Good evening, everybody, and welcome to the City Commission meeting this March 18th, 2025. Thank you all for being here tonight. So for those of you who are here for the first time, welcome, and we appreciate your taking time out of your evening to participate in tonight's activities. We have a format that we follow each time. We begin our meetings with a Pledge of Allegiance, and then we have a moment of silence, and then we get to our business. And as part of our business, we have presentations. We have a few presentations tonight recognizing individuals, groups, or events that have taken place or will take place here in our city. And so those will be presented by various members of the commission, and then after that we get on with the regular business. So if I could ask you all to please join me and Danico Cepeda. Where's Danico? Where's Danico? Right there. Okay. Go to school. North Broward Christian. Okay. Well, welcome. So please lead us in the pledge. I pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic of which we stand, one nation, under God, and invisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Please be seated. We have a little gift for you. Thank you. And I think we want to take a picture. Pam, do you want to take? Pam wants to join us. At this time, I'd like you all to please join me in a moment of silence. Thank you. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. Commissioner Herbst is absent. Vice Mayor Glassman? Here. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Here. Commissioner Sorensen? Here. Mayor Trentos? Here. We have one walk-on tonight. It's a motion for discussion. City Commission requests for review regarding flowing waters, 300 East Oakland Park Boulevard. No other agenda items. So I need to ask you to move to approve the minutes and the agenda as amended. Do I hear a motion? Moved. Second. Moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Mayor Trentos? Yes, and so the minutes and the agenda have been approved as amended. So now we begin our presentations. Our first presentation is with regard to the Council of Fort Lauderdale Civic Association's Introduction of New Leadership and Board Members. And I asked Mary Pelequin if you could please step forward. Where are you, Mary? There you are. Please step forward. And she's the former president of the council. And who is going to do the presentation? Where's Mr. Brown? There you are. Come on up. Mayor, with your permission, I'd like to ask our former board members and the newly elected board that is in attendance tonight to please join me. Sure. Would you all like to join Mr. Brown? I'm sure a lot of familiar faces to the commission. So for those of you who are unfamiliar with what the council is, the council is the coming together of all the presidents of the civic associations that represent individual neighborhoods in our city. And the council meets about once a month, right? Correct. That's right. And you discuss issues that come before the city and try to seek some sort of consensus in bringing the community forward. And so tonight we're recognizing Mary Pelequin as being the former chair of the council and and Mr. Bill Brown, who's from the Central Beach area, who will now be the new president. So, Mr. Brown, the floor is yours. Thank you, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners. As the mayor said, Bill Brown, president of Central Beach, but the newly elected president of the Council of Civic Association with with, first of all, thank you. And yes, there was no money in the budget for a pay raise. I would like to extend a great gratitude to Mary Pelequin, who is the past president. Several of the board members behind me, the past and previous, have worked with her. She's from the Coral Ridge area. She took the last two years, the council, up to a higher level. So I'm going to have a big pair of stiletto heels to follow. That would be interesting. I only said that just to joke. I'd like to see you balance on that. Yeah, really. You and me both. So, Mary, thank you. And you're not going to go far. You're going to be a emeritus to our board. And I will be leaning on you for guidance. Also, I have a commitment not only to my board members, but all neighborhood presidents. As you said, it's got to be a consensus building. And, you know, at the end of the day, trying to get 50-plus neighborhood associations to agree on everything, I know it's impossible, but the closest we reach consensus and unification on issues that are for the betterment of the city and community as a whole. That's the goal of not only mine, but the entire team. I'm only one person on the board, and the board is a team. And that's always been my process, one team, one mission. And that's going to continue with this position. So with that, I'd like to first introduce, who's not here with us, J.J. Rader, Dr. Rader, who's the first vice president. Michael Albetta is the second. Many of you know. Marilyn Mono, who's chair of the committee. She was unable to be with us tonight. Carlos Lang, who's the treasurer for Carlos, lives in District 4, but he's on shift at the fire department in Miami Beach. I have Frankie Lane, who's a District 3 representative. Suzanne Bernstein, who is the recording secretary. Melinda Bowker, who, as many of you know, she just completed the selection committee chair for the new city manager, and who did a fabulous job and represented this community well in that selection process. We have Jim Concanon, and then our historian, long-time resident, who not only knows more history about the council, but also history of the city, and that's Dennis Hummer. So, with that, did I miss anyone? No, thank you. Okay. So, thank you, and Mary, again, thank you, and the new board, and we look forward to working collaboratively with this commission. Great. Thank you. Congratulations. Thank you all for your dedication and sacrifice for our city. We really appreciate it. Bill, I've got a pair of stilettos for you, okay? I have a pair of stilettos for you. Yeah. Okay, right. All right. For our next presentation, I'd like to invite our chief education officer, Susan Leon, who will recognize Stranahan High. Thank you, Mayor. Good evening. On behalf of the city manager's office, this evening, we are excited to announce and present student recognitions tonight for students that attend school and the Stranahan Innovation Zone. This student recognition is based on the eight essential core character traits as identified by Broward County Public Schools and the School Board of Broward County. The character traits are cooperation, responsibility, citizenship, kindness, respect, honesty, self-control, and tolerance. So, at this time, I'd like to ask Marco Lobo Santos from North Fork Elementary School to please come up. Marco is an amazing student. He is very respectful to his adults and very hardworking. He shows high academic achievement by having a perfect score on the state assessment test last year and is working to do that again. He is a model student. Congratulations on behalf of the city of Fort Lauderdale. Qualifies him to be mayor. At this time, I'd like to call up Jeffrey Donis, fifth grader from Riverland Elementary School. Jeffrey demonstrates all the qualities of a strong and positive individual, both as a person, as a student, as well. As a leader, he motivates and inspires his peers. He consistently puts forth effort to do his best and speaks to his commitment and works hard. He's a great example of the essential character traits. Congratulations, Jeffrey. At this time, I'd like to call up Rose Finnea from Stephen Foster Elementary School. Rose's teacher said that she is one of the kindest students they have ever met. She has so much empathy for all the individuals and goes out of the way to make sure her classmates and friends feel cared about. She also takes care of animals and nature and tries to make sure they have what they need to be successful. So she feels deeply and brings gifts and drawings to her friends and is an amazing friend and student. Congratulations, Ruth. Okay, from New River Middle School, please welcome Pilar Reverte, eighth grader. Each school has students that stand out not just for their academics, but for their dedication as well and making a meaningful impact. Pilar is one of those such students. She excels in academics, leadership, and service. She is in three honor-level classes at the middle school level, and she is on the principal's honor roll and part of National Junior Honor Society. She also launched a recycling program and did a fundraiser for an animal shelter. In addition to that, she is very musical, having scored a superior solo and is part of the honors band. That is very impressive. She is in many other clubs and activities as well and is an outstanding scholar, musician, and advocate for her school. So congratulations to Pilar. From Siegel Alternative High School, I would like to welcome up front Janiah James, 12th grader. Janiah has made a positive impact at her school and with her peers. She is very dependable and task-oriented and is currently serving as a recording secretary for the Student Government Association at her school. That is a very busy position, and she is also active in the senior class. She is one of the top students academically and behaviorally, and Siegel could be any more proud than to honor her tonight at this event. Congratulations. From Sheridan Technical College and Technical High School, I welcome Samantha Cendrotti, 12th grader. Samantha was voted unanimously by her teachers to be nominated for this recognition. She has shown a passion for reaching her goals with an academic GPA of a 4.5. She is in dual enrollment at the Technical College in building trades and design and enrolled in Berry University at night to become certified as an EMT by the end of the school year. She has a passion for helping people and wishes to be a firefighter by the age of 20. Where are you, Chief, going? Her abilities are limitless, and we congratulate her. Congratulations, Samantha. At this time, I'd like to bring up Nandita Arjun from Stranahan High School. Nandita is the embodiment of an exquisite character and is the young lady of extraordinary talent with unprecedented academic excellence. She currently maintains a GPA of 5.31. She is number one in her senior class and is a consummate leader who consistently demonstrates high energy and leadership in all roles she takes. That is evidenced by her service hours being 528 hours of service through volunteerism at the Fort Lauderdale Teen Summit, the Annual Harvest Drive, New Alpha Theta, Key Club, and many others. Congratulations to Nandita. Thank you so much. Congratulations, everyone. Yeah, we should come. One or more of those kids will be sitting up here someday, right? Well, you are term limited out, man. Yeah. You are term limited out. Thank you for reminding me. Okay. Junior Robinson. She's Neighborhood Support Assistant Manager. She's going to help tonight in recognizing Neighbor Support Night sponsors. Hello, Junior. Press the button at the bottom. Okay. There you go. You're good. Mayor Commission, Junia Gentilis-Robinson, Acting Manager, Neighbor Support. Neighbor Support Night was held on Thursday, February 13th. We would like to thank everyone who attended this community engagement event. Neighbor Support Night is an opportunity where staff showcase the wide range of city services to our diverse community in the city of Fort Lauderdale. The success of Neighbor Support Night could not be possible without the continued partnership of our local sponsors. I'm here this evening to recognize our sponsors who donated their time, who donated sample bites from their restaurants, who donated sponsorship prizes and other in-kind contributions. I would like to take this time to acknowledge each sponsor who contributed to this event. As I call your name, I ask you to please join me at the podium or up front to be acknowledged. And I'm asking everyone to just hold the applause for at the end. Council of Fort Lauderdale Civic Association. Newly elected president, Bill Brown, Mary Pelequin, Michael Albetta, Susie Bernstein, Melinda Bowker, Frankie Lane, Steve Gannon, James Labrie, and Jim Concanon. If you could please join me at the podium. Broward Center for the Performing Arts, Shelley Bradshaw, Vice President of Operations. Applause, applause. Florida Panthers, I'm not sure if they're here. Matthew Smith, Community Relations Director, and Brooke Faye, Community Relations Coordinator. Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport, Rufus James, he's going to wave, he's here. Okay, Rufus James is joining. YMCA of South Florida, L.A. Lee Mizell Community Center, Cheryl Woods, President and Chief Executive Officer. Fogo de Chau, Juliana Droley, Sales Manager. Ichimora, Asian Fusion, I'm not sure if there's anyone here. Okay. Pumarella, Pizzeria, Larry Miller. Zona Fresca, Sarah Freemer, Catering Director. Lied Kitchen and Bath, Bill and Joe Feinberg. Thank you. The Fort, Richard Campello, Co-Founder. Sprit, Holly Rasheen, Government Relations Director, and Corey Flowers, Project Manager. Waste Management, Andres Limon Cruz, Government Affairs Manager. Not in attendance, but I would like for them to be acknowledged. Bahia Mar, Fort Lauderdale Beach, Jet's Pizza, Jimmy John's Store 2661 Sistrunk, Museum of Discovery and Science, Pelican Grand Beach Resort, Riverside Hotel, and Mondo's Cafe. Please help me acknowledge and thank our sponsors for Neighbor Support Night 2025. So we're going to come here. We'll do whatever you decide. You want to stand up? Okay, okay. That's fine. That's fine. How are you? Congratulations. We can stand up. You want to stand up? Come and stand up. Stand up. Let's stand up. Yeah. Yes. I can hear my voice. Got a whistle? Okay. Smile, everybody. Bill, turn around. Bill, turn around. Thank you. Thank you. Things going well? 600 members are growing. 600. That's good. Sit down and keep quiet. All right. This year's Neighbor Support Night theme was Sweet Home FTL. Every year, departments put forth a lot of effort in displaying creative table displays. This year, we had secret judges that judged the tables in three categories. Best department presentation, engagement with the community, and education of city services. Every year, departments do an excellent job to display creatively, but there is only one winner. And this year, that winner is Department of Service, Development Services Department, DSD. Please come and join me and win your award. And the Oscar goes to? It's from the, I'm just kidding. Wow. You brought, you brought everybody with you, huh, Al? Okay. Oh, do I have to stand up again? Yes. Fun fact, DSD has won this award four times in a row. This is their fifth time winning. Are you finished, Junior? Yeah. Okay. Next, I'd like to invite our dear Vice Mayor Glassman, who's going to present a proclamation to the Fort Lauderdale High School Flying L's Drumline Day folks. Where are you all? There you are. Thank you, Vice Mayor. And with the folks from the flying, come on, why don't you come up? Mayor, I think you have the list of the names. Yes, I'm going to announce the people. Please call Director Alejandro Navarro, Assistant Principal Edward Rodriguez, Jr., and the Drumline members. If you could please join the Vice Mayor at the podium, that would be very helpful. Bravo. It's all yours, Vice Mayor. Thank you, Mayor. Proud moment for this incredible high school in District 2. We're very proud of everything that they do. I'm going to read a proclamation from the Office of the Mayor, City of Fort Lauderdale. Well, this is in recognition of Fort Lauderdale High School Flying L's Drumline. If you came to Neighborhood Support Night, you saw the amazing group that this was. Incredible. I will say my video has really gone viral, marching behind them, and I just want to throw that out there. If you want to check it out on Facebook, just throw that out there. Whereas the Fort Lauderdale High School band program has a rich and esteemed history within the city of Fort Lauderdale, consistently representing the school and the city with excellence in musical performance and community engagement. And whereas the Fort Lauderdale High School marching band, known as, quote, the Sound of the South, unquote, has earned numerous superior ratings in music performance assessments at district and state levels, solidifying its reputation as a premier musical ensemble. And whereas the Fort Lauderdale High School band has proudly showcased its talents at numerous significant city and community events, including the King Holiday Celebration and Parade, the North Lauderdale Holiday Parade, the St. Patrick's Day Parade and Festival, town hall meetings and prestigious gatherings, such as the Broward Education Foundation Hall of Fame Awards Breakfast, and Fort Lauderdale's annual Neighbor Support Night. The band's drum line frequently serves as an exciting highlight, consistently bringing vibrancy, pride, and musical distinction to each occasion. And whereas the Fort Lauderdale High School drum line has demonstrated outstanding musical prowess by consistently placing in the top three at competitions and earning awards for best bass line, best quint line, and best cymbals over the past five years. And whereas the Fort Lauderdale High School marching band, composed of more than 100 enthusiastic students, including 18 talented drum line members, demonstrates exceptional drive by diligently practicing up to four days each week and continually striving for excellence and improvement. And whereas the Fort Lauderdale High School Flying L's drum line consistently brings unmatched energy, thrilling audiences, thrilling audiences, and igniting school spirit with electrifying performances that inspire peers, uplift the community, and showcase an extraordinary commitment to excellence. Now, therefore, we, as City Commissioners of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, do hereby proclaim March 18, 2025, as Fort Lauderdale Flying L's Drumline Day in the City of Fort Lauderdale, and encourage our neighbors to join us in commending the Flying L's Drumline for their outstanding performance at Neighbor Support Night, and in expressing a sincere appreciation for their continued efforts to uplift our community through music. Dated this the 18th day of March, 2025, and signed by our mayor, the Honorable Dean J. Trentalas. Congratulations. Congratulations. Who would like to say a few words? Can't you hear me? Someone want to say a few words? Someone. Someone. Come on. Come on. A few words. Come on. Go ahead. You're the boss. I don't know. Hi. My name is Eddie Rodriguez. I'm the assistant principal. I don't know how many of our neighbors would actually agree to make us, to give us our day based on the sound that we make every day during practices. But we are honored, and we thank the mayor and the commissioners for this, and we're proud to be part of the city, and we look forward to continuing on. So thank you so much. Bravo. That was out of the picture. Here? Here? Could you all move over? Wait, wait. Move over so you're all in front of the screen? Yes. Yes. Thank you, ma'am. Mr. Navarro, Mr. Rodriguez, thank you for your commitment to our students here at Fort Lauderdale High. Thank you so much. Okay. Our last presentation is my honor to present. I'd like to invite our finance director, Linda Short, and to accept a proclamation and recognition of Government Finance Professionals Week. These are the people that tell us how to spend our money. Yes. Well, come over here. So from the office of the mayor of the city of Fort Lauderdale, this proclamation and recognition of – calm down, calm down – in recognition of Government Finance Professionals Week. So whereas the Florida Government Finance Officers Association, FGFOA – say that twice – is a professional association founded in 1937 that serves more than 3,300 professionals from state, county, and municipal governments, educational institutions, special districts, and private firms, whereas the FGFOA is dedicated to providing professional resources through education, networking, leadership, and informational opportunities. Government Finance Professionals Week, sponsored by the FGFOA and its member governmental organizations, is a week-long series of activities aimed at recognizing Government Finance Professionals and the vital services they provide to our state and community. During this week, Government Finance Professionals throughout the state of Florida will be acknowledged for their hard work, dedication, and leadership. The city of Fort Lauderdale proudly recognizes the exceptional dedication, expertise, and integrity of its finance team – did you write this? Whose commitment to fiscal responsibility, transparency, and accountability ensures the effective stewardship of public resources and strengthens this trust of our community and has made Fort Lauderdale the better place that it is. I added that. Now, therefore, we as the city commissioners of the city of Fort Lauderdale do hereby proclaim March 17th through 21, 2025 as Government Finance Professionals Week here in the city of Fort Lauderdale dated March 4th, 2025. Signed by myself, Mayor Dean Trantalis. Congratulations. Would you like to say a few words? Put on my glasses. Yeah. And they're single space. And they're single space. I'm sorry. Here comes the music. No. Okay. I very rarely get to talk at events, and I could not be more proud than to be here tonight. So thank you very much, Honorable Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Commissioners. I'm truly honored and humbled to be standing here in front of you today to accept this proclamation as we celebrate Government Finance Officers Week. This week is not just time to reflect on the important work we do, but it's also an opportunity to recognize the collective impact that we have in ensuring fiscal responsibility, transparency, and accountability in public sector. Yes. The Government Finance Officers, as Government Finance Officers, we play a critical role in managing taxpayers' dollars, developing budgets, maintaining financial systems, and ultimately allowing our city to thrive. Our work is often behind the scenes, but the results of our efforts are felt by every citizen that we serve. Whether it's finding, helping to fund critical services, investing in infrastructure, or just supporting the essential services that we offer, we are stewards of public funds, and that is a responsibility that we carry both with pride and commitment. This fiscal year, let's give some numbers here. This fiscal year, a general fund's budget exceeded $480 million. We support things like public safety, transportation, parks and rec, and community development. The city continues to invest in projects that enhance the quality of life for our neighbors, including ongoing efforts to modernize our infrastructure, improvements on our water and sewer system, and expanding the stormwater management system that we have. In 2024, the rating agencies reaffirmed the city's AAA rating for our general obligation bonds and a AA rating for our other bonds. This is a testament to the strong financial management and the commitment to financial stability. This is no small feat, and it demonstrates the hard work of all those behind me in ensuring that Fort Lauderdale remains well-managed and fiscally sound. So let's really talk about the numbers right now. Okay. In fiscal year 2024, the finance department managed an investment portfolio of $1.4 billion and a debt portfolio of $1.5 billion. We processed $39,000 invoices for $658 million. We issued bills for over 54,000 active customers in our water and sewer system. We processed biweekly payroll for 3,000 active employees on a pay period basis of almost $21 million. We processed 29,000 cash receipts for money coming into the city that we have to post into the system, purchased over $1 billion in assets or things for the city, and issued almost 4,300 purchase orders, and reconciled 75,000 banking transactions that come through from the activities that we do every day. You know, this week is a testament to the hard work, dedication, and expertise of the finance staff right here. We are the unsung heroes who keeps the government running smoothly, even when there's pressure and all the challenges are high. We help to ensure that the resources are allocated and that our city can rely on the stability and integrity of the system that we manage. So, thank you. I would like to take the opportunity to thank my colleagues, both past and present, for their support, their guidance, and collaboration. I also want to extend the gratitude to the families of the finance folks here. They understand the demands of our profession and continue to support us while we work long hours. As we celebrate this week, let's not only acknowledge the achievements, but let's look forward to the work ahead. It is a rapidly changing world, and our roles are evolving, and we must be adaptable, innovative, and forward-thinking. You know, our continued commitment to the profession will ensure excellence and make sure that we're ready to meet the challenges of tomorrow. So, thank you again for this incredible honor. Thank you, everybody. Okay, that concludes our presentations for tonight. Good night, everybody. No, I'm just kidding. Right? So, now we proceed with our regular meeting. And to begin that, I would now ask each member of the commission who, if they have any items from the consent agenda that they would like to pull. If you are here, I have got no one who signed up to speak tonight on anything. So, if there's anyone who wishes to speak on any of these consent agenda items, you needed to have signed up. In the meantime, I'll ask each member of the commission, if there's an item they'd like to pull, to review and discuss separately. Otherwise, we'll vote on all of them together. So, Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? None. None. Thank you. Vice Mayor? None. Commissioner Sorensen? None. None. So, someone please move to approve the consent agenda items? So moved. Second. It's been moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Mayor Trentals? Yes. So, all the consent agenda items have now been approved. If you are here on any of those items, you should know that your item has been approved. You're welcome to stay for the rest of the meeting, or you're welcome to get back to your life. So, let's continue with M1, Motion Approving Agreements for Purchase of Plan Review and Inspection Services, CAP Government, Inc., and Calvin Giordano and Associates. Do I hear a motion? Move. Do I hear a second? Second. It's been moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Mayor Trentals? Yes. M1 is now approved. M2, Motion Approving a Construction Agreement for Mills Pond Park Restrooms. Yes. Finally. Yes. Don't have to go in the woods. Anyway. You're telling everybody what you do. I'm sorry. Do I hear a motion to approve? So moved. Second. May I just ask a question of Steph on this one? Sure. Thank you so much. And I don't know who, would that be Carl? Thank you. So, Carl, I just did a little bit of math here, and I'm hoping you can explain to me because it does seem a little high. But if you look at the total cost of the $2,521,976.90, and you divide it by the number of restrooms. Well, it actually comes out, correct me if I'm wrong, maybe the auditor can help me with that because that's more his thing than my thing. But it's almost like $1,300. Is it $1,300 a square foot for all of this work? It seems very high to me for this type of work. Help me understand that or how this was done or what the competition was in terms of the bidding. I know that. I see the different companies. But is this a high amount for what we're getting? So, good afternoon or good evening, Commissioner. Carl Williams, Parks and Recreation Director. So, to answer your question, it does come a little high, but as part of this process, there was an elevation that had to be done to the site, which is now a requirement for the site that increases that amount. So, what you see is not just the restrooms and concession. It's also to bring that site area up to elevation levels. Okay, good. No, thank you for that because I don't know if I read that, but that would help explain it. It just – It explains part of it. Part of it. It's just a high number for what we're actually seeing in the scope of services, but that's just my opinion. Yes, sir. And also, keep in mind that when we originally had this project, that included the full scope. And so, we – that actually was very expensive and exceeded what we had allocated for the project. And so, we pulled the restroom and concession areas out so that we could move forward with the project itself at hand. Right. So, this $2,500,000 for the items that are mentioned is coming out of – I believe this park was allocated for the park's bond about $5 million, a little bit more than $5 million. Yes, sir. So, this is coming out, so that leaves us $1.8 million roughly? Yep, just a shot under a two. So, it leaves us $1.8 million, and how much is still left to do in this project? So, we still have the standalone restroom, we have the basketball courts, and we also have a playground. Are we going to be able to do that for $1.8 million? Probably not. Probably not. And we have a plan? As of now, we will be evaluating what we have once we start the project and see what we can kind of fit with within the budget. Okay. Thank you. Yes, sir. Any other questions? Okay. The items have been moved, right, and seconded, so please call the roll. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Mayor Trenton? Yes. So, when are they going to be done? You're tired of the bushes. Okay. M3, motion approving change order number 23 for construction management at risk services phase for new police headquarters. Someone like to move the item? Just a question, Mayor, if possible. I just want to make sure that all of this is part of what we've already discussed and that these dollar amounts were included in our recent budget amendment and also that this will all be on ACOM when we reconcile at the end of the day. Some of them. So, a portion. So, this entire amount was included in the budget amendment. Portion of it was related to the 4.4 that we're estimating for the deflection. I think that's about 260,000 of this total. And the rest was incorporated into the budget amendment that we provided a couple of meetings ago. Okay. Thank you. Would you like to move the item? Yes, I would. Okay. Do I hear a second? Moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Mayor Trenton? Yes. And M3 is now approved. M4, motion approving an agreement for the Northwest 15th Avenue roadway improvements. Someone like to move the item? So moved. Do I hear a second? Second. Been moved and seconded. Any questions? Please call the roll. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Mayor Trenton? Yes. And M4 is now approved. Now moving on to resolutions. Our one, the appointment of board and committee members. Mr. Clerk, would you please read the names into the record? Yes. For the April 1st resolution, Board of Adjustment, Howard Elfman, nominated by Vice Mayor Glossman, Samir Yajnik, nominated by Commissioner Sorensen, Amy Mergler, nominated by Commissioner Sorensen, Central City Redevelopment Advisory Board, Olga Zamora, nominated by Vice Mayor Glossman. And for tonight's resolution, Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, William Condon, nominated by Commissioner Sorensen, Historic Preservation Board, Arthur Marcus, nominated by Vice Mayor Glossman, Northwest Progresso Flagler Heights Redevelopment Board, Brian Stafford, nominated by Vice Mayor Glossman, Rhoda Glasgow-Fodderingham, nominated by Commissioner Beasley-Pittman. And we received one name after publication for the Historic Preservation Board, Jonathan Keith, nominated by Commissioner Sorensen. If we could add that to the resolution. Okay. Are there any other modifications or additions? There being none, would someone like to introduce the resolution? Introduced. And that's as amended. Thank you. Okay. Please call the roll. A resolution and city commission of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, appointing or nominating, if applicable, Boarding Committee members as set forth in the exhibit, attached here to and made a part hereof. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Mayor Trentals? R1 is now approved. I want to thank those individuals for your commitment to our city and for the time that you intend to devote to it. I really appreciate it, and so does the commission. R2 is the resolution amending the interlocal agreement, the ILA, with Broward County to extend the duration of the beach area of the Community Redevelopment Agency and on a non-tax increment finance basis for an additional two years to allow for the completion of the CRA-funded beach area projects and other terms. Someone would like to introduce the resolution? Introduced. It's been introduced. Anyone have any questions? There being none, please call the roll. A resolution and city commission in the city of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, approving a first amendment to interlocal agreement among Broward County, the city of Fort Lauderdale, and the city of Fort Lauderdale Community Redevelopment Agency for extension of the term of the Fort Lauderdale Beach Community Redevelopment Area and providing an effective date. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Mayor Trentals? Yes. And R2 is now approved. R3, this is a resolution approving the 2025-2028 State Housing Initiatives Partnership Local Housing Assistance Plan. Anyone have any questions? No one signed up to speak. Someone would like to introduce the resolution? Introduced. It's been introduced. Please call the roll. A resolution to the city commission of the city of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, adopting the local housing assistance plan for fiscal years 25-26, 2026-2027, and 2027-2028 pursuant to the State Housing Initiatives Partnership Program directing staff to timely submit the three-year local housing assistance plan to the Florida Housing Finance Corporation, finding that 5% of the local housing distribution plus 5% of program income is insufficient to adequately pay the necessary costs of administering the local housing assistance plan, delegating authority to the city manager to execute any and all documents necessary or incidental to the receipt and administration of the State Housing Initiatives Partnership Program, and providing an effective date. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Mayor John Tulles? Yes. And that's now approved. Excuse me. Moving on to public hearing. Public hearing 1, PH1, an ordinance amending the City of Fort Lauderdale Comprehensive Plan future land use map, the Beach Community Center parcel from commercial to parks, recreation, and open space designation. No one is signed up to speak. Do I hear a motion to close public hearing? Second. If it's been moved and seconded, please call the roll. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Mayor Trent Tulles? Yes. Public hearing is now closed on PH1. Would someone like to introduce the ordinance? Introduced. Before we vote, can I just ask a question? Where's Al? So, Al, after reading this a second time, explain to me again, this is the building on the Galt Ocean Mile, right? On the Galt Ocean area, right? This is our community center. Correct. Correct. So, by doing this, what opportunity does it open for us while we're wanting to do this? This is not going to be a park. No. It's a building, right? It is, but this is being done as a part of our overall effort to rezone properties used for park purposes to park use. And under that designation, it also calls out civic buildings and community buildings or spaces as a part of park use. So, by this is not your typical park, it's not green space, of course. But here we're designating the building and the use as a park category as we've done in other situations where the zoning has not been consistent. So, because it's for recreational purposes, it falls under that parks designation? Yes, sir. All right. Just wanted to be a great question. It came up. It's come up a couple of times because it's not in line with the others that you've seen. I think the good thing to say is we won't have to answer this question again, as the city manager mentioned, because we've only got a few of them left. Okay. I thought maybe you were going to plant sod on the roof or something. No. Okay. That's always an option. There's only. Okay. All right. That was going to be my question. How many more sites are left? Two or three. Two or three. Yeah. Okay. The ordinance has been introduced. So, please call the roll. In ordinance of the city of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, adopting an amendment to the city of Fort Lauderdale comprehensive plan, future land use map designation from commercial to parks, recreation, open space. All of lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, block 6, called Ocean Mile. Well, according to the plot thereof, it's recorded in plot book 34, page 16 of the public records of Broward County, Florida, together with that certain vacated 20-foot alley in said block 6, as recorded in official records book, 2, 9, 0, 1, 5, page 1, 6, 0, 8 of the public records of Broward County, Florida, lying east of northeast 32nd Avenue, north of northeast 33rd Street, west of northeast 33rd Avenue, and south of northeast 34th Street. All said lands being in the city of Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida, containing 1.3938 acres, more or less, and authorizing the proper city officials to transmit the proposed amendments, supporting data and analyses to reviewing agencies, providing for severability, providing for conflicts, and providing an effective date. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Mayor Trent-Hiles? Yes. And so that is now approved. PH2, public hearing, Quasile judicial ordinance approving a rezoning from General Business B2 District to Uptown Urban Village Southeast District in the city of Fort Lauderdale, 6,000 North Andrews, Florida Department of Transportation and leaseholder of the property, Cypress Creek Leaseholder LLC. Anyone wishing to speak must be sworn in, and the commissioner will announce any site visits, communications, or expert opinions you receive and make them a part of the record. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman, do you have any disclosures that you can recall? I recall. I'm thinking, um, Larkery? Does that sound right? That's the, yeah. Yes. Or it could be, or it could be Nectaria? That office. That office. Yes. Okay, Nectaria. Okay. Um, uh, I don't know if we discussed this. Did we discuss this a while ago? Okay. So I will disclose the same thing. Vice Mayor? I met with Robert Lockery on September 21, 2023. Excuse me? Trust me, someone else gives him his notes. Hey, hey, hey, hey. Hey. We pay attention to detail in District 2. Cut it out. Cut it out. Uh, Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. That's Robert Lockery. Okay. Very good. Um, Nectaria, that's just for questions only. You've signed up to speak. Okay. Anyone have any questions? There being none, would someone like to move to close public hearing? Move. Second. Moved to second it. Please call the roll. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Mayor Trentals? Yes. And public hearing on PH2 is now closed. Would someone like to introduce the ordinance? Introduced. If your ordinance has been introduced, please call the roll. In ordinance amending section 47-1.6 point B of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Unified Land Development Regulations through the revision of the official zoning map of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Schedule A revised compilation attached there to and by reference made a part thereof so as to rezone from General Business District to Uptown Urban Village Southeast District, all of Parcel A, Lightspeed, Broward, Center Platt. According to the plot thereof, as recorded in Platt Book 177, page 32 of the public records of Broward County, Florida, located north of Northwest 60th Street. West of I-95, east of North Andrews Avenue and south of East Cypress Creek Road, all said lands being in the City of Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Mayor Trentals? Yes. And that item is now approved. PH3. This is a public hearing. Second reading. Under an ordinance to amend the City of Fort Lauderdale comprehensive plan, future land use element, parks, recreation, and open space designation to allow community facilities and utility uses as a permitted use and with a restriction on maximum acreage. No one has signed up to speak. Someone please move to close public hearing. Moved. Second. Been moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Mayor Trentals? Yes. And public hearing is now closed on PH3. Would someone like to introduce the ordinance on second reading? Introduced. It's been introduced. Please call the roll. In ordinance to the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, amending the City of Fort Lauderdale comprehensive future land use element policy FLU 1.1.12 to add community facilities and utility uses to the permitted uses in the parks, recreation, open space, future land use designation, providing for severability, repeal of conflicting ordinance provisions transmittal to the applicable reviewing agencies and providing for an effective date. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Mayor Trentals? Yes. And PH3 is now approved on second reading. OFR 1, this is the first reading of an ordinance amending Section 26, Article 7, Valet Parking on Rights of Way and Public Parking Facilities of the Code of Ordinances to establish an administrative temporary valet permit for non-residential use and to provide an appellate process for the suspension of valet permits. Okay. No one signed up to speak. Would someone like to introduce the ordinance? Introduced. The ordinance has been introduced. Please call the roll. In ordinance to the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, providing certain exceptions to permit temporary valet operations in the rights of way as set forth in subsection 26-226A, amending Section 26-232, titled Temporary Valet Permits, to add provisions for the issuance of temporary valet permits, amending Section 28-236, to provide an appellate process for the suspension of a valet permit and providing for severability, repeal of conflicting ordinance provisions in an effective date. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Mayor Trentals? Yes. And OFR 1 is now approved on first reading. OSR 1, this is an ordinance on second reading, amending Chapter 9, Buildings and Construction, Article 2, Permits and Inspections, Division 2, Fees of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Fort Lauderdale to establish scanning fees and reduce private provider discounts on master permit fees for services related to the land development and permitting. I'm sure somebody knows what all that means. Would someone like to introduce the ordinance? Introduce. Okay. Anyone have any questions? There being none, please call the roll. In an ordinance of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, amending Section 9-48 general permit fees to establish scanning fees and reduce private provider discounts on master permit fees for services related to land development and permitting of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, providing for severability, repeal of conflicting ordinance provisions in an effective date. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Mayor Trentiles? Yes. And OSR 1 is now approved on second reading. We have the walk-on item now. This is a motion for discussion. City Commission requests for review. Flowing Waters, case number UDP-S-24030, 3000 East Oakland Park Boulevard. The reason why I called this up is because there's neighborhood concern about the new design that's been proposed that's been proposed by the developer, and Mr. Schein, do you want to come up? Andrew Schein is the representative of the owner, and I wonder if you could hopefully ask a few questions, answer a few questions. Absolutely, Mayor. Did you bring with you today the elevation of the original approved building that was approved by the city? I do have them on a flash drive, yes, if you'd like. Can you give them to our folks so we can bring them up? And just for clarification, were there concerns about the overall design of the building, or was it about the additional units and the 12 extra feet in height? To me, what concerns me is that the new building that was designed is now one single building, much longer than the three towers that were designed originally. And we're continuing to define the intercoastal waterway as a canyon with buildings that fail to appreciate the need for more flow of air, light, and access, visual access. And I think if you bring up the elevations, I'll be able to just – okay. Let me go back to the – So go back. There we are. Do you have a waterway – In this presentation, I – let me – You're making me dizzy. This is – sorry. This is the new one. This is the new one, which is one single building. And it really doesn't – it doesn't really represent the concern that I have because you're taking it from the southern angle and it doesn't really show it from the east side of the building, which is a much longer building than the original concept. And it just creates one single wall of a building along the intercoastal. So this is the before, three towers on top of a pedestal, and this is the after, one tower. None of these pictures really demonstrate what we're trying to show here. Do you have a picture from the waterway? Of the old – Of the old? This is the only new one of the waterway I have. Let me – I do not have an old picture of the waterway view. Well, let's just work with this one, okay? So this one shows two towers on the waterway and one – Three. Two on the waterway and one a little further in, right? So a total of three towers, shorter and with open space between the buildings and not as tall. And the concern that was expressed to me from the homeowners association and others is that the new rendering creates one solid building, longer and taller, and kind of defeats the effort that we're trying to make in order to not deliver new construction that is – well, look across the intercoastal. You see one long building. And it just – it defeats the purpose of trying to open up the new construction for air, light, visibility, and I – I mean, we – the other building was perfectly fine. Now, you've introduced this transfer of development rights issue, and in my conversation with you, you seem to think that it was going to kill the whole concept of transfer of development rights. But why does the transfer of development rights to preserve the historical nature of another building have to somehow compromise the – another neighborhood with a construction project that's going to – what I think is going to be deleterious to a neighborhood? And here we see an opportunity to somehow protect both neighborhoods, the historic preservation one, and to open up the visibility and the air and the light from another neighbor right here at the bridge. What are your thoughts on that? I think we're sort of combining conversations here. One is the overall design of the building, and one is what development rights you can transfer. I know we're doing that. Yeah. The overall development rights that were transferred to this was 12 feet in height and 26 units. Right. Which is what brought us from this design to the other design. And making the finishings nicer and just an overall nicer design of the – I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder at the end of the day. This is a stucco and punch-out window building, and the other one is a beautiful class building. Why couldn't the old building be like this? Again, this is development. It comes down to finances. It does. And it's financial on both the historic preservation side and the development side. Well, now you're confusing the two. Oh, no. They're extremely related. So when – the city created the Transfer of Development Rights Program as a financial incentive for people to preserve their properties, to designate their own property historic, and to be able to transfer what they otherwise would have been able to build to developers in other parts of the city. And so that building that we're talking about is old Progresso Plaza. This particular one, yes. Yes. The 901 Progresso Plaza is where the development rights came from here. So they – so this developer purchased those development rights and as a result is able to build a different building. But why couldn't – why couldn't those development rights be implemented in a structure that – I mean, you just completely changed the whole structure, and you completely changed the design, and you completely changed the goals that we're trying to achieve in terms of trying to open up the visibility and airspace between buildings. It just seems to me like, you know, you're using, you know, the sympathies of transfer of development rights to justify the building of a building that just, I think, compromises a section of our city in a way that doesn't really deserve to have that compromise just to be able to save, you know, the historic nature of another building in another side of the town. We absolutely could have gone 12 feet higher and 26 more units in a stucco – in three stucco towers and with 30 percent more massing than we have right now. We could have done that. I think staff would have looked upon that as quite a negative to keep with this design. But, yeah, I guess we could have gone to what I feel is a significantly worse design. Why couldn't this be the same glass design as the new structure? It's all finances at the end of the day. When you get – you can't – this is a very – this is not – this is a huge building here. When you're doing a huge building with nice finishes, it's more expensive than a smaller building with nice finishes. That's as simple as I can put it. Well, I understand that. But the huge building with nice finishes costs more money, right? The huge building with nice finishes costs more money, yes. And that's what you're proposing tonight is a huge building with nice finishes. We're proposing a significantly smaller building with nicer finishes, significantly smaller. So how many units less is it? It's more units. The overall square footage of the massing of the building is about 30 percent lower. I see. Yeah. May I also want to just correct something because I know you're talking about – and I understand what you're saying in terms of the site and visibility and setbacks and space. But correct me if I'm wrong. What we're looking at now is the originally proposed building, actually approved. Approved. This is approved already. I know that. This is approved. But, again, correct me if I'm wrong, but the new building has absolutely more space between that building and the building to the south. There's actually more of a setback right now. How much more of a setback is it between the new project proposed and the building just to the south of it that we see in the photo? Let me go to the site plan. It's about 81 feet from our building to the property line plus another 10-foot alley. I believe it's a 10-foot – could be a 10-foot alley. So 90 feet. Yeah. Between you and the building to the south. 90 feet. And what's in the approved project right now as it exists? It was similar, but it went straight up instead of – we have the top two floors are stepped back a little bit. The other one was more vertical. So it's the same setback between the two buildings as the originally approved building. The same set – yes. But if you look at this angle versus this angle, you're getting an entire now north-south corridor that you didn't have before because we removed an entire tower. But you've got a parking structure there. Parking – yes, but not a tower. So the distance between the building to the south and the newly designed building, the distance is the same as the originally approved project? About the same. I believe the original was 75 feet instead of 81 feet, and it went straight up and didn't taper at the top like this one does. So it is slightly, slightly more. I believe it was 75 feet at the ground floor on the last one. And, again, on the TDRs, what I was discussing previously, this is an incentive for historic preservation. And if you can't transfer 26 units and 12 feet in height, what can you do with TDRs? Well, but the point is you don't – just to preserve something in another part of the city, you're compromising something in another part of the city. That's – I mean, that's what some people might say. So you can't pull the heartstrings from some to say, oh, we're saving, you know, historic property, and look what we're doing. We're creating a monolithic structure along the intercoastal. Here we go again. And why should we have to make those two choices? Why can't we have a win-win here? If we were talking about transferring 200 units, 300 units, I'd understand. I feel like I'm in a little bit bizarro world here. We're talking about transferring 26 additional units. This is not – You're not just talking about the units. You're talking about the design of the building. You completely changed the whole design of the building. You completely changed the whole idea of trying to open up space. You completely changed everything. If I can – Yeah, go ahead. Thank you, Mary. Just a quick question so that I'm tracking. Dwayne, just so I'm kind of tracking what we're considering here, explain to me what we're legally allowed to consider and evaluate here just – Sure. Because this is called up, and so correct me if I'm wrong, but the call up is for whether or not to have a de novo hearing. Is that what we're doing? That's correct. Okay. And just remind me, because it's been a little bit for me, of what we – oh, Rusty. What's the standard? Yeah. What's the standard, and what can we consider here? Sure. So your commission request for review process is a two-step process. The first is after the statement of intent to call up an item is brought forward, the item comes before you for a motion to determine whether or not to set a de novo hearing. In this particular, which is what you're considering now, you have to review the application, and if it's found that the new project is an area of which, due to the characteristics of the project and the surrounding area, requires additional review in order to ensure that development standards and the criteria have been met and to ensure that the area surrounding the development is protected from the impacts of the development. So those are the two considerations for you when making the determination as to whether or not to grant a motion to set a de novo hearing. Can you restate those again now? Sure. So the commission may adopt a motion to set a hearing to review the application if it's found that the new project is in an area which, due to the characteristics of the project and the surrounding area requires additional review in order to ensure the development standards and criteria have been met and to ensure that the area surrounding the development is protected from the impacts of the new development. Okay. Great. And then, and maybe this is a question for, but I just want us all to be clear for DSD, but the development criteria, what, just give us a refresher on what development criteria means. The development criteria is the criteria that's listed in the ULDR for the level of permit approval that this application was originally set forth. So the, I think in your backup, you have the staff report that has the list of the criteria that was considered in the de novo setting. Again, that's, you know, that criteria is for consideration during the de novo hearing. You would be reviewing it like a site plan level four at your level. But for tonight, you're reviewing basically the characteristics of the project. Great. And so there's four of us here. Remind me of the vote to seek a de novo. Does it have to be? It has to have three. It has to have three. Three or the four. If a two to two fails. Correct. Okay. I just want to be clear on that too. Okay. Great. Thank you. And I will add, this was subject to the mixed use standards. The mixed use standards does have building length requirements for single use residential buildings, it does not for multi-use residential buildings, but still the single use residential building, the building length is 200 feet max, which we don't, don't touch here. So even if this was single use, we still would have met those mixed use requirements. What do you mean single use? If you have just a residential building in a, like a, in a CB or a business zoning district, you have to do the mixed use requirements, even though it's a single use building. Right. So you can do a single use building, but they can't be more than 200 feet at the street wall length. Um, and for multi-use, that's not a requirement for, for multi-use building. So this is a multi-use? Correct. It includes a 4,000 square foot restaurant at the Northeast corner, um, right under the bridge. It's going to be an interesting area. Okay. Uh, all right. So a few people signed up to speak. Thank you, Andrew. Uh, Mary Pellequin followed by Chris Williams. Again, mayor, vice mayor and commissioners. Um, I'm not going to talk too long because the presidents of the Coral Ridge Association and Coral Ridge Country Club are here, and they are a little bit better prepared to talk about this. What I will say is, um, in 2020, the original project was presented to us, um, and the Coral Ridge Association, which is, uh, south of Oakland Park Boulevard. It's an old neighborhood. It's been there a long time. I know it's old because my house is my age. So it's, it's been around. Um, so we were very concerned. We were very concerned about this building in 2020 and it was presented to us. Um, the attorney for the project at that time was Rob Lockery and it was all done on Zoom because of the pandemic and we had some concerns that the building looked like a, the original, original building looked like a 1950s kind of a condo and the ceilings were low and we went back and forth and it came up with a design that, you know, we, we were good with. So that was then. So now this has come up. It has never been brought to the Coral Ridge Association. It is not in this form. It has not been brought to the Coral Ridge Country Club, to my understanding, and it went through P and Z and someone, I don't know who from this project said that they had. And, you know, I find that a little insulting that that was said. It was just, did, come on, come on. In April of last year, I reached out to Chris Williams, a president to present in front of the Coral Ridge Civic Associations board. And we did present in front of them. I had boards, physical boards doing the before and after of these. In October of last year, I sent out a public participation notice to all associations within 300 feet. It went to Chris Williams. It went to Tim Hernandez and it went to, uh, Mr. Fred Nesbitt with the president of the Galt Mile Association. They did not show up to our public participation meeting. The day of the planning and zoning board, I sent Tim Hernandez an email because he, he was concerned about the project saying I'd be willing to defer the project. I did not hear back at the planning and zoning board meeting. I offered to defer the project. All right. I have the email. I have a chance to speak. I have the emails and please remember we are under oath. Okay. I sent him an email the day of the hearing, offering him to defer it. He did not respond at the hearing. I did offer to defer it to the plan at the planning and zoning board here, the planning and zoning board to meet with the associations, the planning and zoning board took a vote on the deferral and decided not to defer it. So I don't know what else I could have done. I did present this at their April 2024 Coral Ridge Civic Association board meeting. I had physical boards with me. So again, I would like to remind everybody we are under oath right now. Thank you. Yes, I was at that meeting and I remember. And he said he would have something for us. And I'm not going to go much more than that because I think the president, of course, Chris Williamson will say that. But there was really nothing, there was not that given to us. It was not that. So you actually attended the meeting, but it was not that. I was on the board, yes. Yeah. Okay. All right. Thank you. Ma'am, if it wasn't that, what was it? There wasn't anything. I didn't, there was nothing. I didn't. Okay. Am I making this up? Chris. Not appropriate. So Chris, why don't you, we can call you back, Mayor, if you want to finish your comments. Good evening, Commissioners, Vice Mayor and Mayor. Appreciate you having us up here. So just to clarify the interaction, our neighborhood has been very involved for many years in looking at sites and development, Belmont Village, Galleria, and the previous rendition of this. So Attorney Shine is almost correct. We met in May of 2024, not April. So I checked the minutes. I remember the meeting vividly because we do this all the time. And he was there to let us know there was going to be a change. And he did have some boards and we looked at the building, but there weren't any details. So he was going to come back to us, which I guess in his mind he did based on a public participation meeting, but that's not the way we work. We are very engaged with the development committee over many, many years and have had many meetings as evidenced by the first rendition of this, which we had dug four or five meetings with the previous group. We've had with the Galleria, the two renditions, dozens of meetings, Belmont Village, very involved in understanding their impact to our neighborhood. And that's what we're concerned about is the impact of the neighborhood. So we never gave you any input on the impact of the neighborhood because we didn't have a chance. I don't know that we're refuting the design because a lot of stuff I'm seeing, I'm seeing for the first time tonight other than a rendition. But very specific items about traffic flow, the access road, 30th place, stormwater impacts, which we talked about in May, and you never came back to me. And I don't think a public participation general meeting is not what we were looking for. So I think you maybe did send out some letters, but it didn't come an email. I never got a phone call. I don't know if Tim was involved. He can speak to that. So that's our concern is that we were bypassed in our minds in participating and helping something like this be a jewel in Coral Ridge. And now looking at some of these things here now, I'm going to have the same concerns as is some of the development committee members that are here today. So I think the engagement for the community was almost zero, and that's disserving to us. So that's why we asked you to call it up so we could see what's going on. Okay, all right, thank you. I appreciate that, Chris. Tim Hernandez, followed by Doug Kuhlman. Tim Hernandez, 2820 Northeast 40th Street, president of the Coral Ridge Country Club Estates Association. I sent you all letters, which hopefully you all received and read, but I want to address a couple things. One, the argument that TDRs, you know, have to be used on this site is ridiculous. TDRs, in our opinion, should be allocated to walkable, transit-rich areas. People are not auto-dependent. The site meets none of those criteria. Let's put it in a place where we can make a positive difference in the community, not where it's not needed just to enrich a developer beyond what they're currently entitled to do. They're using – we asked for them a year ago for a traffic study. Somehow they couldn't manage to generate a traffic study. We wanted to understand the impacts on Oakland Park Boulevard, the intersection of Bayview and Oakland, the intersection of Middle River and Oakland, and the intersection of Federal and Oakland, none of which we can get through many times of the day. They basically, using the LDR code to their credit, to their – you know, that's – they're using it. If a project generates less than 1,000 trips a day, it doesn't have to do it. But when you aggregate all the projects that are either proposed or approved already at the intersection of the intercoastal and Oakland Park and more that are coming, it seems foolish to not consider the aggregate impacts of all the new development that's going to happen and the impacts on the community. There's no public transportation alternatives to get downtown. They made an argument. First, this was going to be a rental project. Then they thought it was going to be a condo project. Okay, this is what they're saying now. It's going to be a condominium project. But, you know, first of all, people buying $1 million to $5 million condos are not going to ride the bus. But second, if they did, you're going to have to take one Route 72, transfer to Route 10 or 20 to just get downtown. And if you're lucky, you'll make it in an hour. It's not going to happen. So, Tim, let me ask you then. So what is your opinion about it? Do you think it just didn't go through the process? What is your objection to this building? We have a lot of objections to the project. The objections to the building, I'd rather have, I mean, anybody who knows what we do. I'm a developer, okay? I like to do smaller, more compact buildings, different heights, different sizes, you know, more space, more light in between the buildings. I think the previous plan is good. If they can generate the same amount of revenue, regardless of what they say, is the question, should we do? I mean, they keep raising this thing. It's an old, ugly stucco building versus a new glass building. Why don't you make the old design look better? It's so easy to do. And any responsible developer would do that, okay? I'm also concerned, you know, about the fact that they claim this is going to be a condo, okay, and therefore it's going to generate less trips, okay, on the road. According to Institute of Traffic Engineers, okay, and another study I cited in my letter by University of Arizona and Portland State just recently in the last five years, they say there's no difference in the trips generated between a greater than 10-story condo and a greater than 10-story apartment, especially when the developer is out marketing today. I mean, they had a blast out to all the local realtors. They've already sold $30 million of units in this building that you can rent immediately. So what's the difference? How do we distinguish between a for-sale condo development and a rental project? But we spent a whole lot of time at the P&Z board talking about, well, it's a condo building. People aren't going to live here half the time. And you can look at the record. You can look at what Attorney Schein stated, and that's exactly what he stated. So, I mean, we have a lot of problems with this project, and not the least of which is we didn't get a seat at the table to participate. Between Coral Ridge Country Club Estates and Coral Ridge, there's almost 11,000 residents that live in this neighborhood. He made a statement that everybody he's talked to loves the project. Okay, he made that to me directly. And everybody's going to love this project, I promise you. I mean, how many emails, Mayor, have you gotten in the last day? How many emails has Commissioner Herbst gotten in the last day? He's not here to say. I think a lot. Okay? We didn't even know this was happening until two days before the hearing when the chairman of our development committee, Mr. Qualey, called me up and said, Tim, do you know about this? I said, I know nothing about this. We asked to meet. We asked for a traffic study. They decided, you know, to me, show you care, show you're willing to listen, okay, to the needs and concerns of the neighborhood. And give me a traffic study that shows the impact on our streets and how whether we can get, navigate to our jobs, to our places of, you know, worship, to where we go, to school, our kids go to school. So show that, show a little bit of a modicum of concern for the neighborhood, okay? Just don't blow us off. Okay, thank you. Doug Kuhlman. Can I ask a question? Oh, I'm sorry. No, he's Tim. It's all good. Okay. Not stop. Gentlemen, stop. We'll put you in different parts of the room. Chris Cooper, could you come up here for a second, or maybe it's a question for Al, too. Traffic study. Wait, we've got all these people coming up. First of all, Chris, please come up. And, gentlemen, just have a seat for a second because Commissioner Sorensen wants to ask some questions. Traffic study. Can you tell us what's been done or hasn't been done in terms of traffic study for this? So what's said earlier was accurate. So when a project comes in for review and it is determined based on looking at the ITE manual, the applicant's traffic engineer, our traffic engineer on staff, and the third-party traffic engineer, if the determination is made based on that analysis that that project generates less than 1,000 trips per day, that that project needs a traffic impact statement. So in this case, what the code requires, and, again, that's what we apply is what the code requires, is that a traffic impact statement was provided to us for review of this amendment to this project. Had that shown otherwise, we would have required a full traffic analysis. But based on what we were provided, what their analysis showed, what the verification of that analysis showed by our staff and consultant, is that it fell under that 1,000-trip threshold, again, requiring just a traffic impact statement. Okay. So city staff is saying the traffic impact is less than 1,000 trips per day. And so what we're able to do, based on the requirements of the code, is ask for that. If we ask for, if anybody asks for anything additional that's outside the code, typically staff wouldn't ask for anything that's outside of the code requirement. Okay. Thanks. Thanks, Mayor. Chris, I'm sorry. I apologize. The public participation meetings, who sends those notices out? So the city provides the addresses. The applicant sends the notices out. There's also a signed notice prior to planning and zoning board. So the requirements of the code for this type of case is that a public participation meeting is offered to the civic associations that are adjacent to the project, as well as anybody that owns property within 300 feet of the project. In addition to that, a sign is placed at the property, at the development site, prior to planning and zoning board. Okay. A sign announcing the planning and zoning meeting. But just concentrating on the public participation meeting, because there seems to be a lot of contradictory testimony here about the public participation and who saw what and when. Does the city require the developer to provide any kind of affidavit of who actually attended or who – an affidavit of, like, where the notices went or who received notice that there would be a public participation meeting? Right. So the affidavit affirms that the applicant has provided the notices that the code prescribed. So, again, notice to the adjacent civic associations as well as anybody owning property within 300 feet of the proposed development site. So we'll get an affidavit from that applicant affirming that they provided the required public notice and held that participation meeting. And do we check that, or do we have any way of basically making sure that that actually did happen? So the affidavit is a legally binding document, so it's incumbent on the applicant that if they're affirming to that action that they've taken that we would seek legal counsel, obviously, if we needed to refute that affidavit. But we don't physically check to make sure. We give them the addresses to mail so they do get that information from us, but then once that's given to them, we get the affidavit in return. Including the presidents of all of those affected neighborhood associations? We tell them what the civic associations are that they need to submit, and we'll provide the addresses of the associations if needed. Okay. And the development team did provide affidavits saying that all of those neighborhood associations were contacted in terms of the dates and times of these public participation meetings? Yes. Yes, we have an affidavit that they provided the public notice required by the code, by the ULDR. Of a date and time of when the public participation meetings would be? Yes. For all of those affected neighborhood associations? For the affected neighborhood associations and the property interest within 300 feet. And then it's up to them to either go and participate or not go? Correct. The code requires that the meeting and the opportunity is offered. Whether or not anybody attends or shows up is completely up to the folks that receive the notice. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Coleman. I'm Doug Coleman, resident, land planner, landscape architect. I'm a member of the Corvage Board. I think this is my second time in seven or eight years anyway. I'm asking you to look at this a little differently. Public input is important. This project came before us, as you heard, in 2022. We met with them. A lot of changes were made. We got in support of the project. Then it came back and changed it. And we never got a chance. This is the first time we've seen this tonight. The reason I showed up tonight, and I think I sent Ms. Pittman a belated email about 3 o'clock, and I'll give you all a copy, was because we have not looked at this. We don't know whether we support it or not because we haven't looked at it. But they set a pattern, a meeting with us, and they met with us again, said they're going to come back, and they didn't meet with us. I guess they sent out notices, but that seems a little odd. Personally, as a planner, I think the reason they probably didn't want to meet with us again, because after the first meeting, we had a lot of suggestions. They made it far better, and everyone's happy. They just never, they didn't certainly go out of their way. In fact, I think they did just the opposite. That's why I'm here. I think this public input is important. My assumption was if it got called up, you would then have a couple of weeks to look at the project. We would have a couple of weeks to look at the project, and maybe we can come back here in two weeks and say, hey, we love it. I don't know. This is the first time I've seen this. It's the first time the board's seen it, and I think that's the problem is something fell between the cracks, whether it was intentional or just happened. But it's not right that this project that we've been looking at for a couple of years all of a sudden shows up on a last-minute notice. So we're really asking you to vote for a delay, if you want to call it that, and bring it back in two weeks or four weeks and instruct the developer to meet with at least the two associations that we previously met with. I don't see how that can hurt anybody. Doug, I have a question, and this is what's really troubling me here. There seems to be such a disconnect over who is saying what and when. Were you aware of the fact that a public participation notice was sent to your board of directors to meet and see the latest in iteration of the site plan? Last year I was off, so I wasn't there last year. What was it, last year? I don't even know. It had to be October of this past year. That's last year, right? Right. No, I wasn't on the board last year. Four months ago. We've gone three years, off a year, on three years. I personally wasn't on. Oh, so you weren't on the board? But I was on the board when we looked at this site years ago. And that's the thing that's, I don't know why we, it seemed like they said they were going to come back, and they took it as just, oh, we notified them of a public meeting and expected us to show up. Okay. When planning, I'm just, I have it in my notes. So the planning and zoning board met on this project on February 19th, right? So are you aware of any outreach at all on either side since the planning and zoning board approved this project, the new project, in terms of contacting the developer or saying we need to meet or any of that? To my knowledge, we didn't even know the planning and zoning board was hearing it until... See, I don't understand. I'm trying to figure out why people are not getting notices. Okay. Well, I don't know about that. But let's look at, as I said, look at this differently. We haven't seen this project, neither association, since they came and met with us, said they were throwing the old one out, met with us with one, said they're going to change it. They never said. We don't have to see that. Did you attend the planning and zoning board meeting? Pardon? Did you attend the planning and zoning board meeting? This one that this was at? February 19th? No. Okay. Why? I didn't even know this was up. You didn't see signs on the site or your neighborhood association didn't send an email out saying, hey, this is coming to planning and zoning, we better show up or... No. No, none of that? None of that. Okay. But my point is, if we were involved in this so heavily before, maybe it's a new developer, I don't know. But, I mean, for them to say they're going to come back and see us and then don't come back and see us, and I hear tonight they sent an email to Chris, and even, I don't know how much notice he got. Chris, did you want to say something to this? Come on. You can come up. Chris Williams, again, board association president. So we found out about the planning and zoning, I think, the day before. Mr. Qualey did a great job of saying, hey, this is coming up. Are we aware of this? So at that point, several people did go to the meeting. Doug, you weren't available. I wasn't available as well, but I did write a letter, gave it to Tim. We did send emails out about the planning and zoning and that we were surprised where we were at. Now, as far as the timing with these letters and the public participation, typically in a project of this magnitude, the association has already had multiple intimate meetings with the developer and the attorney to go over very specific things to come up with something that we might support. And usually at that point, a public participation meeting already has the support or the consent of the association when it's presented to the public. And that's the big gap that is missed. That's what we're upset about. That's what we're concerned about. So by us going to a public participation meeting with a bunch of people from the neighborhood, we're not going to be able to dig into the details. That's what the association board does in the development committee. And that process did not happen within this situation. And I know that when these guys go to DRC, they always ask, did you talk to the associations? And it seems like every year it gets a little more watered down, whereas that's becoming something of, yeah, we, you know, it's not becoming something that's a focal point anymore. And I think it's really important when you have things like this that could add value and make the neighborhood better that we have participation, not by a public meeting. And, yes, he probably sent the letter to a P.O. box, but why wouldn't they contact us directly through a phone call or an e-mail? Do you get notices about DRC meetings? Are you still the president of your neighborhood association? I am, yes, yeah. Do you get notices from the city about DRC and planning and zoning? We do. Did you go to the DRC meeting on this project? I did not. Why? I must have missed it. Okay. Well, you know, I do have a job. There's such a disconnect here. I don't understand it. Don't forget, Commissioner Glassman, we're all volunteers. I know. We all have jobs. And we all bring a lot to the table with our different experiences and what we represent within the community. So, typically, we would have been informed and we would have been part of meetings prior to DRC, and then the developer asks for a support letter to take to DRC. So, if I have to look at agendas every two weeks for DRC and I miss one, is that really putting the burden on it? It's my fault now? But DRC goes through many comments and changes. DRC is a process. So, if folks are engaged at the beginning of DRC, then they're engaged. That's exactly right. We weren't part of the process. So, is it up to me to keep calling attorneys around town? What do you got going on in Coral Ridge? No, but as the president of a neighborhood association, you're getting notices of DRC and you're seeing what's on agendas. This all could have been avoided if there was a follow-up from Attorney Shine after our May meeting on the questions we asked him. Okay, again, I understand. There's just a real disconnect here that I'm trying to figure out. We're not talking about the Valvoline getting approved by the zoning administrator after it was denied on a small project. This is a huge, significant project. Right, and I also feel it's troubling to me that we're having this discussion without the district commissioner here. That's also another thing that's on my mind. Well, here, let me give you a timeline on that. So, if we don't have this today and it doesn't get called up next week, then the deadline passes the following week, I believe. We have until April 13th, although we could go. According to the planning and zoning minutes, the developer has said that they could actually go until the end of May. So, we do have some time. So, we don't know if it's the 13th or in May. The district commissioner did not call this up. No, because he's not here. No, no. I mean the district commissioner did not call this up. So, the day after the planning and zoning meeting, we requested a meeting with Commissioner Herbst to talk about this specific issue. After the planning and zoning? The day after. But he did not call it up. No, because you didn't have the meeting. We didn't have the meeting. Okay. So, we, I personally, reached out to Commissioner Herbst and requested a meeting. The options we were given, the first available meeting was this past Monday. From February 19th? Yes, sir. Till this past Monday? A week ago Monday. Was it Monday, Tim? The 10th, March 10th, yes. A week ago yesterday. Not much of a sense of urgency there. On our part, yes. I mean, we wanted it right away so we could, you know, get the timeline started and not have to be pressured at the last minute like we are now. So, we had a discussion, Tim Hernandez and myself, and another officer from Coleridge, Karen Polivka. We had a great 40-minute conversation. Nothing's happened since. So, it's been eight days. 40-minute conversation with who? That's Commissioner Herbst. Okay. About why we wanted this called up. Okay. And then we both had board meetings that week. Tim's was Wednesday. Mine was Thursday. Our boards both unanimously approved a motion to write a letter officially asking for this to be called up. And those were provided from Coleridge Country Club on Thursday to Commissioner Herbst and then on Friday by my organization. Last Thursday? And then you guys were copied as well on Friday from me. And Tim was Thursday. Yes. So, here we are. So, we have been on the ball. We've just been – I mean, right when planning is going, the next day we try to get this in front of Commissioner Herbst. But he must be okay with the project. He didn't call it up. Commissioner Glassman, he's not here to call it up. No, no, no. Hold on. The process for calling up is just an email. Weeks ago. Yeah. Email could have been sent. It has nothing to do with being sent. Let's just – let's clarify that. He asked us to set a meeting. So, that's what we did. And we didn't get the meeting until March 10th. Right. But he could have called it up March 11th. Well, let's just clarify that. D. Wayne, can a city commissioner or mayor call up an item for a meeting where they will not be attending? Yes. Yeah. Okay. How – hold on. Okay. I just want to clarify. So, the call-up procedure requires you to submit a statement of intent. So, within the statement of intent, they can express the reasons why they're calling the item up. Okay. It would be – I wouldn't recommend that they do so because they should be advocating for the position that they are stating in that statement of intent. But, yes, it's possible. Great. And how close prior to a meeting can a commissioner or the mayor call up an item? I called up yesterday. Well, the code requires – you have a window of 30 days from the time the lower board makes their decision in which to have that motion considered. So, you have that short window of time in which you have to call it up. Great. And it sounds like the mayor, you're saying that you called it up yesterday. I think we did it yesterday. Okay. So, there's – As long as it's within 30 days. As long as it's within 30 days. And then, D. Wayne, can you give us the timeline again just so we're all clear? So, what are our options tonight and how long – is delaying, deferring a possibility? Walk us through these options. So, you have 30 days from the time that the lower board heard the item in which to consider this motion. Okay. And this motion you can set for – you would have to set the de novo hearing within 60 days of today's date. But, as you are aware – well, Commissioner, you weren't on the commission at the time. It was 180 days up. Right. So, I'm just going to educate Commissioner Sorensen on this point. The state legislature enacted a change to the state – a state bill requiring us to act or you to act within a particular time period for quasi-judicial items. And so, in the past, our call-up procedure was actually challenged in court. And I believe the same counsel that's representing this case was on that case, and they were successful. So, we've been advising the commission that they would have to hold – set that hearing within that timeframe before the expiration of that window unless the applicant agrees to a reasonable time extension for final action. So, to be specific, though, Ben, it has to be 180 days from – what day is it? From the application date? From the date that the application is deemed to be complete. Right. So, all this has to happen, the de novo hearing and everything has to happen within 180 days. And so – and we've identified which day as the 180th day? I think April 13th. Hold it. I'm sorry. Just relax. March 21st is, I believe, what staff has indicated as the – March 21st is the 180th date? I believe so. Chris can correct. Chris, can you help us out here? Yes. So, March 21st was the end of the 30-day call-up period. Okay. I believe in this case we have an extension. I don't believe. I know we have an extension. It's past the 180 days already, but we have until April 13th. Thank you. That's the record and the information I have as the date of the expiration of this application. So, that leaves April 1st as the remaining regularly scheduled commission meeting if the commission decides to set a de novo hearing. So, if we set a de novo hearing, it has to be on the April 1st meeting? Yes. Okay. Unless the applicant agrees otherwise, but as we stand today, yes. Okay. All right. Does that conclude your remarks, Chris? Just finishing up what we talked about with Commissioner Herbst and his timing, I don't know. I can't speak for him, so I'm not sure. I know he – It's okay. I don't know why he wasn't here. Maybe something personal, so I don't know. Yeah. It's okay. Just to clarify that, I have no idea. He couldn't be here tonight. It's my understanding that the commissioner may not have called up the item because he believed that – or received notice that Commissioner Sorensen may have called up the item already. Okay. All right. Either way, we're here. Can two people call up an item? Yes. Yes. Yes. D-Wayne. So, one commissioner could call up. Another one could call it up as well. Yeah. Right. And Commissioner Sorensen didn't call it up until March 14th, according to the record. So, there was a lot of time before March 14th for the district commissioner to call up the project. Correct. Is what I'm saying. But thank you for the clarification. Wait. Thank you. And, Andrew, we have one more person who signed up to speak, and then I'd be happy to invite you to rebut. Mr. Qualey. Good evening, everybody. Thank you for having me. And I'm Bruce Qualey. I'm on the board at Coral Ridge Country Club Estates. And I'm also a commercial mortgage broker and partner in a firm and also commercial realtor. So, I'm very familiar with this type of property. And I kind of go around and bird dog all of the things in our general area, so to speak, and see what's going on. And one of the things that hasn't been mentioned yet, really, to the extent it should be, is the absolutely abysmal traffic on Oakland Park Boulevard. It's ridiculous off the charts. You can hardly get through, you know, two or three light changes. And not only is this project coming on in some form, I assume, but there's the other three corners of Oakland and the intercoastal waterway. You have the boat camper things that I know you all looked at. And then there's the thing at Shooters that when they – They tore down the marina. They tore down the marina, and they're going to be putting something in there. I don't know exactly what that is yet. And then there's the – I forget what they call it now. I used to know it as the Commonwealth building. Then it was the Correxit Business Center that they're trying to – that's now for sale. And that was before the DRC board because I went to that. Well, the thing is there's already a building now approved. So in terms of traffic, it's not going to be a big difference between what was approved and what this is proposing. So it's a minor change in terms of the number of units. But right now we're just focusing on the – whether or not the community had an opportunity to review this new proposal. And that's kind of what the issue is here tonight. Okay. Well, I understand that. But you need to, I think, look at the totality of what this could do to the area. And as Tim mentioned, we have no other way of getting around other than our cars in our area. So – You could take a boat. No, I'm just kidding. Not a bad idea. Yeah. All right. So that's all I have to say. But I'd like to have this in front of something in the near future if we can. Okay. Thank you. If I could just ask you a question. Sure. Because I'm very familiar with that street, Oakland Park Boulevard. Okay. And the bridge. I drive it multiple times every single day, all times of the day. There's an approved project on this site right now. Basically the same number of units, maybe 26 less. But it's rental, correct? No, it's more. It's more units, right? We're talking about the subject here? Yeah. I think this has 26 more units. 26 more units. Yes. Than the originally approved project. There's an approved project on the site. Those three towers are approved. That could be built today. My question to you is this, and I'm speaking from experience here. When I say to you that I believe that the original project, which is rental, will be 100% full. Every unit, every day, no questions asked. This project, the new project, is a condo. So, my experience on the beach for many years is the condo buildings are maybe at best 50% full all the time. So, I see this project as a lot less traffic for Oakland Park Boulevard. I see this as a lot less trips. I see this as a lot less service trucks, you name it, coming to this site as opposed to the approved project, which is rental. So, can you just talk to me about that? Because that's my experience. Yes, a little bit. I know Karen Polifka looked into this a little bit. She's a realtor. And there's been – I guess she's out marketing it, as I understand. And in the marketing package, you're allowed to rent from day one. You buy the place. You rent it tomorrow. Then you can rent it three times in a year. A lot of the condos that are being built, most of them, you have to live there for a certain period of time before you can typically rent. Because the owners in the building aren't anxious to have renters next to them. I'm not familiar with the condo documents of this specific project. But I will tell you that once the homeowners take control in the turnover from the developer, they can change that in a second. Oh, sure. So, I know that my building did that. Actually, a little correction there. If you buy and the condo docs say you can rent, then you can't be denied the ability to rent. Only future owners can. Yes, but also – but they can change that. They can change it, but only for future owners. I understand. Okay. And there's always future owners. I understand. Okay. I just want to make sure we – No. And thank you. As a real estate lawyer, I do value your opinion on that. But condo documents can be amended and they can be changed. And a lot of condominiums change those documents because they don't want transient buildings. They want some stability. Right. So – but, again, I just have to take issue with the fact that traffic is going to be an issue now because I think traffic is going to be a lot less than what the traffic would be if it was rental. That's all. My opinion. That's all. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Quayle. Thank you. Okay. Appreciate it. Okay. Anyone else wish to speak on this side? Oh, yes. Mr. Schein. I'm not going to address anything else I would say. This is just my own reputation here. The code requires that we have to have a public participation meeting at least 30 days before the planning and zoning board meeting. We held ours four months before the planning and zoning board meeting so that we still could get that input. A previous speaker did state that a lot of times earlier on in the process, you're designing it and you want to meet with the neighbors. We were still – we didn't have DRC sign-offs. We were still going back and forth with staff on design changes in October when we had that public participation meeting. So we held it four – instead of 30 days before, we held it four months before. So we were still trying to get input at that point. I can't help if people don't show up. We did have a lot of people show up too, mostly from our neighbor immediately to the south, Lauderdale Tower. They didn't have concern – their concerns were mostly construction-related. But they showed up. They received the notice. And if people aren't showing up to meetings that we're inviting them to, I don't know what else I can do. Well, there is some suggestion that we else we could do. For example, I think that the community just wants the opportunity to weigh in on some of the features of the project. And I'm wondering – I think it was suggested that maybe we could ask for a deferral of tonight's action just to give you and a couple of the board members the opportunity to just kind of talk to you about it. This would not be part of the formal public participation part of this, but just talk with the presidents of these associations who have in the past had the opportunity to weigh in on features like traffic and deliveries and so forth and so on, access. Just for their satisfaction and perhaps your peace of mind. No one is saying you did anything wrong. No one is casting any aspersions on you. You went by the book and you did everything you were supposed to, but apparently things slipped through the cracks and there's been some disconnect here. And that's really the only reason why I reacted to that, because I was getting a number of emails from the community who felt that they were disregarded while they were not technically, but they just felt they didn't have a chance to participate. So would it matter to your folks if we deferred this until the next meeting, asking you for an extension from the 180 days for another two weeks so that we can make that decision? I think the commission is probably of the mind to probably approve this anyway, but I think for the satisfaction of the community, it would be great if you would allow them to kind of see if, you know, from a neighborhood point of view, how we might best fit this project into the community. So it's not the extending of the 180 days. It's the, and DeWayne can explain this, but it's the within 30 days voting to hold or not hold a de novo hearing. If the concerns are a traffic, we're really not going to be able to come to terms with them. Well, that I understand. I understand all of that. But in terms of different access, you know, driveways, I mean, you change the whole configuration. So, I mean. We didn't, and we met four times with Lauderdale Tower, our immediate neighbor to the south, because they were going to be the most affected by this. You can tell none of them are here tonight. We are working on a construction agreement with them as well. So it's that the commission would have to take a vote tonight to hold a de novo hearing if that's the case. And I just, I think. I'm trying to avoid that. Well. It's not possible, unfortunately. Well, unless you agree to an extension of the 30 days. DeWayne, can you opine on this? Are we able to do that, DeWayne? Our code doesn't provide for an agreement to. Oh, past 30 days. To waive that code provision. That's a provision in our ULDR. I ordinarily would accept that, but it's, I don't believe it's permitted. Okay. All right. What's the pleasure of the commission? Could I ask just to see one more of the visual again of the original. Sure. Of the approved project. I'd like to see the approved project that's on the books right now. Oh, wait. It's not on our screen. And could be billed. Right? Yes. Can I see that? There you go. Can I see all of the elevations that you might have from the east, west, north, south? Okay. So hold on a second. Okay. So this is a west elevation, right? This is looking northeast. It's looking, right. But it's from the west. Yes. Right. So you have the three towers sort of like in a little mini L shape, right? Yes. And do we have a, from the water that you would see those two towers on the water or no? I can, I don't have the old one in this. I do have it paper copy, I believe. I do have it paper copy. Introduced into the record, Mr. Spence. We don't have any kind of overhead or anything, do we, to show this? No? Okay. Those are the renderings from the 2021 Planning and Zoning Board for this project. And I can provide copies to anyone who else needs. Okay. I could pass this around to everyone. I just wanted to get an idea of what is actually approved on the books right now. This is what's next. What's, Andrew, what's that little, it looks like between the northernmost, sorry, the southernmost tower and, is that Lauderdale Tower to the south? Lauderdale Tower to the south. What's that little structure that almost looks like it's in the setback? Or am I just, is it just a bad angle? No, there's a little building there. There's a, it's like a pool in the, it's, I think in the old one it was like a pool house, a small pool house. We did an at-grade pool. So, correct me if I'm wrong, the massing, the massing of the approved project seems much greater to me than the massing, the bulk of the new project. Significantly greater. I have the numbers here, actually. Yeah. What are those numbers? Did you want to see this? Thanks. And, DeWayne, can the commission request a de novo hearing based on lack of public participation? No. It's only the two criteria that I've outlined earlier in the meeting are the basis for that setting of the de novo hearing. So, what I'm hearing you say is if we feel there's been a lack of public participation, that is not a sufficient standard to request a de novo hearing. Correct. I would go a bit further. So, any challenge to a decision of this body with regards to this would be a challenge based on whether or not you abided by the essential requirements of the law, which include due process. Our codes have been designed to allow for public participation, and the testimony that you've heard today kind of suggests that, you know, no one has – everyone actually put on the record that Mr. Schein complied with the procedures for a public notice and that he just didn't go with the customary reaching out directly to individuals as they expected. I don't think that would be defensible on our end if we even denied him on that basis. Okay. So, that's concerning. Yeah, she has it. She has it. Same one. It's the same one. So, Mayor, that's just a concern of mine. Well, I understand. We don't want to take action outside of the standard that we're charged with complying with. But at this point, you know, I don't know if – you know, if we're saying outside the essential requirements of law and one of the essential requirements of law is public notice and public participation. Mr. Schein has indicated tonight that he sent out the appropriate notices. He complied with the law. The folks that are here tonight from the neighborhood said, you know, they never had an opportunity to actually have a sit-down with them and go through the fine-tuning of this particular project, notwithstanding the notices were properly sent out. So, maybe our hands are tied. I don't know. So, I'm just trying to see how we can help the neighborhood in giving them a comfort level and knowing that they got involved in trying to make this project a better project. So, is there a path to that point? I don't know. Help us out here. Mayor, I also have a question. And, Andrew, maybe you can help me. When I read the minutes of the Planning and Zoning Board meeting of the 19th of February, there was that discussion about deferring their meeting because you said you could actually go out into May. So, there was time at that time to actually have Planning and Zoning reconsider or defer. They voted not to defer. But I haven't seen anyone – there were some people from the neighborhood at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting. But help me understand, did they ask the Planning and Zoning Board meeting to defer? I don't believe they asked. I believe I offered it. And the board took a vote not to defer it. I read that. It was an interesting discussion. But I'm just wondering, and obviously you can't speak on behalf of the neighborhood associations, but I'm wondering why they didn't also implore the Planning and Zoning Board meeting to defer their meeting. What was the consideration for wanting to – why did you offer to defer it? Was it because of the public participation, the public notice? Yes. Yes. It is not my – it's not my style to Stonewall neighborhoods. We understand that. We're not trying to – we're not casting any aspersions here. I know, but that's why I offered. And one of the Planning and Zoning Board members said that we should have reached out to Galt Ocean Mile as well. I did reach out to Galt and send them a notice. But I offered to him that we'll defer it and meet with Galt. They didn't show up to my meeting four months before, but I offered it to them. So, again, just my – it was personal style, I guess. Mayor, on page 7 of 10 of the minutes of the Planning and Zoning Board meeting, it says Mr. Schein added the applicant would be willing to defer approval of the application to a later date in order to meet with the appropriate neighborhoods. Okay, so what is the pleasure of the commission? I have a question just to – for some clarity here. As far as Mr. Schein and the developer, the process, has this process been completely followed? Was there anything that was omitted that did not – that was not followed in this process? Are we going to the letter with the process, with notifying the neighborhoods, with the timeline? Are things in order according to the requirements? Well, staff would be best to give you a broader statement with regards to their compliance throughout the process, but based on the testimony that's on the record today, they have stated – it has been stated on the record that he's in compliance with all the notice requirements, including the public participation meeting. And there's been no denial of that on either side. Okay. So we understand that. Susan, sir, Mayor and Susan separately, can we explore – I'm interested in that 30-day window of – and I don't know what the possible language is doing for this, but possible if the city commission and the applicant or whoever needs to agree to extending that in future instances, can that be something we could consider as an update to our ULDR? Sure. So it would include a waiver provision within that provision of the code, similar to what the statute provides. Right. Does that make sense, Mayor? Yeah. Just go – it's going forward. It doesn't apply now. It doesn't help us to – I know. But I think going forward, that's a helpful tool, right? In fact, in every instance where there's a deadline, I'd like the commission to have the ability to waive it or any kind of provision. The commission should always have the opportunity to waive any of those deadlines or requirements, residency requirements, deadlines. All that stuff should be within the purview of the commission to make changes. Thanks. What I'm hearing and the way I'm going with this, through processes and different hearings we've had, process has been the determination. If we're following the process, we as a commission will follow the compliances and vote in that manner. So that's why I'm asking the question about the process. Why are we spending all this time if the process has been followed and they're in compliance? Well, we're spending this time to determine whether or not the process was followed. And it seems that the testimony is showing that process seems to have been followed. So – and I think that the neighborhoods are not denying that so much as they're saying that in the past it has been the practice where the developer would have a sit-down with the neighborhood leaders, not so much in a big public forum where not a whole lot can be discussed, but where they can sit down one-on-one or two-on-one and go through, you know, in a more defined way how they can help tweak the project. So that's what we're really talking about. I understand. I understand. But still back to the process and compliance. Correct. That sounds more of a privilege or an extended – Accommodation. Accommodation for this. Right. So – All right. Well, again, I throw it out to the commission. If there's no appetite for doing a de novo hearing, then, you know – I just – even if I wanted to do a de novo hearing, we legally don't have a basis for it based on public participation is what DeWayne has clearly articulated. Well, so it would have to be another criteria. I think DeWayne has indicated that if we feel that the essential requirements of law have not been satisfied, then that would be a basis. And that would include – that would include public participation or the due process procedures. And – but we're not hearing that. But also – Actually, what I'm saying is if you're – What are you saying, DeWayne? What I'm saying is if you're looking at the project itself and believe that it does those two criteria that I read to you earlier with regards to its impact on the neighboring community, that it deserves a de novo hearing, then you can set a de novo hearing. The discussion with regards to the due process issue was more along the lines a word of caution to you with regards to the discussion and the way that it was heading. Because it's kind of veered away from where the code says your motion should be based on. DeWayne, in terms of what you mentioned just now, wouldn't the planning and zoning board have considered that in terms of the ULDR and everything that they had to make sure that this project met before they voted? I mean, in other words – Yes, but that's what the call-up provision is a safeguard for you. So, yes, in all cases, the planning and zoning board is charged with making those determinations. Your call-up is to say, hey, they might have missed something, and that's why you want to take a second look at it. I remember in years past – and maybe that's changed now – when we would call up a project, if we did call up a project, I remember you either instructing us or it was implied that we were saying that something was not followed quite correctly at the planning and zoning level. Is that true? That was changed because that became an issue that was a call-up provision that was in the downtown area, and that caused an issue. So we did revise that. And at one time we had to specifically state what it was that we found was done incorrectly when we voted to call up. We don't have to state that anymore? No, it's much looser. Again, it's easier, but you still have to make that motion based on one of those two findings with regards to the project's effect on the area due to its characteristics and so forth. Okay. Thank you. I understand. Thank you. Okay. I don't hear anyone from the floor wanting to make a motion for a de novo hearing, so I guess the item fails. So thank you for coming here tonight. Thank you, folks. Yes, Mr. Hernandez, do you want to say the last word? You have to come up here. Is this in addition – is this after this already happened? See you, Wayne? Sit up. I guess my only question is, following the process, if it was followed, at least mechanically, is not the only criteria as explained by Mr. Spence. It was, does the project in question have an impact on the surrounding community? And I think it's pretty clear that the residents of Coral Ridge Country Club Estates and the residents of Coral Ridge believe it has an impact on our respective communities. That would satisfy the criteria that he articulated and would allow for the de novo hearing to be held. And if it passes, it passes. But to get a project that's truly beneficial to our neighborhoods and the community, how can additional discussion be dismissed so easily? I want to wait until Mr. Spence has – those two criteria that you described, this one being the impact on the community, and what was the other one? I'll read the language again. Read it again. Is it an and or an or? So the motion can set a hearing to review the application if it's found that a new project is in an area which, due to the characteristics of the project and the surrounding area, require additional review in order to ensure the development standards and criteria are met and to ensure that the area surrounding the development is protected from the impacts of the development. All right, so we have to determine if it's going to have an impact. So Mr. Hernandez is suggesting it's going to have an impact, but it also has to be shown that design criteria were not met. So there's no evidence of that tonight. We did provide some evidence of that in our letters and in our testimony at the P&Z board. All right, well, let me ask you to sit down. It's up to the commission. I can't make a motion. It's up to the commission if anyone wants to make a motion to move forward to a de novo hearing, and I'm not hearing anything. Can the mayor not make a motion? No. That is correct. He cannot. No. According to what? Just so I'm tracking. Yeah, yeah, yeah. The boss. As you are aware, we haven't adopted rules of parliamentary procedure, but we do follow, roughly follow Robert's Rules. That provides that the chair is not entitled to make a motion. Okay. Based on our rough following of Robert's Rules that we haven't adopted. Well, didn't we adopt that one? We have not adopted. No, we haven't. We're still in the process of getting some high-level Robert's Rules. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Mr. Schein. Thank you. Okay. Is there any further business in the commission tonight? Any closed-door meetings you'd like to announce, Mr. Spence? Not this time. Not this time. Anything further? Meeting now concluded. Thank you, everybody.