Village Council - Regular Meeting

.

All right, excellent. We're going to call to order this meeting of the Wellington Village Council for August 11th. Please rise for the invocation by Father Matthew Teese from St. David's in the Pines to be followed by the pledge.

Let us pray. Almighty God, we come before you today with hearts full of gratitude for the privilege of living and working in this community. And as we begin a new school year, we lift up our students, our teachers, and all of our administrators. We ask that you grant our students and teachers eager minds and renewed excitement for teaching and learning. Bless our parents, our families, and all who support them, that our schools and communities may be places of growth. We also ask that you bless our first responders and all who work tirelessly to keep our community safe and vibrant and strong. And tonight, we pray your guidance upon the members of this council. Grant them clarity of mind, patience in listening, and courage in all of their decisions. Remind us all that public service is our sacred trust. And may our words and actions reflect our deep care for our neighbors and commitment to the future that we together share. All this we pray through Christ our Lord. Amen.

Thank you. Join us in the pledge. Mr. Barnes.

Okay. That brings us to the approval of the agenda. And with the following modifications, staff will recommend approval of the agenda. One is to move consent item agenda 7I, which is resolution number 2026-42, walk safe and bike safe, to the public hearing agenda as item 8C. Former items 8B and 8C will change respectively to item 8A and 8B. And next, we need to move Public Hearing Item 8A, Ordinance Number 2026-15, the Interlocal Service Boundary Agreement, to Public Hearing Agenda as Item 8D. And with those modifications, staff recommends approval of the agenda.

I'd like to remove something from the consent agenda, if that's possible, for now. Sure. So the file 26-7690 regarding the... What letter is that? No, I pulled it out of my binder. So it's the one about the trophies.

C? Is that C?

Sure.

About the trophies? Trophies, correct.

You can just table that.

So that becomes regular agenda item D. 9B, Mr. Barnes?

I'm checking. It should be 9B, but I want to make sure. Which item will be pulling the NB? Charlie.

Okay.

Gotcha. Okay. Yes, that'll be 9B.

All right. Is there a motion to approve it as extensively amended?

So moved.

Second. All in favor?

Aye.

Aye. Agenda is approved as amended. Mr. Barnes, we have a guest up front. Right.

That brings us to the next item, which is presentation of proclamations. And this is, we have three to four to be considering. This is resolution number AC2026-06, 2026-07, 2026-39, 2026-40. As well as, and those are the four items at this point, and Ms. Quick will be presenting those. Let me read the resolutions for you. I'll be filling in for Ms. Hall in her absence. A resolution of the Board of Supervisors of the Acme Improvement District adopting district budget and non-ad valorem assessment role as provided herein, levying of the non-ad valorem assessments for the district and appointing an authorized representative of the district for certification of the district's non-ad valorem assessment role and providing an effective date. That's for resolution number AC2026-06. Next item is Resolution No. AC-2026-07, a resolution of the Board of Supervisors of the Acme Improvement District, adopting the Water and Wastewater Utility Budget for the fiscal year commencing October 1, 2026, and ending September 30, 2027, and providing an effective date. Third item is Resolution No. 2026-39, a resolution of Wellington, Florida's Council, adopting the Solid Waste Collection Program Budget and Non-Advalorum Assessment Rule and levying the Non-Advalorum Assessments for Solid Waste Collection Disposal within jurisdictional boundaries of Wellington, providing for rates and appointing an authorized representative of Wellington to certify the solid waste collection non-ad valorem assessment role and providing an effective date. And lastly, we have Resolution No. 2026-40, which is a resolution of Wellington, Florida's Council adopting the Saddletail Park Neighborhood Improvement District non-advalorum assessment rule as provided herein, levying of the non-advalorum assessments for the area and appointing an authorized representative of Wellington for certification of the area's non-advalorum assessment rule and providing an effective date. And with that, Ms. Quickle can take over.

And before we get started, these are public hearing items. So we're going to go ahead and combine the public hearings. And then you'll take a separate vote on each resolution. OK. All right.

We'll give you a motion to open public hearing. Doesn't she go first? Either way.

You should present first, and then you have the public.

Yes.

Good evening. Tonight we have four resolutions adopting the budgets and rates for fiscal year 27 for ACME, solid waste, utilities, and Saddle Trail for your consideration. Thank you for the opportunity to present our 27 budget. The foundation of our budget begins with Wellington. Our budget process focuses on the five fundamentals, neighborhood renaissance, economic development, protecting our investment, responsive government, and respecting the environment. We then develop the budget using insights and information from the 2026 Directions Workshop with Council to develop the budget priorities to support the fundamentals to deliver essential services efficiently, support community priorities, fund operations and maintenance of expanded facilities while minimizing tax impacts, and responsibly invest in Wellington's future. The four resolutions presented tonight cover important services and responsibilities as follows. First, the ACME Improvement District assessment provides for stormwater and surface water infrastructure maintenance and improvement, conservation of preserved areas, and equestrian trail upkeep. Next, the utilities budget and rates provide for fiscal year 27 operations that comply with utilities' annual reviews and long-range plans. Then the Solid Waste Assessment provides for solid waste collection and recycling throughout the village. And finally, the Saddle Trail South Improvement District Assessment is for specific resident requested improvements and provided for a designated area. We propose no change in the millage rate of 2.47 mills. That will be considered at the upcoming September 8 and 22 public hearings. There is no change proposed for the ACME rate of $275. For solid waste, the proposed fiscal year 27 preliminary assessment rates are for curbside per unit $325 and container per unit $240. This represents a $5 increase for each from the current year rates. And these rate increases cover the service contract cost. For water and wastewater user rates, we propose the annual indexing rate of 5.08%, which is an average monthly bill increase of $4.79. These rates are based on the annual review of the utility with a five-year plan for operations, maintenance, and capital. The rate is in accordance with the utility rate resolution, which provides for the annual indexing at the greater of 3.5% or the water and sewer CPI. The saddle trail assessments are based on property size and the total debt service amount. The per acre assessment is $1,721, which is unchanged, and the properties are assessed over a 15-year term. This is the 11th year of the assessment. The fiscal year 27 proposed budget continues Wellington's commitment to stable budgeting for sustainability. The total proposed fiscal year 27 budget is $150.4 million, which is $5.5 million, or 3.5% less, than the current year budget of $155.9 million. The $5.5 million decrease is primarily due to reduced capital improvements, elimination of positions, leasing of major equipment, and no election expense. Detailed information regarding major capital projects was presented at the Capital Workshop on August 6, 2026. The proposed fiscal year 27 budget has $147.3 million in revenues and $149.41 million in expenditures. We note that the highest percentage of revenues comes from charges for services, and the highest percentage of expenditures is for operations. The difference between revenues and expenditures is covered by the planned use of $3.12 million in total fund balances, specifically $541,000 in ACME fund reserves, $600,000 in building fund reserves, and $1.98 million in utility reserves. Tonight, this public hearing focuses on the fiscal year 27 budgets for the ACME and the Saddle Trail South improvement districts, the solid waste fund, and the utility budget and rates. These combined budgets equal $52.0 million in revenues and $54.33 million in expenditures, with the planned use of reserves of $541,000 from ACME and $1.9 million in utility reserves and a budgeted increase to reserves of $279,000 in the solid waste fund. The proposed ACME assessment of $275 provides revenues of $6.96 million. We are progressing with the major ACME stormwater pump station facilities improvements project, which is upgrading the pump stations throughout Wellington and ACME improvement district. These significant improvements address improved resiliency and operations for the nine pump stations that are the backbone of our stormwater management program. This is a significant multi-year rehabilitation and renovation program for improving the pump stations. And this plan includes major grant funding applications that also address funding. The total proposed ACME Improvement District fiscal year 27 budget is $7.9 million, which is a decrease of $221,319, or 2.64%. $541,000 from ACME reserves is included to balance the proposed ACME budget. For water and wastewater user rates, we propose the annual indexing rate of 5.08%, which is an average monthly bill increase of $4.79. Each year, as part of our long-range planning, we review the financial forecast for utilities based on their five-year capital improvement plan. This evaluation is the basis for our ongoing commitment to maintaining some of the most critical infrastructure in Wellington. The information from these continued analyses are the basis for supporting our utility rate structure and capital funding. Here is a rate comparison to other utilities. Wellington is shown at the existing 26 rate and the proposed 27 rate. Several have not finalized their proposed 27 rates, and this will be updated as that information is released. Again, the 28 rate structure is anticipated to return to the annual rate increase program of 3.5% based on the financial modeling. The fiscal year 27 utility budget is $38.6 million, which is an increase of $2.3 million, or 6.2%. The primary expenditure changes are for increased capital projects and operational expense increases for chemicals, electricity, and equipment. The fiscal year 27 utilities capital improvement plan focuses on the priority projects shown. These projects meet our capital improvement plan goals of managing rate adjustments while planning for the best long-term health of the utility. prioritizing rehabilitation and replacement projects, continuing transition to all-membrane treatment for water to stay ahead of future regulations, and managing rising capital costs with value engineering, deferring projects where reasonable, and grant under state revolving loan funding. Solid waste revenues for fiscal year 27 are $8.1 million, which is a $273,470 increase from the current fiscal year. This increase is primarily from the proposed increase assessments to cover contract costs. The proposed fiscal year 27 solid waste budget is $8.1 million, which is an increase of approximately $273,470 over the current fiscal year 26 budget. The increase is primarily from the $4.4 million 4% increased contract cost. There is no use of reserves to budget the proposed budget, as this provides for revenues to fully cover the solid waste contract cost. This assessment should continue to have moderate annual increases to maintain the budget to cover costs going forward. Here is a sample tax bill. 18.7% of the total tax bill goes to Wellington and Acme. The largest portion of the tax bill is paid to the school district, followed by Palm Beach County. In conclusion, we present the ACME solid waste saddle trail and utility rates and budgets for adoption tonight. Then budget outreach has concluded and the summary information has been provided to you and is also available on the website. We will have the first public hearing for the budget and adoption of the capital improvement plan on September 8th and then the second on September 22nd. Thank you to all the departments that work to prepare and manage the capital improvement plan and for their work on various parts of the budget. And a special thanks to Ms. Fisher, who's joined us by Zoom, and Ms. Cabret for their work on this budget. We're happy to answer your questions.

Thank you, Ms. Clipple, for that presentation. We need to open public hearing on this, so is there a motion to open public hearing?

So moved.

Second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Public hearing's open. Madam Vice Mayor, we have cards?

We have one. Mr. Tooman, you know the drill. Okay.

Can I talk about all four of them, or one at a time, or how are we doing this?

You get three minutes.

One item. Three minutes for all four? Yes. Three minutes for all four items? Yes. Okay. My name is Bruce Tooman, and my primary and homestead is 0 Lutline. It's 752 Lake Wellington Drive in the Villas of Wellington. How does the Village separate the expenses for Acme District Roads and Parks and the Village Roads and Parks? Isn't it the same, the employees doing the same work? It's also a shame that not all the roads in Wellington Village are maintained by the village, especially abandoned roads that serve three neighborhoods, like the 4th Club Drive. a road that is truly public. Can you explain why there's more than half of our budget is for the capital outlays? We're talking about ACME now. What do we waste our money on? Are these the new pumps that we're putting in? Are these pumps electric or diesel? And are we changing it because of the new green deal or because they need to be replaced? It does appear that this tax fee won't be increasing, and for that case, thank you. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Of course, if you lose property tax revenue next year, you'll probably be increasing this. Now, according to the water notice that I got in the mail, today you will be asked to increase the cost by 5.08%. Well, guess what? July's inflation was only 3.7%. Are you all padding this budget in case you may lose property tax revenue next year? Wasting taxes is the reason why the state got involved in the property taxes. Also, I received a notice about replacement of my water meter. Wouldn't my wall be replaced? I don't know. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Any other cards on this item, Madam Vice Mayor? Anyone else wish to speak on this item? You can come up and fill out a card later. Seeing nobody moving towards the microphone, is there a motion to close public hearing?

I'll move to close public hearing.

Second. All in favor? Aye. Public hearing is now closed. Questions for Ms. Crickle? I just want to commend you and your staff. Once again, I'm putting together a good budget. This is for people watching. This is not ad valorem taxes. This is not your millage rate. This is ACME solid waste utilities and the saddle trail assessment, which is done for septic tanks in a certain neighborhood. Something people should notice on this sample tax bill you've attached? If you look at the sample tax bill, the Wellington portion of your bill is $1,015 a year, which is $85 a month. I think you get a lot for $85 a month to Wellington for what we to take from your taxes to provide you an exchange. I think that's a pretty good deal for most people. I don't really have any observations or comments. Anyone else have comments?

Councilwoman? I want to thank you. I have heard from a lot of residents, obviously, they don't want to pay more for their water. They don't want us to say yes to the increase. They don't want us to say yes to the solid waste. So if we didn't, what would that look like? What would they not want next when we say no? What would be the effects?

So we had the capital improvement workshop last Thursday, and there was an extensive presentation on utilities and the capital projects there. And this is also included in the presentation tonight. Maintaining the water and wastewater plants are some of the most critical infrastructure. The safety of water and the importance of having appropriate sewer is something that is not even questionable. When you hear disasters in other places, where it has not been planned for and taken care of. Terrible things happen to those communities. We go through an extensive financial review separate for the utility each year where we look out five to ten years for what projects we need. Utility projects are very expensive. There's no kidding about that. Several of you have been here. In 2017 and 18, we started major improvement projects for almost all of the water plant and the wastewater plant. And we were very fortunate to be able to do that before the prices increased the way it did starting with 2020 going forward. There is no question in my mind that looking ahead and planning to fund those projects in a reasonable manner is some of the best planning that any municipality or local government can do. There are many places, even in Palm Beach County, that you read very terrible things about their utility systems and their departments. I'm very happy not to be anywhere near any of that. With regard to the other for ACME, ACME provides primarily for stormwater. And, yes, there is the component for parks and roads within that as well, the equestrian trails. Stormwater is extremely important in Florida, the protection from flooding, and the pump stations are the backbone for how that is done. These pump stations are decades old. They're extremely well maintained, but there is no question that there are improvements that can be made to help. When you see disasters that we face, and most of you have been here through multiple disasters, the first thing when you see the torrential rain and the flooding that can happen is is that you want to be reassured that there are protections in place. That is your primary protection for that. It is not inexpensive to maintain and do all of those things. The equipment is massive. The operations are massive. They operate in areas that are very isolated. So I think, again, some of the most important infrastructure that you can maintain. For solid waste, picking up your trash for a $5 increase is To cover contract cost, again, I think that's extremely reasonable. We have great service. We have very few problems with that. We're very fortunate, again. Council went through an extensive process several years ago. We went through a big ordeal to change contractors, and we're very happy with the service that we received from FCC, again, with that. And, again, the Saddle Trail is their own separate agency. choices that those residents made. So I think these fundamental things are some of the most important things that people expect from a government. You expect safe drinking water, you expect your trash to be picked up, and you expect stormwater protection in Florida. Thank you.

I agree on all accounts, and Amanda stole one of my questions that I was going to ask you, but to follow up with that, if we don't approve these funds, these increases, are we able to find these dollars elsewhere in the budget to cover these costs because I'm very reluctant to increase pricing for anybody for any reason at this point because of how dark things look out there for everything that people are buying.

So you have a contract cost for the solid waste. You would have to use your existing fund balance to cover that shortfall. That is not sustainable in the long term. You may be able to do that for a few years, but at some point you would be forced to use up all of the fund balance you have. It does not have an excessive fund balance amount to begin with. For ACME, again, they do not have a large fund balance either. From that perspective, you're talking about probably around $4 or $5 million there. You can do it for, they have no increase proposed. You can do it for a few years, but again, it's not sustainable your immediate changes for the ACME and utilities will be having to cut your capital improvement projects. And again, that usually has a heavy cost in the years when something has to be repaired.

Understood. Thank you. I think it's important that people realize the utilities is an enterprise fund, which means it pays for itself. That money stays in the utilities. It's collected by utilities, and it's put back into utilities. It doesn't go anywhere else in the village. So that pays for itself as it goes. And those projects are extremely expensive, as we've seen. For the last 10 years, I've been looking at utility projects and making sure that we spent the money wisely and carefully. And we have a great team at utilities taking care of all that. So that's something that people are very unhappy if your utilities don't work properly. And if you start drawing down on your reserves and there's an emergency or something else, we're going to be in huge financial trouble. The reason we have reserves is to make sure that we can weather storms as they come, not to avoid paying for increased costs to maintain and operate our systems.

And I would also say that both ACME and Solid Waste experience some of the heaviest costs when we have emergencies such as hurricanes and disasters. Their budgets, that work is frequently charged in those areas. And we're blessed to have the fund balances that we have so that we can respond immediately. The FEMA reimbursements take multiple years to achieve. And again, the fund balance helps cover that so that we're not waiting to do the work.

Understood.

Ms. Quiggle, first of all, I want to say thank you so much. I know how much time you and your team put into this. As humans, we don't like change, obviously. I personally don't like change. I don't want anything to go up. But I do understand that it's necessary at times. And the one thing that I can say for the audience here, this is not something we do every year, but there comes a time where we have to do what we're doing. And in order to keep Wellington how it is, this is what we have to do. So I commend you because I know this is challenging, and we're in challenging times right now, not knowing what's going to happen here come November. But I do appreciate that your team has really put a pencil to all this, and I think it's where we need to be today. Thank you.

Any questions or a motion on, well, four motions I would entertain, starting at the top. Anybody?

I'll move to approve Resolution AC-2026-06. I'll second.

There you go. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Nay. Okay. That passes 4-1.

I'll move to approve Resolution AC-2026-07. I'll second.

All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Nay. 4 to 1, passes.

I'll move to approve Resolution R2026-39.

Second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Nay. 4 to 1, passes.

And I'll move to approve Resolution R2026-40.

Second.

All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Nay. Okay. Thank you, Ms. Quickel.

Thank you.

Mr. Barnes.

That concludes our presentations, items that were public hearings, and it brings us to the consent agenda, and staff recommends approval of the consent agenda as amended.

Is there a motion with cards on the consent agenda?

Madam Vice Mayor?

Someone thinks he has two cards in for the consent agenda. Mr. Toomey, come on up. We'll find your cards. And that was with the removal of the trophies?

That's good. F and H.

My name is Bruce Tooman, and my primary and homestead are zero-line properties at 752 Lake Welling Drive in the Ville of Wellington. Again, I protest to the idea that you're not taking the consent agenda and doing it to the regular agenda. You're not hurting me. You're hurting your members. You're not having the opportunity to vote individually this or discuss it individually. You have to do the whole thing. So this is on your case, not me. F deals with the... The drowning thing. A recent news story about the South Florida City using drowning prevention devices like a riptide or current. I attempted to contact Ryan Hazard over at the Aquatic Center to inform him of this advice, and he was apparently not available. So I told the girl, and she was not even interested. It looks like a very simple device attached to the edge of a pond, a pool, creating a strong flow, creating a riptide current, giving the people an idea of how to swim out of it. Does the program you have here address riptides or rip currents in their prevention? Now, do you want me to go to the next one? Sure. Okay. Do I have to say my name again? No, we know who you are. Okay. This resolution budget amendment appropriates $477,000 from unassigned fund balance to the general fund to offset the reduced license payment received from Wellington Athletic LLC. Isn't this the Wellington Athletic Club that had sued Wellington, the village, for the lack of parking? So why are you bailing them out? Did the village add additional parking when the aquatic center was built, which is what they complained about? I believe the village landscape architect misclassified the town center phase two to reduce the number of bathrooms and parking spaces. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Any more cards on the consent? No. Is there a motion on the consent?

Yeah, I'll move to approve the consent agenda. I just wanted to make one comment that we have an agenda review on Monday where we spend one to three hours discussing everything on the consent detail so there isn't it and that is open to the public not for comment but it's open to the public to view so we do go over that in depth just so we're clear on that but I'll move to approve the consent agenda all in favor aye opposed hearing none passes 5-0 and when one of us wants to pull something from consent like councilman Meyer did tonight we can pull it from consent so that's how this process works mr. Barnes

All right, that concludes our consent items, and it brings us to public hearings. And we have... A couple of public hearing items that we'll be all considering at the same time. I'm going to read the same things. For the ordinances, first item is ordinance number 2026-60 in an ordinance of Wellington, Florida's Council amending Chapter 22 of Wellington's Code of Ordinances titled Traffic and Vehicles to Clarify the Penalty for Golf Cart Violations in Section 22-34 and to create a new Article 7, Sections 22-46 through 22-50. titled Micromobility Devices, governing the use of micromobility devices on public rights-of-way in Wellington, consistent with state law, providing for a conflict, providing for severability, and providing for an effective date. Next item is Ordinance No. 2026-17, which is an ordinance of Wellington, Florida's Council amending Chapter 14, Article 1, Division 1, Sections 14-1, Definitions 14-3, Enforcement Authority, and 14-4, Penalties of the Code of Ordinances, to include a definition of Neighborhood Park and clarify the violations of this chapter may be enforced by law enforcement officers. Amending Chapter 14, Article 2, Division 2, Section 14-21, Game and Sport Activity of the Code of ordinances to clarify that bicycles, scooters, and other similar activities are prohibited inside neighborhood parks and other public recreational areas. And amending Chapter 14, Article 3, Division 4, Section 14-26, use of vehicles of the Court of Ordinances to prohibit non-human powered micro-mobility devices in certain Wellington parks, providing for conflict, providing for severability, and providing an effective date. And the companion resolution item that we'll be hearing at the same time as well is Resolution No. 2026-42, a resolution of Wellington, Florida's Council encouraging the School District of Palm Beach County to evaluate and consider implementing the Walk Safe K-5 and Bike Safe 6-8 evidence-based pedestrian and bicycle safety curricula, encouraging public and private elementary and middle schools to participate in National Walk and Roll to School and National Bike and Roll to School Day, encouraging the use of available educational resources and providing for an effective date.

And again, we're combining the hearings on the two ordinances into one hearing.

Correct. And Ms. Bosch.

Good evening. Before you tonight are two separate ordinances addressing micromobility devices. This is the second reading for both ordinances. Ordinance 2026-16 addresses micromobility. Micro mobility device use and the public rights-of-way and ordinance number 2026 s 17 addresses micro mobility device use in our parks and the reason that those are being done separately is because the village has authority to regulate micro mobility devices both pursuant to chapter 316 in the Florida statutes which addresses traffic and also pursuant to its police powers and With respect to the changes to Chapter 22, first I'll just summarize what's in there from first reading, and then I'll tell you what's changed from first reading to today. So what was approved on first reading is a minimum of 15 to operate micro mobility devices on public rights-of-way that an ID is required that speed limit on sidewalks and pathways is 15 micro mobility devices cannot be utilized on public bridal trails and then there's a reference directing you to chapter 14 with specific regulations relating to parks What's changed from first reading to second is highlighted in the supplement that I provided to you yesterday. You can see it in the red line and the clean version. And it's really more just some cleanup items. So with respect to the enforcement language, and I should back up a little bit, because Chapter 22 also addresses the golf cart penalty, which is It's all part of the same chapter of the code, which is why they're being addressed together. And the change to the golf cart penalty is that what's in the code now is a graduated penalty, a warning, and then increasing amounts. And in speaking with PBSO for purposes of facilitating enforcement, they'd like to see a flat penalty. And we also wanted to make the penalty consistent with what's in the Florida statute. So that was approved on first reading, but what we've changed with respect to the enforcement for both the golf cart penalty and the micromobility ordinance is to just clean up the language to clarify that a citation is in fact a civil citation and not a violation of the Florida statutes. So there's no points associated with it, nothing like that. It's a civil violation of our code. Additionally, we added some headings throughout the ordinance just for ease of reading and reference. We also added an applicability section in section 22-46, and this is to just clarify something that we had already discussed but wasn't actually written in the ordinance, which is that it's intended to apply on public rights-of-way and not in gated communities and on private roads. that would be regulated by those individuals or property owners. And finally, we added some language to reinforce that operators must abide by all applicable state, county, Wellington traffic regulations that language is in the golf cart ordinance already and we just kind of wanted to make it uniform in the micro mobility ordinance as well I do have one additional modification that is not in your materials that I would like to raise which is that in speaking with PBS oh about the age restriction and enforcement of the age restriction Back when we first started talking about this ordinance at the original workshop and there was some discussion about age or no age, we had initially gone with no age and we modified the identification requirements to allow for a school ID. There's a challenge to that now that an age is included. And so I would like to propose to put it back to what it was before, which is that the government issued photo ID would need to include at a minimum a name, address, and date of birth. So that way, when this is being enforced, PBSO will be able to not only identify the individual, but be able to determine how old they are.

So if there's an age component, the ID needs to have a date of birth on it. If there's no age component, then it does not.

Correct.

Okay. That's simple.

Correct unless PBSO wants to correct me. Right.

Okay.

Okay.

And the other ordinance you made a change to?

Yes. So that summarizes what's in the changes to Chapter 22. So Chapter 14, this is the ordinance that addresses our parks specifically, and these regulations were intended to really address some property damage that had occurred recently with respect to some of our parks and facilities that are attributable to the misuse, I would say, of micromobility devices. So just a quick summary of what's in that ordinance. We're adding a definition of neighborhood park. There's an existing prohibition already in that ordinance that prohibits bicycling, roller skating, and skateboarding on turf, basketball courts, tennis courts, and in parking lots. Ms. Silvestri, you asked about parking lots at first reading, and they are included already. Okay. We are we are also adding to that prohibition neighborhood parks boat ramps and playground equipment and clarifying that the prohibition on bicycles and scooters and Skateboards also includes motorized devices. So an e-bike or a bicycle both both are prohibited additionally We made some changes to the use of vehicle sections in our parks, and we're specifically prohibiting the use of micromobility devices at Wellington Town Center, in our neighborhood parks, and on the Hart Trail at Village Park. But the change from first reading was that We've clarified that the limitation at the Hart Trail and Village Park is going to be pursuant to posted signage. So that will allow, because the reason these places were identified was because of higher amounts of pedestrian traffic. But we discussed at first reading that, you know, in the middle of the day, there's not going to be a lot of pedestrian traffic, for example, on the Hart Trail, whereas like during soccer practice, there might be. And so this allows us to post signage that restricts the times that the Hart Trail can be used by micromobility devices without prohibiting it altogether. And one thing that I should have said at the very beginning is that I'm saying micromobility devices, but what I'm really talking about are the non-human powered micromobility devices because a micromobility device includes a bicycle or a regular scooter where you use your foot to propel it. We're talking about things that have motors. And so we've defined them in the ordinance as non-human powered micromobility devices.

Can I have a little clarification on the parking lot thing again? So if a child wants to ride their scooter or a 15 year old wants to ride their scooter to a park and park it in the parking lot to go to the park, is that allowed?

Yes, I believe that that would be allowed.

Because some of the parking lots, they would have to ride through it to get to the parking spot.

I think the intent of that section, and by the way, that's already in the ordinance, but I believe that the intent of that section is not to be weaving in and out and riding all around the parking lot, but to just access the park and get there would be okay. Or some of the parks, some of the neighborhood parks, for example, have circles or pathways around them, so we don't want people...

you know driving and riding in circles around there but to get to the park and park in the parking lot would be okay okay thank you this is a public hearing item so we usually take public comment before we interrogate so is there a motion open public hearing we have a lot of cards so moved second all in favor aye aye public hearing is now open madam vice mayor good luck

Ms. Cohen or Mayor, we have multiple, multiple cards where we have multiple. They're not separate of the A, B, and C of what we just went through. Yeah, we're doing that as one. So do we allow them to stay up here if it's combined?

We're calling everyone up for one three-minute speaking opportunity, but we'll see how it goes.

Right. They can speak to either one. The revision to Chapter 22 or Chapter 14 or to the resolution. They're both quite different. During their three minutes.

Okay, good. That was my question because we do have the multiple on here. So I want to make sure that they can stay up here. All right.

Make sure it's the new version.

Yes. So the first one is Sue. No. Hold on. Okay. We have quite a bit.

Scott Hopper.

Is Scott Hopper here? OK. Come on up. And Mr. Ben Brown, if you want to come on up to this side of the podium.

And to be clear, because we reordered the agenda, your card number might not match what's on the agenda. Right now we're taking comments on the micromobility ordinances, so if you want to speak on the boundary agreement, just let us know and we'll call you back for the second time around. You can speak on both, but I don't want you to walk it up for the wrong thing.

sir oh you're sorry name and address three minutes scott harper one three six five one yarmouth court wellington florida um just in regard to the 15 year old age limit um i will say i watch social media videos regularly i see wheelies and groups and kids doing things that they absolutely shouldn't be doing and it enrages me i've been a rider my whole life my son is a rider He's 14 years old. He started riding an e-scooter when he was going from our address to New Horizons by himself with his little Razor scooter and then progressed from there. Always with appropriate equipment, knows every safety, stop signs, speed limits, move for pedestrians, knows every part of it. He's 14 now. So to say 15 is the age of... appropriate behavior I definitely don't agree with that I would think something more in the line of a rider education program that can be you know we can be charged I wouldn't mind that one bit pay a fee set up a course let your kid come attend it get a certification saying that he does know the rules of doing that and thus applying consequences thereafter if there are infractions. Obviously, this will include proper equipment, helmets, riding goggles, everything in regard to Florida statutes. Again, I'm a rider. I know I can't ride a motorcycle without goggles, but I can do it without a helmet. But I know protective eyewear, there's no room for negotiation on that. And I think that's about it. I mean, it's honestly, it's a way for the town to generate revenue. We have many riders of e-bikes and, you know, thus consequences after the fact, maybe a warning, maybe to a citation given to parents for it. Each of these vehicles, although they don't have a VIN, they do have serial numbers, so they are able to be registered and identified. And, you know, just like with regular driving, same type of consequences.

Thank you, sir.

Mr. Barnes, did you do the timer wrong? I heard a thing off. I just stopped. I would also say, too, with, you know, a lot of people think, you know, go back to the pedal-powered bikes, and that's the way to go. I will say, as a young man, grew up in Massachusetts we would go to the steepest hill I know there's no hills in Florida granted but we would bomb down that thing at 40 50 miles an hour and we were doing this on vehicles that had no reason to be going that fast they were not equipped to do it it wasn't safe to do it and our means of stopping was to shove our shoe into the back tire in between a frame in order to make it in time before something really catastrophic happened So to say that going to regular bikes versus ease is the way, I don't think it is. I think education is, and really getting something in order so that all these kids are educated on how they should be doing this.

Thank you, sir. Appreciate your time.

You're up. Ben Brown. I live in the community of Arden. I'm actually the vice president of HOA, but I'll be speaking on this topic in particular as a resident. When it comes to these e-bikes... We're having bell troubles today, but you have time.

Jim's new here. Your time's not up.

That's all good. When it comes to these e-bikes, e-motos, these things have 40 and 50 miles of range. And we're having an endemic of kids from Wellington ending up in our community, causing massive vandalism, massive amounts of damage. And when they are stopped and detained by PBSO, they have Wellington addresses and zip codes on them. These are not pedal bikes. The range that we grew up with as children is far exceeded with these types of things. So the decision you make here tonight and how much you enable this to happen within Wellington will go far outside of Wellington and the consequences will be felt by others. And I really hope you take that into account tonight. With this, I see no language or any wording for safety with a helmet. Where is the helmet language? It's in there. I didn't see it in there. Is it in there? Okay, I could be wrong, but I really hope there is a full facial because my children ride BMX and motocross and having facial protection with these types of speeds, I know I don't have to educate you on the number of incidences and the tragic events that have already occurred in Wellington, but the more safety that you can mandate if you're going to improve this or approve this is paramount to this. So as we go through, coming across all of this, and having to hire PBSO details and permit details and all that other stuff. I really hope you simplify this language so your deputies understand how to enforce this, this whole ID thing. We have laws in this state for a reason. 15, maybe 16, is the law for a reason. As these children grow and develop in their prefrontal cortex, they do not have the ability to make decisions correctly to the speed, the wheelies, and not just themselves, but how much they're endangering other people in the community. Look around the state of Florida. There are major counties, there are major cities that are banning and outlawing these things. And I will speak later here as we come up because I know a potential annexation of Arden into Wellington is something that will be discussed. And that's why I'm speaking on this most importantly. We are having major, major issues with this. And a lot of them are coming from Wellington, but also some are coming from within our community. Enabling this type of behavior is setting it up for failure and the consequences and the devastation that comes from this will be on you for approving children under the age of 16 that do not have driver's license to be operating vehicles that go 50, 60 miles an hour and have the range to go 50 and 60 miles around the county. So I don't know if I can be any more clear with that. I cannot express enough. You should not allow this, and you should make the state laws stand to 16 years old with a driver's license as what is regarded and required to operate these types of vehicles. So with that, thank you. Thank you, sir.

Ms. Bosch, follow-up on the helmet requirement. Could we discuss helmet use for people under 16?

Yes. So the ordinance does not address helmet use, but the reason for that is that it is already the law under the Florida statute. So regardless of what is in the ordinance, a person under the age of 16 has to wear a helmet.

Okay. I knew it was in here.

It just wasn't expressed out. Okay. So it would just be redundant for us to put it in because it's already there.

Correct, and it would be a statutory violation, not an ordinance violation.

Oh, okay.

Back to you, Madam Vice President.

Next, Alexandria Larson and Lauren Brody.

That's fine. We'll move your card to the next pile. She's on the other one. Put Larson in the next pile.

OK. Ready?

Yep.

OK. Lauren Brody, 13015 La Mirada Circle. So first, I was in agreement with the four of you that voted last time. And I've given this a bit of thought. I'm a New Yorker. The rules there are different. I'm also a former avid competitive cyclist. And it is my opinion that no bicycles of any kind belong on the sidewalk. And I feel that in Wellington we have a little bit of an issue because we have sidewalks and then we have multimodal paths. When we built the multimodal paths, I was concerned. And as someone who uses sidewalks and multimodal paths every day, I'm more concerned. And I think that's part of the problem. I would love to see a ban on e-bikes, flat out. That's my personal opinion. I feel for the parents that use them so that their kids can get themselves to school. I do. But that's not a reason for us to let them do it. If you speak to any neurosurgeon in the country, they will tell you e-bikes should be banned. They're incredibly dangerous. Short of that, whether you do that or not, I think we should consider different rules for sidewalks versus multimodal paths. And I'd like to see the multimodal paths be one direction, because I think that would make them safer. I've yet to see a road in which the multimodal path is only on one side. Maybe it exists. But Wellington Trace, these big blue, they're on both sides of the street. But we have people going in both directions on both sides of the street. So I walk every day. I have a big dog. I'm passed very frequently by all of the things Most people are very polite. They tell me they're coming. Some are not. But they're going in both directions. And sometimes I'm going in both directions. And I think that there's something to be said for changing that and putting big arrows in explaining to people. And then the second thing is education. I think all the time, look how many people we have. This is a big deal. You get people on your social media screaming, yelling, they're not here tonight. Like, how do we get people to engage in this conversation? So an idea I came up with for the rules and for the conversation, QR codes. Post QR codes around the village. Where these people are using. What are the rules? What are the regulations? How do we use them? And how do you reach out and make comments, just in general, about anything? How do you get... on the website? How do you use the website? So it's just something to think about. But I'm not sure if these rules slide. I heard what she said, and it seemed to me she was talking about sidewalks and multimodal paths. I don't think we should have e-bikes on sidewalks. That makes no sense to me. Are e-bikes allowed on the road? Is it the sidewalk or nothing? Because bicycles, I mean, bicycles in New York, you have to be on the road. It's against the law to be on the sidewalk. Florida doesn't have that rule, but you are allowed to be on the road. If you're a cyclist, you can ride anywhere you want, sidewalk, multimodal path, whatever. So I don't know what the rules are, but I encourage you to think about the difference between a small sidewalk with people who are walking and a multimodal path.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Thank you, Ms. Roddy. Ms. Pandage and Mr. Tooman.

You don't have to run.

I'm sorry. We're getting some interference from mobile devices. Could you move your mobile devices away from the microphone?

I don't think it's us. I think it might be out there somewhere.

Maybe the microphone?

Not that one. I think it's the giant Channel 12 microphone next to you. Put it on the other side. Put it on the other side of the podium. That's not going to help. Further away. You're up, ma'am.

Elizabeth Panditch, 1903 Oakberry Circle. I don't know if you all are aware, but when the Winter Equestrian Festival or any horse show is going on, there's already a USCF rule in place that there are no motorized vehicles for children below 16. And it is enforced. Kids have been getting in trouble. So you have that layer of what you're trying to enforce with something that's, and a lot of kids coming in soon, some that are already here. Another point that I wanted to bring up, my daughter Cora, which some of you know, had an accident on her whatever it was. And she had a MIPS helmet on. I don't know if you're familiar with MIPS technology. It's a different type of concussion technology. So building off of the safety aspect that both Ben and the first gentleman that spoke, I think that's another aspect that we can bring in if it does move in that direction to up the quality of helmet care. As I know, if my daughter wasn't wearing a helmet with MIPS, I think our situation would have been not a mild concussion, but something much worse. So the technology is there. I think kids love stickers. They already have their school ID things. So again, if that's a direction you want to go in, just like those stickers, those reflective stickers that you put on your license plate for registration, you could put one of those on the back of a kid's ID tag. I'm moving in different directions because I want the kids to be safe. There's already precedences set in a big part of our community, in the horse community, that is very aware of 16, you have a license, that's it. They've accepted it. And it's okay. So I think there's a way for kids to use their legs. They can scoot with one or pedal with two, and they can get there just the same. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Tooman.

I'm going to speak on item B. I hope I get a chance to speak on item C later. Nope, this is it. Three minutes for both items. It doesn't sound like you want public input. Anyway, my name is Bruce Tooman. My primary and homestead of residence is 752 Lake Wellington Drive in the village of Wellington. This ordinance appears to have been changed. Is this the first reading or the second reading? It should be this first reading. It's disappointing that the recommendation from our public safety officials requiring wearing proper helmets wasn't added. Helmets save lives. And you think somebody's going to go to the state law to say, oh, I've got to wear a helmet? No, they won't. We need it in our ordinance. As a member of the council, at the staff's last meeting, can we reduce the speed limit from 10 to 15 to help protect public safety? 10 miles an hour is a lot safer than 15. The staff said no. Florida statute 3162128 item 1 addresses these devices and states, however, this section may not construe to prevent the local government From adopting ordinances and governing the operation of the devices on streets, highways, sidewalks, and stuff. You have the opportunity. 4th Statute 1316-008 addresses the brute powers of the authorities. And item 1 states, this provision of the chapter shall not deem to prevent local authorities with respect to the streets in STEM. Item 7A addresses regulations and it says the ordinance must restrict use such vehicles or devices to a maximum speed of 15 miles per hour and so forth. Doesn't this mean that the village can reduce the speed to 10 miles an hour? A lot safer than 15. 20 miles would be a violation. 10 miles wouldn't be a violation. And 10 is safer than 15. Section B, you added a section, again, added a section that doesn't apply to private communities. How would you inform these communities? What government employees would know which sidewalks to use, public or private? Apparently, staff did not know which was which last time when 40 of my neighbors got cited for paint on their private sidewalks. At the last meeting, the staff said that these devices were because of damaged village property, and you said it today, too. So this ordinance has nothing to do with public safety, only preventing property. It should be both. I recommend tabling this motion until staff can address Florida Statute 3162128 and the addition of wearing the helmets would make enforcement easier. Because it's hard to stop people with ID because you don't know how old they are. But if they didn't wear a helmet, you could stop them. And it will save lives. And you better get your horse community together. Sounds like they have different rules of what we're doing. So how come nobody talked to them? I'm disappointed. I would like to talk about this other thing too, but our mayor doesn't want to give me any more time. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Newman.

Is there anyone that wishes to speak on this that we do not have a card?

Come on up. We'll get your cars later. Come on up. You can use this one, and ma'am, you can come to this podium here. You go to this one, Jim, and she'll come there.

Name and address, you have three minutes. Hi, Jim Summers, 552 Juniper Place, Wellington, Florida. I just have a couple of things to say, and it's not even about the safety of the children. It's about the safety of the other residents that are using these sidewalks and mobile, whatever they're called, the pathways. Some of you already know I'm an avid runner. I'm on those sidewalks. probably multiple times a week between 5 and 9 when the kids are going to school and everything else. And I've been almost at multiple times. And I know there's people walking their dogs, taking walks, you know, people having, you know, out there with their strollers and the babies. And these things are just way too dangerous to be around all these people doing those things. And that's my opinion. So.

Thank you.

That's about it. Perfect. Thank you.

Ma'am, name and address. You have three minutes.

All right. Jennifer Mayfield. My address is 13194 Quiet Woods Road.

Mia Moore, 1351 Perrywinkle Place, Wellington, Florida.

All right. This is just a letter from my daughter. She's not here because she got too shy, but this is her best friend. Okay. All right. Good evening, Mayor and the members of Village Council. My name is Lexa. I'm 12 years old. And before I tell you why I believe kids like me should be allowed to ride e-scooters, I want you to know something about me. I've already learned the hard way that e-scooters can be dangerous. I know because I fractured my skull in an e-scooter accident. I remember what happened. I remember being hurt, and I know how quickly something that is supposed to be fun can turn into something very serious. So you might think that after... You might think that after... Sorry. We'll get there. So you might think that after an accident like that, I would never want to ride an e-scooter again, but I do. And I want to explain why. My accident didn't teach me that e-scooters are bad. It taught me that riding them responsibly matters. It taught me that speed matters, paying attention matters. Sorry, it keeps jumping. Speed matters, paying attention matters. Wearing a helmet matters. That knowing where you are riding matters. And most importantly, it taught me that being allowed to do something comes with the responsibility to do it safely. That is why I'm here tonight. Not. I'm not asking you to ignore the dangers of e-scooters. I'm asking you not to ignore the opportunity to teach young people how to handle those dangers. I agree with Mayor when he says that e-bikes and scooters are already part of daily life in Wellington. Kids use them to get to parks, practices, friends' houses, and other places that are in our community. They are not going away. And I agree with the mayor that a birthday doesn't magically make someone responsible. If I turn 15 tomorrow, I won't suddenly become a safer rider than I was yesterday. I won't suddenly know how to stop faster. I won't suddenly pay more attention to cars. I won't suddenly understand traffic laws better. What makes me safer is what I've learned. That is why I believe the village should focus on education, parental responsibility, responsible rules, and enforcement, not simply an age band. Teach us. Make sure we know the rules. Require helmets. Set reasonable speed limits. Keep young riders away from dangerous roads and crowded areas. Require parental permission. And if somebody rides recklessly, put consequences in place. But please don't punish every responsible young rider because some people make irresponsible choices. Because there is a big difference between a child who is riding recklessly and a child who has been taught how to ride safely. I know that some people might look at my accident and say, this is exactly what a 12-year-old shouldn't be riding an e-scooter. And I understand that. My parents understand that. I hope you'll look at my story another way. If my accident taught me how important safety is, shouldn't we use that lesson to teach other kids before they get hurt? My experience could be a reason to educate young riders, not simply a reason to ban them. I don't want another kid to fracture their skull. I don't want another family sitting in a hospital wondering what is going to happen. I don't want anyone, kid, adult, pedestrian, or driver, to get hurt. That is exactly why I believe we need better education and better enforcement. The answer to new technology isn't to pretend it doesn't exist. The answer is to teach how to use it responsibly. We teach kids how to cross a street. We teach them how to ride a bicycle. We teach them how to swim. We teach them how to drive.

You can finish reading it.

When they are old enough. We don't teach responsibility by saying you were too young so you don't need to learn. We teach responsibility by giving people the knowledge and boundaries they need to do something safely. I'm asking the village council to do that for young e-riders, scooters. Sorry. Give us rules, give us safety education, give our parents the information they need. Hold reckless riders accountable, but give responsible young people a chance to prove they can follow the rules. I know what it feels like to be the kid in the ambulance, and I know what it feels like for your parents to be scared because their child is hurt. I don't want that for anyone else. So I'm not asking you to choose between safety and freedom. I'm asking you to choose safety through responsibility. Teach us set rules, make us earn the privilege, and hold us accountable when we don't follow them. But please don't tell every responsible 12, 13, or 14-year-old that they are automatically incapable of making good decisions simply because of their age. Because I'm standing here tonight not to tell you that we can learn, and we can be responsible, and we deserve the opportunity. Sorry, I don't do well . You did great. Thank you. Thank you.

And tell your daughter we wish you were here. Any more cards? Anyone else wish to speak on the item, whether or not you turn the card in or not? Seeing none, is there a motion to close public comment?

Move to close public comment.

Second.

All in favor? Aye. Public hearing is now closed. Ms. Bosch, is there an, I'm sorry. No, jump right in. Thank you very much. I was going to turn on my light. Ms. Bosch, is there an educational component or requirement in any of the one, two, three, or can you discuss the educational component in the three different things that we're packaging together?

So there's no educational component in the ordinance. The Florida statute allows municipalities to provide education, but not to mandate education. So neither of the ordinances address education, but the resolution urges the school district to adopt bike safe. I don't have it in front of me, but bike safe and another curriculum that is supposed to help educate students in schools about safe bike use.

But again, as you mentioned, and I just want to clarify and make sure that everybody hears this, it is not a mandatory class that the village of Wellington can require your children to take. Everybody wants to say, let's educate the kids, and I'm all for that. But they have to volunteer to do it. We can't make the kids do it. Is that correct?

Correct. We can provide it, but we can't mandate it.

We can incentivize it. We can reward it. Some great suggestions were made tonight with stickers and some other things. We've talked about gift cards as a practical response for attending these classes.

Absolutely.

Other comments from counsel?

No.

Yeah, I've got some comments. I do, too. Well, I figured you guys did. Go ahead. I'll let you go first.

Okay. I want to thank all the parents that came to speak tonight and the children, even if they weren't here. Very well written, by the way. I want to thank the parents that take the time to teach their kids the rules of the road. Unfortunately, not everybody does that. And even if you do it, sometimes when your children aren't in your care, They don't follow the rules that you set. Even if they're trying to follow the rules, they may not realize they just ran a stop sign or realize that they just went by somebody in a stroller. So unfortunately, for those that do teach their children, that doesn't help for the greater good of the community here. And we have watched for over two years a massive issue. The age of 15 allows for true enforcement. This means that no elementary school children and no middle school children are now riding scooters to and from school. So if we're seeing that, if our deputies are seeing that, they can actually enforce it. First, they're going to warn and educate, I'm sure, and then they're going to actually enforce it. So we're not... doing something that's unenforceable. Saying we're going to educate people, we're not doing anything. If we don't change the age to 15, we are essentially doing nothing. So we have an opportunity to do something here. I believe that the education should absolutely still be pushed, and if we can afford to incentivize with gift cards, that's great, but that's in addition to actually doing something. And that has to be done for the safety of the community. So I am 100% supporting the age of 15. for this, and I believe that that is the right thing to do, and this is our chance to do that and actually make it right. And if we don't do it, then we're truly not doing anything. Educating, we're not doing anything. So this is our opportunity, and I'm proud to support it, and I'm sorry for the responsible children that this does affect, but for the safety of our community, our pedestrians and everything that was mentioned, I believe that that's the right thing to do.

Mr. Meyer? Yes, to echo what Councilwoman Silvestri said, it's not an easy thing to sit up here and make rules for the entire community, but it is our job, and sometimes those decisions are tough, and I am the most freedom-loving person that you can find on this planet, but at the same time, it is our job to make sure that our most vulnerable are and it is our job to make sure that we put the rules in place to assure that. If anybody looked at the workshop that we had, there was a graph that showed where the most incidents and accidents occurred as far as age breakdown. And that age breakdown, if I'm remembering correctly, I think it was from 10 to 14. And there was a huge bell curve at that level. So it tells you where, right there, the evidence is there showing you that this is the reason that I've come to this age of 15 and above, because of the younger kids getting hurt on these things. And then I want to take another perspective is that, you know, if I'm pulling out a Dunkin' Donuts and I'm leaving the drive-thru and this little 7- or 8-year-old that whips by every morning whenever we're sitting out there and I'm in my, you know, SUV or my truck and I run over this kid, who's going to pay for my therapy that I'm going to have to deal with for the rest of my life for killing a child? Tell me that. And then for the parents that say, well, my child's an angel. I'm sure he is or she is. You're OK with exchanging your kid's freedom to ride their e-scooter or e-bike for your neighbor's kid to die or get hurt? Is that what you're saying? That because my child's going to be awesome, follow every rule, ride a helmet, but the kid down the street, he gets hurt or killed, that's OK? Because your kid gets to ride his e-scooter or e-motor? E-moto? Oh, not e-moto, sorry. E-scooter or e-bike? That to me does not seem like a logical exchange. And there's all types of age limits for all types of things. As we know, 16 to drive a car, 15 or whatever for a permit, to buy alcohol, tobacco, so on and so forth. But even in the village itself, let's take the athletic programs, WCFL, for example. because somebody on Facebook that runs WCFL, he's not here tonight, but I was hoping he would be, because there are age brackets, correct me if I'm wrong, for the different teams that play in the WCFL. Why is that? Is it because they don't want a 15-year-old playing against a 6-year-old or a 7-year-old? Why would that be? Just let them all play, right? Let's let the 15-year-old that's 200 pounds smash their 60-pound 6-year-old. So there are already rules, and these rules exist for a reason. It's for safety. So, yes, like Amanda or like Councilwoman Silvestri, I'm proud to support this, and I won't back down off of it.

Well, I'll say it again. I mean, I've written extensively about this. I want to thank everyone for coming and speaking. I want to thank everyone for emailing. I want to thank everyone for commenting on social media, both on my page, on other people's pages, on the village's page. And I support everything in this ordinance, but I still do not support the restriction on people just because of a birthday. Because I think safe riders are made. They're not born. They don't suddenly become safe because they're 15. Even if you look at the driver's licenses, you don't get a permit at 15. You go through an education, pass a test, take a course before you get your learner's permit. So 15 is not a magic age. Cars are different than scooters. I don't want you to run anybody over, by the way, Councilman Meyer. But look both ways before you pull out into the intersection. Don't go in the street. Right. Right, exactly. But I still think... Putting an age limit on is the easy and lazy way to do this. I think we should work on better enforcement on the bad actors. And we know who they are. We've all seen the kids who are tearing through neighborhoods that are driving down the middle of the road. I think we need to enforce the rules against those kids and punish those kids for misbehaving and reckless behavior. And I think we need to enforce the helmet requirement, which is already a state law. And if you see kids without a helmet, they should get pulled over and maybe put a helmet on, and we should fine them. But I don't think you should take away, especially we just started the school year, and a lot of people A lot of parents are already relying on their kids to continue to use these devices to get to school safely and responsibly, as most of them do. There's outliers for everything, but I still think forcing a 15-year-old age minimum without any data that supports why 15 is the magic number. Why 15? Why not 11? Why not let middle schoolers go and ban it on elementary school kids? There's no data that says 15 is some magic number where you're suddenly responsible and 14 you're not and 13 you're not. So I don't support the age limit. I support everything else in the ordinances, but I would not vote for this with the age limit in it.

And that leaves me. This is very, very difficult because I truly see both sides. I really do. And it's hard to sit up here and understand what is being asked of us to vote on. But I'll say this, because I agree with all of my colleagues and everything they have said. I ran on a platform of safety. That is one of the top priorities of what I believe is the most important thing. It's not just for children, it's also for the residents of Wellington. Safety, and we're so blessed, so blessed to have Captain Adazi that leads our PBSO, District Chief Romero that leads Wellington. But if you heard some of the stories that they have shared and what they have to encounter on a daily basis, what they see of the children on these e-bikes and whatever else, they're on the scooters, you would be pretty much where my colleagues are at. It is not anything that we can say Oh, sorry. We're going to pick an age. It has to be where safety is number one. For the children, for the residents, and I will share personally as Councilman Meyer did, I've been close to being hit many times. I have seen golf carts at times go faster than the car on the street that I live. I have seen, I don't know if they're mothers, aunts, or what they are, literally on the way over here, I saw a female holding a four-month baby on a golf cart, driving in her hand around this child. And this is insane. We have to really, really, really take a look and find it in our hearts. And I get very concerned when people say to us that government should not be involved in the parent's life. Well, unfortunately at times the parents are not involved in the child's life. And this is the consequences of what happens. And I spent a lot of time this afternoon Thinking about all this, and yes, it is a little emotional for me because when I think of what Councilmeyer said, that a child can actually lose their life because they're not wearing a helmet or because they're not following the rules. That is not something that any of us here should take lightly. Thank you.

Mr. Levin, do you have any comments?

Yes, I'm an avid cyclist, and when I started riding a bike, I didn't run out and get the handbook on bicycle safety. It was something that was taught to me, something that I learned over time. I believe that education is key, and whether it comes through Bike Safe or the other programs, that we need to find a way to apply it. Our proposed ordinance tonight includes speed limits. It includes persons operating all the non-human powered multi-mobility devices must carry an ID. If the school ID is sufficient, excuse me, a school ID is sufficient if there's no age restriction, as the mayor pointed out earlier.

But we're changing that.

It's A public safety issue and an education issue for me. I've spent a lot of time looking at all the public comment, all the emails, all the correspondence and so forth, whether there's incentives through stickers and shiny things. We've got to find a way to motivate folks to participate in those kinds of programs, in those kinds of educations, whether it's the school principals and that trickles down to the students. The idea with any kind of issue, any kind of ordinance is to educate through the ordinance and eliminate the actions of the bad actors and not punish the good actors. There was an issue not that long ago in front of Woodland Middle School where two kids were rubbing tires. One fell into the traffic lane and was unfortunately killed. We don't outlaw bicycles because two kids were goofing around. We need to understand that that's a risk any time folks go outside, whether it's a bicycle or a non-human-powered micromobility device. I applaud the 12-year-old who almost came tonight and wrote a great letter, that even though she suffered trauma, what it taught her was better safety, wear your helmet. Any time that I'm out, I'm sure on bikes I see cyclists with no helmet, kids and adults I see. micromobility device people out with no helmets, kids and adults. And I believe that the workshop that we saw on where the most trauma was, was actually in adults, not in kids.

No, it wasn't.

It was definitely. It was mostly adults, actually.

It was mostly adults. It didn't confine the data to a particular size of device, and it didn't confine the data to Palm Beach County. It was on a national basis because there isn't enough recorded data on who gets hurt, where they get hurt, and how it trickles back. The best we can do, I think, is to approve the ordinance tonight as it was originally written without the age restriction. So we would satisfy some of the requests tonight to make sure that we're putting together the same ordinance. We can always make it more restrictive. We can always add education as a requirement or a registration of a non-human-powered micromobility device if they have serial numbers. But you can't unwind technology. These things exist. Parents have provided them for their kids, sometimes as a method of conveyance to and from schools. The school district doesn't provide a school bus to and from if you're inside a two-mile walk radius. So I would support this... package of ordinances without the age restriction.

And keep in mind, we can always, if we spend our time and energy enforcing the rules as they are written and as they are going to be enhanced and crack down on the bad riders, if that doesn't change behaviors, we can always add an age limit down the road. Once you do it now, you're never going to take it away. Once you take these things away from these kids, the responsible kids, we're never giving it back. So once we do this, it's gone forever, because we're never going to unban them by some magic reason. So I think before we take the easy way out by banning them from everyone and saying we're done, I think we do the hard work on education and enforcement and see if we can effect behavior change. If we can, then we've succeeded. If we can't, then we put the age restriction in later. But I think jumping from no rules to a ban on everyone under 15 It's the wrong thing for what you all think is the right reason.

Ms. Bosch, can you reiterate the mandatory requirement that we cannot put on people for education again?

So we can't mandate education, but we can incentivize education. And just to clarify, we also can't require registration of these devices, similar to we can't require a learner's permit or a driver's license. The traffic code preempts us in a lot of ways, so our authority is limited. We do have the authority to set an age limit, but we don't have the authority to tie it to a driver's license or a permit.

Appreciate that. We can, like the mayor said, and I agree, we can always put that in place later, but do we have to have a child die before we make that happen? Because that to me seems crazy. So, no.

I have a question. So in the ordinance, we do not have anything written about the helmet because it's state law, but can we add that language into the ordinance?

We could add language to the ordinance. It would be redundant of what is already in the state law.

Can we just reference the state law so that way if the state law changes, we're consistent with the state law?

I think we could do that. That's what we've done other places. It should be in there. We can add language that says that pursuant to the section of the statute that requires it, that helmets are required. Perfect. Okay, thank you.

I'll go ahead and make a motion. I will move to approve 2026-16. Second. Wait, as amended, right?

As amended. As amended, including the ID change. Including the ID change and the age.

And the helmet reference with state law. As amended, yes.

Okay, let's move and second it. All in favor? Aye.

Aye.

All opposed? Aye. Passes three to two.

Okay. I'll move to approve 2026-17. Is there a second? Is that one amended? No, as presented. It's getting confusing.

Second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Hearing none, passes 5-0. Thank you. And then a resolution as well.

Okay. Tell me where that is.

It's under consent.

Aye. Number aye. You guys are killing me.

Letter aye. Okay. There you go. Okay. I'll move to approve resolution number R-2026-42.

Second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Hearing none. Passes 5-0. Okay. Thank you all. Thank you all for coming.

Thank you.

Mr. Barnes takes us to... All right, brings us to our next public hearing item, which is Ordinance No. 2026-15, an ordinance of Wellington, Florida's Council adopting an interlocal service boundary agreement, ISBA, with Palm Beach County to coordinate future land use public facilities and services in advance of future annexations within the area defined by the ISBA, authorizing the mayor to execute the agreement, providing a conflicts clause, providing a severability clause, and providing an effective date. Mr. Sills is here to present the item.

Good evening. This is the second reading of the Ordinance for the Interlocal Service Boundary Agreement. And as soon as the presentation comes up. The proposed boundary for the agreement includes the properties north of southern between what you see there on the screen from the Leonard Land Company west to FPL property. This provides you with some information on the acreage and the number of properties as well as who provides services today. Just real quick, you approved this at first reading back in June. If you approve it tonight, it will go to the county for their adoption on the 26th or consideration for adoption. And then we'll be back to you within six months to amend our intergovernmental coordination element of the comprehensive plan to incorporate this ISBA by reference and also to adjust our map within the land use element regarding future annexation areas. A couple of key things about the agreement. It does not annex any property. It merely defines the procedures for any annexations and establishes the county consent for future annexations. As you know, there's a charter provision within the county that any voluntary annexations require county approval, so this achieves that for the boundary. It defines future land use and density that will be applied to properties if annexed But it does not approve any entitlements for any of the properties within the boundary beyond those that the county has already approved Defines infrastructure Requirements as well as service delivery so that we can ensure efficient and effective service and no duplication of services and the agreement is good for 20 years unless amended or extended That's the extent of my presentation.

All right. This is a public hearing item. And is there a motion to open public hearing?

So moved.

Second. All in favor? Aye. Public hearing is now open. Madam Vice Mayor, I know you've got cards.

I do. Allow me to call two at a time, please, before you start speaking, once you get up to the podium. Mr. Alexandra Larson. Jennifer Mayfield. Elizabeth Pantage.

Go ahead, Ms. Larson. Three minutes.

I didn't know if I had to wait for that. You can go ahead. I didn't agree when you went across Southern Boulevard, period, because in our county charter it says you needed 25 votes. You only had 19. I don't know why anybody here doesn't have a legal eagle to go look at our county charter. You didn't have to jump Southern Boulevard. Even Jeb Bush did an article back in 2000 that says development doesn't pay for itself. You can go back to the Tampa Bay Times and the Orlando Sentinel and read the article about development because he wanted it opened up about development. And as soon as he saw how much it cost, they put a lid on that pot real quick. Because the taxpayers, the one thing I hear wherever I go is people aren't living well. They can't afford to live. Our county, Palm Beach County, their budget is $9 billion, and it's not enough. For some reason, everywhere in Palm Beach County, I thought it was bad living in Dade and Broward because I grew up here and moved to different counties and saw a lot. But I never saw as much greed as I have seen, as I've seen in Palm Beach County. And Dade's a pretty big county. A lot of people. Broward, same thing. Palm Beach County, for some reason, their eyes are always bigger than their stomachs. And like I said, this annexation stuff is ridiculous. the AI data center, you know, all of it. I hate to tell you that that power plant has a 36-inch, 900 PSI gas pipeline with no shutoff valves. for 35 miles in carl springs in 1979 a two inch pipe blew 300 foot crater can you imagine a 36 inch pipe how big that crater is going to be because i did i challenged that power plant even being out here but this our comprehensive plan didn't even want anything going west Go back and look at how it was done. They sent out postcards to the taxpayers and said, what do you want? And we got awards for that comprehensive plan, which we have decided, not you, but our county commissioners have thrown into a bin and pissed on it. I have no other word for that, but that's what happened. Because I memorized the comprehensive plan, and it was a good plan. And for some reason, the elected officials of this county have decided to ignore it. And we do not have good government right now. Because if we did, I wouldn't have phone calls at 6 o'clock in the morning. And I wouldn't have to be told to be down at the county commission meetings on Tuesday. Because on my birthday, a guy stopped me at the restaurant. Why aren't you at the county? It's my birthday. Well, you should still be there. Happy birthday. No, no. It's just a big facetious, but... You know, really, I think you need to take a step back. You do not need to jump Southern Boulevard. I think right now, everybody's eyes are bigger than their stomachs.

Thank you, ma'am. Ms. Louisa, if you can make your way up here, please.

Hello again.

Hello again. Elizabeth Pandich, 1903 Oakberry Circle, Wellington, Florida. So I want to focus to start off with some technical stuff regarding section 3B of the document in the ISBA. You know, there's, I think people have feelings of being cautious of language that seems ambiguous or amorphous. That's kind of how we got SB 180, unforeseen consequences. So in 3B, it talks about what the threshold needed in order to get the consent from an annexation portion. It's a little ambiguous. Is it 50% of the voters? Is it 50% of the homeowners? And there's some questions that I think need to get a little more specific. So how exactly will the yet to be determined 50% threshold be calculated? If a house is jointly owned by two people, are those two property owners? What about a trust or an LLC? What if one person owns multiple properties? Residents deserve to know what the denominator actually is. And then second, and this concerns me potentially more, the agreement doesn't say all of Arden. It says the consent threshold applies to the particular area proposed for annexation. If we had the thing, the FPL is the only portion of that that is specifically allocated as one chunk. So I would like a very clear answer tonight. Is Arden required to be treated as a single annexation area for purposes of calculating that 50% threshold? Or could a smaller portion of Arden be designated as the proposed annex area with the 50% threshold calculated only among the owners or voters inside that smaller area? I don't like gerrymandering. Because this agreement shows that the drafters understood how important that distinction is, like in section 3E with the FPL property, I don't see equivalent language requiring Arden to be treated as a single proposed annexation area. If I'm missing it, please show us where it is. And third, residents should understand that this agreement does not necessarily guarantee a referendum before annexation. Section 3B expressly contemplates obtaining the necessary consent through petitions, followed by an adoption of an annexation ordinance by the Village Council after a public hearing. And once Wellington complies with this agreement, Section 5 says Palm Beach County will not challenge, administratively, judicially, or otherwise, an annexation with this area. I think the biggest piece is, you know, this is a very sensitive area. The Arden residence, Project Tango, everybody's been through a lot and feel that decisions are happening behind closed doors and that things are happening to them, not with them. And I think with this annexation, there could have been better outreach done. I know contacts have been made through the Project Tango, and there's a lot of people in Arden specifically that could have been reached out to for a little better communication for more trust in the system. I'd love those 3B answers, please. Thank you.

Just to be clear, we're not annexing anything by this ordinance. And if we were ever annexing, it would be voted on by the people who were sought to be annexed. And without them voting for it, they cannot be annexed involuntarily. Ma'am.

Hello. My name is Sue Loisel. Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. I serve as the Chair of the Arden Development Impact Committee. I am speaking tonight on behalf of the residents who are deeply concerned about the ISBA and the proposed release of Arden's restricted covenant and annexation and land use. Arden is not just a boundary on a planning map. It is a residential community where families bought homes with clear understanding of the projections, governance, structure, I'm sorry, protections, governance, structure, and community character that were in place. One of the protections is the restricted covenant. That covenant is not a formality. It is a safeguard. Releasing it would remove the important legal protection before residents have reviewed or received full answers about what annexation into Wellington could mean for their future. The ISBA specifically identifies Arden as a logical future annexation area. That matters. Once the covenant is released, the path toward annexation becomes significantly easier. even if another process must follow. The first and most important protection will already be gone. Residents should not have to fight to preserve the rights after they have been quietly weakened. Before any action is taken, residents deserve direct, clear, and public answers. How could annexation affect their taxes and assessments? Who will control the traffic enforcement? What happens to the school, safety, parks, zoning, HOA agreements, land use decisions, and long-term identity of Arden and its surrounding communities? These are not small administrative details. These are the basic questions homeowners have the right to ask before existing protections are removed. I urge this council not to treat the release of the covenant as a routine step in an interlocal agreement. It's a decision with lasting consequences. Once the legal protection is released, it may be difficult or impossible to restore it. The responsible course is to slow down, separate Arden's covenant from the broader ISBA discussion, and ensure residents are fully informed and meaningfully heard before any door of annexation is opened. For these reasons, I respectfully ask Wellington City Council to oppose or delay approval of the ISBA as it applies to Arden and the surrounding communities, and to oppose the removal or release of Arden's restricted covenant unless and until residents have complete information, independent review, and a genuine opportunity to participate. Please protect the voices, expectation, and rights of Arden's residents before making a decision that could permanently change the future of our community. Thank you.

Ms. Nancy Gribble and Lisa Johnson.

Use both podiums.

Good evening. Hello again, old friends. I'm back. Nancy Gribble, 1525 Gallup Drive, Loxahatchee, Florida. I want to applaud Ms. Loisel and her comments as a newer resident of Arden and the county, because I actually was here in 2004 when the GAAPO was put in place. Ms. Lori Cohen was a councilwoman here. Yes, this is a proposed annexation boundary, but everyone knows that with a proposal comes a marriage, and it's usually rather quickly. If you watch the news or do social media, poll after poll on both sides of the aisle is showing that everybody is very dissatisfied and disgusted with government and those who are running our government. and that trust is gone and our trust will be further eroded if the declaration of restricted covenant annexation and land use that is currently on the arden and palm beach aggregates property is removed this covenant was put in place in 2004 when these properties were assigned the glades area protection overlay i won't go into the history because it's more than three minutes It was to protect the agricultural production area in the Glades, the EAA, and more importantly, it was so that no residential uses should be allowed west of the L8. That's very important. The covenant was put in place for the surrounding rural residential communities. It is a big deal. It is personal to us. The communities were made a promise. The removal of the Covenant will open the EAA, the sugarcane fields, and property along County Road 880 to residential development. In case you haven't heard, Stephen Ross has big ideas for Southern Boulevard corridor. Just check out some of the current transportation meetings that some of you have attended. Build, build, build from the coast to Belle Glade on Southern Boulevard. Yes, I will be pressing the county to deny the removal of the restricted covenant and the ISBA and to use all legal remedies to oppose the village's annexation of artistry lakes. The people who were promised this protection deserve it. It is shameful that the village would want to be a party to the consequences of removing the restrictive covenant, destruction of our farms in the EAA, destruction of Everglades restoration and conservation areas by pushing the ISBA as a solution to the county's opposition to the Artistry Lakes annexation. These will be consequences and cannot be undone. Please postpone your ISBA decision. Thank you.

Thank you. Ma'am?

Good evening, Mayor and council members. I'm here to discuss the interlocal service boundary agreement. My name is Lisa Johnson from Loxahatchee. I am here because I believe this council needs to look carefully at what The proposed ISBA could mean for land with existing GAAPO protections. That's the Everglades Area Protection Overlay. Palm Beach County created the GAAPO in 2004 to protect the Everglades agricultural area from encroachment by urban and other uses detrimental to agriculture, conservation, and the Everglades restoration. The county describes GAPO as a barrier to expansion of urban and suburban activities into agricultural areas. The strongest evidence is in Conditions 4 and 5. Condition 4 requires a recorded restricted covenant or deed restriction limiting property within GAPO to uses already approved by the county and consistent with the GAPO. Condition 5 required a recorded restriction prohibiting the property from voluntary annexation into a municipality. signing annexation petitions or otherwise consenting to annexation. The county's own staff reports explains why preventing Wellington's voluntary annexation of Palm Beach Aggregate's properties was part of its strategic to protect the Everglades Agricultural Area. So tonight I am asking, do those recorded restrictions apply to the properties we are discussing? Where is the actual recorded instrument? And if the annexation occurs, do those protections remain fully enforceable and stay with the land? I understand that the inter-local service boundary agreement does not itself annex property, but it is being created to coordinate future land use and future annexations. We are not asking Wellington to create new protections. We are asking you to preserve protections that were placed on the land for a reason. Before approving this framework, please require a written legal determination identifying the applicable GAAPO restrictions and explaining what happens to them after annexation. And I ask the village attorney, if the annexation restriction is no longer enforceable, who released it, when, under what authority, and where is that recorded? Changing jurisdiction should not mean changing protection. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am.

Ben Brown and Raymond Piniella.

First up goes first.

You won. All right. Good evening. My name is Raymond Pinuella. I'm on the board in Arden, but I come tonight as a resident. And I heard that you guys had mentioned, like, oh, we're not annexing you. But that's kind of like saying, hey, you know, we're not getting married, but I'm proposing. Like, you know, this leads to annexation. It's not like, OK, we're just making a decision that has nothing to do with annexing. It's exactly what it has to do with. So I just want to just point out how ridiculous that sounds. So my question is, why? What's going on here? I can tell you when I was president prior to this, even my current role right now, we were never reached out to by anyone from Wellington on this. To my knowledge, no one has been spoken to about the annexation. I'm not saying that we're necessarily, and I don't speak for the community, but as a whole, as a resident, Not necessarily for or against it per se as a group, but nobody spoke to us. Nobody reached out. So it seems very hostile. It seems very rushed. Like, what is the point of rushing to this right now and making this choice tonight? I suggest we pause it. discuss with the art residents, discuss with... I'm curious if anyone has spoken or reached out to Artistry Lake right next to us. They're getting built. They would also be in the zone. They would have the right to vote on this as well as owners. So I'm curious if anyone here spoke to the developer there. If you guys don't rush this and try to make a decision sooner than later, you will also need to reach out to their residents. They will also count towards a vote. And I just don't see the reason why you have to do this now and why you just don't Talk. If you guys want us to join overall the city, I would like for us to talk. Why not? I don't see why we're avoiding that or why you guys are avoiding that. And I think it would be very helpful. So please put a pause to this. reach out to us, hear from the residents, future potential residents of Wellington, because it matters. Think about this. Right now, the population for Wellington is about 62,000 residents, and Arden's about 7,000. You'd be adding almost 12% to your population. That's a sizable difference overall. And for both Arden residents to be under Wellington and also for Wellington residents. I'm not sure. I know obviously this has been an agenda item prior, but I don't think it's really quite well known to the residents of Wellington that this is happening. And I'm sure they would also have their own interest in seeing the expansion of the city and why you guys want to block any other municipality. from having access to Annex Arden over the next 20 years. Because even if you don't pull the trigger right now, you're basically blocking anyone else from doing this for 20 years. And that's a pretty sizable decision by the city, again, without any sort of conversation. So please put a pause on this. Don't make this decision tonight to do this. I'm not saying not to continue this potentially down the road, but talk to us. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. You're up.

Ben Brown, live in Arden. Like Raymond, I'm a board member, but here to speak on my behalf as a resident. I'll be pretty blunt here. This looks like a backdoor job here. This motion and this whole procedure started the day after the town hall that we had with the county and Commissioner Baxter. It seems a little too convenient that as we were shutting the door on the county that this showed up the following day. And now that we have pushed and fought for months on end... Pause my time.

There it is. Can you move your phone?

I haven't moved anything since I've been here, so it's not mine.

I haven't either.

It's all the same stuff in the same place. Go ahead.

I think it was Mr. Brown's phone. No, that's not it. Go ahead.

All right. So anyways, just being blunt here, it looks like a backdoor job. We got the moratorium put on recently. It's been national, local news without question. Everybody knows the county finally is starting to do what they're supposed to. but their code planning and zoning hasn't been updated in 40 years. And based on my cursory knowledge of your zoning and code, you're not up to date either on a hyperscale AI data center that is proposed and is going to continue to be pushed over there. So what I would like to know are what are the assurances by the council that you're gonna make sure that you do not allow Project Tango and PBA to push through what they were originally trying to push through. Because again, we shut the door on the county, but now we're under a whole new set of rules with you guys. There's obviously some crossover to a certain degree. So what is your answer and what are your plans with PBA? And like Raymond said, putting this 20 year thing on and annexing artistry lakes, which we know just the developer has to vote on. So that's a done deal. We obviously know, you know, PBA, it's a done deal if they want to have it done. So it's a couple of votes there. So we're going to be surrounded by you guys. And then what's going to go on. I would also like to ask, what are the plans? Cause again, Just looking at it, it seems pretty convenient. The county just announced their new special taxing district of PBSO. And that increase is going to be astronomical to us. You guys showing up going, hey, we'll annex you, would theoretically be a little bit cheaper. It looks a little convenient. What would the millage rate be? What would the assurances be on our HOA and our bylaws that are there? But I would, again, like to really make sure... what assurances with project tango are you going to put in place what does your county code planning and zoning have to protect residents of arden but not just arden we know flying cow road we know parts of existing wellington would be affected and be affected in a detrimental fashion if tango were to be put through by you guys and i know the tax amount of revenue Could be a little enticing to you guys, so I'm curious as to what the theory or the question is and how enticing that is to you. I would also, again, I'm a blunt shooter, straight shooter here. Mayor Mike, you were on a text thread during Project Tango quasi-judicial hearing with the developers and the lawyers in a text group. I'm wondering what was your intent, your purpose, and what were you communicating with them And would you like to divulge any reason why you're on that text thread? And what is the purpose behind Wellington pushing for this annexation? Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Any other comments?

Is Ms. Janice Ridenour in?

Ridenour.

Okay. I can only read it if you're in the audience. And she's here.

So, yeah, go ahead and read it.

Please delay the approval of the ISBA until Arden has been given the opportunity to learn more. Arden would like to have a voice on a decision of this magnitude.

I forgot to pass out this handout.

We'll take it. Give it to Mr. Stilling so he'll handle it. Any other cards, ma'am?

No.

Move to close public hearing.

That's what I'm looking for. Second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Public hearing is now closed. Mr. Stillings or Mr. Barnes, can you address the question about a restrictive covenant that's come up a few times? Explain what that means, what it is, and what this proposes to do?

Sure. So there is a declaration, a restricted covenant on Arden and some of the PBA Holdings property that addresses, basically requires a five council or commission member vote by the county to dissolve. And it... basically restricts them from voluntary annexation and applies the, as was mentioned, the Glades Area Protection Overlay to the properties. And that was done as part of the agreement when PBA Holdings came through in 2004 for certain land use considerations at that time.

So by approving this, their restricted covenant

Well, the county commission is taking that action. That will be a separate action they take in conjunction with the ISBA if the property is included within the boundary.

But that decision by the county is triggered by our approval?

Well, it's triggered by our request. So the ISBA, its intent, and just so we're clear, the reason we're here is to initially address the objection by the county of the Artistry Lakes annexation. in talking with the county rather than just simply having the isba for artistry lakes we discussed a corridor or more regional approach to include all those properties from the lender property basically those within the boundary and that's so that's why it's a much larger area there's no there's no intent on our part to bring forward any additional annexations uh and the intent or the rationale behind the removing the restrictive covenant is that if we're already seeking the county's consent on any future annexation which would follow the statutory procedures for annexation that We would include that in the agreement now rather than having the agreement and then still having to go back to the county again at a later date if any of those properties wanted to pursue annexations.

Who put the restrictive covenant on the property?

Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners.

It is in favor of the county alone.

Right. So who has the authority to remove it?

The county.

The county. Okay. So whether we do this or not, the county can do whatever they want with the restrictive covenant?

That's correct. And they could elect to approve the ISBA and not remove that restrictive covenant.

Okay. Is there a reason why we can't just do the ISBA for Artistry Lake since it's already been annexed?

That is the initial approach we took. However, when we met with the county staff, there was a desire to look at the entire corridor. And we did not object to that. But at the end of the day, our only objective was to address any questions, comments, potential concerns that the county had as it relates to Artistry Lake.

And there was a comment that we're rushing through this or that there's some backdoor conversation because the initial conversation to Annex Artistry Lakes was March 10th. This is five months later. And we've gone back and forth with the county. That's how we got to this place, yes?

Well, the county initiated a conflict resolution based on their objection, which requires us to go through a mediation process or come up with an agreement to address their objection, which is what the ISBA is intended to do. Absent any agreement, then the county basically would be at an impasse and the county could pursue legal remedy. The intent was to address their objection through...

Sorry, sir. Sorry, sir. We're not talking from the back of the room. We're not talking from the back of the room, sir. No, you had your time. Your three minutes is up, sir.

I have a question.

Your three minutes is up, sir. This is why you got removed from the other meeting. Your three minutes is up, sir.

Okay, I would like to continue and not have that happen.

You're three minutes is up, sir.

Okay. I'm going to talk now. So number one, Arden, I personally, I don't care if we annex Arden or not. I would like the residents of Arden to want it. So I'm not moved either way by this, but Arden goes to our schools. You now have one of our feeder schools in Arden. So it does make sense. For you to be Wellington, Arden cuts through Wellington. We have a lot of traffic from Arden. You go to all of our events. You guys enjoy Wellington. So if it made sense for you to be part of our community and that's what Arden wanted, I'd be fine with that. I personally... don't care if you want to be part of arden and we decide that that makes sense for wellington after hearing all the information then that's fine i would be absolutely fine with the isba just being artistry lakes for now because i don't really want to touch the data center we've already opposed it we i want nothing to do with it and arden if they feel like they haven't been communicated with and they don't want to be part of wellington that that's okay too our that school is a feeder school for our schools. So I would love for that school to be part of Wellington. That's one of my main reasons for wanting that area. But again, if Arden doesn't want to be a part of Wellington, That's fine with me. If that's really what you don't want, I mean, that's okay. So, I mean, I would be absolutely fine with just approving the ISBA with Artistry Lakes.

Well, just to be clear, I mean, this, again, the ISBA just establishes a joint planning effort between us and the county for a future annexation potential. If Artistry Lakes does not, or Arden does not want to be annexed, then there's no annexation potential.

I don't even know if I want to annex that.

Ultimately, so regardless of what's in the ISBA or if the ISBA is even approved, and if it is approved, even in that case, any annexation of Arden would require a vote of all the resident electors there. A referendum. And that is to answer Ms. Panditch's question, even though we're not answering questions, is that that statutory requirement doesn't change with the ISBA. Okay.

I understand that, but I feel that us approving that is us saying, hey, we want you, and I'm not really saying that right now. Okay. I just wanted to clarify that. I do understand the process.

Regardless of what the Board of County Commissioners does or what the Village Wellness Council does, it still has a requirement. Whether it's a voluntary process that they apply or whether it's any kind of other – an involuntary process, uniform method, it requires a vote, and that's where the 51 percent, the simple majority of 51 percent. I will say this.

There's no plan from the school district to build a middle school anytime soon. So you're still coming to Landings. For now, you're still coming to Wellington High School. And if you don't want to be part of Wellington, then... I think that it would behoove us to look at the boundaries because our schools are really overloaded. So that is something. I mean, if you want to be part of Wellington, great. I also think that we have an issue with our schools.

Please stop talking, sir.

So there are things to think about here. Mr. Harbert, I don't know if we can continue the meeting. I mean, are you going to be quiet so we can continue the meeting? We've heard your opinion. We're good. All I'm saying is there's a lot to consider here. I have no issue with you being in our schools. That's not what I'm saying. And I even said I want the feeder school. So there's just a lot to consider.

Please stop talking from the back of the room because we can hear everything you're saying up here. Public comment has concluded. Everyone had a chance to speak. Now we are speaking and asking questions of our staff. That's how this process works. If you all can't control yourselves, Deputy Harper will escort you out of the room because we're having a meeting here and that's just how the process works. Everyone had their chance to talk. Now it's our turn to talk and discuss things. And I'm sorry you don't think it's correct, but everyone had a chance to talk. Ma'am, ma'am, ma'am, we understand that. Ma'am, you want to leave the room as well? We're having a meeting here. Okay? Please stop talking. That's not how this works.

I wanted to point out.

Ms. Cohen.

Yes. I wanted to point out again that nothing in this agreement is annexing anything. I know. We've said that a bunch of times. We know that. The other thing that I want to mention is that this is a negotiated agreement with the county that will resolve the conflict that occurred by their objection to the annexation of Artistry Lake. So I would be very cautious in changing the boundaries that have been negotiated.

And we had an argument with the county when we annexed the property on Seminole Pratt, which is what we resolved that as well. So this takes the county out of the equation from any future attempts to annex property, but it does not take the ultimate annexation decision out of the hands of any resident of property that may someday want to be annexed. And if and when we ever get to that point, there will be full disclosure and everything will be transparent and you all will get to vote on how that works. Or you can vote to not come in. But that's not what this is about today. You're putting the cart before the horse entirely. This is an agreement with the county. Should Wellington ever look to annex any additional property in that box, we have an agreement with the county that they're not going to object and stand in our way. All the property owners still get to vote on it and weigh in. That's how the process works. And if we ever get to that point, that's when you'll get all the disclosures and transparency and community meetings that you will ever want and need, because we're happy to talk to everyone about that. We did it with the last annexation, and we'll do it with this one.

Any other comments? Yeah, just to reiterate what the mayor said, and I'll even simplify it further, I don't want Arden. So if there's any thought that there's some backdoor deal here, I don't really want you. And it's not that I wouldn't accept you, but if you don't want to be part of Wellington, we don't want you in here either. But the other aspect is that the tax roll and all this other stuff, whenever we're looking at the revenue of taxes being reduced, there is no benefit for us to go and annex Arden, in my opinion, because we're going to have to provide services out there, more PBSO deputies, fire departments, so on and so forth. Our city, in my opinion, our village is... Good the way it is. Maybe even a little overloaded, in my opinion, as it is right now. So annexing you doesn't make sense to me. So no offense, but I don't want you anyway. But if it is the case that we say yes to this tonight and you all in Arden come out here and say that you don't want to be part of it, hey, we're good with that. So I say we move to it. Go ahead. Go ahead, Vice Mayor.

Thank you. I think that a lot is being said tonight, and there's some things that maybe are not proper said. I don't agree that we should just say to them, we don't want you anyway.

I'm just a straight shooter like Ben.

At the end of the day, I'm glad to hear Mr. Barnes saying that a vote will take place. That is your right for our people to decide. But when that time comes, it's going to be so much better for us to do this tonight because you have to realize we're taking the county out of the equation. And if you do, if you, I see you shaking your head back here. If you do decide that you want this and the county gets involved and now you want it and now they won't give it to you.

Please stop talking from the back of the room. Thank you.

So just know that this is what needs to happen now, just to get the county out of the equation. No one's saying we're going to put backhoes and we're going to start building out there at all. This is just preventive to make it easier for you when... You vote, if you vote, to do this, to annex with Arden.

And as far as Project Tango, I'll go on record to say I've been against it. I was at the meetings as well. And I think that... Absolutely. Sure. And it's recorded here.

We passed a resolution. We were the first municipality to pass a resolution asking the county for a moratorium. We opposed it.

Anyone want to make a motion on this item? If I may, Mayor.

We have a suggested motion because at this point, the county still has to approve this. Right. And they may choose to approve it, modifying the boundary, reducing taking areas out of it as well. So what we'd like to do is to suggest a motion, as you've got written in front of you there, that would allow our representative, whether it's Mr. Stillings or Ms. Cohen or myself, that's going to be present at the meeting to agree to such a modification if the county chooses to.

But only to the boundary in those provisions related to a boundary change. None of the other terms. Any other terms would be brought back to the council.

So you would move to approve the ISBA with the boundary attached as Exhibit A to our ordinance as presented or an amended boundary if adopted by?

If we just changed the lines, it wouldn't change the terms.

It would just change the exhibit and the boundary. In other words.

And if there are terms specific to the boundary. We both have to agree. There might be a term that's specific to the boundary. Right.

We both have to agree on what the boundaries are. And if the county commission, after we've already approved it, decides that they want to alter the boundaries, then you would be authorizing us to agree to that alteration.

You're agreeing to this without discussing it with us? This would be after we approve this, you guys would go on and do that and make the final?

It would be based on what the county approves. So let's say it goes to the county and they decide they only want to adopt an agreement that has only artistry or only artistry in the Leonard property. The the agreement would then be revised to remove the other properties in any of the terms related to those properties Yes, that's that's all boundary We just allow we could always come back and ask the county if we wanted to add more property to the boundaries later.

Absolutely Do a separate eyes basically it would allow us to Agree to that condition without having to have another meeting call on a council meeting and while it's going on. Okay, so

or to have to come back and amend this ordinance because it will have already been adopted at that point.

By the county, right. So I want to make a motion.

I'll move to adopt the interlocal service boundary agreement with the boundaries as presented subject to the conditions just discussed.

Is there a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Aye. 4 to 1 passes. Thank you very much.

That concludes our public hearing. Agenda brings us to the regular agenda. First item on the regular agenda is 13492, Exotica Lane, a request for a lien reduction. And Mr. Stillings will continue and present this item.

Good evening. Good evening. My name is Jorge Ramos, and first time here, hopefully last time. Okay, so I'm here, you know, because I was shocked. I almost got a heart attack when I received a bill from the city for $161,000 for a tree that was down back in 2008 or something like that. And we bought this property around 2004 with my mother at the time, until 2008. Because the issues at the time, we decided to take it out of the house. Please leave quietly because we're having a meeting.

Thank you.

start renting and hello to everyone. You're fine. Hello to everyone. It's my first time doing this, but it's a great learning curve. I love all the speech and it was great. But yeah, so in 2008 we decided to move her out because we couldn't afford at the time the expenses. It was tough times at the time. So we decided to start renting the property at the time. So always he's been renting since then, the property. And I've always been managing the property. Every time we have a couple of things through the years, like code enforcements, and I was trying to address it as soon as they came up. And I remember in 2018 or something like that, I actually come here to the city. And it was something about the, at the time it was some code about the cleaning of the roof, you know, cleaning of the roof and cleaning on the side, side of the fascia of the roof. And we address it. And then the person there told me, oh, you know, there is something else, but let me see. He told me he was going to get back to me. And I even come here multiple times and I say, please, notice that I was here trying to figure out what's happening, right? Then I never hear about nothing, right? Then this year, at the beginning of the year, I received another quote, oh, you know, you have to paint the... the side of the house and some wood that it was rotting and some grass that it was dying, you know. And at the time, you know, my older tenant that I have there, he shut down the water, you know, so the grass was growing bad. So I addressed that immediately. And then the lady told me, you know, there is something about landscaping, you know, I don't know what it is. I don't know what it is. I remember back in 2007 or 2008, I remember I come to the city and I say, I want to remove a big pine tree that was in the back. I think those were like endangered species. I mean, a species that you could not cut it out. So I say, I need to cut it out because the roots are going into the house. Finally, we end... I only told that to the city, but I never did it. What we did is we just topped out the pine, and that's all we did. So it's the only thing that I remember that it was like back to landscaping that we have. The rest of the things, I always, we always try to address it. And like I say, when they told me this number, I was almost half, like a half-dead back. I told my mom, I mean, the money that, the little money that came out from the Potsitka flows, the house house, I give it to her. You know, right now I have a tenant that is behind on the, I have her behind. I already put her on, on, on, on eviction. But realistically, when I receive this, I say, oh, man, even $1,000 right now is a stretch. So please consider my petition to the city. I would love to live here. Right now, I'm not living here. But it's a great community, and I will support you. Thank you. Mr. Stillings, do you want to tell us the other side of the coin?

Sure. So there were three violations between the years starting in 2012. One referred to no address number on the house, which was for 157 days in violation. There was four trees removed without a permit. That's the longest of the violations at over 5,000 days. And then there were the property maintenance issues that were just mentioned regarding the roof and flashing and some other staining on the structure, which the violation was in effect for just under 1500 days.

And those were all subject to special master hearings and reduced to a fine amount? Yes, sir. And were they turned into liens? Yes, sir. OK. And what is the total? Does each one have a separate total?

Well, the total lien amount is $168, $689, and $0.11. The address number is 3,925. The no permit for the trees, that's the biggest one at 128,550. And then the property maintenance is 36,175.

Did the trees that were removed have to be replaced?

Yes. Were they ever replaced? Yeah. All of the violations were corrected in order for the reduction to be requested.

You said the tree correction took 5,000 days?

5,142 days. Okay.

Was that noticed more than once?

Yes. And were those notices to his mother or to him or to both?

There were some phone calls, emails, multiple forms of communication.

And was that starting in 2012 to him specifically or just to the mom or mother?

I mean, yeah, starting in 2015, we have phone calls to Mr. George, 2016, 2019, and then through to 2026. So from 2015, he started being noticed for all these, and it still took? There were written communication in terms of the notices but in terms of the phone calls the and 2015 is kind of when our new Code documentation system went in place. And so unfortunately, we don't have all the full records of communicate the verbal communication phone calls, etc Going back prior to that Mr. Stillings, where are we today with this issue?

I

Well, so the violations have been corrected, and he has a lien on the property of $168,000-plus that he's trying to get removed or released to the $1,000 request. And so that exceeded the threshold of which staff could offer. We can only reduce it because it's not homesteaded. We can only reduce it no more than 80%, and the lien amount can be no more than $60,000.

So because he's asking for more than 80% reduction and more than $60,000, it has to come to council? Yes, sir. What would an 80% reduction wind up being? What's that number, if you did 80%?

It's like $36,000.

It would reduce it to $36,000? Yes, sir.

OK. $33,789. There it is.

And how much did you spend on all of the violations that you had to rectify?

No, that's, and this is the thing. I don't know if the system changed. I don't know, because, like I say, Ian, I don't know if you have there in your record, because I remember in 2018, 2018, I come specifically, the person that I come to talk with him, because he say, I need to speak with somebody, he didn't know, he didn't have an answer. So he said, I need to speak with somebody upstairs, and then I follow you up. I was calling him, and maybe I sent Ian an email. And I was saying, hey, listen, what is going on? What's happening, right? I never really hear from him.

What do you mean? So they told you you need to do these things. What were you calling for?

No, I was doing it for some scenery. I remember the day that I found out that I really started finding out this is in 2018 when they told me about the roof. Is that considered with your date? Yeah. 2018, 2017, the date of the fascia of the roof? The fascia of the roof? Yeah. Sorry, what was the question? The day that you gave me the code enforcement for cleaning the fascia of the roof, it was around 2018 or 17?

The fascia was completed in 2016.

2016? Okay. So around that time is when I come with my mother, remember? And then I say, no, I correct everything, you know, because they say clean up this. Okay, I correct everything. Everything is good. And then he said, you know, it's something here, but I don't know really. I have to ask questions. And then I say, okay, please, let me know. Let me know if something. Let me know. I never knew what happened. And then one time I come here, and it's when I tell them, please, noted there that I'm here trying to fix it, whatever they need. Tell me what it is. They told me about, you know, something about the trees. I told them about those trees. They were palms that they got infected with this, like, mushroom, you know, that damaged the palms. It's like a big mushroom that attached to the palms, and it died, you know. So that's why I called. I mean, we called them because it was all died. But I didn't know I have to ask for permission for that. You know, I said, it's already dead. It's damaging, so I don't know.

But why did it take you almost 14 years to correct it? I mean, 5,000 days is like 14 years.

I just knew about this about this year, and it's when I corrected. I just knew about what was really happening with this year. That a lady come to my house. from the city, and it's when they told me, you need to fix this wood that is damaged, you need to fix this paint that is damaged. I said, okay, ready. And then she told me, there is something about the landscape. I said, what is about the landscape? She said, there is something, you need to take pictures around the house. I said, okay, and send it to this email. I took the pictures and I sent it. And I said, okay. I always thought about the landscaping, was confused about the 2008, when I mentioned it, about the pine, the pine that damaged the house. I always thought they were telling me about that. No, because I know that pine, you need to ask permission to cut that pine because it's a special pine from here. I don't know. So I said, okay. I didn't cut it. I just trimmed it. I decided not to cut it, just trimmed it. And that's why I knew until this year, and I corrected him, please let me know that everything is good this year. And that's why it was really of knowledge.

Mr. Ramos, if you take the trees out for a second and you look at the two other code violations, one for the house numbers and one for the damage on the roof, you said it was done a few years ago, but it looks like it was resolved in 2016. At that time, did you resolve the payment on the outstanding... Leans?

Exactly. At the time, she told me, I remember I paid like $2,000 something. They charged me for it. Because at the time, I think I had a tenant that also was behind on the rent. And it took me like a year to take her out from the house. And I didn't know nothing that I was coming to the house because I couldn't, you know. I was trying to take the freaking tenant. I'm so sorry. I was trying to take the tenant out of the property.

You were in the eviction process?

Yes, at the time. Which this lady, actually this lady is a lady that they just booked it for because he was doing that in the houses here in Wellington, like for 20 homes or something, 30 or something. This lady, it was an nightmare for me. It took me a year to take her out. And I didn't know how, you know, I didn't have any response from her. I couldn't go to the house. The lawyer told me, you know, don't do nothing. I said, okay, I don't do nothing. So, like I say, every time I knew something with the city, because I know the city could cause me, every time I tried to correct it. And, like I say, when this year they happened, immediately I went and I said, hey, listen, I cannot correct it now, but give me some days and I will correct it. When I corrected and they told me about the... The landscaping is when I say, hey, listen, everything is done. The trees that they told me, it was trees that they died because they got disease. But I didn't know I need to ask permission to grow those.

My question was, did you resolve the outstanding fines?

Everything, yes. Not the fines.

That's why we're here.

Right. At the time, I remember when that lady was there, I remember there was a fine. It was a fine of something. It was like $1,500, which I paid at the time. I don't remember. It was $2,000. So what I'm saying is I never was out of the city. I always was on top of the city. And I like, isn't that something that I like to, I live in Naples. I don't live here. So every time I like to come here and talk with somebody to make sure everything is correct. You know, and that's why.

Who lives in the house now?

Pardon me?

Who lives in your house?

I have a tenant that right now is two months behind, and I'm filing eviction for her. I just filed eviction, but I have the problem that I received money from her, so now the lawyer told me, no, you need to close the case and reopen again. And you're going to say, oh, my God.

I mean, as a homeowner, even if you're renting it out and you don't live here, you still have a responsibility to keep up with your home and we have expectations and we do care about our trees. Always. It sounds like there may have been some sort of lack of communication. I don't know if it has to do with you not living here. I don't know if it's our staff. I don't really know. I don't think that reducing it to $1,000 is fair if this went on for years. I still think that $33,769 is very high. I don't know if there's a number somewhere like in the tens.

It's a very, very long time fine. I don't want to see you find the 168. I don't want to see it be 33. But I can't agree to get it down to 1,000. So we've got to come up with a number that we think makes sense. to show that we need to enforce our regulations. And when they don't get it for 14 years, it's a long time.

I was kind of thinking $1,000 per year since this violation started. That would be $12,000. And I know that's a lot of money. I get it. But at the same time, we had a similar issue just a few months ago with another owner. And his fines were almost, I think, the same amount or close to yours. And We only reduced it to 20%. So we're actually being, at least if we were going to approve something less than $33,000, we were giving you a gift.

No, yeah, no, but look, and I appreciate, I know, I appreciate everything you're doing here and everything. It's just, I think it's, like I say, if it was something that I knew, that I knew, for example, in 2017, I didn't know nothing. In 2017, the person didn't even come back to me. I was here. So it was, if at the time it was, maybe at the time I corrected, right? But I really never got answers. So that's why I let it go. But as soon as this year it came up, Immediately I took action and I remediated immediately. So it's not something that I let it go. That's why when I told you, okay, listen, it was a tree, it was something about the tree, and I was hearing this story from that time, but nobody really gave me the specific answer. And that's why I was saying, I don't know if you change the system, and that's why you catch up with all these things. I don't know what it is. So, like I say, $1,000 at this point is huge money for me, like I say. And I know you are doing the best you can, and I know what happened with previously, but please consider that I really stick in you this year. It was this year. That's it. I didn't know we have these thoughts.

I'm sorry to cut you off. I understand, and I hear you, and I appreciate it. But at the same time, that's why my question to Mr. Stillings was, did you get noticed? Did you get phone calls? Did you get letters? And his answer was yes. You're shaking your head no.

No, because I was here. Like I say, I was here, and every time I was going over there, and I make it in 2018, I say, hey, please, make notice that I was here, please. Make notice that I was here.

Do we have these letters that were sent out?

I MIGHT SUGGEST NOT TO SAY THAT NOT GETTING A VEGETATION REMOVAL PERMIT IS NOT A VIOLATION. BUT IT'S NOT AS VISIBLE AS THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE ISSUES WHICH WERE ONLY THE FOUR-YEAR TIME FRAME. SO MAYBE THAT'S THE CONCESSION IS TO APPLY THE WHATEVER rate or penalty you would want to those years rather than our inability to connect on clearing up the tree removal permit The other is that right now just for your information the resolution requires payment within 30 days Payment plan.

Can we do a plan? Can we do a payment plan?

You can extend it you could provide yeah For the other issues, what would the number be that you're?

At four years, whatever amount you would want to put on each year using Mr. Myers.

I don't think that we ignore the three altogether. Before we get to that point, I have a couple of questions for you, Mr. Stallings. This is going from when, 2014? 2012. And at the time your mother was living in the home, correct, sir?

2008 was the last year she was living in the home. 2008 was the last year she was living in the home. So she was out of there in 2012. And like I said, that's why I thought it was something about 2008, 2007.

And I'm going to say this very respectfully to you. Very respectfully. But you bear responsibility and not keeping communication of some sort, not for you to come and check the mailbox, but you have to bear some kind of responsibility that we had been communicating with you for all those years. Let her finish. I find it a little disturbing that All this time has gone by.

Maria, let me respond to this, okay? Do you think it's fair? You're telling me all these years, right? Do you think it's fair? I was here 2017, 2018, and I was here trying to fix whatever issues, and they didn't know what to do. The person that he was supposed to call me, they never called me. So when he say it was communications, Yes, it was communications. 2017, somebody communicated, I rectified whatever it is, and then he said, that person, after that, he told me, I'll get back to you because I need to ask about these things, which I believe is that. And that person, I never hear from him. I was calling, and it's when I come here, and I say, please, just make note that I was here trying to figure out what I need to do. Then this year is when I received this notice, right? When I received, hey, listen, the maintenance of the house, you know, the house, I changed the roof two years ago. I changed the air conditioning two years ago. The maintenance that he's telling me was this year, from last year, and then I corrected as soon as I can. Okay, paint this, you know, take this wood out. And then they told me about landscaping, okay, bring the stone perp, clean up that. So when you're telling me, yes, yes, you're correct. But here, look at the communication, it was not because they give to you, they call you, no. They call me two times, and both times was never addressed this. So this address, it was only this year. And that's why I corrected. I corrected. So that's what I'm saying. Also, you're saying, is my fault? No. My fault, I was here. So the city also is the fault. It's not just mine.

But what I was trying to communicate with you is this is an investment home for you, correct?

Right now, yes. I'm well, it's for my mother, yes.

So all your bills are going to you, right? They're not going to the tenant.

And I never received nothing like that. I never received that.

You could have come to the village. You could have communicated to us and say, I want all my mail to go here. And that would have alleviated you from being in the situation you are today. I did. Because I'm assuming all of, if you have a mortgage on your home, it's going to you. If all your utilities are going to you.

Absolutely.

So to say...

Sorry, I don't mean to interrupt you. No, please, Mr. Stilling. That was an issue up until September of 2025, where we were sending it to the address listed on the property appraiser's website, which is what we're required to do, which was not the address that Mr. Ramos was receiving mail. At that time it was determined that the address Was incorrect according to mr. Ramos and he had it changed at the property appraiser and then subsequently the written communication was being sent to sounds eerily familiar to that other case right and Well, again, we have to go by what's in the pressure. I'm not saying you did anything wrong. This is carbon copy.

Based on Mr. Stilling's comment previously that notwithstanding that LDR 7.5.4 is not an important item, because it is, but if we remove that from consideration for the moment and go to the first item, which is LDR 7.14.8G1, which is the 3925 cost and code 36-22B1, which is a 36-175 if you total that together, and then reduce that by 80%, which would be normally what we would do on a homesteaded property that staff has the ability to negotiate that part. I think that brings us close to around $8,000. I get $8,020. Thank you. So if we do that, that would be what possibly we could recommend.

I'm good with that. At this point, I think we need a, unless anyone has more questions for the gentleman or Mr. Sellings, I think we need a motion with an amount and a time period.

Right, time period.

Correct.

Motion to approve the settlement of 8,000.

Reduce the fine.

Reduce the fine to 8,020. 8,020.

Given how much time to pay.

With a payment plan to pay over the next 12 months.

Can we do $4,000 cash? $4,000 cash and then, like I said.

It's not a pawn shop.

We're not bargaining. I'll second.

Sir, we're not negotiating. No, no, no. The thing is, yeah. I second it. Okay. There's a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Hearing none. Passes 5-0. Thank you for coming, sir. I'm sorry. It's not the way you like to turn out, but it's a much better number than you came in with. Or the previous guy.

And how much they had to pay. You have one year to pay.

One year to pay.

Okay.

Thank you very much. Thank you very much.

And Mr. Barnes, we've got one more item.

One more item brings us to item 9B on the regular agenda, which is item C, originally on 7C in the consent agenda, which is authorization to award a contract to pale ink DBA visual images for the supply and delivery of trophies, plaques, and medals. And Mr. Juckett is here for this item.

Thank you for sticking around, Mr. Juggett. Hey, cupcake.

Thanks for having me.

Tell us what we have.

This is our annual contract for trophies, plaques, and medals. We went out to bid, and Visual Images was the low bidder. We are seeking authorization to award a contract for three years, and I'm here to answer any questions you may have.

Mr. Councilman, you've got questions?

Yes. So as we spoke about in the agenda review last night, my question was, why do we need to buy participation trophies? I understand how crude and, you know, whatever the thought process is on that, but I think it's actually at the detriment of children to give them participation trophies. I think it diminishes the kids that worked hard that got first and second place for their trophies that everybody gets a trophy. So personally, I would like to see the removal of the participation trophies in any and all sports, but I think that Councilman Levin brought a solution that kind of is in the middle. So we have certain ages and below that would still receive a participation trophy and hopefully to continue to inspire them to play better play harder and work harder to Get that first and second place as they grow older And so I have my questions Mr.

Jacket, what sports are the are we approving this for?

This is for all of our rec sports. So baseball two seasons, softball two seasons, soccer two seasons, boys and girls, basketball two seasons, one of boys, one of girls, volleyball one co-ed season, girls flag football one season.

And of those, Which of these have playoffs or something where they earn a trophy?

All of them.

All of them do. Now, for certain age groups, I know like in soccer, we don't do that for the younger age. Correct. Okay. Is that the only sport that we don't do it for the younger age?

We start doing, no. Soccer, we started doing that at 10 and up. Most of the other sports, we start around the same. Some of them at 7 and 8 as well.

Now, have you ever priced out, and I was thinking about this, have you ever priced out for the specific sport either a soccer ball or something to keep them going so they get better instead of a trophy? And is that astronomically higher?

No, it would probably be cheaper. Okay.

Is that something you think would be a better fit? Maybe for the older kids, but the younger kids still get the trophy that don't participate in the playoffs?

To be honest with you guys, I'll do whatever you guys want here. We're asking questions. In my opinion, from what I've seen, the kids like getting trophies. It gives them something at the end. It gives them a memento. It gives them something of the season. They put it on their shelf or in their bedroom or somewhere in the house. But I also understand the concept of giving trophies to the winners as well.

We already took away their scooters and bikes. We're going to take away their participation trophies too? Making a lot of friends with the youth in our neighborhood and our community. I'm not getting elected again. I think these kids, I mean, I understand the significance of winning versus participating. And the trophies are different for winning and participating. And I think the fact that the kids enjoy them because they put in a lot of time and effort. And to get something when the season's over, I have no problem giving them. I don't think it sends the wrong message. You know, it's not telling them, don't try harder. It's saying, thank you for participating all year. Here's something they put on your shelf at home that shows you played soccer or basketball or whatever it was all year long. So I have no problem taking those, leaving those in place the way it is. And we've done for years.

There's nothing more important than those age groups to be recognized, even if it's a ribbon. But that's how we teach them to be encouraged. That's how we teach them to be better. And that's how we teach them to work, work for it. So I have no problem continuing doing what we're doing. OK. Thank you.

Is there something in lieu of a participation trophy, like if they're soccer players, soccer ball, something like that, to where they have something they can practice with at home, maybe encourage them to be better?

That's something actually in other programs that once you get past a certain age, rather than going to a trophy, you end up getting some kind of memento, whether that's a ball, whether it's some other thing that you get the sweet spots that you can get for your cleats or what have you. But there's other things. But that usually happens in the older age groups in some cases.

I just want to mention something. I mean, this was a sealed bid, low bid, right? Or imitation of bid, rather. And I'm concerned that if we start adjusting the quantities, it might impact whether that particular bidder would be willing to meet the price.

Yeah, I think we should keep it the way it is this year and maybe look at something for next year because the way we did this process to get where we are right now, and I don't want to cause an issue with the other bidders going to say you've now put the whole thing out at risk that we should have considered. That's what I'm concerned about.

They may have bid this price based on quantity, the volume of trophies.

They did, and it's a three-year deal. Right. What I would like to point out, too, is the amount that you see, the $58,000, is nowhere close to that. It's probably closer to around $36,000 to $40,000 a year.

For just participation trophies?

For all the trophies. The registration fees for all the sports covers the cost of the trophies. And if you break it down, I was trying to do it when I had a little bit of time back there, it's about $20,000, I think, that we're talking about over the course of a year for these participation trophies. If you take those out and just have the first and second for all the leagues, that would be the remainder. So we're looking at around $20,000 if I had to venture a guess, depending upon the volume of the seasons.

this is an agreement for three years you said correct okay i mean we've had a long-standing relationship with pain and visual images he does a fantastic job so i i do think that we should just approve this as it is um and then i think that it's a future discussion right i mean this is a little longer if it was a year that'd be better but it's not i think that we should move forward with this but i do think that in the future it could be a discussion

Mr. Juckett, there are age groups in the rec sports that are younger and don't keep score, yes? Correct. Perhaps when we revisit this in the future, we could look at participation trophies for the levels that don't keep score. They're learning team sports, they're learning skills and so forth, and as they matriculate into a score-based age group, maybe that's the break point.

I agree. The other thing I would mention is just keep in mind, and I don't disagree or agree, this is recreation sports. This is not travel. This is not some of these kids, the best they're going to be is a few years of recreation, and that's what they get out of it. But at the end of the day, this is recreation sports.

Well, for the essence of time, since we do have a three-year contract, I'd just say,

Let's do it.

Do you want to make a motion?

I want to make a motion. Let's hear it. Yes.

Motion. What's your motion, Vice Mayor?

To approve as is for the three-year contract.

Second. Motion and second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Nay. Passes four to one. Thank you, Mr. Juckett. Mr. Barnes, do we have anything else?

That brings us to public comment. I'm not sure if we have any cards for public comment.

Of course we do. Mr. Toulon.

Step right up, Mr. Toulon.

Come on back.

My name is Bruce Tooman, and my primary and homesteaded residence is a zero-lot line property at 752 Lake Wellington Drive in the village of Wellington. You know, it doesn't appear that this council is interested in notifying the voters about the election next week, since you have reduced the amount of land that political signs can be placed on, Forest Hill and Southern Boulevard.

Yeah!

Also, the signs should not be picked up by and stored by taxpayers' expense. It is the responsibility of the campaign, not the village. Maybe if you cared about voting, we wouldn't have 85% of the Rolington not voting. Now, during this meeting, you bailed out a company that is suing Villas for nearly half a million dollars, and you reduced the lien on a property for $160,000 when the penalty lien was placed back in May 17, 2020. 2012. Do I have to sue the village to get on the agenda? How do I get my resolution to reduce my lien that was based on retaliation and the failure of this council to define the front plane? Oh, by the way, has staff gave you any definition for the front plane yet? Will they? How can you find if you don't define? My code enforcement officer emailed me recently, and I stated that I had placed plants in my front plane, and if he could come back and take a look at them. He did, and he stated that planning and zoning requires plants to be in the ground. I asked him for a specific ordinance. However, he did not reply. I wonder why. Does our code enforcement officer know our ordinances and codes? I have to wonder. Again, I request my counselor to waive my lien and penalty fines about my property and accept my landscaping plans. Let's face it, staff do make mistakes. Now, I also corrected my original violations and only was asked for printing plants after I complained about selective enforcement. Now, hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil are poor characteristics, traits, of our elected officials. I'm also disappointed that, for some reason, some people get a lot of time to speak and other people don't. Our mayor grouped two together and only elected once. In the past, he put two together and you could take twice as long. It seemed to be uneven and maybe unfair. And that's the problem I have with this, which was mentioned by a lot of people today. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. See you in two weeks. Mr. Barnes, anything else?

No, we don't.

Oh, then I'll see you next month.

That's a shame, I know.

We're done. We're done, sir. Thank you. Mr. Barnes.

Ms. Cohen, attorney's report.

I think we have someone.

We have another public comment in the back. I was distracted to my left. Sir, did you want to come up as well? Did you want to come to this?

Public comment is intended for things that were not on the agenda. Correct. If this is related to something that was.

It is. And so I'm, thank you for pointing that out. Is there a way I can speak off the record, if that's the case?

You can talk to us after the meeting.

That also?

I'll talk to you after the meeting. OK. Thank you. Sir, you might be our last speaker for the night.

No.

But you're still getting three minutes, so don't drag it out.

Is it working? Oh, it is working. My first council meeting, so I apologize for the ignorance.

You can move the microphone up.

This isn't my first, and I still apologize for my ignorance.

It was an interesting meeting, that's for sure.

They're always this fun. You should come every time.

I might, but I couldn't before. I used to be a truck driver, so I wasn't able to make it. But anyways, great meeting. I'm a little confused about what's going on with Arden. It looks like you guys are looking to annex a certain section of it, and I'm only up here to give some suggestions because I listen to you guys and I listen to the residents. I mean...

This was a item on the agenda earlier. So technically this is not proper for a public forum because this was an agenda item to discuss Potential annexation of Arden, although we weren't actually discussing annexation of Arden at the time So technically this is a non agenda item to talk about the future annexation of Arden. So go ahead No, I was just did you tell us your name and address, please?

Oh, yeah Ivan 783 Lake Wellington Drive It was just some suggestion for the council members. I understand their frustration. I understand what you guys are trying to do as well. And I understand the conflict. What they were asking was just for clear communication and whether or not whatever stipulations that are in Arden now or whatever that is, if they were going to stay in place and they couldn't get an answer and they were very frustrated about it. So I'm just making some suggestions for the council that, you know, just... hey, we can't go there yet because one, we're just talking about it and you guys have to pass it. And two, it's not up to you to do that because it belongs to PBC. They didn't seem to understand that point. So I just wanted to make some of that suggestions. And did the, am I paying more water now? Am I paying for more water? I got a higher bill now?

What we discussed earlier was that the water bills are going up 5.08%. Right. Yes. So you'll pay like $5 more a month.

Okay. All right. So that's a done deal. Yes. Okay. All right. That's all I had. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Thanks for sticking around.

Welcome to your first meeting.

Thanks for sticking around. I appreciate it. I actually agreed with you there for a minute with the participation trophies, and then you switched on me. I said, what are you doing? I still voted no.

Thank you, sir. Now, Mr. Barnes, what have we got left?

That brings us to Ms. Cohen's report.

Ms. Cohen, back to you.

Yes. As you know, the law firm of Wiserota is pursuing a challenge to Senate Bill 180. And in their amended complaint, they asserted a number of claims All of the claims were dismissed with prejudice except for their unfunded mandate claim. They are getting ready to amend the complaint, and they have reached out to us to ask if we want to be a part of that. As they have done in the past, they would charge a flat fee of $10,000 at the trial level and then $5,000 at the appellate level. If there was a Supreme Court challenge or appeal, then it would be another $5,000. I'm bringing it to you.

We would get the benefit of the ruling whether we participate or not, correct? And I've read the complaint, the amended complaint. I read the order dismissing the other claims. I don't want to tell the lawyers what they're doing, but I don't think that's a lawsuit I want to buy onto. I'd rather save that $10,000 for participation trophies. And there's...

There's a whole litany of cities that are jumping on, so I don't think that us being added to it helps it at all.

I don't disagree with you, but I was asked to bring it forward.

Anyone want to join the lawsuit? Raise your hand. Negative. There's your instructions. Thank you. Is that it? That's it. Mr. Barnes, back to you.

I'm going to be brief. Though, as Mr. Zuman pointed out, we don't have a meeting on the 25th of August. However, I'd still like to keep the workshop agenda review time frame for a workshop. Sure. So we can continue to provide updates to you on several items. So that will be on the 24th at 4.30, unless everybody's schedule permits an earlier start. But otherwise, we'll do a 4.30 start on the 24th.

I will be out what Ms. Bosch will cover.

With no meeting on the 25th. So the next regular agenda review meeting will be held on Thursday, September 3rd at 4.30 and will be closed September 7th and will reopen on September 8th in observance of Labor Day. Next regular council meeting will be held on Tuesday, September 8th at 6.30. Okay.

That's all you got?

That's all I have.

All right. Councilman, what do you got?

So... That's a great little parlay into what I'd like to talk about. As far as the agenda review, if we can talk about conservation of easements. And what I mean by that is I was able to watch a PowerPoint presentation by a person named Tom Kay that is from, I'm probably going to butcher this, Alachua.

Alachua County. Alachua County.

There you go. Yes, he's from the Conservation Trust there. And he spells out very distinctively what these conservation units can do, what they can't do, and what kind of tools that we can utilize inside of those here in Wellington to preserve our equestrian you know history here and our lands and these larger farm farms and ranches and things of that nature so i think it's worthwhile for staff if they will to kind of look into this and maybe even after staff looks into it and sends us some information we can even ask tom to come down and present to us and see if this is something that we can do to where we can keep the lands that are green Remaining green into I love this word perpetuity. I'm sure a lot of people do so if they would be so kind as to do that That would be fantastic. I think it's worthwhile for all of us.

I tried that ten years ago I'm happy to look at it again didn't work then we could try it again a whole new era Well, it's not us to do is it possibly let's do it right keep in mind We don't get it.

I get it. Yeah, okay

I'll let you go next. Down here, Mr. Levin.

Welcome back to school. May all the students go forward safely without their e-mobility devices and study hard and get great grades.

Councilwoman?

Have a great night. Vice Mayor? I'm good, thank you.

All right, everyone have a safe and productive back to school. Thank you all for coming, and we're adjourned.