City Commission - Regular Meeting

All right. Good evening, everyone. It's 630. I'm calling the meeting to order.

Commissioner Joseph.

Present.

Commissioner Lama. Here. Commissioner Stuyvesant.

Here.

Vice Mayor Vizcarra.

Here.

Mayor Svecin. Here. All members present.

OK. Great. Thank you. Could please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. First item on the agenda that we will consider tonight is the approval of the minutes of May 14th All in favor?

Aye.

Thank you. We will now play the Mayor's opening message.

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We appreciate your attendance and thank you for joining us tonight. Before we begin, there are a few important reminders regarding conduct during our Commission meetings. Please ensure all electronic devices are turned off or set to silent mode to maintain the integrity of our proceedings.

Mutual respect is the foundation of productive discussions.

We ask that everyone remains silent and attentive when someone is addressing the Commission. Clapping, applauding, heckling, or any verbal outburst either in support or opposition of the speaker are strictly prohibited. Any individual wishing to address the commission must fill out a public speaker's card and submit it to the city clerk before the relevant item is announced. Each speaker is granted a maximum of three minutes. Should you exceed this time, the chair will notify you to conclude your remarks, speak directly to the agenda's points, remain concise, and avoid redundancy. Should an individual speak without the chair's permission or continue speaking after a warning, they may be escorted out of the chambers. It is essential to avoid making impertinent, slanderous remarks or becoming boisterous while addressing the Commission. Such behavior may lead to being barred from future Commission appearances, unless the majority of the Commission members present vote otherwise. The presiding officer may disallow signs or placards in the Commission Chamber. Please exit the Chamber quietly and without disruption. The goal of our meetings is to facilitate public input and participation. However, disruptive or disorderly conduct hinders our collective objective. Individuals who want to speak on an item on the agenda are asked to fill out a public speaker's card and give it to the city clerk before the item is called. Speakers are asked to speak to the issues, make comments concise and to the point, and refrain from making duplicate comments. All speakers will be limited to one three-minute comment per item. If you exceed the three-minute allotment, the chair will advise you to finish your comment. If you speak out of turn without permission from the chair and or you do not cease speaking after one warning, you will be escorted out of chambers. In order to maintain orderly conduct and or proper decorum at these meetings, anyone who interferes with the orderly process of the meetings after a warning may be removed from the meeting and may be barred from further appearance before the City Commission. As permitted in S-286-0114, FS and SS 74-5 and 74-21 of the City's Code of Ordinances. Any necessary removal will be made at the direction of the Mayor and will be carried out by law enforcement or a designated Sergeant-at-Arms. It is essential that attendees adhere to these rules of procedure to ensure productive meetings that serve both the public and the City Commission. Thank you for your cooperation and understanding.

Okay, before we get to the order of business, I want to welcome everyone. It's really nice to see so many people in the audience. So thank you for coming. I just want to remind you that in addition to the three-minute rule and making sure that you sign up for any item to speak, this room is designed in a way that we can hear all conversations up here. So even if you're in the back, we can hear your conversation. So kindly, if you do need to speak to your neighbor, please do so outside because it's very disruptive for us up here.

Okay, thank you Yes, we have a couple of changes to tonight's agenda The first one is additional information has been provided for item 9 a which is the resolution awarding the holiday lights bid and Item 9I has been deferred, which is, or was a resolution approving a sub-lease agreement with the Sunny Isles Beach Jewish Community Center. Item 9J has been revised, and a resolution, the resolution specifically has been revised. And item 9K has been added on, which is a resolution adopting the 2025 through 2020-30 Miami-Dade County Local Mitigation Strategy.

And are we combining G and H?

Yes, we are.

OK. Great. Wonderful. Thank you. Do I need to vote on any of those items? So we just need a motion to approve those changes.

Can I get a motion?

Motion.

Second.

All in favor? Aye. Thank you. OK. So now the first item is ordinances first reading, 6A. And I apologize. Give me one second. I just lost my things. 6A is an ordinance of the City Commission of the City of Sunny Isles Beach, Florida, amending Chapter 256 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Sunny Isles Beach, Article 5, Section 256-37, entitled Definitions, Rules and Regulations for Operation, Section 233-8, entitled Penalties for Offenses, and 256-39 entitled enforcement to create and provide regulations for the use of electric bicycles within the city's jurisdiction, providing for repealer, severability, codification, and an effective date.

OK. Mr. City Manager?

Mayor vice mayor members, the commission we're bringing this forward in response to your request to revise and update or bicycle ordinance to include specific regulations. Regarding the bikes.

Do we have any public speakers.

We do OK Stephen hirsch.

Good evening, Stephen hirsch one 72 one Collins. I support this ordinance that's amending Chapter 256 relating to promoting pedestrian safety on our sidewalks. I think it's a great follow-up to the earlier ordinance regarding scooters. However, we must note that this will likely increase the amount of bicycles, albeit motorized bicycles, on the right lane of Collins and Sunny Isles Beach Boulevard. That led me to look at the 236-page 2016 Sunny Isles Beach Transportation Master Plan to see what, if any, provisions could be affected by this, albeit motorized bicycles on our main arteries. After reading the report, it was evident to me that the 2016 study, where survey times are over 10 years old, needs to be updated for several reasons. Population growth has substantially increased traffic demand and are well beyond the original projections. The report predates e-scooters, micro-mobility devices, app-based on-demand tracits, transit demands such as Ubers, Lyfts, and the report relied on traffic counts and patterns from approximately 2014 through 2015. As any of us speak with residents of Sunny Isles Beach and you ask what is one of the major downsides to the quality of life in our city, traffic always seems to be near the top, if not at the top of the list. As the next logical step after creating pedestrian safety for micromobility devices, Suggest a commission I suggest to the Commission that maybe it's time to take and revisit our outdated transportation master plan Sunny Isles Beach has changed dramatically since 2016 with increased development new transportation technologies and evolving pedestrian safety concerns our transportation plan should be updated using current data and so that any future investments that we need to make regarding traffic flow, traffic safety, pedestrian safety, are based on today's realities and not yesterday's assumptions. Thank you very much for allowing me to talk.

Thank you. Any other speakers?

No further speakers.

OK. I'll take comments or questions. Commissioner Joseph, would you like to start?

My idea originally was to ban e-scooters and e-bikes in Sunny Isles. We really don't have a safe provision for them to be in the streets. They're absolutely not safe on the sidewalks. And my regard for that was the safety of residents in the city. We have scooters now for riders under 16 off the streets, which have made a big difference. But I think in the end, we're going to have to take it that one step further, but we'll see how things progress.

But right now, our streets are somewhat safer, and we'll see what happens in the near future.

We can always come back and make our policies stronger as necessary.

Thank you. Commissioner Stevenson? No, no comments. Commissioner Long?

No, no comments.

No comments. OK. Vice Mayor?

I support this, obviously. But I was hoping, and I don't mean to catch anybody off guard, but if you have the information off the top of your head, I know that we started the enforcement or the warning period. And I liked one of the Facebook posts I saw that on that first day, you didn't have to open the warning book. So I was just wondering how it's looking. if you have any input on that.

To date, both PD and code have reported that they've had zero violations. That is great news.

OK. Anyway, that's all.

OK. So with that, I'll take a motion. I'll make a motion. I'll second. Mariccio?

Commissioner Joseph. Yes Commissioner Lama. Yes, Commissioner Syverson. Yes Vice mayor Vizcarra. Yes mayor Svachan. Yes, the ordinance passes our first reading second reading will be scheduled for July Next item is 8a which is In an ordinance of the City Commission of the City of Sunny Isles Beach, Florida, amending Chapter 265, Article 2, Section 265-5, entitled Definitions, and Article 5, Section 265-17, entitled Subdivision Plat Approval of the Court of Ordinances of the City of Sunny Isles Beach, in accordance with the requirements of Section 177.071 of the Florida Statutes, as amended by Senate Bill 784 in 2005, and to align with certain procedures in Chapter 28 of the Miami-Dade Code of Ordinances, providing for repeal of severability, codification, and ineffective deed.

Thank you. Good evening, mayor, vice mayor, commissioners. This is second reading of our ordinance related to the platting procedures in the land development regulations. Just as a quick refresher, the purpose of this ordinance is to come into compliance with state legislation that passed in 2025 that requires all municipalities and counties to administratively approve plats with no further action or approval by the governing body. As the commission requested last month, A line has been added to the ordinance which states, the city manager shall, for informational purposes only, submit a written report to the city commission advising of any plat approval, approval with conditions, or denial. And that's added in two places in the ordinance, once for subdivisions and also for waiver of plats.

thank you thank you are there public speakers no ma'am all right are there questions or comments from the commission yes go ahead commissioner well this this was not the direction that was given to be informed after the application gets approved what's the point so we were we said that we wanted to know when this application was submitted So I will make a motion to modify again exactly the same language that it was recommended with the difference that the city manager shall for informational purposes only submit a written report to the city commission advising of any plat replat or plat modification application. The same thing on the second section. The city manager shall, for informational purposes only, submit a written report to the city commission advising of any waiver of plat application. We had a long discussion and the direction was very simple. We want to be informed. This is administrative. We cannot do anything. We cannot interfere. So the only thing we need to know is to be informed. So we need to be informed when the application is submitted, not after it gets approved.

OK. Before I take a second for your motion, can I just get clarification for the city attorney? Because we discussed this during the agenda review. Right.

As we discussed on Tuesday at the workshop, in looking back at the statute, You as a governing body cannot be involved in any way, shape, or form in the platting process. The language that was requested by implication involves you and inserts you into the process. It screams interference. If there's a difference between knowing when it's applied for versus when it's approved, it points directly to interference, whether it be indirect interference or direct interference. If you have that in your code, anybody challenging it would have that to work with. So again, to keep in the spirit of the statute, you are not involved in the process at all. It should be after the fact.

OK, thank you. There's a motion on the table.

But again, that is guessing that somebody is going to interfere, because that's not what it says. Plus, we give the directions. You can give your recommendation, but we are the legislative body. We are the ones who decide. We're voting for this. And that interference claim, I look for it in the status, and that's an interpretation that is not there. So you are assuming that by we knowing about this, we are going to do something with that information. And that's not the spirit of this. So it was taken from us that information the ability or the power to vote for that application. It wasn't taken for us the ability to get informed. So like I said, it's very simple. We need to be informed when the application is submitted, not after it got approved. That was the specific direction that we gave in the last commission meeting.

OK. Is there a second to Commissioner Stevenson's motion? All right. So the motion dies. We're back on the original motion. Or rather, I don't have a motion yet. So would anyone like to add anything or make a motion? No? OK. So can I get a motion for this item?

Motion.

I need a second. Second. Mauricio?

Commissioner Lama?

Yes.

Commissioner Stuyvesant?

No.

Vice Mayor Vizcarra?

I'm a no, because I don't think the language should have been added to begin with. I liked it the way it was last month, so.

Commissioner Joseph.

OK. No.

Mayor Svetchen.

Yes.

The ordinance fails on second reading, two to three.

OK. So can you clarify what's going to?

Well, by Florida statute, you have to pass an ordinance in this regard.

It has to be administrative. So would you like to make a motion, Commissioner Vizcarra?

I would like to make a motion to remove the language that we added last month.

Can you remind me, please, what that language was for the record?

The language says, as currently written, the city manager shall, for informational purposes only, submit a written report to the city commission advising of any plat approval, approval with conditions, or denials.

OK. Is there a second to vice mayor's motion? We have to pass.

OK. Well, if there's no second, I'll change my vote. Or I'll reconsider the vote or whatever. OK. Hold on. Hold on.

So if we go back, may I please? If we go back to the original language, what are the implications? We'll be opening ourselves. Which original language?

No, it just means that the manager would not need to advise us. That's the difference. So vice mayor. Inform, not advise.

So OK, so that's what I want to know. What are we, OK, what is the vice mayor proposing?

Vice mayor, if you could please clarify for Commissioner Lama why you voted no.

The way that it was originally presented to us. This language about the city manager was added at the last meeting. Correct. And I don't think it's necessary. I think we get the information if there's something that we want to know. We have the monthly reports. I feel like adding, it's not standard language. And I don't think it belongs there. If I have to change my vote, I will. We're not going to be without compliance. But I really think it should just not be there.

All right, so let's try this again, because there was a little bit of confusion. So vice mayor made a motion to go back to the original, which did not have the language of the manager having to inform the commission specifically of a change. Is there a second? OK, so that fails. So procedurally, can we go back to the original?

A motion to reconsider.

Yeah.

Procedurally, we would need to reconsider this. And one of the members of the commission that voted against, in this case the vice mayor, to reconsider this item and then make the motion that she wishes.

All right. OK. So motion to reconsider. As written? Yes, as written today. Today, yes. OK. And a second for that motion.

Second.

OK.

All in favor. So now we're reconsidering the motion as is all right the resolution as written today.

All right now we need a motion for that motion in the second so I mean second.

Commissioner Lama yes. Commissioner Stuyvesant. Vice mayor of this car. Commissioner Joseph no. Miss Fletcher at the ordinance is adopted 3 to 2 as written tonight. All right next item, please next item is 9 a resolutions. A resolution awarding request for proposal number 26 that show for a 1, 2, and approving an agreement with all season imports doing business has the Christmas Palace to saw holiday lights and the creations at various locations throughout the city.

Mr. City manager mayor vice mayor members of the Commission. This is our bid that we put out approving with All season imports doing business as the Christmas Palace to install holiday lights and decorations at various locations throughout the city Okay, do we have public speakers? We do David Virgil, okay

Again, as a reminder, anyone that wants to speak on this item, this is your opportunity to sign up. Thank you. Hi, David.

DAVID VIRGIL, Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Commission. My name is David Virgil. My address is 17500 North Bay Road, Sinaloa Beach. I just want to say that the renderings of the new holiday lights look amazing, in my opinion. um it's great that there is a wide variety of colors to choose from as it appears in the end of the packet it shows red and green blue and white and also yellow so in case anyone's any controversy about the colors the city could choose different colors um there's also great coverage from the north end of the city to the south end of the city so that's pretty great too but just one thing i noticed on like page 30 of the pdf document it shows that there's uh three palm trees at town center park anything to uh fell down so maybe uh two sets of lights may be an extra cost that is unnecessary at this time so yeah thank you any other speakers no ma'am all right um this is a hot topic are we gonna put up the pictures on the screen do we have them

Okay, so who would like to start? This is a big conversation. Commissioner Stuison, would you like to start? Okay, who's ready to speak?

I'll speak.

Go ahead.

So I do like this. Obviously, during our agenda review, I requested that we have a workshop on that because I do think that we need to work a little bit more on the color palette. And then the nativity scene issue came up. So I think that we need a workshop to uh define um how this is going to be structured and take place so yeah that's basically it i i would like to work on the color palette obviously we're not doing that today today we're approving the the awarding of the contract but those are my comments right now okay yeah uh let the city manager answer and then commissioner stewart and you can go

Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to point out to Commissioner Lama's point that we have scheduled a workshop to discuss this further. I spoke with Mauricio, and we have it calendared.

Okay, for the callers. All right, Commissioner Stubison, go ahead.

Okay, that's very interesting because I have here the addendums, and it was very specific, giving the instruction to all the bidders that the select contractor shall provide holiday lighting in neutral conditions non-holiday specific colors. That is exactly what it was in the addendum number three of the questions and answers to all the plan holders. It says that several times the selected contractor shall provide holiday lining in neutral, non-holiday specific colors. Just to say that we are going to have them a workshop for this, for the color theme, when the color theme already is said that it shall provide non-holiday specific colors, that's even worse than being gaslight. Another thing, he said he very specific also during the four meetings that they had, et cetera, that they must provide and install a menorah. Not provide, I'm sorry, install a menorah. That says in the RFP, but excluded specifically the manger from the same display. He said that we can have a nativity, even one of the vendors provided in his offer, and it was excluded. So again, no nativity, nothing for one group, and everything for another group. So again, to say that then we're going to be discussing the color palette, how is that possible when we are going to approve right now a contract that says it cannot be multicolored? I have that question, city manager.

Go ahead. Mr. City manager. Can you just clarify the purpose of the workshop as requested by vice mayor?

I mean like Commissioner Lama We had to provide some general outlines in order to get the bid done because time is of the essence so in terms of Substituting one light for another or the possibility of adding or moving Let's say a nativity scene would be up to the Commission but it certainly falls within our purview of however, we direct the vendor and

OK. Go ahead, Commissioner Joseph.

And that's how we constantly get upcharged. I mean, the whole process is so backwards, it just makes no sense to me. And we do it year after year. We should be having this workshop, we should be having it in March or April, not now. It just makes no sense.

OK. I just want to give others an opportunity. Vice Mayor, did you want to add anything?

I recall sitting up here and having a discussion about it. So I don't understand the outrage. These are things we've talked about.

And we should be having an activity scene.

Wait, wait, wait. And we talked about that. And we talked about that. And just because it gets talked about doesn't mean that there's consensus. Just because it's discussed doesn't mean it was agreed upon. So yeah, I don't want to go down this rabbit hole and be here for an hour. If you guys want to really dig into the details, we can have a workshop about the details. But as far as the contract is concerned, I'm OK with it. OK.

May I say something? Please, go ahead. So I think the color in what was presented is an improvement from last year. I still think it needs to be worked on a little bit more. Me personally, I'd like to see some red and green, which I'm not seeing in this color palette, these schematics. So I'd like to see that. And obviously, we need to talk about the nativity scene as well. I know that there are some legal impediments or certain laws, but I think we should be discussing that in the workshop as well. And that's it. I mean, I really want to streamline it and simplify it. And I think we could work on the color palettes very easily without being upcharged.

So which is going to be? Because we have here a red one, the same one, golden one, the same one, silver one.

I would go with the red one. We take a vote.

That's the point. You're not going to see this again. And also, the issue that we have here with this bidding process is that the scope of work was completely open. It was not a line of prices. So you cannot compare when they were not bidding with a price. So anybody, they could submit their own design. COMMISSIONER JOSEPH, COMMISSIONER STEWART HAS THE FLOOR. LET ME READ. SO WHAT IS A COMPETITIVE BIDDING? GENERAL PRICE COMPETITION AMONG COMPARABLE FIXED SCOPE BIDS. HERE WE DIDN'T HAVE A FIXED SCOPE. ANYBODY HAS TO SUBMIT WHATEVER THEY WANTED. SO EVEN BECAUSE I SAW THE FOUR MEETINGS THAT THE COMMITTEE HAD TO PRESENT THIS RECOMMENDATION. They say themselves, our employees, our staff, that they could not compare. I'm quoting. They could not compare the four beds because they could not understand. There were different line items, different prices. So we didn't ask them to, let's say, quote per Christmas tree, per tree lighting. Anybody could quote.

The question why the lights were still off in Golden Shirt, I'm not aware of it.

I'll find out. OK. Thank you.

All right. Any other comments?

Oh, actually, I do have one.

Please go ahead.

So I had asked also prior to Tuesday's agenda review regarding what is happening with the vendors, AT&T and BreezeLine, regarding the fact that they're not installing fiber, which had been pulled across the intercoastal and is at the bridge in Golden Shores waiting to be installed, but they're just not installing it. They're looking for additional funds from the city Deputy manager and I never got an answer.

I'm not aware of them looking for any additional funds from the city They have not expressed that to us.

What is the reason that we still have copper when it's obsolete? I

So as I told you, I reached out to both AT&T and BreezeLine just yesterday. BreezeLine got back to us. I could not understand their response, and I need to get better clarification, but they said that they are using both fiber and copper, depending on the customer.

I was never offered. I have BreezeLine. I was never offered that opportunity, and they just came and undergrounded mine with copper. And their services on and off it's it's actually still connected not to the underground is still connected to the overhead. So they're not being honest with you and we paid them millions of dollars. So we need follow through by the city manager's office to really not just ride the wave, but see what's really happening and get this job completed.

Commissioner Joseph, can you just clarify your request so that we can have a discussion?

Okay, so for next month, I want a full follow-up on what the city manager's office is doing to hold these services to task in order to have them explain why they're still installing copper and not installing fiber that everywhere else in the city has access to mayor it was supposed to actually myself and um jason senator pizzo were promised by att and breeze line that fiber was going to be installed had no additional charge and they're just not doing it mr city manager

We don't regulate AT&T or Breeze Line, so I'm not sure what you would like.

But this contract was signed with the city. The city signed the contract for the installations.

I'll have to look at that, but we don't regulate. So it's a matter of your office following through on what they do. No, it's not.

We don't regulate either one of those.

Mr. City Attorney?

If they are promising something that they're not delivering to you as a customer or anyone as a customer, they're regulated by the Public Service Commission?

So we're paying millions of dollars for the undergrounding, and we have no oversight?

We're not paying them any money.

We haven't paid any millions of dollars for undergrounding?

You're undergrounding Conduit, but that's between them and their customers. And to the extent that they're promising things to you as a customer that they're not delivering on, that's regulated by the Public Service Commission.

So we installed Conduit for certain services to use, correct? Correct. So we had Hotwire that wanted to come in and install internet in Golden Shores. So who was it that didn't allow them to use the content?

If I recall correctly, Hotwire did not want to participate unless they had full participation from the neighbors, and they didn't.

Right, that's correct.

So we don't regulate that.

They didn't have the opportunity to even advocate to get opinions from the residents. I was never asked by Hotwire if I wanted to have their service.

Well, Commissioner Joseph, that's not up to us to how they run their business. That's up to them. We wouldn't be contacting them and telling them what to do.

So we own the conduit, correct?

Yes. Yes.

we paid to have a conduit installed. And we're allowing services to install their copper cable, which is obsolete, in our conduit without any say-so as to what gets installed in that conduit.

Don't regulate utilities the state of Florida does we can it's just like FPNL. I mean they they are we're essentially preempted again, they are They fall under the Public Service Commission's jurisdiction. So they're doing something. They're not supposed to be doing and again, it's a lot of it comes between The company and the customer what product they provide and the city doesn't get involved in that

This was the city that signed a contract with FP&L and these services several years ago to install the services. And unfortunately, from what I believe is wording, similar to whatever is on the poles goes underground without anyone having any foresight or to do any research to understand that cable, that copper, was obsolete for internet service. And that fiber, which was already several years ago in use, was the up and coming product for internet. And no one thought in this city to look out for the residents And have any forward-thinking thought to say you must since we're paying you so many millions Install fiber. Is that correct?

But again for clarification as far as who the city is paying Well that first of all that question should be directed to the manager and to okay. So my understanding is that we cannot dictate what these companies offer and

So, no. How many millions has the city paid to have the undergrounding work done?

I have to defer to the city manager. Susan? We'll have to research that. Mayor, we're getting off topic.

We've researched it so many times already.

No, I understand. This number should be on the tip of your tongue. Commissioner Joseph, let's stick to the item on the agenda.

No, but no, because then we get to next month, and we still haven't gotten to the point, and these services Every resident, 200 and something households in Golden Shores are the orphan child of the city. Everyone else in this city, every high rise, Atlantic Isle, everywhere has fiber. Golden Shores is the only area that there's no even hope except, what are they saying, for four years, maybe they'll be installing the fiber that's right at the bridge on our side in Golden Shores, and they might get around to it in four years? That's totally unacceptable.

I hear you. However, that's not the item on the agenda.

Well, I've made it. I understand that. I would like to add this. I make a motion to add this to the agenda.

OK, we can't do that right now. Can we make a motion?

I would like to add a discussion as to the undergrounding in Golden Shores and why it has not been followed up on by the city manager's office. And we've just allowed them to ride the wave month after month without accomplishing what they had said they would accomplish.

Who's they?

The AT&T and Breeze Line. We finally have completion except for one property for FP&L's undergrounding. And that's another issue that, for another day, if that doesn't get resolved, that I have to bring up for one resident in Golden Shores that's been tortured with their electrical power.

No, I understand. I think that what you're asking for is not something that we can possibly even discuss today.

Well, I want to bring it. to a head so that the city manager, whose it's his duty with all the millions we've paid out for the undergrounding, to be aggressive in following up and holding these services, their feet to the fire, in order to get the job done the way it was promised.

I understand that. But the question that you're asking is not within the remit of the city manager as far as giving any sort of direction to a private utility.

Well, my point, we have a city attorney if we have to bring suit against them. And that's what we should be doing.

Understand, but you must agree. This is a very very big scope of Discussion that you're looking to month after month. I understand. So how about this direction? Why don't you work it through with the city attorney and the manager and bring it on for next month so that we're all clear and have advanced notice of what exactly you want to discuss Great, okay. Thank you.

You ready? Okay.

We'll be ready. All right I'll take a motion then So move I need a second. I No 2nd OK so what are we doing this instance item dies. Remains OK status quo all right next item.

Next item is 90 resolution approving an agreement with pipeline plumbing service of Broward for as needed citywide plumbing and backflow repairs.

The manager.

Mayor vice mayor members the commission. This is an agreement with pipeline plumbing for as needed citywide plumbing and backflow repairs.

OK. Do we have any public speakers.

No ma'am.

All right. I will take comments or questions for the commission. I will take a motion then.

Motion.

I need a second.

Second.

All in favor. Aye. All right. Next item please.

9E. is a resolution approving a fourth amendment to the agreement with Universal Protection Service, LLC, doing business as allied universal security services for unarmed security guard services at Government Center.

OK, Mr. City Manager.

Mayor, Vice Mayor, members of the Commission, this is the company that provides security guard services at the Government Center 24 hours a day.

Thank you. Do we have public speakers?

No, ma'am.

Any comments from the Commission? No. I'll take a motion, please. Motion. I need a second.

Second.

All in favor? Aye. Aye. Okay. Next item, please.

9F is a resolution approving the issuance of a purchase order to CSPI Technology Solutions for the purchase of uninterruptible power supply units.

Mr. City Manager?

Mayor, vice mayor, members of the commission, this item is for backup power supply for IT.

All right. Do we have any public speaking cards?

No, ma'am.

All right. You sure? Yes. OK. I'll take questions from the commission. Go ahead, Commissioner Joseph.

At the agenda review, even though it's just tangentory to this item, I had asked regarding the solar panels on the city, on city hall roof. Is there any information that you have that I had requested?

Mayor.

Please.

The solar panels, we checked with our IT director and would not be compatible for this use.

Okay. No, I understand, but I had sent over information regarding different types of solar panels. I was asking what type of solar panels do we have exactly?

Solar panels is a separate issue, and we're still gathering the information on that.

Okay, so please, I'm now asking for the brand, make, and... CATEGORY AND EFFICIENCIES REGARDING THE SOLAR PANELS THAT ARE INSTALLED ON THE CITY HALL ROOF, WHETHER IT WAS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT, THE HEAT FACTOR AND SUN FACTOR IN SUNNY ISLES AND SOUTH FLORIDA REGARDING THE TYPE OF SOLAR PANELS THAT WERE INSTALLED OR WAS IT JUST DONE WILLY-NILLY LIKE SO MANY OTHER THINGS THAT WE WASTE MONEY ON IN THIS CITY?

Okay. Anyone else?

And I would like that for next month, please.

That can be done probably by email, your request. Okay. Okay, perfect. I need a motion.

So moved.

I need a second. Second. All in favor?

Aye.

Aye. Next item, please. That's G and H combined. H.

Nineties resolution approving a use and occupancy agreement and then them there too with the Florida Department of Transportation for public parking and other public purchases on parcel number 7756 located at 500 Sunday House Boulevard. 98 is a resolution approving a use and occupancy agreement and then them there too with the 4th Department of Transportation for parcel number 3129 located at 500 Sunday House Boulevard.

OK see manager.

Mayor, vice mayor, members of the commission, these two parcels are near each other off of Sunning Owls Boulevard. And FDOT owns these parcels. This enters into an agreement with FDOT so we can further develop and use those parcels.

All right. Mr. City Clerk, do we have public speakers? OK, I'll take comments from the commission.

Yeah, I have a question, because here they keep making reference to exhibit B. It says everything is about exhibit B, all the maps, et cetera, but there is no exhibit B in any of the three items. So how can we vote if we don't have the full information? Another thing is that it says, as well, that we need to do this so we can sub-list the property for the playground, et cetera. But now we don't even have the sub-list portion being added to the agenda. So like I said, the exhibit B, which is what is the most important part, is not included anywhere. It's just a draft. So I do believe we should defer this item until we have the full scope and all the information.

Sorry, which exhibit B reference are you referring to?

The three of them, they say exhibit B over and over. No, not in the resolution, in the agreements.

What page is it? It looks like it's at least one of them is 4D on page two of the use and occupancy agreement for 7756.

I found 14 reference to exhibit B, and it's nowhere. And that's a specific what is like the scope, the terms, et cetera. What is supposed to be the? OK, the residents state that FDOT use and occupancy agreement and its agenda are appended hereto and incorporated as composite exhibit B. But we don't have any exhibit B. And that's exactly about the use and occupancy agreement. It says then later on that we acknowledge, receive, and acknowledge of all provisions on exhibit B, but we don't have any exhibit B. I'm going to let the city attorney answer that. All the sublease is exhibit B. Again, not exhibit B. So how can we vote something that we don't have?

What page were you referring to? Everywhere. Just pick. Give me one, because I'd like to see.

Just put Control-F and put Exhibit B, and you're going to find it. It's more than 14 references. And that's exactly the exhibit that is going to be redrawing the boundaries and the sketch and the legal description, all of that. None of that is there.

No, I don't know. I don't know. I have 20 pages. I have 20 pages. On the use and occupancy agreement, I have the resolution and the cover page. That's what I have. OK, did you read it? What do you have? Oh, I have the same thing. OK, so where is it? So exhibit B is?

It's supposed to have the scope at the end. But is that in the occupancy agreement? It's everywhere. It's in all the documents. In the resolution? I only saw exhibit A. No, it's not in the resolution. OK, you said it's everywhere. It's not in the memo. It's in the document. Oh, it should be everywhere. In the 18-page documents, you're going to see three of them at the end. And also, it makes reference to Exhibit C. Exhibit C is not there.

But it only has Exhibit A in the occupancy agreement.

Vice Mayor, page 2, number 4 of page 2. Thank you. It says it under D, describing Exhibit B.

Mayor and commissioners, the attachment, the Exhibit B, was attached to the sublease agreement.

So if you look at the schematic, the item labeled... That's the one with the schematics and the shaded...

Yes, that's what is being referenced as Exhibit B. It was just added to the wrong...

which is the deferred item. And I do see the schematic, but it doesn't say there that that's exhibit B, because we have exhibit A, and the schematic is just supposed to be like the three survey and disposition. And like I said, it's not in the two resolutions that we're voting on right now.

OK, Mauricio, for the record, could you clarify where it is, please?

It's in the deferred item. It's attached to item 9J, and it's labeled as a schematic for that.

Rather than exhibit B.

Rather than exhibit B. But it should be attached to items 9H and 9I.

So it was inadvertently left out.

Yeah, attached to the wrong item.

OK. All right, so is it available right now online?

It is available online, yes.

OK.

Again, it's not what it's making. It says in the resolutions that it's going to have, including the scope, the boundaries, et cetera. So like I said, it's not there. Here we can see the schematic, which are the survey, the drawings, the trees, et cetera. That's not the reference that the contract is making about CBB over and over.

May I? Yes, please go ahead. Is the plan to have the sublease item back on next month? Or is there certain things to be worked out?

Some version of that should be back next month. Yes, that is the intent.

Okay.

Should we just...

you know combine everything refer for all of it for next month or we cannot vote is there something time sensitive at this point that that we need to pass this or can we wait i mean uh i'll let the city manager answer that it can be deferred for a month okay does this not slow down us being able to add the parking yes yes i'm just concerned that we are in very very big need of parking in that area

So this delays the parking by at least a month?

Yes.

OK. Are you all comfortable deferring it then? Why was the item deferred? I don't know. No. Please, nothing from the audience, please. OK, so I want to get a very, very clear picture of this before we start deferring anything, because there have been multiple complaints in that area for parking. So the item that was deferred, you said it's coming back next month in some other way, correct?

Yes.

But can you clarify for the commission and for the public why those things need to be connected or don't need to be connected so that way we can make a good decision here, not just defer because we don't want to vote on it.

OK. So the use and occupancy agreement is intentional to be able to bifurcate the green open area from the paved parking area, which is used for a public parking area that has a revenue generator in it. The green open space is just green open space. So the first step is to bifurcate those parcels into two separate pieces. The sublease agreement, which was our initial reason for doing that, had to be approved by FDOT first and also by us. And then it was sent to the Jewish Community Center. Upon their review, they had some edits and some concerns with the agreement as written. They would like to consider changing some terms. They want to meet with us after to see if we could come to a different agreement that is less of a sublease and more of a donation. Where we are not subleasing to them, we are still maintaining the FDOT property, but they would donate the playground.

Right. But I don't want to commingle those two things because the revenue that we generate from that parking, I don't know if you had an opportunity to confirm how much that is per month. I had asked for that. You sent it to us. I did send it to you. You did? Oh, I missed it then. If you can pull that up because missing out, not just obviously we want the additional parking, but we need to be mindful about the lost revenue as well.

Also, in the future, we're planning on having, or when Miami-Dade gets around to it, a water taxi.

Yeah, I'm just keeping, I want to make sure that we're tight on this because any additional delays could compound all of the delays, and this has been a long time coming to get extra parking there.

Okay, so the revenue to date for the one lot that we have there from October 1st, this fiscal year, to June 3rd is $78,885.97. The revenue from last fiscal year was $110,924.87. And how many more parking spaces would this increase? We would have 18 additional regular spaces and two additional handicapped spaces.

And how many do we have there now? At the top of your head. I know it doesn't double it, right? It's like another, all right. But it's a significant enough amount that it's warranted. Okay. So before, one second, one second. I just want to make sure that we're all clear as to what we're talking about here, okay? So go ahead, Commissioner Joseph.

Commissioner, yes. So I understand that on the third floor at Gateway parking lot, the Temple rents space is corrected.

Through a parking agreement, through their zoning approval from a previous commission, they purchased a number of spaces. They are actually on the roof. Okay.

How many?

Again, sir, 26, I think.

Okay. Are there any others available? Any other spots available?

Yes. I mean, it depends.

So why don't we allow them to rent more spots?

If they would like to, we certainly would.

Has anyone proposed that?

Yes, and they do rent it for special events.

But this parking is not limited to just the shul.

This is public parking.

No, I understand.

But most of them will be taken up by shul goers.

Potentially.

Yes.

There's also business there.

Yeah. So I'm not thinking, though, short term. I'm thinking long term.

No, I understand that, but there's also a business there that needs parking. Yes, there's a restaurant. That has nothing to do with the show, right? Yes, exactly. So that could benefit from that parking.

Yeah, and I've been there when people are parking there and walking to the restaurant. So yes, even when there's an event at the synagogue. Sure. But I'm just thinking, if the synagogue is saying they're so pressed for spots, why don't we offer them the more spots... At Gateway, since there are so many more available.

That's always available to them.

They're aware of those spots.

Well, but maybe it hasn't been presented in this manner at this time for them to accept them and alleviate any pressure for the parking.

OK, but again, this is not specific to the synagogue, so.

Yes, I know that.

Right, OK.

But that would also open up more spaces for the restaurant, possibly.

I think people park wherever it's convenient for them. So, okay.

Anyone else? Do we have a motion on deferral? No, we don't, not yet. I agree with Commissioner Joseph, I think. If there is a something that alleviates an immediate problem, if there is one, and we can just do it right, and the city manager says there's no harm, no foul, I'm good with deferring as well.

OK, so you're making a motion to defer? I'll make the motion. OK, I need a second.

Second.

All in favor? Aye. OK. I'm a no on that, just for the record. All right. Next item, please.

Next item is 9J, a resolution allowing the mayor and commissioners at each elected official's sole choice and option to enroll and participate in and receive the same insurance benefits as is available to the city's regular employees, including for a period not to exceed two years at the end of the elected official's respective term of office.

Okay, Mr. City Manager.

Mayor, Vice Mayor, members of the Commission, this is an item that we discussed at a workshop, and we're bringing it back to you for approval. It would establish the ability for the elected officials, after serving two full terms, to participate in the city's health insurance for two years.

Okay, just for clarification, I want to make sure that we understand the item. Mr. City Attorney, if you can clarify.

The first initial part of it is just memorializing what the status quo already is, that you're conferring upon yourself the benefits that I think since 2010 had been received by elected officials. And then when we had the discussion, there was a component that there was direction to come up with – a gap filler with regards to once an elected official leaves office to allow them to get onto other insurance. So I believe the consensus was two years. So that's what we were proposing. But again, that's all up to you.

OK. And just for the members of the public or anyone watching, currently the commission receives the option of participating in the health insurance. same as the city staff, and has been since 2010.

I believe so.

OK, approximately. All right, do we have public speakers, Mauricio?

But that's not for free.

Wait, I understand. Yes, of course.

We do. Dana Goldman?

My name is Dana Goldman. I reside at 308 Point Siena Island Drive in Sunny Isles Beach. And I just want to say a quick support for this initiative. I think it very well memorializes something that is a well-needed benefit for elected officials. and they provide tremendous service. The ones that provide that service for two consecutive terms and they work hard and contribute a lot and this is a finite, there are finite parameters to this and it's a very welcome initiative and I'm happy to support that.

Thank you. Any other speakers?

No, ma'am.

All right. I'll take comments. Go ahead, Commissioner Joseph.

I'm looking for a definition of a full term.

Yes, that's right. This was during the gender review that question was asked.

Right. I think in our conversations before, we had talked about the appointed less of a full term. But, Mercedes, you had quoted that section back on Tuesday. As we discussed, Commissioner Joseph, If it's an appointed, unexpired term, that wouldn't count as a term. But the question you posed to me before the meeting, which we needed to check, we need to check is if, in your case, you were elected to an unexpired term, whether that counts as a term or not.

right and does it have to be the entire term the way that it's written now the resolution is a full both two full uninterrupted elected terms so if you're one day short of the term then you're not eligible that was the direction i got from the city manager okay i understand all right so nobody quits so no one can right and in that regard then it would allow me to run again no No, you would be eligible to use the insurance.

No, he cannot.

Yes, he can, because it's a full term for him.

No, it's not. They need to clarify that.

Specifically for anyone that has the three years as a full term. They were elected to a term, and they can't. add an extra year. So is that considered a full term or not?

What Jerry and Fabiola have are full terms. That's what I'm assuming. Because if it weren't, then that's what he's saying. No, we have to clarify.

Wait, hold on a second.

If it weren't, then he would be able to run for commissioner again. Yes. There's language in our charter. Hold on, please. There's language in our charter that defines. And I remember looking at it some time ago. And you guys are well within that. It's like when you were in that two and a half It's like around that two-year mark that it gets fuzzy. But if you're not able to run for that seat again, it's because that counts as a full term, and that's the position that you're in.

Right. That was my question during the agenda review. So are we including something like that as a full term?

That was the C-2-3, right? Section C-2-3C. Right. and will end at midnight of the day before the commencement term. Whether or not it is actually completed, except that a vacancy being filled for less than two years remaining in the filling of that term shall not be counted as a term under this section.

So it counts. So if you get elected to fill in for more than two years, then that counts as a full term, according to our charter.

OK. So then for health reasons as well, health insurance reasons, then it's a full term.

I would think so. I mean, that's a discussion we're having, but I would say so.

Well, you can't have it both ways, so it has to be determined.

I agree with that.

I don't know what both ways is.

What's the other way? I don't know what both ways is.

What Commissioner Joseph is saying that is if you cannot run for a third term because his would not be considered a full term under this. But it is a full term.

Exactly.

That's what he's saying. He's saying if it's a full term, then it's a full term for all purposes. Yes, correct. But I want to make sure that that's what's in the resolution.

Don't give me the health insurance and I'll run again.

Well, the resolution definitely talks about a full term as to whether what a full term is, is dictated.

Well, you can say, right, you can say as a set forth in C23, whatever it is. You can add that language, yeah. Okay. All right, anyone else?

Yes.

Go ahead.

So, I want to be very precise, okay, because the public opposition, when we are spending their money on ourself, This resolution will have taxpayers pay for the health insurance for two years after elected officials are no longer in office. I heard them suggest that we have to do this to follow the law, but we don't.

No, no, no, no, no. I did not say that.

No, no, no. You are interrupting me.

No, no, no, no, no. Wait a second. Wait a second. I've been interrupted. I'm reading. Wait a second. Commissioner Stevenson, I want to make sure that the record is clear. Let the city attorney clarify.

You are not required to confer upon yourself benefits after you leave office. Simply what you have the status quo since 2010. That's what I stated. I'm not saying that you are required. to give yourself insurance after you leave office? Absolutely not.

I asked in the last commission meeting if we were breaking the law several times with the status quo. And your answer was yes.

With the status quo, you are receiving insurance that has not been conferred upon yourself. So you need to formalize that. But that doesn't talk about insurance after your term.

There are two separate things. Well, and I asked specifically if we were breaking the law many times. I'm going to ask again, the status quo that we have right now, are we or we are not breaking the law?

You've been receiving benefits since 2010.

It's a yes or no question.

It's not a yes or no question.

Yes, it is.

No, it's not.

Well, it is. It's your fluid interpretation, as always. So I'm going to rehear the memorandum of 2009.

You need to memorialize. You have to confer upon yourself the benefits you receive. The city manager can't do it. that the city manager back in the day in 2010 couldn't do it. You have to confer that upon yourselves.

MARTHA MINOW- That, again, is your interpretation, October 29, 2009. And it says, in 2007, the city was audited by the IRS, the Internal Revenue Service. And one of the stipulations effective January 1, 2008, was that the salary of elected officials, salary, be subject to all applicable federal income taxes. Moving on, this information was only recently learned after lengthy discussions with Florida retirement system representative. Nothing to do with insurance. We are talking about FRS. FRS has recommended that the city comply by simply including the elected officials in the next monthly report. We are talking about the Florida retirement system. It doesn't make any allegations to health insurance. The annualized cost for the city is $7,000, whatever, whatever. And the elected officials will eligible for the same benefits and subject to the same requirement as regular city employees. Yeah. Because then you're considered an employee. Moving on. It says, propose next steps. Meet with the elected officials if there is any interest in enrolling the city in the elected official class of FRS and approve a resolution for FRS at the November or December commission meeting. This is extremely self-serving. I'm embarrassed to even be having this discussion right now because for the time being, we have three elected officials that are going to be out of office this November. And right now, they are trying to codify to continue receiving health insurance for the next two years on your dime, in my dime, because I'm a resident of Sunny Isles Beach. So when we are no longer working, you are going to continue paying for our family health insurance. So my question is very simple to the city manager. According to the law, OK? Florida Constitution, Article 7, Number 10, public money may be spent only for a public municipal purpose. What is the municipal purpose of paying the health insurance of the families of elected officials when they are no longer in office for the next 24 months? It's a very simple question about municipal purpose.

Can I answer that?

Please, go ahead.

The Attorney, Florida Attorney General, several Florida Attorney Generals have opined that it is absolutely permissible for you to receive benefits

We may. We don't must. I have your answers here. So it says, you're going to say that it requires the city to pay for a former official's insurance. Article 7 doesn't apply in this case. It doesn't say you have to. Article 7 does not apply in this case. No, you must. So this is a choice. We are choosing to make the people pay for us when we are not longer in office. So I really wanted to see what is the municipal purpose. That's my question. It's very simple.

OK, for clarification, again, these are two separate things. Since 2010. the members of whomever was sitting up here on the dais had the option of using the city health insurance. Some did, some didn't. That's since 2010. It was recently realized that it was never put in a resolution. So this was a cleanup in order to say, if members of the commission are going to continue to receive health insurance, it needs to be resolved. In addition to that, and this is the secondary thing, is there would be an additional benefit if an elected official wanted to use it after leaving office where they can continue using the insurance for themselves, as I understand, not their families themselves. They can pay for their families for an additional two years. So those are two separate things. One thing is the status quo that's been happening since 2010, and the second thing is secondary and additional.

That's another resolution in front of us.

It is. So it is but I want to give someone else an opportunity to speak please that has not yet You've spoken so Commissioner Lama, did you want to add anything?

So first of all, I want to just clarify a couple things or correct a couple things that were said This is not for our families. I don't know where you get that information from and One at a time, but you will have to Yeah, yes Okay, so it just applies to the elected official. And it has a cap of two years. Correct. Okay, so it is very clear. I mean, and this is not something out of the ordinary either because other cities have similar type of policies. Some cities don't, some cities do. So... I mean, you're making it seem as if the residents are going to be paying endless amounts of money. And this is an opportunity that's being given to other people that are going to run and become elected officials as well. And I think, just like ex-Mayor Goldman said, I think it's good to give these elected officials a gap. So when we get back to, let's say, our normal lives, we could have some time to adjust and look for other options when it comes to health insurance.

OK. Vice Mayor, do you want to add anything?

Only that the memo being referred to as FRS. And it has nothing to do with insurance. I agree with that. This is FRS. It doesn't apply. It's not for families. This is not codifying. We went over all of this already. Right. Okay.

And just to be clear, so under Chapter 112, Your employees that retire, that actually retire, you are required under the Florida law to provide them the insurance, continuing insurance, and the same intermix with your other employees so they get the benefit of the lower, right?

And how long is that for?

Continuously. For your retired employees, those that fit the definition of a retired employee... That's in the statute. It's not. How many years?

It's not. It's in that. I'd like, I'd like, we need to maintain decorum up here. So Commissioner Stuyvesant, let the city attorney finish what he's saying.

So on the Florida law, under Chapter 112, you're required for your retired employees, as defined by Florida law, to continue their health insurance if they so opt to do that for life. Yes.

We let the attorney finish.

Right. Under Chapter 166, you have the authority to extend that to other employees that are not deemed eligible. retirees because it's not prohibited by state law okay you are allowed to do that in fact you did it before for your city attorney for many many years right this is the same thing you have the authority under 166 to do that if you want to fair point with municipal purpose you need to decide what that municipal purpose is no doubt about that but It is not prohibited for you under your home rule powers to go ahead and confer that upon yourselves, because specifically it's not prohibited under 112. And it's consistent with the fact that for your other employees that retire, you have to provide them by law. And you can extend that to others if you so wish, which you've done in the past.

Okay, so how about another question? Go ahead. Okay, so I know personally former employees from the city that were invited to the fourth floor just to realize that they were being forced to resign. So when any of our employees, let's say a police officer, a lady police officer, she is pregnant and she's forced to resign, are we going to give them the courtesy of two years of health insurance? Yes or no? Is that for other employees? Or politicians, we are a special class that we have to have a special treatment? Because we cannot retire. We have specific terms for a reason. So retiring benefits does not apply for us. That statute does not apply to us. And like you said, that statute implies that we can do it. that we are not prohibited to do it, not that we have to do it. However, my question remains the same. So a police officer that is pregnant and he gets fired, are we giving that police officer two more years of courtesy insurance? Yes or no?

Not if you fire an employee. Why would you give benefits to someone you fire?

I'm asking that to the city manager. City manager, can you please answer that?

Go ahead, Mr. City Manager. When an employee is fired, do they retain benefits?

Not if they're terminated, no.

If they resign? Voluntarily.

If an employee resigns, do they maintain benefits?

They may be able to under COBRA.

OK. COBRA is just a carryover, expensive carryover.

So we are not paying the insurance of that police officer that was forced to resign, like we do in the fourth floor. So again, this is about choices. Sadly, this is about right and wrong. I myself, due to my current family situation, understand very well the need of health insurance. I have a family member with a very bad condition, so I get it. However, this is not about each of us personally. This is about right and wrong. the rules of engagement. We are in this. And the people that is voting for this, they are going to benefit for this immediately. If we wanted to do that, and this is so important to do, so none of us should be eligible to receive this benefit. And then we can be making a decision that it will make sense. But right now, this is a goodbye gift that we are giving to ourselves. And again, this is totally wrong. That's why people don't trust government anymore. It's completely self-serving. If the idea that you claim is just to clean up the status quo, that option of two more years should not even be there. And if we want to do that as a perk for the people to run for office, the proper way, because it's people's money, should be put in a referendum. And we allow the people to say, you know what? Electoral officials have a very hard job. Maybe they should not be making $10,000 or $20,000 a year. Maybe they have to be making $50,000. Maybe they should be having better benefits. That is up to the people, not to us to increase our salaries or to start giving us perks that they are not there right now. So this is morally reprehensible. This is completely wrong. And in the spirit of being fair, then none of us should be able to benefit from this. OK. Anyone else?

All right. I'll take a motion on the item. So moved. I need a second.

Second.

May I have a roll call, Mayor?

Yes.

Commissioner Joseph.

I defer my vote.

You can't. You can't.

Well, call me last, please.

Commissioner Joseph, you need to vote.

No.

Commissioner Stuyvesant. No. Commissioner Lama.

Yes.

Vice Mayor Vizcarro.

Yes.

Mayor Svecin.

So before I vote, I just want to say that earlier during our workshop, we had a discussion about how in November there's going to be some changes to all of our tax bills, potentially. And while we are an incredibly healthy city, thank God, and we're doing very well, we don't know how that's going to work out after November. So perhaps in past years, I would have been supportive of this item. I think that given how things may or likely will change in November, it's important that we are more, I guess, It's not about responsibility. I would say just more conservative. And while I do agree that health insurance for elected officials is absolutely something that should be allowed, I don't use it. But that doesn't mean that it's a bad thing. Not at all. There are some things that elected officials should be able to get. And perhaps after November, whomever new people are up here, they may decide that they want to revisit this. But based on that and what's happening in November, I'm a no.

The motion and resolution fails.

Commissioner Joseph needed to vote.

He voted. He voted no.

May I say something? So I think that the purpose of this is not to, shower ourselves with extra benefits or anything. Because if we had bad intentions, like other cities have done, we would have raised our salaries exponentially. Because what we get paid, I mean, I'm thankful for it. But obviously, we cannot earn a living from that. Other cities make a lot less. Other cities don't make anything. Other elected officials don't make anything. So I think it's fair to give the opportunity to people that have been sitting here for eight years to have that gap, that cushion. Because now when, let's say, they finish their terms, you need some time to kind of adjust. And whether you're going to go into corporate world or you're going to go into entrepreneurship, YOU KNOW, AT LEAST WE HAVE THE CHOICE IF WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO PARTICIPATE AND MAKE USE OF THOSE TWO EXTRA YEARS. SO I REALLY DO TAKE OFFENSE TO WHAT COMMISSIONER STUBASAN SAID, BECAUSE WE HAVE, WE SIT HERE AND WE SERVE THE PEOPLE, OKAY? AND WE'RE HERE TO SERVE THE COMMUNITY, TO MAKE THE COMMUNITY BETTER. And I don't think this is anything close to trying to benefit ourselves. This is just giving us a cushion of two extra years to have health insurance. Whether we have that choice, we take it. Whether I go back into, like, corporate or have insurance offered to me through another means, fine. But I really take offense in what you said because it really paints a picture that we are trying to really grab a lot of money and we're going to raise our salaries from $20,000 a year to $120,000. I'm giving you an example. The way you're presenting things, okay? So I really take offense with that.

May I? Yes.

Yes, go ahead.

So that's your interpretation of my words, okay? And I never said that specifically. My point was very simple. Actually, we know... God willing, if we don't die before, we know when we are getting out of office. So I know that unless anything happens, I'm going to be out of office in November 2028. So other people like you guys, November 2026. So we can plan accordingly, because we know the moment that we are going to be stepping out of office. And that's why I try to connect this and give an example that somebody who is forced to resign, Then they are called today to the fourth floor, and they go to their home that night knowing that they don't longer have a job. Those people, which I personally know that had those meetings in the fourth floor, more than one, two, and three, Those people never had the opportunity to prepare to get another job, to find another insurance. It happened to them overnight. People with children, people with families. So my point is that we adults clearly, And we can plan accordingly when we are going to be out of office. And also, what is it that we're going to be doing to supplement our income or to get insurance or all of the above. So I was not trying. I was not trying to offend and insult anybody. I'm sorry if you feel offended by my words. They were not directed to you or anybody specifically. It's just that this doesn't make sense. This is how government get . You know when you are getting out of office. So we can plan accordingly. That's all. I think, listen, I'm- Mayor.

Yes? Sorry, before, just a logistical issue. So the resolution. Was voted down but remember they were two parts exactly clarification as to whether There's a part about the status quo and there's a part about the additional two years Okay, we split this out Do we need a motion or what we can do is that we can bring it back next meeting with just the status quo with a status quo Okay.

All right. We don't we don't want to do that right now. I

I mean, no, I'd prefer you have the language in front of you.

OK. I want to close this conversation, because I think we can go on and on. I agree with you, Commissioner Lama and Vice Mayor, and my, I was supportive of this item, but given everything else, it just, it started not making sense to me. And I can appreciate Commissioner Steveson and what you're saying. I think that had you said what you just said now earlier, it would have landed a little bit differently. Okay. Next item, please.

Next item is the add-on.

So you're saying you would change your vote?

No.

The next item is item 9K, which is a resolution adopting the 2025-20 through 2030 Miami-Dade County Local Mitigation Strategy.

OK. Mr. City Manager.

Mayor, vice mayor, members of the commission, this is exactly as it says. It adopts the Dade County local mitigation strategy.

OK. Do we have public speakers?

No, ma'am.

All right. Any comments from the commission? No. I'll take a motion, please.

Motion.

Need a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. All right. Now we're on to, that's it for add-ons, correct? Correct. Citizens Forum, Mauricio, do we have public speakers? We do. All right.

Vitaly Falkovich.

Just make sure we have the clock on, please. Thank you.

Hi, Vitaly. My name is . I come in here as a visitor and conducting a business here. One of the things is that you guys coming up on the budget, 26 to 27, one of the things Things are going on with home taxes and things like that. I'm always wondering how our police department is going to be supported. One of the things is I'm not sure how much you guys get money out of the traffic tickets. Yet if you go to Intercoastal Bridge, I guarantee you that you can... used that budget, the writing the tickets, to able to support our police department. One of the reasons why, because on several occasions, I observed somebody traveling a lot faster than they should be traveling. Another thing is that I don't know whoever's going to get elected, but they're going to have a hard time to do the great job that you guys are doing. And to me, that's very important because as coming up here at night or coming up here in the daytime, it doesn't really matter. You notice things that are going on, and you know that comes with a city manager and administration. When you guys finish, when you guys don't get relaxed or something happens, I want you to look at yourself and say, you know what? I did a great job. Because to me, as a visitor that comes in here very often, I think you guys do an amazing job. Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr. Meadows Good evening mayors and commissioners Victor Marcos collides 1 8 2 0 1 Collins Avenue Sunny Hills Beach, Florida 3 3 1 6 0 I'm the manager of the Trump Royale and And I come to you with three basic things for us. At the last commission meeting that I attended, we were talking about the development right next door to us. And unfortunately, they were not playing nice. 4 o'clock in the morning, trucks and construction taking over the streets, noise affecting a lot of our residents, not to mention the debris and dust that's coming up against the building, creating more expenses for our residents as they have to clean their windows and not being able to enjoy their balconies. We would love for the city manager, or the code enforcement to actually help us. And if there's a possibility for us to get notice when and if they're going to be doing work at 4 o'clock in the morning so that we can advise our residents that these things are taking place. We also want to bring it to your attention. I don't know if you've seen it lately, but a lot of our residents are complaining about beach erosion. And that is something that is affecting us because we've lost a lot of beach in the last eight to nine months, I would say. And we don't know if the city commission has actually been briefed on this or if there's a plan. And last but not least, the most recent complaints we're getting is about the seaweed. And I don't know if there's also a plan for that as well. So I do appreciate your time, and have a great evening.

Thank you. Your comments have been noted by the manager, and he'll be in touch with you. Thank you.

No other speakers, ma'am.

All right. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much. Meeting adjourned.