>> mayor: all right, good evening, everyone, it's 6:30,
I'm calling the meeting to order.
mauricio. >> commissioner joseph.
>> present. >> commissioner lama.
>> here. >> commissioner stuyvesant.
>> here. >> vice mayor viscarra.
>> here. >> mayor sphechen.
>> here. >> all members present, ma'am.
>> mayor: okay, great. Thank you.
if you could please ruse for the pledge of allegiance.
[pledge of allegiance] >> mayor: thank you.
we do not have an invocation tonight.
mauricio? >> okay.
so first item on the agenda that we will consider tonight is the
approval of the minutes of may 14th.
>> can I get a motion, please? >> so moved?
>> second. >> second.
>> all in favor? Thank you.
we will now play the mayor's opening message.
92 good evening, ladies and gentlemen.
we appreciate your attendance and thank you for joining us
tonight. Before we begin, there are a few
important reminders regarding conduct during our commission
meetings. Please ensure all electronic
devices are turned off or set to silent mode to maintain the
integrity of our proceedings. Mutual respect is a foundation
of productive discussions. We ask that everyone remain
silent and attentive when someone is addressing the
commission. Clapping, applauding, heckling,
or any verbal outbursts, either in support or opposition of the
speaker, are strictly prohibited.
any individual wishing to address the commission must fill
out a public speakers card and submit it to the city clerk
before the relevant item is announced.
each speaker is granted a maximum of three minutes.
should you exceed this time, the chair will notify you to
conclude your remarks. Speak directly to the agenda's
points, remain concise, and avoid redundancy.
should an individual speak without the chair's permission,
or continue speaking after a warning, they may be escorted
out of the chambers. It is essential to avoid making
impertinent, slanderous remarks or becoming boisterous while
addressing the commission. Such behavior may lead to being
barred from future commission appearances.
unless majority of the commission members present vote
otherwise. The previding officer may --
presiding officer may disallow signs or placards in the
commission chamber. Please exit the chamber quietly
and without disruption. The goal of our meetings is to
facilitate public input and participation.
however, disrupt fn or disorderly conduct hinders our
collective objective. Individuals who want to speak on
an item on the agenda are asked to fill out a public speakers
card, and give it to the city clerk before the item is
called. Speakers are asked to speak to
the issues, make comments concise and to the point, and
refrain from making duplicate comments.
all speakers will be limited to one three-minute comment per
item. If you exceed the three-minute
allotment the chair will advise you to finish your comment.
if you speak out of turn without permission from the chair and/or
you do not cease speaking after one warning, you will be
escorted out of chambers. In order to maintain orderly
conduct, and/or proper decorum at these meetings, anyone who
interferes with the orderly process of the meetings ara --
after a warning may be removed from the meeting and may be
barred from further appearance before the city commission as
permitted in s286-0114, s-f and ss74.57474.574 and 74-21
of the city's code of ordinances.
any necessary removal will be made at the direction of the
mayor and will be carried out by law enforcement or a designated
sergeant-at-arms. It is essential that attendeesed
adhere to heez rules of procedure to ensure productive
meetings that serve both the public and the city commission.
thank you for your cawpgz and understanding -- cooperation and
understanding. >> mayor: okay, before we get to
the order of business, I want to welcome everyone.
it's really nice to see so many people in the audience.
I want to thank you for coming. I want to re mind you in
addition to the three-minute rule and a make sure you sign
for any item to speak, this room is designed in a way that we can
hear all conversations up here, so even if you're in the back we
can hear your conversations, so kindly if you do need to speak
to your neighbor please do so outside because it's very
disruptive for us up here. Okay, thank you.
mauricio, changes to the agenda.
>> yes, we have a couple of changes to tonight's agenda.
the first one is additional information has been provided
for item 9a, which is the resolution awarding.
item 9a was a resolution -- 9i was a sublease agreement with
the sunny isles beach jewish community center.
item 9j has been revised and a resolution, the resolution
specifically has been revised, and item 9k has been added on,
which is a resolution adopting the 2025 through 2030 miami-dade
county local mitigation strategy.
>> and are we combining g and h?
>> yes, we are. >> mayor: okay.
great. Wonderful.
thank you. Do woo need to vote on --
>> make a motion to approve those changes.
>> mayor: can I get a motion? >> motion.
>> second. >> all in favor?
thank you. Okay.
so now the first item is ordinances for first reading.
6a and I apologize, give me one second, I just lost my things.
6a is an ordinance of the city commission of the city of sunny
isles beach, florida, amending chapter 256 of the code of
ordinances of the city of sunny isles beach article v, section
256-37, entitled definitions, rules and regulations for
operation, section 233-8 entitled penalties for offenses
and 256-39, entitled enforcement.
to create and provide regulations for the use of
electric bicycles within the city's jurisdiction.
providing for repealing, severability, codification, and
an effective date. >> mayor: okay, mr. City
manager? >> mayor, vice mayor, members of
the commission. We're bringing this forward in
response to your request to revise and update our bicycle
ordinance to include specific regulations regarding e-bikes.
>> mayor: okay. Do we have any public speakers?
>> we do. >> mayor: okay.
>> stephen hirsch. >> good evening, stephen hirsch,
17201 collins: I support this ordinance that's amending
chapter 256 relating to promoting pedestrian safety in
our sidewalks. I think it's a great follow-up
to the earlier ordinance regarding scooters.
however we must note this will likely increase the amount of
bicycles albeit motorized bicycles on the right lane of
collins and sunny isles beach boulevard.
that led me to look at the 236-page, 2016 sunny isles beach
master plan to see what if any provisions could be affected by
this, albeit motorized bicycles on our main arteries.
after reading the report it was evident to me that the 2016
study where survey times are over 10 years old needs to be
updated for several reasons. Population growth has
substantially increased traffic demand and are well beyond the
original projections. The report predates e-scooters,
micromobility devices, app-based on demand transit demands such
as ubers, lyfts, and the report relied on traffic counts and
patterns from approximately 2014 through 2015 as any of us speak
with residents of sunny isles beach and ask what are the major
downsides to the quality afflife in our city, traffic always
seems to be near the top if not at the top of the rist.
as the next logical step after creating pedestrian safety for
micromobility devices, I suggest the commission -- I suggest to
the commission that maybe it's time to take and revisit our
outdated transportation master plan sunny isles beach has
changed dramatically since 2016 with increased development, new
transportation technologies, and evolving pedestrian safety
concerns. Our transportation plan should
be updated using current data so that any future investments that
we need to make regarding traffic flow, traffic safety,
pe paid safety are based on today -- pedestrian safety are
based on today's realities and not yesterday's assumptions.
thank you very much for allowing me to talk.
>> mayor: thank you. Any other speakers?
>> no further speakers. >> mayor: okay.
I'll take comments or questions commissioner joseph would you
like to start? >> just my idea originally was
to ban e-scooters and e-biked in sunny isles.
we really don't have a safe provision for them to be in the
streets. They're absolutely not safe on
the sidewalks, and and, regard for that is the safety of
residents in the city. We have scooters now for riders
on the 16 off the streets, which have made a big difference.
we will see how things progress but right now our streets are
somewhat safer and we will see what happens in the near
future. We can always come back and make
our policies stronger as necessary.
>> mayor: vice mayor? >> I support this obviously.
but I was hoping -- hoping, and I don't mean to catch anybody
off guard, but if you have the information off the top of your
head, I know that we started the enforcement or the warning
period, and I liked one of the facebook posts I saw that on
that first day you didn't have to open the warning -- you know
the warning book. So I was just wondering how it's
looking. If you have any input on that.
>> to date both pd and code have reported that they've had zero
violations. >> that is great news.
>> okay. Anyway, that it's all.
>> mayor: okay. With that I'll take a motion?
>> I'll make a motion. >> I'll second.
>> mayor: mauricio? >> commissioner joseph?
>> yes. >> commissioner lama.
>> yes. >> commissioner stuyvesant.
>> yes. >> vice mayor viscarra.
>> yes. >> mayor svechin?
>> the ordinance passes on first reading, second reading will be
scheduled for july. >> okay, next item, please.
>> next item is 8a, which is an ordinance of the city of sunny
isles beach, florida, amending chapter 265 article ii section
265-5 init titled definitions and article v, section 265-17
entitled subdivision plat approval of the code of
orordinances of the city of sunny isles beach.
in accordance with the requirements of section 177.071
of the florida statutes as amended by senate bill 784,
20005, and to align with certain procedures in chapter 28 of the
miami-dade code of ordinances providing for repealer,
severability, codification, and an effective date.
>> thank you. >> good evening, mayor, vice
mayor, commissioners. This is second reading of our
ordinance related to the platting procedures in the land
development regulations. Just as a quick refreshther
purpose of this ordinance is to come into compliance with state
legislation that passed in 2025 that requires all municipalities
and counties to administratively approve plats with no further
action or approval by the governing body.
as the commission requested last month a line has been added to
the ordinance which states the city manager shall for
informational purposes only submit a written report to the
city commission advising of any plat approval, approval with
conditions, or denial. And that's added in two places
in the ordinance, once for subdivisions, and also for
waiver of plats. >> mayor: thank you.
are there public speakers? >> no, ma'am.
>> all right. Are there questions or comments
from the commission? >> yes.
>> mayor: go ahead, commissioner stuyvesant.
>> well this was not the direction that was given.
to be informed after the application gets approved,
what's the point? So we said that we wanted to
know when this application was submitted.
so I will make a motion to modify again exactly the same
language that it was recommended, with the difference
the city manager shall for informational purposes only
submit a written report to the city commission advising of any
plat, free plat or modification application.
the second thing on the site, the city commission shall for
informational purposes only submit a written report to the
city commission advising of any waiver of plat application we
had a discussion and the direction was very simple.
we want to be informed. This is administrative.
we cannot do anything. We cannot interfere, so the only
thing we need to know is to be informed.
we feed to be informed after the application gets submitted, not
after it guess approved. >> mayor: before I take a
motion,x a second to your motion, can I get clarification
from the city attorney because we addressed this during agenda
review. >> right, as we discussed on
tuesday at the workshop in looking back at the statute, you
as a governing body cannot be involved in any way, shape, or
form in the platting process. The language that was requested
by implication involves you and inserts you into the process.
it screams interference. If there is a difference between
going when it's applied for versus when it's approved it
points directly to interfeerps, whether it be indirect inference
or direct interference if you have that in your code anybody
challenging it would have that to work with.
so again to keep in the spirit of the statute you are not
involved in the process at all. It should be after the fact.
>> mayor: okay. Thank you.
>> mayor: there is a motion on the table.
>> again, that is guessing somebody is going to interfere
because that's not what it says.
plus we give the direction, you can give your recommendation,
but we are the legislative body.
we are the ones who decide we're voting for this.
and that interference claim look for it in the status, that's an
interpretation. That is not there.
so -- you are assuming that by we knowing about this we are
going to do something with that information.
and that's not the spirit of this.
so, it was taken from us, the ability of the power to vote for
that, for that application. It wasn't taken for us.
the ability to get informed, so like I said, we need to be
informed when the application gets submitted ignot, not
after it got approved that was the specific direction we gave
in the last commission meeting. >> mayor: okay, is there a
second to commissioner stuyvesant's motion?
okay, so motion dies. We're back on the original
motion or rather I don't have a motion yet.
so would anyone like to add anything or make a motion?
>> can I get a motion for this item?
second? Mauricio?
>> commissioner lama. >> yes.
>> commissioner stuyvesant. >> .
>> no. >> vice mayor viscarra.
>> I'm a no because I don't think the language should've
been added to begin with. I liked it the way it was last
month, so. >> commissioner joseph.
>> okay. >> no.
>> mayor svechin. >> the ordinance fails on second
reading 2-3. >> mayor: okay so can you
clarify what's going -- >> well, by florida statute, you
have to, you have to pass an ordinance in this regard.
>> mayor: so would you like to make a motion, commissioner
viscarra. >> I would like to make a motion
to remove the language we added last month.
>> mayor: can you remind me please what the language was for
the record? >> the language says, as
currently written, the city manager shall for informational
purposes only submit a written report to the city commission
advising of any plat approval, approval with conditions, or
denials. >> mayor: okay, is there a
second to vice mayor's motion? We have to pass something.
>> well, if there is no second I will change my vote or I'll, you
know, I'll reconsider the vote or whatever.
>> okay, hold on. Hold on.
so if we go back, may I, please?
if we go back to the original language, what are the
implications? >> which original language?
>> no, just means that the manager would not need to advise
us. That's the difference.
so, so vice mayor. >> so what are we .
>> vice mayor if you could clarify.
>> the way it was originally presented to us, this language
about the city manager was added last, at the last meeting.
>> correct. >> and I don't think it's
necessary. I think we get the information
if there is something we want to know, we have the monthly
reports, I feel like adding -- it's not standard language and I
don't think it belongs there. I don't -- you know if I have to
change my vote, I will. We're newt going to be without
compliance -- not going to be without compliance but I really
think it should just not be there.
>> mayor: all right so there is -- is there -- let's try this
again so because there wasn't a little bit of confusion.
so vice mayor made a motion to go back to the original which
did not have the language of the manager having to inform the
commission, specifically of a change.
is there a second? If we can go back to the
original? >> procedurally, we would need
to reconsider this and one of the members of the commission
that voted against, in this case vice mayor to reconsider this
item, and then make the motion that she wishes.
all right. >> mayor: okay.
>> so motion to reconsider. >> mayor: as written.
>> yes as written today. >> mayor: today, yes.
>> and the second for that motion.
>> second. >> mayor: okay.
>> all in favor? >> aye.
>> why are we considering the motion as is, the resolution as
written today. >> mayor: all right, now I need
a motion for that. >> second.
>> mayor: all right, mauricio. >> okay, commissioner lama.
>> yes. >> commissioner stuyvesant.
>> no. >> vice mayor viscarra.
>> yes. >> commissioner joseph.
>> no. >> mayor svechin.
>> yes. >> the ordinance is adopted 3-2
as written tonight. >> mayor: all right, next item,
please. >> next item is 9a,
resolutions. A resolution awarding request
for proposal number 26-04012 and approving an agreement with all
season imports doing business as the christmas palace to install
holiday lights and decorations at various locations throughout
the city. >> mayor: okay, mr. City
manager. >> mayor, vice mayor, members of
the commission, this is our bid that we put out approving with
all season imports doing business as the christmas palace
to install holiday lights and decorations at various locations
throughout the city. >> mayor: okay, do we have
public speakers? >> we do.
david virgil. >> mayor: okay.
>> mayor: again as a reminder to everyone, this your opportunity
to speak up. >> my name is david virgil.
my address is 17500 -- I just want to say the renderings of
the new holiday lights look amazing, in my opinion.
it's great that there is a wide variety of colors to choose from
as it appears in the packet. It shows red and green, blue and
white, and also yellow, so in case anyone's controversy about
the colors, the city could choose different colors.
there's also great coverage from the north end of
the city to the south end of the city which is pretty great too.
there is one thing I notice on page 30 of the pdf document, it
shows that there is three palm trees at town center park,
anything two fell down so maybe two sets of light may be an
extra cost that is unnecessary at this time.
so yeah. That's all.
>> mayor: thank you. Any other speakers?
92 no, ma'am. >> mayor: all right.
this is a hot topic. Are we going to put up the
pictures on the screen? Do we have them?
so who would like to start. This is a big conversation,
commissioner stuyvesant would you like to start.
who is ready to speak? >> I'll speak.
>> mayor: go ahead. >> so I do like this.
obviously I requested this. We do need to work a little bit
more on the color palette, and then the nativity scene issue
came up. So I think that we need a
workshop to define how this is going to be structured and take
place. Today we are talking about
awarding of the contract that but those are my comments.
>> mayor: okay, let the city manager answer and then
commissioner stuyvesant, you can go.
>> thank you, mayor. I just wanted to point out to
commissioner lama's point that we have scheduled workshop to
discuss this further. >> commissioner stuyvesant, go
ahead. >> that's very interesting
because I have here addendums and it was very specific, even
the instruction to all the bidders that the select
contractor shall provide holiday lighting in neutral nonholiday
specific colors. That is exactly what it was in
the addendum number 3 are the questions and answers to all the
plan holders. It says that several times.
the selected contractor shall provide holiday lighting in
neutral nonholiday specific colors.
to say it was going to have a workshop for this for the color
theme when the color theme already is, it says it shall
provide no holiday specific colors, that's even wors
than being gaslight. Another thing it says very
specific also during the four meetings they had, et cetera,
that they must install a menorah but exclusive specifically the
manger from the same display. It said that we cannot have it,
nativity even one of the vendors provided in his offer, and it
was excluded. So again, no nativity, nothing
for one group and everything for another group.
they hads we are going to be discussing the color palette.
how is that possible whenware going to approve right now a
contract that says it cannot be multicolor.
I have that question, city manager.
>> mayor: go ahead, city manager.
>> we had to provide some general outlines in order to get
the bid done, because time is of the essence.
so in terms of substituting one light for another or the
possibility of adding or moving let's say a nativity scene would
be up to the commission, but it certainly falls within our
purview of however we direct the vendor.
>> mayor: okay. Go ahead, commissioner joseph.
>> and that's how we constantly get upcharged.
I mean the whole process is backwards, it just make no sense
to me and we do it year after year.
we should be having the, this workshop.
we should be having it in march or april.
not now. It just makes no sense.
>> mayor: okay. Just want to give others an
opportunity, vice mayor did you want to add anything?
>> I recall having, sitting up here and having a discussion
about it so I don't think -- I don't understand the outrage.
this is, these are things we talked about, so and we should
be having a nativity scene. >> vice mayor has the floor.
>> and we talked about that. And we talked about that.
just because it gets talked about doesn't mean there's
consensus. Just because it's discussed
doesn't mean it was agreed upon so I don't want to go down this
rabbit hole and be here for an hour if you guys want to really
dig into the details, we can have a work shop about the
details, but as far as the contract is concerned, I'm okay
with it. >> mayor: okay.
>> may I say something? >> mayor: please, go ahead.
>> so I think the color and what weaz presented is an improvement
from last year. I still think it needs to be
worked on a little but more. Me personally I like to see some
red and green, which I'm not seeing in this color palette,
these schematics. So I like to see thatt and
obviously we need to talk about the nativity scene as well.
you know I know that there is some legal impediments or
certain laws, but I think we should be discussing that in the
workshop as well. That's it.
we want to streamline and simplify it, and I think we can
work on the color pallettes very easily.
>> we have a red one, the same one, golden one, the same one,
silver one, so -- >> I would go with the red one.
we take a vote. >> that's the point.
that's -- you are not going to see this again.
you know? And also, the issue that we have
here with this bidding process is that the scope of work was
completely open. It was not a line of prices.
so you can not compare when there were not bidding with a
price. So anybody, that they could
submit their own design -- no. >> our price that we were --
>> issments commissioner joseph.
commissioner stuyvesant has the floor.
>> let me read. So what is the competitive
bidding? Genuine price competition m
among comparable fix scope bids.
here we didn't have a fixed scope.
anybody has to submit whatever they wanted.
so even because I saw the four meetings that the committee had
to present thesis recommendation -- these
recommendation, they say themselves our employees are
staff that they could not compare.
I'm quoting. Naithey could not compare
the four bids. They were different.
they were different line items. Different prices.
so we didn't ask them to say let's quote per christmas tree.
tyci manager. >> city question why the
lights were still off in golden shores?
>> I was not aware of it. I'll find out.
>> mayor: okay, thank you. All right.
any other comments? >> oh, actually I do have one.
>> mayor: please, go ahead. >> so I had asked also prior to
tuesday's agenda review regarding what is happening with
the vendors at&t and breeze line regarding the fact that they're
not installing fiber, which had been pulled across the
intercoastal and is at the bridge at golden shores waiting
to be installed but they're just not installing it.
they're looking for additional funds from the city.
>> mayor: deputy manager. >> I'm not aware of them getting
any additional funds from the city.
they have not expressed that to us.
>> so what is the reason that we still have copper when it's
obsolete. >> so a I told you I reached out
to both at&t and breeze line just yesterday, breeze line got
back to us, they are, I could not understand their response,
and I need to getter clarification but they said that
they are using both fiber and copper depending on the cus
customer. >> I was with breeze line they
never offered the opportunity and they just came and
undergrounded mine with copper and their service is on and
off. It's, it's actually still
connected not to the underground.
it's still connected to the overhead.
so they are not being honest with you and we have paid them
millions of dollars so we need follow-through with the city
manager's osto not -- office to not just ride the wave but see
what's happening and get this job completed.
>> mayor: commissioner joseph, can you just clarify your
request so that we can have a discussion?
>> okay, so for next month I want a full follow-up on what
the city manager's office is doing to hold these services to
task in order to have them explain why they're still
installing copper and not installing fiber that everywhere
else in the city has access to. >> mayor?
>> they were supposed to actually, myself and jason,
senator pizzo were promised by at&t and breeze line that fiber
was going to be installed at no additional charge and they're
just not doing it. >> mayor: okay, mr. City
manager? >> we don't regulate at&t or
breeze line. So I'm not sure what you would
like -- >> this contract was signed with
the city. The city signed the contract for
for the installations. >> I'll have to look at that but
we don't regulate -- we don't regulate.
>> no, it's not. We don't regulate either one of
those. >> mayor: mr. City attorney?
>> if they are promising something that they're not
delivering to you as a customer, or anyone as a customer, they're
regulated by the public service commission.
>> so we're paying millions of dollars for the undergrounding
and we have -- >> we're not paying --
>> we have no oversight? >> we're not paying them any
money. >> we haven't paid any millions
of dollars for undergrounding? >> you're undergrounding conduit
but they're -- that's between them and their customers.
and to the extent that they're promising things to you as a
customer, that they're not delivering on, that's regulated
by the public service commission.
>> so we installed conduit for certain services to use,
correct? >> correct.
>> mayor: and we -- so we had hot -- we had hot wire that
wanted to come in and install internet in golden shores, and
for some -- so who was it that didn't allow them to use the --
>> if I recall correctly, hot wire did not want to participate
unless they had full participation from the
neighbors, and they didn't. >> right, that's correct.
>> so we don't regulate that. >> they didn't have the
opportunity to, to even advocate to get opinions from the
residents. I was never asked by hot wire if
I wanted to have their service. >> mayor: well, commissioner
joseph, that's not up to us how they run their business.
that's up to them. We wouldn't be contacting them
and telling them what to do. >> mayor: so we own the conduit,
correct? >> yes.
>> we pay to have the conduit installed and we're allowing
services to install their copper cable, which is obsolete, in our
conduit, without any say so as to what gets installed in that
conduit? >> we don't regulate utilities
the state of florida does. We can't, it's just like fp&l.
they are, we're essentially preempted again, they are, they
fall under the public service commission's jurisdiction.
>> okay, so. >> if they're doing something
they're not supposed to be doing and again a lot of it comes
between the company and the customer what product they
provide, and the city doesn't get involved in that.
>> this was the city that signed the contract with fp&l and the
services several years ago to install the services and
unfortunately, from what I believe is wording similar to
whatever is on the poles goes underground, without anyone
having any foresight to -- or to do any research to understand
that cable, that copper was obsolete or internet service,
and that, that fiber which was already several years ago in use
was the up and coming product for internet, and no one thought
in this city to look out for the residents and have any forward
thinking thought to say you must since we're paying so many
millions, install fiber. Is that correct?
>> mayor: but again, for clarification, as far as who the
city is paying. >> well, that, first of all,
that question should be directed to the manager.
and two, my understanding is that we cannot dictate what
these companies offer. >> so, no.
how many millions have, has the city paid to have the
undergrounding work done? >> that I have to defer to the
city manager. >> mayor: susan?
>> we'll have to research that. Mayor, we're getting off topic.
>> mayor: I understand. >> this number should be on the
tip of your tongue. >> mayor: commissioner joseph,
let's stick to the item on the agenda.
so. >> no, but, no, because then we
get to next month, and we still haven't gotten to the point, and
these services, every resident, 200 something households in
golden shores, are the orphan child of the city.
everyone else in this city, every high rise, atlantic isle,
everywhere, has fiber. Golden shores is the only area
that there is no even hope except what are they saying for
four years? Maybe they'll be installing the
fiber that's right at the bridge on our side in golden shores,
and they might get around to it in four years?
that's totally unacceptable. >> mayor: I hear you.
however, that's not the item on the agenda.
>> well, I've made it --led y like to add this --
>> mayor: we're not. >> I make a motion to add this
to the agenda. >> mayor: okay.
we can't do that right now. >> can we make a motion?
>> [off mic] >> I would like to add a
discussion as to the undergrounding in golden shores,
and why it is not been followed up on by the city manager's
office and we've just allowed them to ride the wave month
after month without accomplishing what they had said
they would accomplish. >> who's they?
>> the at&t and breeze line. We finally have completion
except for one property for fp&l's undergrounding.
and that's another issue that for another day if that doesn't
get resolved that I have to bring up for one resident in
golden shores that's been tortured with their electrical
power. >> mayor: no, I understand.
I think that what you're asking for is not something that we can
possibly even discuss today. >> well, I want to bring it to a
head so that the city manager who's it's his duty with all the
millions we've paid out for the undergrounding, to be aggressive
in following up and holding these services, they're feet to
the fireford to get the job -- fire in order to get the job
done in the way it was promised.
>> mayor: I understand that but the question that you're asking
is not within the remit of the city manager as far as giving
any sort of direction to a private utility.
>> well,. >> mayor: is my point.
>> we have the city attorney f. We have to bring suit against
them, then that's what we should be doing.
>> mayor: I understand but you must agree this is a very, very
big scope of discussion that you're looking to --
>> month after month and there's never any --
>> mayor: I understand. How about this, why don't you
work it through with the city attorney and the manager and
bring it on for next month so that we're all clear and
vaadvanced notice of what exactly you want to discuss.
>>> great. >> mayor: okay.
thank you. >> be ready.
>> mayor: okay. We'll be ready.
all right. I'll take a motion then?
>> so moved. >> mayor: I need a second?
>> no second. Okay.
so what do we do in this instance?
the item dies? >> remains.
>> mayor: okay, status quo. Okay, next item.
>> next item is 9d, a resolution approving an agreement with
pipeline plumbing service of broward for as needed citywide
plumbing and back flow repairs. >> mayor: okay.
mr. City manager. >> mayor, vice mayor, members of
the commission. This is an agreement with
pipeline plumbing for as needed citywide plumbing and back flow
repairs. >> mayor: okay.
do we have any public speakers. >> no, ma'am.
>> mayor: all right, I will take comments and questions from the
commission. I will take a motion then.
>> motion. >> need a second.
>> second. >> all in favor?
all right. Next item, please.
>> 9e, is a resolution approving a 4th amendment to the
agreement with universal protection service llc doing
business as alight universal security services for armed
security -- unarmed security guard services at government
center. >> mayor: okay, mr. City
manager. >> mayor, vice mayor, members of
the commission. This is the company that
provides security guard services at the government center 24
hours a day. >> mayor: thank you.
do we have public speakers? >> no, ma'am.
>> mayor: any comments from the commission?
>> no. >> mayor: I'll take a motion,
please? >> so moved.
>> mayor: I need a second? >> second.
>> mayor: all in favor? Okay.
next item, please. >> 9f is a resolution approving
the issuance of a purchase order to cspi technology solutions for
the purchase of uninterruptible power supply units.
>> mayor: mr. City manager? >> mayor, vice mayor, members of
the commission. This item is for backup power
supply for I.t. >> mayor: all right, do we have
any public speaking cards? >> no, ma'am.
>> mayor: all right, you sure? >> yes.
>> mayor: okay. I'll take a questions from the
commission. Go ahead, commissioner joseph.
>> at the agenda review even though it's just tampingantatory
to this -- tangbatory to this item I had asked regarding the
solar panels on the city on city hall roof.
is there any information that you have that I had requested?
>> mayor? >> mayor: please.
>> the solar panels we check with our I.t. Director, and
would not be compatible for this use.
>> no, I understand, but I had sent over information regarding
different types of solar panels.
I was asking what type of solar, solar panels do we have
exactly? >> solar panels is a separate
issue. And we're still gathering the
information on that. >> I'm asking for brand, make
and category, and efficiencies regarding the solar panels that
are installed on the city hall roof, whether it was taken into
account, the heat factor, and sun factor in sunny isles in
south florida regarding the type of solar panels that were
installed or was it just done willy-nilly like so many other
things that we waste money on in this city.
>> mayor: okay. Anyone else?
>> I would like that for next month, please.
>> mayor: that could be done probably by email, your
request. >> mayor: okay, okay.
perfect. I need a motion.
>> so moved. >> mayor: I need a second.
>> second. >> mayor: all in favor?
all right. Next item, please.
it's g and h combined. >> 9g is a resolution approving
a use and occupancy agreement and addendum thereto with the
florida department of transportation for public
parking and other public purposes on parcel number 7756
located at 500 sunny isles boulevard.
19h is a resolution approving a use and occupancy agreement, and
addendum thereto with the florida department of
transportation for parcel number 3129 located at 500 sunny isles
boulevard. >> mayor: okay.
mr. City manager? >> mayor, vice mayor, members of
the commission, these two parcels are near each other off
of sunny isles boulevard and fdot owns these parcels.
this enters into an agreement with fdot, so we can further
develop and use those parcels. >> mayor: all right.
mr. City clerk, do we have public speakers?
okay I'll take comments from the commission.
>> yeah, I have a question because here they make keeping
reference to exhibit b. It says everything is about
exhibit b or the map, et cetera, are but there is no exhibit b in
any of the three items. >> so how can we vote if we
don't the full information. Another thing is that it says as
well that we need to do these so we can, we can sublease the
property for the playground, et cetera.
but now we don't even have the sublease portion being added to
the agenda. So like I said, the exhibit b,
which is what it says the most important part, is not
ininincluded anywhere. It just says draft.
so I do believe we should defer this item until we have the full
scope and all the information. >> sorry, which exhibit b are
you referencing? To t
>> three of them say exhibit b over and over.
no not in the resolution, in the remands.
>> mayor: what page is it? >> okay.
let me go. >> it looks like it's at least
one of them is 4d on page 2. >> I found 14 reference to
exhibit b and it's nowhere. And that's a specific what is
like the scope, the terms, et cetera.
what it's supposed to be the okay, the residents state that
fdot using occupancy agreement and addenda are appended hereto
and incorporated as competent exhibit b but we don't have any
exhibit b. And that's exactly about the use
and o occupancy agreement. It says then later on that we
acknowledge receipt -- we acknowledge provisions exhibit
b, we don't have any exhibit b. >> I'm going to let the city
attorney answer that. >> or the sublease is exhibit b,
again, no exhibit b. So how can we vote on something
that we don't have? >> okay, what page were you
referring to? Just pick one.
>> put f and put exhibit b and you're going to find it.
it's more than 14 reference and that's exactly the exhibit that
is going to be redrawing the boundaries.
in the legal description, all of that, none of that is there.
>> no, I don't know. >> I have 20 pages as, I have 20
pages on the use and occupancy agreement.
I have the resolution and the cover page, that's what I have.
>> okay, you read it? >> what do you have?
>> I have the same thing. >> so where is -- so exhibit b.
>> it's supposed to have the scope.
>> at the end, but -- >> in the occupancy.
>> it's in all the documents. >> in the resolution.
>> it's not in the resolution. It's not in the memo.
it's in the document. >> it should be everywhere.
>> in the 18 pages document you're going to see three of
them at the end, and also it makess reference to exhibit b --
c, exhibit c is not -- >> it only has exhibit a in
the -- >> right.
>> in the occupancy agreement. >> mayor: page 2, number 4 of
page 2. >> thank you.
>> it says it under d. Described in exhibit b.
>> mayor and commissioners, the attachment, the exhibit b was
attached to the sublease agreement, so if you look at the
schematic, the item they pulled.
>> that's the one with the schematics and the shaded green
areas. >> yes, that's what is being
referenced as exhibit b. It was just added to the
wrong -- >> which is the deferred item.
>> yeah. >> and I do see the schematic.
but it doesn't say there that's exhibit b because we had exhibit
a and the schematic is just it's supposed to be like the tree
survey and the position. And disposition.
and it's like I said, it's not in the two resolutions that
we're voting on right now. >> okay, mauricio, for the
record, could you clarify where it is, please?
>> it's in the deferred item. >> it's attached to item 9j, and
it's labeled as schematic for that.
>> for exhibit b. >> rather than exhibit b.
but that, it should be attached to items 9h and 9i.
>> so it was inadvertently left out.
>> yeah, attached to the wrong item.
>> mayor: okay. All right.
so is it available right now on, online?
>> it is available online, yes. >> mayor: okay.
>> again, it's not what it's making, it says in the
resolutions that it's going to have including the scope, the
boundaries, et cetera, so like I said, it's not there.
here we can see the schematic, which are the survey, the
drawings, the trees, et cetera. That's not the reference that
the contract is making about exhibit b over and over.
>> may I? >> yeah, please, go ahead.
>> is the plan to have the sublease item back on next
month? Or is there some things to be
worked out? >> some version of that should
be back next month, yes, that is the intent.
>> okay. >> so we should have --
>> so we should -- you know, combine everything refer for all
for next month or. >> we cannot vote on something
we don't have. >> there is something time
sensitive at this point nat we need to pass this or can we
wait? >> mayor?
>> mayor: let city manager answer that.
>> it can be deferred for a month.
>> mayor: okay. Does this not slow down us being
able to add the parking? >> yes, it does.
>> it delays it, yes. >> mayor: I'm just concerned
that we are in very, very big need of parking in that area, so
this delays the parking by at least a month?
>> yes. >> mayor: okay, are you all
comfortable deferring it then? >> why was the item deferred?
>> I don't know. >> because there is no exact --
[off mic] >> no.
>> mayor: please. Nothing from the audience,
please. Okay.
so I want to get a very, very clear picture of this before we
start deferring anything because there have been multiple
complaints in that area for parking.
so the item that was deferred you said it's coming back next
month in some other way. >> correct.
>> yes, so but can you clarify for the commission and for the
public why those things need to be connected or don't need to be
connected so that way we can make a good decision here not
just defer it because we don't want to vote on it.
>> okay, so the use on occupancy agreement is intentional to be
able to bifurcate the green open area from the paved parking area
which is used for a public parking area that has a revenue
generator in it. The green open space ask just
green open space. So the first step is to
bifurcate those parcels into two separate pieces.
the sublease agreement which was our initial reason for doing
that had to be approved by fdot first and also by us and then it
was sent to the jewish community center upon their review, they
had some edits and some concerns with the agreement as written,
they would like to consider changing some terms.
they want to meet with us after to see if we could come to a
different agreement that is less of a sublease and more of a
donation where we are not subleasing to them.
we are still maintaining the fdot property, but they would
donate the playground. >> mayor: right but I don't want
to commingle those two things because the revenue that we
generate from that parking, I don't know if you had an
opportunity to confirm how much that is per month, I had asked
for that. >> it was sent to us.
>> I did send it to you. >> mayor: you did?
I missed it then if you can bull that up because missing out
obviously not just we want the additional parking, but we need
to be mindful about the lost revenue as
>> also in the future, we're planning on having -- or when
miami-dade gets around to it -- >> mayor: I want to make sure
we're tight on this, because any additional delays can compound
all of the delays, and this had been a long time coming to get
extra parking there. >> so the revenue to date from
october 1 this fiscal year to june 3rd is $78,885.97.
the revenue from last fiscal year was $110,924 $110,924.87.
>> mayor: and how many more parking spaces would this
increase? >> 18 additional and two
additional handicapped spaces. >> mayor: and how many do we
have there now off the top of your head?
>> 30? >> mayor: I know it doesn't
double it, but it's a significant enough amount that
it's warranted, okay. One second.
I just want to make sure we're all clear as to what we're
talking about here. Go ahead, commissioner joseph.
>> so I understand that on the third floor at gateway parking
lot, the temple rents spaces, correct?
>> through their zoning approval from a previous commission, they
purchased a number of spaces. They are actually on the roof.
>> how many? >> again, sir, I'm -- 26, I
think? >> okay.
are there any other available, any other spots available.
>> yes. I mean, it depends.
>> so why don't we allow them to rent more spots?
>> if they would like to, we could.
they do rent it for special events.
>> but this parking is not limited to just the -- this is
public parking. >> I understand.
but most of them will be taken up by shul goers?
>> potentially. There's also a business there.
>> yeah, so I'm not thinking though short term.
I'm thinking long term. >> no, I understand that, but
there's also a business there that needs parking that has
nothing to do with the shul that could benefit from that parking.
>> and I've been there when people are parking there and
walking to the restaurant, so, yes, even when there's an event
at the synagogue. >> mayor: sure.
>> but I'm just thinking if the synagogue is saying they're so
pressed for spots, why don't we offer them the more spots at
gateway? Since there are so many more
available? >> mayor: that's always
available to them. >> they're aware of those spots.
>> but maybe it hasn't been presented in this manner at this
time for them to accept them and alleviate any pressure for the
parking. >> mayor: but again, this is
not specific to the synagogue, so --
>> yes, I know that. But that would also open up more
spaces for the restaurant. Possibly.
>> mayor: I think people park wherever is convenient for them.
anyone else? >> did we have a motion on
deferral? >> mayor: not yet.
>> I agree with commissioner joseph.
I think if there is something that alleviates an immediate
problem if there is one and we can just do it right and the
city manager says there's no harm, no foul, I'm good with
deferring as well. >> mayor: so you're making a
motion to defer. >> yes.
>> mayor: I need a second. >> second.
>> mayor: all in favor? [ chorus of ayes ]
>> I'm a no on that, just for the record.
next item, please. >> next item is
9.j a resolution of the city of sunny isles beach, florida,
allowing the mayor and commissioners, at each elected
official's sole choice and option, to enroll and
participate in and receive the same insurance benefits as is
available to city's regular employees, including for a
period not to exceed two years after the end of the elected
officials' respective terms of office.
>> mayor: mr. City manager? >> mayor, vice mayor, members of
the commission, this is an item we discussed at a workshop and
we're bringing it back to you for approval.
it would establish the ability for the elected officials after
serving two full terms to participate in the city's health
insurance for two years. >> mayor: just for
clarification, I want to make sure that we understand the
item. Mr. City attorney?
>> the first initial part of it is just memorializing what the
status quo already is, that you're conferring upon yourself
the benefits since 2010 have been received by elected
officials. When we had the discussion,
there was a component that there was direction to come up with a
gap filler with regards to once an elected official leaves
office to allow them to get on to other insurance.
so I believe the consensus was two years, so that's what we
were proposing, but again that's all up to you.
>> mayor: and just for the members of the public or anyone
watching, currently the commission receives the option
of participating in the health insurance, same as the city
staff, and has been since 2010. >> I believe so, yes, 2010.
>> mayor: do we have public speakers?
mauricio? >> but that's not for free.
>> mayor: I understand, yes, of course.
>> we do. Dina goldman?
>> my name is dina goldman. I reside at 308 point sienna
drive, and I just want to say a quick support for this
initiative. I think it very well
memorializes something that is a well-needed benefit for elected
officials, and they provide tremendous service, the ones
that provide that service for two consecutive terms.
and they work hard and contribute a lot and this is a
finite -- there are finite parameters to this and it's a
very welcome initiative. And I'm happy to support that.
>> mayor: thank you. Any other speakers?
>> no, ma'am. >> mayor: all right, I'll take
comments -- go ahead, commissioner joseph.
>> I'm looking for a definition of a full term.
>> yes, that's right, there was during the agenda review, that
question was asked. >> right.
I think in our conversations before, we had talked about the
appointed less of a full term, but mauricio, you had quoted
that section of the -- back on tuesday.
as we discussed, commissioner joseph, if it's an appointed
unexpired term, that wouldn't count as a term, but the
question you posed to me before the meeting which we need to
check is if in your case you were elected to an unexpired
term, whether that counts as a term or not.
>> mayor: and does it have to be the entire term.
>> the way it's written now, the resolution is a full both two
full uninterrupted elected terms.
>> mayor: so if you're one day short of the term, then you're
not eligible? >> that was the direction I got
from the city manager, yes. >> mayor: I understand, all
right. >> so nobody quits in the
middle. >> and in that regard, it would
allow me to run again? >> mayor: no, you would be
eligible to use the insurance. >> no, he cannot.
>> mayor: yes, because it's a full term for him.
>> no, it's not. They need to clarify that.
>> mayor: specifically for anyone that has the three years
as a full term, they were elected to a term and they can't
add an extra year, so is that considered a full term or not?
>> what jerry and fabiola have are full terms.
because if it weren't, then that's what he's saying.
if it weren't, then he would be able to run for commissioner
again. >> yes, correct.
>> there's language in the charter that defines, and I
remember looking at it some time ago, and you guys are well
within that. It's like when you were in that
two-and-a-half -- it's like around that two-year mark that
it gets fuzzy, but if you're not able to run for that seat again,
it's because that counts as a full term and that's the
position that you're in. >> mayor: right, that was my
question during the agenda review.
so are we including something like that as a full term?
>> section c23 (c). >> right.
and will end at midnight the day before the mention in the term
whether or not it is actually completed, except a vacancy
being filled for less than two years remaining and the filling
of that term shall not be counted as a term under this
section. >> mayor: so it counts?
>> so if you get elected to fill in for more than two years, then
that counts as a full term, according to our charter.
>> okay, so then for health reasons as well, health
insurance reasons, then it's a full term.
>> I would think so. >> but you can't have it both
ways, so it has to be determined.
>> mayor: I agree with that. Mr. City attorney, is that --
>> what's the other way? I don't know what both ways
means. >> what commissioner joseph is
saying is you cannot run for a third term because his would not
be considered a full term under this --
>> but it is a full term. >> exactly, that's what he's
saying. If it's a full term, then it's a
full term for all purposes. >> yes, correct.
>> mayor: but I want to make sure that's what's in the
resolution. >> don't give the health
insurance and I'll run again! >> the resolution definitely
talks about a full term. As to what a full term is is
dictated by your charter. >> right, you can say as set
forth in c23 ... Whatever. >> mayor: all right.
anyone else? Go ahead.
>> so I want to be very precise, okay?
because the public is owed precision when we're spending
their money on ourself. This resolution will have
taxpayers pay for the health insurance for two years after
elected officials are no longer in office.
I heard it suggested we have to do this to follow the law, but
we don't. >> no, no, I did not say that.
>> no, you're interrupting me -- >> mayor: wait a second.
>> I'm being interrupted. >> mayor: wait, commissioner
stuyvesant, I want to make sure the record is clear --
>> you're not required to confer upon yourself benefits after you
leave office. Simply the status quo since
2010. I'm not saying that you are
required to give yourself insurance after you leave
office. >> I asked in the last
commission meeting if we were breaking the law several times
with the status quo and your answer was yes.
>> with the status quo, you are receiving insurance that has not
been conferred upon yourself, so you need to formalize that but
that doesn't talk about insurance after your term.
>> mayor: those are two separate things.
>> and I asked specifically if we were breaking the law many
times. I'm going to ask again.
the status quo that we have right now, are we breaking the
law? >> you've been receiving
benefits since 2010 -- >> it's a yes or no question.
>> no, it's not. >> it is.
it's your interpretation as always.
so I'm going to -- >> you need to memorialize, you
have to confer upon yourself the benefits you receive.
the city manager can't do it. The city manager back in the day
in 2010 couldn't do it. You have to confer that upon
yourself. >> again, that's your
interpretation. October 29, 2009, in 2007, the
city was audited by the irs, and one of the stipulations
effective january 1, 2008, was that the salary of elected
officials -- salary -- be subject to all applicable
federal income taxes. Moving on: this information was
only recently learned after lengthy discussions with florida
retirement system representatives.
nothing to do with insurance. We are talking about frs.
frs has recommended that the city comply by simply including
the elected officials in the next monthly report.
we are talking about the florida retirement system.
it doesn't make any allegation to health insurance.
the analyzed cost for the city is seven thousand whatever
whatever and the elected officials are eligible for the
same benefits and subject to the same requirements as regular
city employees. >> yes, because then you're
considered an employee. >> moving on, it says proposed
next steps. Meet with the elected officials
so if there is any interest in enrolling the city in the
elected official class of frs, an approval resolution for frs
at the november or december commission meeting.
this is extremely self-serving. I'm embarrassed to even be
having this discussion right now.
because for the time being, we have three elected officials
that are going to be out of office this november.
and right now, they are trying to codify to continue receiving
health insurance for the next two years on your dime and my
dime, because I'm a resident of sunny isles beach, so when we're
in longer working, you are going to continue paying for our
family health insurance. So my question is very simple --
>> I said I already recused myself from the vote.
>> according to the law, florida constitution article 7, number
10, public money may be spent only for a public, municipal
purpose. What is the municipal purpose of
paying the health insurance of the families of elected
officials when they're no longer in office for the next 24
months? It's a very simple question
about municipal purpose. >> can I answer that?
>> mayor: please, go ahead. >> the florida attorney general,
several florida attorney generals, have opined that it's
absolutely permissible for you to receive benefits.
>> we may. We don't must.
I have your answer here. It says you're going to say that
it requires the city to pay for a former official's insurance.
>> article 7 does not apply in this case.
>> so this is a choice. We are choosing to make the
people pay for us when we are no longer in office.
so I really wanted to see what is the municipal purpose.
that's my question, it's very simple.
>> mayor: okay, for clarification, again, these are
two separate things. Since 2010, the members of
whomever was sitting up here on the dais had the option of using
the city health insurance. Some did, some didn't.
that's since 2010. It was recently realized that it
was never put in a resolution. So this was a cleanup in order
to say if members of the commission are going to continue
to receive health insurance, it needs to be resolved.
in addition to that, and this is the secondary thing, there would
be an additional benefit if an elected official wanted to use
it after leaving office where they can continue using the
insurance for themselves, as I understand, not their families,
themselves. They can pay for their families
for an additional two years. So those are two separate
things. One thing is the status quo
happening since 2010 and the second thing is secondary and
additional. >> that's not the issue in front
of us. >> mayor: it is.
but I want to give someone else an opportunity to speak, please,
that has not yet. You've spoken.
>> I've spoken. >> mayor: commissioner lama,
did you want to add anything? >> first of all, I want to just
clarify a couple things or correct a couple things that
were said. This is not for families.
I don't know where you get that information from.
>> you can pay additional for families.
>> mayor: one at a time, please.
>> but you'll have to pay for them.
>> yeah, like now. >> so it just applies to the
elected official and has a cap of two years.
>> correct. >> so it is very clear.
and this is not something out of the ordinary either, because
other cities have similar type of policies.
some cities don't, some cities do.
so, I mean, you're making it seem as if the residents are
going to be paying endless amounts of money.
and this is an opportunity that's been given to other
people that are going to run and become elected officials as
well. And I think just like exmayor
goldman said, it's good to give those elected officials a gap so
when we get back to let's say our normal lives, we can have
some time to adjust and look for other options when it comes to
health insurance. >> mayor: okay, vice mayor?
did you want to add anything? >> only that the memo being
referred to is frs. And it has nothing to do with
insurance, I agree with that. This is frs.
it doesn't apply. It's not for families.
this is not codifying -- we went over all of this already.
>> and just to be clear, so under chapter 112, your
employees that retire, that actually retire, you are
required under florida law to provide them continuing
insurance in the same -- intermixed with your other
employees so they get the benefit of the lower.
>> and how long is that for? >> continuously.
for your retired employees, those that fit the definition of
a retired employee. That's in the statute.
[ off mic ] >> mayor: can we just -- I'd
like -- we need to maintain decorum up here.
commissioner stuyvesant, let the city attorney finish what he's
saying. >> so under florida law under
chapter 112, you're required for your retired employees to
continue their health insurance if they so opt to do that.
>> for life? >> yes.
>> under chapter 166, you have the authority to extend that to
other employees that are not deemed retirees because it's not
prohibited by state law, okay? You are allowed to do it.
in fact, you did it before for your city attorney for many,
many years, right? This is the same thing.
you have the authority under 166 to do that if you want to.
fair point with municipal purpose, you need to decide what
that municipal purpose is, no doubt about that.
but it is not prohibited for you under your home rule powers to
go ahead and confer that upon yourselves because specifically
it's not prohibited under 112 and it's consistent with the
fact that for your other employees that are retired, you
have to provide them by law. And you can extend that to
others if you so wish, which you've done in the past.
>> so I know personally former employees from the city that
were invited to the fourth floor just to realize that they were
being forced to resign. So when any of our employees,
let's say a police officer, a lady police officer, she is
pregnant, and she's forced to resign, are we going to give
them the courtesy of two years of health insurance?
yes or no, is that for all the employees or politicians, we're
a special class that we have to have special treatment?
because we cannot retire. We have specific terms for a
reason. So retirement benefits do not
apply for us. That status does not apply to
us. Like you said, that status
implies that we can do it. That we are not prohibited to do
it. Not that we have to do it.
however, my question remains the same.
so a police officer that is pregnant and they get fired, are
we giving that police officer two more years of courtesy
insurance? Yes or no?
>> not if you fire an employee. Why would you give benefits to
someone you fired? >> I'm asking the city manager.
>> mayor: go ahead, city manager, when an employee is
fired, do they retain benefits? >> not in they're terminated,
no. >> if they resign?
voluntarily. >> mayor: if an employee
resigns, do they maintain benefits?
>> they may be able to under cobra.
>> ccobra is just an expensive carry-over.
>> so we're not paying the insurance of that police officer
that was forced to resign? Like we do on the fourth floor.
so again, this is about choices. Sadly, this is about right and
wrong. I, myself, due to my current
family situation, understand very well the need of health
insurance. I have a family member with a
very bad condition, so I get it. However, this is not a personal
issue. This is about right and wrong.
these are not the rules of engagement.
the people voting for this will benefit from this immediately.
if we wanted to do this, this is so important to do, so none of
us should be eligible to receive this benefit.
and then we can be making a decision that it will make
sense. But right now, this is a
good-bye gift we're giving to ourself and again this is
totally wrong. That's why people don't trust
government anymore. It's completely self-serving.
if the idea that you claim is just to clean up the status quo,
that option of two more years should not even be there.
and if we want to do that as a perk for the people to run for
office, the proper way, because it's people's money, should be
put to a referendum and we allow the people to say you know what,
elected officials have a very hard job.
maybe they should not be making ten or $20,000 a year.
maybe they have to be making 50. Maybe they should be having
better benefits. That is up to the people, not to
us, to increase our salaries or to start giving us perks that
are not there right now. So this is morally
reprehensible, completely wrong. And in the spirit of being fair,
none of us should be able to benefit from this.
>> mayor: okay. Anyone else?
all right. I'll take a motion on the item.
>> so moved. >> mayor: I need a second.
>> roll call, mayor? >> mayor: yes.
>> commissioner joseph. >> I defer my vote.
>> you can't. >> well, call me last, please.
>> commissioner joseph, you need to vote.
>> no. >> commissioner stuyvesant.
>> no. >> commissioner lama.
>> yes. >> vice mayor viscarra.
>> yes. >> mayor svechin?
>> mayor: before I vote, I just want to say that earlier during
our workshop, we had a discussion about how in november
there's going to be some changes to all of our tax bills
potentially. And while we are an incredibly
healthy city, thank god, and we're doing very well, we don't
know how that's going to work out after november.
so perhaps in past years, I would have been supportive of
this item. I think that given how things
may or likely will change in november, it's important that we
are more I guess -- it's not about responsibility.
I would say just more conservative and while I do
agree that health insurance for elected officials is absolutely
something that should be allowed, I don't use it, but
that doesn't mean it's a bad thing, not at all.
there are some things that elected officials should be able
to get. And perhaps after november,
whomever new people are up here, they may decide they want to
revisit this, but based on that and what's happening in
november, I'm a no. >> the motion and resolution
fails. >> commissioner joseph needed to
vote. >> I did.
>> he voted no. >> may I say something?
so I think that the purpose of this is not to, you know, shower
ourselves with extra benefits or anything.
because if we had bad intentions like other cities have done, we
would have raised our salaries exponentially, because what we
get paid, I mean, I'm thankful for it, but obviously we can not
earn a living from that. Other cities make a lot less.
other cities don't make anything.
other elected officials don't make anything.
so I think it's fair to give the opportunity to people that have
been sitting here for eight years to have that gap, that
cushion. Because now when let's say they
finish their terms, you need some time to kind of adjust, and
whether you're going go into the corporate world or go into
entrepreneurship. At less least we have the choicf
we want to continue to participate and make use of
those two extra years, so I really do take offense to what
commissioner stuyvesant said, because we have -- we sit here
and we serve the people, okay? And we're here to serve the
community, to make the community better.
and I don't think this is anything close to trying to, you
know, benefit ourselves. This is just giving us a cushion
of two extra years to have health insurance, whether we
have that choice, we take it, whether I go back into corporate
or have insurance offered to me through another means, fine.
but I really take offense in what you said, because it really
paints a picture that we are trying to really grab a lot of
money and we're going to raise our salaries from $20,000 a year
to 120,000. >> I never said that.
>> I'm giving you an example, the way you're presenting
things. I really take offense with that.
>> so that's your interpretation of my words and I never said
that specifically. My point was very simple.
actually, we know, god willing if we don't die before, we know
when we're getting out of office.
so I know that unless anything happens, I'm going to be out of
office in november 2028. Other people like you guys,
november 2026, so we can plan accordingly because we know the
moment that we are going to be stepping out of office.
and that's why I tried to connect this and give an example
that somebody who is forced to resign, then they are called
today to the fourth floor and they go to their home that night
knowing that they no longer have a job.
those people, which I personally know that had those meetings on
the fourth floor, more than one, two and three, those people
never had the opportunity to prepare to get another job, to
find another insurance. It happened to them overnight.
people with children, people with families.
so my point is that we are adults clearly and we can plan
accordingly when we are going to be out of office and also what
is it that we're going to be doing to supplement our income
or to get insurance. All of the above.
so I was not -- >> it's called life planning.
>> I was not trying to offend or insult anybody, I'm sorry if you
feel offended by my words. They were not directed to you or
anybody specifically. It's just that this doesn't make
sense. This is how government -- you
know when you're getting out of office so we can plan
accordingly. >> mayor, before, just a
logistical issue. So the resolution was voted
down, but remember there were two parts.
>> mayor: exactly, I was just about to get to that.
>> we need clarification about the status quo and then the
additional two years. >> mayor: do we need a motion
to split this out? >> we can bring it back next
meeting with just the status quo.
>> mayor: okay. All right.
we don't want to do that right now?
>> I mean, no, I'd prefer you have the language in front of
you. >> mayor: perfect, okay.
I want to close this conversation, wa, because I thie
can go on and on and I agree with you, commissioner lama and
vice mayor, and -- I was supportive of this item, but
given everything else, it started not making sense to me.
and I can appreciate commissioner stuyvesant, what
you're saying. I think had you said what you
just said now earlier, it would have landed a little bit
differently. Okay, next item, please.
>> next item is the -- >> so you're saying you would
change your vote? >> mayor: no.
>> mayor, vice mayor, members of the commission.
this adopts the date county local mitigation strategy.
>> mayor: do we have public speakers?
>> no, ma'am. >> mayor: any comments from the
commission? I'll take a motion, please.
>> motion. >> second.
>> mayor: all in favor? All right.
now we're on to -- that's it for add-ons, correct?
citizens forum, mauricio? Do we have public speakers?
>> we do. >> vitally?
>> mayor: just make sure we have the clock on, thank you.
>> mi was coming here as a visitor and conducting business
here. One of the things is that you
guys coming up on the budget 2026-27 and one of the things
going on with the home taxes and things like that, I was
wondering how our police department is going to be
supported. One of the things is I'm not
sure how much you guys get money out of traffic tickets.
you go to intercoastal british, I guarantee you can use that
budget, writing the tickets, to be able to support the police
department. One of the reasons why is
because on several occasions, I observed somebody traveling a
lot faster than they should be traveling.
another thing is I don't know where we're going to get
elected, but they're going to have a hard time to do a great
job as you guys are doing. And to me that's very important,
because coming up here at night or in the daytime, it doesn't
really matter, you notice things going on and that comes from the
city manager and administration. When you guys don't get to relax
or something happens, I want you to look at yourself and say you
know what, I did a great job, because as a visitor that comes
here very often, I think you do an amazing job, thank you.
>> mayor: thank you. >> mr. Maddows?
>> good evening, mayor and commissioners.
victor matos, 18201, collins avenue.
I'm the manager of the trump royale and I come to you with
three basic things for us. That the last commission meeting
that I attended, we were talking about the development right next
door to us, and unfortunately, they're not playing nice.
4:00 in the morning, trucks and construction.
taking over the streets. Noise affecting a lot of our
residents. Not to mention the debris and
dust that's coming up against the building creating more
expenses for our residents as they have to clean their windows
and not being able to enjoy their balconies.
we would love for the city manager or the code enforcement
to actually help us and if there's a possibility for us to
get notice when and if they're going to be doing work at 4:00
in the morning so that we can advise our residents that these
things are taking place. We also want to bring to your
attention, I don't know if you've seen it lately, but a lot
of our residents are complaining about beach erosion.
and that is something that is affecting us, because we've lost
a lot of beach in the last eight to nine months, I would say.
and we don't know if the commission has actually been
briefed on this or if there's a plan.
and last but not least, the most recent complaint we're getting
is about the seaweed. I don't know if there's also a
plan for that as well. So I do appreciate your time and
have a great evening. >> mayor: thank you.
your comments have been noted by the manager and he'll be in
touch with you, thank you. >> no other speakers, ma'am.
>> mayor: all right, ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much.
meeting adjourned.