[9:26] Sorry. Good afternoon. I'd like

[9:28] to call to order a special

[9:30] budget workshop of the city of

[9:32] Hallandale Beach. Today is

[9:34] Wednesday, AUGUST 19th, 2026.

[9:36] The time is 4:12 P.M. Could I

[9:38] have a roll call, please? Mayor

[9:39] Cooper. Present. Vice mayor

[9:41] Lazarus. Absent. Commissioner

[9:42] Adams. Yes. Commissioner.

[9:43] Butler here. Commissioner Lima

[9:45] here. City manager. City

[9:47] attorney. Marino. MADAM Mayor,

[9:49] you have a quorum. Thank you,

[9:50] MADAM Clerk. Before we rise for

[9:51] the Pledge of Allegiance. I

[9:55] would like to call to mind a

[9:57] dear friend of Powell in this

[9:59] city who had passed away

[10:01] recently. Kenny Cohen, if

[10:03] you're not familiar with him,

[10:04] he's been in front of us a

[10:05] couple of times. He works

[10:07] directly with the schools. He

[10:10] had passed away. Our prayers go

[10:12] out to his family and everyone

[10:14] that he's touched here in the

[10:16] community. And we also call to

[10:17] mind the continued war in the

[10:19] Middle East and Ukraine and all

[10:20] our armed forces that are

[10:23] fighting overseas, putting

[10:24] themselves in harm's way to

[10:26] protect people in harm's way.

[10:28] And I've always called to mind

[10:30] our first responders here in

[10:32] our city, county, state and

[10:33] nation that protect and defend

[10:36] us every day. A moment of

[10:52] silent prayer, please.

[10:57] Thank

[11:01] you. Commissioner, to lead us

[11:04] in the pledge, please. The

[11:06] United States of America and to

[11:07] the Republic for which it

[11:10] stands. One nation under GOD,

[11:12] indivisible, with liberty and

[11:16] justice for all. Okay. We have

[11:18] anybody signed up for public

[11:19] participation? No, MADAM Mayor,

[11:21] no, we do not. And we don't

[11:23] have any change of the order of

[11:24] business. No, MADAM Mayor, so

[11:27] we will have at it. All right.

[11:28] Thank you very much, MADAM

[11:30] Mayor. And good afternoon,

[11:32] honorable commissioners. So we

[11:34] are here for our well, not our

[11:36] final, but one of our close to

[11:38] final budget hearings. I'm

[11:40] going to ask Director Massey to

[11:42] come and lead us through. We

[11:44] are going to present to you the

[11:47] framework for what will be at

[11:48] the official hearing on the

[11:51] 14th and the 28th. I want to

[11:53] thank staff very much for all

[11:55] of their hard work, because it

[12:01] has been an effort behind the

[12:02] scenes to ensure that we are

[12:03] able to present to the

[12:05] Commission not only another

[12:08] balanced budget. We've had to

[12:09] make some very difficult

[12:11] decisions throughout this

[12:12] process. I want you all to know

[12:14] that. But again, staff has done

[12:15] a tremendous job in getting us

[12:18] to this point, and I am happy

[12:22] to say that we we are going to

[12:25] recommend the rollback rate.

[12:26] That's what this budget is

[12:29] structured for. So I'm sure at

[12:30] the time that we are in in this

[12:32] state's history with what might

[12:33] happen in NOVEMBER, we are

[12:35] probably one of the few cities

[12:37] in the state who will be doing

[12:40] that. So it's it's a testament,

[12:42] again, to your leadership

[12:43] commission and your trust of

[12:46] staff to continue to do the

[12:48] right thing from a fiscal

[12:49] perspective. So, Director

[12:51] Massey, if you could, thank you

[12:52] so much. City manager, doctor

[12:54] Earl. Good evening, mayor, vice

[12:55] mayor, commissioners and City

[12:57] manager, members of the public.

[12:58] Today, we're presenting the

[13:00] City Manager recommended budget

[13:01] and financial Plan for fiscal

[13:03] year 27. This presentation

[13:05] reflects the updates and

[13:06] changes made since the prior

[13:09] budget workshops from JUNE 22nd,

[13:11] and provides the current path

[13:16] towards adoption. Tonight's

[13:17] presentation will cover four

[13:19] main areas. First, where we are

[13:22] in the budget timeline. Current

[13:23] situation. Second, the proposed

[13:25] changes to recommended budget.

[13:27] Third, the proposed millage and

[13:28] finally, the recommended five

[13:29] year financial plan through

[13:32] fiscal year 31. The goal is to

[13:33] provide a clear picture of the

[13:35] 27 budget and the longer

[13:38] financial outlook. The budget

[13:40] process began in JANUARY with

[13:41] budget planning and continue

[13:43] with the department's

[13:45] submissions in FEBRUARY. City

[13:46] manager's office reviews the

[13:48] budget in APRIL, and we have

[13:50] commission workshops in MAY,

[13:52] JUNE, AUGUST 5th and today,

[13:53] AUGUST 19th. The next formal

[13:55] steps are the first and second

[13:56] readings for adoption of the

[13:57] millage and budget on SEPTEMBER

[13:59] 14th and 28th. Once adopted,

[14:01] the 27 budget will take effect

[14:09] on OCTOBER 1st, 2026. The main

[14:10] message on this slide on slide

[14:12] four, is that the 27 budget

[14:14] tentative budget is balanced in

[14:16] the General Fund. Both revenues

[14:17] and expenditures total

[14:20] approximately $134 million.

[14:21] There is no projected general

[14:24] fund shortfall for fy 27. The

[14:25] balanced budget reflects the

[14:26] proposed changes from the city

[14:28] Manager's recommended budget we

[14:30] provided on JUNE 22nd, reduces

[14:31] the proposed millage, the

[14:33] rollback rate, and still

[14:34] maintains the city's focus on

[14:36] long term financial planning

[14:37] and the potential impacts of

[14:43] future property tax reform.

[14:44] This next section walks us

[14:45] through the proposed changes to

[14:47] the City Manager recommended

[14:49] budget. These updates reflect

[14:51] refined estimates, updated fund

[14:53] level activity and additional

[14:54] staff reviews since the prior

[14:57] version of the budget. Is there

[14:59] a question? No, no. Okay. We're

[15:01] good, we're good. I have no

[15:05] button for it on slide six.

[15:06] Wait, I'm on slide six. Slide

[15:10] five. Hold on a second. Slide

[15:14] six. The general fund, which is

[15:16] the city's primary operating

[15:18] fund, supports core services

[15:19] including public safety,

[15:21] general government parks,

[15:22] community service and other

[15:24] city wide functions. On slide

[15:25] six, you will see that we

[15:28] propose the millage at 7.3848

[15:30] on JUNE 22nd. Today, we're

[15:33] proposing a rollback rate of

[15:35] 7.3189. That is an impact of

[15:36] $443,000. So on this slide we

[15:39] have 993,000 reduction in

[15:40] general fund. That's due to the

[15:42] rollback rate. And we moved

[15:44] some items from the general

[15:45] fund to the developer Agreement

[15:46] fund, as we felt it was best

[15:48] suited there. There's details

[15:51] on slide six of the differences

[15:53] in the general fund salaries

[15:54] and benefits. We had slight

[15:56] adjustments of 152,000

[15:57] transfers out. That's the

[15:59] decreased contribution to the

[16:02] renewal and replacement fund.

[16:04] Slide seven provides you with

[16:06] the detail version of those

[16:09] items. B is so contract. We

[16:10] received a few weeks ago that

[16:14] the bso contract increased by

[16:15] $372,000. That is due to the

[16:17] impact of the increased frs

[16:19] contribution on the city side.

[16:21] So we received a revised

[16:23] consideration letter from bso

[16:26] and that impact was $370,000.

[16:28] The tif payment to the cra is

[16:31] reduced by $156,000. That is

[16:32] due to the rollback rate that

[16:35] impact their transfer to

[16:38] transportation fund. That

[16:43] difference. I'm sorry. Hold on

[16:44] a second. Transfer

[16:46] transportation fund. That is

[16:48] because we increased the

[16:51] roadway improvement project,

[16:53] and we also removed the fec

[16:55] lease because that is no longer

[16:57] a viable option for the city at

[16:58] this time. So that's the

[17:00] difference. Impact there for

[17:02] transportation fund, we also

[17:04] reduced the contribution to the

[17:06] renewal and replacement fund.

[17:12] We had identified. What we what

[17:14] we identified that we were

[17:16] going to smooth out the r&r

[17:18] fund, and we used those dollars

[17:19] to fund more immediate

[17:21] priorities such as roadway

[17:23] improvement, funding, the bso

[17:24] contract, and rolling back the

[17:28] knowledge. So the total

[17:29] reduction to the general fund

[17:31] from the proposed recommended

[17:39] budget is $993,000. Slide eight.

[17:41] We're on special revenue funds.

[17:42] There are some changes. The

[17:44] special revenue funds, we

[17:45] reduced, the renewal

[17:48] replacement fund, small changes

[17:49] to three islands in Golden

[17:50] Isles. That's based on the JULY

[17:52] 1st taxable value that came out,

[17:55] the cemetery fund. We did add

[17:56] $75,000 to cemetery fund for

[17:58] the records and asset

[18:01] management project. Down on

[18:05] slide eight, I just. Yes, we

[18:07] removed the fec lease payment

[18:08] and increased roadway

[18:09] improvements for the permit

[18:10] inspection fund, the building

[18:12] fund. We did add marketing for

[18:18] a pilot program. On slide nine.

[18:22] We did add two positions. This

[18:23] slide highlights the strategic

[18:25] personnel updated funded by the

[18:27] utility funds. This budget adds

[18:29] two utility engineer design

[18:31] professional positions. These

[18:32] are senior level positions

[18:34] intended to strengthen in-house

[18:36] design and project management

[18:37] capacity for major utility

[18:41] capital improvements. Just to

[18:44] confirm, and I know I asked you,

[18:45] doctor Earl, about this. This

[18:46] would be kind of putting in

[18:48] place that construction

[18:49] management component of

[18:51] projects throughout the city.

[18:53] Correct. And by also being able

[18:55] to design some of our projects

[18:57] in-house, we hope to move

[18:59] faster and also save a lot of

[19:00] money as well. So it's going to

[19:02] be where we still use

[19:03] consultants, but we're going to

[19:05] try and take over as much as we

[19:06] can internally just to drive

[19:07] these projects home faster.

[19:10] Okay. Thank you. Sorry for the

[19:13] interruption, MISS Mason. Slide

[19:14] ten. We have no proposed

[19:16] changes to the enterprise fund

[19:17] at this time. Those funds

[19:19] include sanitation, stormwater

[19:24] and the utility fund. Other

[19:27] governmental funds. On slide 11,

[19:29] the proposed budget is $31

[19:31] million, a decrease of $86,000

[19:33] from the Developer Agreement

[19:34] Fund. Most of these funds

[19:36] remain unchanged. The Debt

[19:37] Service Fund has a minor

[19:40] increase of $700, and that.

[19:43] Slide 11. Total proposed budget

[19:46] across all fund groups is $251

[19:47] million. That includes

[19:49] enterprise funds,

[19:49] Intergovernmental Special

[19:52] Revenue and the general Fund.

[19:55] The general fund represents

[19:56] 53.44% of the total budget.

[19:59] Enterprise funds represent

[20:01] 25.52% and so forth. This

[20:02] summary reinforces that the

[20:04] overall changes are targeted

[20:05] and primarily reflect

[20:07] refinements to assumptions and

[20:08] fund specific adjustments,

[20:11] rather than a broad reduction

[20:25] in service levels. The city is

[20:28] proposing a millage rate of

[20:30] 7.3189 for fy 27. This reflects

[20:33] a decrease of 0.0660 mills in

[20:35] the operating millage, and a

[20:37] decrease of 0.0053 mills for

[20:39] debt service. This chart shows

[20:40] the city's millage trend over

[20:44] time, including a decrease from

[20:48] 7.3848 in 26 to the proposed

[20:50] 7.3189 in 27. The proposed rate

[20:51] supports a balanced general

[20:52] fund budget, while reducing the

[20:54] military and recognizing

[20:55] affordable concerns for

[20:57] property owners. If we had not

[20:59] decreased the millage rate to

[21:00] the rollback rate, an average

[21:01] single family homeowner would

[21:03] have paid approximately $30

[21:12] more. The final section is a

[21:13] recommended five year financial

[21:14] plan. I know we've gone through

[21:16] this a few times before, but

[21:17] we're going to take some time

[21:19] on it today. Again, this

[21:20] section is important because

[21:22] the 27 budget is balanced, but

[21:24] the city we need to plan for

[21:25] future structural pressures,

[21:27] property tax reform, public

[21:29] safety costs, pensions and

[21:31] capital needs. The five year

[21:32] plan includes several revenue

[21:34] assumptions for property tax

[21:36] reform. The model assumes a

[21:37] $150,000 homestead exemption

[21:40] impact beginning in fy 28. The

[21:42] $250,000 homestead exemption

[21:44] impact in 29 and future years,

[21:45] and a reduction in the

[21:48] commercial property cap from

[21:50] 10% to 5%. Ad valorem revenue

[21:52] is budgeted at 2% growth for fy

[21:54] 28 and future years with fy 27

[21:58] based on the bcc estimate of 2%,

[22:00] 2.25%. The plan also includes

[22:02] the increased fire assessment

[22:05] rate in fy 27, with estimated

[22:06] additional revenue of

[22:08] approximately 400 approximately

[22:11] $800,000. All other revenues

[22:15] are based on recent trends. For

[22:15] expenditure assumptions. The

[22:18] plan includes a 5.5% increase

[22:19] for non police bargaining

[22:21] employees and fy 27 and

[22:23] subsequent years made up of a

[22:25] 3% Cola and a 2.5% merit

[22:27] assumption for police

[22:28] bargaining employees. The plan

[22:30] assumes an 8% increase in 27 in

[22:32] subsequent years, made up of a

[22:34] 3% Cola and 5% merit assumption.

[22:36] These assumptions are intended

[22:37] to reflect anticipated

[22:38] personnel costs growth, while

[22:40] giving the city a realistic

[22:47] long term forecast. The plan

[22:48] also assumes a 5% annual

[22:49] increase for police and fire

[22:52] pensions from fy 27 through fy

[22:55] 31. It also assumes a 10.2%

[22:56] increase for health insurance

[22:58] in fy 27 and subsequent years.

[23:01] For bso, the plan includes a 27

[23:02] consideration proposal and a 5%

[23:04] increase in subsequent years.

[23:05] These items are significant.

[23:07] Cost drivers are important to

[23:08] include in the long term

[23:13] outlook. On slide 19. This is

[23:15] the five year financial plan.

[23:16] This slide brings together the

[23:19] five year general fund forecast.

[23:21] The fy 27 budget is balanced

[23:22] with revenues and expenditures

[23:25] showing both at $134 million.

[23:27] Under. The assumptions shown

[23:29] for fy 28 has a small projected

[23:32] surplus of $268,000 beginning

[23:34] in fy 29. The model shows a

[23:36] projected shortfalls of

[23:39] approximately 4.6 million in 5

[23:40] point 8,000,009.8 million

[23:43] through fy 31. The reserve

[23:44] section shows that the city

[23:45] begins the forecast period with

[23:47] strong unassigned fund balance,

[23:48] but reserves decline over the

[23:50] long term if projected gaps are

[23:53] not addressed. This is why the

[23:55] five year plan is being

[23:56] presented alongside. The annual

[23:57] budget provides us time to plan

[23:59] early, evaluate strategies and

[24:02] avoid making reactive decisions

[24:07] later. The next steps are the

[24:09] two formal public hearings. On

[24:10] SEPTEMBER 14th, we will hold

[24:11] the first public hearing to set

[24:12] the tentative millage and

[24:14] budget. On SEPTEMBER 28th, the

[24:16] city will hold the final public

[24:17] hearing and consider adoption

[24:20] of the 27 budget. I do want to

[24:21] add that the Trim notices are

[24:23] being mailed out this week. If

[24:24] you go online, you should see

[24:26] your trim notice online right

[24:28] now. And not to forget that we

[24:31] did add the three islands item

[24:34] to the trim. Stormwater is now

[24:36] also being added to trim, so if

[24:37] there's a substantial increase,

[24:38] it's because of those items

[24:40] that are on there. And that

[24:42] concludes the presentation.

[24:44] Cool. I don't have any

[24:47] questions at this point.

[24:48] Commissioner Butler, you're

[24:53] recognized. Thank you. Okay. I

[24:55] have a couple of items I just

[24:56] wanted to get some

[24:59] clarification on if I could. So

[25:01] I so some of my questions are

[25:02] going to be focused on these

[25:04] three priorities that I know

[25:05] keep coming back up about

[25:06] traffic, flooding and

[25:07] beautification. So you

[25:08] mentioned that we're adding

[25:09] additional money to the

[25:11] Department of Transportation.

[25:15] What what is that funding and

[25:17] 50,000. Yeah, added $500,000 to

[25:19] the roadway and street

[25:20] improvement project. And so is

[25:22] that is that intended to

[25:25] improve traffic? No, it's

[25:28] intended to address the streets

[25:29] and roadways in the city to

[25:32] repay them. So we increased

[25:34] roadway improvements by

[25:35] $150,000. Did we not also put

[25:36] additional money in the

[25:37] Department of Transportation?

[25:39] Did I did I misunderstand? Yes.

[25:40] We did not put additional money

[25:42] in the Department of

[25:43] Transportation. This additional

[25:44] money into transportation fund.

[25:46] All right. Fund includes

[25:48] streets, roadway. Okay, I

[25:50] misunderstood it, so I'm sorry.

[25:52] Bill. Quick bill. So tied to

[25:54] quick bill. No, that is not

[25:55] tied to quick build. Oh, okay.

[25:57] All right. So so these are for

[25:58] increased roadway improvements.

[26:00] So that's part of our street

[26:01] repaving program. That's

[26:03] correct. All right. So I just I

[26:04] just wanted to I wanted to get

[26:06] into a couple of questions

[26:07] about this because I, doctor

[26:09] Earl and I shared an email back

[26:10] and forth that's been going on

[26:12] for quite some time. And I just

[26:15] want to kind of air this out on

[26:16] the city commission so we make

[26:18] sure we're all on the same page

[26:22] here. Right? So last NOVEMBER,

[26:24] we were provided an email about

[26:27] the status of the street

[26:28] repaving program. Now, this

[26:29] program, I think started in

[26:32] 2023. Doctor Earl. All right.

[26:33] So we've had this program now

[26:37] operating for three years. And

[26:39] in NOVEMBER we were sent a list

[26:41] of streets that are being

[26:43] repaved. And my question was,

[26:45] what is the prioritization? How

[26:47] are we prioritizing? How are we

[26:49] identifying streets? I know the

[26:50] same issue just came up about a

[26:52] month ago during a City

[26:56] commission meeting. So the

[26:58] concern that I have is that

[26:59] since NOVEMBER, I still haven't

[27:01] received anything that

[27:03] indicates how we're identifying

[27:05] streets and how we're repaving

[27:07] streets. So we're putting a, I

[27:08] don't know, a million and a

[27:09] half. I don't know what the

[27:11] number is today, a million and

[27:12] a half into this program. I

[27:14] know we did for the last three

[27:16] years. This year, maybe another

[27:17] million or million and a half

[27:18] into street repaving. And I

[27:20] still don't have a way of

[27:23] telling my residents that ask

[27:24] when their street is going to

[27:26] be repaved and what the

[27:28] schedule is going forward. Now,

[27:29] I understand that we have a lot

[27:31] going on, and I know that

[27:32] there's a lot happening, but

[27:33] this is something that has been

[27:35] going on since NOVEMBER of last

[27:37] year. And so I just want to

[27:38] make sure that we're all on the

[27:40] same page that that, you know,

[27:41] when we first approved this, I

[27:44] went back and I pulled the, the

[27:47] original presentation that we

[27:49] had about the street

[27:51] resurfacing. And I, and I agree

[27:52] with it wholeheartedly. So one

[27:54] of the challenges is of

[27:56] inadequate planning. That was

[27:57] the presentation that we had

[27:59] for the renewal and replacement

[28:01] program. And one of the

[28:02] challenges for inadequate

[28:03] planning, which I agree,

[28:05] financial instability due to

[28:06] reactive spending, service

[28:08] delivery disruptions, increased

[28:10] public dissatisfaction,

[28:11] escalation of long term costs

[28:13] from emergency repairs. I agree

[28:15] with all of that. And so the

[28:16] solution that we had been

[28:20] presented and proposed to us

[28:22] was to adopt a proactive,

[28:24] multi-year planning policy. So

[28:26] that's really what I'm asking

[28:28] us to do, is to do exactly what

[28:29] we suggested that we were going

[28:34] to do. And the, the heartburn

[28:36] that I had with this really is

[28:38] that we have been selecting

[28:40] streets for three years. And I

[28:41] just want to know what process

[28:43] we've been using to select

[28:44] streets for the last three

[28:45] years. I don't need to know

[28:47] that we have a whole new

[28:48] process. I don't need to know

[28:49] formalized process. I just need

[28:52] or or something that is

[28:53] particularly formalized. I just

[28:55] need to know what we've done.

[28:57] And I assume that we have a

[29:01] process. It MAY not be a pretty

[29:02] process. It MAY not be a

[29:05] perfect process, but we need to

[29:07] have a process that we can

[29:08] share with our residents. And I

[29:10] think I think waiting almost a

[29:12] year to get that information on

[29:13] a program that's been running

[29:16] for three years. I'm not asking

[29:18] this to be a priority. I just

[29:20] want to make sure that this is

[29:22] clear, that my my fellow

[29:24] commissioners are are hearing

[29:26] what I'm asking for and why I'm

[29:28] asking for it. And I just think

[29:29] it's an important issue that we

[29:34] need to need to address. So I'm

[29:37] going to leave that there.

[29:39] We've we've had extensive back

[29:40] and forth. And I just, you know,

[29:42] I feel like I try to get these

[29:43] things resolved without

[29:44] bringing them up during a City

[29:47] Commission meeting and airing

[29:48] our dirty laundry, so to speak,

[29:51] in public. So that's the first

[29:52] item that I wanted to talk

[29:54] about. And that's the street

[29:57] repaving program. Yes, ma'am. I

[29:59] know you've asked, and, you

[30:01] know, I've even dug up some old

[30:04] records if it to get clear and

[30:07] concise, you're really is it

[30:08] possible? I guess the question

[30:10] is, doctor, is it possible to

[30:12] list every street that we have

[30:14] paved and just have a program

[30:17] of. When the next. Just a list

[30:18] of what streets are queued. And

[30:20] again, because I know the

[30:21] original plan had a map, it had

[30:23] all the documentation on it. It

[30:25] was different color codes for

[30:26] different years. You know, it

[30:29] was a single snapshot of that.

[30:31] And, you know, I don't know if

[30:34] it's just the basis of

[30:35] presentation and this is what

[30:37] it is because kudos, we did all

[30:39] these streets. I know my street

[30:40] isn't paved yet because we have

[30:42] work under it, you know, and a

[30:43] lot of times people ask, I say,

[30:45] well, let me see if more than

[30:47] likely has something

[30:49] underground, their water, sewer,

[30:50] wastewater or something

[30:51] happening here. But let's

[30:53] figure out what it was because,

[30:54] you know, I have one, two. I

[30:56] had one that I've been asking

[30:58] for for a while that ironically,

[30:59] it was a dead end and I don't

[31:01] think it was on the plan for a

[31:03] while. So maybe it's just if

[31:05] I'm hearing you properly, even

[31:07] just an Excel sheet of the

[31:09] inventory of what we did,

[31:10] what's still in the pipeline,

[31:12] and maybe a time frame for it.

[31:13] Is that simplifying your

[31:14] request? Yeah, let me just I

[31:16] just want to know if it's not,

[31:17] then correct it because that's

[31:19] what I'm hearing. Well, let me

[31:21] and let me just say yes. And I

[31:22] want to I want to add some

[31:24] additional context to that

[31:25] because you're right, that

[31:26] that's that seems like it

[31:28] should be available. This is

[31:31] the note that we had from the,

[31:34] at the time, the dpw director.

[31:37] So the note was roadway

[31:38] evaluations were conducted

[31:39] through field assessments by

[31:41] the streets Division and

[31:42] documented through the city's

[31:44] gis roadway inventory and

[31:46] internal maintenance tracking

[31:47] systems. Due to licensing

[31:49] issues, we're unable to access

[31:50] our gis system to provide the

[31:51] tracking maps. We have been

[31:53] informed by it. The issue is

[31:54] resolved and they will provide

[31:56] the maps from fiscal year 22

[31:57] through 25 once the licenses

[31:59] are reissued. So that was in

[32:01] APRIL of 26. They said that

[32:02] roadway selections were

[32:04] resurfaced based on field

[32:05] observations and several

[32:07] condition indicators, including

[32:09] the frequency and severity of

[32:10] potholes, alligator cracking

[32:12] and structural pavement fatigue,

[32:14] longitudinal and transverse

[32:16] cracking, edge failures, base

[32:17] deterioration, drainage related

[32:19] pavement stress, overall ride

[32:20] quality, resident service

[32:21] requests, and maintenance

[32:22] history. That's a lot. I just

[32:24] said a whole lot of information,

[32:26] but clearly there was something

[32:27] they did something and this was

[32:29] from APRIL of this year. And I

[32:30] understand there's been

[32:31] turnover, but we have a program

[32:33] that's been ongoing for three

[32:34] years, and I assume we're going

[32:36] to continue to do we have more

[32:38] streets to do, I hope, but I

[32:40] don't know. I literally I have

[32:41] a resident that I can't even

[32:43] tell them when their street is

[32:44] going to be repaved or if it's

[32:47] being repaved or if it's even

[32:49] someday will be repaved. So yes,

[32:50] mayor, I agree with everything

[32:53] you just said and I'm asking

[32:56] just that we we provide I don't

[32:57] need us to go out and hire a

[32:58] consultant, put together a

[33:00] whole new program. I don't need

[33:01] us to spend more money on this.

[33:03] I just need to understand what

[33:04] the program that we've been

[33:06] using for three years and, and

[33:07] how that applies for the next

[33:09] year or two to the streets that

[33:10] we still have to repave, which

[33:12] I understand we have quite a

[33:14] few still left. Okay, doctor.

[33:16] Roll through. Doctor. So I'm

[33:17] happy that Commissioner Butler

[33:20] read that because what he read

[33:21] is a response to the question

[33:23] of how did we evaluate the

[33:24] streets. So everything

[33:25] Commissioner Butler just read

[33:26] is exactly what we've said for

[33:29] three years in terms of how we

[33:31] actually evaluated the streets.

[33:32] We started this process over

[33:34] three years ago. And at that

[33:36] point, this was a this was a

[33:37] project that at that time, in

[33:39] the middle of everything else

[33:41] that we were doing, we said

[33:44] that we would now take on under

[33:45] recommendation from

[33:46] Commissioner Butler that we

[33:48] would take on the repaving of,

[33:50] of, of our streets throughout

[33:52] our city. Now, this commission

[33:54] will remember that we have not

[33:57] paved or paved our streets for

[33:59] decades. And so we had to

[34:00] quickly pull something together

[34:02] in terms of how do we evaluate

[34:03] the worst streets that we have

[34:05] in our city. We put together

[34:06] what was initially an eight

[34:09] year program that we were able

[34:10] to condense down to, to now

[34:12] what's roughly a three year

[34:13] program, because initially we

[34:15] were looking to deal with these

[34:17] streets that we had not dealt

[34:20] with for decades over an eight

[34:23] year period of time, our team

[34:27] worked extremely hard to get

[34:29] that down from eight years down

[34:33] to three. Where we are today is

[34:34] we've been given regular

[34:35] updates in the past with the

[34:37] commission. In terms of all the

[34:38] streets that we were doing, we

[34:41] are at the end of those streets

[34:42] now in terms of what was given

[34:44] in APRIL, between APRIL and

[34:45] today, in fact, between MARCH

[34:48] and today, we've had

[34:50] significant turnover in our

[34:51] Department of Public Works, and

[34:53] we have lost the people who

[34:56] were literally doing this

[34:59] street program. And what I have

[35:01] asked this commission for is

[35:03] for time, so that we can deal

[35:07] with our internal issues.

[35:09] Remembering that our team has

[35:11] been doing the work and has not

[35:13] stopped doing the work. But

[35:16] there is a transition period

[35:18] internally that we have to deal

[35:20] with. And so, yes, is the

[35:22] commission going to get a whole

[35:25] new slew of streets that we are

[35:27] going to do? Yes. Will the

[35:29] residents get a response to

[35:30] every single thing that they

[35:34] ask today? The answer is no,

[35:37] because our team is working

[35:38] hard. They are burning it at

[35:41] both ends. Again, let me say it

[35:43] on the record. We took what was

[35:45] an eight year program and

[35:47] turned it into a three year

[35:48] program, and our team has been

[35:51] working extremely hard. I don't

[35:53] sit here not wanting to give

[35:57] the commission information. But

[35:59] we are literally in a

[36:00] transition period and I have

[36:01] said we will get the

[36:03] information I need to get the

[36:05] people on board who are going

[36:06] to take over this program. We

[36:08] have not shied away from

[36:10] anything that this commission

[36:15] has asked us to do. Now, jt, if

[36:19] you if you can, I know you guys

[36:21] have we are closing out the

[36:23] streets that we provided to the

[36:25] Commission three years ago,

[36:26] correct? Correct. Yes. We have

[36:30] we have put those on gis let

[36:33] level gis layers on our map so

[36:35] I can provide that to you as

[36:36] the program. Dear. What I

[36:38] wanted to do was what we had

[36:39] originally programed here, and

[36:41] then have another layer that

[36:42] would be the years in which

[36:43] they were actually constructed.

[36:46] So you could see if there's any

[36:49] streets that we did extra. So

[36:50] planned for the eight year

[36:52] program completed in three. We

[36:54] do have a list that I'm working

[36:58] with right now on the next five

[36:59] years. And I know that Charles

[37:00] was also working on this when

[37:02] Charles was here. Correct.

[37:04] Charles, who is no longer here,

[37:05] right, was the primary contact

[37:07] for this program. And Charles

[37:08] was Charles and I are still

[37:10] working on that list. And

[37:11] Charles, even though he's not

[37:15] here, is working with jt on on

[37:16] trying to get this thing

[37:18] together. Go ahead. Jt yes. So

[37:19] we have the next five years.

[37:22] What I wanted to do is put

[37:23] lengths attached to it. I have

[37:25] a list of roads, but I wanted

[37:27] to update that like we did the

[37:28] first five years to give us

[37:30] linear feet of paving surface

[37:32] that we need to do. And then I

[37:33] wanted to compare that one more

[37:35] time to any known water, sewer,

[37:36] stormwater projects that we're

[37:37] going to have on those roads.

[37:39] So I could give doctor Earl a

[37:40] complete list of what the plan

[37:44] is going to be, focusing on 27

[37:45] first, and then making sure

[37:48] that all the out years are, are,

[37:51] are carefully considered in

[37:53] conjunction with the other

[37:54] multiple projects that we have

[37:56] throughout the city. Same type

[37:57] of thing that we did the last

[37:59] time, but now we have more

[38:01] information on the stormwater

[38:03] from the, the stormwater master

[38:05] plan being developed, the force

[38:06] mains and the water lines that

[38:09] we're looking to do. So it will

[38:12] be based on very similar

[38:13] conditional assessments by our

[38:16] team. Internally. We did

[38:20] consider going out to a cna

[38:23] company to see if they could

[38:24] add some value to our list once

[38:29] we came up with it. But that we

[38:30] haven't brought that to doctor

[38:31] Earl yet. No, we did. You. I

[38:33] said, no, we can do this

[38:35] internally. Yeah. Did Robert

[38:36] bring that to you? That was

[38:38] that was done by the previous.

[38:41] Okay. So long story short, the

[38:43] list is getting close to being

[38:44] finalized. We're going to do

[38:46] the same thing we did the last

[38:48] time, put it on a gis map layer

[38:50] so that you can see it by

[38:51] section of the quadrants. We're

[38:52] going to do a multi quadrant

[38:55] approach each year. Again going

[38:57] forward for the next five years.

[38:58] And then from there we'll see

[39:00] how much is left after that of

[39:01] the city. And then we'll end up

[39:04] doing a maintenance program to

[39:05] maintain the roads in the

[39:06] satisfactory or better

[39:08] condition going forward with

[39:09] our annual maintenance program.

[39:11] So first is to get the roads in

[39:12] satisfactory condition for the

[39:14] ones that aren't, and then to

[39:15] do whatever we have to do to

[39:17] maintain those so that they

[39:18] don't degrade and we have to go

[39:20] into the subbase of the roads,

[39:22] and it costs three to 4 or 5

[39:24] times more than just milling

[39:25] and resurfacing on a regular

[39:27] scheduled basis. So we are

[39:29] working on that plan. Charles

[39:31] is still involved, and as soon

[39:32] as the new director comes in

[39:34] and as soon as the city

[39:37] engineer gets, you know, the

[39:38] opportunity to continue to look

[39:40] at this program, we'll bring it

[39:41] back to the city manager, to

[39:46] the city commission. Good, good.

[39:49] Thank you. So I doctor Earl, I

[39:51] just want to be clear that I am

[39:52] very supportive of the work

[39:55] that the city has been done

[39:58] doing and that the I fully

[39:59] support, obviously, repaving

[40:02] the streets. My my concerns are

[40:04] just that we have a three year

[40:06] program. This is an item that I

[40:07] requested originally in

[40:08] NOVEMBER of last year. So we're

[40:10] coming up on a full year of

[40:12] asking for information of how

[40:13] we're doing something that

[40:14] we've been doing for three

[40:16] years. So while I fully

[40:17] appreciate all the turnover,

[40:18] and I certainly have been very

[40:20] patient, as you've seen in my

[40:22] emails, I certainly haven't

[40:24] brought this up for the entire

[40:26] city commission. But I think I

[40:28] think it's something that the

[40:29] residents deserve to know. And

[40:31] I still have the resident, you

[40:33] know, who still asks me all the

[40:35] time about their roadways, what

[40:38] road it is. I don't know, off

[40:40] the top of my head, but I'm not

[40:41] going to know. I don't mean to

[40:43] pry, because I have somebody

[40:44] too, and I wonder if it's the

[40:46] same one that had the dead end

[40:48] road that hasn't been done yet.

[40:49] I'm only asking because I keep

[40:51] asking that road too, because I

[40:52] keep hearing about it. So the

[40:54] other thing I just wanted to

[40:58] ask. So. We reduced the r&r

[41:00] fund by $1 million. We did

[41:02] reduce the r&r fund by $1

[41:05] million. So is there anything

[41:07] that we have pulled out of what

[41:09] we're doing? Is there a

[41:11] reduction in what we're doing?

[41:12] Is that why did what's the

[41:14] what's driving the reduction?

[41:16] So we had said money. So we had

[41:17] set dollars aside for the

[41:18] facilities assessment. But that

[41:19] assessment is still underway.

[41:21] So instead of holding dollars

[41:22] in the r&r fund for an

[41:24] assessment that is not yet

[41:25] complete, we made the decision

[41:27] to take those dollars and use

[41:29] them to fund the roadway

[41:32] improvement in the fund, and

[41:34] also use it to fund the gap for

[41:36] the bso contract and roll back

[41:37] the millage. So the r&r fund is

[41:39] is funded. We just set those

[41:40] dollars aside for the

[41:41] assessment, but since those

[41:42] assessment numbers have not

[41:45] come back yet, we made that

[41:46] decision in terms of the

[41:47] proposed budget, proposed

[41:48] budget, proposed budget. The

[41:50] current budget has the r&r

[41:51] dollars in it, and we're using

[41:52] those dollars to fund

[41:54] continuous projects. Okay.

[41:57] Thank you. So there are two

[41:59] items that I wanted to bring up.

[42:02] So we had a conversation about

[42:06] the annual commission or action

[42:08] plan. One of the items that we

[42:09] talked about was the green

[42:12] pathway. I had had requested.

[42:14] That item seems to have dropped

[42:16] from it. I forgot all about it,

[42:18] and I just wanted to ask if I

[42:20] could. Now, I did send an email

[42:21] asking for an update. I didn't

[42:23] get a response, so I want to

[42:25] just my understanding, during a

[42:26] recent City Commission meeting,

[42:28] we had brought it up and we

[42:29] were told that it was being

[42:32] added back to the action plan.

[42:34] Am I am I wrong about that? I

[42:37] it was discussed, but yeah,

[42:39] yeah. Sorry. Go ahead. I'm so

[42:41] that was a cr a program that's

[42:43] a cra one. And that was the art

[42:45] trail on the cra side. And what

[42:46] we had discussed at the cra

[42:48] meeting was that initially,

[42:50] over a year ago, we took it off

[42:51] because costs were going up and

[42:53] we weren't sure that we were

[42:55] going to be able to pay for

[42:56] that. And that subsequent cra

[42:58] meetings, we indicated that we

[42:59] were actually doing the art

[43:01] trail project and that we now

[43:02] have to do the guaranteed, I'm

[43:04] sorry, we have to, to go out

[43:06] and do the, the, the guaranteed,

[43:08] the, the gmp for that, the

[43:09] guaranteed price from a

[43:11] contractor for that. So that

[43:13] project is still moving forward.

[43:14] I don't believe that project

[43:16] was actually on the commission

[43:18] annual action plan, was it?

[43:20] Natasha. I don't recall in

[43:21] terms of the art trail because

[43:25] it was a. Right. So so if we if

[43:27] we just have a brief cra

[43:28] discussion, the cra is doing

[43:30] the art trail. That's the trail

[43:31] that will be throughout the

[43:34] whole city. And the next steps

[43:35] now are for that. We have, i

[43:38] believe, 100%, 100% drawings.

[43:40] And the next step now is for

[43:41] the construction manager at

[43:44] risk to actually do to actually

[43:46] do the give us the pricing for

[43:48] that, and then we can go out

[43:49] and start constructing that.

[43:50] That's great news and I'm glad

[43:52] to hear that. And thank you for

[43:54] clarifying it for me. I know

[43:55] now where it came up, and it

[43:57] was while we were doing the

[43:58] resident survey, and it was

[43:59] something that the residents

[44:00] indicated that they wanted. So

[44:03] I'm glad to hear. And I don't

[44:04] know if this was Doctor Earl's

[44:08] idea or Director Finn's idea,

[44:10] but it was clearly something

[44:13] that the residents love the

[44:14] idea of. So I'm glad to hear

[44:17] that it's back on and I. And I

[44:18] do remember that you saying

[44:20] that the cost had gone up and

[44:21] that's why you had taken it

[44:23] back off, but that it was

[44:24] coming back on, and I just

[44:26] didn't see it in the, in the

[44:27] action plan and was concerned

[44:29] that we had we had changed our

[44:32] minds there, if I MAY,

[44:33] Commissioner, just one quick

[44:34] comment, just to give full

[44:35] credit. So the art trail, the

[44:38] concept for a trail that wound

[44:40] throughout the entire city. In

[44:41] all honesty, came from

[44:44] Commissioner Lima Tab. Probably

[44:46] eight years ago we had

[44:47] discussion where she said,

[44:48] wouldn't it be great to have

[44:51] something that ties all of the

[44:52] communities together, almost

[44:54] probably 8 or 9 years ago now?

[44:56] So in all in all honesty, the

[44:58] initial suggestion for that

[44:59] came from came from

[45:00] Commissioner Lima about 8 or 9

[45:02] years ago. And I can remember

[45:05] him her also talking about a

[45:07] safe walking area. Right. I

[45:09] think that was Covid maybe

[45:10] during Covid that you. So

[45:11] that's great news. And it

[45:13] actually, if I could go into my

[45:16] next item, right. So I shared

[45:19] an email about the street

[45:22] lighting on in three islands in

[45:23] the three island safe

[45:24] neighborhood district. And

[45:27] these are the streetlights on

[45:32] Atlantic shores and on three

[45:36] islands, on three islands. So I

[45:38] know that this is a this might

[45:41] be a funding issue, but it is

[45:43] within the safe neighborhood.

[45:45] And I know that we are doing a

[45:48] lot of safe neighborhood. I

[45:49] Commissioner Lazara has brought

[45:50] up several times that it is a

[45:52] public safety issue. So I think

[45:53] it's an important issue, and

[45:55] I'd like to figure out a way

[45:58] for us to to fund that if we

[46:02] can, for the next year. Yes,

[46:04] mayor, there are programs that.

[46:06] And I've ironically, just at

[46:07] Florida League of Cities, I

[46:09] think Phillips was there. There

[46:11] was a couple lighting companies

[46:16] that would come in and I. For

[46:17] now, I should have brought the

[46:19] documents with me, but I didn't

[46:20] think about it. I think that

[46:22] you can actually f, p and l do

[46:25] it as well. But then again, I,

[46:28] I'm not sure if what upfront

[46:31] costs they will provide for.

[46:34] And if it is the, if it's like

[46:35] type of public private

[46:36] partnership where they come in,

[46:38] they'll do it and then you

[46:41] offset it by paying it out over

[46:43] time, you know, kind of we did

[46:45] that with energy development

[46:46] block grants. We would say,

[46:47] guess what, Siemens, you come

[46:49] in, you retrofit whatever

[46:50] you'll upfront it in the

[46:52] savings, end up paying for it.

[46:54] So that MAY be a possibility.

[46:56] Look at a company like that

[46:57] that maybe will do it, but I

[46:58] don't know what the dollar

[47:00] signs would be to do the

[47:02] upfront investment. And then,

[47:03] you know, you have a revenue

[47:05] source from the district to

[47:07] continue to pay for it

[47:08] somewhere, as it would be the

[47:10] case for Golden Isles if we

[47:11] eventually do some type of

[47:12] decorative lighting throughout

[47:14] the community to figure out

[47:15] what that looked like. And as a

[47:17] matter of fact, you can do it

[47:18] before anything else, because

[47:19] usually the lighting isn't on

[47:21] the sidewalk or the street side.

[47:23] It's actually put further away

[47:25] from any of those improvements.

[47:26] But I just want to I just

[47:28] wanted to share that with you.

[47:29] That's why I keep kind of

[47:31] talking about those things. And

[47:32] I haven't had a chance to sit

[47:33] down with our purchasing

[47:35] director and discuss some of

[47:36] those opportunities as well and

[47:37] what they're going to look like.

[47:39] But I think it's doable. But

[47:40] it's I don't know if it's

[47:42] germane that we have to do it

[47:44] today or to make a direction.

[47:45] Well, we're just talking about

[47:46] budget and it came up during

[47:47] the action plan, the

[47:48] commissioner action plan and

[47:51] the email that I sent to you

[47:52] referenced the fact that the

[47:55] dpw has already coordinated

[47:58] with fpl and identified what

[48:00] needs to be done if we want to

[48:01] do it. And now it's just a

[48:04] matter of and understandably,

[48:05] time constraints on the part of

[48:07] the dpw staff. I just wanted to

[48:08] bring it up for the City

[48:12] Commission because I, in a in

[48:13] correctly identified that they

[48:14] were not in the safe

[48:15] neighborhood. They are in the

[48:17] three island safe neighborhood

[48:19] area. And I just want to clear

[48:21] that up and, and believe still

[48:24] that it's important that we

[48:26] figure out a way to, to get

[48:31] them done well. Thank you. This

[48:33] doctor Raul, would you like I

[48:34] know we're not probably going

[48:36] to amend this budget right now,

[48:39] but so we have a direction.

[48:41] Maybe it's to make a motion to

[48:42] direct doctor Earl to work with

[48:45] staff, to research viable

[48:47] alternatives to fund lighting

[48:49] within both districts, and set

[48:51] that up as a type of project or

[48:55] priority, because the revenue

[48:57] stream, if it's being placed in

[48:59] there, the revenue stream would

[49:01] be paid from the district.

[49:03] Because currently, like if you

[49:05] want a light, I can go and say,

[49:06] guess what? I want a light in

[49:08] front of my house. They'll put

[49:10] it in, but then I pay for it.

[49:12] It goes on my bill. Yeah. So,

[49:13] so okay, so mayor, would that

[49:15] work? Doctor? I think it's a

[49:16] great idea, but we're not in

[49:17] the district. My understanding

[49:19] the issue this isn't a dollars

[49:20] issue. This is a time capacity

[49:22] issue on the on the part of dpw.

[49:23] Right. Well companies come in

[49:25] and do it soup to nuts. It's

[49:27] not I'm sorry if that's a way

[49:30] for us to do it. Correct doctor.

[49:32] Yeah I understand the question.

[49:33] Like I know Siemens does it.

[49:35] Philips does it. Sure. Fpl does

[49:37] it. I don't know what has the

[49:38] best price competitive pricing

[49:40] or what it would look like. But

[49:41] they do the construction and I

[49:43] believe all the design of it,

[49:44] like it's all upfront and by

[49:49] them. So I think. Give us well,

[49:51] you can't we can't make a

[49:53] motion here. We will go back

[49:55] and take a look at the funding,

[49:57] take a look at the what we have

[49:59] in terms of the funding, and

[50:00] come back to the commission

[50:01] with a recommendation for how

[50:03] we do this. Right. And like I

[50:04] said, I don't know if, again,

[50:06] it might just be they can do it

[50:08] and then it gets paid out, kind

[50:10] of like an improvement loan or

[50:11] whatever. Okay. Do you want it

[50:13] as a form of motion? We can I

[50:15] don't even think we can because

[50:16] it's a workshop anyway, and we

[50:17] don't have the district budget

[50:19] in front of us. So go ahead.

[50:21] Yeah, that was it. I just

[50:23] wanted to make sure that we

[50:24] brought that back and gave it

[50:27] some attention, since solar

[50:29] would be great. I'm all for

[50:30] solar. She took a thank you

[50:32] because it could be you could a

[50:34] company like that, it might be

[50:35] something even totally

[50:36] different. Yeah. You know, and,

[50:38] and a lot some lightings, even

[50:40] low volt low voltage. So I

[50:41] think it's a, it's not a it's

[50:43] not as easy as saying get it

[50:45] done. In other words, and we

[50:46] know we don't want to pile on,

[50:48] but I think it's the timing of

[50:50] it would be something to look

[50:51] at. Yeah, we can, we can do

[50:53] this. You know, we did this

[50:54] again for lighting throughout

[50:55] the city. And we had an

[50:58] agreement with well, we did it

[51:00] for on the cra side. Yes. And

[51:03] we did that for the length and

[51:05] breadth of the cra. We worked

[51:07] with some partners. We did the

[51:09] design. We worked with fpl, I

[51:10] believe on the cra side. We had

[51:12] a contract. Faith, correct me

[51:14] if I'm wrong for like fpl. In

[51:15] fact, we did have a contract

[51:17] for fpl to help us install all

[51:18] of these things. We just have

[51:21] to bring the design and then we

[51:24] have to pay for maintenance

[51:27] afterwards. Correct? Right. So

[51:28] correct. So the design and

[51:29] maintenance and we have to pay.

[51:31] That's how it works. And and

[51:32] that's what the cra board

[51:34] actually did. So for the. Yes.

[51:35] So we can we will explore it

[51:37] and and bring something back to

[51:38] you. That'd be great. I, you

[51:40] know, one of the things I just

[51:42] want to mention that I think so

[51:45] we have we are assessing this

[51:46] three island safe neighborhood

[51:48] to enhance the safe

[51:50] neighborhood and not doing

[51:51] street lights in the three

[51:52] island safe neighborhood, I

[51:54] think is a gap that we've

[51:55] missed. And I think if I were a

[51:57] three islands resident and I

[51:58] had been assessed and you

[51:59] forgot to do street lights, I

[52:01] would be a little concerned.

[52:02] And it's from my understanding,

[52:06] it wasn't an expensive item,

[52:08] relatively speaking, but I

[52:09] think it's important for us to

[52:11] at least identify if we can do

[52:13] it. And I think that would be

[52:14] great, doctor Earl, if you

[52:16] could bring it back. And I

[52:17] think we can definitely do that,

[52:19] that's great. If it's not part

[52:21] of the I don't think it is, but

[52:23] if it's not already part of the

[52:24] Safe neighborhood plan. Okay.

[52:26] So my next question about the

[52:31] budget on the five year plan,

[52:33] and I brought this up before,

[52:37] so I wanted to ask on this five

[52:43] year plan, we used 2.25% as our

[52:46] estimated annual property tax

[52:48] increase for every year going

[52:52] forward, percent, 2%, 2.25%

[52:54] this year and 2% going forward.

[52:56] That's correct. Okay. So the

[52:57] taxable value increases in the

[52:59] past years, I'm just going to

[53:02] tell you there were 10.72%,

[53:06] 17.26%, 9.09%, 8.17%. Those are

[53:08] the last few years and then

[53:10] 2.25% this year. So the simple

[53:12] five year average is 9.5%.

[53:14] That's the simple average. If I

[53:18] throw out that 17.26%, we're at

[53:19] 7.6%, right? So now we're going

[53:21] all the way down to two. Not

[53:23] opposed to it. I think it's a

[53:25] great, you know, stress test

[53:27] case, but I would love to see

[53:30] this same thing with 4% and 6%,

[53:33] right? Just easy way to do it.

[53:35] I don't think that's a

[53:36] difficult. And when you mean

[53:38] four and 6%, you mean 4% in

[53:40] which year annually going

[53:41] forward. So we're doing 2%

[53:43] annually. Go to 4%. Go to 6%.

[53:44] Let's just see what that looks

[53:46] like. I think I think it'll be

[53:48] a little bit play, isn't it? It

[53:50] should be, I hope so. And do

[53:52] you want to see the impact of

[53:53] that. Is that what you were.

[53:55] Yeah. I'm just curious to see

[53:56] how it looks. That gives us a

[53:58] conservative, a moderate and a

[54:02] historical norm. Right. So that

[54:06] was one of my other requests.

[54:10] Oh, and then so this one I want

[54:12] to, I guess I can bring this up

[54:14] later because it's not

[54:15] specifically on our budget. We

[54:17] can't, we're almost into, well,

[54:19] now we have 530, so we have

[54:21] some time. Keep going. Okay.

[54:23] Because this I could bring up

[54:24] some things under other two. So

[54:27] go ahead. All right. So so one

[54:28] of the, one of the questions

[54:31] that I had, and I, I'm all for

[54:32] us doing stuff at the beach. So

[54:34] I want everybody to know that.

[54:36] And I voted in favor of all the

[54:38] funding. Oh my GOD. Now it's

[54:39] like, no, I don't want it. No,

[54:41] no that's not. Do you have

[54:42] buyer's remorse, Commissioner?

[54:43] That's not what I'm going to

[54:44] say. You say something nice.

[54:46] That is not what I'm going to

[54:48] say. I'm teasing, but I just

[54:49] want to be clear. So when we

[54:51] first said, hey, let's do some

[54:52] beach activation, it was in

[54:54] support of this snack bar. And

[54:55] I'm going to say that over and

[54:57] over and over again, because

[54:58] the snack bar didn't open and

[54:59] we're still doing the beach

[55:01] activation, not opposed to it.

[55:06] Happy to do it. I made a

[55:07] recommendation in a very long

[55:10] email to the city managers, and

[55:11] my apologies to everybody for

[55:16] the long email that we we get

[55:19] food trucks out there in order

[55:21] to offset the fact that we

[55:23] don't have a snack bar. So I

[55:28] will I will be very open and

[55:29] share with everybody that this

[55:31] all comes from spending a month

[55:33] with my kids going to the beach.

[55:35] There are no amenities. You go

[55:37] to the beach, you got to bring

[55:38] everything with you. Good luck

[55:42] buying anything. So so I'm

[55:47] still interested in us doing

[55:49] things that will help us

[55:51] activate our beach. And the

[55:52] $75,000 that we approved for

[55:54] South Beach events. And we have

[55:55] another one coming up, I think

[55:58] very soon. We also approved the

[56:00] so far sounds, which I think is

[56:04] part of our 100 year

[56:07] anniversary preparations. And

[56:09] now we recently just approved,

[56:12] I think, $250,000 for furniture

[56:16] for the North Beach facility.

[56:18] Now, all of those are great as

[56:20] long as they all are leading us

[56:22] to eventually getting a revenue

[56:23] generating tenant into both of

[56:25] those facilities. That's the

[56:27] goal. That's what we're trying

[56:29] to do. I don't want us to to

[56:31] spend all this money in order

[56:33] to have a good time. Not that

[56:34] I'm opposed to having a good

[56:36] time, trust me. But I do want

[56:39] us to ensure that there is a

[56:41] plan, and I believe that there

[56:42] is. I just want to state this

[56:44] on the record. I have I have

[56:45] supported all this stuff and

[56:47] I've supported it for the

[56:48] reason, very specific reason

[56:50] that I want to ensure that this

[56:51] eventually will lead to us

[56:53] being able to fill both the

[56:54] South Beach and North Beach

[56:56] facilities with a tenant. And

[56:57] this ties back to conversations

[56:59] that we had back when we were

[57:01] looking for the South Beach

[57:02] tenant. So I applaud the city

[57:04] for all the work that it's

[57:06] doing. I think, Director Shantz,

[57:08] you've done a fantastic job

[57:10] with the events there. I'm

[57:12] excited about. Well, I don't

[57:14] know if I'm going to be there

[57:15] this weekend. Is it yoga on

[57:18] Sunday 30? Yeah. No no no no. I,

[57:20] I, I come and have a cup of

[57:24] coffee. So I'm, I won't be

[57:26] there. 730 but I'm very excited

[57:28] about that. We're doing things

[57:29] and that our North Beach

[57:30] facility will actually have

[57:31] some activity. And I even went

[57:33] to the point where I suggest

[57:34] that maybe some of our staff

[57:36] should use the second floor as

[57:38] offices. Right? And the only

[57:39] point is, is in order to get

[57:41] usage out of it, right? So that

[57:43] people are using it on a

[57:44] regular basis, that the

[57:45] elevators are working, that the

[57:46] air conditioning is working,

[57:47] that we have people that are

[57:50] utilizing the facility. So I

[57:51] can't imagine somebody wouldn't

[57:53] want to have an office there. I

[57:55] would, but that was just a

[57:56] statement I wanted to make

[57:58] about beach activation. I meant

[58:00] to do under other. But since we.

[58:01] It's fine, we have the time.

[58:04] Sure. I just had a thought on

[58:05] that. You done with that one?

[58:06] Yes, ma'am. I'm done with it.

[58:08] Yes. You know, it occurred to

[58:10] me sitting here, you know, we

[58:12] we ran out a lot of our

[58:14] facilities. We rent them out.

[58:15] We have been sitting on that

[58:17] asset. It has a kitchen. It has

[58:19] a service area. Maybe we look

[58:22] at it as a rental, a rental

[58:23] opportunity. If somebody wants

[58:25] to have a party or an event at

[58:28] the beach, like we do at the

[58:29] cultural center has a built in

[58:31] kitchen, it has built in access.

[58:33] We put a little bit more money

[58:34] into it. Maybe somebody's going

[58:36] to want to have a party there

[58:38] or picnic or something and a

[58:41] corporate event. So food for

[58:43] thought instead of worrying

[58:45] about one particular vendor,

[58:46] because I certainly would rent

[58:47] it out for a party. I think

[58:49] it's a great gig place. We've

[58:51] done that before, I think not

[58:52] we had weddings there, right?

[58:53] Or something. Are you talking

[58:55] North city Future. South. South.

[58:58] South. South. City. Because.

[58:59] Because North doesn't have a

[59:00] kitchen. North doesn't have. No.

[59:02] It didn't have the kitchen or

[59:03] any of that stuff. But we're

[59:05] sitting on a kitchen and an

[59:06] asset that's been empty for

[59:08] like two years. So and if

[59:09] somebody wants to have a party

[59:12] or a beach party or have at it.

[59:13] No, I think I think those are

[59:15] good suggestions. We are. It's

[59:17] just like an moment. Like I was

[59:19] thinking North Beach too. Okay.

[59:23] Go ahead. So South City Beach,

[59:26] we we started and I think we

[59:27] are going to complete at some

[59:29] point I asked director Chance

[59:33] to get full commercial fridges,

[59:34] stoves, prep areas, everything

[59:35] because we're missing all the

[59:37] equipment. And I think you were

[59:40] out there as I toured inside, I

[59:42] walked all around it. So we're

[59:44] going to damn this. Sorry. I

[59:46] also this is a nice spot to

[59:48] leverage. I also asked Director

[59:50] Chance to see about food trucks

[59:54] there on as as basically pop

[59:56] ups as well. So basically we're

[59:57] trying to outfit because in

[59:58] speaking to restaurants, I've

[59:59] spoken to restaurants would

[1:00:02] want to come in most of those

[1:00:05] restaurants who, who would

[1:00:06] potentially do pop ups,

[1:00:07] including local restaurants.

[1:00:09] The lack of equipment in there

[1:00:11] is, is one of our restrictions.

[1:00:12] And so I've asked Director

[1:00:14] Chance to go out and she did

[1:00:16] she find some equipment

[1:00:17] telepathic. That's pretty good.

[1:00:19] No no no. So so we're so we're

[1:00:21] doing that. And then we're also

[1:00:23] going to work on. I know

[1:00:23] Commissioner Butler mentioned

[1:00:25] the food trucks as well. So

[1:00:27] we're also going to work on the

[1:00:28] food trucks as well. In terms

[1:00:29] of the North City Beach

[1:00:32] facility, we're also just this

[1:00:34] week, because of the upcoming

[1:00:37] events, we've added commercial,

[1:00:39] fridge, commercial, like a prep

[1:00:40] area and everything to that

[1:00:43] facility as well. We do have

[1:00:44] some staff that will be moving

[1:00:46] in there temporarily for about

[1:00:50] six weeks at that location. And

[1:00:52] then we're going to finish

[1:00:55] outfitting the facility with,

[1:00:57] with, with Wi-Fi and everything

[1:00:59] else. I know that Sean has been

[1:01:00] working on, on getting that

[1:01:01] done. So hopefully with all of

[1:01:05] these changes, this is only the

[1:01:07] first step to what you all have

[1:01:09] asked us to do. So the the

[1:01:12] other big part of it was to try

[1:01:14] and combine both locations in

[1:01:17] terms of having an rfp. So, you

[1:01:18] know, we're trying to get the

[1:01:19] first part done, which is to

[1:01:21] activate it. I'm happy to say

[1:01:22] that the events this week are

[1:01:24] sold, not sold out, but the

[1:01:25] events this week are sold out,

[1:01:27] for lack of a better term. The

[1:01:28] ones that all the wellness

[1:01:29] events that we planned, every

[1:01:31] one of those things are now

[1:01:33] sold out. So fingers crossed.

[1:01:34] Hopefully we'll and kudos to to

[1:01:36] the team who's who's working on

[1:01:39] that faith and Kathy and Rachel

[1:01:43] and the rest of them. And, and

[1:01:45] then the big part was just

[1:01:47] waiting for the contract. The

[1:01:49] agreement with Itaru Izumi

[1:01:52] slash related. Now that we have

[1:01:55] those parking spaces, well,

[1:01:57] just just to be clear, we have

[1:01:58] we have all the parking spaces,

[1:02:00] but we have less active parking

[1:02:03] spaces than we, than we, we

[1:02:04] need, because there are some

[1:02:06] work going on in the garage

[1:02:08] from Beach Club that's taken

[1:02:10] away about 15 of our parking

[1:02:11] spaces, and then we have some

[1:02:13] other internal parking needs in

[1:02:14] terms of the fire department

[1:02:17] and whatnot as well. And so

[1:02:19] working through all of these

[1:02:21] kinds of things, you know, our

[1:02:22] team is also working on coming

[1:02:24] up with a plan to join both

[1:02:25] facilities together from a

[1:02:26] parking perspective. So there's

[1:02:28] a lot of things that our team

[1:02:29] is working on now that we have

[1:02:32] the parking spaces back as well,

[1:02:34] it's going to, you know, this

[1:02:35] is really that was really one

[1:02:36] of our triggers that approval

[1:02:38] from you all to now go out and

[1:02:40] try and find someone because

[1:02:42] now they now we can say we

[1:02:43] actually have parking spaces in

[1:02:45] that facility. So, so that was

[1:02:47] huge. So we are trying to

[1:02:48] implement everything that you

[1:02:52] guys have approved. I know it's

[1:02:53] sometimes in some cases slow

[1:02:55] going, but I think we are we've

[1:02:56] made significant progress. And

[1:02:58] the other delay in the North

[1:02:59] City Beach facility was the

[1:03:02] elevator, which for it being on

[1:03:05] the beach and not an active

[1:03:06] facility that needed to be

[1:03:08] fixed. And again, with your

[1:03:09] with your help, with your

[1:03:11] approvals, we were able to fix

[1:03:13] that on an emergency basis. And

[1:03:15] now we're going to have a major

[1:03:16] overhaul of that elevator

[1:03:17] coming soon as well. So so

[1:03:20] we're so we're doing the things

[1:03:21] and hopefully we'll do the

[1:03:23] things a lot faster so you guys

[1:03:24] can be happy. Now. You piqued

[1:03:26] my interest. What are they

[1:03:28] using storage for their own

[1:03:30] construction. Beach club

[1:03:32] they've the parking. No, Kathy.

[1:03:34] They've just blocked off those

[1:03:38] spaces. Come on. Yeah. Oh, it's

[1:03:40] for security. For. So people

[1:03:41] don't damage your cars and

[1:03:42] stuff for safety reasons. Okay,

[1:03:44] so it's about 15 spaces that.

[1:03:46] No worries. No worries for a

[1:03:50] while. You're good. No. Two

[1:03:52] more. So two more because I. Go

[1:03:53] ahead. Do you have one? I know,

[1:03:55] go ahead. So the I don't want

[1:03:58] to slow your roll. Keep going.

[1:03:59] Now we're talking about it

[1:04:01] though. Oh my GOD. I have no

[1:04:02] questions. No. Well, I was

[1:04:04] checking to see if anybody was

[1:04:06] in the queue, so. Water tower.

[1:04:08] Oh my GOD. I can tell you about

[1:04:09] that. Please, I want to oh,

[1:04:10] that's what I was going to

[1:04:12] bring up. Okay, good. Wait a

[1:04:14] minute. I want to hear it. This

[1:04:15] is a great hair moment. Oh my

[1:04:17] GOD. You know, I'm going back

[1:04:19] to flc. You know, I'm strolling

[1:04:20] around and one of the companies

[1:04:22] that we used to use to do all

[1:04:23] the water towers was there. And

[1:04:27] I'm like, you know, and another

[1:04:28] gentleman branched out and did

[1:04:30] his own company. So I'm talking

[1:04:31] to him. He goes, I go, you know,

[1:04:33] we've been trying to get our

[1:04:36] water tower painted for like

[1:04:38] ages. He goes, I am so well

[1:04:41] aware of your water tower that

[1:04:43] when we had our water tower, we

[1:04:45] didn't have we didn't plan our

[1:04:47] water tower to have all the

[1:04:50] things around it. And it's an

[1:04:53] issue. It's like he told me, I

[1:04:54] don't want to have like total

[1:04:56] sticker shock. Like we had the

[1:04:57] other thing with the mooring

[1:04:59] field. But he goes, we can look

[1:05:01] like $1 million to paint just

[1:05:03] to paint the tower because the

[1:05:05] screening and safety and

[1:05:07] security and it has to be

[1:05:08] sandblasted. They have to

[1:05:11] secure the hotel, they have to

[1:05:13] secure even beach club, beach

[1:05:14] club, because everything's

[1:05:16] around it. And it's not even

[1:05:19] just about us. It's about

[1:05:20] everything that goes into it.

[1:05:22] But it's millions of dollars.

[1:05:25] We awarded it already. Nope. So

[1:05:27] we have we have $4 million. Oh,

[1:05:29] we did okay in it. And now it's,

[1:05:30] it's the execution of that,

[1:05:32] that our team is now about to

[1:05:33] work. So good. It's just it's

[1:05:35] in process. Yes. It's. Yeah.

[1:05:37] Money is there. I didn't even

[1:05:40] realize we had awarded or we

[1:05:41] allocated money. We didn't

[1:05:43] award it allocated the money to

[1:05:44] do the project. And to your

[1:05:46] point, it is millions of

[1:05:47] dollars to do that. There was

[1:05:49] not an rfq awarded. I thought

[1:05:52] we did. No no no no no no no.

[1:05:55] It was back in 2025. Well, we

[1:05:57] were talking about lighting and

[1:05:59] it was something we approved

[1:06:00] somebody getting in. Director

[1:06:01] Luis, do you remember cleaning.

[1:06:03] And I remember reading all the

[1:06:04] backup material. No I don't

[1:06:06] think. Yeah. My staff is. Yeah,

[1:06:07] they're coming down now because

[1:06:08] sometimes we've done so much.

[1:06:10] It's like, oh, good, I got the

[1:06:11] card. Actually, I was going to

[1:06:13] give you the guys. I don't know

[1:06:15] what it was to talk to him

[1:06:16] about it, but I was like

[1:06:18] sitting I'm like, I remember

[1:06:19] reading the backup about how

[1:06:21] you have to get into the. I was

[1:06:23] just, they totally studied it.

[1:06:25] And it has to be upgraded on a

[1:06:26] regular basis. And I thought we

[1:06:28] were doing that in conjunction.

[1:06:29] I thought we were doing that in

[1:06:31] conjunction with our 100 year

[1:06:34] anniversary. Update do we want

[1:06:36] an update or what do we want?

[1:06:37] Okay, so now we're going to

[1:06:39] we're going to hopefully now

[1:06:40] that we have the city engineer

[1:06:42] and hopefully in the future.

[1:06:43] But we don't want to because

[1:06:44] I'm usually good with numbers.

[1:06:46] And I was thinking we talked

[1:06:48] about 300 and some odd thousand

[1:06:50] dollars for lighting originally,

[1:06:52] and I didn't realize we had

[1:06:53] executed a line item and we

[1:06:54] were already budgeted and it's

[1:06:56] in our budget. Oh, good.

[1:06:57] Because I got the heartburn

[1:06:59] like, oh my GOD, this is it's

[1:07:01] in our cip. Okay, good. It's in

[1:07:02] our cip. All right. Thank thank

[1:07:06] you. So good. Thank you. If you

[1:07:08] want to know all about it, I'll

[1:07:10] give you the guy's card. So oh

[1:07:12] my GOD, I want to this there's

[1:07:14] one other topic I just wanted

[1:07:16] to because I was going to talk

[1:07:17] about that under other. Go

[1:07:19] ahead. Oh, you were doing okay.

[1:07:23] So we still have time. So this

[1:07:25] this item I think for me is a

[1:07:28] little bit difficult to open up.

[1:07:30] But so one of the challenges I

[1:07:36] think that we have. There is a,

[1:07:40] there isn't a, a, I don't know

[1:07:43] how to say this. So we are the

[1:07:45] number one to me, the number

[1:07:47] one purpose that we have, code

[1:07:48] compliance is for

[1:07:51] beautification. And I've I have

[1:07:53] frankly been talking to. Bless

[1:07:54] you, mayor. Excuse me. Wow,

[1:07:57] that was loud. Wow. So we've

[1:07:59] been talking about code

[1:08:01] compliance and how code

[1:08:02] compliance can contribute to

[1:08:03] beautification in the

[1:08:05] neighborhood, in the cities in

[1:08:07] the city. Since I think it was

[1:08:09] a report, I can't remember the

[1:08:10] name of the company back in

[1:08:12] 2006. So this has been a long,

[1:08:14] long time. I mean, well before

[1:08:18] I sat up here. We we recently

[1:08:20] had the two resident surveys

[1:08:22] over a two year period. And

[1:08:23] beautification didn't change,

[1:08:24] right. We didn't see an

[1:08:27] increase in beautification

[1:08:29] during that time period. Over

[1:08:30] the last five years, we've made

[1:08:33] significant investments in code

[1:08:35] compliance. And I think,

[1:08:36] Director Massey, I had

[1:08:37] mentioned to you that I wanted

[1:08:39] to get an electronic copy of

[1:08:40] our budget because one of the

[1:08:42] questions that I had was, what

[1:08:43] is our total code compliance

[1:08:44] current? What is the total

[1:08:46] budget? What how many FTEs do

[1:08:47] we have today and how does that

[1:08:49] compare with five years? And

[1:08:50] this is part of the email. I

[1:08:52] know that I sent you, Doctor

[1:08:53] Earle, and the reason I asked

[1:08:55] for this information is because

[1:08:56] we're not getting the results

[1:08:58] out of code compliance that we

[1:09:00] want. Now, the results that we

[1:09:01] want is beautification, right?

[1:09:03] That's the outcomes that we

[1:09:05] want to get. We, we, we

[1:09:07] received an email that I think

[1:09:12] is, is extraordinary that our

[1:09:16] code increase in cases has

[1:09:18] increased dramatically. And

[1:09:19] that's a wonderful thing.

[1:09:21] That's not a bad thing, but it

[1:09:24] should also have a net impact

[1:09:25] on beautification. That's what

[1:09:28] we're doing it for, right. The

[1:09:29] cases should lead to an

[1:09:30] improvement beautification. And

[1:09:31] so we're missing something. I

[1:09:34] don't know what it is, but the

[1:09:35] outcomes that we want after

[1:09:37] making massive investments in

[1:09:39] code, not massive. When I say

[1:09:41] massive, if I have my numbers

[1:09:42] correct, and I could very well

[1:09:44] be wrong, when I became a

[1:09:47] commissioner, we had five code

[1:09:49] enforcement officers and we had

[1:09:51] no administrative folks. And

[1:09:53] now we have, I don't know, 12

[1:09:55] code officers and at least two

[1:09:57] administrative people. So we've

[1:10:00] more than doubled the code

[1:10:02] department. And we get a

[1:10:04] doubling of the cases now from

[1:10:05] a productivity, you know,

[1:10:06] person per case standpoint.

[1:10:08] That's that's not good, right?

[1:10:09] That's a decrease in

[1:10:12] productivity in cases per code

[1:10:13] officer. But what's more

[1:10:15] important to me is that we're

[1:10:16] not getting the beautification

[1:10:18] results that we want. And I

[1:10:19] know this is a challenging

[1:10:23] thing to measure because it's a

[1:10:24] little bit amorphous. How do

[1:10:27] you measure beautification? But

[1:10:29] something something here,

[1:10:30] obviously, I mean, other than

[1:10:32] the resident survey, which I

[1:10:33] should have came in my speech

[1:10:35] yesterday. No, I'm just

[1:10:36] laughing. Yeah, we can talk

[1:10:39] about that too. So by the way.

[1:10:40] No, because I talked about this,

[1:10:42] I heard good response to I

[1:10:43] didn't mean to interrupt you, I

[1:10:45] apologize. So so this is

[1:10:46] something that I just wanted to

[1:10:48] bring up for the City

[1:10:49] Commission to be aware of,

[1:10:50] because I think it's an

[1:10:51] important item, because it's

[1:10:53] one of the three things that

[1:10:54] our residents are asking us to

[1:10:56] do, right? So traffic, flooding,

[1:10:57] beautification, we've got a lot

[1:10:59] of money that's going into

[1:11:00] traffic. Our Department of

[1:11:01] Transportation has already made

[1:11:03] real world results and impact

[1:11:05] for our residents, which I

[1:11:06] congratulate them for. And

[1:11:08] thank you again for that. I

[1:11:10] know we have a ton of money

[1:11:11] going into flooding, right? I

[1:11:12] don't know how we were

[1:11:13] measuring flooding, because I

[1:11:15] think it's important to be able

[1:11:17] to show to residents the actual

[1:11:20] impacts that we're that we're

[1:11:23] that are result from that. But

[1:11:25] but beautification concerns me.

[1:11:26] And I, I honestly don't know

[1:11:28] what the answer is. I don't

[1:11:29] know if it means if we increase

[1:11:31] our landscaping budget or if we

[1:11:33] create a team that goes around

[1:11:35] and does a lot of the small

[1:11:36] jobs that need to be done

[1:11:39] around the city, like painting

[1:11:41] fire hydrants, I don't know. Oh

[1:11:43] my GOD, somebody just asked me

[1:11:44] about it. Yeah, yeah, I hear it

[1:11:46] all the time too. So it sounds

[1:11:48] like such a small thing, but I

[1:11:50] will, I will, I will tell you

[1:11:51] like an example that I thought

[1:11:53] was amazing response. A year or

[1:11:57] two ago, I had shown some

[1:11:59] photographs of street signs

[1:12:01] that the city owned, and they

[1:12:02] were rusting and falling down.

[1:12:04] And within a week or two,

[1:12:06] doctor Earl, the response was

[1:12:07] amazing. You had people out

[1:12:09] there, they painted them, they

[1:12:10] made them straight again. They

[1:12:12] just little things like that,

[1:12:14] that if it were in my yard, I

[1:12:15] would want to do that, right? I

[1:12:17] would want to clean that stuff

[1:12:19] up. And it made a big impact in

[1:12:21] a very quickly. So I don't know

[1:12:22] what the answer is. I don't

[1:12:24] know how we move forward, but I

[1:12:27] think it's a it's a it's a it's

[1:12:29] an important gap that we need

[1:12:31] to figure out how to address in

[1:12:33] order to deliver on this third

[1:12:34] item that our residents are

[1:12:37] asking us to are saying is most

[1:12:39] important for them. Okay, mayor,

[1:12:40] I will shut up. I'm done. Thank

[1:12:42] you very much for your patience.

[1:12:45] Actually, it like to wrap and

[1:12:47] this is how I phrased it

[1:12:49] yesterday and thought about it

[1:12:50] to me. And I keep saying it's

[1:12:53] called curb curb appeal and

[1:12:55] what code enforcement is

[1:12:56] important. It stops when the

[1:12:58] sidewalk, when where the

[1:13:00] sidewalk ends. That's where it

[1:13:02] is involved with public

[1:13:08] property. The idea of even just

[1:13:09] replacing and getting rid of

[1:13:11] the clutter on the roadway,

[1:13:13] cleaning the roadways I brought

[1:13:14] up, you know, even power

[1:13:16] washing, making sure that we're

[1:13:18] doing those things. And I don't

[1:13:21] know how that translates,

[1:13:23] translates into actionable

[1:13:25] items. I'll give you an example.

[1:13:26] When I grew up, the sidewalk

[1:13:28] was forced to maintain, even if

[1:13:30] we had a swale, you had to cut

[1:13:32] the grass, you had to clean the

[1:13:33] sidewalk. You had to do

[1:13:35] everything you had to do. Right.

[1:13:38] Okay, now we're not in urban

[1:13:40] America. We're no, we're not in

[1:13:41] suburban America. We're in

[1:13:43] urban America the other day,

[1:13:44] and I know it might be a little

[1:13:46] long winded. I was working out

[1:13:48] at Oasis. I was looking down on

[1:13:49] the street and that property

[1:13:51] owner sweeps actually the

[1:13:54] street. Their maintenance goes

[1:13:55] out, scrubs the sidewalk. I

[1:13:58] mean, granted, it's a new area,

[1:14:00] right? Sweeps the sidewalk. And,

[1:14:02] you know, I basically said, you

[1:14:04] know, this is a joint effort.

[1:14:06] People have to contribute to

[1:14:08] making sure. But more

[1:14:10] importantly, residents need to

[1:14:12] understand what we can control

[1:14:13] and what we can't control. So

[1:14:14] if somebody's not going to do

[1:14:16] it and we're going to code

[1:14:17] enforce them and they're not

[1:14:19] going to clean it and just

[1:14:20] ignore it, it's still not

[1:14:21] getting done. So code

[1:14:24] enforcement is a tool, but we

[1:14:26] can find and find and find. But

[1:14:28] that means the job is not

[1:14:29] getting done. So that has to go

[1:14:31] back to the policy. Now like

[1:14:34] you said, we staff's been great.

[1:14:35] They cleaned up the baskets on

[1:14:38] a one a and the trash cans and

[1:14:40] all that stuff. So I think it's

[1:14:43] a multifaceted type of approach

[1:14:44] and means different things to

[1:14:46] different people. You know, I

[1:14:48] mean, we drive through Golden

[1:14:49] Beach all the time. I mean, you

[1:14:51] know, it's wonderful. They have

[1:14:53] a beautiful one way corridor.

[1:14:54] That's what they have to

[1:14:56] maintain. Aventura. Aventura

[1:14:58] has a ton of condos. Think

[1:15:00] about what they have in the

[1:15:03] public realm to take care of a

[1:15:05] lot different than us. We have

[1:15:07] much more public realm when it

[1:15:09] comes to even Pembroke Road,

[1:15:10] Hallandale Beach Boulevard, all

[1:15:12] these roadways, and it costs

[1:15:14] money to maintain them. So

[1:15:16] maybe, you know, we have to

[1:15:18] maybe sit down, maybe we do our

[1:15:20] own exercise to say, let's get

[1:15:22] every bus shelter replaced.

[1:15:24] Let's look at cleaning, you

[1:15:26] know, cleaning the streets,

[1:15:28] doing those types of things.

[1:15:30] But that's definitely that goes

[1:15:31] back to general fund. It goes

[1:15:34] back to investments, street

[1:15:35] signs, all the street signs are

[1:15:38] our responsibility. Hallandale

[1:15:41] Beach Boulevard, it's fdot. We

[1:15:42] can't even pave it. The ones

[1:15:44] that are, you know what I mean?

[1:15:46] So and that's what I talked

[1:15:47] about. So if you talk about it

[1:15:48] conscientiously and say we

[1:15:51] don't a1 a we can partner with.

[1:15:52] We invested money there years

[1:15:55] ago, redeveloping the street

[1:15:56] lighting. We did everything

[1:15:58] down there. Right. It's been a

[1:16:00] while, right? Maybe it needs a

[1:16:01] little a little bit more

[1:16:03] facelift, maybe a little bit

[1:16:05] more landscaping. But those are

[1:16:06] million dollar projects.

[1:16:08] They're not like little, you

[1:16:10] know, the signs. But getting

[1:16:12] back to the science, it's not

[1:16:14] our responsibility to replace

[1:16:15] every sign on Hallandale Beach

[1:16:17] Boulevard. That's not what they

[1:16:19] did. And that's not what they

[1:16:20] did. They did it on Golden

[1:16:21] Isles Drive. And I'm saying,

[1:16:23] that's good, that's good. And

[1:16:24] it was it really made a huge

[1:16:26] difference. But I agree with

[1:16:27] you, mayor. I don't know what

[1:16:29] the answer is. So and so I hear

[1:16:30] you, but maybe strategically

[1:16:31] when we're not worried about

[1:16:33] all the moving parts with

[1:16:35] property tax and, you know, I

[1:16:37] encourage people go online, see

[1:16:39] what see what is your

[1:16:41] responsibility. But some of

[1:16:42] those things, yes, we can do

[1:16:44] better. The curb appeal,

[1:16:45] cleaning it up, doing the bus

[1:16:48] shelters, getting rid of the

[1:16:50] million little advertising

[1:16:52] things, that kind of stuff. So

[1:16:54] I think we set in play some of

[1:16:55] the stuff that will be real,

[1:16:57] but I don't think we're not

[1:16:59] going to change. And I'll shout

[1:17:00] it out and it's horrible. Old

[1:17:02] building where Harry's building

[1:17:04] it. That whole building needs a

[1:17:06] facade replacement. Yeah. But I,

[1:17:08] you know, and it's ugly, so.

[1:17:09] But you're going through other

[1:17:12] areas that aren't 100 years old.

[1:17:14] They're not as urban as us. Or

[1:17:16] there are different type of

[1:17:17] community that was with plan

[1:17:20] design community. So it is a

[1:17:21] difficult obviously, our focus

[1:17:23] should be on the homeless to

[1:17:24] homeless all over the place and

[1:17:25] trash and the shopping carts.

[1:17:27] So yeah, I mean that. So it's

[1:17:28] really bad if we're just

[1:17:29] talking about beautification,

[1:17:31] obviously, what, what do we

[1:17:32] have control over and what we

[1:17:34] can, what we can influence. And,

[1:17:35] and maybe this should be a

[1:17:36] workshop. Maybe, maybe we

[1:17:39] should sit down and, and get

[1:17:41] somebody who actually is an

[1:17:42] expert on, on tying these two

[1:17:44] things together. We've made

[1:17:45] enormous investments. I support

[1:17:46] those investments and code

[1:17:48] compliance. I just we're not

[1:17:49] getting we're not getting the

[1:17:52] outcomes that we wanted.

[1:17:53] They're doing better because

[1:17:54] they're foreclosing. Again, you

[1:17:56] lost the component of how our

[1:17:58] legal department is moving on

[1:17:59] foreclosure. I understand the

[1:18:00] benefit that we're getting out

[1:18:02] of it. And I'm not I'm not

[1:18:03] opposed to all of those

[1:18:05] benefits out of it. We just

[1:18:06] need to figure out how to

[1:18:07] affect this beautification

[1:18:09] thing so that two years from

[1:18:11] now or a year from now, when we

[1:18:12] do a resident survey, people

[1:18:13] are saying, yeah, Hallandale

[1:18:14] really has improved

[1:18:15] significantly in that third

[1:18:16] metric that is so important to

[1:18:18] our residents. Yeah. So I'm

[1:18:19] feeling you. I just talked

[1:18:21] about it yesterday. Yeah. Yeah.

[1:18:23] So we're good. Yes, ma'am.

[1:18:25] Thank you. Talked about that. I

[1:18:26] think we're good. I think we

[1:18:28] can take a pause for ten

[1:18:29] minutes. Give everybody a break.

[1:18:31] Anybody else for budget. Oh and

[1:18:33] great job on the budget again.

[1:18:35] Thank you very much to all of

[1:18:36] you. So I know you guys I

[1:18:38] usually give you everybody

[1:18:39] props. I'm a little tired today

[1:18:41] so yeah. Okay. Thank you very

[1:18:42] much. Thank you doctor. We're

[1:18:46] going to take a recess. Thank

August 19, 2026 Special City Commission Budget Workshop.

Agenda

Transcript