Welcome to the City Commission, this first meeting for the year 2026. Thank you all for being here tonight. We have a lot to accomplish this year and we're very excited to begin tonight with our first meeting. But before we begin, just to let you know, those of you who are here for the first time, we begin our meetings with the Pledge of Allegiance and then followed by a moment of silence and then we have certain announcements and we have one presentation tonight. So something to look forward to. So if I can invite Ashton Paul and Zoe Wilder, if you could please come up and join me at the podium. Come on. Right over here. I just want over here, over here, over here, over here. I just want you to know they never stand up and applaud for me. So come on over here. So Ashton and Zoe are going to lead us to the Pledge of Allegiance. So I invite you to do so now. Close the microphone. Put your hand on your hand. I pledge 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. Yay! Very good. Tonight we have something for you. A bag with some great things. Thank you. Did you bring your parents or any of your family here tonight? No. No? Just the two of you? No. They drove me. Did you drive here? Just step back a little bit against here. We'll take your picture. Wow, pretty. Very good. Thank you so much. So Ashton and Zoe are from Northside Elementary, and we're very happy that they were able to join us here tonight. So thank you. So as we continue on, we now invite you to join us in a moment of silence. And as we do observe that moment of silence, I'd like you to recognize three people. Harry Stewart, who was our former city attorney who recently passed away, who's our city attorney for a number of years. Paul Aragonis, a transportation mobility security guard who was with us for 12 years, recently passed away. And also I'd like to recognize Bryant Perry, Penny, excuse me, who 30 years ago today was killed in the line of duty. He was only 27 years old. So Officer Penny, we miss you, and we recognize you each year as we recognize all those who have fallen in the line of service here in the city of Fort Lauderdale. So if we could just join one another and have a moment of silence in memory of those folks. Okay, thank you. This is also a time when we recognize people who have served in our city for a very long period of time and who have now retired. So I'd like to announce there are six of them tonight. We start with Dwight Lewis, who is a lead facilities worker in Parks and Recreation, who was with us for 38 years. Congratulations, Dwight. We also recognize Alan Diamond, who was a police officer with our police department for 26 years. Congratulations. We have Martin Hendrick and Donald Gauntner. Martin was with Parks and Recreation, and he was with us for 12 years. And Donald Gauntner, a police officer for 26 years. Jesse Gossman, a police officer for 18 years. And Steve Higgins, a police officer for 18 years. Thank you all for being such a great, great part of our community and your public service to the people of the community of Fort Lauderdale. So having said all of that, I now ask the clerk to please call the roll call. Vice Mayor Herbst. Present. Commissioner Glossman. Here. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman. Here. Commissioner Sorensen. Here. Mayor Trantales. Here. Now, on the agenda, we just have one amended item in CR1, which is a consent agenda item. Item K was added to the CAM and the resolution regarding a $4,000 transfer. If you have any questions, we can bring it up at that time. So having said that one amendment to the agenda, can I have a motion to approve the minutes of the last meeting? Excuse me, we have tonight's meeting and the agenda as amended. So moved. Second. Do I have a move and second? It's been a move and seconded. Please call the roll. Vice Mayor Herbst. Yes. Commissioner Glossman. Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman. Yes. Commissioner Sorensen. Yes. Mayor Trantales. Yes. And the agenda as amended and the minutes are now approved. So we have one presentation tonight. I'd like to invite Commissioner Beasley-Pittman, who's going to make a presentation declaring or recognizing January 6, 2026, S3 Kings Day in the city of Fort Lauderdale. And it is Jorge Feliz de Rosario of Fort Lauderdale Hispanic Police Association. Is he here tonight? Welcome. If we have any other members of the Hispanic Police Association, please join us. All right. I was making sure I'm in order here. But first, I would like to say Happy King's Day. I have the honor to present the proclamation from the office of the mayor, the city of Fort Lauderdale. Excuse me. Proclamation and recognition of Three Kings Day. This has been... Okay. Let me put some glasses on you all. Requested by Commissioner Pam Beasley-Pittman. Whereas, Three Kings Day is celebrated each year on January 6 and honors the visit of the three kings, Meshire, Gaspar, and Bezosar, who followed a star to Bethlehem to celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ. And whereas, this festival tradition is widely celebrated in Spain, Puerto Rico, Mexico, and throughout Latin America. And it holds deep religious and cultural significance for his, I'm sorry, for Latino families in the United States. And whereas, according to the Gospel of Matthew, the three kings travel great distance, bringing gifts of gold and frankincense and myrrh, representing Jesus as king, God, and human, and teaching lessons of faith and generosity and devotion. And whereas, families celebrate Three Kings Day throughout through joyful traditions, such as gift-giving and children's parades, family gatherings, and sharing Roshan. Is that correct? R-O-S. Roshan? Help me with this word. Roshan. One more time. Roshan. Okay, got it very much. A special cake that symbolized unity and hope. And whereas, three kings are traditionally understood to have come from different regions of the world, including Meshire, who is often depleted as being African origin, reflecting a longstanding artistic and cultural traditions associated with this celebration. And whereas, three kings' day is both a religious and cultural celebration that strengthens families' bonds, honors heritage, and enriches our communities. Now, therefore, we, the city commissioners of the city of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, do hereby proclaim January 6, 2026, three kings' day in the city of Fort Lauderdale. Dated this day, June 6, January 26, 26, signed by our Honorable Mayor Dean Trantellis. Thank you very much. Okay. I'm going to present this to you. If you would come, if you would like to say something. Well, good afternoon. My name is Jorge Luis Feliz de Rosario, but you guys can call me FDR. I understand my name. It's too long. I am the president of the First Hispanic Police Officers Association, and throughout our foundation, we've been able to help many kids in the community. This is our third year celebrating our three kings' day, and we have been able to help more than 1,000 kids with toys. And we would like to thank Chief Schultz for his generous donations that he provides to us every year, and we're extremely grateful for your support and leadership, and without you, we wouldn't be here. So thank you, sir. And on behalf of the Hispanic community, muchas gracias. Okay. They're going to take us up to the front over here. Yes. Where's the party tonight? Okay. Thank you, Commissioner. So now we move on to what's called the consent agenda items. This is a part of our agenda tonight where the commission votes collectively on all the items unless a member of the commission wishes to pull such an item off the consent agenda, and we'll vote and discuss it separately. So I'll ask the vice mayor, do you have any items from the consent agenda that you would like to pull? None. You have none? Commissioner Beasley-Pittman, were there any consent agenda items? None. Okay. Commissioner Glassman? CR1. CR1. And Commissioner Sorensen? None. Okay. So we have someone who was asked to speak on CR3 and CR4. So those items were not pulled. So I would invite you, Susie Bailey, if you'd like to come up and speak on those items before we consider the other items. Good evening. If you could push the button at the bottom of the speaker. There you go. Hi there. Long time no see. First, before I start, I just want to share something with everyone here, and a big thank you to you all. We're out there with a lot of the residents, not only here in Fort Lauderdale, but throughout Broward County and South Florida. And I'm always so proud to say that Fort Lauderdale has a water quality testing program. We are the only ones that have the Miami Waterkeeper testing program in Broward County. There's only a few in South Florida, which is down in Miami. So I'm really proud, and I want to just thank you all for that, because we couldn't do it without your support. So thank you. You're welcome. Also, I just want to say Happy New Year to you all. I want to thank the city staff and everyone involved for the time and effort that went into this master plan, and the city's commitment to protecting and expanding our tree canopy. I'm here today as the founder of Residence Resilience and as a voice for the many residents I've heard from this past year who care deeply about the loss of green space across our city. R4R supports this plan, but respectfully offers a few suggestions to help strengthen it, grounded in both the plan itself and residents' lived experiences. The plan recognizes that mature tree canopy is far more than just beautiful. Tree canopy mitigates heat, improves air quality and public health, acts as a natural buffer during storms, and reduces stormwater runoff. In fact, the plan documents that Fort Lauderdale's existing canopy has already helped avoid tens of millions of gallons of stormwater runoff, making trees critical resilience infrastructure. Our concerns that we hear from residents, though, is enforcement and prevention. While penalties exist for illegal tree removal, fine levels are often minor and for high-profit development projects, where fines could be absorbed as a cost of just doing business. We respectfully encourage the city to consider really strengthening penalties tied to mature tree canopy removal or appraised value, and using stop-work orders to repeat any flagrant violations. So preservation is taken seriously. Residents are also concerned about how the Tree Canopy Trust Fund is used. While the fund is an important tool, payments into it don't guarantee that trees removed from a neighborhood are replanted back in that same neighborhood or watershed. So because canopy benefits are both citywide and local, we urge prioritizing on-site or neighborhood-based placement wherever feasible, along with greater transparency around how fund dollars are spent. As a long-time advocate for nature-based solutions, I really appreciate the inclusion of mangroves in this plan. Mangroves are living infrastructure that store carbon, reduce flooding, mitigate wave energy, improve water quality, and protect shorelines. We encourage the city to lead by example by investing city meaningful resources in a pilot mangrove planter project, such as along Los Olos Boulevard or other stretches of city-owned seawalls, where mangroves can now be maintained like a hedge to preserve water views while delivering substantial benefits below the surface. Finally, I want to briefly address artificial turf, or what some people call plastic grass, which is not currently in the plan, but may be a state-level policy discussion that affects local authority. But given the plan's emphasis on green spaces and heat mitigation for the health and safety of our waterways, our aquifer, and all those who recreate on these surfaces, is we encourage the city to prioritize a phased transition back to natural grass on city-owned parks and public spaces. In closing, mature tree canopy and living shorelines are frontline defense systems. They defend against heat, flooding, and water pollution. Replacement plantings matter, but preservation, enforcement, transparency, funding, and maintaining the green spaces is what really matters a lot, too. Thank you again for this important plan and for the opportunity to share these comments. R4R looks forward to a continued collaboration with the city to help residents stay informed, stay connected, and stay resilient. Thank you. You're very welcome. Thank you. Thank you for coming tonight. Thank you. Is Stephanie McMillan here? Stephanie, she also wanted to speak on CR3. Hello. I just decided to come tonight, and I don't have anything really well prepared, but I'm a third-generation Fort Lauderdale resident and a local artist. And I just wanted to support the increased plan, you know, the plan to increase the tree canopy. I think that's great. I also want to encourage preservation of the old trees that are here. There's a development that's been approved in my neighborhood that is going to take down probably 50 or more mature trees, including gumbo limbos, mahogany's, and sable palms over on 17th Street and southeast 17th Street and 15th Avenue. And I wish that wasn't going to happen. And there's also the property along Davie Boulevard where all those slash pines are. It's been beautiful ever since I was born here 60 years ago. And I hope that those trees are all preserved when those 30 houses are built there. Anyway, there's also that big old sea grape tree that was over by War Memorial Auditorium that's now gone. And I think that's really sad. There are three raccoons who live in my backyard, and their habitat's getting smaller and smaller. They have nowhere to go. My neighborhood's all built up now. And, yeah, sorry, I'm kind of nervous. I didn't expect so many people to be here. But anyway, I just, you know, want to speak for the trees. Thank you for considering preserving them. I did bring some art prints for all you commissioners. If you'd like to maybe have them in your office as an affirmation about the importance of trees. So thank you. All right. Thank you. Ted and Sarah also want to speak on CR3. Thank you. Hello, everybody. My name is Ted and Sarah, president of the River Oaks Republic. Stephanie McMillan is my favorite local artist. I have a lot of her stuff in our neighborhood, and she's helped me on many things. I'm talking about the urban forestry master plan. And, come on, trees are an integral part of our city from, you know, for living, for the humans, for the animal life. I want to tell you, all the different phases of the trees. We have the very healthy black olive trees that line the median strip of La Solis Boulevard, which are home to squirrels, parrots, birds, to the mangroves, which are home to the marine life. And we have them in River Oaks, Riverside, and at the George English Park. All aspects need to be protected, fought for, and cherished. I know this thing has a great aggressive need to plant trees. I know it's an aggressive undertaking. I know for a fact, in River Oaks, we're trying to do our part. On Christmas Day, we planted nine trees in River Oaks on that day, trying to do our part. And when you come to our meeting on the 15th, Mayor, that we are also coordinating with Laura Tooley to have a tree giveaway on that same night to try to do our part. You know, I've been here most recently losing a lot of things to trees about the on the wooden compound on right off of Davey Boulevard. That was going to be 90 trees coming down, most of them pine trees. The thing that it came through here once as a zoning change at the St. Jerome Church in Edgewood, a huge wooded area that's now going to be 72 townhomes. And that was just a solid wooded area that when it came in front of the planning and zoning, Steve Gannon made a site visit. And he said at the planning and zoning meeting, as I quote, this is like a piece of property that time forgot because it is just still all the woods. And if it goes the way everything else, it will be something that will be forgot, unfortunately. Now, I have a question for the urban forestry people that made that survey. I have a question because I looked at their graph on the percentage of tree canopy in the city of Fort Lauderdale. I've been here all my life, 60 plus years, and they have on their graph that the percentage of tree canopy in 2024 is more than the tree canopy in 2018. I don't see how that is possible. I see us losing trees all the time. I don't see how they – I would like to understand how they manipulated and came up with these numbers that show that we are actually a higher percentage of tree canopy this year than we were five years ago. With the development and all things, I just don't see how that's possible, that there is a growth. And I would like to understand how they came up with these numbers. Well, at some point, you're welcome to talk to our folks, but it's not a question-answer period here. We invite you to come and speak. We thank you for your participation. We assume you support the item? Oh, yes, and I want you to go about it as aggressive as we can. One more quick item. We're talking about the Holiday Park parking garage. I like the parking garage. I see that it's needed. But I think we should leave that piece of property, the land, the flat land that you also want to make a parking lot, leave that as green space, plant a forest in there, have the Holiday Park woods right in that area. We've got the parking garage. I don't know if we need to extend more parking in that one vast area on the south side. Turn that into a nice, you know, green foresty space. I think that would be a great thing to do. Okay. Thank you. Thank you so much. Anyone else wish to speak on this item? All right. I would somewhat like to introduce the resolution. Introduced. This is CR3. I just want folks to understand one thing, though. You know, this is an aspirational thing. It's not a guaranteed thing because we're talking in order to accomplish the level of forestry and canopy that is called for here. It's going to take tens of millions of dollars. So finding that money is going to be the challenge more than it would be planting the trees themselves. So while I certainly support it, and I know I'm sure the entire commission will support it, it's more aspirational, and we're going to do our best to try to achieve it. So the resolution has been introduced. Please call the roll. Do you want to take it separately from the consent agenda because it wasn't pulled from the consent CR3? Do you want to just do the consent vote and that will include CR3? Let's just vote on it. Okay. This is for CR3? Yes. A resolution of the city commission of the city of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, accepting the urban forestry master plan and authorizing the city manager or a designate to execute any and all agreements and documents necessary or incidental to implement the UFMP subject to budget appropriation and availability of funds, providing for conflicts, providing for correction of scriveners' errors, providing for severability and an effective date. Vice Mayor Herbst, now present. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Mayor Trent Ellis? Yes. And CR3 is now approved. Commissioner Herbst, Vice Mayor Herbst, how do you vote on CR3? That's on the accepting the urban forestry master plan. Yes. Okay. Very good. Now with CR1. Commissioner. Yes. Thank you, Mayor. Happy New Year, everyone. Okay. Just two items in this one. These both came up at my pre-agenda meeting last night with our district. First of all, letter E. So, city manager, just a couple of questions that came up from my constituents there. The first one, that $30,789,913, is that the all-in number where we are right now with regards to Carter Park? Yes, that incorporates several different funding sources, so we're looking at that as the overall budget. Okay. Thank you. And then recently we did actually have a budget amendment for $6 million for Carter Park that we approved. The question that I had last night was, is this $4,360,628 part of that, like a tranche of that $6 million, or is this in addition to the $6 million that we already approved? This is a grant separate and apart from the $6 million that was previously appropriated for Carter Park. Okay. So, this is in addition to the $6 million, this $4 million and change. So, this is – oh, Laura, please provide a little background, but this is a grant. I understand. So, Vice Mayor – I'm sorry, Commissioner Glassman. So, the all-in number, as the city manager indicated, is $30,789,913 after the grant. So, the $4 million consists of moving money that's already appropriated to the tune of $2 million, and then the other $2,180,314 is the grant because we have to move the grant match in order to separately account for it. So, the $4 million is actually $2 million in new money and $2 million in existing money for a total of $4 million, which brings the new total of the project to that $30,700,000. So, it's all-inclusive then? It's not $34 million? No. Okay. The new number after the – I'm sorry. Yeah. After the grant acceptance, if you approve this item, the number will be $30,789,913. For the total cost of the project? That'll be the total appropriation. Right. Okay. Okay, great. Thank you. I appreciate that. You're welcome. Thank you so much. And then the other portion of the CR1 that we discussed last night, and I don't even know if this is possible because this also was a grant, but maybe City Manager can help. But if we look at letter I, this is a grant from the Florida Inland Navigation District, over $4 million for the seawall that we're going to be doing on the Hall of Fame Peninsula. Is there any possibility of looking into making that a living seawall? I know that we've had that discussion at commission meetings before about how we want to encourage folks. We've done some incentivizing and subsidies for permitting for living seawalls, but is it too late, or is that a discussion that might be had? I know that the Swimming Hall of Fame partners are responsible for matching that $4 million, so it's a total of $8 million. But is there any room for discussion about possibly at least the section closest to the aquarium, which might make sense? Is there any way that we can possibly look at making at least a portion of that seawall a living seawall? Sure, we can look at that. I think the cost estimate that supports this item was based on a traditional seawall approach, but I think that we could have that discussion and see if we can have that portion be a living seawall or maybe even more, depending on what the costs would be. Right, that would be great, and hopefully the partners will be amenable to something like that. I think it would really be a good way for the city to show that we're setting an example and encouraging people to follow through with that. And I can't imagine a better place than right there on the Intracoastal, on the Swimming Hall of Fame Peninsula, right by a brand-new aquarium. It all just seems to really fit. So I'm hoping that we can have those conversations. I'm happy to join in those conversations if needed, but I would be so appreciative if we could at least explore that. Okay. We'll do that. Thank you, Commissioner. I really appreciate that. Thank you. And those are the questions that I had on the – CR1. On CR1, and with that, I'm able to move that forward. So CR1 is being introduced by Commissioner Glassman. That's as amended to include what was provided before the meeting. Oh, letter K that was added? Yes. Fine. Thank you. Thank you. All right. A resolution to the City Commission of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, amending the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida's fiscal year 2026, final all funds budget for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2025, and ending September 30, 2026, as amended by appropriating and transferring funds, as set forth in the Commission Agenda Memo 25-1157, amending the City of Fort Lauderdale final fiscal year 2026 through fiscal year 2030, community investment plan for the fiscal year's beginning October 21, 2025, and ending September 30, 2030, as amended by appropriating and transferring funds, as set forth in the Commission Agenda Memo 25-1157, in providing for severability and an effective date. Vice Mayor Herbst? Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Mayor Chantals? Yes. And that item is now approved. Do I hear a motion to approve the balance of the consent agenda items? Moved. Do I hear a second? Second. Moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Mayor Chantals? Yes. So those consent agenda items have now been approved. If you're here on those items, you're certainly welcome to stay and enjoy the rest of the meeting. It should be exciting. Otherwise, have a good evening. Our next item is a neighborhood presentation. Linda Taylor, are you here? Yes. There you are. Yes, she is. Regarding private funding awarded to Homes, Inc. Good evening. Good evening. Happy New Year. Mayor. Oh, sorry. It's good. Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners. I bring you good tidings. Homes, Inc. has been a partner with the City of Fort Lauderdale for nearly 20 years. We've worked collaboratively to serve low- to moderate-income residents, and we're deeply grateful for this long-term relationship that we enjoy with the City. This relationship allows us to support and assist some of the community's most vulnerable households. We're pleased to share that Homes, Inc. has received $300,000 in funding. Woo-hoo! Yay! Yay! That's what we said. From the Community Foundation of Broward. This funding is critical because it is so difficult to acquire funding from private donors to assist adults. We are using these funds to supplement the dollars that you provide to us for tenant-based rental assistance, where we assist those homeless families in getting placed in apartments, and we subsidize their rents for anywhere from one to two years provided by funding that you make available to us. Currently, we have 32 families that have been assisted, and this funding is critical because the gap in services is, with your funding, we're able to hire housing navigators and case managers that focus specifically on housing. But we needed some folk who could come in here and work with these families on employability skills and budgeting. So this money will allow us to hire two new staff that will focus specifically on employability skills and financial coaching. We have a MOU with CareerSource Broward, so we're partnered with them, and they will work diligently alongside us. I can't tell you how many families are in dire straits because of the rental cost. So when we get a household of, say, four, and they're paying $2,500 a month in rent, and they only earn $35,000 a year, that's hard to maintain. But we've had – I'm sorry, with me is Fabiola Duncan, and she is the chief operating officer at Homes. And, Fab, how many families have graduated from our program thus far? 20. Okay, so we couldn't have done this without the guidance and the support that we get from Rachel Williams and her department. They work diligently alongside us to make sure that we are adhering to all of the guidelines from HUD. So we wanted you to know that we take your investment in us very seriously and that we are always out there looking for additional funds to supplement the work that we're doing. We also wanted to share that since 2009, the city has supported Homes, Inc. and our self-sufficiency program. We own two acres right there at the intersection of Dixie Highway and 13th Street Northeast, and we have 32 young people who have either aged out of foster and relative care or are community kids who live on our campus, and they pay $300 and $400 a month for rent. And we subsidize their rent, because we have a mortgage, with private donors. And we have a grant from the Children's Services Council where we have had approximately 150 young people go through our paid internship program. And that's critical because when you're 18 years old and you've been in foster care, you don't know how to act in the workplace. And so we have a job coach that works side-by-side with them, and they are doing great things. Many of these kids have gone on. I saw Chris Smith come in the door. Some of our kids have worked at Smitty's. I just real quickly wanted to give you an idea of some of the job placements that have been made both on a temporary and a permanent basis. Riverside Hotel, State Farm, Marriott Hotel, The Hard Rock, real estate offices such as Premier Realty, Children's Village Daycare, Total Pediatrics, Jiffy Lube. And those are just to name a few of the businesses that have hired these young people. And, again, I just want to say thank you. You've made a great investment in Homes, Inc., and keep funding us. Congratulations. And thank you for the wonderful service you provide to our community. We appreciate it. Okay. Moving on to our motions. M1, motion approving the First Amendment to the Spry Point Client Subscription Agreement for Spry CIS, which is a utility billing software, and Spry Mobile, a mobile field service system, and Spry Wallet, which is a utility payment processing software. Would someone like to move the item? Moved. Moved. Second. Moved to second. Mayor, did we – is this neighborhood presentation before this not happening tonight? I'm sorry. I beg your pardon? Is the neighborhood presentation not happening tonight? Well, she just gave it. Oh, that was – oh, I thought it was something else. I'm so sorry. I thought – I'm so sorry. I thought there was another one after you. I apologize. And thank you for being an incredible part of Middle River Terrace. Thank you. We love having you there. Thank you. I'll pay attention a little bit better. I'm sorry. Nice save. Okay. Did Moved and seconded? Yes. Okay. Any questions regarding M1? There being none, please call the roll. Vice Mayor Herbst? Commissioner Glaspin? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Mayor Trent Hollis? Yes, M1 is now approved. M2, a motion approving and authorizing the execution of a revocable license agreement between related FAP Village LLC and the City of Fort Lauderdale for the installation and maintenance of improvements on the North Andrews Avenue in association with the gallery at Flagler Village. We have one person signed up to speak, but just for questions, right? Okay. Anyone have any questions with regard to M2? No. Would someone like to move the item? Introduce. Motion. Motion has been made. Do I hear a second? Second. It's been moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glaspin? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Mayor Trent Hollis? Yes. And M2 is now approved. R1. R1 is appointment of boarding committee members. Mr. Clerk, please read the names into the record. Thank you, Mayor. For the January 20th resolution, Citizens Committee of Recognition, Patricia Zeiler, nominated by Commissioner Sorensen. Risk Management Committee, Vice Mayor Herbst. That's a consensus. And for tonight's resolution, Budget Advisory Board, Ronald Goff, nominated by Vice Mayor Herbst. Citizens Committee of Recognition, Mary Pelequin, and she's consensus as the Council of Fort Lauderdale Civic Association's President. Code Enforcement Board, August Puyos, nominated by Vice Mayor Herbst. Economic Development Advisory Board, Allison Myers, nominated by Commissioner Sorensen. Haley Dowling, nominated by Commissioner Sorensen. Education Advisory Board, Kristen LaFleur, nominated by Commissioner Sorensen. And Brian Bender, nominated by Commissioner Sorensen. General Employees Retirement System Board of Trustees, Jill Prisley, that's the elected employee. And Paul Vandenberg, also an elected employee. Insurance Advisory Board, Jonathan Perillo, nominated by Commissioner Sorensen. Mark Schwartz, nominated by Commissioner Sorensen. Ted Hess Sr., nominated by Commissioner Sorensen. And Joseph Pichura Sr., nominated by Commissioner Sorensen. Parks, Recreation, and Beaches Board, Vanessa Apotheker, nominated by Commissioner Sorensen. Police and Firefighters Retirement System Board of Trustees, Susan Grant, nominated by Mayor Trentalus. Derek Joseph, elected employee police officer. Keith Costas, elected employee firefighter. Public Art and Placement Advisory Board, Phoenix Lynn Marks, nominated by Commissioner Sorensen. 2026 Walk of Fame Induction Committee, Eugenia Ellis, nominated by Mayor Trentalus. Aina Lee, nominated by Mayor Trentalus. Dr. George Hanbury, nominated by Mayor Trentalus. George Platt, nominated by Vice Mayor Herbst. Patrick Shavlowski, nominated by Commissioner Glassman. Lillian Small, nominated by Commissioner Beasley Pittman. And Gail Butler, nominated by Commissioner Sorensen. And that rounds it up. Okay. Are there any additions or modifications? There being none, would someone like to introduce a resolution? Introduced. The resolution has been introduced. Please call the roll. A resolution to the City Commission of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, appointing or nominating, if applicable, Boarding Committee members as set forth in the exhibit attached here to and made a part hereof. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Mayor Trentalus? Yes. And those individuals are now appointed to the Board of Committee. And we thank you for your commitment to the improvement of our city. Thank you for your volunteer involvement. R2, resolution delegating the City Manager the authority to execute a project agreement with the Florida Inland Navigation District for a grant of up to $250,000 for the design and permitting of the International Swimming Hall of Fame Peninsula Public Dock Promenade. No one has signed up to speak. Would someone like to introduce a resolution? Introduced. The resolution has been introduced. Does anyone have any questions? There being none, please call the roll. A resolution to the City Commission of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, approving a grant award of $250,000 for the Florida Inland Navigation District for design and permitting of the International Swimming Hall of Fame Peninsula Public Dock and Promenade Project, delegating authority to the City Manager to execute the fine project agreement in any and all documents necessary or incidental to administration of the grant and providing for an effective date. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Reesley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Mayor Trentalus? Yes. And R2 is now approved. R3, resolution delegating the City Manager the authority to execute a project agreement with the Florida Inland Navigation District for a grant of up to $4,020,769 for the replacement and construction of the International Swimming Hall of Fame Peninsula Sea Wall. Would someone like to introduce the resolution? Introduced. Introduced. No one signed up to speak. Anyone have any additional questions? There being none, please call the roll. A resolution to the City Commission of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, approving a grant award of $4,020,769 from the Florida Inland Navigation District for a replacement and construction of the International Swimming Hall of Fame Peninsula Seawall Project, delegating authority to the City Manager to execute the fine project agreement in any and all documents necessary or incidental to administration of the grant and providing for an effective date. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Mayor Trentalus? Yes. And R3 is now approved. Moving on to R4, Resolution Approving the Revisions to the City of Fort Lauderdale's Unified Flex Policy to Reallocate Unused Affordable Flex Residential Units to the Pool of Unified Flex Residential Units. No one has signed up to speak. Would someone like to introduce the resolution? Introduced. The resolution has been introduced. Please call the roll. A resolution to the City Commission of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, approving the revisioned City of Fort Lauderdale Unified Flex Policy and Strategy Document and Providing for an Effective Date. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Mayor Trentalus? Yes. And R4 is now approved. Moving on to R5, this is a quasi-judicial resolution, amendment to a site plan Level 3 development permit, and alternative design solution requests in Uptown Urban Village, Pinnacle at Cypress, 6520 North Andrews Avenue. Anyone who wishes to speak must be sworn in, and the Commission will announce any site visits, communications, or expert opinions received that make them a part of the record. Vice Mayor, do you have any disclosures? Yes. I've had site visits. I've had conversations. You want to put your microphone on? Sorry about that. So, yes, I've had a site visit. I've had conversations with Tim Wheat and Keith Pollykoff. Okay. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? I'm going to have to double-check. I don't recall speaking with anyone pertaining to this, but I'm going to check right now. I don't either. Is there a representative of this project here? You guys. Okay. Do we ever have a meeting? No, I didn't think so. Okay. Commissioner Glassman? No, me neither. What are we, chopped liver, Mayor? You're a filter fish. Commissioner Sorensen? No, thank you. Okay. No one has signed up to speak. Someone would like to move to close public hearing? So moved. It's been moved. Do I hear a second? Second. It's been moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Mayor Gentiles? Yes. Public hearing on R5 is now closed. Would someone like to introduce the resolution? Introduced. The resolution has been introduced. Any questions? Actually, yeah. I'd like, just if we could, get Tim up for one second. I just want to ask him a quick question about the project. Can you push the button? Yeah. Yeah. Great. There you go. Good evening. Tim Wheat with Pinnacle. Happy to answer any questions. Don't know if I need to be sworn in first. No. Okay. Thank you. Does he have to be sworn in? Okay. Do you swear or affirm the evidence you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you. So, Tim, I just want to talk a little bit about the financing for this. You know, we've got a lot of conversations going on about Live Local Act here in Fort Lauderdale. So, what kind of requirements do you have for this project? You know, why are you doing it in two phases? And, you know, just kind of how this fits into the affordable housing strategy with Florida housing finance. Vice Mayor, Commissioners, thanks for your time. Good question. We've divided the development into two phases, both of which will serve senior housing age 62 plus and be affordable at 60% of area median income or less. Some units at even extremely low income levels. As you heard in the neighborhood presentation, you know, affordable housing is in dire demand and people are struggling to make rent, and that's not getting any easier. So, with the Live Local Act, we could have developed it by right, following just a prescriptive local path. But in working with staff at the city, particularly Jim Hetzel, who was the principal urban planner on this, we opted to take advantage of the uptown urban village transit-oriented development zoning. And what you're approving tonight is our effort to follow your existing rules rather than just, you know, use the hammer of Live Local. So, we could have gone that way and we could have had unlimited density. But it was just easier to, and I think more an effective dynamic working relationship with the members of DRC, the planning and zoning board, Mr. Hetzel, who's been fantastic to work with on this. So, and I think that's worth pointing out where Live Local can be a tool, but it doesn't mean we necessarily have to, you know, follow the preemptions that Tallahassee allows. The first phase of 100 units will break ground in June of this year, and it's been financed by a combination of Florida housing sale funds, low-income housing tax credits, and a gap loan from Broward County. And then phase two, the city commission here gave us $640,000 in a commitment to then leverage the housing credits from Florida housing. We expect next week to have a very good result with regard to that application that was filed in December. I hope I answered your question. That's great. I think you're one of the first projects I've heard of getting sale funds in a while. Well, they come to Broward, but for the first one in the city of Fort Lauderdale in a while, that's correct. That's great. Well, and I appreciate that because, like we said, we've had a lot of projects that are flying under Live Local, so it's nice to know people can still do projects without Live Local. Well, like I said, it's a tool, but, you know, we were in our dynamic relationship with the city. As you know, this isn't our first development here in the city. You know, we were gently persuaded by the staff, why don't you stick with the work under the current zoning and work with you on some of the deviations that you would be approving tonight that travel along with the site plan approval. I've got to tell you, we're very excited about this project. You know, one of the things that we really don't see enough of is the affordable senior product, you know, and we desperately need that within the universe of affordable products is the senior product is really, I think, the one that's lacking the most, so I'm so happy that you're bringing this into the Fort Lauderdale, but to District 1 particularly, so thank you, and to your team. Thank you. Appreciate it. Appreciate it. Okay, thank you. Any further questions? There being none, please call the roll. And, Vice Mayor, that's for approval, correct? Emphatically. Thank you. A resolution, City Commissioner of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, approving the amendment to a site plan Level 3 development permit and an alternative design solution that meets the overall intent of the Uptown Master Plan for a mixed-use development named Pinnacle at Cypress, consisting of 196 senior affordable units and 6,525 square feet of office use, located at 6520 North Andrew Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, in the Uptown Urban Village Northeast Zoning District. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Mayor Trentonis? Yes, and R5 is now approved. R6, resolution approving the First Amendment to the Comprehensive Agreement with the Hall of Fame Partners, LLC. No one has signed up to speak. Would someone like to introduce the resolution? Introduced. This is a very exciting step forward. Thank you to all involved. Okay. Anyone have any questions? Okay. Please call the roll. A resolution, City Commissioner of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, approving the execution of a First Amendment to the Comprehensive Agreement and the City of Fort Lauderdale, Hall of Fame Partners, LLC, delegating authority to the City Manager to execute the First Amendment to the Comprehensive Agreement, repealing any and all resolutions in conflict herewith, providing for an effective date. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Mayor Trentonis? Yes. And R6 is now approved. Congratulations. Can't wait for that project to get started. R7, resolution providing notice of the decision to proceed with the unsolicited proposal submitted for the design, development, financing, construction, operation, and maintenance of a multi-use structure with parking, a surface-level public parking lot, and a fire-rescue EMS substation located within Holiday Park, Fort Lauderdale, and authorizing negotiations of a proposed interim and or comprehensive agreement in accordance with Section 255.065 of the Florida Statutes. We have a number of people who signed up to speak, and what we're going to do tonight is, as all of you may recall, there were three applicants who each submitted proposals, and I thought what we'd do tonight is we would allow the presenters, about 10 minutes, to wrap up their point of view, and tonight hopefully we'll be able to make a selection. So the exhibits, Exhibit 1 is G3 Development, Exhibit 2 is Holiday Park Parking Partners, and Exhibit 3 is Park Place Garages LLC, so I thought I'd take them in that order. Does anyone have any questions for us before we begin? Okay, so City Manager, did you have any introductory remarks that you'd like to make? Thank you, Mayor. So we got the feedback from the Commission during the last meeting, and we went back and prepared some documents for distribution to the three proposers that would allow the city, once we received feedback from those proposers, to provide you with an apples-to-apples comparison based on a 1,000-space parking garage structure, a 292-space surface parking lot, and an 8,000-square-foot fire EMS facility. We did receive documentation from the three proposers. We met with each one just to clarify and ensure that we were all on the same page with information being provided to us. And so what you see before you is a summary of those efforts. We also provided additional background information, this go-round on various funding sources and considerations, development trends and urban density characteristics within our city and in the area in particular. We provided additional information on fire and EMS stations currently under development and response times impacting the area. We also discussed a little bit about our parking operations and capacity to perform parking enforcement activities as well as parking maintenance operations. So with that, you know, we fully support the Commission's direction. Whichever way we go with this project, we know we have three firms before us that are qualified and capable. I did provide a recommendation given the fact that all these firms are qualified and that the schedule for project delivery is relatively the same. I did include in the memorandum before you a recommendation. However, it is for informative purposes only. The Commission is able to make a selection based on any requirements or evaluation criteria that the Commission views as responsible and pertinent to this decision. But the recommendation is for the G3 project based on pricing. As compared to the others, the timeline for delivery was relatively the same as mentioned before. And we felt that although they're being recommended, it's important to say on the record that any of the firms that are before us are qualified and capable. So thank you so much for allowing us to go back and to get additional information. We did confer with the City Auditor on this, and I know that he provided some information to you that mirrors exactly what is in the memorandum before you. So we're very confident in the process, and we look forward to the presentations and your deliberations on this matter. All right, great. Thank you. Just a question. It's my understanding that after the last meeting that we had, the Commission had asked City staff to ensure that each presenter presented us with an apples-to-apples comparison, and you have since provided that to us. And also I understand that part of the instruction that was given to the presenters, the applicants, that they couldn't change anything. Everything had to be whatever design they came up with. They weren't allowed to value engineer it or do any changes, which, by the way, probably is still possible after we choose somebody. But based on my understanding is the instruction to each of the presenters was everything had to remain status quo. You just wanted them to give us a more understandable explanation as to their costs and the pricing for each element that was connected to this project. We're talking about the parking garage. We're talking about the surface parking space. We're talking about the fire station. So, okay, so with that in mind, I would like to invite the folks from G3 Development. Is there any particular order that you'd like? Let's see. You've got – I'm sorry, Mayor. And, Mayor, while they're getting ready to come, I don't know if Ben Rogers had some additional information and background to provide based on what your comments were just now about how we instructed each proposer. Yes, Mr. Rogers. Good evening, Mayor, Commission, Ben Rogers, Assistant City Manager. So I just want to provide clarity to what your comments were about what the proposers were asked. So we broke down our request into four parts. The first one was general assumptions, and in that we asked them to make sure that their costs included any all-in costs. So if that's profit, construction, overhead, any factors that deal with the cost of the project. We also asked them to remove any financing elements out of there, as we don't know if we're going to self-finance that or not. So we didn't want to have different financing rates or considerations in that assumption. We asked them to remove any elective or optional considerations from the base package. So the VertiPort, the Solar Array, anything that would be an add-on, we asked them to remove that from this pricing, so that way it would be close to apples to apples. And then we also asked them to confirm their timelines. We went through each of those three elements you talked about, the parking garage. We asked for 1,000 spaces, again, to remove the optional features. We did ask them to confirm that they have an enhanced landscaping or exterior facade that blend in with the environment. And with that, we got a range of $22.3 million to $31.3 million just for the garage. If you remember back earlier in 2025, the city was working on that design criteria package. We had a cost estimate somewhere around $37.5 million for the garage with an office. As for the surface lot, what we did on there is – Sorry, Ben, say that again, that last sentence. Yes, in January of 2025, when we came to the commission to do the design criteria package, the initial cost estimate that we had was $37.5 million. That was for 1,050 parking spaces as well as 16,000 square feet of office space. So not necessarily apples to apples, but it does show you that the cost of these proposals are less than what we initially anticipated. Okay, that's a good thing. On the surface parking lot, again, in an attempt to go apples to apples, we had the 60% design criteria package for the surface lot. And so we provided each of the proposers with the opinion of probable cost that is associated with the 60% design. That included the elements of roadway, pavement, signage, striping, landscaping, irrigation, utilities, drainage, maintenance of traffic, and miscellaneous. And that provided line-item breakdowns of every item that our design has in it as well as the quantity. So that will adjust as we hit 100% for design, but at least it gave us apples to apples based on the 60%. Our opinion of probable cost by our consultant for the design team was $3.8 million, and the bids came back ranging from $3.4 million to $3.6 million. And then lastly was the fire station. We took some of the specifications from some of the other recently done or planned fire stations where we said we want the proposers to assume 8,000 square feet, which would include two bays, seven bunks, two administrative offices, all the support spaces which were listed out in the spec sheet. And we asked them not to include any unique or specialized equipment such as the alerting system that we have our own requirements that need to be implemented. So that's just an overview of what we asked the proposers to do. Again, we stripped out all of the optional elements in an attempt to get apples to apples. We also did ask them to apply a 5% contingency to all of their pricings. That way, again, they'll have the same contingency factor on their pricing. So, Mayor, that's the confirmation of what we asked for. Okay. Okay, great. Any questions? Any questions? Go ahead. No, thank you, Mayor. Ben, so help me with one thing. In the attachment that we were provided for the project confirmation sheet, I see that you had all three proposers sign. I guess it's like a disclaimer on the bottom. Basically, that, quote, above pricing information is accurate to the best of the undersigned's knowledge is derived from the proposer's holiday park submission as previously submitted to the city and reflects the city-identified baseline assumptions for the stand-alone parking garage, surface parking lot, and fire EMS station components, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. So I just need you to help me understand. And I do see that FinFrock and Holiday Park Partners basically came in the same as what we saw when we met at the last meeting. Park Place has gone down $11 million and changed. So just explain to me, because I don't understand, I'm missing something here, if it says that the above pricing information is accurate and is derived from the proposer's submission as previously submitted to the city, what happened? Why is that possible? Why don't you ask the proposer that? Okay. Well, I want to know about the disclaimer that staff had them all signed. But I'll ask anyone. I don't care. I'm good. Yeah, I think we can defer that to the actual proposal during their presentation. The one thing I will say is on some of the attachments, you see that there are updated information or strikethroughs. That is as a result of after we received the information back, we asked them during a one-on-one conversation to verify all information. We, again, reiterated our expectations and what our intentions were. And so some of the information was modified as we did that. But, again, all of that was in real time at the time of the submission. Okay. I'll deal in a little bit further with this with the developer proposer. Thank you so much. I appreciate it. Thank you. Is there anyone else from staff that wishes to say anything preliminarily? Okay, great. Okay. So G3 development. Now, let me tell you who signed up to speak, Scott, Jacob, Jake, the three of you. If anyone else is going to speak, I just need to have you sworn in, that's all. Are you speaking? All right. So when your turn comes up, we'll swear you in. Okay, perfect. Okay, great. Thank you. Okay, please proceed. Good evening. Good evening, Commission, Mayor. Thank you for your time this evening. Happy New Year. It's good to see you all again. Our group is in front of you again discussing the Holiday Park Garage. Over the last few weeks, we've had the pleasure of sitting down with your staff, coming up with some clarifying information and questions that we will go through this evening. One thing that hasn't changed is our team. Our team structure is the same, and it's a flat, city-centric team focused on the city of Fort Lauderdale. We would be acting G3 development as a developer. We have Keith, our civil engineer, on board. We have FinFrock, the design builder for the parking garage, and then Garth Solutions for our community outreach. Thanks, Jake. Scott Zdroik here with FinFrock. Just a brief overview again of FinFrock. We are the nation's largest design builder of structured parking. We've designed and built over 350 parking garages, about 300 of those here in Florida. Our team is the only team really in the state that can sit here that we perform those with architecture, structural engineering, construction, or concrete manufacturing, and general contracting in-house, all with our own employees. And why that's important is that allows us to perform that with our employees, guarantee that schedule, and guarantee that price to you, the city, right up front. So that gives us a really high-quality product and a high-quality process that we are able to give to you, the city, as we look through a holiday park here. As I said, garages are a repeat process for us. With having done so many, we've been able to develop a litany of processes, and that feeds basically off our continual loop feedback. So every project that we do, we're constantly taking all of our details that we've seen perform through our 80 years in business and really watch those through our maintenance company, who's maintained these garages for 50 years. So we are continuously looking at garages, making them better, and what that allows us to do is deliver to you the lowest cost up front, and then the overall cost of the garage as well. So Jacob's going to talk to you a little bit about the garage. Thanks, Scott. Jacob Luckey at FinFrock. So just wanted to highlight a couple of different things. We're going to go through the pricing as you guys had in front of you, but then also just kind of highlight again on the local experience. So with ourselves at FinFrock, Keith, Garth Solutions, we're all Broward-based offices as well. We have that South Florida manufacturing facility that's just right up the road, and Palm Beach County as well. That is a FinFrock manufacturing facility. And then we've completed, you know, multiple parking garage projects. You can see all the dots on the screen, all in that southeast, what we call southeast Florida environment. So, you know, Broward County is, you know, obviously a huge area that we've performed in, Miami-Dade, Palm Beach. But in general, just right up the road, our most recent garage is for the Arcadian on 7th Ave. So that's, you know, within the past six months, that's been actually CO'd for the city of Fort Lauderdale. And then just have, you know, decades of experience working in that Broward County, understanding the city's process with Keith there, as I mentioned, local and really understand what's going to have to happen from a site planning perspective for not only the parking structure, but the surface lot as well. Just get this through and get the construction started as soon as possible. And then we have Garth Solutions with us here today as well. They highlighted on, you know, engaging the community and the neighbors immediately once, if we are selected to move forward with the Holiday Park parking garage, that's going to be our first step. Really sitting down with the stakeholders, sitting down with the community and the neighbors, you know, having this be their project as much as it is our team's. So we are super excited to start moving forward and start developing that relationship with some of the neighbors around the community and work through, you know, what they want to see and how they're able to utilize this garage as well. So just going through a couple of the design options that we've been asked to kind of revise a little bit. So the 1,000-stall parking garage is something we always had proposed. You can see the numbers as they were broken down here, that $22.3 million with that 5% contingency. So looking at just a standalone parking garage, that's what that would get you. We were asked to revise the fire station from 10,000 square feet down to 8,000 square feet. And this is where you're really starting to see some of the variation. Ben mentioned that, yes, they did provide us some specs as far as what they want to see in that fire station. But as you guys know, you can gold plate a fire station to make it, you know, $20 million versus $2 million. So that's really where we've made some assumptions as far as, you know, what we think is going to be best for the fire department. But we're going to be working through that with the team as far as what they're looking to see in that final space as well. So that's what we have kind of included there. And you can see the cost per square foot has kind of – it's going to be a little bit higher than what you see for others. But that doesn't mean we can't, you know, start to bring that down as well. As far as project completion, we're standing behind the 11 months that we provided previously for the garage and then one additional month if that fire station is incorporated within the structure. So those aren't added together by any means. That's a 12-month process if the fire station is incorporated within the parking structure. Yep. I'll stop the clock. I noticed that your structure is four levels, four stories. Correct. And the other two applicants are five stories with the same amount of parking. Not only that, but you incorporate the fire station within the garage. How are you able to accomplish that? So I've looked through the others' proposals as well just to kind of understand. I mean, you're looking through what the differences between the two options are obviously since it's all, you know, public record at this time. What I'm seeing the difference is some of the proposals actually had that kind of outboard fire station which shortens the garage down. We were, you know, had that garage, that fire station within the structure here which allows us to, you know, extend a larger footprint while still keeping the road to the north. So you're saying the upper floors allow you to extend the garage? Correct. Okay. Exactly. So you're not stopping it short by any means. You're continuing it all the way out. The fire station is going to look incorporated within the parking structure, and that allows to get parking stalls above that as well. So our ground floor is actually raised up in that northeast corner. We're leaving double height space. I think I mentioned that last time we presented that double height space. That allows still for that truck dock to give that 23-, 24-foot clearance in there. But the rest of the fire station still has, you know, sufficient clearance. It's just closer to 12 to 14. And is your fire station – it's hard for me to see this, but the fire station design, does that allow for drive-through passage of the trucks, or is it back in? Currently, as it's framed right now, it's back in. That does not mean it can't be revised to accommodate that. But as it's shown here, without us being able to modify based off of the chief's kind of responses after our last meeting, that is how we have kept it at this time. Okay. Thank you. Yep. And then the surface lot, we – as Ben mentioned as well, we were able to get the updated surface lot 66% drawings. What that allowed us to do is kind of take a look at what they're including, the estimate that was put together, and really put our numbers to it, including that 5% contingency. And you can kind of see there where that number shakes out, very close to what the original budget was. I think they were at like 3.8 million, so we're coming in still a little bit below that based off of some of our unit rates and subcontract numbers that we've gotten. But the overall completion for that surface lot we have is two months. And then just running through the renderings, I know you guys have seen these. We don't have to spend a ton of time on it. You know, as you mentioned, it's a lower-rise structure, so that was intentional to not be so impactful next to the Parker Playhouse, not have this massive structure right there in Holiday Park. So that was the intention. All of the exterior screenings still included in that number, as we mentioned. The fire station there, you can see the double bay on the northeast corner, and then the fire station continues inside the structure, just flying through. This is from the southwest, looking from the Parker Playhouse. It's going to be just right off the screen to the left, and then just an overall aerial shot, seeing where the garage starts to, you know, dead end essentially up at the center bay there, but still, you know, from the exterior still remains as a four-level structure. So I'm going to turn it back over to Jake just to kind of finalize our proposal. Perfect. I won't take too much of y'all this time. I know we have a long meeting this evening, and we've said this all before. Our team is capable. We have the track record. We look forward to hopefully working on this project with your city staff. And, again, just hope for your blessing. You know, we've delivered these projects all over the southeast, southeast Florida. And at this point, we'll just open it up for any questions. All right. Anyone? Are you going to speak? I'm happy to answer any questions. I'm here for questions. Okay. All right. Does that conclude your presentation? Okay. Great. Anyone from the commission have any questions? Commissioner Glassman, you have questions. Yes. Thank you, Mayor, and thank you for your work. I really appreciate it. Thank you for being here, and thank you for being part of this process. Please just talk to me a little bit about your experience with regards to fire EMS stations. Do you have experience in that realm? Yes, sir. We have experience in delivering those for some central Florida municipalities. As Jacob mentioned, it was awesome to have some updated scope to be able to provide some more real numbers. But until we can really dive into those finishes and what the actual interior of that fire station looks like, it's really hard to dial into the cost numbers. And so that's kind of where you see that variation. If we were, you know, able to work with the staff and dial that scope in more, we're confident that number can come down and still provide, you know, what the firemen need. Thank you, because at our last meeting, we did, I believe, sort of have a consensus that we like the idea of an actual build-out instead of just a shell and then going back later. And it makes sense, at least to me, that this really gets done from start to finish. And how do you see that affecting your pricing or your work product? Yeah, I mean, with the price we provided, you know, we are confident that the number is not going up. And it is for a turnkey, you know, fully built-out fire station. Again, we do have some experience with this. We've seen, you know, some municipalities bond out, you know, a certain amount of money for three fire stations, and they only ended up with one. And so obviously we're going to work as hard as we can to minimize any of those surprises. Again, the scope is pretty clear. It's just dialing in the finishes and the final cost. Okay, thank you. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mayor. Anyone else have any questions? Yeah, Mayor. Yes, go ahead. Thank you. Thank you all. Appreciate it. Have you met individually with the mayor or any commissioners? We have met with the mayor. We met with Commissioner Glassman. And I believe that we met a few ones. So you've met with all of us. Three of the five. Three of the five. Not easily Pittman or the vice mayor. Okay, great. How about neighborhoods? Have you met with neighborhood associations? No, we haven't met with any neighborhood associations yet. We are, you know, huge proponents as far as we want to work through and make sure the program's right before getting people excited about the project. So, I mean, that's going to be, as I mentioned, going to be one of our first calls. So, you know, we don't want to present something. I mean, we've even been kind of talking through in these meetings what the fire station, is it included, is it not included? So don't want to get something out there on the street that people are going to comment on, rumors get started without, you know, being able to solidify that program. But that's exactly why we have Vaughn and her team signed up with us to start those discussions as soon as we're selected. Okay, great. Thanks. Talk to me about stormwater retention. What are creative stormwater retention ideas you have? Yeah, I mean, so the stormwater retention, it's already been kind of picked up a lot of that being in that surface lot. I mean, for us, always it's going to be something where we're going to need to start running calculations to really finally understand what that ends up being on the northern lot as well. I mean, we have traditionally been able to put storm vaults underneath the garage. We've done, you know, chambers within the garage footprint. So that is something that we are very accustomed to. I'd say probably 50% of the garages I personally have led have some sort of stormwater chambers underneath them. So that's something that we install, whether it's through a precast kind of box with a lid. Underneath the slab on grade, we've done, you know, perforated holes. We've done drainage wells. So that is not something that's foreign to us by any means. Okay. Thanks. Sidewalk. If I'm tracking right what your project includes, at least right now, is kind of the sidewalk. Sidewalk, yeah, thanks. If you can, let's see, I guess, yeah. Are you just looking at this one or the surface lot to the south? No, that one, yeah. Okay. So you have the sidewalk in front that goes to the, leading to the Parker Playhouse, right? Correct. So I think one of the other proposals has a sidewalk included in there is that goes all the way to Federal Highway. I don't know if you saw that. So I did not see that when I was reviewing it. That doesn't mean, I mean, that's easily something that could be picked up for us. It's just, you know, with us not having that property, you know, it starts to, you know, working on other people's land and things like that. But that is something that we can work through with those, you know, individual property owners if that is a desire. Okay. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks, Marcy. Okay. Any other questions from the commission? A question for the fire chief, not necessarily for the team. I just want to know, Chief Golan, what's your feeling about the station being included in the structure of the garage itself? So this is your house. How do you feel about it? Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners. Thank you for the question. So at the end of it is just making sure that the integrity of the station is there. You know, clearly we would have some concerns in regards to the road noise inside and the parking of vehicles. We don't want, clearly, the vehicles right on top of the fire or right in the vicinity of the fire station. But as long as it's meeting the requirements, the state requirements for a fire station with redundancy and utilities such as the power and things like that. Ceiling heights and all that don't, is that a problem? So with your current configuration of trucks, because I'm also thinking about future use and things like that, right? So obviously truck sizes change over time and so forth. Correct, sir. The dimensions that we gave them are the current footprint that we're looking at with the other stations. Okay, no. So long as they've met those requirements, then they'll be large enough to accommodate the trucks of today as well as moving forward in the future. As what you anticipate for at least the foreseeable future, right? So 20 or 30 years out given a life expectancy of the building. That's correct, sir. This building, the specs on the building were two bays. We anticipate only one bay being utilized in the very beginning. It's also seven bunks. We only anticipate utilizing three of those bunks in the very beginning. So it has the ability to grow with the city in that area. Right. You raised another interesting point. So because it's incorporated in the structure of the building, there will be traffic over the top of the building where your firefighters will be sleeping. I know typically that's going to generate a fair amount of noise through the structure. And your guys do sleep during the day as well, right? So they sleep whenever they can. Yeah. Not much, but when possible. When possible. Kind of like the military. Whenever you can, you sleep, right? So do you see that being problematic because you do have the vibration and the noise kind of comes through the concrete structure? The engineers that I've spoken with have given me great confidence that they're able to mitigate that noise by putting barriers in there. Myself, not in construction, I don't know exactly what that entails, but they've given me a great amount of confidence that they'll be able to achieve that. Okay. The only other thing that was also brought up was in regards to a collective bargaining agreement. It requires secure parking for the firefighters. They've also addressed that concern. Okay. Thank you. Yes, sir. One question. Go ahead. Go ahead. Just briefly on the fire station. Yeah, I was just going to speak to the concern with the vibration. So inside that number, I know I have, we did not specifically mention this. We actually have what we call a box within a box. So I've done this for medical office buildings. So it's going to have some separation completely and the floor? It's structurally separate than the actual structure above because that is a legitimate concern. So, you know, although there's not a ton of traffic that's going to be in that area specifically, we have a box within a box that is going to be structurally isolated. That is, you know, we'll have acoustical considerations as well. Okay. So acoustical, vibration, shaking of the structure, all that stuff. Yeah, from a structural side of things, completely disconnected from the structure above. From an acoustical side of things, there's going to be, you know, layers of drywall, other types of insulation material to mitigate that. Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Beasley Pitt. Yes, thank you. My colleague, Ben Sorensen, asked a question about the stormwater, how that would be addressed. Is that the process that you're going to use, is those tons already baked into this price? For stormwater management? Yes. Yes. I mean, the design of that is still forthcoming, obviously. But, yes, we have stormwater funds to be able to mitigate that included within the proposal, correct? Within the proposal now? Yes. Okay. All right. Thank you. Mayor, I had one other question. Go ahead. Are you finished, Commissioner? Yes, I am. Okay. Just go ahead. Talk to me about life cycle costs of a garage like this. How do you evaluate life cycle costs? How do you estimate them? Do certain garages or material have an increased life cycle cost or lower? Does your design, how does it play into that? Right. Yeah, that's a great question. I mean, it's something we get, you know, all the time as owners always hear, like, okay, a precast garage, what about the leaking, things like that. So, I mean, Scott kind of hammered on it a little bit, but we build over 350 parking garages in the state of Florida. We use that feedback loop to be able to say, what details do we need to improve upon so that that doesn't happen? Because the worst rep that precast gets, it internally affects us. We're not just a precaster, but we are a full design builder that we manufacture our own precast. So, you know, all of our – what we've done to really mitigate anything like that would be, you know, utilizing steel forms, reducing our joint sizes, using a higher level of silicone sealant everywhere, which is a little bit more expensive now, but we don't get a call from you guys in five years saying, hey, I've got my entire roof leaking. I need to have that re-caulked. So, that is something that we put into every single project from the get-go because, you know, we're not looking for – we obviously want to be the lowest first cost, but we also don't want to be the most expensive lifecycle cost, right? So, how we look at the maintenance for a garage is very similar to your car. If you don't do any maintenance on it for five years and then you come in, you're going to be paying a high bill. But if you're looking at it and doing routine maintenance on it, you know, you're going to be spending a fraction of the cost yearly than once you're 10 years down the road, you've got spalling, you have to re-caulk the entire thing, you don't pressure wash it. So, I can provide you an entire list that our maintenance team has put together of this is what you should do every, you know, six months, every year, every five years, every 10 years, and every 25 years. So, that's something – that's literature that we've put together. We've put a white paper together on that that I can send you guys after this so you can kind of better understand what that is. But I could speak for 30 minutes just on, you know, how to maintain a parking structure. Great. All right. Yeah, that's good. Thank you. He's getting excited. You've got to know. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Just another thought. Well, I honestly don't remember our meeting. I do know that we did have a meeting. I don't remember if it was all of you or some of you. But I would know that at our meeting, one of the concerns that I had was trying to integrate a structure like this into a park. And I would have said to you, you know, we need to put a face on this garage that is not going to be offensive to the other activities in the park, especially since we're trying to keep as much of a park setting as possible. So far, the only thing I think you've done is paint the building green. It seems to have not included a significant program of creating an exterior that I think is appropriately integrating itself into Holiday Park. You want to speak to that? Yeah, sure. So our elevations, and I'll kind of just jump back to them. So we've utilized some different materials. Maybe we could go a little bit more forward with you guys as far as how we want to mask this. But it's somewhat beauty is in the eye of the beholder here as far as what you want the garage to look like. We've done garages that blend in completely to an apartment environment versus look like it's a piece of art with metals all over it. But here we, I mean, we tried to utilize, you know, natural elements being a green wall on the stair towers, wood paneling on the base of the stairs there. We utilize, you know, fabric art panels that, you know, are hidden by landscaping here but surrounding the parking structure. So there's other elements that we could utilize, whether it's planters throughout the structure. We could utilize, you know, full green walls everywhere. We could utilize wall panels. So that's really just something that we'd want to work with you guys in the community as far as what this wants to look like. Well, I understand that. I'm sure you could do a lot of things. But I'm just wondering why. I mean, the reason why I bring this up is because, yeah, you can embellish the exterior. Yep. But then it would increase the price and now you're no longer competitive. Sure. Well, yes. While the others have spent a lot of, made a lot of effort to incorporate the kinds of designs we were looking for that helped to, you know, fit the parking garage and integrate it into the surroundings. And that's why their costs are a little bit higher. So to come in with a bare bones kind of parking garage and come in at, you know, the cheapest of all of them, it's understandable why you were less expensive because you didn't include some of the design elements that the others did. So how do you respond to that? Yeah. I mean, what I'd say is we've utilized more of a heavy landscaping budget is what we have currently included within the parking structure. So we were trying to do it more so on the landscaping front rather than just straight up on the exterior of the parking structure. But that doesn't mean that those funds can't be removed. Or I think that the difference between the two, you know, the closest proposal, I guess, is roughly 1.2, 1.6, $2 million. So that's something that, I mean, that's a, that's a considerable amount of dollars where we could utilize that to, you know, work with you guys as far as what this ultimately wants to, to look like from a facade perspective. The only landscaping I see, and I know these are just, you know, renderings, but the only landscaping I see is, is a row of palm trees, which are really, they don't make it. Yeah. We obviously didn't want to provide the full landscape renderings here of, you know, with concern you wouldn't be able to see the garage. Another important consideration is, is the height. We are a whole, you know, story, you are a whole story less, I get that, which is important. I agree. And, again, you know, as Jacob mentioned, we are open to reallocating maybe some of those landscape-heavy funds to look at some more architectural treatments for, for the garage. And then also in the community discussions, I'm sure, you know, some, some different ideas and design criteria might come out of that. Okay. All righty. Anyone else have any questions? Okay. Thank you, folks. Thank you so much. Our next applicant is Holiday Park Parking Partners, who's going to come up and speak. We have Cody and Greg who are signed up to speak. Is there anybody else, just the two of you? If there are more, the more is yours. All right. Good evening, everybody. My name is Cody Keese from Holiday Park Parking Partners. I'm going to recap some of the items that we touched on in the previous presentation and then drill down on some of the design items and some of the optional items that we've talked about. Covering our team, we've gone over Clarence Capital being the developer. Parking Advisors is the optional operations partner. Core being involved throughout the entire process, as well as Justin Architects, a local Fort Lauderdale architect who has completed many garages in South Florida. CES Consultants will talk a little bit more about being the stormwater civil engineer expert in South Florida. Vertiports by Atlantic as our optional design feature, should you choose to work with that item, as well as core construction and styles construction for the design build team. And then if the city chooses to move forward on operations and maintenance, you've got styles, core parking advisors, and Clarence Capital. Touching a little bit on some of the qualifications of the team and some of the bandwidth on projects and being able to complete these type of projects, currently we've got over 150 projects active, over 1,300 employees. We've completed over 250 design build projects similar to this project, but what's important is that we've completed over 25 social infrastructure P3 projects under this very similar delivery method. So it's very important that this is a P3 project that we're proposing on and having experience in that is something that we feel is important as a part of our team. And we complete about $4 billion worth of work annually. Jumping into the EVTOL optional item and some of the viability of this, December 17th, the day after the last presentations, the Department of Transportation issued their Advanced Air Mobility National Strategy. And as you can see through the entire report, there is a heavy focus on these EVTOLs being real, being able to be approved in the very near future. And not just for transportation and Uber-like services, but for defense, for military, for local law enforcement emergency responses, for logistics and cargo. The federal government making a statement in that report saying that they will lead a nationwide effort to accelerate the development and the deployment of advanced air mobility technologies throughout the United States. We've also included a letter from Archer. Archer is one of the manufacturers of the VTOLs. VertiPorts by Atlantic is our partner that is proposing to cover all of the costs for the VertiPort deck should the city choose to utilize that option. So they're choosing to invest, build, and lead the way in the city of Fort Lauderdale should the city choose to exercise this optional design feature. When we're touching on schedule, our schedule that was proposed, while they are all similar, our schedule is the fastest schedule between nine months for the parking garage, six months on the surface lot, 11 months on the fire station. All of those will be done around the same time. But what I think is unique to the plan that we've laid out is because of the advanced level of design that you have on your surface lot, we would be able to provide to you a number in the interim agreement and or comprehensive agreement stage so that we could immediately begin construction on the surface lot so that the patrons that are attending and the neighbors that are attending Holiday Park would actually be able to park on that south surface lot while we construct the garage. The garage is going to take some time on design, on permitting. So being able to have that south lot active, open, and ready for use as quickly as possible so there's very little lag time in between when we start the construction on the parking garage, we feel it's important to be able to give the park access to parking spaces quickly. The optional Vertiport asset, it's approximately a $16 million value that the city is not paying a dollar for. This would be something that at the end of the loan term the city would own, but all the upfront costs to build it and to operate it will be coming as a part of our consortium. So that's a $16 million value that the city would ultimately retain once the loan period is done. Over a proposed 35-year annual lease revenue, approximately $200,000. Again, that can be negotiated to be more, to be less, but just using a round number, that could turn into $7 million of revenue over that entire 35-year period. So between a $16 million value on the infrastructure for the Vertiport itself, which the city would own and be able to retain and use through and past the loan period, you're also going to generate revenue, and that lease payment, we can talk about escalators for overtime inflation. You know, we're not saying $200,000 per year for 35 years. We can negotiate where that goes and how high that goes up over time. But ultimately, the city will own the Vertiport at the end of the day, and the city may continue leasing and collecting revenue on that Vertiport, which the city will not have to front any costs for up front. So the numbers that we submitted, the overall number being $41 million, which, you know, there can be a little sticker shock there, but the 1,000-space parking garage being $31 million, the 292-space surface lot being $3.4 million, and the fire station around $7 million. If you look at the overall value that this proposal is proposing to offer to the city, with that $16 million value on the Vertiport and another $7 million of revenue over time that the city would potentially be able to collect on that, you're really looking at more of an $18 million cost, and you're getting a parking garage, a surface lot, a fire station, and a Vertiport that the city would be able to use in the long term. So when we look at those numbers side by side, if the city chooses to use that optional design feature, we're more looking at, on our proposal, around $18.9 million, while the other ones don't have a revenue generation source that will help the city pay for this so that the city doesn't have to come out of pocket on such a high upfront cost. So this is a true P3 that is going to generate revenue for the city to help pay for this project over time. So just touching back on the qualifications of this team, our team, as you can see, by BD&C. Can you back up? How much did you owe $7 million for the fire station? Is that what you allocated? I'm trying to go back. Sorry. Go back to the fire station right there. $7 million, $96,000? Correct. Okay. And $3.4 million for the service lot. And $31 million for the thousand pay. Okay. Just want to make sure my number is correct. Okay, good. Yep. Please proceed. And for, again, touching on the team qualifications, we've built over 200 fire stations. We've also completed over 74 parking garages right here in South Florida. 45,000 total parking spaces built in Florida. That's 17.2 million square feet of parking garages that this team has completed. So we're no stranger to fire stations. We complete more than just about anybody in the United States, as well as we've completed the 74 parking garages in South Florida. Those are things that the city should ultimately put some weight on. We've completed, you know, and successfully completed a P3 in Broward County. We're the only true P3 offering, a revenue generation source. If you look at the overall value in the should the city choose to exercise the Vertaport option, it turns into the lowest true cost for the city, counting the value and the revenue that could be provided. And we have the fastest and most efficient schedule. Touching on the design, our design is very thoughtful in the overall use and connectivity of the park. We have included a design that complements the other existing structures that are in the park while still maintaining the park. We do have a sidewalk that Commissioner Sorensen mentioned that would potentially connect all the way up to Federal Highway. We only added that because we met with the Flagler Village Civic Association, and that was their question was, hey, every time we try to get to Holiday Park, we have to walk down grass or street with oncoming traffic, you know, in both directions. How can you address that? So we proposed something in there that the city will ultimately have to make a decision if that's what they want to do, but we've incorporated it into our renderings. We have a large park nature walkway at the front of our parking garage that you can see in some of the renderings that, again, continue to keep that natural aesthetic. It's right here at the bottom towards the opening, but you've got that nature walkway that's there and accessible. We've explored options for permeable pavers or different types of asphalt. Should you choose to utilize those, we've already done the research. We've provided you with samples, and that's the city's decision, but we can do all those things. We've provided for an Uber rideshare pickup, drop-off, and valet area that is not, you know, just lost space. It's well thought out so that the circulation of the garage continues. We have a pull-through fire station that allows for the firefighters to not have to get out and back up fire trucks. Now, they can do it, but if you talk to different firefighters, the majority of them are going to tell you that they prefer being able to drive through instead of having to back in. But being able to have a partner that's going to work on those designs for you that we've already incorporated is something that we put a lot of time and effort into. Meeting with the Victoria Park Civic Association, their biggest concern was stormwater. So we added CES consultants to the team who are one of South Florida's experts on stormwater and civil engineering, and they've already run calculations on the potential savings of our water storage on the site. So we're running out of time, but those were some of the main points that we wanted to kind of reiterate. All right. All right, great. Thank you. Just to back up now, you spoke a lot about the VertiPort, and you're saying that if we decided to add the VertiPort to the top floor of the parking garage, that's going to drop the amount of money we have to contribute towards the construction of this job by $16 million? The VertiPort is not included in that $41 million as far as what the city is paying for. The true value of this garage and package together is upwards of $55 million, but the city is only paying $41 million. So trying to explain the $16 million value of the asset while the $7 million potential value of the revenue coming in. So your cost is $50-something million? The contractual cost to the city would only be $41 million. The value that we're providing is upwards of $50 million. Okay, so according to the summary we were just given, with the parking garage at $31 million, the parking lot at $3.4 million, and the fire EMS station at $7 million, your cost comes to almost $42 million. Correct. And that's not taking into consideration the VertiPort deck? It is not taking into consideration? That's completely separate in the park? Completely separate that the city would never pay for. If you elected to use it, we would be paying for that. Okay, so in your calculation, you somehow dropped the cost to $18 million. Where did that number come from? That number comes from the value that would be created from the city owning that VertiPort. The city will own that VertiPort, and the value of that VertiPort is roughly $16 million. Is that because of rent? I mean, where is the value? The rent is the $7 million. That's the revenue over the 35-year period. The value of the VertiPort is you now own a VertiPort in your city. The city owns it. It's not our asset. We're not keeping it from you. It's not you just own the garage. Okay, so it doesn't reduce the cost of the parking garage. It just is value added should we decide. Okay, I get it. Yes. All right, I understand now. All right, I'm sorry. All right, great. Anyone have any questions? I do, Mayor. All right. Thank you very much. And, again, as I mentioned to the first presenter, thank you so much for your time and also for your work on this. I will tell you, obviously, this is located in District 2, and I've had conversations with the presidents of both Flagler Village and also Victoria Park, the two closest neighborhoods, and they're very appreciative that their suggestions were included in this, both from the stormwater perspective of Victoria Park, because that's an issue in this park and as it spills over to the neighborhood, and as you mentioned, Flagler Village with the connectivity from across the street, federal, and making their way. So I will tell you, thank you for that. I want to know, and the mayor just touched upon this, but if you could help just explain. So forgetting the vertiport, so why is your proposal higher for the garage, the surface lot, and the EMS station as opposed to the other two? So for the EMS station and the surface lot, we're relatively in line with the other proposers. I'm not sure if the summary covers that, but the parking garage itself, we do have some design elements that are there to incorporate the park atmosphere, to complement the parker and the War Memorial, and making sure that you do have a design, similar to what the mayor mentioned during the last presentation, that is something respective of the city of Fort Lauderdale and the type of structures that you all are looking forward to building in the city, and not just giving a bare-bones project here. And without, we didn't modify our design on this submission because that's how we understood the instructions, but once we are able to move past this phase, if you guys are to select our team, we are happy to design to any budget that the city provides. We are happy to design any elements that the city would like or would like to take out. There's definitely architectural items that we could take out that would help to lower some of that cost if the city chooses to do that. Ultimately, it's your decision of how you want this garage to look. So basically, the $5 million difference between you and Park Place Garage, and then the $9 million difference between you and G3, for just the parking garage, you're saying is attributable to the architecture, the design, and the elements that go into those. Yes, basically that's correct. And something else that's important to point out, the competitor who just presented has a larger footprint garage. We purposely went with a smaller footprint garage to create a bigger buffer zone at the pedestrian level so that the perception and the feel is more like the park. So that's one of the things. And we also added the expense of a skin, a more decorative, more complimentary skin, to blend in with the War Memorial and with Parker Playhouse. And that's the mainly added cost. The rest of it is, you know, our parking garage is as competitive as almost anybody else's. It's how you dress it up and make it look and appear to the public that's important. Okay. No, understood. Thank you. So, again, just to reiterate, the city is not paying for the Verta Port if we decide that this is an element that we want. Correct. The city is not paying for the Verta Port. And ultimately, if the city chose to no longer want it to be a Verta Port, it can be converted into parking. Okay. That was something I was going to add. Go ahead. We conceive the Verta Port to be, you know, flexible. If for some reason in the future the city wants that to be parking, that's been taken into account as well. And it wouldn't be difficult to make that conversion if at some point in the future that fifth level or sixth level wanted to be a parked area. It would add another 200 to 225 spaces to the structure. If we did decide to go with the Verta Port, and then just touching upon what you said, if the Verta Port is not successful and we decided we did want to see that extra floor as parking, would that be something that you would do at no cost to the city? Okay. Yes. Yes. Yes. Okay. Next question. How do you come upon the figure of $200,000 per year in lease revenue for the Verta Port? So that was the number that was discussed between the financing partner and Verta Port's by Atlantic, but that number is a rough number. Should the city choose to want to charge more, charge less, that is something that we'll be able to sit down and talk about in the comprehensive agreement phase. And however the city wants to program that space, we can accommodate that cost. Obviously, the Verta Port by Atlantic would need to agree to that final number, but they would essentially be a tenant leasing out the Verta Port deck. So that's all negotiable. Absolutely. Okay. So when you account for that value of the Verta Port, which I know we've spent some time on, how do you see yourself comparing to the other two proposals, being that there is such a difference in the garage, and we've gone over the architectural reasons, the design reasons? What other reasons in terms of comparison to the other two proposals? For the most part, that covers it. But, again, the thoughtfulness of the design and including things like the Uber rideshare pickup area, as you can see from the renderings, we've gone above and beyond not only to add mature trees and heavy, lush landscaping, but protecting the existing trees that are there, that are already our native trees. And in our first presentation, we showed you our tree protection plan for all of the trees that are existing and how we'd be able to protect those and keep those trees in good health during the construction of the project. Thank you. Is the value that you're discussing here with regards to not just the lease payments, but also over the time of the lease, are those numbers a guarantee value, or are they just speculative? So the Verta Port deck itself that I'm saying is a $16 million value, there's no speculation there. That is the estimate that we've provided to Verta Port by Atlantic for the cost of that deck. The lease revenue would be subject to whatever rate the city agrees to as well as Verta Port by Atlantic, and then we would be able to update the revenue projections and the performer from there. Any financial risk with regards to this Verta Port to the city? The risk for the Verta Port is through Verta Port by Atlantic. Ultimately, they are leasing that space, and they're the ones that would be programming it and taking the risk of making sure that they're making money on their end. If there was any issue and, say, you guys wanted to terminate their lease and they wanted to get out, we do have it covered in their cost to change that top deck back to parking should the city want that. And last question, why wouldn't we as a commission choose the lowest sticker price? Ultimately, in this parking garage, you're putting it in the middle of a park. If you wanted the bare-bones garage, you can absolutely go with that and find that lowest cost, but I still believe the additional items that we are proposing to add to the garage being the Uber, ride, share, and Lyft, the design aesthetic, it gives it the overall value is better to the city and the patrons of the park and the neighbors that will be attending the park from the covered walkways to the parker to the optional sidewalks that we talked about, the federal for Flackler Village. And it really gives you, like our first slide says, a turnkey P3 service to the city. This is a partnership between us and between the city and ultimately the neighbors and residents that are going to utilize Holiday Park, and we are taking all those things into account. Thank you. That's it for me, Mayor. Thank you. You're very welcome. Anyone else have any questions or comments? Ben, did you have any questions or comments? Yeah, thanks. Go ahead. Thanks, Mayor. Thank you. Thanks for the presentation. Who would operate and maintain the VertiPort? That would all be done by VertiPorts by Atlantic. That is their responsibility. The city would not have to bear any responsibility or cost to that. The city's responsibility would just be to lease that to their tenant, who would then have to take care of that portion. How many similar structures to this, or a question for you, from a VertiPort standpoint, do you operate and maintain? Well, this is a nascent industry, so actually this would be the first of its kind in the United States. Lots of these are being built in the Middle East, but this would be the first one in our country. So definitely Fort Lauderdale would be at the pinnacle of technology for transportation in our nation. Thanks. Cody, if I heard you right, I don't know if I did, but if at some point the city wanted to convert from a VertiPort to just a parking deck on the top, did I hear you say that CORE would pay for that conversion? Not CORE, but Holiday Park Parking Partners, and it's already agreed upon that we would be able to convert that deck. We already have the ramps that are already considered in the VertiPort number. That's not the city's cost, and then we would just have to convert that deck to parking, and that would be our responsibility. Great. So the rest of the garage where cars are parked would be those lifecycle costs would be borne by the city, right? Yes. If the city chooses to opt out of the operations and maintenance component of our proposal, then the city would be responsible for the operations and maintenance outside of typical warranty and warranty is eager to participate in the operations component where we have parking advisors, the largest parking infrastructure operator in the country. But if the city doesn't need that service, that is, again, optional. And then the maintenance portion of it, we can absolutely do that part and remove that risk from the city and have that be something that we are fully responsible for. It's whatever the best option is for the city, but we would be happy to maintain it so that at the end of that 35-year period, you are truly going to receive an asset. It's going to be well-maintained. It's going to be in good working condition, and it's been turnkey at no risk to the city. If anything happens to the garage, it's something that we have to be responsible for as this consortium, similar to any other issue that would happen like a weather event or something gets damaged. It's something that we're going to take care of while the city just maintains that even predictable payment that they're going to be making for the overall loan. Great. If the city opted into the maintenance possibility, any sense of what? That's obviously not included in the $41 million. The operations and maintenance components are not included. We only provided the costs for the construction of the garage, and we were asked to remove any of the financing or options like that, but we can provide that if you choose. Okay. Thank you. That's it, Mayor. Okay. Commissioner Beasley-Pitt. Yes. Yes, I have a couple questions. Thank you. In regards to the road report we're on this conversation, understanding that we would be the first in the country if we took upon this option, being the first, anyone near us in the state of Florida in the tri-county area, because I'm thinking if we do this, is there a connector? I'm thinking about how we connect it with the bright line, that usage. Is this something that is going to pop and go, and it's going to take off and not be stagnant for a moment? Yes. If you could address that. Absolutely. And Rolly can jump in and answer most of that, but I think a lot of us have seen all of the recent publicity between people like Stephen Ross and Palm Beach County with the different investments that he's making personally between Palm Beach County and Dade County, but Broward County is not at the forefront of that. That the city of Fort Lauderdale has the opportunity to be, but as well as FXC, I'll let Rolly talk a little bit more. Thank you. Commissioner, so to your question, our business model does contemplate having several locations, and we already have a leasehold in West Palm Beach, a leasehold in Boca, and a leasehold in Miami-Dade County. So this location would be connected to those. In addition, and Cody just mentioned that, and I believe Director James is here, we have a leasehold or an FBO that is operated by Mandic Aviation, our parent company, at FXC, and we contemplate also having a VertiPort at FXC, which could connect in Broward County to this location, as well as to Points North and Points South, as well as at our FBO in Opelaka, and connecting to our other locations. And then additionally, because of all the buzz that has come about by the federal government pushing forward with this technology, as Cody correctly stated, the likes of Stephen Ross, I don't want to mention a name because it's not been disclosed, but our company has spoken to another very large local developer that wants to build this into his commercial spaces and his residential spaces. So, yes, this will become a network of locations that people will be able to fly to and from, avoiding congestion and traffic. So, yes, it will be a full network. Also, next question, state of Florida, what are we, is the state of Florida connecting to this technology? And then also, what is the FAA? Because I haven't really dove into this part of this opportunity. Definitely. But I just, you know, we don't want to be the light and there's no plug to get into. Well, first of all, let me start with the last point that you touched upon. Anything and everything that we're discussing about developing would have to meet the requirements of all those levels of government. The FAA, of course, controls everything in our national airspace. So they would do an evaluation of the proposed routes in and out. They would make an assessment as to whether there's obstructions, whether it's safe, whether there's any nuisance to the community before they approve the operation of the facility. So that would be paramount and first and foremost in our task as we seek to get this approved. But to your first question about the state of Florida, the charge in the state of Florida is being led by the Florida Department of Transportation. And we really are very lucky in our state that that agency has really been at the forefront. I've been in this industry, it'll be five years and a couple of months. And the state of Florida has been leading the charge that whole time. They've put out a guidebook as it relates to how these things could be integrated into our community. And they just submitted a proposal to the federal government so that the state of Florida will be basically a testing ground for how these operations will happen even before certification of the aircraft comes to be. So we likely will see these aircraft from some of the locations that I mentioned, like at FXE or Opelaka, flying sometime later this year to get people used to seeing them and for the industry themselves to see how they will integrate with other aircraft in the air, whether it's commercial or drones. So very exciting. And my last question, in regards to the fire station, that noise pollution, we talked about how the other presenters, what they're doing to guess, and I guess where it's aligned with the project itself. So if you could explain again about the fire station, where it is located, and if it's attached, detached. Sure. I can look for the – there we go. That's just a quick overhead view. Does this have a laser? So right on this top portion – I'm not sure if you can see it. I can hit this screen. It's on the top portion where you have a drive-through fire station, a pull-through fire station that has it immediately adjacent to the parking garage while still in the same footprint area that we're talking about. It's going to be inherently quieter, but this is just our proposal. If the city wanted it inside the garage, we could absolutely incorporate it inside the garage. But there, I think, is some real benefits for the overall health and wellness of the firefighters that would be living in this station regularly and being able to make sure that they have the best quality and best safe, clean environment to be able to spend their careers in as they serve the city of Fort Lauderdale. Thank you, Mayor. I have no other questions. Okay. Thank you. Vice Mayor, do you have any questions? Yep. A couple of questions, sir. Thank you. Appreciate it. A couple of questions, mostly around the VertiPort as well, because I think that's probably really the most interesting aspect of the garage is a garage to a great extent. But, you know, to your point, really this is the only true P3 out of all the submittals. The other one really more resemble an RFP as far as I'm concerned. So this one having a revenue component really strikes me as being more of a true P3. But I do have some questions about it. I'll also make one comment, too, just from a math perspective. So your $7 million revenue, not really, net present value of that of a 35-year revenue stream is about $3.2 million. So just as we're looking at that for math, I kind of like to get my numbers right. But other than that, not a bad thing. Let's talk about some of these things. So you talked about if we were at some point to decide that we no longer wanted to operate a VertiPort. And let me even back up before that. You said that your team would be constructing and paying for the VertiPort facility. In other words, you will finance that in its entirety up front. So that will not be baked into whatever cost of construction is associated with the rest of the garage. So, you know, if we issue a bond for $30 million to pay for it, your piece of it is separately financed at the time that we let this entire contract. So it's a $50 million contract. We pay $30 million. You're paying your whatever it is, $15 million or $16 million. And all that's funded up front. Correct. Completely separate transaction. Got it. Okay. To the city. Presumably, if two or three years down the road we decide we don't want to be in the VertiPort business anymore, I can't envision a scenario in which we cancel that and you guys just eat $16 million. I mean, from a financial perspective, that seems highly unrealistic to me. So let's talk about that for a minute. Sure. I'm presuming that there is some sort of a walkaway fee if we decide to cancel the contract. You're going to want to get reimbursed for that. I mean, I can't, again, I can't envision any financial scenario where you don't expect to get repaid if we walk away voluntarily and we just cancel the contract. So help me understand. Sure. So in the comprehensive agreement, we can work out terms of two to three years is very quickly for something like that to go away. So there would be terms that would need to be agreed upon by the city if they choose or if the city was to choose to move forward with that option. And, yes, it would be similar to like a termination for convenience type clause, and the city would have to be willing to agree to those terms as well as the VertiPorts by Atlantic willing to accept those terms for that portion of it to work. But, yes, there is an investment, and there would be an expected duration to be able to recover some of that. Right. And I would only expect that. I mean, that's only reasonable. I just want to make sure that we're all clear that, you know, if we cancel this, we don't get a $16 million facility for free. And, you know, Christmas just came, and it's not coming again anytime soon. So, all right, I just want to make sure we're all on the same page with that. Great. Next question. You know, we just ran into a project where they weren't able to get the project viable within a period of time. So, as Commissioner Beasley Pittman put in, we got a lamp that you might not be able to plug in for a while. Now, I know I shared with some folks an article, I believe it was in the New York Times just recently, about how they're looking to start running VertiPort operations, air taxis out of Miami and Palm Beach, and, you know, we're sort of that middle child in the middle that kind of makes it, you know, maybe viable. So, I know this is a technology that I think probably has legs. I know there's a number of companies that are looking at it, and I think the thing that's advantageous for you guys is you're not the manufacturers. You know, you're basically providing the infrastructure, if you will. You know, you're providing the razor, not the razor blade, you know, and that's a good thing. But, you know, sort of like with the autonomous taxis, you know, it may take a while to get this to a point where it becomes a viable business model. You know, that could be three years, it could be five years, it could be longer. What happens if this doesn't really take off in the time frame that is anticipated and hoped for? Sure. So, I can touch on a little bit, and then I'll have Rolly jump back in. But just as far as construction durations go, that is going to give us a little bit of time for this to get approved. If you read the Advanced Air Mobility Plan from the federal government, we know that that's not going to be perfect and the timelines aren't going to be dead on. But around the time it's going to take to get this approved, designed, permitted, constructed, it's going to put us much closer to that time of where these would be ready to get off the ground. And then I'll let Rolly talk a little bit more about the actual approvals. And I see it getting built. I'm just afraid it's going to sit there underutilized. It'll sit there empty is more my concern. I have no doubt you'll build it in a timely manner. I'm just afraid it'll be an unused asset just sitting up there empty and not providing any spaces. Well, we could if we could take it back, but then it's going to cost us $16 million. No, we can just restripe it. We'll rent it back. We can restripe it. But, yeah, so I just want to understand. So if the rapidity of adoption of the new technology is not as rapid as is hoped for, what does that mean for the project overall? And I think I maybe did a poor job of explaining my point of it's going to take us at least a year to get it built, which will put us that much closer to the approval of the actual VTOLs being in action and moving. But, Rolly? In addition to that, our business model does contemplate, and our CEO hates to say this, but basically a crawl, walk, run. We realize that the first three to five years of this, there aren't going to be that many aircraft. People have to get used to it. So we've built that into our business model. We really see this taking off once autonomy gets added, which is not for another five to six years. So around the 10-year mark is when we really see part in the fund that's really taking off and it being much more woven into the fabric of our communities and people being used to it. I mean, it's no different than if you think back, harking back to when Uber first was presented. You know, people were like, I'm getting into somebody's car and I'm driving around. What is that? But now it's become second nature for everybody. So, yeah. And then my other question, and I posed this to you guys. I asked you to kind of think about this, and so I just kind of get it out for everybody's, you know, edification. If, again, the optimistic scenario doesn't work out and at some point the entire operation shuts down and we lose that revenue stream, you know, what happens to us? So at that point you abandon the facility. We take it over. So if you walk away from it, we get the facility back at no charge. We lose our revenue stream. Tell me how you envision all that sort of working out. There's no guarantee of the revenue stream, obviously. Sure. So if we were, if that was to happen and being able to turn that top deck back over to the city, we would be responsible for converting that to parking. And that cost would be covered. If Vertiports by Atlantic were to walk away, that top deck would be converted at no cost to parking. Now, my concern about that, though, is at the time you would opt to do that, the company would probably be in a less than advantageous condition. That's why you'd be walking away from it. Where's the financial guarantee behind that? I'm assuming you don't want to post a bond because that's expensive. You know, you're not going to want to put something in escrow because that's expensive. So where's the, you know, where's sort of the guarantee that, you know, if the business model doesn't work, if it doesn't perform and you do wind up closing the doors and walking away, that we're not left with a facility that we then have to go in and spend whatever that might take to restore back to garage use. You know, what are my guarantees, I guess, is the question at that point. Sure. What's my comfort? At this point, the guarantee that I'm able to give you is that we would convert it to parking on the top deck. We can negotiate in some terms that you and the city would feel comfortable with agreeing to. But what we're prepared at this moment is that we would convert that back to parking. And, yes, unfortunately, that revenue stream would not be a part of it, but it would be able to be used as parking. And what did you say we get, 200 and would you say 85? Did I hear 250, 285, 235? Yeah, between 200 and 225 additional spaces. Come on, Greg. Additional spaces. Okay. Okay. All right. Let me switch gears a little bit now. Just a question that somebody had raised to me. So for those of you who utilize Holiday Park, some of you may, some of you may not. I don't know. We've got horses over there. What's the impact on our horse barn over there? And I don't know how many flights you're planning on on a daily basis when you're up and running at full capacity. I'm sorry? They're not that quiet. The flying devices. I don't know what you call them. Air taxis. Air taxis. They supposedly don't make any noise. Have you ever heard of drone? Yes. All drones make noise. I know. These are very, very big drones. They're going to make noise. They're not silent. So there's going to be noise associated with it. I assume it would be a high-pitched noise. Obviously, our horses are trained to deal with traffic noise and things like that. They're not that skittish. But still, it is a concern that was raised to me. I mean, we spent a lot of money. We had petitions years ago when we were opting to try and eliminate our horse patrol. People came out in droves and donated money to save the horses. By the way, they only did that once. They never donated money again. So it was one year they donated money. But we'll leave that aside. So that's actually 21 years ago. I know. So $65,000 once 20 years ago. Never gave a dime since. Okay. So that's actually one of the first concerns that was brought up to me just by chance. I was talking to somebody at the police department eight, nine months ago. And when they brought that up and said, hey, what are we going to do about the horses? You've got this going on. One, our garage is a little bit further back from the horses, having the fire station be the closest aspect to the horses. We had also talked about building whether it's a block wall, like a privacy-type wall, because there's also, you know, they already have issues with people reaching over the fence and feeding the horses and things like that. And I said, well, you know, some kind of privacy sound wall, block wall that we'd be able to build there for at least that initial car traffic. As far as the VTOLs themselves, 70 decibels at around 100 feet. The garage is already around 60 feet. So you're going to be 60 or 70 decibels is not very high. It's relatively like a vacuum cleaner is Rolly's comparison to what 70 decibels is at that 100 feet. So it'll be slightly louder than that vacuum cleaner. It's actually not as much of a high-pitched whine as you would think because the blades are going slower. There's no exhaust that's on these because they're electric. So it doesn't have that typical drone zing, and it's not nearly as loud of more of like a hum noise to it. But we have considered it, you know, I can't make the whole thing go away. But it is something that we've already talked about and talked about issues with the architect to see if there's some little things that we can do to help make it that much better. And I think with the garage being already further offset on the site and then having, you know, the fire trucks are not coming out of the gates with the lights and sirens on. No, they'll be going out of the park, you know, running quiet until they get out onto Federal Highway. So if you look at the image that's on the screen now, you do see that there's a good distance between the garage and where the horses are located. And if there was that wall, it would significantly reduce it overall. But, yes, there still would be the 70, 80, 90 decibel noise that would be heard. Okay. And how many flights do you factor into your business plan in order for this to be viable for you? What do you anticipate when you reach, you know, stabilization, if you will? Well, at a facility like this where we have what are called two photos, where you would eventually be able to have six aircraft, we would be looking at, I believe, don't quote me on this, I think it's 10 turns per stand in an hour. So, I mean, it could be 20, 30 flights in it, either whether it's in or out in a given hour. Initially, again, these operations will only be visual rights. So it would only be during the day. So it won't be at night. It would be, let's say, from like 8 in the morning until about, or 7 in the morning until about 7 o'clock at night. So over the course of that many hours, about 15 operations, at peak, not at the beginning. At the beginning, it will probably be, you know, one flight every couple of hours, you know, but that won't be until beyond year 5. And then last question that was raised to me by someone. What's your flight path of these? So are these flying over the park? Are they flying over kids? Are they flying over the tennis courts? When they take off, how do you exit the perimeter? So all of that will be addressed by the FAA, and the commissioner asked about that. As we've looked at it preliminarily, we would use the benefit of Sunrise Boulevard, which is just north. So it would be exiting and going north and then going on top of Sunrise out to the ocean, because our best benefit is how close we are to the water. And then that's how we would move up and down the coast as it relates to going to other places. Right past the Galleria. Possibly. But I'm not guaranteeing it's going to be that. That's what we've looked at, is taking the benefit of Federal Highway and Sunrise as access points either to come in or to go out. Okay. All right. Thank you. Commissioner Herbst, I just remembered a point on the financing. You talked about, you know, the company potentially not being in a good position if the Vertiport portion was to fail. And one option that our development finance team had already considered in that, is that, again, as a separate transaction between the finance team and Vertiports by Atlantic, having that cost of conversion in their initial financing as an option so that that cost is already, you know, like a gap coverage. If something goes sour, that cost is already there, and it can be used to take care of that debt conversion. Great. Thank you. Appreciate it. Oh, I'm sorry. I did have one last question. I apologize. How's your management team? I think you got another big project on your plate. We do. So, how are you staffed up for this? Sure. You know, are you able to, you know, I'm thinking, you know, this is kind of the snake with the, you know. Sure. So, I can definitely cover that. Like, when I broke down the, it's going to get lost if I try to go back. The team that we have here, there's only two carries of that team that you're referring to, Corn Stiles being that common denominator. However, this is, I'm just thinking Greg, he was here with the city hall, and he's here again. Yeah. So, Greg being the vice president of Precon, ultimately, you know that we're a very large construction firm. Sure. We already have 150-plus active projects around the country right now with, you know, an annual revenue of about $4 billion that we've got running through it. So, as far as project management, the team that was here, I think you might remember, I had like 15 people standing here. It was a completely different project management team. It was a completely different project executive. You had a different superintendent. You had, I mean, these are different structures completely. So, the teams that work on this from a pre-construction standpoint, like Greg, to the actual construction teams are completely different teams. We have the staff that are there. We've already proposed them and have shown them to you here. But the bandwidth on that is not something that is a concern or would by any means stretch us to a point that we wouldn't be able to handle it or we'd only be able to focus on one or the other. It's something that we're very used to doing. We have people, staff, project management teams across the state and right here in Fort Lauderdale that the Fort Lauderdale office will be handling both of these projects. And we have more than enough staff to be able to take care of those projects. Okay. Thank you. Very much. Appreciate it. Commissioner, just to add to that real quick, something, a project like this, City Hall, and any other number of other projects our companies work on, we're very careful in how we plan our pre-construction workloads. And these have a little bit of a ramp-up time, City Hall, and this one is obviously a lot shorter. But as long as we have the time to properly prepare, the workload is going to be planned for and handled more than adequately between our companies. Okay. Okay, great. Thank you so much. Any other questions of these gentlemen? There are none. Thank you so much, gentlemen. And I was going to say, why don't we take, before the third group comes up, let's take a five- to eight-minute break. And, Mayor, we just wanted to clarify something. We do have a project planned that will or could impact this project. Ben Rogers is going to share a little bit about our Lauderdale, if you don't mind, for ten seconds. After the break. Thank you. We'll resume our meeting. I'd now like to invite Park Place Garages, LLC, to begin your presentation. Oh, did you have something more that you wanted to say? Oh, that's right. One moment. Yes, Ben. You want to talk about Water Trail? Yes, if I dare. I just want to give a brief update because I heard the conversation about the sidewalk down the roadway. I just want to let the commission know that as part of the Water Trail project, we have completely designed that sidewalk. It's 100% design. We haven't moved to the construction yet based off of the YMCA parcel being under development, the garage, and then the surface lot. So the entryway for Holiday Park going from Federal Highway to War Memorial will have a sidewalk on both the north and the south side of the roadway all the way up. In addition, we've worked with the YMCA, so they have a setback going along Federal Highway. So from 8th to 9th, we'll also have that same, that trail. So as Commissioner Sorensen pointed out, that one had a trail, one didn't. We've, again, 100% designed it and we're ready to move forward with construction as part of either this project or a separate project. Is that section of Water Trail funded? We have funds in the Water Trail project that could move that forward if we would decide to use that for that reason. We could also leverage it as part of one of these projects and add it to the scope to have them develop at the same time. But I just want to let the Commission know that we do have 100% design plans for the Water Trail going from War Memorial up to 9th. Excellent. Great. Thank you. Ben, does that also include on the west side of Federal up 9th where the old Searstown project was going to go? Because that was part of that also. So that was segment A, and I believe that the portions that were designed, I think we created the specifications that we want, but we were working with the Searstown developer to actually implement it. So if that project moves forward, then we'll implement that section. But right now we're ready to move forward with down Federal Highway into War Memorial. That's a big F, but okay. Yep. Thank you. Very good. Thank you. Okay. Park Place Garages. All right. Thank you. Mayor, trying to ice the kicker before I come up here. Thank you. Please introduce yourself. My name is John Shearer, and I am with Park Place Garages and Gulf Building. We're here with our team today to talk a little bit about the questions and answers and obviously answer any questions that you may have, mayor, vice mayor, commissioners, and city staff. Again, thank you for the opportunity. We're going to have a quick recap. We're not going through our presentation. You have our presentations. If you have a question about it, please ask. All right. So how did your price drop $11 million? Well, this is a great starting. So it didn't. It didn't. Okay. Talk to us. So the day that we received the responses from the city, we sent the response back saying, this is the correct costs, allocations. The city reviewed it. They submitted it to you. They gave you what our proposals were. I think the city commission at that point says, you know what? We need to get an apples-to-apples comparison, which is exactly what we responded to. In addition, we had a 10,000-square-foot fire station, which was reduced to 8,000 square feet. But overall, the pricing has stayed the same. The fire station has been reduced in price. But when we were finalizing the proposals a month ago here, I was almost jumping out of my seat saying, hey, everything has been added into our proposal, which is why I think the commissioner said, hey, let's go back and let's do a complete apples-to-apples comparison, which is exactly what you have today. Well, going back to the PFM summary, it showed that you, you were with the parking garage, with the fire station, with the surface lot, it all came to $52,800,000. And today you're proposing the same at $36 million. Because it had our developer fees included in there. It had solar in there. It had a larger garage. And that's exactly what we responded to. We said that's not the correct. It's all, you accumulated all of our costs and put it at the bottom. So this was – and if you look at our response, the same night that we received that, that's what we responded to. And this is a clarification of exactly that. Okay. So you pulled out elements then that were – That the city wanted us to pull out for this. Right. Because they weren't apples-to-apples. Exactly. Okay. I get it. So at the end of the meeting, I passed out a big sheet saying, here's our true costs. Okay. And then we kind of stopped at that point. Okay. Well, that's why we needed a breather. Exactly. And that's why we're back here today. I appreciate that. Thank you. Okay. So you've heard a lot of numbers. Let's just keep it simple. We have a 1,000-car garage. We have 292 spaces. And we have an 8,000-square-foot parking garage located within the – 8,000-square-foot fire station located within the parking garage, which is a requirement also from the city when they came in. Is that a drive-through? It is not a drive-through because it's located within the garage itself, which was a request from the latest apples-to-apples comparison. So, you know, when projects like this are evaluated, there are – again, please stop me at any time. You know, you have to look at what are the total costs which you guys are really doing and diving in. Thank you, city staff, for doing this. Our proposal sits in the middle. So some people would say throw out the low, throw out the high, and go with the middle. However, we're not going to do that tonight. We're going to go through and we're going to talk about everything that you have a question on. But we don't like being in the middle of the road. But it's the real construction costs, the real schedules, and that's where real accountability lives for this type of project. We've priced this project the way it will be built, with realistic labor assumptions, careful phasing, and a very clear understanding of many years of fire station and garage experience. Our job is to make sure that the city gets exactly what they expect. And what a fantastic day to be here talking about our garage, about the tree canopies. And we're going to help you with this project because it's not aspirational. That's part of our project, which I think the mayor pointed out. I believe competition is healthy. It sharpens ideas. This project has brought people from all over the country, all over the state, to talk to you about this garage and propose to it. We're local. We are here. That said, we live here. We work here. In fact, my son Jacob is over there right now playing soccer at Holiday Park. We'll be here long after tonight's vote. This project won't be managed from an airport. It won't be managed from a hotel. It's going to be managed from Broward Boulevard, which is where my office is. Our headquarters was built there three years ago. I don't have a board to report to out of state, out of the city. I am the board. I am the CEO. I am the decision maker for this type of project, for this project right now. So, anything you have a question on, I'm happy to answer you. We're offering the city what we think is the best solution for this project. Again, very simply put, 1,000 cars at $26.6 million, 292 parking spaces surface, $3.5 million, which actually went up from our original proposal because we received drawings, and an 8,000 square foot fire station for $6.5 million, total of $36.6 million. As you can see, here's the layout. Of the project, a lot of questions are about the sidewalks. I can tell you about the sidewalks because we built them and we're building them. We're on the YMCA. Obviously, a lot of you know that. Everyone knows that. That's up here because we've talked about it. But you can see the traffic flow, how we're getting cars in and out of our garage. We're going from the Parker, which actually already has a valet, around to the north and having direct access into the back of the garage. We have pedestrian access on the south side of the garage. And one of the questions, I think, was, well, why is your five stories versus four stories? Well, it depends on the footprint. We wanted to pull the footprint in because we wanted to keep all of the mature oaks and trees, which you see on the top right there. So the top right there, those are existing trees that we've maintained in addition to all of the planters and things that you saw in the original proposal. Which side is that? Which side is that on? This is on the south side. So that's the pedestrian traffic that connects War Memorial to the front of our garage going all the way south. That sidewalk will run all the way to Federal Highway, which is what Ben just talked about. Well, I'm looking at G3. I don't see them cutting down any trees. Well, you can see our trees are actually on the – where the location is on the plan. Okay. So we've made sure that we had to pull back all of – in addition to this, we've also burned the whole parking garage. So in other words, to make that first floor kind of disappear, which we thought was important to elevate the landscaping around the garage, which we've already talked about. So fire stations, 60-plus fire stations, we are not the biggest fire station builder in the country. We build a lot of fire stations locally. We have 60-plus delivered with our team. Recent experience on fire stations completed within as little as actually the last month. We just completed one. So let's get back to the 300 surface parking lots. That actually went up by about $300,000, about $400,000, because we received drawings from the city to show, hey, this is what we want you to give us a proposal on. You can see it's a back-end fire station on the bottom left. In order to do a drive-through fire station, we didn't want to exit the vehicles into the park on the park road. We wanted them to be able to exit onto the west side after consulting with the fire chief. And the fire department, it's a one-way out. You can only go east when you get to sunrise. So that's why we said we can't go out that way. And, again, we wanted to keep the fire station within the parking garage itself. All the way on the left, you can see the YMCA and the connectivity between all three. Again, we could talk about a lot of the questions that you've asked already. I know Commissioner Sorensen talked specifically about water drainage. I can tell you a lot about the water drainage because we've been dealing with it at Parker, a 55-year-old building, for a long time. But with that, I'm happy to answer any questions. Just go back for a second. Thank you. So I go back to the previous one. I think, you know, we've talked a lot about the exterior of the building and how it looks and how – but we really haven't spoken a lot about the interior of the building and how it works. So here is a really good footprint to show you. You can see at the top left next to where the fire station is, that's where the valet parkers actually come into the garage. And then you can see where the valet exits towards the south side of it, lining up right with the parkers' drop-off pickup area. You can see on the far northeast side where the normal park patrons can enter the garage. And then on the south side, you've got the in and out for the parkers' self-parking patrons. There's two ramps in here. So there's a very thoughtful design in all of this that's not just apparent so that all that traffic flow is separate when the entire garage is activated. And I think that's really important to understand when you're evaluating the design on it. And I think, Merrill, you may want to speak at just a second more about that. Yeah, we were very, very thoughtful about placing the building, and I was a big proponent of how it connects with everything else that's going on on the campus, how it connects both from a pedestrian-friendly standpoint so that you can physically walk from the War Memorial all the way over to the Holiday Park and everything in between, and also how it integrates into the infrastructure of all these kind of iconic buildings, right? The parker's got a legacy for many, many years, as well as the War Memorial. And the Holiday YMCA is going to be really unique and really extreme, and we're really proud to be part of that team as well. We wanted to make sure that the parking garage served its function, that the transitions in and out, whether you were using a valet, whether you were walking out, whether you were coming with your car or walking by it, was nice and clean and smooth. We've all been trapped in a parking garage because a play let out, and everybody's leaving at the same time. We did the double ramps and have multiple modes of in and out out of that parking garage for that specific reason to make sure that that flows beautifully from one to the other. The architecture itself is helping to really make sure that it's very park-like setting, very natural elements. We have breeze block. We have wood-like treatments as far as the screening. We have artificial planters on it that really enhance the quite lovely landscape buffers that we provided in the enhanced landscaping. We're keeping the existing, and we're adding more to make sure that that experience is top-notch as people kind of traverse through it. We want the garage to be noticed as an amenity but not noticed as an extreme architectural statement. It is going to blend into the landscape, and it's going to be a lovely place for you to come to, park, and do your event, do your thing, do your park. Would you be able to incorporate a covered pathway between the garage and the parker? Yeah, I mean, basically. It doesn't show it here, but, I mean, that's it. We have repositioned purposely the elevator core and the stair core so that they came down kind of at the juncture. Go ahead, Jermaine. So there's actually already a covered entry to the parker on the east side of the parker, which we built five years ago. So if you look, there's a pedestrian access between the handicapped parking spaces. That would probably be the best location to do a covered walkway from there and connect them to right there. I see. I mean, there's always this road we're going to have to deal with. Well, you're going to have to cross the road that runs north-south on the west side. But that's probably going to be less traffic because that's mainly used for valet. I see. Well, people exiting. Well, yeah, people exiting after a show, then certainly there's traffic control and whatnot there. Okay. All right. Thank you. Does that conclude your remarks? Yes. Do you want to – there was a lot of questions with respect to maintenance, right? Maintenance, whether – how do you evaluate that? Mark Santos with Walker Consultants, preeminent parking designer throughout the United States, they do remediation. They go out and fix garages. And I asked Mark to come and be able to talk a little bit about what they see on operating costs for garages. Hi. Good evening. Mark Santos with Walker Consultants. So as Rob has mentioned, we do a lot of parking design, but we also do a lot of parking restoration. And I feel like that gives us a wealth of knowledge on how to actually have durable parking structure. So with what Rob was mentioning, we get involved with a lot of clients to help them provide asset management plans, but they have multiple facilities. And how much do I budget? How much do I need to save for this parking garage? And in our experience, we've come into a range of between $200 a space a year to $400 a space a year as an annual budget for parking structure, almost like a savings for a parking structure. Really, that depends on the type of structure, the life of structure, and as, you know, as things get older and wear and tear, that value, you know, raises from the $200 to the $400. But ultimately, you know, that's very responsive and not proactive in the sense of being a parking designer for 25 years. We design parking structures to have limited maintenance. So it really comes into proper drainage, you know, a lot of pedestrian safety and security. So instead of dealing with things after the fact, we try to implement that in the model, on paper, through design. Okay. Does that complete your presentation? Yes. Okay, great. Thank you. Questions? Anyone have a question of these folks? I do, Mayor. Please, go ahead. Thank you. Again, as I mentioned to the other proposers, thank you so much for your time and your expertise. It's really greatly appreciated. Just talk to me about the ingress-ingress. Is it just one on a proposal into the garage, and is that an issue? How many are there? Mark, you want to answer? So on the south elevation, there's an ingress and an egress. On the east elevation, there's also an ingress and an egress, and that's how you access the two different ramps. On the northwest corner, there is an ingress into the parking garage for the valets. The idea is that the valets will pull up at the front, port-a-cochet of Parker. They'll drop off their folks. The valets will jump in. And they're going to move around the building towards the west, towards the north, and wrap around and into the parking garage at the northwest corner. They'll park on that first level for the valets. And then they'll exit out at the southwest corner and then straight into the port-a-cochet, right, so that they can kind of keep that loop going as far as the valets nice and super clean. So it's very convenient for folks waiting for their car to arrive. So there's actually two in-and-outs and two one-ways, for the lack of a better term, right, because of the valet loop. Thank you. I appreciate it. Commissioner, just to add one more thing. So as Rob mentioned, so we do have two ramps. They are opposing. So the whole idea is that you have two separate tracks to get in and out of the parking facility, limiting the amount of cross-traffic, speeding the flow. I mean, two ramps versus one, you essentially have double the capacity. But in addition, those are also the things we look to in the future. So when you do maintain a garage, when you do have to close it down, we still have one ramp to maintain that facility from going all the way from the ground to the top floor for the future desire. Just wanted to point that out. Again, that really comes in from design all the way through restoration. Can I ask you a question about the – you had a solar component in here, right? Yes. And you took it out. But I see that as part of your design, you have covered parking on the top floor for part of it. Do you know offhand how much the solar component would cost if we kept the solar component? Do you remember? 2.7. How much? 2.7 million. 2.7 million. Okay. All right. Anyone else have any questions? Yeah, Mayor. Go ahead. Thank you. Thank you for the presentation. You all are building the YMCA Rourke Health Project, right? Yes. What advantages would this present if you're selected for the garage, given the fact that you're doing the YMCA? So not only the YMCA, but also, Parker. So there's a lot of information that we understand about the site and how we're going to drain the site. I know that's near and dear to us because it does flood over there. When you have a king tide, you have heavy rains, you have problems all throughout that area. The YMCA has actually brought in all the civil engineering firms when we were designing both the YMCA as well as this particular project because they know the issues relating to it. So in lieu of doing underground retention, we can't do that because what happens is that, you may or may not know this, you probably do, the basement areas of the Parker are below grade. So when you have a king tide, you have heavy rain, you have the base flood is coming up. Well, those walls never leaked before, okay? After all of the infrastructure was installed underneath, you know, all around the Parker, we diverted all the water on that surface underground. So what happens is all of the water that is now underground has nowhere to go. So it's just finding its way everywhere. So what the Y is doing and what the garage is doing are wells, which is what you have to do. You cannot do underwater just retention areas as you would normally. So that's a huge factor because you don't know that unless you've done the two jobs that we're doing currently. In addition, all of the neighborhood associations that we met with, I can't tell you how many meetings I went to discuss and talk about the YMCA and what they need to do, what we need to change, what they like, what they don't like, specifically related pedestrians, pool access, how they're going to get in and out, what's it going to be like for noise for the area. So all of those learning curves that we've learned over the past five years, there's no learning curve here for this. Thanks. That's it for me, Mayor. Okay. Anybody else have any questions? Vice Mayor, Commissioner Pan, Beasley-Pittman? No? Okay. Great. Thank you so much, folks. Okay. We have a couple people who've signed up to speak, Roland Topanis and Meryl Romanek. Are you both still here? Yes. Oh, that was you. Okay. All right. And then, Mayor, will we have a chance to ask staff questions before we get into deliberations? Absolutely. Thank you. All right. Does anyone from the public wish to speak on this who's not connected with one of the applicants? Okay. Very good. All right. Yes. Staff, don't get so comfortable, Mr. Rogers. You have to come back up here. Can you come back up here? Please push the button at the bottom of the speaker. Thank you. Yes, Commissioner. Yes. Thank you, Mayor. Ben, so help me understand something, because in reading the cam, there's a lot of mention of revenue, and I don't know how that would work, because I've been told different things, and maybe you can help explain this. When people purchase tickets to the Parker Playhouse or to events at War Memorial, are they anticipating that that is including parking, because right now they park in the field, they park in the surface lot? Is there any kind of agreement with the Performing Arts Center or the Panthers that restricts us from charging for parking? So my understanding, and I might need some assistance from Deputy City Attorney Spence, I think he's knowledgeable of this, but my understanding is that the agreement with the Parker Playhouse identifies that the city will provide 600 parking spaces for their use during events, but it's silence on the fee collection and revenue generation portion. So for what events? So 600 spaces for all of their? For the Parker events, they have the use of 600 parking spaces. So there would be no charge for those folks? It's silence in the agreement. It does not refer if there is or is not revenue generation associated with the 600 spaces. So we just say here are 600 spaces, but then at some point in time we would have to determine if we're even able to charge, correct? That's correct. And we've had conversations with both the Panthers and the Parker over the years about different scenarios on how we could generate revenue if it is a surcharge on the ticket for events or the ice time or for concerts. We've talked about different ways that we could maybe mitigate the operational ongoing costs, but the revenue generation that we've talked about would not fulfill the debt service obligation from the capital service side. So who's paying for this? Well, the mayor just said, well, who's paying for this? So right now we're contemplating that the parking fund would be the source of revenue for this, and as such, that's why we're also recommending that we do have hourly parking or some kind of revenue generation from the facility to help offset the cost. But I know that at the last meeting we did have a discussion about that. I think I heard from the vice mayor, and I do agree, I don't like the idea of charging fees, parking fees for folks that are just going to use the park. But then again, how would you differentiate users of the park versus people that are there, I guess because it's at nighttime, but maybe you could use the park at night. I don't know. I'm just a little concerned about that aspect because I am concerned about the revenue piece here. So I guess we would have to figure all that out, correct? Yes, I think the first thing we do is a full parking study based off of the events, and now that the War Memorial is open and the park has been going on for a few years, I think we have a more established understanding of what their event schedules would look like. We could do that to calculate what revenue generation could come solely from events. As for hourly parking, I think there's a lot of tools in the toolbox. I've seen things where the first two hours is free, the first three hours is free. We could do a resident permit, so you register one time and you park for X number of hours at no charge. We could do the resident rate, which is 50 percent of what the public rate is. I've seen scenarios where the rooftop might be free, a little less convenient, but has no charge there. So I think there's all different tools in the toolbox that we could come up with and ways to create some revenue for this in hopes to mitigate the capital costs. Thank you. I also know that at the last meeting we discussed operations and maintenance of the garage, and we thought that we could handle that. But I've heard some rumblings, and maybe you can help educate me with regards to the parking garage across from this facility right here. Do we operate that and maintain that? We do. There's a tri-party agreement for the parking garage across the street. In addition to that, we operate the Los Los Garage and the Riverwalk Center Garage, and then we also manage the Bridgeside Square Garage. So we have experience in managing the garages. This garage across the street is a little unique with the event generation and the expectations that the facility has here. And so we're evaluating circumstances right now to determine if our operating facility is the best long term based off of what their roadmap looks like. Right, and if you were to predict, because I have been hearing things both from this facility and elsewhere, that we might actually stop operations and maintenance of the garage across the street from here. We are in conversations about that right now, looking at the pros and cons of that, and if it is more advantageous for this facility and the future of the garage to be operated by someone else. Okay, so if we do give that up, do you still feel confident that we'd be able to operate and maintain this garage in Holiday Park? I do. I think that the tri-party agreement makes it a little bit challenging for the city to operate the facility as the way we would operate. We don't have total control. The DDA and both the Broward Center have rights, and they have their expectations of what they do. So I think there's some complexity based off of the agreement, and I have full confidence that we could operate the Holiday Park garage just like we do the Los Angeles garage or the Broward Center garage. Okay, thank you. I did want to speak with Rufus. If he's here, Mayor, unless people have questions for Ben. Who? Rufus? He is here. Rufus James? Yes. Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners. Rufus James, Director at the FXE Airport. Good evening, Rufus. How are you? Very well. Excellent. So we had a lot of discussion tonight about the VertiPort and these vehicles. So you're our guy when it comes to our airport. So I need to hear from you in terms of your opinion of the viability of what we're contemplating, what you're thinking. I mean, I've been reading a lot of articles, Florida politics, 2026, talking about this is the thing, the governor and others in the state saying this is what we need to see in 2026. I've been reading articles in South Florida Business Journal about everyone that's getting involved in this endeavor. I want to hear from you in terms of what you see as the role that we might play as a city and what that would encompass, what that would mean for the city. How do you see this fitting in as another piece to when folks are landing in our airport? We know who's coming here. We know the kind of jets that are coming here. So tell me what your thought is on this and how you actually see this working for our city. Sure. I'll go back historically. Let's see. Probably back mid-'90s, late-'90s, we had a surface-level helicopter landing area across the street from the bus station, bus depot. And so realizing that it wasn't convenient, and it was used by BSO helicopters as well as Wayne Huizinga and FPL occasionally. And it became inconvenient because of the power lines, the trees, and then obviously the amount of activity that was going on with the bus station. So the airport took the initiative of constructing the helistop, which is elevated above the parking – what is it called now, the – Parking garage. Parking garage, or – I know the name has changed, but – Riverwalk something. Yeah. Yeah, it's directly to the east from here. Near the library. Yes. So that came along in 2002. We were able to get that constructed. And today we average about three to four operations a day. And that is strictly helicopters that's using it. We've had no issues with the operation of it and so forth. Here we are 20-plus years later, and EVITOL, electrical vertical takeoff lift aircraft, coming into the picture. And as you do look across the country as well as internationally, it is gaining traction of having more of these facilities to do these short hops or transportation of passengers to and from, not just an airport, but to get into smaller cities. Obviously, the push lately has been – has come from the federal government. And I know that the governor, Florida Governor DeSantis, wants Florida to be the first state that has really made an effort in growing this possibility of having EVITOL vertiports at several locations in the state. One of the things that come to mind as we talk about getting passengers to and from smaller towns into larger towns, essential air service is something that has occurred over the years. And I guess the reason why the governor is looking to push this especially is there are smaller towns that are probably an hour or two hours away from major airports, and having a vertiport will get these individuals to major airports and so forth. As we look at the different EVITOL manufacturers that are out there in the market, a few names that come to mind, Joby, Archer, Lilium at one point, they're no longer in the picture, but there are some other technology companies that are at the forefront. The investment that has been made by some of the operators, if you will, it's not just aviation operators, but there's actually Toyota, Honda, even GM is making efforts to invest in some of these manufacturers that are creating these aircraft. So having the vertiport located in an urban area is very worthwhile. I mean, it is essential to actually grow the EVITOL program that the federal government as well as the state is looking to push. As I mentioned, we do have the helistop, but that's just what it is, a helistop, drop off and pick up. With the vertiport, you actually have a terminal, they'll provide services, you'll have parking, and so forth. We look at how South Florida has grown, matured, if you will, and some of the events that we're having, this will greatly benefit those type of events, such as World Cup that's coming this year. Joby, I do believe, is expecting to get certification this year. Archer may follow shortly thereafter, and this will really be the test case, if you will, if they're able to get that certification and start transporting passengers to and from some of these locations. We know also with F-1 coming to South Florida now, the first year, I believe there were about seven of the ten drivers who were actually staying on Fort Lauderdale Beach. And there were a few of them who were interested in taking a helicopter to get to the race. However, at the time, the owner of the facility was not interested in having helicopters land at the facility. They landed at North Prairie Airport and then drove to the event. But I think someone mentioned that the owner of the Panthers, or not the Panthers, the Dolphins, has actually joined with Archer, who's a manufacturer of the Evo 12 aircraft, and sees the potential of how that can benefit and work, not just for F-1, but even Dolphin Games or any other activities that they will have at the stadium. So all in all, having the VertiPort at this location, from what I saw at the rendering, you've got six spaces that would accommodate those aircraft. And whereas with the helistop, we have one landing position, one parking position. And so we came up with this concept 20-plus years ago, and here we are now looking to that next advancement where it's not motorized aircraft that generate noise, but electric aircraft that, you know, doesn't generate as much noise as the helicopters do. So I see it as a benefit to the city, and based on what I heard in the presentation, to be the first in the state to have this would be a feather in the cap. Thank you for that. Has FXE contemplated any type of VertiPort like this as our airport? I mean, tell me why that hasn't happened yet, or is it contemplated? So one of the things that we have going on at FXE is the limited amount of, or actually no land, vacant land available for VertiPort. However, with Atlantic, who is based at FXE, they're an FBO tenant, they are in the process of investing almost $40 million in new development. And so they've torn down older hangars to build larger hangars, and so they have real estate to accommodate a VertiPort if it came down to that. Now, what the airport would really be used for as it relates to these Evital aircraft, if it is at the end of the day, go to the airport, plug in, charge up, and get ready for the next day. I would believe, and the discussion has been, at locations like VertiPorts, it would be to have battery packs that they could change out quickly and so forth. But obviously, yeah, maintenance and those types of things would be done at FXE, not at the VertiPort itself. So that's how the airport would be tied to the whole Evital program. And have you spoken with folks in your industry in terms of around the country, gauging the kind of interest in something like this, or do you see it happening in other places that you're aware of, or have you had those kinds of conversations? Yes. So I know that Joby, for instance, and they're based out of California, they have gone to places like New York City, Manhattan Heliport, and actually demonstrated how the aircraft could operate, not caring, paying passengers at the time, but officials who got a feel for what it would be like to have this in the city. In speaking with some of the other manufacturers or having conversations because they did have interest in setting up at the helistop, they are adamant that they want to make this work. And they do believe that it will work, and mainly because of the amount of congestion that is going on with roadway traffic. I do believe the three U.S. markets that typically come up in discussion is L.A., New York, and Miami. But the advantage that we have probably over all of them is that we do have a helistop as a template that could be used. Obviously, with the VertiPort, as I mentioned, it does more than what the helistop does, so that would be very worthwhile having that VertiPort. So my original question, then, in terms of the viability, you see the viability of this? Yes, and again, from the presentation, the fact that there's annual rent that can be generated by the city, I believe the number was $200,000, that's beneficial as well. We would anticipate that over time that there's more that could be generated. And, of course, the cherry on top of all of it is that at the end of the lease term, it belongs to the city outright, and they can set their rates and so forth, which by then, again, now we're looking well into the future of automation. It wouldn't probably require having actual pilots in the cockpit, but they'll be self-automated. Well, I'll let you try that first, and you'll let me know how that goes. And my last question, and I really do appreciate your time and your expertise on this. So I've read – again, I want your opinion on this – I've read that – and I guess this counters the argument for some people that are making that this is something that for elite – you know, this is an elite, you know, just fun thing. But I'm reading that the prediction is that this will cost maybe what an Uber Black costs, like the top level of an Uber or a Lyft. Do you think that's a realistic assessment, and do you see that as reality? Absolutely. That's the ultimate goal. I do believe, you know, similar to the Uber and Lyfts of the world when those came online, it was the case of, oh, that's going to be more expensive than your typical taxi cab. And actually, we see now that it's very popular, right? So the affordability, perhaps not for the average person who would catch the train to go to Miami, but for that person where time is money, using the Uber would – or Uber of disguise, if you will. So using the EVATOL aircraft as a means of getting around town, it would be worthwhile for them. So you think it would meet a demand. There would be a demand there, and this just wouldn't be, you know, a white elephant sitting on top of a garage. Yes, it certainly will be at that point where, you know, someone like myself and you would definitely consider it for moving from – if it's county to county or municipality to municipality. All right. Thank you, Rufus. I really appreciate your time and your expertise. Thank you. No problem. Rufus, is it a lot more comparable to, you know, the helicopter on the east side of Manhattan going to JFK or LaGuardia? I mean, that was – that's pretty much typically an executive class. Yeah. Well, here's one of the things that – this – with the EVATOL aircraft, four to five passengers. And actually, I should – let me take that back. Five – four passengers, you pilot, right? And what I've learned about our generation, younger generation today, it's all about the experience. And so most individuals who don't own an airplane – and these are young individuals – but collectively will put money together and charter an airplane to go from here to the Bahamas, right? And I think that's where this is going, is that, you know, the average individual won't just upon themselves decide to do this. But collectively as a group, so the leisure of it, as you refer to what my – New York has with the helicopter service, this will be definitely a greater benefit as we look to transition from the motorized type of aircraft to electric aircraft. All right. Thank you, Rufus. Sure. You know, we spent a half an hour talking about vertiports and not one minute talking about parking garages. So I'm hoping we can talk about parking garages tonight. Commissioner, did you have any more questions? No, I'm good. Thank you, Mayor. Okay. Anyone else have any comments with regard to the presenters tonight? No, my only thought is I struggle with this because, you know, I look at Brightline as struggling trying to be successful. It's on the verge of bankruptcy right now, and they're a lot cheaper than what this is going to be. So I do have some concerns about the business model. I like the concept. I like the forward-looking technology. I like the fact that, you know, the federal and state governments are getting behind it. But, like I said, Brightline is on the verge of defaulting on its debt. Right. I understand that. But let's talk about parking garages. No, it's an aspect of it. I think it's important. All right. But let's talk about the, you know, we have three parking garages. We have three presenters. Each one has put forward their design and their cost. And so tonight we have to make a decision as to which one we want to go with. So I'd like to entertain a conversation regarding the parking garages, per se, and, you know, how we're going to move forward on this. Because right now on the agenda, just one moment. Well, the reason I bring that up, Mayor, is, you know, the thing that makes that particular garage as appealing as it is, is the inclusion of the vertiport. Without the vertiport in the garage, it's not as attractive of a facility. It's the most expensive one on there. So the reason that, for me, it's appealing is it has a unique feature to it that the other ones don't have. So if that unique feature is not a viable one, then the garage as a whole is not an appealing prospect. So I do think we can't just say we have three garages. We don't. We have a completely different aspect when we look at the Holiday Park parking partner structure because of the inclusion of something that the other two don't have in it. So I don't think we can separate that out. That's my only comment about that. Mayor, I'm willing to talk about the garage if you'd like to. Well, that's what we're here to talk about. Okay. I'm happy to talk about the garage. Let's talk about the garage. Okay. Well, first of all, so let's talk about the garage. This is a very significant site, not just in District 2 but for the entire city. Holiday Park is almost like our central park in the city. And we're building a structure that's going to be between two very historic structures, Parker Playhouse on one side, War Memorial on the other. So actually, the structure is very important to me. Design is very important to me. So that's a big factor for me, and I just think that we should consider that. I understand why the Holiday Park parking partners garages is more expensive. We heard the answers to that. When you use more expensive materials, when you design something that's going to be a little bit above and beyond, it's going to cost you a little bit more. So that's the decision we need to make. We need to decide what kind of structure we want in this site sandwiched between two very historic structures. Do we want something a bit more generic and save some money? Do we want something just a little bit boxier, save some money, or are we looking to something else? And I think that's a very important factor when we look at this garage. It's been said already this evening, a garage is a garage. We're getting 1,000 spaces. We haven't really seen a lot of interior uses or I haven't seen any renderings of the interiors. I can't imagine that there's going to be anything, you know, so incredibly different from one to the other. But we have to decide. We have to decide if we want an EMS station that's going to go, you know, all the way through or back in. These are the discussions that we should be having about the actual structure. But for me, design does matter. I know that it was not part of the CAM in terms of things that we should consider or part of the P3 that we should consider. But then again, with regards to the structure itself, I am concerned about revenue. You know, I'm having concerns about how we're going to separate who's paying, who's not paying. And that to me is also another reason why I see only one of these as a true public-private partnership because of the revenue that's being generated. The others are more of just a design build. And those are the kinds of discussions I'm happy to have. All right. So that's what we're here for tonight is to have that discussion and to make a decision. So my question to all of you is if you have certain things that you're looking for, whether it be cost, whether it be design, whether it be potential for income, you know, sort those components in your mind. And let's speak to – all right, let's make a choice, you know, because according to R7, there's a blank spot here, and we have to fill it in. And so in order for that resolution to pass, we have to fill in one of the three presenters tonight or none for that matter. If we decide that maybe, you know, we don't want a big hulking garage in the middle of Holiday Park, that can we afford it? This is $30-plus million. You know, where is the money coming from? That, too, is a big question. So, you know, so tonight we have to make a decision, and you started talking about design. Is there one of the three that you feel has the better design of the other two? I do. I actually believe that the Holiday Park Parking Partners has the best design of the three. I will also tell you that I've had discussions with the presidents of Victoria Park Civic Association and the Flagler Village Civic Association. They have both told me that they actually support this particular project. They were very happy that this one team came to them in advance to gather input and then incorporate that input into the presentations that we heard this evening in terms of the needs, in terms of their area. And I will also tell you that even though this isn't the main thrust of it, they were both very excited about the VertiPort. They said that their neighborhoods were very first intrigued by it, but then excited by it, and they think that it would have a lot of use. They also think that that will set Fort Lauderdale apart from almost any other place in the country right now will gather a lot of attention to the city. And they think that, again, that revenue source is vital because that means that they will not have to pay every time they enter that garage to park. So I will share that with you that they both told me that and they both knew I asked them for permission to basically relay that information, and they said yes. Well, the only thing – the thing about that revenue source, it's probably years away because even as the presenter was making their presentation, they didn't indicate that on day one they were going to have an activated rooftop. It's going to take several years for this to happen. Well, I would like to negotiate that. I think that city managers, staff should negotiate that. I think we should start seeing revenue almost immediately. But the revenue is going to come from the use of the VertiPort. It's not going to be used yet. I understand that. However, I think once we have a comprehensive agreement and once construction starts, I think that even before they start making their own money on that site, maybe we can ask them, I'd like to see revenue begin ASAP for the city. Is that even doable? But where would the money come from? Well, may I ask the question? Is that doable? To answer the mayor's concern, I'd like to know about revenue. Can that start almost immediately? As soon as the parking garage is open and has a certificate of occupancy, we can lease out that top deck to VertiPorts by Atlantic, and they can immediately begin their lease payments and start the use of the VertiPort. How quickly would that be? And what if all those approvals, FAA, et cetera, et cetera, take a little time? Help me understand the timeline that we're looking at for you to actually construct this. 11 months, was it? It's 11 months. It's 11 months. So you're telling me in 11 months we would be able to start collecting revenue from the VertiPort? Yes. Once it's completed, they would be able to lease out that top deck, so there'll be some time to get the agreement. Yeah, but is the industry ready for it? You indicated that it hasn't ripened yet. But regardless of that, as I also mentioned, our business plan does contemplate that although there'll be lower turn of flights, we are going to be absorbing for years probably some losses. So to the question that you have, any arrangement that we would enter into, and we've done in other locations. I said we have a leasehold in West Palm. We have a leasehold in Poca Raton. We have a leasehold in Miami. With the exception of due diligence and making sure that the FAA is going to approve it and the state's going to approve it, once we've cleared those and we have a deal, we start paying rent on it. So we would be paying, like any other tenant, on that leasehold regardless of the number of turns. Do you have FAA approval on any of those other leaseholds? We're working on those. So you don't? No, of course not, because we're not building them to Commissioner Herb's point. We're not building them before certification because then we will have something sitting not being used. But as we've heard today, not only by Mr. James but by other information we've presented, these are going to be certified by the end of this year. So now we're playing catch-up, trying to get these ready to go, whether it's at an FBO or at our leasehold locations north and south of here, to have something for them to fly from a year from now. So do you have any approved sites for any of the leaseholds? No. Do you know of anybody that does? No, because nobody has any of this, and we're just assuming it's going to happen. Well, I mean, it is going to happen, but nobody's billed them to let them just be there without certification. Like I said, the first movement of that will be probably in about three to six months when this test program that the federal government has issued allows these companies, Joby and Archer, to start flying their aircraft before commercialization and before certification. So we'll have that happening in our area because I'm pretty confident that the state of Florida is going to be selected prior to any of these other sites being approved. Because of the eagerness of the administration in Tallahassee, is what you're saying? Along with the federal government. But yes, we have a very strong submittal to the federal government. Okay. And so to answer your question, Mayor, that could be in 11 months that we would be starting to collect revenue. I don't see revenue sources from the other proposers, and so that's revenue that I don't see elsewhere. And 11 months is, you know, we're talking the end of this year or maybe January, the latest, of 2027. Well, my big concern is being able to afford this. That's the thing. So if you're saying that you're willing to pay more money for the garage, but you see the possibility of closing that gap with a revenue stream that would come from the Virta port, I'm trying to distill your thoughts into something I understand. Well, I'm saying that, yes, the $5 million differential between Holiday Park, Parking Partners, and Park Place, or the – I mean, I'm just talking about the garage now – or the $9 million differential between G3 and Holiday Park, Parking Partners. I see us making that up because of, obviously, the revenue stream here and the only source of revenue. I don't see – I mean, it will be made up in time easily, and I don't see the other revenue sources that can make up for that. And also then, again, we have the possibility of not having to charge folks to park to use the park. So I do see us making that up, $5 million. I don't see a problem making that up. Well, let me ask you something else. I mean, the reason why I'm asking you all these questions is because it's your district, so I'm deferring to you. So just common sense, is this really the best place to put a Virta port and not someplace where it's a little bit less park-like and less – where kids are playing? The playground is right up the street, right up the road over there. You know, what is the thinking is the best place to put something like this, putting aside the technology and the novelty of it and the futuristic aspect of it? You know, is this the best place to put this? Well, I will tell you, when I actually did attend the Victoria Park Civic Association, when this presentation was made to them, so I was there for that entire evening. And I will tell you that that is a neighborhood that is a very young neighborhood right now, lots of families, lots of children. You know it because they're complaining about not seeing the playground yet in Holiday Park. So I hear it all the time, and not once did that concern ever get raised. And these are parents of many children, and, again, they were all actually very excited about the prospect. I did not hear once anyone say, maybe this is not the best place for this. Well, but just using – or put that aside for a moment, just thinking objectively. You know, there are townhouses right on the other side of this roadway, and, you know, they're going to be subject to this traffic. They're talking 30 – up to 30 flights an hour. I mean, this is going to be a busy place. So is this the kind of environment that we want to subject people who are going to the Parker, going to the IcePlex, going to the Y? Well, I think they all work together. In fact, I think that that gets people to these venues. I think it gets people from other places to this venue, and also they can leave from the venue. So it works as a round-trip bonus. Again, all of those folks that heard the presentation and discussed it, and just last night I had the discussion with the president of Victoria Park, just to be sure. And they really want to see that happen. They have not expressed that concern. And I will tell you, honestly, Victoria Park and Flagler Village have gotten very used to a very busy holiday park. We all know what's happened in Holiday Park, and right now I'm hearing just that people are really enjoying the options. They're enjoying the choices. You know, the Panthers' War Memorial has really taken off as a venue. Folks are loving going to the IcePlex. They're loving going to the Federal. They're loving going to play pickleball. We're building more pickleball there in the next phase. So I just see this as a place that's already beyond your concerns. Your concerns might have been a little bit more, I think, valid maybe a few years ago, but I think we're past that point now. I think that people have accepted it. Flagler Village is the densest part of our city and continuing to grow. And then that growth is heading west along Sistrunk Corridor. I just see, again, a lot of upside to this. As I said earlier today, I am not here just to do things for today. I think that as a commission, we owe future generations the ability to say, hey, look, this commission is forward thinking. We're thinking about the future. We're thinking about what's coming next, and we want to be on the cutting edge of that. We don't want to always be reactionary. We don't always want to be behind the curve. We want to be ahead of the curve, and we want to show folks that Fort Lauderdale is progressive, and we see what's coming. And I certainly believe that this is coming, and we're taking advantage of it. And people, I think, will understand that, and I think they will be supportive. At least that's what I'm hearing from the two closest neighborhoods to this site. So if you were being asked to introduce a resolution, would you be introducing the resolution suggesting that Holiday Park Parking Partners would be the selected choice tonight? Yes, I would. Are you introducing that? If you'd like me to. Mayor, if I may. Mayor? Yeah. Excuse me, Mayor. Who's talking? Oh, I'm sorry. Sharing. Good evening, Mayor. Yes. In selecting this percentage. You think we have to rank them? Yes, please. Okay. And I think the clerk has prepared a document for you to do that. You need to rank them. Okay. All right. Well, we're getting there. It's like pulling teeth, but we're getting there. All right. So how would you then rank them? Okay. And by the way, just as a discussion we had the last time when we discussed City Hall, I think some of these items are still negotiable if we're so concerned with the cost differential. Maybe there is something architecturally that we can change, or maybe there is something that would be similar, but maybe a little bit less expensive. If we are concerned about closing the gap, I think that's up to staff to negotiate with the team and figure that out if, indeed, we want to see that price come down. Well, there's a $7 million gap between G3 and Holiday Park. It's a $7 million gap. Right. I'm just talking – I was just talking about the garage, but I see – Yeah, I'm talking about the garage. Oh, just the garage. Yes. But then park places is right in between. Okay. I understand what you're saying, but I'm just saying that I think that's open to negotiation that we could do that. So if I had to rank, if that's what you're asking me, I would recommend Holiday Park Parking Partners, number one. I would say Park Place Garage, number two, and G3 Development, number three. All right. So how would the resolution, Sherry, be constructed now? Because the parentheses just has it for one, right? Correct, Mayor. If that is the selection, if that was the ranking that is chosen, then the number one choice becomes that. Becomes – goes in there. Okay, so there's a resolution now that's been introduced, selecting Holiday Park Parking Partners – say that three times – as number one, and that's part of the resolution with Park Place Garages, number two, and G3 Development, number three. Does someone else on the commission wish to comment on that ranking? We've got a vote on it, so I'd like to hear what other people have to say. No comments? Okay. I'm ranking Holiday Park Partners. Number two, I have G3 and Park Place is three. Okay, but your Holiday Park Parking Partners is one? Yes. Okay. All right. Any other comments, Vice Mayor? How are you going on this? So I had Park Place is one, Holiday Park is two, and G3 is three. All right, so you and Commissioner Glassman agree on G3 as being three, but you switch Holiday Park and Park Place around. Okay. And the reason – and just so I can explain my rationale, I like the idea of the vertiport. I really do. I think it's a very interesting concept. I'm just not quite sure it's ready for prime time. The one thing I do like about Park Place is I like the separate entrances and exits. You know, I've had the experience that they've talked about, about trying to go to some of these events where I find it very difficult when everybody is trying to exit at the same time. I do think in terms of the fact that we have to look at this as we've got to provide 600 spaces for Park or Playhouse when they're having events, and we need to be mindful of that. You know, when they have their – when they have their events, they charge – the ticket price is included – the parking is included in the ticket price that they're charging. You know, so that's an expectation of the patrons. Which they keep. I'm sorry? Which they keep. Which they keep, right. Right, yes, and that's part of the lease agreement. You know, again, we need to be mindful of the fact that I think they paid $30 million to renovate Parker Playhouse. They paid $26 million, and we gave six and a half of that. Right, and – What did we get for it? We didn't get part of the parking. No, we don't get part of the parking, but we've always had this lease agreement with them that we provide them with the parking spaces. They paid the bulk of renovating that facility, which is our facility. Right. So, you know, for them to charge for the parking and include that in their ticket price, I think – but the larger issue, again, though, I think it's the ingress and egress out of the parking facility. It is the way that the fire trucks are going to circulate around the park and how they get in and out of the park. I think those things, to me, make the design of the garage, I think, a better design in that respect. I like the VertiPort, but I think I like the design of their garage. I think it functions better, and I think it will work better for the patrons. Are you talking about Park Place? Park Place, yeah. All right, Commissioner Sorensen, where are your thoughts? Yeah, thanks, Mayor. Just as a kind of corollary to City Hall, so with City Hall, in terms of the cost, we heard several proposals and selected a partner, and now Raquel and the City team is engaged in negotiations with that partner. My understanding of what is going to happen, part of what's going to happen in that negotiation is Raquel with City staff and our input is going to identify what's the budget that we're comfortable with for City Hall, and then that is going to be communicated to the partner, and then they're going to work to fit within those parameters. Fit within a budget without compromising the integrity of the design and the components that we agree to. Right, exactly. So similarly, I view this in a like mind is that Raquel is going to identify a budget that makes the most sense from a parking revenue standpoint, and that whoever we select is going to work to work within that budget. So Raquel, from that standpoint, do you have in your mind a dollar amount that you're thinking of for the garage? Thank you, Commissioner Sorensen. So based on the proposals received, we believe that we would be able to accommodate any of these projects as proposed. However, the G3 and Park Place garage projects would be more in line with being more fiscally responsible in terms of how we want to approach the debt on this project or financing this project. Great. Thanks. Except that doesn't – that's – if you approach it generically, but these folks have been talking about income streams from the VertiPort, which the other two don't include. So, I mean, it's not entirely a fair statement because there's an income stream, potential income stream, right? And so I guess that's part of the thinking of the folks that chose Holiday Park as the number one. When the commission asked us to take a look at an apples-to-apples comparison, we did not incorporate a VertiPort in what we requested from the proposers so that we could actually have that apples-to-apples comparison. And so in looking at potential revenue streams, we're not looking at – or we have not been looking at the VertiPort as a revenue stream as it's a potentiality. The technology, as we heard today, it is pretty new, and we're probably a few years out from being able to realize the VertiPort being in operation as intended. So we're looking at net operating income in our parking fund to determine, hey, what can we afford to do in terms of maintenance, and we're also looking at our debt capacity, how much might we need to borrow in order to accommodate this project. So we're always being mindful of the financial obligation that would come from any of the projects proposed, whether through a P3 or otherwise. And so that is why the recommendation was stated as it was. Okay. Quick question. Ben Rogers? I'm sorry to interrupt you, Ben. Yeah, go ahead. Good question. Ben, when you came up with the $37 million anticipated cost for this project, what components did that include? Is that the garage, the parking lot, and the fire station? Great question. That was from the design criteria package back in January. Give me a second. Let me pull it up. I believe it was just the parking garage, but let me confirm that. Okay. All right, Ben, while you're – well, Ben is looking that up. You can continue with your – Thanks. So a couple questions here. So, Cody, question for you, please. So if we explored the VertiPort option, here's – this would be my interest, is I would not want the lease payment to be based on revenue from the VertiPort. Okay? Correct. Furthermore – It is not. I would not want it based on when the FAA and other agencies permit and approve. It's not. Okay. So what I would want it based on – So when does the lease begin, then? I would want it based on when the certificate of occupancy is approved, the lease payments begin. Yes. And we would just have to negotiate that with the tenant. So I don't want to tell you yes and not be 100 percent true. We have to get the tenant to sign the agreement in doing that, and we will do that, but I have to get them to sign. But, yes, we can negotiate that to get them to be able to occupy that as soon as it's ready for them to use. It would just be like a house. We can't have them move in before it's completed. Okay. Well, that's a variable we can't – we don't know tonight then. We don't know tonight, and just as with the city hall, I think that we're – these – whether we choose lowest cost, mid cost, or highest cost, one, these numbers are going to change. Two, part of the movement towards a comprehensive agreement is going to allow for city staff and us to provide input as to what we would like, design, not design, whatever the case may be, revenue operating models, and so forth. And during that time period – and, Sherry, please correct me if I'm wrong – during that time period, if, for example, an entity comes to us and says, hey, you know, what we thought we could do from a revenue standpoint, we can't do. Or the cost of the precast is higher than we thought it is. At any point, Sherry, we can say, thanks for working with us. We're going in a different direction. That's correct, Commissioner. At any point, you could not be satisfied with the negotiations and move to the next – next-ranked proposer. Great. Great. So, Mayor, I think that's – and so, I guess, Raquel, as you think about whoever we're negotiating with, I think part of that analysis and your budgetary comfort would include what revenue or non-revenue might be generated from that facility as you start planning for the comprehensive agreement, which would then inform the budget amount you're comfortable with. Yes. Is that fair? That's fair and correct, and that's why we wanted to have some opportunity to discuss a fee structure and an opportunity to generate revenue based on utilization of the parking facilities. Okay. So, all of that would be incorporated into the considerations as we would negotiate. Okay. So, I see the VertiPort option as this is very early stages. It's an unknown, unproven, largely, technology. So, because of that, what matters significantly to me in this consideration is the surrounding neighborhoods. How do they feel about this possibility and the impact this could have on them? My mom lives in Victoria Park, you know, so this matters to me personally. I'm texting her. I'm getting good feedback from mom. Okay. So, Commissioner Glassman, when I hear your – what I'm hearing you saying is Flagler – it's your district, Flagler Village, Victoria Park. If they're ranking as a neighborhood, they're saying Holiday Park, VertiPort. That's what they both told me as recently as last evening, and I did attend those meetings at Victoria Park. But, yes, I spoke to the president of both neighborhoods as recently as last night. Okay. So, that to me, my ranking would then be, number one, Holiday Park Parking Partners, two, Park Place Garage, and three, G3. Great. Okay. So, Mr. Rogers, what did you come back with? So, the presentation we did about a year ago for the design criteria package had multiple options. The one I alluded to earlier was option 1A. It was a five-story structure with 16,000 square feet of office space, 1,050 parking spaces, at a cost of $37,500,000. So, we don't have any office space there anymore, do we? We don't. One of the other options from that presentation was a four-story structure with 875 parking spaces, no office space, and that was estimated to cost at $26.5 million. But, in lieu of the office space, we have a fire station now. So, if we swap that out, it kind of comes back up to the 37. I don't know if they're swappable, but yes. Well, how many square feet is the fire station? $8,000. Oh, just $8,000. Great. But it's much more dollars per square foot for a fire station than it would be for office. So, okay. You said $20-something thousand, would you say? $27 million? It was $26.5 million for the 875 parking spaces. Okay. So, it would be about $30 million for $1,000. Okay. All right. It gives me an idea as to what you're – you were very close, then. You were very close in estimating this. Tried my best. Good job. All right. So, we have – so, right now, we have three for Holiday Park parking partners. So, that kind of – that's the majority, then. And two for Park Place as number two – excuse me. You said you wanted Park Place as number three? All right. All right. So, the number one Holiday Park has got the majority. Now, the question is who comes in two. I think it's – I mean, you haven't weighed in yet, have you? No, I haven't yet. Oh, okay. Just checking. But, I mean, the majority has already weighed in. So, it's Holiday Park Parking Partners as the winner here. But, now, the question is who comes in as number two and is a tie between Park Place garages and G3 development. Am I correct, Vice Mayor? You chose G3 development as number two? Number three. Okay. And what did you say, Pam, is number two? What did G3 do? G3 is two? Yeah. So, there's a tie there. I think we need to clarify the Vice Mayor's ranking. Yeah. Yeah. Vice Mayor, I had to – No, I'm sorry. So, my ranking was – Park Place. So, to be clear, Park Place is number one. Holiday Park is number two. G3 was number three. Thank you. Right. So, what he's saying, though, as I understand it, is if Holiday Park is already number one, then Park Place is now fighting for number two. Right? So, Park Place, I think, has the majority as for number two because it has you. No, you gave it number one, right? Yes. You gave number one to Park Place. That's correct. Mayor, the afterwards, too. Mayor, Park Place number two was ranked by Commissioner Sorensen and myself. We both had MS2. And he – and the – Vice Mayor, that was his number one. That was his number one. Correct. So – And that was Commissioner Beasley-Pittman's number three. So, before we go any further, Mayor, a motion to extend the meeting? Second. I was about to do that. Okay. Do I hear a second? Second. Okay. Let's vote on that. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye. Okay. Thank you. Mayor, I think if – To 11 o'clock. Mayor, I just – I think if – Sorry. Go ahead. Go ahead. I think if Vice Mayor's first choice was Park Place and that was not selected, I think then it gives weight to Park Place being a second-ranked for you. Correct. Because the Vice Mayor gave it as number one. Right. So that I would – If the Vice Mayor concurs with that. That was my interpretation of it, yes. Okay. All right. Thank you. Mayor, I just have a question. Wouldn't this be easier ranking if you just told us what your ranking was? Well, I'm just adding up, man. I'm just trying to figure out the strategy here. No, the strategy – Instead of us questioning everything, can you just rank one, two, three, and then we will have the actual number? I have it. I have the numbers here. Okay. I have the numbers here. Okay. Well, which behind which door? So I will concur with Holiday Park being number one and Park Place number two and G3 development number three. So now we have four for Holiday Park partners and at least three, but possibly four, for Park Place number two, and then G3 is number three. So there you go. Okay. Isn't that easy? Well, it's important that I hear from each one of them. It is. And you did 20 minutes ago. Thank you. It's good. Thank you. Any further questions or comments? There being none. Mr. Rogers, did you want to say anything? No, sir. I was just keeping a tally in case – Okay. All right. Let's have a vote. So the – I'm sorry. Just one more. I want to make sure, because we talked about this during the briefings, that in the ranking that it is cited as to what the evaluation criteria or what were the aspects of the proposal that were utilized to establish the ranking. In other words, Mayor, if I – Give us the elements that you're seeking. From the statute that you may consider but you're not required to, and it's unlimited to items such as professional qualifications, general business terms, innovative design techniques, or cost reduction terms, and finance plans. Those are the sorts of things that the statute lays out as items you may consider. You may consider others, and you may value them any way you want. Or not. All right. So I think the most salient features of Holiday Park Parking Partners was design and also cost reduction. And that surpassed the other two, my understanding, because I agree with the city manager that all the things being equal and all the things were equal in terms of capabilities, experience, and so forth. Those were all equal with all three, but something – what stood out for Holiday Park was the design and the potential for cost reduction. Is there a motion currently on the floor? And there's a current resolution. There's a resolution on the floor which ranks Holiday Park as number one, Park Place Garages as number two, and G3 Development as number three. Does that suffice? Yes. Okay. So when I read the resolution, I'm only reading the first name, correct, because it only has one song. Okay. I'm just making sure. But on the record, you needed to know the ranking. Okay. All right. Let's go. And who introduced it? Apologies. Commissioner, you introduced it? Commissioner. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. A resolution to the city commissioner of the city of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, providing notice of its decision to proceed with the unsolicited proposal submitted by Holiday Park Parking Partners, LLC, for the design, development, financing, construction, operation, maintenance of a multi-use structure with public parking, a surface-level parking lot, and a fire rescue EMS substation located within Holiday Park at Northeast 8th Street and Northeast 10th Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and authorizing negotiations of a proposed interim and or comprehensive agreement in accordance with Section 255.065 Florida statutes and providing for an effective date. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Mayor Chantelis? Yes. And that resolution is approved. Congratulations. Okay. Moving on to PH1, public hearing resolution approving an amended and restated ground lease, new ground lease, and letter agreement between New River Trading Post development and the city of Fort Lauderdale for city-owned property located at 330 Southwest 2nd Street, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, commonly known as New River Trading Post. One person has signed up to speak, but this is only with regard to questions. What's that? Yeah, I'm getting to that. Now, keep in mind that PH1 was deferred from December 16th, 2025. This is a public hearing required under Section 8.09 of the Charter. To approve this resolution is required by Section 8.09, and the city manager will now provide a summary of the leases. City manager. Thank you, Mayor. This item is a public hearing on two related ground lease agreements for the city-owned New River Trading Post property. The action before the commission includes approval of an amended and restated ground lease, extending the existing lease through 2058, and approval of a new long-term ground lease, commencing thereafter for a 50-year term. The lease has established updated redevelopment terms, enhanced rent schedules following redevelopment, and additional financial protections for the city, including increased total projected lease revenue, a development fee, and a community contribution. The agreement also clarifies that any future development must comply with city code and may not rely on the Live Local Act without city approval. The lease terms, financial provisions, and redevelopment conditions are described in greater detail in your agenda package. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. As I indicated earlier, only one person signed up to speak, which I believe is for questions only. So if there's anyone else who wish to speak on this item, there being none, would someone please move to close public hearing? Moved. Second. Moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Vice Mayor Herbst. Commissioner Glossman. Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman. Yes. Commissioner Sorensen. Yes. Mayor Chantals. Yes. So public hearing is now closed on PH1. Would someone like to introduce the resolution? Introduced. For approval? For approval. Okay. Please call the roll. A resolution to the City Commission of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, approving an amended and restated new ground lease and a letter agreement between the City of Fort Lauderdale and New River Trading Post Development LTD for City-owned property located at 330 Southwest 2nd Street, commonly known as New River Trading Post, pursuant to Chapter 8.09, authorizing the proper City officials to execute the instruments in any ancillary or supplemental documents related, thereto repealing any and all resolutions in conflict herewith and providing for an effective date. Vice Mayor Herbst. Commissioner Glossman. Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman. Yes. Commissioner Sorensen. Yes. Mayor Chantals. Yes. And PH1 is now approved. Congratulations. A point of personal privilege, Mayor, if I may. Yes, you may. Thank you on this item. The team worked very hard on this diligently and wanted to make sure that we got this done appropriately. Who did? Who did? The team. No, no. I just wanted to point that out, that our team worked very diligently on this and did a great job of getting this done. Who is our team? Well, we had several people involved, certainly Susan Grant and then from my office, Lynn Solomon and Sean Amirani. Okay, great. Thank you so much. Susan, you can take the rest of the night off. I think since we're acknowledging folks, I do want to recognize Angela Salmon who has worked on this project for just about the duration of it since she's been in our office of real estate. Since she was a little child. So thank you so much, City Attorney. I just wanted to throw Angela in the mix there. Where is she? She's resting. Oh, she's over there. There you are. Okay. Anyone else want to stand up and take a bow? Okay. All right. Let's move on to ordinances of first reading. This is OFR 1, an ordinance amending section 8-55.5 of the Code of Ordinances regarding high-impact events on beach property. No one has signed up to speak. Anyone have any questions regarding this? No, just as we discussed this afternoon, though, I want to see us be as strict as possible on this. I want us to be as aggressive as possible on this. And everything that we can do within our power to make sure that we don't see these kinds of incidents happen on the beach again or Himishi or anywhere else in the city for that matter. So I'm just looking forward to how we are going to look at these kinds of issues in the very near future with regards to all of the entertainment districts in our city and just making sure that those were just basically events that were anomalies. And we're not going to see this again. Thank you. Okay. Mayor, staff respectfully request a modification to what is before you. In section B7, it currently lists our ability to prohibit consumption of alcohol on the beach. We're asking that between first and second reading that it be modified to read the sale or consumption of alcohol on beach property. What page is that? It is Exhibit 1, page 5, if you look at number 7. Number 5. Consumption of alcohol on the beach property. What did you want to add? Sale or consumption. Sale or consumption. Sounds good. Does that affect the agreements that we have with the hotels at all, though? So we would need to take a look at that between first and second reading. But the intent here is that if we're going to be prohibiting consumption, we probably should start at the sale of the alcohol. So, yes, that is going to affect the agreements that we have with all of the hotels that have their kiosks out there and the chazes and they're selling food and beverage? Similar to how this will impact the sidewalk cafe permit holders, this would give us the opportunity to prohibit sidewalk cafe operations during those high-impact periods where we're seeing large crowds. So, yes, that would have an impact on those hotels. But it would be for a limited period and based on certain circumstances and criteria. So let me see if I understand this. So if we've got, say, Tortuga down at the south end of the beach, does that mean we're prohibiting the consumption of alcohol on the north end of the beach? Is it the entire beach? Like, how do you envision that working? Are you going to be selective about where we're prohibiting alcohol? It would be during a high-impact period, and the likelihood that that would occur during Tortuga is probably not what we are anticipating. We're looking at, like, spring break types of periods where there's not a permitted event per se, but rather a large population ascending on the beach where we're having issues with keeping control and maintaining public safety in order. I thought when I looked at the agenda item, though, it, like, didn't it enumerate Tortuga as one of the high-impact events? Yeah, but it doesn't mean it necessarily will be implemented. It's just Tortuga – you're not going to deny Tortuga the right to sell alcohol. Right, but we're delegating this authority to the city manager, so it's coming out of our – it's coming out of our hands and it's going to the city manager, so I'm a little – But we're not going to convene a meeting to address an alcohol situation. We have to leave it at the discretion of the city manager. We've always done that. And I would like to add another word here, too, sale or distribution, because people can give it away – give alcohol away, too. Sale, distribution, and consumption. But that's – but you would only invoke this if there's a problem on the beach. That's the whole point. It's not because the event in and of itself is going to be subject to the prohibition. It's only if there's – if it triggers, you know, anti-social behavior and, therefore, the city manager can come in and say, hey, no more alcohol. So let me make sure I understand this. So we've got spring break, high-impact event, and we're going to tell, you know, the folks at the St. Regis that their guests who are paying $1,000 a night can't have a glass of wine on their chair. That's not what it's saying. Okay. I want to make sure I understand this. The high-impact event would have to be declared, so – Spring break is a high-impact event. We declare it. We're done. So let's assume for purposes of discussion that spring break is a high-impact event. We all agree it's a high-impact event. Now I've got the St. Regis is full of guests that want to sit down and have a Chardonnay on their chair. So you're saying now they can't have their Chardonnay? That's not what it says. What does it say, though? It's saying that these are the tools in the toolbox and that they can be utilized as needed based on circumstances on the ground. That doesn't tell me anything. That's word salad. What does that mean? That means that there is chaos on the beach and we need to implement – Up at Beach Place, there's people drinking on the beach. So you can ban everybody consuming alcohol on the entire beach. So we can specify, and our police department will assist in that, areas of the beach where we would need to implement this procedure. So it's not to say that we would, for the entirety of the city of Fort Lauderdale, specify that this is the high-impact area. Right, for the entire month of spring break. Nobody's drinking on the beach. None of our hotels are able to serve any of their guests. No, that's not the intent. Mayor, please, I'm trying to – look, I'm trying to look at worst case here. Allow me to get clarity on what this means. Okay. Okay, law of unintended consequences. That is not the intent. I know it's not the intent. I want to know what it could be utilized for. This is not about you, okay? This is what I call hit-by-the-bus scenario. It's the next city manager or the city manager after that. We're granting you discretionary authority. I want to know what that discretionary authority covers. So I'd like some clarity on what the discretionary authority covers. The ordinance already, as written now and on the books, allows for the prohibition of consumption of alcohol on the beach. Okay. What I was asking is, between first and second reading, for the commission to consider incorporating the word sale as part of that line item. That's all. So not deviating dramatically from what exists, because that is currently on the books. Okay. Any other comments or questions? There being none, someone would like to introduce the ordinance? Introduced. Please call the roll. In the ordinance of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, amending Chapter 8, Article 3 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, titled Public Beaches by amending Section 8-55.5, titled High Impact Events on Beach Property, authorizing the city manager or designee to impose additional temporary immediate measures, including a curfew that restricts juvenile access to designated areas, suspension of sidewalk cafe permits, and a removal of cafe equipment with notice of the permittee and modification of operating hours for parks, for city parks and facilities, providing for severability, providing for conflicts and repeal, providing for correction of scrivener's errors, and providing for an effective date. Vice Mayor Herbst? No. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Mayor Trentals? Yes. And OFR 1 is approved on first reading. And on second reading, I would think about distribution. All right. OFR 2, first reading, ordinance amending Chapter 26 by creating a new Article 10 entitled School Zone Speed Enforcement Act. No one has signed up to speak. Any questions? There being none, someone would like to introduce the ordinance? Introduce. The ordinance has been introduced. Please call the roll. In the ordinance of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, amending Chapter 26 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, providing for purpose, establishing a school zone speed enforcement program, and authorizing the use of speed detection systems within the city, providing for program implementation requirements, providing for designation of school zones, providing for enforcement procedures, providing for annual reporting requirements, providing for correction of scrivener's errors, providing for severability, providing for repeal of conflicting ordinance provisions in an effective date. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Mayor Trentals? Yes. And OFR 2 has now been approved on first reading. OFR 3, this is a first reading of an ordinance amending the City of Fort Lauderdale Unified Land Development Regulations, Article 4, Development Permits and Procedures. I'm not going to read that whole thing. No one has signed up to speak. Anyone wish to comment on this or any comments? There being none, would someone like to introduce the ordinance? Introduced. The ordinance has been introduced. Please call the roll. In the ordinance of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, amending the Unified Land Development Regulations, Article 4, Development Permits and Procedures, amending to Section 47-24.1, generally. Section 47-24.2, Site Plan Development Permits, Section 47-24.3, Conditional Use Permits, Section 47-24.4, Rezoning, City Commission, Section 47-24.6, Vacation of Right-of-Ways, Section 47-24.7, Vacation of Easements, Section 47-3.5, Change in Use, Section 47-3.8, Termination of Nonconforming Status, Section 47-3.9, Reuse of Nonconforming Structure, Section 47-12.6. Central Beach Development Permitting and Approval, Section 47-13.20, Downtown Rack Review Process, Section 47-13.60, Permit Approval, S-A-R-C and N-W-R-A-C. Section 47-18.41, Urban Farms and Community Gardens, Section 47-19.2, Accessor Building Structures and Equipment General, Section 47-19.3, Boat Slips, Docks, Boat Davids, Hoist and Similar Mooring Structures, Section 47-20.3, Parking and Exemption, Section 47-22.3, General Regulations, Signs, and Section 47-26.8.2, City Commission Requests for Review to Revise the City Commission Requests. Review to Revise the City Commission Requests for Review Period to Align Development Time Frames with Florida Statute, Section 166.033, to codify certain development review processes in providing for correction of scrivitor's errors, severability, repeal of conflicting ordinance provisions, and an effective date. Vice Mayor Hurst? Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beesda-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Mayor Chantaz? Yes, and OFR-3 is now approved on first reading. OSR-1, these are second reading ordinances. This is an ordinance amending Chapter 2, Section 2-43, Restrictions on Employment of Relatives. No one has signed up to speak. Anyone have any questions or comments? There being none, please call the roll. Oh, someone would like to introduce the ordinance. Introduce. In ordinance of the City Commission of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, amending Chapter 2, Article 3 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, by amending Section 2-43, titled Restrictions on Employment of Relatives to Remove the Restriction that Relatives Cannot Work in the Same Department, adding a restriction on supervising relatives, providing for severability, providing for repeal of conflicting ordinance provisions, providing for correction of scrivitor's errors, and providing for an effective date. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beesda-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Meritron Talks. Yes, and OSR 1 is now approved on second reading. OSR 2, this is second reading, an ordinance amending Chapter 27 of the Code of Ordinances to establish an administrative application process, associated fees, and defined vehicle-for-hire services and operating standards. A number of people have signed up to speak on this. Call your names three at a time. I don't know if you're all still here, but is Ryan O'Connor here? Do you want to come up and speak? Followed by Paul Minhoff, followed by Jose Barrios. Do you want to speak at the end? Sure. Good evening. Hi. Could you push the button at the bottom of the speaker? Great. I made it. Stayed. Made it. Good evening, everybody. My name is Ryan. I've been a golf cart operator with professional experience going back to Scottsdale, Arizona, where I would just like to explain how we've done it over there for the last 20 years, and I understand you guys are trying to do the same thing. I'm not coming up. I'm sorry. No. For 20 years, Scottsdale has had street-legal golf carts that are required to carry $250,000 of commercial insurance coverage. The Arizona Department of Transportation works in coordination with local police to monitor registration, licensing, and required documentations. Operators who fail to comply are cited, towed, and lose the privilege of operating enforcement. The enforcement is consistent, and the system works. From learning that Fort Lauderdale is now proposing a $1 million insurance requirement, which would cost approximately $20,000 per cart per year, if this ordinate passes, as written, many responsible operators are forced out of business, not because they are unsafe, but because the coverage is unaffordable. There's not one umbrella policy to cover all of your golf carts? I've never heard of such a thing. So the one that I've only ever been used to in Scottsdale, there's only one insurance company that insures all golf carts on the road, and that's like nationwide. And they go anywhere between $250,000. I think there's a little more than that, but the $1 million coverage, I mean, that's… So how much do you pay now for $250,000? $540 a month for insurance. So that's $6,000 a year? Correct. So how does it go up exponentially like that? There's only one insurance company, so they can… Well, it's not really exponential. It's four times… It's four times six is $24,000. So it's really the same rate. It's just more… If it's $6,000 a year for $250,000… Yep. And it's $20,000 for a million, it's actually cheaper than what you're paying now. I mean, we'd have to put… From what I spoke to the insurance company today, and I'm sure my friend Carl over there can explain it a lot better than I can, but from what they said today was that if you wanted a million, it would be $20,000 for the year. And then I'd have to put 25% of that down. So, Ben, are you in… Is this your area? Who's… Oh, okay. Milos. Why are we doing the million dollars? So, good evening. Milos Manstori is director for city's transportation and mobility department. And so, when it comes to insurance requirements, we did work closely with our risk management from the city. The current amount is much lower than what we are proposing, but risk management did find this appropriate given the risk exposure of operation of these vehicles. And Mr. Guy Hine, I believe he is here, and he can provide some additional details. Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners. Hi. So, the thing that I was looking at or risk management is looking at overall, state statute is, I believe, 324.022 that governs this, 125 per person, 250,000 per occurrence. So, a few years ago, about 12 years ago, we had a pedicamp incident in the city, and a couple of women were injured seriously. The commission, at that time, asked us to look at the insurance, and we raised it to a million dollars. They approved that. What my concern with these are that the vehicle that's out front there, that's the vehicle we're talking about, right? What I picture is that vehicle making a left-hand turn in front of, let's just say, a pickup truck at about 40 miles an hour, which isn't all that fast. Those people in that vehicle, that's going to be a serious situation. $250,000 doesn't go very far. Yeah, I agree with you, but at the same time, the reality is that these folks are going to be put out of business. And so, what you're effectively saying is we don't want golf carts on the streets anymore. I'm just looking at the insurance. Yeah, I understand that. But, you know, the other thing is that I saw a statistic, and I don't know how true it is, that these vehicles, whether they be these, like, Laudergo and the circuit and all these other vehicles, have accommodated 600,000 people in one year. Is that a real number? I don't know. Yeah, so that number comes from Circus Laudergo operation. Our microtransit service is probably over 700,000 passengers from the inception of the service a couple of years ago. Yes. There are services that is contracted by the city. So those are city operations. That is correct. It doesn't include the commercial operations. That is correct. I think that's more than what the buses accommodate. Okay, so we understand what you're saying. Okay. Yeah, I just wanted to say, I mean, if you look at all, even rideshare, Uber, Lyft, I mean, it's 300,000 coverage. It's 300,000 for them. Correct, even taxis. I understand that we are – There's a little more protection in the car, though, than – I mean, as a golf cart, we're only allowed to be on a road that's 35 miles an hour. I understand what he said that, I mean, car accidents do happen. But we're not allowed on fast-moving roads, anything over 35. Well, the speed limit may be 35. It doesn't mean that people only go 35. For sure. For sure. Can I – do you mind if I finish? Yeah, wrap it up. Okay. Sorry. I think I – I think we kind of get the gist. Yeah. I just wanted to touch on – there was something that I read also about that you guys want to take away the advertising that we have on the golf carts. Going back to Arizona, we have a thing called TPT. It's Transactional Privileged Tax License that allows us to advertise, whether that's a global brand or a local business, which also helps us have revenue to pay for. I don't think I'd be in favor. How else are you going to pay for your operations? Say what? How else do you pay for your operations but through advertising? Advertising and the rides that we get. But you don't pay – you don't charge a lot for your rides. No. I know. That's why going up to a million insurance, that would be tough for us. All right. And don't we allow advertising on the cabs? Yeah. I'm pretty sure I used to see like lots of strip clubs advertised on the cabs. Yeah, they're everywhere. In fact, I think that's all I ever saw advertised on the cabs when they went by. But yeah. I guess – is that it? Good old Jesse Gattis. What do you think the general liability should be? I mean, going off of everything I know in Scottsdale, for 20 years we've done $250,000. Yeah. That works for us. We're able to pay our insurance. We're able to also have money for the maintenance and storage. But a million is just – I mean, that's – if it sticks to a million, every single driver out there, we're not going to have a job. Yep. And there's a lot of us that want to be out there. We want to work with you guys to have regulation and requirements. There's a lot of drivers that don't belong out there. And I'm more than happy to try to take what we've done in Scottsdale for 20 years to try to make it work here. So – Which is what? Having regulation. So just a quick thing. So in Scottsdale, again, it's the $250,000 insurance. DOT works with the police – works with police out there to make sure that every driver has a – that is – has a vehicle for hire license and has all of our paperwork. Right? But out here, there's – none of the police officers know anything. They just kind of let us do whatever we want. So I'm just saying I think regulation here is, you know, definitely needed. All right. We hear you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate it. Jose? Yes. And then there's Carlo here. Well, good evening. Go ahead. My name is Jose Barrios. I am speaking on behalf of our company, Cap Daddy, my son Carlo. And I want to state first that we support the establishment of this code of ordinances for the purpose of having a better structure, regulations in place, and most importantly, I guess, the enforcement of these regulations. Just to give a little bit of history, we started this service, providing services about three years ago. Last year, when the city required from us to have a permit, we were very happy to apply because we knew that this was – it was going to bring some structure and organization to our business. And so one of the requirements, apart from the permit, was to have insurance. Excuse me. We have a – the requirement is $325,000 liability, commercial liability, just to give you some information about costs. If you have a private insurance on a golf cart, you're paying $500 a year. If you have commercial insurance, you're paying $500 a month per cart. We have five cards. So you can make a math there. Okay. And we need to put 25% down for, you know, when we want security insurance. And so going from $325 to $1 million, you can imagine we as small business owners won't be able to afford that. All right. We get that. Okay. Yeah. And that was discussed. But you also have to understand that while you are providing a service that's convenient and that's user-friendly and that's been very useful in trying to help people get around in our community. We get that. I mean, hundreds of thousands of passengers is a lot of passengers, right? Yes. But it's also a hazardous condition in which people are placed, not because you're driving badly, but because you're vulnerable to those who do drive badly, right? Exactly. So that's the problem. You put yourself in a compromised situation because of the type of vehicle that you drive and then the environment in which you drive that vehicle. So, I mean, I'm scared to drive and I have an SUV. So, you know, it's just the nature of traffic in our community. So that's the reason why we're trying to find a balance here. Yeah. Believe me, we welcome the fact that we are required to have commercial insurance. Yeah. For us, it's peace of mind. I can go to sleep knowing that if something happens, my passengers, my drivers, my property, and the city is protected. So we really welcome that. Okay. I wonder if a person's homeowner's policy could make up for the difference. No? Union umbrella policy, right? Mm-hmm. Okay. And actually, that's one of my clients who owns an insurance company in New York was talking to me about that. Yeah. And so I don't know if the only insurance company that provides coverage for golf cars is willing to accept that kind of umbrella policy to cover for the difference. Right. We need to really discuss that in search for that possibility. But what I was going to talk mainly, since some of the subjects that have been already discussed that I was going to talk about, is our expectations. Last year, when we applied for the permit and secured commercial insurance, we were hoping that the city will enforce these rules. And to our dismay, we have seen probably an increase of golf carts that triple what we started, about 20 to 60 golf carts just in the last year. Right. The majority of these golf carts are owned by particular guys, and they don't have a permit. They don't have permits. They don't have a permit. So it's enforcement. No commercial insurance. It's enforcement. Okay. So that is our main concern, is that enforcement is going to be applied so that it's a fair competition, too, because, I mean, we're paying $500 a month to somebody paying $500 a year. And that kind of commercial insurance would have risk the passengers. That's at their peril, okay? Because if they get hurt or they hurt somebody and they're not insured, then, you know. So there's a lot more risk than that, because if these people get injured and they don't get covered because the car was used for commercial purposes on a private insurance, you know who they're going to go after? Who? You. The city. The city has no responsibility whatsoever. The city has no responsibility for your bet. Lawyers will find a way. If I get into an accident, if I get into a car accident and I don't have enough insurance, they can't go after the city. My concern really is the protection of our passengers. I mean, we have many tourists coming, local people, and I want the best and the safest for them. Okay. Let us move on, because we've got to get going. All right. And, Carlo, do you want to speak? I've got to press the button. All right. It's good. All right. Hello. My name is Carlo Barrios. I've been carting for the past three years. My dad works with me. He's been working with me for the last two years. And, basically, just to reiterate kind of everything that Ryan's already said, that my dad's already said, we are in support of regulation. We believe that regulation is very important. I started driving. There was maybe 12 golf carts on the road. Everybody respected each other. Everybody worked together. It's, you know, probably more than 70 golf carts out there. It's, you know, we believe it's not fair for the ones that are paying the permits, that have their business tax receipt, that are paying their taxes to the city, and the ones that are also covered with the insurance. It doesn't make it a fair playing field for the people that are spending thousands of dollars monthly, thousands of dollars yearly, where we have to cover many more costs in order to actually break a profit, where there's a lot of these other golf carts that are unpermitted, that are, you know, basically making it difficult for the ones that are doing things correctly. You know, my biggest concern here are for the stakeholders that have been permitted, that have done things the right way, which is why I'm standing here today. I'm asking that, you know, potentially we can defer on this ordinance until we have a proper sit-down with the Department of Transportation to review all the articles, and we can offer feedback so we can continue to do business and support one another and give the residents and the tourists of Fort Lauderdale the best possible service and experience. I will say that we did have one sit-down with Morgan Dunn probably six months ago when the new ordinance was beginning to, when they were starting it. Since then, we haven't had another sit-down. After reading the new ordinance and the effective date as soon as tonight, it would put in jeopardy a lot of the small business owners that have hundreds, if not thousands of dollars invested. These golf carts are not cheap. Each cart is somewhere between $20,000 to $30,000. So, if you have more than one golf cart, you know, that's $100,000 minimum that you're paying just in, you know, having the loans out. All right. So, you're in debt quite a bit. Can I ask how much – let's say there's an operator that doesn't have a permit. What's the fine for that? What's the disincentive that we've created to want people to get permits? So, their application fees – the proposed ordinance accounts for the application fee of $151 for the new vehicle and then renewal fee of $100 annually. Right. Let's say – but let's say you catch somebody. The police department finds – sees an operator that hasn't gotten a permit. What's the fine for that? So, we could suspend or evoke their license. But they don't have a license. You can't suspend their driver's license. I'm going to bring Morgan Dunn, who has work on it. Good evening. Morgan Dunn, Transportation and Mobility Department. There is a civil fine penalty of $150. $150? Yes. Come on. That is what it's existing now. It should be $1,000. I mean, $150 is – I would just as soon pay it, then have to pay the insurance and the filing fee. There's no disincentive there. We've got to rework this ordinance. This is not sufficient. Ben? Yeah. Mayor, just a suggestion. So, I agree. I think it would be good, Mayor, and Raquel, if TAM staff could get together with the operators again. I know you've been doing that, Morgan, but just a little bit more, just kind of working through and seeing how we can find some wins. I'm happy to be part of that if it's at all helpful to have a commissioner be involved. Yes, we can defer. Can we defer this? Yes. Let's defer this. Do we need to set a date, David, or we can just defer until such time as we're ready? It should be deferred to the date certain. Second. Wait. Do we need a date certain? We need a date certain. Yeah. It would be preferable to have a date certain. Can we say the first meeting in February? No. Let's give it a little – Yeah, give it more time. March? First meeting in March. Now, Mark, Hannibal, Noel, and Paul have signed up to speak. Are you okay if we defer this? Okay. Yeah. All right. But I would say city manager, we really do need to really get a good handle on this because I hear a lot of complaints, especially on the beach, and that this is an out-of-control situation. But it seems to be that these are the good actors, and we have to figure out a way to go after the bad actors. Well, we had the same problem with vacation rentals, where people were not registering, and they were the bad actors, and we finally got on top of it. Right. And we have to do that here as well because it is an out-of-control situation. Yes, Paul. Mr. Mayor, thank you. Just quickly – But you've got to stand up here and speak because no one can see you or – I know you're going to defer, and I – But you're a lawyer, and you have to say something. There you go. I've got to justify my fee. Justify that fee. Thank you. Get that fee. I get it. I do want to start off by commending the city. This is a major problem here. And there are, unfortunately, only a few legitimate, if you will, permanent golf carts out there. The problem with enforcement overall is that, as a city, all you can do is levy fines, and then you can attach liens. A lot of these officers – a lot of these operators are out-of-city, out-of-state. They show up with tractor trailers. They unload the golf carts for Tortuga and such. And so even if you fine them, your only enforcement mechanism is through code violation. So can we put a thing on their wheel? What is that? A boot? Can we seize the vehicle? Yeah. Can we put a boot on their vehicle? Does that exceed our authority? We don't have language in our ordinance that pertains to booting vehicles, but through my research, I have found other municipalities that do the same. So we can investigate that as an option. To disable them because they're a hazard. Mm-hmm. We can investigate that as an option. So that's how we have – let's rethink this. Yeah. All right. But you would have to – how would you boot the car if it's in motion? Would you stop them? But when you stop them, are you going to boot them at the moment? Right at that moment, yeah. I like the idea of seizing. I think about what – when we have the situations with the dirt bikes and the motor bikes that are on the road, you know, some of the other municipalities, when they have those events and they seize the motorcycles on the spot, and then they have to go back and claim them. So that's a bigger inconvenience, I believe. If I may just very quickly, the – I think Morgan's done a great job. I've been in communication with her. We went to the initial stakeholder meeting. I think one of the things that the interested people who have shown up and who are running legitimate businesses would appreciate is now that the ordinance has been drafted is to now have another stakeholder meeting so that things like the signage, the insurance, enforcement – because really all of this is for naught if at the end of the day – because like you said, Mayor, if it's a $100 fine, even if it's a $1,000 fine, for some of these people, the money that they're making, it's worth it to pay $1,000. Even if they have 10 carts out there, it would be worth it to pay $1,000 a cart. But even the $1,000 means nothing if they're out of state. Yeah, and a lot of them are coming from out of the county, and like my client, Cart Concierge LLC, she's a single unit operator, and she's also a local resident. So not only is she driving around here, but she lives around here, and she sees the shenanigans that are going on. And when you have an event like Tortuga or you name it that's going on at the beach, any person with a golf cart is showing up. She sent me a picture today of somebody just sitting outside of Elbow Room. If the city is going to really want to make this have an impact, then at the end of the day, you're going to need not only the police's involvement, but even city where maybe you go around and every day you have just a dedicated – a couple dedicated code officers who go out and check the permits because otherwise none of this is going to stop, and unfortunately it devalues the city. All right, so we get it. So why don't we just defer this to the first meeting in March? Want to call the roll on that? Yeah, I have a motion to defer to March 3rd, 2026. Okay. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Mayor Trent Halls? Yes. And so OSR 2 is now deferred to March 3rd. Okay. Thank you, folks. Thank you. We appreciate it. Okay. OSR 3, second reading and ordinance, amending to Chapter 8, Section 8.55.4 of the Code of Ordinances, titled Sales, Service, and Consumption of Food and Alcoholic Beverages, and to create an administrative review procedure for license renewal applications and increase the license application fee. Anyone have any questions regarding this? No. There being none. No one signed up to speak. Do I hear – would someone like to introduce the ordinance? Introduced. The ordinance has been introduced. Please call the roll. In ordinance to the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, amending Chapter 8, Article 3 of the Code of Ordinances, the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, titled Public Beaches, by amending Section 8-55.4, titled Sales, Service, and Consumption of Food and Alcoholic Beverages, to create an administrative review procedure for license renewal applications for the sales service and consumption of food and alcoholic beverages on the beach after the first license term is approved by the City Commission, provided the license was not revoked by the City during the immediate license term, providing for an increase in license application fees, providing for definitions, providing for severability, providing for conflicts and repeal, providing for correction of scriveners' errors, and providing for an effective date. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Mayor Trentoels? Yes. And OSR 3 is now approved on second reading. Is there any further business of the Commission? Do you have nothing more? Nothing from the same. And you made your announcement for the closed-door session at the conference meeting, so that's been concluded. Any other comments or questions? None. This meeting concluded. Thank you so much.