And welcome to the Fort Lauderdale City Commission special meeting tonight, this August 27th. Hello. Could you turn up the volume? Is that better? Yeah. Okay. Thank you. So thank you all for being here tonight. This is a special meeting that I called and asked the commission to convene to discuss a single issue, which we will get to. But before we begin the meeting, may I ask you all to please rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. Pledge of Allegiance and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, indivisible, liberty, and justice for all. Thank you. Please be seated. Liberty and justice for all, right? Mr. Clerk, where are you? Would you please call the roll? Vice Mayor Herbst? Present. Not logged in yet? Not logged in yet. Present. Yes, I am. Oh, okay. Okay, he's coming through. Okay. Present. Commissioner Glossman? Here. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman? She's not on yet. Commissioner Sorensen? Here. Mayor Trent-Hallis? Here. So we have a quorum. Two of the commissioners, the vice mayor and Commissioner Beasley-Pittman, indicated they could not attend in person. But the way the rules allow for that situation, as long as there's a quorum of people sitting here in person. So we have that quorum, and we'll now be able to continue with the meeting. I want to just take a moment and explain to the community why I called this special meeting. The reason was because last week, the city of Fort Lauderdale received a letter from the Florida Department of Transportation indicating that the city needed to take action and remove certain markings on the street, which they stated was in violation of state statute and needed to be remedied. In the letter, which I happen to have right here, the letter starts out by saying that we were previously notified of this need and the need to remediate. I just want to say, just for the record, that no one on our staff remembers or recalls getting any such letter or memorandum. This letter, dated August 21st, was the first the city of Fort Lauderdale has heard or was notified about the markings on the street that needed to be remediated. Nonetheless, they gave a deadline, and the deadline is September 4th to remove the marks on the street. Now, our next scheduled meeting is September 3rd, which is the day before. So even if the city commission at that time were to decide to take action and conform with what the state is requesting of us, there would be no time to be able to do that in one day. So it was important that we convene a meeting tonight. It gives us at least a week of time, depending upon what our decision is here tonight, and to be able to decide how we're going to respond to the Florida Department of Transportation's letter, which was signed by Steve Braun, who's the district force secretary. And I just want this opportunity for the community to be able to respond as well before the city commission makes a decision. I thought it was important, as I always do, to hear from the public. And so we will have that opportunity tonight. A lot of people signed up to speak. I might suggest that if you hear your opinion having been voiced, you might want to pass on speaking so that we don't stay too long. Everyone will be given two minutes to speak, and tonight will be the time to be able to voice your opinion. So before we begin, I'd like to turn the matter over to our city manager, Raquel Williams, whose staff will be making an initial presentation. Raquel. Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Commissioners. Thanks for the opportunity to provide some background on the letter that we received on Thursday, August 21st. At this time, our director of transportation and mobility, Milos Mastorovic, will provide some background on the identified locations in that letter. Great. Thank you. Milos. Good evening, everyone. Pleasure and honor to be here. My name is Milos Mastorovic, and I'm director for city's transportation and mobility department. Mr. Mayor, thank you very much for the background. So I'm not going to go over that, but I will go over the presentation right now if you can bring it up. And the next slide. Perfect. So in their August 21st of this year letter, FDOT stated that they identified an initial list of four locations, which are non-compliant per their standards in our city. And those locations are shown here on the slide. The first one is Sebastian Street at State Road A1A. The second one is Breakers Avenue at Reomar Street. The third one is Breakers Avenue at Terramar Street. And the fourth one is Las Olas Boulevard at Almond Avenue. What FDOT is referring in a fourth location are really these cross lines that go across Las Olas between two intersections, which are shown in a photo number four. So black lines across the road. That zigzag design? That is right. Okay. That is right. So FDOT is requesting a couple of things. Number one, that non-compliant payment markings be removed by the city by September 4th of this year. And the number two, the city communicates by September 4th if we intend to comply or not. They further state that if the city does not communicate by September 4th, FDOT will be removing payment markings at all four locations without further notice. And that all costs associated with removal would be a responsibility of the city. Additionally, FDOT stated in a letter that they will pursue withholding of state funds as permitted by the law should the city decide not to comply. Finally, FDOT in their letter also states that the city may file a request for administrative proceeding within 14 days. However, they also stated that the hearing will not involve a request for a waiver to permit this non-conforming, what they find as a non-conforming payment markings to remain in place as they already conducted a review of the payment markings. And they believe that and determine that the payment markings will not be allowed to stay. So they're giving us the opportunity to ask for a review of the situation, but they're telling us in advance that they're not changing their mind. That is correct. Thank you. My pleasure. So I will provide you a little background at each one of these locations. So the first one is the Sebastian Street, Street Art location. This location was, or the flag was installed first time in November of 2021. It was a temporary decal that was installed at that time. It was replaced by the permanent implementation or Street Art in January of 2023. This is a city road and Broward County traffic engineering really has a jurisdiction over traffic control at this location. So this is not on A1A? This is not on A1A. This is on a city street. It's not on Seabreeze? That is correct. It's just a cut-through street between those two streets. Is that correct? That is correct. Okay. Thank you. So the second location and third location are on Breakers Avenue. The second one is at Rio Mar Street, and the third one is on Terramar Street. These were implemented by the city back in 2016. Again, it is the city road, and the county has a jurisdiction over traffic control at this location as well. So what was the point of painting these intersections? So the point of painting these intersections was to improve the safety in this area. Back in 2016, as part of the Connecting Blocks program, the city decided to improve intersections in order to improve safety of pedestrians crossing and overall safety of the traffic. And at that time, also some pedestrian ADA improvements or ramps were constructed as well. Now, did we do this in conformity with any guidelines or the statute that then existed by the state of Florida? So I think that there was internal process that the city underwent when we implemented this, and we hired local artists or artists in order to implement the street art. When it comes to ADA ramps, or ramps, they were absolutely per the standards. When it comes to the art, again, it was a local process that we followed. Okay. Thank you. My pleasure. The final location is Las Olas Boulevard at Almond Avenue. Again, that is what the letter calls for. It's really Las Olas between the two intersections or two crosswalks. And that location was implemented back in 2019. The Las Olas Boulevard was a state road up until around that time when the project was implemented, and it was then transferred over to the city. Again, Las Olas is now a local road, and jurisdiction over traffic control is under Broward County. Was it a state road at the time this design was implemented? It was already transferred over to the city. So this is a city road, then? That is right. So the transfer happened in about 2018, and the project was completed and opened to traffic in 2019. Okay. Thank you. My pleasure. So, Milos, if I could just ask. So, in summary, FDOTS identified four locations, right? All four locations, if I'm understanding it right, all four locations are city streets. That is correct. So, no state streets or roads, and all four, as is the case with, I think, all city streets, we have deference to Broward County for additional traffic oversight. Is that right? That is correct. From the standpoint of traffic control, yes. Right. Have we gotten any communication from Broward County about this matter? We did not. Okay. Thank you. Please proceed. If I could ask a question to Milos. Yeah, go ahead, please. I have a copy of a letter from FDOT. Who's talking? This is Engineering and Operations Melorandum 25-01, dated June 30th of 2025, talking about traffic control device compliance on all routes. Did you receive that letter? Yes, Mr. Vice Mayor, we did. We did, but it was forwarded to us. We never received it directly from FDOT. So, that was the letter that Mr. Mayor was actually mentioning. So, again, the August 21st letter, which we received last year, made a reference to prior letter dated June 30th, which we never received, again, directly from FDOT. It seemed to be internal letter that was sent from central office, FDOT central office, to their district offices, which there are seven in the state. Milos, if you would, for the record, clarify, you're talking about the memorandum and not the letter? That is correct. And you said it was forwarded to you? Was it forwarded by the department? No. No, actually, I received it from the city attorney's office. Okay. Okay. Because I was aware of this letter, and I forwarded it to the city attorney's office on, I believe it's pulling up my records here, July the 12th, asking the city attorney, what are the implications of this directive from FDOT with respect to our street painting, because I was concerned about the financial impact of a potential cutoff of funding. So, I know I'd sent it to the attorney's office. I've had multiple conversations with them all throughout the month of July, and I know that Mr. Bangal from the attorney's office had spoken with city manager Williams regarding it. So, I know that we've been aware of this at least since Saturday, July the 12th. Okay. Thank you. So, just to put a final point on that, we want to make sure that the commission understands that FDOT did not provide the city with notice. We did receive that memorandum through vice mayor and shared it with staff in preparation for any future notice from FDOT, but we have not received a formal notice from FDOT until that letter was sent. Okay. Thank you. That is correct. And just for the record, I was not formally notified. I happened to become aware of it through a newspaper article as it impacted another city and did my own research on the issue and thought it should be proactive in reaching out to the city attorney's office to gauge the financial impact of the city. Okay. Thank you. Is Commissioner Beasley Pittman online too? I just want to make sure. Is she online? Because I can't see. I didn't know the vice mayor was even. I cannot see her. She's not. Pam, are you on yet? She's not on yet. She's not on yet. Okay. All right. Thank you. Go ahead, Duane. May I just want to ask some. Duane, did you finish your comments? Okay. Yes. Thank you, Mayor. While we're talking about that letter, which we never received to begin with, but that was an internal memo, as you mentioned, Milos. I want to just read something, which is very interesting, because when you compare what the state first wrote internally and then now to their agencies versus what we received on August 21, there's a really huge difference. And I'm just going to go to the last paragraph where that huge difference is clear. Quote, any identified noncompliant traffic control devices or pavement markings currently installed on Florida public roads are to be immediately remedied. Example, removed, modified, or replaced is required for conformity with FDOT policy and standards in accordance with Section 316.07457. Failure to remove noncompliant traffic control devices or pavement markings shall be cause for withholding of state funds. This is the kicker. Permission to allow noncompliant traffic control devices or pavement markings to remain may be granted at the department's discretion if the public agency is able to demonstrate good cause for doing so. Now, that's in the memo that vice mayor is mentioning and that others are mentioning, but that, to me, is the key part of that memo. So something happened between July 25 and August 21 where all of a sudden it went from that to you can appeal or ask for a hearing, but it won't do you any good. So that's a big difference I just wanted to bring to everyone's attention. All right. Thank you, Commissioner. We appreciate that. Do you have, do you want to complete your presentation? Mr. Mayor, I'm done. I'm here to respond to any questions that you guys have. Does anyone on the commission have any questions of Milos? I do. Milos, with regards to the Las Olas-Almond intersection, well, I really wouldn't even call it an intersection, that was a big part of our CRA projects. The Las Olas streetscape program, one of the last programs that we did with that beach CRA, it does go over to A1A. So did FDOT have any say at all in that approval or that plan of what we did on Las Olas where we did treat the street when we did the Las Olas Oceanside Park? Did they have any input or comment at all? So we looked into records and we did find that signage and pavement markings was reviewed and approved by the Broward County Traffic Engineering Department. When it comes to FDOT, what was done by FDOT, they did the review and approved some turn lanes, which might be shown in here further south of Festival Street. So there is some driveways and turn lanes review and approval that was done, but not necessarily the black lines that we see in here. That was not part of the... Milos, what you're showing up here, David, we don't see it on the screens. We don't see this on the screen. What's that? Well, what's behind us is not on the screens in front of us. Thank you. Okay, I'm sorry. So, yes, so FDOT did help out with some access management and approval and modification of the turn lanes that are south of Festival Street, but did not review any markings on Festival Street itself. That was done by Broward County Traffic Engineering. Was FDOT aware of this streetscape project of ours in conjunction with the park that we opened? Yes, they were aware because we did share the need for access management and turn lane modifications. Okay, thank you. Milos, follow up. May I ask another question of Milos? Yes, go ahead. Go ahead, Vice Mayor. Thank you. So when I'm reading the June 30, 2025 letter, in the background area, it makes reference to the fact that pavement surface markings is critical for the overall effectiveness of automated vehicle operations as automated vehicle technologies rely heavily on consistent traffic control devices. Now, I know that Waymo is currently operating in Miami, and they're doing a pilot project in Orlando. To your knowledge, were there any autonomous vehicle operations underway at the time we undertook the painting of any of these intersections? Not to my knowledge. Do you know if any of them were contemplated or if there were any applications in at that time? I am on it. Or for that matter, if FDOT had approved autonomous vehicle operations in the state of Florida? I'm not sure, Mr. Vice Mayor. Okay, thank you. Mayor. Yes, go ahead, Ben. Thanks, Milos. With the Las Olas and Almond intersection, so if I heard you right, you said FDOT was aware of the pavement markings. I heard you right. They were aware of the project itself because we needed their help with access management and turn lane modifications and whatnot. Great. Prior to the letter, received any objection or concerns noted from FDOT about these? Not until this time. Okay. So how long were they in existence until approximately? From 2019. Okay. So it's been about six years. So about six years, nothing, and then all of a sudden. Okay. Great. How about the other three? Was there any FDOT awareness of the other three, do you think? So I'm not sure if they were aware, but there was nothing that was communicated to the city up until August 21st. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Ben. And just to add additional context to these particular markings, in particular, number one, the Sebastian Street area. So I met with the then district secretary, Mr. O'Reilly, and the reason why I met with him is because at the time, I wanted to put a rainbow crosswalk on A1A, right there at Sebastian Street. And because we were anticipating a pride parade and also in recognition of the fact that Sebastian Street has become sort of the unofficial beach for the LGBT community. He said, no way, Jose, can you do it there because it's on a state road and it's not in conformity with state requirements. I said, well, what about right there next to A1A? He said, I don't care what you do there. He says, it's not our road and you can do whatever you want. Those are the words out of his mouth. He's not the current secretary. We've heard no disagreement from that policy ever since then. This is the first time we've heard of that. So it's not like we went out there willy-nilly in the middle of the night and started painting up the streets. Everything was done in compliance with and in cooperation with members of the state. Now, having said that, I also read the newspaper. I know one of the few that still do that. And I read, I believe yesterday, that our governor said, well, whatever the policy was then is not the policy now. And we now are changing the policy and we don't want any street markings. Well, if that's the case, now we know it. I wish we had known it a little sooner than just last week. We're asking us for compliance by next Thursday. And it's kind of a little draconian to take this approach. Like all of a sudden the streets are not safe because we have markings in the middle of them. But anyway, it is what it is. It's politics, right, folks? But tonight I thought it would be a good opportunity for the commission to weigh in on this because I don't think the city manager should make that decision. And I don't think I should make that decision. I think the commission needs to make that decision of how to respond to the letter of August 21st. Now, having said that, I do think that the public should weigh in on it, right, because this commission doesn't like to make any decisions unless we hear from the public, right? Okay. So quite a few people have signed up to speak. Like I said, I'll give everyone two minutes. If you decide your opinion has already been voiced, you can also pass on it. And so I just want to make sure that this commission feels comfortable in knowing what the expression of the community is, what the voices are saying, and so how we can respond to the directive that has been given to us by the Florida Department of Transportation. So what I normally do is I name three people so that the first person, please come up and speak, and then the other two will be standing behind that person so that we don't have to wait for a person to keep coming up and delay the proceedings. So with that being said, the first people to have signed up, Troy Liggett, followed by Lester Tylewski, followed by Molly Taylor. Mayor, I think city manager, is Commissioner Beasley Pittman on the line now? She is currently on. Okay, Mayor, so I think she is on the line. Commissioner Beasley Pittman, is there any comment you want to make before we begin public comment? I'm going to wait because I couldn't get connected, but I'm on now, and I don't want to be redundant. So I'll yield to hearing our neighbors, and then I'll make my response once they have said their part. So I'm good right now. Okay, great. Thank you. Troy. Now, at the bottom of the speaker is a button that you need to push in order for the speaker to be perfect. Mr. Mayor, members of the commission, thank you for giving us this opportunity to speak out on this issue. I'm the president of the Middle River Terrace Neighborhood Association here in Fort Lauderdale, which is between Wilton Mannerts and downtown Fort Lauderdale. I'm here as an individual, not as the president of our neighborhood association, because this has come so quickly. We haven't even had a chance to talk about it as an association. But I can tell you that the members that I've talked to of my neighborhood do not appreciate this, what the state is doing to our city. And I will say it is beyond that. They don't respect this decision because it's so transparent about what's going on here. It's hateful and it's hurtful, hurting, to those of us in the LGBT community who try to participate and make our city better with these beautiful, very limited, very decent, not hurting the traffic pattern in our city. And the state would come down on us by doing this. I didn't hear from you how much money we might lose from this. I know I would be very disappointed if the city took the initiative to paint over these. As a taxpayer, if the city bills this, go for it. I think the city attorney and the city should pursue every legal avenue to protest this. I don't know if it's a First Amendment issue. I don't know what we can do. But as an attorney, I know that there are always ways. There are certain political people who will sue over anything, and I think the city should hear. So thank you very much. Thank you. Lester, followed by Molly Taylor, followed by Al Berry. Commission, citizens, can you hear me? Yep. Okay, first of all, hands up for everyone that has seen these locations within the last week. Okay. Sebastian Street, currently under development. Half that flag is gone. The rest is covered by mud. Very invisible. These locations over here, due to the way they were constructed, because we have hot and cold weather, they're different colors, they have expanded and detracted at different levels. They're all cracked up. I don't know if you can hear me on that. My point simply being that these are no longer items of value. They're eyesores. They either need to be replaced or they need to be gone. One or the other. Well, let me, can I enter? No, I'm not finished. No, I know you're not finished. I'm not finished. I want my two minutes. I'll give you your time. I'll give you your time. Okay. Don't worry about it. Go for it. I just want to, I want to correct you on something. The flag itself has been, has deteriorated because of construction in the area. That's what I just said. Let me finish. But the contractor has indicated that they will pay for the complete restoration of that flag. So. Issue solved. Okay. So it doesn't cost the taxpayers a nickel to restore the sign. Issue solved on the flag. So you may continue. So at this point, this is a future item. Within the next half a year, the flag will be redone. Legal issue. These items apparently were installed without proper interaction with the state governing bodies that control this. That's not true. Well, then why can they not remain? Why is the law not visible? I think that's what we're here to ask. All right. So if we're going to spend our money, you're, we're welcome to spend our money. But if it was done in the proper manner in the first time, this would not be a current issue. You know, the final thing is we have so much homelessness here and everybody showed up for a minor issue in the city. Thank you for your attention, citizens. Yes. May I? Well, wait a minute. Wait a minute. I've never seen you show up, Lester, for any homelessness meetings. But you did show up for this. So apparently it means something to you. Right. I haven't seen him since his failed runs for office years ago on the Central Beach Alliance. All right. All right. Let's, let's keep it, keep it clean here. Keep it clean. May I? I, I, I, I need, I need to address something that he said, though, because it's wrong what he said and about the fact that these are not safe and no one checked them out and no one did them. And I would ask the city clerk, can you just put up that slide entitled Asphalt Art Safety Study? This is very important because the state's premise is that these are not safe in terms of traffic. And that's why we have to make sure that people understand why they are safe. While they're putting this up, I'm going to tell you that this is called Asphalt Art Safety Study. Historical Crash Analysis and Observation Behavior Assessment at Asphalt Art Sites. This was done in April, 2022 by Bloomberg Philanthropies. And I will tell you that if you look, it's very interesting because this was a national, national study. The data is right there. And if you look at it, and it's not up there now, but I will just tell you that on page seven, and we can make this available to anyone that wants this because it's a really interesting read. If you look at what this report says, it is so obvious that any time you have any kind of markings on the road, the incidence of accidents just dramatically goes down. People slow down. They take their time to notice what is on the roadway. And many, many cities can show you the statistics of how all of these areas are much less. Now, if you go deeper into this report, you will actually see, believe it or not, on page 14, two of the 17 sites were, how interesting, Terramar Street and Breakers Avenue and Riamar Street and Breakers Avenue. This was in a national study, and if you go further, it shows you how dramatically reduced the number of accidents are at these sites along with the other 15 sites in this study. So I recommend everybody gets a copy of this. My office will be very happy to supply it if you reach out to us. But it's incredible how detailed this is and how obvious it is that the premise for which the state is trying to come down on us is totally ludicrous, ridiculous, and is not grounded in data and facts. And we have to just remember that. Thank you, Mayor. Molly. Could I ask Milos a question? Go ahead. Sorry, Molly. Sorry, it'll be quick. Milos, thank you. In terms of the four locations, to your understanding, when all four locations were installed, did we follow all appropriate city, county, state, federal guidelines in the installation? So my understanding, based on the research that we did, is that, again, when it comes to Sebastian Street, that was the internal city process. The same for Breakers Avenue and when it comes to the street art itself, right? Breakers Avenue, same for those two locations. And finally, the fourth location for Las Solas, would it go through review of our account? Excellent. So it's yes, right? It's appropriately constructed and followed appropriate guidelines. Internal for three locations and including external for the fourth one. Great. Thank you. Thanks, Milos. Thanks, Mayor. Okay. Okay, Molly. Back to me. Good evening. Do you want to call out the next three people so they're ready? Well, I need to take a pause. So right after you and the next person, I'm going to take a pause. I want to call the city attorney up. Okay. I'm Molly Taylor. I'm here representing the neighborhood Coley Hammock Homeowners Association. We have done a poll among our board and I have a letter to read, so I will be there. Okay. Sure. Go ahead. Dear y'all, the Coley Hammock Homeowners Association firmly opposes any intervention by the state or federal government in matters that are rightfully within the authority of our local city government. Our city's decisions are made in full compliance with both local and state law, and it is essential that this authority remain respected. Specifically, decisions regarding the painting of crosswalks or streets are matters of municipal jurisdiction and should not be subject to interference from the governor or state agencies. This is not an issue of sexual orientation or identity. Rather, it is a fundamental matter of local self-governance and the right of our community through its elected officials to determine what best serves its citizens. Okay. Thank you. Thank you so much. Al? Do I have to push any buttons or anything, or am I good? No. You're good. I'm good. Just don't push my buttons, okay? There you go. I do not think that, I'm sorry, I think that everybody here will agree this is not about rainbows, which originally symbolized God's promise not to destroy the world again. I believe that if that were what they still stood for, we would not be here. We would not be getting rid of them. It is also not about safety, as quite frankly was just stated, because there are studies that support the artwalks reducing accidents. We are a diverse nation with many different beliefs and cultures, and I believe that they all need to be protected, they need to be supported, and they need to be represented. The moment that we demonize and attempt to end one, all others are at risk. Thank you. We should not be deciding to keep or end our crosswalks. We should be seeking a way to include them as part of who we are as a people and a nation. That diversity is what makes all of us better, and if we can't see that, we are at risk of losing an important part of what we should be supporting. Changing the rules without due process is wrong, and not what we should ever be about, regardless of the situation. Giving in to threats and intimidation only lead to more threats and more intimidation. I'll wrap this up. Okay. So if not rainbows, where do we say enough? Where do we stop? Thank you. Thank you. I'm going to take a pause here just a moment. I want to call Paul Bengel, who's in our city attorney's office. I think there perhaps needs to be some clarification on the legal aspect of this, and Paul, could you please give us a little explanation about how the law would be applied here? I'd be glad to. Thank you. Could you pull the microphone a little bit further down? Yeah, perfect. I'd be glad to. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners. Paul Bengel, City Attorney's Office. I have a, I'll try to make it as short as I can, a presentation on the law and some options that you may want to consider. So I'll start with the statute in question. In a nutshell, it provides that the FDOT may direct the removal of any purported traffic control device, and that's an important term, that fails to meet the requirements of the section. The statute provides for 14 days' notice and hearing. Some of this that I've prepared has already been discussed, and some of this will be a little technical, so please bear with me. So by way of background, the law requires all official traffic control devices installed by any public body to conform with the manual and specifications published by FDOT. And this is where the definition becomes important. Official traffic control device is defined as all signs, signals, markings, and devices not inconsistent with this chapter, placed or erected by authority of a public body or official having jurisdiction for the purpose of regulating, warning, or guiding traffic. It's further defined as all signs, signals, markings, channelization devices, or other devices that use colors, shapes, symbols, words, sounds, and or tactile information for the primary purpose of communicating a regulatory warning or guidance message to road users on a street, highway, pedestrian facility, bikeway, pathway, or site roadway open to public travel. The Florida Green Book, which is the Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards for Design, Construction, and Maintenance for Streets and Highway, provides as follows. It says, do not apply, it currently says, I should say, do not apply pavement or surface art on travel lanes, paved shoulders, bridges, intersections, crosswalks, or sidewalks. Pavement or surface art is defined as surface markings that are not in direct support of traffic control or public safety. Now, to give you an idea of what the city's challenge could look like, which of course I'd prefer to do in private, but I can't because of the Sunshine Law. As I mentioned earlier, the statute provides for the removal of, quote, purported traffic control devices. It doesn't mention removal of payment or surface art. So you have the prohibition in the manual, but in terms of enforcement and removal, it addresses purported traffic control devices. So there's also a question. And that's even the current regulation, too. Is that what you're stating? Current statute. Current statute. Okay. Thank you. So there's also a question whether the markings, at least the ones that were installed between around 2014 to 2019 in different stages are legal non-conforming and whether the Florida Green Book allowed the markings at the time of their installation. For example, I looked at the 2016 and, of course, with a quick meeting, there wasn't a lot of time to do a lot of research. But I did look at the 2016 edition of the Florida Green Book and I didn't find that prohibition. So there's also statute that provides as follows. Chartered municipalities shall have original jurisdiction over all streets and highways located within their boundaries except state roads and may place and maintain such traffic control devices which conform to the manual and specifications of the Department of Transportation upon all streets and highways under their original jurisdiction as they shall deem necessary to indicate and to carry out the provisions of this chapter or to regulate, warn, or guide traffic. As everyone knows, there's an agreement with the county in that regard. So as to the progress, let's just talk about the progress pride flag for a moment in particular. So Sebastian Street is adjacent to a construction site, as was mentioned, and city ordinance requires restoration of the street, which would include restoration of the flag. So then the question becomes, in light of the FDOT letter, should the progress pride flag be restored? I can't predict, obviously, how the state would react. We can probably guess. One idea, though, I thought of if the contractor is willing would be to provide the city the funds that it would take to restore the, and you mentioned this, to restore the flag in order for the city to use it either as the city sees fit or to place them into some kind of escrow for later use. I've thought of some of the city's options. And I'll tell you what, why don't you hold that? We'll come back to that. And when we're ready to have deliberation. Sure. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Paul. Mayor, can I just ask you more questions? You can ask. Paul, I just want to ask you something because you've been looking at this from a legal perspective. So some of the quotes that we've been hearing about from the governor and also FDOT are things like, we quote, we will not allow our state roads to be commandeered for political purposes. So when we hear that, is that our state roads meaning every single road in the state or just our, quote, state roads? I don't know what's meant by that because the manual does apply to public streets or public roads in order to have uniformity statewide. I don't know what is meant by that, though. Okay. Because I also don't know what it means. I also have heard from the U.S. Transportation Secretary, Sean Duffy, has said, quote, taxpayers expect their dollars to fund safe streets, not rainbow crosswalks. Now, how does that play into everything you've read in terms of the manual, the green book, the standards, when what we're talking about is really not about safe streets at all because we know that the research shows us that these are safer. So how do those words play into what we find in what you just quoted from in terms of the design manual and the manual of uniform minimum standards and also the green book? I suggest that crosswalks are different. Our painted flag on the street is not being used as a crosswalk. It's not being used as a traffic controlled device. And so there's that difference. Crosswalks, I suggest, are different from what we have. But you're very convinced that where the flag is right now is not a crosswalk. It's not a street that's used. Actually, the only time a vehicle would pull into that area is to park because it's a dead end. You cannot get to A1A from Seabreeze there. You just pull in there to park, correct? Okay. So I think this, I think the city has a stronger case actually. I think we're getting into some minutiae that let's talk about after we hear from public comment and then we can talk about options and what the law says. Okay. Thank you. If you don't mind. Thank you. Mayor, if I may speak up for just one second because I want to touch Paul while we've got him up there. So one of the things, you know, again, Paul and I, you and I have been going back and forth on this since, you know, middle of July. So one of the things I know is that the Federal Highway Administration started raising concerns as early as 2011 that crosswalk art creates a false sense of security for drivers and pedestrians and that the manual on uniform traffic control devices discourages non-standard crosswalk parkings, especially bright colors. So while there is a Bloomberg study, which is generally, by the way, supportive of the arts in general, um, the federal government has discouraged the use of crosswalk art because they feel it's dangerous. Any comments about that? Just that I was out there. I saw it. And the flag that's painted on the road. I'm not, I'm sorry. I'm not, I'm referring to the flag. I'm talking to crosswalks specifically. So the federal government, USDOT generally discourages crosswalk markings in bright colors because they feel that they create a false sense of security for pedestrians. Thoughts? Only if you have any. Yeah, no, I, I'm a lawyer. I don't. Okay. Okay. Well, so I just want to be clear though. I know what your lawyers are all about. Irrespective of, of a Bloomberg study, the federal government has since 2011 discouraged decorative crosswalks because they feel it's a safety hazard for pedestrians. And Paul or Milos, do we have data on the two crosswalks? Is there really only two crosswalks here? Out of the four sites cited here, only two of them are actually crosswalks, correct? Yes, that is correct. So I think that, uh, your study, uh, commissioner showed some safety data in here. Uh, when it comes to other two locations, uh, whether it's a Bastion flag, we have, uh, zero crashes there. And we looked at, uh, the last 10 years, whether it's prior to installation or after there were really no crashes. And then for the Las Olas, there were about 20 crashes in total at Almond over the last 10 years from 2014 through 2024. And actually crash rates in terms of number of crashes, uh, per year did drop for Almond after the installation or implementation of our project for that location. Even with the elbow room right there. Right? Amazing. Amazing. Um, so Milos, do we have any, the Bloomberg was 2022. So do we have any data after 2022 for the two locations on breakers? Yes, we do. So, uh, when it comes to breakers, uh, looking at a real Mars street, there were 11 crashes total, uh, from 20 for, for the period of 10 years. Um, and, uh, there was only one injury crash. All other were property damage only. There were no pedestrian or bike involved crashes. And, uh, it looks like the same exact record for the Terramar street 11, uh, one injury crash, all other PD, PDO property damage only, no bike or pedestrians. So it seems to me that it's really not a false sense of security. It actually is security. Well, all right. That's a matter of opinion. So we'll get to that when we get to the, uh, uh, when we get to the opportunity to discuss the matter. Uh, let us continue. Alex, Alex Vallejo. Are you here? Followed by Fred, uh, Fegis followed by, um, uh, father Richard Vitale. Uh, Alex is Alex here. Alex speaks before Fred. Yes. You have to push the button right at the base, at the base, at the base, no at the base. Very good. All right. Good evening. Good evening. Uh, reason I'm here is it's simple. Uh, I have two daughters that I am deeply in love with because they are my daughters. And right now, they're asking me why, why people are not caring about them. We have visited these sites. Um, I don't see anything wrong with them. What I do see is the fact that they would, they want to take our money to cover this beauty, but we have so much dirt and so much everything else around us that that money could be used for. Um, okay. People's rights and their choices are not for us to choose on. It's theirs. My daughters chose their life. I appreciate and I love them for it. Um, I am an ally. Absolutely. 100%. But aside from that, I'm a taxpayer and I want my money to be used on right things, not to fringe on people's rights. Thank you. Thank you. Fred. Okay. Press here. Okay. Hi. My name is Fred Fegis. Uh, I've been a member of the greater Fort Lauderdale LGBT community for 40 years. I've also taught at FAU since 1986. And I'd like to make a couple of comments. First, this is not a matter of simple painting streets or bridges. It's a matter of visibility and affirmation of the LBG2 community, not only here in Fort Lauderdale, but in Florida and in our society in general. As a professor at Florida Atlantic University, I have been teaching courses on sexual and gender since 1986. I remember the first time I taught a course on LGB topics. I had eight students, all of them at some point are coming out. A number of the students, however, asked if they could register as an independent study. They don't want the class on their transcript. The last time I taught this class more than 30 years later, I had 40 students, the class limit. None of them asked to register as an independent study. Moreover, as the class progressed, I found out that over half the students were non-LGBT. When I asked them why they were taking the class, they said they had a family member, a friend, or even a parent who was LGBT. These were our allies. I trust the city council will deal with this matter in an appropriate way. However, I think that we have faced situations as a community where identity has been threatened. I think now we will face this squarely and we will use it as an opportunity to progress. We always emerge stronger and more alive. I look forward to how this crisis gives us an opportunity to say once again, we're here, we're queer, get used to it. Father Vitale, followed by Kate Driscoll, followed by Susan Horowitz. Mr. Mayor, distinguished commissioners, my fellow citizens, my name is Father Rich Vitale, and it is my humble privilege to be here to address you all on behalf of my congregation, Holy Angels National Catholic Church. We stand here today at a crossroads. I can't believe I actually got to make that joke. We stand here today at a crossroads, and we've talked a lot about safety this evening. Well, there's other types of safety beyond traffic safety. If you came and you visited my congregation and you looked through our doors, you would see, and I don't think they'd be upset at me for saying this, a congregation of largely LGBT people in their golden years who live in Fort Lauderdale, and they are transplants from many other places, from Michigan, from Ohio. They're here from conservative parts of Texas and of California. And they all came to the city of Fort Lauderdale, and they come to my church for one reason, safety. They came here because they found a community where they could be themselves with pride, where they could hold the hands of their life partners without fear. That's what this rainbow crosswalk means. It means when you come to our community, you are safe. Now, we are watching a federal government increased with increased authoritarian tendencies. And we are watching a governor who is dancing in his high-heeled boots to take his place. If we kowtow here, it will just creep. And that message will grow and grow and grow. That our community is no longer safe. So, it may come down to it, but I hope that you guys stand strong for our people who moved here to be protected, to be represented by this amazing city that we call home. Thank you. Kate? Hi, I'm Kate Driscoll. I'm here to talk about what some other people have said, but we all know that this isn't about crosswalks, right? We all know this is about groups of people who over the years have been bullied, disenfranchised, discriminated against, beaten, and in some instances even killed. And the Pulse crosswalk was not just a crosswalk. It was a memorial. 49 people lost their lives there because of hate. So, I don't want to hear the argument that, you know, straight white men don't get a day or a month to celebrate them. Because every day in America is for straight white men. And it's been that way since the beginning of time. Women, brown and black people, gay, the gay community, we've all had to fight for our rights. We're still fighting for our rights. So, if we want to put up a monument, if we want to paint a crosswalk, if we want to wear a shirt or a button, and it offends the fragile male ego of people like Hegseth and Trump and Stephen Miller, that's just too bad. Because we're not going away. In fact, we're all joining forces. So, they started this fight, but we are all together now, and we are determined to finish it. Susan Horvitz, followed by Paul Reineson, followed by Chris Nelson. Push the button. I'm here as an ally. I think this is a ruse to eliminate, once again, our statewide community's solidarity with all members of this community. It saddens me. In particular, the prior speaker mentioned the Pulse nightclub. Seeing the governor come out and other politicians come out and say, we stand in solidarity. And then to turn around nine years later and erase that crosswalk just had me in tears. It is not the direction that this community should be moving in. Erase history. It is un-American and unpatriotic what the governor and this administration is trying to do here. I object to the removal of these beautiful public art spaces that I believe stand for solidarity. There is no basis in fact that this street art is creating a hazard. The most recent studies support that. And that's why I think we can stand and say that those facts are untrue. I stand in solidarity with this community. And I ask this community to stand in solidarity with others who are trying to stand up such as Key West and Delray. And I hope that together we are able to create a powerful voice. Thank you. Is Paul here? Followed by Chris Nelson, followed by Piper Spencer. Good evening. Mayor, Vice Mayor on the TV, Commissioners, Paul Reneisen, Landings, District 1. I've lived there since 1993. Do you need the address? No, we're good. Good. Ladies and gentlemen, it reminds me of what it might be like to be a Ukrainian right now because you need to have people that you can follow into battle. And I'm hoping the mayor and the commissioners and particularly my vice mayor, who's my commissioner, will go on record tonight that they're not going to legally challenge this hearing because they're not present. And I have to wonder why, but that we can move forward and get this done. This is the line in the sand. The nation is going to be looking for Lauderdale. This is it. So all of us need to stand up when the people come out of the woods against us for standing up for LGBT community in Fort Lauderdale because they will. The vice mayor has already hinted a little bit here and there about the battle that he himself might fight against us in the support the LBGTQA community. And I'd like to hear the vice mayor go on record. He supports us in the LBGTQA community. I haven't heard that from the vice mayor, but I live in that district and we have plenty of people in our very community that are LBGTQA people. So vice mayor, I challenge you, go on record tonight, please. I will go on record right now. I support the LBGTQ community. There has never been any doubt about that. One last thing. In 1993, I stood before the commission at that time. George Hanberry was the city manager and he was taking all the blows about getting speed, whatever they call the attorney called. These speed control devices? Speed humps. Yes. You're looking at the guy. We prevailed in August. George Hanberry resigned after saying to do speed tables. We wanted a more advanced type of traffic control for the landings. But those speed tables spread all over the city. And if you look at it, if you challenge these crosswalks and paint, you're going to take out the speed tables because it's the same kind of look. There you go. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Chris Nelson. Hello. Hello, Mayor, Commissioners. Chris Nelson for Lauderdale. And first, I would just like to send prayers to Minneapolis, to these poor children that were murdered in an obvious hate crime this morning directed at Christians by a deranged man and sending prayers to them. I would just like to point out that this is not something that's targeting the LGBT community. This is something, this was passed unanimously in the Senate, this bill, HSB 1662. So maybe take it up with the Senate that this thing was passed unanimously and that new guidance has now come down that is saying to remove these works of art or activist banners from the roadways. Now, this also includes Blue Lives Matter road art. It includes some art that was done by children. This is not something that's directed at the LGBT community. And I hear people attacking Governor DeSantis who actually just signed a law allowing for nearly $400 million for a proper Pulse nightclub memorial. I don't know if you knew that. And now, when I said this when you did this, when you put this on the road, this flag, which is the trans pride flag, has been burned out on so many times, it is now unrecognizable. It's not the construction. It's people coming down and burning out over it. The street is not a place to put a flag. It's not a place to put, you wouldn't put the American flag on the street. You wouldn't put a Christian flag or a Jewish flag on the street because those groups would be up in arms about it because it's going to be driven over. Nobody's trying to say take down the rainbow flags when you have them waving, things like that. But I believe they're not. It's not happening. You see them all. You're going to see them at the gay pride parade this year. And I warned when you did this, this was, and I think this is what you wanted, Mayor Dean. You wanted to provoke. And right now, you're going to have to remove these flags. It's just the law. Piper, Piper Spencer, followed by Laura Sue Wilorowski, followed by Jennifer Jones. May I, I just want to know, I, I, shh, shh, shh, shh, you don't need to do this. Come on. Okay. What are you saying? I'll go for a second. Yeah, so we'll do it in a while. I think I got something. Hi. Go ahead. Uh, good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioner. I'm Piper Spencer. Um, I understand from a messenger that you're not a fan of the ukulele, and I understand that. I love ukuleles. So I left it, I left it over there out of respect. Thank you. But I did come here today to support my friend who's worked on a song to support our community, to support my trans, um, daughter, to support all the beautiful people in Fort Lauderdale, and just to let them know that we have their back. If you can do it in a minute and 35 seconds, you're good. Laura Sue's going to take your spot. Okay, well, I was concerned that you thought maybe she was about the same level of ukulele player that I am, and I, because you heard me in May, she's about 10, 100 times as good as me. So if that's your concern. I'm telling you, your time is going to be up in a minute and 18 seconds. Okay, but we both, we both signed up for, so can we have like two times together? I'm telling you, this is not a show, please. This is a... No, this song was inspired by, um, the civic meeting in Gainesville on the same topic, and we want to thank you very much for taking this seriously and giving us the opportunity to speak. There's a rainbow right in the Florida sky, can't paint it away in the dead of night. When the sun shines to light our way, you'll see that you can't take our colors away, can't take our colors away, can't take our colors away. There's a rainbow over Mickey town, where we colored in the white with black and brown, colored in the streets in the light of day. Sorry, but you can't take our colors away, can't take our colors away, can't take our colors away. Rainbow spirit is strong in Fort Lauderdale, in the skies and the streets, yes, without fail. People standing up for the ones cut down, raising flags all over this town, you can't take our colors away, can't take our colors away. All the colors of Florida, people, animals, and trees, the murals in the streets, we are a rainbow of diversity. There's a rainbow all across our state, try as you might, we will not hate. You can try to erase us, but it won't take, cause you can't take our colors away, can't take our colors away. Can't take our colors away, can't take our colors away, can't take our colors away. Thank you. Song by the great Shanna Smith. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Okay. That's a hard act to follow, I will say. Can you hear me okay? Your name is again? Yes. Good evening, commissioners, vice mayor, mayor. My name is Jennifer Jones. I am with Hope and Action Indivisible. We're a local Broward group. We have about 150, we have about 150 active members, and I'm speaking for that group as well as for myself personally, but they all object to the removal of these street paintings. I've lived here in Broward County with my partner, Lynn Cunnings, of over 20 years. She has a nonprofit here called Flippany that does amazing work. I work in the nonprofit sector as well. We've given a lot to this city, right? I mean, we've served the city as probably everyone here has. We've raised two beautiful children who are now successful adults. And I'm here tonight because the rainbow crosswalks more than paints on the street. It's a symbol of visibility, inclusion, and pride, like many people have said. We wouldn't need to paint rainbow flags on our streets if we hadn't been persecuted in the first place. The rainbow pride symbol is a rainbow of humanity created in 1978 after Harvey Milk and so many others in San Francisco had to fight like hell in the 70s for gay people to have the freedom to be themselves, to love who they wanted to love, and to simply exist. So to respond to the gentleman that says, why is Governor DeSantis doing this? Well, it's very clear. He has said himself that he doesn't want woke politics commandeering our roads. Hear it from his mouth. He's very clear about why he's doing this. It's not like that's propaganda. It's from his own mouth. We don't hurt people. We don't push our agenda on anyone. We're just here trying to live. But when you come for us, we will stand up and we will not back down. So our community knows what's at stake. And if we don't fight now, we'll only give DeSantis and Trump and others permission to push us even further. So I'm really, really asking you to please, please stand against this. And, you know, again, while Floridians are struggling to pay for food, housing, homelessness issues, instead of addressing those crises, we're dealing with this. And I just really want to say thank you for letting me speak. Thank you. Alfredo, Alfredo Olvera, Mary Eakins-Duran, and Sister Robin Merrill. Good evening, Mayor and Commissioners. My name is Alfredo Olvera, resident of Florida District 1. I'm president of the Dolphin Democrats. I'm here to speak in support of the Rainbow Crosswalk on Sebastian Street and to oppose any outside interference in our city's right to decide how our streets reflect our community. The FDOT issued a memo claiming the Rainbow Crosswalks are a distraction and that they jeopardize automated vehicle technologies. Think about that. Follow the money. The state is prioritizing self-driving cars over the lived experience of real people. There is no crash data providing Rainbow Crosswalks are unsafe. In fact, studies have shown the opposite. Fewer accidents occur at Rainbow Crossings compared to plane once. The safety argument is a smokescreen. What this is really about is erasing LGBTQ plus visibility under the guise of technical compliance. And here's the deeper problem. This crosswalk was originally FDOT approved, sort of. To now revoke that approval without evidence undermines trust in government and strips away our local authority. Cities should have the right to decide what belongs on their streets and not to be dictated to by Tallahassee or Washington. Our streets are for people first, for residents, families, and visitors who see that rainbow as more than pain. It's a beacon of belonging, a visible promise that for little stands for inclusion and diversity. Calling it a distraction erases its true purpose, safety, visibility, and pride. The state and federal governments are chipping away the rights of local municipalities at a lightened speed. Now is the time to stand for what's right. I urge the commission to stand firm, appeal this order, defend our city's right to reflect the values of our people. Do not let our crosswalks or our voice be erased. Don't let your legacy be one of compliance without bigotry and hate. Thank you. With bigotry and hate. Mary Aikens-Durand followed by Sister Robin Merrill. Hi. Good evening. My name is Mary Aikens-Durand. I'm a longtime area resident and a member of Equality Florida staff, the state's largest LGBTQ civil rights organization. On behalf of our 5,731 supporters in Fort Lauderdale, I'm asking you to defend the city's long history of welcoming LGBTQ residents and defending LGBTQ visibility. Please reject this power grab from Tallahassee. Let's be abundantly clear. Governor DeSantis' action is about extortion and censorship. It has nothing to do with public safety. This is the latest in his campaign to ban books, whitewash history, and attack LGBTQ people. And he'll threaten the major projects that serve us to get his way. Our street art is more than a decoration. It is a visible reminder that LGBTQ people belong here, that they are seen and welcomed, and that Fort Lauderdale values inclusion. This is not about traffic safety. A Florida-based study found that crosswalk art improves safety, resulting in a 10% decrease in drivers running stop signs and a 6% increase in drivers coming to a full stop at intersections. The city of St. Petersburg found a 70% decrease in overall crashes after a mural was added to an intersection, while adjacent intersections saw an increase in crashes over the same period. Fort Lauderdale does not stand alone in resisting this censorship. Cities like Delray Beach and Key West are already pursuing all administrative avenues to resist this power grab and investigating further legal action. Fort Lauderdale can do so too. Please do not bow to the state's bully tactics. Explore every viable avenue, whether administrative or in the courts, to resist this extortion and fight to create cities that match the values of residents. There are several steps you can and should take. Immediately exercise the city's legal right to an administrative hearing and explore the legal options in civil court. Make the state defend why our visibility is, quote, unsafe and when the data proves the opposite and fight for local control. Immediately seek an extension for notifying the state of compliance and for artwork removal until the conclusion of the administrative review. Demand a waiver for the rainbow installation and for our community because the visibility is a priority. Regardless of the outcome, commit to LGBTQ visibility that is of equal or greater visible value. Build back gayer. For every rainbow that DeSantis covers, our community will raise more. Bigger, older, and louder. Commissioners, this vote is about more than paint on pavement. It's about whether we stand firm in the values of inclusion and building a welcoming city. It's about resisting Tallahassee power grabs. No one wants our cities managed from Tallahassee. Please pursue all measures to preserve visibility for the LGBTQ community and combat state government censorship and overreach. Thank you. Sister Robin Merrill, followed by John Barrett, followed by Robert Keston. Hi, I'm Sister Robin Haynes Merrill. I am the artist that was hired by the city to do the intersections on Breakers Avenue. I would like to be able to speak with you all and field questions on the proposal I sent, but also regarding this artwork. But also, you may want to deal with these separately. I think that there's different legal issues regarding the intersections, the two intersections that I painted, and also with the Sebastian Street. So, I welcome that discussion. Well, we're not, this isn't a point, this isn't an opportunity for us to discuss with you. Got it. You know, just here to hear your opinion, and then after that, the commission will have deliberations. Okay, I think it's also important to be aware, though, that that is public art, and I have rights as an individual artist. Those are my designs, and that's my artwork. So, I'm not saying it's better or worse than the flag on the street. I'm saying that I have legal rights to my art, and it is not allowed to be altered, damaged, or removed without my express permission and my involvement. So, I am here to work with y'all and to just talk through the facts. But there's a couple facts that I want to address regarding FDOT's involvement. So, that was, I had to spend so much time to do the FDOT regulations for that design. I had to redo it constantly in order to meet the requirements. They worked very closely. I worked very closely with all of it. So, this was a project under the Safe Streets Program of Florida. This was a project under Vision Zero, which was the state program. On the city level, this was called Connecting the Blocks. And furthermore, I was a member of the Congress on New Urbanism at the time that I did this. So, these crosswalks were used extensively through different seminars and conventions to talk about those exact intersections. So, I met all those requirements. I had to change the design repeatedly to do that. So, I just thought that's an important piece of information. It may not be in writing in the files, but I know it as the artist. All right. Can you conclude your remarks? Can you conclude your remarks because you're past the two minutes? Yeah. Okay, great. Thank you. Actually, Mayor, if I could, I'd like to ask a question to Sister Merrill. Yes, go ahead. So, Sister Merrill, thank you so much. I know you and I spoke before and had a very lengthy and thankfully respectful conversation regarding your artwork and what it meant to you and how you engaged to produce that and the volunteers that helped you. And I know you submitted what I thought was an incredibly thoughtful approach to how we might address this going forward if the decision is made to comply with state law. Could you talk about that a little bit? Sure. Thank you. The reason I said that my crosswalks are the artwork that I designed on Breakers might be treated differently than Sebastian Street is because this is year nine of the artwork that I created on Breakers. It needed repair quite a few years ago. That wasn't done because of a larger project that's slated for Breakers Avenue. So, if that Breakers Avenue project is going through, then these are going to be destroyed. I want to be the one to handle the artwork. I proposed a funeral of sorts, a ceremony. If that's the direction we're going to go as far as taking these out of existence, then I want to be that person who's in charge of doing that. Otherwise, I'd like to see these repainted on Breakers Avenue, but I don't think that that's a part of the plan. One way or the other, there's maintenance issues that need to be addressed. Thank you. I think your suggestion is incredibly thoughtful. And depending on how we go forward with this, I think it merits a lot of consideration. So, thank you very much. I appreciate it. Thank you very much. All right. Thank you. Is John Barrett here? He is not. Okay. Robert Keston, followed by Dr. Elizabeth King, followed by Aaron Lauer. Good evening, and thank you for doing this. I think that it is important. It's important for any number of reasons. One is, if we recall back in the 30s and 40s of the last century, there was a priest. And he made a famous poem that said, I didn't stand up for the socialists when they came for the socialists. He didn't stand up for the Jews because he wasn't a Jew. And when they came for him, there was no one left. This is standing up, and you should be commended for doing just that, because these people are standing up when people come for them. The other thing is that, as Fred Fugis had said before, education is important. We are, I represent Stonewall National Museum Archive and Library, and we represent education of our community. We have one of the largest archives in the nation. We have the largest library, and we do exhibits. If you don't know who you are, it makes it easier for them to take advantage of you. I invite every single one of you to come to the museum, see what we're doing, take a tour of the archive, know the history. Not too long ago, two different schools on two different days from Miami came to visit us. In both cases, not one student had ever heard of Anita Bryant. If you don't know your history, you get DeSantis. If you don't know your history, they cover over your roads. If they don't know your history, you won't see people like Dean and Stephen on commissions anymore. Stand up, be counted, and carry chalk wherever you go. Dr. King, good evening. Good evening. Do I have to press anything? No, I'm good. Hi, my name is Dr. Elizabeth King. I live in District 2 with the best commissioner around. Sorry. You pay me later, okay? I am here representing the Central Beach Alliance. I sit on the board, and I'm going to read this letter from the board. Esteemed mayor, vice mayor, and commissioners, the board of directors of the Central Beach Alliance, CBA, firmly rejects any interference by state or federal authorities in issues that fall squarely under the jurisdiction of our local city government. Our city's decisions are made in strict accordance with both local and state laws, and it is crucial that this authority be upheld and respected. We consider this action to be politically driven and lack genuine safety concerns. It represents an attack on particular groups by elected officials seeking to satisfy their political base. When such measures are implemented under the guise of safety, they affect everyone, regardless of political affiliation. This is why we strongly oppose the excessive intervention of the state of Florida and the federal government. In particular, decisions regarding the painting of the crosswalks or streets fall within municipal authority and should not be subject to interference from the governor or state agencies. The four street paving markings identified by Florida Department of Transportation lie within CBA boundaries. If their intention were truly to enhance safety, they would provide us with additional crosswalks and upgrade existing ones using a variety of methods. None of these measures have any relations to the color of the street or sidewalks. Pedestrians and motor vehicles can observe a flashing sign indicating people crossing or recognize the symbol, which is used widely, not only throughout the United States, but across the globe. Moreover, this is a fundamental issue of local self-governance and the right of our community through its elected representatives to determine what best serves its residents. Sincerely, the Central Beach Alliance Board of Directors. Thank you. Thank you. Aaron Lauer, followed by Paula Yukna, followed by Ted and Sarah. Good evening. My name is Reverend Aaron Lauer, and I am the senior pastor at the United Church of Christ, Fort Lauderdale, in the Coral Ridge neighborhood. And I am a resident of Middle River Terrace. And I stand before you this evening as a proud queer clergy person whose church welcomes all people of all sexual orientations and gender identities. This evening, I do not wish so much to speak to our city commission, but to the people of my community, the LGBTQ community, and our allies here in Fort Lauderdale and around the state of Florida. In 1 John, the apostle writes, There is no fear in love, because perfect love casts out all fear. My friends, our elected officials in Tallahassee want us to fear. They want us to be afraid, to shrink, to be silent, and to go away. As we have heard so much tonight, this is about more than just paint in an intersection. This is about trying to push a community of people back into the closet. But if anything is true about the LGBTQ community, it is that we are a people of love. We are a people who will not be intimidated or made afraid. The love that we have for one another is stronger than any tyrant. And we will keep loving and singing and dancing and celebrating and fighting for our rights, no matter how hard they try to erase us. Because, because our love is too big and bold and beautiful and fabulous to be erased. Amen, and God bless you all. Paula, good evening. One size fits all. Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners. First of all, I want to thank you, Mayor, for calling together this special commission meeting. I am a long-time, year-round resident of Fort Little Beach and a CBA board member for many years. And I am speaking on my own behalf. When I first started hearing what is going on in our state, I was sad. I was upset. But after I read the letter sent to our city of Fort Lauderdale from the Florida Department of Transportation, I got angry. And I'm getting angrier. I don't like being bullied. It reminds me when books were starting to be banned and we were threatened. And now the same thing is happening. None of us like being threatened. None of us like being bullied. We have to draw a line and say enough is enough, and this time is now. The four sites mentioned in the letter are not state roads. They are the city's roads. They are our roads. Other mayors in Florida are staying strong. The vice mayor of Delaware said, it is not about whether Delaware governs itself or whether Tallahassee can invade our streets, erase our culture, and dictate our future. The mayor of Delaware added, let's give it a shot and join cities like Key West who haven't buckled to Florida's ultimatum. So I am asking you, mayor and commissioners, don't buckle, stay strong, and fight for our rights. Ted and Sarah, followed by Julie Levy, followed by James Labrie. Hello, everybody. My name is Ted and Sarah. I'm telling you, she might be small, but I'm following a giant. I'm the president of the River Oak Civic Association. I just want to say, before I start my opinion, that I am for these crosswalks. I do not think they need to be painted over. That's my opinion. I think it's a power grab that I just do not agree with. But, and there's always a but, but my problem is some of the things about what the commission does otherwise. According, please keep it on message. We're here just to talk about the response to the secretary's letter. Okay, well you say that there is a culture war going against the LBGTQ community. When I say, you're saying people are fighting a culture war against some of our residents. You've taken away the basketball court on the beach, which is... I said, please keep it on message. If you can't stay on message, we can reserve your comments for another time. So please don't use this as a platform for your own agenda. Please respect the people that are here and respect the commission that want to hear strictly about the response to the FDOT letter. Okay, I guess I should have brought my ukulele. Then I could have been... Then I could have been all right. Well, you're here tooting... Well, all I hear is you're tooting your own horn. So, no, no, what I'm saying is this. I know what you're saying. Please stick to the FDOT letter response. The response, we're not here to talk about anything else. I'm very happy to hear what you have to say about other things, but not tonight. Well, then I guess... I guess we're done. Wait, did you not hear that I was in favor of the crosswalks when I first came up here? Okay, thank you. All right, I'm sorry you wouldn't want to listen to what I had to say. Thank you, Ted. Julie. Hi. Good evening. I am Julie Levy. I live in Boca Raton, though, not here. But I've been here a lot protesting with my group of Resist, and I love you guys. Anyway, first of all, art is used, I always believe, in healing and promoting well-being in people, and I think the art that's on the streets is beautiful. When I've seen it, it makes me feel great. I'm sure it helps other people with their emotions and healing and all that. But another thing is, I don't know why we have to, well, why it's hurting anybody, and why all of a sudden, all these years now, they decide to change the rules and, you know, take away the art, which I don't understand that at all. It doesn't make sense when there's other things going on in this country. Immigration, the shootings, shooting two children, killing them today at the church. They were praying. I mean, I don't understand that. So that's, you know, the issue should be more of, like, immigration and other things that are going on, climate change and all that. I don't understand why this is a big deal. It's not hurting anybody. To me, I just think it's, we're being bullied. They're telling us what to do. They're taking away our rights and our freedom, and I just think it's hurting people. All right. Thank you. James Labrie, followed by Michael Rayner, followed by the Count. Okay. Mayor Trent Allis, Vice Mayor Herbst, Commissioners Beasley, Pittman, Glassman, and Sorensen. My name is James Labrie. I've been a proud resident of Fort Lauderdale for nearly 23 years. I live in District 1. I am the Vice President of the Poinsettia Heights Civic Association. Tonight, I'm representing myself. With the current governor and supermajority in Tallahassee, we have witnessed books banned from our school libraries and restrictions placed on university courses, African-American history distorted, state statutes that override city ordinances and take away home rule, voting made more difficult with districts redrawn in ways that have disproportionately harmed communities of color, and now efforts to ban rainbow-colored crosswalks. These actions strip away freedoms, limit opportunities, and divide neighbors, all indicative of a government that wants to control people, not protect them. We don't know what the state will do if the city does not agree to the FDOT request for compliance. But we do know this about the governor. He is petty, mean-spirited, and vindictive. Retaliation by the state is very possible. So you're going to have to vote tonight. It's not going to be an easy one. But I also would like you to consider another vote. A vote that would unanimously condemn what the FDOT and the governor is asking you to do. And let's call it what it really is. Homophobic, discriminatory extortion. Thank you. Michael Rayner, followed by The Count, followed by Sean Hall. Good evening, Michael Rayner. First, Sabrina just texted me. There's a rainbow actually above us as we are meeting today. So I guess it's more than symbolic. You know, it's really hard to ignore what's going on. And, you know, from the moment when Trump got into the White House, we saw the erasure of Black Lives Matter right in Washington, D.C. from the street. We're seeing that in Pensacola. We're seeing also in St. Pete the erasure of also Black History Matters. It's the diversity of this whole country that's being erased slowly. And to me, that's what this symbolizes. It's also the erasure of art. It's almost like, you know, I used to have to babysit my little sister. And she watched Rainbow Bright. And it's like Murky Dismal's governor and president of the world. And taking all the color away. But, you know, this is fascism. It's wrong. And even if there are two things that could be true at the same time, even if this was for Waymo, for them to get their Jaguars that are automated to run around Miami to not be distracted, for an elitist class which doesn't help the homeless. But, you know, this isn't the way to do it. This certainly is not the way to do it. And we have seen time and time again from this governor the constant attacks. And if he actually wanted to improve our streets, he would invest and make sure that Broward Boulevard and other streets aren't flooding in the rains that we're getting, and actually invest in our infrastructures. But these are things that we're doing that have been proven to be safety measures, as Commissioner Glassman had pointed out with the study. And this is a bunch of BS. And it is time to fight back. And I think that the city should challenge it and appeal and follow through the process where it is given a time to appeal. All right. Thank you. The count here. The count followed by Sean Hall, followed by Representative Mitch Rosenwald. Congress shall make no law requiring an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of press or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for redress of grievances. Adopted December 15th, 1791, as American law, the First Amendment to our Constitution. Now, what is important is not what I've been hearing now. What is important for you, Mayor Trantellis, what is important for you, Commissioner Glassman, who's leading the way on this, and you, Commissioner Sorensen, who's a lawyer, is the fact that Gitlow versus New York in 1924 applied to the states the First Amendment as an incorporation through the due process clause of the 14th Amendment, although it does not apply to cities and counties. And I want to say something. There's a misunderstanding here. Cities and counties are created by the state legislature, which, in case you don't know, it is a bunch of right-wing, crazy right-wing, Christian Republicans who, you have no idea how bad they are. All right, stick to the message, please. And, and, what, Mayor, you have to file a lawsuit because these people are not gay people or friends of gay people looking at gay rights. They're American citizens covered by the First Amendment of the Constitution, which applies to the activities of the state of New, of New, of New Jersey, of Florida. The people in this room, the people in this room, each and every one of them individually, is entitled to the constitutional right that this, I don't want to say what I, I don't want to characterize what the, what the letter is, except I want to say one thing as a native Floridian who is over 80 years old. The F, the F in F dot for those people who are not involved in politics for 60 years in this state does not stand for Florida. It stands for another word if you get my drift. All right, all right. Please, please conclude your comments, please. File the lawsuit. Okay, thanks. You people each have to give 10 bucks to help fund it because the government isn't, you're going to have to volunteer, you're going to have to go out, and you're going to have to raise money because believe me, they're going to try to keep public money away from this lawsuit. If you're really serious, if you're really serious about the First Amendment, then you've got to give 10 bucks, you've got to find a decent lawyer who's willing to take the case if the city won't sue. Okay. Sean, followed by Representative Mitch Rosenwald, followed by Elijah Manley. How you doing? Hello, everyone. I'm Sean Hall. Shh, shh, shh. I want to say that I am an ally for the community, so I appreciate everyone here today, but I had an idea, though. I mean, obviously, we know that the basketball court is an issue today, and I won't politic that, but I was saying, hey, as a concession, we could do the basketball courts and the LGBT flag on the courts. Vote community to save. I think it's a fair, you know, ask, but seriously, though, I do think that this ask from the federal government is definitely a bully move, and I think that our commission should vote against this for our citizens here, and, you know, hopefully you guys make the right decision. Thank you. All right, thank you. Representative Rich Rosenwald, followed by Elijah Manley, followed by Michael Albetta. Good evening, Mayor Trantalis, Vice Mayor Herbst, Commissioner Beasley-Pittman, Commissioner Glassman, and Commissioner Sorensen, and thank you. This was a meeting that was dire to have. My name is Mitch Rosenwald, newly elected state representative for House District 98, which includes Fort Lauderdale, and I'm going to tell you, my friends, this is one state official who has Fort Lauderdale and yours back. I represent one of four out members. We're at up to four now in the Florida legislature, and I will speak on behalf of all that they are all here in spirit supporting my comments tonight. I do encourage the commission, this is not, maybe it's easy, maybe it's a hard decision to deliberate on, to oppose FDOT's request and explore all legal and administrative options that you have at your disposal. These artistic crosswalks has been determined are not dangerous. In fact, we just learned a night two aren't even crosswalks. So whether the pride flag is ultimately removed or not, guess what? My chalk from Amazon came in the mail two hours before I came to this meeting, but we will not be removed. Instead of focusing on real issues for Floridians like affordability, this is a blatant attempt to literally erase our community, but that's a grave miscalculation. The LGBT community and all of our allies, and I'm so happy to see all of the allies in the room. We're resilient, we're proud, we're strong, and we're permanent. We will outlast any hateful policy. I do my best in the Florida legislature, and we will be here and outlast any hateful policy. So please oppose this and explore all administrative and legal options at Fort Lauderdale's disposal. Thank you all. Thank you. Elijah. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor, Commissioners. I'm here because DeSantis and the Florida Department of Transportation wants to erase our community, starting with the crosswalk at Sebastian Beach. But this crosswalk is not just paint, it's pride, it's about our history, it's about our story. And my opinion is very clear, and excuse me, Mr. Mayor, but if DeSantis and his puppets want to remove the crosswalk, then they should do it them damn selves. And we will repaint it. So we've sat here under this fascist regime, and I watched as they ban our books, they ban our black history, our health care, our stories, and I asked myself, my God, what is happening to our country? Where can we exist? If we can't even exist in our own city, we can't exist in this country, where can we be ourselves? Where can we express ourselves? And so I saw Commissioner John Herbst standing in the picture at the unveiling of the pride crosswalk, and I have to say, Commissioner looked good in that photo. But hear me, action is better than words, and pictures don't protect people. So if you stand with us, I'm asking everyone on this commission to vote with us. We don't need silence. We don't need excuses. We need a city that fights for its people and that doesn't fold to Tallahassee or to Washington. So let me make it plain. Gay people are here in this city. LGBTQ people are here in this city. We've been here. We're not going anywhere. Not today, not tomorrow, and not ever. And we don't just live here. We vote here. So if you're giving us into this attack, if you sell us out, then we will vote you out. If you erase us in the street, then we will erase you at the polls. And there's so much that our state government and our local government could be doing. Tackling the affordability crisis. Fighting the 50s roads so that people could drive their bikes down them safely. We don't have time to be talking about crosswalks because this fascist regime in Tallahassee want to silence our voices. So my message to Ron DeSantis and his puppets at FDOT, leave our city alone. We're not giving that to you. Michael Albetta followed by Ann Wiley followed by John Cotter. Good evening, Mr. Mayor and commissioners and city manager. I am Michael Albetta. I'm the president of Lake Ridge Civic Association since 2012. Lake Ridge is, for those in the audience, is north of the Hustler store on Northeast 15th Avenue. Now you got the idea. So, once again, Mr. Trentalis, mayor, we're in a fight again. A little institutional knowledge. In 2007, we had something called the homosexual toilets. And then you, Mr. Commissioner, well, then you, the commissioner, we stood united together and we brought the community out. And we told, gave the message clearly that we're not standing for this. Who was with us, too, folks, was the Lake Commissioner Carlton Moore. And please pay attention to this, Dr. Pittman, because we need your support. He stood and looked at me and says, Albetta, I'm here united with you and the community because if it's not you folks, it's my folks. And let me tell you something. That word stands clear. And God rest his soul. Speed it up. As the president of Lake Ridge Civic Association, and you pointed out very clearly, Commissioner Glassman, that the paintings on the streets slow down traffic. Factual information. We took National Award, if I stand correct, Milos, and also with the DOT. And we took a statewide award regarding the paintings in the street and slowing down the traffic. We took the traffic, and this is factual. This is not by the counters and by the speed counters. It went from 60 miles an hour down to 30 miles an hour on Northeast 15th Avenue. It's a fact. Yes, there are paintings there. We painted in the street. So, what I'm trying to say is, on behalf of Lake Ridge Civic Association, the entire board, they took a vote that definitely opposed to the paintings, opposed to DeSantis and the rhetoric and the nonsense and his fear tactics and his letters. So, please, I ask the entire commission to vote in favor of what we need to do. Thank you. Thank you. Ann Wiley. Mayor, Commissioners, Ann Wiley, I've been a resident in Fort Lauderdale since 1989. I have found the conversation tonight to be very interesting and I've learned a lot and almost all of it I agree with. I have a different view. I would really appreciate you hearing it as I've heard you because I mean it very sincerely. I don't have any problem with the crosswalk. I think it's very interesting that it slows traffic. I don't have any problem with it at all but I do have a problem with a portion of it. I think where the flag is now is hardly even seen. So, I mean, it's a side street, I believe. Anyhow, I completely agree with the elimination of painted roadways, intersections, or crosswalks. Streets and roadways are for public transit, not for promoting special interests. And we can agree this is a special interest. It's, it's a human, okay, a human, okay, very good. It's, I take that. It's not for promoting human interests. Okay, period. Thank you. Um, so streets and roadways are for transit, not for promoting human interests. Should we have heterosexual highway, Italian flag intersections, or breast cancer ribbons strewn across the street? No, seriously. Why not? No, listen. Should we have the Catholic Church paint a cross down A1A or a synagogue, a Star of David? Should we? Should we? There are many interests and many values that people hold. However, streets and intersections and sidewalks are for public safety and transit, not for promoting special interests. One more sentence. In my opinion, this has nothing to do with being gay. The gay community in Fort Lauderdale is fabulous, and many of my very best neighbors have been gay, including, including, including David and John. Well, it's true. It's true. Ask them. Please conclude your remarks. So this has nothing to do with being gay, you guys. It has to do with promoting a special human interest. And I'm not for streets promoting that. There are many ways to promote that, but not our streets. Our streets are for public transit. So I've listened to you. I've learned from you. I've had a lot of things I've learned from you guys and you women. I hope there's something I said that might be of value to you. Thank you. Thank you. John Cotter, followed by Robert Boo, followed by Oliver Larkin. Good evening, Mayor and Commissioners. Thank you for calling this session tonight. My name is John Cotter. I'm a 30-year resident of Fort Lauderdale. Proud to be a resident of Fort Lauderdale. I love it here. I wouldn't want to live anywhere else. I'm going to limit my remarks to the rainbow installation because that's what I think that the legislation is about. Sorry, Dean. I didn't have time to prepare a song but I did prepare some remarks. Did you bring your ukulele though? No, no ukulele. So I did prepare some remarks to keep it under two minutes. I urge you to oppose the removal of our rainbow street art. This installation is not just a paint on the street. It's a symbol of belonging, of pride, and of safety. For many in our community, it says something simple but powerful. You are seen. You are valued. You belong in Fort Lauderdale. The state frames this removal as a matter of uniformity and regulation but this is not about paint. It is about people. Erasing LGBTQ plus symbols from public view sends a chilling message that our LGBTQ neighbors and visitors are not welcome to be visible in our city. History teaches us how dangerous this can be. In 1930s Germany, restrictions on the Jewish community began not with violence but with erasures. Symbols removed. Visibility stripped away. Now I'm not equivocating our country, our state with Nazi Germany but I am saying that we should recognize the pattern. Exclusion often begins with the disappearance of symbols. Fort Lauderdale has long stood reclaiming my time. Fort Lauderdale has long stood for diversity, pride, and inclusion. People from around the world come here because they know this is a place that welcomes all. To remove this street art now would not just wound our LGBTQ neighbors, it would strip away part of their city's identity. So I ask you to stand up for inclusion, for visibility, and for our values. Keep the rainbow, keep Fort Lauderdale proud. Thank you. Robert Boo followed by Oliver Larkin followed by Ahmed Ismail. Mr. Mayor, Vice Mayor, City Commissioners, my name is Robert Boo. I'm CEO of the Pride Center at Equality Park. Thank you. So from one tireless advocate to another, I ask you from the heart, please do not let the state strip away a vital part of who we are in Fort Lauderdale. For years, so many of us have worked to build a city that is known across the world as welcoming and safe, a place where everyone belongs. It is painful and disheartening to see our energy diverted into battles that divide us while the real struggles facing our neighbors, affordable housing, rising insurance costs, and the high cost of living go unaddressed. At the Pride Center, we open our doors every day to provide what so many seek, a safe place, a sense of family, and a community that celebrates and uplifts LGBTQ plus people and our allies. These values, welcoming, nurturing, and empowering are what make Fort Lauderdale shine. When those values are threatened, our entire community feels it. I ask you, please, stand with us. Stand on the side of history that chooses compassion over exclusion, dignity over discrimination. Stand with all of Fort Lauderdale's communities so that together we can continue to be a city where everyone is proud to call home. Thank you. Thank you. Oliver Law. Mr. Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners, thank you for putting this forum together. My name is Oliver Larkin. I grew up in District 2 in Idyllwild. I live in Deerfield Beach now, but Fort Lauderdale will always be my home. I'm here today to be clear to join the rest of the community in asking you to oppose FDOT's decision and to seek all ways possible to keep the Sebastian Street mural and all of the public art in our city. In 1972, the Marlin Beach Hotel opened in Fort Lauderdale. It was the first gay-friendly hotel in the entire country. We have over 50 years of history of being a safe haven and a mecca for our LGBTQ community, not just here in the state of Florida, but across the country. The Marlin and the LGBT community was here in the 80s when Ronald Reagan was suppressing data on the HIV pandemic. It was here in the 90s and 2000s when gay people could not openly serve in our military under Don't Ask, Don't Tell. And it is still here today as we have a commission that now represents the LGBTQ community where you can now marry who you love in this country no matter what their sexual orientation or gender identity is. So we are asking you today to stand up against this FDOT order, to stand up to Ron DeSantis because he's not just coming after public art. He's coming after public displays and public expression, the freedom of expression to be who you are, which is fundamental to the American project and our sense of liberty. So please stand up against this and we've got your back, not just Fort Lauderdale, but the entire country. Thank you. Thank you. Is Mr. Ismael here? He's not. Ed Loix. Ed. Followed by Max Fenning. Followed by Sam Esposito. Good evening, Mr. Mayor and commissioners. I want to thank you for having this very insightful meeting. I've learned a lot tonight and I'm sure you have as well. I don't want to repeat what other people have said, but I just want to draw a couple things to reemphasize. I really think the advice from your attorney was excellent and I think you've got all the legal advice you need. That's important because when you look at Ron DeSantis, he is mimicking the president. He's a bully, like the president. And those individuals and organizations that have been most successful against Donald Trump have been those who went to court. A bully, if you try to negotiate, compromise, beat them halfway, they see that as weakness and they'll try to get more. So my advice is go to court. Thank you. Max Fenning. Good evening. My name is Max Fenning and I'm the founder and executive director of PRISM, a youth-led nonprofit that works to expand access to LGBT-inclusive education and sexual health resources for young people in South Florida. Governor Ron DeSantis' Department of Transportation has said that this is about safety, but we know that's not true. We've seen mountains of data today to show that the roads with these street murals are some of the safest in our city. But safety is something our community has known less and less every day. But we know what it looks like. We know what it feels like. We know what it means for us. Safety would mean hate crime legislation that protects LGBTQ plus Floridians from being mugged on the same streets they pave over. Safety would look like an end to the trans panic defense that allows for the murder of trans people because their killer was so shocked to discover their identity. Safety is access to health care, PrEP, a life-saving HIV medication, gender-affirming care. Safety is sensible gun reform to prevent the scourge of gun violence like that which took 49 beautiful lives nine years ago at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando for a crosswalk honoring them which just painted over in the dead of the night last week. Safety looks like politicians doing their jobs which does not include being a bully that rips up our kids' books and steals their lunch money right before scribbling over their art with a black crayon. But they don't want our safety so they pull us into the mud to fight fights like this. This is childish and we should treat it with the lack of seriousness that it deserves. The fact that we even need to meet about this is absurd but yet we the adults in the room do not succumb to bullies. We stand up everywhere for our communities our families and kids who even in a state with a government that won't stop reminding them that they are unwanted will find a rainbow at the end of every storm in Fort Lauderdale. That's why we should take every step to protect these beautiful works of art because art is one of the most powerful forms of resistance. Thank you for your time. Thank you Max. Thank you. Next three speakers Sam Esposito Vanessa Apotheker and Laura Hernandez. All three here? Not here? Sam are you here? Yes? No? Okay. Vanessa you here? Yes? Okay. Vanessa and then followed by Laura Hernandez and Aileen Vieira. Thank you. Thanks. Hi Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners. I am Vanessa Apotheker President of Tarpon River Civic Association the District 4 Rep for the Council of Fort Lauderdale Civic Associations also on the Parks and Rec Board. I'm here tonight on behalf of Tarpon River Civic Association our Board and myself we firmly oppose any intervention by state or federal government in matters that are rightfully within the authority of our local government. Decisions regarding the painting of crosswalks or intersections on local streets are matters of municipal jurisdiction and should not be subject to interference from the state. It's a longstanding and fundamental principle matter of local self-governance and the right of local communities and their locally elected officials to determine what's in the best interest of their residents. we sincerely hope that you will defend our basic rights of local self-governance to the fullest extent available under the law. Thanks guys. Thank you Vanessa. Laura Hernandez is Laura here? Eileen Vieira okay Faye what? Hello Faye. At the bottom of the speaker just at the bottom of the speaker. There you go. There it is. Hi. Okay. Good evening Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners, Neighbors and most importantly all the LGBTQ plus allies in this room. Every single fight can't be without you so thank you. Folks, honestly I never thought I'd be at an emergency meeting where the crisis was a crosswalk. Not a hurricane, not flooding, but a few bright stripes on Sebastian Street that mean so much to me and to the LGBTQ plus community. My name is Faye what? And I'm a proud Latina lesbian and lover of Fort Lauderdale. I make my money here in Fort Lauderdale. I spend my money here in Fort Lauderdale. First I want to say how much I love and appreciate Mayor Dean Trentellis for all he's done and continues to do for our community. Also the commission as a whole, Vice Mayor, the commissioners, you've shown time and time again that Fort Lauderdale can lead with courage, compassion, and pride. Now here's the thing. Crosswalks are about safe spaces. They say we see you. You belong here. You're protected as you move forward. That's not politics. That's humanity, people. The state says this flag has to go. Funny, I don't see them rushing to scrape off every other painted crosswalk in the middle of the night in Florida. So why this one? Why our community? We know why and we know because of who? They want to erase us. This isn't just about paint. It's about whether Fort Lauderdale still stands for being visible, for being welcoming, for making sure people don't have to hide who they are just to cross the damn street. So I ask you, don't comply. Take it to court. If a crosswalk can't be a safe space, what does that say about our streets, our city, or our state? This flag tells every queer kid, tells every tourist, every neighbor, you're not alone. And that is worth fighting for. Please defend our voices and our visibility. Thank you. Thank you. Emma Collum, followed by Steve Kuttner, followed by Melinda Bowker, and then Felicia Watkins. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak on this other than those four, those are the last four? Do you have to sign up outside? Good evening. My name is Emma Collum, and I want to talk about what's really at stake with the state's demand to erase Fort Lauderdale's rainbow flag crosswalk. This isn't just about paint on the pavement, it's about whether our community has the right to express who we are and what we value. Fort Lauderdale has always been proud to be one of the most inclusive, diverse, and welcoming cities in Florida, and the rainbow crosswalk reflects the people who live, work, and love here. And yet Tallahassee, a capital that often ignores Broward and Fort Lauderdale priorities is trying to dictate our values while at the same time taking our money. Broward is a donor county. We generate billions every year for the state of Florida. We send far more to Tallahassee than we will ever get back. In fact, our residents subsidize other counties across Florida. So when the state tries to silence our community symbols, it is silencing the very people who keep Florida and Tallahassee running. We are not asking for special treatment. We are asking for respect, for the right to represent ourselves in our own city with our own money. Fort Lauderdale belongs to its people, not to politicians in Tallahassee, and no amount of pressure from the state will erase the values of inclusion, of equality, and of pride that this city stands for. Thank you. Thank you, Emma. Stephen? Is Stephen Kuttner here? He was here earlier. He left. Okay. Melinda Bowker and then Felicia Watkins. Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners. Melinda Bowker here. I'm president of the Downtown Fort Lauderdale Civic Association. I'm here speaking on my own behalf. I am very much in favor of the painted crosswalks remaining, and I stand in support with the strong LGBTQ community that has so eloquently spoken before me. We have painted crosswalks in the downtown in the past, and there's currently a painted crosswalk of a cell boat in Harberdale that the state does not seem to have any interest in. I believe we should retain legal counsel to handle this matter properly and that we should first request a formal exception from the state, though that has not been formally on offer. If that is unsuccessful, the city may then want to explore filing an injunction, hiring a specific attorney to do so, and requesting declaratory judgment from the courts. With regards to requesting an exception, we should focus on the state's presumed focus, which they have stated is safety. Good cause for exception includes that decorative crosswalks have been shown in multiple peer-reviewed studies to increase pedestrian visibility and reduce mid-block collisions. FLBT, FLPD, has recorded no incidents suggesting these crosswalks confuse drivers or impaired traffic operations. Community cohesion, these installations serve as visible markers of inclusion, civic identity, and support for historically underrepresented groups. They strengthen trust between government and residents. Tourism, economic value, as a destination city, Fort Laurel benefits economically from unique, welcoming public spaces. Decorative crosswalks have become focal points for tourism and community events, providing measurable economic impact to adjacent small businesses. Cumulative evidence suggests that decorative crosswalks do not compromise driver comprehension. They improve pedestrian visibility and safety outcomes and to support community identity and economic vitality. I encourage you to be brave in this matter and to oppose what the FDOT letter has requested. Okay, thank you. Is Felicia Watkins here? She's not here. Tom Lander. Is that you, Tom? Yeah. Tom Lander, and then, hold on a second. Tom Lander, Ben Hartard, and Jason Nunez. Tom. Hi, Mayor, Commissioners. I'm a guest in your neighborhood. I live in Hollywood, but I represent Safe Schools South Florida as chairman of the board. Safe Schools South Florida is a group that educate educators and students. And I want to speak for tomorrow. What's happening today is a travesty in many ways. It's just not erasing a crosswalk. It's erasing the future because the youth in our schools are watching what's happening today. They are afraid. Teachers are leaving the classroom because they're afraid to sponsor a gay-straight alliance. That was fear brought by the governor. Students are afraid to join their gay-straight alliance club because they need permission slips to go join any club today and this would out them. Dillard High School had 45 students a few years ago in their club. They now have five. Many schools have no clubs existing, but the youth are smart and they're changing the name. Three years ago, Broward County Public Schools did a diversity day of all their gay-straight alliance clubs. Over 300 attended at Pompano Beach High School. This year, 65 in the whole county. Only eight schools attended. If we don't stand up for the youth because they're watching us today, we are hurting their future and they will suffer if we don't take a stand. I pray that you make a decision, which I know you will, because I believe in the leadership that Fort Lauderdale has shown over and over again. God bless you as you decide. Thank you. Ben, and then Jason. Is Jason Nunez here? Okay, you're the last person. Good evening. Hey. So I had no intent to actually speak here tonight, but I keep hearing things that are relevant to me that have not been spoken about. So I keep hearing those in opposition of the crosswalks or any of the things on the road, stuff related to Waymo, autonomous vehicles, and how it's too difficult for these vehicles to navigate and whatnot. That's all a complete lie. So anyone who's saying that, I'm 38 years old. I'm a retired software engineer. I used to work at Google. I was probably the dumbest one on my team, and that stuff's trivial, right? We're talking a confluence of signals from radar to LIDAR to cameras. So anyone from the government, from the state, from this room who's saying that the software engineers can't figure out how to make these vehicles go because there's some color on the road or whatever it may be, they're lying to you. They're making it up. I've been a subject matter expert in software engineering for as long as I've lived. This stuff's trivial, absolutely trivial. So anytime they bring it up, just assume that they're lying to you. That's it. Mr. Nunez, wrap it up. All right. Mr. Mayor, city commissioners and residents of the greater Fort Lauderdale area, my name is Jason Nunez and I am the president and CEO of the greater Fort Lauderdale LGBTQ and allied business chamber of commerce. I am here to express strong support for rainbow crosswalks and related affirming infrastructure, including rainbow crosswalks and the bridge and Wilton Manors as an emblematic of our region's commitment to inclusivity, safety, and economic vitality. Our membership base represents businesses, workers, and residents who rely on a welcoming environment to attract customers, visitors, and talent to the greater Fort Lauderdale area and beyond. There is a tourism draw, rainbows, crosswalks, signaling a welcoming destination for LGBTQ plus travelers and allies, aligning with Fort Lauderdale's brand as a premier coastal city with vibrant arts, culture, and nightlife. There is a local economic benefit. It increases foot traffic to adjacent businesses, the cafes, restaurants, galleries, retailers, service providers. It enhances nighttime and daytime tourism appeal, encouraging longer stays and repeat visitors. It allows for positive media coverage and word-of-mouth promotion that broadens the visitor pool beyond traditional tourism markets. But let the numbers speak for themselves. The LGBTQ economic impact in the United States is trillions of dollars annually. The estimated national GDP of the LGBTQ business market is $1.4 trillion and of that locally in Fort Lauderdale in 2024, the LGBTQ market was estimated to be at $15 billion. Fort Lauderdale and the broader South Florida corridor attract national and international visitors. Inclusive infrastructure supports safety, repeat visitation, and longer stays benefiting hotels, airlines, attractive, and our local vendors. The impact of local small business near rainbow crosswalks and rainbow bridges proximity advantages include businesses near high-traffic corridors. The curb appeal of welcoming corridors can diversify the customer base, supporting retailers and economic growth within the greater Fort Lauderdale area. A more inclusive, well-promoted cultural district can ride out seasonal fluctuations and contribute to year-round pass-through traffic for local businesses. Our commitment, our community seeks a safe, welcoming environment where residents and visitors can live, work, and socialize without fear of harassment or discrimination. Rainbow crosswalks are symbolic commitments to safety and inclusion. There are also mental and social health benefits. Inclusive infrastructure affirms belonging, potentially reducing social stress from LGBT youth, adults, and the elderly. Stronger sense of community safety supports workforce recruitment and retention in the greater Fort Lauderdale area, expanding to the broader regions. Fort Lauderdale and the greater Fort Lauderdale area, their vision is a robust, inclusive tourism economy supported by safe, attractive public spaces that invite residents and visitors to enjoy dining, arts, culture, and waterfront recreations. Crosswalks amplify that. Florida's economy benefits from a diverse visitor base. Inclusive public infrastructure also helps remain competitive as a desirable destination for LGBTQ plus and allied visitors from across the nation and internationally. We recognize that inclusivity and safety are interdependent. When residents feel safe and welcome, businesses thrive, tourism grows, and Fort Lauderdale remains and keeps its reputation as a diverse, vibrant city and strengthened for all international and local visitors. Thank you, Mayor Udeem, Vice Mayor Hertz and Commissioner members for inviting this dialogue as it truly reflects the Fort Lauderdale's values of safety, dignity, economic vitality, and hospitality for all residents and visitors. Great. Thank you. Okay, so first of all, thank you all for your contribution and participation tonight and your patience. We've been here about two and a half hours and now I'd like to invite Paul back up to the podium to kind of discuss with the commission what our options are and then we can have a discussion amongst the commissioners. Thank you, thank you, Mayor. Good evening again. Some of the city's options are as follows and they're in no particular order. Okay, but, and there may be other options as well but these are some of the things that I thought of. So, one would be to comply with the letter and remove all markings mentioned in the letter. Another one would be to remove the markings at the three locations other than the progress pride flag on the theory that the progress pride flag is not a purported traffic controlled device and challenge the removal directive and request a hearing on that location. Because remember, the statute, as I mentioned before, provides for removal of purported traffic controlled devices. Another one would be to challenge the removal of the markings at all locations and request a hearing. Another one would be, dare I say, do nothing and risk removal of the markings by the state at the city's expense and the possible withholding of state funds. Those are the ones I've thought of. Let me ask you this. Is an option to comply with the state's request and still ask for a subsequent hearing and still participate in legal action to get a definitive ruling from a state court on the constitutionality of these requests? The problem I see with that is it would then become moot. I don't know that we could sustain an action. Is that right? Okay. So we can't comply and sue. We have to do one or the other. I don't think there would be a case or controversy at that point. At that point. Okay. Okay. I mean, yeah, I think that would be the case. So there are several options. Another one, I suppose, would be to remove the progress pride flag and leave the others on the theory that they were okay when they were installed. So what changed? Well, the pride flag was okay when it was installed as well. And that, I would suggest, is not a purported traffic-controlled device because that's not a crosswalk. Right. Okay. Paul, I haven't heard from you what I think we should actually do and I want to hear your opinion on this. I think that we have to apply for that hearing that they told us is a possibility because we have to, before we do anything legally, we have to show that we've exhausted the remedies that were offered to us. So I think that we should do that. Although I feel it's a sham, I feel it's a kangaroo court. To quote the letter that we received on August 21st, please be advised that the hearing will not involve a request for an exception, although that's not what they said in June, will not involve a request for an exception or a waiver to permit the non-conforming pavement markings to remain in place. The department has already reviewed the pavement markings at the locations mentioned above and determined that the pavement markings will not be allowed. So that tells me, okay, we'll go through that motion, but we're not going to really get anywhere. But at the same time that we are filing for that, I want us to pursue filing for an injunction for relief and also I want us to go for a declaratory judgment action. I think we have to seek declaratory judgment action and file as quickly as possible at the same time requesting the hearing, but we have to do those things to protect those four places. I will also tell you that those four places that have been cited are all in my district. I have been speaking to a lot of people. We heard from the neighborhood association tonight within the boundaries of these four sites. And I think that we just have to go for injunction relief and that declaratory judgment. And how would that also work in terms of also at the same time saying, okay, you've given us this chance for a hearing and we're going to ask for that hearing. But I think we need to do all of those things simultaneously. There is a doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies. So it may not be possible to go forward with the administrative remedy and at the same time proceed with other avenues. But I think what the commissioner is saying is this. To exhaust our administrative remedies and on the day that we get a decision, if it's adverse, be prepared to file suit that day asking for injunctive relief and asking for a declaratory judgment. I believe that's what the commissioner is saying. Is that correct? Yes. I mean, you're the attorney so I'm going to defer you on this. I'm just a formal arts administrator and a former school teacher so I'm going to defer to you on this. So talking lawyer to lawyer I think that's what the commissioner is expressing and so that would be consistent with what you said. You have to first exhaust administrative remedies before we can file suit but we can certainly file suit if we should get an adverse ruling after the appeal. But we have to be prepared because we know what the ruling is going to be but I want us to be as prepared as possible. Furthermore, I would like us all and I would ask our legal team to actually confer with Key West, Miami Beach, Delray Beach. Miami Beach is not contesting to my knowledge. Do we know that officially? I'm sorry? Yeah. To date they have the only three cities that I know that are contesting two cities are Key West and Delray. And who else? At the very least And St. Pete? Yeah, the St. Pete said they're going to comply. I saw that in the newspaper. Well, I think that we should reach out to all of these cities. Let them know what we're intending to do. We should also if you feel that we need to seek outside counsel it's also what we should do. And I just feel that we should let these cities understand where we're heading because I think there will be more strength if we are working with other municipalities. Mayor, I have a question if you all can hear me. Can you hear me? What's that? She has a question. Commissioner Beasley-Pittman spoke, Mayor. Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't hear you. Pam, what? Yes, I'm going to try to talk as loud as I can. My question, in the process of exhausting our administrative process, is there an opportunity where the state could still come in and begin to remove those intersection crosswalks that are in question? Is there anything that we could do to prevent that? So that appears to be the threat that they have in their letter. And one of the, you know, one of the things that we did do today is our team did meet with Weiss Rota who is the legal counsel handling the matters for Delray Beach and Key West. And we talked about several legal strategies and one of the things that did come up was the whole concept of the due process and how these letters and the time to conform have been outlined in these documents. So their team is actively researching the issue because it is a concern for us in terms of how we prevent any action if the city chooses to challenge. We would hope that if we filed the administrative challenge that they would somehow stay the threatened action that they have in the letter but there presently is no guarantee of that. but we are exploring the options. Typically you would seek an injunction but as Paul has stated we're evaluating whether or not the law would permit us to move forward with seeking that type of relief while our administrative action is pending. Well, you know, let's face it like these in the night they went in Orlando and they covered over everything before they resolved matters there so we can never Commissioner Beasley Pittman we can't guarantee what the conduct is going to be with regard to the state so you know we're going to have to do our best to just follow the legal follow the legal proceedings and and hopefully a judge you know should the commission decide to proceed legally then we would have to assert the fact that there's no no remedy at law and that we do need an injunction if that's if that's the approach we choose to take and hopefully if that's the case then hopefully a judge will see the immediacy of it before the state comes in with its paintbrush and decides to paint up the town so I think that I think there's an uncertainty there so I don't think there's anyone that really can predict what the state's going to do I would hope that they would allow us the administrative and legal remedy which due process requires and I would hope they wouldn't violate our due process rights so we can only you know take it one step at a time yes I agree but I thought it was I know it was important to add this to the conversation so our neighbors also understand with our attempts what we may agree to do as a commission today we're still up against what the state may come in and do in the middle of the night and so Commissioner we do recognize what they've done in Orlando and that's top of mind for us and so we're thinking both in being proactive in terms of how to prevent any action and reactive in the sense of what our remedies will be in case they take action prior to the resolution of this matter administratively so D. Wayne to follow up on Commissioner Beasley-Pittman's question so if the state follows up on our administrative appeal in 10 days but in one week comes and paints over the street as I understand from what Paul said our legal objection then becomes moot is that accurate no not not necessarily so what what Paul is suggesting is that there is no longer a case in controversy if we remove the well if we remove the markings on the street non-compliant markings if the state if the state removes them how is that any different than it becomes a different cause of action at the end of the day the markings are removed so what is our cause of action a violation of our due process okay does that mean we go back and repaint or the state comes back and repaints a court would have to decide that right we would have to go to court and get that resolved whether or not they were in the wrong in removing the markings and whether or not we have a right to replace those markings so to follow up on that then the court could rule that they violated due process that doesn't necessarily mean that they were wrong in removing the markings simply that that we had a due process appeal right that was not fully exhausted before they removed the markings it doesn't necessarily speak to the question of the markings themselves is that accurate in that context I would say yes but um that would that would that would entail a separate action as to as to whether the state's actions to require us to move remove the markings would be a separate action because you have two actions right you have an action of due process violation and then you have an access an action as to whether whether the the demand to remove was legitimate in the first place right or do you lump those together in one case so the hypothetical it would be two separate actions so what we're dealing with presently is whether or not the state has the authority to have us remove one or all of these markings is the issue that we have before us and what we're proactively thinking in a hypothetical situation is the what if the state comes in and removes those markings prior to the date that they've stated in that letter that would be a clear violation of the due process that the city should be afforded under the administrative procedures act which gives us the 14 days in which to address address the state's directive okay so at that point so assuming that happens in the hypothetical right so if if the court comes back and says right we violated our due process rights were violated the next step then would be to file a cause of action to invalidate the state's directive to remove in the first place right so they would I assume remand it back and have another case correct and in those cases it would be well we didn't have an order so that's interesting because it would just be an action of the agency and not a order that we would be challenging so and then just to follow that through so if we if we were to if we were to file the administrative appeal and while we're waiting for that the state comes in and paints over it as they've already done in other municipalities we would then file for due process but we can't file for due process until the appeal has already run its course right so we have to let the appeal run its course let's say the appeal runs its course and they deny the appeal do we have a case can I answer this question in a slightly different way yeah go ahead so just reading the language of the statute if you don't mind if you wouldn't go ahead go ahead just a little bit so it says that the Department of Transportation may upon receipt and investigation of reported non-compliance and after hearing pursuant to 14 days notice direct the removal of any purported traffic control device that fails to meet the requirements of this section wherever the device is located et cetera et cetera so it shouldn't be removed before the hearing it seems to me I need to explain that in Orlando I don't I can't I don't know okay just just to all right let's just move this thing along so the the vice mayor is asking to differentiate between our rights as to as the proceedings move forward if if we if we do apply for administrative appeal if the state comes in and does takes self-help action before the appeal is concluded what are our rights one way or the other I think the point that Duane made was that we do have a right to pursue a claim for failure to respect our due process rights and even after the appeal and if we should lose the appeal we still have rights in terms of seeking injunctive relief before the state would act any further I think those are the messages I'm hearing tonight and so those are options the commission can consider as we decide to deliberate sure so if you do decide to challenge this I would suggest that your direction to us be as broad as possible because in case there is a possibility a legal theory under which administrative remedies would not have to be exhausted and maybe maybe you could go right to court I mean that's what it sounded like council was was looking at well I think before we get there then I think the commission needs to decide what it wants to do and I think the commission needs to decide you know does it wish to comply does it wish to appeal does it want to give you broad leverage to pursue a legal remedy if the appeal is denied we need to make those decisions tonight and if I may another one would be to decide whether you want to hire the special council who is already involved in right has already done some of the leg work has done some of the leg work and will be doing some more on behalf of multiple cities which could reduce the fees as well how quickly are we expecting to tell us whether we can file for injunctive relief at the same time going with the administrative hearing or do we have to wait did they sort of allude to when that timeline might be when they might have that answer what they feel confident he has a top notch associate working on these issues right now I know that that conversation I don't know when the associate would be done but we understand that we have a short timeline in which to kind of address these issues but you have to recognize that they're not hired by us to do this work so it's Delray's and Key West's work at the moment Paul does that conclude your comments Samir as your contemplating that I'll ask the city clerk to share with you all we did draft a kind of blank resolution if that that's the road you're going to go in terms of special counsel just for you to have let's hear from the commission first right and additionally I just want to reiterate that we're dealing with four different markings that have four different and unique circumstances and situations Mr. Bigel has articulated that we believe that the flag marking has the strongest case in terms of distinguishing it from other traffic control devices the other markings have a case that is based on the history of their installation versus the function that they perform on the streets and the roadways so it's not a in terms of the commission's deliberation it may not be an all-in consideration in terms of what you want to look to defend or maybe you want to take a look at all four and report back in terms of the success level that we think we would have in challenging all four okay mayor yes there is one other thing i want to share with you and that's again directly from the statute regarding the possibility of withholding of funds what the statute says is any additional violation by a public body or official shall be caused for the withholding of state funds deposited in the state transportation trust fund until such public body or official demonstrates to the department of transportation that it is complying with this section so any additional violation is what it says okay all right well clearly you know there's a threat that that they would want to withhold transportation funds if we you know fail to comply i think we heard that threat loud and clear so you're saying that there's that there's a technicality it wouldn't be necessary for these violations for any future violations so we'll consider that as well as parsing of words so i'll leave that up to the people that are smarter than us so all right thank you um commission uh want to speak vice mayor do you want to do you want to speak first certainly so i think if our option is to file an administrative appeal uh i would certainly support that um you know i think there's a long history of uh of the crosswalks as you know i was never in favor of painting the flag on the ground for a variety of reasons i always stated that i thought a historical marker similar to what we did for eula johnson and wayden uh would be a permanent uh reminder of the historical nature of that and its importance to the gay community and the larger community at whole um but i lost that debate the first time around and i was happy to be out there and celebrate the uh the painting of the parade of the flag when it was uh when it was installed so i think if we can go ahead and move forward with an administrative hearing uh i'm i'm all in favor of that when it comes to initiating litigation against the state i don't support that we're asking the state right now for hundreds of millions of dollars in support of the tunnel that you favor which i also don't support but if you're going to go with your hat in hand to the state asking them for hundreds of millions of dollars for and a very important initiative for the city of fort motordale i don't think initiating litigation against them at the same time is likely to lead to an outcome that will result in the funding that we're seeking and so i would not support litigation but in terms of an administrative appeal i think we have nothing to lose and we should move forward asking for that okay thank you all right thank you uh commissioner sorensen you wanted to say something yeah thanks thanks mayor and uh thank you everyone for being here um i think the street markings show that everyone's welcome in our city i think they reflect our values as a city um and i think we should move forward immediately with a administrative appeal mayor i think challenging not only the intersection the uh street markings that have been indicated but any other possible street markings that the state is contemplating concurrent to that mayor i think we should uh request that our city attorney engage with all other municipalities similar similarly situated um to begin that that dialogue and engagement and concurrent as well to engage the uh full um uh support and and and working together with outside counsel who's already uh begun this this process as well so i think those are the the three parts to our next steps mayor commissioner beasley pitman do you have any additional comments yes um let me say this as well i want um someone had asked why um several of us were not present at the meeting i wanted on the record that i'm actually under a physician's care right now and um i requested to be virtual because this is such an important matter and i wanted to be able to um give my input as well but that's the only reason why i'm not in the room tonight um with that moving forward i do um my stance is that we should move forward with the appeal um being able to um be in the fight is what i'm saying i don't think we should just um step aside and let the city the state come in and dictate um what um they are perceiving that should be done i think we should fight this out to the end so with that appeal um what commissioner um sorensen was just adding to it um i like that conversation that even those um intersections that have not been identified if that could be a part of that conversation because this to me um is a gateway you know we've been watching this checkoff box from the state and it's getting you know it's getting larger and larger so we as a city i believe um as a commission we should stand um and move forward with an appeal to reserve our right as much as possible and thank you thank you commissioner commissioner glassman yes thank you mayor um first of all i also want to echo the sentiments have been stated before and thank each and every one of you for for being here this evening and for the important words that we've heard from all of you uh for the almost 100 emails that i have received in the last couple of days which is probably a record on any agenda item uh that i've ever seen in the last almost eight years sitting here uh it is so important as i stated earlier um all four of these sites are in district two that is that is my district um one of the most humbling things about this job is i get to represent a district that is probably of the four districts maybe i would say the most diverse uh in every single way possible um probably also the largest lgbtq plus population in the city uh is also found in district two um it is a beautiful district as is our city um if you could just do me a favor david i gave you a couple of slides of something we did on the beach one of the things that i advocated for and i was very pleased to accomplish was if you've noticed we've been slowly but surely doing art on the lifeguard towers on the beach in my district because i wanted to create a gallery now um do we have those it's coming up i want to explain to you why i feel that we have to go all in on this this is right at the sebastian beach we have a rainbow on a lifeguard tower i requested that because i want you to understand why this symbol is so important the flag that we've been talking about on sebastian um is actually pointing towards this beach we heard a great history lesson i forgot the name of the person who um who told us the history lesson of the marlon beach hotel i could tell you some stories from the 70s at the marlon beach hotel uh keep it keep it clean let me tell you how many people remember the poop deck at the marlon beach hotel okay all right thank you wow hi all i'm saying is there's a real history here and i am someone who advocates for historic preservation there is a real history here i feel that if we don't go all in right now the next letter we'll get is hey what's with this art on the lifeguard towers you're impeding the safety of the of the lifeguards you're you're jeopardizing the safety of the beach goers i could see it folks i could see it and how long how long will this rainbow art be on this lifeguard tower at sebastian beach so i'm saying yes commissioner sorenson we have to take a stand and we have to use all of those tools that we've heard about um and i i'm very curious to hear if we're able to go for injunctive relief at the same time with the declaratory action while we're also pursuing this hearing folks let's not fool ourselves we know what this hearing is going to end up being we've been told in the letter you can come to a hearing but we've already determined that these things have to disappear so again this is so important i also want to thank john for the history lesson of what symbols and art meant in nazi germany again i'm not going as far as that either but i want to also add to that i want people to understand that at that time the regime they they took the art what they called what they called and this is incredible but they called it degenerate art and they created exhibits of it and people flocked to see this degenerate art because it was taken out of the museums obviously most of these artists were jewish some were actually lgbtq i don't have to remind you how many jews and gay and lesbian folks were murdered at that time but it all started somewhere so i'm not saying that we've gotten to the point of declaring all of this degenerate art but it's something to ponder uh i i think that we have to get that ruling from white serota i'm in favor of going with outside counsel i'm in favor of going with the other cities i'm in favor of pursuing every legal remedy because i think we have from what i've heard tonight from our legal team and from the residents and from what i read the safety argument is bogus um and i will tell you something the spite that we are seeing from tallahassee now think about it this sort of started with just lgbtq markings but if you've been reading the media lately this has morphed into every street marking in the state of florida so the hatred for the lgbtq community is so strong that they're willing to throw out every other piece of art on a street in the state of fort lauderdale just to get rid of the lgbtq art that is so clear that is so evident and we have to take a stand one sad story and then i'm done i'm done one sad story that i have to tell you and i feel bad as a former school teacher in may of this year three months ago f dot sponsored a competition in orlando actually lake nona part of orlando they sponsored a competition in an elementary school for the children to design the bike path with the symbol that they wanted on the street they came up with beautiful beautiful designs beautiful colorful designs much nicer than the standard generic whatever you see on a bike lane in a you know in a city that was three months ago they celebrated with the kids three months ago guess what they were just told it's gotta go isn't that a great lesson for our children it's gotta go kids three months after they sponsored the competition and celebrated these school children folks this is serious and we don't have time we have till september 4th we don't have time we have to use every tool in the toolbox we have to pull out all the stops because i don't want to see a letter coming to the city saying remove the art on the lifeguard towers and whatever else they're going to come up with because guess what it's going to happen it's going to happen that's it thanks ma'am okay thank you so again i too want to thank everyone for being here and those that left and had to go home thank you for all being here again as i said at the beginning of the meeting the reason why i asked for this meeting was because i thought it was important that the community be heard and i think the community was heard tonight and i appreciate everyone speaking we had you know a stack of people who spoke i thank you for respecting the time limits in which you were given and i think everyone was able to get their point across and i think the commission has heard you um i i happen to um to wonder you know when it was pointed out to us that this particular statute was overwhelmingly approved by the legislature no one ever really thought that it was going to be weaponized to use against a particular group like it seems to be used against the lgbt community um uh our city attorneys indicated that the that the controlling language here is the traffic control device um uh i'm sure that the state will find every way they can to to associate their actions and to make it look like they're trying to um enforce traffic control mechanisms but as it's been said time and again um it's simply a camouflage for their true intent which is to erase and eliminate all the as or as many lgbtq uh references in the state as possible it's a vengeance i've said it once i'll say it again it's a vengeance against the community and to the fact that they're willing to cut off their nose despite their face as commissioner glassman said just talked about how they're willing to now require tampa to take off their streets the tribute to the police officers um uh and now requiring uh wonderful artistic displays that were never really intended for traffic control uh in any way whatsoever but are simply artistic um references and artistic displays that that our city benefits from you know um you have to ask where does it end where will it end you know if we don't stand up tonight if we don't stand up now you know folks it will it will be the next group so i too agree with the rest of the commission tonight we must stand our ground we cannot allow us to be bullied into submission and to allow others to dictate what we should do in our own communities it violates the home rule of provisions of so many of our statutes you know people have to respect the differences in each community what happens in another county i respect what they want to do but they have to respect what we want to do so so far i've heard that the commission has agreed unanimously and will put it put it to a vote to go forward with the administrative appeal uh then the question becomes do we want to pursue the if we get an adverse reaction or adverse ruling from the administrative appeal do we want to move forward and pursue litigation and i've heard four people out of five say that they would agree with that so i would ask um do you have the resolution in front of you can i see what you have mayor while you wait for that i would ask that you bifurcate those two because i would like us to have a unanimous vote on filing the administrative appeal but when it comes to the lawsuit i'm going to vote no and i don't want to have a four-one vote if that's a combined resolution okay mayor just a suggestion is i i wouldn't want to limit us to the legal remedy of suit there's various legal remedies including suit and so i would want that second motion to include all possible legal remedies not not a narrow interpretation of next steps if that's okay i'll let you make that okay so right now i would ask someone to introduce a resolution um asking that the uh that directing the city staff to pursue the administrative appeal uh in in response to the demand of the august 21st letter sent by the florida department of transportation so uh mayor if i may you can do that by a motion the resolution is what's required to appoint a special counsel okay so someone like entertain a motion at this time okay would someone like to make that motion moved second okay it's been moved and seconded uh so this is with regard to uh pursuing the administrative appeal in response to the august 21st letter uh please call the roll commissioner sorenson yes vice mayor herbst yes commissioner glossman yes commissioner beasley pitman yes mayor trentales yes so that has passed unanimously we will we will do nothing to the street markings until we pursue um you know i just want to say something you know this city has historically respected uh cultural and ethnic diversity and i'm going to give you another example over 20 years ago when we decided to redo cis drunk boulevard a lot of the uh a lot of the infrastructure sidewalks crosswalks were based the designs were based on taken from uh african um themes that were found in in in uh various cultures in the african continent and many of those designs are now in the crosswalks and in the sidewalks are they asking us to remove all of that as well that would be that's that's that's the sin of all this that's where we're saying how far are we going to go you know i'd be i'd be careful of telling them more intersections to look at mayor yeah i know you might just want to keep that to yourself i know but the but the point is that we this city long ago respected the diversity of our community long ago invested in the infrastructure of a section of our community that took pride in who they were and what they represent and why should we stop now why do we want to say no we're going to we're going to you know buckle to the demands of of a administration that says you know you must conform to this requirement we know what their target is but we cannot allow them to overrule what each community wants to do and wants to continue to represent so going forward um uh do i hear a motion to um motion for the floor actually commissioner sorenson i think it was you that indicated that uh you wanted to make a motion with regard to action taken should we get an adverse ruling an administrative appeal yeah and i'd like to nuance that a little bit um and i'll suggest it and then seek feedback dewayne did you have something to say before i no i thought we're moving on to the resolution that's fine okay okay so i would like to make a motion to explore all legal remedies regarding the street markings concurrent with our filing of the administrative challenge and after the filing of the administrative challenge to include but not be limited to engaging with other municipalities in similar situations and the hiring of outside counsel so cut out the last sentence the last last phrase the outside counsel thing so that would have to be done by resolution correct okay so the motion is is to so should we get an adverse ruling no no i don't i don't want to condition it on receiving the ruling i would like to starting immediately uh explore all legal remedies regarding the street markings concurrent with the filing of the administrative challenge and after the filing of the administrative challenge including exploring uh further partnership with similar situated municipalities okay is that okay do i hear a second well if i could just go ahead discuss that a second please wait wait wait okay i hear a second i have to get a second so we can have discussion i'll second it okay uh i think duane wanted to say something yeah just a clarification in terms of what that means so we would explore those remedies but in in terms of taking action on those remedies it would need i think would necessarily need commission direction on that well i think i think the commission i think commissioner sorenson is saying uh as part of the motion to not wait to explore other legal remedies but clearly we have to wait till the end of the administrative uh ruling before we can take any actual action correct we don't know that yet right so as so as we explore legal remedies if there are other options that are available to us outside of the administrative process we'll bring that to the city commission's attention for further action is what is what i'm saying okay then then i might make it uh a little bit stronger explore and um proactively take uh uh legal remedies to uh in in furtherance of the protection in addition to the administrative okay but if i if i can weigh in on that commissioner so that in this case then you're now delegating the authority to the city attorney's office to determine whether or not legal action is appropriate and i think that is an improper delegation of the commission's authority well i would say let's take legal action yeah i mean we regularly delegate legal uh action to the city attorney no we don't not not when it comes to filing litigation when it comes to filing litigation the city commission makes an affirmative vote to that effect i don't think that is that correct well what you want what you're saying is i uh vice mayor i think commissioner sorensen is saying specifically that he wants to take further legal action in addition to the um the uh administrative appeal uh whether or not it can be accomplished within the 14 days i don't know the answer to that but so so let me let me see if i understand that correctly so if the city attorney's office investigates this and they come to a determination that they think it is legally feasible to initiate litigation right now you're saying they should then go under their uh under their own authority that you've delegated to them and file that litigation if they determine that litigation is not legally feasible at this point they should not move forward with filing any any litigation is that an accurate reflection of what you're trying to suggest okay i don't think that's an accurate reflection i will say this we have another meeting next week and between now and then uh we can direct a legal staff to investigate and by the time we have our next meeting we can make it we can hear a report and we can make a decision then does that make sense sure and the reason i asked that mayor is you know when i was listening to to mr bangel and uh you know uh explain the issues behind it there was a lot of uncertainty as to whether this is legally feasible or not and so i i am uncomfortable moving forward on anything whether i vote for it or not i'm still uncomfortable um in my role as an elected official when the attorney's office can't give us a dispositive answer at this point in time paul were you were you in any way um uncertain as to our legal remedies or were you uncertain as to which one amongst the many we could choose from during the appeal period during the appeal period only is what i'm referring to obviously i can't predict how they'll come out no but he's saying but vice mayor is saying is there a legal remedy um aside from the administrative appeal should we during the appeal period during the appeal that's one of the things that that that is being explored that we're exploring and also we discussed that with us with with outside counsel okay so we're gonna so we have so the commission can authorize you then to explore that and then return to us with a with a uh a report at the next meeting and i'm entirely comfortable with that approach if we have an answer by then we don't have a lot of time i i don't know how much i want to explore how much time are we going to spend exploring well the week here's here's a way to maybe caveat is it um to uh explore and advise the commission on possible causes of action we could take if there is uh time allowance if there is a time a lack of timing uh to come back to us then i think it's important to empower the city attorney to take appropriate action i kind of agree with you i mean i just think we should authorize the city attorney's office to proceed with any available legal course of action or cause of action that uh that is justifiable under these circumstances yeah so i think i understand the intent of the commission my my my position will be if there is sufficient time in terms of the legal strategy to bring it back exactly commission action but if the time does not permit i view it as authorization to take the necessary steps to uh protect the city's interests in this matter correct mayor sorry defer to you but that's okay i think what you just said is very important a little different than we've been hearing if you feel that time is of the essence then you just need to go ahead whether we're talking about seeking you know the relief or the exploratory damages or judgment or whatever we that could you you you're going to make that determination right and i understand is it both the injunctive relief and the exploratory or just one or the other or you can do all you have it open-ended you you're asking us to explore all remedies okay if there is if there is a need to exercise a legal remedy within a time frame that's before we can get to a city commission meeting i view this as an authorizing if if the motion is approved as authorizing our office to move forward um using our discretion on such matters okay yes that's that's friendly yeah yeah so i'm mayor so that's your that's my motion and you've seconded it yes i have okay uh any other questions okay please call the role commissioner sorenson yes vice mayor herbs no commissioner glassman yes commissioner beasley pitman yes mayor trentals yes and that uh authority to file legal action is now approved by the city commission of port lauderdale mayor i now like to if it's appropriate now i'd like to introduce the resolution for outside council so the resolution has a couple of of blanks so the outside council who is um engaged on this matter by delray beach and uh i'm understand by key west as well is uh weiserota um the rates that they have provided us is for their senior partner it's 575 the other partners is uh uh per hour uh 525 per hour for um partners and members uh 425 for associates and uh 175 dollars per hour for paralegals and that those will be uh filled in in section two of the order of the resolution okay um is that acceptable is that something like to introduce that resolution i'll introduce it okay any questions or comments okay there being none please call the roll a resolution of the city commission of the city of fort lauderdale florida appointing weiss serota helfman cole and bierman pl to represent the city of fort lauderdale in a florida department of transportation traffic control device non-compliance matter prescribing out hourly rates of pay for such legal services authorizing the city attorney to execute a retainer agreement providing an effective date commissioner sorensen yes vice mayor herbs no commissioner glassman yes commissioner beasley pitman yes mary trentales yes and that resolution is now approved um and i guess that concludes everything for tonight correct again thank you everybody for your support and your and your comments and uh we're hopefully hopefully we can move forward and work with the state and try to come to a resolution that uh that we're all hoping will be in the best interest of everybody here in the community with that having been said this meeting is now completed