>> I LIKE THE BEAT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN IT IS CURRENTLY SEVEN O'CLOCK.
[CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:03]
THANK YOU FOR COMING TO OUR COMMISSION MEETING.CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. MAYOR GOMEZ?
>> THANK YOU. FOR EVERYONE, PLEASE RISE, AND I WILL LEAD IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, BUT I WILL ASK EVERYBODY TO REMAIN STANDING FOR A MOMENT OF SILENCE.
WE HAVE ONE OF OUR PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY, STANLEY FRANCIS PATTERSON WHO PASSED AWAY ON JULY 2ND.
SOME OF US WILL BE THINKING OF HIM AND FOR ANYBODY WHO SERVED IN OUR MILITARY, ANYONE WHO'S LOST AND ANYBODY WHO'S IN OUR HEARTS THAT WE WISH TO SAY A MOMENT OF SILENCE FOR.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. PLEASE BE SEATED.
CITY ATTORNEY, YOUR REPORT, PLEASE.
[1. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT]
>> YES, MADAM MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, I'LL MAKE SURE THAT I'M CLOSE TO THE MICROPHONE BEFORE BEING ADMONISHED TO DO SO.
I HAVE TWO ITEMS TO REPORT TO THE COMMISSION AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
THE FIRST ITEM IS A REQUEST TO SCHEDULE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION IN THE WOODMONT COUNTRY CLUB VERSUS CITY OF TAMARAC LITIGATION MATTER, SUBJECT TO COUNSEL'S APPROVAL.
WE ARE PROPOSING AT LEAST INITIALLY AT THIS POINT IN TIME, TO HAVE OUTSIDE COUNSEL, WHICH IS JOHNSTOWN SOMEHOW TO COME MEET WITH US AN HOUR BEFORE OUR NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING, WHICH WOULD BE OUR FIRST MEETING IN AUGUST, UNLESS YOU WISH FOR US TO SCHEDULE IT FOR DIFFERENT TIME AND DATE TO BRIEF US ON THE STATUS OF THAT LITIGATION, DISCUSS STRATEGY AND POTENTIAL SETTLEMENT ISSUES, AND GIVE DIRECTION TO MR. BURKE ON HOW TO PROCEED WITH THE PENDING LITIGATION.
IT'S BEEN SOME TIME SINCE WE'VE ALL RECEIVED A REPORT AND AN UPDATE FROM HIM AND SO I THOUGHT IT WAS A TIMELY TO GO AHEAD AND DO SO.
ASK THE COMMISSION'S APPROVAL TO SCHEDULE SUCH A SHADE MEETING OR EXECUTIVE SESSION.
>> YOU'RE ASKING FOR 8.30 IN THE MORNING ON WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 24TH?
THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR, FOR SOME REASON I THOUGHT THAT THAT WAS A NIGHT MEETING, BUT WE CAN HAVE IT 9:00 AND MAYBE PUSH BACK AN HOUR OR HALF AN HOUR, THE START OF THE REGULAR MEETING.
I THINK THAT AN HOUR SHOULD BE SUFFICIENT TIME FOR MR. BURKE TO BRIEF US.
>> I MISSED THE BEGINNING PART OF YOUR WORDS.
YOU'RE SAYING GOING BACK TO THE SEPTEMBER MEETING, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? WHAT DID YOU SAY?
>> NO, THE FIRST MEETING IN AUGUST.
>> THE FIRST MEETING IN AUGUST? START AT 9:00 HALF AN HOUR SHOULD BE SUFFICIENT?
>> AND IF WE GO A LITTLE BIT LATER THAN AT LEAST WILL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SUNSHINE LAW.
>> ALL RIGHT. YOU NEED A MOTION?
>> MAKES A MOTION FOR NINE O'CLOCK SHADE SESSION WITH OUTSIDE COUNSEL REGARDING THE MATTER OF WOODMONT VERSUS THE CITY OF TAMARAC. STILL HAVE A SECOND?
>> THANK YOU. THE SECOND ITEM I WANT TO BRING TO THE COMMISSIONERS ATTENTION IS THAT, EARLIER THIS AFTERNOON, MYSELF AND STAFF HAD A CONFERENCE CALL TO DISCUSS AN ISSUE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP BY YOU ALL SHORTLY AFTER VOTE ON THE CHARTER AMENDMENT ISSUES.
WE WILL BE PREPARING AND DISTRIBUTING TO YOU ALL A GUIDANCE DOCUMENT AS TO WHAT ARE THE LIMITS BASED UPON EXISTING STATE LAW ON WHAT WE CAN AND CAN'T DO AS FAR AS EDUCATION WITH RESPECT TO THOSE PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENTS.
I WILL TELL YOU THAT THE MOST RECENT LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENT FURTHER
[00:05:02]
RESTRICTS OUR ABILITY TO DO EDUCATIONAL OUTREACH TO OUR RESIDENTS.IN A NUTSHELL, IT BASICALLY SAYS THAT ALL WE CAN DO IS PROVIDE FACTUAL INFORMATION.
THAT'S THE EXTENT OF OUR ABILITY AS A LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.
>> THANK YOU. CITY MANAGER YOUR REPORT.
[2. CITY MANAGER REPORT]
FIRST IS A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION TO COMMISSIONER ELVIN VILLALOBOS FOR COMPLETING THE NEWLY ELECTED OFFICIALS TRAINING.
>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO GO TO THE WELL? [NOISE]
>> ON BEHALF OF OUR GUEST THE IEM0, FLORIDA LEAGUE OF CITIES UNIVERSITY.
THIS IS BEING PRESENTED TO YOU FOR YOUR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION.
THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH. [APPLAUSE]
>> NOW, I THINK IT SHOULD BE REQUIRED FOR EVERYONE, BUT IT DOES GO AGAINST THE SUNSHINE SO VERY GRATEFUL TO HAVE THE EXPERIENCE TO LEARN EVEN THOUGH IT TOOK A LITTLE WHILE.
IT'S OKAY, JUST VERY INTERESTING TO KNOW.
>> COMMISSIONER WILL BE COMING DOWN IN THIS PRESENTATION.
>>THE NEXT IS A PRESENTATION TO THE CITY COMMISSION, WE HAVE BEING PRESENTED BY RANDY HIBSHMAN TO TAMARAC CITY.
WE HAVEN'T DONE THIS FOR SO LONG I FORGOT ABOUT THESE THINGS.
COMMISSION, YOU'RE INVITED TO COME DOWN, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE.
>> HI, I'M RANDY FROM CHALLENGER BASEBALL.
CHALLENGER IS A BASEBALL PROGRAM FOR SPECIAL NEEDS KIDS THAT WE'VE BEEN DOING SINCE 1990 IN BROWARD COUNTY.
TAMARAC WAS ONE OF OUR VERY FIRST TEAMS AND THERE'S BEEN WITH US ALL THESE YEARS AS A SPONSOR.
THANKS TO THEM AND OTHER SPONSORS, WE CAN PROVIDE THE KIDS WITH UNIFORMS, EQUIPMENT, PICTURES, TROPHIES AND SOME OTHER THINGS LIKE A MARLIN'S GAME AND WE DO A FESTIVAL IN FORT MYERS WHERE WE PLAY THE FORT MYERS CHALLENGE OUR KIDS ALL AT NO CHARGE TO THE PARENTS.
EVERYTHING WE DO IS FOR THE KIDS AND IT'S A WONDERFUL PROGRAM.
EVERYBODY HITS, EVERYBODY FIELDS, EVERYBODY GETS AROUND THE BASIS AND IT'S REALLY FUN TO WATCH THESE KIDS.
IT'S OPEN TO ALL KIDS WITH ANY SPECIAL NEED, WHETHER IT BE MENTAL OR PHYSICAL AND OUR KIDS REALLY HAVE A GOOD TIME JUST GETTING AROUND THE FIELD AND PLAYING.
IT'S REALLY A WAY BASEBALL SUPPOSED TO BE PLAYING.
WHILE I'M WAITING THE OTHER THING I WANT TO DO IS THE COACH WHO HAS BEEN A COACH FOR THE TAMARAC TEAM WAS ON HIS WAY NOW, GOT HOME LATE FROM WORK.
HE HAS BEEN COACHING AT TAMARAC TEAM FOR OVER 20 YEARS AND JIM IS NOW MOVING THIS SUMMER, SO WE'VE HAD NEW COACH AND WE JUST WANT TO RECOGNIZE JIM WHO I HOPE WILL WALK IN BEFORE WE DO THIS IN THE NEXT FEW MINUTES.
BUT I DID WANT TO GIVE A PLAQUE TO THE CITY.
THIS IS A PLAQUE OF THE TAMARAC TEAM AND [APPLAUSE] REALLY CAN'T RUN THE CHALLENGER PROGRAM WITHOUT SPONSORS LIKE YOU GUYS, SO WE REALLY GREATLY APPRECIATE IT.
I'M SORRY ABOUT JIM NOT BEING HERE BECAUSE I WANTED TO THANK HIM AND READ SOMETHING, BUT ANYWAY, I DO WANT TO THANK YOU GUYS VERY MUCH FOR EVERYTHING YOU'VE DONE FOR US.
>> WELL, IF I MAY, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY, ALSO HAVE SOME CERTIFICATES FOR JIM FOR HIS COACHING FOR OVER 20 YEARS.
HIS WIFE, FOR BEING THE ASSISTANT COACH AND FOR THEIR SON.
[00:10:03]
JIM SALMON, ANNETTE SALMON AND KEVIN SALMON [APPLAUSE].THE MANAGER, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE IN YOUR REPORT?
GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS.
LAST WEEK I FORWARDED YOU SOME INFORMATION FROM BROWARD COUNTY REGARDING THE TENANT BILL OF RIGHTS FOR LANDLORDS AND LESSOR'S OF RESIDENTIAL RENTAL PROPERTY IN BROWARD COUNTY.
[NOISE] IN ORDER TO ADDRESS INCREASING CONCERNS RAISED BY BROWARD COUNTY RESIDENTS, THE COUNTY COMMISSION ENACTED TO ORDINANCES REGARDING LANDLORD TENANT ISSUES, SUCH AS RENTAL INCREASES AND TERMINATION NOTICES.
OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT STAFF HAS CONDUCTED AN EDUCATIONAL CAMPAIGN WHICH INVOLVE THE DISTRIBUTION OF A PACKET, INCLUDED A COURTESY NOTICE ALONG WITH ALL THE INFORMATION PROVIDED FROM THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, THE LINK TO WHERE THE ORDINANCES CAN BE FOUND, AS WELL AS THE NOTICE OF THE RENTAL HOUSING RIGHTS.
THIS WAS DISTRIBUTED TO ALL APARTMENT AND RENTAL PROPERTY REGISTERED WITHIN THE CITY.
FROM FINANCIAL SERVICES, I'M VERY HAPPY TO REPORT THAT THE CITY HAS BEEN INFORMED THAT WE'VE BEEN SELECTED TO RECEIVE THE INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC PROCUREMENT 2022 INTEGRITY AWARD FOR THE CITIES WORK AND BUILDING A VERIFICATION PROCESS ON THE LEGITIMACY OF SUPPLIERS DURING THE FIRST WEEKS OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC.
THIS ASSURED THAT THE INTEGRITY OF THE CITY'S PROCUREMENT PROCESS WAS PROTECTED.
THIS AWARD WILL BE PRESENTED TO THE CITY DURING THE NIGP FORUM I'M IN BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS ON AUGUST 24TH.
CONGRATULATIONS TO OUR PURCHASING DIVISION ON THIS AWARD. WELL DONE.
FROM PARKS AND RECREATION, OUR TRANSPORTATION OFFICE WANTED TO LET EVERYONE KNOW THAT WE HAVE A NEW EAST SIDE ROUTE STARTING AUGUST 1ST.
THE EAST SIDE ROUTE WILL RUN ON MONDAYS AND WEDNESDAYS FROM 9:30 AM TO 3: 30 PM.
RESIDENTS OF TAMARAC LAKES NORTH, TAMARAC LAKE SOUTH AND BOULEVARDS OF TAMARAC CAN CONNECT TO THE RED SHUTTLE ROUTE AT SUNSHINE PLAZA.
ONCE CONNECTED TO THE RED ROUTE, PASSENGERS CAN REACH DESTINATIONS SUCH AS WALMART, SUPERCENTER, ALDI, TAMARAC COMMUNITY CENTER PUBLICS AT MIDWAY PLAZA AND MUCH MORE.
ALSO, THE CITY OF TAMARAC PARKS AND RECREATION HAS ESTABLISHED A NEW PARTNERSHIP WITH BROWARD COUNTY PARKS SPECIAL POPULATIONS SECTION FOR INDIVIDUALS AGES 13-25 WITH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES.
THESE PROGRAMS ARE DESIGNED TO DEVELOP, ENHANCE, AND/OR MAINTAIN LEISURE SKILLS, MOTOR SKILLS, SOCIALIZATION, AND OVERALL WELL-BEING, AS WELL AS TO PROMOTE FUN AND ENJOYMENT.
COLLABORATIVE EFFORTS ARE MADE TO DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT A WIDE VARIETY OF YEAR-ROUND RECREATION AND LEISURE PROGRAMS, SPECIAL EVENTS AND SERVICES TO MEET THE INTERESTS AND NEEDS OF CHILDREN, TEENS, ADULTS, AND SENIORS WITH DISABILITIES.
THE CITY RECENTLY HOSTED A SUCCESSFUL BINGO FUN NIGHT WITH INDIVIDUALS IN THIS PROGRAM AT THE TAMARAC COMMUNITY CENTER AND FUN WAS HAD BY ALL.
ADDITIONALLY, WE HAVE SOME FUN EVENTS STILL COMING UP THIS SUMMER.
ON JULY 16TH, FROM NOON TO TWO O'CLOCK, WE HAVE OUR SUMMER SPLASH WITH SANTA AT THE CAP MORELLA AQUATIC CENTER, COME JOIN SANTA FOR SWIMMING, KIDS, CRAFTS, AND MUSIC, FIVE DOLLARS A PERSON.
WE ALSO HAVE CARIBBEAN FAMILY FUN DAY ON SATURDAY, JULY 30TH AT WATER'S EDGE PARK FROM NOON TO TWO, COME AND CELEBRATE THE CARIBBEAN HERITAGE WITH FOOD, FUN GAMES, AND A STEEL DRUM PERFORMANCE.
ON SATURDAY, AUGUST 6TH, FROM 10-1, WE HAVE OUR BACK-TO-SCHOOL SPLASH, JOIN US FOR SWIMMING, MUSIC AND FUN POOL SLIDE ACTIVITIES.
THE FIRST 60 CHILDREN, AGES 5-12 IN ATTENDANCE WILL RECEIVE A FREE BACK-TO-SCHOOL GOODY BAG, AND THAT'S FIVE DOLLARS PER PERSON AS WELL.
THANK YOU. THAT CONCLUDES MY REPORT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CITY MANAGER.
AT THIS TIME, WE ARE MOVING TO PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.
[3. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION]
[00:15:01]
CITY ATTORNEY, WILL YOU PLEASE READ THE RULES OF THE ROAD?>> YES, MADAM MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, UP ON THE SLIDE ABOVE YOU IS THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION RULES OF THE ROAD.
STATE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC MAY SPEAK ONLY AT TIMES DESIGNATED BY THE MAYOR, OR PRESIDING OFFICER, MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC SHELF, STEP TO THE FLOOR OR MICROPHONE, STATE HIS OR HER NAME AND ADDRESS AND AN AUDIBLE TONE FOR THE CLERK'S RECORD, IN LIEU OF PROVIDING THEIR ADDRESS, THEY CAN PROVIDE THEIR CITY OF RESIDENCE.
REMARKS SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE QUESTIONS UNDER DISCUSSION UNLESS SUCH REMARKS COME DURING THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION SECTION OF THE MEETING.
DURING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC MAY SPEAK ON ANY ISSUE THAT IS NOT ON THE AGENDA FOR PUBLIC HEARING DURING THE CITY COMMISSION MEETING.
SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES.
DURING THIS TIME, THERE WILL BE A 30-MINUTE AGGREGATE TIME LIMIT FOR THIS ITEM AND SPEAKERS ARE ENCOURAGED TO SIGN UP IN ADVANCE WITH THE CITY CLERK PRIOR TO THEIR PARTICIPATION.
ALL REMARKS SHALL BE ADDRESSED THE CITY COMMISSION AS A BODY THROUGH THE MAYOR, AND NOT TO ANY MEMBER THEREOF.
THAT ALSO APPLIES TO AMONGST THE BOARD OF THE COMMISSION MEMBERS.
CUMULATIVE AND REPETITIVE TESTIMONY SHOULD BE AVOIDED IN ANY MATTER OF PERSONS, THE SAME POSITION AS THE PREVIOUS SPEAKER MAY SIMPLY STATE THEIR NAMES, ADDRESS, AND THE POSITION WITH WHICH THEY AGREE.
ANY PERSON MAKING DISRUPTIVE AND PERTINENT SHOWING THIS REMARKS OR WHO SHALL BECOME BOISTEROUS WHILE ADDRESSING THE CITY COMMISSION AND REFUSES TO STOP, MAYBE REQUESTS TO LEAVE THE MEETING BY THE CITY COMMISSION.
PERSONS WHOSE LOT OF TIME TO SPEAK HAS EXPIRED, SHALL BE SO ADVISED BY THE CITY CLERK TO CONCLUDE THEIR COMMENTS.
PUBLIC HEARINGS SHOULD CONSIST OF THOSE AGENDA ITEMS WHERE THE PUBLIC MAY PARTICIPATE.
PUBLIC SHALL SPEAK ONLY ON THE AGENDIZED SUBJECT.
SPEAKING TIME FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC IS LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES FOR ANY PARTICULAR TOPIC.
ADDITIONAL TIME MAY BE ADDED BY THE CITY COMMISSION.
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC SHALL NOT DELEGATE OR GIVE THEIR TIME OR ANY PORTION THEREOF TO ANOTHER PARTY.
FOR A PUBLIC HEARING, THE CITY COMMISSION MAY SET AN AGGREGATE TIME LIMIT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
WHEN AN ISSUE HAS BEEN DESIGNATED AS QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC REMARKS SHALL ONLY BE HEARD DURING A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING THAT HAS BEEN PROPERLY NOTICE FOR THAT MATTER.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND AS WE HAVE SOME THINGS ON THE AGENDA THAT PEOPLE MAY BE EXCITED ABOUT, EITHER GOOD OR BAD EXCITEMENT, WE ASK THAT NO CHEERS, NO BOOS, NO CLAPS, NO HOOTS, NO HAULERS.
AS WITH SOME OF US WHO'VE BEEN HERE BEFORE, WE CAN DO OUR LITTLE HAPPY HANDS, OR YOU CAN DO THIS.
THAT'S WHAT YOU WISH TO EXPRESS YOURSELF, BUT THAT IS WHAT IS ASKED SO WE CAN HEAR THE SPEAKERS THAT ARE SPEAKING AND GIVE EVERYBODY THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD.
WE WILL NOW GO TO OUR FIRST PERSON.
WE HAVE DR. JERMAINE FLEMING WITH OUR SCHOOL BOARD. WELCOME.
>> GOOD EVENING. LOUD. GOOD EVENING.
MY NAME IS JERMAINE FLEMING, I'M THE NORTH REGIONAL SUPERINTENDENT.
MY OFFICE SUPPORTS ALL OF THE SCHOOLS IN THE CITY OF TAMARAC, AS WELL AS ALL 67 SCHOOLS NORTH OF COMMERCIAL BOULEVARD.
THANK YOU, MAYOR GOMEZ, FOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK IN COMMISSION.
I'M HERE TODAY ON BEHALF OF BROWARD COUNTY SCHOOLS AND OUR SUPERINTENDENT, DR. VICKIE CARTWRIGHT.
AT BROWARD COUNTY SCHOOLS, OUR FOCUS IS STUDENTS FIRST.
OUR PRIORITIES INCLUDE INCREASING TEACHER AND STAFF COMPENSATION TO ATTRACT AND RETAIN HIGHLY QUALIFIED EMPLOYEES, ENSURING SAFER LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS AND INVESTING IN MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES FOR ALL OF OUR STUDENTS AND FAMILIES.
TO ACHIEVE THESE GOALS, OUR DISTRICT IS ONCE AGAIN PRESENT IN VOTERS WITH THE SECURE THE NEXT GENERATION REFERENDUM, WHICH WILL APPEAR ON AN AUGUST 23RD PRIMARY ELECTION BALLOT.
THE ORIGINAL HALF MEAL REFERENDUM VOTERS APPROVED IN 2018 IS SET TO EXPIRE, WITHOUT THE RENEWED FUNDING FOR MORE THAN 500 SCHOOLS SAFETY PERSONNEL, AND 100 MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONALS WILL BE LOST AND OVER $880 MILLION ANNUALLY IN COMPETITIVE COMPENSATION SUPPLEMENTS FOR OUR TEACHERS AND ELIGIBLE STAFF WILL NO LONGER EXIST.
UNDER THE CURRENT REFERENDUM, THEIR AVERAGE TEACHER RECEIVES ABOUT $4,600 IN SUPPLEMENTS ABOVE THEIR SALARY.
ELIGIBLE STAFF INCLUDES FRONTLINE WORKERS SUCH AS TEACHING ASSISTANTS, BUS DRIVERS, ATTENDANCE, CAFETERIA WORKERS, AND CUSTODIAL STAFF.
RENEWING THE SECURE NEXT GENERATION REFERENDUM WILL INCREASE VOTERS INVESTMENT IN EDUCATION FROM A HALF A MEAL TO A FULL MEAL.
THIS WILL ALLOW US TO CONTINUE SECURING FUNDS FOR ALL OF OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS TO ATTRACT AND MAINTAIN QUALITY PERSONNEL AT A SIMILAR RATE AS OUR NEIGHBORING DISTRICTS TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH.
CURRENTLY, MIAMI-DADE IS AT 3/4 MEAL AND THEY'RE RENEWING FOR A FULL MEAL.
THE SCHOOL BOARD OF PALM BEACH IS CURRENTLY AT ONE MEAL.
ALSO, DUE TO NEW LEGISLATION, 20 PERCENT OF THE GENERAL FUNDS FROM THE REFERENDUM WILL BE SHARED WITH CHARTER SCHOOLS.
[00:20:05]
WHILE CHARTERS ARE NOT REQUIRED TO SPEND THE FUNDS AT THE PERCENTAGE, AS A SCHOOL BOARD IS, THEY'RE REQUIRED TO BUCKET THAT MONEY IN A SIMILAR FASHION AND THOSE BUCKETS ARE LISTED ON THE BALLOT, WHICH ARE SAFETY PERSONNEL, SUPPLEMENTS FOR THEIR WORKFORCE, AS WELL AS MENTAL HEALTH.RENEWING THAT SECURE THE NEXT GENERATION REFERENDUM WILL GENERATE APPROXIMATELY $218 MILLION FOR BROWARD COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, $49 MILLION FOR OUR CHARTER SCHOOLS, WITH THE COMBINED RESULT OF $267 MILLION ANNUALLY.
IT WILL BE BROKEN DOWN IN THE FOLLOWING ALLOCATIONS, 75 PERCENT OR MORE FOR RECRUITING AND RETAINING HIGH-QUALITY TEACHERS AND ELIGIBLE STAFF BY INCREASING COMPENSATION.
AM I OUT OF TIME? ALSO LEFT A HANDOUT FOR ALL THE COMMISSIONERS TO HAVE.
IF I'LL PAUSE IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS.
>> WE DON'T DO QUESTIONS BACK-AND-FORTH BUT WE GREATLY APPRECIATE THE INFORMATION.
I'M SURE EVERYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE DID AS WELL, AND I'M PRETTY SURE THIS IS POSTED ON THE SCHOOL BOARD WEBSITE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE YOU COMING TODAY.
>> MADAM MAYOR, PRIOR TO MR. CORMICAN SPEAKING, WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS BEFORE.
THE STAFF IS GOING TO BE REMOVING THE ITEM RELATED TO THE PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR THE TRAPEZE LOCATION [NOISE] FOR THE SAME REASONS AS LAST TIME, WHICH IS THE SITE IN QUESTION WHERE MR. CORMICAN'S CLIENT IS PROPOSING TO GO INTO HAS INDICATED AT LEAST IN OUR OPINION OF THE CITY, IN A VERY UNEQUIVOCAL TERMS, THAT THE SITE IS NOT AVAILABLE.
MR. CORMICAN IS HERE OBVIOUSLY TO DISPUTE THAT THOSE ASSERTIONS.
AT THE END, WHEN WE DO GET TO THAT PART OF THE AGENDA, WE WILL BE REMOVING THIS ITEM IN THE SAME MANNER AS THE LAST TIME.
>> THANK YOU AND AS SUCH, WE ARE ALLOWING HIM TO HAVE THESE THREE MINUTES DURING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION?
>> THAT IS CORRECT AND HE'S AWARE OF THAT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. PLEASE PROCEED.
>> THANK YOU. MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS, CITY STAFF.
MY NAME IS RUSSELL CORMICAN AND I'M THE ATTORNEY AND DESIGNATED AGENT FOR MEMBERS ONLY MANAGEMENT, LLC, IT'S A CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS AS TRAPEZE.
MY CLIENT IS A LONGSTANDING BUSINESS IN THE CITY OF TAMARAC, GOING ON 15 YEARS OF CONTINUOUS OPERATION NOW.
PRESENT ALSO THIS EVENING IS THE OWNER OF TRAPEZE, ALAN MOSTOW, AS WELL AS THE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, JUNE KELLY.
YOU MAY RECALL WE WERE HERE A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO AND WE ARE SEEKING A REVIEW OF A ZONING VERIFICATION DECISION MADE BY THE CITY THROUGH AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL.
BUT THIS TIME IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT.
LAST TIME THE SITUATION WAS BUT BETWEEN THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY COMMISSION MEETING, THE PROPERTY WE WANTED TO MOVE TO WAS RENTED TO SOMEBODY ELSE.
THIS INSTANCE IS DIFFERENT AND I THINK IT'S A CRUCIAL DIFFERENCE IN THAT THE PROPERTY IS STILL AVAILABLE.
IN FACT, I DROVE BY IT ON THE WAY HERE TONIGHT HAS GOT A TEN-FOOT FOR LEASE SIGN OUT FRONT STILL.
THE PROPERTY OWNER, THROUGH ITS AGENT, SENT A LETTER TO THE CITY STATING THAT THE OFFER MADE BY MY CLIENT WAS REJECTED.
BUT WHAT IT DIDN'T SAY IS THAT THEY WOULDN'T ENTERTAIN ANY FURTHER OFFERS.
IT DIDN'T SAY THEY WOULDN'T ENTERTAIN AN OFFER TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY RATHER THAN LEASE IT, WHICH ARE ALL POSSIBILITIES FROM MY CLIENT'S STANDPOINT.
IF YOU LOOK AT IT'S A DIFFERENT SITUATION, THE PROPERTY WAS NOT RENTED OUT FROM UNDER THEM.
IT'S STILL THERE, IT'S STILL AVAILABLE.
THEY COULD STILL POTENTIALLY RUN IT AND THAT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE WHEN YOU'RE CONSIDERING A ZONING VERIFICATION REQUEST, WHAT THAT IS IS THAT'S AN INSTRUMENT THAT THE CITY OFFERS PEOPLE AND ENTITIES TO UNDERSTAND WHETHER THEY'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO TAKE A CERTAIN ACTION OR NOT BEFORE THEY ACTUALLY TAKE THE ACTION.
IT'S SET UP, SO IF YOU'RE THINKING OF PUTTING UP A SIGN BEFORE YOU ACTUALLY GO OUT AND BUY THE SIGN AND PUT IT UP, YOU CAN COME TO THE CITY AND SAY IT WAS THIS GOING TO BE OKAY UNDER THE ZONING LAWS OR BEFORE YOU MOVE IN AND OPEN A BUSINESS AND SIGN A LEASE AND OBLIGATE YOURSELF TO PAY RENT FOR A PERIOD OF YEARS, YOU CAN COME TO THE CITY AND THE CITY WILL GIVE YOU THEIR OPINION ABOUT WHETHER YOU CAN DO THAT.
IT'S COMPLETELY ADVISORY IN NATURE AND THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING YOU TO DO FOR MY CLIENTS TODAY, AND THAT'S WHY I'M OBJECTING TO THE REMOVAL OF THIS ITEM FROM THE AGENDA.
NOW THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS INDICATED THAT HE THINKS IT SHOULD BE REMOVED, BUT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE DOESN'T GIVE HIM THE AUTHORITY TO DECIDE THAT.
[00:25:04]
IT GIVES YOU THE AUTHORITY TO DECIDE THAT.IT SAYS THE COMMISSION DECIDES THOSE ISSUES.
I'M ASKING YOU TO EXERCISE THAT AUTHORITY THAT YOU HAVE TO ALLOW THIS HEARING TO GO FORWARD.
I'M OBJECTING TO IT BEING REMOVED.
I'M HERE AND I'M READY TO PROCEED JUST LIKE I WAS LAST TIME.
AGAIN, THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING YOU TO DO AND I WOULD LIKE FOR THE COMMISSION TO GIVE US SOME INDICATION ABOUT WHETHER WE ARE ON THE AGENDA OR NOT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
>>TO THE CHAIR QUESTION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY.
I READ THE LETTER SENT. [OVERLAPPING]
>> PLEASE STOP INTERRUPTING ME.
>> NO, YOU NEED TO WAIT TILL YOU'RE RECOGNIZED BY SOMEONE.
>> I HAVE ACCESS TO THE ATTORNEY.
>> YOU'LL HAVE TO WAIT TILL YOU'RE RECOGNIZED.
CITY ATTORNEY, ARE YOU PREPARED TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS MATTER NOW?
>> THANK YOU. VICE MAYOR GELIN NOW PLEASE PROCEED.
>> THE ATTORNEY DIRECTLY LISTS A SECTION WHERE IT STATES SECTION 10-5.3 R5 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE STATES THAT THE APPEAL OF ANY PLANNING BOARD DECISIONS UNDER THIS SUBSECTION SHALL, WHICH MEANS MUST BE MADE TO THE COMMISSION.
IT DOES APPEAR THAT AS THE ATTORNEY STATES, THAT YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO EXPRESS A LEGAL OPINION OR POSITION THEN IT IS UP TO THIS COMMISSION TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT AN APPEAL SHOULD BE HEARD.
>> MY RESPONSE TO THAT IS WHAT MR. CORMICAN HAS NOT PROVIDED TO YOU AND WHICH I PREVIOUSLY INFORMED YOU AND PROVIDED THE INFORMATION TO YOU DURING THE LAST SITUATION, IDENTICAL TO THIS ONE IS THAT OUR CODE PROVIDES FOR NOTICE REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIC TO A LOCATION.
TO THE POINT THAT MR. CORMICAN JUST RAISED IS THE ZONING VERIFICATION LETTER.
ANY ZONING VERIFICATION LETTER HAS TO BE TIED TO A PARTICULAR PIECE OF PROPERTY, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT DESIGNATES WHAT THE RESPONSE WILL BE.
WHAT ZONING IS IT, WHAT'S PERMITTED IN THAT ZONING DISTRICT? WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS AN ABSENCE OF A PIECE OF PROPERTY.
THERE'S NOTHING IN THE RECORD AND BASED UPON THE INFORMATION THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED TO US BY THE PROPERTY OWNER, THIS APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO REPRESENT THEM IN THIS MATTER.
THEREFORE, IN MY OPINION, AS YOUR CITY ATTORNEY, THERE'S NO JURISDICTION TO HEAR THE APPEAL BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING TO APPEAL.
>> THEN WHY DID IT GO THROUGH THE PROCESS, EVEN MAKE IT TO THE PLANNING BOARD IF THEY DIDN'T HAVE THAT REQUIREMENT?
>> BECAUSE OF THE SAME REASON THAT HAPPENED THE LAST TIME WE RECEIVED THE CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER AFTER THE PLANNING BOARD MEETING.
HAD WE HAD THAT INFORMATION BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD, WE OBVIOUSLY NEVER WOULD HAVE PUT IT BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD.
>> MY CONCERN IS THAT WE'RE NOT GIVING THE APPLICANT FAIR AND DUE PROCESS.
>> WE WILL PROVIDE DUE PROCESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR CODE AND PROVIDE THE APPROPRIATE KNOTS.
LET ME ADD THAT, DUE PROCESS IS A MULTI-STREET CONCEPT.
CLEARLY, THE APPLICANT HAS DUE PROCESS RIGHTS, SO DOES THE PROPERTY OWNER, SO DO THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS TO BE PROPERLY NOTICED AND PUT ON NOTICE WHAT THE ISSUES ARE.
WHAT HAS HAPPENED HERE, AND STAFF'S OPINION IS WE'VE RECEIVED A LETTER FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER THAT THE APPLICANT REPRESENTED IT TO STAFF, WAS THE SUBJECT OF A PENDING LEASE, THAT NO THERE IS NO LEASE.
IT HAS BEEN REJECTED, AND THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE ANY AUTHORITY TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OR TO BIND THE PROPERTY OWNER.
UNDER THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, PROCEEDING WITH THE APPEAL WOULD ARGUABLY VIOLATE THE DUE PROCESS RIGHTS OF THE PROPERTY OWNER.
>> BUT THE LETTER STATES THAT THEY NEVER TRIED TO REPRESENT.
THEY'RE REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER.
>> I DON'T KNOW BUT WHAT I SUSPECT IS THAT THE BROKER WORKING FOR MR. CORMICAN'S CLIENT, REACHED OUT TO THE BROKER FOR THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, SAID AND I'M OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I DO NOT KNOW THE NAME OF THE CORPORATE ENTITY.
THIS CORPORATION IS INTERESTED IN RENTING YOUR PROPERTY AND THE OWNER THROUGH ITS OWN BROKER SAID, GREAT.
SURE. HERE'S YOUR PROPOSED TERMS AND THEN SUBSEQUENTLY THE PROPERTY OWNER FOUND OUT THAT THAT CORPORATION WAS IN FACT A TRAPEZE AND REVOKED THAT OFFER TO LEASE THE PROPERTY.
[00:30:02]
BUT THAT IS MY EDUCATED GUESS.AGAIN, IF IT IS THE DESIRE OF THIS COMMISSION TO MOVE FORWARD AND GRANT THE APPEAL, AND THEN SO BE IT.
BUT I WOULD ASK THAT IT'D BE RESCHEDULED BECAUSE THE STAFF IS PARTICULARLY PLANNING STAFF WAS ANTICIPATING OF THE BELIEF THAT THIS MATTER WOULD NOT BE HEARD HERE TONIGHT BECAUSE IT WOULD BE PULLED BECAUSE AGAIN, ALL THE REQUIREMENTS DUE PROCESS HAVE NOT BEEN MET IN ORDER TO PROVIDE PROPER NOTICE TO ALL THE PARTIES INVOLVED, INCLUDING THE PROPERTY OWNER.
THEN IT MIGHT BE I DON'T KNOW THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER APPEARS AT THE HEARING AND SAYS, NO, THERE'S NOTHING THAT WE'RE GOING TO DO OR SAY OR HAPPEN THAT WOULD LEAD US TO ALLOW THIS USE IN OUR PROPERTY, AND THEN WE'RE BACK TO SQUARE ONE.
>> DOES THE CITY'S APPLICATION PROCESS REQUIRE CONSENT? [OVERLAPPING]
>> I DON'T KNOW THAT. [OVERLAPPING]
>> HE HAS A QUESTION REGARDING THE PROCEDURE I PRESUME.
>> WE ARE IN PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, AND THIS IS THE THIRD OR FOURTH CONSECUTIVE TIME THAT VICE MAYOR INTERRUPTS PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.
>> BY INTERRUPTING I HAVE ACCESS TO THE CITY ATTORNEY AS A COMMISSIONER.
>> HOLD ON. [OVERLAPPING]. I UNDERSTAND. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I'M STILL SPEAKING. IF WE CAN MOVE TO PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND ONCE WE GET TO THE ITEM THAT'S BEING DISCUSSED, WE CAN DISCUSS IT THEN.
>> BUT THAT'S THE WILL OF THE COMMISSION.
>> IT IS. WE USUALLY DO NOT TALK BACK AND FORTH THROUGH PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.
THIS IS OUT OF PROCEDURE AND THEREFORE, WE NEED TO PUT OUR PROCEDURES BACK IN ORDER.
THEREFORE, THIS ITEM WILL COME BACK UP.
IT'LL BE DISCUSSED. WE CAN JUST GO FURTHER.
WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO THE CONSENT AGENDA WHEN THE CITY MANAGER HAS ASKED IF WE EVER MOVING ANYTHING AND CHANGING THE AGENDA, WE CAN DISCUSS IT AT THAT TIME.
RIGHT NOW WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK TO OUR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.
OUR PARTICIPATION ON THIS LIST.
CHRIS HODGKINS, LADIES, AND GENTLEMEN, FOR PEOPLE WHO MAY NOT BE AWARE, THE ITEMS ON THE SECTION 10 IS CONSIDERED A WORKSHOP FOR THE CITY COMMISSION.
THERE IS NO DISCUSSION WITH THE PUBLIC.
THEREFORE, IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS OR ANYTHING YOU WANT TO SHARE, PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IS YOUR TIME TO DISCUSS ALL MATTERS OR SHARE ALL MATTERS WITH US.
PLEASE YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES, CHRIS HODGKINS.
>> THANK YOU. I WASN'T PREPARED TO GET UP FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, BUT GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE. [OVERLAPPING].
>> NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE REST OF US, PLEASE.
I AM PRESIDENT OF THE WOODLANDS HOA SECTION IV, I LIVE AT 4905 WOODLANDS BOULEVARD IN TAMARAC.
THIS IS THE STORY, THE LONG STORY, THE SIX MONTHS STORY OF A CAR THAT RAN THROUGH A SIGN TO OUR ENTRANCE ON WOODLANDS BOULEVARD.
THAT HAPPENED IN JANUARY AND IT WAS HIT AGAIN AFTER THAT.
WE HAVE A CRUMBLED SIGN IN FRONT OF OUR ENTRANCE AND IT LOOKS ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE.
I HAD WRITTEN THE MAYOR SEVERAL TIMES TO SAY WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE SIGN.
THERE SHOULD BE INSURANCE MONEY.
IT WAS AN ISSUE FOR SECTION IV BECAUSE THE LAST TIME THE SIGN WAS HIT, SECTION IV GOT THE INSURANCE MONEY.
THE PRESIDENT OF SECTION IV AT THE TIME WAS SHARON ARON BARON FROM TAMARAC TALK AND AS PRESIDENT, SHE OVERSAW AND MADE SURE THAT THAT GOT DONE BY SECTION IV.
THERE'S A HISTORY THERE. THE MAYOR REPLIED THAT THE WHOA WAS HANDLING THIS AND THAT THEY'RE GETTING THE INSURANCE MONEY WHICH WAS 15,000 DOLLARS.
I THEN WROTE THE WHOA, I WROTE THE MAYOR, I WROTE OTHERS.
WHAT I GOT BACK FROM THE MAYOR WAS A MAP SAYING THIS IS CITY PROPERTY.
BUT ANYWAYS, OFF WE WENT AND WE WENT THROUGH THIS WHOLE LONG ORDEAL FOR OVER SIX MONTHS TRYING TO GET THIS SIGN FIXED.
THE WHOA HAD THE CHECK FOR 15,000 DOLLARS.
THEY WEREN'T SHARING INFORMATION WITH THE COMMUNITY.
I APPROACHED THE PRESIDENT OF THE WHOA AND OTHERS SAYING, "PLEASE GIVE US INFORMATION.
WE'RE GLAD TO TAKE AND RUN WITH THIS.
IT NEEDS TO GET DONE." THEY DID GET ONE ESTIMATE AND THE ESTIMATE WAS 42,000 DOLLARS AND THEY ONLY HAD 15,000 DOLLARS.
I SPOKE TO RANDY SCOTT, WHO WAS THE PRESIDENT OF THE WHOA.
THEY THEN GAVE THE 15,000 DOLLARS TO SECTION IV.
[00:35:04]
WE WENT OUT TO JEFFREY SMOLI, MYSELF, PETER LOBES, OTHER MEMBERS OF THE GROUP WENT OUT TO GET AN ESTIMATE.WE GOT A LOCAL COMPANY, SOUTHEAST SIGN COMPANY, RIGHT UP HERE OFF A COMMERCIAL AND THEY CAME UP WITH A SIGN FOR 18,000 DOLLARS, CLEANING IT ALL UP.
I HAVE OPTIONS FOR THE SIGN OUT FRONT TO ANYBODY VOTE ON IT BECAUSE WE WANT TO BE TRANSPARENT AND LET THEM KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.
THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT. A LITTLE QUAGMIRE IS WE HAD A WHOA MEETING AND THE MAYOR SAID THAT SECTION IV CAN APPLY FOR A GRANT BECAUSE THEY CAN'T SPEAK ON BEHALF OF [NOISE] THE WHOA. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT'S ALL ABOUT.
>> [OVERLAPPING] THANK YOU. YOUR THREE MINUTES ARE UP, BUT THANK YOU.
>> DOES THE COMMISSIONER WANT TO GRANT ADDITIONAL TIME? DO WE HAVE CONSENSUS? [OVERLAPPING].
>> COMMISSIONER MIKE GELIN, WE HAVE A WHOLE LIST OF PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE. [OVERLAPPING].
>> I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR ONE MORE MINUTE.
>> WE HAVE ABOUT 10 OTHER PEOPLE WHO WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER, MR. HODGKINS.
>> [OVERLAPPING]. TERRIFIC. LET ANYBODY ELSE SPEAK. THAT'S GREAT.
>> THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE MICHELSON?
>> THEN I HAVE YOU SIGNED UP NEXT, ILENE LIEBERMAN MICHELSON.
>> ILENE LIEBERMAN MICHELSON, 4809, WOODLANDS BOULEVARD IN TAMARAC.
FIRST, I WANTED TO SUGGEST TO YOU A CHANGE IN YOUR POLICY AS FAR AS RECORDS THAT YOU PUT ONLINE.
YOU MAY NOTICE THAT BEFORE TONIGHT'S AGENDA, YOUR FULL AGENDA PACKET IS AVAILABLE FOR ANYBODY TO LOOK AT THE BACKUP THAT YOU HAVE.
RECENTLY, I LEARNED THAT AFTER THE MEETING, YOU TAKE THAT OFF THE WEB, WHICH MEANS IF ANYBODY WANTS TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE AGENDA PACKET, THEY HAVE TO MAKE A PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST TO YOUR CITY CLERK.
THERE'S NO REASON TO REMOVE IT FROM THE ONLINE.
MOST MUNICIPALITIES AND THE COUNTY LEAVE THAT BACKUP THERE FOREVER.
A, IT SAVES STAFF TIME BECAUSE PEOPLE CAN DO THEIR OWN RESEARCH.
THEY DON'T NEED TO MAKE A PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST.
B, IT SERVES THE RESIDENTS MONEY BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY FOR EXTENDED RESEARCH TO BE DONE BY STAFF.
I TALKED TO THE CITY CLERK ABOUT THAT AND SHE IS GOING TO LOOK INTO IT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO BRIEF YOU ON THAT.
MAYOR, I WOULD SINCERELY HOPE THAT WHEN THE ITEMS UNDER 10 COME UP, YOU WOULD ALLOW THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK.
IT IS IMPORTANT THAT YOU HIRE BROWARD COUNTY FIRM.
13TH FLOOR'S LITIGATION IS IN BROWARD COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, AND I FULLY SUPPORT THAT YOU HIRE A BROWARD COUNTY FIRM.
SECONDLY, THIS MATTER HAS BEEN PERCOLATING AROUND FOR 4-5 YEARS, IT'S TIME TO PUT IT TO BID.
THE FOURTH UC HAS ALREADY RULED.
PLEASE SIT A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING WHERE THE ONLY ITEM WILL BE THE LAND-USE PLAN AMENDMENT, THE REZONING, THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THE SITE PLAN FROM 13TH FLOOR SO WE'RE NOT ALL HERE TO FIVE O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING, LIKE HAPPENED LAST TIME.
FINALLY, I JUST WANT TO SUPPORT CHRIS HODGKINS' COMMENTS.
IF YOU'VE DRIVEN BY THE WOODLANDS SIGN, IT HAS TWO PROBLEMS. IN ITS CURRENT LOCATION, IT'S AN ACCIDENT MAGNET.
I THINK IF YOU TALKED TO YOUR POLICE DEPARTMENT, THEY'LL TELL YOU THEY BELIEVE THE LOCATION OF THE SIGN IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THAT INTERSECTION HAS THE MOST ACCIDENTS UP LITERALLY OF ANYWHERE ELSE IN TAMARAC.
IT'S A HIGH ACCIDENT LOCATION AND THEY'VE BEEN SEVERAL REALLY AWFUL ACCIDENTS THERE, JUST THIS FIRST HALF OF THE YEAR.
WHEN YOU GO BY IT, IT LOOKS LIKE THE COMMUNITY IS NEGLECTED BECAUSE THE SIGN IS DAMAGED AND IT DOES NEED TO BE REPLACED.
THIRDLY, THE WHOA AND CHRIS HODGKINS, PETER LOBES, JEFF SMOLI, ALL WORK TOGETHER TO PUT TOGETHER A PROPOSAL WHEREBY A NEW SIGN COULD BE PUT IN THAT LOCATION, SO I'M ASKING THAT YOU FIND THE FUNDS TO REWARD THE WORK OF THESE GOOD PEOPLE WHO FIGURED OUT HOW TO SOLVE A BIG PROBLEM, NOT ONLY FOR THE WOODLANDS BUT FOR TAMARAC AS A WHOLE BECAUSE WE'D LIKE THE INTERSECTION OF WOODLANDS BOULEVARD AND COMMERCIAL BOULEVARD NO LONGER TO BE AN ACCIDENT MAGNETIC.
FOR THAT TO HAPPEN, WE NEED A NEW SIGN, SO PLEASE BE A PARTNER WITH US IN THAT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. I'M SEEING THAT STUART IS NOT YET HERE.
WE WILL GO TO HAROLD SINCLAIR.
I'M SORRY, I'M HAVING TROUBLE READING THE HANDWRITING.
HAROLD, YOU'RE HERE FOR ACTUALLY TR 13790.
>> YOU'RE HERE FOR ONE OF THE REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS.
>> NO. OKAY. [LAUGHTER] THANK YOU. IT'S ALL GOOD.
[00:40:19]
[OVERLAPPING] NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.>> WILLIAM GOFFINET, 5106 MAYBERRY LANE, TAMARAC.
>> MR. GOFFINET, CAN YOU PLEASE COME CLOSER TO THE MICROPHONE. WE CAN'T HEAR YOU.
>> QUESTION BEFORE MY TIME STARTS BECAUSE LAST TIME I DIDN'T GET ANY EXTRA TIME.
IT SAYS UP THERE THE COMMISSION, NOT THE CHAIR.
GIVE ME SOME GUIDANCE ON THAT PLEASE.
>> IT'S THREE MINUTES. MR. GOFFINET.
>> THAT'S OKAY. I'M GOOD WITH TALKING ABOUT THIS WITH THREE MINUTES OF THE TIME.
>> WELL, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE COME TO THE MICROPHONE A LITTLE CLOSER SAY YOUR NAME AGAIN AND ADDRESS FOR THE LOCATION SO WE CAN HEAR YOU FOR THE RECORD. [OVERLAPPING].
>> 5106 MAYBERRY LANE, TAMARAC.
NOW, AS FAR AS THAT SIGN GOES, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THAT LAND WAS CEDED TO THE CITY A WHILE BACK, YEARS AGO, WHICH MAKES IT CITY PROPERTY, WHICH MEANS THAT THE CITY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT SIGN WHOLLY.
YOU DON'T EVEN WANT TO GIVE A LITTLE EXTRA MONEY TO PUT THE SIGN BACK UP? I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS.
EVERYTHING ABOUT THE WOODLANDS YOU SEEM TO WANT TO PUT DOWN, GET RID OF, START BUILDING, AND THAT'S THE WORST IDEA.
THERE ARE MANY OTHER PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THE GOLF COURSE, MAYBE ADD A FEW HIGH-END HOMES AND MAKE THIS THING RIGHT AGAIN.
YOU'RE DOING NOTHING BUT TRYING TO DESTROY THIS COMMUNITY AND YOU LIVE THERE.
YOU WANT TO BE REELECTED, REALLY? THAT'S IT.
>> MADAM MAYOR, BEFORE THE NEXT SPEAKER COMES FORTH, AGAIN, JUST WANT TO REMIND EVERYONE THE RULES OF DECORUM, OUR RULES PROHIBIT IDENTIFYING AND ATTACKING INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBERS, STAFF MEMBERS, OR FOR THAT MATTER, OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.
HEALTHY AND GOOD DEBATE CAN BE HAD WITHOUT PERSONALIZING YOUR ISSUES OR CONCERNS.
>> THANK YOU, CITY ATTORNEY. PATTY LYNN.
>> GOOD EVENING, PATTY LYNN, MAIN LANE, 8 TAMARAC.
CONGRATULATIONS TO THE CITY CLERK.
YOU'RE GOING TO BE APPOINTED, THAT'S WONDERFUL.
EVERYBODY KNOWS YOU BECAUSE EVERYBODY COMES TO DO BUSINESS.
GOOD LUCK IN YOUR NEW REAL POSITION.
>> MA'AM MADAM MAYOR. MA'AM MADAM MAYOR, RESPOND TO MS. LYNN. THANK YOU, MS. LYNN.
LYNN. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I APPRECIATE IT.
CONGRATULATIONS. I KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO DO A WONDERFUL JOB.
>> THERE'S A LOT OF STUFF GOING ON IN EVERYBODY'S LIFE AND EVERYTHING, AND COVID IS OVER AND NOW WE'VE GOT MORE STRESSED WITH THIS, THAT AND THE OTHER.
PLEASE PEOPLE DON'T INTERRUPT EACH OTHER.
IT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU LEARNED IN KINDERGARTEN THAT YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO DO.
BE POLITE, WAIT YOUR TURN, RAISE YOUR HAND OR WHATEVER WAY YOU DO IT.
BUT THIS IS THE CITY WHERE WE LIVE IN.
YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING CITY BUSINESS, AND IT WOULD BE NICE IF YOU CONDUCTED YOURSELVES IN A MANNER THAT SEEMS LIKE YOU'RE PROFESSIONALS, YOU KNOW YOU HAVE A JOB TO DO FOR US, YOU'RE GOING TO DO IT FOR US.
WHEN SOMEBODY IS SPEAKING AND SOMEONE INTERRUPTS THEM, THAT'S JUST UNCIVILIZED.
I WOULD APPRECIATE IT IF EVERYBODY HERE WHO'S ELECTED TO THIS WONDERFUL POSITION, WHICHEVER POSITION IT IS YOU HOLD, YOU JUST GO ABOUT DOING YOUR JOB.
MAKE IT EASY FOR ALL OF US AND BE NICE.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO LIKE EACH OTHER, BUT YOU DO HAVE TO BE POLITE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. STEWART HAS NOT YET ARRIVED.
I WILL GO TO THE NEXT PAGE IS SALLY JAMES.
[00:45:01]
>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS.
I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT SIGNS MYSELF.
I LIVE IN HEATHGATES SUNFLOWER, BUT NOT THE PRICEY KIND.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I NOTICED IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I THINK IT'S PROBABLY TRUE IN NEIGHBORHOODS THROUGHOUT THE CITY, IS YOU'LL SEE THESE SIGNS THAT ARE LASHED TO THE STOP SIGNS.
THEY'LL USE THE LITTLE GARAGE SALE, WIRE FRAMEWORKS AND STICKMAN PEOPLE'S YARDS.
THEY SAY CASH FOR CARS OR CALL 1800 JUNK OR SOMETHING AND THEY'RE NOT OFFICIAL SIGNS.
WHEN I GO FOR WALKS, I TAKE A SCISSORS SOMETIMES AND I CUT THEM DOWN OR I PICK THEM UP.
BUT IT ALWAYS SURPRISES ME THAT THESE THINGS ARE IN PEOPLE'S YARDS, ARE THERE ON THE STOP SIGN RIGHT NEXT TO THEIR HOUSE AND NO ONE TAKES THEM DOWN.
THEY'RE UP FOR MONTHS AND MONTHS AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S BECAUSE PEOPLE SOMEHOW THINK THEY'RE OFFICIAL AND THEY CAN'T TOUCH THEM.
I WAS JUST THINKING IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL IF THE CITY COULD PUT SOMETHING LIKE THE TAMARAC GRAM THAT LETS PEOPLE KNOW IF THEY SEE THESE SIGNS THEY CAN TAKE THEM DOWN BECAUSE THEY'RE TRASH AND THEY'RE ILLEGAL.
THE ONLY REASON I CAN FIGURE AS THEY STAY UP IS BECAUSE PEOPLE SOMEHOW THINK THEY CAN'T TOUCH THEM.
ANYWAY, THAT'S JUST WHAT I WANTED TO THROW IN THERE.
I'D LIKE TO REITERATE WHAT PATTY LYNN SAID.
CONGRATULATIONS KIM, ON YOUR APPOINTMENT AS CITY CLERK.
>> GOOD EVENING. ETHAN MARK, AT 87 SOUTHWEST STREET.
I'M IMPRESSED THAT YOU WERE ABLE TO PRONOUNCE MY NAME.
THANK YOU FOR THAT. LONG-TIME LISTENER, FIRST-TIME CALLER.
I'M COUNCIL FOR 13TH FLOOR WOODLANDS IN CONNECTION WITH THE WOODLANDS PROJECT.
I HAVE HERE IN MY HAND TWO ORDERS FROM A CIRCUIT COURT IN BROWARD COUNTY.
DATED DECEMBER 2021 AND JANUARY 2022, WHICH PROHIBIT THE CITY FROM TAKING ANY ACTION THAT WOULD DISRUPT THE STATUS QUO IN CONNECTION WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT UNTIL THIS DAY IS LIFTED.
IS SETTING THIS MATTER FOR HEARING, DISRUPTING THE STATUS QUO? OF COURSE IT IS. YOU'RE ALL ON NOTICE.
THIS ACTION TO THE EXTENT THAT THIS MATTER HEARD AND THIS ACTION IS SET FOR HEARING, VIOLATES COURT ORDERS.
I UNDERSTAND THAT AGAINST THE ADVICE OF COUNCIL, MR. LOHMAN, YOU'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH POTENTIALLY SETTING THIS HEARING, AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE CLEAR THAT TO THE EXTENT THAT OCCURS, THIS LATEST ACTION BY THE CITY IS SIMPLY THE LATEST EXAMPLE OF THIS CITY TRYING TO SHORT SHRIFT MY CLIENTS DUE PROCESS RIGHTS.
IT REMINDS ME OF THAT LINE FROM SHAKESPEARE, THE LADY DOTH PROTEST TOO MUCH ME THINKS.
WHY IS THE CITY AND THIS COMMISSION SO AFRAID TO GIVE MY CLIENT AND PROCEDURALLY PROPER HEARING? WHAT IS IT THAT WE'RE AFRAID OF? WHY IS THE CITY SO INTENT ON REFUSING TO GIVE MY CLIENT THE DUE PROCESS TO WHICH IT IS ENTITLED? DUE PROCESS THAT I JUST HEARD A FEW MINUTES AGO, ONE OF YOU RECOGNIZED WAS IMPORTANT IN CONNECTION WITH THE DIFFERENT APPLICANT DUE PROCESS.
THAT'S WHAT THIS SHOULD BE ABOUT.
A FEW HOURS AGO, WE FILED A MOTION WITH THE COURT IN WHICH WE ARE GOING TO BE SEEKING SANCTIONS FROM THE CITY TO THE EXTENT THAT THIS HEARING WAS SCHEDULED AND TO ASK THAT THE STAY REMAIN IN PLACE UNTIL MY CLIENT HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMPLETE ITS PREPARATION FOR THIS QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING, AND TO BE CLEAR.
BECAUSE THIS IS A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING WHICH I HEARD EARLIER SOMEBODY INDICATE WHERE WE WANTED THE FOURTH DECA. THAT'S NOT TRUE.
THE CITY OF TAMARAC LOST AT THE FOURTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL.
THE COURT FOUND THAT IT MUST BE HELD AS A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING, SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO GET ACROSS FOR A LONG TIME, THAT THE CITY MUST IN CONNECTION WITH THIS QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING, PROVIDE MY CLIENTS WITH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, DUE PROCESS AND REFUSING TO GIVE MY CLIENTS TIME TO ADDRESS THE 120 COMMENTS THAT CITY STAFF PROVIDED IT REGARDING THE SITE PLAN IS A VIOLATION OF THAT DUE PROCESS.
REFUSING TO GIVE MY CLIENTS AN OPPORTUNITY TO RE-ENGAGE WITH ITS CONSULTANTS, ALLOW THESE CONSULTANTS TO MEET WITH THE REVIEWERS, COMPLETE AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE LANDSCAPE PLAN, THE TREES DISPOSITION PLAN, THE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN, ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW PLANS, THAT'S A VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS AND SO ON AND SO ON.
BUT IT SEEMS THAT UNFORTUNATELY, THE CITY DOES NOT WISH TO MAKE THIS PROCESS FAIR.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, YOU HAVE A CHOICE.
ARE YOU GOING TO LET MY CLIENT PRESENT ITS EVIDENCE FAIRLY AND
[00:50:02]
COMPLETELY SO THAT YOU CAN MAKE YOUR DECISION BASED ON SUBSTANTIAL, COMPETENT EVIDENCE OR NOT? MEANWHILE, OF COURSE, TAXPAYER MONEY IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO BE SPENT TO PAY LAWYERS, INSTEAD OF SIMPLY ALLOWING 13TH FLOOR TO PRESENT ITS EVIDENCE, ALLOW THIS COMMISSION TO HEAR IT, AND MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION.RESPECTFULLY, ON BEHALF OF MY CLIENT, WE OBJECT TO THE MATTER OF BEING HEARD TODAY.
WE ASKED THAT IT BE DEFERRED TO THE APPROPRIATE TIME.
THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE IT.
>> STEWART HAS NOT YET COME INTO THE BUILDING, SO I'M GOING TO ASK IF THERE'S ANYBODY ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO HAS NOT SIGNED UP, STEWART, WEBSTER VERSUS MICHELSON.
COME ON UP. JEFFREY, IT COULD BE NICE IF THERE'S ANYBODY ELSE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK.
DURING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, YOU'LL RAISE YOUR HAND AND RIGHT AFTER JEFFREY SMITH.
NAME AND LOCATION WHEN YOU'RE READY.
>> STEW WEBSTER FOR PSI GARDENS.
MADAM MAYOR, PERSONS ON THE DAIS, PROTOCOL OBSERVED.
I'M HERE THIS EVENING TO TALK ABOUT MY BELOVED CITY.
BUT BEFORE I START, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT I REALLY ENJOYED THIS YEAR'S JUNETEENTH EVENT, PARKS AND REC, JUST GOING FROM SUCCESS TO SUCCESS.
I CAN'T WAIT TO SEE WHAT'S HAPPENING NEXT YEAR.
I'M HERE THIS EVENING TO TALK ABOUT MY BELOVED CITY.
BECAUSE I KNOW HOW SOME TWISTED LISTENERS ARE, LET ME BEGIN TO PUT THIS ASIDE.
THIS IS NOT ABOUT ME. IT'S ABOUT MY CITY.
WE ALL KNOW THE EXPRESSION [FOREIGN] THE MORE THINGS CHANGE, THE MORE THEY REMAIN THE SAME.
IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS THERE WILL BE AN ELECTION.
YET THERE HAS BEEN ABSOLUTELY NO ELECTORIAL ACTIVITY IN THE CITY.
LET ME SPARE MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE.
IN THE PAST I RAN TWICE FOR DISTRICT 2.
THE CABAL AT THAT TIME, MAINLY RESIDING AND LIKE EXCLUSIVE COMMUNITY IN THE DISTRICT WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT COLLUSIVE GOVERNANCE CONTINUED, USED ONE OF THE MOST TRADITIONAL ELECTORIAL STYLES.
THEY FOUND SOMEBODY WITH THE SAME SHADE OF MELANIN AS ME TO SPLIT MY VOTE WHILE THEY MADE SURE TO BRING OUT THEIR POLICY.
IN MY CASE, THEY TURNED OVER SOME ROCKS AND FOUND A WONDERFUL, BEAUTIFUL MILITARY HELICOPTER YOUNG LADY. WE KNOW THE RESULT.
HISTORY SHOWS THAT THE DAY AFTER THE ELECTION SHE CRAWLED BACK ONTO THE ROCK AND DISAPPEARED.
IN 2022, THERE ARE A BUNCH OF CHARACTERS RUNNING FOR THE DISTRICT SEAT AND AS A VERY LONG TIME, FAIRLY PROMINENT PERSON IN MY COMMUNITY, I DON'T KNOW WHY PEOPLE JUST KEEP COMING AND CARPING WITH ME RATHER THAN DOING SOMETHING AND ASKING SOME OF THE CANDIDATES QUESTION.
BUT ANYWAY, THEY'RE RUNNING FOR THE SEAT WHO HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO COMMUNITY OR TRADITIONAL POLITICAL INVOLVEMENT IN THE CITY.
JUST LIKE THE CURRENT SEAT HOLDER HAS.
THIS IS NOT THE TIME TO TALK ABOUT A POSSIBLE ROPE-A-DOPE TECHNIQUE BEING EMPLOYED.
MOVE FROM DISTRICT 2 TO THE MAYORALTY.
INTERESTING. THE CABAL HAS NOW EXPANDED.
THERE ARE CANDIDATES WHO MAY POSSIBLY BE SITTING IN THIS ROOM WHO ABSOLUTELY NOBODY KNOWS ABOUT, BUT WHO FEEL THAT THEY KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT THE COMMUNITY EAST, WEST, NORTH AND SOUTH, AND ABOUT THE SOLID POLITICAL SKILL THAT IT TAKES TO BUILD UP TO THE POSITION OF SITTING ON THE DAIS TO BE CONTINUED.
>> JEFFREY SHAPIRO, 6104 ORCHARD TREE LANES, THE WOODLANDS COMMUNITY.
I WANT TO REBUT THE ATTORNEY REPRESENTING 13 FLORES.
I WANT TO REFRESH ALL OF YOU TO THE LAST TIME SCOTT BECKMAN WAS HERE, WHERE THEN RIGHT AFTER THAT, WITHIN 48 HOURS HE INSTITUTED THE LAWSUIT AGAINST THE CITY.
[00:55:04]
AT THAT TIME, YOU WERE TRYING TO SCHEDULE THE HEARING.THEY WANTED QUASI-JUDICIAL, WHATEVER, THERE WAS A DISAGREEMENT, AND HE INCITED A LAWSUIT.
BUT THE OTHER THING WAS, IS THAT AT THAT TIME, HIS ARGUMENT WAS, 13 FLORE IS NOT PREPARED.
THEY COULDN'T ANSWER THE QUESTIONS THE CITY HAD ASKED OF THEM AND THEY COME BACK WITH AND WHAT UPSETS ME AT THIS MOMENT ABOUT THIS, IS THAT 13 FLORES, HAD OVER SIX MONTHS TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
NOW A DIFFERENT ATTORNEY COMES IN REPRESENTING THEM, SAYING THAT A 13 FLORES IS NOT GETTING THEIR FAIR SHAKE OF TIME.
I DON'T BUY IT, AND I PLEASE HOPE EVERYBODY IN THE CITY OKAY TAKES A NOTICE TO THIS, BECAUSE THIS HAS BEEN DELAY.
THEY INTENTIONALLY WANTED TO DELAY THIS, AND SO THEY'RE NOT READY.
THAT'S TOO BAD. THEIR TIME LIMIT EXPIRED ON THEIR APPLICATION.
NEXT THING, THE ITEMS THAT WERE LISTED HERE UNDER ITEM 10, ALL OF THESE, THESE WERE POSTED ONLINE IN ADVANCE AND WITHOUT NOTICE OR NOBODY READING IT ONLINE AND THEN COMING DOWN HERE, THEY THOUGHT WOULD HEAR A DISCUSSION ON EACH ONE OF THESE ITEMS. IT'S UNFAIR THAT WE COME DOWN HERE AND YOU DECIDED ALSO THAT THIS SHOULD BE HEARD BEHIND CLOSED DOORS IN ANOTHER MEETING, AND THAT'S UNFAIR ON THESE ITEMS. THAT'S ABOUT IT. I JUST WANTED TO LET MY COMMENTS BEING ON.
>> THANK YOU. I'LL DO THE POINT OF CLARIFICATION HERE ON THIS ONE.
>> THANK YOU. THERE IS NO CHANGING THE MEETING AND GOING BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.
IT IS PART OF THIS MEETING IS JUST CONSIDERED MORE OF A WORKSHOP ITEM WHERE THE COMMISSION HAS THE DISCUSSION AND YOU ARE ALL WELCOME TO STAY HERE FOR IT BUT YOU'RE HAVING YOUR COMMENTS TO IT NOW.
DEFINITELY, I'M NOT SURE IF YOU HEARD ME, BUT THAT'S OKAY. THANK YOU.
>> MY NAME IS ANDREW BOSSART, I'M A RESIDENT OF TAMARAC.
I WANT TO THANK MAYOR GOMEZ FOR COMING OUT TO [NOISE] OUR HOMEOWNERS MEETING AND LISTENING TO SOME OF OUR HOMELESS ISSUES.
A LOT OF PEOPLE HAD SOME BIG GRIPES THAT SHE WAS ABLE TO ANSWER, AND THE DEPUTY SHERIFF AS WELL BACK THERE, SHE DID A GREAT JOB.
I ALSO WANT TO BRING UP THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS GOING ON IN OUR CITY THAT ALL THE RESIDENTS HERE ARE SEEING AND EVERYBODY IS FED UP.
THERE'S THINGS GOING ON HERE AT THIS COMMISSION MEETING THAT'S NOT BEING HELD CORRECTLY.
I FEEL THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY IS NOT DOING THE THINGS THAT HE NEEDS TO BE DOING AND HOLD OF THESE MEETINGS ACCORDINGLY.
I FEEL THERE'S NEED TO BE A LOT MORE ACCOUNTABILITY TO WHAT'S GOING ON HERE IN THE CITY.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, I'M DONE.
>> THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE THIS EVENING.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK US TO WORK? MICHELSON, YOU ARE HERE NOW, SO THE FLOOR IS YOURS. YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
>> GOOD EVENING. I'M STUART MICHELSON.
I'VE LIVED AT 4809 WOODLANDS BOULEVARD IN TAMARAC FOR 25 YEARS.
FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS I'VE BEEN WATCHING THIS SITUATION BETWEEN THE CITY AND 13 FLORES.
FIVE YEARS AGO, 13 FLORES COULDN'T MOVE THIS QUICKLY ENOUGH.
THEY ASKED THE STAFF FOR TWO EXTENSIONS, BOTH OF WHICH THEY GOT AND THAT'S ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO.
THEN THIS PAST FALL AND THE THE CITY WAS GOING TO HEAR THIS IN NOVEMBER, THEY FILED A LAWSUIT TO PREVENT THAT FROM HAPPENING.
NOW THAT THE FOURTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL HAS RULED THAT THIS CAN BE HEARD IN A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING, THEY DON'T WANT TO HAVE THAT HAPPEN.
BIG SURPRISE. IT'S CLEAR TO ME THAT 13 FLORES IS WILLING TO DESTROY THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE I LIVE, AND EVEN IN PART, DESTROY THE CITY BY PUTTING AN ADDITIONAL 6,000 CARS A DAY ON COMMERCIAL BOULEVARD.
I'M NOT TAKING A POSITION I TAKE SO I CAN MAKE MONEY.
[01:00:04]
EVERYTHING 13 FLORES TELLS YOU IS SO THAT THEY CAN MAKE ABOUT $30 MILLION BY BUILDING SOMEWHERE ABOUT 355 HOMES.EVERYTHING THEY SAY IS COVERED BY THAT.
IF 13 FLORES SAYS THEY WANT TO GO FAST, I THINK THE CITY SHOULD GO SLOW.
IF 13 FLORES SAYS THAT THE CITY SHOULD GO SLOW, I THINK THAT THE CITY SHOULD GO FAST.
THEY ARE NOT ACTING IN OUR INTERESTS.
THEY ARE ACTING SOLELY IN OUR OWN MONETARY INTEREST.
THE QUASI JUDICIAL HEARINGS SHOULD BE HELD AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, AND I THINK A SINGLE MATTER HEARING ON AUGUST 31ST SOUNDS TOTALLY REASONABLE.
I URGE YOU ALL TO PLEASE SUPPORT VICE MAYOR GELIN'S MOTION, AND I THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME.
>> THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK, WHO HAS NOT YET HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK? SEEING NONE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IS NOW CLOSED.
>> WANTED TO SEE IF WE CAN GET CONSENSUS TO MOVE VICE MAYOR'S GOT ITEMS TO THE FRONT, CONSIDERING THAT YOU MIGHT BE HERE LATE.
IF EVERYONE WOULD BE AMENABLE TO THAT.
>> I'LL BE AMENABLE TO THAT MADAM MAYOR, THANK YOU.
>> I NEED YOU TO REPEAT THAT FOR ME ONE MORE TIME. I DID NOT HEAR YOU.
>> I SAID I WOULD BE AMENABLE TO THAT.
>> I'M SORRY, MS. MARGOLIS, ONE MORE SECOND.
WE'RE TRYING TO GET PEOPLE TO TALK LOUDER SO WE CAN HEAR IT.
>> EXACTLY. WE'RE TRYING TO GET PEOPLE TO SPEAK LOUDER.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS YOU'RE ASKING FOR ALL FOUR ITEMS TO BE MOVED FROM THE WORKSHOP ITEMS TO BE PUT BEFORE CONSENT AGENDA?
>> CORRECT. CONSIDERING THE LENGTH OF THE AGENDA.
>> YOU HAVE A MOTION FOR IT, BUT RESPECTFULLY, I WOULD LIKE US TO DO OUR CONSENT AGENDA SO THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY HAVE OUR CLERK.
>> YEAH. AFTER CONSENT, BUT BEFORE REGULAR.
>> COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS, WILL YOU TAKE THE FINAL AMENDMENT TO YOUR MOTION?
>> COMMISSIONER BOLTON, WILL YOU TAKE THE SECOND TO THE FINAL AMENDMENT?
I BELIEVE THAT DURING A PUBLIC HEARING, THE ATTORNEY FOR OUR MEMBERS MANAGEMENT ALSO ASK THE QUESTION WHETHER OR NOT THE ITEM WOULD BE TAKEN OFF OF THE AGENDA THEIR ITEM.
IF IT'S GOING TO BE TAKEN OFF, LET THEM KNOW SO THEY CAN LEAVE.
>> WE ARE NOW AT CONSENT AGENDA AND WE WILL DEAL WITH ALL ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
[4. CONSENT AGENDA]
THEN WE WILL MOVE ITEMS 10A, B, C, D, TO THE B06 WOULD BE AND THEN WE WILL CONTINUE ON WITH OUR AGENDA.KEEPING IN MIND, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE DO HAVE SOME OTHER QUASI JUDICIAL MATTERS AND PEOPLE HERE FOR THOSE ITEMS AS WELL.
CITY MANAGER, ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS TO THIS AGENDA?
>> YES, MAYOR THERE ARE. THANK YOU.
ITEM 9B THE TRAPEZE ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL IS BEING PULLED FROM THE AGENDA.
ADDITIONALLY, 10B WILL BE HEARD BEFORE 10A WHENEVER YOU GET TO IT. THAT IS IT.
>> LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, CAN I GET A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? WE CAN DEAL WITH THE TRAPEZE.
>> I PULLED AN ITEM FROM THE AGENDA.
>> WHICH ITEM WOULD YOU LIKE TO PULL?
>> ITEM 4K? ALL RIGHT WE WILL BE REMOVING 4KTR13817, WHICH IS THE RESOLUTION OF THE COMMISSION, OBVIOUSLY A TIMER FLORIDA APPOINTING KIMBERLY DYLAN AS CITY CLERK, AND THE REST OF THE TITLE VI READ IN LATER.
I NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED.
>> I GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE BY VICE MAYOR GELIN I HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BOLTON.
ACTING CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
[01:05:01]
>> THANK YOU. I MOVE FOR 4KTA13817.
[4.k TR13817 - A Resolution of the City Commission of the city of Tamarac, Florida, appointing Kimberly Dillon as City Clerk, effective July 13, 2022 or at such date as is mutually agreed upon; providing for conflicts; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date.]
IF YOU WOULD, CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD.>> THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR MEMBERS TO QUESTION.
THIS IS A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA APPOINTING KIMBERLY DYLAN AS CITY CLERK EFFECTIVE JULY 13TH, 2022, OR IT'S SUCH DATE AS IT'S MUTUALLY AGREED UPON, PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, PROVIDING FOR SEPARABILITY, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I NEED A SECOND, PLEASE.
>> THANK YOU. I GOT A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BOLTON TO MY MOTION.
CITY CLERK, I THINK CITY CLERK FOR THE MOMENT, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> THANK YOU MA'AM. COMMISSIONER BOLTON?
>> THANK YOU COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS?
>> CONGRATULATIONS. [APPLAUSE]
>> GENTLEMEN. WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A MOMENT.
THE CITY MANAGER HAS A FEW WORDS TO SAY, PLEASE.
>> FIRST, I JUST WANTED TO CONGRATULATE KIMBERLY ON HER APPOINTMENT AS CITY CLERK.
KIMBERLY DYLAN IS REALLY THE BEST OF TAMARAC.
SHE CAME TO OUR CITY IN 2015 AS A RECORDS COORDINATOR AND HAS PROCEEDED TO WORK HARD AND GO TO SCHOOL AND BE A MOM AND BE INVOLVED IN THE MENTORING PROGRAM AND EVERY SINGLE THING THAT SHE COULD DO TO ADVANCE.
SHE'S BURNED HER MUNICIPAL CLERKING CERTIFICATION, ALWAYS REACHING FOR THE STARS.
IT GIVES ME SUCH GREAT PLEASURE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE YOU AS THE CITY CLERK AND KEEP ON SHINING AND BEING THE EXAMPLE THAT YOU ARE TO ALL OF THE CITY.
IN RECOGNITION AND HONOR OF YOUR SPECIAL DAY, YOUR LOVELY COLLEAGUES HAVE BROUGHT YOU SOME FLOWERS TO CELEBRATE THIS WONDERFUL SUCCESS. THANK YOU.
>> LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A FIVE-MINUTE RECESS, SO OUR ACTUAL CITY CLERK CAN ENJOY SOME PHOTOS WITH THE TEAM AND HER FAMILY.
IT IS 8:07 WILL BE BACK LETS SAY 8:15. THANK YOU.
>> LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THIS MEETING IS BACK IN SESSION.
THE ITEM ON THE TABLE AT THIS TIME WAS ABOUT PULLING ITEM 9B.
[9.b TBO53 - Trapeze - Members Only Management, LLC - Administrative Appeal; Proposed Location: 7707 W Commercial Boulevard, Tamarac, Florida, 33351; Property Folio Identification Number: 494109270010; Property Legal Description: Sutter Investment Company Plat 91-2 B Parcel A. Russell L. Cormican, Esq., designated agent for the business owner, Members Only Management, LLC, (the Applicant) filed an application with the City of Tamarac (City) Department of Community Development seeking an Administrative Appeal of an interpretation rendered by the Planning Board. Administrative appeal of June 1, 2022 decision rendered by Planning Board affirming interpretation rendered by the Director of Community Development dated May 9, 2022 in response to a Zoning Verification Letter regarding the relocation of the Trapeze to 7707 W Commercial Boulevard]
CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE PROCEED IN, PLEASE. BRING THAT MICROPHONE.>> AS BRIEFLY DISCUSSED DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENTS SECTION OF THE AGENDA, STATED AND WILL RESTATE THAT THERE ARE ISSUES NOT ONLY WITH REGARD TO NOTICE, BUT SPECIFICALLY TO POTENTIAL ACTION THAT THIS COMMISSION IS BEING ASKED TO TAKE, THAT WOULD BIND NOT ONLY THE APPLICANT, BUT AS IT RELATES TO THE SPECIFIC LOCATION THAT WAS IDENTIFIED IN THE ZONING VERIFICATION LETTER REQUEST BY THE APPLICANT TO BIND THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION, WHERE WE HAVE SINCE THEN RECEIVED, IN OUR OPINION AND STAFF AND UNEQUIVOCAL DECLARATION FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER THAT THE APPLICANT WHO'S SEEKING THIS APPEAL HAS NO AUTHORITY TO BIND THEM AND THEY ARE NOT GOING TO FOLLOW THAT ZVL OR WHATEVER MIGHT BE THE OUTCOME OF THIS APPEAL, AND THAT THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO SPEAK ON THEIR BEHALF.
AS WAS DISCUSSED BEFORE, I HAVE SERIOUS CONCERNS WITH THE IMPLICATIONS OF DUE PROCESS IN MOVING FORWARD WITH AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL WHEN THE PROPERTY OWNER IS INDICATED THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO BE IN DOOR AND THE APPLICANT DOESN'T HAVE AUTHORITY ON THEIR BEHALF TO SPEAK ON THEIR BEHALF REGARDING THAT ISSUE.
I THINK THAT A BARE MINIMUM, IF THIS COUNCIL OR THIS COMMISSION DECIDES TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE APPEAL, WHICH IS CERTAINLY YOU'RE RIGHT, THAT IT BE RESCHEDULED, SO NOTICE CAN BE PROVIDED TO THE PROPERTY OWNER SPECIFICALLY AND INFORMING THEM THAT THIS COMMISSION INTENDS TO MOVE FORWARD AND GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE PRESENT DURING THE HEARING, WITH COUNCIL, IF THEY SO CHOOSE, SO YOU CAN HEAR FROM ALL THE PARTIES, AND MOVING FORWARD.
[01:10:01]
I DO BELIEVE, AND MS. CALLOWAY CAN SPEAK TO THIS ISSUE IF YOU WISH, THAT IT DOESN'T COMPLY WITH THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF OUR CODE AT THIS POINT IN TIME TO MOVE FORWARD.AS I EXPLAINED BEFORE, THE LAST TIME WE HAD THIS ISSUE IN THE ABSENCE OF A SPECIFIC ADDRESS AT WHICH THE DECISION THAT YOU MAKE IS GOING TO BE BOUND BY AND THERE IS NOTHING TO APPEAL.
>> CITY ATTORNEY, SO HEARING YOU CORRECTLY, IF THE APPLICATION IS NOT COMPLETE, THEN IT DOES NOT COME YET BEFORE THIS COMMISSION FOR THAT CHILD PROVISION FOR THE CITY COMMISSION TO MAKE THAT DECISION, IT RELIES ON THE CITY MANAGER'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR WHAT IS ON THE AGENDA OR NOT, AND THEREFORE AS AN INCOMPLETE APPLICATION IT IS, SHE'S AUTHORIZED TO PULL THE SAME.
>> THAT IS CORRECT. THE LAW IN FLORIDA SAYS THAT IF YOU HAVE NOT COMPLIED WITH ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF YOUR CODE TO PLACE THE ITEM PROPERLY BEFORE YOU FOR CONSIDERATION, ANY ACTION YOU TAKE IS VOID.
THAT CAN BE VOIDED, BUT IS VOID FROM THE GET-GO.
AGAIN, IF IT IS THE DESIRE OF THIS COMMISSION TO GIVE THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY OR THIS APPLICANT THE OPPORTUNITY TO ARGUE THEIR CASE, VERY STRONG RECOMMENDATION IS AT A BARE MINIMUM, IT'D BE RESCHEDULED, THE PROPERTY OWNER IN QUESTION, THE LANDLORD BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO APPEAR AND AGAIN WITH COUNCIL, IF THEY SO CHOOSE AND INFORM YOU ALL OF WHAT THEIR POSITION IS WITH REGARD TO THE PROPOSED USE OF THEIR PROPERTY.
>> CITY ATTORNEY, DOES THIS BODY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO OVERRULE THE CITY MANAGERS? AUTHORITY OVER THE AGENDA?
>> YOU CERTAINLY CAN AGAIN, SCHEDULE OR DIRECT STAFF TO SCHEDULE.
>> THAT WASN'T THE QUESTION THAT WAS ASKED.
>> THE ANSWER IS INDIRECTLY OR DIRECTLY EVENTUAL, YES.
BUT YOU HAVE TO COMPORT WITH THE ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE LAW, WHICH MEANS DUE PROCESS HAS TO BE PROVIDED TO ALL THE AFFECTED PARTIES BEFORE YOU CAN MOVE FORWARD.
THAT IS WHERE YOUR AUTHORITY STOPS.
IN GOOD CONSCIENCE AS YOUR CITY ATTORNEY, I CANNOT RECOMMEND OR TELL YOU TO MOVE FORWARD WITH AN APPLICATION TO HEAR A QUASI JUDICIAL MATTER WHEN PROPER NOTICE HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED TO ALL THE EFFECTIVE PROPERTY OWNERS, OR RATHER AFFECTED PARTIES, INCLUDING IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, THE ACTUAL PROPERTY OWNER WHO'S TOLD US IN WRITING THAT THE APPLICANT HAS NO AUTHORITY TO REPRESENT THEM OR TO BIND THEM.
>> MAY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD.
>> THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME, COMMISSION, WE HAVE HEARD FROM OUR LEGAL COUNCIL ABOUT THIS PROCESS.
OUR CITY MANAGER HAS THE AUTHORITY AND IS INVOKED HER AUTHORITY TO REMOVE THIS ITEM FROM THE AGENDA AS IT IS INCOMPLETE AND DUE PROCESS HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED.
WITH THAT SHE HAS PULLED THE ITEM.
VICE MAYOR GELIN, YOUR LIGHT IS LIT. GO AHEAD.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM MS. CALLOWAY AS TO WHY THIS SHOULD NOT BE HEARD AT THIS TIME.
>> MS. CALLOWAY, THROUGH CITY MANAGER.
>> YES, MAXINE, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND DESCRIBE THE ISSUE.
>> MAXINE CALLOWAY, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.
JUST TO REINFORCE WHAT THE CITY ATTORNEY JUST MENTIONED, THE APPLICATION IS NOT COMPLETE, PARTICULARLY THERE IS IMPROPER NOTICE.
WE HAVE NOTICE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 400 FEET OF A PROPERTY THAT THE PROPERTY OWNERS TOLD US SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED FOR THE CHANGE OF USE FOR THIS APPLICANT.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, AS WE HAVE DONE BEFORE, IF NOTICE IS IMPROPER, THEN WE NEED AN OPPORTUNITY TO RENOTICE AND REHEAR THIS APPLICATION.
>> CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY NOTICE IS IMPROPER?
>> WE HAVE NOTICED A PHYSICAL ADDRESS WHERE THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS INFORMED THE CITY THAT THAT LOCATION IS NOT AVAILABLE FOR THIS APPLICANT.
>> NOW, DO WE HAVE CONSENT FROM THE COMMISSION TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT, THE ATTORNEY?
>> IS THERE A NEED TO BE A MOTION ON THIS ONE BECAUSE THIS ITEM HAS BEEN REMOVED?
[01:15:02]
>> WE'RE DISCUSSING THE REMOVAL OF THE ITEM.
>> NO, SHE'S REMOVED THE ITEM.
THE CITY MANAGER HAS OFFICIALLY REMOVED THE ITEM.
IT'S WHETHER OR NOT IT COMES BACK TO BE HEARD.
>> IF THERE'S A MAJORITY OF THE COMMISSION WHO WISH TO HEAR FROM MR. COCHRAN, THEN YOU CERTAINLY ARE.
I'M SURE HE WOULD LIKE THAT OPPORTUNITY.
I AGAIN WOULD RESPECTFULLY SUGGEST THAT GIVEN THE QUASI-JUDICIAL NATURE OF THE ITEM AND THE IMPLICATIONS OF DUE PROCESS.
AGAIN, I'VE JUST PREVIOUSLY STATED DUE PROCESS IS A MULTI-PRONGED ROAD, IT GOES BOTH WAYS, THAT HE AT LEAST BE GIVEN A BRIEF OPPORTUNITY BUT AGAIN, THAT'S UP TO YOU-ALL.
>> IS THERE A MOTION TO PUT THIS ITEM BACK ON THE QUASI-JUDICIAL SCHEDULE FOR THIS EVENING?
>> I DON'T THINK SO. I'M JUST ASKING TO GET CONSENT TO HEAR FROM THE ATTORNEY WHO'S REPRESENTING A BUSINESS THAT'S BEEN IN TAMARAC FOR ABOUT 20 YEARS, 25 YEARS.
>> HE HAS HAD HIS THREE MINUTES AND THERE'S OTHER BUSINESS AT HAND, SO IF WE'RE NOT HEARING THE ACTUAL SUBSTANCE OF THE BUSINESS AND WE POTENTIALLY COULD HAVE SOME LAWSUITS PENDING, SHOULD WE BE MOVING THIS MATTER ALONG?
>> WE'RE NOT MOVING THE MATTER ALONG, WE'RE JUST GIVING THE REPRESENTATIVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.
SO CAN YOU ASK THE COMMISSION IF THERE'S CONSENT TO GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK?
>> IS THERE A MORE SUBSTANTIAL INFORMATION THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO SHARE IN ADDITION TO THE PRIOR COMMENTS MADE?
>> IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT YOU HAVE OTHER THAN WHAT YOU'VE ALREADY SHARED? CITY ATTORNEY.
>> HIS LETTER IS PART OF THE RECORD AS WELL.
[OVERLAPPING] THE SUBMITTED LETTER THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED TO YOU-ALL, SO THAT'S IN THE RECORD AND TO THE EXTENT THAT MR. COCHRAN MIGHT WANTS TO MAKE COMMENTS ABOUT THE CONTENTS OF THAT LETTER. IT IS IN THE RECORD.
>> I HAVE A POINT OF ORDER FIRST.
CITY ATTORNEY, PART OF THE MATTER IS THAT THIS IS QUASI-JUDICIAL WHEN IT COMES BACK TO US, SO ANYTHING FURTHER THAT MIGHT BE SAID BY MR. COCHRAN OR ANYBODY ON THE COMMISSION, IF THEY'RE NOT SWORN IN, COULD HAVE AN ISSUE WITH ANY FUTURE LITIGATION OR QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING ON THE MATTER.
>> WE WOULD START THE PROCESS AT THE COMMISSION LEVEL ANEW FROM SCRATCH MOVING FORWARD IF THAT IS THE DIRECTION OF THE COMMISSION.
>> BUT NOT AT THIS VERY MOMENT.
>> NO, NOT AT THIS MOMENT. AGAIN, I MADE IT VERY CLEAR.
I BELIEVE THAT TO MOVE FORWARD TONIGHT ON THIS ITEM WOULD BE DEFINITELY INAPPROPRIATE BECAUSE OF NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE CODE AND NOTICE REQUIREMENTS.
>> MY QUESTION BACK TO YOU IS ANY FURTHER COMMENTS FROM ANY OF US OR EVEN MR. COCHRAN AT THIS TIME, HOW DOES THAT AFFECT THE FACT THAT THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE A QUASI-JUDICIAL MATTER?
>> THE COMMENTS OF THE APPLICANT AND THE PRESENTATION THAT WOULD TAKE PLACE AT THE QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING STANDS UNKNOWN.
UNDER THE FLORIDA LAW, THE ONLY THING THAT CAN BE CONSIDERED AND THAT BECOMES PART OF THE RECORD IS THAT WHICH TAKES PLACE AT THE QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING.
WHAT YOU'RE HAVING HERE IS A DISCUSSION AS TO WHEN IF AT ALL DOES THIS ITEM POTENTIALLY GET RESCHEDULED AND TO THE EXTENT THAT TO ASSIST YOU IN MAKING THAT DECISION, MAJORITY OF THE COMMISSION WANTS TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE THEN THAT'S YOUR PRIORITY IF YOU DO NOT HAVE TO.
>> SO DO WE HAVE CONSENSUS FROM THE COMMISSIONER?
>> MR. VILLALOBOS, YOU HAD YOUR QUESTION ANSWERED?
>>SORT OF. I BELIEVE THE ATTORNEY HAD REQUESTED ADDITIONAL MINUTE TO PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE WANTED JUST HEAR?
>> THAT IS THE QUESTION THAT IS BEING POSED.
>> IT SOUNDS LIKE HE SUPPORTS IT.
WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER TWO COMMISSIONERS?
>> THERE'S THREE PEOPLE SINCE I'M NOT EVEN GOING DOWN THE LINE UNLESS YOU WISH TO ANSWER, COMMISSIONER BOLTON, FOR ONE FURTHER MINUTE ON THIS MATTER, PLEASE KEEPING IT TO NEW ITEMS VERSUS ANYTHING NEW. THANK YOU.
>> I DIDN'T WANT TO SPECIFY ONE MINUTE.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S ENOUGH TIME.
>> HE HAD ASKED FOR ONE MINUTE EARLIER AND THAT'S WHAT COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS.
>> WE'RE NOT HEARING THE MATTER TODAY.
PLEASE PROVIDE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT YOU THINK WE NEED.
>> THANK YOU. I WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND TO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S ASSERTION THAT THERE HAS NOT BEEN NOTICE PROVIDED TO THE PROPERTY OWNER, IN FACT, THAT'S NOT ACCURATE.
WE'VE ENGAGED IN THE NOTICE PROVISIONS PROVIDED UNDER THE CODE TO THE LETTER.
WE'VE SENT OUT MAILINGS TO EVERY ADDRESS WITHIN 400 FEET OF THE SUBJECT LOCATION INCLUDING THE LOCATION ITSELF.
WE'VE PLACED A SIGN ON THE PROPERTY OF THE LOCATION.
THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THE CITY OVER THE PAST TWO WEEKS IN WRITING AND IN TELEPHONE CONVERSATIONS THAT ARE REFERRED TO IN HIS LETTER.
[01:20:03]
THE PROPERTY OWNER IS ON NOTICE.IF THE PROPERTY OWNER WANTED TO BE HERE, THEY COULD CERTAINLY BE HERE.
THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT THAT MY CLIENT HAVE A LEASE IN PLACE TO PROCEED WITH THIS HEARING.
THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF THIS HEARING IS SO THEY CAN GET AN ANSWER BEFORE SIGNING A LEASE ON A PROPERTY.
THE PROPERTY IS STILL AVAILABLE.
IF THEY WERE TO RECEIVE APPROVAL TONIGHT, THEY COULD GO MAKE THAT LANDLORD A DIFFERENT OFFER THAN THE ONE THAT HE REJECTED.
HE DIDN'T SAY HE WASN'T GOING TO TAKE ANY OFFER, HE REJECTED THAT OFFER.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT PART YOU SHARED WITH US, APPRECIATE.
>> AT THIS TIME, COMMISSION, THE ITEM IS STILL OFF THE AGENDA.
I'M NOT HEARING ANYBODY ASK ME TO PUT IT BACK ON.
>> I DO WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT.
I DO THINK THAT THE CITY IS PUTTING OURSELVES IN A BAD POSITION BY NOT PROVIDING DUE PROCESS AND IT COULD LEAD TO ADDITIONAL LAWSUITS AND A WASTE OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS BY HAVING TO DEFEND OURSELVES. THANKS.
>> I BELIEVE WE ARE DOING A DUE PROCESS.
IF OUR CITY ATTORNEY IS SAYING THAT WE WANT ALL PARTIES INVOLVED, I BELIEVE THAT THE OWNER, THE REPRESENTATIVE, AND THE ATTORNEY ARE I'M SURE OKAY WITH HAVING EVERYONE INVOLVED IN THE SITUATION.
I DON'T SEE WHY THEY WOULD NOT DISAGREE WITH THAT.
>> THE CHAIR ATTORNEY WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SENDING OUT NOTICES AND MAKING SURE THAT THEY GO OUT SO THAT IT'S SET AND READY?
>> UNDER OUR CODE, IT IS A JOINT PROCESS BETWEEN STAFF AND THE APPLICANT.
I DON'T KNOW, UNFORTUNATELY, OFF THE TOP MY HEAD, WHAT PORTION IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY AND WHAT PORTION IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT.
MS. CALLOWAY MAY CLARIFY THAT.
>> OKAY. I DON'T SEE MS. CALLOWAY.
WE PUBLISHED A NOTICE AND THEN THE APPLICANT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAIL PORTION.
TYPICALLY USING A VENDOR AND PROVIDED US WITH AN AFFIDAVIT AFFIRMING THAT THE NOTICES WERE SENT.
>> YES. WE FULLY NOTICED, WHICH IS WHY WE ARE SAYING NOTICE WOULD BE DEEMED IMPROPER GIVEN THE FACT THAT THE LANDLORD IS ASKED THAT ITS PROPERTY NOT BE CONSIDERED TONIGHT FOR ANY DISCUSSION BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION, AS IT IS NOT HIS INTENT TO LEASE PROPERTY TO TRAPEZE.
>> MS. CALLOWAY, I RECOGNIZE THE BOSS PROGRAM THAT WE HAVE AND IT IS ADVISABLE ON THE BOSS THAT BUSINESS OWNERS DO DUE DILIGENCE WITH BRINGING FORTH A LETTER OF INTENT TO THE CITY BEFORE THEY ENTER INTO A LEASE AGREEMENT.
IT SOUNDS AS IF THE APPLICANT DID THAT ACCORDING TO THE TESTIMONY HEARD BY THE ATTORNEY.
>> THE APPLICANT DID NOT DISCLOSE TO US THAT HE WAS REJECTED.
HIS LEASE WAS REJECTED BY THIS PROPERTY OWNER.
THAT WAS NOT DISCLOSED TO STAFF.
APPARENTLY, THIS OCCURRED SOMETIME BEFORE THE APPLICATION OR DURING THE APPLICATION IS LEASE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER WAS REJECTED BY THE APPLICANT DID NOT DISCLOSE THAT TO US.
>> HAVE YOU IN THE PAST WEIGHED THE OPINION OF PROPERTY OWNERS LIKE THIS SCENARIO WHERE YOU DO NOT GO FORWARD BECAUSE A PROPERTY OWNER SAYS THAT THEY DO NOT WANT TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCESS ANY THE LONGER?
>> COMMISSIONER BOLTON, I HAVE TO TELL YOU THAT THIS PROCESS IS EXTREMELY UNIQUE.
IT'S AN ADMINISTRATIVE OF APPEAL.
IT'S THE FIRST TIME, I BELIEVE, IN THE HISTORY OF THE CITY OR AT LEAST SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE AND SINCE MY STAFF HAS BEEN HERE SINCE WE HAVE PROCESSED ONE.
IS SOMEWHAT UNIQUE, TYPICALLY FOR MOST APPLICATIONS, YOU'LL HAVE TO DO AN OWNER AFFIDAVIT.
WHICH MEANS OWNER SIGNS AFFIRMING THAT THEY GIVE PERMISSION TO THE APPLICANT TO MAKE APPLICATION.
THIS APPLICATION PROCESS IS A BIT UNIQUE AND THE PACKET DID NOT INCLUDE AN OWNER AFFIDAVIT.
>> WOULD YOU REQUIRE AN OWNER AFFIDAVIT BEFORE YOU PUBLISH OR YOU WOULD REQUIRE THE OWNER AFFIDAVIT AFTER YOU PUBLISH?
>> THE OWNER APPLICATIONS IS TYPICALLY A PART OF THE APPLICATION PROCESS.
GOING FORWARD, DEFINITELY, WE WILL INCLUDE IT AS A PART OF THE APPEAL PROCESS.
>> THEN, MS. CALLOWAY, IT SEEMS LIKE YOU LEFT THE BOX UNCHECKED.
YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO GET THE OWNER AFFIDAVIT BEFORE YOU EVEN PUBLISHED.
>> IT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT OF THIS APPLICATION PROCESS.
I SAID BEFORE THIS IS VERY UNIQUE.
IT'S THE FIRST TIME IN THE HISTORY OF THE CITY THAT WE'RE DOING AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL.
THE COURT DOES NOT REQUIRE IT.
I AM NOW REQUIRING IT BECAUSE I SEE THAT THERE'S AN ISSUE,
[01:25:03]
AT LEAST WITH THIS APPLICATION.MOVING FORWARD, I WILL MAKE SURE IT'S INCLUDED.
>> YOU CAN JUST ARBITRARILY REQUIRE SOMETHING IF THE COURT DOES NOT REQUIRE IT?
>> FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE STANDPOINT, PARTICULARLY WHEN THERE IS A DEMONSTRATED NEED, AS THERE IS NOW.
>> IF THE PROPERTY OWNER COMES FORWARD AND SAY THAT THEY CHANGED THEIR MIND, WHAT WOULD YOUR POSITION BE?
>> IN ALL OUR OTHER APPLICATIONS, IF AN AFFIDAVIT OF THE OWNER IS NOT EXECUTED, THEN THE APPLICATION DOES NOT GO FORWARD.
>> THE PROPERTY OWNER'S POSITION WAS STATED IN WRITING?
>> YES, IT WAS. IT WAS PROVIDED TO YOU IN YOUR PACKET AS WELL.
>> I'M ASKING FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PUBLIC.
THE QUESTION IS, THE RESPONSE OF THE PROPERTY OWNER WAS PROVIDED IN WRITING?
>> IT WAS SIGNED AND NOTARIZED?
>> IT WAS SIGNED ALONG WITH AN AGENT AUTHORIZATION AS WELL, AUTHORIZING THE PROPERTY MANAGER TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER.
>> HOW DID YOU VERIFY THE VERACITY OF THE DOCUMENT?
>> WELL, WE SPOKE TO THE PROPERTY MANAGER IN-PERSON AND THEN WE ASKED HIM TO FOLLOW UP AND PROVIDE THE INFORMATION IN WRITING, WHICH HE DID IMMEDIATELY THEREAFTER.
>> DID YOU INVITE THE PROPERTY MANAGER HERE OR THE PROPERTY OWNER HERE TONIGHT?
>> COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS, COMMISSIONER BOLTON IS ASKING PROCEDURAL QUESTIONS THAT PERTAIN TO WHETHER OR NOT THE NOTICE WAS PROVIDED PROPERLY FOR THIS ITEM.
THEREFORE, HE IS ALLOWED TO CONTINUE, BUT HE ONLY HAS TWO MINUTES LEFT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THE PROPERTY MANAGER, WERE THEY INVITED TO CITY HALL TONIGHT TO TESTIFY IN CASE THIS ITEM WOULD GO FORWARD OR IT WAS NOT REQUIRED?
>> IT WAS NOT REQUIRED. I KNOW THEY WERE NOT INVITED.
>> HOW MUCH TIME DID YOU GIVE TO THE APPLICANT TO TELL THEM THAT THE ITEM WOULD NOT GO FORWARD TONIGHT?
>> WE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFIED THE CITY ATTORNEY WHO NOTIFIED THE APPLICANT, I THINK, ALMOST IMMEDIATELY.
>> CAN YOU VERIFY, CITY ATTORNEY, THROUGH THE CHAIR THAT YOU ALMOST IMMEDIATELY OR IMMEDIATELY PROVIDE THE NOTICE.
>> YES. I THINK IT WAS WITHIN 24 HOURS OF RECEIVING THE INFORMATION FROM STAFF.
I SENT AN EMAIL TO MISS CORCORAN WITH A COPY OF THAT CORRESPONDENCE AND ASKING FOR HIM TO GIVE ME A CALL, WHICH SHE DID.
THEN WE HAD A VERY PROFESSIONAL, CORDIAL, AND RATHER LENGTHY CONVERSATION.
I THINK THAT AT ONE POINT IN TIME TO ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WAS ASKED EARLIER, I SAID YOUR CLIENT MAY WANT TO CONSIDER MOVING FORWARD TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE OF WHETHER OR NOT THE LANDLORD IS ONBOARD OR NOT ONBOARD, IS GETTING THE LANDLORD TO SIGN A LETTER OF INTENT THAT YOU CAN THEN PRESENT TO STAFF THAT WE CAN THEN BE ABLE TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD.
>> I THINK THAT THE CITY HAS A HISTORY OF FOLLOWING THE RULE OF THE LAW, SO TO SPEAK.
I THINK THAT MS. CALLOWAY, YOU DIDN'T DO ANYTHING WRONG.
I THINK THAT THE APPLICANT WAS GIVEN APPROPRIATE TIME BEFORE THEY CAME HERE TONIGHT.
CERTAINLY, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE DUE PROCESS AND SHOULD THEY FOLLOW THE LAW AND FOLLOW PROCEDURES IN THE FUTURE, I'D LIKE THE ITEM TO BE HEARD.
I AM A BIG SUPPORTER OF RESIDENTS HAVING RIGHTS, BUSINESS OWNERS HAVING RIGHTS, AND DEVELOPERS HAVING RIGHTS.
AS A COMMISSIONER, YOU MUST ALWAYS BALANCE ALL OF THAT.
I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING THEIR ITEM IF THEY FIND A PROPERTY THAT THEY CAN BIND TO THE IDEA. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BOLTON.
>> I'M SORRY, FOR THE RECORD, FOR WHATEVER IT'S WORTH, STAFF INFORMED ME THAT THEY RECEIVED THE LETTER IN QUESTION FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER ON THE 28TH.
IN YOUR PACKET, YOU'LL SEE THAT I THEN FORWARDED THAT TO MR. COCHRAN ON THE 29TH, A DAY AFTER.
AT THIS TIME, THIS ITEM IS OFF THE AGENDA.
THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE THIS EVENING.
[01:30:02]
WE'RE NOW MOVING OUT-OF-ORDER, EVERYBODY, SO BEAR WITH ME.WE'RE GOING TO BE DISCUSSING 10B.
[10.b Discussion and motion/direction to direct the City Manager to schedule a quasi-judicial hearing with the only matters being 13th Floor's land-use plan amendment, rezoning application, the site plan, and the development agreement on August 31st at 7:00 pm. Requested by Vice Mayor Mike Gelin]
DISCUSSION MOTION OR DIRECTION TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO SCHEDULE A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING FOR THE ONLY MATTERS BEING 13 FLOORS, LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT, REZONING APPLICATION, SITE PLAN, THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ON AUGUST 31ST AT 07:00 PM.AT THIS TIME, OUR SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR THIS MATTER, MAX LOHMAN, WILL HAVE THE FLOOR TO SPEAK WITH US.
>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS.
MAX LOHMAN, SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR THE 13TH FLOOR MATTER.
I WAS ABLE TO SPEAK THE FOUR OF YOU TODAY INDIVIDUALLY ON THE PHONE TO SPEAK TO YOU ABOUT ITEM 10B, AND THEN AS MR. ETHAN MARK SHARED WITH YOU AROUND 6:10 THIS EVENING, THEY FILED A MOTION WITH THE COURT WITH REGARDS TO ITEM 10B ALLEGING THAT IT WOULD BE A VIOLATION OF THE ORDER, IMPOSING A STAY AND A VIOLATION OF THE INJUNCTIVE ORDER.
AS I SHARED WITH YOU PREVIOUSLY, WHILE I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THAT IS NECESSARILY A VIOLATION OF THE STAY, I THINK HOLDING THE HEARING WOULD BE, BUT I DON'T THINK NECESSARILY SETTING IT WOULD BE.
BUT GIVEN THAT, THEY'VE ALREADY FILED A MOTION, AND SO WE WOULD END UP ARGUING THIS MOTION IN FRONT OF THE COURTS AND FIGHTING OVER WHETHER OR NOT IN FACT, SETTING THIS FOR A HEARING IF YOU CHOSE TO DO SO, IS A VIOLATION OF THE STAY AND A VIOLATION OF THE INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, RATHER THAN RESOLVING THE ISSUE BEFORE US WITH AS IT RELATES TO 13TH FLOOR IN THE CIRCUIT COURT, WHICH IS TO SIMPLY GET A FINAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT ENTERED WITH REGARD TO THEIR DECLARATORY RELIEF AND THEIR PRAYER FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, WHICH I THINK IT'D BE VERY EASILY REMEDIED.
I'VE PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED ALL OF YOU A COPY OF THE DRAFT ORDER THAT I HAVE SUBMITTED TO 13 FLOOR FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION.
THEY HAVE THUS FAR OBJECTED TO IT AND HAVE NOT AGREED TO IT.
THERE ARE WAYS TO DEAL WITH THIS THAT ARE I THINK, FAIRLY EXPEDITIOUS.
ITEM WHAT IS NOW WILL BE ITEM 10A OR 10B, IF YOU WILL, THAT WHOEVER YOU CHOOSE TO CONTINUE TO REPRESENT YOU IN THIS MATTER WILL BE ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF THAT FOR YOU.
I THINK THAT YOU WOULD BE UNNECESSARILY ENGAGING IN LITIGATION OVER SOMETHING THAT IS PROBABLY NOT GOING TO OCCUR ON AUGUST 31ST, EVEN IF YOU SET IT BECAUSE THE CITY WON'T PROBABLY GET BEFORE JUDGE FRANK TO HAVE THE MOTION THAT WAS FILED TONIGHT AT 6:10 HEARD.
IT'S NOT LIKELY THAT IT WILL BE FULLY BRIEFED AND THEN HEARD BY AUGUST 31ST.
SO IF YOU WENT FORWARD WITH 10B, IF YOU SET IT, YOU'RE JUST GOING TO TURN AROUND AND HAVE TO CANCEL IT ANYWAY.
I JUST DON'T ADVISE ENGAGING IN IT.
I THINK IT WOULD BE A VERY FOOLISH THING TO DO.
I THINK YOU'RE BEST SERVED DIRECTING YOUR SUCCESSOR COUNSEL TO MOVE FORWARD WITH CONCLUDING THE ITEM BEFORE JUDGE FRANK, WHICH WOULD BE TO GET THE FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER ENTERED WITH REGARD TO THE DECLARATORY RELIEF.
THE FOURTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS OPINION, THEY AFFIRMED THE INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, AND SAID THAT THEY THOUGHT THAT 34 WOULD HAVE A HIGH LIKELIHOOD OF SUCCESS OF DEMONSTRATING THAT THEY ARE ENTITLED TO A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING.
WELL, THE WRITING IS PRETTY MUCH ON THE WALL WHEN YOU GET AN ORDER LIKE THAT, SO YOU GO, OKAY.
WELL, THAT'S THE CASE. WHY WOULD THE CITY WANTS TO THEN GO BACK? IF YOU RECALL, JUDGE FRANK ORIGINALLY HAS SET THIS DOWN FOR A ONE-DAY TRIAL.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ROUGHLY AN EIGHT HOUR HEARING OVER WHETHER OR NOT THEY WERE ENTITLED TO A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING AND WHETHER OR NOT THEY WOULD BE ENTITLED TO INJUNCTIVE RELIEF PENDING THAT.
IT DOES NOT MAKE A LOT OF SENSE.
AS STILL AS YOUR ATTORNEY ON THIS MATTER, FOR YOU TO EXTEND THOSE KINDS OF FUNDS, HAVING A HEARING AND BEING BACK BEFORE JUDGE FRANK WITH SOMETHING THAT HE IS ALMOST CERTAINLY GOING TO GRANT IN THEIR FAVORITE, WHICH IS DECLARED THAT THEY ARE ENTITLED TO A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING.
THAT BEING THE CASE, THAT'S WHY I RECOMMENDED TO YOU PREVIOUSLY AND HAVE RECOMMENDED AGAIN HERE TONIGHT THAT THE BEST COURSE OF ACTION IS TO TRY TO MOVE FORWARD TO GET A FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER.
THAT ORDER WOULD SAY THAT THEY ARE ENTITLED TO A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING AND THE CITY WILL CONDUCT A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING ON THEIR LUBA APPLICATION AND THEY'RE RESOLVING, PERIOD.
THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE ENTITLED TO.
THEY DIDN'T SUE FOR AN EIGHT MONTH EXTENSION AS CONTAINED IN THEIR MOTION.
I'M SURE MOST OF YOU DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO READ IT EVEN THOUGH I EMAILED IT TO YOU ONCE I GOT IT.
BUT BE THAT AS IT MAY, I WOULD STRONGLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO DIMMER ON ITEM 10B OR REMOVE IT FROM THE AGENDA AND NOT TAKE ACTION ON IT.
I KNOW THAT THERE'S A PORTION OF THE PUBLIC THAT
[01:35:02]
VERY MUCH WANTS TO SEE THIS ITEM COME TO CONCLUSION AND RESOLUTION ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, AND I APPRECIATE THAT AND I RESPECT THOSE WISHES AND THAT DESIRE, BUT IT'S MORE IMPORTANT THAT YOU DO IT CORRECTLY AND THAT YOU DO IT PROPERLY UNDER THE LAW SO THAT YOU DON'T BUY YOURSELF ADDITIONAL VEXATION OF LITIGATION OVER NONSENSICAL MATTERS.IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE MOTIVATION HERE IS TO GET THIS ITEM BEFORE YOU PROPERLY SO THAT YOU CAN MAKE A DECISION ON IT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
THEN I'M REASONABLY CERTAIN THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER IT WILL CONTINUE TO BE HE ARGUED IN THE COURTS.
BUT AT LEAST YOU WILL HAVE MADE A DECISION ON IT AND YOU WILL HAVE FOLLOWED YOUR CODE AT THE TIME IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE WAY THE COURTS HAVE RULED.
AS I'VE SHARED WITH YOU, THE FOUR OF YOU I SPOKE TO TODAY, I WILL GO TO MY GRAVE BELIEVING THAT OUR POSITION APPEALING THEIR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF WAS CORRECT.
THE CASE LAW SAYS THAT, I RESPECT THE FOURTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS OPINION.
MOST LAWYERS WILL TELL YOU BEHIND CLOSED DOORS THAT JUST BECAUSE SOMEBODY WEARS A BLACK ROBE, THEY DON'T NECESSARILY SUBSTITUTE THEIR JUDGMENT FOR THEIRS, BUT THEY ARE THE PERSON THAT IS IMBUED WITH THAT AUTHORITY.
THAT BEING THE CASE, THE FOURTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL RULED, AND I THINK THAT'S THE POSTURE THAT WE'RE IN.
SO I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU DO NOT TAKE ACTION OR EVEN BOTHER ENGAGING IN DISCUSSION ON 10B BECAUSE I THINK IT WOULD BE SUPERFLUOUS.
IT'LL BE A WASTE OF TIME AND EFFORT AND TALK ABOUT IT SO YOU CAN DO NOTHING.
I WOULD REALLY STRONGLY ENCOURAGE YOU NOT TO SET THE HEARING.
>> VICE MAYOR, I SEE YOUR LIGHT IS LIT AND YOU'VE HEARD THE CITY ARE SPECIAL COUNSEL.
>> I HAVE QUESTION FOR THE SPECIAL COUNSEL.
THE ATTORNEY FOR 13 FLOOR FILED AT 6:10.
I DON'T THINK ANYONE HERE, AND OUR TUNING TO READ IT, CAN YOU SUMMARIZE WHAT THEIR ARGUMENT IS?
>> I BRIEFLY SKIMMED OVER IT BECAUSE I WAS DRIVING DOWN HERE WHEN IT COMPILED AND DIDN'T EVEN REALIZE IT UNTIL I HAPPENED TO PICK UP MY PHONE AND I WAS SITTING HERE AND SAW THE E-MAIL.
VERY BASICALLY, THEY'RE PUTTING THE COURT ON NOTICE ALLEGING THAT WE WOULD BE VIOLATING THIS DAY, AND THAT WE'D BE VIOLATING THE INJUNCTIVE RELIEF.
I CAN'T REMEMBER EVERYTHING WHAT THEY ASKED FOR AND RELIEF FOR THAT.
I KNOW THAT THERE WAS ALSO SOMETHING I SAW IN THERE WHERE THEY WERE ASKING THE COURT ALTERNATIVELY TO THEN GRANT AN EIGHT MONTH EXTENSION.
AGAIN, THEY WILL BE INJECTING ISSUES AND ITEMS INTO A MATTER THAT ARE BEYOND THE SCOPE OF WHAT THEY PLED IN MY OPINION, AND ARE OUTSIDE THE COURT'S JURISDICTION TO SOME DEGREE AS IT RELATES TO THE EXTENSION.
BUT BE THAT AS IT MAY, WE DON'T TAKE ANY ACTION ON ITEM 10B.
YOU REMOVE THIS FROM THE AGENDA, THE MOTION IS LARGELY MOOT.
IF THEY WANT TO CONTINUE TO GO PURSUE SANCTIONS BECAUSE THEY HAD BECOME HERE AND BECAUSE THEY HAD TO FILE A MOTION, THEY'RE FREE TO DO SO.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT IS SOMETHING THAT IS SANCTIONABLE.
IT DOESN'T MEAN THE COURT COULDN'T AWARD SANCTIONS, BUT SANCTIONS ARE NOT LIGHTLY AWARDED BY THE COURTS.
THEY CAN FILE A MOTION SEEKING THE SANCTIONS AND THE COURT GRANTS THEM YOU'D PAY FOR THEIR TIME AND THEIR COSTS, BUT WHAT THEY ASKED FOR IN THE MOTION WOULD BE MOOT.
THERE'S NOTHING ACTIONABLE, IF YOU DON'T DO IT, THE MOTION WOULD DIE BASICALLY ON ITS OWN IN THAT REGARD AS IT RELATES TO THE VIOLATION OF THE ORDER.
>> OKAY, AND SO YOUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO REMOVE THE ITEM AND NOT DISCUSS IT AT ALL?
>> IF WE DID, THEN YOU'RE SAYING IT WOULD ACTUALLY CAUSE A FURTHER DELAY AND CAUSE US TO SPEND ADDITIONAL FUNDS TO DEFEND OURSELVES.
>> I THINK IF YOU MOVED FORWARD WITH ITEM 10B, YES, SIR, I THINK IT WOULD.
BECAUSE NOW YOU'RE GOING TO BE INVOLVED IN LITIGATING THIS MOTION THAT WAS FILED AND ARGUING OVER THE PORTION OF THE MOTION THAT RELATES TO VIOLATING THE STAY AND VIOLATING THE INJUNCTIVE RELIEF.
IF THEY TRIED TO PRESS FORWARD WITH ASKING FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME THAT THEY COULD TRY TO DO THAT BEFORE THE COURT THAT I HAVE NO DOUBT WILL PROBABLY COME UP IN THE FINAL JUDGMENT HEARING OR WHATEVER HEARING IS CONDUCTED ON THAT MATTER ANYWAY.
BUT THE BULK OF IT AND THE BULK OF THE EXPENSE WOULD BE AVOIDED.
IT WOULD NOT BE SOME KIND OF ANCILLARY ARGUMENT IN SOME KIND OF DISTRACTION, IF YOU WILL, AWAY FROM THE MERITS.
THE IDEA HERE WOULD BE TO MOVE THIS THING FORWARD.
I THINK IT'S PRETTY APPARENT TO EVERYONE THAT'S WATCHING.
THEIR INTENT IS TO DELAY THIS AS LONG AS POSSIBLE NOW.
THEY CONTINUE TO ASK FOR EXTENSIONS.
THAT'S THEIR MOTIVES, OPERANDI, THAT'S WHAT THEY WANT TO DO APPARENTLY IS TO DELAY THIS ITEM.
TAKING ACTION ITEM 10B WOULD HAVE THE EXACT OPPOSITE EFFECT AND OTHER MOTIVATION
[01:40:02]
WAS TO GET IT ON AN AGENDA SO THAT YOU COULD HEAR IT.I THINK WHAT IT WOULD DO IS DO THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF THAT.
IT WOULD ACTUALLY HELP FURTHER A DELAY THAT THEY SEEM TO BE DESIRING.
>> OKAY. WITH THAT BEING SAID, I WILL REMOVE THE ITEM FROM THE AGENDA TO AVOID ADDITIONAL DELAYS AND FURTHER EXPENDITURES.
>> THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR. TEN B IS NOW REMOVED.
WE WILL NOW GO TO 10A. COMMISSION COUNSEL?
[10.a Discussion and motion/direction to hire a Broward County-based law firm and attorney as special counsel to represent the City regarding the hearing on 13th Floor’s land use plan amendment, rezoning application, the site plan, and the development agreement, and any litigation by 13th Floor on this matter. Requested by Vice Mayor Mike Gelin]
>> YES. IN REGARDS TO 10A, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE CITY COMMISSION IS DISSATISFIED WITH THE RESULT.
AS I'VE SHARED WITH ALL OF YOU AND I'M SURE THE PUBLIC DIDN'T GET TO HEAR IT BECAUSE I DIDN'T TALK TO ALL OF THEM.
YOU CAN BE A 100 PERCENT RIGHT, AND WHEN YOU GO INTO COURT, YOU STILL ONLY HAVE A 50/50 SHOT.
I KNOW THAT SEEMS TRITE, IT SEEMS LIKE AN EXCUSE, BUT I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW THERE HAVE BEEN TIMES AND THERE WILL ALWAYS BE TIMES WHEN YOU CAN BE A 100 PERCENT RIGHT IN COURT AND YOU STILL WON'T GET THE RIGHT RESULT BECAUSE JUDGES AND PANELS OF JUDGES ARE HUMAN BEINGS AND THEY MAKE ERRORS AND THEY MISINTERPRET THINGS JUST LIKE ANYONE ELSE CAN.
WE CAN DEBATE ALL DAY WHETHER OR NOT ANYONE THINKS I WAS RIGHT OR WRONG WITH THE ADVICE I GAVE YOU, I STAND BY THAT, BUT I RESPECT THE FACT THAT THE COMMISSION HAS A DESIRE TO GO IN ANOTHER DIRECTION.
EVEN IF THREE OF YOU WANTED ME TO STAY, I DON'T WANT TO CONTINUE ON AS YOUR COUNSEL BECAUSE I'M NOT IN THE HABIT OF REPRESENTING SPLIT BODIES.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, I HAVE MY LETTER OF RESIGNATION AND SPECIAL COUNSEL HERE, I'D LIKE TO TINDER TO YOU, MADAM MAYOR, AND GET OUT OF YOUR WAY SO YOU CAN GO ON TO SELECT A SUCCESSOR COUNSEL TO REPRESENT YOU IN THIS MATTER, AND I WISH THE CITY THE VERY BEST AND I HOPE THAT YOU REACH A SATISFACTORY OUTCOME IN THE LITIGATION AS WELL AS THIS MATTER PENDING BEFORE YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MR. LOHMAN, FOR YOUR SERVICE AND ASSISTANCE TO OUR CITY, AND WE WISH YOU THE BEST.
>> THANKS FOR CLEANING UP OUR CODE AS IT RELATES TO THE LEGISLATIVE MATTERS.
>> THIS LETTER WILL BE PROVIDED TO THE CITY CLERK AT THE END OF THIS MEETING.
SO AT THIS TIME, CITY ATTORNEY MR. HERIN HAS THE ROLE AND THE RESPONSIBILITY OF FINDING SPECIAL COUNSEL LIE SOLELY WITHIN YOU. PLEASE PROCEED.
>> ANTICIPATING THAT MR. LOHMAN WOULD BE TENDERING HIS RESIGNATION BASED UPON CONVERSATIONS IN THAT RESPECT WITH MYSELF AS WELL AS WITH THE CITY MANAGER, I HAVE BEEN LOOKING INTO AND EVALUATING WHO I BELIEVE WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE FIT FOR OUR NEEDS BASED UPON THE COMMENTS OF THE COMMISSION.
AT THIS POINT IN TIME SUBJECT TO A REQUEST THAT HAVE RECEIVED A DRAFT ENGAGEMENT LETTER WITH THE LAW FIRM OF TRIPP SCOTT TO REPRESENT THE CITY IN THIS MATTER MOVING FORWARD IN PLACE OF MR. LOHMAN.
I THINK THAT THEY MEET ALL OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR AND THAT THERE ARE A POWER BASED LAW FIRM.
THAT THEY HAVE A STRONG LAND USE PRACTICE AND A LOT OF STRONG LAND USE PRACTICE ATTORNEYS AS WELL AS LITIGATORS WITHIN THEIR FIRM AND ARE EXTREMELY FAMILIAR WITH THE JUDGES AND APPEARING BEFORE THE CIRCUIT COURT JUDGES IN BROWARD COUNTY, INCLUDING JUDGE FRANK.
WHEN I REACHED OUT TO AND SPOKE TO THEIR MANAGING PARTNER, WHO WOULD ACTUALLY BE THE LEAD ATTORNEY IN THIS MATTER, HIS NAME IS ED POZZUOLI.
HE ASKED ME WHO THE JUDGE WAS, AND I INFORMED HIM THE MATTERS BEFORE JUDGE FRANK, AND HE'S NOW OKAY, GREAT.
WE APPEAR FOR HIM, AND WE'VE NEVER HAD ANY ISSUES WITH HIM IN THE PAST, SO THAT WAS OBVIOUSLY COMFORTING TO HEAR.
THAT IS THE PROPOSAL BETWEEN THE TEAM OF ATTORNEYS THAT WOULD BE HANDLING THIS MATTER MOVING FORWARD IS MR. POZZUOLI, ALONG WITH MR. SMITH, CHRIS SMITH, AS WELL AS WITH CHAIR MCCARTHY, WOULD BE THE THREE ATTORNEYS THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING TO WORK AS A TEAM TO TAKE THIS MATTER FORWARD.
I'VE ALREADY HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH MR. POZZUOLI, AS WELL AS WITH MR. LOHMAN ABOUT TRANSITIONING, AND WE'VE GOT THAT ALL SET, AND THEN WE'LL BE HITTING THE FLOOR RUNNING TOMORROW MORNING.
I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE ATTORNEYS THAT YOU HAVE MENTIONED.
THANK YOU. WE WILL NOW MOVE TO [OVERLAPPING]
[01:45:01]
>> IN TERMS OF THE COST, CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THE COSTS AND HOW IT COMPARES TO THE CURRENT ATTORNEY?
>> IT'S ALWAYS HARD TO GUESSTIMATE COSTS AND FEES, MOVING FORWARD IN A PIECE OF LITIGATION, I CAN TELL YOU THAT HISTORICALLY IN THE TIMEFRAME THAT MR. LOHMAN HAS REPRESENTED THE CITY, WHICH SPANS ABOUT A YEAR-AND-A-HALF WORTH OF TIME, THE COST AND FEES THAT HE'S BUILT THE CITY FOR TOTAL PENDING THE LAST BILL IN THE AREA OF $45-60,000 TOTAL.
THAT'S MY OPINION FOR THE WORK THAT HAD TAKEN PLACE IN THE MATTER. VERY REASONABLE.
I CAN TELL YOU THAT ENGAGING TRIPP SCOTT WILL BE MORE EXPENSIVE.
THEIR HOURLY RATES ARE HIGHER.
THEY AREN'T GIVING US A DISCOUNTED RATE.
THEIR PRINCIPAL ATTORNEYS WILL BE CHARGING US AT $450 AN HOUR, AND THEIR SECONDARY TEAM WILL BE CHARGING $350 AN HOUR.
THEN THERE'S A LOWER COST FOR PARALEGAL WORK.
I CAN CERTAINLY ASK THEM FOR A PROPOSED BUDGET AND INFORM YOU OF THAT.
BUT I WOULD ANTICIPATE THAT THE COST WOULD BE NOT TOO FAR OUT OF LINE WITH WHAT MR. LOHMAN HAS CHARGED FOR THE WORK THAT HE'S DONE OVER THE SAME PERIOD OF TIME.
MAYBE WITH OBVIOUSLY, AS I SAID BEFORE, AN ADJUSTMENT UPWARD OF MAYBE 15, 20 PERCENT, AND CERTAINLY AN ISSUE THAT I WOULD DISCUSS WITH TRIPP SCOTT AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE AWARE OF, AND WE'D KEEP AN EYE ON THAT FOR YOU.
>> IS THE COMMISSION SATISFIED WITH THAT? IS THE COMMISSION FAMILIAR WITH THE FIRM?
>> THERE'S NODDING. YES. CITY ATTORNEY, CAN YOU ALSO SHARE THE COMMENT YOU SHARED, I'M SURE YOU SHARED WITH SOME OF THE OTHERS, OF THE LIST THAT YOU HAVE LOOKED THROUGH SO PEOPLE WHO ARE HERE TONIGHT ARE AWARE THAT THERE WAS ACTUAL DUE DILIGENCE IN FINDING AN ATTORNEY, TRIPP SCOTT IS A GOOD FARM, BUT YOU'RE NOT JUST SETTLED YET?
>> THE NUMBER OF FIRMS THAT DO THIS WORK AND HAVE THIS LEVEL OF EXPERTISE AND CHECK OFF ALL THE BOXES THAT WE MENTIONED BEFORE, SO TO SPEAK, ABOUT BEING A LOCAL FIRM, HAVING THE KNOWLEDGE, THE EXPERIENCE IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA AT PROFESSIONAL RELATIONSHIP TO CHARACTERIZE THAT WITH THE LOCAL JUDICIARY AND ROUTINELY APPEAR BEFORE THEM ON THESE TYPES OF MATTERS IS NOT A LARGE LIST.
WHAT I DID IS OVER THE LAST 2.5-3 WEEKS, ANTICIPATING THIS MIGHT HAPPEN, STARTED DEVELOPING A LIST THAT WAS INCLUDED IN MY OPINION, SOME OF THE PRE-EMINENT LAND USE PRACTITIONERS AND LITIGATORS IN BROWARD COUNTY.
THOSE INCLUDED OF LAW FIRMS AND ATTORNEYS THAT HAVE APPEARED BEFORE YOU-ALL FROM TIME-TO-TIME ON LAND-USE MATTERS.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I SHARED WITH ALL OF YOU, AND WE CAN SHARE WITH THE PUBLIC SEPARATELY, BY THE WAY, IS THAT A NUMBER OF THE FIRMS THAT I REACH OUT TO, WHICH ARE HALF A DOZEN OR MORE, THEY HAD CONFLICTS, 13TH FLOOR, TO ITS CREDIT SPREAD THE WORK.
AS I REACHED OUT TO SOME OF THOSE LAW FIRMS, I WAS INFORMED FROM THE BEGINNING THAT WE CAN'T CONSIDER DOING THIS WORK FOR THE CITY OF TAMARAC BECAUSE WE'RE CONFLICTED OUT BECAUSE WE ALREADY DO WORK FOR 13TH FLOOR.
JUST TO NAME A FEW, WE CONTACTED, LOCHRIE AND CHAKAS, SPOKE TO SOME OF THE ATTORNEYS, SO THAT THEY CAN COME AND CENTER FIT, SPOKE TO SOME OF THE ATTORNEYS AT STEARNS WEAVER, ANOTHER WELL-RESPECTED LITIGATION FIRM THAT HAS OFFICES HERE IN BROWARD.
WHAT WAS THE OTHER ONE? ONE OF THE OTHER FIRMS, I GUESS WHAT I WOULD CALL 1B POTENTIALLY, IS THE CYBER LAW FIRM, EX-MAYOR OF FORT LAUDERDALE.
HE INDICATED THAT, HE COULDN'T CONFIRM, BUT INDICATED HE DIDN'T BELIEVE THAT THEY HAD A CONFLICT, BUT WE HAVE AN IMMEDIATE NEED, SO I FEEL COMFORTABLE AND BELIEVE THAT WE WILL BE WELL REPRESENTED USING TRIPP SCOTT.
BUT WE DID LOOK AT A NUMBER OF FIRMS IN THE BROWARD COUNTY MARKETPLACE WITH SPECIFIC EXPERTISE IN LAND USE AND LAND USE LITIGATION.
[01:50:01]
>> THANK YOU. DUE TO THIS BEING SOLELY WITHIN YOUR POWER THERE IS NO NEED FOR CONSENSUS, WE HAVE NO POWER TO CONTROL WHO YOU WILL BE HIRING. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THAT'S THE READING OF THE CHART.
>> THANK YOU. WITH THAT BEING SAID, I KNOW SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT.
COMMISSIONER PLACKO, I SEE YOUR LIGHT IS LIT.
>> THANK YOU. BASED ON OUR ATTORNEY'S INFORMATION EARLIER ABOUT ARRANGING A MEETING WITH MR. BURKE AND LISTENING TO EVERYTHING WE HAVE HERE TONIGHT.
IT APPEARS TO ME, WE HAVE TWO MAJOR COMMUNITIES WITHIN TAMARAC, WOODLANDS AND WOODMONT.
BOTH OF THESE COMMUNITIES HAVE ISSUES THAT HAVE GONE ON FOR YEARS.
I AM ASKING ALL OF US TO HAVE SOME SENSE OF URGENCY WHEN WE DEAL WITH THIS, HAS GONE ON FOR WAY TOO LONG IN BOTH COMMUNITIES.
I UNDERSTAND THE LITIGATION, HOWEVER, WE AS THE COMMISSION AND STAFF HAVE TO TAKE WHATEVER STEPS WE POSSIBLY CAN TO MOVE THESE ISSUES ALONG.
IT IS NOT FAIR TO THE COMMUNITY.
THOSE OF US WHO LIVE IN THESE PARTICULAR COMMUNITIES WERE CONFRONTED WITH IT EVERY DAY, AND WE HAVE TO LIVE WITH IT.
I'M TIRED OF HEARING ABOUT IT, AND I'M TIRED OF SEEING IT.
I WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK EVERYONE TO TAKE A SENSE OF URGENCY WITH THESE ISSUES AND MOVE THEM ALONG AS QUICKLY AND AS LEGALLY AS WE CAN. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. MY POINT OF CONTENTION IS THE COST.
ATTORNEY, HOW MUCH DID IT COST TO HAVE MAX LOHMAN REPRESENT THE CITY?
>> AGAIN, I PREVIOUSLY SAID THAT APPROXIMATELY 45 TO PROBABLY 50, AND WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED THE LAST INVOICE THAT I'M SURE WILL BE FORTHCOMING.
AGAIN, THAT'S FOR A PERIOD OF A YEAR-AND-A-HALF THAT INCLUDED A NUMBER OF MEETINGS AND A LOT OF INTERACTION BETWEEN MR. LOHMAN AND STAFF TO GET TO THE POINT WHERE WE WERE READY TO MOVE FORWARD.
YOU-ALL MAY RECALL, AND THAT'S WHEN THE LAWSUIT WAS FILED.
SO THEN MR. LOHMAN CONTINUED TO REPRESENT THE CITY AS SPECIAL COUNSEL AND THE RELATED LITIGATION.
AGAIN OVER A PERIOD OF YEAR-AND-A-HALF THAT COST US SOMEWHERE IN THE VICINITY OF BETWEEN $445,000 AND I BELIEVE $55,000.
I WILL GET THAT PRECISE NUMBERS SOON AS I CAN.
WON'T CAUSE US TO EXCEED OUR BUDGET AS WE'RE CURRENTLY PROGRESSING THROUGH THE FISCAL YEAR, AND WE WILL ENDEAVOR TO MAKE SURE THAT TRIPP SCOTT STAYS WITHIN OUR ANNUAL BUDGET IF NECESSARY.
MAYBE WE SET ASIDE CONTINGENCY FOR TRIPP SCOTT TO MOVE FORWARD SO WE HAVE A SEPARATE FUND AVAILABLE THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS TO JUST DEAL WITH THAT.
BUT AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS, ALL LEGAL ISSUES ARE AT OR BELOW BUDGET AND WE ANTICIPATE THAT WE WILL BE AT THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR AT OR MAYBE EVEN BELOW BUDGET.
>> ED POZZUOLI, IS A POWERHOUSE ATTORNEY AND WITH WAY MORE KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERTISE THAN MAX LOHMAN.
I THINK HE'S GOING TO MAYBE COST DOUBLE THE AMOUNT; DON'T YOU THINK?
>> HE HAS INDICATED AS I SAID, THAT I DO ANTICIPATE THAT THERE WILL BE A MORE EXPENDITURES AS WE MOVE FORWARD, BUT WE'RE NOW TOWARD THE END OF THE PROCESS.
AS MR. LOHMAN INDICATED DURING HIS DISCUSSION, THE IDEA IS TO BRING THIS A CONCLUSION SOONER THAN LATER SO THE COST ARE CONTAINED, WE GET MOVING FORWARD, AND THEN ONCE THE DECISION IS TAKEN BY THIS COMMISSION, WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS.
THERE'S NO CRYSTAL BALL UNFORTUNATELY TO SAY,
[01:55:02]
WELL, ONCE YOU-ALL MAKE A DECISION INSIDE OF YOUR HANDS THERE WON'T BE ANY ADDITIONAL LITIGATION.I THINK MR. LOHMAN'S VIEW OF THE WORLD IN THIS PARTICULAR ISSUES THAT THERE'S LIKELY TO BE LITIGATION DEPENDING UPON WHAT THE OUTCOME MAY BE BY WHATEVER IT MAY BE.
I DON'T NECESSARILY DISAGREE WITH THAT, BUT WE'LL CROSS THAT BRIDGE WHEN WE GET TO IT.
THE IDEA AND THE PURPOSE OF ENGAGING SPECIAL COUNSEL.
AT THIS POINT IN TIME IS TO BRING THE CURRENT LITIGATION TO A SWIFT CONCLUSION AND GET THE MATTER TO THE POINT WHERE THIS COMMISSION CAN THEN SCHEDULE A HEARING, CONDUCT THAT HEARING, AND MAKE A DECISION ON THE APPLICATION THAT'S PENDING BEFORE WITH STAFF AND BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION.
>> I JUST WANT TO GO ON RECORD BY SAYING BEFORE THIS PROCESS EVEN STARTED, I SENT AN E-MAIL TO THE CITY MANAGER, CC'D SCOTT BACK ON THAT EMAIL.
IN THAT EMAIL I OUTLINED THAT THE ITEM SHOULD BE QUASI-JUDICIAL.
THAT EMAIL WAS IGNORED AND MONTHS LATER, TWO YEARS LATER, WE'RE HERE SPENDING THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS ON AN ATTORNEY WHEN WE COULD HAVE FOLLOWED THAT SIMPLE ADVICE.
I BELIEVE THIS IS A WASTE OF TAXPAYERS MONEY.
ABSOLUTELY, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD AND MAKE SURE THAT ALL PARTIES ARE TAKEN CARE OFF FROM THE RESIDENTS ARE HEARD.
BUT I REALLY BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD LISTEN JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE WHEN THESE OPINIONS ARE ARE BROUGHT FORWARD. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. TWO OF THE ATTORNEYS THAT YOU MENTIONED, ATTORNEY SMITH WAS A FORMER SENATOR, AND THEN ATTORNEY MCCARTHY IS A FORMER COMMISSIONER IN ONE OF THE LOCAL CITIES.
I'M HOPING THAT WHEN YOU SPEAK WITH THEM REGARDING THEIR ENGAGEMENT AGREEMENT MAYBE THEY CAN DO ON A REDUCED PRICE FOR THE REVIEW, BECAUSE THE REALITY IS THE REVIEW OF THE WORK IS GOING TO BE EXTENSIVE TO BE ABLE TO BRING THEM UP TO SPEED.
THAT WILL BE WHERE A LARGE CHUNK OF MONEY WILL COME UP FIRST, SO HOPEFULLY THEY WILL KEEP IN MIND THE CITY AND THE FACT THAT WE'RE CITY-BASED AND THIS IS OUR TAXPAYER MONEY.
WITH THAT, I BELIEVE ALL COMMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE ON THIS AND YOU WILL CONTINUE TO DO WHAT YOU NEED TO DO TO PROTECT THE CITY.
>> THANK YOU. NOW, I AM GOING TO TAKE 10D.
[10.d Discussion and motion/direction to fund up to $5,000 for the balance of the entrance sign costs for the replacement of the damaged sign at the entrance to the Woodlands at Woodlands Boulevard and Commercial Boulevard. Requested by Vice Mayor Mike Gelin]
THE DISCUSSION IN MOTION DIRECTION REGARDING FUNDING $5,000 TO THE BALANCE OF THE ENTRANCE SIGN AND COSTS FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE DAMAGED SIGN AT THE ENTRANCE TO WOODLANDS BOULEVARD AND COMMERCIAL BOULEVARD BEFORE ITEM 10C, SO THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD CAN EITHER DECIDE TO STAY ON THEIR OWN OR THEY CAN FEEL FREE TO GO HOME.COMMISSIONER VICE MAYOR, YOU HAVE ASKED FOR THIS ITEM ON THE AGENDA?
>> YES. THANK YOU. STEVEN, I THINK YOU GAVE THE CLERK A PRESENTATION, BACKUP.
CAN YOU SHOW THE BACKUP ITEMS, JAMES? THE BACK OF THE AGENDA FOR 10D.
AS ONE OF THE RESIDENTS STATED EARLIER, IN THE WOODLANDS THERE IS A SIGN UPFRONT.
IT'S A PROMINENT COMMUNITY IN TAMARAC AND IT'S A PROMINENT LOCATION ON THE CORNER OF COMMERCIAL BOULEVARD AND WOODLANDS BOULEVARD, AND IT'S A MAJOR ACCIDENT SCENE OR THERE WAS AN ACCIDENT THAT DAMAGED THE WOODLAND SIGN AND THE COMMUNITY GOT TOGETHER AND GOT SOME INSURANCE PROCEEDS TO COVER THE COST OF THE DAMAGE.
THEY DID SOME NEGOTIATION AND FILED ON A REDUCED PRICE FROM THE INITIAL $40,000 ESTIMATED DOWN TO $20,000.
THEY'RE SHORT APPROXIMATELY $5,000, AND THE TAXPAYERS OF THAT COMMUNITY ARE ASKING THE CITY COMMISSION TO ASSIST IN COVERING THE $5,000 VARIANCE TO COVER THE FULL COST OF THE SIGN.
NOW THERE'S SOME PEOPLE WHO ARE SAYING, "WHY SHOULD THE CITY PAY FOR THIS?" THE CITY IS ACTUALLY IN THE BUSINESS OF PAYING FOR SIGNS AND UNFORTUNATELY, WE WERE ALL GIVEN A DOCUMENT.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT CAN BE SHARED ON THE SCREEN.
CITY MANAGER DID THIS DOCUMENT THAT SHOWS THE COMPLETED NEIGHBORHOOD MONUMENT SIGNS AND THEIR COSTS GIVEN TO THE IT PERSON?
>> NO. IT WAS DISTRIBUTED TO ALL OF YOU EARLIER TONIGHT AND THERE IS A HARD COPY ON YOUR DESK.
>> CAN SOMEONE SEND IT TO THE IT DIRECTOR SO HE CAN SHOW IT TO THE AUDIENCE?
[02:00:04]
>> ALL RIGHT. WHILE HE'S GETTING THAT TOGETHER, THERE ARE SEVERAL COMMUNITIES DOWN AT PINEAPPLE PARK IN WOODMONT.
THEY RECEIVED THE SIGN PAID FOR BY THE CITY AT A COST OF $35,990, WESTWOOD5 $35,935, COLONY WEST ESTATE $36,645, WOODMONT GREENS $38,686, WOODMONT COUNTRY CLUB, GOLF AND TENNIS, LYNCH ARDENNES, PALM RIDGE $38,686, BERMUDA CLUB $33,481, ZILLOW COURT AND WOODMONT, NORTHEAST CORNER, AND THEN A ZEALOT COURT AT WESTMONT SOUTHEAST CORNER, $38,453 AND THEN BOTH AT $38,453.
THE CITY HAS SPENT SIGNIFICANT TAXPAYER DOLLARS, WE WERE ALL TAXPAYERS IN THE COMMUNITY, TO HELP ENHANCE AND BEAUTIFY THESE VARIOUS COMMUNITIES.
THE INITIAL ESTIMATE THAT THE WOODLANDS GOT A $40,000 IS RIGHT IN THAT RANGE WITH THE OTHERS THAT THE CITY PAID FOR.
BUT THEY'RE NOT ASKING FOR $38,000 OR $20,000, THEY'RE JUST ASKING FOR $5,000.
THE INSURANCE IS COVERING THE MAJORITY OF THE COST AND THEY WILL CHOOSE ANOTHER PROMINENT SIGN THAT WILL ENHANCE THE COMMUNITY.
THEY'RE ASKING THIS COMMISSION TO APPROVE $5,000 TO HELP COVER THE COST OF THEIR ENTRANCE SIGN.
WHICH I BELIEVE AND I DON'T KNOW IF STAFF, WHETHER THE CITY MANAGER OR MAXINE CAN CONFIRM THAT LAND OR THAT AREAS IS OWNED BY THE CITY OR IT'S PUBLIC LAND, I'M NOT SURE.
>> SORRY, VICE MAYOR. THE LAND UPON WHICH THE SIGN IS ERECTED IS PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
>> JIM, I JUST SENT YOU THE FILE AND IT'S THE NEIGHBORHOOD SIGN ATTACHMENT.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I DON'T DISAGREE WITH VICE MAYOR GELIN ON THE SITUATION AND NOR DO I TAKE AWAY FROM THE EFFORTS THAT THE WOODLANDS RESIDENTS HAVE DONE.
I DON'T THINK I'LL BE SAYING I'M AGAINST IT, BUT I AM AGAINST THE ORDER IT WAS DONE.
THERE ARE COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE APPLIED WAY BEFORE THIS.
THERE HAS BEEN COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE BEEN WAITING LONGER AND ALTHOUGH THIS IS GREAT, I LOVE THE WAY IT LOOKS.
IT'S GOING TO GIVE IT A GREAT SHINE TO THE COMMUNITY.
I THINK WE ARE SITTING IN PRECEDENTS FOR OTHER COMMUNITIES TO SAY, HEY, HOW ABOUT ME, HOW ABOUT ME, WITHOUT GOING THROUGH THE PROPER CHANNELS.
I JUST WANT TO KEEP THAT IN OUR BACK OF OUR MINDS THAT, THAT MIGHT BE AN ISSUE IN THE FUTURE.
BUT I MEAN, IT'S A GREAT THING AND I'M APPRECIATIVE THAT THE COMMUNITY CAME OUT STRONG, PUSHING FORWARD FOR THAT.
>> THANK YOU. [NOISE] I COMPLETELY AGREE THE SIGN IS HORRIBLE.
IT'S YOUR FIRST IMAGE AS YOU'RE COMING INTO THE COMMUNITY.
I WANT TO MAKE A POINT THAT THE SIGNAGE THAT VICE MAYOR WAS TALKING ABOUT THAT IS PART OF THE CITY SIGNAGE PROGRAM.
THESE COMMUNITIES SIGNED UP FOR THESE OVER TWO YEARS AGO, AND THEY WERE TAKEN IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY SIGNED UP.
AT THAT POINT, THERE WERE SOME COMMUNITIES THAT SAID THEY DIDN'T WANT THEM.
JUST TO BE VERY CLEAR, THERE ARE COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE GOTTEN THEM FOR 35 OR $38,000, THAT WAS PART OF THE CITY SIGNAGE PROGRAM.
THIS IS SOMETHING TOTALLY DIFFERENT.
WE DO HAVE MATCHING BEAUTIFICATION GRANTS AVAILABLE TO COMMUNITIES WHICH ARE $5,000.
IF I HEARD CORRECTLY, YOU HAD $15,000 FROM INSURANCE COMPANY AND A QUOTE OF $18,000.
WE'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT $3,000 IF I HEARD CORRECTLY.
I MEAN, SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE ABOUT THIS.
ABSOLUTELY. A MAJOR COMMUNITY LIKE, AND I KNOW WE DON'T WANT TO WAIT WE WANT IT DONE YESTERDAY, AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS IS SAYING BY SETTING UP PRECEDENTS BECAUSE I KNOW THE MINUTE THIS HAPPENS, I'M GOING TO GET A CALL FROM AT LEAST TWO OF THE COMMUNITIES IN
[02:05:01]
MY DISTRICT SAYING YOU NEED TO FIX MY SIGN TOO.CAN WE DO SOMETHING WITH A BEAUTIFICATION GRANT WHICH WILL GET THEM THE $5,000 THAT THEY NEED.
IS THERE A QUESTION FOR [OVERLAPPING] CITY MANAGER?
>> YES. THE NEIGHBORHOOD PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM IS COMING UP WITH THE GRANT APPLICATION PROCESS.
ON AUGUST 4TH, THERE'S AN INFORMATION SESSION AND ON AUGUST 15TH, THAT'S WHEN THE FORMAL APPLICATIONS MAY BE FILED.
>> THANK YOU. PROVIDED APPLICATIONS ARE COMPLETE, AWARD CAN BE MADE BY MID-SEPTEMBER.
THERE'S AN INTERNAL BOARD THAT REVIEWS THE APPLICATION.
THE INFORMATION SESSION IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE WE WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU HAVE EVERYTHING THAT'S NEEDED ONCE THE APPLICATION PERIOD OPEN.
YOU WOULD NEED TWO OR THREE BEDS, OTHER DOCUMENTATIONS THAT YOU WOULD NEED TO FILE HENCE THE REASON FOR THE AUGUST 4TH INFORMATION SESSION AND THE BOARD NEEDS SHORTLY AFTER THE APPLICATION PERIOD CLOSES, AND THEN AWARDS ARE MADE PROVIDED THE APPLICATIONS ARE COMPLETE EARLY MID SEPTEMBER.
>> THEY OBVIOUSLY DO HAVE THE MATCHING FUNDS FOR THAT.
WE DO HAVE THAT ALTERNATIVE WHICH WOULD PUSH IT BACK TO SEPTEMBER, WHICH PROBABLY EVEN IF YOU WERE TO DESIGN TODAY.
[NOISE] CAN I ASK OUR CITY ATTORNEY? CAN I USE INITIATIVE FUNDS FOR THIS?
>> MAYBE. WE WOULD HAVE TO SIT DOWN AND LOOK AT ALL THE ISSUES BECAUSE AS I'VE PREVIOUSLY INFORMED STAFF AND HAD SOME COMMUNICATIONS WITH YOU ALL ABOUT THE EXPENDITURE OF THESE FUNDS AT THE END OF THE DAY, THERE HAS TO BE DEMONSTRATED THAT THERE'S A PUBLIC PURPOSE.
THAT THE TAXPAYERS FUNDS ARE BEING USED FOR A PUBLIC PURPOSE AS OPPOSED TO PRIVATE GAIN.
THE PROBLEM INHERENT WITH THAT ISSUE OR THAT ANALYSIS IS, OF COURSE, AS IS THE CASE MANY TIMES, NEITHER THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE NOR THE FLORIDA COURTS HAVE PRECISELY DEFINED WHAT CONSTITUTES A PUBLIC PURPOSE.
FROM TIME TO TIME, WHEN WE GET INQUIRIES SUCH AS YOURS, WE GO THROUGH THAT ANALYSIS AT THE STAFF LEVEL AND WE'LL GET BACK TO YOU SO WE CAN LOOK INTO THAT AND BE READY TO RESPOND AND LET YOU KNOW IF IT IS, THEN THAT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN FOLLOW THROUGH WITH.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. MS. CALLOWAY, THE PROGRAM THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING, THE NEIGHBORHOOD BEAUTIFICATION PROGRAM, IS IT A GUARANTEE THAT AN HOA WHO APPLIES, WE'LL GET THE FUNDS OR NOT.
>> TO A CERTAIN DEGREE DEPENDING ON IF YOU HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION, IT IS A QUALIFIED EXPENSE, THE SIGNAGE REPAIR OF AN EXISTING SIGNAGE.
IT IS A QUALIFIED APPLICATION FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS, WE HAVE NOT GOTTEN THE LEVEL OF APPLICATIONS WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE.
SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, I WOULD IMAGINE THAT WOULD BE ONE OF FEW APPLICATIONS FILE, WHICH IS WHY WE TRY EVERY YEAR TO ENCOURAGE COMMUNITIES.
IT'S LIKELY PROVIDED ALL THE INFORMATION IS SUBMITTED.
>> WHAT'S THE METRICS AGAIN, IS THAT FIRST-COME FIRST READY OR DO YOU A LOT BY DISTRICT? I FORGET. IT'S BEEN SO LONG, I FORGET.
>> IF THE PROGRAM HAS $50,000 IS 10,000 PER DISTRICT AND I THINK 5,000 AT LARGE UP 10,000 AT LARGER.
>> IF NOBODY FROM EACH DISTRICT APPLIES OR IF THE WHATEVER THEY'RE ASKING FOR DOES NOT QUALIFY, THEN YOU ROLL OVER THE AMOUNT TO THE OTHER DISTRICTS.
>> YEAH. WE'LL CONSIDER. YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
>> OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I REMEMBER.
ATTORNEY ISN'T IT TRUE THAT YOU CAN PROVIDE, FOR INSTANCE, COMMISSIONER PLACKO, WHAT WE CALL A SAFE HARBOR OPINION INSULATING HER TO PROVIDE THE FUNDS TO THE COMMUNITY.
[02:10:10]
>> THAT ISSUE I THINK THE SAFE HARBOR PROVISION THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO IS GENERALLY WITH RESPECT TO ETHICS ISSUES, BUT I CERTAINLY WOULD NOT RENDER AN OPINION TO ANY VIEW ON ANY ISSUE IF I DIDN'T FEEL CONFIDENT IN THE CONTENTS OF THAT OPINION.
>> YOU WOULD GIVE HER AN OPINION OF SOME SORT OR AT LEAST ISSUE A MEMO THAT IF SHE SHOULD EXPAND THE MONEY THAT SHE HAS FOR THE SIGNS, THAT SHE WOULD HAVE SOME SORT OF INSULATION.
>> YES. I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR, I THINK THAT I'LL USE THIS TERM.
THE LOW-HANGING FRUIT HERE IS THE GRANT PROGRAM.
IT SOLVES ALL THE ISSUES, IT'S MONEY THAT HAS SPECIFICALLY BEEN APPROPRIATED FOR THESE TYPES OF IMPROVEMENTS, IT'S THERE AS I UNDERSTAND FROM STAFF.
THEY ACTUALLY ARE UNDER GRANTING BECAUSE THEY DON'T GET ENOUGH APPLICATIONS HISTORICALLY, SO THE MONEY WOULDN'T BE THERE.
IT'S JUST A MATTER OF TIMING TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD IN SEPTEMBER BUT IN THE MEANTIME, IF THE DECISION IF COMMISSIONER PLACKO OR IN THAT MATTER ANY OF YOU ALL SAID, HEY, I'D PREFER TO MOVE FORWARD ON, IT'S ONE OF MY INITIATIVES AND I'D PROVIDE THE ANALYSIS AND LET YOU KNOW IF THAT'S AN ACCEPTABLE USE OF THOSE FUNDS.
>> JIM, CAN YOU PULL UP PAGE 1131? I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THE VIEWER IS ONLINE AND EVERYONE IN HERE CAN ACTUALLY SEE WHAT THE DAMAGE OF THE SIGN LOOKS LIKE.
IT'S VERY VISIBLE FROM THE STREET AS WELL, SO I DON'T THINK THERE'S MUCH TO BE DISCUSSED, IN MY OPINION.
CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE SPREADSHEET THAT SHOWS ALL THE COSTS? CAN YOU SCROLL DOWN A LITTLE BIT TO THE LAST THREE OR FOUR? YEAH. THE ANTICIPATED MONUMENT SIGNS.
SCROLL DOWN SOME MORE. THEN WE EXPECT AGAIN, IT LOOKS LIKE WOODMONT PLACKO COMMISSION [LAUGHTER] IS GETTING A LOT OF MONEY.
WE'RE GOING TO SPEND ANOTHER 40, 80, ALMOST 100,000 DOLLAR IN ADDITIONAL SIGNS.
CAN YOU GO TO THE NEXT PAGE? THERE SHOULD BE ANOTHER PAGE.
WHY WASN'T THE OTHER PAGE SENT TO JIM? FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE RESIDENTS, ON THE NEXT PAGE, TAMARAC LAKE SOUTH, A MILLION DOLLAR EXPENSE ON BUFFER WALLS.
MCNAB ROAD BETWEEN PINE ISLAND ROAD AND A 108 TERRACE, 2.1 MILLION DOLLAR EXPENSE.
57TH STREET BETWEEN NORTHWEST 64TH AVENUE AND PINE ISLAND ROAD, THREE MILLION DOLLAR EXPENSE ON BUFFER WALLS.
THEN MCNAB ROAD, COLONY WEST COUNTRY CLUB, 351,000 DOLLARS.
PROSPECT ROAD, TAMARAC LAKE SOUTH, 1.5 MILLION DOLLARS.
ASKING FOR A LITTLE LESS THAN 5,000 DOLLARS IS NOT A BIG ASK TO IMPROVE A SIGN THAT'S VISIBLE BY.
I KNOW WHAT THE TRAFFIC COUNTS ARE, 70,000 CARS PER DAY.
CITY ATTORNEY MENTIONED PUBLIC PURPOSE.
WHAT WAS THE PUBLIC PURPOSE OF THE EXPENDITURES FOR ALL THESE SIGNS AND BUFFER WALLS?
>> CITY MANAGER, WOULD YOU LIKE TO TELL THE HOST? SORRY ATTORNEY, I JUMPED IN.
>> TO EXTENT I NEED TO TRIM IN AND I WILL.
>> THE PURPOSE WAS THAT IT'S A BEAUTIFICATION PROCESS THAT THE COMMISSION HAS AGREED TO AS PART OF OUR ARTERIAL STUDY AND IDENTIFIED FOR IMAGE AND BEAUTIFICATION AND UPGRADE.
>> BY THE CITY PAYING LESS THAN 5,000 DOLLARS TO ASSIST THIS COMMUNITY, THAT'S BEAUTIFICATION, CORRECT?
>> THAT WOULD BE THE PUBLIC PURPOSE AND SO I THINK THIS IS EASILY JUSTIFIABLE.
IT'S A LOT LESS EXPENSIVE THAN PARTICIPATING IN THE MONUMENT SIGN PROGRAM.
THEN, MS. CALLOWAY, WHAT'S THE SOURCE OF THE 50,000 DOLLAR GRANT FUNDS THAT IS DEDICATED TO THESE SIGN PROGRAMS?
>> IT'S A PART OF THE GENERAL FUND.
>> THEN WHY ARE WE ASKING THIS COMMUNITY TO WAIT WHEN THEY CAN EXECUTE THIS AS SOON AS WE CAN PROVIDE ASSISTANCE OF LESS THAN 5,000 DOLLARS?
[02:15:02]
>> IS THAT A QUESTION DIRECTED TO STAFF OR THE HOUSE? [OVERLAPPING]
>> TO THE COMMISSION. I SEE THERE'S MORE LIGHTS LIT UP FOR FURTHER COMMENT, BUT ONCE COMMENTS ARE DONE, I'LL BE READY TO MAKE A MOTION.
>> I THINK COMMISSIONER GELIN, VICE MAYOR GELIN, BEAT ME TO THE PUNCH WITH THAT QUESTION.
IF WE'RE USING MONEY FROM GENERAL FUNDS TO FUEL THE 50,000 DOLLARS THAT WE HAVE FOR THE BEAUTIFICATION PROGRAM, WHAT PRECLUDES US THEN FROM TONIGHT MAKING AN AWARD FROM SAID FUNDS OR DIFFERENT FUND FROM GENERAL FUNDS TO PURCHASE THE SIGN? THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I'D LIKE TO GET THE ANSWER TO.
TO THE ATTORNEY, WHILE YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT THAT, DOES ANYTHING PRECLUDE A CITY COMMISSIONER FROM A FUNDRAISING TO GET THOSE FUNDS TO THE HOA AND DOES ANYTHING PRECLUDES A COMMISSIONER FROM MAKING A PERSONAL DONATION FROM PERSONAL FUNDS TOWARD THE SIGN?
>> NO. NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF YOUR PERSONAL FUNDS OR ANYONE.
I THINK TO THE ISSUE OF THE OVERRIDING QUESTION OR CONCERN ABOUT WHERE'S THE PUBLIC PURPOSE, IT'S CLEAR THAT THIS COMMISSION AND THIS COMMUNITY HAS MADE A DETERMINATION THROUGH THE EXISTING PROGRAMS AND THROUGH ITS EXISTING GRANT FUNDING PROGRAMS, AND IT'S SETTING ASIDE OF MONIES FOR, I'M GOING TO USE "BEAUTIFICATION".
CERTAINLY THE COURTS HAVE SAID BEAUTIFICATION OF A COMMUNITY IS CERTAINLY A PUBLIC PURPOSE.
I'LL GIVE YOU ANOTHER EXAMPLE THAT COMES TO ME IN MIND.
YOU DECIDE TO PUT IN MORE LANDSCAPING AT ONE OF YOUR PARKS, THAT'S BEAUTIFICATION.
I THINK THAT IT'S JUST A QUESTION OF WHERE DO YOU ALL WANT TO MAKE THE DECISION TO ASK STAFF TO ALLOCATE THE FUNDS RIGHT NOW FROM WHATEVER FUND OR AGAIN, DIRECT EVERYONE TO WORK TOGETHER TO GET THE MONEY THROUGH THAT GRANT PROGRAM.
AGAIN, IT'S AN ISSUE OF TIMING.
I DO RECALL MS. CALLOWAY'S COMMENT, I'M NOT SURE IF IT WAS MS. CALLOWAY'S COMMENT, BUT SOMEONE'S COMMENT DURING THE DISCUSSION JUST AS A PRACTICAL STANDPOINT OF GETTING THE BIDS TO DESIGN ALL THOSE THINGS AND MAYBE THE WOODLANDS AND THE COMMUNITIES ARE ALREADY AHEAD IN THAT REGARD.
BUT I DO RECALL THAT MS. CALLOWAY SAYING THAT THE GRANT PROGRAM REQUIRES AT LEAST PROBABLY TWO ADDITIONAL BIDS IN ADDITION TO WHAT THEY'VE ALREADY RECEIVED.
EITHER WAY, IT'S JUST A MATTER OF TIMING.
>> MS. CALLOWAY, THE FUNDS, THE 50,000 DOLLARS, IT'S ALREADY BUDGETED, CORRECT?
>> YES, IT IS. YES AND THE PROGRAM OPENS AUGUST 4TH IS THE INFORMATIONAL SESSION, AND AUGUST 15TH THE APPLICATION PERIOD OPENS.
>> STAY RIGHT THERE. CITY ATTORNEY, YOU GIVE LONG ANSWERS, BUT PLEASE [LAUGHTER] CUT DOWN ON THE EXPLANATION.
WOULD IT BE IMPROPER TO ADVANCE 5,000 DOLLARS NOW FROM THOSE FUNDS AND SECURE IT FOR THE SIGNS?
>> WITHOUT KNOWING A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE GRANT PROGRAM AND HOW IT WORKS AND WHAT THE QUALIFICATION CRITERIA, I'M HESITANT TO ANSWER IN THE ABSENCE SET, BUT I THINK THE BIGGER ISSUE AND WHAT THE QUESTION REALLY IS, IS IN JUST AS A COMMISSION, CAN YOU DIRECT STAFF TO TAKE EXISTING FUNDING THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS AND TELL STAFF AS PART OF THE BEAUTIFICATION PROGRAMS CITY-WIDE, YOU WANT THIS TO BE PART OF THAT PROGRAM? NOT NECESSARILY PART OF THE GRANT PROGRAM, BUT JUST THE BEAUTIFICATION PROCESS IN GENERAL.
THAT CERTAINLY WOULD BE YOUR DIRECTION ASSUMING THAT THERE'S SUFFICIENT FUNDING AND THAT IT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROPRIATED.
AGAIN, WILL THAT REGARD REFER TO THE MANAGER OR TO THE FINANCE DIRECTOR ABOUT WHERE THE MONEY WOULD COME FROM?
[02:20:01]
>> I THINK BECAUSE THESE FUNDS ARE PRIMARILY DISTRICT TO DISTRICT AND IT SEEMS LIKE VICE MAYOR GELIN WANTS TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE FUNDS ARE ADVANCED, I WOULD NOT BE OPPOSED TO SETTING ASIDE 5,000 DOLLARS FROM THE DISTRICT FUNDS TO BE GIVEN TO THE WOODLAND'S HOA, HOW WOULD YOU RESPOND?
>> ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT THEY WOULD THEREFORE NOT GO THROUGH THE APPLICATION PROCESS?
>> THERE'S A PROGRAM THAT EXISTS AND SO I THINK FOR A LEVEL OF EQUITY, IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR THE COMMUNITY TO GO THROUGH THE APPLICATION PROCESS.
I THINK THAT IF THIS DOES NOT GO THROUGH TONIGHT, THEN I'D BE PREPARED TO MAKE A $700 DONATION FROM PERSONAL FUNDS GIVEN THE FACT THAT I'VE BEEN SAVING ALL MY CAR LOANS ALL THIS TIME.
I HAVE THE MONEY IN MY BANK ACCOUNT.
>> THANK YOU COMMISIONER BOLTON. COMMISSIONER PLACKO.
>> I FORGOT WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY.
SORRY. DURING LAST YEAR'S GRANT PROGRAM WAS ALL $50,000 USED?
>> HOW MUCH DO WE HAVE LEFT FROM LAST YEAR'S?
>> IT DOESN'T ROLL OVER, BUT I'M NOT CERTAIN.
I'D HAVE TO GO BACK AND CHECK, BUT I KNOW SPECIFICALLY WE AWARDED ONLY TWO OR THREE COMMUNITIES.
FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS, IT HAS NOT BEEN AS SUCCESSFUL AS WE'D LIKE IT TO BE.
>> CAN'T WE TAKE IT OUT OF THAT?
I'M JUST SUGGESTING THAT THE COMMUNITY APPLIES TO THE PROGRAM.
THERE'S A PROGRAM THAT'S DESIGNED FOR THIS TYPE OF ASK, AND IT OPENS AUGUST 4TH.
>> I DO COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND, ONCE WE CHANGE THIS DYNAMIC, WE'RE GOING TO OPEN UP THAT CAN OF WORMS. I REALLY DO UNDERSTAND THAT.
BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS SIGN IS PROMINENT IN OUR CITY.
IT IS RIGHT ON COMMERCIAL BOULEVARD.
IT'S BEEN THAT WAY FOR A VERY LONG TIME.
THE SOONER WE CAN GET THIS GOING, THE BETTER IT IS FOR THE COMMUNITY, THE BETTER IT IS FOR EVERYBODY.
I'M JUST LOOKING FOR, I GUESS A FAST TRACK FOR THEM.
>> THANK YOU. BASICALLY, EVERYBODY KNOWS I LIVE IN THE WOODLANDS.
EVERYBODY KNOWS I'VE LIVED THERE FOR 28 YEARS.
I'VE BEEN SEEING THIS MONUMENT SIGN SINCE I'VE BEEN COMING DOWN SINCE '78.
I THINK IT'S GOT AWFUL AND UGLY.
FACT OF THE MATTER IS WE LIVE IN A CITY THAT HAVE PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES.
AS MUCH AS I WOULD LOVE TO SIT HERE AND SAY, DEAR COMMUNITY, YES, LET'S GO GET THAT $3,800.
THERE'S A PROCESS AND A PROCEDURE.
I KNOW FOR COMMUNITIES RIGHT NOW THAT ARE PROMINENT ALONG SOUTH GATE.
THERE'S SOME ALONG UNIVERSITIES, SOME ALONG COMMERCIAL BOULEVARD THAT HAVE JUST BEEN HIT.
IF WE DO THIS TONIGHT AND SAY, DEAR WOODLANDS, YOU'RE MORE IMPORTANT THAN EVERY SINGLE OTHER COMMUNITY, YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR IT.
IS IT RIGHT? WE HAVE A PROCESS IN PLACE.
OUR COMMUNITY, THESE SIGNS THAT HAVE BEEN MENTIONED AND SOUND SO GOOD, $300,000 WAS GIVEN BY WOODMONT IN ORDER TO PAY FOR THE WOODMONT SIGNS.
ANOTHER COUPLE OF 100,000 WILL GIVE HIM WHEN THE PEOPLE FOR DISTRICT FROM MAKING CENTRAL PARK MATTER FOR HIDDEN TRAILS.
THOSE SIGNS, THAT WAS THE NEGOTIATION THERE.
ALL OF THESE SIGNS HAD TO LOOK LIKE THEY LOOK ALIKE.
OUR COMMUNITY WAS ON THE LIST IN 2014.
BUT OUR COMMUNITY SAID, I DON'T WANT IT TO SAY WOODLANDS AT TAMARAC, I WANT TO BE UNIQUE.
THEREFORE, WE WERE REMOVED FROM THAT SIGN PROGRAM.
WE CAME BACK AND THEN AGAIN, THE COMMUNITY SAID WE'RE GOING TO BE REMOVED, AND THAT IS BEFORE SECTIONS 3 AND 4 REMOVED OUT OF THE WHOA.
WHAT I HEAR IS THAT WE CAN SIMPLY APPLY FOR [INAUDIBLE] SOON.
AS COMMISSIONER PLACKO HAS SAID, THE REALITY IS THAT SIGNS NOT GOING TO NECESSARILY BE FABRICATED BEFORE THE DOLLARS ARE IN.
I'M PRETTY SURE A BUSINESS WILL SAY, OH, I'VE GOT 15,000 IN HAND.
IF WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO A LOAN AGAINST THE GRANT POTENTIAL FUTURE, MAYBE WORK SOMETHING OUT THAT WAY.
BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, I KNOW YOU DON'T AGREE WITH ME.
BUT AS THE MAYOR OF THE CITY, I GOT TO THINK ABOUT OUR WHOLE CITY AND NOT JUST THE PLACE WHERE I LIVE,
[02:25:02]
WHERE I'M GOING TO TAKE MY NEXT TWO MINUTES BECAUSE I DIDN'T EVEN HAVE MY FIVE.THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, WE CAN EITHER APPLY LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE.
IT SOUNDS REALLY GOOD THAT WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO MAKE IT, ASK THE WHOA FOR THEIR BID.
WE HAVE OUR BID AND WE SHOULD BE DOING AND BE ABLE TO PUT ONE SIGN IN.
THE SIGN LOOKS GREAT. I THINK THE DESIGN COMPANY DID A GREAT JOB. IT WILL BE NICE.
OR WE CAN GO BACK AND ASK FOR THE CITY TO PAY FOR THE SIGN INCOMPLETE IN TOTAL AND THEN GET BACK ON THE WAITING LIST LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE.
BUT TO SIT HERE TONIGHT AND SAY, BECAUSE OF THIS ONE AREA IN THE COMMUNITY THAT I KNOW IT'S BEING SEEN, THAT GIVES US MORE OF A PRIORITY OVER EVERY SINGLE OTHER RESONANT WITH TAXPAYERS MONEY.
WILDEN'S, DO WE REALLY WANT TO BE THOUGHT OF, AS IF WERE THE ONLY ONES THAT EXIST, AND THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO FOLLOW THE RULES? I'M SORRY, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, MY COMMUNITY.
I KNOW THIS IS NOT WHAT YOU WANT TO HEAR, BUT IT'S NOT LIKE THERE'S NOT AN OPTION.
IN THREE WEEKS, THERE'S AN APPLICATION PROCESS THAT OPENS UP.
WITHIN ANOTHER WEEK AFTER THAT, WE FILE FOR IT.
IT SOUNDS REALLY PROMISING THAT WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET IT.
I CAN'T VOTE IN SUPPORT OF GIVING TAXPAYERS MONEY JUST TO THIS COMMUNITY BECAUSE IT'S GOT A REALLY UGLY SIGN THAT KEEPS GETTING HIT.
I KNOW ON A SIDE NOTE WE ARE WORKING VERY HARD.
AS YOU MAY HAVE SEEN, WE'VE GOT THE LIGHTING SWITCHED OUT, AND WE'RE WORKING WITH THE FDOT TO GET THE MASTER ARMS SWITCHED OUT AND THEN HOPEFULLY GET SOME DESIGNATED ARROWS OUT THERE.
THE CITY MANAGER AND I HAVE A MEETING BEING SCHEDULED WITH FDOT TO GET THAT TO HAPPEN.
MAYBE OUR SIGN WILL NOT BE CONTINUALLY HIT BECAUSE A BEAUTIFUL SIGN LIKE YOU MIGHT BE PUTTING IN, WE DON'T NEED THAT HIT.
THAT IS MY OPINION ON PUBLIC PURPOSE DOLLARS TO BE UTILIZED IN A PROPER PROCEDURE FOR OUR COMMUNITY LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE.
COMMISSIONER, VICE MAYOR, YOU WISH TO MAKE A MOVE?
>> YEAH. [NOISE] JUST TO GET CONSENSUS FROM THE COMMISSION BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVE CONSENSUS TO GRANT THE BALANCE OF THE FUNDS NEEDED BY THE WOMEN'S COMMUNITY BEFORE THE END OF THIS MONTH.
WHATEVER THE APPLICATION PROCESS IS FOR THAT GRANT PROGRAM PROVIDE THOSE DOCUMENTATIONS TO THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE WOODLANDS.
THEY CAN COMPLETE THOSE FORMS BY THE END OF THIS MONTH BECAUSE IF THEY HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL AUGUST AND THEN GET ANNOUNCED IN SEPTEMBER THAT FURTHER DELAYS, THEN MOVING FORWARD WITH THEIR PROCESS AND SO GRANT THEM THE BALANCE OF THE FUNDS THEY NEED BEFORE THE END OF THE MONTH.
THEY CAN FILL OUT THE DOCUMENTATION EITHER AFTER THE APPLICATION PROCESS IN AUGUST, OR BEFOREHAND SINCE YOU KNOW WHAT THE PROCESS IS LIKE.
BUT MAKE SURE WE CAN MOVE FORWARD THIS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
IF WE HAVE CONSENSUS, WE CAN DIRECT STAFF TO GRANT THE FUNDS TO EITHER DIRECTLY THE VENDOR.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE OKAY WITH THAT, OR TO ANY EACH REPRESENT.
I BELIEVE THE VENDOR IS A REGISTERED VENDOR WITH THE CITY OF TAMARAC.
THE WOODLANDS RESIDENTS ARE TAXPAYERS AS WELL.
>> THEY PAID FOR THESE OTHER SIGNS.
>> WELL, NOT ALL OF THEM. NO. A LOT OF THIS MONEY WAS SPENT ELSEWHERE, BUT THAT'S NOT THE POINT HERE.
THOSE WERE ALSO CITY OF TAMARAC SIGNS AT TAMARAC.
THE QUESTION I HAVE IF EVERYBODY IS ALWAYS DONE SOME BUILDING, YOU DON'T GIVE THEM ALL THE MONEY UP FRONT.
IF WE HAVE A $15,000 DEPOSIT KNOWING THAT $5,000 OR LESS THAN $5,000, $38,000 IS COMING, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO FINISH IT IN TIME AND GET THE GRANT IN TIME FOR THIS COMMUNITY WITHOUT HAVING TO MAKE THE COMMUNITY SUBJECT TO LOOKING LIKE WE FEEL THAT WE ARE PRIVILEGED AND HAVE TO JUMP THE LINE ON A PROCESS THAT LOOKS REALLY CLEAR THAT WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET SIMPLY.
AGAIN, IT'S USING TAXPAYERS DOLLARS IN A PROCESS OF IT.
THIS COMMISSION AS A BODY, HAS NEVER AWARDED FUNDS SIMPLY BECAUSE A COMMUNITY HAS COME UP AND ASK FOR IT.
COMMISSION VICE MAYOR GELIN HAS ASKED FOR CONSENSUS TO DO WHAT HE WISHES, WHICH IS TO AWARD THIS MONEY OUT OF THE CITY'S GENERAL FUND FOR THIS PROCESS.
IS THERE CONSENSUS? COMMISSIONER BOLTON.
>> I'VE BEEN DONATING MONEY TO DIFFERENT RESIDENTS AND ORGANIZATIONS FROM MY CAR ALLOWANCE.
LESS $700 BECAUSE I REALLY WANT TO SHOW THAT I'M GIVING THIS MONEY TO THE HOA.
IF ANYBODY WANTS TO CHALLENGE THAT THEY CAN.
I REALLY BELIEVE FROM MY HEART THEY DESERVE IT.
LESS $700, I'M WILLING TO GIVE THE BALANCE TO THE HOA IN ADVANCE.
>> WHEN YOU SAY IN ADVANCE, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?
[02:30:02]
>> REPEATING EXACTLY WHAT VICE MAYOR GELIN SAID, MINUS $700 BECAUSE I'M DONATING $700 TO THE HOA.
>> BUT YOU'RE STILL SAYING THEY'RE APPLYING FOR THE FUNDS. THAT'S WHAT HE'S NOT SAYING.
>> HIS ADVANCE MEANS BEFORE THIS GRANT PROGRAM, SO BEFORE THE END OF THIS MONTH.
COMMISSIONER PLACKO HAS A QUESTION.
>> FOR CLARIFICATION, IS THE VICE MAYOR SAYING ADVANCE THE FUNDS, APPLY FOR THE GRANT AND IF AND WHEN THE GRANT IS APPROVED THEY PAY THE MONEY BACK?
>> YES. ADVANCE THE FUNDS, BUT THE DOCUMENTATION THAT MS. CALLOWAY SAYS IS REQUIRED, THEY CAN SUBMIT THAT DOCUMENTATION DURING THAT REQUIREMENT PERIOD AFTER AUGUST 15TH.
BUT IN THE MEANTIME PROVIDE THE FUNDS, THEY CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THE EXECUTION OF THE CONTRACT.
WE CAN QUICKLY GET THE NEW SIGN-UP.
>> LESS COMMISSIONER BOLTON, CONTRIBUTION. CAR ALLOWANCE.
>> BASICALLY, ADVANCING THE MONEY, AND THEY'RE PAYING IT BACK IF AND WHEN THEY GET THE GRANT.
>> THE CITY WOULD JUST KEEP THE MONEY BECAUSE THEY GOT THE MONEY AHEAD OF TIME.
>> CITY MANAGER, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU HAVE A QUESTION ON YOUR FACE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ASK IT?
>> FRANKLY, I'M JUST NOT CLEAR BECAUSE THE NOTION WAS VERY LENGTHY THAT THE COMMISSIONER MADE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> LET ME CLEAR IT UP, PRIOR TO THE END OF THIS MONTH, DIRECT STAFF TO GRANT THE BALANCE OF THE FUNDS DUE TO THE COMPANY THAT'S DESIGNING THE WOODLANDS SIGN, TO PAY FOR THE NEW SIGN.
THEY SHOULD RECEIVE THE FUNDS BEFORE THE END OF THIS MONTH.
>> I WANT MONEY TOO FOR MY COMMUNITY.
>> COMMISSIONER BOLTON WILL DONATE NEXT MONTH'S CAR ALLOWANCE.
>> LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I AM GOING TO REMIND YOU, WHILE LIBERTY IS WONDERFUL, WE STILL HAVE A REALLY LONG AGENDA TO GET TO.
COMMISSIONER PLACKO, YOU CAN PUT YOUR LIST OUT FOR THE NEXT GENERAL MEETING.
>> MAY I ASK A QUICK QUESTION? IS THERE TIME SENSITIVITY WITH THIS?
>> CAN I POSE THAT TO THE WOODLANDS RESIDENT? [OVERLAPPING]
>> BECAUSE WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT A LONG PERIOD OF TIME.
IF THEY'RE GOING TO FILL OUT THE PAPERWORK, WHY?
>> NO PAPERWORK REQUIRED THEN, LET ME DROP THAT.
LET'S JUST GRANT THE FUNDS, SINCE YOU HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE PAPERWORK.
THEY CAN GIVE YOU THE QUOTES. YOU HAVE THE QUOTES?
>> IT'S JUST ABOUT, THERE IS A PROCESS THAT THE ENTIRE CITY HAS BEEN ADVERTISED THAT IT OPENS ON THE 4TH, AND THAT THE APPLICATIONS BEGAN ON APRIL 15TH.
AS MS. CALLOWAY STATED, IT'S ABOUT EQUITY.
>> I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY STAFF IS SO RESISTANT TO SUPPORTING AND HELPING THE TAXPAYERS THAT FUND THIS CITY?
WHAT I'M RESISTANT TO IS WE HAVE A PROCESS IN PLACE, AND THAT'S ALL. [OVERLAPPING]
>> VICE MAYOR, LET THE CITY MANAGER FINISH HER SENTENCE.
>> I'M SAYING THEY CAN FOLLOW THE PROCESS TO ADVANCE THE FUNDS BEFORE THE END OF THE MONTH.
>> CITY MANAGER WAS FINISHING HER SENTENCE.
>> I UNDERSTAND WHAT SHE'S SAYING.
>> PLEASE PROCEED, CITY MANAGER.
>> THERE'S A PROGRAM AND A PROCESS IN PLACE, WHATEVER THE COMMISSION DECIDES, WE WILL EXECUTE.
>> THE QUESTION WAS ABOUT TIMELINESS, AND IT SEEMS LIKE A VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME.
>> THE QUESTION OF TIME, I GUESS, MR. HODGKINS, YOU ARE THE ONE HOLDING THE CONTRACT.
DOES THE CONTRACT SAY TO YOU THAT IT WILL TAKE A CERTAIN TIME FOR PROCUREMENT FOR CREATING THIS SIGN? DOES IT SAY 50/50? WHAT DOES IT SAY IN THE DETAILS? IF WE'RE GOING TO BE THROWING ALL PROCESS, MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE THE FULL FACTS OF THIS.
>> WELL, THE WHOLE FACT IS, WE'RE NOT OUT HERE LOOKING TO APPLY FOR A BEAUTIFUL SIGN.
THE FACT IS WE HAVE A SIGN THAT THE PICTURE THAT THE VICE MAYOR SHOWED YOU IS SMASHED UP.
>> MR. HODGKINS, CAN YOU PLEASE ANSWER THE QUESTION I ASKED?
>> I AM ANSWERING THE QUESTION, MAYOR.
>> WHAT DOES THE CONTRACT SAY?
>> DON'T INTERRUPT ME AS YOU WERE TELLING OTHER FOLKS NOT TO DO.
>> VERY GOOD. THAT'S HOW WE GOT TO THE POINT THAT WE ARE.
WE'VE DONE EVERYTHING TO TRY TO GET THIS SIGN REPAIRED, AND PART OF THAT EVERYTHING IS WRITING TO YOU MULTIPLE TIMES.
>> MR. HODGKINS, I DID A COURTESY BY ASKING YOU TO COME UP HERE, NOT FOR YOU TO ATTACK ME.
THE QUESTION [OVERLAPPING] IS THE CONTRACT.
>> THAT WHY THE SCHEDULE IS IMPORTANT.
BECAUSE AS SOON AS WE SAID TO THE WHOA, LOOK HERE, GIVE US THE $15,000 FROM THE INSURANCE, WE WILL GO GET BIDS THAT ARE MORE AFFORDABLE.
[02:35:02]
THE ENTRANCE TO OUR COMMUNITY LOOKS LIKE A DISGRACE.>> YES, IT DOES. CAN YOU PLEASE GET TO THE CONTRACT?
>> WE DON'T NEED A STORY, PLEASE, MR. HODGKINS. [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE NEED YOU TO READ THE CONTRACT.
>> I'M TRYING TO GIVE AN ANSWER HERE. THANK YOU.
>> BUT THE ANSWER WAS ASKED SPECIFIC.
>> THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, WE GOT THE 15,000.
WE GOT SOUTHEAST SIGN TO COME IN.
WE LOOKED FOR TWO OTHER COMPANIES TO COME IN.
WE HAD THE ONE ESTIMATE FROM THE WHOA FOR 42,000.
LAST WEEK, WE HAD THEM COME IN, THEY DID FURTHER MEASUREMENTS.
WE SAID WE'VE GOT $15,000 FOR YOU, HOWEVER, AT THAT POINT IN TIME, WE KNEW ABOUT THIS GRANT PROGRAM, WE HOPE TO GET SOME MONEY.
THE IDEA OF MAYOR GELIN SAYING UNDER THE SCHEDULE, IF WE CAN BE ADVANCED THIS MONEY, WE'LL GLADLY APPLY FOR THE PROGRAM.
BUT IN THE MEANTIME, SO AUGUST 4TH TURNS INTO AUGUST 15TH, AUGUST 15TH TURNS INTO SEPTEMBER.
MEANWHILE, WE'VE GOT A SMASHED UP SIGN FOR OUR COMMUNITY.
ALL WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS COME TOGETHER, DO SOMETHING GOOD AND LOOK TO THE CITY FOR SOME HELP ON THAT.
>> THE QUESTION I ASKED WAS VERY SIMPLE.
EVERYBODY HERE IN THIS COMMUNITY HAS EVER ONE'S GOT AN ESTIMATE THAT SAYS, IT'S GOING TO CAUSE YOU $18,820 TO DO THIS SIGN.
IN ORDER FOR US TO PROCEED, PLEASE DEPOSIT HALF THE MONEY.
IT'LL TAKE US THREE WEEKS TO FABRICATE.
THEN WE WILL ASK YOU FOR THE NEXT 25%, AND THEN WE WILL INSTALL IT, AND IT'LL TAKE US SIX WEEKS TO ACCOMPLISH THIS.
THAT IS THE QUESTION I'M ASKING.
SIMPLY. WE'RE BEING TOLD THE URGENCY, IT DOESN'T MATTER IF WE GAVE YOU THE MONEY, THIS SECOND. [OVERLAPPING]
>> NO. YOU DON'T MEAN IT. YOU'RE LYING.
>> THE SIGN IS NOT GOING TO BE DONE MUCH SOONER.
I DON'T KNOW WHY IT IS HARD TO GET A SIMPLE BUSINESS QUESTION ANSWERED WITHOUT THERE HAVING TO BE ANY ATTACKS.
>> I'M FRUSTRATED BECAUSE I'M ASKING FOR A SIMPLE QUESTION.
>> WE HAVE A CONTRACT RIGHT NOW FOR 15,000, THE CHECK IS MADE OUT TO SOUTHEAST SIGN.
THEY WILL GET THE ENTIRE CHECK FOR 15,000.
AS SOON AS WE PICK THE SIGN, WHICH PEOPLE OUT HERE WE'RE VOTING FOR THIS MORNING OR THIS EVENING, THAT GOES TO SOUTHEAST SIGN.
ONCE WE KNOW WHICH ONE IT IS, THEN WE GIVE HIM THE 15,000.
THEN THEY HAVE TO COME TO THE CITY FOR THE PERMITS.
WE EVEN WORKED WITH COMMISSIONER GELIN TO FIND OUT THE TIME FRAME FOR THE PERMITS.
WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS ALL ALONG.
>> I HAVE NOT RECEIVED AN ANSWER TO MY QUESTION.
THERE IS NOT ANYTHING ON AN ESTIMATED TIMEFRAME THAT IT WILL TELL US HOW MUCH FOR A DEPOSIT.
AS SOON AS WE GET THE PERMITS, WE WILL PROCEED, PERIOD.
THEN WHAT WE DID IS WE ADDED TO THE BOTTOM OF THAT CONTRACT, PENDING CITY OF TAMARAC FUNDS.
WHAT WE'RE HOPING FOR IS THE BALANCE WILL BE PAID FOR BY THE CITY OF TAMARAC FUNDS.
WHETHER IT'S THROUGH THIS PROGRAM, OR WHETHER IT'S TONIGHT OR WHATEVER IT IS, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS KEEP HOPE ALIVE AND STAY POSITIVE.
>> KEEPING HOPE ALIVE AND STAY POSITIVE, I'M PRETTY SURE THE SIGN COMPANY, YOU CAN ALSO SAY TO THEM, IT'S PENDING CITY FUNDS.
AS I BELIEVE THE WHOA WAS TOLD, WE WOULD SOMEHOW COME UP WITH THE FUNDS IF THE CITY DIDN'T GRANT THE MONEY.
THERE SEEMS TO BE FOR SOME REASON, JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE ME, WHICH IS FINE.
THE LACK OF BEING ABLE TO TELL ME, [OVERLAPPING] I'M ASKING YOU, PLEASE HELP ME GET ME AN ANSWER ON THE BUSINESS LEVEL.
>> CITY ATTORNEY, I ASKED FOR CONSENSUS, AND I THINK WE HAVE IT.
>> EVERYONE HERE FOR THE MOMENT, PERSONAL ATTACKS EITHER WAY ARE INAPPROPRIATE, BOTH WAYS.
LET'S REFRAIN FROM THAT. LET'S HAVE A DISCUSSION.
I UNDERSTAND THE MAYOR'S QUESTION IS, WHAT'S THE SCHEDULE FOR MAKING THE IMPROVEMENTS, IF MR. HODGKINS CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
COMMISSIONER BOLTON SUPPORTED.
I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER PLACKO DID NOT HAVE A CHANCE TO FINISH HER STATEMENT.
>> WELL, WE'LL GET BACK TO THAT.
MR. HODGKINS SEEMS TO WANT TO KEEP [OVERLAPPING] ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS.
>> MR. HODGKINS WOULD LIKE TO FINISH ANSWERING THE QUESTION.
>> THE ANSWER TO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S QUESTION IS SIMPLE.
I SPOKE TO SOUTHEAST SIGN TWICE TODAY.
I TOLD HIM WE HAVE THE MEETING TONIGHT.
I WAS WAITING FOR THE MEETING TONIGHT BECAUSE WE HAVE THE SIGNS
[02:40:03]
OUT FRONT AND WE WANT IT TO BE TRANSPARENT AND INCLUSIVE.I SAID I WILL HAVE A SIGN FOR YOU TOMORROW THAT WE WILL DO.
ONCE WE HAVE THE SIGN THAT WE WILL DO TOMORROW, HE WILL MOVE FORWARD TO COME TO THE CITY FOR THE PERMIT.
WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY SPECIAL EXEMPTIONS.
WE'RE GOING TO MOVE THIS SIGN BACK.
IT'S GOING TO BE ALL THE CODE.
ONCE WE GET THE PERMIT, THEN WE CAN START FABRICATING THE SIGN.
HE THINKS THAT WILL TAKE PROBABLY 30-45 DAYS TO GET THE SIGN COMPLETED.
ONCE THE SIGN IS COMPLETED, THEN IT'S GOING TO BE A SELF ILLUMINATED SIGN OR A BACKLIT SIGN.
HE'S GOING TO FIX THE ELECTRIC THERE AND THEN THEY'RE GOING TO PUT THE SIGN IN.
NOW, WE ANTICIPATE THAT THAT 15,000 WILL COVER ALL OF THAT, BUT WE WILL STILL HAVE A REMAINDER BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO BE NEEDED FOR THE ELECTRIC OR WHAT THE REMAINDER WILL BE.
WE'VE FIGURED IT'D BE ABOUT 3,900, MAYBE MORE, BUT IT WON'T BE OVER 5,000.
THAT'S WHY WE WROTE IN THE CONTRACT TO THEM PENDING CITY OF TAMARAC MONIES.
WE'RE WILLING TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROGRAM.
WE'D LIKE TO GET STARTED ON THIS.
>> THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING MY TIME IN QUESTION.
>> IT APPEARS TO ME THAT THEY HAVE A DEPOSIT.
THEY CAN START THE CONTRACT, THEY CAN FILL OUT THE PAPERWORK.
I KNOW PART OF THE CRITERIA FOR THIS IS VISIBILITY TO THE ENTIRE CITY.
THIS CERTAINLY HITS THAT ONE ON THE MARK.
I WOULD SAY THAT MAYBE THE WOODLANDS HAS BEEN THROUGH HELL FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS.
I THINK THEY DESERVE A SIGN THAT MAKES THEIR COMMUNITY LOOK THE WAY IT SHOULD.
THIS WAY WHEN ALL OF US DRIVE UP AND DOWN COMMERCIAL BOULEVARD, WE DON'T HAVE TO LOOK OVER AT THAT HORRIBLE SIGN.
I WOULD VENTURE TO SAY THAT YOU CAN GO AHEAD.
YOU CERTAINLY HAVE A DEPOSIT FOR THEM.
THEY'RE NOT GOING TO TAKE YOUR WHOLE $15,000 AND WE'RE GOING TO FILL OUT THE PAPERWORK AND WE'RE GOING TO GET THIS DONE.
>> I DO NOT HEAR CONSENSUS TO COMMISSIONER GELIN OR ARE YOU SAYING YOU'RE ADVANCING THE MONEY? NO. THERE'S AN OR IN THERE COMMISSIONER PLACKO.
COMMISSIONER, VICE MAYOR GELIN'S MOTION IS TO EXPAND THE MONEY BEFORE THE END OF THE MONTH AND THAT THEY WILL APPLY FOR THE SIGN.
ARE YOU IN SUPPORT OF THAT? [BACKGROUND] YOU'VE GOT TO.
COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS AND VICE MAYOR.
YOU'VE GOTTEN CONSENSUS FOR IT.
>> CAN YOU SUMMARIZE THE CONSENSUS. WHO'S THE CONSENSUS?
>> [OVERLAPPING] CONSENSUS. CAN WE MOVE FORWARD, PLEASE?
>> YES. AT THIS TIME, IT IS NOW [OVERLAPPING]
>> CAN I GIVE CONSENSUS AS WELL?
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, FOR THE WOODLANDS, YOU'VE RECEIVED YOUR GRANTS OF MONEY AND YOU ARE OBLIGATED TO APPLY FOR THE GRANT.
IF YOU WISH TO LEAVE. THANK YOU. GET HOME SAFELY.
[10.c Discussion and motion/direction to extend the contract with RSM to conduct a forensic audit on all transactions related to former City Manager Michael Cernech and on all transactions and vendors related to Colony West Clubhouse. Requested by Vice Mayor Mike Gelin]
WHICH WE TOOK OUT OF ORDER.>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> BUT ACTUALLY BECAUSE YOU'RE ALL HERE. I'M SORRY.
THIS IS WHAT THE COMMISSION HAD ASKED FOR FOR THE APPLICANTS WHO ARE HERE FOR THE QUASI JUDICIAL, WHO ARE SITTING HERE AND WAITING.
FOR THE CONTRACT BASE, THE COMMISSION HAD RULED FOR ALL OF 10 TO COME BEFORE THOSE ITEMS. WE WILL FINISH OFF FOR NOW 10C.
10C IS THE DISCUSSION IN MOTION OR DIRECTION TO EXTEND THE CONTRACT WITH RSM TO CONDUCT FORENSIC AUDIT ON ALL TRANSACTIONS RELATED TO FORMER CITY MANAGER MICHAEL STERN AND ON ALL TRANSACTIONS AND VENDORS RELATED TO THIS COLONY WEST CLUBHOUSE.
THIS WAS ASKED BY VICE MAYOR GELIN.
>> I'D LIKE TO ASK THE AUDITORS TO COME DOWN BECAUSE I'LL ASK SOME QUESTIONS.
FIRST, WE HAVE A FINANCIAL AUDIT DONE EVERY SINGLE YEAR.
I'M JUST GOING TO BREAK DOWN SOME BASIC DEFINITIONS AND THEN ASK EITHER OUR CPA ACCOUNTANT, CHRISTINE, YOU ARE A CPA, CORRECT?
>> YES. THEN I'LL ASK OUR AUDITOR TO EXPLAIN.
WE DO FINANCIAL AUDIT EVERY YEAR.
IT'S ALSO CALLED A FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDIT, DEFINED AS THE EXAMINATION OF AN ENTITY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENT AND ACCOMPANYING DISCLOSURE BY AN INDEPENDENT AUDITOR WHO SHOULD BE RSM.
[02:45:01]
THE RESULTS OF A FINANCIAL AUDIT INCLUDE A REPORT BY THE AUDITOR ATTESTING TO THE FAIRNESS OF PRESENTATION AND THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND RELATED DISCLOSURES.IS THAT ACCURATE FINANCE DIRECTOR?
>> AS PART OF THAT ANNUAL AUDIT, DO WE HAVE A FORENSIC AUDITOR LOOKING AT THAT AUDIT?
>> THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDIT IS NOT A FORENSIC AUDIT.
>> WHAT IS A FORENSIC AUDIT? A FORENSIC AUDIT EXAMINES AND EVALUATES A FIRM'S INDIVIDUALS FINANCIAL RECORDS TO DERIVE EVIDENCE USED IN A COURT OR A LEGAL PROCEEDING.
ANOTHER DEFINITION. NO, THIS IS WRONG.
A FORENSIC AUDIT, ALSO KNOWN AS A FORENSIC EXAMINATION, IS AN EXAMINATION OF FINANCIAL RECORDS TO FIND ANY ILLEGAL FINANCIAL ACTIVITY.
WAS THAT THE PURPOSE OF THE ANNUAL AUDIT THAT WE DO TO FIND ILLEGAL ACTIVITY?
>> I'M GOING TO ASK FOR MY POINT OF CLARIFICATION.
I DO BELIEVE NONE OF THIS, THAT IS OBVIOUSLY ALL OVER YOUR DESK VICE MAYOR GELIN WAS PUT IN THE BACKUP.
[OVERLAPPING] FOR US TO ABLE TO HAVE A COMPLETE PROJECT ON AN ITEM OF FORCE FOR REVIEW.
>> UNDERSTOOD. BUT USUALLY THAT MATERIAL IS PUT IN THE BACKGROUND.
>> USUALLY I DO A PRESENTATION AND YOU GUYS SAY I CAN'T HAVE A PRESENTATION UNLESS IT'S DUE FIVE DAYS AHEAD OF TIME, WHICH DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME.
>> [OVERLAPPING] ITEMS TO BE ON THE AGENDA LIKE IT'S SUPPOSED TO.
>> WELL, THAT'S WHY I'M READING IT OUT SO EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT I'M LOOKING AT.
>> OUR ATTORNEY HAS JUST GOTTEN BACK. THANK YOU.
>> CITY MANAGER, I BELIEVE WE HAD CONSENSUS THAT ANYTIME WE WOULD BRING AN ITEM FORWARD, THAT BACKUP WILL BE PROVIDED.
THERE IS NO BACKUP FOR THIS ITEM.
>> IS THERE BACKUP, CITY MANAGER?
>> THERE'S NO BACKUP BECAUSE IT'S A DISCUSSION ABOUT AN AUDIT.
>> JUST A DISCUSSION AND EMOTION AND DIRECTION.
>> THERE'S NO NEED FOR A BACKUP BECAUSE WE'RE JUST HAVING A DISCUSSION.
>> DO YOU HAVE A BACKUP EVERY TIME THERE'S A DISCUSSION?
>> THERE'S A DISCUSSION AND A MOTION AND DIRECTION.
>> WE'RE HAVING A DISCUSSION AND BASED ON THE DISCUSSION, THEY'LL EITHER BE A MOTION AND DIRECTION.
>> CITY MANAGER WAS THERE BACKUP PROVIDED?
>> THERE WAS NO BACKUP PROVIDED. [OVERLAPPING]
>> FOR THIS ITEM MAYOR SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ON THERE.
>> THAT'S NOT TRUE. CITY ATTORNEY, CAN YOU PLEASE OPINE.
EVERY COMMISSIONER WHO PUTS AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA AND THE RULES OR PROCEDURES SAY THAT EVERYONE HAS THE RIGHT TO SPEAK.
BUT IT IS INCUMBENT UPON THE PERSON WHO PUTS THE ITEM ON TO EITHER PROVIDE THE BACKUP OR LIMIT THE DISCUSSION TO WHATEVER HE OR SHE BELIEVES IS WHAT THEY WANT TO SAY TO THE REST OF THE COMMISSION IN AN ATTEMPT TO GAIN CONSENSUS ON A PARTICULAR ITEM.
TO THE EXTENT THAT THE VICE MAYOR OR ANYONE THEN BRINGS AS PART OF THEIR PRESENTATION.
WELL, I'M GOING TO BRING IN SOMEONE FROM THE OUTSIDE.
WHAT I MEAN, THE OUTSIDE, WE OBVIOUSLY KNOW THE PEOPLE FOR RSM, AGAIN, IT'S UP TO YOU WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANT TO HEAR FROM ANYONE ELSE OTHER THAN JUST THE VICE MAYOR ON HIS ITEM BECAUSE OTHERWISE, THERE ISN'T NECESSARILY A BACKUP.
BUT AGAIN, HE DOES HAVE THE RIGHT UNDER OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE TO EXPLAIN HIS ITEM.
>> I DO UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAD CONSENSUS THAT ANY ITEM ON THE AGENDA WILL HAVE BACKUP. [OVERLAPPING]
>> VICE MAYOR, LET COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS FINISH HIS SENTENCE, PLEASE.
>> SO THAT EVERYONE CAN BE PREPARED OR HAVE QUESTIONS OR BE ABLE TO REBUTTAL ANY MISINFORMATION, FACTUAL INFORMATION, AND NOW WE'RE BEING TOLD, YOU'RE THE ONLY ONE WITH INFORMATION AND NO ONE ELSE HAS INFORMATION IN FRONT OF THEM.
NOW WE'RE MAKING A DISCUSSION, THEN THERE'S GOING TO BE A MOTION AND DIRECTION TO THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, AND NONE OF US ARE PREPARED FOR IT.
THIS ITEM SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ON THERE.
>> WHAT I WOULD JUST ADD IS ON THE COMMISSION AGENDA REQUEST FORM, THERE ARE TWO BOXES AT THE BOTTOM.
IT SAYS EITHER TO CHECK YOU'VE PROVIDED INFORMATION OR THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL MATERIALS.
NEITHER OF THESE TWO BOXES WERE CHECKED.
I'LL SEND RESPONSIBILITY FOR QUALITY CONTROL THAT WHEN WE GOT THIS WITHOUT ANY BACKUP, THE PRESUMPTION WAS THERE WAS NO BACKUP. IT WAS PUT ON AS [OVERLAPPING].
[02:50:01]
>> THERE'S NO BACKUP. THIS IS JUST MY MATERIAL THAT I'M READING OFF OF.
>> IT'S NOT BACKUP. CITY ATTORNEY MAY I PROCEED?
>> IF THE QUESTION IS TO ME, THE VICE MAYOR OR ANY MEMBER WHO PUTS AN ITEM HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS AND EXPLAIN THEIR ITEM.
FOR LACK OF A BETTER DESCRIPTION, WHAT I UNDERSTAND IS TAKING PLACE RIGHT NOW OR WHAT IS GOING TO TAKE PLACE BY THE VICE MAYOR, I'M JUST GOING TO USE THIS IN A VERY COLLOQUIAL AND FASHION IS HE WANTS TO USE VISUAL AIDS OR QUESTIONING ANSWERS WITH STAFF OR THIRD PARTIES, THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY AN EXPLANATION.
THE QUESTION IS, YOU ALL DO YOU WANT TO ALLOW THAT OR ARE YOU GOING TO LIMIT HIM TO JUST THE DISCUSSION OF HIS ITEM WITHOUT ASKING QUESTIONS OF ANYONE ELSE? THAT IS THE THRESHOLD ISSUE.
YOU CAN MAKE A MOTION TO I'D LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK AS PART OF MY PRESENTATION OR MY DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF AND THE CONSULTANTS.
IF THERE'S NOT A CONSENSUS AGREEMENT TO ALLOW THAT TO HAPPEN THEN WE'RE BACK TO THE VICE MAYOR, DOES STILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO EXPLAIN AND SEEK CONSENSUS ON HIS ITEM AS THEN HE BEST SEES FIT.
>> I HAVE A POINT OF ORDER QUESTION.
WE HAVE OUR NICE FINE GENTLEMAN FROM RSM HERE.
THEY ARE HERE AND WE DON'T USUALLY HAVE AUTHORITY TO CALL IN SOMEBODY THAT WE HIRE FOR ONE PERSON TO HAVE THEM PRESENT.
THEY'RE USUALLY HIRED BY THE CITY MANAGER, CITY STAFF TO REPRESENT THE COMMISSION NOT JUST BE HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS DIRECTED BY ONE PERSON ON THE COMMISSION TO BE HERE.
WHAT IS THE LEGAL PROCESS OF WHAT WE WERE ABOUT TO DO NOW WITH THIS ITEM?
>> ANYONE CAN ASK THEM QUESTIONS.
>> I AM TALKING TO THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY ABOUT THE FACT THAT VENDORS WERE HIRED THIS EVENING, IT APPEARS TO COME HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS BASED ON ONE PERSON ON THE COMMISSION AND NOT WITHOUT CONSENSUS FROM THE COMMISSION OR APPROVAL FROM THE CITY MANAGER TO EXPEND CITY FUNDS [OVERLAPPING]
>> THEY'RE NOT PAID TO BE HERE TONIGHT.
>> TO HAVE THEM COME HERE THIS EVENING TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ON AN ITEM THAT THEY HAVE THE BACKUP TO MAKE US AWARE OF THE SAME.
CITY MANAGERS, CITY ATTORNEY, THE RESPONSIBILITY OF CITIES PROCEDURES ON THIS MATTER.
>> AS IT RELATES VERY SPECIFICALLY TO THE EXISTING ENGAGEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE OUTSIDE AUDITOR, THAT RELATIONSHIP IS GOVERNED BY OUR CONTRACT AND I DON'T HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF ME, BUT I PRESUME LIKE ALL OF OUR CONTRACTS, THERE'S A CONTACT PERSON BETWEEN THE CONSULTANT AND THE OUTSIDE AUDITORS AND STAFF AND GENERALLY, THESE TYPES OF ISSUES WOULD BE CLEARER OR COMMUNICATED AT THAT LEVEL AS PROVIDED FOR IN THE CONTRACT.
>> CITY ATTORNEY MAY I PROCEED?
>> AGAIN, CERTAINLY YOU CAN PROCEED.
>> I'LL TAKE IT AS A YES. THANK YOU.
>> CITY MANAGER, YOUR LIGHT IS LIT.
>> WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO ADD IS NOT KNOWING THE NATURE OF WHERE THIS CONVERSATION IS GOING, STAFF IS UNPREPARED SO WE HAVEN'T HAD DIRECT CONVERSATION [OVERLAPPING]
>> STAFF IS PREPARED TO ANSWERING QUESTIONS.
>> VICE MAYOR, WILL YOU LET CITY MANAGER FINISH SPEAKING, PLEASE?
>> ALL I'M SAYING IS WHAT WE WANTED TO HERE TONIGHT IS THE CONVERSATION THAT'S HAD AT THE DAIS AND THEN STAFF CAN PROCEED FROM THERE WITH CONSENSUS DIRECTION FROM ALL OF YOU.
WITHOUT HAVING THAT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE NEED TO ANSWER TONIGHT.
>> THE SAME THING BEING THE VENDORS WHO ARE OUTSIDE VENDORS FOR OUR CITY ARE NOT CITY STAFF AND THEY TOO ARE NOT NECESSARILY PREPARED TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS TONIGHT.
WE SHOULD JUST BE HAVING THE DISCUSSION TO DETERMINE IF WE SHOULD BE MOVING FORWARD BUT THEIR ABILITY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS IS PUTTING THEM ON THE SPOT OR WE'RE ALLOWING THEM TO BE ASKED QUESTIONS.
IS THE CITY READY TO PAY THE BILL?
>> ARSEMA, ARE YOU BEING CHARGED TO BE HERE TONIGHT? [OVERLAPPING]
>> NOW YOU'RE GOING TO PUT OUR VENDOR ON THE SPOT WHETHER OR NOT HE EXPECTS TO BE PAID? CITY ATTORNEY.
>> WELL, AGAIN, THE VICE MAYOR HAS THE ABILITY AND THE RIGHT UNDER THE RULES OF PROCEDURE TO DISCUSS HIS ITEMS. IF PART OF THAT DISCUSSION IS NOW BRINGING IN EITHER STAFF OR
[02:55:05]
AN OUTSIDE CONSULTANT TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AND FOR LACK OF BETTER DESCRIPTION, FLESH OUT IS DISCUSSION ITEM ALLOWING THAT TO TAKE PLACE IN THE ABSENCE OF I GUESS, WHAT I THINK IS BEING CALLED PRIOR NOTICE, THAT IS A COMMISSION DECISION.DO YOU WANT TO ALLOW THAT? OTHERWISE, NO.
THEN ALL THAT THE VICE MAYOR HAS THE ABILITY TO DO IS DISCUSS HIS ITEM.
>> YES, IT IS AND I'M PREPARED TO DISCUSS MY ITEM.
>> BUT UNLESS YOU ALL ALLOW PART OF THE DISCUSSION TO BE A QUESTION-AND-ANSWER, THEN IT'S JUST A DISCUSSION ITEM.
>> MY POINT OF ORDER WAS NOT CLEAR, MAYOR, BY THE WAY.
>> COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS, PLEASE RESTATE YOUR POINT OF CLARIFICATION.
>> CITY ATTORNEY, CONSIDERING THAT THERE IS NO BACKUP PROVIDED OR CITY MANAGER, ARE YOU TELLING US THAT WE DON'T NEED TO FURTHER PUT ANY BACKUP AND JUST PUT AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA WITHOUT GIVING EVERYBODY AN OPPORTUNITY [OVERLAPPING]
>> LET ME BE CLEAR. IF ANY MEMBER OF THIS COMMISSION PLACES IN THE ITEM ON THE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION AND ANTICIPATES OR BELIEVES THAT THEY ARE GOING TO USE BACKUP MATERIAL AS THE MANAGER HAS INDICATED, THERE'S THE FORM AND IT GETS CHECKED AND STAFF WOULD THEN FOLLOW UP WITH THE PARTICULAR COUNTY COMMISSIONER SAYING, PLEASE, PROVIDE US YOUR BACKUP, WE'RE GETTING READY TO PUBLISH.
>> SO I DON'T HAVE TO CHECK ANY BOXES?
>> BUT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT, THE SECOND ISSUE THAT I THINK IS BEING DISCUSSED HERE AGAIN, SO I'M VERY CLEAR, IS IN THE ABSENCE OF THAT BOX BEING CHECKED OFF, AND BACKUP MATERIALS BEING PROVIDED, AT THIS POINT IN TIME A PROCEDURAL QUESTION FOR THE COMMISSION TO DECIDE IS WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANT TO ALLOW THE VICE MAYOR, TO ASK QUESTIONS OF A VENDOR OR STAFF IN THE ABSENCE OF THAT BACKUP OR THAT ANTICIPATION.
>> MAYOR, CAN WE GET CONSENSUS WHETHER THERE'S GOING TO BE A Q&A OR JUST A PRESENTATION BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT'S A Q&A?
>> IT'S NOT A Q&A. I HAVE A PRESENTATION.
>> I'M NOT SPEAKING TO YOU VICE MAYOR.
>> AT THIS TIME, I THINK I'M GOING TO ASK FOR A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO YOUR CLARIFICATION.
IT SHOULD BE VICE MAYOR GELIN'S COMMENTARY FOR OUR DISCUSSION AND THE Q&A SHOULD NOT BE EXPECTED OUT OF OUR VENDORS WHO ARE NOT HERE BY THE CONSENSUS OF THE COMMISSION UNDER CONTRACTS [OVERLAPPING]
>> ANYBODY CAN BE HERE, IT'S A PUBLIC MEETING.
WE'RE ELECTED TO BE PROPER [OVERLAPPING]
>> POINT OF ORDER, CITY ATTORNEY.
>> I'M GOING FINISH MY SENTENCE, VICE MAYOR AND THE PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE HERE IS A FACT OF THE LACK OF FOLLOWING PROCEDURES.
SO COMMISSION, THE QUESTION ON THE FLOOR IS WHETHER OR NOT THIS ITEM GOES FORWARD AS WITHOUT ANY BACKUP.
COMMISSIONER GELIN WANTS TO READ HIS ITEMS IN AND DO HIS PRESENTATION THAT WAY, ONE AND THEN DO WE ALLOW THE VENDORS TO BE A PART OF THIS IN SUBJECT TO THIS PROCESS, TWO? BECAUSE VICE MAYOR GELIN IS SAYING THAT HIS APPLICATION FOR THIS ITEM IS COMPLETE, THAT HE DOESN'T NEED ANY OTHER ITEM AND WE WILL GIVE IT THAT.
>> YES. VICE MAYOR, YOU WERE ASKING ME ALSO.
AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES OR WHY ARE OUTSIDE AUDITORS HERE. I DON'T.
>> BECAUSE IF YOU CAN READ THE AGENDA ITEM, IT SAYS DISCUSSION AND MOTION DIRECTION TO EXTEND THE CONTRACT WITH RSM TO CONDUCT A FORENSIC AUDIT.
SO IF THEIR NAME IS HERE AND THEY CHOOSE TO BE HERE, THEY CAN BE HERE.
>> WELL, I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY CHOSE TO BE HERE OR THAT THEY'RE HERE.
NORMALLY, WHAT THEY WOULD DO IS YOU ALL WOULD HAVE A DISCUSSION IF THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT [OVERLAPPING].
>> THIS IS A PUBLIC MEETING, CORRECT? SO THEY CAN BE HERE IF THEY WANT TO BE HERE, RIGHT?
>> BUT THEY ARE NOT FORCED TO COME UP HERE AND PROVIDE COMMENTS.
>> BUT IF I ASKED THEM TO COME HERE AND THEY WANT TO COME, THEN THEY ARE HERE AND ANYBODY ON THIS DESK CAN ASK THEM ANY QUESTION. IS THAT RIGHT?
>> UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES, EVERY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT TO SPEAK DURING PUBLIC COMMENT OR A PARTICULAR AGENDA ITEM.
[03:00:02]
WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES, IF WE HAVE AN EXISTING CONTRACT WITH ANY VENDOR AND THE COMMISSION DIRECTION AFTER A COMMISSION DISCUSSION IS TO STAFF TO MODIFY THAT CONTRACT, TO EXPAND THE SCOPE OF SERVICES, EXTEND THE SCOPE OF SERVICES, OR IN ANY OTHER WAY, FORM OR FASHION, MODIFY THAT SCOPE OF SERVICES SO THE CONSULTANT PROVIDES ADDITIONAL SERVICES NOT ANTICIPATED IN THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT.YOU DO IT THROUGH AN AMENDMENT PROCESS.
YOU DIRECT US, WE WOULD THEN PROCESS AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT AND PUT IT BEFORE YOU AS AN AGENDA ITEM FOR THE INCREASE IN THE SCOPE OF SERVICES.
>> THANK YOU. YOU JUST SENT ME A TEXT EARLIER THAT SAID GENERALLY ITEMS PLACED ON THE AGENDA BY ALL COMMISSIONERS ARE TREATED AS DISCUSSION ITEM OR CONSENSUS.
IF FORMAL ACTION IS REQUIRED, THE ITEM WILL BE PLACED ON THE NEXT AGENDA FOR APPROVAL.
>> OKAY. SO IF THERE'S A FORMAL ACTION TO BE TAKEN, IT WILL BE ON THE NEXT AGENDA.
BUT THEY'RE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF THE COMMISSION HAS ANY QUESTIONS.
>> I'M NOT FINISHED MY THOUGHT IS THEN AT THAT POINT IN TIME, ONCE THE CONSENSUS HAS BEEN REACHED AND THE SCOPE OF SERVICES HAS BEEN DRAFTED, WE WOULD THEN INVITE THE CONSULTANT TO COME TO THAT MEETING AND BE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE EXPANDED SCOPE OF SERVICES.
>> AND THEY CHOSE TO COME TO THIS MEETING TO BE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
WITH A PUBLIC MEETING, THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO ME HERE. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THEY DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE HERE?
>> WHAT YOU ASKED ME IS IF THEY'RE HERE ON THEIR OWN VOLITION.
I DON'T KNOW IF THEY ARE OR NOT. I DID NOT ASK THEM THAT.
>> I'M READY TO CONTINUE WITH MY DISCUSSION.
>> I'M TIRED OF BEING SILENCED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS WHENEVER I BRING UP THE CITY MANAGER, MICHAEL CERNECH.
>> VICE MAYOR GELIN, YOU ARE STATING A FACT OF WHETHER OR NOT RSM WAS HERE VOLUNTARILY BECAUSE THEY SAW THEMSELVES ON AN AGENDA OR IF THEY WERE ASKED TO BE HERE.
I DON'T WANT TO PUT THEM ON THE SPOT BECAUSE I KNOW THE ANSWER.
SO I WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST RSM TO MAKE A DECISION ON WHETHER OR NOT IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO SIT DOWN EVEN THOUGH YOU'RE HERE, AND LET THE CONVERSATION CONTINUE, SO YOU'RE NOT PUT ON THE SPOT TO HAVE TO ANSWER SOMETHING THAT YOU MAY NOT WANT TO ANSWER.
SO, COMMISSIONER GELIN, YOU MAY PROCEED WITH YOUR PRESENTATION ON THE MATTER.
>> I DON'T HAVE A PRESENTATION, I'VE A DISCUSSION AND I HAVE SOME AIDS TO AID ME IN MY DISCUSSION. OKAY?
>> WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT, PLEASE START YOUR COMMENTARY.
>> THANK YOU. PLEASE STOP INTERRUPTING ME.
AS WE ALL KNOW, FORMER CITY MANAGER, MICHAEL CERNECH WAS ARRESTED FOR HIS ROLE IN PARTICIPATING IN A 3 MILLION DOLLAR EXTORTION SCHEME.
SO WHAT NECESSITATES A FORENSIC AUDIT? EXTORTION, THE WRONGFUL USE OF ACTUAL OR THREATENED FORCE, VIOLENCE OR INTIMIDATION TO GAIN MONEY OR PROPERTY FROM AN INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY.
WHAT DID ASHLEY MOODY, THE FLORIDA GENERAL ATTORNEY STATE? FORMER TAMARAC CITY MANAGER, MICHAEL CERNECH WAS CHARGED WITH CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT RACKETEERING FOR HIS ROLE IN ATTEMPTING TO EXTORT $3.4 MILLION.
THAT NECESSITATES CONDUCTING A FORENSIC AUDIT.
I'VE SAID TIME AND TIME AGAIN THAT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT ANY OF THE EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH THE COLONY WEST CLUBHOUSE WAS AN ACCURATE EXPENSE.
TIME AND TIME AGAIN, I SAID THAT I'M GOING TO CALL FOR FORENSIC AUDIT, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE AT THE LAST MEETING WHERE THE AUDIT WAS DISCUSSED, ANOTHER COMMISSIONER SAID, OH, WE GOT A CLEAN AUDIT.
EVERYTHING IS PLAYING. WE DON'T NEED A FORENSIC AUDIT.
BUT THERE'S A VERY DISTINCT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A FORENSIC AUDIT WHERE YOU'RE LOOKING FOR ILLEGAL ACTIVITY AND A REGULAR AUDIT WHERE YOU'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT GENERAL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS THAT SAYS, YEAH, OUR DOCUMENTS ARE HEALTHY.
DUE TO THE FACT THAT WE HAVE FORMER CITY MANAGER WHO WAS ARRESTED AND IS CURRENTLY CHARGED, TO ME THAT CALLS FOR A FORENSIC AUDIT.
AN EXAMPLE OF WHY A FORENSIC AUDIT IS NEEDED AND THIS IS WHY I WANT ONE, ESPECIALLY AS IT RELATES TO THE COLONY WEST CLUBHOUSE, IS AN EXAMPLE THAT WAS GIVEN.
IN THIS PARTICULAR EXAMPLE, THEY'RE SAYING A FICTIONAL COMPUTER COMPANY, THEIR CFO ENTERED INTO A CONTRACT WITH A COMPANY CALLED SMART CHIPS TO SUPPLY PROCESSORS.
WHEN THE CONTRACT WAS SIGNED, SMART CHIPS WAS NOT AUTHORIZED TO CONDUCT BUSINESS BECAUSE IT'S LICENSE HAD BEEN INDEFINITELY REVOKED BASED ON CERTAIN IRREGULARITIES.
[03:05:04]
THE CFO NEW SMART CHIPS' LICENSE WAS SUSPENDED YET STILL SUGGESTED THAT THEIR COMPANY SIGN WITH SMART CHIPS AS THEY WERE SECRETLY RECEIVING COMPENSATION FROM SMART CHIPS FROM DOING SO.IN MY OPINION, I BELIEVE THAT THIS UNSOLICITED PROPOSAL TO DO THE WORK FOR THE COLONY WEST CLUBHOUSE, I BELIEVE THE CITY MANAGER WAS GETTING PAID ON THE BACK END FROM THAT DEAL, AND SO I BELIEVE A FORENSIC AUDIT SHOULD BE CONDUCTED.
WHENEVER SOMEONE HAS BEING ACCUSED FOR A FINANCIAL CRIME AND WHEN DOCUMENTS SHOW FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, WHICH ALL OF YOU GOT.
YOU WANT BACKUP, YOU ALREADY GOT BACK.
YOU GOT IT FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY WHEN THAT CITY MANAGER WAS ARRESTED.
IN THAT DOCUMENT, IT STATED THAT THE CITY MANAGER LIED TO THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT AND TO YOU, PARTICULARLY MAYOR GOMEZ.
>> CITY ATTORNEY WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO?
>> I WILL RETRACT THAT STATEMENT. FINANCE DIRECTOR, CAN YOU SAY WITH 100 PERCENT CERTAINTY THAT IN YOUR DISCUSSIONS WITH THE FORMER CITY MANAGER MICHAEL CERNECH, CAN YOU SAY WITH 100 PERCENT CERTAINTY THAT HE NEVER LIED TO YOU?
>> CITY MANAGER OR CITY ATTORNEY, WOULD YOU LIKE TO JUMP IN NOW?
>> I THINK THAT THE DISCUSSION THAT'S TAKING PLACE TODAY IS, AGAIN, THE REQUEST BY THE VICE MAYOR FOR THIS COMMISSION TO CONSIDER DIRECTING STAFF TO EXPAND THE SCOPE OF ITS EXISTING CONTRACT WITH RMS TO INCLUDE A FORENSIC AUDIT OF ALL THE MATTERS THAT THE PRIOR CITY MANAGER WAS INVOLVED IN, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE COLONY WEST PROJECT.
I THINK THAT IF THAT'S THE REQUEST, WITHOUT GETTING INTO QUESTIONS OR ACCUSATIONS BEYOND, THERE'S A FACTUAL BASIS TO ASSERT THE MATTERS.
I DON'T WANT TO MEAN TO SPEAK FOR THE REST OF THE COMMISSION, BUT THAT'S IT.
I THINK WE NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT GOING BEYOND THAT AND STARTING TO ASK EMPLOYEES OR OUTSIDE VENDORS, CAN YOU VERIFY THAT SOMEONE HASN'T LIED TO YOU WHEN THERE'S WHAT I WOULD CALL OR ATTORNEYS WOULD CALL THE NECESSARY PREDICATE HASN'T BEEN LAID? I UNDERSTAND, YES, THAT IT'S A FACT THAT THE PRIOR MANAGER WAS ARRESTED.
IT'S A FACT THAT THE CHARGES THAT HE'S BEEN ACCUSED OF ARE SET FORTH IN HIS ARREST AFFIDAVIT.
THAT'S THE FACTS THAT WE KNOW. THAT'S IT.
>> IT'S THE FACT THAT HE RELATED FALSE INFORMATION TO THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF CITY GOVERNMENT TO FURTHER THIS MULTI-MILLION. [OVERLAPPING]
>> CAN WE REMEMBER THE WORD ALLEGED BEFORE WE HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH ACIDS, PLEASE.
>> WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, VICE MAYOR, THAT'S THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE VIEW OF WHAT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE HAPPENED.
WHAT IS A MATTER OF RECORD, AND IS A FACTUAL DOCUMENT WHICH WE SHOULD LIMIT OURSELVES TO DISCUSSING AND NOT GOING BEYOND THAT IS THE ARREST AFFIDAVIT.
WHAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OR FOR THAT MATTER, ANYONE ELSE THINKS OR SAYS IS THEIR VIEW OF THE MATTER.
FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, IT'S THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S EDITORIALIZING OF THE ARREST OF THE PRIOR MANAGER.
I WOULD STRONGLY SUGGEST THAT AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS DISCUSSION TONIGHT OR ANYTIME IN THE FUTURE, IS THAT THOSE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE PRIOR CITY MANAGER BE LIMITED ONLY TO WHAT IS A MATTER OF FACT, NOT EDITORIALIZING SPECULATION.
I DON'T KNOW THAT MR. CERNECH LIED TO THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT.
THAT IS WHAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS SAID, AND IT IS HER BURDEN AT SOME POINT AND THAT OF HER STAFF TO ACTUALLY PROVE THAT IN A COURT OF LAW.
BUT UNTIL THAT'S DONE, IT IS JUST THAT.
IT'S NOT A FACT AS OPPOSED TO THE ARREST AFFIDAVIT, WHICH IS A DOCUMENT THAT'S ALREADY BEEN ENTERED INTO THE COURT SYSTEM, IS A FACTUAL DOCUMENT.
I WOULD RECOMMEND AND STRONGLY SUGGEST TO ALL OF US HERE TONIGHT THAT ON THIS DAY AND STAFF, THAT WE LIMIT OUR DISCUSSION TO THOSE FACTUAL ISSUES.
>> TO THE CHAIR OF CITY ATTORNEY,
[03:10:01]
IS THE CITY COMMISSION HAS A FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CITY OF TAMARAC AND ITS FINANCES?>> OKAY. SO IT IS OUR FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY TO ENSURE THAT OUR TAX DOLLARS HAVE NOT BEEN MISAPPROPRIATED.
IT'S A FACT OF THE MATTER THAT THE FORMER CITY MANAGER WAS ARRESTED FOR PARTICIPATING IN A $3.4 MILLION EXTORTION SCHEME.
WE DON'T KNOW WHAT OTHER CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES HE WAS INVOLVED IN THE PAST, AND TO GET TO THAT, IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THIS CITY TO CONDUCT A FORENSIC AUDIT TO DETERMINE IF ANY ILLEGAL ACTIVITY HAS OCCURRED.
RSM, IF YOU WANT TO EXPLAIN WHAT THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN A FORENSIC AUDIT AND A FINANCIAL AUDIT, WHAT IS A FORENSIC AUDIT? ARE YOU OPEN TO ANSWERING ANY QUESTIONS FROM OTHER COMMISSIONERS?
>> POINT OF ORDER. THESE ARE ITEMS THAT COULD HAVE BEEN DEFINED AND SENT TO US IN A PIECE OF PAPER LIKE YOU HAVE ALL OF THAT.
WE'RE NOW SAYING IT'S OKAY FOR ANY SINGLE ONE OF US ON THIS COMMISSION TO HIRE A VENDOR AND TELL THEM TO SHOW UP SO WE CAN ASK SOME QUESTIONS AT A COMMISSION MEETING.
I WANT TO KNOW IF WE'RE SETTING A NEW PRECEDENT.
>> THEY WERE NOT HIRED TO SHOW UP TO THAT.
>> POINT OF ORDER CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE ANSWER ME ON THAT FOR OUR PROCESSES.
>> I'VE SAID IT BEFORE, I'LL SAY IT AGAIN.
THE EXISTING RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THIS CITY AND RMS IS GOVERNED BY THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE PARTIES.
IF YOU ALL WANT TO EXPAND THE SCOPE OF THAT CONTRACT TO INCLUDE A FORENSIC AUDIT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE CALLING OF WEST ACCOUNTS IN THAT PROJECT, THAT IS YOUR PREROGATIVE.
THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THIS DISCUSSION.
BUT I THINK THE ABSENT OF THAT DIRECTION, AND THAT PROPOSAL BEING PUT BEFORE RMS AND AT A PUBLIC MEETING WHERE THOSE DOCUMENTS ARE AVAILABLE, IT WOULD BE PREMATURE TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION IN THAT DISCUSSION WITH RMS. I THINK THAT I CAN SPEAK FOR MYSELF.
BUT I THINK THAT THERE'S BEEN, OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MEETINGS, A LOT OF DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A FINANCIAL AUDIT VERSUS A FORENSIC AUDIT UNLESS ANOTHER COMMISSIONER DOESN'T KNOW THAT DIFFERENCE.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT ASKING RMS AND PUTTING THEM ON THE SPOT IS TO THAT ANSWER.
>> IT'S NOT PUTTING THEM ON THE SPOT.
I RECEIVED A TEXT MESSAGE FROM THE AUDITOR TODAY SAYING BRIGHTON AND I WILL BE AT THE MEETING TONIGHT TO PROVIDE CLARIFICATION ON WHAT A FORENSIC AUDIT ENTAILS, AND GENERALLY, THE PURPOSE FOR SUCH AN AUDIT.
THEY WORK WITH LARGE CORPORATIONS AND LARGE GOVERNMENT ENTITIES.
EVEN IF THEY WERE PUT ON THE SPOT, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO HANDLE IT.
TO HEAR AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ANYONE ON THIS COMMISSION HAS ABOUT THE PURPOSE AND REASON FOR CONDUCTING A FORENSIC AUDIT.
>> I'M GOING TO MAKE ONE MORE POINT OF ORDER CLARIFICATION.
GENTLEMEN, IF YOU ARE HERE, IN MY OPINION, YOU SHOULD BE HERE ON YOUR OWN VOLITION, AND THAT THE CITY OF TAMARAC WILL NOT BE PAYING YOU FOR YOUR SERVICES THIS EVENING SINCE YOU ARE NOT HIRED THROUGH THE PROPER PROCESS TO BE HERE THIS EVENING.
THANK YOU. I DON'T KNOW IF REST OF MY COMMISSION FEELS THIS WAY, BUT I'M GOING TO SHARE WITH YOU, I FEEL THIS WAY.
IF YOU WISH TO ANSWER THE VICE MAYOR'S QUESTION, PLEASE DO SO.
>> JUST TO CLARIFY, OUR ROLE IN THIS PROCESS IS TO BE INDEPENDENT IN THE PROCESS.
WE'LL JUST ANSWER THE QUESTIONS BASED ON OUR PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE.
AS DISCUSSED, THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDIT WHICH WHAT WE PROVIDED PREVIOUSLY WAS JUST AN AUDIT OF THE FINANCIAL IMBALANCES AND CONCLUDING WHETHER OR NOT THOSE BALANCES ARE REASONABLY STATED.
A FORENSIC AUDIT, ON THE OTHER HAND, IS SPECIFIC IN NATURE.
IT FOCUSES ON SPECIFIC RECORDS AND INFORMATION WITH THE OBJECTIVE OF IDENTIFYING IF FRAUD DID OR DID NOT OCCUR.
WHEN YOU DO A FORENSIC AUDIT, YOU'RE FOCUSING ON IDENTIFYING WHETHER THE FRAUD OCCURRED OR NOT, QUANTIFYING THE AMOUNTS OF LOSS, DETERMINING WHO WAS INVOLVED, AND THEN ULTIMATELY WHETHER GIVING A REPORT AND WRITING ARE VERBAL, AND ULTIMATELY GATHERING EVIDENCE IN THE EVENT THAT YOU HAVE TO GO TO COURT FOR WHATEVER PURPOSE.
WE DID NOT CONDUCT A FORENSIC AUDIT WHEN WE DID THE PREVIOUS AUDIT OF THE CDO OR ANNUALLY, WHAT WE DO IS A FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDIT.
>> THANK YOU. CHRISTINE, SINCE YOU'VE BEEN HERE, HAS THE CITY EVER CONDUCTED A FORENSIC AUDIT ON ANYTHING?
[03:15:01]
>> OKAY. ISN'T IT TRUE THAT IF SOMEONE EVEN PADS THEIR EXPENSE REPORT, THAT WILL BE A VIOLATION?
>> THAT WOULD BE AN EXAMPLE OF FRAUD IF THEY PAD AN EXPENSE REPORT TO GET ADDITIONAL MONEY BACK?
>> CORRECT. BUT I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT IN THE CASE OF THE CITY MANAGER, AS WE DO WITH ANY HIGH-LEVEL CITY MANAGER THAT LEAVES THE POSITION, WE DID CONDUCT AN AGREED-UPON PROCEDURE AUDIT OF ALL THOSE TRANSACTIONS INVOLVING MACROS DRAINAGE.
>> BUT THAT WAS NOT A FORENSIC AUDIT?
>> IT WAS MORE IN THE NATURE OF A FORENSIC AUDIT BECAUSE THEY WERE LOOKING AT THOSE TRANSACTIONS TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT THERE WASN'T A FRAUD EXISTENT IN THOSE TRANSACTIONS.
IT WAS NOT A FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDIT.
>> IT WAS NOT A FORENSIC AUDIT.
WAS THERE A CERTIFIED FORENSIC EXAMINER TO EXAMINE THOSE?
>> OKAY, THANK YOU. THE QUESTION BEFORE THIS COMMISSION IS WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANT TO PURSUE A FORENSIC AUDIT TO DETERMINE IF THERE WAS FRAUD INVOLVED WITH THE CITY MANAGER.
AND IN MY VIEW, SPECIFICALLY, AS IT RELATES TO COLONY WEST HOTEL WHERE THIS COMMISSION AND AGAINST MY WISHES, I VOTED NO ON AN $11.7 MILLION APPROVAL ON A NO-BID CONTRACT.
>> THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR. COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS.
>> VICE MAYOR, YOU KEEP MENTIONING NO-BID CONTRACT, BUT YOU HAVE BEEN IN ONE OF THOSE SITUATIONS AS WELL, SO I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU KEEP BRINGING THAT UP.
>> IT'S NOT FOR YOU TO READ REBUT, VICE MAYOR.
>> BECAUSE IT'S $11.7 MILLION IN TAXPAYER DOLLAR. [OVERLAPPING].
>> HE ASKED ME A QUESTION. I HAVE A RIGHT TO ANSWER THE QUESTION.
>> HOLD ON. VICE MAYOR, YOU ARE CORRECT AND HE DID ASK YOU A QUESTION BUT IT'S AN INAPPROPRIATE QUESTION.
>> IT'S AN APPROPRIATE. HE IS IN THE SAME POSITION AS THE ONE HE'S TRYING TO ACCUSE.
>> THE ISSUE IS AGAIN, I DON'T MEAN TO [OVERLAPPING]
>> YOU CAN'T THROW A STONE AND YOU DON'T EXPECT ONE TO BE THROWN EITHER.
>> THE QUESTION IS DOES THIS COMMISSION BASED UPON WHAT [OVERLAPPING].
>> YOU ASKED ME A QUESTION, I ANSWERED THE QUESTION.
>> VICE MAYOR THE ATTORNEY IS SPEAKING.
THANK YOU, MAYOR. LET ME FINISH.
PLEASE PROVIDE ME THE COURTESY OF THAT.
>> I'LL DO THAT. BUT I DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING WHEN HE INTERRUPTED YOU, YOU DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING [OVERLAPPING].
BUT WHEN I INTERRUPTED THEN YOU'VE GOT SOMETHING TO SAY.
>> WE ARE IN RECESS, WE WILL BE BACK IN 15 MINUTES.
WE HAVE THREE, WE ARE PROCEEDING.
I'M GOING TO REMIND EVERYBODY THAT WE ARE STILL ON 10B, NO SORRY, THERE'S 10D, NO IT'S 10C.
GOODNESS GRACIOUS, THERE'S 10C.
WE STILL HAVE 13 ITEMS ON THE AGENDA, FOUR OF WHICH ARE MANDATORY THAT WE REVIEW BECAUSE OF BUDGET, ONE OF THEM IS MANDATORY WE REVIEW BECAUSE IT'S QUASI JUDICIAL AND THEY ARE ENTITLED TO BE HEARD TODAY.
THEN A COUPLE OF OTHER ITEMS THAT ARE JUST AS IMPORTANT.
IF WE CAN PLEASE PROCEED WITH THIS MATTER THAT IS NOT ACTUALLY ONE THAT IS TIME OF SENSITIVE, BUT ANYWAY, COMMISSIONER, VICE MAYOR GO ON. ARE YOU READY TO PROCEED?
>> IF I MAY, DURING THE BREAK, THE OUTSIDE AUDITORS APPROACHED MYSELF AND THE MANAGER AND CONVEYED SOME INFORMATION TO US AND I THINK IS EXTREMELY GERMANE AND MAY ASSIST YOU IN DISPOSING OF THIS ITEM RELATIVELY QUICKLY.
I WILL CERTAINLY ALLOW THEM TO COME AND SPEAK IF YOU SO WANT, BUT THEY'VE INFORMED THE MANAGER AND MYSELF THAT RMS DOES NOT HAVE THE CAPABILITY, THE PEOPLE TO PERFORM A FORENSIC AUDIT THAT YOU MIGHT BE LOOKING FOR.
TO THE EXTENT THAT THE DISCUSSION ITEM WOULD BE DIRECTED ULTIMATELY AT ASKING RMS TO ACTUALLY DO THE WORK? I THINK THEIR POSITION IS AND I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR THEM, THAT THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO IT.
THAT IF THEIR SCOPE OF SERVICES WERE TO BE EXPANDED, THEY WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE TO HIRE A SUB-CONSULTANT TO ACTUALLY DO THE FORENSIC AUDIT AND CERTAINLY ALLOW THEM TO.
WITH THAT SAID, TO CUT THE CHASE, IF THERE IS A CONSENSUS TO PURSUE A FORENSIC AUDIT, WHAT I THINK THE DIRECTION OR IF THERE IS A CONSENSUS IS FOR STAFF TO PREPARE AN ISSUE, AN RFQ OR AN RFP FOR A FORENSIC AUDIT GEARED TO SELECT A FORENSIC AUDITING FIRM THAT SPECIALIZES IN THIS AREA.
[03:20:03]
WE THEN NOT ONLY WOULD KNOW THE SCOPE OF SERVICES THAT WE COULD WRITE INTO THAT RFP, RFQ.BUT JUST AS IMPORTANTLY, BEFORE MOVING FORWARD ON SUCH AN FORENSIC AUDIT, YOU ALL WOULD KNOW WHAT THE COST WOULD BE.
I'LL STOP AT THAT POINT AND ALLOW RMS TO [OVERLAPPING].
>> AT THIS TIME, COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS.
>> I DON'T AGREE THAT WE SHOULD DO THIS CONSIDERING NOW ESPECIALLY MORE UPDATED INFORMATION WILL COST US MORE.
AS IT WAS STATED, IT'S OUR FIDUCIARY DUTY TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR FINANCES ARE IN ORDER.
BUT THE FACT THAT WE HAVE CERTAIN MEMBERS OF THIS COMMISSION WITH SUCH DISTASTE TOWARDS THE PREVIOUS CITY MANAGER AND TO PURSUE OF SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY THE COURT IS ALREADY HANDLING.
THERE IS NO NEED FOR US TO BE TAKING MORE ACTION FURTHER THAN WHAT THE COURT IS ALREADY GOING TO DO.
THE COURT IS ALREADY GOING TO PROSECUTE ACCORDINGLY.
FOR US TO CONTINUOUSLY BE TALKING ABOUT THIS, TWO MEETINGS AGO.
MY AGENDA ITEM, WELL ACTUALLY COMMISSIONER BOLTON'S AGENDA ITEM, WHEN IT COMES TO 180 DAYS WHICH HAS NO TEETH, AS I WAS TOLD.
TO CENSOR THAT PART BECAUSE IT WAS COMING UP CONTINUOUSLY, THIS DISCUSSION OF SIGNAGE CONTINUOUSLY COMES UP.
VICE MAYOR BRINGS IT UP EVERY OTHER MEETING.
IT MAKES NO SENSE HOW WE CAN CONTINUOUSLY HATE SOMEONE SO MUCH THAT WE NOT ONLY HAVE WE SEEN THEM BURN, BUT WE ACTUALLY WANT TO SEE THEM INTO ASHES.
>> YOU TALKED ABOUT NOT NAMING OTHER COMMISSIONERS AND SPEAKING DISPARAGINGLY.
>> I'M NOT DISPARAGING ANYTHING.
>> GENTLEMEN. COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS IS MAKING A GENERAL CONVERSATION COMMENTS, WHICH I BELIEVE SOME OF THE OTHER PEOPLE HAVE AS WELL.
>> NO, HE SAID I HATE THE CITY MANAGER.
I HATE THAT HE COMMITTED A CRIME AGAINST TAMARAC TAXPAYERS [OVERLAPPING].
>> ALLEGED CRIME, VICE MAYOR, ALLEGED.
>> BUT MAKE SURE THAT HE TALKED IN THE CONTEXT OF THIS DISCUSSION IN GENERAL TERMS ABOUT THE COMMISSION AS OPPOSED TO INDIVIDUAL COMMISSIONERS AND PARTICULARLY SHY AWAY FROM INDIVIDUAL NAMES.
>> WE CONTINUOUSLY SPEAK OF THE SAME SUBJECT MATTER EVERY OTHER MEETING IS THE SAME SIGNAGE.
I GUESS TO THE POINT THAT WE'RE NOW DISCUSSING THE SAME THING EVERY SINGLE TIME AND IT GETS OLD.
I DON'T THINK ANY FURTHERANCE OF THIS ITEM IS NEEDED. THANK YOU, MAYOR.
>> THANK YOU. MISS GUN, YOU HAD YOUR LIGHT LIT.
DID YOU WISH TO SAY SOMETHING, PLEASE.
>> ONLY THAT IN MY CONVERSATIONS WITH RMR, NOW I'M CONFUSED, RMS AT THE BREAK.
>> THEY CAME ONLY TONIGHT TO DISCUSS THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN A FORENSIC AUDIT VERSUS A FINANCIAL AUDIT.
THAT WAS WHAT THEY CAME PREPARED TO DISCUSS.
AS THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS SAID, IF YOU WOULD JUST GO TO A VOTE ON WHETHER THERE'S CONSENSUS TO DO THAT AND THEN THERE WOULD BE A SCOPE THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE DEVELOPED, ALL SORTS OF THINGS, PRICING, ALL OF THAT STUFF.
>> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER PLACKO.
>> I DIDN'T EVEN PUSH MY BUTTON. WOW.
FIRST OF ALL, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SOME IDEA OF HOW MUCH IS THIS GOING TO COST.
MORE SO THAN THAT, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT OUR PAST CITY MANAGER, THAT, ON A PERSONAL LEVEL FOR ME WAS GUT WRENCHING.
I HAVE NO ILL WILL TOWARDS HIM.
IT WAS DEVASTATING WHAT HAPPENED AND IT WAS DIFFICULT FOR ME TO MAKE THE DECISION THAT I DID.
NOW, BEING FACED WITH THIS, IF THERE WAS SOMETHING I WAS ON THE COMMISSION DURING THE BUILDING OF COLONY WEST, IF THERE WERE SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED ON ANY LEVEL THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW ABOUT IT.
I ALSO BELIEVE THAT WE WILL EITHER FIND OUT THERE WAS AN ISSUE WHETHER IT HAVE BEEN WITH OUR PAST CITY MANAGER OR ANYBODY ELSE.
MAYBE IT WILL CLEAR HIM AT THIS POINT, WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IT FOR A LONG TIME.
[03:25:01]
BEING AS I WAS INVOLVED IN THOSE DECISIONS, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF THERE IS AN ISSUE.BUT IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ME HAVING ILL WILL TOWARDS OUR FORMER CITY MANAGER AS COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS SAID HATING HIM ABSOLUTELY POSITIVELY, NOT.
I WANT TO MAKE THAT VERY CLEAR. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I CAN ECHO THE SENTIMENT OF COMMISSIONER PLACKO.
I REALLY BELIEVE THAT BECAUSE WE KEEP DISCUSSING THIS OVER AND OVER AGAIN, I THINK THAT WE SHOULD PUT IT TO REST AND TRY TO DO A FORENSIC AUDIT.
WHEN THE CITY MANAGER WAS HERE, THERE WERE MANY TIMES, ON MANY OCCASIONS, WE TALKED ABOUT HOW PASSIONATE HE WAS TOWARD MY DISTRICT.
I WOULD TELL HIM MANY TIMES, I DON'T LIKE YOU, BUT I LIKE THE FACT THAT YOU WORKED HARD FOR MY DISTRICT.
WE HAD THAT UNDERSTANDING AND WE NEVER LET OUR [NOISE] PERSONAL DIFFERENCES OR THAT STUFF GET IN THE WAY OF WORKING FROM MY DISTRICT.
HE REALLY PUT A LOT OF EFFORT FORWARD IN MAKING SURE THAT I ACCOMPLISHED A LOT IN MY DISTRICT.
IT BREAKS MY HEART TO EVEN DISCUSS THIS TONIGHT BECAUSE HE WAS SUCH AN AMAZING MANAGER.
CRAFTY, DISHONEST IN SOME WAYS, BUT VERY GOOD.
>> SIR, ABOUT DEROGATORY REMARKS, PLEASE.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE FORENSIC AUDIT DONE.
WE HAVE A DUTY TO THE RESIDENTS OF TAMARAC.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF WRONGDOING TOOK PLACE, THAT IT COMES TO LIGHT.
QUESTION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY.
>> I BELIEVE AT ONE POINT, YOU SAID THAT WE COULDN'T TALK ABOUT IT BECAUSE THERE WAS AN INVESTIGATION GOING ON OR THE STATE HAD SAID THAT WE COULDN'T TALK ABOUT IT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
>> WELL, CERTAIN NUMBER OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND PRIOR REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION THAT STAFF RECEIVED FROM THIS STATEWIDE PROSECUTOR ARE SUBJECT TO THE PROTECTIONS OF A CERTAIN EXEMPTIONS UNDER THE PUBLIC RECORDS LAW THAT THE STATEWIDE PROSECUTORS INSTRUCTED US NOT TO HAVE ANY PUBLIC DISCUSSIONS REGARDING THEIR REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION AND WE HAVEN'T.
I THINK WHAT I WANT TO EMPHASIZE, AS I'VE ALREADY SAID HERE THIS EVENING IS THAT, AS WE MOVE FORWARD IN WHATEVER DIRECTION THIS COMMISSION DIRECT STAFF TO GO, IS THAT WHEN WE HAVE THIS CONTINUING DISCUSSION NOW AND IN THE FUTURE IS THAT AS IT RELATES TO CERTAIN FACTUAL STATEMENTS, THAT THEY BE FACTUAL AND NOT RUMOR, INNUENDO, OR EDITORIALIZING.
>> WITH THAT SAID, I'D LIKE TO SEE THE FORENSIC AUDIT DONE, FOR THE BENEFIT OF OUR RESIDENTS AND THIS COMMISSION.
>> THANK YOU. I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS AND I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANSWERS TO BE PROVIDED. I'M JUST GOING TO SAY THEM.
WHAT GIVES RISE FOR US TO BELIEVE THAT THERE'S AN ISSUE HERE? THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, THAT THE MAN WAS ACCUSED OF PROVIDING MISINFORMATION, HE'S NOT ACCUSED THAT HE STOLE MONEY.
THERE'S NO ALLEGATIONS OF FINANCIAL MISMANAGEMENT.
THERE'S NO ALLEGATIONS OF ANY OF THOSE KIND OF ISSUES THAT WOULD CAUSE OUR CITY TO HAVE SUCH A CONCERN THAT WE HAVE MONEY MISSING FROM OUR CITY OR THAT PROCESS AND PROCEDURES WERE NOT DONE RIGHT.
WE HAVE BEEN OVER 30 YEARS RECEIVING THE AWARD FOR OUR ACCOUNTING.
WE HAVE BEEN FOR YEARS RECEIVING GREAT REVIEW PROCESSES BY OUR AUDITORS.
[03:30:02]
OUR AUDITORS HAVE DONE AN IN-DEPTH REVIEW EVEN FURTHER THAN WHAT NORMALLY WAS DONE, WHEN IT CAME TO THESE CONCERNS TO THE LAST AUDIT, AND WE GOT TO REPORT ONLY A FEW MONTHS AGO.NOTHING FROM THIS IN-DEPTH INTERVIEW OR REVIEW, HAS GIVEN RISE TO WHERE WE SHOULD BE SPENDING THIS TIME AND OUR TAXPAYERS MONEY TO PUT OUT AN RFP TO THEN PUT OUT A REQUEST FOR A FORENSIC AUDIT, WHICH FORGIVE ME, IF RSM CAN'T DO IT, THE AMOUNT OF THE DOLLAR SIGNS THAT OUR CITY WILL BE SPENDING ON A FORENSIC AUDIT WILL BE A LOT.
WHAT WILL BE THE PURPOSE? BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE HAVE NO PROBABLE CAUSE.
WE HAVE SOME PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT HAPPY WITH THE PROCESSES THAT HAVE BEEN PUT IN PLACE.
BUT THIS COMMISSION HAS SEEN THINGS.
WE'VE HAD ACCESS TO THE RECORDS, WE'VE REVIEWED THINGS.
THERE'S NOTHING THAT GIVES RISE TO BELIEVE THAT THERE HAS BEEN ANY CRIME COMMITTED, WHETHER IT'D BE THROUGH MR. CERNECH OR TO THE CITY OF TAMARAC, BECAUSE THAT'S ALSO THE MESSAGE WE'RE SENDING TO OUR TAXPAYERS.
THAT OUR ACCOUNTING TEAM, OUR EXECUTIVE TEAM DO NOT DO THINGS RIGHT.
I KNOW WE DON'T DO THINGS WRONG. WE DO THINGS RIGHT.
I'M GOING TO TAKE MY NEXT TWO MINUTES BECAUSE I'M GOING TO DO IT ALTOGETHER.
I BELIEVE THERE'S THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS, THERE'S NO REASON FOR US TO BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE TO DO THIS TODAY.
I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG AN RFP TAKES, BUT AT THE SAME TOKEN, MR. CERNECH IS BEING ACCUSED, HIS CRIME WILL HAVE BEEN ADJUDICATED AT SOME POINT.
IS THERE A CERTAIN TIME THAT WE CAN THEN COME BACK AND DO THIS THEN? BECAUSE IT WILL SERVE OUR PURPOSE FOR RIGHT NOW.
OTHER THAN TRYING TO FIND SOMETHING THAT FOR RIGHT NOW, THERE'S NOTHING ON THE SECOND DIVE OR THE THIRD DIVE THAT GIVES US PAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE AN ISSUE.
I THINK THAT THESE UNANSWERED QUESTIONS NEEDS TO BE ANSWERED, OTHER THAN HAVING US TO SPEND MONEY UNNECESSARILY AT THIS TIME, AND I THINK IT'S NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE TAXPAYERS BECAUSE WE HAVE NO PROBABLE CAUSE.
I'M NOT SURE OUR CITY MANAGER, IF YOU WANT TO ANSWER, GO AHEAD.
>> THE ONLY THING I WANTED TO POINT OUT, MAYOR, IS THAT, RSM CAN DO THE WORK, THESE GENTLEMEN CANNOT.
>> THAT WAS JUST MISCONSTRUED.
I WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT WITH YOU.
I KNOW YOU OPENED YOUR STATEMENT WITH THEM.
>> THAT'S FINE. I STILL PRESUME IT'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF ZEROS FOR A FORENSIC AUDIT.
I BELIEVE YOU TOLD US THAT LAST TIME.
THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS, THOSE ARE MY CONCERNS, BECAUSE I THINK WITHOUT HAVING A BASIS TO ACTUALLY DO THIS VERSUS SOME OPINION THAT THERE MIGHT BE SOMETHING OUT THERE, THEN I ALSO THINK THAT TWO IS POTENTIALLY LEADING US FOR A LAWSUIT.
CITY ATTORNEY, COULD THAT BE CORRECT?
>> I DON'T MEAN TO SOUND MAYOR.
I DON'T MEAN THIS TO SOUND FLIPPANT OR DISMISSIVE BUT ANYONE CAN FILE A LOSS.
WHETHER OR NOT SOMEONE MAY SAY THAT THIS IS IT'S ALREADY BEEN DISCUSSED.
YOU ALL HAVE THE AUTHORITY OVER WHAT YOU BELIEVE YOU SHOULD BE LOOKING INTO AND YOUR CAPACITY AS A CITY COMMISSION AND WHERE YOU SPEND THE MONEY.
IF YOU BELIEVE, MAJORITY OF YOU ALL ULTIMATELY BELIEVE THAT CONDUCTING A FORENSIC AUDIT OF THAT, THAT'S AN EXECUTIVE DECISION OF THIS COMMISSION, THAT THEY'RE AT A BARE MINIMUM, IN MY OPINION, QUALIFIED IMMUNITY, IF NOT ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY, BASED UPON THE FUNCTION THAT YOU'RE MAKING AN EXECUTIVE LEVEL DECISION ON TO HAVE SUCH AN AUDIT CONDUCTED.
LONG ANSWER. SHORT ANSWER IS ANYONE CAN SUE WHETHER THAT LAWSUIT WILL BE SUCCESSFUL.
>> YOU BELIEVE IMMUNITY IS GIVEN TO US EVEN IF IT DOESN'T HAVE A BASIS OR THE LEVEL OF THE BASIS FOR THE PROBABLE CAUSE IS MINIMAL?
>> NO. I KNOW THAT WE'RE USING THE CONCEPT OF PROBABLE CAUSE.
THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE RIGHT.
THE QUESTION IS THAT IN YOUR CAPACITY AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE CITY OF TAMARAC, IF YOU ALL BELIEVE THAT IT IS AN APPROPRIATE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS TO ENGAGE AN AUDITOR TO PERFORM A FORENSIC AUDIT,
[03:35:04]
THAT IS AN EXECUTIVE-LEVEL DECISION THAT, AS I SAID BEFORE, AT A BARE MINIMUM, I BELIEVE WOULD BE COVERED BY QUALIFIED IMMUNITY IF NOT ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY BECAUSE THAT'S THE JOB THAT YOU'VE BEEN ELECTED TO DO.IS TO MAKE THOSE TYPES OF DECISIONS AS TO HOW YOU'RE GOING TO SPEND TAXPAYERS' MONEY, INCLUDING ENGAGING AN OUTSIDE AUDITOR TO LOOK AND CONDUCT A FORENSIC AUDITOR TO LOOK AT PARTICULAR TRANSACTIONS TO SEE IF THERE WAS ANY WRONGDOING.
>> I'D LIKE TO GET AT LEAST BALLPARK IDEA OF HOW MUCH WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE, WHAT THE COSTS MIGHT BE.
I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU ALL DON'T DO THAT SO PROBABLY CAN'T ANSWER THAT.
>> AT THE BREAK, I ASKED THE SAME KIND OF QUESTION AND WAS TOLD THAT IT'LL BE DEPENDENT ON THE SCOPE OF SERVICES THAT WE PUT TOGETHER.
DEPENDING ON THE DEPTH OR THE BREADTH OF THE SCOPE WOULD DETERMINE THE COST BECAUSE IT WOULD DETERMINE HOW MUCH TIME IT WOULD TAKE.
>> WELL, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THAT BUT WE'VE OPENED UP THIS PANDORA'S BOX NOW AND IT'S HANGING OUT THERE.
I THINK THAT WE NEED TO CLEAR THIS POOR MAN RATHER THAN KEEP INSINUATING.
IT COULD BE ANY NUMBER OF THINGS THAT HAPPENED DURING THAT TIME.
I WOULD LIKE TO FIND OUT IF THERE'S ANYTHING THERE.
BUT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW HOW MUCH THIS IS GOING TO COST?
IF THE DIRECTION AT THE END OF THE DISCUSSION IS TO DIRECT STAFF TO ISSUE AN RFP OR SOLICIT PROPOSE AN EXPANSION TO THE SCOPE OF SERVICES TO OUR EXISTING AUDITOR TO INCLUDE THIS WORK, WE'LL DO THAT.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU ALL UNDERSTAND THAT UNTIL THE WHOEVER IT IS THAT WE ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH OR EXPAND THE EXISTING SCOPE OF SERVICE WITH THEM, YOU CAN ALWAYS SAY NO.
CERTAINLY PART OF THAT PROCESS I WOULD ENVISION THAT WE WOULD BRING BACK TO YOU IS OBVIOUSLY THE COST.
THAT POINT IN TIME, YOU ALL MADE COLLECTIVELY SAY THE PRICE IS TOO HIGH FOR MY TASTE COLLECTIVELY AND YOU CAN CANCEL THE RFP OR THE PROPOSED EXPANSION OF THE CONTRACT.
>> POINT OF CLARIFICATION, RFPS DO COST TOO, CORRECT?
>> THANK YOU. AT THIS POINT IN TIME, LET'S CALL THE CONSENSUS.
WE ALREADY STARTED COMMISSION [OVERLAPPING].
>> I'M OKAY WITH DOING THE RFP AND THEN DECIDING AT A LATER TIME.
>> CAN I CLARIFY A POINT OF ORDER? THE CITY MANAGER CLARIFIED THAT RSM CAN DO THE WORK SO AN RFP IS NOT NECESSARY.
WE WOULD JUST DEFINE THE SCOPE, PROVIDE THE SCOPE TO RSM, RSM WOULD GIVE US A PRICE, AND THEN WE WOULD DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT.
>> THAT IS ONE WAY THAT YOU CAN PROCEED.
AT THAT POINT AGAIN, IF YOU THINK THAT COMPETITION MAY BRING DOWN THAT PRICE, THEN YOU CAN THEN DIRECT US TO DO THE RFP.
THERE IS MULTIPLE LEVELS AT WHICH YOU ALL CAN DIRECT US AND IT STARTS HERE TONIGHT AS TO WHAT IT IS, HOW YOU WANT US TO PROCEED.
>> IF I COULD JUST ADD ONE THING.
THERE WOULD BE A QUESTION DEPENDING ON THE SCOPE OF SERVICES.
AGAIN, AS WE SAID MYSELF, AND ANILL, WE DO THE FINANCIALLING, WE DON'T DO THE FORENSICS.
WE WOULD OBVIOUSLY HAVE CITY MANAGEMENT MEET WITH THE FORENSIC FOLKS, TALK ABOUT THE SCOPE OF WORK TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE COMFORTABLE.
THE ONE OTHER THING WHICH I MENTIONED IS TEACHER, I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CURRENT FTLA INVESTIGATION WHETHER OR NOT THERE WOULD BE, I GUESS PROHIBITIONS ABOUT DOING SOMETHING LIKE THAT NOW BECAUSE WITH THAT ONGOING, I DON'T KNOW THAT ANSWER, THE LEGAL PART.
BUT THOSE WOULD BE THE THINGS. YES, OUR FIRM CAN DO THE WORK.
AGAIN, DEPENDING ON THE NATURE OF THE SCOPE OF SERVICES AND IF THERE'S NOT, WE DON'T WANT TO GET OURSELVES IN TROUBLE LEGALLY EITHER.
JUST STAYING OUT OF LEGAL TROUBLE, IF WE COULD HELP YOU, WE WOULD.
>> I WOULD AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER, OUR VICE MAYOR GONE AND COMMISSIONER PLACKO'S PROCESS.
>> THEN YOU HAVE CONSENSUS TO ASK ARE I'M GOING TO MAKE SURE I GET OUR RSM TO PROCEED WITH
[03:40:05]
COMING UP WITH A BUDGET TO BE BROUGHT BACK TO THIS COMMISSION WHEN THE TIME STARTING IN IDEAS OF WHAT WOULD BE HANDLED AND THE TIMELINE FOR BOTH.I'M GOING TO ASK A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT FOR YOU TO BIFURCATE IT.
PLEASE DON'T LUMP IT TOGETHER OR LUMP IT TOGETHER BOTH PROVIDE US WITH BOTH GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THIS COMMISSION TO MAKE DECISIONS THAT WAY.
>> WE'RE LOOKING FOR A SCOPE ENTERPRISE.
WHAT DID YOU SAY ABOUT THE BIFURCATION?
>> THERE'S TWO ITEMS THAT ARE BEING LOOKED INTO FOR A FORENSIC AUDIT.
SOME OF IT MAY OVERLAP, SOME OF IT MAY NOT.
[OVERLAPPING] ONE IS PERSONAL AND ONE IS NOT.
IF WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT LITIGATION WHICH SOME OF US ARE WORRIED ABOUT LITIGATION FOR THE CITY AND IT IS OUR JOB TO PROTECT OUR CITY.
SOME OF US BELIEVED THAT OUR QUALIFIED IMMUNITY MIGHT GO AWAY IF WE DON'T HAVE THAT PROBABLE CAUSE FOR IT, CALL IT WHAT YOU WILL.
SO IT GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF US TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THAT DECISION AT A LATER TIME AND STILL PROTECT THE CITY.
>> THROUGH THE CHAIR CITY ATTORNEY.
>> WE WILL BE AWARE OF THOSE CONCERNS, WE WILL LOOK INTO IT FOR ALL OF YOU.
AS PART OF THE PROCESS OF THIS ITEM COMING BACK, INFORM YOU OF MORE DEPTH AND IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS AND CONVERSATIONS WITH SOME OF THE PARTIES THAT HAVE BEEN MENTIONED HERE TO THIS EVENING SO WE ALL HAVE A COMFORT LEVEL MOVING FORWARD.
>> BUT YOU DIDN'T SAY QUALIFIED IMMUNITY WOULD GO AWAY.
>> MY STATEMENT BEFORE WAS THAT THE DECISION TO MOVE FORWARD AND SOLICITING OR DETERMINING ONE, THE SCOPE OF SERVICES AND TWO, THE ASSOCIATED COST FOR A FORENSIC AUDIT IS AN EXECUTIVE LEVEL DECISION WHICH YOU ARE VESTED WITH AND THAT UNDER FLORIDA LAW, THOSE DECISIONS ARE AT IN MY OPINION, AT A BARE MINIMUM COVERED BY QUALIFIED IMMUNITY IF NOT ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY.
AGAIN, WE WILL MAKE THE INQUIRY, WE'LL TALK TO PEOPLE AND WE WILL REPORT BACK TO ALL OF YOU AS APPROPRIATE UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES BEFORE YOU DECIDE TO MOVE FORWARD.
>> THEN I'M JUST GOING TO SUBMIT FOR THE RECORD, THIS ARTICLE, FORENSIC AUDIT, REPORT REVEALS FORMER CITY MANAGER, CARSON CARDVAL, SKIRTED STATE LAW AND A NUMBER OF BIDS AND PURCHASES.
>> VICE MAYOR, THIS ITEM IS DONE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> [OVERLAPPING] I'M LETTING EVERYONE KNOW I'M GOING TO SEND IT TO THE CITY CLERK.
[OVERLAPPING] TO SEND IT TO ALL COMMISSIONERS.
>> THAT'S FINE. DO WHAT YOU WISH. IS NOW 11:10.
>> YOU CONTINUE TO INTERRUPT ME.
>> THAT'S BECAUSE COMMISSIONER WE DON'T DO THIS PART AFTERWARDS.
YOU ARE JUMPING IN WHERE WE DON'T NEED TO BE AND DELAYING THIS MATTER FURTHER.
>> YOU ALWAYS FIND YOURSELF INTERRUPTING ME.
>> LADIES AND GENTLEMEN WE HAVE.
>> MADAM MAYOR, I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION ON THE COMING BACK WITH THIS ITEM.
CAN WE HAVE A TIME CERTAIN WHEN THIS IS COMING BACK? YOU SAID THAT YOUR WORDS WERE SOME TIME IN THE FUTURE THAT COULD BE NEXT MEETING, THAT COULD BE NEXT YEAR.
I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR WHEN THIS IS COMING BACK.
>> I BELIEVE IT'S A CITY MANAGER FOR THE TIME FRAME AND ABILITY FOR THEM TO DO WHAT THEY NEED TO DO.
CITY MANAGER, YOU'RE BEING ASKED.
THERE WAS THREE AND HIS HEAD WAS DOWN SO I'M TRYING TO MOVE THIS MEETING ALONG.
>> YOUR LIGHT'S NOT ON AND YOUR HEAD WAS DOWN.
ARE WE REALLY GOING TO GO THROUGH THIS RIGHT NOW, PLEASE?
>> IT IS NOW AND YOU'RE BEING RECOGNIZED.
CITY MANAGER, DO YOU HAVE AN ESTIMATED TIME AND RSM? DO YOU HAVE AN ESTIMATED TIME OR WILL IT BE DONE IN A TIMELY MANNER? WHAT THE CITY COMMISSIONER BOLTON IS NOW ASKING TO ADD A TIME CERTAIN ONTO THE MATTER.
HE'S EXTENDING THE ITEM TO ASK FOR TIME STARTING ON THE MATTER AND APPROXIMATELY CURIOUS AS TO HOW LONG IT WILL TAKE.
>> WELL, I WOULD NEED TO TALK TO OUR RSM AND GET THOSE DETAILS.
I DON'T KNOW THAT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
>> WE HAVE A BREAK BETWEEN NOW AND WE'RE COMING BACK IN AUGUST.
>> IN YOUR CITY REPORT NEXT TIME, CAN YOU LET US KNOW?
>> [NOISE] CAN WE JUST ASK THEM NOW SINCE THEY'RE HERE.
>> BUT THEY DON'T KNOW THE SCOPE OF WORK.
>> WE DON'T PERSONALLY DO THAT.
>> WE COULD GIVE YOU A REPORT.
WE CAN GET TOGETHER WITH RSM AND HAVE CONVERSATIONS AND UPDATE YOU AT THE VERY NEXT COMMISSION MEETING WHICH IS AUGUST 22ND, 24TH.
AT THAT POINT, WE'LL HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MEET TO UNDERSTAND THE SCOPE.
THAT'S GENERALLY ACCEPTED SCOPE FOR THIS TYPE OF WORK AND THEN WE WILL BE READY TO GO FROM THERE.
[03:45:05]
>> THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME, IT IS 11:10, WHICH I KNOW I SAID 11:10 EARLIER.
BUT THAT CLOCKS A LITTLE FAST, THIS CLOCKS ON TIME.
I WOULD LIKE A MOTION TO KEEP THIS MEETING GOING UNTIL WE FINISH OUR AGENDA.
>> MOTION TO KEEP THE MEETING GOING UNTIL THE AGENDA IS COMPLETELY FINISHED.
>> THANK YOU. I GOT A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS.
AT THIS TIME, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THE QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING OF 9ATR13790.
CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD.
>> DID WE NEED A VOTE ON THAT MOTION, MADAM MAYOR?
>> WE DON'T. I DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO MOVE THINGS AROUND.
IF YOU WISH TO OBJECT TO IT, FOR OUR QUASI-JUDICIAL FOR THE APPLICANT HERE.
>> MADAM MAYOR, DID WE HAVE A VOTE ON WHETHER OR NOT WE WOULD CONTINUE THE MEETING?
>> YOU'RE RIGHT. MY APOLOGIES. CITY CLERK.
[LAUGHTER] YOU ARE OCCASIONALLY RIGHT. YES, YOU ARE.
>> THANK YOU. MADAM MAYOR. COMMISSIONER BOLTON?
>> THANK YOU. WE ARE NOW GOING TO OUR QUASI-JUDICIAL 9ATR13790.
[9.a TR13790 - A Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida, granting site plan (major) with conditions to allow for the demolition of existing two-story 100,980 square foot office building and redevelopment of property for a new 200,147 square foot industrial warehouse building; for the subject property located at 5601 Hiatus Road, Tamarac, Florida (Case No. 13-SP-21); providing for conflicts; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date.]
CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD.>> YES, MADAM MAYOR. THIS IS A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION, CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA, GRANTING SITE PLAN MAJOR WITH CONDITIONS TO ALLOW FOR THE DEMOLITION OF AN EXISTING TWO-STORY 100,980-SQUARE-FOOT OFFICE BUILDING AND REDEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY FOR NEW 200,147-SQUARE-FOOT INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE BUILDING FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5601 HYANNIS ROAD, TAMARAC, FLORIDA, CASE NUMBER 13, SP21.
PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, PROVIDING FOR SEPARABILITY, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
IF YOU WISH, AT THIS POINT IN TIME, I CAN ALSO READ THE BRIEF QUASI-JUDICIAL STATEMENTS SWEARING IN THE WITNESSES, AND THEN WE CAN HAVE DISCLOSURE OF ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS.
>> THANK YOU. ALL PERSONS TESTIFYING BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION ON THIS ITEM MUST BE SWORN IN.
THE PETITIONER AND ANY AFFECTED PERSON SHALL BE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT EVIDENCE, BRING FORTH WITNESSES, CROSS-EXAMINE WITNESSES, AND REPORT ANY TESTIMONY.
ALL EVIDENCE RELIED UPON REASONABLY PRUDENT PERSONS TO CONDUCT THEIR BUSINESS SHALL BE ADMISSIBLE.
WHETHER SUCH EVIDENCE WOULD BE ADMISSIBLE IN COURT OF LAW.
HOWEVER, A MATURE ON DULY REPETITION SHALL BE EXCLUDED.
HEARSAY EVIDENCE MAY BE USED FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUPPLEMENTING OR EXPLAINING OTHER EVIDENCE, BUT IT CANNOT BE SUFFICIENT BY ITSELF TO SUPPORT A PARTICULAR FINDING BY THIS COMMISSION.
DOCUMENTARIES MAY BE PRESENTED IN THE FORM OF A COPY OF THE ORIGINAL OR THE ORIGINAL IF AVAILABLE.
GENERAL PROCESS IS THAT THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT OR STAFF HAS BEEN ARRANGED WITH THE PETITIONER THEN PARTIES WHO ARE IN SUPPORT HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK, PARTIES WHO ARE IN OPPOSITION THEN.
THEN CITY PERSONNEL AND THE TENANT SHALL PROVIDE RESPONSE TO ANY PARTIES PROCEEDING AND FINAL PRESENTATIONS BY THE PETITIONERS, CITY STAFF, AND RESPONSE TO ANY TESTIMONY FROM OTHER PARTIES.
FINALLY, THE CITY COMMISSION SHALL DELIBERATE ON THE PETITION.
NO FURTHER TESTIMONY SHALL BE TAKEN.
THE MEMBERS, CITY COMMISSIONERS, SHALL NOT ASK FOR THE QUESTIONS OF PERSONS PRESENTING TESTIMONY.
THE CITY COMMISSION SHALL DISCUSS THE EVIDENCE THAT WAS PRESENTED THE PRECEDING AND VOTE ON THE PETITION TO APPROVE, DENY, OR PROVE WITH CONDITIONS.
JUST AS A GENERAL STATEMENT, OBVIOUSLY, YOU HAVE TO LIMIT YOUR DELIBERATIONS TO THE EVIDENCE THAT YOU HEAR AT THE HEARING TONIGHT AND BASE THAT YOUR DECISION ON THAT, WHAT YOU BELIEVE TO BE THE COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR DECISION, EITHER TO APPROVE, DENY, OR APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS.
AT THIS POINT IN TIME, WE CAN SWEAR THE WITNESSES, ANYONE WHO'S GOING TO TESTIFY, AND THEN THE COMMISSION CAN DISCLOSE ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS THAT MAY HAVE HAD.
>> ALL WITNESSES, PLEASE STAND.
>> AS AN ORDER IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? THANK YOU.
>> I WILL NOW GO THROUGH THE DISCLOSURES.
COMMISSIONER BOLTON, ANY DISCLOSURES?
>> I HAD A CALL FROM DENNIS MERELY JUST SAYING HE WAS NOT GOING TO BE ATTENDING THIS MEETING TONIGHT.
NOW I NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND.
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS, A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BOLTON.
THE APPLICANT HAS A PRESENTATION.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE YOUR PRESENTATION?
LAND USE COUNCIL FOR THE APPLICANT.
WE DO HAVE THE POWERPOINT PRESENTATION. I'LL BE BRIEF.
I KNOW IT'S BEEN A LONG NIGHT,
[03:50:02]
SO I'LL GO QUICKLY.THIS FIRST SLIDE SHOWS THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY.
AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S ON THE NORTH SIDE OF COMMERCIAL BOULEVARD AND IT'S SITUATED BETWEEN HIATUS ROAD AND THE SOD GRASS EXPRESSWAY AND ACTUALLY MADISON AVENUE.
THIS IS JUST A MORE UP-CLOSE AERIAL SHOT OF THE PROPERTY.
THE LAND USE IS INDUSTRIAL AND IT IS OWNED BUSINESS PARK AND THE COUNTY LAND USE, THE UNDERLYING COUNTY LAND USE IS COMMERCE CENTER.
THE EXISTING BUILDING THERE IS A TWO-STORY, 100,980 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE BUILDING IS CURRENTLY UNOCCUPIED.
THE PROPOSED USE IS A WAREHOUSE BUILDING IS 200,148 SQUARE FEET.
IT HAS ACCESS POINTS ALONG MADISON.
THERE'S TWO ACCESS POINTS ALONG MADISON AVENUE, INGRESS AND EGRESS.
THE NORTHERN MOST ACCESS IS ON MADISON, IT'S SHARED BY SIENESE CAR WASH FACTORY.
MR. HAROLD STRASSLER, SIDE NOTE HERE, HE IS ALSO HERE JOINING US TONIGHT AND THE ARCHITECT CARLO MENDOZA, HE'S ALSO HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE IS NUMEROUS PARKING SPACES.
THERE AN EXCESS OF WHAT'S REQUIRED BY CODE.
160 PARKING SPACES ARE REQUIRED, WE'RE PROVIDING 203.
EIGHT ADA PARKING SPACES, 20-BIKE PARKING SPACES, FOUR ELECTRIC CAR PARKING SPACES, AND THEN THERE'S 44 LOADING DOCK SPACES.
HERE'S SOME RENDERINGS. AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S A VERY ATTRACTIVE, HIGH-QUALITY INDUSTRIAL BUILDING.
IT'S A SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT.
IT HAS TILT UP CONCRETE WALLS PAINTED WHITE AND GRAY.
THERE'S JUST A FEW MORE RENDERINGS.
THERE'S AN EXCESSIVE AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPING.
THERE'S A MAJORITY OF THE THE EXISTING SHADE TREES ARE TO REMAIN.
JUST A LITTLE BIT ABOUT BUTTERS CONSTRUCTION.
THEY ARE HEADQUARTERED IN COCONUT CREEK.
THEY ARE ONE OF THE MOST ACTIVE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPERS IN SOUTH FLORIDA.
NOW THEY'VE WON DEVELOPER OF THE YEAR AWARDS.
THEY HAVE BUILT OVER $18 MILLION, 80 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL FACILITIES, 1.5 BILLION IN PROJECTS SINCE 1987.
THERE'S SOME SAMPLES HERE THAT WE HAVE OF OTHER PROJECTS THAT THEY HAVE CONSTRUCTED.
THIS ONE IN TAMARAC, TAMARAC BUSINESS CENTER.
THEN ALSO THE ONE BELOW IS POMPANO COMMERCE CENTER.
THE ONE ABOVE HERE IS DEERFIELD BEACH, THE HILLSBORO TECHNOLOGY CENTER, AND THE ONE BELOW IS IN COCONUT CREEK FIRST SAWGRASS COMMERCIAL CENTER.
THEN THESE TWO ARE UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
THE TOP ONE IS JOHNSON TECHNOLOGY IN COCONUT CREEK AND POMPANO CROSSING IN POMPANO BEACH.
THANK YOU. AS I HAD MENTIONED BEFORE, WE HAVE HAROLD STRASSLER.
HE'S THE DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE FACILITIES, SIENESE CAR WASH, AND THEY ARE ACTUALLY THE TENANT THAT IS GOING INTO THE PROPOSED USE IF IT'S APPROVED.
THEN ALSO THE ARCHITECT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE KNOW THAT MS. CALLOWAY IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS WE MAY HAVE ON THE PRESENTATION.
AT THIS TIME, I'M GOING TO OPEN THIS ITEM UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.
IF THERE'S ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER, PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM AND WE'LL ALSO HAVE TO SWEAR YOU IN.
SEEING THAT NOBODY HAS ANY COMMENTS ON THE MATTER, THEN PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED.
I'LL OPEN THIS UP FOR DISCUSSION BY OUR COMMISSION.
I AM NOT SEEING ANY COMMENTS BY OUR COMMISSION.
CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> MADAM MAYOR, BEFORE YOU VOTE ON THE ITEM, AND I'M LOOKING TOO MUCH CALLOWAY.
WASN'T THE RECOMMENDATION IN THE ITEM BEFORE THE COMMISSION APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS? I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT AS YOU ALL MOVE FORWARD ON PRESUMPTIVELY APPROVING THIS PROJECT,
[03:55:06]
THAT YOU STATE FOR THE RECORD THAT IT IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL WITH CONDITION AND POTENTIALLY UNLESS THE APPLICANT HAS ANY OBJECTIONS TO THOSE CONDITIONS, THEN THE RECORD WOULD REFLECT THAT IT IS MOVING FORWARD BASED UPON THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL BUT SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT AND THAT ARE IN YOUR PACKET.>> SENIOR ATTORNEY, I APPRECIATE THAT, BUT I BELIEVE ALSO THE TITLE DOES STATE WITH CONDITIONS.
AS SUCH, WE ARE COMPLETE, BUT I WILL.
MS. GRAY, ARE THE CONDITIONS INCLUDED?
>> THANK YOU. FOR THE RECORD, WE MADE THAT VERY CLEAR.
IF YOU WOULD NOW, CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. COMMISSIONER PLACKO?
>> MOTION PASS, 5-0. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. WE ARE VERY PROUD OF YOUR EXPANSION AND YOUR CONTINUED GROWTH AND MUCH CONTINUED SUCCESS. THANK YOU.
NOW, ON OUR REGULAR AGENDA 58013800.
[5.a TR13800 - A Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida, approving the award of RFP #22-06R - Digital Marketing Services, to Connectica, LLC and FMO Media for a three year term; for an estimated cost not to exceed $80,000 per year; authorizing the appropriate City Officials to execute agreements with Connectica, LLC and FMO Media; further authorizing the City Manager to execute an option to renew after two years for a total contract period not to exceed five years including any additions or deletions of specific services as may be required; providing for conflicts; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date.]
THIS IS THE RESOLUTION REGARDING OUR DIGITAL MARKETING SERVICES.CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD.
>> YES, MADAM MAYOR. MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION THIS IS A RESOLUTION, CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA, APPROVING THE AWARD OF RFP NUMBER 22069, DIGITAL MARKETING SERVICES TO CONNECTICUT, LLC, AND FMO MEDIA FOR A THREE-YEAR TERM FOR AN ESTIMATED COST NOT TO EXCEED $80,000 PER YEAR, AUTHORIZING THE APPROPRIATE CITY OFFICIALS TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS WITH CONNECTICUT, LLC, AND FMO MEDIA.
FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN OPTION TO RENEW AFTER TWO YEARS FOR TOTAL CONTRACT PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED FIVE YEARS, INCLUDING ANY ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS OF SPECIFIC SERVICES THAT MAY BE REQUIRED, PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, PROVIDING FOR SEPARABILITY, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
>> THANK YOU. I NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND.
>> THANK YOU'S AND THE LITTLE BOWS FOR THE MOTION, VICE MAYOR FOR THE SECOND.
I'M OPENING THIS UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.
ANYBODY WISHES TO MAKE COMMENTS? SEEING NONE PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED.
MS. BAKER IS AVAILABLE IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS.
COMMISSION, I HAVE MR. HAALAND, I TAKE IT YOU DON'T HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO SAY.
>> IT'S OKAY. VICE MAYOR DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY ON THIS AREA
>> YES. WE HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS AT THE LAST MEETING.
I WANTED TO TABLE IT AND HEAR DIRECTLY FROM THE TWO TOP VENDORS WHO WERE SELECTED.
SOUNDS LIKE THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION WITH THE RFP, BOTH NOT ON THEIR PART, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE MAYBE THE RULES OF THE GAMES WERE CHANGED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE GAME.
I LIKE BOTH OF THE VENDORS THAT WERE SELECTED BY THE SELECTION COMMITTEE.
BUT BOTH VENDORS WENT IN AND AS SOMEONE WHO'S A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER THAT BIDS ON GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS, YOU HATE WHEN YOU GO IN WITH A CERTAIN EXPECTATION AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN THINGS CHANGE.
BOTH VENDORS WENT IN WITH THE GOAL OF SATISFYING A CONTRACT THAT PAID $80,000, AND THEN THEY COME TO THE COMMISSION MEETING AND FIND OUT THAT THEY'RE GOING TO GET $40,000 EACH.
WELL, THEY DIDN'T BID ON GETTING A CONTRACT WITH $40,000.
THEN ADDITIONALLY, JUST OUTSIDE OF THAT, WE'VE HEARD A FEW RESIDENTS, EVEN THOUGH I DON'T BELIEVE THEM, SAY THAT ALL THE CITY HAS A BAD REPUTATION AND ALL THESE THINGS AND WE ARE PROBABLY THE ONLY CITY THAT'S CONSISTENTLY ATTACKED FALSELY, IN MY VIEW, BY TWO BLOGGERS.
SOMETIMES IT'S SUNSET AND ALL THAT JUST WANT TO PUT A STAIN ON THE REPUTATION OF THE CITY OF TAMARAC.
I ACTUALLY THINK WE NEED TO INVEST MORE MONEY IN OUR SOCIAL MEDIA AND OUR MARKETING AND PUBLIC RELATIONS SO THAT WE DO GET THAT GOOD MESSAGE OUT THERE ABOUT THIS CITY.
WE DO NEED TO ENHANCE OUR SOCIAL MEDIA EFFORTS AND WE DO NEED TO ENHANCE OUR VIDEO AND MARKETING AND PUBLIC RELATIONS EFFORTS.
I THINK THAT WE SHOULD APPROVE THIS ITEM, BUT WE SHOULD ALSO RENEGOTIATE THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT SO THAT BOTH PARTIES CAN BE SATISFIED AND CAN FULLY FULFILL THE TERMS AND AGREEMENTS OF A SCOPE OF SERVICES.
I THINK WE SHOULD MAKE THE AWARD AMOUNT NOT TO
[04:00:07]
EXCEED 120,000 AND WE AWARD APPROXIMATELY 70,000 TO CONNECT THEM TO DO THE VIDEO SERVICES AND OTHER SERVICES THAT'S OUTLINED IN THE SCOPE.THEN 40,000-50,000, WHATEVER THAT BALANCES, TO FMO MEDIA FOR THE SOCIAL MEDIA SERVICES AND OTHER SERVICES.
IF YOU SAY, WELL, WHERE DOES THE MONEY COME FROM? IF YOU REMEMBER WE ONLY SPEND 80 PERCENT OF OUR BUDGET LAST YEAR, MS. CALLOWAY TALKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE DIDN'T SPEND THE 50,000 FROM OUR GENERAL FUNDS LAST YEAR.
THEN AGAIN, WE JUST NEED TO INVEST MORE IN SENDING OUT THE GOOD MESSAGE ABOUT WHO WE ARE AS A CITY.
AGAIN, FINALLY, THE TERMS WERE CHANGED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PROCESS.
INSTEAD OF CANCELING THE RFP AND SENDING OUT A NEW RFP, I THINK WE SHOULD COME TO A COMPROMISE AND ALLOW PROCUREMENT TO RENEGOTIATE WITH BOTH VENDORS BECAUSE I DON'T THINK EITHER PARTY IS SATISFIED WITH THE 40,000.
WE DO NEED TO INVEST MORE IN MARKETING AND PUBLIC RELATIONS.
I MEAN, WE HAVE A GREAT PROGRAM WITH THE 50,000 GRANT PROGRAM AND MS. CALLOWAY SAID FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS, WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN THE APPLICATIONS.
WE'RE NOT SENDING THAT MESSAGE OUT THERE ABOUT THE GOOD THINGS WE DO TO HELP THE COMMUNITY ENHANCE ITSELF WITH GRANTS BECAUSE WE'RE NOT GETTING THE MESSAGE OUT THERE PROPERLY.
WE NEED TO INVEST MORE AND GETTING THE MESSAGE OUT.
ONE IS A LOCAL COMPANY THAT'S WORK WITH US IN THE PAST.
ONE IS A COMPANY THAT IS HEADQUARTERED OUT OF STATE, BUT THEY INVEST IT LOCALLY IN THE CITY OF SUNRISE.
IT'S IN BROWARD COUNTY AND IT'S A VETERAN-OWNED BUSINESS.
WE'RE TRYING TO INCREASE OUR SPENDING WITH VETERAN-OWNED BUSINESS AND IT'S ALSO A BUSINESS THAT HIRES RETURNING CITIZENS SO THEY GIVE THEM A SECOND CHANCE.
IT'S A QUALITY FIRM THAT'S A GOOD CORPORATE CITIZEN OBVIOUSLY CONNECTED.
IT HAS BEEN A GOOD PARTNER TO US.
I WOULD LIKE TO AGREE TO APPROVE THIS AT A HIGHER AMOUNT SO WE CAN INVEST MORE IN OUR COMMUNITY AND GETTING OUR MESSAGE OUT.
>> I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY SHARE THE SAME SENTIMENTS AS VICE MAYOR AND NOT SURE ABOUT THE NUMBER.
BUT DEFINITELY, AN INCREASE WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT I'M INTERESTED IN.
>> NO COMMENT. I'M LOOKING AT YOU TOO. COMMISSIONER BOLTON.
>> CERTAINLY, I THINK CONNECTICUT DOES A VERY GOOD JOB OF NOT SEEING FMO IN ACTION.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE CAPABLE OF YET AND THEY WOULD PROVE THEMSELVES OVER TIME.
BUT CONNECTICUT DOES A WONDERFUL JOB FOR OUR CITY AND IT BENEFITS THEM THAT THEY ARE LOCAL TO TAMARAC AND WE ACTUALLY NEED THE SERVICES.
NOT FOR THE SAME REASONS THAT WE GET ATTACKS BY BLOGS.
I THINK THAT THE BLOGS ARE DOING THEIR JOBS.
THEY HAVE A JOB TO ATTACK AND SOMETIMES FALSELY AND SOMETIMES THEY HAVE CAUSE, BUT THEY'RE DOING THEIR JOBS.
LET'S DO OUR JOBS AND KEEP THE PEOPLE'S COMMISSIONERS A HOUSEHOLD NAME.
BUT ABOVE THAT, WE WANT TO KEEP TAMARAC, THIS CITY FOR YOUR LIFE.
WHAT BETTER WAY OF MAKING SURE THAT CONNECTICUT AND FMO MEDIA HELPS US WITH THAT, I'M WILLING TO JUMP IN.
LIKE MY COLLEAGUES SAID, I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE NUMBER YET.
LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT IN DISCUSSION.
LET'S SEE WHERE WE END UP FOR THE IDEA.
>> COMMISSIONER PLACKO DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WANTING TO SPEAK JUST YET.
I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUES THAT WE HAVE TWO GOOD COMPANIES HERE.
GOOD COMPANIES OF LONGEVITY AND WE'VE ENJOYED THEIR SERVICES, AND A GOOD COMPANY THAT WE KNOW HAS GOOD SERVICES TO BRING TO US.
I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT AT THIS TIME WE SHOULD BE JUMPING THE CONTRACT PRICE AT THIS TIME.
I THINK WE NEED TO ALLOW THE CONTRACT TO RUN ITS COURSE,
[04:05:04]
MAYBE A SIX MONTH TRIAL, SEE HOW IT'S GOING, AND THEN FIGURE OUT WHERE THE MONEY LIES.BECAUSE ALSO I THINK TO AUTOMATICALLY JUST SIT HERE TONIGHT AND SAY WE'RE GOING TO BUMP YOUR CONTRACT $40,000, WHEN WE HAVE A BUDGET WE'RE TRYING TO BALANCE, WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP OUR MILLAGE RATE IF WE CAN EVER GET TO THAT PART OF OUR AGENDA SET AT A LOWER RATE THAN WE KEEP IT CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE DID LAST YEAR, THE FIRST TIME AFTER NINE YEARS OF HAVING IT THE FIRST TIME IS GOING DOWN.
GRANTED NOT A LOT BUT IT WENT DOWN AND WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT CAUSING ANY MORE HARDSHIP ON OUR RESIDENTS.
I THINK WE GO FORWARD WITH THE CONTRACT AS IS, WE ADJUST AND REVIEW IN SIX MONTHS, AND WE FIGURED OUT THAT TIME AND WE'LL ALSO KNOW A LITTLE BIT MORE ON OUR BUDGET.
BECAUSE AS WE'VE TALK TONIGHT, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AN INCREASE IN LEGAL FEES.
SOMETHING WE ARE NOT BUDGETED FOR, I DON'T BELIEVE AT THIS TIME.
WE POTENTIALLY HAVE ANOTHER BUDGET LINE ITEM FOR FORENSICS THAT WE DON'T HAVE IN HERE AT THIS TIME.
WE HAVE SOME OTHER BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS THAT WE REALLY NEED TO DO.
I'M NOT SAYING YOUR SERVICES AREN'T WORTH IT BOTH COMPANIES, BUT RIGHT NOW FOR US TO SIT HERE BLINDLY WITHOUT LOOKING AT ALL THE NUMBERS TOGETHER, WITHOUT HAVING AN ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT WE MAY NEED TO BE SPENDING IT ON, I DON'T THINK THAT IS FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE ON OUR BEHALF.
I THINK WHAT WE DO IS WE GET TO CONTRACTS THAT GETS YOU READY, GET YOU MOVING, BECAUSE WE'VE WAITED THREE WEEKS FROM OUR LAST MEETING AND YOU HAVEN'T BEEN DOING YOUR SERVICES TO THE CITY, BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T BEEN CONTRACTED TO AND WE HAVEN'T MOVED ALONG AND GETTING PEOPLE AWARE OF CERTAIN THINGS.
LET'S NOT FORGET, WE DO HAVE A GREAT PIO.
WE JUST NEED HELP BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO EXPAND AND REACH OUR MARKET AND GET THOSE PEOPLE WHO DON'T NORMALLY OPEN UP OUR STUFF, TO OPEN UP OUR STUFF, AND GETTING ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE NOW GETTING TO LEARN THE COMPUTERS TO WANT TO LEARN THEIR COMPUTERS AND DO A LITTLE BIT MORE AND WE NEED YOUR HELP WITH THAT.
MY OPINION IS JUST THAT WE APPROVE YOUR CONTRACT AND WITH THE KNOWLEDGE THAT IN ABOUT SIX MONTHS WE WOULD COME BACK AND REVISIT WHERE WE STAND, AND SEE IF BOTH VENDORS ARE HAPPY OR NOT OR WHAT WE COULD DO, IF ANYTHING, AND HOW MUCH WE'VE ACTUALLY USED IN THE BUDGET.
WE MAY NOT EVEN USE ALL THAT IN THE BUDGET AT THAT TIME OR BEEN HALF-WAY.
THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. MISS GUN.
>> THANK YOU MAYOR. I JUST WAS REMINDED BY PURCHASING THAT THE CONTRACT AMOUNT WILL BE FOR THE ACTUAL SERVICES RENDERED, AND IT DOES NOT NECESSARILY HAVE A CEILING IN THE DOCUMENT.
WE WENT OUT FOR AN RFP WITH A SCOPE WITH AN INTENTION OF WHAT WE WOULD DO.
I THINK IF WE WOULD GO AHEAD AND REVIEW THIS, WE HAVE A BUDGET COMING UP.
WE CAN LOOK AT INCREASED FUNDING FOR THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR, BUT AT THIS TIME, IF WE WOULD JUST MOVE FORWARD WITH THE ITEM AS ITS PROPOSED, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
I'M GOING TO ASK FOR CLARIFICATION.
BASICALLY, YOU'RE SAYING THAT WHILE WE HAVE A NUMBER THAT APPEARS HERE, IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THIS IS A SET NUMBER, IT'S AN APPROXIMATE NUMBER.
IN BOTH BUSINESSES WERE ADVISED THAT THEY'RE GETTING PAID PER THE PROJECT THAT THEY'RE DOING.
IT'S NOT A GUARANTEE EITHER WAY EVEN IF WE ADD A SET NUMBER IN THERE, AND THEN WE CONTINUE TO TALK FURTHER FOR OUR BUDGETING. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> YEAH. THE ITEM IS FOR AN ESTIMATED COST NOT TO EXCEED $80,000 PER YEAR.
IT IS A TASK ORDER TYPE OF ASSIGNMENT BASIS.
>> IT IS A PAY FOR SERVICE PER SERVICE, BUT THERE IS A CAP AT THIS TIME.
HOWEVER, AS WE'VE ALREADY EXPERIENCED HERE IN THE CITY OF TAMARAC, IF WE'RE COMING CLOSE TO A CAP, WE HAVE AT THAT TIME DISCUSSED WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IF WE NEED TO MODIFY AT THAT TIME.
>> YES. CLEARLY IT SAYS NOT TO EXCEED.
I THINK THERE'S CONSENSUS THAT WE SHOULD INVEST MORE IN OUR OVERALL PUBLIC RELATIONS SOCIAL MEDIA VIDEO SO THAT WE SHOULD INCREASE THE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT AS SOME NUMBER ABOVE THE 80,000.
THEN ALSO, ESPECIALLY IF SOMEONE'S A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER, WHEN YOU SAY IT'S GOING TO BE ON A PROJECT BASIS, IT CAN BE 10 HOURS, ONE MONTH, 50 HOURS ANOTHER MONTH, FIVE HOURS ANOTHER MONTH.
IT'S HARD FOR A VENDOR TO PLAN TO SPEND ON BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO SPEND MONEY AND TIME AND RESOURCES TO DO AN ACTIVITY.
IT'S BETTER TO PAY A VENDOR A FLAT AMOUNT OVER THE COURSE OF A 12 MONTH PERIOD VERSUS SAYING OKAY, WELL, THEY USE IT FOR 10 HOURS THIS MONTH, 30 HOURS THE NEXT MONTH, NO HOURS NEXT MONTH, AND SO IT'S HARD FOR YOUR CASH FLOW.
I THINK THAT SHOULD BE CHANGED AS WELL AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE VENDORS CAN NEGOTIATE, BUT CLEARLY IT STATES ARE NOT TO EXCEED 80,000.
[04:10:01]
THEN WHAT THE MANAGER IS SAYING CONTRADICTS THAT, SO FOR THE RECORD, WE SHOULD CLARIFY AT LEAST A DOLLAR AMOUNT BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW WE SHOULD INVEST MORE IN OUR MEDIA RELATIONS.>> JUST TO FURTHER CLARIFY, THANK YOU FOR THE INDULGENCE.
THE CAP IS A BUDGETARIES CAP, SO WE CAN DEFINITELY SPEND MORE, IT'S A BUDGET AMOUNT.
IF THE COMMISSION DIRECTS MORE, WE CAN DO MORE.
THE CONTRACT ISN'T GOING TO BE COMPROMISED IN ANY WAY BY DOING SO.
>> IN ORDER TO MAKE EVERYTHING PROPER, IF THAT IS THE DIRECTION THEN IT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU APPROVE THE ITEM SUBJECT TO AN AMENDMENT WHICH WOULD BE AS SET FORTH IN THE TITLE.
IT CURRENTLY SAYS FOR AN ESTIMATED COST NOT TO EXCEED $80,000 PER YEAR, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU REMOVE THAT YOU AMEND THE TITLE AND THE MOTION TO SAY FOR AN ESTIMATED COST OF 80,000 PER YEAR.
THAT THEN PROVIDES THE FLEXIBILITY THAT YOU'RE DISCUSSING AS OPPOSED TO THE NOT TO EXCEED LANGUAGE, WHICH THEN GENERALLY IS INTERPRETED TO MEAN A HARD CAP.
>> OKAY. I'LL AGREE TO THAT MOTION.
BUT I DO WANT TO ENCOURAGE THE COMMISSION TO SPEAK TO THE VENDORS DIRECTLY AS WELL TO FIND OUT WHAT THEIR NEEDS ARE, WHAT THEIR CHALLENGES ARE, AND SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT THEY HAVE AND HELP THEM WITH THE NEGOTIATION WITH THE CITY AND PROCUREMENT.
>> WELL, WE HAVE A MOTION ALREADY ON THE FLOOR AND IT WAS SET BY COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS AND IT WAS SECONDED BY VICE MAYOR.
>> NO. GO AHEAD. I WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT.
WILL THIS COME BACK TO US IN SIX MONTHS TYPE OF THING TO SEE IF WE CAN READJUST THE DOLLAR VALUE BECAUSE THEY'RE BASING THEIR CONTRACTS ON THE ANNUAL LIKE VICE MAYOR SAID.
IS IT GOING TO COME BACK TO US?
>> I'M GOING TO ASK FOR SOME CLARIFICATION ON THE CONTRACT IN GENERAL AND JUST SOME PROCEDURAL BASIS, PLEASE.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE REALITY IS THAT THESE TWO VENDORS WILL HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT PROJECTS THEY WANT THE PROJECTS BE GIVEN AND HAVE AN ESTIMATED IDEA OF CERTAIN THINGS, CERTAIN FOR THEIR WORK FOR THE YEAR, AND THEN OTHER THINGS WILL BE FLEXIBLE.
>> I'M SORRY. COULD YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THESE TWO VENDORS, WHILE THEY DO CERTAIN THINGS IN A SIMILAR MATTER, THEIR CONTRACTS ALSO A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT FOR THOSE SCOPE OF WORK IN WHICH THEY WILL BE PERFORMING.
IS IT FORESEEABLE, PROBABLE, ACTUAL, THAT THE PIO OFFICE WILL BE PROVIDING BOTH VENDORS WITH AN ESTIMATED SCOPE OF WORK PLAN IF THEY'VE ALREADY HAVEN'T BEEN GIVEN IT IN THE RFP, THAT THESE ARE THE ITEMS IN WHICH THEY WILL BE HANDLING FOR THEIR YEAR OF SERVICE OR THREE YEARS BECAUSE THE CONTRACT IS THREE YEARS? BUT I ALSO BELIEVE IN THE CONTRACTS, THEY ALSO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR AMENDING, OR CANCELING, OR COMING BACK FOR DISCUSSION. PLEASE.
>> LEVENT SUCUOGLU, YOUR SYSTEM SENIOR MANAGER.
MADAM MAYOR, THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER IS RESPONSIBLE FROM THE DIGITAL MARKETING SERVICES PROVIDED ON BEHALF OF THE CITY.
THESE TWO DISTINCT SERVICE PROVIDERS ARE THERE TO SUPPORT AND SUPPLEMENT THE SERVICES OF THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER.
SO THE CONTRACT IS STRUCTURED IN A WAY THAT WE CAN PICK AND CHOOSE FROM THE SPECIALTY AREAS OF EACH CONTRACTOR OR SERVICE PROVIDER.
FOR THAT, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS PROJECT IS TO ESTABLISH A STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE CITY'S DIGITAL MARKETING SERVICES, AND WITH THAT, WE'RE GOING TO DEFINITELY FIND OUT WHAT OUR ROADMAP IS BETWEEN THE TWO SERVICE PROVIDERS.
AT THIS POINT, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO PROVIDE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET THIS PART, YOU'RE GOING TO GET THAT PART,
[04:15:01]
WITHOUT DISTINCT PLAN THAT WE'RE GOING TO SIT DOWN AND DEVELOP WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THESE TWO SERVICE PROVIDERS.ONCE WE HAVE THAT PLAN, WE'RE DEFINITELY GOING TO KNOW THE ROADMAP A LITTLE BETTER AND THAT WAY WE CAN SAY THESE TYPE OF SERVICES, WE'RE GOING TO UTILIZE THIS VENDOR, THESE TYPES OF SERVICES, WE'RE GOING TO UTILIZE THE OTHER SERVICE PROVIDER.
WE WILL BE ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH A BETTER UPDATE AT THAT POINT.
THE CONTRACT IS STRUCTURED IN A WAY THAT WE SUPPLEMENT OUR SERVICES WITH THE RESISTANCE AND THEN WE CAN DEFINITELY COME BACK IN SIX MONTHS OR A QUARTERLY BASIS AND GIVE YOU AN UPDATE AS TO THE PROGRESS AND HOW WE'RE UTILIZING THEIR SERVICES.
>> I THINK AT THIS POINT IN TIME, WE ALL KNOW WE WANT TO USE THEIR SERVICES AND WE HAVE ITEM ON HERE OF WORDING THAT IS KEEPING US A LITTLE BIT FROM MOVING FORWARD, WHICH IS THE, NOT TO EXCEED THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT OF ESTIMATED COST, WHICH THEN ALLOWS, THIS IS A FIRST FOR THE CITY.
WE'RE GROWING AND WE'RE TRYING TO LEARN HOW TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT GAME PLAN TOGETHER AND IF WE HAVE OUR TWO VENDORS WHO ARE AT LEAST WILLING TO CONTRACT WITH US, AND THEN WE HAVE THE OPTIONS WITHIN OUR CONTRACTS, I'VE SEEN THEM, THAT ALLOW US TO CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION TO THEN EITHER MODIFY, TERMINATE, OR JUST PROCEED AS FOLLOWS.
BOTH VENDORS, I BELIEVE YOU'RE AWARE THAT WE'RE GROWING AND WE'RE TRYING, AND SO I'M JUST GOING TO ASK FOR A NOD, ARE YOU WILLING TO WORK WITH US ON THIS? I'VE GOT A NOD FROM BOTH VENDORS INSTEAD OF HAVING TO PULL THEM UP.
AT THIS POINT IN TIME, THE ONLY THING STOPPING US FROM PROGRESS IS US.
OUR VENDORS WANT TO GET TO WORK.
WE KNOW THERE'S GOING TO BE A GAME PLAN.
CAN WE PLEASE PROCEED? COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS, WILL YOU AGREE TO THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT OF REMOVING NOT TO EXCEED AND PUTTING IT INTO ESTIMATED COST?
>> THANK YOU. VICE MAYOR, DO YOU ACCEPT THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO SECOND THE SAME?
>> THANK YOU. IF THERE'S NO OTHER DISCUSSION, I WOULD LIKE US TO CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE.
>> MADAM MAYOR, MY LIGHT IS LIT.
>> WELL, I COULD NOT SEE IT. I APOLOGIZE. GO AHEAD.
WHEN I HAVE WAY TOO MANY PEOPLE, IF YOU'RE ONE OF THE FIRST PEOPLE LIT, I DON'T SEE YOU. GO AHEAD.
>> IF OTHER PEOPLE WOULD TURN THEIR LIGHT OFF, I'D BE HAPPY.
>> I THINK THAT THE AMENDMENT THAT WE'RE MAKING IS WORSE THAN HOW WE STARTED, BECAUSE IF IT IS A SET AMOUNT, THEN IT LOCKS THEM IN TO, JUST HEAR ME OUT, IT LOCKS THEM INTO 80,000.
IF IT IS A NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT, WE'RE NOT DISHING OUT $80,000.
LET'S SAY WE WENT WITH VICE MAYOR GELIN'S NUMBER OF $120,000.
WE'RE NOT DISHING OUT $120,000.
WE'RE JUST SAYING THAT THE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT IS 120,000, SO THEY COULDN'T COME BACK WITH SPENDING ONLY $10,000.
MY POINT OF CONTENTION THOUGH IS, AND I HOPE THAT THE VENDORS UNDERSTAND THIS, IS REALLY AND TRULY THE WORK THAT IS BEING PUT OUT BY THE PIO AND CONNECTICA ALREADY, I THINK IS GREAT, BUT IF THE CONTENT IS NOT GETTING IN FRONT OF ENOUGH PEOPLE, WE PUT OUT A VIDEO, IT GETS 20 VIEWS, 50 VIEWS.
WE DO A STATE OF THE CITY, OR WE DO THAT VIDEO EVERY YEAR.
I SAT OUT LAST YEAR BECAUSE IT'S JUST A WASTE OF TIME.
YOU DO IT, PEOPLE COME, PEOPLE SEE IT, MAYBE 20 PEOPLE IN A ROOM, AND THEN AFTER THAT, 30 PEOPLE SEE IT.
PUT OUT GOOD WORK, BUT SHOW IT TO PEOPLE.
LET RESIDENTS SEE IT, LET THEM VIEW IT, AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE MISSING.
IT'S JUST GETTING WHAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF THE RIGHT PEOPLE.
SO NOT TO EXCEED $120,000 IS BETTER AND MAKE SURE THAT WE DO THAT IN THE FUTURE. THANKS.
>> I AGREE WITH THAT AMENDMENT.
[LAUGHTER] POINT OF CLARIFICATION FOR BUDGETING.
>> I'LL MAKE THAT FROM THE AMENDMENT.
[04:20:02]
WE HAVE 80,000 AND THEN WE LIFT UP AND SAY 120, THAT 40,000 IS NOT TO BE USED BECAUSE WE'VE BUDGETED, IT CAN'T BE UTILIZED FOR OTHER THINGS. IS IT BLOCKED?>> CURRENTLY, I THINK WERE BUDGETED AT 80,000.
WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A BUDGET INCREASE IN ORDER FOR THAT TO HAPPEN/
>> BUT THE BELIEF IS THAT, WELL, WE MAY NOT EVEN SPEND ALL 120, BUT IT'S JUST SITTING THERE.
BUT IF WE JUST BLOCK OUT THAT OTHER 40,000 FOR JUST SITTING THERE THAT WE MAY NOT USE, DOES THAT STOP US FROM BEING ABLE TO UTILIZE THAT 40,000 FOR A DIFFERENT BUDGET ITEM?
>> IF WE ALLOCATE AN ADDITIONAL 40,000 FOR THAT LINE ITEM, IT WILL BE ALLOCATED FOR THAT LINE ITEM.
>> WE ARE NOT ABLE TO SPEND THAT MONEY ELSEWHERE EVEN IF WE DON'T TOUCH THAT MONEY BECAUSE IT IS BEING ALLOCATED FOR ANOTHER ITEM?
>> YES, UNLESS WE DO A BUDGET TRANSFER FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE THAT'S NOT NEEDED.
>> TYPICALLY, IT'S BETTER TO PROCEED WITH THE NUMBER WE HAVE AND THEN DO A BUDGET AMENDMENT IF WE FEEL WE'RE GETTING CLOSER TO AN ITEM WHERE WE MIGHT BE EXCEEDING THE 80,000, WHICH IS A BETTER FINANCIAL PLAN?
>> WE CAN ALSO DO THAT AS WELL.
>> WHICH IS A BETTER FINANCIAL PLAN FOR THE CITY?
>> I WOULD SAY THAT IT'S BETTER TO BUDGET WHAT YOU EXPECT TO SPEND.
IF YOU EXPECT TO SPEND 120,000, THEN THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO BUDGET.
IF WE EXPECT THAT WE'RE GOING TO SPEND 80,000, THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD BUDGET.
IN TERMS OF THE CONTRACT WITH THE VENDORS, IT'S A PERFORMANCE CONTRACT. THEY ARE PAID.
THERE'S NO CEILING AS TO THEIR CONTRACT.
THE CEILING THAT'S IN THE ITEM IS ONLY A BUDGETARY NUMBER.
THAT'S WHY IT'S AN ESTIMATED NUMBER.
>> THIS ITEM FOR ACTUAL AMOUNT IS BEST LEFT FOR BACK TO OUR BUDGET DISCUSSION VERSUS CONTINUALLY GOING BACK AROUND ON IT HERE?
>> WE CAN ALSO DO THAT AS WELL.
>> MS. CHRISTINE. THANK YOU, MAYOR.
HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE HIT THE CEILING?
>> I DO NOT HAVE THAT INFORMATION.
>> IT'S OKAY. I HIGHLY DOUBT THAT IF I GET A CONTRACT FOR 100,000, THAT I'M NOT GOING TO HIT IT AS A VENDOR.
I'M GOING TO STRIVE TO HIT IT AS A VENDOR.
I THINK MAYBE EVEN COMPROMISING, I SPEND ABOUT $8,000 A YEAR ON MARKETING ON SEVERAL OF THINGS THAT I HAVE GOING ON AND IT GETS GREAT RESULTS, AND THAT'S JUST A TEAM OF ME AND ONE MORE PERSON RUNNING IT.
MANY TIMES, I GET BETTER RESULTS AND THE CITY DOES.
FOR ME TO SPEND $30,000, I CAN'T EVEN IMAGINE WHAT I CAN DO WITH $30,000 FOR SOCIAL MEDIA.
SO WE'VE PROBABLY HAVE TOUCHED $70,000 ON CONNECTICA.
BUT MAYBE EVEN COMPROMISING TO 100,000, GIVING 30,000 TO SOCIAL MEDIA AND 70,000 FOR VIDEO AND SHOOTINGS AND ALL THAT RELEVANCE.
MAYBE THAT'S A COMPROMISE THAT WE CAN COME TO BECAUSE WE'RE JUMPING FROM 80 TO 120 AND WE KNOW FOR A FACT IT WILL HIT THAT 120.
I DON'T SEE WHY ANY VENDOR WILL NOT WANT TO TOUCH THAT.
>> IF I MAY. IT WAS I THINK MENTIONED BEFORE, I WANTED TO REITERATE THIS SO WE UNDERSTAND, THAT AS CURRENTLY WRITTEN, THE CONTRACTS HAVE A SCOPE OF SERVICES AND IT'S, ESSENTIALLY, FOR LACK OF A BETTER DESCRIPTION, A PER UNIT COST.
SO EVERY TIME THE CITY USES EITHER ONE OR THE OTHER VENDOR FOR WHAT'S LISTED IN THEIR RESPECTIVE SCOPE OF SERVICES, WHICH ARE NOT THE SAME AND DON'T OVERLAP IF YOU LOOK AT THE MATERIALS, THEN THAT'S WHAT WE GET CHARGED, AND IF WE ASK THEM TO DO A PARTICULAR TASK 50 TIMES WHATEVER THAT COST IS, AND ULTIMATELY, WE MAY OR MAY NOT GET TO THAT $80,000.
SO I THINK TO COMMISSIONER BOLTON'S COMMENT, IT'S WHERE DO YOU ALL FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT THAT NUMBER [NOISE] THAT WHETHER IT'S THE ESTIMATED COST OF $80,000 AS INDICATED, WE CAN ALWAYS MAKE A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO ADD ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE SERVICES IF WE'RE AT THAT POINT AND THAT'S GENERALLY THE PROCESS THAT THE CITY WOULD FOLLOW, IS WE'D BRING IT TO YOU, AND NOT NECESSARILY AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT, BUT AS A BUDGET AMENDMENT SAYING, WE'RE ASKING YOU ALL TO AUTHORIZE US TO TRANSFER ADDITIONAL FUNDS TO COVER THE ADDITIONAL COSTS BECAUSE
[04:25:02]
WE'VE USED THEM MORE THAN WHAT WE ORIGINALLY ANTICIPATED.I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR.
I THINK IT'S EVEN POSSIBLE AGAIN TO EVEN DELETE THE REFERENCE TO AN ESTIMATED COST FROM THE TITLE OF THE RESOLUTION BECAUSE IT'S A PER TASK FLAT FEE TIMES HOWEVER MANY TIMES WE ASK THAT VENDOR TO DO THAT SERVICE FOR US.
ONE OF THEM HAS 13 ITEMS ON THEIR SCOPE OF SERVICES, THE OTHER ONE I THINK IS 21, 19.
THEY ARE DIFFERENT CONTRACTS IN THE SENSE THAT THEY ARE ASKING, OR THEY SPECIFY DIFFERENT TASKS ASSIGNED TO EACH RESPECTIVE VENDOR.
>> WITHOUT EXTENDING THE CONVERSATION ON THIS ITEM, IS IT POSSIBLE TO JUST SPLIT THE TWO WITHOUT HAVING ONE CONTRACT?
>> I'M SORRY. THAT'S MY POINT, WHICH IS THERE IS NO PRICE.
[OVERLAPPING] WHEN WE SAY $80,000, THEORETICALLY.
I'M NOT SAYING THAT IT'S LIKELY OR PROBABLY NEVER TO HAPPEN.
WE COULD SPEND $75,000 OF THAT $80,000 ON ONE VENDOR BECAUSE WE NEVER ASKED THE OTHER VENDOR THAT WE NEED THEIR SERVICES AS SPECIFIED IN THEIR SCOPE OF SERVICES.
THERE IS NO SPECIFIC AMOUNT OF THAT $80,000 ASSIGNED TO EITHER VENDOR AT THIS POINT.
>> WELL, AND I WOULD JUST ASK THAT WE NOT GET PUSHED INTO A CORNER ABOUT HOW MUCH WE SPEND PER VENDOR AND ALL THAT STUFF.
WE ARE GOING TO WORK ON A SOCIAL MEDIA OVERHAUL SO THAT WE DO REACH MORE PEOPLE, THAT THE CAMPAIGNS ARE MORE EFFECTIVE.
THIS IS WHAT THIS CONTRACT IS ABOUT.
WE NEED TO GET INTO WHAT THE PLAN LOOKS LIKE AND WHAT THOSE COSTS ARE.
I DON'T WANT TO PREMATURELY HAVE A CONVERSATION LIMITING THINGS WHEN WE DON'T YET KNOW WHAT WE NEED.
I JUST CAUTION US SETTING CEILINGS PER VENDOR.
LET US START WORKING WITH THEM AND SEE WHAT WE GOT.
THE ISSUE THAT CAME UP, WE PUT THIS RFP OUT.
WE DIDN'T EXPECT WHAT WE GOT BACK EITHER.
BUT WHAT WE LEARNT WAS WE WERE ABLE TO LEVERAGE THE PARTICULAR EXPERIENCE AND SKILL SET OF BOTH OF THESE VENDORS IN DIFFERENT WAYS.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO HERE.
>> THANK YOU, AND YES, THE CONTRACTS, AND I'M GETTING NODS, DO NOT HAVE A DOLLAR AMOUNT OF HOW MUCH YOU CAN HAVE IN YOUR CONTRACT.
THEY JUST SAY IF YOU DO THIS JOB, YOU'RE GOING TO GET PAID THIS.
I DO THINK THAT PART OF THE ISSUE WAS US IN A BUDGETARY ITEM THAT IF WE CAN JUST NOW HAVE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO REMOVE ANY REFERENCE TO THE AMOUNTS WRITTEN IN THIS AGENDA ITEM, WE CAN ACTUALLY GET A CONTRACT SIGNED THAT BOTH VENDORS ARE SAYING THEY WISH TO HAVE SIGNED.
IF EVERYBODY NEEDS ME TO HAVE THEM COME UP HERE TO SAY IT, JUST TO GET IT ON THE RECORD AND DELAY THIS MATTER MORE, THEN WE WILL.
BUT THEY BOTH SAID THAT THEY WANT US TO MOVE FORWARD AND AGAIN, WE'RE THE ONES HOLDING IT BACK.
THERE IS NOTHING IN THESE CONTRACTS THAT HAVE A DOLLAR AMOUNT SAYING THAT THEY CAN ONLY SPEND UP TO A CERTAIN AMOUNT.
THEY JUST SAID IF YOU ASK ME TO DO THE SERVICE, I DO THIS SERVICE, YOU'RE GOING TO PAY ME.
SO CITY COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS, CAN I PLEASE REMOVE THE- [OVERLAPPING]
>> I THINK THAT CAME FROM THE LAST MEETING OF THIS DISCUSSION WHERE IT WAS SAID THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE 50-50.
>> UNDERSTOOD. BUT IT HAS BEEN CLEARED AND IT HAS BEEN CLARIFIED THAT IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A 50-50.
IT'S YOU'RE GOING TO DO THIS SCOPE OF WORK, YOU'RE GOING TO DO THIS SCOPE OF WORK, AND TEAM, PIO AND SOCIAL MEDIA, YOU'RE GOING TO BE MEETING AND YOU'RE GOING TO SET A PLAN FOR THE CITY AND YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE US DO FANTASTIC OUT THERE IN THE PUBLIC.
THAT'S WHAT IT IS. WILL YOU PLEASE ACCEPT THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO REMOVING ANY FINANCIAL WORDING OF NOT TO EXCEED OR EXCEEDING OR ANYTHING ABOUT $80,000.
I'LL READ IT RIGHT OUT THERE BECAUSE I THINK THE CITY CLERK WOULD PREFER THAT.
I CAN SEE YOUR HEAD GOING YES, PLEASE.
[OVERLAPPING] THE WORDING WOULD BE RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA APPROVING THE AWARD OF RFP NUMBER 22.06R, DIGITAL MARKETING SERVICES TO CONNECTICUT, LLC AND FMO MEDIA FOR A THREE-YEAR TERM, AUTHORIZING THE APPROPRIATE CITY OFFICIALS TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENTS WITH CONNECTICUT, LLC AND FBO MEDIA, FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER EXECUTE OPTIONS TO RENEW AFTER TWO YEARS FOR TOTAL CONTRACT PERIOD, CONTINUE, CONTINUE, CONTINUE.
BUT JUST REMOVING THAT ONE ITEM.
DO YOU ACCEPT THAT FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS? THANK YOU. VICE MAYOR, DO YOU FURTHER SECOND?
>> YEAH. I'LL SECOND IT. BUT BEFORE I DO, I JUST WANT TO SAY IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S CONSENSUS FROM THE COMMISSION BETWEEN MYSELF, COMMISSIONER BOLTON, AND COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS THAT WE DO WANT THE CITY TO INVEST MORE.
[04:30:06]
FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENDING THIS DISCUSSION AND MOVING ON, I'LL TAKE THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.BUT WE DO WANT TO SEE THE COMMISSION INVEST MORE AND I THINK WE DO WANT TO SEE THE PROJECT PLAN, ONCE YOU GET THE CONTRACT EXECUTED AND YOU HAVE WHATEVER YOUR PROJECT PLAN, BRING IT TO THE COMMISSION SO WE CAN SEE AND APPROVE.
>> WE'LL PROVIDE OUR FEEDBACK.
>> I SAID WE'LL PROVIDE OUR FEEDBACK.
>> WE'RE HAPPY TO BRING THE PLAN FOR YOUR REVIEW.
>> CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM. MAYOR GOMEZ?
>> MOTION PASS 5-0 AS AMENDED.
>> CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
IF YOU'RE LEAVING US, PLEASE GET HOME SAFELY, AND GOOD MORNING.
[5.b TR13810 - A Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida, awarding ITB 22-11b Tamarac Dog Park renovation project to Maceda Contractors, LLC. and approving the execution of an agreement between the City of Tamarac and Maceda Contractors, LLC. at a cost not to exceed $175,697.00 and a contingency allowance of $17,570.00 for a total project budget of $193,267.00. approving funding from the appropriate capital improvement accounts; providing for conflicts; providing for severability; and providing an effective date.]
WE'RE NOW GOING 5B, CR13801.CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD.
>> YES, MADAM MAYOR. MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, THIS IS A RESOLUTION OF CITY COMMISSION OF CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA ORDERING ITB 22-11B TAMARAC DOG PARK RENOVATION PROJECT TO MACEDA CONTRACTORS, LLC AND APPROVING THE EXECUTION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TAMARAC AND MACEDA CONTRACTORS, LLC.
THE COST NOT TO EXCEED $175,697 AND A CONTINGENCY ALLOWANCE OF $17,570 FOR A TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET OF $193,267, APPROVING FUNDING FROM THE APPROPRIATE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ACCOUNTS, PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, PROVIDING FOR SEPARABILITY, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
>> I NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND, PLEASE.
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PLACKO.
I WILL NOW OPEN THIS UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.
ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WISHING TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS? SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED.
GREG WARNER, OUR PARK AND REC DIRECTOR HAS A PRESENTATION FOR US.
>> GOOD MORNING, MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
GREG WARNER, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION AND I JUST HAVE A SHORT PRESENTATION TO SHOW YOU SOME OF THE SPECIFICS AS TO WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING AT THE DOG PARK TO FRESHEN IT UP AFTER ALL THESE YEARS.
JUST STARTING OUT, I HAVE SOME PHOTOS OF THE EXISTING DOG PARK AND SOME PEOPLE DO REFER TO IT AS GARY B. JONES PARK FOR PEOPLE AND PUPS, I WILL BE USING DOG PARK TONIGHT.
IT OPENED IN 2008, CONSISTS OF THREE DIFFERENT AREAS; A LARGE DOG AREA, SMALL DOG AREA, AND A COMMON AREA.
IT'S BEEN CONSISTENTLY USED THROUGHOUT THE YEARS THAT IT'S BEEN OPENED BY OUR COMMUNITY AND I THINK IT'S BEEN VERY WELL USED AND VERY MUCH APPRECIATED BY THE RESIDENTS.
YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THESE ELEMENTS.
FROM 2008, WE'RE TALKING 14 YEARS THAT THE PARK'S BEEN OPEN, MOST OF THESE ELEMENTS ARE THE ORIGINAL ELEMENTS FROM WHEN THE PARK WAS ORIGINALLY BUILT.
YOU SEE UP HERE THE LEASH STRUCTURE, THE TRASH CAN, THE JODIE RAM, THE MET STATIONS ALL VERY WORN, ALL READY TO BE REPLACED.
WITH THE CONDITION OF THE EQUIPMENT, STAFF HAS HAD TO DO REPAIRS, HAS HAD TO REMOVE PIECES AND REPLACE PIECES AS WE'VE MOVED ALONG.
INVITATION TO BID 22-11B WAS ISSUED SOLICITING QUALIFIED FIRMS TO BID ON THE PERMITTING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE TAMARAC DOG PARK RENOVATION PROJECT.
WE HAD MACEDA CONTRACTORS, LLC WAS DEEMED THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE AND RESPONSIBLE PROPOSER AMONG THE SIX COMPANIES, AND I HOPE THE OTHER COMPANIES, OTHER FIVE COMPANIES LISTED THERE AND A LITTLE BIT ABOUT MACEDA CONTRACTORS.
MORE THAN 14 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN THE SOUTH FLORIDA MARKET DOING CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS.
A FEW EXAMPLES OF THEIR MUNICIPAL PROJECTS INCLUDE RYAN PARK TRAIL AND PICNIC FACILITIES FOR THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PINES THE BILL KEITH PRESERVE BOARDWALK FOR THE CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE, AND THEN PLAYGROUND AND HARDCORE CONSTRUCTION FOR THE SCHOOL BOARD OF BROWARD COUNTY, AND ALSO MACEDA CONTRACTORS IS A HISPANIC- LATINO MINORITY BUSINESS ENTERPRISE CERTIFIED BY THE STATE OF FLORIDA.
GETTING INTO THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT A LITTLE BIT, AS I SAID,
[04:35:02]
THIS WILL BE A REFRESHER, A RENOVATION OF THE EXISTING PARK.ONE THING I DO WANT TO MAKE CLEAR IS THIS PROJECT, AS THEY DO THE CONSTRUCTION WITHIN THE PROJECT, IT WILL BE PHASED THROUGHOUT THE DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE PARK SO THE PARK WILL REMAIN OPEN THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT HERE.
MAYBE SOME SMALLER AREAS FOR THE DOGS, BUT THERE WILL BE AREAS REMAINING OPEN.
WE'RE GOING TO BE REMOVING AND REPLACING THE EXISTING FENCE FABRIC AND THE GATE LATCHES GOING INTO THE PARK.
THERE'LL BE REFURBISHMENT OF THE POSTS AND RAILS WHICH ARE IN STRUCTURALLY GOOD SHAPE, JUST APPEARANCE WISE, THEY WILL BE REFURBISHED, REMOVE AND REPLACE ALL METAL ROOFS FROM THE SHADE STRUCTURES.
AGAIN, THE STRUCTURES THEMSELVES ARE IN GOOD STRUCTURAL CONDITION.
THE SHELTER WILL BE REPLACED AND THEN THE STRUCTURES WILL BE REFURBISHED AS WE MOVE FORWARD THROUGH THAT.
REMOVE AND REPLACE ALL BENCHES, TRASH CANS, WASTE BAG RECEPTABLES, AND THE DOG LEASH POST.
THESE ARE SOME OF THE PHOTOS OF THE NEWER TYPES.
I REALLY LIKED THE TRASH CANS.
I'LL HAVE TO PAUSE ON THERE, THERE WILL BE THEMED TRASH CANS.
WE'RE ALSO, AS PART OF THE PROJECT, WE'RE GOING TO BE ADDING TWO WI-FI POLES WITHIN THE PARK AND THOSE WILL SERVE TO ENHANCE WI-FI IN THE PARK, AS WELL AS PROVIDE SECURITY FOR THE DOG PARK AS WELL.
THEY'LL ALSO BE DOING A GENERAL CLEANUP WITH PRESSURE CLEANING OF THE EXISTING SIDEWALKS AND WALKWAYS, THE CONCRETE SLABS.
ALSO ONE OF THE ISSUES WE'VE HAD THROUGH THE YEARS WITH THE DOG OWNERS IS BUFO FROGS AND DIFFERENT CREATURES HAVE BEEN IN THE PARK.
THEY GATHER IN THE SHRUB AREAS THAT ARE IN THE PARK.
THE SHRUBS LOOK NICE, BUT FUNCTIONALLY THEY ARE NOT.
THEY DON'T WORK FOR US, SO WE'RE GOING TO BE REMOVING THOSE SHRUBS AND REPLACING THOSE AREAS WITH SOD.
THE SPECIFICS OF THE AGREEMENT, THE CONTRACTOR, MACEDA CONTRACTORS, CONTRACT AMOUNT OF 175,697 WITH THE CONTINGENCY 10 PERCENT AT 17,570 FOR A TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET OF 193,267, AND THE FUNDING FOR THE PROJECT IS IN THE CITY'S CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
THE CONTRACTUAL TIMELINE IS 270 CALENDAR DAYS AND IT SEEMS LIKE A LONG TIME FOR THIS TYPE OF PROJECT AND HOPEFULLY, IT WILL BE TOO LONG OF A TIME FRAME.
THE REASON THERE ARE 270 DAYS IN THERE IS BECAUSE WE'RE NOT SURE ABOUT DELIVERY TIMES AND ALL THE ELEMENTS.
THAT'S STILL AN ISSUE WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION MARKET RIGHT NOW, GETTING THE PIECES IN.
WHAT I HAVE FOUND OUT IS, IF THIS ITEM IS APPROVED TONIGHT, CONSTRUCTION WILL BEGIN WITHIN THE NEXT 3-4 WEEKS.
WE ARE PICKING UP A SIGN TOMORROW FROM THE SIGN COMPANY FOR A COMING SOON SIGN AND IT WILL IDENTIFY.
WE'LL HAVE THAT POSTED AT THE PARK BY THE END OF THIS WEEK, WORDING EVERYBODY, THE DOG PARK OWNERS WILL KNOW THAT THIS IS COMING, THE PROJECT IS COMING, AND WHAT'S COMING WITH THE PROJECT.
AT THIS TIME I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
>> I AM NOT SEEING ANY COMMENTS SO I'M GOING TO SAY THANK YOU BECAUSE I KNOW I'VE SPOKEN TO SOME RESIDENTS AS YOU MAY KNOW, AND THEY'LL BE VERY EXCITED TO KNOW COMING SOON SIGN WILL BE COMING AND THERE WILL BE SOME BENCHES FOR THEM TO SIT ON AND PARENTS ARE VERY EXCITED.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALL THAT YOU HAVE PUT INTO TO GET THIS TO COME TO FRUITION.
WITHOUT FURTHER ADO, CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL OUT.
>> MOTION PASSED FIVE TO ZERO. THANK YOU.
>> NOW WE'RE GOING TO 5CTR13811.
[5.c TR13811 - A Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida, to approve a Grant Agreement and $250,000.00 grant award with plaza owner ADE Advantage LLC for the Façade and Exterior Improvement Grant Economic Development Program for a comprehensive renovation to McNab Plaza, 7015-23 N University Drive; Providing for Conflicts; Providing for Severability; and Providing for an Effective Date.]
EXCITED ABOUT THIS ITEM 2.CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD.
>> YES MADAM MAYOR AND MEMBERS COMMISSION.
THIS IS RESOLUTION CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA TO PROVE A GRANT AGREEMENT OF $250,000 GRANT AWARD WITH PLAZA OWNER ADE ADVANTAGE, LLC FOR THE FACADE EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENT GRANT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR
[04:40:04]
A COMPREHENSIVE RENOVATION TO MCNAB PLAZA AT 7015 THROUGH 23 NORTH UNIVERSITY DRIVE, PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, PROVIDING FOR SEPARABILITY, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.I NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND, PLEASE.
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BOLTON, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS.
I WILL NOW OPEN THIS FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.
SEEING ABSOLUTELY NONE, PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED.
LORI FUNDERWHITE, OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MANAGER IS AVAILABLE WITH THE PRESENTATION THAT I NOW I'M EXCITED TO SEE.
>> EXCELLENT. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, AND COMMISSIONERS.
THIS ITEM BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS A GRANT AGREEMENT AND PROPOSED FACADE AND EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS GRANT AWARD FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAZA RENOVATION PROJECT TO THE FORMER WINN-DIXIE PROPERTY AT THE NORTH WEST CORNER OF UNIVERSITY OF MCNAB, WHICH WILL BRING A NEW BRAVO GROCER TENANT AND ADDITIONAL BUSINESSES TO THE PLAZA.
AS YOU KNOW THAT A TOP STRATEGIC GOAL FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN TAMARAC IS TO REVITALIZE, MODERNIZED, REDEVELOP, AND DEVELOP OUR COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS AS OUTLINED IN OUR PLANS, INCLUDING THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC PLAN PLUS THE COMMERCIAL ARTERIAL REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THE STRATEGIC PLAN 2040.
AS WAS RECOMMENDED IN THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC PLAN, THE DEVELOPER INCENTIVES PROGRAM WAS DEVELOPED AND THEN ADOPTED BY THE CITY COMMISSION IN JUNE OF LAST YEAR.
TWO GRANT PROGRAMS ARE ADAPTED FOR 2022 THROUGH THE END OF NEXT YEAR.
THIS PROGRAM, THE COMMERCIAL PLAZA OWNER FACADE AND EXTERIOR GRANTS PROGRAM, AND THEN ALSO THE COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT ACCELERATOR GRANT.
THESE GRANT PROGRAMS WERE LAUNCHED TO INCENTIVIZE PRIVATE SECTOR INVESTMENT WITH THE GOAL OF REVITALIZING OUR COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS AND ENHANCING ALSO THE ABILITY TO ATTRACT QUALITY RETAIL AND COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES WITH MODERNIZED PROPERTIES.
THIS WILL BE OUR FIRST RECOMMENDED PLAZA PROPERTY FOR THE FACADE GRANT PROGRAM AWARD.
BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING, IT'S FOR MCNAB PLAZA, WHICH IS THE FORMER WINN-DIXIE, APPROXIMATELY SIX-ACRE PROPERTY THAT HAS BEEN VACANT FOR ABOUT FOUR YEARS.
THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE MEDICAL MILE REDEVELOPMENT AREA, AND IT IS ALSO BEEN TARGETED AS A FOCUS AREA PROPERTY IN THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC PLAN.
THE PLAZA OWNER, ADE ADVANTAGE LLC IS PLANNING AN ALMOST FOUR MILLION DOLLAR, $3.88 MILLION RENOVATION PROJECT THAT INCLUDES SIGNIFICANT EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS AND REDEVELOPMENT OF THE ENTIRE PROPERTY.
THE PROJECT HAS RECEIVED MINOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL AND IT MEETS THE FACADE GRANT PROGRAM GOAL OF A COMPREHENSIVE AND TRANSFORMATIVE EXTERIOR PLAZA RENOVATION, WHICH WILL REVITALIZE A PROMINENT COMMERCIAL PROPERTY IN TAMARAC.
THE EXISTING BIG BOX BUILDING WOULD BE SUBDIVIDED FOR MULTI-TENANTS, INCLUDING, AS I MENTIONED, THE NEW BRAVO GROCER ANCHORS TENANT, AND WILL BRING 1-2 ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES STILL TO BE DETERMINED TO THE IMPROVED PROPERTY.
THE RENOVATION PROJECT WILL DEMO THE EXISTING FRONTAGE AND REPLACE IT WITH A NEW MODERN ARTICULATED FACADE WAS SIMULATED WOOD PANELS, CULTURED STONES, METAL AWNINGS, AND THREE NEW PROMINENT ENTRANCES.
ALL NEW AND ADDITIONAL WINDOWS AND DOORS WILL BE ADDED FOR BETTER LIGHTING AND A MORE INVITING DESIGN.
LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE MADE WITH NEW MODERN LED SCONCES AT THE ENTRANCES AS WELL AS PARKING LOT LIGHTING UPGRADES AND MODERN AND IMPROVED LED LIGHTS.
HERE'S SOME RENDERINGS FOR THE PROJECT, THE FRONT PART, THE BEFORE AND AFTER PHOTOS.
WE HAVE PHOTOS AS THE PROPERTY EXISTS NOW AND WITH THIS PROJECT, THE RENDERINGS FOR WHAT THE PROJECT WILL LOOK LIKE.
THIS IS THE FRONT FACADE RENDERING, AND THEN HERE WE HAVE THE VANTAGE POINT FROM THE SOUTHEAST, THE CURRENT PHOTO, AND THE FACADE RENDERING.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE NEW FACADE COMPLETELY TRANSFORMS THE EXISTING BIG BOX.
THEN WE HAVE THE PHOTO AND RENDERING FROM THE EAST.
AS YOU CAN SEE, RIGHT NOW, THE EAST FACADE IS BASICALLY A BLANK WALL THAT WILL BE IMPROVED WITH A NEW ARTICULATED FACADE DESIGN, ADDING WINDOWS, AWNINGS, AND IMPROVED LANDSCAPING.
IN TERMS OF PROCESS FOR GRANT APPLICATIONS, JUST VERY QUICKLY, WE HAVE A STAFF GRANT REVIEW PANEL OR GRP, AS I LIKE TO CALL US, THAT REVIEWS, EVALUATES AND APPROVES PROJECT APPLICATIONS TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COMMISSION FOR GRANT AGREEMENT CONSIDERATION.
THE STAFF GRP HAS REVIEWED THE PROJECT APPLICATION FOR THE PLAZA OWNER FACADE AND EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS GRANT PROGRAM, AND UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS THE GRANT AGREEMENT AND AWARD WITH 80 ADVANTAGE, LLC FOR THE MCNAB PLAZA PROJECT AT 7015-23 NORTH UNIVERSITY DRIVE.
[04:45:07]
WE'VE DETERMINED THIS PROJECT MEETS THE GRANT PROGRAM ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS AND WILL ACHIEVE THE PROGRAM GOAL OF SIGNIFICANT COMMERCIAL PROPERTY REVITALIZATION, WHICH WILL ALSO RESULT IN A POSITIVE FISCAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACT FOR THE CITY.UPON GRANT AGREEMENT APPROVAL BY THE CITY COMMISSION, SHOULD IT BE APPROVED, AT DEVELOPER PLAZA OWNER HAS SIX MONTHS TO BEGIN THE PROJECT AND 18 MONTHS TO COMPLETE IT.
AGAIN, THIS IS A REIMBURSEMENT GRANT PROGRAM WHEREBY THE $250,000 IN GRANT FUNDS WILL BE RELEASED UPON SUCCESSFUL PROJECT COMPLETION, BUILDING INSPECTION APPROVALS AND UPON RECEIPT OF AN ITEMIZED FUNDING REQUEST WITH PAID INVOICES, ALL AS STIPULATED IN THE GRANT AGREEMENT.
FUNDS FOR THIS PROGRAM HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AND ALLOCATED WITHIN THE GENERAL FUND FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES.
AGAIN, THIS APPROXIMATELY SIX ACRE SITE HAS BEEN VACANT FOR ABOUT FOUR YEARS NOW WHEN WINN-DIXIE DEPARTED AND ONCE FINISHED WITH ALMOST FOUR MILLION DOLLAR INVESTMENT BY THE PROPERTY OWNER, THE COMPLETED FACADE AND EXTERIOR RENOVATIONS PROJECT WILL RESULT IN A TRANSFORMED, REVITALIZED PROPERTY, INCLUDING A COMPLETELY NEW FACADE WITH UPGRADED LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING, AND PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS.
I THINK AS YOU KNOW, OUR DEVELOPER INCENTIVES AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GRANT PROGRAM IS A TARGETED AND FOCUSED INVESTMENT BY THE CITY TO FACILITATE TRANSFORMATIVE CHANGE IN OUR COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS AND REDEVELOPMENT AREAS.
PROJECTS ARE RECOMMENDED TO THE COMMISSION FOR GRANT AGREEMENT APPROVAL FOR THE OVERALL ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY IMPACT, TO SPUR INVESTMENT, TO REVITALIZE OUTDATED PROPERTIES, ATTRACT NEW BUSINESSES, AND INCREASE THE COMMERCIAL TAX BASE, WHICH THIS PROJECT WILL DO.
WITH ME HERE TONIGHT IS KAREN HERNANDEZ WHO IS REPRESENTING THE PLAZA OWNERS, AND WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COMMISSIONER PLACKO.
GOOD JOB. THAT BUILDING HAS BEEN SITTING THERE FOR FOUR YEARS, IT IS A NIGHTMARE.
I LIKE VERY MUCH THAT WE HAVE IN HERE AS A CONDITION OF RECEIVING THIS GRANT, THE GRANT AGREEMENT STIPULATES THAT THE CITY WILL HAVE THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL RIGHTS FOR FUTURE TENANTS.
I THINK THAT'S VITAL FOR ME AT LEAST.
DO WE HAVE ANYTHING IN MIND AT THAT POINT? BUT I KNOW IT'S WHATEVER THE MARKET WILL DICTATE.
BUT I HOPE WE WILL BE SENSITIVE TO WHAT WE PUT IN THAT ONE OR TWO EXTRA SPOT.
>> WE WILL. I KNOW THE PLAZA OWNER IS TALKING WITH PEOPLE NOW.
THEY'RE JUST NOT READY. THERE'S NO LEASE SIGNED YET.
THEY'RE NOT READY TO ANNOUNCE.
WITH THAT CLAUSE, WE JUST BECAUSE OF THE SIGNIFICANT GRANT INVESTMENT IN THE PROPERTY, WE WOULD JUST LIKE TO HAVE THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL, COURTESY OR RIGHTS TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHO'S COMING INTO THE PROPERTY.
>> I THINK THAT'S A GOOD SAFEGUARD FOR US, BUT THAT'S A PRIME LOCATION.
TO NOW FINALLY, HAVE SOMEONE IN THERE AND ALTHOUGH I HATE TO SAY THIS, I'VE NEVER BEEN IN A BRAVO SUPERMARKET, BUT I DON'T REALLY GO TO SUPERMARKETS MUCH SO, BUT I DEFINITELY WILL GO IN THERE.
I THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE A GREAT ADDITION.
I THINK IT'S THE PERFECT SITE FOR IT AND GOOD JOB.
>> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS.
I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT YOU SAID CITY MANAGER, THROUGH THE CHAIR OR MS. LAURIE, THE LOT TO THE WEST.
>> ON THAT LOT, THERE WILL BE A KELLY COFFEE. IT'S BEEN PROPOSED.
IT'S GOING THROUGH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THEN WOULD COME TO THE COMMISSION FOR A FINAL APPROVAL IN THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS.
>> YES, THAT'S A SEPARATELY OWNED PROPERTY.
JUST AGAIN, GOOD JOB ON THE QUALITY WORK THAT YOU HAVE BEEN DOING FOR THE CITY.
I GUESS I WILL BE TRYING BRAVO OVER THE OTHER SHOPPING PLACES AND I LOOK FORWARD.
I'M ALWAYS IMPRESSED BY COMMISSIONER PLACKO'S QUESTIONS.
THEY ARE ALWAYS WELL THOUGHT OFF AND TYPICALLY THE SAME QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT, THAT I WOULD HAVE HIGHLIGHTED IN THE SAME WAY THAT I HIGHLIGHT MY BOOK.
[04:50:03]
I MEAN, THESE BOOKS ARE SO BIG WITH LOTS OF BACKUP INFORMATION AND TO GO THROUGH THESE BOOKS IS A PAIN.I JUST WANTED TO MENTION, IT'S JUST SO REFRESHING THAT WE COME UP WITH THE SAME QUESTIONS.
GOOD JOB TO YOU AND I LOOK FORWARD TO BRAVO.
>> THANK YOU. LAURIE, WHAT WOULD YOU SAY TO THE COMMON EVERYDAY RESIDENT WHO SAYS THIS IS NOT A GOOD SPEND OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS? GIVING $250,000 TO A DEVELOPER.
>> I WOULD SAY PART OF THE REASON THAT WE DO THIS, IT'S WE'RE MAKING AN INVESTMENT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WITH PROJECTS LIKE THIS AND WITH IT, I MEAN, WE CERTAINLY GET A REVITALIZED COMMERCIAL PROPERTY AND COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR, WHICH IS REALLY OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOAL, BUT WE ALSO GET A RETURN ON OUR INVESTMENT.
THIS IS A PROPERTY THAT'S BEEN SITTING VACANT.
SO IT'LL BE COMPLETELY RENOVATED, IT WILL BRING IN NEW BUSINESSES, SO THERE'S GOING TO BE AN ECONOMIC AND FISCAL IMPACT WITH PROPERTY TAXES FOR THE CITY AS WELL.
WE ALSO KEEP THAT IN MIND WHEN WE'RE MAKING THIS; IT'S AN INVESTMENT.
>> HOW DO YOU MEASURE RETURN ON INVESTMENT?
>> WELL, WE'LL HAVE TO SEE WHEN THE PROPERTY IS REASSESSED AFTER IT'S REDEVELOPED, BUT THAT'S CERTAINLY HOW WOULD WE WOULD MEASURE THE FISCAL IMPACT.
>> IT'S NOT UNCOMMON FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO PARTNER WITH BUSINESSES TO DRIVE DEVELOPMENT AND ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES SO THAT IT CAN IMPROVE THE ECONOMY.
>> WHETHER IT'S $5,000 OR $250,000, IT'S COMMON FOR GOVERNMENT AGENCIES TO PARTNER WITH BUSINESSES AND COMMUNITIES TO HELP REVITALIZE THE CITY.
>> YES, BUT THIS APPLICANT ACTUALLY APPLIED AND FOLLOW PROPER PROCEDURES VERSUS TRYING TO JUMP A LINE.
ANYWAY, BASICALLY I TOO AM VERY HAPPY WITH THE SAFEGUARDS THAT ARE IN PLACE.
I BELIEVE THAT IT ALSO ALLOWS US TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN THE APPLICANT HAS FINISHED WITH CERTAIN CONSTRUCTION, IF THINGS ARE DONE BEFORE THE NEW PEOPLE GO IN, THEIR INVESTMENT DOLLARS ARE STILL WORKING AND WE CANNOT HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH CORRIDOR OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT WE'VE HAD WITH SOME OTHERS AND NOT SAYING SINS OF THE PAST WILL BE ON THIS PROJECT AND I'M PRETTY SURE IT WON'T.
I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO, I GO TO MANY MEETINGS AND THIS HAS RISEN TO THE LEVEL OF THE FIRST OR SECOND QUESTION EVERY TIME.
WHAT'S GOING INTO THE WINN-DIXIE PLAZA? I TOLD THEM THAT THERE'S SOMETHING COMING, BUT IT COULDN'T TALK MORE ABOUT IT UNTIL WE GOT THROUGH HERE TONIGHT AND I'M GOING TO BE VERY EXCITED TO GIVE THEM THE DETAIL ON THIS.
I'M VERY HAPPY WITH THE LANDSCAPING AND THE LIGHTING FROM WHAT I CAN TELL, I'M SURE IT'S GOING TO BE VERY BRIGHT AND VERY BEAUTIFUL AND KEEPING IT NICE AND CLEAN AND GOOD-LOOKING.
I LOOK FORWARD TO THE CONCURRENCY OF HAVING KELLY COFFEE NEXT DOOR IF THAT SHOULD COME THROUGH AND I'M SURE THAT THE TWO LAYOUTS OF THE PROPERTY WILL BE SAFE AND SECURE AND BRIGHTLY LIT AND COMPATIBLE IN THE WAY THAT MAKES IT A NICE FLOW FOR OUR CITY AND THE AESTHETICS.
ALSO I DO THINK OF 14 TIME RETURN ON INVESTMENT IS PRETTY GOOD IF WE HAVE A $3.5 MILLION PROPERTY, MONEY BEING PUT IN AND WE DIVIDE $250,000 TO BE PROVIDED IN THIS GRANT PROGRAM, THAT IS ABOUT RATE OF RETURN OF 14 TIMES 14 TIMES.
IT'LL DEFINITELY SPARK OUR ECONOMY AND I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING WHATEVER ELSE IS PUT IN THERE.
EXCELLENT JOB TO YOU AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TENACITY AND WORKING HARD ON THIS.
AT THIS TIME, WE'RE GOING TO CALL THE ROLL. CITY CLERK?
>> THANK YOU MAYOR. VICE MAYOR GELIN?
>> MOTION PASS 5-0. THANK YOU.
NOW WE ARE MOVING TO 5 DTR 13812.
[5.d TR13812 - A Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida, approving a Purchase and Sale Agreement to acquire the real property located at 4959 N. State Road 7 for a purchase price of One Million Two-Hundred and Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($1,275,000.00); Authorizing the City Manager and City Attorney to take all necessary action to effectuate the purchase; Providing for severability and providing for an effective date.]
CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD.>> YES, MADAM MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, THIS IS A RESOLUTION TO THE COMMISSION, CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA, APPROVING A PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT TO ACQUIRE THE REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4959 NORTH STATE ROAD 7, FOR PURCHASE PRICE OF $1,275,000, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY TO TAKE ALL NECESSARY ACTION TO EFFECTUATE THE PURCHASE, PROVIDING FOR SEPARABILITY, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
>> THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME I NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND.
[04:55:01]
>> COMMISSIONER BOLTON WITH THE MOTION, COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS WITH THE SECOND.
WE'LL ASK FOR ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS.
SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED.
LAURIE FINDLAY OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MANAGER IS MAKING ANOTHER PRESENTATION TO US. PLEASE PROCEED.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. GOOD EVENING ONCE AGAIN.
FOR THE RECORD, LAURIE FINDLAY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MANAGER.
THIS ITEM BEFORE YOU IS A PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT FOR THE CITY TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY OF 4959 NORTH STATE ROAD 7.
THIS ACQUISITION IS AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY FOR THE CITY, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE BRINGING THIS BEFORE YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
WE'RE SEEKING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF THE CONTRACT WORTH OF PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT TO ACQUIRE THIS COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, WHICH IS LOCATED WITHIN A TARGETED REDEVELOPMENT AREA FOR THE CITY.
THIS PURCHASE IS IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE COMMISSION ADOPTED TAMARAC ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC PLAN TO ACQUIRE STRATEGIC PROPERTIES FOR FUTURE COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT PURPOSES, TO REVITALIZE OUR CORRIDORS.
LAST YEAR, THE CITY COMMISSION APPROVED THE ACQUISITION OF THE PARCEL IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT AND SOUTH OF THIS ONE, 4949 NORTH STATE ROAD 7 FOR A FUTURE COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT.
BY PURCHASING THIS SITE AND ASSEMBLING THESE TWO PARCELS FOR A LARGER DEVELOPMENT SITE, THE CITY WILL SIGNIFICANTLY ENHANCE THE VALUE PROPOSITION FOR AN ATTRACTIVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT.
SHOULD THE CITY SUCCESSFULLY ACQUIRED THIS PROPERTY, WE WOULD ENDEAVOR TO SEEK QUALIFIED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS FOR FUTURE COMMISSION APPROVAL TO REDEVELOP THE SITE WITH AN ATTRACTIVE NEW COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT.
THIS SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR ACQUISITION IS LOCATED IN SEVERAL, AS I MENTIONED REDEVELOPMENT AREAS FOR THE CITY.
AS YOU KNOW, THIS LOCATION IS AN IMPORTANT GATEWAY INTO TAMARAC WITH OUR HIGHEST TRAFFIC COUNTS IN THE CITY, WHICH WILL BE ATTRACTIVE FOR OUR FUTURE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPER.
IS THE REASON WHY THIS LOCATION HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN ALL OF OUR CITY PLANS FOR COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT AND REVITALIZATION.
THE TAMARAC ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC PLAN ADOPTED BY THE COMMISSION IN 2018 SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED THIS PROPERTY ALONG WITH ADJACENT PROPERTIES FOR A TARGETED COMMERCIAL REVITALIZATION FOCUS AREA THAT WOULD BE PRIMED FOR COMMERCIAL OR MIXED-USE REDEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL.
THIS PROPERTY ALSO LIES WITHIN THE FOUR CORNERS SHOPPING REDEVELOPMENT AREA FROM THE COMMERCIAL ARTERIAL REDEVELOPMENT STUDY, AND IT'S ALSO A FEDERAL OPPORTUNITY ZONE.
A FEW SPECIFICS ABOUT THIS PROPERTY, 4959 NORTH STATE ROAD 7 IS JUST OVER A HALF AN ACRE AT 0.57 ACRES WITH AN EXISTING 9,300 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL BUILDING.
THE BROWARD COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISERS ASSESSED VALUE OF THIS PROPERTY IS 1.57 MILLION TO RECENT APPRAISALS OF THE PROPERTY AT 1.12 AND 1.05 MILLION, BRINGS THE AVERAGE OF THE TWO APPRAISALS TO 1.085 MILLION, WHICH IS 190,000 BELOW THE NEGOTIATED PURCHASE PRICE OF 1.275 MILLION.
THEREFORE, APPROVAL OF THIS AGREEMENT WOULD REQUIRE A SUPER MAJORITY OF THE COMMISSION.
IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CITY'S REAL ESTATE SERVICES FIRM, COLLIER'S INTERNATIONAL, WE FULLY ANTICIPATE THAT BY ASSEMBLING THESE TWO PARCELS FOR A LARGER COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT SIDE, THE CITY WILL BE ABLE TO SIGNIFICANTLY ENHANCE THE VALUE PROPOSITION TO ATTRACT A DESIRABLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT.
WITH THE ACQUISITION, THE CITY NOT ONLY RECEIVES A LARGER REVITALIZATION PROJECT, WHICH IS ULTIMATELY OUR GOAL, BUT ALSO THE COMMERCIAL MARKET COMPS SUPPORT THAT FINANCIALLY THE CITY WILL ALSO RECEIVE A RETURN ON THIS INVESTMENT IN THE FUTURE COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT OF A LARGER SITE.
HIGHLIGHTING A FEW OF THE KEY CONTRACT TERMS BEYOND THE PURCHASE PRICE, THERE WOULD BE DEPOSITS AND HAS GROW AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, 45 DAY INSPECTION PERIOD PLUS UP TO 45 DAYS TO CLOSE.
THERE ARE THREE TENANTS IN THE PROPERTY.
IN THE BUILDING WITH LEASE EXPLORATIONS OF DECEMBER 2022 AND FEBRUARY 2023, WHICH SHOULD WE ACQUIRE THE CITY IS PURCHASER WOULD NOT REALLY KNEW THE LEASES.
THERE ARE A COUPLE EXISTING BUILDING CODE CASES THAT ARE ADDRESSED IN THE CONTRACT AS WELL.
ONE IS REQUIRED 40-YEAR BUILDING SAFETY INSPECTION WHICH THE SELLER WOULD HAVE TO COMPLETE PRIOR TO CLOSING.
THE OTHER CASE ARE OBLIGATIONS, THE CITY WOULD ASSUME IT CLOSING IN CONNECTION WITH A MINOR AC STANDARD REPAIR ON THE ROOF, CONSIDERED TO BE MINOR REPAIR WORK, AS WELL AS ACCRUED LEANS OF APPROXIMATELY 51,000 THAT HAVE ACCUMULATED OVER A 10-YEAR OLD CASE FROM A PREVIOUS OWNER FOR THE AC STANDARD REPAIR.
THE PURCHASE PRICE AMOUNT OF 1.275 MILLION WILL BE CHARGED TO THE GENERAL FUND VIA TRANSFER FROM A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED RESERVE FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PURCHASES.
[05:00:01]
THIS HAS BEEN BUDGETED FOR IN FISCAL YEAR 2022.WITH THAT, AND IN CLOSING, I WILL ADD THAT OUR ADAPTED ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC PLAN, AGAIN, SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED THIS PARCEL AS ONE OF SEVERAL PROPERTIES, INCLUDING THE ONE WE ACQUIRED LAST YEAR THAT HAVE EXCELLENT OPPORTUNITY FOR REDEVELOPMENT, MIXED-USE POTENTIAL.
IT'S AN EXCELLENT OPPORTUNITY FOR THE CITY TO INVEST AND ASSEMBLE THESE PARCELS FOR SOMETHING LARGER THAN NOT ONLY WILL REVITALIZE THIS CORRIDOR, BUT EVENTUALLY BRING THE CITY OF FISCAL RETURN ON OUR INVESTMENT.
THEREFORE, WE'RE SEEKING YOUR COMMISSION APPROVAL TO EXECUTE THIS CONTRACT TO ACQUIRE 4959 NORTH STATE ROAD 7.
WITH ME HERE TONIGHT TOO, I WANTED TO MENTION IS KEN CROSNAU FROM COLLIER'S, WHO IS OUR REAL ESTATE SERVICES FIRM THAT HELPED BROKER THIS DEAL.
WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. YOU'RE JUST ON FIRE TONIGHT, LAURIE.
WHAT'S JUST SOUTH OF THIS PROPERTY?
>> IMMEDIATELY SOUTH IS THE ONE WE ACQUIRED LAST YEAR, 4949.
>> THEN WHAT'S SOUTH OF THAT PROPERTY?
>> THAT'S WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR.
THAT'S A REALLY NICE PIECE OF PROPERTY TO ACQUIRE.
SHOULD THERE BE MORE, I THINK THAT'S A WONDERFUL OPPORTUNITY FOR THE CITY.
>> WELL, I'LL SAY THE BEARS PROPERTY IS ACTUALLY ON THE MARKET.
OUR HOPE WOULD BE AT THIS POINT IS TO DO SOME A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP WITH A LARGER SITE.
AT THIS POINT, HAVING ACQUIRED THE SITE RIGHT NEXT TO THIS ONE, ASSEMBLING A LARGER PROPERTY, WE'RE ANCHORING THIS REDEVELOPMENT AREA.
I WOULD SAY WITH THE CITY'S INVESTMENT.
>> IT'S THE PERFECT AREA FOR REDEVELOPMENT.
I'M VERY HAPPY TO SEE THAT WE'VE ACQUIRED OR WILL HOPEFULLY BE ACQUIRING A SECOND PROPERTY AND POSSIBLY A THIRD.
KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK, LAURIE.
>> I'M SURE THAT BEARS WOULD SAY YES AFTER WE SAY YES TONIGHT, BUT I HAD A QUESTION ON REPAIRS.
WHY WOULD WE DO ANY REPAIRS THAT WOULD DEMOLISH THE WHOLE BUILDING?
>> WELL, THEY'RE MINOR AC STANDARD REPAIRS.
SHOULD WE ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY, WE WOULD ASSUME THOSE OBLIGATIONS.
>> BUT WE'RE GOING TO DEMOLISH THE BUILDING.
>> WE WOULD GET UP THERE AND TAKE A LOOK AT IT.
>> THAT'S ALL. I WAS JUST CONFUSED BY THAT.
>> IT'S GOOD TO SEE THE LAND ACQUISITION SO WE CAN CONTROL THE FUTURE.
BUT WHAT ARE THE POTENTIAL PLANS OR OPPORTUNITIES FOR THAT ACQUISITION?
>> AT THIS POINT, WE CONTROL THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH.
WITH THIS ACQUISITION, WE WOULD COMBINE THE TWO, AND THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE HAVE CONTROL OVER AT THIS POINT.
AT THE LEAST, WE COULD DO A WICKED ISSUE, RFP, TO SEEK DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS, TO REDEVELOP THE SITE FOR THE PROPERTIES WE OWN.
>> DO YOU AMBITION DEVELOPING COMMERCIAL PROPERTY OR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OR?
>> IT WOULD BE COMMERCIAL OR MIXED USE.
>> WHEN YOU SAY COMMERCIAL, WOULD THAT BE RETAIL OR LIKE AN OFFICE BUILDING?
>> THIS IS RIGHT NOW A NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT.
THE REDEVELOPMENT STUDY FOR THIS AREA CALLED FOR MIXED USE AS FUTURE POTENTIAL USE IN THIS AREA.
>> A QUESTION FOR MR. KRASNER.
ARE WE PAYING A COMPETITIVE PRICE FOR THIS COMPARED TO WHAT'S IN THE MARKET FOR THAT AREA?
>> YES, AS LORI ARTICULATED, GIVEN THE SCALE OF THE REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY, WHEN YOU FACTOR IN WHAT COULD BE DEVELOPED THERE AS A MIXED-USE PROPERTY, THE VALUES ARE WELL IN EXCESS OF WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE.
I CAN'T LOOK AT THESE PROPERTIES IN A VACUUM IN ISOLATION.
WHEN YOU FACTOR IN A LARGER OPPORTUNITY FOR RE-DEVELOPMENT, ABSOLUTELY.
>> DO YOU HAVE AN EXAMPLE OF A SIMILAR TRANSACTION WHERE YOU'VE SEEN A CLIENT PICK UP A COUPLE OF PROPERTIES IN SIMILAR CONDITION AS THESE PROPERTIES,
[05:05:05]
AND THEN WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE AFTER DEVELOPMENT, AND THEN WHAT THOSE VALUES WERE, THE VARIANCE OF THOSE VALUES OF THE PURCHASE PRICE, AND THEN THE VALUE AFTER IMPROVEMENT OR DEVELOPMENT?>> WE'VE DONE SOME ESTIMATES ON WHAT WE THINK IS GOING TO HAPPEN HERE.
I THINK WE'RE PRETTY CONSERVATIVE THAT WE THINK THE NUMBERS ARE GOING TO BE PROBABLY TWICE THE AMOUNT.
>> OKAY. ARE YOU NEGOTIATING WITH BELLS' NOW OR?
>> WE'RE TALKING I MEAN, THERE'S A BUNCH OF SORT OF PLAY IN THAT CARDER.
>> AS LORI SAID, WITH US BEING THE ANCHOR THERE, HAVING THE PROVERBIAL SEAT AT THE TABLE, I THINK IS REALLY GOING TO EFFECTUATE DEVELOPMENT THAT'LL TAKE PLACE THERE.
THEN LORI, AT WHAT POINT DID WE HIT LAUDERDALE LAKES WHEN IT'S TAMARAC STOP ON THAT 441?
>> MOVING SOUTH FROM BELLS, THERE IS A FUNERAL HOME AND THEN A PRESIDENTIAL PLAZA AND THAT'S IT.
>> ALL RIGHT. THEN IS THE PLAN TO ACQUIRE GOING DOWN UNTIL WE HIT LAKES?
>> WELL, THESE ARE ALL PRIVATELY OWNED SO- [LAUGHTER]
>> I THINK THE PLAN IS TO AGAIN ENGAGE IN DISCUSSIONS.
AS LORI SAID, I THINK IT'S GOING TO EVOLVE INTO A PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP, BUT AGAIN, HAVING A SIGNIFICANT STAKE IN THE RE-DEVELOPMENT BY ACQUIRING THIS PARCEL GIVES YOU THAT OPPORTUNITY TO ENGAGE IN CONVERSATIONS WITH GROUPS THAT MIGHT ACQUIRE SOME OF THE PARCELS NORTH AND SOUTH, BUT IT'S AN EXCITING OPPORTUNITY.
>> OKAY. WHAT'S THE COST AGAIN?
>> OKAY. THE FUNDS ARE COMING FROM
>> FROM, WE HAVE $5 MILLION IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUNDS THAT WERE EARMARKED YEARS AGO.
>> SO IT'S COMING FROM THAT, IT WILL BE TRANSFERRED.
WHEN YOU SAY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, THAT CAN ALSO MEAN LAND ACQUISITION OR PROPERTY ACQUISITION.
ARE WE BUYING JUST THE BUILDINGS OR LAND AND THE BUILDING OR IS IT TOGETHER?
>> ARE WE BUYING THE LAND AND THE BUILDING OR JUST THE BUILDING?
>> THE WHOLE PROPERTY. ALL RIGHT.
YOU SAID WE EARMARKED $5 MILLION BEFORE.
HOW MUCH DO WE HAVE LEFT FROM THAT AFTER THESE FEW ACQUISITIONS THAT WE'VE DONE?
>> THE ACQUISITION LAST YEAR WAS 900,000 AND THIS IS 1.275.
AGAIN ALSO OUR GRANT PROGRAMS ARE COMING OUT OF THIS DEVELOPMENT ROAD BECAUSE THOSE ARE ON PROJECT COMPLETION.
>> THERE'S ABOUT $3 MILLION LEFT IN THAT.
CITY MANAGER, DO WE PLAN ON SHIFTING MORE FUNDS TO THAT ACCOUNT FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT?
>> NOT AT THIS TIME, NOT IN THIS PROPOSED BUDGET BECAUSE WE DO HAVE THE MONEY SET ASIDE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT, THE INCENTIVE GRANTS.
SHOULD OTHER PURCHASES COME UP OF LAND, WE COULD GO TO THE FUND BALANCE, SO WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ADDITIONAL PROPOSED IN THE NEXT BUDGET BECAUSE WE WERE SUFFICIENTLY SET FROM OUR FORECASTING.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. IS THE CONTRACTS DONE OR SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM OR WE'RE GOING TO PROVE THIS ITEM AND THEN SIGN AN AGREEMENT?
THE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT IS THE CONTRACT, WHICH IS WHAT YOU'RE VOTING ON TONIGHT.
>> THE CHURCH HAS ALREADY SIGNED OFF ON IT AND EVERYTHING IS DONE ITS JUST THAT YOU'RE WAITING FOR US?
>> BECAUSE I DON'T WANT BISHOP FERGUSON TO THEN GO CHANGE HIS MIND. [LAUGHTER]
>> AGAIN, PART OF THIS PROCESS AS WELL AS INCENTIVIZING PEOPLE THAT HAVE TO MAKE OTHER ARRANGEMENTS FOR THEIR BUSINESS OR THEIR OPERATIONS SO THAT TAKES TIME AS WELL.
>> I THINK VICE MAYOR GELIN ALLUDED TO THIS, BUT I WANT TO ASK IT AGAIN.
IF YOU WERE TO ISOLATE BOTH PROPERTIES ON HIS OWN, BISHOP FERGUSON AND THE CHURCH, DO YOU THINK THAT THEY WOULD GET THE VALUE THAT WE'RE GIVING TO THEM TONIGHT FOR THE PROPERTY?
[05:10:06]
>> I THINK IT'S A FAIR NUMBER FOR A STANDALONE.
BUT AGAIN, I THINK THE RETURN ON THE INVESTMENT IS PART OF A LARGER DEVELOPMENT.
>> YOU KNOW, IT'S BITTERSWEET BECAUSE EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT I LIKE CHURCHES.
I ADORE CHURCHES AND MS. CALLOWAY WILL RECALL HOW MUCH I FOUGHT FOR BISHOP FERGUSON BECAUSE HE HAD SOME ISSUES WITH THE BUILDING AND WAS TRYING TO REACH SOME UNDERSTANDING WITH THE CITY TO MAKE THE CONGREGATION BIGGER AND THAT'S THE STUFF.
I CRIED THEM AT CALLOWAY'S OFFICE.
SHE ACTUALLY GAVE ME TISSUE [LAUGHTER] BECAUSE I REALLY, REALLY APPRECIATE BISHOP FERGUSON AND HIS CHURCH.
IT'S BITTERSWEET TO SEE HIM SELL THE PROPERTY BECAUSE I REALLY WANTED HIM TO SUCCEED IN THE AREA.
BUT WE UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S A BUSINESS DECISION FOR HIM.
I DON'T THINK THAT HE WAS FORCED TO SELL THE BUILDING. WAS HE?
>> NO. HE PRESENTED US WITH HIS TERMS.
>> OKAY, JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE.
>> YEAH. I THINK IT'S A WIN-WIN.
I THINK HE'S HAPPY, AND HE'S GOT A PLAN FOR HIS CONGREGATION THAT'S GOING TO MAKE THEM SUCCESSFUL, AND I THINK IT ALLOWS US TO ALSO BE SUCCESSFUL IN RE-DEVELOPMENT.
>> I JUST WANT TO PUT ON THE RECORD THAT I WAS NOT FOR THIS BEFORE BECAUSE MY GREATEST INTENTION WAS TO SEE THE CHURCH FLOURISH IN THAT AREA.
I THINK BISHOP FERGUSON IS A GREAT PASTOR AND FROM A PASTOR TO ANOTHER PASTOR, YOU BUY THESE PROPERTIES AND YOU HOPE THAT YOUR CONGREGATION WILL FLOURISH AND IN THE LOCATION THAT YOU HAVE VISIONED TO SEE AND THEN IT DOESN'T HAPPEN, YOU GET A LITTLE BIT DISAPPOINTED.
BUT I HOPE THAT WITH THIS ITEM TONIGHT THAT THE CHURCH GETS WHAT THEY WERE LOOKING FOR AND IT'S SOME BENEFIT TO THEM.
THIS GOES BACK TO MY PREVIOUS DISCUSSION TONIGHT ABOUT MR. CERNECH.
HE WAS A GREAT PERSON WITH ENVISIONING THINGS LIKE THIS.
I REMEMBER DISTINCTLY SITTING DOWN WITH HIM AND TALKING ABOUT MY DISTRICT AND HOW I WANTED TO SEE THINGS.
FROM THAT CONVERSATION, THIS $5 MILLION CAME ABOUT.
WE DIDN'T JUST PULL $5 MILLION OUT OF THE HAT.
HE SAID, "I WILL HELP YOU." I HOPE THAT THIS CITY MANAGER WILL CONTINUE THAT SHE'S BEEN GREAT SO FAR.
FINGERS CROSSED, WE'LL CONTINUE THAT WINNING STREAK AND MAKE SURE THAT WE ALLOT MORE MONEY TO THIS.
IF IT PLEASES THE MAYOR THOUGH, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST ASK BISHOP FERGUSON, WOULD YOU PERMIT HIM JUST TO ANSWER ONE QUESTION? THAT HE IS FOR THIS, THAT THIS IS A BENEFIT TO THE CHURCH BECAUSE I JUST WANT TO FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH VOTING YES TONIGHT AND TO GO FORTH.
>> PASTOR FERGUSON, WOULD YOU LIKE TO COME AND CONFIRM THAT THIS IS YOUR SIGNATURE ON THE CONTRACT AND YOU'RE HAPPY TO GO FORWARD? YOU CAN JUST WAVE IF YOU DON'T WANT TO COME UP.
WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO DO? WAVE, YOU'RE GOOD, YOU'RE HAPPY.
>> IT'S SOMETHING I WANT TO DO.
>> IT'S SOMETHING THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO DO.
>> COMMISSIONER BOLTON WOULD LIKE TO CONFIRM THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO DO THIS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M HAPPY.
>> JUST FROM A PASTOR TO A PASTOR,
[05:15:01]
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HE WANTS TO DO WHEN YOU GET A VISION FOR CERTAIN PLACE AND YOU KNOW, YOU'RE GIVING UP ON THAT.YOU JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS THE WILL OF THE SAVIOR AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT HE WANTS AND WITH THE PASTOR BEING THE HEAD OF THE VISION, I'M COMFORTABLE WITH PASSING THIS TONIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> PASTOR, THANK YOU. I KNOW THAT THERE HAS BEEN A LITTLE BIT OF A LONG ROAD ON SOME OF THIS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ENDURANCE AND FOR THE FAMILY AS WELL.
I'M GLAD TO SEE THIS IS COMING TO FRUITION.
SEVERAL YEARS AGO, I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE UP IN DC WHEN THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ZONES WERE BEING DISCUSSED.
ONE THING THAT SOME OF THESE TRIPS DO ALLOW FOR AND I WAS THERE WITH COMMISSIONER FISHMAN AT THE TIME, ALLOW FOR US TO BE IN THE EAR OF OUR SENATOR.
THANKFULLY, WE WERE THERE AT THAT GREAT TIME AND OUR CITY JUMPED RIGHT ON IT AND GOT US TO ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ZONES THAT ARE IN DISTRICT 1.
THIS IS IN THAT AREA AND THERE IS A GREAT PLAN IN PLACE FOR US TO LEVERAGE THE PROPERTY.
THANK YOU, PASTOR FERGUSON, FOR BEING WILLING TO BE PART OF A BIGGER PLAN FOR OUR CITY AND FOR REVITALIZATION AND ADDING IN BETTER ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES AND THEN SOME JOB OPPORTUNITIES AS WELL FOR THE PEOPLE WHO WILL BUILD.
I KNOW THAT WHETHER IT'S THEIRS OR THE OTHER PROPERTIES TO THE SOUTH OR THE PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH OR THE PROPERTIES AS WE GO ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF COMMERCIAL TOWARDS THE TURNPIKE, WHICH ARE ALL IN THAT ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ZONE, THE CITY HAS A GREAT VISION THAT'S COMING INTO FOCUS.
I WAS SPEAKING AT AN ORGANIZATION THE OTHER DAY.
THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT ONE COMMISSION STARTS THAT TIME IS A FACTOR TO MAKE THINGS COME THROUGH TO FRUITION.
YOU JUST HOPE THAT THE NEXT COMMISSION COMING FORWARD WILL BE ABLE TO CONTINUE THAT VISION.
MEANWHILE, I DO BELIEVE THIS IS A 10-YEAR PLAN.
THIS COMMISSION HAS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO CONTINUE TO GET THE FOCUS MORE IN LINE.
IT'S GOING TO BE FANTASTIC FOR THE CITY, WHATEVER THE END RESULT WILL WIND UP BEING.
I'M VERY APPRECIATIVE OF THE TIME AND ENERGY THAT HAS BEEN SPENT TO GET THIS TO COME FORWARD.
THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING SOME OF MY QUESTIONS.
AS YOU KNOW, I HAVE HAD SOME CONCERNS AS WELL, BUT I DO THINK IT IS A GREAT ECONOMIC INVESTMENT INTO OUR OWN CITY THAT WILL HAVE A FANTASTIC RATE OF RETURN TO THE FUTURE.
WITH THAT, IF THERE'S NOTHING FURTHER, I WOULD LIKE CITY CLERK TO PLEASE CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE.
>> THANK YOU. MAYOR. [NOISE] VICE MAYOR GELIN?
>> MOTION PASSES FIVE TO ZERO. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. I'M SURE THE DOCUMENTS WILL BE SIGNED SHORTLY.
>> WE ARE NOW MOVING TO 5ET OF 13779.
[5.e TR13779 - A Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida, approving the proposed millage rate of 7.2000 mills for general operating purposes; approving September 12, 2022 at 5:05 p.m. at the Tamarac Commission Chambers, 7525 N.W. 88th Avenue, Tamarac, Florida, as the date, time and place for the first public hearing to set the tentative millage rate and budget for Fiscal Year 2023; approving September 22, 2022 at 5:05 p.m. at the Tamarac Commission Chambers, 7525 N.W. 88th Avenue, Tamarac, Florida as the date, time, and place for the second public hearing to adopt the millage rate and budget for Fiscal Year 2023; authorizing the City Manager to send the proposed millage rate of 7.2000 and the date, time and place for both the first and second public hearings to the Broward County Property Appraiser for Fiscal Year 2023; providing for conflicts; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date.]
CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD.>> YES. THANK YOU MADAM MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, THIS IS A RESOLUTION CITY COMMISSION, CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA, APPROVING THE PROPOSED MILLAGE RATE OF 7.2000 MILLS FOR GENERAL OPERATING PURPOSES, APPROVING SEPTEMBER 12TH, 2022 AT 5:05 PM AT THE TAMARAC COMMISSION CHAMBERS, 7525 NORTHWEST 80TH AVENUE IN TAMARAC, FLORIDA AS THE DATE, TIME, AND PLACE FOR THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING TO SET THE TENTATIVE MILLAGE RATE AND BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023, APPROVING SEPTEMBER 22ND, 2022 AT 5:05 PM AT THE TAMARAC COMMISSION CHAMBERS, 7525 NORTHWEST 80TH AVENUE, TAMARAC, FLORIDA.
THAT'S THE DATE, TIME, AND PLACE FOR THE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING TO ADOPT THE MILLAGE RATE AND BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SEND THE PROPOSED MILLAGE RATE OF 7.2000 AND THE DATE, TIME, AND PLACE FOR BOTH THE FIRST AND SECOND PUBLIC HEARINGS TO THE BROWARD COUNTY PROPER APPRAISER FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023, PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, PROVIDING FOR SEPARABILITY, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BOLTON.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW OPEN AND PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED.
MS. CAJUSTE, OUR DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL SERVICES IS MAKING A PRESENTATION ON THIS ONE?
>> BECAUSE YOU'RE THE ONLY ONE WHO IS AVAILABLE.
>> GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION.
[05:20:03]
>> I'M GOING TO ASK IF SHE DOESN'T NEED THEM.
>> I AM CHRISTINE CAJUSTE, DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, FOR THE RECORD.
WITH ME IS JEFF STREETER, OUR BUDGET MANAGER.
BEFORE YOU IS TR NUMBER 13779, WHICH IS OUR PROPOSED OPERATING MILLAGE RATE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023.
THIS MILLAGE RATE FUNDS ARE GENERAL FUND OPERATION AND IS PROPOSED AT 7.2000 MILLS.
THE ROLLBACK RATE IS 6.4387 MILLS FOR 2023.
THIS RATE EXCEEDS THE ROLLBACK RATE BY 11.82 PERCENT.
THE RATE THAT YOU WILL APPROVE TONIGHT IS A NOT TO EXCEED RATE.
AT THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING IN SEPTEMBER, WE WILL BRING YOU A TENTATIVE BUDGET AND A PRELIMINARY MILLAGE RATE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023.
ALSO, YOU SEE ON THE SLIDE A LITTLE DEPICTION OF HOW THE MILLAGE RATE IS USED TO CALCULATE THE TAXES PER 1,000 MILLS.
THE PROPOSED MILLAGE RATE AT 7.200.
BEAR IN MIND THAT THE EXPENSES FROM THE GENERAL FUND, THERE'S A LOT OF AREAS THAT ARE VYING FOR THIS MONEY.
IT WILL FUND THE PROPOSED OPERATING BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023.
IT ONLY MAINTAINS CURRENT SERVICE LEVELS.
IT PROVIDES FUNDING FOR THREE ADDITIONAL FULL-TIME POSITION AND THE CONVERSION OF ONE PART-TIME POSITION TO A FULL-TIME POSITION.
IT SHOULD ALSO BE NOTED THAT THE FUNDS RAISED FROM THIS OPERATING MILLAGE DOES NOT FUND ANY CAPITAL EXPENDITURES.
OUR CAPITAL EXPENDITURE THAT YOU'LL SEE IN THE UPCOMING BUDGET IS BEING FUNDED FROM FUND BALANCE FROM OUR SAVINGS FOR PRIORS.
WITH THAT, I'M NOT GOING TO BORE YOU WITH THE DETAIL.
I'M GOING TO LET JEFF DO THAT.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT ALL-INSPIRING INTRODUCTION, CHRISTINE.
>> FOR THE RECORD, JEFF STREETER, BUDGET MANAGER.
AT THE BUDGET WORKSHOP, I SHARED A GRAPH WITH YOU SHOWING A HISTORY OF THE CITY'S TAXABLE VALUE.
THAT GRAPH DEMONSTRATED THAT IT TOOK NEARLY A DECADE TO GO THROUGH A STEEP DECLINE AND CLIMB BACK OUT FROM THE BOTTOM TO REACH PRE-FINANCIAL CRASH LEVELS.
IT ALSO REFLECTED A INCREASE IN CITY'S TOTAL TAXABLE VALUE YEAR OVER YEAR FROM FISCAL YEAR 2022, JULY 1 VALUES.
BASED ON JUNE 1 VALUES, JUNE 1 ESTIMATES, OVER 11.24.
NOW WE'VE RECEIVED THE JULY 1 CERTIFIED VALUES.
IN THE JULY 1 CERTIFIED VALUES, THE CITY GOT A BUMP OF APPROXIMATELY $50 MILLION IN TOTAL TAXABLE VALUE.
THAT BRINGS THE YEAR-OVER-YEAR INCREASE TO 12.29.
THE NET VALUE FROM NEW CONSTRUCTION REMAINED UNCHANGED IN THE JULY 1 VALUES.
THE BUMP THAT WE GOT RESULTS IN AN INCREASE OF BUDGETED PROPERTY TAX REVENUE OF SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 342 AND 343,000.
ALSO, AT THE BUDGET WORKSHOP, I INFORMED YOU THAT THE CITY IS REQUIRED UNDER TRIM, TRUTH IN MILLAGE COMPLIANCE PROCESSES, TO FILE A FORM WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE PROPERTY TAX OVERSIGHT DIVISION THAT EVIDENCES THAT THE BODY APPROVED A MILLAGE RATE WITH THE CORRECT NUMBER OF VOTES.
THAT FORM REQUIRES THAT YOU CALCULATE A FEW DIFFERENT RATES, AND I EXPLAINED TO YOU WHAT THOSE RATES MEANT AND HOW THEY WERE CALCULATED.
I ALSO STRESSED THAT WHEN WE BRING YOU THE PROPOSED MILLAGE RATE AT THE JULY COMMISSION MEETING, THAT THOSE CALCULATED RATES, WE'RE GOING TO ADJUST A LITTLE BIT.
WHAT WE GOT AS A RESULT OF THE JULY 1 VALUES IS THE ROLLBACK RATE. ONE OTHER THING.
I ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THE HIGHER THE TAXABLE VALUE INCREASE, THE LOWER THE ROLLBACK RATE AND THE LOWER THE OTHER RATES THAT ARE CALCULATED FROM THAT, WHICH ARE THOSE OTHER TWO RATES YOU SEE ALONG WITH THE ROLLBACK RATE.
[05:25:02]
WHAT WE GOT IN THE JULY 1 CERTIFIED VALUES IS A ROLLBACK RATE CALCULATED AT 6.4387.THE JUNE 1 ESTIMATED ROLLBACK RATE WAS 6.5006.
YOU CAN SEE THE SLIGHT CHANGE THAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT.
THE MAJORITY VOTE RATE THAT RESULTED FROM JULY 1 VALUES IS 6.8334.
THE MAJORITY VOTE RATE FOR THE JUNE 1 ESTIMATES WAS 6.8991.
IN THE UNANIMOUS VOTE, RATE FROM THE JULY 1 CERTIFIED VALUES CALCULATES OUT TO BE 7.5167, AND THAT RATE FOR THE JUNE 1 ESTIMATED VALUES WAS 7.5891.
THE LAST COLUMN SHOWS YOU THE INCREASE IN BUDGETED REVENUE OVER THE FISCAL YEAR 2022 ADOPTED LEVELS THAT WOULD RESULT FROM EACH ONE OF THOSE CALCULATED MILLAGE RATES.
AT THE BUDGET WORKSHOP THROUGH A SERIES OF TABLES, I DEMONSTRATED THAT BASED ON FISCAL YEAR 2022 ADOPTED BUDGETS, THAT ALTHOUGH THE CITY OF TAMARAC HAD THE TENTH HIGHEST MILLAGE RATE IN THE COUNTY, THAN WHEN IT CAME TO MEDIAN VALUE OF SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES AND MEDIAN VALUE OF CONDOMINIUMS AND THE RELATED TAXES LEVIED ON THOSE MEDIAN VALUES, THAT TAMARAC WOULD RANGE SOMEWHERE BETWEEN FOURTH LOWEST AND SEVENTH LOWEST FOR ALL OF THOSE MEASUREMENTS.
WHAT WE SAW AS A RESULT OF THE JULY 1 VALUES IS THE MEDIAN VALUE FOR TAMARAC SINGLE-FAMILY HOME WENT UP $290.
THAT WOULD TRANSLATE INTO A TAXPAYER IMPACT OF $2.9 FOR THE YEAR.
WE ALSO SAW THAT THE MEDIAN VALUE FOR A CONDOMINIUM WENT UP BY $410, AND THAT WOULD TRANSLATE INTO A TAX PAYER IMPACT.
THAT INCREASE WOULD TRANSLATE TO $2.95 FOR A YEAR.
NOW, WHAT YOU ALSO SEE IN THIS TABLE IS THAT THE INCREASE IN THE MEDIAN VALUE FOR BOTH SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES AND CONDOMINIUMS AT THE COUNTY-WIDE LEVEL GREATLY OUTPACED THE INCREASE IN THE MEDIAN VALUES THAT WE GOT IN JULY 1.
I NEED TO REMIND YOU OF SOME CRITICAL UPCOMING IMPORTANT DATES NO LATER THAN AUGUST 4TH, 2022.
THE CITY MUST SUBMIT THE PROPOSED MILLAGE RATE, FIRE RESCUE ASSESSMENT RATES, SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SERVICES RATE, AND THE STORM-WATER RATE, AND NUISANCE ABATEMENT ASSESSMENT RATE TO THE PROPERTY APPRAISERS OFFICE.
ON AUGUST 12TH, THE PROPERTY APPRAISER WILL BEGIN MAILING TRIM NOTICES.
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 12TH, 2022 AT 5:05 PM, WILL BE THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING TO ADOPT THE TENTATIVE MILLAGE RATE AND TENTATIVE BUDGET.
IT WILL BE THE FINAL PUBLIC HEARING TO ADAPT THE FINAL FIRE RESCUE ASSESSMENT, SOLID WASTES ASSESSMENTS, STORM-WATER ASSESSMENT, AND NUISANCE ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS.
THE BUDGET AD FOR THE PROPOSED BUDGET WILL APPEAR IN THE SEPTEMBER 19TH 2022 SUN SENTINEL.
FOLLOWING THAT, THE FINAL HEARING FOR THE ADOPTED FISCAL 2023 BUDGET AND MILLAGE RATE WILL TAKE PLACE ON SEPTEMBER 22ND, 2022 AT 5:05 PM.
IN SUMMARY, THE GENERAL FUND OPERATING MILLAGE RATE IS BEING PROPOSED AT 7.000 MILLS.
IT PROVIDES FOR GENERAL OPERATIONS OF THE CITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023.
IT MAINTAINS CURRENT SERVICE LEVELS TO RESIDENTS AT A TIME WHEN THE CITY WILL BE EXPECTED TO PAY CONSIDERABLY MORE FOR ALL GOODS AND SERVICES.
AS A REMINDER, THIS MORNING, THE CPI CAME OUT FOR JUNE YEAR OVER YEAR, IT'S UP TO 9.1.
THE MILLAGE RATE WILL FUND THE DESIRED LEVEL OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS.
WITH THAT, THAT FINISHES MY PRESENTATION.
CHRISTINE AND I ARE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.
[05:30:04]
>> SEEING NO QUESTIONS, CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> THEY'RE LIT UP BECAUSE I CALLED THE ROLL.
>> I DON'T HAVE A QUESTION. I JUST HAVE A COMMENT.
>> I WANT TO SEE 7.1 MILLS, BUT I WOULD VOTE TO APPROVE THIS.
>> THE CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. COMMISSIONER PLACKO?
>> IS THERE A MAJORITY OR IS IT SUFFICIENT TO FINANCIAL SERVICES DIRECTORS? IT'S SUFFICIENT? THANK YOU.
>> WE'RE NOW GOING TO 5F TR13780.
[5.f TR13780 - A Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida, relating to the provision of Fire Rescue Services, facilities and programs in the City of Tamarac, Florida; establishing the estimated assessment rate for Fire Rescue Assessments for the Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 2022; directing the preparation of an Assessment Roll; authorizing a public hearing and directing the provision of notice thereof; providing for conflicts; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date.]
CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD.>> THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS A RESOLUTION OF CITY COMMISSIONERS OF THE CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA, RELATING TO THE PROVISION OF FIRE RESCUE SERVICES, FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS IN THE CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA, ESTABLISHING THE ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT RATE FOR FIRE RESCUE ASSESSMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1ST, 2022 DIRECTING THE PREPARATION OF AN ASSESSMENT ROLE AUTHORIZING A PUBLIC HEARING, AND DIRECTING THE PROVISION AND NOTICE THEREOF, PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS PROVIDER SEPARABILITY, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
I NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND, PLEASE.
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BOLTON.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED.
MS. CAJUSTE IS AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS IF NEEDED.
DISCUSSION BY THIS COMMISSION.
SEEING NONE, CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> THANK YOU MAYOR. COMMISSIONER PLACKO?
>> MOTION PASSED, 5-0. THANK YOU.
[5.g TR13781 - A Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida, relating to the provision of Stormwater Management provided by the City’s Stormwater Utility; determining that certain real property will be specially benefited thereby; establishing and confirming the method of calculating the cost of Stormwater Management Service against the real property that will be specially benefited thereby; directing the City Manager to prepare or direct the preparation of a preliminary Stormwater Utility Management Fee Roll based upon the methodology set forth herein; establishing a public hearing for the proposed Stormwater Utility Management Fees and directing the provision of notice in connection therewith; providing for conflict; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date.]
CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD.>> YES, MADAM MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
A RESOLUTION OF CITY COMMISSIONERS, CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA, RELATING TO THE PROVISION OF STORM-WATER MANAGEMENT PROVIDED BY THE CITY STORM-WATER UTILITY, DETERMINING THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WILL BE SPECIALTY BENEFITED THEREBY, ESTABLISHING AND CONFIRMING THE METHOD OF CALCULATING THE COST OF STORM-WATER MANAGEMENT SERVICES AGAINST THE REAL PROPERTY THAT WILL BE SPECIALLY BENEFITED.
THEREBY DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO PREPARE OR DIRECT A PREPARATION OF A PRIMARY STORM-WATER UTILITY MANAGEMENT FEE ROLE BASED UPON THE METHODOLOGIES SET FORTH HEREIN ESTABLISHING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE PROPOSED STORM-WATER UTILITY MANAGEMENT FEES AND DIRECTING THE PROVISION OF NOTICE IN CONNECTION THERE WITH PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, PROVIDING FOR SEPARABILITY, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
>> NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND, PLEASE.
>> COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS WITH THE MOTION.
COMMISSIONER PLACKO WITH A SECOND.
NOW OPENING UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED.
MS. CAJUSTE WILL BE MAKING A PRESENTATION ALONG WITH MR. STRAIGHTER. PLEASE PROCEED.
>> GOOD MORNING AGAIN. [LAUGHTER] HERE WE HAVE THE PRELIMINARY STORMWATER UTILITY MANAGEMENT FEE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023.
I WILL REMIND YOU THAT IN 2013, WE PASS ARGUMENTS NUMBER 2013.05 PROVIDED FOR THE ASSESSMENT.
WHAT WE ESSENTIALLY DID WAS WE TOOK THE STORMWATER FEES FROM THE UTILITY BILL, THE WATER AND SEWER BILL, AND WE PLACED IT ON THE TAX BILL.
THE PROPOSED RATE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023 IS $154.45 PER EQUIVALENT RESIDENTIAL UNIT, OR ERU FOR SHORT, THIS IS $12.18 HIGHER THAN PRIOR.
THIS IS BECAUSE THE ORDINANCE CALLS FOR AN ANNUAL INCREASE OF THREE PERCENT OR A CPI, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER.
USUALLY THE ORDINANCE DATED JUNE, BUT AT THE TIME OF PREPARATION OF THIS ITEM, THE ONLY CPI THAT'S AVAILABLE TO US WAS MADE, WHICH WAS 8.6 PERCENT.
THE CPI FOR JUNE CAME OUT YESTERDAY.
IT WAS 9.1 PERCENT, WHICH IS ACTUALLY THE HIGHEST THEY SAY SINCE 1981.
THE RATE WE'RE PROPOSING IS THAT THE 8.6 PERCENT, $154.45 FOR ERU AND IT WOULD FUND THE STORMWATER OPERATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023.
AS WAS JUST MENTIONED, WITH THE MILLAGE RENT.
THIS WILL BE NOTICED TO THE TAXPAYERS BY A TRIM ON AUGUST 12TH.
PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE ADVERTISED ON AUGUST 14,
[05:35:03]
PUBLIC HEARING TO SET THE ASSESSMENT RATE WILL BE SEPTEMBER 12TH AT 5:05 PM.WITH THAT, I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
>> I SEE NO QUESTIONS. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> YOUR QUESTION, COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS.
>> MRS. STREET, YOU HAD MENTIONED BEFORE FOR THE PREVIOUS ITEM THAT CPI WENT UP TO 9.1, THIS PRESENTATION WAS SHOWING ME AT 8.6.
OR ANY OF YOU, WILL THAT AFFECT?
>> NO, THIS IS WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING AS THE TENTATIVE AND IT WILL REMAIN AT THE 8.6 BECAUSE THAT'S THE AVAILABLE INFORMATION WE HAVE.
>> NOTHING FURTHER. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS?
>> MOTION PASS FIVE TO ZERO. THANK YOU.
[5.h TR13782 - A Resolution of the City Commission of the City of the City of Tamarac, Florida, relating to the provision of Residential Solid Waste Collection Services and facilities and programs in the City of Tamarac, Florida; providing for purpose and definitions; providing for Legislative Determinations; establishing the estimated rate for the Residential Solid Waste Collection Services Assessment for the Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 2022; directing the preparation of a Residential Solid Waste Collection Services Special Assessment Roll; authorizing a public hearing and directing the provision of a Residential Solid Waste Collection Services Special Assessment Roll; authorizing a public hearing and directing the provision of notice thereof; providing for conflicts; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date.]
TR13782 CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD.>> YES, MADAM MAYOR MEMBERS COMMISSION.
THIS IS RESOLUTION CITY COMMISSIONER OF THE CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA, RELATING TO THE PROVISION OF RESIDENTIAL SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SERVICES AND FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS IN CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA.
WRITING FOR PURPOSE AND DEFINITION PRIME FOR LEGISLATIVE DETERMINATIONS, ESTABLISHING THE ESTIMATOR RATE FOR THE RESIDENTS OF SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SERVICES ASSESSMENT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1ST, 2022, DIRECTING THE PREPARATION OF RESIDENCE, SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENT RURAL, AUTHORIZING A PUBLIC HEARING AND DIRECTING THE PROVISION OF RESIDENCE, SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SERVICES, SPECIAL ROLE, AUTHORIZING A PUBLIC HEARING AND DIRECTING THE PROVISION NOTICE.
THERE ARE PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, PROVIDING FOR SEPARABILITY, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MOTION AND A SECOND, PLEASE.
>> COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS WITH THE MOTION, COMMISSIONER PLACKO WITH THE SECOND.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW OPEN AND PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED.
MS. CAJUSTE IS AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION BY THIS COMMISSION? SEEING NONE. CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> THANK YOU MAYOR. COMMISSIONER BOLTON?
[5.i TR13783 - A Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida, relating to the provision of nuisance abatement on certain real properties by the City in accordance with Chapter 9, Article II, Division V of the City’s code of ordinances; determining that certain real property has been specially benefited by the City’s abatement of nuisances thereon; directing the City Manager to prepare or direct the preparation of a preliminary nuisance abatement assessment roll; establishing a public hearing for the proposed levy of unpaid nuisance abatement assessments on the annual tax bill and directing the provision of notice in connection therewith; providing for conflict; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date.]
CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD. EXCUSE ME.
>> [LAUGHTER] A CUP OF COFFEE. SLOW DOWN.
>> FAIR ENOUGH. THIS IS A RESOLUTION CITY COMMISSIONERS, CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA, RELATING TO THE PROVISION OF NUISANCE ABATEMENT, UNCERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES BY THE CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 9, ARTICLE 2, DIVISION 5 OF THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCES, DETERMINING THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY HAS BEEN SPECIALLY BENEFITED BY THE CITY'S ABATEMENT OF NUISANCES THERE ON DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO PREPARE OR DIRECTED PREPARATION OF PRELIMINARY NUISANCE ABATEMENT ASSESSMENT ROLE, ESTABLISHING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE PROPOSED LEVY OF UNPAID NUISANCE ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS ON THE ANNUAL TAX BILL AND DIRECTING THE PROVISION NOTICE AND CONNECTION THERE WITH.
PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, PROVIDING FOR SEPARABILITY, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND, PLEASE.
>> I'VE GOTTEN. COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS FOR THE MOTION.
COMMISSIONER BOLTON FOR THE SECOND, GOING IN THE ORDER OF WHICH I HEARD THEM.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED.
MS. CAJUSTE IS AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. MAYOR GOMEZ?
>> MOTION PASS FIVE TO ZERO. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. WE ARE NOW GOING TO NUMBER 7TR13794.
[7.a TR13794 - A Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida, approving the projects recommended for inclusion in the Fiscal Year 2022/2023 Annual Action Plan for expenditure of the Community Development Block grant funds estimated to be $443,462 for the twenty third program year, attached hereto as Exhibit A; authorizing the appropriate City Officials to submit said Annual Action Plan and related documents to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development; authorizing the Mayor or appropriate City Officials to execute Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan federal application for funding; providing for conflicts; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date.]
THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD.
>> YES, MA'AM. THIS IS A RESOLUTION TO THE COMMISSIONERS TAMARAC FLORIDA APPROVING THE PROJECT RECOMMENDED FOR INCLUSION IN THE FISCAL YEAR 2022/2023 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN FOR EXPENDITURE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS ESTIMATED TO BE $443,462 FOR THE 23RD PROGRAM YEAR.
ATTACHED HERE TOO, AS EXHIBIT A, AUTHORIZING THE APPROPRIATE CITY OFFICIALS TO SUBMIT SAID ANNUAL ACTION PLAN AND RELATED DOCUMENTS.
THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OR APPROPRIATE CITY OFFICIALS TO EXECUTE FISCAL YEAR 2022/2023 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN, FEDERAL APPLICATION FOR FUNDING, PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, PROVIDING FOR SEPARABILITY,
[05:40:01]
AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND, PLEASE.
>> COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS WITH A MOTION.
COMMISSIONER BOLTON WITH A SECOND.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW OPEN AND PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED.
OR ACTUALLY PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED AND PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. THANK YOU.
WE HAVE MS. MAXINE CALLOWAY, OUR DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
I'VE GOT ALL LIGHTS LIT SO I CAN'T TELL IF THERE'S QUESTIONS.
>> SEEING THAT THERE'S NO QUESTIONS.
CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. MAYOR GOMEZ?
>> MOTION PASS FIVE TO ZERO. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. NOW, WE'RE ON 8AT02504,
[8.a TO2504 - An Ordinance of the City Commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida amending Chapter 10, Article 4, entitled Development and Design Standards by amending Section 10-4.10 entitled Signs of the City of Tamarac code of ordinances, by specifically amending Section 10-4.10(L) entitled, Prohibited Signs lifting the prohibition on billboard signs on city owned property and rights of way, and amending Section 10-4.10 (D) entitled General Sign Requirements by creating section 10-4.10(D)(4) entitled, Signs Permitted on City Owned Property/ Right of Way to provide for performance standards for billboard signs, subject to special exception approval; providing for codification; providing for conflicts; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date.]
ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING.CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD.
>> YES, MADAM MAYOR. MEMBERS TO COMMISSION, THIS IS AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSIONERS, CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 10, ARTICLE 4 AND TITLED DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS BY AMENDING SECTION 10-4.10, ENTITLED TO SCIENCE, THE CITY OF TAMARAC CODE OF ORDINANCES BY SPECIFICALLY AMENDING SECTION 10-4.10L, ENTITLED PROHIBITED SIGNS, LIFTING THE PROHIBITION ON BILLBOARD SIGNS AND CITY OWNED PROPERTY AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND AMENDING SECTION 10-4.10D, ENTITLED GENERAL SIGN REQUIREMENTS BY CREATING SECTION 10-4.10D4, ENTITLED SIGNS PERMITTED ONTO THE OWN PROPERTY/RIGHT-OF-WAY TO PROVIDE FOR PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR BILLBOARD SIGNS, SUBJECT SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPROVAL, PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION, PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, PROVIDING FOR SEPARABILITY, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
>> THANK YOU. I NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND.
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BOLTON, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PLACKO.
MS. CALLOWAY IS AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
ANY DISCUSSION BY THIS COMMISSION? SEEING NONE. CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. COMMISSIONER BOLTON?
>> MOTION PASS FOUR TO ONE. THANK YOU.
[8.b TO2506 - An Ordinance of the City commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida, amending Chapter 2, entitled Administration by creating article XIV, entitled Emergency Management to provide for emergency management responsibilities, powers, and regulations; repealing obsolete emergency management provisions; providing for codification; providing a savings provision, providing a conflicts provision, providing for severability, and providing for an effective date]
CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD.>> LAST BUT NOT LEAST, AN ORDINANCE THE CITY COMMISSIONERS, CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA, AMENDING.
CHAPTER 2 AND TITLED ADMINISTRATION BY RECREATING ARTICLE 14 ENTITLED EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT TO PROVIDE FOR EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES, POWERS AND REGULATIONS, REPEALING OBSOLETE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PROVISIONS, PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION, PROVIDING A SAVINGS PROVISION, PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS PROVISION, PROVIDING FOR SEPARABILITY, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND, PLEASE.
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PLACKO.
SEEING THAT THERE'S NO DISCUSSION, WE KNOW THAT MS. CALLOWAY IS AVAILABLE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. COMMISSIONER VILLALOBOS?
>> MOTION PASS FIVE TO ZERO. THANK YOU.
>> ANYONE WHO HAD 110 ON THE BET, YOU LOST, IT'S 109.
EVERYBODY, MEETING IS ADJOURNED, GET HOME SAFELY.
WE WILL SEE YOU BACK IN SESSION AUGUST 24TH. THANK YOU. BE SAFE.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.