City Commission Conference Meeting on 2026-04-07 1:30 PM - Apr 07, 2026

All right, folks, if we could all please find a seat. Good afternoon, everybody, and welcome to the City Commission conference meeting this April 7th, 2026. If we could all please ask you to find a seat and we can begin our meeting. Thank you. So for those of you who are here for the first time, we appreciate your coming and participating in this process. The meeting in the afternoon, the purpose of it is for the Commission to engage in discussions on items, things we don't vote on, but we do have the opportunity to discuss the facts and get information for ultimately having to vote on specific ordinances during the evening meeting. But before we begin that, today we have a couple of neighbor presentations, and two people have signed up to speak today. And the first one is Luke Lockhart, who'd like to talk about loading and unloading zones and parking enforcement. Luke, are you here? Luke? Not here. Okay. All right. We'll pass on, Luke. And the next person, the second person, is Salvador Noriega. Come on up. Please come to the podium. Where's the podium now? Oh, okay. And please push the button at the bottom of the speaker.

Hello, hello. There you are. Thank you. Thank you very much. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Nice to meet you. Well, I'm a neighbor here in Fort Lauderdale. I moved almost three years ago to the Dorsey River neighborhood, really close to here, a few blocks. So, my life has been very nice and calm, a very good, tranquil life here, better than Miami because I came from Miami. So, everything was good until... Are you with the Chamber of Commerce? Sorry, Dan. Last, I mind my own business. I stay at my place. I don't mess with anyone, you know. I keep to myself. I work from home. I'm a writer. I work in advertising. And the other day, sometimes in this neighborhood, you listen to gunshots some days, you know. It happened like two or three times since I moved there. Fire gunshots, you know. But this time, it was Saturday, February 28th night, 10 p.m., something like that. I was watching TV there with my dog. It was evident I was home. My car was there. The lights were on. My property is the only fenced property of the block because when I moved there, I built a fence immediately. I paid for my permit with you guys and everything, and I built my fence to be more secure, you know. And I was watching TV this Saturday, a month, and a little more ago, and I heard these gunshots. Then I started hearing helicopters, then cop cars, you know, sirens. And like half an hour after the gunshots, I hear like a loud explosion in my door, in my gate of my place. And I look out, and my house was being raided by six cops with guns drawn on dogs and terrorizing me and my dog. You know, I look at them, and they told me, come back inside. And I went back inside of my place. They didn't say anything else. They just let my – they broke my gate. They broke my lock and the lock support on my gate. So it's an expensive repair. It's not just like I just changed the lock and that's it. What was the purpose for their coming to your house? They never explained it to me. They didn't give me an explanation, not an apology, nothing. They just told me, wait here. And I wait there on the street talking to the neighbors because the neighbors saw what happened. And the only house they broke in was my house for some reason. And the only gated property, the only place where a subject wouldn't try to hide, that's where they – So after a while, they finally left? They left, and they gave me a card with a case number, and they told me to call this number, patrol division, whatever. I called them. I was like, oh, this case is like a reference for them to send someone and fix my gate, no, because they broke my gate, no? And I called the next day, and they told me, no, it's not here. It's in risk management. And then a sergeant called me because I left a message in your office, mayor, asking Zachary for help because he helped me before with an issue I had with garbage in the neighborhood. And that's why I'm here. Zachary asked me to come here. This sergeant told me I should file a case with risk management, a claim, and I filed the claim, and I sent them pictures and evidence and everything. And they told me that the cops might not even be liable. They wouldn't accept liability or whatever, something like that, and that I have to wait. And now my damage gate by the police is part of a criminal investigation because this person in the city, the risk management person who is helping me with this, told me that the investigation is still on, and they keep on investigating, and until the investigation is, oh, my time is off. It's okay. Sorry. It's okay.

So, all right.

So, let me ask you this. Have you spoken with Commissioner Sorensen at all on this? He's your district commissioner. You just went directly to my office, right? Yes.

I'm his district commissioner. Oh, you're the district commissioner. How are you doing? Oh, hello. I'm sorry. We're three blocks apart. Oh, yes, yes, yes. You replied to my email.

Thank you, Pam.

Yes.

Thank you so much. Yes, yes.

Yes. Okay.

We have not spoken. I heard about the presentation yesterday during my briefing. So, I'm going to see where we go from here.

Okay.

So, Commissioner Beasley-Pittman is your commissioner. So, she's now going to work with you and assist you in this. Chief, do you know anything about this incident? What happened? Why was his house approached in the manner it was and without an explanation to the owner?

How are you?

Good afternoon, Mayor, Commission, Vice Mayor Bill Schultz, Chief of Police. I don't have the specific information I have that being researched right now to see when the call occurred and how long it's been with risk management. But I'll be happy to take your information today and I'll personally follow up with risk management to see where we are. Okay.

All right. Okay. Thank you. It's just scary when you have, you know, when you have police swarming your house and you're told to go in and you have, you know, it looks like a raid. I mean, the fellow. Understood. I mean, it's just, that shouldn't happen to anybody. And there should be an explanation, should be an apology, especially if it wasn't directed at him. Certainly. So, you know, we should. Yeah, I'll look into the whole incident. Yeah, please do that. I will. Great. Thank you.

You too. Thank you, Major. I just don't think it's fair for me to be part now of a criminal investigation. We agree with you.

But apparently, you know, things have fallen between the cracks and we want to make sure that you're taken care of. So we apologize for that.

Thank you, Major. Thank you so much for your time. You're welcome.

And also, I would like to say, we, from my office, we also follow up with this to make sure that we get back with you and keep you in the loop as to the transition, the progress with it. Okay. Thank you.

All right. Great. There's no one else who signed up to speak. So we'll jump right into communications to the City Commission. We have one communication from the Historic Preservation Board. Is anyone here from the Historic Preservation Board? Yes. You want to come up?

Hi. Good afternoon, Mayor and Commissioners. We have a board member, Arthur Marcus, with us this afternoon, who is here to represent the Historic Preservation Board.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Commissioners. As the outgoing chair of the board, our communication today is, let me just read the motion that was read to you. I can read it. Motion made by Mr. Golden. Right.

Seconded by Mr. Jones to recommend communicating to the City Commission the quorum requirement be based on the number of appointed members. In other words, as opposed to those positions that are open. Right.

So right now we have seven members. Tricia, we can have nine? We can have up to nine. But actually, with myself and somebody else having to step down yesterday, we're down to five. So what we're asking is that instead of basing our quorum on the nine members, to base it on the number of members that are attending the meeting.

So you technically need to have every single person attending that meeting so you'd have a quorum.

And we've had to cancel several meetings because of that. Your thoughts on that?

Yeah. Arthur, thank you. First of all, and thank you so much for your service all these years as a district appointee. Thank you. We really appreciate it. And I thank you so much. It's been a pleasure working with you as my appointment on HPB and for your service, not just as a board member, but also as the chair these past few years. So thank you for that. Thank you. I have a question, though, for you, because might this not be a moot point? I know that I'll be submitting a name for your replacement. There's also tonight an appointment that we'll be voting on. Right. So that would get it to eight, and the quorum for eight would be the same as the quorum

for nine.

That would get it to seven.

Well, I'm... Because it was myself plus another board member who stepped down last night. So instead of seven, we're now down to five.

But maybe whoever's appointment that is, I don't know, because I don't know what my colleagues are doing, but hopefully that person is going to be replaced as well. So you should be at least eight. My point being that the quorum for eight is still the same requirement as the quorum for nine. It would still be five. But I understand what you're saying. I would just like to know what we do with other boards and committees in terms of their enabling legislation. Do we do this for the other boards and committees where we just do it based on the number of people sitting? Well, that's the point. That's the point.

Do we do... What is... Anthony, what is our...

What is our practice?

Anthony for harder, director of development services. So most of the boards do the same thing. There are some... Do... What's the same thing? The quorum is based on the number of seats.

Seats, not those who have been appointed.

Not those who have been appointed. But it is... I can't remember the board that does it. There is at least one board that has a quorum based on the number of people available in those appointed seats. And I can get that information for you.

Well, so what is the policy of the commission? What do we want to do? Do you know what it is? I mean, obviously, we should be responsible enough to make sure we've made appointments to our various boards and committees so that this doesn't happen.

Ben, do you have something you want to say about it? Yeah, Mayor. I think it's a good question. I think it makes sense to have the quorum be those that are appointed, be based on those that are appointed. Not the number of seats. Not the number of seats. But the ones that are there. Right. If we're able to make that adjustment.

I think you're right.

Well, I...

What do you think?

I'm not in agreement with that. I think it should be with the seats that's designated overall. I do have a concern about, you know, how do we do this across the board if it's needed? Do we know if it's needed across the board pertaining to the other committees and boards? And also, I'm sorry, if we can go back just a little bit. How many meetings were actually canceled for lack of quorum?

I think in the last year, we've had at least one canceled. But over the last several years, there's been periodic cancellations. But in the last 12 months, you're saying one? One, and then several with delayed starts. Okay. With the one that was canceled, what month was it in? I don't know off the top of my head, but we can get that information. And the reason I ask, because we know summer, people are a little... I want to say it was actually March. It might have been earlier in the year. Okay. All right.

Well...

I like the status quo that we have.

I actually agree with that. But I think it makes more sense that it's based on whatever we have allocated is the number of seats on a board or committee. And then it's incumbent upon all of us to make sure that we're filling those seats. I don't know what other openings we have on HPB. Or I know there's one appointment tonight. Maybe there'll be... I don't know. I don't know what my colleagues are doing. But does staff reach out to the mayor and the commission's office on a regular basis to say, hey, we need some appointments here? Are we reminded of that?

One thing I just wanted to add before Tricia jumps in is that besides canceling the one meeting, we've had problems starting the meeting because of a lack of attendance of board members. So it's not usually the number of board members. So they show up late? Pardon? They would show up late? They don't show up. You said starting a meeting. Right.

Isn't that the same thing as... They show up late and we don't have a quorum.

I see. Okay.

John, do you have a thought about this?

So I would be inclined to go with the number of appointees if this was presenting itself as more of a problem of canceled meetings. We can't help it if people show up late. You know, they can show up late no matter how many we have up there. So I'm inclined to go along with Pam on this. If we were missing, you know, three or four meetings during the course of the year as a result of it, then I think that would be more problematic and we might want to reconsider it. But if it's only one meeting, then I think we can probably live with the status quo.

Okay. Do we know, Mayor, do we know if there are... I hear from board members on other boards that periodically they are unable to meet quorum because of vacancies. Do we know if other meetings, other boards are being canceled as a result?

I've not gotten any reports for the boards that DSD manages, Bill. There are several around the city. And I did just talk with the clerk. He said there are nine boards that have a quorum that's required in this way. In what way? All the others that you have a quorum based on the number of seats. So the number, if there's 11, you have a quorum based on 11. Every other board outside of those nine, he said there's like 31-ish. There's a lot of boards that do it the opposite way. It's how many you've appointed.

Right.

That would determine the number of the quorum. So it's done both ways. Okay. I don't know the rationale behind it, but it is done both ways.

That's all right. I think, Mayor, we should have uniformity on that. Just whichever way we're going to go, I think all boards should be that way. Well, I think you're right.

It seems like the majority is inclined to keep the status quo as far as the quorum being based on the number of open positions as opposed to the ones that are filled. So I guess we just need to know from the clerk what our appointments' vacancies are so that we can be more responsible in making sure those positions are filled.

Yeah, we said.

And I'm open to revisiting in this. Like I said, if we're seeing that there's a recurring problem of cancellations, I'm happy to revisit this in a couple of months. I don't know how many meetings are being canceled across the board. We've got, what, now, 47 boards and committees, I think? 31, he said. No, no, in total, no. Oh, 47. There's a lot. We were at 41, and then we added a few more. So we're up in the mid-40s at this point. So I don't know how many of them. And maybe we can – I hate to add more stuff to your plate, David, and this may not even be a you job. But, you know, if we can get an idea of just how many boards are canceling meetings as a result of lack of a quorum at some point in the next couple of months, you know, say between now and summer. Certainly we can.

So then I think an additional part of that analysis is if – I think we all agree on a degree of uniformity, right? So all the boards should operate the same way. So then the next analysis is if we were to change the boards that have an appointment requirement for the quorum, then how many board meetings would not happen as a result of that change? So if you're following me, which I think would be a big number of meetings that would not meet quorum if we moved them to say it's now no longer the number of seats that you have appointed. It's a total number of seats.

Correct.

See how that would be a big –

So for, I'll just say, Community Appearance Board where there's 20-plus members on it and there's about five or six that are appointed, they wouldn't be having meetings at all. And we do send out the vacancy list usually the Thursday after the commission meeting. So this coming Thursday we'll be sending out the vacancy chart to you all.

Okay. So let us be more responsible in making sure we fill our vacancies because obviously this is an issue. And we'll see how far that goes. All right? All right. Very good. Thank you. Okay. Now moving on to the commission reports.

Vice Mayor, do you have a report today? More of a question, Mayor. So at the last meeting I had asked that we get some information about the site plan for Lockhart so that we could share it with the residents of District 1 and hold a community meeting to look at the plan. I've obtained a location for us to do that, but we still haven't received a site plan. Do you have any information that I can share with my residents?

Raquel, where are we on that? Were we going to just present it to the commission at a meeting? I thought that's what the protocol was.

So the commission asked that we obtain the latest version of the conceptual site plan and disseminate that plan to each commissioner, which would allow for the vice mayor to circulate that and use that as part of the public meeting. To my knowledge, we have not received that conceptual site plan from the developer. I did send out a follow-up request yesterday. I'm not sure if anything hit my email this morning, but as of yesterday, we have not received it. Ms. Toothager, can you come up and please push the button at the bottom of the speaker?

Good afternoon. Is there a conceptual plan that we can now distribute? I received it this morning from InterMiami's in-house architect. I received it this morning, so I will send it to the city. My phone is talking to me to tell me what a conceptual plan is.

Okay, so we can disseminate that. Yes. Okay, well, that necessarily will push back my date. I was planning on having my community meeting on the 15th. This doesn't give me enough time to get that out and get noticed to everybody, so I'll probably have to push that back by another week, just so you know. All right, thank you.

Whatever works for the city. Thank you.

If you can get that done today or tomorrow, we'd appreciate that. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman, Your Honor.

Thank you, Mayor. I'm going to go back to Saturday, March 21st, giving you a report starting from that date. We were excited, are excited, to be able to push forward the Group Violence Intervention Program, which is a project in collaboration with our police department. The event was held at Provident Park. It was an opportunity for law enforcement, some stakeholders, neighbors, all to come together to be introduced to the Group Violence Intervention Project. It was a great afternoon in attendance. We, of course, we, of course, had the PD. We had with us, also, our state, Carmen Tormann, I'm sorry, yes, Dr. Osga, she was with us, as well. And it was a great opportunity to come out into the neighborhood explaining how we are collaborating with the neighbors, with law enforcement to make a change with how we're interacting to let our young people know. And the neighbors overall understand that we, as a city, we recognize that there is a large presence, or some presence, I should say, of violence in the community. And we want to come together, to work together, to start to alleviate that matter. And through this process, it is an opportunity where we also engage individuals who, at one time, had a criminal lifestyle, who have now been reformed, and they are living productive lives. And we are aligning them with young people or individuals who are experiencing some situations in their lives right now that are not necessarily leading to the best decisions. So, this is an opportunity to begin to have that conversation where the community begins to work together to make a change. I've been saying for a minute now, you know, we've heard that proverb where it says, it takes a village to raise our children. But I also believe that even in that village part of it, the villagers, the neighbors, have to be a part of it. You have to come out and participate. And this particular program is, will do just that. I'm really thankful for our police chief who heard me when I first came on as a commissioner, saying that I wanted to address the issue of the violence in our district and our city overall. Also, thanking Captain Will August for his hands on this and all of those who are working on his team to make this come forward. And as well as Dana Baggett, who did a lot of background research to help identify some funding, some grants for what we need to make sure this occur. Also, this is the same project that we talked about during our priority conversation back in January. And I ask that, understanding that we're starting this as a pilot, in a sense, but the request is that this is not a one and done, that we add it to opportunities through our budget, that we have funding so we can continue this. And in my view of it, and the police as well, this is a different approach that can make some great grounds on changing the results that we've been seeing, as in collaboration and working together. So, once again, thank you to our police chief and the police department that's been working with us to achieve this, and also to the neighbors who have stepped up to who want to be a part of this to make a change. And, again, thank you for that. On Tuesday, March 24th, I was able to attend with honor our 372 Police Academy Graduation Ceremony and our new police headquarters. That's a big hand, you all. You're not excited?

Come on.

At that ceremony, Sean Hertz was with us, commissioner for that district, Glassman, as well as our city manager. And it was great to see these new, we don't have to call them recruits anymore, more new police officers and also detention officers to graduate. We were able to shake their hands. They were given their badges. And we all were able to thank them for their commitment to Fort Lauderdale, because they could have made a decision to go anywhere in the nation, and they chose Fort Lauderdale. So, really, thank you to those graduates. I do have the names, but they're very unique names, so I'm not going to butcher the names. But thank you to those five candidates. Very wealthy, ethnic community. Yes. Thank you very much. Also, on Wednesday, the 25th, I had the pleasure of attending as a board member for the Continuum of Care Board through the Broward County. Continuum of Care is a unique board, and the conversation is we need to learn how to connect the dots a little bit better. And right now, with the city of Fort Lauderdale, there is a pilot program that's basically funded through Broward County that's called the Safe Parking Initiative. That parking actually is in District 3, one of the churches, which is Mount Olivet on Northwest 15th Way. They stepped up to be a part of this program. I am really, I'm going to use the word disappointed in the progress with this. This started out November, December-ish. The numbers that are coming back, and I may have to correct the numbers, but with the numbers, originally 184 individuals or parties were vetted for this program. From that 184, 150 were actually considered able to move forward for the next step. From that step of the 150, there are 20 individuals that were deemed to go to the next step to be allowed to park at this particular safe parking. To date, there's only been nine opportunities or nine families that are parking at this particular spot. I'm very, I don't understand, we have conversations, but while I'm bringing this up, I would like to see, we the city, to see how we can collaborate to be more of a voice with this program. So, to city manager, my question is, even though the Broward County, they are the head funding of this project, I believe that we do, as the city of Fort Lauderdale, we're contributing in some fashion. If you can identify what that manner is, and then also, what is an opportunity for us to align with them to change these numbers, increase them, rather.

Thank you, Commissioner. We are not a funding partner for this program at this time. While the program is anticipated to be located in the city of Fort Lauderdale, that does give us an opportunity to weigh in and give our input. We potentially could look at more official ways to partner and collaborate, but at this time, we are not a funding partner. Okay.

So, without the funding piece at this time, I would like to see what we can do. Again, it is in our city, in my district, and I believe that, you know, this is something I advocated for before, and it had an opportunity to go through the county first. It is a project that could be very beneficial if its collaboration is better. I would say it that way. So, if we could move forward in a manner where we could have that conversation and jump in the process, that's what I'm requesting.

I'm going to ask Deputy City Manager Chris Cooper to share a little bit more information.

Thank you, City Manager. So, Commissioner, we have been in conversations with both the county through their Housing and Homeless Services Division and Hope as well with their program. You know, it's important to remember this is a new program for everybody, and so they're going through the process of figuring out what works and what doesn't work, and they've been very candid about the fact that they haven't had a lot of clientele for the program thus far, but there's been some commitment to continue to evolve and think about those things that have been restrictive to people in participating with the program. From our side as the city, we've been in conversations with them. We've used our Homeless Outreach Team to try to find qualifying individuals. We know there's a lot of people in our city and throughout the county that do sleep overnight in vehicles, so we think the population's there and the need is there, so we've been making some efforts on the outreach side to try to find folks to participate in that program. The commission also funded some funds to pilot our own safe parking program, so we've been working with our Homeless Advisory Committee, our Community Services Department,

and LifeNet for Families to bring forward a program for the commission to consider. I believe that's coming either at our next commission meeting or the meeting after for the commission to weigh in on. But, you know, we're learning from what Broward County is doing, the things that have made their program more challenging for people to participate, and using that information to, one, help them, but also to help us with our program to see if we can make that program work in a way that's beneficial to everybody.

Okay. With that, I appreciate that information. My concern is not going into details, but the things that I view as restrictive. I believe that's something we as a city really need to look at to when we move forward in the direction that we're going in because some of those things are really restrictive, and to me it doesn't make sense on, not even on paper, but in reality. So with that part of it.

I agree with you, and, you know, I would have liked to have started and brought this program to you a little bit sooner, but the benefit to where we are now is that we have learned a lot from the county's program and some of the things they've run into, and we've also had the opportunity for our staff with community services as well as LifeNet to work closely with our Homeless Advisor Committee and make sure that, you know, we've implemented things and contemplated things that could overcome some of those challenges that are currently being faced with the other program.

Okay. All right. Thank you for that information. Thank you. Also, I would like to share that on Friday, March 27th, I attended the annual Teach Her Mentoring Program at William Dandy Middle School. Great opportunity. This is my third year attending. The young ladies there, they are really excited. They are looking for mentors. They're looking for opportunities to learn and grow, to be motivated, and I'm glad that I was one of the return invitees that was able to come in to pour into these young people, and I encourage all of us at every level, if you have an opportunity to work with young people, pour into them. We often hear conversations where they're not operating at a level that we were familiar with or what we were exposed to when we were younger, but that's no reason for us not to engage them, not a reason for us not to pour into them and make sure that they're ready to be the next, because it's coming. I tell people this all the time. I love my young people, and I want to make sure that they're ready to be next, because they're the ones who are going to be making those decisions that's based on us when they're sitting there making those votes. So take a moment and embrace the young people. Also, I'd like to share with you Thursday, April 2nd, Career Day at North Fork with Dr. Gretchen Atkins-Brown and her staff. They have always, for years at North Fork, had a wonderful career day. Unfortunately, we know that due to the Board on Broward County Public School System's decision to close North Fork, that is the last career day that we would see at that particular location. However, I want to thank Fort Lauderdale, the city of Fort Lauderdale. We showed up. We were everywhere. Let me tell you. Public Works was there, Human Resources, Law Enforcement, TAM, which is Traffic and Mobility. I don't want to forget anybody. So law enforcement, our motormans, mounted units, canines, our fire department was there. Thank you for coming in to share with our young people about careers and giving them that opportunity to hear what's really out here in the working world. Also, who was there in attendance was Public Supermarket, Hilton, FP&L. I was impressed with FP&L. They showed up with their bucket truck. And I didn't get in, but I did ask. But they were there with their bucket truck. And the kids were really excited about that opportunity. So, again, being able to be a part in the community with North Fork to be a part of one of the last great events that they host on their campus. Also, later in that afternoon, April 2nd, Broward Leagues of Cities. We had our meeting. Unfortunately, we dedicated that meeting in regards to Vice Mayor Nancy Mateo Bowling out of Coral Springs. She was a member of the Broward League of Cities as well. So, we spent that opportunity to remember her, give encouraging words to one another. And I want to take this moment to ask Mayor if during our commission meeting that we would acknowledge and give a moment of silence for her. And then also, just a reminder regarding to the Broward Leagues of Cities, we do have the annual installation dinner that is on May 30th. And I'm encouraging our dais, everyone on commission, to be there as well. A couple more things I wanted to bring to our attention. Also, had a conversation with school board member Jeff Holdness, the principal of Walker Elementary, Ms. Notties, and also a regional director in regards to the Old Dillard Museum. The Old Dillard Museum actually sits on the campus of Walker Elementary. And because of the location, it follows the school hours. So, it's not open as a museum every day. So, this location, it is, this museum, is on our national registry. Tourists want to come and visit this museum. And they don't have the opportunity because Monday through Friday, 8.30 basically to 4. So, we had a conversation as to, with the school board from the city asking, from the district asking, how we can change that with an opportunity for everyone to be able to take part and visit the museum. So, we did have a conversation that, with the principal, she did say that she, with additional staffing, she has been able to keep the school open, I'm sorry, the museum open, to about 6 p.m. on request. So, again, we're still at that, on a request. It's not like someone Googles and say, oh, Old Dillard Museum, let me go visit. And they go and everything is locked down. So, in a conversation with them, want to be able to continue this conversation, to move forward where that is an opportunity for everyone to be able to visit the Old Dillard Museum. And that is something I think we, as a commission, should address as well. Let me see here. Let me see if I'm going to dig deep here. Let me see here which way. I had a meeting last night with my pre-agenda meeting. And one of the neighbors brought up the conversation about the four storm basins in her community. This is at Northwest 18th Avenue and 8th Street. Excuse me, 8th Court. She said in the meeting that her storm drains are basically filled with dirt and one is growing plants out of it. Now, this is the area. This is indoors. We just did the major multimillion-dollar infrastructure in that community. And it wasn't that I didn't believe her, but I had to go see it for myself. And I'm so disappointed in what I saw because we are, as a commission, we're giving direction to make sure that we're ready for this storm season. And not a little bit of dirt. Now, hear me. This is the, you got the grid and you have dirt almost. It is enough to have a green plant growing out of it. So, this needs to be corrected today. This is not right. Commissioner, could you repeat that location, please? Northwest 18th Avenue and Northwest 8th Court is in the community of doors. And, again, that's one of the neighborhoods we just, months ago, finished the stormwater infrastructure.

Commissioner, we'll have that checked out by our Public Works Department today.

All right. And also with that, I would like to ask for a report of the storm drains that have been cleaned, the maintenance for District 3. Thank you. Mayor, that concludes my remarks.

Okay, great. Thank you so much.

Commissioner Glassman.

Actually, Mayor, I apologize. Could I just, before we move on to Commissioner Glassman, I happen to notice that Gina is over here. So, I just want to say thank you. They did a hopscotch painting in George English Park. And I just want to say thank you to Riverwalk Trust and the artists, Heather Neiman and Stephanie Lean. They did an amazing job. So, this is a third of five of them that they're painting. So, I just want to say thank you to Riverwalk Trust and to Gina for coordinating. What is it exactly? Hopscotch. It's a hopscotch. A hopscotch design on the pavement? Yeah. It's in sort of like the burrito style. And it's in there. So, it's coming over to George English. I'll have to come to George English. Don't hurt yourself. But, yeah. Come hopscotch. And, yeah. So, it's a champion hopscotcher. I just have you know my story. You are a champion hopscotcher. I didn't know that about you. So, my resume. And I also want to acknowledge that Gina's grandson is here. He's going to be playing with his band Goose. And they've sold out two shows. So, congratulations. Very nice. He's a drummer. Are we ready? Yes. Thank you. Mr. Glassman. No problem.

Yes. I appreciate the indulgence. Thank you, Mayor. Mayor, next time you're at GE playing pickleball, you can check out the hopscotch right now. Yeah, I can do that. Oh, they have a hopscotch there, too? Well, it's actually at GE, George English Park, where they did the hopscotch. Anyway, thank you, Mayor. A busy couple of weeks. We had an extra week in between here. So, District 2 had a lot going on. March 23rd. I know we were all there. And I just want to also say, again, thank you so much to the DDA. We had a great event, Huizinga Park in Bloom, on March 23rd. It was great to see everyone come back. And, again, enjoy that space that has been created downtown. So incredibly important to our city as we continue to grow to maintain these kinds of spaces. So, congratulations to everyone again. March 24th, Commissioner Beasley-Pittman already mentioned. Commissioner Herbst, she and I did attend that 372nd Police Academy. I've had the pleasure of touring that facility several times now, and it really is a remarkable, remarkable facility. Congratulations to everyone, and I'm thrilled that our police have an amazing headquarters to report to and work out of. Thank you to everyone involved in that. That evening also attended the South Middle River Civic Association meeting at ArtServe. Congratulations to Christina Robinson, who's our new president in South Middle River. Also, congratulations and thank you for all of the years of service to Ed Catalano, who is the outgoing president of the South Middle River Civic Association. March 26th, I had the pleasure of convening our District 2 Neighborhood Association President's Roundtable. Always a great networking time. A lot of sharing going on at those meetings. I want to thank our city attorney, Sherry McCartney, for taking the time to be with us that day. It's really helpful for all of the presidents of these neighborhoods to meet new staff as they come on board and to have that opportunity to have a discussion. So thank you for that, for taking the time on that day. Monday, March 30th, excellent meeting in Himishi Village concerning the Special Entertainment District. We'll be talking a lot about that today. I want to thank everyone, Marine Industries, for hosting us. I want to thank all of the stakeholders for showing up that day. Excellent exchange of ideas. And, again, we'll be discussing that later today. But I wanted to thank staff for putting that meeting together and everyone taking the time. That was a really rough, rainy night. Very stormy. Still excellent turnout. Thank you to everyone for coming and expressing your feelings on that topic. April 1, I had the pleasure of joining Commissioner Sorensen over at a new opening in Flagler Village. Sweet Melody Ice Cream, very well-known in several locations, mostly in Miami-Dade County. This is their first location in Broward County. And they chose to locate in Flagler Village. So we're thrilled about that. And, again, great spirit, a great story there about Sweet Melody. Melody is actually the daughter of the owner. And she was the inspiration for the opening of this business. All the best to everyone at that location for success. April 1 also was the first night of Passover. I want to just tell everyone that's celebrating that and observing that, a very happy Passover. Also this past Sunday, as we all know, we celebrated Easter as well. A very important week on many calendars. Passover will continue through the 9th this week. April 3rd, a really special evening at the Las Olas Oceanside Park. That park at A1A in Las Olas has become an amazing gathering spot for so many people. Such a greatly activated space right on A1A. That night in particular was very special. For those of you that have ever attended Friday Night Sound Waves, more than 10 years now that that event has taken place. That was the brainchild of Ari Glassman. Ari is leaving our city after actually working with our city for about 24 years now. We did a very special proclamation for her. Lots of tributes that night. It was an amazing crowd. I don't know the exact number, but that entire lawn was full of people just enjoying the music and being with everybody every Friday night. And that was the last in that particular series. So I look forward to seeing what kind of responses we get for the RFP so that we can continue that tradition. Many people came up to me and said, please, let's make sure that we continue Friday Night Sound Waves. So I just wanted to say thank you to Ari. Wish her all the best as she heads out to Cleveland. We all make choices, but that's okay. So I wish her the best over up there and out there, wherever she's going. But seriously, I wanted to just say thank you for an amazing time spent in Fort Lauderdale in building community and doing something very special at that site. When you think that that corner was an asphalt parking lot for so many years, and that transformation has really been indicative of what we've seen, not just on the beach, but in the entire city. So thank you to everyone involved in that. Thank you to Parks and Rec for actually...

It was the button south before that.

Yeah, yeah, exactly. But it has really become a very popular place now, so thrilled to report on that. Coming up, April 9th, I'll be speaking at the Birchfinger Street Neighborhood Association. Actually, I think it's called Birch Park Streets now. It used to be Birchfinger Streets. We'll be meeting on the beach and having their annual meeting on April 9th. I look forward to that. April 10th. April 10th is slated for a very interesting new concept in Fort Lauderdale, moving up here from Wynwood, Smorgasbord. And what they do is they take possession of empty fields, empty lots before development, and it's really quite the market. I do know that there might be a hiccup with this, and I will ask staff later. I haven't had a chance to find out about that, if that event is still going to take place. But it is scheduled to take place on April 10th. Again, Smorgasbord is moving here from Wynwood.

That is an amazing development because we have been looking for somebody to, as a vendor, to do exactly what they have been doing in Wynwood for all these last few years. To have it come to Flagler Village is just, we're ready for it. We need it. So whatever has to be done in order to facilitate it, I didn't know it was going to be postponed.

But I have a... Commissioner, there is no issue with the event moving forward as planned.

Good. Okay, so it's going to be this Friday at 6 o'clock?

Correct. Excellent.

I'm happy to hear that. Anyway, we're looking forward to that. That also is going to be a very interesting concept for Flagler Village, not just for Flagler Village and District 2, but also for the entire city, that their presence will be really felt there. It's really quite a concept. Look it up if you're not familiar with it, but we welcome them to Fort Lauderdale. A couple of comments that I'd like to ask the city manager and staff about. First of all, at our President's Roundtable in District 2, there was a lot of discussion in many of the neighborhoods that are experiencing a lot of construction. We're having some really serious issues with construction vehicles blocking the roadways, some confrontations happening when owners come out and talk to the contractors. It's been a little bit nasty, a little bit aggressive. I've been hearing this from several of the neighborhoods in District 2. I do know that on Hendricks Isle and Venice Isle, they've actually been able to work with our staff in making sure that when permits are granted for projects and development, that they put in as conditions of approval, providing off-site parking as the responsibility of the developer, making sure that these roadways are clear. So I just want to make sure, because I'm hearing this more and more and more about this issue in our district, about what's happening when these huge trucks and vehicles just take over the streets and people are not able to get in and out of their driveways, people are not able to navigate their roadways. So I would love for us to be able to see if we can possibly do what we've been doing, obviously, in Hendricks and Venice Isles, in terms of requiring the developer to provide that kind of off-street parking. So if we can work on that.

Commissioner, our Transportation Mobility Department is currently working on a construction parking management plan requirement, and Milos could speak to that if you so desire.

Well, I think it's okay. As long as we're working on that, that's great. I look forward to that and sharing that with the neighborhoods. It's really important. I do want to also thank from staff Joe Pascarello, who I understand he and his team have been very responsive when neighbors call us, and then we pass it along to staff. So I want to say thank you for that, because some of the confrontations have gotten a little ugly, and we certainly don't want to see that happening anymore. Also on the radar, some of our hotspots for homelessness have gotten a little bit worse lately. I had a conversation, obviously, this morning with city manager and chief about this. I want to make sure that we're doing all that we can. I know that we no longer have that capability of holding centers like we used to have. I know that the sheriff's office will not accept people, and we don't have that facility. But I'm hearing more and more of some of our hotspots just getting a little bit hotter. And I want to make sure, especially in areas where I know that businesses have been spending a lot of money, thousands and thousands of dollars to hire their own security, that they're still not able to get ahead of this. So I think that it's really important that we can do all that we can. So if I can just get some sort of updates on that as time goes on, that will be really, really important. And I also wanted to welcome to Flagler Village, Go Grocer. I know that we've talked about the need for grocery stores and other places. It opened up, I think, last week. Correct. Right. That's a long time coming. We have built this amazing part of town, and now we're seeing the services come that actually make it a real neighborhood. Finally. Finally. Mayor, you'll get your chance later. No, but I'm cheering you on. I'm cheering you on. I'm cheering you on. I just want you to know that. After Commissioner Sorensen, we're going to turn it right over to you, and you can just. And where is it located? Go Grocer. It's just drunk in Andrews, right? Yes. In the Motif Building. In the Motif Building, yes. Just trying to help out here. No, you're doing a great job. I really, I appreciate it. I know you have my back, and I thank you for that. Okay, so moving around on Go Grocer. It's a great combination, by the way. It's not a big box grocery store, and it's not a little. What did Rod Hagg would call it?

Excuse me? The Sun Sentinel. They called it a combination of Whole Foods and 7-Eleven.

I think they said if they got married or had a child, it would be Go Grocer or something like that. Exactly. So it's great. It definitely fills a void. So that is absolutely wonderful that that is actually going to be happening. I do want to, I've been watching the news this weekend, I want to actually congratulate Inter-Miami CF on their move to their new stadium. I know that, you know, when you think about it, we thought we would have them for one year. Maybe two. We had them for five. But actually, the agreement with them started in 2019, and I just wanted to wish them all the very best. They are still training in Fort Lauderdale. But I just wanted to say thank you for creating an amazing community spirit these last five years, filling that stadium all the time. I know we still have to work and finish that park situation there, for sure. But I did want to just wish them all the very best in their new home. It's exciting. And I think that the five years that we had here in Fort Lauderdale were excellent for the community, excellent in terms of economic impact, and really brought a lot of attention to our city. So I wanted to say thank you and congratulate them on their new move. Tonight, I know that Commissioner Beasley Pittman mentioned the passing. I was going to also mention that we mentioned Nancy Mateer, but there are some other people I wanted to mention that had a lot to do with Fort Lauderdale. Tom Chancey was a very well-known local landscape architect and arborist. He was the founder of the nonprofit Tree Bank. For many years, this man did amazing work when it came to our landscape in Fort Lauderdale, and he recently passed away. I'm hoping we can remember him as well. Also, from Riverwalk, we lost Richard Rodriguez, a past chair of Riverwalk. I will say that that is also an amazing loss. All of these people have contributed so much to our city and to our county, and I think that I'm hoping that we can remember all of them. It's ironic that tonight we also are doing a proclamation declaring World Landscape Architecture Month. So how fitting that is for us to also remember Tom Chancey. And last but not least, I do want to mention, I know we had a discussion last time about the Solid Waste Working Group and the Governing Board and the Executive Committee. The Executive Committee, I am sure hopefully we'll hear some more details from Commissioner Sorensen who attended, but I was disappointed that there did not seem to be an appetite to add the city of Fort Lauderdale to the Executive Committee. Although they did have the quorum that they were hoping to get for the Governing Board, they just didn't seem to think that that would make it in terms of changing the voting restrictions and the voting rules for the Executive Committee. Ironically, they didn't even deal with the master plan because there was some legal issues. We'll let Ben Sorensen report up. I'm sorry, okay, I'll go ahead. But what I'm getting to the point is I'm actually going to submit my resignation as the liaison to the Solid Waste Working Group. I will say it isn't true. It is true, Mayor. I wish them all the best. They've been working on this for seven years. I have no idea how much longer it's going to go on. But I am going to step aside from representing the commission on the – well, we're not on the Executive Committee. They didn't want us on the Executive Committee. I guess we're still part of the Governing Board, and we are still the largest tonnage in the county when it comes to Solid Waste. So maybe the dynamics will change there, but I'll just be happy to pass that over to whoever you guys want to appoint. City Manager, I had one question about one of your letters to the commission, and this dealt with the Lauderdale-by-the-Sea public safety issue. Lauderdale-by-the-Sea, I guess now, is entering into negotiations with the City of Fort Lauderdale and the Broward Sheriff's Office in terms of providing services. So I want to know sort of what that timeline is. I also want to find out from you why the City of Pompano Beach, which was providing services, declined to be considered again to provide services to Lauderdale-by-the-Sea. And if that's going to impact anything we're going to do, I just want to make sure as we move forward on this that we're not going to find ourselves in a situation where, I guess, Pompano Beach just couldn't make the numbers work. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner. Based on the information provided to us, it appears that Pompano Beach did not have a contract that was in its financial interest, and that is likely why they decided not to put in a proposal for the next contract. We have been advised by the Town Manager that the City will be conducting a study as it relates to fire rescue services, and those are the services that they seek to negotiate with the City of Fort Lauderdale and BSO simultaneously. And so while it isn't really our preference to have dual negotiations going on with both entities, out of respect for the request, we will sit down with them and negotiate for fire rescue services.

Okay, excellent. And that's supposed to occur in 2027 when they – does Pompano go all the way through 2027?

Yvette Matthews, Assistant City Manager. So what they have shared with us is that they would be looking to transition their services mid-year 2027. So that's when they would transition. They're currently on a month-to-month with Pompano right now. Okay, great.

No, thank you for that. I appreciate that.

I just want to make sure we're cautiously moving forward on that and not going to find ourselves in any kind of pitfall that Pompano obviously did. City Manager, can we expect soon to have a discussion at the commission level in a conference meeting or evening meeting about what's happening across from Bahia Mar in terms of that park that is being created?

Is that coming to us soon?

Yes, Commissioner. Our Capital Projects Department has been in discussions with the Bahia Mar developer, and we anticipate bringing an item to the commission for discussion as to what the plans would be for Fort Lauderdale Beach Park. That should come before the commission, the first meeting in May.

First meeting in May. Great. And lastly, I just wanted to welcome to the District 2 team, Kiara Coleman. For those of you that have not met her, we say welcome. She is our new District 2 Outreach Coordinator. Today is her eighth day on the job, so I wanted to say thank you and welcome to Kiara. She's back there sitting next to Erica. Do you want to stand up, Kiara, and just say hello to everybody and wave to everybody?

That's Kiara. Welcome. Thank you, Mayor. I appreciate it.

Okay. Commissioner Sorensen. Thank you, Mayor. I have a number of items here. Let's see. I'd like to start with this. It's the, as you all know, it's an increasingly challenging time for our military service members. We are stretched around the world in a high op-tempo pace right now. And we have 16 members of the city of Fort Lauderdale, myself included, who serve in a military reserve capacity. So we have reservists from Navy, Army, Florida Guard, Coast Guard, Marines, Air Force, all branches. And this presents a very difficult challenge, in my experience as a reservist, of balancing two jobs at minimum for these folks. And I want to highlight, Mayor, what the city does for reservists in general. And city manager, maybe if Jerome could come up just to share anything I missed. But one of the big things, Mayor and Commissioners, I just want to share is when you are deployed as a reservist or called up for duty as a reservist or a Florida Guard member, there's oftentimes where that reservist is not receiving the pay that their city job affords. So there's oftentimes a differential between what you earn as a reservist when you're called up for active duty or extended reserve duty and your regular city pay. That difference can really provide significant challenges for families. When you're supporting family members, that can be a real, real hardship. And so one of the... Do we suspend their pay when they're serving? Well, so that's a great question, Mayor. And so I'll try to articulate what we do, which ultimately is good news. I think as a city we're doing the right thing, Mayor. But I just wanted to kind of visit this as a commission to make sure we're feeling we're doing everything we can to our service members. So that differential, we are not required as a city or an employer to compensate members during that time of service. There are federal laws that ensure that that job is not lost when they return to the city as an employee. But that supplemental pay, historically, what the city has done and continues to do, and again, Jerome, correct me if I'm wrong on any of this, is the city provides the supplemental pay so that whatever that reservist is earning as a reservist when they're deployed or on duty, the city compensates them for the difference between that reservist pay and their standard city pay to allow them to support their families at the level that they traditionally have been able to when they're a city employee. So I just want to... Jerome, am I explaining that right?

Yes, sir. Florida statute actually requires the employers to pay the first 30 days during training for reservists. After the 30 days is up, the employer is not required to supplement the pay that the military provides for that employee. We historically, however, have. We're allowed to by statute. We're just not required to. That is, if the employees' pay from the military is less than what they would have earned had they stayed on the job with the city, then we pay that supplement to make them whole as if they had stayed employed with the city.

Does that interfere with any pension contributions either? Yes.

Yes.

Do we pay that too? Yes, we do. Okay.

Thanks, Mayor. And that's a good question I actually hadn't thought about. And so right now we have 16 City of Fort Lauderdale employees, myself included, who are reservists in some capacity and would be able to seek this support if they are mobilized, deployed, or serving an extended duty. And I just think that's not all cities do that, Mayor. And I'm very proud that as the City of Fort Lauderdale, that's a practice that we embrace and just ask that we continue to encourage that, Mayor. So I just wanted to lift that up. And, Jerome, anything else in terms of supporting reservists and their families that you want to share?

Well, of course, we keep their benefits in place as well. Of course, the employee is subject to the employee contributions towards the benefit plan. But we manage that, and we make sure that there is no loss of benefits in the course of their reserve duty. I understand that both the police and the fire departments have ribbon programs. The fire already has it in place. Police is on the verge of putting one in place for allowing the designation to be placed on the chest of the employee as well.

Great. Thank you. Appreciate that. Thank you, Jerome. Next, highlight a real positive, I think, Mayor, and maybe you were going to cover this, or City Manager, but just the success the entire City team achieved in spring break. Just from supporting our visitors to crowd control to being proactive, just Fort Lauderdale PD, Fort Lauderdale Fire Rescue, Parks and Rec. I mean, just everyone across the board, I thought, did an amazing job. And I just want to thank City Manager for your leadership of what is a very, very intense time period. It's been an important time period for us, but I wanted to highlight that, Mayor. Well, I think it's a good point, and I believe the newspaper even had an article today about it.

And I think our hats off to the chiefs, the two chiefs, and Parks and Rec, as you mentioned, as well as the City Manager, because it's not an easy job corralling, you know, thousands and thousands of people that come into our city. And plus, not just visitors from other states, but also the local kids who love to come to Fort Lauderdale to have a good time. So we appreciate the vendors and the business people that go out of their way to roll out the red carpet for those who do come to visit our city, not just during spring break but throughout the year. But the reports of spring break in Fort Lauderdale were, I should say, uneventful as compared to other cities that we hear about. And, unfortunately, you know, kids just like to be kids, and, you know, we have to make sure that when we promise parents that their kids are going to be safe when they come here, that we fulfill that promise. So I, too, appreciate your bringing it up.

Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. City Attorney, another topic that I know you're working on and just want to bring up is the crafting of an e-bike, e-mobility ordinance, and just want to check on the progress of that city attorney and how we're doing. This is a major concern in my district and I know across the city, and so I want to check in on that.

Thank you, Commissioner. Yes, that is being drafted, and my understanding is that TAM is actually going to go into the community and discuss the proposed ordinance, and then we would have it back to you.

Okay. Great. And time-wise, what are we thinking? If this is April?

Good afternoon, Milos Mastodovic, Director for Cities, Transportation, and Mobility Department. From the standpoint of timeline, our goal is to take it to City Commission in June of this year.

Okay. Great. So, but, Commissioner, you bring up a point that I think needs to be addressed more thoroughly, and that is enforcement. We can have all the laws in the books, but how do we enforce it? How do we manage traffic on city roads where dozens of bicyclists who maraud through our city streets in gang-like fashion, you know, harassing and terrorizing other people, either pedestrians or drivers of vehicles? How are we going to implement an enforcement procedure? I don't expect you to have an answer today, but I'm just saying as part of this program, we have to consider that. How are we going to do it? What are steps that we can allow our police department to take in order to try to enforce whatever ordinance that we come up with?

Absolutely. Great point, Mr. Mayor. And we have drafted an ordinance in the process of drafting. We did receive input from our parks department, our police department, our code, city's attorney's office, and also police legal. So we want to make sure that we are also consistent with some of the state laws that the state of Florida already has or that might be upcoming so that we can simplify their work and job as well. Okay. Thank you.

And, Milos, my understanding, city attorney, my understanding is the state House and state Senate passed e-bikes bill. I think that's going to the governor for signature. Am I tracking that right?

That is correct.

Okay. And that has components where it's limiting speed on sidewalks, if I understand right.

That is correct. Limiting speed on sidewalks to 10 miles per hour within 50 feet away from the pedestrian.

Right. And so what our ordinance would explore, Mayor and Commissioners, I think, is in addition to that, clarity on is that state statute applying only to state roads? Does it apply to city? And then making sure that we're being as aggressive in our regulating of these as possible, right? Is that right?

That is correct. So our approach is to make sure that we are covering parks and turf areas within the parks, number one. Number two, river walk as well. And number three, if there is desire of city commission, we can also expand that to right-of-way or sidewalks. City-owned sidewalks, state statute will be covering FDOT right-of-way. But we're also making sure and working with legal to understand whether the upcoming state law would apply to city right-of-way as well or only state right-of-way. So that's clarification that we're seeking.

Okay, great. And today I received an email asking about non-pedal e-motos and e-dirt bikes that are throttle-powered and pedal-less. Would our statute cover all of those modalities as well?

So our goal is to cover any micromobility devices, and those would be e-scooters, e-skateboards, self-balancing devices, and similar. So those that are powered by not human power.

Okay, so yes, then is that what I – okay, it would cover all of that. Okay, fantastic. Thank you. That's great to hear for that. Next up, let's see, wanted to go to this. Just some of the events, as was mentioned, Happy Easter, Happy Passover to those celebrating. I participated in, for a short period of time, the Lexus corporate run, and so we had, I think, city manager 73 city employees that were part of that run and walk, which I opted for the walking, but I thought that was great. Mayor, I think that was the first time we had that big of a team, so it was excellent, good camaraderie, I thought went very well. Just from – we shifted the route a little bit, and from a feedback standpoint, a couple concerns about the route, but overall I think it went well. City manager, any feedback that you received on the route?

We had very limited complaints about this year's route, so I think we can always fine-tune it and improve, but this was a great upgrade from years past.

Okay, great. That's what I was hearing, too. Also, I got a chance to go to the 13th Annual Fort Lauderdale Track and Field City Championships, and, Mayor, on your behalf, I presented the Mayor's Cup, which I didn't even know existed, but there's a Mayor's Cup for the best track and field team in the city, which was wonderful. And this is the –

Annual.

What's that?

Annual event. Annual event, right?

First, I've heard of it.

Yeah, and Commissioner Beasley-Pittman, you may be more familiar than – Did I present a Mayor's Cup?

Yeah, we've got to get you there next year, Mayor. This is a prestigious event to celebrate your –

Ginkgo biloba, Mayor. Ginkgo biloba. Ginkgo biloba.

So this is the only, as they shared with me, the only citywide event that has all city high schools, public and private, all competing against each other at the same time. So it's just a unique coming together of our city and all the great teams that were there. I remember that. So you've got to remember that, Mayor. It's – Coming back. Coming back for you. Coming back. Just put it on the calendar. So that was great. The Fort Lauderdale Family Fun Day at Snyder Park, thank you. City manager, Parks and Rec, PD, everyone who was involved, that was just a great celebration. Mayor, thanks for, you know, leading us there. Just a wonderful, wonderful day. Along those lines, want to thank Parks and Rec and everyone else who's involved in adjusting the dais here. I think this is working well. So thanks for that. A little too close, don't you think? A little too close. A little too close. Well, this way you can keep an eye on Pat and see what he's really doing over there. I had a chance to visit with our clean team, which falls under public works. So these are folks who are out cleaning our city graffiti, trash, just do amazing work. And they do – they kind of up staff during spring break, Mayor. So they're doing double shifts for a lot of them and just doing an amazing, amazing job. So I just want to thank them for all their great work. Boys and Girls Club of Broward County had a great – we had talked about this before, coordinating with Commissioner Beasley Pittman, this one-day internship where a bunch of the Boys and Girls Club youth got to experience what it's like to be a four-lateral police officer, firefighter, IT, host of opportunities within the city. And many of the students immediately said, this is something I'd like to pursue. So we had – Mayor, we had, I think, three high schoolers that immediately wanted to be part of the police explorers program. Several were interested in IT. So just a great way to show our young people how public service is a wonderful opportunity for them. So I just want to thank – I know it's a heavy lift for all city staff, so I just want to thank city staff for that. Commissioner Glassman, you brought up – thanks for talking about the Solid Waste Authority meeting. So I went on behalf of the city commission, and I brought up – the first thing I said was, you know, basically, what do we need to do to be part on the executive committee as the biggest municipality in Broward County? And I think it's only appropriate. And their feedback to me was, well, in November we'll have an election. And so that was not exactly what I was hoping to hear. So that, to me, was disappointing, Mayor and Commissioner Glassman. What does that mean, in November we're going to have an election? So they have elections every – as I understand it, and Brad, or feel free to correct me, but they have elections every year for the executive committee. So there's a governing committee, which is all municipalities are invited to be part of. The executive committee, they hold elections once a year. And I said the fact that we're the biggest municipality, I think we should be part of. Well, we should have an ex-officio membership there just by virtue of being the biggest city with the most tonnage. Absolutely. You know, and so I still don't quite understand why we're not part of that. Their feedback to me, though, was come to – we'd love the City of Fort Lauderdale representatives to come to every executive committee meeting and be part of the discussion, and we will always encourage your participation and so forth at the executive committee, at the governing committee. And so I said – Without a vote. Thank you very much. Correct. Without a vote.

Without a vote.

Until we're a member. So – and then – Taxation without representation.

Right.

And then, as Commissioner Glassman shared, the idea was at this past meeting that they would vote on the framework for the agreement that would then go to all municipalities to deliberate and vote on themselves. Some of the members of the Broward County Commission that were there brought up concerns about that agreement and asked that there be further clarifications and work on this agreement so that vote to allow this framework to move to cities to discuss was delayed. And so now the tentative date for that vote is April 17th. I am going to be out of town that day, but they suggested that I could vote virtually, possibly, if I'm able to while out of town. So I wanted to defer to you all, Mayor and the Commission, for what you would like to do. I'm happy to attend virtually on April 17th. I am not sure I will be able to vote, but if my schedule allows me to, they've said I can vote virtually, and I'm happy to do so if you like. Okay. That would be helpful, yeah. Okay. If you all like. Okay. So I'll continue in that – and at least for this next meeting, then we can revisit once I get more feedback. And see what you would like to do next. Great. Thank you, Mayor, for that. And I think the last question I had – and, again, maybe you're talking about this for city manager, but just the city manager's letter to the Commission about city hall. I'd like to talk to you about that. I think she's going to bring that up. Great. Thanks, Mayor. That's everything I have. All right. Great.

So you guys have covered most everything, but just a few things I'd like to point out. First of all, I had the honor and the privilege of once again attending the Greater Fort Lauderdale Chamber of Commerce Washington Summit this past – last week. We spent four days in Washington. It was a great event. And Dan Lindblad from the Chamber is here, and I want to commend him for another excellent program that was put together. It started out with a visit to the – it wasn't the embassy. It was the home of the ambassador from Ireland. So she was very gracious in hosting a reception for us on our first night, and it continued to go from there, where we met with a number of congresspeople, members of the administration, members of Holland and Knight staff who used to work with various administrations, talking about a lot of the issues that concerns our city and cities in general. So it was definitely a well-worthwhile program. So thank you once again. And it was Dan's last official participation there because he's going to be retiring in a few weeks. A few weeks? Wow. When? Yeah, there's weeks. Yeah. Okay. I know he's counting the days. But anyway, it was a great event, and I encourage the members of the commission in the future. I think the next one is going to be in 2028. I encourage any and all members of the commission to consider participating in that because it's really a great opportunity for us to learn and to be heard. At the end of that week, we had the family picnic here in the city of Fort Lauderdale at Snyder Park. It was very well attended. It was a beautiful day. I want to thank the Parks and Rec and all the staff for putting together another great program. I know it lasted through the day, and once again, it was fun serving beer early in the morning. But we definitely had a great time, so thank you. Also, we received Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz came to Fort Lauderdale and where she presented a check for $1 million to the city of Fort Lauderdale to help build a public safety training complex. We're very appreciative of that, and I believe this coming week we're going to be getting another check from Congressman Jared Moskowitz, and I'll be talking about that at a later time. So, let's see, you mentioned the Smorgasbord. Oh, you didn't mention the Battle of the Paddles Pickleball Tournament on April 11th at the Fort. April 11th at 11 a.m., I'll be giving welcoming remarks to this national tournament, which we will now be able to host at our beautiful Fort facility down over in Snyder Park. April 14th, and maybe I should ask, well, we'll see. This is the inaugural Prime Pulse Networking evening at New River Drive. This is an announcement of Prime Pulse establishing its first United States base in Fort Lauderdale. Do you want to come up and talk a little bit about it? No? Okay. I'm looking at you. Yeah, you don't want to go. Okay. All right. So, what's great about this is the fact that Fort Lauderdale is being recognized as a center of the tech industry. We have quite a few businesses who are tech-based, tech-focused, who are coming to Fort Lauderdale, and Prime Pulse is a family equity investment firm. It was invited and promoted by the Greater Fort Lauderdale Alliance, and I want to thank you for doing that. Do you want to say a few words about it or – no, you're good. Okay. All right. April 15th, we have the Smart City Expo USA. I'll be on a panel discussion. It'll be in Palm Beach County. This is a Bloomberg-sponsored event, and a number of the mayors from the three counties are going to be talking about smart cities and how to best promote artificial intelligence in making our cities provide better services. April 17th, we have the annual Artserve Impact Awards. This is at Artserve. It's from 6 to 9 p.m. A great opportunity, once again, to recognize individuals in our community who have made a great impact in the arts community. Let me see a couple issues here. But they're mostly – oh, I can – actually, I can talk to a couple. These I can talk to you, Raquel, privately, and the others are going to come up on the agenda. So I'm good to go, and City Manager, your report.

Thank you, Mayor. I do want to echo the sentiments shared earlier by you and by Commissioner Sorensen on our spring break success this year. Thank you so much to all of our teams who participated and planned. This year, I asked Deputy City Manager Chris Cooper as well as Assistant Chief Leslie St. Fleur, who's our emergency manager, to work together to ensure that all of our teams were working collaboratively to enhance our spring break experience. Police and fire and parks and recreation certainly did a wonderful job. I also want to highlight our public works team, transportation and mobility, strategic communications, information technology, procurement, community services, particularly our community enhancement division. So many of our staff members came together to elevate our spring break operation. This year, I had the opportunity to visit him or she from about 12.30 in the morning to 4.30 in the morning to observe the spring break atmosphere. I got a chance to walk around with our police officers. You were there four hours? I was. She saw that sign, that banner that said, all you can drink for $10. I really thought it was. She wasn't going to let that go. I'm not going to let that go. I think it's important to observe spring break in its natural form. And so it was a great eye-opening opportunity. And our team did a phenomenal job. This year, thank you so much for supporting the city's team in implementing various new elements. So this year, strategic communications came up with a tagline for the spring break period, good vibes, clear rules. We also implemented two high-impact zones. We normally do one, which is the barrier island. This year, we did downtown as well. We had enhanced sanitation services to ensure that the beach was pristine at any hour of the day. We had 24-7 code enforcement, something we have not done in the past. Of course, we had the no-open-container restriction. And we had this year as well the age restriction. So we had a lot more tools in the toolbox, and that allowed us to have the flexibility to enforce and also ensure an enjoyable and safe experience. So thank you so much for your support of our team for spring break and for supporting those new enhancements this year. I also want to highlight the team that put together our Lexus Corporate Run team. We were in an agenda briefing, and this was an item on a previous commission agenda where the event producer was looking for a permit. And I asked the team, I said, hey, do we have a team for the Lexus Corporate Run? And they said, no, we haven't done that in many years. And just like that, the Human Resources Department, Strategic Communications, and Parks and Rec, they mobilized. And we had about 75 runners or walkers, self-included. And so I thought that was just a wonderful moment for our team. I did get to go to the Dillard Elementary Career Day alongside various city departments. That was a great experience. I think it's very important for us to demonstrate the benefits of public service and to inspire that next generation to follow suit. So that was very rewarding. I was able to attend the Broward County Sheriff's Advisory Council Awards luncheon, and two of our city personnel in public safety, both police and fire, they were honored that day. And so that's something that really speaks to the caliber of public safety professionals that we have in our city. I do want to highlight that we have the Tortuga Music Festival coming this weekend. You may have noticed that the beach has been transitioning over the past couple of weeks, and we are excited to welcome event goers. Various members of our city team have been working together with the event producer to ensure that we're ready for that impact. And so I appreciate that this event continues to be part of our cultural fabric. I do want to highlight a letter to the commission 26-097 that was issued on April 2nd as it relates to our city hall project. On December 2nd, followed by on January 13th at the city commission prioritization workshop, as well as our February 3rd commission conference meeting,

and then our February 17th city commission meeting, staff has communicated with the commission on the potential target budget for the project. We have been making several strides in the negotiation process since we began on January 8th. We did come to the commission with a draft term sheet on February 17th, which was well received, and the commission provided feedback. But now as we continue to progress, I wanted to ensure that the city commission had an opportunity to learn more about what the project would entail from a design perspective, as well as from a cost perspective, based on the negotiations thus far. It's important that we are on the same page with what the expectations are. And although there was a target budget shared, you know, amongst the commission and acknowledged, we feel that there is a need at this moment for us to revisit that discussion. And we want to make sure that we are aligned with the commission as we negotiate. And so we're looking for the commission to provide feedback. As I shared with each of you in the agenda briefing, we have several scenarios that we're looking at from a design and cost perspective. And before we bring forward the interim agreement, it might be helpful for the commission to reaffirm or reset what we know as the target budget, so that staff can be well-equipped to meet your goals, needs, and expectations, and so that the developer also understands the parameters in which we are working.

Do you want to hand out – you took back the term sheet.

Yes, the clerk has some documents, and we are also able to share on the screen if you desire.

Well, it's easier for me to have it in front of me. I can't see behind me.

Okay, could the clerk's office bring up the screen? We will start with the financial modeling.

So let's talk a little bit about that. Yeah, let's talk a little bit about the financial modeling. I'm going to go to concept B. Now, when the original proposal was provided to us, it was based on a square footage that we have since reduced significantly, and therefore the price of the project was reduced significantly, correct?

Yes, Mayor.

Okay. So in looking at concept B, we see employee headcount of about 630 and programmable gross square footage of about 200,000, but I think it's a little bit more than that as I get more information. And the cost per square foot, you have at $1,200. Have any of these numbers changed since yesterday?

So as I shared in the briefings, the document that you were provided was in draft form. We have since worked with the developer to ensure that we are closer to being accurate as we know it today. They did some additional homework and provided us some updated numbers. So what changed since yesterday was the price per square foot on concept A and concept B. Up until yesterday, the $1,140 per square foot price had been consistent from the date the proposal was submitted until yesterday.

Okay. So in concept B, we're looking at approximately $1,200 a square foot, which comes to a design and construction cost of $240 million. Now, in our discussion, there was – let's talk about the 10% equity interest that the developer has been talking about. Now, in our discussion yesterday, you indicated to me that that was going to cost the city approximately 11.5% on the money that's going to be borrowed in order to accomplish this. Am I in the ballpark?

Sure. What I shared is that the developer is interested in having a 10% equity stake with an internal rate of return at 11.5%. Right. And so depending on the cost of the project, that would dictate what the additional cost to the city would be should the city include the developer equity stake at 10% with that IRR rate at 11.5%. So if you're looking at concept B, it could be that the city could anticipate additional costs. And I'm going to ask Yvette Matthews to come forward and just fact check me. But I know that the price has changed a little bit from yesterday to today. But when we were looking at a project that was about $245 million with developer equity at about $25 million, the additional cost to the city for the developer to have that equity is about $43.7 million.

So, but what has not been discussed is what that represents. It's not just a return on investment, but that's also the cost of operation and maintenance for 30 years, including not just operation and maintenance, but also replacement of parts and materials should they become obsolete and dysfunctional. That was never disclosed to us. Is that part of this discussion?

We did share that the O&M cost was not rolled up into the top line. And so if we look at the document that's before you and currently on the screen and we go down a little bit, we see that with the city financing 90% and the developer financing 10%, the O&M is an added cost.

It's an added cost, but it's also included in this. It's included in the 10%. My understanding is that the 10% equity interest of the developer and the payment of the city of the 11, 11.5% on the so-called equity return, that includes the payment for operation and maintenance as well as replacement of parts and facilities that should wear out or need to be replaced during a 30-year term. That's not money in their pocket, this 11.5%. You want to explain that to us? Yes, sir.

I'm Yvette Matthews, assistant city manager. So the 11.5% equity return is not part of the operation and maintenance costs.

As the manager was mentioning, on line 18 of that worksheet that's in front of you would be the agreement that we would enter into with the developer for the operations and maintenance. The 11.5% equity stake, sometimes people refer to it as an availability payment, that's really more reflective of the developer's stake in the project. So we would finance 90%, they would finance 10%, and their proposition for that 10% is really the coordination of the projects. But also, let's say we get to the project date and the building is not ready, we would not make that availability payment or make a contribution to their equity at that time until the building becomes ready. Let's say that we get further along in the project and there are some substantial challenges with the building. There would be certain deliverables that are tied to us continuing to make that 11.5% contribution that we would withhold in the event that something happened that limited the availability of the building.

But doesn't that also, isn't that practice also carried through for the 30 years?

That is correct. It would be for the 30 years that we are making contributions on their equity return.

Right. So this is kind of an insurance for the city that the maintenance, the operation, and the facilities will all be maintained and kept operational for the 30 years that we have this agreement, correct?

It ensures that we have availability for the building, but there's a separate payment that's $6 million that is specific to ensuring that the building is operated and maintained appropriately and maintained appropriately.

So you're saying that there are two separate payments here?

Correct.

And where is that reflected?

So the first payment is reflected on line 16, which would be the developer's projected availability payment or the equity payment. So that's the 11.5% return on the 10% contribution. So in option B, that would be $3 million a year. And then the second payment would be on line 18, and that would be the operations and maintenance. That's everything from, and we would have to negotiate what it finally includes, but the initial proposal included things like janitorial services, the actual maintenance of the building. And that is included in line 18, and that's the $6.1 million.

And then the third payment obligation is based on the city's 90% financing, which would be $17 million. That's line 15.

That's on line 15? 17. You mean $15 million. That's concept A. We're not looking at concept A. I'm just looking at concept B.

Okay. Line 15, across the board for all concepts, that would be the city's obligation on an annual basis. And then the payments related to the developer, that's line 16 and line 18.

Right. So you're saying that the 10% developer equity of $3 million a year is in addition to the cost for operation and maintenance of 6.160? Correct. You want to come up here, Cody, and explain a little bit about this? What is your response to that?

Thank you, Mayor. Alex Barrett with Plenary, the developer for this project. So I think you had it right with the idea that it's the insurance for the project. So the equity investment is the guarantee that the operations and maintenance requirements will be delivered upon. So it's not just janitorial and those types of services, but it's the condition of the building. So we will be required to keep the building in the same condition that it's delivered on day one for 30 years and give it back to you with 30 years of life left at the end of the term, or you don't pay us that amount back.

So wouldn't that be coming out of the $6.1 million?

No, no, no, no. So the 6.1 is the cost of the actual services. It's the labor for the technicians doing the work. The equity amount is the guarantee of the performance. And so the debt line item, that's a cost. The city's paying that no matter what. The equity is only paid if we meet the obligations of the contract.

Well, let's assume you meet the obligations of the contract, okay? So we'd be paying, in addition to the $6.1 million, we'd be paying an additional $3 million because you're going to be – I mean, I have to assume that you're going to be working with the city in good faith every year, that you're going to maintain and operate the building in a proper manner. So why do we need to have insurance on top of that?

So I think this goes back to a comment that Commissioner Herbst made last time we were here. So you talked about, you know, all of these promises and guarantees and contracts. They sound good, but how do we know that they're going to happen? And the answer to that is that you have $25 million of the developer's money, and you're only paying that back if we meet the contract. And so it's a guarantee of the obligations versus just the cost of performing the work, which, you know, if the cost goes up, we have to eat that. And if there wasn't equity on that, any operator who's charging you for work, they're not going to take cost increases. They're going to just hand a bill back to the city and say, this costs more than we thought.

So it was a $6.1 million. Is that for each year for 30 years? That's right. And there's no increase for cost of living or CPI or anything like that?

It's just tied to CPI. It's tied to CPI. It cannot be increased, but it is tied to CPI to reflect escalation.

And if the cost of something should go up, that comes out of the availability payment?

That's right. It comes out. We pay the additional cost. That's right.

Can we back up on that? Just so I'm clear. So the O&M is going to be done by Stiles, right? They are our subcontractor, yes. Okay. So we've got a contract with Stiles. The contract with Stiles is, I like round numbers. It keeps it simple. I'd rather be approximately right than exactly wrong. Okay. So $6 million. We've got a contract with Stiles. And it's got a built-in inflation factor based on CPI. So you're saying that if it goes up, if their costs go up in excess of CPI, your IRR goes down and you eat that? Correct. Okay. Let me clarify one thing with you because I've heard conflicting stories on this. Is your 11.5% IRR post-tax or pre-tax? Post-tax. Post-tax IRR. Okay. So it's really a 15% IRR, 16% IRR, something. What is the exact number that gives you a post-tax? I haven't done the algebra. I haven't bothered because I wanted to confirm it first. I could do the math.

Yes, it's not that much. So the tax is something that we'll have to calculate on a specific basis once we get into the project. But it will be approximately half a percent, so 12% in total, not 15%.

Your corporate tax rate is only half a percent? Yeah, you. They're billionaires. And I thought I was a good CPA. All right. But, okay. So your IRR in this project to do the project, that's your hurdle rate basically to undertake an investment is 12%.

That's right.

Okay.

And I think, just to add, so when you talk about the maintenance of the building, you know, think about replacement of elevators over time, replacement of the roof. No, I understand the HVAC systems and all that.

I'm just, I'm concerned on the, you know, in the year 21, okay, you're still around, okay? And what's the insurance that the city will have other than we can withhold the availability payment? What's the insurance the city's going to have that we're going to know you're still there? Is there an insurance policy or some kind of bond that gets put up that guarantees that that money is going to be there? Should we have to tap into it?

So the investment itself is that product. So we are paying for 10% of the construction project.

Right.

And then you do not pay that back if we don't meet the project. So at any point in the project, if we are terminated, you owe us nothing. Nothing.

All right. So you're paying 10% of the construction. Okay.

Well, presumably in that case, somebody steps into your shoes and they take over the investment. I mean, if you walk away for whatever reason, presumably somebody else steps in and they take over that.

If we personally walk away?

Yeah.

So if we were terminated for our own default, the city would have the option of replacing us and not paying us back.

What would be a default?

So there's a good example is on construction. We can't be more than a certain amount of time late. So these are the details that still need to be negotiated.

But this is all after the fact. We're talking operations. So construction is done. We're done. We're to the mayor's point. We're 10 years down the road. What are the default options in the agreement 10 years down the road?

So there will be a series of performance requirements. The elevators have to be online. The air conditioning has to be available. All of those types of requirements. Electrical systems have to be functioning. And there will be a threshold for at first you just receive a deduction. So you stop paying us as much. And then once you hit a certain point, you can terminate us because the performance has reached a level that is insufficient enough that you can get rid of us and not pay us back.

But I'm not terminating Stiles because they're the ones that are responsible for the O&M. Like, wouldn't I be terminating the people that are responsible for the O&M? Why would I terminate you as opposed to the company that's responsible for the O&M? I'm missing something in there. We're privity with them.

That's the thing. Right. Because Stiles will be providing the boots on the ground, the individuals.

Well, I think – pardon me one second. So, Mayor, this is a comprehensive agreement. We're in privity of contract with all of them. Well, I don't know that. I thought it was real quick. So, Madam City Attorney, does the comprehensive agreement put us in privity of contract with all of the subs or only with the general?

We've yet to negotiate the comprehensive agreement. We're almost done with the IA, and we'll present that to you shortly.

But those terms could be negotiated.

I would think we need to be in privity of contract with everybody that we want to hold accountable in this. I mean, I would just throw that out there. I don't want to have to work through somebody to hold somebody accountable. Well, the other thing I'm concerned about is – and these are – look, everything looks –

Working points. The fact that you've explained all this makes a lot more sense to me, and it's actually really good for the city. But I'm just – God forbid you should find the entity that's doing the maintenance and operations falls into bankruptcy. I don't want a bankruptcy court coming back and clawing back saying, well, you owe the trustee $25 million because, okay, I just want to make sure that it's structured in such a way that that doesn't become an opportunity for a clawback by a bankruptcy court.

That's a great point. So we are the ones taking that risk. So if Stiles were to go into bankruptcy, we would have to go find someone else to do the work, and if they wouldn't do it for the same cost, again, that comes out of our pocket. So we would go find another contractor to perform the O&M, and the budget to the city would stay unchanged, and so we're the ones paying that increased cost. And so that's part of the layer that this provides is a third party whose money is on the line guaranteeing this for 30 years no matter what.

If the O&M contractor falls through, can't we just go to the marketplace as a city and contract out ourselves? Sure.

Yes, and then you would pay the increased cost of whoever comes in and says, okay, I will do the work, but I will not do it at the budget that your former contractor signed up for because that's part of why they went into bankruptcy is that they underbudgeted the project. And so the difference is not that you can't replace Stiles. You could always replace your contractors, but the city would now be the one paying that increased cost instead of us paying that increased cost. Sure.

Well, you're assuming it's increased. Correct. It might not be the case.

Well, chances are. If the contractor has fallen through, I would say it's highly likely that the cost has gone up, and that's why. But, yes, it could have theoretically gone down.

Okay. So the availability payment is just – it's basically an insurance, right? It's basically – I mean, it's an insurance that if something bad happens that you're going to either hold the O&M team member accountable or you're going to fill in where they might not.

I think the key difference, though, is that in insurance you're just buying the product. We are giving the city $25 million to contribute towards the construction project. That is then being repaid, and the repayment of that is somewhat like an insurance. But the key difference is we have given the city the money up front to help pay for the project.

Right, and you're giving the city money at a far higher rate than the city could get itself, right? So the city can go out to the market, right, and get dollars for, what, 4.5%?

And have to pay that back no matter what. So that's just the difference. Debt is a cost. The city borrows from debt, and you will pay that back no matter what happens in the project.

Right.

With the equity piece, you are only paying that back if the project is being delivered perfectly to the contract for 30 years, 40 years, whatever term we agree to.

Right, which we're assuming it will be. I mean, it's we taking good faith that CORE is going to do an excellent job, right, and that there's not going to be issues, and it's going to be a sustainable project. So we're looking at, over the course of the 30 years, $90 million in availability payments, right, as an insurance. I mean, do I have that number right?

Yes, but I think another key point to make is obviously CORE is going to do an excellent job. No one's questioning that. But when you look at, and I'm not going to talk about just one government, but when you look at government projects across the country, when maintained by the government entity, you have to deal with, you know, budget increases. If something happens and it costs, you have a $20 million cost in one year that you didn't plan for, now that's got to come from somewhere. So the tendency is that cost gets pushed off, called deferred maintenance. And so what eventually happens is at the end of the 30 years, that building is in a state of disrepair, much like why we're here today, because the former city hall got to a point where it was unusable. And so I think part of what this equity provides is guaranteeing that in 30 years, the building will be just as it is the day the CORE hands it over to the city.

Okay. So is your position that the O&M component cannot exist apart from having the equity piece?

That's correct, because no O&M contractor will commit to just unbounded 30-year cost risk without something like an equity investment. So you could go contract styles, and they could provide the operations and maintenance, but if something costs more, they're going to come to you with a bill instead of coming to us.

Right. Again, it's this idea of insurance and how much is insurance worth in this case. I mean, to say, hey, as a city, you could contract separately with an O&M provider, but we're going to help cover if there's a bigger deficit. And for that, we're going to charge a much higher rate for the dollars, for the equity, basically.

Yeah, but keep in mind, though, Ben, that, you know, let's think back 30 years, 1996. Has there been inflation? Has there been cost and supply chain issues? I mean, the risk is really falling upon them and not upon us. So I really believe, honestly, that's a big risk for you guys, because you're taking all the risk away from the city. And I can tell you right now, 30 years' worth of maintenance of any building, especially a government building, is going to – I mean, I'm sure you guys have figured it out, but I can tell you through my own experience working with our city and working with other – watching other municipalities, I just feel that – I mean, I hope you know what you're doing, because this is – because a lot of the risk is really falling on you.

Yeah, we have 65 projects, and this is the model on all of them. We are still there, still performing every single one of those. I think two closing thoughts. So I've talked about the guaranteed condition on handback, but I think it's really important, because if you think about the cost of doing this all again in 30 or 40 years, if the building is in a place where it needs to be replaced again, I mean, that's a key savings of this.

Well, I'll be here in 30 years to make sure you do that.

There you go.

May I have one question? Oh, I'm sorry.

Well, yeah, and so we're looking at, Mayor – I mean, just to be clear, we're looking at, over the course of 30 years, $200 million, $200 million for O&M, $200 million for O&M. And then on top of that, $90 million for availability. So that's $300 million we're paying just for O&M, and then assurance that O&M will be effective and the building will be in good shape. That is a huge dollar amount.

Well, how much – I'm sorry. How much is – go ahead.

Sorry, Mayor. Just the one thing. So the $90 million, I want to make sure it's clear. Yeah. That is in place of you borrowing the money from debt. It's not just a $90 million cost. So it's not that if you don't have equity that the $90 million just disappears. You just then go borrow it from debt. And so I think the analysis was $39 million.

Actually, I think the difference – if you figure that your number is 12 percent, our number – our tick is about 4 percent, so the delta is 8 percent, which would equate to $60 million, Commissioner. So it's a $90 million. Thank you. $60 million in financial costs. Round numbers. Okay. Again, round numbers. Approximately round.

Yeah. Thank you. I mean, so $60 million difference by going in this route, which is massive.

Well, over 30 years. Yeah. Over 30 years. It's not that massive.

I have a question for you guys.

Go ahead.

So help explain, because I think this is really important and we haven't really talked about it. So you have the P3 agreement. It's a, let's say, 40-year agreement, but then if we do go through with all of the risk transfer on you and we spend these dollars, that building is still coming back to us with, correct me if I'm wrong, another 30 years of useful life. That's correct. After the 40-year agreement.

Yeah, so you're correct. In the 30-year period, at the end of that 30 years, we're guaranteeing that you're going to be in the same condition as the day that you first occupied it 30 years from there. So you've got an additional 30 years of life cycle cost. And I think what Alex is trying to say is when you're factoring in just the upfront cost, it may seem expensive. But if you think about in 30 years, if you do not have it maintained to the standard and have an additional 30 years of life to it, well, you're going to have to go spend money on either renovating or replacing or building another city hall, after that, you know, 30 years down the line, so you're going to spend an additional couple hundred million to replace the city hall at the end of that 30 years. So you're getting a guaranteed 60-year life cycle on that building, 30 years during the initial period. And then at handover, it's at 30 years as well, which is guaranteed by the equity stake.

No, I don't see it's costing a couple hundred million at the end of 30 years to build another city hall. I'm thinking more of $500, $600 million.

Yeah, I think if you take average construction inflation, 30 years, a $275 million building now will cost about a billion dollars in 30 years.

Right. And that was my next point. If we assumed all of this risk and cost, I could definitely see that number being reached over that time,

close to a billion, with inflation and cost of money. So, I mean, I know that we're talking now about $60 million, but $60 million in comparison to what we might be facing as a city of $1 billion, it's like a no-brainer.

Cody, what's the lifespan of a building you build today?

I mean, it depends on the actual components of the building, but having a building between, you know, 30 and 50 years, it's not going to be the same as the day that you built it. Sure. But that's typical.

Yeah, 30 to 50 years. Somewhere around there. All right, thanks. Thank you. I mean, I have one broader question, is just how – I thought we were aiming for a $200 million project.

How did we get to these elevated costs that are projected here? I don't know where that $200 million came from because, I mean, we talked about that, and we talked about numbers in general, but frankly, maybe that was aspirational, but there's a reality. And I think that when we compare the per square foot cost of this building, and let's say you compare it to what the county is projecting is going to cost for each building, which is almost twice as much per square foot, I don't think we're out of line in terms of the number, the dollar figure we're looking at now, and the amount of square footage we anticipate being able to incorporate in the structure. So I don't think it's anywhere near out of line. In fact, the county's building is close to $2,000 a square foot, and if you recall, when we were trying to do the joint government center with them, we were at $3,000 a square foot, which is why we totally walked away from that. So now bringing it down to $1,200 a square foot I think is well within the – within, I feel, an appropriate range of costs to be able to build the kind of structure we're looking to create.

So what sounds like, Mayor, you're interested in is the concept B, annual city obligation would be $24 million a year. Is that right, Mayor?

That's what it says here under concept B, yes.

$24 million a year. So in a –

There's principal, interest, everything. Maintenance, it's everything. It's not just – it's a $24 million cost to our budget.

Yeah. So right now we're leasing space for the people that would be in City Hall, I think, City Manager – am I saying that right? The people that would be in City Hall, we're right now leasing space to have those people in offices, right? Is that right?

Yes, we currently lease office space.

Okay. So – and I think that dollar amount is what, $5 million?

To the general fund, yes, roughly $5 million.

Okay. So this would be a difference of then $19 million a year. Is that right? In other words, we'd have to pay – we'd have to find $19 million more a year for 30 years to fund City Hall. To build a new building. That is correct, based on concept B. So, Mayor, in the midst of – we have collective bargaining going on right now with police and fire, which is going to be, in all likelihood, an increase in dollars. We have the state legislature, which is meeting in special session this month to possibly enact some form of property tax reform. And we're already projected to be in a budget deficit next year. Where are we going to be finding $19 million more a year for every year for 30 years, City Manager? What are your – how do we – what will get cut? Because this has to be – there has to be a tradeoff, I'm assuming.

In order for us to meet that annual financial obligation, we would make recommendations to the City Commission as to what could be cut from our budget, as well as any opportunities to increase revenue that could support the general fund. It would be an exercise that would likely cause us to rethink the way that we operate and provide services.

Well, you're talking in very general terms, but let's just answer Commissioner Sorensen's question. Right now, in order to fund this project, we're not looking to take money out of the general fund. We're looking to borrow the money, correct?

We would be doing a special obligation bond. Right. But the payments would be based on our general fund.

So you're saying that in order to borrow the money for this project, we would – the cost of the payment every year to pay for the general obligation – or the special obligation bond would be $18 million?

Yes.

And in the past, have we factored this amount in when we came – when we started planning for City Hall?

Based on the financial modeling that the city had done prior to the proposals and as shared with the commission, we had programmed a payment of about $12.2 million based on a $200 million project. Right. So if the project costs increase to the Concept B plan, we would need to basically find double what we were originally anticipating or had programmed. Not to say that we had already identified where the $12.2 million would have been generated from, but we were thinking that that was feasible and something that we could tackle based on our annual budget process. To go to the Concept B plan, we would have to look more extensively to find revenue or cuts in order to make this availability payment.

All right. So that's something that still has yet to be done.

That is correct. And that would be something staff would recommend, but the commission would certainly have to be very involved in that process because all those decisions have meaningful impacts.

Well, I would say this. If the state legislature should, in its wisdom, decide to eliminate property taxes on homestead property, we obviously have to revisit everything, not just the new City Hall, but everything we do in the city. So to that extent, anyone thinking that, you know, we'll have endless amounts of money after the legislature makes a decision with regard to property tax. Now, keep in mind, it still will have to go to referendum. It still has to be approved by 60% of the electorate. But depending upon what the state legislature does, it's definitely going to impact anything we do here in the city, not just this. So we can't stop everything now. We should continue our planning process, continue to work towards our agreements. And I believe the special session is supposed to be this month, so we'll know sooner than later what's going to happen. So to anyone's consternation that we're not going to have enough money, we don't know what we're going to have until we hear what the legislature is going to pass. I've spoken with our – I'm sure many of you have spoken with our state representative. They're talking about maybe a staggering increase in the homestead exemption over a period of years instead of all at once. So we don't know what it's going to be. So my recommendation is that – to the commission is that we continue to move forward in the way we have been, and then we'll see what our availability of income is going to be once the legislature completes its process.

So, Mayor, this goes back to the issue that I raised a couple of meetings ago. I really think it behooves us to go forward with a general obligation bond because that, again, will be protected irrespective of what property tax reform comes forward or not because of constitutional protections against impairment of contracts. So I really think we need to make sure that we put this to a vote of the residents so that we can have a funding stream that will not be impaired by whatever comes forward from property tax reform. I've said it before, and I will say it again. The only way we can afford this thing for the next 30 years is through a geo bond. We don't want to do a special obligation bond because we don't know where things are going to be, and we are not going to be able to afford $300 million if we don't lock it down with a geo bond. All right. Well, we don't have to make that decision today. We need to make it pretty fast. We need to get this in front of the property appraiser – I'm sorry, the supervisor elections by June.

Right. But we don't need to make that decision today. This is just a conference meeting. It's just a manager's report, and we're just having a conversation bringing us up to date as to what the status of the negotiations have been. And so now we know where things stand. And then by the time we have our next meeting, I think that the state legislature will have spoken and will know more about where we stand as far as our income is concerned. Well, I'm going to throw out one idea.

I'm going to bring it back full circle. And I will say one more time, we need to go back and look at bifurcating our staff, putting admin folks up at the Kaplan Building, up on Cypress, at $28 a square foot, and renting up there for the next 30 years on property that we already owned and putting a ceremonial city hall downtown over by the police station on property that we already owned. That was the most cost-effective solution we could ever have come up with. It's the only one that makes good, fiscally responsible sense. I'll put it out there again. I know you're not going to vote for it, but it is the only financially responsible course of action. Okay. Thank you. All right. Anyone else? City Manager?

Mayor. Please. I'm sorry. Go ahead. I did have just a couple of comments, and I just wrote some notes, because you had mentioned where did the $200 million number come from. So I did go back, and I watched our goal-setting workshop, our prioritization workshop from January when we did discuss this. And actually, Mayor, your words at that time when the $200 million was thrown out was, you said that was pie in the sky, not bad for a target, but not necessarily realistic. And we shouldn't be dictated by that. I personally think that what should be dictating the amount is the work that's been going into this in terms of space programming, operational planning. I don't know how you just pick a number without anything behind it, without anything that's determining that number. So, again, I just wanted to reiterate that that number was never a firm number, although at one point in time it was mentioned as a possible target number. If I look at the city annual obligations on the bottom here, even at the lowest amount, you're going to still be at $20,900,000, up to $26 million. So it's definitely that range that we would have to think of in terms of our annual obligations. And my last point about this process is when I think back on some of the other P3s that we've done, I'm not sure why we're so fixated right now on this number when we really have not gone through all of the costs in terms of really digging down into all of our needs, into all of the operational elements of this building. We haven't done that yet. But I thought, from past experience that we've had with P3s, is that that interim agreement will lay out that process. That interim agreement will then give us the opportunity to dig deep, look at a bunch of different submissions, design processes over a period of time, maybe up to 10 months. And that's when you are really going to be able to hone in on a number that's much more realistic. We have not done that interim agreement yet. We're supposed to do that interim agreement and discuss that at, I think, the next meeting, April 21. So correct me if I'm wrong, but I think right now locking in this dollar amount before all that other work that's necessary to substantiate a dollar amount, it just doesn't make sense. And I don't know why we're putting that pressure on ourselves right now at this moment when I think the interim agreement, which is still coming to us, will lay out that process where we're going to be able to see, you know, exactly how we value engineer, how we do whatever it is. And that, to me, is when the budget is going to be refined, when city staff will meet with the developer. And that, to me, is when we should concentrate and finalize that number. It seems premature to me now. That's all.

Okay. Yep. Mayor, if I could. Yes, please. Yeah. So these are not the only options for City Hall. So, as I've suggested before and I'll suggest again, we should evaluate other options, including buying an existing building. We've been presented with an offer to buy an existing building. It would have a dramatic difference in city annual obligations, including renovation and O&M. So there are plenty of options and now is a time to evaluate costs because the $24 million of a year, $24 million a year obligation would require us as a city, I think, to reduce services or have layoffs.

And that is a significant sacrifice for a city hall. Well, Commissioner, you've made that argument many times and we appreciate your point of view, but the commission has made a vote and decided not to do that. So bringing it up again is not really moving this process forward. But we can reconsider it. Yeah. I'm sorry. Yep, you can.

But until we get to a comprehensive agreement, all options remain on the table. And Commissioner Sorensen, I continue to support it. If I can't move staff up to Kaplan, I will happily move them into 101. I already have my office there. I don't have to move.

Yeah. Okay.

I appreciate it. I don't want you to be disrupted.

I completely agree with you. And we are getting more refined numbers, which these represent. And, Mayor, you brought it up, and I completely agree about the idea of property taxes. So let's wait until we see what the legislature comes through with on property taxes. Maybe it's something. Maybe it's nothing. I mean, the property tax possibility is the biggest financial revenue change the city of Fort Lauderdale has experienced in its entire history. So let's continue the discussion, but let's wait until we get clarity from the legislature this year, and then we can move forward. That's exactly what I'm saying. Okay, great. So let's push the – great. I completely agree. Okay. So let's push the – I don't think you're both really agreeing. I'm speaking.

No, you're both not agreeing.

I'm speaking. You're really not agreeing. Well, I'm saying we need to continue the process going forward, but we may have to pivot if the state legislature suddenly does something that's going to significantly impact our income.

Right.

And that's all I'm saying is I think that's what Ben is saying.

So let's – exactly. So let's wait until the legislature finishes a special session on property taxes and then bring the interim agreement up after the fact because until then we just don't know this massive financial change that could happen to the city. And it still will go to voters, the property tax reform, but at least we'll have a good understanding.

Right. So that would be my suggestion. There's always going to be an if. And I can't in good company tell you what my mother used to say about if when I used to say if because it was very – It was very funny, but it was a little vulgar. Not your mother. Yes, it was. But I'm going to tell you, there's always going to be an if. I'm not in favor of just waiting and waiting and seeing what happens. I think we have to keep moving.

Well, we are.

Keep moving. Keep moving. And we'll deal with an issue when it becomes a reality. I'm not going to worry about if, if, if, and if until I need to worry about if, if, if, and if. Okay.

Mayor, so do you agree with me on waiting to bring the interim agreement forward until – No, I'm not agreeing with you.

We're waiting on anything. We need to keep the process going forward.

And if, for some reason, the state legislature passes something that's going to impact significantly our income, then we will review it. But we don't – it shouldn't stop everything. Well, here's why.

Again, it's dollars. The interim agreement – and city manager, correct me if I'm wrong – the interim agreement binds us to provide reimbursement for expenses to the developer. Is that right? Correct.

There is some financial obligations tied to the interim agreement, certainly not the entirety of the project costs. But from a staff perspective, as we continue to negotiate, it would be helpful for us to have an idea from the commission as to where we need to target in terms of the budget. I know things are being refined, and, you know, I think we will continue to get better details and more accuracy. But from a negotiation perspective, it would be helpful for both sides to understand the parameters with which the commission wants to set for this project.

What do you mean, the parameters?

So a target.

Well, let's work on concept B.

If that is the consensus of the commission, we will do so. We just wanted to get this feedback because we know we were above the $200 million that had previously been discussed. So if the commission would give us the consensus on the target, we will focus our efforts there.

All right.

No, I disagree. We understand that. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman, are you okay with there moving forward to trying to come together with an interim agreement based on concept B?

Yes, I'm okay. I agree with moving forward.

Okay. Concept B. You have a majority. That's a majority. But I still want to understand why the pricing cannot wait until – why can't that be part of the process of the interim agreement? In other words – The guaranteed maximum price? Yeah. Why – well, guaranteed maximum price. Yes, that's after that. But isn't the point of the interim agreement – correct me if I'm wrong. We've gone through a bunch of these P3s before. Aren't those dollar amounts solidified after you go through much more stringent space planning, operational needs, all of that? Then you come up with a number.

So, yes, that will be refined as we continue. Given that the commission had discussed a previous target, I wanted to make sure that we had full awareness of where we were currently with the budget. Okay. And so it's helpful because I don't want to come to the commission way down the line and now the project is out of reach and we have to make another decision. We've potentially wasted time, energy, and money. So I just wanted to get some feedback, check the temperature, so that we know how to negotiate going forward and the developer has some awareness of that as well.

Okay. So I think we've given you that direction. Thank you. Okay.

Do you feel we've given you that direction?

I didn't officially hear your vote or –

Me? Yes. Oh, I'm agreeing with the mayor and Commissioner Beasley-Pittman to give you that official direction.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Do you have anything additional to report on today?

I do. I just wanted to share that staff will be meeting with contractors and their representatives as it relates to the Riverland and Melrose Manor Fortify Lauderdale Stormwater Project with the district commissioners included in that meeting. So stay tuned for more on that.

Okay. Is that complete your report?

Yes. Thank you, Mayor.

City Attorney, do you have any report?

No, I do not, Mayor.

Okay. I frankly would like to take a five- or ten-minute break, if we could. And I just want to also say that a lot of people have signed up on Business 2. How many people are here for Business 2 on the Entertainment District? Like most everybody. Who's here on Business 1? I was wanting to take up Business 2 first so that we can hear all those folks. So if you don't mind, we'll talk about Business 2 first when we come back from the ten-minute break, and then we'll go into Business 1. All right?

Okay, folks.

Let's resume our conference meeting. We've finished with all of our reports. Just going to be a couple of agenda changes. It doesn't appear as though we're going to get to Business 3 today. So this is the outdoor event ordinance presentation. So, City Manager, would you mind if we just scheduled – I don't think – has anyone signed up to speak on Business 3? I don't see any – I don't think anyone's signed up to start. So if we can just put that on another agenda item, that way we don't – people's expectations are not disappointed. So with regard to Business 1, there are three people who have signed up to speak on that, and I'm going to let them speak, and then we'll have our city attorney talk to us about the presentation. Those folks are amenable to that. They just want to be able to leave and go home and perhaps look at the rest of the meeting from home. So if that's okay with the commission, we'll continue now on to Business 1, and the people that have signed up to speak, I will now call as soon as I can find – all right, we'll start with Marilyn Mamano, Marilyn, and followed by Mary Fertig – I'm sorry? Yeah. And then followed by Barbara Stern.

Hang on. I've got to take my paper clip off before you start. Oh, wait a minute. Okay. Lauderdale Tomorrow has advocated for preserving and enhancing public land since we formed as an organization. We've spoken numerous times in front of the city commission and supported the principle that public lands be used for a public purpose. To that end, we have repeatedly requested that public purpose be defined in the city charter. In a 2022 neighborhood presentation given on behalf of our group, we shared a headline from the Daily Business Review, and I quote, only five years' worth of land left. South Florida developers looking for golf courses, racetracks, and landfill amid land crisis to emphasize the importance of strengthening the protections in the city charter for our existing public lands. As you consider proposals to amend the charter on the ballot, we appreciate the areas where you have incorporated prior suggestions from Lauderdale Tomorrow, such as requiring supermajorities and unanimous votes in specific situations. Remaining concerns, Section 8.02, the Charter Revision Committee in 2024 recommended a change which included, quote, for a public purpose to wit an activity that is essential to health, morals, protection, or welfare of the city is determined by the city of Fort Lauderdale City Commission for use predominantly or for use predominantly for educational, literary, scientific, or charitable purposes. In the most recent proposal, it now states to wit an activity that is essential to the health, safety, general welfare of the city is determined by the city commission, notwithstanding an incidental benefit to a private party. Wouldn't it be better to draft a definition that relies on legal opinion rather than on a city council interpretation, as that may change from time to time? It's important to state, and you really have to say, notwithstanding an incidental benefit to a private party, because there's nothing right now to prevent that. The change in the title of Section 8.09 reflects a major change in city policy, currently as leases for more than one year and not more than 50, and 2024, the Charter Revision Commission recommended leases, licenses, concessions, and use agreements for one year, not more than 50. The current proposed title is leases, licenses, concessions, use agreements for more than one year. The tiered approach responds to many of the suggestions we've made over the years. However, the deletion of 50 years with no new limit in place raises concerns. Should there be a cap, can a new tier be added? Leases, 99 years or greater, would be subject to a referendum. Section 8.21 incorporates stronger protections for the sale of parklands. However, there is concern that city commissions could simply avoid a referendum by changing the zoning category. Is there a way to prevent that? Organizations primarily focused on Section 8, but there's one other section that we have a lot of experience in. In 2016, we brought forward two petition initiatives. And considering revisions to Section 3.5, we cautioned the commission against making the process so onerous that it is impossible for citizens to bring forward issues that are of importance to the community. In the past 10 years, there have only been two initiatives, three of which two were brought forward by Lauderdale tomorrow, but all three have led to important community discussions. And I have one last paragraph I'm giving to Marilyn. Can I read my last paragraph? Okay. Finally, with over two dozen changes on one ballot with so many other issues, it could be very confusing and it may discourage voters from responding to all proposals. It may be better to prioritize the most important changes, particularly public lands, and include those on the ballot. Thank you for your consideration.

Okay. Thank you, Mary. Marilyn Momono.

Hi. I'm Marilyn Momono. Good afternoon, Mayor and Commissioners. Thank you for your consideration, Mr. Mayor. In the interest of brevity, I'm simply going to support what Mary has said as the position of Lauderdale tomorrow. I do, though, want to compliment the city attorney and the city manager and whoever on the staff worked on this presentation because considering the complexity of the questions in front of you, it's probably as clear as I've ever seen it presented. So kudos to those people. I just want to say as a planning professional, professionals to professionals, the concern that we have is with the definitions. You always get the devils in the details. So the definition of what does public purpose mean? What does otherwise convey mean? What does in the city's best interest mean? These are terms that, you know, it's very difficult to define. However, on the assumption that this is not the last we're going to be having this discussion, and we know we're going to be having this discussion with all of our members in order to bring forward this information to the public, I would like the opportunity to submit to you some suggestions for how to define these terms. I would be happy to send that offer to you. Again, for the sake of brevity, good start. We're running late. Let's keep working until we get this done and get this on the calendar. Thank you very much.

All right. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Commission Barbara Stern. Kind of curious how we got here, because about two years ago, many of these same revisions were brought to the Commission by the Charter Revision Board, and we were told we couldn't move forward because there had not been enough public outreach. Here we are two years later, next to no public outreach. There was a survey that was done last year, sort of, and the Commission got upset because they didn't know about it. There was a presentation to the Council of Civic Associations. On average, I would say 25 to 30 people attend those meetings. So there's been no real public outreach, and that's why this got stalled two years ago. So now we're here addressing a lot of the same proposed amendments that were recommended two years ago, but we were told then we couldn't move forward because there was no public outreach. I don't know how we're considering this now. If you use your arguments from two years ago, that there wasn't any public outreach. That being said, I'm going to echo some of Lauderdale Tomorrow's comments. I think it was great on addressing the leases, but you didn't put in anything in there about a max lease, and I think that's an important thing to address. There's also no proposed revisions on limiting P3s, but I think after what we saw today, we should be giving some additional consideration on when matters should have to go out for referendum on spending public dollars. If I follow the math from the earlier presentation about City Hall, which was not a separate agenda notice, but we were told that the annual contribution from the city will be $24,160,000 a year. And if we spread that out over 30 years, if I follow the presentation properly, over 30 years, this is going to cost us nearly three-quarters of a billion dollars. The math comes out to $724,800,000. And I hope I misunderstood what was coming out in that presentation, but 30 years at $24 million is costing us over 30 years three-quarters of a billion dollars. If we are going to be spending that kind of money for City Hall, the public should have a say in that. It should go out to vote. And I hope there's some consideration that is given here. We've heard about needing to be fiscally conservative. I wish those conversations were had before City Hall was voted on last year. Then you were one of the ones who voted to move forward with one of the most expensive proposals. So if we're going to be fiscally conservative, let's have a process in place. Let's have the city vote on items that are going to cost us this much money. We still have time to address additional charter changes, and I encourage this city to consider something that would tackle numbers such as this. Thank you.

Okay, great. Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak on this item?

City Manager, could you just simply address what our plan is for the public outreach that was just mentioned? Because I know the Council of Fort Little Civic Associations has written us. So in terms of the timeline and what we would do once this commission did decide if we were going to place any of these items on the November ballot?

Yes. So staff is waiting to hear from the commission as to what those ballot items would be, and we would work with the Council as well as through our Strategic Communications Department to disseminate information, to do public outreach in multiple forms and facets through various channels. And we want to be as aggressive as possible. I think the starting point for us, though, is what those items are, what those topics are.

So in other words, we didn't do any public outreach yet because we don't even know if we are selecting any items for November, and if we do select, we don't know which ones they are.

That is correct. We did get direction from the commission to pull back on any public outreach until such time as the commission decided on which items would be moving forward, potentially.

I need to clarify that, though, because as the speaker pointed out, we decided not to move forward. The commission decided not to move forward on any of the previous board's recommendation because we said that there had been no public outreach prior to it coming to the commission. So is our process that we socialize these ideas with the community before it comes to the commission, or we socialize the ideas with the community after the commission decides? Like, I thought the idea was to get input from the community to help the commission make a better informed decision about what's important to the community. How do we do that before we talk to the community? If we make our decisions without community input, then it seems to me, what's the point? Are we selling it to the community, or are we getting community input to inform our decision-making process?

Well, the direction that we received several months back when that survey was put out, it was to halt or pause until the commission gave staff more definitive direction on what the topics are and not go to the public with the entirety of the charter or the entirety of all of the topics suggested by the Charter Revision Board at that time. And if I'm mistaken, Anthony Fajardo can clarify.

Anthony Fajardo, Director of Development Services. So the city manager is correct. We did start a little bit of public outreach. I did a – let me back up a little bit. There was the original recommendation from the Charter Revision Board back in May of 2024. We did a presentation to the Council of Civic Associations. That presentation, I mean, it was a bad presentation. There was too much information. There was too much data. There was – everyone was glossed over. They weren't really paying attention. They weren't engaged. So we worked with StratCom and the Charter Revision Board to come up with a better method to get it out. What was key to that was breaking it up into smaller bites that we could then deliver to people to, you know, kind of talk about it on a – maybe a per-topic basis or just, you know, an article basis. However, we felt that we never had enough direction to really consolidate it down to what the ultimate topics were that the city commission would prefer to see on a ballot. As you're probably aware, we're not allowed to advocate for these things. We can't go in front of a charter – we can't go in front of an HOA or anybody else and tell them why we think it's a good idea to do what we're doing. We can just be there to educate and answer questions.

So I'm going to ask you to pause right there because I think that is the whole point, right, of why we wanted community input because they could advocate all they want. So the idea of having the community input was to let the neighborhoods advocate to their heart's content about what they think would be valuable to have in the charter and then communicate that to us as decision makers so that we could incorporate that input into our final recommendations as to what went to the commission. So let's go back to that meeting where the presentation was made by the charter revision board to the city commission with a list of final recommendations, and we opted to move forward on none of them. And at that meeting, the commission was very explicit that part of the rationale for not moving forward on any of them is because they had not gone out and gone to every community and every HOA and met with them to talk about what was coming forward. So it seems to me we're moving in a completely opposite direction of why we rejected all the work of the community, I'm sorry, of the charter revision board. You know, my appointee, Richard Weiss, was very, very upset at the amount of work and time he put into that board only to have it rejected at the time. And candidly, he's going through this again and is getting quite frustrated.

So where do we go from here? I mean, I'm hearing, you know, obviously conflicting things. I know, Anthony, what you tried to do was to simplify it a little bit and give it to the public in smaller doses. I don't think every neighborhood association was supposed to be met with. I think we were trying to use the model of the infrastructure task force, which went out and had selected meetings. How many, Jeff, for the city hall? Five. Five meetings throughout the community inviting all neighborhood associations to participate if they chose to, then came back with the final report. So I remember what you said, Anthony. You said, look, we can't just spread it all out because there's too many charter amendments that were being recommended by the advisory board. So, obviously, what you did was you distilled it down to a select number, and now you're asking us to give our opinions on it. I don't know how the commission wants to go from here. Do you want to just – tonight, do you want to just discuss the particular items that have now been presented to us, or do you not want to do anything until we have the full gamut of the proposals that the committee had recommended?

Well, Mayor, to your point, I thought we were going to have, like the infrastructure task force board, to go out to the community and have a series of workshops where these ideas are introduced to the community. If we make our decisions, then there's nothing for the community to talk about. We've made our decisions, and we're presenting it to them as a done deal. We're not asking – we're not seeking input. We're saying, okay, here's what we looked at. You know, we've made our decisions, and this is what we're presenting you with as a final choice. So, we're no longer soliciting input. We're now in – it's a de facto, here's what we've decided.

No. So, why don't we – anything that we decide today, why don't we simply characterize it as a refined recommendation to the community, let the commission look at it, refine the rule changes, and then put it out to the community, unless you just want everything put out to the community and let the community refine it for us. I think that's an unwieldy process. That's, I think, our concern. So, you know, and honestly, I'll be honest, I don't think we're even going to get to it tonight, but –

I guess my only question, Mayor, is I'm just – I guess I'm confused because that's exactly why we rejected it last time around. So, we rejected it because it never went to the community, and now we're saying, okay, we don't need the community's input. So, I don't understand why we're flipping our approach if we rejected two years' worth of work by the Chartered Revision Board last time on the sole basis of we didn't shop it around the community, and now we're not going to shop it around the community. I just – I don't understand the process. Aren't we still going to – here's – sorry, go ahead.

Here's an idea. Sorry to share. So, just working backwards. So, city manager, city attorney, this – our ultimate charter revision changes need to be submitted to the Supervisor Election by when? Is it June? To be on the –

I defer to the clerk.

Yeah. Sorry, city clerk. June 5th. June 5th. To be on the ballot, and this would be on the ballot November 2026, right? Correct. Okay. So, June 5th. So, Mayor, I'm just thinking time-wise. So, we have until June 5th. We're April 7th. So, it would be just – I'm just, you know – What's the pleasure of the committee? Brainstorming. We could – I'm sorry, do you put it out? Is it June 8th? Is it actually June 8th?

Just clarifying?

Mayor. Yeah, I apologize. June 8th. So, if I could – if I could share an idea. So, put it out to the community for a period of time, and then we say that as a commission, we're going to make the decision on what goes on the ballot after that time. So, maybe it's in May we make that decision as a commission. So, there's a month for a community engagement is one idea. Mayor.

Mayor, I personally think that the timeline is so tight to get all of this information to the supervisor of elections for the ballot. But what I think we should do is, first of all, we look at everything, all of the suggestions from the Charter Revision Board, and we figure out how many can one ballot take. Because we're going to have to spread this out over several elections. Well, there are 26 recommendations tonight. Right. And you're not going to be able to put that all on one ballot. So, we have to figure out – we have to look at this holistically. How many elections are we going to have to spread this out over? How many ballot items can we reasonably expect to put on one ballot in any given election? But I do think that we have time for this initial offering with June as our deadline. Let's just look at the low-hanging fruit. Let's just look at the items that need to bring us into compliance with state statutes.

Let's look at cleanup items.

Let's look at items like we appoint a vice mayor in April when we should be doing it in December. That's an old item from when we had our elections in March. There are enough simple, non-controversial issues that I am just labeling cleanup issues, and we just put those in November. And then we let the council do its thing. I don't know. Is there any money to budget city manager for outreach? I'm not sure, but we do the best we can, but we explain that this is going to be a process. We explain that we can only do X amount on any given ballot, but I really don't think that we have any choice other than to just do cleanup items, bring us into compliance with state statutes, that kind of item for this coming November. That's all.

Well, keep in mind that the purpose of the agenda item is simply for discussion purposes. We're not voting on anything. So, to your point, why don't we have those discussions? Why don't we refine the recommendations, then let staff take it out to the community, and then before the June deadline we'll make a decision on what should go on the ballot. Does that seem like an appropriate protocol? Well, silence is consent. No, I thought you just said that was not consent. Didn't you just say that was unwieldy? I didn't say it was unwieldy. I said that the recommendations that have been put before us, let's have a discussion on them, let's refine them and put them out to the community, right, just the ones we're talking about on the agenda, and then get feedback from the community, and then we'll put together an agenda item, vote on it, and do it by the June deadline.

So, that's a big task, just so you know. That's a lot to organize, and good luck to whoever's going to organize all that.

Well, why hasn't it happened until now?

Well, we've been talking about it for over a year. I agree. Well, we were the ones who said, let's revisit this and put it in a different direction to allow the neighbors to come together and put their input on it. And the direction that I'm hearing right now, we are, again, removing the neighbors from the opportunity to get the input. No, no, we could still put it out to the neighbors. Yeah, but we're going to give them a menu, okay, with the items that we're suggesting, and then we're telling them what to pick from. I would prefer, if we follow what we initially said, if the timeline was right about a year ago, that we would allow the board to come back with recommendations, go out and do that community input, allow them, our neighbors, tell us what it is they want us to focus on, and then move forward. So, we're back where we were, again, as Commissioner Herbst said, we're right back where we were the time before.

I don't disagree with you, but now we're at a situation, what do you want to do? We're at the situation. So, I'll tell you what, hold that question, we'll discuss it after we're finished with Business 2. Okay. All right. All right, so we'll now convene the meeting to talk about Business 2. And who's going to be making a presentation?

Trish Logan from Development Services. Okay. Hi, good afternoon, Mayor and Commissioners. Trish Logan, Principal Urban Planner in the Development Services Department, bringing up the presentation now. Today, we're talking about special entertainment districts and some proposed revisions to adopting an ordinance. We'll get the presentation up first. Here we go. So, oops. So, the presentation will cover the background of the special entertainment districts. We'll talk briefly about where the special entertainment districts are located, some of the goals that were outlined previously for the amendments and what we're currently focusing on, some of the recent public outreach that was conducted on this effort, and then we'll give a proposal, an overview of the proposed code amendments as well. So, the special entertainment districts were initially formed to encourage development in regional activity centers to clean up those areas that were identified for promotion of cultural and economic and educational aspects, and just overall enhance the visibility of public projects within those locations. Within that ordinance, it did outline several incentives for these areas, and that included extended hours, no distance separation between liquor establishments, the permission to sell alcohol outdoors. In the original ordinance, it did allow for the open containers to be used, and then also increased decibel levels for noise. The way that these were formed were through outreach to the city manager, and originally it was done through common ownership. So, if it was an area that was owned by one common owner, they could propose to have a special entertainment district through the city manager, provide documentation about security and maintenance, and then have an agreement that those would be the specific areas. So, such as Beach Place is owned by one common owner, there's also a common control option, and that's something that is done in the Hemershee area, where you have several different property owners that are formed together with several different businesses to form that special entertainment district. There are currently five special entertainment districts. There are three located in the downtown area, which are Hemershee, Historic Brickle, and the McCrory buildings. And there are two located on the beach, which is Beach Place and the Toomey district. In June of last year, we did present to the city commission on some of the original amendment goals. This also took into consideration public outreach that was conducted as part of a vision plan effort for the Hemershee area, where there was a lot of focus on enhancing and improving that special entertainment district. We were focused on the management structure of the district, improving security, enforcement, and then overall providing a process update. We looked at reevaluating the incentives that are offered within the special entertainment districts. There would be a continuation of that no minimum distance separation requirement. And earlier this year, just in February, it was adopted that there would no longer be the ability to have off-premise alcohol consumption. So that was changed. And then there was a discussion at the time about limiting the service hours. That's not part of this discussion today. Currently, we've been focusing on that overall management structure of the districts and how that should be addressed, enforcing security and enforcement measures, as well as making sure that the overall special entertainment districts are kept cleaned and maintained throughout. We did conduct some public outreach recently, and we conducted several small group meetings where we talked to different groups of stakeholders about what they'd like to see in an updated ordinance and what they'd like for us to focus on. We did have, last week, a public meeting. We had over 30 attendees that came to that meeting and gave us some input on what we presented to them. We heard a variety of things through all of this outreach, but we did hear that some of the participants would like to see a district-by-district ordinance so that it would be applied on a district-by-district basis rather than an overall blanket ordinance for everyone. We'd heard about stricter enforcement measures to make sure that they were any bad actors within the districts would have enforcement measures placed on their individual business rather than on the district as a whole. And that coincides with some concerns about having an overall district-wide standard that would be imposed on the overall district and may be difficult to manage without clear enforcement mechanisms. So that leads to some of the proposed code amendments that we've been working towards. The intent of what we'd like to propose is to modify the special entertainment district ordinance from a district-based model to an establishment-based model where any enforcement mechanism would be placed primarily on making sure that each individual business had to supply their own security and maintenance plan. So that would involve repealing the existing special entertainment district ordinance and then creating a permit system for each individual establishment. That would require each individual establishment to apply for that permit. There would be set geographic boundaries that identify the existing special entertainment district areas within the code.

Would that be every year or just once?

It would be on an annual basis. There would be specific requirements for the security and maintenance plan that are outlined, and I'll go through that in the next slide. And then we would retain the existing incentives that are in the code, and then implement a process for fines and for suspension and revocation of the permit itself. So within the security and maintenance plan, as of now, within the code, it doesn't really go into a lot of detail of what that would require. We did talk a lot with police to determine what mechanisms or items should be included in the security plan. There was recommendations to ensure that we have identity scanners for underage patrons to ensure that they are not entering these premises and that there are video recording devices, just ensure that each business has a plan in place for when there's special events and making sure there's security coverage for all hours of operation, and then additional elements related to ensuring that the area is kept clean and maintained. So the permit itself would include an application. We have contemplated that it would be submitted to the city manager or their designee, potentially through the police department. Several items would be required as part of that. The primary thing that would be included in that would be the security and maintenance plan for each business. With that, there would be levels of infractions that are on a tiered basis, and those tiers kind of go a little bit more stringent associated with fines and suspensions based on what type of infraction took place. So if there is a code violation versus having underage drinkers, there would be a difference in how that would be handled as far as imposing a fine or a suspension on that business. There are different options that we could implement into the code as far as the fines, levels of fines, periods of suspensions, and then what ultimately would lead to revocation. And then that is all we have in our presentation. We're happy to answer any questions. Okay, thank you.

A number of people have signed up to speak. I wonder if we could do that first before we go into our discussion because it's getting late. I'll call the names three at a time. Try to keep your comments to about two minutes if possible. Start with Dev Matwani. Dev, are you still here? Dev Matwani, followed by Bob Swindell, followed by Robert Lockery. Bob left? Okay.

Right here? Okay. Thank you, Mayor and Commissioners. Dev Matwani with Merrimack Ventures. I also represent the SED, the old Las Olas Riverfront property, as you all know. I wear a number of hats. Last year I was chair of the DDA, currently chair of the Broward Center for the Performing Arts Foundation, as well as vice chair of PACA. And all of these boards I sit on as a volunteer doing community work. We've talked about the frustration with the Hemershey District for many years, but particularly over the last year, as you all have taken it up and talked about it and made some attempts at addressing the issues. But unfortunately, the root of the cause has not been addressed, and there's still a lot of frustration, despite the efforts and all the meetings and conversations, about addressing it. And staff recommendation today, in its entirety, while I appreciate their work, again, is another attempt that doesn't hit the nail on the head. What's the root of the cause? What's that? What's the root of the cause? The root of the cause? Well, it's a lack of enforcement. You have four districts that exist. You don't have problems. We haven't been meeting over the last year for those four districts because they're in compliance. You have good actors. You have a system that works. We're talking about amending a system that works for one district where it's not working. And I agree with staff. The ownership, fractioned ownership, is a challenge. The reality is that they don't fit in the ordinance. But rather than amending the ordinance to fit them, you're amending a rule for the problem child as opposed to addressing the problem. You have many actors in that district that are good, that are good. There's good businesses there, good people that work there, but there's a lot of bad actors. Or there are people that aren't in the district legally, yet they operate like they are. And here we are talking about amending an entire district or four other districts just to appease and accommodate the one district where the problems are. It's like saying if the speed limit's 55, and rather than enforcing the speed limit, if someone's speeding, let's lower it to 35. That makes no sense. Enforce the limit. Enforce the rules on the district before we go to take this step to change. Although I do agree that district needs a separate process, and I'm supportive of that district being allowed to continue to operate as long as there's enforcement and there's rules that allow staff to enforce those rules. It is challenging, but there's certainly enforcement existing that could happen that's not being done right now. And it's very frustrating to be on this board and raising dollars for this foundation and serving the hundreds of thousands of kids that we do and have the types of infractions and incidents we do and drunk people being found in the courtyard and the fountains around here at all these beautiful institutions. So I have no problems with the businesses that are there as a whole, but there are some bad actors within there that need to be addressed. And so I'm not in favor of staff's recommendation. I talked to the city attorney. There is another way to do this. You could decertify the district, the hemorrhage district, and immediately put it into a new district or create a new process for the fractured ownership since they no longer fit within the framework of the existing SED ordinance. And I'd be supportive of that. But outside, and that's not the easy way because it's two steps, but it's the right way to do it. Don't penalize the good actors because there are a few bad actors. Let's address the problem, let's address the issues head on, but changing a whole ordinance and affecting everybody is not going to solve the problem, and all it's going to do is make life harder for those of us who actually follow the rules and operate in the way that the ordinance is intended. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Lockery, followed by Marty Applebaum, followed by Sandy Fay.

Good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners. I like the new setup. It's good to see everybody up on the dais. It's been a long time since COVID ended. I think you may hear some similar themes, but Robert Lockery, again, wearing many hats like Dev, including representing Las Olas Riverfront. You know, I think it's going to be very clear to you, and I think you all have recognized starting last June and through this last year, that something has to change on him or she. It is directly impacting Broward Center. It is directly impacting the Museum of Discovery and Science, as well as history of Fort Lauderdale. But I think it is also important to recognize that the issue does not lie solely with the existing rules that you have in place. It's not a case of them being too lenient or too lax. It's just, it is, very importantly, a case of them not being enforced. In your own backup materials, which staff put together in a good, or rather the operators not abiding by your rules, I should say, the backup shows that of the, in the SED, roughly 84% of the operators today aren't even in the SED. So they're taking advantage of a privilege that the city has offered, but they are not part of the, of the, they don't meet the minimum requirements, have never even been included within that SED. In addition to that, you have the problems that have been mentioned regarding that you have multiple ownerships. When SEDs were clearly, from the initial way they were written to the way they've been operated, it's very important to have one controlling entity or one owner. That's the way they've been drafted. That's the way they've been enforced. You all had an issue with Beach Place a few years ago. You were able to go to the representative of that owner. You were able to make demands on that owner. They've come into compliance, and now they've been operating. By having a disparate number of different representatives and different owners, you only dilute your authority to bring a special entertainment district into line, so to speak. So I think it's very important to recognize that there are laws in place. Apparently, a majority of the folks who are operating in this area are already violating those rules and those regulations, and that by enforcing, I would say a good place to start is enforcing those regulations. Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Marty Applebaum, followed by Sandy Faye, followed by Alan Hooper.

Good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners. I'm a resident. I have lived in South Florida for 40-some-odd years, and I actually remember Button South and Penrods and everything else that you guys were talking about. I've been listening to people talk. I've been up here in the Fort Lauderdale area for about three to five years, three to five years or so. I've been listening to everybody speak about the special entertainment districts and the issues that everybody's been having. And the one thing that I'd like to say is as I listen to people discuss enforcement and rules and regulations, I would encourage you to have the courage to do what happened 30-some-odd years ago when the Fort Lauderdale Beach was the spring break capital of the world with the Button South, with Penrods, and with all the other places that were there, and realize that we need to make the Las Olas Oceanside Loop or Oceanside Park instead because you need to change the image. You need to understand where the real residents want to have and want to participate within the city. Thank you very much. You're very welcome.

Sandy, followed by Alan Hooper, followed by Ty Sutton. Good evening. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners. Appreciate the opportunity to appear for you today and the great work that Ms. Logan and her staff has done and the continuing of the conversation that we have here. Sandy Faye Rivers, I think Riverwalk Center, one of the property owners in the Hemercy District that has, I think, five or six of the establishments that operate there. I agree with the previous speakers before that we should not punish the good actors as a result of the bad actors. What I would take exception at is the statements that the majority of the Hemercy operators are bad actors. That's not the case. There are some. We agree with that. And I think that the proposal that staff has presented to you allows the city to focus and take action against those bad actors and allowing the folks that are following the rules and haven't followed the rules to continue to operate, provide jobs, economic development, revenue to the city. And we think that's the approach that the city should go with today. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you.

Alan Hooper, followed by Ty Sutton, followed by Pat Zyler.

Not yet.

You sound like a spring breaker.

I feel like I've been here since this morning. Okay. And now it's nighttime. All right. Okay. I don't know if you guys know it, but I'm the chairman of the PACA. I've also been a foundation member for years, and there were several of our board members that were here, but they had to leave. So I do want to let you know that they are here in support of what we're telling you. And the Broward Center, the one we're sitting in right now, the MODS, the Historic Society, were all here before any of those operators were here. They were all here. And so, you know, we're sitting in a Broward Center that's worth probably $500 to $700 million today. It was built in 1991, and it's a critical jewel, economic jewel for our city. It's an amenity for our city. It's one of the biggest draws that would make people or CEOs of new businesses want to move here. Okay? That is, until they see the social media of the stabbings, the shootings, the fighting. That kind of stuff is not positive for not only the Broward Center, but for the city of Fort Lauderdale. And this area deserves to be treated with more respect than it's getting now. It deserves the protection from this commission. It deserves the enforcement of the existing ordinance rather than trying to engineer a new ordinance that puts the noncompliant into compliance. A new ordinance that makes bad behavior and dangerous situations vague and hard to enforce. A situation that would drive cultural patrons away from this area. You know, you almost feel like you need to put caution tape across 2nd Street when the shows are letting out so the patrons don't take a dangerously bad right turn and go down the wrong side, down 2nd Street. So, you know, and I think about this, and I'm like, why are we arguing over this? I don't get it. You know, we tout, how do I, we tout all of our successes. We tout the Hall of Fame swimming pool. We tout the Parker, the Panthers, the Hia Mar, all the great things that this city is doing and all the very, the amenities that we're bringing to this city to make it great. And yet, you know, we fail. We drag our feet and fail to protect the biggest asset we got, which is the one we're sitting in. And then meanwhile, we're wondering why companies are choosing to go to Miami and to Palm Beach. And after 15 years of chaos and promises, I think enough is enough, and we really need to reset the situation here. We need to enforce the ordinance that exists today, and we need to clean that area up. I mean really clean it up, because people are staying away. You can ask Ty Sutton. Some of his patrons don't want to even come here because of the situation that's happening on 2nd Street and the press that it gets. Thank you.

Thank you. Ty Sutton, followed by Patricia Zeiler, followed by Ellen Bogdanoff.

Ty Sutton, President and CEO of the Performing Arts Center Authority. I've now attended two sessions with staff, and I want to thank everyone for the incremental changes we've seen to this district. The elimination of open containers and outdoor consumption are positive steps. But the real question is, with these proposed amendments, to basically put one SED in compliance when four already are, where are the teeth? And in the details of this, I wonder what best practices have we looked to around the country? What does Austin do? What does Nashville do? None of that is in there. Does this give – it has video cameras. Does it give police access to them? What are the training steps? What's the alcohol prevention? Those should all be part of every district. But if we're going to look to amend this to create a new one, we need to look at that. What are the requirements for each individual business? What are the options to end such heavy density of licensed businesses, most of which don't actually fall into the bounds of the SED? The SED has been out of compliance since 2013, and I want to put that in perspective for a second. Thirteen years of noncompliance, so we should move to make everyone compliant. I don't know how that makes sense in terms of density, why we have so much, you know, that isn't within the bounds of the 100-foot rule. The 100-foot rule, but my real question is, what is the city going to put into place to investigate, enforce, and make sure these rules are actionable if they are permitted? Who is going to do that? Who has the responsibility, and at what level? Is it 24 hours that I have to report I got a violation, I got a ticket or some other violation? Do I have to report as a business owner every time I have a call for service like you would in Austin? And so I think this isn't completely thought out if this is the path, but at the end of the day, we have a district that hasn't been in compliance for years. And I'll tell you, every time I get a call out at 3.45 or 4.15 a.m. for a 19-year-old who's passed out and in need of medical support on our campus, it's a good reminder that this has to be addressed, and now it's been going on too long. Thank you for your time. All right.

Thank you.

Mayor, Commissioners, Patricia Zeiler.

Fort Lauderdale Historical Society.

I was operating your sun trolley when the beach place was a horror, and that was fixed and brought into compliance under the current ordinance. I moved to Himersi at about the time that this Himersi became noncompliant, and I've watched it deteriorate over the last 12 years. I have customers. I have customers. Ty has customers. Joe at Mods has customers that we bring in in daytime hours. I have 200,000-plus visitors a year with 65% out-of-state, out-of-country. When I first came to work at the Historical Society, I could send my visitor up to Tarpon Bend. I could send them to Taco Craft. I could send them to Rock Burger for a nice lunch. They could sit outside and enjoy the street and enjoy Fort Lauderdale and have a really nice experience. Today, I have no place to send my visitors on 2nd Street, and I don't know that I would do it if I had.

I think the desperation is that there are other businesses here that are driving significant crowds into that district. Broward Center, of course, Mods, and our museums as well. I take care of six of your historic properties. We are stewards for that, and they've been abused by the permission to just free-for-all in that area. And enforcing what the ordinance as it exists today would help all of us. I know it would help historical society.

Thank you.

Great. Thank you. Ellen Bogdanoff, followed by George Hanbury, followed by Jack. Is Jack Abdo still here? He left. Okay.

Thank you, Mayor and Commissioners. I represent several of the bar owners on him or she, and we support a lot of what's being said. Bottom line is that maybe not one size fits all, and if him or she district needs to be treated differently than some of the others, so be it. We support the recommendations from staff. If there are people that are operating as if they are in the district and they're outside the district, nobody wants them shut down more than the legitimate bar owners that are actually in the district. Each and every one of them had mentioned before that they were willing to have private detail. That's how many of them do today. At least three of the bar owners have private detail, and we find that there's a lot less going on there. I want to thank the police. A phenomenal job this spring break. We saw it. There were 49 arrests, of which many, I think there were 29 that were for underage drinking. And I do want to make a point, not one arrest in him or she. They were all on the beach. So they are doing a good job. I do know, in particular, Sway probably collects nearly 1,000 false IDs a year. Some of them are going to get through, but that happens all over the city. That's really not the issue. The issue is that we need to perhaps maybe tweak the ordinance specifically if they want to do it for him or she. I don't think our guys have a problem with it, and with all of the recommendations that are made, they also don't have a problem with it. Because the bad actors that everybody seems to be talking about on him or she are rooting the reputation of the legitimate operators. And there are a lot of legitimate operators on him or she. And we also talked previously that the open container was one of the main issues here. And in that open container, we were going to let it settle for six months and selling alcohol on the street to see if that settled. And it settled a lot. Once in a while, you still had one arrest during the three-week period of that where somebody had an open container. But it's less and less. And I think if we had more detail on the street, which is the plan, spoke to Captain Jenkins, and made a recommendation for more off-duty police officers on the street, I think people will be less inclined to walk around with open containers and to potentially have a problem with some of the things that are going on. I mean, kids getting drunk during spring break and falling asleep on the street, I mean, that's going to happen. It happens all over the city where you see people sleeping on the street. But we support the recommendations. And if they want to treat us differently than they want to treat the others, so be it. We don't have a beef with the other ones if they're operating properly with the current. But we don't think the current ordinance is effective for him or she.

All right. Thank you. Mr. Hanbury, followed by Tim Petrillo, Jenny Moore-Hohn, and Steve Helmos.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. My name is George Hanbury. I'm speaking as a private citizen. My wife, Jenna, and I came to Fort Lauderdale almost 40 years ago when the mayor and the city commission at that time invited me to be the city manager. And I feel like history is repeating itself because in the 1980s, Fort Lauderdale was the wild and woolly place that we saw and talk about. Spring breakers getting drunk in the streets. The old Fort Lauderdale rooms were being rented by the hour. Business could not be attracted to the city. And matter of fact, there was no increase in taxes because there was a decrease in the assessed valuation. The city commission, just to keep the tax rate at the same amount of money to be raised, needed a tax increase. And the city commission ripped the bandage off of the scab and said, hey, too much of a good thing is a bad thing. Overindulgence, overabundance leads nothing but to destruction. And when I came here, the vision of this city commission was by 1994, we want to be recognized as the best city of its size. For the culture, for business, for corporate headquarters, for four- and five-star hotels, and as the destination place for families to come. We want to encourage our children to go to the beach. We don't want to be recognized as Fort Lauderdale with a Bacchanal spring break. So we don't want spring break. And that's, ladies and gentlemen, what the city commission said they wanted to do. They wanted to replace the bad with the good. So they came up with, in order to attract private capital to build five-star hotels, we needed to show the public interest with beautiful, beautiful destination public facilities. Whether it's building Riverwalk, which is what we started doing, starting right at Sailboat Bend, going all the way to Las Olas, cleaning up the beach, making it real pedestrian friendly instead of parking in the sand, and getting rid of spring break where you couldn't rent hotel rooms by the hour or have wet t-shirt contests or many other unspeakable contests. So you're the one that took all the fun away. Yeah, yeah. So this area right here where we're speaking in the 80s and 90s, the Hermeshy District, was wild and woolly. Fort Lauderdale had the highest crime rate per capita in the nation. Some of the worst deaths occurred right here, and it seems to be repeating itself. There was a bar right here that was infamous, that sold many things that you don't want to talk about at home, and that is what the Fort Lauderdale City Commission wanted to do, replace the bad with the good and have the good to get rid of the bad. But going through and having and to establish the special industry districts after what's built, beautiful places like this, the Museum of Science and Discovery, the beach and all of the aspects, Riverwalk, Esplanade Park, all of those public facilities did start bringing investment back into the city, and we actually saw for the first time an increment, an increase in taxes. What we're seeing today, unfortunately, is, hey, too much of a good thing has been a bad thing. We started the special interest districts at the request of the business community that came in that said they needed special entertainment so they could be more like Miami and open up later on at night. So instead of closing down at midnight, let us stay open until 1 o'clock. That's all we need is 1 o'clock, and we started that experiment. Well, it became so good we had to go to 2 o'clock. Well, I left in 1998, and now you see it's 4 o'clock. I don't know if it's going to stop, but I think I'd ask you and encourage you to reexamine. Do we really need this? Because we did it as an experiment in the 90s to continue to attract high-quality businesses, not just to continue to be the old Fort Lickerdale. And I encourage you to really evaluate not just special police or anything else, but is there really a need for this special entertainment district to attract and retain quality entertainment or quality business?

Thank you.

Tim Petrillo.

Thank you. Mayor and commissioners, thank you for looking at this initiative. I do agree with George and Alan and Dev. I think that something needs to change. As you may or may not know, I opened my first restaurant in 1997 on 2nd Street. It was a fine dining restaurant. I own property down there now, and I will not put a restaurant there. I'm opening two on Los Ols Boulevard, and I have them all over the city. And why is that? Because a restaurant does not want to locate in the chaos that's down on 2nd Street. We've been doing this for decades now. I can remember when George Grestha stepped in and tried to put guardrails on this district. Then I remember when Lee Feldman came in and tried to put more guardrails on this district and continued through Chris Logger Room, and now our new city manager is trying to do the same thing. What has happened is we tried to fix a broken system that cannot be fixed. This idea of a common control does not work. Common control means that I am in control of the Macquarie's district. I have no say in how Tin Roof operates. They're part of the district. Tin Roof operates. They're a good operator. I want to make sure that's for the record. But if they were not a good operator, I would have no control on enforcing them. And the city does not want to step in to be the person to be in the common control position. What's your recommendation that we do here? I recommend that the city has a draconious penalty system that they enforce. I mean, you know, it was amazing how quickly the COVID penalties came into effect and how they work quite well. I mean, Dean, you were witnessing that. Why don't we have this for this? You know, you get a warning. Okay. And you get one warning. You have to correct your behavior. You close until you correct your behavior. Then you get a significant penalty. Then you are out of penalties. You cannot – you can no longer operate and use the benefits of an entertainment district after strike three. That's how I feel. All right. Thank you.

All right. Thank you. Jenny Morihone, Steve Helmos, and I see Richard Mercedes here. Okay.

Thank you. Good evening, Mayor, city officials. I think it's interesting to lead with one sentence from the existing ordinance that says, these incentives are designed to promote redevelopment, which will eliminate deteriorating conditions in areas which are found to be detrimental to health, safety, and the welfare of the public. And what we've seen over the past 13 years is a full circle where these incentives have actually contributed to those exact conditions in the him or she area. We started working on this as a city probably 16, 17 years ago, visiting Ybor City to learn from them. Believe that. There was the last update to the him or she agreement, as we've all heard, in 2013. Go back to that. Look at the regulations and requirements that the establishments were supposed to provide for security for four police officers that patrolled the district for seven specific venues that were required to have their own detail. And all of those combined 11 officers to be paid for by the district. Look at the venues that were in the 2013 agreement that are still operating and are playing by the rules. Look at ones that have changed and are promoting 18 and over nights when clearly the agreement says it's a 21 and over district. If individual permits move forward for the him or she district because that needs a unique condition, then look at the best practices for bar management, require that the establishments go through that training, the life, safety, code compliance conditions that venues have. There are no more kitchens except for a handful from the venues down there. The SED ordinance talks about retail, restaurants, entertainment, the collection of those uses that make for a truly viable destination. Look at the media scan over the past five years. It only takes one person's child to not come home. And whose liability is that? You know, it was 2019, Commissioner Glassman, when Tim Petrillo and Jeff Johns and I and others in this room came and sat with you. Two venue operators who said something has to be done. And now is the time to really enforce accountability of the existing regulations and looking at the agreement that may be outdated and no longer existing, but that had some teeth. And let's start there. Thank you. Thank you.

Hello, Steve.

Thank you for giving me a couple of minutes. I'm Steve Halmos. My company is Halmos Holdings. I've been here since 1972, and this is the only the second time I've ever come in front of you to speak, which is really no big deal, except that I hope it's an indicator of how important I believe this issue to be. At one time, I had 500 employees here with my company, which, you know, I no longer have. And I have a partner in all the Stiles projects downtown. I'm partners with Tim Petrillo in all but one or two of the restaurants. And I've either owned directly or in partnership with others roughly 20 properties in downtown Fort Lauderdale. I was chair of the capital campaign that brought that built the mod, the facility, the Museum of Discovery and Science across the street. And I believe I was one of the first donors to this facility that we're sitting in. And I'm not telling you all that the big time you had to toot my own horn, though it kind of feels good to do that. I haven't done that in a while. But I think I'm also aging myself because I kind of like spring break because a few folks here may not know that before Tim Chavone owned the Parrot Lounge, I owned it. So I was kind of sorry to see Fort Lauderdale leave, frankly. Did you install the wood paneling, too? Well, we won't talk about those days. I'm a sophisticated businessman now, so I don't talk about those days. But anyhow, I was kind of sorry to see Fort Lauderdale end. Anyhow, as my friend George Hanbury said. All right, we need to get to the point here. Okay. We now know your resume. Yes. Yeah, enough of my resume. So as my friend George Hanbury said, you know, the Entertainment District was put in place to make this blighted area not blighted. But over the last few years, it has become blighted. And the two organizations that I'm talking about, the Performing Arts Center and the Museum of Discovery and Science, those are important to me. And they should be important to the city. And I would just encourage you. I don't need to tell you all the reasons. Other speakers, I think, have done it more eloquently than I can do it. But I ask you to enforce the existing code. But I really support the three strikes, you're out kind of approach that Tim said. Or going as far as George said and decertify the whole district. Even though that would impact some of the tenants that I have and properties that I own, I don't think anything good happens after 2 a.m. And I would just encourage you, whatever you do, to once and for all clamp down on it and clean this area up. Thanks. Great. Thank you.

Richard Mercedes. Anyone else wish to speak on this item? Okay.

Richard will be the last one. Thank you for letting us speak. Let me speak. The city has some rules when it comes to life safety. You don't have a fire extinguisher. You don't have a proper fire exit. You don't have proper things. The fire department, they shut you down. I learned that the hard way many, many years ago. There's no three strikes. If there's a fire safety issue, they throw you out. They shut you down. I would assume it's not really a fire safety issue. But when kids get served alcohol, that's a big no-no. And a couple of months ago, I sat in this audience and you all gave them an opportunity to clean up their act. You said, get some guards, do this, do that, so on and so forth. Here is an advertisement from Munchies. They're on 2nd Street. On April 10th, they're having an event from 10 a.m. to 4 a.m. It's some sort of a...

10 a.m.?

10 p.m. to 4 a.m. I'm sorry, did I say that wrong?

Yeah.

Okay. Yeah, those hours get me confused. Anything after 2 a.m. is not good. So from 10 p.m. to 4 a.m., all ages are invited. It's right here in black and white. You gave them an opportunity a couple of months ago to clean up their act. I think there was a stabbing or two or three. After that event, shut down the district. Get rid of it. You all have the power.

Can I see that?

You sure may.

Where does it say all?

All ages?

Yeah. Right there. Oh, I see. Down there. Okay. Okay. All right. Thank you. All right. Well, you signed. Did you sign up? All right. Why don't you...

At the bottom, it says all ages. Yeah. That's an Eventbrite. That's not advertised from Munchies. That's something that Eventbrite put there. So that's nothing in our flyer says all ages. If I may, just... I have 60 seconds.

Yeah.

That's why you're up there. Thank you. I'm sorry.

I got to stop you before. We'll give you your 60 seconds. So Eventbrite is where you usually partner up with Eventbrite to sell tickets to events that you're sponsoring. So that's a partner of yours.

It's a third-party seller of tickets, correct? Right. But you partner with them to sell tickets to your event? We partner with Eventbrite to sell tickets to our event. I haven't seen that before just now. I'm just saying, they're an agent of yours.

So whatever they put out there advertising your event, you own that.

Yes. Okay. But I've never seen this before. I'm just saying, you can't claim responsibility for what they put out there publishing your events.

You own whatever they publish.

I do agree. Okay. I do agree with that. And, you know, since the last meeting when we discussed this a couple months ago, we have moved our age from 18 and over to 19 and over because we heard some of the feedback. We are a restaurant bar within the district, and I just have a short speech I wrote just two minutes ago. A few months ago when we were discussing this, an agreement was made. We all agreed that the core problems on him or she weren't coming from people who go inside the businesses, patronize them, and spend money. They were coming from people bringing their own alcohol, carrying flasks, loitering outside, and causing issues on the street. Because of that, we agreed to a solution. Eliminate open containers and give it at least six months to see if the majority of the problems are resolved. The expectation was, let's have a trial period and see what happens. Spring break came, and it was a success. Not only according to the businesses, but according to the Fort Lauderdale Police Department themselves. They publicly bragged about how well things went on him or she in a social media post. So my question is, why are we discussing this again? If the policy we agreed to test is working, and if law enforcement is publicly saying things have improved, why are we talking about changing the rules again? Since open container was removed, we had a strong month. The street's been calmer, safer, and more manageable. But if the city keeps moving the goalposts, changing the rules before the test period is complete, then how are the businesses supposed to know what solutions actually work?

We're looking at this fight that took place right in front of your bar on March 23rd.

I can't. I'm sorry. I can't see that.

This is where we had kids, police officers.

We have some fights, Mayor.

Over a dozen police officers, hundreds of kids, some kids laying on the ground after a fight. And you're telling me that things are cleaned up? You're out of your mind. Don't even try to insult us. According to the police department, they said it was a big improvement. The arrests went down, the underage drinking went down. I'm telling you what this video showed. Sure, there's a video outside of Dicey's just a few days ago of people getting into a fight. We're talking about your establishment. Are you licensed to be in this special entertainment district?

During the last meeting, I believe three of the commissioners agreed that to enforce the code where many of the businesses didn't even know existed. I just asked you a question. Is that a yes or a no? No. No. Okay. All right. All I'm asking is that we honor the agreement. Are you open to 4 a.m.? We are currently open to 4 a.m., yes.

Even though you're not licensed to be in the special entertainment district?

Yes, because the commission in the last meeting agreed to allow it to happen for six months before we started enforcing that code. That's not what we agreed to do.

That's not what we agreed. We allowed those that had the license to continue to maintain their license.

Mayor, we did agree to allow everyone, whether they're licensed or not, to continue to... Okay. You may have a better recollection. Yeah. I asked for us to say, let's enforce those who... Well, look what happened. Right. I agree. I'm with you, Mayor. I'm with you. Yeah. So it's just a mess now.

All right.

I actually thought we agreed not to change the hours, so apparently we have a different idea of what we agreed to. Yeah.

Okay. And pretty easy to chat GPT something, to accuse us of something.

All right. All right.

Vice Mayor and Mayor... Wait. Have you completed your comments?

I'm done. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you.

Vice Mayor, my understanding from our last meeting was no change whatsoever to the operating hours as they are operating. Was that yours? You know what? We went back and forth on so many different iterations.

Right. I think what I was focused on, and you may very well be right, I was thinking in terms of we don't need to change the hours from 4 back to an earlier time until we had an opportunity to revisit this in a couple of months and see how it was working out. That's what we agreed to. I wasn't even thinking.

Right.

I can candidly tell you I wasn't even thinking about those who were operating outside of the limits of the special entertainment district rules.

So candidly, I will tell you I wasn't even thinking with respect to that.

Right.

Right. I wasn't speaking to that for or again. So my confusion on that side.

Yep. No, thanks. Appreciate it.

All right. So city manager? City manager? What are you asking for? You got that, Raquel?

Well, we were given a deadline of 90 days to come back to the commission. We're, we are ahead of that deadline. So the purpose of this conference item is to get your feedback and direction so that by the next meeting we can propose something more tangible. Okay. So let's pull, let's, let's, let's, let's, all right, let's, I'm sorry.

I thought we met January 6th. No, that was another meeting. Isn't it 90 days? No. Well, anyway, um, January 20th. So who, who, who, who, all right, we'll start with, uh, start with district one. Commissioner Herbst, vice mayor. Do you have any comments you'd like to make?

Yes, I do. Actually, I, I find myself rather much, not surprisingly, in agreement with Dr. Hanbury. You know, I, I used to talk with, uh, again, not, I said, not surprisingly, uh, you know, close the button down, close the button down. Well, you know, I used to, I used to sit and, and talk with, uh, with mayor Dressler, uh, on many, many occasions. He and I used to go to lunch over, um, um, uh, chuck and dive, uh, great oysters on Wednesdays. Um, and, and we would talk about this. We would talk about, you know, him beginning this back in the eighties and, and Bob Cox, you know, carrying it forward after that. And, uh, you know, great, great historian of city history. And, you know, as, as Dr. Hanbury points out, our reputation of, of Fort Lickerdale versus what we were trying to accomplish back then. And this was the days before I got to the city. I got here in 06. But, you know, the goal of the city back then was to get rid of the, you know, 12 college kids in a motel. And there was a hotel along the beach. And, and that's why the CRA acquired, what was it? The old Holiday Inn over there, which is now the, the, the, the Los Olos Oceanside Park. Um, using CRA dollars to buy that. Um, so the city made a concerted effort as you put it. And, and I think I like your word, you know, to, to move to an economy driven by culture, not by, you know, drinking oriented activities. And nothing wrong with drinking. I'm, I'm, I'm the first person to go out and enjoy a glass of red wine and, and, uh, and happy to do it. Um, but the, the idea that, that our, our nightlife revolves around something other than getting drunk and wasted and, and puking into the bushes, I think is a direction we've been trying to move Fort Lauderdale in for quite a long period of time. And I will tell you, mayor, and please don't, this is not an insult to you, but I was actually very dismayed at the level of enthusiasm that you displayed for bringing spring break back to the city.

I, I cringed inside when you said spring break is back because I think we were going in the wrong direction, candidly. I don't want Fort Lauderdale to be the spring break city. Kids are going to come here anyway, no matter what we do, I get that. But, you know, when we're talking about a St. Regis and, and hotels of that caliber, when we're talking about what Suntex has done with the Las Olas Marina, when we've got 300 foot yachts that are docking here, we're really trying to promote ourselves as the yachting capital of the world. I think those things are incompatible with bringing the spring break capital of the world. I think we can't be both at the same time. With what they're trying to do with Bahiamar, all of these things that we're seeing with Pier 66, with what Tavistock is doing. I think the direction that Fort Lauderdale has moved in, in the last 20 years is inconsistent with this continuing image of us as a spring break destination. And I would love us as a city to shake that off and continue to move forward as a cultural destination for people. We promote the museums. You know, there are things that we really need to be talking about. One of the things that concerns me is folks are relocating down here from California, from New York, from other high tax places, and they're bringing businesses down with them. And they're not coming to Fort Lauderdale. They're going to, they're going to West Palm and they're going to Miami and they're passing Fort Lauderdale by. And I think one of the reasons that's happening is this reputation that we have. And I think we need to continue to shake that off and present ourselves to the world with our best foot forward. And what we're seeing right now, these images that you were just showing, Mayor, I think speak volumes to why Ken Griffin is in Miami and not here. And why 11 hedge funds have moved to South Florida and they're not here.

Well, I, I, I, I, that's a whole other debate. No, but I, but I think it's part of. Ken Griffin came to Miami well during the heyday of spring break in Miami Beach. So one had nothing to do with the other.

No, but I, I think, I think it's about our image, Mayor. And, and, and all of this comes back to what our image is. And I think our image, again, as, as, as, as, as the gentleman in front of me said, our image should be focused on culture. And I don't think what we're seeing here is culture. So I'd love to see us move in that direction. I think that should be our, our North star is, is what drives us to, to that. I think what we've seen over here with Huizenga Park is, is moving in that direction. I think we have to continue advancing in a direction that cleans up our city, not one that brings it down. Okay. So those are my thoughts. All right. Commissioner Beasley Pittman.

Yes. Um, the conversation on decertification, um, Ellen, I believe you had stated, um, a different ordinance, if I'm not misquoting what you said, but with the decertification, if we could, um, talk about that a little bit, what it looks like and how that would, um, in a sense, remove the chemistry from the other districts. What does that look like and would that put us in a position where we're moving forward? Because with what we're hearing, what we're seeing that is going on in Hemisphere, there hasn't been any change. So if we go ahead and remove that certification, what does the enforcement looks like? What, what is that new look for Hemisphere?

Well, first of all, it would be tough to, it would be tough to go back if you, if you no longer had a special entertainment district, because one of the components of a special entertainment district was to eliminate the distance between bars. So if you already have businesses in place, you can't tell them they can't be in business anymore. So that would be a challenge.

I think you can do that through, I think we could do that legally through ordinances.

And I think we could. I don't know the answer to that question. I think we could. We'll have to have that conversation with our city attorney.

Well, that's the direction I think we need to.

So who do you tell, who do you tell us to leave? I mean, we have four bars in a row next to each other. Who has to leave? No, what I'm saying is I believe that you can legislate the fact that they can still keep that, quote, privilege of, or that ability to be right next to each other if you decertify. In other words, it will take a little bit of work and it will take a couple of readings. But I believe that you can still, if we, well, I'll just wait till I speak because I don't want to interrupt everybody. But, yes, that's the direction I want us to look at.

And maybe even now with city attorney, maybe we can get some type of definition of what that may look like with the decertification. But I do believe that there is an opportunity where we can craft an opportunity for those who are there to, in a sense, of a grandfathering process, but no one who comes in after a certain date, it does not apply to them. And that way we would also give who's there an opportunity to continue doing business, but at the level that's required under the new ordinance. But decertification is what I want to talk about.

Okay. All right, Chair District, both the entertainment districts are in your district. Tell us a little bit about your thoughts.

What's your community saying? So, thank you. I have attended many meetings over the years. I've heard a lot of input, and I just want to thank everyone for all of that input. And I've been listening for a while now. And then after the March 30th meeting that we did just have, I thought about it a lot, still spoke to people. So, what I'm going to actually recommend, and I think it's the way that we need to go now. First of all, I do not want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. I do not want to involve the other four districts. I think we need to separate the chemistry district and not make any of those recommendations law for the other four districts. So, immediately, I don't want to say to the other four districts, you're involved in this. I don't want to make them go through the extra step of that permitting process. I don't want them to have to do that. I just want to leave them alone. I want to focus on him or she. I believe that we have to decertify the district. I think we have to decertify the district, but still give all of the businesses the ability to show that they can, that they can operate legally and responsibly and with accountability. That's not happening now, and I want to make sure that what we say is we are going to take that step of decertification, but we are still going to allow the businesses to go through that individual permit process that we just learned about in that presentation and that we also talked about at the March 30th meeting. Because I think that if we do that, and then if we stress the enforcement aspect that we've been listening to all afternoon, I think we can get there. If there's a business that's not going to comply, if there's a business that is just having difficulty, then that's the end. They will not have those privileges to continue operating as if they are in the SED. I also think that we should take a look at age restrictions. I think we should take a look at age restrictions that are done in other cities in our state, whether that's at 10 p.m. or 11 p.m., whether it's 21, whatever that age restriction, I think we have to look at that. I don't think it does us any good to have, and especially because it's in violation of the agreements that everyone supposedly signed years ago, I don't think it does any good for us to allow 18 years old all night till 4 a.m. So I'd like us to also look at that. So those would be my recommendations in the short term. I think we have to be so strong when it comes to penalties, when it comes to enforcement. But I do think that we're past the point now of just more tweaking, more taking another look. We're just past that point. I think that we have to realize that what's that expression, the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over and over and over and expecting a different outcome. I think we're not going to have that different outcome. But, again, I want to be respectful of the businesses that are playing by the rules, and I want them to understand that decertification is not a penalty in and of itself. It can be if you do not live up to your responsibility and you're not accountable for what's happening. We had good suggestions at that March 30th meeting. Again, the individual businesses should step it up with regards to their security, with regards to even have someone on the sidewalk so that we are controlling sidewalks in front of each of these individual businesses. We have to lay out really specific rules like that so that we can begin to clean this up. I want to be able to hear someone like a Tim Petrillo say, you know what, I'm going to open up a business again. I'm going to open up a restaurant again. I mean, I remember very fondly, you know, Himishi Bar and Grill, those days where people would go and they would eat and then they would come to the theater. I also remember those rooms by the hour. That's a whole other story. But that's okay. I could tell you a few stories from spring break back in my day, but that's okay. We'll talk offline if anyone wants to hear some really good hair-raising stories. I do have a few. But all seriousness. I just think that we need to get serious about this. We need to go in a different direction, and we need to show that we're serious. So I believe that we should ask city attorney to come back to us with a first reading of decertification for Himishi. We have all of the other four districts alone. Let's just focus on that. And then also at the same time, craft those rules, craft those regulations so that the businesses that are there can operate right next to each other. In other words, everything that you think that might not be able to happen because of decertification, I believe that we can craft that legislation so they are going to be given the opportunity to succeed. I want everyone to have the opportunity to succeed, but we have to play by different rules.

That's all.

Thanks. Commissioner Sorensen. Great. Thanks. So the city attorney's process for decertification, which I support, so it would decertify the Himishi Special Entertainment District. Is that right? And it's two readings coming to us. I just want to make sure I'm correct.

I'm understanding the intent of the commission. It would be to decertify that particular SED, and to do that, we'd need to pass an ordinance, obviously, to readings. In doing so, in the first hearing, you would have to establish the criteria that would allow for the decertification. We believe there's ample evidence to do that.

Okay.

And then there would be, in parallel to that, I'm assuming, we would begin creating some of what's suggested here, which is a district-based accountability model?

No, rather an individual establishment-based accountability model, Commissioner, where permits would be issued to each establishment with all of these criteria, much of what you're asking for tonight, so it could be individually enforced and individually accountable, would allow for the same benefits of an SED, but give you the opportunity really to enforce it.

Great. And so what would happen from the point when the Special Entertainment District in Hemerslee is decertified to the new kind of stipulations going into effect?

So we would probably recommend that they dovetail, that the certification ceases at the point in time that the permits are issued for those entities in that geographic area.

Okay, and so during this decertification process, then individual businesses would apply for a permit. Correct. Is that right?

Correct.

They'd apply for a permit, and the permit would stipulate all of the kind of stipulations that we would like as a commission. And then that would be an annual permit renewal process?

Yes.

In addition to all the penalties if they did not follow the stipulations in the permit.

Correct.

Is that right? Okay. For the specific components of what is required to gain and sustain a permit, do we need further discussion as a commission to indicate what those would be? Because we want these things going concurrently, the decertification process and the new permitting process, right?

Right. So are you asking what would be the criteria for the permit? Correct, and for the sustaining of the renewal. And all of those things that we would flesh out, many of the things that you've already mentioned has been contemplated by staff anyway, all the security, particular hours, all of that stuff, and the ability to apply for it, but to have to meet the criteria. We would lay out all that criteria for you in the proposed ordinance.

Yeah, including the revocation as well.

Yes, so, Commissioner, yes, that will take some thinking, and I think that might actually be the most important part of this. I agree. What are the levels of penalties? How do we enforce it? That's going to take some discussion on your part, and I think, obviously, with staff and perhaps with the chief as well.

Right. And, Mayor, I just...

I think the model that Tim Petrill suggested, that we replicate what we did during COVID, makes a lot of sense, where we gave a warning, and then if you don't comply, then, you know, we close you down until you do comply. Right. I mean, you have to put some teeth into this. I agree, Mayor. I'm with you.

And, Mayor, I'd like to have the city manager or the city commission really to have ability to engage and enforce with good discretion. So, yes. So, I think that makes sense. City manager, is that...

Sure.

So, have you given enough direction, then?

Yes. I just want to add that in advance of the item coming forward, we could share a letter to the commission outlining what we are proposing and give you an opportunity to, you know, gather any feedback that you might want to gather from the business community or otherwise so that it's not hitting you cold on a first reading. Okay. Right.

Makes sense. Yeah, I like that. Okay. All right. You have something else? Yes, go ahead.

My question, how quickly will we see that? Are we putting a time to it or just the process?

Sometime before the break. Is that possible?

Yes, Mayor.

Okay. All right. Any further comments or questions on this item? All right. So, my suggestion is that we take a break now and begin our evening meeting at 630. We can resume our discussion regarding the charter amendments after the evening meeting, assuming we still want to go forward, because I know there was a question as to whether or not we should put that out to the public first before we as a commission making a decision. So, this meeting is now concluded, and then we'll resume our evening meeting at 630.

Let's see.

Let's see.

I've got to make it. Let's see. Okay.