The meeting of the Broward County Commission is about to begin. Will all audience members please silence your cell phones. For those viewing from home or on mobile devices, thank you for watching. To stay informed about Broward County government, please visit Broward.org or follow us on social media. County Commission meetings are open to the public. Members of the public wishing to be heard on any agenda item can register one of two ways. Visit registertospeak.broward.org and fill out the online registration form. Or scan the QR code posted in various locations inside and just outside the commission chambers to register on your mobile device. A registration form must be completed for each item you wish to speak on. If you have trouble registering digitally, visit county administration on the fourth floor for assistance. All speakers must appear in person. No further speaker signups will be accepted after an item has been called. Please show respect for others and refrain from making impertinent, slanderous remarks or personal attacks. Boisterous behavior, including applause, booing, and cheering is not permitted. Thank you for joining us. The meeting will begin shortly. Okay, commissioners, please come to the dais. Commissioners, please come to the dais. A mic in the back. I'm going to need it louder soon. Good morning, everybody. Can you take your seat, please? Senator, how are you doing? Ready? All right, good morning, everybody. Let's start. Thank you. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the Broward County Commission. Today is September 10, 2026. I'd like to ask everybody if you would please rise for our Pledge of Allegiance, and please remain standing afterwards. And we're going to have our new county attorney, Anika Ashton, lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. Please remain standing. Ladies and gentlemen, it's customary that we observe a moment of silence, honorable, of notable persons from our community. First, can I go around the dais to see if anybody wants to be recognized? Start with Commissioner Rogers. Good morning, everyone. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Today, we honor Dawson Isaiah Lindo, affectionately known to so many of us as Uncle Dalton, was a pillar of dependability and warmth, touching countless lives through his long, over 30 years career with the transit department and his faithful service in the Sierra Calvary Baptist Church bus ministry. Then, Dalton's adventurous spirit, kind heart, and willingness to serve others left an indelible mark on his neighbors, friends, and church family. He will be deeply missed, but his legacy of community service and goodwill lives on for all of us. He's a driver, and I used him a lot, so I have to recognize him, Mr. Mayor. Then, Reverend Dr. Nesta R. Hyatt, we extend our deepest condolences to the Hyatt family and the entire Gateway Church, Fort Lauderdale community. The passing of Reverend Dr. Hyatt is a profound loss. Over more than 50 years of ministry, our extraordinary pastoral heart, personality, generosity, and nonjudgmental spirit made everyone feel truly valued and loved. From co-founding the church in 1973, and Gateway Christian Academy in 1993, to carrying forward a beautiful shared vision after our husband. Our hearts, true, our prayers are with the family, and I recognize you today. Reikland Anderson, Reikland Lavoisseur, Andy, Marcel Anderson, was a prominent Jamaican filmmaker, editor, and entrepreneur who founded the Jamaica Record and Spree D Cleaners. He passed away at age 83 on August 30th. Our deepest, most heartfelt sympathies extended to his wife, Nancy, his daughters, son-in-law, grandchildren, extended family, and friends. Your footprints are all over Broad County, my friend. You will be missed. Kenneth Dodger Simpson was a devoted husband, grandfather, and friend. He will be missed by the community because he was a heart of certain years of Lauderdale Lakes. You can tell that's my home city. So, just want to recognize you and your family. Thank you, colleagues and friends. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Those of us of a certain age remember two dates. We remember where we were when we heard John F. Kennedy was shot, and we remember where we were when we heard the planes hit the building 25 years ago tomorrow. It particularly resonated 9-11 with me. I had had dinner at Windows on the World less than 10 days before it ceased to exist. I was in the air, I think Senator Rich probably was, also flying up to Tallahassee for Senate committee meetings when I was literally in the air when the planes struck. And they ordered immediate grounding of planes, but we were on final approach anyhow to Tallahassee. The memory of that day and everything around it will live with all of us forever. It was a tragedy of unimaginable seriousness, and I think in many ways we're still recovering from it. And I ask everybody to remember not only all the people that died that day, but all of the first responders who continue to suffer from what occurred during those days. And that's all I have, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. On that same note, let's remember the people that were in, not only at the building, but all the people that have been affected in the wars afterward. Because there's thousands and thousands of people, soldiers, families that have been disrupted from that. And it's something I think we all have to think about over the last 25 years, how that has affected not only them, but the entire country. I'm sorry, I have one more. I did want to remember Donnie Galanti, who was Mayor Galanti's husband. They were a great team. She was mayor for 20 years, and he was at her side the whole time. And we all know how much it takes the effect on spouses and what it means. But he was a wonderful guy, an actual brain surgeon, smart guy. And he'll be missed, and my thoughts go out to his family. Former County Administrator Floyd Johnson left us a couple weeks ago. I just want to recognize him and his family and pray for them and all of the bereaved families in Broward County. Thank you. Sorry, I did not know that Don had passed away. I go back a long way with him. We graduated from Miami Beach High together. Oh, wow. Yes, we did. So he was a wonderful, wonderful person and a great support to Mara. Yeah. I would like to recognize someone that wasn't physically part of our community, although she was here many times. But she was physically a part of the entire United States and maybe even the world, and that's Gloria Steinem. She was an inspiration and a trailblazer whose life and leadership helped transform the fight for women's equality. She died last week at the age of 92. She helped sustain the women's movement through the entire second half of the 20th century and into the 21st century, helping move feminism into the mainstream and building a movement for women to have power over our bodies, our lives, and our futures. She founded Ms. Magazine and the National Women's Political Caucus, which seeks to increase political involvement among women. She spent decades as a journalist, activist, and organizer fighting for women to have an equal voice, equal pay, and equal power. She believed that the real change came from communities, not from waiting for leaders to hand it down. Gloria was instrumental in giving women the confidence and the courage to run for office. Her relentless advocacy inspired generations of women to know their power and to take their rightful place of leadership. She never stopped fighting for justice and equality. At a moment when our freedom is under attack, we must carry her fight forward and continue the work to which Gloria devoted her life. May her memory be for a blessing. Thank you. Thank you. Tuesday was supposed to be the groundbreaking of the cove and affordable housing project that we had in Broward County. And I got an email late in the afternoon that it was canceled, and I didn't think much of it at the time. And then the next day, I found out that we lost Nick Roja from Affiliated. Nick Rojo, young guy, a great family man, a successful young guy. One of our affordable housing developers at Affiliated Development, him and Jeff have done a lot of great work in Broward County, as far as bringing affordable housing projects to our area. And he was also a great mentor to a lot of younger professionals that were starting off in the business. Nick always spent time with them. He was a good business person, a good developer, but even a better man and a better person. And I think the Rojo family should be in our prayers. Thank you. I'd also like to recognize the victims of 9-11 25 years ago. As a former airline employee, I sympathize certainly with folks on those three aircrafts that were used as weapons of mass destruction. Recently, we all know about the accident with the Amazon aircraft. Again, these are airline employees going about their jobs that died on the job. So I certainly want to recognize the work of all airline employees and the sacrifices that they make every day, not knowing whether they are flying or on the ground, if they will go home to their families. And so that's my, basically, sympathies to them. Thank you. Let us also honor all the brave men and women who have served and continue to serve in our armed forces, both here and abroad, and thank them for their service. And I'd like to pause a moment of silence for them. Thank you. Please take your seats. Commissioner Fisher is on the line. Is that, Commissioner Fisher, are you there? Good morning, Mayor. Thank you for the music and breakfast. You had played Dolly Parton and Alan Jackson, so thank you for that. And just if you need to say something, just please, just interject, and I'll be glad to stop that. Monica? Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor, I believe, if I'm not mistaken, I believe there may have been a recent birthday or something that... Yeah, I didn't know there's somebody here that just had a birthday that doesn't like to be recognized, but Sadie Tavares, my chief of staff, just had a birthday. Thank you, Sadie. Today also, as I said, when we selected Anika to run our pledge allegiance, to say the pledge allegiance, welcome as our county attorney, official county attorney, and welcome. And there's a few people here that would like to show your support. I'm going to run through this very quickly. Where's your husband? Eric. Eric's there. Welcome. We have people from the Caribbean Bar Association. Just stand up. Everybody stand up when I call you. We have Wilkie Ferguson, Jr. Bar Association, Bernice Gaines, Dorn, Black Women's Lawyer Association, Virgil Hawkins, Florida Chapter National Bar Association, T.J. Reddick Bar Association, Broward County Bar Association, Miami-Dade County Bar Association, Miami-Dade Chapter of the Florida Association for Women Lawyers. I know I'm missing some. We should have... I don't know if it's the state attorney. Carol Pryor is here. Mr. Anika's father. William, where are you? Come on, sir, stand up. We've got the Florida Bar Young Lawyers Division president, and I've got the Miami-Dade chapters. Whoops. And if I'm not missing anybody, please, let's all come up, and we'll take a quick picture, if that's okay. Sorry. Anika, why don't you go down there, and we'll stay up here. Look what you did. Look at this. Look at what you did. Will you call me? I need to talk. Hey, let's move on. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Let's move on. Let's move on. I don't work for you. I'm sorry. I'll open the right. Oh, yeah, yeah. Come on. I work at the behest of the man. How about that? You'll be working for the behest of yourself soon. See, Harold. Harold, be well. You'll let me know? Yes, sir. Come here. Anika, do you want the rest of the day off? Do you want the rest of the day off? I think there's a lot of work to get done, Mayor. Can I have it? Okay. Pardon me? The mayor, thank you for recognizing me, and thank you for all these folks who came out today and to support me as the county attorney, and, of course, for all of you, for your confidence in me and having me here, and my staff in the county attorney's office, who are some of the best attorneys here in Broward County and the state of Florida, and we're so proud to represent you. Thank you. So we're going to do some proclamations to start first, and the first one, just so everybody kind of gets geared up, you know, we have an organization that actually promotes South Florida, Broward County, not only nationally but internationally, and it happens to be the Florida Panthers, and them winning the Stanley Cup. Their season starts, the preseason starts this month, and then I think beginning of October is the regular season, and I wanted to first get everybody in the mindset, so we've got about 20 seconds of the mindset of the Florida Panthers. Mike Jorgensen, show us the mindset. Okay. So with that, now we're all ready to go. I'm sure they're ready to sell more season tickets. I wanted to first introduce somebody. Everybody may remember for all the years we dealt with Matt Caldwell. Obviously, Matt has moved on, and I want to introduce everybody to somebody. Really, what a great guy. His name is Mike White. Mike, why don't you stand up? Mike is the president of business operations, joined in March 2026, and he has an impressive background, brings 25 years of executive leadership experience across technology, media, hospitality, consumer products, live experiences. Spent 11 years in a senior leadership position with Disney. Most recently served as chief product officer of one of Amazon's autonomous mobility companies. Most importantly, great guy, and he'll do us great. And Mike, welcome to South Florida. Come on up, Mike. This is your unprepared. We just want to welcome you to South Florida. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, everyone. A warm welcome. You've all provided for me, and really appreciate the support. And yeah, I mean, we look at the Florida Panthers as a platform for the community, and so really honored to be here. And so thank you so much for the warm welcome. Mike, welcome. Second, what has to do with the Panthers. Everybody talks about the players. What a great team, and they may talk about the coach, but the real genius behind the team, the person that puts it together, the person responsible for putting a great team on the ice is the general manager, Bill Zito. And we're going to give today, Bill, a proclamation, so I'm going to come on down. Let me just read this to you, okay? Where is Bill Zito, born September 16th. That's in how many days? What do you got, six days? A couple days. 1964, accomplished American ice hockey executive, attorney, professional sports agent, who currently serves as president of hockey operations, general manager of the Florida Panthers. Bill Zito was born in Pittsburgh. To William Zito, former University of Pittsburgh, and I've got Pittsburgh Steelers football player, Priscilla Zito, and spent his formative years in Whitefish Bay, Wisconsin, that great Midwestern guy here, attending University School of Milwaukee in Phillips Andover Academy. And whereas Bill Zito graduated from Yale University, where he played varsity ice hockey from 1984 to 87, and was a member of the Delta Kappa Epsilon fraternity, later continuing his academic journey going to the University of Wisconsin Law School. Following his graduation from law school, Bill practiced in New York, Chicago, representing elite National Hockey League players. And then Bill emerged as one of the most promising executives in professional hockey, earning interviews for multiple NHL general manager positions due to strategic vision and executive acumen. And on September 2nd, 2020, Zito was hired as the general manager of the Florida Panthers, ushering in a historic era of success, success, innovation, competitive excellence for the organization. And in 2024, he was promoted to president of hockey operations and general manager. Under his leadership, the Florida Panthers achieved extraordinary milestones, including back-to-back Stanley Cup championships in 2024, 2025, both secured a memorial final victories, memorable, sorry, memorable final victories over the Edmonton Oilers. During his first five seasons with the Panthers, Zito was a four-time finalist for the Jim Gregory General Manager of the Year Award, earned recognition for his impactful roster decisions, including being named TSN Trade Center General Manager of the Day. And lastly, whereas Bill Zito has made a lasting, profound impact on the Florida Panthers franchise, the South Florida community, and the broader world of professional hockey through his dedication, leadership, and commitment, now therefore, be it proclaimed, Board of County Commissioners, that today, September 10th, is Bill Zito Day in Broward County, Florida, in recognition of his exceptional achievements, his contributions to the sport of hockey, and exemplary leadership of the Florida Panthers. I didn't say that. Now, look at this. Thank you. And we're going to give you a key to the county. Oh, that's wonderful. So I'm not sure what door fits, but you're going to have to find us. Thank you. Anyway, welcome and thank you. Thank you, Mayor Bogan. Thanks, all of you. This is pretty fun. I didn't expect this. Thank you very much. And thank you all for your support and your friendship. It's nice to know, particularly, you know, from the sports side of the house, that we have real fans. And when we see everybody at the rink, please, please say hello. Please come by and say hi, because without you, we can't do this. And it's much appreciated, and thank you very much for this. It's very nice. Made my day. You guys want to come down? Or do you want to stay up there? Now, Monica, is this in every year? Like, is it now forever? Can I drive fast? That's not my decision, sir. If you want to get all your tickets, you've got to go see the sheriff's office. Sheriff, come on up here and take your stuff in. Down here. Come on down. Down here. Down here. Down here. Down here. Um... I guess I can... I'll take a picture in there, just in case I may have to use it. Okay, guys, can we continue? Commissioners, can you come back to your seats, please? All right, our next proclamation is to do with Feeding South Florida. Who's here from Feeding South Florida? Whereas in Broward County, the most recent statistics indicate that there are approximately 205,000 people facing hunger issues, and 72,000 of the 200,000 are children. Broward's average cost of a meal is estimated $4, higher than the state average due to the high cost of living. Since 1981, Feeding South Florida has worked to end hunger in Broward County by providing our community with immediate access to nutritious food. And whereas Feeding South Florida leads hunger and poverty advocacy efforts in our community while transforming lives through innovative programming and education that provides economic growth and overall well-being. And whereas on the day we recognize Hunger Action Month and Go Orange Day by wearing orange to bring awareness to hunger here in Broward County, Broward County, we annually host a special Hunger Awareness Month Go Orange Food Drive to collect food through September with all collections being donated to Feeding South Florida. Whereas Hunger Action Month and Go Orange Day provides opportunities for communities and individuals to engage and sponsor local activities such as fundraising, food collection, social media promotions, and volunteering to have a lasting impact on ending hunger in South Florida. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County Commissioners, Broward County, Florida, that the Board hereby designates September of 2026 as Hunger Action Month in Broward County, Florida to bring awareness to the issue of hunger and encourage everyone to join Feeding South Florida as we end hunger one bite at a time. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Somebody want to say something? Hi, everyone. Thank you. I want to thank Mayor and the Commissioners and, of course, Broward County at large for supporting and recognizing Hunger Action Month. The need, unfortunately, continues to grow, not only in our county but nationally, and we do encourage everyone to please take action in this September and beyond. Ways to get involved with us is to volunteer and donate and bring awareness and advocate on our behalf. And to learn more information, you can visit us at feedinsouthflorida.org. Thank you and have a great day. How can someone donate? You can donate by dropping off directly to our facilities at Pembroke Park. We are located at 2501 Southwest 32nd Terrace, not too far off of the 95. And we also have another location in Boyden Beach as well. Thank you. You're very welcome. Thank you. Yeah. Yeah. I just want to say, you guys do an amazing job for this county. Yeah, I've had a chance to go to your facility, an incredible operation, and the thousands of people you guys help every day. Thank you for everything you're doing. Thank you very much. And I do welcome everyone who's interested in a tour to come out and see our facilities as well. And the tables, so the tables are fine. I have the mic, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Commissioner Rogers, take it away. Requested by Hazel Rogers, your District 9 Commissioner, and it's all about Florida Civic Week and what it does here in the state and in our country. Florida Civic Week is an annual statewide observance dedicated to promoting civic education, encouraging public participation, and strengthening Floridians' understanding of the rights, responsibilities, and democratic principles that support effective government. And whereas, observed each September in recognition of the signing of the United States Constitution on September 17, 1787, Florida Civic Week provides an opportunity to reflect upon the enduring values of representative government, individual rights, civic responsibility, and active citizenship. And whereas, a meaningful civic engagement strengthens communities by encouraging residents to vote, attend public meetings, communicate with elected officials, volunteers, serve their communities, advocate for issues of importance, and participate in decisions that affect their quality of life. One event that I'm proud of is the Mayor and Commissioners for a Day. It's a great way to engage your children, and I recognize 20 years of service with that activity, the Lauderdale Lakes Kiwanis Club. Whereas, civic education play a vital role in preparing future generations to become informed voters, responsible citizens, thoughtful leaders, and active participants in the democratic process. Engagement in civic engagement in civic engagement in Tallahassee is an example of such action, while fostering respect, cooperation, and a greater appreciation for public service. And that's another event that we started locally to make sure our children are exposed to this form of government. Whereas, Broward County proudly recognizes the importance of an informed and engaged community and encourages residents of all ages to participate in civic life, strengthen connection within their neighborhoods, and work collaboratively towards a more inclusive, responsive, and prosperous community. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County Commissioners of Broward County, Florida, that the week of Monday, September 14th through Friday, September 18th, is hereby designated as Florida Civic Weeks. And encourage all Broward County residents to deepen their understanding of the government we have, the government we will vote for in this civic process. Exercise your rights and responsibility as citizens, and contribute to the continued strength and vitality of your community. Go, go, go, go, go, piggy, go, go, photo up. Let me recognize, oh, I see three of my cities here. Thank you. I invited my cities to participate. And then I know I'm following the rules, Mr. Mayor, only two people can speak. So I put all the names in a basket, and I came up with two vice mayors. That was the easiest way to stay out of trouble. Okay? I don't know about you. I want all of my cities to continue to love me. So the vice mayors, and there are two ladies. Do you think someone played with that, how that worked out today? Thank you. Thank you. Lauderdale Hill, city manager, is here representing Lauderdale Hill, and of course, Lauderdale Lake, vice mayor, and of course, Oakland Park, vice mayor. So you two ladies have one minute. Thank you. Good morning, everyone. I thank you so much, Commissioner Browder County Commissioner Hazel Rogers, and to all of the commission team. Thank you so much. I am vice mayor Sharon Thomas from the We Care City of Lauderdale Lakes, and we're all here because we are engaged in our civic duty to improve the lives of each and every one of our residents and those that live in the county. So on behalf of the mayor, Mayor Veronica Edwards-Phillips, and my colleagues, and the community, we say thank you so much. I never leave home without these. Good morning. It is my sincere honor to thank the Honorable Hazel Lee Rogers and the Broward County Commissioners for presenting this recognition to the City of Oakland Park. We are truly grateful for this honor and for your commitment to promoting civic engagement and educating our citizens about the importance of being active participants in our democracy. On behalf of the City of Oakland Park, thank you for recognizing us during Florida Civics Week. We are proud and honored to accept this proclamation, and I cannot stress enough how important it is to be engaged civically throughout the community, and it is something we should truly start passing on to the schools very early on, teaching them how to give back, and I am thankful again for this honor. Thank you very much. Item number 57, withdrawn for staff review, will be resubmitted for the September 22, 2026 agenda. Other modifications? Item 40, the board's consideration is based upon the item with the amended motion statement as shown in additional material 40A. Item 65, Commissioner Rogers' request to be added as a co-sponsor at the request of sponsoring commissioner. This item will be heard immediately following item number 59. Scrivener errors, item 30, the board's consideration of this item is based upon the item with the corrections shown on the attached page. Attachment A of Scrivener errors. Move to consent. Items number 64, 67, and 70 be moved to consent. Move from public hearing to regular. Items 52 and 53 be moved to regular. Time certain. Item 60 is time certain for 1230 p.m. For following the regular meeting, whichever occurs first. Additional material. Items number 1A, 1B, board appointments. Item number 14A, attachment B, borough county land use plan proposed text amendment PCT 26-5, submitted by Commissioner Steve Geller. Item number 19A, memo to the board, submitted by purchasing division. Item number 20A, planning council findings, submitted by office of the county attorney. Item number 56A, airline airport lease and use agreement template, submitted by aviation department. Item number 56B, signatory terminal building lease agreement, template, submitted by aviation department. Item number 64A, joint Broward County Commission and Broward School Board Workshop agenda, submitted by county administration. Item 68A, documents and attachments, submitted by office of the tax collector. Additional material, public hearing. Item number 38A, correspondence from interested parties, submitted by planning council. Item number 40A, amended motion statement, submitted by office of management and budget. Item number 50A, proposed amendment, submitted by mayor. Mark Bogan. Item number 53A, yard waste evaluation, submitted by Commissioner Bean Furr. Item number 53B, clarifying statement of subject report, yard waste evaluation, submitted by Commissioner Bean Furr. Item number 53C, support letter and email correspondence, submitted by Commissioner Lamar P. Fisher. Mr. Mayor, I know there's a group here that would like to compliment you on the health tax, the surtax, whatever, the tax that we're doing for health care, one that we all like, and it's going to be on the consent agenda. So they were here to speak up in supporting that item, and they found out it's on the consent agenda. I'm actually pulling, we'll go around, but I'm going to pull 67. Thank you. I'll start with you, Commissioner Rogers, for polls. Do you have any polls? That one that we vote like. 67. You vote, but pulling 67, okay. Steve? Mr. Mayor, if I can ask county attorney. I was going, I spoke with the tax collector, I was going to suggest that we postpone item 68 till our next meeting. Would the appropriate time be to do that now, or it's not really a poll? Let's wait till later. Okay, thank you. Any polls? No, sir. Just for comment, 22. So we're pulling 22? Yeah. Vice Mayor? No. Senator? Um, 34, because it's a motion to direct, and I don't think that we should be doing that at this point before we have a conversation and some analysis of what we already have. So I don't know if you want to pull it, or... It's up to you. Do you want to pull it? Uh, well, I don't want it to be on consensus, yes. So it's pulled, 34 pulled. Commissioner? Nothing? Commissioner? And 10 for Senator Rich as well. I'm sorry? It's item 10 for Senator Rich as well. Yeah. Senator Rich is pulling 34. And 10. And 10? For an abstention. Okay. County Minister? Michael will handle the public polls. So we have five. We have one, 10, 21, 26, and 67. Wait, slow it down, please. Can you do it again, please? Item number one? Yep. Number 10? Yep. Number 21? Yep. Number 26? Okay. And number 67. Did you say five? I did not say five. Did I say five? He said there were five polls, but not number five. Sorry, sorry, sorry. Ah, so you did say. And 34. No, no. No. I was going to. Okay. I'll ask our county attorney if she would like to phrase the motion. The consent agenda before the board are items two through 33 minus items 10, 21, 22, and 26. And adding to consent items 64 and 70. Mr. Mayor, I would move approval of the consent agenda as read by the county attorney. I have a second. Can I make sure you said 22? I just said two through. You want to repeat it again, please? So the consent agenda are items two through 33, adding to the consent agenda items 64 and 70, minus items 10, 21, 22, 26, and items one and 33, which were originally on the consent agenda are also pulled. And 34, right? 34. 34. One and 34. They said one through four. Yeah, one through 34. She got it right. We're getting it wrong. Except. As soon as he gets back to the country. All right. I got a motion? I made it. Motion. Second? Second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Show that passing. I don't know if Lamar's on. Let's just say passing 8-0. Okay. Let's go to number, start with number one. We have a public poll number one. Item number one. Motion to approve appointments of individuals to various boards, including those provided with the original published agenda and those identified in the additional material distributed for this item. Erica Saunders. I'm sorry, what's the person's name? Erica Saunders. Erica Saunders. You hear? Yes? No? No. Second. I have approval. A motion for item one. I have a second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Show that passing 8-0. Let's go to item 10 for Nan. Okay. This is for an abstention. I serve on the Board of Kids in Distress, which would be financially impacted if item 10 is approved. I do not receive any compensation for serving on this board, and I therefore have no actual statutory voting conflict. However, to avoid the appearance of a conflict, I am abstaining from item 10 and ask that this be reflected in the minutes. Okay. Can I have a motion for 10? Move approval. Mr. Mayor? Yes. You have a speaker. Item number 10A, motion to adopt budget resolution transferring funds within the law enforcement trust fund. 10B, motion to adopt budget resolution transferring funds within the law enforcement trust fund for the Barrett Sheriff's Office in the amount of $17,270 to fund the Dania Beach District. One member of the public has signed up to speak on the item, Chris Nelson. Chris Nelson, please come forward. Welcome. Good morning, commissioners. Chris Nelson. I hope everybody had a good summer. And summer still goes on. It's pretty hot out there still. But love living in South Florida. So the reason I pulled this item is because of the Verkata camera system. And I looked this up, and this camera system does use AI. And I'm sure you guys are probably going to pass this since it was on the consent agenda. But I just want to warn you about the dangers of AI cameras. Okay. I'm sure you've all heard of the flop cameras that have been going up. I don't really see many around Fort Lauderdale. But there's two on the Los Olos Bridge or near the Los Olos Bridge. These things are creepy. Okay. They're run by a private company that uses AI to read license plates and collect data on citizens and our movements, which could be used to be sold to advertisers for billions of dollars. And this has now become a pretty big issue. And both sides of the aisle have come out against the use of AI cameras. And I just hope that when you look at these things, because there's going to be some big decisions that you guys are going to have to make going forward in regards to AI. Now, I wish that the governor's AI Bill of Rights had been passed, but the House wouldn't take it up. The Senate passed it. But this stuff is creepy. You saw that this researcher with Anthropic just resigned and was like, oh, my God, AI is going to be smarter than all of us, and it's going to destroy humanity. And these were researchers that work at the AI companies. Now, have any of you guys seen the movie Terminator 2? Okay. Does the word Skynet mean anything to you? Okay. So James Cameron and others, the Matrix, you know, they warned us about what would happen with AI. And, you know, I take this stuff pretty seriously. So moving forward, I would really debate this and talk about this and do what you can to protect citizens against abuses by AI, AI license plate readers and companies. And I don't know about you, but this stuff in the hands of Broward Sheriff Gregory Toney, I do not like that. Thank you. Mr. Mayor. Let's go talk. You know, you may think it's joking around about Terminator 2, but I've heard the same thing. I've heard the same thing from people that worked at these AI companies and left. But I'll go start with Senator Geller. Mr. Mayor, I don't think that item 10 is the place to be debating this because this is just a transfer in the budget. But Mr. Nelson has raised a serious question. I don't know if Broward County has a policy on these cameras, if it's up to the sheriff or the individuals. Again, 99% of the counties incorporated, but I assume that a lot of the cameras would be going on our right of way. I would ask that staff in the next 30, 45 days, something, get back to us with just what our policy is currently. Do we permit these? Do we leave them up to the cities and then authorize them to use our county right of way for their cameras? It's a good issue that he's raised, not on item 10, but I agree that it is an issue that the commission should discuss. So I'd like to hear from staff what our current policy is. Isn't item 10 where they're going to use that money for those cameras? 10A. Yes. So it is item 10. I mean, do you guys have an issue? Do you want to defer it and talk about this more? Or do you want to get your input? Yes, Commissioner. All I would say is on this, I'd make a motion to approve 10B and C and just not take up item A and let's get the rest of the money that needs to be done. But I don't disagree with that. And what happened yesterday was the exact thing was that there's a greater than – there's not a 0% chance that all of this destroys all of humanity. There is some level of – I mean, that's all they're talking about. And the flock cameras are becoming a big issue. I think that there's a lot more to it because I brought this up in my agenda review. We don't have really a lot – flock is an actual individual company. But there is a lot of this with data compilation of what's going on and what can be used for and who's getting the compilation. Walking around with your cell phone, by the way, is just as dangerous in some of these because they can track exactly where you're going. And it's like when you go somewhere the next day, you get 16 ads from the place that you were just at. That's what this is about. So I'll make a motion to approve items 10B and C. Second. I have a motion. A question. Oh, sure. Go ahead. How much authority do we have over – I know it's a budget amendment. But how much authority do we have over making this decision or overturning what we perceivably see as our fear or concern? So this might be better suited for the attorney, County Attorney Ashton. But what I will say is for these, you're exactly right about procedurally. Item 10 is largely a procedural item that Broward Sheriff's Office comes and requests money to be able to be moved from LETF, from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund. But as far as what your question is about the county commission's authority over decisions that the sheriff would make on equipment that he would purchase for camera equipment or otherwise, I don't know that we have much jurisdiction, but I will defer to the county attorney. I've always been told. So as county administrators pointed out, right, so this is a LETF approval, which statutorily runs through the county since we control the budget. But the attorney general and the case law supports that we provide significant discretion to the sheriff for the use of those funds and approval of these types of LETF items. And so this is just a budget resolution for use of the funds. And then secondarily, the issue, it's a kind of lower level issue about what the sheriff chooses to do, depending on what the, you know, so if this was for something for use for one of our functions, then we would be more involved. But for this, we wouldn't have the ability to say, no, you can't use the LETF funds for this function. So there's no need in us pulling an A out if we can't control the end result of the cameras going in. I mean, we could pull A out and get the position of the sheriff before we approve A. We can't get the position of the sheriff on anything. So why would we waste this time? Why can't we just move it forward if we don't have teeth to bite it or pull it back? Can I? I'm just looking for clarification on my question. I'm going to go around. I got Hazel. Okay. Okay. Mr. Rogers. I am also, I have the same concerns relative to what the sheriff can do with monies that he has jurisdiction over. And that has been a conversation of this board, not to pick on just this item, but I want to speak to a camera and where they're placed. We might not have certain authority, but by having a discussion on that item, we might have a resolution. And if we don't, we go to Tallahassee, and that's why we advocate and just enjoy our civic engagement. If they don't know how we feel because we did not discuss it, what I just saw happen here just now, civic engagement prompted this discussion. We did not pull it. It was the community that pulled it. So all we are saying, we can discuss, we can build consensus, and then we move forward by going to Tallahassee and advocating for why it is not the best use of dollars. All right. I don't know, but I think this discussion is good, and I need to understand this a little bit more. Mr. Scherfer. Thank you. I've always, from even being at the City of Hollywood and here, I've always understood that we have, as you said, it's significant discretion, but it's not no discretion. In other words, we do have a say on this. And if we see something that, you know, piques our interest, like this does, we absolutely can be making note of it, asking for justification, asking for, let them know our concerns, and go from there. It'll probably come back to us, but we do have that, correct? That's correct. So I think it is one of those things where it's probably worth asking the sheriff for his justification and noting the concerns that have been brought up. Commissioner Davis. Thank you. I do believe this is an item that we can discuss separate and apart from this item. So this involves the City of Weston, apparently, as well, and in terms of a policy, which is separate and apart from what the sheriff is doing, that can be implemented even afterwards. So, for example, if the county wanted to say, well, no flood cameras on county-owned roads, that's separate and apart from this. So I think moving forward with this can be done while we make our administrator ask her to look into what our policies are, where we stand, bring it back to us for discussion, to make, you know, an informed decision on flood cameras in general. But to stop this now without having a proper policy in place, to me, is premature. I think they should go forward, and then we look about discussing flood cameras in general, just as the state has done. They decided no flood cameras on state roads. You know, so regardless of what's happening here, they can't put it on a state road. And if we look at it and decide we don't want them on county-owned right-of-ways or whatever, that's separate and apart from this. I think we should go forward with this and then come back in either a workshop or something like that to discuss the flood cameras in general. Okay. Yeah. I totally agree with Commissioner Davis on this. If you look at what this is, the sheriffs submitted this for Law Enforcement Trust Fund money to fund the Westin District Vercata camera system. The system upgrades will include the use of AI-enhanced cameras and will allow the system to be connected to the BSO Real-Time Crime Center. So you're taking away this ability for Westin to do that. And I don't think that we should be doing that, and especially not now. We don't have information. I believe we should pass this as it is and come back and have this conversation. In other words, this is your district and you'd like it approved. I would. Mr. Mayor, just in closing, because I think we've heard the good debate, but I remember in 2022 the legislature passed a law that unfortunately and over the objections of most of the counties gave the sheriffs pretty much complete unilateral discretion to move dollars inside their budget. And I agree with what Senator Rich and Commissioner Davis said. You know, Mr. Nelson did raise an important point that we need to discuss. I just don't think it has to be as part of this. I agree with what the vice mayor said, and I think we should pass it the way it is, but still come back and discuss the policy. Sir, you'd like to arrest? Who did you want to arrest? I'm joking. Come on up and speak. We've already gotten a subpoena this morning. Good morning, Mayor, Commissioners. My name is Sam Cavalieri. I'm the district chief of the Browns Sheriff's Office, Westin District. Just to give this purchase some perspective, this is for interior, exterior security cameras around the district office and footprint. So it's not the discussion about FLOC and LPR. They are not LPR cameras. They are security cameras that would communicate with the real-time crime center, but there's surveillance cameras to add to the security of the district office. Thank you. I think we should have this discussion on policy on other stuff. But did you, Commissioner Udine? I'll withdraw, based on the comments by the chief, I'll withdraw my motion and make a motion to approve item 10. Item 10. Thank you, sir. A, B, and C. Can we take it together, counsel? Yes, we can take all of item 10. So I have a motion now for 10 A, B, and C together. I have a second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? I have to abstain because of kids in distress being part of this. Show that passing 7-0, unless, Lamar, are you there? Okay, no. And then you're, and the vice mayor, I think, is shaking his head yes? Yeah. Yeah, see? So I telepathically knew that you were voting yes on that. 7, yes. Thank you, sir. It's approved. So passed. Yes. And Chris, I think it's a great topic you're bringing up, and we're going to have something on our next agenda to discuss some type of policy. Thank you for bringing that up. Mr. Mayor. It's 7-0 with one abstention. Pardon me? To note the abstention on the record. Right. Yes. Sorry, correct. And Ms. 7-0-1 abstention. Yes, 7-0-1 abstention. Thank you. Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor. Hold on, Steve. For clarification, I just wanted to make sure. So I had Mr. Villalpondo was going to briefly tell you where we are, but what we could do is provide a memo to the board to outline what the board's established policy is or has been to date, and then we could bring forward an item in the future for you to discuss. So instead of maybe just having an automatic item at the next agenda, let us get back to you with the information where we are. Thank you, sir. No, and that's it. I just wanted to make sure. Number 22, I believe. 21, was that the public poll? Can you read the number 21? Item number 21, motion to adopt resolution authorizing and directing the Public Works and Environmental Services Department to file a long-range local government funding request with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. One member of the public has signed us to speak on the item, Franco Magnata. Mr. Magnata, please come on down. How are you doing? I don't think I'm speaking about has exactly what to do with this, but I'm just going to say my piece. Good morning, commissioners. Just say your name again, please. Excuse me? Please just say your name. Oh, Franco Magnata. Thank you, Franco. I'm a lifelong resident of Broward County. Sure. I'm a U.S. Army veteran. Has a dog ever changed your life? A dog has changed mine. Coming home from the military, I suffered from PTSD. And moments away from ending my life, my dog is the reason I'm standing here today. And when she passed, I made a promise to her to help as many veterans, as many dogs as I can, and I'm keeping that promise to her. I work alongside Broward County Animal Care for a few years now. I'm an AKC-certified dog trainer. I even filled in for the behavior list before they were able to hire somebody. I've been nominated Volunteer of the Year for the FAP Awards, and I'm very honored to do that for Broward County. I even helped establish the VA Bark Program, where I work alongside veterans and shelter dogs to train their dogs to be service dogs. And I'm proud to say that one of the urgent dogs from Broward County became a service dog and attends the Miami VA Hospital every day. I don't bring these things up for the accolades or the attaboys or anything like that. If you know me, you know I'm about to work. And if you ever had a dog that meant something to you, picture them now, scared in the back of a kennel, and not having a chance to do that for you. That's what some of these dogs face every day. Okay, my second question is this. When was the last time any of you attended Broward County Animal Care unannounced? In the military, we used to do what's called spot checks. We used to check your guys to make sure they're squared away at any given time to make sure they're ready for the mission. I don't mean to interrupt you, and I love animals, but you're supposed to only speak on the item. You pulled 21. When I talked to them, I think they signed me up for something different. Is there an item on animal care today? The budget tonight? That's where I'm going with it. Yeah, the best time is to speak tonight on this. Oh, yeah, but she signed me up for this one. I have no idea. Tonight, 5 o'clock. Excuse me? 5 o'clock. Your point is getting and supporting animal care. Is that correct? Yes, sir. Okay. Just was there. We delivered a lot of peanut butter and stuff over for the animals and stuff. But I'm being told. I'd love to hear you, but we're not only supposed to allow people to speak on the items that's being thrown away. So is that 5 o'clock? Yeah, 5 o'clock. And I'll give you the time to speak as much as you want on that one. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Thank you. Well, you know what I mean. Yeah. So do I have a motion on 21? So moved. I have a motion on 21 and a second. All in favor of 21. Any opposed? Show the passing 8-0. Next is Beam. You pulled 22. Yeah, just real quick. This is a reminder just to all of the other commissioners that this resilient grant is on the street or will be on the street. And it's something you really want to bring to your cities. They can leverage it. Yeah, I brought it to all my cities. They're all applying. They've got grants going. You guys would probably all want to do the same. Motion to approve. I have a motion and a second. All in favor of number 22. Any opposed? Show that passing 8-0. Going to number 26. Is that a public poll? Yes. Can you please read that? Item number 26. Motion to adopt resolution accepting a warranty D executed by self-storage sample row LC conveying real property located along the north side of Sample Road. One member of the public has signed up to speak on the item. Terry Ann McKenzie. Terry Ann McKenzie. Are you here? Go in once. Terry Ann. Okay. Do I have a motion on number 26? So moved. I'll move it since it's in my district. I'm sorry. I got a motion. No, I'll second it. I got a motion. I got two. I got two motions and two seconds. All in favor of number 26? Aye. Any opposed to that? Show passing 8-0. Next is Nan number 34. So my issue is just the question of a motion to direct on this because I don't think that we have the information. And I don't think personally that this is our role to do this. Since it's my item, do you mind if I introduce it? No. But you asked because I pulled it because I have questions about it. And I don't feel that it's appropriate to go to motion to direct if we can have maybe a discussion and see if because some people may not or may or may not be supportive of this. Okay. It's my item. So I just would like to introduce the commissioners. So at the end of the year, you know that if we have any money that has not been allocated, many of you in the past years that I've been here will allocate it toward Boys and Girls Club, 501c3s for people in the community, not people, but organizations in the community for what we've done. Everybody sitting here that's been around here has done that that I'm aware of. What I wanted to do is also there are employees that go above and beyond. And I think that's a great way to incentivize people and we could be able to recognize employees that go above and beyond and use, you know, if we want to give a thousand dollars extra to employee that goes above and beyond or whatever we want to do, I don't I think it's only a positive thing, you know, positive thing. So and that's so that's my item is so that you as the commission will have the determination of, hey, this employee went above and beyond and and it's it's your office budget. You give it to yourself. You give it to your staff or you can give it to somebody outside the staff to show that they went above and beyond for whatever reason before. So, Nan, do you want to take it from there? Yeah, I feel that we already do that. We are able to give bonuses to our staff. We do that out of money left that's left over. I think this is a very selective thing. And we have we have some processes and I maybe with Monica and Monica could, you know, join in on this. But we have county administrative awards for employees. We have the shining star award. And, you know, sometimes an employee has something that's happened, you know, for which, you know, they're on some kind of a probation or something that we might not even know about. And I just I just I think it takes us into a whole different realm of selecting staff. We all have people that we work with closely because we're on certain committees, you know, and and and we work with those people. But I think it should all be part of the the county excellence program plan. So I just have a, you know, a little heartburn about this. So, Monica, and, you know, I totally respectfully disagree with what you're saying. But does anybody else want to chime in? You know, Commissioner Furn. Yeah, I mean, I love the idea of recognizing employees. Because we have some of the best. I don't think I mean, how many employees do we have total? Almost 7,000. OK, so I'm not going to be in contact with all 7,000. That's just the reality of it. So I'm getting so a lot of people are going to be left out. I'm afraid they might there may be a little resentment factor. How would they even know, though? Because they're going to be seeing somebody being recognized and they're not. And I'm not talking about recognizing publicly. I'm just saying we allocate. So if I want to give a $500 bonus instead of to my staff sitting behind me, I want to give it to Lenny or somebody that is going above and beyond to help constituents in the field. I don't get what. Well, I remember when you were mayor before and you had you had this program. And you recognized a number of people and the one guy who did a patent for the mosquito stuff. Those kind of things that were like amazing and that we were able to kind of let the entire county know these are great things that are happening at the county. I'm a little concerned with doing the monetary part of it. I think because I think there's I do think a resentment factor might fit it come into play there. I think recognizing that is a great idea. And I think I think your your motive here is is is on, you know, on point. But I'm not sure the monetary is is the right way to do it. That's just me. And I do think Monica's I mean, the county admin already has some some ways to do this and me and what is not happening. I don't think we're having a chance to suggest to, you know, to you who we think might be deserving because we're not doing that. We're not we're out of that. We're out of that. Let me solve the problem. Does anybody support this? Does anybody support allowing you guys to allocate from your own fund? Commissioner Davis? Well, I support not from my funds, but I but I do support a monetary, you know, compensation maybe. And it could take the form of and again, it would be through the administrator. And you mentioned about a patent or something where somebody has designed something that has saved the county money. And so they have come up with something or maybe they've produced something, implemented something or raised, you know, did something that somehow you can see the return that it has saved us. So whether it's in the mechanic department, whether it's in the mechanic department, maybe there's something that they've done on the buses that then is monetarily safe in the county. There could be an incentive program for that. And then somebody gets a monetary reward. So I think that should come from the administration and I'm not opposed to a monetary reward for something that's actually saving the county money. What I'm grappling with is how when we come up with ideas as commissioners, we present it to our colleagues. If you want it, you want it, you don't want it. I mean, it's not a bad idea. I would support it. I may not utilize the program, but it's up to you to use it. But we spent or spending a lot of time on something that a commissioner thinks they want. And I just can't, you know, get past this. I've seen it time and time again. But, man, we just did something in your district with the cameras. I did it on principle and process. But the mayor said, it's your district. You speak. And you said, that's what I want. And we all agreed. And that was $189,000. These are our own discretionary dollars that even when I say I want to give it to Bethune-Cook University, one of you could say, I don't want to do that. And that's what I'm having a hard time dealing with. I just think each of us are responsible, elected officials, and we are fiscally responsible with the money that we have. And if it's something I believe in, and it's something I see that's needed in my district, why can't I have it as a commissioner? So I support it in concept. Thank you. Mr. Mayor, the two separate questions I see here. First is on a motion to direct. Motion to direct requires six negative votes not to bring it up. My policy has always been, unless I know I'm going to vote against something, then I'm okay with a motion to direct so that it can be drafted and that we can discuss it. If I were voting now, I would probably be voting no, but I would like to hear more about it, so I would be voting yes today as a courtesy, because I don't know I'm going to vote no on it, so I would vote yes. I would vote against, I would not be one of the six votes against it. However, I would ask you to consider, because this is a motion to direct only. Just to clarify, right, a motion to direct on an ordinance has six objectors, but this is just a motion to direct. The county administrator could come back and do the policy, and you will never see it ever again. So, this is directing your county administrator to take action, as opposed to the county to direct to draft an ordinance, which will come back two times for y'all. Well, Ms. Merrick, let me just finish it. Hold on one second, Steve. Yes, sir. So, even if you guys don't want to do it, all I'm asking is that if you don't want to do it, you don't have to do it. Instead of me giving a bonus to her, I want to give a bonus to somebody else. And so, what you're saying is, no, Commissioner Bogan, I don't want you to have that authority to do, and just like, you know, Senator Rich, when I had excess funds, and you said, give to the legal aid. You wanted to go to the legal aid. And I said, okay, I'll respect that. And all I'm saying is, don't do it if you don't want to do it. But you should have, you should have, you should have, each one of you should have that authority if you want to have that authority. So, if I want to give a dollar to my aid here, I want to give a dollar to a great employee, don't do it. But all I'm asking is that I have that authority. Okay, Mr. Mayor, as I was saying. So, what I would ask, I am assuming that we're going to direct county administration, because I think one commissioner can do that anyhow, but we're not, to report back to us is what I'm saying. I think any commissioner can request administration to look into something and report back. So, what I would ask, Mr. Mayor, as opposed to what you're talking about, is to, that we should consider. And I've seen different companies do this. Write, you know, if you've received great service from Mr. Smith or Ms. Jones, you know, write us. And I think it may be appropriate that, have the county commissioners to say, if we have seen somebody do a great job, inform county administrator. So, county administrator can have a pot of money for that. I am concerned, although I still think we should hear back. You've requested it. So, we should honor that request. But I think that, you know, I don't know a single person in, you know, a single bus driver, a single person in transit. And I don't know how many county commissioners do. And I think they're never going to get a bonus for many of us. Maybe Commissioner McKenzie does. But I've seen you all the time recognize a lot of them. But I don't know any of them. And I think if we're doing it, it's likely going to be people that work on this floor, people that work at the county attorney's office, who I interact with on a regular basis. I don't know that that is the best way, but maybe we could look instead at some notifying people. And then county administration can, you know, give bonuses if they determine that, you know, there's a lot of people doing it. But I will not be objecting today. And let's see what happens when it comes back to us, Mr. Mayor. But just to be clear to Mr. Wright, this is a direct for the county. Right now, as currently drafted, it's a motion to direct the county administrator to modify the policy in order to allow this. And so absent you saying or making a separate motion for something different, that's what would happen. I'm sorry. I thought this was going to come back to us. If we vote on this, I'm not ready to vote for this today. I would like to hear back from county administration on recommendations. I'm not ready to vote yes on this today. I would be ready to hear back. Anybody else? I'm ready. I'm going to vote no on this. The only reason is because I think, and I think it's a great idea, but from an organizational management point of view, it's incredibly complicated and difficult to carry this out. Our motto at Broward County is our best and nothing less. Our employees are supposed to be going above and beyond every employee that we have, back of the house, front of the house. I don't want to get into the business of having to determine bonuses. So it's a great idea. I'm just going to vote no. I respect where the idea comes from. But I don't even need the report from the county administrator because I think it puts them in a horrible position organizationally. I'd take the report from, like, David Kahn, who's not with the county anymore, or somebody who what they think that's in HR. But this, to me, is too slippery of where it's going to go, and the employees should be doing this. They get compensated highly for their best work. I'd like to hear back from the county administration on this, but not at today's meeting. Well, you know, I'm going for a vote. You could vote no. I just want to go for a vote, and nobody wants a second. That's fine. I'm going to move the item. I'm going to move the item. You want a second? I'm going to second it. Okay. I have a motion and a second. All in favor? I got myself, too. And opposed? I have to vote. You're opposed. Okay. Show that not passing. Mr. Mayor, at this point in time, having voted on the prevailing side, can I move that we reconsider and leave this pending? I would like to hear back from county administration on it. I think we should move on. The vote's the vote. The vote's the vote. If you don't think I should have that authority, I hear you. Mayor, can we move the agenda? I hear you. Oh, my God. Let's move on. Number 67, which I and Commissioner Rogers pulled, that's the OPAGA. I'd like to ask, if you don't mind, did you want to have some people? I first want to have Renee, just who dealt with OPAGA, just let the commission know what OPAGA came back with. Item number 67, motion to file performance audit of the proposed Broward County health care plan by McConnell and Jones LLP, the independent certified public accountant retained by the state of Florida's Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability to audit the proposed Broward County health care surtax. We have three speakers that have signed up for the item. The first speaker is Anika Amfroy. Do you want to do the public first? Yes. Okay, let's do public. Who do you have, who do the public here speak on? Anika Amfroy, followed by Lisa Dunkley. I guess they did not type their titles to this request, Mr. Mayor. You'll see there from your state level government. Okay. Come to the mic, the mayor. Come on down. Come on down. Just say your name, please. I was requesting to see if it was possible to have Representative Dunkley speak first because she was the last member to actually carry the portion that we're asking to include, Mayor Bogan. Is that possible to reverse the order to have Representative Dunkley speak before me? Sure. Thank you so much. That's what I was wondering. Of course. I don't care. Yes. Hi, can you just state your name, please? Good morning. Is it still morning? Yes. Good morning, Mayor Bogan and Seif Mayor McKenzie and commissioners of this great county and the administration. I am State Representative Lisa Dunkley. Thank you for giving me this opportunity to share the progress on legislation to improve uterine fibroid research that protects women's health and their privacy in the state of Florida. So, uterine fibroids affect a substantial number of women. As many as 70% to 80% develop fibroids by the age of 50 years old, with a condition becoming especially common during their 30s and 40s. Symptoms may include heavy bleeding, significant pain, fertility challenges, and even life-threatening, which affects work and family life. Fibroids are the leading reason for hysterectomy in the United States, accounting for as many as half of these surgeries. There are more than 18,000 fibroid-related hospitalizations among Florida women ages 15 to 54 in 2024 alone. That tells us why this issue deserves attention and why reliable information matters. And in 2022, the former State Representative Anika Umfroy passed House Bill 543, establishing the requirement for uterine fibroid research. Her legislation laid an important foundation for collecting information about diagnoses, demographics, and treatment. However, the original law prohibited identifying information. A woman might visit several providers before receiving diagnosis or treatment without identifying information. The Department of Health could not determine whether those reports represented different women or the same woman receiving care at several locations. That prevented accurate counting and effective implementation of that database. My legislation, however, continued to address, which was House Bill 327, which requires providers to submit the identifying information needed to distinguish patients and prevent duplicate reporting. This allows the Department to develop a more accurate picture of how many women are affected and how they are being treated. At the same time, House Bill 1515 makes the patient identifying information submitted for the database confidential and exempt from public disclosure. Women should be able to have confidence that their private health information will be protected. Both bills received unanimous support and final passage and took effect July 1st. And I would just want to say I appreciated Senator Barbara Sharif on the Senate side and the amazing staff in the House that helped us to advance this work. The Department of Health estimated that implementation will cost 994. I need you to come to an end here. I will. I will. Thank you, Mayor. 994, which is very important. But what is very important, what the state did was 988,000 approximately, they allocated reoccurring funds for uterine fibroids. So we can see the importance that the state has placed on for women's health. And we're asking, I would welcome our county, my home county, their partnership in making sure we connect women and their health providers for this very important gesture. Thank you. Who's next? Good morning. Can you just state your name, please? Yes, of course. My name is Anika Umfroy, and I'm a resident of the city of Lauderdale Lakes. Good morning, Mayor Bogan, Vice Mayor McKenzie, Commissioner Rich, Commissioner Udine, Commissioner Fisher, Senator Geller, Commissioner Furr, Commissioner Davis, and Commissioner Rogers, County Administrator Crespo, County Attorney Ashton, County Auditor Mendelton, and members of the public and the county staff. Mayor Bogan, thank you for the opportunity to address Broward County Commission today. Mayor Bogan, your dedication to a healthier Broward County through the health care surtax is a testament to your love and commitment to our county. The commission's support of it is a testament to your commitment to a healthier Broward County. Today, I'm here to speak in support of including uterine fibroids in the conditions addressed through the Importment Investment in Public Health. One million Broward County women will develop uterine fibroids, though many will go undiagnosed. My work in Tallahassee in 2022 established the Uterine Fibroids Research and Education Database. A 2026 population-based cohort studied, published in the Journal of American Health Association, analyzed insurance data for more than 2.7 million U.S. women over a 10-year period. Cardiovascular disease occurred in 5.42% of the women with fibroids, compared to 3% of women without fibroids. After accounting for other risk factors, women with fibroids had an 81% higher risk than women without it. This observation study does not prove that uterine fibroids causes cardiovascular disease, but it identifies a significant association that we cannot ignore. One million Broward County women will develop uterine fibroids. They may not know and go undiagnosed, and by adding this surtax and the law that was passed in Tallahassee that has close to a million dollars in reoccurring funds for research and development and education and re-education of the public and of our medical professionals will actually have a huge impact on the people of Broward County. It is something that started off in 2015 as an awareness resolution that was carried by Commissioner Hazley Rogers, who was then Representative Hazley Rogers, and then it came through in 2022 with an enabling law, and then in 2026 with a corrective legislation carried by Representative Dunkley and former County Commissioner, now Senator Barbara Sharif. I come before you today, Commissioners, and ask for your support of adding uterine fibroids to your health surtax. Thank you very much for your time. I appreciate you all, and thank you for the work that you do for our beloved Broward County. Thank you. Yeah, I think all these comments need to be, if it passes and then we have the funding, that's where these comments need to come in. Right now, it's a little premature. We need to win on the ballot in November, so I just wanted to let you know, once that passes, then we could, you know, talk about all the different things we're going to identify. Mr. Mayor? Mayor Bogan, I just want to say thank you for pushing forward this initiative, and we are here today just to express that there are one million Floridian Broward County women who would definitely benefit from being added to your conversation. Sure, sure, sure. Thank you. Commissioner Rogers. Yes, I would like to just continue, and I don't believe we wait until whether or not it passes, because I would like to take all of those women with me when I'm knocking on doors and asking them to support this tax, taxing themselves again, all these women of Broward County. I would like to tell them, I see you in this bill. It will benefit. You will benefit from it. That's what we're saying, and that's why I'm asking my colleagues to make sure that I don't go out and say, yes, it's something that we consider here on this dais. We would not have had an opportunity to hear from the public if this item was not pulled by you, sir. Thank you. So I say thank you, but I would like for my colleagues to understand. There are many women here, and it's every level. We have the documentation. I hear on this dais when my colleagues want to speak on an issue. Show me the science. We're giving you the science. This is not because, you know, it is because it's real. And when you make mention subject to medical professionals, advice, and policymaker's decision, routine devices to detect, evaluate, monitor, there are so many needs out here, and we know that we are truly trying to reach those persons who are indigent or medically poor, which includes what's not limited to cardiovascular disease prevention. So we're saying this is one that can be included in this additional taxpayer action or voters to support, and I think women will jump on it and help us to make sure we deliver. Yeah, we've got to be careful what we say about that ballot issue in our elected positions here. I understand. But anyway, thank you for bringing that forward. I'm getting the evil eye by the attorney, just so you know. Oh, I need to look to my left sometimes. Yeah. Yeah. So anyway, I just wanted to ask Renee. Renee, the state came and audited and wanted to see if Broward County, if it passes, what condition the county's in. And please just give us a quick thumbnail response. Absolutely. So they sent down a team of six auditors who spent about six or so weeks interviewing many, many people in the county. Kudos go out to Kevin Kelleher, Human Services, OPC, Transportation Surtax, OMB, all of whom were interviewed and produced numerous documents. The audit found that the county met expectations in 19 areas, partially met it in five areas. Those five areas were primarily things that have not yet been developed because it has not yet been voted upon by the electorate in November. I wanted to just point out to you all that the audit specifically found that the county's existing health care services demonstrate economies and efficiencies and programmatic effectiveness that provide a solid foundation for implementing the health care plan. And the audit further found that the county has the organizational capacity, staffing levels, and management practices needed to administer the proposed health care plan efficiently and effectively. Thank you. So I pass the gavel over to the vice mayor. I'd like to move forward to. Second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Show that passing 7-0. Yes. Just as a note, I think when we passed the transportation surtax, one of the main selling points was a positive APAGA review. I think when you're going out, because that is a solid review. It gives a good foundation for the voters to feel comfortable with, and it's something that you can run with. So glad to hear it. Mayor, and I agree with the comments made by my colleague, but that APAGA report, I see it has already been published on our website, so the public can see it. But that does not mean we avoid our voices in letting the community know they can request, and we're starting that process. It's just being civil. All I can say is people who have money can afford preventative screenings. People who have money can pay for these things, but the majority of the people in this county can't afford thousands of dollars every year for preventative screenings. And this really levels out. If it happened, it levels the playing field. Whether you have a dollar or a million dollars, you would be able to get the same type of technology and screening and preventative care that's never been offered before. And we understand there are many different types of challenges health-wise, that dollars will pay for it, but it does not buy life, no matter how much money you have. Thank you. So the position I'm taking, let the community know that we can ask for this to be included when it's that time. I thank you. Thank you. Okay, are we on our public hearings? Okay, hold on. Public hearing items today are 35 through 53. The reading clerk will open up each item. Recognize any members of the public signed up to speak. Upon completion of the public comment, the item will come back to the day as for any discussion vote. With the reading clerk, please move forward. The public hearing on item 35 is now open. Item 35 is a motion to adopt resolution granting renewal of a non-exclusive unrestricted Port Everglades steamship agent franchise to Metro Shore Services, LOC, for a new five-year term. No member of the public has signed up to speak on the item. Second. Second. I have a motion to second on number 35. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Show that passing 8-0. Number 36. The public hearing on item 36 is now open. This is the second of two required public hearings. The first public hearing was held on August 20, 2026. Item 36 is a motion to approve marine terminal lease and operating agreement among Brown County, HT, Shipping, Inc., and Harbor Limited for a 6.97-acre marine terminal in the Midport area of Port Everglades with a 10-year term commencing July 1, 2026 and one five-year renewal option term. No member of the public has signed up to speak on the item. Second. I have a motion to second on item 36. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Show that passing 8-0. 37. The public hearing on item 37 is now open. Item 37 is a motion to enact ordinance adopting a small-scale amendment to the county land use map PC26-2 in the city of Parkland. No member of the public has signed up to speak on the item. I have a motion to second on item 37. All in favor? Any opposed? Show that passing 8-0. Number 38. The public hearing on item 38 is now open. Item 38 is a motion to enact ordinance adopting a small-scale amendment to the county land use plan map PC26-5 in the city of Weston. No member of the public has signed up to speak on the item. Anybody moving it? I'm moving. Oh, you signed up for that? Come on down. Do you have them signed up, public speakers, for that? I have them as questions only. Okay. It doesn't matter. Come on down. So we have Diana Rosenquist and Renee Rodriguez. Hi, Diana. Right? Hi. Good morning. My name is Diana Rosenquist, and I'm a Weston resident since 2004. I want to bring your attention to one very specific issue regarding PC26-5 and Tract 59. We obtained the recorded 2013 Declaration of Restrictive Covenant for the East Golf Course. That covenant runs for 99 years and specifically identifies Tract 59 as part of the restricted East Course property. It restricts that property to golf course use or, under its provisions, recreational use or green space. What concerns us is that the applicant's own land use amendment identifies partial to the existing clubhouse property as Tract 59 with the same stated exceptions and proposes residential development on that parcel. So I respectfully ask a very simple question. Has the county attorney compared these two legal descriptions and determined whether residential development on the partial 2, Tract 59, complies with a recorded 99-year restrictive covenant? If that legal question has not been resolved, I respectfully ask this commission not to approve PC26-5 until it has been reviewed and answered on the public record. Thank you. Who's next to speak? Signed up. Renee Rodriguez. Is Renee here? Please. Yes. Good morning. I'm Renee Rodriguez, resident of Weston, resident of Weston, and I represent, I'm the president, I'm the president of the Master Association on Golf Club Road, Country Club Village. I'm sorry, my sympathies are for you. I'm sorry. Go ahead. Sorry? Yeah. It's president's association. I said my sympathies are for you. Okay. All your aggravation. Go ahead. All right. And anyway, I represent 500 units, and we have collected 1,500 signatures of all the residents concerned about this project, and we wanted to make sure that it was clear of everything that's going on, as Ms. Diane just explained already. So, I know in the paperwork it says it's a small amendment, but it looks like it's a small amendment to the developer, but I think it's going to be a large amendment for the residents. So, we just like some clarity on that. Okay. I'm going to ask our council, our county attorney, are you familiar with what type of clarity they're looking for at all? So, Ms. Scorchers here, if we want to get into the specifics, but we're just approving a land use plan, and I understand from what the issues that they have raised are essentially restrictions that favor other private owners and are not restrictions that apply to the general land use of the property. I'm sorry. I didn't understand what you said. Great. I didn't, Steve. From the county's perspective, right, so as we're approving at the land use level, right, we are looking at the legal and regulatory restrictions and rules that we have to follow at that level. The issues that they are raising, and again, Ms. Scorchers has more details, are relating to restrictions on the property that are between private property owners, and so when you do a land use plan change and these types of changes, we don't consider that. That's for the other private owner in order for them to enforce their restriction. Will this change impact private property owners in a negative way, in your opinion? I do not have an opinion on that. Will it impact property owners in a negative way? Well, it impacts property owners, right? So it is impacting the applicants who have their, whose property is going to be changing their use, the folks who have applied, and then, of course, the residents around it are going to have a different use, and that could be negative or positive, depending on who the... So if it can impact, why would we want to pass this? Well, all of the land use changes have an impact on... I understand. ...on folks. But as a county board, why is it in our best interest to pass this? So our role is to review, right, through the process, is to look at the regulatory framework and approve based on the standards that we have laid out from a general perspective, right? And so this, this amendment reaches that, and, and, and therefore, that's why it's before the board. Barbara Blake-Boy is here. Could we ask her? Ms. Blake-Boy is here from the Planning Council, which, who passed this unanimously. So I think she would have enlightened us a little bit. Hi. Good morning. Each land use plan amendment that comes before you and has a recommendation has gone through a review of facilities and analysis, such as water, sewer, park, transportation, schools. So every amendment receives that analysis. So in this situation, the application has been transmitted by the city of Weston to the Bowered County, to Bowered County for a land use plan amendment. And the review has been done. And the Planning Council did pass this unanimously at their meeting. Okay. All I was getting at is we work for the residents of Bowered County, Barbara Stayer. We work for the residents of Bowered County. And I understand what the, what the city government did, but, you know, is this, that, that's, you know, what my interest is, how it will, could negatively impact property owners. I'm not an attorney, but I concur with Ms. Ashton's analysis and that. Okay. Every lane has changed. Okay. Yep. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is what I do professionally. So I, uh, have some questions. The, um, if there is a restrictive covenant in favor of a governmental body, then a governmental body can waive that. If there is a restrictive covenant in favor of a private individual, private, or a corporation, that corporation can waive it. But they have to waive it, um, is in this particular case, I, can you tell us, or maybe this is a my take question. Can you, can someone tell us who the restrictive covenant was in favor of and have they waived that restrictive covenant? If they have, then your argument on the restrictive covenant goes away. If they have not waived it, then your argument is good. So I just need to know who the restrictive covenant was in favor of and has it been waived. And it could only be waived by the party that it was in favor of. I'm not sure who it's in favor of, but these two parcels, I am told, were not part of the restrictive covenant. The clubhouse and the golf course. And the driving range were not part of the restrictive covenant. So in other words, they're not restricted. Okay, so what you're saying is that there was restrictive covenant with a legal description of the property, but the restrictive covenant only covered a portion of the property, because the legal description would be for the entire property. Is that correct? Correct. And she advises that the golf course portion is in favor of the city of Weston. They're also here, and they transmitted it to this board. Okay. But you're saying it didn't, it was never, there was never restrictive covenant on the part so that they wanted. Correct. Okay. Correct. Are you from Weston? Can you verify that? Commissioner, my name is Tara. With your permission. Sure. I'm sorry, Mayor, Commissioners, my name is Tara Patton. I represent the property owners. We understand the residents' concern about the deed restriction. There is approximately 80-something years left on that restriction. These two parcels are not included as part of that. And someone from the city of Weston will be here. And we're happy to meet with the residents in Weston, if you'd like, and we will be happy to share that legal description so you can see that. Come on. Let it go. I'm sorry. Did you want to say something, ma'am? No. No. Okay. Yes, sir. Good morning. My name is Jim Hickey, Director of Development Services for City of Weston. This is an item that's come up in this process. We've had our attorneys review. The restrictive covenant is only for really the golf course portion, so the actual golf course. So the driving range, the clubhouse, and then there's two other parcels which were the maintenance areas for the golf course. Those are not within the restrictive covenants for what I think our residents are talking about. But we've been working with them. They're very familiar. We've been in a couple meetings with them as well. So we'll keep working with the public on the site plan portion of the process, which is underway right now. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. That answers my questions. Have we heard from the public on this besides these two individuals? So as Ms. McBoyt explained, so this has gone through the city's process and then come to us from the city and been in front of the planning council. So this is our next opportunity for involvement in this process. Thank you. Let me just say, this has been going on for years, this whole process. So this is nothing new. And as was mentioned, it's not part of the restricted property. And there are very, very few places in Weston where any housing can be built. And I think that the desire here is to try to, you know, make it appropriate for the neighborhood and everything. But, you know, I believe the city has supported, is now supporting it. They've sent it here. It's been approved by the planning council. And I think that we should go ahead and approve this. Over three years this has been going on, trying to work this all out and what kind of buildings would be on there, what kind of units and so forth. There's no affordable in here. Yeah, well, it's, it's, yeah. Well, it's $3.4 million is going into the county's affordable housing trust fund. Over $10,000 per unit will go into the county's affordable housing trust fund. But, you know, you know what my preference is. I'm not getting that. But this is, this is appropriate for the Weston community and it's been approved. And so I would hope that we would support it. We can't get any units. Any other comments? Can't get any affordable? Since no one wants to move it, I guess we're going to just drop it. I'm moving it. Oh. We have, we have, we have. I already moved it before. I got a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Yes. You sure? Yeah, I'm sure. Positive? He just likes to aggravate me. That's all. Passing, show it passing 7-0. 39, please. The public hearing on item 39 is now open. Item 39 is a motion to enact ordinance adopting county land use plan text amendment PCT 26-9, revising the city of Fort Lauderdale Uptown Activity Center. No member of the public has signed up to speak on the item. Move approval. I have a motion and a, I have a motion and a. Second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor and 39? Aye. Any opposed? Show that passing 7-0. Let's go to item, the public hearing on item 40 is now open. Is that what you want me to say? The item 40 has two parts. The board will consider and vote for both parts at the same time. Want to read part A, please? Part A is a motion to adopt budget resolution within the general fund in the amount of $37,880 to amend revenues and appropriations. Part B is a motion to adopt budget resolution within the county transportation trust fund in the amount of $98,610 to amend revenues and appropriations. No member of the public has signed up to speak on the item. No member of the public has signed up to speak on the item. I have a motion to move approval 40 A and B. Do I have a second? I have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Show 40 A and B passing. Aye. 8-0. Let's go to item 41, please. The public hearing on item 41 is now open. Item 41 is a motion to adopt budget resolutions within the special revenue funds in the amount of $11,637,782 to amend revenues and appropriations. No member of the public has signed up to speak on the item. Do I have a motion? Second. I have a motion and a second on item 41. All in favor? Any opposed? Show that passing 8-0. Item 42, please. The public hearing on item 42 is now open. Item 42 is a motion to adopt budget resolutions within the capital outlay funds in the amount of $35,332,138 to amend revenues and appropriations. No member of the public has signed up to speak on the item. Second. I have a motion and a second on number 42. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Show that passing 8-0. Let's go item 43. The public hearing on item 43 is now open. Item 43 is a motion to adopt budget resolutions within the enterprise funds in the amount of $4,397,880 to amend revenues and appropriations. No member of the public has signed up to speak on the item. I have a motion. Do I have a second, guys? Second. I have a motion and a second on item 43. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Show it. I'm passing 8-0. Let's go to item 44. The public hearing on item 44 is now open. Item 44 is a motion to adopt budget resolutions within the internal service funds in the amount of $250,000 to amend revenues and appropriations. No member of the public has signed up to speak on the item. Second. Motion and a second. All in favor of item 44? Aye. Any opposed? Show it. Passing 8-0. Item 45. The public hearing on item 45 is now open. Item 45 is a motion to adopt resolution amending section 38.18 of the county administrative code to prescribe a revised schedule of retail water and wastewater services, rates, fees, and charges. No member of the public has signed up to speak on the item. Do I have a motion? Hello? Anybody? I got a motion. Do I have a second? Second. I have a motion and a second on item 45. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Show it. Passing 8-0. Number 46. The public hearing on item 46 is now open. Item 46 is a motion to adopt resolution amending section 38.19 of the county administrative code to prescribe a revised schedule of raw water supply large user rates. No member of the public has signed up to speak on the item. Second. I have a motion and a second on item 46. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Show it. Passing 8-0. Number 47. The public hearing on item 47 is now open. Item 47 is a motion to adopt resolution amending section 38.20 of the county administrative code to prescribe a revised schedule of wastewater large user rates. No member of the public has signed up to speak on the item. I have a motion and a second on item 47. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Show it. Passing 8-0. 48, please. The public hearing on item 48 is now open. Item 48 is a motion to enact ordinance pertaining to site planning amending various sections of chapter 39 of the county code of ordinances. No member of the public has signed up to speak on the item. I have a motion. I have a motion and a second on item 48. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Show item 48 passing 8-0. 49, please. The public hearing on item 49 is now open. Item 49 is a motion to enact ordinance pertaining to motor vehicles and traffic repealing section 23.8 of the county code of ordinances. No member of the public has signed up to speak on the item. Second. I have a motion and a second on item 49. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Show passing 8-0. 50, please. The public hearing on item 50 is now open. Item 50 is a motion to adopt resolution pertaining to policies relating to proclamations repealing and replacing section 18.47 of the county administrative code. No member of the public has signed up to speak on the item. A motion for 50? There are amendments on this. Council, is there something that you want me to do differently? Do we need a motion differently? There are proposed amendments, so each of the commissioners who have the proposed amendments, if they want to submit them for consideration. Okay. That's correct. Okay. I have a motion. Do I have a second? Second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor on item 50? No. No. We have to take the amendments. Okay. Who's the first amendment? Commissioner Rogers. Your microphone, please. Amendment 1. It's gone. It's history. I'm joking. It's your first come, first serve. First come, first serve. All right. Thank you. These are my notes. Okay. I want to make sure I'm saying it the right way, Mr. Mayor. I just want to make sure the first come, I did not know how the process worked. It's behind closed doors. It's south, right? So I'm not saying anything is wrong. I just wanted to make it very clear that there's a process. There's a stamp and we know. So when it's my time, you're limiting us. We want to be out of here. We're cutting on the numbers of these proclamations that we can do. But who's proclamation gets in there first should be the one that is considered. That's what I was thinking. First come, first serve. That's all. Can I respond? Do you mind? You can clarify for me. No, not clarify. I wanted to say, so what I thought would be appropriate, let's say that Beam and Steve had proclamations and then they got another proclamation in first, but you didn't have one. What I wanted to suggest, what it should be is that if there's a commissioner that gets something in, it shouldn't be by who gets it in first. It should first be is, okay, you didn't have a chance yet, but they got in there before you. So I mean, I think that after a commissioner does a proclamation, they go to the back of the line. Mr. Mayor, that's Amendment 3 by Commissioner McKenzie does exactly what you just said. That's the mayor's proposed amendment. That's not amendment. That's the additional material. No, I'm not that technical. That's Amendment 3. That's Amendment 3. So Amendment 3, which contradicts what you're saying, is whoever gets there first, but what if beams, here, I got another one. I got another one. I heard it. And so I'm hoping that you understand, and I think it's fair, that if I do a proclamation today, I go to the back of the line, and then everybody gets before me. And if no one's there, there's still three available, then I get mine. But I should go to the back of the line once I do my proclamation. And because I did not understand why it was necessary, what you were trying to do, what went wrong? I don't know what was wrong. I'm just seeing your amendment, and I'm saying I don't want for you to be having the chair at the time to have all this power to choose who comes next. I agree. And that's all I was doing. The chair has limited power. I agree. Okay. So if Commissioner Geller is correct, if it's Amendment 3, all I'm saying is that after a commissioner does a proclamation at Meeting 1, they go to the back of the line, and everybody else gets their shot before that. And then, you know, if nobody wants to do it, if we still have a space, then that person can get another one at the next meeting. But if there are others in front, then they should come because that's what's fair. Okay. And then if the two commissioners would like to do the same topic, for instance, right, I would not know if I was the first one in or the other commissioner on the same topic. The mayor would know. So the mayor would know who comes first if it's the same topic. Okay. That's two is awesome. Because we all have the same ideas and want to support the same things, so who gets in there first should be the one given. You're talking about when there's the same two commissioners in the same topic. Yes. That makes sense. Okay. But that's up to you guys. That's up to everybody. It has to be clear with whomever is looking at these proclamations. We are not looking at it. We only get denied. Anybody can get one. Yep. I think we can leave that with the discretion of the mayor. I like your amendment, Amendment 3, which it is Amendment 3, correct? It's the third amendment. I don't know. We have not labeled them or given them an assigned number. I have Amendment 1, 2, 3, and 4, but it is the third amendment. The mayor's proposed amendment is Item 50A distributed as additional material. Mr. Mayor, I think that your amendment would be preferable to give that to priority people that don't have them. You have to give the mayor some discretion. I'm fine with your amendment. I would prefer your amendment, sir. Whatever. Okay. So I have a motion on that amendment. Any second? Which amendment? Which amendment are we on? One or three? Three. Okay. Mayor Bogans, proposed amendment. Okay. I have a motion and a second. Anybody else? We'll vote. The amendment's out. Well, we got one motion. We got a motion and a second on this one. Okay. On Amendment 3, yours. Yep. Aye. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right. Oh, let's move on. Number 51. No, no, no, no. We have, Commissioner McKenzie has two amendments. First of all. One amendment. Let's just be, let's be clear. We're trying to expedite time. We spent 50 minutes this morning on three proclamations after having these conversations for four years about how we're going to do proclamations. I prefer to take my proclamations to the public. That is me. I don't ask for any proclamations. If we had to go with the ordinance we have right now, I would have six times to go because I haven't gone. But what I want to say is this. If I received a proclamation eight years ago for Robert McKenzie's Kids for the Blind, and that day is mine, do we have to repeat it every year? I think we should eliminate the repetition of proclamations. If you have the day, it's yours. My second amendment would be if we can do it 30 minutes prior to the meeting, and then if another one gets thrown in at the discretionary of the mayor, we'll have enough time if we won't waste 50 minutes of the public's time getting this done. Okay. Hold on. I move for my two amendments. We'll make them a compound. I move the first one, which will be number four, according to Steve, right? I ask her. Number four, to eliminate duplication of proclamations. Your amendment is proposed as Exhibit 3 to the duplication of proclamations. It's Exhibit 3 to the item. Okay. Exhibit 3, I would like to move. Are you moving your, because that includes the amendment for, yeah, it has two. That's what I thought I did until I got, my senator was getting me, correcting me here. So, what's the, what's the appropriate way to do this? Would you like to propose it together? I would like to. Yeah, so bring, discuss the entire proposed amendment together, and then you can make a motion to amend the item as provided in Exhibit 3. Is there any further discussion on what? Yes. Yes. Yes, because I. Senator Rich, you're recognized. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. I think we should separate them, because I don't agree with one of them, and I agree with one of them. So. Well, I better separate them. She's not recognized anymore. That's it. Sorry. Commissioner Davis? Yeah, I think we should separate them, only because the first one, where you're saying to only recognize that day one time ever in a lifetime, you know, there are, for example, if you're talking about domestic violence or, you know, breast cancer awareness, they may come year after year and get the proclamation, the organization, but it's really bringing awareness. And so, you know, they want to come every year to bring awareness, whether it's the same organization or a department. I think they should be recognized as such. You want to call it a proclamation or something else? I don't know. But I don't think once in a lifetime recognizing a day with such significance would suffice. Just like today, Feeding South Florida, I guess every year every mayor recognizes Feeding South Florida. I still think we could do a recognition of the day. I just don't think we spend all this time reproclamating the day that we already gave them, and we honor each and every year. So I agree with you, but I just think when we go back to the podium and we give them another proclamation, that's the duplication. The day itself, yes, we must honor it, and I think we should be flying flags on those days, just not repeating a proclamation presentation. Okay. Senator Keller. I know. I would agree with the motion to bifurcate, and the reason is, again, the way that it's written, I think you can only do breast cancer awareness once ever, and I think that we should be able to do certain things on an annual basis for organizational things. And secondly, you have a motion to change proclamations from 10 o'clock to 930, which I think is a good idea, and I want to support that part, and that's why I'm suggesting that I would move that we bifurcate the motion into two separate ones. One is the part about you can only do it once, and the second is change the time, because I think that you'll have support for the time change, and I don't know if there's support for the once only. Just to be clear with what Senator Geller just stated, the proposal, as currently drafted, is that you have the option of making it an annual day that no longer has to come back before the board, and the board can also bring things back. So it's really just setting up a concept for you to just have an annual day for the cases that you think are appropriate, but it's not required that, you know, you can only do breast cancer a day one time. It's just an option. Like today. It was perfect, but did we have to do another programmation, but we just wear orange, and we raise our flags, and we honor the president of that organization, just so we can make better use of our time, and I'm not taking away from what it is, but when you think about it, it's 365 days in a year, and if we keep giving the same day out to someone, I don't know if I want the same day as Mickey Udeen as my day, so I want my own day. Anybody else? Okay, we got item 50. Council, why don't you phrase this motion? Well, it's the will of the board that you have two separate items considering this, so would you like to consider initially the annual recurring amendment? Sure. So that would not stop an annual, okay, if it doesn't stop the annual presentation for breast cancer or whatever else, fine. So the proposal will be to amend the item as provided on lines 61 through 63 of Exhibit 3 to... I have a better idea. Do them separately, vote them up or down. The outcomes don't matter. Up or down. Yeah, so 65 is... So no amendment, just like I did them, but separate them. A and B. Hold on. So the Keller's amendment don't have to go in there, just up or down. But you're going to vote, but the... 1, A, no duplication. B would be 930. So vice mayor has proposed that you all take, he's making a motion to consider the amendments as provided on line 61 through 63. Okay. And that does not prevent duplication. This does not prevent duplication. You can duplicate or you cannot. So the first item we're voting on is, has to do with not having duplication, correct? The option to not have duplication. The option not having duplication. Okay. All in favor? You need a second? We need some clarification. Can I just ask our county attorney something? Sure. What if we just did nothing here and we just did what we've been doing for the past 20 years? We would be fine, right? Yes, you would be fine. Thank you. This is all the board... And per the charter, the mayor can decide if there's too many one meeting, the mayor can say, hey, there's too many, I'm sorry, you can't do this meeting. Yeah, even without this. And you would vote not to approve the item, item 51. Okay, so if I just want to keep everything the way it's been from since the beginning of the time I've been here, I just vote no on everything? You would vote no on item 50. Okay, thank you. Okay, so we're going to take item 50 and break it up. The first one has to do with item 50. I still don't understand. I want to make sure I'm clear. So if, for example, another organization, maybe not Feeding South Florida, somebody else comes, they requested a proclamation, and it was given last year. We can do the proclamation and give it to this organization. Yes, and you could give Feeding South Florida the same proclamation this year as well, in a future year. It's just giving the option of saying September 10th shall be Feeding South Florida for the next 10 years, and then you would have something on the agenda that notes that September 10th is Feeding South Florida today without doing a proclamation. But they would want to have the proclamation in their hand. But you could also do an actual proclamation. You have the option of presenting a proclamation at the meeting as well and submitting it to the mayor. Okay, so I just want to be clear. That's what you're asking, Vice Mayor. It's optional. You can do it or not do it. That's not what I was asking, but all we have to do is vote this up or down. It's not a game-breaker for me. Up or down. I was trying to help a process, but it seems that we like to be involved in deep conversation about proclamations. I don't care. Why? But, I mean, the attorney is interpreting it one way and you're interpreting it another. I would oppose it if it's saying, point blank, no more proclamations for breast cancer awareness every year. That's how I started out and that's what I'm going to keep on the floor. The other option is out. No, that's not what's currently drafted. So, right now it's just the amendment that was proposed that was printed with the agenda is optional with respect to whether or not it's repeating. Which is not what Vice Mayor McKenzie is saying. That's not what I communicated unless he amended it behind closed doors. Well, let's just get, what's your, it's your item. What, give us what it is. What do you want? No duplication. That's my item A. Okay. Up or down. Okay. Counsel, can we just stop talking and vote on this, please? Yes or no, please. Are we ready? Yes, I would just clarify that the amendment proposed by Vice Mayor would read proclamations may name a day in appreciation of a person or entity and if expressly stated then proclamation, the day naming shall be recurring in perpetuity for a fixed number of years. Right, so it's, so it doesn't prohibit. Well, it doesn't prohibit, but you would set it. That is correct. Yes. That's what, that's correct. I'm going to stop the talking. I'm going to, I want to cut talking. Up or down. You should. Okay. We have a motion on 50A of whether, of 50A. Is there a second on that? No, I second it. Second? No, I didn't second it. I'll say, go ahead. Who seconded it? Anybody second it? I see no second. Mayor, is 50A your item? No, no. We already passed my item. Okay, because, well, that's, that's got 50, you threw me off. This is 50A. No, well, he, he's just. Exhibit three, so it's. This is, this is passed. Look, I mean, Mayor Brogan. Okay, that's done. Mayor Brogan's item has passed. We're considering Vice Mayor McKenzie's amendments to the initial item, which are presented as exhibit three. Get out of it. So he's asked that they be considered separately, and we're considering the changes on lines 61 through 63. Okay, so he made the motion. I'm going to pass the gavel. I'll second your item. So, so we can get a vote. Okay. Okay, we now, this is, this has to do with limiting the amount of, limiting the proclamation's duplication. Duplication. Yes and no. All in favor. Okay, I got three. All opposed. Look at passing three to one. Thank you. Now B. Bill, three to one. Joe, that's not passing six to three against. B, the second part, we're bifurcating it, has to do with? Time's certain. 930. 930. Moving proclamations to 930 at the discretion of the mayor. Otherwise, do I, he has a motion. Do I have a second? I have a motion and a second. All in favor. Raise your hands. Okay. And opposed? Nan, are you opposed? Okay. Show that passing 8-1. We're done with 50. No, you have to vote on the, on the entire, right? So move. Yeah, I'm going to move. Second. All the entire, move is. With amendment. I have a motion and a second. I can't even get my words out. Yeah. So proclamations now are not a part, officially, of our meeting. No, they are. Not unless the, the mayor has that discretion. The meeting has not been called. If you're doing 930, are you calling the meeting? Are we calling the meeting at 930 instead of 10 o'clock? It'll be up to the mayor. If he wants to have the. That's why I'm opposing it. I got you. You already voted. We're done. Let's go on to. Let me just finish. So some of us do come from a little further away. It is better to come at 10 o'clock and we can get our business done. So that's why I, I, I oppose this. Just to be clear, right. So the meeting start, it's, it's proposes that the item be, that proclamations be presented in the 30 minutes prior to the official start time of the meeting. So the official start of the meeting. So it would not be a part of the official meeting. That's correct. Okay. I oppose that. Okay. Item 51, please. Oh, 50. I'm sorry. We have to now vote 50 for the entire amendment. I have a motion by Senator Geller and I have a second by. I may want to table this to know the last meeting of November, 2028, please. Do I have a second to work for 10 years? I mean, the last meeting of 2028, you guys can figure it out when I'm gone. I have a motion. Do I have a second to Senator Geller's motion for this whole thing to be voted on? Gentlemen. Second. I have a motion. Second. All in favor of what we just did. It's now. Raise your hands. No. All in favor. Aye. Okay. One, two, three, four, five. Any opposed? Okay. We got two opposed. Show the opposed seven to two with the council raising her hand too. Was that three? Seven to three. I saw six to three. Was vice mayor? It was. I'm in favor of it. You're in favor of it. Yeah. Seven to two. I got my numbers right. Okay. This is the most ridiculous thing that we wasted time with. Number 51. Please read number 51. The public hearing on item 51 is now open. Item 51 is a motion to enact ordinance pertaining to licenses, business regulations, and consumer protection, amending chapters eight and a half and 20 of the county code of ordinances. No member of the public has signed up to speak on the item. I have a motion on 51. And do I have a second? I have a motion. Second on 51. All in favor. Aye. Any opposed? Show the passing nine zero. 52, please. Item 52 is a motion to receive presentation of the unsolicited public-private partnership proposal submitted by Dependable Equities LLC for a demolition and site-clearing county-owned property located at 400 Northeast 4th Street, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, 33301, and for the temporary use of county-owned property located at 408 Northeast 4th Street, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, 33301, county staff will now present the proposal and provide an overview of the project and statutory process. Do I have a motion? Do I have a motion at all? So we have no motion? We're going to need to extend the meeting, but then staff is also going to make a presentation for these items. I'm sorry? You need a motion to extend the meeting? Yes. I have a motion to extend the meeting. I have a second. All in favor to extend the meeting, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Show the meeting now is extended past 1230. I'm on item number 52 for the public hearing. Is there a motion for 52? I'll move to. Do I have a second on 52? Second. I have a motion and second on 52. Is there a discussion? Yes. Of course. Yes. County staff, Darby Del Sal. Under Florida statutes, we have to provide some information and provide, and we're going to do it with a quick five-slide presentation. Along with this, Tay? I'll be very quick. Like less than five minutes. Okay. I'm sorry. What did you say, Senator Rich? Yes, go ahead, please. Okay. So this item is actually last heard. We have a slideship presentation, but we can kind of jump through that if you'd like. So we last heard this item on the 20th when it was originally presented to the commission seeking direction to move forward with it. In short, Dependable Equities, they represent a developer that is building a 430-unit condominium in downtown Fort Lauderdale, and what they're doing is suggesting to use two lots that are owned by a county that are adjacent and contiguous to this particular property so that they would be able to use that area for construction staging. As it is, what their basic proposal is providing for is that they would take the site, they would clear the buildings there at their cost, hold onto that property for the approximate three years they anticipate it will take to do that particular construction, and then return the property cleaned and secured at the end of that particular term. That is, in essence, is the basis of their particular proposal. The reason why we're having this public meeting today is just to have the opportunity to share with the public what the nature of that presentation is. It doesn't grant them any right. We would have to come back with a finding to show that it actually demonstrates that it meets some type of public purpose or intent of what it is that we want to achieve, and then there, if that is the direction, we would seek permission to then be able to engage in those types of discussions with them regarding how that property would be leased. If you have any questions, I'll be more than happy to take them. Motion to approve. Thank you. Darby. Yes. In that three-year period, you said, or at least I think I heard you, we would title the property to them and then they'd title it back to us in three years? No, no. Is that what you said? No. No, it would not be a sale. Just a typical stage of construction. Right. We'll either deal with it through a lease or a license. Thank you. I have a motion to second. Number 52. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Show item 52 passing unanimously, and we're on our last item of 53. Item 53 is a motion to receive presentation of the unsolicited public-private partnership proposal submitted by 50 Organics LLC as supplemented by its August 17, 2026 addendum to lease, construct, and operate a composting facility on county-owned property located at 7101 Southwest 205th Avenue, Unincorporated Broward County. County staff will now present the proposal and provide an overview of the project and the statutory process. Can you provide your filthy proposal, please? And I'll do it briefly as well. Thank you. Yes. So again, this is another unsolicited proposal. It's in the same stage as the previous one where we're required to do this public meeting to basically present the outlines of what this project is. The proposer who is here today, filthy organics, is looking to lease approximately eight acres of land out of the landfill that we have in Southwest Broward County. And the idea is that they would take basically a clean-filled organic type, you know, what you might think of as yard debris, that sort of stuff. And be able to take that material, be able to compost it, and those portions that can't be resold would then be used for cover at the landfill, and then they would be able to retail the rest of it. Their proposal basically looks at a 20-year term on this particular lease. They're looking at possibly taking about two years to ramp up to where they want to be on that project, in which they're proposing right now about a $10,000 a year lease. And then thereafter, they would be willing to pay the county $5 per ton that they actually receive on the site and process, and then with regard to some of the compost, the county would be able to retrieve up to about 500 tons that they could then use for their own purposes. That is in basically a nutshell what is it they intend to do. At the end of the 20 years, the county would then have the option to take over the program, or they would simply remove whatever is there on the site and return it as it was in its original state. I'll move it, mayor. I have a motion and a second. We have five speakers on this, but if we have approval, will the speakers say thank you, or is there somebody against this so we get against it? We have a 1230 special set with the school board. If we could get this done quickly, fine. Otherwise, we're going to have to postpone this, go to our 1230 school board, and then come back. Do you guys have any thoughts on, do you want to, on this? Speaker? Okay. So we have a 1230 special set with the school board. We're going to adjourn this meeting right now, go to room 430, meet with the school board. Yes, Monica? Mr. Mayor, I believe the 1230 times certain was item number 60 that I believe the school board chair is here or a member of the school board to discuss or speak on the item. That item was going to be held here in this room, and then you guys would recess and go to the joint meeting. So we're going to postpone item 53 on a public hearing. Public hearing is now closed, right? We're going to close the public hearing and come back to it, recess it, whatever. Well, this is a regular item. It was moved to the regular agenda, so. 53? 52 and 53. 52 and 53. Okay. We're going to go to item 60? Yes, sir. Okay. Item 60 is a motion to discuss and direct county administration regarding development of a pilot program to provide Broward County transit bus passes at no cost to eligible high school students. While a member of the public has signed up to speak on the item, school board member Deborah Nixon. Hickson, Hickson. Come on up. While you're coming up, I just wanted to let everybody know. Hickson. So I sit on the value adjustment board speaking to one of the school board members. They were telling me, is there a way we could do this pilot project? The buses don't go out of their way. There's no extra cost to Broward County. And as far as I'm concerned, we shouldn't even be, there's no need to charge these high school students. We all work for taxpayers. And so, you know, it's a pilot project at two schools. And I hope that we can pass this, but five schools, I'm sorry, five schools. Please go ahead and take it away. Thank you. And good morning. Debbie Hickson, countywide school board member. Thank you for bringing the item forward. And I'm very happy to be here before you today. I had a conversation with a few of the commissioners to ask about how we might be able to partner where we're using resources that we can share. And one of them is transportation. And as I mentioned to a few of the commissioners, we're about, and Dr. Wanza, she can vouch for that, we're about 100 bus drivers short right now. So besides taking students to and from school, we have a program where we provide buses to students who are at a magnet program called activity buses. So if they're participating in sports, clubs, any of those things after school, I believe it runs Monday through Thursday, there's buses that then can take those students home from school, you know, take them home in the afternoon so it allows them to participate in the after school activities. So what the proposal is and the discussion we've had is instead of us providing school buses for students to have after school transportation, we would like to partner with the county to provide them bus passes to ride on the county buses, which we think is a win-win for both of us and obviously saves us some money. But it also allows the county to increase your ridership on your buses, which I think is really important. So I think the item is to just have a discussion. So we thought five schools, run a pilot program, see what it will be. I know somebody had asked Dr. Wanza to get the information about what that might save us as a school district. So she has the different schools and the cost savings. So I don't know if you want to just, I know you're in a hurry. So we'll, yes. Good afternoon. Good afternoon, Valerie Wanza. So the five schools that we worked in collaboration to select, the five schools would be Blanche Ely High School, Deerfield Beach High School, Dillard High School, Fort Lauderdale High School, and Miramar High School. So it is spread across the county. And then the cost savings, depending on how many buses that currently run into school and the ridership, the cost savings ranges anywhere from about $99,000. To $150,000 per bus per school year. And just as an example, at Miramar High School, we currently have five activity buses that provide this service. At Blanche Ely, we have seven buses. At Deerfield Beach, we have eight. At Dillard, we have 13. And at Fort Lauderdale High School, we have 11 buses. And they don't necessarily do door-to-door. They take the students to depot stops in the area near their home. So it's an established route at an elementary school, a middle school, or a high school. But understanding that these are high school students, they could avail themselves to whatever routes in their neighborhoods for county transit. So, if I can interrupt you in a second. So what I want to change, as you see on M60, motion discussed and direct. What I'd like to have is a motion to direct the county administrator to move forward with this pilot program so we can help the students at these five schools at no cost to the students during the pilot program. Is everybody good with that? I'm just clarifying that what you said earlier still goes, that this is just on our existing county routes. Yeah, that's what I said. Sure. I am in favor of this, but I just am wondering. I see Corey sitting here. Would we like to get... No. Excuse me. Please don't interrupt me. Sorry, Senator. Go ahead. I'm asking to see if she would like to comment on this in any way and how it would impact us and so forth. I'm in favor of it, but I just am asking the question. So, we have been in coordination with Dr. Wanzo and Superintendent Hepburn and myself. I've talked multiple times. What I would like to do, if it's okay, we don't necessarily have to hear from Corey today, but what I would like to do is, if you give me the direction to work with them to implement this and make sure it's within our existing routes, I did want to disclose to you all that there would be a revenue, potential revenue loss that we currently have today, just in full disclosure, because currently today students have a $1 per ride fare, so we certainly can do this, but the cost savings to the school board would be a potential revenue loss to us for any students that are currently riders in those areas. But we just don't know the number of students that would be engaged, and that's one of the questions that Dr. Wanzo and I have been exchanging information on. But we certainly can move forward with that. Thank you. Mr. Mayor. Excuse me. County Minister, while it may be a revenue loss, we're not losing money because of this. It's the same bus route, same driver, same cost, same everything, correct? It would be the cost to us, but it would be a revenue loss. I understand. So my question, just to make everything clear, this program, if we do it this way, will not be costing us any extra money to do this. That stated is correct. Okay. Yes, Commissioner Rogers. Thank you. I am so happy that we are having this discussion. I have been trying for the past two years to have us have a meeting with the school board. I cannot see how we did not see we would have been saving money a long time ago on different things that we could have been collaborating on. But no one wanted to listen and look at where we are. Looking forward to seeing you at the next, the real meeting, because we should not be having this major discussion without, you know, being partners. We are partners. We're dealing with the same taxpayers and duplicating services. Wait. I didn't say we waste anything. We just need to collaborate a little bit more. And thank you for agreeing to do this. I think it's a great idea. Thank you for bringing it forward, Mr. Mayor. And, you know, students, we need to help students as much as possible. Parents right now, cost of living is so high. That's why most parents have to buy a vehicle even to get their kids around. If they can use the bus, it's a much better option for them. And you're right. It starts young people using public transportation early so that they can continue, hopefully, now being paid passengers in the future. So it's a great idea. Thank you, guys. Do I have a motion? I have a motion and a second. All in favor to direct county administration regarding development of this pilot program, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Show the passing unanimously. 9-0. Thank you so much. We're now going to go to room 430 to meet with the school board and we'll recess the meeting. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Let's start up the meeting. We are back on to item 53. We had a motion and a second regarding, we had a filthy motion and a filthy second regarding item 53, but we had some speakers that want to talk filthy about filthy. So come on up. We have five speakers, Joe Carvalho, Gabriel Clark. Let's call up one at a time. Sir, come on. Say your name, please. Ready? Okay, here we go. Say your name, please. Name is Joe Carvalho here on behalf of Ace Recycling Resources. Okay. First of all, good afternoon. Welcome back, everyone. Mayor Bogan, commissioners, and county administrator. I would be remiss if I didn't also welcome our new county attorney. We're here simply because Ace Recycling Resources, which is located at 2250 Southwest 208 Avenue, just about four miles from the proposed site for filthy organics at the landfill site. What city, sir? Miramar. Okay. Yep. We're about four miles away from there, right across the street from the router waste sorting facility. And first of all, I want to thank you and staff for being open and obviously having this hearing. And we sent a formal letter yesterday, which everyone should have received, with more detail. But we just wanted to be here and have the opportunity to speak. We have shared goals. In fact, we fully support the county's waste diversion goals to avoid putting green organics into the landfill or to transport them to Okeechobee or anywhere else. Certainly, keeping organics out of the landfill is a priority. Ace Recycling operates on a legacy composting site that has been doing composting in one form or another since about 1986, over 40 years. We are licensed by Broward County. We have state registration as a yard trash and composting facility. And we've invested a lot of time, effort, and money in upgrading the site. We did a recent expansion. We're upgrading the modalities that we're using. And we actually have another five-acre piece of land adjacent that we just acquired mitigation for for expansion. So we're really in the same sort of interest, and we're aligned with what the county is looking to do. We're not here really to oppose Filthy Organics. I mean, they're a veteran-owned business doing good work, and we respect that. But we do want the commission to know that there are options in the marketplace, and we are one of them. We only learned about this because of the public agenda. We were rather surprised because we're already licensed an operating compost operator here in South Broward and actively serving the community. We did not approach the county with a proposal because we've been actively engaged in dialogue with the Solid Waste Authority. We just want to be heard and being part of the solution to offer the services that we can offer. We ask the commission to consider deferring the item, not stop it, but create space for dialogue. We're ready, willing, and interested in speaking and working with the commission and any other operator to help meet the needs of the county and of all the constituents. We thank you for your time. We genuinely want to be part of the solution. We're glad to be here. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Who's next? The next speaker is Gabriel Clark. Commission, my name is Gabriel Clark. Please talk into the microphone, sir. Can you hear me? Yeah. Great. Okay. So now a quick question that I wanted to ask you guys is generally how long do you think it takes an iceberg head of lettuce to break down within a landfill? Any estimates? Give us an A, B, C, D. So some people would say a week. Some people would say three months. 26 years. Which one do you think? I think a century, right? Yeah. So let's say it's buried. Just make your point. So 26 years is how long it takes for a head of lettuce to break down inside of a landfill. 26 years? 26 years. The county... 26 years. Roughly 26 years. It's a stubborn head, though. Yeah. Mostly a yellow head. Right. So the county generates roughly 2 million tons of waste a year. 26 years. Organic waste that can be, you know, diverted to a landfill. Nonetheless, I'm here to advocate the support for the public-private partnership with Filthy Organics. When it comes to green waste and organics, they're buried in a standard landfill, trapped in an anaerobic area, like you said. What Filthy Organics is sort of suggesting is that they create a static pile, meaning that the lettuce will now take roughly 30 days to break down compared to 26 years. And, again, the county is generating 2 million tons of organic waste. We can, you know, dissipate that fat really quickly. With this partnership, the county then receives up to 500 cubic yards of finished waste that can then be used for our schools and as an alternative to synthetic fertilizers. So if this were to go through, we do have an alternative option that we can now use for our public parks, our school gardens, and so forth. Thank you, guys. Thank you. The next speaker is Harold Gubnitsky. Well, good afternoon. It was morning when I was preparing to do this. Harold Gubnitsky, Broward County residents in Southwest Ranches. I also chair the Zero Waste Advisory Board for our town. As you know, our town is very active in terms of having a strong voice in the overall sustainability and zero waste. So I'm really here to advocate, first of all, compliment the commission here and the mayor for the foresight on being able to do these kinds of things and take the actions. It was all me. It's all me. And so collectively, you guys are smart ahead in bringing our county forward in South Florida. So thank you as a resident here and as an advocate for the environment. Secondly, you know, as in my position with Southwest Ranches and our town, we've had – I wanted to acknowledge a really, really good agreement, operating agreement with Filthy Organics, with Dustin and his team. So they've been servicing the town now for a couple years. We've had a great relationship. So I'd like to just attest for their abilities, their customer service, their overall professionalism, and one that I think would go well for what's being proposed here. So I just wanted to – I'll give back some time here, but just to give a salute and compliments and something that's a great idea. It's a smart idea, right thing to do. Happy to answer any questions. And it's right in my backyard, so, you know, from where I live. So thank you again for your guys' foresight. Thank you, Harold. Thank you. The next speaker is Julie Long. Hello, Dr. Julie Long. I'm here speaking on behalf of the Broward League of Women Voters. Thank you, Mayor, Commissioners, for the opportunity to speak. The League of Women Voters of Broward County has studied the issue of solid waste and recycling here in Broward County going back at least 35 years. In 2017, when discussions first started and the Solid Waste Working Group was formed, our league was there. We have been at every meeting and given our input along the way. We have a solid waste crisis, and tackling yard waste diversion in the form of the proposal brought forth by Filthy Organics makes good sense. The sooner, the better. The yard waste is a clean and green commodity that is now a disposal problem, but is, in fact, a valuable resource. We hope other companies of the county bring forth similar proposals. Of course, the conditions of this agreement, including the cost and length of the contract, need to be evaluated by county professionals and the Solid Waste Authority of Broward County officials and staff. The proposal is for 25,000 tons of yard waste a year to be composted, with the opportunity to scale up to 100,000 tons per year. This is a very good start. Broward creates about 300,000 tons of trash of yard waste each year. Going forward, we recommend citing other yard waste composting projects in different locations in the county as having all operations in a far corner of the county could be a disincentive for some eastern and centrally located cities to participate. We support this unsolicited proposal and would also like to see the RFP process for yard waste expedited. This will allow multiple partners to help our Solid Waste Authority scale up for success throughout the county. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. Thank you. The last speaker is Linda Thompson-Gonzalez. Good morning. Thank you very much, Mayor, Bogan, Vice Mayor, and Commissioners. My name is Linda Thompson-Gonzalez. I'm a member of several environmental organizations here in the county. However, I'm speaking on my own behalf, so my views expressed are my own. The Filthy Organics proposal under consideration is a timely, no-cost, public-private partnership that will really help Browards solve our solid waste crisis, producing a clean and green, valuable commodity that really will help our Florida year-round growing cycle. It will also help reduce the need for pesticides that pollute our air and our clean water sources. I was present here at the commission in February when the commission agreed to identify inappropriate parts of land for this initiative. During these nine months, meanwhile, the Solid Waste Authority of Broward County has won the requisite approval for our master plan for our cities to participate. So the master plan identifies yard waste as a top priority because it's heavy. It constitutes approximately 30% of our total waste stream, and it wastes much of our landfill space. Current yard waste landfill disposal costs about $75 a ton, which is the highest in the tri-county region. Yet Broward recycles far less yard waste than surrounding counties. This partnership, approximately 28% compared to upwards of 70% in Miami-Dade and other locations, according to the consultant's report that was in the public documents. The partnership is a first step to turning this wasteful practice around and promoting more composting. The partnership will allow the county to generate income from composting at no cost and considerably less time than if the county were to undertake this proposal itself. Most importantly, this partnership provides a flexible working framework within which the yard waste processing infrastructure can be scaled up as the actual need develops around the county. Although Broward creates over 489,000 tons of yard waste each year, the cities are not yet ready to send all of their yard waste for processing as they need to adjust their hauling contracts over the next year. So this is really a major opportunity for Broward to lead and succeed with a proven and reliable business partner. Both the organics already partners with cities, private commercial residential centers throughout the county. It has the resources, the million-dollar business capacity, and experience throughout this county to provide a functioning business model with the necessary flexibility to scale up. This plan will move cities' need a flexible framework to begin moving forward together to meet the goals of our Broward Master Plan. So I would appreciate and greatly appreciate this opportunity and respectfully request you to approve this proposal. Thank you very much. Mayor, I do have one other speaker. Robert Holland. Okay. Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor, Honorable Board. Robert Holland, General Counsel for Ace Recycling. As you guys know, the unsolicited proposal process creates a cone of silence where there's no communication while this is being considered, and this is the first opportunity we've had an opportunity to even know anything about this. As was mentioned earlier, Ace is a small minority company operating out of Fort Lauderdale that does composting out of the city of Miramar, and would love an opportunity to be able to compete in the unsolicited proposal process, which typically says you review it. If you think it's something worthwhile, then you allow some competition on it. Based on the rates that we've seen in the proposal, we think we could exceed those rates back to the county as well, so we'd like an opportunity to compete. The only other concern we have is that about allowing this low-entry land-use opportunity, it could undercut us on our fees and run us out of business as well. So we'd like to be able to sit down with the county and try to figure out the best way that both of these small businesses can survive doing a composting which everybody says is in the best interest of the county. Right now, the way the track that it's taken out, we have no ability to even compete as a small business for this opportunity to do something that we've been doing for almost 40 years. So we'd like an opportunity to at least come to the table, we'll put our numbers on the table as well, or at least work something out with the county where both of these small firms can have the ability to do what is right in the composting arena for the county. So we'd ask you to give some consideration to that versus the fast tracking without allowing anybody else to compete on it. Thank you. Thank you, sir. We had a motion and a second. If you want to go around and have discussion, Senator Geller? I have two issues. First, Mr. Mayor, I have been unable to discuss this with Commissioner Furr, because of sunshine, so this is the only place I can do this. Commissioner Furr, you know Stephanie, Dr. Stephanie Joffi. She comes to all of our meetings. I've known her for many years. She has contacted me asking us to refer, not to take action, to refer this to the Solid Waste Authority for their recommendation. I've also received a letter from Mike Ryan, the chair, saying, no, let's go ahead and do this. Dr. Joffi's concern was that instead of locking ourselves into a contract for 20 years with them, which may be too small, she raised concerns about that, and that's why she wanted the Solid Waste Authority to make a recommendation to us. It's our decision, not the Solid Waste Authority. But if we were to put this off for two weeks to get or a month to get a recommendation from the Solid Waste Authority that might give us more information, I would have asked you this, except I couldn't. This is the only place I can ask you. I will follow your lead on this. Do you have a recommendation as to whether or not we should refer this to the Solid Waste Authority to ask for a recommendation? And then I have a question for Anika. Actually, I have a pretty long statement to say on this, and it may, and it brings, it would answer that. Okay. In that case, I'll wait till I hear, and I will follow your lead. Then I have a question for Anika. I am familiar with the unsolicited proposal law, and as the other attorney just mentioned, it normally gives other people the opportunity to make their own proposals. In this case, of course, they have to know about it, which frequently they don't, in unsolicited proposals. In this case, was there an opportunity, was this posted, and were other vendors given an opportunity to submit their own proposals? If not, I think they have to be given that opportunity under the law. If it was posted, and they just didn't see it, then we've complied with the law. Can you address that issue? So if you recall, at the last meeting, the item that was initially on the agenda was a motion to move forward with the competitive RFP process for unsolicited proposals. At that meeting, the board instead directed staff that we should go forward with the non-competitive process, which is this. So these two public hearings, these are two hearings at which the public has an opportunity to review the proposal. It's posted on the agenda. They have an opportunity to provide feedback to you, just like this gentleman is today, and you can make a determination that, you know, if you would like to change your mind about what the process will go through. If not, we'll have these two meetings, and then you'll make the findings that are required statutorily to move forward without it going through with the RFP. I don't know what the statutory requirements are. The fact that another competitor has, I mean, had we gone through the competitive process and they just didn't apply, I would say, great, we complied with everything. I just want to make sure we're doing this properly. And so if we, because of the presence of a competitor who said, hey, we would like to bid, and we haven't had an opportunity, if we just go ahead and award it to fill with the organics, will that comply, in your opinion, with our legal requirements? So at the next meeting, when we, so we're going to take these comments that we've received today, and staff will bring back findings and recommendations based on the totality of the circumstance. So merely having a person say they would like to solicit a proposal is it doesn't make it, our process insufficient. And so we'll just, if the board wants to move forward with this process, at the next meeting, we'll make the appropriate, we'll put together the appropriate legal findings based on the facts that we have and the proposal that we have in front of us, that if the board wants to direct us to move forward to the next step. So we'd be legally sufficient if we do it without going forward with an RFP, and it's an option for the board. This process, the P3 process, has some flexibility in that. But you can still decide to go the other way if you think that that's, you know, the board would like to open that up. But we will be legally sufficient in both options. Last question. Does the other company that spoke today still have an opportunity to submit written comments and or a counter proposal or anything like that? And if so, what is their deadline? Because you need time to process anything that they submit before. So in fairness to them, do they have a day, a week, three days? You know, how long do they have to submit documents? And that would still give you time to review it and get it to us. The review is going to happen at the staff level in terms of the evaluation of the proposal. The plan right now is that the second public meeting is going to be on the 22nd. So they would be submitting information for us in time for the public meeting. If they're going to do another proposal, if they had comments, just that, you know, exactly what they proposed today, which is perhaps we should look at more options. You know, the Solid Waste Authority, whatever they're, any member of the public, not just another proposer would state, you'd have that on the record. And the board would be able to consider that. But then you'll make the findings at the next meeting. You know, again, your proposer is putting in more resources into this over time. But even after the next meeting, you can still ultimately make a decision to do something different. But, you know, there's flexibility with the board's options in these cases, as long as we have the, you know, and we're, we believe that we have the facts to support moving forward on this process without going out for the RFP. Thank you. And, Mr. Mayor, I think the board owes a debt of gratitude to Commissioner Furr for everything he has done, taking us to where we are. And Commissioner Furr, I'm going to follow your vote today. Thank you, man. I'll be, I'll be very short and brief. But, you know, we, as I stated last time, we talked about this, that we, we had said that we had been working on this for quite a long time. We, the first filthy agonist came to us with a specific property. We instructed staff to go back, find another property. So they, this is not the first time that anybody's heard this going on. I think it was Mr. Gonzalez said in February. So there's been plenty of time for people to react to it. And again, I have nothing against these, these gentlemen here. It's just that, and we talked about last time too, about the Solid Waste Authority taking more time to come up with maybe a recommendation or not recommendation. The board's will at that point in time was to move this forward and move it quickly so we can get this, this, this project underway. It was interesting that, I think the gentleman said about, I think he, I want to put words in your mouth, but you talked about where your fees might be more competitive than what the proposal is today. But then on the same breath, you said that their fees might hinder your business. So it's kind of like, which one do you want? Do you want, you know, something you say you can be more competitive with, you said, but their prices might put you out of business. It just didn't make sense to me at the end of the day. So I would hope that the board would consider moving this along. And if we're doing everything legally, and I thank Senator Gellar for putting that out there. And don't hesitate. It doesn't need to go through more bureaucracy and more red tape. Let's just get this moving now. It's an opportunity. And lastly, is I gave additional material of multiple letters of support, including Mayor Ryan and Sunrise, the mayor of Sunrise, and also Southwest Ranches and so forth. So thank you for coming and speaking about that. So the support is there. It has been there. So I would just encourage. And again, I love my being referred to death. And that's nothing against him because really he is an incredible individual and what he's done for us for Solid Waste. But I think in this particular instance, I think we should be moving forward to the next level. Thank you. I got four words. I support the item. Go ahead, Pete. Okay. I'm going to read this because there's a lot to this. And I think if we were beginning negotiations, there's a lot to take into consideration. So I'm just going to go with this. I want to start by framing why we are having this discussion. It speaks to the large goals of our Solid Waste Authority and where we have been trying to get to for the last 10 years. That's why it's important to have this discussion thoroughly and patiently and make sure we're getting everything right. We've moved past the place where we just bury or burn all of our garbage. One, Broward County has limited space both at the landfills and the waste energy plant. Two, between the leachate and emissions, we've seen that the old ways are both expensive and difficult to mitigate. Three, there's value in the waste stream. And it would be irresponsible to our constituents if we ignored the science and or the savings and didn't do our best to reduce costs and instead try to capture the benefits available. That's why it's so important to look for alternative options. That is why Filthy Organics is here today. And I want to thank Dustin for being a part of the conversation for these last few years. You've brought a lot of things to the table for us to consider and I appreciate that. Two budget cycles ago, this commission asked for a consultant, HDR, to analyze the use of our landfill out by U.S. 27 for processing yard waste, glass recycling, and construction and debris. That report has been attached. I gave it to you all as additional material. The report provides the feasibility and the blueprint how to move forward to handle hundreds of thousands of tons on an annual basis, preserving our capacity at our waste energy plant as well as the Monarch Landfill, which, if you recall, will not be taking organic material after the end of this year. That deadline is January 1st. So it envisions, the master plan envisions a robust mulching process, grinding, shredding, and screening of a large part of the yard waste of this county, both commercial and residential. The result is a valuable product. Depending on how it has been processed mulch that is used in our own yards, our parks, our medians, our nurseries, and a whole host of other places. At the high end of this use, that which has been sifted and screened the most is the feedstock for compost, which can be used for soil and gardens and farms. It is both valuable and extremely useful. Counties throughout the country regularly give mulch away back to the people and municipalities as a public benefit. Everybody wins. We preserve our capacity in the landfills and the mulches available to private yards and to public spaces. The newly established Solid Waste Authority is expected to issue in the very near future, and I'm talking within the next couple months, RFPs, requests for proposals, for the processing of yard waste, recycling, and municipal solid waste. So this unsolicited bid comes at an interesting moment. I don't want to say inconvenient or premature because I can see a pathway where this has benefits, but what it does do is it shakes things up and makes this commission and the SWA accelerate its thinking on scope and sequence of the events. At the last meeting, I voted against this proposal, not because I don't want them to succeed, but because I do. I want to understand how and where the feedstock comes from that will propel filthy organics to do well. It is only with a guaranteed flow of material that filthy organics can design the size and depth of an operation. You can't build an operation on wishes. You need to know how much material to expect before you begin investing in equipment, distribution, and logistics. That said, what I have not been able to figure out is how, once those RFPs hit the street, does Broward County put the landfill into play to be able to respond to that RFP? Presently, for those who don't know, we have a contractor, Big Dog Express. They process all the yard waste that comes into our landfill right now. It is a very small amount. It is just a commercial amount. It's around 14,000 tons. There is no flow control that directs all of our residential yard waste to the Broward County landfill. If there was, there could be literally 20 to 30 times that amount of material coming in to be processed. The landfill, according to our consultant, could handle that amount, but it does require planning and it does require preparation. If the county was interested in operating a mulching operation for residential, the answer is simple. We would respond with a proposal accompanied with the financials required to stand up the facility and run it like a utility, like our water department, where we simply pass through the cost of doing business and maybe we include subcontractors like filthy organics that specialize in compost, or we consider a public-private partnership that allows the use of land to stand up in operation and take care of all this by contract, again with subcontractors like filthy organics to specialize in composting. That decision is coming to this day sooner than later. Either way, what is important is that we should all know the revenues and costs of businesses where public land is being used. It is important so that we make sure that the public benefits are preserved. But today, we are tasked with deciding on this unsolicited bid. How does this fit into the overall picture? I'm still not sure, but if this is the will of the board, we should be asking how can this overture provide a pathway to the bigger picture? By creating a solid and well-written lease agreement today, it provides an anchor into using our landfill as a location for the upcoming RFP. If that's possible, then county staff and the county attorney should negotiate with those possible end games in mind. That means language that deals with flow control, feedstock, potential partnerships, phasing, and open books because we don't want to repeat problems from the past. This is our responsibility. Solid waste is our responsibility. And when we delegate it, we are still responsible. So I say, let's go forward with that in mind, make sure that everybody is on the same page. I can support going forward with Filthy Organics on this. obviously this is a bit of a wrinkle having a new player in this, and I'm not sure how that fits in. But I do think if we are negotiating, all of those things have to be taken into consideration. Thank you. I am... I'm for it. Go ahead, Vice Mayor, please. So I'm kind of interested in what do you want to do on this? It sounds like you were... Once, I know you were against it, and now you're saying you're... Can I get what you asked earlier, which is, I want to hear him, but I keep hearing you. But you're speaking on this side, and it's irritating. I'm trying to get an answer from him. Excuse me? So, and I try to follow the lead of the district commissioners. What I was... And the reason I voted against it last time is because I didn't see a pathway to how the county would be able to respond to the RFP. I had always thought from when we went to do this with AGR that the county would actually be doing this. I actually did think the county would stand up this entire utility, that we would be the ones who would be buying the equipment, we would be doing the mulching, we would be doing the whole thing. That's still a possibility. That's one of those... And the benefit of that is whatever the cost of doing business is, that's the cost that would be passed on to the... And it would definitely be a cheaper cost. However, if we're going to have a subcontractor doing this, then we have to figure out how that subcontractor can or would be able to respond to the RFP and use our landfill. Our landfill needs to be used for this. That's a given. Because there's not any other... There's not really much other landfill. So the question is, how does the county be able to respond to that RFP coming up? I think that if Filthy Organics had an anchor in there already, they could team up as groups do to respond to a larger RFP. Like what's being asked by this other group. Yeah, but it's much... Because whoever responds, like big... It's going to require... Big dog and everybody. Yeah, it's going to require millions of dollars of equipment and big equipment. And the way that you have synergy with a composting operation like this is you make a lot of mulch, a ton of it. But the part that's screened out the most, the really smallest part of it, that's the part that is best used for composting. So this is one small part of a much larger operation. The much larger operation still has to go into effect. Okay. And they'll lend opportunities for others to come on. Yeah. Thank you. You're welcome. Are you done? Mr. Rich? Thank you. I am supportive of this project. And it's kind of bothersome to me that, you know, we have someone who's been working at this for quite some time. And we all have, as the attorney said, we passed through the last time and now we're at this again. I don't expect that this project is going to solve the whole problem. And I think they've made that very clear. This is a beginning. 25,000 tons and we heard how many tons it will take to properly process all of this. But I think that, you know, I feel like we should start. We're forever delaying. I mean, people are working and working and through the process and then they get to the point at the end and all of a sudden then we're going to say, you know, okay, now we're going to do something entirely different. and I think it's not, you know, there's something about it that's not fair to the people, you know, who have been working on this. And I feel that there's plenty of room for everybody if you're talking about the fact that you need, you have all of this yard waste and I know that it's, you know, very little of it is coming to us. So it's a beginning and I think we should start somewhere, start with this and I mean, I am not in favor of sending this back to the solid waste and it will take, it will take much more than two months or whatever, it will take a lot longer to get started with something. So let us begin. We know already that our partners to the, our counties to the north and south are doing more than we're doing. Let's get started with something and we can then, you know, see how this works and the solid waste can be working on other things. We have, you know, people that are, part of the solid waste have let us be, let it be known that they support this and they certainly know more than, you know, than I know but I just know that we talk and talk and talk and we let people work towards something and then we get to a point where we're now going to go back and do something else. So I just feel like we should move ahead with this and as I said, it's a beginning. Mr. Udine, I support the item. Thank you. Commissioner Davis. Yeah, I support the item but I would also like to see, as was mentioned, because you're going to need to do a lot more composting that the other company get an opportunity to speak with staff to see what exactly they're able to offer as well. So just like Commissioner Rich said, there's a lot of room for a lot of people and I think we should make sure that those who are in the industry also get an opportunity. Okay, we have a motion and a second. All in favor? Any opposed? Show the passing 9-0. We're done with 53. Moving on. We want to get the two delegation requests out. We have 54. Who's 54 delegation? 54 delegation, Biscayne Bay Waterkeeper, Inc., DBA, Miami Waterkeeper regarding sand bypass. Mr. Mayor, I've been informed that they had to leave. They're no longer here. Okay. 55 delegation? 55 delegation, Roosevelt Gardens, HOA regarding state of unincorporated Roosevelt Gardens. And Mr. Mayor, I have been informed that he is not here. Okay, that's moving on quickly. I like it. 58 and 59, Mark Gale? Aviation. 56. He's over there. He's waving in the car. 56, I'm sorry, 56 signatory agreements. 56A, motion to approve airline airport lease and use agreement template between Broward County and signatory airlines. 56B, motion to approve signatory terminal building lease agreement template between Broward County and signatory airlines. 56C, motion to authorize aviation department to administratively bill Air Canada, Allegiant, American, Delta, Frontier, JetBlue, Southwest, and United, effective October 1st, 2026, in accordance with the signatory fee structure and chapter 39 of Broward County administrative code. No member of the public has signed up to speak on the item. Second. Second. Do you want to speak on it? Yeah, I just want to say. Hold on, I have a motion to second and come back to speak. Commissioner Furr? Yeah, I just want to congratulate Mark. As long as Allegiant gives Mark a free ride somewhere. I just want to congratulate Mark, Gail, and all the airlines. You know, this was a, is a huge agreement, one that allows us to progress into all of the redevelopment of the airport for the foreseeable future. Our airport is going to be, look totally different a few years from now because of today. And just, I want to congratulate you on all getting us there. Thank you. Good job, Mark. Okay, anybody else? We got a motion, a second, on 56A, B, and C all together. Council, we can do it all three. Okay, all in favor? Any opposed? Vice Mayor, you're for that, Vice Mayor? 56, you're for it. Great. Show that, show that passing unanimously 9-0. Next would be 58-59. 58, motion to approve agreement between Broward County and Universal Protection Service, LLC, DBA, LI, Universal Services, LLC for Security Guard Services for the Fort Lauderdale, Hollywood International, and North Perry airports. No member of the public has signed up to speak on the item. Are we doing those together, Council? No, we're just doing 58 by itself. Okay, because on my sheet, that's why I said 58-59. Okay, I have a motion, 58, a second. I have a motion, a second. All in favor of 59? 58? Any opposed? Show that passing unanimously 9-0. 59. 59, motion to approve agreements between Broward County and A.L. Jackson & Company, PA, Carr Riggs & Ingram, LLC, Forvers, Mazar's, LLP, HCT Certified Public Accountants & Consultants, LLC, and S. Davis & Associates, PA, for a qualified vendors list for certified public accountant services. One member of the public has signed up to speak on the item, Vincent Thrower. Anybody here to speak on that item? Yes, please, come on forward. Please just state your name. Good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Roderick Harvey, partner with HCT Certified Public Accountants & Consultants. The county deliberately designated GEN 2130807B1 as a CBE reserve. The reserve should be meaningful. The three CBEs responded and according to the county's recommendation were found responsive and responsible. This opportunity as a CBE reserve with three qualified CBEs who are available to perform work is important to us CBEs. The county should honor the purpose of the reserve and award the QVL opportunity to those CBEs. This isn't creating a new preference after the fact. It is giving effect to the procurement strategy that OESBD established before the solicitation. Argument two. The 25% contracting goal is not equivalent to CBE prime participation. The two non-CBEs are offering 25% CBE participation but that means the 75% remains with the non-CBE firms. If the objective of the CBE reserve is to create opportunities for CBEs to gain experience as prime contractors then putting those non-CBEs on the QVL does not establish the same economic development objectives. The Broward Business Opportunity Act expressly identifies creating opportunities for CBEs to gain experience as prime contractors as one reason a reserve should be established. We should not dilute our reserve program to the point where the reserve means nothing more than a 25% participation goal. If this solicitation was designated by OESBD as a CBE reserve and the county has designated that three certified CBEs submitted responsive and responsible proposals what specific provision of the Business Opportunities Act requires us to place the two non-CBEs on a QVL rather than limiting the QVL to the three CBEs? And if the answer is that the non-CBEs are permitted to respond can someone point me to the provision that says the non-CBEs must be included in the QVL when a qualified CBE is available. That question is particularly important because may respond is not the same thing as must be awarded. Why are we treating the 25% CBE contracting commitment by non-CBEs as equivalent to giving CBEs the opportunities to act as prime contractors? The commission has the authority to make a best interest determination and I believe the better policy and the policy most consistent with the purpose of our CBE reserve is to move forward with the three qualified CBEs that were found responsive and responsible. Thank you mayor for the extra time. Thank you sir. I want to just ask our council a quick question. I was told under 59 we have a library of firms that have all been vetted and so if I run the port and I need an audit firm I could then do an RFP for that library of firms. Right? And that's all what 59 means to do. Correct? It's not so some are CBE firms some are not CBE firms it's just a total library of firms that were vetted so we can go right to that and do an RFP. Okay? I don't understand does everybody here understand what this gentleman does he want us to take out all the non-CBEs? Why would we want to do that if the non-CBE could be helpful cheaper in some instances I'm all for helping the little guy but I mean how does that benefit the taxpayer if we exclude certain groups as well? I don't understand. Mr. Mayor? I'm going to go around the dais I'll start with you Commissioner Davis Thank you. I do have an item that could possibly clarify which is item 65 and it it allows you to have the non-CBEs with the CBEs on the list but if there are like three or more CBEs then that's a different discussion and the reason why he's having an issue with that to an extent is that if you want me to continue with 65 is that in the past you've had Well I would ask Council Council is there separate items or can we combine them or yeah there's they're separate items and the request was to have the item considered after but and so this is just for the approval of this QVL of this particular QVL but if you have questions about can we consider them can we consider them together so this argument might help them understand where I'm coming from I think you can address the item but we won't take the items up together okay so can I just explain it then please okay so for item 65 how it differs from 59 and if I can read what I have the purpose of the purpose of the motion is to direct the county attorney to draft an ordinance amending chapter 1 section 1 dash 81 of the Broward County Code of Ordinances relating to solicitations involving county business enterprise reserves to provide that the monetary differential does not apply to individual solicitations or resulting awards issued under the QVL established as a CBE reserve when three or more CBEs submit responsive and responsible responses to the solicitation so and back in December 1 2020 the board approved agenda item 69 amendments to the CBE reserve program that added monetary and points differential requirements to place limits on when a CBE would receive an award under the CBE reserve when non-CBE submitted a lower priced or higher ranked response the previous accounting services QVL awarded in August 2020 included seven CBEs and four non-CBEs also responded but the non-CBEs at the time were not included to the list because they were non-responsive or responsible what I'm trying to get to Mr. Mayor is that in this instance if you have three or more CBEs who are responsive and responsible as has been done in the past if we would not necessarily consider them to compete against the non-CBEs because in competing to be on the list to get the work they're on the list the non-CBEs are on the list with the CBEs but if you have them compete for the actual job there is that percentage that will knock out a CBE which I believe is what 10% 5 or 10 depending on the percentage of the size of the contract exactly and in the past that hasn't been a factor because you've had seven CBEs compete and get the work and it's been done correctly without any competition from the non-CBEs is what I'm saying so they want to be able to compete amongst themselves and not have to compete with the non-CBE doesn't the taxpayer benefit no matter who so let's pretend I'm a non-CBE and I could do it a half million dollars cheaper why wouldn't you want as far as the taxpayers are concerned which we have a responsibility to why you're going to say well no you're a non-CBE forget it even though you could save us a half million dollars we got the CBEs that are going to charge more and we're going to not include well don't forget you have situations where the CBEs don't compete with the non-CBEs and there are occasions when the non-CBEs are the only ones doing the work and who is competing with them they're competing amongst themselves right and nobody has a problem with that why is it that the CBEs can't compete amongst themselves because if the non-CBEs can't compete amongst themselves and for example they have an astronomical price then what do you do you negotiate or you go back out so go ahead can you explain to me I just don't get it I'm sorry I'm an idiot so let's just bring it back to this item so item 59 is asking the board to approve a QVL library that has currently five proposers in it we went through a procurement process our procurement process and current rules allow for both CBEs and non-CBEs to respond it has allowed that even in the prior CBEs it just happened that the non-CBEs were not considered in order to move forward with this process we are not able to take out the non-CBEs from this proposal if we approve the QVL for these services so that's the current state they're all vetted they're all qualified yes the current state of our ordinance says you know and having done the procurement we need we are not able to not approve the non-CBEs right we can't reduce the library to just I understand 59 tell me that's the item but nobody's asking you to do that can you explain what 65 does so then the 65 proposes to change our current business opportunity ordinance which when so what happens in a QVL as they stated we sent out a QVL we established a library so we can have quick turns for proposals for particular projects when we do a QVL the CBE we're not looking at pricing essentially right because we're not we don't have a particular project that's being bid on so we're just establishing responsiveness responsibility and then you're going to go out for bid when you have so the airport needs a service they're going to go out for bid they'll rank based on price and the responsiveness to the thing and then at that point we apply our CBE ordinance to the ranking of the pricing which allows for a non-CBE to win even if their pricing is within depending on the project between five so it can be a little bit higher than the non-CBE proposal that's a current proposal right so the Commissioner Davis proposed motion to direct and so if that item when we take that up unless we have six objectors we would go forward and help and propose an ordinance that the board would consider but for the purpose that wouldn't apply to this QVL right now and would only apply in the future when that QVL is I'm getting really frustrated just to tell me what does hers differ from the current code simple question so it would be a change Mr. Mayor can I answer I wanted to counsel I'd like to counsel so the change is right now everybody proposes and we're only looking at the differential when we do ranking for pricing if there are in Commissioner Davis's proposal it would be drafted so if three CBEs respond to a QVL request so there's a request for proposals if at least three respond we do not consider the CBE pricing the non-CBE pricing even if it is significantly lower than the CBE so it's taking away the five or ten percent if at least three CBEs respond to the proposal I just want to understand I understand okay you want to go around do you want to finish yeah and so suppose it's eleven percent you know it doesn't fall between the five and ten plus eleven percent or they're competing amongst themselves it could be less so all I'm saying is to really to be true to the spirit of the CBE reserve if you have three or more at one point we had seven they competed amongst themselves and they got the work and there was no non-CBEs there so I'm just trying to see how we can make sure that the dollars remain within the county they help their businesses in the county they help who they employ within the county rather than an outside farm and so I think this is just the right step it's a small step but it wouldn't be because one CB is is in the list the QBL it's three or more there's seven they compete among themselves you go to the negotiation table and you move forward and that's what happens even when there is no CBEs and it's all non-CBEs they compete and they go to the negotiation table and it's awarded that's just my point we're on 59 okay does anybody here want to go talk about 59 I'm going to go around the dais I'm going to start on this side and go with Commissioner Udine I just want to understand item 59 no so so so QVL no one's getting any work on item number 59 we're not giving anybody any contracts there's no dollars attached to anything here we put out a request pursuant to Broward County ordinances as they're written and we said to all these different accounting firms we're going to have small jobs in the future for some of our agencies and we want a vendors list of who we're going to pick so we've basically culled the vendors list so that every time someone wants a small less than one million dollar accounting gig it doesn't have to take four years to do an RFP this is something that we're going to do really quick so we've cut through the whole chase and we've come to five basically correct except we do have a contract and you're approving the contracts on the agenda because it sets the pricing everything is already done and it says you shall respond at this you know with these terms so it even simplifies it even more because there's then no we don't have to enter into agreement we've already agreed on the terms so it's just pricing so there's five books there's five people in the library five companies who determines who gets the business and makes the money how does that work they and and kind of may be a better place okay yes somebody tell me how that works so when when there's a job that needs to you know the aviation needs a set of accounting work okay this wouldn't be for this wouldn't be for the audit because the audit's a multi multi no no correct it's just different this is a small little accounting smaller smaller smaller work authorization okay explain they would they would then submit their proposals let's say it's the five group the five entities so they would we would say hey aviation needs x number of work done and then which of you five firms would like or be interested in competing for that work okay so then whoever of those five firms wanted to be considered they can propose something including their rates and everything else for that so on those real small jobs comparatively no one else besides these five would be able to correct okay so we have these five then in a group so that the complaint that we have from the cbes that are there is now instead of a one out of three chance in getting picked there are one out of five chance in getting picked all other things being equal to simplify it yes okay now if the bigger company comes in and comes in with pricing if they're ten percent lower if they're within ten percent of the cbe the cba gets the job how does that work right yes that's correct can i ask mr gleason he can give you those specifics i just don't know off the top of my head i believe you're right but i want to make sure yes so if it's ten percent low if they're only if they're five percent lower depending on the amount so in the ten percent situation if they're only five percent lower and it's one of the ten it's a smaller contract then the cbe would still get the work because they are allowed a little bit of a what if they're seven percent lower does the cbe i thought it's ten percent is the bogey if it's the ten percent limit then the cbe still gets the work up to ten percent and so but if it's eleven percent then the non-cbe would get the work in that service so if they so if we have two people that are bidding and one is not one is a cbe and one is one of the non-cbe's if this comes in at nine and a half percent lower the cbe gets it yes yes taxpayers pay the difference but we've given it we've made the policy decision to give it to the cbe if it comes in at ten point five percent lower then the larger company can get the non-cbe will get it yes okay and this is all in compliance with our ordinance and item 59 either we can select what we have here or we have to go back from the beginning and redo the whole thing in our qualified vendor so we can't come here and say we want to just take the three cbe's now now i understand when commissioner if commissioner davis's ordinance went into effect prospectively that's what we'd be talking about but as we are now what are our options on 59 59 it's to approve the qvl and move forward or not approve the qvl right and then it goes back out from the beginning we can't take parts of this exactly got it that's all i wanted to know i guess okay don't make fun of me that's all okay i'm sure if i had those questions others added and they were afraid to ask me no actually i have this straight and i i support i would vote yes on this because this is what we have now and if we want to look to change it then we can do it with 65 or whatever we want to do with with a new ordinance but this is our current ordinance under which these people operated so we can't change 59 but 65 we can put something in play in the future so that this doesn't happen again is what we're saying am i correct no 65 would actually would be able to affect this qvl when it go when they send out for so you know it takes six months to do if we have work in six months right that need that has it under this contract then the new provisions which take which can change either change the differential or change you know how we evaluate the quotations would impact this bid because the cbe ordinance is just the way that we're going to evaluate quotations for you know for these types of libraries so right now there's nothing we can do to change the outcome of this item we could start over but that's you know but that would write significantly this library all right so let's say the non cbe won the contract and it did not fit in the thresholds that you mentioned and the non cbe won it do they have to use one of the cbes to fulfill a certain percentage of that contract then or I mean because the more we dig the more we're going to you know find so I mean I like the idea we're going to fix it but what can we do now can I just clarify something with you vice mayor can I because I know Anika said it but what will happen this list will still go into effect we approve 59 you'll have this list if 60 goes through they don't have any work 65 they don't have any work right now they may get work three months from now then this new thing will go into effect and it will help the people on this list and future lists right I like to clarify one thing as well so to your question vice mayor when the non CBEs submitted to be part of this QVL they had to list at that time at least that they would work with at least 25% of the contract whatever they be awarded for whatever work authorization would have to be used with a CBE firm and they already submitted to us the list of the CBEs that they would work with okay all right thank you I don't quite understand I'm not going there now I'm fine with it 59 we're just approving a library that's all we're doing Mayor can I speak maybe I'm too simple but this is not rocket science this was an ordinance for our 2020 ordinance that we changed for this specific issue 2020 this board changed it to do what it is to do right now this is nothing but for the cities you're used to continuing contract services that's what they call it the city level this is the same thing it's a library a continuing contract service they pull off when they need to do a bit the ordinance was followed that this board passed so we need to go and pass 59 as it is so we don't have to go back and forth and rebid it again and take more time for these SBEs to hopefully get business and then we can move forward with the item that Commissioner Davis says whether we lose or draw it's not rocket science this is what our proposal this is what our order says and that's what we changed thank you Commissioner Rich and Commissioner Udean and Senator Rich said all that needed to be said I will save my remarks to item 65 Mr. Mayor I'm closing and I'm going to ask one question to start please of our procurement code because I am confused as to the policy we are adopting now somewhat that is confusing to me I'm sorry do you know what that is we're not adopting a policy we're just approving the library okay tell me do you honestly believe when you establish the CBE that we wanted to we were already competing let everyone compete so there was a reason that's item 65 for establishing the CBE to provide for local Broward business to compete amongst themselves is that what we're doing no we're just approving the library the debate will be item 65 Commissioner Rogers you want to bring that up under item 65 hear that and fully understand but it affects what you do with 59 I can't see the difference because they are one in the same 25 percent or compete with people I understand what you're saying so I am fighting a fight but can anyone I can answer I would like an answer I can answer your question commissioner 59 is this do you agree that there is a group of companies do you agree or disagree that there's a group of companies that we're going to select from here's the group of companies they're right here and that's all we're voting on a group of companies no policy it's just there's a group of companies you have to have policies to put out the procurement Mr. Mayor it's ordinances of policy go ahead um madam commissioner what I'd like to I think to answer your question you were asking about 21.6 that as I understand it is the waiver of the code provision that is as it relates to the procurement code but this particular situation was part of the business opportunity act which is an ordinance and so the board and county attorney can correct me if I'm wrong the you're correct and that's correct and that's why commissioner davis has proposed the motion to direct on item 65 to address the ordinance a proposed ordinance change because that's how the board would have to go about it and you know why I'm querying Mr. Mayor and my colleagues because in December we had a similar issue with just a different type of vendor I think it's security or whatever cleaning that clearly and I want to speak briefly that 59 and specifically that the certified CBE firms that have been recommended for this qualified vendors list I support moving with the qualified CBE firms but I'm hearing that we can't do that on this item but if that is law and it is clear I can't wait for us to get back to the point where we are helping local small businesses so that they too can play here in Broad County more than ever I believe we need to make sure our small businesses are not competing with these large firms and there were days when we could mandate certain things thank god you have this 25% built in if not they could be walked over and not be considered because things change around here every day I see a non solicited bid got change and added other folks you know we can do what we want to do when we really want to do it and if we look into it we do it quite often all right we do it quite often but it's not fair don't forget your small businesses we are counting on all of us to remember so I would ask I'm done I'm done we have a motion to second 59 all in favor aye any opposed show that passing do we have the motion on that I thought we already had a motion a second okay we have now a motion and a second all in favor aye any opposed show that passing uh pass twice 7-0 uh mckenzie thumbs up 8-0 okay we're getting there we only got three more hours of bmu show that passing 9-0 unanimously uh next one I'm I'm gonna defer the next one to the next meeting the ombudsman thing yeah we're running late I'm gonna defer that mr. mayor you had um indicated that you would take up 65 after you voted on 50 okay I just want because I see 61 is the next next you know I just want to say we're going to defer 61 okay okay 65 um commissioner davis you were explaining it before do you want to just give another quick summary yeah just a quick summary um that in this in the spirit of the cb reserve and again nobody's getting any work this is just a list um for for the future is that if there's three or more cbe's that are on the list there are also non-cbe's on that list which is still can be utilized but if there's three or more they should be competing amongst themselves not with the non-cbe's and only if none of them go for the job then you have the non-cbe's get the work so they're still on the list because you can have non-cbe's that are not going to go for that particular job maybe you know nobody applies for it but you still have the non-cbe's who are then the larger firms and they can come in you know at whatever you know rate they have and they may be able to do the work so they're still on the list but if you've got three or more they don't get to compete for that particular um you know job they can the cbe's can compete amongst themselves and only if none of them apply for the job then you go to the non-cbe are you finished yeah council before i start on the side i want to just make sure this list is 59 59 is the library and the list of companies so let's not talk about the list right now what i want to talk about is is with commissioner davis i want to make sure i got this right if three cbe's are vying for a job then no then a non-cbe cannot vie for it is that what she's what this is well how typically what they typically do is wait no no no yes or no am i right or wrong their proposal is not considered would not so let me say it again if three cbe's decide to bid for a job regardless how many companies are in this library if three cbe's we will not consider other companies that are considered non-cbe's even if they could be cheaper we're just going to consider cbe's that's correct cbe reserve it's called the cbe reserve whatever okay now i understand commissioner rogers before we i just want to remind everyone that because this is a motion to direct for an ordinance we need to have six subjectors for it not to move forward we'll move forward unless there's six subject about it commissioner rogers did you want to say anything okay commissioner gellar thank you mr mayor i agree with your earlier statements i will be objecting to this um the we are wearing two hats here we are wearing a hat trying to help local businesses but we are also wearing a hat as steward of the taxpayer money i'm okay with the five or ten percent preference to local businesses trying to help them but the reason that non-cbe's can bid is they are a backstop they are making sure where if you have 10 people on a library of on a library on but we are also wearing a hat as steward of the taxpayer money. I'm okay with a 5% or 10% preference to local businesses trying to help them, but the reason that non-CBEs can bid is they are a backstop. They are making sure where if you have 10 people on a library and 5 are CBE, 5 are non-CBE, if you have four CBEs bidding a million dollars for a piece of work and a CBE bids half a million. Non-CBE. Non-CBE, I apologize, bids half a million. The increase between half a million and a million is 100% more. That's the purpose of letting non-CBEs bid to make sure that there is not an irrational price among the CBEs. You are giving them a preference, either 5% or 10%, which I'm okay with because we want to help local businesses, but we can't just say pay double or triple because that would not make us responsible stewards of taxpayer money. So I object. We had this exact debate, Commissioner Fisher, you're referring to it, and I don't remember what year, when we determined that a preference was okay. We call it a CBE reserve, and maybe what we need to do is change the word reserve to preference so it's clear that we're going to give a preference, 5% or 10%. I agree with when Commissioner Davis and Commissioner Rogers say, but it's a reserve. I can understand why they're upset, but it's not a reserve. It's really a preference, and I will object to changing that because we would not be responsible stewards of taxpayer money if we pass this. Thank you. Can I? Hold on. I'm going to go around. Anybody else want to speak? I want to go? No, I just, Senator Giller brings up a good point. So on the half a million versus a million, I wanted to hear what Commissioner Davis' thoughts were on that. We'll get, we'll let her close. I just want to, on that, and also, like for instance, the last 59, not bringing up a bad subject, but nine folks bid, nine companies bid, and five were responsible and responsive, okay? So there was nine total, but they picked five that were responsible and responsive. So, but I'm, I think it's a good point. You're kind of wearing both hats. I want to hear what everybody else has to say about that. Commissioner Furr? I feel the same. I think, I think it provides a counterweight. I remember when we were doing this bill, there was a local preference bill, and I'm the one who had sponsored it and pushed real hard for that because I thought it was important because of a multiplying factor, that the money stays in the county. You want to have local businesses. I think everybody on this commission wants that. You'd much rather have a Broward County business, get that. And I think we've put that into the system in many ways. At the same time, you have to make sure that no one can game it. It can't be gamed. You know, and you could have some collusion going on if possible between CBs. This acts as a counterweight to make sure that doesn't happen. So I think, I think it was well thought out when we did it. The one place where you could change, if 10% isn't the right number, that's the place where you may want to change it. If you think you want to try to get, give CBs more of an advantage, you know, you can move that 10% up to 11, 12, wherever you want to move it to. But that's the place where, if you're trying to kind of make sure that CBs, yeah, that's the place to, that's your mechanism to give more advantage, not taking away all the protections. Thank you. Mr. Kennedy, anything? Good. Quick question, which is, I thought I heard that the pricing's fixed to me already. The pricing, is it fixed already? The pricing for the, for the work? No. No. I thought I heard, I get that, but they bid it, but I... They have not to exceed in the contract, so it's not... That's how she said it. They have flexibility on how they're going to actually bid on it, because it'll depend on, right, so depend on the complexity of the work, who's going to be working on it and the rates that they're going to propose for the particular contract. But we have said in the contract that it's on the agenda not to exceed amounts. And this basically is the first time that a non-CBE has participated in this library, am I correct, based on what I'm hearing? Yeah. The last one, there was no non-CBEs competing, and it went through perfectly fine. Yeah. Just, Mr. Vice Mayor, sorry. I looked at this, and I did see that in the last one, since this change, since you had this 5% to 10%, on the last one, which is in, I believe, is in 2020, seven CBEs were competing amongst themselves because no non-CBEs were responsive or responsible. So what do we do? Do we throw it out and go back out? No. We were able to negotiate with the CBEs, even though there were no non-CBEs for your checks and balances. So, you know, it has proven that it can work among the CBEs themselves. And now we just want to restrict it. So I understand it. We just want to restrict it just to non... I'm sorry, to CBEs. When there's three or more, because it has worked in the past, when there were seven, there were no non-CBEs even willing to compete. They weren't responsible or responsive. And it went on just fine. So the argument to say, oh, if there's no non-CBEs, it's not going to work, they're going to overprice, it didn't happen in the past. And they were awarded. Then what's the need? Right. So there is no need to come... No, for 6.5, if it didn't happen in the past, then... Well, because they didn't... They weren't responsive or responsible. They applied, but they didn't come... They didn't follow through. I just think, when we look at this, and we've created this CBE small business, if you will, it was well thought out. But I do think, based on my experience, that I've participated in the county CBEs as a contractor. I went after work I wanted to go after. I went after work that I wanted to go after. I didn't take on the bigger jobs. I stayed in the pool with my peers and sharpened my pencil there, because I still had to bid based on the scope of work that's being proposed. A big company, a big company come in and say, you know what? If anyone's going to move some numbers or play with numbers, it's going to be the bigger company saying that I'll shoot it down to that percentage just to shake up the pool. And I don't know if we can or cannot restrict it to that pool of people, but we came up with a CBE program to try to protect it. Now here we are allowing the bigger fish to get in there, and I think the numbers are really skewed with the bigger fish than it is with the little fish in this case. And I don't know what kind of protections we can put in place. And just be fair. I mean, the big folks are going to eat, whether it's in the little pool or the big ocean. They're going to eat, and they eat well. And that's why every time we have a situation like the compost, the big companies are going to eat. The little companies may or may not eat, but thank God for a commission like this that has protections for that participation piece. Probably in another couple months, we can't refer to it by the names that we have in the past, but it's still going to be small business. Companies in this town that we all say that we want to see higher wages, we want to see more people participating, but oftentimes here, I see it's that little company we're sitting here trying to either put out to pasture, or maybe we are trying to protect, but a lot of times it's that one little person in our pool that we're trying to not help. So I want to see if we can help in this situation, just keep it competitive with the CBEs. That would be my wish here. So I would support it if we can probably workshop it or figure out something that will work for all of us. I think we all want the same thing. It's just that we don't like what we're hearing. It would have to come back anyway as an ordinance. I would like to move it forward and try to find something that will work for our CBEs to be protected. Next. Senator Rich. Can I just clarify, just one thing, right, so that it was only on this particular library that in the last iteration there were no non-CBEs, but we have other QVLs that have CBEs and non-CBEs participate. And if we did the change that's proposed by Commissioner Davis, you would still potentially get a library that had non-CBEs in the library that's approved. You'll have an item, potentially have an item that looks just like this one. It's just when we're applying the pricing for the individual quotations that the changes would come into play. Right. Senator Rich. Okay. I think just for me, I certainly want to help the CBEs. I've been a big supporter of that, but I also am concerned at the possibility of having a situation such as was mentioned by Senator Gellar of having, you know, really use the taxpayer dollars in an inappropriate way. So I just, I need to know how do we avoid that? Is there a way within this framework of what Commissioner Davis is talking about that we can avoid a situation like that from happening? Can I respond? Can I turn it? But either way. To her. Hold on. Counsel, can you answer that question? So, you know, that's entirely a policy choice. Commissioner Furrer proposed, you know, one of the methods which is just changing what your percentage looks like if you wanted to. That's not her question. The question is, is there any way to protect? Yeah. She's answering the question. Right. I don't understand. So this, because the issue is, the concern would be, right, so imagine your three CBEs come in and they are double the price of your non-CBE. Right. Pricing. So in order to protect, to address Senator Rich, it may be just adjusting what that percentage that the board would feel comfortable with for having the CBEs be higher than a non-CBE. Mr. Mayor, can I respond? So that's not the way I was going to handle that. The non-CBEs, when they compete and there's no reserves, no CBEs, they have to negotiate. Why is it we're just picking on the CBEs that all of a sudden they're going to double up the price than anybody else? What about the non-CBEs? What do they do? Who's checking them on the pricing that they bring back? So clearly there is a negotiation factor here and you go back out to be the worst case scenario. If you have no CBEs, if you have no CBEs contending and you only have is non-CBEs and all of a sudden they're outlandish prices, what do you do then? So it's just no different. Why are we treating the CBEs as if there are a set of robbers and thieves and then the non-CBEs only give you the exact price of the item? That is really not the spirit of what we're trying to do. Everybody needs to be able to be treated fairly. And when the non-CBEs are competing amongst themselves, we never have this discussion. But we're having it with the CBEs. I want to go around the desk. I've heard, we heard Commissioner Davis. Let's end this. Based on the state law as it's written now, are we allowed to do any of this in the future? Would this come back? Because I don't want us to get removed over some of this. And I don't expect you to answer this now. You may have to do some research on this. Well, our CBE program is a county business ordinance. So it's small businesses, local, right? It doesn't address the issues that the most recent state laws. Okay. So then the state... We amended our codes to address that in the past. And then the other thing is, is there any specific reason why there's only... Why we're using the number three as far as three CBEs? We could have more than that if we wanted in there, if five CBEs were in there. Yes, and that's correct. And so remember, this is just a motion to direct. The county attorney's office would draft an ordinance that would still be set for public hearing. And the commissioner Davis as the sponsor would give us comments for that. And any commissioner could propose amendments to that ordinance as part of their proposal. But that's just what she is the sponsor commissioner has proposed for us to draft. She wants it to come back to us in the future with an ordinance. Okay. Before we vote, I just was informed we have three speakers on this. Roderick Harvey is the first speaker. Roger, are you here? Okay. Next. Shahiwa Jarrett. Good afternoon. My name is Shahiwa Jarrett-Gellin. I am the president of the Briar County Black Chamber as well as the Florida Association of Black Chambers. I've had the pleasure of serving on the Small Business Advisory Board for Briar County for several years. Actually been the chair twice as well as the Small Business Board Advisory Board for Briar County School Board. So these issues are extremely important to me. In listening to you all today with regard to item 65, it simply directs the county attorney's office to draft an ordinance providing that the monetary differential will not apply to individual solicitations or resulting awards issued under the QVL established as a county business enterprise reserve. I feel that in my members that this is a practical and important improvement to the county CBE program where there are three or more qualified CBE firms that are competing for the opportunity. I can't tell you how many times I've had a conversation with OASBD or other staff members about the number that it would take for folks to have that opportunity so it would just be a CBE reserve. Time after time, year after year, I've been told just three. If we have at least three, that will suffice. That guarantees that there is competition, so I'm not quite sure where these numbers are coming from with regard to these CBEs colluding and not being fair with regard to price. I will tell you as a small business owner, we often in my industry come in a lot lower than the big boys such as Aon, Marsha, McLennan. They are the ones that come in with the high prices and we are able to offer more services at reasonable prices because we're boutique and we control our overhead and that's what our small businesses do every day. So there's not a lack of competition when you're saying that we want to highlight and this is your policy, we want to make sure that our county business enterprises, the folks who hire locally as well as the folks who spend their tax dollars here in the county are able to have an opportunity to do business with the very county that they are headquartered in and that they live in. And so if we have a policy that you all have set out, have set out, when you have the opportunity to protect them and say three of you can compete, five of you can compete, there's still a competition. No one's coming in and raising the prices so that you're all paying triple or double. I'd like you to invite OESBD up or some other staff member to tell you when in fact you pay double or triple. You all have the opportunity to do best and final when we negotiate with our government agencies and we have five different government agencies that we work with in our personal company. You set a price out when you bid but you go into negotiations. And so we get an opportunity to do best and final, we get an opportunity to negotiate and say, well this is the price that we have, this is what we budgeted and then we have an opportunity to meet that as a small company. And that's all we're asking for here. Thank you. Third person. Our final speaker, Terri Ann McKenzie. Good afternoon to you all. My name is Terri Ann McKenzie and I'm the owner of McKenzie's Clean and Inc., a certified CBE firm here in Broward County and I'm here today to support the removal of the restrictive clause in Chapter 1, Section 1-81 regarding the monetary differential. On three occasions, separate occasions, this restrictive clause has prevented my company McKenzie's Cleaning from receiving an award even though we were the highest ranked CBE firm and was found to be responsible and responsive. Today, McKenzie's Cleaning request is simple. Remove Chapter 1, Section 1-81 regarding the monetary differential clause that prevents qualified CBE firms from receiving the opportunities the CBE program was created to provide. The CBE program was created to provide opportunities for small and local business, not barriers. I ask you to tear down these barriers and create a level playing field where the already vetted CBE firms can compete against themselves. I support Item 65 to remove the monetary differential because this change will give CBE firms a fair opportunity to compete, perform, and grow right here in Brownwood County. One point I'd like to make before walking away is that in two cases, McKenzie's price was less than the contractor selected. In addition, please don't forget that most times there's a negotiating process despite being the lowest bidder. Thank you for your time. Mayor. Ms. McKenzie, can I ask you a question? When you were on that one where you were the highest ranked, why did you not get the bid? There was other restrictive language in that particular contract. There was a should versus must language that also prevented us from being the selected CBE firm. Did another CBE firm get the job? No. No, we did not. Mr. Mayor, if I can clarify, I just had our purchasing department share that they believe that the situation that you might be referring to was related to a points differential. So it's a different situation. Is there anything else that you'd like? Monica, we don't, it's okay. He answered the question. That's fine. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I have a question for Anika, county attorney. First, I want everybody to understand that we're not talking about a level playing field. we're still talking about a preference for small businesses anyhow. It's just capped at 5 or 10%. But Anika, Commissioner Davis kept saying, well, they can negotiate. My understanding from what you said is that once they're already on the library, it is a bid, not a negotiation, where you just say, all right, for this, this is how, here's the parameters, this is how much I bid, and then whoever is the lowest price subject to the 5 or 10%, there is not a negotiation. Is that correct? So that's usually a case, and I think it's important that we remember that we're dealing in this very narrow area of the QVL, right? And so there are some other different dynamics that apply when you're going out just to do RFP, that some other factors will come into play, but here, right, we already have everything pretty much negotiated, and so it's just going to be primarily based on price. And what Commissioner Davis is proposing is just to make the changes for this for a QVL, not a general change to the CBE ordinance for every single procurement. The ordinance changes for QVL, this QVL. QVL is not for every single list. Yeah, because this is just a small area. Nobody's getting any work here. They may not even get any work. This is the list. If they were to get any work, then they would go by what I'm proposing. Yes, and I need six subjectors. Yeah. No, there's not it's moving. Mr. Mayor, I've made up my mind. I'd like to make a motion. I would object to this. Okay, are we ready to vote? Yes. Or do you want to spend another hour talking? We can come back after the vote? All right, do I have a motion? I imagine we won't have a quorum. I'm going to go by hands. There's not going to be a voice vote. Okay. Okay? Did you make a motion? Motion to approve. Is there someone seconding that? You'd be happy. It's a motion. Motion to direct. All in favor, show hands. So I got one, two, three. Are you raising your hand? I've raised one, two, wait, one, two, three, four. I'll let it come back. I object. I don't. No, I don't object. I just said let it go. I'm sorry. What did you say? Let it go. I said I'm. You're for it. I didn't say I was for it. I said let it go. I don't know what that means. I'm sorry. Okay. I got one, two, three. You're for it. Are you for it? Are you for moving forward? I didn't say it. It's going to come back. Okay. I got one, two, three, four, five, four, five. We got five in favor. We got five, five in favor. Okay. It moves forward. Five to five to three. Who's the third? Right. He just had to have six objectors. Passes. You voted no, no, correct? No. How do you? Okay. How many times? Excuse me. I know. I think we should really go. And then I'll just wait. Do you want you to tell me how you're voting? Cause I raised hands. How many are for I asked how many for raise your hand? The motion to direct. Okay. That's what they said before. So you got one, two, three, four, five, six. Okay. You raised the hand. Six to two, one, not here. Six to two. Hazel co-sponsored. That's what I said. You said let's move it. She's with you. Okay. Don't take me back. Just please. God. Don't talk to me. Just don't talk to me. Did we address 68 yet? You have three items left today. 66, 68, and 69. I'm going to skip right now over to 68. Skipping over to 68. Motion to authorize county attorney's office to file a lawsuit against Brockhine tax collector. Do I got a motion? Very quickly. I said earlier at the beginning of the meeting that I wanted to postpone this instead. Can I just get an assurance? Because I would like to see if this can be resolved before litigation that we will not be actually filing the litigation before our meeting on the 22nd. Can I respond? You have a chance to negotiate. Senator, we've been working for 10 months, according to council and administration, 10 months on a $10 million issue. They claim they're right. We claim we're right. Let the courts decide. There's nothing more. It's been 10 months. Mr. Mayor, you know we have to draft a lawsuit. So all I'm just saying is we won't actually file within the next two weeks. I'm not amending it, but if you want to make a friendly amendment. I can do a friendly amendment that we won't be actually filing the lawsuit until the 22nd, whenever our next meeting is, so that we can have an opportunity to resolve it. The tax collector called me, said we want to resolve it. Great. But two weeks, and if not, we'll sue. But I think we should vote today to authorize the lawsuit. I'll second this. I got a motion and a second on a friendly amendment to move forward, but not file it until the 23rd of this month. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Show 68 passing with that stipulation. Number 66, motion to discuss mayoral protocols regarding speaking engagements. Mr. Mayor, didn't we already resolve this? I thought you have previously brought this up and we passed your prior motion. Look, I'm done in 60 days and some likely person near me is going to be the mayor. But everything I say goes then, so I don't need an ordinance. But yes, we did discuss this, but I just want to say it's a chance for anybody on the dais, any one of our commissioners, to speak up if they think that there's a problem with the protocol because I'm hearing that there sometimes is a problem with the protocol. So I just, mayoral, whoever's the mayor, there's a protocol. Mayor, when the mayor is speaking, you're not going to have three people speak and as I said, I'm done in two months. But whoever the future mayors are as well, if the mayor is speaking, the mayor can certainly invite somebody, but otherwise the mayor is speaking and none of us are speaking on behalf of the county. So obviously if you're invited alone without the mayor, then you go and speak and do what you want in your neighborhood or do whatever who's inviting you. But if it's an event where the mayor is there, the mayor is the one we agreed. Am I wrong? Mayor Ann Lane. Yeah. Ms. Mayor, it was the mayor. If mayor was unavailable, went to vice mayor, then immediate prior mayor, then seniority. We already adopted this. Any problem? Commissioner Davis, any issues? No, I don't have an issue. From what I remember, I think the district commissioner could also speak. No. That's not on the new? No, it's when the mayor... I was going to make sure. I have to look back because I'm pretty sure you guys made some provisions about a district commissioner if it was an event in the district, in a particular district. Right. Well, that's ridiculous because what of the... I don't think so because most of the stuff is an event in someone's district. So either the mayor is speaking or the mayor... If the mayor is there, the mayor should be speaking on behalf of the county. Then maybe we need to amend it right now. Maybe we need to go and amend this. I don't think they were speaking out of turn. I just think that if they wanted to speak, if it's in their district and they wanted to speak, I think that was part of the protocol. They may not want to speak, but if... Suppose there's an opening and they were instrumental in some of the stuff working with the cities and it's a park in the district. And let's say that just the district commissioner is invited, district manager speaks. But if they invite the mayor to speak, it would be up to the mayor to let the district commissioner speak. I'm sure. It's an option of the mayor. So if... If... If vice mayor becomes mayor and it's in your district, he could decide to speak and not have you speak or he could decide to speak and have you speak. It's up to the mayor. But I noticed that there is not the same... If a commissioner wants to speak, for example, and I know nobody stops the county administrator from speaking, I don't understand why it's the district commissioner if they want to speak at a district event that the county is putting on, but yet the county administrator can speak at every event. I'm not saying she can't, but why is it so restrictive for the elected person in that district that was elected by the people of the district not to be able to address in their own district? Mr. Dean, you got any thoughts on that? Charter. The mayor is the ceremonial dignitary for the county. So if the mayor is there, the mayor speaks. Period. That's the way I look at it. Do we agree? There's something in... But it's because like, I go to a lot of things at the Hard Rock and I really should be speaking at all of them, but it's Geller's district. I'm just teasing. No, if you go to one of these events and it's a county event, but then if you came to something in my district, let's say you came to... I'm in Northwest Broward. Let's say you came up to the... And I think you... They're never going up. I think you came before to the Rizzo Walk in my district when you were mayor. And you came and you spoke... Whatever, you speak. And I spoke. It wasn't a big deal. Okay, Steve Geller is giving me the protocol and the protocol says... It's an item 66. Give me an example like tomorrow is the Airport 9-11 thing. Yeah. I usually go, but I... I don't care. I usually go and sit in the front row if they need... So it's Beams? No, he shouldn't speak. It's Beams district. I love Beams. I'm speaking. You should speak if you're there. If you're not there, then the vice mayor is there. And then if the vice mayor is not there, then the former mayor would be there. I usually go to support if it's a county-wide thing and a county district. I don't expect to really go... So wait. Commissioner Davis, you said that the district commissioner is in here. The Broward County administrator... Guys? Guys? Guys? Guys? I just want to get this clear. There's no one else showed up that last time. Michael? Broward County Administrative Code Section 18.30 Subsection D. Is that what you're talking about? Yes, sir. Close paren or open? Close paren. Thank you. Speaking invitations, trader, intergovernment initials, ceremonial appearances by a commissioner on behalf of the county, whether local or involving travel, shall be directed to the mayor and the mayor shall offer the opportunity to commissioners in the following order. Mayor and then if not vice mayor, not immediate past mayor and then last commissioners in order of seniority. That's it. There's nothing about district commissioners. I'm almost certain that in the new one there was. I'm sorry. I didn't hear her. Please. What? So that's the general provision. But then if there is an engagement, right, that is where a commissioner has a, we're doing a solid waste event where a commissioner has a particular expertise or if it is specific to a district, then mayor- Where does it say that? It's a little bit further down in the paragraph below the- The mayor, yeah. So if it's specific to the district, then the mayor has the discretion to offer it to the commissioner who has the relevant experience and then otherwise go back to the- So the mayor has the discretion. Yes. Okay. So the district commissioner does not have the right to speak. It's up to the mayor, correct? That's correct. Okay. Mayor, further? Does that clarify everything? Because- I mean, I'm good- If you have an issue with Monica about why is the minister speaking, that's a different issue and that's an issue you're certainly entitled to bring up. But Monica does not have authority, sorry Monica, to decide who's speaking. Of course she doesn't. But there was a part in there that talks about if you're invited to speak. And it doesn't say whether it's external or internal. I've been to places where I've been invited to speak, internal or external. If you're invited in your district, you go and that's it. And it's your- It might not be- But whoever the mayor is, if the mayor's invited and it's in your district, it's up to the mayor, whoever that is, to decide whether he wants or she wants to speak. Yeah, and I wouldn't take that away from the mayor. Clearly, you know, it's up to them. All I'm saying is that you can be invited to speak anywhere in the county. Right. Let's move it. I only put this on because I've been hearing that there's some issues. Next time you need to get permission from- Mayor, mayor, let's settle this. We're going to follow the protocol that we have. Correct. Correct? Right. That's what we're going- Does anybody have an issue? We're following the protocol that's already been in effect. Period. Okay, let's move on. Thank you. What's the next one? 69. What have we done? 69. 69? Reading clerk, 69? 69 A, motion to approve co-sponsorship of the Black British Heritage Celebration, an event by Commissioner Alexandra P. Davis. 69 B, motion to approve budget resolutions in fiscal year 2026 and fiscal year 2027 to appropriate, recognize, and implement unanticipated funds in the form of sponsorship dollars for the Black British Heritage Celebration. One member of the public has signed up to speak on the item, Chris Nelson. I'm definitely speaking. Chris, are you there, Chris? Chris is gone. All right. I'm going to bring it back. I'll let the Commissioner Davis, it's your item. Why don't you bring it? Thank you. Yeah, so this is an event that I have been holding over the years as a City of Miramar Commissioner. This year, as a County Commissioner, I'm liking to have it at one of our facilities. And there's no cost, of course, to the county except in kind. What has happened here is that in terms of my sponsors, which I have several, just to name a few, I have Jet Blue, the Florida Panthers Foundation, FP&L, and many others who are going to defray the cost of this event, as well as I have ticketing prices of $40 for the event. The event will host around 200 people for a red carpet reception, dinner, and awards. Some of the folks who will be receiving the awards, you have Leanne Cox, she's an Executive Director to His Majesty Council General and Deputy Council General for the UK, Florida, from the UK for Florida, Puerto Rico, and U.S. Virgin Islands. Also, Dr. Rupert Bromley, who is Senior Strategic Partnership Specialist for Food for the Poor. This recognizes folks of Black British heritage who live within the South Florida region, recognizing their input in their community. And it is well attended, it's attended by the British American Chamber of Commerce, as well as the Concert General, the UK Concert General, and in the past. And so this year, what I'm needing to do is to be able to pay the Performing Arts Center, which is a private center for performing arts, the sponsorship dollars. In order to do so, it has to come through the county to be paid out. So the sponsors would write the check to the county, and then the county would pay it out to the Performing Arts Center. So it's basically a way to make sure that the budget reflects this additional money coming in and money going out. So it's really procedural, but there is no cost to the county. Any other comments? Yep, Steve. Thank you on this. I have no objections to what Commissioner Davis said the way she said it. I just don't know if that's what our resolution says. A resolution says that the county to appropriately recognize and implement unanticipated funds in the aggregate amount of up to $30,000. I have no problem with the way you said you wanted to do it, which is getting money in from sponsors and running it through as long as there's no county GR dollars. And I don't have a problem with using your staff, but I do want to make sure, because that's not the way that I read this, that there are no GR dollars going to that, that this is only the way that Commissioner Davis expressed it, because that's not the way that I read this. So, yes, except that the only thing is that if, for instance, there's not enough funding, then the Commissioner's community events budget would backstop some of it. She could use some of her budget to pay for, you know, any costs related to the staffing. So that's the, but her anticipation is that it will be covered by sponsorship and ticket sales on no GR dollars. So if maybe I need a friendly amendment, I just want to be clear that there are no county GR dollars going. If there is any shortfall, it's coming from her district funding as opposed to... Any county. No, no, I agree. It's not counting from any county. The only county funding would be pass-throughs, and if there's a shortfall, it's coming from your district. I'm okay with that if I need to move that as an amendment. That's how it's currently drafted. Okay, if that's how it's currently drafted, I'm okay. Because my understanding is that, first of all, I guess the plan, right? This marketing, it's already marketing, and this is going on. It's going to be at the PACA, performing arts center. I know that Commissioner Davis talked about using facilities. PACA is not a county facility. So, my understanding is they're not. So, therefore, how are they using? Is the event paying for the space at the performing arts center? No. That is part of the county, and I don't know what the administration is. They can explain it. As part of our contract with PACA, they have certain amount of events that they can do throughout the year that's covered. I think that was like 50 grand, I think, I remember. No, no. It's like 2,500. Up to 50,000 or something? Well, I don't know how much. I'm just concerned that I don't want to get into a scenario where we're taking money from the performing arts center that Broward County is, so explain that to me because I don't understand that part of it. Sorry, I was in the restroom. Again, PACA is not a Broward County facility. Correct. So, in the agreement we have with the performing arts center, there is a $50,000 annual rent credit that we have available to us that we have used from time to time for different county events. For example, if you guys may have gone to the state of the arts in the past and it was held over there, that was part of the rent credit. We have been advised that part of this item would be to utilize that rent credit, but we did get a notification from the performing arts center that because of the level of catering and other things that would be procured for this particular event that the rent credit would not, they would have ordinarily waived the rent, the charge for the rent of that space for anybody, not, you know, any particular reason because it was the county. It was because of the level of, you know, catering and things like that that they were utilizing. So we got an email that that would have been waived regardless and it's not going to be charged against our rent credit. It's not going to be charged against our $50,000. That's correct. But it says in here though, item A, it says in kind contributions of the county. Was that? Staff time. But what Commissioner Davies is saying, we're not using, she's using her own staff. Well, that's still county staff. Well, I got, okay, but she's using her own staff and her own money from her account. From her office budget. Not costing any money at all. That is what this item is. No credits or anything like that. It's just not counting money at all. Okay. That is correct. Excuse me. I want to just clarify. So the money that she can use just come from her office account. Is that what you're saying? That's correct. So as ridiculous as this is sound and I know it sounds ridiculous, this morning I had an item up on how I can use my office funds and you voted against because you didn't think I should be able to use my office funds for my employees, for county employees. but now you want me as one of nine to authorize you to use money for some event that you want to put on and I'm going to do the same favor. I'm voting no against this because it's hypocritical to me. On one hand, I can't have the authority. Excuse me, Nan. I know you're not but I'm talking and I deserve the floor. Okay? And if you don't think I should have the authority to use my judgment and warning employees here at the county for good job for the job they do but now I should then say yes, go ahead and spend money so you can have a celebration with people out in the community. Sounds hypocritical to me but I'm going to vote no on that. Yeah, but that's not... I'm not finished. Okay. Second, not even attending that comment, using your staff and your money is using taxpayer money and taxpayer funds. I've been lectured how I can't use my staff for certain things because it's taxpayer money and it's taxpayer funds who are paying the staff whether it's a dollar out of your account or not so we're using taxpayer money for your staff to go and attend some event that has nothing to do with county business. I'm voting no. Who's next? Okay. Just to respond to what you're saying, there's money in the budget appropriated for this stuff. This is not something I'm pulling out of my hat. For the rental. Only for the rental. No, no, no. I'm talking about for events. There's money in our budget for events. This is not something new. It's been approved for events. Can I... The only thing... Did you mean just in general not for this event? Yeah, in general. In general. I think she's referring to cultural sponsorships and things like that. Is that... No, she's referring to the county commission budget. Remember, they have a portion of funds that they can use for community outreach. So her... This is part of... It's for community outreach. Right. So this is what I would use it for. Commissioner Rich. Thank you. I just want to clarify because when we had this conversation, my understanding is that when you say county... county, you know, monies, it's in kind and my understanding was it's just... It's kind of to do the bookkeeping where the checks come in and they process them and they do that and that's what our staff does. So that's... To me, that was fine. So, I mean, to me, I think that was the only thing that was really basically something that the county is doing as a result of what Commissioner Davis wants to do. Correct. That and then if she uses her own office staff to assist with any of this, that would be the use of the county resources that you're referring to. That's... So I understand. So that's like when we're asked to do a charitable thing. Correct. If we want to do that, sometimes we have to come here first, otherwise we can't even let our district aides send out an email because that's in violation of that. So that's what she's asking for us to do. So there's no actual dollars coming out anywhere? Right. Well, this is a little bit different because, again, because of how the contract with PACO works, they require that the county make the payment. So there are dollars moving and that's why you have two budget resolutions here. Okay. Because you're going to have dollars coming in from the sponsorships and from the payments of the folks who buy tickets and that money is going to be used to make payments to PACO for the cost of the event. So explain to me where the county tax dollars come beside... There's no... There's no county tax dollars. Well, unless, for instance, for instance, she's doing... If there's catering and imagine only 10 people show up for the event and they've budgeted for the event that you need to cover that cost with the number of tickets, then the commission district office funds will be used to pay for the rest of the cost that wasn't covered by the ticket sales. So far, we're doing very well. We have over $21,000 in sponsorships and the event is $25,000. And then we have $8,000 coming from ticket sales. So we're going to go over and that's why we made sure we have that the excess funds will go to the cultural division. So if there's a profit made, then that money comes back to the county? Yes. Okay. Anybody else? Is the profitability written into this item? So if there's any profitability, it comes back to the county? It provides that any excess funds because, again, we're going to be receiving all the money. So if there's excess funds after we make all the payments, then the cultural division is a designated recipient of those funds. It sounds like there's already going to be some excess. You got a motion? Do we have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Show one opposed. Show it passing 6 to 1. Thank you. I think, did we cover our agenda? Because we have a meeting in 40 minutes. Yes, sir. What about non-agenda items? Do you guys want to forego our non-agenda? Because we need a break. We're going to take a break and come back at 5 o'clock. 5 o'clock. Mr. Mayor, is the meeting adjourned? Yes. Thank you.