City Commission Regular Meeting on 2026-10-06 6:00 PM - Oct 06, 2026

Commission meeting this October 6, 2026. Thank you all for being here. For those of you who are here for the first time, welcome. Appreciate your attendance. And what's exciting tonight is that we have two young people who are going to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance tonight. So I'd like you all to please stand and join us in that pledge. Can Brandon Ford and Naomi Marion, please come to the center. 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. You want to be in the photo? Be in the photo. All right, we're going to look at the big camera first. Now we're going to look at the iPad here. You could have been in the photo. Mayor. Mayor. The mother to the son. Okay. Margaret, come take the photo, please. Thank you for pointing that out. I didn't know she was standing over. Okay. Also at the beginning of our meetings, we'd like to take this opportunity to have a moment of silence, to reflect on those that have not been able to join us tonight. Thank you. All right, thank you. It's now an opportunity for me to recognize individuals who have been employed by the city of Fort Lauderdale for more than 20 years and unfortunately are retiring from our city. And I'd like to recognize these next four people, Ephraim Moore, who has been a lead facilities worker in Parks and Rec. who has been with us for 21 years. Thank you so much for your service. Michael Leponet, who's been a police sergeant in our police department for 26 years. Thank you so much, Michael. Jermaine Frazier, deputy fire chief of our fire rescue department, 27 years. Thank you so much. And finally, Sherry Lozier, captain in fire rescue, who's been with us 28 years. Well, congratulations. Thank you so much for your service. So, Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. Commissioner Herbst. Commissioner Glassman. Here. Commissioner Beasley-Pippen. Here. Vice Mayor Sorensen. Here. Mayor Trentos. Here. We have full attendance tonight. We have one agenda announcement, which will be a walk-on resolution regarding the school closures. Have you had a chance to review it? Yes. Okay, great. So, I would ask someone from the commission to please move to approve the minutes of the previous meeting and the agenda as amended. Moved. Second. It was seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Glassman. Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman. Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen. Yes. Commissioner Herbst. Yes. Mayor Trentos. Yes, and the agenda as amended and the minutes are now approved. Mayor, can I just ask a question? So, one of the things in the minutes where we're talking about the budget workshop is you may recall that we had requested that information be provided to us as it related to a study that had been done about cost savings, and I don't believe we've received that. Can we get an update on that, please? I'm not quite sure what that, which, I know what the subject was brought up, but what specifically? It's in the minutes, so that's why I was saying so. So, if it's something that was, that's why I wanted to refer to it. So, it's in the minutes, and we had asked for that, and so I thought, good time to address it. Good afternoon, Yvette Matthews, Assistant City Manager. Commissioner, you're absolutely right. There was a request for, the city did an internal exercise related to potential budget reductions, and that was something that you requested. The OMB team did put together some information. I think we just did not distribute it, so we'll make sure we get it to you. I've only got a few weeks left, so yeah, sooner rather than later. Very soon. Say it as so. I know you'll miss me. So, at the beginning of our meetings, before we get into our agenda, we have an opportunity to recognize individuals, events, or organizations. And here, tonight, we have four such presentations. And our first presentation, I have the honor of presenting a proclamation recognizing the 115th National Day of the Republic of China, Taiwan, here in the city of Fort Lauderdale. And I would invite my dear friend, where is he? There he is. Director General Charles Chi-Yu Chow, who will join me at the podium as I present the proclamation. All right, we're not ready. Let's wait until we take, wait until I read the proclamation. Hold on, hold on. We all set? Okay, so, from the office of the mayor of the city of Fort Lauderdale, this proclamation presented in recognition of the 115th National Day of the Republic of China, Taiwan. Whereas the Republic of China celebrates its 115th National Day on October 10th, 2026. Whereas Taipei Economic and Cultural Office, established in Miami in 1988, continues to strengthen ties between Taiwan and Florida, fostering partnerships and advancing cultural, education, and economic exchange. The friendship between the United States and Taiwan, supported by the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979, continues to advance cooperation in trade, education, innovation, and cultural exchange. In 2026, the United States commemorates the 250 years since the signing of the Declaration of Independence, while Taiwan marks 30 years since its first direct presidential election, milestones that underscore shared values of democracy, self-determination, rule of law, human rights, and accountable government. Since its first direct presidential election in 1996, Taiwan has held eight consecutive presidential elections and experienced peaceful transfers of power, demonstrating the strength and resilience of its democratic institutions. Taiwan continues to play an important role in the global economy and technology sector, with strong demand for artificial intelligence, high-performance computing, semiconductors, and related information and communications technology, contributing to significant economic growth in 2026. Finally, the City of Fort Lauderdale values its sister city relationship with Kaohsiung, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan, and the cultural, educational, and economic exchanges that continue to strengthen our friendship, cooperation, and goodwill between our communities. Now, therefore, we, as the City Commissioners of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, do hereby proclaim October 10, 2026, as the Republic of China, Taiwan Day, here in the City of Fort Lauderdale, and extend our sincere congratulations and best wishes to the people of Taiwan for continued peace and prosperity, and more computer chips. Thank you, sir. Thank you, sir. I added that. Signed by myself, Mayor Dean Tran-Talos. Congratulations. Thank you so much. Thank you, sir. Want to share a few words with us? Yes. Please. Yep. Oh, thank you. Thank you, Honorable Mayor and all Honorable Commissioners, and all our dear friends from these beautiful and wonderful cities. My name is Chi Yu-Chiu. I'm Council General of Taiwan. I must say that I regard the City of Fort Lauderdale as my second home. Because I come from, just now the mayor also mentioned, City of Fort Lauderdale built up a sister city relationship with the City of Kaohsiung. It happened to my hometown. So I always think that I come from Kaohsiung, and then I come to Fort Lauderdale. This place is my second home. Just now one of the commissioners asked me, oh, Charles, I see you again. Last time we see it in last year, 2025, I told them that actually for a lot of them, I almost come here almost every weekend. Because this city is vibrant and also very diverse. You see, we have a Taiwan community, people here to join together. So I must say that is our support. Just now, the mayor also mentioned, this proclamation means a lot. It's not only celebrate, commemorate the 115th National Day of Taiwan, but also it's recognized that Taiwan technology progress and economic prosperity. Maybe you know that Taiwan and U.S., Taiwan, Florida, Taiwan, for a lot of them. We enjoy very close economic cooperation. Last year, for 2026, the trade value between Taiwan and the U.S., up to $256 billion U.S. dollars. Taiwan is the fourth largest trading partner to the United States. We're just next to Mexico, Canada, China, and then there's Taiwan. A lot of people say Taiwan's small. Yes, Taiwan's small. But because we work together with the United States, we also work very hard. We've become one of the major economies in the world. This proclamation means a lot to us because for Lauderdale, this city, I must say that it's a household name to Taiwan. I can assure you, in 1976, our baseball team come to this city to a lot of young men pursue their dream because Taiwanese people also like baseball, just like the kids here. So, I must say that for Lauderdale and Taiwan, we are natural partners. And this recognition, this proclamation not only recognizes us, we will bring back to Taiwan to let them know we have a very good friend in for Lauderdale. Before I end this story, my short remark, I want to say that echo what the mayor mentioned, for Lauderdale and Kaohsiung. We are going to celebrate our sister city relationship in 2028. Two more years to go, but it's too long. Maybe next year, 2026, under the great leadership of the mayor and the commissioner, we can have some warm-up events to have more and more cultural exchange between For Lauderdale and the city of Kaohsiung. Thank you very much. Thank you, everybody. I have one minute presentation. I'm not talking about pineapple story. I'm Tina Wankodong. I'm currently the chairwoman of Greater For Lauderdale Sister Cities International Kaohsiung Divisions. And tonight, together with my friends, we're going to be a one-night ambassador. And we're going to introduce you a very small but very meaningful part of Taiwanese culture, the pineapple shortcake. Okay. We like pineapples, and for multiple reasons. And the main reason is the Taiwanese pronunciations of pineapple, or lai, it sounds very similar to the phrase, good luck to you. And number two, it was Taiwan has a long history of pineapple cultivations. So for generations, this tropical fruit represents the hard work and the tears and sweats of our farmers. So in the back old days, when my grandpa went to visit his friends, and he would bring this pineapple like this to express his sincere gratitude for their friendships. So as time goes by, and Taiwan is getting more and more modernized, some bakers in Taiwan came up with this idea of transforming this tropical fruit into a pastry. So a pastry with buttery crust and a sweet pineapple tart filling in it. Who would say no? Who would say no to this kind of pastry? So yesterday, one of my community members, Emily, spent eight hours baking 80 pineapple shortcakes, and she had me bring them over here to have everybody have a taste of Taiwan, to have everybody sense the warmth of our hospitalities. Okay? So, Mayor, since our sister relationship is growing. So, I hope this pineapple cake will make a bigger wish for us. I hope so, too. Yeah. Okay. May it prosper for decades or forever. Thank you. How's that? Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Maybe we'll take a photo of this. It's a pineapple. Stand in front here. We're all going to have you come over to the middle here. And we're going to have our commissioner stand for the photo as well. So we're going to have the mayor in the middle with our guest here in the middle as well. I have you guys come on this side as well. Let's have some more on the left. Perfect. All right. We're going to be looking at the big camera here in white. We're going to do a photo right here in the middle. And then we'll pass out some more. Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Perfect. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Hey, by the way, this is really good. Okay. Thank you. That was really, really nice. Now I'd like to invite Commissioner Beasley Pittman to present a proclamation recognizing the 10th anniversary of AutoNation's Drive Pink Initiative in October 2026 as Breast Cancer Awareness Month in the city of Fort Lauderdale. I'd like to invite Ashley Shea, the Director of Corporate Affairs, and Lisa Ryans, Vice President of Corporate Affairs and Communications, to please join Commissioner Beasley Pittman at the podium. And you probably noticed that many of us are wearing pink, different versions of pink. This is hot pink, in recognition of Breast Cancer Awareness Month. Commissioner Beasley Pittman. Thank you, Mayor. It's a privilege for me to be able to present this proclamation tonight. Some of you who know me know my story with my family. My mom passed at the age of 57 with breast cancer. And when I was old enough, I began to advocate and go out in the community, working with, at that time, American Cancer Society. And I was the chairperson for Relay for Life for 10 years. So we have one still here in the city. It's Relay for Life, Fort Lauderdale, well, Carter Park, Lauderdale, Lauderdale Lakes, and North Lauderdale. So this is very dear to my heart. I am one who advocates for ratification and elimination of cancer in our lifetime. And that's actually my prayer every day. So I am very hopeful that we will receive as we will see that in our lifetime. Okay? So with that being said, I have the honor of reading the proclamation and presenting it from the Office of the Mayor, City of Fort Lauderdale, and recognition of Breast Cancer Awareness Month and AutoNation Drive Pink Initiative. Whereas AutoNation is a longstanding, has a longstanding commitment to giving back to communities where its associates live and work with a focus on advancing cancer resource, research, and supporting patients, survivors, and families. Whereas in 2026, AutoNation celebrates the 10th anniversary of Drive Pink, its year-round company-wide commitment to driving out cancer and supporting those impacted by the disease. Whereas over the last decade, AutoNation has raised and donated more than $50 million in cancer-related causes, helping funds more than 170,000 hours in breast cancer research, and also supporting organizations and programs that advance research, education, prevention, patient care, and survivorship. Whereas AutoNation, associates, and customers have played an eternal role in Drive Pink and PAC, with customers accounting for more than 1 million individual donations and associates donating thousands of thousands of hours in support of cancer patients and families. And whereas through Drive Pink, across America Day, AutoNation's associates have contributed more than 7,500 volunteer hours, packing and delivering more than 40,000 totes for HOPE, comfort bags to pediatrics and adult cancer patients at hospitals and organizations across the country. Whereas in celebration of Drive Pink's 10th anniversary, AutoNation announced an additional $1 million investment to the grant of $1,000 each to national and regional cancer organizations, including organizations serving patients and families in South Florida. Whereas October is nationally recognized as Breast Cancer Awareness Month, providing an opportunity to raise awareness of breast cancer, encouraging early detection, and honor those who have been diagnosed with the disease, survive, and those who live with those who have lost to breast cancer. Whereas from its Fort Lauderdale headquarters, AutoNation continues to bring together associates, business partners, non-profit organizations, and communities to make a meaningful difference in individuals and families' lives affected by cancer in South Florida and also across the nation. Now, therefore, we, the City Commissioners of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, do hereby recognize and congratulate AutoNation on its 10th anniversary of Drive Pink and commend the company and its associates, customers, and partners for a decade of commitment to fighting against cancer and hereby proclaim October 2026 as Breast Cancer Awareness Month in the City of Fort Lauderdale and encourage all citizens to put forward an effort to raise awareness about breast cancer education and the important importance of early detection and its prevention, dated the sixth day of October 2026 by our Mayor Dean Trantelis. If you would like to say something, please. I'm going to stand on this side. Hello. My name is Lisa Ryans. I am the Vice President of Communications and Corporate Affairs for AutoNation. This is something that's near and dear to my heart, and I'm sure many of us in here who have family members who have dealt with this disease. So it's something that is near to all of our associates, 25,000 across the country. And this is not something that we just come out and, you know, want a proclamation for. Our people live and breathe this every single day. What we say at our stores is that we sell and service cars so that we can help save more lives. So we thank you for this proclamation on behalf of our 25,000. The 50 million is just the beginning, and the million that we just donated last week, 100,000 to 10 different companies around the world, around the country, is just this next step in that stepping stone. So 50 million now, 50 million to come. Thank you very much for this. We're going to have you all go to the middle. If we could have our commissioner stand. I want to partake in the photo. If everyone could stand up right in the middle. We're looking at the big camera. Thank you. Now I'd like to invite our Vice Mayor, Ben Sorensen, to present a proclamation declaring September 15th to October 15th, 2026, as Hispanic Heritage Month here in the city of Fort Lauderdale. And I'd like to invite Juan Saavedra from the Hispanic Heritage Chamber of Commerce to join him at the podium. I see he's already done that. He's here. You're on your way. Thank you, Mayor. Appreciate it. Pues hoy celebramos con orgullo el mes de la avencia hispana. La comunidad. I'll translate this for you. I'll translate. It's all good. It's going to be short. We'll give it to you. We'll give it to you. Thank you. Thank you. We'll be in. We'll be in. Only today. We'll be in. Try it again. Greek tomorrow. Greek tomorrow. Come on. Perfecto. Well, otra vez. La comunidad hispana hace grandes contribuciones a Fort Lauderdale cada día. Celebramos su cultura, sus tradiciones, su trabajo y su servicio. Pues nuestra ciudad es más fuerte gracias a nuestra comunidad hispana. Feliz mes de la herencia hispana. Muchas gracias. So, in English, thank you for tolerating my rough Spanish. So, in English, this is a recognition of. Is that Spanish? Hispanic, that was. It was Catalan with a little. Yeah, Catalan. Yeah. We have a list. That's right. That's right. No left. Exactly. Whereas Hispanic Americans have played an integral role in shaping the history, culture, and prosperity of our nation, contributing across generations to our communities, economy, arts, public service, and civic life, and whereas each year Americans observe National Hispanic Heritage Month from September 15th through October 15th to celebrate the histories, cultures, and contributions of Americans whose heritage traces to Spain, Mexico, the Caribbean, and Central and South America. And whereas Fort Lauderdale is strengthened by a vibrant Hispanic community representing a rich diversity of cultures, traditions, and experiences that contribute to the character and vitality of our city. And whereas Hispanic residents, entrepreneurs, professionals, community leaders make meaningful contributions throughout Fort Lauderdale, including Juan. And whereas Hispanic Heritage Chamber of Commerce, which Juan is part of, works to empower entrepreneurs, cultivate business opportunities, and champion the contributions of Hispanic community members throughout Broward and Palm Beach counties. And whereas Hispanic Heritage Month provides an opportunity to recognize the generations of Hispanic Americans whose leadership, achievements, traditions, and service continue to strengthen Fort Lauderdale and communities around our nation. Now, therefore, we as city commissioners of the city of Fort Lauderdale proclaim September 15th through October 15th as Hispanic Heritage Month, signed your Mayor, Dean Tranteles. Well, very briefly, Mayor, Commissioner, Jefe, thank you so much for everything. As you know, the Hispanic community keeps thriving. Our businesses keep employing a lot of people. We keep, you know, being part of the economic cycle of the city and throughout the county. So thank you so much for your support. You can have everybody in the middle. Juan, you didn't bake any cakes? No cakes. No cakes? No cakes? Oh, my God. No cakes? Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you, Juan. Now I'd like to invite Commissioner Steve Glassman to present a proclamation declaring October 4th through 10th, 2026 as Fire Prevention Week here in the city of Fort Lauderdale. And I'd like to invite Fire Marshal Jason Miller from our Fire Rescue Department to please join. And everyone else that seems to be joining. Look, we have a... Muchas gracias, Mayor. Buenas noches, toda la gente. My accent's much better than the Vice Mayor. All right. Thank you. Good to see you. All right. It's my pleasure to present this proclamation from the Office of the Mayor, City of Fort Lauderdale. This is a proclamation in recognition of National Fire Prevention Week. Whereas, the City of Fort Lauderdale is committed to ensuring the safety and security of all who live in and visit our community, recognizing that fire remains a serious public safety concern, both locally and nationally. And whereas, lithium-ion batteries power many of the rechargeable electronics used in homes every day, including smartphones, tablets, laptops, power tools, e-bikes, e-scooters, and toys. And if misused, damaged, or improperly charged, these batteries can overheat, catch fire, or explode. And whereas, the National Fire Protection Association, NFPA, reports an increase in battery-related fires, underscoring the importance of educating the public about the safe use and charging of lithium-ion batteries and devices. And whereas, safe charging practices can help prevent home fires, including using the cord and charger that came with a device, or one approved by the manufacturer, charging devices on a hard, flat surface on plugging devices when fully charged, and watching for warning signs such as excessive heat or swelling. And whereas, larger devices, including e-bikes and e-scooters, should be charged safely and away from exits, and residents are encouraged to make smart choices each time they charge a lithium-ion battery-powered device. And whereas, Fort Lauderdale Fire Rescue remains dedicated to reducing the occurrence of fires through prevention, safety, education, and community outreach. And whereas, the 2026 Fire Prevention Week theme, Charge into Fire Safety, Safe Charging is a Superpower, reminds residents that following safe charging practices can help reduce the risk of fires in our city. Now, therefore, we, as City Commissioners of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, do hereby proclaim October 4 through October 10, 2026, as National Fire Prevention Week in the City of Fort Lauderdale, and dated this, the 6th day of October, 2026, and signed by our Mayor, the Honorable Dean J. Trentalis. Thank you, Commissioner Glassman, Mayor Trentalis, and fellow Commissioners. Jason Miller, Fire Marshal. Every year, over the last two years, we've had a poster contest recognizing students to draw or prepare a document that has a thematic from the NFPA, which this year was charging into supercharge, charge into, excuse me, charging into the, as a superpower. So, what it basically said was that the functions of charging the devices, whether leaving on flat surfaces, using appropriate battery chargers for the appropriate devices, when it's unattended or fully charged, disconnected. So, there's a lot of components in there with that. But, more importantly, we've had 12 fires for lithium-ion fires in Fort Lauderdale, equaling about $465,000 in damage in the last 12 months. So, we really wanted to bring it home to the students. This week, at Fire Protection, Fire Prevention Week, we've had 1,000 students reached by the end of Friday. So, there is bags like this that have all kinds of brochures in it. So, that's really 1,000 households, just not 1,000 students. So, I want to thank Chief Golan for that, as well as the crews who are going out there and doing the truck demos, Fire Prevention Bureau, as well, that supported this effort in putting all the bags together. And the winner for this year, Ms. Promise Johnson from Dillard Elementary, 3rd grade. Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Glassman. And thank you, folks. Thank you, folks from the fire department. And not just tonight, but for every day, that you keep our communities safe. So, now we have to move on to our regular agenda items. And take care. Have a safe trip back to Miami. Thank you. So, the beginning of our meeting, we addressed what are called consent agenda items. And at this time, I would ask if any member of the commission would like to pull one of the consent agenda items and discuss it and vote on it separately. Otherwise, the commission will vote on all of them at one time. So, Commissioner Herbst, do you have any consent agenda items that you wish to pull? Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? None. I have none. Commissioner Glassman? None. Vice Mayor? CM7, please. CM7. Thank you. So, we have one gentleman, Gary Olson, who wanted to speak on CM11. Is Mr. Olson here? Where is Mr. Olson? Good evening, Mr. Olson. This is CM11. It's a motion approving the First Amendment to the Construction Agreement between the City of Fort Lauderdale and Core Construction Services for the Holiday Park South Surface Parking Law. Please go ahead. Push the button at the bottom of the speaker. I'm on. You're on. Okay. I didn't catch. Did anybody pull this? I pulled it for you. CM11? Yeah. That's why you're here to speak, right? Yes. So, go ahead. No, but I'm saying... No, no one pulled it. Okay. Okay. No one pulled it. Okay. My name is Gary Olson. I've lived in Fort Lauderdale since March of 1984, and I've practiced law in Fort Lauderdale since May of 1984. Over those four-plus decades, I've reviewed thousands of contracts, mostly for business-savvy clients. For the consent agenda, you all state, those matters included under the consent agenda are self-explanatory and are not expected to require review or discussion. It is absurd that this is being brought on the consent agenda. This went from a district's one, two, three, and four matter on July 2nd when the interim agreement was approved to only a district two matter today. You don't think that needs review or discussion? Taxpayers would be on the hook for an additional $498,965, almost half a million dollars, if the consent motion is approved. You don't think that needs review or discussion? You seem to be making the argument that the interim agreement doesn't need to be amended because the construction agreement is not part of the interim agreement. Not only did the proposed interim agreement attach the proposed construction agreement as an exhibit, the interim agreement also states at page 6 of 35 of Exhibit 1 to Motion 8 on July 2nd, paragraph 3.2. The agreement incorporates this document in the following appendices incorporated by reference. Includes the list, L, Exhibit L, Surface Parking Construction Agreement. It is clear that the Surface Parking Construction Agreement is incorporated into the interim agreement. You don't think that needs review or discussion? This consent motion should be denied. Thank you. Okay. Thank you so much, sir. Okay. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman pulled CM7. So except for CM7, do I hear a motion to approve all the rest of the consent agenda items? That was actually... I pulled 7. Oh, I'm sorry. I posed you. I'm sorry. It's fine. Do I hear a motion to approve all the rest of the consent agenda items? Second. Moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trent-Toss? Yes. And all those consent agenda items are now approved. Mr. Olsen, just to your point, I just want you to understand that the commission, each member of the commission has an opportunity to discuss each and every one of these items separately in meetings. And that's how we educate ourselves as to the nature of the item or any or all of these items. And therefore, once we are satisfied with those discussions, we then feel comfortable voting on these items collectively. So I just want you to bring to your attention that while you may think it needs additional discussion, and we appreciate your comment tonight, we have all apprised ourselves of the purposes of each and every item, and therefore, we feel comfortable voting them together on the consent agenda. So I don't want you to think like we just rubber stamp everything. We do review every single item. So moving on to CM7, motion authorizing execution of a dock lease agreement with Rubber Duck Holdings. Vice Mayor. Thank you, Mayor. So I wanted to just talk through this city manager, and I've talked about it, but basically I just want to touch base back, city manager, with our discussion around making sure this is a fair market rate that we are, you know, on the positive side of a, you know, basically leasing 300 linear feet. So if you can walk me through and walk everyone through kind of the market rate analysis and how we're at the price we're at, and Carl, maybe even a little bit of the negotiations, I'm not privy to those. So thanks. So good afternoon, Mayor and Commissioners. Carl Williams, Parks and Recreation Director. Joining me here, who will kind of speak a little bit more towards how we come up with this, is Andrew Krumba, our Marina Manager. I will tell you that this is a market rate price. It is an agreement that we've had for several years now. But, and we also identify a consumer price index increase on that year over year. So, Andrew? Sure. This rate is consistent with the revenues we would derive from a annual occupancy in the same location of the full area. And if we were the private sector, what would this, are we at the rate a private sector marina would be contracting for as well? The private sector is, across the board, the prices vary drastically in the private sector. So we're consistent with our municipal competition. We do rate analysis twice a year. Okay. And Hollywood, Hollandale, Lake Park are similar in terms of amenities. That's how we price. And so, if I'm understanding the history, we consider market rate reset every three years. Is that right? With a 3% CPI adjusted rent? Every year. Every year, you're up 3%. Well, actually, in this case, it's a once-a-year agreement. It's an annual agreement. Okay. But we do two rate analysis each year. One before the summer season, one before the winter season. And what percent have we increased from last year? The rates vary by size, range, and vessel. There's no clear application of a percentage increase across the board. In this case, it's a CPI increase. Okay. But I think we're leasing 300 linear feet at once. Correct. Right. So what is the rate of the 300 linear feet this year versus last year? A 3.4% increase based upon the 12-month CPI. Okay. And we think that small percentage increase is sufficient to adhere to? Yes. And in fact, it is in line, as I mentioned, with the annual revenues we would derive from selling that entire space. Okay. Okay. All right. Great. Thank you. Thanks, City Manager. All right. Great, Mayor. I'll move this to approve. Okay. Do I hear a second? Second. We move to second it. Please call the roll. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herb? Yes. Mayor Trentonis? Yes. And CM7 is now approved. Moving on to neighbor presentations, we have Marilyn Mamano. Marilyn, are you here? There you are. Great. Please step forward. Good evening. Just push the button. There you go. Okie dokie. Hello. Good evening, everyone. Good evening, Mayor and Commissioners. My name is Marilyn Mamano, and I'm speaking tonight on behalf of Lauderdale Tomorrow. You and the people in the audience and people listening at home know us as an advocacy group. Our motto is Public Land for Public Purpose. Tonight, we want to thank you for putting the ballot amendments 1 through 8 on the November 3 ballot. We have often come before this commission and testified on issues involving public lands, sometimes in support of your project and sometimes not so much in support of your projects. But we recognize, and I hope that you do as well, that working together is better than not working together. You have seen us many times on the issue of charter reform. We supported the charter revisions for your odyssey and the debates regarding Section 8, sometimes collectively referred to as the sale and lease of city-owned land. We have been at every hearing on this issue. You probably got tired of seeing us. Yes, we did. Yes, I understand that. But it was worth it. Just kidding. Just kidding. But it was worth it because the outcome is Charter Amendments 7 and 8. So I come here today not only to thank you, but to explain to everyone who is listening here in the audience and on YouTube where this will be published that we are urging everyone to vote yes on Charter Amendments 7 and 8. The key takeaways from a yes vote would be defining public purpose for the first time in the Charter, closing the lease license concession loopholes by defining them all as use agreements, requiring a supermajority of city commissioners to vote for a use agreement involving city-owned land, establishing a tiered system for the approval of these use agreements, and establishing a right of citizens to vote via initiative to stop a use agreement for more than 50 years. Anything, sale, lease, use agreements, rezonings involving city parks would require a unanimous vote of the city commission. We think that if voters know these things, they would vote to approve these amendments. And we are concerned by getting the message out. As a volunteer organization, we are doing everything we can. We are posting on Nextdoor, Facebook, Instagram. We are going to community meetings and making presentations. We are here today so that the people in the audience and at home who view this meeting on YouTube also get the message. We need people to talk to their families, their friends, and their neighbors to help to get the message out. And we also have another concern, and that is ballot fatigue. This is a long ballot with high-profile federal and state elections, judicial decisions. There are controversial state amendments and Broward County questions and important Broward County school board referendums. Voters have to have the stamina to get to the end of the ballot where you will find the 10 city charter amendments. The print is small, the language is sometimes cryptic or confusing, but anybody who thinks it's a good idea to protect our parks and our city-owned land but gets tired or confused by this time and doesn't vote on the amendments forfeits their opportunity to get to the 50-plus-1 votes we need to make it pass. Our message is simple. Be brave and persevere. Get to the end of the ballot. Vote yes on charter amendments 1-8. They were exhaustively debated by the charter revision board. They were subject to two public hearings where actual improvements were made. The commission had a great debate about some of the details, and actually the proposal is better than it was on second hearing than first hearing. And now we have a once-in-a-decade opportunity to improve the protection of parks and city-owned lands. This is not an abstract issue. I keep explaining to people when you say, oh, city-owned land, it's not abstract. Parks and city-owned land are not something apart from us. This is your land, people of Fort Lauderdale. And this is your opportunity to protect it and to participate more fully in the decisions about how it is developed. This is your land. Protect it and vote yes on 7 and 8. And again, we're a volunteer organization. We don't have any money. But if we did, we'd make T-shirts. And it would say, protect city parks, save public lands on November 3, vote yes on 7 and 8. Thank you so much. Thank you very much. Thank you. I thought you were going to break into song. This is your land. This is my land. Thank you, Marilyn. We appreciate it. We appreciate all the work that the Charter Revision Board had done throughout the many months that it met. And hopefully the community will approve the 1 through 10, the charter amendments that were now on the ballot. We also now have, hold on a moment, a presentation. Alexander Stewart. Is Alexander here? Hey, come on up. Sir, you have to give it all to the clerk. Yeah. Everybody doing? All right. Okay, you got three minutes. Let's go. Yes, sir. All right. So I just wanted to bring to everybody's attention the Kingtide flooding issues that really seem to be escalating and are focusing kind of more and more in terms of like the worst areas in front of the Chima and the areas that I showed there in the pictures. And it's frankly, it's getting to a point where, you know, I know there's a lot of discussion around some revitalization and renovation projects spanning all across Las Olas. And, you know, generally while I'm supportive of improving the, you know, the road there and making it as beautiful as possible, it can't come at the cost of, you know, private property and basically having the drainage situation get worse. So just to keep it relatively simple in terms of what we're looking for here is essentially like a map of the current drainage situation, what's going on there, a tidal valve inventory, a drainage and a hydraulic modeling, if any of that kind of work has been done, storm work orders, things of that nature, just so that we can get our arms around what it is that we're looking at and making sure that, frankly, like we're not, you know, paying an undue price to, you know, support the beautification of the road. So, you know, I appreciate your coming to talk to us about that because I used to live near that area. Yeah. And the frustrating thing is, you know, where does the water go? You know, when the canal is as high as the roadway in terms of the water, you can't push it anywhere. It's, you know, that's been a very frustrating part. And that particular area is very low-lying. But I do know that when we do consider the La Solis Mobility Project and the improvements that we intend to make there, stormwater improvement is definitely on the agenda. Okay. All righty? Cool. Thank you. You're very welcome. And, Mayor, if I might, just one sec. Thank you. And also thank you for coming this evening. I want to just make sure, city manager and also Brad Public Works, I do know that Mr. Stewart emailed us a very comprehensive email on September 27th. That was a Sunday, September 28th. The next morning, we did send his email to staff, and we had asked that everyone please get together with Mr. Stewart. So I'm really hoping that that happens. I think a lot of the detail, and I'm not going to go through everything, but all of his points in his email of the 27th make perfect sense. He's asking for three things. Those are all delineated in there. So I just want to make sure that we're following through and making sure that staff has a good conversation with him, gets him all the information that he's asked for this evening, and also addresses all of the other items that are on that September 27th email. Yes, Commissioner, we sure will. So I'll ask Brad Cain while he's here and Mr. Stewart's here to get together before he leaves to make that connection. Thank you. Thank you. Can I ask a question? Yes. So a couple of people have come to me who live in Victoria Park, and we did some work on his road, one particular person, and he had just completed a requirement that he put pavers and a drainage area in front of his property. We came in, did some work on the road, and left his property an absolute disaster. What are we doing with regard to that? Do they just have to contact city staff to come back and repair what was, to put it back in its original condition? Yeah, they would. I don't know the sequencing of it, if what was done was temporary, if there's a more longer-term remediation plan for that area, but that person can reach out to our public works team. We may refer them to our risk team, but have them start with our public works team with the project manager. Okay. I'll do that. I'll move that. All right. Thank you. Mayor, before we move on, just a comment. So I've gotten lots of emails about the flooding that we had, and I'm going to sort of take a contrarian view. I happen to be down at a concert along the Hollywood Broadwalk on Friday night when they were doing that. On the Broadwalk? On the Broadwalk. And I watched the ocean work its way up along the sand and then across the Broadwalk and then down the street and then on to A1A and into the intercoastal and took my boots off and rolled my pants up and walked through a foot and a half of water six blocks to get to the garage and then rolled my motorcycle through all that. And so what I've been trying to explain to people that said you need to do something about the flooding is, you made a really good point, Mayor, you can't put the ocean back in the ocean. You know, high tides are a singular, unique event, and no amount of flooding or flood control or stormwater control or pumping or anything is going to make a difference in those kinds of events. And so I think we need to be realistic as a commission and with our residents as to what is going to happen when we have these kinds of high tides. We had a beautiful full moon that night. I sat there. I listened to the band. I watched the moon. I took a picture, and then I got drenched. How romantic. It was. Right up until the point I had to roll my pants up. It was great. But, no, I think it's a very important point. We had the same situation in Fort Lauderdale. I saw the waves. There was someone that had a video cam from the elbow room, and I saw the waves just covering all with the sand. It was. I had pictures that day from Pompano to Fort Lauderdale on the beach to Hollywood Beach. And every single one of them, by the pier up in Pompano, every single one of them was completely underwater. Every street was completely underwater. So, what I've been trying to explain to the residents that I talked to is, you know, essentially from Palm Beach down to Key West is experiencing the same flooding everywhere. A king tide, high tide. This was an especially bad one, as the paper, you know, pointed out. But there's only so much we can do, and I hope people understand that. And, look, I'm sympathetic. I was driving down Oakland Park Boulevard through a foot and a half of water as well, and I just was thankful that I didn't get stuck in it. And I get that. You know, we had another one of these instances like we had back in April of 2023 where there were cars stuck all over the place. And we were just fortunate that it wasn't as bad as it was back then. Between all the rain we've had and between the high tides, you know, our soil is saturated. There's no place for any of this to drain down anymore, and it's going to be problematic for us right now. So, again, I just want to create reasonable expectations for what we can do. Okay. Thank you. All right. Let's moving on to motions. M1, motion to authorize the settlement of workers' compensation claims for James Brinton v. City of Fort Lauderdale, case number 22-005088DAL. Anyone have any questions? Someone would like to move the item? Moved. Second. Moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trinthals? Yes. And M1 is approved. M2, motion approving an agreement for invitation to bid. Numbers 622-2 for FXC Runway 27, Bypass Taxiways Project with Ranger Construction Industries. No one has signed up to speak. Anyone wish to comment or just would someone like to move the item? Moved. Second. Item has been moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trinthals? Yes. And M2 is now approved. M3, motion approving an agreement. For invitation to bid. Oswald Park Improvements with HG Construction Development Investment. No one has signed up to speak. Would someone like to move the item? So moved. Second. If it's been moved and seconded, please call the roll. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trinthals? Yes. And so M3 is now approved. That's quite a project. Yes. It is. About time, right? Yes. Overdue. M4, motion approving proprietary purchases for water distribution, wastewater collection, and treatment facilities. No one has signed up to speak. Would someone like to move the item? Moved. Second. Moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trinthals? Yes. And M4 is now approved. R1 resolutions, appointment of board and committee members. Mr. Clerk, would you please read the names into the record? Thank you, Mayor. For the October 20th resolution, Central City Redevelopment Advisory Board, Kimber White, nominated by Commissioner Glassman. And for tonight's resolution, Central City Redevelopment Advisory Board, Valerie Christian, nominated by Commissioner Herbst. Christine Jones, nominated by Commissioner Glassman. Historic Preservation Board, Shane Taylor, nominated by Commissioner Beasley-Pittman. Marine Advisory Board, Sam Mitchell. Nominated by Commissioner Beasley-Pittman. Parks, Recreation, and Beaches Board. Heather McQuillen, nominated by Commissioner Glassman. And Patricia Zeiler, nominated by Commissioner Glassman. And that rounds it out. Okay. Are there any modifications or additions that are being done? Would someone like to introduce the resolution? Introduce. Resolution has been introduced. Please call the roll. A resolution of 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 made a part here of. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trent Thomas? Yes. And those individuals have now been appointed, and I want to thank them for their commitment and their volunteerism to the city. R2, resolution approving the City of Fort Lauderdale's 2026 Title VI Program Plan. No one has signed up to speak. Someone would like to introduce the resolution? Introduced. The resolution has been introduced. Please call the roll. A resolution of the City Commission of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, approving the 2026 Title VI Program Plan for the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, authorizing the City Manager to execute the Title VI Program Plan 2026 for the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and providing for an effective date. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trent-Hals? Yes. And R2 is now approved. R3, resolution approving the street renaming of Southwest First Avenue and Northwest First Avenue from West Los Olos Boulevard to Sistrunk Boulevard to be known as Mary Brickle Avenue. No one has signed up to speak. Someone would like to introduce the resolution? Introduced. The resolution has been introduced. Please call the roll. A resolution of the City Commission of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, approving Mary Brickle Avenue as the primary street name of Southwest First Avenue and Northwest First Avenue from West Los Olos Boulevard to Sistrunk Boulevard, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, and providing for an effective date. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trent-Hals? Yes. It's now Mary Brickle Avenue. You have to change your stationery. No problem. R4, a resolution accepting the South Regional Activity Center Vision Plan. Vice Mayor, we had a lengthy discussion and presentation. Do you have any other comments or questions you wanted to make with regard to that? Yeah. Supportive of the direction, want to thank Ray Detman. I know he's not here, but the president of Poinciana Park has really been the driving force, along with city staff. This has been a massive city staff effort, which I think is, there's a lot of excitement in the neighborhoods. In my neighborhood agenda review conversation, one of the emphasis we talked about was storm water and making sure that we're planning for storm water, and Fortify Fort Lauderdale is doing just that. And so we need to continue that investment, Mayor, but I think we're heading in a good direction with this. Okay, great. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Would you like to introduce the resolution? Introduced for approval. The resolution in R4 has now been introduced. No one signed up to speak. Please call the roll. A resolution, the City Commission of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, accepting the South Regional Activity Center Vision Plan and providing for an effective date. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trent-Hals? Yes, and R4 is now approved. R5, a resolution approving the First Amendment to the fiscal year 2023-2024 State Housing Initiatives Program, Rental Housing Development Participation Agreement with Homes, Inc., and allocate an additional $105,000 of community development block grant funds, that's CDBG, for site clearance for the development of an affordable multifamily housing project at 1210 Northeast 5th Terrace in Fort Lauderdale. 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, the City Commission of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, ratifying an award of $400,000 under the State Housing Initiatives Program to Homes, Inc., approving an award of $105,000 to Homes, Inc. under the Community Redevelopment Block Grant Program for the development of an affordable multifamily senior rental housing project, authorizing the City Manager to execute any and all documents related to this transaction, delegating authority to the City Manager to take certain actions, providing for an effective date. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trent Tullis? Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. So, R5 is now approved. R6, resolution approving the 7th amendment to the amended and restated lease agreement with FXC Parcel 15, LLC for Parcel 15 at the Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport and authorizing the City Manager to execute the lease amendment. No one has signed up to speak. Assemblyman, please introduce the resolution. Introduced. Resolution has been introduced. Please call the roll. A resolution, the City Commissioner of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, approving a 7th amendment to the amended and restated lease agreement with FXC Parcel 15, LLC for Parcel 15 at Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport and authorizing the City Manager to execute the amendment, providing for severability, providing for conflicts, and providing for an effective date. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trent Tullis? Yes. And R6 is now approved. R7, a resolution approving the termination of the amended and restated lease agreement for Parcels 8AB and 8G of the Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport and authorizing the proper city officials to execute a consolidated lease agreement with MABA Aviation, LLC, in substantially the form of Attached. 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, the City Commissioner of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, approving termination of existing leases and approving a new lease for Parcels 8G and 8AB, and the additional leased premises by and between the City of Fort Lauderdale and MABA Aviation, LLC, authorizing the proper city officials to execute the new lease and other documents, delegating authority to the city manager to take certain actions, and providing for severability and effective date. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trent Tullis? Yes. And R7 is now approved. Moving on to R8, resolution approving the termination of the termination of the the amended and restated lease agreement with Shelter 16, LLC, for Parcel 16 at the Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport, and authorizing the city manager to execute a new lease agreement with Shelter 16. Does anyone have any questions with regard to this? If there being none, no one is signed up to speak. Would someone like to introduce the resolution? Introduced. Resolution has been introduced to approve the termination. Please call the roll. A resolution, the City Commissioner of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, approving termination of an existing lease for Parcel 16, approving a new lease for Parcel 16, including an option for a future expansion area adjacent to the lease premises between the City of Fort Lauderdale and Shelter 16, LLC, authorizing the proper city officials to execute the lease and other documents, delegating authority to the city manager to take certain actions and providing for severability and an effective date. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trent Tullis? Yes. And R-8 is now approved. R-9, oh, is that? You're right. You're right, Mayor. Yeah, that's right. It's just multiple, yeah. Okay. R-9, resolution approving the termination of the amended and restated lease agreements for Parcels 1B, 7B, 22, and O, and authorizing the city manager to execute a lease agreement with Shelter Executive South, LLC, for the consolidation of Parcels 1B, 7B, 22, O, 3A, 23, 23A, and 24A at Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport. No one has signed up to speak. Someone would like to introduce the resolution. Introduced. Resolution has been introduced. Please call the roll. A resolution of the city commission of the city of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, approving the termination of existing leases for Parcels 1B, 7B, 22, and O, and approving a consolidated new lease for Parcels 1B, 7B, 22, and O, along with the options to add Parcels 3A, 23, 23A, and 24A for the future expansion between the city of Fort Lauderdale and Shelter Executive South, LLC, authorizing the proper city officials to execute the lease and other documents, delegating authority to the city manager to take certain actions, providing for severability and effective date. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trin-Towels? Yes, and R-9 is now approved. R-10, resolution approving the Performing Arts Center Authority budget. Actually, Mayor, before we get to that, if you don't mind, I just want to thank Ben Rogers. He did a tremendous amount of work in helping to move these forward, as did Sherry McCartney and her staff over in the attorney's office. So to everybody that was involved in getting all this done on behalf of the tenants up there at Shelter and everybody, I can tell you they really appreciate everything you've done for them. So to your staff and to you guys for getting these things across the finish line, I just want to say thank you very much. I appreciate the efforts. Mayor, if I may comment, thank you very much, Commissioner. I'd like to point out Lynn Solomon and Sean Amarnani, who did an amazing amount of work in a period of time to get this over the finish line. So I appreciate you pointing that out. Please tell them I really appreciate their efforts. Thank you. And if I could, while we're at it, in addition to Ben Rogers, Carlton Harrison, who's also part of FXC. So great team effort. Absolutely. Thank you, Carlton. Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, Commissioner. Assistant City Manager Rogers. You didn't want to come up and say anything? Dude, I had that last name. Oh, okay. I'm kidding. We're in. We're in. We're going to miss Lynn. Lynn is, yeah, but she's... We haven't been part-time for a while. Yeah. Okay. Back to R10. Resolution approving the performing R-Center Authority budget for fiscal year 2027. 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, City Commissioner of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, approving the fiscal year 2027 budget for the Pouring Arts Center Authority, providing for rescission and repeal of conflicting resolutions and providing for an effective date. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trenton? Yes. And R10 is now approved. Moving on to the last resolution, which is R11. This is a resolution approving a service agreement for 401A and 457B Employee Plan Administration. I'm not going to read the whole thing. Two people have signed up to speak. So does the staff want to say anything first, or should I just allow the speakers to, well, start out with Jeff Francis and then Greg Miller. Where's Mr. Francis? There you are. Well, good evening, Mr. Mayor, council members. I appreciate the opportunity to stand before you once again this evening. It's been 40 years of privilege to serve the city of Fort Lauderdale, and we're hoping to be able to continue that relationship with the city and continue to serve your employees across Fort Lauderdale. And I understand there's a decision that's up for approval this evening, perhaps to move to another provider, and I can certainly respect and understand that decision. But as we think about your employees and we think about their ability, how they want to save their dollars, at the end of the day, deferred compensation program is voluntary. It's the dollars of your employees going into the program. There's no city funds going into it. And so the question is about choice. And as a current provider, you've had a choice for the past many, many years. Today, you're looking at a decision to take away that choice from the employees and give them one option, if you will, with their voluntary dollars. With that in mind, I would like to continue that opportunity to have the ability to dare to compare and for your employees to have the ability to make a decision of what's best for them and their families. And so we've made an offer on the table. I had an opportunity to speak with several commissioners and the mayor. But I just wanted to put it back in front of you this evening. And that is that we're willing to take our fee down to 1.5 basis points or $18 per head. We're willing to guarantee five years at a minimum interest rate of 3.5%. So all five years of the contract, the rate would be guaranteed not to go lower than 3.5%. On our managed account fees, we're at 50 basis points, which is if someone were to elect to have professional money management. And this is a side-by-side offer. We're not asking you to move all the assets just to Nationwide. We're putting that offer out there as a retention offer. And it's an offer simply to give your employees a continued choice at a very, very competitive rate. And therefore, they can make a selfish decision what's best for them and their families. And so I would offer that consideration to you. And just one, if I may, with one other comment is, if there's a better offer on the table as an incumbent, we would welcome the opportunity to try to match that offer that's on the table for that opportunity to continue to serve the City of Fort Lauderdale. With that, thank you so much. I appreciate your time this evening. Thank you. A question for you before you go away. So you and I have talked in the past about some of the funds that you offered. You know, one of my criticisms historically going back in time, and I understand it may no longer be the case today, was the type of funds that were being offered. And you were explaining to me a little bit more that essentially you're white labeling existing funds as opposed to using proprietary funds. Talk a little bit more about that for me. Yeah, absolutely. So outside of the Nationwide fixed account, Nationwide's not managing any of the assets directly ourselves. So unlike, you know, you may see companies like Fidelity or T.R.O. or Vanguard, those are mutual fund companies or investment company products. Nationwide does have some funds that are white labeled that are managed by some of those investment houses, and they may carry names like Nationwide Small Cap or Nationwide Large Cap or Nationwide S&P 500. But Nationwide's actually not the manager of those funds. They're just simply white labeled, carrying the Nationwide name. Similar to if you were to go into a Target and you were to buy a Kirkland brand, Target's not making that product that's under the Kirkland label. It's just white labeled Kirkland brand for Target, if that makes sense. So a question to staff then. So, and I don't know if this is a Glenn question or if this is a Linda question. I'm always about having more choices, not taking choices away from people. There may be people that are quite happy with Nationwide. I don't necessarily want to eliminate that option for them and push them into another provider. I was always unhappy with the fact that we had never competed these things in the first place, which is why Linda and I have this conversation probably once every six months about when we're going to put these things out to bid, and I'm glad that we've done that. Linda, is it feasible to also include them as a provider if employees would like to remain with them, if they're happy with the performance or what have you, with whatever they've had? So I'm not, I'm not going to talk about the procurement process, but what I do know is that the evaluation committee, when they were meeting, had an option, and for size and scale, we get the best rate if it's, if it's pooled and you have one provider, then to break out the assets to several providers. So the EC committee decided to move to the path of just selecting one advisor to get the best rate for the employees. So that's a choice that, like I said, the EC committee decided to go to. How do you feel about this 11th hour wheeling and dealing here? What is, is this something new? Is this, are the terms that he just explained, are they new to you? No, they're not, they're new to me, yes, that he's saying. And we have tried to negotiate in the past a rate because it was never competed. We had reached out when a former procurement person was here and tried to see if we can negotiate rates because the rates were so old and we couldn't come to a point where we can negotiate the rates. And that was probably back in like 2019, 2020 timeframe. Right. So Glenn. So Glenn, talk to me a little bit about the process. So the process entailed not only fees and expenses, that being 30% of the evaluation criteria, Commissioner. Yep. But it also involved three other factors, including experience and qualifications, plan operations and administration, and participant communications and education. When you look at the actual fees itself, you had Mission Square coming in as far as the fees are concerned. Mission Square was ranked number one for fees and services, Nationwide was ranked number two, and Valic was ranked number three. But when you then consider the remaining 70% of the weighted criteria, obviously Valic came substantially ahead. And so to come back to the mayor's comment. Remind me again why that was, because I'm actually a participant in Valic through the city of Jacksonville with my 401 and 457 plans that I had when I was an employee up there. So help me understand why Valic scored so highly up there. So it appears that the EC went ahead and determined that when it came to the other factors, the experience for qualifications, the plan operations and administration, and then as far as educating the employees, they were far superior than Mission Square and Nationwide. I guess none of them have been in the Valic plan before then. Because that was not my experience when I was at Jacksonville, all due respect. But having actually been a Valic plan participant, I can tell you that was not necessarily my experience. And what I would like to also add is, to the mayor's point, both Mission Square and Nationwide had the opportunity to file a protest. They did not exhaust that administrative remedy whatsoever. I don't think this is a protest. No, I'm just indicating that, to the mayor's point, if this last minute thing, there would have been a proper recourse. That proper recourse would have been perhaps bringing up certain issues to our attention. And we were, I mean, we would be more than likely to look into it, but that never happened. So I don't think this is a protest. I see this as sort of a different question, right? You know, somebody's relationship with their investment advisor is sort of their relationship with their doctor. It's a personal relationship. And I'm always very hesitant when I force somebody to switch providers. It's one thing when they voluntarily choose to switch providers. And by the way, again, I was the one who's been pushing us to switch providers for the better part of 15 years now. So I'm not saying I've been a fan of Nationwide. I was not a fan of ICMA, not a fan of VALAC. I've not been a fan of any of the three major providers that I've dealt with in the last 25, 30 years. So, you know, none of them have impressed me greatly. So, but what I do like is having the opportunity for people to be able to pick the provider that they feel best suits them. I chose the one that best suited me at the time when we only had two options. I went with ICMA because I wasn't happy with Nationwide's choices at the time. I would have preferred to have gone to Vanguard, quite honestly, had that been an opportunity for us. And it wasn't because we didn't do the competition I had wanted us to do at a time when it would have actually helped me. I've been paying excessive fees for many, many, many years. And I resent that candidly as the plan sponsor who we are. We've exposed ourselves to substantial liability. And I've told our finance director that repeatedly through the years. But again, it comes down to, I don't want to force somebody to have to give up a provider that they like if they like that. So my question is, can we offer that to them? Is that permissible? And is there a reason not to? I know Linda brought up a very good point about breakpoints on fees. And I understand that. I used to be a financial advisor myself. So I understand how the breakpoints on fees works in the financial industry. So talk to me about whether the providers that are in there have established that. Within their fee structure, are there breakpoints on fees? And if so, are they prepared to honor the lower fee rates, regardless of how many providers there are? Help me understand. So what I can share with you is that the EC had that discussion, Commissioner. Okay. And they went ahead and decided against that. And part of the evaluation committee composition included fire, police, and the general employees collective bargaining units. So you had the representative and the unrepresentative involved in this decision-making. And for whatever reason, it was their choice just to move with one and not two or three. By the way, those were the same guys that threw out the evaluation we did in 2020. And it's taken us six years to do this all over again. So I was not particularly impressed with our evaluation committee either. So our process on this has not exactly been the poster child for doing things right. And our evaluation committee, I'm hoping we're picking better people on the evaluation committee than we did the last time. Yeah. So that evaluation committee consulted with our consultant, Bridges and Chambers. They had that discussion back and forth. And they moved on with just that one recommendation. Let me even back up. Because the question is not, I don't care if you've got a cop and a firefighter on there. Do they know anything about finances? Like last time I checked, I'm a finance guy, and I know nothing about putting out a fire. Yes. Commissioner, I can't speak for them. But what I can speak about is that they heavily relied on Bridges and Chambers. And then their assessment, Bridges and Chambers gave the EC an executive summary report on each and every evaluation. And based upon that, that's how they came to their decision. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, sir. Let me just clarify one point. Go ahead. Please, sir. It was introduced that this was new and not proposed originally. I just want you to know from just a question of integrity, the offer I put before you was our RFP offer. So that wasn't a new offer. That was in our RFP that we had submitted. All we're doing is extending it further for consideration as a side-by-side choice versus just being exclusive. Okay. So it's allowing your employees to dare to compare with the same value that they would have gotten if they had selected nationwide as their exclusive provider. Thank you so much again for your time and consideration. I have a question. Go ahead. At this point where we are, are we able to look at a side-by-side opportunity or are we beyond that point? Linda? For Glenn. Okay. Glenn, come on back. So it just goes back to the same comment, Commissioner. That opportunity was given to the EC. The EC had that discretion that they so desired to that they decided against that. Well, but we're not bound by the EC. Let's stop that conversation. The EC makes a recommendation. And then we, as the elected officials, make a decision. So it's simply advisory in nature. So we need to be very clear about what our evaluation committees are serving to do. They're serving to make a recommendation to us which we could either accept or reject. So I understand your point. But to your point, Commissioner, I don't believe that's the question she asked. The question she asked is, what can we do, not what did the evaluation committee say? So there's, I think, three opportunities that the commission has. It's to accept the recommendation, deny the actual recommendation, or modify the recommendation. That modification usually consists of perhaps the commission providing further instruction to the EC, and then the EC willing to consider that, and then coming back to the board with that decision from the EC. Do we need to go back to the EC, or can't we just decide tonight? It could be, it could be, the commission could decide for themselves to perhaps maybe do something different. Okay. Glenn. Yes. Let's just go through. So I'm looking at the EC evaluation. So you have, Raider number one is the president of the fire union, right? Yes, sir. So that's representing how many employees? Sorry, FOP. So how many? 500 about? Okay. Raider number two is the president of the fire rescue union, representing how many? Okay. Raider number three, I'm not familiar with the role, Raider number three in the city. IT. IT. Mm-hmm. Okay. Raider number four? That's for police. Sorry? It's a police employee. Okay. No, but number, Raider number three was a representation from the federation union. Okay. And that represents, I don't know how many employees, but that's our professional union. Okay. That helps. So federation. Federation representing, Yvette, I'll get the numbers. I just want to understand these numbers of who's on the EC. Well, that's actually reassuring, because at least these guys are on the pension plan. So that's what I'm thinking. Yeah. That's a good point. So thank you, Vice Mayor, for bringing that out. You're bringing up good points. No, that's a very good point, and I'm glad you brought that to the conversation. So the breakdown of our labor groups, the IAFF is about 469. FOP is about 561. Federation, about 379. And Teamsters over 1,100. And is Raider four or five representing Teamsters? Raider four is representing Teamsters, and Raider five is a CPA, also an attorney, and well-versed in investments. And he was a part of the EC, and he represented the unrepresented group. So anybody who was not covered by a bargaining union, he represented us. Okay. So that gives me greater just confidence, just better understanding who's on the EC, who are they representing, who are they communicating with day in and day out as they make these decisions. So, okay. Thank you, Glenn. Appreciate it. Much better way of explaining it. Yeah. There you go. Every once in a while, I add some value, so I appreciate it. Thanks, Vice Mayor. Okay. Thank you. Is Greg Miller here? Yes, sir. Mr. Miller. Good evening. Okay. Thank you, guys. Counterpoint, counterpoint. There it is. There it is. So, Greg Miller with Corbridge Financial. I just, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners, and staff, I appreciate you letting me speak again here to support the committee's recommendation to select Corbridge for the defined contribution retirement plans. So, you know, we've been having a lot of discussion already. The city did have a very diverse committee that did an exhaustive review of the retirement plans with people with experience on that committee there. Including folks from the finance department as well in there. And then they also hired, as we talked about, Burgess Chambers and brought some independent expertise in there to help them through an RFP process. That process was very well done. All of the committee members reviewed all of the responses. They actually even brought all of the respondents in for interviews to speak with all of us. Since then, you know, Corbridge was awarded the contract through that process. Since then, they have negotiated aggressively on behalf of the city employees. And so, they've secured a contract with very strong accountability provisions and protection for the city employees. All right. The savings, and Commissioner Herbst, I believe I heard you talk about the costs a number of times. My understanding from the consultant and from the committee is those savings may exceed $1.25 million every year. Those are dollars that stay in your employees' accounts, help them secure retirement, and also we'll come back to help the city of Fort Lauderdale. And they'll do so because a lot of those people are going to retire locally, and those dollars will be spent in the local community, right? So, I think some of the other discussion here has been about choice and about, you know, taking away from staying multi-vendor or going to a single vendor. Industry best practices are that you go to a single vendor. The entire industry is going down that way. Commissioner Herbst, you talked about Jacksonville many years ago. They went to a single vendor model and have remained there. They do so because you can leverage your scale. We all have open architecture mutual fund platforms. So, you talked about some of the investment options that are available. You talked about white labeling some of those. You know, our platform allows you to get to the vanguard, to Fidelity, American funds, whatever you want. You can have of 12,000 different varieties that are available. And so, you know, the history behind these plans, just so you know, is when they first started the 457 plans in the 70s, companies like Corbridge had very few investment options. And so, for you to offer diversification to your employees, you had to get multiple providers to come in and do that. That has changed. We all have open architecture platforms now so you can get there. From an education standpoint, having a single vendor model allows you to streamline that communication and education process for your employees. It reduces confusion for your employees. They're not trying to figure out, do I pick, you know, Mission Square or Nationwide as they have been for so long and which is going to be better for me? And, Commissioner Herbst, you have a great deal of experience and expertise in finance. Obviously, not everybody has that background as you do. And so, streamlining that communication, eliminating some of the choices that they have to make and some of the confusion that can provide will actually help folks in terms of, you know, working towards that secure retirement that they deserve. So, you know, I stand here. We are very excited to work with the city of Fort Lauderdale. So, we have an incredible service team. Two of them are here with me tonight. And we are going to be committed to driving retirement outcomes, better retirement outcomes for your employee population here. Great. Thank you so much. Like I said, I'll leave you with this. I rolled everything out into IRAs. Yep. Fair enough. So, dissatisfaction drove that. I would have preferred to have left it there, but I – so, do a better job with my employees than was done with me. And we'll be really happy. Yes, sir. We will do that. Thank you. All right. Thank you, sir. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak on this item? Okay. There being none. Some would like to introduce a resolution. The resolution has been introduced on R11. This is to approve the service agreement. Please call the roll. A, Resolution City Commission of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, approving a service agreement for 401A and 457B Employee Plan Administration delegating Ballack Retirement Services Company as the plan administrator of the city's deferred compensation plan and the city's defined contribution money purchase plan authorizing the Director of Human Resources or the Deputy Director of Human Resources to modify, finalize, approve, and execute any and all agreements, extensions, and documents necessary to effectuate deferred compensation and defined contribution money purchase plan administration by Ballack Retirement Services Company, designating the Human Resources Director as the coordinator of the city's defined contribution plan and the city's defined contribution money purchase plan authorizing certain employees to execute certain documents and take certain actions, precision of conflicting resolution provisions, and providing for an effective date. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Visa-Bittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? So I first brought this up four finance directors ago. Thank you, Linda. Yes. And Mayor Trent Hollis. Okay. Yes. R11 is now approved. Moving on to PH1. This is a public hearing regarding the transfer of city-owned property at 1306 Northwest 6th Street in the Northwest Progressive Flagler Heights Community Redevelopment Area from Fort Lauderdale to the Fort Lauderdale Community Redevelopment Agency. Um, we had a discussion on this afternoon. Um, someone would like to introduce the resolution? Um, someone would like to introduce the resolution? Introduce. Uh, it's introduced. Do we have to, we, uh, we, uh, close. Okay. Uh, no one has signed up to speak, so do I hear, let me first ask a motion to, um, close public hearing. You've moved to close public hearing. Do I hear a second? Who moves and seconded? Please call the roll. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Swardson? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trent Hollis? Yes. So public hearing on page one is now closed. Now to introduce the resolution, Commissioner Beasley-Pittman introducing, approving the transfer. Anyone have any questions? There being none, please call the roll. A resolution, City Commissioner of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, approving the transfer of one city-owned property located at 1306 Northwest 6th Street in the Northwest Progressive Flagler Heights Community Redevelopment Agency to the Fort Lauderdale Community Redevelopment Agency for public purposes. Pursued to Section 8.02 of the city charter, subject to terms and conditions, delegating authority to the city manager to execute the conveyance and related instruments and providing for an effective date. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trent Hollis? Yes. And PH1 is now approved. PH2, I'm wondering if we might consider deferring this. I know we discussed it this afternoon. Is there any further thoughts on deferring this item? Anyone have any thoughts on this? Commissioner Beasley-Pittman, Commissioner Glassman, it's in your district, Commissioner Glassman. Yeah, well, we had quite a discussion, except I had recommended that originally, but then I deferred to you. Well, now it's an agenda item before. Oh, I understand. Yeah. But I listened to both you and Commissioner Beasley-Pittman, who didn't want to defer it. No, I'm of the mind now, but now we have more people on the commission. Well, maybe we should hear from them. Yeah. Yeah. Commissioner Herbst, Vice Mayor, do you have any thoughts on this? Sure. The, well, Commissioner Herbst, I'll defer to you if you wanted to start. So, I didn't have the benefit of the afternoon discussion, but I know we've been working on the Lupa, obviously, for up in Uptown for quite a while. That was a significant part of the initiative to develop the Cypress Creek area as another economic engine for the city of Fort Lauderdale. We think this is an important initiative to bring more housing into some of these areas and to align those residential areas with some of these commercial areas. So, I'm not sure, again, what the discussion was for the afternoon, but barring that, I'd like to see all this move forward. But I'm happy to listen to what the comments were. Well, I think the, one of the reasons for wanting to defer it was to allow there be further community outreach as to the ultimate, ultimate decision as to what to do on this site. And to keep it in the hands of the city until there's some, seeing what the best path would be to ultimately achieve what the community ultimately decides what they want to do at the site. It may not be the best path to take, put it into the CRA. It might be best just to leave it in the hands of the city until a decision is made by the community. And so, that was the nature of the discussion. Wait, I apologize, Mayor. I just jumped over to PH3. I was, my, my, my, my, my, my, my. I apologize. The thing got stuck, and it rolled over to the next one. I apologize. I had a feeling you were. Yeah, no, no, no, no. You said pH 2, and I turned the page to look at it, and it rolled into pH 3. So my apologies. There was no discussion on pH 3. No, no, no. I apologize. That's why I was talking about the loop, and I was wondering why I was getting blank looks from everybody. Okay. No, no, actually, I agree. I think actually postponing this makes a lot of sense. You know, we had our initial presentation from Doty with their concept for what they wanted to do over there. I thought that made a lot of sense. But one of the things that I pointed out at the time is, based on my history with the city, I know the restrictions on this that relate to the fact that it's a HUD-financed property. And for those of you that don't know this, everybody thought this was a CRA property, and it was not a CRA property because it had HUD funding into it. And we actually had to go back and repay a substantial amount of money because all the revenue that was generated off the rent from the post office had gone to the CRA, and we had to reimburse the Community Development Department all of that revenue because it's program income. The way HUD works is any money that you generate off of a HUD-financed property is considered to be program income. So we went through this many, many years ago, earlier in my tenure. So I've always known this to be constituted as a HUD property, and I know that that was going to be a challenge for us to overcome no matter what we did. And I think that the Housing Authority might be a very simple way of us to short-circuit that process, to accomplish the same thing, continue the goals and aims of what HUD and CDBG wants to accomplish. So I think if there's an appetite within the community to do that with the district commissioner, I'm not trying to overstep again. I didn't know your conversation earlier. But I think conceptually it makes a lot of sense to move forward in that direction. I think it streamlines the process considerably. And so if there's a consensus to do that, I would certainly support just moving in that direction. I don't think we need to move it to the CRA in order to effectuate that larger plan. Okay. Vice Mayor, do you have any thoughts? Yeah, I think whatever we do, we've got to have robust public participation, engagement. I think we all agree with that. I mean, so that's the foundational piece, yeah. And so I think, again, I wasn't part of the conversation earlier. It sounds like the direction is you can kind of have two options. You could defer the item to a date certain. We could table it and start the public conversation and then decide what the community public wants and then go in that direction. That's kind of what I was thinking. A couple options, yeah. Let's let the community weigh in on it and then see what the best path going forward is. Is it, depending upon what the community decides, what should go there, is the best path to then transfer it to the CRA? Or is it best to just keep it within the city and effectuate the ultimate goal that's been designed? I'm fine with that direction, if that's a pleasure. With the conversation we had earlier today, I was suggesting that we defer with a date comfort. Well, I end up saying let's go ahead and convey it to the CRA. Overall, what we need to do, you said it, we've all said it, we need to make sure the direction that we take is a robust conversation with the community. And with the direction we take, I, being representative of District 3, originally this land was part of District 3. And wanting the community, the community wants to have that voice to make sure that they are heard and what is decided to be put on the property, that we're all in agreement and harmony with it. So, my, my desire is that, again, that robust conversation, being able to work with District 2 to make sure we come to a, an agreement where we're all moving in the same direction for the city overall. Okay. Okay. All right. So, do I have a motion to do? May I, may I just say a few words? Thank you. You said enough today. Thank you very much. Well, yes, I did say a lot this afternoon, actually. Um, and now I'm hearing everyone thinks that that's a great idea. I actually did. So, just, uh. Yeah. I, I was forced to withdraw my motion earlier in the day because I was deferring to my two colleagues who were here with me. But I guess you've both had a change of heart and I'm happy now that everyone's in agreement and I agree with everything that everybody said. Okay. So, would you like to make, would you like to move to defer? I, I, I certainly will. I would, uh, and I know that deferred, do we have to set a time certain, a date for deferral? Well, Commissioner, if you table it, it's indefinite. But if you move to defer, it's a time certain. So, if you table it, then it's time after you're at your leisure. I'm asking because this afternoon I heard problems with tabling. Everyone wanted to defer. You didn't want it to wait forever. Your words were saying, I don't want to wait forever. So, I'm just a little, I'm sort of a little, this is a little twilight zoning for me. No, no twilight zoning. It's a little twilight zoning. Please, I'm going to have to go back and watch the afternoon discussion and then watch this discussion. And I'm going to ask myself, where am I? But this is my position because, again, I want to take the best direction that's for the community. Yes. Table versus deferred. Deferred means we're going to have to, we're going to have a short period of time. Yes, that part I know. Table is indefinite. But the thing is, how long does it take for public outreach? Well, I'm going to say that we, staff has to help with that coordination of all of the public input and all of the stakeholders and the four or five or how many other people are proposing something on the site. We're going to have to make it very efficient. The lease expires in December of 2027. So, we have to figure out, you know, work it back and figure out how much time we need to make sure that we're effective. Six months? So, Mayor, my recommendation would be six months because we do have the holidays coming up in that time frame so we could look at planning for that outreach, some charrettes, what have you. You know, we're very good. We've done this before with other sites. We can put this together. But I think planning for that ahead of the holidays and then planning on having that outreach after the holidays, so six months from now, we should put us in that March, April. So, what's the second meeting in April? What's the second meeting in April? No, April, second meeting in April is April 20th. Then I move that we defer this item until April 20th, 2027. Okay. Is there a motion on the floor to defer to April 20th, 2027? Do I hear a second? Before we second, just clarity from the city manager. Is that enough time? I'm not trying to stretch this out. I want to make sure that we're utilizing our time efficiently, but we don't want any lag time either. If it's only going to take four months, do we need to push it back to March? I'm just trying to say let's not waste the time. If we could do it before April, I believe we would be more productive. Yeah. So, Commissioner, we'll endeavor to bring it back before April. But, again, with the holidays coming up with, you know, November, December timeframe, that may push us out into the first of the year. So, I don't want to overcommit to something we can't deliver, but we'll endeavor to be faster. Okay. All right. I can work with that. Okay. There's a second. Please call. Was that my second? Yes. Oh, she's seconded. Whether you realize it or not. I seconded. Wait a minute. Did I second it? Yes, I seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beza-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trentals? Yes. And that item is now deferred to honor before the April 20th meeting. Honor before. Okay. PH3. It's a public hearing. Second reading. An ordinance amending City of Fort Lauderdale Unified Land Development Regulations regarding Uptown Urban Village. No one has signed up. Oh, wait. Someone did sign up to speak. Well, that's just for questions on PH3. Right, Mr. Lockery? Where are you, Mr. Lockery? Okay. Would someone like to move to close public hearing on PH3? Second. If you're moved and seconded, please call the roll. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trentals? Yes. And public hearing is now closed on PH3. Anyone have any questions? Okay. Someone would like to introduce the ordinance on second reading. It's been introduced. Please call the roll. In ordinance of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Benning Unified Land Development Regulations, Article 13, Additional Zoning Districts, more specifically Section 47-37B.2, Intent and Purpose of Each District, Section 47-37B.3, Applicability and General Regulations, Section 47-37B.4, Listed of Permitted and Conditional Uses, Uptown Urban Village Northeast, Uptown Urban Village Northwest, Uptown Urban Village Southeast, Uptown Urban Village Southeast, Uptown Uptown Urban Village Southwest, Uptown Urban Village Southwest, Uptown Urban Village South Central, and Section 47-37B.6, Uptown Urban Village Zoning District, Special Regulations to Amend the Requirements Related to Residential Use Restrictions in Permitted Locations to Align with Changes to the Land Use Designation for Uptown in Providing for Correction of Scrivener's Errors, Severability Repeal of Conflicting Orance Provisions, and Effective Date. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trantals? Yes. And PH-3 is now approved on second reading. Congratulations. Hope to see smart development in that area. PH-4, public hearing, second reading, quasi-judicial ordinance approving the vacation of a 15-foot-wide and 150-foot-long portion of an alley, 501 Northeast Holdings. Anyone wishing to speak must be sworn in, and the commission will announce any site visits, communications, or expert opinions received, or expert opinions received, and make them a part of the record. Commissioner Herbst, do you have any additional disclosures? Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? You said additional would be the same. Additional disclosures. No additional. I have no additional disclosures. Commissioner Glassman? No additional. And Vice Mayor? No additional. Okay. Mr. Locker, you just signed up to speak for questions only. He's still trying to charm Ms. Toothaker. That's fine. Okay. Would someone like to move to close public hearing on PH-4? Moved. Second. Please call the roll on closing public hearing. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trantals? Yes. And PH-4 public hearing is now closed. Would someone like to introduce the ordinance? Introduce. The ordinance has been introduced. Please call the roll. In order to the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, vacating an approximately 15-foot-wide by a 150-foot-long alley lying within Block 3 of the amended plat of Blocks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33 of North Lauderdale. According to Platt, thereof, as recorded in Platt Book 1, page 182 of the public records of Dade County, Florida, located west of Northwest 4th Avenue, north of Northeast 5th Street, east of Northeast 3rd Avenue, and south of Northeast 6th Street, all said lands being in the City of Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trantals? Yes. And PH-4 is now approved on second reading. Moving on to PH-5. This is a public hearing, second reading, on an ordinance amending the City of Fort Lauderdale Unified Land Development Regulations, zoning district requirements to allow warehouse as a conditional use. Only one person has signed up to speak, Mr. Lockery, and I assume that's just for questions. No one else has signed up to speak. Someone please move to close public hearing. Moved. Second. We move the second to close public hearing on PH-5. Please call the roll. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trantals? Yes. And PH-5 public hearing is now closed. Would someone like to introduce the ordinance on second reading? Introduced. Introduced. Please call the roll. In order to the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, amending the Unified Land Development Regulations, Article 2, Zoning District requirements, more specifically Section 47-6.12, listed of permitted and conditional uses, General Business District to add warehouse facility to the list of conditional uses in the General Business District in providing for correction of scrivener's errors, severability, repeal of conflicting orders provisions, and effective date. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Mayor Trantals? Yes. And PH-5 is now approved on second reading. Moving on to PH-6. This is a de novo review of an application for variants. Case number PLN BOA 2402-001, requesting relief from Section 47-5-31 of the Unified Land Development Regulations for a single-family residence located at 1017 Southwest 19th Street here in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, 33315, to allow an accessory dwelling to remain as built encroaching in the rear yard. In a de novo hearing, the City Commission will consider the application for variants without consideration to any prior decision by the Board of Adjustment. A review of the Board of Adjustment decision was previously conducted at our regular meeting of September 2, 2026, at which the City Commission considered an appeal and adopted Resolution Number 26-174, setting this de novo hearing. At this time, the City Commission will consider the variants application, the evidence adduced in support of and in opposition to the application, and any public comments received at this public hearing to determine whether the applicant has demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that their variants application meets the criteria specified in Section 47-24.12, parens A through parens E of the ULDR. The petitioner is Sharon Duncan. The City Commission will first provide disclosures of any ex parte communications and site visits, and then we will hear from the applicants, followed by public comments. Commissioner Herbst, do you have any disclosures? None. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? No disclosures. I have none either. Commissioner Glassman? None. And Vice Mayor? Yes. Site visits, discussion with neighbors, applicant. Thank you. Okay. So may the applicant come forward to present the application. Good evening. Good evening, Commission. Please identify yourself. My name is Miles Jolly. I am the applicant's attorney. Okay. So I'll try to be as brief as possible. I won't go through the history here or what specifically we're asking, but as background for the Commission's benefit, this specific variance that we're requesting is part of an application that requested three variances for the same structure in the rear yard on this property. Two of those requested variances were approved. The one that we're considering tonight was denied, and that deals with the rear setback. This is an RSA zone property. That rear setback requirement is 15 feet. The structure is 5.4 feet from the rear property line, so we're seeking a variance of just 9.6 feet. And so we have a visual of the structure here. These are a plan view and an elevation. The one-story building that we see on the left-hand side here, that's the structure in question. This is in the left-rear corner of the property. And then on the other side, we see the east elevation. This is what the structure looks like. It's roughly 20 by 15 feet. And here's an actual picture of the structure. As the Commission can see, it's well-built. This is not shoddy construction. It's well-maintained. The property owner, Ms. Duncan, keeps good care of it. So it's not an eyesore. It's not any sort of danger to neighbors, anything like that. And so the background information of how the structure got here is important because that is what we are relying on to meet the criteria to obtain the variance for this rear setback. Ms. Duncan hired who she thought was a licensed contractor to perform a renovation in addition to the existing home on the property and also build the structure. Ms. Duncan, this individual, gave her actual license numbers. It turns out those were somebody else's license numbers. That licensed contractor pulled the permits, obtained, submitted plans, everything like that, and obtained the permits. Unfortunately, that licensed contractor then receded, didn't perform any of the actual work, and this unlicensed contractor did everything from there, which, as we'll see, is unlicensed contracting a violation of Florida law, both by the unlicensed individual and the license holder. So as part of her agreement with this unlicensed contractor, Ms. Duncan was told that everything would be permitted, would be properly approved in compliance with city codes, building codes, everything. Ms. Duncan was showed plans that had been prepared and submitted. She saw permits that had been approved based on those plans. So she was under the impression that the structure had been properly approved and everything was fine, and she relied on who she thought was a licensed contractor for that. As I mentioned, that was not the case, and these are not really just mere allegations. The Florida DVPR has actually adjudicated two complaints that Ms. Duncan submitted with respect to these individuals and found that both had violated Florida law regarding contractor licensing. On the left-hand side, you'll see a Mr. Hernandez. That's the unlicensed individual that my client entered into a contract with. The DVPR found he engaged in unlicensed contracting with respect to this project. And then on the other side is Mr. Pensado. He was the licensed individual that rented his license out to Mr. Hernandez. He also was found guilty and had disciplinary action imposed against him. So these individuals were really the cause of all these problems. Ms. Duncan thought she was relying on somebody who had a license. That wasn't the case. And so, as I mentioned, as you can imagine, the unlicensed contractor built this structure within the rear setback in violation of the ULDR. Ms. Duncan really had no idea. She was relying on who she thought was a licensed individual who said that everything would be properly permitted and approved and did not do that. Ms. Duncan believed she was complying with the code. She was not trying to get around the code. She wasn't trying to skirt the ULDR or get anything over on the city. She thought she was doing everything right, but she was misrepresented to and lied to by these individuals that she relied on. So next, important for context here, and this is important in light of the variance criteria, are what the neighborhood looks like, what neighboring properties look like. This is Ms. Duncan's neighbor to the direct east. So as you can see, this is the east fence on her property line. This is about a six-foot fence. There's a similar accessory structure that's right up against the property line and also right up against the rear property line, similar to the structure that she had built. And then you also have her neighbor just to the north. This is, again, her rear property line. There's a six-foot fence there. There's another shed. It's about seven feet tall. That's right up against that rear property line as well. So the reason for showing the commission these photos is one of the criteria for approving the variance is whether or not the structure is sort of not in compliance, but it fits within the neighborhood. There are other properties that have this substantial property right to having these types of structures. And her neighbors immediately to the north and the east have these as well and seemingly have not had issues with the city. So she assumed that that wasn't a problem as well when she was told that everything would be permitted and approved. And so I know, Mayor Chantal, she mentioned this in your prologue that the BOA's decision is not really binding on the commission tonight. But the two portions of this variance that were approved, the language that the BOA relied on in approving those is good for context because they found here, this is from the BOA's resolution where they approved two of these variances. They say the hardship was not self-created and denying the variance would deny the applicant the ability to construct a structure on the property that other property is situated on her street and her neighborhood would be able to do. And then the other one says because the applicant has shown the hardship. Now, the reason, and I'll show you the rest of the resolution where they approved those two based on that language. The reason that's important for context is because they use that language based on the same set of facts that I just went through. And the variance criteria is the same for those two that they approved and the one that was denied. So if those facts were sufficient for the BOA to approve two of those variances, it would necessarily follow that it would be sufficient to approve the one that they denied. But for whatever reason, they did deny it and they didn't really explain. They just said there was no hardship shown. And so, as you mentioned, Mayor Chantalis, there is five criteria that Ms. Duncan needs to show by a preponderance of the evidence in order for the commission to find that this variance be approved. The first is that special conditions and circumstances affecting the property prevent the reasonable use of such property. Those special conditions and circumstances all relate to the fact that Ms. Duncan thought what she was doing was all approved. There was, unfortunately, an unlicensed contracting individual that lied to her and did not do what he said he was going to do. And that all affects just her and her property. And that would prevent the reasonable use of the property because this is an R8 zoned residential property. An accessory structure like this is permitted. Granted, the rest of the technical requirements in the ULDR are complied with. But those being complied with, this is something that would be allowed on this type of property. And her neighbors have similar structures. The second criteria, circumstances cause these special conditions are peculiar to the property at issue. Again, this is all particular to the misrepresentations and fraud on Ms. Duncan that she thought all this was going to be approved properly and she was told everything was fine and the licensed contractor was doing this and that was not the case. And that is peculiar just to her. Subsection C here, the literal application of the provisions of the ULDR would deprive applicant of the substantial property right that is enjoyed by others in the same zoning district. The commission just needs to go back and look at the photos from Ms. Duncan's neighbors where they've got similar structures near the rear and side property lines within those setbacks. And those apparently are fine and those neighbors have enjoyment of those property rights. That's all Ms. Duncan is trying to get here. And the literal application of the ULDR would prevent her from doing so. Subsection D, the unique hardship is not self-created nor is it the result of mere disregard or ignorance. This was certainly not self-created. Ms. Duncan was not out to pull a fast one on the city or get around the ULDR requirements. She hired a licensed individual or who she thought was a licensed individual for the reason of making sure everything was properly built according to codes and permitted properly, but that did not happen. She wasn't disregarding the ULDR. She wanted everything to be properly approved, and she relied on somebody to make sure that that was done, and unfortunately, she was lied to about that. And then the last, the minimum variance that will make possible or reasonable use of the property, and that will be in harmony with general purposes and intent and not incompatible with adjoining properties. All we're asking for is a variance of 9.6 feet. That's the minimum that's required just to get this rear setback variance approved. It would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent with the ULDR because, again, this is an R8 zone property. An accessory structure would be permitted with all the technical requirements otherwise complied with, and it would not be incompatible with adjoining properties, as we saw from the photos with the neighbors. And it's not otherwise detrimental to public welfare. It hasn't been cited for any sort of hazard, anything like that. It's well taken care of. It's well maintained. And no neighbors have voiced any issues. In fact, we've got the Neighborhood Association president here tonight to speak on Ms. Duncan's behalf. So, in conclusion, Ms. Duncan simply wants to get the structure properly approved. She didn't try. There was no intent here to try to get away with anything. Requiring her, not approving this would require her to demolish the structure she already paid over $20,000 for to be built. The BOA already found hardship based on these same set of facts, so we would ask that the commission reverse the BOA's denial of that one variance for the rear setback and approve it. Okay, very good. Thank you so much. Anyone have any questions of the applicant? All right. We have the floor is now open for public comment. If any member of the public wishes to speak on this item, we have one person who signed up to speak, Ms. Ted and Sarah. Good evening, everybody. Ted and Sarah, president of the River Oaks Civic Association. I spoke on this matter twice at the Board of Adjustments, once here earlier, and this is my second time here. As you know, I was here earlier today, rode my bike back to River Oaks in between, walked my dog, came back here. I'm like, you know, knowing, you know, that this was going to be about last on the agenda, but this is how important it is for me and Sharon Duncan, who just lives a few doors down from me. There was, she thought everything was on the up and up. Sharon, she's such a vital person in our neighborhood. But she lives in her home, just herself and her special needs son, Jonas. He sells raffle tickets at our River Oaks meetings, helps direct people to our extravagant buffets that we have in the River Oaks meetings. She helps out at Green Year Routine, helps out when we were at the Holiday Park Starlight Musical. She's going to help us on December 7th at the Sunday Jazz Brunch when Valerie Tyson is going to be there. We requested to do that one because, you know, she's so good. But Sharon, the house is beautiful, it's immaculate, the landscaping is great. And, you know, this has just been such a burden on her, you know, with everything else that she's trying to do, you know, just living life. And the neighborhood has no problem with this. The neighbors don't. I don't. And she's a great, great citizen of Fort Lauderdale. And, you know, I think we should grant her this variance and make her take, let her have a deep breath and put this behind us. Thank you. All right. Thank you so much. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak on this item? Okay. There being none, someone please move to close public hearing. Moved. Do I hear a second? No. Okay. Moved and seconded. Please call the roll on closing public hearing. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Mayor Trentals? Yes. And public hearing is now closed on page six. Okay. So there are two approaches to this, either to approve the variance request or deny the variance request. So would someone like to, is this a motion or introducing a resolution? A motion. It's a motion. Okay. Would someone like to make a motion with regard to? Yeah, Mayor, I'm happy to make a motion. So let me, I'm sorry, go ahead. Go ahead. No, go ahead, Mayor. No, is it for or against? It's going to be for approval. Okay. So you, so I'm going to recite something and you either agree to it or not agree to it. I move to approve the variance application for case number PLNBOA 24-02001, finding that the applicant has demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that their variance application meets the criteria specified in section 47-24.12a through e of the ULDR. Do you ratify that statement? Correct, Mayor. I do. And one question, though, for our city attorney is, city attorney, is there anything further that this body needs to articulate in terms of criteria? Are we sufficient moving forward with my motion? Okay. Great. It is my finding. It's, it's my finding. I move that it's the commission's finding. So, Mayor, I move to approve the variance, ratify your, your statement. Okay. Anyone else have any comments or statements with regard to this matter? Okay. Please call the roll. Do we second? Yeah, I need a second. Second. Oh, we need a second. Second. Thank you. Yeah. Yeah, if I could ask the zoning administrator, Mohamed, was there, Mohamed, was there an easement issue that we needed to address with an overhang within this motion? Yes. There are, there are two issues. If they obtain this variance, they have to get a letter from the easement. One of the overhang is in the easement. From the utility companies like FPL, whoever has the easement, they have to get a clearance letter from them saying that overhang is okay. That's one of the conditions. And the second condition is they have to add an extra parking, which they have space, they can add it. That is a requirement to have an extra parking. So, so this motion needs to have those two conditions attached to it? Yes, please. Okay. So, do you want to revise your motion? Yeah, I'll include, so motion is subject to the easement and the parking condition. And I would just ask that the applicant's attorney, if they could acknowledge if they're agreeable to those conditions. You have to, actually, you got to come up to the microphone and make that statement, please. And Mohamed, if you, while he's doing that, if you can just clarify the overhang easement, is that to the back of the property and the easement behind the fence? Yes, there's a six foot, there's an easement in the back of the property. Right. And, you know, the overhang is going a little bit inside the easement. The overhang of the accessory unit? Of the roof. Of the extribute structure. Okay. The eaves. Got it. The eaves, yes. Okay. And the option, usually what we accept a letter from the, you know, whoever has the, like, FPL or whoever has the easement. Okay. They give out letters. Sometimes they don't. So, they have to cut it down six inches, eight inches, whatever it is. Got it. They have to cut it down. Okay. So, that onus is on the applicant to seek and receive that letter. That's correct. And relay that communication to the city, right? That's correct. Okay. And then for validating the parking, how does the owner go about that? They have sufficient space, and I think we have discussed it with the owner before. They have to add one extra parking for the unit, which they can. So, we just want to make a condition of the approval that we have to make sure. So, the permit will not be approved unless those two conditions are filled? That's correct. Okay. So, do you amend your motion to require those two conditions? Yes. Does the second also agree to that? Yes. Okay. And does the applicant agree to those two conditions? Yes. We're well aware of those conditions. That's fine. Okay. And one last question, Mohamed. The additional parking space is that, so she has, Ted, I think it's a circular drive, or is it just to pull it? So, is there additional paving that needs to be done? Which needs to be done to add the extra parking for the unit? Okay. And she's aware of that? And yes. She's aware of that. That was always a known condition, so that's no problem. Great. Thank you. Mayor, yes. So, let's move that forward. All right. Any other comments or questions? Okay. There being none, please call the roll. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trimtals? Yes. And that item is now approved. Thank you. Okay. Moving on to Ordinance of Second Reading. This is the second reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 15, Article 5 of the Code of Ordinances by amending Sections 15-181, 15-182, 15-183, 15-184, 15-185, and 15-186 to revise the outdoor event application and permit requirements. No one has signed up to speak. Would someone like to introduce the ordinance? Introduce. The ordinance has been introduced. Any questions or comments? There being none, please call the roll. In ordinance of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, amending Chapter 15, Article 5 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, titled Outdoor Events by Amending Sections 15-181, 15-182, 15-183, 15-184, 15-185, and 15-186 to revise the outdoor event application and permit requirements and implement a new event application fee structure with exceptions providing for definition of the terms legacy event and signature event, adopting an event impact fee matrix, limiting the number of permitted events and road closures on the barrier island, providing for increased penalties, and providing for severability, repeal of conflicting ordinance provisions, correction of scrivener errors, and an effective date. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Carl, thank you. And team Parks and Rec staff coming through again for positivity. Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trentels? Yes. And OSR 1 is now approved on second reading. Congratulations. OSR 2, second reading, an ordinance amending the classification table of the pay plan of the City of Fort Lauderdale by establishing one new classification. No one has signed up to speak. Does someone like to introduce the ordinance? Introduced. It's been introduced. Please call the roll. In ordinance of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, amending the non-bargaining unit classification table of the pay plan of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, as amended by creating and adding one job classification, providing for severability, repeal of conflicting orders provisions, and an effective date. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Yes. Mayor Trentels? Yes. And OSR 2 is now approved in second reading. We have one walk-on resolution. Have you all had a chance to review this? Yes. This is regarding our plea to the school board to include the City of Fort Lauderdale in its decision-making process with regard to the attrition of school facilities. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman, would you like to introduce the resolution? Introduced. Okay. Anyone wish to speak on this item? There being none, please call the roll. A resolution of the City Commission of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, urging the School Board of Broward County, Florida, to provide to the City of Fort Lauderdale data supporting school closures within the City of Fort Lauderdale to include the City of Fort Lauderdale in decision-making regarding school closures within the City of Fort Lauderdale and to consider carefully the community impact of closing legacy schools within the City of Fort Lauderdale in providing for distribution and an effective date. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? Yes. Vice Mayor Sorensen? Yes. Commissioner Herbst? Mayor Trentels? Yes. And that resolution is now approved. And who will be delivering that resolution to the school board? What's the process? What's the process? It will go to the superintendent. To the superintendent. Okay. Great. All right. Is there any further business to the commission, Mr. City Manager? Nothing further. Do you have anything, any, what's the word I'm thinking of, announcements, City Attorney? I do not, Mayor. You do not. Any questions or comments from the commission? There being none, this meeting is now adjourned. Thank you, everybody.