City Commission Regular Meeting on 2025-10-23 6:00 PM - Oct 23, 2025

Good evening, everybody, and welcome to the City Commission meeting for this October 23rd, 2025. Thank you all for being here tonight. I see we have a very lively bunch of people here. If we could all find a seat and so we can begin the meeting. We have a number of guests here tonight, and we have a lot of opportunities to present and recognize individuals and organizations during our presentation session. For those of you who are here for the first time, I welcome you all and thank you for being here tonight. And what we do when we begin our meetings is with the Pledge of Allegiance, and then we have a moment of silence, we have certain announcements, and then we go to our presentations. Tonight we have four presentations in which members of the Commission will assist us in making those presentations. And so as we begin, I'd like to invite Lindsay Juarez from Question Park Elementary. Where's Lindsay? Come on up, Lindsay. May I ask you all to please rise and join us in the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you so much. Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute. Strategic communications, do you have something for her? No. Okay. All right. I'm going to take a picture. Is your family here tonight? Is anybody here? Come on up. How are you? What's your name? City? Whitney. Thank you so much. Thank you, Lindsay. Now, if you could all please join me in a moment of silence. Okay, thank you. At the beginning of the meetings, we also take this as an opportunity to recognize and to congratulate those who are retiring from the city who have been here for long periods of time. In this case, we are here to recognize and thank Gabriela Aguilar, who's been a senior administrative assistant in our police department. She's worked with us for 19 years. So congratulations, Gabriela, and thank you for your service to our city. So having done that and said that, I'd like this clerk to please call the roll. Vice Mayor Herbst. Commissioner Glassman. Here. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman. Here. Commissioner Sorensen. Here. Mayor Trent Halls. Here. We have a couple of agenda announcements. M6 is going to be removed tonight from the agenda, and we'll have a walk-on ordinance amending Chapter 25 of the City of Fort Lauderdale Code of Ordinances regarding streets and sidewalks and undergrounding of utility facilities. Other than that, may I ask someone to please move to approve the minutes and the agenda as amended. So moved. It's been moved. Do I hear a second? Moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Glassman. Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman. Yes. Commissioner Sorensen. Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst. Mayor Trent Halls. Yes. And the agenda as amended, and the minutes have now been approved. So at this point, we have our presentations tonight. And the first presentation has been offered to me to be able to recognize an important individual who has come to Fort Lauderdale and was part of our Sister City program that we recognize and participate in for many, many years. And tonight, it's my pleasure and my honor to recognize Mayor Angie Bell, who is from our sister city in Haiti, Cap-Haitian. And I would like to know if Mayor Bell can join me at the podium. Let's have a round of applause. So there are a few comments I'd like to make, and then I'd like to invite you to say a few words for us, okay? All right. So Mayor Bell served as the Greater Fort Lauderdale Sister City's International Cap-Haitian Co-Chair and has recently been appointed the mayor of our sister city of Cap-Haitian, Haiti's second largest city and the only city in Haiti with direct air service to South Florida. Many of us remember December 2, 2020, when Spirit Airlines Flight 350 marked Cap-Haitian's 350th anniversary. Wow. Long time. And the resumption of service from Fort Lauderdale Hollywood International Airport following the pandemic pause. On that historic day, Ms. Bell represented Fort Lauderdale and the Greater Fort Lauderdale Sister City's International, carrying with her both the proclamation that I signed honoring Cap-Haitian's 350th anniversary and a plaque celebrating our sister city relationship. Today, we are honored to have her here once again, now as mayor, to continue strengthening the bonds of friendship and partnership between our two cities. Please, again, join me in warmly welcoming Mayor Angie Bell. Can you say a few words? It is always a pleasure to be in Fort Lauderdale and now mainly representing Cap-Haitian. And just like you said, we spoke about the Spirit flights, but now we just announced yesterday that Sunrise, our own airlines, is going to start a new flight starting from Fort Lauderdale to Cap-Haitian starting in December. So now I don't have to wake up at 3 a.m. to go to Miami. But like we said, our cities have been sisters for the past 22 years. And my mission as mayor is to strengthen that bond and to make sure that we can collaborate and do more because our cities are more than sisters and we are just over an hour away. We are connected by air and by sea. So we're just looking forward to more, to doing more together and to see how we can connect for development, for anything that can move Haiti forward. And we can exchange because my mission as mayor, like I said, is to have a clean city, a prosperous city, and to move forward. Thank you so much. And I'm really happy to be here. And we have a few gifts from Haiti for you. It's just Haitian tea and a cup from Acaju that says Okap Shirli, which is, it's like my dear Haiti, my dear Cap-Haitian. So thank you so much. And my entire team is here with me and we thank you. Why don't we have our picture taken? And why doesn't the folks from the Sister City program and your colleagues from Haiti please come and join us? Mayor, can we do it in the middle so we can get the whole thing? Yeah, we can do that? Let's do that. Yes, of course. Thank you so much. Now I'd like to invite Commissioner Glassman to present a proclamation in recognition of Princess Cruises' Star Princess Cruises Day. And I'd like to invite Marie Lee, Chief Marketing Officer from Princess Cruises, to please join the Commissioner at the podium. Thank you, Mayor. Appreciate this. I'm very pleased to present this proclamation from the Office of the Mayor, City of Fort Lauderdale, in recognition of Princess Cruises' Star Princess Day, requested by Commissioner Steve Glassman, whereas the cruise industry is indispensable to the economy of Fort Lauderdale, contributing to the economic vitality of the region. In fiscal year 2024, Port Everglades generated $28.1 billion in economic activity, nearly $1.1 billion in state and local taxes, and supported 12,270 local jobs, with projections for 2025 showing 37.7 million cruise passengers worldwide and revenue exceeding $47 billion. And whereas Star Princess, the most impressive and luxurious vessel ever created by Princess Cruises, is a true engineering marvel, offering travelers extraordinary experiences and visiting premier ports around the globe. And whereas Princess Cruises, headquartered in Fort Lauderdale, has chosen Port Everglades as the U.S. home port for Star Princess, signaling a new era of innovation and excellence in the cruise industry. And whereas Star Princess, like her sister ship, Sun Princess, is a LNG-powered ship and integrates the latest technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, minimizing environmental impact, and embodying a commitment to protecting and preserving the world's precious resources. And whereas Star Princess will be one of six Princess ships sailing from Port Everglades during the 2025-2026 Caribbean season, further solidifying Fort Lauderdale as a premier destination for cruise travelers seeking world-class experiences. And whereas Star Princess boasts groundbreaking architectural elements, such as the dome, a geodesic glass-enclosed structure providing climate-controlled comfort with a South Beach-inspired atmosphere, and the technologically advanced arena, the most sophisticated theater at sea. And whereas Princess Cruises announced Matthew McConaughey and his wife Camilla will serve as godparents at the November 6th naming ceremony, and whereas the arrival of Star Princess in Fort Lauderdale marks a significant milestone in the enduring partnership between Princess Cruises and the City of Fort Lauderdale, contributing to the City's economic growth and enhancing its global reputation as a leading maritime travel hub. Now, therefore, we, as City Commissioners of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, to hereby proclaim October 23rd, 2025 as Princess Cruises' Star Princess Day in the City of Fort Lauderdale, dated this the 23rd day of October 2025, and signed by our Mayor, the Honorable Dean J. Trentalas. I just want to say thank you, and we really value our relationship with Fort Lauderdale, and thank you for welcoming Star Princess to Port Everglades. Thank you. Can you get a photo right here? Sure. This is good. Thank you. I've got a bag for you. Perfect. Okay. Okay. Thank you, Commissioner. Now I would like to invite Commissioner Beasley Pittman, who will present a proclamation recognizing Florida City Week here in the City of Fort Lauderdale, and I'd like to invite Council Member Denise Horland and Broward League of Cities President and Plantation Council Member to join you, to join the Commissioner at the podium for the presentation. Good afternoon, everyone. Good evening. I have the honor this afternoon to present a proclamation, which is in recognition of Florida City Week. From the Office of the Mayor, the City of Fort Lauderdale proclamation in recognition of Florida City Week. Whereas the City of Fort Lauderdale is proud to join Florida League of Cities in celebrating Florida City Week, observed October 20th through October 26, 2025. And whereas Florida City Week shines a light on how local government serves families, neighborhoods, and businesses every day. And whereas municipality government is the level of government closest to the people, building strong connections with community and shaping daily lives through public safety, sanitation, clean water, parks, streets, transportation, and customer service. Whereas the City of Fort Lauderdale encourages residents to learn how their city works, meet the people who make it run, and take part in local decision-making throughout the year. And whereas Team FTL is made up of more than 3,000 dedicated employees across 16 departments who serve our community each day. These departments include capital projects, community services, development services, finance, fire rescue, Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport, human resources, information technology, office of management and budget, parks and recreation. See, it's so much fun. I'm having fun saying the name. And whereas the City of Fort Lauderdale calls on all residents to participate in city programs such as Neighbor Leadership Academy, an interactive six-week course on how Fort Lauderdale City's government works, how it works. Residents can also serve on advisory boards and committees, volunteer, and help build strong neighborhoods today and for a better future for the next generation. Now, therefore, we, as City Commissioners of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, do hereby proclaim October 20th through the 26th, 2025, as Florida City Week in the City of Fort Lauderdale, dated this the 20th day of October, 2025, and it is signed by our Mayor, Dean Trentellis. All right. Would you like to say something? I would just very, you want to hold it? Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Beasley-Pittman, for sponsoring this important proclamation, and thank you, Mayor and Commission, for having me this evening. It is my absolute pleasure to stand here and accept this proclamation on behalf of the Broward League of Cities. As you heard in the proclamation, our 31 cities are the government's closest to the people and best poised to address the needs of our residents. So what I would invite any municipality that you live in is you hear there are a lot of people that toil behind the scenes in our cities, and I'd like to ask for their acknowledgement. It's not just the elected officials who are forward-facing, but there's a lot of city staff, and I want to congratulate the staff of the city of Fort Lauderdale for all they do and for being recognized. So thank you very much. Thank you, Denise. Thanks for coming all this way from Plantation. I appreciate it. How are you? Thank you, Commissioner. And now I'd like to invite Commissioner Sorensen to make our final presentation tonight, and this is regarding James Lichtenstein Day in the city of Fort Lauderdale. So who is James? The 2025 high-diving world champion and gold medalist in the men's 27-meter platform and his coach, Stephen. Where is Stephen? LeBue. There you are. Come on. These are two people who not only have stepped up to the 27-meter platform but have actually dived off of it. They just told me, Mayor, that you're next. They have a special spot for you to jump. So, James, congratulations. This is huge. So I want to read a little proclamation so folks hear a little bit more about you. Whereas the city of Fort Lauderdale proudly recognizes residents who achieve excellence on the world stage and bring honor to our community through their talent, dedication, and perseverance. Whereas James, a 30-year-old resident of Fort Lauderdale, how long have you been at Fort Lauderdale? Are you born and raised? I moved here because of the approval of the high-dive tower. Because of the high-dive. There you go, Mayor. There you go. See what happens. We build it. They come. They come. I mean, it's an amazing story. It's either here or China. That's right. You made the right decision. James has demonstrated exceptional athletic ability and commitment by training year-round at the city of Fort Lauderdale Aquatic Complex, one of the nation's premier aquatic facilities and home to the tallest pre-cast concrete dive tower in the Western Hemisphere. And whereas James was crowned world champion in the men's 27-meter platform high-diving event at the 2025 World Athletics Championships in Singapore, earning a gold medal for Team USA and Fort Lauderdale, right? And whereas James' gold medal performance crowns years of relentless dedication and mentorship under former two-time world champion and Team USA coach Stephen Laboue. Did I pronounce your name right? Laboue? Awesome. Stephen. Amazing. Stephen, who embodies a spirit of excellence that defines Fort Lauderdale's aquatic community. And whereas James' world title and gold medal victory bring pride not only to Team USA but the city of Fort Lauderdale, reinforcing our city's reputation as a global center for aquatic sports and a community that nurtures champions. Now, James, I'm going to put you on the spot here a little bit. Do you plan to stay in Fort Lauderdale? He does. I got a commitment, Mayor. And do you plan on winning more gold medals? I do. I do my best. Nice. He said, I'll train like it. I love it. So then, as a result of answering those questions right, James, we, therefore, as a city commission, proclaim October 23rd, 2025, as James Lichtenstein Day in the city of Fort Lauderdale, I encourage all residents to celebrate this day and your amazing accomplishments. James. Stay from work, Ryan. I appreciate everyone's support. Thank you very much. Um, also want to thank those who, uh, everyone who approved the, um, the high dive tower at the Hall of Fame pool. Uh, we're really building champions there and it's, uh, it's a great place to train. Um, and it's an honor representing Fort Lauderdale on the world stage. Thank you. That's yours. Take a little photo here. And our aquatic center team. What's going on? We have, wait, get where you want. Where? Yeah, that thing. Well, show the hardware. Get in here. You need to be next to him. You're there. Okay. Good coaching there, Stephen. It takes a champ to know a champ. All right. Let us now continue. At this point in our, in our meeting, thank you all for being here, everybody. Um, at this point in our meeting, we'll now go into our agenda. Now, the beginning of our agenda consists of consent agenda items. At that point, we will ask any member of the commission if they'd like to pull any of the items before they are voted on altogether. Also there. Okay. If, uh, an item is pulled, that item will be discussed separately and voted on separately. Otherwise, all the other items will be voted on collectively. So, I'd like to ask, uh, members of the commission if they have any items that wish to pull. We'll begin with the vice mayor. Vice mayor, do you have any items you wish to pull? None. None. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? None. Um, I have none. Commissioner Glassman? CP 2 and CP 3. CP 2 and 3. And CP 3. Okay. Uh, Commissioner Sorensen? None. All right. Well, I'm going to pull CR 4, since I have a whole bunch of people who have signed up to speak. And CR 3, which is questions only, so we're good there. So, I'm going to pull CR 4. A lot of people have signed up to speak. Um, okay. So, except for CP 2 and 3 and CR 4, uh, do I hear a motion to approve the rest of the consent agenda items? Move. Do I hear a second? Second. Moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trent Ellis? Yes. And those consent agenda items have now been approved, except CP 2, CP 3, and CR 4. So, if you're here for those items, uh, your items have been approved, um, you're welcome to stay for the rest of the meeting, if you'd like. All right. So, let's begin with the CP items. Um, CP 2, uh, Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Thank you, Mayor. Um, so I understand that this is a motion of approving the award, uh, for bid for the purchase of a mobile emergency response, uh, support portable tower trailer, and this deals with a lot of communication issues, communication, radio communication systems. Um, I, I'm pulling this not so much because I have an issue with this particular agenda item, uh, but I want to continue the conversation that I've begun about the BDA requirements in our city. Um, I, I just, I'm hearing more and more from buildings. I did just get an email the other day from a building on Hendricks again, uh, and forwarded it to, um, Chief Golan and to City Manager Williams. Um, I, I just need to hear from staff. What are we planning on doing in terms of making sure, um, that the responsibility, the financial responsibility is just not falling squarely, uh, in the hands of predominantly these condominium owners who are facing just so many issues these days in terms of structural integrity reserve studies, in terms of property insurance premiums, in terms of special assessments. Um, again, I'm just, I understand what this system is about. There is nothing more important than public safety. Uh, I'm not arguing that at all. I'm just saying that if our police and fire are having issues with communicating with each other, that's not the fault or the responsibility of the homeowners in condominium buildings. That's our responsibility as a city. We should be making sure that we have the right systems in place, the right technology in place so that folks can communicate. Our folks can communicate. Our first responders can communicate. In discussing this issue with our state representative, I'm finding out that other cities are not even mentioning this. This is not even a blip on the radar from other buildings in other cities. Therefore, it leads me to believe that this is a Fort Lauderdale problem. I don't understand why other cities on the coast, um, which also are facing increased development, which also are facing increased construction. Um, why is this not an issue? Why is our state representative only hearing about this from folks, um, in Fort Lauderdale? I'm not going to beat a dead horse, but I just, we've got to start working on ways to figure out a uniform system here. Um, I'm finding that the testing is just, I don't know. I have just too many questions. I've mentioned them before. Um, it seems a bit too random to me. Uh, it seems just a bit suspect to me. I don't like some of the information I'm hearing from some of the buildings in terms of how they're going about, uh, being told who to choose for more testing. I appreciate the flyer that we're getting out now. We're attempting to do more education, which is very important. Um, because up until this, um, way back in January of the year, um, folks were finding out that they were failing something that they had no idea what it even was or that they had any responsibility at all. So again, I want us to continue as a city to figure this out, um, without this financial burden solely falling on the shoulders of, uh, these unit owners who just can't take it. I'm, I'm hearing from buildings in my district now where a majority of the units are for sale. People cannot afford all of the increased costs in these condominium buildings. Um, and they're moving. Uh, I have too many emails that attest to that. Um, they just cannot afford, uh, to live in their units. And we've got to do something other than just adding this other increased burden of hundreds of thousands of dollars on a condominium association, uh, to tell them that they have to be able to have a better system in place whereby our first responders can communicate better. Um, if our first responders cannot communicate better, then I believe that that's our responsibility as a city to make sure that they are communicating. And that's all. And, and with that, I would just like a little response and I'm, I'm also happy to move the item, but, um, I, I just want to hear what we're doing. I want to hear what kind of progress we're making. Thank you. Um, commissioner, you brought this up at a previous meeting. Um, and I think one of the questions that materialized was, um, where does the technology responsibility lie? Is it, is it a function of the general radio system of the city to be able to penetrate the walls of these buildings? Um, or does it require each building to have some sort of booster system in them, which, um, is going to be required in order for any radio system to be able to connect with the, uh, the general tower? I think, I don't know if that question was ever satisfactorily answered. I apologize. Uh, not to my satisfaction. I will tell you though, that I can cite you examples of buildings, um, that have done this work and then they don't pass the next year. Uh, a lot of these buildings have already been given a CO. Um, they were good up until a certain point. And then all of a sudden they're not good, uh, with regards to the signals in the buildings. Uh, again, uh, for a variety of reasons, reasons that are being given to me that don't make a lot of sense. Oh, we have increased construction downtown. Uh, the signals are being blocked because of the increased development in that area or on the beach or downtown, uh, or, uh, the condominium association went ahead and hardened its building by installing impact glass, which to me is a good thing. But then damned if you do damned, if you don't, you installed impact glass to make your building more resilient, but now you're being told you need to spend $200,000 because our radios aren't communicating with each other. It's really a crazy, crazy catch 22. But the question falls back again, does technology exist that the city alone can implement to be able to penetrate these buildings that have been hardened? And maybe Chris, you can help us out. I believe we should be able to do that. Well, let it, okay. You're not a scientist. I'm not a scientist. I'm not a scientist. I only play one on TV. Okay. Chris, can you help us out here? Sure. Just for the record, I'm not a scientist either, but Chris Cooper, assistant city manager. So you asked a question about, um, who's, who, who is the burden placed on essentially to do this? So this, the state through the Florida fire prevention code places the burden on, on the property owners of certain properties. So typically condos and those types of buildings to make sure that there's adequate two-way radio communication for public safety available within their building. So there are a lot of things that can affect the radio strength inside of a building. We've talked about that at prior meetings and, and, and other conversations, but generally speaking, anything that could block or inhibit a radio wave is something that may affect the radio service inside of a building. So for instance, we've talked to staff about things like windows that block certain, um, types of, of light ultraviolet, for example, and those types of, of things can also block radio waves. So those are the types of things that when a building does some improvements, there may be a consequence to the ability for our radio systems to adequately penetrate those, those buildings, which is why the Florida fire prevention code places that burden on those buildings to make sure on the interior of their building, they can get adequate, um, radio signal. But does, does technology exist to allow our system to penetrate these buildings? I mean, or is it a requirement that each individual building have some sort of booster system within the structure that allows our system to enter into their building? I mean, where does, where does the technology lie and where would the burden? So I would, I would suggest based on the Florida fire prevention code, placing this burden on building owners to have adequate signal strength within their buildings, it's probably a combination of factors that include the strength of our signals, either through direct contact from our towers or repeaters on other buildings that, that amplify that signal to the, to these buildings, as well as the system within the buildings to make sure the radio systematically covers it. For new construction, we do through our DRC process review for these two way radio communication systems. It's part of the development review as part of the building permitting review, and then it's part of the inspections of those buildings before they're CEOed. So it's, it's a continuous process of making sure that those systems one are installed in the law also compel buildings that were already built at a certain point in time to have those systems installed within their buildings, but also on new construction to have those systems installed at the time of, of CO. But then Chris, how do you explain a building passing one year and then failing the next year? So that get, that gets back to improvements to the building and other conditions. What if there are no improvements made in that year? It could be a number of things. Could any of all those things be that we just have a poor tower system and a poor signal strength and that we need to do better in terms of what we've been erecting in our city? So I think every situation is different. Again, I'm not, I'm not somebody who evaluates or understands completely the technical aspects of what could affect the radio signal strength to these buildings, but there could be variables present that from one time to another, it could affect the signal strength in certain parts of buildings, especially those that are more interior confined spaces that aren't, aren't, um, easily accessible to those radio signals. Because I can, those were not just made up questions that I just asked. Those were real life questions from people that have told me that they have not made any changes in their building, that they passed one year, they failed the next year. Uh, it's very difficult for them to understand. I also think that our city should be involved in helping with whatever we think is going to improve. Um, maybe there is just a little simple booster that we could have that we're not doing that. We're telling these buildings and they are now freaking out because they're being told they have to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a system, not, not just maybe a little booster in a stairwell or whatever else we can do. So part of what I think leads to the frustration of, of these residents and these building owners in particular is that our city, when we do these inspections, our basis for telling somebody they need to evaluate the signal strength of their, of their two-way radio communication systems is a simple failure of our radios when we're in the building in certain areas of the building. So I think you mentioned earlier, we're then telling these building owners and residents to, to hire somebody essentially to do a further evaluation because to actually evaluate the building and figure out what is needed or what's going wrong with that system or what could be affecting that system is a more advanced process than what we do when we identify the issue of the radio system, potentially not working within the building. So certainly we can explore ways to alleviate potentially that aspect of the situation to make sure that the building owners are, are maybe more confident or more sure in the evaluation they're getting, maybe not from a third party. Maybe there's ways to address that concern directly, but those are things we need to discuss and we are discussing to see if there's opportunities to, you know, be more transparent and also more helpful to those residents that may have an issue with their signal strength. And I think that's of paramount importance because I really do feel that a lot of these condominium associations feel very helpless. They feel taken advantage of. They feel like we've created a cottage industry. All of a sudden they had no, no knowledge of, but now all of a sudden there are these people doing these inspections and telling them, oh, you need this, this and that. And they have no idea. And then they're saying, oh, by the way, we can do that work. And, you know, it'll only cost you, you know, $250,000. And we'll make sure that you have a BDA system where there is that, you know, two-way radio signal strength. I'm just not comfortable with the whole thing. Yeah. And some feedback that we've received is similar to what you just expressed, which is I think the buildings and the residents and the building owners and managers understand the importance of the safety aspect of having an adequate two-way radio communication system within their buildings. Their concern comes from they want to be sure that the investment they're making is the right investment and the best use of their funds. Exactly. And are we sure that it's the best use of their funds? And are we sure that this is the best investment? And are we sure that this pricing is even real or necessary? Or is there something else that we can do to make sure that we have that signal strength? But again, maybe just a little booster in a stairwell or something else other than that. I just think we need to continue exploring this. I'm happy to hear that we are having those discussions. I'm going to continue exploring this with our state elected officials and, you know, state fire marshal. Because I just think it's that important. Because I'm just getting this increased amount of associations and owners just freaking out. Freaking out. Okay. Thank you. In addition to what Chris mentioned, you know, we are reaching out to other cities to see if they are having challenges beyond the ones that Representative Lamarco may have been in touch with. We are pushing the educational approach as well. We're going to be expediting the procurement process. So we're trying to approach this from multiple angles. And our legislative package on the agenda tonight also incorporates this. So this is something that we're behind trying to, you know, get to a resolution. And we will continue the conversation and exploration and report back to the Commission. Right. And then with regards to this agenda item, and I know that this is just really dealing with a portable tower trailer, but are we able to just increase the number of these portable tower trailers and the increase of the number of actual towers? Would that help this BDA issue at all? I asked that same question of staff earlier this week, and I'll allow Ron McKenzie, our Information Technology Services Director, to respond. Thank you. Ron McKenzie, IT Director. The answer to your question is no, that will not penetrate through the building. These towers are different. These towers are ready to roll out in case there is an emergency or an incident happens, and we'll be able to set up towers and be able to provide that type of service to make sure our public safety is able to work safely. What about the bid? And I'm not sure if it's even out yet or is it going out. Didn't we have something prepared to go that would deal with new tower, new strength, new tower, which I would hope would have some impact on the BDA issue? I think we're referring to the P-25 bid that's supposed to be going out. That bid is stated to go out at the beginning of the year. We're actually in the process. TUSA, which was the consultant, is actually redoing that bid, giving us that document. Once we have that squared away, and it goes through procurement and everything like that, we should have it out by the beginning of the year. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Raquel. I will move the item. Before we do that, can I just ask a question, please? So, Raquel, I had made a suggestion that we look into whether or not we could use the excess funds from the building permit fund, since this seems to me to be enforcement of the Florida building code. We cover the fire marshal costs and several other things out of that fund. That fund is actually overfunded because we've been charging our developers too much. This is the third time since I've been here that the fund has been overfunded, and we've had to find very creative ways to draw down the balance in there before we have to repatriate it back to developers. So, have you had an opportunity to look into that? And this may be a Duane question about doing some legal yoga to make sure that this is an appropriate use of the building permit fees. So, our development service... Again, enforcement of the Florida building code, similar to fire marshal inspections and so forth. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Yes, I did take that recommendation or suggestion to our development services team, and we're currently exploring that, but we're not at the phase where we could say definitively whether we would be supportive of that or not or recommending that. So, I'd like to take a proactive approach that we adopt that perspective and let somebody argue us away from it. And so, Commissioner Glassman, my suggestion is that we can utilize this fund. We have... I don't know what our current balance is. I'm sure somebody could probably tell me. Laura? But that being said, I think we can utilize this to, at the very least, offset some of the cost that our buildings, because, you know, the buildings in District 1 along the galt are experiencing the same problems. And I think if we can provide a grant share on some of these things, I think it would behoove us to find a creative way to utilize the excess funds that we have in a way that promotes safety and enforces the Florida Building Code. So, Duane, is it possible for you to get back to us with a legal opinion as to the... I mean, it makes a lot of sense, but I don't know if it's legal. So, if there's any way you can get back to us with some kind of legal opinion as to the ability for this commission to be able to allocate those funds for a project like this. Sure. Our office can look into it and provide an opinion. Okay. Thank you so much. Yeah, I think that would be great. And thank you, Vice Mayor, for that suggestion. I would wholeheartedly support that. I think it makes sense. I think our citizens would be very appreciative if we could figure some way out of this and also help mitigate their financial burden. Thank you. Okay. Mayor, before you move on, this conversation is, you know, is very deep, and I appreciate what we're doing right now. But also, throughout the city, we're understanding that certain condominiums have been identified, but are we, do we have some buildings in other parts of the city that has not been identified? Sometimes, you know, you don't know what's wrong. You just know you're not getting a connection. Can we make sure that the whole city is safe? If this is a problem on the east side, I'm sure to believe that it's on the west side as well. Well, we can look into that. Please. So we can include that as into what's going on. Well, don't all of our structures go through an annual inspection? Well, there are certain types of buildings that would be exempt, and I think that's what our fire chief might be coming to share. Okay. Good evening. Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioner Stephen Golan, your fire chief. So, yes, ma'am, not only are the buildings, the commercial buildings, inspected on an annual basis, but also if any firefighters are having loss of signal while they're in the building, it's what we call a bonk on the radio. The radio, if it loses connection with the tower at any given time, whether we're transmitting or not, it'll go into a bonk status. If they receive that while they're in a building for any type of call, they report that back, and then the BDA team is sent out shortly after to then see if it was just something wrong with maybe the radio at that time or if there's something with that building that needs to be improved. So, but to your point, like, for example, tomorrow we're doing the ribbon cutting on the Adderley. Now, how do we know that that building is going to be serviced by our radio system, or do they also need to have some sort of internal booster for the radio signals to penetrate the building? So that was already in the design of the building. So when it went through review, that was already determined, and that building does, in fact, have a BDA already in it. Okay. During the CO process, it is then turned on and activated before they receive their CO. Okay. All right. So is there a, that annual report, is that available? Because I'm thinking also about the Northwest Gardens, some other, there's a complex I don't know the name of that's on Davy Boulevard that went up right before COVID, just trying to figure out, you know, are we, have there been any reports that I'm not aware of? And if so, I would like to know as well. So new buildings, it's in the design, and then before they get the CO. The older buildings that are already established, it would be in their annual. And the only way that we would actually see it is if they had not passed the test. To date, out of the 483 high-rises that we have in the city, 95 of those have been cited for deficiency in radio communication. So we're looking at about 19%. Okay. Very good. Any other questions of our fire chief? So, Mayor, just to add on, we talked about this last time, which is it's not just residential buildings, but it's schools. So many of our schools don't have the level of communication that we need. And so just as a reminder, we've been talking with the superintendent, and they're working on that, but it's still possibly years away from getting our schools where they need to be. Well, that's not good. It's a massive risk. And this is something that the Parkland Commission identified years ago as a glaring need, and it still hasn't been rectified today. So as we think about this holistically, so one of the things also we talked about last time was compiling, Raquel, if I remember right, it was compiling a list, having the 96 properties that whatever chief, and being aware of what are the properties that we're aware of that have deficient radio comms in them. In addition to that, I think, is including our schools, public and private, that we're aware of that also have deficiencies. So I think, Commissioner Beasley-Pittman, to your point, I think us knowing what those buildings are is important. Raquel, is that fair? And I think we have a list started. I don't think it's comprehensive, but that's certainly something that we can continue to develop. Okay, great. Thanks. Thanks, Mayor. Okay. Any other questions or comments on this item? The item has been moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Sorry, who seconded? I think Commissioner Beasley-Pittman seconded. Okay, thank you. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trent Halls? Yes, and CP2 is now approved. So you have the same concerns on CP3? Yes, so I don't need to repeat all of that, but again, let me just see CP3. Again, this is for the proprietary purchase of a maintenance and support of the Motorola trunk radio system equipment. So my only question is, would purchasing more of these do anything to alleviate the BDA issue or not? These are radio system and two-way subscriber radios, or would they still suffer the same consequences? Ron McKenzie again, Director of IT. This is for the heart of the system. So this is not purchasing any radios. This is for the computer-aided dispatch system as well as the brains of the system so that the communication can happen through the radios. So it has nothing to do with that particular piece. So the brains is not affected? The brains has to make everything else run, but that's what this is about, not about new radios. The brains can't help the radio signal at all. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Let's keep going. No problem. So CP3, are you moving to approve? I am moving. Okay. Thank you to approve. Okay. Do I hear a second? Second. Okay. Thank you. Please call the roll. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trintas? Yes. And CP3 is now approved. Let's just jump back to CR4. This is the issue we had discussed and heard public comment last meeting on street lighting in Menrose Park neighborhood. And for the $35,939.43 monthly cost that was proposed by FPNL. The reason why I polled it is because we have like 40 people who sign up to speak. And honestly, I think we heard a lot of public comment. I know a lot of us have gotten emails over the last couple of weeks, most of which came in support of additional lighting in the neighborhood. Um, but before we go into public comment, if we should go at all, um, is someone from city staff here that can talk to me about this project? Is there nobody from city staff here? Yes, we do have members of city staff available. I just want to share that, uh, staff participated in a meeting on October 14th with members of the Neighborhood Association, as well as with Commissioner Beasley-Pittman and her office. And we shared that in the memorandum that would have been the primary update to the memo. Although the commission asked that this item be moved from the October 7th to today's meeting, we just wanted to share that that meeting did occur and that staff did participate. Wasn't there a recommendation to, um, to modify the number of streetlights? So you may be referring to an email that was sent, um, by the Homeowners Association president, uh, sharing some recommendations, uh, as discussed during that meeting. And so one of those recommendations was to have 150 instead of 555 streetlights at intersections, uh, when asked how that 150 number came about, it wasn't clear that it was representative of the number of intersections within that community. So just an arbitrary number? It may have been. I am not sure. Well, the email says key intersections and potential school bus stops. And then they were looking to do that as an incremental approach to the 550, see how the 150 looked. And then I guess, take it from there, maybe increase as time went on if people really like them, but that's what it says. It says key intersections and potential school bus stops. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman, this is your district. What are your thoughts on this? Well, with the, um, suggestion by, um, I shouldn't say the suggestion, we did agree to go back and have the conversation with, um, the association, the association, identified association. And, um, in that meeting, as it was said, um, those numbers weren't, how we got to the metrics was not defined. And then even in the process of community outreach, these neighbors, these neighbors have cried out to me. They wanted to know what they can do and what they should do. So they took it upon themselves to go out, knock on doors with a petition asking if their neighbors wanted lights or not. I have here with me tonight that I want to, I have, they have already been, um, giving to the clerks. They've gone through that system, but I want everyone to see what these neighbors have gone out in less than seven days. This is from neighbors of Merrill's Park, seven days, less than seven days. They went out and the question is simple. It's a petition. It's not a survey, a petition. We know you asked the question and if you are in favor of it, you sign it. So it's not a survey. It's a petition. They went out, they asked their questions. And if my numbers are correct, this is approximately 400 individuals who are in agreement of lights. Okay. And then we have, okay. And what it says here as a Fort Lauderdale resident and I support having the security of street lights installed in our neighborhood. And also they're, they're, they have the signature, they have this, their signature, their name and their address, which reflects addresses in Merrill's Park. Right. Just looking at this randomly, they, they all 150. Does it say just street lights? It doesn't matter. They want street lights. Oh no, I, I'm not. I don't know. It doesn't have a number. It's not. No, I understand. No, I'm good. I don't want to create an argument. Looking at these just randomly, they're all, they're all, they're all streets in that neighborhood. That's it. So they have, if, if nothing else, the neighbors have spoken. Okay. Okay. We get it. You get it. All right. So, so now the question is the number. Okay. And somehow I think the number 150 was a little arbitrary. It was just like, you know, and, but no one is really, out of these numbers of people who have signed this, um, there's, I mean, I think everybody is, is in support of lighting in the neighborhood. Um, to be honest with you, my biggest beef is not so much in the lighting as the bill we're going to get every month for the lighting. I think it's, I think it's very excessive. And I think, right. $36,000 a month forever. And how much are we paying in other neighborhoods? Well, I don't know that. But so how can you have a problem if you don't know what it is? No, I'm not saying, wait a minute. I'm not arguing. I'm not here to be adversarial. I just, my dispute is with FPNL, not with the project. Okay. We need to renegotiate that number somehow. Uh, we can, we can, if we just, if this commission decides to approve this item tonight, it doesn't mean we're stuck with the $36,000. I just think that that's crazy outrageous. No, no, no. So, um, I would just ask the city manager to, to see if we can go back. Uh, with FPNL and get a more, uh, get a reduced rate on how much lighting costs for these, for these fixtures. In any case, um, uh, it, I, I suspect, and, and I'd like everyone to chime in because I would like to avoid having to, I think everybody who's here tonight is in favor of the lighting, right? Yeah. Is there anyone who's against the lighting? Yes. You have three, four people. You're against lighting. So, wait a minute. Well. I'm going to be heard. I guess I'm going to have, I guess we're going to have to listen to everybody tonight. Okay. Um, so, uh, mirror a little guidance on, in terms of the, uh, reasonable opportunity to be heard. Um, if a speaker has spoken at the last, um, hearing, you have the option of, um, they've had their opportunity to be heard and you can open up the, uh, conversation just to speakers who have not had an opportunity to weigh in on the matter, just, just in terms of guidance. I don't know who spoke last time and who didn't. So, honest. Juliet Rulhak. Juliet, are you here? Yes, she is. Can you talk to us about the price of this? Are you in a position to talk to us about the price of this $36,000 a month? Oh, good. Can you come up, please? Are you Gladys? Come on, Gladys. Okay. You push the button at the bottom of the speaker, the bottom of the speaker. There you go. Good evening. Hi. Gladys. So, talk to us about this $36,000 price tag. That seems awfully high. Well, um. That's a month. Yes. That is, uh, the cost for 555 decorative lights. Um, this is a system where it is part of the LT1 agreement where the poles are basically paid for throughout the duration of the agreement. So, this is an evergreen agreement. So, it'll be, um, the cost of the poles, the fixtures, the maintenance of those, um, as well as the energy. So, it's all bundled in to that one monthly cost. What's the $900,000 for? Doesn't that pay for the poles? That is the cost and aid of construction. So, that would be to install the handholds, the conduits, the bore, um, when they're installing the underground, um, facilities. And that is a one-time, upfront cost. So, the $36,000 is not just for the energy to light up these poles. This is to amortize the cost of the actual, uh, capital expense. Is that what you're saying? The facilities, the maintenance, and the energy. Yes, sir. Right. So, and how long does that go for? The initial LT1 contract is for, uh, the first 10 years. Right. And then it auto-renews every five years thereafter, unless the city or the municipality chooses not to have the facilities any longer. Well, if the $36,000 includes an amortized amount for the capital expense, isn't there a point in time when we've paid for it? I mean... It, this is sort of like leasing the poles and fixtures. It's like a lease. Mm-hmm. It's an evergreen, um, agreement that is, um, approved by the Florida Public Service Commission. Can you tell me roughly what the actual amount allocated for the light, it's lighting, the energy itself? Is there, is there a breakdown? For the energy itself? Yeah. It's about currently $788 a month for the energy itself. Per, per unit? Uh, for all of the lights. For all the lights. Mm-hmm. So, it's just $800 a month for the light, for the 550 poles? Yes, sir. Okay. $555. Okay. So, that's, that's totally different. Okay. That's the energy. All right. All right. Um, does anyone else have any questions of Gladys? If I may just ask one question. This is, again, in an email that we received from the association. So, I, again, I don't know if this is true, but maybe you can help me with some history here. So, it says that all Melrose Park properties were originally constructed with yard post lights, and many residents still maintain them. Uh, these fixtures contribute significantly to the character and ambiance of our neighborhood. We recommend a city-supported incentive program similar to the county's reimbursement program for things like bathroom fixtures where residents who reinstall or repair their post lights can be reimbursed. Are you familiar with the neighborhood at its inception and these lights that this speaks to, or no? I am not. If a resident, and this is something else I was told, so maybe you can help me with this. If a resident contacted FP&L and asked to have a light placed in front of their house on the street, is that possible? Typically, no. The city, um, if it's going to be on a city right-of-way, the city has to make that official request to FP&L. Because I was told that that has actually happened in the past. Again, I don't know for sure. I'm just telling you what I've heard from people. That that actually happened, and then the person did not really like the light anymore because of, you know, it attracted people hanging there and asked to have it removed. Even supposedly, again, I don't know if this is true or not, but would that have even been possible that a person would only be paying, like, $10 a month for that light in front of their house from FP&L? I'm familiar with outdoor lights, and that is paid by the resident and requested by a resident. Those are typically to illuminate private property. If there's an existing distribution pole, typically it's behind the property. And then that resident will request that outdoor light, and that will be part of their monthly bill, of their independent monthly bill. But not a pole in front of a residence on a city right-of-way. I've not encountered that. You've not seen that. Okay, well, thank you. No, that's very helpful. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Okay. Thank you. I have no more questions. Okay. Thank you. So I have a number of people who signed up to speak, but I suspect that some of the folks here have spoken already. I recognize some of the names. I'm sorry? You did sign up. Did you speak last time? All right, well, I'm going to call people's names, and if you've already spoken last time, I'll just, you know, we're on the honor system here because we'd like to get through the issue sooner than later. I can't hear a word you're saying, so it's okay. I'm going to call you up. Duke Dennis, Cheryl McRae, and Liam Ryan. Did you all speak last time? Okay. Did Duke speak? You did not speak. So why don't you come up? Followed by Cheryl McRae, followed by Liam Ryan. Cheryl spoke? Okay. One down. One down. Come on, sir. Come on. Come on. I feel like I'm back in fifth grade at the opening of the play. Commissioners, Mayor, thank you for hearing all of us. Duke Dennis, I'm a happy 24-year resident of Melrose Park. You know, they never tell you they don't have streetlights. You find out the first night you're there, which I just found odd, only because I've always lived with a place with streetlights, and I got kind of used to it, you know. But the HOA and Ms. Guthrie do not speak for the neighborhood. It's no longer an HOA. It's simply a civic organization. It's the Donna Guthrie Fan Club. You know, it's a bunch of people. They think like her. She thinks like them. They meet only every other month. And last one I went, I think there were 15 people there. So are you in favor of the streetlighting? Of course. Okay. But my main point is Donna Guthrie, she has streetlights. She lives on 31st Avenue. So she doesn't have anything to complain about. Well, you know, that's fine. All right, so we'll mark you down as in favor of streetlights. Yeah. Okay. Well, just also, because we think the ones that want the streetlights are thinking of everyone. The ones that don't want them are just thinking of themselves. Okay. You know, we have young people, and we get old people, and I'm going to be an old people one day. I mean, they're carrying me out of that house first, so I want to have safety. But thank you very much. You're very welcome. Now, Mr. Ryan, you come from Tampa, so I can't really want, I don't need, I can't let you speak. You don't even live here. I'm sorry. Maritza Pagan, you spoke last to me. Okay. Christopher Persaud. Sorry. Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners. My name is Christopher Persaud. I have lived in Melrose Park for 22 consecutive years. I have never experienced any crime in our neighborhood. I recently installed two large LED lights fixtures in my driveway from regular lights to bigger LEDs to light up the intersection of my street. And what I have noticed was drivers tend to speed well above 25 miles per hour, the speed limit, which is actually posted on my swale. When I turn those lights off periodically at night, traffic naturally slows down. From this observation, I'm concerned that installing brighter street lights may actually encourage drivers to accelerate through our neighborhoods, creating a safety risk for residents similar to what has happened in broad daylight. My neighbor, Pana, a car actually jumped off the media and crashed into his house, breaking down the whole wall from a speed-accelerating IRA driver. Also, I'm requesting that the board conduct verification to ensure that those individuals who are here tonight in favoring of this street lights, they are actual members, bona fide members of our neighborhood, and not any outsiders, residents, renters. Finish your sentence. Finish your sentence. Finish your sentence. Finish your sentence. Finish your sentence. Um, renters, um, import, making important decisions regarding our neighborhood. Also, um, I have a video from two days ago from Commissioner Pittman that had, uh, someone recruiting, uh, sign petition to, in favor only of street lights and no other option of opposing the street lights. This was a door ring camera that was recording the entire conversation. It's about 15 seconds long. Okay. People are entitled to submit petitions the way they would. That's fine, but you have to put the opposite. But if someone's against something, they don't have to sign it. Yeah, but you did, the person asks, the person asks the question, is there an option to oppose? The person said, no, only for lights. So, I mean, it was just a one-way petition that was organized. Well, that's the way of petitions. That's how petitions work. That's the way of petitions. That's how petitions work. All right, thank you. Okay. Thank you, sir. No problem. I gave that definition before I started, the difference between a petition and a survey. I never got a petition. It doesn't matter. If they knocked on your door, it was a choice. It's just like if you're going through a parking lot and someone approaches you with a petition, they tell you what it is and you have an option to sign. It's not a survey. It was not a survey. Right. And the neighbors, the neighbors went out and did the survey. Okay. Excuse me, the petition. And respectfully, Ms. Pittman. Thank you. I appreciate you, but I left a message for you two years ago and you never call me back. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. I don't know what to say about that. It's okay. It's the same as those people who send me emails to the wrong email address. All right. Clarissa. Clarissa Moeller. Are you here? Did you already speak? All right. Wait, you know, wait, wait, wait. This is not how we do things. If you'd like to come up and speak, you can come up and speak. No one can hear you. No one can see you. We need to have all the testimony on the record. So you're up now. Would you like to speak? Folks, folks, folks. Come on. Come on. Folks. Are we going to get through this or not? Because I can cut off all testimony right now. So let's move forward with those that are eligible and let's listen to the people and what they have to say. So, Clarissa, I've called you up. You don't want to speak. Okay. Caitlin Lecter. Caitlin, are you here? You did speak last. You can't speak anymore. I can't speak anymore. Sorry. That's okay. But you've already testified. And the way the rules are, you've, okay. If you want to, if you want to send us, you know, the commission, an email or something. Yeah. And I, I, I did read it. So, um, Ms. Guerrier, uh, Panerothy Guerrier. No. No, you, that's not how it works. You got to come up here. I can speak loud too. One listens, but I can speak loud. Yeah. Um, my name is Panerothy Guerrier. I've been in Melrose for almost three years. So, I, I love light. Okay. So, the only reason I'm here is for the cost. Because life is, like, when I want to save money like you guys do. Okay. So, it's the cost that bothers me most. So, that's why I'm here. So, I'm opposed because of the amount of money that I'm, I'm going to have to pay. Well, everyone, everyone's going to have to pay it. What, what do you say? I mean, it's, it's a city expense. Yeah. Yeah, but this, but I'm, I'm not going to pay. It's not going to be a bill on top of my, my FPNL bill? Oh, okay. It's going to be on my, it's going to be on my bill. It's going to be on everybody's bill. No. $6,000 a month. The city pays. Okay. All right. This is, I'm paying for lights in your neighborhood. All right. David Nelson, followed by Ray Saunders. You got folks here. All right. Joanne Saunders. You spoke last time. Okay. And you were very eloquent. It was Joanne Saunders, Ray Saunders, Michael. You folks. But you said you already spoke. No, no. Oh, you did not speak. Oh, I'm sorry. Okay. You are Raymond? Yes, Raymond. Okay. Please proceed. Okay. Good evening, everyone. My wife and I has been living in the community since 2020, just to give you guys a backstory. Like the first speaker that went up, we didn't know that there's a community in 2025. We're in 25 now, right? That has no streetlights in the community. You know, that's, that's amazing. I'm actually from the islands. So, um, you know, when a community go up, the first thing goes in is streetlights. And the reason why they do that is for safety. You know, that's very obvious. So I'm surprised that the community didn't have any streetlights. So we didn't get a chance to research that because I didn't even know that was possible. Um, you did your walkthrough in the daytime? The daytime. So I missed that one. I'm going to recommend to everybody when you buy a house, go at night and when it's raining. Okay. So, um, you know, I do understand the community, community concerns, the guys that are saying that they're opposing it, you know, most people more than likely it's going to be because of the costs. You know, I understand that because we're all feeling the costs right across the board. But one of the most important things that we have to look at, you know, is our safety as a community, right? And so the guy, the second speaker that went up spoke about the, um, you know, the, the person driving very, very fast and going into somebody's home. That's a safety issue and we can't have that. But the streetlights is not going to be the thing that's going to fix that. You know, we could probably look at speed bumps to reduce the speeding in the community. And we've been actually talking about that, um, as neighbors, you know, and they've been put in, uh, some of the communities. So that's the solution there. Um, so in reality, man, um, I think it was in 20, 2023 that we had that flooding. I came home in the middle of the night and the community was completely flooded. So I had to literally walk home, you know, in the dark, um, in pretty much knee, knee-eye water, you know, um, with zero streetlights, you know, that's a safety issue, man, because we have a lot of older neighbors in the community. And if something happens and they have to leave their house in the middle of the night, you know, they're going to be in a big, big problems, man. So that's the reality that we have to really think about. All right. So, okay. You're just not just for us. Yeah. Okay. Thank you so much. Good afternoon. My name is Joanne Saunders. Um, to add to his concern, um, I've had conversations with police officers. We were some of the people that went around in neighborhood and got signatures. And I did offer, you know, we are in favor of the lights. If you are in favor of the lights, please sign the petition. It wasn't a, just, you know, yes, sign the petition. I asked. And the majority of the neighbors did say yes. The few that said no thought we were soliciting. That was one thing that caused the issue. So most of the people say yes. Um, there's a small group that are against it, but they don't speak for the whole neighborhood. Um, we got, we only did it for one day. I wish I had gone around more to, to see more people, to get more numbers. Cause had I had known earlier, I would have gone to get more, more names. Most people are saying, yes, we want lights. We just want an alternative, something that's cheaper. That's going to cost less. If that's, if that's a concern for the city, we just want lights. Just if you guys have to go back and sit and find a solution, we just want lights. Okay. Um, we have safety concerns as well, cause I've had, um, situations when I was driving at night and people are wearing dark clothing and I don't see them as I'm turning the corner. So that's a safety concern. We don't want to wait till we have an incident when somebody runs into somebody else for us to say, oh, oops, we need streetlights now. It's important that we, we handle the situation. Now we can't take walks at night. We can't do certain things. Um, if I go take a walk and it gets dark with my daughter, you know, I'm worrying about my safety in the dark of, you know, in a neighborhood, people don't walk their dogs. We have a lot of issues that we could handle if we had streetlights and opinions don't matter. You know, saying that somebody's, um, speeding around the neighborhood, they speed in the daylight. That night doesn't make a difference. If they speed in the day, they're going to speed at night. We can, like they said, put speed bumps, find other methods, but speeding is not the problem. We need lights. That's it. Okay. Thank you. Are you Michael? Yes. Hopefully. So thank you for letting me speak. I'll be honest. I never thought, uh, streetlights would make me so emotional. Okay. It wasn't my plan in life, but I can only speak about my, my personal experience. It's okay. So I moved to, to Florida about five to six years ago, uh, moved to a different place in, uh, Fort Lauderdale, different commissioner, but he was, he's good as well. Um, and at some point we wanted to stay in Fort Lauderdale because we fell in love in the city. Um, we didn't have a lot of money, uh, to purchase a property. And we found a very nice place, which we, which we loved in, uh, in the, in the neighborhood. So, uh, one of my neighbors on the first week, um, actually told me, you guys not going to stay here for long. Young people don't stay in this neighborhood for a long time. And I didn't understand that at first. I'll tell you my personal experience. I'm a pretty large guy. Okay. And I have two dogs that I walk in the evening. And during this season, I can tell you, my wife doesn't take the dogs out because she doesn't feel comfortable. Whoever haven't been in this neighborhood doesn't know how dark it is. Okay. Now I, I can say that I did participate in two of the, uh, meetings throughout the process that, uh, about the lights. I can tell you that I saw the city, the team from the city and FPL trying to do any, anything to make a small group of about five people that, uh, that were opposing. I can tell you that if this problem, we don't feel safe. And if this problem is not going to be solved, okay, this neighborhood will stay with all the residents that just don't have a choice. And those residents, they also don't want light. You, you guys, we hear a lot about, uh, affordability crisis here. We hear this neighborhood excluding young families because no one will put their children outside of their house in the evening when it's such a dark. And just one last thing. Okay. One last thing. Your time is up. Uh, a gentleman here, uh, spoke, uh, about, uh, about crime, that he doesn't have crime. So I can tell you that in my personal house, okay, my bike was stolen in the night and, and okay, you were talking about speeding. So I was so lucky and I have a police report that actually during the evening hours when it was dark, a car hit my gate. So it happened in, in the evening light. I can show you a police report if you want. So what you're saying doesn't make sense. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. We appreciate it. Uh, uh, Claudette Grant is Claudette here. Did you speak already? Yeah, you did. You, you sure? Okay. Uh, followed by Yolanda, followed by Yolanda, which Yolanda didn't give a last name, but you did speak last time. I remember that cause you didn't give your last name last time either. Come on, Claudette. Could you pull the mic closer to your mouth? I have a couple of questions and, um, I've been living in Melrose Park for going on 40 years and I don't know who this is going to benefit. I'm going to benefit because I know it. It's not us. I remember when they said there was going to be drainage. And after they said that they had put in drainage, we had a flood that was apocalyptic. I remember I, my house is kind of on a rise, so I wasn't flooded out, but my neighbor, three doors down, she was, she had to wear boots. Okay. But can we just stick to the issue of lighting? We're not talking about flooding. But see, this is where it's coming from. What does it mean? The lights before we didn't have drainage. Right. They said. Right. And then we had that flooding after the drainage. You don't have drainage system installed in your neighborhood yet. It's designed. After. Yes. There was, they said we had to have drainage. Right. And it was forced down our throat. So, and after the drainage was when we got the flooding. Your system hasn't been installed yet. One of, one of the things that they say, we have, every home in Melrose Park is supposed to have lighting at their gates. So if we have lighting, why do we need more lights? Okay. Well, all right. Thank you. All right. Dimitri. I have not an answer and I'd like to. So, Dimitri Krizanowski, I know I butchered your name. Andrei, Andrei, followed by Jeffrey Johnson, Godfrey Johnson. Good evening, Honorable Mayor Trantalis, members of commission. My name is Dimitri Krizanowski. I moved to Melrose Park around three years ago. And I was very much surprised that we don't have streetlights considering that we live in the 21st century. And discussing the benefits of lighting system on the streets is, I think it's a waste of time because obviously it touches on our security of the neighbors that live in the neighborhood. And just as a neighborhood as a whole, when you walk at night, you don't see anything. It's very dark. It's very dangerous to drive. And I am definitely in favor of installing the streetlights. Also, the great concern is if the city found the budget, allocated the budget for the installation of lights right now, what's going to happen if we don't absorb that funding? And what's going to happen with us if we actually will vote not to have the lights? That would probably mean that the next time we'll speak about this would be in 100 years from now. Also, I just think that like a lot of the residents from Melrose Park just mentioned, our leadership of our homeowners association is kind of live on its own. And they definitely don't represent the opinion of the majority of people that live in the neighborhood. I live on Jackson Boulevard and everybody I spoke to today, yesterday and last week, not even one said, oh, we're against lights. Everybody understands the value of having lights in our neighborhood. And everybody I talk to is definitely in favor. Thank you so much. Okay, thank you. Andre, followed by Godfrey Johnson, followed by Reginald Youngblood. Did you folks speak last time, Godfrey or Reginald? I'm sorry, you've never spoken. Okay. Good evening, sir. Good evening. Commissioner Mayors, I've served the state of Florida for seven years. I've been an architect for the past 12 years now. I moved to the community seven months ago. I can't even believe it's, I think, 740 at night. On this day, we are kind of begging for lights. It's not supposed to be. We're supposed to have lights. It's the basics. Light, water, the basic needs for a community to feel comfortable. Anybody that has a problem with it, I believe, either or, they don't understand what safety means. That's a century. We need to move ahead and understand that lights are necessary for the community. We need to stand up. We're not supposed to be here begging for lights, asking for lights. It's supposed to be given to us. So the problem that other people mention in terms of accident or any other concern they might have about lights, what about if one day, one night, you come to your house and you get shot by somebody in the dark or shot your kids right over in the middle of the street? What are you going to say? That's the time you're going to be for lights. So we need to understand as a community, we need to stand up, and not to be here to beg for lights. It's a necessity. We need to have the lights. Thank you so much. Okay, thank you. Mr. Johnson, followed by Mr. Youngblood, you spoke last week. Mr. Johnson, you spoke last week. Are you a Mr. Youngblood? Mr. Youngblood, why don't you come up? Good evening. I'm very, very nervous, so I'm going to be honest with you. But I will say this. My name is Reginald Youngblood. I'm a resident of Jacksonville, Fort Mellows. For 34 years. I've lived there since 6 years old. Now I'm 40. Of course, I've experienced a lot of darkness. And I've been told by many people that, you know, women needs to be, you know, safe and children and things like that. But I think we all need to be safe. You know, we're not superheroes. I've witnessed a lot of things going on in Mellows. Guys walking around at nighttime. Prostitutes, to be honest. All types of people. So, this is kind of personal to me because my mother, about six years ago, my mother, who was diagnosed with dementia, she was robbed in broad daylight on 441, not far away from Davie Boulevard. So, I can only imagine what would happen at night with no light. You know, I see people. We all have flashlights. We all have a lot of necessities. You know, we pay our bills every month in terms of FPNL. And, you know, inside the house, we have lights. So, I'm just a little confused why we don't have lights outside, you know. And I'm hearing the whole budget and stuff, which is cool, you know. But, honestly, I feel like when it comes to safety, it shouldn't be no dollar amount. And I don't know if I'm going in a circle, but bottom line, I feel like safety is our priority. And we should do something about it. And I vote for yes, obviously. All right. Thank you so much. Is Ms. Porter here? Did you speak last time? This is your first time? Come on up. Followed by Christopher Paul. Mr. Paul, did you already speak last time? You did not. Okay. Good evening, everyone. My name is Nobler Porter. And I've been living in Melrose Park for over 30 years. And some years ago, we have lights. But the lights were on the post behind us. You know, we asked for that. If we don't want the light, then that light will stay with the resident that needs the light. We have no problem. 30 years I've been there. I have no problem. And they're saying they're going around and they were asking for, you know, who wants light. Nobody has ever knocked my door. There's a church down the bottom of the street. I walk down that church. And I walk from that church at night. I never have a problem. So I don't know. These people are just coming into Melrose Park, some of them. And they're saying, oh, we're having this problem. What problem? There's no problem. I don't find no problem in Melrose Park. I'm very happy living there. And again, I have, we have a representative that comes here to speak for us. And they said he cannot speak. Florida Power and Light does not live in Melrose Park. But someone is here that representing Florida Power and Light. So I think, you know, our representatives should speak, you know, on behalf of us. I don't think that's, that's something we're asking that is, you know, that's not, you know, fair. I'm not understanding what you're saying. You're saying you have a representative from Melrose Park? No. We have a representative that comes to speak, you know, on behalf of us. Is that the fellow from Tampa? Yes. And how is he a representative? Well, he comes to speak and we have to tell us, you know, what he could do in order for us to, you know, instead of Florida Power and Light, he's giving us a figure. And he can do it on a cheaper basis for us. And I think, you know, we should hear what he has to offer, you know, against from what Florida Power and Light is offering. All right. All right. Well, maybe we'll have him come up. And I don't really think that's, this is the appropriate time for him to be part of the procurement process, because I think that we already reached out to the community and that would have been his opportunity to make a proposal of how to do this. But now we're not going to be going through the procurement process here. That's the thing. It's either lights or no lights. Right. Half lights, all lights. Okay. Well, one of the things, you know, some years ago when I started, you know, living in Melrose Park or bought a house in Melrose Park, we were told that we could put lights on the front of a house. You can still do that. Put the lights there. And we do have lights. Okay. On a house. So why is Power and Light wants to, you know, come in and put lights there? It's more money for us. No, it's not. It's going to cost us in some way. We don't get nothing free. And I know down the line we are going to be paying for something. Okay. So I'm voting no for the lights. All right. Thank you. All right. The last person is Mr. Paul from the New Hope SDA Church and School. Yes. Good evening, everybody. First of all, I just want to again, my name is Christopher Paul. I am the pastor serving for the past eight years at the New Hope Seventh-day Adventist Church, which is directly in the center of Melrose Park. If you look at that concentric circles there, we are smack dab in the middle. We have a K through eight as well as a early learning childhood center there. Would it be inappropriate, Mr. Mayor, if I asked to see by show of hands how many people are here from Melrose Park? No. We're not polling here. You have two minutes to speak. Sure. Sure. I just kind of wanted to see who my neighbors were in that regard. We didn't put out an invitation for people to come here. The people came on their own free will. No word. It's not a good sampling of who's here, who's not here, who's for, who's against. So tonight, I want to speak not strictly necessarily. Please go ahead. Not necessarily strictly for or against the lighting per se, but to pose some questions that I think that ought to be considered. Third, when it comes to our area, streetlights can raise property values, but higher values also raise property taxes. And many of our long-term residents live on fixed incomes and modest incomes. And the question is, how will the city ensure that this project does not become a backdoor to gentrification or to displacement in this neighborhood? Well, let me stop you there. Sure. The city has not raised the millage rate in 19 years. So if this is somebody's primary residence and they've registered for homestead, their property value can't go up more than 3% a year. So even if they went up 20% or 30%, if their next-door neighbor decides to sell and their next-door neighbor gets a lot of money for the house, it does not impact the taxes on that one person's house, okay, only the person who sells. So it does not push older people out. It doesn't push people who bought years ago out of the neighborhood. In fact, I have to commend this commission that, once again, we've kept the millage rate the same, and hopefully we'll keep that tradition going for many years to come. So whoever thinks that is not accurate. Well, I hope that that makes somebody feel a little bit better to hear that, and we hope that that would certainly stay the same going forward. One more question, because your time is up. Okay, I will leave it at that. I think that I have a lot more to say, but it doesn't make sense if I piecemeal it. And so I just want to make sure that our community really processes the far-reaching extent that this can have, not just in the immediate sense, but particularly if that millage rate is to change, if commission changes, if ideals changes, if income, personal income, does not match what could be a property tax income. All of those things can change the dynamics of the community. And I'm not saying that's a good or a bad thing. Well, you know what, can I ask you a question? Sure. Are you for or against the lighting? You never once said. I did say, I started with this line where I said, I want to speak tonight, not strictly for or against, but there were some things that I wanted us to make sure that they were considered. What decision would you like this commission to make? I'm not speaking to that issue. That's not why I'm here, and that's what I prefaced my entire statements with. Pastor, may I ask the question? Are you a resident in Merrill's Park? I am not a resident directly in Merrill's Park. Let me say something to you. I appreciate your response and your remarks, but the homeowners association, they do not recognize renters nor businesses. Your church is considered a business, so you really are not speaking for the community according to their homeowners association. But I appreciate you, and I would really love to meet you and have a conversation with you. I look forward to that. Thank you, sir. Thank you so much. Thank you. Okay, those are all the people that had signed up to speak. So, Commissioner Beasley-Pittman, it's your district. What do you want us to do? I want us to close the open discussion, and let's move forward with a motion to approve and authorize CR4. Okay, there's a motion on the floor. Well, wait a minute. Hold on. CR4 is a resolution, so Commissioner Beasley-Pittman has introduced a resolution authorizing the city manager to execute an agreement and subsequent renewals with the Florida Power and Light Company. So, does anyone from the commission have any further comments to make? I do, Mayor. I have a few questions, actually. Okay. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. So, I'm very happy to see that we've made a lot of progress from the last time we've met, because in reading the backup and seeing the letter from the association, it looks like they are willing to at least initiate a beginning. So, they went from not wanting any lights. Now, it says 150 lights. I actually, personally, am having issues with the $36,000 a month charge in perpetuity. I think it is an issue. I wish we could have heard from the person that was offering an alternative in terms of the solar power or whatever else, but, Mayor, you chose not to listen to that person. Because I like to be a little bit more educated about this. I like the idea of going from zero to 150, because I'm not convinced that we actually need the 550. I don't have a problem with the $900,000 for the polls, but I am struggling with the $36,000 a month cost to the city. That being said, I don't think it's a bad idea to say, let's see how 150 lights look. And, you know what, if we love it and the neighborhood loves it, let's add some more lights. Or if they say, you know what, the intersections where the street signs are and the bus stops are, that's enough for us. We don't need to go to 550. That's good, too. I think what I'm saying is I think we've made a lot of progress. I want to thank everyone that's come out, everyone that went to the meeting. Thank you, Commissioner Beasley-Pittman, for meeting with the association leadership. I understand that the president of the association has a son in the hospital in Arizona. That's probably why she's not here. I personally think we just have a little bit more work to do. We've waited. It looks like this project started, the discussion started 10 years ago. So I have no problem waiting another 12 days until the next commission meeting. All right. Shh, shh, shh, shh. Please, please, please. No, that's not polite. I'm sorry. We have to be able to have a discussion with each other without yelling at each other, without jeering at each other. But we have to listen to everybody. We've listened to everybody. I like the approach of starting with a certain number and seeing if it works, seeing if the neighborhood is happy, seeing if 150. I don't even care if you make it 200, actually, or even half the 550 into 275. I just think that it makes a real good amount of sense to start with a number, see how it looks, and come back. I think that everyone could come together and figure out where. I guess this says 150 if it's 200 or whatever. It doesn't seem like it's going to take a lot of time for all of these voices to come together and figure out the exact design of where these are going to go. And I think that makes sense to me. It makes sense to me to do this incrementally. Start with a number, see how it looks, and decide if you want more. That's all I'm going to ask. Ask the city commissioner for District 3, vetting, talking with the neighbors. Three occasions we had meetings where these neighbors came out. They decided where they want to go. The starting number is 555. We're not going, I'm not suggesting 150. There's no metrics to even support that. The neighbors are ready to move forward. I support them. And let's do what we came to do. Okay. Anyone else have any comments or questions regarding this item? Mayor, you asked about the $36,000 a month. Are you getting any answers on that? I got a very clear answer. What's the answer to that? I thought the $36,000 was for the energy to light them up every night, and she said, no, only $700 a month is for that. The rest, it's basically a lease payment and maintenance for these lights and light poles. Okay. Anything further? Okay. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. The resolution is to approve the item. Correct. A resolution to the city commissioner of the city of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, authorizing city manager to execute an agreement with the Florida Power and Light Company for the installation of new light-emitting diode street lighting in the Melrose Park neighborhood and providing for an effective date. Commissioner Glossman? No. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Mayor Chantels? Yes. Thank you all for being here tonight. We appreciate your patience, and we appreciate your being involved, so thank you so much, and let's come together as a neighborhood, right, and let's try to work together, and let's make good things happen for Melrose, okay? And, Mayor, also, also, I want to thank staff. They put so much energy into this, of P&L for coming out and working with us to get to a number that the neighbors were comfortable with. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. And try to, if you're going to leave, try to do it quietly because you've got a lot of business to take care of. Okay, moving forward on motions, M1. This is a motion selecting a city attorney finalist and naming a city official or staff member to conduct discussions with the selected finalist for the purpose of presenting terms for a proposed employment contract to the city commission for consideration. Shh, shh, shh, shh. Please. Would someone like to move the item with a recommendation? Should we have a discussion first? I hear crickets. I mean, are we going to do this tonight or are we not? Yes, let's do it tonight. Okay, so would someone like to make a motion? Well, Mayor, you made a suggestion, so why don't you make a motion? Well, I can't make a motion. No, you can make a motion. DeWayne, can the mayor make a motion? You can pass the gavel. Great. Go ahead, Mayor. Here, Mr. Vice Mayor. Okay, I'm going to move that we select Sherry McCartney as our city attorney, and that's my motion. Second. Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Okay, no discussion. I guess I should be allowing the Vice Mayor to make these comments. Right. No, no. We've got to wait for the vote. Take the call for the vote. Will you please have the vote, Mr. Clerk? Are they naming a city official or staff member to... That wasn't the mayor's motion. He can entertain a motion after this motion is taken care of. Just for... Okay. Commissioner Glossman? We're not adding anything in terms of who's going to negotiate? No, that's going to be separate. That's separate. Yes. Thank you. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trent Ellis? Yes. And the motion's approved, I guess. Thank you. Can I have the gavel back? No. Congratulations, Sherry. Yes. See you tomorrow at 8 o'clock in the morning. So, Sherry, when is it that you can come on up to the podium? And, Mayor, while she's coming up, I wanted to thank all three finalists. I really want everyone to know how much I enjoy the conversations, your qualifications, your interest in serving this city. This was a great, great exercise, and you're all to be commended for what you bring to the table. And I just wanted to basically say thank you. Can I add to that as well? Absolutely. I have to say, this was an incredibly impressive group. I've had the pleasure of working with Mr. Mengele for 20 years right now, and I have the utmost respect for his intellect and his collaborative nature. I had a great interview with Angel. I had a wonderful interview with Sherry. And, frankly, I'm surprised we got this caliber of candidates after the process that we've been through. And I'm thrilled that we did, and I'm just very excited that there are folks that are that committed to Fort Lauderdale and want to participate with us in moving the city forward. So, thank you to everybody that took their time. And I also want to thank everybody that was involved in the selection process and all that. A lot of work went into this. So, staff, to everyone. You did a phenomenal job. So, thank you. Okay. And, Mayor, if I could just echo, thank you, Angel and Paul, for your diligence. I want to thank Jerome for your work, wherever you are, Jerome, and the Citizens Committee that you helped shepherd, because that was a really helpful part of this process as well. Thank you, Mayor. And also, echoing candidates, thank you, the interviews. I really enjoyed the conversations, what John has said about the caliber of candidates that were there. This was difficult for me, but I am the decision that we moved on. I'm comfortable with, but thank you all, everyone that was involved. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, and thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you, Commissioners. Thank you for the opportunity to serve this city as a city attorney. I am grateful for the confidence you have in me, and I am really excited to lead this legal team in service of you and Manager Williams and all the city staff. I'm really looking forward to it. Thank you. All right. Great. Thank you. All right. I will entertain a motion as to who will be assigned the task of negotiating a contract with Sherry McCartney. I'll make a motion. Go ahead, do you want? To conduct discussions? Yes. All right. Go ahead. Yes, Mayor, if you're open to it, I'll make a motion that you as mayor lead the discussions with the incoming city attorney. All right. There is a motion on the floor. Do I hear a second? Second. Okay. Moving seconded. Anyone have any comments? All right. There being none, please call the roll. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trent Hollis? Yes. All right. So I'll be assigned. So I'll see you out in the alley. Beat you up. Okay. So I'll have someone from my office contact you, and we'll get to meet as soon as possible. All right. Great. Thank you. All right. Moving on to M2. That's everything with M1, right, Dwayne? Okay. M2, motion approving an agreement for an invitation to bid regarding Victoria Park stormwater improvements as part of the Fortify Lauderdale initiative. Does someone like to move the item? So moved. Do I hear a second? Second. Okay. Okay. Moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trent Hollis? Yes. And M2 is now approved. M3, motion approving a service agreement and business associate agreement with Communicare Technology. Someone like to move the item? Moved. Second. Been moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Mayor Trent Hollis? Yes. And M3 is now approved. M4, motion approving change order. Number 30 for construction management at risk services for the new police headquarters. Moss and Associates. What is this again? So this has to do with general requirements and general conditions, largely in part based on the deflection. And there's some other matters that are incorporated within this change order. Anthony Fajardo can provide any additional content. Okay. And this money will ultimately be deducted from what we're supposed to pay? Because we're not paying for the deflection defects, correct? Anthony? Yes, Mayor Anthony Fajardo, Director of Development Services. So the portions of it that are related to the deflection or any other items that are under the E&O will be going to AECOM for that reimbursement. Just want to make sure we're itemizing that and we're keeping track of it. We are. We have an itemized list that we give to them periodically once it's updated. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else have any questions? Okay. Is there a motion on the floor? Moved. Moved. Do I hear a second? Second. Moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? No. Mayor Trent Ellis? Yes. Yes. And M4 is now approved. M5, motion authorizing the acceptance of FEMA funds for the assistance to firefighters grant in the amount of $1,360,000. Do I hear a motion? Just to accept money, right? Moved. I've been moved and seconded. Do I hear a second? Seconded. Moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trent Ellis? Yes. And M5 is now approved. I guess we have to still approve the minutes from April 1st, 2025. No, we approved them at the beginning of the meeting. That's what I thought. I was told. Yeah, the item duplicated for some reason twice on the agenda. You're confusing me. Okay. R1, appointment of board and committee members. Would you like to read the names into the record, please? Yes. For the November 4th, 2025 resolution, Aviation Advisory Board, Olivia Anderson, nominated by Commissioner Beasley-Pittman. Board of Adjustment, Danella Williams, nominated by... By Commissioner Sorensen. Budget Advisory Board, Samantha Perry-Jones, nominated by Commissioner Beasley-Pittman. Downtown Development Authority, Dev Montwani, nominated by Vice Mayor Herbst. Stephanie Toothaker, nominated by Commissioner Glossman. General Employees Retirement System, Board of Trustees, Mark Burnham, nominated by Mayor Trent Ellis. Public Art and Placement Advisory Board, Jacqueline Garcia-Artega, nominated by Commissioner Sorensen. And Jody Tanner, nominated by Commissioner Sorensen. And for tonight's resolution, Central City Redevelopment Advisory Board, Thomas Manos, nominated by Commissioner Glossman. Community Appearance Board, James Ward, nominated by Commissioner Sorensen. Community Services Board, Wesley Julius, nominated by Commissioner Sorensen. Fire Rescue Facilities Bond Issue Blue Ribbon Committee, John Ratzinas, nominated by Mayor Trent Ellis. Michelle Heiser, nominated by Vice Mayor Herbst. Homeless Advisory Committee, Wesley Julius, nominated by Mayor Trent Ellis. And Sustainability Advisory Board, Edan Strauss, nominated by Mayor Trent Ellis. And that rounds it out. Okay. Are there any modifications or additions? There being none, someone would like to introduce the resolution? Introduce. Resolution has been introduced. Please call the roll. A resolution, 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 here of. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trent Ellis? Yes. And R1 is now approved. I want to thank those folks who have agreed to volunteer for these boards and committees. Thank you for your commitment to our city. R2. This is a quasi-judicial resolution amending a site plan Level 2 development with an alternative design, Arts Park Lofts, 407 North Andrews Avenue. Anyone wishing to speak must be sworn in, and the Commission will announce any site visits, communications, or expedited opinions received, and make them a part of the record. Vice Mayor, do you have any disclosures? Deb Matwani? Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. October 21 this year, spoke with Robert Lockery, also spoke with Deb Matwani. I believe I also spoke with Mr. Lockery on this item. And Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Spoke with Deb Matwani and also spoke with Robert Lockery. And Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Deb Matwani and Robert Lockery. Yeah, I think so, too. Let's see. Okay, so no one has signed up. Like, you've signed up to speak, Nectarira, just for questions. Okay. All righty. So, okay, it's been, the resolution's been introduced, but we're not here for that just yet. We need a motion to close public hearing. So moved. Do I hear a second? Move to second it. Please call the roll. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Commissioner Sorensen? I'm going to get ahead of myself. Yes. Thanks. Vice Mayor Herbst? Mayor Chortels? Yes. And public hearing on R2 is now closed. It's been introduced by Commissioner Glassman. Please call the roll. And that's for approval? Yes. Thank you. A resolution and City Commission of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, approving an amendment to a Site Plan Level 2 Development Permit and an alternate design that meets the overall intent of the downtown master plan for the project known as Arts Park Lofts, located at 407 through 417 North Andrews Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, in the Downtown Regional Activity Center, Urban Village Zoning District. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trent-Hulls? Yes. And R2 is now approved. Congratulations. R3, a resolution levying the fiscal year 2026 operating millage rate of .6111 and debt service millage rate of .3568 for the Downtown Development Authority, DDA, of the City of Fort Lauderdale. Someone would like to introduce the resolution approving the levy. Introduced. Jenny, you signed up to speak, but just for questions, correct? It's been introduced. Anyone from the Commission have any comments or questions? There being none, please call the roll. A resolution to the City Commission of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, levying an ad valorem tax for fiscal year 2025 through 2026 on behalf of the Downtown Development Authority of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, pursuant to Chapter 2005-346 laws. In Florida, Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trent-Hulls? Yes. Spend it wisely. Thank you. That resolution, R3, is now approved. R4, resolution approving the 2026 state legislative program for the City of Fort Lauderdale. Daphne, didn't we already have a discussion on this before? Yeah. So what is the, why are we doing this again tonight? Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners. We're having this discussion again because there were three edits that were done in between the time we workshopped it at the conference and today's approval. So if you look at the agenda or the cam, you'll see that there's a red line version and a clean version. In the red line on page four, we revised the firearm regulation statement because we know with the legal case, with open carry, there is a long gun issue that's being discussed on the state level. So here we would say that we do oppose the legislature's efforts to restrict local governments from prohibiting firearms in government building schools and other critical infrastructure. And then we added the line. Additionally, the commission supports closing the potential legal loophole because that loophole has not been identified as an actual loophole. That may permit open carry firearms with the exception of handguns in sensitive locations explicitly identified in Section 790.06 of the Florida statute. So this is just affirming some measure towards home rule. Correct. Okay. And then on page five, we have addressed the BDA issue in the housing and community development statement by adding a line or a bullet that says state measures aimed at, or the commission supports state measures aimed at helping condominiums and cooperative owners manage the increasing costs resulting from mandated requirements for structural integrity maintenance and enhancements to public safety infrastructure. And we purposefully left it at that statement in order to provide for flexibility and advocacy depending on what bills come about during legislative session. And then the last one is on page six, we added an infrastructure resilience in transportation, a notation for vessels anchoring and mooring. We know there's an ongoing issue with anchoring and mooring at Lake Sylvan. So we said the commission supports measures that will prohibit the anchoring of vessels within 150 feet of any private residence. And further that the commission supports amending legislation defining a live aboard vessel. Those were the main two issues for the vessels and anchoring and mooring that have been addressed since we, we workshopped last. Okay. Any questions of Daphne on these changes or anything else on the legislative priorities? Mayor, just for clarification, the commission had not approved this the last time it was discussed. It was in draft form and it was discussed at a conference meeting. So this would be the first time it's approved by resolution. Okay. So not an amendment, just an update to what you had seen before. Okay, great. Thank you so much. Okay. Would someone like to introduce the resolution? Introduced. The resolution has been introduced. Any further comments or questions of Daphne? Good job, Daphne. Thank you. Thank you. Please call the roll. A resolution to the City Commission of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, approving the City of Fort Lauderdale's 2026 State Legislative Program, authorizing the City Manager to approve any subsequent changes to the City's 2026 State Legislative Program for the duration of the 2026 legislative session and providing for an effective date. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? No. Mayor Chantalis? Yes. So R4 is now approved. R5, resolution delegating the authority to receive, review, and process, and approve plats and replats on behalf of the City Commission to the City of Fort Lauderdale's Development Review Committee and the Director of Development Services Department in compliance with Florida Statute 177.071. Would someone like to introduce the resolution? Introduced. Resolution has been introduced. Anyone have any comments or questions? There being none, please call the roll. A resolution to the City Commission of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, delegating its authority to the City of Fort Lauderdale's Development Review Committee to receive, review, and process plat or replats on behalf of the committee delegating its authority to the Director of the Development Services Department or his or her designate to approve with conditions or deny plat or replats on behalf of the committee and providing for an effective date. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trent Thomas? Yes. And R5 is now approved. Now moving on to ordinances of second reading. This is a second reading of an ordinance amending the City of Fort Lauderdale Unified Land Development Regulations regarding variances, special exceptions, and interpretation of the ULDR regulations. I need one person to sign up to speak. Howard. Howard, are you still here? Oh, there you are. Did you want to speak? Well, come on up. So Howard is on the Board of Adjustment. I pressed at the bottom there. Great. I'm so used to asking people to turn it on, and I didn't do it myself. So I just wanted to have two different items in reference to OSR 1. One, at the Board of Adjustment meeting, and I think you've seen the notes I heard it discussed this afternoon, we do support the administrative review with the exception of new construction. And secondly, we did have some concerns, which you may have seen as well, about the appeals process. The fact is that we do spend a significant amount of time really site visiting and going over the full entire case. And we feel that every time somebody or we would give a no, that you guys are going to have it here, and that's going to probably happen more often than you think. So just wanted to share those are concerns on those items and here to answer any questions. Okay. Thank you. Does anyone have any questions of Howard? I think we had a little bit of a discussion this afternoon on this anyway. Vice Mary, did you want to say something? No, I just want to say I share those concerns. I'm not sure that I'm fully supportive of the idea of what's being proposed. I think you're right. I don't think – this is not like P&Z, where the issues are much larger, much more complex. I think a lot of the people that come to Board of Adjustment, a lot of them are representing themselves. You know, they're not showing up with attorneys and lobbyists and lawyers. It's pro se. And so I agree with your position. You know, Vice Mayor, this afternoon when we were discussing this, one of the issues that came up was by allowing appeals to come to the city commission, it helps homeowners out who would otherwise have to spend a significant amount of money to take it to court. And so that was the consideration. We can always modify this if we find that it's become burdensome. But in the meantime, as an interim measure, we had thought that let us go this way, and that way we'll at least test the process and see what's in the best interest of an individual property owner. So I was listening to a lot of the conference meeting, even though I couldn't be here in person, so I did hear that discussion. So I will take you back in time to when we used to listen to all the code enforcement appeals at the conference meeting, and we would regularly have them on at least once a month. We'd have, you know, a number of people that would come before the commission and plead their case and down on a bended knee and begging for relief, and it became incredibly burdensome, and it became a popularity contest and audience participation. And that's why we removed it from the commission, and we kicked it over to the special magistrate, was to provide more continuity in the process and also to relieve the commission of the burden of having to go through those. I think you're going to find that we're going to listen to a lot of these things, and I think we're going to regret going down this path. Again, like I said, we have gone in the opposite direction of trying to take this off the commission's plate, and I think it would be a mistake to bring it back to us. Just my thought based on experience of having sat through these things for many years. Well, and I was one of those commissioners who sat through those things, and I was one of the commissioners that did say let's not be the reviewing body on code enforcement. But I think this is a little bit different. This is not code enforcement. We're not talking about someone who didn't mow their front lawn or who didn't fix an electrical wire. These are much more significant decisions. But again, it's up to what the commission wants to do. I personally feel that if we can relieve the burden, the financial burden of a property owner, and let's test out this process, and if it's not working for us, then we'll make that decision. But I think we should at least let the community have this chance. And, Mayor, one of the things we're not talking about is what this also does is increases the administrative review and approval process. So there are going to be many cases that will be administratively approved that won't even go to BOA and thus won't even be up for denial and coming back to us. All right. Anything further? Would someone like to introduce the ordinance? Introduced. The ordinance has been introduced. Please call the roll. In ordinance of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, amending subsection 47-24.1 generally, subsection 47-24.12 variances, special exceptions and interpretation of unified land development regulations, subsection 47-26B.1 procedure, subsection 47-29.3 zoning administrator, and subsection 47-33.2 powers and duties of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, unified land development regulations. By changing the appeal process for decisions made by the Board of Adjustment, by providing for administrative review for de minimis variances, and providing for correction of scriveners errors, severability repealed, conflicting ordinance provisions, and an effective date. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? No. Mayor Chantals? Yes. And that is approved on second reading. OSR 2. Mayor, thank you, Howard, for being here. Wait, he's not going anywhere. He's signed up for the second reading. Great. He's speaking more. How are we doing in terms of vacancies on BOA? Are we full? Do we have? What's your... I think as of your most recent appointment, we're full. We're full. Okay, that's what I thought we were good. Okay, thanks. Thanks, Mayor. Okay. Thank you for your service. He's not going anywhere. Oh, he's not? No. OSR 2. Second reading. Ordinance amending the City of Fort Lauderdale Unified Land Development Regulations to revise the Board of Adjustment voting requirements. Howard has signed up to speak. What do you have to say? I don't have much to say on this one. We have no objection. Okay. Would someone like to introduce the ordinance? Introduced. The ordinance has been introduced. Any questions or comments? There being none. Please call the roll. In order to the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, amending subsection 47-33.7 quorum, subsection 47-24.12 variances, special exceptions, and interpretation of unified land development regulations in subsection 47-24.1 generally of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, unified land development regulations by revising the Board of Adjustments voting requirement from a majority plus one of members present to a simple majority for final orders in all motions and providing for correction of scrivener's errors, severability, repeal of conflicting ordinance provisions, and an effective date. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Mayor Trantals? Yes. And OSR 2 is now approved on second reading. OSR 3, second reading, an ordinance amending the City of Fort Lauderdale, ULDR, section 47-27.7, to update notice requirements for historic designation applications submitted by an eligible non-profit corporation. No one has signed up to speak. Anyone have any questions or comments? There being none, would someone like to introduce the ordinance? Introduced. The ordinance has been introduced. Please call the roll. An ordinance to the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, manning subsection 47-27.7, historic designation of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, unified land development regulations by revising the notice requirements for public hearings related to historic designations and providing for correction of scrivener's errors, severability, repeal of conflicting ordinance provisions, and an effective date. Commissioner Glassman? Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trantals? Yes. And OSR 3 is now approved on second reading. I have a walk-on item. This is a first reading of an ordinance, amending Chapter 25 of the City of Fort Lauderdale, the Code of Ordinances regarding Streets and Sidewalks, Undergrounding of Utility Facilities Special Assessment Program. Do you all have time to read any of this? This is voting requirements of 70%. It goes on to a lot of other items. I want to take a moment to review it. Again, this is an ordinance on first reading, so it has to come back to us for a second time. Would someone like to introduce the ordinance? Introduced. The ordinance has been introduced. Any comments or questions? There being none, please call the roll. In ordinance of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, amending the City of Fort Lauderdale Code of Ordinances Sections 25-129.4, 25-129.17, and 25-130 to address undergrounding of utilities, providing for severability, repeal of conflicting ordinance provisions, codification, and correction of scrivener's errors, and providing for an effective date. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trent Ellis? Yes. And the walk-on item has now been approved on first reading. Okay, before we conclude, I have an announcement to make. So, Mayor, the court reporter isn't present as yet. I can hear you. The court reporter hasn't arrived yet. Oh, she's about, or the court reporter's about 10 minutes out. Did you want to... Well, we can still make the announcement and convene and wait for her to show, or him, whoever it is. Okay. Okay. At this time, the City Commission shall meet privately to conduct discussions between the City Manager, the City Attorney, and the City Commission relative to pending litigation pursuant to Section 286.011, parentheses 8, of the Florida statutes in connection with the following matters. City of Fort Lauderdale v. Pierce, Goodwin, Alexander, and Linville, Inc. et al. Present at the Attorney Client Session will be myself, Mayor Dean Trantalis, Vice Mayor Commissioner John C. Herbst, Commissioner Stephen Glassman, Commissioner Pamela Beasley Pittman, Commissioner Ben Sorenson, City Manager Raquel Williams, Interim City Attorney D. Wayne M. Spence, Senior Assistant City Attorney Rhonda Montoya Hassan, Outside Counsel Christian Palacio and Kim Vaughn Lerner, LLP, and Certified Court Reporter, MDS Court Reporting. The estimated length of the session will be approximately 15 minutes. Where do you want to do this? Since we're at the end of the meeting, I think we can clear this room if it's okay. Clear the room! Actually, we're done with the... Can I... We're not done... We're not... I haven't closed the meeting, have I? Correct. So you're going to have to make an announcement... Yes, and then close the meeting. ...at the end. But for practical purposes, everybody, the meeting is now concluded. Okay. We'll take a 10-minute break until everyone clears the room. Okay. The executive closed-door session of the City Commission is now terminated, and the public meeting is now reopened. The evening meeting of the City Commission is also now concluded. Good evening, everybody.