaying citizen, a resident of your city. I am. And I want you to recognize what you're making, what you're allowing going under my water, into my water where I swim. We had a problem drinking it a couple years ago. Now we're swimming in it. I also would encourage the chief to have this $300,000. It's come to my attention, the marinas, they have pump-out facilities. I'm not so sure that all the big boats are using those pump-out facilities. Their Y valve may be open, which is a huge fine, by the way, lots of money, but it stops it. But what would be more convenient than you pull your boat up at the dock and you're tired from the weekend and just pump it out and it goes in the water, right? I believe that's happening. And I'd like the police to go down in the marinas that are in the city and leave notices or be sure that the managers of the marina are checking to make sure the boats are actually using the pump out. Not just that it's there, but they're using it, right? Because I'm sure that's happening, right? But anyway, thank you for, and I hope all of you vote for this. Thank you very much.

Thank you for your comments.

Mr. Chair, that's the end of public comment on this item.

Staff, do you have any comments? Staff, do you have any comments?

Good evening, Major Meyer. So we have a few comments. We're working on an operation with Fish and Wildlife Commission. So far we've towed nine derelict boats out of the waterway. So this is definitely something that we want you guys to take under strong consideration to make our waterways safer. And it's about navigation. Having vessels that are out there for periods of time where they haven't moved or haven't, you know, broke anchor and traveled through the waterways is a strong consideration for us. This is a very busy waterway. A lot of traffic, boat traffic goes through our waterways in the city. It's a very popular location. So we feel very supportive of this. Thank you.

Colleagues. Mr. Chair. I believe I heard Councilwoman Lanier first before staff and then you, Mayor. Thank you.

I just wanted to ask, how do you enforce that in terms of NOT SO MUCH THE BOATS FOR THE 30 DAYS, BUT THE PUMP OUTS. BECAUSE THAT SEEMS TO BE THE REAL ISSUE. NOT THAT THE OTHER ONE IS NOT AN ISSUE, BUT THE ISSUE OF PEOPLE JUST PUTTING WALL SEWAGE OUT INTO THE WATER. HOW DO YOU ENFORCE PEOPLE GOING TO THESE PUMP OUTS? I MEAN, HOW DOES THAT WORK?

NEW SPEAKER, IF I MAY. Yeah, so enforcement is done by visually inspecting the boats to determine if that's an actual act that's taking place. So when we do the marine operations, we bring divers out. We also have an underwater drone that we're in process of purchasing. So we can actually see underneath the vessels. We can actually make a determination of whether or not those things are happening. And then there's other investigative means where we can actually test your systems with dye to see if the fluid actually comes out from underneath the vessel as well.

Thank you, sir. Any other comments or questions? Mayor Blossom. Thank you, Chair.

Mr. Sherman, or city manager, there was a question and concern about the mooring field.

And I know that there's going to be some delays with this between the mooring field. Where are we with the actual mooring field? And the reason I ask is based upon one of the speaker's concerns. And some of our traveling voters that are currently in the intercoastal are not having a set stable location with the different ordinances. It is kind of similar to the homeless issue where I just kick them out of one area and send them to another. So I just want to make sure that we have a structure in place to be able to address these concerns because we don't want to kick our long-term residents out of the area without having some solutions.

It's good evening. Randy Sherman, chief financial officer. So we have two mooring fields that are in the process of being permitted. There is a mooring field area that is Northwest of peanut Island. In that case, we have met all of the permitting requirements. We are simply waiting for the submerged land lease from the state. The other mooring field that we have been working on is over at Phil Foster Park. We have the FDEP approval. We're waiting for the state approval. We are in conversations with Captain Meyer and ACM Coppin with the Sheriff's Department because they do operate out of that location. So we are addressing some of their comments and concerns. We need to have another follow-up meeting with them. But once we go through that process, if they're not opposed to it, they just want to make sure that we've got everything all lined up. So then again, it will go through the process up to the state. But we should be hearing, hopefully, in the next couple of weeks on the submerged land lease. We completed that process in March. Once we get that, then we'll start working with procurement and hopefully our new marine coastal engineers that you may approve tonight to get the solicitation out for the installation and inspection of the moorings once we go forward. And then again, we have the funding for the officers for the police department.

That was the second question, so thank you about the funding. Major Myers, how many actual vessels or ships does the department have now?

We have two marine units. We just took possession of the last boat within the last month and a half. So we have two full-time vessels that are on the waterway that have potential to have full-time vessels.

Mr. Sherman recently said that they're currently parked at the marina.

Correct. So we have a boat lift that was installed for our our latest marine vessel relentless that we took possession of recently and then we also have our former uh boat which is still commissioned still being utilized and that's also at the marine as well okay thank you thank you mr chair i'd just like to to add to this i held two town hall meetings on the mooring fields uh the police department uh you know worked with us during this

In the very beginning, the first public town hall meeting that we had here, there was close to 150, 200 people. Not a single person was in favor of the mooring field at that time. We've been doing some education with the community. I've met with numerous civic associations. I've spoken at numerous meetings with the community. And the real concern was the size of the mooring field, how many boats were going to be in the mooring field. I think we've come to some sort of an agreement with the community after we pass, hopefully we'll pass this ordinance, and then we'll be able to determine after we see how many boats are left there, what the size of the mooring field should be. The community just wants some assurances that they're not going to get, let's say, I'm just going to throw a number out. It's not the actual number, but let's say we said 25 mooring slips. They want to make sure it doesn't turn into 100 mooring slips the next year. So they want some assurances that we're not going to throw this in their face. They don't want this to be a money grab. They want this to be something that's going to preserve the environment and the quality of life for the people that use the waterway. As you know, once the other communities pass these ordinances, all the boats move from West Palm Beach, from Palm Beach, from North Palm Beach to Riviera Beach. So we have everybody's boat sitting in our waterways right now. So it's critical that we pass this ordinance and give the police department the tools they need to clean up our area and our waterway the same way the other communities did. And then we can look at the mooring field with staff what the size should be, and hopefully we'll have our approvals in the next couple of months. That's all, thank you.

Thank you, Vice Chair Spiridis. I have a question regarding residents that may have vessels. Are we providing any discounts for residents who may have vessels and use the Moorfield?

We haven't set the rates for the mowing fields yet. So that rate resolution, we do have to come back to you at that point. But again, that's a consideration. Yeah. That would be left up to the Board.

Okay. All right. Any further comments or questions? If not, Madam Clerk.

Councilperson Davis-Panier? Councilperson Lanier? Yes. Councilperson Miller-Anderson? Yes. Chair Pro Tem Dr. Spiridon?

Yes.

Chairperson Guyton?

Yes.

Unanimous vote.

Thank you, Madam Clerk. I think we are now moving to 11A. Is that correct?

Yes, sir. Mr. Chair, we are on item 11A under resolutions on regular agenda. Resolution number 70-26, a resolution of the City of Riviera Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, authorizing the issuance of the City's general obligation bonds, Series 2026, and the initial aggregate principal amount not to exceed $115 million for the purpose of financing a portion of the cost of the Series 2026 projects. describing the series 2026 projects, determining certain details of the series 2026 bonds, approving the form of a summary notice of sale and a notice of sale and authorizing the public sale of the series 2026 bonds, providing for the application of the proceeds of the series 2026 bonds, delegating authority to proper officials of the city in consultation with the city's financial advisor to accept, pursuant to a competitive public sale process, the bid or bids of the lowest qualified bidder or bidders for the purchase of the Series 2026 bonds. Subject to certain perimeters and other matters set forth in this resolution, approving the form and authorizing the execution of an official statement in connection with the offering and sale of the Series 2026 bonds and authorizing the distribution of a preliminary official statement and the official statement, appointing a paying agent and registrar, authorizing the execution and delivery of a paying agent, registrar agreement, authorizing the series 2026 bonds to be registered, under a book entry only system of the registration authorizing the proper officers of the city to do all other things being necessary or advisable in connection with the sale and delivery of the series 2026 bond and providing for an effective date. Mr. Chair, we have two public comment cards on this item. The acceptance of the cards is closed.

Thank you, Madam Clerk. I would entertain a motion to approve Revolution 7026 moved it's been moved by councilwoman davis preneur it's been seconded by councilwoman um shirley lanier on discussion staff that's good evening again randy sherman chief financial officer um so this item was actually on your agenda on june 17th

THERE ARE THREE BONDS INCLUDED IN THIS $115 MILLION RESOLUTION. THERE'S $25 MILLION FOR THE FIRE STATION, 86. THERE IS $35 MILLION FOR THE POLICE STATION. AND THERE IS $55 MILLION FOR PARKS AND RECS PROJECTS. THE DISCUSSION AT THAT POINT WAS PRIMARILY FOCUSED AROUND THE PARKS AND RECS PROJECTS. AND WE WERE ASKED TO BRING BACK MORE INFORMATION TONIGHT TO TRY TO HOPEFULLY MOVE THIS ITEM ALONG. SO I WILL TELL YOU THAT THREE YEARS AGO THIS MONTH WAS WHEN THESE PROJECTS FIRST WERE DISCUSSED DURING A BUDGET MEETING. AND WE WERE GIVEN DIRECTION BY THE COUNCIL TO MOVE FORWARD WITH LOOKING TO SEE IF WE COULD ISSUE VOTER APPROVED BONDS IN FUNDING OF THESE PROJECTS. THE TAX-BACKED G.O. BONDS, WHICH THESE WOULD BE, WOULD BE YOUR CHEAPEST FINANCING AVAILABLE TO YOU BECAUSE THE PLEDGED REVENUE IS A PROPERTY TAX, WHICH IS A VERY STRONG REVENUE SOURCE VERSUS SOME OF THE OTHER REVENUE SOURCES THAT WE HAVE. SO I'M GOING TO WALK THROUGH HOW WE GOT FROM JULY OF 23 all the way to today and answer any questions that you may have. And I will do this certainly as quickly as I can. I'm not going to read every slide.

Okay. Excuse me.

Yes.

Have you done this walkthrough before?

I'm sorry?

Have you done the walkthrough before?

Not with this board, no.

No. Okay. Nutshell version. Okay? Okay. about 30 minutes to an hour. Okay.

So first thing after the budget meeting that we had in July, we brought forward two resolutions for the board's consideration, resolutions 2723 and the resolution 6923. Resolution 2723 amended the parks and recs master plan. OK, BECAUSE THIS PROJECT ITSELF, EVEN THOUGH COMPONENTS OF IT WERE IN THE PLAN, THIS PROJECT WAS NOT IN THE PLAN AND THE BOARD AMENDED THE PLAN ACCORDINGLY TO MATCH THESE PROJECTS. AND THEN PROJECT RESOLUTION 6923 ACTUALLY STARTED THE PROCESS OF WORKING TOWARDS THE REFERENDUMS. SO WE HAD TO HAVE THIS VOTE THAT YOU'VE APPROVED US TO MOVE FORWARD DEALING WITH supervisor elections and others and getting this question on the ballot. As you know, when there's a referendum, we are not allowed to campaign, right? We are not allowed to take a position. We just go out and we give facts to the voters so they can vote on the referendum and be educated on that fact. So we held, as you can see, a number of meetings at a number of locations. We held night meetings, day meetings, weekend meetings. We did virtual meetings. Each one of these events were two hours in off time. And we had every department that was involved.

So we had library, we had police, we had fire, we had economic development, we had development services.

Everybody who had a stake in this 115 million attended and helped answer questions. We also put together a website on the projects. WE HAD A NUMBER OF WRITTEN NARRATIVES THAT TALKED ABOUT THE PROJECTS, DESCRIBED THE PROJECTS, THEIR COST, AND THE TAX IMPACT, AND THEN WE HAD A WHOLE SLOW OF FAQs, YOU KNOW, FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS. JUST AGAIN TO KIND OF FOCUS ON THE $55 MILLION, THIS IS FROM ONE OF THE WRITE-UPS. There's three components to the $55 million. The one item that you see up here, this is the sports recreation complex that would sit between where City Hall is today or where Station 88 is today.

And what we now know is Inlet Grove, Future Riviera Beach High School.

SO THIS LOCATION WAS CHOSEN TO CONSOLIDATE IT WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT'S FIELDS AND HOPEFULLY GET SOME SYNERGIES IN THERE. THOUGH THEY, YOU KNOW, SCHOOLS CERTAINLY WOULD CONTROL THEIR PROPERTY, CITY WOULD CONTROL ITS PROPERTY, BUT THE CONCEPT WAS IS, HEY, THIS IS AVAILABLE AND WE WOULD HAVE CERTAINLY OUR STUDENTS AND CHILDREN THERE WHO WOULD BE ABLE TO USE THIS COMPLEX. The other two components, oh, let me go back real quick. This portion here was $45 million.

That's what we targeted for that.

Out of the $55 million, we had two other projects. We had 10 million going over, oh, I'm sorry, that's a mistake. Actually it's six and a half million go over to Callaway and it is three and a half million that was assigned out for beach improvements. These beach improvements were before the discussion that we were having with the boardwalk, but these dollars certainly could be used for the boardwalk, but if the boardwalk didn't go forward, we still have the needs for these park improvements. The next item that came up after all of those meetings and education, It actually went on the ballot on March 19th of 2024. There were actually three votes required, one for each project. And as you can see up there from the votes, the top one is the fire department. The one in the middle is the parks project. And then the one at the bottom was the police station. And all of the referendums did pass with voter approval. So the next thing that came along in May of 2024, was the first resolution dealing with the bonding. So we brought that item back in. And again, as you're probably familiar with when we talk about the lot of bonds that we talk about, you know, the public improvement bonds that we do, it's a two resolution process. You adopt the master, which lays out all the details, and then you get to we come back and that's what this one is with the specifics. But that was approved on May 1st. The next thing that we did now that we had the voter referendum, we had all the bonds, the city issued ITN 110624-3 for the city hall project. So within this ITN, it not only included trying to have a public private partnership for city hall, It also included the recreational facility that had just been approved by the voters.

Mr. Chairman, tell the public what an ITN is, what the acronym is.

Oh, I'm sorry. An ITN is an invitation to negotiate. So people would come in giving you, you know, their thoughts and proposals, their qualifications, and then you would choose who you were going to negotiate out of your pool of proposers. SO, AGAIN, WE HAVE THIS ITN, AND THIS IS ONE OF THE SLIDES RIGHT OUT OF THE RFP THAT WENT OUT, THE ITN THAT WENT OUT WHERE WE CLEARLY STATED THAT WE HAVE $20 MILLION FOR THE CITY HALL, THAT 20 MILLION IS COMING FROM YOUR PENNY SALES TAX, AND WE HAVE $45 MILLION TO CONTRIBUTE TO THIS PROJECT FOR THE RECREATIONAL COMPONENT. Mr. Stevens, if you could play the video at this point. On November 17th, you received presentations from the two proposers that had submitted on this ITN. And I just wanted to show you the presentation specifically addressing the parks program.

How long is this presentation? Two minutes.

THEIR PRESENTATION AT PARKS IS LITERALLY TWO MINUTES.

MR. CHAIRMAN, WEREN'T YOU IN THE AGENDA REVIEW MEETING WHERE WE TALKED ABOUT TIMEFRAMES FOR PRESENTATIONS?

AND I DON'T HAVE THAT MANY MORE SLIDES. MR. CHAIR?

YES. MS. MILLER-ANDERSON.

I KNOW WE PROBABLY DON'T WANT AN HOUR dissertation on stuff, but I think it's important for the public to be aware of this stuff. So I don't want them to do a 30, 45 minute one either, but I think he needs to have some grace to be able to explain this or show it so that the public is aware of what's going on as well.

Oh, absolutely. I agree. And I also agree that there's a way to give a lot of information in a concise manner.

without the flow right yeah i think yeah they're they're probably working on that this is a little different for everybody so i just don't want them to cut out important stuff no no just hit the important things leave the fluff out be good okay mr sherman okay there we go

My name is Greg Wisecar. I'm with the sports facilities companies, Florida based out of Clearwater. We have worked with over 3000 communities to plan sustainable operational sports complexes that integrate into the fiber of the community. It's important how you build all of this, how this is developed, but it's even more important how it's ingrained and becomes a central hub of your community for the next decades to come in a sustainable fashion. That's our commitment. That's our part of the team. What we do is everything from programming to operations to running events and making this a central hub of the community, not just in sports. It's a sports complex, but it's so much in sports that goes on there. It's events. It's trade shows. It's community activities. It becomes the central fiber of Riviera Beach, the place that everybody's checking the calendar of what's going on there before we make our plans this weekend. That's what this place is going to be. And all we do is sports and entertainment complex, making them sustainable, making them meaningful, making sure as part of project play, you can see we've partnered with major league baseball, NBA, Nike. You can see SFA, SFM. That's my company. We have made a fund.

You've seen commercials about no child being able to not play because we're here.

Part of this, I'm not commitment to you and our company's commitment. is that no child in this community won't be able to participate in organized sports, recreation activities because of financial reasons, ever, as long as we're involved here. And we plan on being here a long, long time. We do things in Florida, up in Naples, we operate Paradise Coast, and we're expanding that facility for them and brought a USL soccer team to the community. We do Cape Coral, a large racket complex, Panama City Beach, we operate that, Melbourne up the street too, So many things that we'll do, and we'll do that much more for you guys. It's about all this being tied together. That's our commitment. Proud to be a part of the team.

Thank you. Okay, Mr. Chairman, we're going to wrap it up. Yep. I just need my slides.

We got the presentation back up, please. Thank you. There we go. Okay. So before I get into the actual numbers, because the numbers have changed since actually since the last time we spoke, a couple of things I just want to bring to your attention. The whole property tax reform that's coming out of Tallahassee, I know a lot of people are focused on the homestead exemption. There was a portion of that legislation that was passed that actually puts a box around your ability to spend property taxes. They tell you what you can spend taxes on. And if it's not in that box, you can't use property taxes. So what they've told us that we can use taxes on is public safety items, police, fire, emergency medical services, retirement benefits. So funding pensions, financing of infrastructure. So you can take care of your roads and sidewalks and the like. You can use it to pay debt service. So even if they're, referendum passes, we could still use the taxes to pay debt service. And then it goes on to say funding of operations and administration of government. What it doesn't say up there is that we can use for parks and rec. So what we have a real concern that at the last meeting, we talked about the fact that well, if you only do part of the 55, you can always come back and do the balance. The concern is it should the referendum pass, you may not be able to do parks and recs bonds in the future. That's not a certainty, it's part interpretation of this, but we just have that concern. The other thing that we just wanted to bring to your attention is back in October, the board agreed to the land swap at the Palm Beach County School District. So this is Inlet Grove to the top, which would be your high school. It's that middle area between that and city hall complex, which is at the bottom that the school district is swapping over to the city for the pool, the quiet center, all the fields and the recreation that we were going to put in. And then on the flip side, the city is swapping out almost the same size property out of Callaway Park. This is the layout of Callaway Park. Lincoln Elementary is to the right. And again, it's really that center area where they're looking for the parking in the middle there. So again, I just wanna bring that to your attention.

I know the manager has- Okay, you have our attention.

Mr. Manager, do you want to have any comment on this slide? Okay. Okay. So getting to the numbers, we had originally when we were doing these numbers back in 2023, we were looking at $55 million. If you come down to work your way through that top section, we were looking at about 4.125 million. million worth of debt, total debt service about 82 and a half million. The millage rate to cover the 55 million was calculated at 0.56 mils. And so then for $100,000 home, that means you're paying $56. Okay. Excuse me, Chair.

Could you go back and say that one more time?

Sure. So back in 2023, again, looking at the $55 million, debt service would be about $4,125,000 per year for 20 years, which makes your total debt service $82.5 million. The millage rate that would be required to make that payment is 0.5601, which for a value of $100,000 is $56. Okay, so...

Director Sherman, we have to keep our millage rate at that. We have one of the highest millage rates in the entire county, and we have to keep that millage rate up high. We can't lower it like other communities because we have to pay off all these bonds. And they're not going to stop, and it's going to get harder when this new law gets passed because we know it's going to be approved more than likely. So can you tell me what the total bonding is right now? We built... two firehouses already. We've passed other geo bonds. I know for infrastructure, just in the last two years, we spent a lot of money. I know we added $20 million or 25 million onto the police station, onto that 35 million that was already approved. So what is the total amount that we bonded in just the last two years? The last three years.

In the last two years, we actually haven't. bonded anything um i believe it was i believe it was 2022 when we did when we did the fire stage 2022 when we did the fire stations so we did fire stations um 87 and 88 at that point prior to that back in 14 and 15 we issued bonds for the marina area this event center and some road work, and then in 2015 was when we issued the pension obligation bond. So there's substantial debt out there, but we still do have $70 million of borrowing capacity, and that's where that other $60 million is coming from.

Chair, I just want to make it clear that that $56 number that you gave us is not real to the taxpayer, because the taxpayer is paying for all these other bonds. You add them up and you add up the millage rate that we have to keep to paying it. It's substantial. We've actually reached our bonding limit. Is that true?

No, right now we have about 70 million, not counting geotech and geobonds. We have about $70 million of capacity.

additional right now right now that's not a lot of money for a city this size it's not which is again why you look to you know other avenues right and of course you know that we just passed 475 million for the utility district on top of that the people pay for that as well i mean you can call it a fee but you know if it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck it's a duck if you're paying for those services that's coming out of people's pockets they're paying for it So you have to add this all up and say, where are we right now? And what can we really afford? I mean, we would all like to bond everything and have brand new everything, but we have a fiscal responsibility to the taxpayer and to our residents. And I just think that we have to know what the real numbers are. What are we really paying in all these bonds right now?

Sure.

Yes, Councilwoman Miller-Anderson.

I HAVEN'T BEEN ON THE BOARD SINCE 2015. I NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT FOR MANY DECADES, NOTHING WAS DONE TO THESE FACILITIES. SO THEREFORE, THERE MAY NOT HAVE BEEN ANY BONDS ISSUED AT THAT TIME. AS DR. SPIRIT HAS SAID, I THINK LAST NIGHT THAT A LOT OF THINGS HAVE GOTTEN BAD OVER MANY DECADES. SO UNFORTUNATELY RIGHT NOW, WE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE HAVING TO MAKE THESE HARD DECISIONS. AND WITH THAT, THE ISSUING OF SOME OF THESE BONDS HAVE HAD TO OCCUR. AND THE THING IS, WE ARE NOT JUST REPLACING FACILITIES JUST TO REPLACE FACILITIES. REMEMBER, THESE FACILITIES HAD MOLD IN THEM. THESE FACILITIES WERE BEING RAINED ON. THE WATER WAS DRIPPING OUT OF THE CEILINGS. WE HAD FIREFIGHTERS GETTING SICK WITH MOLD. THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BUILDING WAS FULL OF MOLD AS WELL. none of the improvements that we have made was just because we felt like doing it. We had actually gotten to a point where we had no choice but to do it. And so I don't want the residents thinking that this board in the last several years have just decided they wanted to issue bonds because we need to keep in mind for the past 30, 40 years, maybe 50 years, nothing was done. So quite naturally outlived its usefulness. And therefore it is us that is having to make up for that. So, you know, I don't like the placement, like, you know, this board is, you know, not thinking about residents and issuing all the bonds. Remember, we all live here. We're all feeling it. However, the goal is not to place all of this on the residents back. But at the same time, we know we only have a certain amount of time that we need to get things done because we'd like in the police station, where are they? They're somewhere we know they shouldn't be, but that we had no choice for the moment. So that's why it's critical that we build this police station for them so that they can get into a building that is suitable for the police department. So I just, I don't, I really have a hard time listening to someone say that, you know, Like we did. And, you know, you weren't on the council at the time. Most of those times it was us that was on there and Dr. Votel. And we did what we thought was best at that time. So I don't I don't feel any way about the decisions we had to make at that time. Now, clearly going forward. We definitely want to look for different options. We definitely want to make sure we're able to curtail that some kind of way. And one of the ways needs to be during our budget time to cut back some fluff somewhere in these departments, which I'm sure we can find money somewhere. So I don't want it being put out there either that we can't lower our millage rate either. We can't. IF WE CUT BACK SOMEWHERE, SO, YOU KNOW, WE GOT TO PUT THE WHOLE TRUTH OUT THERE. WE CAN'T JUST PUT PART OF THE STORY OUT THERE WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO EXPLAIN THIS TO THE RESIDENTS. WE ALL CARE ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT WE CAN DECREASE THE WATER BILLS, DECREASE WHATEVER THAT WE HAVE GOING ON RIGHT NOW. SO, YOU KNOW, I JUST NEEDED TO SHARE THAT. THANK YOU.

NEW SPEAKER OKAY. LET ME SAY SOMETHING QUICKLY. linear and then vice chair spirit is um we live in a low to moderate income community blue collar as we decide to spend and get into debt we need to keep that in mind my opinion we have over bonded now we're right at our capacity for a low to moderate income community If I needed a car. I'm not going to go out and buy Bentley. I can't afford it. Our sports complex, $45 million. Really? Is that something that we actually really need? We need to be realistic that some decisions have been made that are gonna impact people in our community who can't afford it. That's the reality. There are gonna be assessments in addition to at-belonging taxes. Is that correct, Mr. Sherman? On the bonds. Yes, assessments on properties to pay for these bonds.

There will be a special millage rate that'll be charged up to the tax bill.

However we categorize it, it's going to be in addition to our regular ad valorem taxes.

Correct.

Correct. We're not telling people that. We're telling people that, you know, this will be extra $56. It's going to be hundreds for all these bonds, cumulative. We have a problem, people. And I'm going to be transparent. It's a serious problem. We're considering doing some things that to get us back on track. There were some decisions made in the last five or six years that got us in the bind right now. And we're trying to figure out how to correct it. I'm not going to sugarcoat it like everything is OK and we're not everybody is not doing as well as everyone else some people have a professional job they can afford it we have people who can't afford their water bill right now and we're going to go up 30 another 30 it ought to be 60 another 20 and we're putting a lot on our residents i'm gonna let my other colleagues talk but i don't want to give you the impression that everything is okay everything is not okay and we need to figure out how to get it in control We have a big problem, people. We've committed a lot of financing to these debt companies that a low and moderate income community is gonna have a very serious time trying to pay off. Councilwoman Lanier.

I just wanna say that everything that we bonded, we needed. And I don't feel that getting to parks and recs, that's where we try and hold the bag. People complain all the time about nothing for the children to do, all the time. There is nothing for them to do. Wells and Tate are falling apart. I went to Wells and Tate when I was a kid. It is the same facilities. The police department had mold We needed that. The fire department had mold. We needed that. We're not buying things that we don't need. We're not spending money that we don't have to spend. We need a new water plant. People complain about the water. Then what do we do? We have to do something. We can't just say, well, you know, just suck it up and, you know, you pay. We can't afford that, but we're not going to figure out how to even get it done. We figured out how to get it done, how to get a brand new water plant, how to get new fire stations, how to get new police stations. And so when we come to parks and recs with the children, now we say, oh no, that's too much. That is what they've been waiting on. This community has been waiting on something for their children, period. The facilities that we have are dilapidated at best, at best. There is nothing. So we're looking at a situation where 70 percent of the voters said, yes, this is what we want to do, 70 percent. And I think that we need to move forward with it. And we have people saying that we are in debt. Yes, but we need to figure out a way around it and through it. And as the councilwoman said, that when we do budget this year, we will have to cut back. We're going to have to. if we're going to be able to survive the new laws that are coming out in terms of property taxes, but to get to the children and say, no, that's too much. We're not going to do that. We're not going to bond that because we are in a position where the school board is sinking $100 million into a new high school for Riviera Beach. We go back on this deal with our bonds and that money goes away. There is no high school. There is no land swap. Those kinds of things, it is not just about us. It is about this community. It is about what is best. What do the community need? The new high school was something that was pushed through and finally happened. There was a land swap involved with this deal to be able to do this parks and recs, to be able to have something for the children and to get to do all of this work Take Barracuda Bay, give it to the police department, which is fine. And then to get to parks and recs and say, no, no, that's too much. The improvements to the beach. All of that was a part of $55 million bond that 70% of the people in this city said they wanted to see happen. And that has been going on from 2022, 23, 24 with different types of community charrettes every other month explaining this. Same thing with the water. Explaining what's going to happen. If we're going to need, if we're going to have new water, if we're going to have water that is safe to drink, if we're going to make sure that when we turn our tap on, the water is good, we got to pay for that. And the residents know that. They knew that. And it's our job to figure out how to lessen that burden on them. That's what we were elected to do. But not to get to the end of this, because this is the end in terms of our bonding, in terms of looking at, because this also is tied to the new city hall, which is leaking. So all of these things are not just about saying, OK, we need to tighten our belt. We do. We certainly do. But I don't want to get to the children and get to a new high school and get to a new city hall and say, no, that's enough. We came in this in 2019 with a reimagined Riviera Beach, and we're almost at the finish line. And I think that we need to honor the request of the voters that voted for this bond. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilwoman Lanier. Vice Chair Spiridon.

Chair, I wasn't going to bring it up, but since my colleagues brought it up, the water issue was a very important issue in this city since 2013. If the council would have acted at that time, if they would have just acted three years ago, we would have saved $250 million. We would have more than paid for this whole amount of bonding that we're doing right now. So the lack of movement and action cost us $250 million minimum. That's a fact. Secondly, I don't think anyone's saying that we don't care about the children and that we don't want to improve our facilities. First of all, I don't understand why the council and the city hasn't gone after federal funding. The urban parks recovery action plan Our program provides funding for recreation facilities. There are other funding sources out there from the U.S. government that's available for us to help funding these types of facilities. We've done nothing. We just bond. We take the easy route. It's real easy to just go out and bond. You don't have to fill out an application. You don't have to lobby. You just bond it and charge the people. We have a responsibility to do what every other community does when it comes to these programs and these funding of these programs. Not taking the easy route. We have to take the hard route, like everybody else does. And we will save our taxpayers a substantial amount of money. As the chair said, you know, when we go back to the firehouses, you didn't have to build a Bentley. We could have built something. I understand that the county built three firehouses for what we paid for one station, for station 88. We could have provided those services. And I'm not saying that the fire department doesn't deserve it. I just don't know whether we could afford it. That's the issue. So I think that we have to look very carefully when we spend this money, especially now, because we know that this homestead law has a very good chance of being approved. And if it does, we're going to have a hard time providing essential services. So we have to make those difficult decisions now, just like the other communities are doing. If you look at Palm Beach County and you look at other municipalities, they're making those tough decisions now because they know what's coming down the road. It's too late. Once you got the money, once you own that debt, that's not going away until you finish it off 20, 30 years down the road. So we have to be very, very careful in how we spend the taxpayers money right now. And I'm not saying, I don't think that we don't need these facilities or these improvements. I think we did a poor job in the last few years and how we did it with design build instead of bidding, how we did it and we're taking so long to do these projects. I think we could have saved a substantial amount of money, but we didn't, we're here now, but we have an opportunity tonight to make a decision to save the taxpayers' money and be fiscally responsible.

That's it, Chair. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Chair Spurteous. Councilwoman Davis-Brenner.

So I totally agree that we are definitely going to have to look at our budget. It's going to have to be a tight squeeze when we start our budget process because we do have to say, because what happens is I would hate for us to build all of this new stuff But we can't afford to use it because we can't. We have to move away. I've been hearing a lot of people, a lot of my young professional school teachers that are saying it's just getting too expensive to live in Riviera Beach in Palm Beach County. So I mean, I would love to have all of these great facilities, but if I'M NOT HERE TO ENJOY THEM BECAUSE I HAVE BEEN PRICED OUT AND I CAN'T AFFORD TO LIVE HERE, THEN WHAT GOOD IS IT TO ME AND A LOT OF OUR RESIDENTS WHO ARE WORKING CLASS FAMILIES? I MEAN, TWO INCOME HOUSEHOLDS, BUT WITH ALL OF THESE ASSESSMENTS AND INCREASES, IT IS BECOMING A STRAIN. SO I'M LOOKING AT WHATEVER WE CAN DO FROM TONIGHT ON TO TRY TO HELP OUR RESIDENTS, HELP MYSELF. HELP MY MOM WHO IS ON A FIXED INCOME. CHAIR.

THANK YOU. COUNCILWOMAN DAVIS-PRINCE. COUNCILWOMAN LANIER.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS BOND, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE FACT THAT THIS IS NOT JUST A BOND FOR PARKS AND ROOTS. THERE ARE THREE OTHER ENTITIES TIED TO THIS. THERE IS THE BEACH PART OF IT, THERE IS THE CITY HALL PART OF IT, AND THERE IS THE HIGH SCHOOL, THE NEW HIGH SCHOOL PART OF IT, THE LAND SWAP. SO ANY DECISIONS THAT WE MAKE IS GOING TO AFFECT THAT. SECONDLY, IF THE NEW LAW HAPPENS, AND OF COURSE WE THINK THAT IT WILL, WE CAN'T USE THAT MONEY FOR PARKS AND RAKES AT ALL. So we need to bond now or forever hold our peace because of the situation that we're going to be put in November. And I think that the city has the wherewithal to be able to get this done. And I think that saving taxpayers money is being able to ensure that taxpayers are getting what they ask for. And also our job is to make sure that it does happen and it does happen fiscally. AND ALSO TO SAY THAT THERE'S OTHER FUNDING SOURCES FOR PARKS AND RECS, THEN WE SHOULD HAVE, YOU KNOW, YOU SAID YOU'VE BEEN HERE TWO AND A HALF YEARS, COUNCILMAN, WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THAT BEING, THAT YOU'VE BEEN HERE TWO AND A HALF YEARS, SO TALKING ABOUT PARKS AND RECS AND THE CONVERSATION ABOUT FEDERAL FUNDING AND THAT SHOULD HAVE CAME ON THE TABLE BEFORE TONIGHT. SO WHEN WE HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS, WE CAN'T WAIT UNTIL THE DAY OF TO MAGICALLY THINK OF ALL THESE OTHER THINGS THAT WE COULD HAVE DONE. We are here now. There's a lot of things that we could have done differently. We're not perfect, but 70% of the people in this city are asking for something for their children. And to now skimp on that is something that I don't think they voted for. And I really believe that we can work this out, that we can look at this in a way in which everybody gets what they need to have. And it's not just A SITUATION WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT CUTTING ALL OF THIS OR GUTTING THIS. THERE'S A WAY THAT WE CAN LOOK AT THIS TO BE ABLE TO GET THE THINGS THAT WE NEED FOR OUR CHILDREN. AND IT'S JUST THAT SIMPLE.

MR.

CHAIR. I HEARD VICE CHAIR SPIRITUS AND THEN MAYOR LAWSON.

JUST TO MY COLLEAGUE, YOU MUST HAVE MISSED THE MEETINGS OR YOU WEREN'T LISTENING. I'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT FEDERAL FUNDING, STATE AND FEDERAL FUNDING AND THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS PERSON. FOR TWO AND A HALF YEARS NOW SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE. I'VE HAD DISCUSSION OVER AND OVER AGAIN WITH OUR FORMER CITY MANAGER. I BROUGHT HIM UP AT OUR MEETINGS. WE DID HAVE AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS PERSON FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME BUT THAT PERSON WASN'T REPLACED. I'M NOT SURE WHY. BUT I HAVE BEEN SPEAKING ABOUT IT AND I'VE BEEN SPEAKING TRYING TO EXPLAIN TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND TO OUR FORMER CITY MANAGER HOW YOU LEVERAGE THOSE FUNDS WITH YOUR MUNICIPAL FUNDING. TO MAKE THESE PROJECTS HAPPEN. SO I'VE BEEN HERE AND I'VE BEEN SPEAKING ABOUT IT. WITH REFERENCE TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, MR. SHERMAN, CAN'T WE JUST DO THE EXCHANGE WITHOUT DEVELOPING THE SITE? CAN'T WE EXCHANGE THE PROPERTY AND GIVE IT TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND SAVE THE OTHER PROPERTY FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT?

i guess i mean i'm sure the school district would have would have input into that do we have to necessarily if the school district is willing to swap you could you could swap um but keep in mind that part of the deal over at callaway they're going to try to build that into a high school facility over there and the school district was contributing five million dollars to capital projects over at Callaway. So not only with this six and a half and their 5 million, there is still additional money needed, but I don't know what their opinion is that this part falls apart, you know, where, where it ultimately shakes out. But yeah, I mean, you can always put something else on the land. You can always just have it be open space. It's true.

Follow up. Can I follow up on that?

When you're talking, just go ahead.

Okay, so the quandary that we find ourselves in right now is that we want to build a police station. And we know when we build this police station, we're going to be getting rid of our aquatic center. That's a $23 million aquatic center. You know I don't agree with the location, but I support the police department. I support building a new police station. And the decision on where it was going to go was decided before I got on the council. So we're paying basically $23 million for dirt when we do own land where we could put a police station. I don't know why we're doing what we're doing. Now we have to spend another $20 million to build a new aquatic center. We have to do this because we have to build our police station and we don't want to stop that project or hold that project up. Although I don't know what's going on with that court case. Maybe legal counsels can advise us where we are. But regardless, I know that we have to, we should probably take a portion of the recreation bonding money and build the aquatic center so we can build the police station and still have a swimming pool complex for the community. But I don't see how we could justify spending the additional money at this particular time. You know, when we, when these people, when we pass these bonds, nobody knew what was going to happen with the homestead law. Nobody saw it. That wasn't even on the radar. We didn't understand what was going to be happening. We didn't realize we were going to be building a $475 million water plant. We didn't see this coming. We thought it was $150 million. Things have changed. We have to be able to change as well. We have to do what's right when the times change. We have to stand up and change with the times. I think we have to make a tough decision tonight, but I know where I'm headed. Thank you, Chair.

Mayor Lofton.

Thank you. First concern, Dr. Spiritsch has brought up the land swap. The school board will not proceed with the development of the high school and relocation of the inlet unless we develop the sites. Those discussions have happened over the last seven years. We've been negotiating a lot of these issues and items and know some of the concerns. And what I see too often is that delays happen when there's turnover or change within leadership and government because, of course, there's different ideas, vision, and eyes that look at certain items. The community charrettes, the conversations, and the discussions that we've had in reference to these communications and in regards to these bonds were driven not because the board just wanted to get something done. It was based on the feedback from the residents. So the first concern where everybody all night was just throwing out mud about who didn't do what, who didn't, like, Let's forget that for right now. Let's just talk about the facts. Mr. Sherman, if this ballot initiative passes, homesteaded taxes for properties will be eliminated for homes under $250,000 based upon how the language is written. That is just going to be for homesteaded properties, correct? Correct. If we look at a $250,000 house and those taxes are eliminated, with the same value, we would be adding to that tax roll an assessment of just over $120,000. annually based upon this assessment maybe a little bit less because i think it went from 56 down to 42. so realistically it'd be a hundred dollars so for the entire 115 or just the parks we're just talking about the park okay because so the parks right now i'm going to get to dr spiritus's point about we have to look at the full picture i'm talking about this item that you have on the screen

So we've been able to take the $56 per 100,000 and drop it down closer to $43 per $100,000. So that $200,000 in extra exemptions at our current millage rate is about $1,650 of property taxes that those homes wouldn't pay. And then on this side, they would pay about $85. Residents.

Colleagues, the assessments that are being taxed to most of our residents that are being homesteaded, we only get a third of those taxes, if not less than that. So realistically, the homestead exemption is going to help more of the county, is going to help more of, I'm sorry, it's going to hurt more of the county and some of the school district than it's going to hurt the city of Riviera Beach. But the residents will be saving a substantial amount. So to your point, Dr. Spiritus, if that ballot initiative passes, This year, what's going to happen is the residents will have a substantial savings, but we can actually put this bond initiative on the tax roll, have a substantial investment from our residents, and it's going to cost them a de minimis amount compared to what they'll be saving on their tax bill. If we're talking about dollars and cents, it's going to be a minimal amount in all of this. goes into investment in Riviera Beach, and the tax bill that will be eliminated that is split between the school board, split between the county, and split between the city will be eliminated if they pass it. Now, mind you, I don't support residents.

Give me one second, and then you guys can give feedback.

The second concern is that if we're looking at dollars and cents, Mr. Sherman just stated that if we do not add this to the bill this year, that we may never get to add this because if it passes to Dr. Spiritus's point, we will not be able to bring this back. This item passed by the community by 64%, 65%. So we're going to be very transparent. We're just talking about this item. It was actually 65% on this item. Everything else was closer to 70%. So the residents were asking for these bonds to invest into the community. And the investment is a minimal amount for a homesteaded or a homeowner in the community based upon this assessment. Now back to Dr. Spirits' point. We're looking at the full picture. We have our water plant. We have the additional bonds. We have all of the assessments that's being added, impact fees. This is investments into our community. And these are the things that our residents want to see. We continue to kick the can down the road. We will never see the improvements Because what's going to happen is we're going to keep delaying it every time government turns over. And the minute we're about to score and take the city to new heights, we stop progress. We don't get our water plant built. And to your point, Dr. Spirit, as you said, 2013, it was actually much earlier than that. Because I was in high school when they were still talking about we need a new water plant. And that was well before 2013. So I'm not going to blame this council for the decisions they made to improve this community over the last six years or the last council on the decisions that they did or did not make. But as of right now, to your point, we have to make a decision that not only did the taxpayers and 70% vote on, but this council put into the initiative based upon the charrettes of seven years, not just the opinion of what's been happening over the last one or two. We have to make improvements into our community. We have to build a community with the investments we have. We have to hire an intergovernmental affairs and economic development coordinator. should not be a delay on the staff mr wilkins we need to get that done because mr spirit is to your point you said that it was the last two years to my point it's been the last seven i've been asking for that position for the seven years that i've been serving on this board and having that same conversation so if we don't have somebody advocating to bring additional dollars now my last point and i will send this back to you mr chair is that development is vital If we don't address some of the development in our community, meaning additional doors to increase our ad valorem tax and bring additional revenue then we will not be able to offset some of the burden that we're doing. We're making investments into our water, police, fire facilities. But that also gives us additional capacity to put more doors in our community. So when these projects come to our community and we have 20, 30, 50, 150 residents that are saying no, no, no, let's remember the other 38,000 residents that are impacted because we don't want to have a project in their backyards. because we don't want to have a project at the base of a bridge, because we don't want to have a project in a certain area. Let's consider that the additional ad valorem tax that comes from these investments into our community when we have other projects that are brought here, but they're shut down because of politics. So let's be very transparent. If you want to be real about the entire picture, let's generate some more money for our residents. Let's hire the staff that's necessary. Bring some more dollars in, Mr. City Manager, and let's not turn our back on some projects that would bring additional ad valorem to our community. Thank you, Mr.

Chair. Thank you, Mayor. Did I have Ms. Lanier?

Yes.

I'm sorry, Councilwoman Lanier, and then I have some quick comments, and then we need to keep this moving.

All right, very good. So I just really wanted to say that, first and foremost, residents voted for this. That's the first thing. The second thing, the residents voted for this, 70%. A sports facility can be an enterprise center. It can be GENERATE REVENUE. YOU HAVE PEOPLE WHO HAVE SPORTS FACILITIES AND COMPLEXES THAT GENERATE MONEY FROM REGIONAL SPORTS TOURNAMENTS. I MEAN, THEY MAKE MONEY. THAT IS ONE THING ABOUT THE CITY OF RIVERA BEACH. WE HAVE ACTIVITIES, BUT THEY'RE NOT ACTIVITIES THAT PEOPLE PAY FOR. WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GENERATE INCOME REVENUE FROM THE SPORTS COMPLEX. WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY, FEDERAL FUNDS ARE HIT OR MISS. We may or may not get that. But what we have to do is that the homestead exemption will offset some of these costs. But we really have to understand that this really comes down to, and I hear this all the time, that the children have nothing to do and nowhere to go in this city. And the thing about it is that the facilities, just like every other facility that was in this city, is dilapidated. And we have to understand that if we're going to talk about the future, we can't talk about the past. We can't talk about the fact that what we should have could be. But we can talk about now how we're going to look at the future for the children in River Beach to have someplace to go and someplace that they can be proud of with these with this complex. And that we can make money from and that's the most important thing. And I'll say lastly, this is what the residents voted for.

OK, I'm going to make some closing comments here and then we've got to move on. We've been on this a long time and understandably so. We've been talking about the residents and what they voted for. I think it was even said that 70 percent of the residents voted for this. I have never seen 70 percent of the residents vote in any election. Please, please, please, please. This is not for the JSA. I'm just giving some facts. I'm not trying to be controversial or dispute. These are facts. On average, we have about 10% of our voters that vote. We have about 35, 40,000 voters. If we get 4,000, we had a good voting cycle on average. unless when Obama ran, I think we kicked it up to about 8,000 here. The insinuation that 70% of the residents voted is not factual. And I don't think that the residents, wait, let me finish. I don't think that any of my colleagues was trying to be misleading, but 70% of the people that went to the polls voted, not 70% of the residents. That's a big difference, very big difference. The other thing I'm going to say in my comments here, because we do have to move on. The past administration, before Mr. Wilkins got here, made some decisions that put this decision in a real bind. Everybody was all excited about the new buildings, and we're going to get a new complex, a sports complex, a new city hall, a new this, a new... What they didn't talk about is how much it's going to cost each individual resident. They got excited about the opportunities to have the buildings, not how we were going to pay for them. They said, yeah, we're going to bond them and the residents going to pay. But nobody really broke it down numbers. Your house is worth X number of dollars. The assessment on you going to be X number of dollars. They didn't make the decision like that. They make the decision based on we're going to have some new facilities. Now the rooster comes home to roof. It's got to be paid. And the residents in our community are low and middle income. For me, my back is against the wall now. Because what I don't want to do is jeopardize some of these deals because the bad decisions that were made by a previous administration that's my opinion they recommended some bad things to the council and now we're here trying to decide what we're going to do what we're not going to do what we can afford and what we can't afford people thought everything was rosy when we were talking about doing all these things and everybody banging their chest and we're finna have all this in our community. And people are talking about moving away because they can't afford it now. Some talking to me about moving away just on the water bill increase, not these other assessments, just on the water bill. Gentrification on water bill, water rates, seriously? And we think that we're doing a good job. We're not, in my opinion. We're not compassionate to the resident's income. Some who have it, they're comfortable, we can pay it, let's move. I think about the lowest of our residents. When I say the lowest, I mean economically and what they can afford. And sometimes we don't go that deep in thinking about how it's going to impact the low-income residents So, but my back, we're in a position here now where we have to make a serious decision and it's going to be, it's going to be a difficult decision. I don't want to see everything go down in smoke, but let me, let me say that I do not want to see everything go down in smoke and we have to do this over. I'm really frustrated with the past administration that sold this to our people and to the council without giving it further thought. Vice Chair Spiritus.

Chair, I make a motion that we amend this resolution to reduce the recreation portion from 55 million to 25 million, 20 million to be used for the Aquatic Center, the other 5 million to be used for various parks throughout the city.

One of order.

A point, let's get back on. Mr. Councilwoman Miller, Anderson, you have a point of order and you know that Robert rules point of order.

Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. I don't need that explanation. Let me.

Well, tell me what the procedural mistake is, because that's what a point of order is. Is there a motion on the floor?

Can I talk?

Yeah, but I'm just advising you for the point of order.

I don't need the advisement.

Well, okay.

Let me say what I'm going to say.

If it's dealing with the procedure, you can say it.

Let me say what I'm going to say.

If it's not dealing with the procedure, Councilwoman, I'm not... Let me say what I am going to say, sir. Okay, say what you're going to say.

So just like the... I think it was last night, maybe, we were trying to make a motion in the middle of a motion. Don't we need to... dispose of the other one first or because we had the same issue last night.

Mm hmm.

Yeah, it's only what attorney we have there.

I'm sorry, Mr. Terry. We go, Mr. Tracy. Oh, no, no. I can handle this. I can handle this. There's a motion on the floor. He tried to do amendment to the motion. Either we have to carry the motion on the floor or rescind it. OR HE CAN RESCIND HIS MOTION UNTIL WE CARRY THIS ONE AND BRING IT BACK UP. WHAT'S THE PLEDGE?

CHAIR, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE CALL THE VOTE. AND THEN I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION AFTER THAT.

MR. CHAIR.

SLOW DOWN.

We do have two public comment cards on this item. Okay. And the maker of the motion was Councilperson Davis-Pennier, seconded by Councilperson Lumiere. That's the motion that we have open on the floor right now.

That was the motion on the floor now. And you just have to call the question. If you call the question, it's for the motion on the floor.

So we have to hear the comment.

Not the new motion that you made. Right.

So we have to hear the comments first.

I didn't realize there were comments. Yes. Comment cards, please.

Our speaker is Scott Lewis, followed by Faye Moseman.

Mr. Chair, while Mr. Lewis is walking up, can I make a quick comment? Mr. Spiritus does have the ability to amend that original motion, so he can't make that Mr. Chair, he had the option to amend it. And to Ms. Miller Anderson's point, the motion would need to be disposed unless he's amending the original motion. And I think that was the concern of why she made the point of order. And because she made the point of order, it's just your ruling on the point of order. So if he wanted to amend it, that was his option. And he chose to just say he will vote on this and then bring it back with a different motion after if it doesn't pause. It doesn't pass. So just for clarity, so Robert's rules, as you stated, Mr. Chair. I think I said the exact same thing.

Mr. Miller.

Scott Lewis, for the record. I'm on the audit committee for the city, and we would love to work on some of this, helping you all to cut the budgets and help, but we don't talk about those things at the audit committee. The only things we voted on, Mr. Evans went 100% against what we voted on. on four votes. I've heard a lot of discussion tonight, and when those bonds passed, I don't believe we knew that there was going to have to be a $450 million water plant, some kind of bond on that. Your taxpayers didn't know it. We didn't know it. I don't remember knowing it. And I have stood up here and asked repeatedly, that we get a full picture of all the taxes five years from now, not today, five years. Why? Because there's these little games where the $115 million bond, gee, we're not going to start paying back until after next year's election of the council. So let's just delay that so the voters won't know, the residents won't know. And I don't want you to think it's all rosy. You've got a $10 million error that the Office of Inspector General found with the fire stations. That was wrong. Barracuda Bay, $23 million and it's dilapidated after 17 years? Come on. You can't waste our money like this. Please. You know, and I see the charts with $100,000 taxable value. Who's got a home worth $100,000 in Palm Beach County today? No one. It's just, let's piecemeal it out. It's just a little bit of money. a little bit here and then parking on the beach here and then let's 125 on the water rates that's all gonna don't worry it's staircase over five years that's why i want the five-year projection i know randy and his staff can do that i asked him if he could he said it wouldn't be that difficult but not for a hundred thousand dollar home that doesn't exist that's a shack right we deserve to know and I don't want another pickleball court for the fire station or let's have all this stuff. That's recreation. Saunas for their employees. You know, please don't talk about cutting the budget. Cut it. Do it. Do the hard job that we voted for you to do. Because the last thing I say, and this I want to be sensitive to, because I'm white. Four of you are African-Americans. You are going to be the agent that forces people out of this community, your people. That's your fault.

The next speaker is Fain Lozman.

Thank you for your comment. Next speaker.

Good evening. That vote passed before people knew about the water plant, before they started getting giant bills. You want to put it back on the ballot? It probably wouldn't pass now. One of the problems that the leadership in this city, not the elected leadership, but leadership from Evans and the attorney, they kind of slow walked the scandal with the water plant. By the time they'd done it right away, it wouldn't be $450 million. If they had built these projects in a timely fashion, they wouldn't be $100 million. One of the things that Mr. Guyton is very fiscally understanding what's going on. We need to take every building and get it built as soon as possible. We can't afford to have a recession in two years. Turnberry said, we'll approve it tomorrow. Start building your building. We need that tax money coming in. Every billion dollars of property tax generates 22 million in taxes, ad valorem taxes, 22 million per billion. People want to build a quarter billion dollar building. Hey, we're a special meeting. We'll get you on your way. That's the problem. We piss off developers. We drag things out. Every year their costs go up. But we have a real big answer that nobody's looking at. The EPA rescinded the Endangered Species Act for harm. It becomes effective September 14th, 2026. Whatever seagrass people were complaining about on our property, that's not a big deal anymore. There is a billion dollars of property value on the northwest corner of singer island 160 acres with it was was surveyed appraised for six and a half million an acre six years ago that's over 900 million dollars when kashama miller anderson came to my property she said the people in the west side they don't care if you build houses on singer island let that property be developed that's another 20 million bucks a year that could come into the city just on the raw land value to have a rezoned single family. $20 million a year in a decade, that's $200 million. You cannot afford not to rezone that back to single family residential. The Shands case in Marathon just said, you got to let them develop that island after 20 years. This city is playing a game of Russian roulette. If we win the case in federal court that we're filing against shortly, You're going to have to pay me a few hundred million bucks. There's nothing you can do about it. We need to get income coming in and then we can do these projects. But sitting here and continuing to stop people from, and what about Mehop? People want to convert a condo, a resort hotel. Mehop will pay $20 million to the Emirates, have another tax for the park on any kind of condo, resort hotel conversion. But we got to bring in income.

not not look to stop projects that generate income thank you for your comments do we have any more mr chair that is the end of public comment okay um the mayor was correct in his robert ruse um assessment um i thought i indicated that but if i didn't there can be an amendment but it needs a second and we would vote on that amendment first, if that doesn't pass that original bill.

Okay, Chair, then I go back to my motion to amend the resolution to reduce the recreation portion to $25 million, 20 million for the Aquatic Center, and 5 million to be dispersed amongst the other parks.

Moved by Dr. Spiritus. Is there a second? That motion dies for lack of a second. The original motion is still on the table. The original motion is to pass the resolution as printed. That is, we're on 11A, are we? Yes, by the clerk.

11A.

Okay. Is there any further discussion on the original motion? The amendment failed due to a lack of a second.

I just wanted to say, Chair, right quick that I understood what you were saying about the 70% for the residents who were voting. And when I said 70%, I meant that 70% of the people who actually voted. And I think that the people who voted are reflective of the community. So you're right. I was right. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT AN OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF PEOPLE IN THE CITY VOTED FOR THIS BOND.

UNDERSTOOD. ANY FURTHER COMMENTS?

CHAIR?

COUNCILMEMBER DAVID SPANIER.

SO IS THERE ANY POSSIBILITIES OF REDUCTION FOR THE AQUATIC AND RECREATIONAL FACILITY COSTS THAT WILL NOT IMPACT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT SWAP OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? IS THERE ANY WAY THOSE NUMBERS CAN BE ADJUSTED?

NEW SPEAKER SO THESE OPINIONS AND COSTS WERE GIVEN TO US BY THE PARTY THAT YOU SELECTED TO, YOU KNOW, TO NEGOTIATE WITH. THERE HAS BEEN ABSOLUTELY NO VALUE ENGINEERING, ANYTHING TO THAT. always the opportunity to cut something out, cut down square footage, do something to reduce those numbers. I will tell you that above the $55 million, there's about another $17 million that is unfunded by these bonds. That the project itself that's going to do city would have to in essence fund this 55 million is covering the beach Callaway and the majority of the cost of the aquatics and the replacement for wells. What's not in his numbers is replacement of the fields that are at wells. Okay, because again, you're gonna if they move forward with the city all project that entire south side gets built out. so you have to replace the entire wells complex put in the pool for barracuda bay and in essence replace the fields unless you're going to just always try to use the school fields or go over to callaway and you can use those fields but yeah there's always the opportunity like i said you know we haven't gotten into digging into these numbers this is from you know their opinion of what those costs are they have estimators and that's what they've come

Chair.

So I'm glad you brought that up, Director Sherman. City Hall. City Hall is not in these numbers. You're talking about another 40, $50 million that's not in the bonding numbers. That's going to be a lease. So we're going to have to pay that lease. The taxpayers are going to have to lease back a City Hall. And why are we leasing a City Hall? Because we don't have the bonding ability to build a City Hall. BUT THAT'S A NUMBER THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE PAYING, WHETHER YOU CALL IT A BOND OR WHATEVER YOU CALL IT, THE TAXPAYERS ARE GOING TO BE TAKING MONEY OUT OF THEIR POCKETS AND PAYING FOR THAT NEW CITY HALL. AND THAT'S GOING TO BE ANOTHER $40, $50 MILLION ON TOP OF THE $115 MILLION THAT YOU'RE SHOWING US NOW. AND THAT $115 MILLION IS NOT AN ACCURATE NUMBER BECAUSE WE KNOW WE PASSED GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS TO INCREASE THE POLICE STATION, $20 MILLION, $25 MILLION RIGHT THERE, AND OTHER GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS THAT WE PASSED IN JUST THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE, EXCLUDING THE WATER PLANT. WE HAVE TO MAKE SOME DECISIONS SOONER OR LATER. WE CAN'T JUST KEEP SPENDING THIS MONEY AND THINK IT'S GOING TO RAIN DOWN DOLLAR BILLS AND WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO PAY IT. IT JUST DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY. IF SOMEONE'S PAYING FOR IT, AS THE CHAIR SAID IN THE BEGINNING, WE WILL BE GENERIFYING OUR OWN CITY BY BUILDING THESE PROJECTS AND PASSING THESE BONDS. CHAIR?

WITH THE CHAIR. COUNCILWOMAN SHERLY LENIER. THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO VOTE ON THIS.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE AN APPEAL TO MY COLLEAGUES. I DON'T WANT TO GET TO THE PARKS AND RECS AND THE KIDS AND SAY STOP. BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT WE'RE DOING. WE'RE SAYING THAT THERE'S A LOT THAT WE HAVE ON THE TABLE, BUT WE'RE GOING TO CUT PARKS AND RECS. WE'RE GOING TO CUT because what's happening here is that and hear me out because i'm making an appeal to you guys that all of these things are kind of tied together we fought very hard to get a new high school that is tied to that land swap the school is going to sink 100 million dollars into that new school if that if this doesn't happen then that goes away Same thing with the new city hall. When the city hall is built, there's a whole other area that's going to be developed for revenue for the city. This sports complex can generate revenue. People will pay to do business here with these new sports facilities. So I'm making an appeal to you that we can look at this different ways. But I think that approving this tonight will give us an opportunity to come back and look at federal funding to look at how we can do this and not we can buy it, but we don't have to spend it. And people say, oh, you know, if you get it, you're going to spend it. No, we don't have to. We don't have to we can look at the cost, we can bond it, but look at the look at the cost of the facilities themselves. how to make money from this, how to make money from this. Because one of the residents said it, we're going to have to generate revenue, period. Not just because of this sports complex, not just because of the new police station, the new city hall. We're going to have to generate revenue, period. You go to any other city and you use their pool, you pay for it, period. So we need to look at the fact that I'm appealing to you guys that we can look at this and then we can look at these facilities and see what we can reduce.

Chair.

Okay.

I have a question before we vote.

Okay. Councilwoman Lanier, you're done?

Yes, sir.

Okay. Vice Chair Spiritus.

Director Sherman, do we have to make this vote tonight?

You do not have to make this vote tonight but we're getting to the critical POINT WE'RE SPENDING A LOT OF MONEY ON POLICE AND FIRE AND WE HAVE NO BOND PROCEEDS SO IS IT ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL TONIGHT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT KEEPING CLOSER TO THE NOVEMBER DATE COULD WE VOTE FOR THE POLICE AND THE FIRE

and then bring back the recreation later on after we speak to the school district and we get a legal opinion on whether or not the war is going to permit us to bond for this maybe next year or the year down the road? You could absolutely do that.

If that's, again, it'd be nice to get police and fire out of the equation, get those behind us. But yeah, but again, I just, I would ask that please don't go by like the second meeting of August. Because again, that window to go get to market an issue is getting smaller and smaller. So.

But what are you asking about disparities?

What I'm saying, Councilwoman Lanier, what I'm recommending is that we approve the police and the fire bond tonight and that we go back and have discussions with the school district AND DISCUSSIONS WITH OUR LEGAL COUNSEL TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT THE NEW STATE LAW IS GOING TO PERMIT US TO DO THE RECREATION IN PHASES, DO PHASE ONE, WHICH COULD BE THE AQUATIC CENTER AND SOME OTHER IMPROVEMENTS THIS ROUND, AND THEN MAYBE A YEAR OR TWO DOWN THE ROAD, DO ANOTHER BOND AND FINISH UP THE PLAN FOR THE RECREATION IF WE COULD AFFORD IT AT THAT TIME.

NEW SPEAKER I THINK I HAVE THE SAME RESERVATIONS THAT MR. SHERMAN HAS. WE MAY NOT GET BACK TO THIS. I WANT TO PASS THIS TONIGHT. BUT HEAR ME OUT. WE CAN LOOK AT THE REDUCTION OF THIS AFTER WE'VE APPROVED IT, IN A SENSE. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT, I MEAN, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE IMPROVING LOCAL AMENITIES FOR RESIDENTS. AND, YOU KNOW, ironically you know even if homestead exemption passes that can partially offset the cost of these projects period so we really we really can do this and i think that sure i mean our job is to figure out how which is with you go ahead no you can finish it out i just think that I MEAN, OUR JOB IS TO FIGURE THIS OUT. OUR JOB IS TO WORK TOGETHER TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN GET WHAT RESIDENTS WANT. AND I THINK WE CAN DO THAT.

CHAIR.

OKAY. ARE YOU DONE? YEAH, I'M DONE. VICE CHAIR SPIRITUS.

IT SOUNDS GREAT THAT WE'RE GOING TO CHARGE MONEY AND WE'RE GOING TO MAKE MONEY ON THESE FACILITIES, EXCEPT THAT THAT ISN'T WHAT REALLY HAPPENS IN THE REAL WORLD. I MEAN, I HAD TO RUN RECREATION FACILITIES IN COMMUNITIES we ran an ice skating rink it cost us three million dollars a year and we were charging a lot of money to use it we charge on our beaches to get onto our beaches uh we made millions of dollars but of course there's double that amount of money to operate the beaches so even though you think you're making money in the long run you're actually losing money they don't they very rarely pay for themselves when a municipality is is running these facilities it's very very difficult and very not cost-effective. I mean, you want to provide the services. Clearly, we want to provide the service. I believe the kids should go to the pool for free. I don't think you should charge our own kids to go to a swimming pool. So I'm just recommending that.

I hear you, Mayor. Yeah, I agree. I mean, look at Barrickwood. We made no money off of it.

I'm comfortable in the linear. I think Mayor Lofkin... us next. And then we're going to vote.

Done.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair. Respectfully to Dr. Spiritus, times have changed. When you were running and operating those facilities, we have travel ball. We have different facilities that are generating money and revenue within our parks, recs, and infrastructure. We have to come up with creative ways of generating additional revenue. Barracuda Bay was a a complete landmine for the city where we were losing $500,000 annually. We have to look at everything creatively and go after the federal funding to help buy down this bond. I don't think we can delay this because to your point, if you want to delay this vote tonight, the architectural RFP is going out for the school district for the development of the Suncoast Inlet site. The school district is watching this meeting and negotiated for the last six years with us in regards to land swaps in regards to the investment in the fields that we're building. They will be looking at this to determine how are they going to proceed, because if we're not going to invest into it, I could definitely see them putting a pause on the money that's going to cost to invest. $300 million into Riviera Beach, not the 150, because in addition to the new high school, they're also putting money into inlet. They're putting money into every one of our schools that all increased in grade levels from C's to B's. So every one of our schools that the school district is investing close to 300 millions into our community, we do not want to give them any hesitation or pause if we're really rebuilding this community. So I want us to really take that into consideration. And I'm asking Mr. Chair, as you said, it's some tough decisions but i don't want to blow up something because we're trying to make a rash decision that could change this bond and residents i understand the frustration but please stop shouting out what we're speaking We really want to make sure that we get this done in these decisions that were made. So I'm asking Mr. Chair and to the colleagues on this board, if we can proceed with this at the same time simultaneously, buying these bonds down, working to address some of the revenue, we can walk and chew gum at the same time. So going after helping to bring these down, So reaching out to our federal, state, local lobbyists to tell them that the county, the state, and the federal level to assist with drawing this down because our residents cannot afford all the investment, but the investment is essential and vital for the development and growth of Riviera Beach. So what can we do as partners and work on that now? Thank you, Mr.

Chair. THANK YOU. I'M READY TO CALL THE QUESTION.

WE NEED THE SCHOOL. WE NEED THE SCHOOL. WE NEED THE SCHOOL.

I MAKE A MOTION.

I READ A MOTION ON THE FLOOR. YOU AMENDED IT.

I WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND THE MOTION THAT'S ON THE FLOOR. I'D LIKE TO AMEND IT TO INCLUDE THE POLICE AND THE FIRE STATIONS IN THE BOND AND GO BACK TO COUNCIL AND TO the school district and come back with more information before we vote on the recreation portion of this of this bond.

OK, please, please, please stop in order. OK, that's been an amendment offered up. Wait, wait. That's been an amendment offered up. The amendment needs a second second. It's been seconded by Councilwoman Davis Purneer. It's been moved and properly seconded. Is there any further discussion on the motion? I hope not. Yes.

Can we hear the motion again, please? Hold on a second. I have the right to ask.

Yes. Come up, people. Stop it. Stop it. Did you get the motion, the amendment?

The amendment motion is for the resolution to include the police and fire station bond and come back with more information from legal for the parks and recreation.

And talks with the school district.

And school district.

Madam Chair, please call the question.

Councilperson Davis-Panier.

I'm sorry, yes.

Council person linear. Council person Miller Anderson.

Now.

Chair pro tem. I heard you. Jefferson. Guyton.

No. Now we go back to the original motion.

Yes, sir.

Call the question on the original motion.

Council person Davis Pannier. Yes. Council person linear yes, council person Miller Anderson, yes, chair pro tem doctor spirit is begrudgingly, yes. Chair person guy to yes, that is a unanimous vote.

Okay, we're going to go right into public comment on the general public comment and chair.

I'd like to thank my colleagues for that vote. I really appreciate the fact that we can work together to be able to get some things done.

Absolutely. Now, you did say that we can work together if we can find some room to bring it down.

Okay.

I'm going to hold you to that. Okay. Public comments. Public comments should begin at 7.30 p.m. unless there is no further business of the city council, which in that event, it should begin sooner. In addition, please, people, please be quiet leaving. In addition, if an item is being considered at 7.30 p.m., then comments from the public shall begin immediately after the item has been concluded. Please be reminded that the City Council has adopted rules of decorum governing public conduct during official meetings, which has been posted at the front desk in an effort to preserve order. Please, please, people, Please stop. We're holding a business meeting. If any of the rules are not adhered to, the city chairperson may have any disruptive speaker or attendee removed from the podium, from the meeting or the building, if necessary. Please govern yourselves accordingly. Madam Clerk, how many public comment cards do we have?

Mr. Chair, we have nine public comment cards. The first speakers are Ana Dragon, Antonio Arte, and Lloyd Brown.

Hello everyone, Annette Dragon, Riviera Beach. I believe that the City of Riviera Beach needs to rethink its stance on any proposed new development within the city. Firstly, any council person who has ties to any property development either within the City of Riviera Beach or elsewhere should recuse themselves from voting on any proposed new development within Riviera Beach or, in fact, in Palm Beach County. Secondly, I'm sure that all the citizens of Riviera Beach would want to see written guarantees and proof that sewer capacity, traffic safety, stormwater compliance, utility capacity, and all the infrastructure funding is actually in place prior to any developer being allowed to make a presentation outlining any future development. Thirdly, No special exceptions or waivers should be granted to any developer seeking to build above the property density as per the comprehensive plan. It's obvious that the granted approvals of the high-rises already under construction is not for workforce housing and affordable housing, and therefore in contravention to the housing element of the comprehensive plan on the City of Riviera Beach's website, I would very much like to know why the City Council deemed it appropriate to recently appoint a developer who has no experience in building high-rises anywhere and who is being sued by another city and its own contractors to build a marina project. Per my comment earlier, any favouritism as a result of any tie however loose to any developer should not be permitted. and any councillor who has any ties to any developer should recuse themselves from voting on any development. I have to state that I'm not actually opposed to redevelopment and improvements within the city. It's very important that we do make improvements, but what I would like to see is a more resident-friendly approach. It would help if the city would assist in remediating the derelict and unused properties and convert these properties into affordable workforce housing first. Building 12 or more stories anywhere within the city of Riviera Beach, which caters only to the uber-rich, is not what we want. The residents want to be heard. So please listen to your residents and vote accordingly.

Thank you for your comment.

Mr.

Chair, the next speaker is Antonio Arde, Lloyd Brown, and Rochelle Hughes.

Good evening. My name is Antonio Arte, and I am a structural engineer. I had my sailboat, Oblivion, in a mooring field in front of the Palm Beach Sailing Club for 21 years, since I bought it in 2005, through everything, hurricanes, everything. A few months ago, I got a notice from the town of Palm Beach about being in their waters and given 30 days to move it out of the area. After studying the options with Palm Beach owning all of the water east of the intercoastal waterways, my only option was moving north to feel faster, where my boat has been for several months. I moved to Florida so I could have a sailboat, and the politics have changed and are making that impossible. I am a responsible boat owner. My boat is registered, U.S. Coast Guard documented, and insured. I keep it up well, and I have enjoyed cruising for many years. Unfortunately, there are no options of where to put it. Every beach makes this impossible. The marinas will not accept a boat less than 40 feet long, mine is 29, besides being horribly expensive. There are no mooring fields in the area. I am aware that your city is working to build two of them. And I am in touch with Harbormaster Glenn Benbeck about the mooring field. I have not been able to get a date on when it will be available. He says a year or more. I am afraid I will not be able to have my boat in a year if I cannot find a place to keep it in the meantime. i literally don't know what to do with the boat if you guys kick us out the good voters as even selling the boat in this market is nearly impossible i am here today to propose the council to make a change in the ordinance so that the city can issue anchoring permits to selected voters that meet your requirements whatever they may be, including a yearly fee of $500 or $1,000 a year so that we can be put in a waiting list so that when the mooring field is finished and ready for us, we still have our boats. We are your client. We are the people that will be renting the mooring bolts from you guys. And unless we are allowed to keep our boats in the area, we will not have the boats to rent the mooring bolts from you guys. So I think it is in everybody's interest to provide us with a temporary anchoring permit until you guys finish the mooring field and we can put our boats in your mooring field. Because until that time, Really, we have no other option. Thank you for your comment. Thank you.

The next speaker is Lloyd Brown, followed by Rochelle Hughes and Alfred B. Jones.

Thank you, Chief. I'm not directing this at you, but I talked to a friend of mine, right? And he grew up just after slavery when they had they had black codes. And he told me, he said, it seemed like they walked in our neighborhood and they saw us without a job and they brought up the code. Vagrancy. Jail. Locked up. That's where the black man at. Okay. And then he said another thing they did when you were standing outside by the stores, they made another rule. Lottery. Lottery. Loitering or whatever. And he said jail. And then, you know, when I went up to visit my uncle in Rayford, you know, I didn't know what this was. I think it was Jim Crow law. But I was young, so it was normal to me because I didn't know. But this black guy said, you know, he see these laws, like the open container and all that. And it seemed like they seemed to almost fall over the black individuals I know that walked around. Because I know JC used to be drunk on the corner. Nobody bothered him. I mean, OK, if you're riding around at night and you're on Broadway, and the traffic is coming real heavy, I can understand an officer saying, forget about the crime. Let me go over here and get this dude out here who might get hit. But okay, if we got so much crime, Chief, I ain't trying to say on you, we got so much crime, why worry about a man with a light on a bike or an open container? Let me tell you, because my friends I told him, it's not all the police out there that you run into are going to treat you like the one that you told me about. Let me tell you, these young guys aren't like me. And you ought to hear them talk. And they talk about your officers. Let me tell you. So it's like you ain't going to have to worry about that man on that bike with no light or that dude drinking that open container. You're going to have to worry about them little jitterbugs on the corner of 12 and 13 got a pistol in their pocket. And you messing with them about something.

But I see these kids on my street

ride up and down the street all day long, six, seven years old on them electric bikes, but no officers say nothing. They run through the stop sign. But you want to get a man who's been here 70 years drinking a beer in front of his people who used to own the stores, and you want to take and stop him and fool with him, and that'll be the man save your life. Because them young kids say, oh, let him kick that dude. You know, I ain't trying to let him kick it, because that's the one that stopped me down the street for nothing. And the ones who've got the open container, they'll say the same thing. Man, forget that officer. Let them whoop his behind over there. So I'm going to tell you like this. Them little Jim Colas, they didn't stop. They just got a little bigger. And they made it like it easier that they can pull somebody on the corner for an open container. And I'm going to tell you, if you want friends out there, you better stop bopping them people like this.

Thank you for your comments. Our next public speaker.

Rochelle Hughes, followed by Alfred B. Jones and Faye Moseman.

Good evening, Rochelle Hughes, Riviera Beach.

Wow.

So first of all, I'm going to say, and this goes out to everybody who's watching, if you're a registered voter, you need to get out and vote. Because in seeing some of this stuff, there was only 4,000 votes in regards to those bonds. And now everyone's like, oh my God, residents didn't want it. Well, you didn't come out and vote. So you need to vote, get out there, vote, get your neighbors out to vote. We have 40,000 residents and only 4,000 people voted in that election on those bonds. So we really need to push that, city needs to push that, get your constituents out to vote. regarding the possible property tax what i would like to know and i'm not sure who can tell me is how many residential units do we have in the city today and how many of those are actually homesteaded because i know of our probably on Singer Island, there's quite a few who are, those are second homes. So they're not, and I know in my community, there's a lot of people, actually, there's a lot of homes that are second homes and they're not homesteaded. So I'd like to know how many out of those residential units are homesteaded or not homesteaded. That may give us a better idea of if that amendment passes, how it will affect the city and the budget. In the last meeting, it was stated that there would be an Amrit update. I'm fighting for the Amrit people. And I didn't see it on the agenda to talk about it, but I know it was said at the last meeting that we wanted to have an update and hopefully have the owner here too.

So I'd like to see that happen.

July 4th function, I heard it was great.

Wonderful, I couldn't make it.

I know at the one meeting when they talked about it, there was a budget of $150,000. Did we stay within that budget for, The July 4th function is one of my questions. Another thing too, that I'm going to say, I know there was a conversation with the council about presentation limits. That's great. But also I ask of the council to limit yourselves also on how long you talk about each item. I believe I read somewhere that a council person can maybe make two comments on an item. but we're making three, four, five, six. People are talking over each other. So we spent, what, 45 minutes on that last item. So maybe if we can somehow rein ourselves in from maybe repeating ourselves or whatever, that would cut the time on meetings. And that's all I have. Thanks.

Thank you for your comments. Next public speaker.

The next speaker is Alfred B. Jones, followed by Fain Lozman and Terrence Davis.

Hi, my name is Alfred Jones. I'm sitting here listening to all these, we're talking about the building, building these buildings and everything, but no one is looking after them for the citizens at all. We talk about it, but then we still pass stuff. What about some of these things that we do when we give money to our friends to come up here and pay for stuff? That could be money that could be saved. We do a lot of that, but nobody says anything about it. And one thing that we're talking about doing with this interlocal agreement that we're trying to do with the school board, we have not even okayed the part of the football field. It's not even okayed yet. but we just passed it. Right, Doug? It's not even passed yet. Is it passed yet by the school board about the football field? No, it's not. No, it's not. But this is the stuff that no one is paying attention to what's going on. We're moving Wales over to on the other side of the street when you have all that property over there. So what is going to happen with that property over there? Everything that you're trying to build on that side, you should be building it at Wales Recreation Center where you could have been saving money. Everything. I'm going to hate to say this, but it seems like we might need to start changing some people up here because you're not worried about their citizens. Because we're worried about the citizens, we won't have the highest millage rate in Palm Beach County for a small city. I'm hoping that you guys decide to make a change. We talked about, then I heard Mr. Menear talk about Making money. How can we make money when our programs are not good over at Wells Recreation Center? Let's be real. We talk about all this stuff, but it's a show. And I'm hoping that you guys are paying attention and listening and not just turning your head. Thank you. That's all I have to say.

Thank you for your comment. Next public speaker.

Next speaker is Fain Lozman, followed by Terrence Davis and Cindy March.

Fain Lozman. It's going around Singer Island. They're pushing Evans to come back in March. Evans shook you down for $100,000. He extorted $100,000 because he said there was a sunshine violation between the two of you, between Mr. Guyton and Mr. Spiritus relative to the hiring of Wilkins before I've been with contract even went. So he extorted a hundred grand. He said, you give me a hundred grand and I won't bring it public. I don't know if there was a violation or not, but the fact that you gave $100,000 makes it look like you had something to hide. You should say, we had no sunshine violation, sue us. And he wouldn't have sued you because you had a right to end his contract. So, I mean, that's a big mess that has to be cleared up. If both of you talked outside of a public meeting and he had proof of that, you guys are in a lot of trouble. You can't talk about city business in a non-public meeting. It looks like you paid him off to shut him up. Hey, take a hundred grand and don't talk about that anymore. But he's running over there now trying to get his job back in March. Now, When you raise your hand, uphold the Constitution, part of the Constitution is the Fifth Amendment. The Fifth Amendment said you cannot take private property for the public good and not pay for it. Cedric Thomas said at the candidates' forum, you want our property, you've got to pay for it. Millions of dollars a year of legal fees are being paid by a city attorney that's clueless when it comes to legal billing. She is funding... millions of dollars of legal fees to preclude my property and other properties from being developed. Now that the Endangered Species Act and no harm has been set aside by the Trump administration, now that the Shands case came out and said that those deeds we have the right to develop, that was a big case, brought it out for 20 years in marathon, you are going to have to let that be developed or if you miss the deadline, You're going to get lit up for hundreds of millions of dollars. You just don't understand what's going on. You have the legal team that's clueless. My legal team were prominent Supreme Court advocates. You got a loophole. They said like, oh, well, you didn't apply for a variance and get denied, so you got to start over again. What we applied for, we got denied. You need to change the comp plan. You need to change the zoning. You need to go back to single-family residential, and the people who complain about it They have their homes that they built first. There was 307 acres, 150 of it have already had homes up and down Pine Point Road, Yacht Harbor Manor, Palm Beach Isles. Let the rest of it be developed. That would bring in 20 million bucks a year. In a decade, that's 200 million. You cannot stand in the way. Or let's take it around town and get you recalled for violating the Fifth Amendment that you swore to uphold. We'll start again with five new elected officials.

Thank you very much for your comment. And for the record, I voted against Evan's deal to leave here. Next public speaker, please.

Next speaker. David. Terrence Davis, followed by Cindy March and Tennille T.K. Terrence Davis, Cindy March, and Tennille T.K. Good evening, Council.

It's a shame that y'all be talking about questions be calm. And then when I burst out and say something, y'all be arguing among each other. I still try to respect you after you tell me to be quiet. I don't have no problem with it, you know, because I give respect, even though y'all probably don't think I give respect. One thing I want to say, well, I'm glad the police department is going to be built. I just don't feel like it should be a barricade debate. I went to that town hall meeting with Wells Recreation and Everett and Randall Sherman straight out and lied. Me and Betsy Brown asked them once they built the fire station would they put Wells Recreation back and he said yes and it's still not there. We're spending a lot of money on all these events and I don't have nothing against Mr. Dan Callaway you know because I used that facility when I was small as a cheerleader and summer youth employment program as a sponsor for the little kids to come out and swim but how many more events we're going to have for a retirement party for Dan Calloway. How much that cost us? How much all these other events cost us? You know, we can't just pick and choose our friends and give our proclamations and give our presentations awards because to network for you to be in office the next following year or to bring somebody back who got this city the way it is now and now you all don't have the same energy that you all had when evans was here but then y'all have the energy where you all only want to give a new person a chance to try to help move this city forward to help develop this city that way it would be a good interest for the residents as well as the people that comes in and out the city of rivera beach the water bill has gone up tremendously yes i stay in the community but i have seen my water bill go up from thirty dollars to eighty dollars And less than two months. And that's not fair because we got to decide whether we're going to put food on the table and we still don't have clean water. We shouldn't have went up on that water bill until we got a clean water plan. Y'all could have figured out about the bonds because why tear down Barracuda Bay? Put that police station. I keep asking why we cannot put that police station back where it was. And you know what? I'm not for accolades. I'm not for life. But I found out because I wanted to know how did Evans get my number to invite me to this water plant? I can't be both. I can't be bamboozled, and I will not be balling bamboozled. So what I want to do is let you all have your flak bites, because this doesn't mean a hill of beans to me, because I don't care if it's Glenn Spirits or anybody up here. When I need to call you all out for the truth, I'm going to call you out. It might hurt, but I'm going to respect you, but I'm going to call you out.

So thank you anyway.

I do not need that flak to prove who I am with the city, because I love my city. I love my residents, and I'm going to speak up for them when it's truthful. If I'm wrong, I will admit that I'm wrong.

i will give you the apology but it's enough already you all have a good night thank you for your comments the last speaker is danielle tk and one of staff members would you move that plaque from the good evening mr mayor council president council members

uh thank you for the opportunity my name is tanyel tk kushakian i'm a applicant for the vacant seat on the port of palm beach commission and a candidate for the group five seat on the democratic primary ballot on august 18th just a few hundred yards from where we're sitting tonight is one of palm beach county's most important economic engines the question before voters is whether we're going to unlock its full potential or continue accepting gridlock and missed opportunities You know, I've spoken the last few weeks about my background, my history, my qualifications for the position, but I want to talk tonight about jobs and economic opportunity, which is the central theme of my campaign. The Port of Palm Beach shouldn't just be a place where cargo moves. It should be a catalyst for economic opportunity throughout Riviera Beach and the 971 square miles of the Port District that encompasses nearly 50% of Palm Beach County. 17 municipalities reside within the Port of Palm Beach District, as well as large portions of unincorporated Palm Beach County. And we can do better. We need to have people in place who understand jobs, who understand the workforce, who understand the responsibilities of the decisions that they make and aren't focused on $100 gala tickets and what chamber they should be a member of. We need to get the port back to work, get our commission working for the people. And who's going to benefit the most from that? Most likely Riviera Beach. When the port grows, Riviera Beach should grow with it. I've experienced in workforce development. I worked for one of the largest cybersecurity companies in the world called Offensive Security. Not only were we training DOD personnel on offensive cyber tactics, defensive cyber hygiene and hardening, but we're also developing the workforce of the future, knowing that there are more vacancies for cybersecurity professionals in the United States than there are cybersecurity professionals to fill those vacancies. So I have a direct experience with workforce development and I understand that new technologies, AI and automation is coming. So how are we going to handle that? We need people who understand that we need to protect our workforce, make sure that we can upskill, reskill, and always know that there's going to be some people who don't qualify there, but what are we doing to protect them, to protect our industry, to protect the American worker? And so I'm, Very cognizant of that. I come from a lower middle class family. My father is an independent contractor. I'm a small business owner myself. Spent many years without health insurance, my father as well. So I know what it's like to live paycheck to paycheck. I know what it's like to live in this community and to make ends meet. But I want the people of Riviera Beach to know that when I'm elected commissioner, I'll be thinking about you and your job and your family every day. Thank you.

Thank you very much for your comment. Are there any more public speakers?

Mr. Chair, that's the end of the general public comment.

Okay, our next item is 11B.

Mr. Chair, on item 11b, resolution number 76-26, the resolution of the City Council of the City of Riviera Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, to set the maximum operating millage rate at 8.3500 and maximum debt service millage rate at 1.000 for fiscal year 2026-2027, setting the date, time, and place of the first public hearing and to deliver such to the Palm Beach County property appraiser and providing for an effective date. Mr. Terry, I want public comment card on this item. The acceptance of cards is closed.

Did you say we have any or don't?

We do have one public comment card.

Okay. Thank you. I would entertain a motion to approve this resolution. So moved. It's been moved by Vice Chair Spiritus and seconded by Councilwoman Lanier. Um, on discussion of the motion staff.

Yes, good evening again, Randy Sherman, Chief Financial Officer. Each year, as I know you are all aware, the Board must set a maximum millage rate that then goes on the trim notice that then goes out to the property owners. The maximum rate that you adopt tonight as we go through the budget process can only go down We cannot raise it after your vote tonight. So just real quick, we do have two millage rates that we're dealing with this year. So the operating millage rate, staff is recommending the 8.35. We've been at 8.35 for four years now. That will bring in APPROXIMATELY $83 MILLION OF TAXES, 73 MILLION OF THAT STAYS WITH THE CITY, 10 MILLION GOES TO THE CRA, AND THEN 1.2 MILLION GOES INTO THE MAJOR DISASTER FUND.

NEW SPEAKER PLEASE EXPLAIN TO THE PUBLIC WHY WE'RE DEALING WITH TWO DIFFERENT MILITARY. NEW SPEAKER I WILL.

is the one that will deal with the referendum bonds that were just passed. So that is a separate millage rate that will show on your property tax bill. And these dollars, again, can only be used to pay the debt service on those bonds.

So that is in addition to the top, our regular average.

Correct.

The bottom one is for the bonds.

For the bonds, correct.

So I considered an assessment, but okay, go ahead.

Okay. The other thing that we do have as part of this resolution, we also have to set our first public hearing date. And if you look at the fourth line up there, we do have three budget workshops scheduled for the fourth line up there. September 8th would be our first public hearing date. A PUBLIC HEARING DATE CANNOT BE ON THE SAME NIGHT AS THE SCHOOL BOARD PUBLIC HEARING OR THE COUNTY'S PUBLIC HEARING. THAT WAY TAXPAYERS COULD GO TO ALL THREE IF THEY SO DESIRED. SO THIS RESOLUTION SETS THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING DATE ON SEPTEMBER 8TH. AGAIN, THAT WILL BE NOTICED ON THE TRIM NOTICE. AND THEN WE WOULD BE ADOPTING THE TWO MILLAGE RATES. AND I CAN TAKE ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.

Wait, I think we have one public comment card.

Yes, there was a terrible thing most men.

They were in. For those of you who have Google on your phone, say, who has the highest millage rates in Palm Beach County? I just did a search on Google. Magnolia Park. There's 39 municipalities in Palm Beach County. Magnolia Park is the highest millage. Who do you think is number two? Riviera Beach. Just did the AI search on Google. We have the second highest millage in a county of 39 municipalities. That is hideous. The people who... sitting on that dais who've been around for, you know, a decade, like a Shama Miller, Anderson and Lanier, your legacy is we have the second highest village out of 39. We also have so many poor people that their tax liens are going on their houses. They're losing their houses. We have a, I think we probably have the highest water bill in the County too. So when we look at everybody said that Ben did a great job. He did a horrible job because he didn't control costs. I'm telling you, as the final policymakers of this city, you need to tell your city attorney, we're not spending millions of dollars fighting people that want to redevelop their property. And we can't take the risk that they get a jury award one day, hundreds of millions of dollars that you're going to have to pay. You need to increase your revenue and control your expenses and lower your millage rate. You talk about water bills. You talk about taxes. The millage rate is killing people. They had a case at the Supreme Court. Somebody lost their home for $2,000 in taxes. And they swear to the Supreme Court because they said, where's the fair market value? And they said it was whatever was auctioned off. Even though it was auctioned off at a discount. People are being forced out of their home. People are probably killing themselves losing their homes. I fought the battle 20 years ago to keep people in their home because Michael Brown wanted to take people out and say, poor people shouldn't live by the waterfront. Poor people should live wherever they want to live, but they shouldn't be priced out by incompetence from city managers, from department heads, and from elected officials whose legacy is, okay, we're the best city to live, work, and play. no you're not you can't live when you have the second highest millage in 39 municipalities you need to control costs need to control you need to get a new city attorney because she everything that happens she just farmed it out to a law firm we have corey who's the uh corey came in he was the the uh code enforcement special magistrate he can do the job we don't have to have an outside lawyer sit in and do that You need to control cost. Your legacy can't be we have the second highest millage out of 39 cities. Do a Google search, ask for the highest millage rates, and you should be embarrassed. You say, we got to do something. We got to come in and start cleaning up things that cost millions of dollars like legal fees.

Thank you for your comment. I think that was the only public comment card. And Vice Chair Spiritus, you had requested to have the floor.

right so i uh mr lozman actually brought up what i was going to ask you and that was what is our millage rate compared to the five or six surrounding communities to the city right now um i believe west palm beach is actually higher than us at this point as well mangonia park is higher than us upper palm beach shores is higher than us um

But there are a lot that have a lot of development, a lot of assessed value. The Boca's and Pompano beaches and Delray beaches, as we've talked about when we get into some of our contracts, we provide that information to you about their value per square mile is far in excess of ours. So again, the millage rate, it's just math. It doesn't mean you're necessarily overspending. It's just a factor. That's the amount of money that you need to assess. If your property values are lower, even for the same property, type property, quality of property, if your value is lower because it's in Riviera Beach and it's not in Delray Beach, then your millage rate is your equalizer.

You have Singer Island here in Riviera Beach. which pays a substantial over 53% of your tax base, and they don't use the services year-round, as you know. So I don't think that's a good comparison because you have that development. You have that money coming in from Singer Island. As you know, the Palm Beach Post did a whole story on it when they were doing the millage rates and the taxes, and they were saying, how can Riviera Beach survive? And they said, Singer Island. Uh, so clearly we cannot lower our millage rate because we now have put ourselves in a position where we have debt service that we have to pay. If we were to lower this millage rate, we could not pay the debt service on all these bonds. We would be in big trouble right now. Uh, the, I assume the, the bonding, your bond council and the, uh, the bonding companies obviously looked at our millage rate and what our proposed millage rate was going to be and they looked at our taxes and the evaluation of the properties because you know you understand that every year not a lot of people understand this but that military when your property value goes up your taxes are going up because of the military uh so it goes up that that percentage so that that's pretty substantial uh having a high millage rate but we don't have a choice now because Even tonight, we didn't make the difficult decision that we should have made. That was just the tip of the iceberg of what we're going to have to think about when we get to the budget itself. I don't like the way we started out. Hopefully, we'll change roads when we start looking at the budget and we'll have to make some very difficult decisions. But I don't see that we have any choice in the matter but to accept this military. I was hoping when I got out of the council that eventually I would be able to make a motion to lower the millage rate, but clearly that's not the case. Chair. Mr.

Chair. Yes, it's Councilwoman Davis-Preneur, then Councilwoman Miller-Anderson.

Well, I just want to thank everybody for paying their taxes, and especially Singer Island. Thank you. Because we all pay it, and it all hits us in a very way. But we do understand where the bulk of that comes from, and we appreciate it. My other question is that when is the last time that the millage rate was increased? I think we talked about that.

So it was five years ago that it was decreased. And it... WAS MINIMAL ONE FROM 8.42 TO 8.35 SO IT WENT FROM 8.4 8.42 TO 8.35 SO IT WENT DOWN IT WENT DOWN OKAY MR.

CHAIR ARE YOU DONE COUNCILMEMBER MILLER-ANDERSON

So tonight, what we're voting on now is to set the maximum. That doesn't mean we have to make it that. As Mr. Sherman explained earlier, it is just that once we get to the budgeting process and get ready to set our millage rate, the final one, IT CAN'T BE HIGHER THAN WHAT WE SAY TONIGHT. SO IF WE SEE DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS WE WANT TO CUT BACK ON CERTAIN THINGS IN DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS AND BRING DOWN THE BUDGET, WE CAN CERTAINLY DROP THE MILITARY DOWN. SO THE VOTE TONIGHT IS NOT TO SAY THIS IS WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE. THE VOTE TONIGHT IS TO SAY WE WILL NOT GO HIGHER THAN THAT NUMBER IF DURING THE PROCESS, BUDGETING PROCESS WE WANT TO SAY IT COULD BE 2.5, WE CAN DO THAT. SO TONIGHT'S VOTE IS NOT GOING TO STOP US FROM POSSIBLY LURING IT IF WE FIND A WAY TO DO THAT. SO WE CAN WORK ON THINKING ABOUT WHAT WE WANT TO CUT BACK ON AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL BE ABLE TO DO THAT. BUT TONIGHT I DON'T WANT THE RESIDENTS THINKING THE VOTE WE'RE MAKING NOW IS GOING TO SAY THIS IS WHAT IT IS BECAUSE THAT'S NOT TRUE. THANK YOU.

To come to one of the land and are they in the for the coming. Mister chair.

Mayor love thank you I'm a sermon the one point that service military how's that going to show up on the tax bill.

It actually comes as a separate line. It'll say, I believe on my tax bill, it actually says debt service.

So why do we have one point up there? How did you get that assessment? How did you put that up there? Because I just want to be clear that it's not an additional percent that we're charging or point that we're charging to our residents. What does that represent?

So that is $1 per $1,000 of valuation. So if, again, I'm using the $100,000 because it's easy to extrapolate to other numbers, they pay $100 of debt service.

Got it. So the millage rate that we're setting today is 8.35. For operations, correct. Debt services, is that adding an additional point?

Yes.

So the millage rate will now be... calculated 8.35 and the additional point, which now is 9.35?

Correct. Combined, it would be a maximum of 9.35.

Okay. And on that debt services, when that actually goes on the tax bill, does it have to go through and cycle through the county, the school board? Do we receive a percentage of the total debt services of that point? How is that calculated? If it's a percentage, does it go to the other areas or is it just all going to the city?

So they're going to look at what our debt service cost is, which is going to be roughly $7 million, somewhere in there. Take their assessed value. and just that you know do the math on cost per thousand so it's going i can clearly tell you it's going to be less than that one okay but we don't know how much less at this point you know markets have a tendency to change um but you know the one point won't the one gives us a little bit of cushion between now and when we get to the market and get those rates you know the debt set

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, Mr.

Chair. Yes, Councilwoman Miller-Anderson.

And I would just say that, just keep in mind, when we do the budget, Mr. Wilkins and Mr. Sherman, I know in the past what we've asked for is like, if you're able to show us what the numbers would look like if we did, if we dropped it by 0.5 or or something like that to be able to give us those different numbers. Thank you.

Yes, sir.

Chair.

Yes, Vice Chair Spiridou.

So, Director Sharma, I just want to clarify this. So Bond Council, though, when they were figuring out what our rates were going to be and what they were going to charge us, were they figuring 8.35% as a millage rate when they were doing their numbers?

I'm not sure the connection between the 835 and bond council. I'm sorry.

They're looking to see whether or not we have the ability to pay back the bond. So we're on the hook, whether it was separately as a separate debt service item or not. The city's taxes are at risk. We guarantee those bonds with the tax revenue.

We guarantee those bonds will be guaranteed with property tax revenue. Correct. And when we just went through the rating agency process and we did get two AA ratings, one from Fitch and one from S&P, you know, where they gave the city a weak rating, because again, there's multiple components in the rating, again, was wage levels, unemployment, you know, but again, they, you know, it gets offset by other conditions. So again, they gave us a AA rating. They have expressed their competence and the ability of the community to make these payments, so. Right, hopefully next year we'll have a AAA rating. Listen, I'd love to.

Yeah, but I'm pretty sure, I'm pretty confident that when bond council sat down and they sat down with the underwriters They looked at what we passed last year as our millage rate. They're looking at that the values are going up and that we're going to keep the millage rate at the same level. Because I don't know how we could do it any other way, unless we make some really major cuts. The essential services are a good portion of our budget and they can't be cut.

Okay. I agree. Madam Clerk, please call the roll. I mean, call the question.

Council person Davis been here yet come over from the near. Council person Miller Anderson. Yes. Chair for them back to spirit. Jefferson going to yes, that is the unanimous vote 11 the police. I mean love and the resolution number 82 dash 26 the resolution of the City Council of the city River Beach Palm Beach County, Florida. approving and authorizing the mayor to execute a use of facility agreement between Palm Beach County and the city of Riviera Beach for the purpose of providing space at the Lindsay Davis Center for the operation of a congregate meal program serving eligible seniors, providing for conflict, severability, and an effective date. Mr. Chair, there are no public comment cards on this item. The acceptance of cards is closed.

Second, did you say they are or are not public comments?

There are no cards.

Okay, thank you. I entertain a motion to approve this item. So moved. It's been moved by Vice Chair Spiritus. Second. Seconded by Councilwoman Davis-Preneur. It's been moved and properly seconded. On discussion, staff.

Mike Pinckney, Interim Director. This resolution is for the meal program, for the Lindsay Davis program. up to five days a week uh integral part of the program to give the seniors the ability to have a healthy meal when they come to the program any comments from the council on this no comments okay being none clerk hall please call the vote

Councilperson Davis-Panier?

Yes.

Councilperson Lanier? Yes. Councilperson Miller-Anderson?

Yes.

Chair Brunton, Dr. Spiritus?

Yes.

Chairperson Guyton? The item passes with Chairperson Guyton out.

Clerk Hall, 11D.

Item 11D, resolution number 80-26, a resolution of the City Council of the City of River Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, authorizing the execution of a continuing services, of continuing services contracts for professional marine coastal engineering consulting services with the top four ranked firms, Cummings Sutterberg Inc., Kimley Horn and Associates Inc., Aptum and Grafe USA Inc. obtained through request for qualifications number 1168-25-3 for an initial three-year period with the option to renew for two additional one-year renewal periods. in a cumulative amount not to exceed $200,000, authorizing the Chief Financial Officer to process payments for such services and providing an effective date. Mr. Chair, there are no comment cards on this item. The acceptance of cards is closed.

Okay, before we ask for a motion, I just want to disclose, I did this at previous meetings that Kim Lee Horn had done work for my company a couple of years ago. They no longer work for us. So I just want to get that on the record. Is there a motion to approve this item?

So moved.

Okay, moved by Councilwoman Lanier. Is there a second?

Second.

Second by Councilwoman Davis-Panier. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE ITEM?

STAFF? NEW SPEAKER Good evening, Latonya Ammons, Director of Procurement for the City of Riviera Beach. I bring before you resolution 80-26, seeking approval to enter into a continuing service contract for professional marine and coastal engineering consulting services. with the top four firms that were evaluated and deemed responsive and responsible. The solicitation was distributed to 1,516 vendors. Five responses were received. Four were deemed responsive. They were evaluated, and I sit before you seeking approval to enter into a continuing contract with all four.

Any questions, comments from the council? I have one question. Can you just tell us how you disperse these funds to the number of engineering firms that we have? We have about five engineering firms here. So how do you decide which one gets which project?

If I may, and also ask the CFO to come up and correct me or direct the, to help me answer the question. There is a pool of four and we do rotate or go through the particular list, but it does the ask. We ask them to provide a quote and it's based upon the project.

I don't think, I think the question was just answered. I think that was good enough. Thank you so much.

That was very good.

Thank you.

Chair, we're ready for a vote. No other comments? Okay. Madam Clerk.

Councilperson Davis-Panier? Yes. Councilperson Lanier? Yes. Councilperson Miller-Anderson?

Yes.

Chairperson Dr. Spiridon?

Yes.

Chairperson Guyton?

Yes.

That's a unanimous vote.

Okay. Okay. We are on what, 11D?

We're on item 11E.

E, okay.

Resolution number 83-26, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Riviera Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, accepting the recommendation of staff and authorizing the mayor and city clerk to execute a three-year continuing services contract to provide towing and storage services with COFS of Palm Beach Inc. of West Palm Beach and Cheons Towing Inc. of West Palm Beach, providing for two one-year renewal options based upon the mutual consent of the parties, and providing for an effective date. Mr. Chair, we have two public comment cards on this item. The acceptance of the cards is closed.

Thank you, Madam Clerk. I'll entertain a motion to approve this item. So moved.

Second.

It's been moved by Vice Chair Spiritus and seconded by Councilwoman discussion on the motion staff.

Good evening. Latonya Ammons, Director of Procurement for the City of Riviera Beach. I bring before you Resolution 83-26 for a second time. We are here to ask the Council to enter into a contract with the top two responsive and responsible vendors. Previously, we had asked for the top three. As one of the vendors commented, the solicitation specifically said two. The department went back for correction and we are here to correct that error. So again, a solicitation acts for specifically stated two vendors. We're here to act that we enter into agreement with the top two responsive and responsible vendors. In addition to that, one of the commenters was concerned about the location of the third vendor. That particular vendor was the third rank. They are not being recommended for approval. Thank you very much. We seek approval for the contract with Coffs and Sheehan. Thank you.

Madam Clerk, did you say we have some public comment cards?

Yes, sir. We have two public comment cards. The first would be Crystal Griffin, followed by Sean Okay. Okay.

Okay. Council, any questions or comments? Hearing none, call the question.

Councilperson Davis-Panier?

Yes.

Councilperson Lanier? Yes. Councilperson Miller-Anderson?

Yes.

Chairperson Dr. Spiritus?

Yes.

Chairperson Guyanton?

Yes.

That's a unanimous vote.

Thank you. Now we're down to discussions and deliberations. 12A.

Yes, Mr. Chair.

Paid parking discussion. Okay.

Thank you very much. Again, Randy Sherman, Chief Financial Officer. As you know, on June 3rd, the parking program was put on hold to address some of the concerns that have been being raised since the cameras went live on April 6th. So I'm going to walk through this again. Since that time, we've had a great number of what I'll call really productive conversations PARKERS, BUSINESSES, BUSINESS OWNERS, EMPLOYEES, AND CERTAINLY A LOT OF DISCUSSION INSIDE WITH STAFF. I THINK WE'VE MADE A LOT OF CHANGES THAT WILL IMPROVE THE PROGRAM. IT'S NOT THAT WE FOUND ANYTHING MISSING OR LACKING OR INFORMATION. that wasn't appropriate. It's just that I think it's a living document and program and we certainly can always look to to provide enhancements to it. So again, I'm not going to read all this. This is quick history on the parking program. We literally started this in the CRA in 2015. That's when we started looking at paid parking. If you drop down a little bit further, we didn't pass the ordinance until 2024. We didn't bring on our parking team here, and at one point I'll have them introduce themselves, until December of 25, and then we finally went live last October. I'm sorry, December 24, then we went live in October. For the first period from October through the end of March, it was really all manual. The cameras weren't fully operational. cameras went operational on April 6th, which then obviously has led to a lot of, you know, comments and people raising some concerns. So just to give you a couple of statistics, the cameras give us fantastic data for the periods of April 6th till we shut it down on June 5th, we had 115,591 vehicles go through our parking lots. That is at least five minutes or longer. So these aren't drive-bys. These are people who actually came in and use the parking lots. We did get 363 residents to sign up for their permits. And we actually have 1,192 employee permits that have been issued. Again, just to show you some of the enhancements we made. So this was the original map that IT put together for us. So there's Ocean Walk. The beach is at the bottom. This is the Marina District. The intercoastal is off to your right. And now we have maps that look far more professional. They have been better constructed. They provide much more detail. So even though we had those maps on our website and were certainly accessible to anyone registering for a permit, the maps have been tremendously enhanced, far more detail. Everything is labeled that matches up with the terminology that is being used by our parking group. Other issues that we had, the signs at the top here were the original signs that we had out in the lots. The intent was to make them a little bit beachy and get them to blend into the environment. We're trying to avoid some sign pollution. But again, we have some people say, well, I just didn't see it. And some of the wording on the signs they found a bit confusing, even though it's factual. If you don't understand the entire operation, it's possible they didn't make sense. So we have changed to the red on white. We've clarified the language or updated the language. And we've taken off of the signs the fact that there's two hours free. which was causing some confusion. And we took the rates off, which was causing some confusion. So what we really need to do is try to get the parkers to come in and register their vehicle. As soon as they do that, they will now know that there's two hours free. But in the case that they happen to stay longer than two hours, they will get notified that their two hours is about to lapse. And then they can either leave if they so choose to, or they can now get and pay for the next hour. If you don't come in and register, you obviously don't get those notifications. So we are now providing these enhanced signs. The other thing I'll point out through the little note up there, for those people, and there are parkers who don't use the QR codes, and we understand that, we had put two kiosks over at Ocean Walk. We've been told that people have a hard time finding them. So we have ordered four additional kiosks so that we can put them out, you know, throughout the whole walking area. We've had the question that came up about the citations and the date that was on the citations. When you received a citation in the past, it had the date the citation was actually issued, not the date of the violation. If you wanted the date of the violation, you actually had to look at the picture of the vehicle coming into the lot and the picture of the vehicle leaving the lot, it had the date, the time in those pictures. We have now pulled that data and actually we'll just be displaying it on the top of the citations. So in this case, you can see the third line down up there, it says notice date. So this notice went out on 4-30-2026. But then if you go down to the box, it says, okay, but you entered at 428 at 535 and you didn't exit until 428 on the same day, but at 617. So again, you now have that information. Hopefully that clarifies that issue. As far as the residence passes, again, we had a few folks who didn't necessarily understand what their residence pass actually allowed them to do. So I just wanted to point out, we've sent out a number of direct mailings. These postcards were direct mailings. We did one in October and we did another one in February so we could catch the people who were here year round, make sure we're getting the people who were just coming down perhaps from the north. Reminder, the residence pass is a 12 month pass. So the first batch of residents, their passes will be coming up to expire in the October time period. So again, we will be sending out reminders. Don't forget to renew your residence pass. If you don't have one, please come and get one. Again, they're $50 and it gives you free parking in everywhere but the premium lot at the beach. for the entire 12 months. Another issue a resident brought up was when you come to the city's website and you look at getting a residence pass, they said, we have this lovely blue banner and then we've got all the rules underneath. And if you actually scroll up, you would actually see that the maps are there and the rates are there and everything else. The issue that they pointed out is the button to go out to the actual parking software to, you know, request a resident pass used to be included in that blue banner. And their point was well taken. People look at the blue banner, they click the button, they move on and nobody was looking at anything below that. So we took the button off of here. The button is now at the bottom of the screen. So you have to scroll. Doesn't guarantee you read it, but at least you can see that there are maps and other information below here. We also have, and this has always been the case, when you go out to buy your resident permit or you're doing your employee permit, they're the same. You actually have to check this box that, yeah, I've seen this. Here's the rules and regulations. And this is where it tells you that you can't use your permits in that premium line. And the other issue that we're having is the timing. So if I went in today, it might take two or three days before I'm actually in the system. And some people were getting caught in that two or three days. So we're changing the timing. It's the day you actually register, not the day that, you know, it actually gets processed to eliminate that confusion. But I will tell you anybody that got caught in that, you know, didn't pay any violations. On the employee parking, again, it's very similar to the resident parking. On the left-hand side, it's just a copy of one of the letters that we sent out. We sent them out to every business. We sent them to the CRA, who then delivered them to their customers. We sent them to the harbor master, who delivered them to the boat owners. And we sent it to the property management company over at Ocean Walk. We had, as you saw, 1,192 employees. We did have issues with two businesses that never relayed this information to their employees. Again, when they came in, they got citations. We got them set up with an employee permit, and then we made those citations go away. We also updated the website, which is on the right side of the screen. change some of the language to match, to better match the maps that are on the website. Again, employers, I mentioned, you still have to go through the rules and regulations and confirm that you have seen that page. And I think one of the things that is really going to help the employees, not only are we going to send out those letters, but we have given every business this flyer now that they can take, they can put in their lunchroom, they can put in their break room, whatever. So if the business owners fail to tell their employees, hopefully they will see the flyer that's on the bulletin board in their break room. don't have to go to our website the qr code is right there and again we can get them all signed up and i will tell you last week we met with the business owner we talked to their employees this is a business that has been getting some employees have been getting some citations and the staff that we talked to still didn't know that they could get a permit So, you know, we're trying to deal with that communication between the city, the businesses and the employees. The last item that we had, we did have a lot of confusion over the parkers with disabilities. Again, I won't read this whole thing, but number eight there, it's, you know, allows the communities with parking to charge for parking for disabled parkers. There are three exceptions to that that are listed up there. The cameras can pick up on two of those exceptions. It can't pick up on the third exception.

Sure. That allows communities to charge disabled people That doesn't require community.

You are not required to, but your ordinance, in talking to the state, your ordinance has to specify that you are not going to charge. So when we drafted the ordinance, and it was drafted by Attorney Chris Yagudo, we had the resident permit parking and we dealt with the employees. I did speak with her and I said, is there any reason why we didn't deal with this? And she said, it never came up. Nobody asked about it. Nobody talked about it. She goes, I didn't think about it. She goes, so it's not in your ordinance. So what we are recommending is that we bring back your amendment. to provide free parking for individuals with disabilities. And the way that we will handle this, again, their cameras will pick up if it's on the license plate. But if somebody has a placard and they don't put the placard out, the cameras might not pick it up if the placard's not there. So we would like to create a third permit category for disabled parkers. and again get them registered and then they would just they don't even have to renew it every year they could just come back in they would have it and they would be on the list and they would always get the free parking if somebody slides through which you know somebody's going to come from out of town they're going to come in they're not going to obviously have a permit if they end up then we will just go back we'll you know, deal with the company and then we will, you know, take care of the citation and make it go away. Because the intent is to provide, if that's your choice, obviously, then the intent is that we would do it. Quick question.

Yes, in a minute, I have a quick question and I come to you, Councilwoman Miller-Armisen. If many of our disabled drivers are elderly, And trying to register for something that may seem simple to us is challenging to me at my age. And yeah, I'm trying to figure out a

customer friendly way for elderly people to register telling them to go to a computer and register or their phone that's not going to work no and we we get them we've registered dozens of people right at the finance department um they come in we go out we sit with them we get them registered whether it's um a resident permit or an employee so are you saying that

They can come to finance.

They can come into the office and we have an appointment system we'll handle.

Where is that being promoted or publicized?

Well, we needed to talk to you first. Make sure you wanted this amendment, which I'm going to guess the consensus is you want that amendment.

But yes, I do not want disabled people to be charged.

Correct.

Correct.

So we've had conversations with communication and marketing. We will get that out. It'll be on 18. We'll do mailings. We'll put it in the water bills, you know, we will start publicizing that this is an option.

But I'm only one. I think the other council members need to change.

I encourage you. Yeah, we spoke in the agenda with you. Yeah, pretty much.

Okay. Okay. Now what you did, Mr. Chair, is you did ask for our consultants to come in and walk you through the system and how it works. So I will have Mark and Fred introduce themselves. I have about.

I did have a question before.

Oh, yeah, sure. Councilwoman Miller-Anderson.

My question was about, no, it's probably not a whole lot of people, but I know there are sometimes they provide temporary handicapped placards. So is there, because if someone may have it for maybe four or five months, maybe after they had surgery or something like that, And then afterwards they're fine and they no longer have it. I know you said it was a permanent thing where if they had a placard, they wouldn't have to register anymore. They just always have it and won't have to pay.

what happens with those who have like a temporary placard and it's only you know they're only disabled for four or five months or so and then they're back to normal yeah well we if we should know that when they're coming in i believe that information you know is available um then what we would do is we would have an end date as far as um you know when their permit would expire and you know so sort of sort of think of it like fmla right you got it you got a term everybody knows it's going to expire in six months we would know those are going to expire and we would we would just take them out of the system or confirm that it has expired and take them out during the time of the registration correct so which is that okay thank you

Mr. Sherman. Oh, okay.

Go ahead. Before they go to explain the same question with disabled. Mr. Sherman, we talked about the disabled parking. And legal, have they opined on the ability to charge? If you can go back to that slide that showed other municipalities. Yes. Okay. So state statute says that we cannot charge for parking. These entities, you're saying charge for parking.

They all charge. Legal, you've opined on this and you agree with this sentiment that we can charge with our current

program because just because they're charging I want to make sure that we've set up the proper system the proper process in place that our ordinance is covered because also some of these municipalities have either sold or outsourced or determined that other agencies are governing or overseeing so that's how they can get away with charging but Florida statute says that no public entity can actually charge for handicapped parking So I just want to make sure that we're covered because we may not have the same things in place. If I may, Chair?

Yes, go ahead.

As we went through the statute, we did do an analysis and provided to finance and staff as well regarding the position on this particular section concerning disabled parking. The statute is clear on its face as it relates to not charging disabled motorists. for parking. There are limited instances, however, in the statute that allow for charging special events and things of that nature. If you are to do so, there are provisions for that. There are the municipalities that charge in those limited instances. However, there are, so you have number one, a bar, then you have an exemption, which it speaks to, then there are exceptions to those exemptions. And those exceptions are very clear that in the event that they have a disabled license plate or platter, or they have some type of an apparatus in their vehicle where they operate with their hands, for example, we talked about that at nauseam as it relates to cameras, not be able to pick up on those particular motorists. So, we did tender an opinion to staff concerning that matter. And so I think that is why that previous slide regarding just doing away with charging disabled motorists, I believe that's where that came out of amending the ordinance and going back to the intent behind the statutory provision that we saw in the beginning.

TO THAT POINT, WE'RE LEAVING OURSELVES LIABLE. IF WE'RE CREATING A PERMITTING PROCESS FOR INDIVIDUALS TO REGISTER THAT MAY BE COMING IN, WHETHER IT'S TOURISTS, VISITORS OR GUESTS, IF WE PUT THIS OUT TO OUR RESIDENTS TO ALLOW FOR THEM TO REGISTER FOR A PERMIT OR EVEN JUST NOTICE IT, IF SOMEBODY'S TRAVELING AND STOPS TO VISIT OUR BEACH WITH A PERMIT, WE CANNOT CHARGE THEM BECAUSE THEY WOULD NOT HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THAT PROCESS. BUT IF WE TRY TO AMEND OUR ORDINANCE TO SAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO CHARGE AND GIVE THEM A PERMIT, How do individuals that's traveling or visiting or coming to our beaches with a disabled placard know about our permitting process? So if they register their vehicle. If they're traveling and don't know about our permitting process.

No, I'm not saying register for a permit. They pull into the parking lot, read the sign, register like anybody else. That information will be available there on that, just like it'll have the rates. It'll have, you know, anything that's on.

So that's the, that's the,

the one way that we can get in. But again, as we said, someone's always going to slide through, you're always going to end up catching something you don't want to catch. And then that's the process. You know, when they when they get a violation, every violation gets a set of eyes to look at it. So they go through that process. And again, if they see the placard, if they you know, they, they will go through and not put process the citation if they catch it if it gets down to the point where you know someone calls in and says hey i've got the why didn't i you know then we would deal with them and get it so i bring this up because a resident exit came tonight and dropped off her notice and concerned about being charged who's an actual resident

who had a handicap placard and was charged and received her third notice tonight. So this is the biggest issue because I've also had conversations with residents about potential lawsuits in regards to this process. So I want to make sure that we're completely covered when it comes to the process of charging for disabled individuals coming into the lot. Some municipalities actually just have parking staff that walk around. We have our camera system. And of course, it can't catch every situation with whether it's a placard, whether it's the license plate and notice if it's a handicapped or we have defined handicapped spot. So I just want to make sure that this piece is as clear as possible. And I have a follow up question as we go through, but maybe they can answer it when they do the presentation. But it'll be in reference to how the residents, when they get their passes, do they have to register as well or can they just come in and park? If they have a pass, then they don't have to register. They just drive in, they can park, they're good. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair. But I just want to make sure that this disabled piece is the most important piece because we've had a few residents threatened lawsuit over this. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

And Mr. Sherman, maybe I didn't make myself clear. I didn't ask for them to come and walk through the process. I said when the corrections are made, I wanted to see them do some test runs through our parking lot to ensure that the cameras and the computing process is working as they say that it is.

So they did that today. I think it was today, right, gentlemen?

Wait, slow down.

Okay.

Was it recorded? I mean... The car going in, somebody recording the car going in and showing the process. Yes. If you're recording, you're doing a test of the system. That's what I'm looking for.

Thank you, sir. I'm Mark Pratt. I'm the president of One Parking. Your contract for this is with us. This is Fred Friedemeyer. He's a co-founder of the technology company that have provided the 28 cameras that you see out on the street. I'm going to start with something that forgive me is very simple. I've been blessed to be able to draw just about anything. And this simple illustrations has helped me talk about this with other municipalities where we provide a similar service. If you look down in the lower left, very simply in Delray Beach, why I drew this, we have this going into garages. So you see, I've depicted a car going into a garage by two cameras that capture his plate. He or she, when she drives in and the license numbers, ABC one, two, three, that information goes to our tech cloud. The first question that is asked is, is this a permit holder? If you have a registered permit, you're done. You have to do nothing else. Then if you do not, then we ask, did you pay by phone or you hover over the QR code and make the payment? Well, no, you didn't. Do you go and walk up to the ATM type device called the T2 Luke and make a payment in a tactile way there? No, you didn't. If that occurs, then we send you a citation. We see your car coming out at 1030. As you exit, the similar cameras pick that up. And that quite simply is the process in a nutshell. Mr. Guyton challenged me in a phone call a couple of weeks ago about doing what he just said. So yesterday we reactivated the cameras. We had three different employees drive onto the lot. And what you see on the left is the entry of a Volkswagen with plate BT-9, Fred, what is the last three? 1TZ and holding his watch in front of the plate. So he drove in, immediately got out of the car, went to the back, held up his watch, took a picture. And I have blown that watch face up a bit to the right so you can see it. And you see it's around 517. If you look in the upper right-hand corner, this is the report generated by the tech. An entry was registered at 517. He stayed two minutes showing somebody who quickly drove in and out. We capture that as well, the same thing. Employee jumped out, pulled over, jumped out, and took another picture showing his watch under the plate, plate in the background, and that exit was 519. That was one. On the premium lot, we did the same thing. This employee drove the truck. the left-hand side is the plate and on his bumper, he rested his watch showing 221. I blew that up so we could all see it. And if you look in the upper right-hand corner, 221. He stayed for longer, driving out, same process. He quickly pulled over, jumped out, rested his watch on the bumper beside his plate and we see 254. as the time in this case it's a one minute difference between his watch and what was recorded by the technology same process here the same truck but on the marina south lot an entry at 301 by the watch corresponds to the entry time shown in the tech and then the exit time is much easier to see at 329. And then a final one, another quick turn by our last employee. He's holding his watch in the lower left-hand picture. I've blown it up and we see 214 and I asked him to zip in and zip out to make sure we're catching those. He zipped out at 1215 and there it is in the lower right. So that was my attempt to provide a pictorial evidence of the car and the employee out on the lot, miles away from the technology, and the technology did indeed pick up the time plate, just as we've been discussing. So this is a static evidence, if you will, Mr. Guyton, if you'd like me to record that differently, I can do that.

That is what I requested, but that's not necessary. But I do have another question. Yeah, I wanted to see something in live time where you actually move in and you catch it and then you do that afterwards. but not necessary right now. The thing that I would like to know is how will the promotions be done to advise the residents and customers whenever we decide to start collecting again I think there needs to be a period where they're advised that on this date charges are going to begin again. I don't want people to just drive in and then they realize that it's no longer a pause and there are a whole lot of tickets going out. So had that been thought about, about how to promote the restarting of charges?

Yes, yes, we do that two ways. We do it with signage on the lot. And I would also like to mention prior to going live with the program, we spent weeks and weeks promoting the program and letting the residents know that it was going to go live on a certain day. we'll ramp that up and do it again. We'll have signage, we'll have email, we'll have internet and do the best we can to push the message out early. We don't want to catch people by surprise. That's not what we tried to do the first time and we don't want to do it the second time. So all those resources will be used to make sure we notify the people.

And certainly that would be a decision made by the entire council.

JUST A COUPLE COMMENTS. I'VE BEEN GOING AROUND, YOU KNOW, I GO AROUND A LOT EVERY DAY, AS YOU KNOW. I LOOK AT THE CHARGING STATIONS, AND I'VE SEEN PEOPLE PARKING THEIR CARS IN THE CHARGING STATION AND NOT CHARGING THEIR CARS. THEY'RE JUST GETTING FREE PARKING. HOW DO WE DETERMINE WHETHER SOMEONE, WE DON'T WANT TO CHARGE SOMEONE WHO'S CHARGING THEIR CAR FOR PARKING AND CHARGING THEIR CAR. HOW CAN WE determine a difference or come up with some sort of fine where if you're not charging your car, we make it astronomical. I mean, it's an abuse, obviously.

That's a big, big issue in the parking industry in general. We call that dwell time. We call that an overstay. And frankly, You have charge stations that are many, many, many different kind of charge stations. Some of them come with software that can tell us that, and some are just dumb charge stations that are a little better than an extension cord. If we have the right software, we can, are we charging to use a charge station, an EV charge station? Is it free currently? Charging stations are free. Sorry?

They're free.

So they're not required to dip a credit card or do anything. They just pull up and they plug in or they don't. And this is a massive issue across the parking industry. We can purchase software that will tell us and install it on the EV charge station to do some of the things that you might want to do. But when you don't require the car or the owner of the car to dip a credit card or activate the session, given any sort of identification, it's a difficult thing. You almost have to manually patrol these. Again, I'm being redundant, but that is a constant issue at every EV charge station we have. No offense to a Tesla driver or any EV car. No offense.

Thank you.

It seems to be a license to pull an EV to the charge station, and whether you charge or not, you have the license to use that space. That's not how the program is depicted. If you're going to be in the space, you should be plugged in, and the meter should run until you're charged, and then it's possible to send you a text saying, hey, your car is fully charged. You've got 30 minutes to come and get it. If you don't move the car, then we're going to start assessing the charge. But when you don't have to dip a credit card to start the EV charge station process, we have no way to charge you. So it could be done. But, Councilman, that's a long discussion that I've got so much information on. I could talk your ears off, but I'll be happy to visit with you.

But you brought up some good points. I think the city ought to reconsider, maybe start charging for the use of the charging stations. If we're charging for parking, we might as well charge for the charging stations. then that might solve the problem. But on another matter, we have a group of people that volunteer. We have that enforce the turtle laws on Singer Island and they use that parking lot down there. Is there any way that the city can include them in like the employees or something so where they can get a discount of some sort? These are volunteers. They don't get paid any money. So they've contacted me with concerns about the parking. Then the, uh, my third point, uh, I did request in the past that we go to the condominiums during season and, uh, sell and advise people, you know, have like a little booth or something or table, uh, in the, in the actual condominiums and advise the people. And we should do the same thing in the community centers and at different events. be there and talk to the people, have staff talk to the people and try and sign them up and explain the program to them. I think we'll get a much larger number of people, you know, as community members buying the resident passes.

Thank you, Vice Chair Spiridis. Councilwoman Miller-Anderson and then Mayor Lawson, and then we're going to have to wrap this up.

Yeah, my question, isn't there Are we not doing like a first hour free or something like that for people in case they're going to the restaurant or is it that they have to get it stamped or something? What are we doing? Isn't there like a little grace period there?

Yes, there's a zero to two hours is free. When they hover over the QR code to activate the, really to register their vehicle that it's on the lot, the system will tell them your first two hours are free. If you're not going to be here two hours, if you're eating a, Rafiki Tiki, and you think it's going to take an hour and a half for lunch, you can park for free. That was decided on at the genesis of the program, and that's still in place.

Right, and that's what I thought, but my real question is, I don't own a Tesla or anything that's using the chargers. How long does it charge? Do they need to charge? Is it more than the two hours that they would have for free?

It can be. There are level two chargers, and there's level three fast chargers. If you pull into a level two charger, it depends on how depleted your battery is, and it can take two to six hours to charge. So some people set in front of our EV chargers. We have roughly a hundred of them in facilities all around us here. Some people set in front of those all day long. Some people come and do a quick charge, two or three hours, and then they're gone. So it depends.

Okay.

That's a level two charger, ma'am. A level three charger is zippy. You can pull in and be charged in an hour to two hours.

Okay. Well, maybe then, you know, not tonight, but maybe like Mr. Spears or someone said that we might want to look at charging them at some point, maybe, because they're getting the two hours free. So anything about that, I think we need to have a discussion if that's an issue or big issue that we're having. Thank you.

Okay. Carly, where do we go from here? Mr. Chair.

I had a question. Okay.

Mayor Lawson.

Thank you. At what point, because I know that it's free for the first two hours, but for example, we have these time stamps of going in and driving out. At what point are they charged if they don't scan the QR code? For example, Uber drivers, somebody just dropping off a relative, a guest, somebody that goes in just to talk to the restauranteur and come back out or pick up food. At what point are they actually charged if they don't scan that QR code?

They would be charged after the process is completed. The camera is going to pick them up coming in and leaving. And then the tech cloud, the system, is going to query the amount of time they've been in. Did they make payment by these two forms? Then when they left, if they left, like our employee left after two minutes, it's over. It's done. It's a session that's completed, but it is more or less discarded. because they were in the lot for less than two hours and they shouldn't have had to pay anyway.

They shouldn't have had to pay, but if they don't scan that QR code and they do not have a permit, won't they be charged? But that's not the case that it's been. So has that changed? Because that needs to be very clear, because if that process has changed, because, for example, I believe Dr. Spiritus is the one I mentioned. He drove in and drove out and got a ticket. So if that's no longer the case and they do not have to scan the QR code, that means we're very clear. If somebody comes in, it's time stamped, and they come out within that two-hour period, that they will not be invoiced.

That is 100% correct.

So that was corrected there.

Could you speak into the mic there?

Thank you. Yes, sir. Good evening. I'm Fred Rademeyer. I'm a co-founder of Pave Mobility, the enforcement company with offices in Dania Beach, Florida. We're a Florida-based company. Yes, sir, that two-hour grace period is also baked into our logic. So a citation will not be generated unless the vehicle is there longer than two hours.

So that has been corrected then? Because that was one of the issues we had previously where within that two-hour period, citations were being issued. And I want to make sure that's been taken corrective measures that a citation will not be issued in that two-hour block from the time they drive in and drive out as long as it's within that two-hour time stamp.

That's correct. The only time that there would be a charge is if they're in that premium lot.

If they go into that premium lot, which is closest to the ocean wall, the cameras would catch them driving onto that strip. Correct. Okay. Now, even with that strip, if you had a resident or someone dropping or delivering or dropping someone off, they would be charged. Then if they drove in, dropped someone off, stayed for five minutes, and then drove out. Correct.

On the premium. On the beach side now. On the beach side, yes. What's the wait period? 30 minutes? So even if you want to go over, park, run into the restroom and come out, you still have that 30 minutes and you wouldn't be charged.

Last but not least, the EV conversation. I think that the EV charging stations, I mean, we'll just look into a process of, because we have all level one. We have the lowest charging, so they're very slow. People just use them as locations just to kind of charge, has free parking, and they just use it as a parking hub. So I think that we need to figure out what we can implement for the EV charging, whether it's going to allow for them to charge. If it's going to be free parking, then they need to be paying for parking because we're not charging for the EV charge. But they have to sit there for hours on end because it's such a slow charge.

Yeah, I get that. Coincidentally, we're working with a group called Accelerate, who has the ability to embed their software to handle these things in all manner of EV charge stations. And you know there's a dozen out there.

So I would say just work with some of the EV vendors and see what's the best approach. I know we've talked about a few, so just see where we can come up with that. And then last, the only question I have is just to make sure that we have the proper policy in place and ordinances addressed when it comes to the disabled, because that's my only concern so far. Everything else seems to have been addressed in regards to the timeframe, in regards to the schedule. I mean, I'm good with everything except the disabled.

Real quick, chair. No, just a real quick question. No, I think it was already addressed, but I was distracted by the chair. So, no, I had someone to go into the premium parking, did not get out of the car, was waiting for her children to come from the park. So you said it's a 30-minute grace period?

We're talking about the premium, so I was already interrupting.

That's okay. No, it was at the premium. They pulled in to wait for their children. to come from the playground area and did not get out of the car, but she was cited.

I think you've really, you've taken a massive step up. We used to walk before the cameras could be installed and walking with a handheld that does some of this is so inefficient compared to what you've installed. We're going to see her come in. She picks up the kids and leaves in 17 minutes. She's a non-event. She's within that 30 minutes. And this system, it's catching the vehicle we we had one difference of one minute in all these tests so there's there's so much superior to what was being done we like to talk about the 7-eleven down there hey somebody got a time to run in and get a slurpee and come back out that's the way it's been programmed they can do that again we spent a lot of time with those businesses and a lot of them more or less said what you're saying. We need time for people to come in and do this. I know I'm droning on, but yes, that's covered. Sorry, sir.

Chair, one more question. We've got to wrap it up. I don't believe Director Sherman, the parking lot in front of the Sands Hotel in the back, we don't charge for that, right? That's excluded. I go by there on the weekends and I see it's being used heavily by the people going to PHIL FOSTER PARK. I THINK YOU MIGHT WANT TO PUT A KIOSK THERE OR SOMETHING BECAUSE WE'RE LOSING A LOT OF INCOME.

NEW SPEAKER WE CAN CERTAINLY AND WE'RE LOOKING AS YOU KNOW TO EXPAND AROUND THE EVENT CENTER AS WELL. THAT AND THEN OVER BY THE CRA OFFICES OVER THERE. YOU KNOW THAT LOT IS AS WELL. SO WE CAN EXPAND ON THAT AS LONG AS WE GET THE BLESSING TO DO THAT WE CAN DO THAT. just talking real quick um if we could get permission to turn the cameras on by the 24th i think that's i think that's friday that'll give us ample time what 24th of what of july i'm sorry no that's too quick uh because again that that'll give us a little more than a week to again market that it's coming back out get signs ready and you know and do them i don't support that

I think we need ample time. I know we're trying to rush to start getting the income to educate and promote that we're going to start charging again, at least two weeks. I'm not...

Okay. Well, we can make it the 31st or August 1st, right? We can do August 1st. That's fine.

Make it August 2nd or 3rd. August 1st is on a Saturday.

Okay, you aren't starting the Monday then?

No. That Sunday or Monday, I think, we would give them one last weekend.

We'll give them the weekend.

That Monday.

Okay. The consensus, do we need a vote?

Do we need a vote? That's the consensus.

Okay.

What do you think, Mr. City Manager, do you need a vote? Okay. Somebody make a motion for them to restart, but in the interim, promoting that they're going to start charging that Monday, whatever that date is. Is it the 3rd?

So moved.

It's been moved by Councilwoman Lanier and seconded by Councilwoman Davis-Preneur that we promote from now until the first monday in august that the charges was going they're going to restart at that time it's been it's been properly moved and seconded i hope there's no more discussion on the motion is there any discussion on the motion wait i do have one question wait a minute now i thought she Okay, we're going to carry this motion, but I have one more question. Madam Chair.

Councilperson Davis. I mean, Madam Clerk. Councilperson Lanier. Yes. Councilperson Miller-Anderson. Yes. Chairperson Dr. Spiridon.

Yes.

Chairperson Guyton.

Yes.

I see unanimous vote.

Yes. One last question to the owner. This is just a yes or no question. I really don't want to go into an elaboration. That was an indemnification question with our legal staff. Has that been resolved?

I would deal with that offline. Okay.

We're going to move on to, it's the discussion now. We're going to wrap this meeting up. We're at the confirmation of direction. Mr. City Manager, do you have anything that you would like to confirm for us that you received tonight?

He's actually supposed to read back all of our directives that were given to him this evening.

Well, I didn't hear us give him any directives.

I didn't hear any that were given.

Okay, we'll come back to that discussion by the city manager.

mr chair yes the only thing i said was um during that during the budget process if they could him and mr sherman are able to bring back what during our budget discussion just have in mind what it is what the budget would look like if we decrease the military um but you know by those different numbers that i mentioned earlier yes and and you said by 0.5 what what was the number that you Why 5.25.