Good evening and welcome. The June 10, 2026 City of Plantation Council meeting is now called to order at 6 p.m. Ms. Beggarow, please call the roll. Councilmember Anderson? Here. Councilmember Andreu? Here. Councilmember Fadgen? Here. Councilmember Horland? Here. Councilmember Reinstein? Here. Mayor Sortel? Here. City Attorney Ezra? Here. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Beggarow. Councilmember Anderson was slated to provide the opening remarks, and he is very sick. He looks very good, but he didn't sound good when I spoke to him today. Yeah. Cough for good measure. He was trying to spare his colleagues from getting sick. So I will provide tonight's opening remarks and pledge of allegiance on his behalf. And Councilmember Anderson, we're happy you're on Zoom, but we wish you a speedy recovery. Thank you. So it is election qualifying week all across the state. Some of us call this a silly season. Candidates run for many different reasons, but they must never forget that elected office is not about personal enrichment or power. It is a public service. Mahatma Gandhi said, the best way to find yourself is to lose yourself in the service of others. True servant leadership is a blessing to us all. So to all of the candidates running, thank you for taking the leap. I am praying for peace in your heart, integrity in your actions, and no matter the final outcome, may you find joy in the process and make many new friends along the way. And now would you join me, please, for the Pledge of Allegiance? I pledge. Thank you. Mayor Sordal, you got some items? I have the best item a mayor could ask for. Somebody's giving us money. Friends of the Library? Well, not us. I'm the city. Come down. You're all members of Friends of the Library. We all are, right? Come down again. This was a heck of a year. Yes. This is a record. I'll give you the microphone. I'll get out of the way. Okay. Good evening, everybody. I'm Jill. I'm the president of the Friends of the Helen B. Hoffman Plantation Library. And here's some of our members as well as people on the board and Mayor Sordal as well. So we are here tonight because we are a hardworking group of volunteers, and we are presenting a check to Monica, who's the director of the library, for $35,696.92. And that's not all. From September to May, which is our fiscal year, we also presented in December a check for $15,000 to the library. And for book plating, which we honor people by buying books, we also paid $560.30. So for a total this year of $51,257.22 to the library. Jill, we want to thank you for your leadership. We know that you're leaving us. What a note to go out on. And personally, I want – oh, no? One more term? I have another year. Oh, one more. Okay, wonderful. So good. So we expect even more money next year. Yes. But personally, I want to thank the friends. You mentioned the book plating, the book plate you did in memory. My mom, I really appreciate it. Yes. All right. I'm so glad. I thought you were going to be gone for a year. No. That's wonderful. We are our good, hardworking group. We're going to be there for another year. Wonderful. Okay. Thank you. You want to say anything? I want to get a picture. Do you guys want to say something? Yep. Now it's the part where we take our picture. So because I have the microphone, I wanted to tell you about our weekend at the library and the museum because these funds help us with programming and materials, and our city taxes pay for facilities and staff, and it's a very important partnership. So this weekend at the library, we had the kickoff for the summer reading program, which we all know is so important for kids to keep reading all summer long so they don't lose those skills. We had over 100 families come through. Everybody got a book bag that had a calendar and a book log and a calendar, you know, all the things we were going to have and some prizes. And then we had activities. We had crafts and we had games and we had puzzles, and it was a really great morning. And the friends volunteered and then paid for all the materials, which we appreciate. And then they were able to go to the museum and enjoy the exhibit there. And of course, that's supported by the Plantation Historical Society, another partnership with your city tax dollars and your volunteer organization. And then we had chess at the library later in the afternoon. And that program is for ages eight and up. And our youngest player is eight and our oldest player is over 80. So we are reaching every age group. And that's actually sponsored by our Plantation Kiwanis. They pay for the things we need for that program. And then you could go back to the museum and enjoy Songs of America with the Senior Moments Band. And that was standing room only. So those are the types of things that happen in Plantation that make us a community, and they are important. So thank you very much. Thank you for all of that. Thank you. Mayor, do you have anything else this evening? All right. We'll move on to Parks and Recreation upcoming events. You're not Miss O'Toole. Good evening, Mr. Ambrosio. There we go. Good evening, Mayor, Council. Mike Ambrosio. Thank you. I wasn't sure if you recognized me without the hat. We do. So we have a couple things coming up. On Sunday, June 21st, we have the Longest Day of Play, the Summer Solstice Quest. Celebrate the longest day of the year by completing a self-guided quest, including playground scavenger hunt, fun photo challenges, and more. As well, at the Veltree Tennis Center, Saturday, June 20th, and Sunday, June 21st, we have the Boys and Girls 12s tournament from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. And we still are accepting participants for the Fourth of July Parade. Up until June 24th. And you can find the information for that on our website. Thank you. Great. Thank you, Mr. Ambrosio. All right. At this time, it is 6.08. We are going to recess the City Council meeting and call the CRA meeting to order. Ms. Beggarow, you ready? Yes. Please call the roll. Commissioner Anderson. Here. Commissioner Andreu. Here. Commissioner Fajan. Here. Commissioner Horland. Here. Commissioner Reinstein. Here. Commissioner Sortel. Here. City Attorney Ezra. Here. Thank you. Thank you very much, Ms. Beggarow. The CRA consent agenda consists of two items. Does any member of the commission wish to pull an item? No. Do any member of the public? Do we have a motion? Motion to approve the CRA consent agenda. Second. Second. All right. Ms. Beggarow. Commissioner Anderson. Yes. Commissioner Andreu. Yes. Commissioner Fajan. Yes. Commissioner Horland. Yes. Commissioner Reinstein. Yes. Commissioner Sortel. Thank you very much, Ms. Beggarow. And Mr. Conklin, you'd like to speak on public requests for the CRA? Good evening, sir. Dennis Conklin, 4581 Northwest Six Court. Heavenly hosts protect you and all of your families. I'm here. Basically, it's more of a not request, first off, but secondly. First off, kudos for pulling off the grand opening for the publics at the Four Corners, 441 and Broward Boulevard. Now for my request. Kindly limit the redevelopment of Plantation General Hospital to three stories, like its neighboring condos at the Village Green, and I wish to yield back my time. Thank you, Mr. Conklin. Any other requests of the council for the CRA? All right. With that, this CRA meeting is adjourned at 610, and we will reconvene the city council meeting and open up public requests of the council regarding municipal affairs. To those who wish to speak, we request that you complete a speaker form. If you have not done so already, please do so. When you are called, please approach the podium and make sure the green light is on the microphone. You will have three minutes to make your request to council. Please state your name and address, and please address your remarks to the council president, not the mayor nor individual members of the council. Please keep your remarks to the allotted three minutes, and please use your time efficiently. If extra time will be needed to conclude your remarks, please ask for it as your time is expiring and not prior to beginning your remarks. First up, we have Ms. Lizette Hampton with Ms. Bernardi on deck. I do it in the order that I get them, but yes, Ms. Bernardi, come on up. Good evening. Good evening. Lori Bernardi, 11681 Northwest 6th Street. Can I hand you these first so you can see them? You may approach. Thank you very much. Okay. Over the past several weeks, residents have documented a pattern of conduct by the Plantation Acres Improvement District, which is known as PAID, that raises serious concerns about election influence and misuse of public resources. I want to address the connected actions surrounding the June 20th Terra Park event. Residents have already expressed strong opposition to this dedication, especially since the district engineer stated on the record that Terra Park is only a conceptual location and that future surveys will determine the actual site. Despite this, PAID continues to promote a public dedication event that serves no operational purpose and is timed three days before the special election. On Monday, PAID employees distributed door hangers announcing this same June 20th event. These doors hangers intentionally omitted any reference to the City of Plantation on them, misleading residents into believing PAID alone is hosting and controlling the event. When you combine the timing, the messaging, and the selective information, the June 20th dedication and the door hanger campaign are clearly connected and form a coordinated effort to influence the outcome of the election. The City is being drawn into potential litigation over election interference. In addition, the PAID board, its attorney, the chairman, and the district manager have all been notified multiple times that political signs from a political action committee, a PAC actively campaigning to defeat the ballot measure, are posted on PAID public property. These signs are still there today, still present all over city-owned property throughout Plantation Acres, mainly along major streets and intersections. Despite these notices, PAID has allowed those political signs to remain. The chairman even stated publicly that the signs should not be removed because permission was given for them to stay on public land. This is not only inappropriate, it is legally incorrect. PAID has no authority to grant permission for political signage on public property. Research by our neighbor Ted Taranoo confirms that PAID cannot override city ordinances, rules, or regulations, even on land itself, because all PAID property lies within the city jurisdiction. Under Florida law, municipalities retain broad authority over land use, signage, safety, and public property. Special districts must comply with municipal ordinances unless state law explicitly grants an exemption, and PAID has none. Therefore, PAID cannot authorize political signage, political events, or any activity the city prohibits. PAID is a limited-purpose special district, not a sovereign government, and cannot override city ordinances. So, may I have a few more minutes? All paid-owned land lies within the city of plantations, so city rules, regulations, and code enforcement fully apply. Florida municipalities have broad home rule authority over public property, signage, safety, and land use. Special districts must comply with municipal ordinances unless state law explicitly grants an exemption. PAID has none. PAID cannot authorize activities the city prohibits, including political signage or politically timed events on public land. I will conclude and let Lisette take over. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Bernardi. Ms. Hampton? After Ms. Hampton will be Mr. Conklin and Ms. Hudson on deck. Good afternoon. Lisette Hampton, 11460 Northwest State Street. So, continuing with what Lori started out, Florida Attorney General Opinions. The Florida Attorney General has repeatedly held that political signs are not permitted on public property because government agencies must remain neutral in political activity. This applies to all public land, including land owned by special districts. Paid's allowance of PAC signs on public property combined with the June 20th event and door-hanger campaign raises serious neutrality and election-influenced concerns. Thank you. I'll close afterwards. For me, so what the political action committee and the political action committees in Florida are not required to carry liability insurance. By allowing PAC signs to remain on city and paid owned public property, the city and paid are assuming a liability for a political organization that has no insurance requirement and no assets. This exposes the city of plantation and paid to unnecessary legal and financial risk. Okay. I'm going to now speak for me as a person after observing the tactics of this political committee, political action committee, and their unethical behavior. I don't think this is an organization that should represent any candidate in the city of plantation, my opinion. In closing, I thank you for your time and consideration. Our goal is to protect the integrity of the election process, ensure transparency, and to prevent the city of plantation from being placed in legal jeopardy due to the action of a special district operating within your jurisdiction. Thank you, Ms. Hampton. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Conklin and then Ms. Hudson. May I approach? Yes, you may. Dennis Conklin, 4581 Northwest Six Court. First, I'd like to thank Director Holmes for giving me the information about the Flex Zone ordinance, and I was here for that meeting. That was when the city recognized St. Gregory for its 65th year in the city, so I don't know how that skipped my mind. I guess it was because I was so opposed to it. Last week, June the 4th, was the anniversary of the Tiananmen Square Massacre. June 5th was supposed to be D-Day, and if you go over to the Broward Mall Cinema, there's a movie now called Pressure, and I encourage everybody to go see that because that's how you find out that D-Day wound up on June 6th. I don't want to spoil it for you. I have my usual seven requests, but there's actually an eighth. I presented today 12 pages. My request is to have 12 plantation students of various grades each read approximately 100 words of the Declaration of Independence to file the invocation at the beginning of the City of Plantation Independence Day ceremony or celebration and kindly view the pages. I'd like you to look at request number four, and that is basically the mayor, the administration, the city council members support. Governor DeSantis announced proposals for nine-point citizen bill of rights from artificial intelligence and basically the protection of data centers. We didn't get through the legislature, but that's because we got a bunch of rhinos in the legislature, and we have had for over 25 years. The data centers is basically a land grab. They're not going to be able to function. They're not going to wait after five years because just like your laptops go out of phase and everything else, but they grab all the land, whether it be farmland or cattle land, and it's turned over basically to the elites that run these tech companies. So I hope you'll encourage our legislature to get back in the saddle and do what the governor is saying to protect us. Request number five, they tried to pull another COVID with this, may I extend 30 seconds? 30 seconds, yes. I guess it was some sort of virus from Argentina that got onto a cruise ship, and they got everybody all frightened and everything else like that. So my request five is that the mayor, the administration, and city council members read and sign the Great Barrington Declaration, and everybody in the audience can do it as well. I signed it back in 2020 when it first came out. It's at www.gbdeclaration.org. You, as local officials, swore to uphold the Constitution, even before the state constitution and the city charter. You have the right to protect our rights if you'll do that, and I yield back my time. Thank you, Mr. Conklin. Thank you for allowing me to extend it. Thank you, Mr. Conklin. And I'm going to allow Councilmember Reinstein to make a comment because you've made the request about the Declaration of Independence. Go ahead, Councilmember. Thank you, Council President. I believe last year, following Mr. Conklin, your request for the reading of the Declaration of Independence, that our Parks and Rec Department allowed the JROTC members to read the Declaration of Independence prior to the band performing at the celebration. And so I know that Ms. O'Toole is not here, and I'm not going to put Mr. Ambrosio on the spot, but we can inquire with them if that is something that is scheduled or can be scheduled again this year as well. Yeah, perhaps we can put our JROTC young men in contact with Mr. Ambrosio and Ms. Ryan. Thank you very much for that. Ms. Hudson. You take it. Good evening. Hello. Tiffany Hudson, 8951 North New River Canal. Okay, I'm here to talk about the surveillance cameras again. But I did want to start off the last two times I left the podium. I was reminded that you guys do everything in public. So I wanted to clear up the confusion there because I wasn't insinuating. You didn't. But the meeting that you guys had, I don't know who set it up exactly, on March 6th, 2024. Excuse me. It was a meeting with the vendors like Axon and I think Motorola and they came. That was open to the public. However, it was open for 10 minutes on a Tuesday morning from 9 a.m. to 9, 10 a.m., which I think is insulting. I mean, there's no way anyone could make that. They're either at work or they're with kids. So as I was looking through the minute and listening to the whole thing, there's supposed to be a 3 to 4 p.m. after all the vendors did their private spiels or whatever, and that wasn't recorded at all. So I don't even know if that happened. So I, for one, would have loved to have known about that. And even if I had, I probably wouldn't have been able to attend. But that's what I was referring to. So another point I wanted to make about transparency. These cameras that are being put in, it wasn't well known to us. I mean, it just wasn't. There's a difference between technically being public and it being publicly known. And I haven't talked to anybody that knew anything about this. So this is my concern. The fact that it was, I watched the meeting where you guys voted on it as well. It was pretty much just quick. There wasn't a whole lot of conversation about it. I don't think the due diligence was done after what I was reviewing because I, for one, I've done some little research on it and it's very obvious. This is a very controversial decision. I don't know if you guys have been paying attention to what's going on around the country, but there's tons of people ripping this stuff out of their cities. There's privacy concerns. Axon is a company owned by BlackRock. Of course, they own everything BlackRock, Vanguard, but they're tied to Palantir. There's a lot of concerns about where the data goes. It does not stay here in the city. It gets distributed amongst thousands of police departments. It's been used with ICE. ICE has used it to capture people, if that's a concern of people's. And now it's being used in front of the schools where our kids walk by every day and their faces are now on the camera. So I would just, once again, I'm going to come here every meeting just to kind of, you know, voice my concerns about it because I think it's very important and what I'm hearing from other residents, they're very upset about it and they didn't know. So that's it. Thank you for coming. Are there any other public requests of counsel? Nobody online? Okay, hearing none, we will move on to the consent agenda. Consent agenda consists of items 1 through 12 this evening and may be approved with one motion. Does any member of the council wish to pull an item? Yes, items 1, 2, and 3. And I don't see any member of the public wishes to pull an item. Do we have a motion for the remaining items? Motion to approve the consent agenda with the exception of items 1, 2, 3. Do we have a second? Second. Okay. Ms. Begrove, please call the roll. Councilmember Reinstein? Yes. Councilmember Anderson? Yes. Councilmember Andrew? Yes. Councilmember Fadgen? Councilmember Horland? Yes. Thank you very much. Councilmember Reinstein. Item number 1 is resolution supporting a City of Plantation Web Grant application. Mr. Ezra, do you need to read the summary? 1? No, we do not. All right. Go ahead, Mr. Councilmember Reinstein. Thank you. You are, Mr. Thank you. Thank you. So my comments first, with permission of President Horland, I'd like to first make a few comments regarding 1, 2, and 3 together. So my concerns regarding 1, 2, and 3 have to do with potential changes in revenue and how we will be faced with budget constraints in the future. And while looking at 1, 2, and 3, particularly, well, 1 is tied in. 1 is the Rev Grant application, which the backup indicates that there's a City portion that is a match of, I believe it's 3.2 million. Number 2 is only before us in terms of the architectural services, but it's tied to an approved project of over 981,000. Number 3 is, again, architectural services and civil engineering services for 51,000, but tied to a total project of 1.28 million. And so my concerns are that we are confirming now something that we're going to be paying later, and the concern is what our situation, financial situation, will be if there's changes in how our budget has to be calculated. And so if we look at number 1, so let's start with number 1. What I'd like to just hear from the Administration or from whoever is able to speak on it is that, and we've recently received some further backup information, which I think answers the question, but I'd like it to be voiced out loud here, is that if we pass resolution 1, and is there an option to cancel or revoke if we determine that the City portion is no longer something we can support? So we'll start with number 1, if that's possible. Sure. Jason, I'm a maker CAO, and I appreciate the questions given what's coming up. For item number 1, we can pull out that agreement. I would just remind you all that this would be put in a five-year program, so we do have some time. We are looking for matching funds because, as you all know, we've not stabilized a source of funds for roadway improvements generally anyway, and that's pre-tax reform. This is also going to touch a number of different buckets. There's ADA aspect, some drainage aspect, roadway aspect, so we pull different funds to meet this project. My understanding from the meeting that was held the other night is that it was positively received. If it was negatively received, then we would go ahead and step back from the project. To the Councilman's point, though, if we do decide at a later date, we get through November, November the tax reform passes, and we find ourselves in a fairly substantial situation there. Just to put some texture on that so you all realize, and I want to say this is just as a thought experiment, not a recommendation, what you would be looking at at year one on $150,000, potentially it would mean shuttering or privatizing the library, the aquatic center, equestrian, and tennis center, doing a fire fee at 100% recovery, and a utility tax, and that wouldn't quite get us even. That's year one on $150,000 exemption. So you can see that would be a big sea change for the city. Again, not a recommendation, just a thought experiment of what the impact could potentially be. So anyway, if we were to pull this back, the impact would be that if we do it prior to tip, I believe we would lose 20 points or 20% for the subsequent application period. If it made it to the tip, then we'd have to forfeit a year. But at that point, what does it matter? Because we're really already, you know, if we're at the point of pulling it back, we're probably not in the position to apply a subsequent year. So I think the risk at that point is marginal for us. But to be gained is the matching revenue for roadway improvements we need to do. So we're still, it's something we would recommend moving forward with. And so for number one, the concern with not passing it obviously is losing the matching revenue. Yes, sir. The concern with passing it and backing out at a later point in time are the penalties for future projects, right? There's also that type of penalty that they would issue for future potential projects. Is that right? Yes, sir. And we've already done the groundwork for this. Oh, somewhere else I was going to go with that, but it escaped me. Understood. I don't have any more questions as to number one. I just wanted to make sure that it was clear on the record that there is an opportunity to cancel or revoke, but it would have other ramifications as well. Yes, sir. Before I move on to two and three, I don't know if you want to take a vote. I'd like to take if there's further discussion on item number one. But since you did comment on all three, and I'd like to start by saying I did attend the meeting last night, and that was a plan that had to come before Council and we had discussed, and it was very positive. You know, I think in looking at all three of these in totality, we're not talking about improvements. We're not talking about building a Taj Mahal City Hall. These all have ADA components to them. I think if we were to just briefly speak about item number two, which is City Hall renovation, one of the biggest concerns I've had is public access with our video and our audio, and that is something that I think needs to be addressed. I also feel while we've been wrestling with this property tax proposal, the city has been very fiscally conservative. We are in a better position than some because we have built up our reserves, and I don't feel that the business of the city should come to a stop. I believe that we need to address especially these ADA concerns. But again, to Mr. Nunnmaker's point, the conversation last night with the residents who would be directly impacted by this project, I think it will make that roadway safe where there was a lot of enthusiasm for it, and there were some very enlightening comments that they made that I think staff is taking back. So I'll open it up if anyone else has a comment on item number one. Council President, if you just continued on to two and three, I was going to stop before I go on to two and three. So I'll just finish then for two and three is that the way that I read two and three is that right now we're focused on this initial phase, which is the architectural assessment or the architectural and engineering assessment costs. Is that correct? Yes. And so for both of those, while it does make sense in terms of if you're going to do an assessment, it's probably less costly to do a total assessment instead of doing a piecemeal assessment. My question then goes to is that the projects that those are tied into for each one, two, and three, if we determine at some point in time that we, you know, because of our constraints that we don't wish to go forward with the entirety of those projects. Again, somewhat similar to my question regarding one is that would there be an opportunity to cancel, to pause, to pull back on those projects? Well, absolutely, because each one of those elements is going to come to you for subsequent approval. And to the point President Hornel was making earlier, with this building, I think what you see is we're trying to maximize the use of this, where you see other cities building new city halls or whatnot. We're repurposing the third floor to house IT staff. We are renovating the procurement area. We're doing as much with this building as we can to be as economical with our dollars. On this particular item, what we're faced with right now is just ADA compliance throughout this particular room, whether it's on the dais, the seating. So that's obviously something we do want to move forward. Now, as part of that, what we'll look at based on this feedback is what would the cost be if we don't address, say, the AV issues at the same time as we're ripping up the dais? Like we've received some comments from you all of different elements of the dais are either uncomfortable or this or that. That would be the time to address those issues. Similarly, we want to make this room more flexible, to have more flexible space to accommodate public meetings and whatnot. But to your point, we can always pull those items back. But at a minimum, we would absolutely want to move forward with the ADA improvements. And I think that's my final question, is that for both projects, agenda item two and three, the prioritization in terms of the timeline as well as the need is the ADA requirements. A hundred percent. And I'll just touch quickly on three so y'all can make your decisions. That was something that I believe President Horland brought up to me years ago, the state of the concrete at Sunset Park. So when a request came forward for a shade shelter, we wanted to go visit and say, well, how was the access there? And I'm sure as all of y'all have seen at Sunset Park, it's atrocious. This is something that should have been addressed long ago. So the bulk of that work is going to be very ADA oriented. So then the question would become, if the majority of those funds are going to be expended on a total project basis for the ADA issues, do you want to go ahead and address the shade structure while we're at it? Those are rollover funds that are currently available. And I believe the dugout element even has an ADA aspect to it as well. But we'll highlight all those to you when we bring them forward. And that way y'all can make a decision. Are there any of these that you can back out at that time, particularly as the tax reform gets more real? Thank you very much. That's what I wanted to hear you to confirm on the record. Thank you. My pleasure. Thank you, Councilmember Reinstein. Councilmember, does anybody else have any comments or questions on item number one? Nope. Any member of the public? Do we have a motion? Motion to approve. Can we do all three of them or do you want to do them individually? If you'd like. Is there any public comment on any of those three items? Oh, if you'd like to do them all at once. Mr. Ezra, are you okay with that? It's consent. Yes. Okay. Motion to approve items one, two, and three from the consent agenda. Do we have a second? Second. Okay. Ms. Beggro, please call the roll. Councilmember Reinstein. Yes. Councilmember Anderson. Yes. Councilmember Andreu. Yes. Councilmember Fadgen. Yes. And thank you, Councilmember Reinstein, for your thoughtful comments on those items. Moving on to legislative items. Item number 13 is a request for City Council review. A bid appeal committee order, case number 2026-001. It's RFSP 045-25. This is a request. Councilmembers, you have the information in your backup material. The city will not be presenting any new material. This is requesting an approval or a denial of the award appeal. And then I would ask Mr. Rick McGill if he'd like to come forward. And Mr. McGill, if you recall, filed the appeal. Good evening, Mr. McGill. I have a copy of two pages that are in the appeal. Please just state your name again for the record. Rick McGill, 1573 Blue Water Terrace North Pompano Beach 330. And then your company is? I'm with One Digital. Okay. Thank you very much. And you'd like to approach? Sure. Yes, please. All right. The floor is yours, Mr. McGill. Thank you. One Digital's Fort Lauderdale office. Our team has served as the city's employee benefits consultant since 2017. And I'm here to speak on legislative item 13. My request tonight is straightforward. I'm asking council to take a fresh look at the evaluation record. And if the scoring did not follow the RFSP as written, send the fee portion back for rescoring in accordance with the RFSP. Here's the core issue. The RFSP states that the fee evaluation, 25 out of 100 points, is to be scored using three subjective criteria. First is cost structure. Second is transparency of fees and commissions. And the third is any other relevant costs. The RFSP does not state that the fee score is to be calculated using a lowest price only formula. After the initial committee scoring, One Digital was the top ranked proposer. Following that, procurement announced that the scoring was not correct and disclosed that a non-subjective formula was being used for the total fee score based solely on lowest cost. One committee member originally scored pricing consistent with the RFSP's written factors. However, that approach was overridden and replaced with a different score calculated and entered by procurement. That change altered the outcome. When fee points were converted to a lowest price formula, the award recommendation flipped and we went from first to second. This also has real financial implications for the city. The city's benefits program is a significant expenditure over $20 million annually. A scoring approach that elevates the lowest fee over the RFSP stated fee criteria increases the risk of higher medical trend and missed savings opportunities that can dwarf the fee difference. My ask is this. Please grant council review and direct a transparent criteria aligns rescore consistent with the RFSP as written, particularly regarding the 25 points allocated to fee. To be clear, I'm not asking council to choose a broker tonight. I'm asking for the city to apply the RFSP criteria as written so the award decision is fully supported, consistent, and defensible. The handout that I gave you is part of the appeal. It's just two pages that were issued by the city. On one side you can see from the RFP that it should have been the subjective fee, the three items that I had mentioned, and on the back was how it was actually scored where they just used a percentage based on the lowest fee. Thank you for your time. I'm available for any questions. Okay. Let me just give council the background which is in your backup material on April 29, 2026. Consent agenda item number eight was approved. On April 30, the city received the formal award appeal from digital insurance doing business as one digital. On May 28, 2026, the appeal committee, based on the evidence reviewed, ordered the bid appeal to be denied. And on May 29, 2026, one digital sought review of the entire procurement appeal to come before the city council, and that's why Mr. McGill is here this evening. Thank you. Council members, do we have any questions for Mr. McGill? I just have a comment, President Horland. Yes. Not so much a question. So cost structure, is that not – well, it's a comment. Cost structure is usually based on lowest price. So that could be one of the three criteria, but that would be up to each committee member to make that decision, not using a formula that strictly looks at price and not the other criteria that was listed in there. And it is my understanding that all of our RFPs are structured this way. So this one followed our normal course. It was not anything different than all of the other RFPs that we put out. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Sure. Councilmember Reinstein. I just want to make the last question that Councilmember Andreu asked. I think I saw you shake your head and say yes, but – so you're in agreement that the process was consistent – the process that you went through was consistent with our process? No, that's – no. I mean, the question that was asked was that is that the way that we run – that our city runs this process? Then maybe I misunderstood the question. I thought what the question was – Unless I did. I'm going to ask Councilmember Andreu to – I thought the question was cost structure, wouldn't that be a lowest cost formula? And my answer was, yes, cost structure could be based on a lowest fee, but it says that it's supposed to be cost structure, transparency of fees and commissions, and any other relevant costs. There was another question after that, right? Yes. Thank you. Yeah. Well, it was a statement, but you kind of shook your head and said yes. So the process was not essentially – the terms are arbitrary or capricious, right? The process was our process. You weren't treated differently. Again, I respectfully disagree. So are you – this is what I want to understand is that are you saying that your company and you were treated differently from our regular process? I don't know how you treat other companies. I don't do a lot of RFPs, especially with the city. It's been, I don't know, five years since the last time we responded to an RFP with the city. So then you wouldn't disagree then if you were being told that the way that this process was handled is the same as all of our process. So you weren't – if you were – since you don't know, if you're being told that, you don't have any reason to believe otherwise. And again, I can't argue with what you're saying if that's the way that you do it. But what I'm saying is that the way that the RFP was written is not the way that it was scored. The Curement did the lowest cost and entered a score in on everybody's sheet. It's not a subjective like it's listed on here. If that's the way that you do it for everybody, then why wouldn't it be listed that way in the RFP? And I have responded to other municipalities' RFPs, and it's not uncommon to put in that you're going to use a lowest cost formula. But that's not what's written in here. So that's my argument was that it wasn't scored the way that it's written. Okay? Thank you. Sure. Anything else? Councilmember Reinstein? Councilmember Andreu? Did you? Councilmember Fatcher. Mr. McGill, did you have anything else to add? I do not. I don't see Councilmember Anderson's hand raised. I will make a motion to – for item number 13, requesting that we uphold the bid appeal committee order. Okay. So we're either requesting an approval or a denying of the award appeal. So you're requesting a denial of the award appeal? You want to clarify that? That's what I'm thinking. I want to make sure. Okay. I want to make sure. No. Okay. It is – I am in agreement with the committee order, which is the denial. Which is the denial. So I am upholding the committee order. Mr. Ezra, are you okay with that? I am. You're clear with the motion? Okay. Second. Okay. Ms. Biggerow, please call the roll. Councilmember Reinstein? Yes. Councilmember Anderson? Wait. Can you please clarify? The motion was to uphold the committee's recommendation. So if you vote yes, you're upholding the committee's recommendation? Correct. Okay. Then yes. Councilmember Andreu? Yes. Councilmember Fadgen? Yes. Councilmember Horland? Yes. Item number 14 is PP-26-0022, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Plantation, Florida, Repealing and Replacing Article IV, Impact Fees of Chapter 19 of the City Code in its entirety, Adopting Updated Development Impact Fees. Updated Development Impact Fees for General Government, Police, Fire, Library, Museum, Parks and Recreation and Transportation, Adopting the City of Plantation Development Impact Fees Justification Study, Prepared by DTA Public Finance Inc., Dated May 6, 2026, Providing Legislative Findings, Creating an Impact Fee Schedule and Land Use Categories, Establishing Criteria and Administrative Procedures for Individual Assessment of Impact Fees of Impact Fees for Individual Assessment of Impact Fees, Refunds, Credits, Collection of Fees and Fair Share Agreements, Providing for a Four-Year Phase-In Schedule Pursuant to Section 163.31801 Florida Statutes, Providing for Trust Funds, Providing for Conflict, Severability, Codification and Effective Date Thank you, Mr. Ezra. And Mr. Holmes, good evening. On the record, Dan Holmes, Planning, Zoning and Economic Development Director. I'm just going to kind of do a very quick overview. We do have a representative from DTA that's here and that's able to answer any questions that you may have relative to the study, methodologies, things of that sort. So just quickly, you know, why are we doing this? What are impact fees for? They're basically one-time fees that are paid by new development. They're used to fund capital facilities needed to serve growth. They ensure that new development pays its proportionate share of infrastructure costs and helps reduce the burden on existing residents and taxpayers when new development comes into the city. And finally, required to comply with Florida's Impact Fee Act and Dual Rational Nexus Legal Standard, which if you look through the study, we're very careful to make sure we're following all of those criteria laid out in the statutes. Why update the fees? Why update the fees? Existing fees have not kept pace. We haven't updated the fees in quite some time, so they haven't kept pace with construction costs, land acquisition costs, facility replacement values, and future capital improvement needs. So as you know, as indicated, the city retained DTA to conduct a comprehensive fee study for the city. The study projects growth and infrastructure needs through 2036, and the fees are based on the most recent and localized data as required by the statute. So what was evaluated? First, we evaluated the existing categories that we currently have in our code, which are general government, police, fire rescue, library, museum, and parks and recreation. So we did reevaluate those categories. We then looked at two additional categories as well, which was transportation and stormwater management. After looking at those two new categories, we would recommend adding the new category of transportation. And not, as you saw the staff report, we're not recommending that the stormwater management fees be approved at this time or that they'd be deferred to another study or time. And the reason for that is that we, as you know, the engineering department has been putting in place stormwater assessment fees. Some of the methodologies and things, as we talked about this with legal and stuff, there's some issues with us doing both. And we thought that the better fee would be to continue with the stormwater assessment fee. So Florida law limits fee increases. So when we did take a look at this, the law requires that impact fee increases may only occur once every four years. We've not updated our fees in quite some time. Increases greater than 25% must be phased in. So as you looked at the study, our fee increases would exceed the 25%. So there is a recommendation to phase it in consistent with the statutes. Maximum generated fees cannot be implemented immediately. So even though we do find a maximum fee in there, again, we would be implementing that fee over a four year period. And then fees must be phased in over four annual increments. So 2026 through 2029. So if this was adopted, like in 2026, we would have one fee. In 2027, that fee could be increased slightly and so forth until 2029. And thereafter, we would have that fee, the 2029 fee existing thereafter. You have the, you know, the impact fee study within the background there. But this is just an example of how it would be phased in. Current fee 2026, 2027, 2028, and 2029 is indicated. And then the transportation fee, which is different because it's a new fee, we would be able to implement the maximum fee for the transportation fee. And so what we're recommending this evening is approval of the development impact fee justification study, to update the impact fee ordinance, as indicated, to adopt a four year statutory phase in schedule, to adopt a new transportation impact fee program, and as indicated, to not adopt the stormwater impact fee for adoption as part of the study. So we're happy to answer any questions. As I said, if you have any questions relative to the study, we do have representatives from the DTA here. Thank you, Mr. Holmes. Before I turn it over to Councilmember Andreu, for those listening at home, just want to reiterate that these are not fees to residents. Right. These are fees on development. So, Councilmember Andreu. And that was what I was going to open with as well, but thank you for… But it does repeating. It does. So thank you, though, for stating that. And then I have a question, Mr. Holmes. I did not understand, or if you can explain, how are these fees transferable? When you say transferable, you mean… I read that somewhere. I'm sorry. I thought I heard someone say something, and I lost my internet connection, so I can't bring it up. But I thought I read… I'm sure I read that in the ordinance, but I lost my connection. But it mentioned about them being transferable, and I was… I think, as Jason just indicated, it's the manner in which they're vested. So, if I could get a little more clarification on where we're… How about I go to the mayor, and then we'll come back to you. Sure. Thank you. Mayor? Hey there. Please repeat what you said about stormwater. I thought I misheard it. So, the study did look at a stormwater, a new stormwater fee, as well as transportation fee. And it does recommend a stormwater fee. However, after looking at the stormwater impact fee and then also evaluating the city's existing stormwater assessment fees, we thought it would be more prudent for us to stay with the stormwater assessment fee and not have the two fees overlapping, which we could be challenged on. And just so council knows, you know, next meeting… Yes. Mayor's got stormwater. Okay. Okay. That's all. Thank you, Mayor. Just hold on one minute, Mr. Holmes. Councilmember Fadgen-Reinstein, no questions? Okay. No pressure. I can ask you offline… It's not even 7 o'clock yet. You're okay. I can ask you offline, but I know that I read that and I was just… I was curious how that… Not ringing about. …how that worked. Okay. Let me… I'd have to go back and look at that section. And we can talk about it before the second reading, as well. That's true. This is the first, so I can always circle back with you. Mind it? It's okay. Oh, I hear the… You want to go ahead and make… They would like to be able to see the next win, so you can go ahead, Council President, and I will send Mr. Holmes an email. Okay, and you'll… Before the second reading. Yes. Okay. Do we have a motion, Councilmembers? Motion to approve. Thank you. Do we have a second? Somebody? Second. Ms. Spigrow, please call the roll. Councilmember Reinstein? Yes. Councilmember Anderson? Yes. Councilmember Andrew? Yes. Councilmember Fadgen? Yes. Councilmember Horland? Yes. Thank you very much. We'll see that back for a second reading. Anybody have board or committee appointments? Nobody? All right. Comments by the mayor. Sir, you are up. Back to board appointments. We are short two people on sustainability. Yes. Is that right, Ms. Moore? And we're having trouble getting our meetings. Yeah. So, to that point, I know we just made the joint appointment, Mr. Moselle, and he was on vacation, I think, before that appointment. And I'm having conversations with my appointment because I believe that she… Okay. She got there late. So, we're going to talk about whether she wants to continue and if I need to find somebody else. So, yep, I'm working on that, but if anybody knows of anybody. All right. I know there's a couple of applications in there. My only other council comment is we completed supervisor training. Everybody thought it was fantastic. Wonderful. I'm excited about the things that we're going to learn. And it is well worth the money just in terms of litigation that could… Sure. That we're preventing and everything. So… Absolutely. Especially when you get to HR issues and potential issues there. Yes. So, that's great. For administration bringing that forward. That's all. Great. Thank you, Mayor. Councilmember Fajan. Thank you, Council President Horland. I'm not going to make a lot of comments about this because we spoke a lot about it at the last meeting. I did request some information regarding the speed cameras from Chief Schlegel, who he forwarded to all of us. To the one point, the non-flashing tickets is about 67%. The flashing tickets is about 33%. So, I think that makes sense. It's going to be… Most of the tickets are going to happen when the indication that you're entering this zone is most apparent. Whether you're knowing you're in a speed… A camera-enforced speed zone or not. You know, the flashing lights of the active school zone, you know, does its job. And there's a significant deterrent. And the tickets are getting written on that. So, I'm just throwing that out there because I said… We said that we are going to consider this over the summer before the school year starts. I was thinking about Councilmember Reinstein's picture that he put up at the last council meeting about these manually modified signs. And I actually saw the sign that he… I think it was the specific sign. I don't know if it's multiple signs. So, the questions I had regarding that is… Does it meet all the DOT retro-reflectability requirements? Who did that? Did we do that? Did they do that? Did the county do that? I find it unacceptable that that's the kind of signage that they put up. So, one, I would like to know if what they put up meets all of the requirements that the Florida Statute and, you know, all the standards that Samira would know more about. So, if… Yeah. Councilmember Fadgen, I'm going to let you finish, but I just want to interrupt for a moment because after the last meeting I did speak to administration. We're going to bring this back so we're not just talking about in Council comments and have it as an agenda item. No, I know. This is just a follow-up because there are some things that came up and I wanted to get some research and I want to keep doing that. And like I said, I don't really have a ton of comments about this. There was one other thing regarding the cameras, but I think it might have escaped me. And what you forgot to mention on the data that, you know, we had said previously with the early data we requested that it was just over 30% of plantation residents being ticketed. And if you saw the data today, it was 28%, which I thought was fascinating. Okay. I didn't have time to look at all the data. 28%. And I also think, and I understand about the flashing and non-flashing, but I would think, you know, that a speed sign, speed limit sign would be enough of a deterrent for people to… Yeah, but the problem is, is that there's really a lot of inconsistency when you drive around these districts and people are really starting to notice, like, you know, the signage of, you know… Yeah, should we know? Yes. But the reality is, it should be really clear. And I think that we all agree that the signage needed to be cleaned up. Sure. There's definitely a confusion. Sure. I'm sorry to interrupt you. No, it's okay. I appreciate it. It was really for a discussion, so no worries. If the city attorney, not right now, because like I said, we're going to bring this back. You know, it was brought up that we were not allowed to turn it off. Oh, he left? Well, I'll talk to him offline, but I'm going to tell you what I'm going to request. I read the statute and I did not interpret that we can't turn it off, but it could be vague reading this. I'm not an attorney. I never would have been an attorney, but no offense. And I think that'll be part of the discussion for the agenda or the item. I'll mention that so when it comes back. Okay. So another item, I have a mutual friend of the owner of Bunkers and I attended, which is the… It's the grand opening on Friday. Very exciting. So I went to a soft opening over the weekend. And what did you think? It was fun. I have an injury and it hurts like heck and I want to get better. They've been very lovely in their communication with us. So I'm excited to support them. And what I want to say is that I dared to ask the question how their experience was with the city and overwhelmingly positive. And I wanted to recognize Marlene Rivera and Sean Lamey for the work that they did with above and beyond. And their delay had to do more with their landlord and their fire alarm person than anything we had to do. Right. So I plan on attending. I'll be there. So I hope everyone will be there. It's very nice. And I think… Oh, I'm sorry. I mentioned this to Danny. I asked him if he knew about Freebie. And he did not. So I was saying, like, certainly all the businesses that apply for a business tax receipt within our service area, we need to start putting in the application packages that, hey, you can enroll in this. You can get your business listed as an advertisement. Sure. Especially with the expansion. Yes. Absolutely. It's a good idea. And he immediately downloaded the app, and he's going to look into it to get listed. So with that, that's all I have. So thank you. And to your point, I've been hearing very positive things about our business tax licensing clerks. So, yeah. Thank you, Council Member Fadgin. Council Member Reinstein. Yes. Thank you. I wasn't going to make any comments regarding Red Speed and the enforcement. And I know that Council President Hoyland has just said it's coming back. But I will simply add is that I've been reviewing the contract myself again. And I did look back at one of their initial documents that was a school zone speed study that they provided to us. And in the very cover of it, where they have a picture of one of the signs, it has a speed limit sign that actually says the speed limit. And so, you know, when we're talking about the need for them to reevaluate the signage, I know that they're discussing it now. And that it's a continued discussion because I think we've all made ourselves clear that we're not thrilled with how it has turned out in some respects. With the signage. Yeah, with the signage. So I wanted to also share that I did attend on behalf of the city on May 29th, the Area Agency on Aging of Broward County's 42nd Annual Broward Senior Hall of Fame. And it was a very nice event here in Plantation at the Renaissance and a lot of wonderful people were honored and recognized as inductees into the Senior Hall of Fame. And I also want to share that I read recently and I thought it was worth sharing with everyone is that Central Park Elementary has once again been recognized as an Everglades Champion School at the gold level. And CP teacher Monica Mormon said, I'm going to quote, said even more exciting. We remain the only public elementary school in Broward County to earn this distinction. And I've received the George Barley eight year milestone award for being an Everglades Champion School for eight consecutive years. And she continued to say that this recognition belongs to our amazing students, staff, families and community partners who have embraced environmental literacy and stewardship year after year, from classroom lessons and school gardens to cleanups and conservation projects, every effort matters. And so we should be very proud of Central Park Elementary School for that distinction. I also want to add congratulations to American Heritage Schools. Their Broward campus also reached the gold level as an Everglades Champion School. So we have one public school, one private school that reached that level. And that is quite a feat. Also, we have some congratulations to the Plantation Stars 8U Coach Pitch Team for winning the Little League District Championship. And it's nice to see that we are excelling in so many different levels and so many different areas, academics, sports, conservation. And in relation to that, we also need to make sure that our schools and our school board members know that we want to make sure that they prioritize the arts programs in our schools. I don't know if there's been any change in the past few days, but there's been discussions about reducing or removing or at least not prioritizing arts in our schools. And that shouldn't be acceptable to any of us. I did actually just write a note to myself while some of the members of the public were speaking, our residents, regarding the plantation acres issue. And concern that the city was being drawn into this as she was describing it. And as much as I would prefer not to bring that up at the end of this meeting, I've already done it. And I just want to make sure that at least from a city perspective that we disagree with that statement and that we're comfortable that whatever is being done in the acres by another government entity is not on us. No, sir. I don't feel like we have any liability in the situation. To those concerns, though, I would say they're not unfounded. What we have done is we are issuing a courtesy notice to the paid office because that property is not a right-of-way. They own that property. So those snipe signs are not allowed by code. We do have a complaint, so they'll get a courtesy notice. If they are in the right-of-way, we will pull them up. As far as the event on the 20th, that will be processed as a special event for our purposes. We look at it as an educational event. If they want to make it political, that's on them. We put up a sign noting that we were going to partner with them. That is one of the most significant efforts that we know of to address South Acres drainage issues. But we're not approaching it politically. We've, I believe, done everything we can to stay out of that and just stick to facts. So just to make sure that I'm clear, because I have not gone out there and seen the sign that is being referenced. So if there's a sign that says that we are partnering with them and there is a concern that that entity is making political statements or making statements that we would not support or that we believe should not be made. Is there a concern that the way that it's being advertised as a partnership doesn't fit our city's best interest? Our best interest is to address the drainage issues there. If they want to do anything that's untoward or outside of law, they'll deal with those consequences on their end. We're not going to do it. We're not going to do anything other than education. So you're not concerned with the perception? I just want to make clear is that if there's a sign there that says we're in partnership, and they're presenting whatever they're presenting that we need? That's all paid. I'm concerned with what the city does, and we'll own our actions. Okay, very good. I just want to make sure that at least we respond to that on the record here, that that's not us, that's them, separate entities. Separate entity, separate attorney representing them. We're dotting our I's, crossing our T's, and doing everything as is proper. Yes, sir. Thank you. Thanks. Thank you, Council President. Thank you for bringing that up. You know, that was how we approved the agenda item as a partnership, and it's unfortunate that it's being used for other... Yes, but I just saw that the city attorney... Is it the city attorney? No, that's the mayor. The mayor made a comment on that before I go to the council. No, I just want to back up to the red speed and everything. We heard you all loud and clear. We're going to have an agenda item. Yeah, we're going to put it on the agenda. We've been meeting on it, and we're working... Thank you. No, I appreciate that. I had the conversation. We take it really seriously, and we agree with everything you said. Yeah, and I think it'll be a good conversation to revisit. Some of those signs actually look like ransom notes. That was a good way to put it. Again, thank you, Council Member Reinstein, for bringing that up. Council Member Andrea. Thank you. Going back to Council Member Reinstein's comments with the acres. So, have we been invited officially to that event? Because I have not received anything. I mean, if we're partnering... We haven't, but my intention was, assuming they do the special event, just to show up, just to see what, you know. Curiosity at this point has kind of got me. Okay. I have not been invited. No. That's why, usually when we partner with any entity, and we are doing some type of collaboration... Just to be clear, we weren't partnering for this event. Okay. Our partnership is about the thing itself. Okay. Once I'll get a copy of the special event, assuming it's processed, and we'll be happy to copy all on that. Or not. Or not. Make it for what it's worth. Thank you. Thanks. Join me at the Library for the Juneteenth Bingo on Saturday. Bingo-lingo. Going back to Mr. Holmes. I found it, Mr. Holmes, on page 21. I don't know if it's something quick that you would want to still answer right now, or like I said, I can always circle back with you. I was curious about item 12 on that page that says impact fee credits are assignable and transferable at any time after establishment from one development or parcel to any other within the city. Happy to answer that. Yeah. So once a development comes in and they are assessed an impact fee based upon the square footage or the number of units that they come in with, if there's redevelopment on that site that increases the, say, intensity or density that's developed, they will get credit for what was previously paid at that lower level. Does that make sense? Yes. So if there's redevelopment, they will, whatever was previously paid, they will get credit for that and then they will pay the additional amount. Okay. Okay. That's not how I comprehended it when I read it, but okay. If that's the interpretation, I'm good with that. But it sounded like it was transferable to another parcel. Oh, no, no. Okay. Thank you for clarifying that. Absolutely. Juneteenth is Friday, June 19th, commemorating June 19th, 1865, the day of freedom reached the last enslaved people. And the city, as I stated, will be recognizing the holiday and celebrating Juneteenth family bingo. So I will be at that, Mr. Noonamaker, Saturday, the 13th. And that's starting at one o'clock at Plantation Historical Museum. We also have Flag Day, June 14th. And I know that our chief is doing Coffee with a Hero tomorrow at 1030 at the library. Correct, chief? Mm-hmm. Thank you for that. I won't be able to attend, unfortunately. But that's always a great event. And I'm not able to attend, Laura, the University of Plantation because I have a conflict with another meeting. But I always appreciate the great work you do with the University of Plantation. And I'm sure my other colleagues will be there representing. Also in June, we're celebrating National Caribbean American Heritage Month. So I hope everybody can attend the Island Space Museum's Mango Festival. It is on Father's Day this year. So we'll see at 2 p.m. And it's not here in the city. It's at Charles Dodge City Center. But if you can support them and purchase a ticket with that. And I want to wish all of our fathers a very, or father figures, uncles, grandparents, father figures, a happy Father's Day on June 21st. We greatly appreciate you all. And happy Men's Health Month, too. I know that I saw Councilmember Reinstein is going to be on a men's health panel. And so I know you'll do a great job always representing us on that as well. And I saw a couple of my colleagues that you'll be on there with. So you're going north. You're going north. But yes, men, go get checked and maintain your health and speak about it. So thank you for doing that. And that concludes all of my remarks. Great job. Thank you, Councilmember Andreu. Councilmember Anderson, you have been a trooper. Do you want to try to say anything? Just thank you to you for pinch hitting the comments for me. We can't say anything else. Okay. We hope you feel better. Take care of yourself and thanks for being a trooper tonight. Very quickly, I'm not trying to be extra tonight. But this beautiful crystal gavel was presented to me two weeks ago as I concluded my presidency of the Briarwood League of Cities. And I brought it tonight as really a thank you to the city. I could not have served this year without the support of administration and directors and my colleagues. And thank you all for being there in support as I passed the gavel. It really was incredibly – I was just so proud to represent the city. The first person to do so since Frank Veltri, I think, in 1974. And I'm still on the board of directors as past president. They keep you working. So I'll continue to encourage elected officials to lead with integrity and dignity. And we're still – you've got your other little gavel there. It's been a year of gavels. So we've got a lot of work to do. And I'll segue – again, thank you to everybody for your support. And segueing into this past weekend, I did attend Florida League of Cities Board of Directors meeting. And they tried to attack a lot of other items. And all we wanted to talk about was property taxes, understandably. So what I want to tell you is I met with Mr. Nunnemaker yesterday and kind of a little bit of behind the scenes of what had transpired up there. But most importantly, I think it's important for us to understand that we have our work cut out for us. As I've said, we need to continue to tell our story and what that means to the service we provide to the residents and what these potential cuts could mean to our budget. There will be multiple legal challenges. So without going into too many details, that was one of the things that we spoke about. The attorney for the league felt there were at least – and I'm sure Mr. Ezreal has looked at that thoroughly – at least five phrases in there that could be legally challenged. So there will be legal challenges. There's a timeline for that. We are waiting for more information to come out from the league because there's going to be a whole campaign against this. And it's, you know, been interesting because the media has been on our side. I think there's been some great op-eds written. But the comments following some of those op-eds have been discouraging. And what I said at the Board of Directors meeting is the – in my opinion, the DOGE propaganda that was put out there that you can't trust your cities. And we know there are bad actors out there. We know that. But you don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. But what that was was an attempt to sow distrust in local government. And I think they did a pretty good job. So it is up to us to make sure that our residents know that they can trust us with their tax dollars. So moving on to that, talking about our schools. I don't know if many of you know that South Plantation, about 20 years ago, had a very successful solar car program. And they had a phenomenal teacher there, Dr. Alan Phipps, who went on to win great acclaim when the Einstein Award and moved up to FAU High School. And when my children went there, that engineering program kind of died off. And so did the solar car program. And I made a call this year and said, where's the solar car? And it was kind of in a parking lot somewhere. So I was able to connect the magnet coordinator, Mr. Zeely, with a gentleman who is with the Broward Workshop. And he was actually at the forefront of funding the original solar car. And they were working on this up at FAU. So what I'm excited about is there's going to be a meeting tomorrow. And South Plantation has partnered with FAU High School. And they'll be racing in Texas next month on a solar car. So they're looking for community support. I've connected them with a couple of people, but we're really excited. And I know that I connected them with parks the other day because actually the football field at South Plantation is being renovated. And they needed a track. And Mr. Ambrosio was nice enough to talk to them about that. So it's just something really exciting for the kids. And I wanted to mention that. And, yes, there's a meeting tomorrow from 8 to 10. And I will be there just to meet the team and wish them well. The last thing I wanted to bring up, council members, I promise we'll get out of here before 7.30. As I have spoken to Mr. Nunnamaker and I had a conversation with Matt Thompson in regards to something that I had wanted to bring up quite a while ago. So our dear friend in Coral Springs, former Vice Mayor Nancy Mater, had had an Adopt a Road program in Coral Springs. And she and I talked about this via text message at length last year. And I was prepared to do it myself and go out and order safety vests on Amazon. And because I had done a couple of these with some high school students. And she said, no, no, no, no. You call your public works department and they have the materials. So I did speak to Mr. Nunnamaker yesterday and spoke to Mr. Thompson and said, listen, I'm not looking to increase our cost or our workload. But there are a lot of residents who really want to volunteer and seeking more volunteer opportunities with the city. So what I'd like to ask council is I spoke to Mr. Thompson and said, as I did with the paid leave program and the banners for heroes. I'd like to come up with a proposal if you'd like to, if that's something council would be interested in pursuing. And ask Mr. Thompson if it's something that we could possibly partner with public works. So I just really wanted to see if that's something that you would like to go forward with. Because many cities do it and we don't. Sounds great. Okay, volunteer. I'll volunteer. Okay, good. And I'm hoping everybody will take us straight. The other thing, as a piggyback on that, as Mr. Thompson and I were talking, we had many years ago. And I know Mr. Ezra had worked on the original contract. We had started talking about a Neighbors Helping Neighbor program. And the genesis of that was a Park East homeowners meeting where we have a lot of our residents, specifically female residents who are elderly on a fixed income, living in their homes alone, who need a fence repaired or a house painted. And I know we've talked about this before. The mayor and Councilmember Anderson and I had gone out with rebuild, I think at one point. Remember we were painting houses and planting plants. But I still believe it's something that we can do as a city. And that would, again, mean reaching out to the community. I'm sure there are some general contractors in town and painters who would like to get involved. But I think there are opportunities out there for us to be able to help our residents in different ways. And Mr. Thompson had some ideas as well. So, again, I'm not trying to put any more work on our staff, but I think it's something to explore. So, okay, with everyone's consent, then I'll put something together and present that to Mr. Thompson. And with that, happy Father's Day to all the dads and stepdads and uncles and grandpas out there. And the meeting is adjourned at 726. Good night, everyone.