City Commission Regular Meeting on March 3, 2026 - Mar 05, 2026

The executive closed-door session of the City Commission is now terminated, and the public meeting is now open. Good evening, everybody, and welcome to the City Commission meeting this March 3, 2026. We have a number of interesting items to discuss tonight, and I appreciate all of you being here. For those of you who are here for the first time, welcome and thank you for being here. Thank you. And so let us begin. I'd like to invite Omar Hunter. Omar, where are you? There you are. Omar is going to join us in leading us in the Pledge of Allegiance, so I can ask you all to please stand and join Omar. Where do you go to school? Rock Island Elementary. Very nice, very nice. So you're going to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance tonight? All right, so let us begin. Put your hand over your heart. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republics for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Very good. Thank you so much. Here's a little gift for you for your efforts. Thank you for being here tonight. Your family here? Come on. Come on up here. Is this your family? Come on up here. We'll take a picture of everybody. Come on. No? She doesn't want to. Who is she? She doesn't. My sister. She doesn't want to take a picture. All right. Are you his mom? Yes, sir. Nice to meet you. Nice to meet you, too. Thank you for coming tonight. Thank you for allowing Omar to be here. Very good. Thank you so much. You're welcome. Thank you. You know, that's how Commissioner Glassman started out, so there's great hope for you. Next, I'd like to all invite you to join the commission in a moment of silence, and in doing so, tonight I'd like to recognize a former county commissioner, Suzanne Gunsberger, who passed away this week, an amazing champion for her district, for our community, the county, and for so many people, especially in the LGBT community, for whom she stood up time and again. And it's indeed sad to hear about her passing. Thank you so much. At this time, we take a pause in our meeting to recognize people who have announced their retirement, and these are people who have been here for a very, very long time. There are a few of us together tonight to recognize. We have James Hughes, who is a public works maintenance supervisor in public works, has been with us for 28 years. Thank you. Thank you so much, James, for your commitment to our city. Dave Heaney, public works park supervisor, been with us 24 years. Congratulations. Thank you so much, Dave. Stephen Bean, beach lifeguard, 32 years. Wow. And Milton Salimos, who is a driver engineer in fire rescue, been with us 31 years. And Mark Rossi, fire captain, fire rescue, has been with us 20 years. So congratulations and thank you for your service. So let us begin. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. Vice Mayor Herbst. Commissioner Glassman. Here. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman is not present. Commissioner Sorensen. Here. Mayor Trentos. Yes, here. Just to announce to the community that Commissioner Beasley-Pittman could not be here today. She has medical emergency to which she's attending, and she won't be here for the evening meeting as well. We have an agenda item, a revision, OSR 1, Exhibit 1, which is an ordinance, section 27-27, and 27-66 have now been revised. So would someone like to please move to accept the agenda as amended and the minutes from the previous meeting? So move. Second. Move and seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Sorensen. Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst. Commissioner Glassman. Yes. Mayor Trentos. Yes. So the agenda and the minutes have not been approved, the agenda as amended. So now we take a little pause again, and we have some presentations to discuss tonight. And there are just three. And the reason for presentations is the city recognizes individuals, organizations, or causes which we believe are important to the community. And tonight is my honor and privilege to recognize Mike Lambrex, who's chair of the Coastal Conservation Association, who is coming to the city to provide us with a check for a lot of money. Mike, are you here? There you are. Come on up to the podium. Good evening, everybody. First of all, I want to thank the commission for having us here. The check that we have tonight that we're presenting is for a project that Marco Aguilera, our chief waterways officer, had presented to us and brought to us for the city's first sewage pump-out boat. And it was a grant that Marco had identified. And we came to Marco, and we said, how do we ensure that this happens? How can we incentivize the city? How can we be a part of this as an organization and what we do for marine conservation to ensure that this project goes forward? And so we are committing $10,000 to add on to this grant for the city to be able to purchase and operate this sewage pump-out boat. And this is something that we've been – a lot of the marine community has been asking for for a long time, a very long time. And we're really thankful to have Marco here with us, thankful for the Coastal Conservation Association, thankful for our commission's steadfast commitment to our waterways. And we look forward to doing a lot more. Thank you. So why don't you tell us a little bit what is a pump-out station? Good evening, Marco Aguilera, chief waterways officer, city of Fort Lauderdale. So many boats that have – any boat that has a restroom on board has a sewage holding tank on board. The city currently has four pump-out stations that are operated that are free of charge. The public is welcome to use them, but they are stationary. So it does take a boater to go to the station to do the pump-out themselves. Through the grant, through Coastal Conservation Association, through Lauderdale Isles Water Management District, and through all the partners we had involved throughout this process, we're purchasing a vessel that is a come-to-you service that will be free of charge. We anticipate getting high use out of the vessel, and we're really looking forward to it. And the commitment from Coastal Conservation Association has been unwavering since the beginning. They're an amazing association. If you haven't checked them out online, I suggest you do so. Thank you so much. We really appreciate it. And this is all part of this commission's commitment to ensuring the safety and quality of our waterways. And you want to take our picture? You want to come over here? Go forward to the center. Okay. $10,000. Thank you so much. That really, really is appreciated. Next, we have – I'd like to invite Monica Newman-McClooney, who's head of the U.S. Corporate Social Responsibility and the Embraer Foundation. Please come to the podium. We have a proclamation that we'd like to declare March 2026 as National Women's History Month here in the city of Fort Lauderdale. Thank you, too. So this proclamation was intended to be presented by Commissioner Beasley-Pittman, so on her behalf, I am making that presentation. So from the Office of the Mayor of the City of Fort Lauderdale, this is a proclamation in recognition of National Women's History Month honoring Monica Newman-McClooney, and this was requested by Commissioner Pam Beasley-Pittman. Whereas National Women's History Month is observed each March to honor the trailblazing women who have shaped our nation, expanded opportunity, and broken barriers across every sector of society. Aviation has long been a field defined by innovation and possibility, and the growing presence of women within this industry continues to open doors, elevates representation, and inspire the next generation to reach new heights. Monica, head of the U.S. Corporate Social Responsibility and the Embraer Foundation, exemplifies this spirit through her leadership in advancing corporate responsibility and expanding access to aviation pathways for our youth. The Embraer Foundation, established in 2017 as a 501c3 foundation, makes strategic social investments that positively impact the communities where Embraer employees live and work with a strong commitment to volunteerism and youth engagement in aviation. Monica has built strategic partnerships across the nation that strengthen educational initiatives and broadens access to careers in aviation. Finally, whereas the City of Fort Lauderdale proudly recognizes women leaders whose vision and dedication strengthen communities, expand opportunity, and inspire future generations to soar. Whereas, now therefore, we as the City Commissioners of the City of Fort Lauderdale do hereby proclaim today, March 3rd, 2026, as National Women's History Month here in the City of Fort Lauderdale, signed by myself, Mayor Dean Trantalis. Congratulations. Want to say a few words? Thank you. I promise I will be brief. I am so grateful and honored to be standing before you this evening and to be recognized. It's an amazing way to kick off Women's History Month. So thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm especially grateful to Commissioner Pam Beasley Pittman for this recognition and to be able to do the work that we do not only here in Fort Lauderdale but in other cities across the country. So thank you for having me and thank you for this great honor. Okay, our final presentation, I would invite Commissioner Ben Sorensen who will be presenting a proclamation regarding National Kidney Month here in the City of Fort Lauderdale. And is Barbara Chapman here? Hey, Barbara, come on down. You're the next contestant. Thank you, Mayor. I appreciate it. Thank you, Barbara, for being here. You're looking so festive and colorful. Thank you for being here. I'd love to read this recognition and then turn it over to you. That's all right. I'd love to hear more from you. Great. So this is in recognition of National Kidney Month. Whereas healthy kidneys are essential to regulating the body's balance of water and chemicals in the blood, removing excess fluids, waste, toxins, and medications, and regulating blood pressure, producing red blood cells, and promoting strong bones. And whereas approximately 37 million American adults, nearly one in seven, are living with chronic kidney disease, yet most remain unaware of their condition. The disease is the ninth leading cause of death in the United States, claiming more lives than breast or prostate cancer, with more than 102,000 individuals nationwide currently awaiting a kidney transplant. Whereas in Florida, more than 51,000 individuals are living with kidney failure, approximately 36,000 receive dialysis, and 5,700 remain on the transplant waiting list. Whereas the National Kidney Foundation of Florida is dedicated to the awareness, prevention, and treatment of kidney disease, working to improve the health and well-being of individuals and families affected by kidney and urinary tract disease, and to increase the availability of organs for transplant, and whereas the National Kidney Foundation of Florida hosts an annual Fort Lauderdale Kidney Walk, a meaningful community event that brings together individuals and families affected by kidney disease, along with local supporters, to inspire hope and generate critical funding for patients. In recognition of March as National Kidney Month, the National Kidney Foundation of Florida honors individuals living with the disease, dialysis patients, transplant recipients, living donors, donor families, health care professionals, community partners, and volunteers for their commitment to combating kidney disease. Now, therefore, we as the City Commissioners of the City of Fort Lauderdale proclaim March 3rd, 2026, as National Kidney Day and Month in the City of Fort Lauderdale, dated this day, March 3rd, by your Mayor, Dean J. Trantellis. Thank you so much. Thank you, Commissioners, and thank you, Mayor. My name is Barbara Chapman, as they stated. I'm the Regional Development Director with the National Kidney Foundation of Florida, and it's my honor to be here to accept the proclamation. And just to share that kidney disease is not in the forefront. It is a silent killer. So my connection with kidney disease is through my husband, who is a kidney recipient. He was diagnosed in 2017, which is how I became involved with the National Kidney Foundation of Florida. So fast forward to 2026, I now work for them, advocating on kidney disease and awareness. So thank you so much. And I just want to say orange is the signature color for kidney disease, and it is National Kidney Month. So thank you. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Congratulations. Thank you for being here tonight. And thank you for all the good work you do on behalf of the Foundation. And thank you, Commissioner. So at this point, we have what's called the consent agenda, and it is an opportunity for the commission to vote on all these items at once. Or if there's an item that any one of them would like to pull from the agenda and we'll discuss and vote separately, this would be the time to make that announcement. So, Vice Mayor, do you have any consent agenda items that you would like to pull? And Commissioner Glassman? None. And Commissioner Sorensen? Yes, Mayor. CM8. CM8, which is the Third Amendment to the Brickle License Agreement for the Las Solas Riverfront. Thank you. So except for CM8, do I hear a motion to approve the consent agenda items? So moved. Do I hear a second? Second. Moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Hurst? Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Mayor Trentonis? Yes. And all those consent agenda items are now approved. So if you're here on any of those items, you're welcome to stay for the rest of the meeting. Otherwise, your item has now been approved. CM8, Commissioner. Thank you, Mayor. Mayor, just want to clarify a couple items on this. I've been working with the city attorney and city manager on it. To start, city attorney, if you wouldn't mind just kind of giving the public just an understanding of the basics of this, and then we'll go on to some of the specifics. Thanks. This is the third amendment to the license agreement. This amendment addresses the right of the leasee to extend the lease for a period of 25 years. During the time he did not lease, he did not have access to the related property, the dock space and the sea wall. And so the sea wall was in disrepair. The city needed to fix it. He had limited access to it. And so in negotiating the extension, an extension that he elected to take, which was his right to do, the city negotiated an extended term of two years while the sea wall is repaired. And so that gives him the benefit of having the lack of use of it during the term of his lease. And so that's what this lease would do. It's the third amendment to the underlying lease. And that is all it accomplishes. Great, thank you. And as we've talked about, this agreement doesn't detail or specify what type of dockage and so forth. That will be in partnership between the city and the developer to kind of determine. Is that right, city managers? So there is a day dockage component, and there's also a commercial dockage component. So the day dockage component of 160 linear feet, that is what is memorialized as part of the agreement and the amendment. We do have some improvements that are needed, and as a result of not having those improvements done, this is part of why we are supportive of adding an additional two years to the renewal period. We are undertaking seawall improvements, and we will be installing floating docks. We are currently in the design phase, and we have spoken with various stakeholders, and we're identifying the best location for those floating docks. But there's 160 feet of day dockage and about 300 feet of commercial dockage. Right, but this only contemplates 160. Well, this outlines that the 160 feet that are currently included as part of the license agreement would remain accessible to the public. And what this item essentially addresses is the time period for the renewal, and it also memorializes that no fees would be required from the licensee because the public or capital improvements necessary have not been done to date. Right. And once those improvements are done, then the waiver of those fees would be rescinded. Right. Yep, exactly. And then just the city attorney on the amendment, page two, do we need to add further specificity as to the third whereas clause, developers granted the non-exclusive right to use 160 of near feet of brickled dock space, as shown on exhibit C? It's labeled as day dockage on that exhibit. Do we need to kind of further stipulate? Well, that's what it is, Commissioner. That particular area is the 160 feet, and it is known as day dockage because it is public accessible dockage. And so that's the reference to it in this whereas clause. The city controls the dockage along the riverwalk, which is depicted as the brickled dock space in exhibit C. And exhibit C refers to the day dockage. Is it your point to say that while the amendment says brickled dock space, the exhibit doesn't expressly say brickled dock space? Exactly. It doesn't say brickled dock space on the – that's not a relevant term indicated on the exhibit. Right. It says day dockage, and that's what it's referring to. Right, right. We could amend that exhibit. Exhibit, city manager, the reference was to brickled dock space. I think it was sort of a generic term for day dockage. And I think that we could amend that exhibit to reference that. Or I can amend the language in the amendment to say brickled dockage space known as day dockage space in the exhibit. Whichever avenue is administratively prudent. Yeah. I think that would be helpful just for so we're all clear. Well, I recommend that we make that notation in that whereas clause as you suggested. Okay, great. And then, city manager, we just – city attorney, I talked about how just going forward, it's helpful to have just in the future all the amendments, the original agreement and the amendments attached to the agenda item. I will work with the city attorney's office on that. It goes through a review process with various members of my team as well as the city attorney's team in getting these items before you. So we will work together on that. Okay. Well, would it be helpful to give us a red line version? That would be even better. Yeah. That makes more sense instead of having to plow through what the amendments are if you could have a red line version of what the new version is supposed to be. You know what I'm saying? As distinct from the previous amendment or – Yeah. If we're adding language to a previously approved document and we're making changes just to give a red – it's easier for us to reference what the changes are. Sure. And in this case, it's a new amendment. It's a third amendment. Yeah. So we would and should include the second amendment and the underlying agreement. I think that's appropriate. I agree. Okay. Great. Great. Thank you. That was just the only adjustment there. So I think we're in good shape. So, Mayor, I move to approve. Okay. Do I hear a second? Second. Okay. We have Mr. Martwan. You're good? Okay. You didn't even have to come. By the way, thank you for draping your property with a new lifestyle draping around your property on Federal Highway. Thank you. Are you planning to build soon? Yeah. And that – yeah. And, Mayor, that's moved as amended as we made that minor adjustment. Okay. Please call the roll. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Commissioner Glavin? Yes. Mayor Trentos? Yes. And that item is now approved. Thank you. Okay. Now we go past the consent agenda items, and we move to neighbor presentations. Is Suzanne Jacob here? Hi, Suzanne. Want to come up here? And just push the button at the bottom of the speaker. Oh, it's already on. It's already pushed. Okay, great. How's this? Very good. Hi. Good evening. Thank you so much for allowing me to speak. Good evening. My name is Suzanne Jacob, and I am the Vice President of the Laws of Palmyre Village HOA. I own a home at 6170 Northwest 31st Way. Our neighborhood is less than a mile away from the beginning of runway 927 of Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport. Additionally, please be advised, I am an FAA-licensed commercial pilot. I have a four-year degree from Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Aviation Management, and I have a two-year degree from Broward College in Professional Pilot Technology. I have lived in the lofts' neighborhood since 1997. So what we've been trying to do with the city since the beginning of 2023 is request help specifically with noise abatement. And this started out with Debbie, who's here tonight, and she has been faithfully attending every Aviation Advisory Board meeting for over two years now. And that's been quite entertaining, including the last one. So we've really been trying to work with the airport and to follow the process that's within the city to make our requests. In addition to this, Mayor Dean, you came to our HOA meeting in July of 2023, and Zach was there. Is Zach still with you? Yes. Excellent. Okay. So Zach was there, and we gave him a petition that we had 158 out of 160 homeowners had signed. We also presented this petition personally to John, Commissioner John, at our November 8, 2023 HOA meeting. And finally, this petition was personally presented to Mr. Rufus James, who's the manager, longtime manager of Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport. And that was given to him at the Aviation Advisory Board meeting on December 7, 2023. The last time I came before you was November the 7, 2024, exactly what I'm doing right now. I did the same thing on that date. So again, this is now the fifth attempt that we've made to ask for some help. We do understand and accept that the runway will be receiving a 1,000-foot displaced threshold to the west that's going to move everything closer to us. Specifically, what I have taken exception at is we're using a noise study from 2002. That's still, that's not, I don't mean any disrespect, but that is not the standards of what I would come to expect from the city of Fort Lauderdale, considering how many other things you guys have accomplished. Additionally, just for reference for everyone in the audience, your $736 million water waste treatment plant, there we go. Oh, thank you. Give me another minute. I'll give you one more minute. Thank you. Is right next door to us. So in summary, what I'm looking for is some proactive action by the city to try to update our noise study. I mean, I would love to be back in 2002. All of us were a lot younger then. I mean, some of these airplanes that are now landing at Executive Airport weren't even around in 2002. Are airplanes louder or less loud these days in your experience? It depends on the situation. And one of the things that's very interesting that's included in your budget, and I actually read these things, so your 2025-2029 budget that has this project in there, you have a blast pad built into this, which means that there's going to be a noise issue. So just would really like some help if we could be proactive rather than reactive on this expansion. Thank you. Thank you. So city manager, could we kind of address some of those questions and concerns? Rufus is not here now, is he? No. He is here. Where's Rufus? Oh, there you are. So quiet, Rufus. Good evening, Mayor. Good evening, Commissioners. Rufus James, Airport Director, Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport. So what about, I think the first question, Vice Mayor, is the noise study, right? Right. So the noise study. So can we just kind of walk through some of the issues that were raised? So we've got a noise study that dates back to 2022. 2022, when would we be doing an updated noise study? Oh, 2002. I'm sorry. I apologize. I thought you said 2022. My apologies. 2002. So when would we be doing in the normal course of business an updated noise study? What would trigger a noise study, and it's a Part 150 noise study, is excessive calls from residents and obviously looking at the number of operations that generate those calls and so forth. From the last study that was done in 2002, we had residents involved. Residents made recommendations, which was presented to the FAA. And with those recommendations, an example I'll give is the I-95 turn for departures to the east. That's what residents wanted airplanes to do, the I-95 turn, so they're not flying over Imperial Point. However, the FAA responded that it would be voluntary, not mandatory. So a lot of what was recommended in that 2002 study was voluntary that we could implement, but we couldn't make it mandatory. Let me suggest this, and this is to the city manager. I think anything that's going on almost 25 years old is woefully outdated. So regardless of the volume of calls or anything else, I would suggest that it's probably timely for us to do another study. So can we get that done? I think that we can plan for a noise study in the near future, yes. Okay. Thank you. And so your other questions, you were also talking about the pad? Yep. Come on up there. Yep. That's okay. I'd like to kind of take these one at a time, if we could. So the last time I was here, which was November the 7th, 2024, we had talked about being proactive about building in noise abatement, and you had said, hey, that's a great idea. So one of the part of the part 150 noise study is using the airport perimeter to mitigate noise. Unfortunately, when you have a clear zone of a runway, you can't be building lots of things. But there's only a limited number of things you can put in that clear zone at the end of the runway. So we had talked about earth berms or blast pads or something European, you know. The Europeans do a really good job. You know, we're the Venice of America. So hold on. Let me get... Let's make the airport the Venice of America. So let me get Rufus to address that if we could. So Rufus, could you speak to that, please? So, again, this is one of those items we can put in the environmental assessment or the part 150 noise study, whichever. And when it's submitted to the FAA for their review, they would come back with the final say of whether we can or can't. So can we do this without doing the noise study? I mean, these sounds like improvements that we could make irrespective of whether we do the noise study or not, aren't they? So something such as a berm, since this is the final approach to land, it would require FAA input or study, if you will, to determine the impact on aircraft that are arriving and so forth. Okay. Are there other things that we can do that don't require the FAA's input? Not that I'm aware of. Anything that could impact navigation, aircraft operations, it does require FAA input. Okay. So we start with the noise study and then we progress from the noise study to whatever mitigation efforts we can reasonably do to help out the neighborhood. Yeah. Okay. So that makes the noise study even more important. Okay. And what was your, you had one final question, I thought, didn't you? I don't know if you are aware of this. The airport was given to us by the Navy. I am aware of that very much, yes. Yeah, you are because you're military. So, you know, you guys have done a great job with stewardship. It's one of the few things in the city that makes bucket loads of money instead of causing problems. You know, it's a wonderful thing. We do accept that this is going to happen and we want some help. But please be advised, not only is this going to impact Fort Lauderdale, this is going to impact all of our county changing this runway. You are permanently changing an infrastructure that has been in place for over 50 years. Thank you. All right. Thank you very much. Thank you. And thank you, Rufus. So, Raquel, if you would please give us, to my office at least, a timeline of when we can expect to have this done so I can share that with the residents out there. So I know you said you'd commit to getting it done, but if you could give us an actual timeline of when you anticipate having this done so that we can communicate actual expectations to the community, I think that would be great. I'll discuss with staff what it all entails and what's required. Not today, but once you have a hard date of when you think you can get this done, if this is something that has to go out to RFP, if you've got somebody already under contract that you can use, whatever that process may be, what I'd like to do is to be able to create reasonable expectations in the community. One of the problems that I have is we communicate to the community that we're going to do something and not everybody understands how long it takes for government to move. And so there's an expectation when we say we're going to do something that it's going to happen, and I'm not referring to this particular instance, but within the last month or so, I've had a half dozen residents saying, oh, you said you were going to do something last month. How come it's not done? And they don't understand. When we say we're going to do something, that means sometime within the next year if we're lucky. So what I'm trying to do is create reasonable expectations with the folks in my district about what our process is. So when we say we're going to do something, well, here's our timeline, and here's when we expect to get it done. And that also gives my staff an opportunity to know when we need to be coming back to you and your staff as to where are we, status updates, and so forth. So it creates an expectation on both ends, and we can manage those expectations accordingly. Okay, very good. Thank you. Thank you, Suzanne, for being here tonight. You're very welcome. So moving on, we are now on M1. This is a motion approving an award for invitation to bid regarding the purchase of Prospect Lake Clean Water Center chemicals. I guess we're adding some salt and pepper to it. Morton Salts, Hawkins Water Treatment Group, DBA Hawkins, Inc. No one has signed up to speak. Would someone like to move the item? Moved. Second. Been moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Mayor Trentonx? Yes. And M1 is now approved. M2, motion approving agreements for invitation to bid for turf grass maintenance, northeast and southeast, respectively, to the next lowest responsive and responsible bidder. Visual escape. No one has signed up to speak. Would someone like to move the item? Moved. Second. Moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Mayor Trentonx? Yes. And M2 is now approved. M3, motion approving a reinstatement and amendment to an agreement between Broward County and the City of Fort Lauderdale for property located at 1000 Southwest 2nd Street in substantially the form provided. No one has signed up to speak. Any questions? Okay. Does someone like to move the item? Moved. Second. Moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Sorensen? Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Mayor Trentonx? Yes. And M3 is now approved. Moving on to R1, which is the appointment of board and committee members. Mahalia, are you here? You wanted to speak on this item? All right. I'll invite you to speak, but he's going to read the names into the record, and then you can come up and speak, okay? Mr. Clerk, please read the names into the record. Thank you, Mayor. I was going to discuss the Broward League of Cities, Florida League of Cities, and National League of Cities, but with Commissioner Beasley-Pittman out tonight, I will just put all three of those items on. Why don't we just appoint her to everything while she's not here? We can do that as well. So moved. So moved. You're a second. But I'll put the items on individually, and they can be discussed. Very good. At the next meeting. But for tonight's resolution, the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, Marilyn Mamano, nominated by Commissioner Beasley-Pittman. Aviation Advisory Board, John Fritz-Ratzinas. Thank you. Nominated by Mayor Trantales. William Gilbert, nominated by Commissioner Sorensen. Beach Business Improvement District Advisory Board, Michael Berry, primary member for Beocean Resort Fort Lauderdale. Carlos Young, alternate member for Marriott Courtyard. Summit Hospitality. Cemetery System Board of Trustees, Christine DeMarco, nominated by Commissioner Sorensen. Central City Redevelopment Advisory Board, Fiona Johnson, nominated by Commissioner Glassman. Christopher Casey, nominated by Commissioner Glassman. And Bobby Tinoco, nominated by Commissioner Glassman. Community Services Board, Gary Hensley, nominated by Commissioner Glassman. Mahalia Balfour, nominated by Commissioner Sorensen. Housing Authority of the City of Fort Lauderdale Board of Commissioners. Jeff Lowe, nominated by Mayor Trantales. Infrastructure Advisory Board, Jerry Angeli, nominated by Mayor Trantales. Marilyn Mamano, nominated by Commissioner Beasley-Pittman. Insurance Advisory Board, Hendrick Sienema, nominated by Commissioner Sorensen. David Cooley, nominated by Vice Mayor Herbst. Marine Advisory Board, Norman Beckhoff, nominated by Commissioner Glassman. And for Sunrise Key Neighborhood Improvement District, Thomas Walter, nominated by Commissioner Glassman. And we do have one additional name for the Board of Adjustments, Samir Yajnick. That is Commissioner Sorensen's appointment. And this would be a reinstatement. He reached out and he wanted to stay on the board. He had a couple reasons for why he missed the meetings. And since they have a meeting coming up, if we could add that name as amended. Okay. Okay. Are there any modifications or amendments to the ones that have been read into the record? There being none. Mahalia, want to come up? Which board was Mahalia being recommended for? Community Services. I can't hear you. Community Services. Okay, great. Good evening. Good evening, Mayor, Commissioners. My name is Mahalia Balfour. And first and foremost, I would like to thank Commissioner Sorensen for nominating me for the Community Services Board. I am a public health professional and a Ryan White Part A case manager. In the city of Fort Lauderdale. And currently, the community I work with, those living with HIV, AIDS, are facing severe challenges. Some would say inhumane restrictions to their access to medications and health care. And this board, I truly believe, has the power to make impact to their lives. The CDB grants and the HOPWA grants impact my patients daily. And I believe being of service on this board will be, hopefully, a positive impact to them. So I hope to serve if appointed. And I am so grateful for the nomination. Thank you. Well, thank you so much for your willing to participate and volunteer your time in this effort. Okay, would someone like to introduce the resolution? Introduced. Resolution has been introduced. Please call the roll. And that's as amended to include the reinstatement? As amended. Thank you. Yes. A resolution to the City Commission of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, appointing or nominating, if applicable, Boarding Committee members as set forth in the exhibit attached here to made a part hereof. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Mayor Trentals? Yes, and R1 is now approved. Thanks to all those folks who have agreed to participate in our boards and committees and your volunteerism. We really appreciate it. R2, a resolution delegating the City Manager the authority to submit a grant application to the Florida Inland Navigation District for a grant of up to $2,967,364 for the replacement and construction of the Riverwalk North Seawall. No one has signed up to speak. Would someone like to introduce the resolution? Introduced. The resolution has been introduced. Please call the roll. A resolution to the City Commission of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, delegating the City Manager the authority to execute and submit a grant application to the Florida Inland Navigation District Waterway Assistance Program for the grant funding of up to $2,967,364 for the replacement and construction of the Riverwalk North Seawall. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Mayor Trentals? Yes, and R2 is now approved. R3, this is a resolution delegating to the City Manager the authority to submit a grant application again to the Florida Inland Navigation District for a grant of up to $847,107 for the construction of the Sebastian and Seville seawall replacement projects. No one has signed up to speak. Would someone like to introduce the resolution? Introduced, but I also have some questions. Go ahead. Thanks. Go ahead. So City Managers came up at my District 2 pre-agenda meeting last evening, and I think it's a good point. In the CAM, it talks about the fact that the completed seawall design did not include living seawall components. Based on recent City Commission feedback regarding living seawalls, city staff will explore and evaluate options to retroactively incorporate living seawall components for this project. So this is what came up, and first of all, I want to make it very clear that both my district and I are very much in favor of our push now to do living seawalls. However, this was brought to my attention last night. These two locations in the Central Beach area on Sebastian and Seville are areas that are, number one, used by water taxi service and also riverfront cruises at 2,900 Sebastian. In other words, we have some really large vessels that will be constantly pulling up to these particular areas that might actually be harmful to living seawalls. If we actually go forward with living seawall, they most likely will be destroyed by these vessels. And I just wanted us to be aware of that. I think it's a great point that was brought up. Again, we are very much in favor of the city's push for living seawalls. However, these two locations on Seville and Sebastian on the beach just might not be a good choice for living seawall unless there's some way to mitigate that. But I just wanted to bring up that point. Thank you, Commissioner. Point well taken. And as part of our evaluation process, we would look at the activity in the area. Thank you. Okay. I believe the resolution has been introduced. Yes. So please call the roll. A resolution city commissioner of the city of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, delegating the city manager, the authority to execute and submit a grant application to the Florida Inland Navigation District Waterway Assistance Program for grant funding of up to $840,107 for the replacement and construction of the Sebastian and Seville seawall replacements project. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Mayor Trentos? Yes. And R3 is now approved. R4, a resolution approving an amendment to the public transportation grant agreement with the Florida Department of Transportation for the construction of Runway 9 Parallel Taxiways Extension at the Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport and to delegate authority to the city manager to execute the agreement. No one has signed up to speak. Would someone like to introduce the resolution? Introduced. The resolution has been introduced. Any questions? There being none, please call the roll. A resolution of the city commissioner of the city of Fort Lauderdale, Florida approving an amendment to the public transportation grant agreement with the Florida Department of Transportation to accept additional grant funding in the amount of $3 million from the Florida Department of Transportation for the construction of Runway 9 Parallel Taxiways Extension Project at the Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport, authorizing the city manager to execute the amendment to the public transportation grant agreement on behalf of the city and accept such grant funding for financial project number 454780-1-94-01, providing for conflict, providing for severability, and providing for an effective date. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Mayor Trentals? Yes. An R-4 is now approved. Moving on to R-5. This is a quasi-judicial resolution approving a site plan level 4 central beach development permit for a six-story, 203,907-square-foot multipurpose building with 25,182 square feet of event space, 24,440 square feet of museum, 17,052 square feet of aquarium, and 7,027 square feet of restaurant use and associated parking reduction. This is at 501 Seabreeze Boulevard. Anyone wishing to speak must be sworn in. Good night, Suzanne. Anyone wishing to speak must be sworn in, and the commission will announce any site visits, communications, or expedited opinions received and make them a part of the record. Vice Mayor, do you have any disclosures? No, you didn't meet with Logger R-5. No, R-5. They look alike. They do. They do. None on this one. Okay. Yes. Wrong item. Okay. Yes. I have had meetings with Stephanie Toothaker as well as with the applicants. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Thank you. Several site visits. In addition, I did meet with Mario Caprini and the team, as well as Attorney Stephanie Toothaker on June 12, 2025, October 31, 2025, and November 17, 2025. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Thanks. Site visits and meetings with the applicant. Okay. So we have two people sign up to speak. Stephanie just for some questions. And Mr. Brown, Bill Brown from the Central Beach Alliance, has asked to speak. And then we have to have a little conversation. Good evening, Mayor and Vice Mayor, Members of Commission. Bill Brown, President of the Central Beach Alliance. I come for you this evening in support of this phase. It's one of the final phases of this fantastic project of the Aquatic Center and the iShop project. For many years, in many meetings, and even when Commissioner Glassman was president, the Central Beach, this was always talked about this vision and what it could be and what it couldn't be. And some of the residents had concerns about this building being too high. They went back. They met with the swim club folks. They met with the neighboring homeowners association across the intercoastal. And they worked with other groups to make them feel more compatible for their needs. They brought the height of the building down a couple floors. I know we're losing parking spaces. Parking is a problem. We'll always be a problem on the barrier island. But I think at the end, we're all going to one day look back and just be kind of like Snyder Park and the fort and be so proud of what's been accomplished. And the same with the ice plex. So, you know, this always has been a can-do commission that will do it and do it right. So, I want to commend you and I strongly encourage you to let's pass this and move forward so they can start putting shovels in the ground and start bringing international competitions back here and showcase, again, the swimming community of Fort Lauderdale. Thank you. All right. Great. Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak on this item? Commissioner Glassman, did you have any comments? It is. Thank you, Mayor. I do, I just have some questions about process, but are we going to hear anything about the site plan from the applicant or are we passing on that? They haven't asked to speak. Okay. Then I just have some questions and I don't know if that would be for the applicant or whether it would be for city staff. Mario, you want to come up here also? Okay. Because I want to just make a point here and I want to just know where are we exactly? This is a site plan, but I know that we have so much work to do with regards to finalizing leases. Finalizing finances. And let's face it, these are very unstable times in the world, so I get a little concerned about the markets. I get a little concerned about financing. So if you could just help me understand where we are with that aspect of this, I'm all in favor of this site plan. We've worked really hard, and I do have some questions about that as well because I know parking has been an issue that's been brought up. But I want to begin with this. Okay. Well, thank you so much. Thank you to the mayor and the commissioners. Thank you for all your support on this project. Stephanie Teethaker, on behalf of the applicant, this is the site plan. I'm happy to answer any questions on the site plan, on the parking. It's been a long journey. I was just even in your own staff report, it says on September 14, 2020, the city received the unsolicited proposal. So it's been a long journey. We're so proud to have worked with the swim community, to work with the community at large, to work with the Central Beach Alliance. Thank you to Bill Brown for the comments. It was a long journey getting here on this phase of the site plan. I'm going to pass it off to Mario Caprini so that he can respond to you as to any questions with regard to the lease. And then we can come back to you because I do have some questions about the site. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor, commissioners. Thank you for the opportunity to answer your questions. We've made some good progress. Following the world events, it was a little bit of a scary time in the financial markets. And the probability of the rates lowering are pretty much nil or low, and the probability of the rates going up are really high. So I had communications with Susan, with Ben, with the city manager, and I think we're all on the same page. I believe that the city manager wanted to get comfortable with the deal and make sure that from my last message, my understanding was that she's going to give us the okay, the rate lock, so that we prevent the rates from going up. That's one of the little scary things going on now. Are we good? What I shared with Mario in response to his email of yesterday afternoon is that the developer should feel comfortable with pursuing a rate lock subject to approval of the site plan that is before you for consideration. Right. So if we approve this tonight, then? We'll lock it tomorrow morning. Okay. All right. All right. And we're still good. I checked before I came here. So we're good with the rate? Yeah. We're good with the financing? Yeah. We're on the same page. City manager, we're on the same page with the development team? A couple of adjustments still remaining on insurance, but minor things. It's all coming together, and hopefully by next week we should be able to sign off on that. That's very encouraging. Thank you very much for both of you. So I appreciate that. Stephanie, if I could just ask you some questions about the site plan. Of course. So I've been hearing a lot. People have been misunderstanding some quotes in the paper about parking, not hearing from people. I understand that the building went through significant changes. We did that basically because of the input that we received from the swim community, neighboring condos. We took two floors off that western building. That's correct. Along with that means that some parking was lost on there. Obviously, you can't have both. You're either going to have the height, which no one wanted, or you're going to lose some parking. It's very difficult to have both. Right. So my question to you is, how many parking spaces are we actually losing, and how much under are we that people are upset about? I've done my own math, but I just want to make sure I have that number correct. Give me one moment. There's a whole chart in here that I reviewed, and it's completely accurate. So the total number of spaces that are required, but keep in mind, this includes the aquatic center, the pools, the ocean rescue, the office, the aquatic center and ocean rescue. That's 176 spaces. So some of those are city uses. And then you've got West Building Museum, 61 spaces, aquarium, 43. There's some event space, 63. Restaurant space, that's 62. Total parking spaces required for the West Building is 229 parking spaces. Total parking spaces required for the site is 405. But in the ULDR and the way parking works in Fort Lauderdale and really in every municipality is that you take all these individual uses and you say, how many parking spaces does that require? How many does that require? How many does that require? But those are not unique users. So somebody that's coming to the pools is probably going to eat at the restaurants. Somebody that's going to the aquarium is probably going to eat at the restaurants. Maybe the person in the office is going to the restaurants. Or somebody that's going to the pools is also going to the aquarium. So you don't double count those spaces. So we spent a great deal of time through the DRC process, through the Planning and Zoning Board, with the community and with the city to really analyze what was actually needed on the site. And as a result of that shared parking use and that parking reduction, we are providing 259 parking spaces on site, which is a lot of parking. And, of course, as the district commissioner for the beach, you know that there's also a tremendous amount of foot traffic. Not everybody is driving. That is, we see that when we do hotel development. We just, they don't require the number of parking spaces that they used to require. People don't rent cars. They Uber pretty much everywhere. They walk around and they visit the site. So at 259 spaces, from what's required, if you were to count each use individually, that's a deficient number of 146. But it's not really 146. Because when you have a shared use analysis, you automatically chop a huge number off. And then you also, of course, have parking in the city's Las Olas garage. Okay. So let me just take this a little bit further. The aquatic center closes, what, 6 o'clock, 5 o'clock? 6 o'clock. Okay, so is any of that factored in? Because obviously if you have events after 6 o'clock, you're going to be freeing up a lot of spaces because the aquatic center has closed. Correct. So that cannot even be used by swimmers. That's exactly right. How many parking spaces were attributable to the aquatic center? Oh, sorry. Let me go back to that. The aquatic center actually doesn't list it out separately. But it's, but the total number of parking spaces was 176. Thank you. Yeah, it's 176. 110? 176. 176 for the aquatic center? Yes. And those spaces can't be used because it closes at 6 o'clock. So there's your difference. That includes ocean rescue. So those are not, they're not there once the beach closes. Those cars are not there. Right. So that's very helpful. But I also want to talk about the use of the Las Olas garage, which you mentioned, and I know I've heard that as well as a sort of shuttle people back and forth. So city manager, a couple of years ago when the Las Olas garage first opened, we actually did have a shuttle service because we thought that people might not want to take, you know, the kids, all of the stuff to the beach and go from Las Olas garage by the Intracoastal all the way east to the ocean. We might want to consider reinstating that shuttle service, especially if this is going to happen. And we have an identified shortage, although I'm not so sure it's as severe as some people think, but it might be a good idea for us to look at reinstituting that shuttle service from the garage to at least to the Swimming Hall of Fame Aquatic Center, especially when we think it's going to be crunched on or there's going to be some big event or when we just expect maybe on the weekends if a lot of people are going to the aquarium, the museum, whatever. But I just want us to think about that going forward, that kind of service, because what were you guys thinking of in terms of using the Las Olas garage? Well, our traffic, I'm sorry, our parking analysis, actually, we don't need the Las Olas garage. It's there. It's an amenity for the residents and for visitors, but it's actually not required for this because we're proposing it as a shared parking use with a parking reduction. And staff signed off on the shared use and the parking reduction. That's correct, yes. So they felt that what was being provided was adequate for the use. But I still think, city manager, that we really should look at that. So my understanding is that the resources that we originally allocated for that shuttle service, we repurposed for our circuit micromover program. And so any future needs in terms of that shuttle service, we would evaluate from an operational and fiscal perspective based on the utilization that we're seeing or anticipating. And it could be that we seek partners to potentially offset those costs. I definitely think it's worthwhile keeping it in the back of our mind. I mean, obviously, we're not right there yet. This is an opening tomorrow. But I think it is really important for us to think about. So that's good. I would like us to, you know, just keep that in mind as we move forward. Of course. And I really thank you very much for the information. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you. City manager, I just wanted to bring up one letter that I got about the Swimming Hall of Fame and the Aquatic Center because this does concern me. So I'm getting some complaints about the conditions of the pools. I'm getting some complaints about the fact that people are leaving. They're seeing, you know, algae in the pools. They're seeing what they're claiming to be. Again, I have not witnessed this firsthand, but they're talking about an overall decline of maintenance of the pools in terms of the water conditions. I don't know if we've checked it. I don't know if we're, you know, responding to this e-mail from some of the swimmers, but I think it's worthwhile looking at. Again, I do not have firsthand knowledge of this. I'm just going by what I'm hearing. But I want to make sure that we're sure that the investment that we've made on this peninsula is being maintained in a way that everyone is happy about. That's all. Thank you, Commissioner. And I saw a particular e-mail today, and I shared it with staff, and I'll be following up with them on that. Excellent. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, everyone. Appreciate the information. Thanks. Sure. Can I just – let's just talk some real numbers also. You know, the square footage for the aquarium is significant. And you allocated 40-something parking spaces for the aquarium. I mean, I think there will be several hundred people at a time who will be – I mean, if it's a real success, I think several hundred people at a time will be visiting the aquarium. So you may consider a dedicated shuttle service that you might operate between the parking garage and the aquarium just as an amenity so you don't lose customers because people go there looking for a parking space, can't find it, and go away. I think it's a really good comment. I will tell you that the way the aquarium is supposed to work is that you're ticketed for a time, a specific time. So while we do anticipate a lot of foot traffic and we hope to have it, not everybody is going to be coming at the same time because it's not a huge loss. You're going to stagger the attendance. Exactly. It's staggered times for entrance. I get that. But still, it's a big space. I think it's a great comment. You know, you're going to have a couple hundred people there at a time. And I think once we're up and running and operational, you're going to learn a lot about how this is a new use for Fort Lauderdale and how people use it and what that parking looks like. And I think we can always shift and respond to, you know, to the situation at hand. All right. Very good. All right. Thank you. Thank you so much. Stephanie, just remember, the fact that the mayor has donated his Speedo from 1960 to the museum is going to draw a lot of people. You're going to see the number of people buying tickets from the museum. It's being framed. Thank you. Excellent. Thank you. I will be modeling it. Well, then I take my comments back. I'm sorry. Thank you very much. So before you guys step away, I just want to echo that, too, though, because I've had a number of calls regarding parking as well. And I will just say I think this is probably a mistake. I think you're shortchanging that facility by the parking that I think it needs. My personal preference would be to restore the height and put the parking back that I think it needs. But I know that's not the direction of the commission, but I just want to be on the record that I think cutting the height of the building and losing all that parking spaces is a mistake. Every time we've done a parking reduction in the city, we've always come back to regret it. This is not the first time, and it won't be the last time that it's been a problem. I know, Mayor, you're always the one who's talking about Flagler Village and the lack of parking. I know when I lived out at 511 Southeast Fifth Avenue, we had cars double-parked and triple-parked in the fire lanes in front of that building because of the wonderful valet service that everybody was supposed to use and cars stacked up in the street for hours waiting to be put away. Everywhere we've done parking variances and parking reductions, we've always regretted it. This will be another instance. Well, I just want to repeat again. When we went through so many community meetings, the fact that we took those two levels off of that building was because the swimmers, number one, complained about the size of the building and a distraction to their swimming. The neighboring condominium associations complained about the height of that building. Other people complained that we were dwarfing our beautiful high-diving tower because of the height of the building. So we tried to work with everybody over the course of all of those meetings by bringing that down, and we made it very clear that we were eliminating two floors of parking. Again, it's so hard to please everybody, but again, that's why we did it. We didn't just take two floors off for the heck of it or for the fun of it. We took them off because that's what everyone was clamoring for, and at the same time, knowing that we would, of course, have to lose some parking. Again, I think we're going to have to monitor the situation. I think we're going to have to utilize it. Yeah, and you're both right. I mean, the thing is that, you know, the compromise had to be made. The reduction needed to take place. The height reduction needed to happen. But there are opportunities on the beach to circulate traffic, vehicular traffic. We still have the South Beach parking lot. You know, all of this is very near, and I think a shuttle service between the Aquatic Center and the Las Olas parking garage is something that should be considered as an operational expense going forward, in addition to the city resurrecting its own shuttle service around the beach. I don't know why we stopped it, but anyway, there are opportunities. The Circuit's a great company to work with. They've been efficient, and they're safe, and they're eager to expand their operation here in our city. I've spoken with them multiple times, so we'll make it work. My concern is that it impacts the business model for the aquarium and the museum, and anything that takes away from the customer experience is going to cut the number of patrons that they have there. And the reason that I'm concerned about that is because I'll remind everybody that we are guaranteeing the debt on that entire project. So if it doesn't hit its revenue targets, remember, we are the guarantor. We are the payer of last resort. So my focus is less on whether the swimmers like the height of the building and more on whether the project is financially successful. Thank you. And just – go ahead. I'm sorry. So I'm not sure if you'd like to have staff provide a little bit of background on how we anticipate that parking will be mitigated or managed on the peninsula, and we also have Carl Williams available to – So here's my thinking about that, right? It's just like the conversation we had about Las Olas, where we want parking in front of the restaurants. People like to pull up and park. They don't want to park miles away and take a shuttle. They would rather just go do something else. If we make it difficult – this isn't Disney, where people are willing to park in the goofy lot and take a shuttle because they're planning their entire day around that. This is not. If we make it inconvenient, people won't do it. And so my concern is we are making it inconvenient. And the more friction – I can tell you from a business perspective – the more friction you place, especially when you're dragging young kids around, the less likely people are to do it. And anything that impacts the business model of those facilities out there concerns me, and I think this has an impact on the business model. I hope I'm wrong. Well, we'll see. And at the same time, keep in mind that a lot of the kids that would be coming to the aquarium will be coming in buses. They'll be having groups coming there. Right, but those don't pay. The ones that come in the buses from the schools, those are free. Those are the ones I'm not concerned about. I'm concerned about the paying patrons, the families that are going to be driving in from other parts of the county that are actually going to be buying tickets. The ones that are coming there that are going to be coming through the school system, I don't believe, and maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think they're going to be paying. Why don't you think they're going to be paying? I think part of that whole deal with the school board is that the children get to come there, like, on field trips. I don't know that they're going to be paying a full price for the kids to come, and maybe I'm wrong. They'd pay a student rate. They'd pay a student rate. I'm sure that's probably fairly low. But anyway, again, I hope we're successful. All right, your point is to say, okay, we understand, but I know Mario's a good businessman, and I'm sure they'll figure it out. And, Mayor, if I could just make one more suggestion. There are so many hotels right within a block or two of this site. Their parking garages are empty. They're empty all day. If we can just figure out a clever way to work out arrangements with all of these hotels in that strip and then educate the public about that availability, I'm sure the hotels will be willing to have a little bit more revenue, but at the same time, work with us to make sure that we have that. But I'm telling you right now, so many of those parking garages in all of those buildings are empty. So let's work that out. All right. Very good. Mayor? Yes, ma'am. If you will allow it, I'd like Carl Williams to address the pool conditions comment made earlier. Well, I don't think we need to – that's not the issue before us right now. I'd like to just stick to the issue, but I appreciate staff being willing to respond to the commissioner. They can talk about it after the meeting. Thank you. I think it's relevant only because there's some construction going on on the site, and that's impacting the chemistry of the water, and so we're trying to mitigate that. Okay. Okay. All right. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, folks. Thank you very much. Any further questions or comments? Someone like to close public hearing? Move. Do I hear a second? Second. Moved and seconded. Please call the role of closing public hearing on PH – excuse me, on R5. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Mayor Trentals? Yes. And R5, the public hearing is now closed. Would someone like to introduce the resolution for R5? Introduced. Is that for approval? For approval. Please call the role. A resolution of the City Commission of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, approving the issuance of a site plan level four beach development permit for the development of a six-story multi-purpose building with events-based museum use, aquarium, and restaurant use known as International Swimming Hall of Fame West Building located at 501 Seabirds Boulevard, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, having a land-use designation of Central Beach Regional Activity Center in the South Beach Marina and Hotel Area Zoning District and a parking reduction request for the development. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Mayor Trentals? Yes. And R5 is now approved. Good luck with that. You're welcome. PH-1, public hearing, quasi-judicial ordinance, approving vacation right-of-way, 40-foot wide by 140-foot long portion of Southeast Second Court. Anyone wishing to speak must be sworn in. The Commission will announce any site visits, communications, or expert opinions received and make them a part of the record. Vice Mayor, do you have any disclosures? I don't believe we've talked about this, have we? I'm sorry. Which one are you on? This is on PH-1? PH-1. PH-1. Vacation of the right-of-way on Southeast Second Court? This is a vacation of the right-of-way. Yes. So Robert Lockery. Okay. If I had any communications, it would have been with either Robert Lockery or Nectaria. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Robert Lockery, January 8, 2026. And Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Applicant and site visits. Okay. What would you like to say? I actually just have a correction that Nectaria Chakas, with the firm Lockery and Chakas, on behalf of the applicant, I have been sworn. There, just a correction to one of the conditions of approval. We're fine with all of them, but at the planning and zoning board meeting, we made a modification to one of the conditions, and that was adopted by the planning and zoning board, and it's not reflected in the ordinance. So I just wanted to read it into the record. I've already spoken to Sherry and to Anthony, and this is the way I think we decided to go ahead and resolve that. It's on Exhibit B of the ordinance. It involves the infrastructure that may be located, utilities that may be located in this area, and that we are to relocate them. And instead of, we want the option of granting a utility easement to that facility provider. So at the end of the sentence of condition number two, we would just ask that or an easement granted to the facility provider be added there. Anthony, are you okay with that? Yes, Mayor. We discussed it with Sherry, and we're good with it. Okay. All right. All right. Very good. You're the only, Nectaria, you're the only one that signed up to speak. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak on this item? Okay. There being none, thank you so much. Do I hear a motion to close public hearing? Moved. Do I hear a second? Second. Moved and seconded. Please call the roll. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Mayor Trenton. Yes. Public hearing on PH1 is now closed. Would someone like to introduce the ordinance? Introduced. The ordinance has been introduced. Please call the roll. Sherry. Just real quick, since the commission has amended. As amended. We're doing it as amended or? As amended. As amended. Yeah. Thank you. In ordinance of the city of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, vacating an approximately 40-foot wide by 140-foot portion of Southeast Second Court right-of-way lying between the west line of Lot 5, Block 3, Amended Platte of Oak Ridge, according to Platte thereof, as recorded in Platte Book 10, page 48 of the public records of Broward County, Florida, Extended Southerly, and the east line of Sedlot 5, Extended Southerly, located west of Rio Navarro Waterway, north of East Los Angeles Boulevard, east of South Victoria Park Road, and south of Southeast Second Street, all Southerly lands being the city of Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida. Commissioner Sorenson? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Mayor Trenton. Yes, and PH-1 is now approved. Thank you. PH-2, public hearing, this is a quasi-judicial resolution after the fact certificate of appropriateness for major alterations for the installation of artificial turf within the front outdoor seating area of a designated historic landmark located at 101 South Fort Lauderdale Beach Boulevard. Anyone wishing to speak must be sworn in, and the commission will announce any site visit communications or expert opinions to receive, and make them a part of the record. Vice Mayor, do you have any disclosures? None. I have a disclosure. I spoke with the applicant. Commissioner Glassman? Yes. Numerous site visits, and also met with the applicant and counsel on January 16, 2026, and March 2, 2026. Thank you. Commissioner Sorenson? Yes, the applicant. Okay. So, we have several people sign up to speak. I see one person is chomping at the bit. The count, would you like to start? Good evening. It's been a long time. Good evening. The Pantheon was built between 26 and 19 before the Common Era in Rome. It is the oldest extant, still operating public building from the ancient world. It is noteworthy because after it was built between 2029 and 19 before the Common Era, in 80 of our Common Era, the Emperor Demetian, the last of the Twelve Caesars, had to renovate it. What was interesting is later, one of the second of the five good emperors that succeeded the Twelve Caesars, Trajan, who, if you, with all due respect, you should think in terms of the ambience of Stephen Glassman's attitude towards historical preservation, then restored the building and put an inscription with Marcus Vespanian Agrippa's name on the building, which was the original person who built it between 29 and 19 before the Common Era, which confuses ignorant tourists, thinking that it is the original exact building, which it's not. It's really the renovation by Trajan, who, as I said, had the ambience of historic preservation of Stephen Glassman. Now, the successor of Trajan was his cousin Hadrian, who had sort of the ambience of Dean Trantalus, in the sense of his ambience is more spend it and make it look good, as opposed to Steve Glassman, who says, let's do the research with the magnifying glass. Now, everything was going fine until about 202 of the Common Era, when Emperor Servius Alexander decided that it needed a little fixer up. So it was fixed up again, but he put a little plaque with his name on the building, so it's very little that he actually changed. But remember, it was still being used as a courthouse, as a temple, and it had, and it's most famous, it has the greatest unreinforced rotunda, concrete rotunda on top. Now, everything was going fine until 609 of the Common Era, when the Emperor Polkis in Constantinople heard that the ceiling was coming down and things weren't so great. So he made a deal with Pope Boniface IV, that we convert from a pagan temple, which didn't have any money because everybody was a Christian, into a Christian church, so the Pope took the responsibility of renovating it. So then we have a renovation to preserve it. So the physical building was preserved, but we added altars and chapels, which, by the way, still exists. I prayed in one myself when I was in Rome. Now, everything was going fine until about 1471, when Pope Sixtus IV decided he wanted to glorify Rome. So he took people like Raphael and a person named Malazote de Foley, who was an artist, to put religious frescoes in it. The connection between us here in Fort Lauderdale and Mariluzzo de Foley, because he and his mentor, his teacher, Piero di Francisco's major works are in Rimini. And the reason why we care about Rimini is it happens to be our sister city in Italy. Rimini and Fort Lauderdale have been sister cities for decades. Now, everything was going fine until, of course, Italy was reunified in 1870, and the papal states were abolished, and the king of Italy, or the kingdom of Italy, took over the church. And what they did is they made it a national monument. So they sort of stopped with services, and when the first king of Italy, Victor Emmanuel II, died, and later his son, King Umberto I, died, and his wife died, they are buried in the Pantheon. Can you kind of conclude your comments? So it was under the Republic of Italy, under the kingdom of Italy. When the kingdom was abolished and it became a republic after World War II, then they made a deal with the church, where the church takes care of part of it, and the other part of it is taking care of the state. What is the application to turf in a restaurant on the beach in Fort Lauderdale? What this teaches you, the first example of historic preservation that goes back to 114 of our present era is, you have to be flexible. You have to make changes to historic preservation, to historic buildings, or you end up with a pile of rubble. And a little thing about adding a little turf is a minor thing that will encourage the business and the restaurant, which is the money that keeps the building standing. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Suetonius. Anyway, Michaela Konka, Michaela here. Ah, there she is. Followed by Bill Brown, followed by Courtney Crush, probably just for questions, right? Or you want to say something? What is this? You have to hand it to the clerk. So that letter is from Dr. David Ruggieri, a resident of the historical, of the historic, the La Sola Speech Club. Okay. The historic section. I also, these are copies of my letter that I'm going to share for each one of you. Okay, you can give it to us after. You're using your time here. So, good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Commissioners. I'm writing on behalf of the La Sola Speech Club, as well as Broward Trust for Historic Preservation. As the stewards for this iconic historic building, we understand we cannot take a formal position, since the issue is outside the purview of the facade easement. The Trust can voice its concerns that come with this de novo, and how it may work against the city's own historic design guidelines. This is the second incident where the Café Del Mar, a business that chose to reside in a designated historic structure, has gone to the commission to request a resolution to alter changes that affect visually the exterior of this significant historic building. Your decision today sets a precedent and allows for the consistent idea that if we do not agree with a law, a rule, or a guideline, I will find a way to break it and get someone to change it for me. All of our guidelines start at the federal level and make their way down to the local level for a reason. The federal government, the National Park Services, and the passage of the National Historic Preservation Act, 1966, its subsequent major amendments from 1980 and again in 1992, expand preservation benefits to communities nationwide, to American Indian tribes, and other cultural groups. The National Historic Preservation Act delegates a wide range of responsibilities for historic preservation work to the National Park Service, its partners, and other federal agencies, tribal preservation offices, state historic preservation offices, certified local governments, and private organizations, including the National Trust for Historic Preservation. Together, these make up the National Historic Preservation Partnership. What follows reflects common preservation principles and ideas that are standard to the field of historic preservation. All modifications should respect the building's original character by retaining significant architectural features, materials, and spatial relationships. This ensures that any new additions remain compatible in scale and appearance, yet clearly distinguishable from the historic fabric. Interventions should be minimal and, when possible, reversible with repair, preferred, over-replacement. These principles align with national recognized preservation standards and will help ensure that the property's historic integrity is protected while accommodating contemporary use. Broward Trust for Historic Preservation chooses to make decisions regarding the facade easement based on the Federal Historic Preservation Act and the City of Fort Lauderdale's Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. We believe that the City should follow its own historic design guidelines. You, too, are the steward of this historic section of the Las Solas Beach Club, and, when necessary, it is your responsibility to care for it and protect this building for perpetuity, since it will soon be the last historic structure left on the beach. The Historic Preservation Design Guidelines were completed and approved by the Fort Lauderdale City Council in the spring of 2012. Thank you for your time, consideration, and interest. Yes, Michaela Conka, the president. Can I ask you a question? First of all, thank you for being here tonight. Thank you, Mayor. In looking at your statement, you're saying that retaining significant architectural features. So what was the architectural feature that's under the proposed covering as we see it today, the artificial turf? What's the architectural feature that's being covered up? Well, most of the residents were unhappy with the artificial turf because they want to see the... What architectural feature are we covering up? I am not taking an issue with this turf as much as what's happened to this building over the years, Mayor, because everything that's been approved there has actually distorted the visual aspect of that historic iconic structure. And when I also mentioned the spatial relationship to... Well, let's start... All right, we'll get to that. That's later on in the sentence. Retaining significant architectural features, materials, and spatial relationships. So what does that mean, spatial relationships? Are we detracting from the space continuum by putting the artificial turf? It's a distraction. It's a distraction, not an enhancement. Yes. Okay. So what architectural feature are we destroying with this distraction? I didn't imply that any feature was being destroyed. What I basically was explaining is that the guidelines that have been in place with regards to historic preservation are included in these other principles that align with the nationally recognized preservation standards. I don't want you reading to me. Please, Michaela, I can read. Let's just take your standards that you've identified here in your statement, and let's apply them to the situation. That's what we do in these quasi-judicial situations. We take the facts and we apply them to the law. All right? You've given us the law, architectural features, retaining significant architectural features, materials, and spatial relationships. Now, I just need to understand what architectural features are we obscuring, and what are the spatial relationships that we are compromising? Okay. If you look at any of the pictures of the historicals. I just walked by there this morning, so I have a visual, my personal visual. I know what it looks like. If you look at the historical pictures of what that structure looked like when it was constructed, 1938, I believe. I'm not 36, thank you. There was a wall with a small area in front of the building with some grass. The rest of it was sidewalk. There was no distraction from pergolas to planters to artificial grass. All of that material that sits now in front of this iconic building is, for a true historic preservationist, there's a conflict there for the building. It's a distraction to the building from an architectural standpoint. Okay. I hear you. All right. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. Mayor, I have a question. So did the Broward Trust for Historic Preservation have any say on the awnings that were attached, actually attached to the historic structure? Was that within the purview of your facade easement? The awnings, it's my understanding, Commissioner, that those came up for a resolution when they first were installed. Attached to the building? Yes. Prior to Broward Trust, would that fall within your facade easement that you have on the structure? I had no say in those awnings. That's not the question. The question is, did the Broward Trust, under its facade easement on that structure, participate in the acceptance of the awnings attached to the building? Well, we approved the existing awnings as they are. Attached to the building. I think you got your answer. Okay. Thank you. I'm not an engineer. Okay. Thank you. All right. Stop. Thank you, Michaela. Bill Brown, I hear you're going for a knee operation tomorrow. I'm sorry, you're probably in pain, or you're suffering from euphoria from all the medications you're taking tonight. How better could I spend an evening prior to surgery than with the Sting Dias? Talking about artificial turf in front of the Lauderdale Beach. Okay. Bill Brown, president of Central Beach Alliance, mayor, vice mayor, members of commission. You have my word that I'm not going to give you a history lesson on ancient Rome, nor will I give you a history lesson on modern Rome. But I will give you some facts. When I hear the word distraction, I walk by on a weekly basis, Cafe Domar. I've been in there. I've eaten there. I never even realized it was actually turf. So how can it be a distraction when someone goes by there as many times as I do in other residences? This never came up at any of our meetings. Even when the awnings were put up, it was never an issue. We discussed it at the CBA board, and we felt that since it has no effect on the structural, historical integrity of the building, I mean, how do you attach AstroTurf that covers pavers to a building? It's not. And so we felt there's no need to take it before the membership because it's kind of a moot point. The same thing when the awning, the structural frame of the awning was put up in that building a few years ago. It was never an issue. It's never been an issue. And we ask that you consider all these facts as you deliberate this and hopefully can reach a resolution that will support the businesses and the community. Thank you. Okay. Thank you so much. Courtney Crush, you represent the applicant, correct? Yes, Mayor. I represent Cafe Del Mar. Vincenzo Padula is here with me this evening. Mayor, given some of the comments that were made, may I go through a brief presentation? If you wish. I'll be honest with you. I'm just trying to figure out, because I know the Broward Trust approved the awnings, which completely changes the architectural facade of the building. Wait a minute. Let me finish what I'm saying. Yes, Mayor. But the green artificial turf, which doesn't even touch the building, is somehow considered a distraction or a compromise of the integrity of the historic nature of this building. I'm just trying to. And I don't believe it does, Mayor. Please reconcile that for me. Certainly. As the Mayor may recall, the designation of a portion of the Lauderdale Beach Hotel, in conjunction with related redevelopment plans, was approved by the City Commission in 2002. The City Code, when a structure or a portion of a structure is designated as a historic landmark, also then includes the land surrounding it. You would ask at the last meeting on this item, what portion of the Lauderdale Beach Hotel is designated. So you have the landmark, which is just the facade, and then you have the landmark site, which is the portion of the property I just shared. There was also, in conjunction with that, a facade easement in favor of the Broward Trust for Historic Preservation, which required, if there were any alteration, maintenance, et cetera, permission from the trust be obtained. Just for reference, I shared these with the commission the last time, postcard of the Lauderdale Beach Hotel, a picture that I had shared the last time. You had asked, Mayor, the origin of it. It was in an article, but it was actually excerpted from a press release from the Broward Trust for Historic Preservation, which shows, as you can see, green out in front and the wall. The area today, which, to your question, Mayor, we are seeking a certificate of appropriateness to place turf on top of existing paver. And I do want to make a comment on Mr. Padula's behalf. If the turf company should have pulled a permit to install turf on top of pavers, then the company should have done so. And when Mr. Padula was advised that, even though he wasn't changing pervious area, laying this carpet, if you will, on top of the pavers required a permit, he approached the city to get one. He was then advised that he needed a certificate of appropriateness for a major alteration by the city and filed this application. I've been doing, practicing this area of law for a while. It would never have occurred to me that placing turf on top of that portion of the property, while it is designated historic in support of the facade structure, required a certificate of appropriateness. As was brought up, and to your question, Mayor, the Cafe Del Mar took over this property from H2O, which had approved outdoor dining, had approved awnings, and sought and received a certificate of appropriateness from the Historic Preservation Board. The Broward Test for Historic Preservation at the time said, as long as you're not touching the facade, we have nothing to do with this. So the city approved the awning structure. We are here today to request, and again, I'm not sure why it required, is considered a major alteration, but a certificate of appropriateness for the turf. As you can see, the turf does not obstruct their view of the historic facade. It's actually lower. It is ground cover, and we believe it meets the criteria contained in the city's ULDR. The effect of the work on the landmark or the property, there is no effect. We are not altering the facade, and we are not actually altering the pavers. The relationship between the work and other structures on the landmark, again, this is an inch or two tall. It doesn't impact any relationship between the landmark site or other property. To the extent that the historic, architectural, or archaeological significance and color will be affected, well, it will be green instead of red. It looks like from some of the historical photos, it has been green over time. Again, not creating a distraction to one experiencing the facade. Whether the denial would deprive the property owner of all reasonable beneficial use of the property, this is a commercial condominium, which includes this outdoor area. And depriving the economic viability of operating this cafe, where his patrons clearly enjoy this, we think is inappropriate. The major alteration criteria talks about providing a compatible use that requires minimal alteration to the building, use structure, site, environment, et cetera. There is no alteration to either the facade. The distinguishing original qualities or character of a building, structure, or site, and environment shall not be destroyed. We certainly agree. We're not destroying or altering anything. The sites and the structures on the site have to be recognized as products in their own time. We agree. Turf is a product of this era. I actually think it was invented in 1965. So not quite historic. And again, but does have a nod to the past to this hotel, which had grass before and a putting green, actually. It was tennis courts and a putting green. It was one of the first, as the Commissioner Glassman and you all know, resort hotels on the beach. Every reasonable effort shall be made to protect and preserve archaeological resources affected by adjacent to any acquisition, protection, stabilization, preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, or reconstruction project. There is no impact because there is no digging going on and the like. So, therefore, Mayor, I think we meet each and every one of the city's ULDR requirements for installation of this covering of the pavers, which, while they're not historic, they're not being destroyed either. And we very much appreciate the Commission approving the Certificate of Appropriateness. Thank you. Okay. You're very welcome. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak on this item? There being none. Does anyone else have any questions regarding this? Okay. They're being done. Would someone like to, hold on, move to close public hearing on PH, which one are we on here? Hold on. Two. So moved. It's been moved. Do I hear a second? Second. Moved and seconded to close public hearing on PH2. Please call the roll. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Mayor Trentonis? Yes. And public hearing is now closed on PH2. Would someone like to introduce the resolution? Mayor, is it the resolution? I would like to approve the after-the-fact Certificate of Appropriateness for major alterations, although I do share Ms. Crush's skepticism about major alterations, although that is actually in the camp title. And this is based on your belief that the UDLR, ULDR criteria have been met? Yes. I actually do believe that. And I think we have to look at past practice here for the fact that those- Are you talking about the Christian era or the Roman era? No, I'm not going to go back to the Roman era. I'm just going to go back to, like, 1936 when this structure was constructed. All right. Just trying to get perspective. And as I mentioned a month ago, I actually did file that application for historic designation on this building. Such a significant building in terms of the only Art Deco resort in Fort Lauderdale that has partially been kept right now. It was a major resort and a major architect, and that's why it did deserve the designation that it received. But it is hypocritical to say that there's an issue with this turf when it was already approved for the awnings, the signage on the building. There's actually signage on the building that identifies the retail on the building, the shade structures above the turf. All of that was approved. I don't see how we can say no to what basically is a carpet and yet have that history of approving all of the other alterations to the building. It doesn't make sense. The restaurant did ask the manager of the hotel, I'm sorry, of the La Sola Speech Club condominium at the time for approval and was granted that by the manager of the condominium and also was told by the city that a permit was necessary for the turf. So I'm taking all of that into consideration. But I do have one actual request, Mayor, and I know that this is maybe a little bit outside of this, but if you will just indulge me for a second. I understand the concern of the residents that live right above the restaurant. They are actually residing in the historic structure. As you know, when we did that compromise, it was 2002 when this was designated, the La Sola Beach Club was constructed to the west of what we now have as the remaining designated hotel. And because of that, there are people that actually were able to purchase into the historic structure on the eastern portion of this project. I understand their concerns. I want us to be perhaps sensitive, and if I could just ask the applicant or the applicant's attorney a question on this. Again, I am all in favor of allowing this turf. But I do know that when it comes to historic preservation, the most important aspect is what's facing the street, is what you see from the street, the facade on the street, that elevation. So because of the fact that the planners really go all the way around, except at the very opening, and also to the north where you have the cafe, the turf was put in there for the comfort of the patrons, to make it appealing for the patrons. There are no patrons that sit at the north end by the cafe. Correctly. I would just love that. I'm hoping that we, as a commission, approve the approval of this turf. But then I'm hoping that that's not the end of the story. I'm hoping that you're able to go back to the residence. I'm hoping that you're able to have a conversation and perhaps come to a moment where you're able to at least discuss the removal of the turf all the way north, which really does not impact the seating area, and at the same time possibly, possibly look at the part that really is the most important in terms of historic preservation, that eastern portion. You have a large green area of the turf. I'm just suggesting that a little bit of that remove at the entrance, for instance, where the hostess stand is, and that at least shows some pavers, and it also creates a little bit more of a transition from the street, from the pavers, to the actual turf, and then the seating area. I just would love that kind of an interaction and discussion with especially the owners that live right above the restaurant. If that's just a consideration, I would love for that kind of a commitment. Yes, Vincenzo will commit to get with those unit owners and discuss the north area where there is no seating, and also a discussion regarding the portion of the entrance area. That would be great. That's all I ask. But that's not part of the resolution. I understand, exactly. But I just wanted to get that on the record because I think it's important for the people that live there as well. I know it's not part of what this public hearing is about, but I just wanted to get that on the record. Then I think we can consider that a proffer of a commitment to have those conversations. And I appreciate that. And with that, ma'am, I'm very happy to move this resolution forward. All right. The resolution has been introduced. Please call the roll. A resolution, City Commission, to the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, approving an after-the-fact certificate of appropriateness for major alterations for the installation of artificial turf in the front outdoor seating area of the Lauderdale Beach Hotel, case number UDP-HP25021, for the property located at 101 South Fort Lauderdale Beach Boulevard, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and providing for an effective date. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Mayor Trent Hollis? Yes. And PH2 is now approved. Thank you. Okay. Our last item tonight is OSR 1. This is a second reading, an ordinance amending Chapter 27 of the Code of Ordinances to establish an administrative application process, associated fees, and to define vehicle-for-hire services and operating standards. Again, this is an ordinance on a second reading. The City Commission has already approved this item in the first reading. We have a number of people who sign up to speak, about six, seven. So let us begin. Gregory Oates, followed by Bill Brown. Bill, are you still here? Yep. Followed by Uzochi. I'm never going to even try to pronounce your last name. Please bear with me. Good evening. Good evening. My name is Gregory Oates. As a way of introduction, on April 1st this year, I will celebrate my 21st anniversary riding pedicabs, which began here in Fort Lauderdale under Ocean View rickshaw. Since then, I have become a globally experienced pedicab, but I still have a connection to Fort Lauderdale. I'm passionate about green transit and making places more accessible, especially cycling. I apologize for not having participated in any of the meetings. I'm a busy person. I'm in other places. I'm vaguely familiar with what's going on with some of the legislation. I have a few concerns I'd like to raise. Broadly, I would like to make it clear that golf carts and pedicabs, whilst they can be considered to be co-existent and share many similarities, will at times not do the same type of thing, and they do need to be treated slightly differently in some ways. For example, golf carts being a licensed vehicle by a road vehicle by the state are not able to operate on bicycle paths or where city parks are accessible to bicycles. This means that pedicabs, for example, can give a more romantic, a more laid-back experience of a tour to visitors to the city on the riverfronts and riverwalks, areas like that, whereas a golf cart can't do that. A golf cart can, however, travel at 28 miles an hour and can carry maybe 8 to 10 people. If you treat them with the same licensing regime entirely, the golf carts will probably squeeze out the romantic aspects of the pedicabs. I do believe that golf carts are useful, and they can be more environmentally friendly than regular vehicles, so that's something to consider for sure. Golf carts are not as romantic, I agree. They are not as romantic, exactly. You like somebody cycling, you know. You've got your partner with your significant other, your children. I didn't realize romance was a component to this. Romance is always a part of a pedicab ride, yeah. So I think that something that perhaps needs looking at and considering, maybe this has been mentioned before, is out-of-area riders, if they get permits somehow, they're not really quite as respectful as the old riders. There are still some old Ocean View OEX riders, and there's a small network that we know in other places that would still like to come and work seasonally, as we used to and I used to and still do. The old riders can liaise with people in the city and can say, you know, these are the old people we could maybe be vouched for by people like some of the old Ocean View people, like the Alexanders. I think that the other, one suggestion I may have is if it's possible that you would separate the number of permits and gamma the trial period for a small number of pedicabs to allow it to develop, and then maybe expand from there. That way you can see that you're not going to get a glut of out-of-area riders coming in for one or two events, where they may break a lot of rules. Another thing to consider is that pedicabs can operate as electric bicycles under existing state law, which would limit them to 20 miles an hour. What you may see is out-of-towners coming in, and if you want to get a radar gun on them, you're going to see people doing 30, 35 miles an hour. They're old vehicles. What, pedicabs? Yes. Doing 35 miles an hour? Some do. You've got some pretty strong legs. Yeah, right. So that's the wrong type of electric motor or some very unusual legs. Yes, exactly. All right. Well, thank you so much. Thank you very much. Bill Brown, followed by Uzochi, followed by – I think this says Julie Demure. Good evening, Bill Brown, President of Central Beach Alliance. You've got a lot to say tonight, Bill. I know. This is a long time coming, having to address this problem. As you heard at the first reading, even the legal counsel for some of the operators said that it's out of control. We know it's out of control, these electric vehicles. Right now, it's no control over it, and this ordinance, when it passes, we'll do that. Since the last meeting for this commission ordinance and first reading, I had the opportunity to participate in both the Zoom meeting and in-person meeting with the stakeholders to listen to them. They do have some valid concerns, which is out of the control of the city, and part of that is two years ago when the state legislature passed the bill that allows other operators to come in from, say, Orlando or different counties. And I think at some point, maybe the lobbyist and city should look at it as a legislative agenda action, as a glitch bill, and limiting the number of permits. I support staff. You'll hear probably some of the staff comments to limiting it to the CBA. We've heard it. We've met with the transportation mobility well over two years ago when this start process started. We support keeping it at 100. It's a pilot. If we need to up the number at a certain point later, you still have that flexibility. When it comes to insurance, I see every day, practically, especially on weekends, six and eight, and I hate to put it this way, but intoxicated individuals at 12, 30, 1 a.m. in the morning on these carts. God forbid if one of them ever got T-boned and had serious injuries or loss of life. If you have only $100,000 with an individual occurrence, maximum $300,000 for eight people, my new need that I'm getting tomorrow costs $72,000. So do the math. To ask for a million per occurrence, maximum $2 million, is not unreasonable in today's society, especially when they're transporting these individuals. So we come before you, and let's pass this ordinance. If you have to come back and tweak it later, you do have that flexibility. We support the criminal background checks that's required for the chauffeur's license, which is there now. So let's work together, and we move forward and not kick the can down any further down the road on this. Thank you. Thank you. Uzoshi Onye-Jarura. So you don't want to speak? Okay. Did I come close to pronouncing your name okay? Okay. Is it Julie Demure? Jewel. I'm sorry. You did not get an A in penmanship. I just want you to know that. Being born and raised here in South Florida and then growing up in California, every first year of the school year I've had that issue. My whole name is actually French, and, yes, it's spelled J-U-L-E without an I, but, you know, people read it quickly. And so, you know, every first day of school, Julie for 13 years or, you know, whatever. Nevertheless, I kind of want to follow up on what Gregory Oates was speaking about. I'm a former Ocean View rickshaw operator of pedicabs, and it came to our – it was brought up to us that there was, you know, these things going on with the city as far as, like, you know, the golf carts. And we ended up making it to a meeting where we sat with stakeholders and we learned about all the things that are going forward. We weren't here for the first reading, some of us, and so we're here now. My concern with the ordinance, which I think is a perfectly good ordinance in general, is that quite possibly, if it's possible, we should be allowed to carve out our industry, our bicycle taxi industry, e-bike in some cases because we are – we kind of just transformed a little bit from being exclusively human pedal to e-bike in order to, you know, provide the services that we provide. You know, we're not vehicles for hire that are registered with a DMV, and that's a little concerning. So in general, I'd just like to suggest that if there could be a possibly a carve-out for our specific industry moving forward if this ordinance is passed, which I'm not against. I put neutral on my card, but, frankly, the general consensus I like. I think it's great. Insurance for every – you know, the insurance, like the previous gentleman talked about, $1 million, $2 million. We have that under our own pedicab permitting processes in other cities, and I work in another city outside of Fort Lauderdale. I work in California. That's that issue. The second issue, or at least the second concern that I have is our special events tend to draw the attention of other pedicab operators from other towns that have come in. Some of them were coming into the F1 event in Miami. Somehow they found out about this one here in Fort Lauderdale, Tortuga being the specific event. And last year, many of them showed up from out of town, from another city here locally in the state. And I spoke with someone from Parks and Recs who was concerned about how they were operating. They'd also, like, mentioned that the year before there were some of these same characters who were doing things that just wasn't very couth, charging just excessive amounts of money just to take a bike ride that lasted only maybe 5 to 10 minutes, and they were charging, like, $500. I believe that at least for this coming, Tortuga, there should be some type of edge that the police should have as far as enforcement, particularly and specifically for our pedicab operators that might be coming into work. And then also, you know, while that's happening, just formulate an idea of how we could get us piggybacking off of the ordinance that you're creating tonight, but still kind of having, like, a flex or an umbrella of our own in order to, like, you know, maintain our industry. Okay. All right. Well, thank you for coming tonight. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Eric Schwartz, followed by Paul Minhoff, and Carlos Barrios. Good evening. Good evening, Mayor, Commissioners. I'm here on behalf of the Golf Cart Drivers and Shuttle Services. What we're trying to address is, like, a solid, maybe even signage or something, about the elbow room and, like, their parking. A lot of drivers are getting tickets. We were told that there was going to be a 90-day educational. You know, if a police officer has an issue with you, you know, say, for the newer drivers that don't know, you know, what the standing or parking rules are in spring break event like this, you know, all of the road, all of A1A is blocked off with the barriers to, you know, control the crowds and stuff like that. And we're trying to find out what the actual rule is or ordinance or if there could be an exception while the street is blocked off about us parking at the elbow room because everybody is getting funneled that way because of the street is blocked off for crowd control, which makes perfect sense. But a lot of drivers are getting parking tickets for being there. So we're trying to find out what the statue is for that because… When you say parking at the elbow room, there's no parking at the elbow room. So we typically line up near the bike lane where the elbow room is at the light, and customers come to us. Is this on La Solis or on A1A? On La Solis. On La Solis, okay. Before you make the turns on to A1A. Okay. You know, typically lined up there, our lights are on, we're visible, we're not staying in traffic, we're not upheeding traffic at all. Customers come to us and ask us for the shuttle ride to XYZ, and that's what we do. The carts aren't being left unattended. If someone has to use the bathroom or maybe they run across the street to grab a slice of pizza or something like that, we typically ask the next driver, hey, can you watch my cart? If the cart needs to be moved up, the key's in it, so on and so forth. Can you speak into the microphone? Oh, I'm sorry about that. I have a pretty loud voice, so I don't really ever need a microphone. Well, but we can't pick you up on the recording. Gotcha. I understand. Thank you. So we're trying to find out, you know, because a lot of police officers don't care. We've developed pretty good relationships with them, so on and so forth. But then you have just one traffic. I don't think they're actually police officers, but the people that are in charge of writing the tickets and stuff like that. You know, we're doing the best that we can to provide a service for the city, a relatively safe service for the city, and they're just cracking out these $40 tickets every single day, you know, and that sometimes is a few hours' wage right there. All right. Well, that's an enforcement issue, which I think, you know, we'll have to – that's separate from what we're trying to do tonight. But, you know, it's a – where you park, you know, there on Las Olas. It's – so today I happened to be standing in front of the elbow room at 10 o'clock this morning, and an Uber driver stopped right in front of the elbow room at A1A, blocking. The horns went off like crazy. Police officer was standing right there, issued them a ticket. Okay, you don't stop in the middle of traffic. So we have – you know, these are traffic lanes and travel lanes. That's the problem. So we're saying out of the travel lanes. We are completely clear of the travel lanes. Okay, so that you'd have to take up with our police department. You say – if you say that they, you know, they cooperate with you, then, you know, we'll figure out a way. But that's not what this is about tonight. So – I think everybody that came here might have been misinformed about what we were here for tonight. That's all – or misinterpreted. Well, tonight is – tonight's about establishing rules and regulations for operators, not about the actual – not about the actual practice that you undertake when you, you know, when you run your business on the beach or wherever it may be. Okay. So, you know, we encourage you to meet with our transportation people. This is done, yes. Yeah. And they'll – I've never met you before. I'm relatively new at this, but – It's okay. So, speak with her and, you know, try to figure out some solution. Because we want – you do provide a great service for us, okay? Let's understand that, okay? And we want you to be successful in your business at the same time. And so, let's see if there's a way to work that out. And if I could put on the record, we're definitely more than willing to help provide that shuttle service for the – For the parking garage? For the parking garage as well. Where are they? Oh, they left. If I could get her information, I would love to discuss a business plan with that. Okay. All right. Very good. We'll get that to you. All right. I apologize for wasting your time. You're not wasting your time. We were just under the impression that that's what this meeting was about. But you can meet with them, okay? Thank you. All right. You're very welcome. Paul Minhoff. Hello there. What gems of wisdom are you going to impart with us tonight? I hope – some very useful gems. Thank you for – Well, any different than when you spoke the first time? Well, I can tell you that things have changed immensely. And everyone, the stakeholders that I've spoken to, including my client, just for the record, Paul Minhoff, Tripp Scott here on behalf of Carte Concierge, LLC. I want to start just by thanking Morgan and her folks. The last two meetings that Mr. Brown mentioned, I was at the in-person one. It was very productive. The staff's been very open-minded and listening. And they did come back with a product that is vastly different in a number of incredible ways. And that's also due in part – large part – to the city attorney's office. And Ms. McCarthy's been – her folks have been absolutely fantastic. And I even got a personal call yesterday just to remind me that the meeting was going on and to ask me a couple questions. And I very much appreciated that because I did provide a lot of feedback. I have only one issue, one concern. I have one concern and then an issue tied to that concern. So we know that there's a state statute that allows anyone licensed or permitted in any jurisdiction to come to Fort Lauderdale. And Fort Lauderdale can't require them to be separately permitted. So what's happening is we have this insurance requirement, which is my only objection, if you will, to this ordinance. And I understand why it was set. And I did hear Mr. Brown speak. I think some of the concern can be addressed through enforcement rather than penalizing business owners and small business owners like my client who have only one vehicle. So the insurance right now, as Mr. Brown referenced, is requiring a million dollars per single limit. If you look at the state statute for taxi cabs, Jutneys, and all other types of, as they use the term, for hire passenger transportation vehicles, the limits are 125, 250, 50, and 50,000. So 125,000 per incident for bodily injury, 250 in the aggregate, and 50,000 for property damage. But the city is currently required. So you think that the state legislature is the standard by which we should follow? No, not at all. Okay. I'm just saying that standard is actually followed in a lot of other jurisdictions. So you think we should follow? No. I'm saying that the way the law is written, the statute, the 324, and I wrote it down, 320-06-03, is that these folks can go to a jurisdiction in the state that has much less requirements and operate here, not be required to meet the city's insurance requirements, but the people who actually live here and who are working here and operating small businesses, they're going to be penalized. And ironically, my client – Who's going to be penalized, the person who suffers an injury as a result of patronizing your client or other people who are in the same business who suffer a severe head injury and the limits of their exposure is only $100,000? Who's being penalized here? I'm not advocating for $100,000 of insurance. I'm advocating that $1 million is excessive when you consider the cost. My client just got her renewal. She just sent it to me. She personally holds $150,000, $300,000, and $150,000. That policy, the renewal, is $6,021, one cart, two drivers. If she drops the second driver, which means she would then limit the amount of how often the cart goes out, then it's $5,200. So what's the million-dollar coverage? It's going to be at least three times that amount for one cart. That's unusual because there's usually insurance. It's not calculated arithmetically. There's usually a point of diminishing costs as you go higher. Except there's very few companies that will actually insure golf carts for hire, and that I don't know. Because of the liability and the cost of injuries that they have suffered. I mean, everything is done actuarially. They don't just come up with numbers artificially. No, I agree, but think about it. I can go to Orlando. But this is the same issue years ago when the county was encountered with Uber. And the county was requiring the Uber company and Lyft to have certain insurance requirements. And what did Uber and Lyft do? They went to the state legislature, and the power to enforce a higher insurance requirement was taken away from them. Right. Well, that's the risk here, though, too. It's not the risk, right? Now we want to avoid that risk. No, but if I can go to Orange County and go to City of Orlando and get my permit there, I don't have to live there. I just have to operate, get a permit there. I can then operate here in the city of Fort Lauderdale with 125, 250, 125. So all we're doing is encouraging people to completely circumvent this permit process by just registering somewhere else, which vitiates or undermines the whole purpose of this permit ordinance to begin with and doesn't give you the additional protection. I don't disagree that additional protection is needed. The last time we talked about this, I know the members of the commission were concerned because there are people who have five carts, and now all of a sudden they're going to be paying $50,000, $75,000 for insurance. And when you're on five carts for a million dollars, you're talking about it, and you're going to put these people out of business. And I don't think that's what the city wants to do, especially because I think everyone recognizes it is a valid, viable, and worthwhile enterprise here in the city. But these people are really concerned, and I feel their pain because some of them, my client's not going to be able to afford that. She's going to have to stop. So you're saying they could register anywhere else and then come and operate here? Correct. You can ask Morgan. And they don't need to have – Commissioner, Vice Mayor, may I interject? Yeah, please. Because I see where you're going with this point. So, Mr. Lennon, while it is true that there is reciprocity, that you can get your license, your permit elsewhere and operate in a different county, the insurance requirement is not linked to your permit. So while your permit from Orange County allows you to operate here, Fort Lauderdale still requires you to have that level of insurance. They're not linked. No, it's actually a permit requirement here in Fort Lauderdale. But it would still be – you would still have to have that insurance. That would be the – So if somebody gets their permit in, you know, Polk County, they still have to get our – they still have to meet our insurance requirements. Is that what you're saying? That is our intent. How do we enforce it? If they've got their permit from somewhere else, what's our mechanism for ensuring that they've met our insurance requirements then? Because they've already showed up with their permit. So what do we do then? This becomes an enforcement issue. That's correct. So city manager, how do we then ensure that we've got, you know, equal treatment so that his clients aren't being required to have a higher level of insurance than somebody who's coming in from out of county with a permit that should be meeting our insurance requirements? Can we tell – if I've got two carts side by side on the street, how do I know whether one is permitted here in Fort Lauderdale and one is permitted in Orlando or somewhere else? Vice Mayor, I think enforcement will always be a challenge, whether it's a golf cart or a regular vehicle. Everyone is supposed to have insurance, but everyone doesn't always have that, and our police officers don't necessarily pull over every single car to make sure that they do have insurance. So enforcement will be a challenge, but our requirement to have that higher level of insurance, we hope, will help protect our neighbors. But if they're coming in from out of county, they're not going to have it as a practical matter. Let's be realistic here, right? So the whole purpose of being permitted in Orlando is to avoid our more stringent requirements down here. Otherwise, they would get their permits from here. And so if they're never going to get caught, they're never going to get the insurance. The only time we'll find out they don't have the insurance is after the accident. Or if there's a traffic violation and they're asked to provide their permit and their evidence of insurance, just like any other motor vehicle situation. Well, true, but I doubt when they're asked to provide the evidence of insurance that the police officer is looking at the limits on the insurance. They're just asking, do you have insurance? I doubt they're looking at $100, $300, $1 million, or anything else. No due respect to our officers, but I don't think that they're walking around with our insurance requirements for vehicles to hire handy as their – or our PSAs when they're out there. You know, if we have our public safety aides and they're out there, you know, investigating an accident, I doubt they're looking at the insurance requirements on the insurance certificates. I'm just – I'm trying to be realistic about this. So why do we have any insurance requirements? Why don't we just say – Why do you say you don't need to have insurance if you want to operate in Fort Lauderdale? Well, I'm trying to figure out how – I'm not trying to say none. What I'm trying to figure out is how we put everybody on an equal playing field. Well, what's equal? I don't know. Every single – I'm trying to explore that. I think Fort Lauderdale should set a standard and maybe others should follow because they're going to find that accidents are going to be to the detriment of their patrons. There's a lot of things that I think should happen in the world, Mayor, but that doesn't mean they're going to happen. So in the meantime, so that we don't create an unfair playing field for our local businesses, I want to ask, you know, what do you think – how do we enforce this so that – either one of two things happen. I know what you're suggesting. You're suggesting that we have a lower standard here. The mayor is suggesting that we have a higher standard. If that's the case, how do I get your competitors to have to meet that higher standard? Well, there's an initial problem, a threshold problem here. The ordinance is not written in a way that says any vehicles for hire operating in this city shall meet the following insurance requirements. It literally says in order to get a permit – and I'll read the language – it says before a permit can be issued to any person, you must submit the following proof of automobile liability insurance. It's not tied to the ability to operate. It's tied to getting a permit. The purpose of this ordinance is to regulate issuance of permits, and it's a requirement. I don't know, and I'd have to defer to Madam City Attorney, but I don't know if the city has the authority under the governing statute to tell drivers from other cities that they have to have more insurance than their permit requires in their jurisdiction. I think that contravenes the intent and purpose and language of the statute. But irrespective, if you read the ordinance, it does not mandate insurance for all vehicles for hire. It mandates insurance in order to get a permit in the city of Fort Lauderdale, and that's not the same thing. Well, maybe we need to change that so that there's – Madam Attorney, so there's no misinterpretation. It would be difficult to enforce it, even with that change, because there's nothing it's linked to. So it would be very difficult to enforce that. Well, it's not difficult to enforce if a police officer stops a driver and says, do you have evidence of insurance, and they're going to show evidence of insurance. But under these circumstances, we should require evidence of the scope of their insurance. I mean, it's very doable. And if they can't, then they should be denied the opportunity to operate here. It's a simple – But we're only stopping them for traffic violations. We're not doing random stops. No, you can't do a random stop. No, I know that. But we don't do random stops with automobile vehicles. No, I understand that. But what I'm getting – it's – the point, Mayor, is not catching the people who have lower levels of insurance. It is, how do we create a level playing field so that everybody has the same cost of doing business? So he's going to have a much higher cost of business for his clients than our out-of-county operators are experiencing, putting him at a competitive disadvantage when they're trying to operate. So I think the issue is not – in my mind, the issue is not whether or not they have the same insurance. The issue is whether or not they have the same business model. And what we're saying here is that they have a more cost-advantaged business model because they don't have to follow our rules. Yeah, but the thing is there's a cost of doing business. And having one vehicle for hire is not cost-effective as opposed to having five or ten. That's just – the ability to operate this kind of business does not merit having a single vehicle because the cost is too great. So that's just the nature of this business. So I – you know, we can't accommodate everybody. But the people that we must accommodate are the people who patronize these and who – or who get run over by these and to have the ability to compensate people for their medical suffering. And I think that's more important. Now, I would say anywhere between – I think I saw a statistic between 20 and 30 percent of all motor vehicle drivers in the state of Florida have no insurance. Okay? But we don't know that. And so they have to be stopped because of a traffic violation in order to enforce that part of the law. But that's not – I think the difference here, Mayor, that I'm not arguing that point with you. So the – I think the difference here is this is a commercial business requirement to operate, and I think that's what's different. So it would be like – it would be like saying, you know, the Uber driver doesn't have insurance, like you were – to use your example. And, you know, that makes it – that makes it different competitively if Lyft drivers have to have insurance but Uber drivers don't. You know, then I'm going to say, well, you know, you've cost-advantaged one particular operator over another. But you have to scale up your business in order to be able to pay the expense. I think what we're doing is we're just telling our local operators, don't get your permit here in Fort Lauderdale. Go get your permit in Orlando and then come back and operate here. Well, you know what? And that's what I would do. If that's – if that's – wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. If that's the consequence of this, then so be it. But the reality is that if they're stopped and they cannot prove that they have sufficient insurance, we can prevent them from operating. Actually, I'm not even sure we can if I – Well, we're going to talk about that. Sherry? Yeah, I'm not certain that we could do that. I think the suggestion is – Please, please, please. Hold on, guys. I think the suggestion is – and the point is taken that it creates disparities. I think the suggestion is that the mandate – that this ordinance be modified to mandate similar insurance coverage for all those who operate here, regardless of the county from which they got their permit. Whether we can do that or not, that still creates the enforcement implications, right? How would you – how would you possibly enforce it? Enforcement is always a legal issue when we have an enforcement issue. You're going to buy a lawsuit because some operator is going to sue saying that it violates 320-023, number one. And number two – What is 320-023? It's the state statute that says anybody who has issued a permit in the state of Florida can operate without having to pay any additional permit or licensing fees in the state – in any other jurisdiction within the state. So why do we have any insurance requirement? Let's just say zero. No, because – well, because every jurisdiction – And then everyone will get their permit here in Fort Lauderdale? Every jurisdiction has insurance, Mr. Mayor. It's just a matter of which. So if you require a million dollars, you are going to encourage everyone to register out of the city. And even if the city says you have to have a million to operate here, it's cheaper to pay the fine because it's a civil – it's a municipal fine. It's not a traffic stop. It's not going to be enforceable through arrest or seizure. We talked about that last time. So the people here want to act legally, and they want to act responsibly, and they've been working hard with the mobility department to come up with something that works. But now you're – So what happens if a person has a brain injury as a result of an accident? Is that responsible? No, but that happens every day. I got hit – That happens every day, and you don't want to protect these people? I'm not saying I don't. What are you talking about? I'm not saying I don't. I said we need adequate insurance. A million dollars is just excessive for small business operators. So you're saying people suffer from brain injuries, it happens every day, and $300,000 is sufficient to cover that injury. That is baloney. But a million dollars may not be able to cover that either, number one. And number two, there are – Where's Morgan and Morgan when you need them? When you're dealing with state minimums that are – Please stop talking from the back. If you want to come up and talk, I'll be happy to have you come up here because we can't pick up what you're saying, and it's just a distraction. So please. The whole state minimums for just owning a car are $25,000, $125,000, something to that extent with $10,000 pip. Anybody can kill anybody and create chaos, and that does happen, unfortunately. We're not asking the city to create a danger for these people or to put them in danger. We're asking the city to allow these business operators to operate without having to take a significant portion of any money that they actually earn. Have you ridden in one of these golf carts? Absolutely. And have you – what protection do you have from a motor vehicle that's zooming right beside you? No different than when I ride my motorcycle, Mr. Mayor. Right, exactly. You have zero protection. But that you have – but even in a car, we have minimal protection with the amount of – a little bit of metal that they use. Because I understand your concern. I'm not in any way trying to say the city is wrong at what it wants to do. I just think that it needs to look at the economic ramifications of what the city is trying to impose. And when the city – when the ordinance itself will be undermined by just getting your permit in another city or county, then what you're trying to accomplish, you're better off instituting, let's say, a 153 or even a 255, and at least letting people get their permits here and get that insurance than having them go to Orlando and getting a 100 or a 125 and 300 and then operating here. So you're saying it might be more an incentive to do an incremental increase over the average of what we'd find in other counties rather than the large increase that we're recommending tonight. You want to disincentivize people from registering here. You want them to register here because, number one, you want the revenue, and number two, you want the enforcement powers that the ordinance comes with. If you incentivize them to go somewhere else, they're going to get the minimum insurance at whatever the cheapest jurisdiction is. They're not going to come here with sufficient insurance, and you're going to take the revenue and enforcement away from the city. So it's a lose-lose, and then this becomes all for naught, unfortunately. All right. But I do appreciate you hearing me out, and thank you to the entire commission. No, just playing devil's advocate. No, thank you. Paul, question. Thanks. Do you think we should limit the number of permits? At the end of the day, I think it's – you can limit it to one, you can limit it to 500, you can limit it to 1,000. People can just go register in other jurisdictions. Yeah, that's the problem, man. Exactly. But I do – so I do think a limit – like there are some people that aren't going to go through the hassle and expense of registering somewhere else. They live here, they work here, they want to be here. I don't think we want to penalize – I don't think we want to incentivize people to go somewhere else. I get you. Because they can go right down the road and register in Palm Beach County, or in Hollywood, or wherever else, they allow them for much cheaper without those extreme limits. I think limits are a good thing, but they're really a moot point when you think about anyone can register anywhere and come operate here and not be subject to that limit. Yeah, right. So you don't think we should have limits then? I think – It doesn't serve any purpose. It doesn't serve any purpose, but to get rid of permit limits all over – all together, I don't know that that – you want to do that either. But they really are – they're going to be moot. So 200, 300 of these vehicles on the road, maybe that's reasonable. But the city of Fort Lauderdale, the more restricted they make it, the less you're going to have people registering here. We can't limit the number of people that operate in our city. Correct. All you can do is limit the number of permits. So I think you're setting it right now at 100. That's a low threshold where you're just going to, again, incentivize people to leave. But I do think permit caps are good because there are some people who aren't going to go elsewhere. And you want to limit people who shouldn't be operating in the city, and I think there's a reasonable way to do it. The rest of the ordinance I think is fabulous. I give a lot of credit to everybody involved. The only qualm, I think, that's going to hurt this industry and is going to actually hurt the city more than the intent of fixing this problem is keeping a million dollars insurance. Okay. Thank you. Thank you all. Thank you. Milos, did you want to say something? Absolutely. Thank you very much. So just a couple of things. So in order for anyone to apply elsewhere outside of the city for a permit to operate in here, that would be based on the residency, actually, address of the residency, right? So our operators from here, if they have a residency here, would not be able to go anywhere outside of our city to apply for a permit, right? So someone from Orlando could apply in Orlando, get a permit there for vehicle for higher service, and come down to operate here. However, anyone who has an address here would not be able to go to Orlando, apply for a permit, and come to operate here. That's based on the Florida statute the way that I understand it. All right. So – but – okay. Interesting. And the second – So if they have – so let's be smart about this. So this is – So if they have a P.O. box in Orlando – Actually, they're going to have an LLC, which they can register anywhere. Yeah, that's – yeah, that's the problem. Yeah, it's probably not – it's probably not Joe living at, you know, Galt Ocean Mile. It's probably an LLC registered to a P.O. box somewhere. So how it reads is that active license or a permit to operate a vehicle for higher in the country – I'm sorry, county or municipality in which the person permanently resides. Person permanently resides. Right. So you're saying that – you're saying that LLCs cannot apply for a permit because – well, is a company a person? The Supreme Court said a company is a person. Help people to – You're not helping. The second – the second point about insurance requirements. So when it comes to Florida statute, it was established back 24 years or so ago. So that might be changing. Our risk management staff did conduct additional reviews of about 20-plus municipalities and feels comfortable with what we are proposing just because of type of vehicles and level of exposure and risk that they bring with their operation. And given the fact that the insurance requirements haven't updated – been updated for a number of years. So having heard all this, Milos, what do you recommend? Do you recommend that we keep the ordinance the way it's written? Do you think we should lower the insurance requirements so we can add more of an incentive for people to stay local? What are your thoughts on that? So I think that we have a new process that we are trying to establish in here. What we will have, we will have about 90-day educational period. As a matter of fact, our police department will be helping us educate these operators even now during the spring break. As to the permanent requirements that we currently have in place, we will be doing the same for the future operating standards and expectations. And I think that we will have to stay flexible and mindful of any changes we have to make along the process. I think that we have made a lot of improvements through a year-and-a-half process that we have been developing operating requirements for these type of businesses. And I would go with recommendations about risk management unless they have anything else to add in here. Okay. Thank you. My pleasure. Carlo Berrios, are you still here? There you are. Anyone else wish to speak on this item that has not yet spoken? Good evening, Carlo. Could you please push the button at the bottom? Good evening, Vice Mayor, Mayor, Commission. You know, we've been having a lot of constructive meetings together the last year, year-and-a-half, trying to develop this. Are you an operator? I am an operator. Sorry. I'm representing Cab Daddy. How many do you operate? We have a total of five. Five? Five vehicles. Okay. Over the last three years, I started with one. And insurance is necessary. I mean, it protects the riders. It protects the company, right? If I don't have insurance and something happens, they come after me. I can't work. I can't. My employees don't have a job. I can't pay my bills. As a local, someone who's lived in Broward County in Davie, growing up in Davie, come to Fort Lauderdale the last 26 years of my life. You know, like, we love this city. We're huge proponents for everything going on in the beach. I met with Amy Thomas the other day, who works at, you probably know, down at the beach at Birch, who called me. They want to bring more awareness to the park, to all the things that you guys have going on over there, right? Raise money and awareness to let people know that Fort Lauderdale has so much going on. We are the number one people bringing an awareness to those things in the city, to everything that's going on, to the marina, to the parks, to the new playgrounds. You're cutting our throats by raising the limit to a point that we cannot afford to employ our drivers. We want to look out for the city's interests as well as the people that live here and our own, right? But we have to work to a point that makes sense, because if not, everybody here is smart enough to go get a permit somewhere else. Why not work with us so that we can look out for each other and for the city to make sure it's safe, to make sure that everybody's doing the right thing? So what do you recommend? I recommend let's keep on working together through open conversation and develop the relationship that we've been developing over the last three years. Got it. So we're having an open conversation now. Is the issue of the limit of liability the question? And if that's the question, what limit would you recommend? The limit is good right now. The limit is where I think it needs to be. If you guys want to raise it a little bit, we can try to work to find a spot that makes sense. Because, you know, the cards, first of all, there's one insurance, Prime, right? They also have, you know, kind of a chokehold on what, you know, we can't really fight with them. What they say, what we have to pay goes. So we're already paying a lot of insurance, right? Every car has seatbelts. Some of these cards have video cameras. You know, every car has a sign that says, you must wear a seatbelt, right? They're also consenting adults that also make their own decisions. Just like if you're in a car or an Uber, you're in a consenting adult. Yeah, but accidents happen. Right. Accidents happen. But you're supposed to be wearing your seatbelt if you're riding a golf cart. If you ride any vehicle, and I'm sure there's a statistic out there that says that the likeliness of you getting injured will go down by, I'm sure, a very large percent, right? So let's also think about that. These are adults. These are people that, you know, especially if they're kids. I will get out, and I have a big training manual, by the way. It's like eight pages that I give all the drivers, the new drivers, that shows a process. It's an SOP, right? My standard operating procedure from when you put the key in the vehicle to when you finish at the end of the night that shows exactly how you should operate in a safe manner, picking up, dropping off, entering, stopping, right? So those are also things that need to be educated, right? And I'm happy to give that SOP out to every other driver out here if it means that there's going to be a higher level of safety education. But work with us to a point where we're not having a battle, and the cops, they're already dealing with a lot, right? So why give them way more work when we can be the ones working together to make sure that we're operating in a way that Fort Lauderdale is safe? And also, it's fair for the people that are here, that live here, that love this city, that want to see the city continue to grow, and all the amazing ways that it's been growing over the last five years, and help us develop together. But let me just say one thing. I appreciate everything you're saying, and I'm sure that your drivers are responsible and educated and well-meaning. But I'm also concerned about the car that's being driven by a drunk driver who's going to smash into your vehicle, and then what happens? I'm just – we're just bringing up – these aren't impossibilities. Of course. Of course. These things happen all the time. And I pray that that never happens because that's my number one fear, right, that keeps me up at night. But at the end of the day, that driver also has insurance, right? And we also have insurance. Oh, we don't know that. Well, they're supposed to. And they may have $10,000 liabilities. So trust me. Right. Everyone's got the minimum, minimum amount of insurance. I don't – I have maximum, but there are people that have minimum. So – all right. So – I'm just saying, if you raise it to a point that is excessive, everyone's just going to leave and circumvent. So what is it now? Work with us so we can keep it here. Keep it at what it's at. If anything, I mean, it's already high. Thank you. Thank you, Carlo. Thank you, guys. You're welcome, Carlo. So Mr. Mayor, to answer your question, it's $100,000, $300,000. $100,000 to what? $300,000. $300,000? That's right. All right. No one else has signed up to speak. So – hold on a second. What's this? Hold on a second. Mr. Schwartz, didn't you just speak? All right. I'll give you a minute. Why don't you come up here? And I – Mr. Mayor, I apologize for yelling in the crowd. Don't apologize. Don't apologize. Mr. Mayor, you keep bringing up the insurance of someone getting hurt, and the – you just mentioned a moment ago about the drunk driver that hits the cart driver. Once you wouldn't eliminate half of these carts because their insurance is through the roof and they cannot operate, you're going to have exponentially more drunk drivers driving cars to hurt more people. You know what? It's a very good point. Because we drive so many – I know. People rely on us. And like Carlos said, you really cut us at the throat. We're not – you're not making the people that are driving electric scooters who go exponentially faster than our golf cart. You're not ensuring the – you're not making the people that walk across the street without looking in front of the golf cart. They don't have insurance on their two feet, but you want our insurance through the moon. We don't want – we don't – we're not through the moon. A million dollars. I mean, this young lady's paying $6,000. She's not – she might make that in a month. Okay. So now she has 11 months of income, and one of it is just insurance. Okay. I get it. All right. Thank you, Eric. Well, you're welcome. Thank you. Okay. Anyone else wish to speak on this item? Did you sign up? You did sign up originally. Okay. Come on up. And that's the last one. Good evening. Just to tack on to what Paul was saying – Please state your name. My name is Uzo Chionia Jirua. Just to tack on what he was saying, of course, if our insurance requirements are far higher, people are going to leave, of course, as we've all discussed. So at the very least, if you guys are going to go that route, can we at least use some kind of signaling device to show that we got our permits here as opposed to these other people who just come in so that if we have to pay that crazy amount – let me not say credit. But if we have to pay that much higher amount, at least these other people can't just come in and take food out of our mouths because they have it so much easier than us. Okay. That's a fair question. Okay. Thank you. All right. Do I hear a motion to close public hearing on this? Moved. Do I hear a second? Second. Wake up. Please call a roll on closing public hearing. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Mayor Trentos? Yes. The public hearing is now closed. Okay, folks, what kind of ordinance do we want to introduce here? Right now we're at 100-300. That seems to be the only sticking point regarding this entire ordinance. Do we want to lower it from the million to million or do we want to keep it that way? What's your pleasure? I'm comfortable with the 100-300. Well, the, okay, the business community indicated that they'd be willing to go a little higher. So I'm just wondering if this is an opportunity for us to do that. Do you have a suggestion? What are the, how does it, how, Jerome, how is it structured? Jerome? Mayor, could we defer to Guy Hine, our risk manager, who's done a lot of research on this? Guy, I'm sorry. Guy, how are the insurance limits structured? Is 100-300, what's the next level? Well, there's a lot of different options, but one thing I want to mention is right now state statute says 125 per person, 250 per occurrence. So I'm not sure, city attorney, I think we have to be at least the state minimum. My understanding is we can be above that, but we can't be below state minimum. Right, we're talking about going, we're talking about upping it a little bit. Right. And you're saying what's the state minimum now? 120, 125,000 per person, 250 per occurrence. And we're at 100-300? Correct. So we're actually below the state requirement. So if we go, so what is the next level after that? There's a lot of different options. Can we go 300-500? That I don't know. Bill, can you? We're already at 150. This is the city's insurance agent consultant. Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, you can go up by increments depending on your insurance. So you can go up by 50, you can go up by 100, and you can just keep adding, you can double. Is there a policy that we can go 300-500? You can. Does that make sense? No. Well, we have to go 150-300. That's the state statute. 125-250. Don't correct me. What's that? Yeah. So why don't we start out at 153? No, we're at 103. We're at 103. 153. If we went to 153, I'm not comfortable with that, to be honest with you. But I mean, I'd rather the minimum be a little bit higher, like 200, 400. I mean, but again, it's a pleasure of the commission. What does the commission want to do? Vice Mayor, do you have any thoughts on this? I'd be comfortable with the 153. The 153? Okay. And I think we could always come back and revisit this later on if we don't think it's sufficient. Okay. But again, I understand your points, Mayor, and I don't want to discount them. I do think we need to be mindful of the fact that, you know, we want to have a sufficient level of insurance. Look, I deal with this all the time because I sit on our risk management committee, and I see all of our accidents, and, you know, I review all of our claims. So I appreciate very much on a granular level the kind of accidents that our police officers are getting in, not to pick out, you know, our police officers, but those are some of our more frequent accidents as they're responding to calls. And these are the kinds of crashes that we as a city experience on a regular basis. So we do see a lot of these. And I get where you're coming from on that. But I also want to be mindful of the fact that, you know, these are small businesses. These are mom and pops that are trying to compete. And I want to try and balance out those two competing objectives. And so I think 153 is a reasonable balance of those interests. All right. So would you like to introduce the ordinance? I'll introduce the ordinance at 153. All right. So you're approving the existing ordinance with the amendment of 150 to 300 as the range of insurance coverage. That is correct. Okay. Anyone else have any questions with regard to that? I do. Do we have any data on accidents in our city with these vehicles? Do we have anything to go on in terms of how adequate this insurance level is? By the way, right now, well, we're saying now 153, right? 153. And what are we at right now? 103. 103. And the state minimum is 125.3. 125, 250. 125, 250. Right. But again, do we have any data at all? Do we know what we're talking about here in terms of records of accidents or? We do not, when it comes to operation of these vehicles, we actually only have about two permitted for this fiscal year so far. So many of them we do not have permitted currently and we do not have any readily available accident data or crash data. Does this, okay. I know, I understand. And the state has no data statewide or they don't go by county or they don't go by anything. We don't have any data that they have. So there are tools that we can use in order to determine whether there were any one of these or any vehicles of this sort that were included in crashes historically. But we would have to do that research. So what, Commissioner, for purposes of tonight, why don't we just set us a base, go with that, and we can always amend this if the data comes back to us and suggests that we should. I would like to know that. I personally happen to actually agree with the mayor. I think these numbers are low. Obviously, you must think so also because what you're recommending is much higher. I'm just trying to see if there's a middle ground somewhere, but I'm fine to go with that if that's what we'd like to do. Why don't we start with that? So the one thing I can add, just because I've been doing some research on this. So as I'm looking here, based on my good friend, Chad GPT, says that $15,300 is considered a strong above average balance for bodily injury for specifically for four higher vehicles, exceeds both the standard expert recommendations and legal thresholds for high-risk operations. So it's considered to be a strong insurance expert, suggests that this far exceeds the bare minimum. I think it's okay to start with. Look, we could always go higher, but again, you could always insure to a much higher level. It's a question of balancing out the competing interests. I think this is a good place to start. Okay. Commissioner Schwarz, do you have anything else to add to this? No. All right. So right now, the ordinance being introduced is to approve on second reading with the amendment to require that the insurance coverage be $150,300,000 coverage. So $150,000 single occurrence, $300,000, what's it called? Aggregate. Aggregate, excuse me. Yes, thank you. Okay. With the 100 permit limit. Is that right? Is that part of this? Is that what the ordinance says? Yeah. Okay. All right. There we go. Please call the roll. And just to confirm, the revisions that were sent out yesterday, those are also incorporated into it, correct? Yes, as presented and as amended here. Okay. Thank you. Ed Norton, so the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, admitting Chapter 27 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, titled Vehicles for Hire by admitting Article 1 in general, repealing and replacing Article 2 taxi cabs with Article 2 rental cars with chauffeurs and sightseeing vehicles, and Article 3 motel or hotel courtesy cars with Article 3 non-motorized vehicles for hire, and repealing Article 4 rental cars, Article 5 rental cars with chauffeurs and sightseeing vehicles, and Article 6 non-motorized vehicles for hire, thereby removing references to certificates of public convenience and necessity, and implementing an administrative review and permitting process for the operation of vehicles for hire, amending certain definitions, defining a low-speed vehicle, and revising insurance provisions, and providing for severability, repeal of conflicting ordinance provisions, providing for a correction of Scrivener's errors, and providing for defective date. Commissioner Sorensen? Yes. Vice Mayor Herbst? Yes. Commissioner Glossman? Yes. Mayor Trent Hollis? Yes, and that ordinance is now approved. Mayor? Just be careful, folks. Yes, please. Yes, City Manager. Would the commission like staff to put some advocacy efforts behind this at the state level to promote consistency? Well, at this stage of the game, since the, yeah, at some point, yeah, at some point, I agree, and one of the gentlemen said if they could put a badge that they're permitted by Fort Lauderdale, we'd love to see that, too, because that might give people a level of assurance. You know, it's like being flagged in a certain country, you know. All right. So thank you for your patience and for, you know, your being here tonight and for working with us. Thank you so much. City Manager, is there any further business? Nothing further. Thank you. City Attorney? No, Mayor. Did you want to call for a closed-door session? Thank you very much for reminding me of that. It's okay. That's what I'm here for. I'd like to request a special executive session next meeting, which is March the 19th, related to the three Fort Lauderdale matters with Florida Department of Transportation, and we would have that as early as possible on the, after the conference on the meeting of March the 19th. So this is City of Fort Lauderdale v. Florida Department of Transportation, case number 4D-2025-2783, the 4th District Court of Appeal. City of Fort Lauderdale v. Florida Department of Transportation, case number 4D-2026-0271, the 4th District Court of Appeal. And the City of Fort Lauderdale v. Florida Department of Transportation, the Florida Division of Administrative Hearings, case number 25-004856RU. That is correct. Very good. Mayor, I was going to share this via email, but staff would also like to have an opportunity to provide the commission with an update on our collective bargaining efforts with police and fire. I'm not sure if... Was that, you want that as part of this closed-door session? I think we need an opportunity to get with the commission sooner rather than later. Okay. So that will be included. Yes. Thank you. Okay. Very good. All right. Any further business to the commission? There being none, this meeting is concluded. Thank you, everybody. We'll be right back.