Board Workshop - 12:30pm or immediately following commission meeting - May 12, 2026

First, thank you. We wanted to just, this is a presentation to follow up the March 2026 workshop meeting. At the end of that presentation and workshop, several board members requested that staff consider restoring the child care accommodations back into the facility. And so on April, I believe April 20th or 21st, you had received a memo from Issemi Ayala-Goyazo explaining all of the provisions and all of the details on that analysis. And this is just simply to bring it back to the board to get final direction on how to proceed with that portion. I'll try it over. So good morning, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Commissioners. As the county administrator explained and just stated, our goal today is to provide you the status update of where the project stands and then to provide you a high-level overview of what was detailed in the memo that was shared with the board in April. So what is the current status? We received bids for the demolition services on April 24th. On May 7th, you actually got the email notification from the purchasing division letting you know that we had the clean load bid ready and noting that the director of purchasing will be able to proceed with a word provided that no protests are timely filed and no county commissioner objects to such intended award within five days, business days. As of today's meeting, we do not have any protests that have been received. The demolition permitting is in process with the city and commencement of demolition activities of the Gore building is still expected to occur in summer of 2026. Environmental work and monitoring continues at the site. So going then to the memo that we shared with the board and the question of child care facilities to be included or not as part of the new government center, we find it timely to be able to share with you some key data. The memo was very detailed today during the presentation. We're just going to address key points. Nothing else, but obviously this board can take us into details as it deems appropriate. We made a few assumptions in, I apologize, in working through the data, right? And we chose just for sake of the analysis, the possibility of considering a total enrollment in that child care facility of 120 children. So if you use that number, and that number can be adjusted any way the board wishes, but we needed to make an assumption to be able to build an analysis. If you take into consideration 120 children as the base enrollment, that will require an additional 14,000 square feet of space inside the government facility. If you take that into account, that then equals about $15 million off additional building costs to be put towards the new government center. If you add that to the $663 million that we had shared with you before for the reduced recommended program, that brings your new total to $678 million. Can we go questions by issue? Where's 120 kids come from? I mean, right now, do we have a, there's no child center here. Correct. So where is this 120 kids coming from? No. What employees? So we were using and making an assumption based on some other similar child care facilities downtown in the area. We looked at, we looked at Miami Dade County and other areas that might do similar things. We were just using an assumption. I mean, child care facilities are great, but the building here, I mean, do you have any idea of the, you have 700 employees, how many of those have kids that would utilize this? Yeah. So, so we do have analysis on, and in that memo that that was, it was detailed out for the age of the workforce, the, where the distribution of the workforce lives, where the distribution of our workforce works. All of that is, is outlined there. We're trying to summarize it here, but it was in much greater detail in the, the memo that was provided. So, first of all, did you survey the employees? Survey the employees themselves? No, we did not. To ask that if we had a child care center here, would they use it versus something else? Yeah. So, there was no survey done of the employees if they would want it or utilize it, but what we did do is we, we utilized data that kind of looked at since the inception of our parental leave that I believe actually you might have sponsored that back in 2018, I believe it was, how many employees we have that have utilized the parental leave portion. And so, and I think we've got that data and ISME can speak to that now. And then we extrapolated that out and it was really just to get a sense of, you know, the, the number of employees that we have that have taken advantage of that parental leave. Even that we would assume, you know, if all of them took advantage of, of that. Now, mind you, we have people spread, you know, spread out all over the county where they work. Um, so, but even if you did that, it still would fall short of, of that number, but we wanted to just give a sense of, cause we did that. We had, we had done the assumption before we had gotten all that information back. Um, again, we've got that data, um, and you know, it depends on if the, the objective of the board, if you guys wanted to pursue this, the, the concept, if the objective of the board is to kind of cater to the individuals and the employees that work in that building or for all of county government. And, and, and assuming you have to, you know, take into consideration that people are likely not going to come drive here to drop their kids off at a daycare if they work out at GC West or somewhere else. So, so there's a lot of assumptions that you have to kind of make and what, and we needed to understand better from the board what you guys, if you wanted to pursue this, what, you know, what would be the objective? I asked if you asked, and you know, some people may not even work here because we don't have a childcare center. You don't, you don't know that because the data shows, and I looked up lots of stuff because I've worked on this for years and years and years. And as a matter of fact, my organization did the first definitive study of childcare in America back in 1972, that's how long this has been going on. And there's tremendous advantages, it shows, to having a childcare center where people can bring their children, they, they go down at lunchtime, they, you know, just all different kinds of connections that you don't get when you drop your child off someplace else. So that's why I just wanted to ask that. And the other thing that I wanted to, jokingly I was asking Commissioner Udine if he knows that there's a child center at Spirit, and yes, there happens to be a childcare center at Spirit, because a lot of corporations and a lot of companies are doing this today because they know that it enhances the work experience for their employees. So that's one. The other thing, I'm not going to get too much into this, but I looked up a lot of the numbers, and these numbers are high in terms of monthly cost of childcare as compared to, you know, many other places. And for instance, wait lists are incredibly long for infants. So if we have people that are, you know, have infants, I mean, there are all kinds of reasons why I believe we should investigate this and have this in our building. We're building a new building, state of the art. I mean, to me, for this county government not to include a childcare center is just not the right way to go. MR. MAYOR, IF YOU'RE OKAY FOR US TO CONTINUE TO FINISH THE PRESENTATION. THERE'S NO. SURE. THANK YOU. CONTINUE. OKAY. SO IF, AGAIN, THE IDEA BEHIND THE PRESENTATION WAS TO PROVIDE YOU KIND OF A VERY HIGH LEVEL POINT OF REFERENCE WITH INFORMATION THAT WE HAD IDENTIFIED MIGHT BE OF VALUE OR RELEVANCE TO THIS BOARD IN MAKING A DETERMINATION WHETHER TO INCLUDE OR NOT, RIGHT? SO ASSUMING THE BOARD DECIDES TO BUILD A SHILD CARE FACILITY. AND THE NUMBER, THE ENROLLMENT, THE ACCOMMODATION LEVEL CAN BE REFINED, DEPENDING ON DIRECTION AND CONSENSUS PROVIDED BY THE BOARD, RIGHT? THE BOARD WILL THEN HAVE ONE OF TWO OPTIONS. THERE MIGHT BE OTHERS, RIGHT? ONE OPTION IS TO BRING A THIRD-PARTY OPERATOR, AND IF YOU DECIDE TO BRING A THIRD-PARTY OPERATOR, THEN THAT OPENS THE DOOR TO CONSIDER, DO YOU ALLOW THE USE OF THE FACILITY FREE OF CHARGE? DO YOU SUBSIDIZE THAT USE, MEANING TO SAY, DO YOU REQUEST A LEVEL OF PAYMENT OF RENT, OR DO YOU ASK FOR FULL PAYMENT? WE DID TWO SCENARIOUS. IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THERE MIGHT NOT BE OTHER SCENARIOUS, RIGHT? THIS BOARD HAS THE ABILITY TO DIRECT US ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, BUT WE JUST DID FULL RENT, MAKING ASSUMPTIONS OF WHAT MIGHT BE THE GOING RENT, GIVEN THE CURRENT CONDITIONS AND MARKET CONDITIONS, AND THEN WE APPLIED A 50 PERCENT DISCOUNT OPTION, RIGHT? AND WE TOOK THAT NUMBER, ANNUAL RENT VALUE, AND WE DIVIDED THAT BY THE 120 CHILDREN, AGAIN, JUST AN ASSUME ENROLLMENT. IT CAN BE A DIFFERENT NUMBER, AND WE THEN PROJECTED WHAT WILL BE THE IMPACT ON THE MONTHLY FEE JUST TO COVER THE FACILITIES COMPONENT. ANOTHER OPTION THAT THE COUNTY COULD PURSUE IF THE BOARD DECIDES TO PROCEED WITH PROVIDING ACCOMMODATIONS WILL BE TO DO THE OPERATION IN-HOUSE. WE CURRENTLY DO NOT HAVE, AS SENATOR NOTED BEFORE, CHILD CARE OPERATIONS. OUR DEPARTMENTS ARE NOT CURRENTLY ALIGNED TO PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES, BUT WE AMBICION THAT IF THE SERVICES WERE TO BE PROVIDED, IT WILL PROBABLY BE UNDER THE HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT. IF THAT WAS THE CASE, WE WILL NEED TO CONDUCT FURTHER REVIEW TO FULLY DETERMINE THE STAFFING LEVELS. BUT JUST, AGAIN, MAKING SOME ASSUMPTIONS, WE FORCEED THAT PURSUANT TO FLORIO STATUS, WE WILL NEED AROUND 17 STAFF POSITIONS FOR DIRECT SERVICES. THAT IS ASSUMING THAT AN EQUAL DISTRIBUTION ACROSS THE AGE GROUPS FROM NEWBORN TO FIVE YEARS OF AGE. THEN WE ALSO MADE SOME ASSUMPTIONS, AND YOU WILL NOTICE THAT I KEEP REPEATING THAT WORK, RIGHT, BECAUSE WE WERE TRYING JUST TO PROVIDE SOME BACKGROUND INFORMATION AS TO HOW DISC WILL OPERATE. WE MADE SOME ASSUMPTIONS AS TO THE POTENTIAL PAY GRATES OF THOSE POSITIONS. WE ASSUME AS WELL THAT FOR ADMINISTRATIVE POSITIONS WILL BE REQUIRED, AND IF WE TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THOSE POSITIONS PLUS THE APPLICABLE PAY GRATES, WE GET AN AGGREGATE COST AMOUNT FOR OPERATIONAL COST OF 1.4 MILLION DOLLARS AND I'M ROUNDING. AND AT THAT POINT WE ALSO PROJECTED WHAT WILL BE THE MONTHLY COST BASED ON A 120 CHILDREN ENROLLMENT LEVEL. WE HAD STAFF CONDUCT A SURVEY OF WHAT ARE THE CURRENT MONTHLY COST FOR SHILD CARE OPERATIONS IN BROWER COUNTY, AND THIS SURVEY WAS CONDUCTED BASED ON PUBLICLY AVAILABLE INFORMATION. THEY DID A SEARCH AS TO WHAT OTHERS ARE SHARING OUT THERE, AND YOU HAVE IT BASED ON AGE GROUP. OBVIOUSLY THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DEALING WITH A NEWBORN AND DEALING WITH A PRESCHOOL KID, RIGHT? SO YOU HAVE THOSE AS A RANGE, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY IT VARIES. THEN, AND IT'S FURTHER MORE, IT'S BETTER DETAILED IN THE BAMO, BUT WE MADE THE ASSUMPTION IF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WISHES TO PROVIDE THIS AS A SERVICE FOR COUNTY EMPLOYEES FOR OUR WORKFORCE, LET US LOOK AT THE DISTRIBUTION OF THAT WORKFORCE. SO OUR HUMAN RESOURCES DIVISION ASSISTED US WITH BASICALLY PULLING ALL THE DATA FOR THE WORKFORCE AND IDENTIFYING THAT AROUND 10 PERCENT OF THE COUNTY WORKFORCE FALLS IN THE AGE GROUP BETWEEN 25 AND 34. AND WE ARE HIGHLIGHTING THAT GROUP BECAUSE THAT IS TYPICALLY THE ONE WITH THE HIGHEST LIKELIHOOD OF HAVING INFANTS, TODDLERS, AND PRESCHOOL-AGE CHILDREN. THEN WE ALSO TOOK A LOOK AS TO OUT OF THE WORKFORCE, HOW MANY OF THOSE COLLEAGUES WORK HERE IN THE CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE, AND I'M SAYING THAT BECAUSE THE NEW GOVERNMENT CENTER IS LATED, AS YOU KNOW, TO BE ACROSS THE STREET, AND OF OUR WORKFORCE, ABOUT 44 PERCENT IS LOCATED WORKS IN FORT LAUDERDALE. OF THAT SAME WORKFORCE, AROUND 12 PERCENT WORKS IN THE CITY. THEN WE TOOK A LOOK AT THE CURRENT SHILD CARE NETWORK THAT EXISTS IN THE COUNTY, AND WE JUST HAD OUR TEAM FROM THE PERMITTING DIVISION, CONSUMER PROTECTION DIVISION PULL SOME DATA. WE HAVE IN THE COUNTY 643 LICENSE FACILITIES THAT ARE PROVIDING SERVICES TO AN AGGREGATE AMOUNT OF 70,383 CHILDREN. WE THEN DID A RADIUS. WE WANTED TO HAVE AN IDEA AS TO HOW MANY PROVIDERS WE HAVE WITHIN A 10-MILE RADIUS FROM THE NEW GOVERNMENT CENTER SIDE, AND THAT'S AROUND 421 PROVIDERS. THEN, TO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO PROVIDE THE BOARD DIFFERENT FACTORS TO CONSIDER, WE ASKED SIMILAR COUNTIES, WHAT SERVICES ARE YOU CURRENTLY PROVIDING? SO OUR HUMAN RESOURCES DIVISION SURVEYED MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, PALM BISH COUNTY, HILLSBORROW IN ORANGE COUNTY, FAULTON, AND KING COUNTY AS WELL AS THE BROWER COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS TO DETERMINE WHAT SERVICES THEY WERE PROVIDING. THEY FOUND THAT MOST LURISDICTION SURVEYED DO NOT HAVE ON-SITE CHILD CARE, THAT MIAMI-DADE OFFERS DISCOUNTED CHILD CARE IN A FACILITY NEXT TO THEIR MAIN GOVERNMENT CENTER, WHICH IS OPERATED BY A THIRD-PARTY PROVIDED, THAT BROWER COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOL PROVIDES SERVICES TO CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN AT SELECT LOCATIONS, AND THAT ORANGE COUNTY DOES THE SAME BUT BY OFFERING DISCOUNTING RATES FROM DIFFERENT DAY CARE FACILITIES IN THE AREA. THEN THAT TOOK US TO OUR NEXT STEP. THEN WE EXPANDED THE ANALYSIS TO CONSIDER, ARE THERE OTHER OPTIONS OUT THERE, RATHER THAN PHYSICAL SPACE, WHEREBY ASSISTANCE FOR CHILD CARE FACILITIES IS BEING PROVIDED, AND THAT TOOK US THEN TO THE EARLY LEARNING COALITION OF BROWER MODEL, WHICH IS BASICALLY A BAUSCHER SYSTEM. SO WITH THAT IDEA, AND THEY CURRENTLY PROVIDE BAUSCHERS BASED ON ELIGIBILITY, RIGHT? AND FOR A FAMILY OF FOUR, THE REQUIRED INCOME WILL BE BELOW 55% OF THE STATE MEDIAN INCOME, WHICH IS BASICALLY $56,685 OR LESS ON AN ANNUAL BASIS. TAKING THAT IDEA INTO ACCOUNT, WHEN WE DID, WE THEN DID AN ADDITIONAL PROJECTION, MY APOLOGIES, WE DID AN ADDITIONAL PROJECTION UTILIZING THE SAME THEORETICAL NUMBER, AND I EMPHASIZE IT'S JUST AN ASSUMPTION, OF 100 PARTICIPANTS, PARTICIPANTS, AND WE SET A REFERENCE MONTHLY BENEFIT OF $150 PER MONTH, RIGHT? AND WE DID A CALCULATION JUST TO PROVIDE THE BOARD KIND OF A HIGH LEVEL OVERVIEW OF WHAT IT COULD BE. SO IF YOU WERE TO ESTABLISH A $150 PER MONTH VOUCHER PROGRAM FOR 120 PARTICIPANTS ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, THAT WILL REPRESENT ABOUT $260,000 OF FISCAL IMPACT. AND THAT $150 PER MONTH, IT'S AROUND 11% OF THE AVERAGE COST THAT WE IDENTIFIED ON SLIDE 7. AGAIN, NUMBERS CAN BE ADJUSTED. IT WAS JUST FOR THE MATTER OF BEING ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU A GENERAL IDEA ON DIFFERENT TOPICS. AND THAT BRINGS US THEN TO THE END OF THE PRESENTATION. THANK YOU, ISUMI. AND I KNOW THAT WE JUST THREW A LOT OF INFORMATION AT YOU. AGAIN, THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, SHE DETAILED ACTUALLY, AND A GREAT SPECIFICITY IN APRIL 21ST MEMO. SO, IT WAS REALLY JUST TO GIVE YOU GUYS SOME OPTIONS AND SOME CONSIDERATIONS BASED ON THE CONVERSATION WE HEARD AT THE LAST WORKSHOP ON THE GOVERNMENT CENTER. SO, AND IF I CAN REALLY QUICKLY CLARIFY SOMETHING THAT I MENTIONED TO YOU. I RESPONDED TO SENATOR RICH, AND I DIDN'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME. I JUST WANT TO SHARE IT, PUT IT ON THE RECORD SO YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF OUR WORKFORCE. WHILE WE DID NOT ASK OUR WORKFORCE IF THEY WOULD UTILIZE IT IF THEY WERE HERE, AND WE HAD ONE, SINCE 2019 WHEN THE PARENTAL PAID PARENTAL LEAVE PROGRAM WAS PUT INTO PLACE, ON AVERAGE WE HAVE ABOUT 100 EMPLOYEES A YEAR THAT UTILIZE PAID PARENTAL LEAVE. SO THAT WOULD BE MEAN THAT THEY ARE TAKING THE TIME OFF TO TEND AND BE WITH THEIR SMALL CHILDREN OR ADOPTIONS THAT THEY HAVE. SO THAT KIND OF ALSO INFORMED THAT INFORMATION. I JUST WANTED TO AT LEAST SHARE THAT WITH YOU. I'M GOING TO GO AROUND THE ROOM IF THAT'S OKAY AND SEE IF ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS. WE'RE JUST GOING TO GO FROM LEFT TO RIGHT. YOU WANT TO START? ANY QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW? OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY. CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE FIRST SLIDE? OKAY. THE ONE RIGHT BEFORE THAT. SO JUST TO CONFIRM, THE COST AND HARD COST OF THE NEW GOVERNMENT CENTER AS WE HAVE THE SKINNY VERSION IS $678 MILLION LESS $15.4 MILLION. ALL RIGHT. SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT $660 MILLION. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S THE NUMBER THAT WE'RE GOING WITH? THAT'S IT. WE'LL SAY IT. WHAT'S THE NUMBER? YES. 663. 663 IS WHAT WE'RE PAYING FOR THE NEW GOVERNMENT CENTER. $663 MILLION. YES. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE KNOWS THAT I VOTED AGAINST THIS WHOLE GORE PROPERTY TO BEGIN WITH. NOW LET'S TALK ABOUT THE ISSUE THAT WE'RE HERE. I THINK YOU DID AN AMAZING JOB WITH YOUR PRESENTATION, AND YOU'RE VERY, VERY THOROUGH AND VERY DETAILED. I CAN SAY THE ONLY THING I DISAGREE IS YOU'VE SAID THROUGHOUT YOUR PRESENTATION THE BOARD ASKED YOU TO DO THIS. THE BOARD DIDN'T ASK YOU TO DO THIS. SOME COMMISSIONERS ON THE BOARD ASKED YOU TO DO THIS. THERE IS NO WAY ON GOD'S GREEN EARTH THAT WE SHOULD SPEND $15.4 MILLION AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS A YEAR FOR A CHILD CARE CENTER THAT WE DON'T HAVE NOW THAT WE CAN'T AFFORD AND THAT WOULDN'T BE USED BY OUR EMPLOYEES. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET FIVE VOTES TO VOTE ON THIS. I KNOW COMMISSIONER RICH'S STUDIES THAT SHE READS. THEY'RE ALL PIE IN THE SKY AND THEY'RE BEAUTIFUL STUDIES. YES, IF YOU SPEND MORE TIME WITH YOUR CHILD. BUT PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTY WORK. THEY'RE PAYING A FORTUNE FOR CHILD CARE. WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET DIFFERENT EMPLOYEES BY DOING THIS. AND I THINK THIS WHOLE EXERCISE, IT'S BEAUTIFUL THAT YOU'RE SHOWED IT TO US. THERE'S NO WAY YOU'RE GETTING FIVE VOTES FOR THIS. BUT IF SO, PUT IT ON AN AGENDA AND LET FIVE PEOPLE ON THE RECORD VOTE FOR THIS. SENATOR GILLER. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I HAVE A COUPLE QUICK QUESTIONS. I AM NOT PREPARED TO VOTE FOR THE ADDITIONAL 15.4, BUT I AGREE WITH A LOT OF WHAT SENATOR RICH SAID ABOUT THE NEED FOR CHILD CARE. AND I THINK, ISME, THAT YOU, AND AGAIN, I MUST COMPLIMENT YOU ON THE THOROUGH RESEARCH THAT YOU DID. IF YOU CAN MOVE FORWARD A COUPLE OF SLIDES TO GET TO THE PART ABOUT IF WE CHOOSE TO ADD A CHILD CARE BENEFIT. I THINK THAT IT WOULD, YOU KNOW, AS A GENERAL RULE, I DON'T THINK THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE DOING WHAT THE PRIVATE SECTOR IS CURRENTLY DOING. AND I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE IN COMPETITION WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR. BUT I AGREE WITH A LOT OF WHAT SENATOR RICH WAS SAYING ABOUT WE ALL KNOW HOW IMPOSSIBLY HIGH THE COST OF CHILD CARE ARE. AND THAT IT MAY, IN FACT, BE APPROPRIATE FOR US TO CONSIDER EITHER, AND I'M OPEN TO THIS, A SUPPLEMENT. I DON'T KNOW, CAN WE, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS COUNTY, WHO DO I ASK ABOUT LABOR RELATIONS? IS THAT KEVIN? IS THAT, IS IT, CAN WE, CAN WE AGREE TO SUBSIDIZE CHILD CARE ONLY FOR EMPLOYEES THAT WORK AT COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, WHEREVER THAT MAY BE, AND NOT SUBSIDIZE OUR EMPLOYEES IN IDENTICAL POSITIONS THAT WORK IN OTHER LOCATIONS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY? WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT. OR IS THAT A COLLECTED BARGAINING ISSUE? WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT IT. IT WOULD IMPACT ON, ANY BENEFIT WOULD, COULD POSSIBLY HAVE A COLLECTED BARGAINING IMPACT ON IT. AND WHENEVER YOU DO WITH COLLECTED BARGAINING, IF YOU'RE SINGLING OUT A CERTAIN GROUP AND IT DOESN'T APPLY TO EVERYBODY, IT MAKES IT VERY COMPLICATED. OKAY. BECAUSE ISAMAY'S NUMBERS THERE ARE TALKING ABOUT $120,000 AT $216,000, BUT THAT'S ONLY FOR THE COUNTY EMPLOYEES THAT WOULD WORK AT COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, CORRECT? SO AS PROPOSED OR DESCRIBED HERE, IT COULD BE ANYBODY. I MEAN, WE WOULD ASSUME THAT IT WOULD PROBABLY BE PEOPLE THAT WORKED IN THIS AREA BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT GOING TO DRIVE, YOU KNOW, FAR AWAY FROM WHERE YOU LIVE. WHEN YOU CAME UP WITH THE DEMAND FOR $120,000, WAS THAT BASED ON THE NUMBER OF, WHAT WAS THAT BASED ON? PROFESSIONAL ESTIMATE BASED ON THE BUILDING, THE PROGRAMMING, AND THE NUMBER OF. SO IT WAS BASED ON THE PEOPLE WORKING IN THAT BUILDING, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT WAS THE ASSUMPTION. ALL RIGHT, SO THAT'S 700, ROUGHLY, EMPLOYEES OR SO, WHICH IS ROUGHLY WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THAT, OF OUR COUNTY? I KNOW WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, 8,000 EMPLOYEES, BUT. WE HAVE ABOUT 7,000 EMPLOYEES. OKAY. SO IS THAT 260? ABOUT 10 PERCENT. SO THE FOLKS THAT WOULD BE IN GOVERNMENT CENTER EAST IS ROUGHLY 10 PERCENT. 10 PERCENT. AND SO YOU THINK BASED ON THAT, 10 PERCENT OF THE 700, YOU'D HAVE 120 CHILD CARE PARTICIPANTS? SO, COMMISSIONER, WE MADE AN ESTIMATE, AGAIN, AN EDUCATED ESTIMATE. IT'S NOTHING ELSE, RIGHT? BASED ON THE BUILDING THAT WAS PROGRAMED AND BASED ON THE COUNTY'S WORKFORCE, RIGHT? AND THE REASON, THE QUESTION YOU'RE ASKING IS, WILL IT BE THEN LIMITED JUST TO THE COUNTY EMPLOYEES HERE, RIGHT, THAT COME TO THE GOVERNMENT CENTER? I WILL ARGUE THEY WILL HAVE A PREFERENCE TO THE CHILD CARE FACILITY HERE, RIGHT? BUT IT WILL BE OPEN TO ANY COUNTY THAT MAY NEED THE SERVICE AND IS WILLING TO COME TO THIS FACILITY. THAT'S WHY WE INCLUDED THE INFORMATION REGARDING WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE WORKFORCE WORKS IN THIS. I DON'T WANT TO ASK ANY MORE QUESTIONS. IN CONCLUSION, MR. MAYOR, IF WE'RE GOING TO DO SOMETHING, I THINK BASED ON THESE NUMBERS, AND I'M NOT NECESSARILY OPPOSED. SENATOR RICH RAISED SOME VERY GOOD POINTS. AND WE ALL KNOW ABOUT THE PROBLEM WITH WORKFORCE. BUT I WOULD NOT WANT TO PAY $16 MILLION IN CAPITAL FOR ADDITIONAL SPACE. I WOULD NOT WANT TO BE COMPETING WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR. IF WE'RE GOING TO DO SOMETHING, I THINK WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING, IF, IS DO A SUBSIDY, SO THAT OUR EMPLOYEES THERE CAN HELP PAY FOR PRIVATE CHILD CARE. IT WOULD NOT BE COMPETING AGAINST THE PRIVATE SECTOR, AND IT WOULD BE SUBSTANTIALLY CHEAPER WHILE STILL MEETING THE SAME GOAL AS I BELIEVE THAT SENATOR RICH WAS TALKING ABOUT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I'M GOING TO JUST INTERJECT REAL QUICKLY AND THEN PASS IT ON TO YOU. DID YOU GUYS, YOU WANT ME, YOU WANT TO COME BACK NOW? I CAN GO AFTER YOU IF YOU WANT. NO, GO AHEAD. YEAH, SO I THINK CHILD CARE IS VERY IMPORTANT TO ANY WORK FORCE. AND I REALLY DIDN'T SEE, OBVIOUSLY WE WOULDN'T, I DON'T BELIEVE WE WOULD BE OPERATING A CHILD CARE ITSELF. THAT WOULD BE A THIRD PARTY. BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT YOU HAD LOOKED AT, I THINK, THE NUMBER OF CHILD CARE FACILITIES IN AND AROUND THIS AREA, BUT DID YOU DO A STUDY OF THE COSTS? SO RIGHT NOW AS IT IS, AROUND THIS AREA, YOU HAVE HOW MANY CHILD CARE FACILITIES? WE HAVE 643 WITHIN, IN THE COUNTY, 421 WITHIN A 10-MILE RADIUS OF THE GOER PROPERTY, MEANING TO SAY THIS AREA, ACROSS THE STREET. OKAY. AND I THINK IT WOULD HAVE BEEN HELPFUL TO SEE HOW MANY EMPLOYEES UTILIZE THE ONES IN THE AREA ALREADY, IF EMPLOYEES ARE UTILIZING THEM. DEAD WILL NEED TO BE PERSONAL INFORMATION DISCLOSURE, MEANING TO SAY THAT- I MEAN, IF THEY WANT TO GIVE THE INFORMATION, YOU CAN ONLY ASK, BECAUSE, I MEAN, IT'S LIKE, WELL, HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE CURRENTLY, THE SURVEY, HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE CURRENTLY USING CHILD CARES IN THIS AREA? AND WOULD THEY BE INTERESTED IN A CHILD CARE AT THE GOVERNMENT CENTER? BECAUSE IT MAY BE THAT THERE IS NO INTEREST BECAUSE THIS IS ALREADY PROVIDING WHAT THEY NEED. THEY WOULDN'T WANT TO DO SOMETHING THAT IS ALREADY IN PLACE. I LIKE THE IDEA IF COST IS A PROBLEM OF THE VOUCHER SYSTEM, BECAUSE AT SOME POINT, PEOPLE NEED HELP, ESPECIALLY SINGLE PARENTS. AND MANY OF THEM, MANY WOMEN, ESPECIALLY AFTER COVID, CHOSE NOT TO ENTER INTO THE WORKFORCE BECAUSE IT'S SO EXPENSIVE AND STAY HOME, AND SO THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM. AND I SPEAK AS A WOMAN, AND REALLY A LOT OF THIS IS BASED ON OUR EXPERIENCES AS A SINGLE PARENT. AND I WAS FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO BE WORKING AT MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, AND THE CAROL CENTER, WHICH WAS ADJACENT TO THE GOVERNMENT CENTER, WAS A REAL LIFELINE BECAUSE YOU COULD DROP YOUR CHILD THERE, AND AS SENATOR NANWICH HAS SAID, HAVE THAT BONDING TIME, DURING ESPECIALLY LUNCH TIME, WITH YOUR CHILD. AND AT THAT TIME, THE GOVERNMENT CENTER GAVE A SUBSIDY. IT WASN'T OPERATED BY THE COUNTY, BUT THEY OFFERED A SUBSIDY TO EMPLOYEES WHO UTILIZE THE FACILITY. SO MAYBE THERE'S SOME KIND OF PROGRAM THAT COULD BE DEVELOPED WITH MAYBE EITHER THESE 425 PROVIDERS OR SOMEBODY THAT'S WILLING TO ACCEPT A SUBSIDY IF WE CAN'T HAVE OUR OWN BUILDING. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I KNOW THE QUESTION WAS ALSO ASKED AS TO WHO WOULD HAVE ACCESS IF IT WAS THE LOCATION WAS DOWN HERE. I THINK IF YOU USE THE VOUCHER SYSTEM, THEN IT APPLIES ANYWHERE. AND THAT'S MY REASON FOR SUPPORTING THE VOUCHER SYSTEM. BUT I THINK WE NEED TO HELP TO GET PEOPLE BACK INTO THE WORKFORCE BECAUSE THE COST FOR KEEPING KIDS IN A NURSERY OR WHEREVER IS VERY, VERY EXPENSIVE. SO WHATEVER WE CAN DO, I KNOW THEY'LL APPRECIATE. BUT I BELIEVE THE VOUCHER SYSTEM IS THE MOST EFFECTIVE, EFFICIENT, AND COST SAVINGS ARE THERE. I THINK THERE'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE NOT BEING CONSIDERED HERE. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE OPEN UP FIRST PAGE, PROJECT STATUS, I JUST CONFIRMED THIS WITH LENNY. IF YOU LOOK AT THE FOURTH BULLET, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT GOING TO EVEN BE ABLE TO HIRE SOMEBODY, PROGRESSIVE DESIGN, PROBABLY UNTIL THE END OF THIS YEAR, BEGINNING OF NEXT YEAR. SO WE'RE 27, FIRST QUARTER 27. AND THEN IT'S GOING TO TAKE ANOTHER YEAR UNTIL THAT DESIGN BUILD. SO NOW YOU'RE IN 28. THE BUILDING MAY TAKE TWO TO THREE YEARS. NOW YOU'RE IN 2030, 2031. AND HOW ARE, YOU'RE GIVING COSTS FOR, WHETHER IT BE CHILD CARE OR GIVING COSTS FOR A 600. THESE NUMBERS HAVE TO BE ABSOLUTELY ON THE LOW END, BECAUSE COSTS ARE, KEEP GOING UP. I CAN'T SEE HOW COSTS ARE GOING DOWN. SO WHAT MAY BE, LET ME JUST FINISH. WHAT MIGHT BE $1,400 A MONTH TODAY COULD BE $2,400, $30,000 IN 2030, 2031. SO TO PUT NUMBERS HERE AND TO EVEN SAY THAT THE SKINNY IS 660 MILLION IS REALLY, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT, IT'S REALLY HYPOTHETICALLY LOW. WE'RE PROBABLY TALKING IN THE 700s, 800 MILLION, BECAUSE NOW, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY MIKE CURRY, WHO'S THE EXPERT IN CONSTRUCTION HERE WOULD KNOW, TODAY OF 660 MILLION, FOUR OR FIVE YEARS FROM NOW IS, YOU'RE TALKING, I ASSUME, WHAT PERCENT MORE? OVER 700-something MILLION? MAYOR, I BELIEVE ESCALATION HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN THE ESTIMATE BUILD UPON THE TIME FRAME, BUT YOU ARE CORRECT. YOU ARE LOOKING OUT SEVERAL YEARS AND THERE WILL BE ESCALATION. I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT PERCENTAGE THAT WAS BUILT IN TO THOSE ESTIMATED COSTS. I THOUGHT THESE ARE TODAY'S DOLLARS. SO A COUPLE THINGS. THE ESTIMATE FOR THE 663 MILLION DOLLARS OVER ALL COST IS THE INFORMATION WE PRESENTED DURING THE LAST WORKSHOP AND IT INCLUDED ESCALATION IS STILL AN ESTIMATE, RECOGNIZING THAT THE SIGN HAS NOT TAKEN PLACE, THAT WE HAVE NOT GOTTEN BIDS, RIGHT? WHAT ABOUT THESE NUMBERS FOR THE CHILD CARE? THE INFORMATION REGARDING THE CHILD CARE IS BASED ON THE PER SQUARE FOOD COST THAT WAS USED AS WELL FOR THE NEW GOVERNMENT CENTER FACILITIES. SO WE PROJECTED THAT INFORMATION, EXACTLY THE SAME BASE FOR PROVIDING U.S. WHAT KIND OF ESCALATION HAVE YOU HAD? ARE WE TALKING TEN PERCENT, FIVE PERCENT? SEVEN PERCENT. SO IS MIKE KERWIT VERIFY THINGS ARE GOING UP WAY MORE THAN SEVEN PERCENT? THEY HAVE GONE UP MUCH MORE THAN SEVEN PERCENT. HOWEVER, I BELIEVE THE NUMBER, THE SEVEN PERCENT ESCALATOR IS GOING FORWARD. BUT YES, AS OF TODAY. I JUST THINK WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT THESE NUMBERS THAT WE'RE GETTING ARE, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY MAY NOT BE ACCURATE, NOT INTENTIONALLY, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY YOU CAN'T PREDICT WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A ROBUST ECONOMY OR WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A RECESSION. BUT I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT. AND THE SECOND THING, RIGHT NOW WE'RE FOCUSED ON 2%, 2.5% OF THE ENTIRE BUDGET, 660. YOU KNOW, CHILD CARE. WE'RE GOING TO SPEND THIS AFTERNOON TALKING ABOUT THE 2% OF OUR BUDGET RATHER THAN THE 98% OF THIS HUGE COST. BUT I'LL MOVE IT ON. I AGREE WITH YOU. STAFF JUST DOESN'T KNOW. AND I DON'T SAY THIS IN A BAD WAY. THEY HEARD AT THE LAST MEETING, DO YOU WANT A CHILD CARE FACILITY IN THIS NEW BUILDING? THEY JUST NEED A YES OR NO. AND THE ANSWER IS NOT WHETHER WE, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US UP HERE BELIEVE THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE BETTER THINGS DONE WITH CHILD CARE. DO YOU WANT TO SEE THIS BUILDING, THIS IN THE NEW BUILDING? I'M SAYING NO, WE CAN'T AFFORD IT. AND WHEN WE TALK IN THE FUTURE ABOUT AN ADDITIONAL BENEFIT THAT WE GIVE OUT FOR CHILD CARE, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THAT THAT NUMBER IS GOING TO COME BACK IN THE TENS OF MILLIONS WHEN WE LOOK AT IT THROUGH ALL OF OUR STAFF. BECAUSE EVERY CONTRACTUAL EMPLOYEE IS GOING TO SAY, IF I DON'T HAVE A CHILD, I HAVE AN AGED PARENT AND I WANT THAT, IT'S A BENEFIT. ALL WE HAVE TODAY IS, DO YOU WANT TO SEE A CHILD CARE FACILITY IN THIS NEW BUILDING THAT THE COUNTY OWNS AND OPERATE? MY ANSWER IS NO. THE REST OF, YOU KNOW, WE COULD COME BACK TO THE POLICE THING IN A LITTLE WHILE, BUT WE'LL SPEND HOURS ON THIS. AND, MR. MAYOR, THAT'S EXACTLY THE ANSWER THAT WE NEEDED TODAY FROM EACH OF YOU, YES OR NO, FOR THE BUILDING. THAT'S TRULY ALL. BUT LET ME SAY SOMETHING, IF YOU DON'T MATTER. WE'VE ALREADY SAID YES OR NO. VICE MAYOR, I'LL GET TO YOU IN A MINUTE. I'LL GET TO YOU IN A MINUTE. ONE MINUTE. I GOT SENATOR RICH. SENATOR RICH IS SCHEDULED NEXT. I'LL COME BACK TO YOU. OH, I GUESS SHE'S HANDING IT OFF TO BEAMPUR. OKAY. OKAY. I ACTUALLY THINK WE'RE MISSING THE BIGGER PICTURE. WE LICENSE CHILD CARE. WE'RE THE ONES WHO LICENSE ALL THE CHILD CARE CENTERS IN THIS COUNTY. WE SHOULD BE SHOWING THE MODEL SO THAT EVERY SINGLE CHILD CARE THAT WE LICENSE CAN COME TO OUR FACILITY AND SEE HOW IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE DONE. YOU USE THIS NOT AS A, JUST AS A BENEFIT, BUT YOU USE IT AS A MODEL SO THAT EVERY CHILD, BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE TO TELL EVERYBODY, THOSE FIRST FIVE YEARS ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT. WE NEED TO HAVE ALL 643 LICENSE FACILITIES BE AS MUCH QUALITY AS POSSIBLE. YOU HAVE TO SHOW PEOPLE HOW TO DO THAT. THAT'S WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING. THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY YOU WANT TO DO THIS. AND IT BECOMES YOUR, MUCH LIKE THE CHILDREN'S TRUST FUND DOWN IN MIAMI, THEY HAVE MODEL FACILITIES. THEY BRING ALL THE CHILD, THEY COME IN THERE, HERE'S A CONFERENCE, HERE'S PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT. YOU DO IT THERE. YOU SAY, HERE'S HOW YOU SHOULD SET UP YOUR ROOM. HERE'S HOW YOU DO THESE THINGS. IT'S A MUCH BIGGER PICTURE THAN JUST PROVIDING THAT. THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING YES. I'M REALLY GLAD TO HEAR SPIRIT. THE SPIRIT ALREADY HAS IT THERE. AND IT DOESN'T SURPRISE ME BECAUSE ALL CORPORATIONS... I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION. I KNOW THEY HAVE AN AMENITY DECK NEXT DOOR. THERE ARE, BUT AS, I MEAN, WE KNOW, A LOT OF CORPORATIONS HAVE ADOPTED THIS FOR... ANYWAY, SO THAT'S THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS, THAT, YOU KNOW, FOR OUR PEOPLE WHO DO THE LICENSING, TO BE ABLE TO SHOW, HERE'S HOW YOU DO IT RIGHT, I'M DONE. MR. MAYOR, WHY DON'T YOU USE THE OTHER ONE, SINCE YOU BROKE THAT ONE, PLEASE. I JUST WANT TO LET EVERYBODY IN THE ROOM KNOW THAT WE HAVE FOOD HERE, A LOT OF EXTRA FOOD, AND SO DON'T BE SHY TO GET IT. JUST LET YOU KNOW WE HAVE A LOT OF FOOD HERE. ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER FISHER. COMMISSIONER FISHER, THANK YOU FOR BREAKING THE MICROPHONE. YOU'RE WELCOME. I'M GOING TO BE BRIEFED BECAUSE I THINK A LOT OF IT IS SAID, BUT I JUST WANTED TO... I WANTED A COUPLE THINGS. THANK YOU FOR THE COST COMPARISON VERSUS THIRD-PARTY, VERSUS WHAT WE WOULD DO. WHAT CONCERNS ME IS THE FACT THAT THE LICENSURE IS FINE, BUT THE LIABILITY. in today's world that we're living in, liability issues and insurance premiums can go to the roof, in my opinion. I don't think government should be in that business, right? I think we are here to serve the government entities itself. I don't think we need to be in the child care business. And I'm trying to, I don't think you can even justify the cost versus the service, right? So what's $14 or $15 million, is that really an ROI? I don't think it's even there. So that concerns me. And what Senator Gellar talked about, I don't want to be competing with the private sector. There's 460-something within a 10-mile radius. You know, let them do what they do best, right? I don't think government needs to be in the child care business. And again, taking on that liability, to me, is just not where I would want to be at the end of the day. So that's my comments, Mayor. I don't want to belabor the point. Thank you. Short and sweet. Love it. Senator Ridge, you're not recommending it. So first, so that wouldn't, that would be a shock. First of all, let me just say that this whole thing about third party, whatever, we already do this in our, on a small scale in our, in our, in our, in our court, in our courthouse. We have a child care center. It's run by the Y. It's not run by us. We wouldn't be running this. It would be a third party. In Dade County, the Y runs the, the child care center. So you, you, we're not talking about us running this. What we are talking about, to me, is we pride ourselves, supposedly, in being a very progressive county. You know, doing the right thing for our employees, and, um, for people in this community. I want to just tell you, just read something to you. Renee Jaffe, who's the CEO of the Children's, of the, um, Early Learning Coalition. This was a, a report she gave last month at the, uh, Coordinating Council meeting. So, so much for all these child care centers, because she, um, the, the EOC is in a holding pattern on the budget, on the budget. This is a state. Uh, we would not be, uh, subject to this. And she hopes the legislature does not make any additional cuts. Um, approximately 2,000 kids are on the waiting list, with 700 getting enrolled. There's, there's no money there. I mean, we, we, we can do the model. We can do what we should be doing here in, in, in, in our, in our new center. Um, I think, I think that, you know, we, we, we need to, we need to talk about all these things that we're doing and we shouldn't be doing this. We ought to be talking about the needs of our families. And that includes the people that work for us and people, people, people who, who are not working for us now. They very well decide, you know, that's a good place to work because they have a child care center where I can have my child near me. I mean, there are all kinds of things and all kinds of data that proves this. I don't know that we have to make, we don't have to make any of those decisions, but I would hate for us today to lock out, to lock out the possibility of us having recommending the possibility of having a child care center in our new building. And I, I think it's just incredible that Broward County would be at this point saying, no, we don't want to have a child care center. So, um, you know, I hope that you all can see your way through to leaving it on the agenda. And, um, as I said, I mean, we've heard all this thing about costs and, and you know, we, we, we don't know what this building is going to cost. We don't know what anything is going to cost in it. I do know the numbers that have given out here are high, probably 10% higher than what child care costs already. But, but I, I, I'm just, you know, in a way I'm shocked that we would not be supporting that in this county. All right. I'm going to go around the room, do a quick consensus, yay or nay on considering this. Yeah. Oh, Vice Mayor McKenzie, you're next. Yeah, I'll be quick. Um, I only wanted a child care piece in for an option. My main focus is the new governmental center. So I think if we separate them, I wouldn't know who doesn't want child care, but I think most of us, each time I've been in the room, had a consensus to move forward with a governmental center and not to disrupt where we are. Keep moving forward. Thank you. Vice Mayor, we are moving forward. Nothing's stopping, uh, with even with this discussion. So I'll start with, uh, Michael, you Dean, cause I don't know where he stands on this. Um, no to having a, uh, child care, child care center in the government building. Well, I don't think it's going to serve enough people. I don't think it's cost effective. I think it hurts the private sector. And I think taxpayers who are struggling to pay for their own child care don't have the dollars to pay for the 120 employees in Broward County. I'm a no, and... All right. I don't need dissertation, just your no. Commissioner Davis, where are you? Yes or no? Um, I, I like the idea of a child care center, but if it's, I don't have all the data that I would like to make that decision. So I don't have the, you know, input from the employees. I don't have, uh, whether it's the third part, if it's the Y, if they can facilitate a lower cost for our employer. I don't, I don't have enough information to make a decision. You're up in the air. I, I would be opposed, if we're talking at the Gore building location, I would be opposed to paying the 16 million or whatever in capital funds. If we're talking at, uh, at the, um, spirit headquarters and there's already existing space, that's a different story. I don't want to pay the extra 16 million, but I agree that it, this may be a desirable benefit to give. And we can discuss that later, but I am opposed to paying capital at the Gore building. No for Gore building. Okay. So we, so right now there's no consensus and obviously it doesn't matter because design build isn't going to be for another year, over a year, um, year and a half away. So there's, so let's move on. Okay. So Mr. Mayor, just to, to recap, then you're just saying from the, from the, uh, commissioners in the room and, and commissioner and vice mayor McKenzie, um, there's no consensus for childcare. Right. There's no majority consensus. There's no consensus to put it in or there's no consensus to take it out. Well, well, we do need to know one way or another to move forward with the, the project. Well, we can't vote here. No, but you can give us consensus, but the, the statement that, uh, commissioner, uh, Senator Geller just said. Senator Geller. Is accurate. Senator Geller. To move forward, you need five commissioners. Right now, I don't, there's not five yeses here, but let's move on. Thank you, sir. This is our, um, airport, uh, law enforcement. Yes. Okay. So, and if you may have. By the way, before we start with the airport law enforcement, I would like to let everybody know, and I'd like to quote Sheriff Tony. He says, kudos to the Broward County commissioners for doing their due diligence on this. So, uh, I want to let everybody know. I, I got that a direct quote on his, uh, Instagram account. Anyway, so kudos to us. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Allow me to introduce our team as they come, start sitting next to us. Um, for this conversation on the feasibility of creating, uh, Broward County law enforcement agency to secure the Fort Lauderdale, uh, to secure Fort Lauderdale, um, Hollywood International Airport. To my left, you're gonna see Michael Ruiz sitting next to me. Um, next to him is, um, uh, Senor Gale, our airport director. I don't see Michael Ruiz sitting next to you. Michael Ruiz sitting next to you. He's about to be. There he is. Um, and at the podium, I believe, or, or actually we have sitting next to him, um, at Denmark, our project manager for Jensen Hughes, who conducted the, the, uh, review. Mr. Denmark, Denmark will take you through the presentation, which highlights Jensen Hughes findings spelled out in greater detail in the report you received Friday. Um, and then you also received the, the, uh, presentation, which they'll go through quickly. Um, before we get to that presentation, I'm just gonna ask Mr. Gale to set the stage. And Mr. Gale, will you kick us off? Thank you. Thank you, County Administrator. Good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Commissioners. Um, just to kind of bring us back, uh, where this started. Uh, you may recall that, uh, our workshop on January 20th, uh, of this year, uh, where we first talked about this. I mentioned that the, the genesis for this was, uh, uh, an outgrowth, if you will, from, uh, County Auditor Melton's report. Uh, on BSO at the airport. There were a number of recommendations identified in that audit of things that we needed to work on with BSO in terms of our day-to-day activities. But the number one recommendation in the report was to evaluate other opportunities of providing law enforcement, uh, at the facility. Uh, we contracted, uh, with a firm called Jensen Hughes. Uh, Jensen Hughes is a, a global firm. They get involved in many, many different disciplines, uh, but, uh, specialize in areas like public safety. And while they had a full team of individuals, uh, working on this that were subject matter experts, uh, with us today is, is Dr. Edward, uh, Denmark. Uh, Dr. Denmark comes to us with, with, uh, decades of experience in the public safety realm, uh, served as a police chief. I think multiple occasions, uh, up in Massachusetts, uh, carries a degree in, uh, criminal justice. Uh, and we've worked closely with Ed and Deborah Kirby and the team as they've made their way through this process. You all received a copy of the consultant's report on Friday. Uh, we're going to let Ed go through the presentations and then we stand ready to, uh, answer any questions that we can. So with that, Dr. Denmark, you want to take us away? Mr. Yale, thank you. Uh, first of all, I'm going to start off by, uh, Mr. Mayor, Vice Mayor, commissioners. Uh, on behalf of Jensen Hughes, I want to thank you all for the opportunity to, uh, to be here and to take this important work for, uh, for the county. Um, you know, for us coming through and being able to, to, to provide an objective overview of, of, of, of the feasibility of this process and project. Something that we think we, uh, are, are, are, are eminently qualified to do. And I will talk, tell you a little bit more about the project team that we put together to put this, um, uh, assessment forward. So a little bit, uh, a background about our team, uh, about our company. Uh, as, as Mr. Gale said, we are a leading public safety, uh, consulting firm. Uh, we, we pride ourselves on, on data-driven analysis. Um, you know, we, we, we do have subject matter expertise. However, all of the opinions that we come up with are based on, on, again, data, data-informed processes and, and best practices from across the multiple disciplines that our team is, uh, has experienced over the, over the course of their careers. Um, we have, uh, we put together a, a purpose-built team for this, uh, for this endeavor. Now, uh, Deb Kirby, who is our, uh, our project, uh, uh, uh, global, global leader, who, uh, had executive oversight of this project. She couldn't be here today, but Deborah comes with, um, experience as the, uh, chief organizational development, uh, division, uh, uh, chief for the Chicago Police Department. Uh, I come, uh, with 31 years of, uh, policing experience, 20 of those years as a chief of police. Uh, on the, on the, uh, uh, professional side of things, my, my area of expertise is in organizational development, leadership, and change management. So, uh, I am the project manager for this project. So, I was, uh, in charge of kind of the overall vision of, of putting this together and how we were gonna present this as, in a, in a, in a format that was understandable and digestible for the, for your decision-making purposes. Uh, you will see Robert Wasserman on there. He's, uh, a member of our project team. He was the former director of the Massachusetts Port Authority, uh, uh, Public Safety Division. So, he's oversaw all the public safety from Massachusetts Port Authority. Uh, we had Donald Zufel. He was the deputy commissioner of public safety for the city of Chicago Aviation Department, who oversaw both O'Hare and, uh, Midway Airport's, uh, safety and security operations. And lastly, we had, uh, Mr. Dwayne McGray, who acted as the, he was, uh, executive director of ALEAN, that's the, uh, the law enforcement agency, uh, airport law enforcement agency network. Um, and in addition to that, he was the chief public safety officer at the Nashville Metropolitan Airport. So, as you can see, we, we tapped, um, uh, a deep bench with a lot of, not just law enforcement expertise and experience, but people that had specific airport and aviation law enforcement and public safety experience in developing this project. So, what we were asked to do, um, we were asked to evaluate the feasibility of an independent airport law enforcement agency for the Broward County Aviation Department. So, we looked at feasibility, uh, we want to make sure we were clear. Feasibility was, was a function of several things. Whether it's possible, whether it's practical, and whether it's desirable. So, we, so, anything as we know, anything is possible if you have the right amount of time and resources to put towards, to board something. But our job is to look at this and say, well, does, is it practical from a cost sense? When we say cost, it's not just dollars and cents, it's value. Are we paying for, or are you paying for, what it is that you believe that you need moving forward to look into the future and to satisfy your current organizational needs and goals? And then the last part of that is, um, is it desirable? You know, moving forward, understanding what it's going to take to get there. Is this something that we want to do based on the information that was provided? So, that's kind of the framework of, of, of how we, we put this assessment together. Um, we, we identified further in the reports and, uh, laid out the advantages and disadvantages that we, that we came up with based on, on our professional opinion. And, and the data we looked at, um, as it relates to risk management and, and some of the other things that we would have to consider, uh, moving forward, making a final decision. Uh, we, we identified, uh, that governance is an issue. Um, compliance risks may, may have issues. Are there some financial implications? So, again, we looked at, you know, both short-term and long-term. What are some of the potential risks associated with this? And then all offered some, some potential solutions to mitigate some of those risks if this were, uh, to be looked at as something that is a, a viable option moving forward. At the end, we, we, we produced a report that we hope will support your informed policy decision. Um, and what we did there was we put together a, a, an example of a transition plan. Now, this is based on, on, on, on forecast numbers that are aggressive. They are high. And they are intentionally done for that purpose. Because in assessing feasibility, we don't want to come in with a low number, have someone making a, a decision based on a low number promise to find that moving forward. And you do actual costs that cost more than you, than you had bargained for. So when we do feasibility studies, we, we come in low with an under, excuse me, we come in high with an understanding that those are projections based on giving you a realistic view on whether or not this is something you should move forward with. Not as a final decision, but move forward as, as your next steps in identifying, um, the, the information that you need to make that final informed decision. Additionally, we added a, a, some recommendations for path forward, uh, some key considerations and some questions. Uh, we suggest the commission asks itself as a, as a, as a, as a body to determine, you know, to help them make that final, um, decision. So how do we do with our methodology? Um, we undertook, uh, uh, a bunch of document reviews, stakeholder interviews, uh, comparative analysis of peer airports. Um, we did some financial and operational modeling. Uh, we did an evaluation of government, governance risks and compliance considerations. And we looked at across the board at best practices and, and again, relied heavily on the expertise and the experience of our subject matter experts who actually did the work in airports and, and, and had to do budgeting and staffing for, for, um, law enforcement operations at an airport. Uh, in our final assessment, we, we took our qualitative and quantitative assessments and, you know, we, we made that final determination of whether or not we believe it's feasible to move forward with, with, um, entertaining the idea or gathering the additional data or taking the time necessary to put together the additional data to make a, uh, to make an informed decision. Uh, we provided a high level cost estimate, uh, model, uh, we provided a phase transition roadmap model and we finally, uh, rounded it out with recommendations and key considerations. So our key findings, um, and this, this is the piece that I think everyone's, um, really interested in. Uh, our assessment identifies it is feasible for the Broward County Aviation Division to establish its own independent law enforcement agency. Again, feasibility from the perspective that it's, there, there are no legal prohibitions. Uh, there, there, there's nothing standing in its way that would break from a regulatory perspective that would stop it from happening. So it is feasible. Uh, again, the, what, what remains to be answered is the practical side and the, and the desirable side, which again, I'll go into a little bit further as we, as we talk about the key findings. And we also found that peer airports, uh, that manage their own internal police operations report greater control over enterprise wide security practices. Uh, again, we surveyed, um, eight similarly situated airports and, um, the ones we found, the ones that ran their own airport, um, law enforcement operations felt like they had more day to day control over, over operations as it pertains to, uh, business continuity. Um, shared understanding and, uh, of goals and strategies for the airport. So they, they just had an overall, um, positive experience of running their own compared to the, the additional costs that they have, um, that they, that they encountered. I can say that some of them even said that even if they could do it cheaper, they would never trade and go back to, to what they had in the past because they like running their own. It's just, it's an accountability and governance piece that, that, that, that value piece that they found, um, comfort in, uh, the public safety costs from plane passenger. Again, cost becomes a consideration here. Uh, we didn't find that the costs were out of line with similarly situated airports. So the current costs that are being, uh, that are being allocated for, for this aren't, aren't wildly, um, out of, out of the ballpark. And again, this from a, from a feasibility perspective, that's what we look at at first, just to take the, take a high level look at numbers, just to say, if there's something completely off the chart, we pull the plug and say, this just isn't feasible. These numbers are so far out of line that it doesn't make sense to move forward. We didn't find that in this case, we found that the numbers are all within the same ballpark. So, um, it's, it's not, it's not a, uh, a showstopper or a, uh, a no go decision at this point based on in plane passenger costs. Um, we did find that the autonomy provided, uh, to the Broward County Sheriff's office through the contract. Um, and this is not, uh, a condemnation of any type of, uh, performance or service. This is just about structure. Um, because the, uh, because the contract provides autonomy and separate reporting structures, it sometimes leads to, to gaps in seamless perform, uh, operational performance. Again, this is, this was not intended at all to be an organizational assessment of, or excuse me, an operational assessment of a Broward County, uh, sheriff's capabilities, nor was it an organizational assessment of BCAD's capabilities. This was a feasibility study only to look at the prospect of developing an independent agency. Uh, comprehensive staffing and recruitment plan will be, will be necessary and central to a successful outcome for this project. Um, when we looked at the, the cost projections, they are based, um, solely on speculation on the, based on the numbers that you have today. We, you can't come up with a hard cost until you've determined what the actual organizational structure is going to look like. You have to do a workload analysis and you have to determine how many officers or how many personnel you are going to need to counterbalance some of the functions and things that were done by the, by the sheriff's office. So without those hard numbers ahead of time, you won't be able to really come up with a firm, uh, a firm number for what your budgeted, um, allocation will look like for, for department. So for, for this to be successful, you would have to undertake that recruitment, uh, staffing and recruitment plan, uh, and in, and your workload analysis to, to determine what, what an outcome, what the budget would be finally, because that's going to weigh in heavily on your determination of cost and value. So our final recommendations, um, we recommend, uh, there is a change management plan established and it's supported by project management principles. What we mean there is that there has to be a plan put in place, uh, uh, chronologic plan step-by-step that has decision points throughout. Um, is that, that, that makes sure that you're mitigating, um, uh, uh, you're mitigating any risks that you may encounter due to decision making that, that may push you towards the decision. Um, we want to conduct a formal risk assessment and, and determine what that risk tolerance is because with any change, you're going to, you're going to have some risk associated with it. And four final decisions made need to determine what that risk tolerance is and, and what is the trade off compared to the short term risks versus the long term benefits of, of moving forward with your own agency. Uh, strategic plan needs to be developed that covers near term in the next five years. Um, that makes sure that there, there's a consistent, um, adherence to the vision, the goals and the objectives of, of moving forward to make sure that you're undertaking and developing, um, an independent law enforcement agency first, for, for the right reasons and that you're going to get the desired outcomes when it's, when it's finished. Um, you want to identify the preferred governance framework, uh, for an independent law enforcement agency. And what we mean by that is who, what, what are the reporting structures going to be? Um, who's going to, who, who's ultimately the, the, the head of the agency going to, um, answer to, you know, uh, what is, what is the, the staffing and, uh, command and control of that agency going to look like? And all of those things go into what the, the final, um, organization looks like before you can determine what the final cost is going to be. Uh, again, we need to do, uh, conduct a comprehensive workload analysis and staffing study to make sure that you have the appropriate number of staff doing the appropriate number of jobs for the same reasons that, um, you've established the department in the first place. Uh, conduct a fiscal audit. We want to, we recommend you conduct a fiscal audit of all of the property currently owned by, uh, by BCAD or property that is provided by BCAD to the Broward County Sheriff's Office. Cause that is going to have an impact on your startup costs. So we need to, uh, you need to have, make a determination on what it is that you actually own and what it is that you actually need. And lastly, uh, need to review the enabling requirements to include county ordinances, protocols and partnerships and any potential mutual aid, um, agreements that need to be signed, uh, before you, before you make a final decision. So just to, to close this again, this is a very, very high level overview. Um, but as I said, anytime there's any sort of change, you're going to assume some risks. Um, and, and the County will, will assume some risk if there's a transfer of policing or law enforcement from the Broward County Sheriff's Office to the Broward County Aviation Department. Um, but there are some trade-offs and this is where the decision-making comes in. Um, by creating your own independent police department, you ensure that there's a shared mission goals and strategy between public safety and the business side of running an operation as a police department, I mean, uh, as an airport. Oftentimes again, and in my experience in my career in law enforcement, my focus wasn't always on necessarily what else was going on outside of my immediate needs to perform public safety functions. Um, having, having it fall under the same umbrella as the airport, you then have a shared strategy, shared mission, and, and shared understanding of, of, of priorities. And it, it helps to clarify some operational, um, confusion sometimes. Importantly, um, an independent agency gives an opportunity for consistent, uh, budget forecasting and transparency. Uh, again, when we talk about cost, it's not always upfront dollars and cents cost, but the ability to control and forecast what future spending is going to be. Um, an independent agency gives a greater ability, uh, to do that as opposed to having a contracted service. Um, an enterprise approach to safety and security. Again, it's, it's, it's, it's about being able to have a, uh, uh, uh, an organization wide approach to, to provision of safety, um, throughout the, throughout the, um, the airport campus as opposed to kind of siloed, um, law enforcement, um, operations and safety operations that don't always necessarily. Um, well, they, they, they have to work in concert with one another, but don't always necessarily have the same operational priorities, um, because they, they, they work for different, uh, entities. And the most, one of the most important aspects of the independent agency too is to be able to have, be agile in your responses. Uh, be able to make quick decisions without having to deal with multiple chains of, chains of command and, and have those, uh, decisions made quickly and implemented, um, swiftly. So with that, I would be happy to ask any questions you may have. All right. I'm going to go around the room less. I've been going left to right all day. I'm going to start with right to left this time and start with commissioner Fisher. Come back to me, mayor. Cause I just need to digest something. Okay. Okay. Okay. First of all, thank you for the presentation. It's made me think about a few things differently than I've had to, because I never really thought about the difference in terms of the hierarchy. And, and I, I guess when I'm, you know, how decisions are made or, or having to be nimble there. And when I, when I'm, I'm looking at Mark, I'm thinking when you have to, you don't have necessary full control over VSO. You can't just, you can't give them an order. Is that right? You can't direct their staff, uh, uh, commissioner. I coordinate with the local commanding officer, the captain for the most part. Right. If you are correct. If I don't command any of their staff directly, or I don't give them assignments. I don't tell them what to patrol, where to patrol and whatnot. That is pretty much all done by the commanding officer. So my, so my first question is how are, how is that communication now? And in terms of if you are having to, if you're saying like the airport is really crowded. And you don't see enough VSO guys down there that are directing traffic. How, how nimble are you able to say, hey, we need guys down there now, now. And, and is, do you get that kind of response? You may ask for the diplomatic answer. We do get the response, commissioner. Um, sometimes the call needs to be made. Does the call, should the call have to be made? Is, is part of, of the question. Um, leadership matters on, on all fronts. Um, I've been blessed to serve you all for the last 10 years. And at the airport, um, on the sheriff's side of the house, we've seen high turnover. Uh, particularly in, in the captain's role. I'm on my sixth captain. Oh, wow. A lot. Um, and multiple. Is there a reason, do you, do you, is there a reason why the turnover? You know, some of the captains have performed well and have gone on to be promoted to, to majors. Some have left and, and have retired and whatnot. But that change in leadership, um, uh, at such a high frequency, uh, I think lends itself at times. Uh, the different types of communication and, and how we all get along together on a day-to-day basis. Uh, you know, I, I think the, you know, commanding officer that we have now has only been on for, you know, a few months in his role. And it's working well. So a career, so a career climb, if it was their own agency, they would be thinking I'm going to be going up and I'll be, I'm still working in the same place. As opposed to, I may become a major at it in another city. Typically the promotions have had, uh, from a captain to a major, they would go elsewhere. Yeah. Yeah. Our, uh, system. They may become a police chief of one of our cities or something. Correct. Right. Um, in terms of how, what are, do we have a number of how many personnel BSOs dedicated to the airport? Yes, sir. 125? 125. Okay. And to our, um, consultant, does that number seem high, low? Where does it, where does it fall? Do they have enough? So again, I think, um, the short answer is it's in the ballpark. The, the accurate answer is without a needs assessment, without a workforce analysis, we can only go by the staffing that there's been, that's been provided. So we haven't looked at the actual functions of how many they need or what the actual, um, uh, performance of, of those individuals are. So we, our assessment is based on a number, not based on any kind of organizational assessment on performance. So the answer is we don't know. And to be honest, that's kind of what I was hoping would be part of this, because I think that's an important consideration. I don't know how well those 125 are, are, are being put out there. I don't know if it's top-heavy, I don't, I don't know if it's top-heavy, bottom-heavy, I don't know, I have no idea. Um, that number is split, uh, commissioner, between both sworn and, uh, non-sworn or civilian. Um, in that 125 number, the 22 airport safety officers are the ones that are on the, the curb side. Okay. Uh, the remainder are, uh, on the, uh, on the sworn side of the house. I think when you peruse the report, and, and Dr. Denmark will, will refer to it, some of the comparables that were done of airports of similar size, nature. Uh, we know of airports that, um, handle, let's say, uh, millions more passengers a year than we do, and have few officers. And some that handle less and, um, have more officers. Sometimes it's a function of the geography of the airport. Right. And how you have to be able to, uh, move yourself around or, or how things are put together. So there's different variables that go into, um, finding that exact number. And I think that's what Dr. Denmark was referring to when we do the, um, the analysis of, do you need 125? Do you need 110? Do you need 140? Um, some of that would be part of our, our future analysis going forward. Okay. And, uh, those 125, is that paid for by the airlines right now? Or is that paid for? It's through an airport's budget. Okay. Okay. Yes, sir. Through the signature airlines. 100%. They all figure that out. Yeah. And what is that budget right now? Uh, in FY 26, uh, the law enforcement side of the house was just approximately $36 million. Okay. So that's kind of where we're looking at. And you, and when you were saying you estimated it a little bit high, were you thinking 36 or were you thinking higher than that? So the estimates, uh, there's the estimate that we put together was projecting not just current state, but what actual cost might look like moving forward because of some of the, some of the, the, the other duties or administrative costs behind what goes, what's paid. So, for instance, um, you know, recruitment and training and all the other stuff that happens at the Broward Coward, Broward County Sheriff's Office. Right. But then theoretically have to be undertaken internally at BCAAD. So there's additional costs associated with that. So we inflate purposely the costs, um, as we develop the model to account for some of those, uh, some of the, the additional administrative costs. Again, that could be reduced depending on what could be absorbed through current, uh, BCAAD administration. Again, we don't know that until we actually look at what their capabilities are for the amount of additional work and the additional oversight and the things that would go into that model. Okay. And right now, are we just thinking in terms of police and fire or just, are we just thinking? Police. Just police. Okay. So all the equipment like hazmat and all that stuff, that's all another side. Okay. I'll, I'll hold off him. Perfect. Before we, before I recognize you, Commissioner, uh, Fisher, I just wanted to follow up. Sir, you do this for a living, right? And, and your company is an expert and you do this all over the country, right? Okay. I don't understand your answer to Commissioner Furr when you said we need to do a needs assessment. You could take many airports that have the similar number of passengers, similar number of configuration. And his question was, do we have a high or low or how many officers do we need? And you go, we need a needs assessment. And that answer bothers me. If you're new to this business, I get, so you need a needs assessment, but you're supposed to be an expert. You do this all over the country. So the question is, I think you had a good question. Is there appropriate number of people at the airport? Is there a less number? Is there too many? Based on your experience and all the airports you do over the country, what's your answer? The answer is for the, for this assessment, it was, this was a feasibility, uh, exercise. This was not a needs assessment. So we could give a general and which is what we provided the peer to peer overview. But we did not have the, under the scope of this feasibility study. That was not part of what we were tasked to do. So that was not done. What we did was provided a look at the number of officers per passenger that peer airports have. And we put that in line and said that, uh, that, um, DCAD is in line with their peers. If I can jump in, there's no concern that FLL is unsafe, that we don't have enough law enforcement or private security. That's, that's not a concern. The question of what the perfect number is based on the physical geography of how we have our terminals located, that they aren't all connected, where the posts need to be, where TSA, that's a far more in depth piece. And we would have required a lot more time to get to that point. That's something that would happen if the board wants us to. Michael, the ultimate thought is, are we going to save money? Is one aspect is, are we going to save money besides operational control? Are we going to save money? And the only way you're going to know that is, uh, you know, about having them look at it. But anyway, I'll let you, I'll let commissioner Fisher take it. I just would think that if you weren't hired by us and I'm sitting with you at lunch, based on your experiences, that we have Fort Lauderdale airport, there's so many passengers we have. How many law enforcement personnel do you think would it would take? I would think you would be able to, to know pretty, you know, would give or take because of your experience. Not that you need to do a needs assessment. No? Do you, do you want a response? Of course. Oh, sure. Could I give you a back of the napkin for myself based on what I know today? Sure. But I, what I don't want to do and what we don't do as a, as a, as a, as a normal practice is put those speculative, we think back the napkin, because what happens is people grab onto those and look at that as gospel. What we said is they're in line with what the current public safety needs are. I have an idea in my head, which is what those budget projections in that back is based on. Thank you. Mr. Fisher. Thank you, Mayor, for the, uh, pause. Mr. Dumont, thank you for the 54 page report, uh, that we got on Friday. That was wonderful to try to dissect that though. It's been kind of a, much of a challenge, but, um, as I dissected, I, I, I just made some comments here. In other words, I understand that there are peer airports, um, preferred their own internal police operations, which obviously greater control over security practices that more fully align with the leading industry standards. So even our, our peers are, have, they prefer their own internal versus a, uh, contracted type agency, which is gonna, it's gonna, you hear the common theme, I think, that our county will have full control. And they would not be acquiesced to any other type of a department or agency there. So just hold that thought. Um, also, uh, and I'm gonna go back what Commissioner, um, for a talk, there's no requirement under the contract now for how and where BSO staffs this post, right? Going back to that control thing. So Mark doesn't have any control over that. And also, um, I think currently BSO is not staffed all budgeted BCAP positions. We're talking about 125. So we're not, they're not even filling all those positions. And I knew attrition and I understand that vacancies, but in the contract ahead, for instance, at Pompano Beach, when I was a mayor there, where I had gotten, I would receive rebates on, on my contract. If they didn't fill those positions, I would, do we have that kind of ability? So Monica's shaking her head no. So they're, they're supposed to staff 125. They're not doing it. And yet we're not getting any credits back for it. Uh, if I can answer that, uh, doctor. So two things, uh, commissioner just wanted to clarify on the staff units. There is one requirement that we do make sure that they staff, which is at the security screening checkpoint. That is, uh, in alignment with our airport security program with the TSA. We have to do that. So that is something that we watch for to make sure that they're properly staffed. With respect to the, the staffing, you are correct. Uh, they, they run a vacancy rate, um, have for many, many, many years. So we're not fully staffed. We're just getting close to full staffing on the non, uh, sworn or civilian side of the house. The way that, um, BSO law enforcement, uh, the way that we pay is actually on invoice for, for, for this. The, uh, number of, of hours that are actually worked by the officers. Okay. Cause that's the largest cost is about 31.4 million, which is over 90% of the budget that they charge us is, is in staffing. And they break that down. The captain, executive officer, the crime analyst, the two men supports, 11 deputy sergeants and 22 ASOs and 86 deputies. Uh, we get invoiced. We thoroughly vet that invoice. Do you, do you, do you actually go over that mark yourself to make sure? Uh, my director of security sitting behind me, uh, has that illustrious job, uh, to take care of that, he and his team. But, um, they are meticulous in going through and working to make sure that we are only paying for the services that we receive. We consider that to be in compliance with FAA regulations. Uh, because in 25, you had 15 vacancies. Yeah. Yeah. But you're telling me, Hey, they're required to do this amount. They get required to do the check-ins and all that. I'm also concerned about the other parts of the airport that they're not taking care of. And that concerns me even if we stay with BSO that we have to have full security at the airport. And so we're, if we're continuing to run 15 vacancies, it's not healthy for us. Because God forbid something could happen in that area, which we do not have a deputy. We don't have security. So that's, that's a challenge to me, right? Uh, unified approach on overarching public safety is not present at FLL. This is what the report says. Due to lack of control that BCAD has under the contract. BSO's executive team rarely engages with the BCAD executive team. Ahead of budget, BCAD's not consulted. BSO does not articulate a vision or goals for delivering services or reflect any recognition of BCAD planning initiatives. Collaborative strategy planning does not routinely occur. Ongoing historical challenges further exasperating an ongoing movement in BSO's leadership at FLL. We talked about that. The sheriff controls the assignment of deputies. There are no definition rules and performances requirements on the contract. BCAD has no authority to direct BSO personnel to ensure delivery of the services needed. Contract does not sufficiently have direction or tasking to ensure compliance with BCAD goals and service delivery. And it goes on and on. Now the advantages, of course, those concern me. Those, those challenges, right? And the advantages of having your own is direct accountability. Direct accountability and governance. Improved FAA compliance and grant defensibility. That's huge, right? Operations focused on airport-specific policing. Greater budget visibility and predictability. Long-term continuity and resilience. And strategic control over staffing. So I, I look at this as a, as an opportunity for, for our county to have control again. Right? To be able to control our own destiny. To be able to have the ability to make changes. And to be able to make sure that our airport is fully secured. And that's why, Mayor, I've been a proponent of, of looking at this in a very, very detailed level. Now, whether we have to do additional studies or not, that's okay. But on a glance, in the study that's been provided to me, this is eye-opening, right? We never had that. We can't, of course, audit the BSO's budget. We don't have that ability to do so. Again, taking back control and having that ability to, to have that accountability for Mark, whoever sits in that position, to me, is a huge advantage for Broward County. Thank you. Senator Rich. I have to break my microphone. You're welcome. Next is Senator Geller. Excuse me. Yeah. So, there's just kind of a few things that are, it's like a little fuzzy from, from the, the statements. So, it, it says here, first, our assessment identifies it is feasible. And I've just read, you know, several things in here that say the same thing. It's feasible for BCAD to establish. But I, I can't, it, and then it says, but, you know, we have to do other things. So, can you just clarify a little bit, if it's feasible, what, what is your next step? I mean, what, if, if we decided that we wanted to do this feasible, what, what would, what would it be? Sure. Again, feasibility, it depends on, it's a matter of what it is that you're looking to achieve. And whether or not you are willing to pay any associated costs. We're looking at an independent, just what Commissioner Fisher just said. We're looking at an, you know, independent agency that we control as, as, as the county. Understood. So, and this is fuzzy because the decision whether or not something is valuable to you as a county and to you as a board of commissioners is not something you can hard benchmark and say, you should do this because of X, Y, Z. It's, it's, it's a, it's a value proposition. What value do you put on that control versus dollars and cents? So, that practical aspect of it is an independent individual decision making process that myself as a, as a consultant on my, on my team, as a team of consultants, can't tell you what's best for you. You have to decide what it is that you're willing to, to, to balance versus risk and reward cost versus benefit. Uh, but we're telling you, uh, we set out to tell you that this is feasible. You just have to make that decision and decide where that line is for your, for you and your constituents. Okay. I'm, I'm still not yet. So, it says here, while this report identifies an independent law enforcement agency under the management VCAT is feasible, again, the implementation has risk associated that must be evaluated within the overall context of VCAT goals and the resources needed to stand up a law enforcement organization. And then it talks about, if you roll it out, you know, how long, you know, would be, would be so be needed to, you know, to, to remain there until it was done. I mean, it still doesn't answer to me what, what it is. If you make the decision, I don't know, Mark, maybe you can clarify this. I, it just, we're all kind of struggling with the same thing, I think, here. Sure. Uh, Senator, uh, you know, the, the report, as the doctor pointed out, was feasibility first and foremost. And they got to the end with key findings and recommendations. Is it feasible? Yes. In the recommendations, if we, if the board, uh, at its will said, we, we want staff to proceed and keep moving in this direction to start its own law enforcement, then the recommendations start to kick in. We would recommend that you further evaluate some of your risk. We recommend that you further evaluate some of the human resource components, some of the training components, some of the statutes. Get those things to make sure that you're 100% comfortable with making this decision, because once you go there, you, you need to execute. And even while we're executing, which was pointed out, um, in the report, is that there's the need potentially for an overlap. As we ramp up, um, and, and BSO, uh, may ramp down, how does that work? So the risk assessment of what it is that we would be, uh, looking to undertake, again, if it's the will of the board, that's what they were trying to, to lay out for us. And I think the doctor is saying, he can't make that decision for us, but if you're going to make that decision, here are the things that we need to be mindful of as we move forward. And, Michael, I think you wanted to add. So could you just give a couple of, like, when you're conducting a formal risk assessment to analyze risks associated with transitioning to an independent. So give me an example of what the risks that you're looking to analyze. Okay. So let me take one quick step back first. So I would suggest that there would likely be three important steps moving forward if you wanted to take a next step. So if the will of the board was to continue down the path, one, we'd need to look for leadership, an individual who will essentially serve as chief of police of the organization. We'd need to look to likely for an individual, maybe an organization who knows how to build a law enforcement agency. Those are two, those are not necessarily the same person. Someone who runs an organization isn't necessarily someone who builds an organization from scratch, which would be the first time we do this as, as a county. Um, and especially in such a secure, sensitive location as FLL. And then we would probably work with the county attorney's office to put an item on an upcoming agenda to empower the county administrator to put together budget and plans to be able to move forward with all of these efforts at aviation. To me, those are three concrete next steps that would happen if the board as a whole wanted us to continue down this path because leadership and building, building the organization are two different dynamics. And this is more than a full time job. And it is incredibly important. Uh, we have to maintain security and safety and we'd have to transition collaboratively with the Broward Sheriff's Office throughout that process. That is not an easy change management dynamic for, for the people who, who are involved. So those would be the first three concrete steps I would suggest. And what about the risk? What it, what it, what it? So, so there are a number of risks associated with, so let's say that we take a look at the, the personnel and the staffing level. It, it may be that we find a way of ensuring that there's enough training and recruitment to staff up completely, but that obviously that actually changes the cost structure. Cause now you're actually paying all of those full costs. So when you start calculating those costs and they grow, then it may be a little bit faster than, than is anticipated. Uh, there's also risks for Mark with the airlines, right? Because he works with the airlines to pay for a lot of, of costs. We have to make sure that the airlines as important stakeholders understand what we're doing and don't get nervous about the transition because safety and security is important. Again, that's a, that's a human change management, management dynamic. We may find that there's additional training, um, facilities, equipment that currently is not available that we might have to look for or create. When we start looking sort of at all of the details of, uh, building and the word independent, but sort of it's, it's own agency that perhaps BSO is able to leverage other locations to use. So is there a capital investment that we hadn't anticipated? It's kind of like when you start digging underneath the ground and doing the environmentals on a project, you find things you didn't plan on finding. Those are all of the risks of, of, of moving forward. The benefits are that you, you, it's your information. You get to make the decision. You get to choose where to spend your money. So you're, and you will have confidence that the numbers are the numbers and that nothing is sort of hiding behind a corner for you. Um, and that if, and we've had this kind of conversation, but if you choose to provide say, um, you know, salary increases or union negotiations or whatever the case may be, you know exactly where that money is going to go because you have full authority over the budget process. So I, I, there is a cost benefit, but the risks are very similar to a construction project. They're just on the human side because we don't yet know what we don't know. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Um, first, uh, commissioner Fisher. I do need to tell you, since you asked a lot of the questions I did in the exact same format that I would have asked them. If you continue to practice law, like you have done today and earlier, I will be bringing an unauthorized practice of law complaint between your bankruptcy guidance and your guidance here. But, um, the, uh, sir, I have a series of questions. First, I want to talk about the vacancies. Um, we have, uh, by the way, I read this entire report. You can see the little flips there. Um, I wish I would have gotten it before yesterday, but since it was delivered after five o'clock Friday, I guess not possible. Um, the, you said there is, as I recall, about 125 positions. You also said there were somewhere between 15 and 20 vacancies generally. So, my question is, if there's 125 authorized and 15 to 20 vacant because of the sheriffs, as you referred to, opaque budgeting, are we actually paying as if there are 125 or are we paying as if there's 105 to 110? Senator, if I can answer. Senator, if I can answer. And when I ask, either, any of the three of you can ask, answer any of my questions. Thank you, Senator. Um, again, the split, the full-time employees at 125, that includes. The ASOs. 22 ASOs. Those, I think, only have one vacancy. So, the vacancy. Right. It was the sergeants that was the biggest problem. The majority that exists is on the sworn officer component. And to my earlier comment, um, unlike what, what occurs on the fire side, where, where, uh, the budgeting and the billing is done a little bit differently. Uh, on the law enforcement side, it's always been, um, who worked, how much did they work, and, and exactly what we're paying for. Was there overtime included that there were additional officers on? Uh, and if so, what were they doing in order to, to round out the full complement? Um, that's how we handle, um, the budget on the law enforcement side of the house. Okay. So, we're getting what, we're paying, getting what we're paying for. We're, we're pretty cautious to make sure that we're, uh, not overpaying, uh, for services that we didn't receive. Okay. Thank you. Next question. On page seven of your report, you said in number 10 in blue, um, the cost for, generally, the comparison airports, that operated their own public safety departments, had lower cost for law enforcement agencies. In your final budget, year five of five for us, you showed us as higher than if we stayed with BSO. Um, can I ask, based on your earlier statement that if it's run by BCAD or if it's run by the airport generally, it's cheaper, why it is that you believe in our particular circumstance it would be more expensive? So, again, what happens here when you do feasibility is that there's, this is not an implementation study, right? So, we purposely inflate costs to give people, give organizations a realistic view of what this potentially might be. So, when the, uh, when the organization, when the workload assessment is done, when the staffing assessment is done, and when the administrative costs are built in, those costs may actually come down. Okay. So, is it fair to say that your original statement on page seven, understanding that there's startup and transition costs, which I'm, after those are done, is it generally, should we generally believe your statement of on page seven, that in general, uh, quote, comparison airports that operate their own public safety departments had lower costs than law enforcement, for law enforcement services, that that's more likely than not the predicted outcome here? No guarantees, but. Lower cost, yes, but that doesn't necessarily mean cheaper than you're currently paying. Right, of course, but cheaper than if we stayed with BSO. Senator, and Senator, there's a clarifying point. Yes. I'm going to ask Michael to chime in, because it kind of, it's important to, to discuss it in its totality and, and how this was presented. And so, just to reiterate a point that was made early on in the presentation, because this is a feasibility study, they've essentially calculated almost a worst case scenario, unknown, unknown cost structure for that. As you said, the environmental under the ground, I understood that. Exactly. So that's not their estimate of what it will be. They're saying under this worst case scenario, financially, is this still feasible to do? And the answer is yes. What we actually do between now and then is a completely different estimate. And so we would say that, to your question, yes. So that, that was my question, yes. And now I'm going to try and make it even cheaper. This study just focused on the airport. We have had discussions on creating basically a port authority police, because you are aware of how close our airport and seaport are. If we did that, I would presume that that would, you know, right now there would be one BCAD director for the police, police chief, I'll call him, and still having seaport director. But if you had a combined airport seaport, there would only be one director. So I presume that there would be economies of scale if we talked about both the airport and the seaport as a unified Broward County port authority. Is that correct? Not authority. I'm sorry? Not authority. But you know what I meant. Police department under the auspices of Broward County Commission. Senator, yes, we would gain economies of scale. Okay. Next, I did want to point out the one major downside of this. And I've read and you mentioned a lot of downsides, most of which understanding feasibility, understanding you were pointing worst case scenario. Saying, well, we could have problems filling the positions. Yeah, but so would BSO or Fort Lauderdale police or whoever it was. Yes, I understand there's a shortage of police officers. But that's regardless of what color your uniform is. There's a shortage of police officers. And we all agree that we would want this to be done largely by uniformed officers, not by, you know, private security company, except for like ASOs or something like that, perhaps. Yes. I'm just throwing this out there. The downside, my big downside is the labor negotiations. I'm very happy to have the sheriff handle that and not have us have to handle labor negotiations. Of course, that sounds like a real nightmare. And the last thing that I was going to say, and I'm going to now borrow a page from my esteemed brother of the bar, Commissioner Fisher. I, when I read this, I learned a lot because I hadn't realized to what extent it is important to have the Broward County Aviation Police operating under Broward County Aviation. And just to briefly quote on page 13, where you said there is no requirement under contract for how and where BSO will staff its posts, while BCAAD can request support for certain issues or locations within the terminal, posting is a decision that falls solely to BSO. On page 16 of your report, you said BSO's executive team rarely engages with the BCAAD executive team. On page 17 of your report, you said there are essentially two parallel operations that provide safety for FLL. Each unit, BCAAD and BSO, demonstrates commitments. The contract with BSO is necessary, but has no information on tasking or performance standards and covers assignment of a certain number of personnel only. This provides little support to the BCAAD as the end-use client, ensuring necessary law enforcement services are delivered. On page 22, you said none of the airports that internally control their policing operations expressed discontent with that arrangement. And finally, on page 23, where you said, rather than working as generalists in the delivery of public safety services, police organizations operating as part of an airport organization are focused on delivering public safety services in the context of a transportation operation. Based upon everything that you wrote, Mr. Mayor, in your deference to you, I left out 80% of the quotes that I'd had. It sounds like the most important reason is not which is cheaper, but rather which provides better security working in direct conjunction with the airport with BCAAD. Based on that, I agree with my brother of the bar, Commissioner Fisher, or temporary brother of the bar at least, that we need to at the very least consider, but it looks strongly like we should be doing this. And I would like Monica or Mike or Kevin or whoever to see about expanding this to be an aviation, excuse me, a port, not authority, a port police department. And that that would probably offer both less expense and greater control, more audit ability, and let Mark and Joe have better control over where law enforcement is, when they need it, and making sure that it's coordinated. It sounds like a win-win. So you all have the foresight to ask us to expand this review to also include the port. And so we have been engaged with Jensen Hughes as well in that. So that is currently happening on the port side. Because you're right, if there is the will to do this, it would only make sense to do it to maximize the economies of scale and do both airports and port. Before we go to Commissioner Udine, I just wanted to point out, in all the years Mr. Gale has run airports, he's always wanted to be called captain. So if we do the law enforcement, we can actually legitimately call you captain. Chief, right. Commissioner Udine. A couple observations following what Senator Geller said. The one thing that I get out of this, and I kind of do agree with what Senator Geller said, if you do this, it's got to be airport and port together. I don't think you could separate them because one of the main risks that I see when I read this, and I had some experience dealing with small departments, if you stand up a department with 125 people, you're dealing with a lot of issues with turnover, advancement, and the whole thing. And it's not an easy issue to handle because you'll get a lot of people that will want to be trained right away. They'll be trained in this, and then they'll split the department and go somewhere else. And I think that's a big issue. It would have to be something that's bigger than 100 sworn and 22 assistance sworn. But that's a story for another day. My comments on this just, I don't really know what you're asking me, but just some comments and general observations on the report. What jumped out the most at me is bullets 8 and 9 on page 7. One, clearly there's a breakdown and disconnect between BCAT and BSO here. This contract hasn't been really altered or amended since 1996 other than, hey, we're a little bigger now, add more people. I think the first thing that would have to be done between BCAT and BSO, regardless of what we do, there needs to be a sit-down, and Mark Gale and his security team needs to meet with Sheriff Tony and his security team, and they need to have some different contractual parameters. Unlike other BSO areas, we can audit this until we're blue in the face. This is contractual services, so this is a contract that we're paying for. But kind of like what we get with Tracy and the emergency management component on 911, every month we get a report with some parameters and some benchmarks. We should, and I don't mean we, I mean someone should be able to get those benchmarks on a monthly or quarterly basis so that they can make an informed decision. Second thing is, there has got to be a different way that the chain of command works here, whereas the BCAT, the aviation team, has more say in how public service safety is being presented at the airport. Because you guys know airports, they know public safety, but there's got to be a better way to mesh that, and I'm sure that there could be if there was some working together on it. So I think that that's important to have that done. You know, I was at the airport Friday night picking someone up. It was very quiet, and I saw some BSO people there. No, I wasn't picking him up. I'm not going to pick him up at the airport. Oh, there you go. But there was, it was very quiet. No, you're just picking me up. It's a sunshine violation. I can't pick him up. So it was very quiet, and I saw some BSO officers. I know the deployment there probably would have been better at other times or at other locations, you know, within the airport, especially now with what's going on in Terminal 4. This is probably a decent time to revisit levels of service that you desire as an airport director. That's just one thing that I think about. Commissioner, I just wanted to comment on your points about meeting with BSO. So just for fair disclosure, I did have a meeting yesterday with the undersheriff, along with the colonel, and along with Chief Keefe on the fire department side of the house, to try to pull some things together, all just working together. And when's the last one you had before that? It's been quite a while. Okay. It needs to be more. It needs to be, that's got to be a priority where you guys can work through that kind of stuff together. I think there needs to be way more seamlessness on BCAT and BSO working together in the airport. It's an asset that belongs to the traveling public or to us, and it just cannot be it's my way or the highway when it comes to public safety. And if we're not given everything to a T, then it's a, you know, it's a public safety breach or default on our end. We, everyone wants the same thing. We want the safest possible airport to begin with. I'm not even concerned if it's the least expensive. I want the safest for the traveling public because one incident that happens could have reverberations in the future for years to come. We saw that when we had the incident in the airport a few years ago. Next thing that I, that I say, you know, next week we start our first budget workshop, right? So we're going to get our county administrator's budget in the end of June, beginning of July, like we always get it, and then we're going to vote on it. So basically, for all practical purposes, this budget year is practically over. I mean, we're near the end of it. We're rolling in. And we're going to get back, and I know contractual service is different than the overall BSO budget, and I know you true up and we true up. We're going to get back dollars from BSO at the end of the year. We always do. And that, there's that gentle person's agreement where some goes towards the pension and some goes towards future capital. But since we're going to get that back, obviously, we've budgeted correctly for BSO to operate at a level of service that our constituents demand. Before I vote on the things that Michael said we need to do, I need to see the sheriff withdraw his appeal up in Tallahassee. A, it hasn't been heard. There's no appetite for anybody to hear it up there. It's a decent attempt that was made. I think our response is, you know, there's maybe a color of good faith on the attempt. I asked them yesterday. I think our response blows a lot of holes in the arguments that were made, and I don't think Tallahassee has any appetite to hear it, or they would have heard it already. So the year's almost over. The level of public safety that we've provided to our residents this year has been adequate. That's got to go away so that we can have collaborative discussions with the sheriff's office, because right now we can't even really have it, because we're in quasi-litigation with the sheriff's office over whether their budget is appropriate. So if that goes away and we can have some cohesive meetings between BSO and BCAD, and we can update some of the revisions to the contract, I can have a better comfort level going forward, regardless of what path we take. Commissioner Davis. Thank you. I had the same kind of comments with regards to the contract. It hasn't really been revisited in totality since, what, 1996, I believe. And, you know, there's ways you can improve upon what you would like to see from the sheriff based on the contract. In addition to that, I don't know if there is evaluations that are being done based on the contract. What you'd like to see if there's been situations where they have not been performing as you would like, and they've been evaluated, and there's been improvements or no improvements. So, you know, I think it's a little premature to go from BSO to a whole new department, because I haven't seen any issues raised to the level where you've tried to get them corrected, and the corrective measures have not been adhered to. So I think there's opportunities here to look at the contract, put what you need in that contract, and see if it's amenable to BSO, and to look at some levels of expectations and evaluations based on what you see that needs to be done. I'm kind of concerned about, you know, we're looking at our own fire department, not looking at your own police department, and looking at the department to police the Port Everglades. And so there's a lot going on, and the cost factor here, and not looking at everything in its totality, and then wanting us to make a decision on just a portion, I think is also premature. And like was mentioned, when it's a small department, if you're just looking at the airport, you know, the ability to hire and keep qualified personnel, the ability for upward mobility for these folks in a very small department, you know, who's going to want to work where, you know, there's no growth? You've got to consider that. The support staff, you know, how many sworn would you need? How many support staff? These are concerns for me. And then the cost factor, again, based on fire, airport, seaport, who knows, the convention center, wherever else, I think this is just a portion, and I can't make a decision based on a small portion of the totality of what we're trying to do. I think we need to go back, and I'm in agreement, if we can go back, sit with the sheriff, work on a new contract, and address some of the issues that you feel are not being addressed, and that point, if you can't come to a decision, then maybe that's time to look elsewhere. But right now, I really do think it's a bit premature. Commissioner Rogers. Thank you, Mr. Muir. And you would think my colleague and I had a conversation, but I come from a position of being an elected in a city, and BSO had the police side of it, but not the fire. And when we were talking to staff, everyone was concerned that upward mobility, and getting a new title or new position was not available with that number of employees or that department that was so small, they did not see growth for themselves. So just doing BSO side, law enforcement side, I thought the economy of scale would work with including the fire. So my head went there when I heard that because of my experience in trying to transition employees from a city fire department to BSO. What were their major concerns? Why they look, why we were going there? Then I'm thinking, do I understand fully, why are we looking to go from BSO to our own police or fire departments? What are those things? And maybe there's a document that does truly explain that, so I can take another look at it to be satisfied with where we're going. When I first came in and I looked at the different positions that was on this board and I saw a lot of subject matter experts, right? And I'm saying, okay, can you tell me what would be the top three subject matters that need to be addressed immediately? I'm concerned about that first-year transition period, how that would play out for all of us. And I have it written, risk of the first year, because that's where you're going to have most of your challenge in. But can you answer that for me, the subject matter? What are the top three you think that must be addressed and also, all right, the first year, my major challenges? Yeah, sure. For my assessment, our team's assessment, the biggest risk right now is, and this is nationwide, is finding staff, staffing concern would be the upfront risk that it could be mitigated by having, you know, appropriate staffing plan in place, you know, sourcing, and making sure that there's available staff, making sure that there's available pipeline to provide training for staff that's coming in inexperienced. And so just being able to come up with a number of employees doesn't necessarily guarantee that there's going to be available training in the time span during that transition that you're speaking of. So for me, A, number one, is you don't have an organization if you don't have the people. So my biggest concern would be that transition piece of recruitment. Second concern is there is not an established framework for what we want the department to look like. So in determining what that department looks like as far as staffing, as far as workload analysis, and as far as expectations for a number of total personnel, that would be the second biggest area of risk because then we could control for cost once I know what that number looks like. Thirdly, is that control and governance. Being able to project a future or control for the future, what my budget looks like. Not having that ability now is a vulnerability that I personally, if I was running an organization, wouldn't be comfortable with. So I'd want that to be my concern, is closing that gap to ensure, regardless of what we do, I've got some control over my future budget and my budget forecast. Another concern of mine, let me share. Do you think we're going to have access to BSO resources during this transition? So what is our thoughts around that? So I'll take that, Commissioner. So the Broward Sheriff's Office has both contractual services, they also have regional services. And Broward County cash flows the entirety of the BSO budget. And in my experience, they're as concerned with public safety as absolutely anybody is. So we have no concerns that during a transition period, they would be extremely cooperative. In addition, we fund regional services that would be made available to the airport that are made available to everyone, regardless of whether or not they're providing direct security services there. So, for example, bomb squad, the helicopter services, homicide services that are provided on a regional basis. So I'm very confident, both in our relationship with BSO and BSO's professionalism on the public safety side, that we would be able to work with them to ensure a smooth transition. And those services that they would provide regionally, they would continue to provide even after the creation of a law enforcement agency by Broward County. Do you know of any airports similar to ours that has gone through this process in the last five years, five to ten years? In the last five to ten years, no. We have one in the process now that's in the middle of a four-year transition. But most standalone airport police departments now, we call them legacy departments, because they were in place prior to the implementation of TSA in 2001. So they weren't developed post the regulations that go along with TSA requirements. So the ones that I can't speak of is in New York. They transitioned, but they were a smaller operation. And there was one in upstate Michigan, which is an extremely small operation with about 500,000 to 700,000 passengers. So they really weren't comparable. Which is the agency that's going through its process right now? Which one is going through the process right now? That is MCL. That's Orlando. Orlando. Okay, that's it for me for right now. Thank you. Okay, I get to go last. In January, I brought a workshop together for all of us to discuss this topic. January, February, March, April. Four months have gone by. We've heard from our consultant. I don't know if anyone is aware that in the past five years, the BSO budget has gone up 50%. Is that for the airport seaport? For the airport law enforcement portion. Airport alone, law enforcement portion. So I'm going to bring an agenda item after talking to admin to see about moving forward with this. The only thing I have to take difference with is, Commissioner Davis, when you said, I think you said about maybe this isn't the right time. Our budget, before you've gotten here, if you go look at the budget for BSO, it keeps going up and up and up. This is all about money. And especially if you look at the past five years, it's gone up 50%. So, you know, I believe that we can give the public a safe airport and save money and have control. And just like Commissioner Fisher was talking about before, and I'll be bringing an agenda item at our next meeting. Mr. Mayor, when you say this item, you mean airport and seaport combined, correct? Yes, yes. And to Commissioner Udine, I think we all would like to have a great working relationship, but I think the truth is that BSO and BCAD has not had a good working relationship by evidence of the meeting that hasn't happened in a long time, only because of this agenda item. I believe the undersheriff met with him because we have an agenda item right now. I mean, workshop. But otherwise, it's not been a cordial, get-along, work-together type of relationship. So that's my understanding. So anyway, you need to add something? Yeah. Just briefly. I agree with your conclusion. I'm not sure on the... I don't think that this is a fight between us and BSO. For some words. Well, about the relationship. I think that this is... And I didn't realize it until I read your report, but you've made very plain, as Commissioner Fisher did, just how important it is for us to have for the airport, BCAD, to have operational control over the airport, not because of cost savings, although they'll be there, not because the sheriff is doing a bad job, because I haven't said that, but rather that it's important for aviation to be able to control the aviation area, and the port director should be able to control security at the port, and they don't have that ability currently. And that's the reason I agree with what you said. And just before... Not because of the sheriff. Just to make sure, no one here is saying the sheriff's done a bad job. No one is saying the sheriff's done a bad job. All we're talking about, at least what I'm coming from, is cost savings to the public. And Vice Mayor, did you want to interject? I...he falls asleep, and I can't wake him up again. So if you had to summarize what we're trying to achieve, what would you say we are trying to fix? I think what we're trying to see is, can we provide a law enforcement agency under our control at a cost that, over a long-term cost, that would save the public money and provide the same safety to the flying public, or better, and to the seaport? Well, you want to go around and say another thing? No, I just want to say one thing. Well, Commissioner Udine, then I'll cover you. Okay. So you had set out three steps that you think we should... would be the appropriate way to look at it. Is that what you're going to be bringing up at the next meeting? Or is the next meeting going to be, we're going forward with... Because what I'm saying is, Michael laid out what we need to do as far as at the next meeting, and he laid it out in a professional way. And I do think, to a certain extent, when you say no one's saying that the sheriff or BCAD did a bad job, we all did a bad job. Since 1996, there has not been enough communication between BCAD, BSO, and the county commission on this issue. So we have all... That job is a problem. So we need to make sure that we're doing a better job with that. I agree with the rest of what you said, and I think that we should, if we want to look further at this, but you laid out the way that we should do it in the right way, and I think that that's... Because if you bring up the next... I don't know, but if it's going to be... You'll see. You'll see. You know, I'm going to talk to the admin about it. I'll be honest. I'm frustrated because the consultant, you did a good... Whatever you were tasked to do, but task one, is it feasible? I could ask our attorney, is it feasible? Yes, we can do that. I don't know. Okay, are there risks involved? You point on your... There are risks to consider. I'm sorry. I don't mean how this sounds, but I don't think I need a consultant to tell me, yes, there are risks to consider. We need to know what risks to consider and how we can cover those risks, you know, which are not in the report, but certainly you point out it's feasible. Yep. I think even beforehand we knew it was feasible. I'm not trying to downplay what you bring to the table. I think maybe we should have focused more on, in my opinion, I might be wrong, on I want to report telling us feasibility, how we can implement it, cost, your estimate, obviously can't hold you to estimate cost, but just a plan of attack, not something that's going to take a year because now we're going to do another four months and then we're going to do another four months. It's just this bureaucratic thing that we just keep doing when I think it can get done so much faster and so much easier. Mayor, for that reason, we'll be more than happy to work with you to make sure that you're right on board, that the item that you wanted to bring forward handles it the way you've just referred to it. Okay. I just, you know... I just want to say one last thing. Sure. I didn't say it before, and I think some of us have alluded to it, but I think the big issue is having control of our dollars. I mean, this is, to me, we don't have control. We give the money, and then it's gone. That's it. They can move it around. They can do what they want with it, and, you know, and that's not right. Nobody else can do that. I mean, we give money out. We're pretty careful to make sure it's used for what we had intended, the purpose that we had intended, and I know going back to the helicopter issue with Mayor... You know, so it's not about the job at the airport, per se. I don't think that's anything to do with it. It's about having control over, you know, what we're doing and how our money is spent, and we have over 50% going there now, so we know it's a tremendous amount of money, and we're all concerned about ad valorem taxes, and we have to be concerned about how we spend our dollars and sure that we have accountability. And by the way, I spoke to the sheriff yesterday, told him it's about money. He understands it's about money. He wanted to be a seat at the table. He called me up. He had somebody a seat at the table, and it's, you know, to me, it's, well, the control of the money, the cost of everything, safety, you know, so the sheriff appreciates that we're looking at money. No one's ever criticizing him for his performance or the performance of the officers, so anyway. They could have been here today. They knew about it. Did either of you guys want to... No, we got the gentleman here, too. Thank you. If that's all, I'm going to adjourn the meeting if there's anything else. Pardon me? We were talking about Spirit Headquarters. Oh, let's do it. Are we going to have a conversation about it? Yes. Well, that was just for the child care portion. Weren't we going to... I'm sorry. Only because I brought... If other people want to opine on it, only because I brought it up in the meeting, I said what I needed to say. If anybody else wants to opine... I mean, if we've already spoken about it, so be it. I thought I brought it up at the meeting and I was going to get... Mayor, we asked legal counsel to get bankruptcy advice to look into the feasibility of it. I think that's the decision we made, correct? And we also asked the county administration to look and report back to us how feasible the site is. Yeah, and just... And since you brought that up, I'm going to just ask one... One clarifying point, since you brought that up, you guys were very clear in giving Drew authority to spend about $25,000 or up to $25,000 on legal counsel. And we'll probably send something with Drew to clarify, because we would like to additionally do some additional due diligence on the evaluation of some of the plans we have for the Spirit buildings just to make sure that we're able to give you guys back. The one point of clarification, can't we, in a shade meeting, give you an amount to go up to without being public? Well, no, but we'll talk. I'll get somebody to file a lawsuit, then there'll be a shade meeting, and then we can do that. And, yes, and just so you know, I did speak with Monica, and I spoke a little bit ago, and if she needs to spend money, if she doesn't have the authority, we'll just come forward with a ratification because we know it's time. Just for due diligence on the same issue. Right. I mean, I just want to make sure that somebody's at least looking at this and kicking the tires to see if there's a possibility to do this. I know that, you know, if you don't have to spend the $25,000, you don't have to spend the $25,000. Tomorrow, there could be a notice of sale that they're looking to sell. I mean, who knows what could go on, but I think you should at least have that opportunity if you determine that you need it, and I think we should at least look at it, you know. We definitely need to have staff follow PACER and follow the case to see where it stands, but I think at this time, I think we do need legal advice if we want to see how we would move forward, but again, this case is not going to happen tomorrow. It's going to take a lot of time and effort to wash out, so stay tuned. By the way, I just wanted to make sure I did get a text from the sheriff, and he's correct. The sheriff was not invited to this workshop to my knowledge. You know, I just, before I said he could have come here, you know, but he wasn't formally invited to come and to participate, so I just want to make sure I clear that for the record. And like I said, I just wanted to again thank Commissioner Udine for bringing up this effort to save us hundreds of millions. Whether it works out or not, it was a good try. And send that to Facebook. What's the... Thank you, everybody. Have a great day. Michael, Michael? Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.