Okay. Good evening, everyone. If you can please find your seats, silence your phones.
My name is Seth Salver and I am honored to serve as your mayor.
Mr. Clerk with the roll please.
Yes, roll call. Mayor Salver here. Vice Mayor Wolfe here. Councilman Freemark. Councilman Levy. Councilman Slar here. We have quorum.
Thank you, Mr. Clerk. If we can all please rise for the pledge of allegiance.
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, to the Republic for which it stands,
one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.
You may be seated.
Thank you.
So I'd like to call the Bell Harbor Village special meeting to order tonight as you're, it's
very nice to see all of you here, because this is probably the single most important issue
that this community has ever faced since it's founding.
So I'm comforted and seeing a big crowd tonight.
And frankly, the reason why we were pushing for this meeting
is that since this all started, we've been in active litigation
and given that all of our deliberations have been subject
to a turning-clined privilege and wouldn't really be able to be discussed
in a public meeting.
So this is that opportunity.
We've been cleared. We have authorization from opposing counsel to be able to share things that normally wouldn't be made public at this point in the process
So we're happy that you're all here tonight to to hear and to listen and obviously your voice is heard and
We have a very
Packed agenda so we will get right to it and I'll turn it over to our village manager
George Gonzalez. Thank you, Mr. Mayor
What I would like to do for the council and for the community is to kind of walk through a very
brief but hopefully detailed kind of timeline of events that has brought us to today
so that we all can get to a level playing field from an information perspective after which
which our council will be able to speak more deliberately about the matter that is at hands.
And then, as you mentioned, there'll be some opportunity for public comments.
So let me just kind of remind everybody where we've been, so we can know where we're going.
And I'm not going to go all the way back 60 years when the ballot harvest first opened,
But I will remind everybody that in 2017, almost 10 years ago, the village and the Baal
Harbour Shops entered into a development agreement, a contract that allowed the shops to expand,
which is the expansion that you're seeing under construction today.
In that agreement, there were a number of different requirements, both on the village and on
on the shops to be performed, and we have been over the past nine years or so working to
perform those different requirements. That development agreement was amended in December of 2018.
Not significantly, but enough that it required the council to take another action.
Many of you were here and might recall that a little bit after that in January of 2021,
One, the bow harborshops presented a proposal for a referendum
to raise the height limitation that existed in our charter.
And that that referendum failed pretty nearly unanimously.
It was about 90% of the voters voted against removing that height restriction.
Subsequent to that later that year in 2021 October due to a number of factors related to COVID
and other things, the shops, again petitioned the village to amend a third time or a second
time.
So I have the third agreement related to the development agreement, which provided them with
some modicum of relief in performance of a lot of the deadlines that they were required to meet due
to the COVID impacts.
So that was approved, as I said, in October of 2021.
soon after that, in the following year, the shops began to meet with members and myself to discuss the idea of a hotel
as a concept that they were thinking about proposing, but that never materialized. In 2023, the Florida legislative session enacted the
Governor approved what is called now as the Live Local Act.
And that was what we, you've domestically call it 1.0 because it was the first version of
that in 2023.
I'm not going to get into the details of it but as you probably heard, it has a lot to do with
giving developers an opportunity to build more if they commit to at least 40% of the affordable
of the units to be affordable.
Our lawyers can get into more details but you can see for yourself the Live Local
on line. And then about a year after the legislation was enacted in January of 2024, the
Bell Harbor shops filed an application with the village under the Live Local Act for their
proposal. And I'm just going to show it so you can look at what is submitted as their initial
proposal in January of 2024.
It requires no judgment or no
comments.
Again, that was January of 2024 nearly a little over two years
ago. January 16th of that, a week later we held a meeting in this room
public comments to react to that proposal. And a week later, the bow
the harborshops filed its first lawsuit with the village.
Subsequently, the village passed a number of ordinances to deal with the implications of the
live local act as was approved in 2023.
And in 2024, after we passed our ordinances, the state legislature,
once again enacted amendments to live local act 2.0,
which was a glitch bill to fix and correct issues that had come up from the first initial
legislative act.
June of 2024, Bauharbershobs filed its second lawsuit with the village.
We got two active litigation.
All the while it's coming, all the while the village was
proceeding to review the application per the state statutes that were required as to do so.
and in July of 2024, we deemed the application to be complete, but not approved.
Six months later, and a few months later, in November, the village actually denied the application
pursuant to the state statutes and all of the implications that we felt were insufficient.
So that's November of 2024, nearly nine months after the initial application was filed.
In September of that same year, this council approved an amendment to the budget to increase the
millage to fund and have dedicated monies associated with the bow harborshop's defense.
So that was done in September of 2024 following in concert with the denial.
February of 2025, just a few months later, we had lawsuit number three.
They filed a fluedro, which is a fancy term, but it's litigation relative to the denial that
they received later that year, the Florida Legislature acted one more time and did live local
act 3.0 further preempting communities, including ours, from many of the zoning requirements
that we have.
In August of 2025, pursuant to the litigation that was pending, the village and
the Baal Harbor Shops entered court-ordered mediation. And court-ordered mediation is a step in
the litigation process. Our lawyers can get into the details of that, but we began to discuss
whether or not there was a possibility that there could be some kind of mediated settlement.
Again, that was August of last year.
A little bit after August in October, the Baal Harbor shops filed their fourth litigation with the village.
This is a federal litigation regarding taking any legal taxing.
You get to picture of how this is going.
Earlier this year, now I went to 2026, the Florida Legislature actually passed more amendments to the live local act.
minor as they may be. They still keep making more and more, making it more and more favorable to the
developers. Which brings us to today. And so for those of you that have been hearing rumors
in UN do that the decision has been made that it's all cooked or baked or whatever you
term you want to use. I've laid out to you that everything that this council in this community has
so far has been to deny the application to establish a legal defense fund to defend all of this
litigation and has entered mediation as required through a litigated process and we're now at
the point where we can finally share with you what what the mediator believes is what is represented
as the shop's best and final offer. That's it. It doesn't mean that it's been accepted, it doesn't
mean that it has approved anything like that. This is simply an opportunity now to share that with
you for the first time in the public. It's been a little over two years since we've all gotten
together. So maybe it's a good time for you all to get up to speed and understand where we are.
But there is something that we want to show before the before the lawyers come up. So you want to speak
to the, what the, yeah, so, um, the Bellhubbers shops was not available to be here tonight.
Um, but they did send a video message.
Uh, well, but before we, okay, sorry. Yeah, but before we do play that, I, I just, I see a
lot of people sending. If you have an empty seat next to you, can you just raise your hand?
So folks know that they can, okay, I guess there aren't that many empty seats, okay, okay, so maybe we can work on that.
I also want to take the opportunity to welcome some local elected officials and former elected officials.
So I want to recognize Bay Harbor Island's mayor, Isaac Salver, the name sounds familiar, it's because he's my dad.
Um.
If they hybrid violence counsel member Robert Yaffee,
they hybrid violence town manager, Lindsey, you know,
no, Lindsey Nobel, sorry, they wrote it backwards.
I correct it.
Surfside commissioner David Winegott, former
Bell Harbor mayor Martin Packer, former Bell Harbor mayor Gabriel
Graceman, and former Vice Mayor Joni Blatcher.
So, as you can see, as you can see, this proposal
doesn't just affect Bahl Harbor, it really affects this entire community and really South Florida.
So are we ready to play the video? You just do it up. Okay, let's see what they have to say.
My name is Matthew Whitman Lasonv. I'm the principal owner and steward of Bahl Harbor Shops.
The shops have been part of this community for more than 60 years, and this village has been part
my family for even longer. The village is my family's home community. My grandfather was one of
its original enforcerators and I live here myself. It is ingrained in our DNA. There can be no doubt
that everyone here is aware of the dispute between the shops and the village over our live local
act of application. We are here tonight to discuss a potential settlement of that dispute,
a settlement that is a genuine compromise between neighbors.
But to understand where we are going,
it's important to understand where we have been.
Through decades of hard work across three generations,
I'm humbled to say that Bow Harbor Shops
has become one of the world's most iconic shopping destinations,
boasting more than 100 designer stores,
and a truly unique and picturesque environment.
But the Bow Harbor Shops experience isn't just about fashion.
It's a place where the community comes together, or familiar faces, families, and friends, share moments beneath the ponds.
A place where the heart of the community quietly lives, and emotional connections are made and reinforced every single day.
The shops was born out of a bold vision. Back in 1965, my grandfather, Stanley Whitman, transformed a site occupied by former army barracks into Florida's first high-fashion shopping destination.
Breaking away from traditional malls and creating a tropical, open-air experience, unlike
anything, anywhere, it didn't take long for the shops to attract some of the world's most
prestigious brands, forever changing luxury retail, and our village community.
But Stanley always thought the shops should be even more, and ought to become a proper
village center where residents could live, work, and play.
In 2017, we embarked upon the retail expansion, presently underway, and slated open by
September, bringing a wonderful array of new stores and restaurants, too, or back to
Val Harbor, and investing hundreds and millions of dollars in improvements.
Now the shopps is entering a new chapter, guided by a renewed vision for the future.
Like my grandfather, I am guided by the core principle that this village
Is it just where we do business? It's our home. This community and its interests are deeply rooted in who we are. Today, I am driven by the purpose of making this a more affordable community. Like all of him, I have watched the housing affordability crisis, reshaped this region. Across South Florida, working families and essential employees face real challenges, finding homes in the communities they serve.
In recognition of this issue in 2023, Governor DeSantis signed the Live Local Act, comprehensive
legislation designed to spur affordable housing development statewide.
Shortly thereafter, we engaged to skid more Owens in Merrill, SOM, to design a project that
would put that model to work and transform the shops into the True Village Center we always
envisioned.
In January of 2024, we submitted a live-local act application to the village for a new project
that would expand the shops through the addition of residential housing, including designated
affordable housing, and additional hotel, office, and retail space.
Since the application was filed more than 27 months ago, we've been working through the legal
process, negotiating and spending dozens of hours mediating before Judge Hansen.
We believe strongly in the legal merits of our original application and are fully prepared
to continue to litigate to seek its ultimate approval if we must, but tonight, you will hear
about a proposed settlement term sheet born from the process with Judge Hansman aimed at
resolving this dispute and allowing us to move forward together as neighbors. For context,
in the project proposed in the live local act application, we are seeking to develop 528 residential units
in an expansion that would add more than 2 million
new square feet to the shops.
Across four principal buildings,
each one of which is designed at 300 feet tall.
But the village rejected that proposed,
while we continue to strenuously disagree with that rejection,
we have spent significant time and resources
reworking the proposal to be more in keeping
with what we discussed with village leadership.
In this settlement proposal, the number of residential units
has been cut nearly 66% to 180 units.
The new score footage has been cut nearly in half.
We would develop three principal buildings instead of four,
and the overall height has been reduced dramatically.
For us, this is about people.
It's about the workers who help keep Valharva running,
but can't afford to call at home,
forcing many to commute long distances each day,
clogging the roadways between where they live,
and where they work.
It's about giving those same familiar faces the opportunity to live in the community, they help support,
and turning the shops into a true village center.
To be sure, the settlement plans include additional amenities that the village's existing residents will enjoy and benefit from.
A hotel, a private club, office space, a new retail.
All part of three beautifully designed buildings meant to reflect the same quality and character the shops were known for.
This is just another project. It's a continuation of the legacy. First built right here
in my hometown of Valharber, a community that has been built across generations on the promise
of an initiative. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Okay, sorry.
We're now going to
recognize the attorney, the attorney that's representing Valharber Village in the multiple
litigations, Mr. Aton Mark. But aton before you begin your formal presentation, one of the things
that stuck out to me from this video was how much the Bell Harbor Shops was discussing the
importance of affordable housing. Can you just highlight how many affordable housing units are
in the settlement proposal?
Well, that's fine. Yeah, just grab the microphone. Turn around.
Okay, good evening everybody. I'm eight on mark. I'm going to turn it with the law firm of Mark Fair and Hayden.
So the original proposal, as proposed, contemplated 40% of affordable housing across 520 something units.
So that's going to be about 200 or so affordable housing units. This revised proposal contemplates 180 total units of which 10% would be affordable or 18, 18 units.
Okay,
so I'm not going to speak for a very long time, although I'm sure you'd love to hear me speak for a long time.
We've been acting as litigation counsel for the village for these pending cases, forward five of them.
Let me just say that we're deeply passionate about these cases.
is it's truly privileged to represent this village.
You're not going to hear a ton of passion from me tonight
because we are not inside a courtroom.
We are, I am at a public meeting.
I am not going to start talking about litigation strategy.
I'm not going to tell you all the reasons
we're going to win the case.
I'm just not doing any of that, okay?
What I'm going to do here, no, no, no, no.
What I'm going to do here is I'm going to provide an overview.
I'm just going to provide an overview
of some of specifically the live local litigation,
than what I consider to be sort of the main piece of litigation and not the
ancillary cases. I'm going to talk a little bit about the mediation process and
how we got to this point.
Suffice to say that we have raised very substantial
defenses and in some cases counterclames to all of their affirmative claims.
No, I'm just providing an overview. Okay. One of the cases, which was the
missed without prejudice, the remaining cases with the exception of the federal takings case
was stayed or put on pause, pending the resolution of this mediation process.
As you saw from the video, the shop submitted their application in January 2024, and then
their first lawsuit was filed shortly thereafter.
that. And their main argument was that the village was required to accept that application
as submitted. If you can put up, yes, so that was the plan as submitted. That application
contemplates a 528 unit, 300 or so foot development, multiple residential towers, our arguments
very briefly that just the some of the defenses include that the original live local act
application was defective. That the 2017 development agreement that George alluded to earlier
between the shops and the villages a binding contract and the application that the shops
submitted contravenes that agreement and that in the application the shop submitted they relied on
wrong land development regulations and should have relied on land
development regulations from a different district.
There are other defenses as well.
Those are some of them.
Again, I'm not going to get into the nitty gritty too much.
In mid 2025, in mid 2025, the parties agree to globally
media, all of the pending pieces of litigation,
and we meet it with Judge Michael Hansman.
Some of you may know Judge Hansman, he's retired now, but he was the judge that presided
over the Champlain Towers. He was an excellent judge when he was on the bench, and in my
opinion, probably the top mediator slash arbitrator in town. We spent a lot of time with him.
mediated with him three full days, August 25th, September 8th, October 6th, 2025, and we continue
negotiating thereafter. Today he is not formally declared an impasse.
I want to kind of now talk
about where the negotiations started and where it ended, so you see where it started.
So again,
528 units, 2 million or so square feet, 40% affordable housing, after these negotiations,
we turn, we got to this negotiated plan. George, can you click through? Or from so many?
Okay, so this is the revised plan. So you can see that there's one building that's been
completely eliminated. Some of the buildings are our shorter and that green one that's on
Collins is the hotel, the white one that's on 96 street there is an office and the orange one in the back is residential and you'll see there's some residential on top of the hotel as well.
This as I as was mentioned contemplates 180 new residential units 10% affordable.
The shops also agreed to pay the village $21 million as certain construction milestones are reached.
There's other non-monetary considerations as well, but these are what I consider to be some of the highlights.
As of today, the shops have moved to lift this stay. In other words, the pause that I mentioned earlier.
They've asked to lift that pause on the live local case.
And the parties are preparing to fully ratchet up the litigation, which has been in a little bit of a holding pattern for the past months.
I can tell you that your council members have worked very hard to get from the shops what we are told is their best in final offer.
And that's what this is.
As in any litigation,
I want to be exceedingly clear.
There is risk, okay?
There's risk on both sides.
There's risk for the village
that the court is going to find
that the village was required to approve this application
as it was submitted.
And therefore the shops will get to build that other project you saw,
the first version of it, just as there's risk for the shops that the court will find that
the application was improper or that the development agreement controls and therefore
the shops get nothing among other defenses.
And then there's also legislative risk, which is important to remember here as well.
As you can see in many of you probably saw the news cycle in the past few days, the attorney
general has jumped into this and they've taken a position, they've interjected into this
And it's possible that the state continues to try to strengthen the live local act through legislative amendments.
Regardless, and whatever the council decides today, whether or not they decide to continue the litigation or not,
we believe we have very compelling defenses.
We are prepared and ready to resume litigation.
If that's the decision, and we're very much looking forward to continuing to fight to protect the villagers interest in these cases should that be the decision.
Thank you.
Thank you, wait a second. Before we go into public comment, are there any questions or comments from the council?
I'll say, Mr. Mayor. Go ahead, Vice Mayor.
Thank you. I could even be everyone Vice Mayor David Wolfe.
So good to see everybody here.
We hope you guys come to all of our meetings.
It would be much more exciting.
Anyway, welcome. Good to have everybody here.
Again, I just just for the record.
I would say, and I won't make it long because I look forward to hearing from anybody.
but from my perspective, I am ready to make a motion and to vote on a motion, but I will hold
that off and wait to hear everybody's comments. I think for me it's clear what direction we
should take and so that's all I have to say. I look forward to hearing everybody's comments and
then we'll make a motion later. Thank you. Yeah, councilman's card. I think both yourself and
Aeton put it very, very clearly when you watched Matthew's video. He was all about affordability,
affordability, we're giving back to the community. How you go from 200 and eight units of affordable
housing to 18 units is kind of ridiculous. It really is crazy. At the end of the day, the hotel
increased five X from what the original plan was. So he's pretty much letting us know he wants to have
And that's what he's showing us.
He doesn't care about affordable housing.
We have to really keep that in mind.
So, Mr. Mayor, thank you very much for the time.
Thank you.
So, I'm going to just read the item that we are
that I'm going to then call up the public to speak on.
So, this is to receive consider and possibly take action.
Regarding the mediated settlement proposal,
regarding the Bell Harbor Shop's
Liberal Act Development Application and Related Matters.
So, with that, I'm going to call up our first speaker,
and I'm going to call this the following speakers so that folks are ready to go and we're not waiting for other people to approach the mic.
So our first speaker is former Mayor Martin Packer and our next speaker is going to be former Vice Mayor Jonny Batcher.
Oh, you're not speaking. Okay. And then after Martin Packer, we're going to call up, they are Brian and his Mayor Isaac Salver.
here.
Hold it.
Is it on?
That's working.
Number one.
I want to thank the council.
Number one.
First of all, I can't.
As anything that George had in the beginning because of the fact
I have 15
Years ago, I believe it was about 15 years ago, we went through the same thing and I was on the other side of the IS.
As far as the shops, we shouldn't be referring to the shops as such. We should be referring to the family, which they put up on their sign. It's a family-owned complex.
The thing is I think the family may be in trouble because of the fact they have two of their largest
shops on the property that are in bankruptcy. Now, I don't know if these sacks and Niemann
Marcus are paying rent. They may not be. I have no idea what's going on with the bankruptcy,
but it's the family is in trouble, not the shops. And I would even agree if the shops say
they want to have 20 more new stores there and forget about a hotel. The hotel has been
being pushed for over 20 years, maybe 25 years, and we've had meetings and the village people
have voted 90% that it should not be expanded, as far as individual, as far as individual
stores, if they want to increase their stores in there, I would have no problem.
Traffic is awful as it is right now, and we have only two streets, one North South and
one East West, and you cannot add anything else in it, even if they want to have 18
more affordable units for they kill us. Thank you very much.
Thanks, Marty. Mayor, vice mayor and council.
No, I'll face this way because this is for you guys mostly. I'm Mayor Isaac Salver from the
Town of Bay Harbor Islands. Although our town has not taken official position on this matter,
I'm going to share some personal thoughts with you. I just want you to know that you guys did a great job
because I'm looking at the analysis that was done on this proposal, and it was denied, but it was denied
with very specific purposes, and very specific reasons. You know, one, the hotel, which it seems
that the shops are really pushing a hotel to hotel to hotel. The hotel, the height of this hotel that's
proposed is absolutely prohibited, or the business district code,
and, you know, it's funny
in the video that we saw, you know, the core purpose was making a community center for
the community. Don't be fooled by that. The core purpose is profit, period and a story.
the notion of putting 1.2 million square feet on Collins Avenue when it takes you 20 minutes
to get from the hollover bridge to Bay Harbor Islands or more is, okay, I was listening to good music, I apologize.
But, you know, not only should this denial be supported wholeheartedly and full-throwededly,
each and every one of you that are listening to this meeting should speak to the
Florida legislature and correct this live-local act once and for all.
When this was first proposed in 2023, I thought it was kind of a joke.
the state, preempting, everything that local, municipal authority stands for, preempting it all,
like 80 years of planning we did to make our environment, our towns beautiful, they're just saying,
guess what, erase all that we're taking over now, and that is absolutely unexpected, unacceptable.
So with that, I just want to close by saying, you guys are doing your job, you're doing it incredibly well.
Especially you in the middle, I'm super proud of you.
And I love all of you, keep up, you know, keep up with the good fight.
Thank you.
Jose B. Tone and David Quia, our next two speakers.
Whatever you want.
That way you can face that way.
And the answer was the same I had or so say we don't want six eight park drive.
Yeah, yes, Jose, we don't want six eight park drive, so I've been thinking about the proposal
and I wanted to think about it with respective different stakeholders that may or may not be here.
Right. The shops, the Whitman family, put up a beautiful video. It actually looks like they didn't use
which was kind of nice, and so I commend them for that.
The video talked about, you know, families, and affordable housing, and how much they love the community, which is really nice again.
But then, I don't know if you guys noticed the sort of slight of hand, which I commend you for.
When the lawyer got up here, he talked about how they're going to win this case.
He talked about their legal arguments after telling us that he's not going to tell us about legal strategy.
Okay? So, it's all horse maneuver.
So let's talk about the different stakeholders.
We'll start with the school, which is in Bay Harbor.
The school doesn't have any more room for students.
I mean we're all adults here, but that school is bursting at the seams.
It can not hold new students, right?
So I don't know where you guys are planning to put new students
when you build this building, which is,
has 18 units of affordable housing, and the rest.
Okay, Jose, sorry, eight time represents us.
These are good guys, do it some like a visit.
So it has 18 units of affordable housing, and the rest, the rest is non-affordable.
So I don't know where these students are going to come in.
It doesn't change the subject matter.
Number two, number two, the current residents of the neighborhood.
And by the neighborhood, I'll go to 3134 as a whole.
Right. I think that the traffic concern that was brought up is real. It's something that we're all
feeling, you know, we go from a three lane road to a two lane road, which causes a bottleneck.
It's a big pain for all of us that live here and we are already concerned. So that's a huge issue.
Lastly, something that people may not consider is, I don't know how many people go to the beach
on a regular basis, but even that's starting to feel really packed as it is already.
There's never any parking under the bridge for those of us that want to park there and walk
over. There's not enough space as it is. And the last point which is brought up by a friend
is I think that living in a community is about balance and finding out, finding the right balance
between your time is up. I've started interrupting. Okay, finding the right balance between the schools, the students, the residents, and clearly this this proposal would completely offset that balance.
Thank you.
Mr. Kliat, and if the remaining speakers can address their comments to the council, I think it would be more appropriate. I know like stand on.
Yeah, yeah, and just yeah, let's just address the council. I realize that there's a lot of emotion here.
People are excited and passionate, but this is still our we're the ones making the decision.
So it trusts comments here and yes, and a ton mark is our attorney. He's a good guy.
Okay, Mr. Mr. Queen. Go ahead.
Okay,
um, thank you for letting me speak. Um, this is Day J. Food.
Somewhere around 15 years ago, the Palhoba Citizens Coalition,
which no longer exists most of the people have since passed, we've passed the ordinance, got about 87
and percentage of all in favor of keeping maximum height as currently is on the west side
of Collins Avenue. This is on the west side of Collins Avenue.
The proposals from the state
really first through cities, not small villages, and we are a small one-mile village.
And the Bahaaba shops will never stop trying to take advantage.
They enjoy lawyers.
And we need to stand up against this because it will hurt us.
graphic is horrendous during the season. We are not prepared to have an influx of people.
And how much longer can we put up with their nonsense?
And even the construction of a cut by
and shops now working on it all over a year and helping with the traffic congestion that
helped anything else. I think we should vote this down and try to put it to bed forever.
I mean, it's just too much. It is not for a ball over. This is for a city. This is not a city. This
is a village. Thank you. Thank you. Next three speakers, Nancy Shami, Baba Graheb, John Diamond.
Thank you for all your work and having us speak. Yes. I guess I want to first
fall. Yeah, name and address for the record. Okay, Nancy Shami, 97.05. Colin, say Avenue. Thank you.
that's fine.
I'm kind of confused by the proposal because this whole issue started with the
live work act and it has to be 40%. So I don't know what that was that he just proposed
because you know the idea of ramming a mixed use project is through the 40%. So I mean, that's
makes sense at all. But what I really wanted to talk about was the critical concerns regarding
the safety and welfare of the community environment. And what really scares me if we allow
this to happen isn't a precedent for the entire west side of Collins to go high rise. That's
number one. Secondly, the proposals that consistent with Bell Harbor's historical load density
comprehensive plan and future land use ma'am.
It's the FA, FA are the floor area density was two times what is currently allowed and the building height was 450% increase.
I did notice one thing when I read the act and I don't know if it was the most current because you're saying they have changed it.
But there was an exception that said that if two sites of the project are bordered by single families
owned residential, 25 homes or more, and what that they have restricted to 150% of the residential.
When I looked down from my terrace and I looked at the site, I see homes on the west side,
And I see homes on the on the west side in the South border now.
There's only a couple because there is the city the community center there.
But that is an exception that would limit it to three stories.
So I don't know if anybody's looked it into that so I thought I'd bring that up.
The other thing is Thel Harbor is a FEMA designated flood zone of extreme risk.
The last FEMA flood map was completed in 2009, which was 17 years ago and 12 years before
the Champagne Tower fell down.
We are having increasing sea levels and king tide flooding occurring more frequently.
And I mean, I think you have to go to the safety is this project going to hurt our community and kind of handled the growing density.
During flood and storm evacuations, can we handle the density?
I just want to say the LOS level of service is critical and you're not going to be able to get off the barrier islands.
Thank you.
Thank you. And I know you've got up several questions. Our village manager is writing down all the questions and they will be addressed at the conclusion of public comment.
Bye, Vick Rauhhead.
John Diamond, and AJ Shaktel. Those are our next three speakers.
Well, I want to write about for drive. If I may, the video was interesting. First of all, in order for you to be
neighbor, you got to live here. The only bit of Whitman that I know was the Lake Mr. Whitman, and he
lived in the gated community, and he used to be the member of the Balharber Club. And I think people
forget that during the all this time of the Lake Mr. Whitman, he never spoke up against the violation
of the Balhober Club. How many of you do you know that until 1982, there was a sign right there
Balhober Security Law that says nobabs and no Jews allowed. And Mr. Whitman never spoke as
a influential business person to get rid of it. So let's talk about the history of Mr. Whitman
below this family nonsense, which is bogus. Second,
they talking about 523 units for 2 million
square feet. The calculation that comes up to 3,300 basically if you divide it per unit.
Now they go to 1.2 million for 180 units, basically doubling what they're asking, and they take the
called affordable housing from 200 and 11 to 18. You see the bottom line is money. We
been fighting them. We should continue to fight. And I go one step further. First of all,
Mr. Desancer is going to be out. So let's fight until until it gets off and maybe we get
a better governor. And then we could pass a better laws. And if you don't, this community voted.
This community made a deal with Balharbo sharps. And the deal was, if you accept the expansions,
they forego the hotel and everything else.
They want to really go on it.
They keep suing and they soon,
because they think they have money, they have power,
and they could think, and we should not quit.
If we have to sue the state of Florida
in a federal court, we should do it
as being a live act being unconstitutional.
Besides the traffic that we'll cause,
and I love George when he said the other day,
we talked about the city hall that we're going to build.
He got to get you to traffic.
You think about how many years that's going to take and what's going to do with the infrastructure the source system the water system
We can not have
this kind of a mega
Unit being built it does not affect the infrastructure so I ask all of you please vote
Against this do not settle fight fight
Thank you, John Diamond, AJ Shaftel, and Nina Rudolph.
Good evening, gentlemen. Ladies, thank you so much. My name is John Diamond. I am a resident
of the St. Regis in Bell Harbor. In fact, I'm four years running the vice president of
the Association there, so I understand both aggravation and litigation, so you have my deepest
respect. I think what you're looking for today, I don't want to be repetitive of what everybody
else is saying. I think what you're looking for today is a cue from your residents, from
your friends and your neighbors, what you should be doing as elected officials. And I think
is very clear that we would like to fight this to the very end. And whatever needs to be done,
we will be willing to do and you have our 100% support. Thank you.
AJ Shaktel, Nina Rudolf,
Doug Rudolf.
Good evening. AJ Shaktel, one bell harbor. This is in a
combination beyond any expectation that unfortunately may have a chance of being built.
This is a boils down to illegal analysis, illegal analysis that we haven't been made
privy to, but you guys, I suppose, have hopefully in a lot of pain.
Mike Drap, that's a sign.
Sorry, illegal analysis, what was the contract binding, was the application deficient
And on and on and on, what's the law going to, what's the law now, what's the law going to be?
But the question is, ultimately, and I'm on the budget, budget committee of the village,
we have the funds to fight this, we just have to have the determination to put up those funds that have necessary raise more.
We have the funds to do that also if we need to, but do we have the resolve to stick to stick with this?
Do can we take other actions against the shops such as calling for a community boycott of this not only this village, but the neighboring residents, in the towns that are all going to be affected by the traffic and the construction and everything else and all the things that everybody can talk about, do we have the ability to boycott the shops and the restaurants that depend significantly on people who are in this room and the friends of people who are in this room and in.
So, be strong, so be strong and of good courage.
Thank you all very much.
Thank you.
Lena Rudolf, Doug Rudolf, Diane Randolph.
Bring my husband up with me.
Hi, guys.
Nina Rudolf, two and two, Bell Bay Drive.
Again, I'll make this quick, but a couple of years ago we were in the same position and I
said it's so nice again to be at a meeting where 100% of the people are 4, 100% to have
you guys.
as you can clearly see from here. The main thing I think that you're going to take away,
these guys couldn't build a parking garage properly. I don't know if anybody has to drive into
the Bell Harbor shops, but it's an abomination. So to have the confidence that they would actually
be able to build something to begin with, and anyway, they were not going to affect our traffic.
They closed down 96-3 for 2 years, we couldn't move, look what they built.
I have zero confidence in them, I've lived here for 50 years and watch Bell Harbor grow
and it's a beautiful place and special people and to see it change to something that we wouldn't
be able to drive anywhere or do anything would be absolutely horrible.
Guys, I just want to thank you because I think you can see how we feel, fight them, you have
all of our power, I know that the Zoom is actually,
they can't, there's so many people.
So everybody is very upset about it.
And thank you for doing a great job.
Thank you.
Doug, you're going to follow your wife?
Oh, OK.
Doug Rudolph, Diane Randolph, and Anne Marie Kelly Stopeff.
Yeah, they say not to follow little kids
or animals, but you certainly don't want to follow your wife.
Couple of things. Yeah, she lived here for 50 years. I moved here 30 years ago and I realized something when we moved here.
The real value and strength of this village is that you guys are us guys. These seats come and they go.
You heard from Martin Packer, you heard from gay gay bristles, and say, everybody's here, join
pleasure.
You're us.
We're together on this.
And I think that what you're hearing tonight is that you have 150% backing of this community
to stand your ground, okay?
This is an issue, as you guys said at the beginning, that's the most important issue we've
ever faced.
We all really do live here as opposed to what those guys said.
So we deal with it all the time.
We all have our lives tied up in this community, in our houses, in our homes, the values of what we've done,
our children, our grandchildren.
You know, since I moved here 30 years ago to live with my wife,
I've heard constantly about all the great things that the Whitman's and the shops have done for us.
You know what, guys? Honestly, they don't do anything for us. They do everything for themselves.
That's what it's always been and always will be and all this hog watch that they spread all the time
This great live local thing. They were so concerned about that's buzzy said we're down to 18 units now
And it'll be zero. It doesn't really matter. It's never about us
It's always about them. I think I'm not gonna take the time to talk about all the reasons why we shouldn't allow this
You all know what they are. We live with them. I just want to say this
It's very difficult as a ton said
when you're in litigation, it's scary.
You're spending money.
You don't know where the end is.
I will say this to you.
We're a very lucky, wealthy community.
And I think everybody here wants to stand up
and have you guys stand up for us
and spend whatever it takes.
You have our blessing.
You have our backing.
Please continue to be our representatives
and make this thing the least important.
Let it go away, fight it whatever it takes.
That's what we need to do.
Hi, Diane Randolph, 10185 Collins Avenue. I've owned in Bel Harbor for close to 30 years and lived here full time for the last five.
I spent my career in retail and I would challenge you to look at the Whitman family's claim of affordability.
What are they going to kick out of Fendi and replace it with a gap so that the people who might be living here could actually shop.
Right, luxury retail, for the first time in my 40 years in retail is suffering a serious decline and it's always been impervious to all kinds of, you know, economic downturns, but not lately.
So they're scrambling, right? So I just, again, like everyone else has said, totally support you. We're behind you. We'll do whatever it takes to shut this down. The infrastructure cannot support it.
even before the construction started, it's just untenable and can't be sustained. Thank you.
Thank you.
Annemory Kelley Stelpa, Monique Benun and John Voxy.
Good evening. I started here when I was nine months old.
I'm an actress for 77.
Name an actress for 8.
Pardon me, dear.
Name an actress for the record.
I can't give you my address because I'm in litigation.
Okay, and I will explain it later.
But my name is Annemoree Kelly Stopa.
I started at this hotel when I was nine months old.
So I think I have a lot of history that goes to all of this.
And I have questions.
I don't have answers.
And I think before anything is decided,
before anybody picks aside,
questions need to be answered and brought to the residents who live here.
It's very simple. I was the first one to break the barrier to the restrictions. I sold to a Jewish family,
with the help of the Logan family. And it's not about exclusion, it's about inclusion,
to make it into a real community. We don't need to argue, we need to sit down and discuss.
And I think the most important discussion is number one, have they paid what they promised
in 2018?
I don't know, I don't think so.
Because at the last town council meeting,
they're going to move the police and the town and everybody else.
Now, they're not going to pay. Okay. Well, that means they can't keep their word. I would
like an agreement where they must keep their word, that there is a fund that is set aside
for the issues that they have promised to keep. The second thing is, how long is this going
take. I haven't heard in 19, when I'm 2018, it was seven years. Well, that went out the window.
We're still going into construction. How long is this going to take? I want to know because I don't
want to have to sit in an hour in my car to get from a 163rd street to bail harbor. I think that's
Everybody's concerned. The biggest concern is, how are we going to get ambulances in?
How are we going to get out of town in case there's a hurricane? How is this all happening?
It's got to be explained before any judgment is made. The other thing that I have is,
why are we in litigation for so long? And this is more toward the attorneys. There is such a
called mandatory arbitration. You present your case and it's resolved. You don't have a story.
Joe, but your time is up. What your time is up? Thank you. Well, I think you should
arbitrate. Okay. Monique Benoon, John Bakshi, Amanda Hand.
Good evening. My name is Monique Benoon. Sorry. I'll be reading off of this.
90-80-100 pounds, Avenue. Most of the people already said the most intelligent things which are the
risk of flooding. I'm a former science teacher. You build, there's going to be more flooding. It's
one plus one is two. That's it. The other thing is, as the woman just mentioned, emergency vehicles.
We have an older population, but even not older population. It doesn't even matter. We must
make sure that people can be treated or, you know, emergency vehicles can get through.
It would be a terrible, terrible hazard, having more people living there.
We all want to see people be able to live in, you know, where they want, how they can
afford best, but we have serious concerns about this.
And I'm wondering, was there an independent study done?
Oh, is this just the shops who have made their studies?
It's done analysis based on how much the area can support, how many people have there been independent agencies doing those studies, whether alternative locations, that these people may present their hotels and apartments and affordable housing.
I mean, why does it have to be, there's already no, whether there's already too much traffic.
storm drainage, sanitation, sewer, the emergency vehicles, local ordinances, as the mayor
had said, over 80 years, protecting the way our village looks and all of a sudden everything
is going to change because of a Florida state law.
I think we do need to propose things to the state.
And I thank everybody here, everybody that showed up, showing that it's so important to us.
Thank you for all you time.
And I'm wondering if we have some recourse for the frivolous loss of spring, bringing broad
against us time, after time, after time, at some point.
Don't they have to pay for it?
Isn't there something unfair about having to defend ourselves constantly?
Maybe they should have to pay for some of that.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
John Baxi, Amanda Hand, Ellie Freyne.
Hi, my name is John Baxi, I'm 155 Collins Avenue, I just have one quick question.
are we um we entered into an agreement with those guys and if and if they're not honoring
the agreement can't we we nag on their agreement as well too like is there like some sort
of like a strategy to that questions are being taken and answered at all okay if I
come that's it thanks thank you okay Amanda hand Daniel Goldfarb and Cindy Pereira hi good
in Amanda Quarkhand offices at 1395,
Brett Glavino, on behalf of the Bell Harbor
and North and South condominium at the St. Regis.
I came here tonight not really knowing
what is on the agenda,
because the agenda is a little ambiguous.
It does sound like you're looking for a blessing
from your residents about a settlement
or our continued litigation,
but I think the big question is,
are any of these proposals approval?
is the settlement proposal even a provable on the village code and I don't know that we have an
up detail with one slide to see even what is what is going on here but the question matter is
a reasonable proposal by a good neighbor doesn't have to hide proposals and details from the neighbors
okay you have a room full of people here everything that has been done by the developer in this case
is to avoid facing the public that's what the live local act does you can avoid facing the public
by going through an administrative process,
you don't have to face your neighbors.
The live, in addition, then you go to court,
you go to closed or mediation without your stakeholders.
Now, we have a nice video message tonight.
I represent the Bellhubber North and South
that immediately across the street,
Bellhubber Shops is not reached out to them at all.
So that's a problem.
If you are a good neighbor with a reasonable proposal,
you should be reaching out to your neighbors,
you should be talking to them directly,
not sending a video message, not trying to avoid pacing the public at a hearing, so I'll reserve any of my legal objections for another day.
Thank you. Daniel Goldfarb, Cindy Pereira, and Sandy Goldfarb.
Hello, good evening. It's very clear that the name and address for the record.
Daniel Goldfarb 59 can't thank you. It's very clear that these people don't care about us because they don't even show up here.
And if the state of Florida care of us, they should do something, because when they are
we are in the election time, they come here, they can't do our show, they can't do
this theory and they tell that they care of us.
And if they don't care about us, we should sue them as well, and prove that they are wrong with
this law, not only the windmills, also the state.
And it is not only for our city, for other cities that are going to be in this situation
after us, because as soon as this happened, it's going to happen in other cities as well.
That's the only thing that I have to say.
Thank you.
Sandy Pereira, Sandy Goldfarb, and Leon Wolf.
Hello, Sandy Pereira, 9705 Collins Avenue.
I've lived in the same region for more than 10 years.
I used to live in a village and now I already feel like I live in Brickle.
It takes me 40 minutes to pass five blocks in 96th Street after dropping off my kids at school.
There's been so much construction. I feel like it has taken over all my memories of the view I used to have.
Can't imagine moving forward what many many years of construction will feel like.
I live in a 24th floor and sometimes my son wakes up in the middle of the night from the banking of construction 2 a.m. 3 a.m. it's constant.
I also feel my building infrastructure has shifted from the constant construction all around so it can be good for any neighboring building.
To think that in the future there will be about a 21% increase of residents hotel guests in Ball Harbor sounds like I will need a helicopter to get out of my building.
I understand that affordable housing is an issue but literally any corner will make more sense in this intersection.
I think it will actually repulse people from coming around.
If Mr. Whitman really lives dear, then he will know that our traffic is on bearable at certain
times of the day already without all these extra buildings. If he really cared about our village,
then he will know that a village usually consists of up to 2,500 people. Currently there's about
3,100. What Mr. Whitman wants to do is create a Brickle City Center. He should find another zip code to do that.
Thank you.
Sandy Goldfarb, Leon Wills, and Nico Logan.
Hi, Sandy Goldfarb,
one, three, three, Camden Drive. A lot of the points that I had on my mind have been mentioned,
but one of the things I want to remind us all is that we also have rights. We have rights as a
community and as a city. If you were to look online at city planning considerations,
there's a lot of considerations that are being neglected with the building of this hotel in space.
One of which is not to mention that's been mentioned as the source having good functioning
source is a priority, but also if we continue to block off these arteries to the ocean,
to the ocean, breeze, what we're doing is we're creating a space that's very stagnant, and
we live in a tropical climate, and I think we should really consider that the health and
being of the neighborhood is at stake. We have the big large green wall that was put up,
and now we would be closing off another one of our boundary walls. So just in terms of the health
and safety of the community, I think that's another consideration to take. Thank you. Leon Wolf,
Nikolagan, Brian Salz.
I mean, before I spoke, a clap.
Thank you.
Leon Wolfe, 99, 99 Collins Avenue.
I won't repeat everything everybody's set already.
All the points are really important and will take in.
Two things I want to mention.
Number one, I don't have the document that was signed with the
Whitman's in the village a couple of years ago,
but it's incredible that you're telling me that they signed a document
and saying they wouldn't do X and now they're doing X.
I mean, the audacity of some people.
And could you imagine, if one of their tenants said,
you know, what we find the least five years ago,
but we don't want to pay you anymore, is that okay?
It's incredible.
The second thing I want to mention is,
you know, they've sort of a slight of hand reduce
the size of the development,
but they want a million, 200,000 square feet of something.
Just to put that in perspective,
If you familiar with the first, with the Wacovia building downtown, which is 55 stories tall,
that's a million 100,000 square feet. So it's incredible that they want to make this
larger than that. I mean, it would be monstrous, traffic, safety, all those things.
Vote against. Thank you.
Nikologant, Brian Salz, and Susan Aaron.
Nikologant, 64 came to drive. The people at home haven't been able to all get on,
so I think if we have one of these again when needs to have a larger capacity.
Okay. That's the first thing. And the Bell Harbor shops is disingenuous.
There is nothing that they have done to date that is what they said they would do.
They said we'd have fountains. They said the garage would be beautiful.
The grages horrendous. It looks ugly. The traffic is terrible. I think you know the sentiment
of everybody in this room, which is we want to keep our community the way it is beautiful and
meets the needs and yes we're feeling squeezed by traffic in all the other things. Last night
the enormous number of neighbors we had no power for 14 hours. But the
Bell Harbor shops had power.
So, you know, there's a lot of things in the
infrastructure that are not functioning well and they're making it worse. And so I
think we will all want to floor you to continue fighting for us and on our
half and even the next person who comes after each of you, it's important because our way
of life is being diminished. I was born here and I lived here for more than 60 years and I
could tell you this is not the same community that it was when I was younger. Even 20 years ago
and we need to preserve what we have because green space and open space and our ability to
the beach is being diminished all across the state, and the legislature is the big burden,
and we need to really fight them because they're making our neighborhoods not pleasant anymore.
Thank you.
Brian Salts, Susan Aeron, Francis Newhead.
Hi, Brian Salts, 9601 Collins Avenue.
First of all, thanks to the Council for all the work.
Everybody is still up here with so many constructive comments.
Just to echo them, continue the fight.
You clearly have the support of the village in 100%.
Thank you.
Francis Nuhat, Sheila Elias Tablin and Paul Chaplin.
Sorry, Susan.
Susan, thanks.
Yeah, Susan Francis and then she was Susan Aaron 10225 Collins
I feel that the shops are doing sort of a switch and bait on us that they presented to us this
Complex because of the live local act
That's before us, but all of a sudden, you know this 18
units that they could possibly
get in that in that
And if they're only putting up 180 units, I'm not a developer, but I don't see very much money coming in from that.
So the whole thing is based on them wanting this hotel complex.
And I think that's what we have to consider that that's what they want.
The whole live local was just a roost to get us to accept.
But thank you.
Thank you.
Sheila Lies-Tapplin, Francis Nuhat, Paul Chaplin.
I live in 1999, Collins.
My late husband was Southampton.
He built the harbor house.
And he always remarked about the excellence in the quietness.
When you went into Bell Harbor, it had an era about it.
The streets were wider.
They had the gardening, they checked everybody's gardens, they had a garden thing.
All the other things, the infrastructure, this was never, this was meant to be a resort
town and it's become big city.
And unfortunately we do not have the infrastructure for it and it's extremely serious that
we fight this because it's absolutely the way I haven't, I'm an artist, I have a studio
right near Whole Foods. On Saturday morning, I could make it maybe in nine ten minutes.
I come home from at 3.34 o'clock over an hour, many days. It's remarkable. Anyway, my husband
would be hard sick if he saw this. He was so caring about this community and I hope that you all
fight and I really appreciate all of you. Please keep it up. Thank you.
I'm reaching the end of
the speaker's list. So Francis, New Hunt, our last three speakers unless someone wants to go pick
up, you know, fill out a card. Also, I want to give you opportunity. Anyone who doesn't want to
speak, but wants to raise their hand showing that they are against us proceeding with this proposal
you may do so now.
I guess, yes, I guess. Okay. Okay, and anyone wants to raise their hand in favor. Okay. Okay. Go ahead, Mr.
My name is Francis Nuke.
I live at I work at 1060 King Concourse and I'm representing Bay Harbor Islands and I would like to speak about the women's. They have destroyed our town. You're going to start to destroy your town and I want to explain what he has done to our town. Not only that we don't have the money, I'm sorry, but we just don't have the money to fix our bridges because we have no money.
He came to our town, and he built a 90,000 square foot church right on the business district,
which was not allowed to have this type of usage.
They have not paid any real estate taxes on that church,
and I'm sure everybody can see it when they come to Bay Harbor.
I'm sure you can't miss it.
Okay, the other thing is, they're still in our neighborhood, they're using our only parking garage.
Can you imagine Bell Harbor is using our parking garage, which I don't understand.
But more importantly, I will repeat myself, we don't have any money.
We are not able to fix our causeway island.
How are you going to get over the bridge?
How are you going to get over?
because it's going to fall apart and it keeps fixing it and fixing it and it's still not
to par and we're threatened with that. The other thing is I heard someone talk about the school
because everyone is affected or your kids go to Bay Harbor. That's your zoning. With that we just
finished our comprehensive plan and they did not put in the school elements and if you don't put
school elements, you can build construction, you can't have more density. And they didn't
put it in. And we just finished our comprehensive plan. They took away, we had an
Bellha and Bay Harbor a joint use agreement. That was with the school because we did building
for the school and we were overcrowded. Well, it was only limited to 1200 students. Now they
changed it. The government has changed it to a verification. We have people coming in from Miami
shores all over the place that don't belong in our school. We're overcrowded and we're back
to square one. We don't have a decent school. It's overcrowded and there's nothing for these kids.
It's taken up by outsiders. So I don't understand that either. But I have to admit
Um, the other thing with our comprehensive plan and this is with our, um, what is it called
the town planner.
She comes to our meetings.
She's looking at plans from, uh, 2008.
Those are the traffic studies in there.
From 2008.
Can you imagine this and the traffic studies that they're building?
Thank you.
Our last two speakers, Paul Chaplin and Mike Menzy, or Menzo, I'm not sure if that's an
here now. My name is Paul Chaplin, 108 Ball Bay Drive. I want to say that we really appreciate
what the council has been doing and will continue to do because I'm totally opposed
to these tall buildings on this property. I think we also would like to know what it
actually is the legal process, because are we ever forced into binding arbitration? Does this
go to litigation in front of one judge or a jury? And what's going to happen? And the other thing
did you ever consider if Niemann and Sax are really gone bust in an up-paying rent by taking
a three-story hotel and a three-story condo and telling the go away. Thank you.
Our final speaker for the evening, Mike Menzy. Mike pronounced in the right? Perfect. Okay, thanks.
Good evening, everybody. Thank you. You've heard the community. We're asking for you to continue
is fine. Thank you. What I'd like to do for this community and all of us want to do is help you.
Get us a list of people who we need to contact in the state government because that's what we have to
go with. This is what it also also get us the names of those people and get us a letter that
form letter that we can email or send. Let us help. The other way of we can help as a community. I am
businessman. Hit them in the pocketbooks. We said it. We as a community have to live it. We can speak or we want. Let's do it. Stop. Frequitting the shops. Thank you. Thank you.
Okay. Well, we had a very robust dialogue. It was great to hear.
Uh, uh, uh, did you, did you fill out a speaker's card?
Okay. Okay. No. Okay. So, um, go ahead. Is there, I just want to,
because I want to close public comments. I want to know, are there any other speakers in the audience
tonight that wish to speak? Please be recognized now? Okay. I see. So, just these two speakers?
Okay. Go ahead. Name an address for the record. I'm Steven Sachs. And I live in the
which you guys approved. I live on the north side and the moment they put up the Oceana
if you look at the prices on the north side they declined about 30%. Now we have some women
here from the Said region. I think quite frankly you get another body to put up some money
for litigation. We have the Said region because they are view and their property is going to go down
because of the construction of the noise and again I could say from the facts that I'll probably
has declined my property about 35% so it's the same as the south and I paid that premium for a
beautiful spectacular view. Now the other point that I want to make and two people brought it up
about the traffic but not the traffic for good inconvenience point of view but specifically for medical
reasons for ambulances. Now, I have to look at the north side and I was looking out that
one day when there was traffic from the Palova Bridge to where I'm in the Plaza. There was an ambulance
with its siren going and you have those red light cabras. I could say it took about 15 to 20 minutes
from the top of the head over bridge to the Plaza.
That being said, I decided, because I lived in New York,
very close to the World Trade Center,
and they said in New York, if you see something, say something.
So I decided to call up the Village of El Harbor Police,
so there's a record of that me calling,
and they said you should call the date county up, 911,
which I also called.
So if I hope that person baited to wherever they were going,
but the ambulance was blasted and the people were not moving because they saw that red light.
So this is the separate state of the new buildings.
So that's the only point I want to make, that most important thing is not the inconvenience.
I don't mind waiting two hours, three hours or whatever it may be,
but I don't want to be dead or somebody else being dead because the ambulance can't get through
and somehow the village needs some assurance for the residents here that medical takes priority
And I don't think that's been addressed.
That's the only point I wanted to make.
Thank you.
Final speaker of the evening, name and address for the record, please.
Okay.
Charlene, RJ, 9801, Collins.
The legal counsel and you guys talked about a mediated solution.
Or, but a mediated solution is when both parties come up with a, like, a compromise
that's acceptable to both parties, and then you go and see if everybody accepts.
So what if you could if you're going to talk a little bit at the end and answer some questions.
If you could just explain and you mentioned that the judge is a very reputable judge and
and he's trustworthy and we could trust him. Like why isn't the mediated solution
more reflective of what concerns Bell Harbor? So why is the mediated solution? It's not mediated
it because it's the, it's the Whitman's solution that they're offering like a new proposal.
So I'm just wondering why wasn't the judge or why can't the judge go back and really make a way more
mediated solution. Maybe there is no mediated solution, but if there is a mediated solution, it should be reflective of both parties
desires. Anyways, if you could discuss that, that would be great. Thank you. Thank you.
And before staff begins, before staff begins addressing the comments that have been brought up,
I do want to recognize the Surfside Commissioner and Jayat Trevani.
Thank you. Would you like to address the community?
Okay.
Good evening, everyone.
So here on a personal capacity, because we didn't have the opportunity to discuss this with the commission.
but personally, this is something that I've been really trying to rub my head around this,
the concept behind the live local act, which on one side obviously is trying to address an issue.
We all know that it is an issue in Florida, but on the other side, more than at the technical level,
this idea that local conditions like traffic infrastructure and not considered is something
that is to me and I can't really process that. So anyway I really support your fight here.
Hope I hope you'll be successful and thank you for everything you're doing.
Thank you.
Okay, George, do you want to start?
Yeah, are you bringing it back up to, I can try to address.
So, public kindness clothes, I appreciate you all, I'm making your voices there.
Okay, I'm going to, you know, I was taking good notes, but we'll see how good they were.
A lot of the questions that came up surrounded what is called our concurrency and our level of service,
whether it's water capacity, sewer capacity, traffic capacity, school capacity, emergency vehicles.
All of those things were evaluated as part of our initial review of the application.
And that's part of what led to the denial in November of 2024.
I don't have them off the top of my head, of course, but what we will do is tomorrow on
website, we will post the actual denial letter, so whoever wants to go and read it for themselves,
they'll have an opportunity to do so. It's online already, but it'll make it easier if I just
literally write to the front. But all of those considerations were reviewed by professionals,
not just our staff, and for the various reasons that you'll read, we determined that the application
did not meet the adequacies and we denied it accordingly. So I grouped all of those questions together.
As it relates to the how long this will take to build, your guess is as good as mine.
Past experience on construction is whatever they've undertaken at the shops has taken longer than they even anticipated.
It is their intention or stated intention that many of these buildings will be phased.
So it's not their intention to build them all at once.
That's a double-edged sword.
On the one hand, if you're going to see construction,
but if they're sequenced over time, then it's just that much more.
So it is safe to say that it could be ten or plus years of construction
beyond the eight or ten that you've already experienced.
And that's something that we brought to the table and said that's a concern.
There's a fatigue associated with the construction that has already taken place.
As it relates to frivolous lawsuits, I'm not a lawyer, so I'm going to let the lawyers speak to that if he so means inclined.
I think part of the strongest piece of our defense is the development agreement that was entered into in 2017 and subsequently amended.
And again, it's available online and it is very thorough and very precise and the important thing to take with that is it's together with a site plan that was approved at the same time and that site plan pretty much dictates every inch of the property what will or will not happen on that site plan and that's part of the argument we make is that the live local act while it's intended uses are what they are.
It did not intend, and it clearly doesn't preempt existing contracts.
And that's the crux of the live-local argument that is being litigated.
So, you know, we feel very strongly, they feel strongly on their side, and that's a judge ultimately will determine.
As it relates to someone who said, well, you know, it's just an agreed upon settlement, as I mentioned,
And this is the best and final offer that the Whitman family developers have proposed.
We have not accepted it from our perspective, but what we did insist on is that we did
want to have public transparency, and so that's what you're seeing today.
So no, it's not your typical mediated settlement where an agreement was reached and we're
now here to present it, trying to find if I had any others.
What is the legal process?
Well, it depends on what the council does today.
Obviously, it's accepted.
Then it would need to be, you know,
memorialized as an agreement,
and development agreement of some sort.
Maybe an amendment to the one that exists today.
And then from that,
another question came up about,
is it approval?
It would require ordinance amendments. Whatever they're proposing, whether it's the original proposal or the settlement proposal, any of their instance, our current zoning ordinance does not allow for what is being proposed and it would require a series of ordinance changes, text amendments and the like that would be required to be approved together with the development agreement.
If the council determines to not accept as proposal and instead pursue litigation,
then, you know, buckle up, you know, will be in a, in a battle and that, that will be what it will be.
I'm trying to see if I have missed any question,
Mr. Mayor, into the DA, are there any settlements
that are provable?
Privileess lawsuit, I'll let the lawyers,
I talked a lot about the levels of service.
Why is litigation taking so long?
It, you know, in part, in part, that votes
to our benefit and it parts of votes to their benefit.
Sometimes legal strategy is to extend it and prolong it.
the longer we are litigating the longer the development doesn't happen and then other things could occur.
So, you know, it's a double-ish sort as well.
I think those are the questions that I captured, Mr. Mayor of Susan or A-Ton.
A-Ton wishes to come up.
Oh, very quick. Once, A-Ton Mark, I represent the village.
So, there was question about attorney's fees.
We are seeking under the development agreement.
There's what's called a prevailing party fee provision, which means that the winner of the fight relating to the development agreement is going to get attorney's fees.
So, it works either way, we've invoked that clause, they have as well.
There's some statutory basis for attorney's fees as well, in one of the cases involving the noise ordinance.
There was a little bit of a, there was some confusion I think about the mediator's proposal,
the mediated process, the mediation process, let me just make sure everybody understands what
we're talking about.
Even though Judge Hansen's retired judge, he doesn't have the ability to decide this dispute
for anybody at this time.
We go into the mediation and we spent, like I said, a lot of time, sort of chopping wood.
And he, towards the end of that mediation, made what's called a mediator's proposal, which is a non-binding sort of suggestion that this is something that the parties may wish to consider.
It was not what you saw, but it was a variation of that.
And again, as I mentioned, there is risk on both sides,
and the sign of a successful mediation, as that immediate will tell you,
is that neither side is happy.
The suggestion from the mediator's perspective,
and from the shops perspective, is that they're proposal,
that they were not happy with their proposal either.
they viewed it as a significant concession, that could be gamesmanship, that could be taxic,
tactics, that's just what we were told. And as I said, that was what they indicated was
their best in final offer. So that was a little bit about the mediation process and how we landed
where we were. There was a question about arbitration. arbitration generally is not
appealable. And there's usually a lot of legal reasons why arbitration would want to be avoided
And in this particular case, it wouldn't be available.
In any event, there was a question about a jury trial.
None of these cases were going to the jury
with the exception of the one I believe in the federal taking
case, which that George alluded to earlier.
I believe there was a demand for a jury trial in that case,
but the other four are all going to be in front of a judge
and the judge is going to be the ultimate decision maker.
Thank you.
that I didn't pick up on. There were a series of different questions regarding the development
agreement itself. And I think it's important to mention, I think somebody said,
maybe we can renegotiate it, or can we withhold things that were to the benefit of the shops
since they're holding things from us? Essentially, that's what they should be doing is
renegotiating a development agreement, but they've chosen a different approach.
The development agreement is an agreement like any other two parties can mutually agree to amend it.
It's been amended twice since the time it was first entered into, and it could be amended again.
But that takes two parties to do that, and the other party has chosen litigation instead,
in part because they feel the live local act provides them certain rights that they did not
have prior, and therefore they want to, I guess, take advantage of those, you know, unfortunately
for us, the, a lot of the benefits that endured to the shops under the local, I'm sorry,
under the development agreement had to do with zoning and the ability to expand their, their
existing footprint, which they're in the midst of doing permits have been issued, they're
the construction they knew slash expect that they will have the shops opening September
of this year. We'll see. But those are all kind of in the work, so it's it's it's impossible
for us to now pull the permits and suggest that they cannot complete it. By the same token, a lot
of the public benefits that were in yearning to the villages benefit, have already been received
as well. So, a lot of those exchanges that occurred as part of the development agreement
have already been performed. There are a few elements that are still outstanding,
but nothing that I would suggest is the material part of the project. But yes, we could renegotiate
and that's something that perhaps one would argue that this mediation might be the renegotiation
at that point. The other thing is the notion of the live local act in what it did and didn't
require and does it open a precedent. The state keeps changing it, as I mentioned, it basically
every year they're adding more and more preemptions. As it currently stands, it does not appear to us
that it would allow for similar projects to occur beyond the site that is the shop. In other words,
to ever ask about the west side of Collins, right now as it's written, we do not believe that
it would be an eligible project, but the legislature meets every year. And that's the issue.
Is that every year, the legislature meets, and every year there's the possibility that some
change could occur, including things that might be detrimental to us and our argument here.
And that's something that we need to be cognizant of is that there have been efforts in prior
sessions just two years ago to add a preemption for development agreements. In other words,
at the state would preempt the development agreement and then that argument would be theoretically
mooted. We were successful in preventing that from happening, but that doesn't mean it can't come
again in a future, in a future session.
The proposal that is a settlement, though, it's very
clear that you should remember, that is not a live local act proposal. The original proposal
is, and we've denied it for the reasons that you'll be able to read tomorrow, but the proposed
settlement is not anywhere near what the live local act calls for. Most importantly, as you've
about the the the live local act requires 40 percent affordable in their units and this is only 10 percent or 18 units that's not a live local eligible project
the live local act requires there to be a ratio of commercial versus residential square footage that proposal does not meet that minimum ratio
what they're trying to do is suggest that in this mediated settlement
that we reach a different agreement
that is not a live local act application.
And they just wanted to be clear
that that that would not travel under necessarily the same one.
Sorry, the same moniker.
I think that does, no, covered.
I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.
Mr. Mayor.
Thank you.
I guess before we get into deliberations,
are there any comments from council or questions
on for the attorneys or for George?
Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
and then is it appropriate to make a motion at this point and then continue your conversations or
this conversation? Just America. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Sorry. I don't know if I might
might come again. Yeah, there you go. The one thing that I will appreciate is the support of the community
and the continued support of the communities can be one of the most important things. I think outreach
is unbelievable for you guys to get involved with whether it's calling our local representatives
I don't want to assume, but the Attorney General, and it's an election year, and donations go a very, very long way in this political arena.
So whether it's letter-writing, phone calling, donations to the right people to help move the needle, the way that the Whitman's obviously move the needle, I think it's super important for us to always remember this and get behind it.
And that's the best way that the community can help.
So we'd really appreciate all that help from you guys.
Thank you.
Okay.
So we're going to start with Councilman Levy.
Oh, thank you.
Thank you.
We're going to start with Councilman Levy if you want to share your comments.
They have you feel, then we'll proceed with voting.
Thank you, Mayor.
And you're attending a motion.
Thank you, Mayor.
I think that the one of the same that comes to my mind right now.
something that we're eating per capita boat, which is a Jewish reading that we do from in these
few days of the Homer, which is 49 days a week from Pesach until we get the Tor and Shagot.
And it says, Miu Khachan, Helomeg Mikoladam, who is the one with the wise person, the one who learned
from everybody. And I think that what we have heard from the communities that the one has to stand behind
didn't so we are standing behind them, so I want to say thank you for everybody for coming here
today.
Councilman Splire, would you like to shine?
No, Mr. Mayor, I said my piece, thank you.
Okay, Vice Mayor, well, yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Just a few points, again, I want to repeat how to do some that I had noted earlier.
Again, we saw the beautiful video of Matthew talking about his family's commitment to our
And living in our neighborhood, I don't know if most of you know, he doesn't live in our neighborhood anymore.
He's moved to North Carolina.
But he has his nice place in the same region.
He comes to every once in a while to do business.
And I guess check on his investment.
So he doesn't have to really deal with the traffic.
Like we are in what he's left behind or what he will leave behind.
Again, the live, I think, one thing with regards to live local.
Again, a lot of people talked about, hey, what can you do? Why aren't we doing more?
So, again, I think the our attorney, Aeton discussed it and the mayor and the manager talked about it.
We are superseded by this live local act and so the state has preempted our rights and taken over our rights.
We put setback through things and they said, sorry none of that counts whatever they can do whatever they want.
So this is just something that we don't have a lot of control over.
And I think the biggest issue is I think like Councilman Sklar said,
If people were interested, what we really can do is get a ground roots, grass roots effort
to really go after our legislatures, the Florida Legislature, the Senators and Congress
people and really push back on this liberalical, because as they said, this comes up every
year and they can, again, as these developers go in, this is a windfall for developers,
developers push this liberalical act to get windfalls and being able to build on this tiny little
place huge, huge buildings without any local restriction.
So that's a huge effort, which hopefully somebody takes on,
because I think it's most important.
Again, he shared in his video how much he cared about
affordable housing.
We know that there's only benefit was he got the windfall
of being able to say, hey, we're going to build four big giant
story, because he knew all he was ever wanted was a hotel.
I think his former mayor, Packer, said he's been,
been asking for a hotel for for a long time. So he would use this as Nick. Yeah, so they would use
this as negotiation. You either let us build four buildings which we are able to do or we're
going to come back and now we'll get our hotel and one building and so forth with 18 wonderful units
that will solve our traffic issue because people will live here rather than having to drive to work.
So obviously, this doesn't, doesn't make sense.
Other point I wanted to make.
Oh, somebody said, just, you know, just vote this down.
Obviously, the vote is not voting this down option or not.
The vote is whether we continue fighting and we continue our legal battle,
which again, I am for and I'll make a motion to do.
And it, but it's not totally, you know,
we have to, we have to realize it's not totally in our hands.
Again, if the legislature comes out and changes or if the courts decide that our position
is not correct, there is some risk, but I believe in I think everybody shares, we take
that risk because we know what the other option is.
So, thank you.
Councilman Fremark.
Yep, that's what I'm hearing.
So let's understand as well that the reason, the primary reason that they're willing to fight
as long and hard as they are is that one would estimate that 2 million additional square
feet of rights would equate to about 2 billion dollars of value and one million additional
square feet would equate to approximately a billion dollars of incremental value so that does give the
side, a lot of powder. We have to approach this with eyes.
Why don't we have to understand the risks that are involved? I was the one that was at the mediation sessions, all three of them at Bill's and someberg, and we'll provide some comments on the tone and tanner of the discussions and the negotiations, but I do believe it's important that we be aware that this can cut both ways.
We can end up with them not being able to do anything or we can end up with approval of the live local application of 2 million square feet.
So there's the legal risk. There is the legislative risk and as much as we talk about the grassroots effort and everything else.
Miami-Day County, Bal Harbor, Florida is not all of Florida. There's a whole lot of the rest of the
state that goes north and into the panhandle that are really not terribly sympathetic to what goes on
in Miami-Day County and in South Florida. The developers across the state spent well and they will
continue to spend for changes, for other changes to live local.
The point that A. Tom made on prevailing party fees, and he made this comment as well, works both ways
in terms of how that could potentially end at the end of any litigation, however long that it takes.
affordable housing and live local. I'm here to tell you that's part of the world that I live in in my
my other job where I lead my knee Jewish. We have over a thousand affordable housing units in South
Florida and we're in the process of building more. Live local is very well intended. These guys are
using it in terms of it, the need for affordable housing in the state is real, it's real in
Miami-Dade County as well, but it's not designed nor intended for this use for this purpose
and for what they're doing with that. Going back to the negotiations, I can tell you that in
my view, the negotiations were duplicitous in nature.
There were any number of things that were agreed upon
in one session, sometimes at the beginning of the session
and these were marathon days.
That were then traded back either at a following session
or later in the day.
So as much as we can take a look at the potential
negotiated settlements and so on,
you have to be dealing with an honest credible party on the other side of the table. You just do.
You can disagree and you can disagree vehemently, but you've got to have credibility in whatever
that end result is. True, there's a lot of progress that's been made in what you see.
You see it going from 2 million square feet to a million square feet. But it's not enough in terms of
what we're feeling, I think, and what we're hearing.
And I do complement the community for being fully engaged
and for appearing here this evening
and voicing your concerns and voicing your views.
I can't tell you, there's any surprise
in terms of what we're hearing,
but it's important for you to hear where we are,
where the negotiations are as much as can be shared
and for us to hear from you because there's a cost
And there's everything else that comes along with that.
So I am going to be supportive of continuing to defend the village
and to reject the mediator's proposed settlement term sheet,
once some motion is made.
Thank you.
So I think everybody has made their voices heard,
including the council now, it's my turn.
I just want to say that I am so honored that all of you came out tonight
Because this, what we did tonight, this town hall meeting is really the cornerstone of American democracy.
And this is how decisions should be made in the public, with comments, hearing from experts.
And unfortunately, the legislators in Tallahassee sought to cut out this part of the process when they came up with a local act.
And I believe that there are flaws in the local act that we might be able to exploit,
But that's kind of a conversation for another day, but I am happy that the community is supportive of continuing the fight because I certainly am as well.
So thank you all for coming tonight.
There are before we entertain any motions.
I know Vice Mayor Wolf is eager.
I was notified that there were some emails sent to the clerk from residents that weren't able to attend.
I sent them to your email.
I want to read them.
No, I rather not.
pretty much echo whatever he said, but it's from a guy we'll let and Cassie we'll let.
Yes, okay, so their comments will be incorporated into the record. I do also want to recognize
Surfside Vice Mayor, Diana Van Mergey, who's here tonight. And without further ado, I guess,
Vice Mayor, would you like to make a motion? Or, or it's my pleasure. I'd like to make a motion
to direct the administration and the village attorney to communicate to the shops and
mediator that the settlement on the terms discussed this evening is not acceptable and to continue defending the pending lawsuits.
Thank you.
Is there a second?
It's not a second.
It's been moved in second.
This is a voice vote.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed?
Nine.
Passes unanimously.
Okay.
Motion to adjourn?
Motion.
What?
We're adjourned.
Thank you all.
Here.
You want to shred these, because I've noticed that one.