5.d TR14299 - A Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida, amending the City of Tamarac List of Charitable Entities, by adding “Christian Coalition Against Domestic Abuse Inc.” To the list of charitable entities with whom the City of Tamarac recognizes a formally approved relationship, attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, for the express purpose of compliance with Section 1-19(c)(5)(a)(4) of the Broward County Code of Ordinances; providing for conflicts; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date.

[5.d TR14299 - A Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida, amending the City of Tamarac List of Charitable Entities, by adding “Christian Coalition Against Domestic Abuse Inc.” To the list of charitable entities with whom the City of Tamarac recognizes a formally approved relationship, attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, for the express purpose of compliance with Section 1-19(c)(5)(a)(4) of the Broward County Code of Ordinances; providing for conflicts; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date.]

BOLTON. I NEED TO READ THE TITLE, MADAM MAYOR.

YES. I'M SO SORRY. CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD.

ITEM 5DA RESOLUTION AND CITY COMMISSION AND CITY TAMARAC AMEND THE CITY TAMARAC.

LIST OF ENTITIES BY AN CHRISTIAN COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE, INC..

TO THE LIST OF CHARITABLE ENTITIES WITH WHOM THE CITY OF TAMARAC RECOGNIZE A FORMAL RELATIONSHIP ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT A FOR THE EXPRESS PURPOSE OF COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 1-193584 OF THE COUNTY COURT OF ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE.

THANK YOU. I WILL TAKE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

MOVE IT. I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BOLTON.

SECOND, I HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PATTERSON.

AND AT THIS TIME WE'LL THEN OPEN UP PUBLIC COMMENTS.

ANYBODY WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE COME FORWARD.

SAME RULE APPLY AS PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. KATE JOHNSON, MAINLAND SPORTS.

I BET A COUPLE PEOPLE THAT THIS ITEM WOULD BE PULLED BECAUSE I SAID, IT'S MY NONPROFIT THAT I RUN AND WE KNOW THAT SOME CERTAIN PEOPLE ON THE DAIS HAVE AN ISSUE WITH ME PERSONALLY, AND THEREFORE I FIGURED MY NONPROFIT WOULD BE PULLED.

ALTHOUGH I HAVE NEVER SEEN ANY OTHER NONPROFIT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA BE PULLED FOR DISCUSSION.

SO LET ME TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE CHRISTIAN COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE.

THAT IS OUR 501 C3 NAME. IT IS AN APPROVED 501 C3.

I AM TAX EXEMPT. WE ARE NOT ONLY TAX EXEMPT, WE ARE ONE OF THE FEW CHARITIES THAT THIS COMMISSION HAS APPROVED THAT ACTUALLY ARE ALLOWED TO FUNDRAISE IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA AND RECOGNIZE AS A CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION WITH THE STATE OF FLORIDA. NOW, WHAT WE FOUND WHEN WE STARTED, WE HAVE BEEN AROUND SINCE 2007.

WHAT WE FOUND WHEN WE STARTED WAS. PEOPLE OBJECTED TO OUR NAME BECAUSE IT WAS CHRISTIAN, OR BECAUSE WE HAD DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IN IT, AND WE WOULD HAVE TABLES TO THE COMMUNITY AND WE WOULD WATCH HUSBANDS PULL THEIR WIVES AWAY BECAUSE THE WORDS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE WERE IN IT. AND WE WOULD WATCH PEOPLE FROM THE SECULAR COMMUNITY WALK AWAY FROM OUR TABLE BECAUSE WE HAD CHRISTIAN IN IT.

SO WE PRAYED LONG AND HARD AND WE CAME UP WITH THE DBA, WHICH IS ALSO APPROVED BY THE STATE OF FLORIDA,

[01:45:05]

CALLED LIVING IN FREEDOM AND EMPOWERMENT. SINCE WE CHANGED OUR NAME, WE HAVE HAD MUCH MORE ACCEPTANCE FROM THE COMMUNITY AND FROM THE RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY. WE DO RESOURCES, WE DO TRAININGS, WE DO SPEAKING.

WE DO COUNSELING SERVICES TO THOSE WHO ARE AFFECTED BY DOMESTIC ABUSE, CHILD ABUSE, SEXUAL ABUSE.

SO WE PROVIDE HELP, HOPE AND HEALING TO THOSE AFFECTED BY ABUSE OVER THE LIFE SPAN.

SO I WOULD HOPE THAT THAT IS ENOUGH FOR THIS COMMISSION TO APPROVE OUR NONPROFIT AS PART OF THIS CITY. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I AM AVAILABLE.

OH, BY THE WAY, I'VE NEVER TAKEN A SALARY FOR DOING THIS WORK.

I'M NOT SURE EVERY OTHER NONPROFIT CAN SAY THAT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK? ALL RIGHT. SAME RULES AS BEFORE. PATTY LYNN, MAINLAND'S EIGHT.

I THINK WHEN WE HAD THE WORST TRAGEDY THAT TAMARAC HAS EVER ENDURED, OUR TRIPLE HOMICIDE, THAT CHARITY WAS THE ONE THAT CAME OUT AND HELPED AND OFFERED ASSISTANCE.

I WOULD HOPE. I WOULD HOPE THAT YOU WORK FOR THE PEOPLE OF TAMARAC AND NOT FOR SOMEBODY ELSE'S FEELINGS ABOUT A CHARITY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WISH TO SPEAK? PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IS NOW OVER.

COMMISSIONER. I THANK YOU, MAYOR. AND FOR THE RECORD, THE POOL IS NOT PERSONAL.

AS A MATTER OF FACT, CHARITIES HAVE BEEN PULLED IN THE PAST FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA.

AND PARTICULARLY IT HAS BEEN COMMENTED BY THE VERY SAME SPEAKER THAT CAME TO THIS MIC.

AS A MATTER OF FACT, ON THE LAST OCCASION THAT WE HAD ADDED A CHARITY, GET VISION INTERNATIONAL, THE SAME SPEAKER SPOKE AGAINST THAT CHARITY GET VISION INTERNATIONAL DOES THE SAME EXACT WORK AS THAT CHARITY.

SO TO SAY THAT THE CHARITY IS PULLED BECAUSE OF PERSONAL VENDETTAS? NOT NECESSARILY. PERHAPS IT IS PULLED BECAUSE OF THE CHARACTER OF THE PEOPLE ON THE BOARD.

I DON'T THINK THAT THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS ARE NECESSARILY YOU KNOW, FIT FOR A CHRISTIAN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CHARITY. HOWEVER, THAT IS BESIDES THE POINT.

THE REASON I PULLED THIS CHARITY IS BECAUSE I LOOKED EXTENSIVELY AT THE FORM 990 FILINGS FOR, FOR THIS CHARITY OVER THE YEARS. AND THIS CHARITY SEEMS TO NOT BE A GOOD FIDUCIARY OF THE FUNDS THAT THEY RECEIVE. AS A MATTER OF FACT, THIS CHARITY WAS $8,363. OVER IN EXPENSES LAST YEAR. A CHARITY IS FOR CHARITY. SO YOU NEED TO MANAGE THE CHARITY.

WELL, YOU CANNOT OPERATE IN THE RED. AND SO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE ADDING A CHARITY LIKE THIS THAT DOES NOT HAVE A GOOD FINANCIAL FOOTING, A CHARITY.

THAT SEEMED TO PROMOTE A HUSBAND AND A WIFE ON THE BOARD.

YOU KNOW, WITHOUT HAVING OTHER PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT RELATED BY BLOOD.

AND SO THAT'S MY REASON FOR PULLING. THE CHARITY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE INDIVIDUAL.

I KNOW THAT THIS INDIVIDUAL HAS BEEN VERY POLITICAL IN THE PAST.

I DON'T WANT TO USE THE CITY'S RESOURCES TO FUND POLITICAL MACHINES.

AS A MATTER OF FACT, WHEN I WAS RUNNING FOR DISTRICT ONE CITY COMMISSIONER, AS FOR MY REELECTION IN A LANDSLIDE ELECTION, BY THE WAY, AGAINST TWO INCREDIBLE PEOPLE, VERY INCREDIBLE, VERY FINE PEOPLE YOU KNOW, THIS SAME BOARD MEMBER OF THIS CHARITY SET AS A PRESIDENT OF AN HOA AND USED THE HOA TO PUT SIGNS,

[01:50:04]

POLITICAL SIGNS IN FRONT OF THE HOA. I'VE GOT PICTURES.

I'VE GOT PICTURES. AND IF YOU WANT TO SEE THE PICTURES.

I WILL ASK THE MAYOR TO DIRECT JIM TO PUT IT ON BIG SCREEN.

THE PICTURE WAS TAKEN WITH TIMESTAMPS DAY AFTER DAY, AND SO THAT REFERRAL FOR YOUR HOA IS COMING.

SO TO SAY THAT YOU KNOW WE'RE PULLING THIS CHARITY FOR PERSONAL VENDETTA CHARACTER MATTERS, JUST LIKE DUI, LIN WOULD SAY CHARACTER MATTERS.

OKAY, SO YOU KNOW, THIS IS NOT THE WAY TO START OUR NEW YEAR OFF.

OUR NEW SESSION OFF, PLEASE. ENOUGH. SO YEAH, THERE'S NO SPEAKING FROM THE AUDIENCE.

THAT IS ONE OF THE RULES OF THIS BODY. AND YOU WILL RESPECT THAT.

SO, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THIS IS NOT PERSONAL. I'M JUST PULLING THIS BASED ON THE FINANCIAL STANDING OF THIS ORGANIZATION, AND IT SAYS THAT THE FINANCE DIRECTOR RECOMMENDS IT.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THE FINANCE DIRECTOR DID NOT LOOK INTO THE FINANCES OF THIS ORGANIZATION.

SO I GUESS IT'S ONLY TO HAVE GOOD STANDING THAT IS REGISTERED WITH THE IRS AND THE STATE.

BUT YOU DON'T GO, YOU DON'T YOU DON'T TAKE A DEEP DIVE INTO THE ORGANIZATION.

BUT AS A COMMISSIONER THAT HAS TO PROTECT THE CITY'S PURSE, I HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS CHARITY IS PROPERLY RUN. AND IT IS NOT. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON, THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR.

MY COMMENTS WILL BE BRIEF. I JUST WANTED TO NOTE ON THE RECORD TO, I THINK, A COMMENT BY MISS LYNN REGARDING A RECENT TRAGEDY.

I DO BELIEVE THAT I WAS PERSONALLY THE PERSON THAT ADVOCATED ON BEHALF OF THIS CHARITY TO HOST THE THE EVENTS IN WHICH WE'RE HOSTED.

AND I BELIEVE THAT THE MANAGER CAN CLARIFY THAT.

AND I BELIEVE THAT THE I BELIEVE MADAM PRESIDENT OF THIS CHARITY CAN ALSO CLARIFY THAT.

SO I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT ON THE RECORD BECAUSE THE COMMENT WAS MADE AND IT WAS NOT ACCURATE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND I FEEL THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE THAT ARE NOT ACCURATE.

I FEEL THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE THAT ARE PERSONAL ATTACKS, AND IT IS A PERSONAL OPINION.

I FEEL THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL CHARITIES THAT HAVE NOT BEEN DUG DEEP INTO.

I'VE MADE THAT COMMENT BEFORE, I'VE COMPLAINED ABOUT IT, AND THIS PARTICULAR CHARITY THAT IS ON THE RECORD TODAY HAS ALL THE QUALIFICATIONS. AS FOR WHATEVER FINANCIALS THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE, I DON'T KNOW THE VALIDITY OF THEM.

AND THAT'S FOR AN ISSUE TO BE DISCUSSED AT ANOTHER TIME.

THIS CHARITY WAS GOOD ENOUGH TO PARTICIPATE IN OUR NIGHT OF HEALING.

IT WAS ALSO GOOD ENOUGH TO DO OUR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AWARENESS PROGRAMS. SO I FIND IT THAT WE'RE STARTING ALL OVER AGAIN TO HYPOCRISY, WHERE THIS CHARITY IS GOING TO BE PULLED, BERATED, PERSONALLY ATTACKED INDIVIDUALLY OVER A CHARITY THAT IS DOING GOOD WORK AND ANY OTHER ISSUES WOULD BE BETWEEN THEM AND THE IRS. SO IT'S NOT MY PLACE TO ASK QUESTIONS.

WE DON'T GO BACK AND FORTH, BUT I PRETTY MUCH KNOW THAT SOME OF THAT IS.

NOT NECESSARILY THE TRUTH THAT WAS BEING STATED FROM THE DAIS.

OKAY, SO I HAVE PUT THIS CHARITY ON HERE. I HAVE NOT DONATED TO THIS CHARITY, BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT THE CHARITY HAS DONE WORK FOR THE CITY.

AND SINCE WE HAVE A WHOLE WONDERFUL LIST OF WHERE WE ALSO PARTNER WITH OUR CHARITIES, THIS WAY THIS CHARITY WOULD BE ABLE TO BE ONE THAT WE COULD PARTNER WITH WITHOUT HAVING ANY ISSUES THAT WOULD BE IN CONFLICT WITH THE BROWARD COUNTY ETHICS OR THE CITY'S ETHICS.

BUT THAT'S ANOTHER ITEM ON THIS AGENDA THAT WE'LL GET TO.

BECAUSE I'M WAITING FOR A MEMO FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY, MAYBE THAT'LL COME UP.

BUT WE'VE ALWAYS UNDERSTOOD THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO PARTNER OR DO AN EVENT AND HAVE ANOTHER CHARITY IN THERE, WE PUT THEM ON OUR CHARITY LIST. AND SINCE THIS CHARITY HAD BEEN ALREADY TAKEN FOR THAT PARTNERSHIP, I DECIDED IT WOULD BE THE BEST THING TO DO TO MAKE SURE OUR CHARITY WAS ON HERE.

IF NOTHING ELSE, THAT NEEDS TO BE SAID ABOUT THIS ITEM.

SEEING NONE. CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

MAYOR GOMEZ. YES. ONE MINUTE. I HAVE MY LIGHT.

IT WASN'T ON WHEN I LOOKED AT IT, BECAUSE I LOOKED DOWN WHEN I SAID IT. BUT GO AHEAD. VICE MAYOR. NO.

GO AHEAD. YOU WOULD HAVE TO WAIT AND GIVE PEOPLE THE OPPORTUNITY. MAYOR CITY MANAGER, CAN YOU PLEASE CLARIFY WHAT WAS SAID REGARDING THIS CHARITY? AND IF OUR FINANCE PERSON CAN COME UP AND SPEAK REGARDING WHAT WE SAID ABOUT THE FINANCE?

[01:55:06]

SURE. I CAN ASK OUR FINANCE DIRECTOR TO TO COME AND IDENTIFY THE THE PROCESS WE GO THROUGH AS WE AS WE CHECK ON THESE CHARITIES BEFORE WE PUT THEM ON THE AGENDA SO SHE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT, THAT PROCESS THAT WE FOLLOW.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? OKAY. GOOD MORNING. MAYOR. COMMISSION.

I THINK I'M. SORRY. CHRISTINE CAJUSTE. DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL SERVICES.

WHEN WE ARE ASKED TO PLACE CHARITIES ON THE ON THE AGENDA.

OUR ONLY DUE DILIGENCE IS TO ENSURE THAT IT IS A CHARITY RECOGNIZED BY THE IRS AS A 501 C3.

SO THEREFORE, YOU WOULDN'T VERIFY WHAT WAS SAID BY COMMISSIONER BOLTON OR WHAT WAS SAID BY THE MAYOR.

NO, WE DO NOT INVESTIGATE THE CHARITY TO OPINE ON WHETHER OR NOT WE BELIEVE IT'S A GOOD OR BAD CHARITY.

WE JUST DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE TO ASSURE THAT IT'S TO ENSURE THAT IT'S A VALID CHARITY THAT IS RECOGNIZED BY IRS.

THANK YOU. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, CAN WE TABLE IT TILL WE GET MORE INFORMATION REGARDING WHAT WAS STATED SINCE IT WAS ALREADY STATED IN THE PUBLIC? OR YOU CAN ASK THAT, BUT I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT, EVERY SINGLE CHARITY ON THAT LIST NEEDS TO BE DOUBLE CHECKED THEN, BECAUSE ONE CHARITY SHOULD NOT BE. THIS CHARITY IS NOT ON THE LIST.

I UNDERSTAND, BUT WE NEVER DID THE SAME THING FOR THE OTHER CHARITIES. BUT I REMEMBER US CALLING OUT OTHER CHARITIES AND THEN WE JUST DIDN'T VOTE FOR THEM.

SO I RECALL THAT THAT'S FINE. I WOULD SAY THAT WE WOULD TAKE ALL THE CHARITIES ON IT.

OKAY. YOU KNOW, ONE THAT IS. AND LET'S JUST VOTE.

THANK YOU. NO, YOU WANTED TO ABLE TO DO A MOTION.

I TAKE THAT BACK. WE'LL VOTE. DO A MOTION TO TABLE.

VICE MAYOR. MOTION TO TABLE. I WILL VOTE. OKAY.

WE'LL VOTE. CITY CLERK. MAYOR. GOMEZ. YES. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON.

NO. VICE MAYOR. DANIEL. NO. COMMISSIONER BOLTON.

NO. COMMISSIONER. RIGHT. YES. THANK YOU. MOTION FAILS.

THREE. TWO. TWO. WE DON'T HAVE ANY COMMENTS, BUT I DO HAVE A LOT OF COMMENTS.

UNDERSTOOD. UNDERSTOOD. UNDERSTOOD. AND I AM ASKING FOR A WORKSHOP ITEM ON HAVING ALL OF THE CHARITIES THAT ARE LISTED ON OUR CHARITABLE LIST. ANYONE WHO HAS BEEN REJECTED ON OUR CHARITABLE LIST OVER THE PAST FOUR YEARS TO BE LOOKED AT IN MORE DETAIL AS FAR AS IT HAS BEEN DONE TODAY.

SO I'M ASKING THAT ON THE RECORD FOR MY. DISCUSSION.

BECAUSE IF IT'S NO, NO NO NO, NO, YOU LET EVERYBODY ELSE GET ON THE RECORD FOR THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING.

I WANT ON THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING, MAYOR, THE BODY HAS TO MAKE IF YOU DIRECT AND STAFF TO LOOK AT OTHER CHARITIES.

NO, NO, I'M NOT COMMISSION. I'M PUTTING THE ITEM ON THE AGENDA.

THAT'S FINE. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. MOVING RIGHT ALONG TO THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA

[5.f TR14307 - A Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida, approving and ratifying past purchases of entertainment services for the “Yard on the Lawn” event, Caribbean Heritage Month Celebration held on June 28, 2025, from Riddims Marketing, Inc., in the amount of $62,160.00 and $3,203.00, for a total amount of $65,362.00 in accordance with Section 6-145(b)(6) of the Code, to be paid from the appropriate accounts; providing for conflicts; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date.]

WHICH WAS PULLED, WHICH WAS WHAT I PULLED. NOTES.

ITEM FIVE F ITEM 5FRTR14307. CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD ITEM 5SA RESOLUTION OF CITY COMMISSION C TAMARAC APPROVING AND RATIFYING PAST PURCHASES OF ENTERTAINMENT SERVICE FOR YARD AND ALONG EVENT CAREER AND HERITAGE MONTH CELEBRATION HELD ON JUNE 28TH, 2025 FROM RHYTHMS MARKETING IN THE AMOUNT OF $62,160 AND $3,203, FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT OF 65,362, PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THIS ITEM IS NOW OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.

DOES ANYBODY WISH TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? IF SO, PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM.

KAY JOHNSON MAINLAND'S FOR. AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, COMMISSIONER BOLTON AND HIS WIFE'S BOTH SERVE ON HIS BOARD REGARDING PAYING RHYTHMS MARKETING FOR CARIBBEAN AMERICAN MARKETING.

YOU HAVE ALREADY PURCHASED AND PAID FOR THIS YARD ON THE LAWN.

SERVICE. THE DESCRIPTION STATE $65,362 HAS ALREADY BEEN PAID.

[02:00:04]

WHY ARE YOU PAYING FOR THINGS YOU DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO PAY FOR? ALSO, WHAT WAS THE TOTAL AMOUNT SPENT ON THIS EVENT THAT WAS ATTENDED BY MANY PEOPLE NOT FROM TAMARAC THIS EVENT? THESE FEES TO THIS VENDOR HAVE COST EACH TAMARAC RESIDENT ALMOST $1,000.

WHETHER THEY ATTENDED OR NOT. ADD TO IT WHAT YOU HAVE PAID DONE FILMS AND IT'S ANOTHER $1,000 PER RESIDENT AND THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE ALL OF THEIR EXPENSES. IF WHAT I HAVE HEARD IS CORRECT.

THE MONEY SPENT ON THIS EVENT IS WELL OVER $200,000, BUT I WILL BE REQUESTING THAT INFORMATION.

THAT IS ALMOST $3,000 PER TAMARAC RESIDENT FOR THIS EVENT, MOST OF WHOM DID NOT ATTEND.

THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE FLYING A COMMISSIONER TO JAMAICA TO APPEAR IN A TEN MINUTE TV SPOT.

IF THAT PUTTING HIM UP IN A HOTEL AND OTHER EXPENSES.

HONESTLY, WHAT IS THE PAYOFF FOR THE CITIZENS OF TAMARAC? I AM SURE THERE ARE COMMUNITIES AND HOUSEHOLDS HERE IN OUR CITY WHO COULD BENEFIT FROM ACCESS TO THOSE FUNDS.

INSTEAD, YOU ACT THAT LIKE THIS CITY IS YOUR PRIVATE PIGGY BANK TO DO WITH AS YOU WISH.

PEOPLE WILL REMEMBER THIS WHEN ELECTIONS HAPPEN, AND THOSE WHO CURTAIL SPENDING WILL BE MORE LIKELY TO WIN.

THOSE WHO LINE THEIR OWN POCKETS FOR THEIR OWN BENEFIT WILL NOT.

I HEARD A STATEMENT THE OTHER DAY ABOUT JUSTICE.

THE WICKED DISADVANTAGED THE COMMUNITY TO ADVANCE THEMSELVES.

THIS IS UNJUST AND END QUOTE. IT SEEMS TO ME THESE BEHAVIORS FIT THAT DESCRIPTION, AND WE ARE REQUIRED TO SPEAK OUT AGAINST UNJUST SYSTEMS EVEN WHEN IT COSTS US.

OUR CITY IS NOT HERE FOR YOUR BENEFIT. YOU WORK FOR US AND FOR OUR BENEFIT, NOT YOUR OWN.

IT IS NOT HERE TO LINE YOUR POCKETS OR FURTHER YOUR POLITICAL POWER.

IT IS TIME TO REMEMBER THAT.

NAME, ADDRESS OR PLACE OF WORK? OKAY, I KNOW YOU KNOW, BUT THANK YOU.

HI, MY NAME IS MONA PERLMAN. I'M FROM GRANDVILLE, ONE OF THE KINGS POINT COMMUNITY.

NOW, THAT'S A LARGE COMMUNITY. AND IF THEY KNEW WHAT YOU WERE SPENDING MONEY ON, I CAN TELL YOU THIS PLACE WOULD BE FLOODED.

YOU CANNOT DO THIS. AND I WANT TO KNOW WHY THE CITY MANAGER ISN'T LOOKING AT THE FUNDS MORE CLOSELY.

THIS IS MY MONEY. THIS IS THEIR MONEY. AND I'M GETTING A LITTLE DISGUSTED.

BOLTON, DON'T LOOK AT ME LIKE THAT. BECAUSE. NO, I DON'T LIKE IT.

THE SMIRK. OKAY, SO LET ME TELL YOU SOMETHING.

YOU GUYS HAVE TO LET US KNOW. THIS IS PAST THE TIME.

IT'S PAST JUNE 28TH, AND THAT'S NOT FAIR. IT DOESN'T BENEFIT US.

WHAT WE NEED BETTER IS MORE POLICE AND SAFETY IN THIS COMMUNITY.

ALSO, THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT CANNOT PAY FOR THEIR CONDOS.

IF YOU ARE GOING TO SPEND MONEY RIDICULOUSLY ON AN EVENT THAT NOBODY FROM TAMARAC WENT TO, THEN YOU'RE REALLY NOT WORKING FOR THE CITY OF TAMARAC.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE. PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED. SO, COMMISSIONER. YES. GO AHEAD. COMMISSIONER. SO, ON THE PREVIOUS ITEM, I JUST WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT THAT CHARITIES THAT I APPROVE, I DON'T REALLY DELVE AS DEEP WHEN I MAKE A DONATION. I DELVE DEEPER TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE IN GOOD STANDING. SO FOR ME, YOU GO THROUGH THE THE NATIONAL PROCESS, BUT BEFORE I MAKE A DONATION, I MAKE SURE THAT ALL THAT STUFF IS IN PLACE.

JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT, THIS ITEM. CITY MANAGER.

AREN'T WE JUST APPROVING 3200? JUST TO CLARIFY, WHAT ARE WE WHAT ARE WE APPROVING? WE'RE APPROVING ACTUALLY ABOUT $200. $200 IN SOME CHANGE.

THE CITY MANAGER HAS THE AUTHORITY TO SPEND UP TO $65,000.

AND THIS EXPENDITURE IS ABOUT YEAH. $362 OVER THAT THRESHOLD. SO THIS IS ALREADY PAID. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE WE I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING WE BUILD THAT WE'VE TAKEN CARE OF ALREADY.

AND I THINK WE, AS A COMMISSION, AGREED THAT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE A NICE BIG CARIBBEAN CONCERT.

[02:05:03]

WE ALL CAME TO THAT CONSENSUS AND WE WERE GOING TO HAVE A BIG ARTIST.

AND MORGAN HERITAGE, OF COURSE, IS A GRAMMY WINNING PERFORMING GROUP.

I ACTUALLY KNOW SOMEONE WHO IS A PROMOTER REBEL SALUTE BRT, YOU KNOW, SAM ZIMMER AND I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH THEM ASKING THEM ABOUT THE PRICE. LOOKING AT THIS, AND ASKED THEM ABOUT THE PRICE OF THIS.

AND THEY SAID, ACTUALLY, THIS PRICE IS ACTUALLY KIND OF ON THE LOWER END IN TERMS OF GETTING THE LEVEL AND TYPE OF ARTISTS THAT CAME AND PERFORM FOR US ON THAT DAY. I ALSO ASKED ABOUT THE BREAKDOWN OF THE FLIGHTS AND HOTELS, IF THAT'S COMMON IN THE INDUSTRY.

AND THEY SAID YES, THAT IS COMMON IN THE INDUSTRY AND THE PRICE IS NOT NECESSARILY OUT OF LINE IN TERMS OF DOING MY, MY, MY DUE DILIGENCE RHYTHMS, MARKETING. I'VE SEEN HIM DO WORK IN A CARIBBEAN COMMUNITY JERK FEST.

ALSO DO OTHER EVENTS THAT THAT SO THEY HAVE A STELLAR REPUTATION AS DOING CARIBBEAN EVENTS.

SO I THINK LOOKING AT THIS IN TERMS OF THE VENDOR, I, I CAN SEE THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE THEY'RE KNOWN IN THE COMMUNITY LOOKING AT THE PRICING AND SPEAKING TO SOMEONE WHO IS IN THE INDUSTRY.

I THINK THE PRICE IS IN LINE. I UNDERSTAND FROM THE TAXPAYER'S PERSPECTIVE, YOU KNOW, BUT WE DID ALL AGREE TO HAVE THIS EVENT, AND WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO UPMARKET TAMARAC AND BRING ADDITIONAL PEOPLE.

BUT I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU'VE YOU'VE KIND OF PAID ALREADY AND YOU'RE JUST EXCELLENCE APPROVAL FOR 200 MORE.

IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? THAT'S CORRECT. COMMISSIONER OKAY.

AND GOING THROUGH DOING YOUR DUE DILIGENCE, I CAN TALK BECAUSE I'VE SEEN A COMPANY IN THE COMMUNITY DOING YOUR DUE DILIGENCE.

DO YOUR DUE DILIGENCE, DUE DILIGENCE AND COMPANIES THAT YOU YOU BRING AS A VENDOR.

ABSOLUTELY. WE'VE DONE BUSINESS WITH THEM IN THE PAST AND THEY PROVIDE A TURNKEY PRODUCT TURNKEY PACKAGE.

AND SO THIS WAS ONE OF THOSE FOR THIS EVENT. AND SO WE'RE WE'RE HAPPY WITH THE, WITH THE SERVICES THAT THEY PROVIDED.

AND YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. THE THE NUMBERS FOR THE, THIS KIND OF, THIS CALIBER TALENT TO BRING TO TAMARAC IT WOULD BE A LOT MORE EXPENSIVE. YOU KNOW, SO WE DID HAVE A MUCH FAVORABLE NUMBER IN THIS CASE.

AND AGAIN, GOING BACK TO WHAT I SAID INITIALLY WHEN WE AGREED TO HAVE THIS CONCERT, YOU KNOW, I WANTED IT TO COLONY WHERE. SO IT CAN KIND OF HELP THE RESTAURANT BECAUSE IT'S ON THE SUMMERTIME, OUR REVENUES DIP. AND I KNOW DOING A CONCERT LIKE THIS WOULD BRING A LOT OF PEOPLE FROM DIFFERENT PLACES, WHICH, ACCORDING TO THE NUMBERS, WE BROUGHT LIKE 5500 PEOPLE.

SO FOR ME, THE IDEA WAS INVESTED IN IN ENTERTAINMENT TOURISM, WHICH IS BIG IN THE SUMMERTIME BECAUSE OF SUMMERTIME.

A LOT DOESN'T HAPPEN IN FLORIDA. SO THAT WAS THE WHOLE PREMISE AND THE THOUGHT OF IT AND JUST LOOKING AT THE NUMBERS AND WHAT WE DID AND DON'T MIND DUE DILIGENCE, YOU KNOW, THE NUMBERS ON THAT OTHER LINE ARE OUT OF WHACK. AND THIS IS WHAT YOU GUYS KIND OF DID.

YOU DID YOUR DUE DILIGENCE. AND FOR US, YOUR ACTIONS JUST APPROVED $200 MORE BECAUSE YOU'VE DONE MADE THE PAYMENTS FOR ALL THIS STUFF THAT'S HERE.

WELL, YOU'RE NOT ASKING FOR 65, 65,000 MORE. JUST TO CLARIFY, YOU ARE CORRECT.

WE'RE ASKING FOR RATIFICATION OF 200 OR $362.

OKAY. JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT. THANKS. THANK YOU.

AND SINCE I'M NOT GOING TO BE TIMED, SINCE WHEN THE OTHER COMMISSIONER PUT HIS PULLED HIS, HE HAD PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. I'M NOT GOING TO BE TIMED.

I AM GOING TO GET CITY MANAGER THROUGH YOU. I KNOW THAT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE HERE.

CHRISTINE CAJUSTE, OUR FINANCES DIRECTOR AND MELISSA PATRON, OUR PARKS AND REC DIRECTOR.

NOT NECESSARILY SAYING OTHERS MIGHT NOT BE CALLED FOR SOME QUESTIONS.

AS COMMISSIONER WRIGHT SAID, WE WERE GOING TO DO A BIGGER ITEM ON GROOVIN THE GRASS SO WE CAN HAVE IT AT COLONY WEST SO WE CAN HAVE ALCOHOL AT COLONY WEST, BE ABLE TO PROMOTE COLONY WEST AND HAVE ALL THAT KIND OF GOOD STUFF.

WHAT WAS THE NORMAL? WHAT WAS THE BUDGET AMOUNT THAT WE HAD FOR GROOVE ON THE GRASS ORIGINALLY? GOOD MORNING. MELISSA PETRONE, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION.

OUR ORIGINAL BUDGET FOR THIS EVENT WAS 20,000.

AND THEN WHEN WE DECIDED TO MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT BIGGER AND MOVE IT TO COLONY WEST, WHAT WAS OUR BUDGET AMOUNT? WE DIDN'T INCREASE THE BUDGET. OKAY. SO RIGHT OFF THE TOP.

AN EVENT THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A COLONY WEST THAT GOT MOVED TO THE PARK.

YOU CAN SEE RIGHT OFF THE TOP WHERE IT'S $65,000.

THAT'S JUST NOTING IT FOR THE RECORD, ON THE EXPENSE.

WE RECEIVED IN THE PACKET A NON SIGNED CONTRACT BY THE CITY.

DO YOU KNOW WHAT DATE WE SIGNED THE CONTRACT? I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF US. JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY BECAUSE WE SEE THE NON SIGNED CONTRACT.

[02:10:05]

I, I, I WOULD SAY MAYOR THAT THE THE CONTRACT WAS SIGNED BEFORE THE EVENT.

I DON'T HAVE THE CONTRACT IN FRONT OF ME TO GIVE YOU THE DATE, BUT IT WAS SIGNED PRIOR TO THE EVENT.

ALL RIGHT. WELL, I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT ALSO IF IT WAS BEFORE THE SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR REDEEMS. NOW, SOME PEOPLE KNOW THAT MY BACKGROUND HAS BEEN IN SPECIAL EVENTS, AND I AM EXTREMELY CURIOUS WHY THIS IS THE ONLY THING THAT WE HAVE THAT HAS A COUPLE OF LINE ITEMS. THERE'S NO ACTUAL PROMISES OF CERTAIN THINGS THAT ARE EXPECTED OTHER THAN PERFORMANCE.

ALL COSTS ARE ESTIMATED AT THIS TIME. DON'T KNOW WHAT TIME THAT IS BECAUSE IT'S WELL, WE CAN SEE IT FROM THERE.

PARTICULAR SIGNING OF THERE, CERTAIN AFFIDAVITS THAT AREN'T NOTARIZED, BUT THE PER DIEM.

HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE WE GIVING A PER DIEM? AT WHAT AMOUNT? FOR HOW MANY DAYS? EXCEPT FOR THE LOCAL BAND PERFORMERS WILL REQUIRE.

WHO ARE OUR LOCAL PERFORMERS? WHAT DID THEY DO? AIR AND GROUND TRANSPORTATION. HOTEL. APPROXIMATELY.

APPROXIMATELY 12 AIR FLIGHTS $6,500. APPROXIMATELY 12 HOTEL ROOMS FOR TWO DAYS 5760.

WHERE DID WE PUT THEM? WHERE ARE THE INVOICES? WHAT AIRLINES DO THEY COME FROM? THEY GO. SOME PEOPLE SAID THAT THEY WERE HERE LOCAL.

THEY WERE IN MIAMI THERE. THEY WEREN'T OUT OF THE COUNTRY.

BORN IN BROOKLYN. LIVED IN SPRINGFIELD, MASSACHUSETTS.

TRAVEL THE WORLD, I GET IT. THERE'S FOUR BAND MEMBERS.

THEY PLAYED TWO TRACKS. THEY DID NOT BRING A BAND WITH THEM.

I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH A BIG PARTY. I'VE SHARED THAT WITH YOU ALL.

I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY FOR THIS.

SO GROUND TRANSPORTATION, WE ALREADY HAVE $3,500.

WE'RE PAYING $2,500 FOR PRODUCTION ASSISTANCE AND A BOOKING AGENT FEE FOR RHYTHMS. NOW IS RHYTHMS AN AUTHORIZED BOOKING AGENT FOR MORGAN HERITAGE? THEY ARE A BOOKING AGENT. LIKE ANY OTHER AGENT WE CONTACT.

THEY'RE NOT THE AUTHORIZED BOOKING AGENT, WHICH IS ACTUALLY UNIVERSAL ATTRACTIONS AGENCY.

THEY'RE THE ONES WHO BELIEVE RHYTHMS HAD TO CONTACT IN ORDER TO OBTAIN OUR AGREEMENT WAS WITH RHYTHMS, RIGHT? SO RHYTHMS DID THE WORK, AND I GET WANTING TO PUT ALL THE WORK ON SOMEONE ELSE AND LETTING THEM ORGANIZE ORGANIZED DESPITE ALL THE WORK THAT REALLY WAS DONE BY OUR CITY.

WHY WAS IT NOT KNOWN THAT THERE WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL $3,200 FOR TRANSPORTATION WHEN WE ALREADY HAD $3,500 ALLOTTED FOR SO. 67. ROUNDED UP $6,700 FOR TRANSPORTATION FOR TWO DAYS.

HOW MANY PEOPLE WHAT KIND OF CARS WERE WE PUTTING THEM IN? ARE THEY LIMOUSINES? DO WE HAVE THEM CHAUFFEURED? WHERE DO THEY GO FOR ALL THAT MONEY? IT WAS A DISCUSSION PRIOR TO WITH OUR SPECIAL EVENT SUPERVISOR THAT AT THE TIME OF THE LINE ITEMS, IT WAS AN ESTIMATION BECAUSE FLIGHTS GO UP, HOTEL NIGHT STAYS GO UP.

SO THAT'S JUST AN ESTIMATION. SO THE INVOICE THAT CAME AFTER WAS TOLD TO US THOSE WERE FOR THE INCREASES FROM THE TIME THE AGREEMENT WAS DONE UNTIL THE EVENT.

WELL, WHY WOULD YOU WAIT TILL JULY 1ST FOR THAT? YOU KNOW HOW MUCH YOUR FLIGHTS COST THE DAY YOU BOOK THEM.

WHY DIDN'T THAT INFORMATION COME TO THE CITY, OR WHY DID THE CITY ASK FOR IT? WHY ARE WE GETTING A JULY JULY 1ST ITEM THAT SAYS ADDITIONAL TRANSPORTATION COST FOR YARD ON THE LAWN? IS IT FOR GROUND? IS IT FOR AIR? PAY FOR A CRUISE.

WHAT IS IT? MY BIGGEST PROBLEM WITH ALL OF THIS IS THE FAILURE TO PROVIDE DETAIL.

AND IT SAYS QUANTITY. ONE ONE. ONE PERSON HAD TO PAY 30.

HAD TO PAY 3200. IT'S NOT THE FACT THAT IT'S $200 OVER THE CITY MANAGER'S AMOUNT.

IT'S THE FACT THAT THE CITY OF TAMARAC WOULD ALLOW A CONTRACT TO COME IN AND SPEND ALL THIS MONEY THAT'S ONLY ON RHYTHMS. JUST WAIT TILL THE REST OF THE STUFF.

RIGHT? BECAUSE MISS COULD USE. HOW MUCH DID THE CITY.

HOW MUCH DOES THE WHOLE BILL. NOT HOW MUCH THE CITY PAID.

HOW MUCH WAS THE WHOLE BILL FOR THE MORGAN HERITAGE? THE WHOLE BILL FOR THE WHOLE ENTIRE CONCERT. EVERYTHING THAT WENT OUT FOR THE CONCERT.

ADVERTISING, POLICE, FIRE, BUILDING OF STADIUM, PAYING FOR THE STAGE, ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF.

HOW MUCH DID THIS COST? I DON'T HAVE THAT EXACT SUM, BUT IT WAS SOMEWHERE IN THE REGION OF 150,000.

I'M GOING TO CALL BS ON THAT. ABSOLUTE BALONEY AND A HALF.

OKAY, SO ESPECIALLY WHEN I'VE BEEN TOLD A NUMBER BY THE CITY MANAGER, WHICH IS ALMOST DOUBLE WHAT YOU JUST SHARED.

I'M NOT SAYING WHAT WE PAID, BECAUSE I KNOW $150,000 OUT OF WASTE MANAGEMENT.

THE GIFT THAT WAS GIVEN TO US WAS PAID TO HELP BRING IT DOWN TO WHAT WOULD BE MAYBE $150,000.

[02:15:06]

ANYWAY WE HAVE IN OUR CONTRACT HERE THAT THEY SIGNED.

CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT INCUR COSTS FOR PERFORMANCE OF OF SERVICES UNDER THIS AGREEMENT IN EXCESS OF 62 160 WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION OF THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE. NOW, YOU MAY HAVE SAID THAT IT WAS AN ESTIMATED COST, BUT YOU SHOULD HAVE HAD THE ITEMS IN AND THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN TOLD TO YOU PRIOR TO THAT, THEY WERE GOING TO HAVE AN ADDITIONAL BILL AND IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY THE CITY.

THEN CITY MANAGER, YOU WISH TO SAY SOMETHING? I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, YOU KNOW, THE WORKING RELATIONSHIP WITH THE RHYTHMS. MADAM MAYOR, IN IN INSTANCES WHERE WE HAVE A CONTRACTOR THAT THAT PROVIDES A SERVICE AND THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ITS EXPENDITURES. AND WE LOOK AT THE BOTTOM LINE AND WE DON'T NECESSARILY COLLECT YOU KNOW, THE, THE THE DETAILS OF EXPENDITURES, BECAUSE WE LOOK AT THE BOTTOM LINE, THEY PROVIDE THE SERVICE FOR $62,000, AND THAT'S WHAT'S IMPORTANT FOR US. AND SO IN THIS CASE AS MR. PATRON MENTIONED, WE HAD DELAYS FROM THE ORIGINAL DATE THAT THAT WE HAD INITIALLY ASKED FOR A QUOTATION WHICH WAS AT $62,000. AND THE DAY THAT THAT WE WERE ABLE TO COMMIT BECAUSE OF SOME OTHER CONCERNS THAT THAT WE HAD FOR THE FOR THE ENTIRE EVENT THE FLIGHTS WENT UP AND OTHER THINGS HAVE CHANGED.

AND IT'S NOT JUST THE BAND MEMBERS, THEY ALSO HAVE SPORTING STAFF, YOU KNOW, WITH THEIR EQUIPMENT, WITH THEIR, YOU KNOW, MATERIALS AND, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE AN ENTOURAGE.

AND SO BUT ALL OF THOSE DETAILS ARE THE BUSINESS OF THE PROVIDER.

AND SO PART OF THE COMFORT LEVEL WE HAVE WITH WORKING WITH THESE KINDS OF AGENCIES IS THAT WE DON'T GET TO DEAL WITH THE COMPLICATIONS OF THESE YOU KNOW TALENT BRINGING THEM ON SITE AND DOING ALL THOSE THINGS.

SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE LEVEL OF COMFORT WE HAVE WHEN WE HAVE A TURNKEY PROJECT AND WE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE THAT WE LOOK AT. WELL, I APPRECIATE THAT.

IT'S YOUR OPINION OF HOW IT SHOULD BE. AND BUT ATTORNEY NIAMH, THEY ALSO SHOULD HAVE BEEN ORGANIZED WELL ENOUGH THEN TO PROVIDE US THE DETAILS PRIOR TO THE EVENT HAPPENING. BECAUSE THIS TRANSPORTATION ALLEGEDLY WE KNEW THE NUMBERS PRIOR TO THE EVENT.

SO YOU WOULD HAVE KNOWN AND IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO BE INCORPORATED AND IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO BE IN A PRIOR MEETING FOR US TO DISCUSS THIS OVERAGE.

THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS ALSO, I CAN UNDERSTAND IT'S LIKE, OH, HERE'S OUR POCKETBOOK, HERE'S $65,000.

WE WANT A GREAT EVENT. JUST DO WHATEVER YOU WANT.

I GUESS I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THAT. I WANT TO KNOW THAT I'M GETTING THE SERVICES AND EVERYTHING THAT I'M EXPECTING FOR THAT $65,000.

THAT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY. AND THAT I FEEL MAY HAVE BEEN DONE, BUT IT IS NOT TRANSPARENT AND IT IS NOT PROPERLY PROVIDED FOR US. AND IT FEELS A LOT OF LAST MINUTE THINGS, RIGHT? AND JUST WANT TO ADD ONE MORE THING. AND IN FACT THEY DID COME TO US FOR THESE POTENTIAL ADDITIONAL TRANSPORTATION CHARGES.

AND WE DIDN'T KNOW AT THAT TIME BECAUSE WE STILL WEREN'T FULLY COMMITTED.

AND VERBALLY, WE SAID I SAID THAT THAT YOU KNOW WE'LL BE WILL BE TAKING CARE OF THOSE ADDITIONAL CHARGES BECAUSE THE DELAY WAS ON US AT THAT TIME.

SO THAT ALL ENDED UP BEING $3,200. OKAY. BUT AT THE SAME TOKEN, THEY DEMANDED THE BALANCE.

THEY DEMANDED IMMEDIATELY $37,910 IMMEDIATELY FROM WHATEVER THE DATE WAS THAT I GUESS THE CITY SIGNED THE CONTRACT TO CONFIRM ARTIST BOOKING AND SECURE AIRFARE, HOTEL AND OTHERS, AND THEN THE BALANCE WAS REQUIRED NO LATER THAN JUNE 24TH.

SO BY JUNE 24TH, WE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN EXACTLY WHAT THE AMOUNTS WERE AND THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN BEFORE THE EVENT, AND THEN THERE WAS PLENTY OF TIME TO GET IT ON.

IF NOT THE END OF JUNE MEETING, THE JULY MEETING TO LET US KNOW THAT THIS IS THERE AND PROVIDE US WITH THE DETAIL.

IF THE CITY CITY MANAGER SEEMS YOU WANT TO FALL ON THE SWORD FOR THIS ONE, THAT'S FINE.

BUT I'M JUST SAYING I HAVE A LOT OF PROBLEMS WITH THE CITY NOT GETTING BETTER DETAIL FOR THE AMOUNT OF MONEY WE'RE EXPECTED TO SPEND, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE ORIGINAL BUDGET WAS $20,000.

AND YES, WE AGREED TO MORE, BUT EVERYTHING MORPHED INTO SOMETHING BIG AND IT JUST FEELS LIKE THE POCKETBOOK WAS JUST LIKE, HERE IT IS, BLUSHING, SNEEZING AT THE TRUTH. AS MY GRANDMOTHER WOULD SAY, MISS PRODUCE, IT SEEMS LIKE YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING.

NO. YOU'RE OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO I WANTED IT. I STILL REALLY WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE $3,200 WENT FOR AND WHAT AIRLINES WE PAY FOR AND THE

[02:20:07]

TRANSPORTATION. SO EVENTUALLY, EVEN THOUGH I WAS TOLD IT WAS ALL IN THE BACK UP, WHICH IT WASN'T.

EVENTUALLY I'LL SEE THOSE DOCUMENTS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

COMMISSIONER BOLTON. THANK YOU. LISTEN. THERE'S A QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE COST OF MR. PATRON, CAN YOU CAN YOU COME BACK FOR A SECOND? RESTATE THE THE NUMBER THE AMOUNT FOR THE CARIBBEAN EVENT THAT YOU GUYS WERE PLANNING.

THE PROPOSED AMOUNT FOR THE BUDGET? WELL, WE WERE BUDGETED 20,000 WHEN WE WERE PLANNING.

I DON'T THINK WE GOT TO THAT AMOUNT YET. OKAY, SO YOU WERE YOU BUDGETED $20,000.

FOR WHAT EVENT? FOR THE ISLAND GROOVE ON THE GRASS? YES. WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN FOR A CARIBBEAN HERITAGE MONTH.

NOT NOT THE YARD OF THE LAWN FESTIVAL. CORRECT.

AND THE COST ONLY CHANGED AFTER DISCUSSION BY THIS COMMISSION IN A RETREAT.

THAT SAID, WE DID NOT WANT THAT EVENT THAT THE STAFF WAS PLANNING.

WE WANTED A DIFFERENT EVENT TO CELEBRATE THE OUR RESIDENTS.

YES. OKAY. SO IT IS NOT COMPARING APPLES TO APPLES.

ONE BUDGET WAS FOR SOMETHING ELSE AND ANOTHER BUDGET WAS FOR SOMETHING ELSE.

I WAS WATCHING A FUNNY VIDEO THE OTHER DAY AND YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY ORDERED FOOD ON DOORDASH, AND THEN AS SOON AS THE FOOD WAS ORDERED, THEY CANCELED IT.

AND THEN THE PERSON WENT BACK WITH A CAMERA. WHY DID YOU CANCEL THE ORDER AND THE PERSON WAS EATING THE FOOD? IT'S THE SAME THING THAT IS HAPPENING HERE. WE HAVE A MAYOR THAT WENT ON STAGE.

HA HA HA, LOVED THIS EVENT. OH MY GOSH, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE.

YES YES YES IT'S GREAT. AND THEN COMPLAIN AFTER THE FACT.

YOU'RE CAUGHT WITH THE FOOD IN YOUR MOUTH. YOU KNOW, FOR THE LIMITED AMOUNT OF INFORMATION THAT I HAVE ABOUT THIS EVENT, I UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW THESE PEOPLE WERE ASKING TO STAY AT A FIVE STAR HOTEL.

THEY WERE ASKING TO STAY AT THE RITZ-CARLTON AND THAT SORT OF STUFF.

AND I LOOKED AT THE MANAGER AND SAID, ABSOLUTELY NOT.

ABSOLUTELY NOT. THEY WILL NOT. DO NOT DO THAT.

YOU KNOW, CANCEL THEM. AND AND THERE WERE CONVERSATIONS BACK AND FORTH.

AND YOU KNOW, WHAT? THEY WHERE THEY STAYED. THE SHERATON, THE SHERATON.

THAT'S HOW FRUGAL WE ARE. RIGHT. SO LET'S NOT TALK ABOUT THAT.

HERE'S A HERE'S ANOTHER STORY. I WAS BOOKING A FLIGHT TO A CARIBBEAN COUNTRY, MAYBE TRINIDAD, AND I WAS TALKING TO THE AIRLINE REPRESENTATIVE, AND, YOU KNOW, THE THE THE PERSON WAS GIVING ME THE COURT OF THE TICKET, AND I WAS LIKE, OH, MY GOSH, THIS IS AMAZING. PRICE.

I MADE ONE CHANGE. WHEN THEY WENT BACK, THE TICKET ALMOST DOUBLED.

THAT'S THE AIRLINE INDUSTRY. THAT'S THE COST OF TRANSPORTATION.

THAT'S THE COST OF HOTEL. IT CHANGES ON A WHIM.

SO YOU YOU CAN'T, YOU KNOW, JUST SAY THAT YOU KNOW, WE CANNOT QUANTIFY YOU KNOW, CELEBRATING OUR RESIDENTS. WE CANNOT QUANTIFY, YOU KNOW, CELEBRATING HERITAGE.

AND THIS IS WHAT WE DID. AND SO YOU KNOW, TALKING ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS A AUTHORIZED BOOKING AGENT OF THE ARTIST, I MEAN, AND AN EVENT PLANNER KNOWS, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU ARE PROTECTING THE PURSE OF A OF A CITY THAT LISTEN, IF YOU'RE GOING TO GO TO PERSON A AND PERSON A IS GOING TO CHARGE YOU $100,000 AND YOU GO TO PERSON B WHO HAVE A BETTER RELATIONSHIP WITH A GROUP THAT'S GOING TO CHARGE YOU $20,000.

WHO ARE YOU GOING TO GO TO? THE AUTHORIZED BOOKING AGENT THAT CHARGES $100,000? OR ARE YOU GOING TO GO TO SOMEBODY WHO CHARGES LESS? YOU KNOW, SO WE'RE WE'RE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A GRAMMY AWARD WINNING ARTIST.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A BOOKING AGENT THAT HAS BOOKED FOR HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE WHO ARE GRAMMY AWARD WINNING.

YOU KNOW, AND WHAT SHOULD WE HAVE DONE? GO TO SOMEBODY.

THAT IS MORE COSTLY THAN THAN THESE, YOU KNOW? THIS IS JUST, YOU KNOW, PLAIN SILLY. AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S A WASTE OF OUR TIME.

AND REALLY AND TRULY, I THINK THE QUESTION SHOULD BE CALLED NOW.

THANK YOU. AND FOR THE RECORD, AGAIN, IT IS NOT THAT THE EVENT WASN'T GREAT.

WE HAD A GOOD TIME. I DO NOT AGREE. WE HAD 5500 PEOPLE BECAUSE SOME PEOPLE SAY WE HAD 8500, SOME PEOPLE WE HAD 32. WHATEVER IT WAS, THAT'S NOT THE POINT.

[02:25:02]

AND THE POINT ALWAYS SEEMS TO GET LOST. THE POINT IS, YES, AIRFARE CHANGES, BUT WHEN YOU CHANGED IT THAT DAY, THAT YOU CHANGED IT, YOU HAD TO PAY THE CREDIT CARD IN ORDER TO GET THE FLIGHT.

SO WHEN WAS THIS KNOWN? WHY DIDN'T WE HAVE DETAILS? THAT IS MY ISSUE WITH SPENDING IN THIS CITY. WHEN WE DO EVENTS, WE SHOULD HAVE BETTER RECORDS PROVIDED TO US FOR EXPECTATION.

THAT IS MY COMMENT. COMMISSIONER RYAN WISHES TO SAY SOMETHING.

MADAM ANGELES IS FOLLOWING UP. I THINK YOU YOU YOU YOU BROUGHT QUESTIONS ABOUT THE LEGAL ASPECT OF IT, AND THAT'S NOT MY EXPERTISE. I'M MORE OF THE BUSINESS MIND. AND IF YOU DIVIDE 12 BY 6500 FOR THE FLIGHTS, IT'S 540. THAT'S THE COST OF ECONOMY FLIGHT. IF YOU DIVIDE 12 BY 5700 FOR TWO NIGHTS FOR HOTEL ROOMS, THAT'S ABOUT 290. THAT'S THE COST OF, LIKE, A THREE STAR HOTEL.

IF WE DIVIDE 12 GROUND TRANSPORTATION BY 3500, THAT'S 2.91.

SO IF WE GRANULATED BY THE NUMBERS, I THINK THE BUSINESS IS KIND OF GIVING US GOOD VALUE FOR THE MONEY IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY'RE GIVING AND WHAT WE GOT.

YOU KNOW, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE LEGAL ASPECT OF WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT FROM A BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE. I THINK WE'VE GOTTEN A GOOD DEAL FOR WHAT WE GOT. LOOKING AT IT IN DETAIL IN WHAT THEY HAVE HERE, I THINK IT'S VERY SELF-EXPLANATORY.

IT'S DELINEATED WELL. AND AS A BUSINESS, I THINK, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE TO MAKE THEIR MONEY IN THEIR BOOKING FEE.

IT'S CAPITALISM. IT'S A COUNTRY THAT WE LIVE IN. BUT I DON'T THINK WE WERE OVERCHARGED AT ALL IN ANY WAY.

WITH WHAT? WHAT WE WERE PROVIDING. THANK YOU FOR YOUR OPINION AGAIN.

I DIDN'T SAY WE'RE OVERCHARGED. I SAID WE WERE NOT PROVIDING INFORMATION, IN MY OPINION, IN THE MANNER THAT WAS MORE TRANSPARENT.

CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. MADAM MAYOR, STILL NEED A MOTION.

AND A SECOND, PLEASE. I'M SORRY. ARE WE READY TO MOVE IT? I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BOLTON.

SECOND, I HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER. RIGHT.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BOLTON. YES. MAYOR GOMEZ.

YES. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON. YES. COMMISSIONER WRIGHT.

YES. VICE MAYOR. DANIEL. YES. THANK YOU. MOTION PASSES 5 TO 0.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WHILE I KNOW THAT WE STILL HAVE PLENTY TO GO ON THIS MEETING, IT IS 1204.

AND THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE REQUIRING SOME RESTROOM BREAKS.

WE WILL BE BACK AT 12, 20, 15 MINUTES. WE ARE.

MRS.. HELLO EVERYONE. WE ARE BACK. IT IS 1221.

WE ARE OFF BY A MINUTE. MY APOLOGIES. JUST FOR EVERYONE'S FYI, WE ARE HAVING A HARD STOP AT ONE FOR 30 MINUTES.

A HARD STOP AT ONE FOR 30 MINUTES. ALL RIGHT.

GETTING BACK TO THE FUN OF IT ALL. WE ARE NOW ON ITEM FIVE.

[5.g TR14308 - A Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida, approving an agreement between the City of Tamarac and Waypoint Contracting, Inc.; for the design-build of Westside Dog Park project in accordance with request for proposal (RFP) no. 25-16r for a contract amount of $696,536.40; a contingency in the amount of $69,653.64 will be added to the project account, for a total project budget of $766,190.04; authorizing an expenditure from the appropriate accounts; providing for conflicts; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date]

G TR FOUR. THREE. ZERO. EIGHT. CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD.

ITEM FIVE G. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION AND CITY OF TAMARAC APPROVE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TAMARAC AND WAYPOINT CONTRACTING FOR THE DESIGN.

BUILD A WEST SIDE DOG PARK AND THE PROJECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH RFP NUMBER 25.16.

OFF A CONTRACT. AMOUNT $696,536.40, WITH A CONTINGENCY AMOUNT $69,653.64, FOR A TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET OF $766,190, PLUS ZERO PLUS $0.04, PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU.

I'LL TAKE A MOTION A SECOND. PLEASE. MOVE IT.

SECOND, I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BOLTON.

I HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PATTERSON. AT THIS TIME, THIS ITEM IS NOW OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.

PLEASE, MR. WASSERMAN, COME ON DOWN. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

YOU CAN SPEAK AFTER HIM.

RONALD WASSERMAN 8577J DRIVE TAMARAC 33321. YOU'RE APPROVING OR YOU'RE TRYING TO APPROVE A DOGGIE PARK FOR THREE QUARTERS OF $1 MILLION.

WE HAVE DOGGIE PARKS. WHY DO WE NEED TO BUILD ANOTHER ONE? YOU TALK ABOUT BUDGET. THERE'S AN OVERRIDE OF $16,000.

WHY ARE WE BUILDING ANOTHER DOG PARK IN THE WEST? GET ON SOUTH GATE. GET ON UNIVERSITY. COME TO THE BEAUTIFUL PARK WITH DOGGIE PARK.

WE HAVE PLEASE. IT'S WELL USED. AND FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO LOVE YOUR ANIMALS, I UNDERSTAND.

BUT WHY DO WE NEED TO SPEND THREE QUARTERS OF $1 MILLION FOR THIS?

[02:30:06]

YOU TALK ABOUT BUDGET WOES. WE NEED MORE POLICE.

WE DON'T NEED DOGGIE PARKS. I'VE BEEN TOLD THAT IT'S THE BUDGET.

SO I'LL MAKE THIS PRETTY SIMPLE. I'LL LOOK BEHIND ME.

NONE OF MY NEIGHBORS ARE HERE. IF THEY KNEW THIS KIND OF NONSENSE FOR A DOGGIE PARK.

WHEN CRIME IS HAPPENING IN OUR COMMUNITY. WHEN WE NEED MORE POLICE.

WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT BUDGET WOES, HERE I AM RAISING MY VOICE AGAIN.

AND WHY? FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE ON THIS COMMISSION, YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN SPEAKING BEFORE THE COMMISSION SINCE 2016. MAYOR, I KNOW YOU A LONG TIME, COMMISSIONER BOLTON.

I KNOW YOU A LONG TIME, MADAM. MADAME DANIEL, YOU'RE MY COMMISSIONER.

I APPRECIATE ALL YOUR ASSISTANCE, BUT LET'S GET REAL HERE, GUYS.

YOU NEED TO BUILD A NEW UNIT HERE FOR CITY HALL.

WHAT THE HECK? THREE QUARTERS OF $1 MILLION. I'VE HEARD WE NEED NINE MORE POLICEMEN. BOY, THAT SURE WOULD COVER IT, WOULDN'T IT? SO I'M GOING TO END. AND YOU KNOW I COME HERE.

THIS IS FREEDOM TO ME. MAYOR, I'VE KNOWN YOU SO LONG, MAURY.

WE'VE MET. I KNOW YOU. MADAME PATTERSON, I'VE MET YOU, I KNOW YOU.

EVERYONE KNOWS ME HERE. A DOGGIE PARK FOR THREE QUARTERS OF $1 MILLION.

WOW. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISHES TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME? SEEING NONE. PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED.

COMMISSIONER BOLTON, YOU PULLED THIS ITEM, MADAM MAYOR.

YES. YOU PULLED AN ITEM FOR $300. I'M PULLING AN ITEM FOR 750.

YOU PULL AN ITEM FOR $300. I'M PULLING AN ITEM FOR $750,000 OF TAXPAYERS MONEY.

YOU KNOW, I AGREE WITH RON. THIS IS. THIS IS RIDICULOUS.

$750,000 FOR A DOG PARK. IT HAS HAS NOTHING TO DO.

START THE CLOCK. BECAUSE THEN I DON'T WANT HER TO TO BE TALKING FOREVER.

BURNS MY EAR. YOU KNOW, $750,000 FOR A DOG PARK OR $1 MILLION.

IT'S RIDICULOUS. IT'S. YOU KNOW. AND SO I THINK THIS IS UNDER WHOSE DEPARTMENT.

THAT'S PUBLIC WORKS. PARKS AND REC. OKAY, MELISSA, CAN I ASK YOU A FEW QUESTIONS? FOR THE RECORD, I LOVE DOGS. MY SON WANTS A DOG.

HE'S NOT HAD A DOG GET. MATTHEW, YOU'LL GET THE DOG SOON, BUT NOT NOW.

HOW BIG IS THIS DOG PARK? IT'S A LITTLE OVER HALF AN ACRE.

HALF AN ACRE? OKAY. HAVE YOU LOOKED AT OTHER DOG PARKS IN OTHER CITIES? HAVE I PERSONALLY. NO. DID THE COMMITTEE, THE STAFF, DID ANYONE LOOK TO TO FIND OUT WHERE THE OTHER DOG PARKS ARE? THE OTHER CITIES? WELL, THERE'S A COUPLE AROUND.

COCONUT CREEK HAS ONE. SUNRISE HAS ONE. THERE'S A COUPLE OF DOG PARKS AROUND IN THE AREA.

BUT YOU. BUT YOU DON'T KNOW THE SIZE OF THE OF THEIR DOG PARK.

NO I DON'T. OKAY. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN HELPFUL TO HAVE SOME INFORMATION AS TO HOW MUCH THEIR DOG PARK COST TO CONSTRUCT. RIGHT. FOR A HALF AN ACRE. I REALLY DON'T THINK THAT YOU KNOW IT'S WORTH IT. LISTEN, I HAVE A WHOLE LOT TO TO SAY ON THIS ITEM.

AND, YOU KNOW, I REALLY DON'T WANT TO GO THERE OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT THIS.

[02:35:01]

I THINK IT'S IT'S NOT A WASTE OF USE. IT'S A WASTE OF RESOURCES.

I THINK THAT PERHAPS WE CAN GET A BETTER PRICE.

I DON'T KNOW, BUT, YOU KNOW, THIS DOESN'T SIT WELL WITH ME.

WHEN I HAVE SO MUCH NOTES ON SOMETHING. AND BELIEVE ME, I GO THROUGH THE AGENDAS WITH A FINE TOOTH COMB.

I READ EVERYTHING, AND WHEN I MAKE SO MUCH NOTES, AND I'VE RESEARCHED SO MUCH ABOUT SOMETHING, AND IT AND IT JUST IT GIVES ME THAT AGGRAVATING FEELING.

I, I DON'T I DON'T MOVE FORWARD ON IT. SO, YOU KNOW, I'M GOING TO VOTE NO ON THIS.

I DON'T THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE. AND I THINK THAT THE CITY SHOULD GO BACK AND OR A CHEAPER COST.

THANKS. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON. THANK YOU. MAYOR.

A COUPLE QUESTIONS. MANAGER. ON ON THIS PROJECT.

I'M GLAD IT WAS PULLED. I ACTUALLY DIDN'T REALIZE IT WAS ON CONSENT.

I WAS A LITTLE SURPRISED THAT IT WAS ON CONSENT.

ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING I'VE NOT HAD A CONVERSATION WITH ANYBODY ABOUT THIS PROJECT.

MY FIRST QUESTION IS, IN TERMS OF STRATEGIC GOALS, IT'S MY BACKUP SAYS THAT THIS THIS PROJECT ALIGNS WITH OUR TAMARAC IS HOME GOAL.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN? SURE. COMMISSIONER, FIRST OF ALL, THIS THIS PROJECT IS ONE OF THOSE.

THIS PROJECT IS ONE OF THOSE ITEMS THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE STRATEGIC PLANNING AGENDA BY THE CITY COMMISSION AND FUNDED BY THE CITY COMMISSION.

SO WE'RE FOLLOWING THE DIRECTION BASED ON OUR STRATEGIC PLANNING DIRECTION FROM MAYBE TWO YEARS AGO.

SO TWO YEARS AGO, MAYBE A LITTLE LONGER TWO YEARS AGO, I THINK.

AND SO THAT'S THE, THE HISTORY THAT THAT WHERE WE'RE AT.

SO IN TERMS OF THE RELATIONSHIP, EACH ONE OF US ARE STRATEGIC OR IF EACH ONE OF OUR PROJECTS WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT, THAT THEY SUPPORT ONE OF OUR GOALS, ONE OF OUR STRATEGIC GOALS.

AND IT'S THE MOST APPROPRIATE HOME FOR THIS KIND OF PROJECT IN OUR STRATEGIC PLANNING GOALS OR STRATEGIC GOALS.

SO THAT'S THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PARK AND THE IN THE, IN THE ITEM.

IN TERMS OF THE, THE, THE COST THE, YOU KNOW, 6000 $700,000 FOR FOR A LITTLE OVER HALF AN ACRE. UNFORTUNATELY WHAT IS HALF AN ACRE OR FIVE ACRES? THERE ARE CERTAIN ELEMENTS OF OF THESE PARKS THAT NEEDS TO BE TAKEN CARE OF, WHETHER IT'S YOU KNOW LIGHTING, ELECTRICAL DRAINAGE AND FENCING. YOU KNOW, SOME OF THOSE ARE, YOU KNOW, ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS THAT TAKE UP, MAKE UP MOST OF THE COSTS FOR THESE PARTS. OTHER THAN THAT YOU KNOW IT'S JUST AN OPEN SPACE, ESSENTIALLY. OKAY. SO REGARDING YOU, YOU SPOKE TO COSTS.

I'VE SEEN VARIOUS. FORMS OF BACKUP ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.

I ACTUALLY GOT SOMETHING THIS WEEK FROM YOUR OFFICE THAT TOLD ME THE PROJECT COST WAS HALF $1 MILLION.

HOWEVER, IN THE BACKUP, IT GIVES ME A TOTAL COST OF ONE APPROXIMATELY $1.1 MILLION.

HOWEVER, IT DOES NOT. THAT NUMBER IS NOT INCLUSIVE OF ONGOING MAINTENANCE.

WHAT IS THE COST OF DELIVERING A DOG PARK? SO THE BID.

THIS WAS A STRAIGHT BID, BY THE WAY, AND THE BID HAD A NUMBER OF COMPONENTS.

ONE, THE BASE PARK ITSELF, WHICH HAD THE ESSENTIAL PARTS AND PIECES OF THE CONSTRUCTION.

AND THE SECOND PART WAS FOR SOME OPTIONAL EQUIPMENT, SOME, SOME YOU KNOW LIGHTING ELEMENTS, SOME SECURITY ELEMENTS, WI-FI, THOSE KINDS OF SOLAR LIGHTING, THOSE KINDS OF ELEMENTS.

THEY WERE OPTIONAL. AND SO WHEN WE NOTICED THAT THE OPTIONAL ELEMENTS WAS COSTED WAS COSTING ABOUT $376,000, WE OPTED TO LEAVE THEM AND KEEP THEM OUT OF THE PROJECT AND KEPT THE THE BASE BID IN THIS ITEM YOU MENTIONED NOT LONG AGO THAT IN A STRATEGIC PLANNING SESSION, THE STAFF WAS GUIDED BY THE COMMISSION. WHAT COMMISSION? WAS I A PART OF THAT COMMISSION? YOU WERE NOT OKAY. THE BACKUP I WAS PROVIDED SAYS THAT THE ADOPTED 2014 PARKS MASTER PLAN IDENTIFIED THE NEED FOR AN ADDITIONAL DOG PARK TO SERVE THE COMMUNITY SURROUNDING WESTSIDE PARK.

IT DOESN'T SAY THAT A COMMISSION TWO YEARS AGO.

[02:40:04]

IT SAYS A 2014. 11 YEARS AGO, SOMEBODY DECIDED THEY WANTED TO SPEND.

OR THE PARKS MASTER PLAN IDENTIFIED A NEED TO THE MAYOR'S POINT.

I'M CONFUSED ON THE TRANSPARENCY ON THIS ITEM.

SO THE ORIGINAL MASTER PLAN LOOKED AT THE CITY AS A WHOLE AND SAID, YOU HAVE YOU NEED THIS MUCH GREENSPACE.

YOU NEED THIS MUCH, YOU KNOW, CERTAIN PARKS AND THESE KINDS OF ELEMENTS.

AND SO THEY LOOKED AT IT FROM A HOLISTIC PERSPECTIVE, BUT THEY DID NOT IDENTIFY.

YOU KNOW, YOU NEED TO USE THIS PIECE. YOU NEED TO USE THAT PARCEL.

YOU NEED. SO IT WAS JUST A HOLISTIC REVIEW OF THE CITY'S PARKS NEEDS BASED ON AT THAT TIME.

SO THIS ITEM CAME ABOUT AT A STRATEGIC PLANNING MEETING, I BELIEVE IT WAS TWO YEARS AGO, PRIOR TO YOUR TERM, OBVIOUSLY. AND SO THIS POCKET HAS BEEN YOU KNOW, EMPTY FOR QUITE SOME TIME.

AND THE DISCUSSION WAS THAT IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT CAN WE DO WITH THIS PIECE? AND THE DOG PARK WAS THE THE SUGGESTION. AND SO THAT'S HOW IT BECAME PART OF THE BUDGET.

AND HERE WE ARE TODAY, I'M GOING TO ASK THE ATTORNEY FOR I JUST WANT CLARITY ON BECAUSE I'VE HEARD A NUMBER OF TIMES OVER THE LAST NINE MONTHS. A PRIOR COMMISSION A PRIOR COMMISSION.

IS THE CITY A COUNCIL MANAGER FORM OF GOVERNMENT? CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT FOR ME? BASED ON THE CITY CHARTER? YES. THE CITY HAS A COUNCIL OR CITY COMMISSIONER MANAGER FORM OF GOVERNMENT BY DEFINITION.

COUNCIL MANAGER REFERS TO PRIOR COUNCIL OR CURRENT COUNCIL.

BY DEFINITION, THE POLICY MAKING BODY WHO IS THEN OBVIOUSLY IN CHARGE AT THIS TIME, IS GENERALLY THE ONES THAT MAKE POLICIES THAT THE MANAGER AND OTHER CHARTER MEMBERS MUST FOLLOW. AND THIS IS UP TO THE CURRENT COMMISSION TO FOLLOW ANY PRIOR CITY MANAGER POLICY DIRECTIVE. UNLESS IT'S A CONTRACTUAL ISSUE THAT WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH.

SO WITH THAT SAID, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT.

HOWEVER, IT'S NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY TO EXECUTE VISION FOR THIS CITY BASED ON A PAST COMMISSION, IS IT? IF, WITH RESPECT TO THE VISION OF THE CITY, EACH COMMISSION HAS A RIGHT TO ESTABLISH THE VISION THEY WANT THE STAFF TO FOLLOW? SO IF THERE'S A VISION THAT WAS ESTABLISHED PRIOR TO THIS COMMISSION, THAT VISION CAN BE REVISITED BY THE CURRENT COMMISSION.

THANK YOU. I SAY ALL THAT TO SAY, I'VE HAD MILLIONS OF CONVERSATIONS.

I TALKED TO RESIDENTS ALL THE TIME. I HAVE NOT HAD A SINGLE PERSON, A SINGLE PERSON.

AND I DON'T SAY THIS BECAUSE I, YOU KNOW, EITHER WAY OR THE OTHER, I'VE NOT HAD A SINGLE PERSON ASK ME ABOUT A DOG PARK. I HAVE PERSONALLY LIVED ADJACENT TO THAT SPACE FOR 14 YEARS.

I HAVE PERSONALLY CALLED CODE ENFORCEMENT OVER THE YEARS TO ENSURE THAT IT'S KEPT, THAT IT'S CLEAN, THAT IT'S GRAFFITI FREE, ETC. I'VE NOT NOT HAD A SINGLE PERSON.

I WAS AT A COMMUNITY MEETING LAST WEEK OVER THE SUMMER.

I MENTIONED EARLIER I DIDN'T TAKE A BREAK, I WORKED.

I HAVE SPOKEN TO RESIDENTS HERE, THERE AND EVERYWHERE IN MY DISTRICT.

NOT A SINGLE PERSON EXCEPT THAT ME TO TO THE RESIDENT'S POINT.

AND I APOLOGIZE IF YOUR NAME ESCAPES ME IN THE MOMENT, BUT I'VE SEEN PEOPLE WALKING DOGS IN STEPFORD PARK RELIGIOUSLY, WHICH IS RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER. I HAVE RESIDENTS, HOWEVER, ASKING ME ABOUT ECONOMIC ISSUES.

I HAVE BUSINESS OWNERS WHO NEED SUPPORT. I'VE GOT, YOU KNOW, FAMILIES THAT ARE LOOKING FOR WAYS TO LOOKING FOR US TO IDENTIFY AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I'VE GOT SENIORS WHO ARE LOOKING FOR TAX CUTS.

THERE IS NO WAY THAT I CAN SEE HOW. I JUST CAN'T ALIGN.

TO ME, THIS PROJECT SEEMS MISALIGNED WITH THIS CURRENT COMMISSION.

I'M NOT HERE TO EXECUTE ON ANY OTHER PAST COMMISSIONERS VISION.

[02:45:05]

I'M MET WITH THAT THAT VERBIAGE ON A REGULAR BASIS AROUND HERE, AND I HAVE A REAL PROBLEM WITH THAT.

RESPECTFULLY, I'M REQUESTING THAT BEFORE A PROJECT COME BEFORE ME ON THIS COMMISSION THAT I AM BRIEFED ON IT.

I AGREE WITH THE RESIDENTS I WILL NOT SUPPORT $1 MILLION PLUS DOG PARK.

THANK YOU. WELL, I'LL ASK SOME QUESTIONS. I DON'T KNOW WHO CAN ANSWER THIS, BUT WASN'T THIS WAS THIS MAYBE MELISSA? MR. TRUMP? WAS THIS IN OUR MASTER PARK EASTSIDE PARK PLAN? I KNOW IT'S EASTSIDE, BUT DO WE DO ANYTHING ABOUT THE WEST SIDE AT THAT SAME TIME? THE EASTSIDE FEASIBILITY STUDY? YEAH. DID WE DO ANYTHING AT THE SAME TIME REGARDING.

NO. OKAY. THAT'S FINE. WE GOT A GRANT FOR $250,000 FOR THIS.

OR IS IT 225? WE DO NOT HAVE A GRANT FOR THIS ONE.

WE HAD IT IN THE STATE OF THE CITY, DIDN'T WE? IT SAYS NOT FOR THIS. WELL, I COULD'VE SWORN WE HAD SOMETHING IN THE STATE OF THE CITY ABOUT THE WESTSIDE DOG PARK.

ABOUT THIS ANYWAY. WE'VE BEEN ASKED TO BEAUTIFY.

WE KNOW THAT ACTIVATING AREAS THAT HAVE GRAFFITI AND ARE NOT ALWAYS KEPT CLEAN.

THE CITY HAD THIS COME FORWARD IN ORDER TO ACTIVATE THAT AREA.

BEAUTIFY THAT AREA. PEOPLE ON THEIR PUPS WERE GOING THERE ANYWAY AND MAKE IT A NICE PLACE BETWEEN CAPTIVA AND THE OTHER RESIDENCES TO. WALK THEIR DOGS OR SIT AND HAVE A GOOD TIME OUTSIDE AND WAS GOOD A FREE WI-FI AND SAFETY.

SINCE WE DON'T HAVE A GRANT, THERE GOES THAT QUESTION.

AT THIS, I'VE SPOKEN TO A FEW PEOPLE ABOUT THAT AREA.

SOME PEOPLE ARE HAPPY ABOUT IT. THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT. THEY'RE WORRIED ABOUT NOISE. THEY'RE WORRIED ABOUT THIS. HOW MUCH HAVE WE ALREADY SPENT OTHER THAN PUTTING THIS OUT TO BID? NOTHING THAT I'M AWARE OF. WE PUT IT OUT TO BID.

DIDN'T COST US ANYTHING.

GOOD AFTERNOON. FOR THE RECORD, MUSTAFA ALI, PUBLIC SERVICES DIRECTOR.

WE DID SPEND MONEY TO SURVEY THE PROPERTY, SO WE DID HAVE THE SKETCH, THE PROPERTY SURVEY INCLUDED IN THE IN THE RFP THAT WAS ADVERTISED. SO I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT NUMBER ON ME, BUT WE DID SPEND THAT.

DID WE GO OUT FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THE PARK AS WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING FOR EVERY TIME WE WE DO OUR OWN PARKS OR SITES TO GET PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THIS? NOT THIS ONE. I DON'T BELIEVE SO. MY OPINION IS THAT AT THIS TIME THIS DOESN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE OUR OUR OTHER PARKS BECOME MORE DOG FRIENDLY SINCE PEOPLE ARE BRINGING THEIR DOGS IN ANYWAY.

AND SO INSTEAD OF HAVING WORRIES THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO STEP ON SOMETHING BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANY BAGS OR WE DON'T HAVE ANY FACILITIES OR FOR WHATEVER IT IS.

AS COMMISSIONER PATTERSON PARK HAS GOT DOGS ALL THE TIME.

IT'S ALSO GOT SOME SIGNAGE THAT'S A LITTLE BIT CONFUSING TO RESIDENTS WHERE NO DOGS WILL BE IN THE PLAYGROUND, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE THEY CAN BE ON THE PATH. SO I THINK WE NEED TO MAYBE LOOK AT OUR PARKS AND FIGURE OUT WHERE WE CAN MAKE SOME OF OUR OTHER PARKS MORE USER FRIENDLY FOR PUPS AND PARENTS. GOODNESS GRACIOUS, WE HAD POTBELLY PIGS.

I THINK THEY WERE AT OUR DOG PARK SEVERAL YEARS IN A ROW, RIGHT? WITH ALL THAT'S COMING UP WITH BUDGETING AND ISSUES, I HAVE NO PROBLEM PUTTING THIS TO THE BACK BURNER AND REVISITING AT ANOTHER TIME. I DO BELIEVE THAT SOMETIMES THE FINANCES HAVE GONE HIGHER ON THIS PARTICULAR ONE BECAUSE WE'VE DISCUSSED THAT BUDGET.

WE DISCUSSED IT AT OUR LAST BUDGET. WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING THIS AS STRATEGIC PLANNING. THIS ISN'T A SURPRISE TO ANYBODY.

WE'VE HAD THE INFORMATION PUBLIC HAS KNOWN ABOUT IT.

I BROUGHT IT UP AT THE STATE OF THE CITY. THIS IS NOT.

AND THAT WAS WHAT, IN APRIL, WHATEVER IT WAS AND ALL THE MEETINGS HAVE BEEN PUBLIC.

SO THE LACK OF KNOWLEDGE TYPE THING, I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT BECAUSE THE INFORMATION WAS THERE FOR PEOPLE WHO WANTED TO SEEK IT.

BUT I UNDERSTAND WITH WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH RIGHT NOW ON FINANCES, THIS MAY NOT BE IT.

HOWEVER, I THINK ONE OF THE REASONS IT'S GONE UP SO MUCH IS BECAUSE IT'S ANOTHER PROJECT THAT HAS GOTTEN THAT CAN KICK DOWN THE ROAD, AND EVERY TIME WE PUSH SOMETHING DOWN THE ROAD, IT BECOMES MORE AND MORE EXPENSIVE.

[02:50:01]

BUT AGAIN, ON THIS ONE, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM NOT HAVING THIS ONE GO FORWARD AT THIS TIME, AND BEING BACK FOR DISCUSSION WITH THE PUBLIC AT A LATER DATE TO DETERMINE IF WHAT WE DESIRE REALLY FITS THERE.

COMMISSIONER BOLTON. SO WE DO AGREE THAT IF WE WAIT ON ANYTHING, EVEN SECONDS, THAT THE PRICE GOES UP CAN HAVE YOUR CAKE AND EAT IT TOO. OR HE CAN HAVE THIS LEMON CAKE.

IF APPLES AND APPLES AND ORANGES. ORANGES. ANYWAY VICE MAYOR.

YES, I KNOW THE MAYOR REQUESTED TO MAKING OUR PARKS MORE DOG FRIENDLY, BUT PLEASE KEEP IN MIND THAT SOME OF US, LIKE MYSELF, IS EXTREMELY ALLERGIC TO DOGS. SO IF WE HAVE A DOG PARK, THAT'S WHERE THEY SHOULD GO.

SO SOMEONE LIKE MYSELF WON'T GO TO A DOG PARK BECAUSE I KNOW I'LL GET SICK? THANK YOU, THANK YOU. AND PRECISELY. THAT'S WHY I ASKED FOR A CONVERSATION.

I DIDN'T SAY JUST DO IT. BECAUSE I DO KNOW THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE AFRAID.

THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE ALLERGIC. THERE ARE PET PARENTS ARE NOT PERFECT.

BUT THAT'S WHY IT WOULD BE A CONVERSATION TO BE HAD IN THE FUTURE.

I'M NOT SAYING THAT THIS IS A MOTION FOR THAT NOW.

SEEING NO OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM. CITY CLERK, CALL THE ROLL.

COMMISSIONER WRIGHT. NO. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON.

NO. VICE MAYOR. DANIEL. NO. MAYOR. GOMEZ. NO.

COMMISSIONER. BOLTON. NO. MOTION FAILS. 5 TO 0.

[5.h TR14309 - A Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida, approving a Broward Sheriff’s office permit application for special details and authorizing the appropriate City Officials to execute the permit application for police services to be used by the Parks and Recreation department; approving funding from the appropriate parks and recreation accounts; providing for conflicts; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date.]

MOVING TO FIVE H TR 14309. CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD.

ITEM FIVE H. RESOLUTION OF CITY COMMISSIONER.

CITY TAMARAC APPROVING A BROWARD SHERIFF'S OFFICE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL DETAILS.

AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATE CITY OFFICIALS TO EXECUTE THE PERMIT. APPLICATION FOR POLICE SERVICE TO BE USED BY THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT.

PROVIDED FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

MOVE IT OUT OF RESPECT FOR AT LEAST THE OTHER PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE.

WOULD YOU PLEASE LET ME ASK THE QUESTION AND SAY IT KINDLY? I AM LOOKING FOR A MOTION ON THIS ITEM. MOVE IT.

I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BOLTON AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PATTERSON.

THIS ITEM IS NOW OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS. IS THERE ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED. COMMISSIONER BOLTON, YOU PULLED THIS ITEM? I DID. IS THIS MELISSA AGAIN? OKAY.

OKAY. NAME AND TITLE FOR THE RECORD. MELISSA PATRON, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION.

OKAY. DIRECTOR. $107,000. THIS IS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025, RIGHT? CORRECT. SO IT'S FROM OCTOBER LAST YEAR TO NEXT MONTH.

CORRECT. OKAY. IS THIS MONEY THAT WE ALREADY SPENT? WE HAVE. YES. WE HAVE CURRENTLY EXPENDED $107,000.

THAT'S WHY WE'RE ABOUT GETTING APPROVAL, BECAUSE THE AGREEMENT WENT FOR 107,000 NOT TO EXCEED.

SO WE'RE REQUESTING ADDITIONAL FUNDS TO PAY FOR OUR PARKS DETAIL.

OKAY. SO WE ALREADY SPENT THIS MONEY. CORRECT.

OKAY. CHRISTINE.

CAN I SEE THE CHECKS THAT YOU WROTE TO VSL? YES, YOU CAN.

YOU CAN GET THOSE. WHY IS IT NOT IN THE BACKUP? WE DON'T NORMALLY INCLUDE THE CHECKS IN THE BACKUP.

YOU DON'T NORMALLY INCLUDE CHECKS AND BACKUPS.

OH, REALLY? CHRISTINE? I WONDER WHY. AND THIS WAS ALSO NOT MY ITEM.

I WONDER WHY YOU DON'T INCLUDE CHECKS AND BACKUPS WHEN SOMEBODY IS PAID AND WE'RE RATIFYING AN ITEM, YOU DON'T PUT CHECKS IN BACKUPS. WE USED TO PROVIDE A LIST OF THE PAYMENTS.

SAY THAT? NO. AGAIN, LOUD AND CLEAR SO I CAN HEAR IT.

NOT THAT I'M AWARE OR NOT. OKAY, OKAY. MANAGER.

WHY? WHY DO WE HAVE A SEPARATE AGREEMENT? THIS IS OUTSIDE OF NORMAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES THAT THE BSO PROVIDES UNDER THEIR ANNUAL CONTRACT. THIS IS DETAILED SERVICE THAT WE UTILIZE FOR FOR EVENTS IN PARKS AND SUCH.

[02:55:06]

OKAY, SO WHEN I GO TO EVENTS, RIGHT, I SEE LIKE WASTE MANAGEMENT, GARBAGE CANS FOR THE TRASH. RIGHT. WELL, IT'S AND A PART OF, LET'S SAY, WASTE MANAGEMENT'S AGREEMENT.

THEY AGREED TO PROVIDE SOME TRASH CAN, PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL SERVICES.

RIGHT. YOU'VE SEEN THAT? YES. OKAY. WHY CAN'T BSO DO THAT? WHY ARE WE PAYING AN ADDITIONAL $107,000 FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICES THAT ARE NOT NORMAL? BECAUSE THESE ARE PROVIDED BY BSO DEPUTIES OR BSO STAFF THAT ARE OUTSIDE OF THEIR NORMAL WORKING HOURS.

SO THIS IS NOT PART OF THE BSA'S WORKING SERVICES.

I UNDERSTAND THAT I ALREADY THE FIRST TIME I'M SAYING, WHY CAN'T THEY PUT THIS AS A PART OF THEIR GENERAL AGREEMENT TO SAY, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO THROW IN 100,000 OR $150,000 IN EXTRA SERVICES YOU CAN USE.

YOU KNOW, THESE FINE GENTLEMEN, WHICH I LOVE, BY THE WAY, I DON'T KNOW WHY I LOVE BEER SO, SO MUCH, BUT, YOU KNOW, THESE FINE GENTLEMEN, FINE WOMEN.

BUT, YOU KNOW, WHY CAN'T THEY DO THAT? WHY CAN'T YOU THEN, AS A CITY MANAGER, NEGOTIATE THAT IT CAN BE DONE.

IT CAN BE DONE. BUT WE DID NOT DO IT. AND WE DID NOT PUT THE CHECKS TO BEER, SO EITHER.

YEAH. SELECTIVE CRITICISM. OKAY, SO SHOW ME THE DETAILS FOR THIS $107,000. SHOW ME A LIST OF THINGS THAT WERE, WERE WERE PAIN. YEAH. WE CAN CURRENTLY PROVIDE THAT. OH IT'S NOT IN THE BACK UP.

WHY? I GUESS WE DIDN'T. WHY WEREN'T WE SO DETAILED WITH THIS ITEM? IT'S $107,000 MORE THAN ANY OTHER ITEM THAT WE'RE RATIFYING.

IT IS MORE THAN $300, MELISSA. SO WHY IS THE LIST OF THINGS THAT WE PAID FOR NOT IN THE BACKUP? BECAUSE WE CURRENTLY PAY BSO ABOUT $2,000 A WEEK FOR PART DETAIL.

SO I WANT TO SEE EVERY SINGLE. OH YEAH, I'M NOT VOTING ON THIS.

I'M GOING TO ASK THAT THIS BE TABLED. I'M GOING TO ASK FOR MORE INFORMATION TO COME ON THIS.

I WANT TO SEE EVERY CHECK WRITTEN TO BE. SO I WANT TO SEE A LIST OF ALL THE SERVICES THAT THEY RENDERED FOR THIS $107,000.

Y'ALL WANT TO PLAY GAMES. Y'ALL WANT TO PLAY GAMES? I WANT TO SEE A COMPLETE LIST OF WHAT THIS $107,000 IS.

I WANT TO SEE ALL THE CHECKS. PUT THEM IN THE BACKUP AND LET ME MAKE A DECISION THAT IS RIGHT FOR THESE RESIDENTS.

I'M NOT VOTING YES ON THIS. I LOVE BSO, I THINK THEY DO A GREAT JOB.

BUT IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT TRANSPARENCY AND PICK AND CHOOSE WHAT ITEMS WE PUT A LIST OF THINGS FOR.

OH, I'VE HEARD ABOUT HURRICANE KATRINA. YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR ABOUT HURRICANE BOLTON THIS NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS.

COMMISSIONER PATTERSON, THANK YOU. MAYOR. I TWO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS.

CLARIFYING QUESTIONS. THIS ITEM WAS NOT PACKAGED IN MY OPINION, TRANSPARENTLY EITHER.

I, I BELIEVE THE COMMISSIONER DID ASK ONE OF MY QUESTIONS, BUT I'M STILL NOT EXPLICITLY CLEAR.

THE CITY OF TAMARAC HAS A CONTRACT WITH THE BROWARD SHERIFF'S OFFICE IN AN AMOUNT OF 20 PLUS MILLION DOLLARS.

THIS IS A SEPARATE ITEM WHICH WHICH WHICH I UNDERSTAND IS A SEPARATE CONTRACT FROM THE $20 MILLION IN AN AMOUNT OF $107,000 FOR SPECIAL DETAIL. IS THAT ACCURATE? THAT'S CORRECT. SO WE HAVE WHO'S THE CONTRACT? WHO'S MANAGING THE CONTRACTS? DO YOU, METALIST, ARE YOU MANAGING THE $20 MILLION CONTRACT? SO WHY DOES ONE CONTRACT WITH BSO SIT IN PARTS? WHO'S MANAGING THE OTHER $20 MILLION? WE ARE WHO WE ARE.

CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE. SO WE'VE GOT TWO CONTRACTS WITH THE VENDOR, AND WE'VE GOT TWO DIFFERENT SPACES IN WHICH THEY'RE BEING MANAGED FOR FOR COMPLIANCE. WHO'S MANAGING THEM FOR COMPLIANCE? THE PARKS AND RECREATION IS IS MANAGING THE THE DETAIL SERVICE BECAUSE THEY'RE THE RECIPIENT OF THAT SERVICE FOR THEIR EVENTS AND PARKS AND SUCH.

[03:00:01]

AND SO THEY MANAGE THAT CONTRACT, LIKE MANY OF OTHER SERVICE PROVIDERS FOR PARKS.

WHEN DID THE PARKS CONTRACT? BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THE BSL GENERAL CONTRACT IS PREPARING TO BE TERMED.

WHEN DID THIS? BECAUSE THE BACKUP SHOWS A RESOLUTION SIGNED SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2024.

WAS THAT THE FIRST YEAR WE ENTERED INTO THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT? NO, THIS IS AN ANNUAL PRACTICE WITH BSO FOR DETAILED SERVICES.

OKAY. SO EVERY YEAR IT'S A BUDGET ITEM. WE COME BACK TO COMMISSION FOR FOR APPROVAL.

OKAY. BEAR WITH ME, BECAUSE, AGAIN, I'M THE NEWEST KID ON THE BLOCK.

SO, YOU KNOW, IN ORDER FOR ME TO BE ABLE, I RAN ON, ON ON GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY.

AND SO, OH YOU KNOW, I CAN CARE LESS ABOUT ANYONE'S POLITICS.

I AM HERE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE GOOD STEWARDS OF OTHERS THAT WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR OVERSEEING.

SO MY QUESTIONS ARE PERTINENT TO THAT, AND THAT SPECIFICALLY, I WANT TO UNDERSTAND REGARDING REGARDING SPECIAL DETAIL AND OFF DUTY, IS THE CAPTAIN HERE? I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR CLARIFICATION.

LIEUTENANT. ACTUALLY, DEPUTY MARIN MANAGES THE DETAIL.

SERVICES FOR FOR US. RIGHT. SO. THANK YOU. HOW ARE YOU, LIEUTENANT? DOING? WELL. THANK YOU. CAN YOU CLARIFY FOR ME THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A SPECIAL DETAIL AND OFF DUTY? SO BASICALLY, A DEPUTY SHIFT AND I'LL USE MYSELF.

I WORK 9 A.M. TO 5 P.M. WHEN I'M OFF AT 5 P.M.

THERE'S THE AVAILABILITY FOR OFF DUTY DETAILS, SO OBVIOUSLY THAT'S GOING TO BE NOT NECESSARILY AN OVERTIME STATUS, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE EXTRA DUTY THAT I'M DOING ABOVE AND BEYOND THE SCOPE OF MY OWN REGULAR SHIFT.

SO I HOPE THAT KIND OF CLARIFIES. SO SPECIAL DETAIL IN OFF DUTY ARE SYNONYMOUS.

A SPECIAL A SPECIAL DETAIL USUALLY DOES OCCUR WHEN THE DEPUTY IS OFF DUTY.

CORRECT? OTHERWISE THE OTHER CHARACTERISTIC WOULD BE AN OVERTIME STATUS.

BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THE DISTRICT CAN COVERS.

SO AN ON DUTY OFFICER CAN'T WORK A SPECIAL DETAIL.

CORRECT. AN ON DUTY OFFER OFFICER CAN'T WORK.

SO IS COMMUNITY POLICING A SPECIAL DETAIL? COMMUNITY POLICING.

THERE ARE DIFFERENT SPECIAL DETAILS THAT WE PROVIDE WHICH GO TOWARDS THE COMMUNITY.

AND I'LL GIVE YOU A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES. HALLOWEEN HOOPLA MOVIES IN THE PARK YARD ON THE LAWN, WHICH JUST CAME AND WENT 4TH OF JULY. THOSE ARE COMMUNITY EVENTS THAT WE ARE HIRING SPECIAL DETAILS FOR, WHICH IS ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT THE NORMAL STATUS OF THE DEPUTY'S JOB WOULD BE THAT DAY.

SO WE HAVE YOU HAVE TO YOU HAVE TO BE OFF DUTY TO DO A SPECIAL DETAIL.

CORRECT. SO COMMUNITY POLICING IS A OFF DUTY SERVICE THAT THE CITY IS PROVIDED GENERALLY IS IN CONJUNCTION IN BOTH WAYS. BECAUSE WE DO HAVE UNITS THAT ADDRESS COMMUNITY NEEDS.

WE HAVE THINGS THAT ARE DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS THAT ENGAGE AND INVOLVE THE COMMUNITY.

HOWEVER, CERTAIN EVENTS LIKE THIS WHICH FALL IN THOSE OFF DUTY HOURS ARE THE DEPUTIES THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO DO THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE.

OKAY, I HOPE THAT CLARIFIES A BIT. THERE'S A LITTLE AMBIGUITY HERE.

IT'S NOT NECESSARILY ENTIRELY CLEAR FOR ME, BUT BECAUSE IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT DEPUTY MARION IS A COMMUNITY POLICING OFFICER.

SPECIFICALLY. SHE'S NOT ON ROAD PATROL. SHE'S NOT A DETECTIVE.

SHE IS. RIGHT. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M ACCURATE IN MY ASSESSMENT.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SO I KIND OF TOOK SOME TIME JUST TO KIND OF TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE.

JUST BECAUSE I NEED TO MAKE SURE, AGAIN, THAT I'M CLEAR.

I LOOKED AT THE EXISTING, THE EXISTING CONTRACT, AND IT SAYS GOAL NUMBER THREE IS TO DEVELOP A DISTRICT THAT ENCOURAGES ACCOUNTABILITY AND COMMUNITY POLICING. IT THE OBJECTIVES SOMEWHERE THERE SAYS ENHANCE OUR COMMUNITY POLICING EFFORTS BY ACTIVELY PARTICIPATING IN COMMUNITY EVENTS.

THAT'S A PART OF OUR EXISTING CONTRACT. SO I'M A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED AT HOW WE ARRIVED AT A SPACE WHERE WE NEED TO FUND THAT SERVICE SEPARATELY. IF IT'S A PART OF THE DSO GOAL AND COMMITMENT TO THE CITY OF TAMARAC.

WELL, WE DO HAVE DOWNTOWN SERVICES DOES PROVIDE COMMUNITY OUTREACH PROGRAMS, COMMUNITY OUTREACH UNITS, NEIGHBORHOOD RESPONSE THINGS ALONG THOSE LINES. BUT THOSE ARE ALL BROWARD SHERIFF'S OFFICE UNITS THAT ARE NOT NECESSARILY ASSIGNED TO TAMARAC AS PART OF THEIR OFFICIAL DUTIES. SO SIMILARLY TO WE HAVE TURKEY GIVEAWAYS, THAT IS A NEIGHBORHOOD RESPONSE PROGRAM THAT'S PROVIDED BY THE COUNTY.

[03:05:02]

SO THAT'S A THAT'S A GROUP OF DEPUTIES HEADED BY A SERGEANT AND LIEUTENANT THAT OVERSEES THOSE PROJECTS, SIMILAR TO TO A TURKEY GIVEAWAY DURING THANKSGIVING.

SO THAT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY BE SOMETHING THAT WAS AVAILABLE TO TAMARAC.

IT WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO TAMARAC RESIDENTS SHOULD THEY WANT TO GO TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING AND PARTICIPATE, OF COURSE. BUT THOSE ARE NOT PEOPLE THAT ARE ASSIGNED HERE TO THE TAMARAC DISTRICT, SO WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THAT SERVICE OR THOSE DEPUTIES WITHOUT INCURRING SOME COST.

SO IF A PRIVATE ENTITY LIKE PUBLIX ASKS FOR POLICE SERVICES, IS THAT A SPECIAL DETAIL OR IS THAT OFF DUTY SPECIAL DETAIL IF PUBLIX WANTED ADDITIONAL SECURITY IN THEIR PARKING LOT AFTER HOURS DUE TO ANYTHING HAPPENING.

DURING A SPECIFIC TIMEFRAME THAT'S BEEN IDENTIFIED, THEY CAN HIRE A SECURITY DETAIL AND THAT WOULD BE A DEPUTY THAT WAS OFF DUTY PROVIDING A SPECIAL DETAIL SERVICE. BUT I KIND OF THINK WE ARE KIND OF USING THE TERMS INTERCHANGEABLY, IT SEEMS. YES. THERE IS A SPECIAL DETAIL SERVICES SECTION UNDER THE CONTRACT THAT SAYS BSO WILL PROVIDE SPECIAL DETAIL SERVICES FOR THE CITY SPONSORED EVENTS. HOWEVER, THE DISTRICT CHIEF, IN HIS OR HER DISCRETION, WILL DETERMINE WHETHER THE SERVICES CAN BE PROVIDED THROUGH ON DUTY STAFF ASSIGNED TO THE DISTRICT OR THROUGH A SPECIAL DETAIL.

HAVE WE EVER CONSIDERED HOW MANY SWORN OFFICERS DO WE HAVE? WE HAVE A TOTAL OF SWORN. WE HAVE A TOTAL OF 92.

SO THE CONTRACT SAYS THAT THE DISTRICT CHIEF AND HIS DISCRETION CAN DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT WE USE OUR EXISTING RESOURCES.

HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE HAVE WE ENGAGED THAT PART OF THE CONTRACT? WELL, JUST RECENTLY, THE TWO MAIN EVENTS WHERE WE WERE WE UTILIZED THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN FOR THE JULY AND FREE YARD ON THE LAWN.

THOSE WERE NOT SPECIAL DETAILS THAT WERE FUNDED.

THAT WAS THAT WAS TAKEN UPON BY THE DISTRICT ITSELF.

NORMALLY THOSE THAT THAT PARAGRAPH IN THE CONTRACT IS USUALLY FOR THINGS THAT ARE MAYBE LAST MINUTE, MAYBE SOMETHING THAT HAS COME UP THAT NEEDS POLICE SERVICES, THAT THE DISTRICT CHIEF CAN LOOK OVER, FORMULATE AN OPERATIONAL PLAN, AND PUTS THEM TOGETHER RATHER QUICKLY FOR THE CITY AS A RESPONSE.

WE THEN TAKE UPON THAT COST THINGS THAT ARE PRE-PLANNED ABOVE AND BEYOND THE SCOPE OF WHAT THE DEPUTY'S NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS WOULD BE, AND WHAT THEIR NORMAL SHIFT HOURS WOULD BE, ARE USUALLY HANDLED BY THE SPECIAL DETAIL OFFICE.

THANK YOU. LIEUTENANT. CAN YOU CLARIFY FOR ME, MANAGER, WHAT IS? YOU GUYS ARE ASKING FOR $40,000? FOR WHAT EXACTLY ARE WE RATIFYING CHARGES, EXPENDITURES? OR ARE WE? OR IS THIS A NUMBER FOR FUTURE FOR FOR EVENTS FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER? IT WOULD BE FOR FUTURE EXPENSES. AND WE DO HAVE SOME EXISTING UNPAID INVOICES FROM VSO.

IT WOULD BE TO PAY FOR THOSE AND TO PAY FOR ADDITIONAL POSSIBLE USE OF THESE SERVICES.

AND MELISSA, YOU CAN PROBABLY PROVIDE SOME MORE DETAIL.

YEAH. AND 40,000 IS JUST THE MAXIMUM. DOESN'T MEAN WE'RE GOING TO SPEND THAT.

BUT SO TO AVOID US HAVING TO COME BACK AGAIN BEFORE SEPTEMBER 30TH.

WHAT'S THE RATE. THE RATE IS $74 AN HOUR FOR DEPUTY, 81 FOR SERGEANT.

AND DURING HOLIDAYS IT'S $96 AN HOUR FOR DEPUTY AND $103 FOR SERGEANT.

AND SOMETIMES WE UTILIZE CSAS WHICH ARE $34 AN HOUR, AND THEN HOLIDAY IS $47 AN HOUR.

BY NO MEANS AM I A MATHEMATICIAN, BUT $74 AN HOUR DIVIDED BY THE $40,000 IN WHAT YOU GUYS ARE ASKING IS ABOUT 2000 HOURS.

FULL TIME OFFICER IS ABOUT 2080 HOURS. AT 20 YEARS OF SERVICE, IT'S THE THE VALUE OF A FULL TIME OFFICER IS LESS THAN THE AMOUNT THAT WE'RE SPENDING FOR THIS CONTRACT. SO I DO HAVE QUESTIONS I AM GOING TO SUPPORT OBVIOUSLY MAKING SURE THAT THE STAFF IS PAID, BUT I, MANAGER, HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT OUR PRACTICE HERE IN THE CITY OF TAMARAC IN TERMS OF VSO DETAILS, IN TERMS OF GENERALLY GENERALLY, OF COURSE, IF I MAY, ONE OF THE THINGS WE TRY TO INCORPORATE WITH CITY SPONSORED EVENTS IS AS WE MAKE SURE THAT TAMARAC DISTRICT DEPUTIES ARE GIVEN FIRST PRIORITY.

AND IN MANY CASES, WE DO HAVE THE PEOPLE WHO VOLUNTEER FOR THOSE POSITIONS THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT THE PEOPLE ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE CITY, ARE FOLLOWING THROUGH WITH THOSE DETAILS AND PROVIDING THE BEST SERVICE FOR THE RESIDENTS. THANK YOU.

VICE MAYOR. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I I'M GLAD THIS ITEM CAME UP AND THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING IT BECAUSE I HAVE SOME SERIOUS CONCERN ON OUR PART AS A CITY BECAUSE WE NEED TO NEGOTIATE BETTER.

[03:10:01]

I'M AT THE PARK ALMOST EVERY SATURDAY DURING FOOTBALL SEASON, EVERY DAY FOR CONDITIONING.

AND THE COUGARS WERE TOLD THAT THEY HAVE TO PAY $97 AN HOUR OR 90 SOMETHING DOLLARS AN HOUR FOR EACH DETAIL THEY HAVE EVERY SATURDAY. NOT TO ME. THAT'S RIDICULOUS. THE MONEY'S ABSURD.

NOW, YOU KNOW, WE NEED OUR OWN POLICE DEPARTMENT IN-HOUSE AS WELL AS BSO TO DO CERTAIN OF THESE JOBS, BUT WHERE ARE THEY FINDING $97 AN HOUR? IT WAS JUST 47 LAST YEAR.

NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN, IT'S 97. IT'S TOO MUCH. SO I DON'T KNOW.

WE AS A CITY NEED TO RELOOK REVAMP OUR OUR OUR OUR POLICE FORCE.

WE WE CONTRACT BSO. BUT MAYBE WE ALSO NEED SOMETHING IN-HOUSE TO SAVE US SOME MONEY.

BECAUSE THESE ARE CHILDREN. WE'RE ALL VOLUNTEERING AT THE PARK, RIGHT? EACH SATURDAY COST ABOUT $10,000 TO RUN THE SERIES OF FOOTBALL GAMES, AND THE PARK IS PACKED SO OUR RESIDENTS DO ATTEND.

NORMALLY, WE HAD OUR PAST CAPTAIN. HIS DAUGHTER WAS ON THE CHEERLEADING TEAM.

SO NORMALLY WE DO HAVE BSO PEOPLE THERE JUST AS PARENTS, RIGHT? I THINK A BSO OFFICER IS A TREASURER, BUT $97 AN HOUR TO SERVICE THE COMMUNITY AT A COMMUNITY EVENT, WHICH WE WILL NOT NOT HAVE SECURITY. RIGHT? IT'S TOO MUCH.

SO I THINK AS A CITY, WE NEED TO RELOOK AT THIS WHOLE PACKAGE BECAUSE IT'S NOT WORKING OUT.

IT'S THE BULK OF THE TAX MONEY IS GOING HERE.

I DON'T RECALL WE FIRE'S OUT THERE. I DON'T YOU KNOW, I DON'T SEE A BIG BILL COMING FROM THEM.

BUT I REALIZE THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE OUR OWN.

WELL, MAYBE WE NEED TO HAVE OUR OWN AS WELL TO AT LEAST ACCOMMODATE THIS PART.

AND I WANT US TO REALLY LOOK AT THAT WHEN WE THINK ABOUT WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO FOR THE UPCOMING CONTRACT? BECAUSE THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN INCLUDED, OR WE NEED TO REVAMP WHAT IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE IN THE FUTURE.

WE ALL COMING UP WITH THESE, THESE, THESE SCENARIOS, BUT WE TRULY NEED TO LOOK AND NOT GO BACK TO A CONTRACT THAT IS CONSTANTLY COSTING US MORE AT THE LAST MINUTE. YOU SAY YOU NEED $40,000 BEFORE SEPTEMBER.

SEPTEMBER IS ONE MONTH. THAT'S CRAZY. GIVE ME $40,000.

I'LL GO GET LICENSED TO CARRY A GUN. I MEAN, COME ON.

MAYBE WE NEED TO LOOK AT SECURITY COMPANIES SOMETHING, BUT WE TRULY NEED TO REVAMP AND HAVE A WORKSHOP ON THIS BEFORE THE CONTRACT AND NOT EXTEND THIS CONTRACT THAT IS COSTING US SO MUCH. COMMISSIONER, I THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR.

GOING TO THE POINT OF THE BREAKDOWN. GO BACK TO YOUR COMMISSIONER.

BOLTON KIND OF SAID, YOU KNOW, I LIKE TO SEE NUMBERS. THE PREVIOUS ITEM, 12 PEOPLE DIVIDED OR WHATEVER.

I CAN SEE THE BREAKDOWN IN GRANULAR AT THE COST.

SO I DON'T SEE THAT IN HERE IN TERMS OF HOW MANY OFFICERS, HOW MANY HOURS, WHAT SPECIFIC EVENT.

I DO NOT SEE THAT IN THERE, BUT GOING TO BE SO A DETAIL AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, LIEUTENANT, A DETAIL IS ADDITIONAL SOME SHIP THAT SOMEONE PICKS UP, ISN'T IT? CORRECT. CAN THE CORAL SPRINGS POLICE WORK ON DETAIL IN TAMARAC? NO. WE ARE CONTRACTED FOR BROWARD SHERIFF'S OFFICE.

SPECIAL DETAILS FOR THE CITY OF TAMARAC. CAN FLORIDA HIGHWAY PATROL WORK ON DETAIL IN TAMARAC? NO. THEY CAN'T IF THE FLORIDA HIGHWAY CAN WORK, THEY DON'T DO IT.

ACCORDING TO THIS CONTRACT, WHEN IT'S APPROVED EACH YEAR, IT'S SPECIFIC TO THE BROWARD SHERIFF'S OFFICE FOR SPECIAL DETAIL.

SO THAT'S ONLY SPECIFIC TO BSO, BECAUSE SOMETIMES I SEE THE FLORIDA HIGHWAY PATROL AT THE CHURCH LIKE WORK IN DETAILS.

GOING BACK TO COMMISSIONER PATTERSON'S QUESTION, LIKE BE A SOUL CAN WORK A DETAIL AT PUBLIX, BUT CAN CORAL SPRINGS POLICE WORK A DETAILED PUBLIX IN THE CITY OF TAMARAC? YEAH, THE VENDOR, I GUESS, WOULD HAVE THE CHOICE TO EMPLOY WHOM THEY WILL.

I MEAN, HOWEVER, LEGALLY FROM A STATE PERSPECTIVE CAN BECAUSE I SEE THE FLORIDA HIGHWAY PATROL AND I KNOW SOME RESIDENTS IN WOODLANDS SAID WE HAVE A DETAIL IN THE WOODLANDS THAT THE COMMUNITY WAS PAYING EXTRA FOR, AND SOMEONE MENTIONED THAT THE ONLY PERSON THAT CAN COME IN WAS THE FLORIDA HIGHWAY PATROL.

FOR IN TERMS OF STATE LEGALITY, I DON'T KNOW HOW TRUE IT IS. IT WAS A PERSON WHO'S A BRILLIANT ATTORNEY, RIGHT? HOWEVER, IN TERMS OF THE DETAILS, IS THERE SOMETHING ADDITIONAL THAT PEOPLE THAT WE'RE THAT WE'RE DOING ADDITIONALLY.

SO THE WOODLANDS CONTRACT IS PAID FOR BY THE COUNTY.

SO THEY CAN FILL THAT AT THE THEY TRY TO USE IT WITH THE, WITH TAMARAC DEPUTIES AS WELL.

BUT THIS SO YOU'RE SAYING SO YOU'RE SAYING THIS THIS DETAIL YOU CAN DO BECAUSE AS A PART OF YOUR CONTRACT THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE BASICALLY SAYING I BELIEVE.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO PROBABLY DO SOME MORE RESEARCH ON THAT AND FIND OUT I PERSONALLY DON'T HAVE THE LUXURY OF DOING MANY DETAILS WITH SOME OF THE THINGS THAT I HAVE TO BE AT PARKS AT NIGHT WITH MY KIDS AS WELL. BUT THE THE BENEFIT FOR SOMETHING LIKE WOODLANDS TO BE HOPEFULLY ASSIGNED TO TAMARAC DEPUTIES,

[03:15:03]

AS YOU HAVE PEOPLE WHO ARE FAMILIAR WITH BOTH THE PARKS, THE AREAS, THE STREETS, THE RESIDENTS, AND YOU HAVE THAT KIND OF HOMETOWN FEEL OF AS FAR AS SECURITY BEING PROVIDED.

SO TO HAVE SOMEBODY THAT I'M JUST A HIGHWAY PATROL DOESN'T NECESSARILY KNOW WHERE THEY ARE WHEN THEY'RE CALLING FOR BACKUP, THEY MIGHT NOT KNOW WHERE THEY ARE. OKAY. SO I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE OF THIS DETAIL AND THAT DETAIL. SO YOU KIND OF JUST CLARIFY THAT THIS DETAIL.

YOU SAID IT'S A PART OF YOUR CONTRACT. IT'S INCLUDED.

SO I UNDERSTAND A PRIVATE COMMUNITY LIKE A COMMITTEE LIKE THE WOODLANDS PAYING FOR DETAIL.

BUT WE ARE PAYING FOR THIS AS A CITY, WHEREAS YOU ARE A CONTRACTOR.

I THINK YOU KIND OF JUST CLARIFY THAT THAT SPECIFIC IN QUESTION.

SO IT'S I MEAN IT'S NOTHING AGAINST BS. SO YOU GUYS ARE FINE PEOPLE.

YOU GUYS DO A FANTASTIC JOB. IT'S JUST US LOOKING OUT FOR THE RESIDENTS AND BEING GOOD SORT OF THE MONEY AND UNDERSTANDING EXACTLY HOW THIS WORK.

AND AS A CONTRACT COMES UP FOR RENEGOTIATIONS, HOW THE PARTNERSHIP CAN GET BETTER.

SURE. IT IS NOT JUST ABOUT FIGHTING, IT'S ABOUT HOW WE CAN MAKE THIS PARTNERSHIP BETTER.

OR IF WE DECIDE, YOU KNOW, TO LOOK INTO DIFFERENT WAYS OF MAKING THE PARTNERSHIP BETTER.

BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THE COST DOESN'T HAVE A BREAKDOWN.

IT DOESN'T HAVE SPECIFICS. I DON'T SEE THAT IN THERE. I DON'T SEE HOW MANY OFFICERS, HOW MANY WHATEVER.

BUT I THINK SINCE IT'S FROM LAST YEAR AND WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE OFFICERS ARE TAKING CARE OF SOMETHING I WILL DEFINITELY SUPPORT.

THANK YOU. SO I TOO WANTED TO PULL THIS ITEM.

I AM VERY SUPPORTIVE. I KNOW HOW MUCH WORK YOU AS A VSO DO, AND OUR PARK AND REC DO, AND ALL THE EVENTS WE HAD.

I TOO HAD A PROBLEM WITH THE FACT THAT THERE'S NO DETAIL.

WHAT EVENTS DID THEY GO TO? HOW MANY OFFICERS WERE NEEDED? THERE IS DETAIL OF SAYING HOW MUCH PER OFFICER, DEPUTY LIEUTENANT, ETC.

AND IF IT'S REGULAR DUTY OR IF IT'S HOLIDAY. SO THERE'S NUMBERS IN THERE.

SO WHILE I'M NOT THE MATH GENIUS OF SOME OF THEM, YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE REALLY GOOD WITH IT.

JUST TAKING THE LIEUTENANT AT $110, THE HIGHEST PRICE, AND DIVIDE IT INTO THE FOR $40,000 BEING REQUESTED FOR A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN 30 DAYS, IT CAME OUT TO $363, ABOUT 363 HOURS, WHICH AT EIGHT HOURS A DAY. THAT WOULD BE 15 DAYS STRAIGHT AT EIGHT HOURS.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHY 40 IS NEEDED FOR ONE MONTH.

DID WE ALREADY GO OVER AND IS THAT TO COVER WHAT WE WENT OVER? AND IF THAT'S THE CASE, PUT IT OUT THERE BECAUSE THEN I HAVE NO PROBLEM BECAUSE I KNOW WHAT EVENT IT WOULD BE.

I KNOW WHAT WAS NEEDED. I KNOW THAT THIS COMMISSION AS A WHOLE HAS ALSO ADDED A LOT OF EXTRA EVENTS.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT'S WHERE THE DETAIL MONEY COMES FROM TOO.

IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT? YES, MA'AM. SOME PAY FOR THE DETAILS, SOME DON'T.

IT IS, DEPENDING ON THE EVENT AND THE AGREEMENTS.

RIGHT. SO IT WOULD JUST BE NICE TO KNOW WHAT CARRIED US OVER THE 107.

WHAT MAKES YOU ASK? BECAUSE I DON'T SEE THAT MANY EVENTS.

UNLESS YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE HERE FOR BUDGET ON SEPTEMBER 12TH AND SEPTEMBER 24TH AT 505, BECAUSE WE'VE GOT A LOT TO DISCUSS ON THAT BUDGET.

SO UNLESS YOU'RE LINING US WITH OFFICERS I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE 40,000.

MAYOR, LET ME CLARIFY. IT'S NOT JUST FREE EVENTS. IT'S OUR PARKS DETAIL THAT HAPPENS EVERY DAY, SEVEN DAYS A WEEK.

THAT'S WHERE THE MAJORITY OF THE MONEY GOES TO.

SO OUTSIDE OF OUR REGULAR CONTRACT, WE HAVE A SPECIAL DETAIL THAT GOES THROUGH ALL OF OUR PARKS, OUR 13 PARKS AND OUR 12MI². CORRECT. THAT AMOUNT EQUALS THE A DAILY AMOUNT IS 396 FOR FOUR HOURS OF DETAIL PER NIGHT. AND THEN WE JUST CUT DOWN OUR HOURS.

IT WAS ON SATURDAY SIX HOURS AND SUNDAYS. BUT WE JUST REDUCED THOSE HOURS TO WHAT, TWO THREE HOURS ON THE BUSIEST DAYS OF THE WEEK? WELL, WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH JENNIFER FROM BSO, AND SHE'S BEEN TELLING US THE ACTIVITY ON THOSE DAYS HAVEN'T BEEN AS ACTIVE.

SO THAT'S WHY WE REDUCED. PLUS WE ARE FULLY STAFFED AS PARK RANGERS NOW, WHICH IS HELPING.

OKAY, SO COMMISSIONER WRIGHT IS DOING THE MATH.

I COULD SEE HIS FINGERS GOING ON HIS PHONE. YOU WANT TO SHOUT OUT THE NUMBERS? YOU SAID 396 A DAY. YES. SAME PRICE. LESS HOURS OR SAME PRICE.

SAME HOURS. THAT'S FOR FOUR HOURS A NIGHT. THE WEEKENDS ARE A LITTLE MORE BECAUSE THEY DO BETWEEN 3 TO 6 HOURS, DEPENDING ON THE ACTIVITY THAT'S GOING ON. I'M SORRY.

CAN YOU EXCLUDE THE SATURDAYS? BECAUSE THE COUGARS ARE PAYING $97 PER HOUR FOR SATURDAYS? SO THERE'S A LOT OF POLICE AND I DON'T SEE THAT WE HAVE ONE DETAIL ON SATURDAYS, LIKE AROUND ALL OUR PARKS.

SO THEY'RE NOT ALWAYS GOING TO BE AT THE SPORTS COMPLEX. RIGHT. BUT THEY'RE ALSO PAYING FOR TWO POLICE OFFICERS TO COVER AT $97 AN HOUR TIMES TWO FOR THE PERIOD OF THE DAY, AND IT'S USUALLY FROM LIKE 8 TO 6 AT MINIMUM, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON HOW THE GAMES GO.

[03:20:02]

SO YEAH, THAT IS THAT MONEY THAT'S WITH THE COUGARS AND AND THEIR DETAIL.

SO THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH US. RIGHT. BUT NOW YOU HAVE EXCESSIVE POLICE OFFICERS WITH EXCESSIVE MONEY.

AND I'M TELLING YOU, I'M THERE. I DON'T SEE IT.

YEAH, I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE COUGARS DETAIL, BUT OUR DETAIL HAS TO GO AROUND TO ALL 13 PARKS.

OKAY. MAYOR, I KNOW YOU SAY THERE'S A HARD STOP, BUT I WAS ADVISED THAT I'M SUPPOSED TO LET THIS ONE GO THROUGH AND FINISH IT OFF SO WE CAN THEN HAVE 30 MINUTES FROM WHENEVER THIS IS DONE.

OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY, I, I'M FOLLOWING THE DIRECTIVE.

SO BASICALLY, IF COMMISSIONER, I CAN CONTINUE TO HELP ME AND GIVE ME AN IDEA OF HOW MUCH WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

AND LIKE I SAID, THE 40,000 IS JUST A MAXIMUM.

THAT'S SOMETHING WE PUT IN HERE SO WE DON'T HAVE TO COME IN CASE WE DID GO OVER, WHICH I DON'T FORESEE, BUT JUST GOING UP TO GOING UNDER. I MEAN, IT COULD BE 20,003, 96, -35 MORE DAYS UNTIL SEPTEMBER 30TH.

IS THAT IS IT? AND WE STILL HAVE INVOICES THAT ARE COMING IN FROM THE PAST TWO MONTHS THAT WE HAVEN'T PAID YET.

SO THAT'S ABOUT 13, 14,000 CHOSEN BASED ON YOUR 396 REMAINING DAYS UNTIL SEPTEMBER END OF SEPTEMBER.

RIGHT. AND STILL THE INVOICES THAT ARE STILL COMING IN.

SO I AM SORRY. CAN I MEAN, SHOULDN'T THAT BE INCLUDED IN A REGULAR CONTRACT GOING AROUND DETAIL IN OUR PART? DO YOU WANT TO GIVE FOR TWO MINUTES? I'LL FINISH FOR TWO MINUTES NOW. YOU'RE GOOD TO GO.

I DON'T GOT YOU. SO BASICALLY.

MY PROBLEM, AS WITH THE OTHER ITEMS, IS NOT HAVING THE DETAIL IN THE BACKUP OF THE INFORMATION.

SO WE MAKE EDUCATED DECISIONS. DECISIONS THAT MAKE SENSE, DECISIONS THAT ARE CLEAR, DECISIONS THAT DON'T HAVE OUR COMMUNITY THINKING WE'RE EITHER, YOU KNOW, WE'RE OVERSPENDING OR THAT WE DON'T THINK WE'RE OVERSPENDING.

OR MAYBE WE ARE. I FEEL LIKE A BROKEN RECORD, BUT I KNOW I'VE NOT BEEN HEARD FOR SOME REASON.

PUT MONEY IN THE BACKUP. PUT DETAILS IN THE BACKUP.

BECAUSE WHEN WE DON'T PUT IT IN THE BACKUP, IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE SOMETHING TO HIDE.

AND WE HAVE THE BACKUP. IT'S AS CLEAR AS THAT.

SO I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, AND I KNOW WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO FINISH THE CONTRACT OFF.

I GET IT. I WANT TO KNOW WHY WE SPENT SO MUCH UP TO DATE.

BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT FROM WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, WHY WE NEED TO SPEND THEM HAVE THE ABILITY TO GO UP TO DEFINITELY NOT TO EXCEED.

COMMISSIONER PATTERSON, THANK YOU. MAYOR, I, I JUST WANT MY COLLEAGUES TO CONSIDER.

I KIND OF SAID THIS A LITTLE, A LITTLE WHILE AGO, BUT I REALLY WANT TO ARTICULATE AND REEMPHASIZE WHAT IS IN OUR CONTRACT UNDER SPECIAL DETAIL SERVICES SECTION TWO. IT SAYS BSO WILL PROVIDE SPECIAL DETAIL SERVICES FOR CITY SPONSORED EVENTS.

HOWEVER, THE DISTRICT CHIEF, IN HIS OR HER DISCRETION WILL DETERMINE WHETHER THE SERVICES CAN BE PROVIDED THROUGH ON DUTY STAFF ASSIGNED TO THE DISTRICT OR THROUGH US, OR THROUGH A SPECIAL DETAIL.

IF, IN THE DISTRICT CHIEF'S DISCRETION, BSO IS ABLE TO PROVIDE THE REQUIRED LEVEL OF SERVICES WITH ON DUTY PERSONNEL. THE DISH AT THE TIME OF THE EVENT, THE CITY WILL INCUR NO ADDITIONAL COSTS. WHAT I'M ASKING MY WHAT I'M ASKING OF MY COLLEAGUES AND THE MANAGER.

I ASKED YOU THIS QUESTION WHO'S ENFORCING THE CONTRACT RIGHT NOW? WE ARE ARBITRARILY ASKED TO JUST PAY SOME MONEY.

HAS THE DISTRICT CHIEF TAKEN A LOOK AT THE 92 SWORN OFFICERS TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THEY CAN COVER THE EVENTS FOR SEPTEMBER? EVERY SINGLE TIME COMMISSIONERS OR EVERY SINGLE TIME THIS YOU KNOW REVIEW IS DONE BECAUSE WHEN WE'RE DOING EVENTS AS PART OF THE PLANNING PROCESS, WE MEET WITH VSO, WE MEET WITH DEPUTY MARION TO IDENTIFY THE SECURITY NEEDS BASED ON THE EVENT SIZE.

AND SO, MANAGER, IT DOESN'T SAY DEPUTY MARION.

IT SAYS THE DISTRICT CHIEF, BUT I'M GONNA GET TO THAT.

SO IT'S IT'S PART OF THAT PLANNING. ONCE WE IDENTIFY THE SECURITY NEEDS, THEN THE CHIEF DECIDES, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH OF THE DEPUTIES HE CAN PULL FROM THE STREETS, FROM THE ROADS, FROM THE COMMUNITIES TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS EVENT.

AND THAT'S WHY IN A LOT OF OUR EVENTS, YOU WILL SEE RANK AND FILE AS PART OF JUST YOU KNOW, PRESENCE THERE, VSO PRESENCE THERE THAT ARE NOT PART OF THE DETAILED SERVICES.

SO SO HOW MANY EVENTS HAVE ON DUTY OFFICERS ATTENDED?

[03:25:03]

I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION, BUT YOU NEED TO HAVE BECAUSE IF THERE'S AN ITEM BEFORE ME, WE ARE ASKING FOR $40,000.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE EVENTS ARE. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER OR NOT WE'VE ANALYZED.

I HAD A CHANCE THAT YOU JUST ANNOUNCED THAT WE HAVE A NEW DISTRICT CHIEF.

I MEAN, I THINK THAT WE MIGHT BE PUTTING THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE TO SOME DEGREE.

IF THERE IS AN EVENT THAT YOU NEED TO STAFF, THEN YOU GUYS CAN EASILY COME BACK AND GET THE ITEM OR THE CHARGES RATIFIED.

IF, IN FACT, THE NEW DISTRICT CHIEF DETERMINES THAT THERE'S NOT ENOUGH ON DUTY STAFF TO COVER THE EVENT.

WE CAN DEFINITELY DO THAT. SO IF THAT'S YOUR PREFERENCE, WE CAN DEFINITELY DO THAT RIGHT NOW.

WE DO HAVE SOME OUTSTANDING BILLS THAT NEEDS TO BE PAID.

I'M NOT SURE WHAT THEY AMOUNT TO BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT IN THE IN THE LIST.

SO THIS IS JUST A COVER YOURSELF KIND OF AN ITEM.

BUT IF THAT'S THE PREFERENCE OF THE COMMISSION, WE CAN DEFINITELY GO THROUGH THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR AND THEN COME BACK AND THROW UP.

YOU KNOW, BASED ON THE ACTUAL EXPENDITURES. OKAY.

THANK YOU. THERE WAS A LIGHT LIT, AND NOW IT'S DONE.

EVERYBODY'S CITY MANAGER. DID YOU WISH TO SAY SOMETHING? NO. I MEAN, IF THAT'S THE PREFERENCE OF THE THE CITY COMMISSION FOR US TO WAIT UNTIL WE TOTALLY GO THROUGH THE THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR AND IDENTIFY THE ACTUAL EXPENDITURES FOR DETAILED SERVICES AND THEN COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR RATIFICATION.

I THINK WE CAN DO THAT, TOO. SO WHAT HAPPENS IF IT DOESN'T GET RATIFIED? SO THEN WE'RE OUTSTANDING. WE'RE OUTSTANDING PAYMENTS TO PEOPLE WHO'VE WORKED.

THEN WE WOULD HAVE OUTSTANDING BILLS THAT THAT'S NOT PAID TO BSO.

AND THERE'S GOING TO BE SO MANY PEOPLE WANTING TO DO A DETAIL WHEN THEY KNOW THAT THEY MAY NOT GET PAID.

COMMISSIONER BOLTON HAS LOST HIS LIFE. LIKE. LIKE COMMISSIONER BOLTON.

I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM PAYING VSO. I THINK, YOU KNOW, I THINK YOU GUYS DO.

WELL. I DO HAVE A PROBLEM PAYING YOU, BUT I DO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH.

IS THIS BACKUP, THIS VAGUE BACKUP THAT CHRISTINE PUT TOGETHER? OR WHOEVER? YOU'RE THE FINANCE DIRECTOR, YOU SHOULD PUT THE FINANCES IN THE BACKUP.

YOU PUT FINANCES IN THE BACKUP FOR OTHER ITEMS. PUT IT IN THIS ONE. THIS IS WHAT I DON'T LIKE.

YOU CHOOSE TO BE TRANSPARENT FOR OTHER ITEMS, BUT CHOOSE NOT TO BE TRANSPARENT FOR THIS ITEM.

AND THAT IS MY PROBLEM. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH PAYING VSO.

I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE WORK THAT YOU DO WHEN VSO IS AROUND.

I FEEL SAFE, RIGHT? SO TAKE THAT. FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, I'M NOT VOTING YES ON THIS TODAY.

IF YOU GO FORWARD WITH THE VOTE, I'M VOTING NO.

I THINK THAT WE SHOULD TABLE THIS, COME BACK WITH MORE INFORMATION, COME BACK WITH A LIST OF ALL THE THINGS THAT THEY DID FOR THAT $177,000 OR WHATEVER.

109 COME BACK WITH A LIST OF THE THINGS THAT YOU'RE DOING FOR THE $40,000.

SHOW ME THE MONEY. SHOW ME WHERE IT'S GOING. AND I WANT TO SEE EVERY SINGLE CHECK THAT WAS CUT TO BE A SOLE.

THINK THAT'S UNREASONABLE? IT COULD BE UNREASONABLE.

IT COULD BE, BUT I WANT TO SEE IT. OKAY, SO SO SO THAT'S WHAT MY CONTENTION IS ABOUT THIS ITEM.

I DON'T WANT TO I DON'T WANT TO CHOOSE TO WORK FROM HOME.

SO I'M NOT GOING TO, YOU KNOW, HAVE MY SHOTS FIRED YET.

I HEARD SHOTS FIRED ALREADY. SO, CITY MANAGER, YOU MAY HAVE TO WORK REMOTELY.

BUT FOR NOW, YOU KNOW. MOTION TO TABLE, PLEASE.

SECOND MOTION. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BOLTON TO TABLE.

TIME. NOT CERTAIN. AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PATTERSON.

VICE MAYOR DANIEL. YES. COMMISSIONER WRIGHT. NO.

COMMISSIONER BOLTON. YES. COMMISSIONER. PATTERSON.

YES. MAYOR. GOMEZ. NO. MOTION TO TABLE PASSES 3 TO 2.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IT IS 123. SO, ONE. TWO, THREE.

WE'RE GOING TO BE BACK HERE. WE HAVE A. WE'LL BE BACK AT 150.

DID I DO MY HALF? NO. YES. 30 MINUTES, 150. WELCOME BACK, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. WE ARE THREE MINUTES LATE. IT IS 135, 153.

MY APOLOGIES. AND WE ARE NOW BACK ON THE RECORD.

[5.i TR14312 - A Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida, awarding Bid No.25-29D and approving an agreement with Kimley Horn & Associates for the design of the Colony West Golf Club- Champs course irrigation replacement project in accordance with task authorization No. 25- 29D for a contract amount of $93,570.00; a contingency in the amount of $4,678.50 (5%) will be added to the account for a total project budget of $98,248.50; as authorized by resolution No. R2022-138, for an amount not exceed $98,248.50; authorizing the appropriate City Officials to administer the contract; providing for conflicts; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date.]

AND WE ARE. ITEM FIVE. ITR14312. CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD.

ITEM FIVE A RESOLUTION OF CITY COMMISSION. TAMARA GORDON, BID NUMBER 2529 D AND AN AGREEMENT WITH KIMLEY-HORN

[03:30:01]

ASSOCIATE FOR THE DESIGN OF COUNTY WEST GOLF CLUB.

CHAMPS COURSE IRRIGATION REPLACEMENT PROJECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TASK AUTHORIZATION NUMBER 2529 D FOR A CONTRACT AMOUNT OF 93,570 $70,000. CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,678.50 WILL BE ADDED TO THE ACCOUNT FOR THE TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET OF 98,000 248,050 CENTS, PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU. I NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND.

SO MOVED. SECOND, I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WRIGHT AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PATTERSON.

ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THIS IS NOW CLOSED.

ANY CONVERSATION ON THIS ITEM? SEE NO CONVERSATION.

CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. VICE MAYOR DANIEL.

YES. COMMISSIONER WRIGHT. YES. COMMISSIONER BOLTON IS ABSENT.

COMMISSIONER PATTERSON. YES. MAYOR GOMEZ. YES.

MOTION PASSES 4 TO 0. THANK YOU. MOVING ON TO FIVE J.

[5.j TR14313 - A Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida, ratifying prior expenditures to Done Films LLC for media production and advertising services in the amount of $14,038.79, in excess of the City Manager’s threshold, in accordance with Section 6-145(b)(6) of the Code; authorizing additional payment up to $10,500 for future services in Fiscal Year 2025; providing for conflicts; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date.]

TR 143. ONE THREE. CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD.

YES. ITEM 5JA RESOLUTION. CITY COMMISSIONER, CITY TAMARAC RATIFYING THE EXPANSION OF DON FILMS FOR MEDIA PRODUCTION AND ADVERTISING SERVICE AND AMOUNT OF $14,038.79 IN EXCESS OF CITY MANAGER THRESHOLD IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 615B6 OF THE CODE AUTHORIZING ADDITIONAL PAYMENT UP TO 10,500 FOR FUTURE SERVICE AND FISCAL YEAR 2025, PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU. I'LL TAKE A SECOND TO MY MOTION.

SECOND, I HAVE A SECOND BY VICE MAYOR DANIEL.

SO I PULLED THIS ITEM BECAUSE I JUST WANT TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS.

OH. I'M SORRY. PUBLIC COMMENT. PLEASE COME UP.

KATE JOHNSON, MAINLAND'S FOR REGARDING THIS ITEM.

CORRECT. SO YOU'RE ASKING FOR ANOTHER $10,500 TO DO WHAT IN SEPTEMBER? YOU QUESTION BSO MONEY AND WHY THEY ARE PLANNING WHAT THEY ARE PLANNING FOR THE MONTH.

YET YOU WANT TO GIVE $10,500 DOLLARS FOR SOCIAL MEDIA AND NO KNOWN SERVICES, BUT LET'S PUT IT IN THERE ANYWAY.

ACCORDING TO BACKUP MATERIALS, THEY HAVE ALREADY BEEN PAID, FROM WHAT I COULD TELL, ALMOST $65,000, WHICH IS ABSURD IN ITSELF. PLUS, IF YOU LOOK AT THE BACKUP MATERIALS, THE CHARGES ARE ALMOST ALL FOR COMMISSIONER BOLTON EXPENSES. A COMPANY COMMISSIONER BOLTON TO THE FAITH CENTER, A COMPANY COMMISSIONER BOLTON TO THE FIT ZONE AND MORE.

AND OH, DON'T FORGET RUN HIS SOCIAL MEDIA JUST BECAUSE COMMISSIONER BOLTON USED ALL HIS INITIATIVE, FUNDS AND PORTION OF THE $925,000 ALREADY, DOES NOT MEAN THE TAXPAYERS SHOULD BE SHELLING OUT ANY MORE MONEY. WHY DO COMMISSIONERS HAVE AIDES AND LIAISONS IF THEY NEED OUTSIDE RESOURCES? THIS IS A POLITICAL RUNAROUND AROUND OF THE RULES AND BUDGET THAT TAXPAYERS CANNOT AFFORD.

ALL OF OUR TAX BILLS WENT UP. NOW YOU'RE ASKING FOR MORE.

I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY YOU HAVE A BUDGET AND THEN DO NOT STICK TO IT.

IF A COMMISSIONER USES UP THEIR FUNDS, THEY SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO RUN TO THE CITY TO GET THE CITY TO PAY FOR WHAT EXTRA THEY

[03:35:04]

WANT TO DO. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO SPEAK AT PUBLIC PARTICIPATION OR PUBLIC COMMENTS? SEEING NONE. PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED. SO I KNOW THAT OUR NEW PROCUREMENT GENTLEMAN IS NOT HERE, STEVENS. NOT HERE. I DID ASK SOME QUESTIONS BECAUSE I HAD SIMILAR CONCERNS.

I WOULD JUST EXPRESS THAT WE HAVE A CITY MANAGER WHO CAN AUTHORIZE UP TO $65,000, AND WE HAVE WHERE AN ENTITY HAS ALREADY BEEN PAID OVER $65,000 BY 14,000 AND CHANGE.

AND THERE'S ANOTHER REQUEST FOR 10,005. MY CURIOSITY HAS ALWAYS BEEN ON THIS.

WHY DON'T WE NEED PROCUREMENT ON SOMEBODY WHO IS PERFORMING SERVICES FOR THE CITY AND A CONTRACT WHEN WE HAVE SERVICES, AND ON THIS CONTRACT IN OUR CITY WITH FBO OR FMO? AND WHY, WHEN THERE'S A PERSON DOING SERVICES IN THE CITY, DOES THAT PERSON NOT HAVE TO GO THROUGH PROCUREMENT? I'LL TAKE IT. I MEAN, IT'S A POSSIBLE RHETORICAL, BUT I WANT IT OUT THERE.

SO WOULD YOU PLEASE. SO THIS IS THE PERSON PROVIDED SERVICES TO TO TO COMMISSION MEMBERS, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE COMMISSION MEMBERS AND ALSO TO FOR, FOR AN A VERY SMALL PORTION OF CITY SERVICES.

AND SO THIS IS NOT A VENDOR THAT THE CITY CONTRACTED DIRECTLY.

THIS IS A VENDOR THAT PROVIDES SERVICES TO THE COMMISSION MEMBERS, AS IT HAPPENS, YOU KNOW, ROUTINELY FROM FROM A NUMBER OF SERVICE PROVIDERS.

SO IT'S NOT IT'S NOT ONE THAT THAT THE CITY IS DIRECTLY RUN OUT AND CONTRACTED WITH.

SO YOU KNOW, THE COMMISSION MEMBERS HAVE LET ME GO AHEAD, JUST VENDORS WHO ARE HIRED BY MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION USING INITIATIVE FUNDS ARE EXEMPT FROM THE PROCUREMENT REQUIREMENT.

THE CITY CODE IS CLEARLY EXEMPTION. SO THAT WOULD EXPLAIN THE HIRING OF VENDORS BY COMMISSIONERS UNDER THE CODE. OKAY, SO THE COMMISSION APPROVED THE POLICY THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO DO PROCUREMENT FOR WHEN WE SPEND INITIATIVE FUNDS, CORRECT? THAT'S THE LAW OF THE CITY.

THE ANSWER IS YES. OKAY. MY CONCERN IS WHEN WE'RE USING THIS VENDOR FOR CITY ITEMS WHERE PROCUREMENT HAS NOT BEEN DONE, AND WE HAVE TWO CONTRACTS WITH SOCIAL MEDIA AND PHOTOGRAPHY ALREADY.

WHAT MAKES THAT OKAY? IS THERE SOMETHING? AGAIN I'M NOT AWARE ABOUT IT WASN'T PRESENTED TO ME IF THIS VENDOR WAS BEING USED FOR OTHER SERVICES, EXCEPT, I THINK FOR A YARD AND A LAWN.

AGAIN THE PROCUREMENT CODE PROVIDED EXCEPTION TO VENDORS WHO ARE USED FOR ENTERTAINMENT RELATED SERVICES.

SO THE CITY MANAGER, BASED ON THAT EXCEPTION, COULD HIRE ANY VENDORS WITHOUT GONE THROUGH SOME COMPETITIVE PROCESS.

I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF WE ARE IN VIOLATION WITH OUR CONTRACT WITH CONNECTICUT OR FEMA, BECAUSE WE USE SERVICES THAT WERE NOT THEIRS FOR A CITY EVENT. NO, WE'RE NOT MAYOR. THEIR CONTRACTS ARE NOT EXCLUSIVE.

OKAY. THANK YOU. SO SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAD WERE SIMILAR TO WHAT HAD BEEN ASKED.

THE CITY COMMISSION HAD APPROVED, INSTEAD OF THE LIAISON MONEY GOING TO AN INDIVIDUAL THAT WOULD BE ON A W-2.

AND LIKE AN EMPLOYEE, THEY HAVE UP TO 32 HOURS AT $25 AN HOUR.

AND THAT, I BELIEVE, IS $41,000 IN CHANGE. SO EACH COMMISSIONER WHO OPTED FOR NOT HAVING AN EMPLOYEE HAS $41,000 IN CHANGE FOR THE YEAR TO HIRE A VENDOR ON TOP OF IT. YES, THERE'S THE 926,000 WHICH GOT DIVIDED BETWEEN FOUR COMMISSION DISTRICTS.

SO THAT'S $231,000. SO THAT MONEY IS IN THERE TO BE SPENT ON TOP OF IT.

THERE'S THE INITIATIVE FUNDS, AND THE COMMISSION HAS $20,000 AND THE MAYOR HAS 25.

SO THERE'S MONEY THERE, AND IT IS AUTHORIZED TO SPEND, BECAUSE AS YOU'VE HEARD, THE COMMISSION APPROVED NON PROCUREMENT FOR SERVICES SUCH AS THIS AND ANYTHING OVER $2,500. SO AS MUCH AS IT MAY NOT BE COMFORTABLE TO KNOW, THIS IS AN ITEM THAT IS APPROVED THROUGH THE CITY RULES AND REGULATIONS. I DON'T UNDERSTAND NECESSARILY THE MONEY ORDERS OF INTERNATIONAL MONEY ORDERS.

[03:40:04]

BUT THAT OBVIOUSLY WENT THROUGH FINANCE AND IS APPROVED.

IS IS FINE. OKAY. I'VE GOT NODDING HEADS FROM THE FINANCE DIRECTOR.

AND I SEE THAT WE EXPECT $10,500. I BELIEVE THAT THERE MIGHT BE MORE PEOPLE ON THE COMMISSION THAT USE THIS GENTLEMAN'S SERVICES OR THIS BUSINESS'S IS SERVICES, AND THAT'S PROBABLY WHY FOR 30 DAYS THERE IS AN UP TO ADDITIONAL $10,500.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU.

I JUST WANTED TO HAVE MY CONFIRMATION PUT ON RECORD.

THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH, COMMISSIONER BOLTON. THANK YOU.

AND FOR THE RECORD, THE THIS THIS COMPANY IS DOING EXACTLY THAT.

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT LIAISON STUFF. SO YOU KNOW, TO SAY THAT WE SHOULD HAVE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT LIAISONS, THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE DOING. SO, YOU KNOW THAT'S ONE.

NUMBER TWO, THIS IS NOT ASKING FOR MORE MONEY.

THAT IS NOT BUDGETED. THIS IS MONEY THAT IS ALREADY BUDGETED.

SO THE THERE GOES THAT AS FAR AS MONEY ORDERS.

IN THE PAST, I'VE WRITTEN CHECKS FROM MY BANK ACCOUNT TO FINANCE AND FINANCE DIRECTOR SAYS, OH, YOU HAVE TO SHOW THAT THE CHECK CLEARED YOUR BANK ACCOUNT.

OR FINANCE DEPARTMENT? AS AS WELL AS IN THE IN THE PAST, I THINK ACTUALLY, FOR THIS VENDOR, I SMELLED THEM MONEY AND I WAS TOLD YOU CAN'T SELL THEM MONEY. I MEAN, I STILL HAVE THE EMAILS REFUND THE MONEY TO THE VENDOR AND PAY THEM SOME OTHER WAY. I'M TOLD THAT IF I WRITE A CHECK FROM MY BANK ACCOUNT THEN THE THEN THE FUND, I HAVE TO PROVE THAT THE FUNDS ARE CLEARED. SO CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.

FINANCE DIRECTOR, WHAT'S YOUR POLICY? YES. TYPICALLY WE ASK FOR A CANCELED CHECK, BECAUSE THEN THAT PROVES TO US THAT THE FUNDS LEFT YOUR BANK ACCOUNT. THAT WAS THAT YOU USE TO PAY FOR WHATEVER THE ITEM IS, BECAUSE OTHERWISE, I MEAN, AND THIS IS NOT EXCLUSIVE TO THE COMMISSION. OTHERWISE, SOMEONE CAN JUST WRITE A CHECK.

YOU KNOW, SHOW US A COPY OF THE CHECK. BUT THEY NEVER ISSUED THE CHECK.

SO THAT'S JUST A CONTROL MECHANISM. AND THAT IS WHY A MONEY ORDER IS PURCHASED EITHER FROM A, FROM A, FROM MY BANK ACCOUNT OR WHATEVER IT IS TO SHOW THAT THESE ARE GUARANTEED FUNDS, AND THAT SATISFIES YOUR REQUIREMENT TO SHOW THAT THESE ARE GUARANTEED FUNDS THAT GOES TO THE INDIVIDUAL, OR COMPANY, CORRECT? YES.

OKAY. SO THAT THAT TAKES CARE OF OF OF THAT.

SO WHEN, WHEN I'VE, I CALLED KARNATAKA JUST TO BE TRANSPARENT.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF IAN IS HERE OR IAN IS IS LISTENING.

I CALLED, I CALLED IAN, I ASKED IAN WHAT WHAT THE COST OF HIS SERVICES ARE.

HE TOLD ME THE COST OF HIS SERVICES. HE SENT AN EMAIL WITH THE COST OF HIS SERVICES.

I ASKED OTHER PEOPLE WHAT THE COST OF THEIR SERVICES ARE.

AND THIS, THIS VENDOR WAS LESS. WHICH IS. WHICH IS WHY I USE THIS VENDOR.

SO I WOULD OF HAPPILY USE KARNATAKA IF CONNECTICUT WAS CHEAPER, BUT THEY'RE NOT OKAY.

I ALSO ASKED. I ALSO LOOKED AT THE COST OF WHAT CONNECTICUT IS CHARGING THE CITY.

MIGHT I ADD THAT CONNECTICUT CHARGED $20,000, $20,000 FOR A STATE OF THE CITY VIDEO. OKAY, A STATE OF THE CITY VIDEO. WHEN I ASKED OTHER VENDORS, NOT JUST THIS ONE AS OTHER VENDORS, HOW MUCH WOULD IT COST TO DO A VIDEO LIKE THIS? NOWHERE CLOSE. I GOT A QUOTE FROM THIS VENDOR.

THEY ESTIMATE 20 HOURS OF EDITING $87.50 PER HOUR, TOTALING $17,750.

TEN DAYS OF FILMING AT $150 A DAY, OR $150 EVERY TIME THEY GO OUT TO FILM $1,500.

[03:45:05]

20 HOURS OF CONSULTING WITH STAFF TO GO BACK AND FORTH TO FIGURE OUT WHAT TO PUT IN THE VIDEO AND THAT SORT OF STUFF.

A TOTAL $5,000, NOT 20. SO WE'RE PAYING KARNATAKA FOUR TIMES THE AMOUNT OF OF WHAT THIS VENDOR WOULD BE PAYING.

AND AND IT DOES NOT STOP THERE. WHEN I LOOKED AT THE CONTRACT WITH FMR AND KARNATAKA.

I SAW THAT FMO IN KARNATAKA IS CHARGING ALMOST $400 TO PUT TOGETHER SOCIAL MEDIA CAPTIONS AND TO AND FOR COPYRIGHT. SO WHEN YOU'RE DOING A VIDEO TO COME UP WITH A SCRIPT TO DO THAT VIDEO, THEY'RE CHARGING ALMOST $400. RIDICULOUS. THIS VENDOR, WHEN I DO MY VIDEOS, ZERO FOR SCRIPTING.

SO IF WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT WHAT IS OH, THIS THIS VENDOR IS IS THIS WHY DON'T WE PAY CONNECTED TO THIS? WHY DON'T WE CONTRACT WITH THIS ONE? I CHOOSE TO USE THIS ONE BECAUSE IT'S CHEAPER.

UNDERSTAND? CHEAPER. THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT. THAT'S WHAT WE ALL WANT.

CHEAPER, BUT NOT FOR LESS THAN NOT. NOT TO COMPROMISE QUALITY.

BECAUSE THIS COMPANY HAS NEVER GIVEN ME A VIDEO WITH FINGERPRINTS ON THE LENS.

OTHER COMPANIES HAVE. JUST FOR A BIT OF CLARIFICATION.

COMMISSIONER BOLTON, THIS ITEM, EVEN THOUGH IT DIDN'T IT DIDN'T COME FROM THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT.

THIS IS ABOUT THE THE VENDOR. WHERE DID IT COME FROM? IT CAME FROM THE CITY COMMISSION THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.

OKAY, SO CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE PUT TOGETHER THIS ITEM AND ALL THE BACKUPS.

YES. AND THEN SENT IT TO YOU. OKAY. WHO FROM YOUR OFFICE DID THAT? WE DON'T WANT TO. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW, SO. NO NO NO NO NO NO.

I'LL. I'LL ANSWER. I'LL ANSWER THE QUESTION. SO AS WE PROCESS PAYMENTS, THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT SAYS, OKAY, THIS VENDOR IS IS REACH 65,000 THRESHOLD SO WE CAN PROCESS IT ANYMORE.

SO WHAT'S THE SOLUTION? THE SOLUTION IS FOR COMMISSION TO RATIFY.

SO THEREFORE WE TOOK THAT RESPONSIBILITY TO PREPARE THE ITEM AND SUBMIT IT FOR A COMMISSION APPROVAL.

SO WITH WITH ALL THE BACKUPS THE BACKUP IS PROVIDED BY BY FINANCE DEPARTMENT.

CHRISTINE. YEAH. YES, THEY CAME FROM FINANCE.

OKAY. SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU AND FINANCE DEPARTMENT PUT THIS ITEM TOGETHER WITH ALL THE.

I DID NOT SAY THAT. NO. OKAY, SO WHO DID? IT CAME FROM THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.

OKAY. SO HE JUST. HE JUST BACK AND FORTH. OKAY.

SO. SO WHO DID YOUR YOUR OFFICE? THE THE BACKUP IS PROVIDED BY BY FINANCE.

OKAY. OKAY. AND YOU'RE SAYING CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE? OKAY. I SAID YES. YES. THE. THOSE DOCUMENTS ARE KEPT IN FINANCE.

I'M SAYING THAT FINANCE DEPARTMENT DID NOT PUT THE ITEM TOGETHER FOR THE AGENDA ITEM.

I'M NOT USING MY TWO MINUTES. I WAS JUST FOLLOWING UP WITH THE WITH THE QUESTION FROM THE CITY MANAGER.

JUST JUST TO BE CLEAR. SO FOR THE AGENDA ITEM.

SO I WAS SAYING THAT THIS ITEM IS NOT ABOUT THE FIDELITY OF THE PAYMENTS, BUT IT'S ABOUT THE FACT THAT I'M I'M JUST I'M JUST ASKING A FOLLOW UP QUESTION TO WHAT THE CITY MANAGER ALLUDED TO.

WHO PUT THE BACKUP TOGETHER. WHERE DID IT COME FROM? YOU SAID IT'S NOT FINANCE AND IT'S THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.

THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE SAID HIS FINANCE. SO WHERE DID IT COME FROM? IT CAME THE CITY MANAGER, THE CITY. THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT IS THE HOLDER OF THE DOCUMENTATION.

AND WHO PUT IT IN THE BACKUP? WE DIDN'T. WHO DID? KIND OF ASKED AND ANSWERED IN CITY ATTORNEY. IS THERE ANY RELEVANCE FOR OUR CITY STAFF TO BE GRILLED IN SUCH A MANNER.

THE BACKUP IS HERE IS PUBLIC RECORD DOCUMENTS AND WE NEED TO BE MOVING ON.

IT'S UP TO THE MANAGER AND HIS STAFF TO ANSWER THE CITY COMMISSION QUESTION.

MR. MANAGER, IF YOU WANT TO DIRECT THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION, SURE.

IT'S UP TO YOU. SO WE PREPARED THE AGENDA ITEM AND WE REQUEST THE DOCUMENTS FROM THE APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENT.

AND THEY PROVIDED THE DOCUMENTS AND APPARENTLY WE ATTACHED THEM AS PART OF THE THE AGENDA ITEM.

ANYBODY ELSE HAVING ANY COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER CLARIFICATION, CITY MANAGER, BECAUSE I TRANSITIONED ONE OF MY LIAISON INTO A CONTRACT AS WELL.

SHE'S NOT GOING TO HIT 65 UNTIL LIKE FOUR YEARS FROM NOW, SO I DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT HOPEFULLY.

THE QUESTION IS IS THIS A STANDARD PROTOCOL? WE HAVE TO PROVIDE THE BACKUP AND ALL THAT INFORMATION.

[03:50:05]

KIND OF LIKE WHAT, COMMISSIONER? WHAT WHAT WAS PRESENTED IN THIS FOR STAFF, FOR DUNN FILMS, THE DELIVERABLES WITH THE PICTURES AND THAT TYPE OF STUFF.

YOU KNOW THAT I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO ANSWER HOW MUCH OF A PRACTICE THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL IS, BUT BUT AS YOU CAN SEE FROM YOUR FROM YOUR EXPERIENCE THAT, THAT EVERY SINGLE COMMISSION ITEM THAT WE SUBMIT HAVE THE THE, THE APPROPRIATE BACKUP. SO, TONY, YOU HAVE SOMETHING.

COMMISSIONER WRIGHT, I THINK WHAT I HAVE SEEN, ESPECIALLY WITH COMMISSIONER BOLTON, THAT SUFFICIENT INFORMATION IS PROVIDED TO ESTABLISH PUBLIC PURPOSE. AND FOR ME, I'M PART OF THE REVIEW PROCESS WHEN I HAVE MORE INFORMATION IS BETTER.

SO I BELIEVE FROM THE MORE THE BETTER. SO IF SUFFICIENT INFORMATION TO SHOW EXACTLY WHAT'S THE SERVICE IS BEING PROVIDED, IT HELPS ME. OKAY. OKAY. JUST WANTED THAT FOR CLARIFICATION PURPOSES.

CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. COMMISSIONER BOLTON.

YES, COMMISSIONER. WRIGHT. YES. COMMISSIONER.

PATTERSON. YES. VICE MAYOR. DANIEL. YES. MAYOR.

GOMEZ. NO. MOTION PASSES 4 TO 1. OKEY DOKE. WE ARE NOW MOVING ON TO ITEM FIVE.

[5.k TR14314 - A Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida, Approving and Supporting Commissioner Marlon Bolton’s “Pink Heroes Gala,” “Tamarac for the Cure,” and “South Florida Got Talent” initiatives; authorizing the use of City funds and resources for the fundraising initiatives; providing for distribution of funds raised to the charities on the City-approved list of charities; providing the City Manager with the authority to do all things necessary to effectuate this resolution; and providing for an effective date.]

KEY. ITEMS CR 14314. CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR ITEM FIVE K.

RESOLUTION. CITY COMMISSION, CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA.

APPROVING AND SUPPORTING COMMISSIONER MARLON.

PINK HEROES. GALLOWS, TAMARA FAKIR AND SOUTH FLORIDA GOT TALENT INITIATIVES AUTHORIZING THE USE OF CITY FUNDS AND RESOURCES FOR THE FUND FOR FUNDRAISING ACTIVITIES.

PROVIDING FOR THE DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS RAISED TO THE CHARITIES ON THE CITY.

APPROVAL LIST OF CHARITIES. PROVIDING THE CITY MANAGER WITH THE AUTHORITY TO DO ALL THINGS NECESSARY.

THIS RESOLUTION BROUGHT INTO EFFECT TODAY. THANK YOU.

I'LL TAKE A MOTION A SECOND. MOVE IT. ITEM IS GOING TO FAIL FOR LACK OF A SECOND.

SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BOLTON.

I HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PATTERSON. I PULLED THIS ITEM.

I'M SORRY. I'M REALLY. I KNOW THERE WAS A CONSENT AGENDA.

AREN'T WE? ANYBODY FROM THE AUDIENCE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? I'VE GOT KAY JOHNSON, RONALD WASSERMAN AND ANYBODY ELSE WHO MAY WANT TO SPEAK THEREAFTER.

KATE JOHNSON, MAINLAND'S FOR. WHY BREAK MY RECORD NOW? I SEE THESE ITEMS THAT ARE ON THERE AND I THINK THEY ARE ALL WORTHWHILE EVENTS.

HOWEVER, IF THE CITY IS PAYING FOR AN EVENT, NOT A SPECIFIC PACIFIC COMMISSIONERS INITIATIVE FUNDS OR EXTRA FUNDS, THEN WHY IS IT NOT PROMOTED AS A CITY EVENT RATHER THAN AN EVENT THAT A CERTAIN COMMISSIONER HAS? IF YOU ARE PAYING FOR IT OUT OF YOUR INITIATIVE FUNDS, ALL WELL AND GOOD.

PUT YOUR NAME ON IT. IF THE CITY TAXPAYERS BY WAY OF THIS COMMISSION ARE PAYING FOR AN EVENT, THEN EVERY COMMISSIONER AND MAYOR HERE DESERVES TO HAVE THEIR PICTURE PROMOTED AS AN EVENT THAT YOU ALL VOTE ON. OTHERWISE, IT BECOMES CAMPAIGNING.

AND IF A CERTAIN PERSON IS CAMPAIGNING BY USING INITIATIVES.

IT'S JUST WRONG. I REALLY BELIEVE THAT THIS COMMISSION, EVERY PERSON ON THIS COMMISSION, IF YOU'RE SUPPORTING THESE EVENTS, SHOULD BE ON THE FLIERS AND ADVERTISING AND MARKETING AND IT SHOULD BE PROMOTED AS A CITY OF TAMARAC EVENT. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

FOR THE RECORD, I'M RONALD J. WASSERMAN. I LIVE AT 8577J DRIVE TAMARAC 33321.

SO. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO ME, BY THE WAY.

[03:55:04]

THERE ARE A NUMBER OF CHARITIES HERE THAT ARE LISTED AS A CANCER SURVIVOR MYSELF AND MY LADY WHO'S A BREAST CANCER SURVIVOR. WE SUPPORT THIS KIND OF STUFF.

NO DOUBT ABOUT IT. CANCER IS TRULY, PROBABLY THE DEVIL WORKING ON THIS EARTH.

TAMARAC FOR THE CURE. IS THAT FOR CURE? FOR CANCER? OKAY, I'M CERTAINLY FOR THAT. I'M CERTAINLY FOR THAT.

FOR THE PEOPLE. I DIDN'T GET TO DO MY PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT TO ASK EVERYONE TO BE TESTED FOR CANCER.

LADIES. BREAST CANCER. YOU ALSO GET COLON CANCER.

I'M A COLON CANCER SURVIVOR AND I'M SO GRATEFUL TO BE ALIVE.

AND SO SOUTH FLORIDA'S GOT TALENT. OF COURSE THEY DO.

I HAD A LOT OF FUN HERE. SIX MONTHS AGO OR SIX WEEKS AGO WHEN THEY HAD THE GAL AND WHO WAS BEING THE THE THE MUSICIAN. SO EVERYONE KEPT ON SAYING, PRAISE JESUS, PRAISE JESUS.

IT WAS A LOT OF FUN. IT WAS A LOT OF FUN. SO THANK YOU FOR LISTENING AGAIN.

WHAT IS THIS? I SUPPORT ALL OF YOU. BUT WHEN SOME OF THESE THINGS COME UP AND WE SPENT A LOT OF MONEY, I FEEL GOOD. I SPOKE TODAY ABOUT A DOGGIE PARK.

WE SAVED $1 MILLION. SO THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO ME.

I WON'T SAY IT'S ALWAYS A PLEASURE. BUT AGAIN, I WANT EVERYONE TO KNOW IN THIS ROOM THAT I WANT TO RESPECT YOU AND I DO. OVER HERE TO MY LEFT.

I WANT TO RESPECT YOU. THE PEOPLE WHO SIT BEHIND ME.

I'VE HAD DEALINGS WITH ALL OF YOU. YOU KNOW WHO I AM.

SO THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO ME. I WILL CONTINUE TO SPEAK OUT.

AND WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT? WHO DOES NOT WANT A SAFE, CLEAN COMMUNITY? WHO? THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED. SO I PULLED THIS ITEM.

I HAD SEVERAL QUESTIONS. CITY ATTORNEY, DID YOU PREPARE THIS? YES I DID. OKAY. BASED ON A COMMENT YOU SAID TO ME EARLIER.

DON'T YOU HAVE TO HAVE PEOPLE, THREE PEOPLE, TO ALLOW YOU TO DO THAT ON THE RESOLUTION? SO WHEN I ASKED YOU FOR SOMETHING EARLIER, YOU SAID I NEEDED A COMMISSION APPROVAL BEFORE YOU PREPARED ANYTHING.

IT'S I DON'T KNOW. YEAH, WELL, WE CAN ROLL BACK AND SEE.

ANYWAY SO YOU WERE ASKED TO PREPARE THIS WHEN YOU WERE ASKED TO PREPARE THIS, AND YOU SAW THAT THERE WERE TWO OTHER PEOPLE ON THE COMMISSION WHO GET SPONSORSHIPS FOR OTHER EVENTS, AND WE USED CITY INITIATIVES. DID YOU THINK THAT MAYBE YOU SHOULD SEND US A MEMO ABOUT YOUR FINDINGS? FIRST OF ALL WITH RESPECT TO THE OTHER EVENTS I DON'T HAVE ANY PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE THAT CITY RESOURCES WERE BEING USED.

IN FACT, THROUGH THIS PROCESS. WITH RESPECT THE LAW BROAD ETHICS CODE BASICALLY SAYS THAT IF MORE THAN IN-KIND RESOURCES ARE BEING USED TO RAISE FUNDS FOR CHARITIES, THEN THE COMMISSION APPROVED A FORMAL APPROVAL OF THE CITY COMMISSION IS REQUIRED. ADDITIONALLY, THROUGH RESEARCH AND TALKING TO THE ETHICS GENERAL COUNSEL, DEPUTY GENERAL COUNSEL, BEING ON A LIST OF CHARITIES IS NOT A PER SE FORMAL APPROVAL.

BUT IT IS NOT OR IS. IT'S NOT OKAY. NOT JUST IN WRITING OR YOU HAVE A LETTER.

I GOT IT RIGHT. OKAY, OKAY. AND SO AN ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION I ADVISED COMMISSIONER BOLTON, WHICH YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES HE'S HAPPY WITH ME, SOMETIMES HE'S NOT THAT WE NEED TO GET A FORMAL APPROVAL.

SO IF THESE EVENTS ARE HELD, THEN NO ONE CAN CHALLENGE IT.

AND SAID THE COMMISSION DID NOT APPROVE IT. SO YOU'RE GOING TO SAY YOU DIDN'T HAVE KNOWLEDGE THAT THERE MIGHT BE OTHER EVENTS THAT USE CITY FUNDS WHEN YOU HAVE TO APPROVE EVERY SINGLE INITIATIVE THAT WE DO, I DID NOT APPROVE.

THEY RELATE TO ANY CHARITIES BY ANY MEMBER. MY HUSBAND IS CLEARLY A FUNDRAISER.

YOU'VE NEVER APPROVED IT? LET ME TELL YOU. IN FACT COMMISSIONER BOWEN TOOK THE INITIATIVE TO SEND ME HIS PROPOSAL

[04:00:08]

ALONG WITH THE CITY MANAGER. THAT'S HOW I WAS ABLE TO REVIEW IT.

OTHER CHARITY EVENTS ARE NOT. THEY HAVE NOT BEEN SUBMITTED FOR ME FOR REVIEW.

BUT THE COMMISSIONER, BOLTON TOOK THE INITIATIVE AND SENT IT TO ME BY EMAIL.

AND THE MANAGER, I BELIEVE IN DEPUTY MANAGER.

SO THAT'S WHERE THERE'S THERE'S. IF I DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO REVIEW IT.

SO I WILL NOT HAVE ANY COMMENT. IT'S BEEN GOING ON FOR TWO PRIOR YEARS, AND TWO OF US HAVE HAD EVENTS FOR TWO PRIOR YEARS.

AND SO AS THE CITY ATTORNEY WHO'S BEEN HERE, I WOULD PRESUME YOU WOULD KNOW, BUT THAT'S FINE.

WHAT TROUBLES ME IS THAT YOU HAVE INFORMATION THAT SHOULD BE IN A MEMO TO EVERY SINGLE PERSON ON THE COMMISSION HERE, BECAUSE YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT INTERPRETATION, OR THERE WAS AN UNDERSTANDING, THERE MIGHT BE AN UNDERSTANDING BY MOST OF US THAT ONCE WE PUT A CHARITY ON HERE, THEN WE ARE ALLOWED TO UTILIZE OUR CITY FUNDS TO SOLICIT AND FUNDRAISE FOR THEM.

YOU FOUND OUT INFORMATION THAT YOU SAY IN WRITING IS OTHERWISE.

SO AS A COURTESY TO THE REST OF THE COMMISSION, I WOULD APPRECIATE YOU SENDING THAT TO ALL OF US.

I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM. I THINK WHEN I'M AGAIN, MY STATEMENT, I DIDN'T MAKE A CONCLUSION OF PAST EVENTS, WHETHER THEY WERE ILLEGAL OR NEVER MADE THAT.

I'D SAY ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION WILL PRESENT THAT.

IN FACT, I THINK FROM MY CONVERSATION WITH THE ETHICS COMMISSION, I WILL BASICALLY HAVE SOME CLARITY LANGUAGE.

SO IF YOU'RE ON A LIST OF CHARITY, IF A MEMBER OF COMMISSION WANTS TO MOVE FORWARD AND HOLD A FUNDRAISING EVENT, THE LANGUAGE WOULD BE MORE SPECIFIC GOING FORWARD.

SO WE WOULDN'T HAVE THIS ISSUE AGAIN. OKAY. NO NO, NO, NOT OKAY BECAUSE I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING.

MY HOUSE WITH THE TATAS IS SCHEDULED FOR OCTOBER 11TH, AND IT'S BEEN SOMETHING THAT THIS IS GOING INTO HIS THIRD YEAR.

YES. I USE CITY FUNDS AND THEN I GET SPONSORSHIP AND DONATIONS GET PUT BACK SO MONEY CAN BE THEN DONATED TO THREE CHARITIES THAT ARE ALREADY APPROVED BY THIS COMMISSION.

SO I DON'T I SEE WHERE THE CODE OF ETHICS DOESN'T DO A DEFINITION OF FUNDRAISING.

I SEE WHERE IT SAYS IT REQUIRES APPROVAL. MAYOR, YOU COULD YOU COULD HOLD YOUR YOUR FUNDRAISE.

I HAVE NEVER, BUT NOW YOU'RE TELLING ME I NEED TO ASK PERMISSION FROM THE COMMISSION. IS THAT CORRECT? BUT I INDICATED COMMISSIONER BOLTON'S BONUS CAUTION BECAUSE LANGUAGE WAS NOT CLEAR. AGREED TO ALLOW THIS MATTER TO COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION.

OKAY, SO TO REMEDY THE CLARITY LANGUAGE, I WILL MOVE FORWARD WITH A SIMPLE RESOLUTION, MAYBE AT THE NEXT MEETING OR BEFORE YOUR EVENT TO TO PUT THE LANGUAGE THAT THE COMMISSION ETHICS WANT. SO THEN BASICALLY WHAT YOU JUST SAID IS THAT IT IS UNCLEAR BECAUSE THE RULES ARE UNCLEAR.

AND EVEN THOUGH IT SAYS IN THE RESOLUTION, IT REQUIRES THAT IT IS REQUIRED, WHICH MEANS IT IS CLEAR.

SO THAT'S FINE. IT IS TRUE THAT IT IS UNCLEAR.

THE DEFINITION OF FUNDRAISING AND APPROVAL IS NOT AS SPECIFIC, AND IT COULD BE EASILY BELIEVED BY THIS COMMISSION THAT SINCE WE'VE GOT APPROVAL TO FUNDRAISE FOR OR PUT THESE CHARITIES ON OUR LIST APPROVED LIST, AND SINCE WE ARE ALLOWED TO USE OUR INITIATIVE FUNDS FOR WHETHER IT'S HOSTING A GALA OR HOSTING A HA-HA OR WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE, THEN SINCE IT'S ALREADY APPROVED, THERE SHOULD BE NO ISSUE.

BUT LET ME MAKE IT. LET ME MAKE IT CLEAR THE THE IN-KIND USE OF RESOURCES LIKE USING YOUR INITIATIVE FUNDS, USING YOUR OWN AID, USING TELEPHONE OR CITY COMPUTER IS PERMITTED WITHOUT COMMISSION APPROVAL.

THE ISSUE IS WHEN YOU GO BEYOND THAT, WHEN YOU'RE USING, YOU KNOW, MORE THAN IN-KIND RESOURCES AND THEY DEFINE WHAT IS IN-KIND RESOURCES.

YOU KNOW, YOUR OWN FUND, YOUR OWN AID, TELEPHONE AND COMPUTER.

BUT WHEN YOU USE MORE OF CITY RESOURCE AND FUND, THEN NOW YOU REQUIRE TO GO BEFORE THE COMMISSION, WHICH IS THE QUESTION ON OTHER RESOURCES THAT DO NOT REQUIRE EXPENDITURE OF CITY FUNDS.

YEAH. IF YOU USE, FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU USE AN EMPLOYEES OUTSIDE YOUR OWN AID, THEN NOT USE THE RESOURCES MORE THAN IN-KIND RESOURCES.

SO IF I'M READING THIS CORRECTLY, THE APPROVAL OF THE CITY COMMISSION IS NOT REQUIRED.

WHEN AN ELECTED OFFICIAL USES IN-KIND RESOURCES AND IN-KIND RESOURCES ARE OUR DIRECT STAFF DESIGNEE TO AN ELECTED ATTORNEY, CITY EMAIL, CITY TELEPHONE, AND OTHER RESOURCES THAT DO NOT REQUIRE EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS.

CORRECT. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? ARE YOU SAYING THAT BECAUSE I HEARD THE INITIATIVE FUNDS WERE NOT OTHER WERE OTHER RESOURCES THAT WERE AS YOUR YOUR FUNDS, YOUR AS YOUR INITIATIVE FUNDS OR YOUR FUNDS HAVE USING THOSE FUNDS USING YOUR OWN AID.

COMMISSION APPROVAL IS NOT REQUIRED. OKAY. SO OUR INITIATIVE FUNDS THOUGH, DESPITE BEING PUBLIC FUNDS, ARE BEING DEEMED OKAY BECAUSE THEY ARE INDIVIDUALLY LINE ITEM TO EACH OF US.

CORRECT. AND SO THEREFORE IF WE'RE ONLY USING THOSE FUNDS, WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR OTHER CITY PUBLIC FUNDS,

[04:05:04]

EVEN IF WE GET SPONSORSHIP FROM OUTSIDE PEOPLE FOR AN EVENT TO FUNDRAISE.

THE ONLY CAVEAT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU DON'T GET THE COMMISSION APPROVAL, YOU CAN YOU CAN YOU CAN FUNDRAISE IN YOUR OFFICIAL CAPACITY.

BUT THEN IF IF YOU'RE DOING IT ON YOUR OWN WITHOUT COMMISSION, THEN YOU HAVE TO DISCLOSE YOUR DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT.

SO IS DOES A FLIER THAT CLEARLY SAYS AND EMAILS THAT CLEARLY SAY THAT THIS IS A FUNDRAISER FOR THESE THREE CHARITIES THAT ARE APPROVED BY THE CITY? IS THAT SUFFICIENT DISCLOSURE? NOT BASED ON MY CONVERSATION WITH THE ETHICS COMMISSION.

AGAIN, I THINK FOR ME I WILL REVISIT THE LIST OF CHARITY RESOLUTION.

AND JUST JUST SO YOU SAID IT WAS A CONVERSATION, BUT YOU ALSO SAID IT WAS IN A LETTER, SO GO AHEAD.

WASN'T IT JUST EMAIL IN IN THE INTEREST OF, OF BEING SAFE? MAY I SUGGEST A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT FROM YOU AND POSSIBLY VICE MAYOR, VICE MAYOR DANIEL.

FOR FOR YOUR EVENT THAT'S THAT THAT ISSUE. WILL YOU SELECT SPONSORSHIP? IT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA. IT'S THE USE OF CITY DOLLARS.

AND YOU SPEND SPONSORSHIP, YOU GET SPONSORSHIP TO HELP PAY YOUR EVENT.

SO. SO WE DON'T GET CAUGHT IN A NET WE DON'T NEED.

SO EVERY INITIATIVE NEEDS THIS. I DON'T SEE AGAIN, I DON'T SEE IF I DON'T.

YOU KNOW. IN FACT, I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH RESOURCE WE USE BY YOUR EVENT OR VICE MAYOR EVENT.

BUT IF MORE THAN IN-KIND RESOURCES. MY MIND IS THE COMMISSIONER IN MIND.

WE STAY WITHIN WHAT IS IN OUR INITIATIVES AND WE STAY WITHIN OUR ASSIGNED EMPLOYEES.

OKAY, SO YEAH, IT'S I DON'T USE ANY CITY RESOURCE BECAUSE I USE MY INITIATIVE AND SPONSORSHIP.

OKAY. RIGHT. SO YOU'RE SAYING ON THE RECORD THEN IF WE'RE USING OUR CITY EMPLOYEES THAT ARE ASSIGNED TO US, WE'RE USING OUR CITY INITIATIVES THAT ARE ASSIGNED TO US, AND WE'RE FUNDRAISING FOR CHARITIES THAT ARE ALREADY ON OUR APPROVED LIST THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION. THEN WE'RE OKAY. YES.

THANK YOU. OKAY, OKAY. AND THAT'LL BE IN THE MINUTES. SO WE HAVE IT IN WRITING. THE ONLY ISSUE THAT I WILL CONFER IS WHETHER YOU HAVE A DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT.

OKAY. THAT'S FINE. AND THEN PLEASE FIND OUT IF FLIERS AND EMAILS AND LETTERS AND REQUESTS FOR SPONSORSHIP IS SUFFICIENT ENOUGH TO COVER DISCLOSURE OR IF THERE NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING ELSE. WRITING. THE WAY I READ THE CHAPTER HERE, IT DOESN'T.

BUT PLEASE GET US SOME WRITING SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES.

SO I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH COMMISSIONER BOLTON WANTING TO DO FUNDRAISERS AND AMERICA'S GOT TALENT VERSION, CITY OF TAMARAC STYLE. ALL THAT KIND OF GOOD STUFF.

AND IF YOU'RE TELLING HIM IN YOUR VERSION THAT I GUESS MAYBE COMMISSIONER BOLTON WANTS TO USE OUTSIDE RESOURCES NOT ASSIGNED TO HIM IN THE CITY.

SO THAT'S WHY HE'S ASKING YOU OR ASKING US FOR PERMISSION.

I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH SECTION FIVE OF THE RESOLUTION.

THE CITY COMMISSION HEREBY AUTHORIZES THE CITY MANAGER WITH THE AUTHORITY TO DO ALL THINGS NECESSARY TO EFFECTUATE THIS THIS RESOLUTION.

THE LANGUAGE IN THAT WAS IN THE FIT ZONE. AND ALL OF A SUDDEN, THE NEXT THING I KNOW, WE'RE HAVING A $30,000 BUDGET COMING BEFORE THE COMMISSION AND IS COMING OUT OF THE CITY'S BUDGET TO PAY FOR THOSE THAT EVENT.

SO IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT COMMISSIONER BOLTON WISHES TO DO WITH ALL OF HIS MONEY FROM ALL OF HIS INITIATIVES, AND HOWEVER HE WANTS TO DO IT FROM HIS OWN DIRECT ACCESS POWER TO YOU.

I'M HAPPY TO HELP YOU FOR WANT AND SUPPORT, BUT I CAN'T SUPPORT IT IF THE CITY OF TAMARAC IS GOING TO HAVE ANOTHER BUDGET ITEM TO COME COVER THIS.

COMMISSIONER PAULSON. THANK YOU. MAYOR. LISTEN, I DON'T LIKE THAT THIS ITEM IS IS ON THE AGENDA. SO, YOU KNOW, FOR THE FIRST TIME, WE WE MAY HAVE ALIGNED THERE.

I DIDN'T WANT IT ON THE AGENDA. I SENT MY PROPOSAL TO HANCE, MIRRORING EXACTLY YOUR.

HAHA. FOR TATA'S NOT QUITE. NOT BECAUSE I WANT TO COMPETE.

IT'S BECAUSE I ADMIRE YOUR TATAS AND WHAT IT DOES.

I DON'T ADMIRE THE THE CURSE WORDS THERE, BUT I ADMIRE WHAT THE MONEY DOES, RIGHT? SO I WANTED TO DO EXACTLY THE SAME THING TO RAISE MONEY FOR BREAST CANCER SURVIVORS AND FOR CANCER SURVIVORS.

AS A MATTER OF FACT, MY FATHER DIED FROM PROSTATE CANCER.

I'M NOW OVER 40. SO NOW I HAVE A DOCTOR GOING UP, YOU KNOW, THE ALLEY.

AND SO I HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT I SUPPORT PEOPLE WHO HAVE CANCER.

THAT'S WHAT IT IS. SO THE ATTORNEY AND I, WE WENT BACK AND FORTH.

[04:10:03]

I LITERALLY CUSSED HIM OUT. I VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED MY ITEM COMING ON THE CITY AGENDA.

THIS IS NOT A COUP TO GET MORE MONEY. EACH OF YOU WILL GET A LETTER FROM ME ASKING FOR MONEY.

SO I'M NOT JUST GOING TO USE MY INITIATIVE FUNDS, I'M GOING TO ASK FOR HELP FROM YOUR INITIATIVE FUNDS TOO.

RIGHT. SO? SO NO, IT IS NOT JUST INITIATIVE FUNDS.

I DID NOT AGREE WITH HANS, SO I TOOK IT UPON MYSELF TO CALL THE FLORIDA COMMISSION ON ETHICS, AND THEY ACTUALLY AGREED WITH HANS. SO IT WOULD HAVE BEEN IN YOUR BEST INTEREST TO ADD YOUR TATAS ON THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING.

BE OKAY. I'M JUST SAYING. I'M JUST SAYING PUBLICLY.

SO IT'S ON THE RECORD. SO, SO SO THEY AGREE WITH HIM THAT IF YOU'RE GOING TO USE CITY FUNDS, IT DOESN'T MATTER IF IT IS INITIATIVE FUNDS OR NOT THAT SOMETHING LIKE THIS SHOULD BE ON THE CITY AGENDA.

SO FOR THAT I APOLOGIZE. AND I'M BIG ENOUGH TO DO THAT.

SO, YOU KNOW, NO, I'M NOT PROMOTING IT AS A CITY EVENT BECAUSE IT'S NOT A CITY EVENT.

WHOEVER SPONSORS THE MY EVENTS, JUST LIKE MORRIS SPONSORS THE PET EXPO AND THE TATAS ARE, THEN THEY THEIR PICTURE WILL BE ON IT. SO I'M GOING TO ASK MY COLLEAGUES AND ASK BUSINESS OWNERS AND WHOEVER TO HELP ME WITH THIS EVENT SO THEY GET THE RECOGNITION.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, I BELIEVE THE RESOLUTION IS IS ON POINT.

AS A MATTER OF FACT, I'LL CORRECT. JOHANNS, YOU DID NOT WRITE THE RESOLUTION.

AS A MATTER OF FACT, I HIRED MY OWN ATTORNEY, NOT AI, MISS CALLOWAY.

I HIRED MY OWN ATTORNEY WITH MY OWN MONEY TO TO TO PUT TOGETHER A RESOLUTION.

I SENT IT TO HANS, AND HE DID HIS TAMRAC THING.

SO TO SAY THAT HE MOVED AT THE BEAT OF MY DRUM, THAT'S NOT TRUE.

SO, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I COPIED THE CITY MANAGER ON IT.

SO ANY YOU MISS CALLOWAY, YOU'RE NOT GETTING AWAY.

SO I, I DID THAT AS WELL. SO IT IS NOT A CITY FUNDED EVENT.

AND YOU KNOW, TO THE EXTENT THAT IT BECOMES A CITY FUNDED EVENT BECAUSE I'M GOING TO ASK FOR MONEY, ESPECIALLY FROM YOU, MARIE. IT HAS TO BE ON HERE.

AND LISTEN, CITY FUNDS AND CITY RESOURCES ABOVE, JUST A COMPUTER AND ASSISTANCE AND THAT SORT OF STUFF HAS BEEN USED IN THE PAST, AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS NEED TO RECTIFY PAST, YOU KNOW, ACTIONS, BECAUSE IF I WERE MEAN SPIRITED TO YOU, MAURY, WHEN YOU USED UP CITY FUNDS TO HELP SOME MUSEUM IMPLANTATION TO COME AND DO AN EVENT IN TIME WORK, I THINK THAT SHOULD BE A RESOLUTION AS WELL. AND YOU NEED TO PUT THAT HERE.

LISTEN, I KNOW THIS MAYOR IS AFTER ME. HE. SHE KEEPS TELLING PEOPLE THAT I'M GOING TO PRISON.

SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I DOT EVERY I AND CROSS EVERY T, WHICH IS WHY I ALWAYS SEND THINGS TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, THE CITY MANAGER. I ALWAYS HIRE MY OWN ATTORNEY.

I SPEND MY OWN MONEY TO DO THINGS AND THEN COME BACK FOR HIM, TO HIM, WITH WITH AN OPINION AND GO BACK AND FORTH UNTIL I AM COMFORTABLE.

SO THAT IS WHY I'M DOING THIS. THIS IS NOT A COUP TO GET MORE MONEY.

SO MORE POWER TO TO ALL OF YOU. I THINK THIS IS A GREAT INITIATIVE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. J DRIVE FOR ENDORSING THIS EVENT.

I HOPE TO SEE YOU IN STUART WEBSTER AND ALL MY FABULOUS PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE TO THIS EVENT.

AND YOU'RE ALL WELCOME. I LOVE YOU, STUART WEBSTER.

YOU KNOW THAT. AND SO YEAH. SO. SO DO YOU ACCEPT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH, PAY YOUR ATTORNEY? THAT ISN'T THAT. YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT I'M ASKING.

SO I'M NOT ADDING YOUR I'M NOT ADDING YOUR HAT TO MY MIND.

I WAS NEVER PLANNING ON PUTTING MY HANDS FOR TATAS WITH YOURS.

MY THING IS TO SECTION FIVE. NO, THAT'S ALSO WHAT I AUTHORIZE.

THAT'S ALSO AN AUTHORIZE TO DO ALL NECESSARY THINGS TO EFFECTUATE THIS RESOLUTION, EXCEPT TRANSFER AND BUDGET ADDITIONAL MONEY.

THAT'S ALSO UNKNOWN. OKAY, WELL, WELL, THEN YOU GET MY ANSWER.

AND FOR AND FOR THOSE OF YOU I CAN USE MY TWO MINUTES.

FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO THINK THAT THIS IS A CAMPAIGN THING, I'M NOT ON THE BALLOT.

I WON MY ELECTION FAIR AND SQUARE TWO TIMES BY A LANDSLIDE, AND I'M NOT RUNNING FOR ANYTHING ELSE UNTIL 2030 UNLESS SOMEBODY PUSHES ME TO TO RUN EARLIER. BUT THIS IS NOT A CAMPAIGN ANYTHING.

THIS IS A WONDERFUL EVENT THAT IS GOING TO AFFECT POSITIVE CHANGE IN OUR CITY.

AND THIS IS GOING TO BE AN ABSOLUTELY WONDERFUL EVENT.

AND YOU KNOW WHAT? IF CERTAIN CHARITIES WHO WERE NICELY RUN WERE ON THE LIST OF CHARITIES,

[04:15:06]

THEY IN NOVEMBER WOULD PERHAPS GET SOME MONEY FROM THESE EVENTS.

BUT I'M ONLY GOING TO ASSIST CHARITIES THAT ARE WORTHY.

THANK YOU. CITY ATTORNEY. I'M EXPECTING, AS A POINT OF CLARIFICATION IN WRITING ALL THE ITEMS THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED IN YOUR EMAILS OR YOUR MEMO, SO THAT SOME OF US CAN PREPARE OUR REQUEST FOR THE AGENDA ITEM THAT WILL BE AT THE NEXT MEETING, BECAUSE I'LL HAVE IT ON THE NEXT MEETING, BECAUSE ALLEGEDLY, THERE'S INFORMATION OUT THERE THAT HAS BEEN RECEIVED BY YOURSELF THAT IS OF IMPORTANCE TO THE COMMISSION, AND THEREFORE IT LEGALLY AFFECTS THE REST OF US ON THIS COMMISSION.

AND SO PLEASE PROVIDE THAT TO US TO MEAN TO PRIVATE TO ALL OF US.

AND I WILL HAVE MY ITEM ON THE NEXT AGENDA. OKAY.

CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. VICE MAYOR DANIEL.

YES. MAYOR. GOMEZ. NO. COMMISSIONER. RIGHT. YES.

COMMISSIONER. PATTERSON. YES. COMMISSIONER BOLTON.

YES. THANK YOU. MOTION PASSES FOR IT IS 4 TO 1.

[7.a TO2597 - An Ordinance of the City Commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida, amending Chapter 10, Article 4 of the City of Tamarac Land Development Code, entitled “Development and Design Standards,” by revising Section 10- 4.4, entitled “Landscaping and Tree Preservation,” to clarify and strengthen the city’s landscaping and tree preservation regulations, to enhance consistency in their interpretation, application, and enforcement, and to expand the purposes for which tree preservation trust funds may be used; providing for codification; providing for severability; providing for conflicts; and providing for an effective date.]

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, WE ARE DONE WITH CONSENT AGENDA.

DID WE HEAR FIVE? I YES WE DID. OKAY. I WAS NOT IN THE ROOM.

RIGHT? YOU WERE NOT. YOU DID NOT GET BACK INSIDE.

AND WE WAITED EXTRA TIME. SO WE ARE ON ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING.

78202597. CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD.

ITEM SEVEN A AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION.

CITY. TAMARA COMMITTING CHAPTER TEN, ARTICLE FOUR OF THE CITY TAMARA LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ENTITLED DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGN STAMPS REVISING SECTION TEN DASH 4.4 ENTITLED LANDSCAPING AND TREE PRESERVATION TO CLARIFY STRENGTHEN THE CITY LANDSCAPING TREE PRESERVATION REGULATIONS TO ENHANCE CONSISTENCY IN THE INTERPRETATION APPLICATION ENFORCEMENT. TO EXPAND THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH TREE PRESERVATION TRUST FUNDS MAY BE USED FOR AND FOR CONFLICTS.

RYAN FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

SO MOVED. SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION BY BOLTON.

WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER RAY COMMISSIONER BOLTON.

NOT UNTIL YOU BE POLITE AND RESPECTFUL. FOR THE REST OF THIS COMMISSION, YOU'RE GOING TO JUST BE BOLTON.

OKAY? GOMEZ. ALL RIGHT. GO AHEAD. NO PROBLEM, COMMISSIONER RYAN. BARK.

WELL, MRS. MARKWELL, NOT MY NAME. GO AHEAD. COMMISSIONER.

OH, SORRY. NEVER MIND. SO, FULL PRESENTATION OF THIS WAS DELIVERED A STAFF AGENDA WORKSHOP.

I WOULD LIKE THIS PRESENTATION TO BE DELIVERED TODAY.

SINCE THREE OF US WERE NOT HERE, WE WERE DOING THE BUSINESS OF THE CITY ALONG WITH THE CITY MANAGER.

SO PLEASE PROVIDE THIS PRESENTATION. POINT OF ORDER.

I THINK I THINK THAT WAS I THINK WE SAID THAT THESE STAFF AGENDAS ARE TO BE WATCHED ON DEMAND.

OR DO YOU RECALL, MISS GALLOWAY? YES I DO. COMMISSIONER.

IN FACT, THE CLERK SENT THE LINK OUT ON THE SAME DAY, BUT THE PRESENTATION WAS ALSO PROVIDED IN THE BACKUP.

AND IT'S IN THE LIBRARY, SO IT'S AT YOUR DISCRETION.

RIGHT. SO. AND SO I WAS. I WAS SPEAKING. NO, YOU WERE CUTTING ME ON AND I WAS I WAS IN ORLANDO AS WELL.

AND I HAD THE PLEASURE OF DOING MY RESEARCH AND WATCHING THE CITY COMMISSION MEETING THE AGENDA AND MAKING SURE THAT I WAS PREPARED FOR THIS MEETING. SO. SO WHOEVER IS COMING UNPREPARED SHOULD NOT HAVE TO ASK STAFF FOR A PRESENTATION.

WHEN WE ALL HAD TO WATCH THE STAFF WORKSHOP, READ THROUGH THE BACKUP, LOOK AT ALL OF THE ITEMS AND MAKE SURE WE'RE PREPARED FOR TODAY.

NO. WELL, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I OBJECT. YOU CAN OBJECT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THE THING IS, SOME OF US ACTUALLY PAID ATTENTION AND WENT TO THE CONFERENCE THAT THEY PAID NIGHT TIME.

MAYOR. THAT'S WHAT ON DEMAND IS CALLED NIGHTTIME.

THAT'S OKAY. I HAVE MY STUFF. BUT THERE ARE PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO ALSO HAVE NOT HAD THE PLEASURE OF SEEING THINGS AT THE CITY IS REQUIRING RESIDENTS TO BE MINDFUL OF, WITHOUT THEM HAVING THE ABILITY TO MIND THE INTERNET.

THIS IS NOT ONE THAT GETS TO BE VOTED UPON. ANY CITY PERSON ASKED FOR ONE OF THE EMPLOYEES TO ASSIST AND STAFF MEMBER TO ASSIST.

THAT STAFF MEMBER USUALLY DOES THE RIGHT THING AND ASSISTS.

THEREFORE MISS INCLUDING THE ATTORNEY WHO CAN WRITE RESOLUTIONS AT WILL.

YOU CAN'T HAVE YOU CAN'T CAN EAT IT TOO. JUST ALL I'M SAYING.

TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. BUT ANYWAY, MY LIGHT IS ON.

[04:20:01]

MAYOR, MY LIFE GOES ON. I HAVE A QUESTION. I WAS ASKING FOR THE PRESENTATION TO BE DONE, BUT GO AHEAD.

COMMISSIONER. VICE MAYOR. GO AHEAD. WE DON'T HAVE ANY RULES. JUST. RIGHT. GO AHEAD. WELL, I GUESS NO ONE HAS RULES.

THE MAYOR STATED THAT ORLANDO WAS CITY BUSINESS, BUT MYSELF OR MISS PATTERSON WEREN'T INVITED.

SO I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHO EXACTLY IS THE CITY.

BECAUSE WE WEREN'T WE WEREN'T INCLUDED. AND I HAD TO FIND OUT THROUGH THE GRAPEVINE THAT THOSE TWO WERE GOING.

SO I MADE SURE THAT I TAG ALONG. SO SOME SOMEBODY IS PLAYING FAVORITES.

SOME OF US HAVE BEEN GOING TO THIS ITEM, THIS PLACE, FOR YEARS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY.

WELL, TELL US IT'S A PUBLIC RECORD. YOU GUYS GET THE EMAILS, YOU DON'T READ YOUR EMAILS.

NOT MY PROBLEM. I DIDN'T GET THAT EMAIL. JUST.

JUST LIKE JUST LIKE ENOUGH CHILDREN JUST KNOW WE'RE NOT CHILDREN BEING A CHILD RIGHT NOW.

NO, NO, NOT NOT YOU. EVERYONE SHOULD GET THE SAME PRIVILEGE.

NOT JUST SOME WHEN THEY WANT IT. AND IF YOU WANT TO DRIVE TO TALLAHASSEE WITH ONE PERSON, THEN YOU TAKE A BUS TO TALLAHASSEE.

YOU COULD HAVE DRIVEN WITH ME. WELL, NEXT TIME I'M GOING TO DRIVE TO ORLANDO WITH YOU AND DRIVE TO TALLAHASSEE WITH YOU.

ALRIGHT, I'M GOING TO STAY IN YOUR BEDROOM TOO.

SO JUST. JUST LIKE OTHER PEOPLE DOING THAT. COME ON.

DON'T YOU DO THAT. YEAH, BUT OTHER PEOPLE STAY IN YOUR ROOM.

NO THEY DON'T. OH, YEAH. YOU KNOW, WE GOT PICTURES.

CITY ATTORNEY, DO SOMETHING WITH THIS DISPARAGING MAN.

HAVE SOME CONTROL OVER THE FACT THAT HE PUTS THE LIGHTS OUTSIDE.

LET'S MOVE TO THE ITEM. YEAH. NO. WHY DON'T YOU EVER STAND UP FOR THE PEOPLE? YOU ARE THE PRESIDING OFFICER. YOU MOVE THE ITEM.

FOCUS ON THE ISSUE AT HAND. YOU JUST LET ALL THIS SHIT.

WAIT ONE MINUTE. MY QUESTION WAS, YOU LET PEOPLE COME HERE AND DISRESPECT US ALL THE TIME.

BUT I HAVE PICTURES OF OF PEOPLE COMING OUT OF YOUR ROOM.

IT WILL COME OUT IN YOUR TIME. INCREDIBLE. WITH TIME STAMPS TO PROVE IT, BUSTER.

I WILL PROVE IT, BUSTER. YEAH, LET'S. LET'S MOVE THE TO ITEM, MISS CALLOWAY.

THANK YOU. THIS ITEM IS T0 NUMBER 2597. IT'S THE LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE.

THE TITLE WAS READ INTO THE RECORD. SO FOR THE SAKE OF TIME, I'LL JUST MOVE THROUGH THE SLIDES.

SINCE 2023 IS WHEN THE CITY TOOK OVER THE LANDSCAPE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE FROM THE COUNTY.

BEFORE THAT, THE COUNTY WAS ADMINISTERING, OUR RESIDENTS HAD TO GO TO THE COUNTY TO GET TREE REMOVAL PERMITS, SO ON AND SO FORTH. SO IN 2023, WE TOOK THAT OVER, AND WE HAVE BEEN ADMINISTERING NOW FOR ABOUT TWO YEARS IN THE PROCESS OF ADMINISTERING.

AND THIS IS THE REASON WHY WE ARE MAKING THESE ADJUSTMENTS.

WE HAVE FOUND THAT THERE ARE CERTAIN AREAS WHERE THERE'S SOME AMBIGUITY.

WE NEEDED SOME CLARITY. WE WERE MISSING CERTAIN DEFINITION.

AND THEN WE HAD SOME OF OUR RESIDENTS THAT WERE HAVING DIFFICULTIES IN PLANTING TREES OR REPLACING TREES BECAUSE OF FUNDING ISSUES.

AND SO WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAD SOME DISCRETION IN THE LANGUAGE, IN THE, IN THE LANGUAGE.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE CITY NEEDS, AS I JUST DISCUSSED, AS WELL AS CERTAIN STATE REQUIREMENT AND STATE PREEMPTIONS.

SO ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE'RE DOING IS EXPANDING THE ELIGIBLE USE OF THE TREE PRESERVATION TRUST FUNDS TO INCLUDE PRIVATE PROPERTY AS IT IS NOW.

AND BEFORE THE TRUST FUNDS, MONEY WERE ONLY ALLOCATED FOR PUBLIC PROPERTY.

WE WANTED TO IMPROVE CLARITY THROUGH NEW DEFINITIONS.

WE WANTED TO STRENGTHEN THE TREE PROTECTION AND UPDATE MAINTENANCE REGULATIONS, AND WE ALSO WANT TO ENHANCE THE TREE REMOVAL LICENSING STANDARDS.

AND AS YOU RECALL, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION AT THE RETREAT THIS YEAR, WE ALSO DISCUSSED THIS ITEM, AND THIS WAS ONE OF YOUR STRATEGIC PRIORITIES FOR STAFF TO GO BACK AND TO BRING FORWARD THIS AMENDMENT.

SO THE QUESTION IS WHAT IS CHANGING? AND SO THE SLIDE BEFORE YOU SHOWS YOU ALL THE SECTIONS OF THE CODE THAT WILL BE CHANGING, CHANGING SPECIFICALLY CHANGES TO THE DEFINITIONS, THE TREE REMOVAL LICENSE REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS.

THE TREE PRESERVATION TRUST FUND. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL LANDSCAPING AND LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE.

I WILL GO THROUGH EACH SECTION FOR YOUR BENEFIT, AND THE READ AND HIGHLIGHTED IS WHAT'S NEW AND WILL BE ADDED TO THE CODE.

SO WE HAVE ADDED A DEFINITION FOR HAZARDOUS TREE.

WE HAVE HAD IT ADDED A DEFINITION FOR NUISANCE TREE.

PROPERTY OWNER AND PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY. AND AS WE KNOW THAT THE SWALE AREA THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY THAT IS ADJACENT AND A BURDEN ON THE PROPERTY OWNER PRIVATE PROPERTY HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THAT PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNER.

WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE WAS A DISTINCT DEFINITION FOR THAT.

AS IT RELATES TO THE LICENSE REQUIREMENTS, WE HAVE ADDED SEE TREES THAT, IF REMOVED, WOULD RESULT IN THE PROPERTY NOT SATISFYING THE MINIMUM TREE QUANTITY REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED IN TABLE TEN 4.6. THIS IS IMPORTANT AND IT PROVIDES A BENEFIT FOR A PROPERTY OWNER.

SO ESSENTIALLY IF YOU'RE A SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTY OWNER AND YOU ARE REMOVING A TREE, BUT YOU STILL MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR THE TREES FOR SINGLE FAMILY.

[04:25:05]

FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOUR PROPERTY WAS BUILT BEFORE 2018, THEN THE CODE WOULD HAVE REQUIRED THAT THERE ARE THREE TREES BE ON YOUR PROPERTY.

IT WOULD REQUIRE THAT THERE WOULD BE A TWO IN THE FRONT AND ONE IN THE BACK.

AND IF THE PROPERTY WAS BUILT AFTER 2008, THAT WAS CHANGED.

AND IT REQUIRES FIVE TREES ON YOUR PROPERTY. SO ESSENTIALLY, IF YOU'VE TAKEN OUT A TREE, IF IT'S A NUISANCE TREE, OR FOR WHATEVER REASON, YOU'RE REMOVING A TREE AND YOU STILL MEET THE CODE, THERE'S STILL THREE TREES ON YOUR PROPERTY IN THE PLACES IT NEEDS TO BE, PROVIDED THAT THE TREE THAT YOU HAVE REMOVED IS NOT GREATER THAN 18IN IN CALIBER.

THEN YOU WOULD NOT NEED TO REPLACE THAT TREE AND 18IN IN CALIBER.

IT'S A TREE THAT'S DECADES OLD, 30, 40 YEARS OLD.

SO WE BELIEVE THIS IS OF BENEFIT TO OUR PROPERTY OWNERS.

THE BIGGEST CHANGE IS HOW THE TRUST FUND CAN BE USED.

AND TODAY WE HAVE ACCUMULATED ABOUT $100,000 IN THE TRUST FUND.

AND WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IF THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY OR AN OCCASION WHERE THE CITY COMMISSION WANTS TO CREATE A GRANT PROGRAM OR ALLOW PROPERTY OWNERS TO GET FUNDING TO EITHER REMOVE TREES OR TO PLANT TREES, THAT OPPORTUNITY MIGHT BE AVAILABLE.

SO AS IT IS NOW, THE PROCEEDS FROM THE TREE FUND CAN ONLY BE USED ON PUBLIC PROPERTY.

AND SO THE CHANGE THAT WE'RE MAKING HERE IS THAT THE FUNDS CAN ALSO BE USED IN PRIVATE PROPERTY AND GIVES US THAT FLEXIBILITY OR ABILITY TO DO SOMETHING, SHOULD WE DESIRE TO DO THAT IN THE FUTURE. ON THE PLANT MATERIAL, WE MADE A CHANGE AND ADDED ROMAN NUMERAL 11. ALL THREE SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED. AND THIS IS JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS IN KEEPING WITH STATE LAW.

SO WE ADDED TREES THAT ARE FLORIDA INVASIVE SPECIES TREE TO THE LIST.

THAT WAS NOT ON THE LIST BEFORE. ON THE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE.

WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE WERE VERY CLEAR. IN FACT, WE HAD ONE PARTICULAR ISSUE THAT REALLY ASSISTED US OR MADE US INCLUDE THIS LANGUAGE.

WE HAD CODE THAT HAD AN ISSUE WHERE WE HAD A PROPERTY OWNER THAT HAD SOME VEGETATION THAT WAS GROWING THAT WAS WILDLY GROWING AND THAT WAS IMPEDING OR OWNED PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE. AND SO WE WHEN WE REACHED OUT TO THAT PROPERTY OWNER, WE DID NOT HAVE ANY CLEAR LANGUAGE IN THE CODE WHERE WE COULD HAVE POINTED TO THAT PROPERTY OWNER THAT REQUIRED THEM TO CUT BACK THAT VEGETATION.

SO WE BELIEVE THAT THIS LANGUAGE IS HELPFUL IN MAKING SURE THAT WE CAN GET THAT MAINTENANCE.

AND IF IT IMPACTS OR IMPEDE OUR INFRASTRUCTURE, THEN THAT PROPERTY OWNER CAN GO AHEAD AND MAKE THOSE ADJUSTMENTS.

AND THIS IS FOR HAZARDOUS TREES. WE HAVE CREATED A DEFINITION, BUT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF THE TREES HAZARDOUS THAT THE CITY HAS THE ABILITY TO TELL THAT HOA OR THAT PROPERTY OWNER, THAT YOU NEED TO REMOVE THE TREE BEFORE THIS LANGUAGE WAS ADDED.

WE DIDN'T HAVE A DEFINITION FOR HAZARDOUS TREE.

SO IF THERE'S A TREE THAT'S HAZARDOUS IN SOMEONE'S PROPERTY, IF THAT PROPERTY OWNER DOES NOT WANT TO REMOVE THE TREE, OR IF THE HOA DOES NOT WANT TO REMOVE THE TREE, THE CITY DID NOT HAVE ANY LANGUAGE OR ANY TEETH TO SAY THE TREE IS HAZARDOUS, THEREFORE IT MUST BE REMOVED. AND THIS IS WHAT THIS LANGUAGE DOES.

AND SO ON THIS SLIDE, FOR EVERY TEXT AMENDMENT, THE CODE REQUIRES THAT CERTAIN CRITERIA OR STANDARDS ARE MET.

AND THIS SLIDE IS JUST ESSENTIALLY SAYING THAT THOSE STANDARDS HAVE BEEN MET FOR THAT TEXT AMENDMENT, AND THAT THE AMENDMENT ACHIEVES OUR STRATEGIC PRIORITY AND MEETS.

TAMARAC IS HOME AND TAMARAC IS VIBRANT. AND THAT THE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE CHANGES THAT ARE BEFORE YOU.

AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH.

PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW OPEN.

I'M THE ONLY ONE STILL HERE THAT'S NOT PAID. IT'S NOT LIKE YOU WERE ON THE LIST.

I'M SORRY. I WAS AT THE COMMISSION WORKSHOP WHEN THIS WAS PROPOSED.

SO I LIVE IN A COMMUNITY CALLED SHANGRI-LA, WHICH MANY OF YOU KNOW, OUR COMMUNITY ADJOINS THE WOODMONT GOLF COURSE. SO TO MAKE A VERY LONG STORY SHORT, AND WE'VE HAD ALL KINDS OF ISSUES DURING NUMEROUS STORMS. THESE TREES HAVE FALLEN ON OUR HOME. PROBLEM.

OKAY. THOSE SAME TREES NEED TO BE TRIMMED. SO ANOTHER TIME, THE TREE CAME DOWN AND SMASHED OUR MAILBOXES. DANGEROUS. SO THESE TREES ARE NOT ON OUR PROPERTY.

[04:30:09]

BUT YET WE TAKE CARE OF THEM. SO IT'S A REAL ISSUE ABOUT THE TREES.

WE HAD ONE TREE. AND, FOLKS, YOU DON'T HAVE TO LISTEN TO WHAT I SAY, BUT I'M JUST GOING TO SAY IT ANYHOW.

WE HAD ONE TREE GROWING FROM THIS BIG TREE BY MY COMMUNITY.

THERE'S THREE OF THEM. THAT ROOT WENT UNDERNEATH MY SIDEWALK, CAME ALL THE WAYS AROUND THE HOUSE AND WANTED TO GET UNDERNEATH THE GARAGE.

ONE ROOT THIS BIG. SO I LIKE THESE DEFINITIONS.

I LIKE CLARITY ABOUT THIS. BUT WHEN WE HAVE. WE HAVE TREES THAT SURROUND OUR COMMUNITY AND WE HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF THEM AND NOBODY DOES ANYTHING ABOUT IT.

WE JUST HAD A LANDSCAPER COME TO THE COMMUNITY.

IF ANYONE IS IN AGRICULTURE, KNOWS ABOUT ARBORIST, HE LION TAILED THE TREES.

DOES ANYBODY KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS? WELL. THAT MEANS THEY JUST CUT IT AND NO PROBLEM. HE ALLUDED TO HIM HAVING A LIFT.

HE LIED. SO AGAIN, LANDSCAPING THE GOLF COURSE HAS BEEN EXTREMELY UNCOOPERATIVE WITH US. TREES. YOU CRUSHED OUR MAILBOXES.

THANK YOU.

KAY JOHNSON FOR FIRST. I WANT TO SAY I'M GLAD THAT THE CITY OF TAMARAC HAS TAKEN THIS OVER IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, RATHER THAN WAITING TO REACH OUT TO BROWARD COUNTY.

ALTHOUGH I DO HAVE SOME CONCERNS. IF YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT OUR YARDS OR YARDS ARE SMALL.

PEOPLE ARE ASKING TO CUT DOWN TREES IS BECAUSE THEY'RE BIG AND THEY'RE OVERTAKING EVERYTHING, AND THEY'RE RUINING OUR SPRINKLER SYSTEM, AND THEN THEY'RE BEING TOLD THEY HAVE TO REPLACE IT WITH EITHER 2 OR 3 TREES.

THERE'S NO ROOM FOR 2 OR 3 TREES. THERE'S ROOM, MAYBE FOR ONE TREE TO REPLACE THE ONE THAT'S BEING TAKEN DOWN.

BUT WHEN YOU THEN REQUEST 2 OR 3 TREES, OUR SPRINKLER SYSTEM IS ALREADY OLD AND DAMAGED.

WE ARE PAYING THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS A YEAR TO TAKE CARE OF A SPRINKLER SYSTEM, BECAUSE THESE TREES ARE GETTING BIG AND GOING INTO THE SPRINKLERS.

SO WE'RE ASKING RESIDENTS TO TRIM THEM, TO CUT THEM DOWN, TO DO WHATEVER.

BUT THEN THEY'RE BEING TOLD THEY HAVE TO PLANT 2 OR 3 MORE TREES.

THAT DEFEATS THE PURPOSE. OUR SPRINKLER SYSTEM CANNOT HANDLE IT.

OUR YARDS ARE SMALL. IF YOU TAKE, FOR INSTANCE, MY YARD, I HAVE ONE PALM TREE IN THE FRONT.

MY BACKYARD IS TEN FEET FROM HIDDEN TRAILS PROPERTY LINE.

WHEN HIDDEN TRAILS WAS PUT IN BETWEEN ME BUYING THE HOUSE AND CLOSING ON THE HOUSE, THEY CAME IN AND THEY PUT A LINE OF HEDGES AND TREES. LO AND BEHOLD, I HAVE FIVE TREES IN MY BACKYARD.

NOT ON MY PROPERTY ON HIDDEN TRAILS. I CANNOT GET HIDDEN TRAILS TO TAKE CARE OF THOSE TREES.

THEREFORE, THEY ARE OVER MY PROPERTY, OVER MY ROOF.

AND SOME OF OUR RESIDENTS ARE HAVING THE THE RACCOONS CLIMB UP THOSE TREES ONTO THEIR ROOFS, DAMAGE THEIR ROOFS. ONE OF OUR RESIDENTS GOT BIT THE OTHER DAY BY A RABID RACCOON.

WE HAVE RABID RACCOONS IN OUR AREA. SHE ENDED UP PROTECTING HER DOG.

KICKING THE RACCOON WHO KEPT COMING AND ATTACKING HER.

SHE ENDED UP IN THE E.R., AND SHE'S NOW ON RABIES SHOTS.

WHEN WE REQUIRE TREES THAT END UP BEING OVER PEOPLE'S PROPERTIES AND PLACES FOR RACCOONS, WHICH WE KNOW WE HAVE A TON OF, WE ARE PUTTING OUR RESIDENTS IN DANGER. SO I WOULD ASK THAT YOU RECONSIDER REQUIREMENTS FOR TREES TO BE ABLE TO

[04:35:09]

ACCOMMODATE SPRINKLER SYSTEM, WILDLIFE, AND RESIDENTS ENJOYMENT OF THEIR PROPERTIES.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK? NO. PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED. ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, I DO SO GOING ALONG THE LINES OF MISS CALLAWAY, YOU'RE FAMILIAR.

WE'VE HAD SOME ISSUES WITH SOME RESIDENTS, AND I'VE ASKED YOU ABOUT PLANTING THREE TREES TO GET TO A CANOPY OF ONE TREE.

DOES THIS RECTIFY THAT SO WE DON'T HAVE TO? IF I READ IT CORRECTLY, GO AHEAD.

YEAH, TO A CERTAIN DEGREE. SO IF YOU REMOVED A TREE PROVIDING THESE ARE NOT FRUIT TREES SO THESE ARE NOT COUNTED.

SO IF YOU REMOVE A TREE BUT YOU'RE STILL NEED IN YOUR MINIMUM REQUIREMENT AND YOU STILL HAVE THREE TREES ON YOUR PROPERTY, NOT COUNTING FRUIT TREES OR AND SO ON, THEN THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT FOR YOU TO REPLACE.

HOWEVER, IF THE TREE THAT IS REMOVED IS IN EXCESS OF 18IN IN DIAMETER AND UNFORTUNATELY WE DON'T HAVE DISCRETION RELATIVE TO THAT.

THE TREE PRESERVATION IS A STATUTORY IT'S A STATE.

THE STATE MANDATES AND THEY GOVERN THAT GOVERN THAT AS WELL AS BROWARD COUNTY.

SO IF THE TREE THAT'S REMOVED IS A SPECIMEN TREE, MEANING THAT IS GREATER THAN 18IN IN DIAMETER.

AND THE REASON WHY I WANTED TO MAKE THE DISTINCTION WHEN YOU'RE OVER 18IN.

THAT TREE IS DECADES OLD, AND SO IT WOULD MORE BE AN ANOMALY.

IT'S NOT A FREQUENCY THAT WE'RE GOING TO SEE.

SO WE THINK THIS CHANGE THAT WE'VE MADE AND AND INCLUDED THIS DISTINCTION WOULD PROVIDE GREATER PROTECTION TO RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS.

SO IF YOUR HOME WAS BUILT BEFORE 2018, YOUR THREE TREES ON YOUR PROPERTY, THESE ARE NOT FRUIT TREES OR WHATEVER.

BUT THERE'S THREE AND IT MEETS THAT, THEN YOU SHOULD BE OKAY.

AND THE TREES FROM 2018 AND BEFORE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE PROBABLY DECADES OLD AND THEY'RE PROBABLY REALLY BIG.

AND ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE TOOK IT BACK SO THE CITY COULD DO THIS IS DUE TO ALL THESE ROOTS THAT WERE DESTROYING RESIDENTS HOMES UNDERGROUND, THEIR SPRINKLER SYSTEMS AND ALL THAT. AND SO WE WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE A MECHANISM TO HELP OUR RESIDENTS NOT HAVE TO CONTINUE TO SUFFER THROUGH IT.

SO THIS 18 DIAMETER. I ONLY HAVE TO PLANT ONE TREE THAT IN THE FUTURE WILL GROW TO THAT 18 INCH DIAMETER.

OR AM I BEING MADE TO PLANT? YOU DON'T? YEAH.

YOU DON'T NEED A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT IF YOU'RE A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.

IF YOU MEET THE REQUIREMENTS, YOU STILL. AND THE TREE THAT YOU HAVE REMOVED IS LESS THAN 18IN IN DIAMETER.

I'M ASKING FOR THE 18 AND ABOVE BECAUSE I HAVE IN MY OLDER OR OLDER COMMUNITIES, WE HAVE 18 AND ABOVE, AND WHETHER MOTHER NATURE IS TAKING THEM DOWN OR WHATEVER, SOME OF THESE PLACES MAY ONLY NOW HAVE TWO OUT OF THE THREE TREE, SO ONE OF THEM IS 18 IN DIAMETER COMES DOWN. AM I NOW STILL RESPONSIBLE OF PLANTING SIX TREES TO GET 18IN, OR DO I HAVE MY ONE TREE THAT I KNOW WHEN IT'S GIVEN? IT'S YEARS TO GROW, IT'LL GROW TO THE 18, SO WE WOULD HAVE TO DO THAT CALCULATION TO SEE IF YOU STILL MEET YOUR MINIMUM REQUIREMENT.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S SIX TREES NECESSARILY, BUT WHAT WE WANTED TO ALSO DO IS TO MAKE SURE THERE'S A FUNDING MECHANISM AVAILABLE IN THE EVENT WE NEED TO ASSESS PROPERTY OWNERS. AND SO I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO ANSWER SPECIFICALLY BASED ON LIKE A SCENARIO.

BUT WE WANT TO THINK WE WANT TO GIVE THESE CHANGES AN OPPORTUNITY TO WORK AND TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL CHANGES.

AND JUST TO REMIND YOU THAT OUR HANDS ARE TIED RELATIVE TO MOST OF THIS TREE STUFF WHEN IT COMES TO THE STATE AND BROWARD COUNTY.

IN FACT, WHEN WE TOOK IT FROM BROWARD COUNTY, WE HAD TO SEND OUR DRAFT ORDINANCE TO THEM FOR THEM TO APPROVE IT BEFORE WE WERE ABLE TO TAKE IT. TAKE IT TO YOU. SO WE REALLY TOOK IT OVER SO WE COULD HAVE CONTROL, BUT ALSO TO PROVIDE CONVENIENCE FOR OUR RESIDENTS.

PART OF THE PROBLEM HAS BEEN IT HAS NOT BEEN AS CONVENIENT BECAUSE ONE WOMAN TAKES OFF ONE TREE WITH A SMALL PROPERTY.

AND NOW IT'S HAD TO PUT SIX TREES OR PAY $205,000 IN FINES.

THAT GRANT MONEY IS NOT GOING TO DO IT AT 100,000.

AND IT JUST SEEMS VERY MUCH MORE COMPLICATED.

SO I'M HEARING YOU THAT HOPEFULLY THESE THINGS ARE TAKING CARE OF SOME OF THAT.

BUT FOR PROPERTIES THAT NOW HAVE MALLS THAT WE'VE PUT UP.

ARE WE STILL EXPECTING THOSE RESIDENTS TO GO AND THROW THEIR HEDGE TRIMMERS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WALL TO NOW TRIM CITY PROPERTY WITH TREES TO MAINTAIN THEM? ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS ARE SUPPOSED TO MAINTAIN CITY PROPERTY.

SO THE ANSWER IS A SWALE IF THEY'RE TRIMMING IT.

YES. AND YEAH. AND IF IT FALLS ON SOMEBODY ELSE'S PROPERTY, I THINK THERE'S AN EXPECTATION JUST TO BE CORDIAL AND ASK, COULD THEY COME OVER AND CLEAN IT UP? SO I'M DRIVING DOWN 57.

[04:40:04]

THEN I HAVE SOME TREES THAT ARE IN THE SWALE AREA.

I HAVE A WALL BACK THERE NOW. DO I HAVE TO CONTINUALLY THROW MY.

ACTUALLY, I'VE SEEN A UNIVERSITY, A COMMERCIAL AND WOODLANDS.

THE PEOPLE ON THE NORTHEAST SIDE HAVE HAD TO THROW THEIR ELECTRICAL OVER SO THEY CAN TRIM THE TREES AND THE GRASS IN THE AREA AROUND THERE.

OH, SO THEY GO OVER ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WALL.

THEY DO THAT, BUT BECAUSE IT'S NOT THEIR PROPERTY, BUT THEY HAVE TO MAINTAIN IT.

YEAH, YOU STILL HAVE TO MAINTAIN THEM. MAYBE WE SHOULD FIGURE OUT THE GRANT MONEY TO HELP THOSE PEOPLE NOT HAVE TO DO IT AND PAY OUR PEOPLE WHO DO. GREAT JOB TO TAKE CARE OF THOSE PARTS OF THE TREES. IT SAYS THAT REMOVAL OF ANY TREE.

AND THERE'S AN EXCEPTION. YOU DON'T NEED A LICENSE, AND YOU DO NEED A LICENSE. HOW ARE WE LETTING OUR PEOPLE KNOW THAT THEY NEED TO EVEN FIND OUT IF THEY SHOULD NEED A LICENSE OR NOT? WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH PIO AND WE'LL UPDATE THAT, BUT WE CONTINUE TO SEND OUT A PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT.

WE HAVE BEEN MARKETING THIS AND LETTING PEOPLE KNOW THAT YOU NEED A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT FOR THIS, SO WE HAVE BEEN CONTINUALLY GETTING THAT INFORMATION OUT.

IN FACT, I THINK WE'VE ALSO PUBLISHED IN THE PROGRAM SOME INFORMATION, AND WE CONTINUE TO DO THAT.

WE SHOULD LET EVERYBODY KNOW THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SOME CHANGES, BECAUSE THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO DON'T READ THAT UP ON PAPER OR NOT.

AND I KNOW STEPHANIE HAS TAKEN IT ON THE ROAD AS WELL WHEN SHE ATTENDS HOA MEETINGS AND SO ON, WE MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE AWARE. EXACTLY. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS NOT TAKING CARE OF HER, BUT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT IT IN THE PAST, WAS SITE TRIANGLES.

I DON'T SEE ANY CHANGES TO THE SITE TRIANGLES.

IF THEY'VE BEEN MADE, THEY'RE NOT HIGHLIGHTED. SO IS THIS COMING IN THE FUTURE? WE HAVE A WE HAVE A DIFFERENT SECTION FROM SIDE TRIANGLE.

BUT LOOK AT THIS LANGUAGE THAT WE PUT IN. YOU SEE.

YOU'RE GOING TO BE TAGGED. SO IF YOU WANT TO TAG ME HERE JUST A SECOND.

YEAH YEAH YEAH. SO IN THIS LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE NEW LANGUAGE, OUR PROPERTY OWNER SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE.

WE PUT IN TREATMENT OF LOW HANGING BRANCHES, THOSE OBSTRUCTING STREET LIGHTING AND AFFECTING REQUIRED SITE DISTANCE STANDARDS.

SO DID YOU SEE THAT LANGUAGE AND THE PRUNING.

SO IT'S IN THE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE. WE PUT IN SOME LANGUAGE, YES, BUT IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE HEIGHT.

THE PROBLEM IS IF YOU TRIM TO 16IN AND IT GROWS TO 18IN, AND BY THEN 18IN, OVER 16IN IS DANGEROUS.

WE HAD TALKED ABOUT LOWERING THE SITE TRIANGLES TO ALLOW FOR GROWTH, BECAUSE THEY COME BY EVERY TWO WEEKS OR WHATEVER IT MAY BE.

WE HAVE A COUPLE OF AREAS IN THE CITY THAT ARE VERY DANGEROUS AND PEOPLE ARE CONTINUING TO COMPLAIN, SUCH AS MCNABB IN 108, COMING OUT ON MCNABB FROM UNIVERSITY, THE PLAZA ON THE SOUTH EAST SIDE.

THE HEDGES ARE TALLER. YOU CAN'T REALLY SEE. SO I COME IN A TRIM TO YOUR MINIMUM, BUT YOUR MINIMUM IS WHERE YOUR SITE REQUIREMENT IS GOOD.

SAME THING WITHIN THE WOODLANDS, BUT I THINK THEY FIX THAT. WHAT ARE WE DOING? SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT IT'S GREATER THAN SIX INCHES? I'M REQUIRED TO GO TO SIX INCHES, RIGHT? I'M TRIMMING MY HEDGES FOR MY SIDE TRIANGLES.

YOU GOT? YEAH. IT'S 30IN. 30IN IS WHEN IT'S TOO HIGH.

CORRECT. SO THOSE YOU KNOW, FOR THE RECORD, THOSE STANDARDS ARE SET BY DOT AND THE GREEN BOOK.

SO IT'S A STATE STANDARD THAT ALL MUNICIPALITIES USE.

SO 30IN IS THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION. ANYTHING ABOVE THAT WILL OBSTRUCT THE SITE TRIANGLE ANALYSIS.

SO WE TELL PEOPLE TO TRIM TO WHAT LEVEL. WE CANNOT TELL PEOPLE TO TRIM.

WHAT WE COULD REQUIRE IS YOU CANNOT PASS THE 30IN.

SO YOU COULD TRIM YOUR YOUR SHRUB TO TEN INCHES AND ALLOW ROOM FOR GROWTH.

BUT WE CANNOT DEPICT THAT. YOU HAVE TO TRIM IT TO THAT LEVEL, ALLOW FOR GROWTH.

SO WE COULD TELL THEM WHAT'S THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT ALLOWED.

SO IT'S 30IN ABOVE THE CURB LEVEL. IS 36IN FROM THE ASPHALT LEVEL.

SO IF WE KNOW THAT 30IN IS WAY TOO DANGEROUS, WE CAN'T BE MORE RESTRICTIVE.

THIS IS ONE OF THEM THAT WE HAVE NO RULES AND REGULATIONS TO SAY.

WE WANT TO TRIM TO THE MAXIMUM OF 25, SO WE KNOW PEOPLE CAN BE SAFE.

I'M USING JUST NUMBERS. I'M NOT YOU KNOW. CORRECT. SO SO IT'S AGAIN IT'S A STANDARD THAT WE FOLLOW.

WE FALL BACK ON THE DOT AND THE GREEN BOOK STANDARD. SO IT'S, IT'S STATEWIDE REGULAR STANDARD OF THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION.

SO YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THE LUXURY TO TELL PEOPLE TO TRIM IT TO, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T KNOW THAT.

WHAT'S THAT? CAN WE LOOK INTO IT? WE CAN'T LOOK INTO IT, DEFINITELY.

BUT PEOPLE CAN ARGUE THE CASE THAT THE LAW STATES IS 36IN FROM THE ASPHALT.

THAT'S THE LAW. SO WE'RE MAKING THE LAW TOO. ALL RIGHT.

SO WE CAN CHECK INTO THAT PLEASE. BECAUSE THAT'S BEEN THE PROBLEM.

[04:45:02]

WE HAVE ACCIDENTS OCCURRING AND PEOPLE COMPLAINING THAT THESE ITEMS AND THESE AREAS ARE NOT BEING TRIMMED OR THEY'RE NOT TRIMMED LOW ENOUGH AND THEY'RE GETTING INTO ACCIDENTS AND THEY HAVE CONCERNS. YEAH. SO WE CAN LOOK INTO THAT FOR THE SECOND READING, BUT THE LANGUAGE THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE IS THAT THESE LOW HANGING BRANCHES AND ALL THESE THINGS NEED TO BE TRIMMED, SO IT'S NOT AFFECTING THE REQUIRED SIGHT DISTANCE STANDARDS.

SO THAT LANGUAGE IS HERE. OKAY. THANK YOU. VICE MAYOR.

YES. AS FAR AS EXCUSE ME, AS FAR AS THE FUNDING I LITERALLY JUST HAD TO USE SOME OF THE THE FUNDING THAT I HAD TO HELP A RESIDENT WITH TO REMOVE A TREE THAT WAS OVER $5,000.

I WAS GLAD THAT THE MONEY WAS THERE TO HELP. RIGHT.

BUT WHAT CAN WE DO IN THE FUTURE? I KNOW YOU SAY TRYING TO SECURE FUNDS.

WHAT? WHAT EXACTLY CAN YOU EXPLAIN EXACTLY WHAT THAT PROCESS WILL BE AND WHO IT WILL BE AVAILABLE TO? YEAH, I KNOW WE DON'T HAVE A PROCESS, VICE MAYOR.

I'M JUST SAYING WE HAVE CHANGE IN LANGUAGE TO ALLOW US TO BE ABLE TO USE A TREE FIRST TREE TRUST FUND ON PRIVATE PROPERTY IF WE NEED TO IN THE FUTURE.

CREATE A PROGRAM. HAVE IT ATTACHED TO THE CURB APPEAL PROGRAM.

DEVELOP SOMETHING. I THINK WE DO BECAUSE I ADJUSTED MY PROGRAM TO INCLUDE THAT.

WHEN I HEARD THAT A RETIREE HAD TO PAY $5,000 PLUS DURING MILITARY PLUS GIVES I THINK 600 TO THAT FUND, RIGHT? WHICH IS MONEY SHE DIDN'T HAVE TO BEGIN WITH.

SO THAT'S A PROBLEM. SOMETHING IN THE FUTURE.

THIS LANGUAGE IS GIVING US THE ABILITY TO DO THAT SO THAT WE CAN WE TAKE IT FURTHER AND THEN, YES, INCLUDE IT IN THE CURB APPEAL AND ANYTHING ELSE WE CAN TO ENSURE THAT THESE RESIDENTS GET HELP.

SURE WE CAN. WE CAN DEVELOP SOMETHING AND BRING IT BACK TO YOU. THANK YOU.

SEEING NO FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

COMMISSIONER PATTERSON. YES. MAYOR GOMEZ. YES.

COMMISSIONER RICE. YES. COMMISSIONER BOLTON. YES.

VICE MAYOR. DANIEL. YES. THANK YOU. MOTION PASSES 5 TO 0.

THANK YOU. WE ARE AT 7BTO2598. CITY ATTORNEY.

[7.b TO2598 - An Ordinance of the City Commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida, amending Chapter 10, Article 5 of the City of Tamarac Land Development Code, entitled “Development Review Procedures,” by amending Section 10- 5.2, entitled “Summary Table of Development Review Procedures” , specifically Table 10-5.1 and Table 10-5.2, entitled “General Notice Requirements”; and amending Subsection 10-5.4(J), entitled “Plat Approval,” to designate the Director of Community Development as the administrative authority for plat and replat submittals, and to revise plat approval procedures in compliance with Senate Bill 784, amending Section 177.071 Florida Statutes, as set forth in Exhibit “A”; providing for codification; providing for conflicts; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date.]

PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD. SEVEN B AN ORDINANCE OF CITY COMMISSIONER TAMARAC AMENDING CHAPTER TEN, ARTICLE FIVE OF CITY OF TAMARAC LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES BY AMENDING SECTION TEN 5.2 ENTITLED SUMMARY OF TABLE OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES, SPECIFICALLY TEN DASH 5.1 TEN DASH 5.2 ENTITLED GENERAL NOTICE REQUIREMENT AMENDING SUBSECTION TEN DASH 5.4 J ENTITLED PLAT APPROVAL TO DESIGNATE THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AS ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY FOR PLAT AND REPLANT SUBMITTALS AND REVISE PLAT APPROVAL PROCEDURES IN COMPLIANCE WITH SENATE BILL 789, PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE.

SO MOVED. I AM LOOKING FOR A MOTION. SECOND MOVED.

I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BOLTON AND I HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PATTERSON.

FULL PRESENTATION WAS ON THIS ITEM AT THE STAFF REVIEW WORKSHOP ON THE 25TH.

I'D LIKE TO HEAR A PRESENTATION AND THAT WAS WHAT WAS GOING TO BE ASKED FOR ANYWAY.

MISS CALLAWAY. THANK YOU, MAYOR, AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.

FOR THE RECORD MAXINE CALLOWAY DEPUTY CITY MANAGER.

THIS ITEM. IS A COMPLIANCE ITEM, BUT THE STATE OF FLORIDA ADOPTED SEVERAL BILLS AS A PART OF THEIR LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION, AND SENATE BILLS 787 WAS ADOPTED THAT NEEDED TO TAKE EFFECT JULY 1ST.

THAT TOOK EFFECT JULY 1ST, 2025. ESSENTIALLY, THE ITEM TITLE HAS BEEN READ INTO THE RECORD.

THIS IS REGARDING MAKING THE PROCESS FOR A PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE AS OPPOSED TO A PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS, WHICH IT WAS BEFORE JULY 1ST. AND SO FOR EVERYONE'S BENEFIT, A PLANT IS JUST AN OFFICIAL MAP THAT SHOWS HOW LAND IS DIVIDED FOR DEVELOPMENT.

IT INCLUDES DEDICATION, ROAD DEDICATION AND SUBDIVISION, AND IT'S TYPICALLY PREPARED BY A LICENSED SURVEYOR.

AND FLORIDA STATUTE ONE 7791 TELLS YOU WHAT NEEDS TO BE IN A PLANT, OR THE REQUIREMENT THAT NEEDS TO BE IN APPLIED.

WHY ARE WE UPDATING? AS I SAID BEFORE, SENATE BILL 784 WAS EFFECTIVE JULY 1ST, 2025, AND IT REQUIRES THAT CITY DESIGNATE FIRST AND ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY FOR PLAT AND PLAT APPROVALS, MEET SPECIFIC REVIEW TIMELINES.

THEY WANTED TO ENSURE THAT WE WERE TIMELY IN PROCESSING THESE APPLICATION, AND IT ALSO LIMIT DELAYED THROUGH EXTENSION REQUESTS.

AND SO WE CAN'T EXTEND GIVEN THE EXTENSIONS WE HAVE TO PROCESS IN A TIMELY MANNER.

[04:50:03]

AND THE PURPOSE IS TO STREAMLINE THE PLAT REVIEW PROCESS AND TO ENSURE CONSISTENCY AND PREDICTABILITY STATEWIDE.

SO OUR CURRENT PROCESS AND BROAD COUNTY PROCESS HAS BEEN THE PLOT IS SUBMITTED TO.

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. IT IS TAKEN BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD.

THE PLANNING BOARD PROVIDES A RECOMMENDATION TO A PUBLIC HEARING. AND THEN IT'S TAKEN TO YOU THROUGH A PUBLIC HEARING. THAT'S OUR CURRENT PROCESS. OR TO PUT IT MORE SPECIFICALLY, THE PROCESS BEFORE JULY 1ST, 2025. WHAT IS CHANGING NOW IS TO PROVIDE MORE ACCOUNTABILITY AND CLARITY. STATEWIDE IS THAT SENATE BILL 784 REQUIRES NOW IT BE ADMINISTRATIVE.

SO IT COMES INTO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. IT WOULD HAVE TO BE PROCESSED WITHIN A TIME CERTAIN.

WE WOULD HAVE TO ISSUE A LETTER WITHIN LIKE SEVEN DAYS TO LET THEM KNOW THIS IS THE TIMELINE FOR THE PROCESS.

AND THIS IS YOUR APPLICATION IS COMPLETE. AND SO THAT'S THE CHANGE.

SO IN ORDER TO EFFECTUATE THAT CHANGE WE NEEDED TO MAKE SOME CHANGES IN OUR CODE BECAUSE OUR CODE WAS WRITTEN.

OF COURSE, TO MAKE IT PUBLIC HEARING. AND WE NEEDED TO STRIKE THAT AND MAKE THOSE CHANGES SO WE CAN ALIGN AND CONFORM WITH THE REQUIREMENT.

AND SO WHAT'S IN RED IS THE CHANGES. SO AS YOU CAN SEE THAT WE HAVE ADDED OR REPLACED BECAUSE THE STATUTE ALSO PROVIDES FOR REPLANT WITH THE TREE REMOVAL.

AS A PART OF THE CHANGE, WE REALIZED THAT THIS WAS STILL MAKING REFERENCE TO BROWARD COUNTY.

SO AS A PART OF THIS PROCESS, WE JUST WENT AHEAD AND CLEAN THAT UP IN THE CITY'S CODE UNDER TABLE TEN 5.2, YOU HAVE THE PLAT APPROVAL PROCESS AND THE NOTICE PROVISION.

WE STRUCK ALL OF THAT BECAUSE NO LONGER ARE WE ALLOWED TO DO A PUBLIC HEARING AND TO PROVIDE NOTICE.

SO THAT HAS BEEN STRICKEN ON THE TABLE. 1010 5.4 UNDER THE PURPOSE.

AS YOU CAN SEE, WE HAVE ADDED RE PLAT TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE STATE LAW.

AND THEN WE HAVE ADDED TO THE COMPLIANCE LANGUAGE AND REFERENCED THE APPROPRIATE STATUTE.

177 .071 2025, AS AMENDED. UNDER THE PROCEDURE.

TABLE TEN 5.4 J3. WE STRUCK QUITE A BIT OF LANGUAGE.

THIS IS THE LANGUAGE THAT TALKS ABOUT THE PLANNING BOARD REVIEW BY THE PLANNING BOARD STANDARDS.

AT THE PLANNING BOARD REVIEW BY THE CITY COMMISSION THAT HAD TO BE STRICKEN, AND THAT HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH THE ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY LANGUAGE.

CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW, WE HAD TO ADD THE APPLICATION SUBMITTAL AND THE APPLICATION REVIEW, WHICH GIVES US SEVEN DAYS AFTER RECEIVING THE COMPLETE PLAT OR PLAT SUBMITTAL FOR US TO PROVIDE WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE APPLICANT ACKNOWLEDGING RECEIPT, AND THAT WRITTEN NOTICE NEED TO INCLUDE SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, WHETHER ANY DOCUMENTS ARE MISSING, AND IT HAS TO SPECIFY THE APPLICABLE APPROVAL SCHEDULE IN THAT NOTICE.

AND OF COURSE, THERE IS A RESTRICTION. WE'VE HAVE ADDED THAT WE CANNOT PROVIDE ANY EXTENSION.

THE PLANNING BOARD PROVIDED APPROVAL UNANIMOUSLY, AND THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR IS PROPOSING THAT THIS COMMISSION ADOPT THE PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVE THE ITEM.

THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

NOW OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS. ANYBODY WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM SEEING NONE.

PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED. SEEING NO DISCUSSION FROM THE COMMISSION.

CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. MAYOR GOMEZ MAYOR.

YES, MY LIGHT IS ON. IT WASN'T BECAUSE I LOOKED AT IT AS I WAS SAYING THOSE WORDS TO BRING IT TO ROLL CALL, SO I HAVE NO PROBLEM. COMMISSIONER PATTERSON, WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO SAY? THANK YOU. MAYOR. I JUST WOULD ASK THAT WE. I'M ACTUALLY LOOKING FOR A REVISION.

I THINK JUST IN AN ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION, IT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE THAT WE DEFER THE LANGUAGE TO OR THE APPROVAL TO THE MANAGER OR ITS DESIGNEE. I THINK THAT COULD BE A LITTLE BIT BETTER FOR JUST PURPOSES OF A NUMBER OF THINGS.

WHAT IF OUR DIRECTOR IS OUT ON VACATION OR, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, I THINK THAT IT POTENTIALLY COULD BE BETTER IF IT'S IT'S IF IT'S LABELED THAT WAY, IF THERE'S NO DISCREPANCY WITH THE WAY STATE THE SENATE BILL IS DRAFTED.

AND BASED ON WHAT I READ, IT SEEMS AS THOUGH AS LONG AS IT IS A MUNICIPAL OFFICIAL, IT SHOULD BE FINE.

AND I WOULD ASK THAT MY COLLEAGUES SUPPORT THAT.

SO YOU WISH TO SAY SOMETHING? NO, MAYOR, I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.

THAT FALLS IN LINE WITH THE THE LANGUAGE WE USE IN OTHER SIMILAR OCCASIONS.

I ACCEPT THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. ON THAT FOR A DISCUSSION.

I'M PRESUMING, COMMISSIONER PATTERSON, SINCE YOU WERE THE SECOND, YOU HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. SO THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT IS ON THE FLOOR REGARDING IT BEING INSTEAD OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, IT IS NOW THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE.

[04:55:04]

I'M GOING TO ASK MISS CALLOWAY WHEN IT COMES TO THINGS IN OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND REVIEW PROCEDURES.

WHO IS USUALLY THE PERSON THAT HAS BEEN THROUGHOUT OUR POLICY? THE ONE TO REVIEW AND MAKE DOES MAKE DECISIONS.

IT'S USUALLY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR THROUGHOUT.

BUT THIS BODY I THINK RECENTLY WE HAVE MADE SOME CHANGES IN CHAPTER TEN THAT HAS HAD THE CITY MANAGER'S DESIGNEE, AND WE HAVE PUT THAT IN. SO I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THAT CHANGE.

IT WOULD STILL BE THAT INDIVIDUAL, I'M CERTAIN, BECAUSE THE APPLICATION IS FILED IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. OKAY.

THANK YOU. CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. MAYOR GOMEZ.

YES. VICE MAYOR. DANIEL. YES. COMMISSIONER. BOLTON.

YES, COMMISSIONER. PATTERSON. YES. COMMISSIONER.

WRIGHT. YES. THANK YOU. MOTION PASSES 5 TO 1.

I MEAN, 5 TO 0. AS AMENDED. WE ARE UP TO 7CTO2601.

[7.c TO2601 - An Ordinance of the City Commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida amending Chapter 10, Article 5 of the City of Tamarac Code of Ordinances, entitled “Administration”, by amending Section 10-5.3 entitled “Common Review Procedures” by specifically amending Section 10-5.3(C) entitled “Pre- Application Neighborhood Meeting” to require pre-application neighborhood meetings to be open to the public, and to require actual notice to owners of properties within a townhouse, condominium, or timeshare development; providing for codification; providing for conflicts; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date.]

CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD.

YES. ORDINANCE SEVEN C AND ORDINANCE. CITY COMMISSIONER, CITY OF TAMARAC, AMENDING CHAPTER TEN, ARTICLE FIVE OF THE CITY TEMPORARY COURT OF ORDINANCE ENTITLED ADMINISTRATION AMENDED CHAPTER TEN DASH 5.3 ENTITLED COMMON REVIEW PROCEDURES BY SPECIFICALLY AMENDING SECTION TEN, DASH 5.3 C AND TITLE PRE-APPLICATION NEIGHBORHOOD MEAN.

TO REQUIRE PRE-APPLICATION NEIGHBORHOOD MEANS TO BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AND REQUIRE ACTION.

NOTICE TO OWNERS OF PROPERTIES WITHIN A TOWNHOUSE, CONDOMINIUM OR TIMESHARE DEVELOPMENT FILED FOR EFFECTIVE DATE.

THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. THANK YOU. I'LL TAKE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

MOVE IT. SECOND, THINK THERE IS A MOTION BY BOLTON, A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PATTERSON.

THANK YOU. GOMEZ. NOW, SINCE WE HAVE BEEN DOING ALL OF THESE ITEMS IN THE PRESENTATION, UNLESS IT WISHES TO BE WAIVED, NO ONE ELSE WISHES THIS ITEM TO BE PRESENTED.

EVERYONE'S FINE WITHOUT IT BEING PRESENTED. THEN WE WILL NOT HAVE THE PRESENTATION.

PUBLIC COMMENTS. ANYBODY WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? NO ONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED.

DISCUSSION BY THE COMMISSION, COMMISSIONER PATTERSON. THANK YOU. MAYOR.

THIS ITEM IS WAS BROUGHT FORTH BY REQUEST OF MYSELF.

AND JUST TO PROVIDE THE COMMISSION WITH SOME CONTEXT.

OBVIOUSLY YOU KNOW, I'VE HAD SOME, SOME OPPORTUNITY TO JUST KIND OF OBSERVE THE MANNER IN WHICH, YOU KNOW, I, OUR, OUR CITY GOVERNMENT OPERATES AND I THINK WE MIGHT ALL RECALL A COUPLE MONTHS BACK THERE WAS AN APPLICATION, A PRE-APPLICATION MADE BY KINGS POINT TO TO REZONE A PARCEL THAT SITS ON JUST OFF NOB HILL. AND THAT PARTICULAR PRE-APPLICATION DID STIR QUITE A BIT OF DISCONTENT.

I WOULD, I WOULD VENTURE TO SAY AMONG THE COMMUNITY FOR VARIOUS REASONS.

WITHOUT GETTING INTO ALL OF THE NITTY GRITTY AND ALL THE PARTICULARS ON ALL THE VARIOUS ISSUES THAT I HAD WITH THAT PARTICULAR MATTER I THOUGHT IT WAS APPROPRIATE BASED ON SOME OF THE, SOME OF THE PROCESS TO HAVE THE COMMISSION CONSIDER AND REVISING THE MANNER IN WHICH NOTIFICATION, PUBLICATION MEETINGS, ETC. ARE HELD WITH RESPECT TO PRE APPLICATIONS FOR REZONING SPECIFICALLY. YOU MIGHT YOU MIGHT NOTICE THAT THERE THERE ARE SOME, SOME CHANGES IN THE ZONING CODE RELATIVE TO WHAT IT IS THAT I'M BRINGING FORWARD. I DID HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH SEVERAL RESIDENTS WHO WERE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THE CHANGES THAT WERE BEING PROPOSED. BUT JUST TO KIND OF HIGHLIGHT A, BECAUSE I DIDN'T GET INVITED TO THE, TO THE THE CONFERENCE IN ORLANDO. I PERSONALLY WAS HERE AND I DID WATCH THE THE MEETING ON MONDAY AND STAFF DELIVERED A PRESENTATION.

AND I THINK THAT THERE WERE A COUPLE OF AREAS IN WHICH I WASN'T SURE WERE NECESSARILY ENTIRELY ACCURATE.

SO I DO WANT TO JUST PROVIDE FOR SOME CLARIFICATION.

IT'S IT'S I THINK IT WAS STATED ON THE RECORD MANAGER THAT THE PROCESS CURRENTLY CALLS FOR COMMUNITY MEETINGS.

BUT I THINK TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE SPECIFIC.

THE CODE REQUIRES A PRE-APPLICATION MEETING FOR THOSE WHO ARE WITHIN A 400 FOOT RADIUS OF THE PROPOSED REZONING. SO ON RECORD, IT WAS THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, IT WAS STATED THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S ALREADY THE CODE ALREADY CALLS FOR THAT.

[05:00:09]

BUT I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THE CODE IS VERY SPECIFIC.

IT SAYS 400 FOOT RADIUS. WHAT WAS ALARMING TO THE RESIDENTS IN KINGS POINT, AND IT WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION, WAS THAT THOSE THAT LIVE IN KINGS POINT, THE OWNERS OF THE CONDO UNITS WHO DON'T LIVE WITHIN A 400 FOOT RADIUS, DID NOT NECESSARILY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT PRE-APPLICATION MEETING BECAUSE AS FOR OUR CODE, THEY WEREN'T THE THE APPLICANT WASN'T REQUIRED TO SEND THAT NOTICE.

IS THAT ACCURATE? THAT'S ACCURATE. OKAY. SO SO WE WE WE WENT AHEAD AND MADE SOME PROVISION. TO THE TO THE TO THE, TO THE EXISTING CODE THAT STATES THAT THE MEETING SHALL BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AND ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC MAY ATTEND THE MEETING.

THE MEETING SHALL BE RECORDED BY THE APPLICANT.

IN TERMS OF ADDITIONAL CHANGES UNDER SECTION SUBSECTION B, I B, I THINK THIS IS KIND OF WHERE THINGS GOT REALLY MURKY. AND IT WAS REALLY IMPORTANT TO ME TO MAKE SURE THAT IN AN ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION AND IN TRUE TRANSPARENCY ON REAL SUBSTANTIVE MATTERS, THAT THE COMMUNITY THAT REALLY CARES ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING IN AND AROUND THEM, BECAUSE, I MEAN, I THINK WE KIND OF PLAY ON WORDS AROUND HERE AND PICK AND CHOOSE WHAT WE THINK IS TRANSPARENT.

EVERYONE DOESN'T CARE ABOUT EVERYTHING, BUT PEOPLE CARE ABOUT WHAT'S IN THEIR BACKYARD. AND AND SO WITH RESPECT TO BEING SUBSTANTIVE AND IN OUR IN OUR IN OUR ATTEMPTS TO BE TRANSPARENT.

TRANSPARENT. THANK YOU. THE LANGUAGE SAYS OR SAID THE NOTICE MAY BE MAILED TO THE PRESIDENT OR MANAGER.

SO A PRE-APPLICATION NOTICE FOR A ZONING CHANGE MAY BE MAILED TO THE PRESIDENT OR MANAGER OF THE DEVELOPMENT'S PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION INSTEAD OF INDIVIDUAL UNIT OWNERS.

THIS IS THE WAY OUR CODE HAS BEEN DRAFTED. SO WHEN PEOPLE SEE NEW THINGS, THEY DON'T KNOW WHY THEY DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT IT, THEY ARE UPSET ABOUT IT. IT'S BECAUSE IT'S THE WAY THAT OUR THESE ARE THERE ARE REAL SYSTEMIC ISSUES WITH THE WAY OUR CODE IS DRAFTED.

AND IN ORDER FOR US TO BE TRANSPARENT, WE HAVE TO TAKE A REAL BOLD LOOK AT WHAT WE HAVE ON OUR BOOKS AND MAKE SURE THAT IT IS INCLUSIVE.

BECAUSE WHILE WHILE 1ST MAY NOT NECESSARILY CARE, AT LEAST THIS BODY MAY BE OPTION AND THE OPPORTUNITY AVAILABLE.

WHEN I SPOKE WITH THE APPLICANT, I WAS TOLD THAT THEY WERE HAVING A CLOSE MEETING WITH THEIR HOA BOARD.

I HAD A REAL PROBLEM WITH THAT, BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WOULD CARE ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS IN THEIR IN THEIR BACKYARD.

SO WHAT WE DID WAS WE'RE PROFFERING A CHANGE THAT SAYS THE NOTICE SHALL BE MAILED TO THE PRESIDENT OR MANAGER.

AND THAT AND PREVIOUSLY SAID INSTEAD OF THE INDIVIDUAL OWNERS, NOW IT SAYS AND THE INDIVIDUAL UNIT OWNERS.

SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR THAT IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO ME.

OBVIOUSLY THERE'S SOME ADDITIONAL CHANGES HERE TO INCLUDE. PUBLICATION NOTICE BEING POSTED ON SOCIAL MEDIA ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE WILL TAKE EVERY MEASURE TO ENSURE THAT THOSE THAT ARE AROUND A PROJECT ARE FAMILIAR AND AWARE THAT A ZONING APPLICATION IS BEING MADE.

BUT IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT TO ME TO ENSURE THAT WE AMENDED THE LANGUAGE TO ENSURE THAT THOSE THAT CARE ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THEIR BACKYARD KNOW ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THEIR COMMUNITY. AND SO WITH THAT SAID, I.

I ASK THE COMMISSION TO SUPPORT THIS THIS ITEM.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE REQUESTS FOR MAKING SURE IT'S MANDATORY TO BE MAILED TO THE PRESIDENT OR MANAGER AND INDIVIDUAL UNIT OWNERS.

I'M NOT GOING TO GET INTO THE NITTY GRITTY OF WHEN PEOPLE SAID THAT THEY DID THIS OR DIDN'T DO THAT FROM THE COMMUNITY ON THIS, AND HOW MANY MEETINGS WERE ACTUALLY ALREADY DONE.

FOR THE POSTED NOTICE AND PUBLICATION. IT'S PUBLIC.

IT'S PUBLIC RECORD ANYWAY, SO I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT.

UNFORTUNATELY, I AM NOT ABLE TO ACCEPT A THREE.

IT'S A BUT IT'S NUMBER THREE. THE MEETING SHALL BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, AND ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC MAY ATTEND THE MEETING.

ONE PART AND THE MEETING SHALL BE RECORDED BY THE APPLICANT.

DEPENDING ON THE APPLICANT, THEY MAY NOT HAVE THE CAPITAL OR THE ABILITY TO DO SO.

WHEN YOU USUALLY HAVE THE MEETINGS ON YOUR OWN PROPERTY AND IF THEY DON'T HAVE THE EQUIPMENT TO DO SO, WE ARE MAKING IT HARD FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO COMPLY.

[05:05:02]

THE OTHER PART IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. IF IT'S AN ASSOCIATION THAT'S TRYING TO CHANGE SOMETHING, THE ASSOCIATION RULES ARE THAT THEIR PRIVATE.

JUST LIKE WHEN PEOPLE CAME THROUGH THE WOODLANDS, YOU COULDN'T COME IN THERE. YOU WERE NOT AFFECTED. IT WAS THE WOODLANDS COMMUNITY. YOU HAD EIGHT HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS AND UNLESS YOU WERE INVITED TO IT, YOU COULDN'T COME IN BECAUSE IT WAS PRIVATE TO THE COMMUNITY.

WE CANNOT I DON'T BELIEVE WE CAN. MISS GALLOWAY.

MAYBE YOU COULD TELL ME THE ANSWER TO THIS. ARE WE AUTHORIZED, MISS GALLOWAY? ARE WE ABLE TO MAKE RULES THAT ALLOW US TO OVERRULE THE HO'S PRIVACY AND BEING PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS MAYOR.

THESE MEETINGS ARE NOT MEANT TO BE PRIVATE. THEY'RE NOT MEANT TO BE JUST FOR THE HOA.

THESE PRE-APPLICATION MEETINGS WERE PUT ON THE BOOK IN 2018.

IT'S NOT JUST FOR REZONING, IT'S FOR A FEW MORE APPLICATIONS.

I THINK IT'S A TOTAL OF FIVE DIFFERENT APPLICATIONS THAT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THIS.

IT WAS INTENDED TO BE PUBLIC, ALTHOUGH IT HAS A NOTICE OR RADIUS AREA.

IT IS TO GATHER FEEDBACK FROM RESIDENTS OF THE COMMUNITY TO SEE HOW THAT MIGHT INFORM THE PROJECT.

SO IT WAS NOT INTENDED TO BE FOR A PRIVATE BOARD OR PRIVATE HOA.

IT'S INTENDED TO INFORM THE COMMUNITY AND TO SOLICIT FEEDBACK.

WELL, THE COMMUNITY THAT'S BEING ACCUSED OF ONLY HAVING IT TO THE BOARD IS INCORRECT.

BUT AGAIN, I'M NOT GOING TO SAY THEY SHOULD NOT. THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN A PRIVATE USE. BUT IT WASN'T.

IT WAS ONLY FOR HOMEOWNERS, THOUGH. THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING YOU THE QUESTION THAT I'M NOT GETTING THE ANSWER ON.

OKAY, I'M AN HOA. VERY RARE THAT AN HOA REZONE, RESULTS.

RIGHT. THIS IS NOT NORMAL. AND IT'S NOT JUST A RESULT.

I MEAN, IF YOU'RE DOING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, A REZONING, A SITE PLAN APPLICATION, OR A SITE SPECIFIC LAND USE AMENDMENT. THOSE ARE THE APPLICATIONS THAT REQUIRE THIS PRE-APPLICATION MEETING.

FINE. MY PROPERTY. THE PROPERTY OWNERS IS A PRIVATE COMMUNITY.

THERE ARE RULES AND REGULATIONS ABOUT THE BUSINESS OF THEIR COMMUNITY, HAVE IN THEIR RULES THAT THEY ARE ONLY OPEN TO MEMBERS OF THEIR COMMUNITY. IS THE CITY ALLOWED TO OPEN THE DOORS OF THEIR COMMUNITY TO THE PUBLIC? MAYOR. THIS PRE-APPLICATION MEETING THE RADIUS IS WITHIN 400FT.

AS MENTIONED BY THE COMMISSIONER, IT'S NOT INTENDED.

SO I'M NOT FOLLOWING. WHEN YOU'RE, SAY, OPEN THE DOORS.

SO ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WITHIN THE 400FT RADIUS ARE INVITED TO ATTEND THE MEETING.

THAT WAS THE INTENT OF THIS LANGUAGE. SO IT'S NOT.

IF THE HOA NEEDS A PRIVATE MEETING TO GAIN APPROVAL, THEN THEY CONDUCT THAT SEPARATE, BUT TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS LANGUAGE.

WE'RE NOT ON THE SAME PAGE. YEAH. OKAY. SO IT'S NOT ONLY THE BOARD, RIGHT? IT'S ALL THESE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THIS COMMUNITY.

IT'S A PRIVATE COMMUNITY. SO THE APPLICANT WHO MIGHT NOT BE THE HOA IN THIS CASE IS THE HOA, SAID THE APPLICANT, 13TH FLOOR. THEY DID IT TO ALL THE APPLICANT.

THEY HAVE TO INVITE EVERYONE WITHIN 400FT TO COME TO THE MEETING AND TO LOOK AT THIS PROJECT AND TO SOLICIT COMMENTS.

SO IN THIS CASE, IT HAPPENED TO BE A HOA THAT WAS ALSO THE APPLICANT.

AND SO WE'RE. AMENDING THE CODE IN ONLY THESE INSTANCES.

IF IT'S AN IF, IT'S IF IT'S A CONDOMINIUM, THE SECTION THAT SAYS IT SHALL BE GIVEN IS IN INSTANCES IF THE APPLICATION IS WITHIN A CONDOMINIUM, IN A TIMESHARE. I THINK WHAT THE LANGUAGE SAYS IN THOSE INSTANCES, THEN THE RESIDENTS MUST BE NOTIFIED AS WELL.

BUT IF IT'S THE 13TH FLOOR OR WHATEVER AND IT'S NOT A CONDOMINIUM, THEN YOU'RE SENDING NOTICE TO PEOPLE WITHIN 400FT AND INVITING THEM TO COME. AND THIS IS THE APPLICATION WE INTEND TO FILE.

THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. GIVE ME YOUR FEEDBACK IN YOUR COMMENT.

SO I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED BECAUSE ALSO 400FT WE HAVE WITH COLONY WEST, IF THERE'S ANYTHING TO BE DONE.

SO IT WOULD BE 400FT AND IT INCLUDES CONDOS. BUT WE DIDN'T CARE IF IT SPLIT THE CONDOMINIUM, BECAUSE IF YOU'RE 401FT, WE WEREN'T GIVING YOU NOTICE.

SO BUT YEAH THAT'S NOT YEAH. THAT'S FOR THE THAT WAS JUST FOR THE RESOLUTION FOR THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.

BUT FOR, FOR FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS ORDINANCE WHERE THE NEIGHBORING LANDS ARE PART OF A TOWNHOUSE, IF YOU'RE A PART OF A CONDOMINIUM OR YOU'RE PART OF A TIMESHARE DEVELOPMENT, THEN THAT'S WHEN THEY KNOW THEY SHALL BE MAILED TO THE PRESIDENT AS WELL AS INDIVIDUAL INDIVIDUAL UNITS. AGAIN, I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH THAT.

THAT'S NOT MY QUESTION. OKAY. MY QUESTION IS IF AN APPLICANT.

LET ME REPHRASE IT THIS WAY. IF IT'S 13TH FLOOR, IT'S A IT'S A BUSINESS APPLICANT.

IT'S DIFFERENT RIGHT. BECAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE INVOLVED WHEN IT COMES TO THAT.

BUT IF IT'S A COMMUNITY WISHING TO DO SOMETHING FOR ITS COMMUNITY WITH PROPERTY THAT IT PAYS FOR, IS IT RIGHT TO GO AGAINST THE COMMUNITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS THAT THERE MEETINGS ARE ONLY FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE PROPERTY

[05:10:05]

OWNERS? YES, BECAUSE THAT COMMUNITY IS FILING AN APPLICATION WITH THE CITY OF TAMARAC AND IS A PART OF THAT APPLICATION PROCESS.

THE CITY OF TAMARAC REQUIRES THAT THAT COMMUNITY, AS PRIVATE AS YOU MIGHT BE, MUST NOTIFY THESE PEOPLE AS A PART OF THAT APPLICATION THAT YOU FILED WITH US. THIS IS NOT ABOUT NOTIFYING PEOPLE.

NOTIFY THEM. LET ME ADD OKAY. YEAH. IT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.

IF AN APPLICANT MUST USE A PROPERTY OWNER WHO SEEKS TO REZONE SEEKS A NEW DEVELOPMENT.

THE CITY HAS RULES IN PLACE. PRE-APPLICATION MEETING REQUIREMENT THAT THEY MUST FOLLOW.

NOTWITHSTANDING THE FACT THAT IF THE APPLICANT IS A HOA OR DEVELOPER, LIKE 13 FLOOR, WHATEVER THE RULES OF THE CITY, THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO FOLLOW NOTWITHSTANDING THEIR STATUS.

LEGAL STATUS. SO THIS IS THE RULE OF THE CITY, AND THE CITY CAN IMPOSE THOSE RULES NOTWITHSTANDING, IF THE APPLICANT IS A HOA AND HAS RULES THAT THEY HAVE TO GOVERN BY THE STATE.

BUT THE CITY RULES RESPECT TO THE ZONING PROCESS CONTROLS.

SO BASICALLY THOUGH, THEN TAKING IT TO MAYBE MESHING BOTH OF WHAT'S BEING SAID, THE 400FT, IF I'M NOT PART OF THAT PRIVATE COMMUNITY. I LIVE IN ANOTHER COMMUNITY.

I'M NOT PART OF THIS AREA. I DO HAVE ACCESS TO COME IN.

I AM PUBLIC, I GUESS THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

BUT THEN IT SHOULD BE. THE MEETING SHALL BE OPEN TO THOSE PEOPLE WHO LIVE 400 IN THE 400 RADIUS, BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONES WHO HAVE THE RIGHT TO MAKE COMMENTS AND SAY THINGS. AND FOR WHEN THERE IS, THIS APPLICANT IS SAYING THAT IT'S BEEN REVIEWED IN THE HEARING, HAS TO BE SCHEDULED AFTER THE SUMMARY IS PROVIDED, ARE YOU GOING TO BASE IT ON A SUMMARY OF SOMEBODY WHO LIVES TWO MILES AWAY, WHO COMES TO THIS MEETING, OR ARE YOU GOING TO BE LEFT? IS THE ONE GIVING US THE SUMMARY? SO NOW THE CHANGE THAT HAS BEEN MADE IS THAT IN THE SUMMARY WAS ALWAYS REQUIRED.

CORRECT. IN ADDITION TO THE SUMMARY. NOW THE APPLICANT HAS TO RECORD THE MEETING.

SO THE APPLICANT IS RECORDING THE MEETING AND PROVIDING THE SUMMARY WHICH THEY ALREADY DO.

AND THEN AS A PART OF THE CHANGES, THAT SUMMARY NOW HAS TO BE PROVIDED TO YOU OR PROVIDED TO THE PLANNING BOARD.

WELL, IT'S ALSO SAYS MORE BECAUSE IT'S ALWAYS BEEN NEEDED TO BE PROVIDED TO THE PLANNING BOARD.

IT ALWAYS HAS. INSTEAD, ITS NO HEARING SHALL BE HELD OR SCHEDULED UNTIL THE SUMMARY HAS BEEN PROVIDED, WHICH CAN CREATE A FEW PROBLEMS WITH OUR SCHEDULING OF THINGS FOR THE APPLICANTS IN GENERAL, BECAUSE WE HEAR ABOUT ALL THE TIME WHERE WE NEED TO RUSH THINGS, THEY NEED TO RUSH THINGS WE MISS, THEY MISS SOMETHING OR WE MISS SOMETHING, AND THERE'S BEEN DELAYS AND THEN THIS SHALL CAN CAUSE SOME ISSUES FOR THOSE WHO ARE DOING IT RIGHT.

THEY'RE GOING TO GIVE THE SUMMARY, BUT THEY MISS THEIR THE WAY THEY'VE SCHEDULED THINGS WITHIN THE PERIOD OF TIME.

THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO HAVE IT. DONE BEFORE SCHEDULING.

SO I HAVE A LITTLE CONCERN ABOUT THAT. AND I DON'T HAVE THE DEC CALENDAR.

I DON'T HAVE ALL THAT STUFF. BUT YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING FOR THE PLANNING BOARD AND BEFORE THAT THE DRC REVIEW.

SO I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THAT. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THEM PROVIDING IT.

IT'S ALREADY REQUIRED. I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH SAYING THAT IT'S MORE THAT I HAVE TWO MORE MINUTES AND I CAN TALK.

THANK YOU. MY CUCKOO CLOCK. WE HAVE. I WOULD SAY THAT THE MEETING BEING OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, IF YOU WANT TO PHRASE IT THAT WAY, SHOULD BE TO THOSE IN THE 400 RADIUS, BECAUSE YOU'RE RIGHT, THOSE PEOPLE HAVE A SAY. BUT TO ALLOW SOMEBODY FROM A DIFFERENT PART OF THE CITY TO COME IN, OR EVEN IN A DIFFERENT CITY, OUT OF THIS COUNTY OR ANYWHERE ELSE TO COME IN AND BE ABLE TO BE HEARD AND TO BE PART OF THE BACKUP AND THE CONVERSATION OF THESE FIVE ITEMS THAT YOU SAY THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE PRE-APPLICATION MEETINGS ABOUT, I THINK THAT IS ADDING OTHER PEOPLE'S INTEREST IN THERE THAT DO NOT BELONG IN THE CONVERSATION. SO AND AGAIN, I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE SHALL BE RECORDED, I WOULD SAY BEST EFFORTS TO MAKE SURE IT'S RECORDED BECAUSE WHAT IF THEY DON'T HAVE THAT ABILITY? OR IS IT OKAY THAT THEY SIT HERE ON A CELL PHONE.

SO THOSE ARE MY CONCERNS. I PEOPLE DON'T HAVE TO LIKE THEM.

COMMISSIONER PATTERSON. THANK YOU. MAYOR. THROUGH THE MANAGER.

MISS CALLAWAY, A QUICK, QUICK QUESTION FOR YOU.

BECAUSE I AM AMENABLE TO SOME ADJUSTMENTS. BUT I WANT TO JUST MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY, BECAUSE IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU KNOW, THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION HAD BEEN SUBMITTED.

AND THERE WERE A COUPLE ATTEMPTS AT PRE-APPLICATION MEETINGS, BUT BECAUSE THE MEETING, THE FIRST ATTEMPT WAS HELD NOT IN NECESSARILY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE WAY THE LANGUAGE IS CURRENTLY DRAFTED.

THEY HAD TO DO ANOTHER MEETING BECAUSE IT WAS KIND OF A PRIVATE BOARD MEETING.

THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. AND SO SOME OF THIS IS COMING FROM A SPACE OF ENSURING THAT THE MEMBERS OF THAT COMMUNITY WHETHER THEY ARE WITHIN

[05:15:04]

400FT OR THEY LIVE OR ARE A RESIDENT OR OWNER OF A SUBDIVISION.

IF YOU KNOW, IF I AM A OWNER IN A HOA OR IN A MULTIFAMILY TYPE COMMUNITY.

WHETHER I LIVE ON THE FAR EAST END AND A PROJECTS HAPPENING ON THE WEST, I THINK I SHOULD HAVE SOME WEIGH IN AND I SHOULD KNOW THAT SOMETHING IS HAPPENING IN THAT COMMUNITY. SO BECAUSE AND BUT TO THE MAYOR'S POINT, I REMEMBER HAVING A COMMUNITY MEETING IN MY DISTRICT AND SOMEHOW, SOMEWAY, RESIDENTS THAT LIVED ON THE WEST, ON THE EAST SIDE OF TOWN WERE ALLOWED TO COME INTO MY AND COME INTO THE MEETING AND I WAS TOLD THEY WERE INVITED TO ATTEND.

SO, YOU KNOW, I AGREE THAT THERE SHOULD BE SOME PARAMETERS IN PLACE, AND FOLKS THAT LIVE IN DISTRICT 1ST MAY NOT NECESSARILY NEED TO BE A PART OF A CONVERSATION THAT'S BEING HELD RELATIVE TO DISTRICT THREE AND VICE VERSA.

SO I AM AMENABLE ON SOME LEVEL TO ADJUSTING THE LANGUAGE TO STATE THAT I STILL, YOU KNOW, THAT PERHAPS IT'S NOT TO THE PUBLIC, BUT THAT IT IS.

SO SO IF I MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND THE LANGUAGE.

BUT LET ME ADD, IF WE GO AND CALL IT A PUBLIC MEETING, IT HAS TO BE A PUBLIC MEETING.

WE CANNOT RESTRICT IT FOR RESIDENTS THAT LIVE OUTSIDE OF 400FT RADIUS.

I THINK WHAT YOU HAVE, THE DISTINCTION IS THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE WITHIN THE 400FT RADIUS ARE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES RECEIVED NOTICE, AND THE ONES WHO DON'T LIVE WITHIN THE 400FT DO NOT RECEIVE THE INDIVIDUAL NOTICE.

THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE NOT ONLY WILL REQUIRE A SINGLE FAMILY HOMES NOTICES, BUT ALSO WILL REQUIRE NOTICES FOR INDIVIDUALS WHO LIVE IN CONDO UNITS ALSO. SO THE NOTICE PROVISION ONLY APPLIES WITHIN THAT 400FT RADIUS.

THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION AND I AGREE SO I AGREE.

SO I RETRACT WHAT I SAID. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MEETING BEING OPEN TO THE PUBLIC VERSUS A NOTICE REQUIREMENT.

AND IF THE LANGUAGE STILL IS DRAFTED SUCH THAT THE NOTICE REQUIREMENT IS ONLY.

I'M GOOD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MR. KELLY. DID YOU WISH TO SAY SOMETHING? THANK YOU. IF NO ONE ELSE WISHES TO SPEAK. CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

COMMISSIONER BOLTON. YES. COMMISSIONER WRIGHT.

YES. VICE MAYOR. DANIEL. YES. MAYOR. GOMEZ. YES.

COMMISSIONER PATTERSON. YES. THANK YOU. MOTION PASSES 5 TO 0.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I HAVE BEEN ASKED FOR A RECESS.

IT IS 342. WE WILL BE BACK HERE AT 350.

IT IS. AND, GENTLEMEN, WE ARE BACK ON THE RECORD.

IT IS 350 AND WE ARE UP TO ITEM 7202 603. CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE

[7.d TO2603 - An Ordinance of the city commission of the City of Tamarac, Florida, amending the city’s code of ordinances by amending chapter 2 entitled “Administration”, article III entitled “Boards, Committees, Commissions”, by repealing in its entirety division 12 entitled “Privatization Committee”; providing for codification; providing for conflicts; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date.]

RECORD. I AM 70, IN ORDINANCE CITY COMMISSION, CITY TAMARAC AMENDED CODE OF ORDINANCE BY AMENDING CHAPTER TWO ENTITLED ADMINISTRATION ARTICLE THREE, ENTITLED BOARDS, COMMITTEE, COMMISSION BY REPEALING IT IN ITS ENTIRETY.

DIVISION 12 ENTITLED PRIVATIZATION COMMITTEE PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS.

PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND, PLEASE. SO MOVED.

SECOND, I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BOLTON.

I HAVE A SECOND BY VICE MAYOR DANIEL. THIS ITEM IS NOW OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.

IS THERE ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? PLEASE COME FORWARD.

SEEING NOBODY WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED.

CITY ATTORNEY IS AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM.

DISCUSSION BY THE COMMISSION. WELL, I DO KNOW THAT THERE WERE TWO RESIDENTS HERE EARLIER THAT JUST COULDN'T WAIT ANY LONGER THAT WANTED TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, AND NOT IN FAVOR OF REMOVING THE PRIVATIZATION COMMITTEE.

IT DOES SAY IN HIS OWN WORDING, THIS SHALL BE A PERMANENT AGENCY OF THE CITY, AND SOMEHOW WE'RE HAVE THE ABILITY TO REMOVE THE PERMANENT AGENCY OF THE CITY. IS THAT CORRECT? CITY ATTORNEY IS A CODE AMENDMENT.

THE CITY COMMISSION HAS AUTHORITY TO REVISE AMEND THIS CODE AT ANY TIME.

SO THERE ARE SOME OTHER ITEMS THAT THE CITY COMMISSION SAID THAT WE WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO BRING UP EVER AGAIN.

SO WE'D BE ABLE TO BRING THOSE BACK NOW IF WE WANTED TO, BECAUSE THE CITY COMMISSION CAN AMEND THINGS AT ANY TIME UNLESS THERE'S A CHARTER AMENDMENT WHICH REQUIRE VOTERS APPROVAL. THE CODE CAN BE AMENDED ANY TIME BY THE CITY COMMISSION.

GOOD TO KNOW. I HAVE A PROBLEM HAVING THIS REMOVED.

[05:20:01]

IF THERE ARE ITEMS IN THE CITY THAT NEED TO BE PRIVATIZED, THEN IT SHOULD GO THROUGH A BOARD.

SO THERE IS OPEN AND TRANSPARENT CONVERSATION WITH OUR RESIDENTS.

SO THERE COULD BE THE FIRST STEP IN DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT AN ITEM OR AN ENTITY OR A DEPARTMENT SHOULD BE PRIVATIZED, SHOULD BE GOING THROUGH OUR PUBLIC BOARD, KIND OF JUST LIKE OUR PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD.

WE DON'T HAVE ANY PLANNING COMING UNLESS IT GOES BEFORE THEIR BOARD.

IT'S JUST AS IMPORTANT. IT ALSO FEELS LIKE THIS WOULD BE A POLITICAL ITEM, BECAUSE THERE MAY BE PEOPLE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? YOU DIDN'T DO WHAT I WANTED YOU TO DO. TODAY, I'M GOING TO PRIVATIZE YOUR DEPARTMENT.

SO THERE GOES ARE HUMAN RESOURCES. THERE'S GOOD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, THERE GOES FINANCIAL SERVICES, THERE GOES FIRE DEPARTMENT. HEY, THERE GOES OUR PUBLIC SERVICES AND OUR PARK AND REC.

AND WE WIND UP PRIVATIZING OUR HOMES, OUR WHOLE CITY, WITHOUT HAVING THAT FIRST STOPGAP MEASURE.

THE CITY IS HERE FOR A REASON. WE ARE TO DO THE WORK OF THE PEOPLE.

WE ARE NOT HERE TO GIVE BUSINESSES THE OPPORTUNITY TO RUN OUR CITY ON A CONTRACT THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE GOOD, BECAUSE IT HAS NOT BEEN SCOPED AND FULLY DISCUSSED.

WE'VE SAID HERE TODAY SEVERAL TIMES THAT PEOPLE DON'T ALWAYS COME TO MEETINGS.

THEY'RE NOT ALWAYS INFORMED. THEY MAY SEND THEM THE NOTICES, BUT THEY MAY NOT HAVE READ IT.

THIS IS ANOTHER AVENUE AS A STOPGAP MEASURE TO MAKE SURE THINGS DON'T HAPPEN IN THE CITY.

THINGS DON'T GET PRIVATIZED OR DO GET PRIVATIZED WITH PROPER NOTICE AND PROPER MEETINGS.

BECAUSE ACTUALLY REZONING IS A LOT EASIER. IT HAS A LOT MORE ABILITIES OR REQUIREMENTS TO HAVE PEOPLE HAVE NOTIFICATION IN A MEETING THAN IT SEEMS BEING ABLE TO SAY IF WE'RE GOING TO PRIVATIZE THE DEPARTMENT IN OUR CITY.

I DON'T REALLY THINK THAT WORKS WELL. SO OBVIOUSLY, MY OPINION AND IT IS MY OPINION THAT THIS IS NOT A GOOD THING.

WE SHOULD NOT BE REMOVING OUR PRIVATIZATION COMMITTEE FROM OUR CODE, AND JUST BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T USED IT OFTEN, DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE SHOULD REMOVE IT FROM THE CODE.

COMMISSIONER BOLTON. I SEE THINGS DIFFERENTLY.

I THINK THAT YOU KNOW, WE'RE ON WE'RE THE ONES ON THIS SIDE OF THE STREET BEGGING FOR VOTES, AND THINGS ULTIMATELY END UP ON OUR DESK, OUR LAP.

AND SO NEVERTHELESS, WHETHER OR NOT SOMETHING GOES THROUGH TEN DEPARTMENTS OR 15 BOARDS IT COMES TO THE CITY COMMISSION. AND SO YOU KNOW, WE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE BO FOR ANYTHING THAT POSITIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AFFECT OUR RESONANCE.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S IF A PRIVATIZATION BOARD GAVE A RECOMMENDATION TO US, WE DON'T HAVE TO ACCEPT THAT RECOMMENDATION. BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK SOMETHING LIKE THAT IS BUREAUCRATIC.

IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT HAS A LOT OF RED TAPE. AND SO I THINK THAT YOU KNOW, THE BUCK SHOULD ALWAYS STOP WITH THE CITY COMMISSION.

I JUST WANT TO PREFACE THIS BY SAYING THAT ONE OF MY RESIDENT WAS HERE.

I RESPECT HER GREATLY. SHE IS A FRIEND OF MINE WHO IS VERY TRANSPARENT WITH ME, WITH THINGS THAT ARE SAID.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THOSE PEOPLE ON THIS DAIS OR THAT ONE ON THIS DAIS THIS THAT NORMALLY SPREAD IN A WINDOWS AND LIES. YOU KNOW, JOE BERGER, IT'S NOT TRUE.

CITY IS NOT PRIVATIZING ANY DEPARTMENTS. WE'RE NOT DOING THAT.

SO, SO SO THAT'S NUMBER ONE. TO THE RESIDENTS IN CENTRAL PARK THAT KEEPS HEARING FROM ONE PERSON ON THIS DAIS THAT WE TOOK THE MONEY THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BUILD SABLE PALM PARK AND GAVE IT OVER TO SHAKER VILLAGE.

AGAIN, THAT'S NOT TRUE. SABLE PALM PARK IS IS IS ON TARGET.

IT'S BEING BUILT. AND I HOPE THAT THE SHAKER VILLAGE FORMER SHAKER VILLAGE SITE, WHICH IS OUR EAST SIDE COMMUNITY CENTER IS GOING TO BE BUILT AS WELL. ON THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING, I'D LIKE TO HAVE AN UPDATE FROM YOU, MUSTAFA. I'M GOING TO HOLD YOU RESPONSIBLE AND THE CITY MANAGER FOR MAKING SURE THAT THAT PROJECT GOES THROUGH.

SO I WANT TO KNOW IN THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING, THE UPDATE ON THAT BUILDING.

[05:25:07]

IT'S A GOOD DAY IN TAMARAC WHEN BOLTON IS HAPPY.

COMMISSIONER PATTERSON, THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

MAYOR. A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. WHAT WHAT WAS THE INTENDED PURPOSE OF THE COMMITTEE? COMMISSIONER, IN ALL HONESTY, I DON'T KNOW. BUT IN THE LAST 30 YEARS THAT THAT COMMITTEE HAS BEEN ACTIVATED TWICE.

ONCE WHEN I FIRST STARTED IN 95 AND ONCE ABOUT A YEAR OR TWO AGO.

AND I BELIEVE THE ORIGINAL PURPOSE IS TO PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COMMISSION FOR, FOR SUCH PRIVATIZATION EFFORTS. BUT AS THE COMMISSIONER BOLTON SAID, THE COMMISSION ULTIMATELY MAKES A DECISION AND YOU KNOW, THEY DON'T HAVE TO LISTEN OR FOLLOW THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE COMMITTEE.

THOSE DECISIONS CAN BE MADE RIGHT HERE IN PUBLIC WITH PUBLIC INPUT.

YOU KNOW, IN SUNSHINE. SO IT'S JUST ANOTHER EXTRA STEP IN THE, IN THE PROCESS.

OKAY, SO I HAD THE GREAT PRIVILEGE OF SERVING ON THAT COMMITTEE DURING ONE OF ITS TWO ACTIVATIONS, AND. I WAS HOPING THAT THAT'S WHAT YOU WOULD SAY, BECAUSE I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHY WE WERE THERE.

AND I THINK THAT WHILE WE WERE THERE, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE.

ALL OF A SUDDEN, WE JUST WEREN'T THERE ANYMORE.

THERE WAS, YOU KNOW MUCH, OBVIOUSLY MUCH CONVERSATION ABOUT PRIVATIZING DEPARTMENTS.

I BELIEVE IN CITY GOVERNMENT. I BELIEVE IN CITY STAFF.

I BELIEVE IN CITY PENSIONS. I BELIEVE IN THE SERVICES THAT WE PROVIDE AS A GOVERNMENT.

AND AS YOU KNOW, WE ARE NOT A TOWN. WE ARE A CITY.

A GROWING CITY AT THAT. AND SO FOR I MEAN, I'LL SAY, AS SOMEONE THAT SAID ON THAT BOARD THAT WAS APPOINTED TO SERVE ON THAT BOARD, I DIDN'T SEE THE PURPOSE FOR IT. I THINK THAT THE CITY STAFF, NOT THE CITY STAFF, RATHER BUT THE CITY MANAGER COULD CERTAINLY MOVE THIS CITY FORWARD. I THINK THAT THE ITEMS THAT WERE BEING PRESENTED, I HAD MUCH CONCERN.

I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT A PARATRANSIT AND I QUESTIONED THINGS LIKE MARKETING.

I QUESTIONED THINGS LIKE YOU KNOW JUST, YOU KNOW, JUST OVERALL, WHAT HAVE WE DONE WITH THE SERVICES THAT WE HAVE HERE? I THINK THAT WE HAVE A IT'S KIND OF A MICROWAVE SOLUTION TO, YOU KNOW, OUTSOURCE OUR, OUR SERVICES, THINGS LIKE SOCIAL SERVICES. WE, WHILE WE'RE A GROWING CITY AND THE MEDIAN AGE IS DECREASING.

WE STILL HAVE A LARGE DEMOGRAPHIC OF SENIORS IN OUR COMMUNITY.

SO, YOU KNOW, WHILE IN SOME CASES IT IS IMPORTANT TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH A NEIGHBORING CITY OR PERHAPS EVEN THE COUNTY.

THERE ARE SERVICES THAT NEED TO BE CENTRAL TO OUR CITY.

AND SO I AM IN AGREEMENT THAT THIS BOARD IS NO LONGER NECESSARY.

COMMISSIONER. RIGHT. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. I'M ALSO IN AGREEMENT WITH THE MAYOR AND COMMISSIONER PATTERSON THAT GOVERNMENT SERVICES AND MANY TIMES A LOT OF PEOPLE COME TO GOVERNMENT FOR THE STABILITY OF HAVING A GOVERNMENT JOB, THE PENSION, THE RETIREMENT AND THOSE THINGS.

I'M LOOKING AT STUDY FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, MICHIGAN URBAN SCHOOL OF PLANNING THAT SAYS SERVICES THAT CITIES ARE LIKELY TO PRIVATIZE LEGAL SERVICES. CITY ATTORNEY, PRIVATIZE WASTE.

WASTE AND RECYCLING. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'VE WE'VE PRIVATIZED.

AND THEN IT HAS SERVICES NOT LIKELY TO BE PRIVATIZED.

911. PARKS AND REC. PARKING, VEHICLE MANAGEMENT, UTILITIES.

LAND USE PLANNING, THAT TYPE OF STUFF. SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE CITY IS PERHAPS FOLLOWING THIS RESEARCH, JUST KIND OF PRIVATIZE THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, USUALLY ARE PRIVATIZED BY MUNICIPAL MUNICIPALITIES.

AND GOING BACK TO THE PROCESS AS WELL. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THE PLANNING BOARD, BUT STILL THINGS THAT COME TO US ULTIMATELY, YOU KNOW, DECIDES BY THE COMMITTEE IS DECIDED BY THE COMMISSION.

INITIALLY WHEN WE CREATED THIS, THIS PRIVATIZATION, WHEN WE REACTIVATED IT, I REMEMBER IT WAS FOR THE PARATRANSIT.

THAT'S CORRECT. IT'S IT WAS FOR PARATRANSIT AND ALSO TO CONSIDER THE CITY'S ENTIRE TRANSIT SERVICES AND I THINK, PARDON ME, THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. THAT WAS NOT ON THE AGENDA, BUT I THINK THAT WAS ALSO PART OF THE CONVERSATION.

AND I THINK ULTIMATELY THE COMMISSION SHOT DOWN THE IDEA OF OF WANTING TO HAVE WHAT IS IT CALLED WITH THE TESLA CARS? VERY MUCH SO. YEAH. SO ULTIMATELY THAT CAME TO US.

[05:30:01]

SO I'M IN AGREEMENT THAT, YOU KNOW, YES, THE COMMITTEE PLAYS A ROLE.

I'M NOT FOR PRIVATIZATION. I JUST WANT THAT TO BE CLEAR.

BUT I THINK ULTIMATELY IT COMES BACK TO US. SO I'M IN SUPPORT OF IF WE WANT TO GET RID OF THE COMMITTEE, WE CAN GET RID OF THE COMMITTEE. VICE MAYOR. THANK YOU.

I REMEMBER A COUPLE A FEW WORKSHOPS BACK. WE DID DISCUSS THESE COMMITTEES AND THAT SOME OF THEM WEREN'T BEING UTILIZED.

THIS BEING ONE OF THEM. I THINK SISTER CITY WAS ANOTHER ONE THAT WHEN WE DO CALL THE MEMBERS QUIT BECAUSE THERE'S NO MEETING TO GO TO.

SO WE ALL HAVE TO CONSTANTLY RE ADVERTISE, PUT THEM ON A COMMITTEE THAT DOESN'T MEET.

SO I HAVE NO PROBLEM. BECAUSE WE ALL DECIDED THAT WE WERE GOING TO GET RID OF SOME OF THESE COMMITTEES.

RIGHT. I DON'T KNOW IF WE FORGOT, BUT WE DID.

SO I HAVE NO PROBLEM BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO COME UP FOR THE COMMISSION ANYWAY AS FAR AS PRIVATE IZATION OF ANY DEPARTMENT, BUT WE'RE NOT EVEN TALKING ABOUT PRIVATIZATION OF ANY DEPARTMENT.

SOME UNCLEAR AS TO WHY WE EVEN STATED THAT. THAT'S WHY THE COMMITTEE WAS NEVER NEEDED.

BECAUSE WE'RE NOT PRIVATIZING ANYTHING. AT THIS POINT.

SO I'M FINE WITH IT BECAUSE, LIKE THE OTHER COMMISSION SAID, IT WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION TO MAKE A DECISION, AND WE COULD DECIDE EITHER WAY REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE COMMITTEE SAID.

SO I'M FINE WITH GETTING RID OF THIS COMMITTEE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IT WAS IT'S AN ITEM THAT IS NEEDED WHEN IT'S NEEDED.

AND IT WAS FOR MORE THAN JUST PARATRANSIT. IT WAS FOR DISCUSSION OF THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.

THERE WAS A WHOLE LIST OF THINGS. AND THE BOARD AT THAT TIME WAS NOT FOR DOING SOME OF THE THINGS, AND SOME OF THE REASONS WHY IT DID NOT CONTINUE WAS DUE TO THE FACT THAT THERE WAS NO SUPPORT FROM AFTER THE PRIVATIZATION COMMITTEE WAS MAKING COMMENTS AND ASKING REALLY GOOD QUESTIONS FOR IT TO GO FORWARD ANYWAY.

IT'S NOT IT'S NOT NECESSARY. LEVENT YOU KNOW, YOU'RE GETTING YOUR FOUR VOTES, SO WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE? BUT THAT'S THAT'S NOT IT.

I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY FROM, FROM OUR EMPLOYEES PERSPECTIVE THAT THAT THIS ITEM HAS YOU KNOW, WELL, HE'S CUTTING ME OFF AS I'M SPEAKING, SO DON'T GIVE ME THAT. I'M RUDE.

MY APOLOGIES. BUT BUT YOU'RE TALKING TO ME, MAYOR.

YOU'RE RUDE TOO. AND THAT'S THE PROBLEM. YOU ONLY SPEAK UP WHEN YOU ARE DEEMED AS SOMEONE ELSE'S RUDE.

BUT IT'S YOU. IF YOU DO IT, THEN OTHERS WILL DO IT TOO.

SO YOU HAVE TO BE AN EXAMPLE. GO AHEAD, CITY MANAGER.

MY APOLOGIES. I JUST WANT TO YOU KNOW, PUT IT ON THE RECORD THAT THAT THERE'S NO AGENDA FOR IS THE VICE MAYOR MENTIONED FOR PRIVATIZING ANY OF CITY SERVICES OTHER THAN WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING IN THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT.

THE, THE THE ROOT SYSTEM THAT'S FUNDED BY THE COUNTY.

AND SO THAT'S THE ONLY ONE THAT'S, YOU KNOW, IN THE CONVERSATION.

BUT OUTSIDE OF THAT, THERE ARE NO OTHER SERVICES.

THAT'S IN THAT CONSIDERATION RIGHT NOW. RIGHT NOW.

KEY WORDS RIGHT NOW. SURE. ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN.

SO. THAT IS THE PROBLEM. IT'S THE RIGHT NOW. AND IT'S VERY EASY TO TWIST WORDS AROUND.

WE WERE SUPPOSED TO GET RID OF A BUNCH OF COMMITTEES, BUT WHEN IT CAME TIME FOR US TO DISCUSS IT AT THE WORKSHOP, EVERYBODY TUCKED TAIL AND DIDN'T BOTHER. SO WE DIDN'T GET RID OF ANY OF THEM BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T WANT TO POLITICALLY DO SOMETHING THAT WOULDN'T BE APPEALING.

SO IT DIDN'T HAPPEN. SO ALL THE ALL OF THEM WOUND UP SAYING WHATEVER.

I'VE MADE MY PEACE. I TOLD YOU, I'M NOT FOR GETTING RID OF THE COMMITTEE.

YOU GUYS WANT IT TO GO AWAY? IT'LL GO AWAY. COMMISSIONER BOLTON, MANAGER, JUST FOR THE RECORD, REPEAT. AT THIS POINT, WHAT IS BEING. THOUGHT OF? THE ONLY SERVICE WE'VE BEEN CONSIDERING IS WHAT MOST OTHER CITIES IN THE COUNTY HAVE ALREADY PRIVATIZED.

I HEAR YOU, BUT. OKAY. I'M SORRY. SO WHAT WE'RE CONSIDERING AT THIS POINT IS WHAT MOST OTHER CITIES IN THE COUNTY HAVE ALREADY PRIVATIZED, WITH THE ENCOURAGEMENT AND GUIDANCE OF THE BROWARD COUNTY TRANSIT SYSTEM.

AND THAT'S THE THE THE CITY'S ROUTE SYSTEM THAT CONNECTS WITH THE BROWARD BROWARD COUNTY'S TRANSIT SYSTEM.

IS THAT THE SAME THING AS THE FREEBIE THING THAT CAME BEFORE US BEFORE? NO, IT'S NOT OKAY, BECAUSE I WASN'T I WASN'T FOR THAT.

AND I'M STILL NOT FOR THAT. CORRECT. SO THAT'S NOT IT.

IT'S NOT OKAY. FOR THE BENEFIT OF JOE BERGER.

THAT'S NOT IT. NO. OKAY. SO THIS IS THE BROWARD COUNTY TRANSIT.

WHAT? THIS IS THE THE ROUTE SYSTEM THAT CONNECTS TAMARAC NEIGHBORHOODS INTO BROWARD COUNTY'S TRANSIT SYSTEM.

SO AND IT'S FUNDED BY THE COUNTY, BY THE WAY, NOT WITH CITY DOLLARS.

NOT THE CITY DOLLARS. OKAY. SO WOULD BE A WOULD BE A SYSTEM THAT MOVES PEOPLE FROM THEIR COMMUNITIES

[05:35:07]

AND DROP THEM OFF TO A POINT WHERE THE COUNTY OPERATES.

THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. WELL, THAT WOULD BE GOOD.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. CITY CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

COMMISSIONER BOLTON. YES. VICE MAYOR DANIEL. YES.

MAYOR GOMEZ. NO. COMMISSIONER. RIGHT. NO. COMMISSIONER.

PATTERSON. YES. THANK YOU. MOTION PASSES THREE 32.

THANK YOU. WE ARE GOING TO OUR PUBLIC HEARING.

[9.a TR14289 - A Resolution of the City Commission of The City Of Tamarac, Florida, establishing an adjustment factor to be applied to the Annual Water And Sewer Rate Schedule for the Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 2025 and updating other charges for services incidental to the operation of the City’s Utility System; providing for conflicts; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date.]

IT IS NINE EIGHT CR 14289. CITY ATTORNEY, PLEASE READ THE TITLE FOR THE RECORD.

YES. ITEM NINE A RESOLUTION. CITY COMMISSION AND CITY OF TAMARAC ESTABLISH AN ADJUSTMENT FACTOR.

BE APPLIED TO ANNUAL WATER AND SEWER RATE SCHEDULE FOR FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1ST, 2025 AND UPDATE NOTICE CHARGES FOR SERVICE INCIDENTAL TO THE OPERATION OF CITY UTILITY SYSTEM PRICING FOR CONFLICTS PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND, PLEASE.

ITEM IS GOING TO FAIL FOR A LACK OF SECOND. SECOND.

COMMISSIONER BOLTON MOVES. VICE MAYOR DANIEL SECONDS.

OUR FINANCIAL SERVICES DIRECTOR CHRISTINE CAJUSTE IS GOING TO PROVIDE US WITH A PRESENTATION.

SHE HAS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THEN THAT WAS PRESENTED ON MONDAY.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COMMISSION. YOU HAVE HERE 14289 BEFORE YOU.

WITH WHICH ESTABLISHING ESTABLISHES THE ADJUSTMENT FACTOR TO THE WATER UTILITY BILL FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025.

I WANTED TO GIVE YOU SOME BACKGROUND ON THIS ADJUSTMENT FACTOR.

WATER AND SEWER IS ACCOUNTED FOR IN AN OPERATING FUND, BUT WE CALL THE UTILITIES FUND.